1038Some notes on PE17
- Dec 29, 2007Some questions and observations on PE17:
1) According to the editor's note on page 148 s.v. *AWA, WA*, there is a
root TEN in the "Definitive Linguistic notes" (DLN) group of etymologies.
But there is no root TEN attributed to DLN in the list of "Eldarin Roots and
Stems" (ERS), though all the other etymologies listed are published. Could
the editor please clarify?
2) ERS includes a root STEN attributed to "Quenya Notes" (QN; page 185),
but in the listing of etymologies in the QN on page 145 (s.v. ADA), STEN
does not appear. Where should STEN go in that list (supposing that the
roots are listed in the approximate order they appear in the QN)?
3) Page 182 s.v. RE<TH>: For '(see I 194 s.v. _Sarn Ford_)' read '(see I
184 s.v. _Sarn Ford_)' -- unless the reference to 'I 184' on page 14 is
4) Page 89 s.v. lebethron: For 'the note on _hithlain_ given above (see
I 287f.)' read 'the note on _hithlain_ given above (see I 387f.)'.
5) The section on 'The names _Elbereth_, _Gilthoniel_, _Fanuilos_' on p.
22-23 reads like it might be part of the PMB materials (cf. the next
section), but it is not attributed to it. Is it from the "Words, Phrases
and Passages" proper?
6) On page 25 we read: "palan-díriel. Cf. Q _palantír_ 'far-gazer'.
See note." What 'note' is Tolkien referring to? The editor points to
'the entry for Q _palantír_ [...] at II 199'. But the entry on
_palan-díriel_ is from PMB, and the entries for II 199 _palantír_ and
_palan_ (page 86) are not from the same manuscript.
7) On page 161 s.v. MAG we read: "Thus _mánta_ 'their hand' would be
used = (they raised) their hands (one each), _mántat_ = (they raised)
their hands (each both), and _mánte_ could not occur."
The sentence is remarkably similar to one found in the essay _Eldarin
Hands, Fingers & Numerals_: "In cases such as 'they raised their hands'
_hand_ was in Eldarin syntax always singular, if each (which need not be
expressed) raised one hand, and always dual if each raised both hands;
the plural was impossible" (VT47:6).
Perhaps Tolkien had one of the texts in front of him while writing the
other? Just thought it might be worth mentioning.
8) In the Index (page 192), for "*a'stara" read "*as'tara" (I have omitted
the diacritical marks).
9) There should probably be a cross-reference entry for THAW in the list
of Eldarin Roots and Stems:
"THAW- [See SAWA-]".
(There should be a root sign before SAWA.) There is an entry for <TH>AW
(with a thorn), but the sense is different.
10) On page 189 s.v. WE (and in the editorial comment on WEG, p. 191), a
root WEK is referred to. I cannot find it in the list of "Eldarin Roots
and Stems". Was it deleted?
And now for some idle speculation:
On PE17:181 s.v. PHAW, we read: 'Q _foa_ = [?_furést_]'. I draw a blank
on the form "furést"; is it supposed to be Eldarin or English? Or could
it possibly be a misread Latin gloss? Cf. _hug-_ 'futuere', PE13:147.
Also cf. the deleted words '_khugu_; = _foa_' on PE17:86, which might
suggest that a derivative of _khugu_ would be a poor choice for the
first element in _huorn_ '? tree', because then it would mean
'foa'-tree, whatever _foa_ is.
A Happy New Year!
- Next post in topic >>