|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weed
Lindon
Nov 1 2010, 11:31pm
Post #1 of 21
(3701 views)
Shortcut
|
Whilst I'm sure that has been discussed before, I haven't been here that long.
Did Tolkien actually write or explain his reason for changing the standard English plural?
Or has anyone else explained it?
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Gondolin
Nov 2 2010, 2:52am
Post #2 of 21
(3470 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's consistent with "dwarves".
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"Elves" is a fairly common plural of "elf". The plural of "dwarf" is more ideosyncratic. From Wikipedia:
The original editor of The Lord of the Rings "corrected" Tolkien's plural dwarves to dwarfs. According to Tolkien, the "real 'historical'" plural of dwarf is dwarrows or dwerrows . He referred to dwarves as "a piece of private bad grammar". In Appendix F of The Lord of the Rings it is explained that if we still spoke of dwarves regularly, English might have retained a special plural for the word dwarf as with goose - geese; despite Tolkien's fondness for it, the form dwarrow only appears in his writing as Dwarrowdelf, a name for Moria.
Tolkien used Dwarves, instead, which corresponds with Elf and Elves. In this matter, one has to consider the fact that the etymological development of the term dwarf differs from the similar-sounding word scarf (plural scarves). The English word is related to old Norse dvergr, which, in the other case, would have had the form dvorgr. But this word was never recorded, and the f/g-emendation (English/Norse) dates further back in language history.
Sign up now in the Reading Room to lead a chapter discussion of LotR Book II!
Elizabeth is the TORnsib formerly known as 'erather'
|
|
|
squire
Gondolin
Nov 2 2010, 3:33am
Post #3 of 21
(3480 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Why does dwarrows seem like such an odd word?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I always thought that Tolkien shied away from choosing dwarrows as his plural of dwarf, because the word was so non-standard in English. As well it should be, if we imagine that it should be pronounced to rhyme with, say, "sparrows" plural of sparrow, the bird. It seems that Dwarrows only makes obvious sense as the plural of some imagined word dwarrow, whatever that may be!
But I once suggested that dwarrows, if it was meant by Tolkien to be the plural of dwarf, a word ending in the 'f' sound, must somehow retain that 'f'. How could it? Well, I have often seen enow as a variant for enough in older literature. We pronounce enough as "enuf". It seemed to me - without confirmation, I am no philologist! - that the '-ow' ending is kind of mixed up with the '-ough' ending in our original language. So just as '-ough' is pronounced as either "-oh" or "-uf", depending on the word, so too might a '-ow' ending have two similar pronunciations. Thus the obscure word dwarrows might actually be pronounced "dwarrufs" - which strikes me as a good plural of dwarf!
I don't know if I'm right. And if I am, I don't know if Tolkien foolishly took his reading of dwarrows for granted and so never knew that his audience was baffled by his championing so odd a word as the supposed correct plural for dwarf, rather than the easier-to-digest dwarves.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd (and NOW the 4th too!) TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
 = Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Finding Frodo
Dor-Lomin
Nov 2 2010, 3:43am
Post #4 of 21
(3436 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't know, but I like the way you think!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As "enow" = "enough" so "dwarrows" = "dwarrufs". Suddenly it makes sense!
Where's Frodo?
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Nov 2 2010, 10:06am
Post #6 of 21
(3461 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"Elves" is the standard plural
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
as far as I can see from the dictionaries I've checked (OED, Chambers, Collins). I don't recall ever seeing "elfs". Do you have an example of that spelling being used?
As Elizabeth says, it's really the plural of "dwarfs/dwarves" that is more uncertain.
I found this article about the plural of "dwarf", which goes into the changeability of plurals of words ending in 'f' - I guess the main point is that whether or not the spelling follows, there's a tendency to "voice" the final consonant in the plural, turning the 'f' into a 'v' sound (the example given is "roofs", which sometimes is pronounced as "rooves", even though we never spell it that way). Sometimes the spelling has been changed over the centuries to match what we actually say, and sometimes it hasn't.
Tolkien sometimes seems to like making etymologies follow the evolution they "should" have had, and "dwarves" is perhaps one example of this - if the word had stayed in current use, it quite likely would have had its spelling changed to match the pronunciation (like "scarf/scarves", "hoof/hooves" and so on). And indeed, like "elf/elves". In his imaginary world, dwarves have remained much more familiar than in ours, you might say. So in his world, the normal etymological evolution has taken place.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
NottaSackville
Doriath
Nov 2 2010, 12:03pm
Post #7 of 21
(3429 views)
Shortcut
|
I've always been confused about dwarrows, but that explanation makes total sense. I'm going with it.
Notta
|
|
|
macfalk
Doriath
Nov 2 2010, 12:52pm
Post #8 of 21
(3427 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Having English as 2nd langage only,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I prefer dwarves. For me, it's much more easier. I also think that "dwarves" is a beautiful word on paper while "dwarfs" - not so much.
The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Nov 2 2010, 2:56pm
Post #9 of 21
(3440 views)
Shortcut
|
Well in German, as you probably know, 'w' is always pronounced like English 'v'. And German 'v' is pronounced like English 'f'. I figure all those "labial" (lip-formed) consonants have gone through a lot of evolution in the Germanic languages to get us to where modern English is now.
I've a feeling the "ough" might be a bit of a red herring - it seems to have been adopted as the spelling for all kinds of words with uncertain final consonants - there's through, and though, and cough, slough (pronounced either "-uff" or "-ow" depending on the meaning), even hiccough that's pronounced (and now often written) "hiccup". Most of those examples have either a 'w' final sound, or an 'f'. I'm guessing that at the time those spellings were adopted, the final sounds weren't fully stable. So yes, I agree that 'w' > 'v' > 'f' is likely a common change in consonant sounds as English evolved. And I'd guess that the "ough" spelling is actually masking some of the uncertainty of change that was still happening in the oral language when the written language began to stabilize, maybe when printing became established.
They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled,
the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Gondolin
Nov 2 2010, 6:26pm
Post #11 of 21
(3400 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thanks! that whole thread is relevant & useful.//
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Sign up now in the Reading Room to lead a chapter discussion of LotR Book II!
Elizabeth is the TORnsib formerly known as 'erather'
|
|
|
Weed
Lindon
Nov 3 2010, 12:44pm
Post #12 of 21
(3414 views)
Shortcut
|
I was being stupid and typed in elfs/elves instead of dwarfs/dwarves.
It was obviously the latter I was interested in finding information on. Thank you all for the information.
Sorry! it must've been late.
|
|
|
visualweasel
Nargothrond
Nov 3 2010, 2:42pm
Post #13 of 21
(3403 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Tough Coughs As He Ploughs the Dough
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Thanks for resurrecting my earlier comments on dwarf, dwarves, and dwarrow, N.E.B.; saves me the trouble of doing so myself. Instead, I'll comment on "elves", which was Weed's original question.
As some here have said, elves is the correct plural. As for why, FarFromHome was on the right track: it has to do with the voicing of the labial consonant. Terminally, the final consonant in Old English ælf "elf" was pronounced [f]; however, the plural was ælfe, and between vowels, the normallly unvoiced labial was pronounced [v]. The modern plural merely regularizes the spelling to reflect a pronunciation that goes back at least a thousand years. (We see the same pattern in the Old Norse, where the terminal consonants in the singular, álfr, are unvoiced, but are voiced in the plural, álfar; and in the Old High German, alp, plural elbe.)
But a related question is when and why did Tolkien reject elfin and elfish, which were the correct forms in their day, for elven and elvish? In this case, the forms with the unvoiced [f] were incorrect from a prescriptive standpoint; they should have been [v]. Again, in Old English the spelling has f (as in the compound element, ælfen; and notice that the vowel is Tolkien's e, not the Victorian i), but the pronunciation was [v]. Later, during the Middle English period, the spelling had been altered to reflect the pronunciation, just as Tolkien would later do: we have the attested forms, ælvene, alven, and elvene. (There was a Middle English word, alfin, and though it was unrelated in meaning, it might have caused confusion.)
So it was at some point much later that the spelling reverted. Shakespeare often takes the blame, but that's incorrect; he used elves and elvish (cf. "Thou elvish-mark'd, abortive, rooting hog!", in Ricahrd III.) Drayton also used elvish, not elfish ("Those Elvish secrets to unfold, / which lie from others' reading", in Nymphidia). I think the reversion in spelling dates to the Georgian era, and it really took hold in the Victorian after that. In his celebrated dictionary of 1755, Samuel Johnson gives both forms, but prefers elfish. I don't know why, but I'd like to learn more about that. Anyone?
Tolkien used elfin and elfish in his earliest works, but he thought better of this and reverted to elven and elvish in maybe the late 1920s or early 1930s. Tolkien's use of elven, by the way, has led to at least one amusing error. In the combined edition of Farmer Giles of Ham and Smith of Wootton Major, the publisher misprinted "elven mariners" as "eleven mariners", which led Pauline Baynes to illustrate the scene with exactly that number!
Jason Fisher
Lingwë - Musings of a Fish
The Lord of the Rings discussion 2007-2008 – The Two Towers – III.4 “Treebeard” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
“On Fairy-stories” discussion 2008 – “Origins” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
|
|
|
visualweasel
Nargothrond
Nov 3 2010, 2:43pm
Post #14 of 21
(3421 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Then I've just answered the wrong question
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But hopefully someone finds it interesting anyway. 
Jason Fisher
Lingwë - Musings of a Fish
The Lord of the Rings discussion 2007-2008 – The Two Towers – III.4 “Treebeard” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
“On Fairy-stories” discussion 2008 – “Origins” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Nov 3 2010, 4:33pm
Post #15 of 21
(3389 views)
Shortcut
|
|
But what's wrong with Eff & Dorf?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Kangi Ska Resident Trickster
New Zealand is Middle-earth & today life is good.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
visualweasel
Nargothrond
Nov 4 2010, 6:56pm
Post #18 of 21
(3350 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Glad I'm not the only one who thinks so. :) //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Jason Fisher
Lingwë - Musings of a Fish
The Lord of the Rings discussion 2007-2008 – The Two Towers – III.4 “Treebeard” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
“On Fairy-stories” discussion 2008 – “Origins” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Nov 4 2010, 7:05pm
Post #19 of 21
(3344 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's just that we have little to add.//
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
Kimi
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Nov 5 2010, 12:01am
Post #20 of 21
(3383 views)
Shortcut
|
Elfin and elfish do go back to Shakespeare's time, going by these selected OED references:
Spencer (The Faerie Queene) 1596: I. iv. 42 Him litle answerd th' angry Elfin knight. I. x. 65 A Faery..her base Elfin brood there for thee left; Such, men do Chaungelings call.
1583 STANYHURST Aeneis II. (Arb.) 68 The goast of verye Creüsa..mad her elfish aparance.
But it seems that the Bard, like JRRT, preferred the "v" form.
The Passing of Mistress Rose
My historical novels
Do we find happiness so often that we should turn it off the box when it happens to sit there?
- A Room With a View
|
|
|
visualweasel
Nargothrond
Nov 5 2010, 2:08pm
Post #21 of 21
(3432 views)
Shortcut
|
One of these days, I'm going to have to get OED access! It's the most important resource that I currently do without.
Jason Fisher
Lingwë - Musings of a Fish
The Lord of the Rings discussion 2007-2008 – The Two Towers – III.4 “Treebeard” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
“On Fairy-stories” discussion 2008 – “Origins” – Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
|
|
|
|
|
