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: Gelimp on dæge  (Read 13173 times)

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2013, 09:35:16 AM »

Catte,

You have an interesting point about the subjunctive.  I think that the verbs in your wish would be in the subjunctive, but the verb “wish” itself would be in the indicative. Fortunately it is “wille” in both the subjunctive and indicative.

I would say the same for hope so I would take “hope” to be the indicative whereas “brice” and “onӯwe” would be subjunctives.

Maybe someone can clear this up for us.

Incidently was “Midwintermonðes” a slip. I would have expected “Midwintermonðe”

Catte

  • Guest
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2013, 12:50:17 PM »
Ah, I thought that 'in . . .' used the dative, which I'd looked up as Midwintermonðes.

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2013, 12:52:27 PM »
Catte,

When I read about your hopes it just did not quite feel right. Don’t worry I often get that feeling when I read what the Anglo-Saxons wrote.

It looks as though you have made the comet the object of your hopes. I was thinking that the statement about the comet was the object of your hopes and that the comet was the subject of the other verbs. Therefore I was wondering whether it might be better to replace “ðone comētan” by something like “þe se comēta”.

I thought it was the dative without the  “s” and the genitive with the “s”

« Last Edit: November 28, 2013, 12:55:16 PM by David »

Bowerthane

  • Guest
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2014, 03:37:38 AM »
Tó-dæġe seah iċ Lyft, filmen sé on níwum Englisc Air hǽtt.  Hé is Hefiġneses folġere, sé on níwum Englisc Gravity hǽtt.


Hé cýþeþ tó sóþum hwæt ġelamp on þǽm lagu efne swá ġé wénode Ráġun Stown læċe of þǽre hierstepanne wæs.  Onginnende þǽm on-scyte sǽ-weargum 7 færlíċ slite 7 tó-gínende sé súceþ híe niþer Grendles Græfe hwǽr héo sceal feohtan Eahta Hwá mid eotenisc sweord 7 eald 7 ġetréowe oþ færlíċ wylm wætere 7 séoþende cýþeþ þes is dǽl underflódan þýrle.  Fléogende cwic-stán 7 ellenlíce súpende lyft of seolfor-cealwer, Ráġun sceal séċan weġ háme þurþ flōd-nett eorþscræfa, áfeohtende ormæte cracca 7 ealddo, þone Balrog 7 losode U-bát þe flotmenn ne cnáweþ þá Gúþ ǽr endodon.  Gǽlede ǽlc stæpe weġe be hréolcræfte swá swéte swá pín, spédiġ tácnung 7 ġedréog ġecoren 7 heorugrædiġ scolu grindefiscum oþ, efne swá héo swelġeþ þá fréo-lyft 7 strand éaġe-síene is... uppe ríseþ Traġsi Ulman uppan lyft-þicce Loch Ness Nicor.

   
Ġéa-lá, ġedréog ġecoren tácnung.  Sméaga ac ofer þǽm ġetæl néah-déaþliċ ġefarum 7 cyncræftiġ þurþ þǽre ieldum mid-þý þú, iċ, oþþe æniġ án ús ǽrliċe meahte Traġsi Ulman, on hiere lóh.


Æfter þǽm ic fédde catt.


“Dú náhst nán catt, Búrþeġn,” cwæð catt. “Dú lá þearft fultum.”
 
 
WORDHORD

cwic-stán = molten lava.
cyncræftiġ = genetic
Eahta Hwá = Guess Who.
underflódan þýrle = suboceanic vent.
ormæte cracca 7 ealddo = giant prehistoric squid.
flōd-nett eorþscræfa = network of underwater tunnels.
ġedréog ġecoren = evolutionary.
hréolcræft = camerawork.
lyft-þicce Loch Ness Nicor = inflatable Loch Ness Monster.
néah-déaþliċ ġefaru = near-death experience
grindefisc = piranha fish.
on-scyte sǽ-weargum = shark attack.
seolfor-cealwer = bubbles ( okay, you try).
 
 
______________________________________________________

The moral right of the author to be identified as a Near Earth Object has been asserted. 

David

  • Ealdormann
  • *****
  • Posts: 607
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2014, 10:16:09 AM »

This looks interesting and I need to study it when I have more time.

Just an immediate question about  “on nīwum Englisc”. Should the “Englisc” be declined, I am never sure? I was wondering about “Englisce” or maybe even “Engliscum”. For modern English I tend to go for “niġenglisc”.

Bowerthane

  • Guest
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2014, 01:37:19 PM »
I hope nobody is mistaking my best efforts for exemplary Old English. I'm still not sure if one can begin a sentence with a present participle. I post my little spoofs hoping that others, too, find this an amusing way to practise their Old English.  I'm not a professional Anglo-Saxonist and would be astonished if there were no mistakes, and room for improvement, in the above.




Horsa

  • Guest
Re: Gelimp on dæge
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2014, 04:12:59 PM »

This looks interesting and I need to study it when I have more time.

Just an immediate question about  “on nīwum Englisc”. Should the “Englisc” be declined, I am never sure? I was wondering about “Englisce” or maybe even “Engliscum”. For modern English I tend to go for “niġenglisc”.


I looked for this for a some time a couple of years back, and in the end I found a couple of examples of the word 'englisc' referring to the language and they were undeclined. So I've followed that as a model. I'll write niwum englisc to refer to modern English.