A-declension, masculine and neuter nouns

 

Nominative	Singular	Plural
dags “day”	dagōs
Accusative/Vocative	Dag	dagans
Genetive	Dagis	dagē
Dative	Daga	dagam

 

PG forms of dags were: Sing nom. *đagaz, acc. *đagan, voc *đag(e), gen. *đagesa, dat. *đagai< PIE *dhoghōĩ.

Like dags are declined a great many Gothic masculine nouns: akrs “field”, bagms “tree”, fisks “fish”, hunds “dog”, himins “heaven etc.

Compare also OE Masculine like stan “stone”, scip “ship” etc.

 

Masculine	Singular	Plural
OE Nominative	Stān	stānas
Genetive	Stānes	stāna
Dative	Stāne	stānum
Accusative	Stān	stānas

 

The ō-declension include feminine nouns only and correspond to IE ā-declension

 

Singular	Plural
Nom.Acc. giba ‘gift’	gibōs
Gen. gibōs	gibō
Dat. Gibái	gibōm

 

Like giba are declined a very large number of feminine nouns, as bida “request”, bōka “book”, kara “care’, fēra “country”, mōta “custom-house”, rūna “mystery”, háirda etc.

 

The i-declension contains only masculine and feminine nouns and correspond to the Latin and Greek i-declension.

 

Singular	Plural
Nom. gasts “guest”	gasteis
Acc. gast	gastins
Gen. gastis	gastē
Dat. gasta	gastim
Voc. Gast	-

 

Like gasts are declined arms, “arm”, balgs “wine-skin”, barms “bosom”, gards “house”, saggws “song”, sáiws “sea” etc.

 

Weak declension of nouns.

B. Weak Declension (n-stems).

In the parent language the nom. Sing ended partly in –ēn, -ōn, and partly in –ē, -ō. The reason for this difference is unknown. Here belong masculines, feminines and neuters.

Singular	Plural
Nom. hana “cock”	hanans
Acc. Hanan	hanans
Gen. hanins	hananē
Dat. hanin	hanam

 

 

Like hana are declined a great number of masculines: aha “mind”, ahma “spirit”, atta “father’, brunna “well”, blōma “flower”, falga “cross”, gajuka “companion”, garda “fold’, guma “man”, nuta “fisherman” etc.

Adjectives: strong and weak declension.

In the parent PIE language nouns and adjectives were declined alike without any distinction in endings, as in Latin, Greek, and Sanskrit. In PG adjectives were divided into two groups: strong and weak.

The so-called weak declension of adjectives is a special Germanic formation by means of the suffixes –en-, -on-, which were originally used to form nomina agentis, and attributive nouns as Lat. ēdo “glutton”, Goth. staua “judge’, wardja “guard”. Already in PG the weak declension became the rule when the adjective followed the definite article, as in ahma sa weiha “ ghost the holy one”, OE Wulfmær se geonga “Wulfmær the Young”, OHG Ludowīg ther snello Ludwig the Brave”. At a later period but still in PG, the two kinds of adjectives – strong and weak – became differentiated in use. When the one and when the other form was used in Gothic is a question of syntax.

In Gothic the adjectives are declined as strong or weak. They have three genders and the same cases as nouns.

They also have degrees of comparison. The PIE parent language had several suffixes by means of which the comparative degree was formed. But in the individual branches of the parent language one of the suffixes became more productive than the rest. The only PIE comparative suffix which remained productive in the Germanic languages is –is-, which became –iz- (=Goth. –iz-, OHG –ir-, OE –r-) in PG by Verner’s law. Beside the suffix –iz- there was also in PG a suffix –ōz- (Goth. –ōz-, OHG –ōr-, OE –r-). This suffix is a special Germanic new formation, and arose from the comparative of adverbs whose positive degree originally ended in –ō-. And then at a later period it became extended to adjectives. In Gothic the –ja- stems, I-stems, and –u- stems take the suffix –iz-, a-stems sometimes take the one, sometimes the other.

 

Positive	Comparative
manags “great	managiza
juggs “young”	jūhiza
swinþs “strong”	swinþōza
alþeis “old”	alþiza
hardus “hard”	hardiza

 

 

Pronoun, morphological categories.

Categories. Number: singular, plural, dual.

Cases: Nominative, Accusative, Genitive, Dative.

Gender: masculine, feminine, neuter.

PG pronouns fell roughly under the same main classes as modern pronoun:

· Personal(особові)

· Demonstrative(вказівні)

· Reflexive(зворотні)

· Interrogative(питальні)

· Possessive(присвійні)

· Indefinite(неозначені)

Personal pronouns

PG personal pronouns had 3 persons, 3 numbers in the first and second persons and 3 genders in the third person.

First person

Sing. Dual Plural

Nom ik wit weisa

Gen meina *ugkara unsara

Dat mis ugkis uns, unsis

Acc mik ugkis uns, unsis

Reflexive pronouns

The reflexive pronoun originally referred to the chief person of the sentence irrespectively as to whether the subject was the first, second or third person singular and plural.

Gen seina(себе)

Dat sis(собі)

Acc sik(себе)

Demonstrative

The simple demonstrative sa, þata, sō was used both as demonstrative pronoun this, that, and as definite article, the.

 

SINGULAR	PLURAL
Masculine	Neuter	Feminine	Masculine	Neuter	Feminine
Nom. sa	þata	sō	þái	þō	Þōs
Acc. Þana	þata	þō	þans	þō	Þōs
Gen. þis	þis	þizōs	þizē	þizē	þizō
Dat. þamma	þamma	þamma	þáim	þáim	þáim

The vocabulary of PG

The sources of information about the oldest vocabulary of Germ. Lang-es were: runic inscriptions, toponymy, texts of literary monuments and modern vocabulary of Germ. Languages, which are examined with the help of the comparative-historical method.

The vocabulary can be divided into 3 layers:

1. Common IE words

2. Common Germanic words

3. Words of separate Germ. Lang-es

Common IE vocabulary includes terms of relationship, numerals and names of some plants and animals. The vocabulary of unknown origin forms 30% of the vocabulary of PG. the oldest borrowings were from Celtic and Latin. We also distinguish prattle words borrowed from childish lang., so called traveling words borrowed from unknown lang. and attested in many Germ. lang-es, folk words used in everyday speech and having special semantic meanings.

According to lexical meanings of the words (semantic field) we distinguish a) natural phenomena; b) industrial terms; c) cultural terms, etc.

According to stylistics we distinguish neutral, common used and stylistically coloured (poetic, official, bookish and professional vocabulary) vocabulary. Common used words are the names of things which surround us. They are used in everyday speech and are stylistically neutral: OHG ackar (поле), leban (жити), OE bringan (приносити), wind (вітер). Poetic terms were used in PG epos and included metaphors, epithets, similes and synonims: hilde-leoma (світоч бою – меч). In “Beowulf” there were used 37 nouns which denote the worrier.

Bookish lang. appeared in Late CG and is connected with the development of science and culture. A lot of such words were borrowed from Latin and Greek: L credo> OE creda; L regula> OE regol.

The IE legacy, isogloss.

Words which have common IE root have certain lexical meaning. They reflect surrounding world, natural phenomena, things necessary for people for living. We distinguish such semantic groups of words:

· Natural phenomena: heavenly bodies, atmospheric phenomena, relief, seasons:

– сонце

– Goth. sunno, sauil

– L sol

– OIsl. sol

– OE sunna

– OSlav сльньце

– OHG sunna

– Гора, погорб

– OE hyll

– L collis

– Lithuanian kalnas

– Lettish kalns

· Names of wild animals

· Вовк

– Goth wolfs

– OE wulf

– OHG wolf

– L lupus

– OSlav влькь

· Names of plants

– береза

– OSlav брьза

– OE beorc

– OHG birihha

· Names of birds

· Parts of body

– ніс

– OSlav нось

– Lithuanian nasus

– OE nosu

– OHG nasa

– OIsl. nos

· Relatives

– син

– OSlav. Синь

– Goth sunus

– OIsl. sonr

– OE, OHG sunu

The isogloss: narrow meaning: the line on the map showing the spread of this or that ling. phenomenon; broad sense: a lexical or morphological unit common for certain group of lang-es and which is not encountered (не зустрічається) in the other lang.-es (я маю – в мене є; мешкати – проживати).

Common Germ. stock.

The common vocabulary. In the traditional view the Indo-Europeans before their dispersal (7000/4000 BC) were a nomadic or semi-nomadic pastoral people. They had cattle and sheep, for there are common words for both of these, e.g. English ox is Welsh ych, Sanskrit uksan-, and Tocharian okso. Cattle were obviously highly prized. OE feoh, Sanskrit pacu - and Latin pecu, meant both “cattle” and “wealth”, the Latin word for “money, wealth” was pecunia, and cattle figure prominently in the early writings of Indo-European peoples. They also had domestic animals, including the dog, and possibly the pig, the goat, and the goose, but there no common word for the ass, nor for the camel – English word goes back, via Latin and Greek, to a loan from a Semitic language. The Indo-Europeans certainly had horses, for which a rich vocabulary has survived, and they also had vehicles of some kind, for these are the words for wheel, axle «ось», nave “маточина (колеса)” and yoke “ярмо, хомут”. They had cheese and butter, but no common word for milk has survived, which shows how “chancy” the evidence is. No large common vocabulary has survived for agriculture, such a vocabulary is found in the European languages, but this may obviously date from after dispersal. There are, however, common words for grain, and Greek and Sanskrit have cognate words for plough and for furrow “борозна”, so there is some support to the view that the Proto-Indo-Europeans were agriculturalists.

РОЖЬ, нем. ROGGEN < PG * ruggn-/*rugis - (с обычным удвоением g перед n)< PIE *rughio- in Germanic, Baltic and Slavonic languages, PDE rye.

There is, however, no common word for beer (which an agriculturalist’s product, while there is a word for mead. On the other hand, there is no common vocabulary for hunting or fishing.

There are a number of common words for tools and weapons, including arrows, and there is no evidence to suggest that at one time the tools and weapons were made of stone: the Latin verb secāre ‘ to cut’ is related to saxum ‘a stone, rock’, and the latter is identical with OE seax, which meant ‘knife’. At one time, it seems, a stone could be a cutting instrument. The PIE people knew metal, however, for there two common words for copper and bronze, one of which survives as PDE ore, Latin aes, Sanskrit ayas, and there also words for gold and silver. There is no common terminology for the techniques of metallurgy. The vocabulary shows a familiarity with pottery and also with weaving.

They knew both rain and snow, but their summer seems to have been hot, which suggests a continental climate. The wild animals they knew include wolves, bears, otters, mice, hares, and beavers, but apparently not lions, tigers, elephants, or camels, so presumably they lived in a cool temperate zone. There has been some argument about the common Indo-European words for the beech tree, the eel, and the salmon. The beech does not grow in North-East Europe or anywhere east of Caspian, so it has been argued that the home of the Indo-Europeans must have been farther West. The eel and the salmon are not found in the rivers that flow into the Black sea, so it has been argued that this region too must be ruled out. There are, however, two weaknesses in this argument. The first is that the climate has changed since the times of he PIE: around 4000 BC, the climate of southern Russia was wetter and warmer than it is today, and there were many more trees, especially along the banks of streams and rivers; these trees almost certainly included beech. The second weakness is that we cannot be absolutely certain that these words originally referred to the species in question. E.g., it is possible thet the word for ‘salmon’ (German Lachs, Swedish lax, Russian lososi ‘salmon’, Tocharian laks ‘fish’) did not originally refer to the true salmon, but to a species of Salmo found North of the Black sea.

The view of the IE family is supported by the Indo-European names of Gods. There are a few common to the European and Asiatic languages, and they seem to be personifications of natural forces. Prominent among them, is a Sky God: he Greek Zeus, the Sanskrit Dyaus, the OE Tīw (Tuesday). He was a Father God, as we can see it from his Latin name, Jupiter, which means ‘Sky Father’.