AHC ,have Scandinavia unify in a German 'Fashion' in the 19th century .

I would be interested in the linguistic effects of this. Would there be a standardized Scandinavian language, causing Swedish/Norwegian/Danish/Icelandic to become regarded as patois dialects?
 
What exactly is meant by "unify in a German fashion"? Will there be a new superstructure but the previous regimes are still ruling locally? And there are only two regimes in 1800, but lots of dialects.

Anyway, if these countries are not split up as OTL, but instead united into one centralised state that forces its new standard language on the population, as Sweden did OTL, then yes, there will be no significant local languages. There might be remnant dialects that enthusiasts cling to, but nothing for outsiders to notice.

OTL there were attempts towards Scandinavian, but since everyone wanted their peculiarities to be the standard, nothing came out of it. In this case, there will be no choice. They will just have to use the same standard form, and that language will kill off most other varieties.

Now you might say that Icelandic is a bit more different, but that is OTL today. There actually were some suggestions in Sweden to go a little more mediaeval, and there were some archaisms around in some dialects, so the path of OTL Swedish, Danish and Norwegian need not be taken, although it seems likely to head that way.

I think an early unification is necessary, driven by events like 1809 and 1814. Later on people were set in their ways, so 1860 is too late. So say 1809, the Danish king is chosen as successor in Sweden, with the clause that there will be a constitutional convention for new rule in all of Scandinavia thereafter.

Obviously neither Bokmål nor Nynorsk will appear if we have a unification in the early 1800s. Instead we have a merger of written Danish and written Swedish, so written Scandinavian probably will be sort of similar to OTL Danish and Swedish, and perhaps it will all be called Denmark and Danish.
 

mad orc

Banned
What exactly is meant by "unify in a German fashion"? Will there be a new superstructure but the previous regimes are still ruling locally? And there are only two regimes in 1800, but lots of dialects.

Anyway, if these countries are not split up as OTL, but instead united into one centralised state that forces its new standard language on the population, as Sweden did OTL, then yes, there will be no significant local languages. There might be remnant dialects that enthusiasts cling to, but nothing for outsiders to notice.

OTL there were attempts towards Scandinavian, but since everyone wanted their peculiarities to be the standard, nothing came out of it. In this case, there will be no choice. They will just have to use the same standard form, and that language will kill off most other varieties.

Now you might say that Icelandic is a bit more different, but that is OTL today. There actually were some suggestions in Sweden to go a little more mediaeval, and there were some archaisms around in some dialects, so the path of OTL Swedish, Danish and Norwegian need not be taken, although it seems likely to head that way.

I think an early unification is necessary, driven by events like 1809 and 1814. Later on people were set in their ways, so 1860 is too late. So say 1809, the Danish king is chosen as successor in Sweden, with the clause that there will be a constitutional convention for new rule in all of Scandinavia thereafter.

Obviously neither Bokmål nor Nynorsk will appear if we have a unification in the early 1800s. Instead we have a merger of written Danish and written Swedish, so written Scandinavian probably will be sort of similar to OTL Danish and Swedish, and perhaps it will all be called Denmark and Danish.
This is exactly the quality of answer that i expected .Well done man and hats off .Thanks .
 
Have Sweden back up Denmark when Austria and Prussia come knocking in 1864. Sweden-Norway's not coming to Denmark's aid nixed Pan-Scandinavian sentiment that had been building up since 1848.
 
I would be interested in the linguistic effects of this. Would there be a standardized Scandinavian language, causing Swedish/Norwegian/Danish/Icelandic to become regarded as patois dialects?

To a certain extent you could already argue that Swedish/Norwegian/Danish could be considered dialects of each other, and could probably make a strong case for that their standardized forms are closer than they respectively are to some of their more obscure dialects
 
There are several aspects of the Scandinavian situation that were noticeably different from the German one in ways that would make a 'German fashion' unification difficult.

1. The number of states. In Scandinavia the only two that mattered were Denmark and Sweden, Norway was still closer to a mere territory they fought over. Not even a little brother. Meanwhile Germany was filled with little statelets, smaller states, bigger states, etc. If you put all the German rulers into a room, you had dozens or hundreds of people. For Scandinavia, you had the King of Denmark and the King of Sweden. The former might seem more troublesome, but it becomes less a contest of ego and personality when there's a crowd. It allows parties to form, compromises, and majorities. For Scandinavia in the 19th century, you'd just end up with two kings butting heads. Now that doesn't disqualify an agreement being made, but it does require certain personalities being king at the time. Alongside the proper party politics in the riksradet that would choose pan-Scandinavianism over Danish or Swedish nationalism.

2. Germany was right in the center of Europe. There's a reason much of pan-Germanism is said to have started during Napoleon's occupation of Germany. Germany was occupied, its people conscripted to fight for foreign rulers, had armies marching over it constantly, etc. With Poland partitioned, the Russian bear was right to their east. France was still to their west. The situation was either that Germany became a Major military power able to defend itself from all sides, or it would be the battleground of Europe (as it arguably had been for centuries). Scandinavia is not in such a position. Its main such area is the Sound, but they no longer had the strength to defend even that from Britain and Russia. Germany had the advantage (if a really bad one) of being clearly shown that it was in its best interest to properly unite, or it would never be able to stand against its neighbors. Not quite sure how you could get Scandinavia to receive such a clear message. Even a British-Russian war would likely have other theaters it could use as proxy battlegrounds. Maybe during the Napoleonic War, Britain just doesn't Copenhagen the Danish Fleet but occupies Zealand. Maybe even a bold move forces Norway, already dealing with famine and poverty from the the naval blockade of Britain, to surrender. With it appearing all of Denmark-Norway besides Jutland was thus occupied or surrendered, Napoleon might allow Russia to not merely take Finland but Sweden proper. If the Russians were looting Stockholm like Napoleon looted Berlin and conscripting Swedes to fight in their armies while Britain was press-ganging Danes and Norwegians into serving their ships, you could see greater pan-Scandinavian sympathies afterwards. Less 'they are our natural ethnic and linguistic brothers' and more 'they're our brothers and comrades in our fight to not be used and abused by our more powerful neighbors'.

So while I won't say it would be impossible, there would be several caveats to have a German style unification of Scandinavia. While it might be possible to accomplish it in the mid-1800's through changes in the Scandinavianism movement, Frederick VII's succession, and/or the Second Schleswig War, you might be stretching it a bit. You'd probably have to go all the way to the Napoleonic Wars. Make them even more devastating for the Scandinavian countries, although the OTL Napoleonic Wars were already harsh on them, so that both Sweden and Denmark are knocked out of any historic pride about their power and shown they can't stand alone. I'd also say Norway needs to become a proper kingdom. Three kingdoms is better in that it allows 2-1 votes, preventing a Danish-Swedish union from being paralyzed by the stalemate. Potentially a Norway that surrendered to Britain in the Napoleonic War could receive a boon in an alt-Vienna. A Danish prince marries an English princess as a compromise for Norway's ruler. Then a Swedish marriage a generation later solves that. Although it would be unlikely a Scandinavian unification would end up with a single 'higher' ruler like Prussia's king becoming Emperor, unless you end up with a Frederick VII scenario where one king has no heirs and his rule might fall to another Scandinavian king. It would be more likely, in my view, that a Scandinavian union would be merely involve a federal parliament for pan-Scandinavian affairs while the royal families stay constitutional rulers of their respective kingdoms. Then enough success in an alt-Schleswig War where the three cooperate against the weaker Greater Power of Prussia could restore pride and reaffirm that such a union was for the best. Denmark keeps Schleswig, although probably not Holstein. They then look east to 'liberate' Finland from Russia, thus becoming a minor power as time passes and an alt-WWI approaches.
 

Kaze

Banned
The best time to do it would not be in the 19th Century. The Best time to do it would be much earlier - the Deluge. Instead of overrunning Poland and Russia, re-task the armies to conquer Norway and Denmark. If your fleets and armies are victorious, long live the empire of the north which will dominate northern European politics for generations.
 
I would be interested in the linguistic effects of this. Would there be a standardized Scandinavian language, causing Swedish/Norwegian/Danish/Icelandic to become regarded as patois dialects?
It would probably be a Danish-Swedish language. But it should be a mix of west norse and east norse combined with adoption of new linguistic development.
 
It would probably be a Danish-Swedish language. But it should be a mix of west norse and east norse combined with adoption of new linguistic development.

A common Scandinavian language (let's call it Samnordisk) would in written form likely be closest to Danish as it have the most archaic spelling (through some of the reforms seen in Swedish and Norwegian would likely also be seen here; "nd" becoming "nn" and "hv" becoming "v"). In spoken form I think it would move toward a mix of Bokmål/Danish/Swedish (through I think mubmling quality of Danish would disappear for a more clear pronouncement, but Danish dialects would likely keep it gluttural pronouncement, and we would likely see Danish lose its German number ordering; modern Danes pronounce thing like 1121 as one thousand, one hundred, one and twenty, this would likely be replaced with the more obvious number order. We would likely also see Swedish move toward a common standard, it would likely keep some of the sing song quality, but lose some of its slurring qualities for a more clear pronouncement), Icelandic would likely survive as a separate language, while Faroese would have likely be assimilated and simply end up as one of the West Norwegian dialects. When we
 
To a certain extent you could already argue that Swedish/Norwegian/Danish could be considered dialects of each other, and could probably make a strong case for that their standardized forms are closer than they respectively are to some of their more obscure dialects

True, but if the countries had gone all the way and created a unified written language, that could have significant cultural/economic impact - that would be one written standard for 20 million people today (and the Finns would probably learn it also).
 
A common Scandinavian language (let's call it Samnordisk) would in written form likely be closest to Danish as it have the most archaic spelling (through some of the reforms seen in Swedish and Norwegian would likely also be seen here; "nd" becoming "nn" and "hv" becoming "v"). In spoken form I think it would move toward a mix of Bokmål/Danish/Swedish (through I think mubmling quality of Danish would disappear for a more clear pronouncement, but Danish dialects would likely keep it gluttural pronouncement, and we would likely see Danish lose its German number ordering; modern Danes pronounce thing like 1121 as one thousand, one hundred, one and twenty, this would likely be replaced with the more obvious number order. We would likely also see Swedish move toward a common standard, it would likely keep some of the sing song quality, but lose some of its slurring qualities for a more clear pronouncement), Icelandic would likely survive as a separate language, while Faroese would have likely be assimilated and simply end up as one of the West Norwegian dialects. When we

I wonder how this samnordisk language would lend itself to for litterature, military use, music, etc.

Ikke sikker på engelsk oversettelse, men jeg tror at et samskandinavisk språk vil ha
- Rulle R ikke Skarre R
- ikke bløte/bløde konsonanter
 
Last edited:
Top