Talk:Njáls saga

message: Is the name Gunnarr Hámundarson (with two r) or Gunnar Hámundarson (with one r)?  Gunnar Hámundarson links to one r.
Also, in Icelandic, the double l, or ll, makes a bit of a 'tl' sound. The orthology is similar to the tl, where the tongue is placed  in the 't' sound (as in Tom), but then is moved to the 'l' position. This is done slightly differently by everyone, but the sound is iconic to Icelandic speakers. Why isn't this mentioned and why do the soundbytes not reflect this?
Freemanjs (talk) 19:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Language 

message: Note on the following text:
"The protagonist's name, in Icelandic spelling, is Njáll. The book should therefore be called "Njáll's Saga" in English. In practice the protagonist is commonly referred to as "Njal" in English, and the book "Njal's Saga". This probably arises from a misunderstanding of the correct Icelandic Njáls Saga (no apostrophe), since the genitive (possessive) form of Njáll in Icelandic is Njáls (no apostrophe). It seems that by back-formation from the genitive, Njáll has been anglicized to Njal (no accent). The difference is significant, since in Icelandic a double-L is pronounced quite differently from a single-L.
Some English translations also anglicize other personal names, for example removing the masculine nominative ending -ur from those names that have it. But it is not otherwise common for English speakers to treat Icelandic names in this way.
The name is Gaelic in origin, coming from "Niall", which is often anglicised as "Neil".
???  *NOBODY* needs to know any of this.  What people need to know, MUCH more importantly, is how to pronounce it.  Why don't educated people GET that?
It's very puzzling.  You could teach people something ten times as important and useful by completely eliminating the above and telling them how to pronounce "Burnt Njal."
*Links:
**imdb.com - Brennu Njáls saga (1980) Directed by Friðrik Þór Friðriksson Gangleri 19:18, 2004 Oct 31 (UTC)
If this were Old Icelandic, wouldn't it be one word? Let us use some English name, as policy supports. I don't think we need to have another no consensus on WP:RM; but if we have to...Septentrionalis 18:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Njall 

message: Why do we keep seeing 999 AD listed as Iceland's conversion to Christianity instead of 1000 AD?  Have I been wrong all these years? And my copy of Njal's Saga, which lists 1000?
Some kind of calendar weirdness?  Please advise, someone.
dino 20:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ari might have used a calender which started the new year early in September. This would of course cause a lot of chronological problems. Fornadan (t) 15:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1000 AD?

message: Could people add a section about the saga's translation into English?  It seems to be important within the context of late Romanticism. Pittsburgh Poet (talk) 02:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation? 

message: I've restrained myself from starting an editing war by revising the
original text to say the opposite!
Original sentence:
"Some English translations also anglicize other personal names, for example removing the masculine nominative ending -ur from those names that have it."
This conflates modern Icelandic with Old Norse.  In fact, the nominative forms in -ur are
distinctively modern, while Old Norse simply has -r.  This isn't very important, but it
makes it harder to see how relevant his examples ought to be.
Original sentence:
"But it is not otherwise common for English speakers to treat Icelandic names in this way."
What does "otherwise" mean?  The jump from English speakers wrestling with contemporary
Icelandic names (but not translating from Icelandic) to translators working from archaic
Icelandic texts is simply too big.  In any case, translation from Old Norse is the issue.
Why IS Olaf acceptable for Ólafur (ON Óláfr), but not Njal for Njáll?
The English forms are not merely Icelandic (or Old Norse) forms subject to random loss of nominative
terminations.  Late 19th-century translators into English (e.g., Sir George W. Dasent,
William Morris) systematically gave proper nouns in stem form, not nominative form.  The
limitations of English spelling introduce a few other changes, such as ignoring length markers
on vowels.  Vowels of different lengths are "quite different" too, just as L is "quite different"
from LL. Another change is the use of d for ð, though modern writers seem more willing to use
dh.  This is how we have all become used to forms like Odin, Thor, and Olaf.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnold the Frog (talk • contribs) 23:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another note on "Njal" vs. "Njáll" 

message: Brennu-Njáls saga is indubitably a very great work of literature. But it has its shortcomings. It has shed the realism which characterized some of the older sagas. Granted, Egils saga is also a work of fiction. But compare the travels of Gunnar in Njáls saga and of Egill in Egils saga. In the first, the reader gets acquainted with how the writer thinks viking raids should have happened. In the second, the reader feels that Egill actually was a viking and his exploits therefore, if not more believable (for the most part they are not), describe the mentality better. Combined with the exquisite stylistry of Egils saga (not that the author of Njáls saga was an inferior author) the reader gets the feeling that the author of Egils saga actually got into his protagonist's head, whereas the author of Njáls saga seems to have written from a distance - Gunnar goes here and there, slays the appropriate number of people etc. In short, the author of Egils saga almost certainly had a better idea of what those murderous raids were (see the disgouging of one eye of Ármóðr skegg for an example - this scene would have been impossible in Njála).
Cheers 157.157.230.175 (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The greatest? 

message: We may (or may not?) want to mention, in the "Popular culture" section, that Monty Python's Flying Circus did a 1972 episode, "Whicker's World (or: Njorl's Saga)".  As would be expected from Monty Python, this was a total spoof; the story line (such as it was) had no relationship at all to Njáls Saga, and the name "Njorl" was savagely mispronounced as /ɛn'd͡ʒoɹəl/.  But I would suggest (seriously) that it may be appropriate to mention it here, because a goodly number of readers will be familiar with the Monty Python piece and may otherwise confuse Njáls Saga with the whimsical Njorl's Saga.  Again, I really am being serious here.  Comments?  Richwales (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it, let's hope it stays up Cilibinarii (talk) 17:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular culture (Monty Python, "Njorl's Saga") 

message: Currently still reading the Saga, and had merely wanted to read about the historical background. Thanks for telling me what happened to Njal, with no spoiler warnings. Seriously, that sort of thing should stay in the plot summary section  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.185.168 (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: if it's any comfort the saga is called "Brennu-Njáls saga", the spoiler is in the title. And medieval Icelanders reading or hearing it for the first time would come with the knowledge of the burning built-in 185.45.22.138 (talk) 13:55, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big bloody spoiler in the first paragraph 

message: There is some inconsistency in the endings to some of the names.  Should it be Höskuldur or Höskuldr?  Both forms are used in the article.  I'm not an expert in Norse, but it seems that one form should be used consistently.  Thanks, JG 28 (talk) 16:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  -ur vs -r 

message: Seeing as how this is English Wikipedia, why aren't we using the English name? I don't speak Icelandic. Varlaam (talk) 08:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Njal's Saga 

message: Passage reads "Some readers choose to interpret this episode as her forgiveness since human hair is unusable as bowstring" I'm adding a citation needed as there are multiple ethnographic references to this practice being performed.  My Penguin translation of the saga specifically discusses the use of hair as a bowstring & doesn't concur with the passage as currently written (instead suggests it;s a later medieval practice).  If no citation is forthcoming suggesting simple removal unless anyone has objections as this may be original research.Nathandbeal (talk) 17:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Human hair as bowstring

message: why Gunnarr Hámundarson is spelled with two RRs and then we are directed to an article that spells it with one R.  Most (all?) English spellings are with one ^, so that's how I am going to do it too.  Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am not sure 

message: The third paragraph of the overall summary states that "Gunnar's wife instigates a feud..." but Gunnar arguably starts the feud by sleeping with another woman (the Queen of Norway, if I remember right), or the Queen instigates it by cursing Gunnar. Gunnar's wife reacts to these actions, so it's unclear to me why the page would say that she started the feud.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.124.11 (talk) 00:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  top-level summary incorrect? 

message: Why is Christianity almost entirely expunged from this article? 14.0.225.85 (talk) 07:20, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is Christianity?