LotR --- Appendix E -- Writing and Spelling

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Obviously, of course, this appendix is addressed mostly to those who are interested in learning to read and write Tolkien's languages. Also obviously, the detail with which Tolkien wrote it shows his own love for language.

He explains pronunciations methodically, consonant by consonant, then the vowels. For the most part, those explanations concern the Elvish languages, though comparisons are made with other languages of Middle-earth. He even allows for differences in the educational level of those speaking the lanuage. Most hobbits' pronunciations would be considered rustic, he notes. Then "stress" or "accent" is explained.

The next section deals with scripts, first Tengwar, then Cirth. They differ in age (the first is older) and in the method of writing (brush/pen vs. scratching/incision). Both were developed by Elves, though different kindreds: Tengwar by the Noldor, Cirth by the Sindar. The original Tengwar letters, as invented by Rúmil, were not used in Middle-earth; Fëanor's Tengwar, of a much later date, was the alphabet used there. The Cirth, devised in Beleriand, were widespread, often changed to suit the peoples using them. Daeron's version was used by the Dwarves of Moria.

A Tengwar table, set up according to the similarity of form, precedes the explanations concerning these letters. I find it interesting to read Tolkien's comments on the difference between his system and what he gives as a definition of "alphabet": ...'alphabet', that is, a haphazard series of letters, each with an independent value of its own, recited in a traditional order that has no reference either to their shapes or to their functions. I get the impression that he is glad to be able to set up an orderly system that improves on ours!

The explanations that follow are likely to be of interest only to those learning the languages. One major difference to our alphabet is the fact that the emphasis is on consonants, with no separate letters for vowels, which are indicated by tehtar above the consonants. It is also interesting to note that the letters had no actual names; words that begin with the letter are used as names when necessary.

The tables in the section on the Cirth show the Angerthas version of runes. Since the second part of the table shows the values in our alphabet, the explanations are not as lengthy.

Have you read this appendix thoroughly, sketchily, or not at all? If so, what purpose does it have for you?

I must admit, this is the first time I have read it completely; the only times I have used it were to find help in the pronunciation of names. I remember researching my chosen Middle-earth nickname to see which syllable would be stressed: it's the second to last, so EsTelyn.

[davem]

I think that for many of us the pronunciation guide in the first part of this Appendix is in the wrong place. How many of us got the pronunciation of names wrong on our first reading & struggled on subsequent readings to forget our mistaken readings (I still have to stop myself saying My-nas Tirith, Seleborn, ‘Is’-engard, etc).

I can only speculate on Tolkien’s reasons for his use of C instead of K: probably because ‘Celeborn’, as written looks better than Keleborn: ‘K’ looks too sharp & angullar. ‘Celeborn’ looks more beautiful than ‘Keleborn’ (or ‘Seleborn’). In a written narrative the shape of the word as well as the sound plays a part: ‘Celeborn’ is a more attractive collection of letter shapes than, say ‘Ugluk’.

I have to say, though, I find this the least interesting, or useful, of the Appendices. Most of it, sadly, is beyond me. I wish I could read & write (& speak) an Elvish language, but can’t face the effort of learning it. I do find myself fascinated & impressed by the effort put in by Tolkien, not just in creating these languages, but in inventing such a complext structure & history for them. That said, this is one part of LotR I usually skip. However, there is an occasional ‘gem’ to be found:

The Cirth in their older and simpler form spread eastward in the Second Age and became known to many peoples, to Men and Dwarves, and even to Orcs, all of whom altered them to suit their purposes and according to their skill or lack of it. One such simple form was still used by the Men of Dale, and a similar one by the Rohirrim.

We tend to think of the Rohirrim as ‘illiterate’, but clearly they were not: they used a simple form of the Cirth. If nothing else this shows that writing was not beyond their wit, so they must have had some other reason for not developing a literature. It was clearly a cultural thing - they didn’t write down their history, tales or lore out of choice. The extent of their use of the Cirth is open to specullation. I’d guess it included grave markers & probably inscriptions of names on swords/weapons. Named items have a ‘personality’ in a way - if you give something a name you think of it diifferently. A sword with a name is not just a sword. If it has a name, it has a story: certainly with Tolkien a name is significant.

The use of writing is a way of making things permanent - especially if that ‘writing’ is carved into stone or wood. The fact that this is a rrare thing means that objects which are inscribed have a general importance to the folk, & I’m not just referring to weapons here. We tend to think that the lore & history of Rohan depends for its survival on poets & loremasters learning & memorising it, so that anything that is forgotten is lost forever & cannot be rediscovered. The Rohirrim would have been well aware of this, so that anything that was committed to writing, & particularly to inscriiption would be considered of vital importance, something which they could not afford to risk losing. More importantly, perhaps, it was something which they wished to leave to posterity.

Of course, if you write something down you don’t need to remember it, so in a cullture which places such emphasis on oral transmission writing anything down is almost an admission of ‘defeat’ - if you could depend on something being remembered you wouldn’t bother writing it down. But this inscribing of ‘markers’ (either funeral or territorial) tells us something else about Rohirric cullture: they no longer think of themselves as a nomadic folk. They are bound to their land, they have out down roots. It is a highly significant thing, this change from inscribing names only on portable things like weapons to inscribing them on parts of the landscape.

WE actually see the same thing in the history of written language in Middle-earth itself - the tengwar, designed to be written with ‘brush or pen’ comes first, & is then followed by the invention of the cirth. Things written on with brush or pen (books, scrolls) are portable, & tend to reflect an attitude of not being bound to a particular place. The move to inscribing on metal &, finally, on stone, reflects a new stage: putting down roots. Especially carving on stone. In the first instance you’re saying ‘I’m here, & I’m staying’, but by extension you’re also saying ‘I was here, once. Remember me, I don’t want to be forgotten.’

The very existence of written language reflects a sense of impermanence. Things are written down so that they will be remembered - & so we have the Red Book itself. It is written to preserve the memory of the events which ended the Third Age - more: to ‘keep alive the memory of those events.

[Lalwendë]

I can only speculate on Tolkien’s reasons for his use of C instead of K: probably because ‘Celeborn’, as written looks better than Keleborn: ‘K’ looks too sharp & angullar. ‘Celeborn’ looks more beautiful than ‘Keleborn’ (or ‘Seleborn’). In a written narrative the shape of the word as well as the sound plays a part: ‘Celeborn’ is a more attractive collection of letter shapes than, say ‘Ugluk’.

I think it is from the use of "C" in celtic languages as a hard "C" rather than a soft "C". The most famous example is probably Celtic FC; the football team is known as "Seltic", but the culture it's named after is "Keltic".

[Guinevere]

Have you read this appendix thoroughly, sketchily, or not at all?
In contrast to the part about the calendars, which was the only one that didn't really interest me, I studied this part quite thoroughly!
I think that for many of us the pronunciation guide in the first part of this Appendix is in the wrong place
True, but I was so curious that I had a look at the appendix as soon as I had got the books and noticed the pronounciation guide, so I had the right sound from the start. BtW, this was much easier for me than for people of English mothertongue, for mostly the letters are pronounced like in German. (e.g.Fëanor or Finwë don't need the "funky little dots" in the German edition) But I had to look up many English words in the dictionary just to find the right pronounciation, even if I knew the meaning! (eg "devour")

As for substituting K with C, Tolkien mentions in this appendix The High-elven Quenia has been spelt as much like Latin as its sounds allowed. For this reason c has been preferred to k in both Eldarin languages
and if I remember rightly his son (CT) wrote somewhere that his father had for a long time written the names with K's and only in the last moment decided to use C's instead. (Can't find that reference now)

As to which syllable has to be stressed, I'm not always sure. (Neither is the movie-crew, who talk about Pelennor instead Pelennor fields :p and don't notice that "Mumakil" is the plural of Mumak)
I'm ever so glad I have that wonderdul CD with the recordings of Tolkien (and Christopher Tolkien) reading from his works! :)
I know Quenia was inspired by Finnish, but to me it sounds rather like Italian.


I love the Tengwar and the Cirth! Already when I read the Hobbit I thought it was great fun to find out the Dwarf runes from the map and Elrond's translation and to be able to decipher what was written on the title- page of the book!

Same with the LotR : I was determined to find out the meaning of the Cirth and Tengwar on the title-page. I soon found, that the Cirth, though looking similar, were not the same alphabet as the dwarf runes of the Hobbit!
However, the Cirth were relatively easy to decipher; the Tengwar proved much more difficult! No wonder if "none of the letters had in itself a fixed value"!
I wasn't interested in the values for Quenia or for Sindarin but those for English, and by studying this chapter closely managed finally not only to read the title-page inscription of LotR, but of the the Silmarillion and U.T. as well! I was quite proud! but later I found aTengwar chart (http://www.geocities.com/fontmaster.geo/tengwar/english.htm) in the Internet which made it much easier!

In one of Tolkien's letters there is another slightly different mode of "Elvish writing". (To a boy named Hugh Broghan, I believe)
I had bought a poster with the map of ME and all around this there were Tengwar - and I found that this was written in the mode of this "Broghan letter" .(with tengwar for the vowels instead of tehtar.)
About 2 years ago I was quite enthusiastic about all this. I even wrote a birthday letter to my brother in Tengwar!