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

Re: [elfscript] Re: Getting a Tattoo in Elvish

Expand Messages
  • Johan Winge
    ... Aha, so, you are trying to capture the English pronunciation of Latin (long e realised as the diphthong in hay , rather than a pure long e), by using a
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 9, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:57:32 +0100, elmac526 <elmac526@...> wrote:

      > Thanks for your input! I wrote "me" like that because I was trying to
      > do it phonetically, and since it's Latin, the "me" wouldn't rhyme
      > with a word like "bee" but would rhyme more with "hay." But do you
      > think I should write it with the letter "e" even so?

      Aha, so, you are trying to capture the English pronunciation of Latin
      (long e realised as the diphthong in "hay", rather than a pure long e), by
      using a phonetic mode, which in turn is based on the peculiarities of the
      English orthography (representing the diphthong in "hay", that is /ei/, by
      means of a "long a")? Now, this might be what you want, but frankly, I
      think it makes little sense.

      To clarify, the Latin "e" in the word "me", is, in restored classical
      pronunciation, as well as in almost all national pronunciations except the
      English, a long pure sound /e:/, that is, not a diphthong, but one sound
      drawn out in time. This sound is generally difficult to produce for people
      who have grown up with English, so the diphthong in "hay", "they", is
      generally used instead, as an _approximation_ of the pure vowel. (This is
      very different from what the English would call a "long e", that is the
      sound in "bee", which the Romans would call a long "i".) If you do a
      search for "great vowel shift" on Google, you will get more information
      about the reason for the peculiarities of the English orthography when it
      comes to writing vowels.

      What I would propose instead is that you use a tengwar mode specifically
      adapted to the Latin language. There is no standard way of doing so, but
      it seems to me that using the the Quenya mode as a starting point would be
      a good idea; quesse would then be used to write "qu", for example. Some
      adaptions must of course be undertaken, for example it seems reasonable to
      use ando to write "d".

      I agree with "Palatinus", that, (rather incidently), your transcription
      seems to be an acceptable way of writing the Latin phrase, except for the
      way you wrote "me"; to use the "e" tehta there would be the only
      reasonable choice.

      Some other details: the "u" in "nutrit" is long in classical latin, so you
      can consider doubling the u-tehta, or use a long carrier. (I think you
      should be consistent and either mark all long vowels, that is "nûtrit" and
      "mê", so the alternative would be to get rid of the long carrier in "me".
      I'd recommend indicating the vowel lengths; then again, I'm a classicist.)

      If you want you can also consider using the Quenya order of writing the
      tehtar. I don't know what would be prefered, but the order with the tehta
      on top of the following tengwa is by no means the natural choice.

      Finally, seriously consider if you want to use a computer font for your
      tattoo. An artistical rendering by a skilled calligrapher (who is at least
      familiar with Tengwar) probably would look much better, as well as be more
      personal.

      Best wishes,
      Johan Winge

      PS. Some of the possible ways to transcribe the phrase can be seen at
      http://home.student.uu.se/jowi4905/mix/nutrit.png
      I think I prefer the first line.
    • elmac526
      That helped a lot, Thanks so much! I was so confused about the whole me thing but it makes a lot of sense now :) So, basically, any one of those in your link
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 9, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        That helped a lot, Thanks so much! I was so confused about the
        whole "me" thing but it makes a lot of sense now :)

        So, basically, any one of those in your link would work? And you
        prefer the first line because it is consistant (with the long
        carriers) and uses the Quenya order of writing? I also noticed it
        used the other silme, does the Quenya order require this or can the
        other one be used as well?

        Also thanks for your advice on having a calligrapher write it. I
        would as well prefer this, but the only problem is I don't know
        anyone who does calligraphy :(

        --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "Johan Winge" <johan.winge@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:57:32 +0100, elmac526 <elmac526@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Thanks for your input! I wrote "me" like that because I was
        trying to
        > > do it phonetically, and since it's Latin, the "me" wouldn't rhyme
        > > with a word like "bee" but would rhyme more with "hay." But do you
        > > think I should write it with the letter "e" even so?
        >
        > Aha, so, you are trying to capture the English pronunciation of
        Latin
        > (long e realised as the diphthong in "hay", rather than a pure long
        e), by
        > using a phonetic mode, which in turn is based on the peculiarities
        of the
        > English orthography (representing the diphthong in "hay", that
        is /ei/, by
        > means of a "long a")? Now, this might be what you want, but
        frankly, I
        > think it makes little sense.
        >
        > To clarify, the Latin "e" in the word "me", is, in restored
        classical
        > pronunciation, as well as in almost all national pronunciations
        except the
        > English, a long pure sound /e:/, that is, not a diphthong, but one
        sound
        > drawn out in time. This sound is generally difficult to produce for
        people
        > who have grown up with English, so the diphthong in "hay", "they",
        is
        > generally used instead, as an _approximation_ of the pure vowel.
        (This is
        > very different from what the English would call a "long e", that is
        the
        > sound in "bee", which the Romans would call a long "i".) If you do
        a
        > search for "great vowel shift" on Google, you will get more
        information
        > about the reason for the peculiarities of the English orthography
        when it
        > comes to writing vowels.
        >
        > What I would propose instead is that you use a tengwar mode
        specifically
        > adapted to the Latin language. There is no standard way of doing
        so, but
        > it seems to me that using the the Quenya mode as a starting point
        would be
        > a good idea; quesse would then be used to write "qu", for example.
        Some
        > adaptions must of course be undertaken, for example it seems
        reasonable to
        > use ando to write "d".
        >
        > I agree with "Palatinus", that, (rather incidently), your
        transcription
        > seems to be an acceptable way of writing the Latin phrase, except
        for the
        > way you wrote "me"; to use the "e" tehta there would be the only
        > reasonable choice.
        >
        > Some other details: the "u" in "nutrit" is long in classical latin,
        so you
        > can consider doubling the u-tehta, or use a long carrier. (I think
        you
        > should be consistent and either mark all long vowels, that
        is "nûtrit" and
        > "mê", so the alternative would be to get rid of the long carrier
        in "me".
        > I'd recommend indicating the vowel lengths; then again, I'm a
        classicist.)
        >
        > If you want you can also consider using the Quenya order of writing
        the
        > tehtar. I don't know what would be prefered, but the order with the
        tehta
        > on top of the following tengwa is by no means the natural choice.
        >
        > Finally, seriously consider if you want to use a computer font for
        your
        > tattoo. An artistical rendering by a skilled calligrapher (who is
        at least
        > familiar with Tengwar) probably would look much better, as well as
        be more
        > personal.
        >
        > Best wishes,
        > Johan Winge
        >
        > PS. Some of the possible ways to transcribe the phrase can be seen
        at
        > http://home.student.uu.se/jowi4905/mix/nutrit.png
        > I think I prefer the first line.
        >
      • Palatinus
        The point with Quenya (or else) order of writing has to do with whether most words end on vowels or consonants Quenya s words end mostly onvowels so vowels as
        Message 3 of 10 , Jan 9, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          The point with Quenya (or else) order of writing has to do with whether most words end on vowels or consonants

          Quenya's words end mostly onvowels so vowels as read like following all the consonants

          I don't know which is true about Latin

          ----- Original Message ----
          From: elmac526 <elmac526@...>
          To: elfscript@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2007 7:50:41 PM
          Subject: [elfscript] Re: Getting a Tattoo in Elvish













          That helped a lot, Thanks so much! I was so confused about the

          whole "me" thing but it makes a lot of sense now :)



          So, basically, any one of those in your link would work? And you

          prefer the first line because it is consistant (with the long

          carriers) and uses the Quenya order of writing? I also noticed it

          used the other silme, does the Quenya order require this or can the

          other one be used as well?



          Also thanks for your advice on having a calligrapher write it. I

          would as well prefer this, but the only problem is I don't know

          anyone who does calligraphy :(








          __________________________________________________
          �������������� Yahoo!;
          ���������� �� ���������� �������� (spam); �� Yahoo! Mail �������� ��� �������� ������ ��������� ���� ��� ����������� ���������
          http://mail.yahoo.gr

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Melroch 'Aestan
          ... IMHO the mode choosen would depend on what **kind** of Latin one wants to represent, and indeed how one would want it to be read out. For Classical Latin I
          Message 4 of 10 , Jan 12, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            j_mach_wust skrev:
            > Johan Winge:
            >> On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:50:41 +0100, elmac526
            >> <elmac526@...> wrote:
            >>> So, basically, any one of those in your link would work?
            >>> And you prefer the first line because it is consistant
            >>> (with the long carriers) and uses the Quenya order of
            >>> writing?
            >> That would be more or less my reasoning, yes, but those
            >> things are all a matter of opinion. My point is that all
            >> would be acceptable,
            >
            > I'd prefer a representation of Latin shaped after
            > Tolkien's own Latin tengwar text (DTS 41), that is to say,
            > a 'general use' mode with the tehtar placed on the
            > preceding letters and with Latin vowel length opposition
            > not represented.

            IMHO the mode choosen would depend on what **kind** of Latin
            one wants to represent, and indeed how one would want it to
            be read out. For Classical Latin I would prefer a mode
            closely modelled on the 'standard' Quenya mode, as the two
            languages have similar phonologies. If Medieval or even New
            Latin is concerned, one may indeed want to reflect a
            different pronunciation -- even one of the 'national'
            pronunciations. As for DTS 41 it should be noted that these
            are botanical terms, and an English speaker would read those
            out in the English pronunciation, even if s/he used the
            restored pronunciation when reading Latin text.

            Tehta order should IMO be based on the ratio between vowel-
            final and consonant final words in the language -- I
            actually have a Perl script that can calculate such things.
            For some languages like Swedish, where the ratio is almost
            50/50 and practically any vowel can occur finally one may
            use either order. For a language like German with many
            consonant-
            final words and where the vast majority of final vowels are
            _e_, pronounced as schwa, I would use tehtar on following
            tengwar (or as I call it top-down) and the underdot for
            unstressed _e_ following a consonant. For Latin which has
            predominantly vowel-final words I'd definitely use tehtar on
            preceding tengwar (aka bottom-up). However if one marks
            vowel length, as one IMO should in Classical Latin it is in
            fact the case that most final vowels are long, and so would
            have a carrier anyway!
            --

            /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! ||

            "I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody
            is altogether on my side" -- Fangorn
          • Johan Winge
            ... That would be more or less my reasoning, yes, but those things are all a matter of opinion. My point is that all would be acceptable, (though I personally
            Message 5 of 10 , Jan 12, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:50:41 +0100, elmac526 <elmac526@...> wrote:
              >
              > So, basically, any one of those in your link would work? And you
              > prefer the first line because it is consistant (with the long
              > carriers) and uses the Quenya order of writing?

              That would be more or less my reasoning, yes, but those things are all a
              matter of opinion. My point is that all would be acceptable, (though I
              personally do not particularly fancy doubled tehtar, for example; on the
              matter of tehta-order in Latin, I have, as of yet, really no fixed
              opinion.)

              > I also noticed it
              > used the other silme, does the Quenya order require this or can the
              > other one be used as well?

              No, any variant is fine. I used it only because I think it looks neat (and
              because I could).

              On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:41:24 +0100, Palatinus <elfiness@...> wrote:
              >
              > The point with Quenya (or else) order of writing has to do with whether
              > most words end on vowels or consonants
              >
              > Quenya's words end mostly onvowels so vowels as read like following all
              > the consonants

              Well, that is one common argument, but I don't know if it is the whole
              truth. For example, I would expect the syllable structure of the language
              to have some influence on this.

              > I don't know which is true about Latin

              Me neither, so I made some informal research on the matter. It seems that
              words ending in vowels are slightly more common than words beginning with
              vowels. For example, in Pliny's letters, we have about 14283 words
              beginning with a vowel (and ending with a consonant) and about 18110 words
              ending with a vowel (even when removing the ubiquitous vale, 'farewell'),
              that is, a 27% difference. An analysis of two of Cicero's speeches gives
              the numbers 1412 and 1664, i.e. 18%. (The analysis got somewhat impeded by
              the fact that I had troubles locating a good corpus: I had to find texts
              that distinguished between "j" (consonant) and "i", but it is
              unfortunately much more common with editions that don't do this
              distinction.)

              Whichever mode is used in this case, it is fortunate that the inital word,
              "quod", gives an interpretation key for the reader who doesn't know what
              mode is used: in most languages (that I am familiar with anyway), the
              consonant cluster /kd/ is not very likely to be word final, and definitely
              not likely to be word initial. Hence, the reader is forced to assume that
              the vowel comes in between, and from that, the tehta order of the text is
              deduced.

              --
              Johan Winge
            • j_mach_wust
              ... I d prefer a representation of Latin shaped after Tolkien s own Latin tengwar text (DTS 41), that is to say, a general use mode with the tehtar placed on
              Message 6 of 10 , Jan 12, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Johan Winge:
                >
                > On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:50:41 +0100, elmac526 <elmac526@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > So, basically, any one of those in your link would work? And you
                > > prefer the first line because it is consistant (with the long
                > > carriers) and uses the Quenya order of writing?
                >
                > That would be more or less my reasoning, yes, but those things are
                > all a matter of opinion. My point is that all would be acceptable,

                I'd prefer a representation of Latin shaped after Tolkien's own Latin
                tengwar text (DTS 41), that is to say, a 'general use' mode with the
                tehtar placed on the preceding letters and with Latin vowel length
                opposition not represented.

                > > Quenya's words end mostly onvowels so vowels as read like
                > > following all the consonants
                >
                > Well, that is one common argument, but I don't know if it is the
                > whole truth. For example, I would expect the syllable structure of
                > the language to have some influence on this.

                That's what I'd expect too. More specifically, I'd expect that the
                VC-order is used in languages that have constraints on final vowels,
                like for instance in the Germanic languages where words must not end
                on checked vowels.

                But then, the tehtar-tengwar order is not that fixed. For English,
                Quenya and Old English we have both orders attested.

                grüess
                mach
              • j_mach_wust
                ... I was not referring to the botanical terms in DTS 41 which are represented in their English pronunciation anyway, but to the Latin phrase. And I don t see
                Message 7 of 10 , Jan 13, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Melroch 'Aestan <melroch@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > j_mach_wust skrev:
                  ...
                  > > I'd prefer a representation of Latin shaped after
                  > > Tolkien's own Latin tengwar text (DTS 41), that is to say,
                  > > a 'general use' mode with the tehtar placed on the
                  > > preceding letters and with Latin vowel length opposition
                  > > not represented.
                  >
                  > IMHO the mode choosen would depend on what **kind** of Latin
                  > one wants to represent, and indeed how one would want it to
                  > be read out. For Classical Latin I would prefer a mode
                  > closely modelled on the 'standard' Quenya mode, as the two
                  > languages have similar phonologies. If Medieval or even New
                  > Latin is concerned, one may indeed want to reflect a
                  > different pronunciation -- even one of the 'national'
                  > pronunciations. As for DTS 41 it should be noted that these
                  > are botanical terms, and an English speaker would read those
                  > out in the English pronunciation, even if s/he used the
                  > restored pronunciation when reading Latin text.

                  I was not referring to the botanical terms in DTS 41 which are
                  represented in their English pronunciation anyway, but to the Latin
                  phrase. And I don't see any need to invent a new unattested mode based
                  on the classical Quenya mode when it is no problem to represent Latin
                  according to the 'general use' of the tengwar; â€" and more than that:
                  It's not only no problem, but also attested. Certainly, the phrase
                  from DTS 41 is not classical pronunciation of Latin, but the classical
                  pronunciation can easily be represented in the same mode.

                  The decision whether to write according to the 'general use' or
                  whether to invent a new mode based on classical Quenya, only concerns
                  the very first letter of the phrase which would be spelled with an
                  additional modified left curl according to the 'general use'.

                  > Swedish, where [...] practically any vowel can occur finally

                  Doesn't Swedish have checked vowels, that is, vowels that can only
                  occur in closed syllables? Or is it because of these that you've
                  written "practically"? I'm curious because I boldly presumed all
                  Germanic languages had checked vowels.

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