Hi, I am following this a little bit.


I'd have some comments/questions. Hope you don't mind.


> Ok þegar er konungr veit hverr hann er, tók konungr í hǫnd honum
Auðuni ok bað hann vel kominn:


Here is mentioned the "taking by the hand".
I wonder if it, at the time, was customary to "shake hands",
in the same manner as is done today? In that case, why not
write "the king shook his hand"?
I also notice that the name "Audun" is given in dative,
the same case as "honum". In English it would be more natural
to use the genitive, as in "he shook Audun's hand", but here
we have an example of a pronoun and a proper name juxtaposed both with
the same case. The case (dative) must be due to the standard
expression "taka e-m í hönd" (to shake someone's hand).
I suppose the dative may be due to the possibility of
inserting the preposition "á", since "taka" (to take, grab)
normally rules the accusative. But you don't "take" someone's
hand as you would take or catch a ball or a prisoner.
(the ball out of the air, the prisoner into the jail)
(Grr.. May I now have my hand back, please? :-)



> and at once when the King was [is, veit is pres. tense] certain who
he is took the king by the hand of Auð[u]n and bid [bade, past tense]
him welcome
> As soon as the King was sure of who he was he took Auðun by the hand
and bade him welcome
>
> 'Ok hefir þú mikit skipazk', segir hann, 'síðan vit sámk
> and hast thou much changed said [says] he (?2nd sing) since we
together [saw each other, reflexive form of sjá, 1st pers pl]
> You have changed a lot said he since we last met.

The form "sámk" at first seemed difficult.
Sometimes the 1st plural pret. of "sjá" is written
"ságum", which makes sense. Alternatively it is
shortened to "sóm" or "sám". The reflexive form would
then be "ságumsk", but I guess the "s" is dropped because
it becomes squeezed between "m" and "k".
Another explanation is that it might be due to the combination
of "sám" with the dual pronoun "okr", i.e. sám + okr -> sámk.


> .' Leiðir hann eptir sér inn. Ok er hirðin sá hann, hlógu þeir at honum.
> Led [leads] him after him within, and [when] the housecarles saw him
and laughed [they] at him (?honum - acc.[no, dative])
> He (King) led him (Auðun) after him - inside, and when the
House-carles saw him they laughed at him
> I prefer housecarles because I think they are very unkind and it
sounds rough - so are they [so you prefer your men rough and unkind! J]
>
> En konungr sagði, 'Eigi þurfu þér at honum at hlæja, því at betr
hefir hann sét fyrir sinni sál heldr en ér.'
> [But] The King said "Not needed [need, pres] you at him to laugh,

I think you are right that "þurfa" is to need.
(German "dürfen" is 'to be allowed', which might cause Germans
to translate with "you may not laugh", but that is wrong)



because better (?has [yes]) he cared for [provided for, seen to, more
literally] his soul more than you
> The King said "I do not want you to laugh at him for he has cared
more for his soul than have you (? from the pilgrimage? [exactly, and
beyond that his whole attitude to life throughout)
>
> Þá lét konungr gøra honum laug ok gaf honum síðan klæði, ok er hann
nú með honum.
> then (put?) the King caused to [gøra, make] him a bath and gave to
him after clothing, and he was [is] now with him.

Why not simply use the English "let" here?
i.e. The king let [the servants] prepare a bath for him.
In fact, to me the word "caused" seems so formal here, as to
be misplaced. Wouldn't "The king had them prepare a bath"
sound less formal? Anyway, you decide.




> Then the King ordered a bath for him and afterwards gave him
clothes, and he (Audun) was now with him (?to stay)

The word "ordered" also seems misplaced here. To me it sounds
as if the king uses battle-commands to have simple things
done, such as bathing.

Vale,
Xigung.




> It seems to me the king has made his royal mind up, to keep Auðun
with him and I hope I am not seen to quibble over calling the King''s
men his house-carles, I'm afraid it is personal Alan, they are not so
mannerly as their Master
> Also I found with this passage I was able to scan it and really get
the gist of it, without any study, does this seem right, I never took
to any of my others so well - almost instantly - as this one.
> Kveðja
> Patricia
>
>
>
>
>


> Also, some of us were translating Hrafnkels saga last year and, as
far as I can tell, we only seemed to get about a third of the way
through. Would others be interested in recommencing our translations
where we left off?
>
> Kveðja
> Alan
>
> Þá gekk Auðun fram ok fell til fóta konungi, ok varla kendi konungr
hann. Ok þegar er konungr veit hverr hann er, tók konungr í hǫnd honum
Auðuni ok bað hann vel kominn: 'Ok hefir þú mikit skipazk', segir
hann, 'síðan vit sámk.' Leiðir hann eptir sér inn. Ok er hirðin sá
hann, hlógu þeir at honum. En konungr sagði, 'Eigi þurfu þér at honum
at hlæja, því at betr hefir hann sét fyrir sinni sál heldr en ér.' Þá
lét konungr gøra honum laug ok gaf honum síðan klæði, ok er hann nú
með honum.