Suilaid, mellyn nîn! I have coined a word in Sindarin, and I would
appreciate the opinion of those of you more versed in the 'noble tongue'
than I. My interests include, as I have mentioned before, tengwar
calligraphy, and therefore wanted to coin a Sindarin word for
'calligraphy'. I constructed a word by analogy of the etymology of the
word 'calligraphy', from Greek 'kallos' (or actually the feminine
'kalle', considering the noun it modifies is feminine) = 'beautiful',
and 'graphia' (from 'graphein' = 'to write') = 'script, writing'. In
Noldorin we have a word for 'beautiful, fair': 'bein'. This should
presumably become 'bain' in mature Sindarin. I took the verb 'teitho' =
'write' and and turned it into a gerund: 'teithad'. As the second
element of a compound word, I felt it should be lenited. The result:
baindeithad. Does this sound acceptable, or does anyone have a better
suggestion? Cuio mae! – Danny Andriës.

DDanielA@... wrote:
>
> Suilaid, mellyn nîn! I have coined a word in Sindarin, and I would
> appreciate the opinion of those of you more versed in the 'noble
> tongue'
> than I. My interests include, as I have mentioned before, tengwar
> calligraphy, and therefore wanted to coin a Sindarin word for
> 'calligraphy'. I constructed a word by analogy of the etymology of the
> word 'calligraphy', from Greek 'kallos' (or actually the feminine
> 'kalle', considering the noun it modifies is feminine) = 'beautiful',
> and 'graphia' (from 'graphein' = 'to write') = 'script, writing'. In
> Noldorin we have a word for 'beautiful, fair': 'bein'. This should
> presumably become 'bain' in mature Sindarin. I took the verb 'teitho'
> =
> 'write' and and turned it into a gerund: 'teithad'. As the second
> element of a compound word, I felt it should be lenited. The result:
> baindeithad. Does this sound acceptable, or does anyone have a better
> suggestion? Cuio mae! – Danny Andriës.
  I'm not sure if lenition should be applied in that case (I'm not sure
as in "I've no idea"!), maybe you should ask in Elfling which I think
would be a better place to coin new words (and later announcing them
here so it's common knowledge, of course). I like the word, though.
  Angasule

PD: Please, don't send those pictures in your signature again, they add
50kb to each email, to those of us who pay for our connection time it
really does matter.

Did anyone think about a possible way of aplying the Sarati
for Quenya? As far as I am aware we only know the usage
of the letters for English.


Ales Bican

--
**Flowers blossom. In the winter time. (Moloko, _The time is now_)

>From: Ales Bican <bican@...>
>Reply-To: elfscript@egroups.com
>To: "elfscript@egroups.com" <elfscript@egroups.com>
>Subject: [elfscript] the Sarati
>Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:20:29 +0100
>
>
>
>Did anyone think about a possible way of applying the Sarati
>for Quenya? As far as I am aware we only know the usage
>of the letters for English.

**I did and it doesn't work very well. You have to use two different letters
to spell Q which is a very common sound in the early Qenya of Tol Eressea
(where the sarati would be expected to be known and used).  It is too wide
to fit in a column.  There are other problems, but the alphabet is not a
good fit to the phonology of the language.  Perhaps there is a better way of
doing it in the unpublished information--I don't know.

** Lisa Star
** LisaStar@...
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

I was reading old posts and saw a brief exchange about the need for the
circumflex in the Unicode proposal. Though Professor Tolkien states that
the circumflex is sometimes used as as abbreviated form of the 'a'
tehta, he does not say that this is the only use of the circumflex. In
fact, I believe that another use for it is attested in the King's
Letter, version I. As versions I and III are written with tengwar of the
same style and size, though in different modes, it would seem odd that
version I used an abbreviated form while version III used the three dots
written out in full if they, indeed, represented the same tehta. (The
circumflex written over the 'a' tengwa indicated 'ae' in this example.
Curiously, sometimes 'ae' was written out in full – 'a' tengwa + yanta
– instead.) Also, the 'a' tehta over the 'a' tengwa doesn't seem a
logical rendering for the diphthong 'ae'. I have a theory, but not one
iota of evidence to support it. The diphthong 'ae' could not be
represented by the 'a' tengwa with the 'e' tehta (´) over it because
the acute accent was used for the andaith in the full writing modes.
Might the circumflex not represent a small yanta to signify a following
'e'? There is, after all, a marked resemblance in shape of the
circumflex to yanta. (Presumably 'oe' might be written as anna with a
circumflex, though ths is not attested in the King's Letter.) So I
believe that the circumflex deserves a place,and not just as a
handwritten variant of the three dots. Just my thoughts on the subject!
– Danny.

Danny Andriës writes:

>I have a theory, but not one
>iota of evidence to support it. The diphthong 'ae' could not be
>represented by the 'a' tengwa with the 'e' tehta (´) over it because
>the acute accent was used for the andaith in the full writing modes.
>Might the circumflex not represent a small yanta to signify a following
>'e'?

Certainly.  Since yanta represents /e/ in this mode, a small superscript
yanta is a perfectly reasonable representation for the "e" of /ae/ and
/oe/.  I'm reminded of early German printed books, such as the 1493
Nuremberg Chronicle, in which the umlaut vowels were represented by <a>,
<o>, and <u> with small e's printed above them.


********************************************************************
     Arden R. Smith                          erilaz@...

    "Do you know Languages?  What's the French for fiddle-de-dee?"
    "Fiddle-de-dee's not English," Alice replied gravely.
    "Who ever said it was?" said the Red Queen.

                                      --Lewis Carroll,
                                       _Through the Looking-glass_
********************************************************************

erilaz@... wrote:
>
> Danny Andriës writes:
>
> >I have a theory, but not one
> >iota of evidence to support it. The diphthong 'ae' could not be
> >represented by the 'a' tengwa with the 'e' tehta (´) over it because
> >the acute accent was used for the andaith in the full writing modes.
> >Might the circumflex not represent a small yanta to signify a following
> >'e'?
>
> Certainly.  Since yanta represents /e/ in this mode, a small superscript
> yanta is a perfectly reasonable representation for the "e" of /ae/ and
> /oe/. [...]

Besides, in the King's Letter version II (published in Vinyar Tengwar
#29), this e-tehta is written so that there can be no doubt that it is
in fact a superscripted _yanta_.


Yours,
	 Måns


--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden              <http://hem.passagen.se/mansb>             An þer."

Ales Bican wrote:
>
> Did anyone think about a possible way of aplying the Sarati
> for Quenya? As far as I am aware we only know the usage
> of the letters for English.

Apart from Lisa Star's adaption, Ryszard Derdzinski uses the Sarati in a
Quendya translation of the Valaquenta. It can be seen at
<http://www.kki.net.pl/~galadorn/valaqenta.htm>.

Yours,
	 Måns

--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden              <http://hem.passagen.se/mansb>             An þer."

Hi All, This message was recently passed to me, but I wasn't
able to answer his question:

>I'm using the Cirth table and wanted to know which S is the
>correct for the helmets of the isengard orcs.  ...  If you
>could tell me which number on the table corresponds with the
>correct rune It would be very helpful.

I know that there are references to the Orcs having objects
marked with some sort of runes, but I don't recall any details
as to which Cirth mode they may have used.  Might they have used
an Elvish mode (like Angerthas Daeron) since the Orcs are supposed
to be a corrupted form of the Elves?  But the Orcs may also have
used Angerthas Moria after they over ran Moria.   Then again,
the objects marked with runes may simply have been stolen (or
captured) from the Dwarves.

Any ideas?

--
  Daniel Steven Smith / fontmaster@...
  Fantasy Fonts for Windows / <><
  http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/4948/

Dan Smith forwarded the following:

>>I'm using the Cirth table and wanted to know which S is the
>>correct for the helmets of the isengard orcs.  ...  If you
>>could tell me which number on the table corresponds with the
>>correct rune It would be very helpful.

Appendix E(II) isn't terribly informative in this regard, where it is
stated that "The Cirth in their older and simpler form spread eastward in
the Second Age, and became known to many peoples, to Men and Dwarves, and
even to Orcs, all of whom altered them to suit their purposes and according
to their skill or lack of it" (III:395, 397).  This could mean that they
used either 34 or 35 for <s>, as in the Angerthas Daeron, or that they
could have altered the system and used something else, as the Dwarves did
with the Angerthas Moria.  Presumably Azog used the Angerthas Moria when he
branded his name on Thrór's brow: "in Dwarf-runes so that he could read it"
(III:354).

As for the runes on the helmets of Saruman's Orcs, I don't think that
Orkish usage is especially relevant, since Saruman (and not his minions)
would presumably have been behind the creation of his own heraldic device.
I personally would opt for an Angerthas Daeron version, either 34 or 35,
since Legolas calls the sign on the helmets an "Elf-rune" (II:18).

********************************************************************
     Arden R. Smith                          erilaz@...

    "Do you know Languages?  What's the French for fiddle-de-dee?"
    "Fiddle-de-dee's not English," Alice replied gravely.
    "Who ever said it was?" said the Red Queen.

                                      --Lewis Carroll,
                                       _Through the Looking-glass_
********************************************************************

> >I'm using the Cirth table and wanted to know which S is the correct for
the helmets of the isengard orcs.  ...  If you could tell me which number
on the table corresponds with the correct rune It would be very helpful.

Dan Smith answered:

> Then again, the objects marked with runes may simply have been stolen (or
captured) from the Dwarves.

Well...few Dwarves would use helmets with the inscription "S" for Saruman
(and much less "S" for Sauron...which would actually have to be the rune
for "Th" anyway, since the name Sauron descends from earlier
_Thauron_...cf. the final element of the Sindarin form _Gorthaur_).

It seems that the Orcs did use a variant of the regular runes. "The Cirth
in their older and simpler form spread eastward in the Second Age, and
became known to many peoples, to Men and Dwarves, and even to Orcs, all of
whom altered them to suit their purposes and according to their skill or
lack of it" (Appendix E). I guess the rune that appeared on the helmets of
the Isengard Orcs was (some variant of?) No. 35 in the Angerthas Table. It
was one of the original Cirth, and this is also the S-rune used in the
inscription on Balin's tomb.

- Helge Fauskanger

Lisa Star wrote:

> >Did anyone think about a possible way of applying the Sarati
> >for Quenya? As far as I am aware we only know the usage
> >of the letters for English.
>
> **I did and it doesn't work very well. You have to use two different letters
> to spell Q

**Mans Bjorkman draw my attention to Ryscard Derhanski's
Sarati text. (Thanks Mans!) He solved this problem having
used the sarat /k/ and /u/, which might cause some
confusions: e.g. _cuile_ could be read as _quile_.

> which is a very common sound in the early Qenya of Tol Eressea
> (where the sarati would be expected to be known and used).

**So you used it for Qenya as known from Qenyaqetsa?
TI:453 says that the Aphabet of Ruumil was still used by
the Lindar (the Vanyar) in Valinor.

>  It is too wide
> to fit in a column.  There are other problems, but the alphabet is not a
> good fit to the phonology of the language.  Perhaps there is a better way of
> doing it in the unpublished information--I don't know.

**It is possible.

Seems that you and Ryscard actually used the values of the Sarati
as known from the English way of its usage.

I was thinking slightly otherwise. We know an English mode
for the Tengwar and we know an English mode for the Sarati.
What about combining them?

We know that the tincoteema is used for Q /t/, /nd/, /th/,
/nt/ and /n/, and Eng. /t/, /d/, /th/, /th/ (= /dh/) and /n/.
The dental series is also found in the Sarati. So what about
using the Sarati for Eng. /t/, /d/, /th/, /dh/, /n/ for Quenya
/t/, /nd/, /th/, /nt/ /n/?

Similarly with the parmateema, calmateema and quesseteema.
Therefore we get a single sarat for /qu/.

But we will not know a sarat for /ng/ (Ngoldo), because this
sarat is not known even in English mode (the sarat for Eng. /x/
or Q /hw/ was guessed).

We lack Grade 6 for voiceless nasals: used for /r/, /v/, /y/ and
/w/ in Q.

Grade 2 in the Quenya mode for the Tengwar is used
for the combinations /nd/, /mb/, /ng/ and /ngw/;
Grade 4 for /nt/, /mp/, /nc/ and /nqu/.
I think once Quenya had sounds /d/, /b/, /g/ and /gw/
before they were lost or merged with other sounds.
We know of _Aldudeenie_ for example.
Grade 4 could have been used for /dh/, /v/, /gh/ and /ghw/
resp. /w/.

We also have the additional letters.
We do not know sarati for /rd/ (resp. /rh/) and /ld/
(resp. /hl/). Not given.
Grade 8 might have been used for /s/, /s/ (a variant),
/z/ and /z/ (a variant).
Grade 9 for /hy/, /hw/ (?? -- hwesta sindarinwa), /y/ and /w/.

Slightly weird, I would say...


Ales Bican

--
**Flowers blossom. In the winter time. (Moloko, _The time is now_)

Ales Bican wrote:
>
> Seems that [Lisa] and Ryscard actually used the values of the Sarati
> as known from the English way of its usage.
>
> I was thinking slightly otherwise. We know an English mode
> for the Tengwar and we know an English mode for the Sarati.
> What about combining them?
>
> [...]

Although it is possible the concept of different 'modes' for different
languages was manifest already in the Sarati, I do not think so. Rather,
I think this was one of the innovations of Feanor; the one which
prompted the simple, systematic design of his letters, compared to which
the sarati have an very inconsistent, varied appearance.

I have a theory which, as long as we have just one sample Sarati
document, stands on rather shaky grounds -- but I shall venture to voice
it here. I am under the impression that many, if not all, of the sarati
are meant to depict the method or means with which each phoneme is
articulated. For instance, the /m/ shows the two lips pressed against
each other; the /r/ and /l/ portray the oral cavity, partially blocked
by the tongue (the inner stroke); the unvoiced /th/ depicts in profile
the tongue being pressed against the upper row of teeth; and so on. (The
voiced letters are usually based on the corresponding unvoiced ones,
with an element doubled.) A present-day parallel would be the Korean
alphabet, Han'gul, which was designed along the same lines. If this
theory of mine is correct, then there can of course have been no Sarati
'modes' the same way there were modes for the Tengwar. But as stated,
the theory needs a good deal more evidence before we can seriously
consider it.


Yours,
	 Måns


--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden               http://hem.passagen.se/mansb              An þer."

I notice with great interest that Elfconner Arden R. Smith sometimes
appears on this list, sharing his considerable insight on Tolkien's writing
systems (no, I'm not being ironic...though we are getting there fast).
Today is the four-year anniversary of TolkLang message 23.14 of February
4th, 1997 -- authored by none other than Mr. Smith himself. Allow me to
celebrate Smith's great efforts with a brief quote from this epistle of his
(one should bear in mind that he was defending himself against the
outrageous claim that he and his group are not particularly efficient
publishers):

> I have not been completely idle.  Working through the documents relating
to the writing systems -- deciphering them, putting them into a legible
form, determining their place in the chronology, etc. -- is a
time-consuming process.  Rest assured that when such material does start
appearing, it will be in large batches.

Well. Since Mr. Smith wrote this, the time-consuming process has consumed
another four years. The fact remains that we haven't seen even one "batch"
(large or otherwise) -- let alone *several* batches. Now that Mr. Smith has
spent forty-eight months not being completely idle, in addition to the
comparable amount of time he had apparently spent on the manuscripts
*before* he ever wrote the words above, perhaps we may have a little
update? How are the "large batches" coming along, really? After 4(+++)
years, is Smith finally able to state a deadline -- for the very first
batch, at least? After all, I'm sure Mr. Smith wouldn't want us to "rest
assured" until we slip into a coma.

I asked Mr. Smith much the same question on the TolkLang list several years
ago, but he declined to answer -- undoubtedly because he was spending every
spare moment on Tolkien's manuscripts and didn't have time for "stupid
questions" (as one of his co-workers so eloquently put it on another
occasion...or so I am told). Yet the very fact that nowadays, Smith is able
to make occasional contributions to the Elfscript list would seem to
suggest that he could indeed find the time to provide us with a brief
update. This matter is hardly off topic; to the members of this particular
list, it should be of the utmost interest. So, Arden dearest, please do
tell us: WHEN, really, can we expect to see the first of the "batches" of
new information about Tolkien's writing systems that you promised us four
years ago?

- Helge Fauskanger

At 08:45 PM 2/2/01 -0800, erilaz@... wrote:
>Appendix E(II) isn't terribly informative in this regard, where it is
>stated that "The Cirth in their older and simpler form spread eastward in
>the Second Age, and became known to many peoples, to Men and Dwarves, and
>even to Orcs, all of whom altered them to suit their purposes and according
>to their skill or lack of it" (III:395, 397).

Yes, I've looked in several places and also can't find any clear statements
as to what variation of Cirth runes the Orcs might have used.  The three
most widespread Cirth modes were:
  Angerthas Daeron (Elf runes) S = # 34 [>] & #35 [<]
   "http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/4948/cirth/angerthasdaeron.htm"
  Angerthas Moria (Dwarf runes) S = #54 [upside-down Y] or # 34 [>] & #35 [<]
   "http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/4948/cirth/angerthasmoria.htm"
  Angerthas Erebor (Dwarf runes) S = # 34 [>] & #35 [<]
   "http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/4948/cirth/angerthaserebor.htm"

At 08:45 PM 2/2/01 -0800, erilaz@... wrote:
>As for the runes on the helmets of Saruman's Orcs, I don't think that
>Orkish usage is especially relevant, since Saruman (and not his minions)
>would presumably have been behind the creation of his own heraldic device.
>I personally would opt for an Angerthas Daeron version, either 34 or 35,
>since Legolas calls the sign on the helmets an "Elf-rune" (II:18).

I agree.  Gimli (a dwarf, probably able to read Angerthas Moria and Erebor)
says it is "easy to read".  And Legolas (an elf, probably able to read
Angerthas Daeron) describes them as 'Elf-runes".  The rune has to be one
that was commonly accepted a S in both Elvish and Dwarvish usage.  That
narrows it down to #34 or #35. And since both of the _Lord of the Rings_
Cirth inscriptions (Balin's tomb and the upper title page) use #35 for S,
My vote is for Cirth #35 [<].

Here's the passage Arden referred to:
"... Upon their shields they bore a strange device: a small white hand in
the centre of a black field; on the front of their iron helms was set an
S-rune, wrought of some white metal.
'I have not seen these tokens before,' said Aragorn. 'What do they mean?'
'S is for Sauron,' said Gimli. 'That is easy to read.'
'Nay!' said Legolas. 'Sauron does not use the Elf-runes.'
'Neither does he use his right name, nor permit it to be spelt or spoken,'
said Aragorn. 'And he does not use white. The Orcs in the service of
Barad-dur use the sign of the Red Eye.'  He stood for a moment in thought.
'S is for Saruman, I guess,' he said at length. 'There is evil afoot in
Isengard, and the West is no longer safe.' ..."

Greetings,

	 I'm not sure if what I'm writing is plainly wrong, so first of all
I beg your pardon.

	 In the Book pages made by Tolkien there's and under-bar used to
"double" some runes (even if there are more specific runes for those
particular sounds, but now that doesn't matter); from Mr. Smith's docs I
got the news that there's also a "circumflex" in the Book, but up to now I
haven't found it. Could anyone be so kind to point me to the right page?


	 Saluti,
	 Emanuele.

	 "He loved maps, as I have told you before; and he also
	 liked runes and letters and cunning handwriting..."
		 -- J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit

At 11:25 PM 2/5/01 +0100, Vicentini Emanuele wrote:
> In the Book pages made by Tolkien there's and under-bar used to
>"double" some runes (even if there are more specific runes for those
>particular sounds, but now that doesn't matter); from Mr. Smith's docs I
>got the news that there's also a "circumflex" in the Book, but up to now I
>haven't found it. Could anyone be so kind to point me to the right page?

The "circumflex" is used in:
   _Letters by J.R.R.Tolkien_ (1981), page 132,
   Letter to Hugh Brogan - top inscription
   Houghton Mifflin, 1981 / ISBN 0-395-31555-7
and
   _The Treason of Isengard_ (1989), page 464
   Dwarf runes for writing English (phonetic)
   Houghton Mifflin, 1981 / ISBN 0-395-51562-9

I found Helge's posting to Arden a bit offensive. Maybe he meant it
tongue-in-cheek, but as someone who volunteers a great deal of his
time doing charity work in the world of scripts and computing, I
don't like to see other experts criticized that way. People have time
to give away or they don't.
--
Michael Everson  **  Everson Gunn Teoranta  **   http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Mob +353 86 807 9169 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Vox +353 1 478 2597
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn;  Baile an Bhóthair;  Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

Michael Everson wrote:
>
> I found Helge's posting to Arden a bit offensive. Maybe he meant it
> tongue-in-cheek, but as someone who volunteers a great deal of his
> time doing charity work in the world of scripts and computing, I
> don't like to see other experts criticized that way. People have time
> to give away or they don't.
  I understand what you say, but you're missing a big part of the
problem, I recommend you read Helge's article on copyright which tells
the whole story. You can also check the archives of Elfling and
Tolklang, no need to discuss the topic again, I think, unless something
changes.
  Angasule

--- Dans elfscript@e..., Angasule <angasule@p...> a écrit
> Michael Everson wrote:
> >
> > I found Helge's posting to Arden a bit offensive. Maybe he meant it
> > tongue-in-cheek, but as someone who volunteers a great deal of his
> > time doing charity work in the world of scripts and computing, I
> > don't like to see other experts criticized that way. People have time
> > to give away or they don't.
>  I understand what you say, but you're missing a big part of the
> problem, I recommend you read Helge's article on copyright which tells
> the whole story. You can also check the archives of Elfling and
> Tolklang, no need to discuss the topic again, I think, unless something
> changes.
>  Angasule

It is extraordinary (o say the least!) that Mr. Arden Smith who has
access to *thousands* of unpublished manuscrits pages by JRR Tolkien
dealing with tengwar and sarati still "talks" here as if he was
"blind" having at disposal only the "printed" corpus.

So who is _offensive_, I wonder?

EJK

Edouard Kloczko wrote:
>
> --- Dans elfscript@e..., Angasule <angasule@p...> a écrit
> > Michael Everson wrote:
> > >
> > > I found Helge's posting to Arden a bit offensive. Maybe he meant it
> > > tongue-in-cheek, but as someone who volunteers a great deal of his
> > > time doing charity work in the world of scripts and computing, I
> > > don't like to see other experts criticized that way. People have time
> > > to give away or they don't.
> >  I understand what you say, but you're missing a big part of the
> > problem, I recommend you read Helge's article on copyright which tells
> > the whole story. You can also check the archives of Elfling and
> > Tolklang, no need to discuss the topic again, I think, unless something
> > changes.
> >  Angasule
>
> It is extraordinary (o say the least!) that Mr. Arden Smith who has
> access to *thousands* of unpublished manuscrits pages by JRR Tolkien
> dealing with tengwar and sarati still "talks" here as if he was
> "blind" having at disposal only the "printed" corpus.
>
> So who is _offensive_, I wonder?

And does anyone believe that this will change by being offensive back?

I think most people are aware of this sad issue (if anyone isn't I
second the recommendation to read 'The Question of Copyright' on
http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf) and what it did to TolkLang. Let's hope
the same thing won't happen to ElfScript.


Yours,
	 Måns


--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden               http://hem.passagen.se/mansb              An þer."

At 18:32 +0100 2001-02-08, Mans Bjorkman wrote:

>And does anyone believe that this will change by being offensive back?
>
>I think most people are aware of this sad issue (if anyone isn't I
>second the recommendation to read 'The Question of Copyright' on
>http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf) and what it did to TolkLang. Let's hope
>the same thing won't happen to ElfScript.

There is no link to that article from that page.
--
Michael Everson  **  Everson Gunn Teoranta  **   http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Mob +353 86 807 9169 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Vox +353 1 478 2597
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn;  Baile an Bhóthair;  Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

I have been trying to reconstruct the "Mode of Dale" explicitated
in the page nº ii of the Book of Mazarbul.

Cf. what C. Tolkien wrote in
_Pictures_  : "the later or Westron convention, in its northen variety, in the
application of the Elvish sings to the Common Western Speech."

I'm quite confident about the primary letters and their values. But much
lees so regarding the values of the additional letters.

Any though would be welcome!

EJK

P.S. Note that, as Tolkien said in Appendix E, the consonants, ch, j, sh, zh are
here to be pronounced as in English *not* Elvish ; ch = tsh, j = dz
(John), etc.

Michael Everson wrote:
>
> At 18:32 +0100 2001-02-08, Mans Bjorkman wrote:
>
> >And does anyone believe that this will change by being offensive back?
> >
> >I think most people are aware of this sad issue (if anyone isn't I
> >second the recommendation to read 'The Question of Copyright' on
> >http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf) and what it did to TolkLang. Let's hope
> >the same thing won't happen to ElfScript.
>
> There is no link to that article from that page.
  I recall it was removed from there some time ago (that's why I didn't
give the link) but I think you can find it floating around in other
sites.
  Angasule

Edward J. Kloczko wrote:
>
> I have been trying to reconstruct the "Mode of Dale" explicitated
> in the page nº ii of the Book of Mazarbul.
>
> [...]
>
> Any though would be welcome!
>
> EJK

I don't see why this mode should make use of ómatehtar, as you suggest
at the bottom of the table.

I'd rather guess <esse> and <e. nq.> are used for /z/, since this is how
they are used by the proverbial "man of Gondor".

Rather than a "Mode of Dale", I'd say the mode is what CJRT names it:
the "Westron convention, in its northen variety". That the mode was
known far and wide outside of Dale is demonstrated by the fact that the
same mode, essentially, is used in the King's Letter. The only
significant difference that I've noted is that <rómen> there represents
prevocalic /r/ and <úre> represents /w/. Note also <alda> for long /l:/,
which is found in these two specimen only.

A better candidate for a "Mode of Dale" I think is represented on the
jar in the drawing "Conversation with Smaug". This is apparently also a
variant of the same mode, with the only explicit difference that <úre>
is used for /o/. It is not surprising that slight differences emerged in
a mode known all the way from the Shire in the west to Erebor in the
east.

Regards,
	 Måns

--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden               http://hem.passagen.se/mansb              An þer."

Mans Bjorkman a écrit:
>
> Edward J. Kloczko wrote:
> >
> > I have been trying to reconstruct the "Mode of Dale" explicitated
> > in the page nº ii of the Book of Mazarbul.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Any though would be welcome!
> >
> > EJK
>
> I don't see why this mode should make use of ómatehtar, as you suggest
> at the bottom of the table.

Your right. I should have deleted all those, except the i and j. My mistake.

> I'd rather guess <esse> and <e. nq.> are used for /z/, since this is how
> they are used by the proverbial "man of Gondor".

It is not as simple as that. Alda is used for _ll_ (l:) in the "Northern
mode", but for hl (lh) in the "mode of Gondor"......

> Rather than a "Mode of Dale", I'd say the mode is what CJRT names it:
> the "Westron convention, in its northen variety".

I thought (wronly, I guess now) that _northen_ meant "Dale", e.g. north of
Gondor. I associated Dwarves with Dale and Erebor. Now I beleive just
as you say. C. Tolkien meant _Northen part of the Kingdom_, e.g. Eriador. This
would
explain why Arganron used it in his letter to Sam. It is in that "Northern
Mode" that the Hobbit wrote their Sôval Phâre.

<snip>


> A better candidate for a "Mode of Dale" I think is represented on the
> jar in the drawing "Conversation with Smaug". This is apparently also a
> variant of the same mode, with the only explicit difference that <úre>
> is used for /o/. It is not surprising that slight differences emerged in
> a mode known all the way from the Shire in the west to Erebor in the
> east.

I agree.


Namárie

EJK

Edward J. Kloczko wrote:
>
> Mans Bjorkman a écrit:
>
> [...]
>
> > I'd rather guess <esse> and <e. nq.> are used for /z/, since this is how
> > they are used by the proverbial "man of Gondor".
>
> It is not as simple as that. Alda is used for _ll_ (l:) in the "Northern
> mode", but for hl (lh) in the "mode of Gondor"......

Perhaps so, perhaps <alda> is used for *both* _ll_ and _hl_ in the
Westron modes -- about this we can only speculate. However, since
Westron evidently needed a sign for voiced /z/, and since long /s:/
could be indicated by other means, I'd say _z_ is still the most likely
value for <esse>.

Yrs,
	 Måns


--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden               http://hem.passagen.se/mansb              An þer."

Mans Bjorkman a écrit:
>
> Edward J. Kloczko wrote:
> >
> > Mans Bjorkman a écrit:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > I'd rather guess <esse> and <e. nq.> are used for /z/, since this is how
> > > they are used by the proverbial "man of Gondor".
> >
> > It is not as simple as that. Alda is used for _ll_ (l:) in the "Northern
> > mode", but for hl (lh) in the "mode of Gondor"......
>
> Perhaps so, perhaps <alda> is used for *both* _ll_ and _hl_ in the
> Westron modes -- about this we can only speculate. However, since
> Westron evidently needed a sign for voiced /z/, and since long /s:/
> could be indicated by other means, I'd say _z_ is still the most likely
> value for <esse>.
>

I have scrutinise the page of Mazarbul. Apparently the last word of the line
14th is _is_ and is written with an esse, that is phonetically _iz_ (could
hardly be _iss_). The Dwarves were not a very orthographic people. A Dwarf
wrote "gard" for "guard" (see "Of Dwarves and men" in PMe).
No offence intended to any Dwarf on the list! ;-)


Namárie

EJK

Michael Everson wrote:

> I found Helge's posting to Arden a bit offensive. Maybe he meant it
> tongue-in-cheek, but as someone who volunteers a great deal of his
> time doing charity work in the world of scripts and computing, I
> don't like to see other experts criticized that way. People have time
> to give away or they don't.

Very well, but if they don't, it seems to me that they should not be
involved in the publication of primary materials in the first place. They
should step down and turn the work over to people who actually have the
time to get it done.

Mr. Smith is of course not obliged to answer my question, and it seems he
doesn't intend to, but he must be aware that after all this time, his
flamboyant 1997 assurances about upcoming "large batches" of new info on
the writing systems begin to look disturbingly like a broken promise.

The next issue of Parma Eldalamberon (#13) would seem to be of particular
interest to us: if ever published, it would probably answer many of our
questions about Ruumilian writing. Elfconner Bill Welden wrote in a
TolkLang posting of December 18th, 1998: "The next issue of Parma will
contain materials from the 1920s on Gnomish and Ruumilian." On August 18th,
1999, Christopher Gilson sent me a letter saying that the Gnomish material
was nearly ready. Combining these two pieces of information, we *might*
conclude that when Parma #13 still has not appeared, it is because the
Ruumilian material remains unfinished. Ruumilian seems to be Smith's
jurisdiction, so perhaps he can tell us something about why we are still
waiting for an issue which Gilson originally suggested would be published
in 1997? (TolkLang posting 20.43, late 1996: "We plan to continue next year
with material from the 1920's, including fairly comprehensive grammars of
the two Elvish languages, AS WELL AS THE FIRST WORKING ON THE WRITING
SYSTEMS." - Emphasis added.)

In August 1999, I also asked Gilson, "If even a preposition gets out
without written permission from the Estate, [will you] have broken your
agreement with them?" (To make the question relevant for this list, read "a
single character" instead of "a preposition".) Gilson's answer was NO. So
Smith would hardly be breaking any agreement if he tells us (say) how
Ruumilian writing expresses labialized consonants, e.g. the _qu_ of Quenya.
But I guess he is not going to.

I can well understand why Ed Kloczko finds this whole business rather
offensive.

- Helge Fauskanger

Sarmendili,

My Tengwar font Tengwar Parmaite is now available for downloading from
the web site _Amanye Tenceli_ ( http://hem.passagen.se/mansb/at ).
Comments and suggestions are welcome!

Yours,
	 Måns

--
Måns Björkman                                             "Mun þu mik!
Störtloppsvägen 8, III                                        Man þik.
SE-129 46 Hägersten                                         Un þu mer!
Sweden               http://hem.passagen.se/mansb              An þer."