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

Re: Tolkien's phonemic mode

Expand Messages
  • xeeniseit <xeeniseit@yahoo.com.ar>
    Danny teithant: Certainly the Bombadil , LĂșthien and Treebeard modes do not represen= t RP. So did Tolkien use an alternative as a standard
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 4, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Danny teithant:
      > Certainly the 'Bombadil', 'LĂșthien' and 'Treebeard' modes do not represen=
      t
      RP. So did Tolkien use an alternative as a standard pronunciation? If so, h=
      ow
      do we know what it is? If we attempt to write in these modes, how do we kno=
      w
      that we're spelling a word the way that Tolkien would considering the scarc=
      ity
      of English words wriiten in these Tengwar modes? I don't think we can know.=


      There can't be any certain knowledge, but based on his examples, we can try=

      to make our best guess (in fact, with the KL mode that's not that different=
      ). My
      best guess is: Received Pronunciation + handling of r-sounds as in the
      States.

      > I think Tolkien's early experiments (and yes, they do represent a
      developmental stage) show the adaptability of the Tengwar.

      Do we really know in which temporal order these texts have been written? I =

      only know that the tengwar inscription on the LotR-title page -which I cons=
      ider
      the tehtar-counterpart of the KL-mode- has been published before the
      Bombadil-texts.

      > But I would not recommend using the modes for writing text that you would=

      like to be easily read by others.

      I wouldn't recommend using any tengwar for writing texts that you would lik=
      e
      to be easily read. ;) But I see your point, and I like the idea that Tolkie=
      n
      himself, considering the same point, used orthographic modes when
      adressing a broader public, - but that he used phonemic modes (as the
      Bombadil mode) when using the tengwar for personal purposes! I think it's n=
      ot
      a question of earlier-later, but of private-public. Though I fear we're una=
      ble to
      judge on this until his tengwar diaries are published.

      Actually, I think that behind the question of private-public, there's the q=
      uestion
      of linguistical (de-)formation or not. I consider myself as linguistically =
      (de-
      )formated, and that must be the reason why to me, the phonemical Bombadil
      mode is easily readable, not harder than the orthographical King's Letter
      mode. And I'm sure there are others like me. Of course, I also generally
      recommend the KL mode, but for the few linguistically (de-)formated, I
      recommend the Bombadil mode as something dangerous, but also very
      delicious, comparable to other "secret vices".

      suilaid
      xeeniseit
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.