In fact, the Goths (Ostrogoths as well as
Visigoths) are mentioned quite often in OE sources (e.g. in Widsith and Deor),
always as Gota (N.sg.), Gotan (N.pl.), Gotena (Gen.pl.), Gotum (Dat.pl.) --
forms that unequivocally point out to a weak Germanic stem (*guto:n-). A few
typical examples:
[We:old] Eormanri:c Gotum ... (Eormanric
ruled the Goths)
[Eormanri:c] a:hte wi:de folc Gotena
ri:ces. (E. ruled men far and wide in the Goths' empire)
Gotan of Sciððiu mæ:gþe wið Ro:ma:na ri:ce
gewin upho:fon... (Goths from the country of Scythia made war on the Roman
empire.)
Latin influence is not likely, since in the
Latin prototypes, where these can be identified, the form is <Gothi>
rather than <Got(h)ones>. It's clear that the Anglo-Saxon scribes
used their own traditional term rather than a phonetic calque from
Latin. The past participle <-gotan> you mention is _not_ a nasal stem
(despite it's -an-), so your "analogy" is ruled out as well. <gota> <
*gut-o:n- is a well-formed Germanic agent noun.
Piotr
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Goths: IE Languages vs Germanic
The one citation I found (a 9th C. OE of Bede - "gotena") is obviously
drawn from Latin histories. Perhaps the n-stem appeared by analogy with OE
<gotan>, poured. And by the time ON was written down, @1200, the
Goths were a matter of long ago and distant history, with much intervening
written influence.