I'm having a terrible time trying to get something translated properly. I'm working on a RP with friends, and an emergency message needs to go to a specific person.
Help, [Character name] has been attacked by assassins!
Any help would be appreciated.
-Kris
Trying to translate without having studied grammar beforehand (which I'm guessing is the case here) could hardly yield any proper results with a complex language like Sindarin, especially in cases like this where we lack attested vocabulary for what we wish to express. Sindarin has niether "assassin" nor "to attack" (from which the passive participle would be derived), and there is no way to form these words as neologisms consensually. I could say this, the other would say that, and both would be neither wrong nor right. But my attempt would be:
Ethio! [Name] *oethannen na *ndengryn!
Given the pair aglar / egleria- , it seems to me that a verb derivation *bregedia- could be used to convey "to submit sth to sudden violence".
Another makeshift way to convey "to attack" would be the (rather Modern English like?) use of the theoretical verb *(coth)alcha- "to (enmity-)rush" (< ALAK; cp. ercha- , narcha- ).
I would forgo the English passive + preposition + agent construction and simply translate the expression literally as "[Help!] Assassins (-> *doldagnir(rim) ¹ ?) attacked X" — until someone tells me that we know how to form more than one past tense in Sindarin. ;-]
[ ¹ In imitation of the name Dolwethil (not "Dulwethil") which contains an element from the root (N)DUL. In the Finnic languages, "assassin" is translated by a compound with elements whose meanings are synonymous with the above. We also seem to lack any Eldarin pointers for "hired, paid", etc. ]
@Sami Padanius: Unlike aglar & egleria- which are derived directly from aklar(a) < KALAR, breged comes from ancient "BEREK-e-tē", which is clearly an earlier approach to Sindarin's gerund suffix -ed < -itā. That is to say, direct verbal derivations from BEREK would rather be breitha- (which is indeed attested), and *bregia- (although we lack attested verbs with "...gia...", possibly due to "initial kj/gj > k/g", occurring medially), or perhaps *breg- directly. In any case, I find BEREK "wild, fierce, violent, sudden" to be a fitting root for deriving "to attack". What I used was KOT(H) > oktā- > oktʰā- > oxþa- > oiþa- > oeþa- = *oetha- "to be hostile (towards), attack" (although it is more like "to make war", a connection which is shared by NDAK derivatives, so it can be overlooked with a semantic shift argument).
until someone tells me that we know how to form more than one past tense in Sindarin
Not sure what exactly you mean by this. But regardless, it would be safe to say that we do indeed know about past formations in more than one flavour.
I like using NDUL. I dislike dagnir, as with most late compounds for what should be early concepts, hence my *dangron (<NDAnKrō-ndō). I would have used *dagor (<NDAKrō) but it clashes with the attested dagor (<NDAKrō as well, though it should be *NDAKrē) which is "battle". So if I use NDUL as well, I would say *doldangron.
@Elaran:
[...] That is to say, direct verbal derivations from BEREK would rather be breitha- (which is indeed attested), and bregia- (although we lack attested verbs with "...gia...", possibly due to "initial kj/gj > k/g", occurring medially), or perhaps breg- directly.
Also, since we don't know the gloss for the root BEREK itself, the verb ✷ breg(a)- [ with which cp. dreg(a)-, groga- ] might be intransitive.
After all these considerations, simply using the attested verb breitha- with a preposition [ dan or bo ] before an animate object seems like the recommendable course if one desired to use the word-stock of BEREK for translating "to attack (sb)".
Not sure what exactly you mean by this. But regardless, it would be safe to say that we do indeed know about past formations in more than one flavour.
Past tense forms as different in meaning as English "I saw", "I have seen", "I had seen". Indeed I'll be glad to be reminded of how such can be formed.
Agreed on all points with the BEREK discussion.
I now see what you mean regarding past tense, though I still fail to see why we should not use the passive participle. As for different forms of past tense, you are right that we have only one, since Common Eldarin "I saw" and "I have seen" were unified in Sindarin. We could try reconstructing "I was seeing" (in fact one could argue that present imperfect is already attested, and we have arguably enough material to attempt the idea), but no need to go there now.
Being prompted by the derivation-attempt of synonyms of the thankfully existing and attested dagnir from (N)DAK, I am still searching for Tolkien's own examples, trying to ascertain his ultimate opinion on how the nasal + k/kʰ + r combination(s) developed into Sindarin from earlier Eldarin.
The only phonetical pointer which I've found thus far is bachor (< OS *mbañkʰro) from c. 1940, though pethron and nathron — both being agent-nouns from plosive-final (..K, ..P, ..T) roots — are obviously also noteworthy.
You have beaten me at my own game! You are right, nasals vanished before spirantal clusters, and medial "ŋχ" did not become "ŋg" until after that. But bachor can be simply from MBAKʰrō, without the intrusion of "n", the result would remain the same either way. The same goes for lathron, hence its attested ancient form "la(n)srondo" with the "n" in parentheses. But pethron is definitely from KWEnTro-ndo, and tachol & niphred are also good examples. So, my "dangron" should rather be *dachron:
NDAŋKro-ndo > ndaŋkʰrondo > ndaŋχrondo > daŋχrondo > daŋχrond > daχrond > daχronn > daχron = *dachron
I also thought that we could utilise BERÉK by prefixing (a)n- as in aníra- "to long for" and natha- "to bring help to". Sadly, I don't think that we know enough about how that would work with a root which shows syncopation in isolation. Instead, if we dare to reassign the attested sense of breitha- to *brega- (arguably more fitting), we could rather use breitha- for "to attack" directly.
Hi all, I'd like to piggyback onto this thread and ask, too, for help.
I'm trying to render a phrase in Sindarin, something like "Eagles don't catch flies". The use should be as a motto, to signify a sense of superiority towards "lesser" races, or an unwillingness to stoop to their level in case of provocation.
I've adapted it as "Eagles don't eat worms", with a similar meaning and easier (for me) translation: "Thoron la mad i lewig"
Is this translation correct? Can you suggest something similar, either a more incisive translation or even some phrase from Tolkien corpus? (I was unable to find anything, to my dismay)
@Alden: It has problems, no lenition or pluralisation of some elements. Here instead:
Theryn ló-vedir thluig.
I replaced leweg with lhûg (lenited plural "thluig") because there is evidence that the former may need to be lŷg which is only glossed as "snake" whereas lhûg has both "snake" and "worm" senses.