Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5015Re: Another Tengwar Crack

Expand Messages
  • j_mach_wust
    Nov 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hisilome wrote:
      >
      > j. 'mach' wust wrote:
      >
      > > a transcription of the e in _cries_ with yanta instead of
      > > a seperate e-tehta
      >
      > <<<What exactly do you mean here? i-tehta on short carrier plus
      > yanta, or i-tehta on top of yanta? Where would either usage be
      > attested? (I-tehta on top of yanta maybe based on analogy to the
      > spelling of "ae" in the Michael Endorion dedication?)

      Yes, that's what I meant, the i-tehta on yanta, based on the Endorion
      dedication (DTS 62).

      > In DTS 5, Tolkien spelled "ie" in his own family name with i-tehta
      > on short carrier plus "seperate" e-tetha on the following consonant,
      > just as Lucy did. True, the "ie" in _Tolkien_ is pronounced
      > differently from the one in _cries_, yet we're dealing with
      > predominantly orthographic spelling here, anyway...>>>
      ...

      Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of it when I wrote that
      previous message. I agree that the pronunciation doesn't matter. I
      still think that a transcription with yanta may be an option, since it
      accords with what I've called a "general tencency" of having only one
      true vowel sign per syllable. Based on the transcription of "Reuel" I
      speculate proper names to be excepted from that tendency, allowing an
      even closer reproduction to traditional spelling which may be
      important in proper names – this would account for the use of separate
      vowel signs in the transcription of "Tolkien" in DTS 5. However, this
      speculation is based on very few data, like most assumptions on
      English tehtar modes.

      Then there might be a practical reason to favour the use of yanta in a
      transcription of "cries": If we use two seperate tehtar, this might
      require two separate carriers... Well, on a second thought, I've just
      noticed that this isn't true, since the e-tehta is preferably put on
      the s-hook of the ending and not on a separate carrier: quesse, rómen,
      carrier + i-tehta, attached s-hook + e-tehta.

      Either case, it's a tricky word.

      ---------------------------
      j. 'mach' wust
      http://machhezan.tripod.com
      ---------------------------
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic