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

Re: [elfscript] The "following Y" tehta: above or below?

Expand Messages
  • Carl F.Hostetter
    ... Two points: A) August is in fact a SUMMER month. B) You are an ass.
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 2, 2004
      On Aug 2, 2004, at 7:01 PM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:

      > Today, two days into the beautiful AUTUMN month of August,

      Two points:

      A) August is in fact a SUMMER month.

      B) You are an ass.
    • j_mach_wust
      I believe the placement of the y-dots depends mainly on the way the vowels are represented: In full writing modes, they are above the letters, in tehtar modes,
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 3, 2004
        I believe the placement of the y-dots depends mainly on the way the
        vowels are represented: In full writing modes, they are above the
        letters, in tehtar modes, they are below.

        I don't think, however, that we'd have to assume that the samples of
        isolated tyelpetéma letters with the dots above belong to a full
        writing Quenya mode. I rather think that the representation of
        isolated letters doesn't need to conform with the standard modes. If
        there aren't but isolated letters, then there are no vowel tehtar, so
        the place above the letters may be used for the placement of those
        tehtar that are usually placed below.

        In my opinion, the statement on the 'usual' placement from app. E
        doesn't concern but the specific tyelpetéma of the classical Quenya
        mode which is of course a tehtar mode. I hesitate to consider the
        numerous instances of the two dots placed above the letters to be but
        exceptions (I haven't counted, but I guess that these samples are
        _far_ more numerous than the samples of the two dots below).


        I know of one hint that the tehtar placement may depend on the shape
        of the letters: The instances of hyarmen with the vowel tehta placed
        below. These occur after all in the two Anglosaxon modes, but there
        are some other samples as well. Unfortunately, there are quite few
        samples of hyarmen + vowel tehta. If I remember correctly, the only
        instance of hyarmen with vowel tehtar above are in the Namárie
        transcription, and it's but a single dot.


        It's interesting to compare the placement of the y-tehta with the
        placement of the w-tehta. Curiously, that tehta seems to be placed
        always above! This is shown in the third version of the King's
        Letter, and also in the Manney Inscription. This use is mysterious to
        me, after all since curls below the letters are attested, see DTS 51.

        ---------------------------
        j. 'mach' wust
        http://machhezan.tripod.com
        ---------------------------
      • Arden R.Smith
        ... For two reasons: (1) It is not logical that _ry_ should be represented by a tengwa without a following-y tehta when every other letter of the tyelpetéma
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 4, 2004
          On Aug 2, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Helge K. Fauskanger wrote:

          > Incidentally, I can't quite see why Smith so emphatically
          > rejects the notion that _arya_ belongs to the tyelpetéma ("all the
          > letters
          > in the palatal series...that appear in the Etymologies make use of the
          > following-Y tehta", VT46:34).

          For two reasons:

          (1) It is not logical that _ry_ should be represented by a tengwa
          without a following-y tehta when every other letter of the tyelpetéma
          makes use of the following-y tehta.

          (2) It is a fact that whenever _arda_ is used as a tengwa-name (in both
          published and unpublished sources), it is always applied to tengwa #26.
          Similarly, every occurrence of the tengwa-name _arya_ outside of _The
          Etymologies_ is applied to a tengwa (either #21 or #25) with a
          following-y tehta either above or below it.

          > The story is not quite over, though. I note that according to some
          > secondary sources, the Y-dots should be placed _above_ some letters,
          > but
          > _below_ others, namely the ones that extend above the line (as if to
          > maintain some kind of balance by not adding even more stuff there?) For
          > instance, Helmut W. Pesch in his (German) book _Elbisch_, p. 193,
          > presents
          > a vision of the tyelpetéma that goes like this: the letters tinco,
          > ando,
          > númen and óre appear with dots ABOVE them to form the palatal letters
          > tyelpe, indyo, nyelle, and arya (yes, arya again!), whereas súle and
          > anto,
          > the stems of which extend above the line, have the dots placed below
          > the
          > letter to form the palatals istyar and intya. (In the case of lambe,
          > the
          > dots are placed inside the bow to form the symbol alya.)
          >
          > I don't know where Pesch got this from (I have every reason to assume
          > that
          > he got it from other sources, since I am myself an involuntary
          > contributor
          > to his book). I believe some relevant information appeared in the
          > fanzine
          > Quettar some years ago?

          Pesch's source (directly or indirectly) is almost undoubtedly Edouard
          Kloczko's tengwar chart on the cover of _Vinyar Tengwar_ #8 (Nov.
          1989), which I mention in my Appendix on "The _Tengwar_ in the
          _Etymologies_" (VT46:34, notes 5 and 6).

          > But even if Tolkien does say something like this in
          > some manuscript,

          He does. Kloczko's information, provided by Christopher Tolkien,
          ultimately derives from "The Feanorian Alphabet," an unpublished text
          from the mid to late 1930s; see VT46:34, note 6.

          > it must be balanced against the canonical statement in
          > Appendix E, to the effect that the following-Y diacritic is "usually
          > two
          > underposed dots". There may be some room for exegesis, though. What
          > does
          > "usually" mean in this context? I think most people would take
          > Tolkien's
          > statement to mean, "this diacritic appears as two underposed dots in
          > the
          > usual mode, though in more obscure modes which we won't bother to
          > discuss
          > here, some other doodle may be used with the same meaning, or the dots
          > may
          > not necessarily be underposed". This, indeed, is how I tend to
          > interpret
          > it.

          That's a valid assessment. Underposed dots are indeed more common,
          especially in later writings, but tengwar with the following-y tehta
          above them occur even in post-LotR manuscripts.

          ***************************************************
          Arden R. Smith erilaz@...

          Perilme metto aimaktur perperienta.
          --Elvish proverb

          ***************************************************
        • laurifindil
          ... Edouard ... text ... In 1985, when C. Tolkien wrote to me his letter, he said that he could not find a chart of the tyelpetéma post-LOTR. Have you been
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 26, 2004
            --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Arden R.Smith <erilaz@e...> wrote:

            >
            > Pesch's source (directly or indirectly) is almost undoubtedly
            Edouard
            > Kloczko's tengwar chart on the cover of _Vinyar Tengwar_ #8 (Nov.
            > 1989), which I mention in my Appendix on "The _Tengwar_ in the
            > _Etymologies_" (VT46:34, notes 5 and 6).
            >
            > > But even if Tolkien does say something like this in
            > > some manuscript,
            >
            > He does. Kloczko's information, provided by Christopher Tolkien,
            > ultimately derives from "The Feanorian Alphabet," an unpublished
            text
            > from the mid to late 1930s; see VT46:34, note 6.
            >


            In 1985, when C. Tolkien wrote to me his letter, he said that he
            could not find a chart of the tyelpetéma post-LOTR. Have you been
            able to pintpoint such a list ?

            E. Kloczko
          • Arden R. Smith
            ... Nope. Every post-LotR presentation of the Quenya full-names of the tengwar that I have seen either (a) shows letters of the tyelpetéma with their values
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 26, 2004
              On Aug 26, 2004, at 7:31 AM, laurifindil (Edouard Kloczko) wrote:

              > In 1985, when C. Tolkien wrote to me his letter, he said that he
              > could not find a chart of the tyelpetéma post-LOTR. Have you been
              > able to pintpoint such a list ?

              Nope. Every post-LotR presentation of the Quenya full-names of the
              tengwar that I have seen either (a) shows letters of the tyelpetéma
              with their values but does not mention any of their names, or (b) omits
              the letters of the tyelpetéma entirely.

              ***************************************************
              Arden R. Smith erilaz@...

              Perilme metto aimaktur perperienta.
              --Elvish proverb

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