Article title, etc
This ending, and it related forms, is a difficult subject. On the one hand, the matter is pretty clearly spoken of in J.R.R. Tolkien, Christopher Tolkien (ed.), Unfinished Tales, "Cirion and Eorl and the Friendship of Gondor and Rohan":
"In Rochand the Sindarin ending -nd (-and, -end, -ond) was added; it was commonly used in the names of regions or countries, but the -d was usually dropped in speech, especially in long names, such as Calenardhon, Ithilien, Lamedon, etc." (Note 49)
Only considering this text, we might have -nd as the title of our TG article (as I did when creating the article), and thus let the different forms be connected to, or derived from, this "root" word (or perhaps better, this lowest-common-denominator-word!).
On the other hand, in PE17 the matter is analyzed on a more profound level: we learn, e.g, that:
"(i)on, which appears in various later-formed names of regions [...] is in origin distinct from -ien, -ian, which are reduced from -iend(e), iand(a)." (p. 37)
And, reading on pages 42-43, we can see that these three different forms (each with a different vowel: a, e, or o) all "have various origins".
- -ion is said to derive from root YANA- and/or root YONO ("wide, extensive").
- -ian(d) is said to be derived from yandē ("a wide region, or country", and was "often used in plural of a single country (especially if it contained a varied topographical aspect)".
- -ien seems to be derived from -ian(d).
The over-all problem with PE17 is that is very much a "draft": various different suggestions are given, and it is often hard to present any interpretation of the texts contained in this work as "factual statements".
A second thing to consider is that PE17 is not very commonly spread, while UT is a work which will probably be found in any household with more than an average interest in Tolkien and his works.
These are thus the reasons why I named the article -nd. Let me know if you think differently! --Morgan 20:55, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- I think I can see a pattern. The examples in UT are Gondorian placenames and perhaps speak about Gondor Sindarin, whereas PE attempts to analyze its origin it 'proper' Sindarin. I see that pure Elvish names end in -ion, -iand, -ien, but Third Age names are simpler, lacking the -i- and -d. The note in UT can be interpreted as saying that Gondorians 'just stuck a -Vn(d) to a placename', perhaps trying to imitate what they knew from the names of the Elder Days; the passage in PE attempts to say what was behind all this (which was perhaps forgotten by the Gondorians). Sage 00:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- BTW if Tolkien is firm in his drafts that -ion is unrelated to -iand and -iend, perhaps it should deserve a different article. Sage 00:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)