|
I was not jet a member of teh forum when the discussion was fought out. But I have certainly read it and made my mind up about the problem of {Legolas}[Laegolas]. Since this seems to come up know I will add my two cent to the discussion.
{Legolas}[Laegolas] is a acceptable change for me, especially since it is linguistcally argued. A more substantial change would not have found my approval. I would have tried to change the group decision earlier if the vote had been for a more substantial change.
My reason for this is not linguistcal but purely for reasons of possible interpretetion, which we should not contradict: I am not as sure as other members in the forum that Legolas of Gondolin and Legolas of Grennwood are diffrent elves. That is not saying that I am absoltue sure that they are one and the same, but I see a possibilty that they could be (and a chance much greater than one to a billion, which Lindil once mentioned). Therefore I think our text should be ambigious in this matter. That would allow a linguistcal change like {Legolas}[Laegolas] but nothing more.
As an aside not: Is {Legolas}[Laegolas] a change in the spelling in the elvish script at all or is it just a change of pronounciation?
aravanessė, I did understand your argument agianst pure Sindarin, but I do not quiet agree to it. Noldorin as it was when The Fall of Gondolin was written, is clearly not the language JRR Tolkien later in his life envisaged for the Noldor in Beleriand to have ever spoken. Such a speech existed probably in Tolkiens mind, but it was not the earlier Noldorin of The Lost Tales. Any way it would be help full to hear your positive arguments for the change or no change for the name Legolas.
Respectfully
Findegil
|