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

The Accusative Absolute

Expand Messages
  • Grsartor@aol.com
    Hailai allai, I have followed the contributions under the headings araaiþei aflaiþ and gafilhsaggws and, as often, been full of admiration for the
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 29, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hailai allai,

      I have followed the contributions under the headings "araaiþei aflaiþ" and
      "gafilhsaggws" and, as often, been full of admiration for the erudition they
      evince. There is one small contribution I may be able to make to all this. It is
      about the absolute construction in Gothic. In his writing on 14.6.06 Llama_nom
      mentions the accusative absolute as found in

      þuk taujandan armaion [ni witi hleidumei þeina hwa taujiþ taihswo þeina]
      (Matt. 6:3)

      Wright has an interesting remark about this on page 292 of his Grammar of the
      Gothic Language. He states that it is not, in fact, an absolute construction
      but that "þuk" is the object of "witi", and two Latin manuscripts of the
      Gospels have the same construction, using "te facientem" for "þuk taujandan". The
      implication is that the Gothic has followed the Latin rather than the genitive
      absolute of the Greek. William Bennett, on page 94 of his Introduction to the
      Gothic Language, admits as possible both Wright's view and that the
      construction in question may be an accusative absolute.

      I myself am happier thinking the construction is an accusative absolute,
      since I am not sure I can make proper sense of the Gothic on Wright's view; but my
      inability to understand is not an argument.

      Gerry T.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • llama_nom
      Thanks for pointing that out, Gerry. I d forgotten Wright s note. So if þuk taujandan is the object of witi , are we to read interpret hva taujiþ
      Message 2 of 2 , Jun 29, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for pointing that out, Gerry. I'd forgotten Wright's note. So
        if 'þuk taujandan' is the object of 'witi', are we to read interpret
        'hva taujiþ taihswo þeina' as being in apposition to 'þuk taujandan
        armaion'?

        iþ þuk taujandan armaion ni witi hleidumei þeina hva taujiþ taihswo þeina

        "But let not your left hand know about your acts of charity, what your
        right hand does."

        On the question of Latin influence generally, I'd be interested to
        hear any opinions about Marchand's view: "If one restricts oneself to
        the Greek and Latin manuscripts of the bible as Streitberg has done in
        effect, it is natural that one will suspect a great deal of Latin
        influence on the Gothic bible, since the majority of Latin manuscripts
        are Western, the majority of the Greek uncial manuscripts non-Western.
        The appearance of the same readings in the Gothic, Syriac, Armenian
        and Old Church Slavic makes Streitberg's assumption of Latin influence
        unnecessary and unlikely." (Marchand 1957, Review of "Mossé: Manuel de
        la langue gotique: Grammaire, textes, notes, glossaire", Language
        33:2, p. 234).

        Could 'þuk taujandan' have had a Greek model after all, * se de
        poiounta (rather than Streitberg's 'sou de poiountos')? Or is that
        out of the question?

        Llama Nom





        --- In gothic-l@yahoogroups.com, Grsartor@... wrote:
        >
        > Hailai allai,
        >
        > I have followed the contributions under the headings "araaiþei
        aflaiþ" and
        > "gafilhsaggws" and, as often, been full of admiration for the
        erudition they
        > evince. There is one small contribution I may be able to make to all
        this. It is
        > about the absolute construction in Gothic. In his writing on 14.6.06
        Llama_nom
        > mentions the accusative absolute as found in
        >
        > þuk taujandan armaion [ni witi hleidumei þeina hwa taujiþ taihswo
        þeina]
        > (Matt. 6:3)
        >
        > Wright has an interesting remark about this on page 292 of his
        Grammar of the
        > Gothic Language. He states that it is not, in fact, an absolute
        construction
        > but that "þuk" is the object of "witi", and two Latin manuscripts of
        the
        > Gospels have the same construction, using "te facientem" for "þuk
        taujandan". The
        > implication is that the Gothic has followed the Latin rather than
        the genitive
        > absolute of the Greek. William Bennett, on page 94 of his
        Introduction to the
        > Gothic Language, admits as possible both Wright's view and that the
        > construction in question may be an accusative absolute.
        >
        > I myself am happier thinking the construction is an accusative
        absolute,
        > since I am not sure I can make proper sense of the Gothic on
        Wright's view; but my
        > inability to understand is not an argument.
        >
        > Gerry T.
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.