> Og við umtölur Snorra og það með að hann sá að hann mælti
> satt þá sefaðist Þorkell en Gunnari var í brott fylgt um
> kveldið.
> --And with conversation (dat n.) (of) Snorra and that with
> to he (nom) saw (see: sjá) at (looked at) hann (acc.)
> speak true them (pl. mas. acc.) appease (sefa refx)
> Thorkell (acc.), but Gunnar (dat.) was in away accompany
> (fylgja ppart) around evening (n. acc.)
> --To speak of Snorra, who saw Thorkell speaking the truth
> to Gunnar, who was away accompanying him on this evening.
Neuter <umtal> has no form in <-(u)r>, so <umtölur> can’t be
from <umtal>. Finding nothing in Zoëga, we turn to CV and
find <umtölur> 'persuasions'; it’s marked as a feminine
plural, apparently of an unattested weak feminine <umtala>.
Both <að>s are the particle that functions as a
subordinating conjunction 'that'. The preposition <að>
usually governs the dative, so the fact that you see <að
hann> rather than <að honum> is at least a moderately strong
indication that you’re not dealing with the preposition.
(If you were, by the way, <hann> would just about have to be
its object and would therefore be acc. rather than nom.)
Thus, it’s ‘that he saw that he spoke truth’. (The neuter
nom. sing. of an adjective not infrequently functions as an
abstract noun.)
This <þá> is 'then', not the pronoun. Note that if it were
the indirect object of <mælti>, it would be dative <þeim>.
It isn’t so much temporal, 'at that time', as introducing a
conclusion, something somehow following from the first part
of the sentence. Here I don’t translate it at all, but if I
did, it would be a 'then' following the comma (see below).
In this sentence the 'reflexive' form <sefaðist> has a
passive sense, 'was appeased'. <En> here seems to be the
narrative continuation, usually translated 'and', rather
than the adversative 'but'. <Gunnari var ... fylgt> is an
impersonal construction that is functionally rather like an
English passive. It isn’t obvious from Zoëga s.v. <fylgja>,
but one of the examples in CV makes it clear that <fylgja>
in the sense 'to lead' takes a dative object, and <Gunnari>
is a dative, so Gunnar is being led. It’s literally
something like ‘[it] was led Gunnar’.
And on account of Snorri’s persuasions and with that [the
fact] that he saw that he [= Snorri] spoke [the] truth,
Þorkel was appeased, and Gunnar was led away in the
evening.
> Veisla fór þar vel fram og skörulega.
> --Veisla (nom) traveled (fera-3rd past) there well forward
> and nobly.
> --Veisla went on well and nobly.
Modern Icelandic has done away with the letter <z>; you have
to know here that modern <veisla> is Old Norse <veizla> 'a
feast' (among other things). Despite being separated by
<vel>, the words <þar> and <fram> are actually a linked pair
meaning 'therefrom, from that point on'. (This sort of
separation of elements that form a single unit is quite
common and can be quite confusing.) The sense is that
once Gunnar was out of the way, everything went just fine.
> Og er boði var lokið búast menn í brott.
> --and when offered? (ppart bjóða) was locked? making
> himself ready (búa-make/build refex.) men (pl. acc.) in
> away/breit.
> --and when he was offered lokið he made men ready for
> going away.
One of the most common meaning of <lúka> is 'to end, to
finish', and it takes the dative of the thing ended. Thus,
we might reasonably suspect that <er boði var lokið> is
'when [the] <boði> was ended/done', with <boði> a dative.
That <-i> is a typical dative sing. marker for masc. and
neut. nouns, and sure enough, we find neut. <boð> 'a
banquet, a wedding feast', which fits perfectly.
<Menn> is nom., so the most reasonable guess is that it’s
the subject of <búast>, which in fact it is. The only
question is what folks (<menn>) got ready to do, since the
verb has been omitted. This is not uncommon in this
context. Fortunately, the omitted verb <fara> (or possibly
<ganga> can readily be inferred from <í brott>: they ‘got
ready [to go] away’.
And when [the] wedding-feast was over, folks got ready to
leave.
> Þorkell gaf Snorra allfémiklar gjafir og svo öllum
> virðingamönnum.
> --Thorkell gave (gefa 3rd past) Snorra great monetary
> (fé-mikla?) gifts (nom.?) and so/such all (dat.) human
> value (dat. m.)
> --Who gave whom what? cases don't match logic.
Þorkell is nominative, and <Snorra> can be any of the three
oblique cases. Here <Snorra> is dative, for the recipient.
<Fémikill> in this context is 'costly, valuable', and <all->
is an intensifier: 'very valuable'. <Virðingamönnum> is the
dative plural of <virðingamaðr> 'a man of distinction or
rank'.
Þorkel gave Snorri very valuable gifts, and similarly to
all distinguished folks.
> Snorri bauð heim Bolla Bollasyni og bað hann vera með sér
> öllum þeim stundum er honum þætti það betra.
> --Snorri offered (bjóða) home, Bolla, the sons of Bolla
> and asked (biðja 3rd. past) him (acc.) to be (infinitive)
> with him (dat. reflex) all of them (dat.) a length of time
> (dat.) when to him (dat.) factors that make better.
> --Snorri offered to take Bolla and his sons home and asked
> him to be with him, all of them, a moment, it would make
> things better.
This is <bjóða> 'to invite', the third sense in Zoëga. The
nom. of the name is <Bolli>. <Vera með e-m> is often 'to
stay with someone'. <Öllum þeim stundum> is a single dative
phrase, 'all those whiles (times, occasions)'. <Það> is the
grammatical subject of <þætti>, which is subjunctive: ‘that
should seem to him better, he should think that better’.
Snorri invited Bolli Bollason home [with him] and asked
him to stay with him all those times when that should seem
to him better.
In other words, ‘come when you like, and stay as long as you
like’.
> Bolli þiggur það og ríður heim í Tungu.
> --to Bolla (dat.) received (þiggja gr. ?) that and rode
> (riða) home to Tungu.
> --Bolla received that and rode home to Tungu.
<Þiggur>, older <þiggr>, is 3rd pres. indic. of <þiggja>,
here in the sense 'to accept'. <Ríður> (older <ríðr> is
also present tense. The nom. of <Tungu> is <Tunga>: it’s a
weak feminine.
Bolli accepts that [i.e., the open invitation] and rides
home to Tunga.
Brian