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

Re: [elfscript] Latin (?) Tengwar

Expand Messages
  • Arden R. Smith
    Excellent analysis, Måns! ... When I provided the readings of the words to Wayne and Christina, I was of course aware of _gladiolus_ as a plant name, but I
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Excellent analysis, Måns!

      > The strongest reason to believe that "gladiolus" is meant to be Latin
      > is thus that it appears in a context that suggests it. "Gladiolus" is
      > of course also an English word, being another name for "sword lily".
      > English is notorious for borrowing from other languages, including
      > Latin. What about "fatarum" and "scandens" - are they English words as
      > well? No, not as such. But both have associations with plants.
      > _Fatarum_ is the scientific name of a species of hoverflies (or
      > "flowerflies"), while _scandens_ is a frequent scientific name for
      > various climbing plants. _Gladiolus_ is of course likewise the
      > scientific name of its genus. It is easy to imagine Tolkien sitting
      > with a book on gardening in front of him when jotting down these words.

      When I provided the readings of the words to Wayne and Christina, I was
      of course aware of _gladiolus_ as a plant name, but I had no idea that
      _fatarum_ and _scandens_ had any connection with plants, nor did I
      until I read your recent post. Thank you for providing a link between
      the words; the doodles make (somewhat) more sense now!

      > So if we are to regard the three words as parts of taxonomic names,
      > the only reasonable language to attach them to would be Latin. The
      > objection to this is that the spelling of "gladiolus" appears to
      > represent English pronounciation: [g]lædiowl@s.

      Incidentally, what I actually wrote in my (neatly handwritten) notes to
      Wayne and Christina here was:

      clædiou(l@s (?) ('gladiolus'?)

      [where <æ> was written as a digraph, <u(> was <u> with an inverted
      subscript breve, and <@> was schwa]

      > I think there is another Latin text on the envelope that does this,
      > too: in the phraze "ab incursu et daemonio meridiano", the diphthong
      > _ae_ is written <yanta + acute accent>, which suggests the
      > pronounciation [ej]. This is not correct classic pronounciation, but
      > it may very well be one heard in an English ecclesiastic or other
      > non-academic environment.

      My thoughts exactly.

      > My conclusion is therefore that all the aforementioned Tengwar texts
      > are meant to be Latin, but the spelling does not represent the classic
      > pronounciation. But surely Tolkien would know the classic
      > pronounciation of Latin? Certainly, but he would also be at home with
      > the pronounciation used in the church -- and I am told that Latin as
      > taught at the beginning of the 20th century often followed the native
      > pronounciation of the speaker.

      Tolkien's tengwar texts in Latin vary somewhat in this regard.
      Classical pronunciation is the most common in the unpublished
      manuscripts, but there are deviations. In one text, which will be
      published in the next issue of _Parma Eldalamberon_, consonantal <v> is
      represented twice as [v] and once as [w].


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

      Perilme metto aimaktur perperienta.
      --Elvish proverb

      ***************************************************
    • j_mach_wust
      ... In Letters 306 he wrote: So I grew up in a two-front state, symbolizable by the Oratorian Italian pronunciation of Latin, and the strictly philological
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Måns Björkman <mansb@h...> wrote:
        ...
        > But surely Tolkien would know the classic
        > pronounciation of Latin? Certainly, but he would also be at home
        > with the pronounciation used in the church -- and I am told that
        > Latin as taught at the beginning of the 20th century often followed
        > the native pronounciation of the speaker.

        In Letters 306 he wrote: "So I grew up in a two-front state,
        symbolizable by the Oratorian Italian pronunciation of Latin, and the
        strictly 'philological' pronunciation at that time introduced into our
        Cambridge dominated school."

        The former refers to the catholic pronunciation, the latter to the
        protestant pronunciation at King Edward's School.

        I don't know what the Oratorian Italian pronunciation is, though as to
        the "Italian" part of it, I imagine _ce ge_ to be pronounced [tSe dZe].

        ---------------------------
        j. 'mach' wust
        http://machhezan.tripod.com
        ---------------------------
      • Melroch 'Aestan
        ... The official Latin pronunciation of the RC church is simply the Italian one, with _c_ and _g_ as [tS] and [dZ] before front vowels, with _ti_ + vowel as
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 4, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          j_mach_wust skrev:


          > I don't know what the Oratorian Italian pronunciation is, though as to
          > the "Italian" part of it, I imagine _ce ge_ to be pronounced [tSe dZe].

          The official Latin pronunciation of the RC church is simply
          the Italian one, with _c_ and _g_ as [tS] and [dZ] before front
          vowels, with _ti_ + vowel as [ts] + vowel and disregarding
          quantity except for purposes of stress placement. I'm not
          sure what they do to initial consonantal _i_ though.

          --

          /BP 8^)>
          --
          Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
          A h-ammen ledin i phith! \ \
          __ ____ ____ _____________ ____ __ __ __ / /
          \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / /
          / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / /
          / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /Roccondil\_ // /__/ // /__/ /
          /_________//_/ \_\/ /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)
        • Måns Björkman
          Mellyn, Based on Wust s comments, I have now extensively revised the overview and General Use Tengwar descriptions on Amanye Tenceli
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 5, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Mellyn,

            Based on Wust's comments, I have now extensively revised the overview
            and General Use Tengwar descriptions on Amanye Tenceli
            (http://at.mansbjorkman.net/tengwar.htm and
            http://at.mansbjorkman.net/teng_general.htm). I just want to remark on
            a few minor details.


            --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "j_mach_wust" <j_mach_wust@y...> wrote:
            > ...
            >
            > TENGWAR - GENERAL USE
            >
            > English samples:
            >
            > DTS 11 is also "general use", and so presumably is Tolkien's name in
            > DTS 56 (though I don't know that latter sample).

            Indeed they are! DTS 56 is another example of phonemic spelling: the
            Roman letter digraph "ie" in Tolkien's name is transcribed as a tehta
            on a long carrier. The tehta looks like a grave accent, but the
            inscription is made in such shaky handwriting that I strongly suspect
            it is meant to stand for something else, probably a regular acute accent.


            > In DTS 41, I consider the word "klædiowl?s" to be English, not Latin.

            I guess we have covered this subject in the "Latin (?) Tengwar" thread.


            > ---------
            >
            > Remark on the inclusion of the Old English samples:
            >
            > You have included the Old English specimina of DTS 50 and 51. However,
            > you only describe the tehtar of DTS 50, but neither the tehtar of DTS
            > 51 nor the special tengwar uses of either sample: The representation
            > of "w" by rómen, "wh" by the halla-rómen ligature (if you allow this
            > interpretation) and the use of vilya and vala as independent vowel
            > tengwar (vilya is attested many times in this use, vala in the last
            > word of DTS 50 II, line 24).

            Yes, the Old English samples are in many ways special cases. I have
            admittedly chosen a rather broad definition of the term "General Use".
            The value /w/ for <rómen> has now been included but I have not added
            the Old English /hw/ tengwa, simply because more exotic "additional
            tengwar" will be adressed in the descriptions of each respective language.


            > In the description of the diaeresis tehta, the DTS 50 value is
            > indicated as equally common as the "y"-value, whereas all other DTS 50
            > values are marked as rarer values.

            The wording is now altered so as to make no assessment of which values
            are more common.


            > a. Orthographic Spelling:
            >
            > ...
            >
            > You've forgotten to mention the prenasalization bar.

            No, but the division into different subheadings might be confusing. I
            hope the added note makes it more clear.


            > b. Phonemic Spelling:
            >
            > ...
            >
            > In the chart, vilya is marked as if it were not necessary even though
            > it is attested in the (enigmatic) transcription of "lie" in DTS 36.

            I am not sure how to treat this. To me, the use of <vilya> for [j] is
            quite clearly a mistake. I base this on three facts:
            1) Given the points of articulation for the témar in this mode, we
            would expect <vilya> to represent a velar, not a palatal.
            2) The preceding tengwa in the text is a <lambe>, and it is possible
            to see the closing line of <vilya> as an extension of the top line in
            the <lambe>.
            3) DTS 36 is a draft of the Two Towers cover, and the spelling was
            corrected to <anna> in the final version (DTS 37).


            Yours,
            Måns
          • i_degilbor
            ... In ecclestiastical Latin pronunciation, initial consonantal _i_ is peronounced /j/. It is often spelt _j_ as well (e.g. _Jesu_ rather than _Iesu_, _jam_
            Message 5 of 14 , Sep 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Teithant Melroch 'Aestan:
              > The official Latin pronunciation of the RC church is simply
              > the Italian one, with _c_ and _g_ as [tS] and [dZ] before front
              > vowels, with _ti_ + vowel as [ts] + vowel and disregarding
              > quantity except for purposes of stress placement. I'm not
              > sure what they do to initial consonantal _i_ though.

              In ecclestiastical Latin pronunciation, initial consonantal _i_ is
              peronounced /j/. It is often spelt _j_ as well (e.g. _Jesu_ rather
              than _Iesu_, _jam_ rather than _iam_, etc.). For the most part, the
              pronunciation of the Latin words is based on the pronunciation of
              their Latin descendants. A notable exception is the pronunciation of
              intervocalic _h_ in the words _mihi_ and _nihil_: the _h_ is
              pronounced /k/.

              Cuio mae, Danny.
            • j_mach_wust
              Måns Björkman wrote: ... English phonology, Latin language. Fair enough. ... As I ve said in message #4456, I imagine there might be an interdependence
              Message 6 of 14 , Sep 5, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Måns Björkman wrote:
                ...
                > --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "j_mach_wust" <j_mach_wust@y...>
                > wrote:
                > > ...
                > >
                > > TENGWAR - GENERAL USE
                > >
                > > English samples:
                > >
                > > DTS 11 is also "general use", and so presumably is Tolkien's name
                > > in DTS 56 (though I don't know that latter sample).
                >
                > Indeed they are! DTS 56 is another example of phonemic spelling: the
                > Roman letter digraph "ie" in Tolkien's name is transcribed as a
                > tehta on a long carrier. The tehta looks like a grave accent, but
                > the inscription is made in such shaky handwriting that I strongly
                > suspect it is meant to stand for something else, probably a regular
                > acute accent.
                >
                >
                > > In DTS 41, I consider the word "klædiowl?s" to be English, not
                > > Latin.
                >
                > I guess we have covered this subject in the "Latin (?) Tengwar"
                > thread.

                English phonology, Latin language. Fair enough.


                ...
                > The value /w/ for <rómen> has now been included but I have not added
                > the Old English /hw/ tengwa, simply because more exotic "additional
                > tengwar" will be adressed in the descriptions of each respective
                > language.

                As I've said in message #4456, I imagine there might be an
                interdependence between the use of rómen for W and of the halla-rómen
                ligature for HW. The only published texts that use rómen for W and at
                the same time show instances of HW are the Anglosaxon texts, so
                there's not much evidence for that interdependence. The idea that the
                values of certain signs interdepend with the value of similar signs,
                however, is very characteristic to the tengwar. In any case, you're
                right that the halla-rómen ligature is exotic. But isn't the use of
                rómen for W as well?

                ...
                > > b. Phonemic Spelling:
                > >
                > > ...
                > >
                > > In the chart, vilya is marked as if it were not necessary even
                > > though it is attested in the (enigmatic) transcription of "lie" in
                > > DTS 36.
                >
                > I am not sure how to treat this. To me, the use of <vilya> for [j]
                > is quite clearly a mistake. I base this on three facts:

                I think we can't even be sure that it is intended to represent [j]. It
                might also be a representation of <e>, since the original text of that
                line has "lie", so that use of vilya for <e> could be equivalent to
                the use of yanta for <e> in DTS 62, if we assume it were intended to
                be an orthographic transcription. If it really were an orthographic
                transcription, then we'd expect the silent <e> of the word 'where' to
                be transcribed with a dot below, yet there is none. However, the
                nasalization bar in the word 'land' is also missing. Except for that
                'e' in "where" and for the transcription of "lie", we can't decide
                whether it is a phonemic or an orthographic transcription. What
                puzzles me most is the diaeresis tehta in the transcription of "lie"
                which is not found in any other English tehtar mode (if I'm not wrong)
                and which makes the word look as if it were transcribed in the full
                mode of DTS 16 etc.

                > 1) Given the points of articulation for the témar in this mode, we
                > would expect <vilya> to represent a velar, not a palatal.

                Definitly not palatal, but perhaps a vowel or a glottal stop.

                > 2) The preceding tengwa in the text is a <lambe>, and it is possible
                > to see the closing line of <vilya> as an extension of the top line
                > in the <lambe>.

                I'm not sure about that one. Calligraphically, the text looks quite
                carefully written. And is there any other evidence for a lambe closing
                line extending onto a following calmatéma tengwa?

                > 3) DTS 36 is a draft of the Two Towers cover, and the spelling was
                > corrected to <anna> in the final version (DTS 37).

                And the two dot tehta was corrected to a three dot tehta. I agree that
                this sample is not important in a description of the general use.

                ---------------------------
                j. 'mach' wust
                http://machhezan.tripod.com
                ---------------------------
              • Måns Björkman
                ... It certainly is, though not as exotic as the halla-rómen ligature . And as regards my article, I figured I should try to include every known value of the
                Message 7 of 14 , Sep 5, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "j_mach_wust" <j_mach_wust@y...> wrote:
                  > ...
                  > As I've said in message #4456, I imagine there might be an
                  > interdependence between the use of rómen for W and of the halla-rómen
                  > ligature for HW. The only published texts that use rómen for W and at
                  > the same time show instances of HW are the Anglosaxon texts, so
                  > there's not much evidence for that interdependence. The idea that the
                  > values of certain signs interdepend with the value of similar signs,
                  > however, is very characteristic to the tengwar. In any case, you're
                  > right that the halla-rómen ligature is exotic. But isn't the use of
                  > rómen for W as well?

                  It certainly is, though not as exotic as the "halla-rómen ligature".
                  And as regards my article, I figured I should try to include every
                  known value of the tengwar that I do list.


                  > ...
                  > > > b. Phonemic Spelling:
                  > > >
                  > > > ...
                  > > >
                  > > > In the chart, vilya is marked as if it were not necessary even
                  > > > though it is attested in the (enigmatic) transcription of "lie" in
                  > > > DTS 36.
                  > >
                  > > I am not sure how to treat this. To me, the use of <vilya> for [j]
                  > > is quite clearly a mistake. I base this on three facts:
                  >
                  > I think we can't even be sure that it is intended to represent [j]. It
                  > might also be a representation of <e>, since the original text of that
                  > line has "lie", so that use of vilya for <e> could be equivalent to
                  > the use of yanta for <e> in DTS 62, if we assume it were intended to
                  > be an orthographic transcription.

                  That would be the only attested use of <vilya> for /e/, wouldn't it?
                  (I'm not saying that it would be impossible for that reason, of course.)


                  > If it really were an orthographic
                  > transcription, then we'd expect the silent <e> of the word 'where' to
                  > be transcribed with a dot below, yet there is none. However, the
                  > nasalization bar in the word 'land' is also missing.

                  "The lad of Mordor". Isn't that Sauron? :)


                  > Except for that
                  > 'e' in "where" and for the transcription of "lie", we can't decide
                  > whether it is a phonemic or an orthographic transcription. What
                  > puzzles me most is the diaeresis tehta in the transcription of "lie"
                  > which is not found in any other English tehtar mode (if I'm not wrong)
                  > and which makes the word look as if it were transcribed in the full
                  > mode of DTS 16 etc.

                  Yes, now that you mention it, it looks to me as though Tolkien
                  accidently switched into a different mode.


                  > > 1) Given the points of articulation for the témar in this mode, we
                  > > would expect <vilya> to represent a velar, not a palatal.
                  >
                  > Definitly not palatal, but perhaps a vowel or a glottal stop.

                  Yes, that is possible.


                  > > 2) The preceding tengwa in the text is a <lambe>, and it is possible
                  > > to see the closing line of <vilya> as an extension of the top line
                  > > in the <lambe>.
                  >
                  > I'm not sure about that one. Calligraphically, the text looks quite
                  > carefully written. And is there any other evidence for a lambe closing
                  > line extending onto a following calmatéma tengwa?

                  None that I can think of at the top of my head. On the other hand,
                  there is little other evidence for <vilya> representing /e/ or /j/ either.


                  Yours,
                  Måns
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.