There are several cases where certain forms of words
clash with other forms of other words... I don't
remember examples, but I think this occured to me some
times

Latin has such 'problems' too

> I find the word "man" in the sense "why?" a little
> doubtful. [...]
>
> It would be most logical if "man", as you say, means
> "why". Maybe
> Tolkien imagined that for a short time, the same
> word was used
> for "why" and "who", though this was changed because
> it was rather
> impractical (although we don't have any evidence
> telling us it was
> changed).
> [...]

On 7/30/05, triangeln_siiiiiii <triangeln_siiiiiii@...> wrote:
> --- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, Gildor Inglorion <elfiness@y...>
> wrote:
> > It has been suggested: ma can be declines like a
> > noun... therefore
> >
> > mo 'of what', manen 'how', man 'why, manna/masse
> > 'where' (meaning depending on the Case), mallo 'from where'
> [...]
[...]

I beleive the reason why Gildor made this speculation is because _man_
would have been the dative form of the interrogative element _ma_.
Still this is rather problematic, since _man_ means both "who" and
"what" and the translation "why" would clash. I don't have anything
against homophones; everything may depend on context.

Aiya,
        I sincerely appreciate everyones' advice. I've learned a little bit
from this little exercise. Thank you. I will give these options to my wife and
let her pick the one she likes the best. A lot of her decision will be based on
the asthetics of each of the different tengwar phrases. But _ilu vanya_ will
not be one of them. Again, thank you.

        Narfindë


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, "Mornon" <adriana_dardanelli@t...>
wrote:
> I was thinking about how translate "Land of Four Seas"; "Land of
> Seas" could be *_Eardor_ or *_Earnor; being _can-_ an affix
> for "four", it would be right something like *_Caneardor_, "Four-sea-
> land"?

AFAIK, Nodorin neither Sindarin shows **_ear_ for "sea". It's either _
(g)ae(a)r_ :-)

Prof. Tolkien left more than one words for "sea":
_(g)aear_ [LR II:I, A Elbereth Gilthoniel; Letters, #297]
_(g)aer_ in compounds: e.g. _Belegaer_ [Sil.]

(There is of course _aearon_ as well [A Elbereth Gilthoniel, LR II:I],
which I think is translated as "great sea, mighty sea")

So, BMO, *_Dor Canadaer_ would be fine.

Lucy

--- Vicente Velasco <rashbold@...> wrote:

> On 7/30/05, triangeln_siiiiiii
> <triangeln_siiiiiii@...> wrote:
> > --- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, Gildor Inglorion
> <elfiness@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > It has been suggested: ma can be declines like a
> > > noun... therefore
> > >
> > > mo 'of what', manen 'how', man 'why, manna/masse
> > > 'where' (meaning depending on the Case), mallo
> 'from where'
> > [...]
> [...]
>
> I beleive the reason why Gildor made this
> speculation is because _man_
> would have been the dative form of the interrogative
> element _ma_.
> Still this is rather problematic, since _man_ means
> both "who" and
> "what" and the translation "why" would clash. I
> don't have anything
> against homophones; everything may depend on
> context.
>

This also depends on how one analyses _mana_ from
_Mana i coimas Eldaron?_ (PM:396; 403). Is this simply
a longer variant of _ma_, or _ma_ + the copula _na_
suffixed? If the former, *manan is an alternative to
*man.

Shine on,

Thomas Ferencz

  -- love is the shadow that ripens the wine --

Let's discuss Eldarin languages - http://aglardh.middangeard.hu



____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

Da: "calwen76" <calwen.rudh@...>

> Nodorin neither Sindarin shows **_ear_ for "sea". It's either _
> (g)ae(a)r_

My fault, I forgot to indicate I was speaking about Quenya: my point was if
it would be right use _can-_, _ear_ and _-nor/-dor_ to have an hypotetical
Quenya word *_Canearnor_ or *_Caneardor_.
Thanks for your reply.
Mornon.

Just send us your result just BEFORE you she tries to
tattoo it :)

--- Texasshuffle@... Ýãñáøå:

[...]Thank you. I will give
> these options to my wife and
> let her pick the one she likes the best.[...]

Captain Quack wrote:

>Terry Dock <terrydock@...> wrote:
>
>
>>Hence _Arda vanima_ or _vanima Arda_; or the same construction with _ambar_.
>>
>>
>
>Or perhaps_vanim' Arda_?
>
>
Perhaps :)

But if it is supposed to be written with tengwar, I'm not sure whether
it would make much difference.

--Terry

No the apostrophe didn't make a difference. Something about implied
'a' at the end of words.
        Narfindë


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello everyone!

This question has probably come up before in the list, but I wasn't
able to find any article about it. I've attempted to translate a short
poem into Sindarin and I was faced with the first problem as regards
the pronouns: should we use _nîn_ with a circumflex or _nín_ with an
acute accent? I was working from the articles in Ardalambion and I
found there that all personal pronouns were spelt with an acute
accent. But then I realized that everywhere else they were spelt with
a circumflex! Why the difference? Does it have to do with a convention
or is there any linguistic justification for the different spellings?
I'd appreciate any kind of help, please!

Thank you!

Cecilia

--- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, "Lainiel" <ceciliania@y...> wrote:
> [...] should we use _nîn_ with a circumflex or _nín_ with an
> acute accent?

Hello,
let the evidence speak for ourselves:

In Vinyar Tengwar #44 a Lord's Prayer was published, in Sindarin _Ae
Adar Nín_, _nín_ clearly stated with an accute accent (FMI page 22).
The word _nîn_ is attested as well, but has another meaning: N "tear"
(Etym. 376), the word is anyway connected with expressions for "wet".

Hope this helps,
Lucy

--- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, "Mornon" <adriana_dardanelli@t...>
wrote:
> My fault, I forgot to indicate I was speaking about Quenya: my point
> was if it would be right use _can-_, _ear_ and _-nor/-dor_ to have an
> hypotetical Quenya word *_Canearnor_ or *_Caneardor_.

Aha... my fault. It's because I'm interested more in Sindarin.

But, *_Kaneandor, Kaneardor_, or *_Kaneasta_ [VT43:15] would work.

Lucy

> This question has probably come up before in the list, but I wasn't
> able to find any article about it.

I actually made some remarks in Common Eldarin views on the Sindarin
pronomial system
http://www.phy.duke.edu/~trenk/elvish/pron_rek.html
(which by now is a bit older and isn't one of my best articles anymore,
I'll have to rewrite a few bits eventually...)

> I've attempted to translate a short
> poem into Sindarin and I was faced with the first problem as regards
> the pronouns: should we use _nîn_ with a circumflex or _nín_ with an
> acute accent?

First, let me note that it is not obvious that we should be very concerned
about this difference - you can't make the distinction in tengwar anyway,
only in the English transcription, so how grammatically meaningful can it
be?

The reason for the difference is, as every so often, Tolkien. We see
possessive adjectives applied in three (four) different ways: In the
King's letter we have the circumflex:

_mhellyn în phain_ (all his friends) (SD:128 )
_Meril bess dîn_ (Rose, his wife) (SD:128 )

In the _Ae adar_, we have an acute:

_Adar nín_ (my father) (VT:44)

But more often, we have a definite article and an acute (or even a short
vowel!) (and I will count _en_ here as article though it's not obvious, so
you can throw the example out if you're sceptical):

_i eneth lín_ (thy will) (VT:44)
_i arnad lín_ (thy kingdom) (VT:44)
_i innas lin_ (thy will) (VT:44)
_i mbas ilaurui vín_ (our daily bread) (VT:44)
_i úgerth vin_ (our wrong-doings) (VT:44)
_ered e-mbar nín_ (the mountains of my home) (UT:40, translated in UT:54)


Now - should we be concerned about the lack of acute in some of these
examples (that would show up in tengwar)? David Salo clearly isn't and has
emended the text in his book. Aaron Shaw's last position known to me is
that there's grammatical significance in the accent, my personal
impression is that given the sketchy appearance of the original document
tracking the difference between í and i in Tolkien's handwriting might be
overdoing things. But we don't know.

What about the definite article? Someone in the forum of sindarin.de
(Eirien I believe) has made the very shrewd observation that all persons
('father', 'daughter', friends') combined with the possessive adjective
don't get the article, all other words do (abstract ones like 'will' along
rather earthly ones like 'daily bread'). I tend to think that this is
probably true.


> I was working from the articles in Ardalambion and I
> found there that all personal pronouns were spelt with an acute
> accent. But then I realized that everywhere else they were spelt with
> a circumflex!

Everywhere else is probably a bit overstated ;-) But Helge hasn't been
overly interested in the Sindarin/Noldorin pronomial system, so others
have taken to their own reconstructions...

> Why the difference? Does it have to do with a convention
> or is there any linguistic justification for the different spellings?
> I'd appreciate any kind of help, please!

I hope I answered the question.

* Thorsten

> First, let me note that it is not obvious that we should be very
concerned about this difference - you can't make the distinction in
tengwar anyway, only in the English transcription, so how
grammatically meaningful can it be?
>

A most excellent point and one which strongly suggests that Thorsten
is correct.  We do know that Tolkien did certain things to his english
orthography though to help aid in correct pronunciation.  Perhaps this
is simply a roman differentiation with the intent for clarity?  Just a
random guess and the basis upon which I have some pieces of theory
(please note: theory - very very much theory and more for my own
amusement than as a means for writings use).


> Now - should we be concerned about the lack of acute in some of
these examples (that would show up in tengwar)? David Salo clearly
isn't and has emended the text in his book. Aaron Shaw's last position
known to me is that there's grammatical significance in the accent, my
personal  impression is that given the sketchy appearance of the
original document tracking the difference between í and i in Tolkien's
handwriting might be overdoing things. But we don't know.
>

The topic is certainly an interesting one and is something that I have
pondered before.  My position is that the accent used may be related
to phrasal structure and it may or may not be related to a semantic
difference.  Thorsten, I believe, has the absolute safest position.
It's quite likely that Tolkien wasn't perfect in his writing or did
not mean for any difference to be intended. My thoughts on the matter
are merely hypothetical and based off a very limited and possibly
imperfect corpus.  There is an ancient article I wrote that covers
this topic here:

http://sindarin.weet.us/pronominal.html

It may be interesting.  Just remember that it IS rather old!

If I were to actually write with the language right now I would do as
Thorsten suggests.  I think we both absolutely agree on what the best
course for a prospective student would be (at least a beginner - more
advanced students may wish to delve into theory more).

Since I'm mostly concerned with the theory and stylistics of Tolkien's
languages though I can't presume Tolkien made a mistake (as possible
as that is).  It's just too easy to ignore hard topics by claiming
that Tolkien made a mistake (and hence that we know more than he did).
  My interests require that I not set anything in stone while writing
requires that some things be set as best as we can guess.  Thorsten
is, of course, aware of the difference as well as anybody and I'm
certainly not saying that he is dismissing material out of hand (far
from it).

>
What about the definite article? Someone in the forum of sindarin.de
(Eirien I believe) has made the very shrewd observation that all
persons ('father', 'daughter', friends') combined with the possessive
adjective don't get the article, all other words do (abstract ones
like 'will' along rather earthly ones like 'daily bread'). I tend to
think that this is probably true.
>

Very interesting.  I think this ties in quite well with what I believe
about the syntax of Sindarin.  In fact I think we cover a similar
issue in my syntax article.  Can't remember specifically.  I know the
topic was brought up and discussed.  Sindarin use of definiteness is a
complex and fascinating topic of study.

> First, let me note that it is not obvious that we should be very
concerned
> about this difference - you can't make the distinction in tengwar
anyway,
> only in the English transcription, so how grammatically meaningful
can it
> be?

You're absolutely right, I hadn't considered the fact that there is
actually no difference in tengwar spelling, so there is obviously no
semantic difference either when it comes to possessive pronouns.

Thank you all for your enlightening remarks!

Cecilia

Actually the Quenya Lapseparma entry for "Kathryn" is somewhat
misleading. The name is of unknown origin but is almost surely NOT
from Greek katharos, "pure," merely influenced by it (the original
Greek form being Aikaterine). Either way the Quenya adjective poica
(=Noldorin/Sindarin puig in the Etymologies)would come closer to
katharos than vendea, and a parallel Quenya formation reflecting
this folk etymology might be *Poicaterine; if you find this
objectionable, then some Quenya name-form derived from poica such as
*Poicie(l) would still be more accurate than Veenea or its variants,
though perhaps more difficult to convert into Sindarin. (The fact
that many of these names are of unknown origin shows the limitations
of trying to names into Elvish, as opposed to giving the original
name an Elvish form; in that case the Greek form Aik/c)aterine would
fit Quenya phonetics perfectly down to the feminine e--or, as this
might undesirably suggest Quenya aica "fell, dire," just *Cateriine).
A Sindarin form combining both ideas would be *Puigwen, "Pure
Maiden" (not the loveliest-looking name, to be sure, but this may at
least give you something to work on).

For "glove" the Qenya Lexicon gives mantl (by later Quenya phonetics
*mantil), for "gauntlet" mantele. I'm not sure what the Sindarin
versions of either of these words would be, but in any case we learn
in the Etymologies that "Noldorin" (= Sindarin) preferred the form
kamba "fist" to the word "mo" ( = Q. maa) in the meaning "hand," so
your coinage Kambtobodan might be on the right track after all. The
lenited Kam(b)dobodan would be better but still awkward; perhaps
someone better versed in Sindarin than I can take it from there.
I'll try myself to come up with better alternatives.





--- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew D. Mason" <mrshift@u...>
wrote:
[...]
> Name to translate: Kathryn Glover
> Kathryn: 'derived from Greek 'pure/virginal'; vende "maiden,
*virgin"[...]

This is partly a test to see if I can get the accents to come across.
If anybody spots an inaccuracy in this Quenya sentence, please let me
know!  I used the resources at Ardalambion.  It should mean "Send me
your windblown exiles."

Á menta nyenna etelerror hlápune sinar.

> You're absolutely right, I hadn't considered the fact that there is
> actually no difference in tengwar spelling, so there is obviously no
> semantic difference either when it comes to possessive pronouns.


Not obviously necessarily ;).  But a pretty good guess.

Aaron

"Ilu Ilúvatar en káre eldain a fírimoin ..." - thus begins Fíriel's
Song. I have read HKF's analysis and thought about some less clear
points in the Song, one of them being the word _en_ (occuring in the
text twice). I almost contented myslef with an explanation that it is
simply some introducing particle. But today I found in Helge's
Wordlist an explanation from VT45: "en - particle that may be inserted
before a past tense form to indicate that it refers to a remote past".
Does the source say anything more thereto (e. g. an example)?
Thank you in advance
Quenduluin

--- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, "promenadeofthedeer"
<riverbeauty@h...> wrote:
> This is partly a test to see if I can get the accents to come
across.
> If anybody spots an inaccuracy in this Quenya sentence, please let
me
> know!  I used the resources at Ardalambion.  It should mean "Send me
> your windblown exiles."
>
> Á menta nyenna etelerror hlápune sinar.

The accents come across fine. I would have chosen *ninna for *nyenna,
but both these forms are hypothetical. For "your exiles" I would use
something like *etyalyar (with the -ly- possessive-pronoun infix),
based on the attested *Etyangoldor, "Exiled Noldor." I see Etymologies
etele "outer lands" in your etelerror but the rest of it isn't clear
to me. For sinar "these" (not in your English translation) I would use
sine with adjectival plural inflection.

This looks like a translation of the words on the Statue of Liberty.
Is it?

--- In elfling@yahoogroups.com, "quildarener" <quildarener@y...>
wrote:
[...]
> This looks like a translation of the words on the Statue of
> Liberty. Is it?

Thanks, and yes.  I have been thinking about translating "The New
Colossus" for a long time.  I decided to translate the poem into
prose in Quenya (including neologisms on pages mentioned at
Ardalambion).

I mistyped my retranslation.  The original poem reads "Send these,
the homeless, tempest-tost, to me." I turned it around: "Send to me
these windblown exiles."  (Or, more floridly, "Send to me these
exiles, blown like spray upon the wind.")

I had a question about--fiddlesticks, I don't know the technical term-
-turning an adjective into a collective noun, as in "the homeless."
Is that possible in Quenya?  I tentatively formed the adjective
*maralóra "homeless" (not being sure how to resolve the disallowed
consonant cluster), but I wasn't sure if I could use it in the sense
I wanted.  Would I have to say instead, _Á menta [nyenna/ninna]
hlápune maralóre queni sine,_ "Send to me these windblown, homeless
people?"

> > I have been thinking about translating "The New
> Colossus" for a long time.  I decided to translate the poem into
> prose in Quenya (including neologisms on pages mentioned at
> Ardalambion).

Good choice--short and sweet.
>
> I mistyped my retranslation.  The original poem reads "Send these,
> the homeless, tempest-tost, to me." I turned it around: "Send to
me
> these windblown exiles."  (Or, more floridly, "Send to me these
> exiles, blown like spray upon the wind.")
>
> I had a question about--fiddlesticks, I don't know the technical
term-
> -turning an adjective into a collective noun, as in "the
homeless."
> Is that possible in Quenya?

Based on Treebeard's address to Celeborn and Galadriel in the Return
of the King (also found as part of the Quenya Corpus on Ardalambion)-
-"A vanimar, vanimalion nostari!" "Oh beautiful (ones), parents of
beautiful (ones)"-- I would say yes.

  I tentatively formed the adjective
> *maralóra "homeless" (not being sure how to resolve the disallowed
> consonant cluster), but I wasn't sure if I could use it in the
sense
> I wanted.  Would I have to say instead, _Á menta [nyenna/ninna]
> hlápune maralóre queni sine,_ "Send to me these windblown,
homeless
> people?"

Based on the above, no. I think *mar-e-loorar with an inserted "e"
(and a noun-plural ending, since the adjective is being used as a
noun, cf. vanimar, not vanime, above) would be reasonably clear.
(Assuming the stem for this noun is mar- and not mard-, as it may
also be, though the mard- form would suggest other meanings such
as "earth," "hall," etc.; your original "exiles" would be at least
as good as this and less ambiguous, though also coined). Sinar could
also be used with the noun-ending after all. It depends on whether
you want to use it as a noun or adjective in your translation. (One
noun-ending with the rest adjectival might be best, I'm not sure.)

Part of me wants to consider hlaapune (or hla(a)puune? We don't
know) an inspired choice. On the other hand, in Markirya hlapu- is
apparently intransitive, though you might conceivably convert it to
transitive use as long as your meaning is clear. (The homeless might
also be intransitively hlaapula "blowing in the wind" themselves,
though this might sound slightly comical.) The closest alternative I
can think of would be *haatin-e/-ar suurinen, "hurled (Qenya Lexicon
meaning; in the Etymologies this same stem means "break") by the
wind." The next closest word to "storm" would be raumo, but whether
this can mean a storm or only the noise of one I don't have Oilima
Markirya handy to check.

Hope this helps.

If anyone has any suggestions, I need it for the translation of the
croatian national anthem. thanks

rainalcar wrote:

>If anyone has any suggestions, I need it for the translation of the
>croatian national anthem. thanks
>
Why not use a periphrase: the father of one's father ? My grand father
would look like _atar atarinyo_.

There's a word for "grand son" though: _indyo_ (as Helge suggests, like
_inyo_ in the mounth of the Noldor).

Hope this helps,

--Terry

rainalcar eque:

>If anyone has any suggestions, I need it for the translation of the
>croatian national anthem. thanks

*_ataron_? *_yáratar_?

There is some old "Qenya" word at QL p. 39 also, apparently
(http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/qlindex1.htm#G).


Elhath

_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.com/

Da: "elhath *" <sp12@...>

> There is some old "Qenya" word at QL p. 39 also

QL gives _haru_.
Mornon.

[...]
I believe the QL word is haru, with haruni = "grandmother," but I will
need to check my copy at home to confirm this.

Hello!

How would we translate: what doesn't kill me, makes me stonger!

sa i úmaca nin, cara nin antanca!

What do you think about this?

Thanks in advance for your response

Best regards

Evenstar

Evenstar wrote:

>Hello!
>
>How would we translate: what doesn't kill me, makes me stonger!
>
>sa i úmaca nin, cara nin antanca!
>
>What do you think about this?

Right now my post-rock festival mind goes rather towards something like:

Tai umen mace (or _lá nye mace_?), nye antorya

(or simply _Tai ume mace [= lá mace?], antorya_, as in Finnish)


- I prefer _tai_ since Tolkien himself used it for "that which..." (VT42 p.
34)
- there are no such forms as _maca_ or _cara_ (the aorists would be _mace,
_care_, and the habitual present forms, _máca_, _cára_), since _mac-_ and
_car-_ are root verbs and not derived verbs like _lasta-_, _auta-_, etc.
(whose conjugational stems always end in A) ... someone might also have a
better suggestion for the verb "kill/slay" in Quenya
- _nin_ is the dative, not the direct object (though it is the latter in
*Sindarin*)


Elhath

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/

--- elhath *  wrote:
  Tai umen mace (or _lá nye mace_?), nye antorya

  (or simply _Tai ume mace [= lá mace?], antorya_, as
  in Finnish)

As the same source you cited which has _tai_ also uses _lá_ fornegation, I'd say
Tai lá mace antorya (nice compact translation!).

Shine on,


Thomas Ferencz

  -- love is the shadow that ripens the wine --

Let's discuss Eldarin languages - http://aglardh.middangeard.hu

---------------------------------
  Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]