Post QqdENX8nxQC

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (19:34)

This word analysis focuses on transitive verbs meaning “put, place, lay, set”. Finding a good choice for these words is a challenge, and requires some invention.

We have some good options for these senses from the earliest versions of Tolkien’s language:

1) transitive ᴱQ. kaita- “to place, lie down“ vs. intransitive kaya- or kay- “to lie” (QL/46, PE16/75), both from the root KAYA “lie, rest; dwell”.

2) ᴱQ. kasóro- “to make sit, set” from the root ÐORO “sit” (QL/43).

3) G. pâ- “to put” and panta- “to arrange, order, settle; to set, put, place; to write a book” (GL/63), both likely from PANA “arrange”.

Of these, the roots KAY and PAN survive into Tolkien’s later writing. From the Etymologies we also have:

4) [rejected] ᴹQ. esta- “to place, set, plant” from [rejected] root ES², appearing beside a [rejected] noun esse “place” (EtyAC/ES).

5) ᴹQ. panya- and N. penia- “to fix, set” (Ety/PAN).

We don’t have any good verbs in this semantic space in Tolkien’s later writing, however.

The most recent unrejected word with an appropriate seems to be ᴹQ. panya- and N. penia- “to fix, set”. The root PAN retained the sense “arrange” in Tolkien’s later writings, and the glosses “fix” seems to imply this verb means fixing in place rather than simply putting or placing an object. Similarly, salvaging G. pâ- and panta- is difficult. G. panta- would need to be reformed as N./S. panna- which already has several other attested and important meanings: “to open, enlarge” (Ety/PAT) and “to fill” (Ety/KWAT). A verb form like Q./S. pan- is very close to the root and probably should mean “to arrange”.

Q. caita- survives, but Tolkien is very emphatic in his later writing that this verb is intransitive: meaning “to lie (down)” rather than “to lay”.

We do, however, have an alternate, unglossed verb caia- (PE22/159). This verb is marked OQ., but it could have survived in Quenya, could conceivably have a transitive sense “to lay”. This would be a reversal of the transitive/intransitive senses from ᴱQ.

The noun esse “place” was rejected and seems to have been replaced by Q. nómë “place” (VT42/17, WJ/206), perhaps from an [unattested] root NOM. This could have a transitive verb form nom- or nonta- “to place”.

Finally, the root ÐORO “sit” seems to be replaced but KHAD “sit”, which might also have a transitive verb form hasta- “to make sit, set”. This conflicts with (unattested) Q. hasta- “to mar” deduced from adjectives alahasta “unmarred” and hastaina “marred” (MR/254), but that verb is rather obscure making a homonym more tolerable.

On the Sindarin side, we might cognates nov- or nonta- “to place” and/or hasta- “to make sit, set”. A cognate of caia- might be caea-, though figuring out how exactly to inflect the Quenya or Sindarin verb forms would be a challenge.

Any of these are candidates for neologisms for transitive verbs meaning “to put”. At the moment, I am inclined to keep them all of them with slightly different meanings:

1) ᴺQ. nom, ᴺS. nov “to place, put” from the (unattested) root NOM “place”, with an emphasis of putting into a specific location or place.

2) ᴺQ., ᴺS. hasta “to set, (lit.) to make sit” from the root KHAD “sit”, with an emphasis on the action of placement.

3) ᴺQ. caia-, ᴺS. caea- “to lay (down)” from the root KAY “lie”, with an emphasis on the downward motion and placement in a horizontal position.

EDIT: Based on conversations with Shihali (on the Discord server's +#eldarin channel) and Tamas (see below) I've made the following changes:

1) ᴺQ. satta-, ᴺS. satha- “to place, put” from SAT “space, place”, with an emphasis of putting into a specific location or place.

2) ᴺQ., ᴺS. sesta- “to set, (lit.) to make rest (on)” from the root SED “rest”, with an emphasis on the action of placement.

3) I am leaving alone for now.

#1 was changed to derive from an attested root, #2 was changed to avoid conflict with hasta- “to mar”.

Tamas Ferencz Apr 14, 2018 (21:40)

I also propose *satta- "place, put" from SAT

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (21:45)

Actually, satta- is better than nom- because it is from an attested root. But it might be sasta- from SAT+tā. I need to think about that.

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (21:52)

OK, I've given it a few minutes thought. Shihali on the Discord server helped convince me that SED+tā > sesta- “to put, (lit.) to make rest (on)” is a better choice than hasta- to avoid conflicts with the meaning “to mar”. So if I change nom- >> sasta- for “to place”, the two verbs could have reinforcing meanings.

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (22:00)

Yeah, OK, I am starting to like sasta- or satta-. The root SAT also means “divide, apportion”, but we have other roots in that semantic space, so using sasta- or satta- for “to place” probably isn't costing us anything.

I am on the fence as to which to use, though. sasta- is probably more correct, etymologically, but I think I like the sound of +Tamas Ferencz's original suggestion of satta- better.

Tamas Ferencz Apr 14, 2018 (22:04)

+Paul Strack wouldn't SED+ta yield *serta-?

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (22:06)

+Tamas Ferencz No, CE d+t from suffixion > st

See: http://localhost:8080/eldamo/content/words/word-2479050823.html

I will see if I can dig up an example.

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (22:12)

It's a deleted word, but here's an example: vesta- < WED+tā


Tamas Ferencz Apr 14, 2018 (22:21)

Yeah, well, WEDta yielded vesta-. But looking at Middle Elvish LED or RAD I could just as easily imagine *senna- or *senda-

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (22:23)

+Tamas Ferencz Yes, but CE is a causative verbal suffix. The intended meaning is “to make rest (on)”. So SED+tā fits best, semantically.

Tamas Ferencz Apr 14, 2018 (22:26)

+Paul Strack OK🙂

Tamas Ferencz Apr 14, 2018 (22:30)

Crazy idea: combine NDU and SAT as *nusta-

Paul Strack Apr 14, 2018 (22:37)

+Tamas Ferencz That's not bad, but my intent for “to place, put” was a sense of the verb without a direction. I was going to use caia- for “to lay down, to put down”. Where satta- could be used for “to put on a wall or ceiling”.