Re: Adunaic case system

On Sunday, March 20, 2005, at 09:50 , David J. Peterson wrote:
[snip]
> Now on to Adunaic.  I think what may have been confusing me
> was the description of the Normal.  I think it might be easier to
> think that the Normal is used wherever the Objective and
> Subjective aren't,
This is my understanding of the situation.

> and that the description is an attempt to
> capture this.  So let me look over the whole thing again.
>
> Quoting Doug's original:
> <<
> The Objective (O) form is used only in compound expressions, or actual
> compounds.
> >>
>
> Problem 1: What's the difference between a compound expression and
> an "actual" compound!?
>
> Anyway, looking at the actual examples, you have (I'm rewriting
> them here for ease):
>
> /minul tarik/
> heaven-OBJ. pillar-NOR.
> "pillar of heaven"
In the version I have, it is written _minultârik_ as one word, and
explained: "the idea is that _târik_ or pillar is supporting the sky, so
that the sky is somehow or other the object of what the pillar 'does'."

The description I have reads: "The Objective is used as the first element
in compounds when the second element denotes an agent that _does something
to the first element_."

>
> This looks like the English possessive "heaven's pillar".  This isn't
> like
> the construct state.  Consider the following Arabic example:
>
> sajaara al-waalid
> /car DET.-father/
> "Father's car."
I had been thinking of the construct state in Hebrew - which I have
probably mis-remembered - but looking more closely, this is probably wrong.

[snip]

> Anyway, the other form is
>
> /minal tarik/
> heaven-NOR. pillar-NOR.
> "heavly pillar"
Is this grammaical in Adunaic?

[snip]
> But Ray wrote:
> <<
> I think equating with 'genitive' is incorrect; possession is shown
> by the prefix _an-_  which is often reduced to _'n-_ (e.g. Bâr 'nAnadûnê
> "Lord of Anadune"; Narîka 'nBâri 'nAdûn "The Eagles of the Lords of th
> West").
> >>
>
> So there's three different ways to mark possession in this language
> (the Normal, the Objective, and this an- prefix), and no way to
> distinguish any of them?
My information is that _only_ the 3rd method is used to show *possession*.
===============================================

On Sunday, March 20, 2005, at 06:56 , Roger Mills wrote:

[snip]
> Isn't _amor dei_ the common ex.? Actually English can disambiguate this
> with
> different phrasings: "God's love"-- is subjective, implying God loves
> [us/someone], whereas "love of God" is objective, [our/someone's] love
> w.r.t. God.
Yep - while the Latin is ambiguous. The the meaning "love of God" (i.e.
someone's love w.r.t. God) is the more likely meaning; but the first
meaning is possible. It depends on context.
===============================================

I think without reading the full text "Lowdham's Report" in "Sauron
Defeated", we are guessing a bit in the dark. I have been relying on what
I think is an accurate description at:
http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/adunaic.htm

But it becoming apparent that one needs to read JRRT's full account.

Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason."      [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]