Talk:Crimean Gothic

vocabulary in Busbecq's letter:

[305]
19       Broe. Panis.
20       Plut. Sanguis.
21       Stul. Sedes.
22       Hus. Domus.
23       Wingart. Vitis.
24       Reghen. Pluvia.
25       Bruder. Frater.
26       Schvveſter. Soror.
27       Alt. Senex.
28       Wintch. Ventus.
29       Siluir. Argentum.
30       Goltz. Aurum. 

[306]

1       Kor. Triticum.
2       Salt. Sal.
3       Fiſct. Piſcis.
4       Hoef. Caput.
5       Thurn. Porta.
6       Stein. Stella.
7       Sune. Sol.
8       Mine. Luna.
9       Tag. Dies.
10       Oeghene. Oculi.
11       Bars. Barba.
12       Handa. Manus.
13       Boga. Arcus.
14       Miera. Formica.
15       Rinck. ſiue.
16       Ringo. Annulus.
17       Brunna. Fons.
18       Waghen. Currus.
19       Apel. Pomum.
20       Schietê. Mittere ſagittâ.
21       Schlipen. Dormire.
22       Kommen. Venire.
23       Singhen. Canere.
24       Lachen. Ridere.
25       Eriten. Flere.
26       Geen. Ire.
27       Breen. Aſſare.
28       Schvvalth. Mors.
29    Knauen tag erat illi Bonus dies: Knauen
30    bonum dicebat, et pleraque alia cum no/ſtra 

[307]
1       Kor. Triticum.
2       Salt. Sal.
3       Fiſct. Piſcis.
4       Hoef. Caput.
5       Thurn. Porta.
6       Stein. Stella.
7       Sune. Sol.
8       Mine. Luna.
9       Tag. Dies.
10       Oeghene. Oculi.
11       Bars. Barba.
12       Handa. Manus.
13       Boga. Arcus.
14       Miera. Formica.
15       Rinck. ſiue.
16       Ringo. Annulus.
17       Brunna. Fons.
18       Waghen. Currus.
19       Apel. Pomum.
20       Schietê. Mittere ſagittâ.
21       Schlipen. Dormire.
22       Kommen. Venire.
23       Singhen. Canere.
24       Lachen. Ridere.
25       Eriten. Flere.
26       Geen. Ire.
27       Breen. Aſſare.
28       Schvvalth. Mors.
29    Knauen tag erat illi Bonus dies: Knauen
30    bonum dicebat, et pleraque alia cum no/ſtra 

[308] 
1    Iuſſus ita numerabat. Ita, tua, tria,
2    fyder, fyuf, ſeis, ſeuene, prorſus, ut nos
3    Flandri. Nam vos Brabanti, qui vos Ger/manice
4    loqui factis, hic magnifice vos ef/ferre,
5    et nos ſoletis habere deriſui, ac ſi
6    iſtam vocem pronunciemus rancidius, quam
7    vos Seuenffertis. Proſequebatur deinde,
8    Athenyne, thiine, thiinita, thunetua, thu/netria,
9    etc. Viginti dicebat ſtega, triginta
10    treithyen, quadraginta furdeithien, centum
11    ſada, hazer mille. Quin etiam cantilenam
12    eius linguæ recitabat, cuius initium erat
13    hujuſmodi:
14       Wara Wara ingdolou:
15       Scu te gira Galizu.
16       Hœmiſclep dorbiza ea.

sada, hazer?

does that make it a Satem language? ;) dab (ᛏ) 17:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

more interestingly, is there a translation to the song fragment?

Wara Wara ingdolou:
Scu te gira Galizu.
Hoemisclep dorbiza ea.

dab (ᛏ) 17:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

No. Rursus 14:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Appears CG borrowed several numerals. Busbecq didn't give a translation for the song lyrics, frustating the tokhes off modern scholars left with bare nothing else to analyze the syntax of the language. 惑乱 分からん 13:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

By all appearances, sada and hazer are borrowings from (Scythian/Sarmatian/)Alanic (compare Ossetic). I remember reading that the song has been interpreted as Turkic, which sounds anything but far-fetched, but I can't remember where at the moment. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Austrian-Gothic connection

I have heard the storry from a hungarian count that some of the gothic may have come to middle europe with them and where settelt together with jews ( chasars ?) on the eastern border of hungary, today the middle part of Lower Austria and Styria. It would explain why the bavarian colonialisation in this area was going so smoothly without wars. The Austrian would than be a bavarian gothic mixture and the background of jiddisch ,witch i as Austrian can understand very easely, would rather be gothic and not german, as the Chasar inhabited the former gothic areas. It would explain too, why their is no genetical evidenz of the chasars in the jewish genes.

Thinking of this a prooved my own Austrian dialect to the gothic words and i must say that 60 % is very close some words only exist in Austrian. So ist the Austrian word for speaking angrily "meutern" witch is close to the gothic word of speaking. I am not a linguist, but I dont know any german dialect witch uses this word like this. The concept of the articels is close to the Austrian dialect witch use "te" (e like ending) for women and plural and "tea" (a like bar )for man. All other wordforms can at least exist in forms of the Austrian dialect.

J.

Never heard it before, it sounds dubious, and without any linguistic background to back it up, it'd anyway classify as original research. 惑乱 分からん 01:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Meutern sounds similar to English "mutter" of roughly similar meaning, btw. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 00:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

East Goths: The lost Swedes of Russia and the Ukraine

The East Gothic/Crimean Gothic language may been extinct for two centuries, until recent times has ethnic anthropology accepted the idea of East Goths survived well into the 20th century. The question of how the Estgotes came to Eastern Europe and thrived with their language, a relic of the once-existent East Gothic tribes of the 1000's AD, would remain unknown and theorized until the answer is discovered.

There was speculation of the "lost Swedes" of western Ukraine (as well in Estonia, Belarus, Russia and the Crimea under Greek rule) are direct descendants of the Vikings or Scandinavians whom managed to retain a separate ethnocultural identity, but in small villages and isolated from the Slavic linguistic majority until the late 1800's. In Gotland, there are Lutheran church bells that actually came from the Ukraine in 1913 or 1914 serves as a reminder of a people whom returned to their ancestral homeland.

I've read the National Geographic August 1973 article Gotland, Sweden's treasure island had a brief mention of a few thousand Gotlander Swedes arrived to their "homeland" from the former USSR in the 1920's. In the 1921 Soviet census, about 900 Swedish-Russians (or Ukrainians) lived in one village, Gammalsvenskbi (Gamelsvinsk) became abandoned in World Wars I and II, when the Soviets expelled the "German" inhabitants who happened to be Swedish-speaking of East Gothic descent.

Gammalsvenskbi was settled in 1780 by a small wave of "Estegote" settlers from Estonia and northwest Russia. Due to ethnic conflict in the 19th and early 20th century, the village's residents disliked introducing themselves to their Russian and Ukrainian neighbors, whom would call them "bloody Germans". But when they say "I'm an Estgote Swede", they get insults on how the great Russians defeated King Charles VIII in the battle of Poltava and threatened the "barbarian Goths" to leave the country.

If any remnants of Estgotes, Swedish-Russians and Crimea Goths are around in the 21st century may get never known, but their language is well documented and preserved in writing for research in Crimean Gothic myths, stories and notes on their daily lives. The Soviet Union's policy of history denial and misinformation of ethnic and national minorities, and the "Russification" of Tsarist Russia followed by an equally intolerant "Sovietization" forced an doctrine of assimilation that killed many languages and ethnic identities across the large country, the Crimean Goths were the policy's victims. + 63.3.14.1 18:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This seems like a mixup of goths and gutar. 惑乱 分からん 13:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. The Swedes in Ukraine, many of whom emigrated to Gotland, have no connection to the Crimean Goths. Another language, another people and another history. While the text by the user is of interest regarding the Gammelsvenskby, it has no relevance whatsoever to this article. JdeJ 00:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Or possibly a mixup of goths and geats. The Charles that the Russians knocked the sh*t out of in the battle of Poltava, was more probably Charles XII, an infamous Swedish king that was shot to death at the battle at Fredriksten ... to the relief of many peoples, including the Swedes themselves. Said: Rursus ☻ 19:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

In which case, JdeJ's point remain valid. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 11:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

crimean gothic as busbecq recorded, clearly much more similar to continental germanic dialects than swedish. so i don't think they are swedes. i am crimean tatar though never lived in crimea. but my family told about many different ethnicities in crimea, including volga germans though not goths or any unidentified group which could be them. most likely, crimean goths were assimilated into other ethnicities before 19th. century. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.238.204.165 (talk) 04:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Writing system?

Should we really mention an alphabet? 1st, it seems uncertain that Goths would write in runes at that time, 2nd, there's no attested (native) Crimean Gothic writing, anyway, so the information seems to be pure speculation. By checking out relevant Wikipedia articles, it seems Arabic writing was common in the area at the time, so it doesn't seem too improbable guessing that Crimean Gothic would occasionally be written in that script. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 07:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

People tended (even into the 20th century) to use alphabets according to their religious affiliation. Thus Turkish-speaking Christians used the Greek (if Greek Orthodox) or Armenian (if Armenian Orthodox) alphabets even when writing Turkish. Similarly, Jews used the Hebrew alphabet even when writing German, Spanish, Arabic (ultimately incorporating Hebrew grammar and vocabulary and leading to Yiddish, Ladino, and Judeo-Arabic, among others). It is very unlikely that Christian Crimean Goths wrote in the Arabic alphabet. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I think Busbecq related to the Crimean Goths as illiterate. Sadly. Said: Rursus ☻ 19:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Aah. That's another possibility. Should be easy to find a citation for, if somebody knows Latin. Anyway, my main point was that an explicitly mentiond alphabet wasn't necessary, particularly if the only source claims the people to be illiterate. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 11:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

busbecq also mentioned, the goth man he encountered wasn't very good at his native tongue and speaks greek better. a greek man who was with him knows gothic better. probably, crimean goths were bilingual and lived in interaction with greek co-religionists. so they probably write with greek letters if they write at all in their native tongue. most likely they used greek as literary language. it is a probablity that they may eventually assimilated to crimean greeks or urums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.238.204.165 (talk) 04:09, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The article now mentions Biblical Gothic inscriptions found in Mangup, Crimea. The reference given is in Russian or German, which I can't read. I don't know if the reference links these inscriptions to later Crimean Gothic. --Error (talk) 18:49, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

@Error: I have looked up the paper in German[1]. The authors describe the language in these inscriptions as essentially the same as classical Biblical Gothic. They do not even attempt to make a link to the language recorded by Busbecq. Their main point is that a Gothic literary tradition apparently survived among the Gothic population of Crimea until at least the 9/10th century (based on their dating of the text). Up to now, consensus has been that the vernacular of the Crimean Goths only served as a spoken language, while Greek was their sole literary language.

So actually, this material should be mainly discussed in Gothic language, and only referenced as background information here. I don't know much about Gothic, so maybe we should start a discussion in the talk page of Gothic language about whether the research of Korobov and Vinogradov is due for detailed inclusion there per WP:EXCEPTIONAL. As of now, there is just a very brief mention in the section Gothic_language#History_and_evidence. –Austronesier (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum is a very respected and good journal - I think it satisfies any claims that might be made about being "exceptional" - however the information is better discussed at Gothic language.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Then we can't affirm anything about the Crimean Gothic writing system. Busbecq wrote in the Latin alphabet with his own idiosyncrasies and his informants were very familiar with Greek. The purported Harfindel was written in Hebrew. We don't know if the language was ever written outside the travellers accounts. --Error (talk) 00:04, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Stub class

I assess this article to the stub level. I think the article contains all necessary to be rised to the start level, except proper headings to make it easy to read. If you disagree, then edit the {{WikiProject Languages|class=start}} uppermost on this page to your liking. Said: Rursus (☻) 09:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Or add headings and improve the article to your liking. Said: Rursus (☻) 09:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

There is very little attestation of the language, itself. Except for a vocabulary listing, how much more could be added without refraining to guesswork? (Of course, we could always source others' guesswork.) 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Razn

What's the source for "razn" being loaned from Crimean Tatar? Razn is indeed found in Wulfila's Gothic: [2] [3] 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, razn is considered an inherited Germanic word, compare Old Icelandic rann with the same meaning. The entire paragraph is a highly dubious and wholly unsourced IP addition of no discernible merit (to phrase it politely). It seems unsalvageable given that the IP is not likely to return and provide a source (and just in the event they should really return after all, they can simply enter the information anew, or complain on the talk page; thanks to the revision history, nothing is lost anyway, after all). I've gone and removed it. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Or would the editor mean that razn has been loaned into Crimean Tatar? Anyway, it would probably need sourcing, anyhow. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

i know crimean tatar and i didn't heard a word like "razn". it is inompatible with kypchak phonetics and even if loaned from gothic, it would have transformed into another vocalization. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.238.204.165 (talk) 04:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

'Malthata' and its cognates

In the second table, no Dutch or German cognates are listed for malthata, 'said'. Malthata looks remarkably similar to the first and third person singular preterite of the verb melden, "to announce", which appears as meldete in German and as meldde in Dutch. Are there any specific reasons why these forms are not listed? Iblardi (talk) 02:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

It wouldn't do any harm to recheck these cognates, but I think the answer to this specific question is that melden is not a cognate - Kluge gives the source as a WGmc root *meld-, which cannot be cognate with a Gothic form in -th-. --Pfold (talk) 11:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I now see that malthata is usually linked to Gothic mathljan. Iblardi (talk) 21:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

In the oldest Dutch sentence to date; maltho thi afro lito, maltho is the primordial form of modern Dutch melden. I don't see why a West Germanic root ending in -d (note its apparent absence in some Old Dutch conjugations) cannot share an earlier form with an East Germanic root ending in -th. Kleinsma80 (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The ONW has maltho, malthon derived from *mathlon. Melden is not mentioned.[4] Iblardi (talk) 21:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

In any case then, at least malthata and maltho/mathlon seem to be cognates. "modern lemma" is given as malden, though. Kleinsma80 (talk) 15:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The German cognate also has -d-, not the -t- which you'd expect from earlier -d- because of the High German consonant shift. So German actually requires original -þ- and excludes original -d- as a possibility. CodeCat (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The German word is derived from meld- in all dictionaries, never melþ--. And there's at least one other Old High German word that has -ld- for expected -lt-: sculd from PG *skuldi-, which is only attested in this form. This is due probably due to early irregular revoicing triggered by the preceding liquid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.206.132.131 (talk) 13:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Influence of Busbecq's native language/dialect

Concerning the statement that "there is the possibility that Busbecq's transcription was influenced by his own language" (which has gone unsourced thus far), it is probably more accurate to speak of Flemish (as a Dutch dialect) rather than Dutch in general. This is based on the results of a simple Google Book search (I know, an imperfect method):

• "Some CG forms could have been influenced by either German or Netherlandic orthography" (MacDonald Stearns, Crimean gothic. Analysis and etymology of the corpus (1978))[5]
• "Flemish or German"; although the term "néerlandais" is also used, the article concentrates especially on the phonetics of the region Busbecq came from (Hugo Ryckeboer, "Le flamand de Busbecq et ses interférence avec le gotique de crimée", in: André Rousseau (ed.), Sur les traces de Busbecq et du gotique (1991), p. 167-178)[6]

The author notes that the current spellings, to be sure, are based on a printed edition, not on Busbecq's original handwriting, which is not extant.

• "the interpretation of Busbecq's spelling conventions is difficult, as he uses Flemish and German orthographic conventions" (Jonathan West, in Encyclopedia of the Languages of Europe (2000), p. 107)[7]

Also note that Busbecq makes a point of opposing his own Flemish dialect to Brabantian here: [8], stating that Crimean Gothic seuene corresponds exactly to his own Flemish seuene, whereas they, the allegedly more "Germanic" Brabantians, who use to ridiculize the Flemish for their odd forms, have seuen.

• Iblardi (talk) 10:34, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The material on the dificulties of interpreting B's account is summarised from Stearns. --Pfold (talk) 12:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Without presuming and assuming too much, the problem is as followed. Busbeke was an educated man who would have commanded multiple languages. The idea that his native language/dialect might have influenced his transcriptions of Crimean Gothic, is possible and suggested as a possibility by the sources above. However the assumption that Busbake would have been able to speak Latin and French but would only be able to express himself in West Flemish natively ... is quite far fetched in my opinion. He would have also been able to speak the 'High Dutch'/cultuurtaal of his age; which was highly influenced by Western Brabantian. Ask yourself the question: If I'd encounter a foreign language and sought to describe it (for 'the people at home')... would I use my native dialect or use the standard form?

In truth, we cannot be sure if he based his transcriptions on contemporary West-Flemish, High Brabantian, or a mix of both. Therefore, it is most accurate (or in any case, safe) to state that his transcriptions might have been influenced by Dutch; which covers all possibilities, as opposed to specifying which we cannot (ever) know for sure. G.Burggraaf (talk) 15:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

All this would be fair enough if it were up to us to decide this, but it isn't -our job is to reflect the literature. The statement at issue is taken directly from Stearns, as far as I remember. You may personally believe Stearns can't be right, for the reasons you've given, but none of us here has the standing to alter it on that basis - second guessing one of the few experts on the subject on the basis of what "must have been" is not our job. The only basis for changing "Flemish" to "Dutch" here is if you can show that the article's statement does not accurately represent the preponderant view in the scholarship. --Pfold (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

From the literature provided above, I cannot know with certainty what is meant with 'Flemish'. Is it West-Flemish? East-Flemish? West- + East-Flemish? Southern Dutch? Dutch? It is impossible, at least not with the current sources. To use Dutch, is the safest solution. G.Burggraaf (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The correct solution is to use the terms found in the literature, anything else is presumption. And if you think "Flemish" is too non-specific, "Dutch" is rather obviosuly even more so! --22:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Translations

To CodeCat: Why did you revert my translations? I made them clearer and more correct. I'm also a speaker of Swedish so I know a thing or two about my language. --Shandris^{the azylean} 14:49, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Geen

This is a bit muddled, but it seems that the two different roots for "go, walk" aren't etymologically related (despite similarities in appearance); Gmc. *gangan (or similar) could be derived from PIE *ghengh- (step), while W. Gmc *gaian is derived from PIE *ghe- (release, let go). The Scandinavian form "gå" seems to have been borrowed from Middle Low German, and it's likely that "geen" would come from a West Germanic source, as well. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 09:30, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Two alternatives

Quote: “There are two alternative solutions: that Crimean Gothic presents a separate branch of East Germanic, distinct from Ulfilas' Gothic; or that Crimean Gothic is descended from the dialect of West Germanic settlers who migrated to the Crimea in the early Middle Ages and whose language was subsequently influenced by Gothic.”

First of all: It's quite likely that Crimean Gothic would not have developed from Wulfila's dialect. It could be considered a coincidence if it had. BUT: What is the evidence for this? Just because he wrote reghen and schvvester? And vvurt? This is no proof for anything. It can easily be influenced by German or Dutch. And even if not: Maybe -i- had a lowered pronunciation that could be heard as [e]. And maybe vaurt was later shifted back to vurt. Who knows? No one knows. There dozens of possibilities, not two alternatives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.206.132.131 (talk) 13:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

PS: The introduction from Austin University says this: The words so transmitted are similar enough to those of the Biblical Gothic (BG) of Wulfila's translation that scholars are in general agreement that the language in question is indeed Gothic, but there are some differences which suggest it may not be the later surviving form of BG itself. They say “suggest that it may not”. Much different from what this Wikipedia article says. Quote: "it is accepted that Crimean Gothic is not a descendant of Biblical Gothic." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.206.132.131 (talk) 14:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Crimean Gothic "malthata" (said) still has cognates in German and Netherlandish

The Crimean Gothic verb form 'malthata' (said) is cognate to German 'meldete' as well as Netherlandish 'meldde' from the verb 'melden' meaning to tell or to report. This verb occurs in a more ancient form in a well known Salian Frankish fragment from the Lex Salica "Maltho thi afrio lito."; Salian Frankish is considered to be a kind of "Old Dutch".Amand Keultjes (talk) 01:12, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

They seem to be false cognates. See the earlier discussion on this page, the ONW entry on malthon (from ma(t)hal, "gerechtsplaats") and the article on melden (from meldō-, "aangifte, verraad") in Philippa et al. Iblardi (talk) 06:46, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry but I am slightly annoyed because of this salon science opinion. The etymologiebank.nl article clearly show that the position of the d/th is arbitrary; the d/th can even completely disappear. I have taken the effort to look more closely to the associated Balto-Slavic cognate words. I have found an etymological Lithuanian article on the mentioned Lithuanian word maldýti, which shows that the Balto-Slavic language group the position of the 'd' before or after the 'l' can change and that the 'd' can disappear as well. Common sense actually already does not leave any doubt beforehand, as basically 'meld' en 'malth' are as cognate as possibly can be and are almost impossible candidates for false cognates since their meanings are almost identical as well.

PS I am not going to start up an editing war: there are too many wrong and missed etymologies anyhow! (For instance Holland<Holtland, where it is next to Zeeland: Halland and Seeland are neighbouring regions around Copenhagen.) Amand Keultjes (talk) 23:13, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point: no amount of argument (and certainly no appeal to "common sense"!) can replace the need for an authoritative source in support of your claim. Kluge's very substantial entry on melden, for example, discusses the the uncertainties of its etymology in detail, but does not even mention any root with th or a cognate in Gothic. Find a source - anything else is a waste of time. --Pfold (talk) 10:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

East Germanic at lede?

I think we shouldn't be directly identifying Crimean Gothic as an East Germanic language in the lede as it is contested by numerous authors as explained in Classification section. --Gogolplex (talk) 22:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

The found texts from Crimea

The more recently discovered Gothic graffiti from Crimea do not appear to be the same language as "Crimean Gothic," but rather new examples of Bible Gothic. Shouldn't they be mentioned over there rather than here? Pfold, do you have an opinion?--Ermenrich (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Not off-hand as I haven't looked at the literature on this as yet. But I would say that it should be on the main Gothic page by default - until there's a clear consensus to the contrary. --Pfold (talk) 13:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

It strikes me that there's enough information here that they could possible be there own short article (since that level of detail doesn't belong on the main Gothic article). But given the description as "imitating" Bible Gothic, the difference in age, etc., I don't think it belongs here.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:58, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

I've been trying to look into this; most stuff on Google Scholar that mentions them is written by the original discovers, who do identify the find as The graffiti, datable to between about 850 and the end of the 10th century, exhibit words in Gothic known from Wulfila’s Bible translation, the script used being an archaic variant of Wulfila’s alphabet and the only specimen of this alphabet attested outside Pannonia and Italy. [9]. Via de Gruyter online, I did find:

1) this encyclopedia article though that discusses them in the context of Crimean Gothic [10]: In jüngerer Zeit sind Zeugnisse des (Krim-)got. aufgetaucht, die in die Zeit zwischen 850 und 1000 datiert werden (Korobov/Vinogradov 2016; Vinogradov/Korobov 2015; Vinogradov/Korobov 2018). Fünf got. Graffiti, die in einer frühbyzantinischen Kathedrale in Mangup-Kale auf zwei Spolien geritzt wurden, weisen Wörter auf, die auch aus Wulfilas Bibelübersetzung bekannt sind. Diese Inschriften belegen ein Überleben der got. Sprache auf der Bergkrim bis ins 9. oder 10. Jh. in Koexistenz mit dem Griech. Da keine wesentlichen Unterschiede zwischen der Sprache der Mangup-Graffiti und der got. Bibel erkennbar sind, ist Kontinuität anzunehmen, zumindest im Hinblick auf dieses in religiösen Kontexten verwendetes Idiom. Die mögliche Vokalkürzung von got. wei > wi in den Inschriften I.2 und I.4 (wina[gards] 'Weingarten' und wi[hins]) 'Priester', und die Vereinfachung des Konsonantenclusters -rht - > -rt- in der Genitivform frawaurtis (got. frawaúrhts 'sündig') können nicht zweifelsfrei als Veränderungen im Lautstand der Sprache interpretiert werden.

2) this article comparing Crimean and Bible Gothic [11]: In what amounts to no less than sensational new evidence, significant light has now been shed on these two important questions. In a recently published paper (2016) the Russian scholars Maksim Korobov and Andrei Vinogradov present five newly dis-covered Gothic graffiti scratched on two reused fragments from an early Byzantine cornice from the basilica of the Crimean rock town-stronghold of Mangup (see map in Kokowski 2013, p. 76), graffiti which for archaeological and other reasons may safely be dated to between c. 850 AD and the beginning of the 10th century. Nearly all the words evidenced by the five graffiti are familiar to us from what is extant of Wulfila’s Bible translation. The longest of the Mangup texts contains a quotation from Psalms 77:13–14 (76:14–15 in the Hebrew Bible), an Old Testament passage not recorded else-where in Biblical Gothic. As for the remaining graffiti, two represent Byzantine invo-cations, one is perhaps a commemoration with a formula of modesty, and one has just barely survived. The script used is an archaic variant of Wulfila’s alphabet, and this is the first and only attestation of this alphabet outside Pannonia and Italy (where Wulfila’s script barely survived the middle of the 6th century). The five graffiti suggest that in the second half of the 9th century Gothic served not just as a spoken medium in the Crimea but as a written one as well (in diglossia with Greek). The evidence available does not show any marked differences between the idiom of the five Mangup texts and Wulfila’s Biblical Gothic. (The paper later uses the inscriptions to argue for the East Germanic affiliation of Crimean Gothic).

It seems that, due to their location, the graffiti are relevant to the debates of Crimean Gothic without being Crimean Gothic themselves. All relevant papers seem to identify the graffiti as in the Bible Gothic language.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:50, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the mention - it will probably come back (not with the text of the graffiti) when I add a section on the history of the language.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

The Russian refs which I added a while back (and which are currently not in the article) said Crimean Gothic. Both are academic or sci-pop sources. Ymblanter (talk) 06:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

I’ve added an English version of the paper that says it’s Biblical Gothic. It’s certainly not the same language as this one here, even if it’s related to it as an earlier stage.—Ermenrich (talk) 12:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

malthata

Ermenrich you are surely going to be better informed than me but it is surprising that "malthata" is not being associated with this extremely similar looking word *melþōdā which is also close in meaning [[12]. I can see how that connecting it to *maþlijaną is good for the Gothic connection argument but I can't see who made that proposal or whether it was ever doubted. If you have a source handy it might be good to insert it. Interesting. Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, they’re actually two separate roots. Melden is from this root [13] whereas the malthata root is related to “Gemahl” (spouse) [14]. The etymological dictionary here doesn’t mention any connection between the two roots.—Ermenrich (talk) 15:21, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Yep, I looked it up, but I am wondering why one the one which superficially looks the same is not the proposed origin of the Crimean word, and that made me wonder what sort of literature there is about those proposals we are giving. If that's not something you have to hand then no problem, but it looked strange at first sight.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I think the "melden" root isn't found in Gothic - but you're right, that could be a problem. I think the article in general needs quite a bit of work - most is currently uncited. We have nothing about proposals of CGoth phonology or grammar, etc. Just some stuff heavily reliant on an article from 1989 about whether its East or West Germanic, which appears to have become a mostly moot question since most scholars agree its *probably* East Germanic.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

To be more clear, all the examples we give actually look Low German (which would be an interesting language to add to the comparisons), and only look like Gothic when Gothic is like Low German? I see you added some more sources, but it is difficult to follow how anyone could use such a small amount of written evidence to know for sure that this is not West Germanic? Probably I am missing something, but then I guess other readers might have similar questions.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:28, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

There are a few reasons. The word "ada" for eggs cannot possibly be West Germanic, and neither can "fydur" for four, for instance. Also, the words show a nominative case ending -s, like Gothic. We give Low German-looking words because those are the ones that Busbecq identified as Germanic, presumably (and also may have altered to look more like his native Flemish). The article is currently a mess.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

The full list of words can be found here: [15] I think we can use that as a source for the article actually. Cases of potential nominative -s: If we are correct in interpreting both s and schas representations of CG /s/, then several words may show that CG retained the PGmc nominative singular masculine ending -z as CG /s/. Consider the following examples: CG VVintch 'wind' (if a misprint for *VVintsch, cf. BG winds), CG Fers 'man' (cf. BG faírƕus), CG Rintsch'mountain', CH Borrotsch 'desire'. also: Among adjectives, CG Ieltsch 'healthy' may employ the transcription sch to reflect a strong nominative singular masculine ending CG /s/, and is thus equivalent to BG háils.. There’s also other evidence for lacking rhoticism in some words.—Ermenrich (talk) 19:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Andrew Lancaster, I've rewritten the article. I think it should be clearer now. I've removed the problematic vocab lists, which always attract OR. I'll continue working on it (we need a section on history and I think the Oxford Gothic Grammar will have more information on some linguistic aspects when I can get my hands on it).--Ermenrich (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your work Ermenrich. It is an interesting topic and other articles link here.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:27, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, great work! –Austronesier (talk) 19:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

The Oxford Gothic Grammar has only two pages on Crimean Gothic, much of it listing vocab. The only major thing it has which is missing from this article (yes, good work, Ermenrich) are two paragraphs on (possible) non-Germanic vocab., which you can see in the extract available on Google books (p. 4ff).--Pfold (talk) 22:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Pfold, they’re mentioned in the last sentences of the “corpus” section - I was originally going to list each one but it wasn’t always clear what the source language was.—Ermenrich (talk) 23:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

We could probably add something on pronouns (ich and tzo + the theory that -ta is a clitic for "it") and maybe verb forms ("Tzo warthata and Ies warthata suggests a single ending for the second and third person forms). It will involve digging through some old sources though. Some statements about the nominative -s ending and maybe adjective endings (two adjectives seem to show neuter -ata) might be nice too.--Ermenrich (talk) 00:10, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Ermenrich I see the word "Trümmersprache" mentioned a fair bit in the secondary literature. Do we cover that aspect? I am possibly influenced by the fact that I find some of the neater explanations a bit too neat (and relying more upon strong assumptions about the transmitter's mistakes than linguistics as such). I for one find the idea of de Busbecq using "sch" for "s" really very strange. I can't imagine any Flemish person doing that. It would be a bit like an English diplomat using gh for an f sound. (They know it is an exceptional spelling because they learn it that way. It may only happen in certain positions.) And if Greek was one of the key languages being used I also can't imagine that anyone would use "th" to mean something other than the th sound in English and Greek, and tz instead, which is also used in Greek transcription, but not for the th sound. Of course I am not a linguist, but none of this is linguistics. Is there really no criticism of these assumptions? I do appreciate that you added that remark about Erasmus already. Very interesting. I am not making any concrete proposals here I know, just wondering.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

'sch' as 's' is not strange at all! The spelling -sch was used for -s in Dutch until the 20th century, I believe. "visch," "duitsch" etc. There are places in Crimean Gothic that match this usage exactly: "wintsch" and "ielsch," for instance. As to why he would do it: why did Germans write the word "Kampf" as "Kampff" or "Tal" as "Thal" and "tun" as "thun" or "Finsternis" or "Finsternüß", or "Wolkenhaus" as "Wolckenhauß" (with ß being a ligature of s and z)? This was the Baroque, people spelled things in overly complex ways in pretty much every vernacular language. Busbecq was not a modern linguist who was trying to record sounds in an overly accurate way.

And the word for 'you' is tzo in Crimean Gothic - tz is used where you would expect th, usually. This can because Busbecq misheard the word, but Jellinek quotes Eramsus as saying that the Greek theta was pronounced "ts". "Th", on the other hand, was a pretty standard way of spelling the sound "t" during this time in German at least, "Thir" ("Tier") "Thal" ("Tal"), "Rath" ("Rat"). And indeed, it usually appears in Crimean Gothic where we would expect a "t" or "d".

"Truemmersprache" is, as far as I can figure out, a bit of unuseful jargon. It's referenced in discussions of Crimean Gothic because it was included in a volume called "Truemmersprachen." It just means a poorly attested language.

In any case, we have a statement of WP:RS/AC that most scholars consider the language East Germanic. It's not really our place to question that. I'm waiting for Stearns and Gronvik's monographs to flesh some things out, but I don't think there's anything controversial currently stated in the article.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:16, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

This is what Gothic Online has to say about tz: Consider the following examples: CG Goltz 'gold' (cf. BG gulþ), CG Statz 'land' (cf. BG dat. sg. staþa, OS stað, OHG stad, stado 'shore'), and CG Tzo 'thou' (cf. BG þu, OE þu, ON þú). [...] This digraph only occurs in places where one expects PGmc *þ, though *þ also appears as t, th, and d. It could of course be a misprint, but the correspondences with *þ are not chance, so that this is not likely. As mentioned above, Busbecq may have misunderstood [þ] as [ts] and thus written tz. On the other hand, he may have been attempting to transcribe the voiced fricative [ð]. But since the informant would have distinguished [ð] and [þ], he may have pronounced [ð] in CG Tzo 'thou', but it is less likely in Goltz and Statz. In the end, Busbecq likely heard CG [þ] correctly, but was confounded in how to transcribe it. Perhaps tz was his solution to this dilemma.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I might also add, Andrew, since you mentioned using "gh" for "f", that English borrowed the Dutch word "verlof" in the 1620s with the spelling "verloffe", but it was respelled "furlough", with the "gh" initially standing for an "f" sound [16].--Ermenrich (talk) 18:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

• Stearns, Macdonald J. R.. " Das Krimgotische[*] ". Germanische Altertumskunde Online, edited by Sebastian Brather, Wilhelm Heizmann and Steffen Patzold. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter, 2010. https://www-degruyter-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/database/GAO/entry/RGA-E03_12/html. Accessed 2023-11-29.

Thanks Ermenrich. Indeed if no other sources say anything else, then this is what we need to report. Just checking. BTW (OT) -sch is still used in some words in Dutch (e.g. fantastisch), and still recognized as a way of making a word look old fashioned (e.g. Vlaamsch for Vlaams). --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:56, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

nl:Krim-Gotisch also comes to mind :) –Austronesier (talk) 21:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)