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

the circumflex

Expand Messages
  • DDanielA@webtv.net
    I was reading old posts and saw a brief exchange about the need for the circumflex in the Unicode proposal. Though Professor Tolkien states that the circumflex
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 25, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      I was reading old posts and saw a brief exchange about the need for the
      circumflex in the Unicode proposal. Though Professor Tolkien states that
      the circumflex is sometimes used as as abbreviated form of the 'a'
      tehta, he does not say that this is the only use of the circumflex. In
      fact, I believe that another use for it is attested in the King's
      Letter, version I. As versions I and III are written with tengwar of the
      same style and size, though in different modes, it would seem odd that
      version I used an abbreviated form while version III used the three dots
      written out in full if they, indeed, represented the same tehta. (The
      circumflex written over the 'a' tengwa indicated 'ae' in this example.
      Curiously, sometimes 'ae' was written out in full – 'a' tengwa + yanta
      – instead.) Also, the 'a' tehta over the 'a' tengwa doesn't seem a
      logical rendering for the diphthong 'ae'. I have a theory, but not one
      iota of evidence to support it. The diphthong 'ae' could not be
      represented by the 'a' tengwa with the 'e' tehta (´) over it because
      the acute accent was used for the andaith in the full writing modes.
      Might the circumflex not represent a small yanta to signify a following
      'e'? There is, after all, a marked resemblance in shape of the
      circumflex to yanta. (Presumably 'oe' might be written as anna with a
      circumflex, though ths is not attested in the King's Letter.) So I
      believe that the circumflex deserves a place,and not just as a
      handwritten variant of the three dots. Just my thoughts on the subject!
      – Danny.
    • erilaz@earthlink.net
      ... Certainly. Since yanta represents /e/ in this mode, a small superscript yanta is a perfectly reasonable representation for the e of /ae/ and /oe/. I m
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 25, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Danny Andriës writes:

        >I have a theory, but not one
        >iota of evidence to support it. The diphthong 'ae' could not be
        >represented by the 'a' tengwa with the 'e' tehta (´) over it because
        >the acute accent was used for the andaith in the full writing modes.
        >Might the circumflex not represent a small yanta to signify a following
        >'e'?

        Certainly. Since yanta represents /e/ in this mode, a small superscript
        yanta is a perfectly reasonable representation for the "e" of /ae/ and
        /oe/. I'm reminded of early German printed books, such as the 1493
        Nuremberg Chronicle, in which the umlaut vowels were represented by <a>,
        <o>, and <u> with small e's printed above them.


        ********************************************************************
        Arden R. Smith erilaz@...

        "Do you know Languages? What's the French for fiddle-de-dee?"
        "Fiddle-de-dee's not English," Alice replied gravely.
        "Who ever said it was?" said the Red Queen.

        --Lewis Carroll,
        _Through the Looking-glass_
        ********************************************************************
      • Mans Bjorkman
        ... Besides, in the King s Letter version II (published in Vinyar Tengwar #29), this e-tehta is written so that there can be no doubt that it is in fact a
        Message 3 of 3 , Jan 26, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          erilaz@... wrote:
          >
          > Danny Andriës writes:
          >
          > >I have a theory, but not one
          > >iota of evidence to support it. The diphthong 'ae' could not be
          > >represented by the 'a' tengwa with the 'e' tehta (´) over it because
          > >the acute accent was used for the andaith in the full writing modes.
          > >Might the circumflex not represent a small yanta to signify a following
          > >'e'?
          >
          > Certainly. Since yanta represents /e/ in this mode, a small superscript
          > yanta is a perfectly reasonable representation for the "e" of /ae/ and
          > /oe/. [...]

          Besides, in the King's Letter version II (published in Vinyar Tengwar
          #29), this e-tehta is written so that there can be no doubt that it is
          in fact a superscripted _yanta_.


          Yours,
          Måns


          --
          Måns Björkman "Mun þu mik!
          Störtloppsvägen 8, III Man þik.
          SE-129 46 Hägersten Un þu mer!
          Sweden <http://hem.passagen.se/mansb> An þer."
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.