> A wonderful variety of in-this-world sources for names. Surely with so
> many examples of how names can be derived, there is no need to resort to
> cute names which mean nothing to persons in the world?
Well, touched as I am by your worries as to the sensitivities of Gloranthans, I'm more worried about the sensitivities of those in _this_ world, principally in their roles as punters and players. Most of these days date back to the hey-day of Glorantha as a game world, and they seem to have managed to deter very few of us from interacting with it. Perhaps some people even appreciated the tongue in cheek nature of many of these references -- modest though they may be as regards forays into the field of humour.
> As for "learning a whole new set of place names," I'd rather learn
> the real *Gloranthan* ones than these obviously contrived substitutes.
Did we mention at any point this was a fictional game world? Granting you your legimate concerns as to the 'obviousness', we're essentially haggling about one method of contrivance versus other.
As for the model presented for the hypothetical Great Gloranthan Revolution: I haven't seen much overt reaction to Loren's material, but I'd bet money that if Greg had 'retconned' Carmania along such lines there would have been _howls_ of outrage to it. (Nick and MOB, as suspected such howlers, can I possibly induce you to comment?) And that's in a relatively 'blank' area: try doing this in Prax or Sartar and you'd be unwise to walk down a darkened hallway at your friendly neighbourhood Con...
> But Swenstown (fake English; named after RW person) doesn't add
> verisimilitude, mythological or otherwise. It's a big fish that slaps
> you in the face and says "it's a game, and a silly one at that." I want
> my silliness in the world, not a world whose very existence is silly.
I think this description is from some other gaming planet. Swenstown isn't inherently silly, it isn't out of kilter with other Sartarite names (it's sound is as much fake Norse as fake English, after all), it's trivial to rationalise, and it's in the area of creative ambiguity as to whether it's a 'translation' or an actual Sartarite word. Your objection seem to stem _entirely_ from the meta-consideration of it being named after a RW entity, in this case, the Hon. Anders, i.e. the familiar 'annoying in-joke' objection. I'm not saying you don't have a case, but I fail to see what's so upsetting about it.
> Oh, and the "What are Uleria's runes" thread seems to be in the "yes it
> is"/"no it isn't" stages. Any hope of peace before Christmas?
People in glass discussions, Martin...
Maurice B. (or should I say Boris M.?) says:
> Given the march of cultures through Dragon Pass and Prax, having odd
> sounding names wouldn't be difficult. Is Glorantha designed by a
> linguist, as are Middle Earth or Tekumel? No, it isn't, it's
> designed by a shaman/trickster. But then I'd much rather have
> mythological than linguistic verisimilitude any day (I love online
> dictionaries).
Loud cheers, approving nods, and thunderous applause. Greg is in a no-win situation, destined to be lambasted as either too poe-faced, or as ethnographically sloppy, by one or other faction of the baying multitude. (Well, minitude, perhaps.) Not that we should shed too many tears for him, of course, since a) he's not reading these bunfights; b) he's a lot more mellow about these things than most, and c) he'll likely instead adopt the 'no-lose' strategy of doing whatever the heck he was going to do all along, to wit what seems right to him.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail