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

Re: [elfscript] Tehtarin mode for Sindarin

Expand Messages
  • BP Jonsson
    ... I think that apart from the existence of the Mode of Beleriand itself there at least three indicators: 1) The conventions for writing Quenya. There is no
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 25 4:18 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Gildir wrote:

      >Yes, there might exist a sindarin tehta mode different from the one used
      >in KL-III (DTS 49), using series III for the calmatéma like the Mode of
      >Beleriand. But do we have any indications that it exists? Or do we simply
      >associate Sindarin so much with the Mode of Beleriand that we presume that
      >a tehta mode *must* use series III for the calmatéma?

      I think that apart from the existence of the Mode of Beleriand itself there
      at least three indicators:

      1) The conventions for writing Quenya. There is no reason why the Noldor
      would devise a mode for writing Sindarin which be not as isometric with the
      usual mode for Quenya as possible. After all the sounds /k/, /g/, /N/ of
      the two languages would be identified as identical, and moreover /gw/ and
      /w/ (wilya) actually exist in Sindarin and need their designation. IMO the
      mode seen in The Kings Letter is specifically designed to be isometric with
      a mode used for some language where series III was used for palatals, such
      as English or Westron, e.g. for writing Sindarin words within a text in
      such a language. It is not inconceivable that Men speaking a language
      using series III for palatals would use series IV for velars also when
      writing Sindarin, especially when the same text were written parallel in
      the two languages, but there would be no reason for Elves using Sindarin as
      their primary language to adopt such a mode.

      2) In primary-world terms it seems to me quite unlikely that JRRT would
      never have at least experimented with a mode which essentially would be the
      tehtarin equivalent of the Mode of Beleriand.*

      3) The existence and name of the tengwa _Hwesta Sindarinwa_ is in itself
      strong evidence, since its use for /hw/ essentially presupposes the use of
      "ordinary Hwesta" for /xw/ (_chw_). In a mode where the sound /xw/ be
      expressed with Hwesta plus some diacritic, the sound /hw/ would in all
      likelihood be expressed by Hyarmen plus the same diacritic, so there would
      be no need for a special tengwa for /hw/.

      * I have myself for several years been using such a mode. It uses the same
      vowel tehtar as Quenya, plus reverse u-curl for _y_. For _ae, oe_ it uses
      _yanta_ with the tehtar for _a, o_. Consonantal _i_ (_j_) and _i_ in the
      diphthongs _ai (ei), oi, ui_ is written with _anna_, while _w_ and the
      diphthongs _au, iu_ use _wilya_ or _uure_.
      The lenition of initial _g_ to zero is either indicated with an apostrophe
      or by writing _anka_, and similarly _gw_ -> _'w_ is indicated either with
      apostrophe + _wilya_ or with _unque_.



      /BP 8^)>
      --
      B.Philip Jonsson mailto:bpX@... (delete X)
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
      A h-ammen ledin i phith! \ \
      __ ____ ____ _____________ ____ __ __ __ / /
      \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / /
      / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / /
      / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /Melarokko\_ // /__/ // /__/ /
      /_________//_/ \_\/ /Eowine __ / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
      Gwaedhvenn Angelmiel \ \______/ /a/ /_h-adar Merthol naun
      ~~~~~~~~~Kuinondil~~~\________/~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~
      || Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda kuivie aiya! ||
      "A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)
    • Mans Bjorkman
      ... No, but it s possible they would refrain from making an ómatehta-mode for Sindarin. According to From Quendi and Eldar, Appendix D (Vinyar Tengwar #39),
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 25 12:27 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        BP Jonsson wrote:
        >
        > Gildir wrote:
        >
        > >Yes, there might exist a sindarin tehta mode different from the one used
        > >in KL-III (DTS 49), using series III for the calmatéma like the Mode of
        > >Beleriand. But do we have any indications that it exists? Or do we simply
        > >associate Sindarin so much with the Mode of Beleriand that we presume that
        > >a tehta mode *must* use series III for the calmatéma?
        >
        > I think that apart from the existence of the Mode of Beleriand itself there
        > at least three indicators:
        >
        > 1) The conventions for writing Quenya. There is no reason why the Noldor
        > would devise a mode for writing Sindarin which be not as isometric with the
        > usual mode for Quenya as possible.

        No, but it's possible they would refrain from making an ómatehta-mode
        for Sindarin. According to "From Quendi and Eldar, Appendix D" (Vinyar
        Tengwar #39), someone -- and the context strongly suggests the Noldor --
        thought "the diacritic method of indicating vowels was inconvenient" for
        Sindarin (p. 8).


        > After all the sounds /k/, /g/, /N/ of
        > the two languages would be identified as identical, and moreover /gw/ and
        > /w/ (wilya) actually exist in Sindarin and need their designation. IMO the
        > mode seen in The Kings Letter is specifically designed to be isometric with
        > a mode used for some language where series III was used for palatals, such
        > as English or Westron, e.g. for writing Sindarin words within a text in
        > such a language. It is not inconceivable that Men speaking a language
        > using series III for palatals would use series IV for velars also when
        > writing Sindarin, especially when the same text were written parallel in
        > the two languages, but there would be no reason for Elves using Sindarin as
        > their primary language to adopt such a mode.

        I agree completely. The sounds _kw_, _gw_, _khw/hw_, _ghw/w_, suggested
        in Appendix E to be possible values for series IV, would fit quite well
        with the system of the mode of Beleriand or a similar mode -- even
        though most of the sounds don't occur in Sindarin.


        > * I have myself for several years been using such a mode. It uses the same
        > vowel tehtar as Quenya, plus reverse u-curl for _y_.

        Any particular reason you don't use the diaeresis (¨) for _y_?


        > For _ae, oe_ it uses
        > _yanta_ with the tehtar for _a, o_. Consonantal _i_ (_j_) and _i_ in the
        > diphthongs _ai (ei), oi, ui_ is written with _anna_, while _w_ and the
        > diphthongs _au, iu_ use _wilya_ or _uure_.

        ...that is, the same way as in the King's Letter, except that _au_, _iu_
        are there unattested (and _w_ is written with the 'flipped tilde').


        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."
      • DDanielA@webtv.net
        Måns Björkman wrote: ...but it s possible they would refrain from makng an ómatehta- mode for Sindarin. That may very well be true of the Noldor, but the
        Message 3 of 5 , Apr 25 1:49 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Måns Björkman wrote:
          ...but it's possible they would
          refrain from makng an ómatehta-
          mode for Sindarin.

          That may very well be true of the Noldor, but the Sindar may have
          adopted the tengwar they observed from the Noldor. Hypothesis: Seeing
          the speed of writing and the use of less space that the tengwar
          provided, the Sindar realised the advantages over the comparatively
          cumbersome cirth. They borrowed the Quenya mode, with tehtar, and
          adapted it to Sindarin. The Noldor, on the other hand, found tehtar to
          be inconvenient for Sindarin (for whatever reason...I can't see it!) and
          devised the mode of Beleriand for their use. It's entirely possible for
          two peoples sharing a common tongue to develop separate modes, derived
          from a common ancestor, according to their own preference.

          Måns Björkman wrote:
          BP Jonsson wrote:
          ...Consonantal _i_ (_j_) and
          _i_ in diphthongs _ai (ei), oi,
          ui_ is written with anna_, ...

          ...that is the same as in the King's
          Letter, ...

          Well, almost. Actually the King's Letter, version III, uses 'yanta' for
          consonantal 'i' (Iorhael, ionnath) as well as for the 'e' in 'ae'.
          'Anna' is used solely for the diphthongs 'ai', 'ei' and 'ui'. Obviously
          'oi' would be written 'anna' + u-curl, though this is not attested.
          I, too, have toyed with self-invented Sindarin modes, but these are
          for my own amusement. I would never publish anything using them. For
          that, I stick with the attested forms. When a certain needed convention
          is unattested (tehta mode form for Sindarin 'au', for example), then
          I've got to go with a best guess. I've settled on 'vilya' + a-tehta for
          'au', while using 'vala' for consonantal 'w'. Of course, one of these
          days, another of JRRT's previously unpublished tengwar specimens may
          well surface and prove me wrong! Discovery of the King's Letter
          certainly changed my former views of tengwar orthography! Edouard
          Kloczko's view that there is no standard Sindarin mode is one I don't
          hold with. There is no SINGLE standard, but surely those writing
          Sindarin followed accepted norms. He suggests making up your own. Why?
          We already have three attested examples.

          Cuo mae, Danny.
        • BP Jonsson
          Måns Björkman wrote: [snip] ... I would expect the people of that opinion, whoever they were, to be accustomed to writing Sindarin with Cirth, and hence to
          Message 4 of 5 , Apr 30 4:03 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Måns Björkman wrote:

            [snip]

            >No, but it's possible they would refrain from making an ómatehta-mode for
            >Sindarin. According to "From Quendi and Eldar, Appendix D" (Vinyar Tengwar
            >#39), someone -- and the context strongly suggests the Noldor -- thought
            >"the diacritic method of indicating vowels was inconvenient" for Sindarin
            >(p. 8).

            I would expect the people of that opinion, whoever they were, to be
            accustomed to writing Sindarin with Cirth, and hence to full writing of
            vowels. In any case the debate whether an ómatehta mode be suitable for
            Sindarin or not is likely to have been going on mainly among
            Lambengolmor. Non-experts, whether Ñoldor or Sindar, are likely to have
            based their preferences on more practical considerations, like what kind of
            writing they were used to before or what fitted into the space
            available. The bottom line is of course that the debate on what kind of
            mode be most suitable for Sindarin was going on in JRRT's head, but we can
            rest assured that if different choices were available in Elvish society
            usage would vary. After all standardization as we know it is a modern
            thing, and a rather Saurondic one at that!

            [snip]

            >>* I have myself for several years been using such a mode. It uses the same
            >>vowel tehtar as Quenya, plus reverse u-curl for _y_.
            >
            >Any particular reason you don't use the diaeresis (¨) for _y_?

            Yes, I think the usage of the double-dot for Sindarin _y_ is a Gondorean or
            Westron practice, reflecting the merger of _y_ with _i_ in the
            pronunciation of Third Age Dúnedain. Both in Sindarin and in Germanic
            languages /y/ is a mutation of /u/, and I feel that its orthography should
            reflect this fact.



            /BP 8^)>
            --
            B.Philip Jonsson mailto:bpX@... (delete X)
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
            A h-ammen ledin i phith! \ \
            __ ____ ____ _____________ ____ __ __ __ / /
            \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / /
            / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / /
            / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /Melarokko\_ // /__/ // /__/ /
            /_________//_/ \_\/ /Eowine __ / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
            Gwaedhvenn Angelmiel \ \______/ /a/ /_h-adar Merthol naun
            ~~~~~~~~~Kuinondil~~~\________/~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~
            || Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda kuivie aiya! ||
            "A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)
          • Mans Bjorkman
            ... Certainly. The connection with the Cirth seems a plausible one, although I get the feeling there was some stronger motivation behind this feeling of
            Message 5 of 5 , May 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              BP Jonsson wrote:
              >
              > Måns Björkman wrote:
              >
              > [snip]
              >
              > >No, but it's possible they would refrain from making an ómatehta-mode for
              > >Sindarin. According to "From Quendi and Eldar, Appendix D" (Vinyar Tengwar
              > >#39), someone -- and the context strongly suggests the Noldor -- thought
              > >"the diacritic method of indicating vowels was inconvenient" for Sindarin
              > >(p. 8).
              >
              > I would expect the people of that opinion, whoever they were, to be
              > accustomed to writing Sindarin with Cirth, and hence to full writing of
              > vowels. In any case the debate whether an ómatehta mode be suitable for
              > Sindarin or not is likely to have been going on mainly among
              > Lambengolmor. [...]

              Certainly. The connection with the Cirth seems a plausible one, although
              I get the feeling there was some stronger motivation behind this feeling
              of "inconvenience". But I never meant that people in general would
              refrain from using an ómatehta-mode for Sindarin, just that the some (I
              still hold the Noldor to be the prime suspects) would refrain from
              making one.

              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.