Re: Quenya or Sindarin?
- --- In email@example.com, Chris Ruzin <chris@m...> wrote:
> OK, I've been doing a LOT of searching for Sindarin audio examples,and
> noticed there seem to be many more examples of Quenya both writtenand
> spoken than Sindarin. Is there a reason? Is Quenya easier orharder
> than Sindarin to learn? I know I want to learn them, but I wouldlike
> to start with the easier one for now.It is hard to tell. I think maybe Quenya is easier "in a way" that
there a course made so your searching and studying is made easier. On
the other hand, we have more of Sindarin text. It is up to you. You
may also see the FAQ of Elfling, you may find some answers on your
question. Me personally prefer Sindarin :)
- On Sep 10, 2003, at 2:20 AM, Chris Ruzin wrote:
> Is Quenya easier or harder than Sindarin to learn?The advantage of studying Quenya first is that it makes many of the
features of Sindarin far more transparent, and thus easier to
understand and remember. Sindarin is characterized (_inter alia_) by
weakening and loss of final elements that are usually retained in
Quenya, and by mutation and assimilation of consonants that are often
unchanged in Quenya. Knowing the Quenya cognates of various
phonological and morphological (sounds and endings) features and
developments let's you "see the history" behind and within Sindarin
forms, and thus to more easily analyze them.
- At 08:37 -0400 2003-09-10, Carl F. Hostetter wrote:
>On Sep 10, 2003, at 2:20 AM, Chris Ruzin wrote:Not dissimilar to Finnish and Estonian. I learned the latter (some);
>> Is Quenya easier or harder than Sindarin to learn?
>The advantage of studying Quenya first is that it makes many of the
>features of Sindarin far more transparent, and thus easier to
>understand and remember. Sindarin is characterized (_inter alia_) by
>weakening and loss of final elements that are usually retained in
>Quenya, and by mutation and assimilation of consonants that are often
>unchanged in Quenya. Knowing the Quenya cognates of various
>phonological and morphological (sounds and endings) features and
>developments let's you "see the history" behind and within Sindarin
>forms, and thus to more easily analyze them.
later on I discovered that a number of features in Estonian are
shared in Finnish, but Finnish preserves elements which make it clear
why certain processes are occurring. So Estonian "lugu" has a
genitive "loo" where the consonant is dropped (the lowering of the
vowel is secondary); compare Finnish "Turku" genigive "Turun" where
the consonant is dropped because the syllable is closed by the
genitive -n. So Estonian was originally "lugu" gen. "lugun" >
"luun" > "luu" > "loo".
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
If you want to study both Quenya and Sindarin, there's a number of
reasons to start with Quenya. For one, you don't have to deal with
Sindarin phonemes like 'ae', 'oe', 'y' that are notoriously difficult
for English speakers. On the other hand, Quenya does have 'hl' and 'hr'
(corresponding to S 'lh' and 'rh'). And tose who live the American Deep
South won't find S 'ae' and 'oe' to be a problem.
Quenya is better attested. We get a much better idea of Quenya word
order and grammar from the published texts than is possible for
Sindarin. The Etymologies contain more vocabulary entries for Noldorin
than for Qenya, but the attested Quenya forms far surpass those of
attested Sindarin. With Quenya you don't have to wrestle with those
blasted initial mutations, many of which remain hypothetical. Tengwar
writing is better attested for Quenya, for the most part restricted to a
single mode, unlike the three relatively well-attested S modes. Isolated
'w' is still unattested in two of the three modes! The minus side is
that Q has a large declensional system. That means memorising many
endings, but they luckily tend to be fairly regular.
That said, I still prefer Sindarin. A lot has been said about how Quenya
is a more 'sonorous' sounding language than Sindarin. Personally, I find
the abundance of S voiced stops and spirants where Quenya has voiceless
stops, and S 'th' in place of many Q 's' cognates, tends to make
Sindarin sound softer and less staccato than Quenya. Just my opinion.
Cuio mae, Danny.
- I've been going over different responses from people and reading over
explanations and histories of both languages on several Web sites.
Every one of them says that Quenya is easier to learn because it is
more attested, but I keep leaning towards learning Sindarin first.
It's much prettier to me. I've always loved Gaelic, so maybe that's
why I have this leaning?
I'm from the deep south, so the Sindarin "ae" and "oe" shouldn't be
that difficult. I pick up on languages pretty fast. I had no problem
picking up Portuguese while I was in Brazil. I was there for only one
month, but I learned enough to know what they were talking about to
each other. Spanish is also easy to pick up on. And I knew enough
German to hold a basic conversation while I was in Germany. I didn't
have formal lessons in any of these languages though, so I don't know
all the terminology or even where to begin learning really.
All that said, I will try to learn Sindarin first. I've found the
lessons on councilofelrond.com and they look pretty good. If anyone
else knows of other good lessons (besides those on Ardalambion), please
let me know.
- Teithant Chris Ruzin:
>I keep leaning towards learning Sindarin first. It'sMy feelings as well.
>much prettier to me.
>I'm from the deep south, so the Sindarin "ae" andThink of pronouncing 'my' and 'boy' with a strong redneck accent, but
>"oe" shouldn't be that difficult.
without drawing out the diphthongs. Yo'll be pronouncing S _mae_ and
_boe_. Those two diphthongs don't exist in Received Pronuciation, but I
hear them on a daily basis here in Louisiana!
By the way: you can find sound samples of Sindarin (readings of the
published samples) on Florian Dombach's Mellyn in Edhil website, if you
haven't already checked it out. I don't agree with everything I heard
there, but all in all it's pretty accurate. My main disagreements are
the pronunciation of 'ae' and that long and short 'i' are not
differentiated in quality, though Tolkien tells us that they are. It's
worth a listen.
Cuio mae, Danny.