In the tradition of the old Quettaron Minasúrie thread this topic has been open to discuss possible etymologies and meanings of hitherto unexplained or ambiguous words in Tolkien's writings.
PE 18 has been out for a while now, but I have seen very few discussions about it webwise (my fault surely). Granted, none of the versions of Tengwesta Quenderinwa is the easiest of reads.
I just wanted to mention here briefly the Q word mestanyatse since interestingly the editors don't offer an analysis. Not that it is overly complicated, but it provides interesting alternatives. I take it that the word can be analyzed as
mesta 'end' alternative form of metta, possibly from *meth-ta
yatse 'joining' from YAT-, pointing to a productive verb *yat- 'join'
Vanesse ale mí óre tirno, ve lóte.
This looks convincing. But it seems a bit strange to have an allative inflexion as an element in compounding. I would rather go for the verbal prefix ana-: *an(a)-yat- 'ad-join, at-tach'; thus mest(a)-anyat-se 'ending-attach-ing, attaching of endings'.
And since t-t > s-t was a regular change, I don't think there is any need for a root variant *meth- (mesta from MET- as #questa from KWET-).
Any thoughts about minqetyarme, 'accentuation', btw? At the first glance, it looks like 'eleven-causing', which hardly makes sense :-). If min- has its root meaning 'stand alone, stick out', I could imagine something like *min-quetya- 'single out in speech', but that doesn't account for the -r-.
I see minqetyarme as:
min-q(u)et-tyarme with dropping of one "t" (like in quetil)and that gives a very litteral translation of "accentuation" =the causing of prominent speech.
I don't think there is a t lost in quetil (< *kwet-la like tecil < ¤tekla), but a haplology of *minquetya-tyarme seems plausible enough (*minquetya then being an adjective 'standing out in speech').
Vingo! (That's Quenya for 'bingo' BTW)
I agree that an(a)- is a better choice and fits the meaning, cf. also napan- "add".
I see minqetyarme as minqe + tyarme, where minqe would have something to do with being 'prominent' hence 'peak, stress' and tyarme from KYAR-.
In PE17:131 the following etymology appears to exemplify the loss of nasals in Sindarin:
camprû > camfrū > cāfru
There is no translation given, but this word already appeared earlier in a slightly different form:
KAPA- 'leap', Q. kampo 'flea', N. caifr < kamp'rū, T. camparon (PE14:66)
N. caifr 'flea', pl. caifrin < kamprú: (PE13:140)
It is again a word that sneaks past The Etymologies, although the root KAP- appears there. As one can see, at the time of Early Noldorin the nasal was not lost, but vocalized. But in the Noldorin of The Etymologies we already see a lost nasal in tankla 'pin, brooch' > N. tachl, tachol, although without compensatory lengthening (compare the very similar N. taichr 'prop, support' < tank'rú (PE13:153)).
However, cāfru still seems to be an old form because the vowel is not lost yet. We'd probably have S. *cāfr, pl. *cēfry or *cēfr (*caifr?). Something for the museum of peculiarities!
The farewell formula (hara) máriesse '(stay) in happiness' is found in PE17:162 whence apparently #har- 'stay'. This is one of a number of words that come directly from the earliest sources and aren't mentioned in The Etymologies:
*HADA- > HARA- 'cleave, remain', har(e) 'near' harin 'remains', pa.t. háre, hande (QL:39)
So if #har- is to be used in Neo-Quenya, one has to remember the past tense hande.
So Hare Krishna in Quenya means Krishna stays [with us]. Nice:)
I wonder if it's related to hárar in CO; especially as in Etym 'sit' is from the root KHAM-.
In Etym it was originally KHAD-, with Q. har- 'sit' (VT45:20). So Tolkien reverts to it again in Cirion's Oath, mhm..
I have taken my notes on Arvernien off to work it out for presentation at Omentielva Nelya.
In VT39:12 the editors write concerning antoryame that there is no element tor- meaning 'strength' or 'strong' otherwise attested and therefore relate antoryame 'strengthening', *antorya- 'strengthen' to TUR-.
But I have recently stumbled upon tornanga 'hard-iron = iron-hard' (PE17:56) suggesting #torna 'hard' from *TOR-, so perhaps *an-tor-ya- 'make hard, strengthen' is related to it.
Of note, PE18 has turyande 'fortification', so presumably TOR/TUR were naturally occurring variants of the sundóma.
I find it interesting (although it's a minor point really) that PE17:161, entry √MAG suggests that the plural of _mánta_ "their hand" would be _mánte_ "their hands", although this form could not occur as paired bodyparts were referred to by the singular (quite similar to classical Hungarian BTW). I would've expected **mántar.
I assume that _mánte_ is simply from a plural in -i rather than -r, with -ai > -e (compare the theoretical pluralization pattern of laurea > *laureai > *laure'e > laurie; can't remember where I saw that).
Thanks, I assumed the same, but I found this kind of plural formation unusual in a noun.
How do you analyze _fanwos_ from _fanwos. indemma_ PE17:174? _fanwos_ looks really curious to me, possibly an aborted version? As it can be seen later, _indemma_ in itself means "mind-picture".
The wordlist index on p197 inserts an apostrophe before _indemma_, although it is not apparent from the main text where it comes from (in the main text there is a period between the two words as quoted above).
The Sindarin verb-form _fanha-_ corresponding to Q _fanta-_ is also curious...
Can we be sure at all that fanwos belongs to indemma and it's meant to be a two-word-expression?
If fanwos is Sindarin it could be analyzed as containing the noun suffix -as with a > o in the ultimate syllable as in galod, nallon. This change was quite regular in Goldogrin (see http://sindanorie.lima-city.de/Gold_phon.htm#15).
In Quenya the combination wo otherwise doesn't appear at all, at least my search in the QL and Helge's list had no matches. Instead we see initial wo- > o-, -lwa > gen. -lvo. But it appears in Noldorin cadwor for example.
>The Sindarin verb-form _fanha-_ corresponding to Q _fanta-_ is also curious...
Why? That's the regular Sindarin phonology after some point in the 60s as it seems: mp, nt, nk become long voiceless nasals mh, nh, ngh (VT42:27) (also anta- > anha-).
Is -won in PE17:190 supposed to be a primitive/archaic form underlying more contemporary -uon, or do you think it's actually a standalone form/suffix 'valid' in Tarquesta (76)?
The text (as it is printed in PE, I cannot vouch for the manuscript) does not differentiate between the two, so I assume at this point both were valid and current. Cf. the corresponding patronymics on the same page, -yuo, -yon, -yuon.
To me it's hard to say, there are many forms on the page that are evidently PE because of the long final vowel, like masc. ō, dō, ndō, rō in the line above. Interestingly the same line has -uwo (> ŭ|ū, uo) (but of course the development of uwo does not need to be the same as the development of wo after a consonant).
Can we be sure at all that fanwos belongs to indemma and it's meant to be a two-word-expression?
Indeed we can't. As I said, in the main body of the text there is a period between the two words, in the word index there is an apostrophe. I do not know which one is the correct reading.
It is also possible that _fanwos_ in itself is a typo or has been incorrectly read. Or is a false start.
Point taken on S -ha ending. Thanks.
_emma_ in itself is interesting, isn't it?
What you are seeing in the index is not an apostrophe, it is the open quote for the gloss. In the text Tolkien gives the word _fanwos_ and then following it the explanation of the word, i.e. that it is a particular kind of indemma (or mind-picture) namely one that is of an apparition in dream.
Because Tolkien (as often in WPP) does not put quotes around the gloss there is a potential for confusion, especially as the explanation incorporates another gloss, _indemma_ 'mind-picture'. But since the plural of this, _indemmar_ is independently glossed as 'mind-pictures' (p. 176), I don't believe there is really any doubt about the interpretation of his gloss of _fanwos_.
What it all means etymologically is, of course, a different question :-)
... to say the least! But your explanation makes sense. Thanks!
Now to ponder on _fanwos_... and the etymology of _emma_...
well the only thing that would make sense from _fanwos_ at the moment is if in fact it were a misreading for *fanolos but it seems to be a stretch even for me...
What about it being Sindarin as I mentioned?
But actually, I have another idea - what about a connection with Q. auþa, ausa 'a dim shape, spectral or vague apparition' < aw'tha < WATH (VT42:9-10)? Hence *fan-waþ- > fanwos or maybe *fanwa-aw'þ- > *fanwaus > fanwos. The a|o variation may be similar to apo, po, pa etc (VT44:36). Or maybe, since we know awa > oa for sure, it could be *fanwa-waþ- > *fanwoas > fanwos (cf. Noldo + aran > *Noldoaran > Noldóran (PM:343)). Something like that..
Given Christopher Gilson's explanation and the detailed descriptions on fanwa, fanwos in PE17 and especially on page 179 which says that the "indemmar were by Men mostly received in sleep (dream). If received when bodily awake they were usually vague and phantom-like (and often caused fear)", I would rather see a connection with ÓLOS- and LOS-, therefore a mindpicture veiled by a dream (in order not to cause fear).
It fits semantically, but how do you account for the missing l?.. An idea would be *fanw-ol's > fanwos in the singular, pl. *fanwolsi.
... but of course _emma_ is not a mistery at all, since on page 179. the root √EM "depict, portray" is given.
Given the gloss of Q. míre as "a treasure, a precious thing" (PE17:202, quoting Elfling 34758), couldn't million be a partitive-plural genitive -lion attached to mír with assimilation of -rl- > -ll- as in Casalli? Therefore Heru-i-Million would mean "Lord of the Preciouses" à la Gollum. :)
But the One Ring was made to bind all the rings, not just some or many of them as the partitive plural would imply. Could it be form a conception with -li as an ordinary plural?
In the Etymologies MIR- (precious, treasure) looks as if it's connected to MIL-IK (desire, longing, greed). So we might have MIR-, *MIL- as two modifications.
surely it was not forged to dominate the rings on Lobelia Sackville-Baggins's fingers so I'd venture the partitive is appropriate there...
All in the context of course. If a usual plural refers to 'all the rings in the world', the partitive would refer to 'some/many of the rings in the world' which sounds way too unspecific and could even include Lobelia's rings nevertheless. ;-)
Compare the collective plural in Sindarin: argonath are all the noble statues (actually 2) in a given context, lonnath are all the heavens in a given region and so on..
Now that is a very interesting idea. I like it very much.
Further PE17 mysteries...
On page 76., under the heading for _elye_ Tolkien lists some elements that he deems to be "archaic" in Namárie. Among these (after the startling revelation that _lassin_ is supposed to be the old accusative of _lassi_) he says
Archaic is the agglutinated possessive in óma-rya;
The only way I can understand this statement is to tie it with VT49 where we are told that instead of -rya (which for the Exiles felt like a plural because of the r coming from original -syá) the usual form would be ómaya.
Do you agree with this? Or is there any other aspect of ómarya that should be regarded as "archaic" (surely not the fact that it is "agglutinated")?
I was too quick, as usual - the archaism of _ómarya_ is explained in PE17:130.
Lassin is the old nominative, lassi the accusative substituted instead:
lassi accusative [form used] as nominative (for lassin)
You apparently think that explains everything :)
I thought of opening a PE17 thread since this is not wordhunt in the "classical" sense, but it also fits here.
PE17:68 under the entry for _yulma_ has the following paragraph:
Simple past participle passive, kari-nwa, adj. -ina, after vowel stems -nwa, sinwa, sīna 'known, certain, ascertained'1. After intransitives often = participle active, va-nwa. This has a past form kárienwa (rare).
The last two sentences are a bit unclear for me. What does JRRT mean by "participle active" here? Maybe he means as on p74.
vanwa is an old, participal formation = "having departed"
Do the editors of PE17 note that the 'participle active' suffix -nwa could explain nanwa "existing, actual (true)" from VT49:28?
Yes but based on what we read in PE17, with _na-_ being intransitive, wouldn't nanwa rather mean "having been"?
It seems like that:
karinwa 'made [by someone else]' (passive)
vanwa 'having departed' (active; no passive form since the verb is intransitive and you cannot 'depart someone')
About kárienwa I'm not sure. The sentence may refer back to karinwa, telling us that there is also rare sideform to it with the verb in the past; or it may refer to the participle active just mentioned, so that kárienwa would be 'having made [something]' (Feanáro kárienwa i Silmarilli 'Feanor who made the Silmarils').
Hm, difficult to accept that karinwa being a past passive ppl, kárienwa all of a sudden becomes an active one, if so it would mean that vanwa and kárienwa would represent the same voice and time, some kind of a pluperfect? (was gone, having departed, had gone and having made, [who] had made).
Well, okay, kárienwa is more likely a rare sideform of karinwa. A past participle active itself wouldn't be rare. Btw, there is a present participle apparently formed from an aorist stem: itila 'twinkling, glinting' rather than *ítala. If there is no distinction *'always/ever glinting' (aorist part.) vs. 'glinting right now' (pres. part.) it would be the same kind of variation.
But interestingly, it seems that there is no PPA attested in later Quenya. In the 'Early Qenya Grammar' we have -n (-nd-) for active participles and -ma for passive ones, which can be combined with tense, so from pres. mate and past mansie:
matsin *'is eating', *mansien 'having eaten'
*matsima 'being eaten', *mansiéma 'having been eaten'
According to this scheme we would have PPA *káriéla 'having made' in later Quenya. In Sindarin the PPA seems to be formed from past/lengthened stem + -iel, as thoniel, tíriel.
So, if -lā is a kind of active participle marker, we might see it attached to the past stem tīrie- yielding S. tíriel 'having gazed', Q. *tíriéla; but from aorist tiri-lā > S. *tirel > tiriel 'gazing', Q. *tirila or *tírala.
I hope I am not being confusing talking in participles. :-)
Maybe this is also evident, nevertheless. PE17:129 has _oholima_ "confidential" (applied to grammatical forms). This may come from the roots KHOL-/SKOL- "shut, close" (PE17:157 that yield _hollen_ in Sindarin, with the prefix _o-/ó-_ "together", and the suffix _-ima_ here may have a general adjectival sense instead of "-able" as given in PE17:179.
If this is so, the it is interesting to see that the above roots are productive in Quenya as well as Sindarin.
Maybe it's obvious, but the parts of Númenor Forostar, Andustar, Hyarnustar, Hyarrostar, Orrostar (UT:165) can now be understood seeing how SAT- 'divide, apportion' (VT48:11), in compounds -sta or -sat, is used for fractions and divisions.
Hence *Foro(t)-sta 'northern division, northern part', pl. Forostar *'northern parts, northern province' and so on.
The phrase Ai, dennad Torfir from TI was analyzed in Aglardh's earlier Faras a phith, but the word dennad was never satisfactorily glossed. Now I would suggest a lenited form *tennad, being a gerund from *tennatā '*arriving,' cf. VT49:23-4. Therefore we would have a sentence "Hail, [the] arriving [of] Torfir."
In his article about the Atalante fragments (http://www.elvish.org/elm/atalante.rtf) Ales Bican presents two possibilities of how to interpret lenéme 'with-leave' (SD:246, frontispiece).
According to the first it contains suffixed -mi 'in' attached to an obscure first part *lene. The second and more probable interpretation, as he argues, is a preposition le 'with' prefixed to *néme 'leave'. This is mainly based on the occurrence of le 'with (accompaniment)' in QL (PE12:52), also Goldogrin li, archaic le 'with (of accompaniment only), used between nouns = and' (PE11:53-54) in GL with Q. lē also mentioned.
This latter interpretation seems to be confirmed by a much later appearance of Q. lé 'with' in PE17:95 where it is derived from primitive dē and Tolkien attempts to connect it with the Sindarin preposition di.
For *néme I suspect a connection with neme 'judge' (VT42:34), there changed >> hame >> nave. I could imagine an underlying root NEM- *'decide' with the meaning 'leave, permission' derived from it. Or actually, according to the 'Drowning of Anadûnê' (SD:372-373) destroying Númenor is in fact a decision of Ilúvatar, the Valar lay down their governance at that moment.
It is also handy to have le 'with' in Neo-Quenya. I have a certain reservation using as, I think it appears in aselye without rhotacism because it precedes the stressed syllable, as in ósanwe, asambar and should become ar if used as a separate word, hence e.g. ar 'and' < ASA in VT47:31. Although an extraction from aselye by analogy could be possible, it's not attested as such.
Well, I might as well take a shot. I don't know if this should be in a separate thread, though. You know the draft version we know of (though there are others) for Namárie? I would assert that just like how we find _inya_ for 'year' even though in Etym. and the Namárie in FotR both have _yén_, _máli_ is not 'yellow wings' as has been suggested, but rather a (partitive?) plural of _má_ 'hand'. Additionally, the obscure _arkandavá-le_ is perhaps related to _arcandemmar_ 'our petitions' in VT44:8. The -ndav- _may_ be related to a root NDAB 'judge' (VT42:33), related to Etym. DAB 'permit, allow, etc.', so Varda would be raising her hands in petitioning (Eru?) in permission or judgment. Additionally, _ortelúmenen_ could either be _orte-lúme-nen_ with instrumental attached to 'time' and a prefixed element related to 'raise', or _or-telume-nen_ with the U lengthened for stress reasons, being an instrumental suffixed to _ortelume_ '*high dome (of heaven)'. I'd also read _mírinoite_ as an adjectival 'bejeweled,' cp. the examples given for such an ending on Helge's "Quenya Affixes" page.
That's it for now ...
To browse the contents of the old site, click here:
You can access EldarinWiki by clicking on the link below, or perform a direct search with the search box.
You can perform a search of the Elﬂing YahooGroup by submitting your keyword in the searchbox below.
Powered by Drupal and the Barlow theme by Egon Bianchet.