Goths, Naming and Ablaut

[David L. White]

> In a message dated 2/1/2001 5:55:23 AM, hwhatting at hotmail.com writes:

> << Just a suggestion:  We could have an o-Stem *gauta- (with o-grade of the
> root, a type widely attested for PIE and Gmc.), denoting the tribe, and an
> individualising derived n-stem *guton-, denoting the members of the tribe.>>

        I missed that before.  It sounds right to me.  The odds that the
Geats, who appear to have inhabited southern Sweden, and the Goths are _not_
connected, when both names must go back to /ghou/, would not appear to be
great.

> This raises a question about naming conventions.  If the Gothic name were
> taken from flood, river or the abstract pouring forth of genes, what would
> be the expected form that name would take?

> In OE, I believe the strong verb <ge:otan> (pour) takes an -o- as a past
> participle.

> Wouldn't naming from a verb form (the "flooded ones", the "poured" or
> "spouting" ones or however else this is translated) result in the use of
> the past participle?  And in that case, wouldn't we expect something like OE
> pp <goten>?  And if I am doing this right, in Gothic, the past participle of
> the strong verb <giotan> (pour) would be <gitans>?

        No, it would be /gutan-/, from earlier /gotan-/, before the
characteristically Gothic change of /o/ to /u/.

Dr. David L. White