A STUDY of GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS Although The

言語研究(Gengo Kenkyu) 93(1988),39～60 39

A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS

•\ As Compared with Those in the Greek Original•\

Yoko EDA

Although the Gothic Bible, translated by the Gothic/Greek bilingual bishop, Wulfila, is widely known to be virtually the sole source of information on the Gothic language, it is also true that the issue as to whether or not the language of Wulfila's translation really represents Gothic as spoken and used by Goths in his days has been keenly discussed by a number of scholars for many years. There is no denying, however, that Wulfila's text shows in a number of places linguistic features which can only be considered peculiar to Gothic, and not transferred from Greek. One such feature is the Gothic use of neuter plural participle forms instead of their corresponding masculine or feminine plural participles, as in the original Greek-a notable discrepancy discussed in Y. Eda (1981). That this peculiar use of neuter plural forms in Gothic may have descended directly from Proto-Indo-European is suggested by the similar use of such neuter plural forms in Hittite. The absolute use of participles in Gothic may also be considered such a Gothic or Germanic peculiarity. Absolute participial constructions, parallel to Modern English examples such as weather permitting and generally speaking, are extremely frequent in Wul- fila's Gothic. Moreover, as was pointed out Streitberg (Gotisches Elementarbuch Sect. 260) and Van Der Meer (Praepositionen 90- 91), Greek genitive absolute constructions were replaced in Gothic by dative absolutes (and occasionally accusative absolutes), except 40 Yoko EDA for one instance in which Wulfila uses a genitive absolute construction with the genitive singular noun dagis 'of (a) day'. On one occasion, Wulfila even prefers the dative absolute as a translation of a Greek finite verb form (specifically, aorist indicative first person singular). These facts rule out the possibility that Gothic absolute constructions are mere calques on the Greek original. For the absolute participial constructions in the Greek Bible predominantly employ the genitive case, though the use of the accusative, the dative and the nominative case for such constructions is also attested. In the Greek original, the genitive absolute is used to denote such variety of meanings as cause, situation, concession, condition and time, whereas in Wulfila's Gothic these meanings are generally covered by the dative absolute. How should such semantic functions of the Gothic dative absolute be accounted for? As a result of extensive merging of the oppositions of the original Proto-Indo-European case system, the Gothic dative came to be used to express temporal, locative, ablative, instrumental and comitative functions in addition to its basic dative function. Both Hirt (Handbuch des Urgermanischen 181) and Delbriick (Verglei- chende Syntax I, 195 ff.; II, 494 ff.) recognize such a multifunc- tional use of the Gothic dative. Since the semantic functions of the Gothic dative absolute such as temporal, causal, conditional and comitative more or less overlap with the prepositional functions of the Gothic dative mentioned above, the rather extensive use of the dative absolute in Gothic may be attributed to the wide range of semantic functions of the dative case itself. In contrast to the frequency of the dative absolute, the accusative absolute construction in Gothic is not so common (about 12 instances), and the use of the genitive and the nominative absolute is practically limited to a single occurrence in each case. In A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 41

his Gotisches Elementarbuch, Streitberg makes no mention of the use of the accusative absolute in Gothic, let alone that of the genitive absolute, though he discusses the nominative absolute use briefly (Sect. 244). Further, in his Gotische Casus-Syntaxis Van Der Meer seems reluctant to recognize the existence of the accusative absolute in Gothic. In fact, he even tries on one occasion (64) to reinterpret dauhtar (feminine singular accusative, hereafter f sg A) in "jah atgaggandein inn dauhtar Herodiadins (=and when Herodias' daughter came in-Mark 6:22)" as a mistaken form for dauhtr (f sg D), since there is no formal distinction between the dative and accusative singular in the in-stem present participle of the feminine gender. There exist, however, several other unmistakable examples of the feminine accusative absolute where no such rein- terpretation is possible, so that Van Der Meer's emendation of dauhtar to dauhtr is irrelevant even if correct. Let us adopt the following classification of Gothic absolute constructions and consider each variety in detail. A. The Gothic absolute construction in the dative case B. The Gothic absolute construction in the accusative case C. Others (i. e. Gothic absolute constructions in the genitive and in the nominative case)

A. The Gothic Absolute Construction in the Dative Case In this group A, a considerable number of examples are preceded by the preposition at. According to Van Der Meer (Praepositionen 87 ff.), the dative absolute (hereafter D Abs) with at is found with either locative or temporal meaning, whereas the accusative absolute (hereafter A Abs) with the preposition at seems to be limited to a temporal meaning. Van der Meer, however, concludes that there seems to be no clear semantic distinction between the dative absolute construction with at (at+D Abs) and the one 42 Yoko EDA without it in Wulfila's Gothic. He further adds that the reason the original Greek genitive absolute (hereafter G Abs) construction was translated into Gothic with an absolute construction having a grammatical case other than the dative remains unclear and that the dative absolute construction is, on the other hand, pro- fusely employed in Skeireins. The number of occurrences of the Gothic preposition at+a combination of a dative pronoun (or noun) either preceded or followed by a present (or past) participle (hereafter pt) in the dative, that is, at+D Abs (+ sem S) where (+sem S) means that the given absolute construction contains an explicitly expressed semantic subject (i. e. either a pronoun or a noun as mentioned above) and those of the dative absolute construction without at, namely, D Abs (+ sem S) are just about equal. Se- mantically speaking, these two sets, at + D Abs (+ sem S) and D Abs (+ sem S), are practically indistinguishable from one an- other. In this connection, it may be said at least that the construction at + D Abs (+ sem S) is to be regarded equivalent to D Abs (+ sem S). As for the semantic subjects of these absolute participial constructions, the first or the third person singular dative pronoun mis 'me' or imma 'him' denoting Jesus Christ is often used in the singular, while in the plural (hereafter pl) the third person plural dative pronoun paim, im 'them' or allaim 'all' takes place most frequently. On the other hand, when the semantic subject happens to be a proper name, it is almost exclusively Iesua or Iesu, the dative case form of 'Jesus'. Further, there are scattered instances of the dative form of a common noun such as winda 'wind' in John 6: 18:

"winda mikilamma waiandin (=a great wind blowing)." m sg D

As for examples of past participles in such absolute construc- A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 43 tions, there are only a few of them, where past participles are always declined strong. (1) Examples of Gothic D Abs (+sem S)-Greek G Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic dative absolute corresponding to the Greek genitive absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both constructions. John 8: 30

pata imma rodjandin managai galaubidedun 3 m sg D

imma

ταυτα α υτου λαλουντοs, πολλοι επιοτευσαν ει αυτον

3 m sg G<λ αλεω: pt m sg G (=As he said these things, many believed in him.) (2) Examples of Gothic at +D Abs (+sem S)—Greek G Abs (+ sem S), namely, the Gothic dative absolute with the preposition at preceding and with its semantic subject expressed, whose Greek counterpart is the genitive absolute with its semantic subject also expressed. Luke 7: 24 at galeipandam an paim airum Iohannes dugann rodjan

απελθοντων δετων α γγελων 'Ιωαννου ηρξατο λεγειν

<α περχομαι: pt m pl G <α γγελοs: m pl G

προs τουs οχλουs περι' Ιωαννου (=When the messengers of John had gone, he began to speak to the crowds concerning John. ) When we analyze the examples of (1) from a semantic view- point, they predominantly carry a temporal meaning such as 'when' or'while' though a few instances of causal 'as' or concessive 'though' meaning are aslo found . In Skeireins, there is an anacoluthic use of Gothic dative absolute constructions where each dative absolute behaves like an independent clause or sentence (Die Gotische Bibel 457 fn.). 44 Yoko EDA Similarly, in group (2), an overwhelming number of examples are temporal (`when' or while') , possibly more or less influenced by the intrinsic meaning of the preposition at, which denotes time. There are also scattered examples of causal 'as' or concessive 'though' use . (3) Examples of Goth D/A Abs(+ sem S)—Greek G Abs (+ sem S), namely, the Gothic dative/accusative absolute construction corresponding to the Greek genitive absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both constructions. In Gothic, all the present participles are declined weak, and when they are feminine, They are declined exactly like in-stem feminine weak nouns, where the distinction between the feminine singular dative and the feminine singular accusative form is neu- tralized: managein 'multitude' (f sg D or A). When this neu- tralization takes place in the Gothic absolute construction, ambi- guity as to its grammatical case inevitably arises, unless there is some other clue, as in Mark 8: 1-"at filu managai managein wisandein (=when a very big crowd gathered)." In this passage, the unmistakable feminine singular dative a-stem adjective managai 'big, great' offers us a decisive clue as to the correct interpretation of this participial phrase as an example of the dative absolute. By contrast, when no such a clue is available, the grammatical case of the Gothic absolute construction containing a feminine singular dative/accusative present participle can not be determined. Hence the need of the category, D/A, as mentioned above. In this connection, a scholar like Van Der Meer, reluctant to recognize the existence of the accusative absolute construction in Gothic, wants to emend, as has already been mentioned above, the original feminine singular accusative noun dauhtar'daughter' in Mark 6: 22 to a feminine singular dative form dauhtr because of the double function (i. e. D/A) of the in-stem ending-ein in A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 45

the present participle atgaggandein'coming up' in the same

passage. This emendation of Van Der Meer's, however, seems unnecessary, since there are unmistakable examples of the accusative absolute construction to be dealt with in Section B below: (Mark 5: 18)"jah inngaggandan ina in skip (= finite verb expression, aorist indicative first person singular. Luke 7: 44 atgaggandin in gard Peinana wato mis Gatgaggan: pt m sg D I sg D

εισηλθον σου ειs την οικιαν,

<ε ισερχρμαι: aor l sg (=I entered thy house) Here the original text in Greek uses the finite verb form

εισηλθον, which is replaced in Gothic by the present participle in the dative case, atgaggandin 'coming up; entering', as part of the dative absolute construction. This may, therefore, be said to be a strong evidence that the use of the dative absolute in Gothic is not just a mechanical calque on the original Greek absolute construction, since no Greek absolute cccurs here. (5) An example of Goth D Abs (- sem S)—Greek G Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic 'subject-less' dative absolute construction corresponding to the Greek genitive absolute with its semantic subject expressed. 46 Yoko EDA

2 Cor. 4: 18

waurkjada unsis, ni fairweitjandam pize gasaih-

… κατεργαζεται ημιν, μη σκοπουντων ημων τα βλεπο-

<σ κοπουμαι: pt m pl G l pL G

μενα… (=is preparing for us, because we look not to things that are seen,) (6)-a Examples of Goth D Abs (+sem S)—Greek D Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic dative absolute corresponding to the Greek dative absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both constructions. Luke 8: 27 usgaggandin pan imma ana airpa

εξελθοντι δε α υτω επι την γην

<ε ξερχομαι: pt m sg D m sg D (=as he stepped out on land) (6)-b An example of Goth at + D Abs (+ sem S)—Greek D NP, namely the Gothic dative absolute with at preceding and with its semantic subject expressed, whose Greek counterpart, however, is a dative noun phrase consisting of a demonstrative adjective, a present participle and a noun. Rom. 7: 2 at libandin abin (=while her husband is alive or

In the example (6-b) above, the same Gothic phrase "at libandin abin" corresponds to two different Greek phrases: one in Roman 7: 2 and the other in Roman 7: 3. The Gothic translation of the former, therefore, may be taken to mean 'to the living husband', if we regard "at libandin abin" not as a dative absolute construction but as a combination of a preposition at and a dative noun phrase consisting of an adjectival present participle libandin modifying the immediately succeeding masculine singular dative noun abin. This interpretation is possible, if only we can posit that Wulfila really made a correct literal translation of the original Greek noun phrase in question. One could argue, however, that if Wulfila had actually wanted to make such a literal translation, his Gothic translation would have been: "pamma libandin abin" instead of "at libandin abin." There are two reasons for this argument. One is that when a present participle modifies a noun in Gothic to form a noun phrase, such a phrase is almost always accompanied by a demonstrative adjective (Eda, 1976 93- 104). The other is that the past participle gabundana in "jah auk ufwaira qens at libandin abin gabundana ist witoda (=Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives (RSV);-Rome. 7: 2)" concurs in most cases with a dative noun (phrase) without the preposition at. For these reasons, the phrase "at libandin abin" in Rom. 7: 2 could be taken as a dative absolute construction with at exactly like the identical participial phrase that appears in Rom. 7: 3. (7) Examples of Goth D Abs (-sem S)—Greek D Abs (-sem S), namely, the Gothic dative absolute construction corresponding to the Greek dative absolute without semantic subjects in either of them. Matt. 9: 28 Qimandin pan in garda duatiddjedun imma pai

blindans

ελθοντι δε ειζτην οικιαν προσηλθον α υτω οιτυψλοι,

<ε ρχομαι: pt m sg D (=when (he) entered the house, the blind men came to him) The semantic subject of the present participle (m sg D) qimandin is 'he (=Jesus)' as expressed by imma (=Greek αδτω) in the main clause, although the pronoun imma here cannot in any way be interpreted as part of the dative absolute construction

consisting of qimandin alone. The same applies to αυτω in the Greek text. This is because these two pronouns in Gothic and in Greek are closely tied to the finite verbs, duatiddjedun'came to' and προσηλθον in the main clauses respectively. In spite of the fact that the present participle forms both in Gothic and Greek here are thus without semantic subjects clearly expressed, their inflectional endings quite obviously indicate that their gender, number and case (m sg D) can only refer to imma and α υτω,

that is, to 'Jesus', and never to pai blindans and οι τυψλοι. It can be said, therefore, that when the semantic subject of the present participle is to be easily inferred from the context, such a subject may be null (0). As these examples clearly indicate, the Gothic dative absolute construction then is just as widely applicable as the Greek genitive absolute. In the example (Luke 7: 44) given in (4), in fact, the dative absolute is used in the Gothic translation of the Greek text which has no absolute construction but a finite verb expression instead. In (5), the semantic subject clearly expressed in the Greek genitive absolute is found deleted in the corresponding Gothic dative absolute construction as in 2 Cor. 4: 18, where the implied subject is the first person plural. In (6-b), it looks at least on the surface as if the Gothic dative construction were a blind imitation of the original Greek dative noun phrase, but upon closer investigation, the conversion A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 49

of Greek "τ ω ζωντι ανδρι" in Rom. 7: 2 into Gothic "at libandin abin" also used for the Greek genitive absolute in Rom. 7: 3 makes us feel inclined to regard "at libandin abin" in Rom. 7: 2 as an example of dative absolute just as in the case of the same phrase in Rom. 7: 3. Certainly, this will make the Gothic verbal phrase "gabundana ist witoda (=is bound by law)" in Rom. 7: 2 devoid of its dative noun phrase 'at libandin abin,' since this particular dative phrase has been interpreted to form an absolute construction. Further, the Latin Vulgate translation of the passage in question (Rom. 7: 2) uses the ablative absolute "vivente viro (=her husband living), thus making the remaining Latin verbal phrase"alligata est legi (=is bound by law)" equally devoid of the original dative noun phrase in the Greek Bible. The evidence in the Vulgate here seems to support our dative absolute interpretation of "at libandin abin" in Rom. 7: 2. Thus, when we take all these pieces of evidence into account, namely, the use of the Gothic dative absolute for the finite verb in Greek, that of the Gothic dative absolute for the Greek dative noun phrase and the anacoluthic use of the Gothic dative absolute without at in Skeireins, where dative absolute constructions occur three times as independent sentences, we would be inclined to think that Gothic dative absolutes may have been part of native Gothic usage and not just calques on Greek absolutes. We can perhaps say, in this connection, the Delbruck's argument that Wulfila never used the dative absolute in Gothic except when forced to do so by the Greek model does not sound convincing.

B. The Gothic Absolute Construction in the Accusative Case

As has already been mentioned above, Streitberg never discusses the Gothic accusative absolute in his Gotisches Elementar- buch, nor does Delbriick in his Vergleichende Syntax. Apart from 50 Yoko EDA the Gothic dative absolute, only the nominative absolute has been referred to rather briefly, by Streitberg (Sect. 244). Hirt, however, recognizes the existence of the accusative absolute construction in Gothic in his Handbuch des Urgermanischen (III, 181), calling it "ein Akkusativ cum Partizipium." (1)-a Examples of Goth A Abs (+sem S)-Greek G Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic accusative absolute corresponding to the Greek genitive absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both constructions. In his Casus-Syntaxis (64), Van Der Meer seems reluctant to recognize the existence of the Gothic accusative absolute, though he cites two examples of such a construction (Matt. 6: 3 and Mark 6: 22). In fact, the example of the Gothic accusative absolute are not limited to these two, and accordingly, this would underline the fairly established usage of such a construction in Gothic along with the Gothic dative absolute which has already been shown to be extensively employed in Wulfila's text. Ex. 1. Matt. 6: 3 Ip puk taujandan armaion ni witi hleidumei 2 m sg A

peina, hwa taujip taihswo peina. σου δε ποιουντοζ ελεημοσυνην μη γνωτω η αριστερα σου

2 sg G<π οιεω: pt m sg G

τι ποιει η δεξια σου. (=When thou givest alms, do not let thy left hand know what thy right hand is doing. Ex. 2. Mark 5: 18 jah inngaggandan ina in skip

καi εμβαντos α ντou εis τo πλoioν

<ε μβαiνω pt m sg G m sg G (=and as he was getting into the boat) Ex. 3. The Greek example below gives the first instance of an aorist participle (aor pt), which appears again in the examples to be given in (1-c) and (2-a) of Section B as well as in the entire C Section. All the previous Greek examples mentioned above contained present participles (pt) only. Mark 6: 22 iah atgaggandein inn dauhtar Herodiadins

καi εiσελθoνσηs τηs θuγατρδs αuτηs 'Hρ ω δiαδos

<εiσ ερXoμ αi: aor pt f sg G <θuγ ατηρ: f sg G (=and when Herodias' daughter came in) As has already been discussed, Van Der Meer's emendation of dauhtar (f sg A) to dauhtr (f sg D) has not been adopted in the example above. (1)-b An example of Goth A Abs (-sem S)—Greek G Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic accusative absolute without its semantic subject expressed corresponding, however, to the Greek genitive absolute construction with such a subject. Luke 15: 20 nauhpanuh ban fairra wisandan gasahw ina atta is

ετi δε αuτou μακραν απεχoντos, εiεν αντδν o πατカρ α ντoO

m sg G <α πεχω: pt m sg G (=but while he was yet at a distance, his father saw him) Here the accusative absolute construction,"nauhpanuh pan fairra wisandan," contains no semantic subject, since ina is the direct object of the finite transitive verb gasahw 'saw' in the main clause whose subject is atta is 'his father'. Thus the deleted 52 Yoko EDA semantic subject of the accusative absolute in Gothic is often omitted, when such a subject is to be easily inferred from the context, which is the case here. (1)-c Examples of Goth at+A Abs (+sem S)-Greek G Abs (+ sem S), namely, the Gothic accusative absolute construction with the preposition at corresponding to the Greek genitive absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both constructions. Matt. 27: 1 At maurgin pan waurpanana, runa nemun allai m sg A

П ρωiαs δε γενoμενηs σuμβouλioν ελαβoν παντεs

<π ρωiα: f sg G <γiνoμαi: aor pt f sg G

oi αρχiερeis καi oi πρεσβντερoi τoν λαoν κατα τoν' Iη σoν, (=When morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus) The Gothic example above contains the past participle (p pt) in its accusative absolute construction.

(2)-a Examples of Goth A Abs (+sem S)-Greek A Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic accusative absolute corresponding to the Greek accusative absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both. Mark 9: 28 jah galeipandan ina in gard, siponjos is frehun

καi εiσελθoντα αντoν εis oικoν, oι ματηταi αντoν

<εiσ ερχoμαi: aor pt m sg G

επηρωτων αντoν кατ' iδιαν'

(=and when he had entered the house, his disciples asked him privately) A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 53

(2)-b An example of Goth A Abs (+Periph Pt, + sem S)—Greek A Abs (+ Periph Pt, + sem S), namely, the Gothic accusative absolute containing a periphrastic participle (i. e. wisandans+ p pt) and a semantic subject, which corresponds to the Greek accusative absolute similarly with a periphrastic participle and a semantic subject. Col. 1: 21 jah izwis simle wisandans framapidans 2 pl A

καi νμαs πoτε δνταs απηλλoτρiωμενωs

2 p1 A<εiμi: pt m pl A <α παλλoτρioω: pf pt pass m pl A

(= and you once being estranged)

(3) An example of Goth haban+ A + P Pt—Greek ƒÃƒÃƒÔƒÇƒË+ A + Pf Pt,

namely, the Gothic haban plus an accusative object plus past

participle corresponding to the Greek ƒÃƒÔƒÃƒÇƒËplus an accasative

object plus a perfective participle.

Streitberg in the glossary of his Gotische Bibel puts "absol."

in italics for the entry faurqipan 'excuse', suggesting that he

regards the past participle masculine singular accusative form faurqipanana in the following example as part of the accusative absolute construction. There is no explanation concerning this

construction either in Delbriick's Vergleichende Syntax or Kieckers'

Grammatik. H. Kohzu in his Greek Grammar refers to a similar

construction consitting of ƒÃƒÔƒÃƒÇƒË+accusative +aorist or perfect parti-

ciple and describes it as semantically equivalent to the perfect

tense. Menge-Giithling's Griechisch-Deutsch lists the combination

) + accustive +aorist or perfect participle in the entryƒÃƒÔƒÃiƒË of ƒÃƒÔƒÃiƒË,

and defines its meaning as "zur Bezeichnung des aus einer Hand-

lung hervorgegangenen Zustandes (=to indicate the condition en-

suing from an action)." The exact nature of the accusative object

in this construction is, however, not fully explained there. The

actual example in Gothic is given below together with the Greek 54 YokoEDA

text (containing a perfect participle) and the Latin Vulgate text (also with a pf pt). Luke 14: 18, 19 habai mik faurqipanana 1 sg A

εχε με παρητημενoν

1sgA<π αραiτεoμαi: p f pt m sg A

habe me excusatum 1 sg A

(= have me excuse; please excuse me)

Two different renditions have been given in Modern English

here, the first of which is that the Revised Standard Version, the

second being that of the New International Version. As the most

recent English rendition (1979) of the NIV above indicates, this

construction of haban (ƒÃƒÔƒÃiƒË,habere, or have) + A + p pt had

perhaps best be excluded from our category of absolute constructions, since the use of the past participle faurqipanana in Gothic

can in no way be considered equivalent to that of the participle

in other absolute constructions we have thus far examined. It

seems that in the example of Luke 14: 18-19, the phrase consisting

of the accusative mik and the immediately following past participle faurqipanana forms an embedded sentence, which then functions as a direct object of the finite (2nd person singular imperative)

verb habai. The usual adverbial fuction of the absolute construction

observable in all the previous Gothic examples is totally absent

in this particular instance.

C. Others

(1) An example of Goth G Abs (+sem S)—Greek G Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic genitive absolute corresponding to the

Greek genitive absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both

constructions. A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 55

Mark 16: 1 jah inwisandins sabbate dagis Marja so Magdalene

Kα ι διαγενομενον τον σαββατον Mα ρια η Mα γδαληνη

<δ ιαγiνομαι: aor pt m sg G <σ αββατον:m sg G

και Mα ρια η 'Iακωβον και Σαλωμη ηγορασαν αρωματα, (=and when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices.) The reason the genitive absolute is used in Gothic here is perhaps because the genitive use of the noun dags 'day', namely, dagis seems to have been commonly made as part of an idiom, when combined with such an indefinite pronominal adjective as hwizuh, the masculine singular genitive form of hwazuh 'each, every'. Thus, in Nehemiah 5: 18, dagis hwizuh is used adverbi- ally to mean 'each day'. This already established idiomatic adverbial use of dagis must have facilitated the formation of the adverbial absolute construction in the genitive case here. (2) An example of Goth N Abs (+sem S)-Greek G Abs (+sem S), namely, the Gothic nominative absolute construction corresponding to the Greek genitive absolute with semantic subjects expressed in both. Mark 6: 21

jah waurpans dags gatils, pan Herodis mela

gabaurpais seinaizos nahtamat waurhta paim maistam seinaize

jah•@

και γενομενηζ ημεραζ ενκαιρον, οτε 'Hρωδηζ <γινομαι: aor pt f sg G<η μερα: f sg G

τοιζ γενεσιοιζ αδτον δειπνον εποιει τοιζ μεγιστασιν αδτον και…

(=but an opportunity came when Herod on his birthday gave a banquet for his courtiers and•@ ) 56 Yoko EDA It is most likely that the notional function of the semantic subject in the absolute construction has triggered the development of the semantic subject in the nominative, which linguisic phe- nomenon can also be observed in Greek, though not shown in our examples here. To summarize, all the possible varieties of Gothic absolute constructions as compared with their corresponding Greek counter- parts have thus been covered, and the relative frequencies of these varieties are now given below. The figures indicate the number of occurrences for each variety. In the following table, constructions before dashes (-) are Gothic whereas those after them are Greek. (+sem S) has been shortened to (+ S). Items divided by slashes (/) such as at/0 and D/A are disjunctive: at/0 means 'with at or without at', and D/A, 'dative or accusative'.

Section A

(1) D Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 34

(2) at+D Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 33

(3) at/0+D/A Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 5 (with at: 2)

(4) D Abs (+S) -Aor 1 sg 1

(5) D Abs (-S) -G Abs (+S) 1

(6-a) D Abs (+S) -D Abs (+S) 3

(6-b) at+D Abs (+S) -D NP 1

(7) D Abs (-S) -D Abs (-S) 3

Section B

(1-a) A Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 3

(1-b) A Abs (-S) -G Abs (+S) 1

(1-c) at+A Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 1

(2-a) A Abs (+S) -A Abs (+S) 6

(2-b) A Abs (+Periph Pt, +S) -A Abs (+PeriphPt, +S) 1

(3) haban+ A+P Pt-ƒÃxtƒÃev+A+P Pt 1 A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 57

Section C

(1) G Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 1 (2) N Abs (+S) -G Abs (+S) 1

Conclusion. Based on the examples of the Gothic and the Greek absolute constructions examined above, it can be said that the use of the dative absolute in Gothic is just as firmly established an idiom as that of the genitive absolute in Greek. This argument is supported by the fact that the omission of the semantic subiect takes place in Gothic in spite of its retention in the Greek original (Cf. A, 5), when such a subject is easy to infer from the context, that the Gothic dative absolute replaces, in one instance, the finite verb expression in Greek (Cf. A, 4), and finally that it also replaces the combination of a demonstrative adjective + a noun phrase consisting of an adjectival present participle and a noun in the Greek text (Cf. A, 6-b). Further, 12 occurrences of the Gothic accusative absolute may similarly lead us to posit that this construction may have been fairly well rooted in native Gothic usage, since again the omission of the semantic subject takes place where the corresponding Greek genitive absolute retains it (Cf. B, 1-b), and also because of the fact that the Gothic accusative absolute can begin with the preposition at just as in the case of the dative absolute (Cf. A, 2; B, 1-c). The single occurrence of the Gothic genitive absolute and that of the Gothic nominative absolute may also help strengthen the argument that the use of the Gothic dative absolute may have been part of native Gothic usage, and not a slavish calque on the Greek absolute construction. To a limited extent, the same could perhaps be said of the Gothic accusative absolute construction as well. 58 Yoko EDA

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY A. Texts

Biblia Sacra Latina. London: Samuel Bagster, 1794. Die Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, rev. Das Neue Testament. Stuttgart: Die Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1984. The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testament. Revised Standard Version. New York & Glasgow: William Collins, 1971. The International Bible Society, ed. The Holy Bible. New Inter- national Version. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1985. Marshall, Rev. Alfred. The R. S. V. Interlinear Greek English New Testament. Basingstoke: Samuel Bagster, 19854). Stamm, Friedrich Ludwig, ed. Ulfilas oder die Uns Erhaltenen Denkmaler der Gotischen Sprache. Stuttgart: Magnus Verlag, 1872. Streitberg, Wilhelm, ed. Die Gotische Bibel. Darmstadt: Wissen- schaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 19717). Wrede, Ferdinand, ed. Stamm-Heyne's Ulfilas oder die Uns Erhal- tenen Denkmaler der Gotischen Sprache. Paderborn: Ferdi- nand Schoningh, 1920.

B. Dictionaries

Feist, Sigmund. Vergleichendes Worterbuch der Gotischen Sprache. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1939. Liddel, H. G. & Scott. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964. Menge, Hermann & Otto Guthling. Langenscheidts GroBworterbuch. Teil I, Griechisch-Deutsch. Berlin, Miinchen & Zurich: Langen- scheidt, 1970. Uhlenbeck, C. C. KurzgefaBtes Etymologisches Worterbuch der A STUDY OF GOTHIC ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTIONS 59

Gotischen Sprache. Amsterdam: Verlag von Joh. Muller, 1896.

C. Grammars

Behaghel, Otto. Deutsche Syntax. Bande I-IV. Heidelberg: Carl

Winter, 1923-1932.

Braune, Wilhelm & Ernst A. Ebbinghaus. Gotische Grammatik.

Tubingen: Max Niemeyer, 1961.

Brugmann, Karl & Berthold Delbriick. GrundriƒÀ der Vergleichen-

den Grammatik der Indogermanischen Sprachen. 2. Teil,

Vergleichende Syntax der Indogermanischen Sprachen. StraB-

burg: Karl J. Triibner, 1897.

Campbell, A. Old English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 1964.

Dal, Ingerid. Kurze Deutsche Syntax. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer,

1966.

Hempel, Heinrich. Gotisches Elementarbuch. Berlin: Walter de

Gruyter, 1966.

Hirt, Hermann. Handbuch des Urgermanischen. 3. Teil, AbriB

der Syntax. Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1934.

Kellner, Leon. Historical Outlines of English Syntax. Tokyo:

Kenkyusha, 1964.

Kieckers, E. Historische Griechische Grammatik. Bande I-IV. Berlin

& Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter, 1925-1926.

Kluge, Friedrich. Die Elemente des Gotischen. Berlin & Leipzig:

Walter de Gruyter, 1921.

Kohzu, Harushige. Girishago Bunpo (=A Greek Grammar). Tokyo:

Iwanami, 1961.

Krahe, Hans. Historische Laut- and Formenlehre des Gotischen.

Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1948.

Krause, Wolfgang. Handbuch des Gotischen. Munchen: C. H.

Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1968.

Mosse, Fernand. Manuel de la langue gotique. Paris: Aubier, 60 Yoko EDA

1942. Quirk, Randolph & C. L. Wrenn. An Old English Grammar. London: Methuen, 1960. Streitberg, Wilhelm. Gotisches Elementarbuch. Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1897.

D. Monographs

Eda, Yoko."Gotogo no bunshi ni tsuite(= On the Participles in Gothic),"Kawamura Junior College Bulletin of the English Language and Literature, 9, 31-107 (1976). ."Getogo no chusei fukusu bunshi ni- tsuite (=On the Neuter Plural Participles in Gothic,"Kawamura Junior College Bulletin (Joint Issue), 1, 143-160 (1981). Van Der Meer, Marten Jan. Die Bedeutung and die Rektion der Gotischen Praepositionen. Gotische Casus-Syntax II. Amster- dam: De Koninklijke Akademie, 1930. . Gotische Casus-Syntaxis. I. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1901.

「ゴート語の分詞の絶対用法について」

ほとんど唯一のゴート語の文献はbilingualであったウルフィラによってギリ

シア語から翻訳された聖書である。そこで使用されているゴート語が当時のゴー

ト人達によって使われていたゴート語であるかという問題は今日まで論じられて

きたことも確かである。その一方でゴート語独自のものと考えられるものも随所

にみられることも事実である。例をあげれば中性複数分詞の用法,そしてまたここ

で扱おうとしている分詞の絶対用法である。一般的にゴート語の絶対用法は与格

で表わされているが,意味上の主語の格により対格の例もあることが証明される

し,また異なる2つのギリシア語の構文がゴート語では同じ与格の絶対用法で表

わされていることにより-これは対応するラテン語の例でも裏付けされる- ギリシア語をそのままなぞっているのではないことも証明される。

(原稿受理日昭和62年8月30日)