pfstrack
commented
6 years ago More words needing correction:
-
Gn. agrech is mistakenly glosed “contemp” instead of “contempt”.
-
-l “you” (short suffix) is only listed as -l(yë), making it almost invisible among 1612 entries if you just type “-l”.
-
I didn’t find ui n. “no” and v. “to be not” (VT 49, p. 28) at all, despite the fact that uito, the longer form is actually listed.
-
On the other hand, you separate the entries úr and úrë without referring to úr in the entry úrë, whereas both are probably variants of one another, along the same lines as nor, nórë, etc.
-
Also, I didn’t find aselye “with you” (VT 43, p. 28) in Eldamo, though I think this word would deserve its own entry.
From Damien Bador via email
nelcë “tooth”: your list of entries suggest that nelcë is the latest Quenya version of the word for “tooth”, but as the detailed information in the nelet entry shows, the latest word is in fact nelë, replacing nelet, since the alternate version nelke was later stricken through by Tolkien (see PE 17, p. 56 n. 12).
raiqi “angry”: the word is mistakenly quoted from PE 22 p. 124; the sentence in fact reads “i·nér né raiqa…”, so the adjective “angry” should be listed as raiqa (and it will look like a normal adjective).
endaquet- “answer”: you mention it as a noun, despite the dash present in PE 17, p. 167, which seems to show it is a verb (and it is much more comparable to other verbs such as quet-, aquet-, avaquet-, enquet-, láquet-, etc. than to any other noun derived from the same root).
órë: though you rightly mention the most common uses according to VT 41, you do not list the secondary use “counsel” mentioned in VT 41, p. 11: “it could be used of the influence of one person upon another by visible or audible means (words or signs) — in which case ‘counsel’ was nearer to its sense”
vanga “staff”: this is a Qenya word entirely missed in your entries; yet one finds it in PE 11, p. 21, entry bang, and in fact you actually quote it in the list of cognates of Gn bang. It would definitely deserve its own entry, especially because its phonology is much nearer to Quenya than its cognate vandl.
yava- “bear fruit”: though you give the bare stem in this way, it does not seem to fit with the form yavin, translated as “bears fruit” in PE 12, p. 105: one would rather expect a stem yav-.
While I’m on it, I noticed that your entry Q. axo only mentions the meaning “bone”, while your entry Q. axë “neck, rock ridge” also includes the variant axo attested in RC and PE 17.
I believe there should be two entries for axo, or at least that the alternate (restricted?) meaning “neck, rock ridge” be mentioned in the entry axo, with a redirection toward axë (and vice-versa).