Quenya
sív’ emmë apsenet tien i úcarir emmen
as we forgive those who trespass against us
Element in
- Q. Átaremma
Elements
Word Gloss sívë “*as” emmë “we (emphatic exclusive), *we (dual emphatic exclusive)” apsen- “to remit, release, forgive” te “them” i “who, what, which, that” úcar- “*to trespass, do wrong, sin” emmë “we (emphatic exclusive), *we (dual emphatic exclusive)” Variations
- ier emme {avatyaremme >> avatyarirat >>} avatyarir ta {lucandollommar >> menya lucandollor >>} va menya lucandor ✧ VT43/08
- ier emme avatyarir ta va menya {lucandoll >> lucindoll >>} lucindor ✧ VT43/09
- {ier >>} yan emme {avatyarir ta >> avatyaritar >>} avatyarilta va menya lucindor ✧ VT43/10
- yan emme avatyarilta {lucindillomman >>} rocindillomman ✧ VT43/11
- yan emme avatyarilta {luc >> rucindillomman >> menya ruhtaliello >>} menya rohtaliello ✧ VT43/11
- sív’ emme apsenet tien i úcarer [>> úcarir] emmen ✧ VT43/12
- sív’ emme apsenet tien i úcarer emmen ✧ VT43/12
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.