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

Re: Numbers and counting

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 8 , Jun 5, 2008
    • 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 2 of 8 , Jun 5, 2008
      • 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 3 of 8 , Jun 5, 2008
        • 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 4 of 8 , Jun 9, 2008
          • 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.