Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Languages » Sindarin Discussion » A long list...
Author Topic:
Ranwen
Council Member
Posts: 34
Send Message
Avatar
Post A long list...
on: March 22, 2005 06:39
Suilad,

I tryed a lot a translations this week. Most of them are whole phrases but of a few I am not really sure or I can’t find the words and don’t know how to rewrite the phrase. So if some one around here has a lot of time to spend… (It is al long list..)

It doesn’t matter -> U-câr ______

I remember my youth -> Renen níth nín (Renech (script FotR) you remember-> renen-> I remember??)

I do what you asked me, and what I have to do -> Cerin man anirach ceri nin, a man gerin ceri (I do what you want me to do, and what I have to do)

We will see each other before the end -> Cenatham men ‘nin veth (We will see us for the end)

You may call/name me (name) -> Geriach esto nin (name) (you can call/name me (name))

You need your strength -> Boe le bellas lín (It is necessary to you your strength)

Did I say something wrong? -> Agorennen pedo pen raeg?

Good morning -> Aur vaer (good morning) / aur vain (fair morning)

My father used to call me (name) -> Adar nín iuithant esto nin (name)

I did not know -> Agorennen u-ista.

(Name) sends me -> (name) toltha nin.

He wants to meet you -> E aníra govo le.

The hall of the Kings -> I thamas in Erain.

High King of the Noldor -> Aran chall i Noldorim

Nobody can stop me -> Alben geria daro nin.

I know what you want to do -> Iston man anirach ceri.

I go now -> Badin si.

What will you do? -> Man ceritach?

You are now the true king of Gondor -> Nach si i thenid aran o Gondor.

You will go today -> Badithach sír

Yes, we will go today and you will stay -> Tancave, baditham sír a darithach.

Not for long -> U-annan

I will follow you to the Black Gate -> Aphandam le ‘nin Morannon.

It is my fate -> E na amarth nín

I know. I used to do this long ago. -> Iston. Iuithannen ceri hen anann io.

Don’t look back! -> U-tiro nad!

Go, they wait for you -> Bado, derir al le.

I protect myself -> Berion nin.

I must -> Gerin.

So this is it. I know it is a long list. But please if someone want to take a look at it, especially the first few phrases.

Hannon le,
Ranwen.
Glorfindeil_sindar
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 22, 2005 08:13
I remember my youth -> Renen níth nín (Renech (script FotR) you remember-> renen-> I remember??)
It's "renin"! {renich i lū...? - do you remember the time...?}

I do what you asked me, and what I have to do -> Cerin man anirach ceri nin, a man gerin ceri (I do what you want me to do, and what I have to do)
You shouldn't use "man" if it's not question. Here it's better to use "ian" or "i" for "what"! And maybe it's better to use "boe an nin" {it's necessary for me} for "I have to do" but that's just my opinion...

We will see each other before the end -> Cenatham men ‘nin veth (We will see us for the end)
It should be "cenitham" {infinitive ceni-} and "men" must be lenited as an object of "see"! {ven}

You may call/name me (name) -> Geriach esto nin (name) (you can call/name me (name))
Why "geriach"? It shoyuld be "gerich"! And I guess the name would be lenited in this position...

Did I say something wrong? -> Agorennen pedo pen raeg?
You should take it as "I said something wrong?"! So long "agorennen" is not needed - "pennin pen raeg?" is all you need!

My father used to call me (name) -> Adar nín iuithant esto nin (name)
You don't have to translate the sentence straight to Sindarin just like it is in English! You have to think about the real meaning! In this sentence "My father called me" is the only part you have to translate! "Adar nīn estant nin (lenited name)"!

I did not know -> Agorennen u-ista.
It's "ū-istannen" {I knew not}

He wants to meet you -> E aníra govo le.
"govo" is not the infinitive of "govad-" {to meet} - it's "gevedi" but here I guess it's better to use gerund - "govaded|"...

Nobody can stop me -> Alben geria daro nin.
It's "gār" not "geria"! And I haven't heard about "alben" also, but I don't remember any better words at this moment...

I know what you want to do -> Iston man anirach ceri.
"man" => "ian" or "i" { I don't want to repeat... }

I go now -> Badin si.
It's "bedin" {infinitive of "bad-" is "bedin"} and "si" must be lenited as adjective! {hi}

What will you do? -> Man ceritach?
"h" is missing... {cerithach}

You are now the true king of Gondor -> Nach si i thenid aran o Gondor.
Adjective should better follow the noun {i aran thenid}.
You don't have to use "nach" here - "le" would be a better choise! {try not to use "to be" {na-} in Sindarin where it's not CRITICALY needed!}
and "si" should be lenited...

You will go today -> Badithach sír
Bedithach sīr {or maybe "hīr"}

Yes, we will go today and you will stay -> Tancave, baditham sír a darithach.
"tancave"??? It's usually "mae" for "yes"...
beditham
"derithach" would be correct but better use "le dār" to 'underline' the second person... {hard to explain...}

I will follow you to the Black Gate -> Aphandam le ‘nin Morannon.
aphandam {???} => aphadam is for "we follow". "I will follow" would be "aphadathan" {-on}!

It is my fate -> E na amarth nín
"e" is only for "he"! "Sa" means "it"! And no need for "na" here! Sa amarth nīn!

I know. I used to do this long ago. -> Iston. Iuithannen ceri hen anann io.
Iuithannen ceri => agoren

Don’t look back! -> U-tiro nad!
why "nad"? "ad" or "dan" is used for "back"!

Go, they wait for you -> Bado, derir al le.
"darthar" is a better word for "they wait"...

I must -> Gerin
Well I don't know about this... Maybe it's better to say "it is necessary for me" {boe an nin}

At last... I thought it will never end!
Glorfindeil_sindar
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 23, 2005 04:53
:wave: Yeah, I forgot!!!
In some places I've suggested you to write "an nin" - well it should be "anim"!!!
Good luck!
Fíriel
Enethdan Edhellen
Posts: 1369
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 23, 2005 09:10
Good work, Ranwen! While Glorfindeil has made some useful points, I have some comments of my own to add...


I do what you asked me, and what I have to do -> Cerin man anirach ceri nin, a man gerin ceri (I do what you want me to do, and what I have to do)
You shouldn't use "man" if it's not question. Here it's better to use "ian" or "i" for "what"! And maybe it's better to use "boe an nin" {it's necessary for me} for "I have to do" but that's just my opinion...


Regarding boe anim -- you'll need to use the gerund as well -- boe anim cared. Also, 'asked' is past tense, so should be anira- -- Cerin ian anirnech nin...


We will see each other before the end -> Cenatham men ‘nin veth (We will see us for the end)
It should be "cenitham" {infinitive ceni-} and "men" must be lenited as an object of "see"! {ven}


Mixed mutation occurs with 'nin -- 'nin meth. If you'd like to better convey the sense of 'each other' into Sindarin, there's always the verb 'meet', govad-.

You may call/name me (name) -> Geriach esto nin (name) (you can call/name me (name))
Why "geriach"? It shoyuld be "gerich"! And I guess the name would be lenited in this position...


In addition, you'll want to use the gerund here -- gerich estad nin. There's no need for 'name' to be lenited here, not if Ranwen means to say 'you can name (verb) me'...

Did I say something wrong? -> Agorennen pedo pen raeg?
You should take it as "I said something wrong?"! So long "agorennen" is not needed - "pennin pen raeg?" is all you need!


Glorfindeil's right, you don't need 'did' in this instance -- to express a question, the rising of the tone of voice might do. However, ben is lenited as the object of the verb 'said'.


My father used to call me (name) -> Adar nín iuithant esto nin (name)
You don't have to translate the sentence straight to Sindarin just like it is in English! You have to think about the real meaning! In this sentence "My father called me" is the only part you have to translate! "Adar nīn estant nin (lenited name)"!


True. However Glorfindeil, I'd hate to be fussy, but use the acute accent (nín) for 'my', not a macron.

Nobody can stop me -> Alben geria daro nin.
It's "gār" not "geria"! And I haven't heard about "alben" also, but I don't remember any better words at this moment...


Using the gerund for a secondary verb in a sentence, in this case dared, is preferable (see King's Letter).

I know what you want to do -> Iston man anirach ceri.
"man" => "ian" or "i" { I don't want to repeat... }


Gerund, please.

I go now -> Badin si.
It's "bedin" {infinitive of "bad-" is "bedin"} and "si" must be lenited as adjective! {hi}


Do you mean as an adverb? The only case of an adverb being lenited is edro hi ammen..., Gandalf's invocation.

You are now the true king of Gondor -> Nach si i thenid aran o Gondor.
Adjective should better follow the noun {i aran thenid}.
You don't have to use "nach" here - "le" would be a better choise! {try not to use "to be" {na-} in Sindarin where it's not CRITICALY needed!}
and "si" should be lenited...


Glorfindeil insists on the lenition of si, I don't, so it's up to you Ranwen. I don't believe you need to use the preposition o if you're expressing a genitive relationship -- just omit it. Adjective after noun is preferable -- most examples in the corpus follow this pattern. The avoidance of na- is preferable because it is unlikely that na- would follow regular verb conjugation patterns. (Always best to give a reason for some things, Glorfindeil. )... Le i aran thenid Gondor si...?

You will go today -> Badithach sír
Bedithach sīr {or maybe "hīr"}


Bedithach sír. An -I appended to the end of a basic verb often causes A & O to umlaut to E.

Yes, we will go today and you will stay -> Tancave, baditham sír a darithach.
"tancave"??? It's usually "mae" for "yes"...
beditham
"derithach" would be correct but better use "le dār" to 'underline' the second person... {hard to explain...}


No -- while mae is often used in that sense, mae is thought to mean 'well', as Tolkien mentions mae govannen in the Letters to mean 'well met'. Tencave is from Quenya, and if I recall correctly, means 'certainly'. As in the above case, umlauts occur and result in derithach for 'stay'. If you choose to take up Glorfindeil's suggestion (which I don't necessarily agree with), it should be le deritha, but would make this phrase at odds with the rest of the sentence.

I will follow you to the Black Gate -> Aphandam le ‘nin Morannon.
aphandam {???} => aphadam is for "we follow". "I will follow" would be "aphadathan" {-on}!


Aphadathon le 'nin...


It is my fate -> E na amarth nín
"e" is only for "he"! "Sa" means "it"! And no need for "na" here! Sa amarth nīn!


Glorfindeil, you need to quote the source of unattested pronouns such as sa when issuing definitive statements, and it is _possible_ that e could stand for 'it'.

Don’t look back! -> U-tiro nad!
why "nad"? "ad" or "dan" is used for "back"!


A long Ú for the negative, which in turn causes lenition: ú-diro ad.


Go, they wait for you -> Bado, derir al le.
"darthar" is a better word for "they wait"...


Might dar- be suit also depending on the context in which she uses the translation?...


I must -> Gerin
Well I don't know about this... Maybe it's better to say "it is necessary for me" {boe an nin}


Ranwen, boe is an impersonal verb meaning 'it is necessary'.

It doesn’t matter -> U-câr ______


Ú causes lenition: ú-gâr.

[Edited on 24/3/2005 by Fíriel]
Ailinel
Council Member
Posts: 811
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 24, 2005 12:43
I have a few further comments on Fíriel`s elaborations...


>In addition, you'll want to use the gerund here -- gerich estad nin.

Why? We have the attested neledh neledhi gar godrebh, where gar is governing the infinitive neledhi.



>>"My father called me" is the only part you have to translate! "Adar nīn estant nin"

>True. However Glorfindeil, I'd hate to be fussy, but use the acute accent (nín) for 'my', not a macron.

Actually, in theAe Adar, we see the acute accent, but in the King´s Letter, we see the circumflex. In tengwar writing, the difference between í and î would not be discernible.


>>Nobody can stop me -> Alben geria daro nin.
>>It's "gār" not "geria"!

>Using the gerund for a secondary verb in a sentence, in this case dared, is preferable (see King's Letter).

As mentioned above, the infinitive seems to be valid as well. (Infinitive _deri_)


>>I know what you want to do -> Iston man anirach ceri.

>Gerund, please.

See the above.


>>{try not to use "to be" {na-} in Sindarin where it's not CRITICALY needed!}

>The avoidance of na- is preferable because it is unlikely that na- would follow regular verb conjugation patterns. (Always best to give a reason for some things, Glorfindel.)

I'm under the impression that the original author of the translation has been given these same reasons repeatedly in previous posts.


> If you choose to take up Glorfindeil's suggestion (which I don't necessarily agree with), it should be le deritha, but would make this phrase at odds with the rest of the sentence.

Why?







[Edited on 24/3/2005 by Ailinel]
Ranwen
Council Member
Posts: 34
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 26, 2005 06:14
Thanks a lot all of you.

I still have a little question. Where can I find the 'King's letter" because I read already a lot of (see also the King's letter) at this forum? :blush:

Ranwen

O and Ailinel if I had to use na- how can I translated my phrases best?
gwendeth
Accounts Admin, Sindarin Mod & Head Stargazer of Varda
Posts: 5809
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 26, 2005 06:25
Here's a link :

http://members.cox.net/taramiluiel/sindarin_corpus.htm

(note: it looks like the 'latest' reference is VT 41)
"Tolo si, a tiro i cherth Eru" "Come now, and see the works of God"
Glorfindeil_sindar
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 26, 2005 08:14
I have a problem with my keyboard so I used latvian (my motherlanguage) longmarks (macrons) instead of accents!!! But I guess it's not making a great problem to understand what I mean, right?!
Uialdil_i_degilbor
Elvish Scribe
Posts: 380
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 26, 2005 09:08
I'll address one of the other phrases:

High King of the Noldor -> Aran chall i Noldorim


Noldor is a Quenya word; the Sindarin form is Golodh. So 'King of the Noldor' would be Aran in Golodhrim (spelt as i ñgolodhrim in tengwar). I don't think that the designation of 'high' is really necessary, but I suppose that *Tor-aran could be used (cf. Torhir 'high lord'). In the Romanised spelling of Tor-aran the hyphen is necessary to preserve the stress. Of course, there is no hyphen in tengwar.
Ailinel
Council Member
Posts: 811
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 26, 2005 10:06

O and Ailinel if I had to use na- how can I translated my phrases best?


Ranwen, as pointed out by me and by others, a Sindarin verb *na- "to be" is not attested in Tokien's writings, except for the imperative no. Presumably "to be" is simply omitted within sentences, but of course there might be sentences, that can't be translated without a form of "to be". So what should be done? A good idea could be to find another wording. If that's impossible, e.g. in certain translations, you could use the reconstructed forms of "to be", but you should keep in mind that they are rather speculative. If you are looking for those reconstructed forms, you could take a look at D.Salo's "Gateway to Sindarin", pg. 121-122.
Fíriel
Enethdan Edhellen
Posts: 1369
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 26, 2005 04:21
Hi Ailinel, and thanks for your comments... I probably shouldn't have been so partial in my statements. I do prefer the use of the gerund over the infinitive as secondary verbs, mainly because of the attested usage in the King's Letter, whereas the phrase 'lheben teil (etc.)' is a Noldorin form with no attested, only agreed, translation -- however, Ranwen can have that choice then.

Regarding the independent pronoun: I just feel that the use of the independent pronoun should be consistent, and it doesn't necessarily shift the emphasis of what the speaker is saying. However, that's just my opinion.

[Edited for clarification]

[Edited on 30/3/2005 by Fíriel]
Naneth
Elvish 101 Moderator
Posts: 568
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 29, 2005 06:52
"Three" as an English noun can mean "something having three units or members".

Remember also that "-i" is an adjectival ending in Sindarin, so "neledh neledhi" could mean "three threes" or "three units of three" (three by three).
Ailinel
Council Member
Posts: 811
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 30, 2005 03:16

Remember also that "-i" is an adjectival ending in Sindarin, so "neledh neledhi" could mean "three threes" or "three units of three" (three by three).


I don't quite understand what you mean here. To my knowledge "-i" is an adjectival ending in CE, that changed to "-è" in OS and was lost in Sindarin.

Or are you taking about a mediate suffix -jâ ? But then I don't understand, how it would yield _neledhi_.

Could you please explain it to me!

[Edited on 30/3/2005 by Ailinel]
Naneth
Elvish 101 Moderator
Posts: 568
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: March 31, 2005 06:02
I don't quite understand what you mean here. To my knowledge "-i" is an adjectival ending in CE, that changed to "-è" in OS and was lost in Sindarin.

In our revised adjective lesson, I have this suffix listed. No, it wasn't lost in Sindarin, but was in "more limited" use.

Or are you taking about a mediate suffix -jâ ? But then I don't understand, how it would yield _neledhi_.

Under "Erui", Tolkien writes in The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor: " ... -i, which could come from ēya, and from īya, remained also in (more limited) use; cf. Serni ..."

Note the similarity Tolkien shows us with "serni" and "neledhi":
sarnie > serni
neledie > neledhi

As a side note, the article by Didier Willis which suggests that "neledhi" might be an infinitive form of a verb containing "LED" was published in 1999. The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor, written by JRRTolkien, which explains the Sindarin adjectival suffix "-i", was published in VT42 in 2001.

Also, under "Serni", we find the statement: " an adjectival formation from S. sarn 'small stone, pebble' (as described above), or a collective, the equivalent of Q. sarnie (sarniye) 'shingle, pebble-bank'."
As a "collective", neledhi would also work .... three threes.
Ailinel
Council Member
Posts: 811
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: April 01, 2005 05:25
Naneth,
many thanks for your reply! I have a few further comments and questions respectively:


>In our revised adjective lesson, I have this suffix listed. No, it wasn't lost in Sindarin, but was in "more limited" use.

It appears to be in extremly limited use, since there doesn't exist any other Sindarin adjective with the suffix -i as far as I can see.


>Under "Erui", Tolkien writes in The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor: " ... -i, which could come from ēya, and from īya, remained also in (more limited) use; cf. Serni ..."

If you read the complete entry under "Erui", you may notice that Tolkien wanted to give a different explanation for the ending _-ui_ in _Erui_ here. In the first place he wrote: "...it has the very common adjectival ending -ui of Sindarin. [...]"
Against these words he added the note which you are quoting from.
This note and the elabroations under "Serni" ("An adjectival formation [...] or a collective [...]" give the impression, that Tolkien was trying to explain the etymology of these names, that he had created years ago.


>As a side note, the article by Didier Willis which suggests that "neledhi" might be an infinitive form of a verb containing "LED" was published in 1999. The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor, written by JRRTolkien, which explains the Sindarin adjectival suffix "-i", was published in VT42 in 2001.

As a side note in behalf of clarification: The sentence Lheben teil brann i annon... was written in 1936/37. "The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor" (VT42) was written in 1967-69.
Whatever Tolkien has stated in this essay regarding the etymology of the names _Serni_ and _Erui_ , it can not be applied at random to a Sindarin text from 1936.


>As a "collective", neledhi would also work .... three threes.


If you take a look at "Thror's Map" (AI:92), you might wonder why the text neledh neledhi .. should be translated by "three threes" or "three by three". The runes on the same drawing say clearly "five feet high the door and three may go abreast".
In addition, if you read "The Hobbit"(XI "On the Doorstep"), you will find the following description: "A door five feet wide and three broard was outlined...".

What a strange door it would be, only five feet high, where nine ("three threes" ?) persons might walk abreast...


[Edited on 1/4/2005 by Ailinel]
Naneth
Elvish 101 Moderator
Posts: 568
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: April 01, 2005 08:39
It appears to be in extremly limited use, since there doesn't exist any other Sindarin adjective with the suffix -i as far as I can see.
>>>> I was only quoting JRR Tolkien's exact words.

This note and the elabroations under "Serni" ("An adjectival formation [...] or a collective [...]" give the impression, that Tolkien was trying to explain the etymology of these names, that he had created years ago.
>>>> Yes, and at the same time giving us more valuable information about Sindarin.

As a side note in behalf of clarification: The sentence Lheben teil brann i annon... was written in 1936/37. "The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor" (VT42) was written in 1967-69.
Whatever Tolkien has stated in this essay regarding the etymology of the names _Serni_ and _Erui_ , it can not be applied at random to a Sindarin text from 1936.
>>>> What I was explaning was that "-i" may not have been known to be an adjectival suffix before The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor, nothing else.

"five feet high the door and three may go abreast".
>>>> Actually, the runes read "five feet high the door and three may walk abreast"

What a strange door it would be, only five feet high, where nine ("three threes" ?) persons might walk abreast...
>>>> By three threes I meant "three by three".

Lheben teil brann i·annon ar neledh neledhi gar godrebh
>>>> My main point in this whole discussion was that you can't use an "untranslated" sentence as an example for teaching. "Neledhi" might be a verb, it might not. Another "grey area" is the meaning of "gar". I believe "gar" has been translated by Tolkien in "A Secret Vice" as "went". It also means "place" in "Gar Thurion".

Here's a quote from CHostetter about "gar-" in the above quote being used for "can, be able":
"That is derived from David's interpretation of the Noldorin inscription on an early version of Thror's Map: Lheben teil brann i annon, ar neled neledhi gar godrebh as *'Five feet high [is] the door, and three can go through together'. This is a reasonable proposal (though not the only one), but there isn't any independent evidence I'm aware of to support the gloss of gar as 'can, be able'. In Etymologies N gar- refers to having, possessing, holding. In an earlier form of Noldorin, gar appears to have meant 'go' (MC:217)."

When we don't have a translation from the writer, how can we use the sentence to teach others ?? I would rather stick with translated attested examples such as Fíriel suggests .... "use of the gerund over the infinitive as secondary verbs, mainly because of the attested usage in the King's Letter."
Ailinel
Council Member
Posts: 811
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: April 02, 2005 01:19
> I was only quoting JRR Tolkien's exact words.

Yes, but nonetheless we don't see Sindarin adjectives with the suffix _-i_ in the attested material.


> Yes, and at the same time giving us more valuable information about Sindarin.
> What I was explaning was that "-i" may not have been known to be an adjectival suffix before The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor, nothing else.

To my knowledge _-i_ was certainly not known to be an adjectival suffix in Sindarin before "The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor".

What I wanted to explain was that Tolkien's conception of Sindarin in 1967/69 was definitely different from his conception in 1936/37. Thus by creating a new explanation of the phonology of _Erui_ and _Serni_ he gave us valuable information about this later conception.
The assumption that an untranslated word with the ending _-i_ like _neledhi_ , picked fom a sentence written in 1936/37, would fit in the new conception might be valid, especially with respect to the highly special words for numerals.
But on the other hand we have the attested N _egledhi_ (Etym:368 / VT45:27), suggesting the possibility of an infinitive _neledhi_.


> Actually, the runes read "five feet high the door and three may walk abreast"

Yes, of course it should be "walk".


>By three threes I meant "three by three".

Unfortunately I fail in understanding why "three threes" or "three units of three" is supposed to mean "three by three". Maybe this is due to the fact that English is not my native language?


> My main point in this whole discussion was that you can't use an "untranslated" sentence as an example for teaching. "Neledhi" might be a verb, it might not. Another "grey area" is the meaning of "gar". I believe "gar" has been translated by Tolkien in "A Secret Vice" as "went". It also means "place" in "Gar Thurion".

If you are referring to the lines of the poem:
_Damrod dir hanach dalath benn
ven Sirion gar meilien_ , ("A Secret Vice"),
a cross-reference to "The Grammar and Lexicon of the Gnomish Tongue" (PEXI) might be appropriate ( in order to give a clue to the people you are teaching), that this text is rather Goldogrin than Sindarin.
_Gar Thurion_ equally belongs to "The Books of Lost Tales".


>Here's a quote from CHostetter about "gar-" in the above quote being used for "can, be able":
"That is derived from David's interpretation of the Noldorin inscription on an early version of Thror's Map: Lheben teil brann i annon, ar neled neledhi gar godrebh as *'Five feet high [is] the door, and three can go through together'. This is a reasonable proposal (though not the only one), but there isn't any independent evidence I'm aware of to support the gloss of gar as 'can, be able'. In Etymologies N gar- refers to having, possessing, holding. In an earlier form of Noldorin, gar appears to have meant 'go' (MC:217)."

At least Carl Hostetter stated that "This is a reasonable proposal (though not the only one)".

>When we don't have a translation from the writer, how can we use the sentence to teach others ??

On the contrary, I'm not not attempting to "teach" others! I'm a simple board member and only a beginner in studying Sindarin! I was under the impression that this was a forum devoted to discussion.
Naneth
Elvish 101 Moderator
Posts: 568
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: April 02, 2005 12:46
But on the other hand we have the attested N _egledhi_ (Etym:368 / VT45:27), suggesting the possibility of an infinitive _neledhi_.

>>>> Yes, this is a possibility. That's all I want you to acknowledge, rather that make a statement like you did.
At least Carl Hostetter stated that "This is a reasonable proposal (though not the only one)".

>>>> If you recall my first post, it was ...... "Remember also that "-i" is an adjectival ending in Sindarin, so "neledh neledhi" could mean "three threes" or "three units of three" (three by three). This is in striking contrast to your seemingly definitive statement in response to Fíriel's post where she uses an actual "known form" of writing a phrase (seen in the King's Letter): "Why? We have the attested neledh neledhi gar godrebh, where gar is governing the infinitive neledhi."
And for anyone who is not familiar with this line, "Lheben teil brann i·annon ar neledh neledhi gar godrebh" was first interpreted by Hammond and Scull in "J.R.R Tolkien Artist & Illustrator" as "Five feet high the gate and three by three they go through together".
On the contrary, I'm not not attempting to "teach" others! I'm a simple board member and only a beginner in studying Sindarin! I was under the impression that this was a forum devoted to discussion.

>>>> Discussion is fine. Just please don't make definitive statements where they aren't warranted. Also, when a student is asking a question here, we like to stick to "attested" material when we give an answer. "Speculation" belongs in a different type of thread (scholarly discussion), not where students are asking for correction suggestions. When you say "We have the attested neledh neledhi gar godrebh, where gar is governing the infinitive neledhi." you are giving the impression that you are relying on something Sindarinists look to for answers, when in truth, this piece presents more questions than answers, and we don't have a translation anywhere for it.
Ailinel
Council Member
Posts: 811
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: April 02, 2005 11:53
Yes, you are right. In my first post I should have written: "We have the attested _neledh neledhi gar godrebh_, where _gar_ could be governing the infinitive _neledhi_".
I am sorry.

But with your permission I would like to draw your attention to a rather striking observation: In order to point the board rules out to me, you wrote:


Also, when a student is asking a question here, we like to stick to "attested" material when we give an answer. "Speculation" belongs in a different type of thread (scholarly discussion), not where students are asking for correction suggestions.


Nonetheless it seems questionable, whether you live up to those rules in your own posts, e.g. in your reply in the thread >Help is appreciated< ( 13.03. ), where you provided the following translation suggestion :
"Le, pulech toged guil nín na-chaered, palan-doged guil na-chaered.
(this line reads: you, you are able to lead my life away, to lead my life far away)"

Obviously you didn't feel the necessity to elaborate on _?**pulech_ here.

It makes me think of the classical proverb: >Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi<
Naneth
Elvish 101 Moderator
Posts: 568
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: A long list...
on: April 03, 2005 06:23
Obviously you didn't feel the necessity to elaborate on _?**pulech_ here.
No, I don't feel the need to comment. When a word is listed in Dragonflame, I find no reason to elaborate on what is already written. The person obviously already knows this is a neo-Sindarin word. As for the second person ending, it's been brought up many times in this forum that CHostetter has confirmed that "-ech" has been attested in Sindarin pronoun charts as a second person verbal ending.

If you find further need to argue over the point that "subjunctive mood" should be used for your statement, please take it to PM. Let's keep this thread open for Ranwen's original post.
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email