Dear llama Nom.
Come closer, maybe we have options.
> > En nú haf þú njósn af nær er þeir koma til bæjarins og seg mér.
> > But now have/you discrete-lookout of near as they arrive to the
town
> and report(tell all about) me.
>
> Simply replacing the Icelandic words with their English cognates
> doesn't clarify the matter. "of near as" doesn't mean anything to
me;
> it just isn't an expression I'm familiar with in English. I'm not
> sure whether this is a new suggestion different to your original
one,
> or if you are just explaining your first suggestion using other
words.
I humbly obey your superiority in English.
I reckon that I was merely Fishing...
"But now you have discrete-lookout close as they arrive to the town
and
report me." [She said > dialogue]
Are you trying to translate the Icelandic text into Old-English?
I know the first Icelandic Scholar to use "Norrænu" in writing
his name was "Ari fróði" ...."fyrstur manna hér á landi ritaði á
norrænu."
There are people clearly that take that for granted that he was the
first Icelander with writing capabilities.
I advise you to consult the Work dedicated to "Ólaf HvítaSkáld" [13.
century]
There you will find example of "Ara fróða" [11. century] description
of the Icelanding tongue, where Ari fróði uses nearly modern
Icelandic
to express himself.
You will find similar example of "Þórodd Rúnameistari" (12. century]
wherein he expresses himself in "Norrænu" "Old-Norse". As he is
debating the issue of using the so called "Norrænu" instead of using
more descriptive alphabet he himself has constructed.
Þórodd'ur tells us that he uses "Norrænu" for instructive reasons:
to demonstrate how difficult it is for men of his time to translate
the
"Norrænu" text, into nearly Modern Icelandic.
So apt to the Icelandic tradition, I always translate
the "Norrænu"text,
into the genuine one. Already as 6 years old.
"Er nær kemur" [As "nær" comes] we have (nær) nærkomin: that is
close
[in mind or body (fetus or lover are inmost?) "Nær" is the one that
obtains or reaches.
The ablative in Latin is a case of the name similiar to dative
(referring to an object indirect?): but strictly governed be a verb,
that is to be found in the context.
See: " Hand síðast sumar á Akureyri í verksmiðju skrifaði ljóð á
kvöldin og skar fisk."
If the text were of Latin natur and "Hand" were ablativus of "Hönd"
it could go with "skrifaði" as well as "skar" one cuts fish with the
Hand as well as one writes poems with the hand.
In Icelandic we avoid this by simply putting together what is
closest in mind. HandSkera og HandSkrifa two "new" verbs: come they
in Handy?.
The ablative is huge case/tool in Latin where it is used as agency
to modify meanings of responding verbs.
Icelandic offers a simple huge tool or the root of appropriate
genitives.
The case in case. See also Generator.
Thanks Uoden
Modification by order of words in sentence.
"Nú vill Úlfrinn ganga ór skóginum."
I translate: Well now, will the Wolf exit the forest.
Maybe we have limited sources of "Norrænu" text ,
and accidentally it only reflects "gold age" literary tongue.
Tacitus as the 3 first remarkable Icelandic linguists, proclaim the
tongue, first said spoken in Scandinavia [Norway/Sweden] different
from Germanic, similar to British,
then spoken in Iceland and said to be of same basis as British,
though
they [the tongues] were drifting apart from each other, one maybe
more
than the other.
Sorry I consider myself pragmatic and to not deduce hypothesis,
without
consulting the axioms, in this case
?
But this won't work in ON:
"Úlfrinn gengr ór skóginum."
"Nú gengr úlfrinn ór skóginum."
Not *"Nú úlfrinn gengr ór skóginum."
As we add the adverb "nú", the verb shifts in its relation to the
other words, and "insists" on maintaining its position as the second
component of the sentence, following the adverbial phrase ("nú").
In that sentence, the verb phrase is composed of only one
word, "gengr". Consider a sentence with a more complicated verb
phrase:
"Nú vill Úlfrinn ganga ór skóginum."
The verb phrase here is "vill ganga"; "ganga" is a verb infinitive,
while "vill" is conjugated, and therefore called the "finite" verb.
But you notice that in this sentence, only "vill" stubbornly
maintains
its position, while "ganga" maintains its relation to the noun
phrases; thus, the verb phrase has been split up.
A practical rule may be deduced, which, if well understood and
thoughtfully applied, will result in correct word order in most
cases:
The finite verb within an Old Norse sentence must always be the
first
or the second component, while the rest of the verb phrase retains
its
relation to the noun phrases even if that involves splitting it away
from the finite verb.
This is admittedly complicated; but a student who keeps this in mind
while reading ON texts, should get a feel for this.
This phenomenon is called "Verb-Second", or "V/2"; all Germanic
languages except for English remain V/2 languages today, more or
less.
The origin and inner cause of the V/2 phenomenon is not all too well
understood by linguists, though their knowledge of its function will
suffice for our practical purposes. The V/2 characteristics has
different manifestations within the Germanic family, however, so
speakers of German or even modern Scandinavian languages should not
always trust ON to have the same rules of verb syntax as their
native
languages do.