Re: To Depart
- Hi, I am an owner of another Quenya group just coming in here to see
the flow of things and I came across these vicious set of messages...
Just wanted to say that yes, Tolkien's Quenya is undoubtedly THE
quenya to learn BUT Helge's "quenya analyzed" provides a great base
for an enthusiastic student to start; and once learned they should
explore Tolkien's in detail. It is kind of hard to learn Quenya from
only reading the various works by either Tolkien or his son, so...
both are usable. Just one is a good base for starting and provides
structure and if you will, a formula to learning. I also don't know
of anyone who would badmouth the Quenya used here or anywhere as long
as it isn't "Grelvish".
My list is devoted to helping those learning from the Ardalambion and
then after they establish the base, they may broaden it with further
readings; there are many lists that do this. Just because this group
doesn't focus on the Lessons and a lot of people are already fluent
doesn't mean it isn't for others who don't know as much. How do you
learn anyways if you don't read and ask questions from people who
know more? I am sure they will be happy to help... and from the looks
of it there are a great set of people in this group who do just that.
After all, the intro to this group declares it.
--- In email@example.com, Gildor Inglorion <elfiness@y...> wrote:
> teithant "Carl F. Hostetter"
> > Last time I checked, this list was still devoted to
> > _Tolkien's_ Quenya,
> > not to Helge Fauskanger's course. (Indeed, there is
> > another list,
> > specifically devoted to students of Helge's course.)
> > Until and unless
> > the list's purpose is reconstituted, we should be
> > careful to present
> > facts, theories, and interpretations against
> > Tolkien's, not Helge's,
> > writings.
> watching again another Helge vs Tolkien discussion, i
> would invite both sides to look at it 'cool'
> I consider Quenya a dead and scarcely evidental
> language... not all of it has been survived (aka
> Tolkien hasn't finished every aspect of it) and beyond
> that, something that troubles us is that we have
> evidence of many dialects (aka Tolkien was inconsitent
> and changed often his mind)..
> right, some want to know it better, so, as every
> serious linguist do, we try to reconstruct it.. how?
> deriving words from etymology, borrowing words from
> one 'dialect' to another (aka Qenya words to Quenya)
> and FIRSTLY, documenting new revealed evidence (aka
> newly published Tolkien's drafts).. this fills gaps in
> the puzzle, but again, the 'dialects' are many, often
> contradicting.. we don't know which 'dialect' would be
> the 'standard', or 'best'
> always during this process there is and will be a
> 'standard' form of Quenya, formulated by the
> abovementioned factors.. this form of Quenya is
> admittedly not 'real Quenya' (aka not the Quenya that
> Tolkien would produce should he had worked on it for
> 120 years).. this is just an interpretation and
> nothing more...
> the most popular form of Quenya which is considered
> 'standard' is Helquenya.. this is bad, because SOME
> newbies consider it as 'canon'.. but it is of course
> good because it gives a starting point which can be
> furtherly expanded by newly published evidence and
> knowledge on behalf of the new student
> 'starting point' requests that it is by no means final
> and canonical
> yes, 'final' Quenya wont ever be possible.. it will
> just be one of the evolving 'standard', which
> sometimes will cease to evolve because there will be
> nothing new to add... this will of course be different
> from the 'real Quenya'...
> this will happen when someone wants to compose in an
> undocumented language, like proto-slavic.. the result
> will not be proto-slavic as spoken, but then again it
> wil be the closest that can ever be
> and i don't think it would be bad to do something like
> anyone disagreeing?
> Do You Yahoo!?
> ÁðïêôÞóôå ôç äùñåÜí @... äéåýèõíóç óáò óôï http://www.otenet.gr
- On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 06:40 PM, Alatariel wrote:
> Hi, I am an owner of another Quenya group just coming in here to seeSince when is pointing out facts "vicious"?
> the flow of things and I came across these vicious set of messages...
> BUT Helge's "quenya analyzed" provides a great baseWho ever said otherwise? Certainly not me!
> for an enthusiastic student to start;
> a lot of people are already fluentNo they aren't. There is not even a single person fluent in Quenya, nor
has there ever been, nor (if we're speaking of Quenya proper) will
there ever be.
> How do you learn anyways if you don't read and ask questions fromRight. No one is saying you shouldn't do that. But you're also not
> people who
> know more?
going to learn if you blindly accept false or incomplete answers as the
Carl F. Hostetter Aelfwine@... http://www.elvish.org
ho bios brachys, he de techne makre.
Ars longa, vita brevis.
The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.
"I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take such
a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about."