Tolkien experimented with various words for “debt, trespass” in drafts of the Átaremma prayer from the 1950s. In the earliest draft Tolkien had lucassë (VT43/8), revised to lucië in the second draft (VT43/9-10), and luhta in the third (VT43/11), all based on luc-. In the third version luhta was deleted and replaced by rohta, with luhta reappearing in the fourth version only to be revised again to rohta (VT43/11-12). In the final two versions Tolkien used úcarë (VT43/12), but this may have a different sense such as “misdeed” or “sin”: compare úcarindo “✱sinner” from the Aia María prayer (VT43/11-12).
The derivations of the luc-forms are unclear, as none of the attested meanings of the root √LUK seem to fit. Likewise the attested meaning of ᴹ√ROK has to do with horses, which also doesn’t fit.
Neo-Quenya: For purposes of Neo-Quenya, I would ignore the luc-forms, but would retain rohta for the sense “debt”. For example, Helge Fauskanger used rohta “debt” in his NQNT (NQNT).
Tolkien experimented with various words for “debt, trespass” in drafts of the Átaremma prayer from the 1950s. In the earliest draft Tolkien had lucassë (VT43/8), revised to lucië in the second draft (VT43/9-10), and luhta in the third (VT43/11), all based on luc-. In the third version luhta was deleted and replaced by rohta, with luhta reappearing in the fourth version only to be revised again to rohta (VT43/11-12). In the final two versions Tolkien used úcarë (VT43/12), but this may have a different sense such as “misdeed” or “sin”: compare úcarindo “✱sinner” from the Aia María prayer (VT43/11-12).
The derivations of the luc-forms are unclear, as none of the attested meanings of the root √LUK seem to fit. Likewise the attested meaning of ᴹ√ROK has to do with horses, which also doesn’t fit.
Neo-Quenya: For purposes of Neo-Quenya, I would ignore the luc-forms, but would retain rohta for the sense “debt”. For example, Helge Fauskanger used rohta “debt” in his NQNT (NQNT).