In "The Quenta" (abbreviated as "Q"), Tolkien's 1930 version of his
mythology, the great river of East Beleriand (later called the
_Gelion_) bore for a time the somewhat unusual-looking name
_Flend_. This river is also labeled _Flend_ on the Eastward
Extension of the first 'Silmarillion' map, and in his notes to this
map Christopher Tolkien gives the following account of the name's
textual history (IV:232-33):

"In Q §14 the great river of East Beleriand was first named
_Ascar_, but since _Ascar_ was already in Q the name of the
northernmost of the tributaries from the Blue Mountains I
think that this was a mere slip (see p. 189 and footnote) for
_Flend_, to which it was emended. _Flend_ then > _Gelion_
as on the map."

The name _Flend_ is not translated, but it closely resembles N.
_flind, flinn_ 'fleet-footed, swift', found in the word-lists of
ENF, the "Early Noldorin Fragments" (PE13:143). This word probably
provides the first element in the name _Flinding_, the Elf of
Nargothrond later called _Gwindor_, whose fleetness of foot
proved his undoing in the Battle of Unnumbered Tears, when
he and the Elves of Nargothrond rushed within the very gates
of Angband, where they were slain or captured before
reinforcements could arrive (IV:117).

N. _flind, flinn_ is perhaps related to another form found in ENF:
_lhind, lhinn_ 'arrow' < *_p(i)lind-_, whence also Q. _pilin,
pilind-_ (PE13:149, 163) -- at this period, original initial *PL-
became LH- in Noldorin, for example, _plandá_ > _lhann_
'broad' (PE13:148). Given that initial P- as a root consonant
could have SP- as a variant (see the charts in the Qenya
Phonology, PE14:64), and given that initial SP- became F- in
early Noldorin (cf. *_spalk(w)e_ > N. _falch_ 'cleft, ravine',
PE13:143), it seems possible that *_p(i)lind-_, given in the
ENF as the source of N. _lhind_ and Q. _pilin_ 'arrow', might
have had a variant form *_sp(i)lind-_ (not recorded by Tolkien),
which was the source of N. _flind, flinn_ 'fleet-footed, swift' --
the original meaning of which was perhaps *'arrow-like, swift
as an arrow'.

Another phonological development found in the ENF word-lists is
final A-affection, the process by which the vowel I in a penultimate
syllable was lowered to E due to a final -A that was later lost.
This is common in later Noldorin and Sindarin, e.g., STINTÂ-
'short' > N. _thent_ (V:388). The clearest example of final
A-affection in the ENF occurs in _orerdh_ 'without bowels,
pitiless', for which Tolkien provides the primitive form *_ur'-irda_
(PE13:144). Another version of this entry in the ENF gives related
forms without final A-affection: N. _gir_ 'inwards, interior, inside,
heart' < *_3ird@_ (@ is used here to = schwa), and _girdh_
'entrails, bowels' < _3irdî_ (PE13:161).

Final A-affection may provide the means to connect N. _flind_
'fleet-footed, swift' with the river-name _Flend_. For if it is
plausible that _flind_ derives from *_sp(i)lind-_, then perhaps
_Flend_ is from *_sp(i)linda_, also meaning 'swift' -- certainly
a good name for a river. Though the "Quenta" of 1930 makes
no mention of the Flend being notably swift, the "Quenta
Silmarillion" of c. 1937 states that the Gelion "had neither fall
nor rapids throughout his course, but was ever swifter than
was Sirion" (V:262-63).

But why didn't Tolkien simply name this river the _Flind_? A
conceptual change from _flind, flinn_ > *_flend, flenn_
seems unlikely in light of the fact that the name _Flinding_
also occurs in the "Quenta". The first gloss of _flind, flinn_,
'fleet-footed', suggests that this adjective was perhaps
applied only to _persons_ (and perhaps animals), and it
may be that _flend_ was the form used in describing 'swift'
_things_, like rivers. Such a distinction in the form and use
of certain Elvish adjectives is well attested -- for example,
in the Gnomish Lexicon there is a three-fold distinction in
the word for 'merry':

_dairog_ 'merry (of persons)'.
_dairiol_ 'merry (of things)'.
_dairwed_ 'merry (common)'.

Similarly, in the _Etymologies_ the Noldorin word for 'old' when
referring to persons was _ingem_ 'yearsick' (V:399 s.v. YA-,
VT46:22), but _gern_ 'worn' when referring to things (V:360).

-- Patrick H. Wynne

On 04.09.2005, at 05:03, Patrick H. Wynne wrote:

> But why didn't Tolkien simply name this river the _Flind_? A
> conceptual change from _flind, flinn_ > *_flend, flenn_
> seems unlikely in light of the fact that the name _Flinding_
> also occurs in the "Quenta". The first gloss of _flind, flinn_,
> 'fleet-footed', suggests that this adjective was perhaps
> applied only to _persons_ (and perhaps animals), and it
> may be that _flend_ was the form used in describing 'swift'
> _things_, like rivers.

Leaving aside the question whether rivers (or trees, v.i.)
were classed as 'things' in Elvish, _flind_ can go back e.g.
to _*sp(i)lindi_, an adjectival form; or _*sp(i)lindê_, a more
concrete formation 'the swift thing'. _Flend_ should
go back to _*sp(i)lindâ_ as Patrick has noted.

An interesting parallel to this seems to be found in the name
_Sindar_. The underlying adjective is given as _*thindi_ 'grey, pale,
silvery grey' in both the Etymologies and e.g. XI:384. However, the
name of the people is from an (apparent) _*-â_ adjective (meaning
given as 'the Grey'). This latter adjectival formation could be used
with persons, as also suggested by Tolkien's statement that
_Celeborn_ contained _ornâ_ 'uprising, tall' as 2nd element. Whereas
_ornê_ 'tree' discribes a tall/uprising "thing" (UT:266).

It may be then, I think, that rivers were or could, at least when
being given concrete names, be 'coded' as animated and hence an
_-â_ adjective (as in _Sinda_) would be used. Or, it was at least not
incompatible.

A formation in _-ê_ wasn't used. However, that isn't necessarily due
to semantic constraints.

Rather, it seems quite possible that various strategies to form names
were available. In Indo-European you find nouns derived from
adjectives by means of internal or external derivation or, sometimes,
simply in the form of the adjective. The latter can be explained by
ellipsis. Cf. Modern Greek _neró_ 'water' which was originally just a
qualifying adjective ('clear, cool') with Old Greek _hydôr_ 'water'.
So, _Flend_ could stand for 'the swift' (scil. river). Of course,
very often a direct, zero derivation, without ellipsis is possible as
seemingly in _vanyar_ 'beautiful', 'the Beautiful/ Fair' etc. (The
same occurs in IE, cf. e.g. OIndic _devá-_ 'divine/god').

So maybe, _flend_ is simply an alternative adjectival form (i.e.
*_sp(i)lindâ_ next to _*sp(i)lindi_), or one  necessary because of
'animacy' or similar coding. At any rate, I think it can not be
assumed that a form in _-â_ was used in _Flend_  to denote a "thing".
Indeed, the word _orerdh_ < _*ur-irda_ cited by Patrick might speak
against that assumption as well. While things would indeed have no
pity, it seems a bit pointless to accuse a stone or the like of being
'pitiless' unless in a very 'poetic' diction, speaking with empathy
and assigning at least a certain degree of animacy to a thing. Yet,
that kind of use, I think, can justly be called ' very marked'.
Normally, then, _orerdh_ would be used with incarnate beings. One
could still maintain the idea that _orerdh_ although used with
persons was deliberately coded as "thing" to say such a thing as "you
have as much pity as a stone". However, the other examples adduced,
albeit from a later period of the language, seem to suggest otherwise.

Lastly, assuming an original abstract in _-â_ as in _galadâ_ 'great
growth' > 'tree' (UT:266) doesn't look promising. Do we have to
analyse GALA + DÂ ?

David Kiltz

--- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, David Kiltz <derdron@g...> wrote:

> Leaving aside the question whether rivers (or trees, v.i.)
> were classed as 'things' in Elvish, _flind_ can go back e.g.
> to _*sp(i)lindi_, an adjectival form; or _*sp(i)lindê_, a more
> concrete formation 'the swift thing'. _Flend_ should
> go back to _*sp(i)lindâ_ as Patrick has noted.

I would be more inclined to reconstruct the full primitive form of N.
_flind, flinn_ as *_sp(i)linde_, with short _-e_. I can't find any
examples in the ENF word-lists of a primitive adjective ending in
_-i_, but there are at least three examples there of primitive adjs.
in short _-e_:

*_ekse_ > N. _ech_ 'far away' (PE13:142)
*_pingwé_ > N. _hiw_ 'rich' (PE13:147)
*_t:loise_ > N. _tlui_ 'slender' (PE13:154)

[The acute accent in *_pingwé_ indicates stress rather than length
-- many primitive adjs. in ENF are marked as being stressed on the
final vowel, e.g., *_mburyá: > N. _boir, boer_ 'hot, raging' --
cp. the noun *_mbúrya:_ > N. _bordh_ 'heat, rage' (PE13:139).]

There is thus no suggestion in ENF that *_sp(i)linde_ (or *_-ê_)
would be a "more concrete formation". At any rate, N. _flind,
flinn_ is clearly translated as an adjective, 'fleet-footed, swift'.

Also please note that the primitive form I proposed as underlying
_Flend_ was *_sp(i)linda_ with short final _-a_, not *_sp(i)lindâ_.
There are many primitive adjectives in ENF ending in long *_-â_,
but there are also many that end in short *_-a_, such as *_ur'-irda_
> _orerdh_ 'without bowels, pitiless' (PE13:144), which I cited as an
example of final A-affection. Others include *_sleiwa_ > N. _lhui_
'pale', *_tegna_ > N. _tain_ 'straight', and *_stalga_ > N. _thala_
'valiant' (PE13:149,153). If Yahoo groups allowed us to use more
sophisticated typography, I would transcribe the final _-a_ in my
reconstructed form with both a macron and breve.

> So maybe, _flend_ is simply an alternative adjectival form (i.e.
> *_sp(i)lindâ_ next to _*sp(i)lindi_), or one  necessary because
> of 'animacy' or similar coding. At any rate, I think it can not be
> assumed that a form in _-â_ was used in _Flend_  to denote a
> "thing". Indeed, the word _orerdh_ < _*ur-irda_ cited by Patrick
> might speak against that assumption as well. While things would
> indeed have no pity, it seems a bit pointless to accuse a stone
> or the like of being 'pitiless' unless in a very 'poetic' diction,
> speaking with empathy and assigning at least a certain degree
> of animacy to a thing.

I would definitely not assert that at the time the ENF word-lists
were written the primitive adj. ending *_-a_, _-â_ was regularly
and consistently used across the board as a marker indicating
things rather than animates -- as you note, *_ur'-irda_ >
N. _orerdh_ 'without bowels, pitiless' argues against this!
However, it still strikes me as possible, even probable, that
*_sp(i)linde_ was used of persons and *_sp(i)linda_ of things,
i.e., that the difference in final vowel was used to make the
animate/inanimate distinction _in this particular pair of adjs._,
even though this semantic distinction of *_-e_ vs. *_-a_ was
not universal throughout the language.

For this seems to be the case with Gn. _dairog_ 'merry (of persons)'
and _dairiol_ 'merry (of things)'. _In this particular pair of adjs._,
the ending _-og_ is used to mark the adjective referring to people,
while _-iol_ marks that referring to things. But this distinction
between the use of _-og_ and _-iol_ does NOT appear in Goldogrin
as a whole -- in GL there are adjectives in _-og_ which seem most
logically to apply to things, e.g., _âlog_ 'of wood, wooden' and
_crithog_ 'circular', and there are adjectives in _-iol_ which seem
most logically to apply to persons, e.g., _cauthiol_ 'tasteful,
endowed with good taste -- discreet, circumspect' and _gwenniniol_
'maidenly, girlish'.

-- Patrick H. Wynne

--- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "laurifindil" <ejk@f...> wrote:

> "The Lord of the Rings: A Reader's Companion" by Wayne G.
> Hammond and Christina Scull should be published on :
> 10/25/2005. It will be a welcome volume !
>
> According to the Houghton Mifflin site
>
> <http://www.houghtonmifflinbooks.com/catalog/titledetail.cfm?
> titleNumber=689739>
>
> it will also have : "Translations and primers on how to use
> Tolkien's invented languages."
>
> Could W. G. Hammond or C. Scull tell us please a little more about
> that part? Is it something they wrote or a text (or texts) written by
> JRR Tolkien, or a mix?

Edouard, I'm sorry not to have seen this message and replied to it
sooner. Christina and I also had not seen the description on Houghton
Mifflin's site, and on Amazon US, which was written without
consulting us. This seems to extrapolate from our earliest proposal
for the book, and in the process ventures into a fantasy realm of its
own. We never promised "primers on how to use Tolkien's invented
languages"! though naturally, points of language enter into some of
our notes. Nor does Tolkien's "Nomenclature of The Lord of the Rings"
appear "for the first time". HarperCollins UK's original blurb (still
on Amazon UK) was inaccurate in a few respects too, after which we
wrote the following, which now appears on HarperCollins' sites in the
UK and Canada:

"In The Lord of the Rings: A Reader's Companion internationally
acclaimed scholars Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull examine
Tolkien's masterpiece chapter by chapter, offering expert insights
into its evolution, structure, and meaning. They discuss in close
detail important literary and historical influences on the
development of The Lord of the Rings, connections between that work
and other writings by Tolkien, errors and inconsistencies,
significant changes to the text during its fifty years of
publication, archaic and unusual words used by Tolkien, and words and
passages in his invented languages of Middle-earth. Thousands of
notes, keyed to standard editions of The Lord of the Rings but
universally accessible, reveal the richness and complexity of one of
the most popular works of fiction in our time. In addition to their
own expertise and that of other scholars and critics, Hammond and
Scull frequently draw upon comments by Tolkien himself, made in
letters to family, friends, and enthusiasts, in draft texts of The
Lord of the Rings, and in works written in later years which amplify
or illuminate characters and events in the story. Extensive reference
is made also to writings by Tolkien not previously or widely
published, including elaborate time-schemes, an unfinished manuscript
index to The Lord of the Rings, and most notably, the important
Nomenclature or guide to names in The Lord of the Rings prepared for
the use of translators, long out of print and now newly transcribed
and printed in its entirety. With these resources at hand, even the
most seasoned reader of The Lord of the Rings will come to a greater
enjoyment and appreciation of Tolkien's magnificent achievement."

I also note that in the American description our book is said to have
416 pages. Originally it was supposed to come in around 400-450
pages, but in the process of writing it demanded more and more, so
that (even with some cutting) our typescript ran to between 900 and
1,000 pages. HarperCollins is listing this at 976 pages, presumably
including the index. This posed some production problems, which we
understand have been solved by the use of a thinner paper, in order
to have a volume that isn't difficult to handle, and that (at least
in the UK) can be included in a boxed set with The Lord of the Rings
itself. HarperCollins are publishing the Reader's Companion
simultaneously in both hardcover and paperback, separately and in the
sets.

I should add that despite the similarity of titles (HarperCollins'
choice), The Lord of the Rings: A Reader's Companion is not the same
as The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide which Christina and I are
still working to complete. The first is a book of annotations to The
Lord of the Rings, the second a two-volume reference book on Tolkien.
The Reader's Companion, the 50th anniversary edition of The Lord of
the Rings, and our new index for LR (to be published beginning later
this year) have been more time-sensitive, so as to appear during the
anniversary years.

Wayne Hammond

In Lambengolmor post #799 I mentioned the "forgotten words" of
Elvish, attested forms that are generally "excluded from the
idiosyncratic canons of the neo-Elvish practitioners". Not all of
these words are early forms; personal names and place names
from Tolkien's later writings are also prone to being overlooked
or ignored. For example, Helge K. Fauskanger's Quenya-English
wordlist excludes many of the unique personal names found
on the chart of "The earlier generations of the Line of Elros" that
accompanies "Aldarion and Erendis" (UT:210) -- despite the fact
that many these names are readily translatable (e.g. _Manwendil_,
_Aulendil_, _Oromendil_) and present unique linguistic information
(e.g. the name _Vardilmë_ (Tar-Amandil's sister) evidently provides
the feminine form of the common masculine ending _-(n)dil)_,
and means *'Devoted to Varda').

One name on this chart that particularly caught my eye was _Axantur_.
This name (not in Fauskanger's list and never discussed on Elfling)
apparently consists of Q. _axan_ 'law, rule, commandment' (XI:399)
+ _tur_ 'lord, master' (cf. _Falastur_ 'Lord of the Coasts', LR:1020,
and _Turambar_ 'Master of Doom', S:217). Since _axani_ were not
simply human laws or rules but rather "laws, rules, as primarily
proceeding from Eru" (VT39:30) -- the Ten Commandments might
thus properly be termed _axani_ -- _Axantur_, lit. *'Law-lord', was
probably intended as *'Lord who acts in accordance with the
laws/commandments of Eru'.

There is much food for thought to be found in the other names on
this chart. It's a shame that there has been so little interest in
analysing them.

-- Patrick H. Wynne

Helge Fauskanger, in his Quenya-English wordlist, includes the
following two entries:

_vëa_ (1) "adult, manly, vigorous" (WEG)
_vëa_ (2) "sea" (MC:213, 214, 216; this is "Qenya" and certainly
obsoleted by # 1 above; use _ëar_ in LotR-style Quenya).

However, Fauskanger's assertion here that _vea_ 'sea' from the 1931
"Secret Vice" poems was "certainly obsoleted" by _vea_ 'vigorous' in
the _Etymologies_ is highly dubious in light of two Quenya personal
names found in Tolkien's later writings -- names that, coincidentally,
are not mentioned in Fauskanger's word-list.

One of these names is _Veantur_, which occurs in Tolkien's writings
on Númenor, dating to c. 1965, published in "Unfinished Tales".
_Veantur_ was discussed in several posts on Elfling in Jan. 2002,
at which time Anders Stenström noted the most plausible
translation of the name: "_Veantur_ (clearly 'Sea-master')" (msg.
#8320). This gloss is all the more likely given that in "A Description
of the Island of Númenor" we learn that Vëantur was "Captain of
the King's Ships under Tar-Elendil", who "first achieved the voyage
to Middle-earth" (UT:171). Vëantur is similarly described in
"Aldarion and Erendis" (UT:173) and "The Line of Elros" (UT:219).

The other personal name clearly pointing to the post-Etymologies
survival of _vea_ 'sea' is _Vëandur_, name of the third son of
Isildur in "The Heirs of Elendil", a text apparently dating to the
early 1950s (XII:191). _Vëandur_ literally means *'sea-servant',
probably in the sense 'mariner' -- cp. Tolkien's translation of
_Eärendur_ as '(professional) mariner' (L:386), with _-(n)dur_
derived from a base meaning 'to serve' (ibid.). Vëandur's name
is very much in accord then with those of his two elder brothers,
who also bore names with a maritime theme: _Kiryandil_ (*'Devoted
to Ships') and _Eärnur_, a shorter form of _Eärendur_ 'mariner'.
Isildur's 4th son, Valandil, was the odd man out; his name means
*'Devoted to the Valar'.

The names of the three elder sons of Isildur were later changed, and
appear in "The Disaster of the Gladden Fields" (c. 1968 or later) as
_Elendur_, _Aratan_, and _Ciryon_ (see XII:208, UT:271) -- and
although the first two names no longer refer to seafaring (they
must mean *'Elf/Star-servant' and *'Noble Man' respectively), the
maritime sense is retained in Veantur's new name _Ciryon_
*'Ship-man, mariner'.

Given the strong maritime associations of the characters called
_Veantur_ and _Veandur_, it seems highly unlikely that Tolkien
intended their names to mean *'vigorous-lord' and *'vigorous-
servant'. Fauskanger's flat assertion that _vea_ 'sea' was "certainly
obsoleted" by _vea_ 'adult, manly, vigorous' does not hold up in
light of all the available evidence.

-- Patrick H. Wynne

Patrick Wynne mentioned in message #821 of this list the name _Vëantur_,
besides _Vëandur_, as occurrences of Quenya _vea_ 'sea' in late writings.

Another interesting issue of the name _Veantur_, is the _n_ after _vea_.
This was already discussed in Elfling, where Anders Stenström suggested that
the word for 'sea' might have been changed by Tolkien from _vea_ to *_vean_
(msg. #8320), and Helge Fauskanger replied that probably the suffix _-tur_
alternated with _-ntur_, perhaps by analogy with _-ndil_ and _-ndur_, as
"there is also _Feanturi_ for 'Masters of Spirits', and we know that _fea_
'soul, spirit' wasn't changed to **_fean_" (msg. #8417). Actually in UT:210
we may have another example of _-ntur_: _Malantur_, that could come from
the Q. stem _mala-_ 'gold'. Cp. _malta_ < *_malatâ_ 'gold' in LR:1096, as
well as root MALA(2) related to 'yellow' in QL, (S)MAL- in Etym. and VT45:32,
etc. (I thank Patrick Wynne for pointing out these counterarguments in the
editorial process of this post).

However, it is interesting to see that this "intrusive" _n_ after _vea_ also
occurred in _Veaneldar_, a name for the 'Sea-elves' in a table of the divisions
of the Qendi written in the early thirties (V:403). This case was explained
by Christopher Gilson as the genitive form of _vea_, that "serves to break
up the hiatus that would occur if it were formed with the uninflected stem,
**_vea-eldar_" (VT36:20). Obviously, such an explanation cannot be transferred
to the case of _Veantur_, written in a conceptual stage when the the common
Quenya genitive inflexion was _-o_ (pl. _-(r)on_), not _-n_. But it led
me to think that _Veantur_ could show _another_ inflexion of _vea_, as an
alternative explanation to the variation _-tur_ / _-ntur_.

I was thinking in particular on the old plural in _-m_: *_veam_ > Q. *_vean_
(see a discussion on this old plural suffix by Patrick Wynne in VT47:25).
This could have been used as a collective noun ('the seas'), used frequently
instead of, or alternatively to the singular _vea_, and thus the old plural
would have been preserved.

I am aware that this collective function would have been properly covered
by the general or complete plural *_vear_; but the old plural might have
been favoured, not only by "fossilization" due to a frequent use, but in
compounds with another _r_ by dissimilation (instead of **_Veartur_, for
instance): the other possibility, the Old Quenya plural *_veai_, would have
been less euphonic. The partitive plural *_veali_ perhaps was a good
alternative,
though, like happened with _má_ 'hand', pl. _máli_ (VT47:6, 12, 17-18).

And all this discussion could also be applied to the name _Fëantúri_.

Another interesting issue is the etymology of _vea_ 'sea'. Philip Jonsson
mentioned in Elfling (msg. #8379) its possible relation to the root WAY-
'enfold' of the Etymologies (and I would add VAYA 'enfold, wind about' in
PE12:100), under which we may find several terms associated to the sea (though
specifically related to the 'Outer Sea'). These roots show forms beginning
with _vai-_, derived from primitive forms with long _a_; but *_vaya_ (first
_a_ short) would actually give _vea_, like _fëa_ < _phaya_ (first _a_ with
breve, X:349), as David Salo noted in Elfling msg. #8496. (I thank again
Patrick for his observations on this matter.)

But complementarily, I think that a relation with WEY- 'wind, weave'
(referring to the movement of the sea) is also possible, as in Etym. it is
told that in Q. _wei_ > _wai_, and thus WEY-, WAY- were confused.
Moreover, the word *_weya_ itself could have given Q. _vea_, if that
_eya_ behaved like the pre-accented hiatus _éia_ (with inverted breve
under _i_) > _ea_ as told in the Qenya Phonology (PE12:12, where
_áia_ > _ea_ is also mentioned).

Helios

Hello,

I have been invited to the SILF, which this year is hosted by the
University of Helsinki
http://www.helsinki.fi/romaanisetkielet/congres/index_eng.htm  to
talk about Quenya and Finnish.

The SILF ended yesterday. About 150 linguists participated, mostly
French, but also Greek, Lebanese, Turkish, Spanish, and Finnish (it
was not open to the public, a few students were in).

My talk lasted (as usual in such conferences) 20 mins. with 10 mins.
of discussion. About 10 linguists participated, but remember that
there were 3 conferences at the same time in other rooms. Still, I
cannot say that it was a "big" success. But I am the only professional
linguist in that "very special" field...

Later on, we had a few talks and others who not knowing anything
about the subject became quite interested in it and asked to know
more.

I hope to make three conferences next year, including (at least one)
in the US.

As far as I know, it is the first time ever that a talk about Tolkien's
ConLang was presented at International Conf. of Linguistics.

elfiquement vôtre,

Edouard Kloczko

"Patrick H. Wynne" <pwynne@...> wrote, regarding the chart
of "The earlier generations of the Line of Elros" (UT:210):

> ... many these names are readily translatable (e.g. _Manwendil_,
> _Aulendil_, _Oromendil_) and present unique linguistic information
> (e.g. the name _Vardilmë_ (Tar-Amandil's sister) evidently provides
> the feminine form of the common masculine ending _-(n)dil)_,
> and means *'Devoted to Varda').

Although _Isilme_ has an appropriate meaning, don't you think it
could have a link with the meaning of _Vardilme_ in that case ?

David Giraudeau

[I don't think so -- _Isilme_ as a personal name on the chart is
probably identical to _isilme_ 'moonlight' (MC:222-23), which
occurs in the late version of "The Last Ark" dating to the last
decade of Tolkien's life, and this appears to end in the noun
suffix _-me_ seen in a large number of words describing abstract
concepts, e.g. _undume_ 'abyss', _yaime_ 'wailing', and _kelume_
'flowing, flood (tide), stream', also in the late "Ark" poem and
glossary. The _Etymologies_ does give abstract _nilme_ 'friendship'
as a derivative of NIL-, (N)DIL- 'friend', and this _could_ be present
in an otherwise unattested suffixed form *_-(n)dilme_ in _Vardilme_,
which would then mean *'Friendship of Varda'. If so, then _Isilme_
and _Vardilme_ would both share the abstract ending _-me_,
though beyond that there would be no connection in _meaning_.

However, I think it more likely that _-me_ in _Vardilme_ is instead
the feminine equivalent of agentive _-mo_, seen in such names as
_Ulmo_ 'The Pourer, The Rainer' (S:352) and _Irmo_ 'Desirer' (S:336).
Also cp. (masc.) _nilmo_ 'friend' < (N)DIL- in the _Etymologies_. On
the basis of Tolkien's later gloss of (N)DIL as 'to love, be devoted to'
(L:386), _-dilme_ is probably *'she who loves, she who is devoted (to)',
hence my proposed gloss of _Vardilme_ as *'Devoted to Varda'.
-- PHW]

I wrote, in commenting on David Giraudeau's query:

> However, I think it more likely that _-me_ in _Vardilme_ is instead
> the feminine equivalent of agentive _-mo_, seen in such names as
> _Ulmo_ 'The Pourer, The Rainer' (S:352) and _Irmo_ 'Desirer'
> (S:336). Also cp. (masc.) _nilmo_ 'friend' < (N)DIL- in the
> _Etymologies_.

I should also have noted that a clear example of this feminine
agentive _-me_ appears in the _Etymologies_ s.v. SER- 'love, be
fond of (of liking, friendship)': _serme_ 'friend', feminine form
of masc. _sermo_.

Moreover, if we are to consider it a secondary possibility that
_Vardilme_ might end instead in the abstract ending _-me_
(the ending _-dilme_ perhaps being a form of Q. _nilme_
'friendship'), then we should also consider the secondary
possibility that _Isilme_ might end in fem. _-me_, i.e., _Isilme_
= 'Moon Woman' (Q. _Isil_ 'Moon').

This having been said, application of Occam's Razor suggests
that _Isilme_ is probably 'Moonlight' and _Vardilme_ probably
means *'Devoted to Varda'.

-- Patrick H. Wynne

Not only do we have _Isilme_ — as a female name I would translate it in English
'Moonshine', sounds more feminine to me than just 'Moonlight' ;-) — but also its
male counterpart _Isilmo_ *'Moon(light)-one' (UT:220,226).

Namárië,

Edouard Kloczko

In my post (message #820) on the name _Axantur_ I wrote that this
name apparently consists of Q. _axan_ 'law, rule, commandment'
(XI:399) + _tur_ 'lord, master', and concluded:

> Since _axani_ were not simply human laws or rules but rather "laws,
> rules, as primarily proceeding from Eru" (VT39:30) -- the Ten
> Commandments might thus properly be termed _axani_ -- _Axantur_,
> lit. *'Law-lord', was  probably intended as *'Lord who acts in
> accordance with the laws/commandments of Eru'.

Edouard Kloczko mentioned to me off-list that he would translate
_Axantur_ instead as 'Theologian', and I think this is much closer
to the mark than my suggestion above. The literal sense of the
name would be *'Law-master', i.e. 'one who has mastered (acquired
thorough knowledge of) the laws of Eru'.

Edouard's interpretation is even more compelling in light of the
name of Axantur's father, _Nolondil_ *'Lover of Wisdom' (UT:210).
According to "The Shibboleth of Fëanor", the prefix _ñolo-_ in
_Ñolofinwë_ (Quenya name of Fingolfin) "was the stem of words
referring to wisdom" (XII:344). A footnote to this remark adds:
"'Wisdom' -- but not in the sense 'sagacity, sound judgment (founded
on experience and sufficient knowledge)'; 'Knowledge' would be
nearer, or 'Philosophy' in its older applications which included
Science" (XII:359-60). It seems, then, that _Nolondil_ could best
be translated as *'Philosopher'; Greek _philosophos_ 'lover of
wisdom', from _philein_ 'to love' and _sophos_ 'wise', closely
matches the literal etymology of the Quenya form.

Thus Axantur son of Nolondil appears to be 'Theologian' son of
'Philosopher'. Interestingly, both Nolondil and Axantur were youngest
sons, each with elder brothers preceding them in the line of
succession to the throne. The unlikelihood of their ever being
required to take up the kingship of Númenor, Tolkien seems to
imply, left them with more opportunities to indulge in purely
intellectual pursuits.

-- Patrick H. Wynne

A question remains : were _Axantur_  *'Theologian', and _Nolondil_
*'Philosopher' Númenorian Proper Names only or also lexemes of
Quenya?

I don't remember that an Elf ever bore a name in _-ndur_, or _-ndil_
in the Corpus, only Númenoreans did.

Then, _Nolondil_ (< _ñolo-ndil_) was a Proper Name used by
Númenoreans, not a lexeme of Quenya, used for a 'philosopher',
as far as I can tell.

We have other names in _-tur_ 'master, lord', _Ciryatur, Sorontur,
Minyatur_, etc. But then _-tur_ is not used as a suffix in Quenya
word-formation only as a base (_turkildi_, V:47; _Turko_, XII:352).
Then again,  _Axantur_ was a Proper Name used by Númenoreans
(? and maybe Elves), not a lexeme of Quenya.

Edouard Kloczko

[I don't see any compelling reason to suppose that _axantur_
and _nolondil_ were not simply the usual common nouns used
in Quenya to mean 'theologian' and 'philosoper'. I cannot find
any examples of a common noun ending in _-(n)tur_, though
this is not necessarily an indication that this suffix was only used
in personal names. Quenya unquestionally _did_ form common
nouns with _-ndil_ and _-ndur_, e.g., _arandil_ 'king's friend,
royalist' and _arandur_ 'king's servant, minister' (L:386).

A note to "The Shibboleth of Fëanor" states that "Nerdanel's
father was an 'Aulendil' [> 'Aulendur']" (XII:365), and the use
of the indefinite article _an_ before _Aulendil/Aulendur_ seems
to indicate that this was perceived as a common noun, though
capitalized since it begins with a proper name. (_Aulendur_ is
glossed "'Servant of Aulë', sc. one who was devoted to that
Vala".) Compare English _Luddite_ 'a person opposed to new
technology', a common noun capitalized because it derives
from the name of Ned _Lud_, an early opponent of technology
notorious for destroying machinery.

The same note cited above shows that some Elves did bear
personal names in _-ndil_, for it is said that Nerdanel's father
Sarmo was more widely known as _Urundil_ 'copper-lover'
(XII:366). But there seems no doubt that the endings _-ndil_,
_-ndur_ were far more frequently used in the formation of the
names of Men than they were in the names of Elves. -- PHW]

In Chapter IV "The Calendars" in _The Peoples of Middle-earth_, Christopher
Tolkien
presents the early workings (c. 1949–50) for Appendix D of _The Lord of the
Rings_.
Among this material is the "calendar of the New Era" (XII:133-36), the reformed
calendar
used in Gondor in the Fourth Age. In the "New Era" calendar, the first day of
the year is
named Q. _Entarë_ [<< _Entalë_]. This was the predecessor of _yestarë_, "the
first day of
the year" in Appendix D as published.

_Entarë_ is labeled "Year's beginning" on the chart on XII:134, which suggests
that the
name could be analyzed as *_enta_ 'begin(ning)' + _arë_ 'day' (XII:127 -- in
this earlier
material, _arë_ appears rather than _ré_ as the word for a 24-hour 'day'; also
cp.
_Arendiën_ 'Midyear's Day' on the New Era chart). In the earlier form _Entalë_,
the ending is
instead the abstract noun suffix _-le_, as in _quentale_ 'narration, History'
(VT39:16),
_Erulaitalë_ 'Praise of Eru' (UT:166), etc.

If *_enta_ in _Entarë_ does in fact mean 'beginning', then it perhaps is a
derivative of *EÑ-
'be, exist', whence Q. _ëa_ 'it is, exists' (pa.t. _enge_) and _engwe_ 'thing'
(VT39:6-7,
VT43:58). The Early Qenya Grammar notes that the verbal suffix _-(n)ta_ "is
sometimes
inceptive" (PE14:56), so *_eñ-_ 'exist' + inceptive _-(n)ta_ might have yielded
*_enta-_, lit.
'come into existence', hence 'begin'.

This also suggests an alternative etymology for the form _yestarë_ that replaced
_Entarë_.
Fauskanger suggests in his Quenya-English wordlist that *_yesta_ 'first' in this
form is in
origin a modification of Q. _esta_ 'first' in the _Etymologies_ s.v. ESE-, ESET-
'precede',
whence also Q. _esse_ 'beginning'. On the other hand, given the apparent
derivation of
_Entarë_ < *EÑ- 'be, exist', perhaps *_yesta_ is related, not to ESE-, ESET- but
rather to YÊ,
Î- "stem of verb to be" (VT46:22), seen in forms such as _yé_ 'is' and _yéva_
'will be' in
Fíriel's song (V:72). This might account for the seeming disappearance of _yé_
as 'is' after
the _Etymologies_ and "Lost Road" period -- the word was perhaps reimagined, not
as
'to be', but as 'to begin, come into being'. The _-s-_ in *_yesta_ might
indicate that
Tolkien modified the stem from YÊ- > *YES-, or *_yesta_ might be analyzed as
_ye-_
'begin' + gerundive ending *_-sta_ -- cp. N. _haust_ 'bed' < *_khau-stâ_, lit.
'rest-ing' <
KHAW- 'rest, lie at ease' (V:364).

-- Patrick H. Wynne

In the "New Era" calendar of c. 1949-50 (XII:133-136), the 12
months of the year are divided into five seasons -- Spring,
Autumn, and Stirring have two months each, and Summer and Winter
have three months each. As Christopher Tolkien notes on p. 135,
the Quenya names of the months on this early calendar are almost
identical to those familiar from Appendix D to _The Lord of the
Rings_: _Víressë_ 'April', _Lótessë_ 'May', _Nárië_ 'June', etc.

On the back of the table giving the second version of the "New
Era" calendar is a list of alternative Quenya names for the
months (XII:135). These alternative names are regularly formed
by sequential addition of the prefixes _er-_, _nó-_, and _mete-_
to the name of the season in which a month falls; for example,
the two months in _Tuilë_ 'Spring', _Víressë_ 'April' and
_Lótessë_ 'May', have the alternative names _Ertuilë_ and
_Nótuilë_, respectively. Similarly, the three months of _Lairë_
'Summer' have the alternative names _Ellairë_ (June), _Nólairë_
(July), and _Metelairë_ (August); and so on through the months
comprising _Quellë_ 'Autumn', _Hrívë_ 'Winter', and _Coirë_
'Stirring'. These alternative names do not appear in any form in
Appendix D, since the arrangement of the months into alternating
groups of two and three was a feature that did not survive in
the published text of Appendix D.

THE QUENYA PREFIXES _ER-, NÓ-, METE-_

The alternative name of the first month of each season in the
"New Era" calendar begins with the prefix _er-_, which must mean
'first': _Ertuilë_ *'First-spring', _Ellairë_ *'First-summer'
(with assimilation of RL > LL), _Errívë_ *'First-winter', etc.
This use of _er-_ is unusual, for in Tolkien's later writings
the stem meaning 'one, first in a series' is MIN, whereas ER
means 'single' (non-serial) -- cf. the 1969 essay "The Rivers
and Beacon-hills of Gondor" (VT42:24). Moreover, this
distinction between these two stems dates back to the Early
Qenya Grammar of 1923, which cites _min_ 'one (in a series)' and
_minya_ 'first', vs. _er_ 'one (only, alone)' and _erya_ 'only,
single' (PE14:82); so also in the _Etymologies_, which has Q.
_er_ 'one, alone' and _erya_ 'single, sole' < ERE- 'be alone,
deprived', vs. Q. _mine_ 'one' and _minya_ 'first' < MINI-
'stand alone, stick out'.

Another example of this atypical use of ER instead of MIN in the
sense 'first' occurs in a preliminary list of the names of the
rivers of Gondor (VII:312), which includes N. _Ereg_
'First' (for ordinal _-eg_, cp. _Lhefneg_ 'Fifth' on the same
list). S. _Erui_, which replaced _Ereg_ in LotR (LR:857), was
thus perhaps intended to mean 'First' when it was originally
coined, but Tolkien later stated flatly in "The Rivers and
Beacon-hills" that _Erui_ cannot mean 'first', for "in Eldarin
_er_ was not used in counting in series: it meant 'one, single,
alone'" (VT42:10), a sense appropriate for the Erui because of
the rivers of Gondor it "was the only one without a
tributary" (ibid.).

The second month of each season has an alternative name
beginning in _nó-_, apparently meaning *'after' or *'next' --
cp. the preposition _nó, no_ 'after (only of time)' and the
adverb _no_ 'then, next (of time)' given in QL as derivatives of
the root NÔ- 'ahead, in front; after, of time; tomorrow'. Thus
_Nótuilë_ *'After-spring' (or *'Next-spring'), _Nólairë_
*'After-summer', etc.

The alternative name of the third months of summer and winter
begin with the prefix _mete-_ *'end' or *'last' < MET- 'end',
whence Q. _metta_ 'ending' and _métima_ 'ultimate, final'
(V:373, LR:946, MC:222) -- thus _Metelairë_ *'Last-summer' and
_Meterrívë_ *'Last-winter' (these were later emended to
_Mettelairë, Metterrívë_).

THE NOLDORIN PREFIXES _EB-/EPH-_, _CAD-/CATH-_

The page of alternative names also includes a list of the usual
names of the seasons and months in Noldorin (almost identical to
the Sindarin forms given in Appendix D), along with a few
alternative names.

The most easily analyzable of the alternative Noldorin forms are
those for the second and third months of _Rhíw_ 'Winter': N.
_Ephriw_ (December) and _Cathriw_ (January). When we diagram the
three months of winter with their Q. and N. alternative names --

WINTER:
November -- Q. Errívë
December -- Q. Norrívë   -- N. Ephriw
January  -- Q. Meterrívë -- N. Cathriw

-- it is readily apparent that the N. prefix _eph-_ corresponds
to Q. _nó-_ *'after, next', and N. _cath-_ to Q. _mete-_ *'last,
end'.

N. _eph-_ seems clearly cognate with Q. _ep-_ 'after' in
_epessë_ 'after-name' (UT:266), with the P spirantizing to PH in
contact with the voiceless RH of _Rhíw_ 'Winter'. The same stem
occurs in Q. _epe_ 'before', a word used to introduce the second
element of a comparison (VT44:38). The apparent contradiction of
the same stem meaning both 'before' and 'after' is probably
illusory -- we have already noted that according to QL, the root
NÔ- means 'after' when referring to _time_, but also 'ahead, in
front', probably in a _spatial_ sense. Thus an _epessë_ was a
nickname given to a person later in life _after_ they had
already received their father-name and mother-name, and _Ephriw_
December, lit. *'After-winter', was the month that came _after_
November, the first month of Winter. On the other hand, in a
comparison such as "A is brighter than B", 'than' was rendered
by _epe_ 'before', since A was apparently viewed metaphorically
as standing _before_ B in an imagined scale of brightness.

N. _cath-_ is apparently derived from _cata_ (also _ca, cana_)
'behind, at back of place' (from a list of prepositions dating
to the mid-1950s; VT43:30), with the T spirantized to TH in
contact with the RH in _Rhíw_. The sense intended is probably
'last' in the sense 'hindmost, at the end' (of the three-month
sequence) -- apparently the stem _cata_ did not have the sense
variation between 'before' and 'after' dependent on spatial
versus temporal reference seen in _ep-, epe_ and NÔ-.

Thus far the Noldorin alternative names seem relatively
straightforward. However, the etymologies offered above run into
a major problem when we take into account the alternative names
for the _summer_ months:

SUMMER:
June   -- Q. Ellairë -- N. Ebloer
July   -- Q. Nólairë -- N. Cadloer
August -- Q. Metelairë

There can be little doubt that phonologically N. _eb-_ and
_cad-_ in _Ebloer_ and _Cadloer_ are simply non-spirantized
variants of N. _eph-_ and _cath-_ in _Ephriw_ and _Cathriw_;
_eb-_ < *_ep-_ and _cad-_ < *_cat-_. However, assuming that the
translations of _eph-_ and _cath-_ proposed above are accurate,
we are faced with a semantic conundrum -- for _Ebloer_,
apparently *'After-summer', is the name of June, the _first_
month of summer; and _Cadloer_, apparently *'Last-summer', is
the name of July, the second rather than last month of summer.

"Homer nodded" argumentation is too often resorted to in order
to explain apparent inconsistencies in Tolkien's languages, but
it seems to me that in this instance it is highly likely that
Tolkien did in fact make a mistake, and that his actual
intention was that _Ebloer_ and _Cadloer_ were the alternative
names of July and August respectively, rather than of June and
July.

The text itself seems to provide a mechanism that could explain
how this mistake occurred. The list of Quenya alternative names
on the page is followed by the list of the usual Noldorin names
for the months (arranged into groups of two and three labeled by
season), and below this appears the list of alternative Noldorin
names. As noted above, N. _eph-_ corresponds to Q. _nó-_
*'after, next' (so that N. _Ephriw_ = Q. _Norrívë_), and the
same would of course be true of the variant _eb-_. It seems
possible that as Tolkien set out to write the alternative N.
month-names, he glanced up to the Quenya list to see which
summer month began with the corresponding prefix _nó-_, but his
eye was caught instead by N. _Nórui_ 'June', which also begins
with the letters _nó-_ (though the first element in _Nórui_ is
actually unrelated, *_nór-_ < *_nâr-_ 'sun'). This led Tolkien
to mistakenly assign _Ebloer_ to June, and _Cadloer_ as July
naturally followed on the heels of this.

Tolkien returned to this list ("much later", according to
Christopher Tolkien) and emended _Ebloer_ and _Cadloer_ to
_Eblaer_ and _Cadlaer_, though their assignation to June and
July were allowed to stand. This might argue against assuming a
mistake on Tolkien's part, but when making later changes to the
list Tolkien was perhaps focusing entirely on the Elvish forms
themselves and not paying attention to the meanings assigned to
them. If _Ebloer_ and _Cadloer_ as June and July are _not_
mistakes, then I am at a loss to explain how their prefixes
relate semantically to _Ephriw_ and _Cathriw_.

-- Patrick H. Wynne

Both the _Vinyar Tengwar_ and _Parma Eldalamberon_ errata lists have
been updated:

http://www.elvish.org/errata/

I'd like to thank Diego Seguí for reporting the bulk of these new
errata, and of course Per Lindberg for his continued maintenance of
these lists.

I would like to draw everyone's attention to a significant new
contribution to the linguistic and comparative study of the
phenomenon of vowel affection in Noldorin and Sindarin, made by
Bertrand Bellet (link is to an RTF file):

<http://sindarin.weet.us/affection.rtf>

Bertrand's abstract:
"Vowel affection is a prominent phonological process in the
morphology of J. R. R. Tolkien’s Sindarin and Noldorin. This feature
appeared in the late stages of his Gnomish and remained in his series
of Welsh-inspired languages ever after. Its various kinds and the
terminology used to describe them are first introduced cross-
linguistically, with special reference to Celtic and Germanic
languages. Patterns of vowel alternations in Sindarin and Noldorin
from the Etymologies onwards are then examined synchronically: plural
formation, variation between related morphemes, alternations linked
to affixation and composition are successively considered. From these
data a model is elaborated to explain the diachronic development of
vowel affection, by means of comparison with Quenya and internal
reconstruction, as well as examination of Tolkien’s own indications.
The model includes five stages : lowering of high vowels by A-
metaphony, conditioned lowering of U to O, raising of mid vowels by I-
metaphony, fronting of back vowels by a later I-metaphony, and
finally breaking caused by palatalised consonants. In each case a
brief phonetic explanation is given with a list of relevant examples;
difficult cases and limits of the model are also discussed. Finally,
this reconstructed phonological history is compared to the
development of Welsh and the Germanic languages, in order to
appreciate how far Tolkien used them as models when he built his
languages."

_The Collected Vinyar Tengwar_ Vol. 4 is now available

Volume 4 of _The Collected Vinyar Tengwar_ collects issue 31–40, and
is available for order on the E.L.F. Storefront at Lulu.com
(<http://www.lulu.com/ELF/>) or from the Vinyar Tengwar Web Shop
(<http://www.elvish.org/VT/shop.html>). Note that each volume is offered
in  two different bindings: Perfect (i.e. as a typical softcover book)
and Coil (which allows the issue to open and lie flat, for ease of
reference).

(Once again, I am exceedingly grateful to E.L.F. member Karyn Traphagen
for her hugely generous assitance in preparing these volumes for
publication. Please send her your good thoughts and warm wishes!)


--
========================================================================
=================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."

I have discovered a font-related problem in the first version of the
_CVT_ vol. 4 (_not_ affecting vol. 5a). I have a work-around, and
will release the corrected version later today. However, I notice
that a few people have already ordered copies of the first version.
If you ordered one of these copies, please contact me directly with
your order number and your address, and I will have corrected
replacement copies mailed to you at no charge.

Carl

The corrected version is now available for order.

Those of you who ordered the first version: although the window to do
so seems VERY tight indeed, it might be possible to cancel your order
through your Lulu account. Please try to do so, and if successful
simply place a new order, before you contact me with the replacement
information.


On Oct 28, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

> I have discovered a font-related problem in the first version of the
> _CVT_ vol. 4 (_not_ affecting vol. 5a). I have a work-around, and
> will release the corrected version later today. However, I notice
> that a few people have already ordered copies of the first version.
> If you ordered one of these copies, please contact me directly with
> your order number and your address, and I will have corrected
> replacement copies mailed to you at no charge.
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
> ~-->
> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your
> home page
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GP4qlB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ~->
>
> List guidelines: http://www.elvish.org/LambengolmorList/
> Bibliography and abbreviations: http://www.elvish.org/Tengwestie/
> conventions.phtml
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

If canceling your order (and then making a new order) is not an
option, then on further reflection I would like to ask those of you
who ordered a copy of the first, flawed version, to please wait and
see what arrives before writing me (directly) for a replacement.
Karyn has pointed out to me, quite correctly, that Lulu usually does
not begin production of an order until a few days have lapsed, due to
their production schedules. Therefore, it is possible that, since I
have now replaced the production files with corrected versions, what
you receive will have been made from the corrected files. (A quick
way to tell will be to look at page 33 of issue 31 in the collection,
under the entry _thorn_ 'eagle'. If in the third line of that entry
you see "Ï€oron" (i.e., with an initial Greek "pi" character) instead
of "þoron" (i.e., with an initial Old English "thorn" character), you
got the uncorrected version, and need to contact me for a replacement.

Sorry for all the bother!

Carl


On Oct 28, 2005, at 5:31 PM, Carl F. Hostetter wrote:

> The corrected version is now available for order.
>
> Those of you who ordered the first version: although the window to do
> so seems VERY tight indeed, it might be possible to cancel your order
> through your Lulu account. Please try to do so, and if successful
> simply place a new order, before you contact me with the replacement
> information.
>
>
> On Oct 28, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Carl F. Hostetter wrote:
>
>
>> I have discovered a font-related problem in the first version of the
>> _CVT_ vol. 4 (_not_ affecting vol. 5a). I have a work-around, and
>> will release the corrected version later today. However, I notice
>> that a few people have already ordered copies of the first version.
>> If you ordered one of these copies, please contact me directly with
>> your order number and your address, and I will have corrected
>> replacement copies mailed to you at no charge.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
>> ~-->
>> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your
>> home page
>> http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GP4qlB/TM
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ~->
>>
>> List guidelines: http://www.elvish.org/LambengolmorList/
>> Bibliography and abbreviations: http://www.elvish.org/Tengwestie/
>> conventions.phtml
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
> ~-->
> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your
> home page
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GP4qlB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ~->
>
> List guidelines: http://www.elvish.org/LambengolmorList/
> Bibliography and abbreviations: http://www.elvish.org/Tengwestie/
> conventions.phtml
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

_The Collected Vinyar Tengwar_ Vol. 3 is now available

Volume 3 of _The Collected Vinyar Tengwar_ collects issue 21–30, and
is available for order on the E.L.F. Storefront at Lulu.com
(<http://www.lulu.com/ELF/>) or from the Vinyar Tengwar Web Shop
(<http://www.elvish.org/VT/shop.html>). Note that each volume is offered
in  two different bindings: Perfect (i.e. as a typical softcover book)
and Coil (which allows the issue to open and lie flat, for ease of
reference).


--
====================================================================
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."

_The Collected Vinyar Tengwar_ Vol. 2 is now available

Volume 2 of _The Collected Vinyar Tengwar_ collects issue 11–20, and
is available for order on the E.L.F. Storefront at Lulu.com
(<http://www.lulu.com/ELF/>) or from the Vinyar Tengwar Web Shop
(<http://www.elvish.org/VT/shop.html>). Note that each volume is offered
in  two different bindings: Perfect (i.e. as a typical softcover book)
and Coil (which allows the issue to open and lie flat, for ease of
reference).


--
====================================================================
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."

In their excellent book _The Lord of the Rings: A
Reader's Companion_, Wayne G.Hammond and Christina
Scull write:

"haywards -- The term _hayward_ originally referred to
one who protected the fences around lands enclosed for
growing hay (Old English _hegeweard_), later more
generally applied to one who prevents cattle from
breaking through into enclosed fields with growing
crops." (p. 35)

There are two words _hay_ in English, of distinct
origin:

hay(1). Dried grass. AS. _hieg_ [i with a macron],
cognate with _hew_.

hay(2). Hedge, enclosure. AS. _hege_ ... Survives in
name _Hayward_, official protecting enclosures.

(Weekley, _Concise Etymological Dictionary of Modern
English_. Other etymological dictionaries say
basically the same, e.g. Skeat,
http://www.etymonline.com.)

The dictionaries would seem to agree with the first
part of the definition as given by Hammond & Scull:
"one who protected the fences around lands enclosed".
What I am curious about is the "for growing hay" part.
To me, it sounds suspiciously like folk etymology, as
the OE word _hegeweard_ would have had no particular
connection to ModE _hay_ 'cut grass'.

Isn't the more general application--the "later" one
according to Hammond & Scull--in fact the older one?

Kind regards,
Fredrik Ström

[I can't answer this definitively myself, since Hammond
& Scull may have been citing a reference work to which
I don't have access. I will note that the OED appears to
support Fredrik's interpretation -- it gives the first element
in _hayward_ as hay(2) 'a hedge, a fence', and glosses the
word as 'an officer of a manor, township, or parish, having
charge of the fences and enclosures, esp. to keep cattle
from breaking through from the common into enclosed
fields; sometimes, the herdsman of the cattle feeding on
the common'. This makes no mention of any connection
with hay(1) 'dried grass'.

Wright's _English Dialect Dictionary_ and C.T. Onions'
_Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology_ are both in
accord with the OED on this point. Perhaps Wayne or
Christina might be able to comment? -- PHW]

See Tolkien's _Guide to the Names_, Persons, _Hayward_:
"The word is derived from _hay_ 'fence' (_not_ 'grass') +
_ward_ 'guard'." (TC:168)

- Beregond

Recall also "Haysend" - where too "hay"="hedge".

Lukas

Beregond. Anders Stenström scripsit:

> See Tolkien's _Guide to the Names_, Persons, _Hayward_:
> "The word is derived from _hay_ 'fence' (_not_ 'grass') +
> _ward_ 'guard'." (TC:168)

> - Beregond








> List guidelines: http://www.elvish.org/LambengolmorList/
> Bibliography and abbreviations:
> http://www.elvish.org/Tengwestie/conventions.phtml
> Yahoo! Groups Links

In regard to Fredrik and Pat's comments, our gloss:

> "haywards -- The term _hayward_ originally referred to
> one who protected the fences around lands enclosed for
> growing hay (Old English _hegeweard_), later more
> generally applied to one who prevents cattle from
> breaking through into enclosed fields with growing
> crops." (p. 35)

should have pointed to Tolkien's own gloss in the "Nomenclature", as
indeed we do in our gloss for "Hob Hayward" (LR p. 998, our p. 655).
Our note on p. 35 was written early in the project, and forgotten 620
pages later. Even early on, however, we knew that Hob Hayward would
be coming along, with a name derived from an occupation, and so for
our first note consulted the Oxford _Dictionary of English Surnames_
by Reaney and Wilson, which says: "The original duties of the hayward
seem to have been to protect the fences round the Lammas lands when
enclosed for hay (Coulton), hence his name, OE _hegeweard_ 'guardian
of the fence or hedge'." "Coulton" is nowhere identified by Reaney
and Wilson (probably the writer on medieval history G.G. Coulton),
and it may be that an element of folk etymology is present.

Wayne and Christina

Beregond wrote:

> See Tolkien's _Guide to the Names_, Persons,
> _Hayward_: "The word is derived from _hay_
> 'fence' (_not_ 'grass') + _ward_ 'guard'."
> (TC:168)

The text of the "Guide" is also printed in the
_Reader's Companion_ itself.

[The page reference in Beregond's post was added
by your humble moderator, who decided to cite the
_Tolkien Compass_ edition as currently the most
familiar. The version in _Reader's Companion_ differs
from this in that "it has been newly transcribed from
the professional typescript as corrected by Tolkien, with
reference also to an earlier version in manuscript and
typescript" (RC:751). I have no doubt that in the future
the version in the RC will become the standard text of
reference for Tolkienian linguistics. -- PHW]

I might point out a possible misprint in this context.
On p. 655, entry for Hob Hayward, there is a reference
to a "note for p. 107". However, Hob Hayward is not
mentioned in the notes for page 107 (although the Hay
Gate is, as correctly noted in the next entry on page
655 in the _Reader's Companion_). Possibly the
reference should read "(See also note for p. 10.)",
referring to the note for "haywards"?

Speaking of possible errors in the _Reader's
Companion_, Magnus Åberg, whose "Analysis of Khuzdul"
was read at the Omentielva Minya, made an interesting
observation regarding the following text on page 269:

"_Azan_ [in _Azanulbizar_] was probably a plural of
_uzu_ 'dimness, shadow' (cf. _Khazad_ - _Khuzd_)".

Magnus points out that *_'uzn_ as the singular
of _'azan_ would fit the pattern of _khuzd_ - _khazad_
better than _uzu_ does. Could it be that the word was
misread in the manuscript of the _Nomenclature_?

Kind regards,
/Fredrik Ström

Fredrik wrote:

> I might point out a possible misprint in this context.
> On p. 655, entry for Hob Hayward, there is a reference
> to a "note for p. 107". However, Hob Hayward is not
> mentioned in the notes for page 107 (although the Hay
> Gate is, as correctly noted in the next entry on page
> 655 in the _Reader's Companion_). Possibly the
> reference should read "(See also note for p. 10.)",
> referring to the note for "haywards"?

No, I don't think so. Too many details have passed by now to be sure,
but I think that we meant to point to the mention of the Hay Gate. If
we had meant the note for p. 10 we would have picked up on the
duplication of comments on _hayward_ and dealt with it.

> Magnus points out that *_'uzn_ as the singular
> of _'azan_ would fit the pattern of _khuzd_ - _khazad_
> better than _uzu_ does. Could it be that the word was
> misread in the manuscript of the _Nomenclature_?

Yes, it was. It should be _uzn_.

Wayne

It is universally recognised, by Tolkien himself to begin with (through
Lowdham's pen), that the triconsonantal structure of Adûnaic bases was
inspired by Semitic languages. The vowel system and its use in
morphology is however said to be different: "The vocalic arrangements
within the base, however, do not much resemble Semitic; neither does
Adunaic show anything strictly comparable to the 'gradation' of languages
familiar to us, such as the _e/o_ variation in the Indo-European group.
In an Adunaic Base there is a Characteristic Vowel (CV) which shares with
the consonants in characterizing or identifying the Base. (...) The CV may,
however, be modified in certain recognized ways (described below under
the Vowels) which can produce effects not unlike those of gradation"
(IX:415-6).

Browsing through a book about ancient languages, I recently came
across a brief sketch of Sanskrit structure, and was struck by
similarities with Adûnaic in the matter of vowel gradation (= apophony,
ablaut). I do not remember that Sanskrit had been mentioned yet as
a possible inspiration for Adûnaic in a developed way.

The usual Sanskrit transcription makes use of diacritics not supported
by ASCII, which may be problematic in emails, so I will use instead the
Harvard-Kyoto Convention; a description is available on Wikipedia
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard-Kyoto>. I am not a Sanskritist
at all; if there are errors, I will be happy to be corrected.

Adûnaic as described in Lowdham's report makes a threefold vowel
length distinction: short, long and overlong. In the source, macrons
are used for long vowels and circumflexes for overlong ones, while
short vowels are unmarked. Since macrons too may cause problems
in emails, I will simply double the vowel when long and reserve the
circumflex for overlong vowels.
___________________

1) VOWEL GRADATION

The Adûnaic vowel gradations are of two kinds: the CV can be
lengthened, or modified by a-infixion or "fortification". (Nasal
infixion is also possible). The apophonic series are presented so
in XI:425:

Basic A:  a - aa - â
Basic I:  i - ii - î; ee - âi
Basic U:  u - uu - û; oo - âu

Sanskrit morphology makes much use of vowel gradation, which
it inherited and modified from Proto-Indo-European (PIE). Three
grades are recognised; Western terminology calls them reduced,
full and long. Traditional Sanskrit grammar sees the reduced grade
as basic and describes the other grades as successive addition of
_a_: a first addition gives the guNa grade, a second addition gives
the vRddhi grade. This gives the following alternations
(reduced - full - long):

Basic nil:  nil - a - A
Basic i:  i - e - ai (before a consonant); y - ay - Ay (before a vowel)
Basic u:  u - o - au (before a consonant); v - av - Av (before a vowel)
Basic R:  R - ar - Ar (before a consonant); r - ar - Ar (before a vowel)

Here follow a few examples (the root with its apophonic vowel is
surrounded by asterisks):

Reduced grade:
pa*pt*uH "they flew"
*vid*maH "we know"
*rud*ita- "wept" (past participle)
va*vRt*uH "they turned"

Full grade:
*pat*ati "he, she, it flies"
*ved*mi "I know"
*rod*itum "to weep"
*vart*ate "he, she, it turns"

Long grade:
*pAt*a- "flight"
*vaid*ya- "learned"
a*raud*iSIt "he, she, it wept"
*vArt*tA- "profession"

The successive additions of _a_ described by traditional Sanskrit
grammar are very like the fortification of Adûnaic. In both languages,
_e_ and _o_, which exist in long varieties only, pattern as the
diphthongs they earlier were -- this is very apparent in the contrast
between preconsonantal and prevocalic treatment in Sanskrit
(Sanskrit _e, o, ai, au_ < Indo-Iranian _ai, au, âi, âu_).

It can be noted that if the vowel gradations of Adûnaic resemble
Sanskrit (or better, Indo-Iranian), they are quite different to the PIE
patterns, explaining Lowdham's words that "neither does Adunaic
show anything strictly comparable to the 'gradation' of languages
familiar to us, such as the _e/o_ variation in the Indo-European group".
Beside variations in vowel quantity (quantitative ablaut), PIE extensively
used variation between the qualities _e_ and _o_ (qualitative ablaut)
-- the typical alternations were between e - o - nil (_e_ and _o_ being
short). Long grades in _ê_ and _ô_ existed but their use was quite
restricted. In the Indo-Iranian branch branch of Indo-European, this
system was profoundly altered because _e_ and _o_ (short or long)
merged in _a_ (short or long); qualitative ablaut became prominent
and was much expanded (notably by a change of _o_ > _â_ in certain
positions).

It is also interesting that nasal infixion is reconstructed as a
morphological feature of PIE; there is a class of verbs with nasal
infixes / suffixes in Sanskrit.
___________________

2) ELLIPTICAL DUAL

Another similarity between Adûnaic and Sanskrit is the use of the
elliptical dual: in a conventionally paired opposition of terms, one
in the dual can represent both elements. Édouard Kloczko already
pointed out this similarity (pg. 104 of his _Dictionnaire des langues
des hobbits, des nains, des orques_. Argenteuil [France]: Arda, 2002.
179 p. ISBN 2-911979-04-4). Lowdham provides us with the Adûnaic
example _uuriyat_ "the two suns" = Sun and Moon (IX:428). Sanskrit
examples include:

dyAvA "the two heavens" = heaven and earth
mAtarA "the two mothers" = mother and father
varuNA "the two VaruNa's" = Mitra and VaruNa

For such pairs, Vedic Sanskrit also used copulative compounds with
both members in the dual and accented (a kind of compound known
as dual dvandva); beside _varuNA_ it had _MitrA-varuNA_ for "Mitra
and VaruNa". We know that Adûnaic for oppositive pairs used
compounds too as well as elliptical dual (alone or completed with
the second term in the singular): for "sun and moon" it had beside
_uuriyat_ the forms _uuriniil(uw)at_ and _uuriyat niiloo_(IX:428).
However, this is not fully like a dual dvandva, for we would then
expect _*uuriyat-niil(uw)at_ .
___________________

3) TENSES IN THE VERBAL SYSTEM

We do not know much about Adûnaic verbs, but know that it had
four tenses; aorist, continuative present, continuative past, past.
Sanskrit had a very complicated verbal system, with the following
tenses:

present, imperfect (built on a present stem),
aorist (built on an aorist stem; it was past in meaning),
perfect, and in Vedic a residual pluperfect (built on a perfect stem).

The semantic distinctions between imperfect, aorist and perfect
are said to have blurred with time, but this is a tense system is
quite reminiscent of Ancient Greek, and in Neogrammarian times
it was thought to reflect the PIE verbal system (as far as I know this
idea is met with much reservation today).

There is some parallel with Adûnaic:

-- The two Adûnaic continuative tenses would correspond to the
present and imperfect built on a present stem. In Ancient Greek the
present stem had an imperfective meaning (for Sanskrit it is not clear
from my limited reading -- hints?)

-- The Adûnaic past is also used in association with other tenses as
a "relative" tense shifting even further in past than the associated
tense. Could it be considered as a kind of perfect?

-- Finally, the existence of an aorist. An interesting terminology,
even if the values are not quite the same, since the Adûnaic aorist is
said to be present as well as past -- it is somewhat reminiscent of the
rather present-oriented (or timeless) Quenya aorist.
____________________

I do not know if Tolkien really studied Sanskrit at length, but he
cannot have ignored it because of its great importance in the
comparative grammar of Indo-European languages, even more so
in the time of the Neogrammarians than now. Evidently it left some
traces in Adûnaic. For nasal infixion and the tense system I think
it is possible that Tolkien, more generally, was influenced by the
reconstruction of PIE current at his time; but the vowel gradation
patterns and the elliptic dual are likely to be more specifically
Sanskrit inspired.

Bertrand Bellet
____________________

REFERENCES

Haudry, Jean. _L'indo-européen_. 3rd revised ed. Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France, 1994. 127 p. (Que sais-je ?; 1798). ISBN
2-13-038370-X

Varenne, Jean. _Grammaire du sanskrit_. 2nd revised ed. Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France, 1979. 127 p. (Que sais-je ?; 1416). ISBN
2-13-035894-2

Woodard, Roger D. (ed). _The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's
Ancient Languages_. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
1162 p. ISBN 0-521-56256-2.