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

Re: Full Tengwar Modes for Modern English

Expand Messages
  • Mach Hezan
    ... May I ask how you ve managed to do so (as I d be very interested in obtaining them also)? ... Sure, I should have been reading more carefully. However, I
    Message 1 of 7 , Nov 4, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Ronald Kyrmse wrote:

      >> How did you get all that precise information about DTs 53 and 54
      >
      > in the meantime have obtained images of them

      May I ask how you've managed to do so (as I'd be very interested in
      obtaining them also)?

      >> € In the chart of the vowels, you've confused the tengwar for /a/ and /o/
      >
      > The vowel chart next to the common consonant chart was not meant to show
      > common vowels, but rather the struck-out vowels on the Steinborg drawing,

      Sure, I should have been reading more carefully. However, I rather think
      that on the Steinborg drawing, the tengwa next to _e_ is anna, not a
      stemless calma (or anna). It's not very clear. Sure, stemless calma is more
      consistent with the other modes, but the tengwa I see on the Steinborg
      drawing looks very similar to anna as e.g. seen in the word _by_ on the
      Treebeard page. BTW, this version of anna reminds very much the r-shaped
      short carrier!

      >> € You're writing: "the tengwa anna has variously stood for a, o and the
      >> first vowel in butter."
      >>
      >> Anna for /a/? I only know one instance of this, the word _about_ in DTS
      >> 18,
      >
      > DTS24 (Treebeard) does have anna for /a/, e.g. in _fragment_ and _while_.

      I've confused things up. The use I wanted to question was the use of anna
      for _o_, but somehow I got into _a_. But now I see that the Ilbereth
      Greetings use anna for _o_.

      > The Bombadil-I-mode has anna, not the u-tengwa, for ^ (in the word _up_).

      I'm not so sure about this any more. Compare e.g. the u-shaped tengwa with
      the tengwar from the calmatéma in DTS 17: The uppermost part of the
      calmatéma lúvar always points to the right. The same can be observed in DTS
      16, 18, and 23, but not that clearly.

      >> € On the bottom of the chart at the end of the page (and in FTMME.pdf), I
      >> see many instances of ˆ but no phonemic/orthographic values. That's your
      >> intention, right?
      >
      > Yes: ^ should not appear in the orthographic modes

      Seemingly, our computers have some troubles in understanding each other:
      What I intended to say is that I see many instances of a little hook,
      probably only intended to affirm that the signs exist.

      > What I meant by writing an inverted _r_ is that variety of /r/ that can be
      > dropped (or almost) depending on the English dialect you use, and the
      > right-side-up _r_ is the one not normally dropped, and sometimes even trilled

      This isn't the IPA use, but these are IPA signs. I couldn't find a sign for
      these 'potentially dropped' _r_.

      Since the alternation of óre and rómen reflects the alternation of dropped
      _r_ and 'kept' _r_ that I'm not sure whether it should be suggested to
      speakers of rhotic/_r_-keeping dialects. Indeed, this consideration makes
      the mode of DTS 25 preferrable, where any _r_ is represented with óre. But
      this brings other problems along: Should rómen be used for _w_? How should
      _Mary ­ merry ­ marry_ be distinguished (not all speaker make these
      distinctions)?

      > Should we consider the r-shaped version as a mere allograph of the short
      > carrier?

      Yes, I would consider it a variant of the short carrier, but certainly not a
      free variant but a variant only allowed in certain positions in certain
      modes. In that respect, it might be interesting to compare the use of the
      r-shaped versions of calmatéma letters with the use of their |-shaped
      versions, but I've never paid any attention to that.

      suilaid
      mach
    • Kyrmse
      My replies below -- as usual between [[ ]] == There are many issues to be addressed here, and I have not got the time to make a proper correction to FTMME
      Message 2 of 7 , Nov 5, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        My replies below -- as usual between [[ ]]
        ==> There are many issues to be addressed here, and I have not got
        the time to make a proper correction to FTMME right away. But rest
        assured, all, that I will put up Version 3 asap, _and_ post an
        announcement on Elfscript!

        --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Mach Hezan <machhezan@g...> wrote:
        > Ronald Kyrmse wrote:
        >
        > >> How did you get all that precise information about DTs 53 and 54
        > >
        > > in the meantime have obtained images of them
        >
        > May I ask how you've managed to do so (as I'd be very interested in
        > obtaining them also)? [[They were sent to me by Måns Björkman, but
        I understand (as you of course know) they are for internal use only]]
        >
        > >> € In the chart of the vowels, you've confused the tengwar
        for /a/ and /o/
        > >
        > > The vowel chart next to the common consonant chart was not meant
        to show
        > > common vowels, but rather the struck-out vowels on the Steinborg
        drawing,
        >
        > Sure, I should have been reading more carefully. However, I rather
        think
        > that on the Steinborg drawing, the tengwa next to _e_ is anna, not a
        > stemless calma (or anna). It's not very clear. Sure, stemless calma
        is more
        > consistent with the other modes, but the tengwa I see on the
        Steinborg
        > drawing looks very similar to anna as e.g. seen in the word _by_ on
        the
        > Treebeard page. BTW, this version of anna reminds very much the r-
        shaped
        > short carrier! [[It seems to be an anna indeed, although quite
        drawn-out horizontally -- but not inconsistent with JRRT's usage
        elsewhere]]
        >
        [...]
        >
        > > The Bombadil-I-mode has anna, not the u-tengwa, for ^ (in the
        word _up_).
        >
        > I'm not so sure about this any more. Compare e.g. the u-shaped
        tengwa with
        > the tengwar from the calmatéma in DTS 17: The uppermost part of the
        > calmatéma lúvar always points to the right. The same can be
        observed in DTS
        > 16, 18, and 23, but not that clearly. [[Will compare and publish
        findings...]]
        >
        > >> € On the bottom of the chart at the end of the page (and in
        FTMME.pdf), I
        > >> see many instances of ˆ but no phonemic/orthographic values.
        That's your
        > >> intention, right?
        > >
        > > Yes: ^ should not appear in the orthographic modes
        >
        > Seemingly, our computers have some troubles in understanding each
        other:
        > What I intended to say is that I see many instances of a little
        hook,
        > probably only intended to affirm that the signs exist. [[I finally
        understood that _after_ my reply had gone out -- but had no time to
        correct the reply; you are right, of course]]
        >
        > > What I meant by writing an inverted _r_ is that variety of /r/
        that can be
        > > dropped (or almost) depending on the English dialect you use, and
        the
        > > right-side-up _r_ is the one not normally dropped, and sometimes
        even trilled
        >
        > This isn't the IPA use, but these are IPA signs. I couldn't find a
        sign for
        > these 'potentially dropped' _r_.
        >
        > Since the alternation of óre and rómen reflects the alternation of
        dropped
        > _r_ and 'kept' _r_ that I'm not sure whether it should be suggested
        to
        > speakers of rhotic/_r_-keeping dialects. Indeed, this consideration
        makes
        > the mode of DTS 25 preferrable, where any _r_ is represented with
        óre. But
        > this brings other problems along: Should rómen be used for _w_? How
        should
        > _Mary ­ merry ­ marry_ be distinguished (not all speaker make these
        > distinctions)? [[Maybe using /r/ for a "droppable" _r_ and /R/ for
        the other, strongly pronounced by some rhotics, _and_ explaining the
        notation in a footnote? Am still open to this]]
        >
        > > Should we consider the r-shaped version as a mere allograph of
        the short
        > > carrier?
        >
        > Yes, I would consider it a variant of the short carrier, but
        certainly not a
        > free variant but a variant only allowed in certain positions in
        certain
        > modes. In that respect, it might be interesting to compare the use
        of the
        > r-shaped versions of calmatéma letters with the use of their |-
        shaped
        > versions, but I've never paid any attention to that.
        >
        > suilaid
        > mach
      • mach
        ... Yet [R] is again an IPA sign. I d use the same sign [r] (or the inverted version) for both letters and explain the difference only in the note. suilaid
        Message 3 of 7 , Nov 5, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Ronald Kyrmse wrote:
          >
          >> I couldn't find a sign for these 'potentially dropped' _r_.
          >>
          >> [...]
          >
          > Maybe using /r/ for a "droppable" _r_ and /R/ for the other,
          > strongly pronounced by some rhotics, _and_ explaining the notation
          > in a footnote? Am still open to this

          Yet [R] is again an IPA sign. I'd use the same sign [r] (or the inverted
          version) for both letters and explain the difference only in the note.

          suilaid
          mach
        • Kyrmse
          Version 3, revised after very instructive discussions with several tolkiendili, has been published at http://www.geocities.com/otsoandor/FTMME.htm
          Message 4 of 7 , Nov 10, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Version 3, revised after very instructive discussions with several
            tolkiendili, has been published at
            http://www.geocities.com/otsoandor/FTMME.htm
          • Benct Philip Jonsson
            ... Have you updated your PDF as well? /BP 8^) -- B.Philip Jonsson mailto:melrochX@melroch.se (delete X)
            Message 5 of 7 , Nov 12, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              At 13:39 11.11.2003, elfscript@yahoogroups.com wrote:

              >Message: 5
              > Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:07:19 -0000
              > From: "Kyrmse" <certur@...>
              >Subject: Full Tengwar Modes for Modern English
              >
              >Version 3, revised after very instructive discussions with several
              >tolkiendili, has been published at
              >http://www.geocities.com/otsoandor/FTMME.htm

              Have you updated your PDF as well?



              /BP 8^)
              --
              B.Philip Jonsson mailto:melrochX@... (delete X)
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
              A h-ammen ledin i phith! \ \
              __ ____ ____ _____________ ____ __ __ __ / /
              \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / /
              / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / /
              / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /'Aestan ~\_ // /__/ // /__/ /
              /_________//_/ \_\/ /Eowine __ / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
              Gwaedhvenn Angeliniel\ \______/ /a/ /_h-adar Merthol naun
              ~~~~~~~~~Kuinondil~~~\________/~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~
              || Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda kuivie aiya! ||
              "A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)
            • Kyrmse
              Yes, the PDF file has been updated too -- but do _not_ consider this as the definitive word on the subject! The jury (all of you) is still out, and this is
              Message 6 of 7 , Nov 12, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Yes, the PDF file has been updated too -- but do _not_ consider this
                as the definitive word on the subject! The jury (all of you) is still
                out, and this is merely Version 3 (of many to come, I'm sure).

                --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@m...>
                wrote:
                > At 13:39 11.11.2003, elfscript@yahoogroups.com wrote:
                >
                > >Message: 5
                > > Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:07:19 -0000
                > > From: "Kyrmse" <certur@a...>
                > >Subject: Full Tengwar Modes for Modern English
                > >
                > >Version 3, revised after very instructive discussions with several
                > >tolkiendili, has been published at
                > >http://www.geocities.com/otsoandor/FTMME.htm
                >
                > Have you updated your PDF as well?
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.