stumped (OE translations)

[k_navit]

This is from a confessional prayer.

Ic ondette æfste & tælnesse, twyspræcnesse & leasunge, ellenhete & nið, unnyttes gylpes bigong & idle glengas, uncyste & idelre oferhygde, orgello þe to mines lichoman unræde æfre gelumpe oððe ic agælde þæt to minre sawle frætwum belumpe & me to eces lifes earnunge gegan sceolde.

The first part is simple enough: "I

Comments

[aspasia93]

I got nothing, but indulging in useless boasts and frivolous adornments certainly sounds like it could be fun! Maybe sleeping on it will help...

[knut_hamson]

Give it your best shot and chalk up inconsistencies to spelling mistakes on the part of the author. :)

[lapsus_lingue]

don't know how helpful this will be, but here goes. (not sure you have access to BT where you are, etc

[lapsus_lingue]

What I mean is that perhaps orgello goes along with oferhydge rather than with the unræd portion. Maybe. Possibly.

[k_navit]

This is edited only in Logeman's article in Anglia 11 - nobody else has ever taken a crack at it. He gives the points as they appear in the manuscript, so it goes:
Ic ondette æfste . ך tælnesse . twyspræcnesse . ך leasunge . ellenhete . ך nið . unnyttes gylpes bigong . ך idle glengas . uncyste . ך idelre oferhygde . orgello þe to mines lichoman unræde æfre gelumpe oððe . . .

so there is a point in the manuscript between oferhygde and orgello. That doesn't mean an emendation wouldn't help, but Logeman must have been able to make sense of it or he would probably have emended it (or at least made some note). Of course, for BT to omit it means they must have been able to make sense of the passage without it. Too bad they're all dead and I can't ask them how they would have parsed it.

So are you suggesting orgello is an adjective?

[lapsus_lingue]

maybe? i can see how the point would give you pause, though (no pun intended, sorry, i can't figure out how to say that without the stupid pun). i am also not good enough with endings to say anything for sure, so that.