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

Re: translation question

Expand Messages
  • Calwen Rudh
    ... is less ... stray. ... all the ... Are you sure that Not all who wander [do] stray. and All who wander do not stray. are the same? The first - bare
    Message 1 of 10 , Dec 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Helge K. Fauskanger"
      <helge.fauskanger@n...> wrote:
      > This one may be slightly more "safe" in the sense that the grammar
      is less
      > controversial: _Pain i reviar ú-vistar_. "All who wander do not
      stray."
      > Irrespective of some phonological updating and error-correction,
      all the
      > words are attested (though sometimes in mutated forms).

      Are you sure that "Not all who wander [do] stray." and "All who
      wander do not stray." are the same? The first - bare sentence -
      reads: "Not all stray." but the latter reads "All do not stray."
      [lit.] and there is a difference. Why can it be _Ú-pain i reviar
      mistaid._ meaning "Not all who wander [are] strayed." (I only hope
      there is no lenition in _mistaid_ but this one is not a direct
      object, is it?)?

      Lucy

      P.S. The other thing is that 'spinster core' ignores your suggestion
      posting a double tripple check with the original sentence ...
    • Chuppy Celdran
      thanks for your help, you think you can translate that into the sign used not the word?? ... From: Calwen Rudh To: elfscript@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday,
      Message 2 of 10 , Dec 3, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        thanks for your help, you think you can translate that into the sign used not the word??

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Calwen Rudh
        To: elfscript@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 9:34 PM
        Subject: [elfscript] Re: translation question


        --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Helge K. Fauskanger"
        <helge.fauskanger@n...> wrote:
        > This one may be slightly more "safe" in the sense that the grammar
        is less
        > controversial: _Pain i reviar ú-vistar_. "All who wander do not
        stray."
        > Irrespective of some phonological updating and error-correction,
        all the
        > words are attested (though sometimes in mutated forms).

        Are you sure that "Not all who wander [do] stray." and "All who
        wander do not stray." are the same? The first - bare sentence -
        reads: "Not all stray." but the latter reads "All do not stray."
        [lit.] and there is a difference. Why can it be _Ú-pain i reviar
        mistaid._ meaning "Not all who wander [are] strayed." (I only hope
        there is no lenition in _mistaid_ but this one is not a direct
        object, is it?)?

        Lucy

        P.S. The other thing is that 'spinster core' ignores your suggestion
        posting a double tripple check with the original sentence ...


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        ADVERTISEMENT




        To Post a message, send it to: elfscript@...
        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: elfscript-unsubscribe@...

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Calwen Rudh
        ... sign used not the word?? ... I am not sure that I understood your question... You want the English sentence transcribed in Tengwar or that Sindarin attempt
        Message 3 of 10 , Dec 3, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Chuppy Celdran" <chuppy@i...>
          wrote:
          > thanks for your help, you think you can translate that into the
          sign used not the word??
          >

          I am not sure that I understood your question... You want the
          English sentence transcribed in Tengwar or that Sindarin attempt
          transcribed in Tengwar? Or even something else?

          Lucy
        • Calwen Rudh
          ... Let s see ... hmmm ... oh, sure: where s the lenition after _ú-_, Lucy? So: _Ú-bain i reviar ..._ Sorry. Lucy
          Message 4 of 10 , Dec 3, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            I wrote:
            > Why can it be _Ú-pain i reviar ... _

            Let's see ... hmmm ... oh, sure: where's the lenition after _ú-_,
            Lucy?

            So: _Ú-bain i reviar ..._

            Sorry. Lucy
          • spinster core
            I honestly was not ignoring anyone s advice/suggestions. I did not get said advice until one day after I posted my second question. ... grammar ... suggestion
            Message 5 of 10 , Dec 3, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              I honestly was not ignoring anyone's advice/suggestions. I did not
              get said advice until one day after I posted my second question.

              --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Calwen Rudh" <calwen.rudh@s...>
              wrote:
              > --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Helge K. Fauskanger"
              > <helge.fauskanger@n...> wrote:
              > > This one may be slightly more "safe" in the sense that the
              grammar
              > is less
              > > controversial: _Pain i reviar ú-vistar_. "All who wander do not
              > stray."
              > > Irrespective of some phonological updating and error-correction,
              > all the
              > > words are attested (though sometimes in mutated forms).
              >
              > Are you sure that "Not all who wander [do] stray." and "All who
              > wander do not stray." are the same? The first - bare sentence -
              > reads: "Not all stray." but the latter reads "All do not stray."
              > [lit.] and there is a difference. Why can it be _Ú-pain i reviar
              > mistaid._ meaning "Not all who wander [are] strayed." (I only hope
              > there is no lenition in _mistaid_ but this one is not a direct
              > object, is it?)?
              >
              > Lucy
              >
              > P.S. The other thing is that 'spinster core' ignores your
              suggestion
              > posting a double tripple check with the original sentence ...
            • Helge K. Fauskanger
              ... not the word?? This code will produce _Pain i reviar ú-vistar_ in the Mode of Beleriand: q]Õ6 ` 7lr`]7 .Fr`81]7 Perhaps you want a tehta mode instead?
              Message 6 of 10 , Dec 7, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Chuppy Celdran wrote:

                > thanks for your help, you think you can translate that into the sign used
                not the word??

                This code will produce _Pain i reviar ú-vistar_ in the Mode of Beleriand:

                q]Õ6 ` 7lr`]7 .Fr`81]7

                Perhaps you want a tehta mode instead?

                One uncertain point: since the V of _ú-vistar_ is a lenited form of M (the
                unlenited verbal stem being _mista-_), some would prefer to use a special
                form of the sign for M, as in the King's Letter. In the Mode of Beleriand,
                this would probably be a modified form of Vala (since in this mode, Malta
                denotes a _double_ MM). But then the whole thing becomes somewhat
                speculative.

                Lucy wrote:

                > Are you sure that "Not all who wander [do] stray." and "All who wander
                do not stray." are the same?

                No, but the meaning of the original poem is clearly that NOT all who
                "wander" (i.e. the Dúnedain rangers to whom Aragorn belongs) are lost
                (they "wander" intentionally, i.e. function as rangers -- not planlessly or
                involuntarily but for a purpose, and hence are not "lost" as other
                wanderers in the wild may be).

                - HKF
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.