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

Re: [Lambengolmor] "Tolkien in Oxford"

Expand Messages
  • Carl F. Hostetter
    Thanks to Anders for passing along notice of this very interesting letter! I can add one bit of information not mentioned in the exhibit catalogue, which is
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 27, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks to Anders for passing along notice of this very interesting
      letter!

      I can add one bit of information not mentioned in the exhibit
      catalogue, which is that the accompanying copy of _The Fellowship of
      the Ring_, inscribed by Tolkien (in _tengwar_) with "_elen síla
      lúmenna omentielvo_" (this was 1968, so the change from inclusive _-
      lmo_ to _-lvo_ had been made some years ago), appears to be the very
      copy that Tolkien is shown inscribing in the "Tolkin in Oxford"
      documentary itself. Although I've never seen that documentary, parts
      of it were excerpted for the 1996 documentary (filmed in 1992),
      "J.R.R.T.: A Film Portrait of J.R.R. Tolkien", and it includes part
      of this scene, showing Tolkien beginning the inscription, reaching
      _omentielvo_ and realizing he's left out _lúmenn'_, saying something
      like "Oh, I've made a mistake, haven't I?", and then inserting
      _lúmenna_ above the line.

      Regarding the letter with the two _tengwar_ inscriptions, A "Tolkien
      in Oxford" and B "_arcastar mondósaresse_" (<< _arkastar_):

      The note Tolkien wrote above the second inscription appears to read:

      "in Elvish language [? script]"

      The note in green at the bottom of the sheet appears to read:

      "[?Shown over] some explanations. A is a transliteration of English,
      [?that thus] happens not to be very decorative [?since lacking] the [?
      <a-_tehta_> = a]. B is a translation into Elvish (Quenya)"

      The final note, in black, reads:

      "NB the vowel signs i, e, a, o, u <corresponding _tehta_ above each
      vowel> are placed _after_ the consonant which they follow in speech."

      I was also going to provide some initial thoughts on the two new Quenya
      words, Roman Rausch's message came in as I was writing them, so I'll just
      add a few points to his comments.
    • Roman Rausch
      ... Very interesting! I cannot resist analyzing this right away: _mondósaresse_ in Oxford In Letter no.342 Tolkien gives the elvish word for bull as
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 27, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        >_arcastar mondósaresse_

        Very interesting! I cannot resist analyzing this right away:

        _mondósaresse_ 'in Oxford'

        In Letter no.342 Tolkien gives "the elvish word for 'bull'" as _mundo_
        (apparently in Quenya), so that one can identify _mondo_ 'ox' here.
        An element 'ford, crossing' would be then expected to follow and
        indeed _-sar-_ can be related to THAR- 'across, beyond' (V:392), also
        _thar-_ 'athwart, across' in the _Silmarillion_ glossary with _Tharbad_
        < _thara-pata_ 'crossway'.

        [Note also numerous Q. words in _sar-_ having to do with stones or
        stoniness, as _sarne_ 'stony place' < SAR- (V:385, VT46:12). CFH]

        The long _-ó-_ seems to suggest that one should isolate _#ósar(e)_
        'ford', rather than just _#sar(e)_ with the prefix _ó-_ 'used in words
        describing the meeting, junction, or union of two things or persons,
        or of two groups thought of as units' (XI:367); and _-s-_ < _th_ would
        naturally resist rhotacism here.

        The ending _-sse_ is of course locative, while the vowel _-e-_ before
        it may belong to the preceding word (#_ósare-sse_) or just link the
        ending to it (#_ósar-e-sse_).

        _arcastar_ 'Tolkien'

        Tolkien's name is an anglicization of _Tollkiehn_ , German _tollkühn_
        'foolhardy, reckless, desperately brave' (compare Letter no.165),
        containing _toll_ 'insane, mad, wild' and _kühn_ 'brave'. A more or
        less literal translation into English Tolkien himself also made, was
        'Rashbold' (IX:151).

        I would analyze the Quenya word as _*arca-star_.

        The initial element _arca-_ looks similar to Q _arauka_ 'swift,
        rushing' (PE12:34) from RAVA or RAWA (PE12:79) with many derivatives
        for chase, running, hunting, fierceness; also _rauka_ = _arauka_ 'swift'.
        But of course a diphthong cannot be syncopated, so that one has to
        assume a different derivation from a changed or parallel root, e.g. <
        _*araka_ < (A)RAK- (?); cf. Q _narka_ 'to rend' from NÁRAK- 'tear, rend
        (tr. and intr.)' (V:374, VT45:37).

        The latter element _-star_ seems to be related to STAR- 'stiff'
        (V:388), with _st_ preserved medially. Although this stem yields words
        for grass only — Q _sara_ 'stiff, dry grass, bent', N _thâr_ 'stiff
        grass' and so on — there is a different root TÁRAG- 'tough, stiff'
        producing Q _tarya_ 'tough, stiff' and N. _tarias_ 'stiffness, toughness,
        difficulty', _tarlanc_'stiff-necked, obstinate' with reference to more
        abstract meanings. Hence, _arcastar_ would be something like
        *'rushing [and] stiff-necked'.

        [I like your analysis, though I think _-star_ as 'stiff' (without any
        reference to necks) is a fine rendering of the sense of 'hardy' in
        'foolhardy', both as physically 'hard, tough' and as metaphorically
        'unyielding, resolute'. CFH]

        Roman Rausch
      • Carl F. Hostetter
        ... That should read placed _above_ the consonant , of course; sorry for the typo. Carl
        Message 3 of 19 , Oct 27, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          On Oct 27, 2006, at 11:06 AM, Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

          > The final note, in black, reads:
          >
          > "NB the vowel signs i, e, a, o, u <corresponding _tehta_ above each
          > vowel> are placed _after_ the consonant which they follow in speech."

          That should read "placed _above_ the consonant", of course; sorry for
          the typo.

          Carl
        • Richard Derdzinski
          ... What about connecting _-(a)sta-r_ with Tulkas s title: _Astaldo_ The Valiant ? In my humble opinion the second element in the name _Mondósar(e)_ Oxford
          Message 4 of 19 , Oct 27, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "Roman Rausch" <aranwe@...> wrote, regarding _arcastar_ 'Tolkien':

            > The latter element _-star_ seems to be related to STAR- 'stiff'
            > (V:388), with _st_ preserved medially.

            What about connecting _-(a)sta-r_ with Tulkas's title: _Astaldo_
            'The Valiant'?

            In my humble opinion the second element in the name _Mondósar(e)_
            'Oxford' is derived from the stem SAR-. Look at the tengwa _silmë_
            (and not _thúlë_). It can have the meaning 'hard' (as in the OED
            definition of HARD (n.): 'Hard or firm ground').

            Cheers,

            Richard Derdzinski
          • Roman Rausch
            ... I believe that _Astaldo_ should be rather related to STÁLAG- with primitive _stalga_ stalwart, steady, firm , N _thalion_ hero, dauntless man (V:388)
            Message 5 of 19 , Oct 28, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Derdzinski"
              <galadhorn@...> wrote:

              >What about connecting _-(a)sta-r_ with Tulkas's title: _Astaldo_
              >'The Valiant'?

              I believe that _Astaldo_ should be rather related to STÁLAG- with
              primitive _stalga_ 'stalwart, steady, firm', N _thalion_ 'hero,
              dauntless man' (V:388) and so on. Thus: _*a-stal-do_ with _-do_ as
              e.g. in _Hildor_ 'followers' from KHILI 'follow' (XI:387).

              (Analyzing the name as _*a-sta-ldo_ one runs into several problems - a
              root *(A)SAT(A)- 'valiant' is needed, but not attested; just as the
              personal ending _-ldo_, if I do not overlook anything.)

              >In my humble opinion the second element in the name _Mondósar(e)_
              >'Oxford' is derived from the stem SAR-. Look at the tengwa _silmë_
              >(and not _thúlë_). It can have the meaning 'hard' (as in the OED
              >definition of HARD (n.): 'Hard or firm ground').

              In the "_Namárie_" calligraphy in _The Road Goes Ever On_ we encounter
              _sindanóriello_ and _hísie_, both written with a _silme_, although
              deriving from THIN- (V:392) and KHITH- 'mist, fog' (V:364).

              And if *_Mondósar(e)_ contains SAR-, then what about rhotacism? We
              know a rule that it did not occur if _s_ was followed by the stressed
              vowel (VT44:20), which is the case in _Mondósaresse_, but not in the
              deduced basic form *_Mondósar(e)_.

              In its declination stress would sometimes lie before and sometimes
              after _-s-_.

              The change _-sar-_ > _-rar-_ does not seem euphonious here and it may
              have been the (external) reason to avoid SAR-.

              Besides, the connection beween _sar-_ *'hard ground' and 'ford'
              appears somewhat vague to me, while THAR- is directly attested in
              another name of a ford.

              [The connection with SAR-, if there is one, would I think be to the
              various derivatives connoting or related to stones or stoniness, fords
              often being made of gravel or other agglomerated stones. Note
              S. _Sarn-athrad_ 'Stony-ford' (LR:172, RC:163). CFH]

              Roman Rausch
            • Florian Dombach
              Just a minor correction: For me the first word of the Elvish greeting (inscribed by Tolkien in the copy of _The Fellowship of the Ring_ being auctioned) reads
              Message 6 of 19 , Oct 28, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Just a minor correction:

                For me the first word of the Elvish greeting (inscribed by Tolkien in
                the copy of _The Fellowship of the Ring_ being auctioned) reads neither
                "_elen_" nor "_elem_", as stated on the DTS site, but in fact "_elme_",
                but I will leave it to the Quenya experts to judge if this may have been
                Tolkien's intention or just a double mistake.

                Regards,
                Florian Dombach

                [You are quite correct that the first word is actually written as
                "_elme_". I have no doubt that this was a mistake on Tolkien's
                part, not intentional. As I mentioned previously, Tolkien was
                making this inscription for the cameras, and not at his leisure,
                accounting for the missed and subsequently inserted "_lúmenna_"
                and, no doubt, this misspelling as well. CFH]
              • Beregond. Anders Stenstr�m
                ... I read the first line and a half in this way: Here {or Above ?} are some specimens. A is a transliteration of English. But this happens [Aha! I think
                Message 7 of 19 , Oct 28, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

                  > The note in green at the bottom of the sheet appears to read:
                  >
                  > "[?Shown over] some explanations. A is a transliteration of English,
                  > [?that thus] happens not to be very decorative [?since lacking] the [?
                  > <a-_tehta_> = a]. B is a translation into Elvish (Quenya)"

                  I read the first line and a half in this way:

                  "Here {or "Above"?} are some specimens. A is a transliteration
                  of English. But this happens "

                  [Aha! I think you've go it. CFH]

                  With some luck, the reproduction in the printed catalogue is
                  large enough to allow a more certain reading.

                  Suilad,

                  Beregond
                • F.S.
                  It has long appeared to me that as printed in _The Peoples of Middle-earth_ (XII:295-320), the essay Of Dwarves and Men is strangely circular in disposition.
                  Message 8 of 19 , Oct 28, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    It has long appeared to me that as printed in _The
                    Peoples of Middle-earth_ (XII:295-320), the essay 'Of
                    Dwarves and Men' is strangely circular in disposition.
                    Christopher Tolkien notes that it 'takes up in the
                    middle of a sentence in a passage discussing knowledge
                    of the Common Speech' -- more specifically, discussing
                    the Common Speech as a means for interspecial
                    communication -- and the text ends (without a full
                    stop) in the middle of a discussion of the Common
                    Speech; more specifically, with a sentence on the
                    Common Speech as a means for interspecial
                    communication.

                    Furthermore, Christopher Tolkien points to a break in
                    the essay where, after three and a half pages of
                    manuscript, the typescript draft begins (XII:320 n.
                    9). Naturally one wonders whether the manuscript pages
                    were, in fact, originally the last pages of a draft
                    version of the essay, moved to the beginning at some
                    later time. (There could be a simple explanation to
                    why this was done. Having coverered the topics of the
                    Atani and their languages, the Drúedain, the
                    Halflings, Faramir's 'Middle Men', and the lingua
                    franca, Tolkien may have found himself returning to
                    the Dwarves: 'the Dwarves however were a special
                    case'. If this was so, then he may have decided that
                    the sections on the Dwarves were better kept together
                    and so moved the last pages. This would also explain
                    why no subtitle 'I' appears [cf. XII:324 n. 34], if
                    the essay having been so arranged never was retyped.)

                    However, when queried about the original documents
                    Christopher Tolkien kindly responded that the first
                    typescript words (XII:298 line 2, 'Only occasionally
                    ...') follow in the same line of text, so to speak, as
                    the last manuscript words 'in the Fëanorian Script' in
                    such a way as to show very clearly that the author
                    simply laid down his pen at that point and turned to
                    his typewriter.

                    Nevertheless, I wonder whether more could be said on
                    the matter. If the three and a half manuscript pages
                    -- except, perhaps, for the last (few) sentence(s)? --
                    originally comprised the end of the text, then the
                    essay would have opened with a discussion of the use
                    of runes in the Book of Mazarbul and on Balin's Tomb
                    -- and this would agree with Tolkien's note on the
                    covering page that the essay arose 'from consideration
                    of the Book of Mazarbul' (XII:295).

                    In my opinion the typescript part on Dwarven runes
                    (XII:298-301), where several phrases were later struck
                    out and corrected, definitely has the appearance of a
                    rough draft, while the section that follows
                    ('Relations of the Longbeard Dwarves and Men') seems
                    more finished. One deleted note from the first part
                    was taken up almost verbatim in the latter (see
                    XII:300 n. 21 and cf. the last paragraph on XII:302).
                    Perhaps the essay was pieced together of several
                    separate texts, some of them rewritten from (partly)
                    lost drafts, all written more or less at the same
                    time?

                    There is another curious fact about the essay as
                    printed. After the section on the relations of the
                    Longbeards and Men, ending with a paragraph on what
                    came to pass in the Second Age (XII:304-5), there
                    follows a paragraph on change in the language of the
                    Eldar in Middle-earth (as opposed to that of the Eldar
                    in Valinor), as seen by Elvish loremasters. This
                    paragraph seems to have virtually nothing to do with
                    what precedes it, and it is followed by a clear break
                    (where later the subtitle 'The Atani and their
                    Languages' was pencilled in). Could it be that the
                    part on the Atani and their languages was once
                    preceded by a text on the Elves and their languages,
                    i.e. on Quenya and Sindarin, and that the stray
                    paragraph is a remnant of this text? In any case I
                    think it possible that Tolkien bundled together a text
                    that he had written on the Atani with one or more
                    texts on the Longbeard Dwarves to form an essay 'Of
                    Dwarves and Men', but perhaps we will never know
                    exactly which the constituent parts originally were.

                    I note with interest though that the upcoming _J.R.R.
                    Tolkien Companion and Guide_ by Hammond & Scull
                    contains a section entitled 'Of Dwarves and Men'
                    (http://bcn.net/~whammond/Guide topic list.doc).
                    Perhaps we will find some answers there?

                    /Fredrik Ström
                  • Jerome Colburn
                    ... The wild thought has occurred to me to read it as *_ar-cas+ta-r_: an agent noun in _-r_ to a verb *_casta-_ (in turn formed by adding causative _-ta_ to
                    Message 9 of 19 , Nov 1, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      At 09:10 AM 10/27/06, Roman Rausch wrote:

                      >_arcastar_ 'Tolkien'
                      >
                      >Tolkien's name is an anglicization of _Tollkiehn_ , German _tollkühn_
                      >'foolhardy, reckless, desperately brave' (compare Letter no.165),
                      >containing _toll_ 'insane, mad, wild' and _kühn_ 'brave'. A more or
                      >less literal translation into English Tolkien himself also made, was
                      >'Rashbold' (IX:151).
                      >
                      >I would analyze the Quenya word as _*arca-star_.

                      The wild thought has occurred to me to read it as *_ar-cas+ta-r_: an agent
                      noun in _-r_ to a verb *_casta-_ (in turn formed by adding causative _-ta_
                      to the root KAS- "head") with modifying prefix _ar-_.

                      [Wild it may be, but I had a similar thought. Consider the term "headstrong",
                      partly synonymous with "foolhardy", though milder. CFH]

                      In _Telcontar_ we have an instance of a surname formed by the _-r_ suffix
                      added to a verb stem formed with the _-ta_ suffix added to a root meaning a
                      body part!

                      The meaning would seem to be someone who puts his head outside or beside
                      (the place where it should be), exposing it to risk.

                      The question of the meaning of the name _Castamir_ also arises.

                      Jerome Colburn
                      jcolburn@...
                      blog: http://www.uniquesupport.net/Lists/Jerome%20Colburn/View%20Items.htm
                    • Andreas Johansson
                      ... In Note 24 to Quendi and Eldar, we learn that [m]edial z
                      Message 10 of 19 , Nov 1, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Quoting Roman Rausch <aranwe@...>:

                        > And if *_Mondósar(e)_ contains SAR-, then what about rhotacism? We
                        > know a rule that it did not occur if _s_ was followed by the stressed
                        > vowel (VT44:20), which is the case in _Mondósaresse_, but not in the
                        > deduced basic form *_Mondósar(e)_.
                        >
                        > In its declination stress would sometimes lie before and sometimes
                        > after _-s-_.
                        >
                        > The change _-sar-_ > _-rar-_ does not seem euphonious here and it may
                        > have been the (external) reason to avoid SAR-.

                        In Note 24 to Quendi and Eldar, we learn that "[m]edial z < s had became r in
                        the Ñoldorin dialect of Q except when an adjacent syllable, or (as here) the
                        same syllable, already contained an r", the context being why Dwarvish _Khazâd_
                        was adapted to Quenya as _Kasar_ rather than **_Karar_. Thus from a phonological
                        point of view, there need not be any objection to assuming the presence of SAR.

                        Andreas
                      • hisilome
                        ... Hm. I thought the stress in _Mondósaresse_ would lie on the _e_ preceding the double consonant _ss_ (according to the pronunciation rules as for example
                        Message 11 of 19 , Nov 4, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "Roman Rausch" <aranwe@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > And if *_Mondósar(e)_ contains SAR-, then what about rhotacism? We
                          > know a rule that it did not occur if _s_ was followed by the stressed
                          > vowel (VT44:20), which is the case in _Mondósaresse_, but not in the
                          > deduced basic form *_Mondósar(e)_.

                          Hm. I thought the stress in _Mondósaresse_ would lie on the _e_
                          preceding the double consonant _ss_ (according to the pronunciation
                          rules as for example given in the Appendices of _LotR_, although the
                          example given there involves double _n_)?

                          Or is the passage in VT44:20 to be interpreted to say that rhotacism
                          did not occur when _s_ was followed by a stressed vowel, _regardless in
                          which syllable_ (as long as it comes after the _s_)? From the example
                          given, though, I get the impression that it has to follow the _s_
                          _immediately_ for the rule (of no change from _s_ to _r_) to apply:
                          _ósAnwe_.

                          [That's my impression as well. CFH]

                          David
                        • Pavel Iosad
                          Hello, ... This is the realm of guesswork: the rule, as given, does imply that we could have _s_/_r_ alternations in the paradigm relative to stress (witness
                          Message 12 of 19 , Nov 6, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hello,

                            > Hm. I thought the stress in _Mondósaresse_ would lie on the _e_
                            > preceding the double consonant _ss_ (according to the
                            > pronunciation rules as for example given in the Appendices of
                            >_LotR_, although the example given there involves double _n_)?

                            This is the realm of guesswork: the rule, as given, does imply that we
                            could have _s_/_r_ alternations in the paradigm relative to stress
                            (witness similar developments in Germanic due to Werner's law with
                            rhotacised and non-rhotacised forms coinhabiting the same paradigm, as
                            in OIcel _kjósa_, participle _kørinn_ 'to choose'). Indeed the very
                            word _ósanwe_ could be expected to exhibit this alternation, of
                            course. However, since no examples are provided by Tolkien, it is
                            rather pointless to speculate whether the paradigm would be levelled
                            to follow the nominative or remain true to the historical phonology;
                            what we can do is only note that something like that could be
                            possible.

                            --Pavel
                          • Beregond. Anders Stenström
                            ... The catalogue has arrived, and everything is legible. The words above the second line of tengwar are: In Elvish language & script The note in green
                            Message 13 of 19 , Nov 6, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I wrote:

                              > With some luck, the reproduction in the printed catalogue is
                              > large enough to allow a more certain reading.

                              The catalogue has arrived, and everything is legible. The
                              words above the second line of tengwar are:

                              "In Elvish language
                              & script"

                              The note in green reads:

                              "Here are some specimens. A is a transliteration
                              of English. But this happens not to be very decorative
                              and lacks the XX <a-tehta> = a. B is a translation
                              into Elvish (Quenya)"

                              XX is a deleted "de", apparently the start of a
                              repetitious "decorative". The a-tehta is underlined.

                              (For the final note, in black, see Carl's reading
                              earlier in this thread.)

                              Suilad,

                              Beregond, Anders Stenstr�m
                            • j_mach_wust
                              Beregond/Anders Stenström wrote: ... ... May I ask for the last sign of the second tengwar transcription of Mondósaresse ? On the scan available at
                              Message 14 of 19 , Nov 6, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Beregond/Anders Stenström wrote:
                                ...
                                > The catalogue has arrived, and everything is legible.
                                ...

                                May I ask for the last sign of the second tengwar transcription of
                                'Mondósaresse'? On the scan available at Christie's, I can make out
                                that there is the tengwa 'esse', but I cannot see whether there is an
                                acute above, and--if there is an acute--whether the acute is below the
                                upper stroke of esse or above.

                                grüess
                                j. 'mach' wust
                              • hisilome
                                ... My original objection was mainly to Roman s statement that in _Mondósaresse_ the _s_ is followed by the stressed vowel, which is patently false (if one
                                Message 15 of 19 , Nov 6, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel Iosad" <edricson@...>
                                  wrote:

                                  > > Hm. I thought the stress in _Mondósaresse_ would lie on the _e_
                                  > > preceding the double consonant _ss_ (according to the
                                  > > pronunciation rules as for example given in the Appendices of
                                  > >_LotR_, although the example given there involves double _n_)?
                                  >
                                  >This is the realm of guesswork: the rule, as given, does imply that
                                  >we could have _s_/_r_ alternations in the paradigm relative to stress
                                  >(witness similar developments in Germanic due to Werner's law with
                                  >rhotacised and non-rhotacised forms coinhabiting the same paradigm,
                                  >as in OIcel _kjósa_, participle _kørinn_ 'to choose'). Indeed the
                                  >very word _ósanwe_ could be expected to exhibit this alternation, of
                                  > course. However, since no examples are provided by Tolkien, it is
                                  > rather pointless to speculate whether the paradigm would be levelled
                                  > to follow the nominative or remain true to the historical phonology;
                                  > what we can do is only note that something like that could be
                                  > possible.

                                  My original objection was mainly to Roman's statement that in
                                  _Mondósaresse_ the _s_ is followed by the stressed vowel, which is
                                  patently false (if one agrees that it should be followed
                                  _immediately_ by the stressed vowel, just as in Verner's Law it is
                                  the stress on the _immediately_ _preceding_ vowel that prevented
                                  voiceless fricatives from becoming voiced ones [and, by extension,
                                  _s_ from becoming _r_ via _z_]). Thus the accent of the word should
                                  probably not be seen here as a reason why rhotacism did not occur.

                                  This is why I do not fully agree with your argument: yes, one might
                                  assume of _ósanwe_ that, for example, the locative could be
                                  _óranwesse_ ("true to historical phonology", and similar to your Old
                                  Icelandic example), while it might just as well be _ósanwesse_
                                  (analogical leveling).

                                  I just don't see how this is relevant for _Mondósaresse_ and its
                                  assumed nominative, since the stress is never in the pertinent
                                  syllable anyway. All one can say is that if the word's second element
                                  is indeed derived from SAR-, rhotacism "should" probably have
                                  occurred (in both the nominative and the locative), but for some
                                  reason it didn't. Of course it is also quite possible, as Roman says,
                                  that SAR- is not involved at all.

                                  David
                                • "Beregond. Anders Stenström"
                                  ... There is an acute below the ascender of the esse. Suilad, Beregond
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Nov 6, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    j. 'mach' wust wrote:

                                    > May I ask for the last sign of the second tengwar transcription of
                                    > 'Mondósaresse'? On the scan available at Christie's, I can make out
                                    > that there is the tengwa 'esse', but I cannot see whether there is an
                                    > acute above, and--if there is an acute--whether the acute is below the
                                    > upper stroke of esse or above.

                                    There is an 'acute' below the ascender of the esse.

                                    Suilad,

                                    Beregond
                                  • Harm J. Schelhaas
                                    On reflection, I think that I should relay the following thought to the list. As I had shown Beregond s [Anders Stenström s] initial post and Christie s lot
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Nov 7, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On reflection, I think that I should relay the following thought to the list.

                                      As I had shown Beregond's [Anders Stenström's] initial post and Christie's
                                      lot description to a Smial meeting of the Dutch Tolkien Society Unquendor,
                                      I've been relaying the discussion on "Tolkien in Oxford" here on Lambengolmor
                                      to an interested member of Unquendor. She is a professional linguist, and
                                      used to belong to Unquendor's working group on Elvish Linquistics, when that
                                      existed long before the time of VT, but dropped out of that field for a long time.

                                      (I myself have no solid background in linguistics, which is why I follow this
                                      group with keen interest, but usually do not take part myself.)

                                      On reading the rhotacism discussion, she at first thought people here were
                                      discussing whether the r in "_mondósaResse_" could have developed from an s.
                                      When I pointed out that the discussion was rather why the s ("_mondóSaresse_")
                                      hadn't turned into an r, her reply was that rhotacism of the first consonant in
                                      the second element of a compound is so unheard of, that she as a linguist had
                                      not realized that one would think of it at all, and that Tolkien apparently would
                                      have thought the same. Hence the retention of the s.

                                      -- Harm J. Schelhaas

                                      [Thanks for reporting this. I have no trouble believe it to be so, though I would
                                      caution that even if so, it surely depends on the age of the compound and to
                                      what degree it is perceived to be a compound by the speakers of the language.
                                      Not that either of those are necessarily at issue in this particular example, but
                                      something to bear in mind lest it be regarded as a rule in all cases. CFH]

                                      [And while I'm at it, another gentle reminder to all members to please sign your
                                      posts with your real names, and to refer to other contributors by real name. I don't
                                      mind the use of _epessi_ and other nicknames in email adresses, but I think it
                                      behooves us to use real names in posts and citations. Thanks. CFH]
                                    • Roman Rausch
                                      ... An example for an ancient compound with rhotacism carried out seems to exist, namely: Q _Tindómerel_ * daughter/child of twilight (V:385) with the
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Nov 8, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "Harm J. Schelhaas"
                                        <harm.j.schelhaas@...> wrote:

                                        >When I pointed out that the discussion was rather why the s
                                        >("_mondóSaresse_") hadn't turned into an r, her reply was that
                                        >rhotacism of the first consonant in the second element of a
                                        >compound is so unheard of, that she as a linguist had not realized
                                        >that one would think of it at all, and that Tolkien apparently
                                        >would have thought the same. Hence the retention of the s.

                                        >[Thanks for reporting this. I have no trouble believe it to be so,
                                        >though I would caution that even if so, it surely depends on the age
                                        >of the compound and to what degree it is perceived to be a compound
                                        >by the speakers of the language. [...] CFH]

                                        An example for an ancient compound with rhotacism carried out seems to
                                        exist, namely: Q _Tindómerel_ *'daughter/child of twilight' (V:385)
                                        with the primitive form given as _tindômiselde_, root SEL-D.

                                        But in the context of _Mondósaresse_ this discussion is now pointless
                                        anyway - the note from "Quendi & Eldar" Andreas Johansson pointed out
                                        in message #950 should have the most relevance here, I think.

                                        Roman R.
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.