Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Languages » Sindarin Discussion » Can/Able
Author Topic:
Rinkwraith
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 12:07
Hi,

I'm having a few problems translating a phrase into Quenya (although a Sindarin translation would probably do).

Is it possible to say:
We can never go home
(i.e. we are not able to go home)

I hope this isn't too easy a question: I'm still at a very early stage of learning but haven't found any trace of what I'm after.

Kind regards,

R
Glorfindeil_sindar
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 05:04
An uir ú-gerim badad nan mbar!
[For eternity we are unable to go {to the} home]
Hope, this helps!
Rinkwraith
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 05:44
Thanks Glorfindeil, thats great.

Not overly familiar with Sindarin but as far as I know, it doesn't use an aorist tense for verbs?

I'm wondering whether if it were rendered into Quenya, I should use the aorist. If the time frame (to the best of the speakers knowedge) is 'never' or 'ever' etc. then is that an undetermined or duration-less period? Seems so to me.

But the context of the sentence (it including the word home) suggests that in the past, the speaker could have gone home or was there at some point. So would this stop you using the aorist?

Forgot how involved these languages were; its been a fair few years since I was into all of this.
Glorfindeil_sindar
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 07:33
Well, I don't not ANYTHING about Quenya!
But I've seen that some people use aorist in Sindarin!
I've even found a source in i-net which describes usage of aorist in Sindarin...
Although, such people and sources are very few so I wouldn't suggest that!
Rinkwraith
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 07:48
Suppose I'd better shift this into the quenya sub-forum now that I have the sindarin part of the answer.

I guess maybe they took the aorist from quenya and tried to evolve it to the sindarin forms?

Although that would be an odd thing to do; since as far as I know languages have tended to drop the aorist over time - not add it in. Could be wrong though - usually am.
Lambengolmo
Council Member
Posts: 239
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 02:41
Regarding the Quenya translation, I think the aorist would be best for this sentance:

Lá lertalvë oi lelya masenna.
We are not able to ever go home.
Fíriel
Enethdan Edhellen
Posts: 1369
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 09:22
Glorfindeil, a comment or two...

An uir ú-gerim badad nan mbar!
[For eternity we are unable to go {to the} home]
Hope, this helps!


Ú causes lenition and basic verbs form the gerund with -ed not -ad: an-uir ú-'erim baded nan mbar.

Rinkwaith, the existance of an aorist tense in Sindarin is a theory, and we certainly don't know how such tenses would be conjugated, although I believe Ryszard Derdzinski provides suggestions. See Appendix B of Fauskanger's 'Reconstructing the Sindarin Verb System' if you're further interested.

[Edited on 24/3/2005 by Fíriel]
Rinkwraith
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 23, 2005 10:49
Thanks Lambengolmo - good to see i was on the right lines at least. Don't you love it when you can get the translation you're after and learn something at the same time.

Pleased to see you use 'lelya marenna' as that's what I kinda thought it would be, but wasn't 100% sure whether the allative suffix was correct here. Guess I was thinking too much about english.

Fíriel, thanks for the link. Looks like an interesting article.
Glorfindeil_sindar
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 24, 2005 12:02
Ú causes lenition and basic verbs form the gerund with -ed not -ad: an-uir ú-'erim baded nan mbar.


You're right about "baded" but it's still "ú-gerim" not "ú-'erim" because I used "car-" (to be able) not "gar-" (to have, to possess)!!!
Rinkwraith
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 24, 2005 01:11
Since we're here, I might as well ask this one too.

I have quite a few versions of 'we are lost' in Quenya; does this look correct:
elmë nar vanwë
using an emphatic we (exclusive) pronoun.

If I wanted to use hecil (hecilo - masc.) that would presumably be hecilor -
elmë nar hecilor - we are forsaken (ones)

???

elmë nar hecilor, lá lertalmë oi leyla marenna.
Lambengolmo
Council Member
Posts: 239
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 25, 2005 09:17
Pleased to see you use 'lelya marenna' as that's what I kinda thought it would be, but wasn't 100% sure whether the allative suffix was correct here. Guess I was thinking too much about english.

English "go" and Quenya lelya are intransitive verbs and don't take objects. Put simply; I doubt the sentance "lelyalmë már" is any more valid in Quenya than the sentance "we go a house" is in English.

On a different note, elmë nar hecilor is grammatical. However, I don't know the context of these sentances, so I cannot be sure that your use of an emphatic pronoun and an "exclusive we" is correct.
Fíriel
Enethdan Edhellen
Posts: 1369
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 26, 2005 04:30
You're right about "baded" but it's still "ú-gerim" not "ú-'erim" because I used "car-" (to be able) not "gar-" (to have, to possess)!!!


Well, I still maintain that the proper lenition should be ú-'erim , for I'm aware that people have suggested it is gar- that can mean 'to be able' in addition to 'to have, to possess', as seen in the Noldorin phrase lheben teil brann i annon ar neledh neledhi gar godrebh (agreed translation 'five feet high the door and three can go-through together') -- also, car- means 'to do, to make', unless there's something in the newest VT issues that can elaborate?
Rinkwraith
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Can/Able
on: March 27, 2005 06:13
Thanks for your comments.

On a different note, elmë nar hecilor is grammatical. However, I don't know the context of these sentances, so I cannot be sure that your use of an emphatic pronoun and an "exclusive we" is correct.
Well its a line from gollum's song on the two towers soundtrack. Probably no shock to you there.

I guess my thinking was that the we refered to gollum and smeagol, his dual personality. I was originally going to try and use a dual pronoun, but from what I was reading, its less than clear exactly what the dual pronoun (or emphatic dual pronoun) would be. This uncertainty may have changed (?) and maybe you can tell me what it should be?

Failing that, I went for the emphatic 'we' exclusive - to stress that its gollum and himself who are lost/forsaken and not the person he's speaking to or anyone else.

The seperate pronoun (rather than an ending) was used because it looks nicer. I just prefer them, and again, the emphasis helps the meaning.

I'd really forgotten how much I actually like Quenya until I started doing this.
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email