G+ LoME Archive
Jul 31, 2015 (12:05)
How should I make a cognate of Sindarin
in Quenya? The stem is BOR(ON); should I, starting from the derivatives like
consider a basic
or rather watch how the Sindarin word in formed, follow the pattern of TALAT-roots and make
? Is it grammatically possible to make TALAT verbs not with final
Jul 31, 2015 (12:32)
- simplest would be to assume BOR and form the verb from that; maybe
, c.f. the attested
from MBARAT points to a possible
- or you can go for the attested
Jul 31, 2015 (18:00)
Jul 31, 2015 (18:02)
We have a huge number of derivatives. But no Quenya verbs unfortunately.
Aug 02, 2015 (01:15)
I know of one possible TALAT-stem verb that does not involve a final
"to speak" from KARAP. All the examples I know of involve the stem vowel
, so I don't know if
would work, but I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't either.
Aug 02, 2015 (11:49)
I'm unsure how to explain the derivation of N.
if not by the sundóma suppression and extension. TQ2, however, states that only an ómataima might follow in such a case…
Aug 02, 2015 (12:46)
The vowel loss in
does not have to be primitive. The primitive form could have been
(with the accent marking stress). Then the first vowel would have been lost in Old Noldorin/Sindarin because
was a favored initial combination.
Quenya would have preserved the first vowel after which the accent would shift to the initial syllable:
. I am not sure if the second vowel would have been lost or preserved in Quenya. Come to think of it, I think the Quenya syncope took place before the accent shift, so I think both vowels would be preserved in Quenya, as in Q.
So maybe Q.
, conjugated like a weak verb?
Aug 02, 2015 (12:48)
How is the
adjective formed then? According to PE22, -ima forms with long vowels are passive formations from basic verbs.
Aug 02, 2015 (12:56)
Wait, no, I was wrong. The Quenya syncope took place after the accent shift, since primitive
(Ety/BEREK). Thus probably your original suggestion of
Aug 02, 2015 (13:13)
A Quenya verb
is perfectly legitimate. I was just exploring the idea whether TALAT-stem verb
is also possible. I think it is viable, at least phonetically.
Aug 02, 2015 (13:26)
Gotcha! Utúvienyes! If
is to be read 'steadfast, trustworthy' =
(see the alternate reading of Cirion's Oath, UT), then it can be interpreted as 'one who can be trusted' > hence basic *
means 'to trust' (a person)! We know the conclusion to PE22:158, LVS11 SAB-stem unfinished sentence:
Or by a different verb, to trust, rely on (a person):
Aug 03, 2015 (08:41)
there is also PALAP
Aug 03, 2015 (09:47)
HKF's Quenyallo wordlist seems to point out that the idea behind BOR and all the Q. vor based words is some sort of continuing in action or motion. Thus the 'trustworthiness' in one of the definitions seems to be based on the continuance of the person being referred to. They don't give up or stop so you can trust them.
So, what guesses do we have for a verb root?
"To continue"/" to keep on doing?
Aug 03, 2015 (10:24)
I think there are several possibilities to express the idea. One can use
as a prefix, see
'continuous harping' (I wonder if Tolkien meant this figuratively?:P); one can employ a frequentative form of the verb. Also the expression can be entirely idiomatic (see 'keep on' in English), for instance using the root NID. Perhaps one day we'll see an attested example.
If we want to resort to BOR(ON), I would go for
Aug 03, 2015 (10:26)
For the Etymologies, yes. But I don't remember any use of such forms for anything but 'faithfulness' in late sources. The change of
from 'continuous' to 'steadfast' seems definitive to me.
Aug 03, 2015 (10:36)
that's why I was saying that 'continue' could be entirely idiomatic or come from another root.
E.g. in my native Hungarian the verb 'continue' is related to 'flow'.
Aug 03, 2015 (10:38)
In Russian, to 'long' and 'length' (spatial). Maybe the BOR stem means basically 'trust' but the
BOR-ON adds shades of meaning?
Aug 03, 2015 (10:54)
looking at Voronwe and voronda, I don't think so.
Aug 03, 2015 (10:56)
It'd be easier to accept the original explanation, pointing to the shift
vórima > voronda
in Cirion's Oath as an example of Tolkien remembering he chose a wrong adjective; but the derivation of
is quite clear and even from the point of 'Common Eldarin' texts must point to an underlying basic verb beneath.
Aug 05, 2015 (06:17)
Regarding the final consonant of KALAT bases, PE18:89 says that they "most commonly had as their medial consonant a nasal, sonant, or
, and very frequently (though not necessarily) a final stop (or
Aug 05, 2015 (08:05)
What about the
derivation from the PE17? It shows the unextended stem form BOR in the meaning 'steadfast'.
Aug 08, 2015 (21:02)
What about S.
? I'm at loss at interpreting it somehow different than TALAT-verbalization out of ATHAR; however, can an apparent TALAT stem appear from mere LAT by left ómataima? (Of course, it could also be a Sindarin-specific derivation with the basic suffix; cf. *
'to wake up', then Quenya counterpart to
might as easily become just the
Aug 08, 2015 (23:12)
There are two other possible explanations of
1) It could simply be AT(H) plus the verbal suffix
, seen in verbs like
2) It could be the result of vowel displacement (PE18:87) on the root THAR, whereby the base vowel
is displaced to the beginning of the word to produce
. This is the origin, for example, of S.
My reading of PE17:17 is that Tolkien first considered option 1 as the etymology of
, then revised it to option 2.
Either way, I thing the result would be treated as an ordinary a-stem derived verb, not a TALAT-stem verb.
Aug 08, 2015 (23:38)
For a Quenya equivalent of
, I might suggest
, at least in 1968 (
for "in Oxford"), cp.
:) That does unfortunately seem to clash with
(þ) from the Valarin if it's formed from THAR like
is from MBAR.
Aug 09, 2015 (10:42)
I tend to agree that in the time of composition Tolkien thought of
as a derivative of
'path' (otherwise he wouldn't have said THAR is 'to stand' in PE22:126!). However, the desire to reconcile with
and, I suggest, with
rad > rath
in published LotR, led him to THAR as a possible alternative. Actually, he reassigned 'to stand' to TAR in PE17 ('and Gimli in white'), which leaves THAR free quite purposefully! (I wonder what does the STAR,
in both QVS and EVS mean never glossed — just a generic example of a typical derivation?) Hence we must suppose that
— I wonder why here the idea about 'aorist required because it never was anywhere else' is not employed!