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

More questions about A&C (VT46)

Expand Messages
  • Helios De Rosario Martinez
    After reviewing the second part of Addenda and and Corrigenda to _The Etymologies_ (VT46), and comparing the information there provided with the version of
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 22 11:02 AM
      After reviewing the second part of "Addenda and and Corrigenda to _The
      Etymologies_" (VT46), and comparing the information there provided
      with the version of Etym. published in _The Lost Road_, I have
      collected some more questions and commentaries to the editors. But
      this time I have preferred to gather them in one message, instead of
      spreading them in individual posts:

      1) In p. 14, s.v. SMAL-, the editorial note says that "The gloss of
      *_smalu_ was originally 'flour, meal'...", where the _u_ of _smalu_ is
      marked with a breve. However, in the published text _smalu_ has no
      mark over the _u_, and there is no corrigendum of this word in the
      main text of this base. Is such a corrigendum implied, nevertheless?

      [The form *_smalu_ in the ms. does indeed have a breve over the _u_.
      This is not, however, an overlooked corrigendum -- Tolkien occasionally
      marked short vowels with a breve in the Etymologies, but these breves
      were, as a rule, omitted by Christopher Tolkien in the published text
      as superfluous, since any vowel not marked as long is obviously short
      by default. Hence Carl and I deliberately did not point out instances of
      omitted breves in the A&C, and the breve over the _u_ in *_smalu_ in
      the editorial note in VT46:14 s.v. SMAL- ought to have been deleted
      before publication for the sake of editorial consistency. -- PHW]

      2) In p. 15, there is the entry SPAL-, SPALÁS- commented in the
      editorial note as: "Entry not included in the published text".
      However, a nearly identical entry does occur in the version of _The
      Lost Road_. The only difference is that in the version of _The Lost
      Road_, "SPALÁS-" in the base and "PHALÁS-" in the text do not have the
      acute accent.

      [You are correct, this corrigendum in the A&C is improperly phrased.
      This entry should have been expressed as given below. -- PHW

      SPAL-, SPALAS- [read:] SPAL-, SPÁLAS- [for:] PHAL, PHALAS [read:]
      PHAL-, PHÁLAS-.]

      3) In p. 22, s.v. YA-, _gem_ is corrected to _gern_ (what is coherent
      with the word _gern_ 'worn, old (of things)' s.v. GYER-). But _gem_
      occurs twice in the entry YA- of _The Lost Road_: isolated, and in the
      compound _ingem_ '[old] of persons, "yearsick"'. Though the
      corrigendum could be read as only applied to the isolated word _gern_
      ('old of things'), I find more likely that _ingem_ should be also
      corrected to _ingern_, isn't it?

      [No, _ingem_ is the correct form. Note that _ingem_, applied only
      to _persons_, literally means 'yearsick', i.e., the latter element in
      this compound is N _gemb, gem_ 'sickly', == Q _engwa_, given in
      the Etymologies s.v. GENG-WÂ, which entry also cites N _ingem_
      'year-sick' again. The entry YA- also makes it clear that N _gern_ 'old
      (decrepit, worn)' was applied to _things_ rather than people.
      -- PHW]

      Thank you in advance,
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.