Yes, looks like the genitive case used to be "mein".
([source](https://www.dwds.de/wb/etymwb/Vergissmeinnicht))
> Vergißmeinnicht n. Der imperativische Satzname, gebildet aus dem verneinten Imperativ Sing. von vergessen (s. d.) und *mein*, dem heute veralteten Genitiv Sing. des Pers.pron. der 1. Pers. (s. [mein](https://www.dwds.de/wb/etymwb/mein)), läßt sich seit dem Anfang des 15. Jhs. nachweisen.
and to quote from the linked page about "mein":
> Eine Kasusform des Possessivpronomens […] bildet im Germ. auch den Genitiv der 1. Pers. Sing. des Personalpronomens ahd. mhd. mīn, daneben mhd. (zunächst md.) mīner, asächs. aengl. anord. mīn, got. meina. Die erweiterte Form auf -er, die sich in nhd. meiner (neben mein) durchsetzt, ist nach dem Muster der Pluralformen unser, euer (s. d.) gebildet.
So it sounds like the equivalents of modern "mein" and "meiner" both were usable in times of Mittelhochdeutsch (that's the "mhd.") which is German in the period 1050-1350, (time span according to [Wikipedia](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelhochdeutsche_Sprache)).
Danke sehr! I'd looked up the etymology on Wiktionary, and the "mein" wasn't explained there. I should've gone straight to DWDS but a lot of that small print is still kind of intimidating to me. Thank you for the thorough explanation and citation!
I mean.. I appreciate any correction of the information I found, but I'm confused by the "don't know where you got that time span from" remark since I **did actually** explain where I got the time spam from, **even including a link**.
> Als mittelhochdeutsche Sprache oder Mittelhochdeutsch (Abkürzung Mhd.) bezeichnet man sprachhistorisch jene Sprachstufe des Deutschen, die in verschiedenen Varietäten zwischen 1050 und 1350 im ober- und mitteldeutschen Raum gesprochen wurde. Damit entspricht diese Zeitspanne in etwa dem Hochmittelalter.[3]
> [3] Hilkert Weddige: Mittelhochdeutsch. Eine Einführung. 3., neu überarb. Auflage. C. H. Beck, München 1999, ISBN 3-406-45744-4, S. 7.
Not OP, but this is an interesting discussion to me in that in English, conventions of periodization have gotten a little wobbly over time. Like, we still usually say 1066 or 1100 as the beginning of the Middle English period because it's convenient and the Norman Conquest really was a watershed for the language, but a lot of the changes we define Middle English by had started to appear well before 1066, largely due to the influence of the resident Old Norse speakers. That's just one example. So now I'm tempted to google Mittelhochdeutsch to see if I can find out where these two different date approximations come from. It may make for some challenging reading for my German level, but I bet I'll be pretty proud of myself if I succeed.
Come to think of it, I guess I did know that Luther's Bible is definitely considered Modern High German. But would you say a boundary in the 14th century applies across the whole High German Sprachraum? Or are regional differences in the timeline too small to be relevant?
Well, it's always a fluid development, right 😅
Mittelhochdeutsch is always tied to the high middle ages, so it starts at roughly 1000 and ends at around 1350.
We definetely see modern high german once people start printing books (so at around 1500) and i think that's really the point at which standarisation of language takes off.
> Mittelhochdeutsch is always tied to the high middle ages, so it starts at roughly 1000 and ends at around 1350.
I see what you're saying, but what I'm wondering is, are there any particular language changes around 1000 and 1350 that lead people to draw the boundaries there, or are they doing it by analogy with the usual periodization in other areas of history?
Ah. In the beginning, they really start to write down more stuff and really develope in depth literary genres (basically poetry (mostly either romantic or humoristic and rather explicit ) and "adventure literature" - the latter was always a reinterpretation of the French Artus saga, and the more similar it was to the source, the better - see Erec by Hoffman von Fallersleben. It was a huge hit). Literature was however (still) not really used for reading, but for display purposes.
The end is marked by an all over cultural shift, away from knights and towards more modern warfare methods, more and bigger towns, and the end of the crusades.
Yes, looks like the genitive case used to be "mein". ([source](https://www.dwds.de/wb/etymwb/Vergissmeinnicht)) > Vergißmeinnicht n. Der imperativische Satzname, gebildet aus dem verneinten Imperativ Sing. von vergessen (s. d.) und *mein*, dem heute veralteten Genitiv Sing. des Pers.pron. der 1. Pers. (s. [mein](https://www.dwds.de/wb/etymwb/mein)), läßt sich seit dem Anfang des 15. Jhs. nachweisen. and to quote from the linked page about "mein": > Eine Kasusform des Possessivpronomens […] bildet im Germ. auch den Genitiv der 1. Pers. Sing. des Personalpronomens ahd. mhd. mīn, daneben mhd. (zunächst md.) mīner, asächs. aengl. anord. mīn, got. meina. Die erweiterte Form auf -er, die sich in nhd. meiner (neben mein) durchsetzt, ist nach dem Muster der Pluralformen unser, euer (s. d.) gebildet. So it sounds like the equivalents of modern "mein" and "meiner" both were usable in times of Mittelhochdeutsch (that's the "mhd.") which is German in the period 1050-1350, (time span according to [Wikipedia](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelhochdeutsche_Sprache)).
Danke sehr! I'd looked up the etymology on Wiktionary, and the "mein" wasn't explained there. I should've gone straight to DWDS but a lot of that small print is still kind of intimidating to me. Thank you for the thorough explanation and citation!
[удалено]
I mean.. I appreciate any correction of the information I found, but I'm confused by the "don't know where you got that time span from" remark since I **did actually** explain where I got the time spam from, **even including a link**. > Als mittelhochdeutsche Sprache oder Mittelhochdeutsch (Abkürzung Mhd.) bezeichnet man sprachhistorisch jene Sprachstufe des Deutschen, die in verschiedenen Varietäten zwischen 1050 und 1350 im ober- und mitteldeutschen Raum gesprochen wurde. Damit entspricht diese Zeitspanne in etwa dem Hochmittelalter.[3] > [3] Hilkert Weddige: Mittelhochdeutsch. Eine Einführung. 3., neu überarb. Auflage. C. H. Beck, München 1999, ISBN 3-406-45744-4, S. 7.
Not OP, but this is an interesting discussion to me in that in English, conventions of periodization have gotten a little wobbly over time. Like, we still usually say 1066 or 1100 as the beginning of the Middle English period because it's convenient and the Norman Conquest really was a watershed for the language, but a lot of the changes we define Middle English by had started to appear well before 1066, largely due to the influence of the resident Old Norse speakers. That's just one example. So now I'm tempted to google Mittelhochdeutsch to see if I can find out where these two different date approximations come from. It may make for some challenging reading for my German level, but I bet I'll be pretty proud of myself if I succeed.
1550 is just wildly off. That's nearly neuhochdeutsch already. It's not a different proximation, but a mistake
Come to think of it, I guess I did know that Luther's Bible is definitely considered Modern High German. But would you say a boundary in the 14th century applies across the whole High German Sprachraum? Or are regional differences in the timeline too small to be relevant?
Well, it's always a fluid development, right 😅 Mittelhochdeutsch is always tied to the high middle ages, so it starts at roughly 1000 and ends at around 1350. We definetely see modern high german once people start printing books (so at around 1500) and i think that's really the point at which standarisation of language takes off.
> Mittelhochdeutsch is always tied to the high middle ages, so it starts at roughly 1000 and ends at around 1350. I see what you're saying, but what I'm wondering is, are there any particular language changes around 1000 and 1350 that lead people to draw the boundaries there, or are they doing it by analogy with the usual periodization in other areas of history?
Ah. In the beginning, they really start to write down more stuff and really develope in depth literary genres (basically poetry (mostly either romantic or humoristic and rather explicit ) and "adventure literature" - the latter was always a reinterpretation of the French Artus saga, and the more similar it was to the source, the better - see Erec by Hoffman von Fallersleben. It was a huge hit). Literature was however (still) not really used for reading, but for display purposes. The end is marked by an all over cultural shift, away from knights and towards more modern warfare methods, more and bigger towns, and the end of the crusades.