An after-dinner speech given at the Tolkien Society’s AGM, 19 April 2008, revised 2015 for the anniversary meeting of Taruithorn
Note: the conclusion of this piece is in no way intended to undermine Tolkien’s achievements, but simply to draw attention to a logical tension within the linguistic framework of his Legendarium
Mathom, eleventy,
flet, wolfrider, barrow-wight, kingsfoil: not Elvish but English words skilfully
devised by Tolkien to play their part in his great story. In our book The
Ring of Words,[1]
Peter Gilliver, Jeremy Marshall, and I set out to investigate such words and names, denoting
people, natural features, artefacts, and institutions of Middle-earth,
especially in the Third Age. Words referring to hobbit custom, such as smial, shirriff, thain, and farthing; words used by others, such as elven, flet, halfling, and waybread. Whether they relate to human, elvish,
entish, or even orkish life, they are English-style words because the story is
told in modern English, and the protagonists—the hobbits, Aragorn the Ranger,
Gandalf, and so on—are represented as speaking modern English. Alongside
English there are many glimpses of other languages: sometimes Elvish
‘loanwords’ are employed alongside their English equivalent, for example lembas alongside waybread, or Haradrim alongside and much more usually than Southrons. This makes it clear to the thoughtful
reader that the protagonists did not really speak English, as the narrator of The
Lord of the Rings points
out, but actually spoke the Common Speech or the Westron (the latter a word invented by Tolkien
on the basis of the pre-existing real word Southron).
Now Tolkien has
been compared with Lewis Carroll in his inventiveness, and although he himself pointed
out the great differences, he was not wholly averse to the comparison. In Through
the Looking-glass (1871) Carroll introduced the mock-heroic poem
‘Jabberwocky’. I’m sure you know the first verse:
Twas brillig and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves
And the mome raths outgrabe.[2]
Carroll had written this single verse sixteen years
previously. It occurred in a work called The Rectory Umbrella and
Mischmasch, written in 1855 but not published till 1932, and in
this context, Carroll pretended it was a fragment of Anglo-Saxon verse. Let’s
consider the words wabe and outgrabe: to a reader
with only a rather general idea of Old English they might appear ‘Anglo-Saxon’
enough. For example, outgrabe looks like an archaic past tense of
an irregular verb, like outspake or outbrake.[3]
But Tolkien would never have passed off words like these either as Anglo-Saxon
or as modern descendants of Anglo-Saxon words. Why not? First, because they
conflict with the known principles of English sound-development. In Anglo-Saxon
a single b could not occur at the end of a word or between two vowels; only a double -bb-
could arise between vowels, and in such a place it could only be preceded by a
short vowel. Hence there are no words of Anglo-Saxon origin that end in -abe or
have it in the middle; nearly all words with b in this
position, such as label and gable, are taken from
other languages; and in any case
no Old English ‘strong’ verb could have had a b in this
position, so outgrabe is an impossible past tense.
Secondly, and more
importantly, because they are wholly invented; they are not based on words in
real languages. All Tolkien’s invented English words are based on some
previously existing word, or name, or word-forming element in modern English,
Middle English, Old English, or Old Norse (the language of the sagas). There is
one exception, strangely enough: the word for which Tolkien is most famous. It
is a remarkable paradox that hobbit is virtually the
only word of English form that Tolkien (apparently and untypically) invented
from nothing. If Tolkien had inadvertently saddled himself with two such
etymological monstrosities as wabe and outgrabe, he
would have tried to ‘discover’ philologically convincing explanations for them.
It is characteristic that Tolkien, uneasy that hobbit
seemed to have no prehistory, devised an (imaginary) Anglo-Saxon compound to be its etymological
ancestor, namely holbytla (hole-dweller), and put this into
the mouths of the Rohirrim, whom he represented as speakers of Anglo-Saxon.
Tolkien’s English words and names are successful and
satisfying because they fit properly into the sound pattern of English; they
are not barbarous or outlandish or absurd. They fit into the structure of
English; they use word-forming elements such as -ling and -ish or
they form part of an existing set, as for example eleventy and tweens. They
fit with vocabulary that is appropriate to Third-Age Middle-earth: a world
based on agriculture, with a traditional social structure and customs; they
eschew word elements drawn from modern scientific terminology or urban slang
(the latter is reserved for orcs and Saruman’s henchmen). Above all, they are
all in some sense ‘real’ words: form and meaning are rooted in historical truth.
Some of them exist in current English, but with a different meaning. For
example, farthing—not too long ago the name of a coin. Tolkien’s
meaning ‘one of the four parts into which a territory is divided’ is not found
in any English dictionary. But it is a real meaning belonging to the equivalent
word in Old Norse, fjórðungr: Iceland used to be divided into
four fjórðungar, north, south, east, and west. Tolkien has taken a
word from Old Norse and converted its form into the equivalent form in English,
because just as English farthing is made up of fourth and
the ending -ing, so the Norse word is made up of the equivalent Norse
elements. Mirkwood is a similar adaption of a Norse compound into
English form, being based on the Old Norse name for the great central European
forest, Myrkviðr. Where he has introduced an Anglo-Saxon word Tolkien
has carefully applied his knowledge of the historical sound changes of English
to give the word a current English form: so Anglo-Saxon máðm
‘treasure’ has got the form it would now have if it had survived, mathom, and
Anglo-Saxon eorcnanstān ‘precious stone’ has likewise been updated to Arkenstone. All
these words have a definite feel about them: they are strange and yet lie just
on the edge of familiarity, so that they seem to come from a half-forgotten
time.
Tolkien did not just pluck each word out of some handy
source on the spur of the moment. Rather he brooded on a word till it yielded
its secret: a special application within the story or even a whole story of its
own. The Old English words máðm, orþanc, samwīs, emnet, entisc, and dēagol (and
others) all occur within a few pages of each other in lists at the back of
Joseph Wright’s Anglo-Saxon Grammar, a book which
Tolkien would have used as an undergraduate.[4]
I think that he contemplated each word for a long time. Flet is an
ancient word meaning ‘floor’ and ‘hall’; Tolkien, having explained the word as
an inhabited platform in a tree, adds the aside ‘as such things were called in
those days’. In fact it has never meant this in our world. But it did in
Middle-earth: this is the story that Tolkien drew from a word he had thought
about ever since he encountered it, probably in Beowulf. A
particularly good example of this process is the word ent; in
Old English literature it’s rare and mysterious: Roman ruins are described as orþanc
enta geweorc, ‘the cunning works of giants’. Tolkien wrote:
I always felt that something ought to be done about the peculiar A. Saxon word ent for a ‘giant’ or mighty person of long ago—to whom all old works were ascribed[5].
From this tiny, obscure word he drew what many people
think is his most brilliant invention: Treebeard.[6]
The way that Tolkien worked at chosen words from the past until they yielded up
a new application or a new history is of a piece with his approach to
narrative. As he wrote about this:
My feeling throughout, especially when stuck, [was] that I was not inventing but reporting (imperfectly) and had at times to wait until ‘what really happened’ came through[7].
Again, take the name Westernesse: it has
an air of mystery and ancientness: its termination, as Tolkien himself pointed
out, is like that of fabled lands in Arthurian romance, Logres, Lyonesse.
Remarkably, this word occurs only in the little known Middle English romance King
Horn. But he introduces it as if it is a perfectly
familiar term that will explain the unfamiliar name Númenor: ‘It
was called Númenor, that is Westernesse, and Andúnië or the Sunsetland’.[8]
The Lord of the Rings introduces it even more baldly; it just mentions:
‘The Kings of Men that came over the Sea out of Westernesse’[9].
But it was familiar and natural to Tolkien. Tolkien’s special
words have a dual nature: their links with the languages of the actual world
are necessary to give them historical depth and half-familiarity, but Tolkien
has infused them with a deeper meaning. If he had just made up words, as
Carroll did, The Lord of the Rings and the other
works would simply not have the same powerful evocativeness.
Let’s go back to the word farthing. The
adaptation is a kind of learned word-play: Tolkien’s farthing,
based on Old Norse, is a kind of pun on the familiar farthing, the
name of the small coin, and the link is the etymology. His coinages are full of
learned word-play. Consider the place-name Cracks of Doom,
where the Ring is destroyed. The phrase crack of doom was
an established English expression (occurring in Macbeth) in
which ‘crack’ refers to sound: it means the last trump, the trumpet-call
announcing the day of judgement. Tolkien has deliberately taken ‘crack’ in a
different meaning, that of a physical fissure in the ground, and applied it to
the fearful chasm on the mountain Orodruin. The phrase borrows its terror from
the original meaning but it is a pun—a play on two different meanings of
‘crack’. Another example is the ent-name Quickbeam,
whose primary meaning is ‘sudden beam (of light)’, as the Sindarin equivalent Bregalad
shows. It is also a play on the English dialect word quickbeam
meaning ‘rowan’ or ‘mountain ash’, the kind of tree beloved of the ent Quickbeam.
Or take the name of Beorn. In Anglo-Saxon the word means
‘warrior’or ‘hero’. Its Old Norse
cousin, bjǫrn, means ‘bear’. From that etymological divergence
Tolkien in The Hobbit spins the story of a mighty man who changes into a
bear by night—based on the northern stories of so-called ‘skin-changers’.
Also
in hobbit history there is a learned pun which probably not many people notice.
When the hobbits migrated from the east into the Shire in Third Age 1601, they
were led across the Brandywine by the two brothers, Marcho and Blanco.[10] A number of hobbit names end in -o, and
several, like Frodo, Drogo, Odo, and Otho, are borrowed from medieval Frankish,
as are some other hobbit names like Fredegar and Isengrim. Marcho and Blanco’s
names have this Frankish o-form and are based on two Germanic
words meaning ‘horse’, which in Old English are mearh
(compare ‘mare’) and blanca (literally meaning ‘the white
one’). Now why should Tolkien give the two brothers the name ‘horse’? Well,
consider the two leaders of the first Anglo-Saxons to cross the Channel and
settle in England, according to tradition: Hengest and Horsa. Both their names
mean ‘horse’. (You will recall that Tolkien used to lecture on Hengest,
literally ‘stallion’.) If you’re not convinced about Marcho and Blanco, let me
point out that in an earlier draft of The Lord of the Rings the
brothers’ names are Italian, Marco and Cavallo, and cavallo is
the Italian for ‘horse’.[11]
Tolkien enjoyed puns; there are many in his writings.
He liked the silly sort; for example, in a letter written during the Second
World War he refers to the hens he kept as the ‘fouls’ (because they were messy
and uncooperative).[12]
But he also frequently used puns that had both a more serious motivation and a
more learned etymological foundation. An example occurs in his 1959 Valedictory
Address to the University of Oxford where he remarks
‘when I survey with eye or mind those who may be called my pupils (though
rather in the sense “the apples of my eyes”)’.[13]
This plays on the etymology of the two English words pupil. The apple
of one’s eye, which now means ‘the object of one’s regard’
originally meant ‘the pupil of the eye’ (which was thought to be a hard round
object). English pupil (of the eye) is from Latin pupilla, with
the same meaning, which originally meant ‘doll’ or ‘young girl’. Pupilla is
the feminine of pupillus meaning ‘student’, and from this word we get the
other word pupil. I guess not many of the 1959 audience grasped this
pun. (By the way, the reason for the eye’s pupil being called ‘doll’ was of
course the little image of oneself reflected in the other person’s eye
(sometimes called a baby, as in looking babies).) This ‘serious
punning’ is the ability and desire to read the same thing in two or more
different ways and at the same time to discern an underlying, suggestive,
connection.
Moreover, in the invented languages too there are words and names with the
same radical duality. The first name in the Legendarium, as you know, is Eärendel.
Tolkien knew, and appreciated, its real Germanic etymology (a root meaning
‘dawn’). But, as John Garth says, he wanted also to read in it the unconnected
Anglo-Saxon word ēar, meaning sea.[14]
Eärendel, then, has two roots: it is an Anglo-Saxon name probably
meaning ‘morning star’, but it is also a Legendarium name meaning ‘sea-friend’.
Tolkien coyly ascribes the duality to coincidence, in the Notion Club Papers, when
Arry Lowdham argues that ‘it is not Anglo-Saxon, or rather, it is not only
Anglo-Saxon…I think it is a remarkable case of linguistic coincidence, or
congruence’. [15]
Let’s go back to the earlier point that English in
Tolkien’s narrative represents the Westron, the real Common Speech of humans
and hobbits. Tolkien summarized this transposition of Middle-earth tongues into
real world languages in a note of February 1942:
Language of Shire = modern English, Language of Dale = Norse (used by Dwarves of that region), Language of Rohan = Old English, “Modern English” is lingua franca spoken by all people (except a few secluded folk like Lórien) - but little and ill by orcs.[16]
Were you taken
aback, as I was, on first reading, in Appendix F to The Lord of the Rings, that
the hobbits’ real word for themselves was kuduk and the Rohirrim
really called them kûd-dûkan? Christopher Tolkien refers to this
‘transposition of languages’ as ‘the fiction of authenticity’. He surmises that
the need to account for the Dwarves having Old Norse names (instead of Dwarvish
ones) was the starting-point for the whole theory:
The conception emerged that the Dwarves had ‘outer names’ derived from the tongues of Men with whom they had dealings...And this was very evidently an important component in the theory of the ‘transposition of languages’: for the Dwarves had Norse names because they lived among Men who were represented in The Lord of the Rings as speaking Norse.[17]
However, the
doctrine of the transposition of languages collides with Tolkien’s creative use
of learned word-play. Take the name of Saruman’s tower Orthanc; we
are told that it
had (by design or chance) a two-fold meaning; for in the Elvish speech orthanc signifies Mount Fang, but in the language of the Mark of old the Cunning Mind.[18]
Orthanc comes
from Anglo-Saxon. As a mysterious-sounding word for ‘cunning’ it had probably
appealed to Tolkien for a long time—it is in those lists in Wright’s Grammar
that I mentioned, where it is a near neighbour of entisc—it
was another word, perhaps, that something ought to be done about. But
according to the ‘fiction of authenticity’ Old English only represents the
language of the Rohirrim;
therefore their actual word for ‘cunning mind’ could not have been orthanc, so
it could not have coincided with an Elvish name, derived from orth
‘mount’ and anc ‘fang’. As long as the reader is ignorant of the
‘fiction of authenticity’, this name which mysteriously means both cunning mind
and Mount Fang has magic, but when the transposition of languages is applied,
the ingenious play on words collapses like Isengard itself. To a
correspondent who tried to read significance into the resemblances between
Elvish words and words in actual languages, Tolkien responded, in effect, that Eärendel is
simply a beautiful and suggestive name borrowed from Anglo-Saxon, turned into
Elvish, and nothing more.[19]
But when it came to Eärendel’s ship Wingalótë, his tune was
different. (To understand this point you need to know that Eärendel in Germanic
mythology appears to have been connected with a giant named Wade or Wada. Wade
had a celebrated boat called Guingelot which Tolkien transmuted into Eärendel’s
ship Wingalótë, analysed as an Elvish compound meaning
‘foam-flower’.) Tolkien said in his notes:
Wingalótë..must be retained, since..it is in intention formed to resemble and ‘explain’ the name of Wade’s ship Guingelot.[20]
Tolkien here says that his myth requires Wingalótë to
have a root in both worlds. And how about Atalantë , a
name for Númenor, and Avallóne or Avallonde, a name for Tol Eressëa? These derive
their atmosphere from their resemblance, in form and significance, to Atlantis the
drowned land of Greek legend, and Avallon the Faerie
destination to which the wounded King Arthur was taken after his last battle.
Tolkien however surprisingly remarks, in a letter:
It is a curious chance that the stem √talat used in Quenya for ‘slipping, sliding, falling down’, of which atalantie is a normal (in Quenya) noun-formation, should so much resemble Atlantis.[21]
The dilemma is that, on the imaginative level, the
linguistic links between the Legendarium and our actual history and legend are vital,
but on the logical level they are self-contradictory and can only be treated as
coincidence. We can illustrate this from Appendix D of The Lord of the Rings. In
‘The Shire Calendar’, Tolkien sets out the hobbit names for the days of the
week: Sterday, Sunday, Monday, Trewesday, Hensday, Mersday, Highday. Supposedly
they are translations of the original Elvish names, reflecting the ruling
elements of Arda: Stars, Sun, Moon, Two Trees, etc. Christopher Tolkien writes:
The rhyming of ‘Trewsday, Hensday, Mersday, Highday’ with our ‘Tuesday, Wednesday (Wensday), Thursday, Friday’ he naturally called an accidental likeness; but it was an astonishing coincidence! I am much inclined to think that the Hobbit calendar was the original conception, and that the names of the days were in fact devised precisely in order to provide this ‘accidental likeness’.[22]
Probably the
first step, once Tolkien had decided to retain Sunday and Monday, was to create
a ‘Star-day’. This was done by turning Saturday into the punning
name Sterday, which could plausibly be presented as a modern
development of the (invented) Old English Steorrandæg. But
according to the ‘transposition of languages’ the hobbits did not really speak
English, archaic or otherwise, so why invent a whole set of archaic day names
as if to suggest a mysterious connection with ours?
To conclude: many
words and names of Tolkien’s mythological world, chiefly the English ones, but
also some Elvish ones, are inherently rooted, by word play and word echoes, in
their counterparts in real-world languages. Originally, in The Book of Lost
Tales and its successors, the mythology was meant to be
an extension of the ‘real’ mythology of our world, so this was only to be
expected.[23] Our human
languages were even supposed to have evolved from Elvish ones.[24]
However, independently of all this, Tolkien with carefree abandon in The
Hobbit applied Old English and Old Norse names and words to
the inhabitants of Middle-earth. When the Legendarium ceased to be the prehistory of England and the two narratives were linked up,
the linguistic material rooted in our world posed a dilemma. To solve it, the
‘fiction of authenticity’ emerged, stating that the real-world languages are
only used to translate the Middle-earth languages. But this strikes at the
taproot, the linguistic echoing and word play that are crucial to Tolkien’s
creative imagination. As a symbol of this dilemma stands Orthanc, the
cunning mind.
[1] Peter
Gilliver, Jeremy Marshall, and Edmund Weiner, The Ring of Words: Tolkien and
the Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2008).
[2] Lewis
Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass (1871) i. 21.
[3] Carroll
explains it as ‘Outgrabe, past tense of
the verb to outgribe’ (1855 Lewis Carroll
Rectory Umbrella and Mischmasch (1932) 140).
[4] See Peter
Gilliver, Edmund Weiner, and Jeremy Marshall, ‘The Word as Leaf: Perspectives
on Tolkien as Lexicographer and Philologist’ in Stratford Caldecott and Thomas
Honegger (editors), Tolkien’s The Lord
of the Rings: Sources of Inspiration
(Zurich and Jena: Walking Tree Publishers, 2008), 75.
[5] Letters 157.
[6] Though
Tolkien probably did not invent the name Treebeard: see Gilliver et al. (2008),
72–3.
[7] Letters 163.
[8] The Fall of Numenor, HME V. 14.
[9] LR,
Prologue.
[10] LR,
Prologue and Appendix C.
[11] HME XII.
I. i. 9 and note 14.
[12] Letters 55.
[13] The
Monsters and the Critics (1983), p. 240.
[14] John
Garth, Tolkien and the Great War, (London:
HarperCollins, 2003), p. 45.
[15] 1946,
in HME IX. 237.
[16] HME VI.
xxiii. 424.
[17] Commentary
to Appendix on Languages in HME XII. ii. 70-71.
[18] LR iii. viii.
[19] August
1967, in Letters 297.
[20] ‘The
Problem of Ros’ in HME XII. ii. xii. 371.
[21]16
July 1964, in Letters 257.
[22] ‘The
Calendars’ in HME XII. i. iv. 125.
[23] HME I.
24.
[24] ‘The
Lhammas’, HME V. 179.
No comments:
Post a Comment