Welcome to the discussion forum of Ða Engliscan Gesiðas for all matters relating to the history, language and culture of Anglo-Saxon England. I hope it will provide a useful source of information, stimulate research, and be of real help. Ða Engliscan Gesiðas (The English Companions) maintains a strictly neutral line on all modern and current political and religious matters and it does not follow any particular interpretation of history. Transgression of this Rule will not be tolerated. Any posts which are perceived as breaking this Rule will be deleted with immediate effect without explanation.

Author Topic: Carols  (Read 45717 times)

Bowerthane

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2016, 02:39:39 PM »
Here David and all concerned: this idea just popped up in my head.  Your ( David’s) Christmas carols aren’t enough to fill a booklet on their own*, but surely there’s other Christmas-related material in Engliscan Ġesíþas/ Wiþowinde’s archives, written and graphic, to make up some sort of Christmas gift book that we ġesíþas could give to our kith, kin and anybody we’re trying to interest in Anglo-Saxon England.  Also the Ġesíþas could raise some revenue selling a few from the website.  If my days in advertising are anything to go by, there is some truth on the old adage that the Christmas-buying public will buy anything ( as the ‘sales director’ in a young enterprise ‘company’, some schoolfriends and I even succeeded in selling ‘Christmas Snow’ – which was no more than the polysomethine sawdust we swept up after making the main product).   

Seriously though, we’ve nine months to think through such a project and make it genuine and tasteful.  There’s a typefont called Aucion Light which I always think is the best compromise between clarity and Dark Age/ Early Medieval palaeography, so my vote would be for setting David’s translations ranged centrally inside an inhabited-vine-scroll-type Old English border ( but not one too wide or dark – that’s heavy on the eye).  Likewise, a two-tone booklet printed in a dark brown and tints thereof upon a beige-or-whatever paper would keep the cost down whilst remaining evocative of the Old English originals. Then we could put some fun stuff for kids at the back: line drawings to crayon in, dot-to-dots, LOL cartoons, one of Phyllis's stories with some giggly illustrations etc. and somebody to my certain recollection, has translated Winnie the Poo into Old English.**

Or better than me rattling on, suggestions from my fellow ġesíþas here could improve the above out of all recognition.

Hwæt cwæþ ġé?



*Yet.  Though you’ve got nine months to get on a roll, right?
**And what about a re-write of Dickens’ A Christmas Carol set in Old England? With which Old English figures might one substitute the ghosts?  What would you call Scrooge? Groatwin? Tightgeld? Bloodstan? Fastfist?

« Last Edit: March 31, 2016, 02:24:17 PM by Bowerthane »

Phyllis

  • Administrator
  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
Re: Carols
« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2016, 08:30:41 PM »
Liking the idea Bowerthane!

It will take me that long to translate a kiddie story too, but willing to give it a go!

I was just thinking the other day we could do with some "stuff" to sell for a bit of fund raising. What about any Anglo Saxon recipes? Can we adapt the Spiced Oat Cake one from West Stow?


Phyllis

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2016, 10:23:11 PM »



I was thinking of retiring after translating In The Bleak Midwinter. However I rather like Bowerthane's idea and with Phyllis on board how can I refuse. Nevertherless I would prefer to keep this thread for just the carols. Can you start a new thread for your project - it would be confusing to have the other aspects also on this thread.


It would be nice to give you 12 carols by the end of November but I don't think that I can manage that. Probably I could manage 8 or 9.

Bowerthane

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #33 on: April 04, 2016, 02:15:30 PM »
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Can you start a new thread for your project - it would be confusing to have the other aspects also on this thread
______________________________________________________________________________________________

Quite right David, I’ll calm down and see about ‘editing’ this little exchange for a bespoke thread for the general chat forum, right?

Back to business:

____________________________________________________________________________
O night divine, the night when christ was born;  Lā niht godcund, sēo niht þe crist awōc
_____________________________________________________________________________

Have you caught the lack of a capital C on crist yet? Also, shouldn’t Lā niht godcund be Lā niht godcundu granted that a) it’s rare but possible to use a lone adjective postnominally in Old English but, b) when you do, it should always take the strong declension?  But there’s lots of things I don’t know or misunderstand about Old English so by all means put me straight, if not.



___________________________________________________________________________
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn. For ġeond niwe and wuldorful morgen bricð
___________________________________________________________________________


Shouldn’t that be For ġeond niwe morgen and wuldorfulum bricð ( granted I’ve got the strong masculine declension right for this postnominal adjective)? I’m under the impression it’s not strictly true that second and third etc. adjectives always follow the noun as in “good men and true”, but it’s more characteristic of Old English and has a certain poetic power in this context, I’d say.



_________________________________________________________________________________
Now come the wisemen from out of the Orient land.  Nū cumaþ þā witan of ūt þǣm Ēastum lande.
_________________________________________________________________________________


This sort of thing niggles me.  In this context, certainly, I would not bother with the ūt
and I feel one ought not to do, generally.  As you may well know better than I, Western languages become less terse and inflectional over the centuries and more ‘bitty’, as I have developed the habit of calling the growing tendency towards phrasal verbs, cobbling together prepositions and just plain tautology as one gets towards the present.  In our own day we’ve heard ‘drain’ become ‘drain off’ as if draining went anywhere else, but it’s all of a piece with ‘fall down’ or ‘lift up’ so ‘from out of’ is a pretty typically modern circumlocution that I don’t think is characteristic of the Old English.  Also, since you are syllable conscious, why not Nú cumaþ þá witan of þǽm Éastlande? My Sweet lists éastland and éastdǽl as if proper nouns, with capital Es in the definition, as synonyms for “the East” ( only, in the case of éastland which is why I prefer it here to éastdǽl which may also mean just “the eastern quarter”) the former of which I’ve used in my translation of In the House of Tom Bombadil because it’s an improvement on John Cleese’s line “We have come from the East” from the opening scene from Life of Brian that I posted on this forum two Christmases ago, that anyhow should have been éastdǽle:   

   
Wítega 2:               Wé sind steorwigleras.
Wítega 3:               Wé ǽr cómon of þǽm Eástdǽl.
Mandí:                   Is þes sume ġecynd gamene?
Wítega 1:               Wé willaþ tó herianne þone lýtling.
Wítega 2:               Wé sculon áġiefan hine mannrǽden.
Mandí:                   Mannrǽden!!  Ġé sind eallan ondruncod, ġé sind.  Hit is fúl.  Út!


However, I’d be grateful to read your own ‘take’ on this sort of thing because my nerve has been known to slip when terse and highly inflected Old English is on a collision course with an author’s or lyricist’s choice of words.  In another excerpt from
The Lord of the Rings I’m practising on Haldir says: “‘You feel the power of the Lady of the Galadhrim,’ he said. ‘Would it please you to climb with me up Cerin Amroth?’” Since I don’t worry about word-order before I’ve got the meaning right, this still clunks along as “Ðú félest þæt ríce þǽre Hláfdiġan þǽm Galaþrim,’ hé cwæþ.  ‘Ġeweorþen inc mid mé tó climbanne [ up] Cerin Amroþ?’ because were this just about any writer but Professor Tolkien I’d drop the ‘up’ faster than you can say ‘pleonasm’.  Haldir hasn’t opened a manhole and they aren’t inveigling themselves into the Royal Enclosure at Ascot, so where else could the bleedin’ “climb” be going? 
   Only in this instance, I suppose, it goes against the grain to make free with the choice of word of the Author of the Century, who forgot more about Old English than I’ll ever learn!  FTLOG somebody tell me I’m getting lost in a quibble, here...

   
For another instance, there’s a line in a Rock lyric I’m having fun with, “Fall back down to where you’re from”.  As one would expect of the Rock world, this is a pretty typical example of those cobbled-together circumlocutions I mention.  Now Old English fram-cynn can mean ‘origin’ amongst other things so I’m fairly sure they would have put it Eftfiel þé fram-cynne and maybe so should I.  Yet pleonasm is a legitimate means of achieving stylistic or artistic effect, and in the case of verse may be used to fit the metre or to fit syllables to notes.  I count seven syllables in both “Fall back down to where you’re from” and Eftfiel þé fram-cynne so maybe I’m sorted, but what do other ġesíþas make of the cost to artistic effect and the likely intentions of the lyricist?  Does the Old English give you any ‘feel’ of the original, still?

   Are there any guidelines for disentangling tautology and pointless pleonasm from those intended by the wordsmith, I wonder, or must we always be at the mercy of our common sense, personal taste and what our gut tells us for where the tipping point lies?

_________________________________________________________________
I had expected you to complain that I translated Bethlehem but not Emmanuel.

_________________________________________________________________


  Well, strictly speaking of course proper nouns should usually, and many say always, be left alone.  Yet if there is some special reason for monkeying about with them then consistency rules would dictate that they should all be treated alike.  By lucky chance I’m reading Matthew Polly’s American Shaolin at the moment*  which well exemplifies good, standard editorial practice in this. As a rule he transcribes all the Chinese vocabulary using pinyin, “the approved system of the People’s Republic of China” for “the romanization of the Chinese language” and puts them all in italics, makes exceptions for familiar and therefore naturalised words of Chinese origin such as Confucius, Canton and Hong Kong that go upright, then uses his discretion to spell ‘kung fu’ as ‘kungfu’ partly because that too is a naturalized English word and Polly knows it’s a nonsense to spell it as two words but not ‘Shaolin’ as ‘Shao Lin’, partly because his darling spellchecker kept trying to turn the ‘fu’ into the f-word.   ( Companies come all the way from Canary Wharf for silly old me to dig them out of the poo that spellcheckers can drop you in, or otherwise rescue copy mangled by God’s Wonderful Computer or by some witless prick from IT, one of whom did a runner before I entered the building). 

   Yet it’s really a question of making our minds up what we’re trying to achieve, here, and how seriously we’re taking ourselves.  If we’re just having fun rather than doing a job of work, the bottom line is we can please ourselves.    
   My purely personal answer is that I don’t take myself wholly seriously when translating Old English ( or most of the rest of the time, come to think of it) because I know my abilities are not at the professional level.  Only as or if I seriously feel I’m hitting the professional mark do I see if I can’t ‘shape up’ and make a wholly professional job of work of it; whereupon I would start getting picky about consistency rules and whether, in all poker-faced sobriety, I had any honest-to-goodness grounds for making exceptions to them.  None include being privately pleased with my little self for a purely etymological ‘translation’ of a proper name, so it’s purely for fun that I translated “Heathcliff” as Heideklippe when using Kate Bush’s lyrics to practise my German (  too, so auf Deutsche the celebrated refrain goes Heideklippe, es gibt mich, Cathy, komm zu Haus und mir so kalt ist*).
   Yet at the opposite end of the scale ( can’t find the ruddy thing now!) I have, somewhere or other, an Old English rendition of Kate’s lyric to The Infant Kiss of which I’m a bit proud, because I’ve kept coming back to it over the years so I think it’s a rather polished performance. At any rate it once impressed a lady professor of Old English at the State University of California who asked for a sample of my work, and not just because she turned out to be an old Kate fan, too!  Yet if we are trying to achieve a translation as near as can be to how the Old English, themselves, would have done it then ‘opportunistic etymologizing’ ( if you’ll pardon the expression) would appear to be what the Old English did, viz using etymological translations available to them when it suited them, but not otherwise, would seem to be thoroughly in character.   
   Or in layman’s terms, we can do as we &*£!ing like.


---oo0oo---


* Did anyone catch that Rowan Atkinson film Johnny English II? You’d think that scene where the Shaolin monk pulled a rock along with his scrotum had to be comedy, right?  Well it’s all true.  Scrotally propelled rocks are the least of it.  The photographs in this book are not for the squeamish.  There’s a whole style called “iron crotch kungfu” whose honoulable masters get up in the morning and pummel their willies for half an hour before breakfast.  You could not make this up.

   Shudder to think what the nuns do.

** And not Heideklippe, es gibt mich, Cathy, komm zu Haus und ich so kalt bin. I’ll let Ædmund have fun explaining why that old gaffe has kept native German speakers choking on their chuckles since forever.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 02:13:54 PM by Bowerthane »

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #34 on: April 05, 2016, 12:21:20 PM »



Bowerthane you have given me a lot to consider.
 
Firstly I do not mind your venture being in Old English Language. I just did not want it on the Carols thread as there are still several carols to come. Also if anyone is commenting on one of the translations, which is not the latest, can you tell me which carol it is.
 
1.      The missed capital C was an error. I am trying to follow the original as far as capitals are concerned. The exception is that I am starting each new line with a capital.
2.      For “night divine” I would have put the adjective first in both languages. I thought that the reverse must have a special meaning so I kept it in the translation.
3.      I agree that godcund should be a strong adjective but “-u” and not “-u” is complicated. I defer to Fulk on this who says about adjectives in standard West Saxon “Those formed with heavy suffixes ending in two consonants, such as -cund, -fæst, - fald, -full are inflected in the same way as heavy monosyllabic stems, so that, for example, -u is missing in the feminine nominative singular and the neuter nominative and accusative plural”
4.      I am happy with your change of “niwe and wuldorful morgen bricð” to “niwe morgen and wuldorfulum bricð” except “niwe” should be “nīwe”. Missing the “-um” was a careless slip. I did not know the rule about multiple adjectives. It reminds me about the rule for multiple subjects which I try to write in different ways for clarity. How does that rule work if there are also multiple objects?
5.      I did wonder about the “ūt” and “Ēastland”. I was a bit worried that Ēastland might mean the Balkans but did not rule it out for that reason. I went for my option as it keeps the line to 13 syllables, but I do not mind dropping the “ūt”

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #35 on: April 07, 2016, 05:00:06 PM »



I have now translated the first two verses of In the Bleak Midwinter.
 
In the Bleak Midwinter                                                            In Ðǣm Ǣblǣcum Midwintra
 
In the bleak midwinter, frosty wind may moan,                      In þǣm ǣblǣcan midwintra, forstiġ wind cwiðe.
Earth stood hard as iron, water like a stone;                           Eorðe stōd heard swā isen, swā stān wæter;
Snow had fallen, snow on snow, snow on snow,                    Snāw hæfde dropen, snāw on snāwe, snāw on snāwe,
In the bleak midwinter, long ago.                                            In þǣm ǣblǣcan midwintra, forlonge .
 
Our God, heaven cannot hold him, nor earth sustain;            Ūre God, heofen ne mæġ hine healdan, ne fēt eorþe:
Heaven and earth shall flee away when he comes to reign.     Þā oðflēoþ heofon and eorþe þā hē cymþ tō rīċsianne.
In the bleak midwinter a stable place sufficed                         In þǣm ǣblǣcan midwintra faldstede ġenugde
The Lord God Almighty, Jesus Christ.                                    Se Dryhten God Ælmihtig, Iesus Crist.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2016, 05:03:14 PM by David »

Osgyth

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2016, 06:23:52 PM »
Following on from Bowerthane's suggestion about page decoration, I'd be happy to have a go at creating some border decoration or page illustrations if anyone would like...

Bowerthane

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #37 on: April 11, 2016, 02:21:48 PM »
_______________________________
[Y]ou have given me a lot to consider.
_______________________________


Eft lá þé, Hġústun, or “Right back at you, Houston” as Matt Kowalski put it in Gravity.  That means I’ll need time to address many of the points you raise, but I think I can reply to two or three sooner.


Firstly, I’ve spotted this in The Bleak Midwinter:
___________________________
snāw on snāwe, snāw on snāwe,
___________________________


Surely that’s a slip for snāw ofer snāwe, snāw ofer snāwe?
           

_____________________________________________________
I am trying to follow the original as far as capitals are concerned
_____________________________________________________


Which original, French or English?  I would stick to conventional Modern English capitalization and make any discreet amendments to punctuation I thought advisable, even in the target or Old English version.  I’ve never known that to do any harm, whereas a proper noun lacking an initial capital could put readers’ noses out, not knowing whether it’s a modern typo or not.  Only if one were trying to ‘forge’ or give some kind of pictorial facsimile of how written Old English can really look would I stick to such funny little ways of theirs, as that.

Otherwise, I wouldn’t fear angry letters from Mary Whitehouse saying, “Ooh, I saw you editorializing with the typography and I was disgusted!”

_____________________________________________________________
2. For “night divine” I would have put the adjective first in both languages.
I thought that the reverse must have a special meaning so I kept it in
the translation.
_____________________________________________________________


I’m quite sure you should have listened to your gut on this one, David!  I’ve checked again with the French original and the two Victorian English translations and I’m sure “night divine” is an innovation brought in by the translator. Puzzling since the original has Noël which, since that’s clear enough in English anyway, makes me wonder what he thought he was doing.  My best guess is that Noël wasn’t so common in mid-Victorian times and, since postnominal adjectives are bog standard in French but can sound a bit sweet in English, John Sullivan Dwight thought he was reproducing the flavour of the original by other methods.  Or not because Noël isn’t a conscious gallicism in French anyway, leaving me with no special reason not to stick the adjective back before the noun and sod it.  Is what I say.

If sentimental reasons still call for any kind of purely literary flourish, why not a kenning of the kind we discussed?  My Sweet has godbót for ‘atonement made to the church’, godgimm for ‘divine gem’ and even a goddréam as a poetic term for ‘divine joy’, so I don’t see why you should render it godniht and prune a syllable or two.


_______________________________________________
How does that rule work if there are also multiple objects?
_______________________________________________


Ah, now I can’t tell you how glad I am you asked that!  Thanks to that Old English Syntax by Bruce Mitchell as well as by John McLaughlin – yes, two both with the same title – I’m still working my way through, having copied out a whole wodge of their copy in longhand ( !!!) along with another wodge of photocopies and a third again of the notes I took before they had to go back to the British Library, multiple objects ( and subjects) are right at the cutting edge of my current ability with Old English.  All the notes I took are still not in order, so lately I have been furiously cross-checking and looking things up for what follows because Mitchell really tripped me headlong.  Having been fooling around with Old English for over thirty years, I never so much as heard of such a rule, but here goes.   

Foolishly and carelessly I have omitted to note its provenance, but it looks like it’s from the Chronicle, this is the best exemplar given by a source I cannot rediscover for what I have developed the habit of calling the “detachable noun-phrases” peculiar to Old English:

Her Cynewulf benam Sigebryht his rices 7 West Seaxna wiotan for unryhtum dædum.

“Here Cynewulf and the council of the West Saxons deprived Sigebryht of his kingdom for bad deeds.”


Oh, yes.  This was when I had to believe my eyes.  This source acknowledges that this word order is wholly contrary to Modern English, where multiple agents need not affect the integrity of the subject and usually don’t.  Whereas it is “absolutely standard syntax in Old English” to detach the first element, let it govern the verb including by its number ( so here the verb is in the singular even though it’s Cynewulf and the West Saxon witan doing the depriving) and let the rest come, tagging along after the predicate... give or take any subordinate clauses which, in this instance, appears to follow the rest of the subject.  Your guess is as good as mine whether for unryhtum dædum’s position in the sentence is part of the rule, mere happenstance or some other blódig rule they don’t tell you about...

Why I’m wrestling with this is because I have to deal with a multiple subject and a multiple object in some dialogue from Sucker Punch. Briefing the action girls before they go over the top, the Wise Man says, “The German doctors and engineers have worked out how to send their fallen back to the front.  They’re using steam power and clockworks to keep them moving.” At the moment I’ve got this as: 

Ðá Ealdseaxna læċes ǽr áþohte tó eftcumenne hiera wæl þǽm orde and searocræftiġan.  Híe néotaþ stéam-miht tó behealdanne híe ástyrian and dæġmælweorc.”

The second sentence because, likewise, “a compound object can also be separated by one or more other sentence elements” it says here:

Hie... þone æþeling ofslogon, & þa men þe him mid wærun.

They... killed the prince and the men who were with him.

Awkwardly I have not ascertained whether this exemplar is set in stone, grammatically speaking, or merely an alternative.  So I’m still chasing that up albeit with a gloomy hunch that it is a regular rule.

I don’t know whether to hope or fear this will be news to you, too.

The good news is my beloved translation of The Infant Kiss wasn’t affected – phew! – and In the Trenches is the first action sequence with all the girls in it. One of the real women in my life gave me the extended version on Blu-Ray for Christmas, so it’s got the whole sword fight between Babydoll and the German general, Blondie stopping a brigade-level charge with one magazine ( firing from the hip in full view, it’s amazing) and not forgetting Rocket, the sassy one.  Played by actress Jena Malone who also played the axe-wielding Johanna Mason in Catching Fire, though maybe she’s better remembered for stripping naked in the lift.  Going up.  Ooh, she’s a poppet.





 

« Last Edit: April 12, 2016, 01:53:21 PM by Bowerthane »

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #38 on: April 12, 2016, 04:59:34 PM »



To answer Bowerthane’s last reply:-
 
I am happy with “ snāw ofer snāwe” but what was wrong with “snāw on snāwe”?
 
I will switch “niht godcund” to “godcund niht”.

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #39 on: April 16, 2016, 08:55:06 PM »



I have now translated all of In the Bleak Midwinter.
 
In the Bleak Midwinter                                                             In Ðǣm Ǣblǣcum Midwintra
 
In the bleak midwinter, frosty wind may moan,                       In þǣm ǣblǣcan midwintra, forstiġ wind cwiðe.
Earth stood hard as iron, water like a stone;                           Eorðe stōd heard swā isen, swā stān wæter;
Snow had fallen, snow on snow, snow on snow,                    Snāw hæfde dropen, snāw on snāwe, snāw on snāwe,
In the bleak midwinter, long ago.                                            In þǣm ǣblǣcan midwintra, forlonge .
 
Our God, heaven cannot hold him, nor earth sustain;            Ūre God, heofen ne mæġ hine healdan, ne fēt eorþe:
Heaven and earth shall flee away when he comes to reign.     Þā oðflēoþ heofon and eorþe þā hē cymþ tō rīċsianne.
In the bleak midwinter a stable place sufficed                         In þǣm ǣblǣcan midwintra faldstede ġenugde
The Lord God Almighty, Jesus Christ.                                    Se Dryhten God Ælmihtig, Iesus Crist.
 
Angels and archangels may have gathered there,                    Englas and hēahenglas, hīe þǣr gadroden,
Cherubim and seraphim thronged the air;                               Cerabin and Seraphim lyfte þrungon;
But his mother only, in her maiden bliss,                                Ac his mōdor āna, in hiere mǣdenliċre blisse,
Worshiped the beloved with a kiss.                                         Weorþode þā drūte mid cosse.
 
What can I give him, poor as I am?                                        Hwæt mæġ iċ him ġiefan, swā eom iċ earm?
If I were a shepherd, I would bring a lamb;                            Ġif iċ wǣre scēaphierde, iċ bringe lamb;
If I were a Wise Man, I would do my part;                              Ġif iċ wǣre Wita, iċ doe dǣl mīnne;
Yet what I can I give him: give my heart.                               Ġiet hwæt mæġ iċ him ġiefan: ġiefe heorte mīnne.
 
Next I’m going on to God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen.
 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2016, 08:58:31 PM by David »

Osgyth

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #40 on: April 20, 2016, 09:42:35 PM »
Very much looking forward to that, "God rest ye merry gentlemen" and "The holly and the ivy" are a tie for my favourite carol.

Bowerthane

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #41 on: April 21, 2016, 02:23:13 PM »
Right, now that I’ve found time to give your replies some proper attention, David, my response is as follows:

____________________________________________________________________
I defer to Fulk... “heavy suffixes ending in two consonants, such as -cund, -fæst, - fald, -full are inflected in the same way as heavy monosyllabic stems, so that, for example, -u is missing in the feminine nominative singular and the neuter nominative and accusative plural”
_____________________________________________________________________


Er, check.  Quite right. I was talking beallucas again.


________________________________
[W]hat was wrong with “snāw on snāwe”?
________________________________


Er... nothing.  Really :-[ .  Now I make myself check, I’ve reminded myself that on can and sometimes does mean ‘on’ for all that it usually means ‘in’.  In my case, this kind of mistake comes from the high priority I attach to avoiding ambiguity, giving me the fixed habit of using ofer for ‘on’ and clean forgetting that the Old English were less fussy.  This is how I train myself! So I’d still defend snāw ofer snāwe on that ground but without pretending there’s anything ungrammatical or unhistorical about snāw on snāwe, this time...

___________________________________________
Next I’m going on to God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen.
___________________________________________

Ooh jeepers, great!  One of my favourites too.  I’d toyed with the idea of translating that one myself not long after you started this thread, but something else I’m trying to train myself to do is stop finding things to translate!  Even the script of Sucker Punch and the chapters from Dickens and Tolkien aren’t the only texts I’m ( still!)  fooling about with.  A month or two ago I found the script to Gravity online as well as to another of my all-time favourite films, the original 1967 Bedazzled with Peter Cook and Dudley Moore ( and not that poxy remake, hiss-boo-sucks).  Yet so far I have manfully restrained myself from touching them, putting them away “for later” as a Hobbit would say.         


( Would anyone recognise the following description of a Christmas carol or song?  Part of the lyric may include the words “born to be king of the Israelites” and there’s a chorus or refrain that sounds like Tchaikovsky’s tum ta-ta taa TAA taa tum taa tum-ti-taa, ta ta taa TAA ta-ta taa with possibly sleigh bells ringing. I’ve tried likely and unlikely combinations in Google and I’m beginning to think I imagined it.  Only I do like what I think I remember of it and shouldn’t mind seeing how it looks in Old English.)



« Last Edit: April 23, 2016, 12:22:20 PM by Bowerthane »

Osgyth

  • Guest
Re: Carols
« Reply #42 on: April 22, 2016, 09:05:17 AM »
Are you thinking of "I believe in father Christmas" by Greg Lake?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lqwqknq7nuI

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #43 on: April 22, 2016, 12:35:02 PM »



 I hope to post the first part of "God rest ye merry gentlemen" at the week-end. However, the May issue of horsmūð is becoming my top priority.
 
"The Holly and the Ivy" is number 12 on my list. I would like to have 12 carols for Christmas so I should that far. I have about 20 carols in mind.
 
My first thoughts are for Christmas carols but we could then go onto songs such as “I believe in father Christmas”, “White Christmas”, “Jingle Bells” and “Mary’s boy child”.
 
I would like some advice for number seven on my list which is “Once in Royal David’s City”. My only spelling for David is the Anglian Dauid. Is there a West Saxon spelling such as Dafid and also is there a West Saxon spelling for Iesus (Jesus) such as Ġesus?

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Carols
« Reply #44 on: April 23, 2016, 08:18:00 AM »
 
I was looking at “O Holy Night” this morning and was surprised to see that I had 
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn.            For ġeond nīwe morgen and wuldorfulum þurbricð.
Originally I had all this in the nominative case but Bowerthane suggested that I had missed off  the –um  from wuldorful. I saw the “for” and so thought it should be in the dative but that would give
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn.            For ġeond nīwum morgenne and wuldorfulum þurbricð.
 
 
However I think that in this case the “for” is a conjunction , not a preposition. Therefore I think everything should be in the nominative case. Also I put the verb at the end to rhyme with a later line. This did not happen so I would move the forward so that we have
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn.            For ġeond þurbricð nīwe morgen and wuldorful.
 
I am told that there are some idiomatic locative cases that look as though they are mixing up the nominative and dative eg-  tō-morgen and  in-morgen.
You might think that these are just compounds where the stem is used. However, in contrast we do get tōdǣlde and tōgædere.