Talk:Wulf and Eadwacer

Wikibooks or Wikisource

This is hardly an encyclopaedia article unless you propose to discuss and explain it, or at least provide a translation and a summary of its meaning. If you really just want to provide the text, then Wikibooks or Wikisource is probably the best home for it. Sjc 07:58, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This poem certainly deserves an article. As much as I am willing to admit that proposing a translation of Wulf and Eadwacer is the most horrifyingly presumptuous thing one can do in the world of Anglo-Saxonism, I suppose I will produce an interlinear translation of the poem as one possible understanding of it, seeing as it's been over a year and no one else has done so. I will somewhere note that this is just one possible interpretation, as it is indeed the case that there is no single agreed interpretation of this poem and certain lines are downright ungrammatical. I'll try to do this some time in the next week. I'll additionally provide some simple commentary on the poem, but nothing is uncontroversial about this text, so there's a limit to what can be stated objectively. --Yst 09:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

How about a rough outline of the content and a note or two on the fact that translations are controversial and why to start with.GraemeLeggett 11:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, I elected to write on interpretation of the poem with reference to the text rather than do an interlinear translation, as this allows for more, and more convenient, discussion of ambiguities. In the process, I ended up doing an overhaul of the article as a whole and writing on its genre and history as well. --Yst 18:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)