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

N. _thund_ in VT 46:16

Expand Messages
  • hisweloke
    VT 46:16, entry SUD- lists the N. words _thund, thonn; thonnas_ (first written _sunn, sonnas_). The -nd/-nn variation often occurs in the _Etymologies_ (e.g.
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 29 4:40 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      VT 46:16, entry SUD- lists the N. words _thund, thonn; thonnas_ (first
      written _sunn, sonnas_).

      The -nd/-nn variation often occurs in the _Etymologies_ (e.g. _thand,
      thann_, VT 46:16) and primitive *u generally yields /o/ in Noldorin.

      Therefore, are the -u- read in _thund_ and _sunn_ really certain in
      the manuscript, or could they possibly be malformed -o-?

      From the few facsimile pages of Tolkien's texts we have, I have the
      impression that Tolkien's -o-, when written quickly (esp. before -n),
      are sometimes not always fully closed on top (for instance, this seems
      to be the case for the final -o- in _Angalagon_ and _ono- on the VT
      46:5 facsimile -- unless this is to be ascribed to an artefact of the
      printed reproduction or even to my poor sight. I certainly don't claim
      to have any experience deciphering Tolkien's hand-writing!)

      Of course, S. _thond_ "root" is later attested in _Morthond_
      "Blackroot" (e.g. LR app. E).

      Regards,

      Didier.

      [Yes, the form is very clearly written as _thund_; likewise, the parallel deleted form _sunn_ is very clearly written as such. A fact not noted in the A&C is that this _sunn_ itself overwrites earlier _sonn_, which reinforces the deliberateness of the _u_ in both forms. CFH]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.