Re: Hofdingi verses Hersir

Heill, Dirk!

I believe that höfðingi is derived from höfuð (head), not hof, which is a very common derivation in IE languages (ie. leaders described as a "head" - still used in English (eg. head of an organisation)). If we consider that "chieftain" comes to us through Norman French from Latin caput "head", then it is indeed a very apt translation, and cognate as well.

Kveðja,
Dan

Dirk Howat wrote:

Llama Non,

You stated:
I think it was JRR Tolkien (or was it?) who once commented on the
problems of the word "chieftain" having Amerindian connotations
(this talking about translating Beowulf), but by now "chieftain"
seems quite a standard way of translating höfðingi, and so it might
be more confusing--dishonest even?--to use different titles for the
same person. Since hersir is a different word, it might be a good
idea to consistently translate this "lord" in distinction to
höfðingi. It's what I tend to do, but I doubt I live up to any
rigorous standards


The word hofdingi and hersir have different connotations. You are 
right hofdingi is cheiftain whereas hersir is definately related to 
war, her = war is a very common word and broadly Germanic. So while 
hofdingi, (hof - temple, abode) would more correlate to POLITICAL 
leader being it is related to more or less geographic connotations, 
again, hof a place. Whereas, hersir would be translated as Warlord, 
or Warleader, being her is related to war.  This is why, IMO, a 
literal translation is preferable. But other may take a different 
appoach.








--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "llama_nom" <600cell@...> 
wrote:

Dirk, Sarah, Patricia, Laurel, Mona (and everyone else interested

in

boendr!), hello!

--- In norse_course@yahoogroups.com, "Dirk Howat"

<dirk_howat@...>

wrote:

This implies being bonded to another person (of greater stature)

and

the inability to own land.

Here's part of the entry in Cleasby & Vigfusson:

"properly a part, act. from búa (turned into a noun subst., cp. 
frændi, fjándi), A. S. buan; Germ, bauer, and therefore originally

till er of the ground, husbandman, but it always involved the

sense

of ownership, and included all owners of land (or boer, q. v.).

from

the petty freeholder to the franklin, and esp. the-class

represented

by the yeoman of England generally or the statesman of

Westmoreland

and Cumberland..."

http://penguin.pearson.swarthmore.edu/~scrist1/scanned_books/html/oi_

cleasbyvigfusson/b0074.html

My apologies if everyone's already read this in the course of this 
discussion!  The article goes on to say that bóndi acquired 
derogatory connotations in 'despotic' Norway (of commoners as 
opposed to nobility), but positive ones in the Icelandic 
commonwealth (where it simply excluded priests & knights).  All of 
which makes me wonder if--in spite of your reservation's Dirk--
"farmer" might be the best all purpose translation after all, as

it

has that ambiguity in modern English.  That seems the most

literal,

and it could refer to some poor farmer with one cow and a small 
field, or it might be a large landowner with wealth and influence.

More specific words like franklin or freeholder might work in some 
contexts--I'd have to check the exact meanings of these (and so 
might many readers...)--but serf and bondsman maybe stray too far?

Here is what I do:
If you come across the word multiple times, I would translate it

in

a few meanings. For example, if bondi was used 3 times the same 
text, in the same context a farmer, not a noble, I would

translate

bondi as:


bondsmen
serf
farmer
karl

This is a subject I've been thinking about a bit recently.  It's 
often what I do too: it allows you to cunningly slip in the

various

meanings contained in the original word without being too verbose, 
or having recourse to clunking explanations.  But on the other

hand,

I've read some saga translation reviews which frown on this 
as "inconsistency".  And I can see the point that if a particular 
term is used in the original, for example with legal implications

in

Norse society, it might be important to stick to one English term

to

translate it.  The choice of an English word might then be 
relatively arbitrary (it might even be a more or less artificial 
calque like "landmen" or "landed men"), but by constant use, a

sense

of the connotations of the original word would come out.

I think it was JRR Tolkien (or was it?) who once commented on the 
problems of the word "chieftain" having Amerindian connotations 
(this talking about translating Beowulf), but by now "chieftain" 
seems quite a standard way of translating höfðingi, and so it

might

be more confusing--dishonest even?--to use different titles for

the

same person.  Since hersir is a different word, it might be a good 
idea to consistently translate this "lord" in distinction to 
höfðingi.  It's what I tend to do, but I doubt I live up to any 
rigorous standards...

There are also stylistic arguments for at least aiming at 
consistency, where possible.  For example if a certain word or 
phrase is repeated in the original, there might be a good

aesthetic

reason for this.  On the whole, I try not to lose such effects,

even

if the result sounds strange in English.  Strange is sometimes

good!

But the other side to this is that, in some areas, Icelandic has a 
more varied vocabulary than English: mælti, kvað, sagði (all of 
which suggest English "said")--yes there are alternatives, but

they

usually introduce some extra meaning not in the 
original: "declared", "objected", etc.  So where the meaning and 
aesthetics aren't affected I do add some arbitrary variety to 
balence this out.  Or that's my excuse, anyway.

If bondi was used for a man going viking then I might translate 
bondi if it came up mulitple times as first:
 
bondsmen
karl

The second of these could suggest to people with some knowledge of 
Old Norse, or at least the names for classes of people, that the 
word in the original was karl (man, chap; commoner, peasant)--

which

some might see as misleading--although as far as I know the terms 
karl and bóndi aren't always mutually exclusive.  Not necessarily 
disagreeing with you on this one--just something else to think

about

(as if all that grammar's not enough!).  Here's a question: do you 
know if jarl and bóndi are exclusive?  I get the impression that 
they would be.

Again, one of the uses of the literal translation is changing 
English back into more like it was. We thus gain a paradigm

shift.

understand some people want to modernize it for whatever their 
reasons are, like many Christian translate the bible in

different

ways to fullfill their political agenda. Literal translations

takes

political motives out of it and immerses the reader into that 
society as realistically as possible.

Sometimes this can be not so much changing English back into what

it

was, as creating a sort of lingua franca for the past to talk to

the

present--if that makes sense?--something that is clear to modern 
readers but also has a terminology consistent with that of the 
original.  Actually this is a huge balencing act, if you sacrifice 
some ease of understanding on the part of the casual reader, you 
might get a more strictly acurate version.  By chosing unfamiliar 
words (archaic or modern), you could remove these political 
associations and force the reader to learn the acurate meaning.

But

then go too far and it could get intimidating, or be seen as 
shirking the duty of translator.  But by picking a term with some 
associations, but hopefully not too many misleading ones, you

might

just get the best of both worlds: something the casual reader can 
understand, but which repays closer study.

To some extent this is a matter of taste.  Anyway, I'm waffling,

so

I'll shut up now.

Llama Nom




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/GP4qlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

A Norse funny farm, overrun by smart people.

Homepage: http://www.hi.is/~haukurth/norse/

To escape from this funny farm try rattling off an e-mail to:

norse_course-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/norse_course/

<*> 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/

Re: Hofdingi verses Hersir - Deriviations