9,167
edits
Bpnjohnson (talk | contribs) m (→Adjectives) |
Bpnjohnson (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Griutungi is an East Germanic language which was the ancestor of [[Valthungian]]. It was contemporaneous and likely mutually intelligible with Gothic. There was no written record of Griutungi, aside from a few possible examples written in the Gothic alphabet which may have been attributed to Gothic instead. It has been reconstructed with a very similar phonology: | Griutungi is an East Germanic language which was the ancestor of [[Valthungian]]. It was contemporaneous and likely mutually intelligible with Gothic. There was no written record of Griutungi, aside from a few possible examples written in the Gothic alphabet which may have been attributed to Gothic instead. It has been reconstructed with a very similar phonology: | ||
{{ | {{Bpnjohnson.info|Griutungi|Grēwtungiskō, Gutiskō|ˈɡreːw.tʊŋ.ɡɪs.koː, ˈɡu.tɪs.koː|2018|Northern Italy, ca. 400ᴀᴅ|Indo-European|Indo-European|Germanic|East Germanic||||||}} | ||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
| | |||
}} | |||
==Comparison of Gothic and Griutungi Orthography== | ==Comparison of Gothic and Griutungi Orthography== | ||
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" | {| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" | ||
Line 313: | Line 284: | ||
===Prepositions=== | ===Prepositions=== | ||
* The Germanic preposition ''*tô'' remains in Griutungi as ''*tō'', while in Gothic it inexplicably – despite several conflicting theories, all of which seem like a bit of a stretch – became ''du''; Griutungi seems to have also had ''*du'', used in a benefactive sense, though it was likely borrowed from Gothic proper sometime in the fifth or sixth century while the two languages were still fairly mutually intelligible. | * The Germanic preposition ''*tô'' remains in Griutungi as ''*tō'', while in Gothic it inexplicably – despite several conflicting theories, all of which seem like a bit of a stretch – became ''du''; Griutungi seems to have also had ''*du'', used in a benefactive sense, though it was likely borrowed from Gothic proper sometime in the fifth or sixth century while the two languages were still fairly mutually intelligible. | ||
* The Germanic preposition ''*eup'' – which likely only survived in East Germanic, as all other Germanic languages are descended from the zero-grade form ''*upp'' – became ''iup'' in Gothic, but appears to have gone through some sort of back-formation or possible borrowing in Griutungi resulting in ''*iukw''. This may have happened later, before Old Valthungian proper where it is attested as ''gyivqv'' and ''jivku'', but it is more likely that this occurred before /kʷ/ became /kw/, somewhere around the third or fourth century. | |||
===Nouns=== | ===Nouns=== | ||
Line 326: | Line 298: | ||
===Differences Likely Due to Later Changes=== | ===Differences Likely Due to Later Changes=== | ||
* The final ''–t'' of the neuter interrogative pronoun (‘what’) was lost in Gothic, likely due to Coronal Consonant Deletion, but persists in [[Valthungian]], though it is possible that ''–t'' was lost initially and then later | * The final ''–t'' of the neuter interrogative pronoun (‘what’) was lost in Gothic, likely due to Coronal Consonant Deletion, but persists in [[Valthungian]], though it is possible that ''–t'' was lost initially and then later restored by analogy with other neuter nominative and accusative pronouns, determiners, and adjectives (e.g. ''it'', ''þat'', ''hit'', ''gōdat'', &c.) | ||
* Weak verbs in [[Valthungian]] show no trace of the d-reduplication that occurs in Gothic in the past tenses (e.g. Gothic ''kambidēdun'' ‘they combed’ versus Griutungi ''kambidun''). This is possibly | * Weak verbs in [[Valthungian]] show no trace of the d-reduplication that occurs in Gothic in the past tenses (e.g. Gothic ''kambidēdun'' ‘they combed’ versus Griutungi *''kambidun''). This is possibly ascribed to paradigmatic levelling, though it is likely that it was never manifested in the same manner that it was in Gothic. | ||
* Gothic has a small class of feminine nouns (sometimes called “i/ō-stems”) which follow the i-stem paradigm in the singular and the ō-stem in the plural. These nouns exclusively follow the i-stem in Valthungian. E.g. Gothic ''haims'', plural ''haimōs'', compared to Griutungi *''hǣms'', *''hǣmīs''. | * Gothic has a small class of feminine nouns (sometimes called “i/ō-stems”) which follow the i-stem paradigm in the singular and the ō-stem in the plural. These nouns exclusively follow the i-stem in Valthungian. E.g. Gothic ''haims'', plural ''haimōs'', compared to Griutungi *''hǣms'', *''hǣmīs''. | ||
* The genitive singular of feminine i- and ō-stem nouns and adjectives in Valthungian is ''–is'' instead of the expected ''**–as'' (e.g. Gothic ''qēnais'' ‘wife’s’, ''gibōs'' ‘gift’s’, but [[Valthungian]] ''kwēnis'', ''givis'', suggesting a Griutungi ''*kwēnis'' and ''*gibis''). This may be partially due to paradigmatic levelling, but it is assumed that at least the feminine i-stem paradigm in Griutungi was identical to the masculine in all cases except for the dative. | * The genitive singular of feminine i- and ō-stem nouns and adjectives in Valthungian is ''–is'' instead of the expected ''**–as'' (e.g. Gothic ''qēnais'' ‘wife’s’, ''gibōs'' ‘gift’s’, but [[Valthungian]] ''kwēnis'', ''givis'', suggesting a Griutungi ''*kwēnis'' and ''*gibis''). This may be partially due to paradigmatic levelling, but it is assumed that at least the feminine i-stem paradigm in Griutungi was identical to the masculine in all cases except for the dative. | ||
* Gothic shows an alternation in the comparative and superlative of adjectives where some take an ''ō-'' ending and other take ''i-''. Valthungian exclusively takes ''i-'' for comparison. It is unknown whether Griutungi used both forms. | * Gothic shows an alternation in the comparative and superlative of adjectives where some take an ''ō-'' ending and other take ''i-''. Valthungian exclusively takes ''i-'' for comparison. It is unknown whether Griutungi used both forms. | ||
* The numbers 70, 80, and 90 in Gothic took a different ‘tens’ form which does not appear in [[Valthungian]], though likely due to later analogy. Gothic ''sibuntēhund'' ‘70’, ''ahtautēhund'' ‘80’, ''niuntēhund'' ‘90’, but Griutungi *''sibuntigjus'', *''ahtǭtigjus'', *''niuntigjus''; Valthungian ''sivuntiǧis'', ''ātatiǧis'', ''njuntiǧis''. | * The numbers 70, 80, and 90 in Gothic took a different ‘tens’ form which does not appear in [[Valthungian]], though likely due to later analogy. Gothic ''sibuntēhund'' ‘70’, ''ahtautēhund'' ‘80’, ''niuntēhund'' ‘90’, but Griutungi *''sibuntigjus'', *''ahtǭtigjus'', *''niuntigjus''; Valthungian ''sivuntiǧis'', ''ātatiǧis'', ''njuntiǧis''. | ||
* [[Valthungian]] also has a curious “trial distributive,” ''þrǣ'', | * [[Valthungian]] also has a curious “trial distributive,” ''þrǣ'', analogous to the dual ''bǣ'' (Gothic ''bai''), though this is likely an innovation to the language well after Gothic times, rather than evidence of a Griutungi ''*þrǣ''. |