User:Austronesier/sandbox5

Continental West Germanic dialect continuum

The continental West Germanic dialect continuum encompasses all West Germanic varieties that are spoken on mainland Europe, with the exception of the Frisian languages.

These West Germanic dialects are traditionally discussed as dialects of Dutch and German depending on the literary language of the area where they are spoken, but they actually form an unbroken dialect continuum: while neighboring varieties are usually mutually intelligible, mutual intelligibility decreases with growing distance.

In spite of its nature as a dialect continuum, the distribution of characteristic innovations allows for a division into distinct dialect groups. On the highest level, three groups can be distinguished: Low Franconian, Low Saxon/Low German and High German. These three groups cut across the boundaries set by modern literary languages: while the great majority of High German dialects are spoken in the region where Standard German serves as literary language, both Low Saxon and Low Franconian are distributed over the German and Dutch literary domains.

Classification

See also: Dutch dialects and German dialects

The Benrath and Speyer lines delineating the High German dialect area with Central German (light blue) and Upper German (green). The yellow area was not affected by the High German consonant shift and comprises Low German, Low Franconian, and Frisian varieties.

The Einheitsplural line (red), dividing Low Saxon (orange) from Low Franconian (yellow).

The continental West Germanic dialects can be broadly divided into three groups, based on linguistic changes that already occurred in the early Middle Ages:

• Low Franconian
• Low Saxon
• High German

High German is set off from the other two groups by the High German consonant shift that affected the tenues *t, *p and *k, with *t shifting to /ts/ or /s/ in all dialects, while the shift of *p and *k is positionally constrained in the northern part of High German area and increasingly affects all positions when moving to the south. The scope of the shift of geminate *pp to /pf/ is used in German dialectology to divide the Upper German subgroup from the Central German subgroup. Further, High German displays a split of the rising diphthongs *au and *ai underwent a split in High German: they were retained as diphthongs in most environments, but became mid long monophthongs before certain consonants.

Low Saxon (usually called Niederdeutsch 'Low German' or Plattdeutsch in Germany) is primarily characterized by the occurrence of the "unitary plural" (German: Einheitsplural, Dutch: eenheidspluralis): while Proto-Germanic had distinct verb endings for all three persons in the plural, Low Saxon dialects have a uniform ending for all three persons.

Next to the absence of the High German consonant shift and the (historical) absence of the unitary plural, Low Franconian is defined by the cross-section of two innovations, one of which is shared with Low Saxon, while the other also occurs in High German. Low Franconian and Low Saxon share the (near-)unconditioned monophthongization of *ai and *au to /eː/ and /oː/), although a transitional area in the southeast (=South Low Franconian) takes part the High German split. A feature shared by High German and Low Franconian is the shift of the Proto-West Germanic mid long vowels *ē₂ and *ō to falling diphthongs /ie/ and /uo/ (often simplified to /iː/ and /uː/, as in standard Dutch and German). Low Saxon varieties mostly retain the mid monophthongs (although secondary diphthongization occurs in some areas).

These dialect groups are not to be understood in a rigid manner, since each in turn displays a high degree of internal diversification, while dialects spoken in the vicinty, but on opposite sides of the main dividing lines between the major groups are often mutually intelligible. For instance, one can follow a continuous north-to-south sequence of mutually intelligible dialects from Zeelandic (Low Franconian), Brabantian (Low Franconian), Limburgish (Low Franconian), Ripuarian (Central German), Moselle Franconian (Central German), South Franconian (Upper German) to Swabian (Upper German); speakers of each dialect can understand the dialect of their respective immediate neighbors, but will experience difficulties to comprehend more distant dialects. As a result, the choice of larger dialect divisions with sharp borders often becomes arbitrary; only the differences between varieties spoken at the most extremes (e.g. Zeelandic and Tyrolian) intuitively suggest that these varieties must belong to different diasystems (i.e. dialect groups or languages).

Relation to Anglo-Frisian

See also: Anglo-Frisian and North Sea Germanic

The Anglo-Frisian languages form a separate branch within the West Germanic languages. The terms "Ingvaeonic" or "North Sea Germanic" are used to emphasize the connections between innovations found in Anglo-Frisian and the continental Germanic Low German varieties. However, Low German shares a number of features with Low Franconian that are not shared by Anglo-Frisian. Additionally, both Low Franconian and Low Saxon have a mixture of Ingvaeonic features ("Ingvaeonisms") and non-Ingvaeonic features; while a majority of scholars count Low German as part of North Sea Germanic, others dispute its membership. At least at least some of this mixture comes from early and pervasive influence from High German dialects, probably beginning around 700 CE. Within Low Franconian, Ingvaeonisms can be further divided into older Ingvaeonisms, which are found through Low Franconian, and younger Ingvaeonisms, which are only found in the coastal areas.

"Ingvaeonisms"

Loss of nasal consonants before spirants

Further information: Ingvaeonic nasal spirant law

In North Sea Germanic, a nasal followed by a fricative is lost after a short vowel, resulting in compensatory lengthening of that vowel. This feature is found consistently in the Old Saxon stage of Low German and sometimes in Low Franconian.

Middle Low German dialects restore many nasal consonants lost through the spirant law, giving forms such as ander rather than Old Saxon othar ("other"). In some words, the presence or absence of the nasal fluctuates by dialect, with western dialects using us ("us") while eastern dialects use uns. Some of these changes may be due to leveling of forms with and without the nasal, while others point to High German influence. High German influence on Low Saxon vocabulary is already visible in the Old Saxon period, as Old Saxon attests words such as kind and urkundeo that do not follow the nasal spirant law.

Low Franconian shows show cases of the nasal spirant law through its whole dialect area, such as vijf ("five" cf. High German fünf), whereas others are restricted to coastal dialects, such as mui(den), used for river mouths in place names and cognate with standard Dutch mond "mouth".

r-metathesis

Metathesis of vowel sequences and r has traditionally been considered to be a North Sea Germanic trait, being found commonly in Frisian, slightly less commonly in English. It is a common feature of Northern continental West Germanic dialects, and is found in standard Dutch, but almost entirely absent in standard High German. Both Middle Dutch and Middle Low German are securely attested as metathesizing sequences of -rV- (where V = any short vowel) to -Vr- before t, d, s, n in a closed syllable. This creates a contrast with High German words: Dutch borst vs. High German Brust, and in place names, between -born and -bronn/-brunn. However, it now appears that metathesis in both languages represents an independent development, with Low German perhaps connected to Frisian, but Dutch developing metathesis first in an unconnected geographic area. Arjen Versloot and Elżbieta Adamczyk argue that metathesis is a common enough linguistic process that it is not a useful diagnostic for Old Saxon's membership in North Sea Germanic.

Metathesis of r clusters is attested in Old Saxon from the 9th century onward, when a Westphalian manuscript attests hers "horse" (cf. High German Ross); however, it is possible that this form is a loanword from Frisian. Other infrequent cases of metathesis have been argued to exist from then onward, especially in forms of names ending in -berht; metathesized forms of the word for "horse" are found in three of the four attested Old Saxon dialects (the fourth does not attest the word), with Westphalian showing a mix of metathesized and non-metathesized forms. From Westphalia, metathesis also spread into the High German Ripuarian and Middle Franconian dialects, and eventually reaching Upper German Lower Alemannic dialects on the Upper Rhine. Metathesis initially follows the same rules as in Westphalian, but it became more infrequent and phonetically restricted as the change moved southward. The metathesized form that has spread the farthest to the south is bersten ("burst"), which has replaced earlier bresten in standard German. In modern High German dialects, metathesized forms are restricted to Central German; earlier metathesized forms have been reversed in favor of unmetathesized ones in many places.

For Dutch, metathesis of the same type as Low German is first attested between 1050 and 1150 in Flanders. The number of words affected decreases as one travels East from Flanders; Flemish also has metathesis in some open syllables, such as verde vs. standard Dutch vrede ("peace"). Additionally, the sequence -vR- metathesized if followed by -xt, giving forms such as vrucht rather than High German Furcht ("fright"). This change is found in most Franconian dialects besides Limburgian by the early Middle Dutch period.

Palatalization of velars

The Ingvaeonic languages have a tendency to palatalize the velar consonants /k/ and /ɡ/ before the front vowels /i/ and /e/. Scholars disagree whether this feature occurred in a common proto-language stage or developed later, with Old Saxon evidence perhaps suggesting the former.

In Old and Middle Saxon, palatalized forms of /k/ and /ɡ/ (=[ɣ] in most positions) are common, with palatalized /k/ indicated in the orthography by <ki> (e.g. kiennen, cf. High German kennen) or in some cases by <z> (e.g. zind, cf. High German Kind), while palatalized /g/ was indicated by <i(j)> or sometimes <gi> (e.g. ielden, cf. High German gelten). The palatalization of /k/ probably occurred over a wide area and to differing amounts in different dialects; in modern Low German, it has in most but not all cases been reversed to /k/. Outside of many place names, one modern survival is the word sever ("beetle"), still used in many Low German dialects and equivalent to High German Käfer. Earlier /ɡ/, on the other hand, often alternates with /j/ or is a palatal fricative in modern Low German German dialects, often including in the environment of back vowels.

Dutch and German may also show some evidence for far less widespread palatalization of /ɡ/, with older texts showing variation between <g> and <i/j>. However, palatalization is dismissed as a cause by most authorities.

Fronting of *a

The fronting of *a is found consistently in Old English and Old Frisian (e.g. Old English dæg vs. Old High German tac "day"), but took place only partially in Low Saxon and Low Franconian, producing doublets of words with a/e in Old Saxon. In Middle Low German, most of these doublets were eliminated in favor of the a version: of the Old Saxon variants glas and gles only glas is found in Middle Low German.

Sound changes

Next to the High Germanic consonant shift and the charateristic changes involving Proto-Germamic diphthongs and long mid vowels, several sound changes have affected to various degrees the varieties of the continental West Germanic dialect continuum across the borders between Low Franconian, Low Saxon and High German.

Consonants

High German consonant shift

Main article: High German consonant shift

The major divide between High German dialects and the remaining part of the continental West Germanic dialect continuum is defined by the High German consonant shift. In all High German dialects, *t shifted to /ts/ or /s/, while *p and *k became /f/ and /x/ when following a vowel. The northern border of the area where this sound shift occurs is known as the "Benrath line". Reflexes of *p and *k in other positions vary, with the most thorough application of the shift to /pf ~ f/ and /kx ~ x/ occurring in the southern part of the High German dialect area. The scope of the shift of geminate *pp to /pf/ is used in German dialectology to divide the Upper German subgroup from the Central German subgroup; the border between Upper and Central German is called "Speyer line".

A related change was the shift of voiced stops to voiceless stops. This is most widespread with *d to /t/, found in all Upper and Central German dialects, with only Rhine Franconian restricting it to geminates and word finally. A related shift, of *b to /p/ is today restricted to southern Bavarian and some Alemannic dialects in initial position, but was formerly found throughout Bavarian and somewhat in Alemannic in all positions in the word. The shift of *g to *k was reversed by the Middle High German period.

Development of Proto-Germanic /β ð ɣ/

In early West Germanic, the Proto-Germanic voiced obstruents /β ð ɣ/ had the following realizations:

• /ð/ shifted to a voiced stop /d/ in all positions.
• /β/ became /b/ in intitial position, in the cluster /-mb-/ and when geminated /-bb-/. Elsewhere, it remained /β/.
• The realization of /ɣ/ is less clear, since the grapheme ⟨g⟩ was used for voiced stops and fricatives alike. A stop realization can safely assumed only following a nasal and under gemination (/-ng-/, /-gg-/), while it most likely remained a fricative in all other positions.

The different dialects show further developments, which generally divide Low German and Low Franconian from High German. In Old Saxon, /β/ appears to have become a stop in the same pattern as described above, however, /ɣ/ appears to have remained a voiced fricative except when following a nasal, based on the evidence of modern dialects. Low Franconian also shifts /β/ as described above, but the status of /ɣ/ in Old Low Franconian is disputed: it was either a voiced fricative in most positions as in Old Saxon, or it had become a stop in initial position and when geminated, only later to spirantized to /ɣ/ again. Both Low Franconian and Low German also display final devoicing of the voiced fricatives at the end of words: Old Saxon gaf (from Proto-West Germanic *ɣaβ) and burch (cf. High German Burg).

In Old High German, all dialects except Middle Franconian instead are argued to have shifted /β ɣ/ shifted to the stops /b g/ in all positions; Middle Franconian instead shows the same pattern as Old Saxon.

Final fortition

Final fortition or final devoicing refers to the pronounciation of voiced obstruents such as [b, d, g, z, v] as [p, t, k, s, f]. This is a general feature of continental West Germanic languages, and is more general than that found in other Germanic languages, including Old English, where only fricatives are affected. Final devoicing is already attested in Old Low Franconian. There is some evidence for it in Old High German as early as the 8th century, but its presence is only certain in Middle High German, reflected in spellings such as tac for earlier tag. It is likewise attested as the general rule in Middle Low German.

Final fortition was lost as a rule in the Early Modern German period due to the syncope of final schwa reintroducing final voiced consonants. However, the rule that final obstruents are devoiced but was reacquired subsequently. A similar development occurred in Low and Central Franconian dialects that apocopated final schwa; most dialects subsequently reacquired the rule of final devoicing, though some also retain voiced final stops. While final fortition is a part of standard German in Germany, it is not part of the Austrian standard, and Low and High German dialects differ in how they handle final contrast. Some dialects have historically retained a contrast, such as Meissen Saxon, others, such as Hessian, instead voice final voiceless stops (see also inner-German lenition).

Voicing of initial and medieval voiceless fricatives

The Proto-Germanic fricatives /s f þ x/ have historically voiced word internally in all continental Germanic languages, as well as initially in both Low Franconian and High German dialects; /þ/ eventually became a stop d in all positions (see below) and initial and medial /x/ became /h/.

In Low Franconian, initial and medial voicing appears to have occurred by the 9th, 10th, or 11th century: a change of /f/ to /v/ is clearly attested by spelling, and a parallel change of /s/ to /z/ can be posited. Middle Dutch continues to show voicing of initial /f/ to /v/, and reflects the voiceless of /s/ to /z/ in spelling (while retaining /s/ in initial consonant clusters such as slapen). It has also been adopted into modern standard Dutch, but in Northern and Western Low Franconian dialects, the initial fricatives are voiceless. While initial voicing is not generally posited for Old Saxon or Middle Low German, both, as well as modern Low German dialects, have medial voicing.

Old High German shows a shift of initial and medieval /f/ to /v/ in the 9th century (fater > vater); evidence of a parallel shift of /s/ to /z/ can be posited from early loanwords in Slavic languages. In the late Middle High German period, /v/ merges with /f/ in many dialects, thereby becoming devoiced, although the spelling with <v> continues to be used in standard High German in initial position (Vater, pronounced [faːtɐ]). /s/ continues to be voiced as [z] in initial and medial position, but has undergone a number of other changes over the Middle High German period. Conservative Upper German dialects today continue to have distinct lenis consonants /v̥ z̥/ where formerly voiced /z/ and /v/ were present.

Proto-Germanic *þ (/θ/) > /d/

In all varieties of the continental West Germanic dialect continuum, the Proto-Germamic voiceless dental fricative *þ (/θ/) shifted to /d/ (not counting subsequent sound changes such as final devoicing, rhotacism or complete loss in intervocalic position) during the Old High German, Middle Dutch and Middle Low German periods. After going through an intermediate stage as a voiced dental fricative /ð/, the shift to plosive /d/ started as early as the 6th century in Bavarian. From there, it radiated to neighboring Alemannic (8th century) and East Franconian (9th century), subsequently to Central German (10th–11th century), Low Franconian (12th century) and Low Saxon (12th–14 century).

The other West Germanic varieties on the continent, viz. the Frisian languages, were not affected by this change, but eventually lost the dental fricative by different pathways. In West Frisian, it generally became /t/ in initial position and /d/ in other positions by the 15th century. For North Frisian and the Wangerooge dialect of East Frisian, a fricative articluation is still reported in the 19th century, but eventually gave way to a plosive realization in the 20th century in all dialects (except for Amrum North Frisian, which has *þ > /s, z/ in many instances). While not directly related to the sound change in the continental West Germanic dialect continuum, loss of /θ/ in Frisian languages was most probably triggered by contact with West Germanic prestige varieties (Dutch, Low Saxon and standard German) and long periods of bilingualism.

Spirantization and loss of medial voiced stops

Later spirantization of /b d g/ occurred word internally: /b/ > /w/ occurred in all dialects that experienced inner-German lenition (see below) except for Swabian and some Upper Rhenish varieties, but also throughout Bavarian; /g/ > /ɣ/ occurs in the same area except that only Northern Bavarian and some Central Bavarian is effected; /d/ > /ð/ only occurs in Rhine Franconian. Younger speakers have replaced /ð/ with /r/, e.g. bruːðɐr > bruːrɐr. In Middle High German, these stops might be lost entirely medially, giving variant forms like seit/saget, meide/mägede, and hân/haben. Many of these contracted forms continue to be used in modern dialects.

In modern Dutch, /d/ has been lost after a long vowel or diphthong and a following schwa. In Brabantine, the syllables were kept apart by inserting a semi-vowel /j/ (snīden > snijen), whereas in Hollandish, the following syllable was contracted (weder > weer). Standard Dutch has adopted different forms from different dialects and often continues to write the lost /d/. This loss must have been proceeded by a spirantization of /d/, possibly as /ð/. Many Dutch dialects also lose /ɣ/ and /v/ under the same conditions. Loss of /d/ also affected most Low Franconian dialects in Germany (with the exception of the Bergish dialects) and some western Ripuarian dialects, and further many Low Saxon dialects (Westphalian, Eastphalian, parts of Northern Low German).

Developments of sibilants and sibilant clusters

West Germanic originally contained a consonant cluster *sk in all positions of the word; continental West Germanic varieties have shifted this cluster in all or some of these positions. In High German dialects, *sk shifted to /ʃ/ in High German dialects, probably via an intermediate stage of /sx/; this is usually dated to the 11th century. The situation is more complicated in other West Germanic dialects, which treated *sk differently depending on its position in the word. In most Low Franconian dialects, *sk shifted to /sx/ in initial position but simplified to /s/ in medial and final position; most scholars believe this change occurred in the Middle Dutch period (1150-1500). Western Flemish dialects did not simplify medial /sk/ to /s/: the cluster appears there variously as /sk/, /sʔ/, /ʃx/, and /ʃ/, while some northern Low Franconian dialects maintained initial /sk/. Low German dialects vary in how they shifted /*sk/. East Low German and Eastphalian show /ʃ/ in all positions like High German, whereas Westphalian and North Low German show a variety of outcomes, shown on the table below. The Low German changes probably postdate the shift in High German.

Outcomes of West Germanic /*sk/ in the continental West Germanic languages, divided by dialect and position in word, accordinding to Hall 2021

Dialect group	Initial *sk	Medial *sk	Final *sk
High German	/ʃ/	/ʃ/	/ʃ/
Southeastern Low Franconian	/ʃ/	/ʃ/	/ʃ/
East Low German	/ʃ/	/ʃ/	/ʃ/
Eastphalian Low German	/ʃ/	/ʃ/	/ʃ/
North Low German and Westphalian	/ʃ/	/sk/	/sk/
	/ʃ/	/s/	/s/
	/ʃx/	/sk/	/sk/
	/ʃx/	/ʃk/	/ʃx/
	/ʃx/	/ʃk/	/s/
	/sx/, /sç/	/sk/	/sk/
Western Flemish	/sx/	/sk/, /sʔ/, /ʃx/, /ʃ/	/s/
Most Low Franconian	/sx/	/s/	/s/

With the emergence of this new /ʃ/-sound, the old sibilant phoneme /s/ (which probably had a retracted [ʃ]-like articulation in Old and Middle High German, as still witnessed by modern Dutch) merged with /ʃ/ in word-initial position before a consonant (e.g. slange > Schlange /ʃlaŋə/ 'snake', stein > Stein /ʃtai̯n/ 'stone') in all High German dialects, and also in some Low Saxon and South Low Franconian dialects. The shift of /rs/ to /rʃ/ is common in most High German dialects, but only sporadically found its way into standard High German (e.g. ars > Arsch 'arse'). In Alemannic and adjacent Upper Franconian, Rhine Franocnian and Moselle Franconian dialects, /sp/ and /st/ became /ʃp/ and /ʃt/ also in non-initial position (e.g. fest > fescht 'tight'). In the southmost part of Alemannic and Bavarian Upper German, /s/ could even become /ʃ/ when not appearing before a consonant (e.g. sî > /ʃiː/ 'she' in the Wallis dialect of Visp).

Development of West Germanic *xs

The West Germanic consonant cluster *xs does not remain in any continental West Germanic language. It develops in two ways: simplification to /s/ or the change of the velar fricative /x/ to a velar stop /k/ (giving /ks/). Generally speaking, all Low German and Low Franconian dialects have simplified *xs to /s/ (e.g. Low German ses, Dutch zes = six). This simplification occurred as early as the 9th century in Low Franconian, from there spreading eastward before the Middle Low German period. Various Central and Upper German dialects, including several that do not directly border each other, show the same simplification, with forms such as wassen for wahsen attested in Middle Franconian, Hessian, and sometimes in Alemannic already in the Middle High German period.

In those High German dialects that don't simplify *xs to /s/, /*xs/ instead becomes /ks/ (e.g. seks = six). This change appears to have begun in Bavarian in late Middle High German. However, modern standard German continues to write <chs> although the pronunciation has changed (sechs, pronounced [zɛks], = "six").

/ft/ > /xt/

Various dialects of Low Franconian, Low German, and West Central German dialects share a shift of /f/ to /x/ when preceding /t/ and following a short vowel. Generally, these dialects are found on the Western edge of the West Germanic continuum.

The earliest evidence for the shift comes from Middle Franconian from the 9th century, this suggests a spread from Central Germany; from there the change spread north and east, growing weaker as it goes. It is attested in Low Saxon in the 10th and Low Franconian in the 12th centuries. Among the Low Franconian dialects, North Hollandic was excluded from the change, and relicts of /ft/ can be found in Northern Brabantine as late as the fifteenth century. Within Low German, the shift is most prevalent in Westphalian. While some shifted words are found throughout the Low German area, such as lucht (High German Luft "air"), most dialects of Low German retain /ft/ in most words.

Inner-German lenition

Inner-German lenition refers to the weakening of fortis stops and fricatives to their equivalent lenis stops and fricatives (/p, t, k, s, f/ > /b, d, g, z, v/), often with the loss of aspiration. It is first attested around around 1300 near Vienna in the Bavarian dialect group before spreading to other dialects. It is referred to as "inner-German" because it is not found in dialects in the north of Central German, nor in southern Upper German dialects. All Central German dialects except for Northern Thuringian, Middle Franconian, and Silesian are affected. Affected Upper German dialects include Swabian, East Franconian, and Central and Northern Bavarian. The Bavarian realization of the lenition differs from that found in the other dialects. Between the Upper German dialects with lenition and those without is a thin belt of dialects that only weaken consonants in initial position.

In the non-Bavarian dialects, the change applies to all instances of /p t k/ in all positions, causing them to lose aspiration and merge with /b d g/. In East Franconian, for instance, pass and Bass, Tier and dir, and Karten and Garten are all pronounced with the lenis stops. The shift also affects affricates such as /st, sp, ts/ and /pf/, which become /ʃd, ʃb, ds/ and /bf/. Final /sp/ and /mp/ may not be weakened.

In the Bavarian dialects in initial position, the same change happens and also includes affricates /pf ts kx/ gnobf (standard Knopf). However, /k/ retains its aspiration and is thus distinct for /g/: Lower Austrian gʰuːɐ (standard German Kuh). Word-internally and finally, Central and Northern Bavarian do not weaken /p, t, k, s, f/ before fricatives and stops, thus retaining combinations such as /st, sp, pf, ks, ft, cht, ts/ and /mp/. Additionally, these dialects shorten vowels before geminates, which remain fortis, while lengthening vowels whenever /p, t, k/ were not geminated while also weakening them. All sounds, including /st, pf, cht, ts/, are voiced finally except for /ks/ and /mp/. The result is that lenis consonants always appear after short vowels and fortis consonants always appear after long vowels. Due to apocope, morphological variations can be shown via a change in consonant and vowel length: tiːʒ̊ (table) vs. tiʃː (tables).

Loss of final nasal consonants

Final nasal consonants are often deleted in West Germanic dialects, most commonly in unstressed syllables but also occasionally in stressed ones.

Final -n is preserved in all monosyllabic words featuring a long vowel or diphthong in Low German, Rhine Franconian, and Upper Saxon, and most of Thuringian. Northern and Central Franconian dialects show variability in whether they delete final unstressed /n/ after schwa, giving variously [-ə] and [-ən]. Moselle Franconian follows the so-called "Eifel rule" (Eifler Regel) in the inflection of masculine articles and adjectives. Further south except in Bavarian, however, n is deleted in progressively more instances. In more southerly Central German dialects, forms such as mein "my" may become mei (Hessian). All Alemannic dialects also delete final unstressed /n/. In far southern Alemannic, all final /n/'s are deleted, including on monosyllabic words. This gives words such as Maa (Mann) "man" and schö (schön) "beautiful".

In standard Dutch and many Dutch dialects, including Hollandic, Brabantine, and Limburgs, a similar process occurs, but only /n/ after a schwa is deleted; western Flemish and Low Fraconian dialects spoken close to the Frisian and Low Saxon speech areas retain the final -n of the suffix and instead tend to delete the schwa and create a syllabic nasal. Zeelandish deletes some nasals and retains others. The Low Franconian Limburgs and Central German Ripuarian dialects share a feature of deleting final /n/ after lax vowels in monosyllabic words.

Velarization

West Germanic dialects feature two main types of consonant velarization: the change of /nd/ to /ŋd/ and /nt/ to /ŋ/, /ŋg/, or /ŋk/, and "Rhenish gutturalization" (or "velarization"), which affects final nasals and dental stops after a historically long vowel.

The more common of the two velarizations is the change of /nd/ and /nt/, where it mostly occurs word internally, for instance Ende > Enge or Engde. The affected word with the greatest geographic spread is hinten (behind), which appears as hinge(n) East to West in various Central German dialects from the Rhineland to the German-Polish border, and also affects Alemannic dialects as far as Switzerland. It was also formerly present in High Prussian and affects some Alemannic dialects further south in the Rhineland, but mostly in pockets. The change at the end of a word (e.g. Kind > Kingd) has a more restricted geographic distribution, found in Ripuarian, and to some extent in Moselle Franconian, Eastern Hessian, and a pocket in Silesian. Southern Middle Low German dialects also experienced this process, including southern Westphalian, southern Brandenburgish, parts of Pommeranian and Low Prussian.

"Rhenish gutturalization" is found in Ripuarian and some surrounding areas, including some parts of Limburgish. In "Rhenish gutturalization," dental stops and nasals are velarized after a historic long vowel, typically ī, ǖ, and ō, which is then shortened and possibly lowered: wīn > weŋ, brūn > broŋ, liute > lük, zīt > tsek.

Pronunciation and loss of /r/

Germanic languages show a variety of realizations of /r/. Early Germanic is often argued to have possessed an apical trill r (r), a type of r still found in modern Germanic dialects; however Germanic languages appear to have always possessed more than one realization of /r/.

Among tradition dialects of German, most dialects had an apical trill (r), as formerly also found in the standard. Parts of the historical Silesian dialect had a retroflex rhotic (ɽ) or similar sound. The uvular frictative (ʁ), today considered standard in Germany, was historically only found in some regions of East Central German. Dialects in the West, including most Swabian and High Alemannic, some Moselle Franconian, and some Rhine Franconian, had the related uvular trill (ʀ. While scholars have often argued that this form of /r/ only entered German late and under French influence, this view lacks significant support. Uvular /r/ is found in dialects not significantly influenced by French. Additionally, Yiddish has ʁ, pointing to an origin before the separation of High German and Yiddish. In the present day, uvular /r/ has become far more widespread. Among contemporary dialects, some varieties devoice, particularly in the West, final /r/ to x in words like Sport.

Vowels

Umlaut

See also: Germanic umlaut

i-Umlaut refers to a process of vowel raising and/or fronting of vowels when i/j occurred later in the word. Umlaut processes can be divided into three categories: "primary umlaut", that is, the raising of short /a/ to /e/ when followed later in the word by /i/ or /j/; "secondary umlaut", the raising of /a:/ to /æ:/ before /i-j/; and then "general umlaut", the fronting of /u(:)/ and /o(:)/ to /y(:)/ and /ø(:)/. While all West Germanic dialects are affected by "primary umlaut", not all are affected by "secondary" or "general umlaut". Scholars debate the exact manner in which i-umlaut occurred; in the earliest attested forms of High German, Old Low Franconian, and Old Saxon, only "primary umlaut" is marked in writing, although in Old High German and Old Saxon, other vowels must have experienced umlaut. Among the modern dialects, the two areas lacking some umlaut, namely Low Franconian and Upper German, are on opposite sides of the West Germanic dialect continuum.

In Low Franconian, "secondary" and "general" umlaut are confined to eastern dialects. As one travels eastward from the coast, one encounters progressively more umlaut effects, with first /a:/ and then /o:/ also being affected. Coastal Western Flemish varieties lack "secondary umlaut" of /a:/, a feature shared with the dialects of North and South Holland. Other southern varieties of Flemish Dutch do have "secondary umlaut." Additionally, Low Franconian varieties block primary umlaut in cases where /x/ and a consonant intervene between the /a/ and /i-j/: thus standard Dutch machtig vs. standard German mächtig. "General umlaut" of West Germanic /*o:/ and /*au/ are only found in eastern dialects, with the exception of the area around Utrecht. Most Low Franconian dialects, as well as Standard Dutch, completely lack the umlaut of long vowels (/a:/, /o:/, /u:/). The more limited application of umlaut in Dutch results in contrasts between standard Dutch and standard German such as kaas vs. Käse, horen vs. hören, and groeten vs. grüßen. Low Franconian varieties that have general umlaut can be further divided into dialects which only have umlaut as a historical sound shift in the lexcion, and those which have umlaut as a part of inflectional morophology (e.g. plural formation, verb conjugation). This morphological umlaut is restricted to South Low Franconian (e.g. Limburgish /vuːt/ 'foot' vs. /vyːt/ 'feet') and to the easternmost part of the Brabantian and Kleverlandish dialect areas. Dutch Low Saxon varieties display the same division: while all have general umlaut in individual words, morphological umlaut is restricted to the eastern dialects.

The southern High German dialects Bavarian and Alemannic show more umlaut than Low Franconian, but also have a number of forms where "general umlaut" is lacking. In these dialects, umlaut of /u/ is most often missing when formerly geminated /kk/ or /xx/ intervene between it and /i-j/: southern Upper German muck, ʃduk, khuxɘ, lu:ge vs. standard German Mücke, Stück, Küche, Lüge. In the Appenzeller dialect, umlaut of /u/ also fails before geminate /mm/, while Alemannic also sometimes blocks umlaut of /u/ before intervening /pf/, /kx/, and /ts/. Modern standard German has adopted some forms featuring umlaut-blocking, including suchen (cf. Low German sööken) and um (from Old High German umbi, cf. Low German öm).

Monophthongization of *au and *ai

The Proto-Germanic diphthongs *ai and *au fully or partially undergo monophthongization to ē and ō in Continental West Germanic, in contrast to Anglo-Frisian, where reflexes as ā and ēa dominate.

In Old Saxon, *au is always reflected as ō. In Middle Low Saxon, this o-sound is generally spelled in the same way as the reflex of original *ō. Yet, it must have been phonetically different since it has reflexes distinct from the latter in many modern Low Saxon dialects; for this reason it is notated as ō² in scholarly works (e.g. eastern Westphalian brō²t > /braut/ 'bread' vs. kō¹ken > /kɛokən/ 'cake', with ō¹ < *au).

Most dialects of Old Low Franconian show a parallel development to Old Saxon, with *au becoming /ō/ except when *au was followed by *w, in which case /ou/ was produced (e.g. houwen "to hew"); this change probably dates to the beginning of the 8th century. Old High German, on the other hand, retains a diphthong in most cases, shifting *au to /ou/ except when *au occurred before /x/ or a dental consonant, in which case it also become /ō/.

Proto-Germanic *ai split into *ē and *ei in Old Saxon, Old Low Franconian and Old High German, however under different conditions. In Old Saxon and most of Old Low Franconian, the monophthong *ē is the regular outcome unless the following syllable contained /i/ or /j/, in which case the diphthong *ei occurred. Middle and Modern Dutch still reflect the original distribution of these sounds. In Middle Low Saxon, both were often spelled alike, but are distinguished from each other (and from two other sources of ⟨ē⟩) in academic notation as ē² (corresponding to Low Franconian *ē) and ē³ ((corresponding to Low Franconian *ei). The former is mostly reflected as /eː/ in modern dialects, while the latter usually has become /ai/, e.g. hē²t > /heːt/ 'hot' and rē³n > /rain/ 'pure' in Münsterland Westphalian.

In High German, *ai generally appears as ei and only shifted to ē before in r, w, h and in absolute final postion. This type of split extends to the north beyond the Benrath line into the southeastern part of the Low Franconian area and is one of the features that defines the South Low Franconian dialect group.

The diphthongal realization of ei and ou is retained in many High German dialects, often with further modifications such as ei > /ɔi/ (Swabian) or /ɔa/ (Central Bavarian). Secondary monophthongization is also widespread; its outcome is usually distinct from the original monophthongs. E.g., Central Hessian has ei, au > /aː/, while Ripuarian dialects have /eː/ and /oː/. In both dialect groups (and also in East Franconian and Upper Saxon dialects), the original monophthongs ē and ō were raised to /iː/ and /uː/.

Development of Proto-West Germanic *ē² and *ō

Early West Germanic had two long mid vowels, *ē² and *ō. While *ō was a straightforward continuation of the Proto-Germanic vowel, *ē² had developed from various sources the details of which are disputed. Original Proto-Germanic *ē had shifted to *æ in Northwest Germanic and was further lowered to *ā in Continental West Germanic (except for isolated Ingvaeonisms in Low Saxon and Low Franconian).

In Old Low Franconian and Old High German, *ē² and *ō became falling diphthongs /ie/ and /uo/, with the latter also having an umlauted variant, /üe/, in High German. These are generally retained as falling diphthongs in Alemannic and Bavarian dialects (/iə/, /uə/, and /yə/ in Alemannic, /ia/, /ua/, and /ya/ in Bavarian), while they became high monophthongs /iː/, /uː/ /yː/ in East Franconian, most Low Franconian and many Central German dialects (including standard Dutch and standard German). In Moselle Fraconian, Ripuarian Fraconian and South Low Franconian, the most common reflexes are /eː/ and /oː/. In North Bavarian, Central Hessian and some Moselle Franconian dialects, the rising diphthongs /ei/ and /ou/ appear.

In Low Saxon, the long mid vowels mostly appear unchanged in the early literary record of Old Saxon (although they are occasionally spelled ie and uo). In Middle Low German, they are also generally written as mid monophthongs wihouth being distinguished from mid monophthongs from other sources. In academic descriptions of Middle Low German, the reflexes of *ē² and *ō are conventionally transcribed as ē⁴ and ō¹, based on the historical source and and the various realizations of these mid monophthongs in modern Low Saxon dialects. They appear as /eː/ and /oː/ in northern Low Saxon dialects, but became diphthongs in large parts of Westphalian and Eastphalian, e.g. kō¹ken > /kaukən/ 'cake', flē⁴gen > /flaigən/ 'fly (v.)' in southern Westphalian. In Low Saxon varieties spoken on both sides close to the Dutch–German border, the monophthongs are raised to near-high /ɪː/ and /ʊː/, while they have become high vowels /iː/ and /uː/ in most Dutch Low Saxon dialects spoken further west.

Developed of West Germanic *eu

The Proto-West Germanic diphthong *eu develops in different ways in the different dialects. Most dialects of High German, Low Franconian, and Low Saxon follow the "Franconian rule," according to which *eu lowered to /io/ before a low vowel in the next syllable except before /w/, and became /iu/ elsewhere: *beuda > OHG biotan. In Bavarian and Alemannic, however *eu was only lowered to /io/ if not before a labial or velar consonant except h, otherwise it became /iu/, regardless of the following vowel: *beuda > biutan.

In all dialects, /io/ merged with reflexes of Proto-West Germanic *ē². Most upper German dialects have retained earlier /iu/ as a separate diphthong until the present. Other dialects have instead merged it with /yː/ or /uː/ in the High Middle Ages; however, it was rediphthongized in North Bavarian and Hessian to /öu/. In southern Low Franconian dialects, the reflexes of earlier /io/ and /iu/ have both merged to /ie/, something also found in more northern Low Franconian dialects before /r/.

Diphthonization of high vowels

The long high vowels *ī and *ū (and also umlauted *ǖ /yː/) independently became diphthongs in two large disjunct areas of the continental West Germanic dialect continuum (and also in the West Germanic Anglic varieties on the British Isles): in the southeastern part having radiated out from the Bavarian to much of the High German area; and in large parts the Low Franconian area in the northwest, with the Brabantian dialect as a historical starting point. Both standard Dutch and standard German are based on varieties that have undergone the diphthonization of high vowels, as in Dutch ijs /ɛis/ and German Eis /ais/ from Middle Dutch/Middle High German īs 'ice'.

Among High German dialects, diphthongization is first documented in Bavarian dialects in Carinthia and Tyrol starting from the 12th century. By the 15th century, it had reached its current extent. The diphthongization area covers all of Bavarian, East Franconian, most of Rhine Franconian, Moselle Franconian and East Central German, and the Swabian branch of the Alemannic dialect group. The high vowels remained unchanged in almost all Alemannic varieties spoken to the west and south of Swabian (with small isolated pockets of diphthongizing dialects in the High Alemannic and Highest Alemannic areas), in adjacent Rhine Franconian and Moselle Franconian dialects spoken in Lorraine, in the Moselle Franconian dialects of the Siegerland, in Ripuarian, and in a contiguous area formed by Hessian and Thuringian dialects spoken on both sides of the divide between West and East Central German.

In the Low Franconian area, the diphthongization started in the early Modern Dutch period (i.e. the 1500s) in the Brabantian and East Flemish areas, and from there spread to the north to Holland and Utrecht. The old long high vowels were retained in the southwest in West Flemish and Zeelandic, and in Kleverlandish and most of South Low Franconian in the east (except for much of West Limburgish).

In Low Saxon, long high vowels remained for the most part unchanged. Diphthonization only occurred (independent of the Low Franconian and High German vowel shifts) in a limited area comprising eastern Westphalian dialects and neighboring dialects of the Eastphalian group, e.g. hūs > /hius/ 'house', īs > /uis/ 'ice'.

The common West Germanic drift towards diphthonization of high vowels can be explained by assuming that *ī and *ū where phonetically [ij] and [uw] in the entire West Germanic area and thus inherently prone to diphthongization. This is corroborated by the fact that in Ripuarian and in the non-dipthongizing varieties of South Low Franconian, high long vowels behave like rising diphthongs (and also like combinations of short vowels with syllable-closing sonorants /l, r, m, n/) in respect to their tone accent properties.

Reflexes of ā (< Proto-Germanic *ē¹)

The Proto-Germanic vowel *ē¹ lowered to *ǣ in Proto-(North-)West Germanic and became a long open vowel ā /aː/ in Old Saxon, Old Low Franconian and Old High German. With the exception of western Low Franconian varieties, this ā underwent a split in the late Middle Ages into a non-umlauted form and an umlauted form (usually transcribed as æ in descriptions of Middle High German, and as ē¹ for Middle Low German).

In the non-umlauting Low Franconian area, many coastal dialects display spontaneous fronting to /ɛː/~/æː/ (in Zeeland, parts of West Flanders and South Holland) or /eː/ (North Holland at the language border to Frisian). Further inland in Holland, /aː/ remains unchanged, while in non-umlauting Low Franconian varieties in the south, "darkened" (i.e. velarized) reflexes as /ɔː/ and /oː/ occur.

In High German, Low Saxon and the umlauting Low Franconian dialects, ā underwent velarization to /ɑː/, /ɔ:/, /o:/ or even /u:/, often merging with back vowels from other sources such as monophthongized *au, or lengthened *o or *u in open syllables. Only in Cimbrian, some Highest and High Alemannic dialects, and the East German dialect of Berlin, /aː/ retained its original quality. There are two umlauted counterparts of ā. In words like Middle High German kæse 'cheese' or schære 'scissors' (or its Low Saxon and Low Franconian cognates), umlauted ā appears in the base form of the word and does not alternate with non-umlauted ā. In such words, æ usually merged with front vowels from other sources to /ɛː/, /eː/ or even /iː/. In Bavarian (excluding Cimbrian), Alsatian and many East Central German dialects, æ is represented by /aː/. Only few dialects retain umlauted ā as a distinct sound that does not merge with any other sound, e.g. /ɛː/ in southern Westphalian (where it is the front counterpart of /ɔ:/ from non-umlauted ā). The other umlauted counterpart of ā (so-called Analogieumlaut, lit. 'umlaut by analogy') appears in inflected forms (e.g. noun plurals, or 2nd and 3rd person singular verb forms) and often differs from primary reflexes of æ. In dialects that have a rounded reflex of ā, its counterpart in inflected forms is also rounded (except in dialects with unrounding), e.g. Kleverlandish Low Franconian /ʃœːp/ 'sheep', plural of /ʃɔːp/.

Unstressed vowel reduction

All the continental West Germanic languages have greatly simplified the vowel and syllable structure of Proto-West Germanic. The tendency of Germanic languages to reduce vowels in unstressed syllables in Germanic languages has commonly been attributed to Germanic's strong word-initial or root syllable stress. This has resulted in most unstressed vowels becoming schwa [ə] over time.

The earliest recorded stages of West Germanic languages all contain a variety of full vowels in unstressed syllables. Old High German even retains long vowels in unstressed syllables, which are not found in the other early-attested West Germanic languages. The change from the old to the middle stage of High and Low German and Dutch was marked by the widespread replacement of vowels in unstressed syllables with schwa, resulting in simplifications of the morphology as endings become indistinct. However, some endings with secondary stress maintained full vowels, such as -bar, -dom, and -unge. Additionally, unstressed medial syllables could be lost entirely through syncope: OHG hêriro > MHG hêrre (modern German Herr).

The process began in unstressed prefixes before progressing to medial and then to final syllables. Old Low Franconian in the 9th and 10th centuries appears to have experienced far greater reduction than contemporary Old High German or Old Saxon. Among High German dialects, Central German and East Franconian show evidence of reduction earliest, in the 9th century, with evidence for reduction in Old Saxon immediately following. Bavarian and Alemannic only show reduction later. Alemannic appears to have been particularly conservative, reducing only unstressed short vowels to schwa while retaining distinct unstressed long vowels well into the Middle High German period. The farthest southern Highest Alemannic, such as Walser German, have retained distinct vowels in unstressed syllables to the present, such as nominative plural die Taga, genitive plural der Tago. The decreased isolation of these isolated mountain valleys in the 20th century has meant that the distinction between final vowels has become less clear here as well.

Middle Dutch continued to have an unstressed long vowel (/iː/) in the ending -lijk and an unstressed short vowel (/i/) in the ending -ig. In modern Dutch, both endings have been reduced to schwa.

Syncope and apocope

The loss of final unstressed vowels (usually schwa [ə]) forms a significant isogloss within West Germanic dialects. The so-called "Early New High German apocope" was a general loss of final /-e/ in all instances, which appeared first in Bavarian in the 13th century and came to encompass most Alemannic and West Central German, but not East Central German, which retained many instances of final schwa. A similar change is independently attested in Hollandic Low Franconian, also in the 13th century; however, schwa was retained on some categories of words. Apocope is not attested in Low German until the 16th century, when it appears in the north, around Mecklenburg. Among the modern dialects, final schwa is retained in a continuous belt that comprises Low Saxon and High German dialects on both sides of the Benrath line and extends into the Dutch Low Saxon area, additionally in a relic area within Low Franconian in the southwest (West Flemish, Zeelandic, parts of East Flemish). It was lost to the north and south of this belt: in the northern part of Low Saxon, in much of West Central German and almost all of Upper German; however, the loss is in some instances morphologically conditioned, as, for plural morpheme -e is retained in a much larger area than the dative ending -e. Some dialects, such as Low German on the border with Low Franconian and Thuringian, only apocopate schwa after sonorants, but retain it after stop consonants: strotə but bluəm (cf. standard German Blume).

Beginning in Middle High German, most High German dialects and standard German have syncopated many unstressed vowels in final syllables, depending on the surrounding consonants: houbet > Haupt "head". Middle Dutch shows a more advanced stage of syncope in unstressed final syllables than contemporary Middle High German, but tends to retain schwa in initial syllables. Low German dialects vary in how much syncope they show: North Low German and East Low German have syncopated most medial unstressed syllables, whereas southern Westphalian and Eastphalian often have not, retaining unstressed vowels in words such as lengeste "longest".

The deletion of schwa in unstressed prefixes such as ge- and be- depends on the dialect, with progressively more syncopation as one moves south. Low German, Low and Middle Franconian, Low and Upper Hessian, and East Central German generally do not syncopate prefixes at all, whereas Swabian, Upper Alsatian, Bavarian, and Swiss Alemannic generally syncopate schwa in all instances. East Franconian and Bavarian show the least prefix syncopation in the north, with it progressively increasingly to cover more consonant combinations as one moves south. Dialects in between syncopate to lesser amounts. However, some syncopated forms are found in almost all dialects and appear to be older, namely the syncopation of schwa before /r/ and /l/ in some lexemes, found in for instance German bleiben (< belîben) and glauben (< gelouben, cf. Dutch geloven).

Unrounding and secondary rounding

The majority of High German dialects have experienced the unrounding of the front rounded vowels /y/ (written <ü>) and /ø/ (written <ö>) to their unrounded counterparts /i/ and /e/ respectively. The change probably began in the 13th century in Bavarian at the latest and then spread throughout the early modern period. Today, it includes all High German dialects except for Ripuarian, East Franconian, and High Alemannic. Unrounded pronunciations of umlauted vowels were also formerly encountered as part of the High German standard until the 19th century, but are today considered nonstandard.

Most Low German and Low Franconian dialects did not experience unrounding. It is found in Low German dialects from around Bremen and was previously present in some East Low German varieties spoken in what is now Poland and Russia's Kaliningrad Oblast. In Low Franconian, systematic unrounding is mainly found in the southern part of the Brabantian area around Leuven and in some Central and West Limburgian varieties of South Low Franconian.

There was also an opposite process, "secondary rounding," in which the front unrounded vowels /i/ and /e/ were rounded /y/ and /ø/ respectively. Secondary rounding is a fairly irregular process, usually occurring around /w/, other labial consonants, /ʃ/, and especially before /r/ and /l/. It occurred very frequently in Low German dialects beginning in the 13th century, with the most secondary rounding taking place in North Low German. Commonly rounded forms in Low German include bün (German bin). In the High German dialect area, it seems to have begun in the 13th century in the High Alemannic area, then spread to Swabian and East Franconian. Among High German dialects, it is today especially common in High Alemannic, northern East Franconian, East Hessian, and Thuringian. e.g. dṻʃ (standard German Tisch). It is occasionally found even in dialects that have unrounded their umlauted vowels, such as Central and South Bavarian, e.g. Central Bavarian ṏfm (standard German Ofen).

Spontaneous fronting

Spontaneous fronting of the rounded back vowels/diphthongs /o(ː), u(ː), ou, au, ua, uə/ occurred in Low Fraconian dialects and some High German dialects. Unlike i-umlaut, this fronting is not conditioned by the phonological environment. Spontaneous fronting can result in partially fronted rounded central vowels (e.g. /ʉ/, /ɤ/ etc.), or in fully fronted rounded vowels (/y/, /ø/ etc.).

Most Low Franconian dialects except for some in the Southeast have spontaneous fronting of ū to /y:/ (and thus merged it with original /y:/ that arose from the early West Germanic dipthong /iu/), as shown by the change of earlier hūs to huis (/hyːs/ in Middle Dutch, diphthongized to /hœys/ in Modern Dutch). This palatalization also spread (often paired with shortening to /y/) to some Low Saxon dialects in the Netherlands. Spontaneous palatalization of /u:/ did not occur in South Low Franconian (except in the westernmost part) and in the northeastern part of the Brabantian dialect area. Sponaneous fronting of Middle Dutch ō (from Proto-Germanic *au) has a much more limited scope and only occurs in East Flanders and the southwesternmost part of Brabant (including Brussels), where it is realized as /yə/ (e.g. /byəm/ < bōm 'tree').

In High German, spontaneous fronting is especially associated with High and Low Alemannic, North Hessian, and West Thuringian: e.g. Low Alemannic hüs ("house"), brüədər ("brother"). West Thuringian and Upper Saxon instead shift to unrounded back vowels vowels (/ʉ/, /ɤ/). In Low German, fronting occurs most frequently before dental consonants. sünne ("sun"), dörp ("village", cf. High German Dorf). The process effected Westphalian the least and East Frisian Low German the most.

In some Low Fraconian and High German and dialects, spontaneous fronting is linked to the unrounding of historical front rounded vowels. In these dialects, the resulting vowels re-occupy the place of the historical rounded front vowels that have undergone unrounding, which can be analysed as a chain shift, e.g. /uː/ > /yː/ > /iː/. Spontaneous fronting rarely affects all rounded back vowels/diphthongs to the same degree. As a rule, /uː/, /ou/ and /uə/ are more prone to spontaneous fronting than /oː/ and short back vowels.

Open syllable lengthening

Open syllable lengthening refers to the change of short vowels to long vowels in stressed open syllables. It is first attested in Low Franconian around 1200, and is theorized to have spread from there. It is also possible that it began in different times in different regions, as there is some early evidence from Bavarian. Open syllable lengthening did not affect many middle and southern Alemannic dialects, and there are isolated pockets in southern Bavarian, including the Cimbrian language island, which never acquired the feature.

In early Middle Dutch, open syllable lengthening lengthened /e a o/ in open syllables but lowered /i u/ to /e o/. In standard Dutch, these vowels have merged with /e: o:/, but Eastern Dutch dialects continue to distinguish between them. Alterations in vowel length between different forms of the same word are mostly leveled out, with verbs and adjectives taking the short form, while nouns might take either. Several nouns have maintained the alteration between a short vowel in the singular and a long one in the plural: wĕg, plural we:gen, schĭp, plural sche:pen. With the exception of Westphalian, where diphthongization had previously taken place in open syllables, Low German follows the same pattern as Low Franconian, with Eastphalian keeping old and new long vowels distinct.

In most German dialects stressed short vowels in open syllables were lengthened in a more regular way than Dutch or Low German, without affecting the quality of the vowel: năme > Na:me, sĭgen > siegen (<ie> = [i:]). Unlike in Dutch or Low German, in cases where a noun paradigm would thereby have different vowel lengths, typically the long vowel was chosen: thus We:g "way" with a long vowel because of the plural We:ge, but the adverb is wěg (away) with a short vowel. Several Bavarian dialects lack the feature of leveling the paradigm, instead retaining short vowels in words like Weg, as do some High Alemannic dialects.

Closed Syllable shortening

Closed syllable shortening refers to a process in which long vowels and diphthongs were shortened in closed syllables. It is not as widespread or as regular as open syllable lengthening. Among High German dialects, closed syllable shortening occurred in Central German dialects in the 12th century. Bavarian shows only a few examples and Alemannic mostly lacks the shortening. It occurred especially before /xt/ (e.g. gebra:ht > gebrǎcht "brought", lieht > Licht "light"), /rC/ (C=any consonant), before geminate or formerly geminate consonants (MHG geno:z) {<geno:zz} > Genǒsse), and also in unstressed endings with long vowels like MHG -li:ch (modern standard German -lĭch). Middle Low German likewise often shortened vowels before two consonants, although these shortenings were often removed again via analogy, especially in the northern East Low German dialects. They remain before /ft/ and /xt/, however. Middle Dutch shared the shortening of long vowels and diphthongs before /xt/ with High and Low German (e.g. Dutch dǎcht, licht), which in Low Franconian can also come from earlier /ft/ (e.g. gekŏcht, from koːpen "to buy"). Occasional shortenings occurred before other vowel combinations (e.g. liːnden > lǐnden.

Other vowel lengthening and shortening phenomena

In most dialects of Middle Low German besides Westphalian, long ē and ō experienced shortening especially before t d m n and a following unstressed -er or -el (heːmel > hěmmel "heaven", beːter > bětter "better"). This change occurred following open syllable lengthening. In Eastphalian and to some extent other dialects, lengthened e and o also experienced shortening before n d t before unstressed -en. Sometimes Eastphalian experienced shortening before other endings, such as -ing, -ich, or with the consonants g and p before the same unstressed final syllables (e.g. oːpenen > ǒppenen "to open").

Vowel Raising and Lowering

High vowel lowering refers to the lowering of high vowels such as i, ü, and u to e, ö and o, most typically before nasals and liquids. Typically, only short vowels are affected, though the lowering of long vowels is also attested. In High German, the change began in the 12th century. It is most characteristic of Central German dialects, but is also found in Upper German dialects such as Swabian. The rules for when a lowering takes place vary throughout Central German and are often no longer obvious from the present-day. West Central German generally shows a wider range of lowering contexts than East Central German. Low German experienced lowering of high vowels before r and a following labial or velar consonant in the 11th century.

Franconian tone accent

In the western part of the continental West Germanic dialect continuum, three dialect groups, viz. South Low Franconian, Ripuarian and Moselle Franconian, have developed contrastive tone accent on stressed long vowels, diphthongs and short vowels followed by a sonorant (i.e. /r, l, m, n, ŋ/). Two types of tone are distinguished which are conventionally called Stoßton/stoottoon ('thrusting tone') or simply tone accent 1 (TA 1) and Schleifton/sleeptoon ('slurring tone') or tone accent 2 (TA 2). While indivdual dialects may differ in detail, TA 1 is for the most part realized (in declarative sentences) as a strong pitch drop (= falling tone) within the syllable, while TA 2 is usually realized as a level high tone or a high falling tone with only a slight pitch drop.

While the phonetic driving force that caused the development of tone accent and its geographicial origin are still a matter of debate, the historical phonological conditions of it are well understood. The tone accent of a syllable in modern dialects depends on the original quantity and quality of the stressed vowel in Middle High German and Middle Limburgian (= Middle East Low Franconian):

• Most Ripuarian and Moselle Franconian follow the so-called "Rule A". Under Rule A, originally long mid and low vowels (i.e. /eː, ɛː, oː, ɔː, aː/) and falling diphthongs (/ie, uo/) always produced TA 1 (e.g. skaːf > Ripuarian ʃɔː¹f 'sheep'). High long vowels (/iː, uː/), rising diphthongs (/ei, ou/) and originally short vowels that underwent open-syllable lengthening mostly received TA 2 (e.g. muːs > muː²s 'mouse'; maxən > maː²xə 'make'); however, in the special case when these vowels/diphthongs were followed by an unstressed syllable that started in a voiced consonant, they developed TA 1 (e.g. bliːbən > bliː¹və 'stay').
• South Low Franconian mostly follow "Rule A2", which is largely identical to Rule A but additionally requires that the unstressed vowel following a voiced consonant undergoes apocope in order to trigger TA 1 for high long vowels, rising diphthongs, and lengthened short vowels. For instance, the Sittard dialect has banə > baː¹n 'road' where unstressed /ə/ underwent apocope. The difference between Rule A and Rule A2 is only visible when unstressed /ə/ following a voiced consonant did not undergo apocope: TA 1 with high vowels and rising diphthongs is then triggered only in Rule A dialects, but not in Rule A2 dialects. For instance, skriːbən becomes ʃriː¹və in Kölsch (Ripuarian, Rule A), but ʃriː²və in the Central Limburgian dialect of Maasbracht (South Low Franconian, Rule A2).
• Finally, "Rule B" is observed in the southeastern part of the Moselle Franconian dialect area. Rule B largely operates as a mirror image of Rule A, with high long vowels and rising diphthongs receiving TA 1, while long non-high vowels and falling diphthongs have TA 2.

Northern Low German has developed a phonologically similar feature, known as Knick ("bend").

Grammar

Pronouns

Modern standard Dutch shows no distinction between accusative and dative pronouns for any person, and sometimes no longer distinguishes between subject and object forms. Some dialects retain a distinction, or did so until recently, for the third person pronouns. Others have simplified the system further, using for instance ons ("us") as a subject pronoun.

1st and 2nd person singular pronouns

Proto-Germanic featured a pronominal system for the first and second person singular ("I", "you") featuring four distinct forms, a nominative, an accusative, a dative, and a genitive/possessive. All three dialect areas have maintained the nominative form for "I", variously ich (High German) or ik (Dutch, Low German). The forms of the 2nd person singular vary more widely as most Dutch dialects have replaced the earlier pronoun du, still used in High and Low German, with the plural form, je; the original du is found today only on the western edge of the Low Franconian dialect area.

In West Germanic, North Sea Germanic tends to lose the distinction between accusative and dative forms of the 1st and 2nd person singular pronouns ("me", "you"). Most Low German dialects level in favor of the dative (mi and di), but some, such as Eastphalian, instead favor the original accusative (e.g. mek, deck). The loss of distinct accusative/dative pronouns for the first and second person singular had already occurred in Old Saxon, although accusative forms are occasionally attested, and they resurface as general forms in some dialects of Middle Low German. Middle Dutch likewise attests a loss of the distinction in favor of the dative, giving mi (modern mij and di, although some High German influenced originally accusative forms (mik/mich) are found in the southeast and in dialects bordering Germany. Most High German dialects maintain a distinction, having mich dich (acc.) and mir dir (dat.).

For "you", modern standard Dutch uses subject jij, object form jou, with an unstressed form je that can be used for either form. In the south, the pronoun begins with /g-/ rather than /j-/ (gij). While these are originally plural forms, related to German ihr and Low German jy (see below), in modern Dutch, they are only used in the singular except for je.

1st and 2nd person plural pronouns

The first consonant of the nominative/subject 1st person plural pronoun varies throughout the dialect continuum. Within Southeastern Low Franconian (? unclear from source and my Lower Rhenish geography is not the best), forms with initial f (fer/vir/för/fir) are found east of Eupen, around Geilenkirchen and Erkelenz, as well as east of Dülken, Süchteln, and around Remscheid. Initial f is also found in a large around of neighboring Low German Westphalian (fi/fui/feï). The remainder of Low German has initial w. Dialects south of the ik/ich line have initial m. (?).

Proto-West Germanic probably made no distinction between accusative and dative for the 1st and 2nd person plural ("us", "you"), and almost all modern High and Low German dialects have a single pronoun for both. In Old High German, however, separate accusative and dative forms were innovated: unsih, iuwih (accusative) vs. uns, iu (dative). Low Saxon also vary rarely attests a form unsik, while a form jüch (as opposed to dative jü) is attested early in North Middle Low German. In High German, the two forms were eventually leveled in favor of only uns for the 1st person and only euch for the second person. Low German dialects vary as to which form they chose; Eastphalian uses the former accusative forms for both (üsch and jück), while other dialects may use the dative (us or uns for "us", ju for "you"). The small Westphalian dialect of Drolshagen-Plettenberg-Schmallenberg is unique among High and Low German dialects in having distinct dative and accusative pronouns for the 2nd person plural (auk [acc], au [dat]).

Both most Upper German Bavarian dialects and the Low German spoken around Dortmund have replaced the 2nd person plural pronoun with what was originally a dual form: nominative Bav. eß, Dort. (g)it, accusative/dative Bav. enk, Dort. ink. In modern Bavarian, these pronouns have mostly been ousted in favor of the more standard German ir/aich, except in rural areas.

3rd person pronouns

With the exception of the High German dialects, all continental West Germanic dialects share the innovation of using a 3rd person masculine nominative/subject pronoun ("he") beginning with h- (Dutch hij, Low German he vs. High German er). h- forms are also found in the Central German Rhineland dialects; there is also a transition zone with a mixed form her.

Reflexive pronoun

Low German and Low Franconian had originally lost their third person reflexive pronouns (that is, there was no special word for himself as opposed to him), a feature shared with the North Sea Germanic languages English and Frisian. More recently, the High German reflexive pronoun sich has been imported into both Low German and standard Dutch. Southwestern, Northwestern, and most Eastern Low Franconian dialects continue to use the same pronoun for both "him" and "himself;" eastern dialects near the German border also use the forms zik, zich, or zich.

Verbs

First person singular ending

Most Proto-West Germanic verbs used a vocalic ending to mark the first person singular, variously -u and -ō, depending on verb class (e.g. OHG/OS biru, "I bear", OHG/OS neriu "I nourish") Old High German and Old Saxon the first person singular ending-m from the athematic verbs to some classes of weak verbs: in Old Saxon and Old High German it appears on verbs with the vowel -o/ō (e.g. OS salbon, OHG salbōm "I salve"), while Old High German also extended it to weak verbs ending in -e/ē (e.g. OHG habēm vs. OS hebbiu "I have").

In the High medieval period, the different verb classes leveled the first person singular in all continental Germanic dialects, mostly to -e (/-ə/) (the phonetic development of the vocalic ending). In dialects with apocope, this final schwa was subsequently lost. In modern Dutch dialects, the schwa is only retained in Zeelandic, Flemish, and Dutch Low Saxon. Across the Dutch–German border, -e is retained in the western and southern parts of the Low German dialect area. Among High German dialects, it is still found e.g. in Northern Hessian and the northern Thuringian dialects.

In Middle Franconian and West Alemmanic, the leveling was instead to -en, the phonetic development of -m. Various West Central German dialects, including all of Central Franconian, have retained this ending for the first person singular until the present (e.g. Luxembourgish ech kafen "I buy"), but the ending is often reduced to /-ə/ in many (or all) phonetic environments, depending on dialect. While the Old Low Franconian Psalms use -en for all persons, most Middle Dutch shows the same leveling to -e as most Middle High German, with -en only appearing in Eastern dialects dialects (e.g. ic bidden "I ask"). The modern dialects of Zeeland and West Flanders feature a more general -en suffix for the first person singular. This form is probably not related to the earlier -en ending in older Low Franconian, but is rather the result of a more recent change influenced by the athematic verbs.

The Dutch spoken in southern Holland and around Utrecht instead has a first person singular ending -t (e.g. ik geeft "I give"). This is part of the phenomenon of Eenheidssingularis ("unity singular") in these dialects, in which all singular verbs take the ending -t. This feature arose because the ending is lost when the verb and pronoun are inverted (cf. geef hij "does he give"), thus matching the 1st person singular form of the verb with schwa apocope.

Second person singular ending

The earliest second person singular ending in Germanic was -Vs; in Old High German, this ending began to receive a final t, becoming -est in Middle High German. Typically, this change is argued to derive from a reanalysis of a following pronoun du as part of the verb stem: zelis dû > zelistû "you tell". Analogy with verbs already ending in -t like bist may have also played a role.

In Middle High German, Central Franconian maintained the older -es ending, whereas in East Central German and Upper German, -est became more and more dominant. Central Franconian dialects continue to feature a verb ending -s, e.g. Cologne du nimps "you take". In Middle Dutch, while the form -(e)st does occur, it is not as common. In the modern Netherlands, most dialects have lost the second person singular pronoun doe. Among those that maintain it, distinctive second person singular verb endings remain. In East Limburgish and Dutch Low German near the German border near Groningen and Twente, the form -s is still maintained without a following -t. In Groningen itself, both -ste and the simplification -se appear. Final -s is also maintained in German Low Franconian. In German Low German, the ending -(e)s without following -t is still found in Westphalian, while other Low German dialects adopted the form -(e)st during the Middle Low German period.

Syncope in verb endings

As a result of schwa syncope, most modern continental German dialects have reduced the verb endings -et, -es(t), and -ete/-ede to -t, -s(t), and -te/-de.

Most Westphalian and parts of Eastphalian do not syncopate the schwa in the endings -est, -et (in Low German, 3rd person singular and all plural), or -ede. Other Low German dialects syncopated these endings during the Middle Low German period. The North Low German of Emsland losses the -t entirely in verbs stems ending in stops or fricatives: fänk "catches" and drif "drives".

Standard German retains the schwa in these endings when the verb stem ends in a dental stop (/d/ or /t/), e.g. er redet. An exception is made for the 2nd and 3rd person singular present of strong verbs with a vowel change (e.g. 3rd person singular er wird, er rät, but 2nd person plural ihr werdet, ihr ratet). The syncope on these verbs predates that of schwa more generally, already being common in Middle High German. For other verbs, Early New High German still shows inconsistent application of syncope. Virtually all modern High German dialects syncopate the vowel even when the stem ends in a dental stop, leading to forms such as er fint (rather than er findet) and er ret (rather than er redet), geredt (rather than geredet). On the other hand, some southern High German dialects use unsyncopated forms where the standard has adopted a syncopated form, e.g. er ratet (rather than er rät).

Syncope of schwa in verb endings was already common in Middle Dutch. Standard Dutch and most dialects syncopate the schwa even when the stem ends in a dental stop (e.g. hij vindt "he finds"), however some Hollandic, Zeelandic, and French-Flemish dialects maintain the schwa before dental stops. The dialect of Stellingwerfs also maintains the schwa after b (e.g. schabbet), while the dialect of Goeree-Overflakkee maintains the long preterite form -ede.

Plural endings

Proto-West Germanic featured distinct endings for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person plural. Among modern dialects, three distinct endings are only retained in the southern part of Highest Alemannic in Valais and in some Central Bavarian dialects (Niederbayern, parts of Austria), e.g. Walser German wir mache, ir machet, schi machunt. Ripuarian maintains three forms only for athematic verbs. All other dialects have simplified the system in some way.

Old Saxon, in common with other North Sea Germanic languages but unlike Old High German or Old Low Franconian, possessed a single ending for the plural (Einheitsplural), -ad. The subjunctive plural used -en. In the Middle Low German period, dialects began to use a single form for the subjunctive and indicative. The former subjunctive ending -en came to be used as the general form especially in the east and, including in the literary language of the Hanseatic League. A third form, the suffix -ent, is found in Westphalian texts from the 13th and 14th century. Most dialects in the western part of the modern Low Saxon area continue to use -(e)t, while dialects in the eastern part have adopted the subjunctive ending -(e)n; based on this feature, the latter are classified as Eastern Low German in traditional German dialectology. The ending -(e)n is also employed in the northernmost dialects in Schleswig; in the northwest on both sides of the Dutch–German border in the Stellingwerven, Groningen, and East Friesland; in the Waldeck region around Korbach bordering on northern Hessian; and in a narrow stretch of Westphalian dialects in the southwest close to the boundary with the Ripuarian dialect area. The suffix -ent survives in a small pocket of southern Westphalian dialects around Olpe and Drolshagen.

Most Low Franconian and High German dialects have conflated the first and third person plural endings (-en), but retain a distinct ending for the second person plural (-t). The simplification of -ent to -en can be dated to before 1350 in Central German and spread from there into Bavarian and East Franconian by the 15th century, while it predates the Middle Dutch period (1250) in Low Franconian. In many Low Franconian varieties (including standard Dutch), the historical second person plural form has acquired a singular function (e.g. standard Dutch jij maakt 'you (sg.) make'), and a new plural has formed, taking the ending -en. This change has produced a secondary unitary plural that is historically unrelated to the Low Saxon unitary plural. The ending -nt is retained in some South Low Franconian dialects in the first and third person plural forms of athematic and contracted verbs.

Independent from Low Saxon, Einheitsplural also developed in High German dialects of the Southwest, affecting much of Alemannic and some adjacent Rhine Franconian dialects. In Rhine Franconian dialects west of the Rhine and in Low Alemannic, the general plural suffix is /-ə/ (from earlier -ən with n-apocope), while in Swabian and in the eastern part of the High Alemannic area the suffix /-ət/ (or /-əd/) is used, e.g. Low Alemannic mache vs. Swabian machet '(we/you/they) make', with contracted and athematic verbs instead taking either -n or -nt depending on dialect. Highest Alemanic and western High Alemannic dialects still retain two or three distict plural verb endings.

Preterite and perfect forms

Strong verbs

Most dialects have leveled the earlier ablaut between the singular and plural of strong verbs.

In Dutch dialects, distinct vowels between the singular and plural for at least some ablaut classes are maintained in Western Flemish around Herlen, in Belgian Eastern Limburgish, and in the Zeelandic spoken in northern Brabant.

During the Middle Low German period, the umlauted vowel formerly used in the past subjunctive frequently came to replace the non-umlauted vowel of the past plural of strong verbs. North and East Low German have subsequently replaced this vowel with that of the preterite singular. However, Westphalian and some Eastphalian dialects have maintained the change in vowels: Westphalian ik halp "I helped", du hülpest "you (s) helped, weu hülpen "we help". The area of Osnabrück has leveled this difference by applying the vowel of the plural to the singular.

Weak verbs

The preterite in Dutch dialects shows several forms. Some Hollandish, Zealandic, and French Flemish dialects add the full form -ede (e.g. ik bakkede "I baked"), at least to some verbs. In most dialects with syncope of the "binding e" in old -ede, the form -de is assimilated to a preceding voiced consonant (e.g. ik bakte), as in standard Dutch. However, most Limburgish dialects always adds -de, without devoicing; West Limburgs has generalized the ending -n to all persons in the preterite. South East Limburgish instead adds adds -et-, to which personal endings are then added (e.g. ich gaapet). West Flemish adds -d/-t, a form that features both syncope and apocope, but French Flemish usually adds -ste (e.g. ik bakste "I baked), a form borrowed from the preterite present verbs (cf. archaic onste, dorste). East Flemish shows an expanded form -dege/-tege. This was originally a double ending -dede/-tede, with the second /d/ weakened to /ɤ/. Overflakkee, Schouwen-Duiveland, and Zeelandic-Flemish have a preterite ending -ende.

In most of Low German, because of the loss of medial /d/, the ending -ede becomes -e (which can be apocopated): hör(e) "I hear/heard", hörest "you hear/heard", but höret "he hears" vs. hör(e) "he heard". Dialects with this feature often use the perfect to express the 1st and 2nd person singular. Westphalian, however, has retained medial /d/, sometimes with syncope of the preceding schwa: ik kuakede "I cooked", ik woende "I lived". After voiceless consonants, this syncopated -de becomes -te, a feature also of Dutch Low Saxon. In West Low German Neumarkish, this -te form has spread to other verbs, possibly under High German influenced. Many West Low German dialects show rhoticism of medial /d/ to /r/, giving forms such as ik harre "I had".

Weak verbs with "Rückumlaut"

Most Low German dialects have reduced the amount of "Rückumlaut", but in Westphalian (as in the neighboring West Central German) the verbs featuring "Rückumlaut" are frequent: e.g. setten - sat "set - set", seggen - sachte. Rückumlaut is also common in the neighboring Limburgish dialects (e.g. heure "hear" [present tense] vs. ik hoort "I heard").

ge- prefix

By around the year 1000, the Proto-Germanic prefix *ga- had become grammaticalized with the past participle of verbs in continental West Germanic, around the same period that saw the development of the periphrastic perfect tense. As such, it is found in modern standard German and Dutch. Originally, the prefix seems to have had perfective meaning; its application to participles in the high medieval period was inconsistent. In the oldest stages of the continental West Germanic languages, the prefix was still perfective, and thus was not added to verbs that were themselves perfective or telic in meaning. Additionally, the prefix could be added to finite verbs to indicate pluperfect or future meaning, creating oppositions such as sah ("saw") vs. gisah ("came to see").

In the Middle High German and Middle Dutch period, there remained a class of verbs that were felt to be inherently perfective and thus lacked the ge- prefix for their participles, such as gehen/gaan, werden/worden, komen, and vinden. In modern standard German and Dutch, the prefix is now added to most verbs lacking initial unstressed prefixes, with the difference that Dutch also adds them to verbs containing the suffix -eeren whereas verbs in standard German with -ieren are suffixless (Dutch gestudeerd vs. German studiert). Several Low Franconian, Central, and Upper German dialects have retained the original practice of not adding ge- to certain verbs that are felt to be perfective, while standard German still does not add ge- to werden in the passive.

Ge- has often been phonologically reduced or lost in modern West Germanic languages. Central German retains the prefix in all instances, but in certain Upper German dialects of Bavarian, Alemmanic, and East Franconian, the vowel of the prefix is syncopated in front of certain consonants such as fricatives, nasals, semivowels, liquids, rhotics and /h/, giving g- (e.g. gflogə, cf. standard German geflogen). Moreover, many Upper German dialects delete ge- completely on verbs with stems beginning with a stop: *gbråxt > bråxt (standard German gebracht). Northern Dutch dialects lack the ge-prefix entirely, while some more southerly ones reduced it to e-; far southern dialects and standard Dutch both retain ge- and it has been reintroduced further north at least partially through the influence of standard Dutch. West Low German dialects show a similar development. The ge-prefix is lost in most of Westphalia and North Low German, but is retained in Eastphalian as e-. Among East Low German dialects, Brandenburgian and Middle Pomeranian, northern dialects lack the prefix, central ones have e-, and southern ones have je-. The largely extinct Low Prussian likewise had je-.

Subjunctive

Proto-West Germanic featured two subjunctive forms: a present subjunctive and a past subjunctive. In German grammar, the present subjunctive is typically called "subjunctive I" (Konjunktiv I), whereas the past subjunctive is called "subjunctive II" (Konjunktiv II).

In Proto-West Germanic, the present subjunctive featured an ending -ē for strong verbs and class I and III weak verbs, but an ending -ō for class II weak verbs. Today, present subjunctive forms are only found in Standard German and the Alemannic dialects, where they are used to indicate indirect speech, as well as in optative and jussive statements.

The past subjunctive was formed by adding a vowel -ī to the preterite stem (including the dental ending of weak verbs), to which further endings for person and number could be added. The past subjunctive of weak verbs did not experience umlaut, despite formerly having ended in -ī. Once final -ī reduced to schwa, this resulted in the merger of the preterite and past subjunctive of most weak verbs in all three dialect groups: hôrta "I heard" vs. hôrti "I would hear" > ich hôrte "I heard/would hear". In High and Low German, the final -ī resulted in the umlaut of the subjunctive forms of strong verbs: nāmi > ich nǣme "I would take".

In Upper German dialects that have lost the preterite, the preterite form has sometimes been retained in a subjunctive meaning. Bavarian, furthermore, has generalized the old dental preterite marker -ad into a general marker of the "past subjunctive" for all verbs, including for strong verbs (e.g. kàmad "would come") and model verbs (e.g. kuntad "could"). High Alemannic moves some weak verbs to the strong class in the subjunctive, but also vice versa: e.g. Bernese German miech or miechti "would make" from weak mache "to make", but also chämti "would come" from strong choo "come". Most frequently, the subjunctive involves changing the stem vowel of the verb to /ie/ or /ää/.

Among West Central dialects, Luxemburgish has retained about 30 verbs with both a preterite and a "past subjunctive" form. Verbs are frequently differentiated by a vowel change, e.g. from ou (preterite) to éi (subjunctive).

Most Low German and Low Franconian dialects have lost a distinctive past subjunctive. Most Low Franconian dialects only experienced umlaut of short a; as a consequence, the preterite and the past subjunctive stem were identical for almost all verbs, especially following the syncope of final schwa (gave > gaf). A separate past subjunctive can still be found in Westflemish and Geldric. In Low German, the umlauted vowel of the strong subjunctive came to replace the unumlauted vowel of the preterite plural of weak verbs, from there also replacing the singular vowel in most dialects. While subjunctives can be found in some other dialect groups, they are most frequent in Eastphalian and Westphalian, which maintain two distinct vowels in the preterite. Here, as in most Low Franconian and Low German dialects, the subjunctive remains distinct in only a few forms: here, the 1st and 3rd person singular: ik sünge "I would help" vs. ik sang "I sang.

Athematic verbs and "short verbs"

Proto-West Germanic had a small class of 4 athematic verbs, descended from the Proto-Indo-European -mi verbs, that took the ending -m for the first person singular in the present tense. These appear in Old High German as stām "I stand", gām "I go", tōm/tuom "I do", and bim "I am".Aside from the third person in -m and the lack of vowel in the suffix, these verbs did not show any other unusual conjugation features in the present tense. However, all of these verbs were suppletive to various degrees, especially in the non-present forms. bim in particular used three different roots, while gām and stām had longer forms, in Old High German gangan and stantan, and tōm shows reduplication in the preterite.

In 11th-century High German, a new class of "short verbs" developed in the 11th century from the athematic verbs and six other verbs that were shortened to a single syllable, namely vân "to catch", slân "to hit, sên "to see", zien "to pull", hân "to have", and lân "to let". When used in their contracted forms, all of these verbs lacked a vowel in the verb endings and had a first person singular ending -n (the phonological development of the earlier -m). Analogies to the verbs gân and stân are visible throughout the paradigms of these verbs in the Middle High German period. Except for the athematic verbs, longer, uncontracted forms also existed for the contracted verbs, and these uncontracted forms were encountered more frequently in certain persons and numbers (e.g. singular vs. plural), though this varied from verb to verb and from dialect to dialect. The most frequently contracted verbs were hân and lân. Middle Dutch also shows a form ic haen "I have" as a contraction from haven, an alternative form of the verb hebben "to have".

Standard German and many dialects have removed most of the contracted forms and expanded the former short verbs gên and stên to gehen and stehen, probably on analogy with sên > sehen. Standard modern German only maintains two "short verbs", sein, "to be", which is highly suppletive, and tun "to do". Only "to be" maintains a final -n (ich bin "I am"). The verb haben, on the other hand, has contracted forms in the 2nd and 3rd person singular and preterite, but otherwise uses the uncontracted stem.

"Short verbs" as a special class

Central Franconian has, depending on dialect, between six and seven "short verbs" with a unique conjugation, in Ripuarian han "to have", jon "to go", sin "to be", sin "to see", ston "to stand", and dun "to do". Luxembourgish adds ginn "to give". In Ripuarian, only "short verbs" such as /doːn/ 'do', /jɔːn/ 'go', /ʃtɔːn/ 'stand', /zen/ 'be', and /han/ 'have' show the final /-n/ ending of the Central Franconian first person singular (e.g. jon "I go"). Additionally, they have distinct endings for all three persons in the plural: /miːʁ jɔːn/ "we go", /iːʁ jɔːt/ "you go", /ze jɔːnt/ "they go". The neighboring South Low Franconian dialects (Limburgish) likewise show an -n ending for short verbs with stem final vowels in the first person singular (e.g. iχ ɣaːn "I go"). For the plural, most dialects have an ending -n for the 1st and 3rd person plural (wi-zi ɣaːn "we-they go"). Dialects in the far southeast instead have the ending -nt (wi-zi ɣaːnt "we-they go", wi-zi haːnt "we-they have").

In Alemmanic, the "short verb" class includes up to 13 verbs. Besides those already mentioned, Alemmanic also includes gëë "to give", nëë "to take", and choo "to come". These verbs take divergent plural suffixes from other verbs. In Western Alemannic, they take /-n/ in the western Einheitsplural-area, while the eastern area has /-nt/, e.g. Low Alemannic hen vs. Swabian hent '(we/you/they) have'. Non-short verbs show other plural endings, such as -ed (e.g. mached). Additionally, in Swiss Alemannic short verbs take umlaut in the plural, similar to model verbs (e.g. gönd "we/you/they go"). The contracted verbs are typically uncontracted in their "present subjunctive" forms; the three most frequent verbs, "to do", "to be" and "to have" have added an inorganic final -g that helps differentiate them from their indicative forms: Zurich German tüeg/syyg/hääg.

Forms of gên, stên, sên, and tuon, with a final -e(n) for the infinitive and 1st and 3rd person plural can be found in some Alemannic, Bavarian, and Franconian dialects.

In modern standard Dutch, there are six "short verbs," zijn "to be", doen "to do", gaan "to go", staan "to stand", as well as zien "to see" and slaan "to hit", the latter two the result of contraction; like in German, only "to be" preserves final -n (ik ben "I am"), with the West Flemish of Westhoek even preserving final -m (ik bem). In dialects, these verbs (and sometimes other contracted verbs) have preserved or acquired a number of morphological peculiarities, including sometimes a first person singular in -n. In the North Hollandic, forms such as ik doen are used generally, whereas in southern Hollandic the n is only inserted to avoid hiatus before the verb and a following vowel (doen ik and also ik doen et); in this same context, many dialects insert an -n to the short verbs zien (to see) and slaan (to hit) to avoid hiatus in inversion (zien ik). These forms may be found in near-dialect colloquial Dutch (tussentaal) more generally, even when not in hiatus. The same strategy of -n to avoid hiatus is found in southern Flemish and Brabantine, but in other areas -t, -d -j, or -g may be inserted. Some dialects from the plural by adding an additional -e: we doene/gane/stane, probably on analogy with other dialects that have syncopated final -n in the thematic verbs and thus have plurals of two syllables (e.g. we leve "we live"); Zeelandic and Overflakkee instead add -e (schwa) directly to the root we doee, gae, stae.

gân/gên ('to go') and stân/stên ('to stand')

The vowel of the athematic verbs "to go" and "to stand" varies throughout the continental West Germanic dialect continuum, making it a useful marker of dialect. Generally:

• the form gân/stân is characteristic of all Low German and Low Franconian dialects, along with parts of Ripuarian, parts of Moselle Franconian, southern Alemannic, and West Upper Alemannic except for Alsatian.
• the form gên/stên is characteristic of Ripuarian between the ik/ich and maken/machen lines, Moselle Franconian south of the op/auf line, Rhine Franconian, Alsatian, East Middle German, North Upper German, and East Upper German.
• the form ganga/stên is used in the Swabian area where Bavarian and Alemmanic meet and north of it.

In Central Franconian, South Low Franconian and also in many Low German dialects, the second and third person singular forms of gân/gên and stân/stên reflect earlier *gais/*stais and *gait/*stait (e.g. Cologne Ripuarian jeis/jeit, infinitive: jɔːn), which most likely go back to analogical formations with thematic verb endings (e.g. *gais < *gâ-is). Such forms are already attested in the Franconian variety of Old High German in Otfrid's Evangelienbuch. In the Alemannic gân/stân area, Highest Alemannic dialects display the same forms in the second and third person singular (e.g. Visperterminen geisch/geit), while other Swiss Alemannic dialects have invariant *â here (e.g. Zurich (High Alemannic) gaasch/gaat), Basel (Low Alemannic) goosch/goot).

dôn ('to do')

In analogy to gân/gên and stân/stên, Central Franconian, South Low Franconian and many Low German dialects have developed second and third person singular forms of the type *dais/*dait (e.g. Cologne Ripuarian deis/deit, infinitive: dun).

hân < habên ('to have')

The vowel of the verb "to have" varies between High German on the one hand and Low German and Low Franconian on the other. Low German and Low Franconian both generally have /e/, along with some High German dialects in the Rhineland and a few disconnected ones further south. This characteristic difference comes from the verb belonging to two different weak verb classes in earlier West Germanic. Whereas Low Franconian and Low Saxon shared a form hebbian, a class I weak verb ending in -jan, Old High German had habēn, a class II weak verb ending in -ēn. As a result, the Low Franconian and Saxon forms underwent umlaut and West Germanic gemination, whereas the High German forms did not.

In Dutch and Low German dialects, the conjugation of hebben historically shows a change in consonants from /b/ to /v/ in the 2nd and 3rd person singular, along the lines of: ik hebbe, du hevest, hi hevet. In Low German, however, most dialects have leveled the first person singular to ik hevve or ik heff. The plural has only been leveled in Westphalian, Eastphalian, and East Pommeranian (hevvet/heft/het/hevve, and the infinitive has remained unaffected in most dialects. Dutch dialects maintain the contrast, with earlier hevet becoming heeft via schwa syncope. In Brabantine and Limburgish, the /f/ has been lost entirely, giving heet and variants; South Hollandish instead has heit.

Contracted forms of the verb haben remain common in High German dialects. Variants of ich han is found in Rhine and Central Franconian, Alemannic, and Upper Austrian and Tyrolean Bavarian. The uncontracted first-person singular (e.g. ich habe) is most common in East Franconian, in Palatine, in Lower Alemannic on the Rhine, and in much of Bavarian. The second and third person singular are contracted in all dialects except some Bavarian ones, which have forms similar to habst and habt. Contracted forms in the plural are found in Alemannic and Central Franconian.

Unlike High German, most Low Franconian and Low German dialects did not contract the verb "to have". However, on the border with Central German, Low German plural forms hat and han, as well as a first person singular hä and infinitive hän in South Brandenburgish, show High German influence. Contracted forms of "to have" are found in East Flemish and the southeastern West Flemish (ik hèn), in some isolated pockets in Zeelandic. This is probably a native contraction of a form *heb-n with a final -n for the first person singular.

The South Low Franconian dialect area. The East Limburgish–Ripuarian transitional area which shares hān with Ripuarian is labelled "1".

In the South Low Franconian dialect area, the divide between contracted hān from Old High German habên and uncontracted hebbe(n)/hevve(n) from Old Low Franconian/Old Saxon hebbian largely conincides with the sagen-line, which separates reflexes of Old High German sagên 'to say' from those of Old Low Franconian/Old Saxon seggian. The sagen-line marks the border between the transitional East Limburgish–Ripuarian dialect area and East Limburgish (and all other subgroups of South Low Franconian). Contracted hān is thus predominantly found the German part of the South Low Franconian dialect area and in the southeasternmost part of Dutch Limburg and in eastern Belgia around Eupen, while uncontracted hebbe(n)/hevve(n) is predominantly found in Dutch and Belgian Limburg, and additionally in the northwest of the German part (see map).

lân < lâzzan < lâtan ('to let')

The contracted form lân is only found in very conservative dialects today. It can still be found in some Alemmanic and Bavarian dialects, such as Swiss German laa (Zurich) or loo (Basel), or in North Bavarian Upper Palatinate German forms like lout ("he lets").

Modal and preterite-present verbs

Proto-West Germanic attests 12 verbs that inflect in the present as other verbs do in the preterite (preterite presents), descending from the Proto-Indo-European stative conjugation. Only 11 of these verbs are attested in continental West Germanic. Preterite present verbs share peculiarities of conjugation in the present tense, including: 1) the lack of an ending in the first and third person singular; 2) the use of a second person singular ending -t in the earliest attestations; 3) the existence of ablaut between the singular and plural in several verbs. Additionally, the verbs formed their preterite tense by adding a dental suffix without any intervening vowel, e.g. Old High German tohta. In Old High German, the preterite present verbs appear as (listing first the singular then the plural): weiz/wizzum "know", *eih/eigum "have", toug/tugum "be useful", darf/durfum "need", gi-tar/gi-turrum "dare", kann/kunnum "know, understand", an/unnum "grant", scal/skulum "should, to owe", gi-nah/*gi-nuhum "to be enough", mag/magum "to be able", muoz/muozzum "be able, have opportunity".

Originally, all of these verbs had full lexical meaning. However, over time, many of them become model verbs while others cease to preterite present verbs; other verbs are added to the model category as well. Modal verbs, as they have been added to the category, have taken on aspects of the special morphology of the other preterite-present verbs. This begins in the early Middle Ages with the verb wellen "to want", originally an optative athematic verb.

A number of preterite present verbs have either been lost entirely or moved to either the strong or weak conjugations, particularly those without modal use. The verb ginah is already extinct in early Old High German; only attested twice. Modern Dutch, modern High German, and modern Low German have all lost the verb *eih/eigum. In Old High German, it is only attested in the plural and the present subjunctive; other forms use habēn, the ancestor of the modern German verb haben "to have". This usage had already become rare in the High Middle Ages. German gönnen/Dutch gunnen, a form of earlier an/unnum with a syncopated prefix ge-, has become a normal weak verb in all Dutch and High and Low German dialects; German taugen/Dutch deugen has become a regular, non-model verb in all Dutch and High German dialects, but in Low German it has remained a preterite present verb in parts of Brandenburgish and Low Prussian.

Conjugation

Preterite-present verbs generally take no ending in the first and third person singular. Non-apocopating Dutch dialects such as that of Goeree may add an -e to the first person singular, as for other verbs: ik wete "I know". West Flemish dialects sometimes show forms with final -n, e.g. ik moetn/moen rather than ik moet.

Most dialects have replaced the original preterite-present 2nd person singular ending -t with -s(t), as on other verbs. This change can already be seen in Old High German for the verb *kan/*kun. Low Saxon has retained the ending -t in some places, such as Groningen, for at least some modals: doe zelt "you shall". Alemannic has likewise maintained the old ending -t for sollen and wollen (e.g. e.g. Bernese solt, wolt), but many dialects have contracted it with the preceding l in wellen and sollen, giving forms such witt and sott (< wilt and solt).

Originally, most preterite present verbs showed ablaut between the singular and plural in the present tense. Additionally, in High and Low German, the plural ablaut of the preterite-present verbs have frequently shown umlaut since the High Middle Ages, e.g. ich kann and wir können (or, with unrounding, kennen); Low German ik will vs. we wüllt. From the plural, it gradually spread into the infinitive as well. The origin of this umlaut is debated. Theories include:

1. the umlaut was formed due to enclitic pronouns containing the vowel i, causing umlaut (e.g. durfen wir > dürfen wir);
2. it originated in via analogy to the weak verbs with "Rückumlaut" (e.g. Middle High German present plural grüezen, preterite gruozte influenced müezen, muozte
3. it originated in the subjunctive forms, which regularly showed umlaut, including in the "present subjunctive" (e.g. ich müsse), although this form does not produce umlaut in any other verbs;
4. it comes from a desire to more clearly differentiate the plural from the singular, similar to the use of Umlaut in High and Low German nouns.

Some dialects have lost the ablaut between singular and plural, e.g. some Bavarian and Alemmanic dialects ich derf and wir derfen, or dialectal Dutch ik kann wij kannen. Among Low and High German dialects, in Low German, most dialects maintain separate stems for müssen, sollen, and dürfen, but not for wollen. In Central German, most dialects maintain separate stems for müssen and wollen, but only some for dürfen and very few for sollen. Upper German dialects reflect the same pattern as Central German. sollen is the form without umlaut in the plural with the widest distribution in modern dialects. Only Low German and southwestern Upper German dialects regularly show a difference between the singular and plural stems of sollen.

Contracted forms of modal verbs (that is, lacking their stem final consonant) are common in German dialects. In High and Low German dialects, the modal verbs often appear in contracted forms that lack their final consonant. This is most common in western Swiss Alemannic, where short forms of all five modal verbs occur (e.g. chöü, möü, söü, wei, mue). können has short forms throughout Alemannic in the singular due to final nasal deletion, but in the plural only in western Swiss Alemannic. Short forms of müssen in the plural are also found in Alsatian, southern Swabian, and eastern Swiss German, only the last of which also has short forms in the singular. Outside of müssen, only mögen has a short form outside of Swiss German, in Alsatian. All all areas with contracted forms, the contracted modal verbs take the same ending as the so-called "short-verbs". Contracted forms are also found in Upper Hessian and Moselle Franconian.

*darf/*durf and *dar/*durr

Low German dialects often show metathesis of the r, giving forms like West Low German draf.

High German, Dutch, and Low German have all confused *darf/*durf (originally "to need") with *dar/*durr "to dare". In High German this secondary meaning of the verb has sense died out, but suppletive paradigms involving forms of both *darf/*durf and *dar/*durs are common in dialects. For instance, Alemannic dialects continue to show forms lacking a final f (e.g. East High Alemannic daa "is allowed"), resulting from the confusion. Likewise, in parts of North Low German and Pommeranian Low German, dörren (from *dar/*dur) has replaced dröven, taking on its meaning? In Dutch, "to dare" has become the primary meaning of durven. The Dutch verb has become a weak verb in most dialects, but has developed a strong past tense (dierf) in southern dialects. In South Brabantine, *dar/*dur has survived as tèère "to dare". The form duurn has survived in Dutch Low Saxon in the meaning "to dare".

In Old High German *darf/*durf is used almost exclusively with a negation to show that something is not necessary. This meaning survives in some modern dialects. Later, the negation developed the meaning "not to be able to". In the 15th century, it comes to be used with this meaning without negation, with the meaning "to be allowed.

*kan/*kun

In the earliest attested Germanic languages, *kan/*kun was mostly used to show intellectual ability. It began to show ability more generally during the high medieval period. In High German, it did not fully replace the verb mögen in the meaning "to be able" until the 18th century.

*mag

In Old High German, *mag meant something like "to be able to". After the 16th century, it increasingly came to mean "to like" in High German, being replaced in the meaning "to be able to" by können by the 18th century. In Dutch, the meaning has instead developed to "be allowed to" (cf. English "may").

*mōt

*mōt originally showed the same form for both the singular and plural. As it still does in Dutch and Low German dialects. In High German, a distinction developed between the singular and plural by inserting umlaut (muoz/müezen—the earliest modal verb for which the use of umlaut in the plural can be shown. In central German, the formerly long diphthong of muoz and müezen came to be pronounced short during the late Middle Ages. In Upper German, it remains a long diphthong (e.g. Alemannic mer müend "we must").

In southern Westphalian, maut (< Middle Low German môt 'must') lacks its own preterite form, instead using the preterite of mag (moxtə).

In the earliest attested stages of the Germanic languages, muozan was mostly used to mean "to enable", contrasting with the verbs kunnan and mugan in that it referred to external circumstances rather than internal ability. In the 10th century, it developed the meaning "to force" in High German, but was also used to express wishes in both German and Dutch. It developed the present meaning in all varieties of "to need to" "to be required to" in the 1200s.

*skal/*skul

In most German and Dutch dialects, the initial /sk/ of the Proto-West Germanic verb *skal/*skul- 'shall' has been simplified to /s/, possibly due to the word's frequent occurrence in enclitic positions. This form developed first in Old Low Franconian in the 9th century and spread from there to High German, where it replaced earlier initial /ʃ/. Some Bavarian dialects such as Upper Palatinate have maintained initial /ʃ/ (e.g. schol) to the present day. While older stages of Low German almost exclusively showed an intial /sk/, /sx/, or /ʃ/ for the verb schölen, in the modern dialects this form has receded northward under High German influence. It is now limited to North Low German, except Hamburg and East Frisian Low German, and Eastern Pomeranian.

Among High German dialects, the change from schal to sol was often accompanied by the shift of a to o. All Dutch and most Low German dialects continue to show a in the singular. The plural originally showed u, but changed to o in many High German dialects. Upper German and Low German then frequently umlauted this vowel (söllen). Other vowels appear in various dialects.

In the earliest attested stages of the Germanic languages, *skal/*skul showed obligation or necessity. In this last meaning, it comes to be replaced by müezen over the high medieval period. In Dutch and Low German?, it comes to be used primarily as an auxiliary to form the future tense.

*well

The verb *well was not originally a preterite present verb, but rather an optative verb. However, it developed the traits of other preterite present verbs already in the early Middle Ages. In earlier High German, the stem tended to alternate between will and wel(len). In East Central German, the plural /e/ has become /o/, a change which has expanded into many West Central and also Upper German dialects. Among modern dialects, Alemannic and Bavarian dialects often retain the old /e/ vowel in the plural (e.g. Upper Palatinate Bavarian mer welle "we want"), sometimes rounding it to /ö/. Low German instead shows /i/ in both singular and plural (with the plural sometime rounded to /ü/, depending on dialect), as do most Low Franconian (Dutch) dialects; Central Franconian originally has /i/ (sometimes lowered to /e/) but has often adopted /o/ from East Central German.

The verb *well is attested meaning "to want" since Old High German.

Complementizer agreement

A feature known as "complementizer agreement" is common to most continental West Germanic dialects, as well as Frisian, but is absent from standard German and Dutch. In this feature, endings are added to complementizers such as conjunctions, but also to question words and relative pronouns, so that they agree with the subject of the clause. It is found throughout a wide-range of varieties and shows a great deal of homogeneity where it is found.

Most dialects with the feature belong to one of two areal groups:

• Most Frisian, Eastern Dutch dialects, and German dialects typically show agreement with the 2nd person singular, e.g. Westphalian vanste "if/when you", with the -ste agreeing with the 2nd person singular subject. This is the form of complementizer agreement with the greatest areal distribution. Dialects featuring this system include Middle Franconian, Rhine Franconian, as well as some variants of Alemannic and southern Bavarian.
• Most Western Dutch dialects instead show agreement for number, e.g. ase we hore (Katwijk Dutch) "when we hear", with -e marking the plural subject.

Some West Flemish dialects show agreement for all persons, although this is in some case via a zero-suffix. Other dialects, mainly clustered in adjoining regions of the East Central and northern Upper German groups, such as Upper Saxon, Thuringian, East Franconian, and North Bavarian, show agreement for all persons in the plural as well as the second person singular, e.g. North Bavarian dasn mer "that we", with the -n showing first person plural agreement.

This feature is first attested in 13th century Dutch, but it is not attested in German at all until far more recently. Some dialects lack the feature, such as the Dutch of Utrecht, North and South Brabant, Gelderland, and Antwerp; the German areal distribution requires more research.

Nouns

Gender system

Standard Dutch and northern Dutch dialects have merged the masculine and feminine genders into a single common gender; southern dialects, however, maintain the three gender system. The merger of masculine and feminine is also found in the Low German spoken in East Frisia.

Case system

The earliest continental West Germanic languages attest four cases robustly: nominative, accusative, dative, and genitive. A fifth case, the instrumental, was retained on only some nouns stems and pronominal forms. Standard German retains a four-case system. However, the number of contexts in which the genitive case is used in the standard language has steadily decreased. Most dialects have eliminated the genitive case and simplified the gender system in other ways, although a few have maintained a three case system of nominative, accusative, dative. Standard Dutch and its dialects have lost case distinctions except for a few relic expressions. In all dialects, case marking is now primarily found on determiners and modifiers rather than on the noun.

Most Low German dialects have simplified the case system to nominative vs. a single oblique case by merging the dative and accusative, an innovation visible already before 1500. Distinct dative morphology, namely the addition of a final schwa singular nouns of all three genders, is still found in (moribund) Eastern Low German dialects as well as Eastphalian and Westphalian. Western High German dialects have either retained a three case system or else merged the nominative and accusative while keeping a distinct dative case. Western dialects maintaining all three cases tend to be more centrally located, while those merging are found more on the periphery. Eastern dialects instead either have a nominative-oblique distinction, as in Low German, or else have merged all three cases.

The only Low Franconian dialect to maintain any sort of case inflection is found in Vorden, part of Lower Geldric; it maintains a difference between the nominative and dative/accusative for adjectives, and may add a final dative -e to masculine/neuter nouns. Otherwise, Dutch dialects had lost an independent dative case by the mid 19th century and the genitive by the end of that century The nominative and the accusative were also merged. In northern dialects, the nominative case became the default form, resulting in a merger of the masculine and feminine genders. In southern dialects, the accusative case became the default instead.

Pluralization

High and Low German has maintained a very complex plural system, with several different potential endings. Standard Dutch, in contrast, has simplified to just two endings, -en and -s. Additionally, German has steadily developed a system whereby the plural form is closely associated with gender. In standard German, 90% of inanimate masculine nouns take the ending -e, 70% of feminine nouns take the ending -(e)n, 70% of neuter nouns take the ending -e and 20% take the ending -er. Dutch, however, shows no such correlation between gender and plurality, a difference that had already developed in the 12th century. Different dialects handle pluralization differently.

-e plurals

The plural ending -e (pronounced as schwa [ə]) developed from two sources: a-stem masculine nouns (e.g. Old High German tag - tagā "day - days") and i-stem nouns of all three genders (e.g. Old High German gast - gesti "guest - guests"). The i-stem category was productive way of pluralizing in Old Low Franconian and Old High German, but more rare in Ingvaeonic dialects such as Old Saxon. In Old Low Franconian and Old High German, the class was expanded mostly with feminine nouns, such as craft "strength".

i-stem plurals developed umlaut in the plural, as seen in Old High German/Old Saxon gesti "guests". In Middle High and Middle Low German and even more so in Early New High German, many formerly a-stem nouns come to be pluralized with umlaut. In modern Low German, however, plurals with umlaut are less common than in High German dialects. In coastal Dutch dialects, where only primary umlaut of /ǎ/ took place, most of these umlauted plural forms were removed by the Middle Dutch period, giving e.g. Middle Dutch gaste. Exceptions, such as stad - steden, may show High German influence. Umlauted plural forms are found in Southeastern Low Franconian, which experienced more umlauting phenomena.

In the Middle High German period, the ending -e was extended beyond former a-stem masculine nouns and i-stem nouns to also encompass many neuter a-stem nouns, which formerly took no ending. Modern High German dialects without schwa-apocope frequently pluralize masculine nouns by adding final -e, and in some dialects with schwa-apocope, the plural ending -e has been restored. It is either restored in all instances or if it would otherwise be impossible to distinguish the singular from the plural by other means, such as umlaut. East Central German dialects have frequently added the ending to two-syllable nouns that would otherwise have no ending: Upper Saxon epelə "apples".

In Old Saxon, a-stem nouns typically take a plural ending -as/-os rather than -a (see s-plural); the -a ending is first attested in southwestern dialects along the Rhine in the 9th century. Arjen Versloot argues for Low Franconian influence as the cause; other scholars suggest High German influence. In Middle Low German, the use of -e (from a-stems and i-stems) was greatly extended, encompassing many old masculine a-stems that formerly took -os as well as neuter a-stems that took no ending. In modern Low German dialects, the ending -e is only preserved in southwestern dialects, with others having experienced schwa apocope.

In Dutch, the inherited plural ending -e was lost during the late Middle Ages, being replaced with the endings -en or -s. Many High and Low German varieties with apocope have likewise either moved these words to the zero-change plural category or else innovated new pluralization strategies for words that formerly took -e plural.

-er plurals

The modern plural ending -er originates with the Proto-Germanic s- stem neuter nouns. This class of nouns was very small in the earliest West Germanic languages, mostly limited to young animals. The earliest form of this ending has an important isogloss for West Germanic languages: in most Old High German it is -ir, causing umlaut (lemmir "lambs", whereas in other West Germanic languages, including the Central Franconian dialects of Old High German, the same stem appears as -ere, (lammere) without umlaut.

In High German, the use of -er plurals has steadily grown to encompass ever more neuter nouns over time, especially in the early modern period. Western Central and Upper German dialects and Bavarian have often extended its use onto nouns that do not take -er plural in other dialects (e.g. better "beds"). Many dialects also use -er to form the plural of the diminutive -chen: South Hessian fēgəlxər "little birds". East Central German uses the ending less frequently than other dialects. In most High German dialects, the -er plural is always accompanied by umlaut if possible. However, in Central Franconian, especially Ripuarian, umlautless forms of some -er plural nouns remain to the present. Both standard German and dialects have applied -er to some masculine nouns, but these were all formerly primarily or only used in the neuter.

Low German also extended the use of -er nouns in the early modern period, but in most dialects it is not as frequent as in High German. In the area around the Weser, it has also spread to many masculine nouns (e.g. stēner "stones"), but in the remaining Low German dialects it is almost exclusively restricted to neuter nouns. West Low German -er plurals do not show umlaut (e.g. kalver "calves", lammer "lambs"), but East Low German has generally adopted umlauted forms from High German influence. In Westphalian, the ending remains the unsyncopated /-ərə/. Dutch Low Saxon shows the same expansion, sometimes with umlaut, e.g. holt - hölter "wood - woods".

Dutch did not extend the use of -er as far as High or Low German and the ending is no longer productive. In Standard Dutch, 15 neuter nouns still take a plural form -eren, formed from -er + the still productive plural form -en. This plural developed from the earlier -ere in Middle Dutch. In dialects, the -eren form is found in Brabantine and dialects further to the east. In southwestern dialects, the plural -s was added instead, giving -ers. Some eastern dialects have the simple ending -er. Southeastern Low Franconian (Limburgish) shows a greater number of -er plurals, including some otherwise found in High German dialects: daːkər "rooves", huːzər "houses". Some Limburgish -er plurals feature umlaut, as in High and Low German, but there is a tendency for this umlaut to be replaced with the unmutated vowel: lamər or lemər "lambs".

-en plurals

The -en plural ending originates with the class of weak nouns, which could belong to the masculine, feminine, or neuter genders. During the high and late Middle Ages, the ending was also extended to feminine o-stem nouns, which had come to end in schwa in both the singular and plural.

In German, -en is the normal pluralization strategy for feminine nouns and "weak nouns". Many Central and High German dialects apocopate final -n, so that for those dialects that do not apocopate final -e, a difference between singular and plural is lost in these classes. Sometimes, these dialects innovate a change in vowel quality to retain a singular - plural distinction. Besides feminine and weak nouns, Low German has moved nouns that formerly used -e in the plural to the -en pluralization.

The spread of the -en plural in Dutch to nouns that formerly took -e is probably on analogy with verb verbs; additionally, Middle Dutch nouns with an -e plural became -en in the dative, which may have aided the spread of the -en plural in other instances. Many feminine nouns likewise acquired an -en plural via a merger with the weak declension.

-s plurals

Like some of instances of the ending -e, the ending -s originates with the a-stem masculine nouns. It is sometimes considered a shared North Sea Germanic feature. Its precise origins are uncertain; it appears to continue the old nominative plural form -ōz, possibly with secondary stress. In English it is the almost exclusive ending, whereas it is not native to High German. For Germanic a-stems, Old English has -ās as the sole pluralization strategy, whereas Old Saxon attests both -os/-as and -a.

Old Saxon appears to have originally only had a plural form -os, but adopted the alternative ending -a under either High German or Low Franconian influence. Although it became rare in the Middle Low German period, the ending -s survived and becomes more common from the mid 14th century onward, when it begins to be used with words denoting people, especially those ending in -er, then also -el and words denoting familial relationship. In modern Low German dialects, -s is the most productive plural ending. It has become the ending for any word that does not pluralize in another way, including those who have lost a final -e plural via schwa apocope. It is also used with nouns ending in -er, -el, -en, as well as sometimes pleonastically with the plural ending -en (giving a double ending -ens). For the diminutive suffix -ken, a plural form is used in which the final -n is lost: Westphalian snäpskəs

The origins of the s-plural in Dutch dialects are disputed; these become common in the Middle Dutch period. In minor Old Low Franconian sources, -as plurals such as nestas ("nests") are attested, but it is possible that these derive from Frisian, Anglo-Saxon, or even Latin influence on the manuscripts: the main sources in Old Low Franconian only attest -a plurals. It has variously been argued that the frequent -s ending in Middle Dutch originated in language contact with Old French, speading from the area of Calais into other dialects; that the form originated in coastal dialects and is a native Ingvaeonic feature; or that it originated in eastern dialects under the influence of Old Saxon. Among modern dialects, It is most common and productive in Flemish, and is also common in Northeastern dialects, where it is commonly used for monosyllabic nouns and nouns ending in -er. In Hollandish, -s is added to nouns ending in schwa, which receive -n in Standard Dutch, and in the form -es to those ending in a consonant (e.g. kip - kippes "chicken - chickens"). In West Frisian, the variant -se is found. Limburgish has an -s plural much like standard Dutch (e.g. vaders "fathers"), but it sometimes combines it with umlaut: broːr - brøːrs "brother - "brothers", zoːn - zøːns "son - sons". The is probably a recent development in Limburgish, coming from Western dialects or standard Dutch, explaining how it came to be combined with umlaut.

In Old and Middle High German, no plural forms in -s are attested, but -s plurals have become common in High German since the Early New High German period through mostly the influence of Low German and French: the earliest attestations are on loanwords from these languages. The ending is very rare in Upper German dialects, but not uncommon in Central German dialects, especially East Central German. It is frequently used for words that do not have a distinct plural, such as die Kumpels "the buddies" (rather than prescribed die Kumpel).

Zero-ending plurals

In early West Germanic, neuter a-stem nouns had a plural form that lacked any ending, caused by apocope of the final unstressed vowel -u: Old High German wort (singular) and wort (plural). Generally, these unmarked forms were given new plural endings during the Middle Ages, adding -e or -er. Later Dutch has replaced -e with -en. However, endingless plurals still survive in some Dutch dialects (e.g. schaap "sheep" [pl]). Some High German dialects, primarily Swiss Alemannic, have preserved the endingless neuter plural more generally: xind "child - children" ek "corner - corners".

Plurals without any ending are required in standard German for most nouns ending in -en, -er, and -el in the singular. These plurals developed in the transition from old to middle stages of continental West German via a syncope of the final ending -e following an unstressed syllable (Old High German nagala > Middle High German nagel "nails"). Some of these have since become umlauted in standard German (Middle High German nagel > modern German Nägel "nails), but many show no change. Middle Dutch vacillated between adding -en or -s in these cases; modern Dutch usually adds -s. Most High German dialects have likewise applied new pluralization strategies such as umlaut or a new ending to these nouns. Plurals without any marking at all are likewise virtually nonexistent in Low German.

Central and Upper German dialects which experienced schwa-apocope often have zero-ending plurals. Plurality is instead frequently marked by umlaut. In the former i-stems, this umlaut is inherited, but in many words it is motivated only by morphology: Tag (s.) Täg (cf. standard Tage). Other dialects may use variations in vowel length and consonant quality to mark plurality. These same options are also found in Low German dialects with schwa syncope: (e.g. Brandeburgisch arm - ärm "arm - arms", Brandenburgish dax då~g "day - days").

Some High German dialects featuring both syncope of final -e and final -en feature large classes of nouns without any plural marking.

Diminutive formation

The most common form of the diminutive suffix is divided between the north and the south of the West Germanic dialect continuum, between suffixes derived from an earlier -lîn (southern) or an earlier -kîn (northern). This contrast dates back to the common Germanic period.

Upper German dialects, along with southern East Central German, generally show a suffix contain an -l (e.g. standard German -lein, Swabian -le, Bavarian -(e)l). Northern dialects instead form their diminutive with a velar or palatal consonant. The standard Dutch diminutive -tje has come from a palatalization of an earlier -kijn, whereas the standard German -chen derives from central German dialects in which -ken underwent the High German consonant shift. Many Low German dialects have -ke(n), but Low German dialects around Hamburg have lost their diminutive suffix, whereas some dialects have developed new suffixes.

Historical records indicate that Central German originally used an -l based suffix and adopted a -k based suffix from further north after the Old High German period. In modern standard German, it is no longer possible to determine whether a speaker/writer is from the north or south based on diminutive use, as certain rules now determine which diminutive is used with which words. Moreover, over the course of the Early New High German period, there is a marked shift for writers in all areas to use the -chen suffix as the default in most situations in the standard language.

Literary languages

At the earliest stage of attestation in the Early Middle Ages, continental West Germanic dialects are documented in manifold regional scribal varieties, mostly linked to monasteries. Based on their broad lingustic properties, they can be assigned to three major groups (Old High German, Old Saxon and Old Dutch) that correspond to the three contemporary dialect groups.. The coexistence of locally competing regional literary traditions continued into the Late Middle Ages, but for each of the three groups, supra-regional standardized varieties started to emerge. In the Dutch and High German areas, these were mostly linked to the production of literary works, while in the Low Saxon area, the Middle Low German standard language that florished from the 14th to the 16th century was tied to the influence of the Hanseatic League. With the decline of the Hanseatic League and the emergence of the High German-based modern standard German language, the latter has become the literary language not only for the High German dialects, but also for much of the Low Saxon dialect area. For Low Franconian, the transition from Middle Dutch to Modern Dutch went along with a regional shift from Branbantian-based standard Middle Dutch to Hollandic-based standard Modern Dutch.

Until the 20th century, standard Dutch and standard German were the only standardized literary languages in the continental West Germanic continuum. In the late 20th century, Luxembourgish emerged as a literary standard based on the local Moselle Franconian variety of Luxembourg. In the Netherlands, Limburgish (i.e. the Low Franconian dialects of Dutch Limburg that mostly belong to the South Low Franconian group) gained offcial recognition as a regional language.

Bibliography

• Adamczyk, Elżbieta (2022). "Plural inflection in varieties of Dutch: Patterns of restructuring and geographical redistribution". Nederlandse Taalkunde. 27 (3): 394–427. doi:10.5117/NEDtAA2022.3.005.ADAM.
• Arens, Josef (1908). Der Vokalismus der Mundarten im Kreise Olpe unter Zugrundelegung der Mundart von Elspe. Borna: Robert Noske.
• Baechler, Raffaela; Pröll, Simon (2018). "Loss and preservation of case in Germanic non-standard varieties". Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. 3 (1:): 1–35. doi:10.5334/gjgl.680.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
• Beckmann, Werner (1990). "Zur Geschichte der deutschen Modalverben. Das Problem des Umlaüs bei den Modalverben in der deutschen Schiftsprache und den Dialekten" (PDF). Niederdeutsches Wort. 30: 55–81.
• Behaghel, Otto (1928). Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. Grundriß der germanischen Philologie, Band 3 (5th ed.). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
• Bloemhoff, Henk; Niebaum, Hermann; Twilhaar, Jan Nijen; Scholtmeijer, Harrie (2013a). "Low Saxon phonology". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 454–475. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.454.
• Bloemhoff, Henk; Niebaum, Hermann; Twilhaar, Jan Nijen; Scholtmeijer, Harrie (2013b). "The Low Saxon dialects: Morphology and syntax". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 476–495. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.476.
• Boersma, Paul (2017). "The history of the Franconian tone contrast". In Wolfgang Kehrein; Björn Köhnlein; Paul Boersma; Marc van Oostendorp (eds.). Segmental Structure and Tone (PDF). Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 27–97. doi:10.1515/9783110341263-003. ISBN 978-3-11-034126-3.
• Braune, Wilhelm; Reiffenstein, Ingo (2004). Althochdeutsche Grammatik (15 ed.). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
• Brinkmann, Thomas (1987). Präteritopräsentia. Morphologische Entwicklungen einer Sonderklasse in den altgermanischen Sprachen. Niemeyer. doi:10.1515/9783111357706.
• Brogyani, Bela (1986). "Nicht abgeschwächte Endsilbenvokale in spätmittelhochdeutscher Zeit: Untersuchungen anhand des großen Urbars von Einsiedeln aus dem Jahre 1331". In Klingenberg, Heinz; Brogyanyi, Bela; Krömmelbein, Thomas (eds.). Germanic dialects : linguistic and philological investigations. J. Benjamins. pp. 81–107. ISBN 9027235260.
• Christen, Helen (2019). "Alemannisch In Der Schweiz". In Joachim Herrgen; Jürgen Erich Schmidt (eds.). Sprache und Raum - Ein internationales Handbuch der Sprachvariation. Band 4: Deutsch. Handbücher Zur Sprach- Und Kommunikationswissenschaft. 30.4. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 246–279. doi:10.1515/9783110261295-09.
• Dammel, Antje (2011). Konjugationsklassenwandel. Prinzipien des Ab-, Um- und Ausbaus verbalflexivischer Allomorphie in germanischen Sprachen. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110240351.
• Dammel, Antje; Schallert, Oliver (2020). "Modalverben in deutschen Dialekten: Ein Testfall für die Analyse morphologischer Variation". In Christen, Helen; et al. (eds.). Regiolekt - der neue Dialekt? Akten des 6. Kongresses der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Dialektologie des Deutschen (IGDD). Franz Steiner Verlag. pp. 193–226.
• De Schutter, Georges (2008). "Werkwoordvormen in de zuidelijke Nederlandse dialecten: stamkeuze en werkwoorduitgangen. Analyse en beschrijving op basis van het RND-materiaal, deel I" (PDF). Taal en Tongval (60): 121–171.
• De Schutter, Georges (2013). "The dialects of the Brabant region: Phonological properties". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 277–297. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.277.
• De Schutter, Georges; Hermans, Ben (2013). "The Limburg dialects: Grammatical properties". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 356–377. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.356.
• de Vaan, Michiel (1999). "Towards an explanation of the Franconian tone accents". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik. 51: 23–44. doi:10.1163/18756719-051-01-90000004. hdl:1887/14124.
• de Vaan, Michiel (2017). The Dawn of Dutch: Language contact in the Western Low Countries before 1200. John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/nss.30.
• Dingeldein, Heinrich J. (1983). "Spezielle Pluralbildungen in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1196–1202. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-006.
• Donaldson, B.C. (1983). Dutch: A Linguistic History of Holland and Belgium. Martinus Nijhoff.
• Durrell, Martin (1990). "Westphalian and Eastphalian". In Russ, Charles V. J. (ed.). The Dialects of Modern German: A Linguistic Survey. Routledge. pp. 59–89.
• Ebert, Robert P.; Reichmann, Oskar; Solms, Hans-Joachim; Wegera, Klaus-Peter (1993). Ebert, Robert P.; Reichmann, Oskar; Solms, Hans-Joachim; Wegera, Klaus-Peter (eds.). Frühneuhochdeutsche Grammatik. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110920130. ISBN 978-3-484-10672-7.
• Euler, Wolfram (2022). Das Westgermanische. Seine Rekonstruktion von der Herausbildung im 3. Jahrhundert bis zur Aufgliederung im 7. Jahrhundert (2 ed.). Verlag Inspiration Unlimited. ISBN 978-945127-414. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: length (help)
• Fertig, David (1998). "The ge- Participle Prefix in Early New High German and the Modern Dialects". American Journal of Germanic Linguistics & Literatures. 10 (2): 237–78. doi:10.1017/S1040820700002353.
• Fischer, Hanna (2021). "Präteritumschwund im Deutschen. Neue Erkenntnisse zu einem alten Rätsel". Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. 143 (3): 331–363. doi:10.1515/bgsl-2021-0027.
• Fischer, Hanna (2024). "Von der Flexion in die Wortbildung und darüber hinaus. Zur diachronen Entwicklung des s-Suffixes im Deutschen". Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik. 52 (2): 257–286. doi:10.1515/zgl-2024-2013.
• Foerste, William (1957). "Geschichte der niederdeutschen Mundarten". In Wolfgang Stammler (ed.). Deutsche Philologie im Aufriß. Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). Berlin: Erich Schmidt. pp. 1729–1898.
• Franck, Johannes (1910). Mittelniederländische Grammatik (2 ed.). Tauchnitz.
• Frings, Theodor (1916). "Mittelfränkisch-niedererfränkische Studien". Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. 41: 193–271. doi:10.1515/bgsl.1916.1916.41.193.
• Frings, Theodor (1961). "FLÄMISCH KACHTEL 'FÜLLEN', LATEINISCH CAPITALE, UND DER ÜBERGANG VON FT ZU CHT, DEUTSCH KRAFT, NIEDERLÄNDISCH CRACHT". Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. 81 (Sonderband): 363–393. doi:10.1515/bgsl.1961.82.s1.363.
• Frings, Theodor; Lerchner, Gotthard (1966). Niederländisch und Niederdeutsch: Aufbau und Gliederung des Niederdeutschen. Akademie Verlag. doi:10.1515/9783112701034.
• Frings, Theodor; van Ginneken, Jacob (1919). "Zur Geschichte des Niederfränkischen in Limburg". Zeitschrift für Deutsche Mundarten. 14: 97–209. JSTOR 40497953.
• Fritz, Gerd (1997). "Historische Semantik der Modalverben. Problemskizze – Exemplarische Analysen – Forschungsüberblick. 1. Einleitung und erste Orientierung". In Fritz, Gerd; Gloning, Thomas (eds.). Untersuchungen zur semantischen Entwicklungsgeschichte der Modalverben im Deutschen. Niemyer. pp. 1–13. doi:10.1515/9783110940848.1.
• Fulk, R.D. (2018). A Comparative Grammar of the Early Germanic Languages. Studies in Germanic Linguistics. Vol. 3. John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/sigl.3. ISBN 978-90-272-6312-4.
• Gaeta, Livio (2010). "The Invisible Hand of Grammaticalization: West Germanic substitutive infinitive and the prefix ge-". In Rainer, Franz (ed.). Variation and Change in Morphology. Selected Papers from the 13 International Morphology Meeting, Vienne, February 2008. John Benjamins. pp. 89–105.
• Gallée, Johan Hendrik (1993). Altsächsische Grammatik. Mit Berichtigungen und Literaturnachträgen. Nach Wendelin Försters letzter Ausgabe in Auswahl bearbeitet und mit Einleitung und Glossar versehen (3 ed.). Niemeyer. doi:10.1515/9783110920147.
• Goblirsch, Kurt Gustav (2003). "THE VOICING OF FRICATIVES IN WEST GERMANIC AND THE PARTIAL CONSONANT SHIFT". Folia Linguistica Historica. 37 (1–2): 111–152. doi:10.1515/flih.2003.24.1-2.111.
• Goblirsch, Kurt Gustav (2018). Gemination, Lenition, and Vowel Lengthening: On the History of Quantity in Germanic. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781139540780.
• Goossens, Jan (1962). "Die Gerundeten Palatalvokale Im Niederländischen Sprachraum". Zeitschrift Für Mundartforschung. 29 (4): 312–328. JSTOR 40500045.
• Goossens, Jan (1965). "Die Gliederung des Südniederfränkischen" (PDF). Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter. 30: 79–94.
• Goossens, Jan (1970a). "Inleiding tot de Nederlandse dialectologie". Handelingen van de Koninklijke Commissie voor Toponymie en Dialectologie. 44 (1): 105–273. doi:10.21825/hctd.88272.
• Goossens, Jan (1970b). "Niederländische Mundarten – vom Deutschen aus gesehen" (PDF). Niederdeutsches Wort. 10: 61–80.
• Goossens, Jan (1974). Historische Phonologie des Niederländischen. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783111411576.
• Goossens, Jan (1980). "Middelnederlandse vocaalsystemen" (PDF). Verslagen en Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde: 161–251.
• Goossens, Jan (1987). "Schets van de meervoudsvorming der substantieven in de Nederlandse dialecten". Taal & Tongval. 39: 141–174.
• Goossens, Jan (2008). "Dialectgeografische grondslagen van een Nederlandse taalgeschiedenis". Handelingen van de Koninklijke Commissie voor Toponymie en Dialectologie. 80 (1): 33–258. doi:10.21825/hctd.88678.
• Goossens, Jan (1994). "Ze den Personalpronomina im Rhein- und Maasland". In Mattheier, Klaus J.; Wiesinger, Peter (eds.). Dialektologie des Deutschen. Forschungsstand und Entwicklungstendenzen. de Gruyter. pp. 45–48. doi:10.1515/9783110958485.45.
• Goossens, Jan (2014). "Het vroegere Zuid-Brabantse ontrondingsgebied". Handelingen van de Koninklijke Commissie voor Toponymie en Dialectologie. 86: 139–152. doi:10.2143/TD.86.0.1000009.
• Grimm, Jacob (2023). Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm, digitalisierte Fassung im Wörterbuchnetz des Trier Center for Digital Humanities.
• Grimme, Hubert (1910). Plattdeutsche Mundarten. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783111367583.
• Harbert, Wayne (2007). The Germanic Languages. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511755071.
• Härd, John Evert (1980). "Mittelniederdeutsch". In Hans Peter Althaus; Helmut Henne; Herbert Ernst Wiegand (eds.). Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik. Berlin, New York: Max Niemeyer. pp. 584–588. doi:10.1515/9783110960846.584.
• Hall, Tracy Alan (2021). "The Realization of West Germanic +[sk] in Low German". Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. 143 (1): 1–50. doi:10.1515/bgsl-2021-0001.
• Harnisch, Rüdiger (2019). "Ostfränkisch". Sprache und Raum - Ein internationales Handbuch der Sprachvariation. Band 4: Deutsch. de Gruyter Mouton. pp. 363–406. doi:10.1515/9783110261295-012.
• Havranová, Kateřina (2014). "Default Case in Dutch: A Comparative Study of Dutch and English Case Systems". In Ludmila Veselovská; Markéta Janebová (eds.). Complex Visibles Out There. Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistics Colloquium 2014: Language Use and Linguistic Structure. Palacký University. pp. 163–174.
• Henry, Victor (1900). Le dialecte alaman de Colmar (Haute-Alsace) en 1870: grammaire et lexique. Paris: Félix Alcan.
• Hermans, Ben (2013). "Phonological features of Limburgian dialects". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 336–355. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.336.
• Hinskens, Frans (2009). "The erosion of a variable process. The case of n-deletion in Ripuarian and Limburg dialects of Dutch". In Kügler, Frank; Féry, Caroline; van de Vijver, Ruben (eds.). Variation and Gradience in Phonetics and Phonology. de Gruyter Mouton. pp. 311–350. doi:10.1515/9783110219326.
• Höder, Steffen (2014). "Low German: A profile of a word language". In Reina, Javier Caro; Szczepaniak, Renata (eds.). Syllable and Word Languages. de Gruyter. pp. 305–326. doi:10.1515/9783110346992.305.
• Hol, A. R. (1941). "Het prefix in het verleden deelwoord". Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse taal en letterkunde. 60: 249–293.
• Howe, Stephen (1996). The Personal Pronouns in the Germanic Languages: A Study of Personal Pronoun Morphology and Change in the Germanic Languages from the First Records to the Present Day. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110819205.
• Hooge, David (1983). "Verwendungstypen der Tempusformen in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1209–1220. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-006.
• Howell, Robert B.; Salmons, Joseph (1997). "Umlautless residues in Germanic". American Journal of Germanic Linguistics & Literatures. 9 (1): 83–111. doi:10.1017/S1040820700002006.
• Jones, Howard; Jones, Martin H. (2019). The Oxford Guide to Middle High German. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780199654611.001.0001.
• Kaiser, Livia (2021). Runes Across the North Sea from the Migration Period and Beyond: An Annotated Edition of the Old Frisian Runic Corpus. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110728224.
• Keel, William D. (1981). "APOCOPE AND SYNCOPE IN MODERN GERMAN DIALECTS". In Henderson, Michael M. T. (ed.). 1980 Mid-America Linguistics Conference papers. University of Kansas. pp. 257–265.
• Keel, William D. (2020). "The West Germanic Dialect Continuum". In Michael T. Putnam; B. Richard Page (eds.). The Cambridge Handbook of Germanic Linguistics. Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. pp. 736–760. doi:10.1017/9781108378291.032.
• Kienle, Richard (1969). Historische Laut- und Formenlehre des Deutschen. de Gruyter Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783111392479.
• Klein, Thomas (2003a). "ALTHOCHDEUTSCH UND ALTNIEDERLÄNDISCH". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik. 57 (1): 19–60. doi:10.1163/18756719-90000131.
• Klein, Thomas (2003b). "Niederdeutsch und Hochdeutsch in mittelhochdeutscher Zeit". In Berthele, Raphael; Christen, Helen; Germann, Sibylle; Hove, Ingrid (eds.). Die deutsche Schriftsprache und die Regionen: Entstehungsgeschichtliche Fragen in neuer Sicht. de Gruyter. pp. 203–229. doi:10.1515/9783110201574.203.
• Klein, Thomas; Büthe, Eva (2011). "Regularisierung des Irregulären Zur Geschichte der Verbgruppe um gehen und stehen im Mittelfränkischen". In Plate, Ralf; Schubert, Martin (eds.). Mittelhochdeutsch. Beiträge zur Überlieferung, Sprache und Literatur. de Gruyter. pp. 305–330. doi:10.1515/9783110262353.305.
• Klein, Thomas (2013). "Zum r-Plural im Westgermanischen". NOWELE. North-Western European Language Evolution. 66 (2): 169–196. doi:10.1075/nowele.66.2.03kle.
• Klein, Thomas; Solms, Hans-Joachim; Wegera, Klaus-Peter (2018). Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. Teil II: Flexionsmorphologie. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110523522.
• Koch, Günter (2019). "Bairisch In Deutschland". In Joachim Herrgen; Jürgen Erich Schmidt (eds.). Sprache und Raum - Ein internationales Handbuch der Sprachvariation. Band 4: Deutsch. Handbücher Zur Sprach- Und Kommunikationswissenschaft. 30.4. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 279–318. doi:10.1515/9783110261295-010.
• König, Werner (1994). dtv-Atlas zur deutschen Sprache (10 ed.). Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.
• Kozianka, Maria; Sturm, Laura (2017). "Prothese und Aphärese im Westgermanischen". Jahrbuch für Germanistische Sprachgeschichte. 8 (1): 108–120. doi:10.1515/jbgsg-2017-0008.
• Krogmann, Willy (1970). "ALTSÄCHSISCH UND MITTELNIEDERDEUTSCH". In Schmitt, Ludwig E. (ed.). Kurzer Grundriß der germanischen Philologie bis 1500. Band 1: Sprachgeschichte. de Gruyter. pp. 211–252. doi:10.1515/9783110822717.211.
• Kroghe, Steffen (2013). "Die Anfänge des Altsächsischen". NOWELE. 66 (2): 141–168. doi:10.1075/nowele.66.2.02kro.
• Küpperbusch, Emil (1932). "Born und Brunnen". Teuthonista. 8 (1/2): 55–94. JSTOR 40498822.
• Kürschner, Sebastian (2008). Deklinationsklassen-Wandel. Eine diachron-kontrastive Studie zur Entwicklung der Pluralallomorphie im Deutschen, Niederländischen, Schwedischen und Dänischen. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110210842.
• Kürschner, Sebastian (2018). "Dialects of German, Dutch, and the Scandinavian Languages". In Charles Boberg; John Nerbonne; Dominic Watt (eds.). The Handbook of Dialectology. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. pp. 462–473. doi:10.1002/9781118827628.ch27.
• Kürschner, Sebastian; Nübling, Damaris (2011). "The interaction of gender and declension in Germanic languages". Folia Linguistica. 45 (2): 355–388. doi:10.1515/flin.2011.014.
• Laker, Stephen (2014). "The Downfall of Dental Fricatives: Frisian Perspectives on a Wider Germanic Trend". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik. 73: 261–300. doi:10.1163/9789401211918_011.
• Lahiri, Aditi; Riad, Tomas; Jacobs, Haike (1999). "Diachronic prosody". In van der Hulst, Harry (ed.). Word Prosodic Systems in the Languages of Europe. de Gruyter Mouton. pp. 335–422. doi:10.1515/9783110197082.1.335.
• Lameli, Alfred (2018). "The replacement of diminutive suffixes in the New High German period: A time series analysis in word formation". Journal of Historical Linguistics. 8 (2): 273–313. doi:10.1075/jhl.17014.lam.
• Lasch, Agathe (1974). Mittelniederdeutsche Grammatik (2 ed.). Niemeyer. doi:10.1515/9783111393124.
• Lenz, Alexandra N. (2019). "Bairisch Und Alemannisch In Österreich". In Joachim Herrgen; Jürgen Erich Schmidt (eds.). Sprache und Raum - Ein internationales Handbuch der Sprachvariation. Band 4: Deutsch. Handbücher Zur Sprach- Und Kommunikationswissenschaft. 30.4. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 318–363. doi:10.1515/9783110261295-011.
• Marynissen, Ann (2009). "Taalverandering tussen evolutie en normering: De e-apocope als breuklijn tussen het Nederlands en het Duits". Nederlandse Taalkunde. 14 (3): 233–254.
• Marynissen, Ann; Janssens, Guy (2013). "A regional history of Dutch". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 81–100. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.81.
• Martin, Bernhard (1959). Die deutschen Mundarten (2 ed.). N. G. Elwert Verlag.
• Meisen, Karl, ed. (1964). Rheinisches Wörterbuch, Band 8. Berlin: Erika Klopp.
• Mitzka, Walther (1957). "Hochdeutsche Mundarten". In Wolfgang Stammler (ed.). Deutsche Philologie im Aufriß. Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). Berlin: Erich Schmidt. pp. 1599–1728.
• Müller, Josef, ed. (1931). Rheinisches Wörterbuch, Band 2. Berlin: Fritz Klopp.
• Münch, Ferdinand (1904). Grammatik der ripuarisch-fränkischen Mundart. Bonn: Bouvier.
• Newton, G. (1990). "Central Franconian". In Russ, Charles V. J. (ed.). The Dialects of Modern German: A Linguistic Survey. Routledge. pp. 136–209.
• Niebaum, Hermann (1980). "Westniederdeutsch". In Hans Peter Althaus; Helmut Henne; Herbert Ernst Wiegand (eds.). Lexikon der Germanistischen Linguistik. Berlin, New York: Max Niemeyer. pp. 458–464. doi:10.1515/9783110960846.458.
• Niebaum, Hermann (1983). "Zur Formengeographie". In Goossens, Jan (ed.). Niederdeutsch. Sprache und Literatur (2 ed.). pp. 158–174.
• Niebaum, Hermann; Macha, Jürgen (2014). Enführung in die Dialektologie des Deutschen. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110338713.
• Nielsen, Hans Frede (2001). "Frisian and the Grouping of the Older Germanic Languages". In Munske, Horst Haider; Århammar, Nils; Faltings, Volker F.; Hoekstra, Jarich F.; Vries, Oebele; Walker, Alastair G.H.; Wilts, Ommo (eds.). Handbuch des Friesischen. Niemeyer. pp. 512–523. doi:10.1515/9783110946925.512.
• Noelliste, Erin; Kniess, Tyler (2024). "Unmarkedness of the coronal nasal in Alemannic". The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics. 27 (7). doi:10.1007/s10828-024-09153-x.
• Noble, C.A.M. (1983). Modern German dialects. Peter Long.
• Nübling, Damaris (1995a). "Die Kurzverben im Schweizerdeutschen : in der Kürze liegt die Würze oder: Im Spannungsfeld zwischen Reduktion und Differenzierung". In Löffler, Heinrich (ed.). Alemannische Dialektforschung : Bilanz und Perspektiven ; Beiträge zur 11. Arbeitstagung Alemannischer Dialektologen (PDF). Francke. pp. 165–179.
• Nübling, Damaris (1995b). "Kurzverben in germanischen Sprachen. Unterschiedliche Wege - gleiche Ziele". Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. 62 (2): 127–154. JSTOR 40504008.
• Nübling, Damaris (2000). Prinzipien der Irregularisierung. Eine kontrastive Analyse von zehn Verben in zehn germanischen Sprachen. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110915082.
• Nübling, Damaris (2001). "Wechselflexion Luxemburgisch - Deutsch kontrastiv: "ech soen - du sees/si seet" vs. "ich sage, du sagst, sie sagt" : zum sekundären Ausbau eines präsentischen Wurzelvokalwechsels im Luxemburgischen" (PDF). Sprachwissenschaft. 26 (4): 433–472.
• Nübling, Damaris (2008). "Müssen, dürfen, können, mögen: Wie kam der Umlaut in die Prateritoprasentia? - Neues zu einem alten Problem der Irregularitat". In Stroh, Cornelia; Urdze, Aina (eds.). Morphologische Irregularität. Neue Ansätze, Sichtweisen und Daten. Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer. pp. 91–109.
• Panzer, Baldur (1972). "Morphologische Systeme niederdeutscher und niederländischer Dialekte" (PDF). Niederdeutsches Wort. 12: 144–169.
• Paul, Hermann (1968). Deutsche Grammatik. de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110929805.
• Paul, Hermann; Wiehl, Peter; Grosse, Siegfried (1998). Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik (24 ed.). Niemeyer.
• Polenz, Peter von (2020). Geschichte der deutschen Sprache (11 ed.). de Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110485660.
• Rabanus, Stefan (2005). "Dialektwandel im 20. Jahrhundert. Verbalplural in Südwestdeutschland". In Eggers, Eckhard; Schmidt, Jürgen Erich; Stellmacher, Dieter (eds.). Moderne Dialekte – Neue Dialektologie. Akten des 1. Kongresses der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Dialektologie des Deutschen (IGDD) am Forschungsinstitut für deutsche Sprache „Deutscher Sprachatlas“ der Philipps-Universität Marburg vom 5.–8. März 2003. Stuttgart: Steiner. pp. 267–290. hdl:11562/23971.
• Rabanus, Stefan (2022). "Nominal Inflectional Morphology in Germanic: Pronouns". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.952.
• Rein, Kurt (1983). "Kontraktion in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1147–1154. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-006.
• Roos, N.G.J. (2009). The Weak Past Tense in Dutch and Low German (PDF) (Thesis). Nijmegan University.
• Rowley, Anthony (1983). "Das Präteritum in den heutigen deutschen Dialekten". Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. 50 (2): 161–182. JSTOR 40501826.
• Rübekeil, Ludwig (2017). "The dialectology of Germanic". Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics. Vol. 2. de Gruyter Mouton. pp. 986–1002. doi:10.1515/9783110523874-013.
• Salmons, Joseph (2017). "The Evolution of Germanic". In Klein, Jared; Joseph, Brian; Fritz, Matthias (eds.). Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics: An International Handbook. Vol. 2. de Gruyter Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110523874-014.
• Salmons, Joseph (2018). A History of German: What the Past Reveals about Today's Language (2 ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Sanders, Willy (1974). "Deutsch, Niederdeutsch, Niederländisch". Niederdeutsches Wort. 14: 1–22.
• Saltveit, Laurits (1983). "Anlage der Modussysteme in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1220–1232. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-006.
• Sapp, Christopher D. (2009). "Syncope as the Cause of Präteritumschwund: New Data from an Early New High German Corpus". Journal of Germanic Linguistics. 21 (4): 419–450. doi:10.1017/S1470542709990134.
• Schockaert, Tuur; Van de Velde, Freek (2024). "Een multivariate analyse van de diachronie van het ge-prefix bij het voltooid deelwoord van perfectiva simplicia in het Middelnederlands". Nederlandse Taalkunde. 29 (2): 222–252. doi:10.5117/NEDTAA2024.2.003.SCHO.
• Scott, Alan (2014). The Genitive Case in Dutch and German: A Study of Morphosyntactic Change in Codified Languages. Brill. doi:10.1163/9789004183285.
• Seebold, Elmar (2013). "Die Aufgliederung der germanischen Sprachen". NOWELE. 66 (1): 55–77. doi:10.1075/nowele.66.1.04see.
• Seiler, Guido (2009). "Sound change or analogy? Monosyllabic lengthening in German and some of its consequences". Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics. 12: 229–272. doi:10.1007/s10828-009-9031-y.
• Shrier, Martha (1965). "Case Systems in German Dialects". Language. 41 (3): 420–438. JSTOR 411785.
• Simmler, Franz (1983). "Konsonantenschwächung in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1121–1130. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-005.
• Stiles, Patrick V. (2013). "The pan-West Germanic isoglosses and the sub-relationships of West Germanic to other branches". NOWELE. 66: 5–38. doi:10.1075/nowele.66.1.02sti.
• Stiles, Patrick V. (2017). "The Comparative Method, Internal Reconstruction, Areal Norms and the West Germanic Third Person Pronoun". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik. 77: 410–441. doi:10.1163/18756719-12340083.
• Swanenberg, Jos (2019). "Grenzen aan de streektaal: De taalkundige en de culturele benadering van het Brabants in Nederland". In Veronique De Tier; Anne-Sophie Ghyselen; Ton van de Wijngaard (eds.). De wondere wereld van de streektaalgrenzen. Leiden: Stichting Nederlandse Dialecten. pp. 39–48.
• Szczepaniak, Renata (2014). "Vowel and consonant epentheses in the history of German from the typological perspective of syllable and word languages". In Caro Reina, Javier; Szczepaniak, Renata (eds.). Syllable and Word Languages. de Gruyter. pp. 160–180. doi:10.1515/9783110346992.160.
• Taeldeman, Johan (2013a). "East Flemish: Phonology". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 211–234. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.211.
• Taeldeman, Johan (2013b). "The southwestern dialect area: Phonology". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 150–173. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.150.
• Taubken, Hans (1996). "Zur Lautgeographie des Westfälischen". Die niederdeutschen Mundarten. Münster: Aschendorf. pp. 2–13.
• Tiefenbach, Heinrich (1987). "-chen und -lein. Überlegungen zu Problemen des sprachgeographischen Befundes und seiner sprachhistorischen Deutung". Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. 54 (1): 2–27. JSTOR 40502254.
• Van Bree, Cor (2007) [1987]. Historische Grammatica van het Nederlands. bdnl.
• Van Bree, Cor (2013). "The spectrum of spatial varieties of Dutch: The historical genesis". In Frans Hinskens; Johan Taeldeman (eds.). Dutch. Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Volume 3. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 100–128. doi:10.1515/9783110261332.81.
• Van Bree, Cor (2016). Leerboek voor de historische grammatica van het Nederlands - Deel 1: Gotische grammatica, inleiding, klankleer (2 ed.). Universitet Leiden.
• Van Bree, Cor (2020). Leerboek voor de historische grammatica van het Nederlands - Deel 2: Flexie woordvorming (2 ed.). Universitet Leiden.
• Van de Velde, Freek (2024). "Dutch". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.935.
• van der Hoek, Michel (2010). "Old Franconian and Middle Dutch <gh> and Velar Palatalization". Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. 132 (1). doi:10.1515/bgsl.2010.002.
• van der Wal, Marijke J.; Quak, Aad (1994). "Old and Middle Continental Germanic". In König, Ekkehard; van der Auwera, Johan (eds.). The Germanic Languages. Routledge. pp. 72–109.
• van Koppen, Marjo (2017). "Complementizer Agreement". The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax (2 ed.). Wiley Blackwell. pp. 1–140. doi:10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom061.
• van Loey, Adolphe (1964). Schönfelds Historische Grammatica van het Nederlands (7 ed.). N.V. W. J. Thieme & Cie.
• van Loey, Adolphe (1970). "ALTNIEDERLÄNDISCH UND MITTELNIEDERLÄNDISCH". In Schmitt, Ludwig E. (ed.). Kurzer Grundriß der germanischen Philologie bis 1500. Band 1: Sprachgeschichte. de Gruyter. pp. 253–287. doi:10.1515/9783110822717.253.
• van Loon, Jozef (2003). "DE CHRONOLOGIE VAN DE R-METATHESIS IN HET NEDERLANDS EN AANGRENZENDE GERMAANSE TALEN". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik. 1: 141–167. doi:10.1163/18756719-90000136.
• Versloot, Arjen (2016). "Die Endungen -os/-as und -a des Nominativ/Akkusativ Plurals der a-Stämme im Altsächsischen". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik. 76 (4): 464–477. doi:10.1163/18756719-12340052.
• Versloot, Arjen; Adamczyk, Elżbieta (2017). "The Geography and Dialects of Old Saxon: River-basin communication networks and the distributional patterns of North Sea Germanic features in Old Saxon". In Hines, John; IJssennagger-van der Pluijm, Nelleke (eds.). Frisians and their North Sea Neighbours: From the Fifth Century to the Viking Age. Boydell and Brewer. pp. 125–148. doi:10.1515/9781787440630-014.
• Voyles, Joseph B. (1971). "The Problem of West Germanic". Folia Linguistica Historica. 5 (1–2): 117–150. doi:10.1515/flin.1969.5.1-2.117.
• Wagner, Kurt (1926). "Die Geschichte eines Lautwandels. ks < chs > s". Teuthonista. 2 (1): 30–46. JSTOR 40498432.
• Weijnen, A. (1958). Nederlandse dialectkunde (PDF). Assen: Van Gorcum & Comp.
• Weiß, Helmut (2005). "Inflected Complementizers in Continental West Germanic Dialects". Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. 72 (2): 148–166. JSTOR 40505274.
• Werlen, Iwar (1983). "Velarisierungen (Gutturalisierungen) in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1130–1136. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-005.
• Werlen, Iwar (1985). Gebrauch und Bedeutung der Modalverben in alemannischen Dialekten. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik Beiheft 49. Franz Steiner Verlag.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1970a). Phonetisch-phonologische Untersuchungen zur Vokalentwicklung in den deutschen Dialekten, Band 1: Die Langvokale im Hochdeutschen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co. doi:10.1515/9783110881240.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1970b). Phonetisch-phonologische Untersuchungen zur Vokalentwicklung in den deutschen Dialekten, Band 2: Die Diphthonge im Hochdeutschen. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co. doi:10.1515/9783110881240.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1983a). "Die Einteilung der deutschen Dialekte". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 807–900. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-003.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1983b). "Deutsche Dialektgebiete außerhalb des deutschen Sprachgebiets". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 900–930. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-003.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1983c). "Rundung und Entrundung, Palatalisierung und Entpalatalisierung, Velarisierung und Entvelarisierung in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1101–1106. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-003.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1983d). "Dehnung und Kürzung in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1088–1101. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-003.
• Wiesinger, Peter (1983e). "Hebung und Senkung in den deutschen Dialekten". In Besch, Werner (ed.). Dialektologie: Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. pp. 1106–1111. doi:10.1515/9783110203332-003.
• Wiesinger, Peter (2017a) [1975]. "Strukturgeographische und strukturhistorische Untersuchungen zur Stellung der bergischen Mundarten zwischen Ripuarisch, Niederfränkisch und Westfälisch". In Wiesinger, Peter; Patocka, Franz (eds.). Strukturelle historische Dialektologie des Deutschen: Strukturhistorische und strukturgeographische Studien zur Vokalentwicklung deutscher Dialekte. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag. pp. 341–437.
• Wiesinger, Peter (2017b) [1980]. "Die Stellung der Dialekte Hessens im Mitteldeutschen". In Wiesinger, Peter; Patocka, Franz (eds.). Strukturelle historische Dialektologie des Deutschen: Strukturhistorische und strukturgeographische Studien zur Vokalentwicklung deutscher Dialekte. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag. pp. 159–262.