This is a stupid language
Aug. 2nd, 2007 12:12 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
highlyeccentric(but I love it)
And the editors, translators and so forth are equally stupid. (ed- ok, not stupid, aggravating.) Plus, both my teachers are in England, so I cannot run crying to them.
Talking about the Dream of the Rood as a literary dream/vision. I wish to talk about the role of the Cross as guide figure in the poem (making it an oracular dream by Macrobius' analysis. Note to self- blog about Macrobius, cos' he's whacky). Anyway, Dan gave us the Kennedy translation, which I noticed as soon as I picked it up is vastly different to the version over at Old English At UVA that I used with Melanie last year. Went through the translation I had made then, picked out some good stuff about thought being something external which comes to you, much like a dream. (What does this mean for the boundaries between inspiration and revelation, I wonder?) Speaking of thought/dream... I wonder what it was titled in the MSS? If the title was in OE or Latin? What word is it we translate as "dream" in Dream of the Rood? Where does one find these things out? Are they relevant at all?
Found some problematic bits- what Kennedy translates as "when mortal men were sunk in slumber", between Melanie and the Anthology, I ended up with "while the speech-bearers remained in bed". Which doesn't place such emphasis on sleep, let alone a sleep/death/dream connection, but something about silence & midnight perhaps? There are all sorts of words for people in OE, the choice of one which emphasises speech must be deliberate... what is it about the lack of speech which enables revelation?
Anyway. Kennedy tells us that through all creation the angels of God beheld it (the Cross) shining. When I looked at my translation, that's what I had had first (with "eternity" instead of creation), but going on the notes in the Anthology, and Melanie's explanations in class, I had amended it to all the fair ones throughout eternity beheld the Lord's angel there. Which I like, a lot, because it is an excellent linguistic demonstration of the role of the cross in the poem, as angelic messenger to the poet and as angelic warrior in Christ's service.
This obviously depends on the number of angels. The Anthology has Beheoldon Þær engel Dryhtnes ealle.... Engel being singular, and ealle being a collective for fair ones. Bonus, sorted.
Except that my other edition, Sweet, has Beheoldon Þær engeldryhta feala. In which there are many of God's angels (gen pl). Not to mention the fact that the word used for "fair" in both editions looks like an adverb to me, although the Anthology tells me it is masculine plural nominative. So "many of God's angels beheld it fairly there throughout eternity/creation" would make sense, which is close enough to Kennedy and doesn't have the cross as an angel.
Until you read Sweet's footnote on this phrase, which says engel dryhtnes ealle. So we're back to square one. Aggravated by this, i read the Anthology version carefully, to no avail. I looked in the notes in the back of Sweet, and found that one of the two versions- not sure which, it just said "line nine", is an ammendment by someone to an ammendment by someone else. None of this explains why all the fuss or what the MSS actually says. And both Mel and Dan are in England! And won't be back untill I have to give this speech. This is going to annoy me and distract me and generally drive me insane until i find out what's going on.
Stuart Thompson Thought For The Day: If those who study the Anglo-Saxon period are Anglo-Saxonists, then are those who specifically practice the speaking of Anglo-Saxon language anglosaxophonists?
And the editors, translators and so forth are equally stupid. (ed- ok, not stupid, aggravating.) Plus, both my teachers are in England, so I cannot run crying to them.
Talking about the Dream of the Rood as a literary dream/vision. I wish to talk about the role of the Cross as guide figure in the poem (making it an oracular dream by Macrobius' analysis. Note to self- blog about Macrobius, cos' he's whacky). Anyway, Dan gave us the Kennedy translation, which I noticed as soon as I picked it up is vastly different to the version over at Old English At UVA that I used with Melanie last year. Went through the translation I had made then, picked out some good stuff about thought being something external which comes to you, much like a dream. (What does this mean for the boundaries between inspiration and revelation, I wonder?) Speaking of thought/dream... I wonder what it was titled in the MSS? If the title was in OE or Latin? What word is it we translate as "dream" in Dream of the Rood? Where does one find these things out? Are they relevant at all?
Found some problematic bits- what Kennedy translates as "when mortal men were sunk in slumber", between Melanie and the Anthology, I ended up with "while the speech-bearers remained in bed". Which doesn't place such emphasis on sleep, let alone a sleep/death/dream connection, but something about silence & midnight perhaps? There are all sorts of words for people in OE, the choice of one which emphasises speech must be deliberate... what is it about the lack of speech which enables revelation?
Anyway. Kennedy tells us that through all creation the angels of God beheld it (the Cross) shining. When I looked at my translation, that's what I had had first (with "eternity" instead of creation), but going on the notes in the Anthology, and Melanie's explanations in class, I had amended it to all the fair ones throughout eternity beheld the Lord's angel there. Which I like, a lot, because it is an excellent linguistic demonstration of the role of the cross in the poem, as angelic messenger to the poet and as angelic warrior in Christ's service.
This obviously depends on the number of angels. The Anthology has Beheoldon Þær engel Dryhtnes ealle.... Engel being singular, and ealle being a collective for fair ones. Bonus, sorted.
Except that my other edition, Sweet, has Beheoldon Þær engeldryhta feala. In which there are many of God's angels (gen pl). Not to mention the fact that the word used for "fair" in both editions looks like an adverb to me, although the Anthology tells me it is masculine plural nominative. So "many of God's angels beheld it fairly there throughout eternity/creation" would make sense, which is close enough to Kennedy and doesn't have the cross as an angel.
Until you read Sweet's footnote on this phrase, which says engel dryhtnes ealle. So we're back to square one. Aggravated by this, i read the Anthology version carefully, to no avail. I looked in the notes in the back of Sweet, and found that one of the two versions- not sure which, it just said "line nine", is an ammendment by someone to an ammendment by someone else. None of this explains why all the fuss or what the MSS actually says. And both Mel and Dan are in England! And won't be back untill I have to give this speech. This is going to annoy me and distract me and generally drive me insane until i find out what's going on.
Stuart Thompson Thought For The Day: If those who study the Anglo-Saxon period are Anglo-Saxonists, then are those who specifically practice the speaking of Anglo-Saxon language anglosaxophonists?