go'

go'

Q. ŏ-'. >> gwá. This gloss was rejected.

go

together

(prefix) go-, gwa- (+ lenition) (co-, com-).

go

together

gwa- (+ lenition) (co-, com-).

bad

go

#bad- (i vâd, i medir), pa.t. bant. Isolated from trevad- ”traverse”.

bad

go

(i vâd, i medir), pa.t. bant. Isolated from trevad- ”traverse”.

ban- Archaic

verb. ?to go

dadwen-

verb. to return, go back

A Sindarin verb for “return, go back” as a combination of √(N)DAN “back” and √MEN “go”, contrasted with dandol- “return, come back” appearing in notes from around 1959 (PE17/166). Tolkien first gave this verb as {namen >>} damen reflecting vacillation on the primitive prefix ✱nan- > ✱ndan-. Later in the same notes he gave a form dadwen, reflecting either vacillation of the development of ancient nm in Sindarin (to either dw or mm), or vacillation on the prefix itself ((n)dad- vs. (n)dan-).

Neo-Sindarin: For purposes of Neo-Sindarin, I would use ᴺS. dammen- for this word as the most phonologically plausible. Tolkien represented intervocalic m as both mm and m in Sindarin (e.g. lammad vs. minlamad), so damen- is possible as well. Either way, the pronunciation would be [damen] with short [m].

edledhia-

verb. to go into exile

glenna-

verb. *to go, travel, *to travel, go

A verb implied as an element of anglennatha “will approach” from the King’s Letter of the early 1950s. It is probably cognate to ᴹQ. lenna- “go” from The Etymologies of the 1930s (Ety/LED; EtyAC/LED). It thus likely had a similar meaning.

Neo-Sindarin: For purposes of Neo-Sindarin, I use glenna- mainly for “travel”.

go-

together

_pref. _together. Q. o-.

gwa-

prefix. together (only in old compounds, the living form is go-)

gwae-

verb. to go, depart, to go [away], depart

This highly irregular verb appeared in Definitive Linguistic Notes (DLN) from 1959 as the Sindarin equivalent of Q. auta- “go (away), depart” which is itself very irregular, with both verbs derived from the invertible root √WĀ/AWA (PE17/148). The Sindarin verb has a present tense form gwaen “I go” and past forms 1st. sg. anwen “✱I went” and 3rd. sg. anu/awn “✱he/she went”, with these past forms apparently based on an ancient nasal-infixed strong past ✶anwē (from which the archaic Q. strong past †anwe “went” was derived). It has two more forms gwanu/gwawn. These seem to be the equivalent of Q. vanwa “lost” < ✶wanwā.

The present tense form gwaen “I go” is especially peculiar. Compare this to the more regular present tenses cewin “I taste” < kawin(e) (PE22/152) and galon “I grow” < galān(e) (PE17/131). I think the likeliest explanation is that gwaen is derived from an ancient aorist form wa-i-nĭ, with *ai* becoming *ae* as was usual of Sindarin’s phonetic developments. If so, the presents of this verb would be based on √WA and the past inflections based on √AW.

A final twist is that in the note from DLN Tolkien mentions *u*-intrusion, a sound change parallel to the more common *i*-intrusion, whereby a final u moved before a preceding consonant. The forms awn and gwawn are thus the u-intruded results of anu and gwanu. This u-intrusion would not occur in forms with further suffixes, like anwen “I went”.

A probably related form gwanwen “departed” appears in the Quendi and Eldar (Q&E) essay from 1959-60 (WJ/378). This could be an independent adjective, but could also be a passive participle of gwae- (or some variant of it), possibly a strengthened or elaborated form of gwanu/gwawn. Note that Q&E also states that:

> The only normal derivative [of AWA] is the preposition o, the usual word for ‘from, of’. None of the forms of the element ✱awa are found as a prefix in S, probably because they became like or the same as the products of ✱wō, ✱wo (WJ/366).

Some people believe this indicates that Tolkien rejected other derivatives like gwae-, but since Q&E also contains gwanwen, I think this statement only applies to direct derivatives of AWA, as opposed to gwae- and gwanwen which are derived from the inverted root WĀ.

Neo-Sindarin: How to handle this verb in the context of Neo-Sindarin is unclear. Given the extreme irregularity of this verb, it is tempting to discard it. Unfortunately, we have no other attested Sindarin verbs for “to depart”. Furthermore, common verbs like “go” tend to be irregular in many languages (such as English as “go” vs. “went”), so it makes sense the same would be true of Sindarin. As such, I propose the following conjugation for this verb (hat tip to Gilruin for most of this paradigm; he suggested much better forms than my original ideas):

• Present tense ✱gwae “go” < primitive ✶gwa-ĭ, with inflections added to this form: gwaen “I go”, ✱gwael “you go”, etc.

• Past tense awn “went” < ✶anwē with *u*-intrusion. Inflected forms are based on non-intruded anw-: anwen “I went”, ✱anwel “you went”, etc.

• Past/passive participle gwanwen “departed”, an elaboration of the older (archaic?) perfective participle gwanu/gwawn.

• Future ✱gwatha “will go”, ✱gwathon “I will go”, < ✶wa-thā, wa-thā-nĭ.

• Gerund ✱gwaed (< ✶wa-itā) and active participle ✱gwaul (< ✶wa-ālā) “departing”.

• Imperative ✱gwaw “go!” < ✶wa-ā, as with baw “don’t!” < ✶bā (WJ/371-2).

Finally, this verb means “go” specifically in the sense “depart”, that is: “go away”. For “go (generally and in any direction)”, use the verb men-.

If you dislike the irregularity of gwae- or you believe that Tolkien’s notes in Q&E (see above) indicate this verb was rejected along with (most) Sindarin derivatives of AWA, then the neologism haena- “to leave, depart” gives an alternative verb.

gwaen

suffix. I go

('waen) _ v. pres. & pron. suff. _I go. >> anwen. This gloss was rejected.

men-

verb. to go

The basic Sindarin verb for “go”, derived from the root √MEN (PE17/143). Its archaic past form emēnē was discussed in notes from around 1965 (PE17/93); its modern past would be ✱evín. It also appeared in its gerund form in the sentence niðin __mened__ “I have a mind to go, I intend to go” in notes from 1969 (PE22/165).

minna-

verb. go in

_ v. _go in, enter. >> minno

nidhin mened

I have a mind to go, I intend to go

o

preposition. from, of (preposition (as a proclitic) used in either direction, from or to the point of view of the speaker)

According to WJ/366, the preposition "is normally o in all positions, though od appears occasionally before vowels, especially before o-". With a suffixed article, see also uin

o

preposition. from

_ prep. _from, of. In older S. o had the form od before vowels. o menel aglar elenath ! lit. 'from Firmament glory of the stars !'.

o

preposition. from

_ prep. _from. . This gloss was rejected.

od

preposition. from, of (preposition (as a proclitic) used in either direction, from or to the point of view of the speaker)

According to WJ/366, the preposition "is normally o in all positions, though od appears occasionally before vowels, especially before o-". With a suffixed article, see also uin

dammen-

verb. to return, go back

edledh

go into exile

edledh- (i edledh, in edledhir), pa.t. edlent or edledhas. (VT45:27; the ”Noldorin” forms have gl for Sindarin dl), also edledhia- (i edledhia, in edledhiar). Suggested Sindarin form of ”Noldorin” egledhia-

edledh

go into exile

*edledh- (i edledh, in edledhir), pa.t. edlent or edledhas. (VT45:27; the ”Noldorin” forms have gl for Sindarin dl)

edledh

go into exile

(i edledh, in edledhir), pa.t. edlent or edledhas. (VT45:27; the ”Noldorin” forms have gl for Sindarin dl), also edledhia- (i edledhia, in edledhiar). Suggested Sindarin form of ”Noldorin” egledhia

edledh

go into exile

(i edledh, in edledhir), pa.t. edlent or edledhas. (VT45:27; the ”Noldorin” forms have gl for Sindarin dl)

edledhia-

verb. to go into exile

godref

through together

(AI:92)

neledh

go in

neledh- (i neledh, i neledhir) (enter)

neledh

go in

(i neledh, i neledhir) (enter)

nevra-

verb. to face, go forward

A neologism coined by Paul Strack in 2018 specifically for Eldamo based on √NEB “turn towards (speaker)” (PE17/27) and inspired by Ilk. nivra- “to face, go forward”, also serving as a replacement for ᴱN. athra- and G. gwintha-.

o

of

(od), followed by hard mutation. With article uin ”from the, of the” (followed by ”mixed” mutation according to David Salo’s reconstuctuons). (WJ:366). Not to be confused with o ”about, concerning”.

rong

adverb. soon

rû²

adverb. soon, anon

gō

preposition. from

am

root. go up, go up, [ᴹ√] up

For all of Tolkien’s life, the Primitive Elvish root for “up” was √AM. Its best known derivatives are probably Q. ambo, S. amon “hill”. Tolkien introduced this root all the way back in the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s, where Tolkien gave it as ᴱ√AM(U) “up(ward)” (QL/30). In The Etymologies of the 1930s it was ᴹ√AM “up” (Ety/AM²), and in 1967 notes Tolkien gave it as “AM, go up, especially of climbing” (PE17/157). In a separate set of notes on comparison from early 1967, Tolkien said:

> But there existed a “base” that was intrinsically “comparative”, √AMA. This signified addition, increase, plus (PE17/91).

Tolkien did not explicitly connect this to √AM “up”, but it seems likely the two were related. See the discussion of √AMA for further details.

and(ă)

adverb/conjunction. moreover, to go on further, to say more

ba(n)

root. meet, come up against; go (away), meet, come up against; go, [ᴹ√] proceed

A root meaning “go, proceed” appearing as one of the many etymologies of Q. vanwa “gone, departed”. It may have been a partial restoration of the (rejected) meaning of the root ᴹ√AB “go away, depart” from The Etymologies of the 1930s, a root that later was altered in that document to mean “refuse, deny, say no” (Ety/AB). It may also have been intended as a replacement for ᴹ√WAN “depart, go away, disappear, vanish”, also from The Etymologies and the basis for ᴹQ. vanwa in the 1930s.

In the published corpus, the first clear mention of this root is in a discussion of the Quenya future suffix -(u)va from the late 1940s where it was given as √BĀ, BANA “go, proceed” with Q. vanwa “gone, over” as one of its derivatives (PE22/97). It appeared again in a discussion of the Sindarin greeting mae govannen “well met” from the late 1950s, where Tolkien hypothesized that the verb “meet” might be go- “together” + ban- “go” or “meet”, which he again connected to Q. vanwa “gone” (PE17/16). Phonetic complications prompted Tolkien to coin a new verb covad- “assemble, gather together” from a root √KOB, but he was unwilling to commit at this time to the new verb because of the obvious similarity of govannen to √BAN “go” (PE17/16-17).

However, in 1959 when he was overhauling the Eldarin system of negation, it seems Tolkien finally rejected √BA(N) “go” because of the conflict with √BĀ/ABA “refuse”, and he transferred the sense “go” to the root √MEN (PE17/143). In etymological notes contemporaneous with the Quendi and Eldar essay of 1959-60, Tolkien restored √KOB “gather” (PE17/150) though he seems to have eventually settled on the form √KOM for this root along with a restored verb S. covad- “bring together, make meet” (PE17/157-158). Q. vanwa “gone” was also transferred to √WĀ/AWA by the time of the Quendi and Eldar essay (WJ/366). Meanwhile, the Quenya future had been transferred from √BA to the root √UB in the early 1950s (PE22/132).

This left no remaining functions for √BA(N) “go”, and there is no further sign of it starting in the 1960s.

del

root. walk, go, proceed, travel

This root appears in the Quendi and Eldar essay from 1959-60 with the sense “walk, go, proceed, travel” (WJ/360). Its derivatives were S. Edhel “Elf” and Q. †Eldo which blended with Elda “Elf”, both originally with the sense “one who goes” (✶edelō): those who left lake Cuiviénen to travel to Valinor. It is also the basis of several words meaning “to go”: T. delia- and Q. lelya-.

Many of Quenya derivatives of this root actually derive from an inversion √LED of the original √DEL. According to the Quendi and Eldar essay, this inversion only occurred in Quenya (WJ/363). In earlier writings like The Etymologies, however, ᴹ√LED “go, fare, travel” was the basic root in all languages. It seems that Tolkien revised ᴹ√LED >> √DEL, preserving √LED only as a Quenya variant. The strongest sign of this change was Tolkien’s consistent alteration of N. Eledh >> S. Edhel.

This leaves open the question of what happened to the other non-Quenya derivatives of ᴹ√LED, such as S. edlen(n) “exile”. It is possible that they were transferred to a new root √LEN, which was the basis for S. lembas “way bread” (PE17/60). For purposes of Neo-Eldarin, I prefer to assume the verb [N.] †ledh- “go, fare, travel” did exist, but was archaic and survived only as an element in other verbs like [ᴺS.] edledhia- “go into exile” and [N.] neledh- “enter”.

delya-

verb. walk, go, proceed, travel

kyel

root. go down slowly

led

root. go, proceed, go, proceed, [ᴹ√] fare, travel

This root appeared in The Etymologies (Ety/LED) and in some later writings (PE17/51, 139) with the basic sense “go”. In the Quendi and Eldar essay from 1959-60, Tolkien decided that √LED was a Quenya-only variant of the original root √DEL (WJ/360, 363). Elsewhere, Tolkien said that √LED was “not much used in Sindarin except in compounds with ✶et ‘out’ as edlen(n)” (PE17/51). Its Sindarin derivative S. lembas “way bread” was reassigned to √LEN (PE17/60). See √DEL and √LEN for further discussion.

loy

root. go wrong, fail, go wrong, fail, [ᴹ√] miss, fail to go; lack, be without

A Quenya-only root in linguistic notes from 1959 meaning “go wrong, fail” with the basic sense of “miss mark, go (or send) wrong, fall short or beside ([one’s] aim, what is due or proper)” (PE17/151); in a marginal note Tolkien also wrote “go awry, ill, wrongly”. Its Sindarin equivalent was √DEW. The root ᴹ√LOY also appeared in The Etymologies of the 1930s with the gloss “lack, be without; miss, fail to go”, though all of its derivatives were rejected (EtyAC/LOYO).

men

root. go, move, proceed (in any direction); make for, go towards; have as object, (in)tend; direction, object, point moved toward; region

This root first appeared as unglossed ᴹ√MEN in The Etymologies of the 1930s, where it seemed to be stationary in nature given its derivatives ᴹQ. men “place, spot” and ᴹQ. ména “region” (Ety/MEN). It was an element in direction words like ᴹQ. formen/N. forven, apparently meaning “✱north place” at this conceptual stage. In Demonstrative, Relative, and Correlative Stems (DRC) from the late 1940s, Tolkien first glossed ᴹ√MEN as “place, spot”, but that instance of the root was revised to ᴹ√NOM (PE23/112 and note #12), and a bit later in the same document Tolkien gave a new meaning to ᴹ√MEN as “purpose, aim” (PE23/112).

In the Quenya Verbal System (QVS) from 1948, Tolkien first gave ᴹ√MEN the gloss “aim at, intend, purpose” with the more specific sense “make for, proceed towards” when used with the allative, but then crossed this out and simply made the gloss “go, proceed” (PE22/103 and note #21). In Common Eldarin: Noun Structure of the early 1950s, Tolkien first gave √MEN the gloss as “place, situation, site”, then revised it to “direction, object, point moved toward” (PE21/79 and note #39).

Thereafter Tolkien mostly gave this root the basic sense “go” (PE17/93, 143, 165; VT39/11; VT42/32). Tolkien gave a somewhat lengthy description of the root in Definitive Linguistic Notes (DLN) from 1959:

> √MEN go, move, proceed in any direction (irrespective of speaker’s position, or assumed point of thought). mēn- a way, a going, a mov[ement] (PE17/165).

Thus in the 1950s and 1960s, Q. formen likely meant “✱north way” rather than “✱north place”. However, in a footnote in The Road Goes Ever On from 1967, Tolkien did say that men had the meaning “direction, region” as part of an explanation of √MENEL “heavens” = men + el (“region of stars”), so it seems Tolkien did not entirely abandon the use of this element as a name for places.

Neo-Eldarin: For purposes of Neo-Quenya, I sometimes see √MEN use for movement in general (as in motion picture) rather than movement in a direction. I personally recommend using ᴱQ. lev- “(intr.) move” from Qenya Wordlists of the 1920s for that purpose (PE16/132) since I think it is important to distinguish “move” from “go”, but if you prefer to use only later words you might be more comfortable expanding the semantic scope of √MEN to movement in general.

@@@ 1950s mendë “will” = “✱intent” and 1964 menta- “have as object, (in)tend”

ran

root. wander, stray, meander, go on an uncertain course, go aside from a course (commanded or self-chosen); err

This root first appeared as ᴹ√RAN “wander, stray” in The Etymologies of the 1930s with derivatives like ᴹQ. ranya-/N. rhenia- “to stray”, ᴹQ. ránen/N. rhaun “errant”, and ᴹQ. Rana/N. Rhân as names for the Moon (Ety/RAN). These Moon-names also appeared in earlier writings but without clear etymologies (LT1/192; GL/64). Such Moon names continued to appear in later writings, for example: Q. Rána “Wayward” (S/99). The root √RAN itself was mentioned quite frequently in Tolkien’s later writings with glosses like “wander, stray” (PE17/182), “wander, stray, go on uncertain course” (VT42/12) and “err, go aside from a course (commanded or self-chosen)” (PE17/78).

sedu

verb. go to rest

sedu-

verb. to go to rest

thusya-

verb. to go forth (as an emission)

wo

root. together

This root was the basis for the prefix Q. o- and S. go- “together”. In the 1910s Gnomish Lexicon, G. go- (unaccented) or gwa- “together” was derived from primitive ᴱ✶ŋu̯a and the Qenya form was ᴱQ. ma- (GL/40-41). In the 1920s the Early Noldorin form was still ᴱN. go- or gwa- but the Qenya form was ᴱQ. va- (PE13/162), probably from primitive ✱wa-. In The Etymologies of the 1930s Tolkien gave the root as ᴹ√WŌ̆ “together” with derivatives ᴹQ. o- and N. go- or stressed gwa- (Ety/WŌ; EtyAC/WŌ).

In The Etymologies Tolkien explained the go-/gwa- variation in Noldorin as the result of the sound change whereby stressed wŏ became wa in Common Eldarin (Ety/WŌ); Tolkien gave a similar explanation for Sindarin in the Quendi and Eldar essay of 1959-60 (WJ/367). Despite stressed wŏ > wa being an ancient change, the wa variant did not survive in Quenya. Tolkien explained the sound change whereby *wo* became *o* in Quenya several times: in the Outline of Phonetic Development (OP1) from the 1940s, in the Outline of Phonology (OP2) from the early 1950s, and in the Quendi and Eldar essay of 1959-60 (PE19/53, 106; WJ/367). The root √WO itself also appeared several times in Tolkien’s later writings (PE17/16, 191; WJ/361), in one place with the variant √WONO (PE17/191).

wā/awa

root. away (from); go (away), depart, pass away, move (from speaker); before (of time), ago, away (from); go (away), depart, pass away, move (from speaker); before (of time), ago; [ᴹ√] forth, out

This invertible root and ones like it were the basis for “away” words for much of Tolkien’s life. The earliest iteration was ᴱ√AVA “go away, depart, leave” in the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s with derivatives like ᴱQ. au “away from” and ᴱQ. avanwa “going, passing, nearly gone” (QL/33). This early root remanifested as ᴹ√AB “go away, depart, leave” in The Etymologies of the 1930s, but the gloss of that root was revised to “refuse, deny” (Ety/AB). As a replacement, Tolkien introduced ᴹ√AWA “away, forth; out” with derivatives like ᴹQ. ava “outside”; Tolkien also considered deriving a privative prefix ᴹQ. ava- from this root (Ety/AWA).

The root √AWA was mentioned many times in Tolkien’s later writings, along with its inverted variant √WĀ, usually with the sense “away (from)” or a verbal sense “go (away), depart, pass away”. Its most detailed description appeared in the Quendi and Eldar essay of 1959-60, where Tolkien said:

> The element ✱AWA ... referred to movement away, viewed from the point of view of the thing, person, or place left. As a prefix it had probably already developed in CE the form ✱au-. The form ✱awa was originally an independent adverbial form, but appears to have been also used as a prefix (as an intensive form of ✱awa-, ✱au-). The form ✱wā- was probably originally used as a verbal stem, and possibly also in composition with verbal stems (WJ/361).

In this same document Tolkien said of Sindarin that:

> The only normal derivative [of √AWA] is the preposition o, the usual word for “from, of”. None of the forms of the element ✱awa are found as a prefix in S, probably because they became like or the same as the products of ✱wō, ✱wo (WJ/366).

Indeed, most of the attested derivatives of this root are in Quenya, but there are a couple in Sindarin, such as the aforementioned S. o from AWA, as well S. gwanwen “departed” (WJ/378) and the verb S. gwae- “go”, probably only in the limited sense “depart” (PE17/148), both from WĀ.

In late notes from 1969 Tolkien gave the root √AWA the sense “before or ago (of time)” (PE22/167 note #117; PE22/168), but I suspect this was a transient idea.

wō

prefix. together

ówō

adverb. together

ăwă

preposition. from

ʒō

preposition. from

lenna-

verb. go

lenna- vb. "go", pa.t. lendë "went" (LED; cf. lelya-). In the Etymologies as printed in LR, the word lenna- wrongly appears as **linna-; see VT45:27.

men-

verb. go

#men- (4) vb. "go" (VT47:11, cf. VT42:30, VT49:23), attested in the aorist (menë) in the sentence imbi Menel Cemenyë menë Ráno tië "between Heaven and Earth goes the path of the Moon". In the verb nanwen- "return" (or go/come back), -men- is changed to -wen- following nan- "back" (etymological form cited as nan-men-, PE17:166). In examples from VT49:23, 24, Tolkien used men- in the sense of "go as far as": 1st person sg. aorist menin (menin coaryanna "I arrive at [or come/get to] his house"), endingless aorist menë, present tense ména- "is on point of arrival, is just coming to an end", past tense mennë "arrived, reached", in this tense usually with locative rather than allative (mennen sís "I arrive[d] here"), perfect eménië "has just arrived", future menuva "will arrive". All of these examples were first written with the verb as ten- rather than men-, Tolkien then emending the initial consonant.

-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**.

anta-

verb. cause to go to, send; give

anya-

verb. go to, reach,arrive at

auta-

verb. to go (away), depart, leave; to pass away, disappear, be lost, to go (away), depart, leave; [variant: vanya-] to pass away, disappear, be lost

A rather irregular verb whose base meaning is “go (away), depart, leave” and by extension with the senses “pass away, disappear, be lost”, derived from the invertible root √WĀ/AWA “away” (PE17/63; WJ/366). Its most notable use is in the Namárië poem where it appeared in its plural perfect form avánier “have passed” (LotR/377). The related adjective vanwa “lost, departed, vanished” appeared in the same poem. Tolkien’s desire to retain the forms avánie and vanwa likely influenced his investigation of this verb; its conceptual development is quite complex (see below).

The irregularity of this verb is due to some of its tenses being based on √AW, and others on √WĀ. Starting in the late 1950s he usually represent the base verb stem as auta- (PE17/63; PE22/164; WJ/366), such as in __auta__ i lómë “the night is passing” from The Silmarillion (S/190). The stem form auta- was based on √AW + tă, similar to other verbs whose roots ended in y/w which usually required a formative suffix like ✶-tă (PE22/156). Such “half-strong” verbs normally had past forms with nasal-infixion before the formative suffix, in this case with primitive ✶áwa-n-tē becoming modern öante because ancient *awa* become *öa* in Quenya’s phonetic history (WJ/366-367). Tolkien posited similar perfect forms öantie or öávie (WJ/366; PE17/148; PE22/164).

In the Quendi and Eldar essay from 1959-60, Tolkien said that:

> In the more purely physical sense “went away (to another place)” the regular forms (for a -ta verb of this class) öante, öantie were used (WJ/366).

However, in this document (and others) he described another past form váne from primitive ✶wāne, derived from √WĀ rather than √AW (PE17/63; WJ/366). From this ancient past form the perfect avánie was derived, with Tolkien saying “the forms of past and perfect became progressively more closely associated in Quenya” (WJ/366). This variant of the past and perfect was associated with the adjective (originally a perfective adjective) vanwa “gone, lost, no longer to be had, vanished, departed, dead, past and over”, and from it got the meaning: “✱passed away, went away (to never return)”. It was in this sense the perfect form avánier was used in the Namárië poem.

Conceptual Development: This verb has numerous precursors in Tolkien’s earlier writings, since the original root ᴱ√AVA “go away, depart, leave” dates back to the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s (QL/33). This root had a verb form ᴱQ. avin “he departs” with past form ambe (QL/33). The early root also had an inversion ᴱ√VAHA, from which an alternate past form vâ “went” was derived (QL/99). Thus the notion that the past and present forms of this verb were from inversions of the root was quite an old idea in Tolkien’s mind.

The English-Qenya Dictionary of the 1920s had a verb form ᴱQ. vana- “pass, depart, vanish, go away” (PE15/76). This became ᴹQ. vanya- “go, depart, disappear” in The Etymologies of the 1930s under the root ᴹ√WAN “depart, go away, disappear, vanish” (Ety/WAN). This verb reappeared in the “Merin Sentence” from the mid-to-late 1950s: merin sa haryalyë alassë nó __vanyalyë__ Ambarello “I hope that you have happiness before you pass from the world” (MS). It is thus likely the base verb was vanya- when Tolkien first composed the Namárië poem, and in the 1st edition of The Lord of the Rings the perfect form was vánier without the leading a (RC/341).

The verb form ᴹQ. auta- with the sense “to go away” first appeared in the Outline of Phonetic Development (OP1) from the 1940s, where it was a variant of ᴹQ. apsa- < ᴹ✶abtā- of the same meaning, a back-formation from the past form avante < ✱aba-n-tē, all based on the root ᴹ√ABA/BA “away, go away” (PE19/45). However, sometime in the late 1930s or early 1940s, Tolkien revised the meaning of ᴹ√AB to “refuse, deny, say no” (Ety/AB). In the Outline of Phonology (OP2) from the early 1950s, Tolkien had a similar verbal paradigm with Q. apta < ✶ab-ta vs. Q. auta as back-formation from past avante, but in that document the past was glossed “refused, denied, said nay” (PE19/90).

The derivations of auta- “go away, depart” from the root √WĀ/AWA began to appear in documents from the late 1950s and early 1960s such as Notes on Galadriel’s Song (NGS: PE17/63), Definitive Linguistic Notes (DLN: PE17/148), and Quendi and Eldar (Q&E: WJ/365-366). He seem to stick with this paradigm going forward, but continue to experiment with various forms for different verb tenses. For example, in couple places Tolkien gave anwe as another (archaic) past along with oante (WJ/366; PE17/148). In another place he consider a variant verb ava- “depart, go away, disappear, be lost” with present avea, future auva, past vāne, and perfect avānie (PE17/63).

Neo-Quenya: It is pretty clear Tolkien intended the aorist form of this verb to be auta. In NGS Tolkien gave a future form autuva (PE17/63) and in Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) from 1969 a present form autya (PE22/164). LVS had a number of -ya or -ia present tenses for various *ta*-formative verbs, but also said something like “make Q. ea as present tense invaded other forms” in a difficult-to-read note. I take that to mean that the -ya/-ia presents regularized to -ea across many verb classes, so I would use the present tense form ✱autea “is departing” instead and assume that †autya is archaic; see the discussion of the Quenya present tense for more details.

This verb had two past paradigms: öante “went away (to another place)” vs. váne “✱pass away, went away (to never return)”, along with associated perfects öantie vs. avánie, with the last meaning “have passed away” (RGEO/58). In the aorist, present and future tenses this distinction is frequently less relevant, because the “to never return” qualifier is necessarily unknown. Where it is relevant, however, I would use a variant stem form vanya- “to pass away, disappear, be lost”, a back-formation derived from the alternate perfect avánie, inspired by the verb form in The Etymologies and the Merin Sentence (see above).

auta-

verb. go away, leave

auta- (1) vb. "go away, leave" (leave the point of the speaker's thought); old "strong" past tense anwë, usually replaced by vánë, perfect avánië but when the meaning is purely physical "went away (to another place)" rather than "disappear", the past tense oantë, perfect oantië was used. Past participle vanwa "gone, lost, no longer to be had, vanished, departed, dead, past and over" (WJ:366)

auta-

verb. go away

avamanyar

collective name. Elves who would not go to Aman

Another name of the Avari meaning “Elves who would not go to Aman”. This term was coined to distinguish them from the Úmanyar “Elves who did not go to Aman, but not because they refused” (that is, the Sindar). It is a combination of Amanyar (“Elves of Aman”) with the prefix ava- for refusal. Unlike the other elaborations of Amanyar, this term appears in the singular in at least one place: avamanya “not (willing to go to) Aman” (PE17/143).

enelmo

go-between, intervener, intermediary [as noun], mediator

enelmo noun "a go-between, intervener, intermediary [as noun], mediator" (VT47:14)

enelmo

noun. go-between, intervener, intermediary, mediator

etsurya-

verb. to go out, to go out, *blow out

A verb appearing in the phrase ar thúlë Manwëo {etturinye >>} etsurinye... “and the spirit [breath] of Manwe went out” (NM/239-240). According to Carl Hostetter, etturinye was not crossed out, but a revision of the phrase used etsurinye instead. This second form is likely the half-strong past tense of a verb etsurya-, a combination of et “out” and surya- (< ✱thusya-) “blow (intr.)”, so more literally “✱to blow out [of something]”. The translation “went out” is therefore probably a loose translation, and this verb should only be used of a blowing thing like breath or wind. The form etturinye is what the past tense would have been if developed directly from ancient ✱et-thusya, while etsurinye would be a reformation from surya- after th > s in modern Quenya.

ho

from

ho prep. "from" (3O); cf. hó-

hótul-

verb. to come away (to leave a place and go to another)

A verb in the Quendi and Eldar essay of 1959-60 glossed “come away, so as to leave a place or group and join another in the thought or place of the speaker”, used to illustrate the mean of the prefix hó- “away from” in combination with the verb tul- “come” (WJ/368).

langa-

verb. to cross, go over, pass over

langa- vb. "to cross, go over, pass over" (VT49:65)

langa-

verb. to cross, go over, pass over

lelya-

verb. to go, proceed (in any direction), travel, to travel, go, proceed (in any direction)

A verb appearing in the Quendi and Eldar essay (Q&E) from 1959-60, glossed “go, proceed (in any direction), travel” and with a strong past form lende, derived from primitive ✶ledja- based on the root √LED (WJ/363).

Conceptual Development: This verb went through quite a number of revisions, the most stable element being its past form lende “went”. The first iteration of this verb appeared in The Etymologies as ᴹQ. lesta- “to leave” [presumably ✱led+ta] under a draft entry for the root ᴹ√ELED “go, depart, leave” (Ety/ELED), but that entry was deleted and the meaning of the extended root was revised to ᴹ√ELED “star-folk”. Elsewhere in The Etymologies Tolkien had lenna- “go” [presumably ✱led+na] with past form lende “went, departed” under the root ᴹ√LED “go, fare, travel” (Ety/LED; EtyAC/LED). In The Etymologies as published in The Lost Road Christopher Tolkien gave linna “go” (LR/368), but in their Addenda and Corrigenda to the Etymologies Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne stated the actual form was lenna (VT45/27).

The past form lende appeared regularly in Tolkien’s writings of the 1930s, 40s and 50s, typically glossed “went” (LR/47, 56, 72; SD/310), but sometimes “came” (LR/56; SD/56; PE17/65; VT27/7). These two translations were not contradictory if we assume the verb meant “proceed (in any direction)” and so could mean “go” or “come” depending on circumstance and the relative position of the speaker. Tolkien did not given another version of its stem form until lelya- [led+ya] appeared in the Q&E essay of 1959-60, as noted above (WJ/363). Another related verb form lenda- “go free” [le-n-d+a] appeared in Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) from 1969 beneath a never-before-seen root √TIG and verb tinga- “go (for a long while)”, both verbs derived via nasal-infixion from their root, but an “X X” was written in the margins next to √TIG, which seems to indicate this was a transient idea (PE22/157 and note #70).

Neo-Quenya: For purposes of Neo-Quenya, I would assume the stem form is lelya- “travel, go, proceed (in any direction)”. I would further assume lelya- implies a longer journey (“travel”) than the most generic verb for “go”, which is Q. men-; see that entry for discussion.

lelya-

verb. go, proceed (in any direction), travel

lelya- (1) vb. "go, proceed (in any direction), travel", pa.t. lendë / elendë (WJ:363, VT14:5, PE17:139) At one point Tolkien assigned a more specific meaning to the underlying root LED: "go away from the speaker or the point in mind, depart" (PE17:52), which would make lelya- a near synonym of auta-. The same source denies that the derivatives of _LED _were used simply for "go, move, travel", but elsewhere Tolkien assigns precisely that meaning to lelya-.

lenda-

verb. to go free

lenweta-

verb. go away, migrate, leave ones abode

lenweta- vb. "go away, migrate, leave ones abode", pa.t. lenwentë (PE17:51)

lerya-

verb. release, set free, let go

lerya- vb. "release, set free, let go"; negated avalerya- "bind, make fast, restrain, deprive of liberty" (VT41:5, 6)

lerya-

verb. to release, set free, let go

A verb for “release, set free, let go” in notes from 1959-60, derived from the root √LER “free” (VT41/5; PE17/160).

Conceptual Development: The Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s had ᴱQ. fainu- “release” under the early root ᴱ√FAẎA, also having to do with freedom (QL/37).

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).

men-

verb. to go, proceed, move (generally); to come, arrive, to go, proceed, move (in some direction); to come [when moving to a destination], arrive [+ locative]

The basic Quenya word for “go”, appearing with this meaning in notes from the late 1950s where it was connected to omentië “meeting” (PE17/13). It appeared regularly in Tolkien’s writing thereafter. In Definitive Linguistic Notes (DLN) from 1959 Tolkien specified that its root √MEN meant “go, move, proceed in any direction (irrespective of speaker’s position, or assumed point of thought)” (PE17/165), and in notes associated with the Ósanwe-kenta essay from this same period Tolkien said the root meant “move, proceed (in a direction intended by a person)” (VT41/6). As such, a more accurate translation would be “move (in a direction)”, somewhat more general than English “go”, which often (but not always) has the implication “move (away)”.

Indeed, Tolkien sometimes translated this verb as “come” (PE22/162) or “arrive” (VT49/24). In Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) from 1969, when discussing the phrases vá ménanyë “I am not coming” and vá meninyë ó le “I won’t come with you”, Tolkien said:

> E[nglish] says “come” in such cases where there is a question of accompanying others. Q. uses “go” [men-] of movement to or towards any point other than the “here” of the speaker, actual or reported within a narrative (PE22/162).

In notes from around 1968 Tolkien had {√ten >>} √men in various expressions for “arrive”, saying “chiefly in past {tenne >>} menne ‘arrived, reached’, which is usually used with locative not allative: {tennen >>} mennen sís ‘I arrive[d] here’ (VT49/23-24)”. I would interpret this to mean men- + locative (“go at”) could have the sense “arrive”, but (a) this notion could be remnants of the rejected root √TEN and (b) the examples in this note used “arrive” regardless of whether or not the locative was present.

In any case, it seems Q. men- could be translated by a variety of English verbs (“move, go, come, arrive”) depending on the relative positions of the speaker, the mover, and the destination.

Conceptual Development: In The Etymologies of the 1930s the root ᴹ√MEN was unglossed but does not seem to be verbal in sense, since in that document there was no verb form and ᴹQ. men was translated “place, spot” (Ety/MEN). In Demonstrative, Relative, and Correlative Stems (DRC) from the late 1940s, Tolkien first glossed ᴹ√MEN as “place, spot”, but that instance of the root was revised to ᴹ√NOM (PE23/112 and note #12). In the Quenya Verbal System (QVS) from 1948, the root did have a verbal sense, and Tolkien originally used the verb ᴹQ. men- in the sense “mean, intend, wish”, but then transferred the senses “mean, intend” to ᴹQ. tel- and the sense “wish” to ᴹQ. mer- (PE22/99 note #1, 118 note #106 and #107). In QVS Tolkien first gave the root ᴹ√MEN the translation “aim at, intend, purpose”, indicating that with the allative it meant “make for, proceed towards”, but in red ink he revised the root’s gloss to “go, proceed” (PE22/103 and note #24).

Throughout the 1950s and 60s, Tolkien vacillated on the meaning of the root √MEN switching between “place”, “intend” and “go”, but starting in 1959 he mostly used the verb men- in the sense “go, move (in a direction)”, as described above.

In earlier writings, Tolkien used a variety of different Qenya words for “go”. In the Gnomish Lexicon of the 1910s, he had ᴱQ. inta- as the cognate of G. intha “go (indefinite), fare, proceed” (GL/51). In Early Qenya Word-lists of the 1920s he had ᴱQ. ere “goes” and ᴱQ. tie- “go”, but both were rejected without replacement (PE16/133)

Neo-Quenya: For purposes of Neo-Quenya, I would use men- only in the sense “move (in a direction)”, mostly translatable “go” or “come” depending on context. In combination with the locative I would translate men- as “arrive” as in mennen Tirionessë “I arrived at Tirion, (lit.) I went at Tirion”, but I would use anya- as the more usual verb for “reach, arrive at”. I have seen some Neo-Quenya writers use men- for the more general sense “move (not necessarily in some direction)”, as in ᴺQ. menemma “motion picture”. However, I think it is better to have a separate verb for this, so I use [ᴱQ.] lev- “move (intr.)” for this purposes: ᴺQ. levemma “motion picture”.

men-

verb. go; come [to any point other than the ’here’ of the speaker]

menta-

verb. send, cause to go

menta- (1) vb. "send, cause to go" (in a desired direction) (VT41:6, VT43:15). A similar-sounding primitive verb mentioned in PE17:93 is said to have past and perfect forms that would produce Quenya *mennë*, eménië, but here Tolkien seems to be discussing a distinct intransitive verb "go" and its Sindarin descendants, and Quenya menta- rather belongs to the causative (transitive) verbs which according to the same source has "weak" past-tense forms (in -në, hence mentanë "sent", and likely ementië** as perfect "has sent").

menta-

verb. to send, cause to go (in a desired direction)

A verb for “send, cause to go (in a desired direction)” appearing in notes from 1959-60 as a causative form of √MEN “go, move, proceed” (PE17/165; VT41/6). This is probably the most general Quenya verb for “send”, as opposed to tulta- which is “send [for] = cause to come (towards the speaker)”.

mína

desiring to start, eager to go

mína adj. "desiring to start, eager to go", also verb mína- "desire to go in some direction, to wish to go to a place, make for it, have some end in view" (VT39:11)

mína-

verb. to desire to go in some direction, wish to go to a place, make for it; to have some end in view

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].

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.

pel-

verb. go round, revolve, return

pel- vb. "go round, revolve, return" (PEL), apparently also transitive "encircle" (mentioned in the Silmarillion Appendix as a meaning of the root), cf. also "Qenya" pele- "surround, fence in, pen in" (pa.t. pellë given, QL:73)

rato

soon

rato adv. "soon" (Arct)

ron(go)

adverb. soon

ron (rongo)

adverb. soon

sen-

verb. let loose, free, let go

sen- vb. "let loose, free, let go" (VT43:18)

sen-

verb. to let loose, free, let go

A verb (or root) glossed “let loose, free, let go” serving as the basis for apsen- “remit, release, forgive” in etymological notes associated with Quenya prayers from the 1950s (VT43/18).

ten-

verb. go as far as

[ten- (3) vb. "go as far as", 1st person sg. aorist tenin, (tenin coaryanna "I arrive at [or come/get to] his house"), endingless aorist tenë, present tense téna- "is on point of arrival, is just coming to an end", past tense tennë "arrived, reached", in this tense usually with locative rather than allative: tennen sís "I arrive[d] here", perfect eténië "has just arrived", future tenuva "will arrive".] (VT49:23, 35, 36; Tolkien emended the initial consonant from t to m throughout)

tinga-

verb. to go (for a long while)

A verb glossed “go (for a long while)” in Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) from 1969 derived from a never-before-seen root √TIG and via nasal-infixion of the root, but an “X X” was written in the margins next it which seems to indicate this was a transient idea (PE22/157 and note #70).

uo

together

[uo adv. "together" (PE17:191)]

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.

va

from

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".

vanya-

verb. go, depart, disappear

vanya- (2) vb. "go, depart, disappear", pa.t. vannë (WAN). The verb auta- may have replaced this word in Tolkien's later conception.

wa-

prefix. together

áva márië

go happily

etelelya-

verb. to go into exile, go out

A neologism for “go into exile” created by Boris Shapiro in PPQ (PPQ) from the early 2000s, analogous N. egledhia-. Helge Fauskanger instead used this verb to mean “go out, go forth” for his NQNT (NQNT). I think both meanings can coexist.

etemen-

verb. to go out, go forth

A neologism for “go out” used by Helge Fauskanger in his NQNT (NQNT), a combination of et(e)- “out” and men- “go”.

lelelya-

verb. to go on travelling, keep travelling

A neologism for “go on travelling, keep travelling” used by Helge Fauskanger in his NQNT (NQNT), a frequentative form of the verb lelya- “travel”.

naildë

interjection. go ahead

nailyë

interjection. go ahead, you are welcome to proceed

A neologism for “go ahead, you are welcome to proceed” coined by Luinyelle posted on 2025-05-25 in the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord Server (VLDS) as a combination of nai “may it be that” and lye “you (polite)”. Familiar and plural variants naityë and naildë also exist.

naityë

interjection. go ahead

nimba-

verb. to face, go forward

tumba-

verb. to cast down (into depths); *to dive; (orig.) to go or cause to go deep, endeepen

uo

adverb. together

áldë

interjection. go ahead

ályë

interjection. go ahead

A neologism for “go ahead” coined by Luinyelle posted on 2025-05-25 in the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord Server (VLDS), as a combination of imperative á and lye “you (polite)”. Familiar and plural variants átye and álde also exist.

átyë

interjection. go ahead

egledh-

verb. to go into exile

egledhia-

verb. to go into exile

egledhia-

verb. to go into exile

go-

prefix. together

go-

prefix. together

gwa- Archaic

prefix. together

gwa-

prefix. together (only in old compounds, the living form is go-)

ledh-

verb. *to go, fare, travel

A verb whose existence is suggested by ON. lende “fared” in The Etymologies of the 1930s under the root ᴹ√LED “go, fare, travel”, also appearing as an element in N. egledhi “go into exile” (Ety/LED). The verb ledh- thus likely has a meaning similar to its root.

The verb ledh- may also appear as an element in the verb N. neledh- within a sentence from Thrór’s Map from 1936: N. lheben teil brann i annon ar neledh __neledhi__ gar godrebh “five foot high the door and three may walk abreast” (TAI/150). Didier Willis and David Salo suggested that neledh- may actually mean “enter”, as a combination of ne- “in” and ledh- “go” (PED-TAI, GS/216-7).

Conceptual Development: In notes from the 1950s and 60s, Tolkien said of the root √LED that:

> ... the stem was not much used in Sindarin, except in compounds with et “out”, as edlen(n), “exiled” < et-lendā. In neither Quenya nor Sindarin was the stem used just for “go, move, travel” (PE17/51).

Neo-Sindarin: The above note makes the use of an independent verb ledh- in Neo-Sindarin rather dubious. For purposes of Neo-Sindarin I would assume S. †ledh- “go, fare, travel” was archaic, surviving mainly as an element in other verbs like [ᴺS.] edledhia- “go into exile” and [N.] neledh- “enter”. For “go” I would use S. men- and for “travel” I would use S. glenna-.

o

preposition. from, of (preposition (as a proclitic) used in either direction, from or to the point of view of the speaker)

According to WJ/366, the preposition "is normally o in all positions, though od appears occasionally before vowels, especially before o-". With a suffixed article, see also uin

-ô

preposition. from

A prepositional suffix translated “from” (SD/429). In a few places, the suffix appears with the glide-consonant v (pronounced [w]) between it and a preceding u-vowel (SD/247, 249). It is likely related to the Quenya genitive inflection Q. -o.

Conceptual Development: At an earlier conceptual stage, this suffix was a grammatical inflection, the draft-genitive -ō (SD/438).

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).

auta-

verb. to go, depart, pass away

delia-

verb. to go, proceed

ho

preposition. from

vo-

prefix. together