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

Re: [Lambengolmor] Re: ómentie

Expand Messages
  • Edward J. Kloczko
    ... That is not how I interpret the text in WJ. The root in CE is written _WO_ with a short _o_. The usual lengthening of _o_ is presented as a development in
    Message 1 of 15 , Mar 22, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

      > Given that Q _o-_/_ó-_ and T _wo-_/_vo-_ are known to have arisen from
      > a variably-lengthened element even in Common Eldarin,

      That is not how I interpret the text in WJ. The root in CE is written _WO_ with
      a short _o_. The usual lengthening of _o_ is presented as a development in
      the CE _word_ wô only; _wo-_ is stated to be a prefix, there is no CE prefix
      _wô-_ apparently at that time, from my understanding.

      The lengthening of prefix _wo-_ > _wô-_ looks to be quite a late development
      (internal time) (?)in Beleriand just prior to the "voyage" to Aman(?).

      > Thus, for
      > instance, as I noted in my editorial notes on the _ósanwe-kenta_
      > (VT39), Tolkien wrote both _osanwe_ and _ósanwe_ in that essay.

      That is a strong argument for the coexistence of Q. _ómentie_ and
      _omentie_ at the same internal time.

      Edouard Kloczko
    • Edward J. Kloczko
      ... _mammilla_ _mamilla_ shows the usual and well known Latin internal geminated consonant simplification after a long vowel, as _*seddolod_ _sedulo_; or
      Message 2 of 15 , Mar 22, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Hans Georg Lundahl a écrit:

        > Ecrit M. Kloczko:
        >
        > "My question is quite unrelated to the stress pattern itself, but to "why/how?"
        > (?Old) Quenya _ómentie_ > Quenya _omentie_."
        >
        > Well - how come Old Latin _mammilla_ becomes Latin _mamilla_?

        _mammilla_ > _mamilla_ shows the usual and well known Latin internal geminated
        consonant simplification after a long vowel, as _*seddolod_ > _sedulo_; or
        _*sed-cubo_ > _*seccubo_ > _secubo_, etc. This phenomenon goes as well for the
        Germanic as you pointed out in your post but not in Ancient Greek.

        In Quenya we are dealing with an initial long vowel shortening.

        Edouard Kloczko
      • Hans Georg Lundahl
        ... Pas du tout. Not at all. The vowels in _mamilla_ are all short. Just like the vowels in primitive _mamma_ (which does not mean mother , but if I recall
        Message 3 of 15 , Mar 22, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          "Edward J. Kloczko" <ejk@...> wrote:

          > _mammilla_ > _mamilla_ shows the usual and well known Latin internal geminated
          > consonant simplification after a long vowel, as _*seddolod_ > _sedulo_; or
          > _*sed-cubo_ > _*seccubo_ > _secubo_, etc. This phenomenon goes as well for the
          > Germanic as you pointed out in your post but not in Ancient Greek.
          >
          > In Quenya we are dealing with an initial long vowel shortening.

          Pas du tout. Not at all. The vowels in _mamilla_ are all short. Just like the vowels in
          primitive _mamma_ (which does not mean 'mother', but if I recall correctly, 'female
          breast' -- _mamilla_ means 'nipple'). The reason cannot therefore be any clash
          between long vowel and long consonant. On _sedulo_ I pass. As for _secubo_ you
          may be right or the composition may be later than the fall of d in _sed-_. But in
          _mamilla_, we have a long syllable shortened precisely because it is pretonic --
          not that this shortening is absolutly regular, rather it is sporadic (a Jung-grammarian
          would say: often reversed by analogy). At least that is the account of _mammilla_ >
          _mamilla_ given by the learned Stowasser, and you have not disproven it. Is the Greek
          cognate -- if any -- a word in letter _eta_ (Ionic-Attic dialect group)?

          If -- as is most probable -- the explanation of short first syllable in _mamilla_ is
          rhythmic, the rhythmic feeling of mature Latin -- the relevance to Quenya, which
          borrows nearly all of Latin prosody (not the muta cum liquida exception, nor the
          accent on last syllable when followed by an enclitic word, but the rest), is obvious
          -- except that more learned eldalambengolmor than myself are saying that the
          root of that prefix was originally short. But even then: a reason for shortening in
          one language may be a reason for not lengthening in another.

          Hans Georg Lundahl

          Gå före i kön och få din sajt värderad på nolltid med Yahoo! Express

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Carl F. Hostetter
          ... Edouard is correct that the root *WO (XI:367; no CE prefix form *_wo-_ is actually cited there) underlying the Quenya prefix _ó-_ / _o-_ is not stated in
          Message 4 of 15 , Mar 22, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            On Saturday, March 22, 2003, at 09:46 AM, Edward J. Kloczko wrote:

            > Carl F. Hostetter wrote:
            >
            >> Given that Q _o-_/_ó-_ and T _wo-_/_vo-_ are known to have arisen
            >> from a variably-lengthened element even in Common Eldarin,
            >
            > That is not how I interpret the text in WJ. The root in CE is written
            > _WO_ with a short _o_. The usual lengthening of _o_ is presented as a
            > development in the CE _word_ wô only; _wo-_ is stated to be a prefix,
            > there is no CE prefix _wô-_ apparently at that time, from my
            > understanding.

            Edouard is correct that the root *WO (XI:367; no CE prefix form *_wo-_
            is actually cited there) underlying the Quenya prefix _ó-_ / _o-_ is
            not stated in _Quendi and Eldar_ to have been variably lengthened.
            However, its CE reflexes, the independent and length- (and perhaps
            stress-) contrastive words *_wô_ and *_wo_ [? stands for macron], are
            cited as a pair elsewhere in _Q&E_ (XI:366). We are also told (367)
            that *WO "does not remain in Q as an independent word", but is "a
            frequent prefix in the form _ó-_ (usually reduced to _o-_ when
            unstressed)". Taken together, this suggests that the Quenya prefix _ó-_
            is _in origin_ a reflex of the CE independent word *_wô_, and that its
            shortened counterpart _o-_ is _in origin_ a reflex of CE *_wo_ (though
            with much subsequent leveling of forms in Quenya due to stress
            patterns).

            As further support for this, note that the _Etymologies_ tells us that:
            "In Q the form _wô_, and the unstressed _wo_ [there is a breve in the
            text], combined to produce prefix [_o-_ / _ô-_] 'together'" (V:399 s.v.
            WÔ-).

            It does appear, then, that a length- (and stress-?) contrastive pair of
            CE words *_wô_, *_wo_ underlies the variably lengthened and stressed
            Quenya prefix _ó-_ / _o-_.

            --
            =========================================================================================Carl F. Hostetter Aelfwine@... http://www.elvish.org

            ho bios brachys, he de techne makre.
            Ars longa, vita brevis.
            The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.
            "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take such
            a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about."
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.