-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".
Quenya
-wë
suffix. ancient name suffix (usually but not always masculine)
-wë
person
-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
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
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.