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

Re: bireikei* & bnauan* (Köbler)

Expand Messages
  • llama_nom
    ... Hails aftra bi spedistin Þiudan! I finally tracked down that Old Norse attestation in the Dialogues of Gregory, Book 3, Chapter 17 [
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 24, 2006
      --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, "thiudans" <thiudans@...> wrote:
      > *BNAUAN (GW 100)
      > This word has caused a bit of confusion, I think unnecessarily,
      > and some have even gone so far, on the basis of its single
      > occurrence, to propose a grand lineage of origins, suggesting a
      > Go. *bi-nauan, "germ. bnowwan (=binowwan?, abl. Seebold s. *
      > nauan)". I think this Nom. Pl. M. Part. Pres. (surely Köbler is right
      > here) to be found in Luke 6, 1 CA is nothing other than a
      > misreading or miswriting of *hnauandans, i.e. Go. *hnauan "to
      > rub".
      > The explanation of *hnauan seems preferable to Torp's
      > suggestion, p. 298, entry 9, which provides varations on a root
      > verb *nu-, nuwan, nowa "schaben, reiben", claiming "(=bi-
      > nowan), red. vb. "zerreiben"; AN. nua, bnua, gnua (=ga-nowan)
      > reiben; AHD niuwan (und hniuwan), nuan part. ginuwan, mhd.
      > niuwen, nuwen zerstoßen, zerdrücken, zerstampfen, zerreiben." I
      > cannot find any source for ON "bnu'a". Zoega refers ON nu'a =
      > ON gnu'a, which in the present scheme may < NGmc. ga-
      > hnu'a(n).
      > The MS. not being available in this circumstance to check this
      > possibility, we may trust to our familiarity with the Gothic hand
      > and orthography and confidently note that the distinction of the
      > Gothic characters for H and for B is to be made in almost one
      > small stroke, viz. at the top of the long right-hand bar on the B,
      > there is another stroke which curves up to the right, which the H
      > does not have (the thin connecting bar at the base of the B
      > seems nearly invisible and hardly of consequence). This "jot"
      > could easily have been mistakenly added, or could be a blot of
      > ink, or who knows what. It is enough that the rest of both
      > characters is virtually similar. I am unfortunately unable to
      > ascertain the various misreadings and their specific nature to
      > corroborate the likelihood of such an error as here is proposed.
      > Furthermore, we do not doubt that our version of CA is the
      > handiwork of a copyist. In any event, were the characters to differ
      > by more two or three minor strokes we should not find difficulty in
      > maintaining the weight of the argument, which is in its simplicity.
      > Now to the the etymological evidence supporting the correction.
      > First, we find in Torp a few entries pertaining to the idea "rub":
      > p.99 *HNO'- * HNU-, HNEWWAN. These seem to be of most
      > interest here. Köbler in his Germanisches Wörterbuch, owing
      > much to FFT, glosses Gmc. *hnu- "NHD. reiben", *hnu-, *
      > hnewwan-, *hnaw "NHD. stoßen, reiben". The variance of the
      > two forms presents little problem. We encounter in the Gothic
      > perhaps a derivation of the first stem form (with shortend vowel
      > grade) rather than the second stem form: Gmc. *hna(w)an- > Go.
      > *hna'uan, like Go. bauan.
      > One may alternatively propose a verb *gnauan, if one consider
      > the possibility of G being mistaken for "B". This finds support in a
      > root of similar meaning "reiben": p. 138 (entry 4): GNU-.
      > However, it has been for present purposes imagined that H
      > would be more easily transformed to B than would G. It seems
      > altogether more likely

      Hails aftra bi spedistin Þiudan!

      I finally tracked down that Old Norse attestation in the Dialogues of
      Gregory, Book 3, Chapter 17 [
      ]. The disputed verb *bnúa appears here in the preterite singular
      form 'bneri'. To recap, this is cited by Fritzner as an alternative
      form of ON núa, gnúa [
      http://www.edd.uio.no/perl/search/search.cgi?appid=86&tabid=1275 ].

      As for Go. bnauandans, the 'b' is quite clear in this image, seventh
      line from the top [
      ], and not easily confused with 'h'. Harder to confuse Go. 'b' and
      'h' than their Roman equivalents.

      Stray thoughts: could the unique combination 'bn' be a piece sound
      symbolism (onomatopoeia's more abstract cousin), suggesting the
      resistance and roughness of the rubbed object. Although there aren't
      any other examples of the prefix bi- being contracted like this, there
      is one example of ga- contracted before a vowel: gaumjan < *ga-aumijan
      (Streitberg 296).

      Llama Nom
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.