Cover not available
Article published In:
Historical Germanic morphosyntax
Edited by Stephen Laker and John Ole Askedal
[NOWELE 74:2] 2021
► pp. 155–171

Overt subject pronoun in Gothic vs null subject in Greek

 | University of Perugia
The Gothic translation of the Bible is a word-for-word rendition of a lost Greek Vorlage (reconstructed by W. Streitberg in 1908; 2nd revised edition in 1919). As previous studies have pointed out, one of the most interesting features of this version is the presence of the overt subject pronoun in instances where there is a null subject in Greek. Considering that Gothic is a null subject language, how is it possible to justify this feature? Based on a new collation that uses biblical textual witnesses not considered by Streitberg (i.e. Greek majuscule and minuscule manuscripts, Church Fathers, commentaries, lectionaries, and Vetus Latina manuscripts), this paper analyses the Gothic-Greek divergences involving the presence of the overt subject pronoun in the Gospel of John, in order to verify previous hypotheses and shed new light on this debated topic.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.General remarks
  • 3.Overt subject pronoun in Gothic vs null subject pronoun in Greek
    • 3.1 ik ‘I’
    • 3.2 þu ‘you’
    • 3.3 is ‘he’
    • 3.4 weis ‘we’
    • 3.5 jus ‘you’
    • 3.6 eis ‘they’
  • 4.Null subject pronoun in Gothic vs overt subject pronoun in Greek
  • 5.Doubtful cases
  • 6.Inconsistency
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 November 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/nowele.00055.fal
References (27)
References
Abraham, W. 1991. Null subjects: from Gothic, Old High German and Middle High German to Modern German: From pro-drop to semi pro-drop. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 341. 1–28.Google Scholar
Axel, K. 2005. Null subjects and verb placement in Old High German. In S. Kepser & M. Reis (eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives, 27–48. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burkitt, F. C. 1900. The Vulgate Gospels and the Codex Brixianus . The Journal of Theological Studies 11. 129–134.Google Scholar
Burton, Ph. 2002. Assessing Latin-Gothic interaction. In J. N. Adams et al. (eds.), Bilingualism in ancient society: Language contact and the written word, 393–418. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Electronic Editions of The Gospel according to John in Greek, Latin, Syriac and Coptic = [URL]
Electronic Editions of The Byzantine Edition of the Gospel according to John = [URL]
Erdmann, O. 1886. Grundzüge der deutschen Syntax nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung. 1. Gebrauch der Wortklassen. Die Formationen des Verbums in einfachen Sätzen und in Satzverbindungen. Stuttgart: Cotta.Google Scholar
Falluomini, C. 2015. The Gothic version of the Gospels and Pauline Epistles: Cultural background, transmission and character. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. Zum gotischen Fragment aus Bologna II: Berichtigungen und neue Lesungen. Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 1461. 284–294.Google Scholar
Ferraresi, G. 2005. Word order and phrase structure in Gothic. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Fertig, D. 2000. Null subjects in Gothic. American Journal of Germanic Linguistics & Literatures 121. 3–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Held, K. 1903. Das Verbum ohne pronominales Subjekt in der älteren deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Mayer & Müller.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. 2010. Null subject parameters. In Th. Biberauer, A. Holmberg et al. (eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory, 88–124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. 1908–1909. Notes sur quelques faits gotiques. Mémoires de la Société de linguistique de Paris 151. 73–103.Google Scholar
Miller, D. G. 2019. The Oxford Gothic grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nestle & Aland28 = Novum Testamentum Graece. Begründet von Eberhard und Erwin Nestle, herausgegeben von B. und K. Aland, J. Karavidopoulos, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger. 281. rev. Aufl., herausgegeben vom Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung Münster/Westphalia unter der Leitung von H. Strutwolf. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.Google Scholar
Porter, S. E. 1995. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. 2nd edn with corrections. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ratkus, A. 2009. The Greek sources of the Gothic Bible translation. Vertimo Studijos 21. 37–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M. A. & W. G. Pierpont (eds.). 2005. The New Testament in the original Greek: Byzantine textform. 2nd rev. edn. Southborough, MA: Chilton Book Publishing.Google Scholar
Rosenkvist, H. 2009. Referential null subjects in Germanic languages: An overview. Working Papers in Scandinavian syntax 841. 151–180.Google Scholar
Schäferdiek, K. 1981. Die Fragmente der ‘Skeireins’ und der Johanneskommentar des Theodor von Herakleia. Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur 1101. 175–193.Google Scholar
Schulze, W. 1924. Personalpronomen und Subjektsausdruck im Gotischen. In W. Horn (ed.), Beiträge zur germanischen Sprachwissenschaft. Festschrift für Otto Behaghel, 92–109. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Streitberg, W. (ed.). 1908. Die gotische Bibel. I. Der gotische Text und seine griechische Vorlage. Mit Einleitung, Lesarten und Quellennachweisen sowie den kleineren Denkmälern als Anhang. 2nd rev. edn 1919 (7th rev. edn with an addendum by P. Scardigli. 2000). Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
1920. Gotisches Elementarbuch. 61. Aufl. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Walkden, G. 2013. Null subjects in Old English. Language Variation and Change 251. 155–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, J. 1910. Grammar of the Gothic language. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar