cxey67e3oF5 — G+ LoME Archive

Leonard W. Aug 15, 2015 (10:37)

Mellyn!
I've reserved most of my attention for Sindarin the last five years, so now that I'm dabbling with Quenya (how can I not after PE22?), I really need your help!

I've been asked to translate this rather peculiar sentence: "let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has not seen the nightfall."

I was initially drawn to ava "refuse," but I wasn't satisfied with the sentence as it materialised (refuse to give permission...)

So I decided to reword the sentence to "do not swear to walk in darkness, if you have not seen nightfall" thus:
~~ava vesta vantie morniesse cénai lá ecéniel i undóme~~
> ~~ava care vanda vantien morniesse cénai lá ecéniel i undóme~~
> váse care vanda vantien morniesse laqui ecénies i undóme.

I'm uncertain about many things in this translation, especially the use of ava and cénai. Can cénai lá be merged to célá? What do you think?

Leonard W. Aug 15, 2015 (10:41)

And moments after I published this question, I realised that vesta- is used for weddings. Whops. vanda would be better, but I'm unsure how to use it. ava care vanda vantien?

Tamas Ferencz Aug 15, 2015 (11:04)

Yet I think you should use vá/váse, "he mustn't, he is not to", or its second person equivalent, see the discussion of their uses on pp 161-162 of PE22

Tamas Ferencz Aug 15, 2015 (11:07)

Perhaps a construction like vá......, laqui.... - 'let him not, unless'

Leonard W. Aug 15, 2015 (11:12)

+Tamas Ferencz yes, that's a much cleaner construction. Thanks!

Александр Запрягаев Aug 15, 2015 (17:53)

+Leonard W. +Tamas Ferencz I think a construction care vanda vantien implies 'make oath in order to walk_. Vanda i patuvas morniesse? (I think it would be better to use attested pata from PE17 than updating the Etymologies). Also, vanda seems for me a participial formation vad-na from a tentative verbal stem vad; maybe, váse vade i patuvas morniesse?

Leonard W. Aug 15, 2015 (18:02)

+Александр Запрягаев I was trying to achieve "[...] make an oath for walking in darkness"?

Tamas Ferencz Aug 15, 2015 (18:55)

+Александр Запрягаев I doubt **vade would have remained like that

Александр Запрягаев Aug 17, 2015 (13:56)

+Tamas Ferencz Yes, it should have gone to vare; however, that seems to clash with ware 'to err' in PE22…

Tamas Ferencz Aug 17, 2015 (14:06)

+Александр Запрягаев
it could be *varta-, with a transitive sense, taking an aorist infinitive as an object

Александр Запрягаев Aug 17, 2015 (14:07)

+Tamas Ferencz But medial dt goes to st in Eldarin — so rather vasta?

Tamas Ferencz Aug 17, 2015 (14:22)

+Александр Запрягаев
hm, probably yes. Then again for now it's probably safer to resort to expressions like kare vanda or quete vanda?

Although of course at one point vesta- meant 'to swear to do sg', so *vasta- would nicely follow that and conform to the shape of the noun.

Александр Запрягаев Aug 17, 2015 (20:38)

+Tamas Ferencz Well, I'll stick for vere now. It would be strange to form a participial adjective from a stem which is not verbal; and vesta will be already taked by a causativisation, 'make one swear'.
Anyway, as for the homonymy: by the Great Eagles (anaksartainen? :D), in English language, 'to make an oath' is homonymic with 'to say foul words'; why isn't it allowed to just 'to make an oath' and 'to go astray' to coicide in mere one of the dialects, namely Ñoldorin?

Tamas Ferencz Aug 17, 2015 (22:24)

+Александр Запрягаев fine with me, *vare it is then

Leonard W. Aug 18, 2015 (08:52)

Well, as long as it's not used in a context of love and affection, because then there would be much grief! :) Interesting discussion!

Tamas Ferencz Aug 18, 2015 (09:47)

+Leonard W. Will you show us the "end product"?

Александр Запрягаев Aug 18, 2015 (11:59)

+Tamas Ferencz My pick:
Vásë varë i patuvas morniessë laqui ecénies i•lómë.
(As N. dû is glossed 'nightfall' and cognate to Q. lómë, I'd change the word.)

Tamas Ferencz Aug 18, 2015 (13:11)

+Александр Запрягаев
do you think we can make the following distinction:

a) váse vare i paduva*s* morniesse - "let him not swear that he will walk in the dark"
b) vase vare i paduva morniesse - "let him not swear he that will walk in the dark"

In the second case i is a relative pronoun and effectively the subject of the verb pada so the latter does not need a pronominal suffix.

Александр Запрягаев Aug 18, 2015 (13:26)

+Tamas Ferencz Legit enough. There is no other possibility to find a subject in the second version, and it can only be in apposition to the suffixed se of the 'imperative'.

Александр Запрягаев Aug 18, 2015 (15:24)

+Tamas Ferencz +Leonard W. A sudden addition: ware pa. t. only wáre; if vare pa. t. vande (which is implied by sunstantivisation), then they are even further distinguished!

Tamas Ferencz Aug 18, 2015 (15:56)

+Александр Запрягаев
just realized you had used **paduvas, but intervocalic d is not found - I guess it was a typo

Tamas Ferencz Aug 18, 2015 (15:56)

+Александр Запрягаев
good thinking

Александр Запрягаев Aug 18, 2015 (16:04)

+Tamas Ferencz Well spotted! (Mae hirnen!) It's a typo caused by remembering Sindarin instead.

Leonard W. Aug 18, 2015 (16:05)

I'll get back to you when I get home! I'm at work at the moment :)

Александр Запрягаев Aug 18, 2015 (16:07)

+Leonard W. I just added you to our discussions (Ethrebith) in Hangouts! Feel free to pay a visit!

Leonard W. Aug 18, 2015 (22:11)

+Александр Запрягаев
+Tamas Ferencz I'm leaning towards he whose name I can't spell with latin alphabet, although I'm a bit hesitant to use neologisms at this point, because quete vanda could be used as well. But... whew! Translation is tricky and fun!

Tamas Ferencz Aug 19, 2015 (01:35)

+Leonard W. Just call him Elhath 😊