Hwæt wē Gār-Dena in gēardagum þēodcyninga þrym gefrūnon hū ða æþelingas ellen fremedon
The above is the
Old English opening line for Beowulf. There's been a lot of debate on how to translate the opening word "Hwaet". This is ironic because "hwaet" is Old English for "what", so the question is, what's there to translate‽ Here's a straight translation without punctuation (though capitalization is added per modern convention).
What we have heard of the majesty of the Spear-Danes in days of old how the nobles performed acts of courage
The problem comes from punctuation that has been added by translators. For Centuries, translators have added punctuation to that treats "Hwaet" as an interjection.
An interjection is a word or phrase that is grammatically independent from the words around it, and mainly expresses feeling rather than meaning. - Merriam-Webster
So, the punctuation typically breaks up the first line into two sentences, but that breakdown is the reason for the confusion.
Hwæt! Wē Gār-Dena in gēardagum, þēodcyninga, þrym gefrūnon, hū ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.
There are huge debates on how to translate "Hwaet" as an interjection. Choices that have been made are "Lo!", "Listen!", "So,", "Hark!" and "Bro!", among many others. However, a plain reading the text reveals something that's typically missed in all of these debates.
"Hwaet" is not an interjection! It should be treated as an intensifying adverb. It shouldn't be separately punctuated because it is grammatically necessary to the sentence. The first line should just be:
"Hwæt wē Gār-Dena in gēardagum, þēodcyninga, þrym gefrūnon, hū ða æþelingas ellen fremedon."
Or
"What we have heard of the majesty of the Spear-Danes in days of old, how the nobles performed acts of courage."
This restores a concept from the plain reading, that of parallelism between the two phrases with structures that utilize an intensifying adverb. This is the raw poetry of the line. In fact, if there are to be two sentences, the breakdown should be between these two phrases (which currently form a run-on sentence).
"What we have heard of the majesty of the Spear-Danes in days of old. How the nobles performed acts of courage."
⁂
However, from my perspective, there's another problem that now arises with modern translations. That is, modern translations seem to treat Beowulf as story being told by a bard as some myth from long ago. In my opinion, that's not how a plain reading of that first line introduces the story.
Let's try a literal-based (word-for-word) translation.
What we Spear-Danes in days-of-old of-people-kings majesty have-heard how the nobles courage performed
If we take "we" to be inclusive to an intended audience having some relationship with the Spear-Danes, then this isn't a bard's retelling of an old myth. It could be the speaker including the audience in a story about a shared lineage. Taking this into account may render the modern translation as follows:
What of the Spear-Danes in days of old, of the kings' majesty we have heard. How the nobles performed acts of courage.
By respecting the grammar of the original text (even without punctuation as guides), we actually may discover a sentence that introduces a story as a matter of heritage, a claim of shared greatness from which the audience descends. Such an introduction actually recontextualizes the entire surviving story of Beowulf. This story regales the audience with great deeds of a shared history.
----
Sources:
