I have posted on this before in several of the Elvish/Quenya/Sindarin threads but so many people continue to hope for an Elvish course on Duolingo that I. 1 févr. Learn the language of elves from J.R.R Tolkin fantasy books The Lord of the Rings. Memorize common phrases in Elvish with an easy and. Ceux qui apprennent le Sindarin (ou tout autre langage construit) ont sans doute été interrogés sur leur manière d’apprendre de telles langues. En discutant.
|Published (Last):||23 May 2011|
|PDF File Size:||10.95 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.57 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Elvish (Quenya and Sindarin) on Duolingo: an explanation
J’aime absolument les langages elfiques, ainsi paprendre peux comprendre ceci parfaitement, et je vous souhaite beaucoup de plaisir! So, while he argues of galad being a lenited form and translates as ‘star-light’ in his first explanation, he insists that it is unlenited in the second sindwrin and means ‘Star of brilliance’. Vinyar Tengwar 43 features 6 different versions of the Lord’s Prayer in Quenya which allow to trace how Tolkien, not satisfied with the previous versions, altered features of grammar and vocabulary to arrive at a version that would appeal more to him – till he decided to rewrite that one as well.
Tolkien’s own dictionaries usually contain several layers of entries – early pencilled ones, crossed out, replaced by ink entries, at times crossed out again and re-written, reflecting the constant alteration of the languages in vocabulary and simdarin.
Why am I telling all this to you? Because, creating a speakable Sindarin or Quenya is not only about filling in the gaps with clever reconstructions – it involves at times heavy editorial decisions and throwing out Tolkien-made material on the basis of personal preferences. But there’s no good guideline of doing so – should we go with Tolkien’s latest decisions?
Or should we go with what’s closest to LOTR? So in the end, it boils down apprfndre an editor’s choice which one to use. I have written both a Sindarin and a Quenya course and hence made quite a few editorial decisions of that kind, just to offer an easier-to-learn version for beginners. That is, I feel, okay, because I clearly say so in the course and try to keep is as close as possible to Tolkien’s ideas and only try to straighten out contradictions.
But you see, the problems start when you have leaned Sindarin from my or Helge Fauskanger’s course and try to explain it to someone else. If you’re not careful, that what Tolkien actually wrote gets lost in the process. Because there’s something which may be called truth by repetition.
To give an example: Helge Fauskanger writes in Sindarin, the Aprpendre Tongue:. In Sindarin, adjectives including participles following the noun they describe are usually lenited.
There are, however, quite a few attested cases where soft mutation fails to take place in such combination. I would advise people writing in Sindarin to let adjectives lenit in this position, though, since this seems to be the main rule. He actually phrases it carefully and mentiones exceptions.
However, people quoting from him usually simplify the statement into Adjectives in Sindarin follow the noun and are lenited. This has been repeated so frequently that you can frequently find people pointing out that leaving the adjective unlenited is wrong.
Now, if you turn to the actual evidence, I could find 8 examples without lenition, 9 examples with lenition, 1 example with nasal mutation and sijdarin examples where we can’t tell see Mutations in Sindarin So in fact, being the main rule is based on just a small 9: The story gets even more strange if you consider adverbs directly trailing verbs.
Helge never wrote about them being lenited – so most people assume they are unlenited or lenited after an imperative. But if you look at the actual evidence, we find two clear lenitions, two clear non-lenitions and three where we don’t know. That is about the same ratio as for adjective lenition, and there’s no reason to assume that the rules for adverbs would be any different – and yet, based on frequent repetition, the most widespread ‘truth’ is that trailing adjectives are lenited whereas trailing adverbs are not.
But sindafin you can verify yourself, there’s little factual basis for both statements. At least, Tolkien did not follow these rules himself.
Or, to turn to a different direction. You may be tempted to explain to someone that the 2nd person verb ending in Sindarin is sidnarin. I certainly wrote so in my Sindarin course.
You may even be aware of the evidence if you’ve studied Ardalambion where Helge quotes:. Now, Helge phrases this very carefully again, and the following truth by repetition is only partially his fault.
But truth is – the sentence is not translated anywhere. Hardly an incident Tolkien would write about. In fact, the ‘canonical’ interpretation makes little sense. Well – while names at times occur, it is unlikely here. Carl Hostetter who has access to the original manuscript told in a dicusssion on I Lam Arth:. David is presenting the facts selectively here, neglecting to mention that the sentence he saw occurs in a context — sc.
So, the actual evidence from the sentence that -ch means ‘you’ in that sentence is close to none. We are left with three bits of actual evidence: I hope you see now what’s wrong with telling someone that -ch is the 2nd person ending in Sindarin. In fact, even telling someone that I think -ch is the 2nd person ending in Sindarin and I did write so in my course is not entirely correct – because what I really think is that at some point Tolkien had in mind -g as a 2nd person sg.
So, the actual reason that I recommend -ch in my course is that the whole affair is a terrible mess, that it is plausible enough and that a lot of people recognize it – so no need to throw in my slightly more complicated views if I am not sure of them anyway.
How do I say, “I love you” in Elvish? | Yahoo Questions/Réponses
And I hope you can understand that I feel really uncomfortable whenever I see someone telling that -ch is the 2nd person ending in Sindarin just because I say so or because Helge says so for that matter slndarin because it completely obscures what Tolkien has to say in that matter.
You see, the next difficulty when one ‘standardizes’ Sindarin is the following – I have a different idea about what is most likely correct than Ryszard Derdzinski or Apprednre Fauskanger – and for me it’s easy sidnarin read their texts, because I know what Tolkien has written and what other possible conclusions can be drawn of that because I rejected those when I made my editorial decisions – but I never forgot them – but if you know Sindarin only from one secondary source you may wonder a lot about some unfamiliar grammar.
So – eventually it pays off to know different interpretations even if you only want to use the language. But aporendre a caveat – even if there are often different possible interpretations that does not imply ‘anything goes’ – we may often not know what is right, but we can boil it down to two or three possibilities, and anything else is still wrong.
What’s the point of all this? I would like to ask you to be extremely careful how you present apperndre when you’re explaining Elvish to someone if you only know secondary sources yourself. In making statements like that is such and such you’re very often twisting the truth in terms of what Tolkien actually had in mind – even if you have the best intentions of helping someone – just keep that distinction by arguing that Helge thinks that Look into what Tolkien has to say – and you’re fine.
But ultimately, you’re not in a position to explain how Elvish grammar is unless you’ve studied Tolkien himself. Just using the languages for fanfic is fine as paprendre, and you can have a lot of fun doing so I certainly had But if you really want to understand what Tolkien’s thoughts are and appremdre he viewed the Elvish grammar – then I’m afraid a secondary oe will never be enough, and that is a lot more work.
So – it’s up to you what you mean by learning Elvish – some apprenre are happy just using the languages, others are content just to study them on a formal level without ever writing a bit of text – I have done and enjoyed both.
But whatever you do, have fun it’s a hobby after all and recognize the limits I guess none of us really wants to spread all these false things.