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

Re: Haywards, and an uzu

Expand Messages
  • F. Strÿfffff6m
    ... The text of the Guide is also printed in the _Reader s Companion_ itself. [The page reference in Beregond s post was added by your humble moderator, who
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 6, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Beregond wrote:

      > See Tolkien's _Guide to the Names_, Persons,
      > _Hayward_: "The word is derived from _hay_
      > 'fence' (_not_ 'grass') + _ward_ 'guard'."
      > (TC:168)

      The text of the "Guide" is also printed in the
      _Reader's Companion_ itself.

      [The page reference in Beregond's post was added
      by your humble moderator, who decided to cite the
      _Tolkien Compass_ edition as currently the most
      familiar. The version in _Reader's Companion_ differs
      from this in that "it has been newly transcribed from
      the professional typescript as corrected by Tolkien, with
      reference also to an earlier version in manuscript and
      typescript" (RC:751). I have no doubt that in the future
      the version in the RC will become the standard text of
      reference for Tolkienian linguistics. -- PHW]

      I might point out a possible misprint in this context.
      On p. 655, entry for Hob Hayward, there is a reference
      to a "note for p. 107". However, Hob Hayward is not
      mentioned in the notes for page 107 (although the Hay
      Gate is, as correctly noted in the next entry on page
      655 in the _Reader's Companion_). Possibly the
      reference should read "(See also note for p. 10.)",
      referring to the note for "haywards"?

      Speaking of possible errors in the _Reader's
      Companion_, Magnus Åberg, whose "Analysis of Khuzdul"
      was read at the Omentielva Minya, made an interesting
      observation regarding the following text on page 269:

      "_Azan_ [in _Azanulbizar_] was probably a plural of
      _uzu_ 'dimness, shadow' (cf. _Khazad_ - _Khuzd_)".

      Magnus points out that *_'uzn_ as the singular
      of _'azan_ would fit the pattern of _khuzd_ - _khazad_
      better than _uzu_ does. Could it be that the word was
      misread in the manuscript of the _Nomenclature_?

      Kind regards,
      /Fredrik Ström
    • Wayne G. Hammond
      ... No, I don t think so. Too many details have passed by now to be sure, but I think that we meant to point to the mention of the Hay Gate. If we had meant
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 6, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Fredrik wrote:

        > I might point out a possible misprint in this context.
        > On p. 655, entry for Hob Hayward, there is a reference
        > to a "note for p. 107". However, Hob Hayward is not
        > mentioned in the notes for page 107 (although the Hay
        > Gate is, as correctly noted in the next entry on page
        > 655 in the _Reader's Companion_). Possibly the
        > reference should read "(See also note for p. 10.)",
        > referring to the note for "haywards"?

        No, I don't think so. Too many details have passed by now to be sure,
        but I think that we meant to point to the mention of the Hay Gate. If
        we had meant the note for p. 10 we would have picked up on the
        duplication of comments on _hayward_ and dealt with it.

        > Magnus points out that *_'uzn_ as the singular
        > of _'azan_ would fit the pattern of _khuzd_ - _khazad_
        > better than _uzu_ does. Could it be that the word was
        > misread in the manuscript of the _Nomenclature_?

        Yes, it was. It should be _uzn_.

        Wayne
      • F. Str�m
        On p. 580 in _The Lord of the Rings: A Reader s Companion_, Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull writes: _athelas_ in the noble tongue [...] In the following
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 13, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          On p. 580 in _The Lord of the Rings: A Reader's
          Companion_, Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull writes:
          "_athelas_ in the noble tongue [...] In the following
          paragraph Aragorn gives the corresponding name of the
          plant in Quenya, _asea aranion_ 'leaf of kings'."

          The Sindarin name is discussed on p. 183:
          "Athelas [...] The first element is problematic;
          according to Arden R. Smith, an unpublished etymology
          connects it with Quenya _asea_, as in _asea aranion_
          'kingsfoil' (but if so, _athelas_ = 'leaf-leaf')."

          The translation 'leaf of kings' does not seem to be
          attested. The only translation of _asea_ that I know
          of is the one quoted by William C. Hicklin on the
          art.fan.tolkien newsgroup:
          <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books.tolkien/browse_thread/thread/34fc7f494c7ff868/3fad9c3c879f5a2c?lnk=st&q=athelas+hicklin&rnum=1&hl=en#3fad9c3c879f5a2c>

          "Christopher Tolkien and I have had an ongoing discussion about the origins of
          this word. It plainly contains -las 'leaf'. It is possible (but entirely
          speculative) that what Tolkien had in mind at that time (1938-39) was the Old
          English word aethele 'noble, royal.' This would translate 'kingsfoil,' near
          enough. At any rate, a very late note (1970 or later) says that Asea (cf.
          Aragorn, 'asea aranion') was the name in Quenya, regularly adapted and
          compounded with -las in Sindarin. The plant was known to the medical
          loremasters of the Noldor. The root is *ATHAYA, 'helpful, kindly,
          beneficial.' "

          From this it would seem that _asea_ is in fact an
          adjective (perhaps substantivized) meaning *'beneficial'
          and that the 'leaf'(or 'foil') part is understood in the
          Quenya name:_asea [?lasse] aranion_, 'the beneficial
          (leaf) of kings'. But perhaps there are other explanations
          as well.

          /Fredrik
        • Arden R. Smith
          ... Strictly speaking, that s true. It s really just an extrapolation, based on the gloss of _athelas_ as kingsfoil and the transparent meaning of _aranion_
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 13, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            On Nov 13, 2005, at 3:20 PM, F. Ström wrote:

            > The translation 'leaf of kings' does not seem to be
            > attested.

            Strictly speaking, that's true. It's really just an extrapolation,
            based on the gloss of _athelas_ as 'kingsfoil' and the transparent
            meaning of _aranion_ 'of kings'.

            > "Christopher Tolkien and I have had an ongoing discussion about the
            > origins of this word. It plainly contains -las 'leaf'. It is possible
            > (but entirely speculative) that what Tolkien had in mind at that time
            > (1938-39) was the Old English word aethele 'noble, royal.' This
            > would translate 'kingsfoil,' near enough. At any rate, a very late
            > note (1970 or later) says that Asea (cf. Aragorn, 'asea aranion') was
            > the name in Quenya, regularly adapted and compounded with -las
            > in Sindarin. The plant was known to the medical loremasters of the
            > Noldor. The root is *ATHAYA, 'helpful, kindly, beneficial.' "

            Interesting. I was unaware of this. The unpublished etymology that I
            cited derives _athelas_ and _asea_ from a similar form (though spelling
            TH with thorn), but unfortunately leaves it unglossed. This etymology,
            incidentally, is considerably earlier than that mentioned by Bill
            Hicklin, dating from sometime between the publication of the first
            edition (1954-55) and the publication of the second edition (1965).

            ***************************************************
            Arden R. Smith erilaz@...

            Perilme metto aimaktur perperienta.
            --Elvish proverb

            ***************************************************
          • F. Ström
            ...
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 14, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              --- "F. Ström" <frestro@...> skrev:
              > The translation 'leaf of kings' does not seem to be
              > attested. The only translation of _asea_ that I know
              > of is the one quoted by William C. Hicklin on the
              > art.fan.tolkien newsgroup:
              >
              <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books.tolkien/browse_thread/thread/34fc7f494c7ff868/3fad9c3c879f5a2c?lnk=st&q=athelas+hicklin&rnum=1&hl=en#3fad9c3c879f5a2c>

              The URL in my post was editorially changed, but the
              reference to the "art.fan.tolkien" newsgroup was not
              updated to "rec.arts.books.tolkien" along with it.

              [Quite right; sorry! The link you sent originally didn't work for me, so I googled it myself, and didn't notice the discrepancy. CFH]

              Forconvenience I quote the first post by William C.
              Hicklin as well:

              <http://groups.google.se/group/alt.fan.tolkien/browse_thread/thread/7b7287d31cfa1e77/bdb4b12467dc0ad1?lnk=st>

              "The herb was known to the Noldor, who termed it
              "athea" from *ATHAYA 'helpful, kindly, beneficial.' A
              later sound shift rendered it "asea" (cf. Aragorn's
              "asea aranion" in "The Houses of Healing.") In
              Middle-earth the word was converted into regularized
              Sindarin form as athe- plus -las 'leaf.'"

              /Fredrik
            • F. Strÿfffff6m
              On his Addenda and Corrigenda page to RC (http://bcn.net/~whammond/addenda/readers.html), Wayne Hammond writes: On the Lambengolmor forum,
              Message 6 of 11 , Dec 2, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                On his 'Addenda and Corrigenda' page to RC (http://bcn.net/~whammond/addenda/readers.html), Wayne Hammond writes:

                'On the Lambengolmor forum, message 850 [...], Fredrik Ström correctly comments that our gloss asëa aranion 'leaf of kings' is not attested in Tolkien's writings. In message 851, however, Arden R. Smith defends this translation as an extrapolation from the gloss of athelas 'kingsfoil' in an unpublished etymology by Tolkien together with 'the transparent meaning of aranion "of kings"'.'

                What Arden wrote was:
                >The unpublished etymology that I cited derives _athelas_ and _asea_ from a
                >similar form [..] but unfortunately leaves it unglossed

                I think no-one queries the translation *'of kings'. However, in the light of Tolkien's gloss on _athea_ (regularly > _asea_ after the change of Q. _th_ > _s_ described in 'The Shibboleth of Feanor' [XII:331]), I'm not sure that the translation *'leaf' should be defended (and I don't think Arden said so, either). I think that the note on RC:183 is correct except for the parenthesis, '(but if so, _athelas_ = ''leaf-leaf'')', since the attested etymological connection between _athe-_ and _asea_ does not imply that _athe-_ means 'leaf'. In the note on RC:580 ll. 2-3 from bottom, perhaps one should substitute Tolkien's actual gloss ('beneficial') for 'leaf' (or simply omit the words 'leaf of kings')?

                /Fredrik



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • William Cloud Hicklin
                You know, I ve felt guilty for the better part of a decade for my unthinking and unauthorized posting of that snippet on Usenet- especially since soon
                Message 7 of 11 , Oct 26, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  You know, I've felt guilty for the better part of a decade for
                  my unthinking and unauthorized posting of that snippet on
                  Usenet- especially since soon therafter the copyright-law war
                  erupted with the Salo/Star/Fauskanger axis. Fortunately it seems
                  that it hasn't spread that far, since even Arden appears to have
                  been unaware of it (although it has turned up in a couple of
                  online "encyclopedias").

                  In any event, it's out, and surely there would be no harm if Wayne
                  Hammond and Christina Scull were to use it, since they carry the
                  Imprimatur.

                  I suspect that _asea aranion/athelas_ is one of those Q-S pairs
                  that aren't literal translations. Now, I'm no linguist; but we
                  can at least be certain that _asea_ and _athe-_ are equivalent
                  elements, and, as Frederik points out, that the Quenya assumed
                  or omitted the leaf-element. Or, viewed the other way around,
                  that the leaf-element was added by the Exiles when they formed
                  their Sindarin equivalent (acc. to the late note, the plant was
                  known to the medical loremasters of the Noldor- with no
                  indication whether the Sindar were aware of its properties, or
                  even if it was native to Middle-earth). The snippet's wording
                  has _asea_ regularly > _athe-_, "compounded with _-las_," which
                  to me suggests that the _-las_ element only entered with the
                  Sindarin conversion. Why would this be? Another note cited by
                  Wayne and Christina indicates that only the leaves were used,
                  which may be relevant. Or perhaps the linguistic loremasters
                  found "athe" alone to be ugly?

                  [Tolkien wrote in his note on "Stress" in Section I of Appendix E
                  that words in which the stress falls on the third syllable from the
                  end -- e.g. _Denethor, Fëanor_ -- "are favoured in the Eldarin
                  languages, especially Quenya." It seems natural then that the
                  medical loremasters of the Noldor, whose native tongue was
                  Quenya, would expand _athe-_ to the more euphonious (not to
                  mention distinctive) _athelas_. PHW]

                  One might speculate whether "aranion" was a pre- or post-
                  Downfall Numenorean addition ("balm" > "kingsbalm"), since the
                  specific association of healing with the King appears to have
                  been theirs, not the Elves'. This leads to yet another
                  question- whether Ad/CS _kingsfoil_ followed or in fact underlay
                  the hypothesised Num. addition of _aranion_ .

                  -- William Cloud Hicklin

                  > I think no-one queries the translation *'of kings'. However,
                  in the light of Tolkien's gloss on _athea_ (regularly > _asea_
                  after the change of Q. _th_ > _s_ described in 'The Shibboleth
                  of Feanor' [XII:331]), I'm not sure that the translation
                  *'leaf' should be defended (and I don't think Arden said so,
                  either). I think that the note on RC:183 is correct except for
                  the parenthesis, '(but if so, _athelas_ = ''leaf-leaf'')',
                  since the attested etymological connection between _athe-_ and
                  _asea_ does not imply that _athe-_ means 'leaf'. In the note on
                  RC:580 ll. 2-3 from bottom, perhaps one should substitute
                  Tolkien's actual gloss ('beneficial') for 'leaf' (or simply omit
                  the words 'leaf of kings')?
                  >
                  > /Fredrik
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.