>Maglos tells: -> narrates, reports, ...
>even if -r would be -> is
(which however doesn’t lead to a long -i- if the ending is -i already
-> closing bracket missing
p. 102 orcwarriors -> orc warriors
p. 103 to form compound -> 'a compound' or 'compounds'
p. 105 differenc -> difference
p. 106 or more precise –> precisely
The forms in Aorist are most irregular.
Do you mean to say that they are highly
irregular, or for the most part
? If the latter –> 'mostly'
as if they would be -> were
Tentanenyë i tengwa sírenna. (I pointed the sign towards the river.)
If we are talking about a direction sign, maybe better: tanna
= (PE 17:186)?
as if the verb would have been (2x) –> 'were', (or: 'had been')
according to what the specific meaning -> delete either 'what' or 'the'
consructions -> constructions
óla nin ([it] dreams for me; I dream)
In OE and ME impersonal verbs were not uncommon, there is e.g. 'me mette' (= 'I dreamed'), which is invariantly rendered '(it) dreamed to
me' in the relevant literature.
p. 118 loosing -> losing
Hísielo carië macileva (Hísiel’s making of a sword)
Often gerunds are used as verbal nouns, but other possibilities can occur:
Nenwëo mapalë massava (Nenwe’s seizing of bread)
I don't get it – what's the difference between these two examples? They're both gerunds governing another noun.
I even wonder if it makes much sense to elaborate on the difference between gerunds and verbal nouns – English grammarians, for one, agree nowadays that there is none, gerunds are in fact verbal nouns by definition. What about the situation in Quenya, did Tolkien ever refer to the term 'verbal noun', or is "enyalien: ... in infinitive (or gerundial) form en-yalië, here in dative "for the re-calling," but governing a direct object " in UT:317 our only reference?
make sharp a sword -> a sword sharp
Merin mahtuvalye + Merin i mahtuvalye. -> mahtuvalyë
Maite ohtar Hísiel ná? -> Maitë
mountaintop -> mountain top
p. 121 theree -> three
p. 124 how the letters look like -> what...like
necesary -> necessary
can be used for in this meaning -> delete 'in'?
Men equétientë varyuvalmë i osto.
(They have said to us we shall defend the town.)
-> that we should
ones own action + ones choices -> one's
... an impersonal construction makes a lot of sense).
–> opening bracket missing
p. 126 beween -> between
have much trust for -> in
used quite similar to –> -ly
p. 129 experss -> express
p. 130 verbform -> verb form
tára oron or oron tára (a high mountain)
-> set Quenya text off against English: tára oron
or oron tára
p. 135 diminuitive (2x) -> diminutive
imme -> immë
imle (thou thyselves) -> imlë (thou thyself)
imle (thou thyselves (pl.)) -> imlë (ye yourselves)
intye -> intyë
imle (you yourself) -> imlë (you yourselves)
inte -> intë
how it sounded -> what… like
intellegible -> intelligible
A number of differences exists -> exist
works slightly different –> -ly
singular or nouns -> of
mahtie -> mahtië
z.B. -> e. g.
...for some it is not quite clear from which conceptual phase of Tolkien’s work they are taken.
A bit ambiguous (readers might feel addressed by "some") – maybe add: 'words', or rephrase using e.g. 'in some instances'?
p. 151 There are two reasons that -> why