--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Mcharg"
<Gerald.Mcharg@...> wrote:

> Xigung
> Thanks for your comments. As I'm working my way through Gordon's
>Old Norse texts for the second time - and I really am labouring
>over them! -you'll forgive me for not discussing all your comments
>and suggestions. However, regarding your first comment, that I
>translated 'kømr' as 'came' and not 'come'; this is deliberate. The
>events related to the king are in the past, but the writer, wishing
>to give an air of urgency or excitement about what has just
>happened uses the 'historic present'. It's a literary device used
>in English and Latin and classical Greek.

Just a minor detail: You're right, however this switching back and
forth between past and present seems to be rather unmotivated in ON.
My ON professor doesn't like to call it "historic present" because
it doesn't always indicate excitement or urgency, but the tense can
change for no apparent reason -- and it changes a lot! Therefore one
has to translate the verb tenses a bit freely to make sense.

Chris :)