User talk:Glésan

Welcome and thank you

Just wanted to drop by and say hello, not many people edit Gothic here so it's refreshing to see someone take an interest. I've been editing Gothic on en.wikt for a few years now, but in doing so have largely been focusing on breadth of coverage, not so much depth I am afraid. Your recent massive and comprehensive additions to various entries have therefore been very welcome, they seem to be without significant faults (and the same cannot be said for my own edits, especially my early edits). So: thank you! Out of curiosity, are you interested in the language as an amateur, or are you trained as a historical linguist? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind words; I am happy that you appreciate my edits, and it is nice to know that another person is working on Gothic. I have been "lurking" a bit on this site, and have finally decided to participate myself (possibly due to annoyance at small errors here and there). I like delving deep into the meanings and attestations of single words, so hopefully our contributions can complement each other. And I am indeed a student of historical linguistics with a special interest in the early Germanic languages, such as Gothic, Old Norse and Old English. And I like Gothic in particular: The smallness of its corpus means that it is easy to get a good overview over the attested forms. Glésan (talk) 14:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the smallness of the corpus can be quite nice for that reason. It's of course also unfortunate - Gothic texts are fascinating from many perspectives besides the linguistic. Their very production seems a small miracle - so very few non-Latin or Greek vernaculars from Europe left any significant traces during Late Antiquity. Luckily for us occasionally a new text does get discovered, such as the Bononiensia and the Mangup inscriptions which came to light during the past decade or so. Anyhow - nice to see someone else taking the same interest, and good to hear you study historical linguistics - personally I am just a historian with a keen interest in language and sometimes miss things a linguist might catch. So keep up the good work. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 16:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Module errors

Please remember that when you do this, you get this, and make the necessary changes. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 04:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Seen and corrected. Thank you for making me aware of it. --Glésan (talk) 14:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Nasality in Old Norse

Hi Glésan. In this edit you added nasality to the pronunciation of Old Norse mǫgr, but what is the basis for this? I am aware that nasality was a thing in Old Norse, but AFAIK it arose in cases where the vowel had originally had a following nasal in Proto-Germanic, and that doesn't seem to be the case here? —Pinnerup (talk) 16:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)