Re: More Gothic text

Joe Fatula wrote:
> Looking at Gothic texts, I'm getting the impression that it's a lot
further
> from English than a North Germanic language would be.
>
The orthography doesn't help either.  In Wright's grammar, there are
diacritics to show the 3 (assumed) pronunciations of "ai" and "au"-- ái, aí,
ai etc.  "ei" represents /i:/; there are macrons over various vowels, to
distinguish long vs. short /o/ for ex.  Then there are the sound changes;
Mod.Germ /au/ = Goth. /u/ (us- = aus-); plus the ablaut changes in verbs are
more transparent in Goth.  Pre-tonic vowels have become neutralized or lost;
galaub- is modern glauben; far- is modern ver- etc. etc.

I suspect if we could hear the texts read with the assumed pronunciation,
they might be a _little_ more recognizable. There's also the problem that in
some cases (like Paul's text) Wulfilas had to translate Greek philosophical
concepts; and in some cases, he seems to have translated the Greek word for
word (Wright has parallel Greek texts for some passages)

John's text was quite obscure!! My second one (from the story of the
Gaddarene swine) had a few hints-- skipa 'ship', swein- /swi:n-/ modern
Schwein. "qaþ"  (qaT) of course is Shakespearan "quoth" '(he) said'.  One
line contained the strange word "laigaion", copying the Greek "legeo:n"  in
"My name is Legion, for I am many".  Odd in English too, eh?  The Our Father
was a poor choice.........

Reply