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

Re: Sindarin past-tense from TIR-

Expand Messages
  • Carl F. Hostetter
    I accept Helge s correction regarding my use of _tiri-_ as a stem-form, and thank him for it (as I have previously noted, I was clearly writing too late and
    Message 1 of 21 , Oct 18, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      I accept Helge's correction regarding my use of "_tiri-_" as a
      stem-form, and thank him for it (as I have previously noted, I was
      clearly writing too late and too hastily that night). Fortunately, the
      status of *_tiri-_ has no bearing on my conclusions regarding his
      proposed past-tense forms, *_tirnin_ and *_idiren_, and above all no
      bearing on the main point: that given the (sole) attested pa.t. form
      _tiriant_, which Tolkien gives as the pa.t. of both alternates _tiri_
      and _tirio_, it makes no sense to invent a different pa.t. form based
      on conjecture concerning a putative past participle. Even if Helge's
      contentions regarding *_tirnen_ are accepted -- despite being
      unprovable -- *_tirnen_ in no way proves that any such pa.t. form as
      *_tirnin_ ever existed in Noldorin or Sindarin.

      I reject, however, Helge's small-minded and opportunistic response to
      an error I made in my first post, and myself corrected within hours,
      despite the fact that now three days later he has read my own
      correction (as he responds to a different part of my corrective post).
      Such petty behavior _ought_ to be beneath him.

      On to specific points:

      On Oct 18, 2003, at 2:48 PM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:

      > The past tense _tiriant_ connects with the immediately preceding
      > infinitive form _tirio_; it is not necessarily intended as the pa.t.
      > of the synonym _tiri_ as well.

      I disagree. Tolkien's wording makes it quite clear that _tiri_ and
      _tirio_ are alternate forms, for which the past tense is _tiriant_: "N
      _tiri_ or _tirio_, pa.t. _tiriant_".

      > As for the final vowel before the pronominal ending, CFH surely
      > recalls the Turin Wrapper form _agorech_ instead of **_agorach_

      I dealt with Helge's unwarrented assumptions and assertions about
      _agor_ and _agorech_ and their relationship in a post I made to the
      Lambengolmor list two days ago, and to which I refer the interested
      reader: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lambengolmor/message/496>

      > If the stem TIR formed its past tense by the same pattern, maybe we
      > would see *_itîri_ as the primitive form?

      Perhaps, yes, as I have already implied in my Lambengolmor post.

      > Just like the long vowel of _akâra_ has been shortened in _agor_
      > (where _â_ became _au_ and then _o_), it may be assumed that *_itîr-_
      > would produce *_idir_ rather than *_idír_,

      But the long vowel of *_akâra_ was _not_ shortened: as your own figure
      indicates, it was diphthongized and then monophthongized. No such
      process would occur in *_itîra-_ / *_itîri-_, so I see no reason why
      the vowel would not remain long, esp. in stressed position.

      > at the stage sometimes called Middle Sindarin (a post-Tolkien term).

      Which is to say, a non-Tolkien term.

      > CFH returns to _tirnen_ in a later letter:
      >
      >> On further reflection, I think it is better to instead view N
      >> *_tirnen_ as simply an analogical formation based on the very
      >> frequent occurrence of p.ps. in _-nen_ among both basic and derived
      >> verbs in Noldorin, e.g. N. _dant-_ 'to fall', _dannen_ 'fallen' <
      >> DAT-, DANT-; N _presto_ 'to affect, trouble, disturb', _prestannen_
      >> 'affected' < PERES-; etc.
      >
      > On still further reflection, CFH may reach the insight that
      > _prestannen_ is the past tense *_prestant_ "disturbed, affected" + the
      > actual past participle marker _-en_ (the longer form -nen only occurs
      > incidentally, so to speak, where there happens to be or arise an -n-
      > before this shorter ending). In_prestannen_, we have intervocalic _nt_
      > becoming _nn_, a regular development.

      Despite Helge's false implication, I am of course quite fully aware of
      the actual historical processes underlying such past participles as N
      _prestannen_. That is precisely why I said that N *_tirnen_ is perhaps
      an _analogical_ formation, not a regular phonological development. I
      did not say -- as can plainly be seen from Helge's own quotation of my
      post -- that there is or ever was a past-participial ending _-nen_; I
      said only that past participles _in_ _-nen_ are very frequent. It is
      the frequency of such sequences that lead to analogical formations,
      just as we see with the pervasively analogical N/S pa.t. in _-nt_.

      > The past participle marker _-en_ historically evolves from _-e_ (the
      > vowel all past tense-forms originally seem to have ended in, still so
      > in Quenya) + the participial ending _-nâ_, worn down to _-n_ in
      > Noldorin/Sindarin.

      I disagree with this unqualified assertion. This _-en_ may also have
      arisen from *_-inâ_, and thus be cognate with the Quenya past
      participial ending _-ina_ exhibited by such relatively late Quenya
      forms as _rákina_ 'broken', etc.

      > Well, this is getting off topic: nothing about the scripts. By all
      > means, since we do happen to have the past tense of a verb meaning
      > "watch" directly attested, we may just as well use it:

      No, not "just as well": _better_. And what a novel idea. I wish I'd
      come up with it. Oh wait....

      > Otherwise CFH and I should continue this discussion on Elfling.
      > Ooops...a practical problem in his end.

      Again, this sort of petty behavior _ought_ to be beneath Helge. And as
      Helge is fully aware, we can carry out this and any other scholarly
      discussion of Tolkien's languages he would care to engage in on the
      Lambengolmor list, where no one hides behind the shield of censorship.

      > Well, I think we have pretty much exhausted this topic anyway.

      Hardly.



      --
      =============================================
      Carl F. Hostetter Aelfwine@... http://www.elvish.org

      ho bios brachys, he de techne makre.
      Ars longa, vita brevis.
      The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.
      "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take such
      a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about."
    • Helge K. Fauskanger
      ... and thank him for it (as I have previously noted, I was clearly writing too late and too hastily that night). [...] ... error I made in my first
      Message 2 of 21 , Oct 25, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

        > I accept Helge's correction regarding my use of "_tiri-_" as a stem-form,
        and thank him for it (as I have previously noted, I was clearly writing too
        late and too hastily that night).
        [...]
        > I reject, however, Helge's small-minded and opportunistic response to an
        error I made in my first post...Such petty behavior _ought_ to be beneath
        him.

        So what is it, really? Does Hostetter thank me or call me names when I
        point out his mistakes? It seems to be the same error he refers to in both
        of the quotations above.

        However, this is clearly not the right forum to discuss the other
        linguistic issues he brought up, since they have nothing to do with the
        scripts: such as whether *_itîr-_ etc. would produce Sindarin *_idir_ or
        *_idír_ with a long vowel, or whether the past participle ending _-en_
        descends from _-e-nâ_ or _-inâ_. I have dealt with these things in notes
        added to my article "Reconstructing the Sindarin Verb System"; interested
        list members may access it and search for Hostetter's name:

        http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/sverb-rec.htm

        A brand new Appendix also deals with some criticism he presented on the
        Lambengolmor list (whether it is proper to call past tense forms in _-nt_
        "3rd person" forms, as I have done).

        - HKF
      • Carl F. Hostetter
        ... Once again, Helge would rather jump to an absurd, even contradictory, conclusion, than to simply spend a few extra moments actually reading what I wrote.
        Message 3 of 21 , Oct 25, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          On Oct 25, 2003, at 8:42 AM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:

          > Carl F. Hostetter wrote:
          >
          >> I accept Helge's correction regarding my use of "_tiri-_" as a
          >> stem-form,
          > and thank him for it (as I have previously noted, I was clearly
          > writing too
          > late and too hastily that night).
          > [...]
          >> I reject, however, Helge's small-minded and opportunistic response to
          >> an
          > error I made in my first post...Such petty behavior _ought_ to be
          > beneath
          > him.
          >
          > So what is it, really? Does Hostetter thank me or call me names when I
          > point out his mistakes? It seems to be the same error he refers to in
          > both
          > of the quotations above.

          Once again, Helge would rather jump to an absurd, even contradictory,
          conclusion, than to simply spend a few extra moments actually reading
          what I wrote. The two were very clearly _not_ the same error.

          To answer Helge's question, I'm happy to accept corrections to (actual)
          errors. But when I have _already_ corrected my own error, in a post
          that Helge has clearly seen (if not read), because he is _replying_ to
          it and _quoting_ from it, then that is nothing more than pettiness.
        • Carl F. Hostetter
          ... List members that have followed this discussion may be interested in my comments upon and corrections to Helge s new notes:
          Message 4 of 21 , Oct 28, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            On Oct 25, 2003, at 8:42 AM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:

            > I have dealt with these things in notes added to my article
            > "Reconstructing the Sindarin Verb System"; interested list members may
            > access it and search for Hostetter's name:
            >
            > http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/sverb-rec.htm

            List members that have followed this discussion may be interested in my
            comments upon and corrections to Helge's new notes:

            <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lambengolmor/message/510>



            --
            =============================================
            Carl F. Hostetter Aelfwine@... http://www.elvish.org

            ho bios brachys, he de techne makre.
            Ars longa, vita brevis.
            The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.
            "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take such
            a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about."
          • Carl F. Hostetter
            It has been one week since I posted my corrections to Helge s misrepresentations of my words in revisions he made to his Sindarin verb article, yet despite
            Message 5 of 21 , Nov 4, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              It has been one week since I posted my corrections to Helge's misrepresentations of
              my words in revisions he made to his Sindarin verb article, yet despite having plenty
              of time to respond to people's posts online, he has yet to remove his false claims
              from his article. I respectfully request that he do so immediately, as should any who
              care about truth and accuracy in discussing Tolkien's linguistic inventions.

              (I'll also take this opportunity to note that Helge has an unclosed italics tag in his
              article, in the note in which he misrepresents my statement regarding the possible
              origins of the past participle ending _-en_.)



              --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Carl F. Hostetter <Aelfwine@e...> wrote:
              >
              > On Oct 25, 2003, at 8:42 AM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:
              >
              > > I have dealt with these things in notes added to my article
              > > "Reconstructing the Sindarin Verb System"; interested list members may
              > > access it and search for Hostetter's name:
              > >
              > > http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/sverb-rec.htm
              >
              > List members that have followed this discussion may be interested in my
              > comments upon and corrections to Helge's new notes:
              >
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lambengolmor/message/510>
            • Karyn
              ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/elfscript/files/LOTRtshirt.PNG ... Can you please tell me what font you used for this? Karyn
              Message 6 of 21 , Nov 5, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "elimloth" <draco@s...> wrote:
                > d_daniel_andries@w... wrote:
                > [...] I would suggest _Hîr i-Chorvath: han tiriannen minui._
                > > ('Lord of the Rings: I saw it first.') Written in the KLIII
                > tengwar mode, [...]
                >
                > Like so:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/elfscript/files/LOTRtshirt.PNG
                >
                > Elimloth

                Can you please tell me what font you used for this?
                Karyn
              • Carl F. Hostetter
                I see that despite having read my messages -- he corrected the unclosed tag I noted in my message within hours of its posting -- Helge has still not corrected
                Message 7 of 21 , Nov 5, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  I see that despite having read my messages -- he corrected the unclosed tag I noted
                  in my message within hours of its posting -- Helge has still not corrected his
                  erroneous claims about and misrepresentations of my actual words and arguments
                  concerning his treatment of Noldorin and Sindarin past-tense verbs.

                  I hope that the open contempt for truth and accuracy, motivated by personal animus
                  and political expediency, that Helge hereby exhibits will be noted and borne in mind
                  by those of you who read his treatises and accept his claims uncritically.

                  Don't accept _anything_ Helge says as true unless you can verify it for yourself from
                  the actual sources.



                  --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Carl F. Hostetter" <Aelfwine@e...> wrote:

                  > It has been one week since I posted my corrections to Helge's misrepresentations of
                  > my words in revisions he made to his Sindarin verb article, yet despite having plenty
                  > of time to respond to people's posts online, he has yet to remove his false claims
                  > from his article. I respectfully request that he do so immediately, as should any who
                  > care about truth and accuracy in discussing Tolkien's linguistic inventions.
                  >
                  > (I'll also take this opportunity to note that Helge has an unclosed italics tag in his
                  > article, in the note in which he misrepresents my statement regarding the possible
                  > origins of the past participle ending _-en_.)
                  >
                  > --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Carl F. Hostetter <Aelfwine@e...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > On Oct 25, 2003, at 8:42 AM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:
                  > >
                  > > > I have dealt with these things in notes added to my article
                  > > > "Reconstructing the Sindarin Verb System"; interested list members may
                  > > > access it and search for Hostetter's name:
                  > > >
                  > > > http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/sverb-rec.htm
                  > >
                  > > List members that have followed this discussion may be interested in my
                  > > comments upon and corrections to Helge's new notes:
                  > >
                  > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lambengolmor/message/510>
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.