Well, in my own experience, when translating Hávamál, I found it the most
helpful translation to work with. It does have errors, but not as many as I
had seen in other translations, plus the English isn´t as tortured as some.
Granted, I haven´t seen Dronke´s translation, so I will look this up, but for
newbies, I still think CL´s translation is one of the most accessible and
relatively accurate versions around, especially for those who don´t have
access to a University library. I appreciate your caveat, though. You would
recommend Dronke´s translation, or is there a better one?

Dan

Pelle Erobreren wrote:

> THIS IS A PRIVATE COMMUNICATION, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN
> POSTED ON THE NORSE_COURSE LIST.
>
> >From: Daniel Bray <dbray@...>
> >To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
>
> >I recommend Carolyne Larrington's recent translation of the Poetic Edda
> >(Oxford World Classics Series: 1997?) - it is the most accurate I've
> >seen yet.
>
> I first thought you were joking, since you seem to have some
> ability to read Old Icelandic texts. However, I think you are
> actually serious, so I thought you might be interested in the
> below document. If you're not, just throw it away.
>
> INFORMAL NOTES ON LARRINGTON'S ERRORS IN VÖLUSPÁ.
> -------------------------------------------------
> NB: This is a private communication, and should
> not be forwarded or re-published without the
> original sender's permission.
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Below, I have compiled what seem to me to be the most
> important errors in Larrington's translation of the
> first poem of the Codex Regious, Völuspá, aka The
> Seeress's Prophecy.
>
> Some of the errors are pretty inexcusable, but others
> may well be seen as irrelevant. However, it is my
> opinion that NONE of these errors is irrelevant to
> someone who intends to study this poem in depth.
>
> It must also be noted that NONE of these errors should
> be necessary in a translation by a person with Ms
> Larrington's presumed academic qualificatons. Völuspá
> is the most studied, and written about, poem in the
> Eddic corpus, and numerous detailed commentaries are
> available in many languages. Also, most of the lines
> incorrectly translated by Ms Larrington have been
> better translated (or better understood) by previous
> translators. I have usually used Dronke's translation
> as a comparison, as it is easily the most accurate one
> available today. I therefore want to point out that
> even though Dronke's translation was published after
> Larrington's, it is, in fact, older, and it is a known
> fact that Larrington had access to it in manuscript as
> she was working on her own translation, as is apparent
> from the "Acknowledgements" (p. ix). For those who do
> not know, it perhaps needs to be stated here that
> Dronke was Larrington's teacher at Oxford University,
> and taught her Old Norse.
>
> I want to make it absolutely clear that my treatment
> of the errors in Larrington's translation of Völuspá
> is firmly based on the review by Edward Pettit and
> John Porter, in Saga-Book 25.1 (1998). I have expanded
> their two-page treatment extensively, and added many
> observations, but without their original work the labour
> involved would have been far too time-consuming for me
> to attempt.
>
> I also want to make it VERY clear, that Larrington's
> translation still contains various errors, which are
> too minor to mention here. It must also be mentioned
> that Larrington's errors of "style" are just as numerous
> as her errors in grammar and syntax. Such errors can only
> be corrected with a completely new translation.
>
> VÖLUSPÁ -----------------------------------------------
>
> 1:5-6
> ----------------------
> VILDU at ek Valföðr Father of the Slain, you
> VEL fyr telja wished that I should declare
>
> "Wished" is wrong. If singular, VILDU can not be past
> tense. VEL ("well") is omitted. Dronke: "You wish me,
> Father of the Slain, well to narrate." The implication is:
> "You wish me to narrate in a pleasing/proper manner".
> The loose syntax could also be interpreted to indicate a
> question: "Do you, Óðinn, wish me to narrate...?"
> [It should be noted that the form VILDU can be past tense,
> but then it would have to be 3p plural: "They wanted me
> to ..."]
>
> 2:1-4
> ----------------------
> Ek man jötna I, born of giants,
> ÁR UM BORNA remember very early
> þá er FORÐUM mik those who nurtured
> fædda höfðu. me then.
>
> This is terrible, and reveals that CL is extremely ignorant
> of the basic syntax of Icelandic. The literal meaning is:
> "I remember early-born giants, those who long ago reared me".
> Thus Dronke: "I remember giants born early in time, who long
> ago had reared me".
>
> 4:1-2
> ----------------------
> ÁÐR Burs synir First the sons of Bur
> BJÖÐUM um ypðu brought up the earth
>
> "Áðr" means "before", not "first", and refers back to stanza
> 3. "Bjöðum" is dative plural, properly "lands". Dronke has:
> "Before Burr's sons lifted up seashores".
>
> 4:3-4
> ----------------------
> þeir er Miðgarð the glorious ones who
> MÆRAN skópu shaped the world between
>
> The meaning is "they who created renowned/famous/glorious
> Midgard". The adjective "mæran (acc)" doesn't qualify "þeir"
> (nom), but "Miðgarð (acc)", as Dronke knows: "they who
> moulded glorious Miðgarðr".
>
> 4:5-6
> ----------------------
> Sól skein sunnan the sun shone from the south
> á SALAR STEINA on the hall of stones
>
> This means literally: "The sun shone from the south upon
> the hall's stones (the stones of the hall)" (NOT "the hall
> of stones"!). CL's translation suggests that she is utterly
> ignorant of the grammar and syntax of Icelandic. Cp. Dronke:
> "Sun shone from the south on the stones of that mansion",
> where she correctly reads "salr" as "Midgard".
>
> 5:1-2
> ----------------------
> SÓL varp sunnan From the south, Sun,
> sinni MÁNA companion of the moon
>
> If the sun is personified here, then surely the moon should
> be as well (and capitalized). In order to be consistent, we
> must either have "Sun, companion of Moon", or "the sun,
> companion of the moon".
>
> 5:5-8
> ----------------------
> Sól þat né vissi Sun did not know
> hvar hón SALI átti, where her hall might be,
> stjörnur þat né vissu the stars did not know
> hvar þær STAÐI áttu where their place might be
>
> As usual, Larrington confuses singular and plural forms of
> nouns. This should be "halls", and "places". Dronke has
> "mansions" and "stations" - which neatly catches the
> astronomical/astrological flavour of the passage.
>
> 7:1-2
> ----------------------
> Hittusk æsir The Æsir met
> á IÐAVELLI on Idavoll Plain
>
> cp. 60:1-2
> Finnask æsir The Æsir meet
> á IÐAVELLI on Idavoll
>
> This is inconsistent. The place-name should be identical
> in both instances. "Plain" is superflous, as it is a
> translation of 'völlr'. If used, it should properly be
> Ida Plain, not Idavoll Plain.
>
> 7:3-4
> ----------------------
> þeir er HÖRG ok HOF they built altars
> hátimbruðu and high temples
>
> The word translated as "altars" is singular, not plural.
> Dronke also makes this mistake. [The word translated as
> "temples" can be either singular or plural, but it should
> probably be taken as singular. The gods build ONE altar,
> ONE temple, the "prototypes" of all other altars and
> temples.] Also, 'high' belongs with both nouns, as Dronke
> realizes: "towering altars and temples".
>
> Stanzas 9 - 10
> ----------------------
>
> Both Larrington and Dronke have failed to keep up with
> recent scholarship here. Modern Icelandic scholars have
> shown that these stanzas should properly be understood as:
>
> Then all the gods ascended
> the thrones of fate,
> the most holy gods,
> and deliberated upon this:
> who of the dwarves
> should create mankind
> from the blood of Brimir
> and the limbs (bones) of Bláinn.
>
> There Mótsognir had become
> the most esteemed
> of all the dwarves,
> but Durinn the second.
> They fashioned many
> human figures,
> these dwarves, from earth,
> as Durinn commanded.
>
> This passage has got nothing to do with the creation of
> dwarves, but THE CREATION OF MEN BY DWARVES. When evil
> enters creation in the form of three ogresses (whose
> identity will not be discussed here), the gods react by
> having their master-smiths, the Dwarves, create mankind,
> or rather MATERIAL HUMAN BODIES (which receive their divine
> spiritual gifts in stanzas 17-18). The true meaning of
> stanzas 9-10, and their direct continuation in stanzas
> 17-18, has been obscured by the extraneous interpolation
> of stanzas 11-16 ("Dwarf-List"), which is all too obviously
> a late scribal addition.
>
> It is of interest to note, that as early as 1968, Auden
> and Taylor hit the nail on the head in their translation:
>
> The high Gods
> gathered in council
> in their hall of judgement:
> WHO OF THE DWARVES
> SHOULD MOULD MAN
> by master craft
> from Brimir's blood
> and Blain's limbs?
>
> Stanzas 11-16 (Dvergatal "Dwarf-List")
> ----------------------
>
> Not that it matters, but Larrington's treatment of the
> Dwarf-names is ludicrous. She translates some of them,
> but leaves others intact. One might perhaps expect her
> to translate names with obvious meanings, and leave the
> obscure names untranslated, but no! FRÆGR "famous one"
> is left untranslated, while LÓNI is "Sea-pool", which is
> by no means certain.
>
> Since I firmly believe that the "Dwarf-list" does not
> form a part of the original Völuspá, and rather belongs
> with the NAFNAÞULUR appended to various manuscripts of
> Snorri's Prose Edda, I can't be bothered to comment on
> Larrington's numerous errors and inconsistencies here.
>
> 19:6-8
> ----------------------
> þærs í DALA falla. which fall in the valley,
> Stendr Æ yfir GRÆNN ever green, it stands over
> Urðarbrunni. the well of fate.
>
> Should be "valleys". Larrington constantly does this.
> How can you trust a translator that can't differentiate
> between singular and plural?
>
> The word translated as "ever" modifies "stands", not
> "green". The correct meaning is:
>
> It stands forever,
> green, over Urðr's well.
>
> "Well of fate" is an interpretation, not a translation.
> You can not call Urðarbrunnr thus, unless you also
> translate the name Urðr as "Fate" consistently.
>
> 20:1-2
> ----------------------
> Þaðan koma MEYJAR From there come three girls,
> MARGS VITANDI knowing a great deal
>
> This sounds extrardinary silly. Referring to the three
> norns as "girls knowing a great deal" is pathetic when
> compared with the original. Cp. Dronke's
>
> >From there come maidens
> deep in knowledge
>
> 20:11
> ----------------------
> alda BÖRNUM the sons of men
>
> is wrong - the text says "children of men". Somebody
> said that this translation was friendlier to women than
> previous ones. Not here, at least.
>
> 22:3-4
> ----------------------
> VÖLU velspá the seer with pleasant prophecies,
> VITTI hon GANDA she charmed them with spells
>
> It seems strange to translate VÖLU as "seer" here,
> considering that the poem's name (VÖLUSPÁ) is translated
> as "The SeerESS's Prophecy".
>
> "She charmed them with spells" is an impossible reading of
> a disputed line, which most likely means "she empowered
> magic wands". Dronke's "she conjured spirits" is also dubious.
>
> 24:1-2
> ----------------------
> Fleygði Óðinn Odin shot a spear,
> ok Í folk um skaut hurled it over the host
>
> Óðinn does not throw his spear "over" the host, but "at" it,
> or "into" it. It should also be noted that the original does
> not mention the spear at all. Cp. Dronke:
>
> Odin flung,
> and shot into the host
>
> 24:7
> ----------------------
> knáttu vanir VÍGSPÁ the Vanir, indomitable
>
> The word VÍGSPÁ cannot possibly mean "indomitable". It isn't
> even an adjective, but a noun (in the dative) meaning
> "war-charm", a type of magic used in battle. Dronke renders
> correctly, if awkwardly:
>
> Vanir were - by a war charm -
> live and kicking on the plain.
>
> 25:5-6
> ----------------------
> hverr hefði lopt ALT who had mixed the air
> lævi blandit with wickedness
>
> The word ALT "all" is left out. Cp. the word VEL "well" in
> stanza 1. Even if we supplied the missing word, the translation
> leaves much to be desired. Dronke's translation is much more
> accurate and effective: "who had laced all he air with ruin".
>
> 26:5
> ----------------------
> Á GENGUSK eiðar the oaths broke apart
>
> Is "the oaths broke apart" normal English? Isn't the
> thought better expressed by a simpler "oaths were broken"?
>
> 27:5-7
> ----------------------
> Á sér hon ausask she sees, pouring down,
> AURGUM FORSI the muddy torrent
> af VEÐI Valföðrs. from the wager of Father of the Slain.
>
> "She sees, pouring down, the muddy torrent" is too
> inexact. The phrase means "she sees a river pouring
> in a muddy torrent". AURGUM FORSI is a dative.
>
> "Wager" is, I believe, an incorrect word. There is no betting
> going on here. "Pledge" would be more to the point. Dronke has
> "forfeit". Óðinn has basically "pawned" his eye to Mímir.
>
> 29:4
> ----------------------
> ok spáGANDA and a rod of divination
>
> This should be plural - "rods".
>
> 29:5-6
> ----------------------
> sá hon vítt ok um vítt she saw widely, widely
> of veröld hverja into all the worlds
>
> is too inaccurate and too weak. Dronke, as usual, gets it right:
> "she saw far, and far beyond - over every world".
>
> 30:1-2
> ----------------------
> Sá hon valkyrjur She saw valkyries
> vítt um KOMNAR coming from far and wide
>
> The participle KOMNAR doesn't mean "coming", it means
> "having come".
>
> 30:5-6
> ----------------------
> Skuld helt skildi, Skuld held one shield,
> en Skögul ÖNNUR Skögul another
>
> This is certainly one of the most embarrassing errors I have
> ever seen! A first-year student should be able to figure out
> the grammar here - the lines man literally:
>
> Skuld held a shield,
> and Skögul (was) the second one
>
> implying that Skuld is the first one. ÖNNUR (feminine,
> nominative) cannot possibly refer to SKILDI (masculine,
> dative). Dronke manages this rather neatly:
>
> Skuld bore a shield,
> and Skögul was with her
>
> 32:1-8
> ----------------------
> Varð af þeim meiði, From that plant
> er MÆR sýndisk, which seemed so lovely
> harmflaug hættlig, came a dangerous, harmful dart,
> Höðr NAM skjóta. Hod began to shoot.
> Baldrs bróðir var Baldr's brother was
> of borinn SNEMMA, born very quickly ;
> sá NAM, Óðins sonr, Odin's son began fighting
> einnættr vega. at one night old.
>
> "Which seemed so lovely" - there is no "so" here, and
> the adjective is mistranslated. It means "small, slender"
> i.e. innocent-looking.
>
> "Hod began to shoot" should be simply "Höðr shot".
> "Odin's son began fighting" should be "Óðinn's son slew".
>
> The auxillary verb NAM, translated as "began" here, is
> quite meaningless. NAM SKJÓTA is equivalent to SKAUT
> "shot" - NAM VEGA is equivalent to VÁ = "slew". Dronke
> makes the same mistake - an easy one to make for the
> non-native - but at least *she* should know better.
>
> "Was born very quickly" !! Very funny! - the correct
> meaning is "was born early" or "soon". He was born
> prematurely, not fast!
>
> 35:3-4
> ----------------------
> lægjarns líki that evil-loving form
> Loka áþekkjan Loki she recognized
>
> The word ÁÞEKKJAN is translated as "recognized", which
> is a ridiculous mistake. The whole phrase for Loki
> here is (in the nominative) [HAPTR] ÁÞEKKR LÍKI LÆGJARNS
> LOKA, literally "[a captive] similar to the likeness of
> the malignant Loki", i.e. Loki himself. A typical
> example of poetic paraphrasis. Dronke, in her commentary,
> obviously construes the sentence correctly, but this
> isn't quite apparent from her translation: "a captive
> ... in the shape of malignant Loki, unmistakable". That
> final "unmistakable" an over-translation.
>
> 36:2-4
> ----------------------
> um EITRdala from poison valleys
> söxum ok sverðum, a river of knives and swords,
> SLÍÐR heitir sú. Cutting it is called.
>
> "from poison valleys" is wrong on all counts. UM means
> "through", not "from". EITR can, to be sure, mean poison,
> but here it refers to temperature: Dronke's "venom-cold"
> is more to the point and perfectly catches the double
> meaning of the Icelandic EITR.
>
> "A river of knives and swords". Better would be: "a
> river with knives and swords" (Dronke). The former
> would be expressed with a genitive, but we have a
> dative here. There is a considerable difference in
> the image achieved.
>
> The name SLÍÐUR does not mean "Cutting". It means
> "Terrible, Savage", but there is also a possible play on
> words here, as SLÍÐR also means "scabbard", and in the
> kenning-system the scabbard could be called "the sword's
> path".
>
> 38:5
> ----------------------
> FELLU eitrdropar drops of poison fall
>
> We have past tense here: "fell".
>
> 38:7
> ----------------------
> SÁ er undinn salr the hall is woven
>
> Should rather be "THAT hall is woven".
>
> 39:5-6
> ----------------------
> ok þanns annars glepr and those who seduced the close
> eyrarúnu. confidantes of other men.
>
> No less than four errors!! Plural for singular three times,
> and past for present once. This should be "the one who
> seduces the close confidante of another", although I'm not
> very happy with "confidante". Dronke is better: "the one
> who seduces another's close-trusted wife".
>
> 39:7-9
> ----------------------
> Þar SAUG Niðhöggr There Nidhogg sucks
> NÁI framgengna, the bodies of the dead -
> SLEIT vargr VERA. a wolf tears the corpses of men
>
> "Bodies of the dead" should be "corpses of the dead".
> VERA simply means men, not "corpses of men".
>
> "sucks" should be "sucked".
> "tears" should be "tore".
>
> How on earth did this woman manage to squeeze out a
> doctorate in Old Icelandic studies at Oxford University?
>
> 40:1
> ----------------------
> Austr sat in aldna In the east sat an old woman
>
> Wrong. The article should be definite, "the", which makes
> it clear that this is not just any old woman, but one well
> known to the audience. And it really doesn't say "the old
> woman" either, but "the old one" (feminine). The impact of
> the original is totally different, as Dronke tries to catch
> in her:
>
> "In the east she sat, the old one ..."
>
> 40:8
> ----------------------
> í trolls hami. in monstrous form.
>
> No! Rather, "in the shape of a troll", or even "in the skin
> of a giant". Dronke has "in troll's skin".
>
> 41:1-6
> ----------------------
> Fyllisk fjörvi The corpses of
> feigra manna, doomed men fall,
> rýðr ragna sjöt the gods' dwellings are reddened
> rauðum dreyra. with crimson blood ;
> Svört verða sólskin sunshine becomes black
> of sumur eptir the next summer
>
> This stanza is terribly mangled, and surely the worst of
> the lot. There is only a vague correspondence between the
> words, but the general syntax is totally off. It is quite
> obvious that the translator simply has no idea of how the
> syntax works here:
>
> "The corpses of doomed men fall" is utterly wrong. The
> lines literally mean:
>
> "He (the wolf) sates himself on the
> life-blood of men doomed to die".
>
> "The gods' dwellings are reddened" is not much better.
> The subject of the sentence is still the wolf, and the
> meaning is:
>
> "HE red-paints the gods' homes".
>
> OF SUMUR EPTIR does not mean "the next summer". SUMUR is
> plural, and the phrase means "in the summers that follow",
> as Dronke correctly has it.
>
> 42:1
> ----------------------
> sat ÞAR á haugi He sat on the mound
>
> The word ÞAR "there" is omitted. This "there" is important,
> it refers back to stanza 40 - "there" equals "in the
> Ironwood".
>
> 42:5,7
> ----------------------
> gól UM HÁNUM A rooster crowed
> ...
> fagrrauðr HANI that bright-red cockerel
>
> The words UM HÁNUM are omitted. As in the next stanza
> (where UM is mistranslated as "for"), they mean "above him".
>
> Note that HANI is translated as "rooster" AND "cockerel".
> This is unnecessary, since the word only occurs once in the
> stanza. Cp. also next stanza.
>
> 43:1
> ----------------------
> Gól UM ásum crowed for the Æsir
>
> should be "crowed above the Æsir". See previous stanza.
>
> In 43:7, HANI is translated as "cock". Cp. previous
> stanza, where the same word was "rooster" and "cockerel".
> Inexcusable from an academic translator. As Pettit/Porter
> note, this obscures the parallelism.
>
> 44:3
> ----------------------
> FESTR mun slitna the rope will break
>
> "Rope" is wrong - should be "fetter, bond".
> [Cp. stanzas 49 and 58.]
>
> In 44:7-8 the rare word SIGTÍVAR is translated as
> "fighting gods" - the word is also found in
> stanzas 49 and 58, where it is translated as
> "victorious gods" and "victory-gods". This is
> ridiculous, especially because the word in question
> is a very interesting (and puzzling) word indeed,
> for reasons that do not belong here. Also, the phrase
> is oviously formulaic, and therefore should always be
> translated the same.
>
> 45:3-4
> ----------------------
> munu SYSTRUNGAR brother and sister will
> SIFJUM spilla violate the bond of kinship
>
> "Systrungar" are "sisters' sons", not "brother and sister".
> Larrington seems to see incest here, there is none. "Bond
> of kinship" should be either "bonds of kinship" (plural),
> or, simply "kinship".
>
> 45:5
> ----------------------
> Hart er í heimi hard it is in the world,
> hórdómr mikill there is much adultery
>
> "Hard it is in the world" is admittedly a literal translation,
> but the meaning is not quite the same. I'm at a loss to provide
> a good translation here at the drop of a hat. Dronke's "it is
> harsh in the world" is better, but doesn't do it for me.
>
> "Much adultery" is extremely weak for HÓRDÓMR MIKILL. As usual,
> Dronke hits the spot: "whoredom rife".
>
> 45:5
> ----------------------
> LEIKA Míms synir The sons of Mim are at play
> en mjötuðr KYNDISK and fate catches fire
> at inu GALLA at the ancient
> Gjallarhorni Gjallar-horn
>
> "Are at play" - better would be "sport", "cavort". I think
> Larrington has crossed over to Modern Icelandic here.
>
> "Fate catches fire" (!!) - does this carry any meaning for the
> English speaker? P/P suggest "fate is kindled" - which sounds
> sensible. Dronke has "fate's measure is lit" which is interesting.
>
> "At the ancient Gjallar-horn" - I really think this needs to be
> "at the sound of the ancient G." for the meaning to be readily
> apparent. And a mere quibble: GALLR does not mean "ancient", it
> means "loud-sounding", "clear-ringing".
>
> 47:1-8
> ----------------------
> Skelfr Yggdrasils Yggdrasill shudders,
> ASKR standandi, the tree standing upright,
> ymr it aldna tré the ancient tree groans
> en jötunn LOSNAR. and the giant is loose ;
> Hræðask allir all are terrified
> á HELVEGUM, on the roads to hell,
> áðr Surtar þann before Surt's kin
> SEFI of gleypir. swallows it up.
>
> "The tree" - the original has ASKR "Ash".
>
> "The giant is loose" - more correctly: "the giant breaks loose"
> or "the giant slips free".
>
> "Surt's kin" is rather ambiguous - better to be exact and say
> "Surt's kinsman".
>
> "Roads to hell" - not really. HELVEGIR is simply equivalent to
> HEL, the Realm of Hel. VEGIR "roads" isn't literal here, no more
> than in "Norway".
>
> [It wasn't really my intention to comment on Larrington's NOTES
> here, but this one can't be avoided. She says: "What is swallowed
> is unclear - perhaps the road to hell". - Wow.
>
> What is swallowed is referred to as ÞANN "that one, him" - it is
> masculine, singular. The stanza has HELVEGUM (plural) "hell-roads"
> which makes it impossible for ÞANN to be grammatically related
> to HELVEGUM. QED.
>
> What is swallowed, being masculine and singular, must be either the
> GIANT or the ASH (if we refuse to accept emendations to the stanza).
> The tree seems likelier, but the matter is far too complex to treat
> here. A good overview of the problems, and attempts to solve them,
> can be found in Sig. Nordal's edition of Völuspá (which has been
> translated, and should be found in good libraries).
>
> 48:3,5-7
> ----------------------
> GNÝR allr jötunheimr. All Giantland groans.
> ... ...
> STYNJA dvergar The dwarfs howl
> fyr steindurum, before their rocky doors,
> veggbergs VÍSIR. the princes of the mountain wall.
>
> "All Giantland groans" - not really. The verb used here (GNÝR)
> means "roar, resound". Dronke's "Giant Realm is aroar" is fine.
>
> "The dwarfs howl" - I beg your pardon! STYNJA does not mean
> "howl" - it means "groan".
>
> "Princes of the mountain wall" - VÍSIR does not mean "princes",
> and isn't even a noun here. It is an adjective in the plural,
> meaning "wise", "knowing well", "familiar with". Dronke: "well
> knowing their immuring rock" (which sounds enigmatic, but then
> so does the original).
>
> 49:1
> ----------------------
> Geyr NÚ Garmr mjök Garm bays loudly
>
> The important NÚ ("now") is omitted. Small words are important
> too, and can make a lot of difference, especially in poetry!
>
> In 49:8 SIGTÍVAR is translated as "victorious gods" - see above,
> notes to stanza 44.
>
> 50:1
> ----------------------
> en ari HLAKKAR, the eagle shrieks in anticipation,
> slítr NÁI neffölr pale-beaked he tears the corpse
>
> "Shrieks in anticipation" as a translation of HLAKKAR is simply
> wrong, the verb simply means "screams (as a bird)". CL is
> probably thinking of the Modern Icelandic expression HLAKKA TIL
> "look forward to" - but no such meaning can be attached to the
> Old Icelandic poetic language of Völuspá, I'm afraid. There is
> an element of joy implied, even exultation, but definitely not
> "anticipation".
>
> "Pale-beaked he tears the corpse" - once more the translator is
> unable to decide whether words are in the singular or plural - a
> better translation would be: "pale-beaked he rips CORPSES apart".
> Wouldn't "the corpse" imply a certain, specific corpse? There is
> no such thing here.
>
> 51:1
> ----------------------
> um LÖG lýðir over the waves
>
> More correctly: "over the ocean".
>
> 51:5-6
> ----------------------
> Fara fífls megir There are monstrous brood
> með freka allir with all the raveners
>
> This is simply awful! The sentence means:
>
> "All the sons of the giant travel with the wolf".
>
> Typically, this translator has no sense of number and
> case. She thinks "freka" is a plural word, and that
> "allir" belongs with it. It is singular, and "allir"
> belongs with "megir". A first-year student in Icelandic
> could easily fail his exams just by committing a few
> similar blunders.
>
> 52:3-6
> ----------------------
> skínn af sverði the sun of the slaughter-gods
> sól VALTÍVA. glances from his sword ;
> Grjótbjörg GNATA, the rocky cliffs crack open
> en gífr RATA. and the troll-women are abroad
>
> "The sun of the slaughter-gods glances from his sword" is
> extremely dubious. First, VALTÍVAR are not "Slaughter-gods",
> but rather "Gods of the Slain" (a totally different concept).
> Second, the genitive VALTÍVA is wrongly construed with "sun",
> rather than "sword". The correct meaning is:
>
> "The sun shines from the sword of the gods", i.e. the sword
> of the gods gleams like the sun, or reflects the sun. This is,
> incidentally, the sword that originally belonged to Freyr
> (thus "sword of the gods"), and then passed into the hands of
> giants.
>
> "The rocky cliffs crack open". Not so. GNATA means "crash",
> "collide".
>
> "Troll-women are abroad". Nope. RATA means "stumble". There's
> nothing special about troll-women being abroad, they are so
> most of the time. But here they "stumble" because of the
> earthquake, which causes great cliffs to tumble from mountains,
> and crash into each other.
>
> 53:7-8
> ----------------------
> Þá MUN Friggjar then the beloved
> falla angan. of Frigg must fall.
>
> There's no "must" in the original, it is simple future tense:
> "will fall". The same error is found in stanzas 55 and 56.
>
> 54:4-5
> ----------------------
> at VALDÝRI. against the Beast of Slaughter ;
> ... megi HVEÐRUNGS of Loki's kinsman ...
>
> "Beast of Slaughter" - VALDÝR is not a proper name, and the
> meaning is more properly and simply "carrion-beast" (beast
> that eats the slain).
>
> "Loki's kinsman" should read "Hveðrung's son". An academic
> translator should not take such liberties, especially with
> such a debated name as HVEÐRUNGR.
>
> STANZA 55
> ----------------------
> [It is sloppy of Larrington not to mention that this stanza
> is only found in the Hauksbók manuscript, where it replaces
> stanza 54 (in the Codex Regius).]
>
> Gínn LOPT YFIR In the air gapes
> lindi jarðar, the Earth-Girdler,
> gapa ÝGS kjaptar the terrible jaws of the serpent
> orms Í HÆÐUM. yawn above ;
> MUN Óðins son Odin's son must
> ormi mæta meet the serpent,
> vargs AT DAUÐA (the kin of Vidar
> Víðars niðja. is the death of the wolf).
>
> "In the air" - incorrect, better as: "across the sky".
>
> "The Earth-Girdler" - this is not a proper name, but a kenning:
> "girdle of the earth". There is no need to capitalize.
>
> "The terrible jaws of the serpent" - ÝGS (singular) is mistakenly
> construed with KJAPTAR (plural), instead of ORMS (singular). The
> correct meaning is, of course, "the jaws of the terrible serpent".
>
> "Above" translates Í HÆÐUM - which is too weak. "In the heights"
> or "on high" would be closer to the original.
>
> "Odin's son MUST meet the serpent" - see 53 above. There is no
> MUST here, it is simple future tense ("will meet"). [I wonder
> if Larrington had been reading that awful book by Bauschatz,
> where he claims that Old Icelandic had no future tense? I wouldn't
> be surprised.]
>
> "(the kin of Vidar is the death of the wolf)". This translation is
> simply not possible. The textual problems are too complicated to be
> treated here (sorry - but it would take *pages*). The definitive
> treatment is found in Jón Helgason's critical edition (pp. 44-46).
> Jón was the first man to read this stanza, using ultra-violet light
> to inspect a seriously damaged portion of the Hauksbók manuscript of
> Völuspá (in the sixties). The second half of the stanza does not
> make sense as it stands in the manuscript, but Jón suggested a simple,
> and very reasonable, emendation (generally accepted) which would give
> the following meaning (I translate the whole stanza, for clarity):
>
> The earth's belt = the Midgard-worm
> yawns across the sky,
> the jaws of the ghastly worm
> gape in the heavens;
> the son of Óðinn = Þórr
> shall meet the worm's venom
> after the death
> of Viðarr's kinsmen. = i.e. the other gods
>
> Now compare this to Larrington's travesty.
>
> 56:2,6-8,10
> ----------------------
> mögr HLÖÐYNJAR son of Earth
> ... ...
> MIÐGARÐS véurr, the defender of earth strikes ;
> munu halir allir all men must
> HEIMSTÖÐ ryðja, leave their homesteads
> ... ...
> Fjörgynjar BURR Fiorgyn's child takes,
>
> "Son of Earth" - the text says "son of Hlöðyn".
> "Defender of earth" - the text has "defender of Midgard".
>
> It needs hardly be stated that it is extremely confusing
> for the reader to have two different terms translated as
> EARTH in such close proximity (one the giantess JÖRÐ, mother
> of Thor, the other MIÐGARÐR, Midgard, the dwelling of men).
> Interestingly, Larrington then translates FJÖRGYNJAR BURR
> as "Fiorgyn's child" in line 10 (where we have now learned
> to expect "Earth's child"), but even this is wrong - BURR
> means SON, not CHILD!
>
> "All men MUST leave" - see 53 and 55 above. There is no MUST
> here, simply a future tense: "will leave". (The Bauschatz
> fallacy again?)
>
> "Leave", although not strictly incorrect, seems rather tame
> for RYÐJA, a very forceful, almost violent, verb. "Abandon",
> or even "flee", would be better.
>
> "Their homesteads" is wrong. Firstly, the word is in the
> singular. Secondly, "homestead/worldstead" here simply means
> "Midgard", the earthly dwelling of men.
>
> 58:1,4
> ----------------------
> Geyr NÚ Garmr mjök Garm bays loudly
> ...
> en FREKI renna. and the ravener run free.
>
> NÚ ("now") is again omitted. See # 49. And if I haven't said
> so before, "ravener" should simply be "wolf" (or "Freki").
>
> In 58:8 SIGTÍVAR is translated as "victory-gods" - the word
> has been translated in two different ways previously, see
> notes to stanzas 44 ("fighting gods") and 49 ("victorious
> gods")
>
> 59:3,5
> ----------------------
> JÖRÐ ór ægi Earth from the ocean
> ... ...
> Falla FORSAR the waterfall plunges
>
> "Earth from the ocean" - the capitalization is wrong.
> This is simply "earth", not "Earth" the goddess Jörð.
>
> "Waterfall" should be plural. Same old error.
>
> 60:7
> ----------------------
> ok á FimbulTÝS of the Mighty One.
>
> "Mighty One" - the original has FIMBULTÝR "Mighty GOD".
> And "fimbul" would probably be better translated with
> a stronger term.
>
> 62:1-3,7,6
> ----------------------
> Munu ÓSÁNIR Without sowing
> akrar vaxa, the fields will grow,
> BÖLS mun alls batna, all ills will be healed,
> ... ...
> vel VALTÍVAR the gods of slaughter
> HROPTS SIGTOPTIR in the sage's palaces
>
> "Without sowing the fields" - I agree with P/P that
> "unsown fields" is a better choice and an exact translation.
>
> "All ills will be healed" - BÖLS is singular, as Dronke
> knows: "all harm will be healed".
>
> "The gods of slaughter" - again! This irritating translation
> of VALTÍVAR (see above 52) totally mistranslates the word, and
> reveals the ignorance of the translator.
>
> "In the sage's palaces" !!! - I have no idea how Larrington
> manages to read the text in this manner. The text has HROPTS
> SIGTOPTIR "Odin's battle-ruins". Dronke misreads "sigtoptir"
> as "walls of triumph", but this is not SIGR "victory", but
> SIG "battle".
>
> 63:3-5
> ----------------------
> ok burir byggja and the sons of two brothers
> bræðra TVEGGJA will inhabit
> vindheim VÍÐAN. widely, the windy world.
>
> "The sons of two brothers" - there should be a NOTE here,
> pointing out that the text could just as well be interpreted
> as "the sons of Tveggi's brothers", Tveggi being a certified
> name of Óðinn (whose brothers are mentioned in stanza 18).
>
> "Widely, the windy world" is meaningless and wrong, and the
> text means: "wide wind-world". VINDHEIMR "wind-world" is a
> simple kenning for "sky, heaven".
>
> 64:5-8
> ----------------------
> Þar skulu dyggvar there the noble
> dróttir byggja lords will live
> ok um aldrdaga and spend their
> ynðis njóta. days in pleasure.
>
> "Noble lords" - ouch! DYGGVAR DRÓTTIR simply means "good men",
> (see Nordal's commentary).
>
> "And spend their days in pleasure" - OK UM ALDRDAGA YNDIS NJÓTA
> really means "and experience bliss through eternity".
>
> STANZA 65
> --------------------
>
> This stanza is not in the Regius manuscript, and is only found
> in the Hauksbók. The enthusiatic student simply *must* read
> Nordal's commentary on this stanza - it is **BASIC**.
>
> Larringon's translation of REGINDÓMR as "judgement-place of the
> gods" is extremely dubious, and, not to mince words, impossible.
> "Divine rule" is the most likely meaning here, as Nordal
> established. Ólafur Briem has also pointed out that the word is
> almost certainly formed as a parallel to KONUNGDÓMR "kingship",
>
> === END ================================
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tag din Hotmail med dig, når du går http://www.msn.dk/mobile
>
> Sumir hafa kvæði...
> ...aðrir spakmæli.
>
> - Keth
>
> Homepage: http://www.hi.is/~haukurth/norse/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> norse_course-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--
Daniel Bray
dbray@...
School of Studies in Religion A20
University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia

"Nobody believes the official spokesman... but everybody trusts an
unidentified source." Ron Nesen