va prep. "from" (VT43:20; prefixed in the form var- in var-úra "from evil", VT43:24). In VT49:24, va, au and o are quoted as variants of the stem awa "away from".
Quenya
va
preposition/prefix. (away) from, (away) from, [ᴹQ.] away; [ᴱQ.] gone forth; with
va
from
vanwa
adjective. gone, lost, departed, vanished, past, over, no longer to be had, passed away, dead, gone, lost, departed, vanished, past, over, no longer to be had, passed away, dead, [ᴹQ.] gone for good; [ᴱQ.] on the road
An adjective whose basic sense is “gone, lost”, with numerous other similar translations such as “no longer to be had, vanished, departed, dead, past, over, gone for good”. The word vanwa is a good example of what I call an “anchor word”: a word that Tolkien established early in his development of Elvish and retained unchanged despite numerous changes in related elements of the languages. This word first appeared as part of the name ᴱQ. Mar __Vanwa__ Tyaliéva “Cottage of the Lost Play” from the 1910s (LT1/14). Its most notable use in later writings was in the poem Namárië, where it appeared in the phrase sí __vanwa__ ná, Rómello __vanwa__, Valimar! “now lost, lost to those from the east is Valimar!” (LotR/377).
Conceptual Development: In the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s, the adjective ᴱQ. vanwa “gone, on the road, past, over, lost” appeared under the early root ᴱ√VAHA (QL/99), itself based on the root ᴱ√AVA “go away, depart, leave” (QL/33). It reappeared in the English-Qenya Dictionary of the 1920s with the gloss “over, gone” (PE15/76). In The Etymologies of the 1930s, ᴹQ. vanwa “gone, departed, vanished, lost, past” was derived from the root ᴹ√WAN “depart, go away, disappear, vanish” (Ety/WAN).
In the Quenya Verbal System of the 1948, ᴹQ. vanwa “gone, over” was given as an example of the perfective participle -nwa in combination with the root ᴹ√BĀ/BANA “go, proceed” (PE22/106). Very likely this was the derivation when Tolkien wrote the Namárië poem for the 1st edition of The Fellowship of the Ring published in 1954. However, in 1959 Tolkien abandoned the root √BA(N) “go” (PE17/143). At that point Tolkien coined a new etymology for vanwa based on the invertible root √WĀ/AWA, most fully described in the Quendi and Eldar essay from 1959-60 (WJ/366). In that document Tolkien described its derivation and meaning as follows:
> This last [vanwa] was an old formation (which is also found in Sindarin), and was the most frequently used part of the verb [auta- “go away, leave”]. It developed the meanings “gone, lost, no longer to be had, vanished, departed, dead, past and over”.
Despite all these changes in its derivation and the associated roots, the adjective vanwa itself retained the same basic form and meaning throughout Tolkien’s life.
-va
suffix. possessive or adjectival ending
-wa after consonants
-va
from
-va possessive ending, presumably related to the preposition va "from". In Eldaliéva, Ingoldova, miruvóreva, Oroméva, rómeva, Valinóreva (q.v. for references), Follondiéva, Hyallondiéva (see under turmen for references). Following a consonant, the ending instead appears as -wa (andamacilwa "of the long sword", PE17:147, rómenwa *"of the East", PE17:59). Pl. -vë when governing a plural word (from archaic -vai) (WJ:407), but it seems that -va was used throughout in late Exilic Quenya (cf. miruvóreva governing the plural word yuldar in Namárië). Pl. -iva (-ivë*), dual -twa, partitive pl. -líva**.
lissë miruvóreva mí oromardi
of sweet nectar in the high-halls
The 4th phrase of the prose Namárië. Tolkien altered the text from the poetic version as follows:
> mi oromardi lissë miruvóreva >> lissë miruvóreva mí oromardi
Tolkien moved the possessive element lissë miruvóreva “of sweet nectar” forward in the prose version so that it immediately follows the noun it modifies, namely the lintë yuldar “swift draughts” of the previous line. Thus “swift draughts of sweet mead” as in the English translation of the poem.
ava-
verb. to depart, go away, disappear, be lost
illöa(va)
adverb/adjective. annual, yearly, per annum (year as item)
@@@ by Röandil on the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord Server (VLDS) on 2023-04-12, i.e. "a yearly festival", cf. ilaurëa “daily”
qualöa(va)
adverb/adjective. annual, yearly, perennial (year as whole)
@@@ by Röandil on the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord Server (VLDS) on 2023-04-12, i.e. "yearly income"
mal ámë etelehta ulcullo: násië
but deliver us from evil: Amen
The tenth line of Átaremma, Tolkien’s Quenya translation of the Lord’s Prayer. The conjunction mal “but” is followed by a combination of imperative particle á and the pronoun me “us”. This is followed by the aorist form of the verb etelehta “deliver” and ulcullo “from evil”, the ablative form of the noun ulco (perhaps a noun form of ulca). The final word násië, corresponding to English “Amen”, seems to be a Quenya word meaning “✱be it thus”.
Decomposition: Broken into its constituent elements, this phrase would be:
> mal á-më ete-lehta ulcu-llo: násië = “✱but (imperative)-us out-free evil-from: amen”
Conceptual Development: The tenth line underwent more changes than any other line in the prayer. In version III of the prayer, this phrase was first written as a near match to the phrase in version IIb, but was radically altered to a form that persisted to version IV. The analysis below designates these two variations of version III as IIIa and IIIb.
In earlier versions of the prayer, the word for “but” was mostly ono (IIa-IV), though in version I it was {anat >>} one, and it was elided to on’ in version IIIa.
The earlier imperative element was either na (I-IIa) or a (IIIb-IV), and it appeared either before the verb (I-IIa, IIIb-IV) or in the middle of the verb (IIb-IIIa) as et·a·rúna.
The object pronoun me consistently appeared immediately after the verb in the versions I-IV of the prayer rather than before the verb as in version V-VI.
The early versions (I-IV) used a different verb et(e)rúna for “deliver”, still in the aorist tense but in (IIIb-IV) with an embedded imperative et·a·rúna, as noted above.
Tolkien earlier considered several words for “evil”: olca (I deleted), ulca (I), ulco (IIa) and úro (IIa-IV), the last of these possibly a noun form of úra “nasty”. These appeared either with the allative suffix -llo (I) or the preposition va “(away) from” (IIa-IV). In versions IIIb-IV only, the prepositional phrase va úro appeared before the verb rather than after.
Quenya words corresponding to “Amen” appeared only in a few versions: san na (IIa), násan (IIb) and násië (VI), each meaning something like “✱be it thus” or “✱be it so”.
| |  I  |IIa|IIb|IIIa|IIIb|IV|V|VI| |{anat >>}|one|ono|on’|ono|mal| |na etrúna me|et·a·rúna me|va úro|ám’ etelehta|áme etelehta| |{olcallo >>}|ulcallo|va ulco|{var-úra >>} va úro|aly’ eterúna me|ulcullo| | |san na|násan| |násie|
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.
o-
prefix. together
A prefix meaning “together” derived from primitive √WO (WJ/367). The modern Quenya form of the prefix is the result of the sound change whereby “unstressed wo was often reduced to o with loss of w” (PE19/106). Note that “when stressed the [primitive] sequence wo was usually changed > wa”, so in theory Quenya might have a variant prefix ✱va- “together” that was the result of an ancient stressed prefix, much like Sindarin go- vs. gwa-. However, there is little sign of such a prefix va- in Quenya; the only example is vávea “(con)similar”. Instead, the short o- generally became ó- in those rare cases where it was stressed (WJ/367).
In the Quendi and Eldar essay from 1959-60 Tolkien said that o- was “used in words describing the meeting, junction, or union of two things or persons, or of two groups thought of as units”, as opposed to yo- used for three or more things (WJ/361, 367). In examples elsewhere, though, o- “together” seems to have a more general meaning in words like olass(i)ë “foliage, collection of leaves” or ombari “company, dwellers together” (NM/117). I would therefore assume yo- is only used when plurality was emphasized, and o- “together” was the default choice otherwise.
Conceptual Development: The earliest precursor to this suffix appeared in the Gnomish Lexicon of the 1910s as ᴱQ. ma- “together” derived from primitive ᴱ✶ŋu̯a (GL/40). This was part of a paradigm in which G. go- was the result of unstressed ᴱ✶ŋu̯a, and gwa- was the normal phonological result. There was also an apparently related suffix ᴱQ. -ngwe in the Narqelion poem in phrases like ómalingwe lir’ amaldar = “✱(together) with voices singing gently”, which could also be derived from primitive ᴱ✶ŋu̯a. The Early Noldorin Dictionary of the 1920s had ᴱQ. va- as the equivalent of ᴱN. go- “together”, probably reflecting a change to primitive ✱wa- (PE13/162).
The Etymologies of the 1930s had both ᴹQ. ō̆- and N. go- “together” derived from the root ᴹ√WŌ̆ (Ety/WŌ). In this new paradigm, N. gwa- was the result of stressed primitive wó-. In Quenya primitive wō and unstressed wŏ blended to produce o- “together”, which could be either short o or long ó. In the Outline of Phonetic Development (OP1) of the 1940s, Tolkien seems to hint that stressed (g)wo- > wá- in Quenya as well (PE19/53). But as noted above there is only one example (vávea) of prefixal wa-/va- “together” in actual Quenya words from Tolkien’s later writings.
miruvórë
noun. mead, nectar, special wine or cordial, drink of the Elves, (lit.) precious juice, mead, nectar, special wine or cordial, drink of the Elves, (lit.) precious juice, [ᴱQ.] sweet drink
The Quenya word for the special Elvish drink of Rivendell, more commonly known by its (Sindarin) name S. miruvor (LotR/290), itself a loan word from Quenya (PE17/37). The Quenya word dates all the way back to the earliest versions of the legendarium, with ᴱQ. miruvōre “nectar, drink of the Valar, sweet drink” appearing in the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s (QL/61), and the shorter form miruvor appearing The Lost Tales from this same period (LT1/153).
Possible Etymology: In notes from 1967, Tolkien admitted this word was inspired by Germanic među + wōþi = “sweet mead”, which would have become miřuwoři in the English language branch (PE17/64). In the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s it was a combination of ᴱQ. miru “wine” and ᴱQ. wóre “sweet” (QL/61, 104). In notes from the late 1950s, Tolkien redefined it as a combination of √MIR “precious” and ✶wōri “juice”, but then declared this was a false etymology (PE17/37-38). Indeed, in the Quendi and Eldar essay of 1959-60 Tolkien said the Quenya word was based on Valarin mirubhōze (WJ/399), elsewhere glossed “a honey wine” (PE17/38), with the element Val. mirub being “wine”.
o
preposition. from
A preposition for “from”, especially in the genitival sense “originating from”. For “from” in a positional sense, it is far more common to use the ablative suffix -llo.
Conceptual Development: The preposition ᴱQ. ô was first mentioned in the Gnomish Lexicon of the 1910s as the equivalent of G. a(n·) “from” which had an ablative sense (GL/17). In Primitive Quendian Structure: Final Consonants written in 1936, Tolkien mentioned {o >> ho >>} o as a preposition based on primitive ᴹ✶ʒō̆ “away from, from among” (PE21/60 and note #48). In The Etymologies of the 1930s, ᴹQ. ho “from” appeared under the root ᴹ√ƷŌ̆ “from, away, from among, out of” (Ety/ƷŌ̆). This primitive form ʒō̆ was also the basis of the Quenya genitive suffix ᴹQ. -o.
In Definitive Linguistic Notes (DLN) from 1959, Tolkien mentioned the preposition Q. o “from” as a reduction of ancient ✶ăwă “away” (PE17/148). In Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) written in 1969 Tolkien again mentioned ō < ✶hō “from” with some difficult-to-read qualifications that seem to indicate this was “from” in the genitival sense, as opposed to ✶lō “from” in the positional/ablative sense (PE22/168).
Neo-Quenya: For purposes of Neo-Quenya I would assume that o is a rarely used preposition, usually replaced by either genitive -o [originating from] or ablative -llo [moving from].
uo
adverb. together
The adverb uo “together” appeared as a derivative of ✶ówō in a rejected page of notes on the etymology about the prefix o- of the same meaning, probably from around 1959 (PE17/191).
Neo-Quenya: Though the page is rejected, the etymology of ᴺQ. uo “together” remains plausible, so I would retain this adverb for purposes of Neo-Quenya.
vá meninyë ó le
I won’t come with you
au
away
au (2) adv. "away", of position rather than movement (compare oa). PE17:148
ho
from
ho prep. "from" (3O); cf. hó-
hó-
away, from, from among
hó- verbal prefix; "away, from, from among", the point of view being outside the thing, place, or group in thought (WJ:368)
ló
from
ló, lo (2) prep. "from", also used = "by" introducing the agent after a passive construction: nahtana ló Turin *"slain by Túrin" (VT49:24). A similar and possibly identical form is mentioned in the Etymologies as being somehow related to the ablative ending -llo, but is not there clearly defined (VT45:28). At one point, Tolkien suggested that lo rather than the ending -llo was used with proper names (lo Manwë rather than Manwello for "from Manwë"), but this seems to have been a short-lived idea (VT49:24).
uo
together
[uo adv. "together" (PE17:191)]
váquet-
verb. to refuse, forbid, prohibit; (lit.) to say no, to say ‘I will not or do not’
wa-
prefix. together
uo
adverb. together
A preposition for “[away] from” appearing in some versions of the Átaremma prayer from the 1950s, in phrases like ono __va__ úro aly’ eterúna me “but deliver us from evil” (VT43/9-11). In the final version of the prayer, it was replaced with the ablative suffix -llo (VT43/12). va- “away from” is mentioned in notes associated with the Ambidexters Sentence for the 1960s where it seems to function as a prefix (VT49/24).
Conceptual Development: ᴱQ. vā “gone forth, away” appeared in the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s under the early root ᴱ√VAHA (QL/99). In the English-Qenya Dictionary of the 1920s, vá “away” was an adverb, interjection and adjective, but this entry was deleted (PE15/70). Elsewhere in the dictionary va was a preposition “with” in combination with ᴱQ. vesta- “marry”, as in vesta va “marry with (someone)”.
In the Early Qenya Grammar also from the 1920s, va was a preposition “from” in the phrase hwa·telpe ie-rautanéma ompa __va__ húyo “his money had all been stolen from him” (PE14/54). In the 1930s and 40s it appeared as a prefix va- “away” in vahaiya or vahāya “far away” in various iterations of the Lament of Atalante (LR/47; SD/247, 310).
Neo-Quenya: For purposes of Neo-Quenya, I would assume va is a preposition or prefix, serving a similar function to adverb/prefix au “away (from)”, replacing prefixal au- in cases where va- is more euphonic. As a preposition I would assume it is only rarely used, being generally replaced with the ablative suffix -llo, but va can be preferable when the sense “from” is more abstract (stolen from him, delivered from evil) rather than describing actual motion or direction.