ya
noun. *they (neuter)
yad-
verb. to go
A verb appearing in the Lament of Akallabêth in the form ayadda “(it) went” (SD/247, VT24/12). Its initial element is the 3rd persons neuter plural suffix a- “it”. This leaves the basic verb form yadda, which is the past tense according to the theories used here.
Conceptual Development: It appeared in the form yadda in the first draft version of the Lament, and this form was also briefly considered as a replacement for unakkha “he-came” in the first sentence of the Lament (SD/312).
kalab-
verb. to fall (down)
A verb translated “fall down” (SD/439). This verb has more conjugations than any other attested Adûnaic verb, and is therefore useful for studying the Adûnaic verb system. Excluding the first draft of the Lament of Akallabêth, it appears in four forms: ukallaba “[he] fell” (SD/429), hikallaba “she fell (down)” (SD/427), hikalba “she fell” (VT24/12) and yakalubim “lean over” (SD/251). Andreas Moehn suggested (LGtAG, EotAL/KAL’B) the last of these could be a different verb kalub- “to lean”, but I think it is likelier to be a form of kalab-, as suggested by Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne (VSH/26-27).
Various verbal prefixes and suffixes can be extracted by comparison to other forms: the pronominal prefixes u- “he”, hi- “she” and ya- “they (neuter)”, as well as the plural verb suffix -m. Removing these elements, we have three distinct forms: kallaba “fell”, kalba “fell” and kalubi “lean over”. These likely represent distinct verb tenses. The question is: which ones?
Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne suggested (VSH/26-27) that kalubi is most likely the continuative-present with the literal sense “✱are falling over”, a conclusion with which most other authors agree (AL/Adûnaic, NBA/14). Andreas Moehn agreed on this verb tense (LGtAG, EotAL/KAL’B), but suggested that it is from the verb kalub- “to lean” instead.
The two remaining forms kalba and kallaba both have the gloss “fell”. This ambiguity is because the Adûnaic aorist tense could used to describe the past in a narrative (SD/439). Most authors agree that these forms are the Adûnaic aorist and past tenses respectively, though Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne suggested that kallaba is the continuative-past instead (VSH/27-28). See the entry on the Adûnaic past tense for further discussion.
Finally, there is form appearing only in the draft versions of the Lament: akallabi “fell in ruin”. I believe this is an example of draft-perfect tense; see that entry for further discussion.
nakh-
verb. to come
A verb translated in the past tense as “came” (SD/247, 311), so probably meaning “to come”. Like kalab-, this is one of the few Adûnaic verbs attested in more than one conjugation. As such, it is useful in the study of Adûnaic verbs, in this case biconsonantal-verbs as opposed to triconsonantal kalab-.
It is attested in two forms, unakkha “he-came” and yanākhim “are at hand”. The initial elements in these forms are the 3rd-sg masculine pronominal prefix u- and the 3rd-pl neuter pronominal prefix ya-, respectively, while the latter form has the plural verbal suffix -m. Removing these elements leaves the conjugated forms nakkha and nākhi, which are the past and continuative-present tenses according to the theories used here. If the second form is the continuative-present, its literal meaning may be “are coming”.
Conceptual Development: In the draft version of the Lament of Akallabêth, this verb stem was apparently nek-, with past forms hunekkū >> unekkū “he-came”, with Tolkien vacillating on the proper form of the 3rd-sg masculine pronominal prefix u-.
-ak Reconstructed
preposition. away
A suffix in the word êphalak “far away”, a derivative of êphal “far” (SD/247). Some authors have suggested that -ak is an intensive suffix “very” instead of suffix meaning “away” (LGtAG, NBA/32). However, the corresponding Quenya word vahai(y)a “far away” is a combination va “(away) from” and haiya “far”, so it seems to me that the literal translation “away” is more likely to be correct (this translation of va was published after LGtAG and NBA were written).
-zê
preposition. at
A prepositional suffix translated “at” (SD/429), but not appearing in any example sentences. It is perhaps a later repurposing of the draft-dative case suffix -s, since the other draft-cases became prepositional suffixes in later versions of the Adûnaic grammar: draft genitive -ō versus later preposition -ô “from”, draft instrumental -ma versus later preposition -mâ “with”.
dâur
noun. gloom
A noun translated as “gloom” derived from the root √DAWAR (SD/423). It is an example of how primitive [[ad|[w] and [j] became [u] and [i] before consonants and finally]], thereby producing diphthongs.
kan-
verb. to hold
A verb translated “hold”, given by Tolkien as an example of a biconsonantal-verb (SD/439). There is unfortunately no information on how it might be conjugated.
raba
noun. dog
A noun translated “dog” and fully declined as an example of a Strong II noun (SD/437). It is also used as an example of a common-noun that can be altered to masculine and feminine forms rabô “male dog” and rabê “bitch” (SD/434).
rûkh
noun. shout
A word glossed “shout” (SD/426). Andreas Moehn suggested (EotAL/RUKH) that it may be a verb rûkh- “to shout”, but it appears in a list of nouns, so I think it likelier that it is noun form.
A pronominal prefix, most likely the neuter/common plural pronoun “they”. It appears in the verb yanâkhim “[they] are at hand” in the sentence narîka ’nBâri ’nAdûn yanâkhim and in the verb yakalubim “[they] lean over” in the sentence urîd yakalubim (SD/251), both sentences having plural subjects. See the entry on pronominal-prefixes for more discussion.