Reconstruction talk:Proto-Germanic/raupijaną

The Dutch form is regular (no umlaut on long vowels), but shouldn't the High and Low German forms have umlaut? (There's an early modern German variant "reufen".) Kolmiel (talk) 18:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

OHG roufen reflects a class 1 weak verb, so it would have had umlaut. Same for Old Saxon. —CodeCat 18:47, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I thought. It's a bit strange. There are some pecularities with umlaut in Upper German (cf. glauben for early modern German "gleuben", and generally no umlaut before geminates: Bavarian "Ruck" for Rücken). But the Middle Low German form is also given with -ō- rather than -ȫ- in the dicitionaries I've seen. Kolmiel (talk) 21:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

PS: Compare the same in taufen (Central German täufen). It would seem to be an Upper German influence. Maybe the MLG should be read with -ȫ-. Kolmiel (talk) 15:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

PPS: Yes. I've found a note in DWB (1957) on "sträuben", which confirms that Upper German has no umlaut in -ou- (and other long vowels/dipthongs??) + labial: [Die Variante] strauben beruht wohl immer auf der obd. umlauthinderung vor labial. Kolmiel (talk) 18:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)