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

Re: [gothic-l] Auhjodjus Þahainais

Expand Messages
  • Grsartor@aol.com
    Hailai allai. I regret that I do not know the author s name, but The Sound of Silence, as he has translated it into Gothic, looks good to me. However, I have
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 28, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hailai allai.

      I regret that I do not know the author's name, but The Sound of Silence, as
      he has translated it into Gothic, looks good to me. However, I have not
      ventured to try singing it to its tune. The composition, and the literal
      English translation provided with it, are appended to this email. Since there
      are a few invented terms it would be nice to be provided with a discussion
      of them. Apart from that I offer a few comments, which should be carefully
      scrutinised, since they may be wrong.

      I think the construction in lines 5-6 should be amended to "soei in huga"
      etc; or if "so" is allowed to stand then "was" should be dropped.

      In the fifth line of verse 2, I suspect the word for stabbed was meant to
      be "stugqana", and in the next line "split" should be represented by
      "disskaiskaiþ": the Goths do not seem to have let themselves off reduplication in
      the preterite when a verb of Class 7 had a prefix: consider, e.g.,
      fralailot, the preterite of fraletan. If the indicated change would mess the rhythm
      up, not to mention its being awkward to pronounce, it might be reasonable
      to drop the dis- prefix, since "skaidan" by itself seems to have had
      something like the required meaning.

      In verse 4, if "galeiko" governs a dative, its second occurrence would have
      to be followed by "rigna dumbamma". Possibly this would make the line
      rather full of syllables. If so, then the problem might be cured by using "swe"
      rather than "galeiko"; for in all the relevant examples I have managed to
      find, the word acts like a conjunction, and so there would be a choice
      between "rign dumb" and "rign dumbata".

      In the fifth line of verse 5, the reference to a prophet has been
      overlooked; and was the use of "writanona" deliberate rather than from an
      involuntary thought of English? I think the expected word would be "melida" or
      "ufmelida".

      In the last line I think "auhjodjuns" should be "auhjoduns".

      Gerry T.



      Here are the Gothic translation of the Sound of Silence and its literal
      rendition in English, both copied from the site where they were published.

      Auhjodjus Þahainais

      Hails, riqis, alþja frijond meins.
      Qam aftra rodjan miþ þus,
      siuns auk sliupandei hnasquba
      bilaiþ þan saislep sedins seinos.
      Jah siuns so ïnn huga meinamma
      miþsatida was, und hita ïst
      ïn auhjodau þamma þahainais.

      Ïn draumam rimislausaim ƕarb
      sundro. Gatwons aggwjos staine
      uf glitmunjai lukarnis.
      Halsafanan wiþra frius qrammiþuh afwandida
      biþe augona meina stikana wesun fram braƕa þamma niujaliuhadis
      þatei naht diskaiþ
      taitokuh auhjodau þamma þahainais.

      Þanuh ïn liuhada þamma naqadin saƕ
      taihun þusundjos manne aufto managizans.
      Mans rodjand ïnu rodein.
      Mans hausjand ïnu hausein.
      Mans meljand saggwins þanzei ni aiw stibnos miþdailidedun.
      Jah ni ainshun sokida
      usþriutan auhjodau þamma þahainais.

      Qaþ: Unwitans, ni wituþ jus
      þahains galeiko gunda aukiþ.
      Hauseiþ waurda meina ei laisjau ïzwis!
      Nimiþ armins meinans ei nimau ïzwis!
      Ïþ waurda meina drusun galeiko rigna dumba
      jah galeikodedun sik
      ïn brunnam þaim þahainais.

      Þanuh þiuda hniwun bedunuh
      du niujaguda þatei namnidedun.
      Jah bandwa ƕota seina gataih
      bi waurda þo si skop.
      Qaþuh bandwa: waurda þo ana waddjum ufwigis writanona sind
      jah huznis sala.
      Jah birodidedun auhjodjuns þans þahainais.


      Sounds Of.silence

      Hello, darkness, old friend my
      I.came again to.talk with you
      vision for creeping softly
      left while I.slept seeds its.
      And vision the in mind my
      planted was, until this.time is
      in sound the of.silence.

      In dreams restless I.walked
      alone. Streets narrow of.stone
      under glow of.lamp.
      Collar against cold damp.and I.turned.
      When eyes my stabbed were by flash the of.new-light
      that night split
      touched.and sound the of.silence.

      Then in light the naked I.saw
      ten thousand of.men maybe more
      People they.talk without speaking.
      People they.hear without listening.
      People they.write songs they.that never voices shared.
      And no one dared
      to.disturb sound the of.silence.

      I.said: Fools, not know you.all
      silence like cancer grows.
      Hear words my that I.might.reach you!
      Take arms my that I.might.reach you!
      But words my they.fell like rain silent
      and they.echoed
      in wells the of.silence.

      Then.and people they.bowed they.prayed.and
      to new-god it.that they.named.
      And sign it.flashed its warning
      in words the it formed.
      It.said.and sign: words.of.the.prophets the on walls of.subway written are
      and of.house halls.
      And they.whispered sounds the of.silence


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • anheropl0x
      Hello, Gerry! Thanks for the reply. As I said before, this final draft has flaws that I ve found in the past few months, and you ve wonderfully pointed out
      Message 2 of 5 , Dec 28, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello, Gerry! Thanks for the reply. As I said before, this final draft has flaws that I've found in the past few months, and you've wonderfully pointed out more that I will either concur with, dispute or explain. Let's go in order with what you said.

        "I think the construction in lines 5-6 should be amended to "soei in huga"
        etc; or if "so" is allowed to stand then "was" should be dropped."
        After giving it some thought, "soei" should be in there. I originally meant it so be simply "so siuns" with inverted word order as I see so commonly, but even with the passive tense of miþsatjan, it makes no sense to not have the cj "that" in the line.

        "In the fifth line of verse 2, I suspect the word for stabbed was meant to
        be "stugqana", and in the next line "split" should be represented by
        "disskaiskaiþ": the Goths do not seem to have let themselves off reduplication in
        the preterite when a verb of Class 7 had a prefix: consider, e.g.,
        fralailot, the preterite of fraletan. If the indicated change would mess the rhythm
        up, not to mention its being awkward to pronounce, it might be reasonable
        to drop the dis- prefix, since "skaidan" by itself seems to have had
        something like the required meaning."
        Massive typo on my part. I in fact meant the sv I verb disskreitan, which in pret. third person sing. becomes disskraiþ (why it makes that -t a -þ I am somewhat lost on). But, as you pointed out, skaidan could be used as well, making skaiskaiþ. As for NE stabbed, I had been using the verb stikan, found here under S for stab (v.): http://www.oe.eclipse.co.uk/nom/letters.htm Though whether you find this dictionary to be legitimate is your call. P.P. of stikan being stikans, and declined strong to nom. pl. neut. should be stikana. I believe the reason I went with nom. pl. masc. is because after searching at length I came across a sample of my sentence in the Silver Bible where masculine was used for a neuter noun, which fits perfectly with augona. I can't think of the example, nor where I found it, because I'm sure after a few hours of working on this, my brain shut down haha. This verb can still be discussed though, but there is my reasoning for stikana.

        "In verse 4, if "galeiko" governs a dative, its second occurrence would have
        to be followed by "rigna dumbamma". Possibly this would make the line
        rather full of syllables. If so, then the problem might be cured by using "swe"
        rather than "galeiko"; for in all the relevant examples I have managed to
        find, the word acts like a conjunction, and so there would be a choice
        between "rign dumb" and "rign dumbata"."
        The adverb/adjective "like" is ungodly hard for me to translate correctly, since there seems to be so many ways to do it. There's swa, swe, galieks, galeiko. And they all seem the same to me, though I think of swe, swa, swaswe more as "as" than "like." Help would be appreciated in this. I did search as much as I could examples of all four and found galeiko to be the most forgiving and neutral to how it is used, but I had no idea it governs the dative. I have read that no where, though I see galeiks governs the dative. It seems that like is overused in English and other languages have problems coming up with a simple way to equal its meaning as well (take for example German having gefallen, mögen and gern haben). So for this one, I certainly say it's debatable. Though the person who helped me iron out a lot of mistakes had nothing to say about it if I recall.

        "In the fifth line of verse 5, the reference to a prophet has been
        overlooked; and was the use of "writanona" deliberate rather than from an
        involuntary thought of English? I think the expected word would be "melida" or "ufmelida"."
        I agree with you for the most part of this. I had found somewhere that pl. waurd meant message from prophets. And now that I can't find this anywhere without more extensive searching, I feel.. well... less than smart at having done that. I do think I originally had prophets in there. "writanona" is the weak P.P. declension in pl. nom. neut. Wreitan, according to the aforementioned dictionary, means inscribed or engraved, which on a wall seems a bit more fitting. If I were to use the verb meljan or gameljan, the correct declension would be (ga)melidona for weak and (ga)melida for strong. "ufmeljan" I can not find in Wright's dictionary. Though according to a random site, means to sign (as in agreeing to a document).

        "In the last line I think "auhjodjuns" should be "auhjoduns"."
        Another typo. Can't believe I let that one slip by. Thanks for catching it.


        Anyway, my name is Johann. :) And I thank you for taking the time to look this over and point out the major flaws like that. This helps further my knowledge more than most things, since I've no one to sit down with and actively study Gothic.
      • Grsartor@aol.com
        Hailai allai, þishun Johann. Well, Johann, if I have been helpful to you about translation of The Sound of Silence, then you have been helpful to me, and
        Message 3 of 5 , Dec 31, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Hailai allai, þishun Johann.

          Well, Johann, if I have been helpful to you about translation of The Sound of Silence, then you have been helpful to me, and given plenty to check up on and ponder. One or two things arise:

          You want to render "stabbed" by a form of "stikan", which I had not realised existed. It is listed in Koebler, and if I correctly understand his rather cryptic presentation, it seems to be a reconstructed strong verb of class 5. So I think you are right that its past participle in the neuter plural would be "stikana".

          As for "disskreitan" for splitting, would the preterite not be "disskrait" rather than "disskraiþ? According to Lehmann the verb is known only from Mark 14:63, where it occurs as a present participle; so if there was expected to be any anomaly in the preterite we presumably have to look at other verbs that belong to the same class and end in the same consonant; and at least four verbs fit the bill: "beitan", "andbeitan", "gasmeitan", and "inweitan". The preterite of "inweitan" occurs several times as "inwait", e.g. Matt. 8:2

          jah sai, manna þrutsfill habands durinnands inwait ina...

          The preterite of "gasmeitan" occurs in John 9:6

          ...jah gasmait imma ana augona þata fani þamma blindin

          The preterite of "andbeitan" occurs several times as "andbait" e.g. Mark 1:25

          jah andbait ina Iesus qiþands...

          As for ways of saying "like" in Gothic: "galeiks" in its various inflected forms seems to be fine for expressing an adjectival "like", e.g. you are like (= similar to) your brother. An example is Galatians 5:21

          neiþa, maurþra, drugkaneins, gabauros jah þata galeiko þaim...

          This looks as if literally it is something along the lines of

          [various vices] and that [which is] like those,

          and is presumably in weak declension because of its being preceded by the Gothic demonstrative or definite article.
          The difficulty is with adverbial "like" (= similarly to). English is often potentially or actually ambiguous with this usage, and so it would not be surprising if other languages, especially highly inflected ones, favoured a conjunction.

          So what about "galeiko" for adverbial "like" (my words like silent raindrops fell)? I had supposed that this was a Johannes innovation. However, Philippians 2:6 is said to have such a usage:

          saei in gudaskaunein wisands ni wulwa rahnida wisan sik galeiko guda,

          who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,

          Unfortunately I find the Gothic obscure, and on turning to the original Greek, that obscure also, though interestingly it appears to have an adjectival (neuter plural) "like". Help from others better able to understand the original and its Wulfilian rendition would be welcome.

          On to verse 5. I had questioned "wreitan" as a rendition of the verb "write", but on checking I see that it is listed in Koebler as a reconstructed strong verb of class 1.

          My last quibble was about the omission of an explicit reference to any prophet. Whether "waurd" in Gothic has any tendency to mean specifically a prophetic utterance I have not been able to ascertain. But in a context where writing is on a wall, it might be a reasonable liberty to assume it anyway.



          Gerry T.



          -----Original Message-----
          From: anheropl0x <anheropl0x@...>
          To: gothic-l@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 14:14
          Subject: [gothic-l] Re: Auhjodjus Þahainais


          Hello, Gerry! Thanks for the reply. As I said before, this final draft has flaws

          that I've found in the past few months, and you've wonderfully pointed out more

          that I will either concur with, dispute or explain. Let's go in order with what

          you said.



          "I think the construction in lines 5-6 should be amended to "soei in huga"

          etc; or if "so" is allowed to stand then "was" should be dropped."

          After giving it some thought, "soei" should be in there. I originally meant

          it so be simply "so siuns" with inverted word order as I see so commonly, but

          even with the passive tense of miþsatjan, it makes no sense to not have the cj

          "that" in the line.



          "In the fifth line of verse 2, I suspect the word for stabbed was meant to

          be "stugqana", and in the next line "split" should be represented by

          "disskaiskaiþ": the Goths do not seem to have let themselves off reduplication

          in

          the preterite when a verb of Class 7 had a prefix: consider, e.g.,

          fralailot, the preterite of fraletan. If the indicated change would mess the

          rhythm

          up, not to mention its being awkward to pronounce, it might be reasonable

          to drop the dis- prefix, since "skaidan" by itself seems to have had

          something like the required meaning."

          Massive typo on my part. I in fact meant the sv I verb disskreitan, which in

          pret. third person sing. becomes disskraiþ (why it makes that -t a -þ I am

          somewhat lost on). But, as you pointed out, skaidan could be used as well,

          making skaiskaiþ. As for NE stabbed, I had been using the verb stikan, found

          here under S for stab (v.): http://www.oe.eclipse.co.uk/nom/letters.htm Though

          whether you find this dictionary to be legitimate is your call. P.P. of stikan

          being stikans, and declined strong to nom. pl. neut. should be stikana. I

          believe the reason I went with nom. pl. masc. is because after searching at

          length I came across a sample of my sentence in the Silver Bible where masculine

          was used for a neuter noun, which fits perfectly with augona. I can't think of

          the example, nor where I found it, because I'm sure after a few hours of working

          on this, my brain shut down haha. This verb can still be discussed though, but

          there is my reasoning for stikana.



          "In verse 4, if "galeiko" governs a dative, its second occurrence would have

          to be followed by "rigna dumbamma". Possibly this would make the line

          rather full of syllables. If so, then the problem might be cured by using "swe"

          rather than "galeiko"; for in all the relevant examples I have managed to

          find, the word acts like a conjunction, and so there would be a choice

          between "rign dumb" and "rign dumbata"."

          The adverb/adjective "like" is ungodly hard for me to translate correctly,

          since there seems to be so many ways to do it. There's swa, swe, galieks,

          galeiko. And they all seem the same to me, though I think of swe, swa, swaswe

          more as "as" than "like." Help would be appreciated in this. I did search as

          much as I could examples of all four and found galeiko to be the most forgiving

          and neutral to how it is used, but I had no idea it governs the dative. I have

          read that no where, though I see galeiks governs the dative. It seems that like

          is overused in English and other languages have problems coming up with a simple

          way to equal its meaning as well (take for example German having gefallen, mögen

          and gern haben). So for this one, I certainly say it's debatable. Though the

          person who helped me iron out a lot of mistakes had nothing to say about it if I

          recall.



          "In the fifth line of verse 5, the reference to a prophet has been

          overlooked; and was the use of "writanona" deliberate rather than from an

          involuntary thought of English? I think the expected word would be "melida" or

          "ufmelida"."

          I agree with you for the most part of this. I had found somewhere that pl.

          waurd meant message from prophets. And now that I can't find this anywhere

          without more extensive searching, I feel.. well... less than smart at having

          done that. I do think I originally had prophets in there. "writanona" is the

          weak P.P. declension in pl. nom. neut. Wreitan, according to the aforementioned

          dictionary, means inscribed or engraved, which on a wall seems a bit more

          fitting. If I were to use the verb meljan or gameljan, the correct declension

          would be (ga)melidona for weak and (ga)melida for strong. "ufmeljan" I can not

          find in Wright's dictionary. Though according to a random site, means to sign

          (as in agreeing to a document).



          "In the last line I think "auhjodjuns" should be "auhjoduns"."

          Another typo. Can't believe I let that one slip by. Thanks for catching it.





          Anyway, my name is Johann. :) And I thank you for taking the time to look this

          over and point out the major flaws like that. This helps further my knowledge

          more than most things, since I've no one to sit down with and actively study

          Gothic.







          ------------------------------------



          You are a member of the Gothic-L list. To unsubscribe, send a blank email to

          <gothic-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com>.Yahoo! Groups Links



          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/



          Individual Email | Traditional



          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/join

          (Yahoo! ID required)



          gothic-l-digest@yahoogroups.com

          gothic-l-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com



          gothic-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • anheropl0x
          I went back over the first part about so siuns and decided to leave it as is. Because without the word order it should be The vision was planted... It s
          Message 4 of 5 , Dec 31, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            I went back over the first part about "so siuns" and decided to leave it as is. Because without the word order it should be "The vision was planted..." It's passive and puts vision in the nominative, and there is no cj. "that," so I don't see much need now. But it's still open to debate if someone can come up with more reason to change it.

            Disskraiþ should be disskrait. I had been using the Verbix site and for whatever reason it's giving sv. I verbs whose roots end in -t an þ.

            As for waurd in plural also having meaning of prophetic words, I distinctly remember finding, but now I can't find it anywhere. I'm rather disappointed in this. but the line, being such a mouthful anyway, I might remove the mention of the prophet from the English "translation," but that doesn't exactly do the song justice, does it?

            I think I'll wait for someone else to come up with information on "galeiko," as the dictionary I use says: "(like, so, similar to) swe; (alike, similar to) ga-leiks +dat.; (akin) sama-kuns (i-stem); "of like mind" sama-frathjis, sama-saiwals, ga-qiss; "be of like mind" thata samo frathjan/hugjan; (in like manner, likewise, similarly) ga-leiko, ana-leiko, sama-leiko, thammuh samin haidau; (just like, just as, even as) swa-swe; "as...so" swe...swa; "like...so too" swe...jah, swe...swa jah, swe...swah."

            So you are right about galeiks governing the dative, but it says nothing for galeiko, which in Wright's book mentions that galeiko is an "ablative of adjective[s] was often used adverbially." Then lists words: andaugjo, analeiko, galeiko, glaggwo, sinteino, sniumundo, sprauto, þiubjo, þridjo, etc. Then in the dictionary part I used, there's many instances of swa/swe, and it starts to get really confusing on what the differences are most of the time.

            --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Grsartor@... wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Hailai allai, þishun Johann.
            >
            > Well, Johann, if I have been helpful to you about translation of The Sound of Silence, then you have been helpful to me, and given plenty to check up on and ponder. One or two things arise:
            >
            > You want to render "stabbed" by a form of "stikan", which I had not realised existed. It is listed in Koebler, and if I correctly understand his rather cryptic presentation, it seems to be a reconstructed strong verb of class 5. So I think you are right that its past participle in the neuter plural would be "stikana".
            >
            > As for "disskreitan" for splitting, would the preterite not be "disskrait" rather than "disskraiþ? According to Lehmann the verb is known only from Mark 14:63, where it occurs as a present participle; so if there was expected to be any anomaly in the preterite we presumably have to look at other verbs that belong to the same class and end in the same consonant; and at least four verbs fit the bill: "beitan", "andbeitan", "gasmeitan", and "inweitan". The preterite of "inweitan" occurs several times as "inwait", e.g. Matt. 8:2
            >
            > jah sai, manna þrutsfill habands durinnands inwait ina...
            >
            > The preterite of "gasmeitan" occurs in John 9:6
            >
            > ...jah gasmait imma ana augona þata fani þamma blindin
            >
            > The preterite of "andbeitan" occurs several times as "andbait" e.g. Mark 1:25
            >
            > jah andbait ina Iesus qiþands...
            >
            > As for ways of saying "like" in Gothic: "galeiks" in its various inflected forms seems to be fine for expressing an adjectival "like", e.g. you are like (= similar to) your brother. An example is Galatians 5:21
            >
            > neiþa, maurþra, drugkaneins, gabauros jah þata galeiko þaim...
            >
            > This looks as if literally it is something along the lines of
            >
            > [various vices] and that [which is] like those,
            >
            > and is presumably in weak declension because of its being preceded by the Gothic demonstrative or definite article.
            > The difficulty is with adverbial "like" (= similarly to). English is often potentially or actually ambiguous with this usage, and so it would not be surprising if other languages, especially highly inflected ones, favoured a conjunction.
            >
            > So what about "galeiko" for adverbial "like" (my words like silent raindrops fell)? I had supposed that this was a Johannes innovation. However, Philippians 2:6 is said to have such a usage:
            >
            > saei in gudaskaunein wisands ni wulwa rahnida wisan sik galeiko guda,
            >
            > who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
            >
            > Unfortunately I find the Gothic obscure, and on turning to the original Greek, that obscure also, though interestingly it appears to have an adjectival (neuter plural) "like". Help from others better able to understand the original and its Wulfilian rendition would be welcome.
            >
            > On to verse 5. I had questioned "wreitan" as a rendition of the verb "write", but on checking I see that it is listed in Koebler as a reconstructed strong verb of class 1.
            >
            > My last quibble was about the omission of an explicit reference to any prophet. Whether "waurd" in Gothic has any tendency to mean specifically a prophetic utterance I have not been able to ascertain. But in a context where writing is on a wall, it might be a reasonable liberty to assume it anyway.
            >
            >
            >
            > Gerry T.
          • Grsartor@aol.com
            Hailai A question that arose out of Johann s translation of The Sound of Silence was how to express like in Gothic. What I give here will not help him to
            Message 5 of 5 , Jan 3, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Hailai

              A question that arose out of Johann's translation of The Sound of Silence
              was how to express "like" in Gothic. What I give here will not help him to
              decide how, if at all, to amend his translation, but may none the less be of
              interest.

              Adverbial use of "galeiko" seems to be alleged only in Philippians 2:6. The
              relevant words and the corresponding Greek are these:

              ...saei in gudaskaunein wisands ni wulwa rahnida wisan sik galeiko guda

              ...hos en morphe theou hyparchwn oukh harpagmon hegesato to einai isa thew

              I was puzzled by the last word but one of the Greek. Formally it is the
              neuter plural of the adjective "isos", meaning "the same". Happily, I have
              just found in an analytical lexicon of NT Greek that in this line the use of
              "isa" was adverbial, and meant "on an equality". So did Wulfila make a
              somewhat literal translation here of a Greek idiom? This would possibly not be a
              great surprise since in other ways he seems to follow his original very
              closely. Consider, e.g., the Greek idiom "to have badly" meaning to be ill.
              Wulfila several times renders this as "ubil haban", and once even more
              literally as "ubilaba haban" (Mark 2:17). I wonder what effect such alien idiom
              would have had on the Goths: could such strange expressions have given the
              NT an aura of mystery?

              All this will not, admittedly, help with how to express "like" in Gothic,
              which is the question that started my inquiries, and indeed it possibly
              muddies the waters. But at least I feel it makes a line of Wulfia's Gothic less
              puzzling, since otherwise I should have expected the last word but one to
              be "galeikana".

              Gerry T.


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.