us-

verb. us-

us- (þ) prefix denoting something bad; cf. uscarë

us-

prefix. [wrong] with a bad sense; unsuitable, bad, improper, useless, wrong

us-

escape

#us- vb. "escape" (given in the form usin "he escapes" in LT1:251; this would have to mean "I escape" if the word is to be adopted to Tolkien's later Quenya). Cf. uswë.

us-

verb. to escape, get out

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.

-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_)

-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-.

-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).

-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).

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".

histë

dusk

histë noun "dusk" (LT1:255)

hísë

dusk

hísë (2) noun "dusk" (LT1:255). A "Qenya" form possibly obsoleted by #1 above.

lómë

dusk, twilight

lómë noun "dusk, twilight", also "night"; according to SD:415, the stem is lómi- (contrast the "Qenya" genitive lómen rather than **lómin in VT45:28). According to PE17:152, lómë refers to night "when viewed favourably, as a rule, but it became the general rule" (cf. SD:414-415 regarding lōmi as an Adûnaic loan-word based on lómë, meaning "fair night, a night of stars" with "no connotations of gloom or fear"). In the battle-cry auta i lómë "the night is passing" (Silm. ch. 20), the "night" would however seem to refer metaphorically to the reign of Morgoth. As for the gloss, cf. Lómion masc. name "Child of Twilight [dusk]", the Quenya name Aredhel secretly gave to Maeglin _(SA). Otherwise lómë is usually defined as "night" (Letters:308, LR:41, SD:302 cf.414-15, SA:dú)_; the _Etymologies defines lómë as "Night [as phenomenon], night-time, shades of night, Dark" (DO3/DŌ, LUM, DOMO, VT45:28), or "night-light" (VT45:28, reading of _lómë uncertain). In early "Qenya" the gloss was "dusk, gloom, darkness" (LT1:255). Cf. lómelindëpl. lómelindi "nightingale" _(SA:dú, LR:41; SD:302, MR:172, DO3/DŌ, LIN2, TIN). _Derived adjective #lómëa "gloomy" in Lómëanor "Gloomyland"; see Taurelilómëa-tumbalemorna...

usque

noun. dusk

dusk

usque

noun. dusk, twilight

usquë

reek

usquë ("q")noun "reek" (USUK). In the pre-classical Tengwar system presupposed in the Etymologies, usquë was also the name of tengwa #16, which at this conceptual stage had the value squ (VT46:20). Later, Tolkien would call this letter unquë, with the value nqu.

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.

we

we

we, wé, see ve #2