diff --git a/src/data/eldamo-data.xml b/src/data/eldamo-data.xml index 00de12dfd1..59433f0f46 100644 --- a/src/data/eldamo-data.xml +++ b/src/data/eldamo-data.xml @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ © 2008 - 2019, Paul Strack. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ---> +--> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

At this point in time, this arrangement of added and excluded words is very much a work in progress, and I am always open to feedback. Nothing here should in any way be considered “final” (if such a conclusion is even possible).

]]> <p>Words in this section are neologisms (fan-invented words) for Neo-Quenya. These words are listed here to make it easier to evaluate these words independently of words created by Tolkien. Many of these “neologisms” are actually Tolkien-invented words (or adaptations of such words) that have been updated to be more consistent with the later forms of his languages. The language of the original form is in brackets, for example: ᴺQ. [ᴱQ.] <b><a l="nq" v="occa"/></b> “knee” is an adaptation of Early Qenya <b><a l="eq" v="okka"/></b>, updated to the spelling conventions of the later Quenya language. Words adapted from the earliest versions of the language (Early Qenya or ᴱQ. from 1910-1930) are also treated as neologisms to more accurately reflect their degree of acceptance among authors of Neo-Quenya.</p> -<p>There can be considerable disagreement among fans of about the “right” way to add words into Tolkien’s languages. However, some of these neologisms have gone through some kind of community vetting process and are more generally accepted. Where available, the creator of each word as well as the process used to vet the word (if any) is listed next to the neologism. Unmarked “neologisms” are simply early words from before 1930 adopted without any changes beyond simple orthographic updates. Those marked with a “^” are early words that have gone through some minor changes from early forms to better fit the linguistic structures of Tolkien’s later languages. Those marked with a “!” are pure inventions, though they are generally based in some way on Tolkien’s linguistic elements.</p> +<p>There can be considerable disagreement among fans of Elvish about the “right” way to add words into Tolkien’s languages. However, some of these neologisms have gone through some kind of community vetting process and are more generally accepted. Where available, the creator of each word as well as the process used to vet the word (if any) is listed next to the neologism. Unmarked “neologisms” are simply early words from before 1930 adopted without any changes beyond simple orthographic updates. Those marked with a “^” are early words that have gone through some minor changes from early forms to better fit the linguistic structures of Tolkien’s later languages. Those marked with a “!” are pure inventions, though they are generally based in some way on Tolkien’s linguistic elements.</p> <p>Since Tolkien’s worked on his languages throughout his life and changed his mind many times on how they worked, we cannot incorporate all of his words into a single Neo-Quenya language if we want it be coherent. This sections lists those of Tolkien’s words that I think should <i>not</i> be used, with replacements if available, either a better word from Tolkien himself or a fan-invented word (neologism).</p> <p>Not everyone agrees which of Tolkien’s words should and should not be used in Neo-Quenya writing. Those words marked with a warning sign (⚠️) are those that I personally recommend against using, but other Neo-Quenya writers may disagree.</p> @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

At this point in time, this arrangement of added and excluded words is very much a work in progress, and I am always open to feedback. Nothing here should in any way be considered “final” (if such a conclusion is even possible).

]]> <p>Words in this section are neologisms (fan-invented words) for Neo-Sindarin. These words are listed here to make it easier to evaluate these words independently of words created by Tolkien. Many of these “neologisms” are actually Tolkien-invented words (or adaptations of such words) that have been updated to be more consistent with the later forms of his languages. The language of the original form is in brackets, for example: ᴺS. [N.] <b><a l="ns" v="laug"/></b> “warm” is an adaptation of Noldorin <b><a l="n" v="lhaug"/></b> to be consistent with the phonology of Sindarin. Words adapted from the earliest versions of the language (Early Noldorin [ᴱN.] or Gnomish [G.] from 1910-1930) are also treated as neologisms to more accurately reflect their degree of acceptance among authors of Neo-Sindarin.</p> -<p>There can be considerable disagreement among fans of about the “right” way to add words into Tolkien’s languages. However, some of these neologisms have gone through some kind of community vetting process and are more generally accepted. Where available, the creator of each word as well as the process used to vet the word (if any) is listed next to the neologism. Unmarked “neologisms” are simply early words from before 1930 adopted without any changes beyond simple orthographic updates. Those marked with a “^” are early words that have gone through some minor changes from early forms to better fit the linguistic structures of Tolkien’s later languages. Those marked with a “!” are pure inventions, though they are generally based in some way on Tolkien’s linguistic elements.</p> +<p>There can be considerable disagreement among fans of Elvish about the “right” way to add words into Tolkien’s languages. However, some of these neologisms have gone through some kind of community vetting process and are more generally accepted. Where available, the creator of each word as well as the process used to vet the word (if any) is listed next to the neologism. Unmarked “neologisms” are simply early words from before 1930 adopted without any changes beyond simple orthographic updates. Those marked with a “^” are early words that have gone through some minor changes from early forms to better fit the linguistic structures of Tolkien’s later languages. Those marked with a “!” are pure inventions, though they are generally based in some way on Tolkien’s linguistic elements.</p> <p>Since Tolkien’s worked on his languages throughout his life and changed his mind many times on how they worked, we cannot incorporate all of his words into a single Neo-Sindarin language if we want it be coherent. This sections lists those of Tolkien’s words that I think should <i>not</i> be used, with replacements if available, either a better word from Tolkien himself or a fan-invented word (neologism).</p> <p>Not everyone agrees which of Tolkien’s words should and should not be used in Neo-Sindarin writing. Those words marked with a warning sign (⚠️) are those that I personally recommend against using, but other Neo-Sindarin writers may disagree.</p> @@ -122,8 +122,8 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This section explores the phonetic developments of “Old Sindarin” between the time when the Sindar split from the Teleri and when the Noldor returned to Beleriand. See the notes on Sindarin phonetics for a description of my main methodology and sources.

]]> The information presented in this section is the Sindarin language as Tolkien described it during the publication of the Lord of the Rings and afterwards (1950-1973). Words from earlier forms of the language (Noldorin, Gnomish) are not included here, even though some of Tolkien’s earlier conceptions probably remained valid. For a more complete list of Sindarin words to use in writing, see the Neo-Sindarin language section.

]]> - This section explores the later phonetic developments in the Sindarin language of the 1950s and 1960s; for earlier (in-universe) changes see the phonetics discussions for Ancient Telerin and Old Sindarin. My analysis also compares Sindarin to the early conceptual stages of the language in order to trace the evolution of Tolkien’s ideas: Noldorin (1930s), Early Noldorin (1920s) and Gnomish (1910s).

-

My analysis of the Sindarin phonology draws heavily on David Salo’s work in A Gateway to Sindarin (GS/31-72), but there are quite a few places where my analysis differs from his, because a lot of material has been been published in the time between when he wrote his book (2004) and when I did my research (mainly 2018-2019). I also consulted a number of other articles by Bertrand Bellet (NPE, VASN) and Thorsten Renk (ENPP), and relied very heavily on the work of Roman Rausch (HPG, HPITN) for comparisons with the Gnomish and Early Noldorin conceptual stages of the language.

+ This section explores the later phonetic developments in the Sindarin language of the 1950s and 1960s; for earlier (in-universe) changes see the phonetics discussions for Ancient Telerin and Old Sindarin. My analysis also compares Sindarin to the early conceptual stages of the language in order to trace the conceptual evolution of Tolkien’s ideas: Noldorin (1930s), Early Noldorin (1920s) and Gnomish (1910s).

+

My analysis of the Sindarin phonology draws heavily on David Salo’s work in A Gateway to Sindarin (GS/31-72), but there are quite a few places where my analysis differs from his, mostly because a lot of material has been been published in the time between when he wrote his book (2004) and when I did my research (mainly 2018-2019). I also consulted a number of other articles by Bertrand Bellet (NPE, VASN) and Thorsten Renk (ENPP), and relied very heavily on the work of Roman Rausch (HPG, HPITN) for comparisons with the Gnomish and Early Noldorin conceptual stages of the language.

I consider this analysis more or less “complete”, in that I’ve explored the majority of the etymologies of published Sindarin words, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is correct in all places, since frequently the evidence is ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations. There are also a couple areas, notably Sandhi sound changes at morpheme boundaries, that I only barely cover. For Sandhi changes in particular I recommend consulting A Gateway to Sindarin (GS/51-59), which despite its age is in the only thorough exploration of this topic that has been published.

]]> The Sindarin words presented here are limited to those Tolkien used in the period around the publication of The Lord of the Rings and afterwards (1951-1973). In early periods, Tolkien used a different names for this language: either “Noldorin” or (even earlier) “Gnomish”. The words from these earlier versions of the language are not strictly speaking Sindarin. Nevertheless, many fans who compose Sindarin writings adapt some of these early words and use them with Sindarin; see Neo-Sindarin for further information.

]]> @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 - Nandorin is the language of the Silvan Elves, originally spoken in Mirkwood and Lórien but gradually displaced by Sindarin, though the Silvan Elves spoke this language with a distinct accent (LotR/1127 note #1). The Nandorin language was related to Sindarin, developing among the Telerin Elves who remained East of the Misty Mountains (PE17/60). A dialect of this language was spoken by the Green Elves of Beleriand (S/94). As such, it is conceptually related to Tolkien’s earlier Danian language from the Etymologies, but given the small number of attested words, it is difficult to deduce how similar the two languages were.

]]> + Nandorin is the language of the Silvan Elves, originally spoken in Mirkwood and Lórien but gradually displaced by Sindarin, though the Silvan Elves spoke this language with a distinct accent (LotR/1127 note #1). The Nandorin language was related to Sindarin, developing among the Telerin Elves who remained East of the Misty Mountains (PE17/60). A dialect of this language was spoken by the Green Elves of Beleriand (S/94). As such, it is conceptually related to Tolkien’s earlier Danian language from The Etymologies, but given the small number of attested words, it is difficult to deduce how similar the two languages were.

]]> @@ -206,15 +206,21 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Primitive Elvish as Tolkien conceived of it in his Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). At this stage, Tolkien imagined that the Valar originally taught the Elves language, so the Middle Primitive Elvish was also the language of the Valar. See later Primitive Elvish for Tolkien’s thoughts on this language in the period during and after the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> - - Quenya as Tolkien conceived of it in his Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). At this stage, it was generally spelled Qenya, and was the language of the first tribe of Elves only; the Noldor spoke Noldorin. See later Quenya for Tolkien’s thoughts on this language in the period during and after the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> + + Ancient Quenya, from the 1930s and 1940s. See that language for further discussion.]]> + + Quenya as Tolkien conceived of it in his Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). At this stage, it was generally spelled Qenya, and was the language of the first tribe of Elves only; the Noldor spoke Noldorin. See later Quenya for Tolkien’s thoughts on this language in the period during and after the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> + + + The form of Quenya spoken by the Lindar @@@

]]> + - In the Etymologies from the 1930s, Tolkien defined a distinct “Old Noldorin” stage of development, as the language evolved from (Middle) Primitive Elvish into Noldorin. It was the precursor to Old Sindarin as Tolkien conceived of it after the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> + In The Etymologies from the 1930s, Tolkien defined a distinct “Old Noldorin” stage of development, as the language evolved from (Middle) Primitive Elvish into Noldorin. It was the precursor to Old Sindarin as Tolkien conceived of it after the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> My analysis of the Old Noldorin phonology is based mainly on David Salo’s work on it and the Old Sindarin language in A Gateway to Sindarin (GS/31-72). I have taken a first pass at working out the basic phonetic rules for the development from Primitive Elvish through Old Noldorin to Noldorin, but I not yet compared it to the phonology of later Old Sindarin or earlier Gnomish, nor to its real-world counterpart Old Welsh.

]]> The language the Noldor as Tolkien conceived of it in his Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). At this stage, Qenya was the language of the first tribe of Elves only. The Noldorin language was the precursor to the Sindarin language that Tolkien defined shortly before the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> - In the published material, Tolkien’s most detailed description of Noldorin historical phonology was in the Comparative Tables from the 1930s (PE19/18-28). Further phonetic rules can be deduced by analyzing the sound changes appearing in the Etymologies (LR/341-400). My analysis of Noldorin phonology also relies heavily on David Salo’s work on it and the Sindarin language in A Gateway to Sindarin (GS/31-72).

+ In the published material, Tolkien’s most detailed description of Noldorin historical phonology was in the Comparative Tables from the 1930s (PE19/18-28). Further phonetic rules can be deduced by analyzing the sound changes appearing in The Etymologies (LR/341-400). My analysis of Noldorin phonology also relies heavily on David Salo’s work on it and the Sindarin language in A Gateway to Sindarin (GS/31-72).

I have taken a first pass at working out the basic phonetic rules for the development from Primitive Elvish through Old Noldorin to Noldorin, but I not yet compared it to the phonology of later Sindarin or earlier Gnomish, nor to its real-world counterpart Welsh. It is also known that there is a discussion of Noldorin phonology in an unpublished Noldorin grammar (PE13/120 note #1), so any analysis here must be considered preliminary until that document becomes available.

]]> @@ -222,23 +228,23 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Telerin as Tolkien conceived of it in his Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). See later Telerin for Tolkien’s thoughts on this language in the period during and after the publication of The Lord of the Rings.

]]> - The language the Elves of Beleriand in Tolkien’s Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). In the Etymologies from the 1930s, Tolkien described several dialects of this language, including the main Ilkorin language (Ilk.), Doriathrin (Dor.) and Falathrin (Fal.). This lexicon groups them all together under Ilkorin/Doriathrin. Tolkien also sometimes labeled these languages Beleriandic (Bel.), especially in later writings (e.g. PE18/103-4). When Tolkien rearranged his linguistic history so that Sindarin became language of the Elves of Beleriand, he abandoned Ilkorin, though some aspects of the language may have survived in North Sindarin.

+ The language the Elves of Beleriand in Tolkien’s Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). In The Etymologies from the 1930s, Tolkien described several dialects of this language, including the main Ilkorin language (Ilk.), Doriathrin (Dor.) and Falathrin (Fal.). This lexicon groups them all together under Ilkorin/Doriathrin. Tolkien also sometimes labeled these languages Beleriandic (Bel.), especially in later writings (e.g. PE18/103-4). When Tolkien rearranged his linguistic history so that Sindarin became language of the Elves of Beleriand, he abandoned Ilkorin, though some aspects of the language may have survived in North Sindarin.

]]> - The Ilkorin words presented here are almost entirely drawn from the Etymologies (LR/341-400).

]]> - Many of the names in the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s are actually Ilkorin or Doriathrin, some so designated in the main text and others indicated in the Etymologies.

]]> - There is no published grammar for Ilkorin nor any attested phrases in that language, but a bit of Ilkorin grammar can be gleaned from the examples in the Etymologies.

]]> + The Ilkorin words presented here are almost entirely drawn from The Etymologies (LR/341-400).

]]> + Many of the names in the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s are actually Ilkorin or Doriathrin, some so designated in the main text and others indicated in The Etymologies.

]]> + There is no published grammar for Ilkorin nor any attested phrases in that language, but a bit of Ilkorin grammar can be gleaned from the examples in The Etymologies.

]]> In the published material, Tolkien described Ilkorin historical phonology in two places: the Comparative Tables from the 1930s (PE19/18-28) and in some notes within the second version of Tengwesta Qenderinwa from around 1950 (TQ2, PE18/71-107). In the second work, Tolkien referred to Ilkorin as “Beleriandic” or “Sindarin”, since he was in the middle of transitioning from the Noldorin of 1930s and 1940s to the Sindarin of the 1950s and later. Shortly after TQ2 was written, he abandoned the Ilkorin language entirely, since he reconceived the native language of the Elves of Beleriand as Sindarin.

-

Both of these discussions described only some of the phonetic developments of Ilkorin: mostly sounds in isolation, independent of context except for their position in the word (initial, medial or final), as well as a couple of other specialized cases. Additional rules can be deduced by examining the phonetic developments in the Etymologies of the 1930s (LR/341-400), which are largely but not completely compatible with the changes described in the Comparative Tables.

-

In the Comparative Tables, Tolkien first said that Ilkorin was of a “Germanic type” (PE19/22 note #54) as was the case for the phonology of Early Ilkorin, but Tolkien later rejected this change, presumably after he revised the tables. He then said that “Doriath[rin] etc. = Noldorin (viz. as it used to be)”, which Christopher Gilson suggested meant that it adopted the Welsh-like phonology of earlier Gnomish and Early Noldorin (PE19/22 note #56). Thus, comparison to Welsh can provide additional clues to Ilkorin phonology.

+

Both of these discussions described only some of the phonetic developments of Ilkorin: mostly sounds in isolation, independent of context except for their position in the word (initial, medial or final), as well as a couple of other specialized cases. Additional rules can be deduced by examining the phonetic developments in The Etymologies of the 1930s (LR/341-400), which are largely but not completely compatible with the changes described in the Comparative Tables.

+

In the Comparative Tables, Tolkien first said that Ilkorin was of a “Germanic type” (PE19/22 note #54) as was the case for the phonology of Early Ilkorin, but Tolkien later rejected this description, presumably after he revised the tables. He then said that “Doriath[rin] etc. = Noldorin (viz. as it used to be)”, which Christopher Gilson suggested meant that it adopted the Welsh-like phonology of earlier Gnomish and Early Noldorin (PE19/22 note #56). Thus, comparison to Welsh can provide additional clues to Ilkorin phonology.

For my analysis of the phonology of Ilkorin and Doriathrin, I frequently consulted Helge Fauskanger’s work on these languages from his Ardalambion web site (AL-Ilkorin, AL-Doriathrin). Most of the Ilkorin phonetic rules in this lexicon agreed with Mr. Fauskanger’s analysis, but his work predates the publication of the Comparative Tables and TQ2. There are few cases where I was able to describe certain sound changes in more detail because I had access to more information, but in almost all cases I found Mr. Fauskanger’s analysis remains valid.

]]> The language of the Green Elves in Tolkien’s Middle Period (1930-1950 in the terminology of this lexicon). As such, it may be considered a precursor to the Nandorin language as Tolkien defined it after the publication of The Lord of the Rings. In this period, Tolkien mostly focused on one dialect of Danian: the Ossiriandic language spoken by the Green-elves of Ossiriand (LR/180). This lexicon incorporates the few words specifically assigned to that dialect in this section. Tolkien also discussed another Danian dialect called Leikvian (LR/188) or East Danian (PE19/18) spoken by the Green Elves that remained east of the Blue Mountains, and that dialect is treated here as well.

]]> - The Danian words presented here are drawn entirely from the Etymologies (LR/341-400).

]]> - Only a few of the names in the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s are marked as Danian in the Etymologies.

]]> + The Danian words presented here are drawn entirely from The Etymologies (LR/341-400).

]]> + Only a few of the names in the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s are marked as Danian in The Etymologies.

]]> Very little can be deduced about the grammar of Danian, given the small number of examples. This section mostly describes the history and dialects of the language.

]]> - In the published material, Tolkien only described Danian historical phonology in one place: the Comparative Tables from the 1930s (PE19/18-28). These tables described only some of the phonetic developments of Danian: mostly sounds in isolation, independent of context except for their position in the word (initial, medial or final), as well as a couple of other specialized cases. Some additional rules can be deduced by examining the phonetic developments in the Etymologies of the 1930s (LR/341-400).

-

One important clue from the Comparative Tables was that the Danian languages were of a “Germanic type”, and that more specifically Ossiriandic phonetically resembled Old English and East Danian resembled Old Norse (PE19/22). Some of the more mysterious sound changes in the Etymologies can be explained by comparison to the real-world Proto-Germanic, Old English and Old Norse languages, such as the apparent phenomenon of vowel breaking. Such comparisons must be done carefully, however. For example, Danian show little evidence of the famous sound changes from Grimm’s Law: the only parallel is the change of initial [p] to [f]. Compare this to the phonology of Early Ilkorin where the operation of Grimm’s Law is clear.

+ In the published material, Tolkien only described Danian historical phonology in one place: the Comparative Tables from the 1930s (PE19/18-28). These tables described only some of the phonetic developments of Danian: mostly sounds in isolation, independent of context except for their position in the word (initial, medial or final), as well as a couple of other specialized cases. Some additional rules can be deduced by examining the phonetic developments in The Etymologies of the 1930s (LR/341-400).

+

One important clue from the Comparative Tables was that the Danian languages were of a “Germanic type”, and that more specifically Ossiriandic phonetically resembled Old English and East Danian resembled Old Norse (PE19/22). Some of the more mysterious sound changes in The Etymologies can be explained by comparison to the real-world Proto-Germanic, Old English and Old Norse languages, such as the apparent phenomenon of vowel breaking. Such comparisons must be done carefully, however. For example, Danian show little evidence of the famous sound changes from Grimm’s Law: the only parallel is the change of initial [p] to [f]. Compare this to the phonology of Early Ilkorin where the operation of Grimm’s Law is clear.

As I did with Ilkorin and Doriathrin, I consulted Helge Fauskanger’s work on the Danian and Nandorin languages from his Ardalambion web site (AL-Nandorin), which as far as I know is the only other attempt to analyze Danian. Unfortunately, Mr. Fauskanger’s analysis predates the publication of the Comparative Tables in PE19, and he was missing the all-important clue that Danian/Ossiriandic was inspired by Old English. As such, while he able to recognize such phenomenom as vowel-breaking, his analysis was limited because he did not know which real-world languages to compare it to. Using that additional piece of information, I was able to deduce a number of patterns of sound change not appearing in Mr. Fauskanger’s article. Nevertheless, given the lack of evidence, my work here can only be described as slightly-better-informed educated guesses on the development of Danian.

@@@ For comparison to Proto-Germanic, Old English and Old Norse, I mostly used the information from articles related to those languages in Wikipedia. Given the mutable nature of those articles, I haven't cite any references to them, since any references I make could easily be out-of-date by the time someone else consults them. Instead, I left placeholder references as (ref/@@@). When I have time, I hope to fill in proper citations to those deductions, hopefully from sources from the same time period as when Tolkien created the Danian language.

]]> @@ -317,6 +323,11 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 http://www.quicksilver899.com/Tolkien/Tolkien_Dictionary.html]]> Etymological discussions of the names appearing The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion.

]]> + + + Various letters published by auction houses. The list below links to the original document, if it is available. References are by the date the letter was originally written and cite only relevant Elvish text: the first 2 digits of the decimal value are the line number, and the last 2 digits are the word position in the line.

+]]> + http://sindanoorie.net/art/ei_ai.html]]> @@ -338,7 +349,7 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 http://www.elvish.org/Tengwestie/articles/DeRosarioMartinez/earlyilkorin.pdf]]> - An analysis of Ilkorin phonology from the period prior to the Etymologies.

]]> + An analysis of Ilkorin phonology from the period prior to The Etymologies.

]]> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/elfling/]]> @@ -355,17 +366,17 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 - The Etymologies were published at the end of the Lost Road (LR/341-400). This document is one of most extensive collection of Elvish words available. It was composed between 1937 and 1938, shortly before Tolkien began work on The Lord of the Rings. It was clearly a work in progress, with ongoing changes to individual entries.

-

At this stage, Tolkien still conceived of the language that would become Sindarin as the native language of the Noldor, and it is labeled Noldorin (N) in the Etymologies. Tolkien referred to the older version of this languages as Old Noldorin (ON). He sometimes referred to the contemporary language as Exilic Noldorin (EN) or simply Exilic. For simplicity, the references in this lexicon use the abbreviation N in all such cases. The native language of the elves of Beleriand is called Ilkorin (Ilk) at this stage, with various dialects such as Doriathrin (Dor).

-

The Etymologies were transcribed in LR by Christopher Tolkien. They were revisited by Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne in VT45-46, in a pair of articles titled “Addenda and Corrigenda to the Etymologies”, referred to in this lexicon as EtymAC. The EtymAC articles indicates several places where Christopher Tolkien’s interpretations of his father’s difficult handwriting probably needs to be corrected. These corrections are indicated by the symbol “»»”.

-

Being primarily a linguistic work, the Etymologies used phonetic spellings for words. It includes the etymology (roots and primitive forms) of most words. The “>” symbol is in most cases used to indicate etymological derivation, but in a few case Christopher Tolkien used it to indicate changes Tolkien made in the text. Textual changes are always indicated by “>>” in this lexicon. Where Tolkien lists multiple forms of the same word, the first instance is often a more primitive form while the second is the newer form. This is especially common of N. (Noldorin) and ON. (Old Noldorin) entries.

+ The Etymologies were published at the end of the Lost Road (LR/341-400). This document is one of most extensive collection of Elvish words available. It was composed between 1937 and 1938, shortly before Tolkien began work on The Lord of the Rings. It was clearly a work in progress, with ongoing changes to individual entries.

+

At this stage, Tolkien still conceived of the language that would become Sindarin as the native language of the Noldor, and it is labeled Noldorin (N) in The Etymologies. Tolkien referred to the older version of this languages as Old Noldorin (ON). He sometimes referred to the contemporary language as Exilic Noldorin (EN) or simply Exilic. For simplicity, the references in this lexicon use the abbreviation N in all such cases. The native language of the elves of Beleriand is called Ilkorin (Ilk) at this stage, with various dialects such as Doriathrin (Dor).

+

The Etymologies were transcribed in LR by Christopher Tolkien. They were revisited by Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne in VT45-46, in a pair of articles titled “Addenda and Corrigenda to The Etymologies”, referred to in this lexicon as EtymAC. The EtymAC articles indicates several places where Christopher Tolkien’s interpretations of his father’s difficult handwriting probably needs to be corrected. These corrections are indicated by the symbol “»»”.

+

Being primarily a linguistic work, The Etymologies used phonetic spellings for words. It includes the etymology (roots and primitive forms) of most words. The “>” symbol is in most cases used to indicate etymological derivation, but in a few case Christopher Tolkien used it to indicate changes Tolkien made in the text. Textual changes are always indicated by “>>” in this lexicon. Where Tolkien lists multiple forms of the same word, the first instance is often a more primitive form while the second is the newer form. This is especially common of N. (Noldorin) and ON. (Old Noldorin) entries.

References are by the root element of words, as listed in LR. The numerical value indicates the position of the word within the entry.

]]> - When Christopher Tolkien prepared the Etymologies at the end of the Lost Road (LR/341), his goal was demonstrating the meaning of words within the corresponding written narrative by his father from that period. As such, he did not include all the variations and rejected forms present in the original material.

-

In Vinyar Tengwar #45 and Vinyar Tengwar #46, Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne published a set of Addenda and Corrigenda to the Etymologies including this missing material. It also corrected some errors in the original text, as indicated by the symbol “»»”.

-

References are by the root element of words, as listed in the Etymologies. These references include relationships to items from the original Etymologies where such relations are clear from context.

+ When Christopher Tolkien prepared The Etymologies at the end of the Lost Road (LR/341), his goal was demonstrating the meaning of words within the corresponding written narrative by his father from that period. As such, he did not include all the variations and rejected forms present in the original material.

+

In Vinyar Tengwar #45 and Vinyar Tengwar #46, Carl Hostetter and Patrick Wynne published a set of Addenda and Corrigenda to The Etymologies including this missing material. It also corrected some errors in the original text, as indicated by the symbol “»»”.

+

References are by the root element of words, as listed in The Etymologies. These references include relationships to items from The Etymologies as published in The Lost Road where such relations are clear from context.

Needs review.

]]> @@ -470,7 +481,7 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 - The fifth book in the History of Middle Earth series. It discusses an unfinished story, “The Lost Road”, for which the tale of the Fall of Númenor was first developed. It also includes the drafts of The Silmarillion prior to Tolkien’s temporary abandonment of that work at the end of the 1930s to focus on The Lord of the Rings. Finally, it includes the very important Etymologies, a collection of Elvish words and their derivations written in the mid-1930s, referenced separately in this lexicon (Ety, EtymAC).

+ The fifth book in the History of Middle Earth series. It discusses an unfinished story, “The Lost Road”, for which the tale of the Fall of Númenor was first developed. It also includes the drafts of The Silmarillion prior to Tolkien’s temporary abandonment of that work at the end of the 1930s to focus on The Lord of the Rings. Finally, it includes The Etymologies, a very important collection of Elvish words and their derivations written in the mid-1930s, referenced separately in this lexicon (Ety, EtymAC).

References are by page number; the first 2 digits of the decimal value are the line number, and the last 2 digits are the word position in the line.

Needs review.

]]> @@ -564,7 +575,7 @@ To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 - The twelfth issue of Parma Eldalamberon. This issue publishes two documents written in the 1910s: the Qenyqesta (PE12/1-28) and the so-called Qenya Lexicon (QL, PE11/29-106); Tolkien himself labeled this document the Qenya Dictionary. The Qenya Lexicon has its own set of entries in this lexicon, so the PE12 entries refer only to the Qenyqesta, which is an analysis of Early Qenya phonology.

+ The twelfth issue of Parma Eldalamberon. This issue publishes two documents written in the 1910s: the Qenyaqesta (PE12/1-28) and the so-called Qenya Lexicon (QL, PE11/29-106); Tolkien himself labeled this document the Qenya Dictionary. The Qenya Lexicon has its own set of entries in this lexicon, so the PE12 entries refer only to the Qenyaqesta, which is an analysis of Early Qenya phonology.

References are by page number; the first 2 digits of the decimal value are the line number, and the last 2 digits are the word position in the line.

Needs review.

]]> @@ -602,7 +613,7 @@ Arden R. Smith, Bill Welden; 2001]]> The eighteenth issue of Parma Eldalamberon. This issue includes two versions of the Tengwesta Qenderinwa, a work that describes the common primitive structures of the Elvish languages. Tolkien began writing the first version (TQ1: PE18/23-58) in the late 1930s and began the second (TQ2: PE18/71-107) in the early 1950s as a revision of the first. Tolkien wrote a partial revision of TQ1, labeled “Elements of Quendian Structure”, sometime before starting TQ2 (EQS: PE18/59-68). PE18 also contains an article on pre-Fëanorian alphabets from the 1920s, a continuation of the first article on this topic from PE16.

-

The second version of the Tengwesta Qenderinwa (TQ2) still predates Tolkien’s reorganization of the Elvish languages into Quenya and Sindarin, though early evidence of this change appear in the document, such as the name Sindarin for the Elves of Beleriand. The two main languages are still Quenya (Q.) spoken only by the Vanyar and Noldorin (N.) spoken by the Noldor, as it was in the Etymologies. The “Sindarin” of this document remains in the same continuum with the Beleriandic languages of the Etymologies (Ilkorin and Doriathrin), and is labeled “Bel.” (Beleriandic) in this lexicon.

+

The second version of the Tengwesta Qenderinwa (TQ2) still predates Tolkien’s reorganization of the Elvish languages into Quenya and Sindarin, though early evidence of this change appear in the document, such as the name Sindarin for the Elves of Beleriand. The two main languages are still Quenya (Q.) spoken only by the Vanyar and Noldorin (N.) spoken by the Noldor, as it was in The Etymologies. The “Sindarin” of this document remains in the same continuum with the Beleriandic languages of The Etymologies (Ilkorin and Doriathrin), and is labeled “Bel.” (Beleriandic) in this lexicon.

The TQ2 document is problematic for this lexicon’s divisions of Tolkien’s conceptual development, since it lies on the cusp between the Middle (1930-1950, pre-Sindarin) and Late (after 1950, post-Sindarin) Periods. To simplify comparison with later Quenya and Sindarin words, this lexicon labels the Noldorin words in TQ2 as Late Noldorin (ᴸN) or Late Old Noldorin (ᴸON), but groups them with Sindarin and Old Sindarin. This makes it easier to compare the information in TQ2 to earlier phonology documents, including TQ1 and OP1 (PE19/29-67). This also appropriately puts TQ2 in the same period as the second Outline of Phonology document (OP2) from PE19/68-107.

References are by page number; the first 2 digits of the decimal value are the line number, and the last 2 digits are the word position in the line.

Needs review.

]]> @@ -5912,7 +5923,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - A noun meaning “flower” (PE19/99). It appears as an element in Adûnaic names from the 1940s (Rôthinzil, SD/360) and later (Inziladûn, LotR/1035).

]]> + A noun meaning “flower” or more specifically “lily” (PE19/99). It appears as an element in Adûnaic names from the 1940s (Rôthinzil, SD/360) and later (Inziladûn, LotR/1035).

]]> @@ -11222,7 +11233,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu The name by which the first chief of Beorians was known, meaning “Vassal” in the language of his people (S/142). His true name was .

-

Conceptual Development: The name (G?) first appeared in the Lays of Beleriand from the 1920s (LB/187). The name remained N. in Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s (LR/274) and was explicitly marked Noldorin in the Etymologies, where it was simply “follower, vassal” used as a name (Ety/BEW). The name fit poorly even with the phonology of the earlier Noldorin language (as discussed in the entry for ), and so in later writings Tolkien reconceived the name as being in the Bëorian language (WJ/218).

]]> +

Conceptual Development: The name (G?) first appeared in the Lays of Beleriand from the 1920s (LB/187). The name remained N. in Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s (LR/274) and was explicitly marked Noldorin in The Etymologies, where it was simply “follower, vassal” used as a name (Ety/BEW). The name fit poorly even with the phonology of the earlier Noldorin language (as discussed in the entry for ), and so in later writings Tolkien reconceived the name as being in the Bëorian language (WJ/218).

]]> @@ -11538,7 +11549,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu Daughter of and leader of the Haladin (S/146). Her name seems to be derived from the prefix “chief, head” like all the other early leaders of the Haladin (WJ/238), though it might also be derived from “watch, guard” (WJ/270).

-

Conceptual Development: In the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s, this name was applied to various male characters described as “hunters” (SM/108 note #11, LR/130), and in the Etymologies was tentatively given as a Noldorin name derived from the roots ᴹ√SKAL “skin, fur” or ᴹ√ “uplift” (Ety/KHAL), but both these derivations were rejected. The leader of the Haladin was stil described as male in Lord of the Rings drafts from the 1940s (WR/157). The male Haleth the Hunter still appeared in the Grey Annals from the early 1950s (WJ/48), but in later Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s, the leader of the Haladin was described as female (WJ/221). She appeared in a genealogy chart from this period (WJ/237), where a note indicates the derivation given above.

]]> +

Conceptual Development: In the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s, this name was applied to various male characters described as “hunters” (SM/108 note #11, LR/130), and in The Etymologies was tentatively given as a Noldorin name derived from the roots ᴹ√SKAL “skin, fur” or ᴹ√ “uplift” (Ety/KHAL), but both these derivations were rejected. The leader of the Haladin was stil described as male in Lord of the Rings drafts from the 1940s (WR/157). The male Haleth the Hunter still appeared in the Grey Annals from the early 1950s (WJ/48), but in later Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s, the leader of the Haladin was described as female (WJ/221). She appeared in a genealogy chart from this period (WJ/237), where a note indicates the derivation given above.

]]> @@ -11605,7 +11616,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu Brother of , as indicated in a late genealogy chart of the House of Haleth (WJ/237).

-

Conceptual Development: N. was the son of (male) the Hunter and father of in Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s (SM/297, LR/275). In the Etymologies, the name Hûndor was given as a combination of “heart” and the suffix “lord” (Ety/KHŌ-N, EtyAC/KHŌ-N).

+

Conceptual Development: N. was the son of (male) the Hunter and father of in Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s (SM/297, LR/275). In The Etymologies, the name Hûndor was given as a combination of “heart” and the suffix “lord” (Ety/KHŌ-N, EtyAC/KHŌ-N).

The character Hundor continued to appear in Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s (WJ/49), but when the character of became a lady, the genealogy of this house was rearranged so that became the father of , and the similarly named Hundar became instead his brother (WJ/237).

]]> @@ -11639,7 +11650,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu Youngest son of and father of (S/148). His name was from the language of Atani but adapted into Sindarin (PM/348, 364 note #49).

-

Conceptual Development: In the earliest Lost Tales, the father of Tuor was first named G. “axe” (LT2/88, LT2A/Peleg). The name was revised to ᴱN. in Lays of Beleriand from the 1920s (LB/145). The name only became N. in the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s (SM/24, LR/275), and the Etymologies was given as a Noldorin name meaning “heart-vigour, courage”, derived from primitive ᴹ✶ (Ety/KHŌ-N, GOR). In notes for the Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s Tolkien decided his name was adapted from his native language, as noted above.

]]> +

Conceptual Development: In the earliest Lost Tales, the father of Tuor was first named G. “axe” (LT2/88, LT2A/Peleg). The name was revised to ᴱN. in Lays of Beleriand from the 1920s (LB/145). The name only became N. in the Silmarillion drafts from the 1930s (SM/24, LR/275), and The Etymologies was given as a Noldorin name meaning “heart-vigour, courage”, derived from primitive ᴹ✶ (Ety/KHŌ-N, GOR). In notes for the Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s Tolkien decided his name was adapted from his native language, as noted above.

]]> @@ -11843,7 +11854,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu Son of and father of (S/148). His name was from the language of Atani but adapted into Sindarin (PM/348, 364 note #49).

-

Conceptual Development: This character was named G. when he first appeared in the the earliest Lost Tales (LT1/48), and kept this name thereafter, though sometimes it appeared in variant forms such as Tûr (LT2/202) or Turlin (SM/5). Christopher Tolkien suggested the earliest version of this name was probably associated with the root ᴱ√ “be strong” (LT1A/Tuor). In the Etymologies from the 1930s, N. was given the meaning “strength-vigor” and derived from primitive ᴹ✶ (Ety/TUG, GOR). In notes for the Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s Tolkien decided his name was adapted from his native language, as noted above.

]]> +

Conceptual Development: This character was named G. when he first appeared in the the earliest Lost Tales (LT1/48), and kept this name thereafter, though sometimes it appeared in variant forms such as Tûr (LT2/202) or Turlin (SM/5). Christopher Tolkien suggested the earliest version of this name was probably associated with the root ᴱ√ “be strong” (LT1A/Tuor). In The Etymologies from the 1930s, N. was given the meaning “strength-vigor” and derived from primitive ᴹ✶ (Ety/TUG, GOR). In notes for the Silmarillion revisions from the 1950s-60s Tolkien decided his name was adapted from his native language, as noted above.

]]> @@ -12236,7 +12247,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu order="04200" page-id="2075789753"> In Ilkorin, it seems that [g] developed into a vowel before the nasals [m] and [n], similar to developments in Noldorin, though the vowels that developed in the two languages were different. This rule seems to apply to original primitive [g]: ᴹ✶ > Dor. (Ety/LUG², EtyAC/LUG²). It also applied to [g] that developed from [k] before nasals: ᴹ✶ > Ilk. (Ety/TAK), as well as [g] that developed from [ɣ] before nasals: ᴹ✶ > kogna > coun > Ilk. (Ety/KUƷ).

-

The last of these developments makes it difficult to determine when this vocalization occurred. Since primitive [ɣ] fell together with [g] before nasals, the vocalization of [g] could have occurred earlier, before . Phonetically, though, it makes more sense for the vocalization to have occurred after spirantalization so that [Vg{mn}] > [Vɣ{mn}] > [Vu{mn}]. However, it is simpler to describe this rule as direct vocalization of [g], which is how the development is presented here.

+

The last of these developments makes it difficult to determine when this vocalization occurred. Since primitive [ɣ] fell together with [g] before nasals, the vocalization of [g] could have occurred earlier, before . Phonetically, though, it makes more sense for the vocalization to have occurred after spirantalization so that [Vg{mn}] > [Vɣ{mn}] > [Vu{mn}]. However, it is simpler to describe this rule as direct vocalization of [g], which is how the phonetic development is presented here.

The vowel that developed seems to have been [u], such as: ᴹ✶ > Ilk. (Ety/TAK). Where the result was [ou], this further developed into [au]: ᴹ✶ > kogna > coun > Ilk. (Ety/KUƷ). Tolkien seems to have been uncertain about the development of [ug{mn}]. At first he seems to have decided that [g] developed into [i]: ᴹ✶ > Dor. luin (Ety/LUG²), but then he revised this word to Dor. , making it consistent with the other developments of [g] into [u] (EtyAC/LUG²).

Unlike what happened in Noldorin, there are no examples of this vocalization of [g] occurring in Ilkorin before [l] or [r]. One possible counter-example indicates that such changes did not occur: which may have developed from primitive [leklā] (Ety/LEK). If the vocalization rule applied, it could be expected to develop into [legla >] **leul. The evidence is thin enough, though, that it is hard to make a conclusion one way or another.

]]> @@ -12375,7 +12386,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - In the Ilkorin phonetic developments described in the Comparative Tables, an initial labialized [s] lost its labialization (PE19/21). In the Etymologies, none of the roots beginning with SY- have Ilkorin derivatives, so there are no attested examples of this change.

]]> + In the Ilkorin phonetic developments described in the Comparative Tables, an initial labialized [s] lost its labialization (PE19/21). In The Etymologies, none of the roots beginning with SY- have Ilkorin derivatives, so there are no attested examples of this change.

]]> @@ -12528,7 +12539,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - There are a couple of examples in which a long [ō] became [ū] in Ilkorin, a peculiar development because the Comparative Tables indicate that primitive [ō] was usually preserved (PE19/25). Helge Fauskanger noted this aberrant development for ᴹ✶ > Ilk. , but did not speculate on a general rule (AL-Ilkorin/dûm). After Fauskanger’s work, a second example was published in the Addenda and Corrigenda to the Etymologies: ᴹ✶ > Dor. from a deleted entry (EtyAC/GÓROM).

+ There are a couple of examples in which a long [ō] became [ū] in Ilkorin, a peculiar development because the Comparative Tables indicate that primitive [ō] was usually preserved (PE19/25). Helge Fauskanger noted this aberrant development for ᴹ✶ > Ilk. , but did not speculate on a general rule (AL-Ilkorin/dûm). After Fauskanger’s work, a second example was published in the Addenda and Corrigenda to The Etymologies: ᴹ✶ > Dor. from a deleted entry (EtyAC/GÓROM).

The change precedes the consonant [m] in both examples, so it is logical to assume that this is the situation leading [ō] to become [ū]. There are other phonetic rules in Ilkorin that associate [u] and [m]: in the development of vowels from syllabic final [l], [r], [n], [m], the vowel that developed was usually [o] (-Cl > -Col; -Cr > -Cor; -Cn > -Con) but in the case of [m] was [u] (-Cm > -Cum).

This change must have occurred before [ā] became [ō], because the change of [ō] to [ū] did not apply to ᴹ✶kwāme > Ilk. (Ety/KWAM). It is possible this development occurred with short [ŭ], but there are no attested examples. Helge Fauskanger suggested that may also have occurred before other nasals such as [n] (AL-Ilkorin/thôn).

]]> @@ -12713,7 +12724,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu from="-{kgx}w-|VxwV" order="04600" page-id="2548364623"> - In Ilkorin, it seems that medial labialized velars were de-labialized, losing the following [w]-sound. There are several examples of this medial development in the Comparative Tables: ᴹ✶-ŋw- > [-ŋgw- >] Ilk. -ŋg-, ᴹ✶-kw- > [-gw- >] Ilk. -g(w)- (PE19/23). There are also a number of examples of this development in the Etymologies (see below). If the [w] in these examples were retained, it would later have become final after , and then this final [w] would have become [u], as happened with ᴹ✶ > (Ety/KHIS). The fact that there are no such examples of final [u] after a velar is strong evidence for this de-labialization of medial velars.

+ In Ilkorin, it seems that medial labialized velars were de-labialized, losing the following [w]-sound. There are several examples of this medial development in the Comparative Tables: ᴹ✶-ŋw- > [-ŋgw- >] Ilk. -ŋg-, ᴹ✶-kw- > [-gw- >] Ilk. -g(w)- (PE19/23). There are also a number of examples of this development in The Etymologies (see below). If the [w] in these examples were retained, it would later have become final after , and then this final [w] would have become [u], as happened with ᴹ✶ > (Ety/KHIS). The fact that there are no such examples of final [u] after a velar is strong evidence for this de-labialization of medial velars.

According to the Comparative Tables, the development for intervocalic [-xw-] was slightly different. Here, the labialized spirant developed into [-h-], probably first becoming ƕ [hʷ]. This change did not occur if the [-xw-] was preceded by a consonant, in which case the [w] was simply lost, as described above: ᴹ✶ > [alxwa >] Ilk. [alx] (Ety/ÁLAK).

]]> @@ -12782,7 +12793,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - A Doriathrin word for “bridge” appearing the Addenda and Corrigenda to the Etymologies (EtyAC/YAT), likely a derivative of the same primitive form ᴹ✶ as its cognates in other languages. An earlier deleted form iaðum may indicate Tolkien’s uncertainty over the development of initial [j] (= “y”) in Ilkorin; elsewhere the rule is that .

]]> + A Doriathrin word for “bridge” appearing the Addenda and Corrigenda to The Etymologies (EtyAC/YAT), likely a derivative of the same primitive form ᴹ✶ as its cognates in other languages. An earlier deleted form iaðum may indicate Tolkien’s uncertainty over the development of initial [j] (= “y”) in Ilkorin; elsewhere the rule is that .

]]> @@ -12845,7 +12856,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu gloss="exterior, outside, (lit.) outside the fence" cat="SR_OO" page-id="2201816155"> - A Doriathrin noun meaning “the exterior, the outside”, literally “outside the fence” (Ety/GAT(H)). It is a combination of “outside” and “fence”. The entry in the Etymologies also had a rejected variant argadon (EtyAC/GAT(H)).

]]> + A Doriathrin noun meaning “the exterior, the outside”, literally “outside the fence” (Ety/GAT(H)). It is a combination of “outside” and “fence”. The entry in The Etymologies also had a rejected variant argadon (EtyAC/GAT(H)).

]]> ya- and the plu - A variant form of “[Land] Outside the Fence”, marked as in the Etymologies (Ety/GAT(H), Ety/AR²). If so, it is evidence that in that dialect, primitive [g] became [i] between an [r] and a vowel, just as in the main Ilkorin dialect .

+ A variant form of “[Land] Outside the Fence”, marked as in The Etymologies (Ety/GAT(H), Ety/AR²). If so, it is evidence that in that dialect, primitive [g] became [i] between an [r] and a vowel, just as in the main Ilkorin dialect .

Conceptual Development: In the Gnomish Lexicon from the 1910s, ᴱIlk. or Ariador was also said to be a dialectical word, from (early) Ilkorin (GL/20), possibly with a similar phonetic development.

]]> @@ -12908,7 +12919,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - A Doriathrin adjective meaning “red” derived from the root ᴹ√ (Ety/YAR), likely derived from primitive form such as *✶yarna [jarna]. It is a good example of how in Ilkorin.

]]> + A Doriathrin adjective meaning “red” derived from the root ᴹ√ (Ety/YAR), likely derived from a primitive form such as *✶yarna [jarna]. It is a good example of how in Ilkorin.

]]> @@ -12968,7 +12979,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - A title in the Etymologies translated “Vala-king”, a combination of the root ᴹ√ and Ilk. “king”, also attested in its plural form Balthorin (Ety/BAL). It is an example of how voiceless stops became spirants after liquids l and r.

]]> + A title in The Etymologies translated “Vala-king”, a combination of the root ᴹ√ and Ilk. “king”, also attested in its plural form Balthorin (Ety/BAL). It is an example of how voiceless stops became spirants after liquids l and r.

]]> @@ -12992,7 +13003,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - This word is marked Ilk. in one entry in the Etymologies (Ety/KOR), but elsewhere the same word is marked as Noldorin: N. (Ety/MBAS). The elements of this word are also marked as Noldorin: N. “bread” (Ety/MBAS) and N. “round” (Ety/KOR). It is possible the Ilkorin word underwent the same phonetic development as its Noldorin counterpart, or that it is a loan word from Noldorin.

]]> + This word is marked Ilk. in one entry in The Etymologies (Ety/KOR), but elsewhere the same word is marked as Noldorin: N. (Ety/MBAS). The elements of this word are also marked as Noldorin: N. “bread” (Ety/MBAS) and N. “round” (Ety/KOR). It is possible the Ilkorin word underwent the same phonetic development as its Noldorin counterpart, or that it is a loan word from Noldorin.

]]> @@ -13105,7 +13116,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - An adjective meaning “bowed, bow-shaped, bent” developed from the primitive form ᴹ✶ (Ety/KUƷ). The middle diphthong went through various sound changes as indicated in the Etymologies. First the [u] became [o] preceding the final [a] (kogna), then the [g] (from ✶ʒ) vocalized to [u] before the [n] (coun) and finally the diphthong [ou] became [au] (caun).

]]> + An adjective meaning “bowed, bow-shaped, bent” developed from the primitive form ᴹ✶ (Ety/KUƷ). The middle diphthong went through various sound changes as indicated in The Etymologies. First the [u] became [o] preceding the final [a] (kogna), then the [g] (from ✶ʒ) vocalized to [u] before the [n] (coun) and finally the diphthong [ou] became [au] (caun).

]]> @@ -13129,7 +13140,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - Ilkorin had a class-plural suffix , identical in form and origin to (PE21/57). This suffix appeared in the Etymologies from the 1930s within the collective form Eglath of “Elf”, both as Doriathrin (Ety/ELED) and general Ilkorin (Ety/GAT(H), LED). It is possible this suffix was also used as (and was perhaps inspired by) the Gnomish general plural suffix .

]]> + Ilkorin had a class-plural suffix , identical in form and origin to (PE21/57). This suffix appeared in The Etymologies from the 1930s within the collective form Eglath of “Elf”, both as Doriathrin (Ety/ELED) and general Ilkorin (Ety/GAT(H), LED). It is possible this suffix was also used as (and was perhaps inspired by) the Gnomish general plural suffix .

]]> @@ -13157,7 +13168,7 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - A noun meaning “small gull, petrel, sea-bird” derived from primitive ᴹ✶ (EtyAC/KWǢ, PE22/32), an example of how primitive in Ilkorin. In the Etymlogies, this word was marked as Ilkorin (EtyAC/KWǢ), while in Tolkien’s description of the “Fëanorian Alphabet”, it was marked as Falathrin (PE22/32).

]]> + A noun meaning “small gull, petrel, sea-bird” derived from primitive ᴹ✶ (EtyAC/KWǢ, PE22/32), an example of how primitive in Ilkorin. In the Etymologies, this word was marked as Ilkorin (EtyAC/KWǢ), while in Tolkien’s description of the “Fëanorian Alphabet”, it was marked as Falathrin (PE22/32).

]]> @@ -13357,8 +13368,8 @@ After removing the pronominal prefix ya- and the plu - Doriathrin was the dialect of Ilkorin spoken by the Elves of (LR/175). In the Etymologies, Tolkien marked almost as many words as Doriathrin (Dor.) as he did Ilkorin (Ilk.). There are very few examples of words appearing in both dialects, however, and almost all of them have the same form. In fact, the only words with distinct Ilkorian and Doriathrin forms are the names Ilk. Argad/Argador (Ety/AR²) versus Dor. (Ety/GAT(H)), and Ilk. (Ety/MAP) versus Dor. (Ety/KAB).

-

Despite the lack of evidence, the examples in the Etymologies do hint at several possible differences between the two dialects:

+ Doriathrin was the dialect of Ilkorin spoken by the Elves of (LR/175). In The Etymologies, Tolkien marked almost as many words as Doriathrin (Dor.) as he did Ilkorin (Ilk.). There are very few examples of words appearing in both dialects, however, and almost all of them have the same form. In fact, the only words with distinct Ilkorian and Doriathrin forms are the names Ilk. Argad/Argador (Ety/AR²) versus Dor. (Ety/GAT(H)), and Ilk. (Ety/MAP) versus Dor. (Ety/KAB).

+

Despite the lack of evidence, the examples in The Etymologies do hint at several possible differences between the two dialects:

In some of these examples, the presence of an existing short o in one syllable of the word may have prevented the reduction of au in another syllable via dissimilation: Gaurhoth, , . The same might also be true of u in and . Other examples are hard to explain, though: “day” remained in but reduced in names of the week like and ; “dwarf” remained in and but reduced in and ; “gold” remained in but reduced in , and “Golden-bed”.

+

@@@ also preserved in Araw and aw past tense of sav-

Simplification to ó: The last two examples and are of particular interest, because they are examples of cases where au did not reduce all the way to short [ŏ], but simplified to long [ō]. Similar examples include:

The last two names are outliers, because was designated a North Sindarin words in the 1950s (PE17/133) or a loan word from Ilkorin in the 1930s (Ety/LAM), and both were likely attempts to retain early Gnomish names that Tolkien happened to like the shape of (G. ). In the other examples, however, it is probably notable that the long ó was retained in a stressed position. Perhaps the reduction all the way to ŏ was not required if stressed long ó was followed only by a single consonant.

+

Rare au > a: @@@ all from primitive ā before clusters: Narbeleth, Nardol, Nardol, Narwain (from [nār-]), Aracchír (from [arāt-]) and Iarwain (from [jārā-]) vs. Iorhael, Rodwen, Rodnor, Novrod, Arodreth, condir (from Discord conversation with Elaran on 2019-07-08).

Possible phonetic rules: Sorting through all these variations and coming up a coherent set of phonetic rules is challenging, especially since we don’t know which forms represent conceptual variations or cases where Tolkien simply chose not to update names from an earlier phase of the language. Here is my attempt, however:

 -

Note that the reduction of au > o could rarely occur even in monosyllables, such as the preposition “from” derived from ✶ or ✶au(t) (PE17/148, WJ/366). Prepositions were often unstressed and practically proclitics in Sindarin, since they mutate the initial consonant of following words.

-

[ae] rarely reduced to [ĕ]: There are a couple examples where it seems [ae] likewise reduced to short [ĕ] in both Sindarin and Noldorin:

+

Note that the reduction of au > o could rarely occur even in monosyllables, such as the preposition “from” derived from ✶ or ✶au(t) (PE17/148, WJ/366) or do a (mutated) variant of taw “thither” (PE19/104). Minor words like prepositions were often unstressed and practically proclitics in Sindarin, since they mutate the initial consonant of following words, so these reductions might be the result of treating the preposition as part of the following word.

+

[ae] rarely reduced to [ĕ]: There are a few examples where it seems [ae] likewise reduced to short [ĕ] in both Sindarin and Noldorin:

This change seems to be the exception rather than the rule, however, since there are far more examples where ae is retained in polysyllables for both Sindarin and Noldorin. Another possible example is S. “Signifier” which appears beside another form Taengyl (MR/385), but as pointed out by Lokyt in a post on the Aglardh forms on 2019-03-16, very likely these two have different primitive forms, being cognates of the variant Quenya forms and Tainacolli respectively.

Conceptual Developments: There are examples of au > o in the Gnomish of the 1910s and Early Noldorin of the 1920s, as pointed out by Roman Rausch in his Historical Phonology of Goldogrin (HPG/§1.2) and Historical Phonologies of Ilkorin, Telerin and Noldorin around 1923 (HPITN/§4.2.5). This indicates that this sound change was probably an old idea of Tolkien’s:

@@ -219463,15 +230218,16 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + - There is evidence that in some conditions, the combinations [awa] became a simple diphthong [au] in Sindarin and Noldorin. This sound change was originally suggested to me by Elaran in chats on the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord server in 2018. The clearest examples of this sound change is the (occasional) development of ✶glawar(e) > S. “gold (light or colour)” (PE17/17). There are a couple other examples that might also include this sound change:

+ There is evidence that in some conditions, the combinations [awa] became a simple diphthong [au] in Sindarin and Noldorin. This sound change was originally suggested to me by Elaran in chats on the Vinyë Lambengolmor Discord server in 2018. The clearest examples of this sound change is the (occasional) development of ✶glawar(e) > S. “gold (light or colour)” (PE17/17). There are a few more examples that might include this sound change:

Most likely this sporadic sound change is tied to Sindarin stress patterns. The Sindarin word for “gold (light or colour)” also appeared as S. derived from the same root √ (PE17/159, VT41/10). There are some similar variations on the development of vowels separated by semi-vowels in Quenya (clusters like awa or aya), but in Quenya we have some explicit notes on how these developments occurred (PE19/61-62). There is one quote from Tolkien from the late 1960s that states that, unlike Quenya, the loss of intervocalic [w] was not a common pattern in Sindarin:

In S. -w- did not vanish or bec[ome] absorbed while foll[owing] vowel remained, but became u̯ and formed diphthongs when the foll[owing] vowel was lost (PE22/152).
@@ -219495,12 +230251,6 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - - - - - - @@ -219580,7 +230330,6 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - @@ -219663,7 +230412,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + @@ -219673,7 +230422,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + @@ -219728,6 +230477,33 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> + + In Sindarin, the combination ðv became ðw. The clearest description of this sound change appears in notes on the development of stops + nasals from the the late 1960s:

+
tm, dm > ðm, later ðv, ðw (VT42/26).
+

This note only shows the development for v arising from the spirantalization of m, but another late note hints at similar developments for v arising from primitive b:

+
In Sindarin zd > ´d, đ but zg, zb > đʒ, đƀ > đa, đu, as in nadha “fetter” [< ✶nazg-], maða “mud” [< ✶mazgō/ŭ], buðu “large fly” [< ✶buzbō]. (PE19/101; the primitive forms appear earlier on the same page with Quenya derivations.)
+

This note shows zb > đƀ [ðβ] > đu, but the example makes it clear that resulting u occurs where the spirant became final: ✶buzbō [> *buđƀ(o)] > buðu (Tolkien generally used ƀ to represent IPA [β]). A plausible series of sound changes would be -ðƀ(o) > -ðv > -ðw > -ðu: it is normal for final [w] to became [u] after a consonant. I think the most likely set of developments are zb, db > ðƀ > ðv, which blends with dm > ðv, all of which later becomes ðw. The resulting -ðw > -ðu when final.

+

Some rough etymological notes discussing Quenya and Sindarin words for “throne” from the late 1960s provide some more examples of this sound change. These notes describe many possible developments, but the ones relevant to this discussion are:

+
+khadmā. χanmā > χanw̃ā > hanw̃a. [Q.] tarhanwa “throne”, high seat.
+ara. ... [S.] arahaðm. arahaðw, archaf. chaðw. haðw.
+... [S.] haðma. haðwa, to seat. haðwad. arahaðwad (PE22/148).
+

These notes are somewhat difficult to parse, but it seems that the primitive form of “seat” was khadmā. Its Quenya derivative was hanwa and its Sindarin derivative was:

+
    +
  • khadmā [> *chaðv(a)] > chaðw > haðw [probably pronounced haðu].
    • +
+

The verb form haðwa- “to seat” indicates this development occurred medially as well, but here the pronunciation probably remained [ðw].

+

Note that one of the above forms, archaf, shows an inconsistent set of phonetic developments, and elsewhere on the same page Tolkien wrote “dm > v. gm > u̯w. dagma, dau(v).” It seems Tolkien was considering alternate developments whereby dm, gm > v, uw, which explains the alternate form archaf. An unrelated note from the late 1960s appearing along with the Shibboleth of Fëanor indicates that this alternate development might be North Sindarin:

+
In the Northern dialect, however, in final position only, CE. tw > dw > ðw, thw > þw, nw became b, v, f, m (VT41/8).
+

Tolkien’s notes associated with the Noldorin use of the Feanorian Alphabet from the 1930s indicate he at least considered similar developments at this early conceptual stage of the language:

+
The exhilic development [of zb, zg] (to ðw, ði̯) suggests that W S became during ON [ðb, ðg], but these letters continued to be used. zd, however, became d, with lengthening of preceding vowel, and in consequence in late ON 2 was often substituted for @ (PE22/26).
+

Tolkien rejected these phonetic developments in the 1930s, however, because he decided [z] vocalized all before voiced stops in Old Noldorin, so that zb produced u̯b (PE22/26, note #78). Likewise, in Old Noldorin all (not just in homorganic combinations of stops and nasals as in Sindarin), so that dm > nm. Thus, the combinations that normally produced ðv > ðw in Sindarin had distinct developments in Noldorin.

+

As the previous note from the 1930s indicates, the Sindarin sound change of v > w after ð resembles the medial post-consonantal vocalizations of [ɣ], whereby : lg, rg, ðg > lʒ, rʒ, ðʒ > li, ri, ði, probably passing through [j] (“y”) in the process. Unlike [ɣ], it seems [v] did not change after liquids, since medial and final lv, rv are fairly common (final lv, rv are denoted “lf, rf” in Tolkien’s orthography of Sindarin). Thus, only ðv > ðw.

+

Conceptual Development: As noted above, the combinations normally leading to ðv > ðw in Sindarin did not occur in Noldorin due to other, earlier sound changes. In Early Noldorin and Gnomish most (if not all) examples of dhw seem to be the result of dh + w, so its unclear how these phonetic developments played out in the earliest conceptual stages of the language.

]]> + + + @@ -219776,8 +230552,10 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + + @@ -219859,7 +230637,6 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - @@ -220035,7 +230812,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - In both Sindarin and Noldorin, any non-initial [h] vanished after vowels, as noted by David Salo (GS/§4.100, GS/§4.107, GS/§4.116). A similar sound change occurred in Welsh (WGCH/§94ii). This sound change primarily applied to the [h] that developed from intervocalic [s] which therefore ultimately vanished, as described by Tolkien in a note in The Etymologies from the 1930s:

N. dis “bride” cannot be direct for ON. dis since medial and final s were lost in Exhilic Noldorin (EtyAC/NDIS).
@@ -220093,7 +230870,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> from="{lrð}ɣV" order="02700" page-id="2139740021"> - Where [ɣ] appears between a sonant (voiced consonants like [l], [r] and [ð]) and a vowel, it changed into the vowel [i], as noted by David Salo (GS/§4.152). All the examples we have of this phonetic development are from Noldorin, but we have no reason to believe Sindarin was any different:

+ Where [ɣ] appears between a sonant (voiced consonants like [l], [r] and [ð]) and a vowel, it changed into the vowel [i], as noted by David Salo (GS/§4.152). Probably it based through [j] (“y”) in the process so that (for example) medial lʒ > ly > li. All the examples we have of this phonetic development are from Noldorin, but we have no reason to believe Sindarin was any different:

  • ON. > N. Diriel (Ety/DER).
  • ᴹ✶ [> *thalʒon(d)] > N. “hero, dauntless man” (Ety/STÁLAG).
    • @@ -220137,7 +230914,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - In both Sindarin and Noldorin, any [ɣ] that survived other sound changes eventually vanished. At this point, the only surviving [ɣ] appeared primarily (a) between vowels or (b) at the end of words. Furthermore, these [ɣ] were mostly the result of the soft-mutation of [g]; any [ɣ] that originated from Primitive Elvish vanished much earlier. Where this [ɣ] appeared medially before and after sonants (liquids, nasals and other spirants), it had developed into vowel (usually i but sometimes u in Noldorin). Where [ɣ] became final after another consonant, it generally had already developed into the vowel a.

    + In both Sindarin and Noldorin, any [ɣ] that survived other sound changes eventually vanished. At this point, the only surviving [ɣ] appeared primarily (a) between vowels or (b) at the end of words. Furthermore, these [ɣ] were mostly the result of the soft-mutation of [g]; any [ɣ] that originated from Primitive Elvish vanished much earlier. Where this [ɣ] appeared medially before and after sonants (liquids, nasals and other spirants), it had developed into vowel (usually i but sometimes u in Noldorin). Where [ɣ] became final after another consonant, it generally had already developed into the vowel a.

    Tolkien explicitly mentioned the vanishing of [ɣ] from [g] in notes on the Noldorin usage of the Feanorian Alphabet from the 1930s:

    Early in the third century the change (beginning to appear at the end of the second) was complete, whereby the voiced spirant [ʒ] derived from ON g became vocalized, and was lost between vowels. It was long retained in Gondolic spelling (f transcribed gh), especially where it had not become a syllabic vowel as in tara “tough” < targh, ON targa, and its original place was still marked by hiatus. But later in Gondolic spelling the use of f became rare. It was sometime retained to mark the mutation of initial g: it is then transcribed gh or ” since no consonantal sound was actually preserved: thus snjn4 golodh “Gnome”, `Bfnjn4 igholodh or i”oloð “the Gnome”. The old h-sign ½ (no longer required as h since this function was exercised by 9) was reintroduced and called gas-dil “stop-gap”, and employed to mark hiatus caused by the loss of g, ʒ and so (since the medial-hiatus was usually got rid of by contraction) usually a sign of the mutation of g: as `B½.j.4 [sic] i’oloð “the Gnome”, gasdil is thus transcribed [’] (PE22/34).

    As indicated by this note, the loss of [ɣ] from [g] played a significant role in the soft-mutation system of Sindarin and Noldorin: whereas the soft-mutation of the other voiced stops b and d were the voiced spirants v and dh, an initial g vanished completely, which was often marked with a [’] in transcription. There are numerous examples of this sound loss medially in Sindarin and Noldorin as well:

    @@ -220167,8 +230944,8 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]>     page-id="1058893297"> - - + + ē on PE19/106]]> from="V{ɣ}{lrmn}" order="01000" page-id="539122737"> - In Sindarin (as well as Noldorin and Gnomish), the voiced velar spirant [ɣ] vocalized before various consonants, most notably liquids ([l], [r]) and nasals ([m], [n]). In Noldorin, the velar nasal [ŋ] vocalized in similar ways, perhaps by merging first with [ɣ] (see the Noldorin discussion below). The resulting diphthongs in some cases had a distinct development from those of primitive diphthongs, indicating this was a comparatively late change, probably after the Old Sindarin/Old Noldorin period, as suggested by David Salo (GS/§4.87, §4.90). A similar change occurred in Welsh (WGCH/§104ii). In most cases it seems these developments were parallel to the vocalizations of the voiceless velar spirant [x], which can be used for additional clues for these phonetic developments.

    + In Sindarin (as well as Noldorin and Gnomish), the voiced velar spirant [ɣ] vocalized before various consonants, most notably liquids ([l], [r]) and nasals ([m], [n]). In Noldorin, the velar nasal [ŋ] vocalized in similar ways, perhaps by merging first with [ɣ] (see the Noldorin discussion below), but in Sindarin the vocalization of [ŋ] was distinct. The diphthongs resulting from the vocalization of [ɣ] in some cases had a distinct development from those of primitive diphthongs, indicating this was a comparatively late change, probably after the Old Sindarin/Old Noldorin period, as suggested by David Salo (GS/§4.87, §4.90). A similar change occurred in Welsh (WGCH/§104ii). In most cases it seems these developments were parallel to the vocalizations of the voiceless velar spirant [x], which can be used for additional clues for these phonetic developments.

    In the case of nasals, Tolkien described this sound change for Sindarin in notes on Elvish numerals from the late 1960s (VT42/26):

    In Sindarin voiceless stops (i.e. p, t, k) before nasals became voiced > b, d, g, and then together with the original voiced stops in this position became nasals before homorganic nasals (tn, dn > nn; pm, bm > mm), but before other nasals became spirants as generally medially (pn, bn > vn; tm, dm > ðm, later ðv, ðw; kn, gn > gn > in; km, gm > gm > im > iv, iw [emphasis added]).

    As indicated by the later phonetic developments in this note, gn > in and gm > im. Most likely there was first an intermediate sound change of [g] > [ɣ], since in Sindarin. Hence the most likely phonetic change was [Vgn] > [Vɣn] > [Vin], and similarly [Vgm] > [Vɣm] > [Vim] > [Viw]. There are a number of Sindarin words in which the sound changes described above seem to occur:

    @@ -220212,13 +230989,13 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]>

There are a few more words in Gnomish that seem to show similar phonetic developments, but these examples are less clear:

 -

The first couple of Gnomish examples are predicated on the assumption that χ became voiced ʒ before other voiced consonants, but this seems to be a reasonable assumption. The last two examples are a bit dubious, since the quote mark above ʒ̔ likely indicates that the primitive forms actually contained voiced palatal or palatalized spirants [ʝ] instead of [ɣ]; the analogous root in the Qenya Lexicon for Baʒ̔- seems to be “enfold, wind about” (QL/100), and Tolkien often used the symbol Ẏ in this document to indicate y-sounds that originated from palatal spirants.

+

The first couple of Gnomish examples are predicated on the assumption that χ became voiced ʒ before other voiced consonants, but this seems to be a reasonable assumption. The last two examples are a bit dubious, since the quote mark above ʒ̔ likely indicates that the primitive forms actually contained voiced palatal spirant [ʝ] instead of [ɣ]; the analogous root in the Qenya Lexicon for Baʒ̔- seems to be “enfold, wind about” (QL/100), and Tolkien often used the symbol Ẏ in this document to indicate y-sounds that originated from palatal spirants.

Once we account for the obscuring changes whereby and , it seems that [ɣ] vocalized to [i] fairly consistently in the 1910s and 1920s, which was the conclusion of Roman Rausch as well. The analogous Gnomish and Early Noldorin vocalizations of [x] also fit this pattern, with a more complete set of examples.

Noldorin Developments (1930s): Tolkien partially described the Noldorin vocalizations of ʒ [ɣ] in notes on the usage of the Feanorian Alphabet from the 1930s (PE22/39-40). They resemble the apparent Sindarin pattern, but there are some differences:

The long diphthongs — ON diphthongs, diphthongization of ON ō, or new diphthongs from short vowel + vowel (in contractions or in contact with vocalized ʒ, χ), or from long vowels + epenthetic ı̯ ... @@ -220236,14 +231013,14 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]>
  • [eɣ] > [ei]
  • [uɣ] > [ui]
    • -

    Although not listed, presumably [iɣ] > [ī]. These rules are mostly consistent with the phonetic development of words appearing in the Etymologies from the 1930s. Here is a representative sample:

    +

    Although not listed, presumably [iɣ] > [ī]. These rules are mostly consistent with the phonetic development of words appearing in The Etymologies from the 1930s. Here is a representative sample:

    -

    There are no clear examples of [uɣ] > [ui] in the Etymologies, however. Instead, we consistently see [uɣ] > [ū]:

    +

    There are no clear examples of [uɣ] > [ui] in The Etymologies, however. Instead, we consistently see [uɣ] > [ū]:

     -

    Here Tolkien states that the vocalizations of ʒ in combination with “affected a” has the same phonetic development as e and combinations with “affected o” and u also have the same phonetic developments. Since the only type of affection to modify a is i-affection, most likely this is what Tolkien means. But this is not consistent with the examples in the Etymologies, where the vocalizations of ʒ took place before a-affection, which itself preceded i-affection.

    -

    Summary of Conceptual Developments: In the Gnomish and Early Noldorin of the 1910s and 1920s, it seems [ɣ] vocalized to [i] before nasals and liquids (and possibly a few other consonants like [ð]). The same was mostly true in the Noldorin of the 1930s, but Tolkien said that [oɣ] > [ou] instead, and examples in the Etymologies indicate that [uɣ] > [ū] as well. By the Sindarin of the 1950s, it seems [ɣ] consistently vocalized to [i] once again. There does seem to be some vacillation on the ordering of this sound change, in particular whether or not it took place before or after (or between) a-affection and i-affection. In Noldorin, the voiced velar [ŋ] underwent similar vocalizations where it appeared before other nasals, but this was not true of Sindarin.

    +

    Here Tolkien states that the vocalizations of ʒ in combination with “affected a” has the same phonetic development as e and combinations with “affected o” and u also have the same phonetic developments. Since the only type of affection to modify a is i-affection, most likely this is what Tolkien means. But this is not consistent with the examples in The Etymologies, where the vocalizations of ʒ took place before a-affection, which itself preceded i-affection.

    +

    Summary of Conceptual Developments: In the Gnomish and Early Noldorin of the 1910s and 1920s, it seems [ɣ] vocalized to [i] before nasals and liquids (and possibly a few other consonants like [ð]). The same was mostly true in the Noldorin of the 1930s, but Tolkien said that [oɣ] > [ou] instead, and examples in The Etymologies indicate that [uɣ] > [ū] as well. By the Sindarin of the 1950s, it seems [ɣ] consistently vocalized to [i] once again. There does seem to be some vacillation on the ordering of this sound change, in particular whether or not it took place before or after (or between) a-affection and i-affection. In Noldorin, the voiced velar [ŋ] underwent similar vocalizations where it appeared before other nasals, but this was not true of Sindarin.

    For further discussion of the timing of this sound change and its possible implications, see the notes on the phonetic development of Early Noldorin, Noldorin and Sindarin plurals in the entry on how .

    ]]> + @@ -220287,7 +231065,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + ē on PE19/106]]> + @@ -220319,20 +231098,20 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - - - - + + + + - + - + @@ -220449,7 +231228,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + @@ -220778,24 +231557,12 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - - - - - - - - - - - - @@ -220963,20 +231730,20 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - - + + - - - + + + - + HSG/§2.3

    ]]>     @@ -220996,7 +231763,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]>     - In Sindarin and Noldorin, where combinations of [m] and labials had simplified to long [mm], this long [mm] further reduced to [m]; this sound change occurred both medially and finally. This long [mm] could be derived from a variety of sources, most notably: from     medial [mf] (which originated from [mp] or from [mpʰ]), or from [mb] that had become [mm] anywhere in the word. This change must have occurred after the phonetic development of [m] to [v], since any [m] from [mm] survived, and in fact this was the only way an isolated [m] could appear in a Sindarin word, except initially (where the change of [m] to [v] did not happen).

    Tolkien mentioned this change in The Lord of the Rings appendices:

    @@ -221035,14 +231802,14 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + - + - + @@ -221063,15 +231830,9 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - - - - - - @@ -221107,7 +231868,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + @@ -221194,7 +231955,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]>
    S ñm = ¯w. Q ñ fell in with g, h, but S. ñ vanished early with lengthening. [tekma > teŋ̃ma > tēw earlier in the page] (PE17/44).
    [in a chart of the phonetic development of nasal combinations] ŋn > ŋn > ¯n; ŋm > ŋw̃ > ¯w; [teŋmā > teŋwā > tēwa > S. tîw earlier in the page] (PE22/149).

    Relatively few velar nasals [ŋ] survived past the Old Sindarin period. In Primitive Elvish [ŋ] either (a) assimilated to following stops and aspirates becoming [n] or [m] or (b) it often became [ɣ], such as before liquids [r], [l] (PE18/102, PE19/98). Furthermore, in Old Sindarin, any . Ultimately, the only Sindarin survivals of [ŋ] were [ŋg] and [ŋk] (PE18/104), but based on the notes above it also survived for a time in combination with other nasals (except [ŋŋ] which became [ŋg]) before ultimately vanishing with compensatory lengthening as described above.

    -

    Conceptual Development: These Sindarin vocalizations of [ŋ] seems distinct from the Noldorin phonetic developments, where the vocalizations of [ŋ] before primitive nasals [m], [n] aligned with the vocalizations of [ɣ]. In part this was because in (Old) Noldorin stops became nasals before nasals, so that all of primitive [ɣn], [gn] and [ŋn] shared the same vocalizations (to [in] or [un]) in the Noldorin conceptual stage, and similarly for [ɣm], [gm] and [ŋm]. This was not the case in Sindarin, where primitive [gn] and [ŋn] had distinct develoments (to [in] or [¯n], respectively) and similarly for [gm] and [ŋm]. There are some remnants of the Noldorin phonetic developments ([eŋw] > [eiw] rather than [ēw]) in an etymology of S. appearing in notes from the 1950s:

    +

    Conceptual Development: These Sindarin vocalizations of [ŋ] seems distinct from the Noldorin phonetic developments, where the vocalizations of [ŋ] before primitive nasals [m], [n] aligned with the vocalizations of [ɣ]. In part this was because in (Old) Noldorin all stops became nasals before nasals, so that primitive [ɣn], [gn] and [ŋn] all shared the same vocalizations (to [in] or [un]) in the Noldorin conceptual stage, and similarly for [ɣm], [gm] and [ŋm]. This was not the case in Sindarin, where primitive [gn] and [ŋn] had distinct develoments (to [in] or [¯n], respectively) and similarly for [gm] and [ŋm]. There are some remnants of the Noldorin phonetic developments ([eŋw] > [eiw] rather than [ēw]) in an etymology of S. appearing in notes from the 1950s:

    @@ -221221,20 +231982,26 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> from="{nŋ}m" order="01800" page-id="3258926163"> - There is evidence that in both Sindarin and Noldorin, the labial nasal [m] became [w] after another nasal, [n] or [ŋ]. This sound change is mentioned in some notes from the late 1960s on the phonetic developments of combinations of nasals:

    -
    S nm > nw ... ŋm > ŋw̃ > ¯w (PE22/149).
    + There is evidence that in both Sindarin and Noldorin, the labial nasal [m] became [w] after another nasal, [n] or [ŋ] (the latter only in Sindarin, see below). This sound change is mentioned in some notes from the late 1960s on the phonetic developments of combinations of nasals:

    +
    [S] nm > nw̃ > n. (PE22/148).
    +S nm > nw ... ŋm > ŋw̃ > ¯w (PE22/149).

    The clearest examples of this change are the etymologies of N. and (some of) the etymologies of S. or tîw:

    -

    Sometimes this phonetic developments is obscured by other sound changes, notably the (Old Noldorin) sound change where by stops became nasals before nasals (PE22/26). For example:

    +

    Note that this sound change may simply be part of the general trend whereby (and then to -w when final).

    +

    Conceptual Development: The sound change [nm] > [nw] was more applicable in Noldorin than Sindarin, since in (Old) Noldorin all , so that the combination nm could also arise from both dm and tm (the latter because ). For example:

    -

    Remnants of this Noldorin sound change can be seen in the Sindarin development of tekmā > tegmā > teŋw given above, which shows [km] > [gm] > [ŋm]; an example on the next page has tekma > teŋ̃ma as well (PE17/44). However, in notes associated with Elvish Numerals written in the late 1960s, Tolkien revised this phonetic development in Sindarin, so that the nasalization of stops before nasals was limited to homorganic stops and only (VT42/26). This forced Tolkien to revise the root for S. “letter” (√ >> √), but [ŋm] > [ŋw] remained a factor in its phonetic development.

    -

    It is unclear how (or whether) the sound change nm/ŋm > nw/ŋw is related to the general spirantalization of [m] in Sindarin and Noldorin.

    ]]>     +

    Remnants of these Noldorin sound changes for stops + nasals can be seen in the Sindarin development of tekmā > tegmā > teŋw given above, which shows [km] > [gm] > [ŋm]; an example on the next page has tekma > teŋ̃ma as well (PE17/44). However, in notes associated with Elvish Numerals written in the late 1960s, Tolkien revised this phonetic development in Sindarin, so that the nasalization of stops before nasals was limited to homorganic stops and only (VT42/26). This forced Tolkien to revise the root for S. “letter” (√ >> √), but [ŋm] > [ŋw] remained a factor in its phonetic development (PE22/149).

    +

    The sound change [nm] > [nw] must have been very limited in Sindarin. After the revision on the development of stops + nasals noted above, nm could only arise from primitive nm and n + m in compounds. However, examples elsewhere indicate that , as with OS. > S. (PM/404) or ✶n[d]an-men > [*dammen-] > S. damen- (PE17/166). Thus [nm] > [nw] could only occur from primitive nm, and we have no explicit examples of this sound change in Sindarin.

    +

    Conversely, the sound change [ŋm] > [ŋw] probably did not occur in Noldorin, since earlier still [ŋ] vocalized before [m] in Noldorin:

    +]]>     @@ -221243,12 +232010,10 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + - @@ -221299,7 +232064,7 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]> - + @@ -221354,8 +232119,8 @@ see VT48/7 and PE22/155, also older rule ei > ē on PE19/106]]>
  • ᴹ✶ > ON. > N. “hollow, cavernous” (Ety/ROD; EtyAC/ROD).
  • ᴹ✶ > ON. > N. “warrior, soldier” (Ety/NDAK).
    • -

    The last example is somewhat obscure because Tolkien frequently represented [ǭ] as ō in the Etymologies; the long vowel [ō] could not itself appear in Old Noldorin, since earlier long [ō] became [ū]. It is possible, though, that in some conditions [ǭ] became [ō] instead: see the entry on how [au] became [o] in polysyllables. This later development of diphthongal [au] to short [o] frequently masked the earlier change of [ǭ] > [au], as shown in the final syllables of the first example Hadhod above.

    -

    In the Comparitive Tables for phonetic developments composed in the 1930s, Tolkien shows a more intricate development than the one given above. In particular, all of ā, ǭ and au merged into ǭ, which then becomes ou and then finally au (PE19/25): ā/ǭ/au > ǭ > ou > au. The same intermediate development ǭ > ou > au appears in the Noldorin notes from the 1930s on how ǭ evolved (PE18/46, PE22/27); see above for details. There are examples showing this fuller development in the Etymologies:

    +

    The last example is somewhat obscure because Tolkien frequently represented [ǭ] as ō in The Etymologies; the long vowel [ō] could not itself appear in Old Noldorin, since earlier long [ō] became [ū]. It is possible, though, that in some conditions [ǭ] became [ō] instead: see the entry on how [au] became [o] in polysyllables. This later development of diphthongal [au] to short [o] frequently masked the earlier change of [ǭ] > [au], as shown in the final syllables of the first example Hadhod above.

    +

    In the Comparitive Tables for phonetic developments composed in the 1930s, Tolkien shows a more intricate development than the one given above. In particular, all of ā, ǭ and au merged into ǭ, which then becomes ou and then finally au (PE19/25): ā/ǭ/au > ǭ > ou > au. The same intermediate development ǭ > ou > au appears in the Noldorin notes from the 1930s on how ǭ evolved (PE18/46, PE22/27); see above for details. There are examples showing this fuller development in The Etymologies: