Thanks LN.

 

I have a few additional comments on your excellent and most appreciated analysis. First of all do you know why some of text in the poem is included within parenthesis – is it clearly indicated in the original text or an editorial interpretation? Other comments below. In these comments I´m not necessary saying that I disagree with you – I just need more comvincingJ

 

Takk

Alan

 

-----Original Message-----
From: norse_course@yahoogroups.com [mailto:norse_course@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of llama_nom
Sent: Tuesday, 12 July 2005 2:34 AM
To: norse_course@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [norse_course] Re: Miscellanea Section L Subsection (iii)/Translation

 

 

Well, I butted in earlier because I thought this was a bit of a

tangled one and not really fair to unleash on beginners,

 

No pain, no gain

 

 but

actually you all did impressively well in riddling out the

meanings.  In case anyone doesn't have access to Gordon's

translation, here it is: "I have laid a loop on the heath beyond

Jordan --the wise lady will remember this during the serpent's sorrow

[lit. path-thong's]; but I think it seems far to all stay-at-home's

to go thither; blood fell warm on the wide plain."

 

> 

> 'Ek hefi lagða lykkju leiðar þvengs of heiði

> I have placed a coil of lace of (the) way over (the) heath.

 

 

'leiðar þvengs' "lace/thong of the way" [snake] would seem to be

parenthetical, not connected with this sentence but rather

with 'sút'.

 

You say, "would seem to be parenthetical" - that seems to me to be somewhat inconclusive - whether or not you agree with my reading, is my reading actually gramatically and syntactically defensible?

 

The 'sút þvengs leiðar' "sorrow of the thong of the

road" = "serpent's sorrow".  The skalds often spliced their

sentences like this, and the confusion caused by the fact that he's

already talking about tying knots may well be deliberate!

 

The kenning might seem bizarre but is actually a conventional way of

referring to seasons in skaldic verse, according to how amenable the

weather is to snakes.  Snorri says that winter can be called 'bani

orma' "death/bane/killer of snakes", and summer 'líkn

ormanna' "comfort/relief/mercy of the snakes".  He cites Ormr

Steinþórsson's kenning 'orms tregi' "snake's grief" for winter.

 

I don’t think any of the snake kennings you cite or the double kennings bizarre – in fact they’re rather cute! And I have no problem with the concept of double kennings per se but, to my mind, the ‘splicing’ of sút in line 4 with ‘leiðar þvengs’ in line 2 reeks more of scholarly ingenuity and “cleverness” in their quest for double kennings than a genuine intention on behalf of the poet/author.

 

Did the poets care about snakes?  I think it was just a good excuse

for gratuitous snake-kennings.  For example, Sörlastikki, in Sörla

þáttr, has 'dalreyðar miskunnar' "dale-rorqual's [=land-fish =

serpent's] mercies", that is to say: the season which is kind to the

snake, i.e. summer.  Similarly Egill Skallagrímsson called

summer 'dalmiskunn fiska'.  Here the elements of the kenning are

swapped, but the intended meaning is 'miskunn dalfiska' "mercy of

[i.e. for] dale-fishes", summer.

 

> Snotr minnisk þess svanni

> A wise woman (will) be reminded of that

 

Or simply "remember that" (his tying of the knots).

 

 

> sút), fyr Jórðán útan;

> (with) sorrow [dat sg?], beyond Jordan ;

 

See above: sorrow nothing to do with the wise woman, just part of

the kenning for winter.  Yes, I think dat.sg.

 

As above, is connecting sút with leiðar þvengs incontrovertable? Whether or not you agree with my reading, is it actually gramatically and syntactically defensible? ie Why can´t the sorrow be the wise woman´s?

 

 

> en hykk at þó þykki

> but I think that nevertheless (it) seems

 

 

The (dative) subject of 'þykki' is 'heimdrögum öllum' "all stay-at-

homes" in the final line: I think it seems to them; I think [that]

they think [that] it [is] a long way to walk/go there [to where I

tied the knots, on the heath beyond the River Jordan].

 

I always translate these constructions this way to demonstrate the grammar, eg mér þykkir = [literally] (it) seems to me = I think

 

Also, how precise is the translation stay-at-home for heimdragi, which both Gordon and Zöega both give? A stay-at-home seems to me to be someone who never leaves home while the components of heimdragi suggest to me, rather, someone who is always keen to get back home whenever they go away. Is this quibble valid?

 

> þangat langt at ganga

> a long way to walk from there,

 

 

'þangat' "to there, thither" (þann veg at), rather than "from there,

thence", which would be 'þaðan'.  Slip of the keyboard, no doubt.

 

Oops. Exactly.

 

> (blóð fell varmt á víðan

> blood fell warm on (the) wide

> völl) heimdrögum öllum

> plain, for all those who yearn for [are drawn to] home

 

I'm not even sure there needs to be an excuse to mention blood in

Viking poetry.  Violence was done, it almost goes without saying. 

Like the woman, it might refer to a particular event, or it might be

just part of the convention.  It seems like a parenthetical

interjection, as Gordon punctuates it, in the middle of the sentence

about it seeming a long way to stay-at-homes.

 

How was that?  Hope I haven't confused things even more.

 

LN

 

 

 

 

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/

 

 

 

 

 

--

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.

Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005