我只會「晚安、再見」和「謝謝你」，「晚安」、「再見」，他們說slitzweitz。「謝謝你」，他們說tediews。
後來找到了下面的東西,可是卻一點也不明。
(會有人給我翻譯嗎???)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
發展史
Regarding Khuzdul, Tolkien stated that "this tongue has been sketched in some detail of structure, if with a very small vocabulary" (PM:300). It evidently came into being in the thirties. The Khuzdul names Khazaddûm and Gabilgathol turn up in an early Silmarillion version; see LR:274. Here we also find Khuzûd as the Dwarves' name for their own kind, later changed to Khazâd. The name Khazaddûm Tolkien first applied to Nogrod, not to Moria. Christopher Tolkien comments: "Khazaddûm is the first occurrence of the celebrated name. It is interesting to observe that it existed - but as the Dwarvish name of Nogrod - already at this time. Later the Dwarvish name of Nogrod was Tumunzahar... Gabilgathol, now first appearing, remained as the Dwarvish name of Belegost." (LR:278)
語言結構
Of the Dwarvish language we are told that "structurally and grammatically it differed widely from all other languages of the West at that time" (PM:316-317). It seems that it was widely regarded as the proverbial "difficult language", like many Westerners think of Chinese today.
The phonology was in some respects peculiar compared to other contemporary languages. There were at least two aspirated stops, kh and th, i.e k and t followed by h. (Note that kh and th do not here denote German ach-Laut and th as in English thin, as these digraphs often do in Tolkien's spelling.) Initial English k and t are also aspirated, but probably not as strongly as in Khuzdul. Khuzdul also possesses unaspirated stops, like French and Russian k and t, but unlike the situation in both English, French and Russian, Khuzdul k and t are phonemes in their own right, that must be distinguished from kh and th. As we know very few Khuzdul words, it is hardly surprising that we have no minimal pairs, but k vs. kh and t vs. th are seen to contrast initially: Kibil-nâla vs. Khazad-dûm and Tumunzahar vs. Tharkûn. Other consonants include the voiced plosive b, the unvoiced spirants f and s, the voiced spirants z and gh, the lateral l, the vibrant r (some Dwarves used a uvular R, others evidently trilled R), the nasals n and m, and one semi-vowel, y.
If some consonants were somewhat peculiar, the vowel system was pretty ordinary. The short vowels seem to form a classical five-vowel system, a, i, e, o, u. According to Tolkien's notes on Daeron's Runes, reduction vowels like the ones heard in butter were also common, but they are not directly attested (unless some of the u's and e's represent such vowels). Four long vowels are attested, â, ?, î and û. The apparent absence of *ô may well be due to our small corpus. Long vowels may be shortened when unstressed (?), compare Khazâd with Khazad-dûm. (Actually we know nothing about how Khuzdul words are accented.)
The basic structure of Khuzdul resembles that of the Semitic languages, like Arabic and Hebrew. The stems from which words are derived are not by themselves pronounceable words, but consist of consonants only. Nouns, verbs, adjectives etc. are derived not only by prefixes and suffixes (if such devices are used at all), but also by inserting certain vowels between these consonants, sometimes also by doubling one of the consonants. Often the words are actually inflected by internal vowel-changes instead of adding affixes: Rukhs means "Orc", but plural "Orcs" is Rakhâs. The root consonants - the so-called radicals - remain the same, like *R-Kh-S in this case. In Khuzdul as well as in Semitic languages, there are usually three radicals in the root; several such roots are mentioned in TI:174 and RS:466: B-R-Z "red", B-N-D "head", K-B-L "silver", N-R-G "black". An example of a biconsonantal root is Z-N "dark, dim" (RS:466). Of course, vowels will be added when these roots appear as actual words, e.g. baraz "red" or bund "head" from B-R-Z, B-N-D. The radicals Kh-Z-D contain the general idea of "dwarvishness" and can be observed in such words as Khazâd "Dwarves" and Khuzdul "Dwarvish" ("Orkish" would presumably be *Rukhsul). The same radicals Kh-Z-D are evidently present in the ancient Khuzdul name of Nargothrond, Nulukkhizdîn, but the precise meaning of this name is unknown (note that Nulukkizdîn in the Silmarillion ch. 21 is a misspelling; see WJ:180). The most basic meaning of Kh-Z-D may have something to do with the number "seven", compare Adûnaic hazid (SD:428). The Dwarves were descended from Seven Fathers and were divided into Seven Kindreds - and as we know, dwarfs (sic!) are still associated with the number seven even in very late and very childish Mannish mythology.
文法總成
As has already been mentioned, our Khuzdul corpus is very small. There are a few names, like Khazad-dûm and Zirak-zigil, the inscription on Balin's tomb, and a battle cry: Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-m?nu! "Axes of the Dwarves! The Dwarves are upon you!"
Baruk Khazâd! is said to mean "Axes of the Dwarves!" Baruk is usually taken to be an example of something similar to the Hebrew "construct state": the state a word is said to be in when it is placed in front of a noun to express a genitival relationship: X Y meaning "X of Y" or "Y's X". (Compare Hebrew sûs "horse", hammelekh "the king", sûs hammelekh "the king's horse, the horse of the king".) Of course, we cannot be certain that baruk is the normal plural "axes" and not a specialized form meaning "axes of". It may be significant that all the other attested plurals contain a long vowel: Khazâd "Dwarves", Rakhâs "Orcs", tarâg "beards", shathûr "clouds", ûl "streams", dûm "excavations, halls". Could the normal plural "axes" be *barûk? Shathûr "clouds" may represent a plural pattern in -a-û-. In Hebrew, the vowels of words in the construct state are often shortened. Or, given that u is clearly a Dwarvish element meaning "of" (Bund-u-shathûr "Head in/of Clouds", TI:174), is it incorporated in baruk, inserted between the second and third radical? Words with three simple radicals (1-2-3) seem to have singular forms in 1u23 (bund "head", Rukhs "Orc" - radicals B-N-D, *R-Kh-S) and plurals in 1a2â3 (Rakhâs "Orcs", compare Khazâd "Dwarves" and tarâg "beards" from *Kh-Z-D and *T-R-G). As baruk seems to have a similar radical structure of three consonants (*B-R-K), we may perhaps add a construct state plural in 1a2u3 to the paradigm and inflect B-R-K "axe" as follows: Singular *burk "axe", normal plural *barâk "axes", construct state plural baruk "[the] axes of" (and similarly e.g. *tarug Khazâd "the beards of the Dwarves" from the attested form tarâg "beards"?) The construct state singular may have the form 1u23u (*burku Khazâd "the axe of the Dwarves"), if Bundushathûr is simply *Bundu Shathûr "Head of Clouds" being written in one word when used as the name of a mountain (B-N-D "head").
The second part of the battle-cry is Khazâd ai-m?nu! "The Dwarves are upon you!", our only real sentence. Ai-m?nu is "upon you", ai being a short form of aya "upon" and m?nu being accusative plural "you". This is evidently a nominal sentence, containing no actual Khuzdul equivalent of the verb "are". Sentences like this - "X Y" meaning "X is/are Y" - are common in Russian and many Semitic languages. This may support the theory of a distinct construct state of nouns, to distinguish "X Y" meaning "X of Y" from "X Y" meaning "X is Y".
Then there is the text that appears if one deciphers the runes on Balin's tomb: Balin Fundinul uzbad Khazaddûmu, "Balin son of Fundin, Lord of Moria." The names Balin and Fundin are Mannish, so their etymologies are irrelevant. What remains is the ending -ul, here used to form a patronymic, uzbad "lord" and the well-known name Khazad-dûm "Dwarrowdelf, Moria" (though there is no equivalent of the hyphen in the Runic inscription). It here occurs with an ending -u, that is evidently a genitive of some sort. But why is an ending required here when none is present in Baruk Khazâd "axes of the Dwarves"? (It does not matter whether baruk is a specialized form meaning "axes of" or is simply "axes"; even if it incorporates an element meaning "of", this inflection still affects the first word in the construction, not the second as in uzbad Khazaddûmu.) Evidently this is a kind of objective genitive, denoting that Moria is ruled by the lord, not simply that the lord somehow "owns" Moria (might that be *uzbud Khazaddûm, following the pattern of baruk Khazâd???) This theory finds strong support in Adûnaic, the N?menorean tongue, that descended from a Mannish tongue influenced by Khuzdul (SD:414). This language has a so-called "objective" form incorporating u that is used in compounds, e.g. gimlu-nitîr "kindler of a star" (gimlu- being the objective of gimli "star", SD:428 cf. 427). Though this N?menorean objective is used in compounds only and not independently as in uzbad Khazaddûmu, it may in origin be related to the Khuzdul objective.
The only noun that is attested both in the plural and the singular has already been mentioned, Rukhs "Orc", pl. Rakhâs. As we speculated above, Khazâd "the Dwarves" and tarâg "beards" may be plurals formed according to the same pattern, so that the singular nouns "Dwarf" and "beard" are *Khuzd, *turg. The word shathûr "clouds" evidently belong to another plural pattern than Khazâd and Rakhâs, and we cannot reconstruct the singular form. It would probably have the same radicals *Sh-Th-R, but different vowels. Other plural nouns are ûl "streams" and dûm "excavations, halls" (the latter may also be a collective). Is it significant that they both contain the same vowel û as shathûr?
Only three verbs are attested: gunud "delve underground, excavate, tunnel" (stated to be a root), felek "hew rock" and the related word felak, meaning to use a tool like a broad-bladed chisel, or small axe-head without haft. Felak may also be used as a noun denoting such a tool. Cf. English "hammer", noun or verb. This example indicates that Khuzdul verbs cannot always be distinguished from other parts of speech by their form alone.
We have a few adjectives: There is the word Khuzdul itself, apparently meaning "dwarvish", being derived from *Khuzd "dwarf" with the ending -ul that is also used to form patronymics: Fundinul, son of Fundin. We also have sigin "long" in Sigin-tarâg, the Longbeards. If Khuzdul adjectives agree in number, sigin may be a plural form. (On the other hand, the basic, uninflected form of the adjective may be used in compounds.) Zirak (pl. *zirik???) may be the adjective "silver" according to TI:174, but on the next page it is suggested that it means "spike" instead. It is possible that an adjective follows the noun it describes (though not in compounds like "Longbeards"); see below.
In compounds, the order of the elements is the same as in English: Khazad-dûm "Dwarrowdelf", Kibil-nâla "Silverlode", Kheled-zâram "Glass-lake" (concerning this translation rather than "Mirrormere", see wordlist), Gabilgathol "Great Fortress", Sigin-tarâg "Longbeards". The name Zirak-zigil "Silver-spike" (Celebdil, Silvertine) fits this pattern (TI:174), but Tolkien later seems to have decided that zirak means "spike" and zigil means "silver" rather than vice versa. In that case, this word may be a "construct state" connection just like baruk Khazâd seems to be: *Zirak zigil "Spike (of) silver" (a construction that Frodo, naturally ignorant of Khuzdul, took to be a compound and spelt Zirak-zigil, Zirakzigil). If zigil is an adjective "silver" rather than a noun, this construction may suggest that adjectives follow the noun they describe.
Only one pronoun is attested: m?nu, plural accusative "you" (WR:20).
We have only two prepositions, aya "upon" (WR:20, reduced form ai in ai-m?nu "upon you"), and u "in, of" (only attested in the middle of a compound, Bundushathur = "Head in/of Clouds", name of the mountain Cloudyhead, Sindarin Fanuidhol).
There is not much we can say about derivation. One derivational pattern seems to be of the form 1a23ûn, where 1, 2, 3 represent the three radicals. The meaning seems to be simply "person, thing or place characterized by the root meaning": Nargûn "Mordor, *Black Land", from the radicals N-R-G "black", and Tharkûn "Staff-man", Gandalf's Dwarvish name (radicals *Th-R-K "staff"?) If the consonants Z-Gh-L really are the radicals of the verb "to war" and Azaghâl means "warrior", we have an agentive pattern a1a2â3. The word Khuzdul "Dwarvish" may argue the existence of an adjectival pattern 1u23ul. But as stated above, -ul may be simply an adjectival ending added to the singular form of the noun (*khuzd "Dwarf"). Compare the patronymic Fundinul. If so, there is no need to establish a pattern 1u23ul that involves the original radicals.
Adjectives like baraz "red" (B-R-Z) or sigin "long" (*S-G-N) clearly represent adjectival patterns 1a2a3 and 1i2i3 (though kibil "silver" seems to be a noun).
The word Mazarbul, as in "the chamber of Mazarbul" (Chamber of Records), seems to represent some more complex derivation. If -ul is simply the adjectival ending discussed above (which would mean that the "of" in the translation is strictly superfluous), we are left with mazarb "record(s?)". Could this be a kind of past participle, or the corresponding noun, of a verb "record" (radicals probably *Z-R-B)? If so, we have a pattern ma1a23. |
發表於 2005-2-10 04:51 PM
| 
