A short gothic poem
faltin2001
d.faltin at HISPEED.CH
Sun Jul 28 13:25:21 UTC 2013
--- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "Edmund" <edmundfairfax at ...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Gothic 'tagl' translates Greek 'thriks' = 'the hair of the head' or 'a single hair'. In two of the three extant instances of the word, 'tagl' refers to a single strand of hair (Mat5,36 & Mat10,30). In the third, it refers to the hair of a camel that went into the making of a hair-shirt; here the sense is apparently hair as a material (as opposed to leather, wool, or some other material or fibre). 'tagl' is cognate with OE 'taegl' (> ModE 'tail') 'tail (of a horse, ox)<, ON 'tagl' 'horse's tail' or 'horse-hair rope', and OHG 'zakal'. To assume, however, that Gothic 'tagl' could also mean 'tail' or 'long hair' is unwarranted. There are a number of instances wherein the later Germanic cognates do not agree precisely in sense or connotation with the earlier Gothic kin-word.
>
> Gothic 'skuft' translates Greek 'trikhes' and is also extant only three times. In all three instances, 'skuft' means 'hair of the head' as a collective (Joh11,2; Luk7,33; Lk 744). It is kin to ON 'skopt' 'hair' (a poetic word), OHG skuft (> ModG 'Schopf' = 'top of the head, tuft, shock of hair'), and possibly ModE 'scut' (perhaps from ON 'skott', a later form of 'skopt') 'short tail (of rabbit, hare, deer', although this latter etymology is not secure.
To complete the terms for "hair" (tagl, skuft) we also have Gothic "flahta" referring to a tail of hair, related to modern German "Flechte".
>
> The idea that the Goths - or indeed any ancient Germanic people - habitually wore their hair long (like a hippy) is moot. In his >Germania< Tacitus mentions that some warriors in some Germanic tribes of the first century AD would not cut their hair until they had slain a foe, which seems to imply that their hair was not normally long, and that long unkempt hair was part of a vow (cf. the Roman practice of letting the hair and beard grow as part of mourning). The representation of Germani on the Marcus Aurelius column, commemorating the Marcomannic war of the second century AD, does not show particularly long hair. The only more or less realistic depiction of a Goth from the fifth century AD is to my knowledge that of Stilicho, which shows him with a Byzantine haircut, and not with hippy-locks.
>
Other authentic depictions are the portraits of Odoacer on quarter-siliqua coins and of Theodahat on his famous Roman folles. Both kings show kind of medium long hair. Only the Merovingian kings seemed to have worn their hair really long. The fact that their very long hair was distinctive suggests that "normal" people would have worn shorter hair.
Cheers,
Dirk
>
>
> --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, halsteis@ wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> In a message dated 08/07/2013 23:43:27 GMT Daylight Time,
> > >> duke.co@ writes:
> > >>
> > >> does someone haf a definitive words for nose and hair......i think
> > >> hair
> > >> is tagla , but back in those days all the goths had long hair and i
> > >> assume
> > >> they were talkin about putting their hair as a pony tail......not sure
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > that is an interesting point. If "tagl" meant (hair-) tail it could be
> > > related to the dialectic German word "Zagel" meaing tail (of a horse or
> > > cow).
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Dirk
> > >
> > In modern Norwegian, hestetagl (horse-tagl) means horse-hair, as in mane
> > and tail.
> >
> > Halstein.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> --- On Sun, 7/7/13, Edmund <edmundfairfax@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> From: Edmund <edmundfairfax@>
> > >> Subject: [gothic-l] Re: A short gothic poem
> > >> To: gothic-l at yahoogroups.com
> > >> Date: Sunday, July 7, 2013, 4:30 PM
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Dear Gerry,
> > >>
> > >> I have done some checking, as promised, and can relay the following.
> > >>
> > >> 1) Earlier attempts to equate the wisan- and wairthan-passive forms
> > >> with
> > >> the etymological equivalents in modern German have been shown to be
> > >> misguided and ultimately misrepresentative of the linguistic facts. A
> > >> study done by
> > >> Anneliese Bammesberger entitled "Die Deutung partiell konkurriender
> > >> Formen: Ueberlegungen zum Gotischen Was-, Warth-Passiv" (in >Befund und
> > >> Deutung.
> > >> Zum Verhaeltnis von Empirie und Interpretation in Sprach- und
> > >> Literaturwissenschaft< 1979) has shown that the
> > >>
> > >> 'was-' und 'warth-'Passiv werden in gleicher Weise zum Ausdruck
> > >> passivischer Bedeutung verwendet. Zwischen diesen beiden Morphemgruppen
> > >> sind
> > >> Unterschiede in der syntaktisch-semanatischen Funktion nicht
> > >> ueberzeugend
> > >> nachzuweisen. (p. 108)
> > >>
> > >> In other words, there is, on the whole, no demonstrable difference in
> > >> meaning between the pseudo-auxiliaries 'wisan' and 'wairthan' in the
> > >> formation
> > >> of the paraphrastic passive, and that "'warth-' wie 'was-'Passiv kann
> > >> griechischen Aorist oder Perfekt entsprechen" ('the 'warth-' like the
> > >> 'was-'passive can correspond to the Greek aorist or perfect'). To cite
> > >> only a couple
> > >> of her examples:
> > >>
> > >> 'gabaurans warth' (J9,20) = aorist, versus 'galothoths warth' (C7,18) =
> > >> perfect
> > >> 'gabaurans was' (G4,23) = perfect, versus 'galothoths wast' (C7,21) =
> > >> aorist
> > >>
> > >> This means ultimately that Gothic lacks an unambiguous way of showing a
> > >> stative versus an active sense in the paraphrastic passive.
> > >>
> > >> 2) The example I cited in an earlier e-mail, with 'haitada' ('is
> > >> called'),
> > >> seems to have caused some confusion because of my gloss. 'Haitan' means
> > >> simply 'to have as one's name, to be named, to be called'. The gloss
> > >> 'to be
> > >> called' need not imply reiteration -- "keep on calling him" as you
> > >> worded
> > >> it. Thus the line I cited could also be translated 'Barabbas or Jesus,
> > >> whose
> > >> name is Christ'. This is clearly stative. And I have found some further
> > >> examples wherein a stative sense is quite clear:
> > >>
> > >> us thammei all fadreinis in himina jah ana airtha namnjada (E3,15)
> > >> 'whence
> > >> every family in heaven and on earth is named'
> > >>
> > >> swethauh ei ufarassau izwis frijonds mins frijoda (2C12,15) 'but such
> > >> that
> > >> loving you more, will I be loved less'
> > >>
> > >> fram thammei gafahanai habanda (2T2,26) 'by whom they are held captive'
> > >>
> > >> As these examples show, a stative sense is in fact possible with
> > >> inflected
> > >> passives.
> > >>
> > >> The foregoing then means that the phrase "is buried" can be translated
> > >> indifferently as 'filhada' or 'ist fulhans'.
> > >>
> > >> --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "Edmund" <edmundfairfax@> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > My objection was in fact NOT to the use of the past participle in the
> > >> poem but rather to the form "fulhada", which is a confusion of a past
> > >> participle and an inflected rather than paraphrastic present passive
> > >> form; if an
> > >> inflected present passive form is to be used, then it must be 'filhada'
> > >> or a
> > >> prefixed form of the same.
> > >> >
> > >> > As you rightly observe, the paraphrastic passive construction could
> > >> also
> > >> be used to form present passives, with a present or future reference.
> > >> Given that the verb 'wisan' is inherently stative, the form 'ist
> > >> fulhans' is
> > >> naturally to be interpreted as a stative passive. That the inflected
> > >> pres.
> > >> passive cannot have a stative meaning, however, I have my doubts, but
> > >> at this
> > >> point, I will do more research and report my findings in due course.
> > >> >
> > >> > Certainly, the use of 'ist fulhans' (with the past part. properly
> > >> agreeing with whatever word it is to modify), or by ellipsis simply the
> > >> past
> > >> part. alone, would seem to be a very acceptable choice in the context
> > >> of the
> > >> poem. The following example is very close in sense:
> > >> >
> > >> > ni waiht auk ist gahulith thatei ni andhuljaidau (Mat10,26) 'for
> > >> nothing
> > >> is hidden that may not be revealed'
> > >> >
> > >> > To my thinking, the verb 'affilhan' ('to bury away' so as to hide)
> > >> seemed apt given the context of the poem: the stress seems to be on the
> > >> absolute
> > >> loss God knows where -- 'buried in an abyss of oblivion', I believe it
> > >> was. The prefix 'af-' seemed to heighten the effect but, of course,
> > >> need not
> > >> be used.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, Grsartor@ wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Sorry to harp. Here is why I think that "fulhan" rather than
> > >> "filhada"
> > >> was
> > >> > > right:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The formula "it is written" occurs repeatedly in the New Testament,
> > >> and is
> > >> > > expressed by Wulfila as "gameliþ ist" or "gamelid ist". Example:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Matt 11:10 sa ist auk bi þanei gameliþ ist: sai, ik insandja aggilu
> > >> > > meinana faura þus, saei gamanweiþ wig þeinana faura þus.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > This is he of whom it is written,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "Behold, I send my messenger before thy face,
> > >> > > who shall prepare thy way before thee."
> > >> > >
> > >> > > There are many other examples, such as Mark 1:2, Mark 7:6, Luke
> > >> 2:23,
> > >> 3:4,
> > >> > > 4:4, 4:8.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It is clear, then, that to the question "where is the word of the
> > >> prophet"
> > >> > > a possible answer would be
> > >> > >
> > >> > > gameliþ [ist] in malmin - [it is] written in the sand,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Gothic, like English, using a past participle.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > And so, if the question is "where is our heritage", as in the poem
> > >> we
> > >> have
> > >> > > been concerned with, an answer like "buried in ..." would surely
> > >> contain
> > >> > > "buried" as a past participle, wherefore my belief that the
> > >> original
> > >> > > "fulhan" was right.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Now let us consider Edmund's counterexample:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "hwana wileith ei fraletau izwis? Barabban thau Jesu, saei haitada
> > >> > > Xristus?" (Mat. 27,17)
> > >> > > 'Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas or Jesus, who is
> > >> called
> > >> > > Christ?'
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Here, the present passive (haitada) may have been chosen because
> > >> the
> > >> sense
> > >> > > was that Christos is what people keep calling him. On the other
> > >> hand,
> > >> "it
> > >> > > is written" refers to something written once and for all. I think
> > >> the
> > >> > > latter example is more relevant to the answer for what has happened
> > >> to
> > >> our
> > >> > > heritage: it has been buried once and for all, rather than that
> > >> people
> > >> keep
> > >> > > burying it.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > A look at the original Greek perhaps supports my conjecture. For
> > >> > > corresponding to Edmund's quoted "saei haitada Xristus" it has "ton
> > >> legomenon
> > >> > > Christon", meaning "the one called Christ" - using for "called" a
> > >> present passive
> > >> > > participle, legomenon. On the other hand, "gamelid ist" translates
> > >> a
> > >> Greek
> > >> > > perfect, "gegraptai" - it has been written. I am told that the
> > >> Greek
> > >> > > perfect expresses an abiding consequence of an action, and Wulfila
> > >> chose to
> > >> > > represent this by the same construction as English uses. If our
> > >> heritage has
> > >> > > been buried, or lies buried, it is in another abiding state, and so
> > >> I
> > >> guess
> > >> > > that Greek would use a perfect, and Wulfila would have represented
> > >> this by
> > >> > > "fulhan ist".
> > >> > >
> > >> > > As for compounds of "filhan", Matt 8:22 uses "gafilhan" for burying
> > >> (leave
> > >> > > the dead to bury their dead). On the other hand, the suggested
> > >> "affilhan"
> > >> > > is used in Luke 10:21 to mean to hide something away.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Mark 14:8 uses "usfilh" to mean burial.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Luke 9:59 and 9:60 uses "usfilhan" for bury
> > >> > >
> > >> > > John 12:7 "gafilh" is burial.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Gerry T.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > In a message dated 06/07/2013 00:10:03 GMT Daylight Time,
> > >> > > edmundfairfax@ writes:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 1) "sijain" should be 'sijai'
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 2) There seems to be much confusion about the formation of the
> > >> Gothic
> > >> > > passive. A careful look in a good grammar, such as Braune's (5.1,
> > >> 2004), will
> > >> > > reveal that there is an inflected passive only in the present
> > >> indicative and
> > >> > > present subjunctive; in the preterite, a paraphrastic construction
> > >> is
> > >> used
> > >> > > consisting of a suitable preterite form of the auxiliary '
> > >> wisan/wairthan'
> > >> > > and the past participle of the main verb. I quote from the Braune:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "Das Passiv ist nur noch in einigen Formen des Indikativ und
> > >> Optativ
> > >> > > Praes. vorhanden...die fehlenden Passivformen werden umschrieben
> > >> durch
> > >> das Part.
> > >> > > Praet. mit dem entsprechenden Formen von 'wairthan' oder 'wisan',
> > >> z.B.
> > >> > > 'daupjada' "werde getauft' (Mk. 10,38), aber 'daupiths was' 'wurde
> > >> getauft'
> > >> > > (Mk. 1,19)."
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The present passive is formed by using the stem of the infinitive,
> > >> not
> > >> the
> > >> > > preterite. Thus, 'fulhada' is altogether incorrect.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It should also be noted that there is no perfect in Gothic. A
> > >> passive
> > >> can
> > >> > > have both an active or stative sense. As an example of the stative
> > >> sense,
> > >> > > consider the following line from the Gothic Bible:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "hwana wileith ei fraletau izwis? Barabban thau Jesu, saei haitada
> > >> > > Xristus?" (Mat. 27,17)
> > >> > > 'Whom do you want me to release to you? Barabbas or Jesus, who is
> > >> called
> > >> > > Christ?'
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Here 'haitada', the third-person singular present indicative
> > >> passive
> > >> of
> > >> > > the verb 'haitan', clearly has a stative rather than active sense;
> > >> the
> > >> > > subordinate clause could also be rendered as 'whose name is
> > >> Christ'.
> > >> Thus, it
> > >> > > does not follow that ''filhada' 'is buried' must have only an
> > >> active
> > >> sense,
> > >> > > and not a stative sense.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 3) The Goths employed the convention of scriptio continua
> > >> ('continuous
> > >> > > writing'), that is, writing without spaces between words (e.g.
> > >> > > "tobeornottobethatisthequestion"). But in modern editions, words
> > >> are
> > >> normally separated
> > >> > > by spaces, and prefixes and suffixes are written together with the
> > >> word they
> > >> > > belong to without the use of hyphens. Thus "af-grundithai" ought to
> > >> be
> > >> > > written 'afgrundithai'.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 4) The form "afilhada" lacks the 'f' of the prefix and should be
> > >> > > 'affilhada'.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, Grsartor@ wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Sorry to quibble at this stage, but:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > (i) I think "sijain" should be "sijai".
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > (ii) I think the original choice of "fulhan" for "(lying) buried"
> > >> was
> > >> > > > right. The form "filhada" means that a thing is buried in the
> > >> sense
> > >> that
> > >> > > someone
> > >> > > > is in the act or habit of burying it. Since the burial is
> > >> complete
> > >> you
> > >> > > > want the past participle, which is passive in sense. In the
> > >> modern
> > >> > > Germanic
> > >> > > > languages it is apparently active when used with "have" as an
> > >> > > auxiliary, but
> > >> > > > this construction I think was adopted from the Latin tongues, and
> > >> does
> > >> > > not
> > >> > > > appear in Gothic. In any case the true passive sense is brought
> > >> out
> > >> in
> > >> > > > modern German, or occasionally in English, e.g.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > The police have got the building surrounded (= the police have
> > >> > > surrounded
> > >> > > > the building).
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Gerry T.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > In a message dated 05/07/2013 21:19:17 GMT Daylight Time,
> > >> nodead4@
> > >> > > > writes:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Understood!
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Therefore, the poem finally is of this form:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Hvar ist othal unsar? / Hvar ist arbi unsar?
> > >> > > > Afilhada ufarmaudeins af-grundithai
> > >> > > > Hindana thizos ahwos, aiwis andéis
> > >> > > > Wulthag sijain fraweit.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I was using "heritage" as broadly meant, so I finally choose
> > >> "arby"
> > >> > > > instead of "othal" then. I guess you should be credited in the
> > >> > > recording booklet!!
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Many thanx to all.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --- In gothic-l at yahoogroups.com, "nodead4" <nodead4@> wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Hello all, I have composed a short poem Gothic language. I'm
> > >> not a
> > >> > > > linguist nor an expert, so there will be several mistakes. Some
> > >> help
> > >> is
> > >> > > > requested to make it right. (This is part of a song in english,
> > >> but
> > >> I
> > >> > > wanted to
> > >> > > > include this speech in a middle section).
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Hvar ist othal unsar? (where is our heritage?)
> > >> > > > > Fulhans ana ufar maudeis af-grunditha (buried into the abyss of
> > >> > > oblivion)
> > >> > > > > Thairh thata ahwa, aiws and�is (across the river, the end of
> > >> an
> > >> > > era)
> > >> > > > > Wolthags fraweit wisan. (Glorious revenge be)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Thanx in advance.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > ------------------------------------
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 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
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > ------------------------------------
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 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
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >> 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
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/gothic-l/attachments/20130728/ab0a8212/attachment.htm>
More information about the Gothic-l
mailing list