Meaning of "Goth"

[X99Lynx at aol.com]

In a message dated 12/18/2000 11:48:13 PM, dlwhite at texas.net writes:

<< The word is sometimes connected with a word meaning 'flood' or
something of that sort (sometimes given as 'pour').  It occurs to me that
from an original /gout/ (ancestral to Germanic /gaut/), /gut/ might be a
zero-grade, such as would (since this is a strong verb) occur in past
participles (like "flooded").   A zero-grade version is, by the way,
generally taken to be the ancestor of modern English "gut", though the
semantics are unclear (to me).  The full o-grade might have meant "flood",
so that the two variants might go back to a difference of opinion as to
whether the Goths were being called in effect "the flood people" or "the
flooded people".   As for why they would be called anything of the sort, I
vaguely recall that sea-levels in the general vicinity were rising at about
the time in question. >>

Thank you, Dr. White, for the help.

It was the Cimbri, I believe, who explained their invasions into Roman
territory in the late BC as the result of a flood that overcame their dikes
and forced them to leave home.  Perhaps there is some relation.

The original meaning of the word "Goth" is confused by many factors, not the
least by the assumption that the word is Germanic.  The common names for many
groups is in fact the ones applied by outsiders (e.g., "Greek", "Apache",
"Basque"), so it is never clear with names of obscure origins whether the
name was in fact indigenous.

There is a weak verb <us-gutan> recorded in Ulfila that means 'pour out' and
would appear to have some connection with such words as 'gutter'.   But in
the earliest attested writings, we already see <Gu<thorn>> as 'God'; plural,
<guda>.   So the idea that the 'pour' reference may be to religious libations
rather than floods or waterways is there from the start, if the name has its
roots in Gothic.

In a message dated 12/14/2000 3:18:28 AM, mcv at wxs.nl wrote: <<The only
attested Gothic form is <Gut-Tiuda> "Gothia".>>  I can't for the life of me
find the source for this attestation though it is often mentioned.  However,
it's worth noting that in Ulfila, <<thorn>iuda> is often used to refer to
"heathens" or "Gentiles" and has a load of similar terms in Greek that refer
to certain kinds of non-Christian religious worship (e.g., <Thuiades>,
whorshippers at the Dionysian festival of <Thuia>).  On its face, however,
<Gut-Tiuda> appears to mean "God-people", certainly not an unusual
self-appelation for people in history who have felt a certain special
connection to the Deity, be they Israelites or Mormons.  But I do not know if
this attested form referred to pre-Christian or Christian Goths.

One question that all of this raises is how this word "Goth" works with a
regular <PIE development?  If the word were <gut> in east Germanic, than what
transformations should it have gone through.  I have for example this from
Lehrman:  "Initial position: Gk anser (for hanser) Goth. gans, OHG kans --- Gk
khéoth (fundo), Gk khutós (fusus) Goth. giutan, OHG kiozan --- Gk khol*,
ON gall, OHG kalla --- Gk khthés, heri, hesternus, Goth. gistra, OHG këstar
--- Gk khórtos, hortus, gards, OHG karto --- hostis (peregrinus) gasts, kast
--- homo, Goth. guma, OHG komo --- Gk khth*n like khthés for khés for
khóm, cf. khamái, humi, humus; to be compared with Goth. gauï, OHG kouwi,
kou--- "

 Note in the above that the <g-> is consistently unique to Gothic. If "Goth"
is Gothic, shouldn't we expect the kind of development seen in the examples
given above?

Regards,
Steve Long