An unglossed root in the Outline of Phonology from the early 1950s illustrating certain phonetic combinations (PE19/98), and therefore possibly not a “real” root.
Primitive elvish
mel
root. love, love, [ᴹ√] love (as friend)
melā
verb. love
melā-
verb. to love
ndilā-
verb. to love, be devoted to
ndīli
noun. a special concern with or love for
ndilā
verb. love, be devoted to
lemek
root. [unglossed]
phut
root. [unglossed]
An unglossed root appearing in the second version of Tengwesta Qenderinwa (TQ2) as an etymological variation of √PUT (PE18/90).
sal
root. [unglossed], *harp(ing), lyre
The unglossed root ᴱ√SALA appeared in the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s with derivatives like ᴱQ. salma “lyre, small harp” and ᴱQ. salumbe “harping, music” (QL/81). The root √SAL appeared again Common Eldarin: Verb Structure from the early 1950s to illustrate the reformed perfect form of its verb Q. asálie (PE22/132), but since these later forms are unglossed it is unclear whether they have the same meaning (“✱harp(ing)”) as the earlier version of the root.
stuk
root. [unglossed]
tig
root. [unglossed]
A root appearing in Late Notes on Verb Structure (LVS) from 1969 as the basis for the verb Q. tinga- “go (for a long while)” (PE22/157). The etymology was marked with an “X” and so was probably a transient idea (PE22/157 note #70).
graw Reconstructed
root. [unglossed], [ᴹ√] dark, swart
This root appeared as a primitive form grawa serving as the basis of the word Q. roa “bear” >> “dog” in notes on monosyllabic roots from 1968 (VT47/35); a Sindarin derivative S. graw “bear” appeared in other notes written around the same time (VT47/12). Patrick Wynne suggested that in the sense “bear” grawa might be connected to the root ᴹ√GRAWA “dark, swart” from The Etymologies of the 1930s (EtyAC/GRAWA).
This root was the basis for Elvish “love” words for all of Tolkien’s life. The root first appeared as ᴱ√MELE “love” in the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s with derivatives like ᴱQ. mel- “to love”, ᴱQ. meles(se) “love”, and ᴱQ. melin “dear, beloved” (QL/60). In the contemporaneous Gnomish Lexicon it had similar derivatives like G. mel- “love” and G. melon “dear, beloved” (GL/57).
In The Etymologies of the 1930s Tolkien specified that ᴹ√MEL meant “love (as friend)”, and for the first time it included the derivative N. mellon “friend” (Ety/MEL); Gnomish “friend” words from the 1910s were mostly based on G. ged (GL/38). However, the same entry included ᴹQ. melindo/ᴹQ. melisse “lover” (male and female), so it seems even in the 1930s it could refer to romantic love (Ety/MEL). The root continued to appear in Tolkien’s later writings associated with “love” (PE18/46, 96; PE17/41; VT39/10).
In notes from 1959, Tolkien elaborated on the precise sense of √MEL and its role in romantic and non-romantic love:
> Love, which Men might call “friendship” (but for the greater strength and warmth and permanency with which it was felt by the Quendi) was represented by √mel. This was primarily a motion or inclination of the fëa [“spirit”], and therefore could occur between persons of the same sex or different sexes. It included no sexual or procreative desire, though naturally in Incarnates the difference of sex altered the emotion, since “sex” is held by the Eldar to belong also to the fëa and not solely to the hröa [“body”], and is therefore not wholly included in procreation ... The “desire” for marriage and bodily union was represented by √yer; but this never in the uncorrupted occurred without “love” √mel, nor without the desire for children. This element was therefore seldom used except to describe occasions of its dominance in the process of courting and marriage. The feelings of lovers desiring marriage, and of husband and wife, were usually described by √mel. This “love” remained, of course, permanent after the satisfaction of √yer in the “Time of the Children”; but was strengthened by this satisfaction and the memory of it to a normally unbreakable bond (NM/20).
Thus √MEL was close in sense to Greek “philia”, used of friendship, whereas √YER was used of “eros” or sexual desire. But in Elvish thinking, √MEL was essential for romantic love, and √YER only arose from that. Furthermore, √YER was not the most important element in the love between romantic partners, as the period of procreation and child-rearing took up a relatively small portion of Elvish lives. It was the more enduring feeling of friendship between lovers that really mattered, and thus √MEL was used of both non-romantic and romantic love, though it had not particular sexual connotation.