Studia Islandica - 01.06.1956, Blaðsíða 59

57
ment of this sort: a poor writer may well combine a
predelection for hypotaxis with clumsiness in the akward
repetition of too many empty words. Especially a writer
like the one of V, whose verbosity we remarked upon
in section 9.
—. Should one consider two periods, the second of
which beginning with ok, as one, the length of
periods in V would become considerably greater,
the difference in style between V and M being
more marked.
12.4. A feature of M ch. 26 is the asyndeton, which occurs
not less than nine times. In the rest of the saga it is
rarely met with, in about half a dozen instances only.
It is worth our while to compare two passages i.n the
three texts. Both are part of the narrative wherein the
meeting between Glúmr and Skúta is told; in both the
tension is palpable.
1. Skúta carefully approaches Glúm’s shed.
M 26, 27-30: Skúta hafði sverð í hendi, þat er
Fluga hét, ök hjálm á hgfði; gengr at sélsdurun-
um ok laust á vegginn ok víkr síðan hjá sélinu.
Glúmr gengr út, svá at hann hafði ekki í hendi;
sér engan mann; snýr hjá selinu.
V 99, 7-10: gengr hann þá at selsdurunum ... ok
hefir ekki i hendi sér ok snýr ... hjá sélinu.
R.: Nú gengr Skúta at sélsdurunum ... ok hafði
ekki í hendi, ok sér nú eigi manninn. Hann snýr
þá hjá sétinu.
2. Skúta contrives a scheme to escape his pursuers.
M 27, 17-19: leitar sér ráðs:brýtr spjótit af
skapti ok hefir fyrir staf, tekr af Sgðulinn ok rvðr
berbakt, snýr veslinu, ríðr at sauðum ok œpir
hátt.