[gothic-l] Reflexive pronouns + sa/is revisited

Sun Jan 16 10:57:05 UTC 2005

Thanks Gerry,

Excellent clear explanation: I hadn't even got round to thinking 
about participles!  The use of imma in the your last example might 
be due to the fact that the pronoun is separated so far from its 
antecedant.  The use of ina in 1Cor 15,28 is a counter example to 
things like

> insandidedun ferjans þans us liutein taiknjandans sik garaihtans 
wisan (Luke 
> 20:20)

So it seems like there was some uncertainty over participles.  
Speculation: could this be because these participles are being used 
more than would be natural in colloquial Gothic, in immitation of 
the Greek?  If a Gothic speaker was expecting a subordinate clause 
in such circumstances, that could lead to anomalous reflexives even 
where not referring to the subject.  But maybe there was already an 
ambiguity there.  Is the adjectival "reflexive + participle" 
combination the more common then?

How does this work for reported speech?  I believe there is some 
fluctuation here in Old Norse.  Hammer's German Grammer has these 
counter examples to the usual rule about reflexive = subject:

Karl fand Walter mit einem Bericht ueber sich (Walter).
Kart fand Walter mit einem Bericht ueber ihn (Karl.

>From what you've said in C, I guess Gothic would be more likely to 
take the opposite tack, that is: sik = *Karls; ina = *Waldahari.

On a slightly different topic, there was a question recently about 
the use of sa and is, and if there is any rule about which to use.  
I had forgotten there is actually something about this in Wright 
para. 431.  He says "IS is sometimes used where we should expect 
SA".  He doesn't elabourate on what "we should expect", but gives 
these examples:

(1) iþ is dugann merjan filu...swaswe is ni mahta in baurg galeiþan
"and he (the beggar) began to tell everyone...so that he (Jesus) 
couldn´t go into the city"

(2) saei bigitiþ saiwala seina fraqisteiþ izai, jah saei fraqisteiþ 
saiwalai seinai in meina, bigitiþ þo.

I think the implication is that the second IS in (1) would more 
often be SA.  But ambiguity is avoided in the first part of (2), 
even if the genders were the same, since if he was destroying 
himself a reflexive would be used.

But one circumstance where IS is very often used with a change of 
subject is in dialogue, in the combinations: 'iþ is qaþ' and 'iþ is 
qaþuh' = "and/but he said", the second more emphatic I 
think: "and/but *he* said".

Llama Nom

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, Grsartor at a... wrote:
> What I think is the rule for use of reflexives in Gothic is 
simpler than its 
> counterpart in English. If I am right, a reflexive pronoun is used 
when it 
> refers to the subject of the finite verb (not an infinitive or a 
participle) in 
> its clause. For some examples where Gothic and English practices 
differ consider
> 
> A. Sentences with a pronoun as the object of a dependent infinitve.
> 
> (i) The king ordered the physician to cure him.
> 
> (ii) The king ordered the physician to cure himself.
> 
> From (ii) a native speaker of English would naturally understand 
that the 
> physician was required to practise self-healing, whereas in (i) he 
must heal some 
> other person, quite possibly the king. If the patient in (i) is 
indeed the 
> king, then Gothic would make the pronoun reflexive, since it 
refers to the 
> subject of the verb "ordered".
> 
> Examples:
> 
> ...þaiei ni wildedun mik þiudanon ufar sis
> who did not want me to rule over them.
> 
> jah bedun ina allai gaujans þize Gaddarene galeiþan fairra sis 
(Luke 8:37)
> and all the people of the G asked him to go away from them.
> 
> 
> B. Sentences with a pronoun as the object of a participle.
> 
> (i) The king blamed the physician (that was) treating him.
> 
> Whether or not the bracketed words are omitted English would not 
use a 
> reflexive. In Gothic a reflexive would be used if the bracketed 
words were omitted 
> and the patient was the king, the principle being the same as in A.
> 
> Examples:
> 
> wandjands sik du þizai afarlaistjandein sis managein qaþ (Luke 7:9)
> turning to the crowd following him he said
> 
> qaþuþ þan jah þamma haitandin sik   (Luke 14:12)
> and he said then to the one inviting him
> 
> What if the inviting was truly reflexive? That is, suppose we 
wanted to say 
> "he said to the one inviting himself". I think Gothic would use a 
reflexive 
> pronoun here also. Consider, for example,
> 
> in galaubeinai liba sun(a)us gudis gibandins sik faur mik 
(Galatians 2:20)
> I live in the faith of the son of G, [the one] giving himself for 
me.
> 
> insandidedun ferjans þans us liutein taiknjandans sik garaihtans 
wisan (Luke 
> 20:20)
> they sent spies representing themselves as sincere [i.e. the spies 
pretended 
> to be sincere]
> 
> 
> C. Sentences with an adjectival prepositional phrase.
> 
> (i) He feared the darkness (that was) around him.
> 
> Here again, English would not use a reflexive. Gothic, if the 
bracketed words 
> are omitted, would use a reflexive for the same reason as in A and 
B, unless 
> the sense was that he feared the darkness that surrounded someone 
else.
> 
> Example:
> 
> gasaihwands þan Iesus managans hiuhmans bi sik, haihait galeiþan 
siponjans 
> hindar marein. (Matt 8:18)
> then Jesus, seeing the great crowds around him, ordered his 
disciples to go 
> to the other side of the lake.
> 
> On the other hand, consider
> 
> (ii) He drew his coat more tightly round himself.
> 
> The prepositional phrase is adverbial, and both English and Gothic 
require a 
> reflexive.
> 
> Here is an elaborate one from Mark 12:19, describing what might 
happen when a 
> man dies childless but leaving a wife:
> 
> ei nimai broþar is þo qen is jah ussatjai barna broþr seinamma.
> that his brother must take his wife and have children for his 
brother
> 
> 
> Here is quite a knotty one from 15:28 of Corinthians I:
> 
> þanuh biþe alla gakunnun sik faura imma, þanuþ-þan is silba sunus 
gakann sik 
> faura þamma ufhnaiwjandin uf ina þo alla, ei sijai guþ alla in 
allaim
> And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself 
will be 
> subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God 
may be all in all.
> 
> The use of "ina" seems to violate my proposed rule, but perhaps 
Wulfila found 
> all this nearly as confusing as I do.
> 
> And here I think is another exception to the rule I have proposed:
> 
> ei gebi unsis unagein us handau fijande unsaraize galausidaim 
skalkinon imma 
> (Luke 1:74)
> to grant us that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, 
might 
> serve him without fear
> 
> In the Gothic version the last word refers to the subject of its 
clause, and 
> so I should have expected "sis".
> 
> Gerry T.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/S.QlOD/3MnJAA/Zx0JAA/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/