Drus Griutinge

[llama_nom]

And with "So was ubila wiko / allaim inu hrabna", compare Völuspá: "Sá
er undinn salr / orma hryggjum."


--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "thiudans" <thiudans@> wrote:
> >
> > Very nice work. Wow!
> > 
> > Haven't time to go through it all yet.
> > I noticed a couple things first off.
> > You use "thata" referring to two masculines,
> > thiudans andsomething else. Maybe that could
> > or should be "Sa". the alliterative line only
> > requires one th- in the first halfline so it couldwork.
> 
> Þus awiliudo, Þiudan!  Galaubja, þatei "þata" in swaleikaim frisahtim
> fagr ist.
> 
> Thanks Thiudans!  I think "thata" is okay in such examples.
> 
> "Das neutr. Pron. steht ohne Rücksicht auf das Genus des
> Prädikatsnomens" (Streitberg/Stopp: Gotische Syntax 1981, 236.4).  
> 
> Gabair (compare): niu þata ist sa timrja, sa sunus Marjins = OUC
> hOUTOS ESTIN hO TEKTWN, hO hUIOS THS MARIAS (Mk 6:3); hva ist wens =
> TIS ESTIN hH ELPIS (Eph 1:18).
> 
> Cf. also OE: þæt wæs gód/grim cyning "that was a good/fierce king"
> (masculine); þæt wæs God ælmihtig "that was God almighty" (masculine);
> and ON: þat er maðr "that is a man" (masculine); þat er vargr "that is
> a wolf" (mascukine); þat var góðr gripr "that was a good treasure"
> (masculine); þat var mikill boer ok vegligur "that was a large and
> fine farm" (masculine); þat er nú kölluð Sygnakleif "that is now
> called Sygnakleif" (feminine).
> 
> > Also, I wonder if alliteration of the germanic tradition
> > ever allowed st- to go with s- and sn- words.
> 
> Not as far as I know.  /st/, /sk/ and /sp/ each only alliterate with
> themselves, but /s/ alliterates with /s/, /sm/ or /sn/, e.g. Beowulf
> 190: singála séað / ne mihte snotor hæleð.
> 
> > We see
> > in reduplicating verbs that st- is thought of usually
> > as an inseperable complex, and in OE and OHG
> > poetry I belive sk- and st- had to go only with themselves.
> 
> Yes.  Did you spot a mistake?  In "ufsniþanai stainam, / sunjus juþan
> bai" there is just single alliteration: /sn/ alliterates only with
> /s/, while /st/ isn't part of the pattern (compare Beowulf 44:
> þéodgestréonum / þonne þá dydon -- with allit. on þéod- and þá, while
> /st/ doesn't take part in the scheme; Beowulf 935: húsa sélest /
> heorodréorig stód -- with allit. on /h/, while /s/ and /st/ contrast
> and don't take part in the pattern; Beowulf 996: secga gehwylcum /
> þára þe on swylc starað -- single allit. on /s/, while /hw/ and /st/
> aren't part of the pattern).  Similarly in "ana Danaprais staþam, /
> dairnjai saurgai," there is just single alliteration on /d/.
> 
> LN
> 
> 
> > 
> > --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > http://www.oe.eclipse.co.uk/nom/drus.htm
> > > 
> > > To change the subject slightly, I've been working on a Gothic
poem of
> > > late.  As you can see, some of my reconstructions coincide with ones
> > > that have been suggested recently.  Any comments, queries,
corrections
> > > or criticisms welcome.
> > >
> >
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/gothic-l/attachments/20070417/e1b62eff/attachment.htm>