Elements of Crimean Gothic Grammar

Materials for the study of late Crimean Gothic are very scanty, but that does not mean we cannot get an insight of its grammar and structure by comparing a few elements of Busbeq's vocabulary with Wulfilian grammar and other Germanic tongues.

Gender

Busbeq provides us with only two distinct articles : tho and the, which would suggest Crimean Gothic had at least two grammatical genders. The o ending of tho is reminiscent of the feminine accusative article þo, which allows us to suppose it had the same value in the late language. This would mean that Crimean Gothic had retained its feminine gender (at the contrary of Danish, for instance, which merged it with masculine into a 'common' gender) . From this, we can relatively safely deduce that it had retained the masculine gender as well, for which the definite article was most probably the.

Analysis of the adjectives provided by Busbeq would also suggest that Late Gothic had also retained its neuter gender. Indeed we have :

Gadeltha : pulchrum

Atochta : bad

Wichtgata : white

Which all ends with a -ta or -tha ending. This ending is reminiscent of the -ata adjectival neuter ending of the older tongue. It is likely that it had the same value in the later language. This would suggest that Crimean Gothic had retained a distinct neuter gender, much like German.

Postponed article

A number of words provided by Busbeq ends with elements which cannot be explained by their equivalent in Wulfilian Gothic. These elements are

• -t
  • Fisct : fish (from fisk)
  • Schedit : light

• -a
  • Handa : hand (from handus)
  • Boga : bow
  • Miera : ant
  • Brunna : spring (from Brunna)

• -o
  • Ringo : ring (from *hrings)

 These forms cannot be explained by the so-called weak declension, some of the concerned word could be supposed to belong to. The mark of this declension seems to be rather -e (sunne 'sun' from sunno). Moreover, ringo seems to be a strong masculine, its equivalent in Wulfilian Gothic being hrings.

A better explaination should be to suppose that Crimean Gothic had a postponed article, similar to the one we find in Icelandic. -t is most probably a neuter (Danish -et, Icelandic -ið), the status of the two other ones is unsure, due to the bad quality of the transcription. Comparison with the articles the and tho would suggest -o feminine and -a masculine. This is, however, not coherent with the fact that hrings was masculine in the older tongue (but this may have changed).

Declension

Busbeq provided us with no declension table, but its translation of "good day" makes sure that Crimean Gothic had retained a declension (or had lost it only quite recently).

Indeed knauen in knauen tag ends with a -en ending wich is similar to the German accusative adjectival ending -en. As a rule, such greetings are at the accusative in Germanic tongues which have not lost their declensions, it is not, therefore, unreasonnable to suppose it was so in Crimean Gothic too. The logical conclusion is that knauen is at the accusative case, what would mean that Crimean Gothic had at least two cases : accusative and nominative.

Verbs

Busbeq provides us with a number of verbs at various forms. From these we can make a number of deductions :

Infinitive

The infinitive verbs in Busbeq's list invariably ends with -(e)n

Schietn : to shoot (from skiutan)

Schlipen : to sleep (from slepan)

Kommen : to come (from qiman)

Singhen : to sing (from singan)

Lachen : to laugh

Geen : to go

Breen : to roast

This allows us to suppose that this -(e)n (from -an) is the mark of the infinitive, much like in German.

Preterit

Busbeq provides us with a number of short past clauses, with what seems to be verbs at the preterit tense.

Tzo warthata : you did

Ies Wathata : he did

Ich malthata : I spoke

All these verbs end with the same ending -ta obviously deivated from the Wulfilian ending -da. It does not seem to be distinction made between the third first persons. There is, unfortunately no way to tell what the plural was like.