[gothic-l] Re: Scandinavian Inscriptions - East/North/West Germanic

[akoddsson]

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <penterakt at f...> wrote:
> > The E-W-N classification system for the inscriptions (aka 
> Antonsen) is not really realistic, in my view. 
> 
> I'd like to know more about this.  Are you saying it's unrealistic 
only in the context of the Scandinavian inscriptions, or unrealistic 
per se?  

Only in the context of Scandinavian inscriptions. My basic rule is: 
it belongs where it was found unless proven otherwise. Antonsen has 
some Scandinavian inscriptions listed under east or west along with 
actual territorial east and west inscriptions. He classified these 
according to certain ideas about the language (1975). 

  The usual assumption with the (admittedly sparse) south 
> east European inscriptions is that Gothic -s (from Gmc -z or -s) 
is spelt with the S-rune (cf. Szabadbattyan, Kovel, Letcani).  Are 
there any clear examples of S being used for etymological Gmc Z in 
the Scandinavian corpus?

Not that I can recall. We discussed awings (Denmark).

  And if there were, would this be evidence 
> for East Gmc?  What, if anything, would consitute evidence?

See above. Antonsen lists awings as east germanic #93 due to this. 

  The 
> change z > R (palatal voiced alveolar) doesn't show up in runic 
spelling, so that might make it difficult to distinguish between the 
ancestors of North and East Gmc dialects.

This is the classic dilemma of whether to write R or z. z always 
becomes R and R is always from z, at least in north germanic. What 
should we write? I just write z because its lower case. More then 
likely, z - R cannot be dated. However, R could mutate preceeding 
vowels, some of which are shown in inscriptions. There is evidence 
of this in Old Norse and Old English as well. 

  And when did z > r in 
> West Germanic?

400+ for sure, but how much later I'm not sure. We could look it up. 

> Latin, I think, had no way of distinguishing [s] and [z], but 
maybe there is evidence from Greek records of barbarian names - 
except that the most common example (the usual nominative singular 
ending) is usually obscured in classical writings by the Greek/Latin 
terminations.

Unfortunately true.

> Something I've always wondered is, how much evidence actually 
exists for the traditional list of the "East Germanic" tribes: 
Vandals, Sueves, Gepids, Herulians, Skirians, Rugians, Burgundians, 
etc.  Are there specific Gothic-like features discernable in names, 
loan words, legal terms, or whatever - or is this list made largely 
on the basis of assumed geagraphical origin/habitation?

This is outside of my sphere ;) However, the Rugians would appear to 
be from Rogaland in Norway. Bornholm is also an island off the south 
of Sweden. It's called borgundarhólmr in Old Norse. While this alone 
does not prove anything, the names look very suspicious. How many of 
the limited germanic groups used these names for themselves?

> The one example that does come to mind, is the name of the Vandal 
dynastic founder twin Raus (cf. Modern German: Rohr).  There is also 
the French roseau 'reed', probably borrowed from either the 
Visigoths or the Burgundians, as far as I know.

> > But would I be 
right in thinking that when an inscription consists of a single name 
it is usually in the nominative?

> > No, there are examples of genitive only, like keþan in Norway 
and several others of this type. If a name occurs by itself on a 
stone and in the genitive, then it means that the stone/memorial 
belongs to this person. 

> Ah yes, thanks for putting me right there - and I've just 
remembered the Caister inscription from England: RAIHAN, which is 
taken to mean "of a deer".

Yes, this is the common gen.sg.masc.n-stem at this north/west stage. 

>  However, there was no æ rune (always long). Writers 
used both -ai and -e (ê) to represent this sound, in verbs from the 
original *-æ- and in dat.sgs. from monothongization of ai to æ'(also 
written ê, but not identical to regular long ê). If Antonsen is 
right in thinking that the sixth vowel rune, which was discontinued 
before the old inscriptions, represented æ' (as in *jæ'ran), then it 
disappeared because of stressed æ'-to-â change in NG, leaving the æ' 
in unstressed positions to be represented by -ai or -e, which never 
represents this sound in stressed positions. Thus, talgidai is just 
as normal as talgide, as far as spelling goes. 

> > The unstressed æ'(ê) in the 3rd sg.pres. of weak verbs is NWG, 
not just proto-norse. It predates the earliest inscriptions. 

> So where does ô fit into all this?, as on the Gallehus horn: 
TAWIDO.

1st person sg. past indicative: tawidô

I'll post the Gallehus Horn to Theudiskon for our grammar exercise.

> I wonder if the convention of equating /e/ and /ai/ spread beyond 
Scandinavia.  If so, that undermines the usefulness of the form U(N)
ThF(I)NTHAI, on the Charnay fibula, for establishing the value 
of /ai/ in Gothic (or Burgundian in this case).  Which is a shame...

There simply was no rune at this stage to represent æ', whether from 
original unstressed æ' or from monothongization of unstressed ai to 
æ'. UAIEO were the only vowel options, hence E for both E and Ê, AI 
for AI, but E or AI for unstressed Æ'.

> >   there still wouldn't have to be 
many anomalies to completely throw modern researchers.  In these 
cases, as you've said, a default assumption of Norse seems best.

> > True, any anomality, even a scrible, can throw modern 
researchers. A grade school teacher teaching the alphabet and 
spelling might be in a good position to access the frequency of 
mistakes/mispellings ;)

> Mine more than most, I think...

I still can't spell english worth a damn. I need a dictionary ;)

> > Llama, join Theudiskon at yahoogroups if you haven't already. 
There is no topic there except the language and runic inscription 
are not off topic. You clearly have an interest in the early language
(s) ;)
> 
> Thanks for the tip - I shall!

See you there. We can post, read, compare and discuss all the runes 
we want there.

Regards,
Konrad
 
> Llama Nom



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>. 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gothic-l/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     gothic-l-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/