"So can someone please help me with just a simple spelling and BASIC
pronounciation thereof of the name Swiftaxe."

I would go for 'Snarøx'. I have put up a ~20K sound file where I try
pronuncing it:
www.geocities.com/jepe2503/snarox.wav
I hope my northern Scandinavian accent will do here.

In modern Swedish it would become 'snaryxa'. Here is probably a
typical example of eastern 'u' vs western 'o' (i-umlauts 'ø' and 'y',
resp.) as in 'hult' vs 'holt'; 'kull-' vs 'koll-' etc.

/Sjul


--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, Mark Grass <snaebjornr@...>
wrote:

> Thank you all for the wonderful help and rather
> extensive language course. I don't want to sound rude
> but can someone please tell me what most of that meant
> in English?! I wasn't an english major by any means.
> And I've yet to actually know two major things from
> these messages; 1. What would I use to say Swiftaxe in
> Icelandic as a byname? 2.How do I pronounce it?
>
> You see I speak no other language but English and that
> badly. I speak American which any will tell you is not
> by any means a language of its own and a rip off of
> nearly every other! I would like to learn to speak Old
> Norse, of this I have no doubt. But I must learn from
> the very beginning. Starting with the absolute basics.
> It truly is unfair to start someone in the middle of a
> language and expect them to know how the Spanish trill
> their R! I am not trying to be disrepctful in the
> least but I'm so lost now that I'm considering
> changing my persona to an English man so I can say my
> own name!
>
> So can someone please help me with just a simple
> spelling and BASIC pronounciation thereof of the name
> Swiftaxe.
> Sincerely,
> Snaebjorn
> --- "R.C. Zarco" <rczarco@...> wrote:
> > Salutations,
> >
> > I would not enter in this discussion because I have
> > some conceptions(in pronunciation matters) really
> > different from the most of you.But,one little
> > inference made me enter now in the question.So,let's
> > go straight to the question:
> >
> > >"> Of these 2 is defensible, 3 and 3.2 are correct,
> > >>I am not
> > >>certain about 1 and 4 while 3.1 and 5 are
> > >>definitely incorrect.
> > >
> > >5 is only incorrect because you've never tried it,
> > >but wold otherwise be
> > >correct as an assumption from English speakers
> >
> > When you say that "it's correct to the english
> > speakers",you're defending a feeble point-of-view.
> > All languages have a nomadic nature,but(how a
> > delightful paradox!!!)they have some axioms that
> > should be followed.So,how to solve this problem?Only
> > assuming which all the "speaker beings" are capable
> > to reach the hypothetic "herself" of other being
> > that is a "natural speaker" of the language he is
> > now trying to talk.
> > Reaching this "state of mind",entering in the
> > "herself" of a "natural speaker" of the language he
> > is trying to use,ALL the natural conceptions of your
> > hypothetic "birth-language" MUST be abandoned.This
> > "abandon" it's a ineffaceable introduction to any
> > effort in speak all languages not-natural to you.
> > Of course someone might could say that,doing what
> > was said above,all the singularity of the "being
> > that is trying to speak another language than your
> > own" it's lost.Certainly who say that has serious
> > problems with his five wits.The singularity of the
> > "speaker" isn't negated for his effort in follow the
> > "languages rules" as any "natural speaker" of the
> > language in question.This doesn't happens because
> > all the combination,metric,rhythmics and contents of
> > the words encountered in his message are really
> > proper,express the unique and complete singularity
> > of the speaker.
> > Someone may could say too that "dead languages"
> > don't have "living speakers" to we have absolute
> > certainty how the pronunciation "essentially" works.
> > In this case,the most prudent thing to do,it's
> > follow what the majority accepts.The "majority
> > acceptation" becomes the paradigm,the "metrics" that
> > will give us the "proper space" to compose our
> > "sonnet" with our own ideas,passions... singularity.
> >
> > My best regards,
> >
> > - R.C.Zarco
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ny versjon av Yahoo! Messenger
> > Nye ikoner og bakgrunner, webkamera med
> > superkvalitet og dobbelt så morsom
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com