The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor

Appendix: The Eldarin numerals

The following text has been removed from the entry for the river-name Levnui (S. ‘fifth') above to this appendix.

The stems of the Common Eldarin numerals (which up to 12 agree closely in the derived languages) were: 1 ‘single' (non-serial) ER; ‘one, first of a series' MIN. 2 TATA, ATTA. 3 NEL, NEL-ED. From 3-9{51} the stems were dissyllabic (Note 1) (triconsonantal, though two of them had no initial consonant, as was not infrequent in Common Eldarin in this pattern): 4 kan-at. 6 en-ek(w) (the (w) only appears in Quenya). 7 ot-os. 8 tol-ot.{52} 9 net-er. 10 kwaya, kway-am. 11 minik(w). 12 yunuk(w).{53} 5 is omitted because it is exceptional. It had the stem lepen, and a supposed variant lemen (but see further below) neither of which ever appeared without the third consonant.

The numerals, as is usual, are mostly not referable with certainty to other stems or bases. The form min is probably the same in origin as MIN that appears in words applying to isolated prominent things, such as steeples, tall turrets, sharp mountain peaks, minya ‘first' thus meant eminent, prominent', cf. Q. eteminya ‘prominent'; also minde ‘turret', augmented in mindon ‘lofty tower', minasse, S. minas: ‘fort, city, with a citadel and central watch-tower'. ‘Five' was no doubt a special number primitively in peoples of elvish/human shape, being the number of the fingers on one hand. Thus lepen is without doubt related to the stem LEP ‘finger' (Note 2). It is also certain that 10 kwaya, and kwayam (-m being also of plural origin), is related to base KWA (kwa-kwa, kwa-t) ‘full, complete, all, every", and meant ‘all, the whole lot, all the ten fingers'.{54} But already in Common Eldarin the multiples of three, especially six and twelve, were considered specially important, for general arithmetical reasons; and eventually beside the decimal numeration a complete duodecimal system was devised for calculations, some of which, such as the special words for 12 (dozen), 18, and 144 (gross), were in general use.{55} But since this appears to have been a relatively late development (only begun after the Common Eldarin [?Period] except for the word for 12),{56} the vague similarity of nel(ed), e-nek-we, net-er are probably not significant.

In Common Eldarin the full forms with ómataima (long or short){57} were employed as cardinals: as Telerin canat, Sindarin canad 4 < kanata. In Quenya the second vowel was syncopated as usual with short unstressed vowels following a stressed vowel of the same quality: hence Q. kanta 4 < kanatā. For 5 Telerin had lepen, S. leben. In Telerin final n (< m, n) was not lost, but it was lost in Sindarin; it is therefore probable that in Common Eldarin *lepen had assumed the form lepene with a final vowel modelled on the other numerals. The Quenya form is lempe. This does not support the view that 5 had in Common Eldarin an alternative stem lemen. In pre-record Quenya the sequences pm, pn, tn, kn were frequently reversed{58}—a process assisted by the frequency with which nasal (homorganic) infixion competed with the suffixion of n, m in word formation, and also by the severe phonetic changes which overtook the voiceless stops before nasals (Note 3). So lepene > lepne would yield lempe without need to substitute m. See further under Ordinals.

The ordinals in Common Eldarin appear to have been formed by addition of adjectival -yā to a stem in which the second vowel was absent. Not by syncope, but according to the primitive modes of derivation from bases. In Quenya the ending -ea was generalized for 3rd, 4th, 6th-9th inclusive. It was the natural form for Quenya in 3rd, 4th, 6th, 9th, and ousted the oya proper to 7th, 8th.{59} The Quenya forms were: 1st minya; 2nd tatya (Note 4) early replaced by attea; 3rd nelya, also neldea; 4th kantea; 5th lemenya (the usual form; lempea only appears in late Quenya); 6th enquea; 7th otsea; 8th toldea;{60} 9th nertea; 10th quainea. The Sindarin forms were cardinal 1 mîn, er; 2 tâd; 3 nêl; 4 canad; 5 leben; 6 eneg; 7 odog{61} (the historical form odo < otoso occurred in Doriathrin according to the grammarians); 8 toloð;{62} 9 neder; 10 pae. The Sindarin ordinals were mainly formed with suffixed -ui, derived from ō-ya, ū-ya (which were present in 7th and 8th), and generalized as a suffix in these and other adjectives. 1st mein, main (from minya, only used in senses ‘prime, chief, pre-eminent', etc.), minui; 2nd taid (only used in senses ‘supporting, second in command', etc.), tadui; 3rd neil, nail (late S. nelui); 4th canthui; 5th levnui; 6th enchui; 7th othui; 8th tollui;{63} 9th nedrui; 10th paenui (Note 5). Other occasional forms are 6th enecthui, with -thui deduced from 4th, 7th, 8th; 7th odothui. othui is the normal and older form, and is directly derived from C.E. otsōya.

In this setting the aberrant Q. lemenya and S. levnui may be better understood. The form lemenya in Quenya plainly supports the view that the Common Eldarin numeral for 5 differed from the others from 3 to 9: it was not originally a triconsonantal stem, the final nasal was an inflexion, and there was no ómataima beyond it at the primitive time when these adjectives were devised; the adjectival -ya was therefore added direct to the nasal. The m however is a Quenya alteration based on lempe. In Telerin, in contrast to Quenya and Sindarin, the ordinals, under the influence of minya, tatya, nelya, and lepenya, generalized the pattern in which -ya was added direct to the final consonant of the stem: so T. 4th canatya, 6th enetya, 7th ototya,{64} 8th tolodya,{65} 9th neterya, 10th paianya. It may be observed that 5th was lepenya; since the cardinal was lepen and there was no such form as Q. lempe to induce a change to lemen-. That Telerin, though in many ways the most archaic of the Eldarin tongues, was not immune from analogical changes is seen in the form ototya (with tya instead of sya) after -tya in 2nd, 4th, 6th; but it would be unreasonable to suppose that T. lepenya has p after lepen instead of m as in the Q. lemenya; since the m is isolated in Quenya and satisfactorily explicable from lempe, whereas a variant stem *lemen would be obscure in its relations to lepen, which has credible etymological connexions.

The S. levnui does not support *lemen. It is true that *lemnui made on a pattern similar to the other numerals would yield levnui; but so would a stem-form lepn- in Sindarin. In Sindarin voiceless stops [i.e., p, t, k] before nasals became voiced > b, d, g, and then together with the original voiced stops in this position became nasals before homorganic nasals (tn, dn > nn; pm, bm > mm), but before other nasals became spirants as generally medially (pn, bn > vn; tm, dm > ðm, later > ðv, ðw; kn, gn > gn > in; km, gm > gm > im > iv, iw). Since, however, Quenya and Telerin show clearly that the stem lepen was originally a distinct stem not primitively capable of extrusion of the second vowel, the actual history of the Sindarin aberration is probably this: the sequel of C.E. lepenya would have produced *lepein(a) [deleted: more probably lebein(a)], but its aberration from its neighbours would have only the support of the distant *neil(a) 3rd, which was not a triconsonantal stem; it was therefore remodelled to lepni(a) after enki(a) 6th and nerti(a) 9th and the similar pattern of the stems in *kantaia 4th, otsoia 7th, toltoia 8th. This lepni then followed the normal Sindarin development to levni, subsequently adopting as all the others of its neighbours the ending ui.

A torn half-sheet placed among this discussion of Eldarin numerals reads:

Far too complicated.lemenya must be abandoned, the Old Quenya reflex in Vanyarin was lepenya (as in Telerin). In Noldorin Quenya its aberration was corrected by lempea (with -ea of other ordinals) derived from lempe, and before the Exile this was already the usual spoken form of 5th in Noldorin Quenya, though the Noldor all knew lepenya since that was used in Vanyarin and also in Telerin.

Note 1: The simpler, and probably older, bi-consonantal forms occur, however, in adverbial or prefixed forms: as AT(A) ‘double, bi-, di-’, in numerals signifying ‘doubled'; similarly NEL-, KAN-, etc.{66}

Note 2: Cf. the probable ultimate relationship between five, finger, and fist.{67} It was considered probable that originally it was a plural *lepem—m being certainly an ancient plural indicator in Common Eldarin—‘fingers', sc. of one hand. But if so lepem must have been altered by dissimilation > lepen and the final -n associated with the third consonant of the other numerals.

Note 3: But the chief reason, no doubt, was the strong predilection which Quenya showed for the sequences of sonants: m, n, n; l, r before stops, as against those in which the sonants followed. Transposition also occurs in Quenya in ancient forms of tr, tl, etc. > rt, lt. Of this an example occurs in C.E. *netere which in Quenya appears as nerte.

Note 4: The reason for the Quenya divergence in the ordinal: Q. atta 2, but T. tata, S. tad is not certain. The appearance of at(a) in adverbial or prefixal use in Quenya, Telerin, and Sindarin; [and] of Q. atatya ‘double' and S. edaid ‘double', suggest that the most primitive form was AT, reduplicated to Atat to enforce the duality. Of a primitive atata the normal Quenya development was atta, while atatya remained because the second a was not syncopated, being in a long syllable.{68} But whatever its origin ATATA was treated as a triconsonantal stem: those in which there was no actual initial consonant were in ancient modes of derivation often deprived of the initial vowel when the accent was placed on the second syllable. T. tata, S. tad may thus be referred to (a)táta. The placing of the accent would not affect Quenya since in PQ the accent became placed on the first syllable in all cases, except for words formed with still recognized prefixes.{69}

Note 5: The forms canthui, enchui, tolthui are those of the southern Sindarin dialect adopted by the Noldor. In the Northern dialect (which perished in the course of the war against Morgoth) nt, nc, mp had remained unchanged. In the Southern dialects nt, ñk, mp remained when standing finally—or more probably the spirant was re-stopped in this position; for similarly final lth > lt, though rth remained finally. Medially however nth (nþ), nch (ñx), mf (mp with bilabial f), and lth (lþ) became long voiceless n, ñ, m, l, though the old spelling was mostly retained (beside nh, ñh, mh, lh), and among those to whom Sindarin became a language of lore, as the men of Gondor who were or claimed to be of Númenórean race, the spirant was reintroduced from the spelling. In true Sindarin of the Elves or Elf-friends of the early ages the final form was often introduced medially. In the transcription of Elvish Sindarin in The Lord of the Rings ll is used in the manner of modern Welsh for the medial voiceless l; as in mallorn < malhorn < malþorn < malt ‘gold' and orn ‘tree’.{70}