Talk:Languages constructed by Tolkien - Wikipedia

Tolkien had the ability to feel languages? This statement rates an 11 on the fawning index.

agree & rephrase ;) dab 15:49, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What about Naffarin? From what I read in a Tolkien biography, it resembles Spanish but I don't know enough to include it in the list. -- Error 22:46, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Not a Middle-earth language, but rather his first 'real' conlang. While some Naffarin apparently made it into Qenya (early Quenya), it is not related to the Quendi in any way. Anárion 06:05, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

the paragraphs on "Entish" should be moved to Entish language as they clog up the List of languages. dab 15:49, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Removed to a paragraph in Ent instead. [[User:Anárion|File:Anarion.png]] 16:08, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Middle-Earth is only one of the continents of the world in question, but this article also deals with languages exclusive to Aman (another continent). I would suggest that the entry be renamed Languages of Arda. --LRC 17:17, 22 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the title Languages of Arda would be more appropriate. ~Leia~

The link to the "The Tolkienian Linguistics FAQ" is somewhat idiosyncratic in its presentation and perhaps should not have such a prominent position in the link list? Maybe it can stay where it is and be named "Elvish Linguistic Fellowship’s Tolkienian Linguistics FAQ" (or something similar) to reflect its singular viewpoint?

Actually, artificial meaning man-made means all languages are artificial because they were all created by men.

I've read that orcs don't actually have a language but just alter other languages along with speaking Black Speech. so wouldn't it be a waste to have orcs there basically twice.

Shouldn't this article be named Languages of Middle-earth rather than languages of Arda? I think that it has been agreed on using Middle-earth for all articles concerning Tolkien's universe. Galadh 17:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

See above where it was previously moved from that name to this. I think 'Middle-earth' is fine as the term is often used to refer to the whole of Tolkien's creation (as it was by JRRT himself), but there'll always be a few pointing out the more precise definition. --CBDunkerson 21:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Tolkien was a philologist and, in his mind, this was different from being a 'linguist'. In Letters, he states explicitly "I am not a linguist". Accordingly, I am changing linguist > philologist.

Languages of Arda → Tolkien's constructed languages — We are dealing here with a Fictional Universe created by J.R.R. Tolkien, author. If "Elves", "Arda", etc do not exist, the languages do. These "constructed languages" are not of or from "Middle-earth" or even "Arda" but from Tolkien's mind, from our World (since you can speak them, if you dare ;-)). When Tolkien created "Gnomish" (one of his first languages) he did not use the term "Middle-earth" at all in his novels, he used it about 15 years later, or "Arda", a very technical Elvish word, invented about 25 years later, and which only the core fans "know" (Arda means many things in Quenya, like our "Solar System". So technically speaking Martian is also a language from/of Arda! The casual reader has never heard of Arda probabaly. And some Elvish languages were not part or used in "Middle-earth". The "Quenya Vanyarin" dialect developped in Eldamar, not part of Middle-earth. Tolkien Invented these tongues not Elves. ;-) I'm new so I do not know how to create or redirect these to Tolkien's constructed languages and Tolkien's Elvish languages, sorry. 90.54.1.73 (talk) 00:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Elvish languages (Middle-earth) → Tolkien's Elvish languages

Okay by me. —Tamfang (talk) 04:37, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Oppose Tolkien's Elvish languages I see no point in this move, it converts the title to a possessive form. It could easily be "Tolkienian Elvish languages" or some other form. Elf languages (Tolkien) would make more sense. 65.94.45.209 (talk) 12:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

  If you object to the possessive form like that, would 'languages consturcted by Tolkien' or closer to that be fine? Munci (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Langauges constructed by Tolkien is fine by me. Counterparted by Elf languages of Tolkien to match the titles? 65.94.45.209 (talk) 22:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

  I'm new here, sorry again, and I wonder who will decide? It is the last one who spoke (wrote)? Are we going to vote? "Elf language(s)"? Elf-tongue(s), Elven-language(s), Elvish-language(s), etc. are used by Tolkien, always with a "-" in "The Lord of the Rings". Languages constructed by Tolkien, sounds like good English to me, yes. But aren't we talking about "Constrcuted Languages", and not "Languages Constrcuted" here? "Quenya is a language contructed by ..." is fine in an English sentence but here we are talking about Lemma, the best Headword. Languages constructed by Tolkien is not apparopriate as a Headword, since you could add anything after: by Tolkien in his bath, by Tolkien in a plane, by Tolkien on a sunny day, etc. 90.54.1.73 (talk) 01:16, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Support removal of 'Arda' from title as per nom. Munci (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
• Partial support. I see nothing wrong with "Elvish languages (Middle-earth)". It's a perfectly good title, clear and recognizable, and IMO better than the suggested alternatives. However, I support moving "Languages of Arda", which IMO is not adequately descriptive. Does the MOS have s.t. against genitives in titles? How about just "Constructed languages (Tolkien)"? — kwami (talk) 01:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Elvish languages (Tolkien)? —Tamfang (talk) 01:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

  "Constructed languages (Tolkien)" does sound like a good idea. Munci (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)-Reply

• Partial support. I agree with Kwamikagami, we should not move "Elvish languages (Middle-earth)". Middle-earth is a key word here that fits just fine into a title. Even if in-universe-Elvish is also spoken in Aman which is outside Middle-earth, the latter is too unknown to the general public. Therefore I too think we should remove Arda from the title over here as it is likewise too unknown. In List of constructed languages there's a section "Languages used in fiction" so I don't see anything wrong with a new title "Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien" (let's use the initials too, not just the name); but a possesive form seems wrong to me. De728631 (talk) 01:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

  "Tibetan languages", is better than "Languages of Tibet" (and it is not the same thing, either). So "Tolkienian Languages" could do too, what do you think? And by the way, is there "rules" about Lemma/Headword?86.214.50.9 (talk) 01:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

There are some rules and guidelines at WP:Article titles. And I don't think that a lot of people can sort the term "Tolkienian". It's too specific again. De728631 (talk) 01:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

And "Languages of ..." is actually more or less a standard title for language articles on Wikipedia. We don't use adjectives. De728631 (talk) 01:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Partial support and comment. I agree on removing "Arda" as proposed. I believe a non-specialist looking for information would look for "Elvish", so I think "Elvish languages (J.R.R. Tolkien)" makes sense. And I like "Languages of Middle-earth (J.R.R. Tolkien)" for the broader article. Neither 'elvish' nor 'Middle-earth' is confined to JRRT's Legendarium, strictly speaking. (And 'Legendarium' is another in-crowd term we should avoid in titles, not that it has been suggested.) - PKM (talk) 07:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, if we use "Languages of Middle-earth (J.R.R. Tolkien)" with Middle-earth in it then we can as well keep "Elvish languages (Middle-earth)". De728631 (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

What noun to use for various collections from Tolkien's stories is a perennial (and IMO picayune) question. It really shouldn't matter as anyone searching Wikipedia for 'Tolkien languages', 'Middle-earth languages', or any other likely term WILL find this page somewhere within the top five results. That said, the usual convention is to use 'Middle-earth' as the identifier because it is the most widely known and frequently used by all commenters (back to Tolkien himself) to refer to the entire setting in common discussion... despite its technical meaning within the setting being more specific. Ergo, if we must change names I'd suggest 'Elvish languages (Middle-earth)' and 'Languages of Middle-earth'... which I believe this page used to be named until someone else did the whole 'Middle-earth is just the mortal lands' dance and moved it to Arda... which will inevitably happen again some time in the future. --12.42.51.28 (talk) 11:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The main problem is: Tolkien also constructed several languages outside his fictional world of "Middle-earth". There should be one page where all T's ConLangs could be listed and (briefly) presented. This won't be possible with a page named "Languages of Middle-earth". I also opposed to Elvish languages (Middle-earth). These are ConLangs and it should be im my opinion then Elvish languges (Tolkien). Tolkien made on Elvish tongue for the little "Elfs" in his "Father Xmas" stories for his children. And Elvish languages (Tolkien) cannot be "danced" with. No way of chnaging it (Middle-earth, or Arda). Tolkien is the "maker". Laurifindil (talk) 18:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Tolkien's fictional workd is not "Middle-earth", it is Arda. This is why this article has been kept under this title for years. So far it is the best title I can think of. "Languages constructed by J.R.R. Tolkien" is a possibility, but awkward. "Constructed languages (Tolkien)" doesn't sit right with our article title conventions. --dab (𒁳) 19:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Danced? Does that mean you find the phrase awkward, or something else? —Tamfang (talk) 19:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply