Heill Haukur !

--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, Haukur Thorgeirsson
<haukurth@...> wrote:

> Heill, Símon.
>
> > Please can someone explain the following:
> >
> > nú skal sá gefa öðrum, er til hefir."
>
> now shall {that one} give {the other} that {possesses}
>
> I'm guessing it's the phrasal verb 'hafa til' that
> is giving you trouble. In this case I think you could
> translate it with "has something". Poor Vöggr can't give
> the king anything but the king has a lot to give.
>
> Kveðja,
> Haukur

That was strange: the original message was illegible at
my end. I then went to Netutgafan to find a legible text
to get a proper context. But there I found the following
variant, which might be helpful:

« Hrólfr konungr mælti: "Nafn hefir þú gefit mér,
þat sem við mik mun festast, eða hvat gefr þú mér
at nafnfesti?"
Vöggr svaraði: "Alls ekki hefi ek til, því at ek em
félauss."
Konungr mælti: "Sá hlýtr þá at gefa öðrum sem til á."
Hann dregr þá gullhring af hendi sér ok gefr þessum manni.
»

Here I find it enlightening to note that Voggr
first uses the phrase "at hafa til" in saying
"alls hefi ek til [ekki]", and then goes on to
elaborate by saying "ek em felauss" (I have nothing).

My idea would be to read "til" as English "for"
but then adding a silent ending such as "purpose",
i.e. by saying that "at hafa til" means something
like "to have [something] for [such purpose]",
but that it is a very abbreviated sort of expression
where everything superfluous has been dropped.

For me the biggest problem then seems to be the word
"alls", what kind of word it really is. If I "cheat"
by looking in Zoëga, I do see that it can be seen
as an adverb, hence: "I do not have [all that nuch]
for [such purpose]". Do you agree with such a reading ?

Best regards
Xigung