Speak, friend, and enter!

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".

This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The Lord of the Rings has been translated into nearly 40 languages; is
anyone aware of such a language where the above riddle would present a
problem? If so, how was it handled by the translator? (Or for
translators who are not familiar with the book, how would you handle
this problem?)

Regards,
Tristan

[Ekkehard Dengler]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

Why would it be impossible to use a vocative form as a password? Nouns
appearing in direct speech aren't treated as objects in any language, as far
as I know. And wordplay based on meta-language is by no means peculiar to
English.

Regards,
Ekkehard

[Jens Kilian]

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The point is that it is a riddle in *Elvish*: "pedo mellon a minno".
Gandalf's initial translation is at fault, and would be at fault in any
language.

If Gandalf spoke Latin, for example, it might be "loqui, amice, et intra"
vs. "dixi 'amicus' et intra."[1]

Jens.

[1] I'm not too sure about the imperatives, but it's more than 30 years
since I learned this stuff :-)

[Ekkehard Dengler]

Post by Jens Kilian

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The point is that it is a riddle in *Elvish*: "pedo mellon a minno".
Gandalf's initial translation is at fault, and would be at fault in any
language.
If Gandalf spoke Latin, for example, it might be "loqui, amice, et intra"
vs. "dixi 'amicus' et intra."[1]
Jens.
[1] I'm not too sure about the imperatives, but it's more than 30 years
since I learned this stuff :-)

Hi.

I think the imperative forms should be "loquere" and "dic".

Anyway -- I imagine that it's difficult in many languages to find a verb
that's as ambiguous as "speak" ("talk" vs. "say"), but why wouldn't <dic
"amice"> work?

Regards,
Ekkehard

[Padraic Brown]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:13:33 +0100, "Ekkehard Dengler"

Post by Ekkehard Dengler

Post by Jens Kilian

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The point is that it is a riddle in *Elvish*: "pedo mellon a minno".
Gandalf's initial translation is at fault, and would be at fault in any
language.
If Gandalf spoke Latin, for example, it might be "loqui, amice, et intra"
vs. "dixi 'amicus' et intra."[1]
Jens.
[1] I'm not too sure about the imperatives, but it's more than 30 years
since I learned this stuff :-)

Hi.
I think the imperative forms should be "loquere" and "dic".
Anyway -- I imagine that it's difficult in many languages to find a verb
that's as ambiguous as "speak" ("talk" vs. "say"), but why wouldn't <dic
"amice"> work?

It probably would. He's simply using a word, loqui, that seems to
answer better to English "speak"; as opposed to dicere which answeres
nicely to English "say". [Amongst other things.]

The whole joke relies on Gandalf's translation into Westron and the
assumptions everyone (and mostly Gandalf himself) makes based on that
translation.

Padraic.

la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu
ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Padraic Brown

Post by Padraic Brown
The whole joke relies on Gandalf's translation into Westron and the
assumptions everyone (and mostly Gandalf himself) makes based on that
translation.

It's no joke standing around puzzled when wargs and orcs are after you,
not even an Irish joke. (;-)

[John Woodgate]

Post by Ekkehard Dengler
I think the imperative forms should be "loquere" and "dic".
Anyway -- I imagine that it's difficult in many languages to find a verb
that's as ambiguous as "speak" ("talk" vs. "say"), but why wouldn't <dic
"amice"> work?

I think the imperative is 'dice', and the Latin would be 'Dice "amicus"
et intra', as opposed to 'Loquere, amice, et intra.'

But I have been know to get Latin wrong on a few previous occasions.

[Javi]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Ekkehard Dengler

Post by Ekkehard Dengler
I think the imperative forms should be "loquere" and "dic".
Anyway -- I imagine that it's difficult in many languages to find a
verb that's as ambiguous as "speak" ("talk" vs. "say"), but why
wouldn't <dic "amice"> work?

I think the imperative is 'dice', and the Latin would be 'Dice
"amicus" et intra', as opposed to 'Loquere, amice, et intra.'

Some Latin verbs have "shortened" imperatives, as "fac" (from "facio");
anyway, "dico" has both forms: "dic" (more common) and "dice" (not so
common).

But I have been know to get Latin wrong on a few previous occasions.

--
Saludos cordiales
Javi

Mood conjugation:

I enjoy a drop
You never say no
He is an alcoholic

(Craig Brown)

[Aris Katsaris]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

Aris Katsaris

[Padraic Brown]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:09:54 +0200, "Aris Katsaris"

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

How does it not work in English? If it wasn't an admirable cross
linguistic joke between Elvish and Westron / English, I doubt very
much Tolkien would have made such a big deal over it.

Padraic.

la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu
ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.

[Aris Katsaris]

Post by Padraic Brown
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:09:54 +0200, "Aris Katsaris"

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

How does it not work in English?

Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

English isn't my native language, though. Native speakers may have a
different and more relevant opinion on this.

Aris Katsaris

[Padraic Brown]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:41:35 +0200, "Aris Katsaris"

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Padraic Brown

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

How does it not work in English?

Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak! That's where the joke is!,
since presumably Westron has, like English, two different verbs for
the notion.

Had Gandalf chosen the Westron word for "say" rather than the Westron
word for "speak", they could have avoided all the nastiness with that
monster in the lake and perhaps the Gate of Moria would not have been
destroyed or damaged and the holly trees would have survived.

And no, "Speak, friend, and enter" is not at all unusual. It means, in
this case, "Friend, give me the magic word and I'll open up!" While
what is intended by the Elves that made the door was "Say the word
mellon and I'll open up!"

Post by Aris Katsaris
English isn't my native language, though. Native speakers may have a
different and more relevant opinion on this.

Quite. Mind you, Sindarin isn't my L1, but a quick perusal of the
English-Sindarin lexicon reveals that there is a 2 to 1 correspondence
between English and Sindarin in this case, which is why the joke
works.

There's also that fact that Tolkien himself was a linguist. If there
weren't a joke in there, he wouldn't have wasted so much time on it.

Padraic.

la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu
ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Padraic Brown

Post by Padraic Brown
Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak!

What is your authority for this statement?

[Yuk Tang]

Post by John Woodgate
I read in sci.lang.translation that Padraic Brown

Post by Padraic Brown
Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak!

What is your authority for this statement?

Gandalf.

The language on the doors is Sindarin. Gandalf, a fluent speaker of
Sindarin, translated the inscription as 'speak' and 'say'.

[Padraic Brown]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:38:45 +0000, John Woodgate

Post by John Woodgate
I read in sci.lang.translation that Padraic Brown

Post by Padraic Brown
Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak!

What is your authority for this statement?

Gandalf of course!

Gandalf: "They say only...'Speak, friend, and enter.' "
Merry: "What does it mean by 'Speak, friend, and enter'?"
Gimli: "That is plain enough. If you are a friend, speak the password,
and the doors will open and you can enter."
[...]
Gandalf: "I was wrong after all, and Gimli too. Merry, of all people,
was on the right track. ... The translation should have been 'Say
FRIEND and enter'. I had only to speak the Elvish word for friend and
the doors opened."

Padraic.

la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu
ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.

[A Tsar Is Born]

Post by Padraic Brown
Gandalf: "They say only...'Speak, friend, and enter.' "
Merry: "What does it mean by 'Speak, friend, and enter'?"
Gimli: "That is plain enough. If you are a friend, speak the password,
and the doors will open and you can enter."
[...]
Gandalf: "I was wrong after all, and Gimli too. Merry, of all people,
was on the right track. ... The translation should have been 'Say
FRIEND and enter'. I had only to speak the Elvish word for friend and
the doors opened."

If he'd been reading aloud instead of having developed the bad habit of
reading silently, he would have tripped the switch without all this trouble.

And not given us one of the most exciting scenes in the trilogy.

Tsar Parmathule

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Padraic Brown
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:41:35 +0200, "Aris Katsaris"

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Padraic Brown

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

How does it not work in English?

Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak! That's where the joke is!,
since presumably Westron has, like English, two different verbs for
the notion.
Had Gandalf chosen the Westron word for "say" rather than the Westron
word for "speak", they could have avoided all the nastiness with that
monster in the lake and perhaps the Gate of Moria would not have been
destroyed or damaged and the holly trees would have survived.
And no, "Speak, friend, and enter" is not at all unusual. It means, in
this case, "Friend, give me the magic word and I'll open up!" While
what is intended by the Elves that made the door was "Say the word
mellon and I'll open up!"

Post by Aris Katsaris
English isn't my native language, though. Native speakers may have a
different and more relevant opinion on this.

Quite. Mind you, Sindarin isn't my L1, but a quick perusal of the
English-Sindarin lexicon reveals that there is a 2 to 1 correspondence
between English and Sindarin in this case, which is why the joke
works.
There's also that fact that Tolkien himself was a linguist. If there
weren't a joke in there, he wouldn't have wasted so much time on it.

A philologist. Shippey reports he didn't have much patience for
linguistics.

[Troels Forchhammer]

In message <***@4ax.com>,
Padraic Brown <***@yahoo.com> enriched us with:
<snip>

Post by Padraic Brown
Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak! That's where the joke is!,
since presumably Westron has, like English, two different verbs for
the notion.

That means that it wouldn't work properly if translated to a
language that, like Sindarin, has only one verb - or would it?
(the translation error would probably be lost, but the error of
understanding might be kept intact).

Does anyone know of such a language? And if so is LotR translated
into that language (and how does this passage work in that
translation)?

[LITTLE LOCUS]

Post by Troels Forchhammer
<snip>

Post by Padraic Brown
Ped- is Sindarin for both say and speak! That's where the joke is!,
since presumably Westron has, like English, two different verbs for
the notion.

That means that it wouldn't work properly if translated to a
language that, like Sindarin, has only one verb - or would it?
(the translation error would probably be lost, but the error of
understanding might be kept intact).
Does anyone know of such a language?

Spanish, actually. There are a verb for "speak" (hablar) and another one
for "say" (decir), but the 2nd person singular of imperative present
(that's "you, say") of decir (dí) also has a sometimes-used "you, speak"
meaning.

Post by Troels Forchhammer
And if so is LotR translated
into that language (and how does this passage work in that
translation)?

Rather than going with the Elvish play of words, the translator kept
theWestron separate meanings.

Funily enough, rest of the line would have the same grammar in English
and in Spanish (usually they run diferently)... so I'll just put the
Spanish relevant word :)

literal translation of the Elvish line (having both meanings) would be

dí, friend, and enter

the translators made for Gandalf to use the hablar verb (only "speak" meaning)

habla, friend, and enter

and later on realize he should have used the other verb. It turns out
even better than in English.

L.L.

[Stan Brown]

Post by Aris Katsaris
Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

It's "Speak, Friend, and enter" versus "Say 'friend' and enter". In
ordinary English text the punctuation is required, and makes it
clear that the first one is giving an instruction to the Friend
reading the doors.

But inscriptions usually don't include much or any punctuation. So
in English the inscription would be SPEAK FRIEND AND ENTER or SAY
FRIEND AND ENTER. I think the pun works well in English as
(obviously) in Elvish.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Aris Katsaris
Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

It's "Speak, Friend, and enter" versus "Say 'friend' and enter". In
ordinary English text the punctuation is required, and makes it
clear that the first one is giving an instruction to the Friend
reading the doors.
But inscriptions usually don't include much or any punctuation. So
in English the inscription would be SPEAK FRIEND AND ENTER or SAY
FRIEND AND ENTER. I think the pun works well in English as
(obviously) in Elvish.

What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

[p***@mail.ru]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Aris Katsaris
Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

[...]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Stan Brown
But inscriptions usually don't include much or any punctuation. So
in English the inscription would be SPEAK FRIEND AND ENTER or SAY
FRIEND AND ENTER. I think the pun works well in English as
(obviously) in Elvish.

What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

A valid point. However, this is related to the famous key distribution
problem (how many Elves were there in Eregion?). This is not a usual
arrangement of passwords changing every day; it is most likely a kind of
'public key infrastructure' where every legitimate user has the knowledge
necessary to use the lock. It is also simple - we must bear in mind the
fact that anti-Elven activity had not been observed in the area
(Annatar/Sauron AFAIK appeared in Eregion *after* the door had been made
- I may be wrong here).

Archie

[Einde O'Callaghan]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Stan Brown

Post by Aris Katsaris
Well... Say "Friend" and enter, is the actual meanimg... "Speak Friend"...
well, I guess it works a *bit*, but it's an odd usage of "speak", isn't it?

It's "Speak, Friend, and enter" versus "Say 'friend' and enter". In
ordinary English text the punctuation is required, and makes it
clear that the first one is giving an instruction to the Friend
reading the doors.
But inscriptions usually don't include much or any punctuation. So
in English the inscription would be SPEAK FRIEND AND ENTER or SAY
FRIEND AND ENTER. I think the pun works well in English as
(obviously) in Elvish.

What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

It wasn't meant to be that secret, since it was written in peaceful
times. But it wasn't always visible IIRC.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

[Bill O'Meally]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

As Gandalf says, "Those were happier times". The password was apparently
not so secret.

[Dirk Thierbach]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

The writing is normally invisible; Gandalf has to activate it
using his hands and "muttering words under his breaths".

Also note his comment "Too simple for a learned lore-master in these
suspicious days. Those were happier times.".

- Dirk

[F'up to r.a.b.t only]

[Dorte Schuenecke]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:42:06 GMT, "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

I reckon at the time the gate was made, the most imminent threat were
Orcs and other evil creatures who'd never utter any word in any Elvish
tongue. Since they were the ones that should keep out, the password was
good enough.

- Dorte

[the softrat]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:42:06 GMT, "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What's the point of a secret password if the secret is written over the
door it's supposed to be protecting?

No orc or other creature of Sauron would voluntarily speak Elvish.

the softrat
Curmudgeon-at-Large
mailto:***@pobox.com
--

[JXStern]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:09:54 +0200, "Aris Katsaris"

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

LOL

I always wondered at this point if there was supposed to be some
shortcoming in the quality of Elvish written on the door, such that it
should have been clearer, could have been clearer.

(Actually, one would have assumed that Gandalf should well have known
the password long before showing up, for such a major site in Middle
Earth history, and certainly should have had no problem translating
well-written Elvish even of an ancient mode)

J.

[eNo]

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole place was
the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all that much... Is
it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up this gate with an Elvish
key word?

[ALuddy]

Post by eNo
Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole place was
the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all that much... Is
it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up this gate with an Elvish
key word?

'Well, here we are at last!' said Gandalf. 'Here the Elven-way from
Hollin ended. Holly was the token of the people of that land, and they
planted it here to mark the end of their domain; for the West-door was
made chiefly for their use in their traffic with the Lords of Moria.
Those were happier days, when there was still close friendship at
times between folk of different race, even between Dwarves and Elves.'

At the time the doors were built, it was not true that dwarves "didn't
dig Elves all that much". They built the door with a password in
Elvish primarily for Elves to use. As Gandalf implies, no password is
needed to open the doors from the other direction (i.e. from within).

[Prai Jei]

Post by eNo
Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole place was
the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all that much... Is
it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up this gate with an Elvish
key word?

Diplomatic relations between the species were less strained in the Elder
Days, but the Dwarf tongue was (and still is) a closely-guarded secret and
would not have been used as a password for a door open(able) to all-comers.

[Einde O'Callaghan]

Post by eNo

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...

Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole place was
the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all that much... Is
it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up this gate with an Elvish
key word?

Obviously you weren't paying attention when you read the book - if you
ever did. Exactly this issue is dealt with in detail.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by Einde O'Callaghan

Post by eNo
Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole
place was the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all
that much... Is it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up
this gate with an Elvish key word?

Obviously you weren't paying attention when you read the book - if you
ever did. Exactly this issue is dealt with in detail.

What makes you think eNo has read the book recently enough to remember,
or even read it at all? He/she posed a legitimate question undeserving
of your snobbish excuse for an answer.

Regards,
Tristan

[Einde O'Callaghan]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by Einde O'Callaghan

Post by eNo
Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole
place was the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all
that much... Is it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up
this gate with an Elvish key word?

Obviously you weren't paying attention when you read the book - if you
ever did. Exactly this issue is dealt with in detail.

What makes you think eNo has read the book recently enough to remember,
or even read it at all? He/she posed a legitimate question undeserving
of your snobbish excuse for an answer.

I wasn't trying to be snobbish - merely pointing out that the answer to
the question was in the book.

I was unaware at the time that the discussion was posted to newsgroups
other than slt where i reaad it - and i replied just as I would to any
other query in that newsgroup. Obviously snobbishness is in the eye of
the beholder.

Einde O'Callaghan

Follow-ups to slt only.

[Stan Brown]

Post by eNo
Interesting/ironic how the inscription is in Elvish, but the whole place was
the domain of dwarfs, who, apparently, didn't dig Elves all that much... Is
it consistent/believable that dwarfs would open up this gate with an Elvish
key word?

The doors were inscribed by the Elf Celebrimbor, though "made" by
the dwarf Narvi.

Dwarves did not reveal their own language to anyone, but regularly
used the language of the people they lived among. So for doors built
in the middle of the Second Age, during the time when their
neighbors were friendly Elves, they would certainly have used an
Elvish inscription and password.

[Peter Twydell]

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...
Aris Katsaris

There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.




I'll get me jumpsuit...

[Nick Worley]

[snip]
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

PML, although I thought Elvish lived on a double-decker bus on the moon (or
at least that's what the Sunday Sport claimed a few years back)
:o)

[David Goward]

[snip]
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

But only after closing time on a Saturday night...

[Einde O'Callaghan]

Post by Peter Twydell

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English,

Actually it doesn't -- it only works well in Elvish...
Aris Katsaris

There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

Does he have a drink problem? ;-)

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

[Jim Deutch]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:59:50 +0100, Einde O'Callaghan

Post by Einde O'Callaghan

Post by Peter Twydell
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

Does he have a drink problem? ;-)

Or more to the point, does he have a weight problem, wear
rhinestone-studded clothes, drive a cadillac, and love donuts?

Jim Deutch

[Bill O'Meally]

Post by Jim Deutch
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:59:50 +0100, Einde O'Callaghan

Post by Einde O'Callaghan

Post by Peter Twydell
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

Does he have a drink problem? ;-)

Or more to the point, does he have a weight problem, wear
rhinestone-studded clothes, drive a cadillac, and love donuts?

Not to mention peanut-butter & 'naner sandwiches

[Andrew Morgan]

Post by Peter Twydell
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

Bollocks. Im going to be singing that all night now. Who *was* that?

Google pulls up two useless links on "There's a bloke works down our
chip shop swears he's Elvis"

Aha! Kirsty McColl

"There's a bloke works down our chip shop" did it

andy "OT" M

[David Goward]

Post by Andrew Morgan

Post by Peter Twydell
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

Bollocks. Im going to be singing that all night now. Who *was* that?
Google pulls up two useless links on "There's a bloke works down our
chip shop swears he's Elvis"
Aha! Kirsty McColl
"There's a bloke works down our chip shop" did it
andy "OT" M

But he's a liar and I'm not sure about you ;-)

It's actually "There's a *guy* works down the chip shop swears he's
Elvis"...
see www.kirstymaccoll.com/lyrics/lyrics/chipshop.htm

[Peter Twydell]

Post by David Goward

Post by Andrew Morgan

Post by Peter Twydell
There's a bloke works down our chip shop swears he's Elvish.

Bollocks. Im going to be singing that all night now. Who *was* that?
Google pulls up two useless links on "There's a bloke works down our
chip shop swears he's Elvis"
Aha! Kirsty McColl
"There's a bloke works down our chip shop" did it
andy "OT" M

But he's a liar and I'm not sure about you ;-)
It's actually "There's a *guy* works down the chip shop swears he's
Elvis"...
see www.kirstymaccoll.com/lyrics/lyrics/chipshop.htm

OK, I stand corrected.

BTW, if you haven't read Terry Pratchett's "Soul Music", about Music
With Rocks In, you should. If you like that sort of thing, that is.

[A Tsar Is Born]

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The question is where to place the commas in a language that uses no
punctuation. Tolkien must frequently have come across this in his
translating. Most famously (in English history) there is the case of the
Latin message sent by the Bishop of Norwich to the captors of Edward II:
Eduardum non caedere timere bene est (IIRC) which can be read as either "Do
not kill Edward, it is good to fear" or "Do not fear to kill Edward, it is
good." The bishop knew his men, and just what interpretation they would give
it, but his hands were clean.

My favorite of Tolkien's language jokes is the one mentioned in the
appendices: the hobbits have lost the idea of formal "you" (2nd person
plural) and intimate "you" (2nd person singular); just the reverse of
English, where 2nd person singular has all but vanished, hobbits use "thou"
with any single person. When Pippin is in Gondor, he addresses even the
Steward familiarly, which shocks and impresses the people of Gondor (none of
whom would dare); this is one reason why they assume he must be of royal
blood.

Tsar Parmathule

[Bill O'Meally]

For example,

Post by A Tsar Is Born

Post by Tristan Miller
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The question is where to place the commas in a language that uses no
punctuation. Tolkien must frequently have come across this in his
translating.

There was also the translation of "speak", which could also have been
"say".

[Aris Katsaris]

Post by A Tsar Is Born

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The question is where to place the commas in a language that uses no
punctuation. Tolkien must frequently have come across this in his
translating. Most famously (in English history) there is the case of the
Eduardum non caedere timere bene est (IIRC) which can be read as either "Do
not kill Edward, it is good to fear" or "Do not fear to kill Edward, it is
good." The bishop knew his men, and just what interpretation they would give
it, but his hands were clean.

Or in ancient Greek, one of the most famous of the Delphic oracles:

"ikseis afikseis ouk en polemo thnikseis"

Depending on where you'll place the comma, before or after the
"ouk", this can mean either:

"You will go, you will return, you shall not die in the war."
or
"You will go, you will not return, you shall die in the war."

This oracle is so well known as an example in modern Greece that
the phrase "ikseis afikseis" is nowadays used to refer to anything
ambiguously spoken or anyone who uses such language.

Aris Katsaris

[Javi]

Post by Aris Katsaris

Post by A Tsar Is Born

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the
duplicity of the inscription cannot be preserved in some
translations. For example, in languages with a vocative case, it
would be obvious from the inflection on "friend" that it was meant
as the object of "speak" and not a term of address.

The question is where to place the commas in a language that uses no
punctuation. Tolkien must frequently have come across this in his
translating. Most famously (in English history) there is the case of
the Latin message sent by the Bishop of Norwich to the captors of
Edward II: Eduardum non caedere timere bene est (IIRC) which can be
read as either "Do not kill Edward, it is good to fear" or "Do not
fear to kill Edward, it is good." The bishop knew his men, and just
what interpretation they would give it, but his hands were clean.

"ikseis afikseis ouk en polemo thnikseis"
Depending on where you'll place the comma, before or after the
"You will go, you will return, you shall not die in the war."
or
"You will go, you will not return, you shall die in the war."
This oracle is so well known as an example in modern Greece that
the phrase "ikseis afikseis" is nowadays used to refer to anything
ambiguously spoken or anyone who uses such language.

That example only works in writing, as punctuations marks were not used by
the ancients, since in speech it would be clear where to place the comma.

Many of the oracles' prophecies could be understood in opposite ways, as in
the answer to Pyrrhus:
"Dico te Romanos vincere"
which can be understood "I say that you defeat the Romans" or "I say that
the Romans defeat you". Or in the answer to the Lycian king (what was his
name?) when he doubted about declaring war to the Persian empire:
"You will destroy a big empire"
and, in fact, he destroyed his own empire when he lost the war against the
Persians.

--
Saludos cordiales
Javi

Mood conjugation:

I enjoy a drop
You never say no
He is an alcoholic

(Craig Brown)

[Stan Brown]

In article <eR5ub.45183$***@nwrdny03.gnilink.net> in
rec.arts.books.tolkien, A Tsar Is Born

Post by A Tsar Is Born
Most famously (in English history) there is the case of the
Eduardum non caedere timere bene est (IIRC) which can be read as either "Do
not kill Edward, it is good to fear" or "Do not fear to kill Edward, it is
good." The bishop knew his men, and just what interpretation they would give
it, but his hands were clean.

I always thought that story was apocryphal, an early "urban legend".

[Nisse]

Post by A Tsar Is Born

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The question is where to place the commas in a language that uses no
punctuation. Tolkien must frequently have come across this in his
translating. Most famously (in English history) there is the case of the
Eduardum non caedere timere bene est (IIRC) which can be read as either "Do
not kill Edward, it is good to fear" or "Do not fear to kill Edward, it is
good." The bishop knew his men, and just what interpretation they would give
it, but his hands were clean.
My favorite of Tolkien's language jokes is the one mentioned in the
appendices: the hobbits have lost the idea of formal "you" (2nd person
plural) and intimate "you" (2nd person singular); just the reverse of
English, where 2nd person singular has all but vanished, hobbits use "thou"
with any single person. When Pippin is in Gondor, he addresses even the
Steward familiarly, which shocks and impresses the people of Gondor (none of
whom would dare); this is one reason why they assume he must be of royal
blood.

This is a problem, not uncommon to people with Swedish as their mothers tounge
(which works CLOSE to the hobbits way of speak). When learning German or
visiting
Germany, for example the use of the word du (thou), which in Swedish is good
manners, get sometimes awkward consequences... In English, where You has
replaced Thou, the problem is nonexistent (Du [Swedish] equals You [English],
a single word for a single word...).

Post by A Tsar Is Born
Tsar Parmathule

[John Woodgate]

Post by Nisse
This is a problem, not uncommon to people with Swedish as their mothers
tounge (which works CLOSE to the hobbits way of speak).

This is characteristic of Tolkien's languages, IMHO. Hobbits speak a
sort of Scandinavian, Elves a sort of Welsh and the Black Speech seems
to owe something to Inuit.

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by John Woodgate

Post by Nisse
This is a problem, not uncommon to people with Swedish as their
mothers tounge (which works CLOSE to the hobbits way of speak).

This is characteristic of Tolkien's languages, IMHO. Hobbits speak a
sort of Scandinavian, Elves a sort of Welsh and the Black Speech seems
to owe something to Inuit.

Whence comes this interpretation of yours? I have heard John
Rhys-Davies comment on the "Welsh lilt" of Elvish, but the only
instance of "untranslated" Black Speech we find in Tolkien's writings
looks and sounds nothing like Inuit to me.

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Tristan Miller
<***@nothingisreal.com> wrote (in <***@ID-
187157.news.dfncis.de>) about 'Speak, friend, and enter!', on Wed, 19

the only instance of
"untranslated" Black Speech we find in Tolkien's writings looks and
sounds nothing like Inuit to me.

OK, it does seem so to me, from seeing a few Inuit words. Lots of d, k
and u sounds.

[n***@nospamPanix.com]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by John Woodgate

Post by Nisse
This is a problem, not uncommon to people with Swedish as their
mothers tounge (which works CLOSE to the hobbits way of speak).

This is characteristic of Tolkien's languages, IMHO. Hobbits speak a
sort of Scandinavian, Elves a sort of Welsh and the Black Speech seems
to owe something to Inuit.

Whence comes this interpretation of yours? I have heard John
Rhys-Davies comment on the "Welsh lilt" of Elvish, but the only
instance of "untranslated" Black Speech we find in Tolkien's writings
looks and sounds nothing like Inuit to me.

Sindarin has several phonological and grammatical features that
were influenced by Welsh (e.g., lenition).

Ugluk u bagronk sha pushdug Saruman-glob bub-hosh skai (untranslated;
in posthumously published material, Tolkien made two quite different
translations, suggesting that it was untranslated at the time he
wrote it). Anyway, to _my_ admittedly untrained ear, it vaguely
resembles Russian, a language that I do not know.

It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the
Black Speech in any way on Inuit.

[John Woodgate]

It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the Black
Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by John Woodgate

It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the Black
Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or other
Eskimo languages?

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Woodgate

Post by n***@nospamPanix.com
It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the
Black Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or other
Eskimo languages?

As a professional linguist, it's not unlikely he would have had at least
a passing knowledge of them. In my undergraduate linguistic education
we used examples from many languages, including Inuit. I recall we had
to learn the orthography (a variant of Cree syllabics) and also
translate some text. I'm certainly not fluent in Inuit, or Xhosa, or
Latin, or Tamil, or Zapotec, or any of the other languages we studied,
but I probably know enough about them to invent a language influenced
by their more interesting grammatical or phonetic features.

Regards,
Tristan

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Tristan Miller
<***@nothingisreal.com> wrote (in <***@ID-
187157.news.dfncis.de>) about 'Speak, friend, and enter!', on Thu, 20

Post by Tristan Miller
As a professional linguist, it's not unlikely he would have had at least
a passing knowledge of them. In my undergraduate linguistic education
we used examples from many languages, including Inuit. I recall we had
to learn the orthography (a variant of Cree syllabics) and also
translate some text. I'm certainly not fluent in Inuit, or Xhosa, or
Latin, or Tamil, or Zapotec, or any of the other languages we studied,
but I probably know enough about them to invent a language influenced by
their more interesting grammatical or phonetic features.

It was my assumption that something similar would apply to JRRT.
Certainly, as a pure amateur, I am prepared to learn about ANY language
when the opportunity arises.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by John Woodgate
I read in sci.lang.translation that Tristan Miller
187157.news.dfncis.de>) about 'Speak, friend, and enter!', on Thu, 20

Post by Tristan Miller
As a professional linguist, it's not unlikely he would have had at least
a passing knowledge of them. In my undergraduate linguistic education
we used examples from many languages, including Inuit. I recall we had
to learn the orthography (a variant of Cree syllabics) and also
translate some text. I'm certainly not fluent in Inuit, or Xhosa, or
Latin, or Tamil, or Zapotec, or any of the other languages we studied,
but I probably know enough about them to invent a language influenced by
their more interesting grammatical or phonetic features.

It was my assumption that something similar would apply to JRRT.
Certainly, as a pure amateur, I am prepared to learn about ANY language
when the opportunity arises.

Tolkien would not have been content with a superficial acquaintance with
anything.

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Peter T. Daniels

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Tolkien would not have been content with a superficial acquaintance with
anything.

No, but then he was a professional. And it's difficult to define
'superficial'. It's even more difficult to 'unlearn' bits of a language
that you are not content with because they are superficial!

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Woodgate

Post by n***@nospamPanix.com
It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the
Black Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or other
Eskimo languages?

As a professional linguist,

He was not a linguist; he was hostile to the incipient profession of
linguistics as it was beginning to be found in Britain in his time. See
Shippey, Road to Middle Earth 2003 ed.

Post by Tristan Miller
it's not unlikely he would have had at least
a passing knowledge of them. In my undergraduate linguistic education
we used examples from many languages, including Inuit. I recall we had
to learn the orthography (a variant of Cree syllabics) and also
translate some text. I'm certainly not fluent in Inuit, or Xhosa, or
Latin, or Tamil, or Zapotec, or any of the other languages we studied,
but I probably know enough about them to invent a language influenced
by their more interesting grammatical or phonetic features.

JRRT did not have an "undergraduate linguistic education."

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tristan Miller
As a professional linguist,

He was not a linguist; he was hostile to the incipient profession of
linguistics as it was beginning to be found in Britain in his time.
See Shippey, Road to Middle Earth 2003 ed.

He was on the staff of the OED, was the author of numerous successful
books making extensive use of constructed languages, and worked as a
professor of Anglo-Saxon. One does not obtain such positions without a
significantly more than basic understanding of the principles of
syntax, semantics, morphology, phonolgy, phonetics. Whatever aversion
Tolkien may have had to certain others calling themselves linguists,
the fact remains that linguistics was, or formed a large part of, his
chosen profession.

[the softrat]

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:27:23 +0100, Tristan Miller

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tristan Miller
As a professional linguist,

He was not a linguist; he was hostile to the incipient profession of
linguistics as it was beginning to be found in Britain in his time.
See Shippey, Road to Middle Earth 2003 ed.

He was on the staff of the OED, was the author of numerous successful
books making extensive use of constructed languages, and worked as a
professor of Anglo-Saxon. One does not obtain such positions without a
significantly more than basic understanding of the principles of
syntax, semantics, morphology, phonolgy, phonetics. Whatever aversion
Tolkien may have had to certain others calling themselves linguists,
the fact remains that linguistics was, or formed a large part of, his
chosen profession.

Tolkien was not a linguist; he was a philologist, concentrating on the
Middle English of the West Midlands. As a rule, philologists are not
terribly interested in languages without a literature or a attested
history. And he certainly was not 'educated' in a contemporary (2003
AD) style, which loves to hammer the thesis that all cultures are
equal down the students' throats.


the softrat
Curmudgeon-at-Large
mailto:***@pobox.com
--
A conclusion is the place where you get tired of thinking.
(Arthur Bloch)

[John Woodgate]

And he certainly was not 'educated' in a contemporary (2003 AD)
style, which loves to hammer the thesis that all cultures are equal down
the students' throats.

For appropriately defined meanings of 'equal', the proposition is self-
evident, whether the cultures (Streptococca, Legionella?) are located in
students' trachea or elsewhere.(;-)

[coyotes morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Woodgate

Post by n***@nospamPanix.com
It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the
Black Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or other
Eskimo languages?

As a professional linguist, it's not unlikely he would have had at least

he wasnt
he was a philogist

[AC]

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:48:02 GMT,

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Woodgate

It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the Black
Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or other
Eskimo languages?

I'm fairly certain anyone with a linguistics background would have at least
some knowledge of the Inuit languages. Maybe not a lot, but at least some
knowledge of the structure and genetics of the language (as would have been
known at the time).

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by AC

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Woodgate

Post by n***@nospamPanix.com
It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the
Black Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or
other Eskimo languages?

I'm fairly certain anyone with a linguistics background would have at least
some knowledge of the Inuit languages. Maybe not a lot, but at least some

there are far too many languages for a person yo know all of them
you can expect familarity in one or two language families but not more

One needn't know a language in detail in order to model a constructed
language on its most prominent features. If one wants to loosely base
some invented tongue on Inuktitut (the proper name for the language of
the Inuit), simply giving it an extremely agglutinative morphology, a
null-subject syntax, a guttural sound system, and syllabic orthography
would be sufficient. Sufficient for anyone with a broad knowledge of
linguistics to posit a kinship with Inuktitut, that is; while there are
thousands of natural languages on Earth, comparatively few of them
share these four features.

With respect to Black Speech in particular, I'd say that any connection
to Inuktitut is tenuous at best. From the sample Gandalf reads and its
English translation, it's fairly obvious that the Mordor tongue is
neither highly agglutinative nor incorporative. There's no evidence of
null-subject formation. The only two transliterations we have use an
alphabetic orthography. There may be a case for a guttural phonology,
but as we have only transliterations into English and Elvish it's hard
to say. Nouns are inflected for number, but there does not appear to
be a singular/dual/plural distinction as in Inuktitut. It's difficult
to say whether the case system is ergative since IIRC we're not given
any examples of intransitive verbs. Overall I'd say the Black Speech
has more in common with English than it does with the Eskimo-Aleut
languages.

Regards,
Tristan

[coyotes morgan mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges]

Post by Tristan Miller
One needn't know a language in detail in order to model a constructed

try it sometime
i name a random language you describe the phonemes and morphology

ready set go

cantonese
basque
cherokee
coptic
english
tagalog
uzbek
finnish
classical arabic
ohlone

[RufusTFirefly]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by AC

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by John Woodgate

Post by n***@nospamPanix.com
It would, in any case, be astonishing if Tolkien had modeled the
Black Speech in any way on Inuit.

Why would it be astonishing?

What evidence is there that Tolkien knew anything about Inuit or
other Eskimo languages?

I'm fairly certain anyone with a linguistics background would have at least
some knowledge of the Inuit languages. Maybe not a lot, but at least some

there are far too many languages for a person yo know all of them
you can expect familarity in one or two language families but not more

One needn't know a language in detail in order to model a constructed
language on its most prominent features. If one wants to loosely base
some invented tongue on Inuktitut (the proper name for the language of
the Inuit), simply giving it an extremely agglutinative morphology, a
null-subject syntax, a guttural sound system, and syllabic orthography
would be sufficient. Sufficient for anyone with a broad knowledge of
linguistics to posit a kinship with Inuktitut, that is; while there are
thousands of natural languages on Earth, comparatively few of them
share these four features.
With respect to Black Speech in particular, I'd say that any connection
to Inuktitut is tenuous at best. From the sample Gandalf reads and its
English translation, it's fairly obvious that the Mordor tongue is
neither highly agglutinative nor incorporative. There's no evidence of
null-subject formation. The only two transliterations we have use an
alphabetic orthography. There may be a case for a guttural phonology,
but as we have only transliterations into English and Elvish it's hard
to say. Nouns are inflected for number, but there does not appear to
be a singular/dual/plural distinction as in Inuktitut. It's difficult
to say whether the case system is ergative since IIRC we're not given
any examples of intransitive verbs. Overall I'd say the Black Speech
has more in common with English than it does with the Eskimo-Aleut
languages.
Regards,
Tristan

Check out the big brain on Tristan!

Post by Tristan Miller
--
_
_V.-o Tristan Miller [en,(fr,de,ia)] >< Space is limited
/ |`-' -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= <> In a haiku, so it's hard
(7_\\ http://www.nothingisreal.com/ >< To finish what you

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:00:29 +0000, John Woodgate

Post by John Woodgate

Post by Nisse
This is a problem, not uncommon to people with Swedish as their mothers
tounge (which works CLOSE to the hobbits way of speak).

This is characteristic of Tolkien's languages, IMHO. Hobbits speak a
sort of Scandinavian, Elves a sort of Welsh and the Black Speech seems
to owe something to Inuit.

Hobbits do not speak a sort of Scandinavian. They speak Westron,
which throughout LotR is consistently translated into English.
Of their former language they retain only a few odd words; these
are enough, however, to show that it was closely related to the
language of the Rohirrim. This language is represented by Old
English.

Sindarin was to some extent based on Welsh; Quenya, however, was
based mostly on Finnish, with significant influence from Latin
and Greek. His inspiration for the Black Speech isn't known;
suggestions that I've seen include Turkish and Hurrian.

Brian

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Brian M. Scott
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:00:29 +0000, John Woodgate

Post by John Woodgate

Post by Nisse
This is a problem, not uncommon to people with Swedish as their mothers
tounge (which works CLOSE to the hobbits way of speak).

This is characteristic of Tolkien's languages, IMHO. Hobbits speak a
sort of Scandinavian, Elves a sort of Welsh and the Black Speech seems
to owe something to Inuit.

Hobbits do not speak a sort of Scandinavian. They speak Westron,
which throughout LotR is consistently translated into English.
Of their former language they retain only a few odd words; these
are enough, however, to show that it was closely related to the
language of the Rohirrim. This language is represented by Old
English.
Sindarin was to some extent based on Welsh; Quenya, however, was
based mostly on Finnish, with significant influence from Latin
and Greek. His inspiration for the Black Speech isn't known;
suggestions that I've seen include Turkish and Hurrian.

Whoever suggested Hurrian clearly knew nothing of the history of Hurrian
studies.

Shippey's index lists "Black Speech" only once -- and the reference is
to a page where he mentions the Welsh etc. connections of the other
languages, so if he knew of anything relevant to Bl.Sp., that's where
he'd have mentioned it.

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.lang.translation that Tristan Miller
<***@nothingisreal.com> wrote (in <***@ID-
187157.news.dfncis.de>) about 'Speak, friend, and enter!', on Mon, 17

Post by Tristan Miller
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to open
the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which Gandalf
translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!"

He does, but Tolkien is deceiving his English readers. The inscription
actually means "Say 'friend' and enter". In English, we have the two
words 'speak' and 'say'. JRRT is implying that the Elvish 'pedo' can be
translated either as 'speak' or 'say'. If Gandalf had translated it as
'Say', there would have been no need to spend that long time trying to
guess the password, which greatly heightens the dramatic tension.

So, Gandalf the translator is to blame. (;-)

Post by Tristan Miller
The party (mis)interprets
this as meaning that the doors will automatically open once one calls
out some secret password known only to friends. They spend considerable
time trying to guess the password before they realize that the
inscription is actually requesting them to simply say the Elvish word
for "friend".

Since it was Celebrimbor who translated Durin's words into Elvish and
wrote the inscription, it's obviously all his fault. (;-)

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

But, more significantly, there has to be a possibility of confusion over
the precise meaning of 'pedo', 'speak' or 'say'. I suspect this is the
bigger problem in some languages.

[Javi]

Post by John Woodgate
I read in sci.lang.translation that Tristan Miller
187157.news.dfncis.de>) about 'Speak, friend, and enter!', on Mon, 17

Post by Tristan Miller
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!"

He does, but Tolkien is deceiving his English readers. The
inscription actually means "Say 'friend' and enter". In English, we
have the two words 'speak' and 'say'. JRRT is implying that the
Elvish 'pedo' can be translated either as 'speak' or 'say'. If
Gandalf had translated it as 'Say', there would have been no need to
spend that long time trying to guess the password, which greatly
heightens the dramatic tension.
So, Gandalf the translator is to blame. (;-)

Post by Tristan Miller
The party (mis)interprets
this as meaning that the doors will automatically open once one calls
out some secret password known only to friends. They spend
considerable time trying to guess the password before they realize
that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say the
Elvish word for "friend".

Since it was Celebrimbor who translated Durin's words into Elvish and
wrote the inscription, it's obviously all his fault. (;-)

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the
duplicity of the inscription cannot be preserved in some
translations. For example, in languages with a vocative case, it
would be obvious from the inflection on "friend" that it was meant
as the object of "speak" and not a term of address.

The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin "dic
amice et intra".

Post by John Woodgate
But, more significantly, there has to be a possibility of confusion
over the precise meaning of 'pedo', 'speak' or 'say'. I suspect this
is the bigger problem in some languages.

Not so big. The difference between "speak" and "say" is not too clear cut:
often, one is included in the other, so using the more general, as in
English "speak", would work.

--
Saludos cordiales
Javi

Mood conjugation:

I enjoy a drop
You never say no
He is an alcoholic

(Craig Brown)

[John Woodgate]

[big snip]

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin "dic
amice et intra".

No, I feel sure that's bad Latin. 'Say "friend" and enter' has 'amicus',
not 'amice', because the friend is not being addressed: in fact there IS
not friend, it's the word 'amicus' that is the password.

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
But, more significantly, there has to be a possibility of confusion
over the precise meaning of 'pedo', 'speak' or 'say'. I suspect this
is the bigger problem in some languages.

often, one is included in the other, so using the more general, as in
English "speak", would work.

No, it wouldn't. The whole point of the episode is based on the fact
that 'Speak "friend" and enter.' is not a normal construction in
English. If it were, the solution would be far more obvious to Gandalf.

[Javi]

Post by John Woodgate
[big snip]

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin
"dic amice et intra".

No, I feel sure that's bad Latin. 'Say "friend" and enter' has
'amicus', not 'amice', because the friend is not being addressed: in
fact there IS not friend, it's the word 'amicus' that is the password.

Just because you say so. Do you know how those magic passwords work? You
have to say the *exact* word, so the word can be *exactly* "amice", not
"amicus" nor "amicum". So "pedo mellon a minno" = "dic amice et intra",
without punctuation marks, as usual in epigraphy. The whole point of the
episode is that Gandalf is guessing the wrong punctuation.

Post by John Woodgate

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
But, more significantly, there has to be a possibility of confusion
over the precise meaning of 'pedo', 'speak' or 'say'. I suspect this
is the bigger problem in some languages.

Not so big. The difference between "speak" and "say" is not too
clear cut: often, one is included in the other, so using the more
general, as in English "speak", would work.

No, it wouldn't. The whole point of the episode is based on the fact
that 'Speak "friend" and enter.' is not a normal construction in
English. If it were, the solution would be far more obvious to
Gandalf.

Of course, it is not a normal construction, but it is a *possible*
construction. Nowadays, the intransitive uses of "to speak" are a lot more
common than the transitives uses, but they are possible. The transitive use
below says that is is a synonim of "pronounce":

1 a (1) : to utter with the speaking voice : PRONOUNCE (2) : to give a
recitation of : DECLAIM b : to express orally : DECLARE <free to speak their
minds> c : ADDRESS, ACCOST; especially : HAIL.

(From the Merriam-Webster dictionary)

Main Entry: speak
Pronunciation: 'spEk
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): spoke /'spOk/; spo·ken /'spO-k&n/; speak·ing
Etymology: Middle English speken, from Old English sprecan, specan; akin to
Old High German sprehhan to speak, Greek spharageisthai to crackle
Date: before 12th century
intransitive senses
1 a : to utter words or articulate sounds with the ordinary voice : TALK b
(1) : to express thoughts, opinions, or feelings orally (2) : to extend a
greeting (3) : to be on speaking terms <still were not speaking after the
dispute> c (1) : to express oneself before a group (2) : to address one's
remarks <speak to the issue>
2 a : to make a written statement <his diaries... spoke... of his
entrancement with death -- Sy Kahn> b : to use such an expression -- often
used in the phrase so to speak <was at the enemy's gates, so to speak -- C.
S. Forester> c : to serve as spokesman <spoke for the whole group>
3 a : to express feelings by other than verbal means <actions speak louder
than words> b : SIGNAL c : to be interesting or attractive : APPEAL <great
music... speaks directly to the emotions -- A. N. Whitehead>
4 : to make a request : ASK <spoke for the remaining piece of pie>
5 : to make a characteristic or natural sound <all at once the thunder
spoke -- George Meredith>
6 a : TESTIFY b : to be indicative or suggestive <his gold... spoke of
riches in the land -- Julian Dana>
transitive senses
1 a (1) : to utter with the speaking voice : PRONOUNCE (2) : to give a
recitation of : DECLAIM b : to express orally : DECLARE <free to speak their
minds> c : ADDRESS, ACCOST; especially : HAIL
2 : to make known in writing : STATE
3 : to use or be able to use in speaking <speaks Spanish>
4 : to indicate by other than verbal means
5 archaic : DESCRIBE, DEPICT

--
Saludos cordiales
Javi

Mood conjugation:

I enjoy a drop
You never say no
He is an alcoholic

(Craig Brown)

[Padraic Brown]

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
[big snip]

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin
"dic amice et intra".

No, I feel sure that's bad Latin. 'Say "friend" and enter' has
'amicus', not 'amice', because the friend is not being addressed: in
fact there IS not friend, it's the word 'amicus' that is the password.

Just because you say so. Do you know how those magic passwords work? You
have to say the *exact* word, so the word can be *exactly* "amice", not
"amicus" nor "amicum".

This is true, and why the joke also works in Latin which has marked
case. The vocative "amice" is ambiguous: is it a real vocative, urging
one to say some magic word; or is "amice" itself the magic word?

Post by Javi
So "pedo mellon a minno" = "dic amice et intra",
without punctuation marks, as usual in epigraphy. The whole point of the
episode is that Gandalf is guessing the wrong punctuation.

It has very little to do with punctiation as there was none in the
Sindarin inscription. Gandalf's mistake is one of choosing the wrong
Westron word to translate pedo. Tolkien marks this choice by first
using "speak", later using "say" once Gandalf has understood his
error. Once Gandalf did that, all the punctuation in Middle Earth
would be of no help. Had he picked the right translation, the episode
would never have transpired.

Padraic.

la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu
ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.

[Ekkehard Dengler]

Post by John Woodgate
The whole point of the episode is based on the fact
that 'Speak "friend" and enter.' is not a normal construction in
English. If it were, the solution would be far more obvious to Gandalf.

Hi John.

I agree that what creates the confusion in the first place is the fact
that "speak", Gandalf's translation of the ambiguous Elvish word,
doesn't *usually* mean "say" in modern English. If he'd read and
translated the Elvish as "say" right away, the whole episode would
have been pointless.

On the other hand, one could argue that what eventually set him on the
right track may well have been the rare meaning "utter, pronounce".
After all, he did find the solution in time without being given any
useful clue.

I know this would imply an uncommon usage of "speak". However, the
word apparently used to be more versatile than it is now. (Here's an
example from the OED: "Loudly spake the prince: <Forbear, there is a
worthier.>") And surely it's still possible in literary English to use
"speak" with object phrases such as "the hallowed name" or "the famous
words". At any rate, this usage would be in keeping with the
pseudo-archaic English that "The Lord of the Rings" is written in. So
"speak" is semi-ambiguous in this context, which perhaps made it
easier for Gandalf to review (or re-interpret) his translation. I
admit that Gandalf himself changes his translation to '*Say* <friend>
and enter' once he's found the answer, but he goes on to say: "I had
only to *speak* the Elvish word for <friend> and the doors opened."

Be that as it may, in order for Gandalf's first translation to be
misleading, all it really takes is an ambiguous Elvish source text
rather than a particular kind of verb in the target language. I
originally thought it took an intermediate degree of ambiguity in
order for the translation to be misleading and for the riddle to be
solvable at the same time, but I'm no longer convinced.

Even if the meanings "talk" and "say" were equally plausible, the
translation of the inscription would still pose a potential riddle. In
fact, the riddle probably works even in Brazilian Portuguese, where
"falar" can mean both "talk" and "say": "Fala, amigo, e entra" vs.
"Fala <amigo> e entra." Unfortunately, I don't happen to have a
Portuguese version of the text.

What's crucial is the lack of distinction between language and
meta-language, although a perfectly ambiguous verb would probably make
Gandalf's task easier.

And even if the verb used in the translation had only one unequivocal
meaning, it would still be possible to reread the source text and spot
the ambiguity.

Regards,
Ekkehard

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by Ekkehard Dengler
I agree that what creates the confusion in the first place is the fact
that "speak", Gandalf's translation of the ambiguous Elvish word,
doesn't *usually* mean "say" in modern English. If he'd read and
translated the Elvish as "say" right away, the whole episode would
have been pointless.
On the other hand, one could argue that what eventually set him on the
right track may well have been the rare meaning "utter, pronounce".
After all, he did find the solution in time without being given any
useful clue.

Actually, Gandalf did not find the solution. It was one of Frodo's
cousins (either Merry or Pippin; I can't remember which) who discovered
the ambiguity, effectively suggesting to Gandalf that he speak the
Elvish word for "friend".

Post by Ekkehard Dengler
I know this would imply an uncommon usage of "speak". However, the
word apparently used to be more versatile than it is now....
this usage would be in keeping with the
pseudo-archaic English that "The Lord of the Rings" is written in.

My thoughts exactly. Thank you for putting in very clear terms what I
ought to have mentioned back in my original post. :)

Regards,
Tristan

[Bill O'Meally]

Post by Tristan Miller
Actually, Gandalf did not find the solution. It was one of Frodo's
cousins (either Merry or Pippin; I can't remember which) who

discovered

Post by Tristan Miller
the ambiguity, effectively suggesting to Gandalf that he speak the
Elvish word for "friend".

I wouldn't say that. Merry simply said "what does it mean by 'speak,
friend, and enter'".[1] Gandalf eventually comes up with the answer, but
says Merry was on the right track. I always felt he was giving Merry
more credit than was due.

[1] Note the commas. Now had it been written "speak friend, and enter",
that would suggest Merry was on to something.

[Padraic Brown]

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:41:54 GMT, "Bill O'Meally"

Post by Bill O'Meally

Post by Tristan Miller
Actually, Gandalf did not find the solution. It was one of Frodo's
cousins (either Merry or Pippin; I can't remember which) who
discovered
the ambiguity, effectively suggesting to Gandalf that he speak the
Elvish word for "friend".

I wouldn't say that. Merry simply said "what does it mean by 'speak,
friend, and enter'".[1] Gandalf eventually comes up with the answer, but
says Merry was on the right track. I always felt he was giving Merry
more credit than was due.
[1] Note the commas. Now had it been written "speak friend, and enter",
that would suggest Merry was on to something.

He's simply repeating Gandalf's translation.

Padraic.

la cieurgeourea provoer mal trasfu
ast meiyoer ke 'l andrext ben trasfu.

[Bill O'Meally]

Post by Padraic Brown
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:41:54 GMT, "Bill O'Meally"

Post by Bill O'Meally
I wouldn't say that. Merry simply said "what does it mean by 'speak,
friend, and enter'".[1] Gandalf eventually comes up with the answer, but
says Merry was on the right track. I always felt he was giving Merry
more credit than was due.
[1] Note the commas. Now had it been written "speak friend, and enter",
that would suggest Merry was on to something.

He's simply repeating Gandalf's translation.

Right. But if the commas were placed differently, it would imply that
Merry was interpreting the translation differently (and correctly, I
might add).

[Jens Kilian]

Post by Tristan Miller
Actually, Gandalf did not find the solution.

Actually, he did. In the book, that is.

IDNHTBIFOM, but as I recall, Gandalf sits down after his earlier failed
attempts, and some time later starts laughing, saying something like
"Ridiculously easy, like most riddles." Pippin's remark comes much earlier,
immediately after Gandalf (incorrectly) translates the inscription.

[Bill O'Meally]

"Jens Kilian" <***@agilent.com> wrote in message news:***@socbl033.germany.agilent.com...

Pippin's remark comes much earlier,

Post by Jens Kilian
immediately after Gandalf (incorrectly) translates the inscription.

Merry's remark.

[s***@nomail.com]

In rec.arts.books.tolkien Jens Kilian <***@agilent.com> wrote:
: Tristan Miller <***@nothingisreal.com> writes:
:> Actually, Gandalf did not find the solution.

: Actually, he did. In the book, that is.

: IDNHTBIFOM, but as I recall, Gandalf sits down after his earlier failed
: attempts, and some time later starts laughing, saying something like
: "Ridiculously easy, like most riddles." Pippin's remark comes much earlier,
: immediately after Gandalf (incorrectly) translates the inscription.

If I remember rightly, in the drafts Merry's (or one of the hobbits)
original comment is closer to the mark. Christopher Tolkien notes
that Gandalf's statement that "Merry, of all people, was on the
right track" made more sense originally, and that in the final
version it is not clear why Gandalf said this. I will have
to go rummage around in HoME to find the exact quote.

Stephen

[Anthony J. Bryant]

Post by Tristan Miller
Actually, Gandalf did not find the solution. It was one of Frodo's
cousins (either Merry or Pippin; I can't remember which) who discovered
the ambiguity, effectively suggesting to Gandalf that he speak the
Elvish word for "friend".

Yes, Gandalf did. The movie made it Frodo (the hobbitish penchant for riddles,
y'know) but in the book it was *entirely* Gandalf.

Tony

[John Lawler]

Post by John Woodgate
[big snip]

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin "dic
amice et intra".

No, I feel sure that's bad Latin. 'Say "friend" and enter' has 'amicus',
not 'amice', because the friend is not being addressed: in fact there IS
not friend, it's the word 'amicus' that is the password.

Or 'amicum', the accusative.
There's a nice question here whether your ordinary
Latin speaker would avoid using the usual accusative
for the direct object of 'dic' just to make sure the
word was in its nominative citation form. How prevalent
was the use-mention distinction in Latin case assignment?

The more pressing, and original point, however, is
whether Quenya had a case system that distinguished
at least accusative (or nominative) from vocative.

Or whether 'mellon' is an irregular noun with the
relevant case endings identical -- and if not, which
case form is the magic password, or whether there's
a morphological analyzer in the spell that strips
the case affixes and works on the bare root.

The verb's important, too, because of the likelihood
that there would be selectional restrictions on
direct quotations in objects. But the case system
is the big problem.

-John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler U Michigan Linguistics Dept
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"You can only find truth with logic if you have already found
truth without it." -- G.K. Chesterton

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by Javi

Post by John Woodgate
The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin
"dic amice et intra".

I had considered this, but it seems rather silly to have a password in
the vocative. Moreover it would make the party's confusion over the
meaning of the inscription rather unbelievable. Correctly translating
the vocative "amice" would immediately cast doubt upon Gandalf's
interpretation of "dic".

Regards,
Tristan

[Raven]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.

Post by Javi
Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin
"dic amice et intra".

I had considered this, but it seems rather silly to have a password in
the vocative.

Not necessarily. The builder of the doors could choose any password he
wanted, just as some sysadm building a system with humour rather than
security in mind. The builder could have this in mind, that the person
trying to open the door should address the door, calling it "friend".

Corvus.

[Tristan Miller]

Greetings.

Post by Raven

Post by Tristan Miller

Post by Javi
Not necessarily: the password may be a word in vocative, so in
Latin "dic amice et intra".

I had considered this, but it seems rather silly to have a password
in the vocative.

Not necessarily. The builder of the doors could choose any
password he wanted

I didn't say it was impossible, just that it seems silly. From a
security standpoint, no, but certainly from a linguistic one, where for
most languages the "default" form of the noun is the nominative. But
then again, that's speaking as someone whose mother tongue is not
highly inflected.

This raises an interesting question. When modern-day speakers of
inflected languages are asked to choose a password, and they select a
noun, is the probability of their inflecting it in the nominative
higher than chance? For example, Hungarian has about twenty different
cases, depending on how one counts; assuming a Hungarian speaker has
chosen the word for "friend" as a password, are the chances of her
choosing to write this as "barát" (nom.) greater than those for
"barátot" (acc.) or "barátnak" (dat.) or "baráttal" (com.)? Is the
distribution of password case uniform, or does it reflect actual
spoken/written usage, or does it have some entirely different
distribution?

Regards,
Tristan

[Raven]

Post by Tristan Miller

Post by Raven
Not necessarily. The builder of the doors could choose any
password he wanted

I didn't say it was impossible, just that it seems silly. From a
security standpoint, no, but certainly from a linguistic one, where for
most languages the "default" form of the noun is the nominative. But
then again, that's speaking as someone whose mother tongue is not
highly inflected.

I presume that in Sindarin the Nominative would be the default. A case
[1] might be made that Old Norse had the Accusative as the default, since
this case had no suffix to mark it. The Nominative had -r. Though I don't
know if this was true for all nouns.
But I don't see why the builder of the doors should choose the default
case. He might choose the Nominative because a welcome guest would declare
himself as a friend, and use this case. Or like I noted in my previous
post, he could choose Vocative, addressing the doors. It depends on how his
mind worked when he chose the password. If he simply wanted to use the word
"friend" to celebrate the friendship between Eregion and Khazad-dûm then he
would likely use the dictionary entry which would probably be the Nominative
form.
But Sindarin seems to have been case-less, anyway, descending from an
inflected ancestor-language but relying now on word order and prepositions.
Primitive Quendian seems to have had few cases; Quenya had many but not a
Vocative. Perhaps we should go with "a mhellon" for a Vocative of mellon.
:-)

[1] Pun noticed.

Holló.

[John Woodgate]

Post by Raven
Or like I noted
in my previous post, he could choose Vocative, addressing the doors.

Then 'doors', not 'friend' would be in the vocative, unless you mean
that the speaker (!) regards the doors as 'Friend', but then again it
would be 'Friends'.

[Ekkehard Dengler]

Post by Tristan Miller

Post by Javi
the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin
"dic amice et intra".

I had considered this, but it seems rather silly to have a password in
the vocative.

Perhaps not in this case, since friendship is usually a reciprocal
thing. If we assume, as we must, that the gate is operated by an
invisible guard, then both the nominative and the vocative seem to
make sense to me: "Say you're a friend and I'll let you in" vs. "Call
me <friend> and I'll let you in."

Regards,
Ekkehard

[John Woodgate]

Post by Ekkehard Dengler

Post by Tristan Miller

Post by Javi
the password may be a word in vocative, so in Latin
"dic amice et intra".

I had considered this, but it seems rather silly to have a password in
the vocative.

Perhaps not in this case, since friendship is usually a reciprocal
thing. If we assume, as we must, that the gate is operated by an
invisible guard, then both the nominative and the vocative seem to
make sense to me: "Say you're a friend and I'll let you in" vs. "Call
me <friend> and I'll let you in."

It seems to me that this whole subject is a case of the provocative.
(;-)

[TT Arvind]

Post by Tristan Miller
I had considered this, but it seems rather silly to have a password in
the vocative. Moreover it would make the party's confusion over the
meaning of the inscription rather unbelievable. Correctly translating
the vocative "amice" would immediately cast doubt upon Gandalf's
interpretation of "dic".

Would it? If the password were 'amice', couldn't the use of the vocative
lead to the sign being interpreted as "speak, O friend, and enter",
thereby leading to the same confusion?

[Stan Brown]

In article <HNDEFjBhZPu$***@jmwa.demon.co.uk> in
rec.arts.books.tolkien, John Woodgate

Post by John Woodgate
I read in sci.lang.translation that Tristan Miller
187157.news.dfncis.de>) about 'Speak, friend, and enter!', on Mon, 17

Post by Tristan Miller
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.

The language only needs an accusative case to be in trouble, not
necessarily a vocative distinct from the nominative.

I don't think so. The instruction, with punctuation that wasn't
shown in the inscription, could be "Dic 'amicus'" -- IIRC "dic" is
the imperative of "dicere".

In other words, the password could be a nominative (or vocative)
form, even if the direct object of the imperative "say", since it
was a word used as a word (i.e. a particular sequence of sounds) and
not as a grammatical part of the sentence. It could just as well
have been "Say 'blahblah' and enter."

By contrast, "Speak, Friend, and enter" would have to have "Friend"
in the vocative, or whatever serves as vocative.

[Donald J. Harlow]

Post by Tristan Miller
Greetings.
One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
(mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
the Elvish word for "friend".
This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
not a term of address.
The Lord of the Rings has been translated into nearly 40 languages; is
anyone aware of such a language where the above riddle would present a
problem? If so, how was it handled by the translator? (Or for
translators who are not familiar with the book, how would you handle
this problem?)

As far as I can tell, the riddle works not because of the structure of
Westron (English) but of the source language, which apparently has no
vocative, no commas and no quotation marks, and expecially does not
distinguish between the words for "make a statement" (say) and "make
language" (speak). As far as I can tell, the problem is in the translation
of the original command, not in the command itself. Presumably, most
languages can generate similar, if not identical, misunderstandings.

In his Esperanto translation (Ekaterinburg: Sezonoj, 1995), William Auld
uses precisely the same method as Tolkien does in the original English, with
the same effect.

--
-- Don HARLOW
http://www.webcom.com/~donh/don/don.html
http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/

[J***@r.invalid]

In rec.arts.books.tolkien Donald J. Harlow <***@donh.best.vwh.net> wrote:
: "Tristan Miller" <***@nothingisreal.com> skribis en mesagxo
: news:***@ID-187157.news.dfncis.de...
:> Greetings.
:>
:> One of the more memorable scenes in The Lord of the Rings is when the
:> fellowship reaches the entrance of Moria and must figure out how to
:> open the magical doors. There is an inscription on the doors which
:> Gandalf translates as, "Speak, friend, and enter!" The party
:> (mis)interprets this as meaning that the doors will automatically open
:> once one calls out some secret password known only to friends. They
:> spend considerable time trying to guess the password before they
:> realize that the inscription is actually requesting them to simply say
:> the Elvish word for "friend".
:>
:> This riddle works rather well in English, but I suspect the duplicity of
:> the inscription cannot be preserved in some translations. For example,
:> in languages with a vocative case, it would be obvious from the
:> inflection on "friend" that it was meant as the object of "speak" and
:> not a term of address.
:>
:> The Lord of the Rings has been translated into nearly 40 languages; is
:> anyone aware of such a language where the above riddle would present a
:> problem? If so, how was it handled by the translator? (Or for
:> translators who are not familiar with the book, how would you handle
:> this problem?)
:>
: As far as I can tell, the riddle works not because of the structure of
: Westron (English) but of the source language, which apparently has no
: vocative, no commas and no quotation marks, and expecially does not
: distinguish between the words for "make a statement" (say) and "make
: language" (speak). As far as I can tell, the problem is in the translation
: of the original command, not in the command itself. Presumably, most
: languages can generate similar, if not identical, misunderstandings.

Actually, while the source language (Sindarin) doesn't seem to
have a marker for vocative it appears direct objects usually
undergo soft mutation. It appears, however, that the actual
riddle of the inscription is that soft mutation has been ignored
for the password and it's been written exactly as it is to be
pronounced for the doors to open, thus causing the mistranslation
of it as vocative into English.

In languages that mark the vocative explicitly, an easy solution
would be to put the password in vocative first and then in the
proper form when the riddle has been solved.

And, as you note, if the language also makes a distinction between
"speak" and "say", the same method as the English translation can
be used.


/Lars

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by J***@r.invalid
Actually, while the source language (Sindarin) doesn't seem to
have a marker for vocative it appears direct objects usually
undergo soft mutation. It appears, however, that the actual
riddle of the inscription is that soft mutation has been ignored
for the password and it's been written exactly as it is to be
pronounced for the doors to open, thus causing the mistranslation
of it as vocative into English.
In languages that mark the vocative explicitly, an easy solution
would be to put the password in vocative first and then in the
proper form when the riddle has been solved.
And, as you note, if the language also makes a distinction between
"speak" and "say", the same method as the English translation can
be used.

But how will we know, given that Christopher Tolkien says in the last
volume of Addenda that there is much manuscript material on the
languages, which he declines to publish?

I suggested to Tom Shippey that he might do an edition of the grammars,
and he suggested it would be a task for a younger person ...

[J***@r.invalid]

In rec.arts.books.tolkien Peter T. Daniels <***@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

[snip]

:
: But how will we know, given that Christopher Tolkien says in the last
: volume of Addenda that there is much manuscript material on the
: languages, which he declines to publish?
:
: I suggested to Tom Shippey that he might do an edition of the grammars,
: and he suggested it would be a task for a younger person ...

A group of people is currently dedicating their time to further
publish Tolkien's linguistic writings, usually accompanied by
analyses and commentaries. For more information on the two main
publications, Vinyar Tengwar and Parma Eldalamberon, see:

http://www.elvish.org


/Lars

[Peter T. Daniels]

[snip]
: But how will we know, given that Christopher Tolkien says in the last
: volume of Addenda that there is much manuscript material on the
: languages, which he declines to publish?
: I suggested to Tom Shippey that he might do an edition of the grammars,
: and he suggested it would be a task for a younger person ...
A group of people is currently dedicating their time to further
publish Tolkien's linguistic writings, usually accompanied by
analyses and commentaries. For more information on the two main
http://www.elvish.org

If they don't come from Houghton Mifflin, how will they be distributed?