For the record, I have removed the following mention from the "Etymology" section:
- Didier Willis has speculated that it was the "finger-oak", or Quercus Digitata, though the identification of the second element as oron rather than doron, "oak", made that interpretation questionable.
First, these speculations were written before we had PE17 providing Tolkien's late reinterpretations (including a wholly new root, RUN). Secondly, this might still not be so "questionable" (an oak tree is still possible nevertheless). Moreover, various other alternatives where studied in the referred article (e.g. various chestnut trees), and the form oron was even mentioned (though deduced, at the time) in part 2 of the article. That is to say, the writing just removed was not very neutral anyhow. For the record, my old article was revised for publication, in Tolkien, le façonnement d'un monde, vol. 1 (2011), pp. 85-98, taking into account Tolkien's revised etymology, as well as other possibilities (e.g. a rather similar name is found in Gnomish, lepthindros, a horse chestnut). I am not sure however, would such analyses and subtleties pertain to this encyclopedic article? - Drakon 19:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know about this specific question, but my issue with your edit is that you have added speculation without reference, speculation I would be mindful to remove: "It may suggest that the wood is naturally dark, or that it has high enough tannin content and can thereafter be darkened by chemical processes (e.g. with ammonia), so that to confer a black finish to pieces of furniture." It needs a source or it needs to go. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 08:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
- Oops, that's quite right, indeed, sorry for that. I just removed the speculation. I don't feel I can refer to my own article without sounding biased, so it seems indeed preferable to stick with the facts and only mention the attested color of the casket, without going beyond the text. Drakon 13:52, 5 April 2015 (UTC)