I'm curious

[serai]

Why do so many hobbit fic writers insist on using the Scottish word bairn, when Tolkien himself said that hobbit babies and children are called fauntlings or faunts? I can see digging up a word if he had never addressed the issue. (Though I'd try to find an English word, or at least one derived from the same sources, rather than something Scots. From what I understand, Tolkien didn't like Scots or Gaelic, just like he didn't like French, and took great care not even to use words that English had appropriated from them.) But in this case, he actually had a word, told us what it was, and people still don't use it.

Can someone explain this? Because it makes no sense to me at all.

Comments

[elenya54.livejournal.com]

The fact I don't use "faunt" in my fics is deliberate. I don't like the word. Tolkien has translated the Red Book as he sees fit. I've decided on a different translation ;) :D I use hobbit-lad/hobbit-lass and hobbitling.

However, you might feel more comfortable about "bairn" if I point out it derives from an Old English word, bearn - beran, to bear.

[annwyn55.livejournal.com]

LOL. I thought that I was the only one who disliked that word. I prefer "youngling" or "hobbitling" - easier on the "ear". And as Elanor says, I'm sure that the hobbits had more than one word for "child" anyway.

[serai1.livejournal.com]

Oh man. "Youngling" and "hobbitling" sound much clumsier to me, like the conflations that a lot of writer create around the word "hobbit" (meaning things like "workhobbit" and "firehobbit"). To my ear, all these things sound like writers twisting themselves around not to use certain words. If the word "fauntling" doesn't suit, why not just say "child" or "baby"? I don't think I ever saw "youngling" before I started reading hobbit fic, and I've read a lot over the years, and I certainly never came across "hobbitling" before.

My dissatisfaction with "hobbitling" comes from my not believing that hobbits would obsess on the word "hobbit" so much. Do men call their babies "humanlings"? No, they don't. They're just babies. If Tolkien had never said anything on the matter, I'd just use that word as well. And I don't use it in narration, unless the narrator is a hobbit himself.

Oh, whatever. This being my opinion, I ought to have kept it to myself.

[elenya54.livejournal.com]

Oh, whatever. This being my opinion, I ought to have kept it to myself.

I don't see why. It makes for an interesting discussion. :)

Isn't "youngling" used in the third of the Star Wars prequels? I have to admit that I don't like that one - probably because of that connection. We all have our likes and dislikes, and it's bound to translate through to our writing, but I can't see the problem with expressing them. Like you, I've given up on "Mathom" being used correctly in the fandom. It has almost reached the stage of having acquired a new meaning through repeated misusage. It wasn't until I read Dickens in my teen years that I realised how the word "cute" had been misinterpreted and reinvented to mean "sweet". In Dickens it's written as 'cute, short for acute, meaning clever, so a cute child is strictly speaking a precociously clever one. Such is the English language.

I love the origins of words, hence I own an etymological dictionary and can come up with OE origins for "bairn" :D

[serai1.livejournal.com]

Hey, if "youngling" came up in a Lucas script, then that's enough reason right there NEVER to use it, at least for me. That man has to be one of the worst writers I've ever come across. His writing is so stilted, so self-conscious, so bloody WOODEN, that I nearly can't stand to listen to it. (I think the first two SW films are the only ones he wrote that I can stand to watch, and I certainly have never seen Phantom Menace.)

Hee! I like that about "cute". Like the word "nice", whose original meaning I much prefer to the modern one. Yeah, words do get mutilated over time, and I certainly understand that, although I'm not going to encourage it. But I'm always puzzled by these habits in a fandom based on a book by a philology professor, a guy so obsessed with his love of English that he wouldn't even use any English words that were obviously foreign in origin. (Thanks to T. Shippey for pointing that out to me! I'd never noticed it before, but he's right, and it does have a definite effect on the book's sound and feel.) A lady hobbit wouldn't carry a bouquet, she'd carry a posey, for instance. That's the kind of attention to detail he exhibits, and while I wouldn't expect his kind of extremity on the part of fans, we're also not writing thousand-page books. Just short stories, and some of them really damn short.

[trilliah.livejournal.com]

Ah, amelioration, pejoration...my History of the English Language class comes to use at last.

My main issue with Lucas (apart from the fact that he crams too many special effects into not enough plot) is his utter inability to write real romance. Han and Leia are great until they ADMIT to liking one another--then they get ridiculous. ("Who are you?" "Someone who love you." *squirm*)

In case you're wondering why I'm suddenly commenting on this thread: I missed it before, and your latest post made me curious enough to check it out. I'm not sure why you think you've offended folks--most I can see is interesting discussion--but I would say if you're not wanting debate, don't pose linguistic questions. Fandom's weird about those. ;)

I need a covering-up-my-ears-and-screaming icon for subjects like this...

[serai1.livejournal.com]

Romance? The guy can't even write passable dialogue. ("You are like sand"...ARRRGHGHGHKILLKILLKILL) It's incredibly telling that in Empire (for my money, the best of the SW films) the only really good line, one that is both funny and just an on-the-mark summing up of a whole character, which is Han's response to Leia's "I love you" - "I know" - is a friggin' improvisation on Harrison Ford's part! He objected to Han saying "I love you too", since DUH! Han would never, ever say that. And that line sums up everything that's wrong with Lucas's writing: clumsy, amateurish, one-dimensional, uninsightful, etc., etc., etc. The guy just sucks. Props once again to Mr. Ford for uttering the immortal actor's lament, "George, you can write this shit, but you can't say it."

As to the other...I got responses other than here. *sigh*

Re: I need a covering-up-my-ears-and-screaming icon for subjects like this...

[trilliah.livejournal.com]

*dies* That's awesome!!! Oy, Han saying "I love you too?" OMFG thank you LORD for sparing us THAT nonsense. And yes: Empire Strikes Back has ALWAYS been my favorite. New Hope just doesn't GO anywhere, and Jedi's Luke is a bit too obnoxious for me. I don't even think the newer ones bear mentioning.

Eep. I'm sorry to hear that. :(

[wyna-hiros.livejournal.com]

Yes, I believe "youngling" was used in the Prequels at some point.

[trilliah.livejournal.com]

Yeah; it's one of the ranks of Jedi. Youngling, apprentice, master. Something like that.

[trilliah.livejournal.com]

My dissatisfaction with "hobbitling" comes from my not believing that hobbits would obsess on the word "hobbit" so much.

Ooh, I'll jump in and second that. I read fics where someone comments on Sam's "nice round hobbit belly" or "pert hobbit nose" or Frodo's "un-hobbitlike complexion" and I think "Why don't they just say "nice round belly, pert nose, and unusual complexion?" After all, it's not like we'd sit here and say "What a nice human nose you have!" And even though there ARE other races in ME, hobbits have sort of made it a point to avoid much interaction with them, suggesting a sort of racial-centrism that would probably not need to specify on things like that.

As for bairn, I don't use it for two reasons: one, I tend to write slash and it's best if there are no underage folk involved, and two, I don't know how to pronounce it, and that bothers me a bit. ;)

[serai1.livejournal.com]

suggesting a sort of racial-centrism

I think it would go beyond centrism to be actual ignorance of other races at all. Hobbits are aware of other races, but besides men, most hobbits (especially those far from the borders) probably wouldn't know enough about what elves look like to be able to compare them with hobbits. And even if they did, they still wouldn't append "hobbit" that way, because the use would be obvious. Elves and dwarves and such may exist somewhere in the world, but it's pointless to make a distinction between them and hobbits when, for most hobbits, it's so spectacularly unlikely that anyone in the Shire could ever be mistaken for one. No elf's foot on earth was ever covered in hair, for instance.