Tolkien Gateway

Tolkien Gateway is 10 years old. Sign up today to edit TG and help us grow for years to come.

User talk:Morgan

Archive.png
Archives
Nuvola apps edu languages.png
Welcome to Morgan's talk page.

[edit] why did you delete my post about translating?

recently i posted about some translating english to elvish, and you deleted that post. so rude Unsigned comment by MrSkinny21 (talk • contribs).

Until Morgan answers, I'd like to inform you that your question was out of topic. The TG forum questions should be about the maintainance and improvement of TG, its policies and its articles, not random discussions about Tolkien. You should try with Elfling or other Tolkien forums. Sage 18:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Ditto!--Morgan 19:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
And as someone who has, in the past, attempted to master some of the Elven tongues, let me just say: it's a fool's errand to translate things. You can exercise, and it's nice couleur locale for a fanfic, but there are too many problems. Tolkien changed his mind, and we simply don't know enough words to do it, and Tolkien changed his mind, or they're really reconstructions that don't account for irregularities, and did I mention Tolkien changed his mind? He did that a lot. Every Elvish translation site you see online uses a fanon reconstruction, and there are different versions at that (because have I mentioned Tolkien changed his mind?), especially concerning past tense and personal pronouns. Some are better than others, but none of them are perfection, because perfect Elvish didn't even exist in Tolkien's mind. --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 20:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Also, I just want to point out that when creating Quenya, Sindarin, Khuzdul, etc. Tolkien tended to change his mind, a lot. :) --Hyarion 03:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

[edit] World War I

Hello. You've deleted my emendation on the numbers of British casualties along with Rob Gilson, in the first day of the Somme battle. But if you look at the page 158 of Tolkien and the Great War, you'll see that the number of 360,000 casualties is impossible and it's more probably 36,000.

"Rob Gilson's division had lost most heavily of all on the first day of the Battle of the Somme, but along with the British front there had been 57,000 casualties: out of the 100,000 who entered No Man's Land, 20,000 had been killed and twice as many wounded."
― {{{2}}}

So, nearly 40,000. This number is the same given in the table of the lost and wounded British on the Wikipedia (sorry, I can't find an equivalent english table), with 35,493 casualties. The number of 360,000 is the number of total casualties for the whole Battle of the Somme. Maybe, a reformulation of the sentence can be useful, because it's a little vague. I'm not a English native speaker, and I understand this sentence like if the 360,000 casualties felt on this same day with Rob Gilson, but it's not the case. Thank you for your time. 82.244.254.212 09:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi. As you say, the sentence right now is a bit ambiguous; I read it as referring to the whole Battle of the Somme, but if it's read as referring to only the first day, the number you suggest seems to be the correct one. I agree that a reformulation of the sentence would be useful. Thanks for taking time to explain the issue! --Morgan 00:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)