Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Numbers and counting

Expand Messages
  • se3k4life101
    How would you count numbers if you were just counting? Ains, twai, threis, fidwor, etc... ? Or would you just use the neuter: ain, twa, thrija, fidwor...?
    Message 1 of 8 , Jun 2 12:13 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      How would you count numbers if you were just counting?

      Ains, twai, threis, fidwor, etc... ? Or would you just use the neuter:
      ain, twa, thrija, fidwor...?

      Likewise, what if you were counting objects, like in english "object
      one, object two, object three..."? Would it agree with the noun? I
      feel like the numbers should be in some kind of singular form rather
      than as plural adjectives in this context.

      I've been wondering about this for awhile, so any help would be much
      appreciated. Thanks.
    • OSCAR HERRERA
      ains,twa,threis,fidor,fimf,saihts,sebun,autau,niun,taihun,ainliff,twailiff,threliff,fidorliff,fimfliff,saihtsliff,sebunliff,autliff,niunliff,etc.........twatig
      Message 2 of 8 , Jun 2 9:56 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        ains,twa,threis,fidor,fimf,saihts,sebun,autau,niun,taihun,ainliff,twailiff,threliff,fidorliff,fimfliff,saihtsliff,sebunliff,autliff,niunliff,etc.........twatigzin....

        se3k4life101 <se3k4life101@...> wrote: How would you count numbers if you were just counting?

        Ains, twai, threis, fidwor, etc... ? Or would you just use the neuter:
        ain, twa, thrija, fidwor...?

        Likewise, what if you were counting objects, like in english "object
        one, object two, object three..."? Would it agree with the noun? I
        feel like the numbers should be in some kind of singular form rather
        than as plural adjectives in this context.

        I've been wondering about this for awhile, so any help would be much
        appreciated. Thanks.






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Fredrik
        ... I would use the neuter forms. I don t know if that is more correct than using masculine or feminine but since it seems as crimean gothic used neuter I
        Message 3 of 8 , Jun 3 7:33 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "se3k4life101" <se3k4life101@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > How would you count numbers if you were just counting?
          >
          > Ains, twai, threis, fidwor, etc... ? Or would you just use the neuter:
          > ain, twa, thrija, fidwor...?
          >

          I would use the neuter forms. I don't know if that is more correct than
          using masculine or feminine but since it seems as crimean gothic used
          neuter I think that's the better choice.

          > Likewise, what if you were counting objects, like in english "object
          > one, object two, object three..."? Would it agree with the noun? I
          > feel like the numbers should be in some kind of singular form rather
          > than as plural adjectives in this context.
          >
          I don't know this either and I guess it's not very common to count like
          this. My guess would be that numbers agree with noun.
          E.g. waurd ain, waurd twa, waurd thrija ktl.

          > I've been wondering about this for awhile, so any help would be much
          > appreciated. Thanks.
          >
        • llama_nom
          ... Agreed. Without any direct evidence from the fragments of Biblical Gothic, the Crimean example seems like a good one to follow. ... I think here, Gothic
          Message 4 of 8 , Jun 3 8:12 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "se3k4life101" <se3k4life101@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > How would you count numbers if you were just counting?
            > >
            > > Ains, twai, threis, fidwor, etc... ? Or would you just use the neuter:
            > > ain, twa, thrija, fidwor...?
            > >
            >
            > I would use the neuter forms. I don't know if that is more correct than
            > using masculine or feminine but since it seems as crimean gothic used
            > neuter I think that's the better choice.


            Agreed. Without any direct evidence from the fragments of Biblical
            Gothic, the Crimean example seems like a good one to follow.


            > > Likewise, what if you were counting objects, like in english "object
            > > one, object two, object three..."? Would it agree with the noun? I
            > > feel like the numbers should be in some kind of singular form rather
            > > than as plural adjectives in this context.
            > >
            > I don't know this either and I guess it's not very common to count like
            > this. My guess would be that numbers agree with noun.
            > E.g. waurd ain, waurd twa, waurd thrija ktl.


            I think here, Gothic would probably use ordinal numbers (fruma, anþar,
            þridja, ?*fidworþa - first, second, third, fourth). This is the
            practice used for the names of Paul's epistles:

            Du Teimauþaiau ·a· dustodeiþ.
            Du Teimauþaiau frumei dustodeiþ.
            "The First [Letter] to Timothy begins." (I Timothy begins.)

            Du Kaurinþaium anþara dustodeiþ.
            "The Second Letter to the Corinthians begins." (II Corinthians begins.)

            Du Kaurinþium ·a· ustauh. Du Kaurinþium frume[i] melida ist us
            Filippai, swe qeþun sumai; iþ mais þugkeiþ bi silbins apaustaulaus
            insahtai melida wisan us Asiai.
            "The 1st [Letter] to the Corinthians ends. The First [Letter] to the
            Corinthians is written from Philipae, according to some; but it seems
            rather according to the apostle's own statement to have been written
            from Asia."
          • Fredrik
            ... anþar, ... begins.) ... seems ... So how it is said is in reallity: first object, second object, third object etc. and not object one, object two, object
            Message 5 of 8 , Jun 5 5:34 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              > I think here, Gothic would probably use ordinal numbers (fruma,
              anþar,
              > þridja, ?*fidworþa - first, second, third, fourth). This is the
              > practice used for the names of Paul's epistles:
              >
              > Du Teimauþaiau ·a· dustodeiþ.
              > Du Teimauþaiau frumei dustodeiþ.
              > "The First [Letter] to Timothy begins." (I Timothy begins.)
              >
              > Du Kaurinþaium anþara dustodeiþ.
              > "The Second Letter to the Corinthians begins." (II Corinthians
              begins.)
              >
              > Du Kaurinþium ·a· ustauh. Du Kaurinþium frume[i] melida ist us
              > Filippai, swe qeþun sumai; iþ mais þugkeiþ bi silbins apaustaulaus
              > insahtai melida wisan us Asiai.
              > "The 1st [Letter] to the Corinthians ends. The First [Letter] to the
              > Corinthians is written from Philipae, according to some; but it
              seems
              > rather according to the apostle's own statement to have been written
              > from Asia."
              >
              So how it is said is in reallity: first object, second object, third
              object etc. and not object one, object two, object three etc, right?
              This seems to me to be a more natural way of coounting object as well.
              And since it obviously is attested that seems to be the correct way.
            • Fredrik
              In crimean they count with ite as one. What is that? Is it from ita = it? According to zompist the word for one is ene, what s the evidence of that?
              Message 6 of 8 , Jun 5 5:44 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                In crimean they count with ite as one.
                What is that? Is it from ita = it?

                According to zompist the word for one is ene, what's the evidence of
                that? http://zompist.com/euro.htm#ie

                Why do the numbers in crimean gothic end with -e?
                e.g. sevene, nyne and thiine?

                The e in athe is obvious coz it's a weakened 'au' I presume.

                Should th in crimean be read as t?

                And what about ii in thiine. Is that a long i or two syllables?
                if so I guess it should have been a short e in the first syllable and
                a schwa in the second.
              • llama_nom
                ... Busbecq actually cites it as ita . Yes, I think probably is from the personal pronoun spelt the same in Biblical Gothic, unless perhaps it s a contraction
                Message 7 of 8 , Jun 5 11:33 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > In crimean they count with ite as one.
                  > What is that? Is it from ita = it?

                  Busbecq actually cites it as 'ita'. Yes, I think probably is from the
                  personal pronoun spelt the same in Biblical Gothic, unless perhaps
                  it's a contraction from the numeral 'ainata'. This could well have
                  happened if it was used in unstressed positions, e.g. if it came to be
                  used as an indefinite article as in many other Germanic languages.

                  >
                  > According to zompist the word for one is ene, what's the evidence of
                  > that? http://zompist.com/euro.htm#ie

                  Must be a mistake, or somebody tried to reconstruct the masculine form
                  of 1 without realising that 2 and 3 are also neuter.

                  >
                  > Why do the numbers in crimean gothic end with -e?
                  > e.g. sevene, nyne and thiine?

                  I don't know. Maybe the final -e in these numbers arose by analogy
                  with athe.

                  >
                  > The e in athe is obvious coz it's a weakened 'au' I presume.


                  I think so. Compare sune (BG sunno), mine (BG mena), etc.

                  >
                  > Should th in crimean be read as t?
                  >
                  > And what about ii in thiine. Is that a long i or two syllables?
                  > if so I guess it should have been a short e in the first syllable and
                  > a schwa in the second.
                  >

                  I don't know about the 'ii'. Maybe [i:]? Grønvik thought that
                  initial /t/ and /d/ of Germanic had fallen together in Crimean Gothic
                  as a voiceless stop [t], which Busbeque spells variously 't' and 'th'
                  (similarly /b/ and /p/ > [p], as in 'plut'). But the forms 'goltz'
                  and 'statz' made him think that [þ] probably did still exist in
                  Crimean Gothic. Busbecq may not have represented it very accurately
                  because there was no such sound in his own language.
                • Fredrik
                  ... the ... be ... Yes that seems to a reasonable explanation. When unstressed would it be enata then? ... of ... form ... OK, but when used with masculine
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jun 9 3:32 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > In crimean they count with ite as one.
                    > > What is that? Is it from ita = it?
                    >
                    > Busbecq actually cites it as 'ita'. Yes, I think probably is from
                    the
                    > personal pronoun spelt the same in Biblical Gothic, unless perhaps
                    > it's a contraction from the numeral 'ainata'. This could well have
                    > happened if it was used in unstressed positions, e.g. if it came to
                    be
                    > used as an indefinite article as in many other Germanic languages.
                    >
                    Yes that seems to a reasonable explanation. When unstressed would it
                    be enata then?

                    > >
                    > > According to zompist the word for one is ene, what's the evidence
                    of
                    > > that? http://zompist.com/euro.htm#ie
                    >
                    > Must be a mistake, or somebody tried to reconstruct the masculine
                    form
                    > of 1 without realising that 2 and 3 are also neuter.
                    >
                    OK, but when used with masculine nouns it should be used. Shouldn't a
                    masculine be just en or ens if -s suffix is kept?

                    > >
                    > > Why do the numbers in crimean gothic end with -e?
                    > > e.g. sevene, nyne and thiine?
                    >
                    > I don't know. Maybe the final -e in these numbers arose by analogy
                    > with athe.
                    >
                    > >
                    > > The e in athe is obvious coz it's a weakened 'au' I presume.
                    >
                    >
                    > I think so. Compare sune (BG sunno), mine (BG mena), etc.
                    >
                    > >
                    > > Should th in crimean be read as t?
                    > >
                    > > And what about ii in thiine. Is that a long i or two syllables?
                    > > if so I guess it should have been a short e in the first syllable
                    and
                    > > a schwa in the second.
                    > >
                    >
                    > I don't know about the 'ii'. Maybe [i:]? Grønvik thought that

                    It was a greek guy who told Busbecq all these words and he could have
                    some greek influence on pronunciation (as one website suggests), for
                    instance hails should have been hel (or el) [(h)e:l] but he said it
                    as iel coz he didn't use long vowels in his greek dialect. And his
                    short e was broken into ie. If that's correct words such as thiine,
                    breen etc. shouldn't have any long vowel.

                    > initial /t/ and /d/ of Germanic had fallen together in Crimean
                    Gothic
                    > as a voiceless stop [t], which Busbeque spells variously 't'
                    and 'th'
                    > (similarly /b/ and /p/ > [p], as in 'plut'). But the forms 'goltz'
                    > and 'statz' made him think that [þ] probably did still exist in
                    > Crimean Gothic. Busbecq may not have represented it very accurately
                    > because there was no such sound in his own language.
                    >
                    B seems to become voiceless before l (plut) but kept before some
                    other (bruder, bars etc.) Is it the same with g (e.g. goltz), the
                    word for cry was written as eriten but shouldn't this be griten, with
                    g remaining?

                    I think it's confusing how Busbecq uses the spelling th and tz. If th
                    is [t] and tz [T] then I wonder why the definite article the and tho
                    as initla [t] and the pronoun [T]. Further could it be presumed that
                    [T] was kept initlally before vowel and final (e.g. goltz, statz).

                    I realize that this is now off topic and should probably be discussed
                    under crimean gothic instead, sorry for that ;)
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.