[Milton-L] Hopefully not an ignoble request

Salwa Khoddam skhoddam at cox.net
Fri Nov 13 23:52:19 EST 2015


Klaeber also translates it as "inglorious" and so do many translations that
I checked. Heaney's words are actually "you disgraced yourselves." As for
Tolkien, he glosses over this incident. His translation is incomplete
anyway, in prose, and not meant for publication.

Salwa

 

 

From: milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu
[mailto:milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu] On Behalf Of Jameela Lares
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 3:47 PM
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Hopefully not an ignoble request

 

Heaney actually goes with a dynamic equivalent, something like "They
disgraced themselves" over the two lines.  Sorry-I looked it up but then
left the book at School.

 

Jameela

 

From: milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu
<mailto:milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu>
[mailto:milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu] On Behalf Of Stella Revard
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 3:33 PM
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu
<mailto:milton-l at lists.richmond.edu> >
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Hopefully not an ignoble request

 

C. L. Wrenn in his 1953 edition of Beowulf (London:  Harrap, 1953), glosses
domleas as "without glory," so it would seem that "inglorious" would fit
nicely.  I don't have my other editions handy (Klaeber, for instance), nor
the old prose translation revised by Tolkien, or the Heaney translation....

Carter Revard



On 11/13/15, Matthew Jordan <matthewjorda at gmail.com
<mailto:matthewjorda at gmail.com> > wrote:

Mute and inglorious?

 

On 13 November 2015 at 17:48, Dario Rivarossa <dario.rivarossa at gmail.com
<mailto:dario.rivarossa at gmail.com%20%3cdario.rivarossa at gmail.com>
<dario.rivarossa at gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear scholars

sorry if the message does not refer to Milton, but this is surely the
proper place to find experts in English literature.
While rereading "Beowulf," I have just been struck by a word used in
line 2890 by Wiglaf when he shames the would-be 'bodyguard' of Beowulf
and points at their "dom-leasan daed." How should the adjective be
interpreted?

1. As "nameless," i.e. so shameful that there exists no word to define it?
2. Or more simply, "not glorious" at all for them?
3. Or maybe both?

The excellent Italian version by Ludovica Koch renders it as _infame,_
i.e. literally the opposite of "famous," therefore vile, ignoble,
etc., that seems to suggest solution no. 3.
With many thanks in advance.

--
il Tassista http://tassonomia.blogspot.it e http://stornielle.blogspot.it
co-artist with the Magic Trio http://tiziafra.wix.com/the-magic-trio
_______________________________________________
Milton-L mailing list
Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu <mailto:Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu>
<Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu <mailto:Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu> >
Manage your list membership and access list archives at
http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l

Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20151113/fef5bbca/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Milton-L mailing list