Quenya

• Phonology
• Development in contact
• Morphology
• Derivation of adjectives
• Syntax
• Article
• Modality
• Lexicology

Phonology

Development in contact

Consonants

Initial Consonant Groups

Combinations with Y

*Also in Númenórean Quenya

Combinations with W

*Also in Númenórean Quenya

Nasalized Groups

*Also in Númenórean Quenya

Combinations with S

*Colloquial Sindarin influence

Combinations with D, G

Medial Combinations

Voiceless Stops

Voiceless Aspirates

Voiced Stops

Nasals

*Colloquial Sindarin influence

Liquids

Sibilants

Consonants at Word End

Nasals

Liquids

Fricatives

Stops

Groups

Vowels

Changes in hiatus

CE	PQ	NTQ
aja	ea	ea
aje	ie	ie
ajo	eo	eo
awa	oa	oa, ava
awo	uo	uo
awe	oe	oe
ājV	ajjV	ajjV
āwV	āvV	āvV
aga	ā	ā
āge	ā	ā
āgo	ā	ā
āgē	ē	ē
agē	ē	ē
age	ē	ē
āgō	ō	ō
agō	ō	ō
ago	ō	ō

CE	PQ	NTQ	Comment
eja	ea	ea
eje	ie	ie
ejo	io	io
ewa	ewa	ewa, eva
ewo	eo	eo
ewe	ewe	ewe
ējV	ejjV	ejjV
ēwV	ēvV	ēvV
ega	ea	ea
ego	eo	eo
ege	ē	ē
ej	ē	ē	stressed
ej	ī	ī	unstressed

CE	PQ	NTQ	VTQ
ijV	i(j)V	i(j)V	i(j)V
ige	ie	ie	ie
igo	io	io	io
iga	ia	ia	ia
igi	ī	ī	ī
igu	iw	jū	jū

CE	PQ	NTQ	Comment
ojV	ojV	ojV
oje	oe	oe
owa	oa	oa, ova
owo	uo	uo
owe	ue	ue
oga	oa	oa
oge	oe	oe
ogo	ō	ō
ow	ō	ō	stressed
ow	ū	ū	unstressed

CE	PQ	NTQ	VTQ
uwV	u(w)V	u(w)V	u(w)V
uge	ue	ue	ue
ugo	uo	uo	uo
uga	ua	ua	ua
ugu	ū	ū	ū
ugi	uj	uj	wī

CE	PQ	NTQ	Comment
wo	wa	wa	stressed
wō	wō	wō
woj	waj	n
wow	wō	n
waw	aw, wā	aw, w

Vowels at Word End

CE	PQ	NTQ	Comment
iw	io, iju	io, iju
uj	ue, uvi	ue, uvi
i	e	e
u	o	o
e, a, o	—	—
ai	e	e
oi	ui	ui	stressed
oi	ī	i	unstressed

Morphology

Derivation of adjectives

Denominal adjectives

A primary distinction within adjective classes is between qualitative and relational adjectives. Qualitative adjectives express properties that describe entities and are typically gradable. In contrast, relational adjectives function to classify entities, denoting the domains to which they belong or specifying relationships with other entities, including those with argumental roles.

Relational adjectives

Relational adjectives, one of the more thoroughly researched classes of denominal adjectives, are semantically underspecified regarding the type of relationship they establish between the head noun and their base noun. The interpretation of this relationship adapts flexibly to contextual relevance. In this framework, the fundamental semantic role of relational adjectives is classificatory: they denote subtypes of the head noun by establishing connections with other entities. Unlike qualifying adjectives, which involve a content-rich relational function R, the relational adjective’s link more closely resembles a semantically neutral preposition, such as of in English or de in Spanish.

The affixes involved in forming relational adjectives are:

• -itĭ: hlon(a)itë ‘phonetic’, ólamaitë ‘consonantal’ (and so erólamaitë ‘uniconsonantal’, attólamaitë ‘biconsonantal’, nelólamaitë ‘triconsonantal’). Earlier aranaitë ‘royal’ was likely replaced by the derivative of -jā: aranya; and the hanuvoitë ‘male’ with *vona ‘male’.
• -jā is the most represented suffix here. It can be seen with:
  • – consonantal nouns: apacenya ‘of foresight’, tercenya ‘of insight’, elenya ‘stellar’, aranya ‘[royal]’, ferinya ‘beechen’, arinya ‘early’, and especially place-names: amanya ‘[of Aman]’, formenya ‘northern’, hyarmenya ‘southern’, númenya ‘western’, rómenya ‘eastern’.
  • – moraic nouns: gávea ‘consonantal’, vénea ‘virginal’, essea ‘local’.
  • – derivative nouns: lúmequentalea ‘historical’, ampanotalea ‘architectural’, ettelea ‘foreign’, farastea ‘of the chase’, lirustea ‘fit for singing’, nengwea ‘nasal’, yárea or yalúmea ‘olden’.
  • – pseudo-vocalic nouns: entya ‘central’, enya ‘middle’ (but see also endea ‘middle’).
• -(i)nā is particularly represented by:
  • – the material adjectives (which are however in the fuzzy area between relational and qualifying categories): angaina ‘of iron’, taurina or toina ‘of wood’, sarna ‘of stone’. It could also include cemna ‘of earth’ (< cén), but it's more likely to show -ā (< cemen).
  • – derivative nouns: lambina ‘of tongue’, cunduina ‘princely’, parmaina ‘literary’, valaina ‘divine’.
• -ā with haplology is attested only in the earlier period, and includes ómanda ‘vocalic’, toa ‘woolen’, as well as mentioned above cemna, and in theoretical framework instances of moraic adjectives: linda ‘melodious’, gúla ‘occult’.
• Finally, the list also includes -(r)in, that specializes only on demonyms¹: Eldarin ‘of the Eldar’, Telerin ‘of the Teleri’, Vanyarin ‘of the Vanyar’, etc.

An example like ⟨ taurina ‘of wood’, taurea ‘forested’ ⟩ illustrates the tendency for -jā to convey a possessive reading more naturally. Thus, a hypothetical adjective like *lambea, if it existed, would more likely mean ‘having a tongue’ rather than anything else. In fact, as will be detailed in the section on possessive adjectives, the suffix -inā is absent in contexts where a possessive reading is required.

¹ With the exception of telperin, likely discarded.

Genitive II

In contrast to English, where the semantically empty preposition of serves as a counterpart to relational adjectives, Quenya employs a Genitive II case. Examples like Eruva ‘divine’ illustrate how this genitive can encroach upon adjectival functions. Although there is overlap between relational adjectives and the Genitive II case, a noun in the Genitive II case has a richer structure; it can, for instance, express a numP feature, as in lambe Eldaiva ‘language of the Elves’. Relational adjectives, being structurally impoverished, cannot convey such features — thus, cunduina ‘royal’, but not *cundurina.

Qualifying adjectives

Unlike relational adjectives, qualifying adjectives project additional syntactic features that underlie their core properties:

• Degree Modification: Qualifying adjectives generally allow modification by degree, a feature unavailable in relational adjectives.
• Predicative Function: Qualifying adjectives function as predicates, introducing properties that can truthfully be attributed to a subject.
• Stable Semantics: Qualifying adjectives exhibit stable semantics, where each adjective aligns with a particular conceptual dimension. While relational adjectives leave the relationship with the head noun underspecified, allowing contextual interpretation, qualifying adjectives specify the dimension directly. 

 Four traditional categories of qualifying denominal adjectives can be identified: possessive adjectives (1), similitudinal adjectives (2), causative adjectives (3), and dispositional adjectives (4).

1. Possessive: hloirea ‘venomous’, laistea ‘ignorant’, ómea ‘voiced’.
2. Similitudinal: vinima ‘childish’, lossea ‘snowy’, elvea ‘starlike’.
3. Causative: rávea ‘roaring’, gorta ‘horrible’, naicelea ‘painful’.
4. Dispositional: handa ‘understanding’, penda ‘inclined’, tinda ‘glinting’.

The distinctions among these four classes — possessive, similitudinal, causative, and dispositional — do not correspond to syntactic projection differences. Instead, they reflect variations in the type of pP layer employed, corresponding to the specific “flavor” of p used in each case. These flavors represent distinct organizations within the conceptual semantics component, aligning with qualia structure theory (Pustejovsky, 1995). Each class of qualifying denominal adjectives corresponds to one of four qualia classes:

• p<constitutive> = possP: possessive adjectives, reflecting the constitutive quale
• p<formal> = simP: similitudinal adjectives, reflecting the formal quale
• p<agentive> = causP: causative adjectives, reflecting the agentive quale
• p<telic> = disP: dispositional adjectives, reflecting the telic quale 

Qualia structure

Qualia structure organizes the conceptual interpretation of words as information stored within the lexical entries of linguistic exponents, rather than in the syntactic structure that they spell out. It encapsulates the minimal characteristics that define our understanding of the meanings of nouns and verbs. Pustejovsky (1995) identifies four types of qualia, each representing a different dimension of this conceptual information:

• Formal quale: distinguishes an object within a domain, including attributes like shape, dimensionality, color, magnitude, and orientation.
• Constitutive quale: expresses the relationship between an object and its parts or constituents, covering material and component elements.
• Agentive quale: denotes factors involved in the origin or creation of an object.
• Telic quale: relates to the purpose or function of an object, either in terms of an agent’s intended action or an inherent functional aim.

For example, a book encompasses, beyond its formal (large, green, standing) and constitutive (cover, paper, ink) properties, an agentive quale (the act of writing that created it) and a telic quale (its purpose of being read).

The four classes of qualifying adjectives correspond to the four qualia precisely because adjectives are not fundamental, primitive categories in natural languages. The selection among these qualia types is not left solely to the nature of the p exponent, as one might anticipate with purely conceptual semantics. These qualia distinctions are reinforced by specific affixes that directly map to respective qualia-based types of p, producing adjectives of only one kind: -arwa for possessive, -vea for similitudinal, -cara for causative, -isa for dispositional, etc.

Possessive adjectives

Possessive adjectives, broadly, denote attributes of an entity by associating it with a salient, constitutive element. This relation is generally limited to particular classes of concepts, as certain roots, notably those expressing events or animate beings, do not typically form possessive adjectives.

A significant portion of possessive adjectives is based on nouns referring to physical entities, further divided into five distinct sub-classes:

• – body parts;
• – items of clothing;
• – substances (produced by the body or otherwise);
• – physical entities that accompany, modify, or decorate an entity;
• – structural parts that form part of the internal structure of an object.

In addition to physical entities, non-physical concepts also provide bases for possessive adjectives. Common sub-classes of such nouns include:

• – capacities and abilities;
• – moral qualities;
• – mental states;
• – diseases and ailments;
• – other characteristics that describe an entity's intrinsic properties.

Possessive adjectives align closely with the constitutive quale by characterizing an entity through a salient aspect or property that forms part of its identity. This inherent connection explains why possessive adjectives involving nouns in this context often convey an inalienable possession reading, where the attribute is understood as an inseparable characteristic of the entity.

• conversion: sauricumba ‘foul-bellied’, quingatelco ‘bow-legged’, raccalepta ‘claw-fingered’, – all three from Treebeard’s speech, – but also marta ‘fated’, *vala ‘powerful’, galda ‘polished’.
• -itĭ: maitë ‘skillful’ (and many ‘-handed’ variations, e.g. hyarmaitë ‘lefthanded’), manaitë ‘blessed’, ómaitë ‘voiced’, nírítë ‘forceful’, nítë ‘dewy’.
• -jā is the most represented suffix here. It can be seen with:
  • – consonantal nouns: attalya ‘biped’, fantarcenya ‘perspicacious’, herenya ‘fortunate’, nenya ‘wet’.
  • – moraic nouns: lómea ‘gloomy’ (and lilómea ‘many-shadowed’), mírea ‘jeweled’, ómea ‘voiced’, fínea ‘dexterous’, ondórea ‘pitiless’, pirucendea ‘on the point of toes’, rúzea ‘wrathful’, túrea ‘mighty’, lárea ‘fat’, mailea ‘lustful’, hórea ‘impulsive’, lingea ‘with a musical sound’, lillassea ‘having many leaves’, lilótea ‘having many flowers’, poldórea ‘strong’.
  • – derivative vocalic nouns: airea ‘holy’, coirea ‘living’, taurea ‘forested’, almárea ‘blessed’, hloirea ‘venomous’, nairea ‘sorrowful’, eressea ‘lonely’, caimassea ‘sick’, lintyulussea ‘having many poplars’, laistea ‘ignorant’, nemestea ‘apparent’, atalantea ‘downfallen’.
  • – pseudo-vocalic nouns: alalvea ‘having many elms’, lindornea ‘having many oaks’.
• -ā: góla ‘wise’, ringa ‘cold’, russa ‘red-haired’, finda ‘haired’, melecta ‘mighty’, laica ‘acute’, túra ‘great’, raina ‘smiling’, ruina ‘blazing’, sincahonda ‘flinthearted’.
• -nā: orna ‘hasty’, quinna ‘crested’, ambuna ‘hilly’, rína ‘crowned’.
• -imā: vailima ‘windy’, nessima ‘youthful’, úvanima ‘ugly’, alima ‘good’, vórima ‘faithful’.
• -inqua: alcarinqua ‘glorious’, erinqua ‘single’.
• hapax: -wā: linyenwa ‘old’; -rā: vára ‘dirty’; -ŭ: hlúvö ‘greasy’; -arwa: aldarwa ‘having trees’.

Privative adjectives

In Quenya, privative adjectives can be derived through prefixation from possessive adjectives (like prefix des- in Spanish), or a specialized privative morpheme (-less or -free in English):

• ú- or al- with possessive adjectives: úmaitë ‘unskilled’, úvanë, úvanima ‘ugly’, úpahtea ‘speechless’, úfanwea ‘unveiled’, alómea ‘voiceless’.
• ú-, al- or ava- with nouns: alahen ‘eyeless’, úpa ‘dumb’ (lit. ‘mouth-less’), avanóte ‘numberless’. These three instances can also be additional examples of conversion.
• -lóra with nouns: ómalóra ‘voiceless’. This morpheme was likely replaced by nec-, -enca, later affixes mentioned in writing without attestation.

Similitudinal adjectives

Similitudinal adjectives are less frequent than possessive ones, as noted in various studies. Just as the notion of ‘possession’ in possessive adjectives is understood broadly — where Y has X — similitudinal adjectives interpret resemblance flexibly, following the pattern: Y is like X.

Among common nouns, the primary classes forming the bases for similitudinal adjectives include:

• – animals, especially those stereotypically associated with specific moral or physical qualities
• – substances, fruits, and other natural entities with prominent physical attributes
• – social roles, particularly professions or statuses tied to human attributes
• – places associated with stereotypical behaviors or inhabited by groups with characteristic properties
• – geometric shapes

While not exhaustive, these classes are the most prominent sources.

The primary interpretation of a similitudinal adjective is that Y shares a salient characteristic typically associated with nouns of the X class. Which specific property is highlighted is often underspecified, though color and shape are common. Additional properties, such as texture, size, flavor, and smell, may also be conveyed, with the interpretation often varying based on the subject the adjective modifies.

When the base noun denotes a human or other animate being, the highlighted property tends to involve abilities, moral qualities, or typical behaviors. For nouns indicating social status or occupations, a behavior-focused reading is almost obligatory; if the noun denotes an animal, both behavioral and physical traits are commonly inferred.

Similitudinal adjectives are associated with the formal quale, as the resemblance relation may encompass any distinctive property that sets the base noun apart within its domain, such as shape, size, color, or texture.

The affixes involved in forming similitudinal adjectives are:

• conversion: laicalasse ‘green as leaves’, tornanga ‘iron hard’.
• -itĭ: ruscuitë ‘foxy’. To this category can also be allocated pronominal sítë ‘of this sort’, taitë ‘of that sort’.
• -jā: laurea ‘golden’, lossea ‘snowy’, mairea ‘beautiful’, úmea ‘abundant’, nieninquea ‘like a snowdrop’, oialea ‘eternal’, vilvarindea ‘like a butterfly’, pitya ‘petty’. Here also belong adjectives on -vea: elvea ‘starlike’.
• -(i)nā: lóna ‘dark’, lúna ‘[dark]’, cúna ‘curved‘, morna ‘somber’, culda or culina ‘golden-red’, tunga ‘taut’, malina ‘yellow’, culuina ‘orange’, telpina ‘silver’.
• -imā: vinima ‘childish’, mírima ‘very precious’.
• -ā: míra ‘beautiful’, fána ‘white’, rinda ‘circular’, tunda ‘tall’, yanda or yonda ‘wide’, helca ‘icy’, sinca ‘[flinty]’, felca ‘[cavernous]’, vea ‘adult’, helda or nilda ‘friendly’, norna ‘tough’, corna ‘round’, landa ‘wide’, rimba ‘frequent’, runya ‘fiery red’.
• -ĭ: lissë ‘sweet’, lossë ‘snowy’.
• -tā: olosta ‘dreamy’, telepta ‘silver’.
• -rā, -lā: téra ‘straight’, sára ‘bitter’, astula ‘bony’; and -kā: tauca ‘stiff’.
  

Causative adjectives

Causative adjectives, or effect adjectives, are derived when the base noun is understood as an effect produced or triggered by the subject. In these cases, the subject is considered to bring about the quality or state that the adjective describes.

The bases used in causative adjectives can denote either physical objects or eventualities. Within eventualities, there are three main distinctions:

• – physical objects: such as laira (‘shady’) or ilucara (‘omnificent’), where the subject causes the presence or manifestation of these objects or states.
• – psychological states (the most frequent): like nairea (‘sorrowful’), naicelea (‘painful’), or gorta (‘horrible’), where the subject induces a particular emotional or psychological state.
• – events and processes: including tinda (‘glinting’), saura (‘foul’), and cuivea (‘wakening’), where the subject initiates an event or ongoing process.

Causative adjectives align with the agentive quale, interpreting the subject as the catalyst for the state or effect represented by the base noun. In other words, the subject is the agent or cause behind the manifestation of the quality encapsulated by the adjective.

The affixes involved in forming causative adjectives are:

• -jā: rávea ‘roaring’, yaimea ‘wailing’, cuivea ‘wakening’, naicea ‘cruel’, naicelea ‘painful’, nairea ‘sorrowful’.
• -ā: tinda ‘glinting’, laira ‘shady’, naira ‘horrible’, naica ‘painful’, gorta ‘horrible’.
• -imā: írima ‘desirable’, lámina ‘echoing’.
• -carā: ilucara ‘omnificent’.

Dispositional adjectives

A dispositional adjective refers to the characteristic of having a tendency or inclination toward a specific behavior, which is understood in relation to the noun from which it is derived. The preferred bases typically either represent actions themselves or are nouns closely associated with events, as they can be seen as outcomes of those events. At its core then dispositional denominal adjectives activate the telic quale of the nouns they originate from. A disposition defines the subject by its inclination to engage in typical occurrences for which the base noun serves as a reference.

The affixes involved in forming dispositional adjectives are:

• -ā: handa ‘understanding’, penda ‘sloping’ (and so am(ba)penda ‘uphill’), zanya ‘regular’.

Deverbal adjectives

The main grammatical difference between adjectives and verbs is that prototypically the latter denote events, that is, dynamic processes and changes, while the former are used to express qualities and relations with other entities. As such, deverbal adjectives, — perhaps the most described type of adjectives in the original sources, for Tolkien returned to them on several occasions, — lose the base’s verbal property of eventivity.

When attached to verbal bases, adjectival affixes typically reference either an argument of the base or the event itself. That is, deverbal adjectives typically prefer either a subject-referencing or an object-referencing interpretation.

The object-referencing adjectives include non-episodic modal adjectives and episodic participial forms of passive reading:

• modal: cénima ‘visible’, mátima ‘edible’, cárima ‘feasible’.
• participial: alacarna ‘well-done’, rembina ‘entangled’, avanwa ‘forbidden’.

The subject-referencing adjectives include non-episodic potential, dispositional and habitual adjectives, and episodic participial forms of active reading:

• potential: firya ‘mortal’, himíte ‘able to stick on’, noroite ‘capable of running’.
• dispositional: cúvula ‘flexible’, nyárula ‘apt to talk’, tiríte ‘watchful’.
• habitual: melumatya ‘honey-eating’, coloite ‘tolerant’, melima ‘affectionate’.
• participial: vilwa ‘fluttering’, tirila ‘watching’, senda ‘resting’.

Unlike denominal adjectival suffixes, the number of productive suffixes that turn verbs into adjectives in Quenya is not high. Next to past participles (-nā and allomorphs), the suffixes -imā (‘-able’) and -itë (‘-ant’) are perhaps the most productive ones. The suffix -jā is also relatively productive with verbs. Beyond these cases, there are a number of unproductive suffixes or suffixes that are productive in other domains but not as deverbal adjectivizers.

Object-referencing adjectives

Modal adjectives

Modal passive adjectives are those that express the possibility or the necessity of undergoing a particular event. Adjectives built with ‑able in English are typical examples.

The affixes involved in forming modal adjectives are¹:

• ⟨ μ ⟩ – imā or -timā:
  • – on transitive verbs: cárima or *cartima ‘feasible’ (and so alcárima or lacárima ‘impossible (to make)’, ancárima ‘easy’, úcárima ‘difficult’, urucárima ‘hard’), cénima ‘visible’ (and so ascénima ‘visible’, hraicénima ‘hard to see’), cólima ‘bearable’, cúvima ‘concealable’ or ‘flexible’, quétima ‘speak-able’ (and so alqettima² ‘unutterable’, úquétima ‘unspeakable’), mátima or *mastima ‘edible’, lamélima ‘unlovable’, nótima ‘countable’ (and so únótima ‘countless’, urnótima ‘hard to count’), nútima ‘[lowerable]‘, únyárima ‘impossible to recount’, úfantima ‘not concealable’, púlima ‘liquid’ (i.e. ‘pour-able’), alfárima ‘impossible to pursue’, tírima ‘observable’, túlima ‘[bring-able]’, túvima ‘discover-able’, yúlima ‘drinkable’.³
  • – on unaccusative verbs: fírima ‘mortal’ (and so alfírima ‘immortal’), nízima ‘fragrant’, férima ‘ready to hand’.

¹ There are also two erroneous instances of -itĭ in such role: lacaraitë ‘impossible’, lanotoitë ‘innumerable’, those are not considered further.
² In the Middle Period ⟨ μ ⟩ could be either vocalic or consonantal, but in the Late Period it is firmly attested only as vocalic.
³ In the Middle Period the verbs that could not infix a mora were taking -alimā: ortalima, alaninquitálima, istalima. But there is no evidence of the epenthetic -l- in the Late Period: tultaima, caltaima.

The derivation of adjectives like fírima ‘mortal’ from unaccusative verbs firë ‘to die’ exemplifies how the suffix -imā functions to denote a patient or theme role in both transitive and unaccusative contexts. This observation aligns with generative views, which suggest that unaccusative verbs are structurally distinct from other intransitives because they possess an underlying object rather than a subject argument. This structural characteristic means that adjectives derived from unaccusative verbs with -imā are consistent in referencing the patient/theme, as is the case with perishable and variable in English, which similarly denote qualities of being acted upon or affected. Similarly in participial forms like firin ‘dead’ and lanta ‘falling’ unaccusative bases bear a conventionally passive marker.

The deontic reading does not seem to be productive in Quenya. Several instances of modal adjectives with the prohibitive prefix ava- are recorded: avaquétima ‘that must not be said’, avanyárima ‘what one must not tell’. Non-negated example is rúcima ‘terrible’ (i.e. ‘what must be feared’), but it could as well be an example of a causative adjective derived from an otherwise unattested noun, like írima ‘desirable’ (< íre ‘desire’) and lámina ‘echoing’ (< láma ‘echo’). There are accidental cases or primary affixes -wā: yelwa ‘loathsome’; and -kā: faica ‘contemptible’.

Passive participial adjectives

Episodic participial adjectives differ sharply from modal adjectives in that they entail a specific event directly associated with the state they denote. Modal adjectives, like mortal or edible, express potential or necessity for involvement in an event (e.g., the possibility of dying or being eaten) but do not refer to any actual occurrence of that event. Thus, an edible mushroom can still be intact, and we simply state it is in principle safe to eat, based on its nature.

In contrast, episodic participial adjectives like eaten necessitate the existence of a specific event that has brought about the current state. An eaten mushroom has undergone the event of eating; this is inherent to the adjective’s meaning and reflects an irreversible change brought by that event. These adjectives therefore capture not only a state but also a completed process or occurrence that defines the entity's present condition. Such participial adjectives are called resultant.

The affixes involved in forming passive participial adjectives are:

• -nā:
  • – on transitive verbs: alacarna ‘well-done’, varna ‘protected’, nahamna ‘summoned’, hampa ‘restrained’, querna ‘turned’ (and so nuquerna ‘reversed’), nanca or nactana ‘slain’, raina ‘netted’, harna ‘wounded’, húna ‘cursed’, zanca ‘split’, hyarna ‘compact’, taina ‘lengthened’, yonna or yonda ‘enclosed’, nulda or nulla ‘hidden’ (and also halda ‘hidden’), alaquenta ‘well said’ (and also manaquenta ‘blessed’), tapta ‘impeded’, lecta ‘released’, pacta ‘closed’, quanta ‘full’ (and so penquanta ‘full to the brim’), sacta ‘marred’, canta ‘shaped’ (as in lassecanta ‘leaf-shaped’), yulda ‘drunk’, helda ‘naked’, rempa ‘hooked’, nóna ‘born’, nucumna ‘humbled’, colla ‘worn’, zanga ‘crowded’, zenna ‘short’ (i.e. ‘cut short’), tanca ‘firm’, tamna ‘artificial’ (i.e. ‘crafted’), palda or palla ‘wide’ (i.e. ‘expanded’), halda or halla ‘tall’ (i.e. ‘extended’), ?muina ‘secret’, pasta ‘smooth’, tanta ‘double’, melda ‘dear’.
  • – on unaccusative verbs: cuina ‘alive’, yerna ‘old’, lorna ‘asleep’, (a)valda ‘excited’, tumna ‘deep’ (i.e. ‘going down’), lanta ‘falling’, panta ‘open’, lumna or lunga ‘heavy’.
• -in:¹
  • – on transitive verbs: úharin ‘unmarred’, ur(u)carin ‘made with difficulty’, hwarin ‘crooked’, melin ‘dear’.
  • – on unaccusative verbs: qalin or firin ‘dead’, ilfirin ‘immortal’, locin ‘bent’.
• -inā:
  • – on transitive verbs: rembina ‘entangled’ (and so aldarembina ‘treemeshed’), carina ‘done’ (and so lacarina ‘undone’), harina or hastaina ‘marred’, lerina ‘free (of things)’, racina ‘stripped’, estaina ‘named’, farina ‘fugitive’, calina ‘illuminated’.
  • – on unaccusative verbs: latina ‘free (of land)’, picina ‘little’.
• ⟨ μ ⟩ – inā: rácina ‘broken’, rúcina ‘confused’, nótina ‘counted’.
• -nwā: avanwa ‘forbidden’, sinwa ‘known’, turyanwa ‘fortified’, alanwa or olinwa ‘adult’, enwa or nanwa ‘existing’.
• -ĭ with prefixes such as aza- ‘easy to’, hrai- ‘hard to’, ú- or al- ‘not’: ascenë ‘easily seen’, hraicenë ‘hard to see’, hrainotë ‘hard to count’, azalastë ‘easily heard’, únotë ‘uncounted’.² This could also be reinforced with -jā: únotea.
• -nŭ: lungö ‘heavy’.
• ⟨ a ⟩ – ā: nauca ‘stunted’, raica ‘crooked’, nauta ‘bound’.

Note that even though such adjectives as zenna ‘short’ or palla ‘wide’ lost their episodicity and became to express formal quale, they’re still considered together with other participial adjectives from etymological perspective. 

¹ In a single instance this affix showed a variant -ne: urcarne.
² The occurrences of ⟨ μ ⟩ insertion were rejected: asanótë, urunótë.

Subject-referencing adjectives

Just like with object-referencing adjectives, in the category of subject-referencing adjectives we distinguish between episodic participial adjectives and non-episodic modal adjectives. The modal adjectives could further be split into a number of semantic groups: potential (‘able to do’), dispositional (‘likely to do’), and habitual (‘typically does’). It is often non-trivial to distinguish them without the context, however: only dispositional adjectives employ a unique for this category affix -ulā. Particularly, most habitual adjectives are differentiated only pragmatically based on the qualified noun.

Potential adjectives

Potential adjectives express the ability of triggering a particular event (solve > solvent):

• -ϑitĭ:¹ cenítë ‘seeing’ (and lacenítë ‘blind’, i.e. ‘not able to see’), yulunefítë ‘amphibious’ (i.e. ‘able to breathe water’), himítë ‘able to stick on’, noroitë ‘capable of running’. In the Middle Period the suffix could optionally be extended with -ma-: cara(ma)itë ‘able to make’, tulu(ma)itë ‘probable’ (i.e. ‘able to come’).
• -jā: firya ‘mortal’ (i.e. ‘able to die’), ranya ‘free’ (i.e. ‘able to wander’), finya ‘clever’ (i.e. ‘able to make things’, and so leptafinya ‘clever-fingered’).

¹ Where ϑ stands for a thematic vowel, traditionally called ómataima in the source materials.

Dispositional adjectives

Dispositional adjectives denote an inherent property of being prone to participating in a particular action. Crucially, this does not imply that the event has ever taken place in the past, or will take part in the future. In abstract terms, in a potential adjective, the entity has the necessary properties that allow it to participate in an event whereas, in a dispositional adjective, those properties are sufficient to guarantee participation in that event.

• -ulā:¹ cúvula ‘flexible’, nyárula ‘apt to talk’, *matula ‘edacious’.
• -ϑitĭ: xiétë ‘impermanent’ (i.e. ‘that is likely to pass’), tirítë ‘watchful’, naitë ‘true’ (i.e. ‘that is likely to be’).
• ⟨ a ⟩ – ā: maica ‘sharp’ (and so hendumaica ‘sharp-eyed’), hlaiwa ‘sickly’.
• -jā: canya or verya ‘bold’ (i.e. ‘likely to dare’), cotya ‘hostile’, lelya ‘delicate’.

To this category also belong rare desiderative adjectives formed with a duplifix ⟨ i ⟩ – ā: soica ‘thirsty’, mína ‘eager to go’, maita ‘hungry’.

¹ In the Middle Period attested in fact as ⟨ μ ⟩ – ulā, as seen in some of the examples.

Habitual adjectives

Let’s consider an example like a forgetful child. It is clear by the meaning of this deverbal adjective that a dispositional paraphrase ‘that is likely to forget’ is not enough. It would be unfair to call someone forgetful if they were never actually known for forgetting something in the past. A paraphrase ‘that regularly forgets’ is more apt: this description is correct if and only if that child happened to forget something in the past, and better, did so regularly. This reading involves a semantic notion of habituality that is non-episodic (Carlson, 2011): the habitual statements are conditioned to be true in case of regular occurrences of the event, but that does not mean that it occurred in any given time span. Consider a situation John smokes: it is not sufficient to attest that John smoked in the last two days, only that he’s a smoker.

Habitual adjectives are almost exclusively restricted to human subjects, as in many cases the base verbs denote activities that only humans can perform. In other cases the habitual reading is available if the tendency is conceptualized as a personality trait.

• -ϑitĭ: caraitë ‘active’, coloitë ‘tolerant’, cuvoitë ‘secretive’, yuluitë ‘drinking’.
• -jā in compounds: melumatya ‘honey-eating’, saucarya ‘evil-doing’.
• -imā of intensive meaning: melima ‘affectionate’, calima ‘bright’ (and so úcalima ‘dim’), norima ‘swift’¹, celima ‘fluent’, istima ‘wise’.²
• ⟨ a ⟩ – ā: zaura ‘foul’, taura ‘mighty’.
• -lā, -rā: saila or saira ‘wise’ (and so alasaila ‘unwise’).
  

¹ Erroneously used as nórima on one occasion.
² An additional entry, silma ‘shining’ (< *silimā), is the only example of syncope in such adjectives. However, it is only glossed as such in the Middle Period, and in the Later Period only nominal gloss remains.

Active participial adjectives

An expected counterpart to object-referencing adjectives, these active adjective are of general significance, not implying co-reference of time with the predicate.

• ⟨ a ⟩ – ā: méla ‘loving’.
• -jā: úlea ‘pouring’, alatulya ‘welcome’, penya ‘lacking’, rilya ‘glittering’, alya ‘rich’, tolya ‘prominent’, sirea ‘liquid’, valya ‘having power’.
• ⟨ μ ⟩ – imā: métima ‘last’.
• -nā: penna ‘lacking’, hlinta ‘swift’, senda ‘resting’, nimpa or limpa ‘drooping’, rimpa ‘rushing’, neuna ‘second’, orna ‘uprising’.
• -lā, -rā: itara ‘gleaming’, caila ‘bedridden’, ceula ‘living’.
• -ilā: laistila ‘ignorant’, tirila ‘watching’, itila ‘glinting’.
• ⟨ μ ⟩ – ā: naraca ‘rending’, tereva ‘fine’, himba ‘sticking’.
• -wā: arwa ‘possessing’ (hence -arwā in possessive adjectives), vilwa ‘fluttering’, vanwa ‘gone’³.

³ Later re-imagined as a perfective participle of auta.

Other grammatical categories

Other categories can also produce adjectives, though much less frequently. The result is typically a relational adjective.

• – pronouns: with -nā: hyana ‘other’, sana ‘that’, sina ‘this’, tana ‘that’; with -ā: exa ‘other’; with -jā: ilya ‘each’, imya ‘same’, ninya ‘my’, menya ‘our’.
• – numerals: with -jā: erya ‘single’, minya ‘first’, attea ‘second’, neldea ‘third’, etc.
• – prepositions and adverbs: with -jā: etya ‘exiled’, mitya ‘interior’, vea ‘apparent’; with -ā: noa ‘former’.
• – adjectives of degree: with reduplication: mimíre or mimírima ‘very beautiful’, armemelda ‘very dear’; with -i(n)kĭ: luinincë ‘bluish’.

Basic adjectives

The truth is that the above analysis only scratches the surface of the adjectives available in the corpus. The majority of them cannot be linked to an underlying fundamental structure, and it is clear that Tolkien considered an adjectivizer to operate on the lexical root directly. Many if not all ā-adjectives mentioned previously likely belong here as well, and most of affixes appearing in adjectives are not involved in classical denominal and deverbal paradigms. These underived adjectives always contain a primary affix: ā, ĭ or ŭ by themselves or accompanied with an extension.

Extension \ Affix	ā	ĭ	ŭ
	✔	✔	✔
⟨ μV ⟩	✔	✔	✔
⟨ μC ⟩	✔	✔	*
n	✔	✔
r	✔	✔
t	(✔)	*
j	✔
k	✔
l	✔
w	✔
⟨ a ⟩	✔

In practice, due to historical developments, many of those patterns produce the same form, and without semantic content they become indistinguishable. Many disyllabic words that appeared before could be regarded as belonging to basic adjectives instead, but they won’t be repeated in the examples below.

• -ā: vana ‘fair-haired’ (and so ilvana ‘perfect’, úvana ‘marred’), pia ‘little’. To this list also belong many adjectives derived from TALAT-root. Many of them appear in the Middle Period, and later were commonly analyzed as having one of the primary affixes: parca ‘dry’, tulca ‘steadfast’, verca ‘wild’, tella ‘hindmost’, tarya ‘tough’¹, talta ‘unsteady’, arta ‘[noble]’, enta ‘another’, aina ‘holy’, alta ‘large’, anda ‘long’, aica ‘sharp’, maxa ‘soft’, mixa ‘wet’, tyelca ‘hasty’.
• -ĭ: morë ‘black’, vanë ‘fair’, carnë ‘red’, parnë ‘bare’, varnë ‘russet’, vindë ‘pale blue’.
• -ŭ: *telö ‘last’, *minö ‘slim’.

¹ In the Late Period the phonological result would rather be targa.

Duplifixes

A duplifix is a combination of a traditional suffix with a use of non-concatenative morphology. We can distinguish two types:

1. V-duplifix with moraic addition to the nucleus: lengthening of the root-vowel, insertion of ⟨ a ⟩ or ⟨ i ⟩;
2. C-duplifix with moraic addition to the coda: lengthening of the final root consonant or homorganic addition to it. 

Consonant	Lengthening μL	Strengthening μS
b	bb > pp	mb
d	dd > tt, ld	nd
g	gg > kk	ŋg
p	pp
t	tt
k	kk
th	tt
kh	kk
m	mm	mb
n	nn	nd
ŋ	ŋŋ > ŋg	ŋg
l	ll	ld
r	rr	rd
s	ss	st, ts
w		gw
j		gy

The V-duplifix via lengthening occurs for all possible nuclei, and for the most of codas. Note that even though the primitive forms mītha, nēthā and khīmā are attested, the corresponding Quenya reflexes are either unattested, or changed their affixes: mista, himba.

• ⟨ μ_V ⟩ – ā: hróva ‘dark brown’, náva ‘hollow’, néca ‘pale’, tára ‘wise’, hráva ‘wild’, *léra ‘hard’, céva ‘new’, héra ‘principal’, lára ‘flat’, láta ‘open’, léra ‘free’, mána ‘blessed’, míva ‘tiny’, náha ‘narrow’, nı́ca ‘little’, nı́pa ‘small’, núra ‘deep’, hrúa ‘evil’, tára ‘tall’, úra ‘large’, yána ‘wide’, móla ‘enslaved’.
• ⟨ μ_V ⟩ – ĭ: fánë ‘white’, mírë ‘precious’, mízë ‘gray’.
• ⟨ μ_V ⟩ – ŭ: hlúvö ‘greasy’.

C-duplifix via lengthening is relatively rare, and as a rule, for bases on b, d, g, m, n was replaced with strengthening. Historically both patterns yielded the same result for bases on ŋ → ng. Tolkien remarks: “only [ tt ], [ ss ], [ ll ] were common” (PE18/41), and in fact, only those combinations are attested in adjectival formations. C-duplifix via strengthening is significantly more common (Table 3).

• ⟨ μ_S ⟩ – ā: amba ‘more’, lomba ‘blind’, orda ‘profound’, nenda ‘wet’, finda ‘fine’, ronda ‘solid’, runda ‘polished’, zanda ‘firm’, zinda ‘gray’, nanda ‘back’, hranga ‘awkward’, inga ‘first’, varanda ‘sublime’, voronda ‘faithful’, lusta ‘empty’, astalda ‘strong’, molda ‘large’, polda ‘big’, sarda ‘hard’, telda ‘last’, urda ‘hard’, minda ‘prominent’.
• ⟨ μ_L ⟩ – ā: titta ‘little’.
• ⟨ μ_S ⟩ – ĭ: fimbë ‘slender’, hlimbë ‘slippery’, limbë ‘quick’, rindë ‘swift’, zindë ‘gray’, nindë ‘slender’, ilin ‘pale blue’ (from *ilindë).
• ⟨ μ_L ⟩ – ĭ: mussë ‘soft’, missë ‘wet’.

Other primary affixes

An affix is considered primary if it can attach directly to a root without a thematic vowel. Some of them, like -jā and -nā are very productive in other categories, the others appear rarely.

• -jā: alya ‘good’, arya ‘excelling’, meletya ‘mighty’, mirya ‘beautiful’, netya ‘pretty’, nitya ‘little’, golya ‘dark-haired’, senya ‘usual’, vanya ‘beautiful’ (and so ilvanya ‘perfect’), vinya ‘young’, fanya ‘white’, forya ‘right’, hyarya ‘left’, inya ‘female’, marya ‘pale’, merya ‘festive’, milya ‘soft’, vinya ‘pale blue’, virya ‘fresh’, hraia ‘awkward’.
• -nā: hyarna ‘southern’, cumna ‘empty’, moina ‘familiar’, núna ‘western’, forna ‘northern’, róna ‘east’ (and so orróna ‘eastern’), roina ‘ruddy’, torna ‘hard’, zorna ‘steadfast’, úna ‘forlorn’, malda ‘yellow’, cinta ‘small’, mista ‘gray’.
• -nĭ:¹ pincë ‘little’, luinë ‘blue’ (and so menelluin ‘sky-blue’), lúnë ‘blue’, ninquë ‘white’.
• -rā: yára ‘old’, oira ‘eternal’, mára ‘useful’, haira ‘remote’, véra ‘personal’, urra ‘bad’, úra ‘nasty’, gaira ‘vast’, maira ‘precious’, haura ‘huge’, aira ‘holy’, larca ‘swift’, arca ‘narrow’, nexa or nerca ‘sharp’, mixa ‘sharp-pointed’, naxa ‘evil’.
• -rĭ: airë ‘holy’, vairë ‘wavy’.
• -lā: olca ‘bad’, ulca ‘gloomy’ (and so henulca), faila ‘generous’.
• -kā: aica ‘dire’, finca ‘clever’, laica ‘green’, lauca ‘warm’, loica ‘failing’, parca ‘naked’, ruxa ‘wroth’, turca ‘strong’, valca ‘fierce’, fauca ‘thirsty’, milca ‘greedy’, gwalca ‘cruel’, poica ‘clean’, tiuca ‘fat’.
• -tā: fasta ‘pleased’, alahasta ‘marred’.²
• -wā: finwa ‘clever’, lanwa ‘limited’, anwa ‘real’, hanwa ‘male’, atwa ‘double’, engwa ‘sickly’, mirwa ‘precious’, helwa ‘pale blue’, hizwa ‘gray’, malwa ‘fallow’, aiqua ‘steep’, voronwa ‘enduring’, laiqua ‘green’, raiqua ‘angry’, unqua ‘hollow’. 

¹ Two more entries are attested only in CE and/or Sindarin: *nincë or *nimpë ‘small’.
² Those could be considered examples of conversion as a strategy of deverbal derivation with prefixes instead of -ĭ, but that analysis would put azalaste at odds with the rest of entries. 

Syntax

Article

Use of the Article

To explain various asymmetries with regard to the (non-)use of definite article in Quenya as compared to English, we will exploit the distinction of semantic and pragmatic uniqueness as originally introduced by Löbner¹ and some generalizations made by Ortmann² and Schwarz³ over weak-strong article splits encountered in many languages.

Nominal Concept Types

In his theory Löbner proposes a lexical distinction of noun types in how they classify the universe:

Lexical units have their default combination [±U][±R], but virtually each of them can undergo a type shift into any other combination:

Nouns which interpretation coincides with their lexical combination are then called nouns of this type, and which interpretation diverges from that combination are then called concepts of this type. The four possible types are then called: 

The terminology distinguishes the noun's underlying type (eg. functional noun, FN) from its actual use (eg. functional concept, FC).

Semantic vs Pragmatic Uniqueness

It is crucial then to distinguish between individual and functional nouns on one hand which are lexically unique, and concepts which uniqueness results from the context (linguistic or extra-linguistic). In his work Ortmann claims that this distinction results in the fundamental split of the article use: concepts are marked in a more explicit way. It's especially easy to obseve such tendency in languages which show two types of definite articles — weak and strong — like German.

The matter is not only complicated by the fact that articles tend to invade into other categories⁴, but also by fuzzy cases which could be analyzed either as semantic or pragmatic. The latter especially results in the article variation in closely related languages.

Strong Article in Quenya

The first major difference we can point between Quenya and English is the (non-)use of the article with unique nouns, where it is logically redundant:

However, it occurs with unique concepts to mark the incongruence:

Many languages diverge here from the Ortmann's statement where Quenya adheres to it: they use the weak (semantic) article in the immediate use IC like in the sentence above. Schwarz shows that the weak article is used without anaphoricity. The immediate use IC is pragmatic but non-anaphoric. Löbner's and Ortmann's uniqueness scale avoids to include immediate use IC altogether.

The Threshold of Semantic and Pragmatic Uniqueness

Some corner cases which don't clearly belong either to semantic or pragmatic uniqueness are:

Non-Lexical Functional Concepts

Non-lexical FC is a concept where semantic uniqueness comes about by syntactic structure and semantic composition rather than by the lexical meaning of the head noun. In particular, these are nouns combined with ordinal numbers, and with superlative forms of attributive adjectives. In these cases uniqueness is achieved by the lexical meaning of the modifier.

Complex FC in Quenya

Quenya superlative adjectives do not take the article⁵, and  neither do the determining adjectives like last, next, only:

To the same list of adjectives belongs same, yet Tolkien gives an example i imya “the same”. [PE23/134]

 While no canonical example of ordinal number with a noun exists, they belong to the same category, and it is expected to observe a lack of the article with them too.

Bridging

Bridging or ‘definite associative anaphora’ (DAA) describes a noun, typically a functional noun, which is uniquely defined by its relation to a previously mentioned noun:

Based on the world knowledge, the hearer knows that at a wedding, there should be one and only one bride, a room has only one ceiling and a car needs a motor. DAAs combine properties of pragmatic uniqueness (by virtue of anaphoricity) and semantic uniqueness (by virtue of involving a FN). It is therefore natural for there to be considerable variation in the use of articles.

DAA in Quenya

Tolkien himself explains the use of the article with DAA on at least one occasion, — i falmalinnar:

The waves are implied in ilye tier: […]  Those routes had naturally been over the waves. [PE23/134]

There's no other canonical example of DAA in the current corpus of Quenya, but two sentences are close approximations to such:

The first example Eru → the children is a 'relational anaphora', and the second example one → the left hand is 'part-whole' DAA. Even though Schwarz and Ortmann discuss how part-whole and maker-product DAAs differ in their semantic-pragmatic dichotomy in some languages, the examples above show that in Quenya any DAA is marked by the article.

Autophoric Nouns

Autophoric nouns establish their unique reference by a restrictive relative clause. Context-dependency affects the weak-strong article choice, but it seems Quenya in general requires an article uniformly (even when the relative clause is reduced) unless superceded by another determiner:

In a bit confused way, to this list can also belong this line from Namárie:

This is how Tolkien explains the use of i eleni:

Thus in Galadriel’s lament it is said tintilar i eleni: that is, those stars that adorned or shone through the transparent roofs of the Domes of Varda, which were not all the visible stars, nor in fact the actual stars of the firmament of the outer world. [PE23/133]

Or, in other words, stars → that tremble in the vaults of Varda: even though the noun itself is not syntactically autophoric, it is implicitly. 

Quenya as a Split I System

The simplified scale of uniqueness suggested by Löbner and Ortmann:

deictic SN < anaphoric SN < autophoric SN < DAA < non-lexical IC, FC < IN, FN < proper names

where the cut-off position for the article use varies from language to language:

Footnotes

1: Journal of Semantics 4: 279–326, 1985

2: Frames and Concept Types: 293-321, 2014

3: Two Types of Definites in Natural Language, Florian Schwarz, 2009

4: as in Greek, where the article is used even with names

5: PE17/91

Modality

Propositional modality

Epistemic modality is concerned with the speaker's attitude towards whether the proposition is true. There are three types which are common in languages:

There is then two-way distinction between:

In many languages one of these contrasts is either the only one present in the system or the more important one.

Some languages have ways to indicate that the judgement is either weaker or stronger. English, for instance, uses the past tense forms of the modals. These express a lower degree of commitment.

Propositional modality in Quenya

Quenya possesses epistemical possibility-necessity contrast with further differentiation in strength. There is no evidence for inference contrast, and it's assumed that either deductive and/or assumptive would be translated as unmarked future.

Speculative

Tolkien provided several contradicting paradigms for uncertain statements:

Note that modal particle should directly precede the verb (PE22/97). Otherwise it is interpreted as a conjunction if:

cé 'may' in PE22/154 (21-1969), PE22/158 (22-1969); 'if' in AS (08-1969)

(Also see on Optative)

Deductive & Assumptive

No examples of deductive exists. No clear example of assumptive exists, but we can make an educated guess.

It may be added that even languages that have future tenses that are not formally modal, but belong within the inflectional system, often use these tenses for similar purposes. They are used in an assumptive sense, like English will, in, e.g., French and Italian (cf French ça sera le facteur 'that'll be the postman')

Event modality

Event modality refers to events which have not taken place yet. The distinction is drawn between conditioning factors, which are:

Deontic

Similarly to epistemic modality, deontic modality distinguishes between:

Additionally we can consider commissive, where speaker commits themself to do something. In English it is signalled by the modal verb shall. "You shall not pass!" — where Gandalf commits himself to ensuring that the balrog will not pass the bridge — is a canonic example of commissive.

Just as with epistemic modals, the force of the judgements can be weakened:

Deontic modality in Quenya

Tolkien did not explicitly talk about permission and obligation in Quenya, but we have a few words which might fit the slot.

Dynamic

Dynamic modality expresses the ability and willigness (in English done with can and will respectively). In many languages there is no formal distinction between permission and ability. In English, however, the distinction is in that may is not used to indicate ability.

Dynamic modality in Quenya

Abilitive is expressed in Quenya with lexical verbs:

Volitive is only attested in negative constructions:

Imperative

Most languages have a specific form that can be identified as Imperative. In languages such as English, where the modal systems are marked by modal verbs, the imperative is quite independent of them. But notionally, imperative is closely associated with deontic modals.

Unlike in English, in Quenya Imperative is a part of its modality system, expressed by an optional particle á.

[To Do] Add description of gradation

Optative

The subjunctive is frequently used for wishes and fears:

The more correct term applicable to Quenya would be desiderative and timitive. We have examples of two constructions:

The distinction then can be reminiscent of cé being used as an epistemic particle before the verb, or conjunction if initially.

Note that the use of nai as a desirative marker was already present in Early Qenya (PE14/59), where nai was also the weak marker of epistemic possibility. In this sense the Early Qenya was very similar to the subjunctive use in European languages in this context.

Purposive

Clauses that express purpose are marked with a conjunction plus the subjunctive in Latin and Classical Greek, and similarly in Spanish and Italian:

We have one purposive sentence in Quenya:

which potentially can use (defunct) subjunctive.

Unreality

In a large number of languages a clear distinction can be made between real and unreal conditions. In some languages this is marked with the tense alone, in others by a combination of tense and mood. Similarly to the discussion on epistemic and deontic modality, the 'modal-past' weakens the supposition, stating the condition less likely to occur.

Conditions that predict, in terms of cause and effect, the occurence of one event on condition of another, always require a modal verb in apodosis (both real and unreal):

Non-predictive conditionals such as If John came, Mary left, which merely indicate that if the protasis is true, so is the apodosis, without necessarily implying that there is a cause and effect, have no restrictions on the tense and modality of such sentences.

In Quenya

PE22/120 system is a verbatim carry-over from Latin system:

Compare Latin schema:

with Quenya:

The difference between aiqe + Past, enai + Past vs auve + Past, au + Past might be as in:

with the 1st, there is an implication that I had the ability and merely needed help to fulfill it, but with the second it is clear that I did not have the ability, but would have had it if (impossibly) I had been older.

PE22/138 had differences (que > quí > íte in pencil):

PE22/158 was discarded:

Lexicology