Brūcendmōtung:Wōdenhelm

Almazán

Please, could you translate this article onto the language of this Wikipedia? Thanks for your help. If you wanna translate your city onto Aragonese, Spanish, Catalonian, Galician o Asturian language, tell it to me, please. I'm Chabi there. --85.54.141.142 08:08, 15 Gēolmōnaþ 2007 (UTC)

Iċ dyde, þēah þǣr ne wæs miċel tō wrītan. Ƿōdenhelm 12:38, 7 Se Æfterra Gēola 2008 (UTC)

Old English MediaWiki messages imported into Betawiki

Hi Wōdenhelm. I see that you are one of the few active contributors to this project. Thank you for that. We imported the messages from Special:Allmessages into betawiki:. Betawiki also supports the translation of messages for over 100 extensions, with over 1,500 messages. I would like to invite you to join the Betawiki localisation project to improve support for Old English. Currently 27% of the interface messages have been translated.

If you have any further questions, please let me know on my talk page on Betawiki. We will try and assist you as much as possible. You can also find us on the Freenode IRC network in the channel #mediawiki-i18n where we would be happy to help you get started.

Thank you very much for your attention and I do hope to you on Betawiki soon! Cheers! Siebrand@Betawiki 18:40, 15 Gēolmōnaþ 2007 (UTC)

Computer games

Hey Wōdenhelm! Good to see you on ang! As for the computer games, it's cool to see Jaguar games here...I have a soft spot for that system, being an Atari kid myself :) We've got se circolwyrde for computer, and þæt gamen for game. Gamen in singular is:

• þæt gamen (pl: þā gamen)
• þæs gamenes (pl: þāra gamena)
• þǣm gamene (pl: þǣm gamenum)
• þæt gamen (pl: þā gamen)

If I can help you out in the language, feel free to send a message! --James 21:21, 14 Se Æfterra Gēola 2008 (UTC)

Swēte, iċ wilcume eall help þæt cann iċ ġietan. Ƿōdenhelm 23:16, 14 Se Æfterra Gēola 2008 (UTC)

Just a correction, in a subordinate clause, the subject is first, the object second, then the verb at the end. So it's "help, þe ic cann onfōn" (help, which I can receive). Gietan wasn't used like today. They had niman, onfōn, and underfōn for different uses. --James 06:54, 17 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Betawiki

Just sign up. You'll get a welcome message that explains everything and gives you all the links you need. Cheers! Siebrand 12:44, 27 Solmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Football

I'd probably understand þōðer as ball, so fōtþōðer as a sport would make sense. As for sport, the only thing I can see is plega. Hwilc plegcynd? Fōtþōðer. --James 19:22, 1 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hello! Do you know if there are any bureaucrats in this wikipedia? --Kenshin 10:25, 10 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the answer and good luck! As I can see, thanks to your diligence, both quantity and quality here in ang.wikipedia is growing quite fast. To say the truth, I just wanted to change my username as I've already done in other wikipedias. Well, then I'll contact stiuards again :P --Kenshin 07:41, 12 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Answer

You haven't had an admin status here yet? Oops... I thought you've already had it. Just as you said, nowadays you're the biggest contributor in this wikipedia, so I was sure you're that 3rd administrator who was unmentioned (It was Drini who was unmentioned there). But if I've already added your name to sysop list by mistake, I'll try not to disappoint you and making that becpme true :). Since you're probably the most active user here, I'll contact stuards for giving you the sysop rights in this wikipedia. That won't be easy and quickly and I'm not sure if they accept the request, because I haven't ever contact them for sysop rights and stuards are always busy. --Viskonsas 20:49, 16 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Hey! So do you want to become an administrator? :) If so, you have to be supported by at least 2-3 users here. So we'll have to do a vote :) --Viskonsas 20:49, 16 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

My proposal for Administrator/Sysop status

NOTE: This exact same text has been moved to a more proper location, which can be found here. So when submitting your votes or comments, please use that link, instead of the text here.

I'm placing this here on my talk page, for the simple fact that I'm not sure of where else to put it. If there is a more proper location, just let me know.

I would like to go up for Administration status because of my passion for this Wikipedia project and for my contributions. I will list my reasons below:

*My personal passion and dedication to the project.

• My numerous contributions to the project, of various topics.
• Continual revisions of various project pages, with respect to their length and content.
• Creating nearly word-for-word translations, to make pages of equal quality to their Modern English counterparts.
• I check Recent Changes every single day, to monitor for quality edits, and to be on the lookout for vandalism.
• My creations of several categories, and linking them into a proper hierarchy of categories and sub-categories.

I would like to thank everyone who views this and votes.

—Ƿōdenhelm 21:01, 16 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

===Votes (1:0)=== Support

# Strong support. This user deserves and needs to be an administrator of this wikipedia. He does a cleanup, tidies articles... As I can see, currently there's not enough active administrators. Without sysop rights, He is not able to delete deletable files, edit metawiki, undo unprofitable changes and so on... --Viskonsas 21:30, 16 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

This vote should be in the Wikipedia:Bewitend page. --James 07:25, 17 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Comments

By the way, I was that person who suggested Wōdenhelm asking for sysops rights. --Viskonsas 21:30, 16 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC) ===Result===

The vote is currently proceeding

Grammar

Passive constructions weren't as often used in OE as in modern English, as they favord the "one does X" construction, like modern German "man findet etwas" rather than "etwas wird gefunden." In OE, that's "man findeþ hit" rather than "hit biþ fram him gefunden." The preposition be was not used for passives. For people, fram was used, and þurh with inanimate things or concepts. --James 06:54, 17 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Article Co-Op

I was thinking on some of the mints from OE, which are easy to search for, grab from another wiki, and translate. Just search Bosworth and Toller for them (they all end in 'minte'). Typically with plant names, we just use the Latin name, and have a redirect from the Englisc name, as there are several words that could refer to related or the same plant, so it's a way to avoid confusion. --James 00:19, 21 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Yeah that's one thing I remember from elementary school, is that some scientists will only refer to a species by its scientific name, so as to remove any possibility of mix-up; from one species having several names, or from one name being applied to several species. —Ƿōdenhelm 04:09, 21 Hrēþmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

(And on that note, why the horse cant we have scientific names in OE?) >:(

Hi !

Hey, I'm Amanda, and I was just looking around here - neat stuff! Just one question - what's with the banner on the front page? xo --AmandaPanda 10:46, 2 Ēastermōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

The deal...

I've no personal grudge against you or anyone, so please do not take anything as such. I don't have AIM, but I've got to get to work shortly, so I can't IM until this evening after Karate. I only have MSN messenger, if you wanted to use that after 8 pm EST. Have a good day! --James 11:56, 2 Ēastermōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Old English

I can't believe it, but I actually understand Old English. It looks like Old Limburgish! Umbel 09:28, 6 Ēastermōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the translation

Thank you for the translation, Wōdenhelm :-) Ev 14:16, 18 Sēremōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Macrons in Names

The points you raised are good points, and I had thought them over before doing any renaming. I have not made such deep-seated changes as you might think though. I have renamed some British place-name articles to versions without macrons, but only in their names; the text retains the macrons.

A major reason; it is near-impossible to type macrons into the "Sēcan" box to find an article. Also other articles' text, and thus their links, might not use the same macrons. If "Sēcan" and Wiki links were tolerant as to treat any vowel the same, with or without its macron, it would not matter.

I do doubt the authenticity of macrons in general and the attribution of macrons in particular place names in the absence of firm authority, but that is another debate (and the OE Wicipædia is an educational tool, where macrons can thus be appropriate). I am not trying take all macrons out wholesale; I am just making Wicipædia easier to use by having some macronless titles.

The old versions of the names remain as working, alternative names; each is a "redirect" to the new macron-less version. Therefore all Wiki links which do use the macrons still work.

Conversely, with several articles (such as "Israhēl") I have not renamed the article at all but I have created a redirect page ("Israhel"); so that if the name is typed (or linked) without macrons, it will redirect to the actual article with macrons.

It all helps to make it easier to use, and it avoids the danger of duplicate articles, one with and one without macrons in the name.

Hogweard 16:48, 20 Hāligmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Transliteration

Bonjour,

Can you, please, transliterate « Þēodisc Hǣðenscipe » and « Geānlǣht Rīcu American » in runnic alphabet ? (There are so many letters with near value !) And « ᚠᛁᚠ » in latin alphabet : macron or not macron ? « fif » or « fīf » ? Thanx.

--Budelberger 01:23, 23 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC) ().

Runes never made use of accent marks of any sort, so you can get away with omitting them, when writing them. This current computer I'm using unfortunately does not have the needed Unicode range support for the Runic characters, but I'll see what I can do for you about transcribing those articles into Runic for ya. --Ƿōdenhelm 21:54, 29 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC)

(Please leave the conversation on its initial page !)

Thanx for your answer. I did'nt ask for macrons, but for those different letters for the « same » sound, e. g. « ᚩᚬᚭᚮ », « ᚲᚴ », « ᚺᚻᚼᚽ », « ᚾᚿ », etc. And I don't need the transliteration of the whole pages, but only their title : « Þēodisc Hǣðenscipe » and « Geānlǣht Rīcu American ». If you can't read this Unicode range, try the wonderful SC Unipad ! <http://www.unipad.org/main/> --Budelberger 23:10, 3 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC) (). (Have you seen, e. g., Fīf/ᚠᛁᚠ ? And if somebody can translate « latin/runnic alphabet version » in Englisc…)

betawiki

Hello Wōdenhelm, please forgive me writing in English. I would like to invite You kindly to betawiki: it is the place where the translations of the interface take place (because if translated there they are available in all ang-projects and in every wmf-project in the special:preferences). I hope You are interested in helping localizing the interface for ang or if You need help doing so let me know, best regards, --fugol _{(:> )=|} 21:59, 30 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC)

P.S. it looks like this wiki would need an additional local sysop, if You are interested, please feel free to make a request (if there is too few local support, because there are too few people, You could also consider to request temporary adminship), thanks, --fugol _{(:> )=|} 22:02, 30 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC)

Sounds great, please feel free to open a request at m:Steward_requests/Permissions#Temporary_permissions_or_emergency_or_technical_access (don't forget to ask locally too, so the active people here can give their opinion or object even). Other members of ang wiki could of course do the same and ask for adminship too.

Best regards, --fugol _{(:> )=|} 05:25, 31 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC)

Just wondering...

I don't change things viciously. Apart from just adding material, the main changing of existing material, apart from adding redirects for alternative spellings, has been with a view to authenticity.

I have been changing all those masculine endings given to feminine "-ia" country names (and odd things like that; Cent is never declined for example), though that is not to say I always get it right in my own material. One other target is the form of compound state titles, that I commented on in the Hū secge ic Talk page. I might do the same with royal titles when I have convinced myself from the texts that I am right.

Sometimes I have come across use of a neologism where there is a good, authentic Englisc word or phrase, but that is perhaps not so common. Ostsǣ, Taprabane and Sericus Garsecg come into that category.

The material you have written is practically untouched by my attentions.

Unless of course you are referring to my interesting choice of word order. That comes down to aesthetics.

Hogweard 22:45, 30 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, Virginia. I think I can say, with little fear of contradiction, that there is no original Englisc source naming the land of Virginia. (Mind you, when it was discovered, the language spoken by the Devonian sailors below deck would not have been much different.) The Roman gens Virginia is probably unfound too.

Some say Virginia was named for Queen Elizabeth, the Virgin Queen, though more likely it was for its virgin forests and hills.

One cannot pick every name apart, or Australia would be "Suþerne Land" and goodness knows what would become of America. I think the article name "Uirginia" has it right on this occasion.

Hogweard 22:35, 31 Winterfylleþ 2008 (UTC)

Gerecþegnung

If you can find a better term than gerecþegnung, we can try it. It is intended for "administration", specifically for local government. It is not the same as "power" or "authority", as such bodies in Britain have very little power of their own; just responsibility to impliment functions laid upon them.

Gerec is government or authority. (And a gereca is a governor.) Þegnung is ministration or service (see B&T) and þengnian to minister or serve. I will confess that I have seen no authority for joining the two together. Mind you, I have not seen any direct equivalent for the matter I am describing. Perhaps the office of a Þegn is pretty close in some respects (and that, no doubt, is þegnung).

One cannot do word-for-word translations. The two ends of English are not the same (not since countless new words were invented in the 16th century simply to have one word concepts). Nevertheless, a single word "gerec-þegnung" seemed a good one with authenticity behind its elements and one not too unlikely to have been used.

Everything is open to improvements, and we do not have to have consistency in the same words and phrases for each concept. Indeed, soulless consistency is inauthentic!

Hogweard 11:57, 3 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Yogh

Yogh, ȝ, is inauthentic. It is authentic to Middle English and to mediaeval Scots, but not to Englisc.

The shape of yogh is that of the normal lower-case g as written by English and Irish scribes. Norman scribes introduced a different hand, with g closer to what we see today. Since a soft g in Norman French (and scribal Latin) is pronounced differently from the g in English, they retained the shape of the English g to represent that sound in English.

That is the origin of yogh; it became a separate letter after the Conquest, but it did not exist as a letter in Englisc and should not be used.

Byrhtferð lists the letters of the alphabet in 1011. He gives them as:

A B C D E F G H I K L M N O P Q R S T V X Y Z & ƿ Þ Ð Æ

There is a good run through of the history of less-used Latin alphabet letters in Mike Everson’s work[1] [2].

Hogweard 13:24, 10 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

I'm familiar with that, however I feel that the letter Yogh did indeed exist, but the visual glyph did not. Two letters, two sounds, being written with one single character. And for the modern eye, I like to distinguish those two sounds, yet still be as accurate, as possible. Our current G did not exist at that point, so rather than Ġ, I feel that Ȝ would be the better choice. Besides that, Ȝ makes OE alot easier for me to read. Many OE books use yogh, and even the German wikipedia has wynn and yogh available as characters to type with, when you choose that character set. I'm not one of these latin-lovers who feel it is necessary to remove characteristics from English ya know—Ƿōdenhelm 23:38, 10 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Whatever your thoughts on the shape of "g" being close to the later yogh, the shape of the capital letter is that of the normal G, so a capital yogh is out of the question.

There is no distinction in written Englisc between a hard G and a soft G.

Hogweard 21:58, 16 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Yeah and also keep in mind that the language was only just starting to be written on a large scale. By not using yogh, you're using very conservative typography (as in, sticking to what you grew up with), and you're depriving OE writing of its flavor and beauty. Furthermore, how are you gonna say that "yogh is inauthentic" while insisting upon using "w"? That just goes back to what i said about your narrow typography.

Even the German wikipedia has yogh and wynn available for the OE typeset. Go to the German wiki, click to edit any article, and simply look at the language list at the bottom, and you'll see what i'm talking about. A few OE books of mine also make use of yogh.

Basically, i'm absolutely hard-bent on using yogh and wynn, and absolutely nothing in this world will prevent me from doing so.

Furthermore, i feel that your editing style is very amateurish and unprofessional, your writing style is supremely inconsistent, and i feel like you're a mere beginner trying to write an encyclopedia. It seems like half of my editing consists of fixing your horrid mistakes.

Now with that being said, are you gonna start stepping up your quality, or are you gonna continue ruining this wiki by censoring macrons according to your whims?

—Ƿōdenhelm 05:22, 17 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

I will not row about the authenticity of wen. I have just not worried; if w is good enough for every text book it is good enough for me. If others want to make a big fuss, so be it. Wen is of course authentic. "W" also appears throughout the period, though as "vv". I will try to find a manuscript copy of the Chronicle to see if it has "VVillelm bastard" or "Ƿillelm bastard". (No "se", by the way.)

As to yogh, I cannot be bothered to squabble about the shape of a lower-case G, as long as the upper-case G remains. Again, if others want to take you up on it, let them.

I make many mistakes and I am glad to be corrected. I should engrave on my forehead that the present tense third person singular of liecgan is liþ (or līþ). Do correct me and I do not take it amiss. Likewise when I spot an error (I know India and Italia end in -a, but they are still feminine) then I will correct them, with no criticism meant; we are none of us native speakers.

Much though is no mistake. There are always differences of opinion in interpretation. Words have many spellings, all of which are right. Me and Mec are both used in the accusative. Þ and ð are wholly interchangeable. I mostly write without macrons, which is authentic; our forefathers wrote without them. Find me any original text (apart from a grammar perhaps) which has any vowel-length macrons. Throughout the whole of Beowulf and the whole of the Chronicle the only macrons are in "-ū", to shorten "-um". (There are no dots over c or g either; I think Sweet invented those.) On the other hand as a help to learning, macrons are of use.

In names though, why "Hāmtūn" not "Hamtun"? The vowels are short in the place-name, if long in the words which gave it its elements. Where are these vowel lengths coming from in place-names? No original text has them. Where for example did the ē come from in Dēorwente; it derives from the Old Welsh Derw (oak) not the English Dēor. Deoraby (where I used to live) likewise may be from Deorwente and so has a short e. If there is no text to support these macrons, then someone has been making it all up.

There is also much that I do not know. There is much that we cannot know of the language because of what was not written down. We fill in what we come across from the sources. There is always room for well-intentioned guesswork or a neologism to be replaced by an actual word or phrase someone has found in an original source. (Who would have guessed that the North Pole is mentioned in Boethius and rendered into pure Germanic Englisc by Ælfred?)

If we know what we disagree on and where we only vary in tendency, then we can get on with it with occasional gristbiting but without mutual suspicion.

Hogweard 13:59, 17 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Oh by the way man, my apologies for being rude. I often become needlessly angry and mouthy over things. But, rudeness aside, my main concern is the inconsistency of formatting. For example, you only sometimes using macrons, and sometimes making compound nouns hyphenated, while making others into singular words, like Oxnafordscīr being right next to Norþhamtūn-scir. While I understand your intentions of historical accuracy, the only problem with that, is that ancient writers themselves often varied in style, and didnt have nearly as strict of a requirement of uniformity as we now require. Just go ahead and go along with the standardized formatting which we use on this Wiki, which fits most closely to modern German (which, as we know, is where English came from, plus it gives us a close relative to easily model after)

—Ƿōdenhelm 23:20, 17 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Wen

Wen, ƿ is authentic. It was the usual letter for the w sound. VV does occur on occasion in Englisc, throughout the period, but ƿ is the norm.

Nevertheless, ƿ is not found in modern printed texts. They have always been happy to use w, which makes for no practical problem. I think we should generally stick with that convention. Also, it is almost impossible to type ƿ, and the sandbox does not provide for it.

Practice to date has been to ignore ƿ. It is an unspoken convention; like using Classical West Saxon in preference to later forms. Perhaps there should be a specific policy.

Hogweard 13:24, 10 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Tell James to put Wynn and Yogh onto the sandbox. He USED to have dotted characters there, but got mad and censored them out when I began using them. If you're concerned about ease of typing, I'll see if i can conjure up a custom keyboard for you. Plus, one cannot say that they wish to remain historically accurate, while at the same time, removing wynn. —Ƿōdenhelm 23:41, 10 Blōtmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Articles on Kings, and misc

For the growing list of articles on kings, we should grope toward consistency. In the texts I have found just one "of Engla land", and that not giving a title. English kings are "Engla cyning". The royal title in charters changed from "Rex Anglorum" to "Rex Angliae" in or after Henry I's time, but there is no need to change the Englisc, without a sound authority for "Englaland cyning" or "Cyning of Englalande" or some such.

Other nations' kings take the people's name too, but then I have seen "Asyria cyning" too (not "Cyning of Asyrie"). What do you think?

As for Oswiu / Osƿiu / Osuuiu / Oswy, the title has gone wrong. He would never be entitled "of Norþhumberlande"; always "Norþhymbra cyning" or "Norþanhymbra cyning". His realm was Norþanhymbra rice or Norþhymbra rice, or Norþhymbra land. The Chronicles use all these combinations and more, and switches Þ and Ð of course, but the sources never use a U in the name and never have a "-land" or "-rice" version with the royal title as far as I have seen.

I would apply the same to each of the kings and kingdoms mentioned.

(I have added a word to our last exchange on Hēafodsīde too.)

Hogweard 23:18, 6 Gēolmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, we do seem to have various kinds of kingly styles used. My first initial suggestion would be "(Name), King of (Place)" done in OE. My use of "of (Place)" previously was used in the sense of "from", giving us "(Name) from (Place)", but I suppose that, for instance, Osƿiu, Cyning Norþhymbralandes would be a good fit. The only reason I'd stick with Norþhymbraland, would be to keep regular naming consistency in titles. Other than that, I could care less how the location is referred to within articles, as long as all links point to the existing target. —Ƿōdenhelm 23:27, 6 Gēolmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Much as I like variety and much as the sources are full of variety, some consistency is practical. I disagree with "King of (place)" when describing kings before 1100, simply because that is not authentic; we know what they were called. Generally it should be "(People [gen pl]) cyning". On other occasions we can have "(Place) cyning", which is found on occasion, at least when referring to foreign parts.

I'd love to delve into the sources, but at 11:40 pm already, I am craving my pillow!

Hogweard 23:38, 6 Gēolmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring

If disagreeing with your approach is "edit warring" I must continue. You have not put any of your changes to the editor community, such as is left. "Bold editing" is one thing, but mass reversal in style and practice is something very different.

Perhaps you could put this on the Hēafodsīde mōtung page?

For "Geānlǣht Cynerīce" page, find me a single "capital yogh" in any Englisc text and I might reconsider the "Ȝeānlǣht Cynedōm" thing and others.

There was a long debate on how to translate "United Kingdom" and it was settled by consensus. You should not try to reverse that without any discussion.

Hogweard 15:53, 12 Gēolmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)

Regarding yogh and wen

I personally don't favour the use of yogh and wen, and think we should follow the conventions of modern Anglo-Saxon scholarship in using g and w.

Personally, I'm not terribly motivated by the question of whether this is historically accurate or not; I feel that the dominant conventions of modern Anglo-Saxon orthography (by Anglo-Saxon scholars, etc.) should serve as more of a guide than scribal conventions of the Anglo-Saxon era.

In any case, the prevailing convention before making your change (e.g. to Ȝeānlǣht Cynerīce) was not to use yogh and wen (I think this may have actually been codified somewhere by James) and I do think this is something that ought to be standardized and that we should engage in some sort of process before changing orthographic standards. --Saforrest 04:03, 18 Gēolmōnaþ 2008 (UTC)