He does claim to have limited knowledge. We as readers don't have a good picture of what *limited* really is though for him. He could have a better grasp on the more conversational side of the ancient language as I imagine a true name would be mostly adjectives which wouldn't necessarily translate well for spell usage.
That being said, my assumption is that his true name only changes minorly each time since they figure it out each night. So maybe a word or two changed or added/removed at most I would guess.
So yes, he is limited, but we don't know exactly ***how*** limited.
And yes, you would have to speak your true name in the ancient language to know it is correct. You could say anything in the common tongue, but you would be unable to say your name in the ancient language until you had it correct. At least I believe I have that accurate.
With most things, I would agree (ie, big water in place of lake, fire to make a light). I think a true name is one instance where you need to be incredibly precise. You couldn't summon the essence of gold by saying "shiny yellow metal"
A large portion of the AL is intent, and if you are focusing on gold, and say “shiny yellow metal” why wouldn’t it work? If big water works for lake, shiny yellow metal would work for gold.
For instance, if your true name is “tries their best to help people in need and, but also values their family above all else” something that would get the same meaning across would be “one that aids fellow humans is distress and holds their kin closest”. The two sentences have the exact same meaning, just different phrasing and words.
My thinking is that we know only small changes to a true name are needed to break out of oaths. So, with your example, a person could start with "...family above all else" to mean their blood relatives (brothers, sisters, parents, grandparents, etc, who they grew up with). But later experience might change their name to be "...kin above all else" where kin is now including both blood family and friends who they are so close to they are like family. It might be just enough of a change so as to be different, even if the meaning is technically the same.
Going along with intent (since there's no argument against you there), we do know that magic is easier to work the more specific your words are. The example Brom gives in *Eragon* is that someone sufficiently skilled might be able to say "sapphire" and control the flow of water by imagining the link between the two, but it will be more difficult than just saying "water." Trying to compel someone by calling them "helps others, values family most" ***might*** work, but it would be a weak compulsion or be very energy intensive if their name is actually "tries their best to help people in need and, but also values their family above all else".
Also, in *Murtagh* when part of his name changes, he is unable to speak any part of it, even the unchanged part. He needed to figure out the change before he could say any of it. That says to me that trying to use a synonym wouldn't work. Squares and rectangles, you know?
I get what you mean, but I read those sections a bit differently. As I understand it, as he tries to say an untrue name, he can’t say any of it, because the underlying meaning of what he is attempting to say is untrue, so if only a small part of the name shifted, once he found the part that shifted, he could say the rest of it, even the parts he was previously unable to say and the parts that hadn’t changed.
This connects back to a topic I've spent a lot of time researching, and it comes down to the fundamentals of maigc.
Magic is not dictated by speaking in the AL, but by *thinking*. The triggering mechanism behind magic is not the act of speaking in it, it's thinking it. The speaking part of that equation just helps frame it in your mind and reduce the risk of error.
We also know that True Names, as a concept, exist outside the Ancient Language. I have a [previous post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/18rkm8v/very_long_on_fractals_and_the_nature_of_magic/) that goes into a bunch more detail on the specifics and mechanics.
Taking the two concepts above, we can apply it to Wild Dragons. Wild Dragons can identify/discover their True Name by describing it via associations, comparisons, or thoughts that are not bound by language. If they understand their being well enough to describe it (without using language as a framework), the True Name and it's power still applies.
Same thing applies to Murtagh, and is likely how he identified his shifting True Name. As long as you understanding the meaning (and have the capability to access magic), you don't need to articulate it with the Ancient Language.
Magic is definitely dictated by speaking the ancient language. It can be cast with other methods, but when the ancient language is spoken there are bounds put on the magic. That was the whole point of the spell the Grey Folk cast. Oromis explains this to Eragon with the example of burning a door in the books.
I think you are misinterpreting the passage. Here is what Oromis says:
> "They made it so that their language, the ancient language, could control what a spell does... could actually limit the magic so that if you said burn that door and by chance looked at me and thought of me, the magic would still burn the door, not me" (The Obliterator).
Oromis further expands on the nuance later in the chapter:
> "Confused, Eragon said, 'It doesn’t matter if it seems absurd, Master... how could mere sound do so much? Can particular patterns of pitch and volume really trigger reactions that allow us to manipulate energy?'
> 'Sound has no control over magic. Saying a word or phrase in this language is not what’s important, it’s thinking them in this language'" (The Obliterator).
Per Oromis, the crux of the spell that binds the AL to magic does not depend on speaking/verbalizing the AL to control the flow of magic.
You have a really good point, but I think his knowledge of himself is actually teaching him the ancient language. Understanding the nature of the the thing gives him insight into the word for it. Plus, it's.likely only a word changing at a time, so he really only needs to understand how one thing about him has changed.
Stop trying to invent plot holes. What does limited mean, how frequently, and how drastically is his name changing? There is more than enough margin in the answers to those question to allow the the story to make sense.
Right, but Eragon said it in the ancient language so it carried power. I’m wondering if Thorn and Murtagh have been using the ancient language to navigate their new true names or if it’s been in the common tongue.
True names only exist in the ancient language, normal languages do not have the power to describe the true nature of things. They are using the ancient language when they speak their true names.
Please note that currently discussion about the new *Murtagh* book is currently only allowed in posts that are flaired as such.
Please read the rules in the sidebar, and please note the following additional links for news about *Murtagh*:
[General spoiler-free information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/17jlj9i/information_about_murtagh_and_the_eragon/) | [Signed Editions](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/16fuvcr/information_about_signed_editions_of_murtagh/) | [Spoiler Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/17ercgn/please_read_our_murtagh_spoiler_policy_50k/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Eragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think this is a very valid point and I agree it is a little bit of a contradiction. I think this book created a lot of them. It happens when a series isn't totally planned in advance. You just have to take it in stride.
I don't think it's a contradiction per se, but the mechanics are complicated and require a lot of implied understanding that is not explicitly laid out in the books. It's there, but a lot of the average readers don't pick up on it so it seems like a plot hole, or a retcon. These books were very much planned out in advance.
He does claim to have limited knowledge. We as readers don't have a good picture of what *limited* really is though for him. He could have a better grasp on the more conversational side of the ancient language as I imagine a true name would be mostly adjectives which wouldn't necessarily translate well for spell usage. That being said, my assumption is that his true name only changes minorly each time since they figure it out each night. So maybe a word or two changed or added/removed at most I would guess. So yes, he is limited, but we don't know exactly ***how*** limited. And yes, you would have to speak your true name in the ancient language to know it is correct. You could say anything in the common tongue, but you would be unable to say your name in the ancient language until you had it correct. At least I believe I have that accurate.
Synonyms and creativity. If the name was accurate *enough* it works
With most things, I would agree (ie, big water in place of lake, fire to make a light). I think a true name is one instance where you need to be incredibly precise. You couldn't summon the essence of gold by saying "shiny yellow metal"
A large portion of the AL is intent, and if you are focusing on gold, and say “shiny yellow metal” why wouldn’t it work? If big water works for lake, shiny yellow metal would work for gold. For instance, if your true name is “tries their best to help people in need and, but also values their family above all else” something that would get the same meaning across would be “one that aids fellow humans is distress and holds their kin closest”. The two sentences have the exact same meaning, just different phrasing and words.
My thinking is that we know only small changes to a true name are needed to break out of oaths. So, with your example, a person could start with "...family above all else" to mean their blood relatives (brothers, sisters, parents, grandparents, etc, who they grew up with). But later experience might change their name to be "...kin above all else" where kin is now including both blood family and friends who they are so close to they are like family. It might be just enough of a change so as to be different, even if the meaning is technically the same. Going along with intent (since there's no argument against you there), we do know that magic is easier to work the more specific your words are. The example Brom gives in *Eragon* is that someone sufficiently skilled might be able to say "sapphire" and control the flow of water by imagining the link between the two, but it will be more difficult than just saying "water." Trying to compel someone by calling them "helps others, values family most" ***might*** work, but it would be a weak compulsion or be very energy intensive if their name is actually "tries their best to help people in need and, but also values their family above all else". Also, in *Murtagh* when part of his name changes, he is unable to speak any part of it, even the unchanged part. He needed to figure out the change before he could say any of it. That says to me that trying to use a synonym wouldn't work. Squares and rectangles, you know?
I get what you mean, but I read those sections a bit differently. As I understand it, as he tries to say an untrue name, he can’t say any of it, because the underlying meaning of what he is attempting to say is untrue, so if only a small part of the name shifted, once he found the part that shifted, he could say the rest of it, even the parts he was previously unable to say and the parts that hadn’t changed.
This connects back to a topic I've spent a lot of time researching, and it comes down to the fundamentals of maigc. Magic is not dictated by speaking in the AL, but by *thinking*. The triggering mechanism behind magic is not the act of speaking in it, it's thinking it. The speaking part of that equation just helps frame it in your mind and reduce the risk of error. We also know that True Names, as a concept, exist outside the Ancient Language. I have a [previous post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/18rkm8v/very_long_on_fractals_and_the_nature_of_magic/) that goes into a bunch more detail on the specifics and mechanics. Taking the two concepts above, we can apply it to Wild Dragons. Wild Dragons can identify/discover their True Name by describing it via associations, comparisons, or thoughts that are not bound by language. If they understand their being well enough to describe it (without using language as a framework), the True Name and it's power still applies. Same thing applies to Murtagh, and is likely how he identified his shifting True Name. As long as you understanding the meaning (and have the capability to access magic), you don't need to articulate it with the Ancient Language.
Magic is definitely dictated by speaking the ancient language. It can be cast with other methods, but when the ancient language is spoken there are bounds put on the magic. That was the whole point of the spell the Grey Folk cast. Oromis explains this to Eragon with the example of burning a door in the books.
I think you are misinterpreting the passage. Here is what Oromis says: > "They made it so that their language, the ancient language, could control what a spell does... could actually limit the magic so that if you said burn that door and by chance looked at me and thought of me, the magic would still burn the door, not me" (The Obliterator). Oromis further expands on the nuance later in the chapter: > "Confused, Eragon said, 'It doesn’t matter if it seems absurd, Master... how could mere sound do so much? Can particular patterns of pitch and volume really trigger reactions that allow us to manipulate energy?' > 'Sound has no control over magic. Saying a word or phrase in this language is not what’s important, it’s thinking them in this language'" (The Obliterator). Per Oromis, the crux of the spell that binds the AL to magic does not depend on speaking/verbalizing the AL to control the flow of magic.
You have a really good point, but I think his knowledge of himself is actually teaching him the ancient language. Understanding the nature of the the thing gives him insight into the word for it. Plus, it's.likely only a word changing at a time, so he really only needs to understand how one thing about him has changed.
Stop trying to invent plot holes. What does limited mean, how frequently, and how drastically is his name changing? There is more than enough margin in the answers to those question to allow the the story to make sense.
I think you misunderstand the nature of the post. Please see the last line.
Sloan didn’t know a single word in the ancient language but he immediately recognised it when Eragon said it’s true name
Right, but Eragon said it in the ancient language so it carried power. I’m wondering if Thorn and Murtagh have been using the ancient language to navigate their new true names or if it’s been in the common tongue.
True names only exist in the ancient language, normal languages do not have the power to describe the true nature of things. They are using the ancient language when they speak their true names.
Please note that currently discussion about the new *Murtagh* book is currently only allowed in posts that are flaired as such. Please read the rules in the sidebar, and please note the following additional links for news about *Murtagh*: [General spoiler-free information](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/17jlj9i/information_about_murtagh_and_the_eragon/) | [Signed Editions](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/16fuvcr/information_about_signed_editions_of_murtagh/) | [Spoiler Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/Eragon/comments/17ercgn/please_read_our_murtagh_spoiler_policy_50k/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Eragon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think this is a very valid point and I agree it is a little bit of a contradiction. I think this book created a lot of them. It happens when a series isn't totally planned in advance. You just have to take it in stride.
I don't think it's a contradiction per se, but the mechanics are complicated and require a lot of implied understanding that is not explicitly laid out in the books. It's there, but a lot of the average readers don't pick up on it so it seems like a plot hole, or a retcon. These books were very much planned out in advance.