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

451Re: Quenya pronouns 1: _ni_

Expand Messages
  • Hans
    Jun 4, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, Ales Bican <ales.bican@s...> wrote:

      > **Or perhaps _-ni+e_ > _-nye_ or, which I find more likely, _-ni+ye_
      >> _-nye_ (just like _-le+ye_ and ?_ke+ye_ > _tye_).

      The latter possibility occurred to me after I sent my post, too.

      >> I'll return to "you" (and other pronouns) in other posts.
      > **I hope you will do.

      No need for reminders, here, it's just that time is limited, and I can't return to it as
      soon as I wished. BTW, the idea of a look at pronouns in the original sources at a
      time when fabrications abound (remember the infamous S _-ch_ and
      "reconstructions" of independent S pronouns like **_ce_) is not exactly new. We
      find it in TolkLang message 7.90, for instance, some ten years ago, by Patrick
      Wynne. ;) It's interesting to investigate how much we can add, now.

      So let's get over it with first person singular, then. Material published since then
      allows us to conclude that it is surprisingly consistent in Elvish languages we
      know more or less, i.e. Quenya, Sindarin and Telerin: it's all the same root NI-.

      People may ask "what about _im_ in Sindarin?" There was an attempt by Didier
      Willis to construct a common etymology:

      [Hiswelókë's Sindarin dictionary (Edition 1.5, Lexicon 0.99)]
      _im*_ ['im] pron. "I" LotR/II:IV, LB/354 OS *_imbè_, CE *_iñgwi_, *_iñwi_
      (*I-ÑWI, NI)

      We may wonder: what evidence do we have for the OS and CE forms?

      [We may even wonder what evidence we have for "OS" at all! CFH]

      Certainly, *_iñgwi_ > _im_ would be possible in Sindarin (remember entry YA-
      in _Etymologies_, GENG-WÂ > _gem_ in N), but I doubt it in Telerin, where we
      find possessive _nia_ and allative _nin_ in the sentence _óre nia pete nin_
      (VT41:11). Moreover, I can't seem to remember any example for *ÑW > N in
      Quenya, and I'm pretty sure the labial element would persist. I just asked that
      question at Elfling, and the answer was a reference to _VT_ 21, where (obviously)
      several possible meanings of _ngwin_ were investigated, one of them being
      "for me". We know from later evidence (cf. VT43:36) that another meaning
      discussed already then is far more likely, "for us", both from the charts of
      prepositions with suffixed enclitic pronouns mentioned there, and from
      _vomentienguo_ in XI:407.

      The same source (VT41:11) gives _Guren bêd enni_, showing that the element
      _ni_ survived in Sindarin, too. The suffixes _-n_ for "I" (verbs) or for "my" (nouns)
      support this. Interestingly, we have two different dative/allative forms: _enni_
      just quoted, meaning "(to) me", and _anim_ from Gilraen's _linnod_ (LR:1036).

      Now the difference _anim_/_enni_ and the translations "for myself"/"(to) me"
      suggest an obvious (though VERY speculative) solution: _im_ doesn't literally
      mean "I", but "self". Remember that the two occurences of _im_ as a standalone
      word are to emphasize a name: _im Narvi_ (LR:298) and _im Tinúviel_ (III:254).

      So what do you think?

    • Show all 3 messages in this topic