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

Re: [elfscript]: consonantal y in "full" Sindarin

Expand Messages
  • Gildor Inglorion
    teithant xeeniseit ... maybe because it was both availiable and nice as a shape... and except that (and maybe it was the main reason) it was the original
    Message 1 of 20 , May 7, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      teithant xeeniseit

      > BTW, anybody ever found a possible explanation why
      > yanta is used and
      > not anna, as it is the case in other tehtar modes
      > with the same tιmar
      > distribution (e.g. DTS 10 or DTS 39). I've always
      > thought of this
      > yanta as of an unexplainable exception, which is
      > very unsatisfying.

      maybe because it was both availiable and nice as a
      shape... and except that (and maybe it was the main
      reason) it was the original consonantal y letter in
      the primal tengwar mode(s) (cf. it's name)

      ____________________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Αποκτήστε τη δωρεάν @... διεύθυνση σας στο http://www.otenet.gr
    • xeeniseit
      teithant xeeniseitBTW, anybody ever found a possible explanation why yanta is used and not anna, as it is the case in other tehtar modes with the same
      Message 2 of 20 , May 8, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        teithant xeeniseit

        >> BTW, anybody ever found a possible explanation why yanta is used and
        not anna, as it is the case in other tehtar modes with the same témar
        distribution (e.g. DTS 10 or DTS 39). I've always thought of this yanta as=
        of an
        unexplainable exception, which is very unsatisfying.

        Gildor teithant:

        > and except that (and maybe it was the main reason) it was the original
        consonantal y letter in the primal tengwar mode(s) (cf. it's name)

        I'm not so sure whether the Quenya mode is the original or the primal tengw=
        ar
        mode. If it were like that, then the other modes should be similar to it. B=
        ut the
        similarities between them are bigger than the similarities between the Quen=
        ya
        mode and any of them. The Quenya mode doesn't even follow the generally
        accepted relations between the letters as explained in the appendices. Ther=
        e
        it is said explicitly that it differs from the other modes. (First sentence=
        of the
        sub-chapter "comment" or so, I'm sorry I can't cite the original.)

        And if yanta is a modification of anna (of what other tengwa could it be a =

        modification?), we can assume that in the very original mode we unfortunate=
        ly
        don't know of, anna would represent a consonantal y-sound. This could even =

        lead to the assumption that the calmatéma very originally was a (truely)
        palatal series. But I'm not sure whether that early Quenya already had pala=
        tal
        sounds or whether they only developped later.

        suilaid
      • Gildor Inglorion
        teithant xeeniseit ... it s because didnt base tengwar on Quenya, but in general elvish phonology, so that the tengwar could be adapted in any language... he
        Message 3 of 20 , May 8, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          teithant xeeniseit

          > mode and any of them. The Quenya mode doesn't even
          > follow the generally
          > accepted relations between the letters as explained
          > in the appendices. Ther=
          > e
          > it is said explicitly that it differs from the other
          > modes. (First sentence=
          > of the
          > sub-chapter "comment" or so, I'm sorry I can't cite
          > the original.)

          it's because didnt base tengwar on Quenya, but in
          general elvish phonology, so that the tengwar could be
          adapted in any language...

          he then adapted Quenya to them, but the adaptation was
          not perfect (not as sindarin or westron) because of
          Quenya's strict rules

          > And if yanta is a modification of anna (of what
          > other tengwa could it be a =
          > modification?), we can assume that in the very
          > original mode we unfortunate=
          > ly
          > don't know of, anna would represent a consonantal
          > y-sound. This could even =

          no, yanta and anna have no relation.. my theory is
          that yanta was used as consonantal y while anna was
          used for a carrier and/or to show early-lost initial
          g- sound (eg. alda from galada or alasse from galasse)

          > lead to the assumption that the calmatιma very
          > originally was a (truely)
          > palatal series. But I'm not sure whether that early
          > Quenya already had pala=
          > tal
          > sounds or whether they only developped later.

          tyelpetema was then for palatalised sounds

          ____________________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Αποκτήστε τη δωρεάν @... διεύθυνση σας στο http://www.otenet.gr
        • xeeniseit
          ... (not as sindarin or westron) because of Quenya s strict rules Suppose you mean King s Letter Sindarin, as Moria Gate Sindarin doesn t even have consistent
          Message 4 of 20 , May 8, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Gildor Inglorion teithant:
            > he then adapted Quenya to them, but the adaptation was not perfect
            (not as sindarin or westron) because of Quenya's strict rules

            Suppose you mean King's Letter Sindarin, as Moria Gate Sindarin
            doesn't even have consistent tyeller. Which Quenya has (except for
            óretyelle, but that's the case in most modes). It only changes the
            meaning of the lúvar, but the change is more or less regular: A
            doubled lúva means (pre)nasalisation.

            xeeniseit teithant:
            >> And if yanta is a modification of anna (of what other tengwa could
            it be a modification?), we can assume that in the very original mode
            we unfortunately don't know of, anna would represent a consonantal y-
            sound.

            Gildor Inglorion teithant:
            > no, yanta and anna have no relation.. my theory is that yanta was
            used as consonantal y while anna was used for a carrier and/or to
            show early-lost initial g- sound (eg. alda from galada or alasse from
            galasse)

            The appendices say that all additional letters but lambe and silme
            are modifications of another tengwa. What other tengwa could be the
            model for yanta, if it's not anna?

            Assuming that the appendices are right, and assuming that yanta is
            really developped out of anna, then we have to ask: why? There is a
            certain similarity between g-sounds and y-sounds, cf. "yesterday" to
            German "gestern" (yesterday) and "Tag" (day). But Quenya didn't have
            the development *g>y but *g>*gh>(zero). I don't know a lot about the
            historical phonology of Quenya, but it seems very unlikely to me to
            assume *g>*y>(zero), because Third Age Quenya has y-sounds in the
            same environments where that loss would have taken place.

            Why then? Perhaps: Anna is the very original sign for the y-
            consonant, yanta has developped from it, because there was a need for
            a special sign for the -i in diphtongs.

            But if anna was the very original sign for the y-consonant, the
            original value of calmatéma couldn't be that of a velar series, but
            rather of some kind of palatal series. Quenya has such a series, but
            it uses calmatéma with two underposed dots for it. Do we have to
            assume that Feanor originally designed a wholly different témar
            distribution? Or is it more likely that the original tengwar mode was
            designed for the English language, not by Feanor but rather by J.R.R.
            Tolkien?

            suilaid
          • Gildor Inglorion
            teithant xeeniseit ... none... yanta and hyarmen seem to be related ... where? the only circumstance i can remember is yelle from GJEL... in Quenya, as far as
            Message 5 of 20 , May 10, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              teithant xeeniseit

              > The appendices say that all additional letters but
              > lambe and silme
              > are modifications of another tengwa. What other
              > tengwa could be the
              > model for yanta, if it's not anna?

              none... yanta and hyarmen seem to be related

              > German "gestern" (yesterday) and "Tag" (day). But
              > Quenya didn't have
              > the development *g>y but *g>*gh>(zero). I don't know
              > a lot about the
              > historical phonology of Quenya, but it seems very
              > unlikely to me to
              > assume *g>*y>(zero), because Third Age Quenya has
              > y-sounds in the
              > same environments where that loss would have taken
              > place.

              where? the only circumstance i can remember is yelle
              from GJEL... in Quenya, as far as etymology and
              phonology are concerned, y is not related to g

              > Why then? Perhaps: Anna is the very original sign
              > for the y-
              > consonant, yanta has developped from it, because
              > there was a need for
              > a special sign for the -i in diphtongs.

              App. D of Quendi and Eldar says more or less, that the
              original value of Anna was *gh- and it was used as a
              tehtar carrier.. when this way of thinking was
              abandoned, anna was used now as 'following-y' carrier,
              because as i udnerstand, the dots under the short
              carrier wouldnt look good

              > But if anna was the very original sign for the
              > y-consonant, the
              > original value of calmatιma couldn't be that of a
              > velar series, but
              > rather of some kind of palatal series. Quenya has
              > such a series, but
              > it uses calmatιma with two underposed dots for it.

              no, it used Tyelpetema which is Tincotema with dots

              > Do we have to
              > assume that Feanor originally designed a wholly
              > different tιmar
              > distribution? Or is it more likely that the original
              > tengwar mode was
              > designed for the English language, not by Feanor but
              > rather by J.R.R.
              > Tolkien?

              you might be interested in the Quenta Eldatencelion i
              have written (still not perfect), found in the essays
              of Gwaith.. it was based mostly on App. D of Quendi
              and Eldar

              ____________________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Αποκτήστε τη δωρεάν @... διεύθυνση σας στο http://www.otenet.gr
            • Gildor Inglorion
              im teithant ... gee i just remembered... felya from phelga, and possibly other cases... you are right :)
              Message 6 of 20 , May 10, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                im teithant

                > where? the only circumstance i can remember is yelle
                > from GJEL... in Quenya, as far as etymology and
                > phonology are concerned, y is not related to g

                gee i just remembered... felya from phelga, and
                possibly other cases... you are right :)

                ____________________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Αποκτήστε τη δωρεάν @... διεύθυνση σας στο http://www.otenet.gr
              • xeeniseit
                teithant xeeniseit: The appendices say that all additional letters but lambe and silme are modifications of another tengwa. What other tengwa could be the
                Message 7 of 20 , May 11, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  teithant xeeniseit:
                  >> The appendices say that all additional letters but lambe and silme are
                  modifications of another tengwa. What other tengwa could be the model for
                  yanta, if it's not anna?

                  Gildor teithant:
                  > none... yanta and hyarmen seem to be related

                  That's true, and it makes sense, as the pair hy/y is the palatal fricative =

                  unvoiced/voiced opposition. But this doesn't change much, because hyarmen
                  also is a modification of one of the primary letters (if the appendices are=
                  right).
                  Of which one? I'd guess of harma. That's the same case: A sign for a palata=
                  l
                  sound (no matter whether yanta or hyarmen) is borrowed from calmatéma.
                  And that seem very curious to me.

                  But if -as Gildor's affirmed- Quenyan y is somewhat related to g, this coul=
                  d be
                  the explanation. I wonder whether the sound of hy also has a relation to
                  palatal sounds? Then the development from harma to hyarmen could also be
                  explained. Who knows about that?

                  suilaid
                • laurifindil
                  ... e = unvoiced/voiced opposition. But this doesn t change much, because hyarmen= ... re= right). Of which one? I d guess of harma. That s the same
                  Message 8 of 20 , May 12, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "xeeniseit" <xeeniseit@y...> wrote:
                    > teithant xeeniseit:
                    > >> The appendices say that all additional letters but lambe and silme are=

                    > modifications of another tengwa. What other tengwa could be the model for=

                    > yanta, if it's not anna?
                    >
                    > Gildor teithant:
                    > > none... yanta and hyarmen seem to be related
                    >
                    > That's true, and it makes sense, as the pair hy/y is the palatal fricativ=
                    e =
                    >
                    > unvoiced/voiced opposition. But this doesn't change much, because hyarmen=

                    > also is a modification of one of the primary letters (if the appendices a=
                    re=
                    > right).
                    > Of which one? I'd guess of harma. That's the same case: A sign for a pala=
                    ta=
                    > l
                    > sound (no matter whether yanta or hyarmen) is borrowed from calmatéma.
                    > And that seem very curious to me.
                    >
                    > But if -as Gildor's affirmed- Quenyan y is somewhat related to g, this co=
                    ul=
                    > d be
                    > the explanation. I wonder whether the sound of hy also has a relation to =

                    > palatal sounds? Then the development from harma to hyarmen could also be =

                    > explained. Who knows about that?

                    All of this is just plain nonsense! :-(

                    The tengwa _yanta_ is just a copy of a sarat ; see/read Parma XIII, p.
                    88.

                    EJK
                  • xeeniseit
                    Laurifindil teithant: The tengwa _yanta_ is just a copy of a sarat ;I suppose this an explicit statement by Tolkien, isn t it? If it really is,= then it s
                    Message 9 of 20 , May 13, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Laurifindil teithant:
                      > The tengwa _yanta_ is just a copy of a sarat ;

                      I suppose this an explicit statement by Tolkien, isn't it? If it really is,=
                      then it's in
                      overt contradiction to the appendices, where J.R.R. Tolkien says that all
                      additional letters but lambe and silme are modifications of other letters. =
                      This
                      wouldn't be the first contradiction in Tolkien's work, but such a contradic=
                      tion
                      must be judged on very carefully and not just be thrown away as plain
                      nonsense. Tell me at least a reason why you're ignoring the appendices.

                      But there are more questions, and more intersting ones: Why is the relation=

                      between hyarmen and yanta so similar to the relation between thúletyelle an=
                      d
                      óretyelle, e.g. between hwesta and vilya? In both cases we have a pair of a=

                      voiceless fricative and an approximate (the weakest consonant of its téma),=
                      in
                      both cases we have no doubling, in both cases the only difference in shape =
                      is
                      the raised "stem" of the former, vs a shortened one of the second. Such
                      interesting relations are totally ignored if you simply affirm that yanta i=
                      s copied
                      from the "alphabet of Rúmil".

                      > see/read Parma XIII, p. 88.

                      I'm sorry it's only a few time ago I've become aware that there's such a th=
                      ing
                      as parma, but it was way too late. And borrowing it is a very complicated t=
                      hing,
                      if you don't find any copy in your country.

                      suilaid
                      xeeniseit
                    • Gildor Inglorion
                      teithant xeeniseit ... parma 13 has been published over a year ago, and i m still waiting for some of its info incorporated to the known sites... even Amanye
                      Message 10 of 20 , May 13, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        teithant xeeniseit

                        > > see/read Parma XIII, p. 88.
                        >
                        > I'm sorry it's only a few time ago I've become aware
                        > that there's such a th=
                        > ing
                        > as parma, but it was way too late. And borrowing it
                        > is a very complicated t=
                        > hing,
                        > if you don't find any copy in your country.

                        parma 13 has been published over a year ago, and i'm
                        still waiting for some of its info incorporated to the
                        known sites...

                        even Amanye Tenceli has been 'dead', promising that it
                        will incorporate the info from parma 13 'soon' :(

                        ____________________________________________________________
                        Do You Yahoo!?
                        Αποκτήστε τη δωρεάν @... διεύθυνση σας στο http://www.otenet.gr
                      • xeeniseit
                        ... Then I shouldn t ignore them either. The appendices say something interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant of harma. How is
                        Message 11 of 20 , May 13, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          teithant xeeniseit:
                          > Tell me at least a reason why you're ignoring the appendices.

                          Then I shouldn't ignore them either. The appendices say something
                          interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant of
                          harma. How is this to be understood? Does this mean that the palatal fricative
                          hy is to be considered a variant of the velar one? Etymologically? I can't judge
                          on that, as I don't know about Quenya etymology. Phonetically? This would
                          seem strange to me, but maybe possible, but I'd like to have more evidence
                          on it.

                          suilaid
                          xeeniseit
                        • John Cowan
                          ... Consider the alternation in German and other languages between [x] and [C], the velar and palatal fricatives. Near front vowels, as in ich , one gets the
                          Message 12 of 20 , May 13, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            xeeniseit scripsit:

                            > Then I shouldn't ignore them either. The appendices say something
                            > interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant of
                            > harma. How is this to be understood? Does this mean that the palatal fricative
                            > hy is to be considered a variant of the velar one? Etymologically? I can't judge
                            > on that, as I don't know about Quenya etymology. Phonetically? This would
                            > seem strange to me, but maybe possible, but I'd like to have more evidence
                            > on it.

                            Consider the alternation in German and other languages between [x] and [C], the
                            velar and palatal fricatives. Near front vowels, as in "ich", one gets the palatal
                            fricative; near back vowels, as in "ach", one gets the velar fricative.

                            --
                            A poetical purist named Cowan [that's me: jcowan@...]
                            Once put the rest of us dowan. [on xml-dev]
                            "Your verse would be sweeter http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
                            If it only had metre http://www.reutershealth.com
                            And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan." [overpacked line!] --Michael Kay
                          • DDanielA@webtv.net
                            ... overt ... silme are modifications of other letters. It isn t really a contradiction. JRRT does indeed write that the additional letters (save lambe and
                            Message 13 of 20 , May 13, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Teithant Alf:
                              >Laurifindil teithant:
                              > >The tengwa _yanta_ is just a copy of a sarat ;
                              >I suppose this an explicit statement by Tolkien,
                              >isn't it? If it really is, then it's in
                              overt
                              >contradiction to the appendices, where J.R.R.
                              >Tolkien says that all additional letters but lambe and
                              silme are modifications of other letters.

                              It isn't really a contradiction. JRRT does indeed write that the
                              additional letters (save lambe and silme) are "modifications of other
                              letters", but note that he does not say "modifications of other
                              Fëanorian tengwar." "Letters" could apply equally well to the sarati;
                              they are also letters. JRRT also states in the appendix that the tengwar
                              owed something to the letters of Rúmil. I had always assumed that this
                              referred to things like arrangement and use of vowel diacriticals, but
                              it could also apply to borrowing the shape of a sarat.

                              >but such a contradiction not just be thrown
                              >away as plain nonsense.

                              Some people just happen to use an unfortunate choice of words.
                              'Nonsense' is too strong a word, and inappropriate here.
                              >Why is the relation between hyarmen and yanta
                              >so similar to the relation between thúletyelle
                              >and óretyelle, e.g. between hwesta and vilya? In
                              >both cases we have a pair of a
                              voiceless
                              >fricative and an approximate (the weakest
                              >consonant of its téma), in
                              both
                              >cases we have no doubling, in both cases the
                              >only difference in shape is
                              the raised
                              >"stem" of the former, vs a shortened one of the
                              >second.

                              Good point. But of course the correspondence is not exact. In origin,
                              hyarmen represented [hj]. Hwesta originally represented [xw] before the
                              [x] was softened to [h]. But still an interesting observation! :)

                              Cuio mae, Danny.
                            • xeeniseit
                              ... interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant of harma. How is this to be understood? Does this mean that the palatal fricative hy
                              Message 14 of 20 , May 15, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                xeeniseit scripsit:
                                > > Then I shouldn't ignore them either. The appendices say something
                                interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant
                                of harma. How is this to be understood? Does this mean that the
                                palatal fricative hy is to be considered a variant of the velar one?
                                Etymologically? I can't judge on that, as I don't know about Quenya
                                etymology. Phonetically? This would seem strange to me, but maybe
                                possible, but I'd like to have more evidence on it.

                                John Cowan responsit:
                                > Consider the alternation in German and other languages between [x]
                                and [C], the velar and palatal fricatives. Near front vowels, as
                                in "ich", one gets the palatal fricative; near back vowels, as
                                in "ach", one gets the velar fricative.

                                Well known to me. And 3rd Age Quenya shows the same alternation with
                                original ch between vowel and t (tehtar as "te-hy-tar", ohtar as "o-
                                ch-tar"). But even though in that way, an original ch has become hy,
                                there's also an original hy which -as far as I can see- has nothing
                                to do with original ch. At least, both sounds occur in the same
                                surroundings (e.g. at the beginning of a word before a: hyarmen,
                                charma). But it depends (almost) entirely on the context whether you
                                have German /x/ or /C/, and the same happens with Quenya vowel `+ ht:
                                it depends on the preceding vowel.

                                Danny teithant:
                                > In origin, hyarmen represented [hj].

                                This makes things even trickier! Even though I believe that by means
                                of coarticulation, of connected speech (nobody pronounces isolate
                                sounds), there's only a very short way from [hj] to [C]. But I have
                                no idea how I can put together the ideas of hyarmen originally
                                representing [hj] and being derived from charma as a weaker variant.

                                But suppose that hyarmen originally represented /h/: Then its being a
                                weaker variant of /ch/ wouldn't be problematic any longer. - But then
                                there'd be a mess with the word 'original'. What is the most original
                                tengwar mode? In internal history it must be Feanors mode, but we
                                don't know it; in external history I suspect it's the English mode.
                                And the h-ch stuff in an English mode makes more sense to me than the
                                hy-ch stuff of Quenya!???

                                Why is there more logic in the English mode than in the Quenya mode
                                or in the mode of Beleriand?

                                suilaid
                                alf
                              • xeeniseit
                                ... interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant of harma. How is this to be understood? Does this mean that the palatal fricative hy
                                Message 15 of 20 , May 15, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  xeeniseit scripsit:
                                  > > Then I shouldn't ignore them either. The appendices say something
                                  interesting on hyarmen: That in the beginning it was a weaker variant
                                  of harma. How is this to be understood? Does this mean that the
                                  palatal fricative hy is to be considered a variant of the velar one?
                                  Etymologically? I can't judge on that, as I don't know about Quenya
                                  etymology. Phonetically? This would seem strange to me, but maybe
                                  possible, but I'd like to have more evidence on it.

                                  John Cowan responsit:
                                  > Consider the alternation in German and other languages between [x]
                                  and [C], the velar and palatal fricatives. Near front vowels, as
                                  in "ich", one gets the palatal fricative; near back vowels, as
                                  in "ach", one gets the velar fricative.

                                  Well known to me. And 3rd Age Quenya shows the same alternation with
                                  original ch between vowel and t (tehtar as "te-hy-tar", ohtar as "o-
                                  ch-tar"). But even though in that way, an original ch has become hy,
                                  there's also an original hy which -as far as I can see- has nothing
                                  to do with original ch. At least, both sounds occur in the same
                                  surroundings (e.g. at the beginning of a word before a: hyarmen,
                                  charma). But it depends (almost) entirely on the context whether you
                                  have German /x/ or /C/, and the same happens with Quenya vowel `+ ht:
                                  it depends on the preceding vowel.

                                  Danny teithant:
                                  > In origin, hyarmen represented [hj].

                                  This makes things even trickier! Even though I believe that by means
                                  of coarticulation, of connected speech (nobody pronounces isolate
                                  sounds), there's only a very short way from [hj] to [C]. But I have
                                  no idea how I can put together the ideas of hyarmen originally
                                  representing [hj] and being derived from charma as a weaker variant.

                                  But suppose that hyarmen originally represented /h/: Then its being a
                                  weaker variant of /ch/ wouldn't be problematic any longer. - But then
                                  there'd be a mess with the word 'original'. What is the most original
                                  tengwar mode? In internal history it must be Feanors mode, but we
                                  don't know it; in external history I suspect it's the English mode.
                                  And the h-ch stuff in an English mode makes more sense to me than the
                                  hy-ch stuff of Quenya!???

                                  Why is there more logic in the English mode than in the Quenya mode
                                  or in the mode of Beleriand?

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