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

Re: [gothic-l] Wanna share your ambitions and intenstions?

Expand Messages
  • OSCAR HERRERA
    i agree with all that you said.....a national revival is needed...weis skuld alla distaida gutrazda.....ulfila gaf unsara tho mahtiega du anastodja gutrazda
    Message 1 of 9 , Mar 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      i agree with all that you said.....a national revival is needed...weis skuld alla distaida gutrazda.....ulfila gaf unsara tho mahtiega du anastodja gutrazda aftra......is gaskeirandan fram tho boko xristana ist tho luknith faur tho andawairth.....oscar

      Fredrik <gadrauhts@...> wrote: Hi!

      I guess everyone here have some intentions and reasons why you wanna
      learn gothic. One could be a general interest in languages and
      specially in gothic, but why is that?

      Different from other languages like english, german and spanish which
      people learn (mostly) because it could be useful in their work.
      Gothic is not that useful, coz nobody uses it.

      So why do you wanna learn it/did you learn it?
      Was it maybe because you wanna know how to speak it, of some reason
      or was it coz you wanna understand germanic hostory more??

      Myself I have changed my reasons during the time. First of all I have
      a interest in languages and especially in germanic ones. When I
      first, long ago, found out that there was a third branch of the
      germanic family, the eastern this become my main interest, so I began
      to study it as much as possible. First just to learn a little about
      it and see what this east germanic branch was like, and what was
      different between this and the west and noth germanic branches.

      Later I got a book with some basic grammar, a tiny dictionary and
      some text samples from the bible. Since that time I have been trying
      to learn gothic. Mostly when it comes to understanding those texts.
      It's kinda hard to learn speaking it when it lacks so much (attested)
      words.

      Do you also wanna share your ambitions and dreams/thoughts?

      Mine is to learn to speak gothic fluently and with a much better
      pronunciation then I have now. (It's still a long way to go...my
      grammar kinda sucks for now). This means that my vocabulary has to
      expand but also that the total gothic vocabulary has to that too.
      That's why I'm tryin to collect neologisms in a dictionary. My
      present goal is to reach 30 000 words, which is the average number of
      words is a pocket dictionary.
      I don't think it's total necessary that all these neologisms is
      standard for all gothic speakers, if some one like to use other words
      I think thats OK. For example we can say that I prefer a puristic
      vocabulary so a word like republic should be thiudawaihts, but if
      some one like raípubleik (to remind of other germanic languages) or
      smth like that...go for it.

      My dreams and (utopic) thought is that I should be able to use it in
      daily speech. For that I probably need some one or two in my life
      that also know how to speak it, (and that's not like it today).

      I think it would be interesting to know a little about you and what's
      on your mind about all this...so plz share your thought.

      /Fredrik





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









      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • llama_nom
      I have an ambition to work out some basic things about Gothic word order, which isn t so easy, because Gothic Bible is in most ways a word for word translation
      Message 2 of 9 , Mar 12, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        I have an ambition to work out some basic things about Gothic word
        order, which isn't so easy, because Gothic Bible is in most ways a
        word for word translation from the Greek, so you have to look out
        for those specific ways in which it differs. It's also complicated
        by the fact that the exact text of the Greek original that it was
        based on is not known. Wilhelm Streitberg printed a reconstructed
        version of the Greek, which appears at the Wulfila Project site and
        at TITUS, but very often other Greek versions offer a better match
        for the Gothic, so these have to be ckecked too. Useful are regular
        deviations, such as 'iþ' almost always being placed first in the
        clause, in contrast to Greek DE, which comes second. Likewise
        Go. 'unte' for Gk. GAR. Also where Gothic needs two or more words
        to translate a single Greek word, although even here you have to be
        careful because given half a chance the Gothic will imitate the
        order of morphemes in the Greek word! Occasional and arbitrary
        differences are always suspect, especially where they can be
        paralleled elsewhere in the Greek. Modern researchers are sometimes
        a bit erratic about this, but really you have to be strict in what
        evidence is allowed, otherwise there's no way of establishing what
        is a genuine Gothic usage, and what is really a feature of Greek
        syntax.

        It's fiddly and time-consuming work, and short of more texts being
        discovered, there'll always be mysteries. But the payoff is a
        glimpse into the syntax of an early Germanic language, in some ways
        like its later kin, in other ways intriguingly different. I'd also
        like to learn more about syntactical theory, because this could
        offer a way of deducing generalised rules from the scant evidence.
        But it's important to establish what that evidence is first before
        resorting to theory.

        This had impications for anyone who wants to write or speak in a
        reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all
        that can be established about the historical language, otherwise any
        reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressing
        their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas a
        language is more than just vocabulary. But then any living laguage
        is going to develop in its own way in any case, so maybe this
        wouldn't seem so important to other people.

        I also have a Secret Plan to write something on pronunciation.
        Having read (and ranted at!) the rather chaotic and contradictory
        Wikipedia entry a couple of months back, and then this new Gothic
        Online Course, I've finally been galled into starting a file on the
        matter. That could take ages too, but I'm concentrating to begin
        with on the thorny issue of <ai> and <au>. Again, a lot of problems
        will never be solved, but I reckon I can narrow down the
        possibilities a bit with logic. For example, some scolars have
        suggested that each digraph stood for a single phoneme, but the loss
        of final inflectional -s only after a short syllable implies that
        <ai> and <au> probably had both short and long variants. Loanwords
        and the spelling of personal names in Latin and Greek texts suggests
        that the old Germanic diphthings were preserved well after Wulfila's
        time in some dialects, but lost in others, though it may not be
        possible to make a simple division between "Visigoths"
        and "Ostrogoths" on this point.




        --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hi!
        >
        > I guess everyone here have some intentions and reasons why you
        wanna
        > learn gothic. One could be a general interest in languages and
        > specially in gothic, but why is that?
        >
        > Different from other languages like english, german and spanish
        which
        > people learn (mostly) because it could be useful in their work.
        > Gothic is not that useful, coz nobody uses it.
        >
        > So why do you wanna learn it/did you learn it?
        > Was it maybe because you wanna know how to speak it, of some
        reason
        > or was it coz you wanna understand germanic hostory more??
        >
        > Myself I have changed my reasons during the time. First of all I
        have
        > a interest in languages and especially in germanic ones. When I
        > first, long ago, found out that there was a third branch of the
        > germanic family, the eastern this become my main interest, so I
        began
        > to study it as much as possible. First just to learn a little
        about
        > it and see what this east germanic branch was like, and what was
        > different between this and the west and noth germanic branches.
        >
        > Later I got a book with some basic grammar, a tiny dictionary and
        > some text samples from the bible. Since that time I have been
        trying
        > to learn gothic. Mostly when it comes to understanding those texts.
        > It's kinda hard to learn speaking it when it lacks so much
        (attested)
        > words.
        >
        > Do you also wanna share your ambitions and dreams/thoughts?
        >
        > Mine is to learn to speak gothic fluently and with a much better
        > pronunciation then I have now. (It's still a long way to go...my
        > grammar kinda sucks for now). This means that my vocabulary has to
        > expand but also that the total gothic vocabulary has to that too.
        > That's why I'm tryin to collect neologisms in a dictionary. My
        > present goal is to reach 30 000 words, which is the average number
        of
        > words is a pocket dictionary.
        > I don't think it's total necessary that all these neologisms is
        > standard for all gothic speakers, if some one like to use other
        words
        > I think thats OK. For example we can say that I prefer a puristic
        > vocabulary so a word like republic should be thiudawaihts, but if
        > some one like raí°µbleik (to remind of other germanic languages) or
        > smth like that...go for it.
        >
        > My dreams and (utopic) thought is that I should be able to use it
        in
        > daily speech. For that I probably need some one or two in my life
        > that also know how to speak it, (and that's not like it today).
        >
        > I think it would be interesting to know a little about you and
        what's
        > on your mind about all this...so plz share your thought.
        >
        > /Fredrik
        >
      • akoddsson
        ... reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all that can be established about the historical language, otherwise any reconstruction would
        Message 3 of 9 , Mar 13, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          > This had impications for anyone who wants to write or speak in a
          reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all
          that can be established about the historical language, otherwise any
          reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressing
          their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas a
          language is more than just vocabulary.

          In my opinion, thou hast hit the nail on the head here. What is most
          important is understanding and reconstructing the historical tongue
          itself. Inventing new words for things non-existed in the historical
          language may be fun, but reconstructing the historical vocabulary is
          much more important. Essentially, learning an histrical tongue has a
          lot to do with learning historical words ;) In the case of Gothic,
          so much of the basic vocabulary has been lost (i.e. is unattested)
          that in order for the language to be usable, vocabulary must be re-
          constructed. This is where prioritization needs to occur if Gothic
          is to approach usablity in modern times, whether as a purley written
          or spoken langauge. There is little talk or writing if no one knows
          what words to use. Furthermore, a focus on historical vocabulary is
          consistent with typical reasons why a person might choose to study
          Gothic, such as understanding an early germanic tongue. Thus, words
          like *grôneis (green) and *aihvs (horse) or much more important than
          new words for democracy or the stock market, for example. Likewise,
          historical syntax is what we should be after, rather than learning
          how to use Gothic words with foreign syntax. These two points are
          especially relevant in the case of Gothic, I think, as attestation
          of syntax is through a translation of a foreign book (rather than
          via the speech of a native speaker) and attestation of vocabulary
          largely limited to words (some even foreign) needed to translated a
          book containing culture, concepts, geograpy, history, etc. which
          have no roots in native Gothic culture. Thus, the syntax and choice
          of words may or may not closely reflect native speech. What is then
          needed is a focus on native speech, in as much as this is possible
          with a dead language - making a concerted effort to reconstuct what,
          in all likelihood, was the vocabulary and manner of daily speech.
          Now, if this sounds easy, try the following exercise and ask which
          of the two you found easier:

          Translate in Gothic:
          1. Hello, John. It is good to see you. How have you been?
          2. ME words 'casino' and 'telephone' (using Gothic roots)

          Now, number 2 could prove a fun competition for those of us who
          perhaps think we know what we are doing, but it is not likely going
          to help get gothic back on its feet. Number one, on the other hand,
          poses deeply challenging problems for us, as simply translating the
          English words is out of the question. Simply put, we know that they
          do not represent Gothic syntax or vocabulary.

          Regards,
          Konrad

          > I also have a Secret Plan to write something on pronunciation.
          Having read (and ranted at!) the rather chaotic and contradictory
          Wikipedia entry a couple of months back, and then this new Gothic
          Online Course, I've finally been galled into starting a file on the
          matter. That could take ages too, but I'm concentrating to begin
          with on the thorny issue of <ai> and <au>. Again, a lot of problems
          will never be solved, but I reckon I can narrow down the
          possibilities a bit with logic. For example, some scolars have
          suggested that each digraph stood for a single phoneme, but the loss
          of final inflectional -s only after a short syllable implies that
          <ai> and <au> probably had both short and long variants. Loanwords
          and the spelling of personal names in Latin and Greek texts suggests
          that the old Germanic diphthings were preserved well after Wulfila's
          time in some dialects, but lost in others, though it may not be
          possible to make a simple division between "Visigoths"
          and "Ostrogoths" on this point.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hi!
          > >
          > > I guess everyone here have some intentions and reasons why you
          > wanna
          > > learn gothic. One could be a general interest in languages and
          > > specially in gothic, but why is that?
          > >
          > > Different from other languages like english, german and spanish
          > which
          > > people learn (mostly) because it could be useful in their work.
          > > Gothic is not that useful, coz nobody uses it.
          > >
          > > So why do you wanna learn it/did you learn it?
          > > Was it maybe because you wanna know how to speak it, of some
          > reason
          > > or was it coz you wanna understand germanic hostory more??
          > >
          > > Myself I have changed my reasons during the time. First of all I
          > have
          > > a interest in languages and especially in germanic ones. When I
          > > first, long ago, found out that there was a third branch of the
          > > germanic family, the eastern this become my main interest, so I
          > began
          > > to study it as much as possible. First just to learn a little
          > about
          > > it and see what this east germanic branch was like, and what was
          > > different between this and the west and noth germanic branches.
          > >
          > > Later I got a book with some basic grammar, a tiny dictionary
          and
          > > some text samples from the bible. Since that time I have been
          > trying
          > > to learn gothic. Mostly when it comes to understanding those
          texts.
          > > It's kinda hard to learn speaking it when it lacks so much
          > (attested)
          > > words.
          > >
          > > Do you also wanna share your ambitions and dreams/thoughts?
          > >
          > > Mine is to learn to speak gothic fluently and with a much better
          > > pronunciation then I have now. (It's still a long way to go...my
          > > grammar kinda sucks for now). This means that my vocabulary has
          to
          > > expand but also that the total gothic vocabulary has to that
          too.
          > > That's why I'm tryin to collect neologisms in a dictionary. My
          > > present goal is to reach 30 000 words, which is the average
          number
          > of
          > > words is a pocket dictionary.
          > > I don't think it's total necessary that all these neologisms is
          > > standard for all gothic speakers, if some one like to use other
          > words
          > > I think thats OK. For example we can say that I prefer a
          puristic
          > > vocabulary so a word like republic should be thiudawaihts, but
          if
          > > some one like raí°µbleik (to remind of other germanic languages)
          or
          > > smth like that...go for it.
          > >
          > > My dreams and (utopic) thought is that I should be able to use
          it
          > in
          > > daily speech. For that I probably need some one or two in my
          life
          > > that also know how to speak it, (and that's not like it today).
          > >
          > > I think it would be interesting to know a little about you and
          > what's
          > > on your mind about all this...so plz share your thought.
          > >
          > > /Fredrik
          > >
          >
        • OSCAR HERRERA
          language is language.....i mean english is probably spoiken different today than say 1000 yrs ago.../.we can only go word for word...meaning sometimes a
          Message 4 of 9 , Mar 13, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            language is language.....i mean english is probably spoiken different today than say 1000 yrs ago.../.we can only go word for word...meaning sometimes a translation in english might be helpful when speaking in gothic.....or whatever language were using besides english....i also have talkin to people in northern spain and some in andorra still speak gothic and what is left of it....oscar

            akoddsson <konrad_oddsson@...> wrote: > This had impications for anyone who wants to write or speak in a
            reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all
            that can be established about the historical language, otherwise any
            reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressing
            their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas a
            language is more than just vocabulary.

            In my opinion, thou hast hit the nail on the head here. What is most
            important is understanding and reconstructing the historical tongue
            itself. Inventing new words for things non-existed in the historical
            language may be fun, but reconstructing the historical vocabulary is
            much more important. Essentially, learning an histrical tongue has a
            lot to do with learning historical words ;) In the case of Gothic,
            so much of the basic vocabulary has been lost (i.e. is unattested)
            that in order for the language to be usable, vocabulary must be re-
            constructed. This is where prioritization needs to occur if Gothic
            is to approach usablity in modern times, whether as a purley written
            or spoken langauge. There is little talk or writing if no one knows
            what words to use. Furthermore, a focus on historical vocabulary is
            consistent with typical reasons why a person might choose to study
            Gothic, such as understanding an early germanic tongue. Thus, words
            like *grôneis (green) and *aihvs (horse) or much more important than
            new words for democracy or the stock market, for example. Likewise,
            historical syntax is what we should be after, rather than learning
            how to use Gothic words with foreign syntax. These two points are
            especially relevant in the case of Gothic, I think, as attestation
            of syntax is through a translation of a foreign book (rather than
            via the speech of a native speaker) and attestation of vocabulary
            largely limited to words (some even foreign) needed to translated a
            book containing culture, concepts, geograpy, history, etc. which
            have no roots in native Gothic culture. Thus, the syntax and choice
            of words may or may not closely reflect native speech. What is then
            needed is a focus on native speech, in as much as this is possible
            with a dead language - making a concerted effort to reconstuct what,
            in all likelihood, was the vocabulary and manner of daily speech.
            Now, if this sounds easy, try the following exercise and ask which
            of the two you found easier:

            Translate in Gothic:
            1. Hello, John. It is good to see you. How have you been?
            2. ME words 'casino' and 'telephone' (using Gothic roots)

            Now, number 2 could prove a fun competition for those of us who
            perhaps think we know what we are doing, but it is not likely going
            to help get gothic back on its feet. Number one, on the other hand,
            poses deeply challenging problems for us, as simply translating the
            English words is out of the question. Simply put, we know that they
            do not represent Gothic syntax or vocabulary.

            Regards,
            Konrad

            > I also have a Secret Plan to write something on pronunciation.
            Having read (and ranted at!) the rather chaotic and contradictory
            Wikipedia entry a couple of months back, and then this new Gothic
            Online Course, I've finally been galled into starting a file on the
            matter. That could take ages too, but I'm concentrating to begin
            with on the thorny issue of and . Again, a lot of problems
            will never be solved, but I reckon I can narrow down the
            possibilities a bit with logic. For example, some scolars have
            suggested that each digraph stood for a single phoneme, but the loss
            of final inflectional -s only after a short syllable implies that
            and probably had both short and long variants. Loanwords
            and the spelling of personal names in Latin and Greek texts suggests
            that the old Germanic diphthings were preserved well after Wulfila's
            time in some dialects, but lost in others, though it may not be
            possible to make a simple division between "Visigoths"
            and "Ostrogoths" on this point.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi!
            > >
            > > I guess everyone here have some intentions and reasons why you
            > wanna
            > > learn gothic. One could be a general interest in languages and
            > > specially in gothic, but why is that?
            > >
            > > Different from other languages like english, german and spanish
            > which
            > > people learn (mostly) because it could be useful in their work.
            > > Gothic is not that useful, coz nobody uses it.
            > >
            > > So why do you wanna learn it/did you learn it?
            > > Was it maybe because you wanna know how to speak it, of some
            > reason
            > > or was it coz you wanna understand germanic hostory more??
            > >
            > > Myself I have changed my reasons during the time. First of all I
            > have
            > > a interest in languages and especially in germanic ones. When I
            > > first, long ago, found out that there was a third branch of the
            > > germanic family, the eastern this become my main interest, so I
            > began
            > > to study it as much as possible. First just to learn a little
            > about
            > > it and see what this east germanic branch was like, and what was
            > > different between this and the west and noth germanic branches.
            > >
            > > Later I got a book with some basic grammar, a tiny dictionary
            and
            > > some text samples from the bible. Since that time I have been
            > trying
            > > to learn gothic. Mostly when it comes to understanding those
            texts.
            > > It's kinda hard to learn speaking it when it lacks so much
            > (attested)
            > > words.
            > >
            > > Do you also wanna share your ambitions and dreams/thoughts?
            > >
            > > Mine is to learn to speak gothic fluently and with a much better
            > > pronunciation then I have now. (It's still a long way to go...my
            > > grammar kinda sucks for now). This means that my vocabulary has
            to
            > > expand but also that the total gothic vocabulary has to that
            too.
            > > That's why I'm tryin to collect neologisms in a dictionary. My
            > > present goal is to reach 30 000 words, which is the average
            number
            > of
            > > words is a pocket dictionary.
            > > I don't think it's total necessary that all these neologisms is
            > > standard for all gothic speakers, if some one like to use other
            > words
            > > I think thats OK. For example we can say that I prefer a
            puristic
            > > vocabulary so a word like republic should be thiudawaihts, but
            if
            > > some one like raí°µbleik (to remind of other germanic languages)
            or
            > > smth like that...go for it.
            > >
            > > My dreams and (utopic) thought is that I should be able to use
            it
            > in
            > > daily speech. For that I probably need some one or two in my
            life
            > > that also know how to speak it, (and that's not like it today).
            > >
            > > I think it would be interesting to know a little about you and
            > what's
            > > on your mind about all this...so plz share your thought.
            > >
            > > /Fredrik
            > >
            >






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










            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • llama_nom
            ... I think we re safe with *aihvs, but green could be either a ja- stem (*groneis) or an i-stem (grons). The etymological dictionaries I ve seen tend to
            Message 5 of 9 , Mar 13, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              > like *grí±ºíµ©s (green) and *aihvs (horse)

              I think we're safe with *aihvs, but "green" could be either a ja-
              stem (*groneis) or an i-stem (grons). The etymological dictionaries
              I've seen tend to reconstrcut a ja-stem, perhaps because that's the
              more common declension and without evidence from Gothic or early
              runic inscriptions, there's no indication of whether it was even an
              i-stem.



              > Translate in Gothic:
              > 1. Hello, John. It is good to see you. How have you been?
              > 2. ME words 'casino' and 'telephone' (using Gothic roots)


              Ah, maybe one day all our fancy learning will help us to solve this
              embarrassingly simple, but very difficult problem. This goes beyond
              just the 'easy' problem of vocabulary, and the nightmarishly tricky
              business of syntax, and gets us into the outright fiendish realm of
              idioms and usage and how the language actually behave when it was
              alive an on its feet in a real functioning society about which we
              still have so much to learn. The Gothic Bible isn't much help here;
              we could hunt for situations in the literature of the other early
              germanic languages, especially Old English and Old Norse, where
              people meet who already know each other, and what they say. Of
              course, the style of speech there might be rather formal, or even in
              poetry, so we'd have to take that into account. But if we found
              enough examples we could maybe begin to get a feel for the sort of
              conventional exchange that might be expected to take place. I think
              the sagas might call this a 'fagnaðarfundr' "joyful meeting",
              sometimes with heart-melting understatement. A quick rumage on
              Google turns up a few happy moments, although not much non-context-
              specific small talk... Oh well, a good excuse for more reading. In
              Old English, Ælfric's Colloquy has some interesting informal
              conversation, but limited in topic.

              As for the easy question, I'm sure suggestions have already been
              made for telephone, so I'll propose 'hlaut-hus' "casino", by analogy
              with 'gudhus' and 'faurhah'. On the ommission of the stem vowel in
              these compounds, Bennett suggested that the 'h' may have been
              dropped, causing the vowel to go too, to avoid hiatus (cf. also the
              spelling 'freijhals').

              Anyway, important is what we chose to be important, so I won't say
              the things that most interest me are more important than what
              interests someone else, just what most occupies the Gothic sections
              of my brain tonight. I think there's a lot still to be learnt from
              the surviving evidence for Gothic which can make our imaginative
              reconstructions more accurate. Basic stuff like: what exactly is
              the status of 'aspect' in Gothic verbs? What word orders were most
              likely? What word orders were permitted in natural speech? What
              constraints were placed in freedom of word order? What rhetorical
              and emphatic effects were gained from particular changes in the
              unmarked word order? What are the differences between the rules or
              tendencies affecting the placement of nouns from those affecting
              pronouns? What contexts triggered V2 (verb second word order); was
              it always triggered in such contexts; which contexts was it optional
              in; how did Gothic resemble Old English was it in this respect, and
              how did it differ? How do main clauses differ from subordinate
              clauses, for example in permitting V2, and in the placement of
              adverbs, etc.? What rules govern the use of reflexives? What rules
              govern the placement of pronouns? Does it make sense to talk about
              oblique subjects in Gothic? What is the full story about case
              attraction of relative pronouns? What is the full story with
              passives of verbs that govern oblique cases; why are they sometimes
              oblique with impersonal verbs as in other Germanic languages, but
              othertimes nominative with the verb inflected for number? Can all
              such instances be attributed to a middle, rather than a strictly
              passive meaning? Or is this a piece of Gothic 'nominative
              sickness'? And such, and such, and such.





              --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "akoddsson" <konrad_oddsson@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > > This had impications for anyone who wants to write or speak in a
              > reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all
              > that can be established about the historical language, otherwise
              any
              > reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressing
              > their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas
              a
              > language is more than just vocabulary.
              >
              > In my opinion, thou hast hit the nail on the head here. What is
              most
              > important is understanding and reconstructing the historical
              tongue
              > itself. Inventing new words for things non-existed in the
              historical
              > language may be fun, but reconstructing the historical vocabulary
              is
              > much more important. Essentially, learning an histrical tongue has
              a
              > lot to do with learning historical words ;) In the case of Gothic,
              > so much of the basic vocabulary has been lost (i.e. is unattested)
              > that in order for the language to be usable, vocabulary must be re-
              > constructed. This is where prioritization needs to occur if Gothic
              > is to approach usablity in modern times, whether as a purley
              written
              > or spoken langauge. There is little talk or writing if no one
              knows
              > what words to use. Furthermore, a focus on historical vocabulary
              is
              > consistent with typical reasons why a person might choose to study
              > Gothic, such as understanding an early germanic tongue. Thus,
              words
              > like *grí±ºíµ©s (green) and *aihvs (horse) or much more important than
              > new words for democracy or the stock market, for example.
              Likewise,
              > historical syntax is what we should be after, rather than learning
              > how to use Gothic words with foreign syntax. These two points are
              > especially relevant in the case of Gothic, I think, as attestation
              > of syntax is through a translation of a foreign book (rather than
              > via the speech of a native speaker) and attestation of vocabulary
              > largely limited to words (some even foreign) needed to translated
              a
              > book containing culture, concepts, geograpy, history, etc. which
              > have no roots in native Gothic culture. Thus, the syntax and
              choice
              > of words may or may not closely reflect native speech. What is
              then
              > needed is a focus on native speech, in as much as this is possible
              > with a dead language - making a concerted effort to reconstuct
              what,
              > in all likelihood, was the vocabulary and manner of daily speech.
              > Now, if this sounds easy, try the following exercise and ask which
              > of the two you found easier:
              >
              > Translate in Gothic:
              > 1. Hello, John. It is good to see you. How have you been?
              > 2. ME words 'casino' and 'telephone' (using Gothic roots)
              >
              > Now, number 2 could prove a fun competition for those of us who
              > perhaps think we know what we are doing, but it is not likely
              going
              > to help get gothic back on its feet. Number one, on the other
              hand,
              > poses deeply challenging problems for us, as simply translating
              the
              > English words is out of the question. Simply put, we know that
              they
              > do not represent Gothic syntax or vocabulary.
              >
              > Regards,
              > Konrad
            • Fredrik
              I think you re right when you say it is important to recunstruct those words which probably existed but ain t attested, before creating words for things that
              Message 6 of 9 , Mar 14, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                I think you're right when you say it is important to recunstruct
                those words which probably existed but ain't attested, before
                creating words for things that we know didn't exist at that time.

                But for me it's equally important to cunstruct both kinda words.
                To be able to use a language in daily speech today we must have all
                those words that existed at that time and the most of thw words of
                modern stuff.
                So a neologism (according to me) could be both *lahs and e.g.
                fairrasiuns. Even though lahs might have been an existing word and
                fairrasiuns not.

                Syntax is nothing I am that good at so I try to learn what you guys
                find out.

                --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "akoddsson" <konrad_oddsson@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > > This had impications for anyone who wants to write or speak in a
                > reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all
                > that can be established about the historical language, otherwise
                any
                > reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressing
                > their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas
                a
                > language is more than just vocabulary.
                >
                > In my opinion, thou hast hit the nail on the head here. What is
                most
                > important is understanding and reconstructing the historical tongue
                > itself. Inventing new words for things non-existed in the
                historical
                > language may be fun, but reconstructing the historical vocabulary
                is
                > much more important. Essentially, learning an histrical tongue has
                a
                > lot to do with learning historical words ;) In the case of Gothic,
                > so much of the basic vocabulary has been lost (i.e. is unattested)
                > that in order for the language to be usable, vocabulary must be re-
                > constructed. This is where prioritization needs to occur if Gothic
                > is to approach usablity in modern times, whether as a purley
                written
                > or spoken langauge. There is little talk or writing if no one knows
                > what words to use. Furthermore, a focus on historical vocabulary is
                > consistent with typical reasons why a person might choose to study
                > Gothic, such as understanding an early germanic tongue. Thus, words
                > like *grôneis (green) and *aihvs (horse) or much more important
                than
                > new words for democracy or the stock market, for example. Likewise,
                > historical syntax is what we should be after, rather than learning
                > how to use Gothic words with foreign syntax. These two points are
                > especially relevant in the case of Gothic, I think, as attestation
                > of syntax is through a translation of a foreign book (rather than
                > via the speech of a native speaker) and attestation of vocabulary
                > largely limited to words (some even foreign) needed to translated a
                > book containing culture, concepts, geograpy, history, etc. which
                > have no roots in native Gothic culture. Thus, the syntax and choice
                > of words may or may not closely reflect native speech. What is then
                > needed is a focus on native speech, in as much as this is possible
                > with a dead language - making a concerted effort to reconstuct
                what,
                > in all likelihood, was the vocabulary and manner of daily speech.
                > Now, if this sounds easy, try the following exercise and ask which
                > of the two you found easier:
                >
                > Translate in Gothic:
                > 1. Hello, John. It is good to see you. How have you been?
                > 2. ME words 'casino' and 'telephone' (using Gothic roots)
                >
                > Now, number 2 could prove a fun competition for those of us who
                > perhaps think we know what we are doing, but it is not likely going
                > to help get gothic back on its feet. Number one, on the other hand,
                > poses deeply challenging problems for us, as simply translating the
                > English words is out of the question. Simply put, we know that they
                > do not represent Gothic syntax or vocabulary.
                >
                > Regards,
                > Konrad
                >
              • thiudans
                Hails! Thought I would bring back a piece of history (as I was perusing the archives). I wonder how you are doing on these goals, not as a matter of control,
                Message 7 of 9 , Apr 19, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hails!

                  Thought I would bring back a piece of history (as I was perusing the
                  archives). I wonder how you are doing on these goals, not as a matter
                  of control, but purely because I am interested in the results of these
                  efforts!

                  Cheers,
                  Th.

                  --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > I have an ambition to work out some basic things about Gothic word
                  > order, which isn't so easy, because Gothic Bible is in most ways a
                  > word for word translation from the Greek, so you have to look out
                  > for those specific ways in which it differs. It's also complicated
                  > by the fact that the exact text of the Greek original that it was
                  > based on is not known. Wilhelm Streitberg printed a reconstructed
                  > version of the Greek, which appears at the Wulfila Project site and
                  > at TITUS, but very often other Greek versions offer a better match
                  > for the Gothic, so these have to be ckecked too. Useful are regular
                  > deviations, such as 'iþ' almost always being placed first in the
                  > clause, in contrast to Greek DE, which comes second. Likewise
                  > Go. 'unte' for Gk. GAR. Also where Gothic needs two or more words
                  > to translate a single Greek word, although even here you have to be
                  > careful because given half a chance the Gothic will imitate the
                  > order of morphemes in the Greek word! Occasional and arbitrary
                  > differences are always suspect, especially where they can be
                  > paralleled elsewhere in the Greek. Modern researchers are sometimes
                  > a bit erratic about this, but really you have to be strict in what
                  > evidence is allowed, otherwise there's no way of establishing what
                  > is a genuine Gothic usage, and what is really a feature of Greek
                  > syntax.
                  >
                  > It's fiddly and time-consuming work, and short of more texts being
                  > discovered, there'll always be mysteries. But the payoff is a
                  > glimpse into the syntax of an early Germanic language, in some ways
                  > like its later kin, in other ways intriguingly different. I'd also
                  > like to learn more about syntactical theory, because this could
                  > offer a way of deducing generalised rules from the scant evidence.
                  > But it's important to establish what that evidence is first before
                  > resorting to theory.
                  >
                  > This had impications for anyone who wants to write or speak in a
                  > reconstructed Gothic. I think it would be good to establish all
                  > that can be established about the historical language, otherwise any
                  > reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressing
                  > their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas a
                  > language is more than just vocabulary. But then any living laguage
                  > is going to develop in its own way in any case, so maybe this
                  > wouldn't seem so important to other people.
                  >
                  > I also have a Secret Plan to write something on pronunciation.
                  > Having read (and ranted at!) the rather chaotic and contradictory
                  > Wikipedia entry a couple of months back, and then this new Gothic
                  > Online Course, I've finally been galled into starting a file on the
                  > matter. That could take ages too, but I'm concentrating to begin
                  > with on the thorny issue of <ai> and <au>. Again, a lot of problems
                  > will never be solved, but I reckon I can narrow down the
                  > possibilities a bit with logic. For example, some scolars have
                  > suggested that each digraph stood for a single phoneme, but the loss
                  > of final inflectional -s only after a short syllable implies that
                  > <ai> and <au> probably had both short and long variants. Loanwords
                  > and the spelling of personal names in Latin and Greek texts suggests
                  > that the old Germanic diphthings were preserved well after Wulfila's
                  > time in some dialects, but lost in others, though it may not be
                  > possible to make a simple division between "Visigoths"
                  > and "Ostrogoths" on this point.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Hi!
                  > >
                  > > I guess everyone here have some intentions and reasons why you
                  > wanna
                  > > learn gothic. One could be a general interest in languages and
                  > > specially in gothic, but why is that?
                  > >
                  > > Different from other languages like english, german and spanish
                  > which
                  > > people learn (mostly) because it could be useful in their work.
                  > > Gothic is not that useful, coz nobody uses it.
                  > >
                  > > So why do you wanna learn it/did you learn it?
                  > > Was it maybe because you wanna know how to speak it, of some
                  > reason
                  > > or was it coz you wanna understand germanic hostory more??
                  > >
                  > > Myself I have changed my reasons during the time. First of all I
                  > have
                  > > a interest in languages and especially in germanic ones. When I
                  > > first, long ago, found out that there was a third branch of the
                  > > germanic family, the eastern this become my main interest, so I
                  > began
                  > > to study it as much as possible. First just to learn a little
                  > about
                  > > it and see what this east germanic branch was like, and what was
                  > > different between this and the west and noth germanic branches.
                  > >
                  > > Later I got a book with some basic grammar, a tiny dictionary and
                  > > some text samples from the bible. Since that time I have been
                  > trying
                  > > to learn gothic. Mostly when it comes to understanding those texts.
                  > > It's kinda hard to learn speaking it when it lacks so much
                  > (attested)
                  > > words.
                  > >
                  > > Do you also wanna share your ambitions and dreams/thoughts?
                  > >
                  > > Mine is to learn to speak gothic fluently and with a much better
                  > > pronunciation then I have now. (It's still a long way to go...my
                  > > grammar kinda sucks for now). This means that my vocabulary has to
                  > > expand but also that the total gothic vocabulary has to that too.
                  > > That's why I'm tryin to collect neologisms in a dictionary. My
                  > > present goal is to reach 30 000 words, which is the average number
                  > of
                  > > words is a pocket dictionary.
                  > > I don't think it's total necessary that all these neologisms is
                  > > standard for all gothic speakers, if some one like to use other
                  > words
                  > > I think thats OK. For example we can say that I prefer a puristic
                  > > vocabulary so a word like republic should be thiudawaihts, but if
                  > > some one like raí°µbleik (to remind of other germanic languages) or
                  > > smth like that...go for it.
                  > >
                  > > My dreams and (utopic) thought is that I should be able to use it
                  > in
                  > > daily speech. For that I probably need some one or two in my life
                  > > that also know how to speak it, (and that's not like it today).
                  > >
                  > > I think it would be interesting to know a little about you and
                  > what's
                  > > on your mind about all this...so plz share your thought.
                  > >
                  > > /Fredrik
                  > >
                  >
                • Justïn
                  Hails, Well, I d say my interest in Gothic [this is going to sound pathetic] started with my fascination with Tolkien and our shared interest in dead
                  Message 8 of 9 , Apr 19, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hails,

                    Well, I'd say my interest in Gothic [this is going to sound pathetic]
                    started with my fascination with Tolkien and our shared interest in
                    dead languages. I think I failed to realise that one could actually
                    'learn' Gothic and Old English, and I chose to learn Gothic as it
                    seems to outdate Old English, Saxon, etc. Other than that, a
                    fascination with the ancient peoples and a desire to speak a language
                    so old, and the mere æsthetic appeal of the language while written and
                    the way it sounds.

                    My goal is to learn the language well enough to be able to freely
                    journal my thoughts and daily activities in it, and write poetry and
                    music in it, being able to contribute to a language that has only
                    relatively few speakers and literary pieces in it, aside from
                    Wulfila's and Tolien's, and now a few of our members'.

                    So far my goal has struggled for attention while earning my degrees,
                    but I like to think in terms of pursuing interests this group is an
                    inspiration to take my text with me and study whenever and wherever I
                    have the chance, though it's an awkward conversation starter when one
                    asks me what I'm reading...

                    I hope I am able to contribute to our attempts in resurrecting the
                    language, it seems I at least sparked a renewed interest in
                    neologisms, hopefully we can organise our efforts in a way that bears
                    fruition...and hopefully I am able to do more than simply spur on
                    those who are so far ahead of me their knowledge of linguistics and
                    etymologies.

                    Here's to hope!

                    -Justïn
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.