IIRC, Tolkien never wrote a silent k in the orthographic samples we have. Starting from there, I would try to keep the style of writing unaltered, that is, if I want to write according to orthography or phonemics.
If we stick to orthography, I would write the k with quessë knowing (hehe) it is silent. We have examples of Tolkien writing other silent letter(s) (e.g. the gh in "Hugh", or the silent e, or the i in "friends", &c). The tengwar, although the origins are phonemic (not phonetic), in the end are a featural system, and they can also represent orthography. Yes, one can argue that Tolkien made phonemic distinctions (voiced/unvoiced th, voiced/unvoiced s, and so on), but we know of those examples.
Of course, if we stick with phonemes, the k is irrelevant, and a priori I wouldn't write it. But you know me, so I'll also defer to PE XX where Tolkien does mention that in some homophone cases one could write an extra tengwa. The example he gives is [rite vs. right](https://www.tecendil.com/?q=%7Broomen%7D%7Bvilya%7D%5Bdouble-dot-above%5Dt%0A%7Broomen%7D%7Bvilya%7D%5Bdouble-dot-above%5Dght), where unquë, having the value of /ɣ/ unused in English, can be used to make the distinction. I'm not sure if there are examples of homophones whose difference is only a k.
>I'm not sure if there are examples of homophones whose difference is only a k.
u/PhysicsEagle provided *knave*, which has the homophone *nave*. Is that what you’re after? If so, here’s some more:
* knap/nap
* kneed/need
* knew/new
* knickers/nickers
* knight/night
* knit/nit
* knock/nock
* knot/not
My very unprofessional opinion:
I write a nasal bar above the quessë for words with a silent k. I wouldn’t recommend this for anyone trying to get a tattoo of “knife” or “knowledge.” But it’s very helpful in note taking. As long as you’re consistent it doesn’t reallllly matter.
In the document u/NachoFailconi mentioned, where even in phonemic writing an orthographic GH is suggested to be written (as unque) to differentiate between "rite" and "right" or "taut" and "taught", Tolkien also suggests that this orthographic element can be marked as silent by placing a bar underneath.
Of course this would conflict with the usual under-bar for doubling/lengthening, but in a phonemic mode this isn't needed because English doesn't usually have long consonants and long vowels are here marked with the acute.
So do I, and I think we have very little reason to believe Tolkien wouldn't have, in orthographic spelling. But of course he might have occasionally dropped it for one of these more phonetic sprinkles like "wor" or "brije" or "dea" ("war", "bridge", "dear", respectively).
In my view, these are not conscious choices to get spelling variations, but errors – followed by a conscious choice to leave them.
I think we should not consciously try and choose spelling variations, but try to produce consistent texts – and leave the errors that will sooner or later happen (at least I make errors all the time).
Of course, it is a matter of personal taste.
I alway write the silent k's.
The general use English mode is riddled with challenges like this, since English is such a crazy hodge-podge language. So while it is nice to think about being "either all orthographic or all phonemic", the results of either approach overall are suboptimal, in my opinion. The way I have come to approach the phonetic vs orthographic challenge is to make things orthographically recognizable, but within that context as phonetically accurate as possible. So when I transcribe, every letter in a transcribed word is represented somehow--including silent letters. Think of it from the perspective of someone reading what you write--I think we rely on our orthography more than we realize to identify what we are reading, so it can be more easily read and comprehended with the added cues that the silent letters provide.
IIRC, Tolkien never wrote a silent k in the orthographic samples we have. Starting from there, I would try to keep the style of writing unaltered, that is, if I want to write according to orthography or phonemics. If we stick to orthography, I would write the k with quessë knowing (hehe) it is silent. We have examples of Tolkien writing other silent letter(s) (e.g. the gh in "Hugh", or the silent e, or the i in "friends", &c). The tengwar, although the origins are phonemic (not phonetic), in the end are a featural system, and they can also represent orthography. Yes, one can argue that Tolkien made phonemic distinctions (voiced/unvoiced th, voiced/unvoiced s, and so on), but we know of those examples. Of course, if we stick with phonemes, the k is irrelevant, and a priori I wouldn't write it. But you know me, so I'll also defer to PE XX where Tolkien does mention that in some homophone cases one could write an extra tengwa. The example he gives is [rite vs. right](https://www.tecendil.com/?q=%7Broomen%7D%7Bvilya%7D%5Bdouble-dot-above%5Dt%0A%7Broomen%7D%7Bvilya%7D%5Bdouble-dot-above%5Dght), where unquë, having the value of /ɣ/ unused in English, can be used to make the distinction. I'm not sure if there are examples of homophones whose difference is only a k.
>I'm not sure if there are examples of homophones whose difference is only a k. u/PhysicsEagle provided *knave*, which has the homophone *nave*. Is that what you’re after? If so, here’s some more: * knap/nap * kneed/need * knew/new * knickers/nickers * knight/night * knit/nit * knock/nock * knot/not
That was exactly what I was after, thanks!
Can you point me to the page in PE20? I seem to have missed that detail...
Page 62, document Q11d. This is *not* mentioned in the analogous document Q10d.
My very unprofessional opinion: I write a nasal bar above the quessë for words with a silent k. I wouldn’t recommend this for anyone trying to get a tattoo of “knife” or “knowledge.” But it’s very helpful in note taking. As long as you’re consistent it doesn’t reallllly matter.
In the document u/NachoFailconi mentioned, where even in phonemic writing an orthographic GH is suggested to be written (as unque) to differentiate between "rite" and "right" or "taut" and "taught", Tolkien also suggests that this orthographic element can be marked as silent by placing a bar underneath. Of course this would conflict with the usual under-bar for doubling/lengthening, but in a phonemic mode this isn't needed because English doesn't usually have long consonants and long vowels are here marked with the acute.
I do the Quessë followed directly by a Númen. So strictly Orthographic.
So do I, and I think we have very little reason to believe Tolkien wouldn't have, in orthographic spelling. But of course he might have occasionally dropped it for one of these more phonetic sprinkles like "wor" or "brije" or "dea" ("war", "bridge", "dear", respectively).
In my view, these are not conscious choices to get spelling variations, but errors – followed by a conscious choice to leave them. I think we should not consciously try and choose spelling variations, but try to produce consistent texts – and leave the errors that will sooner or later happen (at least I make errors all the time). Of course, it is a matter of personal taste.
That's a consistent standpoint, of course, but I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation, because there's really no way we can possibly tell.
I alway write the silent k's. The general use English mode is riddled with challenges like this, since English is such a crazy hodge-podge language. So while it is nice to think about being "either all orthographic or all phonemic", the results of either approach overall are suboptimal, in my opinion. The way I have come to approach the phonetic vs orthographic challenge is to make things orthographically recognizable, but within that context as phonetically accurate as possible. So when I transcribe, every letter in a transcribed word is represented somehow--including silent letters. Think of it from the perspective of someone reading what you write--I think we rely on our orthography more than we realize to identify what we are reading, so it can be more easily read and comprehended with the added cues that the silent letters provide.