Editiones Arnamagnæanæ. Series B - 01.10.1968, Síða 135
CXXXIII
Atlention will now be paid to some features of the
language of the translation in E and F.
In the translation which was the source for E
and in part for E the Latin turns of expression
were preserved to a greater degree than in A, whose
language is less closely dependent on the original.
This can be seen particularly in the following features:
Relative clauses are introduced by hverr, e.g.
L 52 de quo, rendered qf huorjum; other instances
are provided by the renderings of L 72, 92, 125-26,
cf. also F 187, 243 huar af. A single instance of this
type of construction is found in A 106.
A participle is often employed where idiomatical
Icelandic would have a whole clause, e.g. L 29
'paratus, rendered ferd(ar)buinn, L 85 regressus, ren-
dered apturhuerfandi; other instances are provided
by the renderings of L 37, 59 (E, text altered in F),
102, 106-7, 133.
The ablative absolute construction is imitated,
e.g. L 45-46 intromisso solummodo capite, rendered
ad einz hofdinu jnnriettu (E, cf. F3-4, altered in F1),
L 212 visis ergo miraculis, rendered ad siedum stor-
merkium; other instances are provided by the render-
ings of L 66 (E, altered in F1, omitted F3-4), 137-38,
153. Constructions of this type are also found where
there is no ablative absolute in the Latin text:
E 71, F 38-39, E 82.
Misunderstanding of the original seems to be the
explanation for the translation of bipennis L 19 by
hœkja (A ox); similarly when corpora mortuorum
animalium L 206-7 is translated by lykamer daudra
manna og qvikinda peirra, since all available Latin
texts agree on this reading. Regina Austri L 217-28
is inaccurately stated to come af Austurlande F 231.
The words med godgirnd E 23-24 are attached to
the wrong sentence, cf. L 3, but this may be a scribal