ISSN 1054-7606 ASTRA aSLATTIC UAE Vinyar Tengwar Number 39 July 1998 Contents From Quendi and Eldar, Appendix D ERR. Tolkien Osanwe-kenta: ‘Enquiry into the Communication of Thought’ 21 . IRR. Tolkien Departments Editor’s Musings 2 Resources ELF News 3 Information Fe eee 7 ops pmo ppambspargePage 2 Vinyar Tengwar: Number 39 CS 1998 Editor’s Musings Well, there he goes again Despite my best intentions, I’ve let another year slip by since the last issue. Thus, while [ must maintain Estel that VT will indeed return to a more frequent, regular schedule, lacking Anudir I'll not venture any predictions at this time. In the interim, I urge all subscribers to visit the VF Web page (see the back cover) periodically for news, and also to alert me of any changes in your postal or e-mail addresses This issue I am very pleased to present two primary texts, both associated with the c. 1959-60 linguistic essay Quend? and Eldar (the bulk of which has been published in The War of the jewels), which Christopher Tolkien has graciously provided for publication in VT. The first of these is that portion of Appendix D to Quendi and Eldar that was excluded from The War of the Jewels, comprising a discussion of various opinions and discoveries of Féanor and other Flvish Loremasters on orthography, phonology, and base structure. The second is the companion essay Osanwe-kenla, ‘Enquiry into the Communication of Thought’, a discussion of direct thought-transmis- sion between minds that ranges to encompass a remarkable statement on the moral and natural philosophy of Arda, on the methods and motivations of Melkor, and on the role of language in them. Finally, | urge all readers to direct their attention ta the announcement on the facing page of Parma Eldalamberon 12, featuring the publication of Tolkien’s Qenyagetsa. — Carl F. Hostetter “It is nat for nothing that T have been a philologist, perhaps I am a philolo gist still, that is ta say, a teacher of slow reading:-— in the end 1 also write slowly. Nowadays it is not anly my habit, it is also to my taste — a malicious taste, pethaps? — no longer to write anything which dues not reduce to despair every sort of man who is ‘in a hurry’. For philology is that vencrable art which demands of its votaries one thing above all: to go aside, to lake time, to become still, to become slow — it is a goldsmith’s art and connois- seurship of the word which has nothing but delicate, cautious work to do and achieves nothing if it does not achieve it lentv.” — Friedrich Nietzsche, preface to Daybreak. Vinyar Tengwar is produced by the editor on an Apple Power Macintosh 7500 personal computer, using a Mustek scarmer, Microsoft Word 6.0, and Adabe PageMaker 6.5 VT is seein the Adobe Minion PostScript typeface, com uses the Graccit, PAKiel, TransCprillic, and ‘TransRomans PostScript fonts available from Linguist’s Software, Inc. P.O. Box 580, Fdmonds, WA 98020-0580, USA; tel. (206) 775-1130. VT i printed an an HP LaserJet MP laser printer.PARMA ELDALAMBERON THE Book OF ELVEN TONGUES Number 12 — 1998 Parma is a journal of linguistic studies of fantasy literature, espe- * ge! cially off the Elvish languages and names in the works of RR. Lk Tolkien. 5, QENYAQETSA *, The Phonology and Lexicon of the QENYA TONGUE By J. R. R. Tolkien Presenting the “Qenya Lexicon” in its entirety, together with a contemporary phonology of Qenya. © Edited by Christopher Gilson, Carl F. Hostetter, Patrick Wynne, and Arden R. Smith xxii + 112 pp. Available for $20 plus postage and handling ($2 USA, $3 elsewhere in North and South America, $4 Europe, Africa, Asia and Austra- lia}, from: Christopher Gilson, 10200 Miller Avenue #426, Cupertino, CA 95014, USA; e-mail [email protected]. All payments must be in US dollars. Make all checks payable to Christopher Gilon. Some back-issues ate still available; write for details.Pagea _____Vittyar Tengwar - Number a9 July 1998 From Quendi and Eldar, Appendix D byJ. R.R. Tolkien Edited with introduction, glossaries, and additional notes by Carl F. Hostetter : Tolkien’s texts copyright i998 The Tolkien Trust The following is that section of Appendix D, subtitled “*Kwen, Quenya, and the Elvish (especially Noldorin) words for Language”, to the c. 1959-60 essay Quendi and Eldar that Christopher Tolkien excluded from that essay in The War of the Jewels (see WJ:359). The placement of this section in App. D is indicated by Christopher ai the top of p. 396 of that volume. This section comprises most of eight of the typescript pages of the latest version of Quendi and Eldar. These typescript pages have been emended in a very few places by Tolkien in ink, chiefly in correction of typographical errors. In this edition, these changes have all been incorporated silently. Tolkien also added one note to the typescript in red ball-point pen (see Authur’s Note 5 below). in this edition, Tolkien’s text has been reorganized slightly in the matter of notes. As throughout Quendi and Eldar, Tolkien at points interrupts the main text with notes, typed on the line following the notation mark, even where this interrupts a sentence (cf. WJ:359). Christopher's practice in editing Quendi and Bidar of collecting Tolkien’s notes at the end of the essay, and distinguishing them from editorial notes by referring to them in the text with Note 1, Note 2, elc. in parentheses, fas been adopted here. ‘The typescript of Quendi and Eldar was preceded by a complex of manuscript rhaterials, clipped together into two small bundles by Tolkien. These probably did not long precede the typescript, as one of the shects in the second bundle is a calendar page for November 1959. Among the first bundle are two manuscript versions of what would become Appendix D of the typescript, both of which have been inserted into the bundle between sheets numbered 18 and 19 by Tol- kien. The earlier of these versions, titled “Appendix: Noldorin words for Lan- guage” and occupying four sides labelled “18(a)” through “38(d)” by Tolkien, differs greally froma the typesctipt version, and is given in full below, after the typescript version. The intermediate manuscripl version, occupying nine sides labelled “a” through “i” by Tolkien, has little textual value, as the typescript follows it very closely, but variants of interest are given in the editorial notes. Some of these variants occur in the portion of App. D published on p. 394 of The War of the Jewels, and can most conveniently be cited here: in the manuscript the stem from which Q. tengwe ‘indication, sign, token’ was detived is given as *TENE, and the intermediate form as *tefigwe; the Quenya phrase translating ‘phonetic signs’ is given as hlonaiti tengwi; and a tengwesta cmploying phonetic signs is called a hlonatte tengwesta. Two editorial glossaries of the Elvish forms encountered in the typescript and in the first manuscript version have been supplied after each text, following Tolkien’s notes, as a convenient place for citing further information relevant toJuly 1998 Vinyar Fengwar-Number39_ Page 5 them from other texts {especially The Etymologies and the published portions of Quendi and Eldar) and for most of the specifically linguistic editorial commen- tary. Tam grateful to Christopher Tolkien for providing these texts for publication in Vinyar Tengwar, and to Christopher Gilson, Arden Smith, and Patrick Wynne for their assistance in preparing this edition. [this text immediately follows the last paragraph oni p.395 of The War of the Jewels] At his period the Loremasters did not, of course, know of the Dwarvish iglishmék, and were still in Aman limited to the examination of the Eldarin dialects and. gestures, enlarged by some acquaintance with the language of the Valar (sce note below).' They were, however, impressed by the analogy of silent gesture-signs, the component movements of which could be seen; and this much affected their earlier analyses and descriptions of their own language, which thus tended at first to pay more attention to the physical movements made in speaking that to the audible effects, considering the speaker rather than the hearer. ‘Thus according to the earlier Loremasters a lambe must be analysed into a number of tengwi, which could be used alone or in combinations. In a hwerme more than one visibly distinct gesture could be combined to convey a simple meaning (Note 1). Yet any une such movement might suffice alone to convey a meaning. So it was in speech. Though it was much more com- plex and organized and normally employed combinations of lingual or other movernents, it could still use for one “word” a phonetic element that could be regarded as simple or uncombined. In this way the early analysts came to use, in dealing with speech, the term fengwe not for a “word”, even if separate and uncompounded, asa sign or token of ils meaning, but for the separable phonetic movements of which words were composed. In their views of what constituted an elementary phonetic movement or tengwe they appear also to have been influenced by their theories concerning the origins of Elvish speech, and the way in which the normal “stems” or word-bases had been built up from simpler beginnings. In any case they at first analysed the component tengwi of Elvish speech as being each of the actual or supposed basic consonants followed by one of the basic vowels which {as they said) “coloured” it, The total number of quante tengwi, or full signs, making up a tengwesta was, therefore, the number of its basic conso- nants multiplied by the number of its basic vowels. Thus Vata “eat” was composed of tengwe ma + tengwe ta; but this conjunction and order constituted a distinct quetta or word, having no nec- essary connexion in meaning with, say, Vnaka (in which the sccond tengwe only was changed), nor with Vtama (in which only the order was changed). But with regard to Quenya as it was, this analysis had still to account for consonant groups and final consonants (that is, for consonants without any following or colouring vowel); and fur vowels uccurring alone, especiallyPage 6 Vinyar Tengwar « Number 39 July 1998 initially. The Noldor at this time already knew much concerning the history of their own language, and it was partly in the light of this knowledge that they dealt with these two points. With regard to vowelless consonants, they held these in every case to have “lost” a following vowel, and they called them rakine tengwi “stripped” or “deprived signs”. Kor this purpose it was not necessary to distinguish be- tween true “loss” and “omission”, that is, between the “unintended” pho- netic disappearance of sounds in the course of speaking and of linguistic transmission in time, and the suppression or rejection of sounds in the course of conscious invention and the construction of more complex words. (Eventually the loremasters regarded this distinction as of great impot- tance.) With regard to vowels without preceding consonants, they proceeded similarly. They had in Quenya a few vocalic monosyllables, as i and ti; and also a few dissyllables that were vocalic, such as éa “it is” or 6a “away”. There were also a not inconsiderable number of dissyllabic words that, though they had an initial consonant, had no medial, such as téa “wood” or ie “people”. But most difficult to accommodate to their theory of basic struc- ture were the many “stems” that had no initial consonant. Reside the pattern which they regarded as normal: XaXa (in which X stands fur any basic consonant, and a for any vowel), as for example Vinata, there were many of the type -aXa, such as Vara? The Loremasters asserted that these vowels must have “lost” their preceding consonants; but since they held that a consonant was a more vital part of a tengwe than the colouring vowel, they called such unaccompanied vowels penye fengwi, that is “lacking” or “inad- equate signs” 3 The assumption of loss, in these two cases, was not, however, due merely to theory. It was in many words the actual historical explanation of the occurrence of vowels without a preceding consonant (in the case of medial hiatus probably always the explanation); it was also often the true explana- tion of the contact of consonants without intervening vowels, while all final consonants had probably lost a final vowel, if remote Quendian origins were considered. The Loremasters were aware of this. Some consonants had been lost within the recorded history of Quenya in Aman; or their former pres- ence could be detected by the examination of Quenya and by a comparison with the 'felerin dialect. Many contemporary final consonants had following vowels in older periods, or were clearly related to words that still bad follow- ing vowels. For instance, Mandos from older Mandostd beside oste from older osté (the shortening and subsequent loss of final vowels in the second elements of compounds being a frequent feature of the earlier stages of Quenya).* The former presence of intervocalic #, later lost in Quenya, could be detected by consideration of the relations between téa “indicates” and tenge “indicated”,Julyayo8___Vityar Tengwar- Number 39 Page 7 tengwe “sign”, and comparison with da “exists” beside engwe “thing”. The former presence of initial g could be detected by the comparison of, say, Q. alda “tree” with T. gala.” and the process of loss be deduced from the spelling in the old Kuimilian script salda (using an initial sign which was known by tradition among the loremasters to have represented the open back spirant). At this period, therefore, the loremasters represented the penye tengwi as dependent upon a sign for a lost consonant; and for this purpose they used the sign in Rimilian for old [3] : 39:6 though they did net intend by this to assert that the missing consonant was always due to a reduction of g, or that the loss had only occurred since the divergence of Quenya and Telerin. Thete were many cases in which Quenya and Telerin agreed in having no initial consonant. With regard to the penye tengwi however, the early loremasters still had difficulty with the diphthongs. They were obliged indeed to include among the basic vowels the diphthongs ai, au (calling them “double” or “blended colours”). For it was plain that in many cases ai, ait existed as modifications or “strengthenings” of simple i, 2, which could not reasonably be explained by consonantal loss, whereas all other diphthongs arose only from the “dep- tivation” of the vowel that had once followed after consunantal j and w. For example, tuile “spring” in relation to *TUJU “sprout, bud”. This was analysed as tu-yu-le. ai and au could of course also arise in the same way, and were then similarly analysed: e.g. taina “stretched, elongated” from *TAJA “stretch”, and taure “forest” from *TAWA “wood”; these were analysed as ta-ya-na and ta-wa-re. But raika “crooked” from *RIKI “twist”, and nauka “stunted” from *NUKU, were analysed as rai-ka and nau-ka, This theory of loss was thus in very many cases historically justified, and was a reasonable account of how word-shapes had been invented, or con- structed by combination, and of how they had been modified in transmis- sion. But it was in many points erroneous historically. The initial conso- nant-groups, for instance, were certainly not, in most cases, produced by vocalic loss; neither was the important feature in Quenya of medial nasal- infixion, as in mante “ate” in relation to mata, The vowels also had piainly in the formative period becn employable by themselves as significant ele- ments; and the fact that there were few independent words of purely yocalic structure, though vowels were largely used as modifying additions to basic stems, was due simply to the small number of vowels. This was the situation when Féanor, early in his career, turned his atten- tion to matters af language and writing. It is said that he soan advanced far beyond the loremasters of his time. He made collections of all the available lore, oral and written, concerning Quenya in earlier days, and studied in detail its relations with Telerin. He is said also, being then in his youth before the days of his discontent, to have learned “more than any other ofPage & _Minyar Tengwar - Number 39 July 1998 the Eldar in Arda” of the language of the Valar. This he got mostly from Aule (Note 2), and so enlarged his view by experience of a tongue wholly different in sounds and structure from his native language. But Féanor soon turned to other matters; and in any case his primary interest was in writing, in ils practical and its decorative aspects rather than as an accurate phonetic transcription. Not that he was without interest in phonetic analysis. He was indeed superior in this department to any of his predecessors; and the al- phabet, or alphabetic system, that he devised? provided the means of expres- sion for many more individual sounds than those that actually existed in Quenya or Telerin, Though being primarily made for their expression, it was naturally largely conditioned by the phonetic character and range of these languages. In the mode that he propounded for the practical representation of Quenya he made use of the syllabic analysis of his predecessors, already embodied in the older Rumilian script, but he did this chiefly for the sake of compactness and brevity. The basic “letters” were consonants, and vowels were indicated by diacritic signs, usually written above the preceding conso- nant (that is, according to the older terminology, indicating its “colour”). Where a vowel had no preceding consonant use was made of the device already mentioned, by which the vowel signs were attached to the letter J. But this no longer had in the Féanorian system any consonantal value, and became merely a “carrier” for convenience in writing. Féanor indeed repu- diated the theory that penye tengwi'? were always due to consonantal lass." (Note 3) . Féanor, therefore, in spite of the usual mode of spelling, held that vawels were each independent tengwi, or word-building elements, though different in functions. Vowels he called éra-tengwi ot dmear; and consonants fdva- tengwi or Advear.!? That is, those chiefly dependent on resonance of the voice, and those chiefly dependent on the movements in the mouth (includ- ing the lips)'? (Note 4). For fidvear he later substituted the invented word patakar, taking p, t k (as in his alphabet) to represent the chief positions of consonantal contact or friction. Féanor actually devised “for the Loremasters” separate independent let- ters for the vowels, distinct from the tehtar.'5 This quanta sarme or “full writing” was indeed mainly used by the Loremasters for special purposes, until later in Middle-earth the Féanorian letters were applied to other lan- guages, such as Sindarin, in which the diacritic method of indicating vowels was inconvenient.'® Among Féanor’s other opinions or discoveries two may be mentioned. Both proceeded from his conception of the process which he called “strengthening” (antoryame). He said that it was plain from an examination of the inter-relations among stems, and among the derivatives of any one stem, that the “word-builders” had deliberately enriched or “strengthened” this or that component sound (according to its own character), for empha-July 1998 Vinyar ‘Tengwar-Number 39 Page sis, or merely for differentiation. The simplest cases were those in which a sound had simply been lengthened: as in the relation of *»dta (the stem of the continuous form “is eating”) to the supposed stem “mata. Where the vowel was lengthened the process had been disregarded; but Feanor held that it was not different in principle from such cases as *groted beside *grota from the stem *(g)roto,'7 or *lassé, Q. lasse “leaf”, in which the medial con- sonant had been lengthened. It was absurd to analyse these as go-ro-to-ta, go-ro-ta, la-sa-se. Their true relations to the simplest forms were “rot > +RoT-4; “las > laS-é. (Note 5) In gr- as a variation of r- Féanor saw a case of another method of strengthening: the construction. of what he called “blends” (ostim#). That is, the running together of two elements, that could be analysed phonetically (without reference to intention or effect) as separate gestures or movements, into a combination that had and was intended to have a unitary effect and significance. Other examples that he cited were the relations between initial st and s-, or f-; gi- and L; ky- and kw and k-. But he was particularly impressed by the nasal combinations, notably mb, nd, ng, and pointed out that these last were enormously frequent in Quenya as strengthenings of both #7, n, # and b, d, g, being in fact preferred to the simple lengthenings mm, nn, iif, and far more frequent than bb, da, gg. For example, he said that rondo “vaulted hall” was not ro-no-do, nor even ron+do, but in relation to the stem “ron was roNo with “blend” (ostime) or (consonantal) diphthong (ohlon) used for the strengthening of n. Féanor used the same terms, ostime or ohlon, for vocalic diphthongs. He was inclined to regard them as all of one kind. He recognized, of course, that they could be produced by the loss (or absence) of a vawel following the consonantal forms of i, w: J and W; but he was of the opinion that many of the supposed stems of such a shape as *Tiuyu, *Taya (according to the older views) were really in origin mono-consonantal; sc. that *fai had been a stern using an chton, but was comparable to md “hand” which used a merely lengthened vowel. He pointed out that in any case ohloni of vowels could be produced by the contact of vowels with additional i, i or #, # and without any intervening consonant being lost: as (he said) in pé “lip” beside pew “the two lips, the mouth-opening”. (Note 6) But Féanor saw that these points did not explain the special position of ai, au in their relation to basic i, u. These had evidently, he said, been strength- ened, in a way similar to, say, d > nd, by the prefixing of another element that combined with the i or w: raika in relation to *RIK was *rlk-+d, with ai instead of the simple lengthening as in irikie “has twisted”. I was in the course of his investigation of this point by comparison with Telerin, that he arrived at the conclusion that not only such stems as *RIK, *RUK, with basic 2, u, had in the primitive period been capable of using an ohlon instead of simple lengthening, but also such stems as *REK and “ROK. The obloni ae, da, however, had not proved durable, and became long vowels. But, by aPage 10 . Vinyar Tengwar - Numbet 39 __ July 1998 divergence that probably went far back, in the Vanya-Noldorin branch, ae, ac became e@ (“long é near to d”) and @ (“long 6 near to @”), which then later became identified with normal é, 6. In the Telerin branch both had become a. This @, 6 that were represented in Telerin by @ were long known as “Féanor’s ¢ and o”. Their existence was Jater confirmed by investigation of Sindarin and Nandorin. Later Loremasters were, however, inclined to the opinion that this a¢, ao were not very primitive developments, but compara- tively late and due to the analogy of ai: i, and au: u. The examples of ai, au of this origin are not very numerous. They were mostly “intensive”, as in rauke “very terrible creature” (*RUK); taura “very mighty, vast, of unmeasured might or size” (*TUR). Some were “continua- tive”, as in Vaire “Ever-weaving” (*WIR). The examples of @, g were fewer, if limited to indubitable cases, such as Q. méla “loving, affectionate”, T. mala (MEL); Q. kélo “burden”, S. cau “great burden, affliction” < *kald (KOL). On the relation of the name Oronre to, the Sindarin form Araw (which probably exhibits a similar development of ¢ > Q. 6 but T. 4} see note below on Valarin.!8 (Note 7) Author’s Notes to the extract from Quendi and Eldar, App. D Note 1 An example given by later commentators, probably from iglishmék, is the slight raising of the forefinger of the right hand followed at once by a similar movement of the forefinger of the left: this meant “I am listening”. But if the two movements were made simultaneously, it meant “listen!” Note2 But the later legend that Aule also acquainted him with the language that he had made for the Dwarves may be an addition due to the fame of Féanor. Note3 He is reported (by Pengolodh) to have said that “words may he analysed into their tengwi, but I would say rather that they have one ur more cham- bers, and the vowel is the room in cach, and the consonants are the walls. One may live in a space without walls, but not in walls with no space: kt is only a noise, hardly audible in normal speech, but ket may have significance. Our fathers therefore in building words took the vowels and parted them with the consonants as walls; but for them the word-beginning and word- ending were sufficient divisions, though the least that could be allowed. The word-beginning was the stronger, as we see in that vowels at the beginning seldom disappear, whereas those at the end often vanish, having no end-wall to contain them”. Note 4 Chiefly: the part played by the tongue in producing vowel-qualities, and by the voice in certain consonants, was of course recognized.July1998 —_Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 __ Page Note 5'% Later, though generally agreeing, the loremasters held that gr- / r- was a variation modelled on gl- / I-, the original strengthening of r- initially was ar- (often evidenced in Sindarin). Note 6 In the last point he was of course right, though the example peu was incor- rect {see below); but the later Loremasters (who generally followed his opin- ions) abandoned his views of the stems with medial J or W, when Quendian origins had been further investigated, in the light of their knowledge of other languages such as Sindarin and Nandorin. The later view was that in fact “full stems” {meaning noun-adjective or verb stems) were actually by the end of the common development of primitive Quendian seldom if ever monoconsonantal: for instance ma “hand” was perceived to be a contraction of older *saha after prehistoric loss of intervocalic h (a sound that Féanor did not know existed in Quendian), which was preserved before ¢, as in mahta- “to handle, wield, manage”. pé was recognized as being a similar cantraction from *pefte, and the dual peu from *pefia, the original # being discernible in the “strengthened” stem penga- “pout” and in Q. pefiquanta “full to the brim, with mouth full”. Note 7 Some of the loremasters were of the opinion that if Féanor’s theory was right the limitation of “vocalic strengthening” to the prefixing of intetior a was difficult to understand, and that there should be examples of the addi- tion of i, : ei, ai, of, ui from simple e, a, 0, u, and ow, au, et, iu from simple o, a, e, i, No certain examples of the addition of v can be adduced; though this might be explained by the fact that Eldarin (and probably Primitive Quendian) exhibited a marked preference for the diphthongs ending in i, and indeed for j rather than w as a suffixal element. Of the examples ad- duced for added i, few are convincing or incapable of other equally probable explanation, The best example is * maikd, Q. maika “blade of a cutting tool or weapon, especially sword-blade” in relation to *MAK “cut, hew with a sharp edge”, Q. make “hews with a sword”, makil “sword”, makar “swords- man”. No other origin for maika can be found, and it cannot be a very early word made from lost material. By some loremasters it was brought into relation with a small group of supposed ancient “desiderative” formations with intruded ;, that also deserve consideration: Q. maita “hungry” (*MAT)}; soika “thirsty” (*SOK “gulp, quaff, drink”); mina “desiring to start, eager to go”, and mina- y. “desire to go in some direction, to wish to go to a place, take for it; have some end in view” < *meind (*MEN “go”). Maika would, thus be interpreted as “eager, fit, ready to cut”, and it might well be brought into relation with the idea often found in the ancient tales that swords were greedy or thirsty.Page 12, . Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 . July 1998 Editorial glossary to the extract from Quendi and Eldar, App. D All words and elements are Quenya unless otherwise indicated. aida ‘tree’ < 3alda; cognate with Telerin gaila (q.v.). CF. GALAD- ‘tree’ (LR:357] antoryame ‘strengthening. This can tentatively be analyzed as an-tor-ya-me. The element an- may be the superlative or intensive prefix (L:279). No ele- ment tor- meaning ‘strength’ or ‘strong’ is otherwise attested, but cf. the early root TURU ‘am strong’ (Q:95) and the element turka- ‘strong, powerful (in body)’ (PM:352). -ya is a very common adjectival ending, as well as a verbal suffix. *antorya- may thus mean ‘strengthen’, in the perhaps more literal sense of ‘becoming or being made stronger’. -me is a very common abstract nominal ending; as in mirme ‘the action or an act of nfra (‘will’)’ (cf. the Osanwe-kenta below, p. 30). The whole may thus mean, literally, ‘an act (or the act) of becoming or being made stronger’. caul Sindarin ‘great burden, affliction’ < *kalé < *KOL; Cf. Q. kdlo below. éa ‘it is; exists’ (inaplied derivation < *efia)7° Cl, MRiz, 35 WI:qo2. engwe ‘thing’; cf. da above. gaila Telerin ‘tree’; cognate with Q. alda (q.v.). hwerme ‘gesture-code’ (W]:395). fis the definite article (‘the’), and also serves as a relative pronoun (‘that, who’; see Ivan Derzhanski’s article “Peth i dirathar aen” in VY 38). Cf. 1- ‘that? (deictic particle) (LR:361). ighishmék Khuzdul ‘gesture-language’ (WJ:395). irikie ‘has twisted’ < *RIK ‘twist’. Cf. ratka below, and RIK(H)- ‘jerk, sudden move, flirt’ whence rikta- jerk, give quick twist er move, twitch’ (LR:383). Other Quenya perfect-tense verbs formed by prefixion and lengthening of the base-vawel (sundéma, WJ:318) and suffixion of -ie include avdnie-r ‘(they) have gone away’ (:394, R:66) and urtivie-nye-s ‘have found it’ (I]:250) kéfo ‘burden’; cognate with Sindarin caul (q.v.). Cf. kolla ‘borne, worn, espe- cially a vestment or cloak’ (MR:385 n. 19). Jambe ‘longue-movement, (way of) using the tongue’ in non-technical use, ‘language’; ‘a way of talking; dialect’, applicd to the separate languages of any people or region (W)-394). In linguistic theory, a tengwesta (q.v.) employing phonetic signs; also ‘the way of speaking’, i.e. phonetics and phonology (WJ:395). Cf. also WJ:416 n. 33; LAB- ‘lick’ (LR:367). tasse ‘lea?’ < *lassé. Cf. LAS!- ‘eaf’ (LR:367). Tie ‘people’. Cf. LI- ‘many’ (LR:369). ma ‘hand’ < *maha. Cf. MA3- ‘hand’ (LR371). maita- ‘to handle, wield, manage’, Cf. Eldarin *mahtd- ‘stroke, feel, handle: wield’ < M.A3- ‘hand” (LR:371) and “makra- ‘wield a weapon’ < MAK- ‘sword? also as v. ‘fight (with sword), cleave’) (ibid.), both yielding Q. muhte-. maika ‘blade of a cutting tool or weapon, especially sword-blade’ < “maika < *MAK ‘cut, hew with a sharp edge’. CE. make below. maita ‘hungry’ < "MAT; cf. *matd below. makar ‘swordsman’; cl. muke below. Cf also Menelmacar ‘Swordsman of the Sky’ (1, IIL392).July 1998 Vinyar Terigwar - Number 39 Page 13 make ‘hews with a sword’ < *MAK ‘cut, hew with a sharp edge’; cf. maika above; also MAK- ‘sword, or as a verb-stem: fight (with sword), cleave’ (LR:371). makil ‘sword’; cf. make above; also makil < *makla “write” (WJ:396). soika ‘thirsty’ <*SOK ‘gulp, quaff, drinl’. Cf. SUK- ‘drink’ (LR:388). taina ‘stretched, elongated’ < “TAJA ‘stretch’. Cf. TAY- ‘extend, make long(er)’ (LR:391). taura ‘very mighty, vast, of unmeasured might or size’, a strengthened, “inten- sive” form < “TUR. Cf, TUR- ‘power, control, mastery, victory’ (LR:395). taure ‘forest? < “TAWA ‘wood’. Cf. *tauré ‘great wood, forest’? < TAWAR- ‘wood, forest’ (LR:391) 1éa ‘indicates’ (implied derivation < *tefia); cf. tenge below. The Etymologies has tea ‘straight line, road” < TEN- (LR:392). tefstar Cf. this entry in the editorial glossary to the first version, below (p. 18). tenge ‘indicated’ ef, 1a above. tengwe, pl. tengwi ‘indication, sign, token’ < *TEN ‘to paint at; indicate, signify’ (WJ:394); though having no necessary refetence to sounds (ibid.), when used of speech it means ‘an elementary phonetic movement, one of the separable phonetic movements of which words are composed’. In early linguistic analy- sis, one of the basic consonants followed by one of the basic vawels, In The Etymologies, tengwe ‘writing’ and terigwa ‘letter’ are derived from TER- ‘make a mark, write or draw (signs or letters)’ (LR:391). tengwesta ‘a system or code of signs (tengwi)’, a “particular product” of fengwestie ‘Language, as a whole’ (WI:394). ‘Though having no necessary ref- erence to speech (ibid.: a hwerme is also a tengwesta, 395), when unqualified it is taken to mean ‘a spoken language’, including its phonetics, phonology, morphology, grammar. and vocabulary (395). téa ‘wood’, prob. < *TAWA ‘wood’ (cf. taure above). tuile n. ‘spring’ < *TUJU ‘sprout, bud’. CE tuile ‘spring-time’ < TUY- ‘spring, sprout’ (LB:395). ti Among notes closely contemporary (but not located) with Quendi and Eldar is the following: Q. a adv. and prep. ‘without, destitute of usually followed by genitive], @ calo ‘without light’. Adj. dna ‘deprived of, destitute, for- lon’. As prefix ‘not-’ (‘un-, in-"}, denying presence or possession of thing or quality: dvanima ‘not fair, ugly’. But neg. of such an adj. as vanima ‘fair’ was also made wilh @ + noun. dvane ‘without beauty’, which could then he adjectivalized dvanea, But note unote(a) = ‘nol counted, uncounted’, dadtin ‘not possible to count, countless’. CE. the entry snat in the editorial glossary to the Osanwe-kenta, below (p. 33), and the negative stems UGU-, UMU- (LR:398). Vaire ‘Ever-weaving’, a strengthened, “continuative” form < “WIR. The Bty- mologies has Vaire ‘Weaver’ < *weiré < WEY- “wind, weave’ (1.R:398).July 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 15 Appendix: Noldorin words for Language This text, the germ of App. D, arose as a long note to a sentence on the recto of a manuscript page, originally numbered 6 (but renumbered 18 following the addi- tion of twelve pages at the front), in the first bundle of manuscript materials for Quendi and Eldar. That sentence reads: “It is, therefore, difficult to see how [the word Quenya} could acquire its exclusively linguistic sense, unless the stem *kwen- from which it was formed (probably anciently, being in fact the oldest Llvish word for “language”) had once had a linguistic reference”. Against the word “language”, Tolkien inserted an asterisk, and added a corresponding foot- note to the page reading: “See over ‘Appendix’. On the verso, numbered 7, preceded by another asterisk, Tolkien began development of what would be- come the text given below. This first effort, however, was abortive, succumbing to deletions, increasingly rapid and rapidly devolving handwriting, and more- ot-less legible notes crowded into alt four margins; and the whole was eventually struck through several times. The note, again preceded by an asterisk, was then begun anew, and this time completed, on four manuscript sides originally numbered 7 through 10 (subse- quently renumbered “18(a)” through “18(d)”). In the top margin of the first side, Tolkien wrote, and subsequently deleted, the words “Notes to follow p. 6”. To the right of this he wrote “Apperidix”, and below this “Noldorin words for Lan- guage”. Above all af these he wrote “Appendix to Quendi”. The text of the completed note is given here, with citations of interesting variants from the abortive first attempt given in the editorial notes. As before, Tolkien’s own notes are collected at the end of his text, after which a glossary of Elvish forms with linguistic cross-references and commentary has been provided. In Q. and S. the word *lambe (Q. lambe, S. fam(m)) was used for the lan- guage of dialect of a particular country ot people. This was simply the word for the physical tongue (derived from Viab ‘lick, move tongue’), and not in origin connected with Viam ‘sound’?! though it was associated with it, This use of lambe ‘tongue’ no doubt referred to the speech-habits of different languages,” which made the Longues of their speakers more adept in pro- ducing sounds and combinations familiar to them: lambe was thus never used for ‘language’ in general, but only for particular forms of speech, and was always jomed with a defining adjective or genitive, as “their tongue; Elvish tongues; the tongue of the Noldor, etc.” For “language” in general the later Noldorin loremasters, having then? knowledge not only of various Flvish languages and dialects, but also of several languages of other Incarnates (such as Men and Dwarves), used the terms: refgwele, tefigwesta, and lambele, Tefigwele was the most general term, used to embrace Language in all its aspects, Tefigwesta was applied more particularly to structure, including what we should call morphology and grammar. Lambele was concerned with “phonetic” aspects. Tengwele was a derivative from the base NTEN “represent, betoken, indi-Pageie Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 July 1998 cate (by sign), etc.” According to Noldorin analysis a language, and all Lan- guage, was composed of a (practically) limited number of vocal tengwi (Note tefigwele was thus a general word for the grouping or composing of tefigwi into a linguistic system, Nouns made with the ending -lz seem prop- erly to have beem universal and abstract; though naturally in colloquial usage they often became particular in reference. As quenta ‘a narrative, a story’, quentale ‘narration, History’; but quentale Noldoron f Noldorinwa ‘the history of the Noldor’. Tefigwele, however, being’a technical term of linguis- tic loremasters, retained its theoretic general sense, and for particular lan- guages lambe was used. Similarly the technical lambele did not become an equivalent of Jambe (in its linguistic sense), but remained a general word for what we might call “phonetics”, though lambele included various aspects that were not purely “phonetic”, but considered the effects of design, selec- tion, predilection (aesthetic preferences), and meaning upon the nature and use of the tefigwi. Tefigwesta was not in origin a general word, but meant “any particular grouping, collection or arrangement of tefigwi”, Each lambe thus had its own. tefigwesta (or exemplification of tefgwele). But since tefigwesta became specially applied ta the use of linguistic elements accord- ing, to meaning and function (the remark above on the force of -l2 is a point of tefigwesta) the word became used by the Loremasters not only for the “grammar”, widely considered, of any language described, but for Grammar in general, including historical considerations, especially in so far as they helped to explain the actual features of a language at the period studied. So guentasta would be used (not quentale) of any particular arrangement (by some author) of a series of records or evidences into a given historical account2” Thus quentale Noldorinwa still meant “that part of History which concerned the Noldor (the real series of events and experiences)”, but Ingoldo’s Ilistory of the Noldor would be Noldo-quentasta Ingoldova. ‘A tefigwe was the linguistic element “as spoken or heard”. In earlier analy- sis, and with special application to Noldorin views on the base-structure of Quenya, it seems to have been applied to each of the real or supposed. “ba- sic’ consonants followed by one of the “basic” vowels: thus ta, te; ko, ku, ete. But when the actual state of Quenya and other languages was analysed, apart from theories of origin, this was abandoned, and tefigwe was applied to cach individual “speech-sound”, according to its phonetic nature, and its audi- tory effect and appreciation. Since vowels continued to be called pennar (Note 2), fefigwi came to be applied specially to consonantal elements, a process assisted by the Féanorian system of writing (just as that system was itself affected by the early syllabic analysis). But in more technical accounts vowels were distin- guished as dmatefigwi, and consonants as larbetefigwi. That is, elements chiefly dependent on the éma “voice, resonance of the vocal chords”; and those chiefly characterized by tongue-positions; though, of course, the fact that tongue configurations differentiated the vowel-qualities, while vocal-July 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 17 resonance played a part in the character of many consonants was recog- nized. (Other terms, recognizing these features, were sometimes used as: musse tefgwi ‘soft elements’, vr lehta tefigwi (lehtar) ‘free, released elements’, for vowels; and sarda tefigwi ‘hard sounds’, or tapta tefigwi (taptar) ‘impeded elements’, for consonants, Musst ‘softs’ and Sarde ‘hards’® were, however, not precisely equivalent to lehtar and taptar. Musi included (voiced) con- tinuants, or “semivowels”: 4 7, m,n, (9), y w, which could function vocalically though except for y, w (as i, w) this did not occur in Quenya.) In writing the form tefigwa was used. This meant any one visible sign representing (theoretically) any one audible tefgwe. It was usually applied to the consonantal signs, since in the mode most commonly employed in spell- ing Quenya the vowels were represented by separate “marks” (rehtar) placed aver or below the tefigwar. ‘Author's Notes to “Noldorin words for Language” Notez . Plural of tefigwe [< te#-wé] ‘sign, token’. Note 2 Faced by the fact that words could exist without consonants, and that even according to their analysis of “bases” many such bases had no initial conso- nant, earlier theorists either (a) included in the list of tefigwi the basic vowels standing alone, or (b} assumed the former presence of what they called a “silent” or “vanished” consonant. For this they used the sign (letter) €#, originally representing [5], which had in fact (as they knew) once existed in their own Quenya dialect, and explained the relation between many words in Noldorin that began with a vowel, where the Telerin dialect had g-. But it did not explain all words without an initial consonant, or words with only an initial consonant and no medial. Thus the Noldorin term for vowel, especially as standing alone as a linguistic element, was penna (sc. penna tefigwe) ‘lacking’, a tefigwe without its normal concomitant. Editorial glossary to “Noldorin wards for Language” All words and elements are Quenya unless otherwise indicated. Ingoldova ‘of Ingold, Ingold’s’. For the possessive use of the adjectival ending -va, see W):368-69 s.v. *HO. Tam(m) Sindarin cognate of Q. dambe (q.v.)- Jambe ‘(physical) tongue’ (= $. lam(m)) < *lambé < Viab ‘lick, move tongue’s also used of the language or dialect ef a particular people or country, in reference to the speech-habits of different languages. In Quendi and Eldar (Wh.a6 n. 33) and The Etymologies (LR:367 s.¥, LAB- ‘lick’}, the physical tongue is lamba. Cf. the entry lambe in the editorial glossary to the typescript version, above (p. 12). lambele ‘language, in particular consideration of its phonetic aspects; phonetics’,Page 18 Vinyar Tengwar Number 39 July 1998 including consideration of the effects of phonetic design, selection, meaning, and aesthetic predilection. Cf. -le below; also Iémarydvé ‘individual pleasure in the sounds and forms of words’ (MR:215). lambetefigwi ‘tefigwi chiefly characterized by tongue-positions; consonants’. le < -1é, properly a universal and abstract nominal ending. Iehta ‘Icee, released’. Cf. N./S. leithian ‘release from bondage” (LR:368 s.v. lehtar pi. = lehta tefigwi “free, released elements; vowels’, musse ‘soft’. mussi pl. ‘softs’ = musse terigwi ‘soft elements; vowels’, a class of tefigwi inclusive of both the vowels and of the voiced continuants or semivowels. CE. sarde. NoBdoron / Noldorinwa genitive (partitive / adjectival) pl. ‘of the Noldor’. For the distinction hetween the two forms, see W]:368-69 s.v. *HO. With the ending -inwa compare Q. sindarinwa ‘Grey-elven’ i.e. ‘of the Sindar’ (401). éma ‘voice, resonance of the vocal chords’. Cf. OM- (LR:379). ématengwi ‘tefigwi chicfly dependent on the éma; vowels’. Cf. tehtar below, also Omatehtar ‘vowel-signs (WJ:396). penna, pl. pennar lit. ‘lacking’, used to mean ‘a vowel’, especially as standing alone asa linguistic element. Cf. penye in the typescript version, above quenta ‘a narrative, a story’. Also cf. genta ‘tale’ (LR:36 s.v. KWET- ‘say’). quentale ‘narration, History’; also ‘a history’. Cf. -le above; also gentale ‘account, history’ (LR:366 s.v. KWET- ‘say’). quentasta ‘any particular arrangement (by some author) of a series of records o evidences into a givett historical account’, sarda ‘hard’. Cf. Q. sar, pl. sardi ‘(small} stone’ (LR:385 s.v. SAR-). sarde pl. ‘hards’ = sarda. tefigwi ‘hard sounds; consonants’, presumably a class of consonantal tefigwi complementary to the #ussi (q.v.). tapta adj. ‘impeded’; Cf. TAP- ‘stop’ (LR:390). taptar pl. = tapta teri mpeded elements; consonants’. tehtar ‘marks’, in writing, vowel signs placed over or below the terigwar. Cf. 1:397, 399-400; and TEK- ‘make a mark, write or draw (signs or letters)’ (LR:391); also denateh tar ‘vowel-signs’ (W7:396) and ématefigwi, above. tefigwa, pl. tefigwar in writing, any one visible sign representing any one audible tefigwe; usually applied only to consonantal signs. CE. 1:397 ff, WJ:396. tefigwe, pl. tefigwi ‘sign, token’ < teii-wé < VTEN ‘represent, betoken, indicate (by sign)’, In linguistic analysis, an individual speech-sound; esp., in constrast with the penniar, a consonantal element. In earlier analysis, one of the basic consonants fallowed by one of the basic vowels. tefigwele ‘language’ as a general term, ‘Language’ in all its aspects; ‘the grouping or composing of tefigwi into a linguistic system’. Cf. tefigwe and -le above; also tengwestie of similar meaning (W394). lefgwesta ‘any particular grouping, collection or arrangement of tefgwi; an ex- emplification of fefigwele’, Used for ‘language’ in particular consideration of structure, including morphology and grammar; the use of linguistic elements according to meaning and function; the particular ‘grammar’ of a language; but also ‘Grammar’ in general, including historical considerations, especially when explicative of actual synchronic features of a language. CLW1:394-95- K-).July 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 19 Editorial Notes 2. The reference is to the Note on the ‘Language of the Valar’ (WJ:397-407). 2, Cf. the brief discussion of Elvish basic structure at the beginning of App. D (Wh391-92). 3. The intermediate manuscript gives the corresponding singular penya tengwe ‘a lacking or inadequate sign’. 4. The Glossary to the Athrabeth derives the Vala-name Mandos (stem mandost-) trom mando ‘custody, safe-keeping’ and oste ‘a strong or fortified building or place’ (MR:350). 5. In the intermediate manuscript the Telerin form as first written was galda, but this was replaced in the act of writing with galla. 6. Arden Smith writes: “No such character appears in the available Ramilian materials, which for the most part date from the early 1920s. In these manu- scripts, “carriers” are always represented by simple strokes, either vertical or horizontal, as illustrated in VT 37, p. 22. The value [3], however, is always repre- sented by a very different sign, which most frequently has the form “FE”. >, The intermediate manuscript has here “penye tengwi or (as they were often called, using penya as a technical noun) the penyar”. 8 The stems *TUJU and *TAJA in this paragraph were altered by Tolkien from earlier *fUYU and *TAYA (which are also the forms in the manuscript). 9. The intermediate manuscript has “devised and bequeathed to the Eldar”. jo. The intermediate manuscript has penyar. a1. The intermediate manuscript continues here: “To him are said to be due the names for vowel and consonant as distinct types of word-building element”. 12. In the intermediate manuscript, consonants are pdvatengwi or pavear. These were also the forms first given on the typescript, before these were emended to fidva-tengwi and fdvear. 15. The intermediate manuscript ceads “mouth, pdva, {including tongue, lips and teeth)”, where pdva was a later insertion. 14. In the intermediate manuscript this sentence concludes: “the three main consonantal contact-positions in Quenya”. 15, The intermediate manuscript adds “or Gmatehtar, but these were mainly used by Loremasters (e.g. in recording in waiting matters that had hitherto remained oral)”. 16. The rest of the typescript version of this extract has no precedent in the intermediate manuscript, which continues from this point with text correspond- ing to the conclusion of App. D (WJ:396—97). In the manuscript, the name of the most eminent member of the Lambengolmor, called Pengolodh in the typescript, is given as “Thingédbel (or Singoldo)” (cf W]419 ne 25), and he is said to have collected much linguistic material “before (he overthrow of Angband and the departure of the grealer part of the Eldar from Middle-earth” (cf. WJ:397)- 17. A note to Quendi and Eldar cites the Common Eldarin element (g)rota ‘excavation, underground dwelling’ and the verb "groto ‘dig, excavate, tunnel’ and Sindarin “groth < *grofta (an intensified form of grod < *grota) ‘a large excavation” (WT:414-15 n. 26).Page 20_ Vinyar Tengwar- Number 39 July 1998 18. CE, W]:qoo. ag. This is a later note, added in the margin in red ball-point pen. 20. Regarding the full and precise significance of éa ‘it is, exists’, and the difficulties suzrounding this and other cosmological terms that Christopher Tol- kien discusses in Morgoth’s Ring pp. 37-38, and further om pp. 39 and 62. 64), it is convenient to cite here one of a few very late notes inserted in the Quendi and Eldar typescript (one of the sheets is a Publication Notice dated March 1968); this begins: ift- everything, all, the whole. This is more than éa, which is all ‘na- ture’ but was not held to include [souls?] and spirits. ilu includes Gud, all ‘souls’ & spirits as well as éa. iluisa ‘omniscient’, ilivala ‘omnipo- tent’, dukara ‘omnificenr’. ilya = ‘each, every, all of a particular group of things’, cf. GL (ie. Galadriel’s Lament] ilye tier ‘all roads, paths’ {sc. between Middle-earth and Aman}. In the typescript Quendi and Fldar, iluve ‘allness, the all is said to be “an equivalent of Ea” (WYi4o2). a1. The first version cites “Warn ‘sound’ : Q. idma ‘a sound’, but especially a speech sound”. Cf. LAM- (LR:367). 22. The first version adds “or divergent languages”. 23. Tolkien has altered original “now” to “then”. 24. In the first version, this sentence began: “The word for ‘language’ in general, [deleted: of a similar sort to Elvish language and so including the speech of Men, Dwarves, and even of Orcs,| ...”. as. In the first version, this sentence reads: “In their [i.e. the Noldorin linguis- tic Loremasters’] analysis, a language was built from a number of elements, each called a tefigwa or fefigwe”. A note in the bottom margin, apparently in reference to this, reads: “tefigwe pl. teAgwi was the more abstract or phonetic term”. 26. The first version states that “Abstracts made with ending (ajle, (ejle are properly universals, so that tengwele = the composing, grouping of tengwi into a [camposed?] language”. 27. From what Tolkien says here of queritasta and teiigwesta, it appears that one may tentatively isolate a Quenya ending in *-sta indicating a ‘particular grouping, collection, or arrangement’ of instances of the noun to which it is suffixed. Noting that Q. -st- sometimes corresponds to N. / S. -th (cf. Q. hosta ‘large number’, N. hoth ‘host, crowd’, LR:364 s.v. KHOTH-; S. oth ‘horde’, UT 313 n. 24; also Q. nasta ‘spear-head, point, gore, triangle’, N. / 8. naith ‘gore, tongue (of land)’, LR:387 sv. SNAS., SNAT-, T1I:43q), it seems reasonable to wonder whether such an ending could be related to the Sindarin ending -ath, which Tolkien describes as “originally a collective noun-suffix”, used in Sindarin as “a group plural, embracing all things of the same name, or those associated in some special arrangement or organization” (R:74=75). In a letter dated 17 Dec., 1972, Tolkien notes that -ath is net a dual ending, nor related to Q. aéta ‘2’, but instead “a collective or group suffix” (L:427). 28. The glosses of “Mussi” and “Sarde” were originally ‘soft’ and ‘hard’, later corrected to ‘softs’ and ‘hards’, respectively.July 1998 Vinyar Tengwar » Number 39 Page 21 Osanwe-kenta by J.R.R. Tolkien Edited with introduction, glossary, and additional notes by. Carl F. Hostetter Tolkien’s text capyright @1998 The Tolkien Trust The essay entitled Osanwe-kenta, “Enquiry into the Communication of Thought’, is extant in eight typescript pages, paginated 1 through 8 by Tolkien, Tt is presented and (self-}described as a “résumé” (see below) or “abbreviation” (MR-415) by an unnamed redactor! of another work of the same title that the Elvish Loremaster Pengolodh “set at the end of his Larmnas or ‘Account of Tongues” (ibid.)2 While thus a separate document, it nonetheless is closely associated and na doubt closely contemporary with the longer essay that Tolkien titled Quendi and Eldar (the bulk of which has heen published in The War of the Jewels), with which it is located among Tolkien’s papers. A note on one of the title pages of Quendi and Eldar indicates that the Osanwe-kenta was intended by Tolkien as an adjunct to the longer essay: “To which is added an abbreviation of the Osanwe-kenta or ‘Communication of Thought” (ibid.). Furthermore, Christopher Toikien notes that his father used the title Quendi and Eldar not only for the longer essay, but also to include the Osanwe-kenta and another brief essay on the origin of Ores (the latter published in Morgoth’s Ring, ef. pp. 415 #£). All three essays are extant in typescript versions that are “identical in general appearance” (MR:415). The association of the Osanwe-kenta with Quendi and Eldar also extends to terminology and subject matter. For example, the Osanwe-kenta employs certain linguistic terms defined and discussed in some detail in Quendi and Eldar (e.g. tengwesta, Lambe) in a manner that assuines that the definitions and distinctions given there are already knows, Further, the Osauwe-kenta amplifies certain statements in the Note on the ‘Language of the Valar’ hat concludes Quendi and Eldar. for instance, that “It was the special talent of the Incarnate, whe lived by necessary union of hréa and féa, to make language” (W):405); and, more strik- ingly, that “the Valar and Maiar could transmit and receive thought directly (by the will of both parties) according to theie right nature”, although their “use of bodily form ... made this mode of communication less swift and precise” (406). It ikewise amplifies upon “the speed with which ... a tengwesta may be learned bya higher order”, by the aid of direct “transmission and reception of thought” in conjunction with “warmth of heart” and “desire to understand others", as exemplified by the quickness with which Finrod learned the Béorian language (ibid.)> ‘According to Christopher ‘Tolkien, one of the copies of Quendi and Eldar is “preserved in a folded newspaper of March 1960”, and notes written by his father on this paper and on the cover of the other copy include the Osanwe- kenta among the Appendices to Quendi and Eldar (MR:a1s). Christopher con~ cludes that this complex of material, including the Osanwe-kenta, “was thus inPage 22 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 July 1998 being when the newspaper was used fur this purpose, and although, as in other similar cases, this does not provide a perfectly certain terminus ad quem, there seems to be no reason to doubt that it belongs to 2959-60” (ibid). ‘The eight typescript pages presented here appear to comprise the sole extant text of the Osamve-kenta; if it was preceded by any typescript or manuscript versions, they have apparently not been preserved. In the top margin of the first of these pages, Tolkien has written the three lines of its present title in ink. He has also numbered the first seven pages in the upper right-hand corner by hand, and written the notation “Osanwe” to the left of the numeral on each af these pages, also im ink; but the page number and notation are typed in the same positions on the eighth page. This suggests that Tolkien may have paused, or perhaps uriginally concluded the essay, somewhere on the seventh page, and written the short title and page number on those pages he had typed at that point, before the eighth page was begun. If so, he may have done so at the break on the seventh page indicated by a blank space before the paragraph beginning “If we speak last of the ‘folly of Manwe”. The typescript has also been emended at points by Tolkien in ink, chiefly in correction of typographical errors, though on a few occasions supplying a change of wording. Save in a very few instances these changes have been incorporated silently in (his edition. In this edition, Tolkien’s text has also been reorganized slightly in the matter of notes. On the first page of the typescript (only) Tolkien used numbered footnotes, but as throughout Quendi and Eldar, elsewhere in the Osanwe-kenta he at points interrupts his text with notes, typically typed on the line following, or within a few lines of, the notation mark, even where this interrupts a sentence (cf. WJ359). Christopher Totkien’s practice in editing Quendi and Lidar of col- lecting Tolkien's notes at the end of the essay, distinguishing them from edito- tial notes by referring to them in the text with Note i, Note z, etc. in parentheses, has been adopted here for most of these notes. However, seven very brief notes, which simply supply Quenya glosses of terms under discussion (those for sanwe- latya, sdma, lita, indo, pahta, avanir, and aquapahrie), have been placed in the main text parenthetically. A brief editorial glossary of the Elvish forms encountered in the Osanwe- kenfa has been supplied following Tolkien’s notes, as a convenient place for citing further information relevant to them from other texts {especially Quendi and Eldar, various texts in Morgoth's Ring, and The Etymnologies) and for most of the specifically linguistic editorial commentary. Iam grateful to Christupher Tolkien for providing this text for publication in Vinyar Tengwar, and to Christopher Gilson, Wayne Hammond, Christina Scull, Arden Smith, and Patrick Wynne for their assistance in preparing this edition.Fly 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 23 ; Osanwe-kenta* “Enquiry inte the Communication of Thought” (résumé of Pengolodh’s discussion) At the end of the Lammas Pengolodh discusses briefly direct thought-trans- mission (sanwe-latya “thought-opening”), making several assertions about it, which are evidently dependent upon theorics and abservations of the Eldar elsewhere treated at length by Elvish loremasters. They are concerned primarily with the Eldar and the Valar (including the lesscr Maiar of the same order}. Men are not specially considered, except in so far as they are included in general statements about the ncarnates (Mirréanwi). Of them Pengolodh says only: “Men have the same faculty as the Quendi, but it is in itself weaker, and is weaker in operation owing to the strength of the hrda, over which most men have small control by the will”. Pengolodh includes this matter primarily owing to its connexion with tengwesta. But he is also concerned as an historian to examine the relations wf Melkor and his agents with the Valar and the Eruhini,> though this also has a connexion with “language”, since, as he points ont, this, the greatest of the talents of the Mirrdanwi, has been turned by Melkor to his own greatest advantage. Pengolodh says that all minds (sda, pl. sémar) are equal in status, though they differ in capacity and strength. A mind by its nature perccives another mind directly. But it cannot perceive more than the existence of another mind (as something other than itself, though of the same order) except by the will of both parties (Note 1). The degree of will, however, need not be the same in both parties. If we call one mind G (for gues or comer) and the other H (for host or receiver), then G must have full intention to inspect H or to inform it. But knowledge may be gained or imparted by G, even. when H ig not seeking or intending® to impart or to learn: the act of G will be effective, if H is simply “open” (idsa; ldtie “openness”). This distinction, he says, is of the greatest importance. “Openness” is the natural or simple state (indo) of a mind that is not otherwise engaged (Note 2). In “Arda Unmarred” (that is, in ideal condi- tions free from evil)” openness would be the normal state. Nonetheless any mind may be closed (pahta). This requires an act of conscious will: Unwill {avanir). It may be made against G, against G and some others, or be a total retreat int “privacy” (aquapahtie). Though in “Arda Unmarred” openness is the normal state, every mind has, from its first making as an individual, the right to close; and it has absolute power to make this effective by will, Nothing can penetrate the harrier af Unwill (Note 3}.Page2g Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 July 1998 All these things, says Pengolodh, are true of ali minds, from the Ainur in the presence of Eru, or the great Valar such as Manwe and Melkor, to the Maiar in Ea, and down te the least of the Mirréanwi, But different states bring in limitations, which are not fully controlled by the will. The Valar entered into Ea and Time of free will, and they are now in Time, so long as it endures. They can perceive nothing outside Time, save by memory of their existence before it began: they can recall the Song and the Vision. They are, of course, open to Eru, Lut they cannot of their own will “see” any part of His mind. They can open themselves to Eru in entrealy, and He may then reveal His thought to them (Note 4). The Incarnates have by the nature of sda the same faculties; but their perception is dimmed by the Aréa, for their féa is united to their hréa a normal procedure is through the Aria, which is in itself part of Ba, without thought. The dimming is indeed double; for thought has to pass one mantle of hréa and penetrate another. For this reason in Incarnates transmission of thought requires strengthening to be effective. Strengthening can be by affiri- ity, by urgency, or by authority. Affinity may be due to kinship; for this may increase the likeness of hrda to Ada, and so of the concerns and modes of thaught of the indwelling fear; kinship is also normally accompanied by love and sympathy. Ailinity may come simply from love and friendship, which is likeness or affinity of féa to fea. Urgency is imparted by great need of the “sender™ (as in joy, grief or fear); and if these things are in any degree shared by the “receiver” the thought is the clearer received. Authority may also lend force to the thought of ane who has a duty towards another, or of any ruler who has a right to issue com- mands or to seek the truth for the good of others. These causes may strengthen the thought to pass the veils and reach a recipient mind. But that mind must remain open, and at the least passive. I, being aware that it is addressed, it then closes, no urgency or affinity will enable the sender’s thought to enter. Lastly, tengwesta has also become an impediment It is in Incarnates clearer and tnore precise than their direct reception of thought. By it also they can communicate easily with others, when no strength is added to their thought: as, for example, when strangers first meet. And, as we have seen, the use of “language” soon becomes habitual, so that the practice of ésanwe (interchange of thought) is neglected and becomes more difficult. ‘hus we see thal the Incarnate tend more and more to use or to endeavour to use ésanwe only in great need and urgency, and especially when Jambe is un- availing. As when the voice cannot be heard, which comes most often be- cause of distance. For distance in itself offers no impediment whatever lo ésanwe. But those who by affinity might well use dsaswe will use larnbe whenJuly 1998 Vinyar Tengwar + Number 39 Page 25 in proximity, by habit or preference. Yet we may mark also how the “affine” may more quickly understand the lambe that they use between them, and indeed all that they would say is not put into words, With fewer words they come swifter to a better understanding, There can be no doubt that here ésatnve is also often taking place; for the will to converse in dambe is a will to communicate thought, and lays the minds open. It may be, of course, that the two that converse know already part of the matter and the thought of the other upon it, so that only allusions dark to the stranger need be made; but this is not always so. The affine will reach an understanding more swiftly than, strangers upon matters that neither have before discussed, and they “will more quickly perceive the import of words that, however numerous, well-chosen, and precise, must remain inadequate. The bya and tengwesta have inevitably some like effect upon the Valar, if they assume Bodily taiment. The hréa will to some degree dim in force and precision the sending of the thought, and if the other be also embodied the reception of it. If they have acquired the habit of tengwesta, as some may who have acquired the custom of being arrayed, then this will reduce the practice of dsanwe. But these effects are far less than in the case of the Incarnate. For the Aréa of a Vala, even when il has become customary, is far more under the control of the will, The thought of the Vatar is far stronger and more penetrant. And so far as concerns their dealings one with another, the affinity between the Valar is greater than the affinity between any other beings; so that the use of tengwesta or dambe has never become imperative, and only with some has it become a custom and preference, And as for their dealings with all other minds in Ea, their thought often has the highest authority, and the greatest urgency. (Note 5) Pengolodh then proceeds to the abuses of sanwe. “For” he says, “some who have read so far, may already have questioned my lore, saying: ‘This seems not to accord with the histories. If the sda were inviolable by force, how could Melkor have deceived so many minds and enslaved so many? Or is it not rather true that the séma may be protected by greater strength but captured also by greater strength? Wherefore Melkor, the greatest, and even to the last possessing the most fixed, determined and ruthless will, could penetrate the minds of the Valar, but withhold himself from them, so that even Manwe in dealing with him may seem to us at times feeble, unwary, and deceived. Is this nol so? “{ say that it is not so. Things may seem alike, but if they are in kind wholly different they must be distinguished. Foresight which is prevision? and forecasting’? which is opinion made by reasoning upon present evi- dence, may be identical in their prediction, but they are wholly different in mode, and they should be distinguished by loremasters, even if the dailyPage 26 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 July 1998 language of both Elves and Men gives them the same name as departinents of wisdom”. {Note 6) in like manner, extortion of the secrets of a mind may seem to come from reading it by force in despite of its unwill, for the knowledge gained may at times appear to be as complete as any that could be obtained, Nonetheless it does not come from penetration of the barrier of unwill. There is indeed no axan that the barrier should not be forced, for it is finat, a thing impossible to be or to be done, and. the greater the force exerted, the greater the resistance of the unwill.!! But it is an axan universal that none shall directly by force or indirectly by fraud take from another what he has a right to hold and keep as his own. Melkor repudiated all axani. He would also abolish (for himself) all dinaté if he could. Indeed in his beginning and the days of his great might the most ruinous of his violences came from his endcavaur so to order Ea that there were no limits or obstacles to his will. But this he could not do. The dnati remained, a perpetual reminder of the existence of Eru and His invincibility, a reminder also of the co-existence with himself of other beings {equal in descent if not in power) impregnable by force. From this proceeds his un- ceasing and umappeasable rage. He found that the open approach of a sama of power and great force of will was felt by a lesser sda as an immense pressure, accompanied by fear. To dominate by weight of power and fear was his delight; but in this case he found them unavailing: fear closed the door faster. Therefore he tried deceit and stealth. Here he was aided by the simplicity of those unaware of evil, or not yet accustomed to beware of it. And for that reason it was said above that the distinction of openness and active will to entertain was of great importance. For he would come by stealth to a mind open and unwary, hoping to learn some part of its thought before it closed, and still more to implant in it his own thought, to deceive it and win it to his friendship. His thought was ever the same, though varied to suit each case (so far as he understood it): he was above all benevolent; he was rich and could give any gift that they desired to his friends; he had a special love for the one thai he addressed; but he must be trusted. In this way he won entry into many minds, removing their unwill, and unlocking the door by the only key, though his key was counterfeit. Yet this was not what he most desired, the conquest of the recalcitrant, the enslave- ment of his enemies. Those who listened and did not close the door were too often already inclined to his friendship; some (according to their mea- sure) had already entered on paths like his own, and listened because they hoped to learn and receive from him things that would further their own purposes. (So it was with those of the Maiar who first and earliest feil under his domination, They were already rebels, but lacking Melkor’s power andJuly 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 27 ruthless will they admired him, and saw in his leadership hope of effective rebellion.) But those who were yet simple and uncorrupted in “heart” (Note 7) were at once aware of his entry, and if they listened to the warning of their hearts, ceased to listen, ejected him, and closed the door. It was such as these that Melkor most desired to overcome: his enemies, for to him all were enemies who resisted him in the least thing or claimed anything whatsoever as their own and not his.'? Therefore he sought means to circumvent the sisat and the unwill. And this weapon he found in “language”. For we speak now of the Incarnate, the Eruhini whom he most desired to subjugate in Eru’s despite. Their bodies being of Ba ate subject to force; and their spitits, being united to their bodies in love and solicitude, are subject to fear on their behalf. And their language, though it comes from the spirit or mind, operates through and with the body: it is not the sda nor ils sarwe, but it may express the sanwe in its mode and according to its capacity. Upon the body and upon the indweller, therefore, such pressure and such fear may be exerted that the incarnate person may be forced to speak. So Melkor thought in the darkness of his forethought long ere we awoke. For in days of old, when the Valar instructed the Eldar new-come to Aman cancerning the beginning of things and the enmity of Melkor, Manwe him- self said to those who would listen: “Of the Children of Eru Melkor knew less than his peers, giving less heed to what he might have learned, as we did, in the Vision of their Coming. Yet, as we naw fear since we know you in your true being, to everything that might aid his designs for mastery his mind was keen to attend, and his purpose leaped forward swifter than ours, being bound by no axan. From the first he was greatly interested in “lan- guage”, that talent that the Brubini would have by nature; but we did not at once perceive the malice in this interest, for many of us shared it, and Aule above all, But in time we discovered that he had made a language for those who served him; and he has learned our tongue with ease. He has great skill in this matter. Beyond doubt he will master all tongues, even the fair speech of the Eldar. Therefore, if ever you should speak with him beware!” “Alas!” says Pengolodh, “in Valinor Mclkar used the Quenya with such mastery that al] the Eldar were amazed, for his use could not be bettered, scarce equalled even, by the poets and the loremasters”. Thus by deceit, by Jies, by torment of the body and the spirit, by the threat of torment to others well loved, or by the sheer terror of his presence, Melkor ever sought to force the Incarnate that fell into his power, or came within his reach, ta speak and to tell him all that he would know. But his own Lie begot an endless progeny of lies. By this means he has destroyed many, he has caused treacheries untold, and he has gained knowledge of secrets to his great advantage and the undo- ing of his enemies, But this is not by entering the mind, or by reading it as itPage 28 Vinyar Tengwar » Number 39 July 1998 is, in its despite. Nay, for great though the knowledge that he gained, behind the words (even of those in fear and torment) dwells ever the séma invio- lable: the words are not in it, though they may proceed from it (as cries from behind a locked door); they must be judged and assessed for what truth may be in them. Therefore, the Liar says that all words are lies: all things that he hears are threaded through with deceit, with evasions, hidden meanings, and hate. In this vast network he himself enmeshed struggles and rages, gnawed by suspicion, doubt, and fear. Not so would it have been, if he could have broken the barrier, and seen the heart as it is in its truth unveiled. If we speak last of the “folly” of Manwe and the weakness and unwariness of the Valar, let us beware how we judge. In the histories, indeed, we may be amazed and grieved to read how (seemingly) Melkor deceived and cuzened others, and how even Manwe appears at times almost a simpleton compared with him: as if a kind but unwise father were treating a wayward child who would assuredly im time perceive the error of his ways, Whereas we, looking on and knowing the outcome, see now that Melkor knew weil the error of his ways, but was fixed in them by hate and pride beyond return. He could read the mind of Manwe, for the door was open; but his own mind was false and even if the doer seemed open, there were doors of iron within closed for ever. How otherwise would you have it? Should Manwe and the Valar meet secrecy with subterfuge, treachery with falsehood, lies with more lies? If Melkor would usurp their rights, should they deny his? Can hate overcome hate? Nay, Manwe was wiser; or being ever open to Eru he did His will, which is more than wisdom. He was ever open because he had nothing to conceal, no thought that it was harmful for any to know, if they could comprehend it. Indeed Melkor knew his will without questioning it; and he knew that Manwe was bound by the commands and injunctions of Er, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always, even. knowing that Melkor would break them as it suited his purpose, Thus the merciless will ever count on mercy, and the liars make use of truth; for if mercy and truth are withheld from the cruel and the lying, they have ceased to be honoured.!? Manwe could not by duress attempt to compel Melkor to reveal his thought and purposes, or (if he used words) to speak the truth. If he spoke and said: this is true, he must be believed until proved false; if he said: this I will do, as you bid, be must be allowed the opportunity to fulfill his promise. (Note 8) The force and restraint that were used upon Melkor by the united power of all the Valar, were not used to extort confession (which was needless); nor to compel him to reveal his thought (which was unlawful, even if not vain). ‘He was made captive as a punishment for his evil deeds, under the authority of the King. So we may say; but it were better said that he was deprived for aJuly 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 29 term, fixed by promise, of his power to act, so that he might halt and con- sider himself, and have thus the only chance that mercy could contrive of repentance and amendment. For the healing of Arda indeed, but for his own healing also, Melkor bad the right to exist, and the right to act and use his powers. Manwe had the authority to rule and to order the world, so far as he could, for the well-being of the Eruhini; but if Melkor would repent and return to the allegiance of Eru, he must be given his freedom again. He could not be enslaved, or denied his part. The office of the Elder King was to retain all his subjects in the allegiance of Eru, or to bring them back to it, and in that allegiance to leave them free. Therefore not until the last, and not then except by the express command of Eru and by His power, was Melkor thrown utterly down and deprived for ever of all power to do or to undo. Who among the Eldar hold that the captivity of Melkor in Mandos {which was achieved by force) was either unwise or unlawful? Yet the resolve to assault Melkor, not merely to withstand him, to mect violence with wrath to the peril of Arda, was taken by Manwe only with reluctance, And con- sider: what good in this case did even the lawful use of force accomplish? It removed him for a while and relieved Middle-earth from the pressure of his malice, but it did not uprout his evil, for it could not do so. Unless, maybe, Melkor had indeed repented. (Note 9) But he did not repent, and in humili- ation he became more obdurate: more subtle in his deceits, more cunning in his lies, crueller and more dastardly in his revenge. The weakest and most imprudent of all the actions of Manwe, as it seems to many, was the release of Melkor from captivity. From this came the greatest loss and harm: the death of the Trees, and the exile and the anguish of the Noldor. Yet through this suffering there came also, as maybe in no other way could it have came, the victory of the Elder Days: the downfall of Angband and the last over- throw of Melkor. Who then can say with assurance that if Melkor had been held in bond less evil would have followed? Even in his diminishment the power of Melkor is beyond our calculation. Yet some ruinous outburst of his despair is not the worst that might have befallen. The release was according to the promise of Manwe. If Manwe had broken this promise for his own pur- poses, even though still intending “good”, he would have taken a step upon the paths of Melkor. That is a perilous step. In that hour and act he would have ceased to be the vice-gerent of the One, becoming but a king who takes advantage over a rival whom he has conquered by force. Would we then have the sorrows that indeed befell; or would we have the Elder King lose his honour, and so pass, maybe, to a world rent between two proud lords striv- ing for the throne? Of this we may be sure, we children of small strength: any one of the Valar might have taken the paths of Melkor and become like him: one was enough.Page 30 _ Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 _ July 1998 Author’s Notes to the Osanwe-kenta . Note 1 Here nira (“will” as a potential or faculty) since the minimum requirement is that this faculty shall not be exerted in denial; action or an act of will is nirme; as sanwe “Thought” or “a thought” is the action or an act of sdma. Note 2 It may be occupied with thinking and inattentive to other things; it may be “turned towards Eru”; it may be engaged in “thought-converse” with a third mind, Pengolodh says: “Only great minds can converse with more than one other at the same time; several may confer, but then at one time only one is imparting, while the others receive”. Note 3 “No mind can, however, be closed against Fru, either against His inspection or against His message. The latter it may not heed, but it cannot say it did not receive it”. Note 4 Pengolodh adds: “Some say that Manwe, by a special grace to the King, could still in a measure perceive Eru; others more probably, that he re- mained nearest to Eru, and Eru was most ready to hear and answer him”. Note 5 Here Pengolodh adds a long note on the use of hrdar by the Valar. In brief he says thal though in origin a “self-arraying”, it may tend to approach the state of “incarnation”, especially with the lesser members of that order (the Maiar). “It is said that the longer and the more the same hrda is used, the greater is the bond of habit, and the less de the ‘self-arrayed’ desire to leave it. As raiment may soon cease to be adornment, and becomes (as is said in the tongues of both Elves and Men) a ‘habit’, a customary garb. Or if among Elves and Men it be worn to mitigate heat or cold, it soon makes the clad body less able to endure these things when naked”. Pengolodh also cites the opinion that if a “spirit” (that is, one of those not embodied by creation) uses a hrda for the furtherance of its personal purposes, or (still more) for the enjoyment of bodily faculties, it finds it increasingly difficult to operate without the hréa. The things that are most binding are those that in the Incarnate have to do with the life of the Aréq itself, its sustenance and its propagation. Thus eating and drinking are binding, but not the delight in beauty of sound or form. Most binding is begetting or conceiving. “We do not know the axani (laws, rules, as primarily proceeding from Eru) that were laid down upon the Valar with particular reference to their state, but it seems clear that there was no axan against these things. None- theless it appears to be an axan, or maybe necessary consequence, that if they are done, then the spirit must dweil in the body that it used, and be under the same necessities as the Incarnate. The only case that is known inJuly 1998 Vittyar Tengwar + Number 39 Page 31 the histories of the Eldar is that of Melian who became the spouse of King Elu-thingol. This certainly was not evil or against the will of Eru, and though it led to sorrow, both Elves and Men were enriched. “The great Valar do not do thesc things: they beget not, neither do they eat and drink, save at the high asari, in token of their lordship and indwell- ing of Arda, and far the blessing of the sustenance of the Children. Melkor alone of the Great became at last bound to a bodily form; but that was because of the use that he made of this in his purpose to become Lord af the Incarnate, and of the great evils that he did in the visible body. Also he had dissipated his native powers in the control of his agents and servants, so that he became in the end, in himself and without their support, 2 weakened thing, consumed by hate and unable to restore himself from the state into which he had fallen. Even his visible form he could no longer master, so that its hideousness could not any longer be masked, and it showed forth the evil of his mind, So it was also with even some of his greatest servants, as in these later days we see: they became wedded to the forms of their evil deeds, and if these budies were taken from them or destroyed, they were nullified, until they had rebuilt a semblance of their former habitations, with which they could continue the evil courses in which they had become fixed”. (Pengolodh here evidently refers to Sauron in particular, from whose arising he fled at last from Middle-earth. But the first destruction of the bodily form of Sauron was recorded in the histories of the Elder Days, in the Lay of Leithian.) Note 6 Pengolodh here elaborates (though it is not necessary for his argument) this matter of “foresight”. No mind, he asserts, knows what is not in it. All that it has experienced is in it, though in the case of the Incarnate, dependent upon the instruments of the hréa, some things may be “forgotten”, not immedi- ately available for recollection, But no part of the “future” is there, for the mind cannot see it or have seen it: that is, a mind placed in time. Such a mind can learn of the future only [rom another mind which has seen it. But that means only from Eru ultimately, or mediately from some mind that has seen in Eru same part of His purpose (such as the Ainur who are now the Valar in Ei). An Incarnate can thus only know anything of the future, by instruction derived from the Valar, or by a revelation coming direct from Eru, But any mind, whether of the Valar or of the Incarnate, may deduce by reason what will or may come to pass. This is not foresight, not though it may be clearer in terms and indeed even more accurate than glimpses of foresight. Not even if it is formed into visions seen in dream, which is a means whereby “foresight” also is frequently presented to the mind. Minds that have great knowledge of the past, the present, and the nature of Fa may predict with grcat accuracy, and the nearer the future the clearer (saving always the freedom of ru). Much therefore of what is called “fore-Page 32 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 _ July 1998 sight” in careless speech is only the deduction of the wise; and if it be received, as warning or instruction, from the Valar, it may be only deduc- tion of the wiser, though it may sometimes be “foresight” at second hand. Note 7 enda, This we translate “heart”, though it has no physical reference to any organ of the ferda, It means “centre”, and refers (though by inevitable physi- cal allegory) to the fea ar scm itself, distinct from the periphery (as it were) of its contacts with the #rdéa; self-aware; endowed with the primeval wisdom of its making which made it sensitive to anything inimical in the least de- gree. Note 8 For which reason Melkor often spoke the truth, and indeed he seldom lied without any admixture of truth. Unless it was in his lies against Bru; and it was, maybe, lor uttering these that he was cut off from return, Note 9 Some hold that, though evil might then have been mitigated, it could not have been undone even by Melkor repentant; for power had gone forth from him and was no longer under the control of his will. Arda was marred in its very being. The seeds that the hand sows will grow and multiply though the hand be removed. Editorial glossary to the Osanwe-kenta All words are Quenya unless otherwise indicated. aquapahtie ‘privacy’. Apparently composed of aqua- ‘fully, completely, alto- gether, wholly’ (WJ-392) + “paht-ie ‘closed-ness’ (cf, pahta ‘closed’ and kdtie ‘openness’, below). asar, pl. asari ‘fixed time, festival’ (WJ:399). avanir ‘unwill’. Apparently composed of ava-, expressing refusal or prohibition (cf. WJ370-71s.v. *ABA), + -nir ‘will’ (cf. fra below). axan, pl. axani ‘law, rule, commandment; as primarily proceeding from Eru’. Adopted from Valarin akasan ‘He says’, referring to Eru (WJ:399)- enda ‘centre, heart’; uf persons, having no reference to the physical organ, bul to the féa or sdma itself, distinct from its contacts with the Arda. CE ENED- ‘centre’ (LR:356). Eruhini Children of Eru’, ie. Elves and Men (W]:gu3). (fea, pl. féar ‘soul, indwelling spirit, of an incarnate being’ (MR:349, 470). Also cf. WI-405. hréa, pl. hréar ‘body (of an incarnate being)’ (MR:350, 470). Also cf. W):aos. indo n. ‘state’, perhaps specifically ‘state of mind (sdma)’. In “LQ 2” (MR:m6, 230 8. 16) irido is used for ‘mind’, which here is the translation of sda; while The Etymologies has indo ‘heart, mood’ (LR:361 s.v. ID-). Kenta ‘enquiry’. Cf. Essekenta *“name-enquiry’ (MR:415). Cf. the verb stem ken- ‘see, behold’ (MC:222) and the element cenyé ‘sight’ in apacenyé ‘foresight’July 1948 _Vinyar Tengwar Number 39. Page 33, and tercenyé ‘insight’ (MR:26), which may suggest that kente might more literally mean ‘a looking Cinto)’ some matter.!4 lambe CI. the entry lambe in the editorial glossary to the extract from Quendi and Eldar App. D, above {p.12). lata adj. ‘open’. Cf. LAT- ‘lie open’ (LR:368). fatie ‘openness. latya ‘opening’. Mirréanwi ‘Incarnates’, literally ‘those put into flesh (hrda)” (MR:350). nira n. ‘will, as a potential or faculty’. Cf. S. anira ‘(he) desires’ (SD:128-29).!*° nirme ‘the action or an act of nira’, ésanwe ‘communication of interchange of thought’. Apparently composed of the prefix o- “used in words describing the meeting, junction, or union of two (hings” (Wh367 sv. *WO) + sanwe (q.v.).14 pahta adj. ‘closed’. Cf. nguapahtie above. sdena, pl. sdzmar ‘mind’, sanwe ‘Thought; a thought; as the action ar an act of sdsma’. Cf. ésanwe above. tengwesta Cf. the entry tengwesta in the editorial glossary to the extract from Quendi and Fidar App. D, above (p. 14). tinat, pL. tinati ‘a thing impossible to be or to be done’. Apparently composed of ti + nat ‘thing’ (cf. LR:374 sv. NA2-). The Etymologies gives the Q. prefix # as meaning ‘not, un-, in- (usually with bad sense)’ (LR:396 s.v. UGU-), but the force of #i- here is stronger than that conveyed by those isolated glosses. Compare the distinction between avaguétina ‘not to be said, that must net be said’ and raquétima ‘uspeakable, impossible to say, put into words, or unpronounceable’ (W370 s.v. *ABA). Cf the entry in the editorial glossary to the extract from Quendi and Eldar App. D, above {p. 14). Editorial notes 1. It is of course tempting to identify this redactor, and that of Quendi and Eldar, as lfwine, the Anglo-Saxon mariner who was the wanslator / transmitter of and commentatur upon other works of Pengolodh, such as the Quenta Silma- rilfion (LR:2a1, 203-4, 275 fn.) and, notably, Lhansmas 8 (cf. LR:167). 2. While Pengolodh’s Lammas ‘Account of Tongues’ here is, within the subcreation, the same work as his Litansas (the text published in The Lost Road), it appears that it refers to an unwritten (or, at any rate, no longer extant) version of that work that differs in certain respects, The published Laammas, for instance, does not end with a discussion of “direct thought-transmission”, as the present text states of the Lammas; and the Note on the ‘Language of the Valar” that concludes Quendi and Eldar, said to be “summarized” from Pengolodh’s comments at the beginning of luis Lammas (WJ:397), is very much longer and mote detailed than the very brief, general statement thal begins the Lharsmas (LRass), (At least one contemporary reference to the Lammas may, however, have been to the extant Lhanimas: see W):208-9 n. §6.) 3. In its remarkable natural and moral philosophical range, the Osanwe-kentta also has strong affinities with other, sirotlarly philosophical, and closely contem-rage 34 Vinyar Lengwar - Number 39 July 1998 porary writings published in Morgoth’s Ring: e.g. Laws and Customs among the Eldar, che Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, and many of the briefer writings col- lected in Part V, “Myths Transformed”. Of these, of particular note in connec- tion with the present essay are texts II (MR-375 ff), VI Metkor Morgoth (390 ff.}, and VII Notes on motives in the Silmarillion (394-f6.), all in some manner con- cerned with the motives and methods of Melkor and his dealings with Manwé and the other Valar and the Incarnates. The beginning of part (ii) of this last text (398 ff.) is especially noteworthy; though very mach briefer and less detailed than the Gsanwe-kenta, it is also concerned with “thought-transference” and with many of the same philosophical issues surrounding it as are discussed in the present text. 4. The first elernent of this Quenya title has an accent over the initial vowel everywhere else in Tolkien’s text. 5. In this and every subsequent instance, “Eruhini” hus been altered by Tol- kien from typed “Eruhin” (cf. MR:320), 6. Tolkien replaced “willing” with “intending” in the act of typing, 7. The concept of the Marring of Arda was much elaborated by Tolkien among the closely contemporary writings published in Morgoth’s Ring (for the many references, see MR:455). Cf. also W:4o1. &. Tolkien wrote “an impediment” above deleted “a barrier’. 9. Cf. the discussion of essi apacenyé ‘names of foresight’, given by a mather to her child in the hour of its birth in indication of “same foresight of its special fate” (MR:216). Jo. Tolkien wrote “forecasting” in the margin as a replacement for deleted “predicting”. u. With this statement of the irpossibility of forced penetration of the mind, compare the first paragraph of part (ii} of the Notes on motives in the Silmarillion (MR:398-99), which appears to say that such an act is possible, though forbid- den and, even if done for “good” purposes, criminal. 12. With this discussion of Melkor’s deceitful methods of winning entry through the door of the sda, it is interesting to compare the contemporary depiction of his failed attempt to cozen, flatter, and entice Féanor into allowing him to enter through the (physical) door of Formenos, in the second-phase expansion of the Quenta Silmarillion chapter “Of the Silmarils and the Unrest of the Noldor” (MR:280 $54, also $:71-72). 13. This sentence originally ended: “they have ceased to be [— and?] have become mere prudence”, 14. Based on the only previously published translation of the title Osarwe- kenta as ‘Communication of Thought’ (MR-415), dsanwe and kenta have previ- ously been interpreted, wrongly, as meaning ‘thought’ and ‘communication’, respectively (e.g. VT34:29-30). a5. It has previously been suggested (VT31:7, 30) that S, atira is to be ana- lyzed as an- + ira (and derived from the hase ID- ‘heart, desire, wish’, LR-361); this still seems possible, but Q. mira suggests an alternative analysis as a- + nira,July 1998 Vinyar Tengwar - Number 39 Page 35 Resources ‘The following are just some of the resources available for the study af Tolkien’s invented languages. For a more complete list, visit: http:f/www.crols.com/aelfwine/Tolkien/linguistics/resources.html Primers An Introduction to Elvish, edited by Jim Altan, (Somerset: Bran’s Head Books, 1978. ISBN 0-905220-10-2). A venerable but still valuable primer of Tolkienian linguistics. ItE is available for £14.50 ($22.50 for US orders; prices include postage) from the bookseller Thornton’s of Oxford, 11 Broad Street, Oxford OX1 3AR, England. Tel. 0865-242939, Fax 0865- 204021, e-mail [email protected] Basic Quenya, by Nancy Martsch. Second edition. Quenya for beginners! Twenty-two lessons, plus Quenya—English / English-Quenya vocabulary. $10 plus postage: USA ist class $3, book rate $1.25; Canada airmail $3, surface $2.25; Europe airmail $5, surface $2.75. Make checks payable to Nancy Martsch, P.O. Box 55372, Sherman Oaks, CA 91413, USA, Dictionaries and Concordances A Working Concordance, A Working English Lexicon, A Working Reverse Dic- tionary (with or without meanings), A Working Reverse Index, A Working Reverse Glossary. A Working Tolkien Glossary (in 7 volumes), A Compre- hensive Index of Proper Names and Places, available in printed form and on disk (OS format) from Paul Nolan Hyde, 8520 Jean Parrish Ct. NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87122, USA. Journals Parma Eldalamberon. A journal of linguistic studies of fantasy literature, especially of the Elvish languages and names in the works of J.R.R. Tol- kien. Editer: Christopher Gilson, 10200 Miller Ave. #426, Cupertino, CA 95014, USA: e-mail [email protected]. Panza is an occasional journal, sold on a per-issue basis, Write for current information. Quettar. The Bulletin of the Linguistic Fellowship of ‘The ‘Lolkien Society. Editor: julian Bradfield, Subscriptions to: the Editor at Univ. of Edinburgh, Dept. of Computer Science, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh EH3 9JZ, UK; e- mail [email protected]. Four-issue subseription:.£3.75 for UK, £4.50 surface elsewhere, £6 airmail. Internet Mailing List TolkLang. Join this online forum for the discussion of Tolkienian linguistics by sending a message with the single word subscribe to [email protected]Vinyar Tengwar The journal of the Elvish Linguistic Fellowship, a Special Interest Group of the Mythopoeic Sacicty. hitp:!/www. crals.com/aelfwine/Tolkien/linguistics/ELFFVT/VT html Vinyar I engwar is a rcferced journal indexed by the Modern Language Association. Editor: Cat] B. Hostetter, 2509 Ambling Circle, Crofton, MD 214, USA. E-mail [email protected] Review panel: Christopher Gilson, Arden R. Smith, and Patrick Wynne. Cover design: by Patrick Wynne. Subscriptions: A six-issue subscription costs: giz USA. $5 Canada, South America, and overseas surface mail. $18 Overseas airmail. Subscription status page: hetp:{}www.erols.com/aelfwine/T olkien/ELF/members.tm Back issues: All back issues are perpetually available at the current per-issue subscrip- tion price: $2 USA, $2.50 Canada, South America, and. overseas surface mail, $3 overseas airmail. Deduct 25% if ordering 8 or more back issues. For a complete list of the contents of VF ta date, visit: httpsi/www-erols.com/aelfwine/Tolkien/ELF/VT/VT_contents html Payments: All payments must be in US dollars. Make checks payable to Carl Hostecier. Submissions: All material should in some manner deal with ‘lolkien's invented lan- guages. All submissions must be typed, or must be exquisitely legible: the editor will not decipher lower-glyphiics, The editor reserves the right to edit any material {except artwrork) for purposes of clarity, brevity, and relevance. Ihivatar smiles upon submissions by e-mail or on Macintosh or MS-DOS disks (3.5"} in Microsoit Word or plain text (ASCII) formats. Copyright of all material submitted és retained by the author or artist, although VT reserves the right t reprint the material at any time. Acknowledgement that original material subsequently reprinted elsewhere first appeared in VT would be @ welcome courtesy. All quotations from the works of . R.R. or Christopher Tolkien are copyright of their Publishers and/or the Tolkien Estate. AH olher material és @xg98 Vinyat Tengwar. Bibliographical Abbreviations H_ The Hobbit LB The Lays of Beleriand 1 The Fellowship of the Ring SM _ The Shaping of Middle-earth Te The Two fowers LR The Lost Road Ul The Return of the King RS The Retirrt of the Shadow R The Road Goes Ever On TL fhe Treason of isengard TC A Tolkien Compass WR The War of the Ring S The Sitmaritiion SD Sauron Defeated UT Unfinished Tales MR = Morgoth’s Ring L The Zetters of L.R.R. Tolkien WI] The War of the Jewels MC The Monsters and the Critics. PM _ The Peoples af Middle-earth LT. fhe Book of Lose Tales, Vert One LNG Flare aa Ngoldathon, in Parma i LT2 The Book of Last Tales, Part Two Q Qenyagersa, in Parmara Page references are te the siandard hacdco cr edition, where this exists, witless otherwise noteet,