RE: [norse_course] Nú brýtr þú ok týnir sk ipinu ok fénu (conditional indicative?)
Thanks LN. Comments inserted
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of llama_nom
Sent: Wednesday, 4 May 2005 4:24 PM
Subject: [norse_course] Nú brýtr þú ok týnir skipinu ok fénu (conditional indicative?)
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "AThompson" <athompso@p...>
> ok eru víða øroefi ok hætt skipum.
> And (the) harbourless coasts (nom. plural?) are wide and
dangerous/destructive to ships.
I think 'víða' must be an adverb here, since 'øroefi' is neuter
(nom. pl., as you say), so maybe: "and there are harbourless-coasts
widely/in-many-places and [it is] dangerous to ships."
Agree that 'víða' is probably an adverb meaning ‘in many places’ (I was so intent on making it an adjective that I refused to accept that it was an adverb) but suggest that ‘hætt’ is still strong nom. pl. adj in predicative position: so instead: “and harbourless-coasts are [found]
in-many-places (or “are widely [found]”) and [are] dangerous to ships.”
> Nú brýtr þú ok týnir skipinu ok fénu, lítt sér þat þá á,
> Now (should) you wreck (subj) and lose (presumably subj) the ship
and the possessions (sg), that (will be) little seen (indic but why
not subj?) then (there will be then little to show)
Now it gets confusing. 'brýtr' is indicative, isn't it? The
subjunctive 'brjótir' crops up soon. 'týnir' could be either, but
as the verbs either side of it are both indicative, I'm guessing it
is too. Granted, Gwyn Jones has "Now should you be wrecked and lose
both ship and lading, there will be little to show that you have met
King Svein...", but look at the way this version with modern
spelling is punctuated.
I don't know if this is the right way to think of it, but could it
be sort of rhetorical and concerned? "Now you're going to [go and]
get [yourself] shipwrecked [aren't you]. There won't be much to
show THEN that you've (subj.) met..."
Another way of looking at it, which I considered, is:
The king says: “Now [imagine/consider this possible scenario, Auðun]: You wreck your ship and lose your possessions; then [one] sees little to [prove] that you have met King Sveinn and given him a treasure”
Agree that 'brýtr' and 'týnir' are indicative and I wouldn’t have tried to twist it otherwise otherwise except for 'hafir fundit' in the final clause. I guess it’s possible that the writer got caught up in the conditional meaning of the sentence and slipped into the use of the subjunctive even though the grammatical construction required the indicative. This would only mean a single slip up, compared to the less likely double slip of using 'brýtr' and 'sér' instead of 'brjótir' and 'sjáir'.
Or would it be better to just treat it as if 'brýtr' has the force
of a subjunctive, if not the form? The final subjunctive HAFIR I
guess is there because it involves a perception that won't take
place. But is it the negative quality that causes this, or the fact
that it's a perception? I wonder if indicative would be prefered if
he was saying "then it certainly will be seen that you've met..."
Or would the fact that it's describing some hypothetical person's
perception be enough to demand the subjunctive? So many questions...
> at þú hafir fundit Svein konung ok gefit honum gørsimi.
> that you have (subj!) met King Sveinn and given him a treasure.
> ok ertu þá enn eigi félauss með öllu,
> and you are (will be - pres as future) then still not completely
> þótt þú brjótir skipit, ef þú fær haldit þessu.
> even though you (should) wreck (subj) the ship, if you are able to
hold (on to) this.
Yes: 'hafir' and 'brjótir' sunjunctive, but 'þú fær' indicative!
(Google 'ef þú fær' 24; 'ef þú fáir' just 3, all in subordinate
clauses with 'að'. Similar statistics for 'geta').
For 'hafir' see above. On 'brjótir' and 'fær' there is no question that they are subjunctive and indicative respectively: 'brjótir' because it is within a concessive ‘þótt’ clause and 'fær' because it is in a real conditional 'ef' clause (as I indicated in my comments to Patricia) and as you identify in your follow up reference to Einarsson. I used Einarsson in preparing my feedback to Patricia and I was seeing the 'Nú brýtr þú ok týnir skipinu ok fénu…' sentence as an example of the Imaginary Conditional, only 'brýtr' and 'sér' would not behave as I wanted them to.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
A Norse funny farm, overrun by smart people.
To escape from this funny farm try rattling off an e-mail to:
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.2 - Release Date: 2/05/2005
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.3 - Release Date: 3/05/2005
- What is next, the same names, see if that would not cause confusion, I have just ordered the third editions of parts two and three, for the extra text etc, and hope to get them shortly.I have my name down for the re-publishing ot the Cleasby Vigfusson Job - from the OUP but I have to think of a better excuse other than sheer self-indulgence.BTW, do you know anyone else who reads a dictionary and traces here and there like a person stepping on the stepping stones, I am minded of a Wiccan Ritual - "From a word I am led to a Word and from a Deed to another Deed", you can never have too many books, so your dwelling be on good foundationsPatriciaI hotly deny it - it is untrue I have never sunk a building with my books It is a lie----- Original Message -----From: llama_nomSent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 7:16 PMSubject: [norse_course] Re: New person saying hello--- In email@example.com, "Patricia"
> Anthony Faulkes' "A New Introduction to Old Norse" [
> http://www.shef.ac.uk/viking-society/ ], comes in three volumes:
> grammar, reader and glossary. Some other websites for beginners
> Excuse me LN, this is not strictly correct, Michael Barnes is
responsible for Compiling the Grammar, Anthony Faulkes worked on the
Reader and the Index, I have twice recommended the books under these
names, trust me, I have the said books in front of me.
Yes, you're right, Patricia, of course. I recently got a flyer from
the Viking Society advertising the 3rd editions of the reader and
glossary (Maybe you did too?). I think that's what led me astray.
Well, that's my excuse anyway. Sulks: why can't everyone just have
the same name. Save ourselves a lot of confusion...