Reconstruction talk:Proto-Germanic/skakulaz

@Leasnam You've written that the Old Dutch is attested in derivatives. Are you positive about that? The etymological dictionaries at Etymologiebank date it to the late 14th century and there is no lemma in the Oudnederlands Woordenboek. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 16:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@Lingo Bingo Dingo I believe I may have gotten that from the same entry in etymologiebank for 'schakel': oudnnl. ook (blijkens onghescākelt) “voetkluister voor dieren”. I suppose this must be Middle Dutch instead. I've removed the blurb. Leasnam (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@Leasnam, oh, I see. No, "oudnnl." or "oud-nnl." is an abbreviation for Oudnieuwnederlands ("Early Modern Dutch", so it is the period from 1500 to 1700). Today the term Vroegnieuwnederlands is more common in that meaning. Also, I should warn that the quote with "oudnnl." is from Van Wijk's version of Franck's etymological dictionary, which is rather old and can be quite unreliable by now. This does seem reliable though, but it is only an early attestation for the meaning "fetter for animals". ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 08:43, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah I see. Thanks for pointing that out !  :) Leasnam (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@Leasnam By the way, do you know what the quality of the unstressed Old Dutch vowel would have been, *u? Reduction of unstressed vowels only occurred in the 12th century, didn't it? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 08:47, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I missed that. I believe u is correct. Leasnam (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)