Talk:Þorgerðr Hölgabrúðr and Irpa

Rename
Would anyone mind if I move this article to Irpa and Þorgerðr? Good work, by the way.--Berig (talk) 16:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :} Now to move on to the theory section here. About the split - I was planning on making a Þorgerðr article to keep the two apart. I think it just gets really confusing for everyone when they're combined as they both have an amount of theories specific to them. Of course, Irpa is not mentioned as much as Þorgerðr but they do have unique notions surrounding them so it might be best to just keep them in different articles with some duplicate information. For example, the summaries of both of the sources I've made can just be copied and pasted into the Þorgerðr article as well alongside the other mentions. bloodofox: (talk) 16:12, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, on second thought, usually I am against merging articles but because Irpa only appears with Þorgerðr, I support the move, though I would use Þorgerðr's full name. bloodofox: (talk) 16:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is probably best. As with related cases like Geri and Freki, Hugin and Munin, Ask and Embla, Gyrd and Gnupa... you get my point. These two appear together consistently. We should give some thought on keeping confusion away, so that people unfamiliar with the complexity of the sagas do not get lost. :) –Holt T•C 16:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Erm, by the way. We seem to be very incongruent when it comes to Anglicization and simplifying of the Norse names. Has this been discussed before? –Holt T•C 16:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Anglicization of Old Norse names has been discussed ad nauseam on WP. The general agreement is to use anglicized names if a common form exists, e.g. Thor, and normalized Old Icelandic forms when no common English form exists (as in this case).--Berig (talk) 17:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

[outdent] Heh, I can imagine. General agreement understood. –Holt T•C 23:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation?
I have no idea how to say these names - would a pronunciation guide be useful to anyone other than me? Steve802 (talk) 20:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, I've been thinking about adding one, as it definitely is useful for some. Thanks for reminding me! If no one gets me to it (which they probably will), I will add one tomorrow, as I am quite busy today. –Holt T•C 10:06, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Pronunciation – done. –Holt T•C 09:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey there, Holt. I'm not entirely happy with the IPA rendering of these names, it seems they're a mix-up of modern Icelandic pronuciation and Old Norse without being correct for either. But I don't want to barge in and change it without discussing it first. Were you trying to give the ON or the Icelandic pronunciation? Nothingbutmeat (talk) 09:38, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I was wondering a bit about that. I simply followed a guide, and noticed the same as you, but as I know neither Icelandic nor ON, it was the best I could do. If you can fix it to Old Norse, and you know it's correct according to scholar consesus, it's be great if you did. Cheers, –Holt T•C 09:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, there is often confusion, I find, in the world of phonetic transcription. I've changed it now. I don't think I made any mistakes but if someone else wants to have a look at it, they're welcome to do so! Nothingbutmeat (talk) 22:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Great! –Holt T•C 22:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I changed it to a third version. I agree with the 'g' in Þorgerðr being voiced but I'd still like to keep it as a palatal. I don't see a strong reason for the 'p' to be aspirated so I changed that back. I have no strong opinions on the vowels, though I'm curious what sources you're using there. Haukur (talk) 14:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, Haukur. I was wondering what sources you were using; I can't recall ever seeing a book on Old Norse that explicitly states that the velar stops were palatalised before certain vowels. The ON article here on Wikipedia certainly does not make that claim and the article on the history of the Icelandic language says palatalisation developed in the 1500s (though that claim is not sourced). As for the aspiration, it's normally left out of broad IPA transcriptions but again Grimm's law presupposes aspiration of the voiceless stops except after s. As for the vowels, was there anything in particular you were wondering about? Nothingbutmeat (talk) 09:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's one: the book Old English and its Closest Relatives by Orrin W. Robinson says, on page 83: "Similarly, before any of the front vowels (long and short i, e, y, ø, long &oelig; and æ), but especially before i and its consonantal counterpart j, k was pronounced with a distinct palatalization, as [ki]: kenna is pronounced like kjenna." Haukur (talk) 10:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I found a text relating to it also. I'm still not entirely convinced though, the wording in the example above is a bit hazy and it doesn't say how early the palatalisation is supposed to have appeared. It still seems to be a matter of preference. Nothingbutmeat (talk) 12:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, we can say that the palatalization in Old Norse occurred later or to a lesser extent than in Old English, cf. examples like 'skirt' and 'shirt'. But it must surely have been there before the merger of /ǫ/ and /ø/ ca. 1200. We can see that kørinn became kjörinn while gǫltr became göltur and I have a hard time explaining that without palatalization in ON before 1200. Haukur (talk) 12:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Better example: Today we have the minimal pair kör (being bedridden because of old age) and kjör (choice), the only difference is that the 'k' is palatalized in the second word and not in the first word. Those words were also distinct before 1200 as kǫr and kør. Haukur (talk) 12:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This is no big deal to me, if you want to leave it as palatal then fine. I still feel that the time-line of development is open for interpretation. Nothingbutmeat (talk) 13:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * To the other stuff: How does Grimm's law need aspirated stops? That one's new to me. Haukur (talk) 13:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Again, it is no big deal to me, leave it unaspirated if you wish, I'm at work and do not have access to any books. As far as I can remember of what I read, the claim is based on the fact that the voiceless stops are, with few exceptions, aspirated in the modern Germanic languages, whether they were from the very beginning or whether it developed later but still at the Proto-Germanic stage. Nothingbutmeat (talk) 13:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This particular transcription is, of course, no big deal but I'm keen on solidifying my knowledge. I checked Iversen's classic grammar and he's got palatalized stops too. The aspiration is tricky - I may be willing to buy aspirated stops in frontal position but I'm not so sure about clusters like 'rp'. Haukur (talk) 13:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * There always seems to be discrepancies when it comes to dead languages doesn't there, and understandably so. It may be that many grammars simply choose not to include the palatalisation for various reasons, perhaps because, unlike modern Icelandic, it was non-phonemic before soft vowels. As for the aspiration, it may very well have been less pronounced in non-initial position although it seems unlikely, to me at least, that it should be entirely absent. In any case if it is non-phonemic, it doesn't matter. Still, it does provide clarity to those who have no knowledge of the language and who may think that the voiceless stops are pronounced as they are, for example, in the Romance languages. It would be nice to have a Wikipedia concensus on ON pronunciation and be able to add IPA to all articles on related topics. I find a great deal of them are lacking it and I think IPA is very helpful. Nothingbutmeat (talk) 14:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * What's a soft vowel? I think the contrast between, say Gjallar and gallar in Old Norse was probably, as it is now, that the initial consonant was palatalized in one case and not the other. A Wikipedia guideline for transcribing ON would certainly be useful. Haukur (talk) 14:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I meant to say front vowel, palatalisation before back vowels was certainly phonemic. Nothingbutmeat (talk) 08:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I second the suggestion about putting up an Old Norse pronunctiaion guideline, that would have been extremely helpful for editors and readers alike. –Holt T•C 18:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Additional attestations
I think the article should mention the references to Þorgerðr and Irpa in Flateyjarbók and Ketils saga hœngs, but wanted to check here first to see if there are any objections to doing so. Also, is it sufficient to refer to Flateyjarbók as a source, or should the reference be further specified as Ólafs saga Triggvasonar 173, or Þorleifs saga jarlsskálds 7? Rsradford (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It should absolutely mention their appearances in those sources! The more you can provide the better :).--Berig (talk) 21:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Definitely - I intended to add these last mentions at some point but, as usual, got side tracked. Definitely mention the stanzas and all specifications and, if you have any doubts, use the other alike sections as a guide. I'll go behind and help out. bloodofox: (talk) 02:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciations...
Really? We have a pronunciation for "Irpa" but not "Þorgerðr Hölgabrúðr"? Really? &mdash; TORTOISE WRATH  02:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I came here for the same reason. I don't speak any form of scandiavian languages. I can't tell if the pronunciation that was there was a mix-up of modern Icelandic pronuciation and Old Norse without being correct for either. I only need a reference to understand what is there. If you want, you can put both but PLEASE put something just as a reference, e.g. Icelandic IPA. Septrya (talk) 22:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)