Tolkien, a philologist would have said he rediscovered old words. Donaldson uses words people don't always use, in ways they aren't always used.Like Tolkien and other fantasists, Donaldson invents new words
Like many Donaldson vocabulary choices, better sense is made if one remembers the more obscure or less frequently used definitions of words.If the dust is articulated, it is either talking or has jointed limbs.
If you're going to write a book that's at all interesting, there has to be conflict, and you must, therefore, put your characters through hell. Very few books contain no suffering whatsoever. Whether it's court-of-the-star-chamber or garden variety unhappiness, someone probably at least must feel some anxiety.Though their series are significantly different, Donaldson's treatment of his characters resembles Tolkien's: Both put their characters into horrific situations and subject them to great physical and emotional pain.
I think the described use of ineffable is not completely unorthodox, though not common. A way of amplfying something to an extreme degree is to say it's unexpressable. "Ineffable sadness." "Ineffable beauty." Even without using that particular word, people use the same idea when they say "I can't say how grateful I am" or something to that effect.
Here's another review, more helpful, I think, in describing the book (though I don't understand the connection to ELF):
www.sfsite.com/11a/re187.htm
And this review blurb included reaction from a non-Covenant series reader who picked up Runes:
www.bookbrowse.com/index.cfm?page=title&titleID=1457