Hans commented on Petri Tikka's suggestion that _lyenna_
may be an elided form of _elyenna_:
> In XI:363 (it's the Harper Collins paperback) we read about the
> "de/le as pronominal elements in the 2nd person". This explains the
> Sindarin pronoun _dîn_, btw.
> We also read "dj became ly medially in Quenya". I don't think the
> "medially" was stressed without any need: Initial dj (or DY in the
> Etymologies) did NOT change into _ly_! (cf. V:394, DYEL-, Q _yelma_)
> Since the word _lyenna_ obviously is pronominal 2nd person, the
> _dj_>_ly_ must have been medial, after some elided vowel, indeed.
**This does not, however, necessarily mean that _ly_ in _lyenna_
has to be medial. As you cited, there is a variantion between de/le
in the 2nd person and _lyenna_ may well be from the element le,
not de. I am not sure where Tolkien intended the variant de to be
realized, because both pronominal suffixes _-l_ and _-le_ (e.g.
in _óle_, see VT43:29) seem to be from le. Perhaps he wanted
to explain _-lda_ "your" (in Aragorn's farewell _Arwen vanimalda,
namárie!_, LotR 1st ed.).
Mi dissero che a quell'epoca per quindici giorni e quindici notti
i retori Gabundus e Terentius discussero sul vocativo di _ego_,
e infine vennero alle armi. (Umberto Eco, _Il nome della rosa_)