-
1 ELF
quendë (a technical, generic term, seldom used in the sg; pl Quendi is the usual form; there are gender-specific forms quendu m. and quendi f., but they seem to be rare; pl. forms quendur, quendir are attested), Elda (originally generic, but later [MET] used of Elves of the Three Kindreds [Noldor, Vanyar, Teleri] only. That was at least the proper usage: Elda was the normal word for "elf" in Valinor, since all Elves there were Eldar, and quendë became a word of lore. An archaic variant of Elda was Eldo.) With generic reference, the pl. Eldar has no article and is used to eman “Elves, The Elves, All Elves”; i Eldar with the article means “the Elves” with reference to some particular individuals previously mentioned. The partitive plural Eldali “Elves, some Elves” is also attested (VT49:8). ELVES OF AMAN Amanyar (sg \#Amanya), ELVES WHO REFUSED TO JOIN IN THE WESTWARD MARCH (from Cuiviénen) Avari (sg Avar in WJ:371, VT47:13, 24; Avar or Avaro in Etym), also called Avamanyar "those who did not go to Aman, because they would not" (distinguish Úmanyar, Úamanyar, Alamanyar "those who did not in the event reach Aman", though they did join in the march from Cuiviénen; these are also called Heceldi or Ecelli, see EGLATH). See also DARK ELVES, GREEN-ELVES, GREY-ELVES, HIGH-ELVES, LIGHT-ELVES, SEA-ELVES, LITTLE ELF. Cf. also ELVENHOME Eldamar, Elendë. ELF-PEOPLE Eldalië, ELVISH Eldarinwa (adj only, pl. Eldarinwë attested in VT47:14; but "Elvish" meaning Elvish language is simply Eldarin. Properly, these words for "Elvish" apply to the Tree Kindreds only, not to all the Quendi.) Quenderin ("Elvish" referring to all the Quendi, "Quendian"; this remained a learned word) –WJ:361/KWEN(ED), MR:229 ELED, Silm:424, AB/WJ:371/Silm:65/MR:163, WJ:363, Silm:23/392, MR:415, WJ:407 -
2 GULF
yáwë (cleft, ravine). According to VT46:22, it is possible that the gloss "gulf" actually reads "gully" in Tolkien's manuscript, and the other glosses may support this reading. The word londë (land-locked haven) is translated “gulf” in TI:423. Early “Qenya” has fásë = gulf, gap, but Tolkien’s later Quenya would not have s in this position (unless it represents earlier þ). –YAG, TI:423, GL:36 -
3 REMAIN
lemya- (to tarry). Possibly this verb should have the past tense *lemnë rather than ?lemyanë, since intransitive verbs in –ya may seem to surrender this suffix in the past tense. REMAINS erin (evidently a verb; the ending -n for 3rd person rather than 1st person would not be valid in later Quenya. A verbal stem \#er- "remain" may perhaps be isolated, but the source is very early and writers should rather use lemya-.) –VT45:26, LT1:269 -
4 OUR
As described in the entry WE, the 3rd person pl. pronouns distinguish plural forms from dual (depending on whether two or more persons are involved) and exclusive forms from inclusive (depending on whether the party addressed is included in “we/our”). Tolkien revised the relevant endings repeatedly. According to one late resolution described in VT49:16, the endings for exclusive “our” are –lma in the plural and –mma as a dual form, hence *aldalma “our tree” (with an “our” of at least three persons, not including the party addressed), but *aldamma “our tree = my and one other person’s tree”. The corresponding inclusive forms are –lwa (plural) and –ngwa (dual). Since the subject ending corresponding to the former is attested as “-lwe, –lve” (VT49:51), –lwa can surely also appear as *-lva, as in *omentielva “our meeting” (attested in the genitive case: omentielvo “of our meeting”, WJ:367). Hence *aldalwa/aldalva “our tree” (an “our” of at least three persons, including the party addressed), dual *aldangwa “our tree = thy and my tree”. – An independent word for plural exclusive "our" appears in VT43:19, 35: menya (also menyë modifying a plural noun). The corresponding plural inclusive form should apparently be *venya (pl. *venyë) for archaic *wenya (pl. wenyai > wenyë). The dual forms would most likely be *mentya (excl.) and *ventya (incl.); compare me, we/ve as the independent pronouns for “we” (with dual forms met, wet/*vet and dative forms *ment, * went/vent, from which the independent possessive pronouns are apparently derived by adding the adjectival ending -ya). – Notice that in an earlier conceptual phase, the forms in –mm- were plural (not as later dual) inclusive, and the forms in –lm- were plural inclusive rather than exclusive. This is why the word translated “of our meeting” appeared as omentielmo in the first edition of LotR, but was changed to omentielvo in the Second Edition. Cf. also Átaremma “our Father” as the first word of Tolkien’s translation of the Lord’s Prayer (VT43:12); this “our” is obviously meant to be plural exclusive rather than dual as it later became (according to Tolkien’s later conventions, “our Father” would be *Átarelma when a group of three or more persons addresses a party not included in “our”, in this case the Father himself). -
5 BE
Quenya uses forms of ná as the copula used to join adjectives, nouns or pronouns “in statements (or wishes) asserting (or desiring) a thing to have certain quality, or to be the same as another” (VT49:28). It may also denote a position, as in tanomë nauvan “I will be there” (VT49:19). PE17:68 mentions návë “being” as a “general infinitive” form; the gloss would suggest that návë may also be regarded as a gerund. Present tense ná “is” (Nam), pl. nar or nár ”are" (PE15:36, VT49:27, 30), dual nát (VT49:30). Also attested with various pronominal endings: nányë/nanyë “I am”, nalyë or natyë “you (sg.) are” (polite and familiar, respectively), nás “it is”, násë “(s)he is”, nalmë “we are” (VT49:27, 30). Some forms listed in VT49:27 are perhaps intended as aorist forms (nain “I am”, naityë/nailyë “you are”); VT49:30 however lists aorist forms with no intruding i (nanyë *“I am”, nalyë *”thou art”, ná “is”, nassë *”(s)he is”, nalmë *“we are”, nar “are”). Pa.t. nánë or né “was”, pl. náner/nér and dual nét “were” (VT49:6, 10, 27, 30). According to VT49:31, né “was” cannot receive pronominal endings (though nésë “he was” is attested elsewhere, VT49:28-29), and such endings are rather added to the form ane-, e.g. anen “I was”, anel “you were”, anes “(s)he/it was” (VT49:28). Future tense nauva "will be" (VT42:34, VT49:19; alternative form uva only in VT49:30) Perfect anaië “has been” (VT49:27, first written as anáyë). The form na may be used as imperative (na airë "be holy", VT43:14, alcar...na Erun "glory...be to God", VT44:34); this imperative na is apparently incorporated in the word nai "be it that" (misleading translation "maybe" in LotR). This nai can be combined with a verb to express a hope that something will happen (Nam: nai hiruvalyë Valimar, “may you find Valimar”) or if the verb is in the present rather than the future tense, that it is already happening (VT49:39: nai Eru lye mánata “God bless you” or *”may God be blessing you”). According to PE17:58, imperative na is short for á na with the imperative particle included. – Ná "is" appears with a short vowel (na) in some sources, but writers should probably maintain the long vowel to avoid confusion with the imperative na (and with the wholly distinct preposition na "to"). The short form na- may however be usual before pronominal suffixes. By one interpretation, na with a short vowel represents the aorist (VT49:27). – The word ëa is variously translated "is", "exists", "it is", "let it be". It has a more absolute meaning than ná, with reference to existence rather than being a mere copula. It may also be used (with prepositional phrases) to denote a position: i ëa han ëa “[our Father] who is beyond [the universe of] Eä” (VT43:12-14), i Eru i or ilyë mahalmar ëa “the One who is above all thrones” (UT:305). The pa.t. of this verb is engë, VT43:38, perfect engië or rarely éyë, future euva, VT49:29. – Fíriel's Song contains a word ye "is" (compare VT46:22), but its status in LotR-style Quenya is uncertain. – NOT BE, NOT DO: Also attested is the negative copula uin and umin "I do not, am not" (1st pers. aorist), pa.t. úmë. According to VT49:29, forms like ui “it is not”, uin(yë) “I am not”, uil(yë) *“you are not”, *uis *”(s)he is not” and uilmë *”we are not” are cited in a document dating from about 1968, though some of this was struck out. The monosyllable ú is used for “was not” in one text. The negation lá can be inflected for time “when verb is not expressed”. Tense-forms given: (aorist) lanyë “I do not, am not”; the other forms are cited without pronominal suffixes: present laia, past lánë, perfect alaië, future lauva, imperative ala, alá. MAY IT BE SO, see AMEN. –VT49:27-34, Nam/RGEO:67, VT43:34/An Introduction to Elvish:5, VT42:34,Silm:21/391, FS, UGU/UMU, VT49:13 -
6 THREE
neldë (the “Qenya” form olë in LT1:258 apparently did not survive into Tolkien’s later Quenya). Tolkien used neldë to illustrate the syntax of numerals “from…3 onwards”: The numeral follows the noun, which also receives any case endings, and the numeral is indeclinable: eleni neldë “three stars”, genitive elenion neldë “of three stars”. – In older usage, the noun would appear in the genitive plural, so that “three stars” would be elenion neldë (literally, three of stars) and case endings would be added to the numeral, so that genitive “of three stars” would be elenion neldëo; notice that the numeral inflects as a singular noun. –NEL, SA:neldor, VT47:11, VT48:6, VT49:45 -
7 WE, US
The relevant Quenya pronouns make two distinctions not found in English. “We” can be either inclusive or exclusive, depending on whether the party addressed is included in “we” or not. Furthermore, “we” can be either plural (involving at least three persons) or dual (involving only two persons, the speaker and one other). Tolkien repeatedly revised the relevant endings. According to VT49:16, 51 one late resolution goes like this: The ending for plural exclusive “we” is -lmë, corresponding to dual exclusive -mmë. Hence e.g. carilmë *“we [not including you] do”, carimmë *“the two of us do; I and one other [not you] do”. The ending for plural inclusive “we” is to be -lwë or -lvë, corresponding to -ngwë for dual inclusive “we” (VT49:16; variant -nquë in VT49:51): Carilwë “we [including you] do”, caringwë “the two of us do; thou and I do”. The corresponding independent pronouns were pl. exclusive me, pl. inclusive we or later ve with variant vi (PE17:130); when stressed these could have long vowels (mé and wé > vé, VT49:51). They may also appear in object position (“us” rather than “we”), e.g. suffixed to ála “do not” in the negative command álamë tulya, "do not lead us" (VT43:12, 22). If these pronouns are to be dual, they receive the dual ending -t (exclusive met, inclusive wet > *vet; compare imbë met “between us [two]” in Namarië). The dual pronouns do not have a long vowel even when stressed. The pronouns me, we/*ve and their long variants can also receive case endings, like dative men or véna “for us” (VT43:27, 28, 33, VT49:14) or locative messë "on us" (VT44:12). An emphatic pronoun is attested as emmë “we” (VT43:20), this reflects an earlier conceptual stage where Tolkien used the forms in -mmë for plural rather than dual exclusive “we” (VT49:48, cf. forms like vammë, WJ:371); presumably he would later regard emmë as a dual exclusive form, corresponding to pl. *elmë (and with *elwë > *elvë and *engwë as the emphatic pronouns for inclusive “you”, plural and dual, respectively). These emphatic pronouns can also receive case endings; the dative form emmen “for us” is attested (VT43:12, 20). – Genitive forms, see OUR; reflexive pronouns, see OURSELVES. -
8 COUNT
– the stem not- can be isolated from the word for "countable", see below. It actually occurs in Etym, but is glossed "reckon" instead. COUNT UP onot- (cf. not- "reckon" – the perfect of both these verbs would presumably be *onótië), COUNTABLE \#nótima (isolated from únótimë "countless, not-countable, numberless", sg. únótima). NOT COUNTING hequa (leaving aside, excluding, except) –NOT, Nam, RGEO:67, VT39:14, WJ:364, 365 -
9 FREE
(adj.) léra, aranya (not to be confused with aranya *"my king"; the shorter form ranya also cited must not be confused with the verb "stray, wander"), mirima (but a very similar word, mírima, is rather assigned the meaning “very valuable” in Tolkien’s later Quenya). The previous words are apparently used to describe “free” persons, whereas the following refer to inanimates: latin, latina (open, cleared [of land]), lerina ("free" of things in the sense of "not guarded, reserved, made fast, or 'owned'", VT41:5). Lehta “free, released” (perhaps applicable to persons, but cf. the following:) FREE ELEMENT (a term for "vowel") \#lehta tengwë (only pl. lehta tengwi is attested; we would rather expect *lehtë tengwi). (A word fairë "free" is mentioned in LT1:250, but may be obsolete: several other meanings are attributed to this word in later writings [see DEATH, PHANTOM, RADIANCE]. Fairië "freedom" does not clash with later words, but must probably be considered conceptually obsolete if fairë is so regarded.) FREE FROM EVIL aman (see BLESSED) –VT41:5, VT46:10, MIS, LAT, VT39:17, WJ:399 (verb) rúna- (see DELIVER); SET FREE lerya- (release, let go), sen- (let go, let loose) –VT43:23, VT41:5, 6, VT43:18 -
10 US
The exclusive pronoun (us = “I and some others, not you”) is me (suffixed to ála “do not” in álamë tulya, "do not lead us”, VT43:12, 22). This pronoun evidently connects with the ending -lmë, see WE. Inclusive "us" (i.e. "you and me") should apparently be *ve (for older we), connecting with the subject ending -lvë (older -lwë). If the pronouns me, *ve are stressed, the vowel may be lengthened (mé, vé, VT49:51). In another conceptual phase, Tolkien’s word for inclusive "we, us" may have been *ngwë (Third Age Quenya *nwë), VT48:11. The dual forms receive the ending -t, hence met, wet > *vet as the words for “us” referring to only two persons (exclusive met = “me and one other [not you]”; inclusive wet/*vet = “thee and me”). – Evidently me, *ve would be the same as subject and object, so that these forms could also be translated "we" as a short independent pronoun, and they can also receive case endings, e.g. attested forms like locative messë "on us", allative mello "from us", dative men "for us", allative véna “to us”. The forms atarmë, metermë "for us" also seem to include me, but these forms were evidently ephemeral ("for us", exclusive, is better rendered as men, itself an attested form). –Nam/RGEO:67, VT43:15, 19, VT44:18, VT49:14 -
11 RADIANCE
alcar, alcarë (brilliance, splendour), incalë (compare Ancalë or "Radiant One" as a name of the Sun, LR:392 s.v. KAL, though it is not clear whether or not Tolkien abandoned this word), fairë (Note: the word fairë has several other meanings – see DEATH, FREEDOM, PHANTOM), nalta (glittering reflection [from jewels, glass, polished metals, or water] – alata in Silm:433 is the Telerin form, and alta in VT42:32 would seem to be a variant. In PM:347, nalta is spelt with initial ñ, that is, ng. Initial ng had become n in Third Age Quenya, and we follow the system of LotR and transcribe it accordingly. But if this word is written in Tengwar, the initial n should be transcribed with the letter noldo, not númen.) RADIANT alcarinqua (glorious) –AKLA-R, VT45:36, PHAY, PM:347, WJ:369 (where alkar is translated "splendour") -
12 THE
i. – In Quenya, the definite article is generally used as in English. However, notice that it is not used before plural words denoting an entire people or race, such as Valar, Quendi, Noldor, Sindar, Eldar, Ainur, Fírimar etc. This is evident from examples like lambë Eldaron "the language of the Eldar [lit. simply "Eldar"]", Valar valuvar "the will of the Valar [lit. simply "Valar"] will be done". Cf. Tolkien's use of "Men" with no article, meaning the entire human race or humans in general, while "the Men" would be a group of individuals. Anar "the Sun" and Isil "the Moon" are probably treated like proper names in Quenya; they do not take the article. When a noun is determined by a following genitive, it is evidently optional whether it takes the article or not: mannar Valion "into the hands [lit. simply "hands"] of the Lords", Indis i Ciryamo "The Mariner's Wife, *The Wife [lit. simply "Wife"] of the Mariner" – but contrast I Equessi Rúmilo "the Sayings of Rúmil", i arani Eldaron "the Kings of the Eldar". If the genitive precedes the noun it connects with, the article must probably be left out in all cases, as in English (*Eldaron arani, ?Eldaron i arani). Note: i is also the relative pronoun "who, that" and the conjunction “that”; see THAT \#3 and \#4. –I, WJ:404, 368, FS, UT:8, WJ:398, 369 -
13 HAWK
fion (pl fioni, fiondi) (Tolkien's gloss was "not certainly legible; the likeliest interpretation would be 'haste', but 'hawk' is a possibility." The translation "haste" is out of the question, as this word would have no plural form. Besides, a quite different word for "haste" [ormë] is known.) –PHI -
14 PLACE
\#nómë (isolated from nómesseron, compound "of place-names", VT42:17). In Etym the word for "place" is men, though this word would clash with the dative pronoun *men "to/for us"; \#nómë may be preferred not only for clarity but also because it is apparently present in the LotR itself in the word sinomë "in this place" (Elendil's Oath); –nomë would be the compound form of nómë. It also occurs in tanomë “in the place (referred to)”. STONY PLACE sarnë (gloss misread as "strong place" in the Etymologies as printed in LR, see VT46:12). AT BACK OF PLACE, see BEHIND. Verb WISH TO GO TO A PLACE mína- (desire to go in some direction, make for it, have some end in view) –VT42:17, MEN, LotR:1003, SD:56, VT49:11, SAR, VT39:11 -
15 POSSESS
harya-; POSSESSING arwa (+ genitive) (in control of) (Note: harya- is not used of one's offspring. In MR:228, Tolkien notes that "no Elf would speak of possessing children; he would say: 'three children have been added unto me', or 'are with me', or 'are in my house'.") –3AR -
16 SMALL
níca, *nincë (said to have "good senses"; the latter is given in the archaic form "ninki" and would therefore have the stem-form ninci-), nípa, *nimpë (said to be used "usually with connotation of weakness"; the latter adj. is given in the archaic form nimpi and would therefore have the stem-form nimpi-), pitya (the latter is never translated by Tolkien, but Pitya-naucor is glossed "petty-dwarves", and pica "small spot" must be derived from the same root.) In one compound, Tolkien seemingly changed pitya to nitya (see PM:365, VT48:15). Cf. also nauca, an adjective "especially applied to things that though in themselves full-grown were smaller or shorter than their kind, and were hard, twisted, or ill-shapen." LT1:256 has an adjective inya "small", but this is probably not a valid word in LotR-style Quenya (in which language *inya may mean "my, mine".) –VT48:18, VT47:26, PIK, WJ:389, 413 -
17 THEY, THEM
(3rd person pl. and dual forms): As the pronominal ending for “they”, Tolkien hesitated between -ltë and -ntë. For instance, a verb like “they do” is attested both as cariltë and carintë (VT49:16, 17). In one text, the ending -ltë is marked as archaic or poetic (VT49:17), but in other paradigms no such qualification occurs (VT49:51). The alternative form -nte- occurs in UT:317, with a second pronominal marker (-s “it”, denoting the object) following: Tiruvantes "they will keep it". General considerations of euphony may favour -ltë rather than -ntë (e.g. *quenteltë rather than *quententë for “they spoke” – in the past tense, many verbs end in -ntë even before any pronominal endings are supplied, like quentë “spoke” in this example). The ending -ltë (unlike -ntë) would also conform with the general system that the plural pronominal endings include the plural marker l (VT48:11). – In Tolkien’s early material, the ending -ltë appears as -lto instead (e.g. tulielto “they have come”, LT1:270). – A simple plural verb (with ending -r) can have “they” as its implied subject, as in the example quetir en “they still say” (PE17:167). – In the independent pronouns, distinct forms of may be used depending on whether “they, them” refers to living beings (persons, animals or even plants) or to non-living things or abstracts. The “personal” independent pronoun is te, which may have a long vowel when stressed (té, VT49:51). It is also attested in object position (laita te “bless them”, LotR:989 cf. Letters:308, VT43:20). It can receive case endings, e.g. dative ten (VT49:14; variant forms téna and tien, VT49:14, VT43:12, 21). As the “impersonal” they, them referring to non-living things, Tolkien in some sources used ta (VT43:20; 8, 9), but this apparently caused dissatisfaction because he also wanted ta to be the singular pronoun “that, it”. According to VT49:32, the form tai was introduced as the word for impersonal or inanimate “they, them” (in some places changed to te, apparently suggesting that Tolkien considered using te for both personal and impersonal “they/them”, abandoning the distinction). Another source (VT49:51) lists sa as the pl. impersonal form, but all other published sources use this pronoun for singular impersonal “it”, not pl. “they”. – The object “them” can also be expressed by the ending -t following another pronominal suffix (laituvalmet, “we shall bless [or praise] them", LotR:989 cf Letters:308). Presumably this ending -t makes no distinction between personal and impersonal forms. – Quenya also possesses special dual forms of “they, them”, used where only two persons or things are referred to (none of these pronouns distinguish between personal and impersonal forms). In VT49:16, the old ending for dual “they” is given as -stë (marked as archaic or poetic), but this would clash with the corresponding 2nd person ending. According to VT49:51, this ending was changed (also within the imaginary world) from -stë to -ttë, which seems the better alternative (*carittë, “the two of them do”). The independent dual pronoun is given as tú (ibid.) However, it may also be permissible to use te for “they, them” even where only two persons are involved (te is seemingly used with reference to Frodo and Sam in one of the examples above, laita te “bless them”). – Genitive forms, see THEIR; reflexive pronoun, see THEMSELVES. -
18 BOW
(vb) luhta- (Note: a homophone means "enchant"), \#caw- (cited in source as cawin "I bow", 1st pers. aorist; in Tolkien's later conception it would be difficult to account for w in this position, and we should perhaps read *cav- with pa.t. *canwë); BOW (noun) quinga, cú (also = crescent Moon), lúva, cúnë (crescent); RAINBOW helyanwë ("sky-bridge"), Ilweran, Ilweranta (LT2:348 has iluquinga "sky-bow", but this word was obsoleted when Tolkien changed the meaning of ilu from "sky" to "universe".) BOWLEGGED quingatelco (So it is translated, but this must really be a noun: "bow-leg" [quinga + telco]. No Quenya adjectives end in –o, unless this is the only one. Read *quingatelca for "bow-legged"? Cf. one of the other words from the same source, sincahonda, changed from sincahondo in an earlier draft – but at that time Tolkien had already omitted quingatelco and hence did not change its ending: See SD:72.) –VT47:35, LT1:257, SD 68, 72, KWIG, KU3, LT1:256, LotR:1154, LT1:271 -
19 CONSONANT
\#pataca (only pl. patacar is attested), \#lambetengwë (literally "tongue-sign"; only pl. lambetengwi is attested; this refers to consonants as tengwi or phonemes), also náva-tengwë ("ñava-") (literally "mouth-sign"; only pl. náva-tengwi is attested; the shorter form \#návëa pl. návëar was also used, but Fëanor replaced these terms with \#pataca). Yet another term for "consonant" was \#tapta tengwë "impeded element". (Only pl. tapta tengwi is attested; we would rather expect *taptë tengwi with the pl. form of the adjective. The nominal pl. of the adjective, taptar, was used in the same sense as tapta tengwi.) Tolkien also notes: "Since...in the mode of spelling commonly used the full signs were consonantal, in ordinary non-technical use tengwar [sg tengwa, see LETTER] became equivalent to 'consonants'." Cf. also surya "spirant consonant" and punta "stopped consonant", i.e. a consonant sign with an underposed dot to indiate that it is not followed by a vowel. –VT39:8, VT39:16, 17, WJ:396, SUS, PUT (see PUS), VT46:10, 33 -
20 ELF-FRIEND
Elendil (actually meaning *"star-friend". Tolkien notes: "It is not surprising that the Edain...found it difficult to discern whether words and names containing the element el referred to the stars or to the Elves. This is seen in the name Elendil, which was meant to bear the sense "Elf-friend". Properly in Quenya it meant 'a lover or student of the stars'... 'Elf-friend' would have been more correctly represented by Quen(den)dil or Eldandil.") –WJ:410
Страницы
- 1
- 2
См. также в других словарях:
would not dream of doing something — phrase used for emphasizing that you would definitely not do something I wouldn’t dream of telling you how to do your job. Thesaurus: way of saying that you will not do somethingsynonym Main entry: dream … Useful english dictionary
would (not) (do something) for all the tea in China — old fashioned if you say that you would not do something for all the tea in China, you mean that nothing could persuade you to do it. I wouldn t be a teacher for all the tea in China … New idioms dictionary
would not hear of — Will or would not allow or tolerate ● hear … Useful english dictionary
would not touch with a bargepole — ► would not touch with a bargepole informal would refuse to have anything to do with. Main Entry: ↑bargepole … English terms dictionary
would not put it past him — would not put it past him, etc (informal) I, etc regard him, etc as (esp morally) capable of (some action disapproved of) ● past … Useful english dictionary
Would Not Come — Song infobox Name = Would Not Come Artist = Alanis Morissette Album = Supposed Former Infatuation Junkie Released = November 3 1998 track no = 12 Recorded = April August, 1998 Genre = Alternative rock Length = 4:05 Writer = Alanis Morissette,… … Wikipedia
would not be seen dead — phr. would not do something under any circumstances. □ I wouldn’t be seen dead going out with Ziggy! □ Martha would not be seen dead going into a place like that … Dictionary of American slang and colloquial expressions
would not hear of — ► will (or would) not hear of will (or would) not allow or agree to. Main Entry: ↑hear … English terms dictionary
would not be caught dead — (someone) would not be caught dead someone would never do or wear something. I wouldn t be caught dead doing ads for that company. My father wouldn t have been caught dead in a white suit. Etymology: based on the idea that something very bad… … New idioms dictionary
would not dream of doing something — used for emphasizing that you would definitely not do something I wouldn t dream of telling you how to do your job … English dictionary
would not touch someone/thing with a bargepole — informal would refuse to have anything to do with someone or something. → bargepole … English new terms dictionary
