Re: Wanna share your ambitions and intenstions?
- 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
So a neologism (according to me) could be both *lahs and e.g.
fairrasiuns. Even though lahs might have been an existing word and
Syntax is nothing I am that good at so I try to learn what you guys
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "akoddsson" <konrad_oddsson@...>
> > 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
> reconstruction would tend to take the form of people expressinga
> their thoughts in modern ways but just using Gothic words, whereas
> language is more than just vocabulary.most
> In my opinion, thou hast hit the nail on the head here. What is
> important is understanding and reconstructing the historical tonguehistorical
> itself. Inventing new words for things non-existed in the
> language may be fun, but reconstructing the historical vocabularyis
> much more important. Essentially, learning an histrical tongue hasa
> lot to do with learning historical words ;) In the case of Gothic,written
> 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
> or spoken langauge. There is little talk or writing if no one knowsthan
> 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
> new words for democracy or the stock market, for example. Likewise,what,
> 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
> 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.
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
--- In email@example.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 'iÃ¾' 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
> 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 firstname.lastname@example.org, "Fredrik" <gadrauhts@> wrote:
> > Hi!
> > I guess everyone here have some intentions and reasons why you
> > 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
> > 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
> > or was it coz you wanna understand germanic hostory more??
> > Myself I have changed my reasons during the time. First of all I
> > 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
> > to study it as much as possible. First just to learn a little
> > 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
> > to learn gothic. Mostly when it comes to understanding those texts.
> > It's kinda hard to learn speaking it when it lacks so much
> > 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
> > 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
> > 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
> > 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
> > on your mind about all this...so plz share your thought.
> > /Fredrik
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
Here's to hope!