I guess there was a change in the frequency, that kind of changes don't happen over night.
It's quite common in norse language to use only the definite adjective without the pronoun, as long as the writer considers the meaning to be clear, he often omits what can be omitted. If he wants to write Tor opened the door, he might just write Tor opened, if the text already has described the closed door.
'br��ir minn l�till' is the version I'd recomend because it's in the nominative case wich is the form norse uses in vocative function. The order of the words doesn't matter.
I checed out modern Icelandic, the syntax is much more 'normalised', and they do use definite/demonstrative article/pronoun in the 'modern' way.
I don't know about *br��lir, it might not exist in written texts as I'm sure it would only be used as a personal nick name, but I have no confirmation that the diminuative may be applied this way. I'll have to check this up properly, so I'll get back to this in a couple of weeks.
llama_nom <600cell@...> wrote:
Do you know if there was any change in the frequency of the definite/demonstrative pronoun over time in Norse? I've read that it's much rarer in the oldest Old English, originally only used where we would say "that" in Modern English, but became steadily more common and in later Old English is often used like a definite article "the". On the other hand, in the oldest Old English, and sometimes in Gothic, definite adjectives can appear without the pronoun where we would say "the" (there is some variation in Gothic: in spedistin daga; in �amma spedistin daga "in the last day"), and cf. ON nicknames:
I'varr beinlausi (alongside I'varr inn beinlausi)
Looking again at those examples I had, the one from Gautreks saga probably does involve line of sight. I should have written "good ox"
there, not "best ox". Sorry I forgot to identify example 5: that was from Hervarar saga, ch. 11. The brother in question is the addressee's only brother, but then the actual superlatives are often used to mean "a very" rather than literally "the most". Maybe we could say "that most warlike brother of yours" = "your very warlike brother"?
I found some modern examples of 'fr�ndi minn g��ur', as a vocative. So do you think it would be best, if addressing this brother to say 'br��ir minn l�till'? Or 'br��ir minn litli', or 'litli br��ir minn'? I haven't found *br��lir yet. I wonder if the runic inscriptions have anything like this.
--- In email@example.com, Annika Larla Evensen McKibbin <runadis@...> wrote: > Hi Llama > > In norse the definite and the demonstrative pronouns are expressed the same ((h)inn), which
can sometimes be confusing semantically. They are as a rule ( though no rules are followed through without fault in the norse litterature), only used in the cases mentioned, and one other i forgot to mention as i didn't see it as applying to the case, when you wish to point out what one's talking about as the most 'what ever adjective is in question' among its like. (I don't think it was the smallest brother in the world who was in question.) > In the first 5 examples I might add -which is the best/sharpest/ most warlike of all. Which probbably fits quite well into the transelations. Often it will be a case of iterpetation, are we talking about somethin exeptional, or someting we have prior knowlege of? Thogh, in (2) it seems like the man is in sight, or at least within ear shot, which would amont to the same, as it seems he's beeing spoken directly to. > > Your other examples I
don't see any hindrance for applying theese rules to either, but then I don't know much about the habits of these languages... > > As to your Norweigan example, it's quite standard for the runic inscriptions, no definite pronouns. > > How this applies to modern Icelandic I do not know, but i do know that it doesn't apply to modern Norweigan... I probbably will find out though, as I've gotten curious... > > The coupeling of the demonstrative and possesive I'd attribute to the norse love of bragging/putting forth of their possesons and gifts. > > To me it seems the definite article as we use and know it, doesn't really apply to the norse language. > > The use of the diminuative has continued in the use of names until today, and I only assume it has it's roots in everyday use of the language, and that it would be used and affect the words much the
same as when making superlatives... I freely admit I'm on thin ice here, I realise it's something I've been taking for granted, though it feels quite natural to do this with the language. > > Eaters of the Dead, never heard abuot it before ( just got a short brief of the action), Don't really know what to say about that... > > Runadis > > llama_nom <600cell@...> wrote: > > > Hi Annika, > > > _the '(h)inn' would of course only be used if the brother had > recently been mentioned in the same conversation or was in sight at > the time of the conversation... > > Does this rule about (h)inn apply to Modern Icelandic? And if the > brother was not in sight and had not been recently mentioned, would > the adjective still be weak? Here are some examples from Old > Icelandic where I think the thing/person is being
mentioned for the > first time in the conversation: > > 1) Gillingr skal hafa uxa minn inn g��a > "G. shall have my best ox" > (Gautreks saga, ch. 2) > > 2) Upp r�stu �akkr��r, > �r�ll minn in bezti. > "Arise Th., my best thrall" > (V�lundarkvi�a, st. 39) > > 3) ok minn inn hvassi hj�rr > "and my sharp sword" > (F�fnism�l, st. 6) > > 4) Skaltu n� drekka brullaup til hennar ok fara � skr��a minn inn > besta. > You must/shall now marry her and go in my best raiment. > (Sturlaugs saga starfsama, ch. 22) > > 5) br��ir �inn inn b��sk�i > "your warlike brother" > > Admittedly in 3, though not mentioned, the sword has been felt. In > 1 and 4 I'm not sure if the item in in sight, but maybe. Gilling is > a poor man so perhaps he keeps his ox indoors. I don't know the > context of 4, I'm
afraid. In 5, the brother is probably NOT IN > SIGHT, as he's just arrived and instructed the speaker to go inside > the hall to announce his arrival. > > Not strictly relevant, but the use of possessive + demonstrative is > also found in Old English: > > 6) bro�er �in se selesta > "your blessed brother" > (Gu�lac 1332-3) > > ...and weak adjectives with or without definite/demonstrative > pronouns in Gothic: > > 7) �u is sunus meins sa liuba > you are my own beloved son > (Luke 3,22)--speaker = voice from heaven, who hasn't mentioned > anything till now > > 8) sa sunus meins dau�s was jah gaqiunoda > my son was dead but came to life > (Luke 15,24)--speaker = father of the Prodigal Son, speaking in > private to his jealous other son > > 9) �u nu, barn mein waliso > so you, my dear child > (2Tim
2,1) > > In vocatives like 9, the weak/definite declension of the adjective > is a matter of convention, used even in writing a letter, as in 9, > or a Gospel, where the adressee is not in sight: batista > �aiaufeilu "most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1,1). This is the very > beginning of the Gospel, so Th. hasn't been mentioned previously > either. On the other hand, an early 5th c. inscription from Norway > has the vocative adjective declined strong, and without > demonstrative/article: > > 10) Birg, Inguboro, swestar minu liubu meR Wage > "Save/protect [me], Inguboro, my dear sister, me WagaR." > (Opedal runestone) > > It has been speculated that this was a prayer addressed to the > occupant of a nearby grave-mound (20m away, according to Arild > Hauge's site). I don't know if that affects the grammar though. > The Opedal
inscription conflicts with Gothic usage. Would this > require a definite pronoun in Old Norse? Modern Icelandic? > > > > > Also I think it's likely that instead of using the word little > they would maybe only use a diminuative, so you could get something > like br�� + le (the diminuative) + ur/ir, which with vocal > subtraction would give an end result somthing like br��lir, which > would mean little or small brother... > > > Do you have any examples of this method of forming a diminutive? > Did it survive in Old Icelandic as a productive affix? The old > diminutives -ill and -li were added to the end of the word and > affect the declination, but I hadn't heard of this diminutive infix > in ON. I'm not sure that even -ill and -li were freely combined > with roots in historical times. > > Where did the
speaker come from in Eaters of the Dead? I haven't > read the book, but in the film (13th Warrior) I think they end up in > Norway don't they? But could it be an East Norse peculiarity? > Maybe we should be looking for parallels on Swedish runestones. > Lots of examples of br��ir, anyway, but are there any with an > adjective? > > Llama Nom > > > > > > > > > > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Annika Larla Evensen McKibbin > <runadis@...> wrote: > > _the '(h)inn' would of course only be used if the brother had > recently been mentioned in the same conversation or was in sight at > the time of the conversation... Also I think it's likely that > instead of using the word little they would maybe only use a > diminuative, so you could get something like br�� + le (the >
diminuative) + ur/ir, which with vocal subtraction would give an > end result somthing like br��lir, wich would mean little or small > brother... > > > > Runadis > > > > llama_nom <600cell@...> wrote: > > > > --- In email@example.com, "absnt_mnd_prof" > > <hilandfox@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Can anyone give me the old norse for this? > > > > > > Google turns up a lot of Modern Icelandic examples of both: > > > > litli br��ir minn (1990) > > br��ir minn litli (52) > > > > Also a few with: hinn litli br��ir minn. I don't know if that > adds > > the same kind of emphasis as English "that little brother of mine". > > > > Perhaps the most likely way to say it in Old Norse would be: > > > >
br��ir minn inn litli > > > > Llama Nom > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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: > > > > firstname.lastname@example.org > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT > > document.write(''); > > > > --------------------------------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/norse_course/ > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to: > > email@example.com > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Do you Yahoo!? > > All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo! > > > > > > 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: > > firstname.lastname@example.org > > > Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT > document.write(''); > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Groups Links >
> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/norse_course/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > email@example.com > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'