Who cares what medieval Icelandic scholars think about a word that is uniquely Gloranthan? "Gyrda" has no real-world meaning, so why do we care what they think?
While I support the author's and editors decision to not use a word; since the word in question A) has no real-world usage and B) has been in use in Glorantha since 2000, why discard it? Simply becaues it has no real-world derivation? Whither "tula" then? "Orlanth" or "Ernalda" or "Humakt"?
The Sartarite languiage as seen in Glorantha has elements of Icelandic, Saxon, Norse, Welsh, and made-up words as well. There's no need to discard a perfectly good word simply because there is real-world confusion about a word that is somewhat similar.
In the words of Nick Brookes, a naff retcon.
He was born with the gift of laughter and the sense that the world was mad R. Sabatini, Scaramouche
Powered by hypermail