That is not correct, it depends on the history.
You took Paul, so take me too.....or, so take me too.

So ist das nicht korrekt, es kommt auf die Vorgeschichte an.
Du hast Paul genommen, so nimm mich auch.....oder, so nimm auch mich.

(03-05-2021, 10:25 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.That is not correct, it depends on the history.
You took Paul, so take me too.....or, so take me too.

So ist das nicht korrekt, es kommt auf die Vorgeschichte an.
Du hast Paul genommen, so nimm mich auch.....oder, so nimm auch mich.

You are correct. I think something may be lost in translation here for those who don't speak German, so I will clarify.

The "nimm mich" might be addressed to God, as in "take my life, God, so I can be reunited with my loved ones". 

Additionally, as you show, being embedded in a longer sentence allows for different word order to stress certain parts. The word order "Take quickly me also" is ungrammatical, but it becomes somewhat more plausible in your example: "You took Paul, so take quickly me also".

This still sounds weird in modern English, but it sounds a bit less weird already to me in Dutch (though still not optimal). There is a correlation between loss of tenses and stricter word order, so it is possible that word order in a Middle German dialect was still flexible enough to allow this.

Another instance where the seemingly "ungrammatical" word order would be acceptable is the poetic verse, from which this kind of phrase may have been (theoretically) borrowed.

The example from the real poem which I quoted above seems to demonstrate that: as far as I understand,  "er muste gahs von im vare" is like English "he had to quickly from him move". Another interesting point in this example is that words "balde" and "gahs", seemingly of the same meaning, are used together.

What is certain is that there is, at the moment, no satisfactory reading neither of the first, nor of the last line on the whole. In the first line, "pox leber" is pretty undisputable, after that we have some mess, and the last word may be the most enigmatic in all the VMS marginalia. In the last line, "so nim" is clear, all other parts are questionable and require some additional "explanations" to be brought in.

Summarizing the cons of three major interpretations discussed in this thread:

- so nim gas mich - irregular word order, implied personification ("mich") related to some object outside the phrase itself, no space between "gas" and "mich"
- palden probiren so nim gasmi[l]ch - assumption that l was omitted and not corrected back, assumption that pbren is abbreviated probiren (no historic examples to confirm), also I'm unsure about the grammar of "palden probiren"
- nimtzas - the stuff looks much more like "g", not "cz" or "tz", also quite a decent space between "nim" and the supposed "tz"

Interestingly, as I noted some years ago, if we take it for ubren instead of pbren, then ub is Swiss for uber (see Idiotikon), and ren is abomasum, which is depicted to the upper left, annotated as "lab" (meaning the same thing). This fits the context, but again there is no space between ub and ren, and the more so, there seems to be the trace of the descender...

Maybe one could approach it in a systematical way, trying to localize the exact dialect that this is written in, using some hints. One hint that is 100% there is that "p" is systematically used versus "b", it is pox, not bocks, and it is palden and not balden. I do not know if this can suggest any specific location though, and was not just common.

As a side note, and I'm sorry that I mess this all up, but I'm leaving it for a record, lest I completely forget about that in a week, - it occurred to me that, much as "oladabas" may be distorted "Ialdabaoth" of the gnostics (as I suggested above), "anchiton" may be not that substance from the Alexander romance, but instead it may be distorted "Antichton" - which is the old pythagorean concept of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..

The word order in English is different from that in German and Dutch, so this may be very hard to assess for someone who does not speak those languages. The example "er muste gahs von im vare" is standard word order.

About "probiren", this would be an infinitive used in imperative form. This exists in modern language, here is an example I found online:

Zwiebeln abziehen und in Ringe schneiden. ; Peel the onions and slice them.

It is possible that this existed in Middle German dialects, but I wouldn't assume that before checking. Imperatives are one of those things in language that like to evolve.

(03-05-2021, 11:44 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(though still not optimal).

Very much so, I would say. The word "auch" is just about the only word I could imagine between "nim" and "mich" that would be in place. Even "bitte" would not go there, but either before or after.

It is just awkward, as I wrote, which does not mean that it is definitely wrong, but it makes the option less preferred.

Many things are individual.
For example, one writes "blut" with a b, and two lines later he writes "plut" with a p. Or "berner , perner", but it's the same person.
I must not compare Alemannic and Bavarian directly with MHD.
"ez aber" High German would say "ez" is written with an "s".
That may be so, but it means "jetzt aber".now but
In dialect, many things are swallowed, which makes it so difficult for others.
You have to hear it to really understand it. Even for me, a single word is difficult, what exactly is meant. There are many possibilities. Therefore, it is best to read the whole sentence.

I intend to catch up on the very interesting discussion of the linguistic details of the presumably German (?) phrases as soon as possible ("gas"), but in the meantime I do wish to add one more argument to my suggestion above that an English author could have deliberately chosen to write marginalia in German, even in semi-proficient German, rather than in English or French, for security reasons:

If scholars have believed that the ms is of Central European origin, might it not be the case that this is precisely the impression that the English author of the ms intended to create, just in case it fell into the wrong hands of Henry IV or an official in his court? The Duke of York could then plausibly and believably have said, "This is just an exotic manuscript I acquired while I was serving on embassy in the Count Palatine in Heidelberg."

Geoffrey

(03-05-2021, 12:30 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.About "probiren", this would be an infinitive used in imperative form.

What would be "balden" prepended to that?

(03-05-2021, 12:39 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The word "auch" is just about the only word I could imagine between "nim" and "mich" that would be in place.

I agree it is awkward. I cannot talk about German in this level of sophistication, but here is how I feel about the word order in modern Dutch. So imagine someone died and his deeply religious friend is overcome with grief and asks for god to take him too. Imagine the exclamation "You have taken x away from me, so quickly take me also". In this case, more words can go between "neem" and "mij".

The word order "dus neem ook snel mij!" is possible in Dutch because by shifting "mij" to the back, it receives the stress, enhancing the poetic effect. 
However, to get this effect I must place everything between the verb and the stressed object. If you put the ook/auch behind the sentence it becomes awkward again.