A root mentioned in notes from the late 1950s having to do with “persons” serving as the basis for the suffix Q. -wë common in ancient Quenya names (PE17/189-90). In The Etymologies of the 1930s this suffix had two variants: masculine ᴹQ. -we derived from root ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour”, but also abstract ᴹQ. -we derived from unrelated ᴹ✶-wē (Ety/WEG). The suffix was masculine in some later notes as well, where Tolkien said “√WEG, WEƷ, √NES, NETH- referred to masculinity and femininity apart from sex and so could refer to the Valar and Maiar” (PE17/190), but this etymology was rejected and in its place Tolkien wrote: “√WE ? WEƷ ‘person’, individual (only used of Elves and Men), thus origin of -we in Quenya names as Manwe, Voronwe” (PE17/189). In Quenya Notes (QN) from 1957 Tolkien wrote:
> -we in Quenya names (Manwe, etc.). This is in origin a separate word √WĒ (WE’E ?), from its form an ancient element of Eldarin vocabulary. Probably related to Q ve “as, like”; vëa “seeming, apparent”; vávea, ovéa “(con)similar, alike”. In Sindarin adoption of Quenya names (as Voronwe > Bronweg) -we was sometimes used to represent -we, which historically had become w or u (as in Elu = Elwe). But this S -we is of distinct origin, √WEG- “live, be active”. Hence ✱wego(n) “living creature”: Q weo, vëo, S gwê (PE17/189).
In these Quenya Notes, √WĒ as a name element was distinct from √WEG “active”, and neither were distinctly masculine. The initial version of this note glossed √WE as “a person or being” (PE17/190), but in revision Tolkien connected it to Q. ve “as, like” (PE17/189). The interpretation of the suffix -we as gender-neutral was mentioned again in The Shibboleth of Fëanor from 1968 where Tolkien said it was derived from √EWE “person” (PM/340). However, the only feminine name where this element appeared was Q. Elenwë the wife of Turgon (S/90, PM/345), and most of the names with this element were both masculine and ancient.
See the entry on √WEG for more on the evolution of earlier, largely masculine, forms.
A primitive “dual” element mentioned in notes on numbers from the late 1960s, contributing to the forms of primitive ✶enekwe “six” and ✶yun(e)kwe “twelve” in the Quenya branch of Elvish, as well as the ancient 1st person inclusive pronoun ✶ñwe (VT48/10). It was probably related to the ancient dual suffix ✶-ū (Let/427). It was also likely a later iteration the dual root ᴱ√WI from the Qenya Lexicon of the 1910s which was likewise connected to dual U (QL/33). This early root was mentioned in the contemporaneous Gnomish Lexicon as ᴱ✶u̯i (GL/45).