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

Re: [elfscript] nasal vowels

Expand Messages
  • Kassandra Velez
    ... In my Portuguese mode, I just used the over-tilde (would be over-bar with high-stemmed tengwar, but I didn t use any of those for vowels) over the vowel
    Message 1 of 17 , Dec 31, 1969
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Alf Gandson wrote:
      >Hi
      >Are there other people who write French with a tehtar
      >mode which does not follow traditional spelling? Or
      >Polish, or Portuguese, or other languages with nasal
      >vowels? My question is: What solutions have you found
      >to express these nasal vowels?

      In my Portuguese mode, I just used the over-tilde (would be over-bar with high-stemmed tengwar, but I didn't use any of those for vowels) over the vowel tengwa. But then, that was a full mode (too many vowels to use tehtar well). In a tehta mode, I suppose one could, aside from modifying the tehtar, put an otherwise unused tengwa from the nasal series after the nasal vowel (a� or a�w for �, for example). (IIRC, Polish is a special case, only having two nasal vowels; these can easily be written with completely separate tehtar.)
    • Arden R. Smith
      ... Add a dot below the óre, and you ve got it. -- ******************************************************************** Arden R. Smith
      Message 2 of 17 , May 1, 2002
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Gildir wrote:

        >In summary, then, it appears that the inscription is:
        >
        > [vilya] [lambe] [ando] [úre] [óre] [númen + e-tehta]
        >
        >(Is this correct?)

        Add a dot below the óre, and you've got it.


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

        "Do you know Languages? What's the French for fiddle-de-dee?"
        "Fiddle-de-dee's not English," Alice replied gravely.
        "Who ever said it was?" said the Red Queen.

        --Lewis Carroll,
        _Through the Looking-glass_
        ********************************************************************
      • Sébastien Bertho
        Aiya lambendili ! I d like to thank Mr. Arden R. Smith for his very clear and comprehensive answer to my question and for his very useful comments ! Thank s
        Message 3 of 17 , May 11, 2002
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Aiya lambendili !

          I'd like to thank Mr. Arden R. Smith for his very clear and comprehensive
          answer to my question and for his very useful comments !

          Thank's also to John Cowan, Michael Everson and Gildir for their comments.

          I wrote :
          >> I noticed what seemed to me a typo in "Artist and Illustrator" by W.
          >> Hammond and C. Scull (p. 72, note 67 mentions a tree labeled in tengwar
          >> "ald orné").
          >>
          >> Searching in the TolkLang archive, I found that this error has been
          >> already pointed by Lisa Star (in her post of the 3 Feb 1997), but I
          >> haven't been able to find a definitive reply. The only one I found was
          >> from Arden R. Smith (4 Feb 1997), but he only says that "the reading
          >> should indeed have been _alda orne_".
          >>
          >> Has the Editorial Team or someone else seen the original tengwar
          >> inscription or did W.. Hammond or C. Scull given a definitive reply ?

          Arden R. Smith wrote :
          > Wayne and Christina have in fact listed this correction in their
          > "Corrigenda to _J. R. R. Tolkien: Artist & Illustrator_" in _The
          > Tolkien Collector_ #15 (February 1997), p. 19.

          I live in France and all the interesting specialized publications are not
          always available here, nor is it easy to be aware of this kind of
          publications...

          > I have seen the tengwar inscription in question, though it was not
          > until after _Artist & Illustrator_ had already been published. That
          > _orné_ should have been read as _orne_ is clear: the e-tehta is
          > above _nuumen_ and is neither doubled nor placed above a long
          > carrier. The reading of _alda_ rather than _ald_, on the other hand,
          > rests entirely on a knowledge of Quenya vocabulary, since the a-tehta
          > is not used at all in this inscription. The word could be read as
          > _ald_, _alad_, _alada_, or _alda_, if it were not for the fact that
          > the first three are not Quenya words.

          OK.

          > The inscription uses the letters _lambe_ and _ando_ rather than the letter
          > _alda_, and given the usual Quenya value of _ando_, the word could be
          > interpreted as _aland_ or _alanda_, as well. The word _alanda_ in fact
          > appears (without a gloss) in the Qenya Lexicon (PE12:30), but given that
          > the inscription in question is used as a caption under a drawing of a
          > tree, _alda_ seems to be a more likely reading than _alanda_.

          But *_aland_ or more probably _alanda_ could be possible as well, since the
          drawing and the inscription seem to date from the late 20's.
          Are there any clues for a precise datation of them ? A&I speaks about the
          preceeding drawingw that are form july and august 1928, but the drawing that
          interests us seems to have been made on a separate sheet, probably later
          than the last drawings in the Book of Ishness.

          Does someone know if the letter _alda_ was already in existence at this
          stage of Tolkien's linguistics (late 20's) ? I'm most interested in the
          languages (especially Quenya), but, alas, I'm not a specialist in the
          scripts !

          More, _alanda_ appears indeed unglossed on p. 30 of the QL, but it is
          glossed "wide" on p. 34 (and so it in the "Poetic & Mythologic Words of
          Eldarissa") and "broad, wide" on p. 51(from stem LARA, with a diacritic on
          the 'r') !

          > However, I won't discount the possibility that _alanda_ *might* be
          > the correct reading, meaning something like "growing," "thriving," or
          > "blessed"; cf. the derivatives of GALA- in Etym. (V:357).

          I am most inclined to interpret the inscription as *_alanda orne_, with the
          probable meaning *"wide tree", since _alda orne_ *"tree tree" would seem
          very odd !
          I'd like very much to see how the tree looks like on the drawing... Can you
          please help, Mr. Smith ?

          > I should add that the second word in the inscription cannot be
          > interpreted as _orane_, since _óre_ is used instead of _rómen_, and
          > especially because a dot was placed under the _óre_, indicating that
          > no vowel follows the _r_. A dot was not placed under the _lambe_,
          > though we should perhaps also expect one there.

          To me, the fact that no point is placed under _lambe_ (nor under _ando_) in
          the first word points also toward an interpretation of it as _alanda_ and
          not _alda_.

          > The most curious thing about this inscription is in the
          > representation of the initial vowels. These are represented by full
          > letters rather than by tehtar above short carriers. The initial _a_
          > of _alda_ is represented by the letter _vilya_ and the initial _o_ of
          > _orne_ by _úre_. These letters appear with these values in the full
          > mode for English seen in inscriptions like the _Errantry_ and _Tom
          > Bombadil_ calligraphy (_Pictures_ 48), but nowhere else have I seen
          > vowel tengwar and vowel tehtar combined in this way.

          Very interesting indeed !

          Gildir wrote :
          > By the way: the originating TolkLang message (and subsequent
          > messages) refers to AI page 72 note 67. It's page 67, note 72.

          I only have the french edition of A&I, and I wasn't sure about the page
          number, so I gave the (erroneous) one given in Lisa Star's message on
          TolkLang... Sorry !

          Thank you again for your answer Mr. Smith !

          Namárië !

          Sébastien
        • Alf Gandson
          Hi Are there other people who write French with a tehtar mode which does not follow traditional spelling? Or Polish, or Portuguese, or other languages with
          Message 4 of 17 , May 14, 2002
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi
            Are there other people who write French with a tehtar
            mode which does not follow traditional spelling? Or
            Polish, or Portuguese, or other languages with nasal
            vowels? My question is: What solutions have you found
            to express these nasal vowels?

            I use (for French) modifications of the "regular"
            tehtar for e, o, a and from the tehta I use to
            represent the French eu-sound (which is actually the
            Sindarin u-tehta): to each of these tehtar, I attach a
            little line which is meant to be understood as derived
            from the tehta for preceding -n- (the bar upon a
            tengwa).

            greetings, alf

            Conectate a Internet GRATIS con Yahoo! Conexión:
            http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar
          • DDanielA@webtv.net
            ... The French tehta mode that I am most familiar with definitely does not follow traditional spelling; it is completely phonemic. In that mode, nasal vowels
            Message 5 of 17 , May 14, 2002
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Teithant Alf:
              >Are there other people who write French with a tehtar mode
              >which does not follow traditional spelling? Or Polish,
              >or Portuguese, or other languages with nasal vowels? My
              >question is: What solutions have you found to express these
              >nasal vowels?

              The French tehta mode that I am most familiar with definitely does not
              follow traditional spelling; it is completely phonemic. In that mode,
              nasal vowels are represent by placing the appropriate ómatehta over
              the tengwa 'nwalme'. ('noldo' wold also be a logical choice, but in this
              mode it is used for '-gn-' = [nj].) Ryszard Derdzinski's Polish mode
              uses the 'a' and 'e' tehtar over the long carrier to represented the
              nasalised versions of these vowels. I have seen about six different
              Portuguese modes, but only two of them are tehta modes; those two handle
              the nasal vowels the same as the French mode I spoke of before, i.e. the
              appropriate tehtar over 'nwalme'.

              Cuio mae, Danny.
            • Alf Gandson
              ... is ... I d be very intrested in your French mode as I use a phonemic one too, but don t know any other. How does the mode you mention handle the non-nasal
              Message 6 of 17 , May 15, 2002
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Danny teithant:
                >The French tehta mode that I am most familiar with
                >definitely does not follow traditional spelling; it
                is
                >completely phonemic.

                I'd be very intrested in your French mode as I use a
                phonemic one too, but don't know any other. How does
                the mode you mention handle the non-nasal vowels?
                Their number, which can be up to twelve, still exeeds
                about two times the number of Tolkien's standard vowel
                tehtar.

                I'm not very happy with my solution (though it works).
                I mark the difference between the two e-sounds, the
                two eu-sounds and the two o-sounds by doubbling the
                closer versions [unhappy]. As I want to have similar
                tehtar doubbled, I use the Sindarin/Quenya/Westron
                u-curl for the French eu-sound [very unhappy]. I
                represent the closest vowels (i, u and ou) by a point,
                a little _uure_, i.e. a little circle used as tehta
                [unhappy] (I use the _uure_ tengwa for the u-sound in
                _lui_), and a tilde [very unhappy], the most opened
                vowels (front a and back a) by the normal and the
                inverted Sindarin/Quenya/Westron a-tehta. I don't
                write the schwa-e at all [unhappy]. I place the vowel
                tehtar on the preceding tengwa as all French vowels
                can occur at the end of a word (unlike e.g. in
                English).

                suilaid, alf

                =====


                Conectate a Internet GRATIS con Yahoo! Conexión:
                http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar
              • Arden R. Smith
                ... I can t make any judgements concerning the date of the drawing based on the paper or the artwork, but on the basis of the script I would guess that it
                Message 7 of 17 , May 25, 2002
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sébastien Bertho wrote:

                  >But *_aland_ or more probably _alanda_ could be possible as well, since the
                  >drawing and the inscription seem to date from the late 20's.
                  >Are there any clues for a precise datation of them ? A&I speaks about the
                  >preceeding drawingw that are form july and august 1928, but the drawing that
                  >interests us seems to have been made on a separate sheet, probably later
                  >than the last drawings in the Book of Ishness.

                  I can't make any judgements concerning the date of the drawing based
                  on the paper or the artwork, but on the basis of the script I would
                  guess that it dates from around 1930. Tengwar scripts in documents
                  dated 1931 and later conform more or less to the conception of the
                  Feanorian system as it is presented in published materials, whereas
                  unpublished tengwar-style scripts from as late as 1929 still differ
                  in significant respects.

                  >Does someone know if the letter _alda_ was already in existence at this
                  >stage of Tolkien's linguistics (late 20's) ? I'm most interested in the
                  >languages (especially Quenya), but, alas, I'm not a specialist in the
                  >scripts !

                  The letter that came to be called _alda_ (whether or not it was
                  called that at the time) existed in such a form with the value _ld_
                  in at least one Qenya application of the tengwar by the 1930s, but
                  it's impossible to say whether the drawing is earlier or later.

                  Certainly the *concept* of _alda_, i.e. a single letter to represent
                  the cluster _ld_ in Qenya, was in existence long before Tolkien made
                  this drawing, since we find such a thing in Qenya applications of the
                  Rúmilian alphabet (see R13 and R17).

                  However, that doesn't mean that Tolkien would necessarily have used
                  it every time he wrote Q(u)enya in tengwar. The discussion of the
                  Feanorian alphabet from which the Rúmilian excerpts in R24 were
                  taken presents a mode in which the letter we know as _alda_ has the
                  value _ld_ and another mode in which it has the value _lh_ (or _hl_),
                  and Tolkien uses *both* of these modes for the representation of
                  Qenya.

                  Furthermore, it's far from certain that the letter we know as _ando_
                  has the value _nd_ in this inscription. This letter doesn't have the
                  value _nd_ in *either* of the modes that I mentioned in the previous
                  paragraph.

                  >More, _alanda_ appears indeed unglossed on p. 30 of the QL, but it is
                  >glossed "wide" on p. 34 (and so it in the "Poetic & Mythologic Words of
                  >Eldarissa") and "broad, wide" on p. 51(from stem LARA, with a diacritic on
                  >the 'r') !

                  Oops. You're quite correct. As the kids say nowadays, "My bad!"

                  >I am most inclined to interpret the inscription as *_alanda orne_, with the
                  >probable meaning *"wide tree", since _alda orne_ *"tree tree" would seem
                  >very odd !

                  Not necessarily. I can think of two scenarios in which the reading
                  _alda orne_ would be perfectly normal: (1) This is a tree, and these
                  are the two words used to denote this object in Qenya; (2) Which of
                  these two Qenya words for "tree" should be applied to a tree of this
                  kind?

                  The big question here is whether _alanda_ 'wide' still existed in
                  1930s Qenya. _Etymologies_ has _landa_ 'wide' (V:367), with which we
                  may compare _I Nori Landar_ *'The Great Lands' (I:84-85, 263) and
                  Goldogrin _land_, _lann_ 'broad' (PE11:52). Of course, none of this
                  proves anything, since _alanda_ could have existed alongside _landa_.

                  >I'd like very much to see how the tree looks like on the drawing... Can you
                  >please help, Mr. Smith ?

                  That would of course require the permission of both the Tolkien
                  Estate and the Bodleian Library, but I can give you some idea of what
                  it looks like. It's similar in shape to the tree in the foreground
                  of "Trolls' Hill" (_Artist & Illustrator_, fig. 99), but a bit more
                  conical, with a trunk only about one third as tall. So while the
                  tree isn't narrow by any means, it doesn't strike me as remarkably
                  wide, either.

                  >To me, the fact that no point is placed under _lambe_ (nor under _ando_) in
                  >the first word points also toward an interpretation of it as _alanda_ and
                  >not _alda_.

                  This is of course a strong point in favor of _alanda_, but I should
                  note that Tolkien occasionally forgot to include the subscript dot
                  when writing in this fashion. See, for example, the "misspelling" of
                  _Ziguur_ in line 11 of Text II of Lowdham's Old English manuscript
                  (IX:321). Note also that the subscript dot is optional, as shown by
                  the example of _clm_ for _calma_ in Appendix E.

                  In conclusion, _alanda orne_ 'wide tree' may indeed be correct, but I
                  see no reason to cast aside _alda orne_.

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

                  "Do you know Languages? What's the French for fiddle-de-dee?"
                  "Fiddle-de-dee's not English," Alice replied gravely.
                  "Who ever said it was?" said the Red Queen.

                  --Lewis Carroll,
                  _Through the Looking-glass_
                  ********************************************************************
                • Sébastien Bertho
                  Thank you again Mr. Smith for your comprehensive explanations and comments ! ... the ... that ... OK. This datation, even vague, helps us. ... OK. ... OK. ...
                  Message 8 of 17 , May 26, 2002
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thank you again Mr. Smith for your comprehensive explanations and comments !

                    I wrote :
                    >> But *_aland_ or more probably _alanda_ could be possible as well, since
                    the
                    >> drawing and the inscription seem to date from the late 20's.
                    >> Are there any clues for a precise datation of them ? A&I speaks about the
                    >> preceeding drawingw that are form july and august 1928, but the drawing
                    that
                    >> interests us seems to have been made on a separate sheet, probably later
                    >> than the last drawings in the Book of Ishness.

                    Arden R. Smith wrote :
                    > I can't make any judgements concerning the date of the drawing based
                    > on the paper or the artwork, but on the basis of the script I would
                    > guess that it dates from around 1930. Tengwar scripts in documents
                    > dated 1931 and later conform more or less to the conception of the
                    > Feanorian system as it is presented in published materials, whereas
                    > unpublished tengwar-style scripts from as late as 1929 still differ
                    > in significant respects.

                    OK. This datation, even vague, helps us.

                    >> Does someone know if the letter _alda_ was already in existence at this
                    >> stage of Tolkien's linguistics (late 20's) ? I'm most interested in the
                    >> languages (especially Quenya), but, alas, I'm not a specialist in the
                    >> scripts !

                    > The letter that came to be called _alda_ (whether or not it was
                    > called that at the time) existed in such a form with the value _ld_
                    > in at least one Qenya application of the tengwar by the 1930s, but
                    > it's impossible to say whether the drawing is earlier or later.
                    >
                    > Certainly the *concept* of _alda_, i.e. a single letter to represent
                    > the cluster _ld_ in Qenya, was in existence long before Tolkien made
                    > this drawing, since we find such a thing in Qenya applications of the
                    > Rúmilian alphabet (see R13 and R17).

                    OK.

                    > However, that doesn't mean that Tolkien would necessarily have used
                    > it every time he wrote Q(u)enya in tengwar. The discussion of the
                    > Feanorian alphabet from which the Rúmilian excerpts in R24 were
                    > taken presents a mode in which the letter we know as _alda_ has the
                    > value _ld_ and another mode in which it has the value _lh_ (or _hl_),
                    > and Tolkien uses *both* of these modes for the representation of
                    > Qenya.

                    OK.

                    > Furthermore, it's far from certain that the letter we know as _ando_
                    > has the value _nd_ in this inscription. This letter doesn't have the
                    > value _nd_ in *either* of the modes that I mentioned in the previous
                    > paragraph.

                    OK.

                    >> More, _alanda_ appears indeed unglossed on p. 30 of the QL, but it is
                    >> glossed "wide" on p. 34 (and so it in the "Poetic & Mythologic Words of
                    >> Eldarissa") and "broad, wide" on p. 51(from stem LARA, with a diacritic
                    on
                    >> the 'r') !

                    > Oops. You're quite correct. As the kids say nowadays, "My bad!"

                    You're welcome ! ;-)

                    >> I am most inclined to interpret the inscription as *_alanda orne_, with
                    the
                    >> probable meaning *"wide tree", since _alda orne_ *"tree tree" would seem
                    >> very odd !

                    > Not necessarily. I can think of two scenarios in which the reading
                    > _alda orne_ would be perfectly normal: (1) This is a tree, and these
                    > are the two words used to denote this object in Qenya; (2) Which of
                    > these two Qenya words for "tree" should be applied to a tree of this
                    > kind?

                    Yes, I thought about this kind of expanation. That's why I wondered if the
                    tree was really wide or not.

                    > The big question here is whether _alanda_ 'wide' still existed in
                    > 1930s Qenya. _Etymologies_ has _landa_ 'wide' (V:367), with which we
                    > may compare _I Nori Landar_ *'The Great Lands' (I:84-85, 263) and
                    > Goldogrin _land_, _lann_ 'broad' (PE11:52). Of course, none of this
                    > proves anything, since _alanda_ could have existed alongside _landa_.

                    Yes, _alanda_ may be an alternative form of _alanda_, with duplication of
                    the stem vowel.

                    >> I'd like very much to see how the tree looks like on the drawing... Can
                    you
                    >> please help, Mr. Smith ?

                    > That would of course require the permission of both the Tolkien
                    > Estate and the Bodleian Library, but I can give you some idea of what
                    > it looks like. It's similar in shape to the tree in the foreground
                    > of "Trolls' Hill" (_Artist & Illustrator_, fig. 99), but a bit more
                    > conical, with a trunk only about one third as tall. So while the
                    > tree isn't narrow by any means, it doesn't strike me as remarkably
                    > wide, either.

                    I didn't want you to publish it (it would be non-sense !), all I wanted was
                    some clues or a description of the tree on the drawing. Thank you very much
                    for your help, that was what I needed !

                    >> To me, the fact that no point is placed under _lambe_ (nor under _ando_)
                    in
                    >> the first word points also toward an interpretation of it as _alanda_ and
                    >> not _alda_.

                    > This is of course a strong point in favor of _alanda_, but I should
                    > note that Tolkien occasionally forgot to include the subscript dot
                    > when writing in this fashion. See, for example, the "misspelling" of
                    > _Ziguur_ in line 11 of Text II of Lowdham's Old English manuscript
                    > (IX:321). Note also that the subscript dot is optional, as shown by
                    > the example of _clm_ for _calma_ in Appendix E.

                    OK.

                    > In conclusion, _alanda orne_ 'wide tree' may indeed be correct, but I
                    > see no reason to cast aside _alda orne_.

                    OK, you're right !
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.