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

154Re: [Lambengolmor] -Vndo

Expand Messages
  • David Kiltz
    Jul 29 11:47 AM
      On Montag, Juli 29, 2002, at 03:28 Uhr, Patrick Wynne [in mess. 153] wrote:

      > The best evidence against interpretation of agentive _-ndo_ as
      > "a 'personalized' form of a participle past active" is the fact that
      > agentives in _-ndo_ seem instead to be clearly formed from the
      > _aorist_ stem.

      Excuse me, but I fail to see your point here. The past (passive)
      participle in _-ina_ (cf. _rákina_ in "A Secret Vice") also seems to be
      build on the aorist. That may be a coincidence. Anyway, why do you think
      that derivation from the aorist stem contradicts interpretation as a
      participle past active ? The aorist can, after all, be used as a past
      tense. Also, I think it is the _n_ that carries the notion of "past".

      > Thus _úcarindor_ 'sinners, evil-doers' in _Aia María_ III, IV
      > (VT43:27-8)
      > can be seen to contain the same aorist stem _kari-_ 'make, do' seen
      > in _i karir quettar ómainen_ cited above; _úcarindor_ indicates people
      > who habitually sin, as a general fact without specific reference to
      > past or present.

      Why ? Already for theological reasons I cannot agree but let's leave
      that aside.
      The aorist does not only denote a general fact (which is not the same as
      "habit" !) but a specific event (in the past). Cf. _ohtakáre valannar_

      > In some instances Tolkien
      > hesitated between giving a verb an i-stem aorist or an a-stem aorist;
      > hence we see both _lucindor_ and _lucandor_ 'those who trespass,
      > transgressors' in the earlier drafts of the Átaremma.

      Here again I can't help to think that an interpretation as "those that
      have trespassed, sinned against us" suggests itself rather than "those
      that habitually sin against us".

      David Kiltz
    • Show all 22 messages in this topic