# Running River or River Running?



## Barliman Butterbur (May 17, 2005)

In _The Hobbit_, JRR's map shows two rivers meeting at the Long Lake: the Forest River and the River Running.

In the book the latter river is called the River Running five times, and it is called the Running River _ten_ times. Which is right? Personally, I believe that the River Running, as on the map in Tolkien's own fist, is correct, and that some smug self-righteously ignorant type compositor gratuitously "corrected" the book. What do _you_ think?

Barley


----------



## chrysophalax (May 17, 2005)

While I didn't vote on the poll...my own thought is that it could be the difference between European and American lingo...we don't say River Mississippi...but I've heard, for example, the River Thames...or the River Seine.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 17, 2005)

chrysophalax said:


> While I didn't vote on the poll...my own thought is that it could be the difference between European and American lingo...we don't say River Mississippi...but I've heard, for example, the River Thames...or the River Seine.



But what of the fact that the river is called one thing five times and another ten times? Something has to be wrong with that. (I might just send another query to The Tolkien Society, despite the fact that someone wrote in to say that they're no more authority on Tolkien than anyone else's site.)

Barley


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 17, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> But what of the fact that the river is called one thing five times and another ten times?



Tolkien wanted it that way! (Sorry, I couldn't resist )

Seriously, were talking about a river that has an Elvish name, Celduin. So it perhaps makes little difference whether it is referred to in the Common Speech as "Running River" or "River Running," if these are only translations of "Celduin."


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 17, 2005)

Arthur_Vandelay said:


> Tolkien wanted it that way! (Sorry, I couldn't resist )
> 
> Seriously, were talking about a river that has an Elvish name, Celduin. So it perhaps makes little difference whether it is referred to in the Common Speech as "Running River" or "River Running," if these are only translations of "Celduin."



LOL!  Touché! True enough, but it isn't called that in the book. I think it's a case of "gratuitous correction by the unauthorized," something that has plagued Tolkien's tales since their inception.

Barley


----------



## ingolmo (May 18, 2005)

You might want to check who in the book said River Running, and who said Running river. That could sort it out a bit, if say, certain characters have a habit of saying River Running, and some characters say Running River.
-Ingolmo


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 18, 2005)

ingolmo said:


> You might want to check who in the book said River Running, and who said Running river. That could sort it out a bit, if say, certain characters have a habit of saying River Running, and some characters say Running River.



Now _there's_ a good research project for you, m'friend! Get back to us with the results as soon as you can! 

Barley


----------



## Gothmog (May 18, 2005)

I have had a look at how the two versions of the name are used. What I found was this.

The only characters to use “River Running” were Thorin in speech and possibly Elrond in thinking about the map. Tolkien used name “River Running” twice in descriptions.

The only character to use “Running River” was Thorin twice. Tolkien used the name “Running River” eight times in descriptions.

However, I am inclined to side with Barly and say that the correct name is found on the map.


----------



## HLGStrider (May 18, 2005)

I always think of it as River Running just because it sounds more magical. I mean, I like to refer to rivers without the river bit. The Columbia river is the Columbia. No river needed. Same with mountains. It's "Snows on Hood!" not Mt. Hood. Adams not Mt. Adams. The only exception is Mt. St. Helens because I like the double abriviation, and I feel the poor thing needs reassurance that it is still actually a mountain after that embarrassing 1980 incident.

Someone hits her over the head to get her back to the point. 

Anyway, I just thought of it as an issue more of style than substance. It's prettier the Running-second way, but isn't it correct both ways? 

Running is just the name of the River, so it would be the same as whether it is a Frog named Kermit or Kermit the Frog. Same difference.


----------



## baragund (May 19, 2005)

River Running does it for me. As Mr. B pointed out, the map under Tolkien's own hand is a pretty strong indicator. And as Elgee pointed out, is sounds better (to me) that way. More lyrical...


----------



## Greenwood (May 26, 2005)

I vote for River Running. It seems to fit Tolkien's style better. 

I have also come across two instances in the Appendices of LOTR in which it is referred to as the River Running: 1) A footnote in Appendix A in the section "Gondor and the Heirs of Anarion"; 2) further along in the same section in the subsection called "The Stewards".


----------



## Eledhwen (Jun 16, 2005)

It's probably like in Greek - it doesn't matter which way round you put them.


----------



## jallan (Aug 4, 2006)

There is no necessity that one form of the name should be more _correct_ than the other. 

For example, a search on ["River Thames"] in Google gets 2,410,000 hits, but a search on ["Thames River"] still gets 805,000 hits. That the "River Thames" form is the more common one doesn't make "Thames River" incorrect. The same person is likely to put "river" before or after "Thames" on a whim without much thought about the matter.

Geographic features quite often have varying names and varying forms of names applied to them, sometimes with general acceptance of the varying forms and sometimes with great argument about which form is supposedly the most correct.


----------



## Hirila (Aug 6, 2006)

Another simple explanation would be that the river is running (downhill, towards the lake etc.)
Its name is "Running" (when translated). So it is the "River Running" and also the "Running River", emphasizing its property "running", after which it was surely meant to be named. (Just like many rivers bear a name pointing at a certain characteristic like fast, slim, blue, deep etc.)


----------



## grendel (Aug 9, 2006)

jallan said:


> For example, a search on ["River Thames"] in Google gets 2,410,000 hits, but a search on ["Thames River"] still gets 805,000 hits.



You may want to keep in mind that there is a Thames River here in the U.S., as opposed to the River Thames in merry olde England. They're spelled the same but pronounced differently; but anyway, that may be why you get hits on both.


----------



## jallan (Aug 24, 2006)

grendel said:


> You may want to keep in mind that there is a Thames River here in the U.S., as opposed to the River Thames in merry olde England. They're spelled the same but pronounced differently; but anyway, that may be why you get hits on both.


Quite true, as well as the Thames river in Ontario. Canada. But most of the references to "Thames River" appear to be to the English Thames. See for example http://www.thamesexecutivecharters.com/ where both "River Thames" and "Thames River" appears in the text in references to the British Thames.

Use of the epithet "River" before the actual name of a river rather than following the river name is more common in British English and the opposite is true in North American English. 

But enough examples are easily found on the Web to show that Britishers generally do at times use "River" following the proper name of the river. Accordingly Tolkien's varying use of both "River Running" and "Running River" seems quite normal.

At http://www.essex.police.uk/offbeat/o_mu_44.php there is reference to the founding of the Thames River Police in 1798 and the Coln River Police in 1891. Of course these might have been understood as < river name > + "river-police" rather than < river-name > -"River" + "police".

I don't know whether the common use of "River" following the actual river name in North America is a development that occurred after the first early founding of British colonies or whether it represents common usage in Britain at the time of first settlements, if not common formal usage in books, or whether indeed the common North American usage is dialectical in origin, that is that more of those who emigrated to the colonies might have spoken dialects in Britain at that time where "River" usually followed the name.


----------

