Word analysis

Luke 10:26
CA þaruh qaþ du imma: in witoda ƕa gameliþ ist? ƕaiwa ussiggwis?
— ὁ δὲ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτόν, ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τί γέγραπται; πῶς ἀναγινώσκεις;
— At ille dixit ad eum : In lege quid scriptum est ? quomodo legis ?
— He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
— En Hij zeide tot hem: Wat is in de wet geschreven? Hoe leest gij?
— Jésus lui dit: Qu'est-il écrit dans la loi? Qu'y lis-tu?

Token: þaruh

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: verified and/or disambiguated.

Token: qaþ

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

  • Lemma qiþan: Verb (abl.V.5)
    WS 1910, p. 107: sagen [perfektives Simplex, 296]
    • Active Indicative Preterite 3rd Person Singular
    • Active Indicative Preterite 1st Person Singular

Status: not verified, morphosyntactically ambiguous.

Token: du

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified, lexically ambiguous.

Token: imma

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified, morphosyntactically ambiguous.

Token: in

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified but unambiguous.

Token: witoda

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified, morphosyntactically ambiguous.

Token: ƕa

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

  • Lemma ƕas: Pronoun, interrogative (Pron.)
    WS 1910, p. 62: wer? 1. [interrogativ] 2. [indefinit (173.1)] irgend einer [stets affirmativ, auch in negativen Sätzen] – "ƕo ƕeilo": eine Zeitlang
    • Neuter Nominative Singular
    • Neuter Accusative Singular

Status: not verified, morphosyntactically ambiguous.

Token: gameliþ

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified, morphosyntactically ambiguous.

Token: ist

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified but unambiguous.

Token: ƕaiwa

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified but unambiguous.

Token: ussiggwis

Codex Argenteus, facs. 230 (fol. 165v)

Status: not verified but unambiguous.