-we

suffix. person, being, individual, person, being, individual; [N.] masculine suffix

A name suffix in Sindarin, largely used in names adapted from Quenya, such as Manwe or Bronwe, the latter an adaptation of Q. Voronwë. However, the true cognate of the Quenya name suffix -wë is -u, as in S. Elu the later form of Elwë. This -u is not an active name suffix in Sindarin, though, and survives only in a few ancient names like Elu. In borrowed names, the suffix -we can be masculinized as -weg (PE23/87).

Conceptual Development: In the Gnomish Lexicon of the 1910s this suffix was G. -weg and was used broadly in names such as G. Manweg (GL/56) as well as an agental suffix in words like G. finweg “craftsman” (GL/35). This early version seems to be the suffixal form of G. gweg “man” (GL/44). The suffix was often paired with its feminine equivalent G. -win such as G. gothweg “warrior” vs. G. gothwin “amazon” (GL/42), or G. faronweg vs. G. faronwin for a male and female “foreigner” (GL/34).

In The Etymologies of the 1930s this suffix became N. -we derived from primitive ᴹ✶-wego under the root ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour”, which in Noldorin was distinct in origin from ᴹQ. -we which was (mostly) based on an ancient abstract suffix ᴹ✶-wē (Ety/WEG). Pure Quenya names like Finwe retained their form when used in Noldorin, but there were also some native Noldorin names with this suffix such as N. Bronwe < ON. Bronwega.

In the first version of notes on Quenya Personal Pronouns (QPP1) from the late 1940s (PE23/87), Tolkien again indicated this suffix was influenced by Quenya:

> Manwe etc. contain a stem or suffix √EWE, WĒ originally abstract. Voronwe = steadfastness. In EN male names (since Boronwē was feminine) were made masculine by add[ition] of -ko, hence Bronweg (PE23/87).

Tolkien revisited this suffix in various notes from the late 1950s and gave it a similar origin, with the caveat that all of the “native” names from the stories had become direct adaptations from Quenya. As Tolkien described it in Quenya Notes (QN) from 1957:

> In Sindarin adoption of Quenya names (as Voronwe > Bronweg) -we was sometimes used to represent -we, which historically had become w or u (as in Elu = Elwe). But this S -we is of distinct origin, √WEG-, live, be active. Hence ✱wego(n), living creature: Q weo, veo, S gwê. Cf. ✱weg-tē, activity, occupation (PE17/189).

In an earlier but rejected version of this note, Tolkien gave the root form as √WEK instead of √WEG with Sindarin suffix -weg (PE17/190).

-we

suffix. It corresponds to fem

_masc. suff. _It corresponds to fem. -iel. Q. -we.

-m

suffix. we

1st du. pron. suff. #we (you and me). Q. -mmo.See paradigm PE17:132.

-nc

suffix. we

1st du. pron. suff. #we (you and me). Q. -lmo.See paradigm PE17:132. >> -ngid

sui mín i gohenam di ai gerir úgerth ammen

as we forgive those who trespass against us

The eighth line of Ae Adar Nín, Tolkien’s Sindarin translation of the Lord’s Prayer (VT44/21). The first word is the preposition sui “as”. The second word has the same form as mín “our” but seems to function as men “us” (as it appeared in the first draft of this sentence). The third word is i “who”, followed by gohenam, the 2nd-pl inflection of the verb gohena- “to forgive” with its direct object di, the lenited form of the pronoun ti “them”.

The function of the sixth word ai (“those who”) is difficult to decipher. See the entry for that word for further discussion.

The seventh word gerir is a lenited form of cerir (as it appeared in the draft), which itself is the plural of the verb car- “to do”. This followed by úgerth, the plural of úgarth “trespass, ✱misdeed” and ammen “to us”, a combination of an “to, for” and men “us”.

Decomposition: Broken into its constituent elements, this phrase would be:

> sui mín i gohena-m di [← ti] ai gerir [← cerir] úgerth am-men = “✱as us who forgive-we them who do-(plural) trespasses to-us”

The sense of this phrase seems to be: “as us, who forgive those who do trespasses to us”.

Conceptual Development: Tolkien wrote a draft version (I) before producing a revised version (II) of this phrase (VT44/22, note on line 8). For “as we [us]”, Tolkien used the preposition sui “as” in both versions, but for “us” Tolkien wrote mín >> men in the draft, and then mí ni >> mín in the revision. Of these, men “us” seems to me to be the most consistent with Tolkien’s use of this pronoun elsewhere. Bill Welden discussed possible interpretations of this pronoun usage on VT44/28.

For “forgive”, Tolkien first wrote dihenam in the draft, which is another form of the verb díhena- “forgive” used in the previous line of the prayer. Tolkien replaced this with góhenam in the draft, which appeared as gohenam in the revised phrase. As pointed out by Bill Welden (VT44/29), it isn’t clear whether Tolkien intended to replace díhena- with gohena- generally as the Sindarin verb for “forgive”, or whether both verbs were valid with slightly different connotations.

See the entry for the word ai “✱those who” for a discussion of the development of that word (ayath >> ay >> ai).

Tolkien reversed the order of úgarth “trespass” and cerir “do-(plural)” between the draft and revised versions, which required changing cerir to its lenited form gerir (which Tolkien first wrote mistakenly as garer in the revised version before correcting it to gerir).

In the draft version, Tolkien wrote ann for “against us”, but as Bill Welden points out (VT44/22), Tolkien almost certainly intended ammen as it appeared in the revised version and elsewhere in the prayer, and simply failed to complete this form in the draft.

|  I  |II| |sui| |{mín >>} men|{mí ni >>} mín| |i| |{dihenam >>} góhenam|gohenam| |di| |{ayath >> ay >>} ai|ai| |ugerth|{garer >>} gerir| |cerir|úgerth| |ann|ammen|

men

we

men (accusative mín ”us”, presumably usually lenited vín, which is also the genitive ”our”).

men

we

(accusative mín ”us”, presumably usually lenited vín, which is also the genitive ”our”).

-ad Archaic

suffix. dual

The Sindarin dual was almost certainly derived from the same primitive form ✶ata as the Quenya dual ending -t, indicating this ending was ancient in form. The other Quenya dual, -u, would not have been active in Sindarin since final vowels were lost.

Tolkien stated (Let/427) that this ending was archaic and lost, but did not state when it disappeared. The ending may have still been active in the First Age. The ending appears in the day-name Orgaladhad “Day of the Two Trees”. Since the Sindar had no direct experience with the trees, this word was likely adopted from its Quenya cognate Aldúya when the Noldor and Sindar were reunited.

-m

suffix. we (probably the excl

1st pl. pron. suff. #we (probably the excl. form). Q. -mbe.See paradigm PE17:132.

-nc

suffix. we (probably the incl

1st pl. pron. suff. #we (probably the incl. form). Q. -lme.See paradigm PE17:132. >> -ngid

-on

suffix. masculine suffix

A masculine suffix and ending in male names (PE17/43, 141; WJ/400), probably related to the masculine ending or agental suffix ✶-on(do) (NM/353; Ety/KAL). It becomes -or when following an n (PE17/141).

Conceptual Development: N. -on was often use as a male suffix in the Noldorin of the 1930s and 40s. In Gnomish of the 1910s, it seems G. -os was another common male suffix in words such as G. ainos “(male) god” from neuter G. ain “god” (GL/18) and G. hethos “brother” from neuter G. heth “✱sibling” (GL/48-49), though masculine G. -(r)on was still more common in this early period.

aew

noun. (small) bird

aewen

adjective. of birds

ar·phent rían tuor·na: man agorech?

*and said Rían to Tuor: what have we done?

avam

suffix. we won't

v. & pron. suff. we won't. Q. vamme. >> avo

eneth

noun. name

esta-

verb. to name

penim

verb. we have not

_ v. & suff. _we have not. >> -m

penim vast

we have no bread

aew

bird

(small bird) 1) aew. No distinct pl. form. 2) fileg, pl. filig; the form filigod appears as an alternative singular. or

aew

bird

. No distinct pl. form.

aewen

of birds

pl. aewin.

emlinn

yellowhammer

(= "yellow singer"); no distinct pl. form. Also emelin, no distinct pl. form; coll. pl. emelinnath. Adj.

eneth

name

(noun) eneth (pl. enith)

eneth

name

(pl. enith)

ess

noun. name

esta

name

(verb.) esta- (call) (i esta, in estar)

esta

name

(call) (i esta, in estar)

fileg

bird

pl. filig; the form filigod appears as an alternative singular.

gwe

pronoun. we (inclusive)

me

pronoun. we (exclusive)

pe

pronoun. we (inclusive)

-we

suffix. masculine suffix

-on

suffix. masculine suffix

aew

noun. (small) bird

emelin

noun. yellow bird, "yellow hammer"

emlin

noun. yellow bird, "yellow hammer"

emmelin

noun. yellow bird, "yellow hammer"

fileg

noun. small bird

filigod

noun. small bird

gwe

noun. man, warrior

-wë

suffix. ancient name suffix (usually but not always masculine)

A suffix that “appears frequently in ... Quenya names of the First Age, such as Voronwe, generally but not exclusively masculine” (PM/340). It was derived from the root √WĒ/EWE “person, being, individual”, but was sometimes also related to √WEG “live, be active” (PM/340; PE17/189-190), especially in the case of its Sindarin variant -we.

Conceptual Development: The suffix ᴱQ. -we dates all the way back to the earliest versions of the legendarium, being an element in some very stable names like ᴱQ. Manwe and ᴱQ. Finwe which Tolkien never changed after their introduction. The early basis for this suffix isn’t entirely clear, but its Gnomish equivalent G. -weg seems to be the suffixal form of G. gweg “man” (GL/44). This Gnomish variant was specifically masculine and often paired with its feminine equivalent G. -win. In the Declension of Nouns from the early 1930s, Tolkien said that ᴹQ. -we in names like ᴹQ. Finwe was a masculine suffix based on archaic ᴹQ. †wē “man, warrior”, but he also said that the suffix in ᴹQ. Manwe was distinct (PE21/1).

In The Etymologies of the 1930s, Tolkien said the name suffix had two different origins and meanings, ᴹQ. -we “masculine” and ᴹQ. -we “abstract”:

> veo (✱wegō) “man”. The latter in compound form ✱-wego is frequent in masculine names, taking Q form -we (< weg). This can be distinguished from -we (-wē abstract suffix) ... The abstract suffix occurs in the names Manwe, Fionwe, Elwe, Ingwe, Finwe (Ety/WEG).

Thus the masculine variant of the suffix was derived from primitive ᴹ✶-wego under the root ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour”, while the abstract suffix was derived from unrelated abstract suffix ᴹ✶-wē.

This duality in origin seems to have continued in Tolkien’s later writings, where Tolkien variously tied the suffix to either √WĒ “person, individual, being” (PE17/189-190) or √WEG, the latter glossed “live, be active” (PE17/189) but also “masculinity apart from sex” and thus usable in names of the Valar, though the note with this last gloss appeared was struck through (PE17/190). The last mention of this suffix is in The Shibboleth of Fëanor from 1968, where it was described as an abstract name suffix, most frequent in male names, based on √EWE “person” (PM/340), as noted above.

-wë

person

-wë a suffix occurring in many personal names, generally but not exclusively masculine (Elenwë is the sole certain example of a fem. name with this ending); it is derived from a stem simply meaning "person" (PM:340, WJ:399). In Etym, -wë is simply defined as an element that is frequent in masculine names, and it is there derived from a stem (WEG) having to do with "(manly) vigour".

-lwë

we

-lwë, later -lvë, pronominal ending "we" (VT49:51), 1st person pl. inclusive ending, occurring in the verbs carilwë "we do" (VT49:16) and navilwë (see #nav-). The ending became -lvë in later, Exilic Quenya (VT49:51). See -lv-.

we

we

we, wé, see ve #2

-lwë Archaic

suffix. we (inclusive)

-nwë

suffix. we (exclusive dual)

-ngwë

we

-ngwë "we", 1st person dual inclusive pronominal ending: "thou and I" (compare the exclusive dual form -mmë). Caringwë, "the two of us do" (VT49:16). One source lists the ending as "-inke > -inque" instead (VT49:51, 53, 57; "inke" was apparently Old Quenya). In an earlier pronoun table reproduced in VT49:48, the ending -ngwë is listed as an alternative to -lmë, which Tolkien at the time used as the plural inclusive ending (a later revision made it plural exclusive).

-ngwë

suffix. we (inclusive dual)

@@@ < -ñge < -ññe < -sñe

-lmë

we

-lmë 1st person pl. pronominal ending: "we" (VT49:38; 51 carilmë *"we do", VT49:16). It was originally intended to be inclusive "we" (VT49:48), including the person(s) spoken to, but by 1965 Tolkien made this the ending for exclusive "we" instead (cf. the changed definition of the corresponding possessive ending -lma, see above). _(VT49:38) Exemplified in laituvalmet "we shall bless them" (lait-uva-lme-t "bless-shall-we-them") (the meaning apparently changed from inclusive to exclusive "we", VT49:55), see also nalmë under ná# 1. (LotR3:VI ch. 4, translated in Letters:308_)

-mmë

we

-mmë "we", 1st person dual exclusive pronominal ending: "I and one other" (compare the inclusive dual form -ngwë or -nquë). First written -immë in one source (VT49:57). Carimmë, "the two of us do" (VT49:16, cf. VT43:6). At an earlier conceptual stage, the ending was already exclusive, but plural rather than dual: vammë "we won't" (WJ:371), firuvammë "we will die" (VT43:34), etemmë ?"out of us" (VT43:36); see also VT49:48, 49, 55. Also compare the corresponding emphatic pronoun emmë (q.v.). The ending -lmë replaced -mmë in its former (plural exclusive) sense. In some early material, -mmë was apparently used as an ending for plural inclusive "we" (VT49:55).

emmë

we

emmë (2) pron. "we", emphatic pronoun; dative emmen (VT43:12, 20). In the source this pronoun is intended as the 1st person plural exclusive; later Tolkien changed the corresponding pronominal ending from -mmë to -lmë, and the plural emphatic pronoun would likewise change from emmë to *elmë. Since the ending -mmë was redefined as a dualexclusive pronoun, the form emmë may still be valid as such, as a dual emphatic pronoun "we" = "(s)he and I".

ve

we

ve (2) pron. "we", 1st person pl. inclusive (corresponding to exclusive me), derived from an original stem-form we (VT49:50, PE17:130). Variant vi, q.v. Stressed wé, later vé (VT49:51). Dative (*wéna >) véna, VT49:14. Dual wet*, later vet "the two of us" (inclusive; cf. exclusive met) (VT49:51). Also compare the dative form ngwin or ngwen (q.v.), but this would apparently be wen > ven** according to Tolkiens later ideas.

vi

we

vi pron. "we", 1st person inclusive (PE17:130), variant of ve #2.

ortírielyanna rucimmë, aina eruontari

we fly to thy patronage, O holy Mother of God

The first line of Ortírielyanna, Tolkien’s translation of the Sub Tuum Praesidium prayer. The first word Ortírielyanna “to thy patronage” is 2nd-person-polite (-lya “thy”) ablative (-nna “to”) form of ortírië “patronage”. The second word rucimmë “we fly” is the 1st-person-plural-exclusive inflection (-mmë “we”) of the verb ruc- “flee”. The third word is aina “holy” and the last word is Eruontari, a name of Mary as the genetrix (female begetter) of the Son of God.

Decomposition: Broken into its constituent elements, this phrase would be:

> ortírie-lya-nna ruci-mme, Aina Eru-ontari = “✱patronage-thy-to flee-we, Holy God-genetrix”.

Conceptual Development: The first word was initially written Ortírielyanne (with final e instead of a), but Wynne, Smith and Hostetter suggested this is probably a slip (VT44/5). The third word was initially written Aini >> Aina. Tolkien considered several different Quenya translations for “Mother of God”; ignoring incomplete forms, the development was Eruamillë >> Eruontarië >> Eruontari.

-lmo

we (two)

-lmo "we (two)", abandoned pronominal ending for the 1st person dual inclusive (later revised by Tolkien to -ngwë). This -lmo was listed as an alternative to -ngo (VT49:48).

-lmo

suffix. we (inclusive dual)

-lmë

suffix. we (exclusive)

-lmë

suffix. we (inclusive)

-lvë

suffix. we (inclusive)

The suffix -lvë is the first person plural inclusive inflection: “we (including you)” (PE17/130; VT49/16, 51). The corresponding possessive form -lva “our (inclusive)” appears in its genitive form -lvo in the famous phrase elen síla lúmenn’ omentielvo.

Possible Etymology: Tolkien indicated that this inflection was ultimately derived from the primitive pronoun ✶we, with the same plural marker l as other plural inflections such as -l(yë) and -ltë, and that its oldest form was ✶-lwe (PE17/130; VT49/50-51). At one point Tolkien indicated that the change of *lw* > *lv* was the normal phonetic development in Quenya (PE17/129). There little evidence that Tolkien carried through with the phonetic rule, however, and there are plenty of examples of unmodified lw in later Quenya. A better explanation might be that -lwe changed to -lve under the influence of the independent pronoun ve. These ideas came out of a discussion with Shihali on the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord Server (VLDS) on Jan 28, 2018.

Conceptual Development: @@@

-mmo

we (two)

[-mmo "we (two)", abandoned pronominal suffix for the 1st person dual exclusive, which ending Tolkien later revised to -mmë (VT49:48).]

-mmo

suffix. we (exclusive dual)

-mmë

suffix. we (exclusive)

-mmë

suffix. we (exclusive dual)

> -zme > -sme

-ngo

we (two)

-ngo "we (two)", abandoned pronominal ending for the 1st person dual inclusive (later revised by Tolkien to -ngwë/-nquë). An alternative form -lmo was also listed (VT49:48). The ending -ngo was probably meant to represent older *-ngwo (VT49:49).

-ngo

suffix. we (inclusive dual)

-ngë

suffix. we (inclusive dual)

-o

person, somebody

-o (2), also -ó, "a person, somebody", pronominal suffix (PM:340)

-on

name

-on gen.pl. ending (3O), in aldaron, aranion, elenion, Eldaron, #esseron, Ingweron, Istarion, Númevalion, Quendion, Silmarillion, Sindaron, tasarion (see Nan-Tasarion), Valion, wenderon, yénion. Normally the ending -on is added to the nominative plural, whether it ends in -i or -r, but some nouns in -ë that would have nominative plurals in -i seem to prefer the ending -ron in the genitive (hence #esseron as the gen. pl. of essë "name", though the nominative pl. is attested as essi and we might have expected the gen. pl. *ession; similarly wenderon, Ingweron).

-on

suffix. masculine suffix

Námo

person, somebody

námo (2) noun "a person, somebody" (PM:340 writers may prefer the synonym quén to avoid confusion with # 1)

alcarin vendë ar manaquenta

O glorious and blessed Virgin

The fourth line of Ortírielyanna, Tolkien’s translation of the Sub Tuum Praesidium prayer. The first word is the adjective alcarin “glorious” modifying Vendë “Virgin”. It is followed by ar “and” and the second adjective manaquenta “blessed”.

Decomposition: A more literal translation of this phrase would be:

> alcarin Vendë ar manaquenta = “✱glorious Virgin and blessed”

Conceptual Development: Tolkien revised this sentence three times (VT44/7). Unfinished forms appearing before the first version indicate that Tolkien was uncertain whether the word for “virgin” should begin with a v or a w. He settled on Venë in the first version, revised to Venë’ in the second and Vendë in the third. He similarly revised the adjectives “glorious” (alcarinqua >> alcare >> alcarin) and “blessed (incomplete manque... >> manquenta >> manaquenta).

The first and second versions began with what appears to be the imperative particle á, but I think it is more likely to be a stressed form of the vocative a “O”. The second version had Véne’ alcare, which Wynne, Smith and Hostetter suggested might have its adjective and noun functions switched: “✱Virginal glory” instead of “glorious Virgin”, with Véne’ being an elided form of an unattested adjective vénëa (VT44/10). As further evidence of this, the word order switched in the final versions to alcarin Vénde. The form Véne’ was not deleted, so perhaps Tolkien still considered it to be a valid alternative.

|I|II|III| |á Véne|á Véne’|alcarin| |alcarinqua|alcare|Vénde| |ar| |manque...|manquenta|manaquenta|

andavë laituvalmet

long we will praise them

curufinwë

masculine name. *Skilled-Finwë

The father-name of S. Curufin, from which his Sindarin name was derived (MR/217, PM/352). It is a compound of curu “skill” and his grandfather’s name Finwë. The short form of this name was Curvo (PM/352). This name was also the father-name of Curufin’s father, Fëanor (S/63, MR/87).

elvë

pronoun. we (emphatic inclusive)

emmo

pronoun. we (emphatic exclusive dual)

emmë

pronoun. *we (emphatic exclusive dual), *we (emphatic exclusive dual), we (emphatic exclusive)

engo

pronoun. *we (emphatic dual)

esse

noun. name

essë

name

essë (1) noun "name", also later name of Tengwa #31, originally (MET) called árë (ázë). (Appendix E). With a pronominal ending esselya "thy name" (VT43:14). Pl. #essi in PM:339 and MR:470, gen.pl. #esseron "of names" in the compound Nómesseron (q.v.); we would rather have expected *ession, given the nom.pl. essi; perhaps #esser is a valid alternative plural form. Essecarmë noun "name-making" (MR:214, 470), Eldarin ceremony where the father announces the name of his child. Essecenta *("k") noun "Name-essay" (see centa) (MR:415); Essecilmë noun "name-choosing", an Eldarin ceremony where a child named him- or herself according to personal lámatyávë (q.v.) (MR:214, 471). The meaning Tolkien originally assigned to the word essë** in the Etymologies was "place" rather than "name" (VT45:12).

essë

noun. name

esta-

verb. name

ilmë

pronoun. we (emphatic inclusive)

incë

pronoun. *we (emphatic dual)

ingë

pronoun. *we (emphatic dual)

inquë

pronoun. we, thou-and-I (emphatic inclusive dual)

ma caruvalwë ohta

shall we make war

mai-

verb. to have, possess

An irregular verb for “have, possessive” in Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) from 1969 (PE22/148). The section where it appeared was struck through (PE22/148 note #24). It may have been supplanted by öa- “possess, own, keep” from the same bundle of documents (PE22/151).

me

we, us

me (1) 1st person pl. exclusive pronoun "we, us" (VT49:51; VT43:23, VT44:9). This pronoun preserves the original stem-form (VT49:50). Stressed mé (VT49:51). Cf. also mel-lumna "us-is-heavy", sc. *"is heavy for us" (LR:47, mel- is evidently an assimilated form of men "for us", dative of me; the form men is attested by itself, VT43:21). For me as object, cf. álamë** "do not [do something to] us", negative imperative particle with object pronoun suffixed (VT43:19: álamë tulya, "do not lead us"), ámen** "do [something for] us", imperative particle with dative pronoun suffixed (ámen apsenë "forgive us", VT43:12, 18). Dual exclusive met "we/us (two)" (Nam, VT49:51), "you and me" (VT47:11; the latter translation would make met an inclusive pronoun, though it is elsewhere suggested that it is rather exclusive: "him/her and me", corresponding to wet [q.v.] as the true inclusive dual form). Rá men or rámen "for us/on our behalf", see rá. Locative messë "on us", VT44:12 (also with prefix o, ó- ?"with" in the same source). See also ménë, ómë.

me

pronoun. us, we (exclusive)

nalmë

we are

nalmë (1) "we are", see ná #1, -lmë

nassë

person, an individual

nassë (1) "a person, an individual" (VT49:30). Also translated "true-being" (pl. nasser is attested), the inner "true" being of a person. With a pronominal suffix in the form nassentar "their true-being" (PE17:175, cf. -nta #2), in the source referring to the "true" spiritual nature of the Valar, as hidden within their visible shapes. The word nassentar would seem to be plural, *"their true-beings". Not to be confused with the verb nassë/násë "he/she is"; see ná #1.

omentielvo

we/our

-lv- element in pronominal endings for inclusive plural "we/our" (VT43:14). Iincludes the old 1st pl. inclusive stem we (VT48:10). Omentielvo "of our meeting" (q.v.) includes the ending #-lva "our" with the genitive ending -o attached. The corresponding ending for inclusive "we" is perhaps normally -lvë in late exilic Quenya; the variant form -lwë occurs in the verbs carilwë "we do" (VT49:16), navilwë "we judge" (VT42:34); according to VT48:11 this may simply be the older (pre-Exilic) form of *-lvë (VT49:51 lists the ending for "we" as "-lwe, -lve", apparently the older and the younger form).

sanda

name

[sanda, sandë] (þ) (2) noun "name" (VT46:16)

sanya

name

[sanya] (þ) (2) noun ?"name" (reading of gloss uncertain, VT46:16)

sív’ emmë apsenet tien i úcarir emmen

as we forgive those who trespass against us

The eighth line of Átaremma, Tolkien’s Quenya translation of the Lord’s Prayer. The first word sív’ is an elided form of sívë “as”. It is followed by the emphatic second person plural subject pronoun emmë “us” and apsenet “forgive [them]”, the aorist form of the verb apsen- “forgive” with a plural direct object suffix -t. The fourth word tien “those” is a dative (indirect object) form of tie, apparently a variant of the third person plural pronoun te.

The second half of this phrase is the subordinate clause i úcarir emmen “who trespass against us”, composed of i “who”, úcarir “trespass” (aorist plural of úcar- “to do wrong, to sin”) and emmen “against us” (dative of emmë). The last of these is unusual in that it has an emphatic pronoun used as an object rather than the subject.

Decomposition: Broken into its constituent elements, this phrase would be:

> sív(e) emmë apsene-t tie-n i úcari-r emme-n = “✱as we forgive-them those-for who trespass-(plural) us-against”

Taken together, the first half of the phrase has a subject (emmë), verb (apsene), a direct object suffix (-t) and an indirect object (tien). The sense of the phrase is probably something like “✱as we forgive them [the trespasses] for those [the trespassers] who trespass against us”.

Conceptual Development: Earlier versions of the prayer (I-IV) used a different verb avatyar- for “forgive”, as well as different prepositions for “so”: ier (I-IIa) and yan (III-IV). They also lacked any Quenya equivalent of “those who” (tien i in versions V-VI). The literal meaning of this phrase in versions I-IV of the prayer seems to be “✱as we forgive our trespassers”.

Tolkien considered a variety of ways to express “trespassers”. In version I-III, he used a (?verbal) element meaning “trespass” with the agental suffix -ndo: lucando (I), lucindo (IIa-IIb) and rocindë (III), all meaning “trespasser” and all in the plural. In version IV, he used rohtalië “trespass-people”, a compound of the noun rohta “trespass” and lië “people”.

These he combined with either the independent pronoun menya “our” (I-IIb, IV) or the possessive suffix -mma “our” (I deletion, III). Finally, he used an ablative element meaning “from”, either the preposition va (I-IIb) or the ablative suffix -llo (I deletion, III-IV). There was a similar construction for the verb avatyar- in line 6.

In version V of the prayer, Tolkien corrected úcarer to úcarir. This second form is more consistent with the rules Tolkien followed elsewhere in forming the aorist tense of a (basic) verb: it ends in an -e if unsuffixed but has an -i- between it and any suffix (-r in this case). However, Tolkien still used the form úcarer in version IV of the prayer, for reasons unknown.

| |  I  |IIa|IIb|III|IV|V|VI| |ier|yan|sív’| |emme| |{avatyarirat >>}|avatyarir ta|avatyarilta|apsenet| | |tien i| |{lucandollommar >>}|va menya lucandor|va menya lucindor|rocindillomman|menya rohtaliello|úcarer emmen|

For better consistency with Tolkien’s other writings, I have used the more typical aorist form úcarir for the entry of this phrase. As Helge Fauskanger points out (LP-AM), there is a similar issue with apsenet, which might be expected to be ✱✱apsenit, though in this case the variation may be due to the fact that object suffixes are appended directly to the verb instead of to a subject suffix.

ve

pronoun. us, we (inclusive)

vá caruvalwë (ohta)

we will not (make war)

wilin

bird

wilin noun "bird" (LT1:273; if this "Qenya" word is to be used in LotR-style Quenya, it must not be confused with the 1st pers. aorist of the verb wil-.)

elmë Speculative

pronoun. we (emphatic inclusive), *we (emphatic exclusive)

yuitë

adjective. dual

An adjective for “dual”, a combination of yu- “both” and the suffix -itë arising out of a conversation in Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord Server (VLDS) in 2019-08-24. Also used as a grammatical term.

-wē

suffix. person; male suffix

-lwē

suffix. 1st person plural b (inclusive)

we

pronoun. we, us (inclusive)

we

root. dual

A primitive “dual” element mentioned in notes on numbers from the late 1960s, contributing to the forms of primitive ✶enekwe “six” and ✶yun(e)kwe “twelve” in the Quenya branch of Elvish, as well as the ancient 1st person inclusive pronoun ✶ñwe (VT48/10). It was probably related to the ancient dual suffix ✶-ū (Let/427). It was also likely a later iteration the dual root ᴱ√WI from the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s which was likewise connected to dual U (QL/33). This early root was mentioned in the contemporaneous Gnomish Lexicon as ᴱ✶u̯i (GL/45).

weg

root. live, be active, live, be active; [ᴹ√] (manly) vigour

This root was connected to vigour and masculinity for much of Tolkien’s life. The earliest iteration of this root seems to be primitive ᴱ√gu̯eg- from the Gnomish Lexicon of the 1910s that served as the basis for various words such as G. gweg “man”, G. gwectha- “impregnate; generate”, and G. gwionert “deed of valour” (GL/44). Tolkien mentioned a few Qenya cognates like ᴱQ. wie and ᴱQ. wenga, but they were unglossed (GL/44). In the Gnomish Lexicon Slips Tolkien gave {ᴱ√we >>} ᴱ√waik as the primitive form beside {ᴱ✶u̯ē+kĕ >> ᴱ✶u̯ĕ+kĕ >>} ᴱ✶u̯ǝkḗ (PE13/117).

In the Early Noldorin Dictionary of the 1920s Tolkien gave ᴱ✶wikā > ᴱN. gweg “man” vs. ᴱQ. vika “valiant”; the Qenya form indicates this 1920s primitive was not specifically masculine, and it also had a primitive feminine variant ᴱ✶wiktā (PE13/162). It was nonetheless related to other words likes ᴱ✶wiqē > ᴱN. gwib “teors”, which is Old English = “penis” (PE13/162). Some similar forms like ᴱQ. via “male” and ᴱQ. vie “teors” appeared in Early Qenya Word-list of the 1920s as well (PE16/135). These 1920s forms seem to be based on primitive ✱ᴱ√WI instead of ᴱ√(g)weg.

In the Declension of Nouns from the early 1930s Tolkien gave primitive weʒ- as the basis for N. gwe, ᴹQ. †wé “man, warrior” and the masculine suffix ᴹQ. -we common in names (PE21/1). In The Etymologies of the 1930s this masculine suffix was derived from ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour” along with other derivatives like ᴹQ. vea “adult, manly, vigorous”, ᴹQ. vie “manhood, vigour” and N. gweith “manhood; man-power, troop of able bodied men, host, regiment” (Ety/WEG; EtyAC/WEG).

In some notes from the late 1950s Tolkien again gave the suffix Q. -wë as masculine and derived it from √WEG or √WEƷ, but then changed his mind and decided it was derived from √WĒ or √WEƷ “person” (PE17/189-190), an idea he seems to have stuck with thereafter; see the entry on √WĒ/EWE for further discussion. In Quenya Notes (QN) from 1957 Tolkien gave {√WEK >>} √WEG as distinct from √WĒ, giving it the gloss “live, be active” where it served as the basis for words like Q. vëo/S. gwê “living creature” and Q. vehtë “life”, though he clarified that this last word was “not Life in general or as a principle, but (a period of) individual activity, as in vehtequentalë ‘biography’ (PE17/189)”. This use for “active” can also be seen in the primitive name ✶Denwego “Light-and-active” in the Quendi and Eldar essay from 1959-60 (WJ/412).

Neo-Eldarin: For purposes of Neo-Eldarin, I think it is best to assume this root had to do with vigour and activeness, characteristics that were generally (but not absolutely) attributed as masculine. This allows us to retain the largest array of derivatives of this root from various periods. I also think it is best to assume it remains distinct from √WĒ/EWE “person”, though the two roots may originally have been related.

wē/ewe

root. person, being, individual

This root served as the basis for the suffix Q. -wë common in ancient Quenya names. In The Etymologies of the 1930s, this suffix had two variants: masculine ᴹQ. -we derived from root ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour”, but also abstract ᴹQ. -we derived from unrelated ᴹ✶-wē (Ety/WEG). In the first version of Quenya Personal Pronouns (QPP1) from the late 1940s where Tolkien said “Manwe etc. contain a stem or suffix √EWE, WĒ originally abstract” (PE23/87).

The suffix -we was sometimes specifically masculine in some later notes as well (circa 1959), where Tolkien said “√WEG, WEƷ, √NES, NETH- referred to masculinity and femininity apart from sex and so could refer to the Valar and Maiar” (PE17/190), but this etymology was rejected and in its place Tolkien wrote: “√WE ? WEƷ ‘person’, individual (only used of Elves and Men), thus origin of -we in Quenya names as Manwe, Voronwe” (PE17/189). In Quenya Notes (QN) from 1957 Tolkien wrote:

> -we in Quenya names (Manwe, etc.). This is in origin a separate word √WĒ (WE’E ?), from its form an ancient element of Eldarin vocabulary. Probably related to Q ve “as, like”; vëa “seeming, apparent”; vávea, ovéa “(con)similar, alike”. In Sindarin adoption of Quenya names (as Voronwe > Bronweg) -we was sometimes used to represent -we, which historically had become w or u (as in Elu = Elwe). But this S -we is of distinct origin, √WEG- “live, be active”. Hence ✱wego(n) “living creature”: Q weo, vëo, S gwê (PE17/189).

In these Quenya Notes, √WĒ as a name element was distinct from √WEG “active”, and neither were distinctly masculine. The initial version of this note glossed √WE as “a person or being” (PE17/190), but in revision Tolkien connected it to Q. ve “as, like” (PE17/189). The interpretation of the suffix -we as gender-neutral was mentioned again in The Shibboleth of Fëanor from 1968 where Tolkien said it was derived from √EWE “person” (PM/340). However, the only feminine name where this element appeared was Q. Elenwë the wife of Turgon (S/90, PM/345), and most of the names with this element were both masculine and ancient.

See the entry on √WEG for more on the evolution of earlier, largely masculine, forms.

leñwe

noun. leñwe

teñwe

noun. sign, token, indication

-(u)mē

suffix. denoting a (single) action

-ū

suffix. dual

bē

preposition. as, like

Tolkien used the word Q. ve for “as, like” in Quenya for much of his life, but its etymological origins varied. In the the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s, Tolkien had two distinct roots for “similarity”: unglossed ᴱ√SĒ with variant ᴱ√SENE⁽²⁾ and derivatives like ᴱQ. se “as, like, in manner of” and ᴱQ. (a)sesta- “to liken, compare” (QL/82), and also ᴱ√VĪ “as” with variant ᴱ√VI‘I and derivatives like ᴱQ. ve “as, like”, ᴱQ. vealta- “to resemble”, and ᴱQ. vīkana- “compare” (QL/101). The semantic distinction between the two roots isn’t clear, and in the contemporaneous Gnomish Lexicon there was a third set of forms beginning with fel- such as G. fel “as, like”, G. feleg “equal”, and G. feltha- “resemble, seem like” (GL/34).

In later notes Tolkien proposed a variety of primitive origins for Q. ve “as, like”: ✶wē (we’e) in 1957 Quenya Notes (VT49/10; PE17/189), ✶bē from notes from the late 1950s or early 1960s (VT49/32 note #10), and ✶vai as a relative of suffixal -va in notes from 1968 (VT49/32 note #10). As there are not any definite Sindarin cognates for Q. ve in Tolkien’s published writings, it is hard to know which of these is more likely.

Neo-Eldarin: For purposes of Neo-Eldarin, I would go with primitive ✶bē as the most widely excepted option, producing S. ✱be “as, like”.

elwe

pronoun. inclusive, we = you and I/me

igwe

pronoun. we (inclusive emphatic)

imme

pronoun. we (exclusive emphatic)

imme utūlijēr lá isse

we have come, not he

ingwe

pronoun. we (inclusive emphatic)

khe

pronoun. we, us (inclusive)

me

pronoun. we (exclusive)

mi

pronoun. we (exclusive)

min(i)kewē̆

cardinal. eleven, (lit.) fresh one

mō

noun. person

sam-wē

noun. an act of thinking, a thought

ñe

pronoun. we, us (inclusive)

en

root. name

-û

suffix. masculine suffix

A suffix used to form masculine nouns from common or neuter nouns (SD/435). Another common variant was -ô (SD/438).