Post emTyhvrnXKx

Fiona Jallings Jul 27, 2015 (00:42)

Alright, I finished a small mountain of updates (still have more to go... need to finish rewriting homework assignments and making quizzes) but here is the new chapter based on what we learned about Sindarin in PE22.

There's also changes to the Question lesson:
and the Present Tense lesson:

So, did you find any errors or points to argue over? Think I'm completely wrong and have misunderstood everything? Let me know!

Ekin Gören Jul 27, 2015 (00:51)

"Ledhithon ir phenin vellon." and the rest of the "-itha"s in 6.3 needs fixing.

Fiona Jallings Jul 27, 2015 (01:05)

Argh, a few always slip through. Thanks for spotting those.

Александр Запрягаев Jul 27, 2015 (07:25)

+Fiona Jallings Have you decided to stick to the m/nc conjugational system for a while? I thought we can now reconstruct the system corresponding to the omentielvo shift fairly well:

1sg. -on (attested)
2sg. form. -ol (attested)
2sg. Dor. -odh
2sg. fam. -og
3sg. -a

1pl. excl. -of (attested)
1pl. incl. -ab (attested)
2pl. form. -alir
2pl. Dor. -adhir
2pl. fam. -agir
3pl. -ar

Doriathrin, normally with reduplications:
1du. excl. -am (*1du. incl. -aph (*2du. form. -adhad ??
2du. fam. -ach (kke)
3du. -ast (dissim. tte)

This would also point to a tentative pronominal set:
Ni, Le, Dhe, Ge, De; Ve, Be, Li, Dhi, Gi, Di.

Fiona Jallings Jul 27, 2015 (07:39)

Yeah, I'm sticking with -m/-nc for now. I focus on LotR-era style Sindarin,  so I use the chart from PE17 page 132.

Александр Запрягаев Jul 27, 2015 (07:45)

+Fiona Jallings Then you should redo the Quenya Pronouns section back into LotR-compatibility as well. Showing -lme there but -n in Sindarin is counterlogical.
I just opened the chart; you can add ma 'one, a thing' now.

Fiona Jallings Jul 27, 2015 (10:35)

The fact is, the chapter in PE 17 is the best, most complete chart of Sindarin pronoun-suffixes. For Quenya - I'm not an innovator. I go with what I find others using most often.

Александр Запрягаев Jul 27, 2015 (18:06)

+Fiona Jallings Honestly, I don't believe this chart from PE17 is the most concise. In fact, being just a jotting of inflexions without any supporting deductions, it can easily be but an experimentation. Tolkien noted himself that 'Sindarin had lost the Common Eldarin (CE) distinction between ’we’ Pl. 1a exclusive of the person(s) addressed, and 1b inclusive. But the causes of the confusion were mainly phonetic' (PE17:129), that is, ngwe > mbe > m word-finally in Sindarin, the two forms coincide and there is no actual way to explain nc. (Unless it is borrowed, but then the Doriathrin appearance is even trickier.) Anyway, I don't believe that the same site should provide -mme for Quenya 1 dual and -m for Sindarin 1 plural; these are from quite different conceptual stages.

Fiona Jallings Jul 28, 2015 (03:57)

Actually, I think -nc is from ni+ki, like the Quenya suffix -nce.
ETA: Hunted down the reference - it's VT49/51.

Александр Запрягаев Jul 28, 2015 (10:32)

+Fiona Jallings I'm not persuaded still. Such a derivation rather leads to expect a dual form, 'you and I', without others included; even more, such "games" with consonants seem to be Ñoldorin type of enjoyment and their appearance in Sindarin would indeed be strange especially -ngid. Thingol accepting a form Maedhros showed to him and making a dual of his own? Also the id dualities; knowing the ad suffixation to be from postposed atta (PE21), I cannot explain those well enough.

Fiona Jallings Jul 28, 2015 (10:54)

The dual suffix likely is just -t.  the I and A are remnants of the ancient ends of the words, preserved by the added consonant.

Александр Запрягаев Jul 28, 2015 (11:09)

+Fiona Jallings 'The elements ta, tta are clearly only reduction of the normal numeral element for 'two'. Originally they could only appear in nouns, and were distinguished from the others in function, being a parallel to the partitive or indefinite plural: see above. That is: originally in CE appeared, say, talu 'a pair of feet' of one person; but eledā'ta, eledatta 'a couple of Elves'' (PE21:73)

Leonard W. Jul 30, 2015 (10:29)

+Fiona Jallings Great site!  But it is so hard to give definite answers about Sindarin, as you've pointed out yourself. I'd personally be very interested for a more in-depth discussion about your extrapolated grammar, because of the many very interesting theories you have on mutation, pronouns and syntax. :)

Remy Corbin Jul 30, 2015 (19:43)

+Александр Запрягаев And couldn't be ni>-on, ci>-og, me>-of, *pe>-ab?

Александр Запрягаев Jul 30, 2015 (19:44)

+Remi Korben That's what I meant. However all personal pronouns are for some reasons lenited in attested texts so I performed that from the start. The matter of final vowels in them and their correspondence to the peculiar a/o-distribution is to be yet settled.

Tamas Ferencz Sep 08, 2015 (10:41)

Hey, +Fiona Jallings I am getting an error (database error) when trying to access your page

Fiona Jallings Sep 09, 2015 (01:31)

+Tamas Ferencz  Weird, it's working fine for me. What page are you having trouble accessing?

Tamas Ferencz Sep 09, 2015 (08:47)

+Fiona Jallings
any of them - but now it's back. Sorry for the false alarm!