----- Original Message -----
From: Sarah Bowen
To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 8:30 PM
Subject: [norse_course] Boðvarr strikes again!

Sælir Jed og Simon!
 
My exams are over!  No more studying, just back to earning some money - oh, well!
 
I held on to this in case Thomas, Daniel and Laurel wanted to post their translations, but I can always get back to them separately if they want me to.  So here goes...
 
it looks like this section was more straightforward, only one or two minor things cropped up...
 
ok þo hann upp allan... yes, I guess the 'upp' is a kind of intensifier here, it means 'and washed him thoroughly all over'.
 
síðan gekk Böðvarr til þess rúms...
I know rúm means bed in modern Icelandic but in O.N. it means seat or bench (perhaps because after an evening meal with plenty to eat and drink, they would fall asleep in an alcoholic stupor at the table! - sorry, I'm maligning them, I daresay there's a much more appropriate linguistic reason for the semantic shift!)
 
hann er svá hræddr at skelfr á honum leggr ok liðr...
I think it´s interesting that the subject of the subordinate clause (at skelfr á honum leggr ok liðr) is plural - leg and limb and yet the verb is in the singular - skelfr.  Barnes explains this is because leggr ok liðr is an expression used to refer to the whole body, meaning he trembles all over (or from head to toe, which I prefer because it is an equivalent English expression).
 
at þessi maðr vill hjálpa sér... vilja also conveys the meaning want or intend.
 
Perhaps I'll post up a longer section this week and see how everyone gets on with it.  If anyone else wants to join us, it's not too late, just pitch in and do what you can.
 
Kveðja,
Sarah.
 
Sarah,
Could it be that in the Old Norse psyche, 'leggr ok liðr' was conceived of as a single entity ?  I think I'm saying what Barnes is saying, but in different words.
If this is so, then it must have been thought of as a collective noun, and collective nouns like 'government', 'congregation', etc., take a singular verb. Or at least they used to: if you listen to any news programme, in the UK at least, you will now hear the presenters say, '.....the government are.....'. When I was at school mumblemumble years ago, we would have been reprimanded for saying or writing this" 'The government is', boy -  can you not write English correctly", the teachers would say.
According to this dictum, the present newscasters are using grammar in a slovenly fashion. But are they really? Perhaps the nation thinks of 'government' not as a collective body, but as many individuals. Yet with other collective nouns like 'club' ,'society', we would not be happy in saying 'the club are', 'the society are' 
This is what I like about Old Norse, or any other language; it makes you think, and hopefully, it clarifies your thoughts about your native tongue.  It makes you think about the thought processes of others who live in different countries, or who lived in other times.  You want to get into their minds. It makes you realise that present-day English does not set a fixed standard to be emulated by speakers of other languages. Would any Americans, Australians, Irish, etc, like to comment on this?
Cheers,
Jed


A Norse funny farm, overrun by smart people.

Homepage: http://www.hi.is/~haukurth/norse/

To escape from this funny farm try rattling off an e-mail to:

norse_course-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.