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

miscellanea

Expand Messages
  • Ales Bican
    ... **You are right about + for the combination -lv-, and you would get -lb-. Tolkien said that for -lv- not -lw-. The example _omentielvo_ is
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 14 9:29 AM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      DDanielA@... wrote:

      > One additional curiosity of Quenya: The combination 'lv' (as in
      > 'omentielvo') was often written 'lambe umbar', especially by elves. From
      > LotR, Appendix E.

      **You are right about <lambe> + <umbar> for the combination
      -lv-, and you would get -lb-. Tolkien said that for -lv- not -lw-.
      The example _omentielvo_ is not, however, a happy one. You know it is
      gen. "of our meeting". It is not certain if nom. "our meeting" would
      be _omentilva_ or _omentielwa_. The latter is more probable, because
      it is the dual.
      Now if it is _omentielwa_, we would get _omentielvo_ not _omentielwo_,
      because the sequence -wo- is not possible in Quenya.


      Angasule wrote:

      > The sound ñ by itself doesn't occur medially in Quenya outside of
      > clusters, AFAIK.

      **You can get it secondarily. If we assume the existance of
      the word *_ñal-_ "shine by reflection" (root ÑAL of the same
      meaning, _ñalta_ "radiance", PM:347), then the perfect may be
      *_añálie_ "has shone".


      Angasule asked:

      > > A dot below the tengwa? I hadn't read about this one, where did Tolkien
      > > mention/use it?

      Jeremie Knusel replied:

      > I can't find where I saw it but as example, in the "dictionnaire des langues
      > elfiques", p. 113, there is a tengwar transcribe of "menelluin irildeo
      > ondolindello" that comes from "Tolkien, Life and Legend" p 77, and the last
      > 'n' of menelluin is written with númen and a dot bellow

      **A dot below a tengwa seems to do the same job as the apostrophe
      in English. _menelluin irildeo_ may be _menelluine irildeo_. The form
      _luine_ is not actually attested but many color-names end in _-e_ (its
      variant _lúne_ show final e indeed).


      Angasule wrote:

      > ohloni (the attested plural, I don't know if the singular has been
      > attested, it could as well be ohlone, couldn't it?) is I guess the
      > prefix o- plus the word hloni.

      **WJ:394 gives _hloni_ "sound", VT39:9 gives both _ohloni_ and
      _ohlon_ "diphtong". This suggests *_hlon_ "sound".


      Ales Bican

      --
      **I want love or death, that's it. (Mathilda, _Léon: Version Intégrale_)
    • Jeremie Knusel
      ... There is a mail in the tolklang archive whose topic is: Dot below tehta = no vowel (Vinyar Tengwar #25 p6)
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 14 12:41 PM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > **A dot below a tengwa seems to do the same job as the apostrophe
        > in English. _menelluin irildeo_ may be _menelluine irildeo_. The form
        > _luine_ is not actually attested but many color-names end in _-e_ (its
        > variant _lúne_ show final e indeed).

        There is a mail in the tolklang archive whose topic is:
        'Dot below' tehta = "no vowel" (Vinyar Tengwar #25 p6)
        (http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/misc/local/TolkLang/Vol5/5.66)

        Does anyone have VT25 ? :)


        Jeremie
      • Angasule
        ... Is ñalta identified as a Quenya word? I ask because I have doubts about the behaviour of initial Ñ, the only example I knew was ñolme holme which
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 15 12:05 AM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Ales Bican wrote:
          >
          > Angasule wrote:
          >
          > > The sound ñ by itself doesn't occur medially in Quenya outside of
          > > clusters, AFAIK.
          >
          > **You can get it secondarily. If we assume the existance of
          > the word *_ñal-_ "shine by reflection" (root ÑAL of the same
          > meaning, _ñalta_ "radiance", PM:347), then the perfect may be
          > *_añálie_ "has shone".
          Is ñalta identified as a Quenya word? I ask because I have doubts about
          the behaviour of initial Ñ, the only example I knew was ñolme > holme
          which could be a misreading. Anyway, I think añálié would rather become
          eálie (or would that be aelie? vowels confuse me still) or maybe even
          angálie (with strengthening, in the second case).

          > **WJ:394 gives _hloni_ "sound", VT39:9 gives both _ohloni_ and
          > _ohlon_ "diphtong". This suggests *_hlon_ "sound".
          Thanks for the info.
          Angasule
        • Ales Bican
          ... **Yes, it is. Primitive (CE) form is given as ñalatá, and its scions are Quenya _ñalta_, Telerin _alata_ and Sindarin _galad_. ... **I would say it is a
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 15 12:24 PM
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Angasule wrote:

            > > > The sound ñ by itself doesn't occur medially in Quenya outside of
            > > > clusters, AFAIK.
            > >
            > > **You can get it secondarily. If we assume the existance of
            > > the word *_ñal-_ "shine by reflection" (root ÑAL of the same
            > > meaning, _ñalta_ "radiance", PM:347), then the perfect may be
            > > *_añálie_ "has shone".
            > Is ñalta identified as a Quenya word?

            **Yes, it is. Primitive (CE) form is given as ñalatá, and its scions
            are Quenya _ñalta_, Telerin _alata_ and Sindarin _galad_.

            > I ask because I have doubts about
            > the behaviour of initial Ñ, the only example I knew was ñolme > holme
            > which could be a misreading.

            **I would say it is a misreading. Anyway, stem ÑOL gives
            Quenya _holme_ and Noldorin _ûl_ (not *_gûl_).

            > Anyway, I think añálié would rather become
            > eálie (or would that be aelie? vowels confuse me still) or maybe even
            > angálie (with strengthening, in the second case).

            **Good point. You are right that CE intervocalic ñ disappeared, but it
            is uncertain what would happen here. Will ñ be lost or not? This
            leads to another problem.
            You know there is a verb _halya-_ "veil" derived from the stem SKAL-.
            Initial sk became _h_ in Quenya. Now how will its perfect look like?
            _ahálie_ or _axálie_? Medial sk became _cs_ (_x_) in Quenya.
            What about _laira_ "shady" (stem DAY), will "most shady" be _andaira_
            or _allaira_? We know that _lindornea_ "having many oaks" behaves like
            this (stem DORON, _norno_ "oak"; _lin-_ "many").
            And what about _verya_ "bold" (BER). Will "boldest" be _amberya_
            or _anverya_? We know that _Envinyatar_ is possible and that it is
            neither _enwinyatar_ nor _embinyatar_.
            So it is questionable what will happen with _añálie_.
            However, _ñal-_ is pronounced _nal-_ in 3rd Age Quenya, so the
            perfect can be _análie_ then.


            Ales Bican

            --
            **I want love or death, that's it. (Mathilda, _Léon: Version Intégrale_)
          • Angasule
            ... Yes, it was the most likely, confirming it is good, though! ... Envinyatar can be exaplained as a late construction, but análie is definitely the way to
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 15 6:59 PM
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Ales Bican wrote:
              >
              > Angasule wrote:
              >
              > > > > The sound ñ by itself doesn't occur medially in Quenya outside of
              > > > > clusters, AFAIK.
              > > >
              > > > **You can get it secondarily. If we assume the existance of
              > > > the word *_ñal-_ "shine by reflection" (root ÑAL of the same
              > > > meaning, _ñalta_ "radiance", PM:347), then the perfect may be
              > > > *_añálie_ "has shone".
              > > Is ñalta identified as a Quenya word?
              >
              > **Yes, it is. Primitive (CE) form is given as ñalatá, and its scions
              > are Quenya _ñalta_, Telerin _alata_ and Sindarin _galad_.
              >
              > > I ask because I have doubts about
              > > the behaviour of initial Ñ, the only example I knew was ñolme > holme
              > > which could be a misreading.
              >
              > **I would say it is a misreading. Anyway, stem ÑOL gives
              > Quenya _holme_ and Noldorin _ûl_ (not *_gûl_).
              Yes, it was the most likely, confirming it is good, though!

              > > Anyway, I think añálié would rather become
              > > eálie (or would that be aelie? vowels confuse me still) or maybe even
              > > angálie (with strengthening, in the second case).
              >
              > **Good point. You are right that CE intervocalic ñ disappeared, but it
              > is uncertain what would happen here. Will ñ be lost or not? This
              > leads to another problem.
              > You know there is a verb _halya-_ "veil" derived from the stem SKAL-.
              > Initial sk became _h_ in Quenya. Now how will its perfect look like?
              > _ahálie_ or _axálie_? Medial sk became _cs_ (_x_) in Quenya.
              > What about _laira_ "shady" (stem DAY), will "most shady" be _andaira_
              > or _allaira_? We know that _lindornea_ "having many oaks" behaves like
              > this (stem DORON, _norno_ "oak"; _lin-_ "many").
              > And what about _verya_ "bold" (BER). Will "boldest" be _amberya_
              > or _anverya_? We know that _Envinyatar_ is possible and that it is
              > neither _enwinyatar_ nor _embinyatar_.
              > So it is questionable what will happen with _añálie_.
              > However, _ñal-_ is pronounced _nal-_ in 3rd Age Quenya, so the
              > perfect can be _análie_ then.
              Envinyatar can be exaplained as a late construction, but análie is
              definitely the way to go with the current info, I agree! It may actually
              turn out to be the correct form (in any case it can be seen as
              levelling).
              Angasule
            • Mans Bjorkman
              ... I do. Without having reread the TolkLang message, I do no doubt that it refers to the article The Subscript Dot: A New _Tehta_ Usage by our esteemed
              Message 6 of 6 , Apr 16 2:41 AM
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Jeremie Knusel wrote:
                >
                > There is a mail in the tolklang archive whose topic is:
                > 'Dot below' tehta = "no vowel" (Vinyar Tengwar #25 p6)
                > (http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/misc/local/TolkLang/Vol5/5.66)
                >
                > Does anyone have VT25 ? :)

                I do. Without having reread the TolkLang message, I do no doubt that it
                refers to the article "The Subscript Dot: A New _Tehta_ Usage" by our
                esteemed elfscribe Arden Smith. In brief, the article begins with
                describing the tehta usage in Lowdham's Old English manuscripts from the
                then recently published Sauron Defeated. It is noted that the Adûnaic
                word _Zigûr_ is once written with a dot beneath the <óre> (and _Zigûre_
                is not), likewise that Quenya _Tarcalion_ has a dot beneath the <númen>,
                while the a-tehtar are missing. Smith then quotes the note from Appendix
                E about _a_ often being omitted in Quenya, so "for _calma_ 'lamp' _clm_
                could be written." In _Tarcalion_, Smith notes, <tinco> and <quesse>
                (sic! not <calma>) "are each followed by an implicit _a_. The letters
                [<óre>] and [<númen>] have _no_ vowel following them, and _this_ is what
                the subscript dot indicates."

                Then the exhibition catalogue "J.R.R. Tolkien: Life and Legend. An
                exhibition to Commemorate the Centenary of the Birth of J.R.R. Tolkien
                (1892-1973)" is referred to. The catalogue contains the inscription
                _Menelluin Írildeo Ondolindello_ (with the authorial caption "Idril's
                Device The 'Cornflower' pattern Menelluin"), the same inscription that
                was later published in Artist and Illustrator. Here the final <númen> of
                _Menelluin_ carries a subscript dot, while the preceding _i_ is placed
                on a short carrier.

                The catalogue also contains an untranscribed inscription that goes:
                "<quesse><lambe + subscript dot><malta> <hyarmen + e-tehta><ando +
                superscript tilde><silme + subscript dot>". Smith interprets this as
                _calma hendas_, "a light in the eye", despite the untraditional use of
                <quesse> and <ando>. However this inscription is to be interpreted, it
                seems clear to me that the subscript dot is here and elsewhere used to
                indicate lack of following _a_.

                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.