Talk:The Etymologies

The most significant weakness of this article from the p.o.v. of an encyclopedia is how "closed" it is - the etymologies are their own little universe, within the Tolkien canon, and I don't know of any secondary literature about them. All an encyclopedia entry can do is discuss what they are and how they relate to the greater whole. The etymologies are, to make matters worse, not 'fixed' in any way - they underwent a constant state of flux for the entire time Tolkien nibbled at them. Because there was never a canonical Elvish language, there isn't any way to do normal literary criticism of how the layers emerged into a finished product. The article needs to explain why the etymologies were never finished. Scott1329m 12:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I wanted to do a major rewrite to this, but still don't know how. Maybe we should make an article referring to the 'external' history and then something about the 'internal sundocarmë' would be the best, isn't it? What I really suggest is to write it from the very beginning. --Neigel von Teighen 13:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

–iz–, –is–
Is it known how JRRT preferred to spell organi*ation? He worked on the OED, which (I believe) prefers &laquo;z&raquo;, but the rest of Britain seems to prefer &laquo;s&raquo;. (This is one unequivocal case where the article ought to prefer a British standard!) —Tamfang (talk) 17:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Noldorin
Some mention ought to be made that at the (external) time of Etym the Noldor spoke what later became Sindarin. What's the best place for that? —Tamfang (talk) 23:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe just a wikilink to Sindarin where the early Noldorin concept is explained? De728631 (talk) 23:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

But the lexicon.

 * The etymological development was always in flux but the lexicon of the Elvish tongues.

Will Laurifindil, who added the bold phrase, explain what it means? —Tamfang (talk) 23:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)