Re: where the shadows lay - lie?
- machhezan scripsit:
> > And I don't think that Tolkien would have written anything which was goingto be published in a phonemic mode! Or that he'd ever done anything half-
way inbetween a phonemic and a traditional spelling!
John Cowan responsit:
> On the contrary, that is just what the title-page inscription is. Appendix Esays:
>adequate phonetically could be devised from the Feanorian system. The brief
> # There was of course no 'mode' for the representation of English. One
example on the title-page does not attempt to exhibit this. It is rather an
example of what a man of Gondor might have produced, hesitating between
the values of the letters familiar in his 'mode' and the traditional spelling of
That's true, even though it's only because of one single tehta determined by
pronunciation and not by tradition -the o-tehta in the word 'war'-, the Title
Page inscription still can be called 'half-way inbetween a phonemic and a
traditional spelling', and even though 'half-way' might sound exagerated to
some, but no matter.
But if you already call the Title Page mode 'half-way inbetween a phonemic
and a traditional spelling', how would you call then the mode of DTS 37 which
-if we assume that it is partly phonemic- is a mixture of representations of
nowaday's English's vowels and of mute 'e'-sounds that already in
Shakespeare's times weren't pronounced any more (don't forget that in other
phonemic tehtar modes, the subposed dot is always pronounced, cf. DTS
39)? And don't forget that this mode, if it's read the same way we read the Title
Page inscription mode, is highly ambiguous, leading to the misreading 'lay'
instead of 'lie'. And that the earlier version of it, DTS 36, asks for a wholly
different explanation. Have a look at it!