Re: Two Questions
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "quildarener" <quildarener@y...>
> --- In email@example.com, "Peter" <pedelberg@h...> wrote:
> > What I feel writer should refrain from is stating that they
> > write "Genuine Elvish", "Correct Elvish" or any other
> > statement. Let's be honest: whatever we write is a mish-mash of
> > Tolkien's ideas spanning decades, and even Tolkien rarely had
> > final answer to our questions, but kept on changing his ideas.is,
> > Much controversy spring from the question of what Real Elvish
> > but let's face it, there is no real Elvish, but many differentto
> > of Real Elvish in Tolkien's writing.
> > Maybe we should even cultivate our own linguistic taste and try
> > find words in Elvish that sound beautiful as well as sticking toI am not sure what you mean. I did not mean that writing in Elvish
> > general scheme of Elvish phonology etc.
> I wholeheartedly agree and wish that more people did (or at least
> were willing to resist the authoritarians).
was resisting anything in itself. What I do find authoritorian is
when people claim that they are wtiting "genuine Elvish" when not
such thing exists - at least not in the singular.
> The one qualifyingcommunication
> consideration is that some kind of standard for common
> should emerge for those writing in Quenya.Why? As I see it we don't need any one standard for writing Elvish,
and the idea is contrary to the nature of Tolkien's writings which
were in constant flux. Why can't a writer just state his/her
principles, and then write on. I don't believe in the idea of a
genuine neo-Quenya or neo-Sindarin since they can never be "genuine"
or "correct" as Tolkien never made his mind about the final form of
Quenya or Sindarin grammar.
> But if that is to emergea
> at all it should be from those actually using Quenya and not from
> Royal Tolkien Academy of (real or imagined) elitist scholarsThese user will do so whatever anyone does and peace be with them.
> imposing its standards from on high in Tolkien's name.
All I ask (if they want to be taken seriously) is that they state
their principles and try to make it beautiful instead of conforming
to some neo-Quenya or neo-Sindarin canonic grammar.
I am in the dark as to who this Royal Elvish Academy is who wants to
define neo-Quenya or neo-Sindarin grammar from on high. Let's
discuss issues instead of people. I have read quite a bit of your
Elvish translations. What is your principle of selection and your
thoughts on the esthetics of Quenya? I must admit I have only
written one short poem in Elvish during the last many years, so
maybe I am not the most qualified to discuss this, but please join
in, all you people out there.