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

Gafilhsaggws

Expand Messages
  • Arthur Jones
    Hails, I would like to thank the Gothic List members who contributed their condolences and their fine Gothic thoughts on the occasion of my Mother s passing.
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 15, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hails,

      I would like to thank the Gothic List members who contributed their condolences and their fine Gothic thoughts on the occasion of my Mother's passing.

      Mom would have thoroughly enjoyed the discussion of nouns, declensions, dative and accusative absolutes, gerundives, and reconstructions that several of you have built up over the past few days! Indeed, you have done her great honour.

      Especially, I would like to thank LLama_Nomandans, Michael Erwin, Ualarauans, Pituxalina, and others for joining in. Imagine a wake in an extinct language!

      Incidentally: I notice once more that reconstructing "wings" in Gothic served to run us by the e>i process again (weggs - wiggs - vaegg - wing). I am gaining am impression that, perhaps, predominant Gothic dialects such as that (or those) incorporated by Wulfila were intentionally left a bit archaic at the time --mid fourth Century-- to create a sense of unity, as well as the aura of respect usually shown to tribal elders and their older speech patterns. In fact, the e>i changes might have been considerably more advanced in the spoken vernacular of the time.

      In other languages, the e>i transition is anything but complete: Take, e.g., Appalachian English, in most dialects of which "pen" and "pin" are homophones, as are "many - minny", "men - min", etc.

      As to "wings", would a reconstruction based on archaic forms of the NHD (Neuhochdeutsch) "Fittich" be a possible? As LLama_Nomerabilis has pointed out, the MFO (Most Frequently Occurring) Gothic word could well have been a "feather" relative: hence, perhaps "fedarahs" or similar?

      Thanks again, all.

      Arthur




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • llama_nom
      Hails Arthur, The least I could do... The e in my proposed weggs was meant to be a long vowel /e:/ which corresponds to ON /a:/, in this case mutated to
      Message 2 of 3 , Jun 15, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Hails Arthur,

        The least I could do... The 'e' in my proposed 'weggs' was meant to
        be a long vowel /e:/ which corresponds to ON /a:/, in this case
        mutated to /æ:/. I'm guessing the vowel was shortened (due to the
        consonant cluster?) and raised (due to the nasal?). But where each of
        these changes happened, in English or Danish (cf. Da. vinge), I'm not
        sure. I notice that all your examples of i : e merge in Appalatian
        have a nasal after them. Does the same happen in other environments,
        e.g. 'pit' : 'pet'? The Gothic cognate of 'feather' would be *fiþra,
        feminine o-stem. Which would alliterate nicely, accusative: fiþros
        falþanans (or dative: fiþrom falþanaim). OHG fedarah might be Go.
        *fiþrak- or *fiþrah-, depending what this suffix is. Have you seen
        any explanation for that? According to Grimm, LG fittek is borrowed
        from High German (as shown by the medial consonant). Other words, OS
        fetherhamo, OE feþerhama, ON fjaðrhamr, although Grimm says that these
        "drückt mehr das ganze gefieder aus." Go. *fiþrahama?

        aLlarma_aNemone_aNomomaly
        (Ack, you've set me mutating now...)



        --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Jones <arthurobin2002@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hails,
        >
        > I would like to thank the Gothic List members who contributed
        their condolences and their fine Gothic thoughts on the occasion of my
        Mother's passing.
        >
        > Mom would have thoroughly enjoyed the discussion of nouns,
        declensions, dative and accusative absolutes, gerundives, and
        reconstructions that several of you have built up over the past few
        days! Indeed, you have done her great honour.
        >
        > Especially, I would like to thank LLama_Nomandans, Michael Erwin,
        Ualarauans, Pituxalina, and others for joining in. Imagine a wake in
        an extinct language!
        >
        > Incidentally: I notice once more that reconstructing "wings" in
        Gothic served to run us by the e>i process again (weggs - wiggs -
        vaegg - wing). I am gaining am impression that, perhaps, predominant
        Gothic dialects such as that (or those) incorporated by Wulfila were
        intentionally left a bit archaic at the time --mid fourth Century-- to
        create a sense of unity, as well as the aura of respect usually shown
        to tribal elders and their older speech patterns. In fact, the e>i
        changes might have been considerably more advanced in the spoken
        vernacular of the time.
        >
        > In other languages, the e>i transition is anything but complete:
        Take, e.g., Appalachian English, in most dialects of which "pen" and
        "pin" are homophones, as are "many - minny", "men - min", etc.
        >
        > As to "wings", would a reconstruction based on archaic forms of
        the NHD (Neuhochdeutsch) "Fittich" be a possible? As LLama_Nomerabilis
        has pointed out, the MFO (Most Frequently Occurring) Gothic word could
        well have been a "feather" relative: hence, perhaps "fedarahs" or similar?
        >
        > Thanks again, all.
        >
        > Arthur
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • llama_nom
        Old Low Franconian: fetherac; OS fetherak; MLG vederik. So maybe Go. *fiþraks, masculine a-stem. (In his Old Saxon dictionary, Koebler cites PIE *petrg-
        Message 3 of 3 , Jun 15, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Old Low Franconian: fetherac; OS fetherak; MLG vederik. So maybe Go.
          *fiþraks, masculine a-stem. (In his Old Saxon dictionary, Koebler
          cites PIE *petrg- from Pokorny.)

          fiþrakans falþanans (acc.)
          fiþrakam falþanaim (dat.)


          --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > Hails Arthur,
          >
          > The least I could do... The 'e' in my proposed 'weggs' was meant to
          > be a long vowel /e:/ which corresponds to ON /a:/, in this case
          > mutated to /æ:/. I'm guessing the vowel was shortened (due to the
          > consonant cluster?) and raised (due to the nasal?). But where each of
          > these changes happened, in English or Danish (cf. Da. vinge), I'm not
          > sure. I notice that all your examples of i : e merge in Appalatian
          > have a nasal after them. Does the same happen in other environments,
          > e.g. 'pit' : 'pet'? The Gothic cognate of 'feather' would be *fiþra,
          > feminine o-stem. Which would alliterate nicely, accusative: fiþros
          > falþanans (or dative: fiþrom falþanaim). OHG fedarah might be Go.
          > *fiþrak- or *fiþrah-, depending what this suffix is. Have you seen
          > any explanation for that? According to Grimm, LG fittek is borrowed
          > from High German (as shown by the medial consonant). Other words, OS
          > fetherhamo, OE feþerhama, ON fjaðrhamr, although Grimm says that these
          > "drückt mehr das ganze gefieder aus." Go. *fiþrahama?
          >
          > aLlarma_aNemone_aNomomaly
          > (Ack, you've set me mutating now...)
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Jones <arthurobin2002@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hails,
          > >
          > > I would like to thank the Gothic List members who contributed
          > their condolences and their fine Gothic thoughts on the occasion of my
          > Mother's passing.
          > >
          > > Mom would have thoroughly enjoyed the discussion of nouns,
          > declensions, dative and accusative absolutes, gerundives, and
          > reconstructions that several of you have built up over the past few
          > days! Indeed, you have done her great honour.
          > >
          > > Especially, I would like to thank LLama_Nomandans, Michael Erwin,
          > Ualarauans, Pituxalina, and others for joining in. Imagine a wake in
          > an extinct language!
          > >
          > > Incidentally: I notice once more that reconstructing "wings" in
          > Gothic served to run us by the e>i process again (weggs - wiggs -
          > vaegg - wing). I am gaining am impression that, perhaps, predominant
          > Gothic dialects such as that (or those) incorporated by Wulfila were
          > intentionally left a bit archaic at the time --mid fourth Century-- to
          > create a sense of unity, as well as the aura of respect usually shown
          > to tribal elders and their older speech patterns. In fact, the e>i
          > changes might have been considerably more advanced in the spoken
          > vernacular of the time.
          > >
          > > In other languages, the e>i transition is anything but complete:
          > Take, e.g., Appalachian English, in most dialects of which "pen" and
          > "pin" are homophones, as are "many - minny", "men - min", etc.
          > >
          > > As to "wings", would a reconstruction based on archaic forms of
          > the NHD (Neuhochdeutsch) "Fittich" be a possible? As LLama_Nomerabilis
          > has pointed out, the MFO (Most Frequently Occurring) Gothic word could
          > well have been a "feather" relative: hence, perhaps "fedarahs" or
          similar?
          > >
          > > Thanks again, all.
          > >
          > > Arthur
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.