4353Re: [elfscript] Re: about "i" + Was DTS 8 written by JRRT?
- Nov 3, 2004<>> j_mach_wust wrote:
>We also find many "capitalizations" in other Tolkien's tengwar texts.
>> 'Hísilómë' Dave wrote:
> Are there many
> incidences of a "capitalized short carrier"? Come to think
> of it, long carriers usually seem to be extended
> _downwards_, not upwards, so this would certainly give
> weight to your argument :).
There's another sample of a "capitalized" short carrier in DTS 18
(third verse, third line) (the same sample shows even a "capitalized"
long carrier: fifth verse, first word).
[Right, so a "capitalized" carrier would have an upwardly extended stem
and a curl to the left at the bottom, and thus generally look a bit like
a "J"--BTW, did you come up with the term? The "capitalization" does not
seem to serve any special function, does it?]
>>> In the Doors of Durin inscription (as published inWait a minute, isn't DTS 8 not drawn by J. R. R. Tolkien at all, but a
>>> Fellowship), I'm not sure whether for example the "i" in
>>> _minno_ is to be considered a long or a short carrier?
>>> What does it look like to you? Anyway, in this sample,
>>> again, the only clear-cut occurence of a long carrier
>>> seems to me to be the "i" in _Im (Narvi)_, word-initial
>> I'd say it the other way round: The only clear-cut
>> occurences of short carriers are in the words _Durin_ and
> Don't know, this really seems to be a matter of
> interpretation. I'm looking at the second hardcover
> edition by George Allen & Unwin, p.319, and to me the "i"
> in, say, _Celebrimbor_ or _Eregion_ also look kind of
> short to me, especially when compared with the "i"
> occurrences in _i thiw hin_. To close to call I guess :).
> In some earlier drafts that are reproduced in AI, e.g. nos
> 150 and 151, all carriers seem to be distinctly short. As
> you said, it doesn't seem to make a big difference in this
copy made of DTS 32 by some graphic? I think this is told in the
Artist & Illustrator, but I have only made a copy of page 158 and
brought the book back to the library.
[You are, as usual, right :). On page 161 of my edition of AI, it says
that "The picture of the Doors of Durin  reproduced in "The Lord of
the Rings" was made by a blockmaker's copyist after Tolkien's final
design ." I have to say, though, that in , as opposed to
, I feel that _all_ the carriers clearly look short, and it would
thus seem that the "ambiguity" in this sample was only introduced by the
copyist, who in all likelihood was not aware of the subtleties of
> BTW, there are some "strange" spellings in these earlierI think this isn't a reflection of a earlier conceptual stage of this
> drafts (...) This is probably some earlier
> conceptual stage for this mode?
mode, but of a earlier conceptual stage of the language (have a look
at the bottom of DTS 29 :-).
[Yes, about that: I've never been able to clearly decipher Tolkien's
writing here, specifically what follows after the opening "This is...".
Can you read it? "This is an (?) use of the elvish character (?)
spelling" (or maybe it's "This is a-something-use, the "n" belonging to
the word following the article "a"). At first I thought maybe
"erroneous" use, but the letters really to me look more like a-r-e-h(or
l-i?)-a (?)(?), and that obviously doesn't make much sense. Maybe
"earlier use"? But where we should see "e", I only see "a", and it
generally doesn't seem to fit. Guess I'm a lousy reader of Tolkien's
handwriting. Any ideas? BTW, I only thought it might be an "earlier
stage of this _mode_" because "spelling" is being mentioned...]
Well, there is actually one earlier
feature in the mode, too: The andotyelle seems to be used not only for
long nasal consonants (nn, mm), but also for the prenasalized voiced
stops (nd, mb), see 'Celebrimbor, ndíw'.
[Right, the latter use for nasalized voiced stops would correspond to
the use in the Classical Quenya Mode. I'd say it's an earlier stage in
both the language and the spelling :)--though the two are, of course,
not _necessarily_ closely connected.]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>