Talk:Lóðurr

message: Lóðurr → Lodur – Use English. Jonathunder 10:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Oppose. There is no standard English form so we should use the native form as per Use English. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 06:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I strongly agree. Sam Spade 20:53, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Please let's discuss the naming standard for names from Norse mythology rather than each individual case. It's far too resource consuming this way. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 06:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly agree. Sam Spade 20:53, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: This gives the wrong impression that all the names listed are anglicised, and needs changing.  Something saying "The name Lóðurr can be represented as Lóður, Lódurr, Lódur, Lóthurr, Lóthur, Lódhurr, Lódhur, Loðurr or Loður. Its anglicised representations are Lodurr, Lodur, Lothurr, Lothur, Lodhurr and Lodhur." This would remove the impression in the current sentence, that some of the names that use the non-English characters "ó" and "ð" are anglicised, which they are not. Mark 12:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes they are. The form 'Lódur', for example, is used as an anglicized form in John Lindow's Handbook on Norse Mythology. But in any case "represented or anglicized" surely covers all bases. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 14:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No they are not!! That is John's version, but they still aren't fully anglicised. Mark 04:14, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I should have mentioned that I recently discussed precisely this issue with Philip at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Norse mythology). - Haukur Þorgeirsson 18:28, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglicised names 

message: Þrymlur (Am 604 g, 4º) ca. 1300-1400. Same story as Þrymskviða who also survives in Scandinavia as Tor af havsgård, and Torekall.
Þrymlur uses both Loke, loptr, & Lodr about the same person.
Relevant parts from the kvæde:
18. 
"Loki er jafnan leitum uanur, 
leikr hann þratt um beima, 
hann skal fara sem fugllinn suanr 
ok flivga j under heima." 
19. 
Gumnum þotti granda fæst 
garpnum bragda drivga; 
fiadrham hafdi Loptr læst, 
Loke tok hatt at fliuga. 
20. 
Flygr hann ut yfir aasa gard 
ein ueg lad sem geima; 
karlli jllt j kryppv vard, 
hann kemr j jotnna heima. 
21. 
Fiolnes þion kom furdu dæll 
fram at landa bavgi; 
ute stod firi Odens þræll 
jotunin Þrymr aa havgi. 
22. 
Liotr talar j lynde veill, 
leidadj ordum slettum: 
"Lodr kom þu hingat heill, 
huad hefr karll j frettum?"   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fylgi (talk • contribs) 07:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I, in fact, agree - the rímur evidence is important and overlooked. I've been meaning to write something about that. But until something is published pointing this out we can unfortunately not include it in the article due to the WP:OR policy. Haukur (talk) 11:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other sources for Loke=Lodr 

message: Bryonmorrigan reverted my deletion of the etymology of "Lördag" in Swedish with a reference to "my opinion".
That lördag is a contraction of "lögardag" meaning "bathing day" is not my opinion. It is the etymology stated on the page for Saturday, albeit with a "citation needed" tag. On the Swedish page for "Lördag", there is a reference to the Swedish national encyclopedia (Nationalencyklopedin).
Unless there are any references to another etymology added to this article I will remove the sentence again. PikeWake (talk) 11:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's an article where one of Sweden's most esteemed archaeologists (Gad Rausing) opines about the other entymological origins. .  I'd add it to the article now, but I'm in a bit of a hurry.  --01:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Very interesting article! If I may make a suggestion: Since Rausing himself states that the mainstream etymology "...may be the correct interpretation..." it would probably be better to say that the Lóðurr origin of the word is an alternative explanation, and not state it as the only one, as it does now. PikeWake (talk) 08:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  I know it needs working, which is why I added the "citation needed" tag.  But it was only because of the previous editor's addition of the material that I actually did some digging and found the Gad Rausing article.  I was hoping someone (who can read Swedish!) would add some more cites!  --Bryon Morrigan --  Talk 13:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm Swedish and I have tried to find references, but none of the good sources for etymology in Swedish mention the Lóðurr theory. I'll try to ask some people who work with Swedish archaeology if they know if someone has continued Rausing's work. PikeWake (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of Lördag (Saturday)