Marko Snoj Ljubljana CDU 809.199 INDQEUROPEAN +~ IN LmvIAN In the article are presented reflections of IE short +! in the cuneiform Luwian. Based on the material from DLL and ffiv it was established that IE +! in the neutral positions reflects as -.2,- while in the non-neutral positions (before or behindProt~ Luw. +i and behind +u) reflects, at least in graphics, as i• ~ " There are many hazy facts in the historical phonetics of the IE-Anat. languages.In the present article I am trying to clear up a developing course of IE +! in the cune~form Luwian.I pre- sent examples with rather acceptableetymologies which contains Proto-Anat. +~ from Laroche's Dictionnaire de la languelouvite (DLL) and Friedrich's Hethitisches Worterbuch (HW). DLL has been until now the most systematical collection of Luw.1words. Proto-Anat. +~ is generally identic with IE +!, with exception of borrowed words which came in the language(s) after IE par- ting. First,. I have to present reflections of IE +~ +- and + ... +v _, ~ .2' .2. in the IE-Anat. languages in the neutral positions: IE Proto-Anat. ti-gj!OUU tsi-srouo Luw. HLuw. Pal. Lzc. Lzd. Hitt. +~ +e a a a a a e/i +-e +-l.' +eC?) i i i i i;e + ... o +~(?) a a a e a a +w a +a a a a a a a Second, I want to point at the inexact cuneiform writing, which had been destined for Akkad. language and has not been adapted to IE-Anat. languages successfully enaugh. So,we don't know the exact phonetic value of the cuneiform signs ~ !W:! and~ /pi/ in Luw. that are the topics of the present ar- 467 ticle. In all probability we have to .read the vowel of these two signs, at least in cases where it doesn't reflect IE +i and +~ (or i,-diphtongs) as a bit palatal semivowel which,un~ fortunatly, in writing has coincided with the real i from men- tioned sources. Below in the text I always deal with the ort~ graphic but never with the phonetic values of discussed signs. I also have to remind on Hitt. assibilation of dentals, which ~-. +~+ + is caused by Proto-Anat. ~, !:. (i.e. IE ~' ~ and ~) but ne- +„ .z ver ~· + At last, in the Luw. orthography the Proto-Anat. ~ is distin- . +•; + + + + + guished from _!! !!_ by the fact that IE 1, _!:, 1!h bh, dh and +Eh are doubled behind accented IE +!; IE +.§. is doubled also behind unaccented IE +!, while all these consonants are writ- ten singly behind Proto-Anat. +!/!! (Čop 1970: 85 ff.). Examples of Proto-Anat. +e in the neutral positions: 1) Luw. ~- "faire", HLuw. aia-, Lyc. !!..~ = Hitt.ij!.a- "machen, tun" (DLL 23, HW 80). The Hitt.and Ltiw.verb may be-Irom +iiia„ IE reduplicated ?res. +iiia- from the root +ie- "werfen,m~c;,,...,_ ~ ~ ~ -~ tun" .(Tischler 1978: 339). So,there is no ~ 2n this Anat.verb. 2) Luw. akuwa- "boire", Pal. ahu- "trinken" (?) = Hitt. eku- "trinken" (DLL 24, HW 40), Tocn:-AB :vok- "to drink", IE +ak~a­ : +ek~- "Wasser, Fluss" (Pokorny 1959: 23, Čop 1971/2: 35 f.). The Anat. verb is the result of IE ablaut +~ : + ~(> .!!).;Luw._!!- kuwa• might be also a generalized weak stem which is found in Hitt. Pres. 3. Pl. aku~anzi. 3) Luw. annari- (according to Rosenkranz 1952: 21) "eine wiin- schenswerte Eigenschaft", c.f. Luw. annar-ummi- "fort" = Hitt. innar-a-uant- "riistig (?)", Luw. DAnnarumienzi = Hitt.Dinnara- " uanteš (DLL 27, H\'l 83) < Proto-Anat. +en-nar-a- "strenght, vi- ~our11 <: IE +en-n8 r-o- =Slav. +(j)~d.rl with inserted -9.-between the old +-:-n- and +-,!:-,cf. Skr. ,1~ifar "vigorous,f~esh", +j~dro in OCS j1&dro, Russ. jadro, Pol. jadro, Skr. ;iedro"nucleus"that 468 is not related to OI anda• "egg, testicle" (so Miklošič 1886: 104) or Gr. &.b~&j 11voll: • dicht, ausgewachsen,rei:t'"\so .Trautmann 1923: 1o7 and others) that is built :t'rom the Adv.~b"'l"' :t'rom IE + ~- ( cf. Arm. at-ok' "voll, ausgewachsen", :t'urther Lat. ~­ tis, Goth. saf's "satt") by the su:t':t'ix -ro- (Frisk 1973 I: 20 :t':t'.) • IE +en-na r- is a compound from IE +en "in" and the root +ner- (by Pokorny 1959: 765 +a:ner-, +aner-) "(magische)Lebens- kraft" = Finn.-Lapp +nore- in Finn. nuori, Lapp nuorra "young" ~ .y . t ,, ( the IZ-Ural. equation a.:i.~covered by Cop .1975/2: 94). Gr. tiA.""tf "man" results IE +an-ner-s, OI slinara "strong, youthful" < IE +- a . • / . + , a su( )nnero- and Gr.E'U-")VW~ "idem" results IE seu- nnor-s .so, there is no need to suppose an initial laryngeal in this root. . . . Otherwise Tischler 1978: 361 presu:aies originaily +a2nor- that would reflect in Hitt. and OI as in- (cf. OI 'Indra- 11the name of the god"). By such assumption it is impossible to explain Luw. 2.!E- that in confrontation with the ·Hitt. inn- represents only IE +enn-. 4). Luw. aš- "etre", HLuw. ,!!!!-, Pal. aš-, Lyc. ~ (?) "idem" = Hitt. eš- "sein, vorhanden sein" (DLL 33, HW 42) from IE +es- nseinn (Pokorny 1959: 343). 5)'Luw. a~ua(r)nu- "ensanglanter", Hitt. ešijarnu- "blutig ma- chen" (DLII 34, HW 44).are identical denoI1U.nat1ve-causative verbs, made from IE +esH-r- (Hitt. ešhar) "Blut" by the su:t'- fix +-n(e)u- (Poko.rny 1959: 343). „ 6) Luw. ad- "manger", HLuw. ad-/ar- = Hitt. ~- "essen, fres- sen" (DLL 34, HW 44) from IE +ed- "essenn (Pokorny 1959: 287 f.). Luw. ad- may be also a weak stem like Hitt. Pres. 3. Pl. adanzi. 7) Luw. atari- "nourirn = Hitt. etriia- "ernahren" (DLL 34, HW ----- ~ 44), cf. Hitt. ~- "Gericht, Spel.sen, Mahlzeitn, :t'urther see N• 6. 8) Luw. adduwal(i)- "mal, inauvais", Hiruw. adu(wa)ta, cf. Hitt. 469 idalu- "schlecht, bose" (DLL 35, HW 93, Meriggi 1962:44),Toch. B yolo "bose", OI ~- "poor", IE +edh- "bad, evil" .(Čop 1970: 91, 1975/1: 20l!- f.). 9) Luw. kutaššara/i- "muraille", B:Luw. kutasari = Hitt. BAD- eš~ar "Mauer, Befestigung, Burg" (DLL 58, HW .226), ci'.etymoio- gycaly the same suffix: beyond tne N• 30. 10) Luw. mall'it-"miel", Pal. malit = Hitt. ~·(written mi._ ,ill) from IE + meli t, cf. Gr. ~!)...1 , Gen. ~t>.l TO.S , Gotli. mil~, Alb. mjalte (Čop 1970: 85). · 11) Luw. mammana- "d:i,re", Hitt. ~-, memi~a- "sprechen" (DLL 67, HW 1l!-O) is reduplicated Perf. IE +me-mon-, +me-mn- from the root +men- "denken, geistig er:::-egt sein" (Pokorny: 1959: ?26, Čop 1961: 58 ff., 1970: 85). 12) Luw. mannaeuni-, manna(t;u)wan:i~ = Hitt. maninku().l.ant)- "kurz" (DLII 68, HW 136), hypotbehcal IE +men-enk~-; the first member of compound is IE word for "hand." (week stem) (by Po ... korny 1959: ?LI-O +~-, Ge~~ +me-n..;.es ·· "Hand") the seccond ·one_is ·· the· suffix: of direction that is fourid also in OI ud...;affc~ "tur• ned upwards", Lat. nrop-inau-us "near". The second Luw. suffix: is compared with .th;:it one in Hitt. arat;z~en~a-. 11 umwohnend ••• " (cf. Hitt. ara:g.za "ringsum, ausserhalb" (Čop 1970: 88 :f., HW 28). 13) Luw. ~- "LI-", HLuw. ~- = Hitt~ IIieu- "4", Proto-Anat. +meu- "4" (DLL ?O, Friedrich 1960: 71). 1ll-) Luw. narran "devant, avant", HLuw. ·~ Hitt. ~ "v~rn, varan" (DLL 78, HW 176) from IE +nero_;m (Acc. Sg~to+ne­ ~ "ferner"), cf. O~ param "hinaus liber, jenseits, nach"(Po- korny 1959: 811, Čop 1970: 86). 15) Luw. ~anna- "ecorcer" = H:i.tt. (arlJa) ~inna(i)- "abschalen" (DLL 85, HW 193). But in the Hitt. e:x:ists also ~an- "abscha- be!.J. (?), saubern (?), (gefalte Baumst.amme) von d.er Rinde be- 470 freien (?) 11 , Pret. Sg. 3. Šau-na-at-ta. (mv 183, 193); both verbs from IE +sen- 11 sich mit etwas abgeben, in Ehren halten11 (P~korny 1959; 909). So, Proto-Anat. +~ in. this Luw. word can not be· proved. 16) Luw. šašša(i)- 11 coucher, reposer" = Hitt. šeš- "rUhen, schlafen" (DLL 87, H.W 191), IE + ses- "to sle,~p", cf. OI ~' Av. hah:ini '11he sleeps, I sleep.''· (Mayrhofer 1976: 449) •. '. 17) Luw. tannaš(a) "ciel", HLuw. tanas( a) {DLL 8rl, HW 1915~ = = Lith. debesis "cloud.i•, pro~ably. from IE +nebhes- "Nebel, Durist •· •• 11 (Pokorny 1959i 315) •. · 18) Luw. uwata- 11 amener 11 = Hitt. uuate- "herbringen" (DLL 104-, ffif ·239) is a thematic Pre~~ IE +u~.:Oe- .r~_Q~ the. roo.t .+1*edh_; . "fiihren" (Pokorny 1959: 1115 f.). Luw. thematic vowel in""""tiie. neutral position is ""..§!.-, .Hitt~ '.".'~-, cf. _also thematic iterative suffix Lµw. -šš-a-, Hitt. "'.'.'šk:.~ (Friedrich 1960: 74 f.). Cf. W ;24- and 28. Luw. waš~:,;.: '!vetir" is probably comparable with the 'Hitt• weak stem ~aš(š)-(~e~(š)-; 1!aŠŠi~a-, ~ešši~a-) "be~~~-ici~:U,bedecken" (HW 2zmy;-p.ex:--Pr°es. 3. P1• uaššanzi = Luw. wasanti; IE +ues.;.. ",, - "' . "" "kleiden", Goth. wasjan (Pokorny 1959: 4'172 f., DLL 108}• _,_ Luw. waš:g.a- "maitre (?)" deri~es from IE +~os-Ho- (by Pokorny 1959:~ +uesu- "gut•i) related to Luw. wašu- 11bon11 (Čop''- 1971 „ - /1 : 9 f.) ( that .is not identic wi th Hi i;t. aššu. 11 gut", _so DLL 110) < IE- tl;los-u- ,.; orr. f'o "gut, Giite" · (Pok9rrlY, :i.~c. ·without Luw. examples).-Cf. the reiat:i.ons between Hitt. e~b.a- (~:i.tten . . .· . . . . . v. ·. . išha-) "Herr" from IE +es„H-o- = lat. erus (Pedersen 1938: • § ~' OI asu-ra- 11mighty, master 11< +es::-at IE +etse.;.. ris~~~ fle;;. ame" --(Čop 1981: 93 f.) aiid aššu- "gut" from IE :os-u- or +a s~u:.. to .the root +es- "gut, tuchtig" c:Pokorny 1959: 34-2,Fcie""". drich 1923: 370). Examples of Proto-Anat. +~in the non""".neutral Positions: Laroche (DL:G 134-) calles attention to the oppositicm L~w.,!- ~- 471 gainst Hitt. ke/i- and cites two examples: 19) Luw. immara/i- "campagne":Hitt •. kim(ma)ra- "Feld, Flur" (HW 109). Both words may have arisen from IE +ghrem-ero-, cf. Germ. · +g;:un-Ju- "Grund" (Čop 1956: 43) or IE +ghim-ro- without a sin- gle parailel (Čop 1971/1: 3). · 20 Luw. iššari-. "main" ; Hitt~ keššera- "Hand". (HW 108) < IE + . . ghes(o)r- "Hand" (Pokorny 1959: 447). + .. . + In both cases weakend IE fil! Ck!!):>-:t'> z before the palatal vo- .. + - wel assimilates following .!:_ to !• Regressive assimilation is fotmd in: ) +dh''h +dh )'i • . :, L t• . '' d II ... 21 IE ee: om--+ ... · elom+i-,,.,. 'uw. i:vami- Er e , cf. Hluw • .., takam• "earth"< I_E +ji·""';;:hom~ (Cop 1971/1: 6 f., 1.9 f .). 22) Luw. +mai- ;'crowd", Adj. mayaŠ~i- "de la foule'' (DLL fi5) dissimilated from +mi;yi...: < IE +mef;E-5:.;.. "mul ta, magtia 11 (see Po- korny 1959: 708); the vowel -i- is saved in Lyc. mi_;:nt..;.i "mee..: ting, assambly" < +mii-ant-i--< IE +mef?:Ha-nt- = OI mah~t- (Čop . " . . ""·~-----1965: 123,_1971/1: 1-24). Example for such a dissimilati"on is . .. +· . . cited also under the N• 1. The· phenomenon IE .5!!: > Luw. t6 de- ~ . ' . .. . tailed by Cop 1971/1: 1-24. The second non-neutral position t.hat prevents changing +e to .! is behind Proto-Anat. +~ (and +.E (?)). Examples: 23) Luw. iŠŠar-wili- 11 droite" (DLL 53) against Hitt. ual-kiŠŠa- ~- "~dig erfal:li-en".(HW 234) 2 , IE +)l-el- "wallen, wahlen 11 , OHG v . . . . ~' _w_o_l_a "w~l.111 • (Cap 1980), otlierwiše"Hrozny 1917: 40 compa- res Lat. valeo. 24) Luw. widai-, ("' )wiwida(i)~ "(her)bringen (?)"= Hitt •. ueda- "herbringen" (DLL 111, HW 256), IE +uedh- "fiihren, heimf'ilhren11 ... (Pokorny 1959: 115 f). 25) Pal. ~- "bauen"3, Lyd. uit.- = Hitt. 12-ete- "bauen" (Car-„ y --+ ruba 1970: 76, Sevoroskin 1967: 23, HW 254), .J..J:!; ~edh-"knilpfen, 472 binden" (Pokorny 1959: 116 f.)or ~e-d.he- (-d.ha1- (?)) 11nieder- setzen11 (Kronasser 1966: 554-). 26) Luw. wid- 11 eau11 = Hitt. stem :i.n Gen. Sg. ~et-en-aš.(DLL 111, HW 249).o Luw. wid- may be explained as a lenghtenecl. grade, too, ci'. Hitt. Nom:.-Acc. Pl. )Cidar (?), ocs v~dro (Pokqrny 1959:80). In Pal. Loc.-Dat.;. uattanii'"Warruba 1970: 79) we · can see the „ same vowelas·in the Hitt;, Nom;. Sg •. uatar. „ . 27) Luw. wiyana- 11vin11 , Hitt •. 1P-J.ana- 11Wein11 .(DLL 111, HW 225) < +~aina-, .ta:ken over .from Semith. +wainu (Assir. inu).The phe- nomenon can be explained as regressive assimilation (see .N· 21, 22 and 1). 28) Thematic vowel IE +~~~ is in neutral position in Luw.;.reali- sed as -~- (see N° 18). On the other hand, Luw. tarawi- ·11 abat- tre, terasser1r can be explained as thematic deadverbati ve +tar- a~;...e- rela:ted to Hitt. tarti 11bauchlings (?) 11 , tara~a 11 idem11(DLL '92,'"li'W 213, · 217; etymology Luw. tarawi..;.: Hitt. ~ .founded by Čop 1980). 29) Luw. (Hupešna) SALalhuitra- 11 a kind o.f priestess•~ = SALai:guešr;- 11 Funktionar~ im Kultus 11 (DLL 176, Ir:l 19, Čop 100) • Etymology unknown. . . Hitt. 1965: 30) Luw •. !;uidwali- 11vivant 11 , !tuitwal-a!}it- 11vie 11 , stem ~uidu- 11vivre11' cf. Hitt. !J.uiŠu-ai- 11 leben11 ' guiš-, gueš- nidem11--rm;r. 47, IDI 71 f., Čop 1965: 168 f.). Prot~-anat. +t~es- 11to live 11 may be simply IE +H~es- , cf •. OI vasati "he dwells,11 , Go.th. wisan "to be, to remain11--n?O'korny 1959: 1170; about other alteroa:tives „ see Cop, loc. cit.). Luw. Ša!}uidar(a)- 11 regu1ier, normaln and Hitt. Šaku~aššar(a)­ "richtig, vollstandig11 (DLL 84, HW 178) have arosen . .from Proto- Anat. +sak~asar(a)- (c.f. Hitt. Šakuua "eyes"). The Luw. word is . „ influenceci by the primary adjective Šahui- thatis saved p. ex. in Šahui-dali- (Čop 1965: 99, 112). Th; ...:i- in Šahu-i- is iden- y - w tic with that one in Luw. parra-i-, Lat. tenu-i-.s et~„. So,the~e 473 is no -~- in this case. Uncertain examples are Luw. (UZU)happi~a- "membre" that may re- sult +B-ap-eŠar = Hitt. !IBUtiappeŠŠ~ "Glied, Korperteil (:PLL~·41, HW 54, Tischler 1977: 165), cf •. the same suffix in Luw.mal!}ašša'."" (DLL 65) an:d underthe N•9; and Luw. nintanza (Acc.Pl.) "die Ru- der (?)" (HW 169) that may represent IE Acc. Pl. +(s)pendhons , (+(s)pendhons (?), cf. vrddhi formation in Hitt. Nom.-Acc. Pl. JP.dar) to Nom. +(s)pendh6-, +(s)pondho- "Holzeimer", cf. Gr. crnl\f"l ( <+ spaidha) "Bez. mehrerer flacher und langlicher Gegen- stande; z. b• ·· šchwert (klinge), Ruderblatt, Spate 1 ••• ";. Pokorny 1959: 989 without the Luw. and Gr. parallels to which kindly called my attention Prof. Bojan Čop). Otherwise Frisk 1973 II 775 connects the Gr. word with Germ. spatfan, -on "Spaten". Conclusions IE + e re . flects in Luw.: 1) In neutral posi tions a according -to - . . .; - - the phonetical~rthographical rule {Cop 1970: 85 ff.), see N•2;.. 18; 2) In the proximity of Proto-Luw. +~ is assimilated to i, see N• 19-22; 3) behind IE+~ reflects asi (also in Pal. (?)) , see N• 23-30. In the last case the +~ following consonant in Luw. is not doubled although IE +~ is accented„ Finally, I have to remark that the third conclusion is exclu- sively phonetical-orthographical rule and has nothing to dowith the productiveness of -i-: stem in Luw. that is a matter of word .formation. The ru1e should.be proved or disproved by more mate- riala that are not accesible to me. Notes Manythanks to Prof. Bojan Čop fo revising the artiQle and cot-rectin.€; m.Y faults. 1By th~ term Luw. is always ment cuneiform.Luw. Hieroglyphic Luw. is always appointed by its attribute. 2Čop 1965: 112 cites wid- (see N• 26) and the discussing one. 4·74 He also compares Luw.hirut- "serment" with-Hitt.haruaš-i- "sec- ~ ~ ~ ret" where vowel relations in the first syllable are not clear~ 0carruba loco cito cites as a possible meaning also "bringen" but a-t; least -from the context ariinam-pi ti Ui t_eši antanam ti Ui- teši (KUJ3 XXXV 165 Vso 23) where the agent is Dicat~zipuri only the meani_ng "bauen, erschaffen" is evident. Reference s „ COP, Bo1956o LuvicaI.,. SlavistiCSha revija IX, priloga Liriguis- tica II (40-46)0 Ljubljana. 19610 Zur Vertretung der indogerman:ischeh- N'asalis so- nans ini0 Irethitischen. Linguistica VI (.57~2}.Ljubljana~ 1965. Sur une regle phonetique de la langue louvite. Linguistica VII/2 (99-123). Ljubljana. 19700 Eine luwische orthographisch-phonetische Regelo Indogermanische Forschungen LXXV (85-96). Berlin, New York. 1971/1. Indogerlliahica minora, I. Sur les langues anato- liennes. Dissertationes Academiae scientiarum et artium Slovenicae, classis II: philologia et litterae,Num.vIII. Ljubljana. 1971/2. Zu ein Paar glottogonischen Fallen. Linguistica XI l35-49). Ljubljana. 1975/1. Studien im tocharischen Auslaut I. Ljubljana. 1975/2. Die indogermanische Deklination im Lichte der indouralischen vergleichenden Grammatik. Ljublj_ana. 1980. Lecture. Fac}lltyof philosophy in Ljub].jana. 1981. Sur l'origine des themes pronominaux - sigmatiques des langues indo-europeen.""l.es. Linguistica XXI.Ljubljana. CARRUBA,o. 1970. Das Palaische, Texte, Grammatik;, Lexicon. Wiesbaden. FRIEDRICH, J. 1923. Einige nethitische: - Etymologien.In:do.germa .... nische Forschungen XXXXI (369-392). Berlin, Leipzig. 1960. HethitischesElementarbuch. 1. Teil: Kurzegefasste GralIII!latik. Heidelberg. 475 -.: HVT. Hethitisches Worterbuch. Heidelberg 1952. FRISK, H. 1973. Griechisches etymologisches Worterbuch I-II. Heidelberg. HROZNY, J. 1917. Die Sprache der Hethiter. Leipzig. KRONASSER, H. 1976. Etymologie der hethitischen Sprache II, Lief. 5-6. Wiesbaden. LAROCHE, E. DLL. Dictionnaire de la langue louvite.Paris 1959. MAYRHOFER, M. 1953 ff. Kurzegefasstes etymologisches Worter- buch des Altindischen. Heidelberg. MERIGGI, P. 1962. Hieroglyphisch-Hethitisches Glossar.Wiesbaden. MIKLOŠIČ, F. 1886. Etymologisches Worter'buch der slavischen Sprachen. i;lien. PEDERSEN, H. 1938. Hittitisch und die anderen indoeuropiiischen Sprachen. K~benhavn. POKORNY, J. 1959.: Indogermanisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Bern. 1948-1959. ROSENKRANZ, B •. 1952. Beitrage zur Zrforschung des Luwischen. ŠEVOROŠKIN, V.V. 1967. Lidijskij jazyk. Moskva. TISCHLER, J. 1977 ff. Hethitisches etymologisches Glossar. Ins- bruck. TRAUTMANN, R. 1923. Baltisch-Slavisches Worterbuch. Gottingen. Povzetek RZFL!!.""1CSI INDO.SVROPSKEGA +_! V LUVIJŠČINI Iz m;ateriala, ki ga nudita Larochev DLL in Friedrichov HW je razvidno, da v nemotenih pozicijah indoevropskemu +! U.Streza luv. !.• Če stoji pra1uv. refleks indoevropskega~! v sosedstvu praluv. 'JI. (kakršnegakoli izvora), ga ta palatalni konsonant asimilira v historični i• To velja tudi pri izposojenkah.Tudi v poziciji zaide~+~ stoji vsaj v ortografiji na mestu ide.+! luv. (in pal. (?)) -i, ki pa ne povzroči ortografske geminaci- je sledečega sonanta ali medie aspirateniti v primerih, ko je bil +i poudarjen• 476