James 3:6

[ualarauans]

Hails, Lama!

Thank you very much for your correction. I've got some further 
doubts concerning this fragment and I'd appreciate to know what the 
list-mates think.

KOSMOS = fairhvus "world", but isn't "ornament", "attire" another 
meaning of the Greek word? In this context, couldn't the tongue be 
called a "decoration of iniquity", i.e. a means to disguise it
(with lies)? We've got Go. fetjan KOSMEIN "to adorn", "to decorate"; 
hrains, gafaurs KOSMIOS "decent" attested. hO KOSMOS THS ADIKIAS = 
feteins inwindiþos?

KAQISTATAI = gasatida ist. Or, maybe, gasatjada?

hH SPILOUSA = anawammjandei. Doesn't it need the article here:
so anawammjandei? And what about no article before the first 
appearance of tuggo in the sentence and putting it before the second 
one – is it correct here?

FLOGIZEIN = intandjan (attested for KATAKAIEIN). Another variant 
was, of course, inbrannjan (KAIEIN). We've got lauhmuni for FLOX 
(gen. FLOGOS). How about *lauhmunjan for FLOGIZEIN (formally like 
glitmunjan)? And, FLOGIZOMENH hUPO THS GEENNHS – couldn't it be also 
intandjada fram gaiainnin? BTW, am I right putting dat. sg.
of gaiainna* after weak masculina (gaiainnin*)? Maybe, the only 
attested acc. sg. gaiainnan is but a copy of Greek acc. sg. fem.
1st decl. GEENNAN?

Finally, TROCOS = runs (attested for DROMOS). And we know rinnan for 
TRECEIN. Here there's a problem. In my grandparents' library I 
recently found an old book titled "Grammatik des neutestamentlichen 
Sprachidioms", bearb. von Dr. G. B. Winer, Leipzig, 1867, where on 
p. 53 I read: "Begründet ... ist der Unterschied zwischen TROCOS 
(oxytonon) "Rad", wie Jac. 3, 6. der Text und die accentuirten Codd. 
haben, und TROCOS (paroxytonon) "Lauf", wie nach ... u. A. gelesen 
werden soll... Das Bild TROCOS (oxytonon) GENESEWS ist
(mit FLOGIZOUSA verbunden) weder incorrect noch bei Jacobus 
besonders auffällig, eine Aenderung der Schreibart mithin unnötig". 
I have no idea in how much outdated this is now, but if it was 
really "a wheel of birth", what could Gothic "wheel" be like?

Ualarauans

--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell at ...> wrote:

> Hails, Walhahrabn!
> 
> Looks convincing.  Just one thing comes to mind: I would suggest
> 'fram' rather than 'af' to translate hUPO here.  This seems to be 
the
> normal preposition used where Gothic needs to express the agent in 
a
> passive construction (unlike Old Norse, where it would be 'af').  I
> can't think of any examples where 'af' is used in this way in the
> Gothic corpus.
> 
> http://www.wulfila.be/lib/streitberg/1910/HTML/B037.html
> http://www.wulfila.be/lib/streitberg/1910/HTML/B001.html
> 
> LN
> 
> --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "ualarauans" <ualarauans at ...> 
wrote:
> >
> > Hails!
> >
> > (James 3:6):
> >
> > "And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue
> > among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth 
on
> > fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell".
> >
> > KAI hH GLWSSA PUR hO KOSMOS THS ADIKIAS hH GLWSSA KAQISTATAI EN 
TOIS
> > MELESIN hHMWN hH SPILOUSA hOLON TO SWMA KAI FLOGIZOUSA TON TROCON
> > THS GENESEWS KAI FLOGIZOMENH hUPO THS GEENNHS
> >
> > [*] jah tuggo <ist> fon fairhvus inwindiþos so tuggo gasatida 
ist in
> > liþum unsaraim anawammjandei allata leik jah intandjandei run
> > gabaurþais jah intandida af gaiainnin
> >
> > Please criticize the Gothic version. All comments are welcome.
> >
> > Thanx
> >
> > Ualarauans

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/gothic-l/attachments/20070215/f1bc08bf/attachment.htm>