Hi Alan!
Strange business with the characters:
What you write in ON comes across unreadable at my end.
The two of us evidently have a relative problem there.
When others submit ON sentences, I can read them just fine.
btw my system is Linux running Mozilla.

Otherwise, thank you for your remarks!

"not" as adverb?
My dictionary lists both "ikke" and "ikkje" as adverbs.
So that must be the answer I guess. But look at the sentences
A is equal to B.
A is not equal to B.
Then 'not' may be regarded as modifying the verb 'is'.
But can it not also be seen as modifying the word 'equal'?
A is unequal to B.
I think those classification schemes may vary considerably
without affecting the correctness of the described sentences.
btw 'equal' is probably an adjective, since the adverb would
be 'equally'.

With regard to þykkja and illa/illr, I have consulted
at least 3 different grammar books, but nowhere did I find
a really good answer.

What I did find, however, was that some dictionaries
also list 'illt' as adverb, in addition to 'illa'.
(the neutr. sg. Nom./Acc. form)


But in one particular ON dictionary (a Danish one),
I found a hint of an answer, because it says:

" e-m þykkir e-t vel, illa (: orðit),
= en er vel, ilde tilfreds med noget ".

Here the verb 'orðit' in paranthesis, is probably the
author of the dictionary's attemt at explaining the
presence of the adverbial form 'illa'.
As I understand it, the author hints at a missing
verb, a verb that may be skipped without violating the
ON syntax rules.
There was also a hint somewhere, that some verbs like
better to be associated with adverbs, whereas others
better like adjectives. verða may then be such a verb as
prefers adverbs. I am not quite sure, because I could
not relocate the place I read it. But it does make some sense.

In Old Norse, I also thought þykkja was linked to
the Dative and the Accusative cases, with an absent
Nominative. That is because it is a so-called 'impersonal'
verb. The absent Nominative may then be replaced by some
transpersonal 'it' for the purpose of translating.
The pattern then is: e-m þykkir e-n (vera) e-t,
for example: "mér þykkir manninn (vera) spakan"
English: "to me [it] seems the man is wise".
But here "the man" is an Accusative.
The subject of the verb is 'it'.

Another point I noted, is that when mér is placed
after þykkir, then "þykkir mér" is often changed
to "þykki mér" because an -r before an m- is cumbersome
to pronounce, and so the -r is dropped. (as in the
example in Hrafnkel's saga)

But acording to yet another dictionary, þykkja
takes a Dative object and a Nominative subject.
In that case the example becomes "mér tykkir maðurinn (vera) spakr ".
It is difficult to decide, in most examples, which of the two
patterns is being used, because the Nominative form so often
coincides with the accusative.
Here another dictionary example:
"mér synist hun falleg" (German: "sie dünkt mir (mich) schön".)
(to me she seems beautiful)
Here 'falleg' is from fallegr = adjective.
Presumably, with þykkja, the same example would be:
"þykki mér hana fallega", or the other variant:
"þykki mér hun falleg".
I don't know which variant would hold up to a closer investigation.
The dictionaries I consulted seemed to have skipped much of
the examples that would have been relevant to this particular
problem.
Here another example from the Edda:
"hloeligt mér þat þykkir", where hloeligr = adj. = riduculous
or laughable. So, it is clear that adjectives are used
just as often as adverbs.
If I am allowed to improvise from the above, then it seems to
me that, by analogy, the following sentence might be correct:
" Hloeligt tykki mér, at þú ert þannig til görr ".
I wonder what Haukur would have to say about it.

Best regards
Xigung


--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Thompson" <athompso@...>
wrote:

> Hi Xigung
>
> Thanks for your comments and it's good to see your computer is still

emitting strange characters :)

>
> Regarding the formation of adverbs from adjectives, Gordon, list the

following ways it can occur:

>
> 1. By means of suffixes, namely -a, as in illa, gjarna from illr,

gjarn; -i, as in lengi, from langr; -an,as in jafnan, saman, fram
jafn, samr...

> 2. from special uses of particular cases: gen sg alls (partitive,

passing into degree); dat sg neut miklu (degree); acc sg alt "all the
way"; dat pl stórum, næstum.

> 3. the neut sg of most adjs could be used as an adverb: sárt ertu

leikinn 'sorely art thou treated.'

>
> However, Gordon gives no rule to guide us in distinguishing why

'illr' to use my example, would become type 1 'illa' rather than type
3 'illt'

>
> Turning to my particular example, I would consider that 'at þú ert

þann veg til gõrr' is really the subject of the sentence rather than
the object, and hence if 'illa' was modifying the subject clause it
would still logically need to be an adjective. Thus, in English word
order (subject - verb - complement - indirect object): 'At þú ert þann
veg til gõrr þykkir illt mér (That you are treated in this way seems
bad to me). Nevertheless, I guess logic can only take you so far in
language and beyond that one has to allow for idiom. Thus, just as
'þykkja' takes the dative case, it may also 'take' an adverb rather
than an adjective as a modifier. From your knowledge, if you were to
substitute 'good', 'silly', 'unusual', 'disappointing' etc for 'bad'
in the expression 'Illa þykkir mér' would you use the adverbial form
(noting that often the adverbial form and the adjective would be
indistinguishable)?

>
> With respect to your comments on the use of 'ekki,' I don´t know if

you meant it but your explanation completely supported my argument
that it was being used as the adverb 'not' rather than as a pronoun.

>
> Kveðja
> Alysseann
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xigung [mailto:xigung@...]
> Sent: Friday, 6 February 2004 6:06 AM
> To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [norse_course] Re: Hrafnkel 152-176 / Laurel
>
> > 154. 'Illa þykkir mér, at þú ert þann veg til gõrr, f=

óstri
minn,

> > My translation: ‘(It) seems to me, that you are thus treated badl=

y,

> my fosterling,
> > Other translations: â€Å"It seems to me (I think it)
> evil/unpleasant/bad that your are treated thus, my foster son,
> >
> > In this sentence, I think ‘illa’ is an adverb modifying â=

€˜gõrr

> til’rather than an adjective. If it was an adjective wouldnâ€â„=

¢t it be

> ‘illt” ie the nom sg neuter form? There is a similar situatio=

n
at line

> 166: Einarr svarar: 'Illa hefir mér at farit,’ where some have=

> translated ‘illa’ as ‘something bad’ (ie as an =

adjective)
where aga=

> in,
> I think it is an adverb, ie: ‘It has fared badly with me.’
>
> My immediate understanding of this sentence is slightly different.
> "illa þykkir mér" is the first unit, or partial sentence.
> But it is incomplete without an accusative object, which is
> typically a "þat" and that may be used to fill out the empty
> slot thus: "illa þykkir mér þat" (bad seems to me 'you_know_what=

')

> But in the actual sentence the þat-slot has been replaced
> by the subclause "at þú ert þann veg til görr", typically
> beginning with the conjunction "at". Thus, instead of qualifying
> þat (demonstrative sg.n.acc.), illa now qualifies the whole
> sub-clause that has replaced the slot-word þat. And so it is
> the whole condition of the horse which is qualified by "illa".
> Thus, "illa", as I see it, does not qualify a single noun or
> verb in the sub clause, but the whole sub clause.
>
> Looking in my dictionary, I see your point, though, that
> 'illa' is the adverbial form, whereas the adjective form
> is 'illr' in its 24 adaptions.
>
> If you then have followed my way of thinking above,
> where I did not reflect on the point you raise here,
> I would say that when 'illa' qualifies a condition/state-of-affairs
> described by a sub-clause, it would mainly qualify
> the verb of the sub clause, hence the adverbial form.
>
> Simpler is to see it as adverbial qualifier of the verb
> in the first clause, þykkja. For example, replacing
> 'to think' by 'to rain', you might want to say in
> English: "It rains badly [on me]".
> Then 'badly' is adverb to the verb 'rain'.
> However, if you say "It rains bad [stuff] on me",
> the 'bad' is adjective to the suppressed 'stuff'.
> In the case at hand, "illa" may either be seen as
> qualifying þykkja or as qualifying the sub-clause
> that starts with 'at'. I do not know what the right
> answer is, or if there is a way to find it out.
>
>
>
> There is something that I don't understand here, and that
> is how adverbs are formed from adjectives. What is the rule?
> Why is it 'illa' that is the adverb corresponding to 'illr'
> and not some other form. I am not sure what the rule is here.
> I can try to look it up. Any way, in actual practice
> you don't worry about it, but just remember the example
> 'illa þykkir mér..' and whenever you use it, always follow
> that paradigma. But I agree that there ought to be a
> grammatical explanation.
>
> >
> > 157. Far þú til liðs þíns.'
> > My translation: Go (you) to your herd
> > Other translations: Go now to your mares.”, â€Å"Go back to you=

r
herd”

> >
> > Comment: ‘now’ and ‘back’ are not in the orig=

inal and
would not

> > be included in a literal translation.
> " Go you to your 'army' ".
> ('army'= lið = heap of individuals, group, flock)
>
> > 161. Øxi hafði hann í hendi, en ekki fleira vápna.
> > My translation: He had an axe in (his) hand, but not more weapons.
> > Other translations: He had an ax in hand, but no more/other weapons.
> >
> > Comment: ‘ekki’ can be a neut pronoun meaning ‘nothi=

ng’ or
as an

> adverb meaning ‘not’, but I don’t think it can be use=

d to mean
‘noâ=

> €™.
> Thus, I think it is used here as an adverb. There are a number of
> other places where I think it is also being used as an adverb: four
> times between lines 168-171, where others have, in some cases,
> translated it as ‘no.’ I notice that the text seems (to me a=

t least)

> to use both ‘ekki’ and ‘eigi’ almost interchang=

eably for the
adverb=

>
> ‘not’ (see line 172, for example, immediately following the =

examples

> of ‘ekki’ I mentioned. Would one normally expect this in a

single text

> or am I missing something?
>
> I think you have to use the method of "filling out" here,
> i.e. replace by:
> 161. Øxi hafði hann í hendi, en ekki hafði hann fleira váp=

na.

>
> Then you will see that the structure is
> A, but not B.
> The word 'en' then is a conjunction tying together two
> partial statements A and B. 'ekki' in front of statement B
> then signifies the abnegation of statement B,
> i.e. " he did n o t have more weapons [than the axe] ".
>
> > 167. en nú er fundinn.'
> > but now are found.”
> >
> > Question: why is the 3rd pers sg ‘er’ used here, when the =

sense

> would suggest plural ‘eru’?
>
> Good question!
> If the 'found' refers to the sheep (sauðr m., pl. sauðir),
> then it ought to have been
> "sem nú eru fundnir"
> But in the preceding sentence you used an unclear form
> of the verb vera. If the original ON said "vart"
> it is clear that the group of sheep is seen as a unit,
> hence singular. But I'd like to look at the original ON
> first, before I am completely sure.
>
>
>
> >
> > 168. Hann kvazk ekki at slíku telja.
> > My translation: He (Hrafnkel) declared himself (that he was) not to
> count (object to) such.
> > Other translation: He didn’t speak to object at such.
> >
> > Comment: I think ‘ekki’ is modifying ‘telja’ =

rather than
‘kvazk=

> ’
>
> Here, in logical notation:
> A said B
> A said not B.
> 'not B' then stands for the logical opposite of the whole statement B.
> In Hamlet: " To be or not to be, that is the question ".
> Here: " To count or not to count...."
> You see that english can also put 'not' before 'to'.
> But I think you are right that the 'ekki' in front of the 'at'
> as a consequence affects the verb in statement B.
>
>
>
> >
> > 176. en þó hefir þú vel við gengit.'
> > My translation: but still you have
> intended/meant/behaved/proceeded/acted well.
> > Other translations: but nevertheless you have readily confessed.
> >
> > Comment: I note that Gordon glosses ‘ganga við’ as

´confess’ and

> Zoega as ‘avow.’ Zoega also gives the middle voice ‘ga=

ngast
við’ a=

> s
> ‘to confess.’ My modern Icelandic dictionary only gives

‘gangast við=

> ’
> as ‘to confess’ with no entry for ‘ganga við.â€â=

„¢ Without
using these=

>
> aids my initial translation was that ´ganga við vel’ had the=

sense

> that Einar had acted with good intentions throughout the episode, not
> only in owning up to riding Freyfaxi, but also in trying to carry out
> his shepherds duty. I would be interested in any opinions regarding
> whether ´ganga við’ might have the meaning I indicated.
> >
>
> Well, at least in Danish and Norwegian "å vedgå" means to admit
> something, such as 'to admit guilt'. The composite verb is formed
> from 'å gå' (to go) plus the preposition 'ved' (by, at).
> By putting the preposition in front of the verb, you have composed
> a new verb 'å ved-gå' that means to admit -- that is, not in the se=

nse

> of admitting someone to a building, but in the sense of acknowledging
> some act, or maybe some fact. (such as 2+2=4)
> The medio-passive form (-zk) then means that one admits something
> to oneself.
>
> Well, thank you very much for the thought excercises!
>
> Best
> Xigung
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Laurel Bradshaw [mailto:llawryf@...]
> > Sent: Saturday, 31 January 2004 9:18 AM
> > To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [norse_course] Hrafnkel 152-176 / Laurel
> >
> > 'Hvat mun garprinn vilja, er hann er heim kominn?'
> > what - should - the gallant fellow - wish - that - he - towards home
> - came
> > "What should the gallant fellow want, that he has come back home?"
> >
> > segir Hrafnkell. 'Eigi mun þat góðu gegna.'
> > says - Hrafnkell - not - must - that - good - bode
> > said Hrafnkel. "That doesn't bode well."
> >
> >
> > Síðan gekk hann út ok sér Freyfaxa ok mælti við hann:=

> > then - went - he - out - and - sees - Freyfaxi - and - says - to - him
> > Then he went out and saw Freyfaxi, and said to him:
> >
> > 'Illa þykkir mér, at þú ert þann veg til gõrr, fós=

tri minn,

> > unpleasing - it seems - to me - as regards - you - are - that -
> manner - treated - fosterling - of mine
> > "I am displeased at how you have been treated, my foster-son,
> >
> > en heima hafðir þú vit þitt, er þú sagðir mér t=

il,

> > but - at home - had - you - wits - your - when - you - told - me -
> concerning this
> > but you had your wits about you when you told me of this.
> >
> > ok skal þessa hefnt verða. Far þú til liðs þíns.'=

> > and - shall - this - avenged - be - go - you - to - herd - your
> > This will be avenged. Go to your herd."
> >
> >
> > En hann gekk þegar upp eptir dalnum til stóðs síns.
> > and - he - went - at once - up - along - the valley - to - stud - his
> > And he went immediately up the valley to his stud.
> >
> >
> > Hrafnkell ferr í rekkju sína um kveldit
> > Hrafnkell - went - to - bed - his - in - the evening
> > Hrafnkel went to (his) bed that evening
> >
> > ok svaf af um nóttina.
> > and - slept - through - the night
> > and slept through the night.
> >
> > En um morguninn lét hann taka sér hest
> > and - in - the morning - let - he - take - himself - a horse
> > In the morning, he had a horse taken
> >
> > ok leggja á sõðul ok ríðr upp til sels.
> > and - put - on - a saddle - and - rode - up - to - sheiling
> > and saddled for him, and rode up to the sheiling.
> >
> > Hann ríðr í blám klæðum.
> > he - rode - in - black - clothing
> > He rode wearing black clothes.
> >
> > Øxi hafði hann í hendi, en ekki fleira vápna.
> > an ax - had - he - in - hand - but - no - more - weapons
> > He had an ax in his hand, but no other weapons.
> >
> > Þá hafði Einarr nýrekit fé í kvíar.
> > then - had - Einarr - newly driven - livestock - into - sheepfold
> > Einar had just driven the sheep into the fold.
> >
> > Hann lá á kvíagarðinum ok talði fé,
> > he - was lying - on - the sheepfold wall - and - counting - sheep
> > He was lying on the wall of the sheepfold, counting the sheep,
> >
> > en konur váru at mjólka.
> > and - women - were - at - milking
> > and the women were milking.
> >
> >
> > Þau heilsuðu honum.
> > they - greeted - him (Hrafnkell)
> > They greeted Hrafnkel.
> >
> >
> > Hann spurði, hversu þeim fÅ"ri (foeri) at.
> > he - asked - how - to them - were going - concerning
> > He asked how things had been going for them.
> >
> >
> > Einarr svarar: 'Illa hefir mér at farit,
> > Einarr - answered - unpleasing - has - to me - concerning - faring
> > Einar answered: "It hasn't been going well for me,
> >
> > því at vant varð þriggja tiga ásauðar nær viku,
> > because - lacking - were - three - of ten - ewes - nearly - a week
> > because thirty ewes were missing for nearly a week,
>
> This is confusing, because in ON it is either "vart" or váruð"
> But the form you quote is neither. I suspect you have mixed
> in thje modern Icelandic, but am not sure.
>
> >
> > en nú er fundinn.'
> > but - now - are - found
> > but now they've been found."
> >
> >
> > Hann kvazk ekki at slíku telja.
> > he - said - not - about - such - to count
> > He (Hrafnkel) said that such things were of no account.
> >
> > 'Eða hefir ekki verr at farit?
> > and/or/but - has - nothing - worse - concerning - faring
> > "Hasn't anything worse happened?
> >
> > Hefir þat ok ekki svá opt til borit sem ván hefir at verit,
> > has - that - but/though - not - so - often - come to pass - that -
> expectation - has - happened
> > It hasn't occured as often as might be expected,
> >
> > at fjárins hafi vant verit.
> > that - of livestock - has - a lack - happened
> > that the sheep have gone missing.
> >
> > En hefir þú ekki nõkkut riðit Freyfaxa mínum hinn fyrra =

dag?'

> > but - have - you - not - in any way - ridden - Freyfaxi - my - the -
> before - day
> > But didn't you ride my Freyfaxi yesterday?"
> >
> >
> > Hann kvezk eigi þræta þess mega.
> > he - said - not - deny - this - to be able
> > Einar said he couldn't deny it.
> >
> >
> > Hrafnkell svarar: 'Fyrir hví reiztu þessu hrossi,
> > Hrafnkell - answered - for this reason - why - did you ride - this -
> horse
> > Hrafnkel answered: "For what reason did you ride this horse
> >
> > er þér var bannat, þar er hin váru nóg til,
> > which - to you - was - forbidden - where - it - was - sufficient -
> concerning
> > that was forbidden to you, when there were plenty of others
> >
> > er þér var lofat?
> > which - to you - were - permitted
> > that you had permission to take?
> >
> > Þar munda ek hafa gefit þér upp eina sõk,
> > there - would - I - have - given quarter - to you - up - one - offense
> > I would have forgiven you (this) one offense,
> >
> > ef ek hefða eigi svá mikit um mælt,
> > if - I - had - not - so - much - about it - said
> > if I had not sworn such a great (oath) about this,
> >
> > en þó hefir þú vel við gengit.'
> > but - nevertheless - have -you - readily - towards (this) - confessed
> > but nevertheless you have readily confessed."
> >
> >
> > ·
>