Heilir góðir nemendr!
--- In
norse_course@yahoogroups.com, Haukur Thorgeirsson
<haukurth@...> wrote:
> [on "ormrinn langi" vs. "ormr inn langi"]
>
> > Ok segi ek: That just looks like a difference in word division,
which is somewhat arbitrary (or lacking) in the manuscripts.
> Vel mælir þú. That's quite correct. Word division in the mss and
word division in normalized text isn't always the same thing.
> > Ok spyr ek: What are the relative frequencies of noun-adjective
and adjective-noun word order?
> > Ok spyr ek: How frequently does the article ('inn') come before
the noun?
> > Ok spyr ek: What are the relative frequencies of these [name]
forms?
> Vel spyrr þú. Kann ek eigi svá vel svara.
> I think adjective-noun is rather more common in Old Norse. I think
that the preceding article is more common than the succeeding one
where it is allowed. Remember that you can only have the article
preceding the noun when there's an adjective in between.
Make a note of this if your are trying to learn Old Norse. What
Haukur is expressing here is a very important rule in Old Norse.
There must be an adjective preceding the noun if the article is
appear before the noun. Grammatically, you must say 'hinn langi
ormr' and never 'langi hinn ormr', 'hinn ormr langi', 'langi ormr
hinn', 'ormr langi hinn' or the like - that is to say, if you intend
to convey to idea 'the long snake/worm'. On the other hand, you can
also attach the article and say 'ormrinn langi'. Both 'hinn langi
ormr' and 'ormrinn langi' have the same basic meaning - only usage
and custom, which are highly refined and somewhat changable, make
any distinction between the two. Native speakers would have under-
stood fine points of usage between 'hinn langi ormr' and 'ormrinn
langi', much as modern speakers do today.
I haven't got a clue on the proper names; my hunch
> is that the "Þorsteinn rauðr" type may be the least common.
In phrases like 'Eiríkr rauði', the article is eliptical - that is
to say, it is implied. 'Eiríkr rauðr', on the other hand, has a
different meaning, which is somewhat closer to 'Erik, the red one'
rather than 'Erik the Red'. Usage of the article in Old Norse is
quite complicated by comparison with Modern English. In Old Norse,
as well as in Icelandic and Faroese, one can say each of the four
following phrases:
blár himinn/himinn blár
blái himinninn/himinninn blái
himinninn blár/blár himinninn
himinn blái/blái himinn
The first two are regular and absolutely required learning. Custom
and usage dictate their word order. The second two are restricted,
conveying subtly different shades of meaning which are atypical in
daily speech and difficult to learn. Certain writers, for instance,
make a stylistic device of one or both of the latter. In English,
the closest translation of 'himinninn blár' I can think of is 'the
heaven, the blue one', while 'himinn blái' seems to imply the idea
that there is only one heaven. Native speakers will understand the
various shades of meaning implied by these phrases, even if they
cannot describe them in detail when asked to. In learing Old Norse,
focus only on the first two above. These are regular and required.
> We can do a little test if you like. Let's do a "frequency
analysis" of the first chapter of Heimskringla - even though that's
a way too small sample :)
> "Kringla heimsins, sú er mannfólkit byggvir, er mjök vágskorin.
In Modern Icelandic, the article is often omitted when the subject
is abstract (óhlutbundið) as opposed to concrete (hlutbundið). The
usage 'mannfólkit' implies the idea of a fixed singular entity. The
reason is that the noun 'fólk' is abstract. One can point to a tree
or a stone, but one cannot point to 'the folk'. One can say 'þat er
gott fólk' or 'fólkit er gott', but the meanings are very different.
However, instead of elaborating further on the usage of the article,
I encourage you to ask the following question whenever you see that
the definite article is missing from subjects modified by adjectives
of the strong variety: Is this subject in any way abstract? Asking
this question will not clarify every instance, but it will help you
understand the article better.
Ganga höf stór úr útsjánum inn í jörðina.
Giant seas...no fixed number implied.
The earth...singular entity implied.
Er þat kunnigt at haf gengr frá Nörvasundum ok allt út til
Jórsalalands.
A sea...some certain one, but indefinite.
Jórsalaland...a place name, no article in this case.
Af hafinu gengr langr hafsbotn til landnorðrs
> er heitir Svartahaf.
From the sea/from that one...the one named in the previous sentence.
Sá skilr heimsþriðjungana.
That(the sea bottom).
From here and forward, Snorri and Haukur rule the article:
Heitir fyrir austan Asía en fyrir vestan kalla sumir Evrópu en sumir
Eneu. En norðan at Svartahafi gengr Svíþjóð in mikla eða in kalda.
Svíþjóð ina miklu kalla sumir menn eigi minni en Serkland it mikla,
sumir jafna henni við Bláland it mikla. Inn nyrðri hlutr Svíþjóðar
liggr óbyggðr af frosti ok kulda, svá sem inn syðri hlutr Blálands
er auðr af sólarbruna. Í Svíþjóð eru stórhéruð mörg. Þar eru ok
margs konar þjóðir ok margar tungur. Þar eru risar ok þar eru
dvergar, þar eru blámenn ok þar eru margs konar undarligar þjóðir.
Þar eru ok dýr ok drekar furðuliga stórir. Úr norðri frá fjöllum
þeim er fyrir útan eru byggð alla fellr á um Svíþjóð, sú er at réttu
heitir Tanaís. Hon var forðum kölluð Tanakvísl eða Vanakvísl. Hon
kømr til sjávar inn í Svartahaf. Í Vanakvíslum var þá kallað
Vanaland eða Vanaheimr. Sú á skilr heimsþriðjungana. Heitir fyrir
austan Asía en fyrir vestan Evrópa."
>
>
> *Noun-adjective*
>
> höf stór
> drekar [furðuliga] stórir
>
>
> *Adjective-noun*
>
> langr hafsbotn
> margar tungur
> byggð öll
> undarligar þjóðir
>
>
> *Noun-article-adjective*
> Svíþjóð in mikla
> Svíþjóð in kalda
> Serkland it mikla
> Bláland it mikla
>
>
> *Article-adjective-noun*
> inn nyrðri hlutr
> inn syðri hlutr
>
> This slightly supports my contention that adjective-noun is more
> common than noun-adjective. But obviously both are perfectly
normal.
>
>
> The typical modern Icelandic forms are:
>
> langur hafsbotn
> langi hafsbotninn
>
> The following forms, while perfectly understandable, are probably
> confined to literary usage:
>
> hafsbotn langur
> hinn langi hafsbotn
>
> The latter is more common in the other Scandinavian languages;
> in Faroese we would have:
>
> tann langi havsbotnur (assuming 'havsbotnur' is a word)
>
>
> > Ok segi ek: As a beginner, I want to use the more common word
orders, etc.
>
> Vel mælir þú ok hyggiliga.
>
> Kveðja,
> Haukr