Thread:User talk:Rua/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/grēfijô/reply (2)

It is definitely not pointless in linguistic terms, when looking at the German Low Saxon (GLS) variant one can see that the GLS variant is derived from *grēve, the Dutch Low Saxon (DLS) variant from *grāvio. Only listing *grēve (which was previously the case) would make it seem as if the DLS variant is not derived from Old Saxon (OS) but rather a borrowing from Dutch, which is not the case, since the reconstructed form *grāvio is also listed in the OS dictionaries (and I know that most of the entries on there are reconstructed, or are either based on documents which where written by Franks). I don't know how familiar you are with Old Saxon, but ƀ can be written as v, generally not as f (also see the Old Saxon entry Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/gebaną. *grēve could hypothetically be an umlaut form of *grāvio, but seeing that reconstructed pgm. form is *grēfijô, it is more likely that *grāvio developed from *grēve, so one cannot simply list one of the two. If you would like to limit the number of entries, it could simply be reduced to *grāvio and *grēve, since the forms with ƀ are merely an alternative spelling of the afore mentioned entries (which I have now updated). I definitely do not take it personally if someone corrects my edits, as long as they are actually corrected. I do prefer to be informed before edits are reverted without any (clear) motivation.