You are on page 1of 490

A GRAMMAR OF THE HITTITE LANGUAGE

Part 1: Reference Grammar

00-HittiteGrammar.indb i 6/5/08 4:13:57 PM

L A N G UA G E S O F
TH E A NC I E N T N E A R E A S T

Editorial Board
G R, Pennsylvania State University
Editor-in-Chief

J P. A Brown University
G B. G The Oriental Institute, Univ. of Chicago
J H Harvard University
M K Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena
A L Universität Basel
H. C M University of California, Los Angeles
P M University of Michigan
P. O S Harvard University
M P. S Universität Leipzig

1. A Grammar of the Hittite Language, by Harry A. Hoffner Jr. and H. Craig Melchert
Part 1: Reference Grammar
Part 2: Tutorial

00-HittiteGrammar.indb ii 6/5/08 4:13:58 PM

A Grammar of the
Hittite Language
Part 1

Reference Grammar

by

H A. H, J.
The University of Chicago

and

H. C M
The University of California, Los Angeles

Winona Lake, Indiana
E
2008

00-HittiteGrammar.indb iii 6/5/08 4:13:58 PM

© 2008 by Harry A. Hoffner, Jr., and H. Craig Melchert
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Hoffner, Harry A.
A grammar of the Hittite language / by Harry A. Hoffner Jr. and H. Craig Melchert.
p. cm. — (Languages of the ancient near east ; 1)
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-1-57506-119-1 (hardcover : alk. paper)
1. Hittite language—Grammar. I. Melchert, H. Craig (Harold Craig), 1945–
II. Title.
P945.H59 2008
491ʹ.998dc22
2008018385

00-HittiteGrammar.indb iv 6/5/08 4:13:59 PM

To three giants of Hittitology,
in whose shadow we stand

Hs G G†

E L†

H O

00-HittiteGrammar.indb v 6/5/08 4:13:59 PM

00-HittiteGrammar.indb vi 6/5/08 4:14:00 PM

CONTENTS

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv
Abbreviations and Conventional Markings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii
General Abbreviations xviii
Bibliographical Abbreviations xx
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Hittites and Their Language 1
Decipherment 1
The Text Corpus 2
Modern Resources for Study 3
Cuneiform Editions 3
Commentaries 4
Sign Lexicon 4
Grammars 5
Dictionaries 5
Text Catalogues and Name Collections 7
Chapter 1. Orthography and Phonology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
The Cuneiform Writing System of the Hittites 9
Orthography 10
Writing Conventions 10
Transcriptional Conventions 14
Homophony 15
Polyphony 16
Multivalence 21
New Values 21
Logogram Pronunciation 22
Phonology 24
Individual Phonemes (Vowels and Consonants) 24
Vowels 25
Consonants 35
Phonotactics 48
Onomatopoeia 49
Accent 49
Chapter 2. Noun and Adjective Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Underived Stems 52
Derived Stems 53
Reduplicated Nouns and Adjectives 62
Compounded Nouns and Adjectives 63

vii

00-HittiteGrammar.indb vii 6/5/08 4:14:00 PM

Contents viii

Chapter 3. Noun and Adjective Inflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Inflectional Endings 69
The Basic Scheme 69
Common-Gender Nominative 70
Common-Gender Accusative 71
Neuter Nominative-Accusative 71
Ergative 72
Genitive 73
Dative-Locative 74
Vocative 74
Allative 76
Ablative 76
Instrumental 77
Stem Variation 78
Chapter 4. Noun and Adjective Declension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
a-Stem Nouns 79
Common-Gender a-Stem Nouns 79
Neuter a-Stem Nouns 82
a-Stem Adjectives 83
i- and u-Stem Nouns 85
i-Stem Nouns 86
i-Mutation 86
Common-Gender i-Stem Nouns 87
Neuter i-Stem Nouns 90
ai-Stem Nouns 92
i-Stem Adjectives 94
u-Stem Nouns 97
Common-Gender u-Stem Nouns 98
Neuter u-Stem Nouns 101
au-Stem Nouns 101
u-Stem Adjectives 102
e-Stem Noun 104
Consonantal-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 105
ḫ-Stem Noun 105
l-Stem Nouns 105
al-Stem Nouns 106
e/il-Stem Nouns 107
ul-Stem Nouns 107
n-Stem Nouns 108
Neuter n-Stem Nouns 108
Common-Gender n-Stem Nouns 111
r-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 114
s-Stem Nouns 117
t-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 120
Simple t-Stem Nouns 121
nt-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 123
r/n-Stem Nouns 124

00-HittiteGrammar.indb viii 6/5/08 4:14:01 PM

ix Contents

Non-Derived r/n-Stem Nouns 124
Derived Nouns with Suffix -ātar 126
Derived Nouns with Suffix -eššar 128
Derived Nouns with Suffix -āwar 129
Derived Nouns with Suffix -mar 130
Verbal Substantives 130
Irregular Consonant-Stem Nouns 130
Chapter 5. Personal Pronouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Distinctive Features of Pronominal Stems and Endings 132
Accented (Independent) Personal Pronouns 133
Enclitic Personal Pronouns 135
Chapter 6. Possessive Pronouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Chapter 7. Deixis: The Demonstratives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
kā- and apā- 143
aši, uni, ini 144
anni- 146
Adverbs Built to Demonstratives 147
Chapter 8. Relative and Indefinite Pronouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
The Interrogative and Relative Pronoun kui- 149
The Indefinite Pronoun kuiški and the Distributive kuišša 149
Other Stems with Partial Pronominal Inflection 152
Chapter 9. Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Form and Declension of the Cardinals 153
‘One’ 154
‘Two’ to ‘Ten’ 156
The Syntax of the Cardinals 158
Agreement in Case 158
Number Agreement with Non-Collectives 158
Counting Non-Decimal Sets 163
Word Order in Counting 165
Fractions 165
Ordinal Numbers 166
Ordinals in -t- 167
Multiplicatives 168
Distributives 170
Derivative Adjectives and Verbs 170
Numbers in Compounds 171
Compound Numbers 171
Chapter 10. Verb Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Reduplicated Roots 173
Verbal Suffixes and Infixes 175
Overview 175
The Individual Suffixes 175

00-HittiteGrammar.indb ix 6/5/08 4:14:01 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . . 230 Consonantal Stems 230 Vocalic Stems 231 Chronology of the Medio-Passive Endings 233 Medio-Passive Stem Formation 233 Chapter 15. . . . . . . and Supine 185 Chapter 12. . . . . . . . . . . .224 Verbs with the Imperfective Suffix -anna/i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Consonantal Stems 214 Vocalic Stems 218 a-Stems 218 Stems Originally in -Cw. . . . . Grammatical Agreement . . . . . . . . Noun Cases . . . . . . Verb Inflection . . . . . Contents x Chapter 11. . . Participle. . .222 ai-Stems 222 Stems with Mixed Inflection in -a. . . . . . . . Infinitive. . . . . . . 187 Consonantal Stems 187 Root Stems 187 Affixed Stems 196 Vocalic Stems 198 Ablauting 198 Non-Ablauting 210 Suppletive Verb 211 Verbs with Mixed Stems 212 Chapter 13. . .and ḫi-Forms 227 Chapter14. . . 180 Types of Verbal Inflection 180 Irregularities in the mi-Conjugation 183 Irregularities in the ḫi-Conjugation 184 Medio-Passive Endings 184 Verbal Substantive.226 Mixture of mi. Conjugation of ḫi-Verbs . . . Conjugation of mi-Verbs . . .indb x 6/5/08 4:14:02 PM .and -i. . . . . . . . . . . . 242 Generalities 242 Nominative 242 Vocative and “Naming Construction” 244 Other Forms of Direct Address 245 Accusative 246 Ergative 250 Genitive 250 Word Order in a Genitival Phrase 254 Dative-Locative 257 Indirect Object 257 00-HittiteGrammar. Medio-Passive Conjugation . . . . . . . . . 235 Types of Agreement 235 Lack of Agreement 239 In Gender 239 In Number 240 Chapter 16. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . 271 Comparison of Adjectives 273 Comparative Degree 273 Superlative Degree 275 Chapter 18. Pronouns . . 277 Independent Personal Pronouns 277 Enclitic Personal Pronouns 279 (Third-Person) Subject Clitics 280 Intransitive Verbs with Subject Clitics 280 Intransitive Verbs without Subject Clitics 281 Other Clauses without Referential Subjects 282 Special Cases 282 Demonstrative Pronouns 283 kā-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Local Adverbs 289 Temporal Adverbs 290 Adverbs of Manner 291 Denominative Adverbs 291 The Adverbial Suffix -ili 292 Adverbial Circumlocutions 293 Chapter 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 Free-standing Adverbs 295 Preverbs 295 Postpositions 297 Chapter 21. xi Contents Indicating Possession 258 Dative of Disadvantage 258 Goal 259 Purpose or Result 260 Location 260 Temporal Uses 261 Units of Measure and Dimensions 262 Additive-Incremental 262 Allative 262 Ablative 264 Instrumental 268 Cases with Particular Verbs 270 Chapter 17.287 Chapter 19. . . . . and aši : Word Order 283 Declinable kāš . . . Local Adverbs. . apā-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preverbs. . . Adjectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .indb xi 6/5/08 4:14:03 PM . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 Active Voice 302 Middle Voice 303 Passive Voice 303 00-HittiteGrammar. . . . . . . . kāš as a Distributive Expression 285 Correlated kā-Forms Having Different Cases 286 Other Deictic Elements 286 The Indefinite Pronoun kuiški 286 tamai. Adverbs . . . . . . and Postpositions . . . . . . . Verb Voice . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Negation . . . Non-Finite Verb Forms . . . 330 Verbal Substantive 330 Infinitive 332 Supine 338 Participle 339 Chapter 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .311 Chapter 23. . . . . . . . . . Contents xii Chapter 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 Imperfectives 317 Adverbial Markers 317 Suffix Markers 318 Nuances of Imperfective Aspect 318 Choice of Suffix 322 Suffix Redundancy 323 kāša (tta) and kāšma 323 The “Serial” Use of pai. . . Verb Mood . . . 313 Indicative 313 Imperative 313 Optative. . 341 natta 341 Word Order with natta 341 Negative Rhetorical Questions (with Negatives of Assertion) 342 nawi ‘not yet’ 343 Imperatival and Categorical Negative lē 344 lē⸗man and nūman 344 Categorical Negative lē 345 Word Order with lē 345 ne/ikku 345 Double Negatives 346 Carry-Over of Negative Force 346 Summary 346 00-HittiteGrammar. . . Verb Tense . .and ēš. . . . . . . Verb Aspect . . . . .indb xii 6/5/08 4:14:03 PM . . . .‘to come’ 324 Chapter 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and Irrealis 314 Optative 315 Potential and Irrealis 315 Chapter 24. Potential. . . . . . . . . . . 306 Present 306 Preterite 309 The Analytic Perfect Construction 310 Function 310 Form 310 Uniqueness within the Old Anatolian Indo-European Group 310 Examples 311 “Stative” Constructions with ḫar (k). .‘to go’ and uwa. . .

. . . . Conjunctions . . . . . . and Adverbs 350 Questions Posing Alternatives 353 Indirect Questions 353 Chapter 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 Clause-Initial Clause-Linking Conjunctions 390 Distribution 390 nu 390 šu 392 ta 393 Enclitic Clause-Linking Conjunctions 395 -a/-ma 395 -a/-ya 399 Asyndeton 401 Form 401 Function 402 00-HittiteGrammar. xiii Contents Chapter 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .indb xiii 6/5/08 4:14:04 PM . . . . . . . . . . . . . Questions . -kan. . -ašta. . . 348 Intonation Marking 348 Yes–No Questions 348 Direct Questions with Interrogative Pronouns. . . . . . . Particles . . -apa. 354 The Particle -wa (r-) 354 The Particle -z (a) 357 Form 357 Reflexive Function 357 Lexical Use of -z (a) 360 Use in Nominal Sentences and with the Verb ‘To Be’ 362 The Local Particles -an. . . . . . . Adjectives. and -šan 364 The Particle -kan 366 The “Local” Value 366 Accompanying the “Dative of Disadvantage” 371 The Terminative Value 372 With Verbs of Hostility 372 Aspect Independent of Verb’s Lexical Meaning 372 Absence of Expected -kan 373 Summary 373 The Particle -šan 374 Co-occurring with the Adverb šer 374 Physical or Conceptual Movement toward an Object 375 The Particle -an 377 The Particle -apa 378 The Particle -ašta 382 The Particle -pat 384 Anaphoric 385 Particularizing 386 Restrictive 387 Contrastive 388 Chapter 29.

. . . . . Sumerian and Akkadian . . . . . . . . . . . . -(a) ku 405 Chapter 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . .indb xiv 6/5/08 4:14:04 PM . . . 406 Word Order 406 Major Constituents 406 Deletion Processes 409 Sentential Clitics 410 Nominal and “To Be” Sentences 412 Dependent Clauses 414 Temporal Clauses 416 Causal Clauses 418 Concessive Clauses 419 Conditional Clauses 419 Simple Conditions 420 Contrary-to-Fact Conditions 422 Relative Clauses 423 Indirect Statements and Questions 426 Multiple Dependent Clauses 428 Chapter 31. and Participles 430 Pronouns 430 Verbs 430 Akkadian Grammar 430 Orthography 431 Superscripting 432 Phonetic Complements 433 Phonology 433 Morphology 434 Nouns and Adjectives 434 Pronominal Suffixes 437 Numbers 438 Verbs 438 Conjunctions 440 Calques 440 Prepositions 441 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clauses . Contents xiv Disjunction 405 naššu . . . . . . . . . . . naš (šu)ma 405 -(a) ku . . . 442 00-HittiteGrammar. . . . . Adjectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430 Sumerograms 430 Nouns. . . . .

We ask indulgence in advance for the inevitable omissions and inadequacies. or New Hittite status to all cited forms in the paradigms proved to be overly optimistic. Our primary goal has been to describe the language sys- tematically as it appears in the extant texts. Several generations have learned Hittite with the help of the outstanding Hethitisches Elementarbuch of Johannes Friedrich (second edition: 1960). One of the most dramatic changes in Hittitology since 1960 has been our enhanced ability to establish a relative chronology not only of texts (recognized since the earliest days of the field) but also of individual copies of those texts. In order to avoid inventing more Hittite sentences than absolutely necessary. We have otherwise been selective in making what we take to be valid generalizations about the date of various phenomena in appropriate passages in the grammar. the passage of more than 40 years has inevitably rendered parts of Friedrich’s grammar outdated or incomplete. along with a limited but representative sample of the lexicon. Middle. we have insofar as possible used for the exercises Hittite sentences that actually occur in xv 00-HittiteGrammar. The tutorial is a series of graded lessons arranged in a typical fashion. Our own efforts to procure or produce teaching materials for the classroom led us to conclude that the time had come for a more comprehensive reference grammar of Hittite. along the lines of Wolfram von Soden’s Grundriß der akkadischen Grammatik (latest posthumous edition in 1995). No descriptive grammar can ever pretend to be truly definitive. We have sought to give full recognition to established find- ings in this area. PREFACE This book originated in supplementary teaching materials developed by the authors for classroom instruction. Each lesson has illustrative sentences suitable for practice in translation. while striving to acknowl- edge different points of view. We expressly disavow any intent of systematic coverage in this regard. we have not hesitated to make reasoned choices. However.indb xv 6/5/08 4:14:05 PM . including in installments of the ongoing major lexica. We have referred to prehistoric factors only where we feel that they help elucidate features of attested Hittite or are of broad interest. that could also serve as the basis for an accompanying set of graded lessons for language learners. Further refinements must be left for the future. but our initial intention of assigning Old. We have therefore limited ourselves to marking consistently only examples assured as Old Hittite by their appearance in cop- ies from the Old Hittite period (OS = Old Script). On points where there is no consensus. Major morpho- logical categories are introduced a few at a time. A number of recent works have tried to address cur- rent instructional needs. often written many years after the text’s composition. We have done our best to incorporate and synthesize the advances made since the work of Friedrich and to make this grammar as broad and up-to-date in coverage as possible. Many issues about the dating of texts and manuscripts remain unresolved.

long-suffering Chicago Cubs baseball fans! The Authors Christmas. Nevertheless. and Elisabeth Rieken for reading all or part of an earlier draft of the grammar and offering innumerable helpful suggestions and criticisms. omissions. Jared Klein. Norbert Oettinger.indb xvi 6/5/08 4:14:05 PM . We would also like to thank Mr. we cannot give assurance that such a method will produce satisfactory results. For these we alone are responsible. Jay Jasanoff. We are indebted to colleagues too numerous to mention for their prompt sending of copies of published and unpublished works and responses to queries. Professor Gonzalo Rubio. patience. Preface xvi the texts in either their original form or slightly adapted. both authors are grateful to Winifred Hoffner for the hospitality. and unfailing good humor which she has shown to us during the long and sometimes trying gestation period of this book and for standing together with us as loyal. Our enormous overall debt to scholars past and present should be apparent through- out. es- pecially on matters of syntax. 2005 00-HittiteGrammar. Aaron Butts of Duke University for working through an earlier draft of the tutorial and suggesting changes in it. Last but not least. for further helpful suggestions. since we were not able to follow all their suggestions. they cannot be accountable for whatever errors. but we have designed the tutorial primarily for classroom use with an instructor who knows the language. We have keyed the tutorial to the reference grammar and have provided extensive notes for the exercise sentences. Brinkman. or infelicities remain. Theo van den Hout. The present version has been immeasurably improved due to their efforts. and the LANE series editor. We wish to thank in particular Professors John A. Although some readers may be able to use the tutorial for self-instruction. Benjamin Fortson.

NH by itself implies NS.‘mother’ can be written either an-na-az or an-na-za. we follow the CHD practice of using a graphic representation of the one. This applies also to optional plene spellings (e. The slanted equal sign (⸗) in Hittite transcriptions indicates a boundary before a clitic element.).or two-wedge variants: ˚ and ¬. joined pieces published in separate places are noted as KUB 24. etc. pḫutezzi).. But the datings themselves may differ from those of earlier printed CHD volumes. -az(a) means that the ablative ending can be written either -Ca-za or -Ca-az. Middle. and New Hittite (ca. 1350–1190).5 + KUB 9.g. Parentheses may also occasionally mark a speech element lost through a regular sound change but restored in our broad transcription to aid lexical and/or grammati- xvii 00-HittiteGrammar. OS used by itself implies OH/OS.5+. -s’ in our translations. In the paradigms the following conventions are followed. MS. Parentheses within forms may mark optional modes of writing the word: e.. annaz(a) means that the ablative of anna. Wherever possible. ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONAL MARKINGS In general. The same convention is used with transliter- ated forms: šar-re-(e-)ez-zi. and New Hittite.indb xvii 6/5/08 4:14:06 PM . . and following a slash (/) indicate the date of the copy with OS. . we have arbitrarily used the masculine pronoun ‘he’. see below under “Bibliographical Abbreviations. MH.. Unlike verbs in the Semitic languages. a-wa-ri-ya-aš. 31 or just as KUB 24. we seek to conform to the datings of the copies now used in the on-line Konkordanz of the Mainz center for Hittitological research. which implies that there is a join but does not specify its identity. we employ the sigla OH. Middle Hittite (ca. etc. Since there is no convenient transliteration for the marker wedges that Hittite scribes prefixed to forms exhibiting foreign or unusual elements. when the actual gender of the subject is unknown. To avoid ugly renderings such as ‘he/she/it . Text datings follow the format of the CHD (e. the Hittite language can be re- garded as developing in three stages: Old Hittite (ca. a-u-wa-ri-aš.. and New Hittite Script. Middle. ḫuiš(u)wanza sig- nals the existence of ḫu-iš-wa-an-za as well as ḫu-i-šu-wa-an-za. OH/MS. and NS for Old. rather than the German system of using “ah” and “mh” to denote the date of the individual copy).” As we describe in more detail in the Introduction.g. and NH for Old. 1650–1450 . and unless otherwise noted in the remarks below..13 obv.g. For further details. In citing Hittite text references. 1450–1350). paḫḫu(e)naš signals the existence of spellings paḫḫuenaš and paḫḫunaš. a(u)wari(y)aš signals the possible spellings a-u-wa-ri-ya-aš.. As in the CHD. Hittite verbs with third-person subjects are indifferent to the biological gender of their subjects. we follow the system of abbreviation used in the Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (CHD). wal(a)ḫzi indicates that this form can be written either wa-al-aḫ-zi or wa-la-aḫ-zi.

at-ta-aš-mi-iš ‘their father’ as attaš⸗(š)miš ).) will be transcribed atta(n)⸗ššan..1 (p. and §28.72. When quoting from a modern publication. we use pairs of single quotation marks (‘.g.’). ḫuiš(u)wanza) require that the alter- nate writings ḫuišwanza and ḫuišuwanza both occur in OS.. nepiš. Forms in the paradigms of ḫi-conjugation verbs marked with † are mi-conjugation intrusions. but may or may not occur in later periods. . 32) a parenthesized letter indicates a phoneme lost through a phonotactic change: ḫuišwatar⸗m(u)⸗apa means that the form ḫuišwatarmapa arose through deletion of the u vowel before the suffixed particle -apa. nepiši.. however. adjective col. p. Old Hittite an-da-ma-pa.indb xviii 6/5/08 4:14:07 PM . 139).g.g. by supplying one of the two identical consonants within parentheses (e. not that one is OS and the other from a post-OS copy. column adv. General Abbreviations abl. p.5 (p. 378) the conjunctions n(u). p. But as with all bolded forms. not *nepiš(i)). accusative C consonant (in CV. p.. adverb coll. annall(i)eš indicates that an-na-al-li-eš (or an-na-al-li-e-eš) could also be transliterated an-na-al-le-eš (or an-na-al-le-e-eš). In rare cases (see §1. tuzzi(n)⸗man ‘my army’ in §6. Similarly na-pa (for n(u)⸗apa) in §28.100. collective 00-HittiteGrammar. 32. 12). . Forms in the paradigms of mi-conjugation verbs marked by a following † are ḫi- conjugation intrusions. will be transcribed anda⸗m(u)⸗apa (§1. abbreviated.g.72. ištamana(n)⸗šan ‘his ear’. š(u). allative acc. ablative Akk. where a nongeminate consonant represents two identical consonants straddling a clitic boundary..100 (p. . Old Hittite at-ta-aš-ša-an ‘his father’ (acc. Likewise we clarify instances of “simplified spellings” (§1. kar (a)pzi means that kar-ap-zi could be interpreted as either /karptsi/ or /karaptsi/). a writing ḫuiš(u)wanza leaves open the possibility that one or both of the variant writings also occurs in post-OS. Abbreviations and Conventional Markings xviii cal identification: e. active CLuw.10.g. CVC. when the form contains the clitic pronoun -mu. Entire forms marked by parentheses indicate those occurring rarely in the texts. la-a-am-ma-a-mi-it as lāmmā(n)⸗mit.”). iš-ki-še-et will appear as iški(š)⸗šet. Cuneiform Luwian adj. 378). t(a) in §29. we employ pairs of double quotation marks (“. 389). abbreviation all. VC) act. The bolding is OS-inclusive. Bolded forms indicate that the form is attested in OS. Instances of the latter scenario require a second recording in the paradigm (e. When translating ancient texts or individual ancient words. . Bolded forms with parenthesized letters (e. not OS-exclusive. Akkadian abbr. A parenthesized letter or syllable may also indicate alternative interpretations of a single writing (e.

locative Tel. supine intr. plural Gilg. ergative OH Old Hittite Erg. CVC. versus n.v. (foot)note 00-HittiteGrammar. vocative Muw. Luwian tr. feminine pers. and following perf. obverse erg. under the word lit. number DN divine name nom. comm. participle ex(x). pr. dative no. indefinite scil. in the same place pret.g.-p.e. masculine translit. present (tense) ibid. Hittite postpos. intransitive Šupp. example(s) pass. impersonal rit. interjection Sum. pronoun IE Indo-European rel. transitive masc. et cetera part. perfect fem. translated (by) m marks the PN of a male person trans. Gilgamesh Epic (CTH 341) pl. literally Tel. Sumerian interrog. relative imp. object e. infinitive sg. namely inf. iterative s. Hurrian pres. nominative dupl(s). substantive interj. especially p(p). instrumental subst. passive f(f). reverse impers. possessive Hitt. postposition HLuw.indb xix 6/5/08 4:14:08 PM . edited (by) obj. personal communication fest. conjunction neut. tantum only plural GN geographical name PN personal name Hatt. preverb(s) i. xix Abbreviations and Conventional Markings com. translation. that is pron. Ergänzungsheft OS Old Hittite Script esp. Telipinu loc. duplicate(s) NS New Hittite Script ed. variant(s) Murš. common gender n(om). edition. imperative ref(s). for example obv. Hieroglyphic Luwian PrAn. nominative-accusative conj. ritual indef. preterite idem the same (author) prev. dative-loctive NH New Hittite dat. Šuppiluliuma iter. reference(s) imperf. Muwatalli vs. Telipinu proclamation Luw. Proto-Anatolian Hurr. Muršili voc. interrogative sup. page(s) etc. Tudḫaliya m. imperfective rev. Ḫattušili poss. transliteration MH Middle Hittite Tudḫ. VC) MS Middle Hittite Script var(s).-a(cc). neuter d. genitive pl. festival (text) PIE Proto-Indo-European gen. singular ins. medio-passive (voice) V vowel (in CV.-l.

= equivalences in dupls. . and others which. ] ( . HW 2. . CTH. .. pp.. 15). . 00-HittiteGrammar.. . HE.. AA Archäologischer Anzeiger AAA Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology ABoT Ankara arkeoloji müzesinde bulunan Boğazköy tabletleri AGI Archivio Glottologico Italiano AfO Archiv für Orientforschung AHP Melchert 1994 AHw von Soden 1965–85 AIPHOS Annuaire de l’Institut de Philologie et d’Histoire Orientales et Slaves AM Annals of Muršili. See §1... . ) . All such interpretations are provisional. ⸗ marks clitic boundaries § section (of this or other books) * prefixed to unattested forms (. xvii–xviii) (. .. HW. HED. etc..] encloses material lost in text break [ .. only where the distinction seemed especially salient. . edited in Goetze 1933a ANET Pritchard 1969 AoF Altorientalische Forschungen 1. . Abbreviations and Conventional Markings xx x in transliteration indicates an illegible sign x non-subscripted x stands for an indeterminate number x subscripted following a sign value indicates a value not yet assigned a number in official sign lists × within Sumerograms the multiplication sign × precedes sign element inscribed within another. . It is generally impossible to capture phonetic detail for Hittite.. . ( . . lexical texts.g. . given in [. we had occasion to refer to very frequently: AHP and LH.) within a Hittite word encloses omissible part of word (see above. /.) in translation encloses words not in the Hittite but needed in English [.] encloses phonetic interpretations1 [. ⟩⟩ encloses material to be omitted / . marked by /. We have therefore mostly limited our interpretations of its sound system to matters of contrast.. ) encloses material restored from a duplicate < derives or develops from > becomes/develops into ⟨.. We have resorted to phonetic interpretations.. . .⟩ encloses material accidentally omitted by the scribe ⟨( . HZL) which are so well- known and commonly used that it seemed inadvisable to refer to them in the Author-Date style. )⟩ encloses material omitted from main text but restored from a duplicate ⟨⟨ .indb xx 6/5/08 4:14:08 PM .]. Journal abbreviations occur only in the comprehensive bibliography that closes this work. while not quite so standard as the above.. . / encloses phonological/phonemic interpretations1 ˚ single-wedge marker ¬ double-wedge marker Bibliographical Abbreviations In-text bibliographical citations are in the Author-Date form (“Wilhelm 1992”) except for a re- stricted number of reference works (e.14 (p.

Hoffner. 1947. bare numbers refer to pages. Inventory numbers of Boğazköy tablets excavated from 1968 to the present BrTabl. and van den Hout 1980– CLL Melchert 1993b CoS Hallo and Younger 2003 CTH Laroche 1971 DLL Laroche 1959 DŠ Deeds of Šuppiluliuma cited according to the edition of Güterbock 1956 EHS Kronasser 1966 FHG Laroche 1951a. Kammenhuber. . numbers following # refer to sign numbers IBoT Istanbul arkeoloji müzelerinde bulunan Boğazköy tabletleri 1–4 — Istanbul 1944. 1956–2005 CDA Black. Apology of Ḫattušili III cited according to the edition of Otten 1981 HE Friedrich 1960 HED Puhvel 1984– HFAC Beckman and Hoffner 1985 HKM Maşat tablets cited by the cuneiform edition Alp 1991b HS Historische Sprachforschung HSCP Harvard Studies in Classical Philology HT Hittite Texts in the Cuneiform Character in the British Museum HW Friedrich 1952 (reprint Friedrich 1991) HW2 Friedrich. . 1954.indb xxi 6/5/08 4:14:09 PM . xxi Abbreviations and Conventional Markings ArAn Archivum Anatolicum ArOr Archiv Orientální AuOr Aula Orientalis Belleten Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten BiOr Bibliotheca Orientalis Bo Inventory numbers of Boğazköy tablets excavated 1906–1912 Bo year/ . latest revision von Soden 1995 Ḫatt. and Postgate 1999 CHD Güterbock. George. 1952 FHL Durand and Laroche 1982 GAG von Soden 1952. The Bronze Tablet cited according to the edition of Otten 1988 BSL Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies CAD Gelb et al. and Hoffmann 1975– HZL Rüster and Neu 1989. Ankara 1988 IF Indogermanische Forschungen IM Istanbuler Mitteilungen IncLing Incontri Linguistici JAC Journal of Ancient Civilizations JANER Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions JANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies JIES Journal of Indo-European Studies JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies KBo Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi KlF Kleinasiatische Forschungen 00-HittiteGrammar.

Konkordanz der hethitischen Texte at http://www. Nouvelles assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires OA Oriens Antiquus OLZ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung Or NS Orientalia Nova Series PP 1–4 First to Fourth Plague Prayers of Muršili II. 1930 THeth 11 Hoffmann 1984 TIES Tocharian and Indo-European Studies TPS Transactions of the Philological Society Ullik.de/ hetkonk/ KUB Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi KuSa Wilhelm 1997 KuT Precedes inventory numbers of Kuşaklı tablets KZ Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung (“Kuhns Zeitschrift”) Laws Hittite laws cited by § in LH Lg Language LH Hoffner 1997d LSU Riemschneider 1958 MDOG Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft zu Berlin MIO Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung MSpr Muršili’s Aphasia. ed.U. ed. ed.hethport. Goetze 1930a RA Revue d’Assyriologie et d’Archéologie orientale RHA Revue hittite et asianique RS Ras Shamra text. cited by inventory number SBo 1 Güterbock 1940 SMEA Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici StBoT Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten SV 1–2 State treaties cited according to the editions by Friedrich 1926.A. Lebrun 1985 MSS Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft N. Güterbock 1952 VBoT Verstreute Boghazköi-Texte (Goetze 1930c) VO Vicino Oriente WO Die Welt des Orients WZKM Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und verwandte Gebiete ZDMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 00-HittiteGrammar. Abbreviations and Conventional Markings xxii Konk. Ullikummi myth.indb xxii 6/5/08 4:14:10 PM .uni-wuerzburg.B.

The story of the rediscovery of the Hittite writing system.” Yet the assumption that these inscriptions related somehow to the ancient Hittites was correct. Weber and Ebeling 1915: 1074. Official excavations begun there in 1906 under the direction of Hugo Winckler and Theodore Makridi revealed a great city dating from the time of the New Kingdom pharaohs of Egypt and the Kassite dynasty of Babylonia. language. See Güterbock 1995b for the history. 2. 1 0. Bryce 1998. J. 3. claimed the two Arzawa letters were written in a previ- ously unknown Indo-European language (1902). For coverage of the Hittites. Although many tablets were composed in Akkadian and could be read immediately. Hoffner 1994. Macqueen 1986. In the second volume of the edition of the Amarna tablets O. Weber maintained that—according to a letter sent to Weber— Knudt- zon had eventually lost confidence in his own discovery.indb 1 6/5/08 4:14:10 PM . Klengel and Klengel 1975. The people we now call “Hittites” lived almost four thousand years ago in the central highlands of what is today the Republic of Turkey. 2 Several huge archives of clay tablets inscribed in a variety of cuneiform writing very similar to the contemporary Amarna archives found in Egypt were discovered. Decipherment 0. A. confirming the excavators’ suspicion that they had found the capital of “Ḫatti. de Martino 2003. 2002. representing correspondence between the Egyptian pharaoh and the king of a land called “Arzawa” (later revealed to be located in southwestern Anatolia). In its main lines it runs as follows. 3 leading to the inaccurate 1. A Norwe- gian scholar. and civiliza- tion has been told often. 1 00-HittiteGrammar.1. Similar inscriptions on rock reliefs in central Anatolia led explorers and archae- ologists to impressive ruins near the village of Boğazköy.” the vast majority were written in the native language of the Hittites. Two tablets in this native language had been found decades earlier in the Amarna archives.2. INTRODUCTION The Hittites and Their Language 0.” At that time scholars could not know that the language of these inscriptions was not Hittite proper but a closely related language now called “Luwian. Hoffner 2003a. Gurney 1990. 1997a.3. Knudtzon. their culture and history—written for the general reader—see any one of the following: Bittel 1970. Stone blocks found in Syria at the end of the 19th century with hieroglyphic inscriptions chiseled into them were correctly connected to the people known from the Hebrew Bible and the Neo-Assyrian annals as “Hittites. His claim came under heavy criticism from specialists in Indo-European languages.

and Carian. 0.10). and we will do so in this grammar.4 Introduction 2 assertion by others that Knudtzon had retracted his claim to decipherment. For orientation in the subject of the various names used in ancient and modern times for this people and their language see Güterbock 1959. 1917). and inflecting.” etc. appeared in archeological and philological literature of the 20th century as “Boghaz- köy. This town earlier bore the name Boğazköy (‘gorge village’). The vast majority of the excavated tablets are conserved today in Turkish museums in Ankara. The alternative name “Nesite” is rarely used. The historical relationship of Hittite (more correctly of the Anatolian sub-branch) to the rest of the Indo-European family is a matter of continuing debate.” “Boghazköi. Ḫattuša. but this issue lies beyond the purview of the present descriptive grammar.6–0. and van den Hout 2006. marking the role of most words in a sentence by a system of end- ings (word-final suffixes). Hittite shows the typical features of an older Indo-European language: it is both synthetic.. 00-HittiteGrammar. and Çorum. Other sizable collections 4. Hittite is a member of the Anatolian sub-branch of the widespread Indo-European family that includes Sanskrit. most of them recovered from the royal archives of the capital city. The language now called “Hittite” 4 was the principal administrative language of the ancient kingdom of Ḫatti. The Text Corpus 0. attested in documents from the state archives in its capital city. showing significant use of derivational suffixes to form words. Although the official name of the town today is Boğazkale (‘gorge castle’). Latin. near the modern town of Boğazkale (‘gorge castle’). Ḫattuša. Greek. Ly- cian. it is customary in scholarly literature to continue to spell the name Boğazköy (sometimes spelled without the Turkish ğ as Boghazköy). which. Other Indo-European languages of ancient Anatolia include Luwian. Hittite cuneiform tablets and tablet fragments. a Czech Assyriologist named Bedřich Hrozný demonstrated convincingly that Knudtzon’s allegedly retracted theory was in fact correct and published the first ad- equate grammatical sketch of what became known henceforth as the “Hittite” language (Hrozný 1915. Melchert 2005b. For recent discussions of this problem see Wilhelm 2002b.5.indb 2 6/5/08 4:14:11 PM . and social classes or population groups. see Güterbock 1958). Our limited written sources leave us almost wholly ignorant about the status of Hittite as a spoken language in terms of place. and most of the modern languages of Eu- rope. 5. number well over 30. Istanbul.000. Palaic.4. and from a few other sites (see in detail §§0. Lydian. Boğazköy. nešumnili ‘(in) the language of (the city of) Neša’ (also known as Kaneš. According to the currently most widely accepted chronology these texts date from the 16th to 13th centuries . 0. Working with a much larger corpus of well-preserved documents in the “Arzawa language” from Boğazköy. 5 0.” “Boghaz Keui. before the introduction of standardized writing of contemporary Turk- ish. time.6. although the Hittites’ own designation for their lan- guage was ne/ašili.

Hittite Texts in the Cuneiform Character in the British Museum (HT). KBo). Ortaköy [Çorum]. 00-HittiteGrammar. Kayalıpınar). Ugarit. The archive of Šapinuwa dates from the Middle Hittite period (ca. Kuşaklı. Alaca Höyük. the British Museum. the weight of textual evidence will continue to be the large harvest of tablets from the capital city. Modern Resources for Study Cuneiform Editions 0. most of those from Boğazköy have been published as facsimile editions (drawings) in the following publications: 60 volumes in the series Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi (abbr. Kuşaklı-Sarissa (KuSa). Although it seems likely that in the coming decades additional small archives will be found at other provincial centers of the Hittite heartland.9 are found in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin. 0. and Akkadian tablets were found. Syria: Alalakh. Fragments hittites du Louvre (FHL). as well as in private holdings. beginning in 1990 a cache of more than three thousand tablets has been excavated at Ortaköy (ancient Šapinuwa) in the Çorum Province of Turkey (Süel 2002). with much smaller holdings in various academic institutions or museums in America. Egypt: Amarna. Of the excavated tablets. and the Louvre. IBoT) and a handful of other volumes in smaller series. Verstreute Boghazköi- texte (VBoT).8. Hurrian. A much smaller number were found in the tablet archives of ancient peoples of the Mediterra- nean littoral (Syria and Egypt) 6 who had diplomatic relations with the Hittites. 1400–1350). 7. Although throughout the nearly 100 years of discovery and publication a very large corpus of Hittite texts and fragments has been published. whose former director was Heinrich Otten and whose current director is Gernot Wilhelm. This center for research maintains a wide range of research 6. 4 volumes in the Turkish series Istanbul arkeoloji müzelerinde bulunan Boğazköy tabletleri (abbr. 0. some Hittite. there still remains a substantial number of tablets in Turkish museums awaiting publication.9. And although it seems unlikely that any additional large source of clay tablets will be found in Ḫattuša. 7 The task of publishing facsimile editions of Hittite cuneiform texts from the Boğazköy excavations is in the hands of the Boğazköy Archive of the Academy of Sci- ences of Mainz. during exacavations directed by Müller-Karpe at Kayalıpınar near Sivas.7. In 2005. Once published. and Emar. Fragments hittites de Genève (FHG). it should shed valuable light not only on this relatively poorly understood period in the history of the Hittites but also on a crucial period in the development of their language between the Old and New Hittite periods. Maşat Höyük. Germany. 3 Introduction 0. KUB).indb 3 6/5/08 4:14:12 PM . Ankara arkeoloji müzesinde bulunan Boğazköy tabletleri (ABoT). Most known Hittite cuneiform texts were found at sites in central Turkey (Bo- ğazköy. 45 volumes in Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi (abbr. and the Middle East. Europe. England. Hittite Fragments in American Collections (HFAC). Hand-copies of them are being prepared by Elisabeth Rieken.

Scattered individual tablets from Emar. is a subdivision of the more comprehensive series Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatisch-Aegyptischen Gesell- schaft. Christel Rüster and Erich Neu. a bibliography. Alalakh. digitized photos of some tablets. Commentaries 0. 1922. 10. 1989. in which the following important editions appeared: Hrozný 1917. which in turn is a subseries of Studia Mediterranea. and El-Amarna have been published in excavation reports and journal articles. Hittite compositions of many textual genres have been reconstructed from the tablets and presented in translit- eration. 1997.12. The earliest such series was Boghazköi Studien. currently edited by Gernot Wilhelm. and the beginnings of a set of digital editions of texts (“Digitale Publika- tion von Texten der Hethiter [DPTH]”).10.indb 4 6/5/08 4:14:13 PM . Sommer 1920. Sommer. p. Sign Lexicon 0.5. and some available online at the Hethitologie Portal Mainz. 8 The largest and best known of the German series is Studien zu den Boğazköy-Texten (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Ugarit. p. 1998. 0. A new series of text editions in Italy is the Series Hethaea (Italian University Press). with critical notes. Under each sign entry are listed all known examples of its meaning as a logogram (see §1. 1991b). A smaller number of tablets from the ongoing excavations at Kuşaklı (ancient Šarišša) directed by Andreas Müller-Karpe have been published by Gernot Wilhelm (1995. Weidner 1923. Today there exist at least three significant series of this type in Germany and several in Italy. Rüster assisted Heinrich Otten for many years in producing ex- cellent hand-copies for the KBo series. HZL). Since the early days of Hittitology in the 20th century. edited by Onofrio Carruba. 0. and (often) lexical indices. abbr. Neu produced some of the standard guides for the dating of Hittite cuneiform texts on the basis of paleography. edited by Ferdinand Sommer and published in Leipzig. StBoT). a collection of personal names. Germany. commentary. Approximately 116 tablets or large fragments from the now completed exca- vations at Maşat Höyük (ancient Tapikka) were published by Alp (1991a. also published in Leipzig and edited by F. The authoritative sign lexicon for Hittite texts is Hethitisches Zeichenlexikon: Inventar und Interpretation der Keilschriftzeichen aus den Boğazköy-Texten (Wies- baden: Harrassowitz. He- thitische Texte. compiled by two experts in the field. 00-HittiteGrammar. arranged under each entry in roughly chronological order. 8. abbr. A second important series. We can therefore expect no additional tablets from Maşat. 7). some available only to scholars visiting the site at Mainz (such as the com- prehensive lexical files). Sommer and Ehelolf 1924. 2002a).11. The volume not only contains the complete known repertory of signs but virtually all known variant forms of the signs.10 Introduction 4 resources. including the online edition of Silvin Košak’s Konkordanz der hethitischen Texte (see further below.

indb 5 6/5/08 4:14:14 PM . 9 Less satisfactory. it is marked by a careful. abbr. third unaltered edition. Very brief surveys also exist. VC. Schmalstieg. pp. such as the inflected forms.37–1. It provides a German translation of all words whose meanings were known to Friedrich. a selection of inflected forms. it lacks many useful features of Friedrich’s earlier work. personal names.15 §§1. 5 Introduction 0. at the back of HZL are alphabetized lists of Sumerograms and Akkadograms with German and Turkish translations. HW). such as Kammenhuber 1969b. cautious. 0. Later significant systematic works from this perspective are Kronasser 1956. The first is the revised and augmented second edition of Johannes Friedrich’s Hethitisches Wörterbuch. For more than forty years. Luraghi 1997a. and CVC signs. Although this work was last updated (in the third supplement) in 1966. HE). But although this is more up-to-date than HW. There is a grammatical sketch of the Middle Hittite texts from Maşat by Hoffner (forthcoming a). reprinted posthumously under a single cover (Fried- rich 1991). 1974. A more recent Hittite-German word list that covers the entire alphabet is Tischler 2001. Francia 2005. 00-HittiteGrammar. This dictionary (abbreviated as HW2) began its coverage with A and has now partially completed the letter Ḫ in 9. and continued now by Inge Hoffmann. Grammars 0. 10.15. 1952. begun under the direction of Annelies Kammenhuber of the University of Munich. and the list of Hurrian vocabulary. but written in English. logo- graphically written proper names (divine names. on which see §0. 1966.44. and Gertz (1987). 1960.15. 22–24) and its use as a component of multisign logograms (Sumero- grams and Akkadograms) and logographically written proper names that contain the sign in question. 10 with its three supplements. Dictionaries Hittite Language 0. Of particular value to beginners. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. the bibliographies. a brief bibliography of studies of the word’s meaning. and sometimes a proposed etymology. and Rieken 2005a. tables of common CV. The best concise coverage of the entire Hittite vocabulary is still Johannes Friedrich’s Hethitisches Wörterbuch (first edition. Two projects have been underway since the 1970s to produce complete dic- tionaries of Hittite on the scale of Wolfram von Soden’s Akkadisches Handwörterbuch and the Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. and of easily confused signs. abbr. Germany.14. and Ivanov 1963. is the grammar by Held. which appeared in a revised and enlarged second edition as Sturtevant and Hahn 1951. Reprint. and accurate approach and is a model of conciseness. Heidelberg: Winter. the best instructional grammar of Hittite has been Johannes Friedrich’s Hethitisches Elementarbuch (Heidelberg: Carl Winter. To be distinguished from HW2. From the comparative Indo- Europeanist perspective an early influential work was Sturtevant 1933. geographical names).13.

suffers in this respect. Luwian Language 0. Even Laroche 1960. abbr.16 Introduction 6 volume 3. N. The Chicago team has begun placing a partially modified version of the text of published volumes online (the so-called eCHD). 0. Work began in Chicago in 1974 under the joint direction of Hans G.C. and has useful semantic discussions. 1984–. Some Hieroglyphic Luwian words are listed and glossed in HW and its three supplements in the appendix “Nachbarsprachen. Hoffner Jr. which changed the readings of several high-frequency signs and thus revocalized many words. Such a full presentation enables users with limited access to the original sources to appreciate and weigh the evidence for determining the word’s meaning.” But the usefulness of glossaries and word-lists for Hieroglyphic Luwian published prior to Hawkins. a user can trace the chronological development of various meanings and grammatical usages. The new corpus of Hi- eroglyphic Luwian texts (Hawkins 2000) contains a very useful partial index of Luwian 00-HittiteGrammar. Puhvel conscientiously lists all inflected forms of words included in his corpus. Hittite Etymological Dic- tionary (7 vols. HED).indb 6 6/5/08 4:14:15 PM . on the basis of lexical files collected over a period of ten years (1965–75) by Hoffner.16. N. gives translations of selected passages in which the inflected forms occur. Using this documentation. 0. which in- cludes all words attested in the corpus edited by Frank Starke (1985) and gives selected coverage of Luwian words appearing in Hittite contexts. the CHD began its published coverage with L. The CHD also includes notations indicat- ing the best estimate of the date of original composition and of the copy of many cited sources. Among these earlier works is Meriggi 1962. focuses primarily on etymology. Berlin: Mouton / de Gruyter. and to produce transcriptions and full translations of representative occurrences of these words. The important multivolume work by Jaan Puhvel. To date. A second ongoing work. This database was augmented by CHD staff during the following years. is now more than halfway through the alphabet (A–N) and is useful for more than etymological considerations. CLL). The latest glossary of the cuneiform Luwian texts is Craig Melchert’s Cunei- form Luvian Lexicon (Chapel Hill. P and the first two fascicles of S have appeared. M. so that articles can be consulted over the internet.: Self-published. Güterbock and Harry A. whether or not their meanings have been determined. is limited. and Neumann 1974. volumes covering words begin- ning with L. to date. Both of these projects attempt to include treatments of all known words appearing in published texts. 1977–). Melchert’s lexicon may be obtained in PDF format from the author. The second project is The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.17. abbr. which was once a standard tool. 1993. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck. HED provides no dating of the forms and thus cannot show diachronic development within the attested languages. Morpurgo Davies. In order to avoid immediate overlap with the Munich project. which in many respects still remains a crucial tool. Johann Tischler’s Hethitisches Etymologisches Glossar (14 Lieferungen to date.

7 Introduction 0. Košak’s Konkordanz der hethitischen Texte (currently at Universität Würzburg. For vocabulary.indb 7 6/5/08 4:14:16 PM . No one can adequately keep up with Hittite textual evidence without a cata- logue of text compositions. 1971. 1992b. An up-to-date replacement is HZL 304–69. Wilhelm 1992a.20 words. premier supplément” Revue hittite et asianique 30 [1972]: 94–133).20. in which each logogram is accompanied by the number of the sign in the rep- ertoire under which it is booked. as well as the concise CDA.).19. Their results are also incorporated by Johann Tischler (2001) in his appendix of Sumerograms. An up-to-date Hurrian glossary is badly needed in view of the many newly available texts. and Giorgieri 2000. which would have contained a complete glossary of this extremely valuable text. here- after abbreviated Konk. which must be supplemented by tabulations and lists in new publications. as do the vocabulary lists at the back of three recent introductory grammars of Luwian (Werner and Lüscher 1991. Sumerograms and Akkadograms 0. and 1970s the leading authority in this field was the French Hittitologist Emmanuel Laroche. because one not only has to identify and locate all the known compositions but must also reconstruct texts from myriads of joins and duplicates. But more than thirty years have passed since the last update of this work. This is particularly so. and the list of Hurrian words in the back of the introductory grammar by Ilse Wegner (2000). Catsanicos 1996. whose magnum opus was his catalogue of Hittite texts. Payne 2004). abbr. AHw and CAD. An older listing of Sumerograms and Akkadograms in Hittite texts can be found in HW 264–315 and its three supplements. but a complete diction- ary is still lacking. 1960s. 00-HittiteGrammar. Not restricted to examples attested in Hittite texts are the complete dictionaires of Ak- kadian. Other valuable sources on grammar include André-Salvini and Salvini 1999. The latest complete glossary published is by Laroche (1978–79). Neu’s death in 1999 deprived us of his planned companion volume.18. Text Catalogues and Name Collections Hittite Cuneiform Texts 0. and Laroche’s death precluded any further revision by him. Hurrian Language 0. published originally in installments in the journal Revue hittite et asian- ique and subsequently produced in a revised and enlarged second edition as Catalogue des textes hittites (Paris: Klincksieck. CTH). see Neu 1996.” currently at Emory University) and the online version of S. Currently it is neces- sary to supplement CTH with the online additions at the web site maintained by Billie Collins (“Hittite Home Page. as well as a German and a Turkish translation. Laroche later supplemented this (“Catalogue des textes hittites. such as the Hurro- Hittite bilingual “Song of Release” edited by Erich Neu (1996). In the 1950s. Plöchl 2003. 1992c.

van Gessel’s does not group the various deities according to their ethnic provenience. For many years. Additions to this second edition were published by Gary Beckman (1983a). Personal Names 0.22. revised editions of his collection of personal names. The first comprehensive collection and study of the personal names of the Hit- tite texts was by Laroche (1951b. van Gessel (1998–2001) has the advantage of completeness and great detail. eventually. together with bibliography on each deity. although he published supplements and. 1955). A revised and much augmented second edition appeared in 1966. It contains not only the text references but translations of the immediate context of the more significant toponyms and a relatively complete bibliography of studies in which a location for the toponym in question has been proposed. The Hethitologie Portal Mainz web site now contains a Répertoire onomas- tique prepared by Marie-Claude Trémouille in 2002.23. nor is there much discussion of the deities whose names are cata- logued. Divine Names 0. For some reason. The great Tübingen Atlas of ancient Western Asia has produced a series of valuable volumes cataloguing toponyms from the major text corpora and time periods. L. For this one must consult the recent comprehensive volumes on Hittite religion by Volkert Haas (1994) and Maciej Popko (1995). 00-HittiteGrammar. with a supplement (1992). 0. The volume covering the Hittite empire is by Giuseppe del Monte and Tischler (1978).indb 8 6/5/08 4:14:18 PM . But un- like Laroche’s work. The first significant collection of toponyms in Hittite texts was published by Hayri Ertem (1973). the only systematic and comprehensive collection of divine names was Laroche 1947. The new comprehensive collection by Ben H. Every attested occurrence is listed.21.21 Introduction 8 Toponyms 0. Laroche never at- tempted to revise his collection of divine names.

Before the advent of the Old Assyrian merchant colonies at the beginning of the second millennium . The exact time and the precise source from which the Hittites obtained the cuneiform writing system and applied it to the recording of their own IE language is unknown. with English translations by Beckman 1999: 114–24 and Hoffner 2000. it was employed not only by the Assyrian merchants but also on occasions by the local Anatolian rulers (Balkan 1957. 2. 292).. where it was devised by the Sumerians for writing their own language and adapted centuries later for writing Ak- kadian.4 Since Assyrian trading colonies existed in central Asia Minor (Cappadocia) 1. on metal and on wax-covered wooden writing boards (referred to in the texts as gulzattar or. Kammenhuber 1969b: 162). is described in the Egyptian translation of that tablet. none of which have survived. which appears both on the walls of the temple of the god Amon at Karnak and in the Ramesseum.indb 9 6/5/08 4:14:18 PM . For a surviving metal tablet see Neve 1987: 405–8 and Otten 1988. lēʾu]). These royal inscriptions were composed in Luwian (Hittite luwili. present-day Iraq. GIŠ-5 [= Akk. Wilson (ANET 201).1. kings began to use this system for carving royal inscriptions on rock faces or stelae. The Hittite texts were written by professional scribes on clay tablets that were impressed with a stylus and dried in the sun and. On the origins of this script in Anatolia see Mora 1991 and Hawkins 2003. the script used on clay and metal tablets was cuneiform. p. during the so-called New Hittite (or Empire) period. officials used this hieroglyphic script to inscribe stamp and cylinder seals. for this designation see §19. A good summary of the present state of our knowledge on this subject can be found in HZL 15–16. a Semitic language. Much later. see the English translation by John A. Chapter 1 ORTHOGRAPHY AND PHONOLOGY The Cuneiform Writing System of the Hittites 1..3 1. to a lesser extent. there was no writing in Anatolia (Kammenhuber 1969b: 161–62).15. a language closely related to Hittite.2 During the earliest phase of their kingdom’s history. 3. containing the text of a treaty between the two countries.3. Although it is unclear what script was used on the writ- ing boards.1 The cuneiform (from the Latin word for ‘wedge-shaped’) system derives ultimately from Southern Mesopotamia. Once the Old Assyrian writing system arrived. the Hittites occasionally utilized a hieroglyphic script. In addition to cuneiform writing on clay tablets. On the Luwians and their language see now Melchert 2003d. 9 00-HittiteGrammar. 1. the Old Hittite period. logographi- cally.2. 4. A silver tablet sent from Hatti to Egypt.

agent.5. 1.5 during his military campaigns in North Syria. The cuneiform syllabary from its earliest stages in Mesopotamia consisted of configurations of one or more wedges comprising what are called “signs.4 Orthography and Phonology 10 as early as ca. or the verb ‘to sit down’). Logograms can serve either to represent spoken words or as “determinatives” to classify semantically an immediately following (much less commonly. see §§1. or possessor. 1650–1600). the noun ‘king’. and even for broad periods of their king- dom. while Hittite scribes used the  or  signs. and left behind written documents composed in cuneiform. or transcription of Hittite words in an ancient contemporary alphabetic script. p. But even a cursory comparison of Old Assyrian and Old Hittite cu- neiform writing reveals that (1) the shapes of the signs (palaeography).. has proven both difficult and controversial. captured scribes who were using a form of the late Old Babylonian syllabary. and these captives formed the nucleus of the first scribal academy at Ḫattuša. the Sumerogram  ‘king’ (without added Hittite ending) can stand for subject.8 Logograms are signs or combinations of signs that designate a particular word in the target language (e. we will use only ap- proximate dates when it becomes necessary to identify a period of Hittite history. tense. 1950 .” Signs on Hit- tite tablets are written left to right. the former are called Sumerograms. acoustic recording. Sumerian case markers (Thomsen 1984: 88–109) were not employed by Hittite scribes.44 (pp. Morpurgo Davies 1986.. 1986. the latter Akkadograms. Old Assyrian uses the & sign for the syllable ti.6 Orthography Writing Conventions 1.indb 10 6/5/08 4:14:19 PM . 23–24).39–1. Logograms in Hit- tite texts consist of words from the Sumerian and Akkadian languages. see §1. as can the adjective  ‘great’. 9. We gain access to Hittite phonology and morphology only through the filter of the conventions the ancient scribes employed when they wrote on clay using the cuneiform syllabary. with spaces between words. and (3) the choice of signs for the expression of a given syllable (orthography) are all quite different. we have no way of knowing the precise sounds of the language. For general treatments of the subject of writing systems in the ancient Near East see Hawkins 1979. one might have expected that the Hittites obtained knowledge of the cuneiform writing system from them. 22) usu- ally fail to indicate the grammatical case of the noun or adjective9 and the voice. Since this is not a history textbook.37. direct or in- direct object. For the latest discussion of the problem see Rubio 2006.7 1. 7. But Hecker (1992 and 1996) argues that the Hittites borrowed an atypical form of cuneiform known in the Old Assyrian milieu. the adjective ‘large’. a preceding) word. Because we have no living speaker of the Hittite language. Klinger (1998) also discusses the question of who taught the Hittites to write.g. (2) the selection of logograms (Sumerograms). 6. For example.4. 8. Establishing an absolute chronology for the Hittite kings. For example. Sumerograms in Hittite texts (apart from the information given by occasional Hittite phonetic complements. It is therefore generally assumed that Ḫattušili I (ca. 5. Signs are functionally distinguished as phonetic (or perhaps better syllabic) and logographic. When a Sumerogram stands in a case other 00-HittiteGrammar.

Most Hittite words in this grammar are not transliterated but presented in broad transcription.g. connecting those belonging to a single word with hyphens (e. ut Consonant + Vowel + Consonant CVC e. na-at > nat. Sumerograms often consist of a single sign and not infrequently are read with a value different from the sign’s syllabic value in Akkadian or Hittite.11 Ak- kadograms consist of one or more signs read with the normal phonetic values ( ‘not’.g.37. 436). resembling the construct state of the Akkadian noun (on which see §31. ab. p.. -- ‘word’). where the genitive marker  is not obligatory. Stop-final VC signs with voiced-voiceless possibilities (/.. read  in Akkadian and ka in Hittite is read  in both Babylonian and Hittite texts. An exception is the use of the sequence of noun plus its genitive complement  ()  ‘land of the king’. /. For example. 1. kap. If the VC sign in question is word final. etc. Vowel V e. or ‘they’. i. Further- more. See chapter 31 (pp. bar. Neither transliteration nor broad transcription pretend to reflect the precise pronunciation of Hittite words. only an approximation.   ‘to/for the king’. - ‘father’. ti. 430ff.g. for example. 11. 11 Orthography and Phonology 1.g. - is indirect object or possessor. For example.g. it is written voiceless (e-ša- > ešat ‘he sat down’).g.20 (p.. Hittite scribes (unlike later Baby- lonian and Assyrian scribes) never used a single sign to represent CVCV other than in logograms.. lu Vowel + Consonant VC e. Similarly with ‘hand’: - subject. e.g.   ‘of the king’. ‘you’. ‘daughter. 25) occurs when a vowel already represented in a CV or VC sign is redundantly expressed by an adjacent V sign. 10. an Akkadogram occasionally lacks the case ending altogether. We say “normally” because in Hittite contexts the Akkadian case forms are occasionally used erroneously. ba.  GIŠ ‘from the table’). when it is the Sumerogram meaning ‘word’.8. The repertoire of phonetic signs con- sists only of signs of the following structural types. Each cuneiform sign has a syllabic value. not *adtaš. - is direct object.. Adjacent identical consonants are not simplified but remain geminate (ap-pa-an-zi > appanzi). 00-HittiteGrammar. but ši-uš > šiuš). ‘she’. p. 1. u Consonant + Vowel CV e. it is usually marked with an Akkadian preposition (see §31.. e. than subject or direct object. -ta-aš > attaš ‘father’. only the presence of a Hittite verbal ending attached as a phonetic complement to the end of the Sumerogram  ‘seize’ can indicate whether the subject is ‘I’. pé. /. p. eš.46..g. - direct object.7. the sign Æ. the hyphens are removed and adjacent repetitions of identical vowels are simplified (e. But Sum- erograms also can consist of two or more signs (¥ò . What is called plene writing (see also §1. Thus - ‘father’ is normally subject. kán. a-ša-an-zi ‘they are’). il. see §31. - object of preposition (Akkadian geni- tive case).) conform to the voice character of the following CV. a-ša-an-zi > ašanzi. 441) (e.8 or person of the verb. we write the most appropriate values of the individual signs. 437).) for a brief survey of Akkadian grammar.23. kir.6. When we use broad transcription. girl’). a. ‘he’.10 whereas Akkadograms usually indicate all of these.. When we transliterate. da. ḫar/ḫur 1.indb 11 6/5/08 4:14:20 PM .

3. ša-ra-a-zi-ya-aḫ-ta KUB 19.63 v 20. a-šu-u KBo 8.13 For shorthand spellings of geminates omitting the CV sign see §1. alongside ordinary plene spellings šu-u and šu-u-un (see the paradigm in §4. 15 signal a clitic boundary between the accusative singular noun (-un ‘ox’.6 obv. ē. 2. neut.‘full. acc.1 ii 23.9 Orthography and Phonology 12 word-initial as e-eš-ta = ēšta or u-up-zi = ūpzi. a-ša-nu-wa-an-za KBo 4. 00-HittiteGrammar. -un ‘sheep’) and the following clitic local particle -ašta. The /w/ fills a hiatus produced by loss of a PIE laryngeal (see Watkins 1975: 378 and Oettinger 1976a: 39 n. 27. However. 72). 48). p. ši-wa-ti KBo 39. Other examples of nongeminate writing of geminates are: nu-kán passim (see AHP 14).10. -u-ú-. p. šu-u-ú and sg. šu-u-ú-un of the adjective šuu.64 ii 13.indb 12 6/5/08 4:14:21 PM . cannot be entirely excluded (see §1.47 obv. 104).1 rev.57. wa-ši-ya-at KUB 44. sg. For example -un-aš-ta (not *-u-na- aš-ta) and -un-aš-ta (not *-u-na-aš-ta) in KUB 30.142. There is one example of non-initial hyper-plene writing.241 rev. That the hyper-plene spelling indicates a preserved hiatus /su_u-/. ḫa-ti-li KUB 7.34 i 25.11. There are no known Hittite words consisting solely of a hyper-plene vowel. 14. 3 verbal ending -zi see Yoshida 1998. as per Watkins and Oettinger. 6. Since Hittite (as well as Mesopotamian) cuneiform has no sign for a conso- nant without a vowel. 2. unpronounced) vowel. On the nongeminate writings of postvocalic pres. Vowels written plene are indicated in broad transcription with macrons (ā. 1. ar-mi-zi-iš KBo 13. 13 and AHP 54–55 and 115). com.9.3:16ʹ.10 obv. 1. Hittite scribes normally spelled single (non-geminate) intervocalic consonants as (C)V-CV (te-pu ‘few’. tu-zi-uš KBo 6. The consonants in question are those underlined in this and the following paragraph.12 Rare exceptions to this rule are significant in that they often mark a clitic boundary. it is impossible to write initial or final sequences of two or more consonants or internal sequences of three or more consonants without using at least one “empty” (i. as a hunter’s imitation of the repetitive cry of a bird or animal (§24. a-a-bi ‘ritual pit’.-acc.12. only descriptions of sounds heard in nature. 13. ḫa-za-aš-ta KUB 12. where a word begins with two a-signs: a-a-an ‘warm’. a-ap-pa ‘back.62 rev. or word- internal as ma-a-an = mān or i-da-a-lu-uš = idāluš. /smen-/ ‘to forfeit’ must be spelled ša-me-en. a-da-na KUB 30. mḪa-tu-ši-- KUB 26.4 + KBo 13.. 1.71 iv 16. a-pí-ya ‘here’).86 rev. Much less common is a hyper-plene writing. One type omits the VC sign: GIŠlu-ti-ya-az for lu-ut-ti-ya-az ‘window’. p. found in the sg.58 iii 17.11. [ḫ]a-zi-wi5-aš KBo 41. 320).68 i 5. and /spikusta-/ ‘pin’ must be spelled 12. 18.27 obv. word-final as pa-ra-a = parā. tu-zi-ya-aš KUB 2. a-ša-u-i-it KBo 11. ī. The hyper-plene spelling here probably points to a stem /suwu-/ with an unusual sequence /-uwu-/ (see Goetze 1954: 404 n. ki-ša-an KUB 39. ū). nom.76 + KBo 41. pa-ḫur KBo 13.34 iii 40.67 i 15.e.152:12ʹ. again’) or CVC-CV (kat-ta ‘down’). along- side regular spellings for geminate consonants we also find shorthand (or simplified) spellings. As an example of an initial sequence. Scribes write double (geminate) consonants intervocalically as (C)V-VC-CV (na-at-ta ‘not’. ki-še-ra-aš-ša- an KBo 3. such as i-i.or še-me-en-. filled’. ḫa-a-šu-uš KUB 15. 2 (second example). 1. A mere long vowel /su:-/ (Berman 1972b: 188–89) would not account for the hyper-plene spelling (see also the discussion of Weitenberg 1984: 136–40).

In some cases.]. cult inv.NA4ku- un-ku-nu-uz-in. ši-iš-at-ti. see §1. These cases are not examples of scribal errors. ša-an-aḫ or ša-an-ḫa ‘seek!’ for /sanh/.and mi-li-id-du. 10 (p. 13 Orthography and Phonology 1.4 with n. 31). šu-up-ya-aḫ.32 iii 29. it (i. Internal sequences of three con- sonants.87 + KUB 20. šuppaš.82 (p. šu-up-in. A scribe could write šuppiš. cites ma-li-id-du. *šu-pí-in.9).or ša-pí-ik-ku-uš-ta-.12 še-pí-ik-ku-uš-ta. There are two attested exceptions. Also written ki-iš-šar-at. šuppin. The normal rules of cuneiform writing require that a VC sign either occur word-final or be followed by a CV(C) sign. . 47). wa-al-aḫ ‘hit!’ for /walh/. 15. sometimes left the /n/ graphically unexpressed (so Kimball 1999: 315–16): li-ik-zi (/linktsi/) ‘he swears’ and li-ik-ta ‘he swore’. NH).14 i 13).. ma-a-aḫ-an ‘as’. Both types would be abbreviated writings.. pár-aḫ-ta represents /parhta/. OH/MS).. The same principle usually applies to spellings CVC-VC: e.as evidence for an initial sequence /ml-/. §1.137 (p. wa-ar-aš ‘reap!’ for /wars/.15 ii 15).5 + KUB 9. 19. tar-kum-ya-an[-. p. nepiši kat-an (KUB 24.11). dYa-ar-iš. dKi-pí-ik-aš-du (KUB 51. As shown by the above examples. na-ak-uš-ši-uš (KUB 32. This rule would ac- count for the examples: kiš-an ‘thus’. followed by many others. /harspawants/ must be spelled ḫar-aš-pa-wa-an-za. the former would be marked as such by a special orthographic pattern and would be understood to be equiva- lent to the writings šu-up-pí-iš. Examples of a final sequence are: kar-aš ‘cut!’ for /kars/. as well as šu-pí-iš (VS 28. it is assumed that the written vowel in aḫ is not to be pronounced and represents a way around the limitation of cuneiform in writing sequences of three consonants (/walhta/ or /walhtsi/) (see §1.138. the first of which is /n/. 30). an additional rule applied: one should also read the shorthand in these cases as including an i-vowel following the geminate z: -az- 14. When the geminate con- sonant written in shorthand was a z.10 i 39.76:8ʹ).26 rev. or šuppiyaḫ (for example) as šu-up-iš. ḫa-at-an-na-aš (HFAC 12 4). But examples exist of writings of the type VC-VC (see also above. UZUšu-pa (KUB 25. me-e-ek-e-eš is OH. §6.13 obv. i-ya-an-er (KUB 33.14 As an example of a medial triconsonantal sequence. the bee) is ḫanti tuḫšanza’ (KUB 17. but a system of scribal shorthand used mostly15 in post-OH. . Hittite regularly uses final Ca signs to spell word-final consonantal sequences. §4. But while the latter forms give no hint that they are abbreviated. evidence shows that a CVC-VC spelling is merely shorthand for CV-CV-VC: LÚḫi-ip-pár-aš or ḫu(-u)-up-pár-aš along- side ḫu-up-pa-ra-aš. 1. ši-pí-ik-ku-uš-ta. where final /-ants/ is spelled -an-zi instead of the usual -an-za: namma⸗war⸗aš ḫanti tuḫšanzi ‘And furthermore. represented by the example wa-al-aḫ-ta/-zi. 48) -[ri] ‘When it becom[es] spring’ (KUB 38.indb 13 6/5/08 4:14:22 PM . 138). however. ḫa-aš-uš ‘ashes’ (< ḫašš-) (KUB 39. 00-HittiteGrammar. šu-up-iš. and mān ḫa-me-eš-kán-zi (for ḫa-me-eš-kán-za. For more on empty vowels in Hittite writing see §1. A second type consists of cases where it appears that the scribe has simplified a VC-CV sequence (with identical C) by omitting the CV sign. and AHP 29.19 iv 17). and ki-iš-šar- ta ‘by the hand’ for /kissard/. m Pí-ip-pa-ap-aš. Kuryłowicz (1958). šu-up-pí-in.115 iii 14). itself a late form of ḫa-me-eš-ḫa-an-za.g. or *šu-pí-ya-aḫ.12. and šu-up-pí-ya-aḫ. 115). ša-ra-az-iš. In one type. or šu-up-ya-aḫ.e.

Akkadograms in upper case italic letters (-- ‘word’). creating ugly forms such as . In order to avoid this.13. 35). yet in other cases one-word transcriptions such as . An argument could therefore be made that. Luwian.83.. -uš ‘king’. as MUNUS. Syllabically written Hittite. ‘silver’) are usually con- nected by a period.78. Although strictly speaking this is inconsistent.. Most treat the  element as a determinative and transcribe LÚ. mār šarri) are used.. and Hurrian words are always written in lowercase italic letters (Hittite e-eš-zi ‘he is’. We also follow the CHD in writing . Hurrian al-la-ni ‘the Lady’). is to be read & ‘threshing floor’.  in the plural.. and Sumerograms in upper case non-italic letters ( ‘king’). In only a few cases a Sumerogram consisting of two or more signs has a reading which is not the sum of the readings of its components: . or Akkadian word are connected to each other and to an adjacent Sumerogram with hyphens (at-ta-aš ‘father’. Hurrian.76–1.  ‘prince’ (lit. Cases of this type occur too frequently to be scribal omissions and too irregularly to be cases of syncope (on syncope see §§1.. 32–33. following the example of the scribes.). and . always as a single compound rather than two words.indb 14 6/5/08 4:14:23 PM . Luwian.. There are also different approaches for transcribing the word ‘enemy’ (adjective and noun). 1.34 i 43). ša-ra-az-ya-az. in the singular but .14. ḫu-u-it-ti-ya-az (KBo 13. In this grammar we transcribe . where the plural marker occurs between the first and second components. ḫa-az-i-ú. mTup-pí-d ‘Tuppi-Teššup’). in the singular but . iš-pa-an-tu-uz-aš-šar (KBo 22.90:8) (for tiyēzzi in dupl. Luwian zi-la-ti-ya ‘in the future’.—that is. Akk. Akk. ‘lord of the offering’. it is a reasonable accommodation and allows us to continue with the standard transcription for Sumerograms found in most of the existing tools in the field of Hittitology (such as the HZL). -- ‘my father’. But this creates an awkward situation for the plurals of several of these common compounds. [t]i-i-e-ez (KBo 34. The reasons for this pro- 00-HittiteGrammar.  in the plural. kap-pu-u-e-ez (KUB 58. But there is no uniform system among Hittitologists regarding the use of the period to connect component signs of Sumerian nouns or expressions. Signs forming a single Sumerian word (. bēl niqê). The scribes themselves do not seem to have left what is called “word space” between the component signs in either case. Signs forming a part of a Hittite. . MUNUS. while the CHD transcribes it as a compound . §1. Transcriptional Conventions 1. ke(-e)-ez-ya (for kezzi⸗ya). In some cases one finds two-word transcriptions such as   ‘offerer’ (lit.198 i 1ʹ) (for išpantuzziaššar). we shall transcribe . 1. sg.13 Orthography and Phonology 14 ya-za (abl. KUB 15. Sumerian scribes created sign complexes in which one sign was inscribed inside another. ‘son of the king’.105 ii 12ʹ) (for kappuezzi). pp..8 is to be read  ‘cupbearer’. ‘gold’ (without prejudice as to its probable Sumerian pronunciation) instead of .37 ii 26) (for wemiyazzi⸗ya⸗kan). we should write . thus also the interesting pres. - ‘god’. 3 forms of mi-verbs: ú-e-mi-ya-az-ya-kán (KBo 10. p.194:7) (for ḫūittiyazzi).

00-HittiteGrammar. bà (with grave ac- cent) the third. The older practice. a grave accent on the first vowel () for the fifth. followed by the inscribed/contained sign second. but a few relics remained from the early period of writing in Mesoopotamia.. If there is uncertainty about the pronunciation. Homophony 1. LÚ. šu. unmarked ba in transliteration indicates the sign first established as having the /ba/ value. kan.. the “number one” value of /pi/ is the sign  (HZL #317). is always to be read wa. and subsequent values are all indicated with subscript numbers. e. placed an acute accent on the second vowel () for the second value. an acute accent on the first vowel () for the fourth. bá (with acute accent) denotes the second.. but the Sumerian pronunciation of such groups was usually not a sum of the components:  (‘mouth’) with inscribed  (‘water’) was read as the verb  ‘to drink’. but at least one occurs rather commonly: × ‘mouth’. muškênu).. Examples of this writing convention are still found in Hittite texts.  ‘land’. the component signs in words did not always have to be in order. ). 15 Orthography and Phonology 1.indb 15 6/5/08 4:14:25 PM . In the earliest period of Sumerian writing. Signs with identical syllabic values are called homophones. *maškaʾen (later Akk. × =  ‘tongue’. × = 9 ‘tooth’. u. × =  ‘thunder’. ba4 the fourth. they redundantly added a plural suffix as well (e. The accent mark always rests on the vowel or.15 cedure need not concern us here.15. the Sumerogram for ‘poor man’. Most such complexes occurring in Hittite texts have known pronunciations: × =  or  ‘to drink’. Sumerian scribes sometimes indicated plurality by simply repeating the sign of the plu- ralized item: thus. i. In order to distinguish homophones in transliteration. in case the sign has two vowels. . the complex is written as ×. Assyriologists and Hittitologists mark them with accents or subscript numbers.). Thus.. this was no longer the case. ‘lands’.16 In reading and writing Hittite in translitera- tion. The cuneiform syllabary contains many signs of identical phonetic value (e. on the first (. but . with the framing/container sign first. Some homophonous values of signs in the Mesopotamian forms of the syllabary are not used for writing Hittite. In some cases. Only a few complexes of this kind used in Hittite do not have known pronunciations. aš. instead of transcribing the sign twice. For example. represents the old Sumerian writing of an early loan from Akkadian. etc. Whenever the Sumerian pronunciation for a sign-complex of this sort is known. but since the Hittite scribes had lost the rationale for this convention. it is very important to distinguish homophones. following an earlier Assyriological method. × =  ‘to eat’. . which in Hit- tite texts. scholars transcribe the pair with the same roman letters but with a different identification number:  (representing a single sign).g.g. . For example. &). The sign most commonly 16. ba.. the latter preceded by a multiplication sign.g. By the time of the Hittite scribes. there are several signs each for the syllables a. a grave accent on second vowel () for the third. when it is not a logogram. in contrast with  (representing +).). This practice was initiated in Hittitology by HZL (1989) and has become the new standard. the sign-complex is transcribed with that value (e.

For example. can also be expressed by the sign  (which then has the transcriptional value eš15. CV signs possessing a number-one value of both voiced and voiceless nature. /g/. ta-ga-a-an and da-ga-a-an ‘on the ground’. 35–36). others dKu-mar-pí .  = bu or pu. du.16. not kà). g or k). which normally is represented only by the sign . Moreover. Hittitologists normally transliterate the obstruent according to the value of the cuneiform sign most favored by the tradition of Hittitologists. 1.86. In the following three pairs. Some CV type signs whose initial consonant is a stop can have either a voiced or voiceless17 interpretation:  can be bu or pu. /pat/ (also read /pit/). Similarly. p. Some cuneiform signs have more than one phonetic value..86. In very late texts the syllabic value /eš/. /d/. We use the terminology “voiced” and “voiceless” in this book. the sign  can be read ab or ap. and /tuh/. p. ad-da-as and at-ta-aš ‘father’ (§§1. /k/) were probably pronounced voiceless at the beginning of words (§1. The above rules are ideals. when writing Hittite. ga. others dTe-li-bi-nu.19 Hittitologists are divided as to how they transliterate signs in the Sumero-Akkadian syllabary intended to express the Akkadian emphatic velar q in combination with a vowel (primarily . 36). 21). Nevertheless. /p/. This is particularly notable in the case of proper names: some write dKu-mar-bi. pád/t or píd/t (instead of be).g. the latter is used almost exclusively in logograms (- ‘his/her/its’) or proper names (mKaš-šú-ú).16 Orthography and Phonology 16 used for the value /pi/ (or /bi/) is the sign transliterated bi or pí. they are polyphonous. 1. e. 18. In that sense we are not speaking of real polyphonic val- ues in spellings such as ga-an-ki and ka-an-ki ‘he hangs’.35. /par/. In the case of the homophonous signs šu and šú. not tù. 00-HittiteGrammar. since /qi/ and /qu/ were rendered in the 17. Usually the favored trans- literation is that which uses the number one value ( pa. that is. the first sign can also have the i-containing value given in parentheses. some dTe-li-pí-nu. Polyphony 1. In the case of ur and úr. Exceptions to this pattern are the preferred transliterations utilizing the voiceless stops such as pí or pé (instead of bi). tág/k (instead of dag/k). pár (instead of bar). /t/. But in most cases the signs used are the “number one” variants. when transcribing syllabically-written Hittite words. all CV signs in which the C is a stop (/b/. tén (instead of din or den). are normally rendered with the voiceless stop.84–1. although we are aware that for Hit- tite other scholars prefer the terms “fortis” and “lenis” or “tense” and “lax. the former is much more common than the latter.  as ug or uk.” See AHP 13–21 and Luraghi 1997a: 3 with n. pp. Nor in the interest of phonetic realization do we transliterate ga-an-ki as kà-an-ki (or kà-an-gi5). Most scholars have their own personal preferences or habits in transcrip- tion. not bá. né (ni) and ne. Hittite scribes preferred the “number two” signs for /kan/.18 Signs of the types VC and CVC do not indicate whether the final stop is voiced or voiceless (b or p. d or t. Very few homophonous signs are used interchangeably in Hittite. while the second sign has only the e-containing value: ḫe (ḫi) and ḫé. In Hittite. 19. for which see §1. ze (zi) and zé. the scribes do not even use contrastively those CV signs with initial stop that distinguish voicing in the Akkadian syllabary: a-ta-an-zi and a-da-an-zi ‘they eat’.indb 16 6/5/08 4:14:27 PM .  as id or it.

One sign in Hittite is used with both a CV value and a quite different CVC value: the  sign is usually read ri. etc.7. it makes no difference whether one transliterates NA4za-ap-za--ya KUB 51. The stops which occur at the end of VC or CVC signs. Readers will see the letter q used both in transliteration and transcription of Hittite. Instead of employing in this case the transcriptional value ga5 for . kal can be read as dan.21 A few signs with primary CV values in Hittite are used in either logograms or proper names with a differing CVC value: pa has the  value in the geographical names --. p. ši has the value  in Akkadograms.32. it must be read -tal-: see ú-na-at-tal- la-an-pát ‘the merchant himself’ KBo 6. e-ep ‘seize!’. Seven signs each have alternate CVC values that differ significantly: pár can be read as maš.19.g. and §1. because both according to the rules of Hittite spelling (see §§1..17.7 (p. while others (including the CHD) prefer to avoid the subscripted value and rely on users to know that qa in transliterated Hittite does not represent an emphatic velar. and Hur- rian words. māmītu ‘curse’). when they occur word- final..3 i 13 (OH/NS) with duplicate ú-na-at-ta-al- la-an-pát KBo 6. especially in writing derived nouns in -(a)t(t)alla. we would advocate the use of the ‘unmarked’ value qa. choosing where possible from common alternative values those which most nearly approximate what we think was the pronunciation.18. For this purpose. 1.and talḫāi-. V-kV and V-qV represent /VgV/.85. which is attested in Akkadian and listed in HZL but rarely if ever used by Hittitologists. 35. are written as voiceless: ḫu-u-da-ak ‘promptly’. and the  ( pát) sign can be read as  in the Akkadogram - (Akk. and V-gV. Luwian.19 contemporary Akkadian syllabary with the  and  signs). We have chosen to employ the CHD procedure in this grammar. -.84–1. Signs of the type CVC can have more than one reading. Because the signs Vg-gV. and should not assume that this indicates the existence of emphatic velar phonemes in those languages. for example. it is obvious that the function of a transliteration of Hittite is not to show precise pronunciation but to code the individual cuneiform signs in roman script. tar can also be read as ḫaš in Hittite words and as  in Akkadograms such as - ‘I fell silent’. 21. 57). but in certain environments. 17 Orthography and Phonology 1. On the latter see Košak 1993 (reading tal-ḫa-a-an-du).(see §2. or something like this. Because Hittite possessed no such consonant. 11) and from the writing of this word in alphabetic Ugaritic and Hebrew as spsg we can tell that the consonant in question was /g/. 20. kur can be read as mad/t. On the distinction between transliteration and transcription see §1. p. kir can be read as piš or paš. many scholars prefer to transliterate  as ka4 and transcribe 20 it as k (e. p. 1. ḫar/ḫur can be read as mur (although the mur value is largely restricted to the royal name Muršili and the geographical name Amurru). 00-HittiteGrammar. 11).43 i 9 as NA4za-ap-za-qa-ya or NA4za-ap-za-ka4- ya. e-et ‘eat!’ 1. The value tal of the  sign is also used word-initial in the verbs talliya. V-k-kV and Vq-qV all equally represent /VkV/ in Hit- tite. HZL).2 i 6 (OS).indb 17 6/5/08 4:14:28 PM .

which HZL (sign #330) represents without an assigned number as tanx23 (see §1. Sometimes. the consonants of a CVC sign are stable and the differ- ence is only in the internal vowel. and possibly kat and kit9 and kar and kir8. 22.68:8ʹ and m Máš aš-ḫu-i-lu-wa(-an) KUB 14.23. 38ʹ to distinguish pár and maš. The last two examples courtesy of S.indb 18 6/5/08 4:14:29 PM .1 iv 9. pé-ner er ‘they drove’ KBo 4. 24. van den Hout.26 1.22. Košak. came in the gate-building)’ KUB 41.12 obv. For the proposal of kit9 see Goetze 1927: 60 and Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: 13 n. i 23. 3) that the assured value /kat/ be used regularly in Hittite. where the superscripted ki/e sign guides the reader to select the ker value of the following sign in preference to its piš value. ker/kir ).3 i 17 (NH) might be read pí-iš-ker8 to harmonize with the normal writings pí-iš-ker and pí-iš-ke-er. but doing so might mask a rare and important variant form. .20 Orthography and Phonology 18 1. In such cases we transliterate the sequence using a superscript as follows: e-šešer (i. 1.e. 22 to distinguish dan from kal. one could surmise scribal error. Rarely scribes would attempt to disambiguate a CVC sign’s internal vowel by adding a CV sign of unambiguous vowel immediately preceding it or a VC one follow- ing it. Otten agreed with the recommendation of Sommer and Falkenstein (1938: 69 n.15 iv 37ʹ. and mMi-id- dan an-na-mu-u-wa-aš KBo 4. See Neu 1989a on the third-person plural preterite active ending -ar. 10. tuḫḫueššar túḫ uḫ-ša ‘he uses tuḫḫueššar. 23. however. scribes used the same disambiguating methods. usually read tén. as are pát and pé/ít.‘to seat’ by Jakob-Rost (1972: 50–51. NINDApur u-ur- pu-ru-uš KUB 9. and the a/i variations thereby occasioned be explained in other ways within Hittite.21. 27. 21). The form was incorrectly explained as a late intransitive (‘sitzen’) to the causative verb ašeš-/ ešeš. ešer) ‘they were sitting’. followed by HED E/I 209 and HW 2 A 386b). p. The first three examples were called to our attention by N. In cases where it occurs only once or twice. who questioned the use of kit9 (especially in OH) in view of the observation by von Soden and Röllig (1991: 13) that the value /kit/ for the  sign does not occur in Akkadian texts before the first millenniun. This example courtesy of T.25:4 = Laws §119 copy aa (OS). CiC signs routinely also have the value CeC (pét/pít.2 ii 20. 1. MUNUS.2 rev. acquired the value /tan/. 8.35. writing pí-iš-keker ‘they used to give’ KUB 29.4 rev. But other examples of preposed CV or postposed VC signs seem to have no disambiguating value. . one wonders why it was done. 25. Oettinger. HZL #173 cau- tiously writes this value (as well as kir8) within parentheses in view of Otten (1973: 23). In transliteration a subscripted x (not the multiplication sign but the letter “x” representing the al- gebraic symbol for “unknown number”) denotes a demonstrable phonetic value that has not yet received a standardized numerical value in HZL or the Akkadian syllabaries.MEŠkat at-re-eš ‘female musicians’ KBo 32.’ Because in most of the cited cases the practice seems unnecessary.17. šer/šir.25 pár ar-na KUB 35.85 i 3. KBo 42. 26.24 1. In cases where the difference is also in the consonants.22 In the 13th century the sign  (B). 00-HittiteGrammar. 74.20. But other vowel differences also exist: ḫar and ḫur are the same sign.. because the adjacent CVC signs had only one known syllabic value in Hittite writing:27 kar-didim-mi-ya-az ‘anger’ KUB 24. The verb pí-iš-  ‘they used to give’ KUB 38. 9ʹ. pár and pirx. nu araḫza kuēš e-šešer ‘And those who were sitting outside (.

where the final consonant of nouns written CVC (e. But some CV signs whose vowel is i often have a second reading with e: û  pí pé H  gi ge G & ḫi ḫe &  ki ke O  li le ’  ni né J  ri re 28. nom. scribal error is an improbable explanation.28 1. which alternates with (a-)ar-ga-(a-)mi. 29. Rarely one finds cases of a sign sequence CVC1-C1V (other than CVm) in which C1 is not to be understood as geminate. to indicate /tuhhsa/. p. Word-final -m was lost in the case endings of Akkadian nouns and adjectives during the historical period of Hittite (see §31.66.‘fear’ (written in sg. 19 Orthography and Phonology 1. -. although this is not to be understood as gemination. Extrapolating from this practice. 00-HittiteGrammar. which occurs fairly often. but never *wa-aš-tu/du-ul-la/i (see §4. 436). Reading cuneiform signs of the type CVC as CVx recognizes a scribal convention that derives from the Sumerians.. alternating with wa-aš-d/tu-la/i-. and even -Vm (e.‘lyre’ (and ar- kam-mi-ya-ya-la. -. The vowel of each CV-type sign is usually specific. but never written *na-aḫ-ša-ar-ra-az).but never with *ar-ga-am-mi-. NH scribes felt free to use CVm signs for /CV/ in writing Hittite words. túḫ-uḫ-ša might have the same function as wa-al-aḫ-ta (/walhta/). the inventors of cuneiform.spellings in NS are suspect.24.g. Such complications make it difficult to determine the reality of geminate /-mm-/ in a number of words. although the -m was no longer pro- nounced in concurrent Akkadian. Even some -Vm-mV. GIŠ---).29 This is the case with the  sign in wa-aš-túl-la/i-. etc). -. It is very unlikely that the /-m-/ in words such as this became geminate from OH to NH. 1. Note NS du-um-me-e-ni and even tum-um-me-(e-)ni for consistent OS and MS tu-me-e-ni or du-me-(e)-ni ‘we take’..‘lyre-player’). 108). and in a blended writing na-aḫ-šar-ra-az.26 But in examples such as tuḫḫueššar túḫ uḫ-ša. not only in word-final position (e-eš-tum.25.20. But words were sometimes still written conventionally with final -CVm signs (e. as na-aḫ-ša-ra-az. p.  ‘ox’) is repeated when followed by suffixes beginning with a vowel: -da (read gu4-da for /guda/) ‘of the ox’. Spellings -CVm-mV. 1. -..g. na-aḫ-šar-az.indb 19 6/5/08 4:14:30 PM . read e-eš-tu4 for /e:stu/ ‘let be’). See also use of the  sign in ar-kam-mi. but also in other cases (iš-dam-ma-aš-mi for /istamasmi/ ‘I hear’).in NS are thus not always reliable indicators of a genuine geminate /-mm-/.g.26. Other possible examples include naḫšaratt. -. -.

is often further disambiguated by the writing ši-i-e-eš-šar. en and in. Aside from the & sign (aḫ. read syllabically only as wa in Hittite. it ed. when followed by a vowel sign of a different quality. iḫ. 1. 1. 1. iḫ. É u. On the other hand.9 i 11. ta-i-az-zi-la-an-ni /tayatsilanni/ ‘in theft’. a-ra-a-u-aš /ara:was/ ‘exempt’.46 (p. 87). i-(e-)ez-zi /ye:tsi/ ‘he does/makes’. ša-ú-i-ti-iš-za /sawidists/ ‘weanling (animal)’. The vowel categories a — e/i — u are always kept distinct in such signs. šu-wa(-a)-i(-e)-ez- zi /suwaye:tsi/ ‘he shall look’.’ Even šieššar ‘beer’. i-da-a-la-u-e-eš /ida:lawe:s/ ‘evil (ones)’. ep ‚  id. mi and me are different signs. There appear to be a few instances of sequences spelled Ci-e with an un- ambiguous Ci sign that must nevertheless be read as /Ce:/— mi-e-ni KUB 29. only rarely as pí-e. ritual’. Similarly. §1. 11). or uḫ).33. pé or pí followed immediately by -e is almost always to be interpreted as pé-e. ek .29. are often used to represent /y/ and /w/: OH i-an-zi /yantsi/ ‘they do/make’.32. ne (/ ) is more common than né () for /ne/. 25).28. and wu. read aḫ. One VC sign that can be read with any vowel is D &.27. /karpye:tsi/ could be spelled kar-pí-ez-zi but usually as kar-pí-e-ez-zi (with an extra e) to disambiguate the writing of the following iz/ez sign.indb 20 6/5/08 4:14:31 PM . ú-ez-zi /we:tsi/ ‘he comes’. ik eg. 15 00-HittiteGrammar. i-ú-ga-an /yugan/ ‘yoke’. ip eb. and ti and te.31. a second sign with value restricted to  + e is equally or even more common: ḫé (º &) is more common than ḫe (&/&) for /he/. we. et ˆ  ig. 29): œ  ib. 1. Exceptions: eš and iš are different signs. 1. and S ú (intervocali- cally). or uḫ. which uses the unambiguous  sign. where the  sign (* HZL #317). ḫa-az-zi-ú-i /hatsiwi/ ‘ceremony. and §4. The signs … i and S ú (word-initial) and … i.27 Orthography and Phonology 20 1. eḫ. the scribes often added clues. as are el and il.8 (p. For some of the above /Ce/ sequences. as are ši and še. Almost all i-containing VC signs can also have an e value (see also §1.19 (p. eḫ. to prevent a mistaken reading *šeššar.63. This is in contrast to contemporary Akkadian usage. See the remarks on “plene writing” in §1. p. we find pí-i-e-et-ta ‘allotment.30. wi. has the possible readings wa. na-a-ú-i /na:wi/ ‘not yet’. no CV or VC type sign used in Hit- tite fails to distinguish between vowels other than e and i. 1.  im em —  ir er B  iz ez 1. Where there is doubt about the vocalic identity of a given ambiguous sign.

nom.34 ii 19 (OH/NS) is a form of tiye.  gán. the  sign (^ or @). p. acquired the value /tan/.36 obv.  ‘well-being’ - ‘judgment’. we should be extremely cautious in appealing to this possibility in questionable cases. Because their word for wine (Sumerian ) was wiyanaš.indb 21 6/5/08 4:14:32 PM .20. 21 Orthography and Phonology 1. matter’ - ‘your (sg. Multivalence 1. d. In texts written in the 13th century. That is. Many signs in the Hittite cuneiform syllabary are multivalent.(‘said’). 7ʹ (sg. saying]’).-l.-acc.34. and the sign  (B).  (unit of .  ‘to cut (off)’  / in - ‘I fell tar in tar-aḫ-zi ‘he silent’ conquers’ New Values 1. they gave to the  sign (ä) the value /wi/. In only a few cases the Hittite scribes appear to have introduced a new phonetic value to an existing cuneiform sign. represented without an assigned number as tanx (see §1. Examples are: Sign Name Sumerographic value(s) Akkadographic value Hittitographic value   ‘water’  in - ‘to’ a in a-ri ‘he arrives’   ‘god’ or  ‘sky’  in --- ‘city LÚ an in ma-a-an ‘when. Nevertheless.15.)’ ka in ka-a-aš ‘this’  6 ‘dark’ or ‘night’  in -- ‘whatever’ mi in mi-li-it ‘honey’  . of /te:bu-/ ‘little’). For example. legal case’.35. not of te. de in pé-di ‘in place’.23 rev. 4 in e-de-ez ‘on that side’ --4 ‘my lady’   ‘lord’  in -- ‘he en in ku-en-zi ‘he kills’ bowed’   ‘milk’ ---- ‘districts’ ga in e-ga-aš ‘ice’   ‘field’. What used to be considered a pronominal stem ši-(i)-e. if’ administrator’   ‘judgment. they have logographic as well as syllabic (or phonetic) values. of /me:na-/ ‘face’).but now is correctly recognized as the number ‘one’ (see Goedegebuure 2006) should not be read as /se:-/ (see already Neu 1997: 147). neut.(‘stepped [to Aškaliya. 16 here).35 (sg. The sign that has the logographic value  ‘wheat’ («) and in most other contemporary cuneiform systems the syllabic value áš has the syllabic value tàš 00-HittiteGrammar. usually read tén.  in - ‘slave’ and di. 24ʹ shows that ti-e-et in KBo 3. 18). ti-i-et in the duplicate KBo 3. [t]i-e-pu KBo 25. p. which we transliter- ate as wi5 (see HZL #131). kán in ḫi-in-kán measure) ‘plague’   ‘word. which normally stands for the Sumerian plural marker must occasionally be read as phonetic eš15 (see HZL #360A and §1.

and u subscripted to render sounds in the Hurrian and Hattic lan- guages that were nonexistent in their own language (probably labial fricatives such as [f] or [v]). sign #339). wuú (see HZL ##318–26). For discussion of the broader subject of “Fehlertypologie” with examples see Rüster 1988. the resulting form can be bewildering: - 30. although in her list of examples (pp. -iš ‘great’ (subject case [nominative]. HKM 22:9. which are rebus writ- ings. wii. italics ours). such as m..e.30 Words could be written with Sumerograms to which the final syllable (often containing the all-important inflectional ending) was indicated as a phonetic complement: -uš ‘king’ (subject case [nominative]. etc. ---an-na- aš-za for attaš⸗miš⸗naš⸗za Ḫatt. unless it spread from Ḫattuša to Syria and Egypt. 295. There are a very few cases where the spelling may suggest otherwise. This contrasts with the customary writing of initial /we/ and /wi/ as ú-e.  for 8. . The auditory error (“Hörfehler”) is not mentioned in her article. such as: m. which however she describes only as “eine Verwechslung ähnlich aussehender Keilschriftzeichen” (p. ‘throne’. i 9. The scribes also used spellings in which pV (or bV) alternated with wV to indicate the fricative sounds in Hattic and Hurrian words. d-uš ‘sun(god)’ as dIštanuš. -zi (= Hitt. 1. 1. we. iyazi) ‘he does’ (present tense third person singular). singular). e. 299–303) there are cases clearly due to auditory (not visual) similarity:  for . boy born on the 20th day of a festival. 00-HittiteGrammar. 31. 80 obv. That Hittite scribes sometimes used the logogram’s own pronunciation in dictating texts to copyists is clear from errors in hearing such as .31 Some personal names of Hittite officials are Akkadian in origin. The Sumerogram  (‘king’) was pronounced with the Hittite word for ‘king’ ḫaššuš. as well as occasionally in Akkadian texts from El Amarna and Ugarit (see Labat 1988: 155.-aš ‘queen’ as ḫaššuššaraš. ‘he died’. i. We assume that logograms in Hittite contexts were normally pronounced by Hittite scribes with their Hittite equivalents. - = Akkadian ili ‘of a god’. if this really stands for išḫāš⸗šan. It would be a subcategory of her section 2 (“Zeichenvertauschung”). Ḫattu + ši + ili = the royal name Ḫattušili ! A parade example of a rebus writing (see HE §8c “spielerische Schreibungen”). and  ‘large. When a single word or phrase contains Sumerograms. GIŠ = Akkadian ḫaṭṭu ‘staff. to be read with Akkadian values as mMār-ešrē HKM 31:20 ‘son of day twenty’ (i. for proper . Not to be read in Hittite are apparent logograms in a few proper names. 1.  for . both when reading a tablet aloud and when dictating. and possibly also --uš-ša-an HKM 52:25. singular). stick’. 5. see Alp 1991a: 78–79).36 Orthography and Phonology 22 in Hittite (see HZL #241).and ú-i. Logogram Pronunciation 1.20.37. wi. or .38. etc. for cor- rect GIŠ. / wee.  for .GIŠ-ši--.36. followed by both Akka- dian and Hittite phonetic complements.(rarely u- i-) and post-initial /we/ as -u-e or -ú-e. : wuu. These graphic innovations are conventionally transcribed with subscripted vowels thus: = waa. - un (direct object case [accusative]. to be read using Akkadian values as mḪattušili. GIŠ. wu) sign with the vowel signs a. It was not therefore a Hittite innovation. Hittite scribes utilized ligatures of the  (* wa. For instance.indb 22 6/5/08 4:14:33 PM . singular). great’ as šalliš. .and /wi/ as -u-i or -ú-i in native Hittite words..

00-HittiteGrammar. URUNerik ‘the city Nerik’. 167)  country names  designations of male persons. Proper names regularly bear determinatives.40.indb 23 6/5/08 4:14:35 PM . Some Sumerograms prefixed (much less commonly suffixed) to nouns are de- terminatives. They are class markers. Sometimes what appears at first to be a determinative is rather a logogram:  URUḪalpa ‘land of (city) Aleppo’ (not KUR. even if those few words occur frequently.   ‘guard’ (lit.URUḪalpa). including personal names  bird names. always appended  textiles or garments  city names  objects entirely or partially made of copper (Single vertical personal name of a male individual wedge) 1. identifying the noun in question (whether that noun is written in Hittite. 1. 23 Orthography and Phonology 1. Thus.. but also to the logogram  ‘city’ in .50.. followed by the last syllable of the Hittite noun šiuniš ‘god’ (§4.41 -iš ‘god’ uses Sumerian  ‘god’ followed by the end of the Akkadian equiva- lent noun ilum ‘god’ (albeit in the genitive case. mountain names (and names of mountain deities) have prefixed &. A complete repertoire of these determinatives can be found in HZL. but appended to the word it modifies 4 minerals or objects of stone  green plants. ‘man of the spear’) (not LÚ ‘spear belonging to the male class’). ilim). mountain names  river names  appended to place names. In the last two cases the virtu- ally consistent retention of the Akkadian genitive ending - on the second noun betrays its function in Akkadian as a genitive. or Akkadian) as belonging to a particular semantic class:32  ceramic or stone containers  trees or objects entirely or partially made of wood &.51 (p.39. names of springs and spring deities have prefixed  (or ).. 1. 100). river names (and names of river deities) have prefixed . excluding personal names  reptiles  designations of female persons.  '+ ‘messenger’ (literally ‘man of the message’) (not LÚ '+ ‘message belonging to the male class’). p. ḫaraš MUŠEN ‘eagle’). Sumerian.41.. In transliteration (but not in the cuneiform writing itself) these determinatives are superscripted (e. city 32. see §9. Such hybrid writings are few in number. generally not prefixed.g.

The m sign is a single vertical wedge usually represent- ing the numeral ‘one’.  appended to the names of herbs or vegetables (e. This suggests that.44. 63). Hurrian. is rendered as a superscripted lowercase d: dTeššub. But also prefixed: MUŠENḫara(n)-.g.51. &. Names of deities other than mountain. especially in OS texts.. where the Sumerian plural suffixes .36 While no regular rule for the selection of one of these three Sumerian plural markers has been discovered. 167). 1. the meaning of  was lost to Hittite scribes. fPuduḫepaš. dḫašša. as . and when it does occur.42 Orthography and Phonology 24 names have prefixed . ḫaḫḫašittin SAR). there is a marked tendency to use  with nouns denoting persons and &.). as was the  in . 00-HittiteGrammar.42.43.34 1. with other objects. 1. 432).. or Akkadian. then neither should we write a Sumerogram .‘(dei- fied) hearth’. Phonology Individual Phonemes (Vowels and Consonants) 1. when it is to be thought of as deified. which. such as ḫal-ki ḪI. a noun denoting an object. the suffixed plural marker  is rare after Old Hittite. will also bear the  determinative: e. early on. 35. but not when it is Sumerian. If we do not write a Boğazköy Akkadogram ---- ‘watchposts’ (the plural of ) as --- - or the plural of English ‘land’ as ‘lands’. For the unusual placement of determina- tives on compound nouns see §2. 34.ḪI. While the suffixed plural markers ( and &. Occasionally. Sometimes the plural marker interrupts a syllabic writing. and  are superscripted as determinatives only when the noun that precedes them is Hit- tite.45. 1.35  ‘place’ in URUḪalpa KI ‘Aleppo’. 36.60 (p. So in the CHD.A-uš ‘crops’. (§9.&. or spring dei- ties have a prefixed  (‘god’) sign. A few determinatives are placed not in front of their nouns but after them:  ‘bird’ in ḫaraš MUŠEN ‘eagle’. The f sign elsewhere represents the word  ‘woman’ or the syllabic value šal.g.33 Male and female personal names have prefixed signs that are rendered by superscripted m and f : (mnemonic for ‘male/masculine’ and ‘female/femi- nine’) mḪattušiliš.indb 24 6/5/08 4:14:35 PM .&. however. river. since then the Sumerian plural marker is to be read as part of the Sumerogram.. See §31. Luwian. Many Hittitologists prefer an upper case D: DTeššub.(numeral). For this reason many other Hittitologists prefer the superscripted roman numeral “one” for the first (IḪattušiliš) and upper case SAL or MUNUS for the second (MUNUSPuduḫepaš).) are equally common in all periods.A (contra HE §6d)..10 (p. Prefixed determinatives (as class markers) are less frequently used in OH than in MH and NH. see Neu 1983: 53 for examples. it is redundantly combined with another plural marker (. We follow the CHD system. It is important to distinguish between the supposed ancient pronunciation (to the extent that we can reconstruct it) and the conventional pronunciation employed by 33. p.

Many scholars assume the existence of both short and long vowels in Hittite. dā. and URUPa-la- a /Pla/ (see Βλαηνή and Παφλαγωνία).  is not read *še in Hittite-language texts. as in pa-ra-a (/pra/). šu-u-. but there is no consensus on their distribution or on the phonemic status of long vowels (see Melchert 1992 and Kimball 1999. In the noun pairs uttar versus uttār and ḫuidar versus ḫuidār. Melchert (1984b: 162) adduces three additional reasons for plene writings: (1) to show e-coloring of the vowel with ambiguous Ce/i and e/i C signs.47 modern scholars. gen. Such variant spellings in the same document sometimes arose when a scribe who preferred the short writings copied a document whose scribe preferred the long ones. etc.46. Although  can be read either ni or né.20. 110). URU Palā. 348). yet’ is diffentiated from the combination of conjunction nu and clitic -wa (nu-wa) consistently by the plene writing of the former. the difference in vowel length marks a contrast between singular and plural (§3. sg. Vowels Plene Writing and Vowel Length 1.6. p. both with copious references to other views). In some cases. i-it ‘go!’). nom.indb 25 6/5/08 4:14:36 PM .8. te-e-kán vs. there can be no such motivation for dative-locatives iš-ši-i ‘mouth’ and ḫa-aš-ši-i ‘hearth’. (2) to mark the position of the accented syllable (e. 37. but we cannot be certain that plene writing always indicates length (as opposed to stress) or that non-plene writing always denotes short vowels. 71). and URUDa-la-a-wa /Tlawa/ (in later Greek letters Τλῶς). pa-a-. 00-HittiteGrammar. ták-na-a-aš (§4. Other reasons may include: (4) rarely to indicate interrogative intonation (§27.2. parā. and (5) to distinguish real vowels from mere graphs. īt. In broad transcription. The single word nu-u-wa ‘still.47. 1. 25 Orthography and Phonology 1. there may be a dia- chronic dimension: še-e-er is the OS writing of what in later periods was written short še-er (§6.. The so-called plene writing (e.. Most of the Hittite words cited in this grammar are cited in “broad transcription. But other examples of what appears to be the same word or form with longer and shorter spellings—for example.37 (3) in the case of all monosyllables except clause-initial conjunctions (nu.g.71. te-e-. the plene writings cited above are indicated with macrons: tēkan. URUDalāwa. p.” not in transliteration. ti-i-. while the i in OH dative-locative ut-ni-i vs. p. to avoid writing a word with only one sign (da-a ‘take!’. ta). 140). where the first a is merely graphic. še-er and še-e-er ‘above’ and pa-an-zi and pa-a-an-zi ‘they go’—are not dif- ferent words but different spellings of the same word. p. nominative-accusative ut-ne-e ‘land’ might be for disambiguating the vowel. The cuneiform writing system has a limited ability to ex- press the phonemes of the Hittite language. 11) offered a means of expressing vowel length. The following description applies to the ancient pronunciation unless explicitly stated otherwise. taknāš. Thus. p. Some sort of length or stress must be indicated in the latter cases. see §1.g..

50.). ētri.39 1.48.26 i 26. e-ep-zi ‘he seizes’ (never *i-ip- zi). mu-u-ga-an-zi KBo 10.indb 26 6/5/08 4:14:37 PM . tu-u-li-ya KUB 6. Word-final: ku(-i)-e ‘which’ (pl. u-re-e-na-an-da KBo 11.35 i 8 vs.51.‘to pre- sent’.48 Orthography and Phonology 26 Inventory of vowels 1. neut. ú-re-e-na-an-ta KBo 11.46 iii 51 vs.10 iii 26 vs.53. Mel- chert 1984b. e-ku-zi ‘he drinks’ (never *i-ku-zi). lu-ú-ri-iš KUB 13.5 iii 5.-l. neut.49. there are also many cases of alternate spellings. e- eš(-ša)-ri ‘form. ku-(e-)en-zi ‘he kills’ or ku-(e-)en-ta ‘he killed’ never alternate with forms in i (e. *ú-i-te-et.20 iii 24. distinct from /u/.33. e. Many words containing the vowels e or i show no fluctuation over time: Words with Stable e 1. a-pé-e ‘those’ (pl.34 i 32 vs. Hittite seems to have distinguished four vowels (a. 21. lu-u-ri-iš KUB 13.) — versus ut-ni-i (d. *ku-(i-)in-zi. pu-ú-ul KBo 26. u). mu-ú-ga-it KBo 3.. *ti-iz-zi.or i-containing cuneiform signs. etc.). i. there is no basis for assuming a Hittite vowel /o/.38 See now Rieken 2005b for the possibility of a secondary split of pre-Hittite */u/ (from all sources) into phonetic [o] and [u]. 00-HittiteGrammar. Vowel Alternations e and i 1.18 iii 6. *ši-ir. spelled with the sign ú (reflecting prehis- toric *u). ú-i-e-eš ‘we’ KUB 30. neut. pu-ú-nu-uš-ša-an-zi KBo 20. 1. ti-i-et (allegedly ‘he said’) see §1. iš-nu-ú-ri KUB 41.). 1992).) — pé-e in pé-e ḫar(k). enant. Word-initial: e-eš-zi ‘he is’ (never *i-iš-zi). and le-e ‘let not’. shape. ut-ne-e and ut-né-e ‘land’ (nom. image’ (never *iš-ša-ri). Word-internal: še(-e)-er ‘above. and early NH. On ku-i-en-zi see Melchert 1984b: 78.‘tame (animal)’. On ti-e-et with dupl.52. iš-nu- u-ri KBo 6. ega. even in the same manuscript.2 i 13 and 16 (OS). probably with marginal phonemicization of /o/. While many words are spelled consistently with either u or ú. pu-u-ul KBo 3. vs. the two vowels were certainly distinct phonemes in Hittite (Otten and Souček 1969: 56.‘ice’ (never *i-ga-).5 iii! 7. 38. breaking down only in late NH.72 iii 13.g. pu-u/ú-ti-iš KUB 32. over’. p. Examples include: ḫu-u/ú-ni-ik-zi KBo 6. The contrast of the plural ke-e ‘these’ with (neuter) singular ki-i ‘this’ is stable through OH.123 ii 18 and 40. each of which could be long or short. pu-u-nu-uš-ta KUB 36. MH.7 iv 10 etc. Despite the claim of Eichner (1980: 156) and Hart (1983: 124–30). tu-ú-li-ya KUB 21. Both u and ú are used to spell reflexes of *u and *Vu-diphthong (Melchert 1992: 186–87. spelled with the sign u (reflecting prehistoric diphthong *Vu). 1.7 i 13. vs.36 ii 8. Despite the ambiguity of certain e. e-ed-mi ‘I eat’. There are extremely rare mixed spellings such as ku-i-en-zi.1 iv 39.-acc. 1. te-ez-zi ‘he speaks’ and te-et ‘he spoke’.20 iii 43 vs. Kimball 1999: 79–80). ú-e-te-et ‘he built’. 39. e-ḫu ‘come!’ (never *i-ḫu).‘food’.

For the special case of ši(-ip)-pa-an-d ° ‘to libate’ (also with consistent i-vocalism) beside iš-pa-an-d °. Certain words changed e to i. 143). išiyaḫḫ. 41.. track. i-it ‘go!’ (in deliberate disambiguity from e-et ‘eat!’.’ (Otten and Souček 1969: 56). ending on nouns in OH is always -i rather than -e.137 (p.46 i 39 (1992: 80) has not stood the test of Singer’s collation (1996: 54 ad B i 38). However. Furthermore. The present first-singular ḫi- conjugation ending is often -ḫé in OS.42 i-ni-iš-ša-an > e-ni-iš-ša-an ‘thus’. The equation of Palaic šameri. i-da-(a-)lu ‘evil’. or vice versa.(Čop cited in AHP 155) is quite uncertain. which must be determined exclusively on the basis of inner-Hittite spellings.with initial *sm-. but in post-OH always -ḫi.-l. GIŠin-ta- lu-uz-zi ‘shovel(?)’. neut. for words with etymological initial sequences *st.is complicated. i-wa-ar (postposition) ‘like. The last example is only found in OH.61.41 1. išk(iya). within the attested history of Hit- tite: (i-)iš-ša-i > e-eš-ša-i ‘(s)he performs’. no example of plene writing of this “prothetic” vowel in Hittite.3.‘pin’ has preserved /sp-/ (see §1. OH spellings ya-an-zi ‘they do/make’ and ya-an-ni-iš ‘they set out’ of what later is consistently written i-ya-an-zi and i-ya-an-ni-iš suggest that these words begin with y. see the next section.‘to anoint’. 42.‘kneading trough. nom. There is.4. There is still no certain example of either ini or eni in OS.57 Words with Stable i 1.without alternate spellings *šV-tV.with Hittite išmeri(ya). Words with Fluctuation between e and i 1. There is no certain example of eniššan in OS. see Forssman (1994).11. as in foreign words beginning with sequences loaned into Turkish istasyon ‘station’ (Oettinger 1979: 416–17 against AHP 31–33). iniššan occurs as late as in NH letters (KBo 18. innarā ‘independently’ (written in. not i. nom. 47).-acc.56). dough- pan’. whereas all certain examples are in NS. which showed [x ]. i-ku-na.40 See further §1. Word-initial: iyatar ‘proliferation.55.and *sk. išnura.57. spy out’. p. even if the equation were valid. 43. 43 ke-e > ki-i ‘these’ (pl. There is contrast between e and i.or *šV-kV-. §1. i-ni > e-ni ‘that (one)’. while ša/še/ši-pí-ik-ku-uš-ta. p.> e-ku-na. - D - accidentally omit- ted from the line following iš-ta-ma-aš-ša-du inserted by the scribe between [ḫu-u-ma-]an-te-iš and iš-ta- ma-aš-ša-du.56. cool’. . this is also almost always the case. abundance’ and its cognate forms. The first two examples 40.‘step(?)’. as seen in e-et ‘eat!’ and i-it ‘go!’. There is no proof for prothetic i.‘to trace. iškiš ‘back’. It is likely that consis- tent iš-pa-an-t° ‘night’ also shows a real prothetic i-.‘cold. fertility. But Eichner’s reading i-iš-ta-ma-aš-ša-du in KUB 6.54. it would not affect our understanding of the Hittite pronunciation. 27 Orthography and Phonology 1. §7. 00-HittiteGrammar.argues that these contain a real “prothetic” vowel.not *en-). iš-ša-al-li ‘spittle’. 1.indb 27 6/5/08 4:14:38 PM . Word-final: The sg. d. i-iš-š° (the oblique stem of aiš ‘mouth’). all of which the copyist Weber misunderstood and miscopied. -še > -ši ‘to him/her’. The situation for *sp. 12). ilan. and pl. therefore. com. as well as in clitic -še ‘to him/her/it (dative)’ and the dative-locative of the clitic possessive -ši ‘in his/her/its .86:29). . In MH and NH. as’. The consistent spellings iš-tV.and iš-kV. For some exceptions in -e see §1.

1 i 12.58. On the limited appearance of -iš for pl.‘scale of a balance’.5 iii 66. One should always be prepared to find isolated examples of e for i or vice-versa. of u-stem nouns and adjectives the stem vowel u tends (already in OH) to color the d.45 In substantives one finds sporadic word-final e for i in NH (or NS) in the sg. -eš in NH see now Sidel’tsev 2002. GIŠe-ri-pí. §4. 98. §4. pé-eš-ta and pí-iš-ta ‘(s)he gave’. ‘robe’. MUŠ il-lu-ya-an-k° and MUŠel-li-ya-an-k° ‘serpent’. an-tu-uḫ-še. of a-stem nouns (eš-ḫé.indb 28 6/5/08 4:14:39 PM . Some words show a fluctuation that cannot be explained as a development from earlier to later phases of Hittite. d. 1.127 iv 1. . 1. pé-(e-)ra-an and once pí-i-ra-an ‘before’. 30. Word-initial i/e vacillation: iš-na. compare also i-da-la-u-e KUB 29.-l. 46. 00-HittiteGrammar.1 iii 11 (OH/NS) and &-u-e KUB 21. sg.1 + KBo 3.59. te-pa-u-e-wa-mu KUB 33.and eš-na.46 44.)’. See Neu 1979a: 187–88.2.-l. ending vowel i to e. eš. .) and ti-iš-šum-mi-uš (both OS in Otten and Souček 1969: 13). The other changes are surely real.8 i 8. ú-e-mi-ya- and ú-i-mi-ya.24. The examples cited in the preceding paragraph show that there were at least some real changes in the distribution of /e/ and /i/ from OH to NH.-l. p. however. ke-e-da-ni and ki-i-da-ni 44 ‘to/for this’. u-i-ya-at-tén and ú-e-ya-at-tén ‘send! (pl. wa-ar-iš-ša-at-te for /warrissa-/ is another example of the system of scribal shorthand discussed in §1. etc. but see ar-ša-ni-e-še ‘you envy’. especially p. i-ni- ra-aš. Word-internal i/e vacillation: te-eš-šum-mi-uš ‘cups’ (acc. KUB 30.43. com. iš-dam-ma-ne [§4. KUB 7. This is so common as to resist interpretation as an anomaly. in the following cases (and many others) we cannot determine the status of the variations in e. a-aš-ša-u-e KUB 31. e-ne-ra-an.46 iii 61 (Muw. vs. GIŠel-zi.and GIŠi-ri(-im)-pí. -ši.(medio-passive) ‘to sit down.16. nom. II. but their conditioning is not fully explained.and GIŠil-zi.16 + KUB 39. 86). In the sg. The examples also raise the possibility.and i-spellings. 45.65. and in-na-re-en ‘eyebrow’. 1. p.‘to find’. Weitenberg 1984: 319 §844). ḫi-in-kán vs. See §1. . p. ḫé-en-kán ‘plague’. 80]. Because much of our evidence consists of NS copies of texts of uncertain date and compositional history.58 Orthography and Phonology 28 may reflect a phonetic change (Melchert 1984b: 153–56. i-ga-at-ta-ru and e-ga- at-ta-ru ‘let it become cool’. p. and wa-ar-iš-ša-at-te ‘you help’.‘cedar’ (loanword from Akkadian erinnu via Hurrian. Neu 1979a: 187–88) and of the con- sonantal stem adjective ḫu-u-ma-an-te ‘to all’ (see Hoffner forthcoming: §45) and of u-stem adjectives (§3. All examples are late: KUB 6. še- ek-nu-.42 ii 22. 72.106 ii 5.‘dough’. 1. Word-final i/e vacillation: pres. II). pé-e-te. 1. Weitenberg 1984: 319. iš-ḫa-aḫ-ru and e-eš-ḫa-aḫ-ru ‘tear(s)’. that NH copyists misunderstood the patterns they found in older texts and introduced errors and even unreal creations. but see Rieken 1996: 294–97). d. 2 mi-conjugation ending is usually -ši. p. Weitenberg is cautious and claims that the formation is not prior to Muw.).60. -ḫe > -ḫi after -mi. pa-an-ga-u-e KUB 31. 13. p. . 74. and the last two instead reflect a morphological replacement (-še > -ši after the nominal dative-locative ending -i. -zi. die down’ has e-ša-ri and i-ša-ri ‘it (a fire) dies down’.61. ši-ik-nu-.12.

but never *i-ik-du). 74). copy p. while others prefer to reserve the interpretive stage for broad transcription. such as the representation of glides (see §1. examples of what are called “broken writings” (e.46. The same caution needs to be observed in the case of rare necessary values such as eš17 for  (e.81 i 7ʹ and iv 9..‘net’ (e-ek-ta-. Under these circumstances. Many cuneiform signs of the type vowel + consonant in which the vowel is i may also be read e (see §1. never *i-ik-ta-). 1 verb -me KUB 22.. 47. and NS dative-locatives like pé-e-te and pé-te for pé-di. which must not be invoked arbitrarily but only in restricted environments (pl. p.8.g. 12. and examples such as ku-uš-ša-ni-eš-ši-it in Laws §157.28 (p. we and other scholars do not hesitate to make judgments in broad transcription. -e. are not yet attested with a plene i vocaliza- tion: ekt.63.25 + KUB 50. For vocatives in -e. §1. there sometimes occur. p. as done above. p. Thus. e-ek. There is not yet any consensus on just which of these orthographic variations represent real linguistic alternations and which are merely unusual or “nonstandard” spellings. as in other cases. act. p.and *i-ip-. Also voc. 11 and §1. Once such a decision is made.g. 25) in order for the words to count as examples with fluctuation. ḫu-ul-lu-mi-en for ḫullumen KUB 23. It would be premature to impose our individual judg- ment by transliterating at-ti-mì or pé-ti7. both vowels must be attested in plene writing (e. 29. In this grammar we follow the second procedure. we would hesitate to exclude its beginning in the pre-NH period. at-ti-me ‘O my father’ for expected *at-ta-mi. Similarly. The following words which are represented as fluctuating in the ‘bound transcriptions’ of Friedrich HW. e-eš.31. 48). transliterating -me-in but transcribing the sequence as ḫullumen and always indicating to the reader the nature of the spelling. iš-tar-ni-šum-mi. One should therefore be prepared to encounter “normalized” spellings such as pēti for pé-e-te.62. com. in words spelled with such signs.21 obv.indb 29 6/5/08 4:14:40 PM .63 Also in the vocative of u-stem nouns and names: -u-e (MS). Unless one thinks such writings actually reflect hiatus (§1. 20). GIŠeppiya- But in view of three cases of OH/NS and two of MH/NS. sg. some scholars indi- cate the decision by using rarer transcriptional values: -mì-in or -me-en6 . e-ep. 20) or the interpretation of ambiguous e/i signs (see §1.g. see §3.28. p.55 rev. -me-in or -mi-en): te-eš-šu-um-me-in for teššummin (Otten and Souček 1969: 13). of nouns or adjectives) and in absolutely clear cases in late NH.47 1. even in carefully written texts. prudence suggests that we should transliterate such cases according to the most frequent values for the signs used. where we must understand kuššani⸗ššit. 1. implying that we know for certain that Hittite scribes employed the respective signs with these values. 29 Orthography and Phonology 1. However. 00-HittiteGrammar.and i-iš-. ekdu. one has to assume that only one of the two indicated vowels is valid and make a judgment as to which is intended. d-e (Weitenberg 1984: 314 §833).(e-ek-du.. to which we will always attach a warning that it is smoothed over and indicate precisely what signs are used. in -eš17).and *i-ik-. iš-tar-ni-šu-um-me KUB 26. vs.64). In neither case should one assume that Hittite scribes regularly used  with the mì value or  with the en6 value.142. pres. nom. e-et- and i-it-.

pl.v. 1. ap-pé-e-ez-zi. The CHD.66.6 i 11 for e-ep-ta ‘he seized’.1 iii 58 for me-eq-qa-uš ‘many’. and nešḫut / nišḫut ‘turn yourself’ is replaced by naišḫut (see Jasanoff 2003: 183). so Melchert 1984b and CHD P s.20 (p. e-ez-za-an ‘chaff..e. were not pronounced differently from i-e-(ez-)zi. never *i-ip-pí-ya-). 3 verbal ending -er.. even when written -i-. 2 must be read -tén. the default reading—whenever there is no plene vowel to disambiguate.67. ma-eq-qa-uš KUB 26. a and e 1.(in e-grade form e-er-te-ni of the verb ar. and ḫe(n)k-/ḫai(n)k. e-er-ma-an ‘illness. ti-e-ez-zi.37 (p. disease’. e-er. however.). Both paišta and pešta ‘he gave’ are replacements of paiš. Souček. just as final  in the pret. The second set of spellings is merely a more explicit writing of the first set. both HW2 and HED use the so-called unmarked i value. For the legitimate syllabic values in Hittite of the  sign see §1.indb 30 6/5/08 4:14:41 PM .along- side [ap-p]a-iz-zi-an and [ap-p]a-iz-zi-uš-ša. The cases of vocalic stability appear to refute the idea that e and i merged completely in Hittite at any period (pace Kimball 1999: 73–79). ti-ez-zi. For persons unaware of the complexity of the writing system it is also confus- ing that many Hittitologists use the i value of ambivalent e/i signs as the “unmarked” value—i. pí-ra-an (which could just as well be interpreted as pé-ra-an. Quite different are the problematic examples of etymologically well-founded e rarely written ai (HE §13b) or ae: a-ep-ta KBo 5.64 Orthography and Phonology 30 (e-ep-pí-ya-.65. 78). For the replacement of kappuezzi and kappuet by kappuwāizzi and kappuwāit see Oettinger 1979: 336. for the sign  00-HittiteGrammar. e/i and ai 1. etc. 1. insists on an “inter- preted” transliteration (*-šet transliterated as -še-et. 1. rather than -tin. We must allow for the possibility that different phonological rules applied at different stages in the language and that texts composed in one period but recopied many years later present an artificial and unreliable picture of the phonology. for which see §3. it must be read -šer (not šir).64. 18). 1.68. must be read -i-er. Forms such as i-ez-zi.’ The pret. on the other hand. and -ker (not kir). pé-eš-ši-e-ez-zi. pl. is admittedly complex and to some extent confusing. Most alternations of a and e in nouns and verbs reflect so-called ablaut. e. pé-eš-ši-ez-zi. Some of the alternations between e/i and ai noted by HE §13 reflect mor- phological replacements in NH. not -še-it). Of the major dictionaries in progress at present.‘to arrive’). When this ending is written with CVC signs.(Neu 1974: 41 with notes). Many words whose writ- ings always contain one of these signs and that never use plene writing are uncertain as to their vocalization. The picture. There was a historical progression of thematic mi-conjugation verbs with forms such as i-ez-zi and i-e(-ez)-zi in OH and early MH to i-ya-(az-)zi in late MH and NH (Carruba. etc. and imp..g. and Sternemann 1965).

that pairs like paiweni and paiwani ‘we will go’ (see §12. are probably pre-NH but are not clearly older than the more common forms. Luraghi 1997a: 25. 314).10. 49 Melchert assumed that the difference in stress placement was morpho- logically conditioned and carried no functional significance. The pres.71.49 Pairs like apteni and eptani are particularly suggestive of a pattern resulting from different accent placement. as in KBo 3. 50. Otten and Souček (1969: 78). *pé-eš-ši-ši. Melchert 1984b: 54–55. p. *pé-eš-ši-nu-un forms in the same OH paradigms.14. semantic features expressed in other IE languages through the sub- junctive and optative moods. i-stem ending -iyaš beside -iēš in New Hittite appears to show a similar change (§3.70. AHP 137–38. crediting Warren Cowgill for the analysis.69. 3 forms of the mi-conjugation. however.48 The appearance of a nominative- accusative plural com. 00-HittiteGrammar. p. HE §40.50 a and u 1.71 can be read as iz or ez. There are no regular alternations between i and u. while -weni/-teni were the stressed outcomes. especially n. 1968. The latter is regularly selected when immediately followed by the particles -z(a) and -šan (Hrozný 1917: 127–28. In the analysis cited in n. §23.4 iii 28 and 33) suggests that the latter can and should be read as /pedi/ and leaves the proposed rule in doubt. Eichner would also compare mi-li-it ‘honey’ < *melit (compare Luwian mallit). however. written pé/í- di. -tta and -ddu. The latter endings then spread at the expense of the former. indicating modality: interrogation. in more detail. p. 31 Orthography and Phonology 1. applying only in the case of particular morphemes). 1. 65).51 Combinatory Vowel Changes Vowel Assimilation 1. subjunctive ideas. The clitic second-singular pronoun has two allomorphs. see §5.. 1980: 143–48. 1966b. 209) reflect differing sentential intonation. The variation in first.41. d. It is possible. If members of the first set really were pronounced /itsi/ and /titsi/. significantly missing from Hittite (§11.. p. 48. For the view that -wani and -tani are due to Luwian influence see Rosenkranz 1952: 13–15. *ti-im-mi (or *ti-i-mi) and *pé-eš-ši-mi. 135). 71).16. etc. 5. 49.-l. make’ and ú-en-zi ‘they come’ for the more common i-ya-an-zi and ú-wa-an-zi. 51.and second-plural endings -weni/-teni and -wani/-tani is the result of early differences in the position of the stress: -wani/-tani were the outcomes when the endings did not receive stress. p.. Eichner has proposed that the form of the sg. For a few sporadic cases of uncertain status see AHP 178. 180. such as i-en-zi ‘they do. The fact that similar-sounding ta⸗za (‘and’ + reflexive particle) remains unchanged shows that this change was not phonological but “morphophonemic” (i.3. Carruba 1966a: 41. The presence of pé-e-di beside pé/í-di (even in the same ms. pl. showed from OH evidence that these endings are not due to Luwian influence. of pedan ‘place’.indb 31 6/5/08 4:14:42 PM .e. one should be able to find *i-im-mi. is always to be read /pidi/ where the first /i/ in place of expected /e/ is to be attributed to the influence of the following /i/ of the ending (briefly 1973: 84 n.

wemiške. neut.75.2 (p. appezzin < appezziyan ‘subsequently’. (Ungnad 1920). iii 39. as do 5-in ‘well’ KUB 31. or in takku⸗aš Law §27.(ilališke- < ilalye-. for šu-wa-an-ta-an) show syncope. and imperfectives of stems in -ye-/-ya.‘poured’). nu⸗at > n⸗at. 382). When the conjunctions nu and šu are followed by a clitic beginning with a vowel other than /u/. etc.< wemye-. §28.(Oettinger. com. i-en-zi- mu-uš ‘But they make them’ (< ienzi⸗ma⸗uš) KBo 16. karū⸗aš KBo 4. kinun⸗a⸗m(u)⸗apa (OH/MS). for normal ti-ya-an-te-eš). 1. b 4ʹ. 1. It also does not occur in na-at-ši-at (see §30. etc. to -i.105:4 and pas- sim (for *lazzin53 < *lazziyan. or nu-uš-ši-iš-ta < nu⸗šši⸗ašta HKM 116:30 (MH/MS). For the morphologically conditioned deletion of various stem-final vowels be- fore vowel-initial suffixes see §2. nam?-mu-uš(-za-kán) KUB 7.86 obv. 51). 52.‘to pour’ (see part. terin (see teriyan). and šu-u-un-ta-an (ibid. The initial -a. the vowel of the conjunction is elided: nu⸗aš > n⸗aš.14 rev. 5ʹ and karūw⸗at KUB 14. 239). etc. 11 (OS). where the same morpheme -ši is involved. i-stem ending -iē/aš to -iš (see §4. takku⸗an Law §28.68 obv. 152). Additional examples include lelḫundāi.in many cases contract.72. and šuḫmilin (sg.‘to be old’. p. 18ʹ. 24 (MH/NS). the a of -ma is elided: ta-a-i-mu-uš-za (< tāi⸗ma⸗uš⸗za) KBo 20.).72 Orthography and Phonology 32 Elision 1.indb 32 6/5/08 4:14:42 PM .and -(u)wa. Forms such as ti-in-ti-eš (IBoT 1.‘me’: ḫuišwatar⸗m(u)⸗apa (OH/MS). 1. nu⸗e > n⸗e.-acc. HE §38a.and -u-. See further the occasional contraction of the NH pl. Syncope 1. < *šuḫmiliyant-. This rule also applies to the clitic pronoun -mu. nom. and in this grammar. §15. ḫu- u-la-li-it-ta-at (ibid.13. When the clitic conjunction -ma ‘but’ is followed by another clitic beginning with u. nu⸗mm(u)⸗ašta (OH/MS). p.or -ši-: nu-uš-še-pa < nu⸗šše⸗apa KUB 36.1 ii 11 is not an example of namm(a) + -uš (see CHD L–N 391).110 (p.165 rev.110 obv. 411). ii 41. 53.19. miyaḫunte. p. Perhaps attested in restored [la?-a]z-zi-in KUB 43.32 ii 9.52 1. it is possible that the elision rule seen in the cases with -ašta and -apa. dapin (see dapian. comm. 87).19.76. had ceased to operate by the time this repeated pronoun construction was coined.of the local particles -apa and -ašta is elided after the dative singular clitic -še. 2 ḫuitti < ḫuittiya. anda⸗m(u)⸗apa (OH/NS). lu-uk-kat-ta-mu-uš-kán (< lukkatta⸗ma⸗uš⸗kan) KBo 27. lilḫuwant. 15ʹ (MS). 00-HittiteGrammar. for normal ḫu-u-la-li-ya-at-ta-at). as shown by its failure to apply in the case of the local particle -an and the non-geminating clitic conjunction -a: nu-uš-še-an Law §78 (OS) and a-pé-e-a KUB 36. of stem *lazziyant-). Since na-at-ši-at occurs only in text copies from late NH.14 ii 13 (NH). nu⸗ašta > n⸗ašta.78 i 10. ḫingan⸗a⸗m(u)⸗apa (OH/MS). neither of which survived in the living language of late NH.10. That this rule is morphophonemic is shown by the fact that it fails to occur in other u + a sequences: ēpdu⸗an KUB 23. see CHD -mu a. p. pers. neut.).36 ii 48 [MH/MS].100 rev. This rule is morphophonemic. §8. KUB 60. sg.74. 9 (OS) (van den Hout 1991: 198). Sequences -(i)ya. 4 (OS).31 left col.73. Possibly also in stem-final position in the imp. respectively.

. NA4kunnan-/NA4ku- wannan. p. 58. .2 iv 54–55 (OS) (see CHD nakkuš. The form na-at in š⸗an attaš⸗miš mKizzuwan na-at⟨-ta⟩ḫu-e-⟨eš-⟩-nu-ú-ut ‘and my father did not spare(?) Kizzuwa’ KBo 3. One possible case is karūli. Otten and Souček 1969: 57 for the forms).28 ii 19 (OH/MS) in view of the many sign omissions in the immediate context is al- most certainly a case of an accidental omission of the ta in na-at-ta (so Laroche 1973: 187. There are no sure examples of apocope.17–13. . p. Text chronology shows that memiyani occurs later than memini. . memini. p. and may be assumed for the protoform *aši⸗ma > OH āšma (see below.57 54. 78) such as antuwaḫḫa-/antuḫša. so that syncope seems unlikely. The pair ḫuinu. 189). Only the sec- ond (like peḫute. (2) multiple stems for the same word such as laḫu-i and laḫuwa-i ‘pours’ (see §§13.78 miḫuntaḫḫ. with var. But there are many examples where the contraction fails to occur. . if we interpret copy A as the NH scribe of copy B did: ‘it is a loss. 133). §7. Some apparent alternations reflect rather different stems. 33 Orthography and Phonology 1. Even less clear is the alternation in wilan-/ulin. d.37.‘body. p. or’ > post-OH naššu .38 ii 21–22) may show genuine apocope as well.13 ii 26–27. reading na-at as n⸗at with -at referring to -ri kuit ḫarkzi.2 iv 54–55 (Laws §98 copy A.‘to make old’) all from *miyaḫwant- ‘old’ (Melchert 1984b: 53.55 1.-l. of ‘word’ (§4. and neither the chrono- logical distribution nor the precise conditioning for the syncope (in terms of accent or word length) is clear. which takes this as two clauses). The example [. ka-ru-ú-li-uš⸗ma⸗za . In examples such as kuera-/kura. šanḫunta ‘roasted things’ from šanḫuwant-.63 + KUB 8. n[a-a]t-tu-wa-az KUB 43. 57. or warāni/urāni ‘burns’.-l.‘human being’.54 Some examples may show either syncope or something else: uriwarant-/wariwarant. . where cases are also cited that may reflect processes other than syncope: (1) possible examples of ablaut (see §3.37. Here an original ‘zero-grade’ adjective has been renewed under the influence of the related verb ḫue/iš- ‘to be alive’. 56.for karu(w)ili-.and ḫunu. 405). For a recent discussion of the problem see Rieken (2001). In addition. limb’. 55.and ḫu(w). One possible instance is the form na-at for na-at-ta ‘not’.18. p.77. p. nat ‘not’. 146). naššu⸗ma ‘either .75.‘clay’. See also §1. . 7 (OS?) (which is a variant of --wa-az KUB 58.56 Ablaut (see §3. 197.78. 112).‘liv- ing. CHD natta a 1ʹ aʹ) may either show syncope of expected na-at-ta-wa-az or be an additional example of an old shorter variant of natta. in copy B nakkuš ŪL šarnikzi ) might be a genuine example.-uš / d-aš -az ašašta KBo 32. .59.16.] / nat aruwaizzi ‘[. 1. This also seems the most probable explanation for memiyani vs. šeknuš/šeknuwaš ‘robe’. he shall not make compensation’ KBo 6. alive’ (see EHS 37–38.indb 33 6/5/08 4:14:43 PM .‘blazing (fire)’.‘skilled’.‘to run’ (see Melchert 1984b: 52).and wida(i). . it is possible that the genitive singular of personal names mNunnuš and m Taruḫšuš reflects syncope instead of a genitive singular *-s ending.48 iv 3 [OH/NS]. našma (see §29.] does not bow’ KUB 44. Syncope is also seen in OH naššu .simply belong to two different verbs meaning ‘to bring’. The stems uda. etc. waštul-/uštul- ‘sin’. It is uncertain whether any alternations of ue~u or ui~u are also to be attributed to syncope. 222). 78) is more likely in OH ḫu-šu-wa-an-da-an and ḫu-uš-wa-an-da-an for later ḫuišwant.‘bead’.31 left col.79.‘to make old’ (see miyaḫ(u)wandaḫḫ. ulkiššara-/walkiššara. But one cannot exclude the interpretation of Hoffner in LH 95–96.‘field’ and tuekka-/tukka.‘cause to run’ are based on the respective weak stems ḫuy. pl. sg. . d.of the base verb ḫuwai.and uwate-) takes as its objects living beings capable of self-propulsion (see CHD P 352 00-HittiteGrammar. nakkuš nat [šarnik]za KBo 6. there is no good basis for choosing between syncope and ablaut.

‘to die’ and išiyaḫḫiš to išiyaḫḫ- ‘to denounce’.80.to dai.(with i-insertion before the s) and ḫaššikke. There is a similar insertion before the pret.and the suffix -ške-: appi/eške-.‘to dispute. For further examples see Rieken (2001: 372–74).9. the root appears in an archaic form without the -i. kurške-58 ‘to cut’ as kuwarške-. 60.‘to say’ we also find tar-ši-ik-ke. p.. However. the limitations of the cuneiform writing system in spelling conso- nant sequences (§1.120. šarninki/eške-.79.59 The discussion here is limited to those cases where it is likely that addition of suffixes to roots leads to genuine vowel insertion. An i or e is inserted between a root ending in a labial or velar stop or in -ḫ. p. 134).11.81. infini- in summary of peda. Insertion of i/e. 199) originally had variants without the final vowel. p. Written kur-aš-k°.‘to put’ (< /d-ske-/).StBoT 25 #137 iii 15ʹ must represent a genuine variant treatment. p. When these appear before suffixes beginning with -w. 3 takkišta and other forms of takš.after the [s]: azzikke. A new systematic treatment of the problem is sorely needed. In zikke-.(< *ḫann-ske. and there is no consensus on this issue. The rare alternate form zaške. 59. 12) make it hard to distinguish with certainty genuine inserted vowels from those that are merely graphic. to judge’ we find both ḫanniške. Likewise in pret.to e/ad. Insertion of u. 1. sg. sg. verbal noun -war .60 This development is also sometimes seen after roots ending in other dental consonants: alongside tar-aš-ke. For possible anaptyxis of i in the origin of the instrumental ending see §3. 00-HittiteGrammar. etc. In certain cases. The behavior of roots ending in a dental consonant is more complex.82. Vowel Insertion (“Anaptyxis”) 1. 1.23. with insertion.B). Against AHP 30 and with Oettinger (1979: 318) and others. but spellings with e begin in MH. the usual treatment when -ške.(§12. 218) or -e. paḫḫur ‘fire’ appears as paḫḫuwar.‘to pierce’.(/tarske-/) to tar. and in NH one finds both i and e with some frequency (Melchert 1984b: 108. 43). as in the previous examples (Oettinger 1993).(§13.g.35. However. Likewise for the addition to ḫann(a). The analysis in AHP 29–33 is both incomplete and in some respects erroneous.‘to eat’ (< /ad-ske-/) and zikke. the consistency of the spellings with i argues that the vowel is real. Some verbs whose attested stem in Hittite ends in -a. In MH we find pret. šanḫi/eške-.with i-insertion after the s and assimilation (see §1. sg. 58. It is reasonably certain that some original sequences of consonants were bro- ken up in pre-Hittite by secondarily inserted vowels (see English athlete pronounced [æθəlit]). 1.79 Orthography and Phonology 34 Diphthongization (“Breaking”) 1.indb 34 6/5/08 4:14:44 PM .seen in the inflection of dai-. 3 ending -š (Oettinger 1993: 41): akkiš to akk.with inserted -i-.(pl.is added to a root ending in a dental stop is insertion of -i. p. 3 ḫatteš to ḫatt. words with original u come to be spelled with uwa: e. 77. The vowel is consistently i in OH. who plausibly suggests that these cases show a genuine sound change whereby the u develops into a diphthong.‘to fashion’. 1 -wen(i).

In the second example etriyant. com. For the sake of simplicity we here describe the contrast in stops as one of voicing. This insertion may be viewed as anaptyxis. nom. Insertion of a. There are two probable cases of syncope followed by anaptyxis to resolve an internal sequence of three consonants of which the middle one is r. p.g.‘to seize (part. There is no consensus as to whether the phonetic contrast in attested Hittite is one of voicing or of some other feature such as “fortis” vs.63 obv. 1. neut. and §1.62 Further research has fully confirmed this analysis.-acc. Eichner. a u is inserted before the -w-. In the first example kutruweneš ‘witnesses’ by syncope became *kutrweneš. Sturtevant (1933: 66–67).-acc. nom.9. most morphemes are written consistently with either single or double stops. but see AHP 57 (with references to Eichner 1988 and Bernabé 1983) for other interpretations.‘that’ (with rare sg. sg. While there are a few examples of inconsistent spellings (e. One can even cite a small number of semantically contrasting minimal or near-minimal pairs: apā.-acc.85 tive -wanzi). while geminate stops continue PIE voiceless stops (Sturtevant 1933: 66–67).). appān). following a suggestion by Mudge. E. Patterned exceptions actually confirm the contrast (see AHP 14). In general Hittite intervocalic single stops reflect PIE voiced and voiced aspi- rate stops. 62. 35 Orthography and Phonology 1.78b 9ʹ) (Oettinger 1982b: 164)..g.126. p. apān) vs.(§1. “lenis” or “aspirated” vs. That the attested spelling variants both represent a sequence [trw] with non-syllabic [r] is highly unlikely but cannot in principle be excluded. paddan ‘dug’ (sg. occasional i-ya-ta-ri for regular i-ya- at-ta-ri ).63 61.12. app. and others). padān ‘of the feet’ vs.83..‘(well-)fed. neut. p. sg. with references to Čop. 44).). 63. and explanations have been found for most apparent exceptions (AHP 16 and Kimball 1999: 261–64.is then dissimi- lated to -um. Whether or not the stops spelled as geminate in Hittite were voiceless. fattened.85. first argued that there is a phonemic contrast in Hittite between single and double (“geminate”) stops in intervocalic position. which then resolved to etaryant. neut. acc.61 Consonants Contrasts in Stops 1. *dweni > *duweni > tumēni ‘we take’ (OH) to dā-. šekkan ‘known’ (part. robust’ by syncope became *etryant-. *tarnwanzi > *tarnuwanzi > tarnu(m)manzi ‘to release’ to tarna-.84. while many others may be explained as “simplified spellings” (see §1. šekan ‘cubit’ vs. and the new sequence -uw. 00-HittiteGrammar. which then re- solved by anaptyxis to kutarweneš (ku-tar-ú-e-ni-eš KUB 23. they seem to have been so heard by Ugaritic scribes: see alphabetic writings of Hittite names such as Šu-up-pí-lu-li-u-ma ( ṯpllm). 1.(e-tar-ya-an-t[a-an] KUB 12. nom. 12.indb 35 6/5/08 4:14:45 PM . but we do not mean thereby to take a definitive stance on this issue. “unaspirated” (see AHP 16–18 with references to a variety of opinions). Compare the similar conventions for writing Hurrian stops in syllabic cuneiform (Wegner 2000: 39–40). 13). 16) (Melchert 1997b).

e-et ‘eat’ (sg. and sonorants (m. p.87. gw.). but a handful of ex- amples suggest that it probably applied there: see /-dr-/ in appatriye. imp. e-eš-tu ‘let him be’ /d/: i-di or e-di ‘on this side’.4 vi 4ʹ. or dat.86. tu-uk ‘you’ (sg. ḫ). y. 1. la-ga-(a-)an ‘bent. forwards’ /P/#: e-ep ‘seize’ (sg. l. respectively) vs. ḫu-u-da-a-ak ‘promptly’ 64.‘pure’ /b/: a-pa-a-aš ‘that one’ #/P/: pé-e-ri-ya-aš ‘of the house’. w). Stops 1. and forms that end in a hyphen represent stem forms. imp. Since the device of marking the contrast by single vs.indb 36 6/5/08 4:14:46 PM . intersection’ < ḫatta. It was neutralized in word-initial and word-final position (see AHP 18–21 and Luraghi 1997a: §1. capitalized voiceless stops represent cases where the voicing opposition is neutralized. am-mu-uk ‘me’ (acc. ša-a-ak ‘know’. ke-eš-šar. g. wa-a-tar ‘water’ #/T/: ta-a-ru ‘wood. The # sign represents the word boundary. zi-(i-)ik ‘you’ (sg.1.) /k/: tu-e-eg-ga. The usual spelling is kat-ta. affricate (ts). it is difficult to prove the contrast for internal sequences of stop plus another consonant. at-ta-aš or ad-da-aš ‘father’.43:9ʹ. 00-HittiteGrammar. HED K 128 (“rarely ka-at-”) cites no example. There are four series of stops in Hittite—bilabial.‘crossroads. velar. šu-up-pí.46 vi 21) show that the double writing of the dental is secure. n. inclined’ #/K/: kat-ta ‘down(ward)’. The following table of Hittite stops is adapted from Luraghi 1997a: §1. ku-ú-ša-ta ‘bride- price’ /K/#: la-a-ak ‘bend’ (sg. imp.86 Orthography and Phonology 36 1. i-it ‘go’ (sg. ki-iš-ša-an ‘thus’. fricatives (š. d.) /T/#: ke-eš-ša-ri-it ‘by the hand’ (instrumental case). It is believed that Hittite possessed voiced and voiceless consonants of the fol- lowing types: stops (b. but occurrences of ka-at-ta (KUB 20. acc. ša-ag-ga-aḫ-ḫi ‘I know’ /g/: la-a-ki ‘he bends’. t.‘body’.88. and labiovelar —all of which can be voiceless or voiced when intervocalic. KUB 58.). /t/: kat-ta or ka-at-ta 64 ‘down(ward)’. Inventory of Consonants 1.50 iii 7) and one of ka-at-ta-an (KUB 56. It is likely that the phonemic contrast in Hittite stops existed only word inter- nally.). kw). As in Luraghi’s table.‘to cut’ spelled ḫa-at-(ta)-re-eš-n°. gemi- nate spellings was only used consistently intervocalically. imp. or dat. k. pa-ra-a ‘forth.).2.). r. again’. /p/: a-ap-pa ‘back. lu-uk-ke-et ‘he set fire to’.‘hand’. /-tr-/ in ḫatrešš(n).‘to commandeer’ < apptar ‘seizing’ spelled ap-pa-ta-ri-ez-zi and ap-pa-at-ri-ez-zi Law §76 (OS and NS. tree’. nom.1). KUB 20. dental.

44): imp. ne-ku-uz mēḫur ‘in the evening time. p. The uncertainty of interpreting Ugaritic ṣ as an affricate /ts/. ke-e-ez ‘on this side’. a-ru-na-az ‘from the sea’. /z/ in Ugaritic does. or’ 1. The cuneiform signs conventionally transcribed as containing a z represent a sound (or sounds) with three distinct sources in Hittite. p. . -ku ‘whether . who claims that original single intervocalic -z. The affricate /ts/ written with z or zz may have had no voiced counterpart.53. 68. the z-containing signs are not used (see the examples in §1. 00-HittiteGrammar. however.125. also makes this evidence uncompelling. gen. On the question of how to transliterate  in Hittite words see above. p. 1.in ḫa-an-te-ez-zi-ya. of the common gender t-stem aniyatt.’ But see Yoshida (1998). we have only one sign in the Hittite syllabary whose number-one transcriptional value contains an emphatic: . .in URULawa(z)zantiya was voiceless. as it is in Hebrew.91.is /dz/ and -zz./aniyat-s/ is spelled a-ni-ya-az vs. Also patterning with q and ṭ in Semitic languages is the sibilant ṣ.‘front. the cuneiform syl- labary possessed some that were intended to represent so-called emphatic stops of the Semitic Akkadian language: the velar conventionally represented by the Roman letter q and the dental represented by ṭ. first’ (see §2. §1.indb 37 6/5/08 4:14:47 PM . However.111. The first two sources suggest that z stands for a voiceless dental affricate /ts/. and final: za-aḫ-ḫa-iš ‘battle’.67 (2) In other cases it represents the affricate /ts/ resulting from the dissimilation of a dental stop before another dental stop (see §1. ú-ez-zi ‘he comes’. 37 Orthography and Phonology 1. 65. there are no signs for this ṣ that cannot as easily be read as z. (3) In still others it represents the sound resulting from prehistoric assibilation of *ty and *ti: suffix -zziya- < *-tyo.89. 3 /e:tstu/ ‘let him eat’ is spelled e-ez(-za)-du. indicate that the -(z)z. 67.for /kw/ see the discussion in AHP 61. The contrast /s/ vs. a-ku-an-zi ‘they drink’ 65 #/Kw/: ku-iš ‘who’. . . 16). 41). In addition to signs indicating voiced and voiceless stops. 66. nom. Affricates 1. (1) Some cases reflect a se- quence /t+s/: the sg.is /ts/. That z is representing an affricate /ts/ here is confirmed by the fact that in those cases in clitic se- quences when /-t+s-/ becomes /-ss-/ and the dental stop is lost. it would constitute evidence that Hittite z was not /ts/ only if Ugaritic had an available affricate /ts/ phoneme.90. medial. a-ni-ya-at-ta-aš. 61) and pres. 3 ending -zzi < *-ti in e-ep-zi ‘takes’ etc. On the absence of intervocalic -Vk-ku.16 (p. there is no evidence for a phonemic contrast between these instances and those reflecting /t+s/. It occurs word initial. ku-en-zi ‘he kills’ /Kw/#: e-ku ‘drink!’.66 Because even the Babylonians and Assyrians often wrote these consonants with the same signs they employed for the nonemphatic counter- parts. instead of an ‘emphatic.’ as in Arabic. Even if the Ugaritic alphabetic place name lwsnd denotes the city name URULawa(z)zantiya (del Monte and Tischler 1978: 237–38). sg.91 /gw/: ša-a-ku-wa ‘eyes’.68 Nothing precludes a palatal or palatalized affricate (see the sound of English ‘church’) for those cases resulting from assibilation. and we follow most Hittitologists in adopting this value. But in the Hittite cuneiform syl- labary. sg. -ku . sg.

92. Having adopted the z-containing signs for an affricate (§1. Evidence cited from the transliteration of names in other writing systems is complex. It may have been pronounced as dental-alveolar [s]. The cuneiform syllabary as adopted by the Hittites had only two sets of CV and VC signs. but other possibilities (such as a pharyngeal fricative) cannot be excluded. Hurrian. 1973). stimmloser Interdental [ ṯ ] gesprochen wurde.136 (p. ḫi. Therefore the fact that š indicates a voiceless (alveo-)palatal sibilant (like English sh) in Akkadian says nothing about the quality of the sound in Hittite. etc. or Hebrew lēkh l ekha ‘get out of here!’). sign S 29) and conventionally transcribed by Egyptologists as s+acute accent (on this. according to environment.: šuppi.‘pure’ + luli. etc. see Edel 1948. 70. respec- tively).92 Orthography and Phonology 38 For the possibility that some instances of z stand for a voiced fricative [z] see §1.93. ḫal. aḫ. it is highly unlikely that the ṯ was pronounced [s]. and no inferences regarding the Hittite articulation should be drawn from it. The cuneiform signs containing ḫ 70 (that is.” Since Ugaritic cuneiform employed another sign for /s/. Scottish loch. ḫat. The precise value in Hittite of the sound represented by the cuneiform signs containing š cannot be determined at present. These signs eventually comprised the third set of sibilant-containing signs in Akkadian (. 47).) represent a voiceless velar fricative [x] in Akkadian (like Arabic khalīfah ‘caliph’.71 We use /h/ in phonemic transcriptions merely for the sake of typographic 69. ḫar. Ancient Ugaritic and ancient and modern Arabic use different written characters to designate the two distinct phonemes realized as velar and pharyngeal fricatives (usually transliterated as ḫ and ḥ. 113): “Es ist somit wahrscheinlich das ug.90).  ‘flesh’. 71. túḫ. 1. ḫa.indb 38 6/5/08 4:14:47 PM . Hittite ḫ(ḫ) also probably stands for a velar fricative. ḫu. Fricatives 1.‘pond’ + ethnicon -um(a)n-) appears in alphabetic Ugaritic as ṯpllm. Tropper (2000: 108–13) concludes (p. /ṯ/ doch als nicht-affrizierter. Advocates of the /s/ interpretation point to writings of Hittite royal names in Egyptian Hieroglyphs with the sign representing a folded cloth (Gardiner 1957: 507. The pronunciation [s] or [ ʃ] (“sin” or “shin”) used by individual scholars today for the Hittite sibilant is entirely conven- tional. However. Obviously they did have [s] signs used exclusively for Sumerograms:  ‘sinew’. alveo-palatal [ ʃ]. or even palatal [ç]. ). 1. . etc.94. the royal name Šuppiluliuma—which happens to be the only Hittite royal name that is linguistically Hittite (rather than Luwian. For typographic economy some publications use h for ḫ and s for š. All that one can declare with certainty is that Hittite had a single /s/ phoneme. The voiceless sibilant of PIE was surely a dental-alveolar /s/. 1. Hurrian names compounded with -šarri and spelled with š-containing signs at Boğazköy appear in Ugaritic alphabetic texts as ṯr. but nothing assures us that it retained that value in Hittite.69 contain- ing sibilants: šV/Vš and zV/Vz. Since a few proper names written in Hittite with ḫ appear in alphabetic Ugaritic with the velar frica- 00-HittiteGrammar. used non-logographically. or some combination of these. Hittite scribes had no signs left to indicate a sibilant other than those with š.  ‘horn’.

nom. sg.) ‘time’. and two approximants or semivowels /y/ and /w/ (European scholars often write these as 9 i and u9).). e-ša-an-zi ‘they sit’. 9). with nasal reduction. acc. me-ma-al ‘meal.). two liquids /l/ and /r/. not as the single sound [ ʃ] of English sh. See also the place name trġds. /m:/: am-mu-uk ‘me’.‘to pour’. 73. The simple nasals and liquids contrast with geminates in intervocalic position: ku-na-an ‘struck/ killed’ (part. 7.g. ḫa-me-eš-ḫi ‘in spring’. neut.73 which as in the city/country name Tarḫuntašša certainly contains the name of the stormgod d Tarḫunta. mi-im-ma-i ‘refuses’.3). the same as Arabic ‫ ﻍ‬to ‫ . the second ḫ in the medio-passive ending -(ḫ)ḫaḫari. Examples: 1. tive ḫ. wa-an-nu-um-mi-ya-aš ‘orphan’. ar-ra-aš ‘anus’. For the ḫ/ḫḫ contrast. 1. ma-a-la-i ‘she agrees’. a-aš-ša-an-zi ‘they remain’. the verb waḫ-/weḫ.72 The ḫḫ/ḫ contrast is generally thought to reflect a tense/lax or voiceless/voiced distinction (Luraghi 1997a: §1.2. 39 Orthography and Phonology 1. nom.14 obv. Both ḫ and š show contrasting single and double writing intervocalically: a-ša-an-zi ‘they are’. dam-mi-iš-ḫa-aš ‘oppression’. nam-ma ‘again. gemination) (Luraghi 1997a: §1. etc. com.. and in the place name written gt trġnds ‘winepress of T. There are. note that both cuneiform ḫ and t are reflected as voiced ġ and d. mēḫur (mēḫuni. groats’.97. GIŠzaḫurti-.3). neut. ku-un-na-an ‘righthand’ (adj. the contrast being [γ] to [x]. /m/: la-a-ma-an ‘name’. ma-al-la-i ‘she mills’.-acc. or Turkish ş.96.e. the velar fricative interpretation is slightly more likely.) versus ša-aḫ-ḫa-an (noun denoting a kind of obligation). com. a-ra-aš ‘colleague’. ḫu-u-ma-an-te-eš ‘all’ (pl. The sequence šḫ is pronounced as [s] or [ ʃ] plus the separate strong fricative. etc. German sch.99 simplicity and do not thereby intend any claim regarding its realization. The lax/voiced sound of nongeminate ḫ is reflected in the spelling of the Hittite personal and royal name m Tudḫaliya in Ugaritic alphabetic script as tdġl (where the phoneme written ġ is a lax/ voiced counterpart to ḫ.95. of course. occasional lapses: me-na-ḫa-an-da (KBo 7. as well as a number of words that consistently write intervocalic ḫ: e. But given the mistakes in hearing phonemes from other languages.‘to turn’ and its derivatives waḫatar. are inter- preted as consonantal length (i. Hittite sonorants include two nasals /m/ and /n/. The phoneme /r/ never occurs in intial position.indb 39 6/5/08 4:14:49 PM .95). on the other hand. The examples of consistent contrasting š and šš.’. clogged’ (part. see the minimal pair ša-a-ḫa-an and ša-ḫa-a-an ‘blocked.98. this argument can only be suggestive. If so.). 72. 1. sg. sg. and e-eš-ša-an- zi ‘they work. 00-HittiteGrammar. waḫeššar. 1. kam-ma-ri ‘in a swarm/cloud’. next’. produce’. laḫu(wa)i. nor /m/ in final position.99. not conclusive.2.. Sonorants 1.ﺥ‬see also Hebrew tidʿal < *tudġal in Genesis 14:1. Also favoring the velar fricative interpretation is the writing of mTu-ud-ḫa-li-ya as tdġl (see §1. OS) for normal me-na-aḫ-ḫa-an-da. -(ḫ)ḫaḫati.

ú-wa-nu-un ‘I came’. ta-ki-ya ‘in another’. šēr ‘above’. u-un-na-i ‘he drives (here)’. 1. §4. túḫ-ša-an-na-i ‘he shall harvest (a grapevine)’. ku-na-an ‘struck. thing’. /n/: ne-e-wa-an ‘new’. kurur ‘hostility’. inheritance share’. šu-ul-la-an-na-az ‘out of wantonness’. šu- wa-i-ez-zi ‘he shall look’. ut-tar ‘word. me-ḫur-ri ḪI. ḫi-i-li ‘in the courtyard’. a-ú ‘see!’. pít-ti-nu-zi ‘he runs off with’.102. sight’.A ‘times’. 1. 74. pen’. šu- wa-i-ez-zi ‘he shall look’. ta-ra-an-za ‘promised’. /n:/: an-na-aš ‘mother’. 1. lu-ú-li-ya ‘in a pond’.104.24.106. mar-ri ‘rashly’. an-ni-iš- ki-iz-zi ‘he performs’. 00-HittiteGrammar. tu-li-ya ‘to the assembly’. ú-nu-wa-an-zi ‘they decorate’. /y/: i-ez-zi ‘he does/makes’. foul waters’ (pl. GIŠma-a-ri-in ‘spear’. In preferring the reading né-u-i-i[t] to ni-u-i-i[t]. ḫu-ú-ni-ik-zi ‘injures’. šu-un-na-i ‘he fills’. i-wa-a-ru ‘dowry’. 31. ša-ar-ra-an-zi ‘they divide’. i-an-zi ‘they go’. ka-ru-ú ‘long ago. in-na-ra- u-wa-an-za ‘vigorous’. il-lu-ya-an-ga-aš ‘serpent’. da-a-la-i ‘he leaves’. ú-wa-a-tar ‘vision. i-da-a-lu-uš ‘evil’. na-ú-i ‘not yet’. ke-eš-ša-ra-aš ‘hand’. /l/: la-a-la-an ‘tongue’. u-ur-re-er ‘they came to the aid of’. pu-nu-uš-ša-an-zi ‘they inquire’. wa-aš-tu-la-aš ‘of a/the sin’. ḫasduēr ‘brushwood’. /l:/: ma-al-la-i ‘she mills’. p. in-na-ra-a ‘independently’. zi-in-ni-it ‘he finished’. da-šu-wa-an-za ‘blind’. an-nu-uš ‘mothers’ (acc. 1. pár- ra-an-da ‘across’. ta-i-ez-zi. 1. ḫu-uš-še-el-li-ya-az ‘from the mud pit’. e-ša-ri ‘he sits down’. da-me-da-ni ‘to another’. ma-a-la-i ‘he agrees’. ti-in-nu-zi ‘he paralyzes’. me-er-ra-a-an-ta-ru ‘let them disappear’. ú-ez-zi ‘he comes’. ne-e-wa-an or ne-e-u-wa-an ‘new’. ma-ya-an-za ‘young adult’. i-wa-a-ru ‘dowry. 19. /w/: wa-a-tar ‘water’. ša-a-i-ú-uš (an animal). p. ḫa-a-li ‘corral. pí-ya-na-iz-zi ‘he rewards’.100 Orthography and Phonology 40 For the problem of apparent intervocalic geminate m in words using CVm-mV see §1. /r/: a-ra-aš ‘colleague’. mi-ir-mi-ir-ru-uš ‘drainage waters. zi-in-na-i ‘he finishes’. mar-mar-ri ‘in a marsh(?)’.). the issue is similar to the case of pé/í-di. a-ra-a-u- wa-aš ‘exempt’.103. me-ma-al ‘meal’. formerly’. ḫu-ul-la-an-zi ‘they contest’.101. ki-nu-un ‘now’. iš-kal-la-a-ri ‘he tears off’. for which see §1. ú-e-te-ez-zi ‘he builds’. ku-u-ru-ri ‘to a foreign (land)’. šu-ul-la-an-na-az ‘out of wantonness’. ú-na-at-ta-al-la-an ‘merchant’.). /r:/: ar-ra-aš ‘anus’.107.100.16. ne-e-u-[it] or né- u-i-i[t] 74 ‘with new’. kar-ma-la-aš-ša-i ‘he causes permanent injury’.indb 40 6/5/08 4:14:50 PM . 1.71. ú-wa-ar-ra ‘for help’. ta-a-i-e-ez-zi and ta-ya-az-zi ‘he steals’. in-na-ra-wa-tar ‘vigor’. ta-a-i-ú-ga- aš ‘two-year-old’. ú-na-at-ta-al-la-an ‘merchant’. a-ra-wa-an-ni-iš ‘free’. 1. ta-az-zi-il-li-iš (a kind of priest). da-a-i ‘puts’ (< dai-). acc. 86). 1. 1. še-ḫi-il- li-ya-aš ‘of purity’ (Hurrian loanword. ga-pí-nu-uš ‘threads’. p. killed’. du-wa-a-an ‘on one side’.105. i-wa-ar ‘like’. ḫa-az-zi-ú ‘rite’.

.. išt[anani] . 19). minumarri ḪI. our father! Where were you?’)’ KUB 33. dāi ‘he puts it (-at) on the altar’.126–1.24. an initial w followed by a vowel is written with ú or u preceding a wV sign: ú-wa-ar-kán-ta-an (warkant-) ‘fat’.110. ú-wi5-ta-ar ‘wa- ters’.‘lower’. ú-wi5-te-ni-it ‘with water’. pp. ku-en-ner for ku-e-ner ‘they killed’ (see §12. l.-i⸗kuw⸗at⸗šan . 41 Orthography and Phonology 1. p. 1. etc. and let them make it into weapons of d of Akkad’ KBo 22.-eš iyandu ‘Let him cut down the paini-tree that stands for you(?) in his gate house. .) na-aš-ši ḫinkantat ‘and they bowed to him. 44–45. (see Melchert 1984b: 13.. . 1.6 iv14–16. . As indicated above (§1. (the eloper) shall give it (-at) to him as compensa- tion’ KBo 6. 00-HittiteGrammar. Rarely. . neut.indb 41 6/5/08 4:14:51 PM . This feature is particularly common in verbal substantives with the ending -i: ar-ku-wa-ar-ri ḪI. but is by no means regular there (compare kururi ḪI. OS rituals show instrumental ka-lu-u-lu-pí-iš-mi-t(a-aš-ta) ‘with their fingers’ or ka-lu-lu- pí-iz-mi-it with restored -t-. etc. The question of their linguistic reality and possible conditioning remains to be answered.66 + KBo 40. in some instances.60 i 5–7. see iv 21.) (the first man) gave (for the bride). u-wa-al-aḫ-zi ‘he strikes’.A ‘sooth- ings’. [tak?š]anni⸗kuw⸗a(t) ⸗ša⟨n⟩ ‘whether it (is) in the mountain . p. clearly reflected in OS texts.127. most words are stable in showing either one or the other. from OH/NS texts: GIŠpāini⸗w[a⸗tt]a kuit Éḫilamni⸗šit ārta (15) nu⸗war⸗a(t)⸗šta karšdu nu⸗war⸗at URU Agade d-aš (16) [GIŠ]. words that have a single n. p.3 ii 6–7 = Laws §28a (OH/NS) (HE §36 c: < ta⸗at⸗še ‘und es ihm’ and na-aš-ša-an KBo 5.333 iii 8 (OH?/MS). and kad!-du-uš-mi-it for kaddut⸗šmit ‘with their talons’ KUB 43.42. 190).A ‘pleas’. (saying: ‘O Tarḫunta. Other exx.6. as expected. we see it also in (dTarḫunta encoun- tered eight ‘sons of the gods’ on the road.111. seems to have been a phenomenon of OH.for kat-te-ra. 20–21). or r in the older language unexpectedly show geminate spellings in NH (NS): e. However. in the OH?/MS festival text from Šarišša KuT 53 ii 15–19 (ed. In OH/NS texts we find further exx. For further examples see AHP 165. tš > šš This change. Wilhelm 2002a: 345) the neuter noun ‘half’ (see §9.A ‘hostile’). and. or it (is) in the [pl]ain’ KUB 43. . sometimes side-by-side with examples in which the lost dental has been restored. but restored in i 50: [na-a]t-ša-an. . These late geminate spellings cannot be explained away in the manner of those for m (see §1. 165) in the phrase kuit - ḫarzi ‘what half he holds (in his right hand)’ is resumed na-aš-ša-an . there is a regular contrast intervocalically be- tween single and geminate nasals and liquids. .&.60 i 17. Assimilation of Consonants 1. For the dissimilation of uw to um and wu to mu see §§1.g. iš-ḫi-ú-ul-la-aš for iš-ḫi-ú-la-aš ‘of the treaty’. kat-te-er-ra.108. which occurs only when t and š are divided by a clitic boundary.: HE §36c claimed this assimilation on the basis of kuit kuit p[ešta] ta-aš-še šarnikzi ‘whatever (kuit kuit.111 1.109. &.97).2 iv 12 [< nu + -at + -šan]).

ḫuitnaš) ‘wild animals’ and is likely in other examples such as ḫartar ‘offense’ (d. The aberrant hapax sg. see Oettinger 2000b: 183–84. When the clitic ‘and’ occurs on ablatives.ez⸗ya.39 ii 13.remains problematic. 29. Addition of -a ‘and’ to a sg. on the case ending): -ša (= ḫaššuš + -a) ‘and the king’.in these examples to Luwian influence. antuḫšazzi⸗ya) ibid.115.32.1+ i 27 and TÚGtermazzi⸗ya KUB 22. 27).‘to make stand up’ to tiya. tn > nn ḫatttar.112 Orthography and Phonology 42 1. gen. ḫattannaš (from *ḫattatnaš).2 iii 14 and kuēzzi HKM 24:45 (MH/MS). See HE §32 2 and Neumann 1964: 50 with literature. 57.sa]. and’ appears as -ya.16 ii 46 (HED H 353).116. Since most examples are found in nouns with nom. KUB 16. See §§29. . 395). of iyātar ‘abundance’) and takšatniya. spelled -an-za-(aš-)ša (HE §25b). abl. 1. There are rare examples of this earlier.‘plaintiff’. The clitic -a that means ‘also. the -tn. 1. longer ablative even in final. 1.‘(a) plain’). which would assign the only occurrence to date of wetna. 1. 1.e.9 vi 6. This clitic must not be confused with the postconsonantal clitic -a of OH that does not geminate a preceding consonant.indb 42 6/5/08 4:14:52 PM . .or in their transparent derivatives. ḫu-]ú-e-et-na-aš in KUB 1.113. whence exceptions like iyatnaš (gen.)’. 56. . 128). 76): ḫūmandazzi⸗ya KUB 26.70 obv.. . As in kez . -tn. ḫaratnazi) and kattawatnalli.is sometimes trivially restored by anal- ogy. . 75. 10 (for expected kez and kuez) (Sommer and Ehelolf 1924: 29).-acc.114.in Luwian. among others. and compare the Southern American English pronunciation [dnt] for ‘isn’t it’). unprotected position: kēzzi KBo 4. ḫaratni. KUB 15. in /-ants/ (spelled -an-za) leads to [-ants..e.106 (p. There is no need or justification for attrib- uting the -tn. and the clitic took the form -ya: -ya ‘and the king (nom. The i is rather a genuine reflex in protected non-final position of the earlier ablative ending *-ati > -azzi > -az (§3. . . KBo 4.75 A loanword explanation is possible but unprovable for examples such as mitnaz and wetna. UN- azzi⸗ya (i. gen. 00-HittiteGrammar. . the endings -az-zi-ya and -ez-zi- 77 ya are not to be interpreted as *. ḫuittaš with its geminate -tt. p.is also preserved in transparent derivatives such as the causatives ḫatnu. 76. and’).-l. Luwian influence is clear in the case of the loanword ḫuitar (gen. and’ geminates a preceding consonant. despite the efforts of Carruba (1966a: 18–19 n. We disagree with the proposed restoration [.112.to ḫuedar ‘wildlife’.‘to dry (something) out’ to ḫat. In OH and MH the clitic ‘and’ appended to a logogram was attached to its last consonant (i. nom. . After vowels ‘also. kezzi⸗ya.az⸗ya or *. in -ātar and oblique stem in -ann. In NH the scribal habit changed: the case ending no longer occurred on the phonetic complement. .24. see §4.34 iii 43 (MH/MS).76 One clear exception to the rule in a native Hittite word is utne ‘land. For the latest discussion on the derivation of this word and the reason for the nonassimilation. . takšann. 77.> -tn. reflect- ing a prehistoric assimilation of *-C+ha (see Luwian -ḫa ‘also. Luwian influence is also possible for the unusual MH variant ḫannetnit for regular ḫannešnit (see AHP 272–73 with reference to Čop for an apparent change sn.‘to make level’ (< takšatar.‘to stand’.‘to become dry’ and tit(ta)nu.(a wild animal).25 (p. country’.

ḫa-tu- ga/ka-aš-me-et.10 obv.(< ḫanna.120.121 1. nš > z: pé-e-ra-az-mi-it (< pēran⸗šmit) (OS). An n can arise where it is etymologically unjustified by remote assimilation to another nasal preceding or following in the word (Oettinger 1994.117. Less usual. Kept distinct from ḫaške-. who argues from a duplicate that ḫal-ki-im should be read --. such as imperfective stems ḫaššike. kar-di-mi-ya-at-ta-aš-ša-an.” unassimilated forms: ḫanneške. 1. 1.‘to give birth’ and ḫa/eške-. 129). 78. OS).. 41. the imperfective stem of ḫaš(š). An assimilation nš > šš is also seen in the -ške-suffix forms of some roots end- ing in -n-: ku(w)aške. Some cases of z before or after a nasal may stand for a voiced fricative [z] resulting from voicing assimilation of s (see §1. ma- aḫ-ḫa-an-ša-ma-aš. er- ma-aš-ma-aš-kán (< erman⸗šmaš⸗kan). an-na-aš-ma-an-na (< annan⸗šmann⸗a). that of ḫaš(š)-/ḫeš. pé-e-ra-aš-ši-it.and tarneške-.121. occasionally later developed more “regular. da-a-aḫ-ḫu-uš-ma-aš-ta < dāḫḫun⸗šmaš⸗šta. p. For an alternate account of the ablatives in -anza see Jasanoff 1973. ma-a-an-ši. 80. nm > mm At clitic boundaries n may assimilate to immediately following m. The unassimilated sequence nš is rare in Hittite: a-an-ši ‘he wipes’ (and other forms of this verb anš-). See further §4. and na-aš-ša-an. 36.‘to judge’79) and taršike. li-in-kán-ta KUB 13.44:9. 14.16 iii 13 (OH/NS). the noun anšaššiwi.110 (p. one finds back-forms in which the n was secondarily restored: na-an-ša-an.‘to kill’. 79.119. 4).to kuen.indb 43 6/5/08 4:14:53 PM . dši-ú-šu[m-(mi-in)] ibid. 43 Orthography and Phonology 1. tanantezzi for tannattezzi or tannattešzi ‘it will be laid waste’ (Riemschneider 1970: 32). acc.. 1.118. The resulting geminate is regularly spelled as such between vowels but is occasionally reduced to š: an-na-aš-ša- an. Beginning in MH.and tar(a)ške. acc.‘to let’. . Kimball 1999: 318–19): ḫaššannanza for ḫaššannaz ‘from the family’. pé-ra-an-ši-it. as an Akkadian genitive. producing a geminate consonant that is occasionally reduced to a single m:78 ad-dam- ma-an < attan⸗man ‘my father’ (sg.e.35 i 9 for correct li-in-kat-ta ‘he swore’ (HE §31b). But the claim for ḫalkim pianzi (with dupl. 47).(< tarna. 00-HittiteGrammar.136. tu-ek-kam-ma-an < tuekkan⸗man ‘my body’ KUB 30. with many exx. i.2 + KBo 19. of naḫšaratt-). 1. Goetze 1930b: 5–6. la-a-am-ma-a-mi-it < lāman⸗mit ‘my name’ KUB 1. HE §§31. ḫalkin pianzi) in Laws §112 has recently been rightly questioned by Otten (1990). tetḫešnanza ‘with thunder’. [tar-l]i-pa-aš-ša-an.80 ḫantešnaz ‘from the hole’ for ḫattešnaz. ma-a-am-ma-an < mān⸗man KUB 30.27 obv. nš > šš The assimilation of nš to šš at clitic boundaries is fairly common already in OH (Otten and Souček 1969: 57–58): e-er-ma-aš-me-et (< ērman⸗šmet).-am-ma-an < . but dši-ú-šum-m[i-in] < dšiun⸗šummin ‘our deity’ KBo 3. naḫšarantan for naḫšarattan ‘fear’ (sg. 10. not graphically geminate ša-aḫ-ḫa-me-et < šaḫḫan⸗met ‘my obligation for šaḫḫan-services’ KBo 6.22:39 (OS). Some other verbs showing earlier assimilated forms.‘corpse(?)’.10 obv. Otten 1969: 5 with n.‘to open’.) KBo 3.1 ii 19 (Laws §40. 22.-an⸗man ‘of my servants’ KBo 3.

122.47.g. 83. Kammenhuber 1969b: 137.in these cases see §1. This rule is usually characterized as “s-epenthesis. The former solution is unlikely. and possibly also in the bird name tarumaki. -weni. 1. This affricate was also retained even in cases where the following dental stop was itself assibilated to an affricate. Observed already by HE §29. The genitive ḫilannaš in Laws §82 and §89 was derived by Friedrich (1959) from ḫilamnaš.123.‘to become (of) another’ from the adjective tameum(a)n. in the verb au-/u. since 81. p.+ -wāi. p.69. genitive of ḫilammar ‘portico’.124. Possible partial assimilations such as nt > nd are masked by the lack of a means in Hittite cuneiform for showing the voiced-voiceless distinction in the obstruents when they directly follow another consonant (-an-ta. For the source of -uw. spelled e-ez-(za)-du or redundantly as e-ez-za-aš-du (see §12. n. Third-plural present forms like arnuwanzi and participles like arnuwant. that /e:d-tu/ ‘let him eat’ ap- pears as [e:tstu].‘to make (of) another’ and tameummešš. with references). This dissimilation also affects the secondary sequence -uw.‘(belonging to) another’. with the suffix -uman. -war. since one would have to assume mn > mm and mn > nn in the same language during the same time period.-l. 1. Melchert 1984b: 22–27.are not counter-examples.(§2.(see wak.(see AHP 152–53 with refs. uw > um A word-internal sequence -uw.82 as seen in the first-plural verbal endings -mani.‘to bite’) (see also below p. e. ešḫarnu. mn > mmn > mm m is geminated before n (spelled -Vm-nV. 1. 63.is often simplified to -mm. of NINDAšaram(a)n. ša-ra-am-ma-na- aš.(a type of bread) is ša-ra-am-na-aš.(as in šu-mu-ma-aḫ ‘unite!’ in KUB 29. 60) we find URUŠutummanaš ‘the man of Šuta’ and tameummaḫḫ.1 ii 43.82 (p. Dissimilatory Changes 1.‘to see’ in umeni ‘we see’ and aumen ‘we saw’ (OS).81 It is by this change. mn > nn does not exist in Hittite. 330). §11.. 28.3.126. but by Laroche (1957a: 18–19) from unattested *ḫilatar. Otten and Souček 1969: 78–79): warnu.and -an-da. and -men 83 and the verbal substantive end- ing -mar and infinitive ending -manzi (see §§25.) and even written -m.‘make blood-red’ (Melchert 1984b: 27). dt/tt > zt Hittite preserves a PIE rule by which the first of two dental stops is dissimilated to an affricate [ts].+ -weni > warnu(m)meni.” but as per Weriand Merlingen and others is more accurately viewed as dissimilation (see Melchert 2003c: 154. 210–211]). §§12. p.‘wood- pecker(?)’ from taru.2–25. 186].in forms like tarnum(m)eni ‘we leave’ < tarn-uweni to tarn(a)- ‘to leave’. 00-HittiteGrammar.125. which take the place of regular -wani. -wen. 187] for further examples). d.44–12.122 Orthography and Phonology 44 1.or -Vm-mV- nV-) and then the sequence -mmn. 34). spelled e(-ez)-za-(az-)zi.‘wood. producing an unusual geminate affricate.are in free variation).tsi]. 82. see §2.indb 44 6/5/08 4:14:54 PM . 1. Already in OS in a-ú-me-en.47 [pp. and -wanzi in the nu-causative verbs (HE §29a.3 [p.45. and ša-ra-am-ma-aš (see §4. -meni. Thus /e:d-tsi/ ‘he eats’ appears as [e:ts.22 [p.> ešḫarnumāi. 60): pl. tree’ + waki. p.is dissimilated to -um-. 108).

acc. m—n > m—l irmanant.‘deity. 3.131 these represent arnu-+ -anzi/-ant. pa-ap-pár-zi for pa-ap-pár-aš-zi. 1. l—l > l—r ḫapalzil (kind of stew?) > ḫapalzir. There are genuine examples of sporadic loss of /s/ before /ts/: a-ar-zi for a-ar-aš-zi. Along with HE (§§29. p. forms such as zašḫimuš ‘dreams’ (< zašḫai-). kišnu. The opposite of remote assimilation. For reasons against assuming this loss in pres. There are a few instances that suggest a genuine if sporadic deletion of ḫ next to stop: idālawatti beside idālawaḫti ‘you harm’.128. and the rule does not apply to a secondary -w. in texts from MH into the 13th century the pl. wu > mu idālu. ták-ki-iz-zi for ták-ki-iš-zi. Sommer and Falkenstein 1938: 76 n.- mu-uš (= šimuš < šiwuš) (Neu 1974: 121–22 with notes). 00-HittiteGrammar. and warput for expected *warpḫut ‘Bathe!’ for which Neu (1968b: 191) compares ši-ip-pa-an-du-un Bo 2738 iv 5 (now 84. 177). See other unusual pl. THeth 11:28–29).without inherent -w-. The rule also does not apply in secondary sequences of -uw. Similarly. n—m > l—m lāman ‘name’ (< pre-OH *nāman). ḫinnuzi for ḫinganuzi (/hinknutsi/) ‘makes to bow’. There are some examples of sporadic loss of stops in the middle of sequences involving sonorants: e.‘new’ is ne-mu-uš. as idālaweš. 75. not /simus/. n.1+ ii 13 (ed. acc.24. Melchert 1984b: 22–23. god’ is .84 and the pl.‘having sickness’ (§2. 45 Orthography and Phonology 1. but its acc. and wa-ra-a-nu ‘let it burn’ from the verbal stem war. com.and the medio-passive endings -ari and -aru. thus pāndu⸗wa⸗z ašandu KBo 3. 1.. 1. pl. ḫamanzi for ḫamangazi (/hamanktsi/)‘intertwines’.g.‘sick. trips’ (< laḫḫa-?). 174) and Otten and Souček (1969: 57).131. r—r > r—n *urāri > OH ú-ra-a-ni and post-OH wa-ra-a-ni ‘it burns’. 1. com. remote dissimilation (Oettinger 1994: 310–14).11. who maintains that this writing is a “graphic substitute” (“Ersatzschreibung”) and indicates a pronunciation /siwus/. šallamuš < šalli. see Watkins (1973).127. For further examples. nom. Loss (Deletion) of Consonants 1. 169. 4. namely. HE §29b. ill’. ta-pu-uz-za for ta-pu-uš-za. who showed that these belong to stative verbs in -e. perhaps also lē ‘let not’ (< pre-Hittite *nē) arising from combinations lē⸗man and lē⸗mu.(2×) for /kistnu-/ (usually written kištanu-) ‘to extin- guish’.‘big’ (see p. There are too many examples for them all to be due to scribal errors. occurs in the following examples: 1. acc. Goetze 1927: 120 n. 4. of newa. p. com. 76). 2. 56) > irmalant. laḫḫemuš ‘errands.indb 45 6/5/08 4:14:55 PM .‘bad’ forms its pl. 1. as idālamuš. we regard this as a true dissimilatory sound change (“Lautwechsel”) against Neu (1974: 121–22). of šiu.occurring at a clitic boundary.130.inserted to fill a “hiatus” in a sequence -uV-. 95.129. lammar ‘hour’ (< pre- OH *nammar). com. see AHP 166–67.(§10. sg. 3 verb forms in -e(z)zi (Riemschneider 1970: 65).

.46 i 60. Most cases of preserved final -ar reflect original syllabic *rX. 64 (NH) for sip- panti ‘he offers’. šallaš (see Sommer 1932: 357 with lit. Yoshida 1990: 108–12). 1. ši-ip-pa-ti KUB 6.132 Orthography and Phonology 46 KUB 58. or z (Kimball 1999: 316–19.79 iv 5) for regular ši-ip-pa-an-da-aḫ-ḫu-un (/sipandhun/).31 i 42 for linkueni ‘we will swear’. causing sporadic nonrepresentation in writing (HW §30b. 1. ḫ: ša-a-aḫ (imp.‘thirsty’ (Elisabeth Rieken. pu-u-ut for purut ‘mud’. Old Hittite reflects this contrast in plural paprāta beside singular paprātar ‘impurity’. TÚGkueššar for TÚGkureššar (a garment). LÚ.2 iii 35 (MH/NS) alongside ḫūmandaz. ḫa-an-ne-eš-ša-še-et. comm. iš-ḫu-uz-zi-ya-an-te-eš HT 1 i 32 ‘belted’. This might explain the use of the prop vowel i in kaniriwant.135). t.. EHS 65–70.91 iii 8 for zankilatar ‘compensation’. For ēšḫar and geni- tive ešnaš see §4.for artarti. iš-ḫu-uz-zi-ya-te-eš KUB 9.&. In certain circumstances n is lost before immediately following ḫ. To these one might also add: naḫšarnuške⸗wa[r⸗an kuieš] uritenuške⸗war⸗an kuieš ‘[those who] were frightening [him].indb 46 6/5/08 4:14:55 PM . ḫatrešša along- side ḫatreššar ‘message’. Melchert 1988b.102 (p. A prehistoric loss of intervocalic *y is still reflected in the oblique forms of i-stem adjectives such as sg. za-ki-la-tar KUB 42. Goetze and Pedersen 1934: 30–32.) for ša-an-aḫ ‘seek’. HE §§31 and 36).133. k: ḫi-kán-ni KBo 3. t: ḫu-u-ma-da-az KUB 13. Compare also plural UZUḫappešša (also written UZU.4. artati.).31 i 37 ‘they clothe themselves’.-ša) alongside singular UZUḫappeššar ‘body part’. There was a weak articulation of intervocalic and preconsonantal r. pers. Final r was lost prehistorically in final position after an unaccented vowel (Neu 1982. Preconsonantal: wagganteš for warkanteš ‘fat ones’. 94) and in OH medio-passives such as ne(-e)-a ‘turns’ (see §1. ma-an-ni-ku-wa-an IBoT 1. [pár-t]a-a-u-wa-aš-ši-it-wa. li-ku- wa-an-ni KUB 9. This loss probably also accounts for the appearance of the quotation particle -war as -wa in final position (see §28.‘mush- room(?)’. kušduwāta ‘slanders. p. 1. 48). Sommer and Falkenstein 1938: 66). w. those who were terrifying him’ KUB 60. also across word boundary: ki-iš-ša te-ez-zi ‘thus he says’ (for kiššan tezzi) (Kümmel 1967: 17). p.134.may be dissimilatory.MEŠša-ku-ni-e-eš KUB 39. 354). ú-e-eš-ša-an-ta KUB 9.36 i 9 for ḫinkani. This occurs even when the “final” r is protected by a suffix: ḫattata⸗mit ‘my wis- dom’ (Sommer and Falkenstein 1938: 179). šullāta ‘disrespectful acts’. k. mīyata alongside miyātar ‘prosperity’. 1. ḫa-at-ta-ta-mi-it. false accusations’. 354) (cf. p. p. The appearance of the quotation particle as -wa. with many exx. w: ma-a-wa < mān⸗wa ‘when/if (+ quotation particle)’ KUB 00-HittiteGrammar.before a consonant may be a regularization of the preconsonantal loss of r (see §28.135. but the loss of r before w could also be compared with nw > w (§1.4. AHP 125). Melchert 1984b: 44–45.71 i 5 as plural of LÚšankunni ‘priest’.132. pa-ga-u-wa-aš KUB 24. 126).157 iii 7–8. see also Goetze 1930b: 5–6. The loss in this case and in a(r)tarti.13 iii 23 for pangawaš ‘of the multitude’. Intervocalic: pé-an for pé-ra-an ‘before’. gen.142. where one expects the third preterite plural ending -er.36 i 17 (MH/MS) for manninkuwan ‘near’.37. and §4. 1.31 i 39 with dupl. ú-e-eš-ša-ta HT 1:30 with dupl.

The example ḫu-in-pa-an (KUB 33.to dai.137. 34. a sequence of affricate [ts] + fricative [x] (Elisabeth Rieken.to -tt.at a clitic boundary. Possible support for the presence of a nasalized vowel may be found in the spelling ge-em-zu (KBo 5.-an-na-za < antuḫšannanza (ergative of antuḫšātar) KUB 1. The same development is seen in z(a)kkar beside regular šakkar ‘dung’ (see AHP 121).138 36. 140). ‘feces-mouth’). regular zikke-.101 obv. z: li-in-ga-zi < linkanzi ‘they swear’.indb 47 6/5/08 4:14:56 PM . d Paḫḫurzeš and dPaḫḫuršeš.and marzaštarri-. The apparent word-internal alternation of š and z in zašḫai.36 iii 4) for usual ḫu-im-pa-an suggests the same reduction to a nasalized vowel also before a labial stop. comm. as well as in maršaštarri.). See Oettinger (1994: 322). 00-HittiteGrammar. showing spo- radic assimilation of [s] to the preceding sonorant. however. piršaḫḫanna and pirzaḫḫanna. or it may represent a voiced fricative [z]. 60) without anaptyxis vs. The status of the z in such examples is not clear. 43) and §6. the alternate spellings without n are too frequent to be emended as scribal errors.alongside noun gulzi-. with literature) is to be interpreted as showing alternate graphic representations of initial /tsh-/... Epenthesis 1.represents /tsk-/: (1) in the rare imperfec- tive stem zaške. initial zašk/g. contrasting with assimilation of original */VnsV/ to /VssV/ (AHP 121): *nXsós > *ansás > anzāš ‘us’. for an explanation of z(a)mankur in terms of epenthesis. abl. guršipi.85 In any case. where an etymological m is extremely unlikely (see Weitenberg 1984: 165).and zazḫai- ‘dream’(HE §27 c. A secondary sequence [ns]. liquid (l or r) + š alternates with liquid + z in some cases: dGulšeš and (verb) gulš. 47 Orthography and Phonology 1. nom. ša-an-ḫa-zi < šanḫanzi ‘they seek’. See for such assimilations §§1. Other Alternations 1. reflecting epenthesis of t in sequences of sonorant plus s (AHP 121). usually resulting from an earlier syllabic nasal plus s. an interchange that suggests a partial neutralization in this environment: 85.‘to put’ (see p. We cannot decide this question from the orthography. appears in Hittite as nz. it is possible that the nasalization was preserved in the preceding a vowel and not entirely lost. 1. LÚḫalugatallattin < ḫalugatallan⸗tin ‘your messenger’ in VBoT 1 obv. Éarzana and Éaršana.and gurzippant-.3 i 24) for ge-en-zu ‘lap. In the latter. 4.138. pers. It may stand for [ts].136. which appears to show sporadic assimilation of [sm-] to [zm-] (contra AHP 172). Likewise. gulzattanaz.e. i. Similarly. (2) in zašgaraiš ‘anus’ (lit.‘bearded’ and z(a)mankur ‘beard’ (AHP 94). . AHP 121). The latter alternative is supported by the alternation of š and z in š(a)mankurwant.has for some unknown reason become /tsk-/ instead of regular išk. mercy’.5 (p. gul- zatar IBoT 3.1 i 30. original initial *sk.118–1. One occasionally finds k for ḫ and vice-versa when either is in contact with a sibilant. n. naḫzi and naḫši (Carruba 1966a: 36. 19 may show the same loss or instead assimilation of -nt.119 (p.45:2 and passim. Since these spellings alternate with ones showing the n.with prothesis (see išgašuwant- ‘covered with dung’).

37.a-] in cases such as ne-(e-)a(-ri) ‘turns’ and -e-aš ‘of the lands’. Most Hittite vowels occur freely in word-initial and word-final po- sition. p. The sequence nunu can appear haplologically as nu in: kištanun KUB 27.139.140. as well as Akkadian/Hur- rian and Hittite guršip-/gurzip-/gurpiši. The glides /y/ and /w/ occur word-finally if one interprets diphthongs as consist- ing of vowel plus glide. Forms like OH e-uk-ši ‘you drink’ alternating with post-OH e-ku-uš-ši (/ekwsi/) reflect not metathesis but the uncertainty of the scribes as to how to write a unitary labio-velar consonant [kw]. All voiceless obstruents. arkuwar ‘plea’ < *arkuwawar. of i-stem adjectives with ablaut (§3. /h/ occurs principally in the imperative second singular of verbs with stems ending in ḫ. both glides (w and y).MEŠḫazkara-86 and išḫaruḫ.35 i 28 for *mernunun ‘I caused to disappear’. and one also frequently finds forms such as ne-ya-ri and ut-ne-ya-aš (see Melchert 1984b: 46–47.(§4. For a mere attempt to sketch some of the possibilities see AHP 110–14.for MUNUS. For other. But there is a tendency for this hiatus to be filled with -y-. On haplol- ogy at Maşat see Hoffner forthcoming. com. Metathesis of š and r is attested in the alternation ašara/i. 78). and /r/ are common. See also tar-uk-zi for /tarkwzi/. MUNUS. 12.la.MEŠḫazḫara. Consonants. nom.for UZUiškiša. Metathesis of š and p is possible in the passage of Akkadian loan LÚ-- into Hittite LÚa-pí-ši.139 Orthography and Phonology 48 ḫameškanza for ḫamešḫanza ‘spring’.(HED A 128–29). They are probably pronounced as [sal.142.and araša/i.indb 48 6/5/08 4:14:57 PM . 1. limited to nunu: kap-pu-u-wa-ar ‘count- ing’ HKM 21:6 (MH/MS) < *kappuwawar. 86) (Kümmel 1967: 95–96). Vowels. 86. 36).la.112 iv 14 (HE §28a). however. Such haplology is not. and acc. Still another likely case consists of the sequences -a-(e-)eš and -a-uš in the pl. more dubious cases see AHP 115. The affricate /ts/ and the fricative /s/ appear freely in word-final position.67 iii 11 for *kištanunun ‘I extinguished’. For this and some other examples as reflecting a change kr > hr see now Oettinger 2000a. but absolute proof is not possible. 1. 00-HittiteGrammar. Phonotactics 1. and all so- norants except r occur word-initially (on the neutralization of voicing in word-initial and word-final stops see §1. but also UZUišḫiša.‘back’ KUB 33. The most certain common example is the sequence [-e. For the adjective šu-u(-ú-uš) ‘full’ see §1.8.86.us]. More doubtful is the equivalence of ta-aḫ-ša-at-ta-ri and *takšattari (Kümmel 1967: 109). there is no final /m/.16. p.(Kümmel 1967: 105–6). 1.e:s] and [sal.141. p. Word-final /n/. with references).e.for iškaruḫ. Hiatus—i. p. The nature of the cuneiform writing system makes it difficult to determine the status of consonantal sequences. /l/. mernun KUB 13. such as šal-la-(e-)eš and šal- la-uš ‘great’..(Kronasser 1966: 98. Kümmel 1967: 109). a sequence of two vowels not forming a diphthong—is relatively rare in Hittite. elsewhere written tar-ku(-uz)-zi. 1. For possible restrictions see AHP 114.

2 ii 35 [OS] for takku⸗at or ša-aḫ-ḫa-ni-ya-aš Ḫatt. tetḫa. Eichner 1980 150–64). However. Accent 1. idālawēš ‘evil’ (pl. see §2. there is no guarantee that the accent in attested Hittite has consistently remained 87.57. p.143. šaluwašaluwa.145 1. it is by no means assured that indica- tion of vowel length is the only function of plene spellings (again see §1. e. ták-ku-wa-at KBo 6. Carruba 1981). 49 Orthography and Phonology 1. when a word contains two plene spellings.. galgalturi. It at least seems clear that. 88. 25) directly mark the position of the accent (Hart 1980.89 Third.e:tsi] or [kapuwe:tsi]. iv 85 [NH] for šaḫḫani⸗aš) also does not prove that all such sequences were pronounced with an inserted glide. and pa-ri-an alongside pa-ri-ya-an for [pari. 173–174) may therefore imitate the sounds they denote.‘to laugh’. Likewise.‘to thunder’.(names of birds named for the repeated call they make). and §1. 89.g. p. even in a living language. there are nouns for natural phenomena (storms). p. Second.87 The occasional insertion of a glide in vowel sequences at clitic bound- ary (e. Nevertheless.(name of a small amphibian). To further complicate matters. animals.e:ssniT] alongside [siye:ssniT] or merely another spelling for the latter.11. com.144. A few of the reduplicated verbal stems (§§10.(per- cussion instrument). Nevertheless. one of the instances cannot reflect the accent: e. a universal characteristic of onomatopoetic words. p.‘to whisper’. we subscribe to the view that plene spellings for the most part directly indicate vowel length. ḫuḫupal.19. 54). 12). p.). 00-HittiteGrammar.indb 49 6/5/08 4:14:58 PM . Kimball 1983.46. 320.88 Compare the archer-hunter who utters the repetitive cry ee ee of his prey (§24.46.145.. These examples share the feature of reduplication (§§2. p. Such examples are far from rare.8.) may represent a genuine alternate pronunciation [si. Onomatopoeia is difficult to identify. akuwakuwa. and taštašiya. Drawing inferences about the accent in this way faces several problems. pp.an] or [pariyan]. For an onomatopoetic verb ‘to whistle’ in Hattic see Singer 2002a. Onomatopoeia 1.(percussion instrument.. The spelling ši-eš-ša-ni-it alongside ši-i-e-eš-ša-ni-it for ‘with beer’ (ins. kap-pu-ez-zi alongside kap-pu-u-(e)-ez-zi ‘counts’ may stand for [kapu. 62).3–10.g. vowel length may indirectly show the place of the accent in that prehistoric long vowels were preserved and short vowels lengthened under the accent (see. in many instances we also cannot exclude that it is the high vowel that is lacking: either ši-eš-ni-it or ši-i-e-eš-ša-ni-it (or both) could represent spoken [sye:ssniT]. 25). such as ḫaḫḫarš. First. It is impossible to determine whether sequences of /i/ and /u/ followed with- out written glide by a different vowel are always pronounced with an intervening glide as [iyV] and [uwV] or are sometimes pronounced with hiatus as [iV] and [uV]. Our knowledge of the Hittite accent is quite limited.g. the use of plene spellings is far from consistent.and kallikalli.‘thunderstorm’.56–2. or musical instruments that appear to imitate the sounds made: ḫaršiḫarši. Some scholars have proposed that plene spellings (see §1.5. nom.

it is widely as- sumed that Hittite has preserved the inherited accentual pattern. 00-HittiteGrammar. sg.-l. For example. tēkan vs. gen. but readers should not infer that there is any consensus on the position of the accent in general. There are a significant number of examples in both nominal and verbal in- flection where the position of the Hittite accent as reflected by plene spellings matches that reconstructed for Proto-Indo-European and where. p.71. sg.146 Orthography and Phonology 50 in the prehistoric position which led to the supposed lengthening effects. 110) appears to continue directly PIE *dhéĝhōm vs. 1.indb 50 6/5/08 4:14:59 PM . *dhĝh-ʹ with mobile accent (for the PIE inflec- tion of ‘earth’ see Schindler 1967). consequently. ašānt. Likewise. 78).-acc. p. Hittite sg. taknī ‘earth’ (see §4. nom.37.‘being’ < *h1 ésti vs.(see Oettinger 1979: 86–98). In sum. We will call attention to cases on which there is widespread agreement. 1.146. taknāš. ēšzi ‘is’ vs. d. there is a high degree of circularity in the reasoning just described. All statements about the position of the accent in Hittite should be viewed with this caveat in mind. For the accompanying stem variation known as “ablaut” see §3. *h1 sónt.

tall’.3 Examples with -u-: park-u.‘to be proven guilty by ordeal’. Our goal here is to describe the situation within Hittite. Hittite also shows signifi- cant traces of the PIE phenomenon widely known as the “Caland System” (see Meier- Brügger 2000: 271–72. suffix addition—not replacement—being the regular pattern.‘to cause to perish. also park-nu. However. as in other older Indo-European languages. perfect’ was reinterpreted as mišriw-ant.2. parku- i. 2003: 288–91).‘high’ > parg-ašti. numbers.‘libation’ > išpantuzzi-aššar.‘rich’ > ḫappin-aḫḫ.‘to purify’. Chapter 2 NOUN AND ADJECTIVE FORMATION 2. However it is to be explained historically.‘to become wide’. 3.‘impure.was deleted in the formation of mišriw-aḫḫ. Since the pattern with substitution was synchronically irregular for (pre-)Hit- tite speakers. For more examples see the respective paragraphs on specific nominal and verbal derivational suffixes. Hittite also extended this pattern to the suffix -want.1 Of these. Negations (such as ‘not’) and preverbs (such as ‘up. This happens most typically when the base is an adjective.g. Nominal and verbal stem formation in Hittite.. although in the body of this grammar the latter will often be referred to under the more explicit term “preverb. destroy’. adverbs.‘to make rich’ and ḫappin-ešš.(see Mel- chert 1984a: 80): mišri-want. also palḫ-ešš.‘long-lasting’ > uktūri(y)-aḫḫ- 1. ḫark.‘to become rich’.‘narrow’ > ḫatku-ešš. perfect’. the (final) suffix of the base is deleted with the addition of another suffix. verbs. and particles. and Hittite shows many cases with stems in -u-. 51 00-HittiteGrammar. On the model of the examples with -ant-.‘to make splendid. generally consists of addition of a derivational suffix to a root or to a stem consisting of a root plus one or more suffixes: e. adjectives. We make no attempt to distinguish between inherited examples and innovative examples modeled on the former.and parg-atar ‘height’.2 2. guilty’ > papr-e.‘ruin.‘libation vessel’. this process appears descriptively as derivation by substitution: i. papr-ant.‘to become high. For verbal stem formation see chapter 10.‘splendid. Examples with -i-: palḫ-i.‘wide’ > palḫ-ašti-. down’) are here subsumed under adverbs.‘to perish’ > ḫark-a. postpositions.‘pure. adjectives. clear’ > parku-e. uktūri.” 2.. and -ant-. išpant. only nouns. Examples with -ant-: ḫappin-ant.indb 51 6/5/08 4:14:59 PM .‘to become narrow’.‘to make high’ and park-ešš. -i-. pronouns. and verbs show productive patterns of stem formation. The Hittite lexicon includes the following parts of speech: nouns. destruction’ and > ḫark-nu.‘to libate’ > išpant- uzzi. one also predictably finds examples of the same suffixes with the regular process of addition: ḫatku.‘to become clear’ and parku-nu.before -ant. conjunctions.e. palḫ-atar and palḫ-eššar ‘width’.1.

‘blue’. 2003: F309. Ékippa. dignity’. Meier-Brügger 2000.‘eyelid’.(a cult functionary).SANGAkumra. Szemerényi 1996: 182–85. for which no gender-specific forms are yet attested. 2. negna. nega.‘hand’ (also an r-stem). Less certain are: LÚḫatwaya. What follows is a brief orientation to the most important classes of underived stems and a survey of productive suffixes. (see Taracha 2001). deceitful’.‘anus’. nēwa.9.‘tooth’. exempt’. A few of these continue PIE o-stems (Kammenhuber 1969c: 279–80.‘righthand’.‘new’ and pittalwa. Because in post-OH many nouns which were originally not i-stems took on i- stem appearance in the nominative and accusative due to the so-called i-mutation (see 00-HittiteGrammar. paltana. 456).‘reed.‘bladder(?)’. etc.(a secretion or infection of the eye) < Akk.‘head’ (also an r/n-stem ḫaršar. pappaššala.” we intend no claim as to the word’s status in pre-Hittite—only that within the historical period of Hittite there existed no more basic form from which the word in question was derived.10 (p. kunna.‘ear’.‘border. tešḫa.3. pedestal’. Many common gender nouns denoting body parts are a-stem nouns: antaka- ‘loins(?)’ (see Melchert 2003a). Other common gender a-stem nouns with no apparent derivational suffix are: aška.‘plain. šīpu (see Fincke 2000). lala. ištamana. See also the valuable discussions of selected stem classes in Weitenberg 1984 and Rieken 1999a. which are continued by Hittite a-stems. F311). 279. Assured loanwords among common gender a-stems are relatively few: for ex- ample. arawa.‘false.‘tongue’.5.‘important’ > nakki(y)-atar ‘importance. Noun and adjective stems can be subdivided into derived and underived. arra.‘oppression. In us- ing the term “underived.‘gate’. 2. irḫa.‘digit’. dammešḫa.‘reed hut’ < Sumerian (.4. keššara. 83).< Akkadian arzannu ‘groats’ (Hoffner 1974).‘free. kalulupa.6.< Old As- syrian kumru (Otten 1990b) = LÚ12 (Hoffner 1996a). palzaḫḫa- ‘statue base. nata.‘shoulder’. arrow’. laḫḫa. pantuḫa. 145. boundary’. 2003: 218).‘hair. 2. 2. The largest class of underived stems ends in -a.8. Éarzana. simple’.‘campaign’.‘nose’. 2. and šipa. 2. LÚ. The majority of adjectives in PIE were o-stems (Meier-Brügger 2000: 201.’ Likely also belonging here are anašša. marša. ḫaršana.‘brother’ (logograms  and ).(see EHS 165–66).‘sole of the foot’.‘upper back(?)’ and titita. e/inera.‘sleep’. Underived Stems 2. injury’. Underived a-stem adjectives include: āndara. perhaps < Hattic ḫatweš (Soysal 2004: 17. since they too bear no Hittite derivational suffix. The last comprehensive treatment of Hittite nominal stem formation is EHS. We also include possible loanwords in this category.7. kaka.‘esophagus’. laplipa.indb 52 6/5/08 4:15:01 PM .). mayant- ‘young’ > maya(n)d-atar ‘youth’ and mayant-aḫḫ.‘sister’.‘eyebrow’.3 Noun and Adjective Formation 52 ‘to make long-lasting’ nakkī. pata. patalḫa. ḫaršanaš).‘foot’. 2. For their inflection see §4. tetana.‘to make young’.

luzzi.” 00-HittiteGrammar. kakkari.‘lap.‘censer’ < Hurr. ḫattalu. Berman 1972b. and wellu.‘pillar’.15 §4. pūri.‘forced labor.11. and zakki.10. Derived nouns and adjectives consist of a root (whether noun. (neuter gender) āššu. sacrificial animal’.14. kenupi.‘clay tablet’ < Akk.‘tree. šiu. paramour’. kappi. 2.‘latch’.‘wheel’. the common gender NINDAtaparwašu. paršdu.‘fresh. we limit our list of underived -i-stems here to those that show exclusively i-stem inflection. shoot.12. tāru.‘pot- tery.‘grass. tuppi.‘duckweed. Only one example is at all likely. ḫeu. Luwian suffixes that occur in Hittite-language contexts are marked with the notation “Luw. or adverb) to which one or more derivational suffixes have been added.17.‘artery(?). p. earthenware’.‘sprout.‘door bolt’. kakkaru. kurakki. wood’. sanga (with possible stem influence from Hurrian as the intermediary of the loan?).‘throat(?)’.‘lasting. tuzzi. 53 Noun and Adjective Formation 2.15.‘ear’ < Akk. ḫazzizzi. ḫaḫ(ḫa)ri.‘rain’.(kind of tree and its wood) < Hattic (Soysal 2004: 148. nura(n)ti-.‘trunk (of tree)’. 86). išmeri.‘well-being’ < Hurr.‘anger’. Examples of u-stems underived within the historical period of Hittite are: (common gender) ḫaššu. Among nouns identifiable in this manner are: (common gender) auli. 2.‘caraway seed. GIŠparnulli. lūli.‘lung. cumin’. inheritance share’. kullupi.‘river bank’.‘wooden log. thunderbolt(?)’.‘priest’ < Akk. šāru- ‘plunder. Kammenhuber 1969b: 291–300.‘god’. verb.‘lip’. agannu. womb.(a kind of bread loaf) < Akk. iwaru.‘rein’.‘small’. aḫrušḫi.‘goods’. and Meriggi 1980: §§1–4).(a garment) < Akk.’ 2. ḫasīsu.‘corral. išḫaḫru- ‘tears’.‘dowry.‘sickle’. ḫalenzu. keldi.(kind of wood) < Hattic šaḫiš. kappāni. Derived Stems 2. to which the case endings are added (HE §§43–53. difficult’. pupu. ḫurki. (neuter gender) elzi- ‘scales’. 590). tašku. nakkī.‘grain.indb 53 6/5/08 4:15:01 PM .(kind of bread) < Hattic. šankunni.(a unit of land measurement). Common gen- der examples: aganni. keldi. šaḫi.‘stela’. Neuter examples: atupli.‘king’. and welku.‘testicle(?)’. kapanu. algae’. Underived i-stem adjectives include: ḫuelpi. karpi. 300.(a container) < Akk. 2.‘knee’. utuplu. bud’. šangû < Sum. The resulting combination constitutes the derived stem. aḫrušḫi. EHS 160–343. kapru. The majority of assured loanwords appear in Hittite as i-stems. genzu.(incantation priest) < Akk. genu.13. kapunu. wappu.‘meadow’.‘heavy. diaphragm’. kalmi. LÚapiši. booty’. ukturi. young’. āšipu (with metathesis). ṭuppu. 2. Loanwords appearing in Hittite as u-stems are quite rare. ‘pomegranate’ < Akk. pen’. adjective.‘army’. corvée’. lurindu (*nurindu). durable’. ḫalki. ḫuwaši. ḫāli. cistern’.‘pond.‘lover. mercy’. The following is a list of the principal suffixes for forming derived stems of nouns and adjectives and examples of the resulting forms. barley’.

16 Noun and Adjective Formation 54 2.‘grain pest. There are also a few common- gender nouns formed to nominal bases: ḫullanzai.21 (p. Some of these are assuredly native Hittite: ardal. pappaššala/i. The suffix -al. For some examples see §§4. 49).‘to give birth to. išḫiyal.‘verbal intimidation. nakkuššaḫit.‘to bewitch. destruc- tion’ < ḫark.‘status of a substitute’ < tarpašša/i. rite’.34–4.. lapanallaḫit. §1.‘to administer’. šarra- ‘part.‘prerogative. Other nouns in -aḫi. tarpaššaḫit. 2.‘bread fragment’ < parš.18. p.‘to lift’.‘substitute’.‘song’ < išḫamai. winal.’ Some Luwian stems in -al.’ Others are certainly loanwords from Luwian (see §2.forms common gender action and result nouns from verbs (EHS 166–67):4 alwanzaḫḫa.‘oath’< link. ‘biter’’ < wag.g. share’ < šarra.‘fight’ < zaḫḫ. The suffix -ai. p. victoriousness’ < muwattalla/i.’5 2.‘scapegoat’.‘cut (of meat). be destroyed’. zašḫai.‘to give a sign’). ištarninkai.‘dream. 4.‘overpowering. ḫarga.6 2.‘staff. victorious’. draw near’. including uncertain ones such as LÚkīta-.‘status of a warden of the salt deposits’ < lapanalla/i.see Oettinger 1995: 214–15. who only cites Rößle on ḫazkara-.‘ruin.g.‘to bite’.‘to administer. Also relevant is Rieken 2004a: 535.‘to sin’.‘sin’ < wašta. 72).‘to swear’.)’.‘to strike’.’ Some cases may be either Hittite or Luwian in origin: e. custom. išḫamai. club.16. who interprets several these forms as containing a suffix -ḫa-.‘defeat’ (see ḫullant.‘status of a scapegoat’ < nakkušša/i. fragment’. Of unclear derivation: kurkurai.‘to swear’.‘to divide. 93–94). hex’. maniyaḫḫa. neighborhood’ < maninkuwaḫḫ. waštai..‘curse’ < ḫu(wa)rt. right.‘to sing’.‘to cut off’.‘to make a hollow sound’ (imitative.‘defeated’). sector (of territory)’ < karš.‘rock-cutting saw’ < ard.) (see §2. šaklai.‘administrative district’ < maniyaḫḫ.(part of a wagon or chariot wheel).17. ḫuḫupal- (a percussion instrument) < ḫup.‘to make ill’.‘to bind. wagai.are borrowed into Hittite as common gender stems with either a-stem or i-stem inflection: e.‘band’ < išḫi(ya). govern (in iter. Also see §3.‘to break. It also appears on a few terms for concrete objects: ḫaršandanaḫit.productively forms common-gender action nouns from ver- bal roots: ḫurtai. The suffix -a.‘administration.‘esophagus’. ḫašša.’ Most neuter ai-stems are underived.‘vicinity. The suffix -aḫi(t-) (Luw. district’ < maniyaḫḫ. karša. maninkuwaḫḫa. On the problem of (MUNUS)ḫazgarai ‘female musicians’ to ḫazgara. 62): ariyal.‘warden of the salt deposits’. zaḫḫai.144. šagai. p. sign’ (see šakiya.‘to saw’. muwaddalaḫit- ‘overpowering might.‘practice of ritual magic’ < malḫaššalla/i- ‘pertaining to ritual magic’. 2.55.‘omen.and šišai ‘tail’ beside šēša. 6. generate’.‘crown prince’.indb 54 6/5/08 4:15:02 PM .35 (pp. 540.‘sorcery’ < alwanzaḫḫ.in Hittite contexts may be of Hurrian derivation.19. expressing status: tuḫukantaḫit. 00-HittiteGrammar. 62) forms neuter abstract nouns from adjectives and nouns.‘illness’ < ištarnink.‘basket’ < ariya.‘grandchild’ (perhaps originally ‘off- spring’) < ḫaš(š). 5. tarmal.‘to ap- proach. threat’. malḫaššallaḫit.55. maniyaḫḫai.‘hammer.‘to perish. We differ from Kronasser (EHS §96). Berman (1972b: 115–16) adds further examples. NINDAparša.‘status of a crown prince’ < tuḫukanta/i.forms neuter instrumental nouns from verbal bases. linkai.

The hapax puriyal.suffix in its participial and possessive uses. nom. 9. naḫḫan ‘fear’ (< naḫḫ. 72). LÚ walḫiyala. auriyala. p. it is used to form participles (see §§25. 2. 00-HittiteGrammar.21 (p.referring to persons are common gender (appaliyalla- ‘plotter. išpanduziyala.as a deri- vational suffix in Hittite.‘dancer’ < imperfec- tive form of tarwāi. *palšala. 8. The roles of the suffix -ant-10 are various and complex (HE §48.’ leads to productive use of -ala.(Luw. We analyze forms of neuter noun stems ending in -anza and -anteš not as derivational but as examples of the ergative case. CAD Ḫ 113.-la-) ‘guide.‘temple’.‘to dance’.‘basket’).‘player of the arkammi-instrument’. LÚzuppariyala.‘torch-bearer’ < zuppari- ‘torch’.8 šakuwalli.‘motherly.and *palšiyala. ḫaršiyala. AHw 327a sub mng.‘one who offers NINDA ḫarši-’. in Hittite we can speak of a single -ant. 11.45.‘cup-stand’ < zeri.‘to travel. . See. Historically. In drawing these distinctions we make no claim regarding the prehistoric source(s) of the -ant.forms adjectives from nouns: genzuwala.‘eye (šākuwa) cover’. Derived adjectives with this suffix are: annalla.(sg.forms neuter action/result nouns from verbal bases: ḫenkan ‘death’ (< ḫenk.(a functionary) < É arzana. and §4. cara- van leader’ < palša.or -alli.‘border guard’ < auri.20.‘one who serves tawal-drink’. for example. derived verb -šiyaḫḫ-) exist for the base noun.‘liver’. karimnala.< šerḫ(a). 20 on the different PIE sources for the Hittite -ant. “the suffix”).) and -alli.8–3. mudan ‘garbage’ (< mudāi- ‘to remove’). LÚ/MUNUSḫuwaššanala. = Akk. We may distinguish the following attested functions of -ant.‘trap’. Since both stems palša. ša ḫarrāni(m) ‘caravan leader’ (OAss.suf- fix. 7.(a substance). The suffix -ala. we posit distinct origins for several of the functions. LÚlaḫḫiyala.‘fatherly. 10.‘to fear’).‘one who serves walḫi drink’.11 First.39–25. 4).’ One such adjective derives from an adverbial base: tuwala. 2.(written .suffix (hence.‘worshiper of dḪuwaššana’. while those referring to things are neuter (ḫaršanalli. zeriyalli. paternal’.alongside more common paršulli- ‘bread fragment’ due to nouns in -ul such as išḫiul.‘cup’). liššiyala.‘lip ( pūri-) cover’.23.‘for- mer.55. puriyal⟨li ⟩.‘head’. both *palšala.and *palši. caravan’. maternal’.21.‘merciful’ < genzu ‘mercy’.‘crown’ < ḫaršan.‘basket-carrier’ < irḫuit.‘scale (for weighing)’ < gank.9 (pp.due to the superficial influence of real nouns in -al. 86–87).(CHD P) are possible.10 (pp. This pattern of forming agent nouns eventually leads to deverbal examples: gangala.‘pertaining to the liver’ < lišši. Descriptively.22. irḫu(i)talla. The Hittite noun is formed on the pattern of .‘traveler(?)’ < laḫḫiya. annalla /i. See paršul.(Luw. The suffix -an.‘to weigh’. arzanala. 62). See §§3.indb 55 6/5/08 4:15:03 PM .‘temple servant’ < karimn. Subsequent substantivization of adjectives of this kind in the sense ‘the one pertaining to/who deals with . The suffixes -alla. -iš. usurper’ < appali. LÚtarweškala. Melchert 2000: 58 n. previous’.‘distant’ < tuwa ‘at a distance’.‘border post’. . 2. See §4.to form what are effectively agent nouns from other nouns: LÚ/MUNUS arkamiyala.) form nouns from nouns (see §2. Melchert 2000: 58–61).23 2.‘inn’. 40. 55 Noun and Adjective Formation 2. LÚ šerḫala. 83–84).‘lip cover’ is either a scribal error for *puriyalli or a nonce creation based on puriyalli.‘to allot’). journey.7 tawalala.‘one who offers libations’ < išpanduzzi ‘libation’.9 attalla. with n. 66–67) and §3. Nouns in -alla.17 (pp.‘road.

2. šuppi.2 (p.‘(demon) of the courtyard (ḫila-)’.has been preserved.‘wear- ing a (woman’s) headdress (TÚGkureššar)’. 51).and šuppi( y)ant.‘spring-time (in general)’. The suffix -ašša/i. ill’.SAGTarlipanta may indicate a mountain on which the berries grew from which they made the dark red tarlipa-drink.‘(roads) covered with shells or pebbles (NA4aku-)’.‘thirsty’ with the possessive suffix dis- cussed in §2. 2.‘re- volt’ < ḫarnamniya.‘rock’). pleasant’.27. however.24). Here belong such examples as išpant. The mountain name ḪUR.‘population.and aššu(w)ant.‘thirst’ (see kanin-ant.‘to revolt’.‘adornment’ < unuwāi.‘(deity) of the ear’. but the shorter stem must be presumed as a base of other derived forms: see §2. A few Hittite stems in -(a)nt.‘the (next/following) spring’ vs.‘ill’.also forms possessive denominal adjectives (HE §48 b 1):12 perunant. on the -nt. dŠakuwašša- ‘(deity) of the eye’.‘having sickness (irman). dWašdulašši- ‘(demon) concerned with sin (waštul-)’. The noun utneyant.and ikunant.‘wearing a woman’s headdress’ either from TÚGkureššar or *kurešnāi.‘to exert oneself’.25. 2.‘provided with a drinking tube (nata-)’.‘rocky’ (< peruna. irmala. natant.also has a delimiting or “individualizing” function (Melchert 2000: 58–61.and irma- lant. Some examples naturally allow for both possibilities: annanuzziant. See. tariyašḫa. Not all such cases reflect participles of interven- ing but unattested denominal verbs (against Goetze [1930b: 34–35] and others). dapi. ḫamešḫa.‘entire’. 2. 12.28. (NA4)akuwant. 2.‘grand- father. ikuna. the reference is to a particular instance (Goetze 1951: 469–70): ḫamešḫant.‘in-law’.‘to adorn’. 00-HittiteGrammar.‘fatigue’ < ta(r)riya. 68–69). both short and extended stems of the adjectives and nouns are still attested in Hittite.‘priest’.24 Noun and Adjective Formation 56 pp. There are other examples in which only the extended stem in -ant.26. The suffix -ant. 2.forms denominal adjectives denoting appurtenance which may themselves become nouns: dḪilašši.‘night’ (see Avestan xšapan-) and kanint.‘to fit with a k ’.and ḫuḫḫant. The suffix -ant. URUTarḫuntašša. gaena. See on this point Oettinger 1981. inhabitants’ could also be a possessive denominal adjective in origin ‘(those) possessing the land (utne-)’.usually forms common gender action/result nouns from verbs (EHS 167): unuwašḫa. Meier-Brügger 2000: 173. there is no longer any dis- cernible difference in meaning between the base stem and the extended stem in -ant-: aššu.to a stem in -(a)n- (Oettinger 1982a.‘to fit with a halter’.‘halter’ or via an unattested verb *annanuzziya. irmanant.‘(city) of (the god) Tarḫunta’.reflect the addition of a -t. dIštamanašša. The suffix -(a)šḫa. TÚGkurešnant. 2003: 185). 339–340. ḫuḫḫa. and TÚG kurešnant. In a number of adjective and noun pairs. correctly.‘good.’ In the above cases.participle in PIE see Szemerényi 1996: 317–18. 2001b). 2.indb 56 6/5/08 4:15:04 PM .‘cold’. Sturtevant and Hahn (1951: §119).and dapiyant.29. ḫarnamniyašḫa. šankunni- and šankunniyant. etc.and gaenant.24.‘wearing a halter’ may be de- rived directly from KUŠannanuzzi.‘holy sacred’. When it is added to names of the seasons.

malāi. moor’ < luli(ya). 62) forms common-gender agent nouns.‘pond’ and others with no attested base forms. examples such as tešḫa.‘height’ < parku.‘watchman’.‘lyre-player’ < *kinar ‘lyre’ (< Semitic *kinnār. p. ḫalugatalla. duškaratt- ‘amusement. The suffix -ašti. See also lu(m)pašti.’ For archaic šiwatt. wešuriškatalla. For discussion of the semantic content of this suffix see Rieken 1999a: 118. In terms of attested Hittite.‘pain. 121. entertainment.31. 51). 2. tuḫḫiyatt.‘fear’. Of uncertain derivation: aršanatalla.2. such as ḫapparnuwašḫa. pity’ < kariya. 00-HittiteGrammar. On this class of action noun see Berman 1972b: 155–56 and Laroche 1975.‘envier’ (see aršane. 2. Many are formed on the imperfective -ške/ a.‘guard.13 2.‘anger’. informant’. MUNUSkankatitalla. halo’. paradigms).33.(a stone). 120) and §4.‘width’ < palḫi- ‘wide’.forms common gender nouns to adjectival bases: dalugašti- ‘length’ < daluki. Contra Starke (1979: 258).(see §2. wage earner’ (see kuššan ‘wage’). adjectives. n.‘hired laborer.91 (p.‘sparing (one)’. memiškattalla. ḫukmatalla. See §4. On the problematic words maniyaḫḫiyatt-. LÚkinartalla.‘crier’ or ‘clapper ‘ < palwāi-.‘strangler’. ḫandatt-.‘sentry’.‘groaning/screaming in pain’. išḫamatalla.‘to envy’ §10. 177).‘spy. 206. 2.‘helper’. akuwatar ‘drinking’.‘grass(?)’. grief’ without known base.32. and nouns: (1) from verbs: aggtar ‘death’. equipment’. 14. Denominal examples: ḫaliyatalla.‘woman serving kankati-soup’. karuiliyatt.‘long’. verbose’. apptar ‘seizing’. De- verbal examples: peran ḫuyatalla. concurrence.‘enchanter’ (see ḫukmai. watarnaḫḫaz.33 nuntariyašḫa.‘agreement. ḫašātar/ 13.94 (p. see Hitt. 121. adtar ‘eating’.‘to sing’. approval’ (< CLuw mali-/malāi. kinnôr). p. LÚkuššanatalla-.stem (§12. pargašti.‘message’. The suffix -att-14 forms common gender action/result nouns from verbal and adjectival bases: aniyatt. without attested base. wiwiškatalla.31–12. watch’. adminstrator’.or -ašḫa-.‘to hasten’. accede’. sentinel’ < ḫāli ‘sector. The stem vowels of i.‘haste’ < nuntariya.‘to think’.‘high’. 204): išiyaḫḫiškatalla. karitašḫa. ššiyatar ‘love’.30. there is no solid evidence that all examples of the productive deverbal suffix -(a)šḫa.‘previous state’.‘eloquent.see Rieken 1999a: 120–25. kuššaniyatalla. The status of the apparent denominal example luliyašḫa- ‘swampland.33.‘wailer’.‘day’.‘performance. 57 Noun and Adjective Formation 2. naḫšaratt. kardimiyatt.indb 57 6/5/08 4:15:04 PM .are Luwianisms.‘singer’ < išḫamai. one cannot tell whether the productive suffix was -šḫa.‘messenger’ < ḫaluga.‘compliance.‘radiance. maliyašḫa.55. Since all clear examples are based on stems ending in -a-. Hebr. watchman.‘spell’). and lamarḫandatt. armuwalašḫa. and marruwašḫa. palwatalla. *armaḫḫatar ‘conception. piškattalla. Nor is there yet evidence for the suffix even being pro- ductive in either form of Luwian. maniyaḫiškatalla- ‘governor. see p. ḫuppar⟨at⟩t-.‘moonlight’ < armuwalāi- ‘to shine (of the moon)’. p. kariyašḫa. pregnancy’.‘to approve’). p.and u-stem adjectives are deleted before this suffix (see §2. The suffix -tar forms neuter abstract/action nouns from verbs. is unclear.‘dream’ are underived (see Starke 1979: 248–50).‘to comply.11. The suffix -(a)t(t)alla. palḫašti. weḫeškattalla. uškiškattalla.

34. The suffix -iya.’ The stem vowels of some adjectives in -i. For the inflection see §4. purity’. šulltar ‘wantonness. nakkiyātar ‘importance.‘to groan. ḫūigatar ‘heap of threshed grain(?)’. kurkurima.see §9. mukeššar ‘prayer’.‘screaming’ < taškupāi. 97]. external’.‘intimidation’ < kurkuriya.forms adjectives from nouns and adverbs and probably forms numeric adjectives: išpantiya. palḫeššar ‘width’. ḫanneššar ‘judgment’. On the semantics and history of this suffix see Oettinger 2001a.‘groaning.‘sevenfold(?)’ (a beverage name based on the numeral ‘seven’.‘to cut’).15 *gaina- tar ‘in-law-ship’. Initially analyzed by Laroche (1956). pišntar ‘manliness. 2. araḫzeya- ‘outer. separate’.(ḫatuka/i.‘to make threefold’ and 4-yaḫḫ. The stem vowels of adjectives in -i.‘previous. parkeššar ‘height’. 128). 16.‘agitation. agony. wante- 15.(*mewiya-?) ‘fourfold’ in 3-yaḫḫ.indb 58 6/5/08 4:15:05 PM . Also a few collectives from nouns: e. nuntariya.‘to put’). 2. idālawatar ‘evil’.(parku..‘be(come) bright’.‘to tremble’. papreššar ‘im- purity’. ‘gift’. marlatar ‘foolishness’.39 [p. mighty’.‘empty’ < šannapi (adverb of disputed meaning). -tar ‘womanliness. (TÚG)iškalleššar ‘torn garment’. For the adverbial suffix -ili see §19.‘cold’ < e/ikuna. taruppeššar ‘total’.and -u. be in pain’. 2.(see andurza ‘inside’). šieššar ‘beer’ (< šai. ḫatreššar ‘sending.‘special. The suffix -ili. 51). (3) from nouns: anniyatar ‘mother- hood’. (de-adjectival) alwanzeššar ‘sorcery’. For an alternate explanation of 4-yaḫḫ. ḫantiya. pure’. worry’ < laḫlaḫḫiya.‘wide’) and -u. interior’ < *andur. 2.‘to make fourfold’. *3-ya- (*teriya-) ‘threefold’ and *4-ya.‘thundering’ < tetḫa- ‘to thunder’.34 Noun and Adjective Formation 58 ḫaššatar ‘procreation. antuḫštar ‘humanity’. taškupima.36. palḫi. patteššar ‘hole (dug)’.‘high’) are deleted before this suffix (see §2. clan’.‘nocturnal’ < išpant.‘internal.‘high’) are deleted before this suffix (see §2. 51). manhood’. pain’ < tuḫḫāi.37. humankind’. disrespectful- ness’. dignity’.59 (p.(šuppi.‘frightening’ §4.35. parku. *maniyaḫḫatar ‘administration’ (< maniyaḫḫ.‘brightness’ < lalukke.‘holy. palḫātar ‘width’.‘middle’ < ištarna ‘in the midst of’. lalukkima.‘trembling’ < katkattiya. 170). uppeššar ‘something sent (uppa-). 00-HittiteGrammar.15 (p. 2. šiptamiya.forms adjectives from various bases: karuili.‘swift. tarḫuili- ‘victorious. tetḫeššar ‘thunder- ing’. (2) from adjectives: ḫatugtar ‘fright’. The Hittite word may have originally meant ‘status of a human being’. The suffix -ima-16 forms common-gender action nouns from verbs and ad- jectives: ekunima. šuppeššar ‘holiness.‘to scream’. tuḫḫima. but its use in historical Hittite is always as a collective: ‘mankind. message’. 292).‘cold’.‘to be agitated’. šannapili. former’ < karū ‘formerly’.g. p. Sometimes written with geminate m.‘night’. ḫatteššar ‘hole (cut)’. laḫlaḫḫima. p. lalakueššar ‘swarm of ants’. tetḫima. TÚGkureššar ‘wom- an’s headdress’ (< *‘cut piece of cloth’ < kuer. tieššar ‘orchard’ (*‘a planting of trees’ < dai.2. womb. The suffix -eššar forms neuter action nouns and abstracts from verbs and adjectives: (deverbal) ašeššar ‘seated group’. *andayandatar ‘status of a live-in husband’.‘to press’).108 (p.2. swiftly rising’.‘to intimidate’. ištarniya. anduriya. katkattima.‘to administer’).

38.‘to become a (female) slave’ for evidence that the noun under- lying  ‘woman slave’ is derived from that underlying  ‘man slave’.indb 59 6/5/08 4:15:05 PM .32. 263. išḫiul ‘obliga- tion. akuttara.82 (p. 269. 297. 5ʹ is [.‘to comb (wool).‘femininity’. 129. The Hittite word for ‘woman’. waiter : waitress. šuppiš ‘holy/consecrated man’ and šuppeššaraš ‘virgin’ (see HE §50a. The suffix -tara. Indeterminate: *mišri- ‘brilliance’ (< *miš. treaty’ < išḫiya. sin’. immiul ‘mixture’ < immiya.‘to be anxious’. Compare Luwian nan-i-š ‘brother’ and nan-ašr-i-š ‘sis- ter’ (-ašr-). 17. 1993 196–98).in §2. See LH 43.39.forms common-gender and neuter nouns to verbal bases (some not directly attested). SÍGkišri- ‘?’ < kiš. 1993a. questioned by Güterbock (1992. Kammenhuber 1969b: 189–90. however. offense’ < wašta. On this element in onomastics see Laroche 1966: 302–6. as does Luwian wanati. Carruba 1991. EHS 109.‘brilliant’ and mišriwātar ‘brilliance’. wawarkima.‘herdsman’ < weš(iya). when added to nouns denoting human (or divine) males. The a of the verb stem is deleted before this suffix: waštul ‘sin. marks the corresponding female is the derivational suffix -(š)šara-. The correct reading of KBo 44. 111.‘lightning’. well being’ < aššu.forms neuter nouns from verbs (for their inflection see §4. and šešarul ‘sieve’ < šešariya. x NINDAwa-ge-]eš-šar 10-li. 2.’ Neuter: ētri.’17 It operates like the English -ess in pairs such as actor : actress. not [.‘to graze’. See §4.42. This suffix distinguishes the pairs ḫaššuš ‘king’ and ḫaššuššaraš ‘queen’.(weaver’s tool)19 and paḫḫurul (an implement). . On this derivation see Rößle 1998. Common: auri. 115). 261. and two from nouns: kazzarnul (a textile) < karza(n). 107): takšul ‘peace.40.‘to crumble’. 185–86.see -(a)t(t)alla. and the Hittite words underlying  ‘male slave’ and  ‘fe- male slave.(base of the deriva- tives ašraḫit. 59 Noun and Adjective Formation 2.‘to sift’.41.and kuwašša. favor. . Puhvel (HED K 306–8) agreed with Güterbock in questioning the philological basis of Neu’s example of kuinna. 2. and master : mistress. See the derived verb -aššarešš. feminine’). paršiul ‘crumb’ < paršiya. reflects the PIE root *gwen-. The suffix -ul. friendship’ < takš. 2.‘to miss the mark. Laroche 1966: 302–6.‘to eat’.‘to bind’. .‘woman’ but agreed with Carruba’s identification of the adjective kuwanša. p.18 There is one example from an adjective: aššul ‘goodness.142 (183/n) rev. . išḫaš ‘lord’ and išḫaššaraš ‘lady’.42 wantema.‘anxiety’ < werite.‘food’ < et. 00-HittiteGrammar.‘to drink’.‘to join’.forms agent nouns from verbal bases: weštara.‘twinkle’) in mišriwant. ašrul(i ).‘observation post’ < au (š ). This word is not an i-stem (contra Neu apud Rieken 1999a: 470 n.(an official) < eku-/aku. For -talla. 1995c). 124. 18. hinge’. look’. A linguistic relic which. 2. weritema. The suffix -ri.66. 2.‘woman’ see Neu 1990.‘good’. 2317). 139. 19.‘to see. še-]eš-šar-u-li.‘female’ and reconstructed the Hittite noun ‘woman’ as ku(w)an(a)-. The source of this suffix is probably an old word for ‘woman’ seen in Luwian *ašr (i). 198.(see Starke 1980).‘to mix’.‘female. On the putative Hittite kuinna.‘door-pivot.

Nerikaili (‘from Nerik’).) LÚluwiumnaš ‘of a man of Luwiya’.‘mortar bowl in which foodstuffs are crushed’ < kuškuš. Some examples may be collective plurals in -i of noun stems in -ul-. 2. 00-HittiteGrammar. and šumumaḫḫ.‘to make different’ (*tameuman. 21 and pupulli. ḫuttulli. URUšutummanaš ‘the (man) of Šuta’. Ex- amples: (sg.22 (sg. 111). Also attested is an l-stem paršul-. pluck’. Oettinger 2003: 147). unify’ (see Rieken 2000b and §9.’ Note too the ethnic pronoun kuenzumnaš ‘whatever his home’ KBo 1.15 (p. 124.forms common-gender nouns from various bases: ašandula- ‘garrisoning’.‘sea’. The fol- lowing contain -ili: Ḫattušili (‘from Ḫattuša’). These factitive verbs are derived from the zero-grade form of the 20.47. Ḫimuili (‘from Ḫemuwa’).‘to cover’. p. URU kātapūmeneš ‘the men of Kātapa’. 292).‘loop’. Personal names were often based upon ethnica (see Laroche 1957b. 2. 22. CHD P 192 s. 271. pittula. Note also arunuman. Oettinger 1982b.indb 60 6/5/08 4:15:06 PM .‘who.) mŠuppiluliumaš ‘(man) of URUŠuppiluliya’.is deleted before this suffix.forms ethnica based upon place-names (Kammenhuber 1969b: 120–21. Piriyašauma.(for *šumummaḫḫ-) ‘to make (several objects) one (*šumuman-). URUanunum(i)neš ‘the men of Anunuwa’.43. gen. Kammenhuber 1993: 194–95. kui.‘to crush’. for its inflection see §4.‘to break’.v. and note URUpalaumnili ‘in the language of the land of Pala’. The suffix -ula. Hoffner 1998c).‘bread fragment’ < parš(iya). The royal name Šuppiluliuma certainly contains the toponym URUŠuppiluliya + the suffix -uman-.) URUšudulumniš ‘(elders) of Šudul’. 1966. nom. See URUḪa-at-tu-[š]um-ma-aš KBo 7.‘ruins’ (from an un- clear base). URUḫattušummaš. 171).or the old Hat- tic -il + Hittite theme vowel -i-.43 Noun and Adjective Formation 60 2. (pl. Gašgaili (‘from the Kaška people’). 2. 2. what’ (EHS 102. stopper’ < ištapp.45. The a of the verbal stem -(i)ya. This same -uman. Arinnili (‘from Arinna’). DUG ḫariulli.‘of Nineveh’. 295.14 rev. 215. paršulli. Katapaili (‘from Katapa’). 3 (OS). 113.‘lid. and the following personal names may con- tain that suffix: Šuppiuman.‘tuft.‘maritime’ from aruna. 271) built on the interrogative-relative pron. URUšalampūmeneš ‘the men of Šalampa’.‘belonging to another’ < tamai-). The suffix -ulli-20 forms neuter instrumental and result nouns from verbs: ištappulli. The Luwian ethnicon is in -wann(i)- (Kammenhuber 1969b: 153. URUištanumnili ‘in the language of Ištanuwa. 295. something plucked’ < ḫu(i)ttiya. Naḫuma. Artumanna. 660–61. Karaḫnuili (‘from Karaḫna’).suffix is preserved in factitive verbs: tameummaḫḫ. 21. LÚ.) URU purušḫandumnan ‘the man from Purušḫanda’. Zardumanni. For kanišumnili and nešumnili ‘in the language of Kaniš/Neša (= Hittite) see §19.62. 2. The suffix -uman. These names can use either the Hittite ethnicon -uman. acc. 318): see URUninuwawann(i). Melchert 1983: 4–6.MEŠnešumeneš ‘men of Neša.’ Case uncertain from lack of context: URUuššumnaš ‘man of Ušša’.(a container).74 (p.35 iii 9 (Kammenhuber 1969b: 215. Taḫurwaili (‘from Taḫurpa’).‘body-veil’ < kariya. 268.46.44. Ḫanikkuili (‘from Ankuwa’). Ḫupešnaili (‘from Ḫupišna’). nom. kuškuššulli. (sg. 194).‘to pull. 268. kariulli.‘to stop up’.

‘gift’ < ḫenk. [ša]r-ni-ik-zi-lu-uš KUB 46.53.forms result nouns from verbs: šarnikzil. Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: §119. 96).once suspected of being this word (see Laroche 1947: 67–68 and AlHeth 84 n. uppermost’ (< *-tyo.§1.80 (p.52.‘ritual’ < aniya.136 23. 44). The a of the verbal stem -(i)ya.forms common-gender and neuter instrumental nouns from verbs: kuruzzi.and *šeḫuganiya-. URUWiyana- wanda ‘(city) having vines.‘to (pr)offer’.‘wearing a diadem’. naduwant. The suffix -(u)war forms the verbal substantive of most verbs (see §11.49. kurur.‘tool for cutting’ < kuer. 185). p. Nouns (frequently divine names) ending in -šepa.‘to per- form’. last’.‘vessel for libating’ < išpand- ‘to libate’.(Laroche 1947: 67–68) may contain a derivational suffix or be true compound nouns containing a word še/ipa.forms neuter nouns from verbs: aniur. kanir(u)want. Compare also with unclear bases: kudur. 2.90. pittuliyawant. sash’ < išḫiya.‘to bind’). and §4.38. See Goetze 1930b: 34–35.50.‘having anxiety’.‘belt.‘latter.‘(terrain) having reeds’.‘having brilliance’.‘having fear. 2. Kammenhuber 1969b: 188– 89. 2. 250) seems to denote a disease of the eyes or an impairment of vision. 10 (NH) indicates that at least šarnikzil. p. kištuwant- ‘having hunger’. 84. KUB 46. mišriwant. 00-HittiteGrammar. ḫengur.‘covered with colostrum(?)’ (GAtar (a)šgan. afraid’ (see on their formation Oettinger 1988). p.24 2.‘covered with meconium(?)’ (*šeḫugan-) are built to denominative verbs *tar(a)šganiya. kurutawant.forms adjectives from local adverbs: ḫantezzi(ya). 25.had common-gender forms as well as neuter.’ One also finds some deverbal examples: armaḫḫuwant- ‘pregnant’.‘having anger.54.is deleted before this suffix. tayazzil. HE §49d. whose geminate is not consistently written.‘spirit(?)’ that is not directly attested. The suffix -zil.‘having brightness’. The pl.20.‘thirsty’. innarawant. paradigms in §4.38 i 7.or -zipa.with assimilation to -umm.and kanešš(u)want. The suffix -uzzi. for the inflection see §4. duškarawant. lalukkiwant. In view of the last two examples in -iya-.in PIE). ešḫarwant- ‘having bloodstains’.‘higher. lupannawant.‘to cut’.48. ḫupigawant.‘compensation’.(a body part).‘having vigor’. The a of the verbal stem -(i)ya.see §1. p.42 iv 6. išpanduzzi.‘wearing a horned crown(?)’.51. first’.‘wearing a veil’. later. p. 61 Noun and Adjective Formation 2. The suffix -want-23 forms possessive adjectives from nouns: šamankurwant- ‘having a beard’.10. 114). 294. kartimmiyawant.122.‘having joy’. The suffix -zzi(ya).indb 61 6/5/08 4:15:07 PM . it is possible that the forms tar (a)šganiyawant. 2. šarazzi(ya).‘theft’. 2.alongside -šepa. Oettinger 1988.‘former.‘hostility’. The word šīpa-/šipa. appezzi(ya). see Hoffner 2005) and šeḫuganiyawant. angry’.25 For -(n)zipa.is deleted before this suffix (išḫuzzi. 37. Sihler 1995: §346 (< the “hysterokinetic suffix” -went. 2.(see §1. The suffix -ur. 24. acc. naḫšariyawant.54 suffix *-umn.

from a reanalysis of the same Luwian suffix -alla/i. EHS 119–22.58.‘forehead’). Along with the many names for plants and animals. 47). 2.‘tail’. citing lalakueša. Some are probably formed according to inherited patterns.‘lightning’. §17. šiggašigga-. words derived from baby talk (compare in English Mama. taršanzipa.(Melchert 2005b) and (4) ‘agent’ nouns in -(a)t(t)alla.indb 62 6/5/08 4:15:07 PM .26 and (6) genitival adjectives in -ašša/i-.(Oettinger 1986a).‘father’ in the com- 26. laplipa. As a suffix (or in a compound) it occurs in daganzipa. šaluwašaluwa- and kallikalli.‘deaf.‘grandmother’ belong to this class (see also pappa. dḪilanzipa.(a small animal.(a plant name). it is often difficult to decide whether a particular example involves borrow- ing or not. and .‘eyelash’ (see Luwian lalpi-). 2.(< aška. though Starke wrongly denies and Rieken underestimates the number of native Hittite examples.‘gate’). memal.55. None of the examples below can be shown to be inherited from PIE. note the common occurrence of reduplicated nouns for anatomical terms. Reduplication in both verbs and nouns is a feature of PIE (Beekes 1995: 171. and adjectives (van Brock 1964. titita.‘night’). GIŠkarkaralli-.(< ḫila- ‘court’). Hittite and Luwian vocabulary contains a considerable number of reduplicated nouns.‘esopha- gus’. gaga/i.spreads at the expense of the na- tive suffix -ala-.(Starke 1990: 153–76) and (2) participles in -m(m)i-. possibly onomatopoetic for the animal’s noise. a native Hittite suffix is reinforced by borrowings from Luwian: (5) nouns in -al-. dMiyatanzipa. For reduplicated verbal stems see §10.‘father’ (Luwian tāta/i-).‘earth’ (< tekan. ḫuḫḫa. Reduplicated Nouns and Adjectives 2. akuwakuwa.(< ḫant. while others are wholly new. wantewantema.57. imitating their repeated call?).‘platform’. deaf person’. In these last two types. but denied in HED A 26. Direct borrowings: (1) abstracts in -aḫit. 2.4 tariyattariyan. ḫalḫaltumar (i).‘tooth’. pa(p)paššala/i. and Kammenhuber 1969b: 184. 173).‘nose’. For this type see Starke 1990: 300–342 and Rieken 1999a: 445–58. tetana- ‘hair’.‘stormy weather’. Some of the derivational suffixes listed above are either borrowed from Lu- wian or created within Hittite by modification of Luwian material.‘cor- ner’.‘meal’.3).56. verbs.(< miyātar ‘fruitfulness’ [r/n- stem]).‘grandfather’. artarti.3 (p. šiša(i). dḪantašepa. duddumi.55 Noun and Adjective Formation 62 (p.from the Luwian adjectival suffix -alla/i. and ḫannaḫanna. Daddy.‘ant’).and -alli.‘mother’. A special kind of reduplication is what in German is called Lallwörter (EHS 117–19). (d)aškašepa. bye bye and terms for bodily discharges such as pee pee and poo poo). Sihler 1995: 487 §443). but the process is also highly productive cross-linguistically. The new suffix -(a)t(t)alla. ḫaršiḫarši. dIšpanzašepa.(< išpant. Among the nouns and adjectives: ḫuwaḫḫurti. anna.(bird names. It is likely that in Hittite such words as atta. 00-HittiteGrammar.‘throat’. dagan ‘earth’). Modifica- tions: (3) nouns in -alla. 2. In still other cases.

44. his table on p.‘future’ (āppa ‘after’ + šiwatt. parā ḫandandātar ‘divine power.59. . (Neu 1986.‘day’). p. Kammenhuber 1969b: 183–84. -riyašeššar ‘settlement of a city’27 (second component ašeššar ‘settlement’). in ḫullanzin and zaḫḫin. šerkurant. That all of these combinations were treated as single words is shown by the fact that. who was well aware of the syllabic reading ḫappira. LÚmukešnaš -aš. . when they are marked by determinatives (§§1. pappanekneš ‘brothers having the same father’ ( pappa ‘father’ + negna. of the normal a-stem ḫappira. which instead of -ya-še-eš-šar reads [. LÚantiyant.indb 63 6/5/08 4:15:09 PM . it is completely possible that several of those listed in the preceding paragraph owe their form to baby talk. LÚ. the interpretation of -riyašeššar as *ḫappiriyašeššar has now been placed in doubt by KBo 27. pp. 00-HittiteGrammar. pattarpalḫi. luck’.32 with n. 23–24). 63 Noun and Adjective Formation 2. the latter appear on the preceding genitive or preverb rather than on the head noun.‘city’.-]ḫuri(ya)-. The third type is formed by the combination attributive adjective + head noun: UZUparkui ḫaštai ‘(cut of meat called) pure bone’.(a bird name: ‘broad of wing’. never- theless listed this word under the  Sumerogram because he was uncertain of its syllabic Hittite reading. Neu (1974: 106–7) and Oettinger (1976a: 46) consid- ered it to be based not on a d.for . . 344).MEŠ ḫazziwaš išḫeš. acc. 28.28 with uw > um across word boundary [§1. 116).-l.34 iii 29. Neu 1986): dāyuga. kattakurant.‘sister’).‘( jug) cut off beneath’. 2.” The first type consists of nouns with a modifying genitive: LÚmaniyaḫḫiyaš išḫa-.with sg. see §26. Kammenhuber (1954: 406) and Kronasser (EHS 291) considered it to stand for *ḫappiriyašeššar and took ḫappiri as d. and possibly tārumaki-MUŠEN ‘woodpecker’ (tāru. Hoffner 1966. p.39–1.‘heart’ + -ātar). See §4.‘brother’). §9.‘(loaf) cut off above’ (Hoffner 1966). 27. appašiwatt.with wakin (tārumaki[n MUŠEN]) in the sg.-l. UZUdānḫašti ‘(cut of meat called) second bone’.3.‘son-in-law who moves in with his bride’s family’ (< anda iya-). but on an alternate stem ḫappiri(ya)-..126. not *ḫappiri(ya)-. 44]).and zaḫḫai.12 iii 4. NINDAšaramnaš ḫāliš.-]x-ḫu-ri-ya-še-eš-šar! This suggests that underlying  in this word was a word [. For wagai. pattar + palḫi-). The seond type comprises nouns derived from a preverb + verb combination (HE §53 b): (LÚ) peran ḫuyatalla. acc.‘city’. compare the derived action nouns ḫullanzai.19. . esp. tuzziyašeššar ‘camp/settle- ment of an army (tuzzi)’.‘two-year-old’ (dā ‘two’+ yuga-. HE §53 a. 92). Compounded forms also exist (Güterbock 1955. Although Neu and Oettinger may be right about ḫappiri(ya). 66 (p. zašgaraiš ‘anus’ (zaškar ‘excrement’ + aiš ‘mouth’).‘mother’ + nega. Compounded Nouns and Adjectives 2.60 pound pappanekneš ‘brothers having the same father’). fate.‘biter’ (analysis by Hoffner 1966). Friedrich (HW1 [1952] 299). 153). helper’.‘he who runs before.60. And since words for body parts are among the first acquired by young children.‘wood/tree’ + wak(a)i. etc. The negation nūman ‘not want(ing) to’ (Hoffner 1982) seems to con- sist of a negative element (nū?) added to the optative man (see CHD sub both man and nūman. annanekeš ‘sis- ters having the same mother’ (anna. p. šallakartātar ‘negli- gence’ (šalla ‘high’ + kart. There are also forms that are better described as “univerbations. a duplicate to KBo 6. providence.

and some pronouns are gender. Grammatical gender is evident (and pertinent) only in the nominative and accusative cases. 2. ega. there is a broad correlation in Hittite between the grammatical gender of a noun and the animacy of its referent: nouns denoting living beings—divine.2 and some declinable cardinal numbers) by word-final suffixes (“endings”). 133). and others) or an archaic system in which there was no feminine distinct from the masculine (so. Hittite nouns have no formal feminine gender (EHS 106–7).3. alpa- ‘cloud’. aruna.1.‘furrow’. case.‘ice’.4. and a zero ending in the singular (except in a-stems. marking the syntactic role of verbs and of nominal categories (such as noun. (see §5. pl. 3.‘sea’.4. ins. and Starke 1990: 85–87). Chapter 3 NOUN AND ADJECTIVE INFLECTION 3. But as in other systems. which can be masculine or feminine according to the biological gender of the animal referent (Sihler 1995: 244). the Hittite declen- sion of pronouns and substantives resembles that of nouns such as Latin fēlis ‘cat’ and canis ‘dog’. peruna.‘dark’.‘burden’. Harðarson 1994: 32–39. 3.‘pure’. are formal relics of the PIE feminine that have lost their original connotation as feminines (Pedersen 1938: 35–36. Hittite is an inflecting language. and neut. 59) for the suffix used by Hittites to designate females (-(š)šara-). See §2. parkui. alternatively animate and inanimate. where the ending is -(a)n).4–2. 3. 52). Many common-gender nouns denote non-living things (aimpa. or animal—are usually common or animate. Gender.. The inflectional categories of nouns. Hittite recognizes two grammatical gender classes. Oettinger 1987.. nom.indb 64 6/5/08 4:15:09 PM . ḫaluga. and numerous exceptions exist. Neu 1969: 237–41).3 Nouns 1. which show different forms for the gen.1 pronoun..39 (p.2. Likewise controversial is the suggestion that adjectives of the type dankui. It remains a matter of debate whether this reflects a prehistoric merger of inherited masculine and feminine into a common (or animate) gender (so Kammenhuber 1969b: 253. traditionally called common and neuter. ad- jectives. Kammenhuber 1969b: 253. As in other IE languages.g. Including the participles as a verbal adjective. this correlation is an imperfect one. human.6. and number.‘rock’. There is a special set of case endings for the pronouns. and only common-gender a-stems are productive in Hittite (see §§2. com. 64 00-HittiteGrammar. e.. Characteristics of the Hittite neuter or inanimate nouns are the same features that characterize neuter nouns in other old IE languages: identical forms in the nominative and accusative cases. 3. abl. adjective.. p. p. aggala.‘message’) because they belong to the a-stem class. In respect to the lack of a masculine-feminine contrast. see also Kronasser 1966: 107.

Compare the well-known example of the German diminutive suffixes -chen and -lein. -ima-. because productive t-stems are common gender. and §3.55.1–4. 46. For example.‘knee’ and the neuter root noun ker/kard.4 For example.8 4. in a ritual passage where a house is to be transformed into a ram. and other semantic fields. 7. The noun for ‘troops’ is unknown. buildings or parts of buildings..6 Of nouns referring to groups of animals. for these suffixes).” based on the undeniable widespread correlation of common gender with animacy of the referent. p. p. -eššar. -att-. MEŠ ḫazkara(i).25 i 24ʹ)7. For although the sg. 8. even diminutives referring to people are grammatically neuter: Mädchen ‘girl’. not because they are an inalienable part of the human being and therefore could be argued to be inherently “animate. nom. This is no more remarkable or significant for the overall system than the fact that grammatical gender affects poetic imagery in modern IE languages (e.5 [pp. nom. The determining fac- tor is formal. etc. are formally common or animate.when forming collectives. 53–62. ed. the neuter noun per appears as a secondary common-gender sg. Hittite also preserves the inherited neuter u-stem genu. The essentially formal basis of grammatical gender described in §3.‘liver’ and ḫaršar/ḫaršan.‘heart’.45 iv 31). §§4. . not semantic: certain suffixes or inflectional types belong to a given gen- der. Since these form neuter nouns.34 iv 7 (MH/ NS) is an ergative (Laroche 1962: 26. in contrast to the ergative parnanza of the duplicate (KUB 41. are formally neuter or inanimate. it is not unparalleled (see §1. the moon is typically depicted as a female in Romance 00-HittiteGrammar.9 below [p. where it is being depicted as an active body part.(group of female musicians) are all neuter. 5.21.5 referring to inanimate objects may be common or neuter gender.) ge-nu-un (com. 32). because the suffixes -tar and -eššar form neuter nouns. iyantan genun KBo 40.4–2.(see Hoffner 1998a: 37–40 and §3. it can hardly be accidental that genu. regardless of the semantic field to which the referent belongs (see §§2. . parnaš in one version (KBo 10. Of nouns referring to groups of humans.‘troops’ is common gender. Nouns in -aḫit-.) KUB 9. a neuter noun.5 while antuḫšātar ‘people.indb 65 6/5/08 4:15:10 PM . . . -tar. ašeššar ‘assembly’. as does -a(i). .8 [p.8 iv 30). ḫaššātar ‘family’.‘head’ are also neuter (all these belonging to well-attested neuter inflectional types in Hittite). and only common gender a-stems are productive in Hittite (see §§2. and so on. is inflected as common gender only in the phrase ‘the walking knee’ (sg. and MUNUS. -ašḫa-. ḫappiriyašeššar ‘population of a city’.3 did not prevent speakers from occasionally employing common gender to mark true “animatiza- tion. Fräulein ‘young woman’.5. wooden and metal tools. 67]). One possibility might be tuzziyant-. For con- venient lists see Tischler 2001 under the respective determinatives . etc. ḫuitar ‘wild animals’ and lala(k)ueššar ‘swarm of ants’ are neces- sarily neuter because of their stems. pp. acc. See the scribal confusion about the same construction in i-ya-an-ni-ya-an (neut. Nouns in -ala-. Hutter 1988: 38–39. This formal factor over- rides the general tendency of nouns referring to humans and animals to be common gender. -al-.15–2. The same principle applies to nouns referring to plants and to all kinds of manufactured items. 3. such as containers..‘knee’. 65 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3. while lišši. 72): li-in-ki-ya-az KUB 30. 79–82]).g. humanity’..” but because they belong to the a-stem class. and MUNUS. 6.135.MEŠḫazkaraiyaza / ḫazkaranza are alternate spellings of the ergative of ḫazgarai. many body parts are common gender. 82–83.-az in KBo 17.-t. 52].34 iii 37. although their referents are animate. as claimed by Tischler (2001: 222) and others.1 i 30 (OS) would be an unusual spelling for /-ants/. Similarly.

Hoffner 1992a) the word attaz is followed im- mediately by ḫu-uḫ-ḫ[a?-.31 and its duplicate KUB 57. 3.) (see further §3. or instrumental.6. First. He properly labeled this form an “ergative. and §16.6 Noun and Adjective Inflection 66 3. ..8. while direct objects of transitive verbs appear in the accusative. For two reasons it is necessary to insist on the unremarkable facts cited in §§3. and the following context refers to . expressing location (goal for these nouns being marked in OH only by the allative in -a. it furnishes direct counterevidence for the second claim. Starke (1977: 122–26) has in- correctly claimed that in OH there was a grammatical contrast in the behavior of nouns referring to persons and animals (“Personenklasse”) and those referring to inanimate ob- jects (“Sachklasse”). We stress that we insist here only on the validity of the split ergative system for attested Hittite.9 Specifically: (1) case forms in -i of nouns referring to living beings are allegedly attested in OH only in functions belonging to the dative (recipient. We take no stand on its historical origin (for an alternative to the view presented by Garrett (1990b).1. and Tjerkstra 1999: 7 and 100 n.21. as the context suggests. p. with refs.31:1 (OS) is a form of ‘father’. and Josephson 2003a and 2004). ‘sons’.65.) or -anteš (pl. 13 §§2. ⸗ and negnan ‘brother’. 258. p.9–10. only a deriva- tional suffix -(š)šara. as established by Laroche (1962). 11.” Case syntax in Hittite for the most part operates according to an “accusative” system typical for an IE language: subjects of both transitive and in- transitive verbs appear in the nominative. the status of ergativity in PIE is 00-HittiteGrammar.” although his own characterization of its behavior left ample room for doubt.68.3– 3.107. “Split Ergativity. p. this analysis has been uncritically accepted by a number of scholars (e. §16. 257. Since the “gender” opposition in Hittite contrasts only animate and inanimate. while case forms in -i of nouns referring to inanimate objects occur only in the function of a locative.3.. If the word attaz in KBo 20. there is no formal distinction between masculine and feminine gender. Furthermore.indb 66 6/5/08 4:15:12 PM .11 Pronouns and common-gender nouns follow the “accusative” pattern: as subjects they appear in the nominative (whether languages. p. the distribution of which can be conditioned by a variety of grammatical factors.9 below).7. 269). 22). ablative.(§2.]. Unfortunately. and  ‘mother’.69 (ed. it obligatorily takes the form -anza (sg. where it is masculine gender). “Split ergativity” refers to a situation in which a language uses both accusative and ergative patterns of case syntax side by side. but as a male in German. goal. In KBo 20.10 For further evidence refuting both (1) and (2) see the examples cited in the respective paragraphs on the case syntax of the dative-locative (§16.39. and one from whom something is removed). However. p.g.70. p. 9.1. 259) and the instrumental (§16.8–3. misconceptions about the distinction have prevented a proper appreciation of the role of the ergative case (see §§3. and place from which only by the ablative). 3. when a neuter noun func- tions as the subject of a transitive verb.5. 72). 10. (2) nouns referring to living beings (“Personenklasse”) never occur in OH in the allative. .5 regarding the relationship of grammatical gender and semantic animacy in Hittite. Luraghi 1997a: 8 §2. compare Oettinger 2001b: 311–12. 59) used to form nouns denoting human (or divine) females from corresponding male-denoting nouns. Garrett (1990b) has since demonstrated that Hittite nominal syntax shows precisely the features expected of a language with a “split ergative” system. where the word is feminine gender. 3. Second.

(female musicians) is semanti- cally animate. Luraghi 1987. 3. Neu 1989b. The fact that the word appears as MUNUS.9. HE §§54–56). Others who reject the notion of ergativity in Hittite include Benveniste 1962b.MEŠḫazkara(i). As stressed by Hoffner (1998a: 37–40). For example. Nor is the notion of being “active” the determining factor.g. we would not expect it to show the features of a fully ergative language such as Hurrian. 67 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3. The second claim is simply false.8 iv 30. and Oettinger 2001b. on which see. as in n⸗uš attaš nepišanza -an tarna ‘O father heaven. the Hit- tites in a few instances also used the available ergative marker for the same purpose.11 the verb is transitive or intransitive) and as direct objects in the accusative.” 13. it appears in one version (KUB 41. 3. wātar arašzi ‘water flows’. It is illogical to say that -anza here “animatizes” a noun that is already semantically animate. Just as formally defined grammatical gender occasionally is employed to mark genuine animacy of a usually inanimate referent (see §3. Comrie 1998. Rumsey 1987. where the ergative pattern applies only to a subset of the nominal system. and Marazzi 1996: 161–62. extending its usage in such cases beyond its proper grammatical sphere. Kammenhuber 1985: 452–55. e. That the ergative may occasionally function simultaneously as appositional direct address without abandoning its ergative role. 34) as parnanza as subject of both an intransitive and transi- tive verb. The first of these objec- tions is irrelevant: since Hittite shows split ergativity. OH distinguishes as many as eight cases of the noun and adjective in the singular and as many as six in the plural (Forrer 1922. so. They are: an entirely separate issue. Rejection of an ergative case in Hittite has been based on two invalid objections (for both see.indb 67 6/5/08 4:15:13 PM . 00-HittiteGrammar. 12. Carruba 1992. unsurprisingly.11. but as a collective it happens to be grammati- cally neuter. These and other facts confirm that the selection of the endings -anza and -anteš is grammatically conditioned (by neuter gender and subjecthood of transitive verbs) and has nothing to do with semantic ani- macy.. referring only to persons. among others. (2) -anza/-anteš belong to a quasi-derivational -ant-suffix that semantically “animatizes” neuter nouns referring to inanimates (when they are functioning in what is loosely labeled an “active” sense). Case. but in the “ergative” as the subjects of transitive verbs. in a ritual context where a house is likened first to a ram and then to a ewe. Grammatically neu- ter nouns referring to persons or things appear in the nominative-accusative (properly “absolutive”) when they are the subjects of intransitive action verbs: ašeššar šarā tiyazi ‘the assembly stands up’. For the sake of simplicity.12 3.5). Starke 1977: 182 n.10. Villar 1983. “Ergative case” is the only proper characterization for such a feature. the noun MUNUS. 24):13 (1) Hittite does not show the features of a typical ergative language such as Hurrian. turn them back!’ is also unremarkable.MEŠḫazkaraiyaza / ḫazkaranza just when it is the subject of a transitive verb confirms that the ending -anza marks ergative case. we elsewhere retain the traditional term “nominative-accusative” for the case that should properly be termed “absolutive. But neuter nouns follow an “ergative” pattern: they appear in the “absolutive” case as the subjects of intransitive verbs and objects of transitive verbs.

survive in NH only in isolated expressions. 3. These collective forms have been previously regarded incorrectly as neuters and their occurrence on substantives of common gender as evidence for hetero- genericity in Hittite nouns (for heterogenericity see §15. in the declension of substantives and pronouns (for the lat- ter. Of the terms for body parts occurring in pairs (eyes. and the instrumental means or accompaniment. (3) accusative. The latter two cases are indifferent to number throughout the history of the language. The plural in OH contrasts nominative. dGulšeš/Gulšuš ‘the Fates’ (goddesses). which had only the collective plural (Eichner 1985). išmeri. OH also preserves the PIE contrast between a “count” (or “distributive”) plural and collective plural in common-gender nouns (Neu 1969. plus ablative and instrumental (but the last two cases show no contrast between singular and plural). and clitic pronoun distinguish singular from plural in OH in all cases but the instrumental (ending -(i)t) and ablative (ending -(a)z). productive in OH and MH. nostrils.12 Noun and Adjective Inflection 68 (1) vocative. genitive. One such device was to use the only appropriate endings it had—namely. There was origi- nally no such contrast for neuter nouns.14 A ninth case.3). In post-OH the genitive is identical in singular and plural. These examples do not show alternation in gender but rather a contrast in number: alpa ‘bank of clouds’ vs. (5) allative. with references (citing da(n)ḫašti. and plural (Szeme- rényi 1996: §7.1. (4) genitive.15 Thus. see chapters 5–8) Hittite distinguishes only singular and plural number.21).8–3.12. Hittite nominal cases function like those in other case languages: the nominative marks the subject.‘reins’ and elzi. Inflectional endings of the noun. Neu 1992. Number. Animate nouns contrasted a “count” or “distributive” plural with a collective plural (Eichner 1985). PIE substantives distinguished singular. For traces of the dual in Hittite and Luwian see among others Rieken 1994: 52–53. p. Hittite did develop several devices for providing a count plural for neuter nouns. the ablative place from which.9 and §3. occurs only with neuter nouns. and (8) instrumental. 3. adjective. Eichner 1985. their appearance in the ergative case as subjects of transitive verbs still results in only an eight-way contrast within the paradigm of neuter nouns. gul-aš-ša ‘fate’ (of a person) vs.13. (2) nominative. The OH allative marks only place to which. (6) dative-locative. the dative-locative the indirect ob- ject or place in/to which.indb 68 6/5/08 4:15:15 PM . See Melchert 2000: 62–64 for further instances. The common gender nominative and accusative plural also merge in NH. Melchert 2000). Since neuter nouns do not distinguish nominative and accusative. dual. 240). the ergative (§§3.‘double-bone’. 15. those of the 14. For literature on the dual see Szemerényi 1996: §7. the accusative the direct object. The Old Anatolian languages such as Hittite show only indirect traces of the dual. 3.14. etc. and dative-locative. (7) ablative. ears. 00-HittiteGrammar.13. The allative and in- strumental. accusative. These scattered examples are treated synchronically as collective plurals. alpeš/alpuš ‘(individual) clouds’.).‘scales’). For the uses of the cases in detail see chapter 16. the genitive possession. Dative and locative singular have already merged into a common “dative-locative” form in the singular in OH. only šākuwa ‘(two) eyes’ has a possibility of ultimate derivation from an old dual.

14 common-gender nouns: e.indb 69 6/10/08 7:37:54 AM .22). 22 erg.21 -i 21. -aš -aš -aš 24 d. including Luraghi (1997a: §2. -aš 18 -an (cons. With consonantal stems.75 iii 19 (OS). dḪal-ki-ya ( paršiya. See §3. 19. lu-ut-ti-ya KBo 8. 00-HittiteGrammar.). 16 17 nom. 21.2 i 56 (OS). KBo 17. See §3.-acc. see Konk. For the rules governing the choice see §3. -n (a-stems) -∅. §4. Plural nom. For these see the detailed paragraphs which follow the paradigm.g. Extremely rare alternative endings have been omitted. luttaeš and luttauš ‘windows’ for neuter luttai. With and without lengthening of the vowel of the stem. p. in sequence with all other DNs in d. 107 (šarnikzil). ša-ni-ya ši-wa-at ‘on the same day’ KBo 3.14. -n -∅.-a. with the plural of neuter nouns marked by the endings of the old collective. For the sake of simplicity.22:60 (OS).10 rev. stems) -an (cons. Luraghi (1997a: §2. But what is attested (as a hapax) is only -iaš (see below.-l. Inflectional Endings The Basic Scheme 3. -n.1. com.2 i 7 (OS). ḫu-wa-ši-ya KUB 28.-l. 20. The contrast between collective and count plural appears to have been lost by NH. We have found no unambiguous case in Old Script.15. -uš.82. -aš -an.6). -ya (i-stems). The endings -a and -i are used with consonantal stems and -i with verbal substantives.75 iii 25 (OS). OS examples: GIŠ ḫu-lu-ka-an-ni-ya (eša) KBo 17. 31). as have all except the most straightforward distributional restrictions. See §3. stems) n.74++ ii 5 and passim (OS?. pl. -aš -i. ša-ni-ya ú- it-ti ‘in the same year’ KBo 3. For the use of a suffix -ant. -anza -anteš -anza -anteš 23 gen. lu-li-ya ‘in a vat’ KBo 6.16. Some. Also -s in nekuz (§3. -š. neut. §4. the collective endings are for the most part referred to below as “nominative-accusative plural neuter” except in those cases where they clearly belong to common-gender nouns. com. 21 -∅. sg. 6 (OS). stems) stems). -i. in -an in OH. See §3.) KUB 41.19 -a. 24. The following paradigm shows the basic scheme of noun and adjective endings in Hittite.. 69 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3.‘window’. ta-ki-i-ya URU-ri ‘in another city’ KBo 6. -∅ -eš -š -uš. pl. 23. -aš -∅ (cons. -ai 25 16. 18.74++ iii 20 (OS). -uš -n. -ya (i. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Old Hittite New Hittite Case sg. -a. -eš. in -a or -i belonging to certain common-gender forms are collectives.15 rev! 20 (OS).20. where one finds only singular and plural.20.6) adds -aš.26 (p. claim sg. 22. -eš. -e. n. -∅. p.to show a count plural of collectives see §9. -aš 18 acc. 115 (some nouns in -ar).65.23. 159).1.22:10 (OS). gen.20. KUB 28. 17.

see §1. There is a single exception [ḫa-an-te-e]z-zi-aš ‘first. and pl.11 (p. acc. nu⸗wa⸗šmaš 5-anduš `⸗pat peḫḫi ‘I do not give them good ones’ KUB 13.19 (p.2 + KUB 48.(mostly -nt-) use -eš with a few exceptions. -a -a 27 abl. The -aza ending is secondary and not attested in Old Hittite (OS). common-gender ending is /-s/. continues into NH. The appearance of -iaš for -ieš could show an isolated early example (OS) of the change cited for MH in this paragraph and in §4.2 obv.28 -za 29 -az(a) ins. the reigns of Ḫattušili III. Plural common. In NH the allative was replaced by the dative-locative.82. 30. sg.A-aš HKM 19:6 (Hoffner forthcom- ing: §53). ši-it-tar-za ‘with sundisks’ and ne-pí-iš-za ‘from heaven’. -er-za ‘from the house’ (§3. tabarnai KUB 44. 31. pl.g. šekkanduš KBo 23. (2) stems in -t. 31). nom. The OH ending is -eš.. §56.116 iii 21 (MS). 00-HittiteGrammar. for all stem classes. the sg. Variable use of -eš and -uš for both pl. acc. 107. -d/ta 30 Common-Gender Nominative 2526 27 28 29 30Table of nominative endings. pl.16.31 In the MH Maşat letters.(see §4.1 iii 9. 27.24. The ablative and instrumental are indifferent to number. com. -i. 28.68. com. crop’: ḫal-ki ḪI. The ending -uš becomes the regu- lar ending for a merged pl. com.e. -az(a). MUNUStawanannai KBo 17. Šuppiluliuma II) a stable distribution is achieved (Melchert 1995).26. 3. With the exception of a few nouns with stems in -ar. 29. 37). older’ KBo 22. -d/ta -it. 74). acc. -∅ -∅ 26 all. -eš for the accusative): see Hoffner forthcoming: §54. The ending -aš also appears on i-stem nouns such as ḫalki. 23.. and duwarnanduš in iv 12. nom. e. 3. for šarnikzil).‘grain. in -amuš). See labarnai -i KUB 2.60 iii 15. p. nom. as per Neu (1979a: 192). dMammai KUB 27. but an archaism is also possible. it is an archaism and not a form of current speech. The vocative and allative did not exist in the plural. ending -uš begins to be used for the nominative (and the pl. 32.indb 70 6/5/08 4:15:17 PM . com. Singular common. -e. nom.90 (p. p. To the extent that a distinctive allative form in -a occurs in NH compositions. 25 (oracle questions about Urḫi-Teššub). For an explanation of this ending see §3. URUĒblai KBo 32. 3. p. The ending -za is confined to consonantal stems. com. it is an archaism and not a form of current speech.19 iii 37ʹ (MH/MS).114 obv. all of which take a zero ending. 18.32 (3) the 25.-acc. but by late NH (i.65.35+ ii 8 (Hatt. 13) and §1. -it.88 + KBo 24. p. end. with the following exceptions: (1) u-stem adjectives generalize -aweš (eliminating the irregular pl. 115) and possibly a few with stems in -zil.67 ii 45. To the extent that the instrumental occurs in NH compositions. On the cuneiform writing of this /s/ on stems ending in nt and Vt.15. None of these examples is found in OS. com.(see §4. In NH the instrumental was replaced by the ablative. the pl. 26 voc. Tudḫaliya IV. 87) for NH i-stems (see also §1.16 Noun and Adjective Inflection 70 Old Hittite New Hittite Case sg. 26. III).

generalizes kuiēš (§8.33 There is thus no merger between the plural nominative-accusative and the plural dative-locative in NH. .16.-iš (= šiuniš) ‘deities’.-loaves’. but -ieš and -aeš continue to be found. Common-Gender Accusative 3.2. which is 33.20 relative-interrogative kui. Neuter Nominative-Accusative 3.-i[š] (= ḫaššuiš) ‘former kings’. tekan ‘earth’.] KBo 16. genuwa ‘knees’.20. ḫa-a-ra-ni-iš MUŠEN ‘eagles’ (§1. ḫaššun ‘king’ < ḫaššu + n). p. taru ‘tree. In any event. ḫalkin ‘grain’ < ḫalki + n. pl. a-stems add an -n: ezzan ‘chaff. one has to assume scribal corruption of the following passage: kāša⸗wa ammel tuēggaš⸗miēš ānta ‘Now my body parts are warming up’ VBoT 58 i 24 (OH/NS). i-da-la-u-i-ìš and al-wa-an-zi-ni-ìš (reading EŠ as ìš. possessive clitic and the medio-passive pres.57.-ši-iš (= antuḫšiš) ‘evil persons’. which show mostly -iuš and -auš. nom. 8.34 unambiguous writings of the nominative plural common ending as -iš occur: i-da-la-u-i-35 . pedan ‘place’. . 3. For developments in MH and NH see §3. -iš (= negniš) ‘brothers’. p. kunnan ‘right’. such as GIŠišparuzzi ‘rafters’ and idālu uddār ‘evil words’ (see p. com.75.17.18. al-wa-an-zi-ni- an-tu-uḫ-ši- iš ‘sorcerous persons’. where the plene written -mi-e-eš for the pl.19.-iš (= pišniš) ‘men’. On the neuter nominative-accusative plural in general in Hittite see Gertz 1982. a value that the sign unques- tionably has in late NH). nom. 35. as shown by the fact that in later texts the zero ending is replaced by -a (ḫaliya ‘corrals’. see Melchert 1995: 271).-u[š].-i [š .-acc. which because of kē cannot be read . ending would be very rare prior to NH.. 34.indb 71 6/5/08 4:15:18 PM . idālawa ‘evils’).. n. idālu ‘evil’. hence.45 obv. . šuel ‘thread’. There is no tendency to merge neuter nominative-accusative singular and plural (contra Prins 1997). cited by Mel- chert 1995). No such regularity is found for i-stems. com. In older texts we find a zero ending for neuter plural i-stems and u-stems. 112). A possible earlier example occurs in MH/MS: kē⸗a . §4. 00-HittiteGrammar. 3 a-a-an-ta point to a plural subject tuēggaš. Consonantal stems use -an (kardimmiyattan ‘anger’ < kardimmiyatt + an). along with -iyaš (and rarely even -aš and -iš. yugan ‘yoke’. wood’. šalli ‘great’. instances of this writing of the pl. and Watkins 1982). most nouns and adjectives use the bare stem: aiš mouth. The accusative singular of common-gender nouns with vocalic stems is -n (antuḫšan ‘human’ < antuḫša + n. In late NH. Plural common. . 28. nom. there is no compelling evidence for the ending -aš as pl. Singular common. . other than with i-stems. In view of the unambiguous -iš ending on the nouns. 149) (see McIntyre. ka-ru-ú-i-li-iš . 3. straw’. If our claim is valid. 71 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3. In the neuter nominative-accusative singular. p. ekan ‘ice’. šarliya ‘š. it is possible that the attributive adjectives also had this ending. ḫaḫḫal ‘brushwood’. 121. The OH ending is -uš. Contrary to repeated claims. 103. com.

A (§4. p.98 iv 21 (CHD L–N 64 “pl.81. p.89. [ḫuw]alliššananza < ḫu(wa)lliš(n). p.‘oath’.37. p. 66). nom. matter’. 114).85. 67). šuppeššarri ḪI. and minumarri ḪI.‘bone’.. and an individualizing idea is required for the plural. in all occurrences the verbs of which the noun is the subject are plurals. Ergatives built to a collective stem are known in the case of [MUNUS]. p. 46]) or -anteš in the plural.”) of lingai.g.‘window’. 184). aniyatta is attested already in OS (see Neu 1983: 15–16 n.‘oath(-deity)’ (§3.94. possessions’.indb 72 6/5/08 4:15:19 PM . 106). and r-stem adjectives and nouns such as zankilatarri ḪI. singular ḫuidar ‘wildlife’ (written variously: collective ḫu-u-i-tar. it takes an ergative case ending: -anza in the singular (rarely written -az. There are rare exceptions: GIŠluttanza < luttai-/luttiy.81. 3. plural widār (written ú-i-da-a-ar) ‘waters. p. (bodies of) water’.A. ḫu-u-i-ta- a-ar. the ergative end- ings are regularly attached to the oblique stem: ḫaštiyanza < ḫaštai-/ḫaštiy. The ending -i is attested principally with the verbal substantives of the type arkuwarri ḪI. Although in this case the ergative singular ending -a(n)za was selected. 00-HittiteGrammar. In all three of the above examples.‘?’. and possibly linkiyanza and linkiyanteš ‘oath- deity/-deities built to the collective kuie -- MEŠ (*lingai) dapianda KBo 16. but never with plene writing in final syl- lable). p.‘fire’. ḫu-i-da-a-ar. ḫu-u-e-da-ar. 131. šāwarri.A (§4. while aniyatti is attested only in post-OS. p.21 Noun and Adjective Inflection 72 the regular ending for consonantal stems such as šuppala (see §4. ḫalḫaltumari. when a neuter noun appears as the subject of a transitive verb. [MUNUS. A few neuter nouns (principally in -r/n-) also directly continue an archaic PIE pattern by which the plural nominative-accusative was distinguished from the singular by a different ab- laut pattern (see §3. §4. and aniuri (§4. 78): singular wādar (written wa-a-tar) ‘water’. p. nom.133.MEŠḫ]a-az-ka-ra-an-za ‘female temple musicians’37 built to the collective ḫazkarai (for which see Hoffner 1998a). showing that the plurality of the referent was kept in mind (see again Hoffner 1998a).135 [p. distributive plural ḫuidār ‘beasts’ (written ḫu-i-ta-a-ar. the old plural of the adjective a-aš-šu ‘good’. 74). MUNUS.84. a collective idea is either possible or explicit in the singular. In cases where there is a difference between the nominative-accusative and oblique stem in the base neuter noun. 127).21. linki- yanza/linkiaz and linkiyanteš < lingai-/linkiy. singular uttar ‘word.A.MEŠḫa-az-qa-ra-i- ya-za. see §1. 36. kudurra (see §4. 117. 46). As described in §3. the plene writing of the final syllable reflects the original presence of a laryngeal (*-uh2) (see Watkins 1982 and AHP 86. paḫḫuenanza < paḫḫur/paḫḫuen. neut.10. p. for the forms see HED H 353–54). 119) and aniyatta (see §4. 37. p. ḫu-i-ta-ar. Ergative 3.64. kururi ḪI. iškiša (see §4.36 Some neuter r/n-stems that regularly take a zero ending also show plurals with deletion of the final -r (e. but we also find aniyatti alongside aniyatta.MEŠḫa!-az-ka-ra-a-i-ya-za. utterance. In the word a-aš-šu-u ‘goods. 117).104. kušduwāta ‘calumnies’.A (see HE §185 b 2).8 (p. plural uttār (written ud-da-a-ar) ‘words’. 121). 114). One must be careful to distinguish the ergative endings -anza and -anteš on neuter nouns from the homophonous sg. ḫuppari. §1. always with plene writing in last syllable.

and all OH occurrences can be so read. although there is a rare use of -š with nekuz in the set phrase nekuz meḫur ‘at twilight time’ (originally *‘time of twilight’) (see Rieken 1999b: 84 with n.-men’ (OH/MS). araḫzenan  .. gen. The first example refutes the claim (Kammenhuber 1969c: 254–55 [§30. 46) from the ablative ending (see §3. 400). n. gen. Other forms such as -az (= šiwaz) ‘in/on the day’ may not be genitives but nominatives. only the ending -aš (from PIE *-os) is widely attested. In OH there existed a distinct form for the pl. the gods of earth’ KUB 26. Plural. see p. For the genitive singular in PIE the endings: -es/-os/-s are posited (Sihler 1995: 248. The genitive personal names mNunnuš and mTaruḫšuš and the DN dTašammaz of the old language (so Neu 1979a: 185–86 with n. on which see p. 55. 22) may be relics of such a gen. 89). Singular. 311. 00-HittiteGrammar. com. Laroche’s own conclusion (1965: 40) that -an originally had a collective meaning has no basis in fact. One must further distinguish the ergative ending -anza when it is spelled without the -n. See also §4. ending -enzan.22. cited CHD L–N 448 as either sg. taknaš .. ending -aš.2c] and 304–5 [§42]) that the ending was limited to semantically animate nouns. 313). ‘stool of the feet’ (OS).indb 73 6/5/08 4:15:19 PM . Genitive 3.MEŠḫāpian parna ‘to the house of the ḫ. šiunan antuḫšiš ‘people of the gods’ (OH/NS). there are no assured OS examples of -an marking genitive singular (-an āški in Laws §187 may be ‘to/in the gate of the kings’.)] ‘the gods of the heavens. n. Apparent examples of -an as a singular in post-OS copies of OH archetypes either are not genitives (see Laroche) or may be errors. . which becomes the only genitive ending in NH. 39.(whether these endings are historically related is a separate question. One example from a MH text might be explained by a plural conception of the sky.6:6ʹ–7ʹ (the duplicate KBo 8. 11). . WSem šmm): nepišan [(.< /siuns/ + /anna-/?).39 Despite repeated claims.23 and pl. 3. marked by an ending in -an < PIE *-ōm (Laroche 1965. some examples of this ending must be interpreted as plurals. 73 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3. 98) and §4.38 As shown by Laroche (1965: 33–41). It occurs on padānn⸗a GIŠ. LÚ.- ‘the lands of the surround- ing enemies’ (OH/NS). His claim of a prehistoric collective value for -an is refuted by the ex- clusively plural meaning of the cognate endings Lycian -e῀ and Lydian -aν. 77).). p.50 (p. gen.-n⸗a .35 ii 10 reads nēpišaš . gen. Kammenhuber 1969c: 304–5.135. 2003: 196).33. Beginning already in OH we find a competing pl. p.-n⸗a ištarna ‘among brothers and sisters’ (OH/ NS). but rests entirely on his erroneous prehistoric analysis of the pronominal pl. It is impossible to determine whether this ending reflects a merger with the dative-locative plural or the genitive singular. and . in -š (opposed by Melchert 1984a) but pose problems that cannot yet be resolved.-nan⸗a ištarna ‘but (-a/-ma) among the gods’ (OS). 98. analogous to the plural form in the Semitic languages (Akkadian šamû. For the Hittite sg. Szemerényi 1996: 160.-an parna ‘to the house of the (royal) children’ (OS). . 100) (šiunzanna. Meier-Brügger 2000: 183.as -az(a) (see §1. 38. as his analysis of the attestations shows. or pl.44 (p. gen. endings of common-gender stems in -ant.23.

*-i. 28). Neu 1979a: 188). 40. ending in OS is -i.32.26. p. §3. [dApr]itai. In MH and NH we also find rarely -e: [ḫ]ūmante⸗ya HKM 88:5 (MH/MS). From a pre-Hittite IE locative in *-we/on-t-i was derived the infinitive in -wanzi. Vocative 3. see p. ending in -i in the singular. n. 185. The only sg. 130). possibly also nepišza (versus nepišaz. ending correctly in -ai: šallai ḫaššannai ‘to the great family’. 71.-l. and ketkarza and tapušza. producing an ending -ai (e. 77.89 [p. often but not always in the nominative (see §16.” also posited for PIE by Meier-Brügger 2000: 183. Singular. -er (*per) ‘in the house’. loc. p. keššar ‘in the hand’ (see p. 118. 3. For another view. In the case of a-stems. labarnai). the stem-vowel is usually deleted before the d. and MUNUStawanannai (so again Neu 1979a: 188. The few examples of the dative-locative of u-stems like -ru are probably merely scribal errors but in any case do not reflect anything archaic in PIE terms. 197).32 and §4. dat. while the supine in -wan may have been derived from the endingless locative *-we/on (Laroche 1970: 41–42.25. n. 190) and -er (*ker) ‘in the heart’. n. 109. see Szemerényi 1996: 160–61. In other cases the a-stem vowel was not deleted in a foreign word or foreign name: URUĒblai. A zero ending (an “endingless locative. loc.2 iv 10ʹ (MH/NS). In Hittite the dative and locative. 183). whose archaic status is shown by the fact that they are attested only as adverbs. This rare ending is a sporadic innovation and does not represent an archaism (so. in pl.24.16.indb 74 6/5/08 4:15:20 PM .27. dat. and possibly also tapuwaš ‘on the side/rib’ (see p.24 Noun and Adjective Inflection 74 Dative-Locative 3. Neu 1979a: 189). p. 119] with n. 245). an archaism (Neu 1980): -erza (versus parnaz. p. KUB 13. 3. 3.115. -aš in the plural. lamman ‘in/on the name’ (see p. which were formally distinct in both singular and plural in PIE (in sg. and the u-stem forms a-aš-ša-u-e and i-da-la-u-e cited above in §1. §3.32 for ablative forms built on the endingless locative. Plural entities are addressed using appositives. This is the regular ending throughout Hittite.. Meier-Brügger 2000: 183.37 and n. followed by Miller 2004: 141). labarnai.28. 2003: 196. nepiš ‘in heaven’. have merged. n. 00-HittiteGrammar.40 In some cases it can plausibly be explained as influenced by an im- mediately preceding i-stem attributive adj. For examples and uses see below in chapter 19. 36. *-bh(y)os. A voc. but in a few cases we find the ending added to the stem in -a-. dagan ‘on the ground’. correctly. with additions by Oettinger 1982c): šiwat ‘on the day’. §4. ending -i. 3. dMammai. -su. *-mos. 94). but not by Szemerényi 1996: 160) also exists for a small group of nouns (Neu 1980.-l. *-ei. 142). deriving the Hittite infinitive from an old ablative. 2003: 196–97). 116. The vocative proper exists only in the singular.61 (p. The plural always had only one ending (-aš) throughout the Hittite period. d. See below in §3.g. Forms of the dative-locative of the i-stem adjectives šuppai and šallai are not examples of this ar- chaic ending but can be explained in terms of the behavior of i-stem adjectives (see §4.

great king’. mTuttu ⸗ ‘Tuttu is his name’) from u-stem vocatives. Regardless of its prehistoric source (on which see the refs. See. d-ta atta⸗šu[mmi] ‘O Tarḫunta. 42.42 In at least two cases.indb 75 6/5/08 4:15:21 PM . . and .(see §2. For a possible third instance (lāli ‘O tongue’) see p. with -e: d-e (= dIštanue) išḫa⸗mi ‘O Sungod. (u-stems:) dMukišanu ‘O Mukišanu’. In Hittite. In OH. speakers could have analogically created vocatives in -anti by analyzing ergative /-ants/ as /-ant+s/ and adding the productive -i to the presumed stem /-ant-/. Hittite speakers used vocatives in -anti: pedanti ‘O place!’. Com- pare: (a-stems:) išḫā-mi ‘my lord’. To serve as the vocative of the neuter nouns pedan ‘place’. Eichner 1974b: 234–35).1. *ḫaššue) ‘O Ištanu. in n. and d -e šarkui -ue ‘O Sungod.127 i 1. 15).18 ii 7 and the form in question understood as a dative concluding the preceding clause. such as in n⸗uš attaš nepišanza -an tarna ‘O Father Sky. it has an ending in zero). -anz(a) /-ants/ that marks a subject matches formally the sg. for an alternative explanation. nom.g. The use on vocatives of the clitic possessives in -met/- mit (d⸗met ‘O my Sungod’. p. release 41. 25.-ant. 44. which show i-mutation (§4.either directly or indirectly: directly.-an-ti ‘O Silver!’43 3. -iš-š]i . []-ni⸗mi ‘O my brother’. -ui (*ḫaššui) ‘O king’ (Neu 1979a: 179. 75 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3. Consonantal stems seem to show both the bare stem and the -i ending: dWišūriyanta ‘O Wisuriyant!’ (read [wisuriyant/d]). ⸗mit ‘O my son’. p.25. 11.2) to distinguish u-stems in nam- ing constructions (e.6. which only occur in MS or NS copies of older texts is based on a misunderstanding of the clitic possessives by copyists who no longer had these as a living part of their language.29 (sg. u-stem appellatives and names take the ending -i/-e: d-i (*dIštanui) ‘O Sungod’. 81. com. but pedanti ‘O place!’ and . of a stem in -ant-. and §6. and .-an-ti ‘O Silver!’. a-stem nouns have a vocative in -i with the a-stem vowel deleted be- fore it: atti⸗me ‘O my father’ and []-ni⸗mi ‘O my brother’ (= *negni⸗mi from negna-) (see CHD sub -mi-e 2ʹ and negna-). 86–87). Thus. The absence of assibilation makes it extremely un- 00-HittiteGrammar. dIštanui šarku -ue ‘O Ištanu. Such writings do not represent a real usage of any period (see Otten 1973: 55. [dAla]waimi le⸗aš namma zaḫḫiškeši ‘O Alawaimi.) ending in zero is posited for PIE (see Szemerényi 1996: 160.e. show either -i or -e vocalization in the vocative: išḫā-mi ‘my lord’. šalli ‘great’ in dIštanu -li -ue (i. atti⸗me ‘O my father’.. nepiš. 43. pp. if one views them as vocatives corresponding to ergatives in -anz(a).. ⸗mit ‘O my lord’. don’t fight them any longer’.29. 56).17. 2003: 196). however. n. Although the break before the form in question might be restored as [.. 141).44 or instead of the vocative they used an appositional direct address. heroic king!’ (ibid. pre-eminent king’. Meier-Brügger 2000: 183–84. sg.as contemporary examples of the “individualizing” suffix -ant. No unambiguous example of a vocative form of a neuter substantive is yet known in Hittite. if one interprets pedant. most common nouns and adjectives (including a few u-stems)41 the vocative appears as the bare stem (i. erg. my lord!’ KUB 31. With i-stems the evidence is inconclusive: d Kumarbi. This fact seems to undermine Luraghi’s attempt (1997a: §2. These forms show the vocative ending -i with stems in -ant. The enclitic possessive pronouns. . 66). ou[r] father’. p. in cases of genuine personification.‘sky’.- an-ti lē⸗mu⸗kan kueš[i] KUB 36. indirectly. dImpaluri.e. wappu⸗mit ‘O my river bank’).and .11. since both use the bare stem. ‘silver’.

Schmal- stieg.30. since the neuter noun here takes a transitive verb. p.13. The ‘place’ addressed by the vocative pedanti is to be thought of in some sense as capable of understanding and responding to the address and therefore “animate. Old Hittite had in the singular a noun case ending in -a indicating motion ‘to’. acc. In the case of Silver.107. ‘toward’. and šarā. Neu (1979a: 178) and Luraghi (1997a: 15 §2. arḫa. Szemerényi (1996: 159) writes: “In the neuter. the form addresses a person bearing that name.34 iv 32. Allative 3. the allative forms in -a (but not the infinitives or local adverbs) were replaced by forms in -i. correctly. Otten and Souček 1969: 62–63. On the history of research. in what place’ (so. not the metal itself (see Hoffner 1988b: 163–64). voc. distinct from the true vocative (§16. This case was discovered by Forrer (1928). 128. Starke 1977). The usual ablative ending is -az. see Starke 1977: 131–35. the al- lative no longer existed. Nominative pro vocative occurs in rare instances in the singular but so far not in the plural. not ‘where. Neu 1979a: 189–90) and intensifying in MH. Kammenhuber 1979a.” It is sometimes called the “directive” (Laroche 1970. with occasional post-OH spelling variant -aza (see Melchert 1977: 443–47). we use the term allative. see also Laroche 1970: 41–42.indb 76 6/5/08 4:15:22 PM . 244). Luraghi 1997a) or “terminative” (Starke 1977. xvi introduced the term allative as a deliberate pendant to its opposite. incorrectly. 00-HittiteGrammar.30 Noun and Adjective Inflection 76 them’ KUB 15. although allative forms continued to be copied by NH scribes from older archetypes. who called it the “Richtungskasus.is appropriate. They may have in mind an example of appositional direct address (§16. the ablative. Perhaps beginning already in OH (Otten and Souček 1969: 62–63.16. which express directed movement. The alternative post-consonantal ending -za (not -aza) is archaic (see likely that the vocatives in -anti are archaisms of any sort (see the arguments of Carruba [1992: 86] against Garrett [1990b: 275]). originated as allatives (see Laroche 1970.31. p. and Gertz 1987). 3. From the allative form of the heteroclitic action nouns in -ātar is derived the infinitive in -anna (§4. Kammenhuber 1979a). Neu 1974: 67. The allative is exclusively the case of ‘whither.6) claim a vocative plural end- ing -eš but give no example to substantiate it. nom. Brixhe 1979. to what place’. of the same number are not distinguished. 245). In this grammar. Held. In NH speech.” Of the situation in PIE. p. Ablative 3.32. Neu 1970: 55 n.” 3. Many scholars think that common local adverbs such as anda. So long as the case in -a is kept distinct from the dative-locative in -i. parā. 30). or ‘into’. The ablative and instrumental cases do not distinguish singular and plural. it is of little consequence which of the several proposed names one gives it. The CHD III/1 (1980) p. where the ergative case ending (-anza) on the neuter noun nepiš.1.

&-aš iwa[r .102 i 1. ištaminit and ištamanta ‘with the ear’.39 2. ketkarza ‘at the head’ (§3. p. The unique form iēšnat in namma alwanzenan i-e-eš-na-at .58 iv 26–27. For an ex- ample in a unique infinitive form see p.60 i 17. MH/MS). kunnaz ‘to/on the right’). and tuppianza cited by Melchert 1977: 449–50) are instead ergatives (for uddananza in both functions see §4. and the frozen ablative in the local adverbs tapušza ‘to the side’ (§19. 42).] the sorceror with ieššar.] [. p. some alleged examples (e. 48. and uddananza KUB 12. 00-HittiteGrammar.-acc. p. -az. It is plausible that the simple dental without preceding i was the earliest Hittite instrumental ending (Neu 1979a: 190). 77 Noun and Adjective Inflection 3. therewith’ (HED A 87). 291. The endings -az (following vowels) and -za (following consonants) are almost in complementary distribution in Old Script manuscripts (Melchert 1977). iēššar see KUB 9. ḫannešnanza.. . 111). But already in these oldest manuscripts -az begins to encroach on -za in the consonantal stems. andurza ‘inside’ (§16.5. §7. kedanta ‘with this’ (see Melchert 1977: 458).26. 124–125). papran- nanza.95 i 11. šittarza (§4. does not distinguish singular and plural.5). kiššarit and kiššarta ‘with the hand’. 2 (OS).28.g.101. pp. p. 5) is probably an imperfect attempt to replace an older instrumental i-e-eš-ni-it with an ablative i-e-eš-na-az.39 ii 2 and 8. n.80–1.92.81. . caution is needed in interpreting forms with endings -anza.2 i 42 = Laws §20 (OS). like the ablative. 147). 3. .33. One also finds this ending with the demonstratives: apedanda ‘with that.42 obv. with the i developing by anaptyxis (§§1. nepišza ‘from heaven’ (OS). ḫuitnanza.indb 77 6/5/08 4:15:23 PM . For the variant ending -(a)(z)zi that regularly appears before the clitic -ya ‘also. Since the ergative ending may also appear as -az(a) (see §1.115 [p. luttianza KBo 21. It is not evidence for an instrumental ending -at. §20. p. p. see §1. n.34.72 + rev. 265.-]andu ‘Then let them [.35 §3. 289). nom. . 36. on which see LH 31 with n. The instrumental. There is a rare ablative ending -anza: assured examples include GIŠluttanza KBo 8. See also kad!-du-ut ‘with (the eagle’s) talons’ KUB 43.35.‘knee’ (see p. . 45. 3. šakuit and šākuwat 45 < šākuwa- ‘eye’. araḫza ‘outside’ (§19.11. we- danda and wetenit ‘with water’.26 and §4. 34) in the environment of a preceding dental. āppa par (š)za ‘backwards’ (Neu 1980). §19.84. Instrumental 3. . p. 46).19.? 23–24 (for sg. we also find a rare ending -d/t(a): ganut and genut < genu. Alongside the prevailing instrumental ending -it or -et. p. 4. 101.12 rev. KUB 23. 130]) and thus far found only in -erza ‘from the house’. However. 117). 185. 15 (Mita text. and -aza. 300. išḫananza KUB 39. like the Mother Goddess’ KBo 21. uddanta ‘by the word’. compare -laz ‘to/on the left’. There are occasional instances of the use of the Akkadian preposition  ‘from’ followed by the inflected ablative form of the noun:   Lu-ú-ya-az ‘from the land of Luwiya’ KBo 6. šaganda ‘with oil/grease’. and’ and rarely in word-final position.135.116 (p.

long *ē or *ō (length- ened grade). Inflectional classes that show such alternations are labeled ablauting (such as i-stem nouns. There was a strong correlation in PIE between the position of the accent and the ablaut pattern. such variation usually contrasts the singu- lar nominative and accusative (sometimes only the singular nominative) with all other forms of the paradigm. Meier-Brügger 2000: 188–201. is invariant in Hittite. 3. For the definitions and terminology of PIE inflectional types now popular in the field see. 00-HittiteGrammar.. nom. on which see §3. see sg. but in inflected words a root or suffix47 could appear with short *e or *o ( full grade). 2003: 144–52. In most cases the stem.37.49 46.37. As in other IE languages. In nouns and adjectives. For many of the consonant stem nouns see Rieken 1999a. In the demonstrative pronouns. *l. Ablaut.indb 78 6/5/08 4:15:24 PM . there is variation in the stem. or singular versus plural).g. but other patterns also exist. ablaut was a morphological process: a given morphological category had a particular ablaut. not always reflecting the PIE morphological feature ablaut. see §3.36. 48. In roots or suffixes that contained one of the sonorant consonants *m. Hittite nominal (and verbal) inflection shows some traces of the PIE morphological process of vowel alternation called ablaut (also apophony or vowel gra- dation). 47. It is difficult to prove. e. there is also a contrast between the stem of the nominative and accusative versus the other cases see (§7. past sang/sang.46.g. p. Meier-Brügger 2000: 135–42. but likely.46 Most PIE roots and suffixes were defined by the sequence of consonants they contained. p..48 It was common in PIE for different parts of a single paradigm to show different ablaut grades (e. past participle sung/gesungen. Details will be left to the description of the individual inflectional types.22 [p. button. 73] on the three PIE forms of the singular genitive ending). wešiš — pl. 3. 25). in Hittite the appearance of ablaut has been changed due to prehistoric sound changes and the tendency to generalize one ablaut grade throughout a paradigm. nom. But by the time of PIE.g. There was also ablaut in a limited number of inflectional endings (e. nominative-accusative versus the other cases. the sonorant be- came syllabic (see the sound of English bottom. Likewise. consisting of a root or a root plus one or more suffixes. or *r.. *n. the glides *w and *y became respectively *u and *i in the same position. butter ) in the zero grade when between two consonants or between consonant and word boundary. wešaēš). or no vowel (zero grade). to which inflectional endings are attached. This is still seen in the “strong” verbs of modern Germanic languages such as English and German: present sings/singt. that in a few nominal paradigms the variation in the shape of the stem is accompanied by a shift in the accent (see on this issue §1. bottle.36 Noun and Adjective Inflection 78 Stem Variation 3. 2003: 201–18. 49. No attempt can be made here to describe the historical de- velopment of these types in Hittite. For a general overview of PIE ablaut see Sihler 1995: 108–24. In some instances.3. PIE roots are conventionally cited with an *e vowel. 143). and it seems virtually certain that the vowel alternations of ablaut were originally phonologically conditioned.

Another a-stem vocative: ne-eg-na ‘O brother’ (see Hoffner 1988a). by context. our father!’ KUB 33. 79 00-HittiteGrammar. išḫa 1. antḫšan. For a-stem nouns in the Old Anatolian languages see Kammenhuber 1969b: 193–94. 5. the latter elsewhere.1. and in NH the latter has almost completely displaced the former. 2. nom. 123 Common-Gender a-Stem Nouns 4. addan annan išḫān voc. antuwaḫḫiš 2 attaš. This form is found in OS only with attached clitics. The stems begin to compete in MH.and u-stem classes. see here §1. nom. 40. Forms in parentheses are less common variants.70 rev. Groddek 1999: 38. ac- cording to Rieken 2001: 190–91. antuwaḫḫan. In this class. The rare writing an-tu-u-uḫ-ša-an occurs in the NH fragment Bo 3379 8ʹ (StBoT 19 50).66 + KBo 40. 6. antwaḫḫaš. sg. išḫaš 3 anduḫšan. 4. They form the largest and most regular Hittite stem-class. 279–80 and Meriggi 1980: §§5–40. Forms in bold type are in OS. attan.indb 79 6/5/08 4:15:24 PM . 3. substantives and adjectives decline identically. nom. d-ta [a]t-ta-šu[m-mi] ‘O Tarḫunta.2. addaš annaš išḫāš.76. in contrast to the i.333 iii 8. 4567 ‘human being’1 ‘father’ ‘mother’ ‘lord’ Singular antuḫšaš. The following are paradigms of a-stem common-gender nouns (HE §§64–65).are largely suppletive in OH (perhaps due to ablaut grade. The stems antuwaḫḫa.44 iii 7). p.and antuḫša.! iii 10. is presently inexplicable (HW 2 A 118–19 “wertlos”). Chapter 4 NOUN AND ADJECTIVE DECLENSION a-Stem Nouns 4. 33): the former in sg. Of the Hittite nouns and adjectives with vocalic stems. 46.4 acc.. ed. see CHD sub marnan A and parganu-). if correct.6 atti 7 išḫā. 5 atta. those with stems in a equal in number the total of those in i and u combined. The rare form antūwaḫza (KUB 12. 7. at-ti-me ‘O my father!’ (KBo 12.

3 i 23 (OS).-uš ‘rivers’. 21. antuḫše 9 atti anni išḫī 10 (ešḫe. and kakapuš.: ḫaššeš. an-tu-uḫ-ša-aš KUB 31. nom. 10. HKM 89:15 (MH/MS) is accusative by context. Correct LH 270. although seemingly pl. Other a-stem pl. 22.-uš ‘borders’ KBo 4. . KBo 19. an-tu-wa-aḫ-ḫe-eš KBo 3.46 obv. .-uš antuḫšuš.1 i 10.-uš ‘mountains’. .1 + KBo 25.60 ii 16 (OH/NS) is possibly sg. išḫa11) Numerically Indifferent abl. anduḫšaš. i 88 (Tudḫ. There are no examples of pl. antuḫšuš 17 acc . 12. zapzikit ‘with glazed dinnerware’. iš-ḫa-aš-ši KUB 24.19. 13 antuḫšet 14 Plural nom.58 i 52 (MS). see §1.68 obv. attuš annuš. in -uš see above sub §3. p. 19.16. nom. p. 38. For other examples of a-stem nouns with late NH pl. IV). unuwašḫit ‘with decoration’. nom.9 i 51 (TH 2:28 i 57) with var. See §4. 14. pappanikneš. an-tu-uḫ-še-et 1691/u ii 5 (MS). antuḫšaš addaš išḫāš d.g.20 anduḫšuš. KUB 44. an-tu-uḫ-še is not yet attested in OS. anniuš 18 . an-tu-uḫ-ša-az ‘together with (its) inhabitants’ BrTabl. For dative-locative in -e see §3. by context. where sg. chil- dren’. on foot’. . tuekkeš.. 9. attaš annaš išḫāš antuḫšaš. iš-ḫé-eš KBo 3. iš-ḫe-e-eš KUB 30. in form.-l. *iš-ḫi-iš or *iš-ḫi-i-iš to match at-ti-iš. and walleš in -eš or -iš. 16. nom. 00-HittiteGrammar. IV). i 89 (Tudḫ. &.: tešḫit ‘by means of a dream’. antuḫšaz 12 attaz annaz(a) ins. kakkapiš.10 rev. Other a-stem sg. nom. iš-ḫa-[aš?-]ša-aš-ma-aš-ša-an (išḫaš⸗a⸗šmaš⸗šan) KBo 3. an-tu-uḫ-ši-iš KBo 3.” 13. 7. Other a-stem pl.&. 77) BrTabl. antuḫši. attiēš. an-tu-uḫ-še KUB 43. . ḫanzaššeš.-uš ‘sons. Always written non-plene (e.-uš (*negnuš) ‘brothers’. patet and -it ‘by foot. 17. 4.-na-az (*antuḫšan⸗a⸗z) is incorrectly labeled “abl. ii 48.34. p. 42. ins. p.16.18 attiš.61 rev. 19. antuwaḫḫaš 8 d. acc. an-du-uḫ-ša-aš KBo 17.61. [šu]lleš in 89:19 seems also to be pl. 74 and §1. . iš-ḫi-iš-ši) when enclitic pronoun is attached.2 Noun and Adjective Declension 80 ‘human being’1 ‘father’ ‘mother’ ‘lord’ gen..16 adduš antuwaḫḫeš. acc.88:4ʹ. antuḫšeš 21 gen. an-ni-iš. §3.-uš BrTabl. 11.&.24.17.13 i 27) in -uš. 20. 6. addaš išḫaš 22 antuḫšaš. 86. [an-tu-u]ḫ-še-eš HKM 50:5 (MH/MS). 28.74 iii 6. 70.indb 80 6/5/08 4:15:25 PM . anduḫšaš 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 8. and lalit ‘with the tongue’.127 + ABoT 44 i 37 (OH/NS). 18. . antūwaḫḫaš. 21.1+ ii 32 (OH/NS). 7. Also attested in the writing -az (NH).-l. 15. an-tu-uḫ-ša-az-zi-ya (with clitic -ya ‘and’. 15 antuḫšeš. p. etc.: nēkuš ‘sisters’. acc.-uš (*irḫuš ‘borders’ KBo 5. See also -a ⸗šši in KUB 36. p. anniš išḫš 19 antuḫšiš. iš-ḫi-eš-ši KUB 41.1 i 21 (OH/NS).

2 ‘tongue’ ‘ear’23 ‘roof’ ‘sea’ Singular nom. 25.28. lālan ištamanan šuḫḫan arunan voc.20 i 5 is due to a scribal error (read iš-ta-ma⟨⟨-aš ⟩⟩-ni with Neu apud Rieken 1999a: 406 n. 244). 22 (the latter with apparent neuter agreement) as collectives.may not imply geminate m. lāluš ištmanuš šuḫḫuš arunuš 25 coll. Among a-stem allatives: laḫḫa ‘to/on a campaign’ (OS). on which see §3. in -e see §3. 75.14 (p. 4 (NH) see HED A 179. 29. 2042).31 ii 11. iš-dam-ma-né-eš-ši KBo 10. 28. . is nominative by context. For the most part.35 (p.24 (p. see Hoffner 2003b: 621. lālaš ištaminaš. 30. -na ‘to the right’. 26. d. p. The writing -dam-ma.89 rev. see §1. 00-HittiteGrammar. 74).(see §4. as still reflected in the archaic instru- mental išḫimanta. la-a-li could be a sg. 24.-l.4 i 4. ištamanaš⸗kan KUB 55. For the development of the word for ‘ear’ see Oettinger 2003: 147–51. lālit ištaminit. The word was originally a common gender n-stem of the type of išḫiman. There is no syllabically written neuter form of this noun ištaman in KUB 14.&. The abl. Alternatively. šuḫḫaš 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 23. lāli 25 gen. p. 31. iš-ta-ma-né-eš KBo 13. arunaza šuḫḫazi(⸗ya) 30 ins.241 rev.74. lāli iš-dam-ma-ne. and fairly frequently in OH/MS or OH/NS.28 šuḫḫa aruna 29 Numerically Indifferent abl. back-formed from a collective iš-ta-ma-aš-[mi-it] ‘your (pl. The unique writing iš-ta-ma-aš-ni KUB 55. 32.) ears’.-l. in -i (compare atti⸗me ‘O my father’). šūḫza (OS) belongs to another stem šuḫ(ḫ)-: see Rieken 1999a: 65–66. For sg.4 + KBo 13. But such a neuter singular *ištaman may stand behind the spelling -an KUB 8. KUB 44.13 i 18–20. See §3. ḫapā ‘to the river’.83 4–5 (OH/MS). KUB 36. the word came to be inflected as a common gender a-stem išḫa/imana-.110 iii 21 (OS).-l.24 (p. šuḫḫaš arunaš ištamanaš 24 acc. arunaz. lāleš ištamaneš 32 acc. &. 111). 19). -az ištamanaz šuḫḫaza. as HED E/I 458 claims.45 ii 26.&.59:16ʹ and . .-aš arunaš 33 d. however. cited by HED E/I 458 as genitive. 33. voc. šūḫḫi aruni ištamani 27 all. 77). 81 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. a-ru-na KUB 36. lāli šuḫḫa gen. lalš — 24 šuḫḫaš arunaš 26 d. 27.indb 81 6/5/08 4:15:26 PM .20 + KUB 9. For the repeated direct address form la-a-li la-a-li ‘Tongues! Tongues!’ KBo 20. ištamanta 31 Plural nom. and §16.

pedi eki yuki Numerically Indifferent abl.-l.is the syllabic reading for ‘son’ (Hoffmann 1992) is unconvincing.3 Noun and Adjective Declension 82 4. -(l)aš.34 The extremely common a-stem noun ‘son.-aš. See also Hoffner 1971. -li. . pl. because only common gender a-stems are productive in Hittite. But some syllabic forms exist: pl. The Hittite a-stem has replaced an original root noun.72:11ʹ (OS). 50). For GIŠeya.146 (p. and d.120:6 (OH/NS).4. Neuter a-stem nouns are much less common (HE §64).? (4). The common a-stem noun pada.18 rev. pēdaz(a). 37. pl. KUB 44. §4. acc.‘hand’ see §4. 35. d.unambiguously indicates an n-stem. . 19 (HED E/I 257.‘place’.indb 82 6/5/08 4:15:27 PM . pedaš ekaš yugaš d. 3 i-ú-uk ú-en-zi ‘three pairs of acrobats/dancers come’ KBo 25. nom. pa-te-et KUB 51.3. 4. nom. pl. The suggestion that pulla. For the stem. acc. pa-ta-a-an KBo 17. sg. No attested form of ega. gen.15:10 (OS). For the vocatives see §3. 110). child’ is always written logographically35: sg.8 obv. nom.28 (p. Examples are: peda. 00-HittiteGrammar. keššara. citing Laroche 1969a: 372–73).2 ii 19 (OH/NS). ega.20 rev.70 (p. whose alternating accent is probably still reflected in the differing position of the vowel length in the pl. gen. d. 4.-l. pedaz(a) ins. pēdan.74 i 9 (OH/MS). -aš.46:3. pēdi. pedan ekan yugan gen.-l. ins. pl. versus the pl.‘foot’ is mostly written with the logogram . acc. yoke’. gen. A rare example of the bare root occurs in . Neuter a-Stem Nouns 4. 5 (NS) and . and paradigm of keššar.-uš. yukit Plural gen. pēdaš.-acc.5.36 ii 14 (OH/NS). A secondary common gender sigmatic sg. acc. See §1. is also attested: e-ga-aš KUB 21. pedaš 36 37 34. For discussion see Rieken 1999a: 61–62. see CHD P sub Épulla-.&. ‘place’ ‘ice’ 36 ‘yoke’ 37 Singular nom.-l.(an evergreen tree) see below. 74).82 (p. . pa-a-tu-u[š] KBo 25. . - (l)aš. 19 (OS). 4. pa-ta-a-aš(-ša-aš) KBo 17. 115). sg. d. pēdaš. gen. and yuga. 36. pēdaš d.6. gender.-it (*pate/it) in KBo 10. sg.&.-l.(-eš).-l. pl. [ p]a- a-ta-an KUB 34.‘pair. pa-ta-a-n(a) (= patān⸗a) KBo 20. -(l)an.‘ice’.

8. t/dannattan araḫzenan -an annallan n.38 kušata ‘bride price’. 00-HittiteGrammar.34:7. 58). Only attested in the nominative- accusative are ḫaramma. nom. šuppa kūšata. dannatti araḫzeni kunni. p. 55) and §4. and tarušḫa. araḫzenaš -naš annallaš d. 41. 55) and -iya. tarušḫa (a leather part of the harness). kušta. šuppa(ya)š kušataš 4. The other two nouns have the following limited paradigm. see §4. 41–42 belong to a noun ‘desolation. annalli.7 (p.10 4.2 rev. form in -an. neut. An i-stem annalli.indb 83 6/5/08 4:15:28 PM . The forms dan-na-at-⟨⟨ta⟩⟩-te-eš and dan- na-at-te!-in in KUB 36.(§2. since  can also be read ze. kūšāta gen. We do not distinguish the signs  and  in the bound transcription of this word..(§2.35.-a.21 (p. a-Stem Adjectives 4.‘sacred. 86). for which the sg. The paradigm of a-stem adjectives (HE §65): 39 40 41 ‘empty’39 ‘external’ ‘right-hand’ ‘earlier.-acc. On vocatives of neuter substantives see §3. 39.(§2.89 rev.20. See §2. This latter type can be identified by the fact that there is no clear sg. -alla. KUB 40. com. underived) a-stem adjectives see §2. not to the adjective.10.e. — araḫzenaš kunnaš annallaš acc. The adjective dannatta. acc. 83 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. indicating items consisting of aggregates of components: 7ḫaramma (a kind of stew).17 (p. and a noun is also appropriate for the example dan-na-at-ti-iš in KUB 21. annallin and the plural form annalliuš (annalliuš KUB 38. com. ‘consecrated meat’ ‘bride price’ nom.7. t/dannattan araḫzenan kunnan annallan gen. 52). p. araḫzena -na 38. pūrana. 8. piyētta. 4. GIŠgalamma (a part of the door).-l. 75).‘empty’ is exclusively an a-stem.29 (p. the sg.21. (UZU)šuppa ‘consecrated meat’. For primary (i. UZUšuppa is a lexicalized form of the archaic collective plural of šuppi. com. See also those in -ala. wilderness’ (Haas 1970: 155). -ni annalli all. p 55). III).also exists. galamma.9.-acc. consecrated’. neut.37 (p. and annaliuš HT 4:13) are attested. 40.29 i 12 (Hatt. Other examples can be found in the lists provided by Reichert (1963: 65–74) and Jie (1994: 6–21). 94). former’ 40 Singular 41 nom. More common than neuter singular nouns are those inflected only in the collec- tive (neuter) plural.

alwanzenan ḫantezzian — 46 arawan gen.the pl. 290). araḫzenuš annalliš acc.62 + KBo 6. com. -a[z] annallaz 42 ins. acc. If we are not dealing with a misspelling for araḫzena in both places. alwanzenaz ḫantezzi(y)az apezzi(y)az arawaz ins. 47. See p.76. 00-HittiteGrammar. §19.-a. ibid. 31.-l. t/dannatta araḫzena kunna annalla gen. former’ 40 Numerically Indifferent abl.indb 84 6/5/08 4:15:29 PM . alwanzeneš ḫantezzieš 48 appezzieš 48 araweš acc. as often assumed.41 iii 12 (OS).6. neut. in KBo 3. com. For the a-stem adjective newa. kunnit Plural nom. p.-a. alwanzena Numerically Indifferent abl. com. 48. 43. com. p.: ne-e-u[-it] and ni-u-i-i [t].43 -niš annall(i)eš. nom. acc. a-ra-u-aš KBo 22. neut. p. alwanzenaš appezziyaš 42. neut. alwanzenaš ḫantezziyaš arawaš d. alwanzeni arawi all. Other a-stem sg. 47 alwanzenit arawit Plural nom. Written a-ra-aḫ-zé-né-e-eš (with the  sign) and transcribed araḫzenieš by HED A 134.25. 45. 284) cannot be pl. p.was formed the adverb appezziyan (from OS) / appezzin ‘afterwards’ (see §1. 44. 44).: ne-e-u[-it]. alwanzenuš ḫantezziuš appezziuš n. com. 46. araḫzenaza kunnaz.44 — 43 -nuš n. i 28 (for the word order see 18. alwanzena gen.-l. a-ra-u-wa-aš KUB 8.4 i 26 and kē araḫzenaš . com. 4. of appezziya. the construction might be that of a genitive ‘land(s) of the outside’. 32. 70. free’ Singular nom. dannattaš annallaš 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 ‘bewitching’ ‘first’ ‘last’ ‘exempt.-acc.. Other a-stem sg. araḫzenaš in the NH examples uni araḫzenaš . alwanzenaš d.126. perhaps modeled on takšulaš utnē ‘lands of peace’.-a. ne-mu-uš reflects the shift *newuš > nemuš (see §1. ins. com. n. as shown by the modifiers uni and kē. From the sg.-l. neut. alwanzenaš ḫantezziyaš appezziyaš arawaš 45 acc. ins. and ni (or né)-u-i-i [t].2 iii 22 = Laws §56 (OS). alwanzenan ḫantezziyan appezziyan arawan n. araḫzenaš annallaš d.10 Noun and Adjective Declension 84 ‘empty’39 ‘external’ ‘right-hand’ ‘earlier. dannadduš araḫzeneš.

(respectively. the latter have. respectively.and -uw. neut. -u-. abl. ištarniyan šarāzziyan 49 n. middle’ ‘upper.indb 85 6/5/08 4:15:30 PM . -iy-. com. show ablaut (see §3. i. 270–82 and Meriggi 1980: §§41–92. The reconstruction of the context and grammatical interpretation proposed by these scholars is quite uncertain.62 ii 4ʹ. anturieš. interior’ ‘central. In contrast to the a-stem class. nom.-a. and -ay-. šarazziyaš d. of these words. ištarniyan gen.in the nominative and accusative singular. com.and u-stem classes for the most part decline dif- ferently.38. anturiyaš šarāzzi(y)aš d. of ḫantezziya-. 94). anturiuš ša[razz]iēš.53. The form could also be a sg.) and the pl. Substantives regularly have an invariant stem in -i-/-u.-l. For the u-stem nouns in Hittite see Weitenberg 1984 and the reviews by Melchert (1984a). but -a(y)-/-aw. acc. and Eichner (1991).would be indistinguishable from those of the shorter. com. p. superior’ Singular nom.12. com. 49. appezzi-.13. where Haas (1994: 713) and Glocker (1997: 34) take it as sg.before -a-).2:47 (NH).and u-stem nouns in the Old Anatolian languages see Kammenhuber 1969b: 194–95. usually showing -i-/-u. There are exceptionally some substantives with ablaut and some adjectives without it. 4. šarzzi(y)az Plural nom. The oblique case forms (gen.in the nominative and accusative plural and in the oblique cases. Only in the broken context of KUB 33.11. šarazziya Numerically Indifferent abl. Adjectives.37.. nom. substantives and adjectives of the i. and -aw-. neut. -iy. and šarazzi. appezziya-. anturiyaš ištarniyaš šarazziyaš 49 50sarazziyan paradigm 4. 85 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.-l. ḫantezzi-. KUB 19. Where the former have -i-. ins. -uw-. and acc. 00-HittiteGrammar. anturiyaš ištarniyaš acc. i-stem forms. For i. p. and šarazziya. §4.-acc.and u-Stem Nouns 4.50 šarazziuš gen. There is a strong parallelism between the inflection of i. 50. 61. anturiya ištarniya šarazziya all.. Carruba (1989).13 ‘internal. 78). however.and u-stems in Hit- tite in terms of where and how they show ablaut. p.(§2.

Luwian influence is also seen in the abl. p. erḫuiti. the i-vowel often being a part of a Hurrian suffix: -šḫi.‘ritual pit’. acc. šangû < Sum. utuplu.‘mother’.is not part of the stem. 221). Girbal 1990. -arti-. When the Hittites began to borrow Luwian nouns and suffixes (see §2. they not only imitated the Luwian usage in loanwords but also carried it over in some cases to native Hittite words.‘priest’ < Akk. -ugari-. however.indb 86 6/5/08 4:15:30 PM . The Luwian nouns with nominative-accusative singular in -aḫi are also t-stems (see DLL 132 §5). anniuš to anna.MEŠ katrīēš to MUNUSkatra. There are ten times as many common gender i-stem nouns as neuter i-stem nouns. ḫasīsu. In the case of a-stems. and zakki. attiēš to atta. -ški-.‘clay tablet’ < Akk. For these derivational suffixes in Hurrian see the grammatical treatments of Hurrian.between the stem and the case endings of the nominative and accusative of the com- mon gender. and Wegner 2000: 47–52. whence they retain remnants of a Luwian t-stem in the sg. GIŠḫulugannaš 51. singular and plural (Starke 1990: 56–93). district’ < Akk.(a garment) < Akk. nura(n)ti- ‘pomegranate’ < Akk.‘father’. but also by “reverse i-mutation” new -a.‘field’. Complicating the picture of the i-stem noun is the phenomenon of so-called i-motion (or i-mutation). -ri-. āpitaz (Starke 1990: 198–200. This entailed not only creating new -i. 00-HittiteGrammar.‘female musician’. and abl. and the -a. §1. etc.‘region.14. ending -ati occurring on the noun aulati (§4. 55–61) 4. They are usually inflected as i-stems in Hittite (common gender or neuter).forms elsewhere (Rieken 1994: 43–47). atupli.‘latch’ entered Hittite from Luwian.49. -ki-. In paradigms of such nouns. šankunni. ḫalzi.‘ear’ < Akk.15. com. Bush 1964. 4. but with the -t. gimriuš to gimra. 75–77.55. The result. ḫazzizzi. -ili-.17. agannu. com.16. the -a.‘reed’).forms tend to be found in the common gender nominative and accusative. Neu 1988b.23). nom.14 Noun and Adjective Declension 86 i-Stem Nouns 4.in some forms and -a.‘basket’. ḫubrušḫi-). The nouns āpi. pl.often in the oblique cases (see the paradigms in §4. 62). pp. LÚapiši. com. -ašti-. aganni. 4.(incantation priest) < Akk. -ḫi-. erḫui. 211–12. d. Several productive derivational suffixes end in -i-: -alli-. -uzzi.23). MUNUS. s an g a (with possible stem influence from Hurrian as the intermediary of the loan?). GInatin to nata. -uri-. āpiti.(aḫrušḫi-.forms to old a-stems (pl.21–2. āšipu (with metathesis. kakkaru. i-Mutation 4. p.140. -ulli-. Derivatives show that the -i.(a container) < Akk. ḫalṣu.51 Loanwords from Hurrian or Akkadian mediated through Hurrian enter Hittite as i-stems: tuppi.-l.in others. sg.of the stem is deleted before the -i-. acc. the -i. lurindu (*nurindu). zakkitī. such as Speiser 1941. 48). Many nouns borrowed from Hurrian end in i. etc. gen.(a kind of bread loaf) < Akk. is in effect a paradigm with -i.(see §2. Wilhelm 1992a. ṭuppu.forms to old i-stems (sg. Most (but not all) Luwian nominal stems insert an obligatory -i. kakkari.

20).indb 87 6/5/08 4:15:31 PM . com. ḫalkiš and tuzziš. nom. especially in OH. 84). For a d.g. palša.26. . there was some confusion..76. -uš) are affixed directly to the i-stem: ḫal-ki-e-eš. and annalli.g.g. see luttiya 1-iš . Rare forms of the nominative singular such as tu-uz-zi-aš (instead of the normal i-stem noun tu-uz-zi-iš ‘army’)53 may be analogical formations with the stems in -iya- (for the paradigm of iya-stems see §4. -eš. 4. nom. producing a pl. This rare form. GIŠḫulugannaz to GIŠḫuluganni-. 32. nom. and the sg.23. ed. GIŠḫuluganniaz]). tuzziaš.(e. On the endings of the plural nominative in late NH see §3.-l. For an allative example see either kāšatta⸗wa utniya paitteni ‘you are about to go to the land’ KBo 22. 00-HittiteGrammar. GIŠḫuluganniya.g. acc. Paradigms of common-gender i-stem substantives with non-ablauting stem: 52. Our convention with nouns showing i-mutation is to write the stem as -a/i. or n⸗an⸗kan tuzziya anda uwate ‘Bring him in to the army’ HKM 35:6–7 (MH/MS). is found only in KBo 2.19. 4. 87 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. In cases where a noun is poorly attested. see nn.. 53.32..1:24 (OS). com. pl. abl. annalla-. . The allative of the i-stems ends in -iya.52 4. for ‘former’. NH i-stem common-gender nominative-accusative plurals in -i(y)aš (e. but no special spelling (such as *ḫal-ki-i-uš) indicates this.-acc. In i-stems the inflectional endings combine with the stem as follows (see also Neu 1985): (1) endings which consist of simple consonants or zero are affixed directly to the i.10. d. which in OH is a simple i-stem without muta- tion [see sg. Common-Gender i-Stem Nouns 4.23 and abl. we cannot always be certain whether the stem is originally in -a. In NH there is also occasional contraction of -iēš to -iš (e.74+ ii 5 (OS).22. 4. and Melchert 1995: 271–72). ending identical to that of the sg. 70). nouns with stem -ašša/i-). p.or -i.and palši. ḫalkiaš) show that examples spelled ambiguously (§1. A glide may have existed in speech. AM 182. d. com.g. nom..12 iv 1-8). com. example see NA4ḫuwašiya 1  appa[(nzi)] ‘they seize one sheep at the stela’ KUB 53.14 ii 12–14 (par..(Rieken 1994: 49–50). most notably in stems with suffixes containing -l(l)-: e. p. 19) as -Ce/i-e-eš (e.20. Forms with the ending -iya also occasionally appear in post-OS texts in a dative-locative function. we find the stems annala-. ḫal-ki-uš. šipanti ‘he libates … once at the window’ KBo 17. annali-. pl.g.16 (p.21.(e.18. (see §1.5 ii 13 (NH).-l. (2) case endings which begin with an a-vowel are affixed to the longer stem in -iy- or -ay-. KUB 53.-l. road’). ḫal- ke/i-e-eš and tu-uz-ze/i-e-eš) are to be read as -Ciēš. 4. not -Cēš (see §1. Predictably. ends in -ī or -i. Case endings that begin with an e or u vowel (pl. p. p. 88). p. and with an ai-stem. 54 and 56..‘way. com. however.

pūriēš purapšēš.-l. (HED H 38 and Hoffner forthcoming §57).54 ḫalkiaš 55 tuzziēš. 57. ḫalkiuš.. pūri. ḫalki. patiliēš. ḫalkiš .42 iii 19 (MH/NS). aulī ḫalkī all. nom. ḫal-ki ḪI. 56. A rare instance of pl. This form is not registered in HED H 37. pūri(y)aš purapšeyaš patiliēš. 00-HittiteGrammar.16 (p. see HED H 37 and Hoffner forthcoming §53. See §4.19. pāteliš. pātiliyaš 54. pūriūš purapšiuš gen. priyaz ins. prin d. acc. tuzziya Numerically Indifferent abl.11 ii 6 was meant. priš purapšiš ptiliš.) ins. Perhaps nu ḫal-ki-iš išḫiyanteš KUB 15.-aš in HKM 19:6 (MH/MS). ḫalkiya. pū⟨r⟩iya purapši Numerically Indifferent abl. purapšiuš batiliēš acc.A-aš 57 coll.indb 88 6/5/08 4:15:32 PM . sacrificial animal’ Singular nom. ḫal-ki &. ḫalkiaš d. pūrit Plural nom. nom. An additional rare pl.-l. tuzziyaš auliuš ḫal-ki-(e-)eš. ḫalkiš tuzziš auliš acc. ḫalki(y)aš tuzzi(y)aš auliyaš d. patiliēš. ḫalkiyaš tuzziuš. was cited without reference in HW 47. 70). ḫalkin. tuzziya auliya.A gen.-l. ḫalkit Plural nom. ḫalkiēš. auliuš acc. 4. See §3. btiliš acc.23 Noun and Adjective Declension 88 ‘grain’ ‘army’ ‘artery(?). priuš.-l. patiliyaš d. 56 aulieš. ḫalki ḪI. ḫalkiaš 54 55 56 57halkis paradigm ‘lip’ (a type of priest) (a type of priest) Singular nom. ḫal-ki &. dḪalkin tuzzin aulin gen. tu-uz-zi-iš occurs in KUB 31. pātilieš. 55.-aš in HKM 19:10 (MH/MS) is pl. ḫalkiyaz(a) tuzzi(y)az aulati (Luw.

āpidaz(a) Plural nom. See LH 139f. za-ak-ki! ḪI. zakkiuš . 122 and HED E/I 401 as free-standing genitive. 60. āpiyaš 58. aldannaš 58 59 60 61 ‘belt. 59. āpi SÍG ēšri d. aldani Numerically Indifferent abl. III 44. 86). sash’ ‘anger’ ‘ritual pit’ ‘fleece(?)’ Singular nom.58 zakkiya auri. zakkitī. altannuš (ḪI. Only attested in NS. 89 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. Analyzed by Friedrich 1959: 112. zakkeš auriš aldanniš.-l. auriyaza altaniyaz Plural nom. piyaz. apiaš d. zakkin gen. Attested in KUB 13. aldaniš acc. išḫuzzin karpin pin SÍG ēšrin gen. auriya aldanni.1+ i 19 (MS).23 ‘latch’ ‘observation post’ ‘spring. auriyaš altanniaš. 61. auriuš 59 altanniš. auwariēš altanniuš zakkēš coll.A) 60 acc. 279.-l. auriuš.A d.15 (p. Late NH in BrTabl.indb 89 6/5/08 4:15:33 PM . išḫuzzi(y)aš apīyaš coll. zakkiš. karpi āpiya. a(u)wari(y)aš d. zakki (y)aš auri (y)aš. water source’ Singular nom. karpiuš 61 acc.. See §4. išḫuziš karpiš SÍG ēšriš acc. auriēš. 00-HittiteGrammar. āpiti Numerically Indifferent abl.-l.-l.

65.-acc. -ḪI.24 Noun and Adjective Declension 90 Neuter i-Stem Nouns 4. ḫuššulli Numerically Indifferent abl. 21. ‘bridge’ dump’ (pl. nom. erḫiti ḫuššili. ḫuwašiya. Note also the sg. ērḫui. shows apparent confusion with stems in -il (see §4.-l.-acc. ḫuwaši(y)aš išpantuzzi(y)aš tuppi(y)aš d.-acc. išpanduzzi. showing a Luwian sound change (see AHP 258) in this loanword from Luwian. tuppiya ḫuwaši išpantuziya all. ḫuššiliaz erḫūiyaz ins. ḫuššiliya. ḫuwāši išpandu(z)zi tuppi erg. Paradigm of neuter i-stem substantives: 62 ‘stela’ ‘libation’ ‘clay tablet’ Singular nom. erḫiyaš ḫūššiliyaš 63 d.-l.A nom. The form er-u-i-ti KUB 38.-acc. 63. d. armizziyaš 62.e.A-aš 63 ‘basket’ ‘garbage pit.25 i 16. p.-l. tuppi. ḫuššil 62 erḫui gen.A gen. transliterated as er-⟨ḫu-⟩u-i-ti (i.. scribal error) in HED E/I 283. armizzi d. ḫuwaši - ḪI. tuppi(y)az. tuppiazza Plural ḪI. ērḫuit Plural nom. below with a different stem ḫuššulli-. 00-HittiteGrammar. 107). tantum) Singular nom. tuppianza gen. is rather a real form.24. ērḫūi. ḫuwāšiya Numerically Indifferent abl.-acc. This sg.indb 90 6/5/08 4:15:33 PM . The limited evidence makes it hard to determine the original inflection of this noun.-l. 4. erḫuyaz.

ḫalḫaltu(m)mariyaš. image’.41 i 7 (analyzed as sg. iššalli.30 4. ḫalḫaltumaraza Plural nom. Other neuter i-stem nouns: appuzzi.‘scales’. com.28.-l. ḫalḫaltumariyaš. 4.‘saliva.25. māriēš wešaēš acc. arkami.186 ii 8 cannot yet be determined. Largely based upon Neu 1985: 259–60. ḫalḫaltumaraš d. Singular all.30.‘form. ḫaršiḫarši.‘corner’. d. ēšri. ḫalḫaltumaraš 64.‘rite. fat. Paradigm of i-stem substantives with ablauting stem:64 ‘spear(?)’ ‘pasture’ Singular nom. shape. ḫulali.-l.24. māriuš wešauš 4.‘bad weather’. erimpi.‘cedar’. māriyaš d. 19 (so HED H 20). 65. p. cult act’. māraīt Plural nom. ḫalḫaltmari gen. sector’. com.-a.29. on the ghost geminate m see §1. coll. the form - 4 ḫal-ḫal-du-um-ma-ri-ya KUB 7. com. since no case form exclusive to an i-stem is yet attested.‘tallow. grease’.26.and i-stem noun ḫalḫaltumar (i).indb 91 6/5/08 4:15:34 PM . wešiš acc. ḫalḫaltumariyēš n.‘distaff’. ḫalḫaldummariya in HED H 20–21 and HW 2 H 29) is uncertain./ -li ‘void’ and UZUappuzzi. KBo 4. etc. spittle’. ḫalḫaltumari 65 Numerically Indifferent abl.‘food’. ḫalḫaltumār. Perhaps dual or collective in origin: elzi.‘pen. 91 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. In addition to tuppianza (listed above). 19). The stem of allative Émakziya KBo 22. because at the beginning of a new sentence the -ya could be the conjunction ‘and’. com. ḫāli.(a musical in- strument. ḫazziwi.1 obv. 4. 65 4. 4. mārin wešin gen.-l. wešai Numerically Indifferent ins.27. or d. Paradigm of the mixed r. ētri.‘fat’ exist in the forms -li-an-za (see CHD sub šannapili-) and UZUappuzziyanza. corral. 00-HittiteGrammar.-l. ḫaršiyalli- ‘pithos vessel’. ergatives of the neuter nouns šanna⸗ pili.

The rare example of a sg. zaḫḫain. and zaḫḫin. 54). Second. HE §68a: Weitenberg 1979.31 Noun and Adjective Declension 92 4. lingāen.-l.92:7 reflects a sporadic back-formation from the pl.37.31. acc. 67).(also spelled -ae-) in the nominative and accusative and -i. but underwent a complex series of secondary developments. sg.see §2.indb 92 6/5/08 4:15:35 PM .23. d.10 (p. ḫurtai lenqai.20.-l. 4. tuḫḫuwain). linguš ḫurtauš 66. 67 4. the neuter noun generalized the r-stem (seen in the collective ḫalḫaltumār.33.(-ay. 88). lingaiš ḫurdaēš acc.66 On the other hand. linkiyanza. šumanzanan to common gender šumanza(n)-.‘corner’ was originally a neuter r/n-stem (see §4. such as sg. the older common gender i-stem tuḫḫui. 130).show ablaut in the stem (see §3. p. For the derivation of stems in -ai. neut. 78. ḫullanzin. Nouns in -ai. as per Melchert 2000: 64 n. p.before -a-). 9) with šaklain ~ šaklin ‘custom. 00-HittiteGrammar. But there is a tendency to generalize -ai. The noun ḫalḫaltumar. zaḫḫaiš lingaiš ḫurtāiš ḫalluwāiš acc. Since the oblique stem of these nouns is identical with that of ordinary non-ablauting i-stem nouns (§4. etc.(-iy- before -a-) in the oblique cases. Finally.(NS tuḫḫuwaiš. Common-gender action nouns: ‘battle’ ‘oath’ ‘curse’ ‘quarrel’ Singular nom. ḫurtāin ḫalluwāin zaḫḫin lingaen erg.‘smoke’ (OH/MS tuḫḫuiš. apāt⸗wa  - KUB 26. šaklin. lingae Numerically Indifferent abl. ai-Stem Nouns 4. lingayaš. lingai. ḫalḫaltumari. zaḫḫiyaz(a) li/enkiyaz(a) ḫurtiyaz ḫalluwayaza ins. ḫalḫaltumari was taken as the base for creating an i-stem count plural (see Melchert 2000: 65–66).18 (p. zaḫḫait Plural nom. the alternative collective ḫalḫaltumari was created (§3. and ḫalḫaltumaraš and ḫalḫaltumaraz). 72). examples of the latter inflection also occur. 34). 1984): the original pattern had -ai. so that it appears in the oblique cases as well. zaḫḫiyaš linkiyaš. ḫurtiya. neut. linkiyaz 67 gen. p. p. zaḫḫiya linkiya. collective lingae (see the similarly back-formed sg. tuḫḫuin) acquires a new stem tuḫḫuwai. On the status of these ergatives formed to a common gender noun (or possibly to the collective of such a noun) see §3. lingayaš ḫurtiyaš d.32.26 rev. lingain. right’. 67. hence zaḫḫait. First. Compare zaḫḫain ~ zaḫḫin ‘battle’ and ḫullanzain ~ ḫullanzin (VS 28.112.

šaklayaza Plural nom. šakl [ āeš].13. Attested as ḫa-aš-ti-i-aš in KBo 20.-l. p. All clear attested cases of ‘window’ are functioning as singulars.-acc.8 rev. šakliya Numerically Indifferent abl. 7 (OS). .-l. šaklin šagain waštāin išḫamain gen. ḫāštai. luttanza. luttiya Numerically Indifferent abl. ling[a]e erg. šaklauš acc. Both ḫaštāe and luddāi (in all their spelling variants) reflect prehistoric collectives. ḫaštāe gen. šagae 68 69 70 4. It is often hard to tell whether one should translate ‘bone’ or ‘bones’ for ḫaštāi. linkiyanteš 67 gen. right’ ‘portent’ ‘sin’ ‘song’ Singular nom. 68). luttiyaš 68. luttāuš 70 coll. or all. ḫaštae. 69. šakli.34. 00-HittiteGrammar. luttianza Plural nom. luddāi erg. šaklāyaš šakiyaš d. GIŠ .-uš 69 acc.34 ‘battle’ ‘oath’ ‘curse’ ‘quarrel’ coll. ḫašti(y)aš 68 lutti(y)aš d. šaklin. Neuter nouns: ‘bone(s)’ ‘window(s)’ Singular nom. luttanza gen. 93 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. luttiyaz. luttāuš are “count plurals” (see §3. ḫurdiyaš ‘custom. šakliš šagaiš waštāiš išḫamaiš acc. lutti(y)aš d. 70. šaklauš šagauš waštauš išḫama[uš] coll.indb 93 6/5/08 4:15:36 PM .-uš and acc.-l. ḫaštai luttai.

com. HE §15a) to show syncope (§1. The forms in -aya.show a secondary restoration of the intervocalic y. accusative. allative.126 (p.35.36. šimuš from /siw-us/ to šiu.78. -i all. (older) -az. Paradigms of the i-stem adjectives. karši-. -in -auš n. Kammenhuber 1969b: 194–95. pp. and sometimes dative- locative 71 singular.+ -i. -iya Numerically Indifferent ins. taking the zero grade in nominative. §4.40 (p. 46.35 Noun and Adjective Declension 94 4. 4. ḫuelpi-.50 (p. annauli-. See §1.134.38. mekki-.are further affected by the inflection of stems in -iya-. 98). 71. Ablauting: šalli-. acc. which was lost prehistorically (see §1. arawanni-. dankui-. The i-stem adjectives (with a few exceptions) show ablauting stems.37. and adjectives in -ui.39–4. -it abl. see pl. either in Proto-Anatolian (Melchert 1984b: 44–45) or in pre-Hittite (AHP 130). ḫarwaši-. šallaz < *šallayaz. and §4. and Sommer 1932: 357 with literature). Hence forms like šuppi from šuppi. parkui-. 85) is sometimes altered by influence from the i-stem nouns. The (stem +) endings for the i-stem adjective are: Singular Plural nom. 44). instrumental. 100).+ -i. Neu 1985).‘dream’ is pl. 32–33) — šallaš < *šallayaš. p. -iš -aeš or -aiš acc. The regular system of ablaut given in §4.45 (p. -i (older) -a.g.-l. -ai. acc.and daluka-/daluki. 00-HittiteGrammar. For ḫatuka-/ḫatuki. which behaves as though the stem were *zašḫiu-.13 (p. neut. zašḫimuš.-a. šuppi-. (older) -aš.see §§4. šuppa < *šuppaya — are actually older than those show- ing the secondary restoration. An aberrant form of zašḫai. i-Stem Adjectives 4. (secondary) -ayaš (secondary) -ayaš d. daluki-.76–§1. and the full grade ai or au in all other cases (HE §71. The forms that have been claimed (e. 97). Non-ablauting: karūili-..‘god’. (secondary) -ayaz 4. com. nakkī-.indb 94 6/10/08 7:39:06 AM . beside šuppai from full grade šuppai. 280–81. warḫui-. (older) -aš. palḫi-. 4. ḫarki-. (secondary) -aya gen.

šalleš. 76. warḫi parkui dankui gen. com.-a. šalli šuppai. šallayaz šuppaz(a). 2 (NS) and a semi-logographic -la-mu-uš KBo 12. and pár-ku-u-i. šalla Numerically Indifferent abl. com. neut. pure’ ‘much. šuppit Plural nom. šallayaš šuppayaš meqqayaš d.1:6 (OS) should be read me-ma-i (see CHD mi( ya)ḫu(wa)nt. analogical to the stems that take this ending regularly. parkueš dankuiš. Written pár-ku-i.indb 95 6/5/08 4:15:37 PM . šalla. meqqayaz šuppayaz(a) ins. See §1. see §1.-l.75 šallāyuš 76 šuppauš meqquš n. 28). 74.38 ‘large’ ‘holy. šalliyaš [šu] ppaš. dankūīn 77 n. p. 00-HittiteGrammar. many’ Singular nom. šallai.58 (p. What was read by Archi (1979: 45–46) as pár-ku-i in KBo 22.-a. In the rare form šal-la-mu-uš KBo 27. šalleš 72 šuppiš mekkiš acc. šalliš.41. šuppa 73 all. warḫūīn parkuin dankuin. šallaēš. 98). Analogical to substantives. 97).2b). 95 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.42 iv 22 the allative šuppa is functioning as a dative-locative in a post-OH text. neut.-a. šallayaš.11 obv. 73. com. šallaya. warḫuwayaš parkuwaš.89 iii 11 (MS?) the m is secondary. pár-ku-ú-i. 45) and §4. šalli šuppi mekki voc. dankuwayaš parkuwayaš 72. as the CHD points out. *šalli (-li ) gen. It should therefore not be read me- ek-ki-eš (see §4. šallai šuppa. šallayaš šuppayaš d. com. šuppayaš 72 73 74 75 76 77 karuwili ‘rough. warḫūīš parkuiš. šallin šuppin n. dankuwayaš acc. meqqauš 74 acc. šuppeš meggaēš. com. warḫuiš. me-ek-ke-eš belongs to the stem mekk-. šuppaya meggaya gen.-l. šalliuš. šuppi.45 (p. neut. com. dense’ ‘pure’ ‘dark’ Singular nom. šallaš.127 (p. 75. šallauš šuppaēš. In šuppa pedi KUB 30. warḫun. 77.

former’ Singular 79 nom. warḫuwaēš. com. tankuwaēš.-a. karūiliyaš. karūiliyaš. karūiliyaz(a) ins.-l.-l.indb 96 6/5/08 4:15:38 PM . warḫūwayaz parkuwayaz(a) dankuwayaz. neut. com. karūeliēš.38 Noun and Adjective Declension 96 ‘rough. com. ḫarkin karūilin. neut. karūiliyaš d. palḫāeš. warḫuwauš n.-l. palḫin. dankuwaz ins. karūiliuš. sg. karūili. com. bright’ ‘wide’ ‘old. parkuēš. com. Forms included here are only the adjective palḫi-. palḫaea. tankuēš warḫuēš parkuwāeš. ḫarki palḫi karūila. warḫuwaya parkui. dankui all. dankuwa 78 Numerically Indifferent abl. 4. acc. com. palḫa. karūi[li]t Plural nom. Additional forms attested for the noun are: sg. parkuwaēš. da!-an-ku-w[a tág]-na KBo 11. parkue. parkuwai dankuwi.-acc. palḫiēš karūiliš.-l. ḫarki karūili gen. com. dankuwai parkuwaya d.-a. parkuwa. karūiliaš 78. neut. not the noun. parkuwāit dankuit Plural nom. parkuwayaš. d.-a. nom. karūili Numerically Indifferent abl. neut. tankuwaya. pl. palḫi. karūiliuš.14 iii 26. dankuyaz. palḫaš.-l. dankuwayazza. dense’ ‘pure’ ‘dark’ Singular d. etc. warḫiš. ḫarga. tankuwa. 79. sg. parkuiēš acc. ḫargaēš palḫāēš. karūlin n. karūiliya d. karūiliaš n. ḫarkiš palḫiš karūiliš. tankuwaš parkuiyaš 78 79 ‘white. palḫaēš. warḫuwa. 00-HittiteGrammar. karūiliš. gen. parkuwaiš. parkuwae. karūileš acc. karūilaš acc.

The adjective ḫatuka-/ḫatuki. ḫadugaeš./pl. The oldest occurrences (talugaēš. talugauš.7 ii 27. Schmalstieg. ḫatugan. com. ḫatugayaz. but all other case forms appropriate to an i-stem: sg. show that these competing stems existed already in OH. me-ek-ke-eš.-acc. 31.indb 97 6/5/08 4:15:39 PM . marked as suspect with ‘!’ in HW 206. ḫadugaš. dalugayaz 86 4.80 which resembles the corresponding form of the u-stem adjectives (see §4. dalugāi 85 dālugauwaš Numerically Indifferent abl.-aš talugaēš acc. 86. talugaš.‘much. 80.-l. dalugayaz. nom. 81. ḫatugaeš. gen. ḫatugai. The adjective daluka-/daluki. dalugaeš n. com. p... d. 87. many’ also has a k-stem in OH (§4. And dalugawaš. com.84 dalugaš d. which occur in OS. talugaēš. nom. da-lu-ga -tar VAT 7481 iv 6 (OH/late NS).-l. u-Stem Nouns 4. talugay[a].17 i 5 (NH). as adverb talūga KBo 10. acc. all MS) point to an i-stem. several in MS. 818283848586 Singular Plural 81 nom. iii 44 (MH/NS). com.‘long’ is so far unattested in OS copies.-za)] KUB 15. talugauš. talugauš. see Weitenberg 1984 and Neu 1985). The adjective mekki.67 ii 40. form dālugauwaš (MH/NS). ḫatugauš. 97 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.41. com. pl. d.‘awesome. com. pl. is probably from the NH scribe. pl. KBo 10. The inflection of u-stem and au-stem nouns is analogous to that of the i. neut. nom. 84. com.40. IV). acc. frightening’ has singular nominative and accusative a-stem forms. and Gertz 1987: 16). 85. nom.37. sg. me-e-ek. 105) that exhibits the following forms (see CHD L–N s. sg.-a. d.or -aw-. 78) are the same: (1) endings which consist of simple consonants or zero are affixed directly to the u. 101).-acc.10 iii 29 (OH/MS). and an atypical pl. neut. me-e-ek-kán. if it is not an error. abl.v. 82. nom. KUB 17.42 4.51.10 iii 33 (OH/MS) in broken context could be pl. talugay[a]).-aš). com. com.-l. The form in KUB 17. com. me-ek-ku-uš. me-ek- kán.60. form (.39. These forms are often erroneously cited as forms of the stem mekki. Sg. several oblique case forms appropriate to an i-stem (dalugai. ḫatugan.): sg.1 iii 15 (Tudḫ. p. KUB 26. It has a late NH a-stem sg. acc. .42. The ablaut rules (§3. HE §71. The bolded forms.18. pl.-l. nom. p. or pl. The unambiguous a-stem forms are NH or NS. acc. p. me-ek-ke-e-eš. acc.in Hittite grammars (see Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: §148a.and ai-stems (§4. (2) case endings which begin with a vowel are affixed to the longer stem in -u(w). dalugayaz [(. 00-HittiteGrammar. KUB 27. neut. daluga 82 talugay[a] 83 gen. sg. and Held. 83. neut. 4.24 v 9 (OH/NS).

See Neu 1985: 187–88 and Weitenberg 1984: 318. gen. -uit. com. 89 90 91 4. 76 (p. -un -uš n. acc. is -amuš.46.-l. §3. kēlamuš ‘?’. genuwa in §4. which comes from *-awuš by the rule in §1.-wa (*welluwa) in §4. 91. iii 51 and šallamuš (also written - lamuš. third shape of ŠA in ms.43 Noun and Adjective Declension 98 4.45. com. 28. com.61. The latter form incorrectly inter- preted as nom.127 (p. see LH 237.60 i 17 (OH/NS) see §3. p. Because the Hittite genitive ending -an derives from a PIE pl. Some authorities affirm the existence of a sg.g. the -m. -ut 91 Common-Gender u-Stem Nouns 4. 22. 100). In zašḫimuš ‘dreams’ (< zašḫai-) Tunn. Neu 1979a: 185–86 with n. p. neut.23.43.35 (p. Paradigms for sample u-stem common gender nouns: 87. 95). See italuwa KBo 18. ms. See kad-du- uš-mi-it < *kaddut⸗šmit ‘with their talons’ also in i 17 (Watkins 1995). -uwaz ins. pargamuš ‘high’. we have listed it here as plural (on the pl.-l. With adjectives: āššamuš ‘dear’. -ui -uwaš Numerically Indifferent abl. 45). see §4. in HED K 138. etc. itālamuš ‘evil’. -uš -ueš acc. daššamuš ‘heavy’. -uwaš -uwaš. -uwa 90 d.-a.51 (p.50 (p.before the ending -uš is secondary.46. A) to  GIŠ-ša! see LH 47–48. šargamuš ‘preeminent’. 89. Several irregularities must be pointed out: (1) in the sg.g. 19 (OS). 74)87 and (2) the pl. For emending the contextually genitive  GIŠ-uš (Laws §40. see §3.22 (p. 90. an end- ing -e emerges as an alternative to -i (§1. 4. The stem + endings for the u-stem (non-ablauting) substantive are: Singular Plural nom. and Weitenberg 1984: 315 §836). 101). in -š (e. šūwamuš ‘full’ (OS). A) is much closer in form to UŠ than are its post-OS forms.35 (p. gen.-acc. ḫalluwamuš ‘deep’.. gen. in NH. 4. both < šalli-) ‘great’.151 rev. wappamuš ‘banks’. *-ōm. 00-HittiteGrammar. p. 88. Melchert 1984a) have declared themselves unconvinced by the sparse evidence. -an see §3. The OS form of ŠA (HZL #158/11. Others (e. -u -uwa (older -u) gen. neut. gen. 73).indb 98 6/5/08 4:15:40 PM . -uwan 89 all. . 73) and §4.88 For discussion of possible cases of the sg. It cannot be determined for certain whether -an (*ḫaššuwan) is singular ‘of the king’ (HHw 46 “des Königs”) or plural ‘of the kings’.44. 4. 94) and n.47..24. d. With substan- tives: ḫeyamuš ‘rains’. in -š. For kad!-du-ut ‘with (the eagle’s) talons’ KUB 43. 77).

See namma ḫaššī dapušza ḫa-aš-š[u]-w[a-aš lamni] 1⸗ šipanti KBo 13. with their literature. ḫa-aš-šu-uš claimed by Güterbock (1957. On the ablauting suffix -nu-/-nau. ú-e-el-lu-wa[ in KUB 8.-aš 92 93 94 95 96 9798 99 100 hassu “king” paradigm ablauting 98 ‘rain’99 ‘river bank’ Singular nom. 94. 2 12) is shown by the parallel passage KBo 24.see Weiten- berg 1984: 221–22. 28).see Ünal 1977 and Neu 1981a.165 iii! 6–7. ḫaššuwaš 93 d.96 welluwa gen. of ḫašš. in KUB 31. wlluwaz. . On Hittite ḫeu. .100 rev. wellūwaz -waz ins.42 and §1.61 (p. . See p.(full grade šeknau-). For this unusual vocative of a noun denoting an inanimate object see §3. 96. wappu100 gen. ú-el-lu KUB 17. com.-l. -ue gen. Weitenberg (1984 182–83) considers this noun neuter in MH/MS (ú-e-el-lu KBo 5. nom. The alleged syllabic writing of the sg. nom.-wa Numerically Indifferent abl. 00-HittiteGrammar. wappuwa d. 98. wlluwaš -(w)aš.7 = LS 1). 99 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. -an 97 d.‘ashes’ (see Puhvel. acc. 97.29 (p. restored following KUB 30.8 iv 27 (pre-NH). thereafter cited in HW Erg.41 iv 5.47 non-ablauting ‘meadow’ ‘king’ Singular nom. 75). 99. wēlli -i. with a transfer to common gender in NH. ḫeuš acc. ḫeyawaš wappuwaš all. wēlluš -uš 92 acc. 100.indb 99 6/5/08 4:15:40 PM . 89. -ue 94 all. wēlluaš. n.57 i 7–8 to be pl. wellun -un voc. 9–10. wappui 92. 95 . welluwaš . 98. HED H 210).-it Plural nom.-l. 95. wellu. ḫēun wappun voc. Other u-stem pl. ḫewaš. 93.-l.41 (StBoT 25 #109) ii 16. See other collective forms ú-e-el-lu VBoT 58 i 10 (OH/NS). forms: tarnueš. See §4.-iš acc.-uš coll. ḫuppidanueš. Also ablauting is (TÚG)šeknu.

acc. wappuwaz ins. beginning a clause in an OS text.g. šiuni. Otten 1961: 120–21.50. Ehelolf 1936. šiun + local particle -an. 104. p. 290–91. if it is not. p. 107. *šiuniš (--iš). written logographically in OS either in the Sume- rian and Akkadian order of constituents as MUNUS(.48..17. d. The form ši-ú-na-an. 45). thus sg.104 From a stem šiu. šiunaš. /he:us/ could easily be analogical after other u-stems. The noun wappu.-mu-uš) (< *šiwuš. acc. 4. nom. 106.(-) or in the Hittite 101. (e. 86).10 ii 11 (OH/MS). gen. gen. ins. of the OS noun(!) forms dšiuš⸗šummiš ‘our god’ and d šiuš⸗šmiš ‘their god’. and §4. 105. The oblique cases are formed from a stem šiun.-l.and wašku(i). nom. Weitenberg (1984: 270–71) regards warku(i)-.indb 100 6/5/08 4:15:41 PM .as secondary u- stems developed from primary i-stems. šiunan. acc. ḫēmuš. ḫeweš. could already be an example of this development. For the source of the i-stems see Starke 1990: 180–81.(/syuns/ + /anna/) ‘god’s (or gods’) mother’. The noun ḫēu. and Rieken 1999a: 35–39. 106 A stem šiw-(< *diw-) is the base of pl.‘rain’ already in OH has an ablauting paradigm of the type shown by the adjective idālu-.(τινα. 45).49.102 wappuš103 101 102 103 4.105 and sg. nom. The form ḫēmuš is expected for pl.1). nom. *šiunin (--in).127. A pl. attested in secondary use as a pl. 4. com. with the addition of “i-mutation” (see §4. ḫé-e-u-uš 101 acc. In the sg. in /s/ (see §3. τινος.(< prehistoric *dyu-) are formed: sg. Laroche 1967.22. τινι) from older accusative singulars see Sihler 1995: 338. but its other forms show a transfer to the non-ablauting class. šiunaš. A rare sg. *šiun: sg. šiunit.107 This stem also came to be used for the nominative and accusative singular. ḫé-e-ú-uš. wappuš ).MEŠ). see §1. from /he:w-us/ (see §1. not a proper name). 182–83. acc. ḫe(y)amuš wappamuš. 103.” Per Weitenberg 1984: 329 an accusative of direction. nom. Pl.‘god’ has a complex inflection. See Goetze and Pedersen 1934: 72–73. acc. *šiun. ši-mu-uš (also written . Neu 1998.127. 4. pl. acc. gen. p.in Greek ‘Zeus’ and in the interrogative-indefinite *τιν. as Neu (StBoT 26:168) tentatively suggests. acc. “zu den Flußufern. Preserved in with final n assimilated to the following sibilant in d šiu(n)⸗šummin ‘our god’ (com- mon noun. but the plene spelling in -u-uš/-ú-uš remains unexplained.44. For a similar development of the stem Ζην. but this is far too early to be the result of analogy with the u-stem adjectives (Kammenhuber 1969b: 281. 73. is the same as the sg. 00-HittiteGrammar. 80. p. ḫeyaweš. 98) built to this longer stem may also be found in the OS compound noun MUNUSšiunzanna. wa-ap-pa-mu-uš KUB 33. and especially Watkins 1974. Kammenhuber 1969b: 141. where the pl. p. Steiner 1971.‘river bank’ has an OH/MS ablauting form wappamuš (< *wappawuš). acc. Neu 1985: 260 §2. šiuš. The noun šiu.48 Noun and Adjective Declension 100 Numerically Indifferent abl. 186. 102.that was abstracted from the OH sg. ḫeawit Plural nom.

ginuššin (see HW 107.66 ii 3). the representation of the /ns/ in /syuns/ as nz could reflect the secondary nature of the sg. 108.) and -ruḪI.63 obv.52. A rare form: KBo 4. The phonetically identical singular and plural forms of the nominative- accusative of the neuter noun -ru (*tāru) are sometimes distinguished graphically in the texts by means of the plural determinative: -ru (sg. even though the n here was never syllabic). -(ru) i. 77). genut.37.undergoes “breaking” to -wa-. 109. genuwa d.32.37.. 47.-l. 78. in /syun+s/ (see §1.A erg. for ganut as an instrumental see §3.(a tree). p. 78).see Watkins 1974: 105. p. ganut 111 -ruit 4. šišḫau. Most of these nouns are poorly attested. 111. genu. Paradigms for the (non-ablauting) u-stem nouns of neuter gender. -ru genuwa -ru ḪI.51.‘knee’ and GIŠtāru. p. 26. genu tāru. genuwaz ins.to be a case where older -u.(-ru) ‘tree. with only the noun ḫarnau.‘birthing stool’. We take šiwanzanna. 224) for the OS forms. except that the generalization of the “full-grade” stem is more nearly complete. Neuter nouns include ḫarganau.35. and Gertz 1987: 16) has been explained by Eichner (1979) as a false analysis of genušši-. MS) is an archaism showing zero grade of the root (on ablaut see §3. which is uncertain. p. au-Stem Nouns 4. and Held.79 (p. This form (KUB 12.136.‘birthing stool’ showing a few traces of ablaut (see §3.MEŠ).‘sweat’. The alleged common-gender form ge-nu-uš abstracted from genuššuš. p. 34). 501.108 Neuter u-Stem Nouns 4. 00-HittiteGrammar. wood’: 109 110 111 Singular Plural 109 GIŠ nom. Hittite shows a small class of nouns with stems in -au.A (pl. 92. For šiunzanna. 110. If the above analysis is correct. sole’.2 i 30. genuwaš -ruwaš genuwaš -ruwaš all. There is only one common-gender noun attested.see also Rieken 1999a: 37 n. ḫarnau.as showing syncope from *siunas-anna. gen.53 order as MUNUS(. For further discus- sion of the difficult šiunzanna-/šiwanzanna.-acc.whose inflection is entirely parallel to that of nouns in -ai.). 35. 101 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.‘palm. and Weitenberg 1979). (-ru)110 genuwaš Numerically Indifferent abl.53. -ruwanza gen.indb 101 6/5/08 4:15:42 PM . and GIŠtanau. The only plural attested thus far is the count plural ḫarganawiš (KUB 33.(see §4. 160. See Neu (1983: 169 n. ginušši. see Rieken 2001 and here §1. Schmalstieg.

com. p.65 rev.54 Noun and Adjective Declension 102 4.61 (p. and alpu. *-awa d. -awaz ins.-a.indb 102 6/5/08 4:15:43 PM . tepšu. 78) and sometimes not: e. 1 (MH?/MS). ḫarnāuwaš. Paradigms for au-stem nouns: ‘birthing stool’ (com. neut. nom.‘exalted’ (ablauting). ḫarauwaš ḫarnuwaš 113 d. surely due to the fact that all other au-stems are neuter.) Singular nom. 114. KBo 17.. 4. -awaš -awaš all. 112. 00-HittiteGrammar. KBo 17. 115.55. 28) and §4. -un -amuš n. The normal stem + endings for the u-stem adjective are: Singular Plural nom. -awit 4. Substantivized adjectives sometimes show ablaut (§3. Paradigms for the u-stem adjectives (all ablauting except ḫallu.65 obv.‘sharp’ (non-ablauting). acc. See Puhvel. 98). The sg. ḫarnaūn ḫarāu GIŠ gen. form ḫarnāu is a secondary creation. ḫarnāuš 112 GIŠ ḫarāu GIŠ acc. The hapax sg. 4.-acc. 15 (MH?/MS).54. ḫarnuwi 114 GIŠ ḫārawi/ḫarāwi u-Stem Adjectives 112 113 114115 4. āššuwaz and āššawaz ‘with goods’ in the NH composition Deeds of Šuppi- luliuma (Weitenberg 1984: 322–23).-l.37.56. 113.43 (p. See §1. -awa gen.-l. -awi. ḫarnāwi. For other forms see šarku.g. com. -awe 115 -awaš Numerically Indifferent abl. ḫarnāin is an error due to confusion with the substance ḫurnai-.‘insignificant’ (ablauting). neut. -u -u (older). -uš -aweš acc.and dampu-).) ‘poplar’ (neut.57. HED H 175.

-l. forms are NH or at least NS. āššawi. āššū ‘goods.57 ‘good’ ‘high’ ‘bad’ ‘raw.42 ii 9 (HW and HED) may be a mistake for i-da-a- la-⟨u⟩-az. For these and the substantivized collective pl. ḫuešu panku gen. com. see i-da-a-lu ud-da-a-ar . 117. since the form in question is from parkui. 118. pangawi. ḫuiššawaza. ḫuešaweš acc. āššawa. idālawaš. pangawaz &-uwaz 119 ḫuišawaz. 00-HittiteGrammar. 71). āššamuš pargamuš. pár-ku-wa-aš KUB 10.14 iii 17 need not imply *idāluwaš.20 (p. 122. . nom. . pangawe idālawe Numerically Indifferent abl. āššaweš pargaweš idālaweš ḫuišaweš. neut. There is no phonological explanation for the form as it stands. āššuš parkuš idāluš pankuš. āššun parkun idālun pankun n. . A form pár-ga-u-e-i is also attested once (KBo 3. 121. 119. a conflation of pár-ga-u-i and pár-ga-u-e. ‘all. idālawa.indb 103 6/5/08 4:15:44 PM . idālamuš panqaweš pár-ga-u-uš.-l. panguš acc. āššawet idālawit pankuit Plural nom. pangaweš ḫuwišaweš. āššawe idālawi. entire’ uncooked’ Singular nom. pár-ku in KUB 24. Forms like &-u-wa-aš KBo 4. ḫuešuwaza ins. pargawaš idālawaš ḫuiša⟨w⟩aš 116 117 118 119 120 121 122idalu paradigm 116.-a. For pl. āššu121 parku 122 idālu 121 gen. pargawi 118 itālawi.-l. pár-ga-u-i. The hapax i-da-a-la-az uddānaz KUB 15. 103 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. ḫušuwaza. āššawaš — 116 &-uwaš 117 pangawaš d. 120. attributive adjective idālu are cited in Weitenberg 1984: 211–12 (§531). neut. since the complement can represent the final signs of i-da-a-la-u-wa-aš. property’ (OS) see §3. All currently attested sg. Examples of pl.11 i 11 (HW 161) for expected *pargawaš does not exist.68 ii 11-12 (OH/NS). d. āššu parku idālu ḫuišu. com. pár-ga-u-wa.-a. neut. a-aš-šu ud-da-a-ar ‘bad things . com.-acc. good things’ KUB 33.8 iii 10). com. pargawēš 120 n. see Weitenberg 1984: 132–33. &-uwaš d.‘pure’. pár-ga-u-e-eš KBo 4.1 i 25.4 iv 30 (NH). . āššawaza pargawaz idālawaz(a). ḫuešawaz(a).

thus becoming indistin- guishable from the sg. 42). These weak stem forms (e. 123. But in later Hittite utnē.71 iii! 9 (late NH).5 iv 26. tepawa daššawa gen.(see §1. The noun utne..-l. šu-u-wa-mu-uš [ḫal]luwauš 126 n. Paradigm (for which see Weitenberg 1984: 140) given in transliteration instead of broad transcrip- tion because of the unusual spellings (§1. utniyaz) were preserved in NH copies of OS originals. KBo 6. ḫatkuš šu-u-uš taššuš acc.‘land. p. com.. tepawaz(a) ḫatgawaz ḫalluwaz šu-u-az ins. 4.indb 104 6/5/08 4:15:45 PM . One would expect *ḫalluš (non-ablauting) or *ḫallamuš (ablauting). tepuš daššuš.142. country’ has an ablauting paradigm in OH. few’ ‘heavy’ ‘narrow. d. and a weak stem utni(y). 174. *utnē-i contracted to utnē.112 (p. ḫal-lu-uš KUB 31. For preservation of tn see §1. 11). both singular and plural. tepawaš ḫalluwaš d. nom. See discussion of the similar form šuwamuš in §1. tepawe Numerically Indifferent abl. 124.-a. šu-u-ú gen. com. com. neut.was generalized as the stem for the entire paradigm.-l. taššu šu-u.g. Plural nom. tepun daššun ḫatkun šu-u-un. with utnē in the nominative-accusative. p. daššaweš ḫalluēš. In the OS sg. tepawēš. te-e-pa-u-i-eš 124 ḫalluš 125 acc. d.8. ‘deep’ ‘full’123 tight’ Singular nom. 48).often inserted before endings beginning with an -a.-a.-pl. 126.-acc. tēpu daššu. šu-u-ú-un n. daššamuš ḫalluwamuš. with a -y.-l.58 Noun and Adjective Declension 104 ‘small. com. The attested forms are irregu- lar. 125. 00-HittiteGrammar.58. 11).in all other cases (see Neu 1974: 109–14).8 (p. neut. for interpretation as /te:pawis/ see LH 55 n. ḫalluwaš 123 124 125 126 e-Stem Noun 4.

išqaruḫi (NS). For athematic nominal suffixes in PIE see Watkins 1998: 62–63. 54 §79.-l.60.61. -al-. utnē utnē gen. There are no l-stem adjectives.59.‘winter’.). d. The situation is less clear for those in -i/el (Rieken 1999a: 473–94). many’ there existed a k-stem mekk. nom. whether or not it is an inherited word. 81) and n. gi-e-mi ‘in winter’ (Rieken 1999a: 77–78). In OH. however. and the only m-stem is giem. 30 (p. n. -att-.(see §4. -want-. iškariḫ (both MS). 4. utniya Numerically Indifferent abl. This is clearly the case for stems in -al and -ul (Rieken 1999a: 445–72). utnē utne(y)aš. all l-stem nouns are neuters (see also Kammenhuber 1969b: 297–300). 82).62. ḫ-Stem Noun 4. l. -t-. 4. utniyaz Consonantal-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 4. and -zil. to which we may also add NINDAtūnik (sg. l-Stem Nouns 4. -ant-. iškaruḫit (MS). the neuter išqaruḫ (a vessel). see chapter 2) end in consonants: -aḫit-. The following derivational suffixes (for their meanings.). One ḫ-stem noun is known. 97. and CHD sub mekki-).-acc. 37 (p. -eššar. On l-stem nouns see Rieken 1999a: 419–98. and see n.‘much. NINDA tūningaš (sg.-tar. sg. utnīaš all. According to HE p. 105 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. -ul-. and Meriggi 1980: §§93–130.63.indb 105 6/10/08 7:39:37 AM . -an-. gen. š. 283–91. For those in Hittite see Rieken 1999a.-acc. -war. Hittite nouns and adjectives show only a limited number of consonants or consonant sequences in stem-final position: ḫ. r.-acc. and (n) t. For possible traces of additional stems in velars see Rieken 1999a: 61–66.63 Singular Plural nom.41. Other PIE root nouns with bilabial stop stems have migrated to the vocalic stem class (see Goetze 1937 and HED H 115 [on ḫapa. alongside the more common adjectival stem mekki. Representative de- clined forms are: sg. p. 00-HittiteGrammar.-l. utne(y)aš utne(y)aš d. unless takšul belongs to this class. ins. -ur-. For nouns with consonantal stems in the Old Anatolian languages see Kammenhuber 1969b: 196–99. attested in the sg.‘river’]). d. iškaruḫ.-l. utne(y) az. nom. There are no b/p-stems.

šiyattal ‘blade(?)’. ḫḫḫallit mema(l)lit tawalit. Dinçol 1998. skill’). neut. nom. ḫaḫḫali tawali ḫuḫupali šupli.see §2. Paradigms for the stems in -al: 128 129 ‘brushwood(?). ḫuḫupalit (tawallit) Plural n. šuppalaš. In memal(l).127 šuppal ‘domestic animal’.(and probably ḫaḫḫal(l)-) the gemi- nate -ll. there was a tendency to generalize -l. For nouns formed with a suffix -al. Güterbock 1995a. ḫaḫḫali ḫuḫupalli. šuppalanza gen. On the problem of the alternative a-stem forms of šuppal-. šuppalaš 128 n. Prins 1997: 57–58. šuppalan 129 d.19 (p. kurtal (a container). cleverness. māl (perhaps ‘intelligence.is probably in imitation of memall-. but because this was simplified to -l in word-final position in the nominative-accusative. katral (a metal harness piece). groats’ (a beverage) (musical ‘cattle’ underbrush(?)’ instrument) Singular nom. tawal (an intoxicating bever- age). tawaral (a kind of bread). 128. On puriyal (perhaps for puriyalli) ‘lip cover’ see §2. šuppalan erg. ḫāḫḫal mēmal tawal ḫuḫupal šuppal. flour’. memal ‘meal. 117. see Melchert 1993a: 111. 8 (p. 129. The geminate in pl. 00-HittiteGrammar.-a. ḫuḫupal (musical instrument). šuppalann⸗a ḫanneššar KUB 31.-l. ‘meal. 55). See on this noun Melchert 1988a. com. 4. ḫaḫḫallaš mema(l)laš tawalaš d.(see Rieken 1999a: 71– 73). memallaz tawalaz ḫuḫupalaz ins. underbrush(?)’.-acc. The single example with a geminate in tawal. ḫuḫuppalli is part of a separate phenomenon whose status remains unclear: see §1. including sg. 41). 54). Polvani 1988. neut. ḫaḫḫallaš 127.21 with n.-l.127 + ABoT 44+ i 43 (OH/NS). šuppala ḫuḫupal.109 (p. Other nouns ending in -al are: ḫaḫḫal ‘brushwood(?). šuppali Numerically Indifferent abl.64. but we cannot be sure because the origin of the word is quite unknown. ḫuḫupāla gen. nom.64 Noun and Adjective Declension 106 al-Stem Nouns 4.is original.indb 106 6/5/08 4:15:46 PM .-a. com.

alil. tayazzil ‘theft’. Because of the multivalence of the  sign.-a. ḫapalzel is sometimes dissimilated to ḫapalzir. a-li-la-az) could also be read alelaš.indb 107 6/5/08 4:15:47 PM . aleli. com. neut. 107 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. 133. 134. Nouns ending in -ul (for examples see §2.66 e/il-Stem Nouns 4. ‘blossom’ ‘thread’ ‘unnatural ‘compensatory sex act.-l.exists for aššul ‘favor. a-li-li. 59). Explicit common- gender evidence is post-OH. aššuli could just as well belong to it as to the older neuter l-stem. ḫur-ke-la-aš and ḫur-ke-la-za are also possible readings. incest’. form is ambiguous as to its gender. aššulan. including those with a derivational suffix -zil. both kurur and takšul are nouns. alili šuili Numerically Indifferent abl. Since alel is unattested prior to NS. ḫapalzil (kind of stew?). šarnikziluš 135 n. alili ḪI.-a. alilaz ḫurkilaza šarnikzilaz ins. but compare also Rieken 1999a: 482–83 and 490–91. 131.66. are: ḫurkil ‘unnatural sex act.-l. gazzimuel (a leather part of the harness). aššulaš and the sg. gen. 30 (Murš. šuel ḫurkil.42. ḫurkel šarnikzil. šuilit Plural acc. p. well being’.131 šarnikzel gen. not adjectives. all post-OS forms with endings beginning with a vowel (a-li-la-aš. with sg. flower’. acc. NH forms of the sg. d. ḫurutil (kind of stew). šarnikzil ‘compensatory payment’. nom. On this late NS form as evidence of animacy see Melchert 1997a: 713. alilaš ḫurkilaš 134 šarnikzilaš d.131 šarnikzel 132 n. whereas alil is found in OH/MS. 00-HittiteGrammar. II). On the problem of apparent common-gender forms to some stems in -i/el see Melchert 2001. alilaš 130 šarnikzil. it is probable that alil was the OH form of the word. Nouns ending in -e/il. 132. incest’ payment’ Singular nom. 136. nom. com. An NH alternate common- gender a-stem aššula. alliance’. See [mā]n šarnikzel kuiš ‘If (there is) any restitution’ in KUB 14.133 alel šuil. neut. alelaz.136 130. 135.A 130 131 132 133 134 135 ul-Stem Nouns 4. A noun takšul means ‘peace. pa(ḫ)šuil (kind of fodder).8 rev. According to Neu (1979b). In OS contexts (all in the Laws) this sg. aššulaš and sg. The forms with suffix -zil are older than those with -zel. alil ‘blossom. dammašḫuel (variety of pear tree?). šuil ‘thread’.65.

as *wa-aš-d/tu-ul-la/i. plague’. See also §1.-acc.A 138 nom. šekan ‘span’. inan ‘disease’. ú-li-ni-i. išḫiulaš aššulaš takšulaš waštulaš. šagan ‘oil’. nom. not *lamanaš ). wilan ‘clay’ (gen. Oettinger 1980): tēkan ‘earth’.‘?’ inflect in Hittite as neuter n-stem pluralia tantum. For competing ac- counts of the prehistory of karzan. išḫiulaza wašdulaza ins.of the oblique cases is preserved. p.-acc. 48 (p.indb 108 6/5/08 4:15:48 PM . reverence’. šaḫḫan ‘feudal due’. takšulit waštulit Plural ḪI. 41).-acc. 39) and §1. 138. waštul išḫiuli takšul 137 138 4.9 ii 15 in broken context is most likely wašdull⸗a with -a/-ya ‘and’ and is no evidence for a pl.and pittula-. with forms parallel to šaraman.69. šaramnaz).-acc.71) are neuter (Kammenhuber 1969b: 197–98 §19. degree’. ilan ‘step. waštullaš 137 d. 4. d. wilnaš 141). nom. wa-aš-du-ul-la KUB 18. and waštullaz are written wa-aš-túl-la/i-.see Eichner 1973: 98 n.68–4. wašduli.25. 141. n-Stem Nouns Neuter n-Stem Nouns 4. The stems karzan.would (§1. 139. kuššan ‘wage’. lāman ‘name’. takšan ‘midst’. wašdul išḫiul aššul takšul gen. This alternation does not reflect ablaut but the fact that the prehistoric syllabic *-nX of the nominative- accusative appears as Hittite -an. kuššan ‘wage’ (d. 140.67. lamnaš.(a weaver’s tool) and GIŠḫanzan. tēkan ‘earth’ (gen.68. 139 4. The a in the final syllable -an of some n-stems does not appear in their oblique cases:140 laman ‘name’ (gen. naḫḫan ‘fear. šaraman (a kind of bread) (abl.67 Noun and Adjective Declension 108 ‘sin’ ‘obligation’ ‘well being’ ‘peace. kušni ). 00-HittiteGrammar. alliance’ Singular nom. See n. waštulla. Most n-stem nouns (§§4. In addition. 78). waštullaz. wašdulit.43 (p. while *-n. 137.5. wilan ‘clay’ shows an unusual sg.may not require the positing of a geminate l. oblique stem karzan-). 60). such as ašandula.109 (p.(pl.97 (p. aššuli takšuli waštulli Numerically Indifferent abl.-l. 19). ērman ‘illness’. The forms transcribed waštullaš. ḫengan ‘death. taknāš ). waštulli.-l. See §2. There are also a-stem nouns in -ula-. uštulaš. 78 and Rieken 1999a: 391–92. waštul. in which the sign sequence -túl-la/i. karza.-l.

šaganda147 Plural 148 nom. šaḫḫni lamni. 305).-acc. šaḫḫani šaram(ma)na. -za 143 šaram(ma)naz šaḫḫanza ins. kuššani. The variant šarāma is an archaism (see Gertz 1982: 298. This form in -i is a collective. The so-called endingless locative (Neu 1980).2 obv. 144.indb 109 6/5/08 4:15:48 PM .-acc. šaḫḫan laman gen. šḫḫanit lamnit šaramnit Plural nom. 145. 8. 437). ḫenkan šagan 145 gen. 44). See §31. fee’ ‘plague’ ‘oil’ Singular nom. p. The variant šaramma results from šaramna by assimilation (see §1. 147. šaramnaš. just as in English wage and wages are used interchangeably. kušni. ḫengani. ḫeganni Numerically Indifferent abl. The form la-am-ni-i belongs to the heteroclitic noun lammar ‘moment. 146.-l. kušnaz ḫinganaz(a) ins. 109 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.70 4. ša-ga-an KBo 38.-acc. 2 (OS).122. kuššan.68 obv. hour’. šaḫḫanaš lamnaš šaramnaš 143 144 145 146 147 148 Case ‘wage. šarammaš d. ša-ag-ni KBo 32.14 iii 11 (MH/MS). 143. Here the regular end- ing -a has been added to the stem šaramn-.144 šarāma d.23 (p. kuššanaz. šaḫḫanaš lamnaš šaramannaš. ku-uš-ša-ni 142. šaramma. ḫinganaš šagnāš d.70. šagni 146 kuššanī ḫingani. not a count plural.-l. 00-HittiteGrammar.-l. šaḫḫanaz(a). Paradigms for the neuter n-stems: 142 (a tax or ‘name’ (a kind of bread) obligation) Singular nom.-acc. lamman 142 šaramni Numerically Indifferent abl. kšan ḫinkan. 148. ša-gán-da KBo 22.

-l. 50). eyaz). d.-acc. 4. 361. eyani Numerically Indifferent abl. taknāš in broad transcription. This word shows a mixture of n-stem (eyanaš. An identical form tagān (OS) or dagan occurs also in the compound noun daganzipa. 153.6. 00-HittiteGrammar. 187.37. Paradigm for neuter n-stem tekan with ablaut (§3. See §1. It is found to date only in NH or NS texts.71. eya. kunnanan. tēkan153 gen.e.  (/ya/). kuwannanaš 151 152153 4. taknaš. eyaš. Both te-kán and the end- ingless locative da-ga-an with their single writing between vowels suggest that the velar was voiced. 152. 154.8 (p. This word is conventionally written tēkan. 155.(dagan + šipa-) ‘earth-genius’ > ‘earth’. taknā abl.154 tagān.indb 110 6/5/08 4:15:49 PM . All nominative-accusative forms written e-ya we take as plurals. eyanit) and a-stem forms (eyaš. Alternating vowel length in this paradigm as well as ablaut grades suggest word stress on the plene position (AHP 185). eyanaš kunnaš. diachronic priority can be established for neither stem.-acc. which could be either (see §4.146 (p. for eyan. p. see §1. 47). 11) and §1. eyaz kuwannanaza ins. i.-l. eya.-l. This word as attested shows a mixture of n-stem and a-stem forms. taknī.136 (p. The form e-i-e is problematic. p.-acc.. taknāš d.71 Noun and Adjective Declension 110 (a tree variety) 149 ‘bead’ 150 Singular 151 nom. 150.72. 82. 78): 149 150 154 155 nom. eya. kunnan gen. eyanit kunnanit Plural GIŠ 152 nom. 151. even if in some cases they func- tion as collectives denoting a single object. for the a- stem neuter paradigm). kunnanaš d. eyani. What appears to be I + E graphi- cally is probably a scribal lapse for graphic I + A.155 tāgan all. taknāz(a) 4. eyan kuwannan. 149. AHP 185. e-i-e kuwanna gen.-acc. Sometimes written e-a-an. The nature (in Hittite) of the initial stop (d or t) is uncertain. Because it is found in OS only in the nom.

ending -s. Oettinger 2003. arkamma-.78. 60).75 Common-Gender n-Stem Nouns 4. p. Neu 1981b: 350–51.as well as -an. Possibly also (DUG)šāšan.and -n. with variants -en. Melchert 1983: 3–12. ends in -aš (without -n-!). nom. Sg. alkištan. Paradigms for animate nouns with sg.but also the regular sg. Thus one finds sg. ḫāraš arkammaš išḫimāš. oblique in -an-/-en-/-n-. alkištanaš.74. nom. nom.47 (p. išḫaminan gen. išḫima/en. 158. analogical to sg.‘cord’.in the oblique stem (see §4. There is a tendency in all these nouns to adopt the inflection of the a-stems—in two directions: based either on the sg. perhaps remodeled on the basis of Luwian loanwords in -anna/i-. memi(y)an. p.122. 111 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. 4. See Latin homō.37. nom. On the other hand. 159.‘eagle’. man’. 4. išḫimanaš acc. ḫāranaš arkammanaš d. arkammani 156. one also finds sg.(for the last item. largely superseding the previous treatments.‘tribute’. but some nouns show ablaut (see §3. ḫāran does not occur before MH and is a back formation. and URUšutummanaš ‘man of Šuta’. nom. p. p.69. and mŠuppiluliuma-. [GIŠalk]ištanaš at KUB 33. and mŠuppiluliuman. All common-gender n-nouns in Hittite except one (§4.158 išḫimanaš.73. 78). ḫāranan is OS.‘lamp’. Oettinger 1982b: esp.75. and the ethnicon suffix -um(a)n.157 Only the last two show a vocalic alternation e/a. and šutummana-.‘word.-l. For further examples of forms of -uman. and. 175–77.‘branch’. 108) and the phonetic changes this produces (see §1.(see Oettinger 1980. nom. in -aš and oblique stem in -an-: 159 ‘eagle’ ‘tribute’ ‘cord. -aš.156 In many instances the latter stem is invariant -an-. ḫāran 159 išḫimanan. Nouns belonging to the type with sg. memi(y)an. p. 157. only arkamman. but compare the different analysis by Rieken 2004b). as if the stems were alkištana-. nom. lacked not only the -n. thing’. nom. while all other cases have a stem containing -n-. ḫāran beside ḫāranan. 00-HittiteGrammar. which seems to have developed secondarily in NH a geminate n. 113) show a pat- tern in which the sg. nom.indb 111 6/5/08 4:15:50 PM . ḫāran. memi(y)a-. arkamman išḫimenan.is further complicated by the loss of the -a. as if the stems were ḫāra-. or on the oblique stem. ḫāranan.45–2. 44). acc. acc. rope’ Singular nom. and. see §2. ḫāraš. hominis ‘human being.45. in fact. 60).see §§2. This type reflects a PIE paradigm where the sg. išḫimana-. above all. The inflection of stems in -uman.117 iv 11. Hittite has added the regular ending -s to the sg. in- clude: arkamman.

161 162 ‘word’ ‘grape cluster’ Singular nom.23 (rev.35 (p. 33). arkammuš. memiyani. memieni Numerically Indifferent abl. ḫāraniš išḫimāneš acc. 161. memiyanaš 160. §3.162 memiyaneš. 27).16 (p. išḫimanit. memi(ya)nit mūrinit Plural acc.-acc. For the instrumental forms išḫimanda and išḫimanta see §3. 70). 162. 4. See §1. arkammanaš Note that the adverbial derivative ‘like an eagle’ shows the n-stem: ḫāranili. memi(ya)naza ins. which we consider to be OS. p. 54.57 (p. 77). memiyanaš d. neut. The noun memi(y)an.and a derived stem mūri(ya)n-) or simply mūri(ya)n. nom.seen in the forms memini and meminit (see n. išḫimanta Plural 160 nom. From KUB 43.-l. memini. The unique paradigm of ‘grape cluster’ may re- flect mixture of two different paradigms (an i-stem mūri. mūriuš. 160 4. contra Konk. išḫimanaz ins. išḫimanda. mūriš 161 acc.76 Noun and Adjective Declension 112 ‘eagle’ ‘tribute’ ‘cord. which lists it as MS.‘word’ also has a variant stem memin. memi(y)aš mureš. rope’ Numerically Indifferent abl. memiyanuš. mūriyanuš memiyaš gen.-l.76.. memi(y)an murin gen.with contraction. išḫimanuš argamanuš gen.indb 112 6/5/08 4:15:51 PM . memiyanaš d. 00-HittiteGrammar. memi(y)an is also attested in NH as a secondary sg. 21).

. there is a tendency to remodel this alternating paradigm as an a-stem. But there are objections worth considering (Güterbock 1992.. Güterbock 1992. -ni. -iš KUB 44.-iš. 167 168 Singular nom. (thus MS sg. 111). 111) (Oettinger 1982b).-uš gen. -aš 167 -iš 168 acc. 168.-aš 4.25 obv. nom. These nouns closely resemble those in §4. and (Ú)šumanzan. 113 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. nom. . -i Plural nom.83 (p. On suggestions for the Hittite word underlying  (earlier reading ) ‘woman’ (either *g(u)wen-. 35 nu⸗za zik d-uš kutruwaš ēš.-l. kutruwaš 163 kutrueš. kutrui kutruwaš 4.or NS pl. la(ḫ)ḫanzuš 163. Once again.79 4. like the nouns in §4.77. 1995c).4 ii 36–37 the form kutrūš is pl. .-eš. Examples include: GIŠalanzan. and is likewise subject to leveling as an a-stem kutruwa-. . kutrūš.79. nom. either after the sg. not sg. The Hittite word for ‘woman’ (-n-).166 If Neu (1990) and Carruba (1991. But they also have a sg. kutruwaš. see Neu 1990. shows a unique paradigm with the addition of -s in the sg. 1993a) are right. 167. In kutrūšš⸗a (var. kutarweneš 165 d.(a kind of tree). will’. nom. -aš is a secondary a-stem based on the oblique forms (see §4. or *g(u)wan-). Weitenberg 1995: 337.with sg. KBo 15.indb 113 6/5/08 4:15:52 PM . See on this writing §1.-l. mind. ištanzan. 165. Carruba 1993a.‘soul.241 rev. 00-HittiteGrammar. the underlying Hittite word was kuinn(a)-. 27.74 (p. kutruweneš.‘shelduck’.78. 35). 163 164 165 Singular Plural nom. Güterbock 1995c.‘(bul)rush’. nom.-aš d. . 166.-uš acc. alanzaš as if to alanza. which is descriptively an n-stem.(Melchert 2003b). p. -aš d. -za. gen.66 iii 3 and 10.78B ii 9. 164 kutruwaneš. kutruwašš⸗a) -an iyanteš ašandu KUB 13.74. The noun meaning ‘witness’ originally had a stem in -wa/en. 164. -an gen. in -anzaš without -n-. -naš. . ku-tar-ú-e-ne-eš KUB 23. in -waš.-l. laḫ(ḫ)anzan. -nan. while the rest of the cases are based on a stem -anzan-. acc. As shown by the spelling -na-aš KUB 8. Carruba 1991. HED K 306–8. nom.4 + KBo 13.75 in having a sg. in -anza without the final -š. and Rieken 1999a: 39–42. A small class of common-gender nouns has a stem in -anzan.

-a. Of the r-stem nouns (HE §80. form NA4ḫé-kur ḪI. producing ḫaštērz(a). aniuri kudur(r)a. even laḫanziuš [late NS] as if to *laḫanzi-) or after the other cases (thus NS sg.80 Noun and Adjective Declension 114 as if to la(ḫ)ḫanza-. URU -raš. 61) are all neuters.-a. -an. is inflected as a neuter.109 (p. ḫašterza acc.171 Stems in -ar include nouns of both genders and adjectives. citing anterior literature. Kammenhuber 1969b: 287). The final wedge (-aš ?) on the pl. 172 173 174paradigm of hasterza 4. paršūraš aniuraš Ḫaštiraš. URU Ḫaštiran.A 169. 41). See §1. 172. and nothing in that context suggests the need for a plural form. Paradigms of nouns in -ur and -er: ‘soup. ištanzanaš as if to ištanzana-). -aš are in MS manuscripts. d. paršūrit Plural nom. On the geminate sonorant see §1. ḫašduer kudurri ḪI. 171. . nom. 174. paršūrazzi aniuraz ḫašduerraza 173 ins.⟩ (with Beckman 1983b: 38–39). 00-HittiteGrammar. 173. EHS.170 The sg. which has common gender agreement (kūn NA4 ḫekur) but as yet no unequivocal common gender inflection.also back-forms a neuter singular based on the collective plural šumanza.A-aš cited by HED H 289 is clearly indicated in the copy with a circle of dots as partially erased.-l. p.169 There are only two nouns in -er: ḫašduer ‘brushwood’.-eš 174 n. 42).. paršūr aniur kudur ḫašdur URU gen.62 + KBo 17.indb 114 6/5/08 4:15:53 PM . an old collective. while ḫašter.80.81. those in -ur (§2. The noun šumanzan.‘star’ is common gender and adds an -s in the sg. nom. neut. com. neut. The earliest examples of sg. with the exception of NA4ḫekur ‘rock sanctuary’.63 iv 4 to read NA4ḫé-kur-uš with unusual syllabification or NA4ḫé-kur ⟨.arose as it did in the case of keššar > keššara- (§4. 4. a-ni-ú-ri is incorrectly registered as sg. See Weitenberg 1995: 334–35. Without im- mediate context. nom. -aš and the stem form URU-ra suggest that a secondary a-stem ḫašte/ira. . nom. r-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 4. com. stew’ ‘ritual’ (a body part) ‘brushwood’ ‘star’ Singular nom. URU Ḫašteran n. Most examples are part of place names where the word is written in the stem form.82). com.48. nom.116 (p. it is a toss-up whether in KBo 17. 170. -aš Numerically Indifferent 172 abl. Inflected forms of NA4ḫekur are virtually non-existent. in HED 1:70.

and kešširaš. ḫappari(ya).34+ IBoT 4. kišširaš. kiššeran.-a. keššar was stressed e. 287.45 obv. The alternation of e. 12) and §1. nom.(< PIE *-tor . proposed by Neu. neut. 207–8.g.82. which is once attested with the inherited asigmatic sg. and zero between the šš and the r of the word for ‘hand’ probably indicates that no vowel stood in that position and the word contained a consonantal sequence ssr (so AHP 29). the agent nouns in -tara-) had previously done. 14 (NS) is a back formation based on ḫappirāi.. kišširan 180 n. nom. examples: kišširaš. ‘hand’ became a common gender a-stem noun. sg. 178 179 180 ‘hand’ ‘purchase. following Kimball.179 keššeraš. ke-eš-šar. 00-HittiteGrammar. 276. kiššaraš 175.-l. ins. sale’ have an invariant stem and require no further comment. p.g. acc. ki-še-ra-aš-ša-an (*kiššeran⸗šan ‘his hand’) KBo 3.176 This is also the only r-stem noun to show traces of ablaut in its stem. and §4. com. The only forms diagnostic of this later a-stem are the sg. ki-iš-še-ra-an KUB 11.177 In OH the vowel in the first syllable of sg. agent nouns in -tara. On this correct interpretation of keššar⸗šiš see Weitenberg 1995: 334.70 rev. see §2. 180. 177. For the orthography ki-iš-šar-at see §1. sg. In the earlier stages of Hittite the word for ‘hand’ had the following paradigm (HE §80b): sg. i.54 iv 6 (OH/NS). com. In the case of nouns in -ar we must distinguish between original r-stems and secondary ones. Of original r-stems. 74). gimriuš (< gimra.26.2 (p. 178.‘steppe. KBo 24.beside ḫapparāi-.‘sale price’ and rejects the view that this is to be read as [ḫant]ezziyaš ḫappari⸗uš wāši ‘he shall buy them at the price of the first (man)’.27 obv. neuter nouns in -ar such as ḫappar. 176. the hapax ḫa-ap-pí-ir in KBo 12. We follow LH 121. §4. but rather the form -aš-še-et of the NH parallel text that is erroneous. šittariuš (< šittara-).12 (p.‘purchase. p. Rieken 1999a: 261–62). 13). but in the other forms of the paradigm was unstressed i (AHP 101).82 4. 79). keššar. 310). nom. all. See Rieken 1999a: 318 n. keššeraš. and laḫanziuš (< laḫanza [a bird]). 178 for the form ḫappariuš.175 The PIE r-stem poly- syllabic animate nouns are generally transferred to the a-stem class in Hittite (Rieken 1999a: 261–68): e. ki-iš-šar-ta. ki-iš-ri or ke-eš-šar (§3. it is not keššar⸗šiš. 86). keššar-šiš ‘his hand’. Late NH pl.‘mother’).11 (p. 31. which takes ḫa-ap-pa-ri-uš in Laws §146 (aa ii 11) as a different stem. 59). See n.. grassland’). 3 (OH/NS). on which see §4. with references. nom. ki-iš-ra-a. sale’178 Singular nom. ki-iš-ši-ra-aš VBoT 58 i 39 (OH/NS). StBoT 18 107 and followed by HW 2 H 215–16 and HED H 125–26.79. a.17 (p. ki-iš-šar-at.indb 115 6/5/08 4:15:54 PM . ḫappar gen. In the later language. §4. 1549.84. Against HED H 125 (following Laroche). com. There is one exception. kešširaš acc. Contrary to Kammenhuber (1969b: 281. kiššariuš shows the same intrusive i found in anniuš (< anna. the word for ‘hand’ (Weitenberg 1995: 334. 179.41. as others of its class (e. 115 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. d.

the response to the above sound change was the creation of two separate paradigms: a neuter a-stem šawitra. acc. Due to a pre-Hittite change involving final sequences of *-Cros/m (Melchert 1993a). ki-iš-š[(a-ri-iš-ši )] ‘in(to) his hand’ KUB 11. KUB 12. ki-iš-ri-i ‘in(to) the hand’ HKM 44:10 (MH/MS). ke-e-da-ni-ma ḫu-up-pa- ra-aš kat-ta ki-it-ta KUB 33.-l. 185. kišraš 181 182 183 184 185kissar “hand” paradigm end 4. ki-iš-še-ri-it KUB 29. kiššeruš.8 rev. kišrā 184 Numerically Indifferent abl.127 i 23. acc. kišširit185 Plural nom. ki-iš-ri-mi ‘in(to) my hand’ KBo 3. kišširi.83. com. kiššarī. etc.-l. and sg. The paradigms of šittar ‘sun disk’ and ḫuppar (a vessel) follow: ‘sun disk’ (com.40 iii 32. ki-iš-ša-ri KUB 13. 187. 184. ḫappari kišr . 182. ḫupparaš d. ki-iš-ša-ri-mi KBo 3. KBo 8. kiššariuš gen.6 i 4ʹ (= THeth 11:24 i 70) (OH/NS).42 rev. com.” See Neu 1980: 33–35. The anomalous sg. ki-iš-ri- it-ti ‘in(to) your hand’ KBo 3.21 ii 5 (Adad hymn. See še-me-e-na-aš ḫu-u-up-pa-ra-aš šu-u-uš KBo 20.83 Noun and Adjective Declension 116 ‘hand’ ‘purchase. a number of common-gender nouns (šittara-. 11 (OS). ki-iš- šar-at. 4 (OS). Contrary to Neu (1982–83: 125–26). 00-HittiteGrammar. ki-iš-ši-ri-it KUB 30. 6 (cult inv. ḫūpparaš 187 acc. kišrt. KBo 3. sale’178 Singular 181 d. were replaced in later Hittite by a-stem forms in -araš and -aran.37 i 5. nom.1 ii 5 restored by KUB 11. In the case of the word for ‘horn’. kiššari. KBo 8. ki-iš-ša-ri-iš-mi ‘in(to) their hand’ StBoT 8 i 20 (OS).-l. kišraš.23 i 4 (OH/NS). com.) (a vessel) Singular nom..182 keššar 183 all. kišarta. ki-iš-ša-ri-i StBoT 8 i 28 (OS). 4. ke-eš-šar “endingless locative. kiššaraz ḫapparaz ins. kiššerit.and a neuter r-stem šāwatar (Melchert 1993a: 105–6). however. šittar ḫuppar. 183. ḫuppara-) came to have sg. MH/NS). NH?).8 obv. com. kiššariš acc.59 iii 8–9 (OS).20 i 18 (MH/NS).84. there is no evidence that there was any gender alternation in any of these stems in OH. 186.186 187 4. ki-iš-šar-ta KBo 20. keššarta. nom.1 ii 22. šittara/in ḫupparan gen. kiššarta.35 iii 7 (MH/MS).28:7. 31 (OH/MS). forms in -ar although their stems were in -ra-.indb 116 6/5/08 4:15:55 PM . com. kiššaraš d. forms in -ar.63 obv. and sg. 4 (OS or OH/MS). ḫppari 181. KUB 31. 26.

šittaraš ḫupparuš coll. kallar) have the same history as the nouns described in §4. The following nouns belong to the s-stem class: aiš ‘mouth’. šakuwaššaran kallaran n. kallāra kurura gen. ḫuppari 188huppar paradigm end 4. šittareš acc..g.A n. com. [ . 188.-a. šakuwaššarit kallarit Plural nom. s-Stem Nouns 4. kallar. kurur šakuwaššaraš.).43:4ʹ (MS?. kururaš šakuwaššaraš d.83. com. šakuwaššar. neut. OS according to Konk. šittarza ḫupparaza ins.87. Paradigms for r-stem adjectives: ‘hostilility’ ‘full. k]al-la-ar KUB 12. šittaraz.-l. 00-HittiteGrammar. and Sihler 1995: 305.87 ‘sun disk’ (com.as a noun secondarily used as an adjective. . . neut. kurur šakuwaššaruš acc. ḫupparit Plural nom. 117 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. 1983: 97 with n. kurur. complete’ ‘ominous’ Singular nom. com. 354) and others in analyzing kurur. ḫapuš ‘reed stalk(?). kururaš 4. kūruri šakuwaššari Numerically Indifferent abl. the exceptions being ḫš ‘soap’ and ḫandaiš ‘heat’.85. The adjectives in -ar (e.-a. ankiš (a kind of plant). šakuwaššaraza ins. ḫandaiš ‘heat’. Beekes 1995: 185–86. com. šittariuš. We follow Neu (1979b.86. kurur šakuwaššar kallar 188 gen. In Hittite most s-stem nouns are neuter. šakuwaššaruš ḪI. kururi . šakuwaššar acc.indb 117 6/5/08 4:15:56 PM . For the PIE origins of the inflection of Hittite s-stems see Rieken: 1999a 171– 83.) (a vessel) Numerically Indifferent abl.

190.8–3.8 i 34. tapuwaš 189 190 191192 193 ‘lituus’ ‘heat’ ‘soap. iššaz ins. which HW 213 assigned to the genitive. iššī. heaven’. aiš ‘mouth’ and the compound zaškaraiš containing it are the only s-stem nouns that show ablaut. com. iškiš ‘back’.-l.13.88.115 (NS).4 ii 10 (NH). ḫaššaš acc. kutriš ‘reckoning’ (see HED K 298). it must be such. Paradigms for s-stem nouns: ‘mouth’ ‘side’189 dannaš-bread Singular nom. KUB 2. instead they are sg. aišši tāpūwaš (?)190 all. 120). an extended stem -šn. ×. 202. 193. 4.-acc. 68). pp. The adverbs tapuša ‘to the side’ and tapušza ‘beside’ were originally the allative and ablative of this s-stem.4 i 9.9.90 with n. The second ta-a-pu-u-wa-aš form in KUB 9.(see §4.23 i 5–6 (NS). com. p.&.-uš d.88 Noun and Adjective Declension 118 penis(?)’. nom. This example is not evidence for heterogenicity in this word but rather a sporadic example of the use of a common-gender form for a count plural in early NH (see §3. dannaš (a kind of bread). ḫupallaš ‘scalp(?) or skull(?)’. p. and a shorter i-stem (HW 74. to stems in -ant-. aiš tapuwaš dannaš erg. ḫš ‘soap’. iššaš tapuwaššaš d. 4. ash’ Singular nom. zaškaraiš ‘anus’ (< zaškar ‘excrement’ + aiš ‘mouth’). ḫandaiš 193 ḫāš. The forms NINDAtannaza and dannaza do not belong to his word. with restoration from KUB 31. kalmuš ‘lituus. Neu- ter nouns cannot serve as subjects of transitive verbs (see §§3. crook’ maldaniš ‘mushroom(?)’. Although no inflectional aspect of this word shows it to be common gender. 192. HED H 424). išša Numerically Indifferent abl.indb 118 6/5/08 4:15:56 PM . 66–67). Perhaps it is an endingless locative. KUB 14. nepiš ‘sky. ḫaššan 189. purpuriš (a vessel). iššit dannašit 191 Plural 192 acc. 00-HittiteGrammar.-l.‘pine cone’ shows both an s-stem. tāpuwaššanza gen. whereas ḫandaiš does so: mān⸗a[(n)] ḫandaiš walḫzi zig⸗an ekunimi dai KBo 3. 191. com. is con- textually a dative-locative (probably singular). The noun ḫu(wa)lli(š)/ḫuwalliš (ša)n.

Only the extended stem in -ššn.-l.116.shows that this noun originally belonged to the type of s-stem with an -n. Plene writing of the initial syllable is common in OS.‘of the lituus’. kalmuš gen. ḫaššuš 4. nom. com. see §4.indb 119 6/5/08 4:15:57 PM . ne-pí-ša (NS). iškišaš nepišaš d. 120).-acc. ne-e-pí-ša (OS). which cannot be explained by accent: see AHP 150–51. This secondary sg. 196. -aš acc. to a stem atešš (a)na. kalmuši ḫandaiši Numerically Indifferent abl. used in a list despite its syntactic role as a direct object. 197. nepiš 197 all.175:6ʹ belongs to the paradigm of kalmuš. the form a-te-eš-ša-na-aš in KUB 9. atešš(a). com. com. 195. ne-e-pí-iš (OS). Against Rieken (1999a: 192).in the oblique cases.89. for which there are parallels.) ins. but it may also belong to a derived adjectival stem *kalmušiya.in this word. kalmušaš 194 d. [nep]išaš. 198. ne-pí-iš (OS and later). nepiš see Neu 1980. nepišanza gen.31 i 27 is not “hopelessly cor- rupt” but merely a sg. kalmušaz.-acc. ash’ Singular nom. If kalmušiyaš KBo 34. see CHD L–N 448. ne-pé-eš only in NS.‘axe’. iškiši nepiši.can explain the consistent geminate -šš. iškiš npiš 196 ateš erg. kalmušit Plural acc.‘back’. com. kalmušati (Luw.89 ‘lituus’ ‘heat’ ‘soap. 00-HittiteGrammar.-l. p. One group of nouns has members with secondary common-gender stems in the nominative and accusative extended by a thematic vowel a: iškiš(a). On the endingless loc. 194 195 196 197 198 nepis “sky”: paradigm beginning ‘back’ ‘sky’ ‘axe’195 Singular nom. nepiš(a)- ‘sky’. iškiša n piša 198 194. 119 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. nom. it resembles kardiyaš to kard- ‘heart’ (see §4.90 (p. 131). iškišan nepišan ateššan nom.

tunnakkiš(n-) ‘inner cham- ber’. 199 nepišaz(a) ins. KBo 29. com. 00-HittiteGrammar. While PIE simple t-stems are rare (Beekes 1995: 178). iškišaz npišza. The combination of t/d with an immediately following š (as in the sg. Due to the wide use and productivity of a derivational suffix -att.indb 120 6/5/08 4:15:58 PM .58 i 3. dandukiš(n-) ‘humanity. 9.91. 37). ateššet Plural acc.15 rev. ḫaddareš(n-) ‘intersection. 73. 203. p.199:7ʹ. camp-chair’. iškiša atišša 201 gen.90 Noun and Adjective Declension 120 ‘back’ ‘sky’ ‘axe’195 Numerically indifferent abl.are not.included in this class by Rieken (1999a: 391–92) see n. dunnakkešnaš.extension in the oblique cases: ḫaḫriš(n-) ‘lung’. neut. 4. Rieken 1999a: 83–170). For the stems karzan. + particle -za (see n. 108). 202. Attested in the ergative form [ḫu-w]a-al-li-iš-ša-na-an-za KUB 7. cited in HED A 227–28 in unpublished form as “atteššuš-ma ZABAR 97/b r. gen. 15 (OS) and ne-pí-iš-za KBo 3. 139 (p. uppiš(n-) ‘what is sent’ (AHP 150–51. EHS 254–56.(see §4. 4. Kammenhuber 1969b: 196. gen. tunnakkiš gen.? ateššuš 200 n. 4. p. tunnakišna. 200.used to form action nouns. du[nnake]šni all.69 iii 4). 363 and §3.” 201. Kro- nasser 1956: 129–31. 74) are unfounded.92. the human race’. ne-e-pí-iš-za KUB 43. etc. The only neuter t-stems in Hittite are those in -itt. members of this group were regularized by being fitted into the heteroclitic r/n-stem class with new nominative-accusative forms such as tunna(k)keššar (KUB 25. takšeš(n-) ‘assemblage’. nom. those in -nt.203 Later. ḫu(wa)lliš(n-) ‘pine cone’.and GIŠ ḫanzan. KBo 30. ‘inner chamber’ nom.90–1. 15.-acc.23 rev.) is represented by the graph z in Hittite cuneiform (see §§1. If an- 199. p. p. (see §3. com.91.26. iškišitti? ateššit.22:2 (OS). 7.23. the number of t-stem nouns in Hittite is fairly large (Pedersen 1938: 40–41. fork’. Another group shows an -n. [t]unnakkešnaš d. The alternate interpreta- tions of the latter as sg. p. nepišan 199 200 201 nepis “sky”: end 4. Rieken 1999a: 386–404).202 kuppiš(n-) ‘stool.95. This form may be pl.90. ḫatalkiš(n-) ‘hawthorn’. (Otten 1951: 40 and EHS 327) and as endingless loc. tunnakkišna t-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 4. 122).-l. and CHD L–N 448).-a.

22:64 (OS) vs.‘sleep. kartimmiyaza . 78).64 iv 1ʹ (MH/MS). 206. Abstracted from compound [ap-pa-š ]i-wa-at-ta KUB 31. See on this problem AHP 144–45. šaš-t. we/itti šiwatti. com. For the possibility that aniat as attested is a correct collective plural and an archaism see AHP 87. and kutt. who emends to a-ni-ya-at-⟨ta⟩-še-et. following Schindler).31 (p. Kammenhuber 1969b: 196. aniyaz 207 gāšza. kardimiyaz. On šīwatt. ú-i-it-ti KUB 29. Against taking a-ni-at-še-et (OS) as evidence for secondary neuter gender see Rieken (1999a: 107). . Interpretation as nominative or genitive is possible (see Neu 1983: 15–16 n.(see HED K 298). kašza *we/izza. 207. 00-HittiteGrammar.-az. but there is evidence for both e.indb 121 6/5/08 4:15:59 PM .shows partially preserved ablaut (§3. com. . Of the latter only kar(a)itt- ‘flood’ < *g ̑ r(o)i-t. A derived t-stem nekut. Starke 1990: 458 n.37. -an -an d gen. henceforth’ (Rieken 1999a: 104).‘wall’ < ̑g h(o)u-t. 209. 400. Common-gender t-stem nouns include one PIE root noun. it was necessary to write it in cuneiform as -za.see Pedersen 1938: 175.94 other consonant immediately preceded this /ts/ in final position. Rieken 1999a: 102–5. Paradigms of common-gender t-stem nouns: ‘anger’ ‘task. 208. bed’ to šeš-/šaš.204 The noun ḫalmaššuitt. gen.94. šīwaz? 208 acc. 4. for which see §2. 57). Šīwattaš.‘throne dais’ is a loanword from Hattic. Simple t-Stem Nouns 205 206 207 208 209 210 4.‘hunger’ < *g(h)os-t. ritual’ ‘famine’ ‘year’ 205 ‘day’ 206 Singular nom.72 iv 2.‘to sleep’. and several nouns derived with a suffix -t-.32:2 and KUB 4. Rieken 1999a: 102–3).209 -ti all. Others have gener- alized the o-grade: kašt. This situation is especially common with stems in -nt-. AHP 102.-aš šīwaz? d. Spellings like pl. 1666. p. where nekuz is judged to be an old genitive < *nekw-t-s (Rieken 1999a: 84 with n. kartimmi(y)atti šiwāt. 74. the word for ‘year’ (wē/ītt.(but e-grade is reflected in the deriva- tive kištuwant.93. The word for ‘year’ reflects a PIE e-grade. There is also a productive class of nouns with the suffix -att-. kardimiyattaš aniyattaš *we/ittaš. ú-e/it-ta-an are therefore ambiguous.‘hungry’). See also the second member of the OH a-ni-ši-wa-at ‘today.-atti.-za -az. where the final sequence of three consonants /nts/ was written -Vn-za.-l.and i-vocalism in the Hittite word: ú-e-et-ta-[(an-da-an-ni)] KBo 3. Rieken 1999a: 103. Yoshida 2000. aniyatti kāšti wītti.‘evening’ is attested only in the set phrase nekuz meḫur ‘evening time’. 210. . kardimiyattan aniyattan kaštan *we/ittan. -aš. 204–5. 131. šīwat. *šiwatta 210 204. with an unpronounced a. 121 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.< *wētt-). 205.

com..&. 212. 6ʹ (NH). tuškarattaš kuttaš 215 d. aš . naḫšarattan kuttan dušgaratan.&. KBo 4. IBoT 1.-l. Rieken (1999a: 115) argues against the interpreta- tion as ablative of *naḫšar-. . gen.-uš . karit[ti ] KBo 22.-za (. karaitti KUB 36.-l. duškaratta(z)za naḫšarataza kuttaz ins. II).-uš 211 .-aš. 6 (Murš. obv. Neuter t-stems are represented by militt. 00-HittiteGrammar.36 i 59 (MH/MS) with CHD L–N 344. com.&. we/ittan. aniyatti. . aniat (?) 207 gen. 213.421 rev. MSpr. aniyatta.95 Noun and Adjective Declension 122 ‘anger’ ‘task. . aniyattaš . dušgaraz(a) naḫšaraz. com. 211. dušgaratti. 215. 58. karaitti. naḫšaradduš kudduš d. 216. ritual’ ‘famine’ ‘year’ 205 ‘day’ 206 Numerically Indifferent abl. garittiš naḫšaratteš kutteš acc.&... karaīz. RS 25.-uš acc.&. 4.95.42 obv. 214. kariz.indb 122 6/5/08 4:15:59 PM . com.6 i 27 (OH?/NS). tušgarattan. See Rieken 1999a: 116 n.-aš 211 212 213 214 215 216shiwatt paradigm end ‘flood’ ‘joy’ ‘fear’ ‘wall’ Singular nom.. Plural nom. com. .&.8 ii 22 (Murš. II).‘honey’ and šeppitt. Nei- ther noun occurs in the plural. 533. . kāštit Plural nom. naḫšarattaš kuttaš 4.-l.-aš d.(a cereal). naḫšaratti kutti karitti 214 dušqarati 216 Numerically Indifferent abl. kardimiyattuš.110:18 (OS). .&. garitteš. com.)-az ins.-uš 212 kartimmiyadduš coll.213 kuzza gerēzza naḫšarraz acc. KUB 22.

(§§25. com. kant. -it nt-Stem Nouns and Adjectives 4. išpandi ḫūmanti ḫuišwanti appanti Numerically Indifferent abl. ‘oats’?). For the ergative case in -anza/-anteš. ḫūmanduš. Hittite participles.217 ḫūmanteš.(a cereal. išpanza ḫūmanza ḫuiš(u)wanza. milit. šeppidaš d. see §3. Other nt-stem plural nominatives are: . Adjectives in -nt.(for these see §§2.-a.-l. 66). ḫūmantit Plural nom.39–25. may sometimes be substantivized.‘wind’. išpandaš ḫūmandaš ḫuišwantaš appantaš d. militaš šeppittaš.27.98 ‘honey’ ‘šeppit-grain’ nom.‘small’. ḫūmandaš appantaš d. pp.98. 218. 4. appanza ḫušuwanza acc. For derived adjectives with a suffix -ant. and several types of stems derived with a suffix -(a)nt.-l. Common-gender nouns in -nt.) ‘captured’ > ‘captive’ Singular nom. neut. 123 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. ḫūman gen.8 (p. com.include one root noun. which are also formed with a suffix -ant.50 (p. -anza gen.25 and 2.-l. -it šeppit erg. 61).) ‘living’ (adj. one probable old participle.&.1 iv 16 (Murš. -ti ins. II). 56). ḫūmandaš appantaš 217.-uš (*ḫuwanduš ) ‘winds’ KUB 24.see §2. appantan ḫuišwandan n.indb 123 6/5/08 4:16:00 PM .for which no shorter bases can be found in Hittite are ḫūmant- ‘all’ and am(m)iyant.-acc. com. 00-HittiteGrammar. ḫuiš(u)wanteš appānteš ḫūmanduš acc. ḫuwant.26 (p. 217 218 humant- 4. Paradigms of Stems in -nt-: ‘night’ (noun) ‘all’ (adj. Perhaps this is rather a collective in -i. išpandan ḫūmandan ḫuš(u)wand/tan. ḫūmand/ta appanti 218 gen. com. 339–340). išpandaz ḫūmandaz appantaz ins.96.24 and §2. neut. 56) and for those with a suffix -want. p.97. išpanti.-a.45. ḫuišwanduš appanduš ḫūmanteš n.see §2.

See also Meier-Brügger 2000: 190–201. p. Sihler 1995: §§290–92. Kammenhuber 1955b = Kammenhuber 1993: 1–10. For details on the ablaut and accent pattern of these stems in PIE see Rieken 1999a: 269–70. and §1.” In Hittite. uddani. Beekes 1995: 174–76. Spellings such as ú-i-ti-ni-it KBo 23. but not *u-e/i-. 00-HittiteGrammar. the word for ‘day’ (šiwatt-) is not an r/n-stem. On the alternation of initial ú-i. p. 220. kuttar ‘neck(?). with and without ablaut (see §3. once ú-wi5-.100. witen-. wātar ‘water’. p. ‘fire’. šēḫur ‘urine’. uttar wtar mēḫur ēšḫar.3. strength’. paḫḫur. In Hittite it is a large and productive class (Hrozný 1915: 24–25. ēšḫananza witenanza gen. uddananza wetinanza. ēšḫar ‘blood’. 11.-a. ēšnaš d. Non-Derived r / n-Stem Nouns 4. paḫḫu(e)ni (uddānī) meḫueni išḫani 219.101.in the rest of the cases. 4./ ú-e.in this word see Kammen- huber 1969: 199 with anterior literature. išḫar. 187. 298). The initial syllable wi.1 iv 24 are exceedingly rare. paḫḫuwar/paḫḫur ‘fire’. Sihler 1995: 298–302). ēšḫani. mēḫur ‘time’. HE §81. pankur (a body part) (see Kammenhuber 1969b: 198– 99. “the lexicon involved belongs to the most basic stratum of vocabulary—body parts and words like ‘water’. Oettinger 1986b: 11–15).is inevitably spelled with ú-e/i-. Szemerényi 1996: 161–62. (3) derivatives in -eššar.4). uddanaš. 221. witenaš 221 meḫunaš išḫanāš. and (5) derivatives in -mar. As Sihler observes (p. The only widespread type (the so-called r/n stems) has a suffix ending in -r in the nominative-accusative and a suffix ending in -n.8. 1917: 64–65. All r/n- stem nouns are neuter. Group 1: Archaic words (some inherited from PIE) built directly to the root (often no longer recognizable).46. (2) derivatives in -tar. some with mobile accent (see §1. 25. p. witeni mēḫuni. PIE “heteroclite” stems have the peculiarity of taking a suffix in the nominative- accusative different from the one used in the rest of the cases.145. however. Szemerényi 1996: §7. (4) derivatives in -āwar. §1. 78). 49):219 uttar ‘word’. Note that the ḫ in this word is omissible (see §4.99. ēššar 220 paḫḫuwar erg. This class is known in other old IE languages (Beekes 1995: 187. weteni. No adjectives belong to this class. paḫḫu(e)naš uttanaš išḫānaš. 4. lammar ‘hour’. The vast majority of weten-. and ‘day’. It is not due to a scribal error.102). with differing views and terminology.99 Noun and Adjective Declension 124 r/n-Stem Nouns 4. 2003: 204–18 on the general framework. etc. 220 221 ‘word’ ‘water’ ‘time’ ‘blood’ ‘fire’ Singular n.indb 124 6/5/08 4:16:01 PM . There are five groups of nouns which exhibit this r/n alternation in their de- clension: (1) words built directly to the root. spellings have e in the second syllable (-te-). The position of the accent in these forms can be determined by vowel gradation and plene writings.-l.37. ‘blood’.or we. EHS 278–321.

77) ud-da-an-ta is attested in KUB 30. p. meḫunaš uttanaš wetenaš 229 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 mehur paradigm end watar paradigm ‘hour’ ‘neck(?)’ ‘urine’ (body part) Singular n. išḫanda) see §3. šēḫuwar pankur gen. 226.indb 125 6/5/08 4:16:02 PM . išḫanda. 41). Listed in HW 2 2:121a without refs. 18 (OH/MS). ēšnaza. ḫuḫupal > ḫuḫupalli ḪI. kuttanaz ins.-l.3 iii 23. witinit.109.100 rev. 224. uddanit. 6 may be Luwian (see the immediate context).A) than on r/n-stems. paḫḫu(e)naz(a) uddananza 222 wetenazza. šeḫuna Numerically Indifferent abl. meḫurri ḪI. This final -i on the neuter plural is more common in the verbal substantives (arkuwarri ḪI.A 227 uddār 225 wedār. wedanda. p. witenaz(a) išḫananza ins.2 ii 8 is not only Hittite but Old Script! See also ú-wi5-ta-ar in KUB 13.33 (p. But see zankilatarri ḪI. uwitenaš. uttanānteš.A.-a. See §3. ēšḫanta.-a. ēšḫanit 224 widand/ta Plural n.28 ii 20 (OH/NS) appears to show double marking of the plural (for the ending -a compare kallāra in §4.-l. On the subject of this final -i on neuter nouns see Prins 1997: 56–61.101 ‘word’ ‘water’ ‘time’ ‘blood’ ‘fire’ Numerically Indifferent abl. 117) and the gemination seen with neuter nominative-ac- cusative plurals in -i (see §1. wetenanteš uddananteš gen.&. 00-HittiteGrammar.A in §3. 223. 77). 125 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. ú-e-ta-ar KBo 12. minumarri ḪI.71 i 24. 228.-aš meḫunaš 228 d. lammar kuttani šeḫuni all. 227.3 iii 37.A.35 (p.10 obv. alel > aleli ḪI. uddanaš .20 (p. KUB 13. But ú-e-da-ar KBo 25. witār. paḫḫu(e)nit uddanta 223 witenit.A. witanta. kuttanit pankunit 222. uddanāš. uttār. wetenaz(a). wetenit. lamni. The form uddārra⸗met ‘my words’ KBo 3. lamnaš šeḫunaš pankunaš d.A. For the instrumentals in -d/ta after a resonant (uddanta. 229. KUB 39. widār. uddanaz(a). 72).85. uwitār 226 erg. e/išḫanaz. wedanda. lammar kuttar šēḫur. kurtal > kurtalli ḪI. 225. The non-plene spelling of the second syllable in the plural ‘waters’ is unusual.A) and in the non-heteroclitic consonantal stems (kurur > kururi ḪI. The reality of this isolated form in a late copy is open to question.

(see §1. [nakk]i[y]annit 00-HittiteGrammar. 66.in the other cases.103. n.-acc.‘blood relative’ [see Singer 1999]. It is quite uncertain whether the variants paḫḫuwar and šeḫuwar represent ablaut or not. Ablaut is definitely shown by the alternation in the word for ‘water’ between wātar. 36. and attributes it to a scribal error. p. fame’ and karš(a)ttar ‘segment’ (Starke 1990: 455–56 and 560–64). except that they never show assimilation of -tn. EHS 291–97) show -tar in the nominative-accusative. citing Schindler). 78) and -tn.105). and the set of variants witen-/weten-/wetin-.112. paprātar nakkiyātar -nātar alwanztar erg. Derived Nouns with Suffix -ātar 4. AHP 71 indicates that the phenomenon is pre-Hittite. Friedrich (HE §28 b) explained this as due to a weakly articulated ḫ. ēšnaš old. where -ar reflects a PIE syllabic *rX (see n. AHP 71 considers gen. p. They include many abstracts or words for states or status ( see §2. respect’ ‘servitude’ ‘sorcery’ Singular nom. as well as some concrete nouns (§4. paprannaz(a). 48.102 Noun and Adjective Declension 126 4.(see also išḫarwant-.33. with nom. The alternation paḫḫur /paḫḫuen.4. the archaic ending -d/ta is found either instead of or alongside of the normal ending -it. The alternation of i and e in witen-/weten. and išḫarnumāi- ‘to bloody’) is explained as a prothetic vowel that originated in the oblique forms of the collective plural and spread to the nominative-accusative (Melchert 1984b: 109 n. such as ḫuitar ‘wildlife. These inflect like the nouns in -ātar. 77) and p. Note that the ḫ in ēšḫar is omissible in NH.102. See also §3. which may even have been omitted dialectally. 57) . On the form išḫimanda (< išḫima(n)-) see Oettinger 1982a: 235 §2. paprannanza alwanzannaz gen. p. widār. Hittite has also borrowed a few nouns from Luwian with a suffix -(t)tar/-tn-. The i in išḫan.104. Group 2: Derived nouns in -tar (Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: 98 §159. HED E/I 313 acknowledges several forms without ḫ and considers them to be due to a secondary development. -nanaz paprannanza ins. wedanda).-l. išḫanda. ēššar analogical to it. 42). HW 2 E 121 includes only one example.‘bloodied’. išḫanittara.to -nn. e-eš-šar (in its NH paradigm). wedan-. but the single example meḫueni for meḫuni is merely analogical to paḫḫueni. Note too that in three out of the four r/n-stem nouns whose instrumental is attested (uddanta. paprannaš alwanzannaš d.is explicable as i < *e in the unaccented root syllable (Rieken 1999a: 292–93). Instrumental in -ta. išḫaškant.in the word for ‘fire’ shows ablaut.or assimilated -nn. 185. 4.papratar paradigm beginning ‘impurity’ ‘reverence.indb 126 6/5/08 4:16:03 PM . 4. not independent in Hittite (see also Rieken 1999a: 303).35 (p. papranni nakkiyanni -anni alwanzanni Numerically Indifferent abl. Of these doublets Rieken claims that the former occurs in the older texts.

šullanni ḫuišwanni laḫḫiyanni Numerically Indifferent abl. karšattar erg. The plural forms of nouns in this class are especially rare because they al- most never denote concrete. These again represent concrete instances: e. countable objects.. 230. za(n)kilatar ḪI.-acc. 127 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. miyatar.indb 127 6/5/08 4:16:03 PM . šullannaz(a) ḫuišwannaza ins. Thus šiuniyātar ‘deity’ developed into a term for a cult emblem or image.104 end huitar paradigm ‘fine’ ‘wildlife’ ‘segment. ḫuitnanza gen. Forms without final -r are archaisms and represent originally distinct pl. For the ending -i on plural neuters see §3. ḫuitnit Plural nom.-acc.-acc.A 4.A KBo 12.-acc.105. game’. In the meaning ‘military campaigns’ we find the plural form -natar ḪI.g. 71). kušduwāta ‘instances of slander’.-acc. respect’ ‘servitude’ ‘sorcery’ Plural nom. ḫuitār. nakkiyātar) or classes of animate entities (ḫuitar ‘fauna.20 (p. ḫuitnaš d. ḫuetar karšatar. exploit’ > ‘military campaign’. nom. 00-HittiteGrammar.g.-l.-acc. zankilatar ḫitar. and -nātar (*pišnātar) ‘manhood’ > ‘manly deed. [š]u-ul-la-a-ta 78/w 3ʹ (NS). šullatar ḫuišwatar laḫḫiyatar gen. paprāta alwanzta ‘growth’ ‘insolence’ ‘life’ ‘journey’ Singular nom. myata šullāta laḫḫiyatar 230 4. alwanzta ‘acts of sorcery’.. paprāta ‘acts of impurity’. ḫattāda/ḫattata ‘wise thoughts’. but either states (e.38 ii 14 (NH). ḫuišwannit Plural 230 nom. forms (Neu 1982. miyannaš ḫuišwannaš d.-l. Melchert 1988b). karšaddani Numerically Indifferent ins. ḫuidār zankilatarri HI.A. antuḫšātar ‘humanity’). parcel’ Singular nom.105 ‘impurity’ ‘reverence. miyātar šullātar. Some words that originally denoted a status developed into designation for concrete instances of the status.

kurešni paprešni ḫannešni.&. 176).A ‘gifts’. . UZU-peššar ḪI.-acc.106. kurešnit. p.A ‘women’s headdresses’. 42).75 obv.(see §1. Group 3: Derived nouns in -eššar (for examples see §2. citing Čop. ḫalkueššar ḪI. kurešnaš tetḫišnaš ḫanniššanaš d.-l. kurišnit ḫannetnit 232 Plural ḪI. p. where -ar re- flects a PIE syllabic *rX (see n. ḫannaššani Numerically Indifferent abl. 58. As with the -ātar class. -anni.-acc. 20). 00-HittiteGrammar. iyata tamēta ‘instances of growth and proliferation’ (= ‘things that grow abundantly’. ḫanneššar kureššar papreššar tetḫeššar 231 erg.107. p. d. . ḫannišnanza gen. are attested. assimilating to -annaš.&.A nom.109) in the other cases. nom. ḫaratni to ḫarātar.34. ileššar ḪI.112. (šieššar ) ‘portions of beer’. ḫannešnit. Compare also the derivatives iyatniyant.A ‘omens. kureššar 231. (ḫanneššar ) ‘cases’. and . *-atnaš. Verbs derived from these nouns employ the oblique stem (see §10. 232. the concrete -eššar nouns have overt plural forms: uppeššar ḪI. originally the allative of the verbal substantive in -ātar. 48. only their sg. Almost all nouns in this class show an assimilation of -tn.A ‘items provided for the cult’. 4. p.20.to -nn. and sg. TÚGkureššar ḪI. Also ḫunḫunešnanza (from ḫunḫu(n)eššar) and annašnanza (from annaššar KUB 43. Derived Nouns with Suffix -eššar 4. 231 232 hannessar paradigm ‘judgment’ (a woman’s ‘impurity’ ‘thunder’ headdress) Singular nom. For one possibility see AHP 273. ḫannešnaš.A ‘limbs. p. Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: 98–99 §160) show -ššar in the nominative-accusative.108.-l.106 Noun and Adjective Declension 128 išḫaššarwata ‘lordly acts(?)’. ḫa-an-ne-iš-ni. with no clear explanation. But there are some exceptions. etc.indb 128 6/5/08 4:16:04 PM . portents’. see HED E/I sub iyatar). 185). Although some verbs form their verbal substantive with the suffix -tar (§11. -annaz. This form is a hapax. 4.A ‘invocations’. gen. such as sg.‘abundant’ < iyātar ‘growth’ and takšatniya. body parts’. *-atni.‘to make level’ < takšātar ‘plain’. 4. the earlier forms of the oblique cases of the -ātar nouns. *-atnaz.&.-acc.10. ḫannešnaz tetḫešna(n)za ins. mukiššar ḪI. These same verbs form their infinitive in -anna. 78) and -ššn-(see §4.

27–29).57–1.is used to indicate explicitly the geminate [-ss-]. uppešni ḫattešni mukešni Numerically Indifferent abl. e.A nom. šiēššar uppeššar ḫatteššar mukeššar erg.-ar 00-HittiteGrammar. All the following are neuters: ašāwar ‘fold. The regular form of the suffix. Singular nom. Group 4: Stems in -āwar. ašaunai garauni Numerically Indifferent abl. -aunaš ([pa-]ar-ta-ú-na-aš KUB 36. 127). uppeššar mukiššar ḪI. 129 Noun and Adjective Declension 4.&. -eššar/-eššn-. including gen. 4. they can also assume the vocalism of the verbal stem: e. For the plural forms without -r as archaisms see §1.are to be viewed as indicated in §§1. such as annaššar (part of a building?). where -ša.g.105 (p.107).110.-acc. HE §85). ašauni. Derived Nouns with Suffix -āwar 4.121.A 4.indb 129 6/5/08 4:16:05 PM .-l.&. partawar ‘wing. . ašawa(r) partawa(r) . 46) and §4.62 (pp. Note also the examples of secondary nasalization (see §1. [muk]iššanaš d.-acc. is spelled consistently with -eš- in original texts of all periods (Melchert 1984b: 90. feather’.g. karāwar ‘horn(s)’. pen’.109. ašaunaz partaunaz -az ins. šieš(ša)nit Plural ḪI. Spellings of the oblique stem in -e/iš-ša-nV. ašāwar partawar karāwar gen. 128. 140). OS(?)).are to be read with an empty vowel as [-essnV-].133 (p. -ešnaš ḫattešnaš mukešnaš. There are also a few nouns in -aššar built to unknown roots. Since many nouns in -eššar are closely associated with verbs.-acc. partaunit Plural nom.. 43) in tetḫešnanza (for *tetḫešnaza) and ḫantešnaz (for *ḫattešnaz). The oblique stem is -aun-. can be confused formally with ergatives such as ḫannišnanza ‘the judgment’ (see §4. gen. denoting concrete physical objects (Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: 99 §161.111..111 ‘beer’ ‘gift’ ‘hole’ ‘invocation’ Singular nom. Nasalized ablatives.-acc. tetḫešnanza ‘with thunder’. Only the context will reveal which form is intended. Variant spellings with -iš. -za ḫantešnaz ins.49 i 8. partaunaš -aš d. ḫannaššar ‘judgment’ (beside the usual ḫanneššar) after ḫanna.‘to judge’. p.-l.

But with very rare exceptions cited there.115. Irregular Consonant-Stem Nouns 4.-l. 91). n.112 Noun and Adjective Declension 130 Derived Nouns with Suffix -mar 4. 46).113. tiyammanda Plural gen. ḫaršumnaš 4. 185). Group 5: Nouns with stems in -mar (HE §§86. ḫilamnanza gen. The claim that the form ḫilannaš (sg. ḫilamna d. originally the abl. For ḫalḫaltumar. p.1 i 26) is spelled like a plural (§1. but also (only) in the sg. This may be another case of the “weak r ” (on which see §1.20 (p. 233 Verbal Substantives 4. 186). 44). ḫarnammar ‘yeast’. 36).20. which sometimes appears as -mar.22 (p. ḫilamni Numerically Indifferent abl. 00-HittiteGrammar. gen. 186). *ḫaršummar ‘headwaters (of a river)’.-l. but a plural of ‘yeast’ (kinds/pieces of yeast?) seems difficult to maintain. The following is the paradigm of the word *pēr ‘house’ with oblique stem parn-. ḫaršumnaš d. ḫilamnaš all. for which see §11. 46).123 (p. d.30 (p.-l. p. stir up. excite’ (< ḫarnammar ‘ferment. 185. p. as described in §§11. pēri and abl. see §4.-acc.112. The second form (ḫa-ar-na-am-ma from KUB 7. not to be confused with the verbal substantives in -mar.-acc. gen. a special form periyaš (Hoffner 1995c). yeast’). which is not het- eroclitic but retains the stem r in inflection and shows an i-stem count plural form (ḫalḫaltumarēš). Singular nom. 185) and §11. ḫarnamma 233 erg.22 (p. 185). arpamar (a pastry). *pērza (-erza) built on an endingless locative *pēr. ḫilammar tiyammar ḫarnammar. 4.132. Verbs with verbal substantive in -war likewise form their infinitive in -wanzi.133. and sg. Note also the sg. only the nom.indb 130 6/5/08 4:16:05 PM .-ins. 233. Most verbs form their verbal substantive with the suffix -war (§11. Verbs derived from these nouns employ the oblique stem: ḫarnamniya. (in -w/maš!) are attested. tiyammar ‘cord’.) in Laws §82 and §89 belongs to ḫilammar can only be valid if one believes in a shift of mn > nn in Hittite.114. See §1. of the verbal substantive in -war (see p. gen. ḫilamnaz ins. All neuters: ḫilammar ‘gate building’.‘to cause a ferment.

-er (*kēr) .. . -er-za). kartašma. 131 Noun and Adjective Declension 4. pé-e-ri. parnaz(a). periyaš 234 . An alternative view is that kerti is itself an aberrant locative form (see CHD L–N 291 sub minu. -ri.-l. Sihler 1995 and Rieken 1999a: 52 n. pēri (pé-e-ri ).56. 237.1 iii 41. . . kard/tiyaš d. karti. . nom.C section a (citing Neu) and Rieken 1999a: 52–53). erg. kartaš cited by some scholars (among others. which Neu suggested to her as an alternative restoration of KUB 51. 16. §3. It is best not to claim a genitive kartaš until the reading and interpretation of VBoT 58 i 13 and its apparent duplicate can be re- solved to everyone’s satisfaction. parnanza gen. -er (*pēr) parnaš Numerically Indifferent all.1 to expect pēri pēr [an . cited Rieken 1999a: 52 n.&.indb 131 6/5/08 4:16:06 PM . gen.-acc. and because there is no reason from the duplicate KUB 29. . where we find only kardiyaš).-l.] instead of . -erza (*pērza). It is the appearance of the i only in the genitive (so also in HLuwian) that is noteworthy. The reading pé-e- r [i-ya-aš iš-ḫe-eš ] proposed by Hoffner (1995c) was objected to by Rieken (1999a: 306 n. Its existence is claimed on the basis of an analysis of the form kar-ta-aš-ma in VBoT 58 i 13 as kartaš⸗ma (allative karta⸗šma was proposed by HW 103 and favored by Hoffner [by letter to Rieken.116. The form pé-e-r [i ?-ya-aš iš-ḫe-e-eš ] or pé-e-r [a ?-aš iš-ḫe-e-eš ] (the only trace of the disputed sign is a single horizontal wedge head which could be either the only horizontal in  or the upper one at the beginning of ) in KUB 51.-l. . -er (*pēr ) -er.- acc. .is already securely attested in the oblique cases (d. parni. abl. ker 237 all.-acc. is debatable. 238]). 236. parnaš. which reads [.56:4ʹ duplicates -aš - MEŠ- in KUB 29. 235. parna abl. 26 (Eichner 1979: 45 n. 22. erg.. The matter is further complicated by the apparent duplicate KBo 25. -er (*kēr) ‘heart’ and oblique stem kard. 9).116 Singular Plural nom. The PIE neuter root noun for ‘heart’ appears in Hittite with sg. kardit 234. But since the stem pēr. kartaz ins.&.-naš (*parnaš) d. karta. 00-HittiteGrammar. ]. we would prefer to their res- toration either pēr [iyaš išḫeš] or pēr [aš išḫeš ] (pending results of collation of the trace). a]ppuzzi karta[-.107. see below). The al- leged sg. gen. An endingless locative in ker⸗ti (⸗tta) minuandu KBo 3. .21 iii 12. 74). -ta Numerically Indifferent abl. kardiyaš built to the oblique stem is not an exact parallel to *pēriyaš built to the nominative-accusative stem. 1471) because the parallel between gen. .(except for the sg.236 237 Singular Plural (UZU) nom. 238.26 (p. .235 -az 234 235 per paradigm house paradim end 4. — gen. .

149). tamedaz (abl. 2. as is the -i on the pronoun aši.7 (p. nom.).‘me’ in the other cases. 154) and §9. (kāš — kūn and apāš — apūn) do not share the same stem. com. and Rieken 2002). while the other cases show a different one: kuiš ‘who’ (sg. Pro- nouns have some distinctive declensional endings and often show more than one stem form (see Sihler 1995: 384–85. -tu) or yet another stem (-naš. celui-ci.10. See §7.1. 156) on numbers which employ the typical pronominal endings -ēl and -edani. acc. Latin ego-met. The -ila in zikila ‘you yourself’. nōs-met (Szemerényi 1996: 202).‘other’ (§8.3 (p. zik ‘you (sg. acc. 132 00-HittiteGrammar. and acc. Chapter 5 PERSONAL PRONOUNS Distinctive Features of Pronominal Stems and Endings 5. 3. or wēš ‘we’ (nom. com. The less common late variants kān and apān were perhaps formed on analogy with kuiš.) but oblique forms tamel (gen. p. kuin ‘whom’ (sg. *me ‘me’. uni.‘that’.7.10–7.11 (p.) versus anz. -šmaš).7 (p. ta- main (sg.).‘this’ and apa. In the relatives and interrogatives (see chapter 8) the nominative and accusative often share one stem. which has the forms tamaiš (sg.)’ accented pronoun shows a single stem šum. eni (see §§7.)’ (nom.in the other cases.) versus amm.). 144–146). Also called “accented personal pronouns” (Luraghi 1997a: 24). tamedani (sg. confined to the nominative forms (see §18. d.indb 132 6/5/08 4:16:07 PM . celui.(see §8. *eg ̑ h2 ‘I’ versus acc. It is a characteristic of IE languages that the pronominal paradigms exhibit cer- tain differences from the nominal and adjectival ones (Kammenhuber 1969b: 207).2. Pronouns are often strengthened by means of particles: French ce. p. com.3. 5. the normal forms of the sg. In the case of the demonstrative pronouns ka. com. ukila ‘I myself’. In Hittite only the ‘you (pl. 144). com. Szemerényi 1996: 203 §8. pp.). §7. 1.) versus tu. This is particularly true of the independent personal pronouns. nom. Compare also the adjective tamai.1. kuin. See §9.2. In Hittite we see this in ūk ‘I’ (nom.16. 279).) versus kue(da). and apāšila ‘he himself’ is such a particle.3 5. 152).for all grammatical cases (§5.1 where a different stem distin- guishes the nominative from the other cases: nom. p. 143). nom.‘us’ in the other cases.-l.8).2 The clitic forms of the same pronouns may show the non-nominative stem of the accented form (-mu.).

‘belonging to him/her/it’: a-pé-el-la-az KUB 14.10.e. Accented (Independent) Personal Pronouns 5. apē ‘those’) reflects a pronominal ending *-oi inherited from PIE (see Sihler 1995: 386 §374. and the clitics -met ‘my’. For its forms see §7. p. dative-locative.8. those of the first and second person) show no grammatical gender (i. 5.4. inherently ‘animate’. not *ke-i. 5.4). ins. tuēl ‘your’. 143). and -šet ‘his’. it. they’). which matches apāt ‘that’.35. she. In the PIE pronominal systems the neuter nominative-accusative singular often had a final dental stop (see Kammenhuber 1969b: 309 §45. 170).2. kēdani (i. True personal pronouns (i. 5). In the instrumental of the de- monstratives. kēl ‘this one’s’. In Hittite the anaphoric demonstrative pronoun apā. see ape+dan+da).8 5. nom.‘this (very)’ (CLL 281) with inserted -št-.indb 133 6/5/08 4:16:08 PM . whereas in the demonstratives the endings differ (abl. The endings -ēl. Sometimes insertions ap- pear between stem and endings: CLuwian zāšta/i. animate vs. and Hittite sg. -enzan.when it is used as a personal pronoun from when it is used as a demonstrative pronoun. while in OH and MH the genitive plural uses -enzan in the accented pronoun (šu(m)menzan ‘your [pl.).]’ §5.served once as the basis for a possessive stem apella. 1. Szeme- rényi 1996: 204–5). takes the place of -it.e. p. p.-acc. 77. the ending /d/. 133 Personal Pronouns 5. apenzan ‘of those’). apēl ‘his/her’. In the sg.7.5. The following is the paradigm of the independent personal pronouns: 00-HittiteGrammar. kuit ‘what’. and §9.4. kuēl ‘which one’s. Hit- tite also shows an ending -e in the pronominal neuter nominative-accusative plural (kē ‘these’. an example of the degenitival adjective class which existed already in OH (on which see Hoffner 2006.8.-l. -tet ‘your’. There is no formal differentiation of apā. inanimate).. also uses simple -z (as in kēz and apēz). both in -e/it in the enclitic possessives). -ez/-edaz. OH had kī (‘this’) without the final den- tal. -ell.e. p. -edanda).‘the aforementioned (one)’ (see chapter 7) also functions as the accented pronoun for the third person (‘he. šumēl ‘your (pl.6. Sihler 1995: §374.. In late Hittite. The ending -e of the common-gender nominative plural (kē ‘these’. and -edaz of the genitive and ablative are shared with other pronouns (§5. apē ‘those’. kue ‘(the ones) which’).. There are case endings which are peculiar to pronouns (see also §7. 5.61. in addition to the ending -az. written -da (§3. ke+dan+i) ‘this’. 143). d. 134) and demonstratives (kinzan and kēnzan ‘of these’. anzēl ‘our’. neut. p. p. or accusative. 2. In the personal and the enclitic possessive pronouns there is no formal difference between ablative and instrumental (both cases in -edaz in the accented personal pronoun. presumably because in speech situa- tions both speaker and addressee were assumed to be living beings. The ablative. 137. The accented first-person and second-person singular pronouns do not have case endings in the nominative. but apāt (‘that’) with it. as well as §6. The genitive singular and plural use the ending -el (see §7. 144): ammēl ‘my’.3 (p.4 iv 23. that is. whose’.

II). §3. §4. 19. anzāš šum(m)āš. Since in the first. zīk5 acc.9 iii 8 (Murš. zik. ammuk zik. šumēš. šumeš (originally nominative). iii 3.12 ii 25).. In OH ammuk. etc. ammēdaz(a) tuēdaz(a) Plural nom. apāš. (OS).and second-person pronouns (ammuk. ammel. HE §96 and Kammenhuber 1969b: 209–10. zi-ga. Old Hittite (OH) employs as nominatives only the forms ūk.g. 8. (anzaš). anzāš. modeled on ammel. wēš. Similarly ūk is employed as both accusative and dative in the late NH period.). p. anzāš (late) šumeš.14. while šu(m)mel is so far attested only in NH. and anzel. e. etc. tul d. A rare variant form [šu]minzan⸗a occurs in KBo 3. 15 (OH/NS). ūk. 5.7 šumēl (NH) d. 13. p. ūk (late) tuk abl. zi-i-ik KBo 25. and zi-i-g[a-an] KBo 5. e. 250) do not exist. soon was extended further to the dative (KUB 26. 00-HittiteGrammar.indb 134 6/5/08 4:16:10 PM . KUB 12.2. §4. šumēš. 4.-l. 69. We have already seen (§3. p. tuel.16. and apē. ii 12.43:4ʹ (MS?. ammuk.. 79.g.g. and in two cases (ūk and šumeš) the reverse also has taken place. 70. šum(m)ēš (late) gen. prons. Neu 1997. and šumāš serve only as datives or accusatives. The forms with geminate m are all post-OS. On the other hand anzel ‘our’ is attested already in OS (see n. Post-OH. 5. 83. wēš. whereas in MH and NH various dative or accusative forms have come to be used as nominatives. ú-ga. anzēl šu(m)menzan. ammēl. 5. ammuk. All such sequences represent the pronoun + the clitics ‘and’ or ‘but’ (Houwink ten Cate 1973b. 7. Rarely this form has a long i.10.-l.9 Personal Pronouns 134 First Person Second Person Singular 4 nom. anzēdaz šum(m)ēdaz 4 5 6 7 paradigm of independent pers. Alleged forms of the independent personal pronouns with -a extensions (e.6 šum(m)āš (late) acc. OS according to Konk. which first was extended to the accusative. 20. šum(m)ēš (late) abl. 5.10. p. tuk) the dative and accusative forms are identical. ú-uq-qa.) that this mutual contami- nation of nominative and accusative cases in the plural is common among nouns and adjectives. 6. šummeš.27 obv.9. see.. anzel. uk (late) tuk gen. 8) 4. see CHD P sub pankur. anzāš šum(m)āš.112 i 5. and chapter 29 here). zi-iq-qa. The form šumenzan is OH (but not yet in OS).

The enclitic -mu loses its u-vowel in a morphophonemic change when im- mediately followed by -ašta or -apa (§1. 135 Personal Pronouns 5. 5.13.27).12.14 and is therefore not an NH innovation (contra Sommer and Falkenstein 1938: 77 and HE §97b).13–18. For the rules governing occurrence of the enclitic third-person subject pronoun see §§18. p. 410–412). Enclitic Personal Pronouns 5. URUKaniš 30 . -mu -naš 2nd-person acc. 32. 280–283). -ta. -at (MH/NH) acc. 1926: 17) (transliteration of Bo 2423 = 2 BoTU 10 = KBo 3.and second-person forms: Singular Plural 1st-person acc.14. rejected by Sommer and Falkenstein (1938: 75).2 obv. 5. The secure attestation of anzel ‘our’ in the OS Zalpa text ( . -aš -e (OH/MH).indb 135 6/5/08 4:16:11 PM . The true ex- pected first plural genitive *anzenzan. -an -uš (OH/MH).8 Plural apenzan ‘their’ always contrasts with singular apel ‘his. For this see §§30. More on the unaccented/clitic personal pronouns can be found in §18. -at (MH/NH) dat. Enclitic -ta is written regularly with 8. com. com.15–30. 00-HittiteGrammar. The Hittite forms are: First. revived by Kammenhuber (1969b: 209–10) and Neu (1997: 140–41). - āšma anze[l ]. -at -e (OH/MH). -ši (MH/NH) -šmaš 5. if it ever existed.3 (p.19 (pp. Geminate writings -Vm-mu rarely occur in OH/NS texts (CHD -mu a). the old Anatolian family of IE languages possessed a set of clitic forms that fill the role of direct and in- direct objects of the personal pronouns.-dat.d 11ʹ.-dat.)’. 1⸗ ḫāšta KBo 22. 411). These enclitic pronouns can only occur in certain locations in the clause and in relation to other clitics on the same word.21 (pp. -aš (MH/NH) n. -mi. (-du) -šmaš Third-person forms: Singular Plural nom.11.19 (p. and CHD -mu a). 277) and §30. her. -še (OH).72. its’. and rejected with additional evidence by CHD mān 1 a 2ʹ. 12–13 OS) makes extremely unlikely the theory of Forrer (1922. was already replaced by anzel in prehistoric times. pankur 2 a) that there was in OH a first plural independent genitive pronoun *ammenzan. neut. In addition to accented (or independent) personal pronouns. formally parallel to šumenzan ‘your (pl.-a.

). 35).).indb 136 6/5/08 4:16:11 PM . but not in -mu (see above in this paragraph for rare exceptions in NS). The allomorph -tu (usually written with the  sign. her.’ 9. in which the  sign is used.)’. and -naš. -š(a)maš ‘to/from them. rarely )9 regularly oc- curs when this pronoun is immediately followed by either the clitic particle -z(a) or -šan (§1.70. to/from me (dat. whereas: -še/i ‘to/from him. There are only a handful of exceptions. unlike the other dative-accusative clitic pronouns ending in a vowel: -mu-kán.). acc. The clitic -šmaš occurs following vowels. -šmaš) can be either dative or accusative. The initial consonant is written singly following a consonant or logogram but geminate following a vowel in -ta. -še/-ši-kán. 5.).)’.15. The first. -ta. -še.and second-person pronoun forms (-mu. to/from us (dat. -š(a)maš ‘you (pl. to/from you’ (dat. and -šmaš can only be dative: -mu ‘me (acc.9 The particle -ta also regularly occasions a geminate writing of a following -kan (written -ták-kán).85 (p. to/from you (dat.16 (p. On the free variation in principle of / and / see §1. it’.)’ (with the -du allomorph occurring before -za). -naš. -ši. 00-HittiteGrammar. 31). replaced later by -ši. -šamaš following consonants or logograms. 16).15 Personal Pronouns 136 the  sign.). 5. p. -naš ‘us (acc. §1. The form -še is the OH form. -ta ‘you (acc. while the third-person forms -še.

In later MH and throughout NH this construction was first supplemented and then re- placed by an analytical one. p. 278): apēl waštul ‘his sin’ (MH). . On the enclitic possessive pronoun in Hittite see HE §§106–9. it probably covers a genitive independent pronoun. the queen)’ KUB 14. 1947: 87. Houwink ten Cate apud Josephson 1967: 1239 n. see Francia 1996b: 212–13. my wife. 1. Since apez existed to express ‘from it’. ammel aššul ‘my greeting’ (MH).. Otten and Souček 1969: 70–71. 21).(and the analo- gous kuēlla-‘whose’ [cuius]. anzel ‘our’. ⸗ ‘my son’) do not indicate the form of the Hittite possessive.indb 137 6/5/08 4:16:12 PM . Francia 1995. only Hittite and Luwian clearly attest enclitic possessive pronouns. Kammenhuber 1969b: 214 “durch 1. tuel -i ‘your land’ (MH). ammēdaz - az tar (a)ḫḫun ‘I conquered these hostile lands in ten years with my (own) hand’ KBo 3.‘your’.1. n. But if the text is an NH composition. and §9. Ḫakmiš (and) Nerik’ KUB 36.2. 1996b. it is possible that the Akkadian possessive suffix covers an enclitic possessive pronoun. Kammenhuber 1969b: 210–12. ‘our’. logographically written nouns and their possessive suffixes (e.48 i 12 (Gilg. ammuk ⸗ ⸗  dIšḫara [ḫurza]kket nu⸗nnaš⸗kan anda šipanzaket nu⸗kan ⸗ apellaz . and my wife died from the (actions) of that one (i.10. instead of just being a meaningless alternative to apez (HW 2 sub apā-2 5.4. CHD L–N (1989) 222–23.4. 170). An even later development during the final century of NH was the declinable possessive pronoun tue(da). 16–17. tuedaš āššiyantaš pēdaš URUḪakmiš URUNerik ‘in your favorite places. p.4 iv 23 suggests the existence of a small class of degenitival adjectives.).4 iv 22–23 the form apellaz. Rosenkranz 1978: 71–72. ‘his/her/its’. it is likely that in the sentence nu . apel ‘his’. 245–56. ‘its’. using the genitive independent pronouns ammel ‘my’. 137 00-HittiteGrammar. and šumel ‘your’ (for the functions of which see §18.g. Houwink ten Cate 1967. ‘And the queen kept [curs]ing me. tuel ‘your’.). and kept making offerings against us.  . Neu 1997.90 obv. In NS texts. Villar 1988. Chapter 6 POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS 6.61.. 18. 282. ‘thy’. and my son before (the goddess) Išḫara. actu- ally meant ‘from (that) of her’ (so Sommer and Falkenstein 1938: 93 n. including this possessive pronoun apella. ‘her’. If the text is an NS copy of an OH or MH original.4 iv 45–46. 141). etc. 133. Of the old Indo-European languages of Anatolia.” and de Martino 1998: 38 with n. The rare form apellaz KUB 14. nu⸗za kē .4.e. p. p.1 OH and MH expressed the possessive relationship by suffixing to the noun a possessive pronoun (‘my’.g “durch jene. 6. as in: `⸗war⸗an⸗kan tuetaza memiyanaz kuenner ‘did they not kill it (the bull) at your word?’ KUB 8. An attempt to identify this category in Luwian was made by Carruba (1986). built to the genitive form apel (see Hoffner 2006 and §5.

See HE 65 §108. Note that all examples are in post-OH copies. 3.21 ii 16. 41). 10). com. 109). Kammenhuber 1969b: 211–12. 6. The NH -šin is found in at-ta-aš-ši-in (*attan⸗šin) KUB 34. and -šman. the enclitic possessive ending -šmi. durch ihre Machenschaften”). 9. p. -šin 7 -šumman. but only with “broken” writings -mi-eš and -me-iš (see CHD sub -mi-).)’ or ‘their’. and Rosen- kranz (1978).)’ ‘their’ Singular nom. -šeš 6 -šummiš -šmiš -šmiš -meš 4 acc.53 i 17 (OH/MS) probably preserves without modernization the read- ing in an OS archetype. ⸗mu⸗kan LÚ. and if d⸗šummin ‘our sun’ (referring to the king) KBo 20. -ši.-a. The following is the paradigm for the enclitic possessive pronoun:2 34567 8 910 Case ‘my’ ‘thy’ ‘his’ ‘our’3 ‘your (pl. Otten 1959: 180 and 1973: 35. 5.see §1. form is -ti-iš. 16 (OS) is uncertain. and expected.72 right col.10 -šummit -šmit -šmit 2. -šman. -tan. but it must be correct.19 iv 8 (OH/NS) (see StBoT 9:56–57). For the geminate l in apella. Whenever this ending must immediately follow an unassimilated consonant in its noun’s ending (this normally occurs only in the neuter and with complemented adverbs of the type pēraššamet [for peran⸗ šamet] and -an⸗šamet). com. n.67 + KBo 17. com .will be written -ša-mi. The i vocalization of the sg. put into my hand my enemies and my enviers’ StBoT 24 i 58–59. -miš. -tin -šan. Neu 1974: 65–66. if d šiušummin in KBo 3. and Francia 1995. 101. Although the more common. 6. 6. 10. 00-HittiteGrammar. 1 possessive was not yet known to Friedrich (HE). -⟨⟨iš-⟩⟩ši-in-ma KBo 6. 239. nu tuel waršulaš⸗te-eš paišgataru ‘And let your waršulaš go’ VBoT 58 i 10–11 (OH/NS). -naš.3 Possessive Pronouns 138 das von ihr.or -še-mi-.44 iv 4 (OH/MS).4 iv 6 (NH) (see LH 54 n. -min -šummin 9 -šmin -šmin n.indb 138 6/5/08 4:16:14 PM . -mi-ìš and -mì-iš).4. has put the land (namely) the four corners in your hand alone’ KUB 31.3.‘your (pl.18 iii 14 (cited CHD latti.1 c). -tan. Also ek-za-te-eš ‘your net’ KBo 3.MEŠaršanatalluš d ⸗ -i dāiš ‘I. d-šum-ma-an in KUB 43.22 (OS Anitta) is really the noun + possessive ‘our deity’ and not just a proper name that happens to sound like the words ‘our deity’. Not so far attested as *-me-eš. Kammenhuber (1969b). my lady. 168 and - in identical construction in iv 8. -šan. see German “etwas mir in die Hand legen.13. 4. -man. Another method for indicating the possessive relationship was the use of dative enclitic pronouns of the type -mu. -šmaš (see Luraghi 1997a: 23): . 6. Enlil. We follow Eichner’s analysis of ge-nu-uš-ši-in (1979).8 -šman. the by-form -te-eš is attested in nu waršulaš⸗te-eš ammel katta uwaru ‘Let your (sg.) father. -šmet. neut. -šummin (instead of expected *-šumman) is a striking lack of concurrence with the other OS sg.) waršulaš appear to me’ KUB 36. which therefore does not contain the clitic pronoun (see §15. 10 -šmet. acc.as the pl.-aš attaš⸗teš -e 4 ḫalḫaldumari tu[k⸗p]at kišri⸗tti t[iy]an ḫarzi ‘Your (sg. The example of -šaš in KBo 25. 8.” This method is not yet attested in OS manuscripts (Güterbock 1983: 75). who considered it a variant of šmi.. 119. la-at-ti-en-š [i?-in?] KUB 17. -met -tet -šet. since cuneiform writing cannot represent a sequence of three consecutive con- sonants without some empty vowel. forms -man. -tiš. The identity of šummi. and d. -ta. -teš 5 -šiš.109 (p.88 iv 17 (OH/MS?) reflects an OS original’s spelling.127 + ABoT 44 + i 22–23 (OH/NS). 128. both of which could be interpreted as -miš (using HZL’s transcriptional method. 7. and p. acc. -šit -šummet.

18–19. -taš -šaš 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 enclitic paradigm end 6. -mi. 16. kat-ti-šu-mi HKM 57:21 ‘to you (pl. kardiyaš⸗taš ‘of thy heart’ (lit. Rosenkranz 1978: 71–72). iš-ša-aš-ša ‘into his/her mouth’ KBo 3. an-ta-ga-aš-ša ‘to her loins(?)’ KUB 36. neut.-a. com.14 -maš -taš -šaš -šummaš 15 d. 141) and agree in number. 19. 23. 12. On the forms in -e/it see §6.3 iii 22 = Laws §55 (OH/NS). 21. See LÚ. see §16.44 iv 12.9.1+ i 23 (OH/NS).22 -šummiš -šmiš -šmiš acc. -ma 17 -ta 18 -ša 19 Numerically Indifferent abl. Both the substantive and the enclitic possessive pronoun are declined (for rare exceptions in NH see §6. atti⸗ši (lit. -muš -tuš -šuš -šummuš -šmuš -šmuš. -šumuš n. ‘of the heart’ + ‘of thy’). See a-re-eš-me-eš (*areš⸗šmeš) ‘your colleagues’ in KBo 6.38 obv. 17. On the forms in -e/it see §6. to its pen’ KBo 26. -mit -ti -ši -šummi -šmi. . 20.). -šummit 22 gen.-l. and case: kiššari⸗mi ‘in my hand’ (lit.-men’ in KBo 6. Hoffmann 1984: 16–17. ‘to the father’ + 11.70 rev. E.MEŠka-ru-ḫa-le-eš-me-eš-ša ‘and their k.11 (p. -tet -šet.10 adverbs -šmit Plural nom. com. For allative -ta. 00-HittiteGrammar. -mit -tit. -met.2 iii 14 = Laws §54 (OS). Including with adverbs. such as katti⸗mi. -šiš -šummeš. see CHD sub * mi-.333 iii 8. -me. -šmet.g.136 obv. parn-). 22. 139 Possessive Pronouns 6.e 2ʹ aʹ).66 + KBo 40.5.12 -šum[mi ]13 -me/it gen. . [a-ša-ú-n]a-aš-ša ‘to its sty . katti⸗(š)ši and ištarni⸗šummi. ištarni⸗šmi. ‘in the hand’ + ‘in my’).85 (p. -mit -tit -šet.3 i 26 (OS). 13. and ḫu-u-um-ma-aš-š[a] . 141). Attested in pár-na-aš-ša ‘to his house’ (see CHD P sub per. [pé-]e-ra-aš-ši-it KBo 17.indb 139 6/5/08 4:16:15 PM . -šmeš 21 -šmeš. Attested in at-ti-me ‘O my father’ KBo 12. .5 Case ‘my’ ‘thy’ ‘his’ ‘our’ ‘your (pl.-l. 4. -mit -šet.. -šit -šumet -šmit. -šmi (-šumi )16 all. -šit -šmit -šmit 20 with -met. KBo 3. -man d.11 (p. ed. . katti⸗tti. KUB 33.11 iii 22. -mi. In pár-nam-ma (= parna⸗mma). -e-aš-ša ‘to his land’ KUB 23. tuzziyaš⸗miš ‘my army’ (sg. 141). 15.! 10b (CHD -mi. com.)’.-ins.)’ ‘their’ 11 voc. 14. 264). p. There are no cases of a possessive -man ‘my’ used with a genitive singular in OS and thus no assur- ance of the reality of such a usage (pace Kammenhuber 1969b: 212. gender. -miš -te/iš -šeš. nom. -šit -šmet. 1969c: 33. 18.

251) and mostly -et suggests that šer ‘above. ša-a-ku-wa-aš-me-et (more than 40 exx. with only rare exceptions (šu-up-pa-aš-mi-it StBoT 25 #13 iv 18ʹ.17+ iii 23. -az⸗(š)mit ‘from their houses’ KBo 30. the singular and plural nominative-accusative neuter forms show consistently -et: me-e-ni-im-me-et. yeladêha ‘her unborn child(ren)’ in the Exodus 21:22 assault law.20 + ABoT 35 + KBo 17. Melchert 1984b: 122–26.). one would surely have ka-lu-lu-pa-az-mi-it.3 iv 28 = Laws §90 (OH/NS). ištamana(n)⸗ šan ‘his ear’. ša-aḫ-ḫa-me-et. ḫunḫumaz⸗šit KBo 3. See Houwink ten Cate 1967. ‘her innards’. pé-e-ra-az-mi-it StBoT 25 #4 iii 44 (plus 3 more exx. while with pēran ‘in front’ the regular usage is with -it: pé- e-ra-am-mi-it KBo 3. ištarni⸗šmi ‘in your (pl. . Compare the following singular accusative forms: ḫalugatalla(n)⸗tin ‘your envoy’. which is possible in the context. pl.10 iii 10 (OH/MS).118–1. 513–14).54 i 14 (StBoT 25 #54 OS).35:9.1+ i 18 (OS) (StBoT 8:20–21. 66). which clearly reflects a form containing a noun. 6. nom.20 iii 3.8 iii 20. tuggaz⸗šēt (sic) ‘from his body’ KUB 17.38. ]x tu-u-ri-it-ti-it in broken context of KBo 3. pantuḫa(n)⸗šan ‘his bladder’.). 6. acc. šarḫuwanduš⸗šuš ‘her unborn child (lit. StBoT 25 #4 i 13. Final n in the substantive regularly assimilates to the first consonant of the possessive pronoun (see §§1. In OH (OS). If it were ablative.36 + KBo 25.2 iv 47. 73). two exceptions pé-e-ra-aš-še-et StBoT 25 #3 i 33 and pé-ra-an-te-et KUB 26.6. 00-HittiteGrammar. [ pé]-e-ra-aš-ši-it StBoT 25 #4 i 26. On the overall problem of -et/-it spellings see Otten and Souček 1969: 72–73. arra(n)⸗šan ‘his anus’.). and Francia 1996b. The use with adverbs (adpositions) is more complex.) companions’. . with two exceptions: ka-lu-lu-pí-iz-me-e[t] StBoT 25 #3 iv 34 and [(ki-iš-ša-ra-az-s)]e-et StBoT 25 #12 ii 12. 235). 24.119. 25. i-da-a-lu-uš- mi-it StBoT 26 #151 ii 4). 58. kuttanaz⸗šmit ‘from their shoulders’ KBo 20.).) vs. 2) that no example exists of an instrumental use of a clitic possessive pronoun. The use of the “split genitive” construction (see §16. tuēggaz⸗šit KUB 43. See on the “split genitive” construction Garrett 1998. It is hard to see how kalulupizmit could be anything but an instrumental form (so correctly Neu. But see OS ka-lu-lu-pí-iz-mi-it StBoT 8 iv 33 ‘with their fingers’25 and [. See Melchert 1977: 166–68. one exception še-e-er-ši-it KBo 6.6 Possessive Pronouns 140 ‘to his’). The ablative-instrumental shows regularly -it: iš-ša-az-mi-it StBoT 25 #3 i 18 and dupl. pl. 6. as is shown by the following examples with ablative nouns: iššaz⸗(š)mit ‘from their mouths’ KBo 17. vs. suggesting that the “ablative-instrumental” forms are all ablative.) midst’. we find only -et (3 exx. ka-lu-lu-pí-iz-mi-it StBoT 25 #4 iv 30 (plus 6 more exx. With ketkar ‘at the head’. 43). areš⸗šmeš ‘your (pl. p. on’ behaves like ketkar: še-e- er-še-me-et StBoT 25 #6 ii 14ʹ (plus 5 more exx. šarḫuwantaz⸗šet ‘from its stomach’ KBo 6.indb 140 6/5/08 4:16:16 PM .22:79 (OS). StBoT 26: 171 nn.)’.3 (p.7. The same clitic possessive case form in -i/et is shared by ablative and instru- mental (StBoT 8:71. tuzzi(n)⸗man ‘my army’. p. It has been claimed by Francia (1996b: 210 n.34:11ʹ. - az⸗tet ‘at your right hand’. arḫa(n)⸗šan ‘his border’. Compare Heb.24 For more examples of this kind of agreement see §15.

10. speakers lost the sense of the bipartite nature of constructions like attaš⸗miš and began to decline only the final element. 1996b. *-ša. -šan) is earlier (OH and sporadically MH). when the enclitic possessive was passing out of use. It is not always easy to decide. 8 and 9 (p. especially in post-OS copies. nom. 138).-acc. -tin.12 6. -tan. See §20. ‘between you (pl. In the dative-locative the clitic possessive is found on adverbs and postpositions which themselves have the form of a dative-locative: ištarni⸗šummi ‘in our midst’ (= an- zaš ištarna).11 ii 22 (NS). Attached to ordinary substantives.)’ or ‘our’. against Houwink ten Cate 1967). 6. katti⸗tti ‘together with you’ (= tuk katta). neut. Later scribes wrongly as- sumed that the forms ending in -it or -et were “all-purpose” and falsely spread them to other cases such as vocative singular (§3. 74) or dative-locative singular in copies of older texts. plural 2.9. In OH ištarni⸗šummi always means ‘between us’. *-ta. [uk⸗ma] mTudḫaliyaš išpandaz tuzzi(n)⸗man -nun KUB 23. acc. For analysis of examples see Francia 1995. nn.8. In the singular accusative forms the a vocalism (-man. on OH -šummin ‘our’ (sg. §6. 300) with references.28.). and attaštin (for *attan⸗tin) ‘thy father’ (HE §109b. the writing -šu(m)mi.11.12. 141 Possessive Pronouns 6. serves instead: šākuwa⸗šmet ‘their eyes’ KBo 17.26 the i vocalism (-min. see also Francia 1996b: 210–11). etc. But see above. katti⸗šummi ‘with us’ (= anzaš katta). whether -šu(m)mi- indicates the plural 3. acc. or ‘between them’. *-ma. neut.1 i 24 (OS).)’. In the empire period (NH). 00-HittiteGrammar. There is no basis for assuming that the use of -i/et with the vocative or dative-locative was part of Hittite speech in any period (Otten 1973: 55 and Melchert 1977: 259–62. attašman (for *attan⸗man) ‘my father’.indb 141 6/5/08 4:16:17 PM . 6.4. 6. or plural 1. ‘your (pl.26 (p. In the latter case it is due to a misunderstanding of older texts where ‘between us’ was meant.refers in OS and MS originals to ‘our’ but in NS copies can be either ‘their’. attašmin (for *attan⸗min). whereas in NH compositions it may mean ‘between us’. nom.. p. Thus sg.-acc. the sg. There is no pl. -šin) is NH. 26. 6.

Chapter 7
DEIXIS: THE DEMONSTRATIVES

7.1. The function of the demonstratives, called deixis, is to indicate position of a
third party or object relative to the deictic center. In ordinary speech the deictic center
is the person speaking. In what is called “situational deixis,” a speech is reported and
the deictic center is that of the person whose speech is reported, not that of the reporting
speaker. The two most common systems are a two-way contrast based on distance from
the speaker (this = near, that = far) or a three-way contrast based on primary relationship
to speaker and person spoken to: (1) I-deixis (here, near the speaker, proximal), (2) you-
deixis (there, near the one(s) addressed, medial), (3) yonder-deixis (over there, not near
speaker or hearer, distal) (Szemerényi 1996: 204 with bibliography in n. 1). In the case
of Hittite, Goedegebuure (2002–3) has demonstrated a three-way deixis: kā-, apā-, and
aši (but see §7.17, p. 146, for a possible minor two-way contrast). In face-to-face speech
situations the spoken demonstratives were probably reinforced by gestures of eye and
hand. Sometimes Hittite texts refer to such demonstrative gestures with phrases such
as .&.-it iezzi ‘he makes (a signal) with (his) eyes’ or  dāi ‘he extends (lit.
places) the hand’. The proximal demonstrative kā- ‘this’ can refer to the object on which
the writing is found or to a person bringing the tablet to the recipient: kī⸗ma⸗za 
[⸗] mTudḫaliyaš [ -at] ūq ⟨⟨q⟩⟩1⸗at m..[-aš .] . . . iyanun
‘[My father] Tudḫaliya [did] not [make] this statue; I, Šuppiluliyama, [Great King,]
. . . made it (and inscribed it with his exploits)’ KBo 12.38 ii 4–10 (cf. comments by
Güterbock 1967: 80–81; see also KBo 10.2 iii 21–22. Since both KBo 12.38 and KBo
10.2 are copies on clay tablets of the two statue inscriptions, the original function of the
kī has been lost). See also maḫḫan⸗ta kāš tuppianza anda wemiyazzi ‘when this tablet
reaches you’ HKM 14:3–5; mān⸗ma⸗wa `⸗ma nu⸗wa⸗šši kāš LÚ pedi⸗⟨š ⟩ši
ešaru kuitman⸗aš uezzi kuitman⸗aš apiya -pa uezzi ‘But if not, then let this chari-
oteer (who brings or accompanies this tablet) stay there in place of him (as a hostage to
guarantee safe return), while he is coming (here, to me) and returning there’ KUB 14.3
ii 70–72 (= Sommer 1932: ii 71–73, NH).

7.2. In kiššan ‘in the following (i.e., yet to be stated) manner’ and apeniššan ‘in the
preceding (i.e., just stated) manner’ (§7.18, p. 147) we have the cataphoric (‘as follows’)
and anaphoric (‘as just stated’) use of adverbs based upon deictic pronouns. The third
1. Here we have a case of asyndeton, but apparently with improper gemination. See §29.38 end (p. 400),
and §29.47 (p. 402).

142

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 142 6/5/08 4:16:17 PM

143 Deixis: The Demonstratives 7.4

type, iniššan/eniššan, is attested as both anaphoric (KBo 5.6 iii 16) and cataphoric (KBo
5.6 iv 4) in the same text, probably because in the latter case it builds upon the “rec-
ognitional” function (see Goedegebuure 2002–3) of the distal demonstrative aši / uni /
ini, with reference to something well known to both speaker and addressee (in this case
the Hittite king and his addressee, the Egyptian queen). In other occurrences, i/eniššan
seems more likely to be anaphoric like apeniššan (KUB 19.30 iv 11–12; KBo 4.4 iv 50;
KBo 5.8 i 16–17; KBo 3.4 iii 83–84—all Murs. II).

kā- and apā-
7.3. The proximal and medial demonstratives in Hittite are kā- ‘this’ and apā- ‘that’;
the Luwian equivalents are za- and apā-. The medial demonstrative, apā-, also serves as
a third-person independent pronoun (§5.6, p. 133). When it does so, its singular nomina-
tive shares with the first- and second-person singular nominative pronouns ūk and zik
the ability to take the suffix -ila (apāšila ‘himself’; see §18.7, p. 279). The following is
the paradigm for the Hittite demonstratives kā- ‘this’ and apā- ‘that’: 2 3 4

Singular Plural Singular Plural
nom. com. kāš kē, kūš,2 (kēuš) 2 apāš, (apaš) apē, apūš 2
3
acc. com kūn, (kān) kūš, kē apūn, (apān) apūš, apē 3
n.-a. neut. kī, kē 2 kē, kī 2 apāt, (apat) apē
2
gen. kēl kinzan, kēdaš apēl apenzan, apēdaš 2
d.-l. kēdani, (kēti) kēdaš apedani, apēdani, apēdaš
(apētī)
Numerically Indifferent Numerically Indifferent
3
abl. kez(za) apēz(za) 3
ins. kēdanta, kidanda, kēt 4 apedanda, apēt

7.4. Hittite demonstratives, even in OH, show a mixture of nominal and pronominal
endings. Nominal endings are present in the singular nominative common (-š) and ac-
cusative (-n) and the plural accusative common (-uš). Pronominal endings are evident
in the neuter forms, the singular and plural genitive (-el, -nzan) and the plural nomina-
tive common (-e). Although the declension of the two primary contrasting demonstra-
tives, kā- and apā-, shows broad agreement, there are a few striking differences. In
the singular nominative-accusative neuter OH had kī ‘this’ but apāt ‘that’. In the PIE
pronominal systems, singular nominative-accusative neuter often had a final dental stop

2. Only in LH.
3. Only post-OH.
4. Only in the use to mark relative location ‘on this side’, a meaning later expressed by the ablative
kēz.

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 143 6/5/08 4:16:19 PM

7.5 Deixis: The Demonstratives 144

(see Kammenhuber 1969b: 309 §45, 1; Sihler 1995: §374, 2; Szemerényi 1996: 204–5),
which matches apāt. The source of kī is unclear. Also unclear is the source of the ele-
ments -d- and -an- in the oblique cases. The rare nom.-acc. neut. kīni (e.g., KBo 34.142
i 7ʹ) resembles ini (see §7.12). It is unclear whether ke-e-ni attested in broken contexts is
a variant matching eni or a faulty spelling for dative-locative ke-e-da-ni (see Neu 1980:
50–51, n. 116, and 1997: 156–57).

7.5. The ending -e of the common-gender nominative plural reflects a pronominal
ending *-oi inherited from PIE (see §5.4, p. 133). In OH (i.e., OS) we find only com-
mon-gender nominative plural -e and accusative plural -uš. The nominative plural forms
in -uš represent contamination from the accusative forms. The isolated example keuš
represents a conflated formation of the old ending -e + the later ending. On the implica-
tions of these features for the dating of Hittite texts see Houwink ten Cate 1970: 14 and
Hoffner 1972: 17. In the MH (MS) letters from Maşat we find both -uš (apūš) and -e
(apē, kē) for the common-gender accusative plural (Hoffner forthcoming §148).

7.6. The regular spelling of apē as a-pé-e (i.e., a-bi-e) helps to avoid orthographic
confusion with the Akkadogram -, as well as the Hittite (perhaps originally Hurrian)
noun ābi ‘ritual pit’ (see Hoffner 1967a) normally written a-a-bi.

7.7. The forms kān and apān are isolated and occur in later texts. The antiquity of
the kūn and apūn forms in Hittite is supported by the archaic pronoun aš-i (sg. nom.),
un-i (sg. acc.) (Laroche 1979), which preserves the same vowel contrast.

7.8. The genitive singular shows the same characteristic pronominal genitive ending
-el that marks the independent personal pronouns (§5.4, p. 133) and the plural genitive
ending -enzan that marks the independent personal pronoun šumenzan (§5.7, p. 133,
and §5.10, p. 134).

7.9. For the instrumentals kidanda and apedanda see §3.35 (p. 77).

aši, uni, ini

7.10. There is a third demonstrative—formally similar to Latin is, ea, id—built on
the same stem a- (and variants) as the third-person enclitic (anaphoric) pronoun (see
§5.12, p. 135) but showing the same vocalic opposition (a – u) in the nominative and
singular accusative common as the demonstratives kā- and apā-, a different singular
neuter ending (ini vs. -t), and having no plural forms. Laroche (1979), following Peder-
sen (1938), claimed that forms which others had attributed to separate paradigms (with
stems aši-, uni-, i/eni-; see HW 36, 41, 234) were actually—at least during the Old Hit-
tite period—members of the same paradigm. He was followed in turn by Neu (1979c:
79, 82), who utilized the diachronic aspect as a dating criterion.

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 144 6/5/08 4:16:20 PM

145 Deixis: The Demonstratives 7.14

7.11. The original unified paradigm resembled the following (Goedegebuure 2002–
3: 25–28):
sg. nom. com. aši
sg. acc. com. uni 5
n.-a. neut. ini
6
d.-l. edani
abl.6 ede(z)za, etez(a), edaza
56

7.12. The common-gender nominative and accusative forms consist of an inflected
stem a- followed by the deictic element i. The inflection can be compared to kāš and
apāš (ending: -aš) and kūn and apūn (ending: -un). The source of nominative-accusa-
tive neuter ini (later eni ) and of the stem ed- of the dative-locative and ablative is not
clear.

7.13. Of the forms in the paradigm above that are not attested in OS, all but the
ablative forms edezza, edaza probably existed in OH speech. The form edi has been
previously regarded as a dative-locative predecessor of NS edani. There is no solid
evidence from its occurrences that it is a dative-locative. On the contrary, its OS use in
complete parallel with the old instrumental kēt (see §16.93, p. 266) suggests that it too
had the functions later expressed by the ablative forms edezza, edaza, which represent
post-OH creations.
7.14. It appears that by NH even the speakers of Hittite no longer understood how
these unusual forms fit into a single paradigm. New forms arose through analogy to the
customary paradigms, assuming that the stems to be inflected were aši-, uni-, and eni-. A
new nominative ašiš was formed from the “stem” aši-.7 The many occurrences of aši 8 in

5. Goedegebuure (2002–3: 28 n. 55) claims a sg. acc. com. a-ši in KBo 17.17 (+) KBo 30.30 obv. 6ʹ–7ʹ
(OS!). We have less confidence in this reading, especially because it is in OS, and would prefer some other
interpretation. It is notable that, in contrast to the NH paradigm with its example of a singular genitive, the
pre-NH paradigm has no example of a genitive form. It is therefore worth considering that aši is the miss-
ing genitive. Granted that the case-forms preceding the final -i in the pre-NH paradigm are all pronominal,
whereas -aš is the nominal genitive case ending. But there is no *eli form to match the pronominal genitive
ending (in kel and apel ), and the Luwian genitive adjective in -ašši- resembles it. The passage would make
as good or better sense if aši is understood as a free-standing genitive: ‘O Sungod of the gods, I hereby
give to the gods (the equivalent/substitute) of that one. I give Our Sun Labarna, (inasmuch as) [I] give his
equivalent. Here is his equivalent, his living (substitute)!’ With this translation we would be opting for
Goedegebuure’s possibility 2a (on p. 65), namely, that aši anticipates and is coreferential with the posses-
sive clitic -šan ‘his (equivalent)’ in a-a-an-da-aš-ša-an.
6. These forms function as adverbs marking relative location, as indicated by Goedegebuure.
7. Goedegebuure (2002–3: 5) considers only two new stems to have been created in NH: uni- and eni-,
both based upon the accusative forms in the pre-NH paradigm. She apparently (following HW2 A 400a
“wertlos”) considered ašiš in its one occurrence as an invention of the scribe (2002–3: 24).
8. For this form in the singular accusative see Goedegebuure 2002–3: 4 n. 13.

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 145 6/5/08 4:16:21 PM

7.15 Deixis: The Demonstratives 146

NH as singular nominative common are simply carried over from the pre-NH paradigm,
and the 18 occurrences as singular accusative common exhibit a merger of the nomina-
tive and singular accusative common in late NH (Tudḫaliya IV and following). For the
new stem uni-, the forms uniš (sg. nom. com.), unin (sg. acc. com.), uniyaš (sg. gen.),
and uniuš (pl. nom. and acc. com.) are attested. For the new stem eni-, the forms eniš
(sg. nom. com.) and eniuš (pl. nom. or acc. com.) are attested. Objections to Laroche by
Kammenhuber (in HW2 A 400) on the basis of an alleged uniuš in OH (reference to the
form was not given!) remain to be confirmed. It appears rather that all uniuš forms are
found in NH. That “correct” forms such as aši (sg. nom. com.), uni (sg. acc. com.), eni
and ini (neut.) continue to occur in NH (Muršili II), pace Kammenhuber, is not surpris-
ing. They constitute no serious objection to Pedersen’s and Laroche’s analyses.
7.15. The ablative and dative-locative forms also continue the pre-NH paradigm, not
being alignable with either of the newly created stems.
7.16. This third demonstrative appears to have been distal and has functions com-
monly found in other languages possessing such a third demonstrative (see Goedege-
buure 2002–3). Goedegebuure found that aši served in four roles typical of demon-
stratives: (1) situational, (2) recognitional, (3) discourse deictic, and (4) tracking or
anaphoric. To it was built an interjection/adverb identical in formation with kāša/kāšma
(Hoffner 2002–3). As kāš⸗a consists of an initial component derived from the near de-
monstrative kā- plus the topicalizing -a/-ma (kāš⸗a regularly in OH, rebuilt as kāš⸗ma
in post-OH when non-geminating -a was lost and -ma occurred in all environments),
so OH (i.e., OS) āšma must be analyzed as a contracted form from aši plus -a/-ma, se-
lecting -ma in post-vocalic environment (§29.24, p. 395).9 On this type of contraction,
compare OH naššu⸗ma > post-OH našma (again see Hoffner 2002–3 for the details and
above in §1.77, p. 33).

anni-

7.17. From the stem anni- (HED A 51–55) there is only the singular nominative
common form anniš. To this stem belong the adverbs annaz and annišan ‘once, long
ago’ (compare kez and kiššan). The meaning of annišan suggests a far-deictic mean-
ing ‘that’ for anni-. There is also a very rare stem ani- (or ana-) seen in the compound
a-ni-ši-wa-at ‘today’ KBo 3.45:12ʹ (see Neu 1980: 15–16; HW2 A 81b; HED A 52).
This meager evidence suggests that an original contrast in spatial deixis between ana/
i- *‘this’ and anna/i- *‘that’ shifted to temporal deixis: ani⸗šiwat ‘on this day’ > ‘today’
vs. annaz *‘at that time’ > ‘formerly’.

9. Of course, there are examples in NH of aši followed by the particle -a/-ma which do not show the
contraction. But these are not examples of the adverb any more than every kāš followed immediately by
-a/-ma is an example of the adverb kāša/kāšma, or every kuiš followed by -a/-ya is the distributive kuišša
‘each’.

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 146 6/5/08 4:16:22 PM

147 Deixis: The Demonstratives 7.19

Adverbs Built to Demonstratives
7.18. In Hittite a number of adverbs are derived from the demonstrative bases, from
one of which in turn an adjective is derived. As a rule it is the stems ke/i- and ape/i- that
occur in the pronominal adverbs, just as the stem kuwa- (versus kui-) occurs in pronomi-
nal adverbs and conjunctions kuwapi, kuwapikki, kuwattan, etc. (Kammenhuber 1969b:
207). Local and temporal adverbs differ in their frame of reference. In local adverbs,
mirror frames of reference exist between speaker and addressee (each has his own kā
‘by me’ versus apiya ‘by you’): see examples KUB 14.3 ii 71–72 (= Sommer 1932: ii
72–73) (§30.37, p. 417), HKM 18 left edge 2–5 (§30.43, p. 418), and especially KUB
21.38 obv. 11–12 (§30.69, p. 427), whereas in the temporal a single frame is shared
by both: proximal (indeed, immediate) and medial/remote (kinun ‘now’ versus apiya
‘then’). 10 11 12 13 14

ka-/ke- apā-/ape-
kā ‘here, hither’10 apiya ‘there, thither’
kēt ‘from/in this direction’ (OH only)11
kēz ‘from/in this direction’ (post-OH only) 12 apēz ‘from that place’
kinun ‘now, at this time’ apiya ‘then, at that time’
13 14
kiššan, kīniššan ‘in the following apiniššan,14 apeniššan, (apēniššan) ‘in the
manner’ preceding manner’
kiššuwant- (adj.) ‘this kind of a . . . ’ apeniššuwant- (adj.) ‘that kind of a . . . ’

7.19. The demonstratives kā- and apā- also occur in kitpantalaz ‘from this moment
on’ and apit pantalaz ‘from that moment on’. While the first is always written as one
word and the second in its two occurrences as two words, both are probably univerba-
tions with a single accent. This is reflected not only in the spelling ki-it vs. ke-e-et (see
§1.46, p. 25, and AHP 139), but also in the placement of -pat in apit pantalaz⸗pat
(§16.94, p. 266, and §28.118, p. 384). See also ketkarza ‘at the head’. The combination
of a demonstrative stem with ending -e/it and a noun in the ablative parallels the use
of the clitic possessive ending -e/it which serves both instrumental and ablative (see
§6.7, p. 140). The demonstratives had no separate ablative form when these adverbial
expressions were created.

10. OH variant of kā is kāni (KBo 22.2 obv. 9). The CLuwian equivalent of kāni is zāni (CLL 277) built
to the near demonstrative root zā-.
11. In the broken context [. . .] kēt ūnnāi KBo 17.23 obv. 5 ‘Drive (or: he drives) in this direction [. . .]’
seems likely.
12. In OH we also find kēt for ‘on this side’.
13. For kiššan in interrogative clauses see §27.3 (p. 348).
14. Kammenhuber (1969b: 207) considers kiniššan an analogical formation to apeniššan, but the exis-
tence of older iniššan < ini and of kīniššan < kīni suggests that apiniššan was already modeled on the other
two in OH and that the vocalization apeniššan was later and secondary, just like that of eni and eniššan.

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 147 6/5/08 4:16:22 PM

7.20 Deixis: The Demonstratives 148

7.20. In some derivatives of the near/medial demonstrative that serve the same se-
mantic function, the endings are not the same: kinun ‘now’ (< kā-) versus apiya ‘then’
(< apā-).

7.21. One adverb built upon kā- (e.g., kāša/kāšma, on which see Hoffner 1968b and
see §§24.27–24.30, pp. 323–324) has no counterpart built upon apā- but intead one built
on the distal demonstrative aši (āšma, on which see Hoffner 2002–3). Since kāša/kāšma
is built upon the near (speaker-proximal) demonstrative, it serves appropriately to add
temporal immediacy to the finite verb forms associated with it. The form āšma, on the
other hand, being built on the distal (remote) demonstrative has no such function with
regard to the accompanying verb but instead marks spatial, temporal, or “disassociative”
distance in the thought expressed (Hoffner 2002–3).

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 148 6/5/08 4:16:23 PM

Chapter 8
RELATIVE AND INDEFINITE PRONOUNS

8.1. In Hittite the common form kui- serves both interrogative and relative functions,
while the indefinite function is filled by kuiški ‘someone, anyone’. Only in combination
with takku/mān ‘if’ can kui- have an indefinite meaning (see Latin sīquis).1

The Interrogative and Relative Pronoun kui-

8.2. The following paradigm of kui- ‘who, which’ serves for both functions. As with
the demonstratives, there was a stem for the nominative and accusative (kui-) vocalized
differently from that of the oblique cases (kue-) (see §5.2, p. 132). For the syntax of the
interrogative pronouns see chapter 27 and for relative pronouns see chapter 30. 2 3 4 5 6 7

Singular Plural
nom. com. kuiš kuiēš, kuēš (kueuš 2)
acc. com. kuin kuiuš, kuiēš,3 (kueuš, kuiš,4 kue 5)
n.-a. neut. kuit kue (kuie)
6
gen. kuēl *kuenzan 7
d.-l. kuedani kuedaš
abl. kuēz(za)

The Indefinite Pronoun kuiški and the Distributive kuišša

8.3. The indefinite pronoun ‘some(one), any(one)’ is kuiški with inflected kui- plus
particle -kki/-kka. The distributive ‘each, every’ is kuišša, with inflected kui- plus the

1. Possibly also in parkunuši⸗ma⸗za ` kuit nu⸗za anda imma ḫatkišnuši KBo 3.1 ii 44 (OH/NS). See
§26.7 (p. 342).
2. Attested in copies of Muw. II’s treaty with Alakšandu of Wiluša (CTH 76).
3. See §3.16 (p. 70).
4. ku-iš KUB 32.123 iii 31 (cited in HW 114).
5. nu-mu .&. ku-e up-pé-eš-ta na-at ar-ḫa ḫ[ar-]ra-an-te-eš e-š[ir] na-aš e-du-un-na - ‘The
birds which (kue, could be collective [§§3.12–3.13, p. 68]) you sent to me were spoiled (pl. com.), and I
neither ate them (pl. com.) (nor . . . )” AT 125 obv. 11–13 (NH), see ibid. 5 (cited HW 114 as “Atch 5, 11”).
See also in the paradigm of HE §119.
6. Too rare to be added to the table of forms is ku-u-e-el KUB 12.21 i 15 (OH/NS), ed. Hoffner 1992a.
7. Expected on analogy with sg. apel — pl. apenzan. There may be a vestige of this independently un-
attested form in the indefinite ethnic adjective kuenzumna- (see §2.45, p. 60).

149

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 149 6/5/08 4:16:24 PM

8.4 Relative and Indefinite Pronouns 150

conjunction -a/-ya ‘also, and’. See also adverbial kuwapitta ‘everywhere, in each place’.
The plural forms (kuiušša, kuedašša) always refers to groups, often numbered (kuedašša
 3? [ . . . ] HKM 90:6ʹ), or collectives with 1- or  (IBoT 3.114 obv. 8
restored from dupl. KUB 58.83 ii 21; KUB 32.123 + KBo 29.206 i 7, 11, 25 [vs. the sg.
kuedaniya 1-edani in line 14]; KUB 58.100 ii 6). Forms wholly in parentheses in the
table below are rare. 8 910

kuiški kuišša
Singular Plural Singular Plural
nom. com. kuiški kuiēšqa, kuēšqa kuišša 8
acc. com. kuinki kuiušga kuinna kuiušša
n.-a. neut. kuitki kuēq(q)a, (kuekki ) kuitta
gen. kuēlka, kuelka, kuella
kuelqa, kuelga,
(kulki) 9
d.-l. kuedanikki, kuedašqa kuedaniya kuedašša
(kuedanikka)
Numerically Indifferent Numerically Indifferent
10
abl./ins. kuezqa, (kuezzaqa, kuizzaqa) kuezziya

8.4. kuišša is not used as a generalizing relative ‘whoever’ (contra Sommer and
Falkenstein 1938: 59, HE §120 b and §125). Of Sommer’s proof texts, several are writ-
ten with ungeminated š, thus excluding analysis as kuišša, and the others with geminate
š (e.g., nu . kuišša kuwatta utne [(paizzi)] KBo 3.67 i 9) are genuine distribu-
tives. One should not confuse kuišša ‘each, every(one)’ showing geminate -šš- with
kuiša (ku-i-ša) ‘whoever’, where the non-geminating conjunction -a/-ma merely rein-
forces the unspecified sense of clause-initial kuiš (§30.59, p. 424).

8.5. The particle of kuiški regularly appears as -(k)ki when the vowel in the imme-
diately preceding syllable is i (kuiški, kuinki, kuitki, kuedanikki) and as -(k)ka in other
environments. On the other hand, some -(k)ki and -(k)ka forms appear as exceptions to
the above rule: gen. kulki, nom.-acc. neut. kuekki, and d.-l. kuedanikka.

8.6. On the word order in constructions with kuelka + head noun see §16.55
(p. 255). For word order of kuiški with negatives see §26.7 (p. 342), §26.14 (p. 343),
and §26.21 (p. 345). On general principles of word order with kuiški see §§18.33–18.36
(pp. 286–287).

8. See §8.4.
9. ku-e-el-ki KBo 39.219:8, KUB 23.68 obv. 15 (MH/NS), KBo 39.219:8; ku-el-ki KBo 9.137 ii 9,
KBo 19.61 iv 2, KUB 13.23:3. Since all of the non-plene examples are at end of line and cramped for space,
it appears that the plene writing was the norm.
10. Written ku-e-ez-za-qa KUB 22.52 obv. 11 and ku-i-iz-za-qa IBoT 3.122:7.

00-HittiteGrammar.indb 150 6/5/08 4:16:24 PM

kuwapi ‘whenever’  ‘when’ kuwapikki ‘never’ Modal kiššan ‘thus..) kuiš ‘someone. what place.. apēda.) (com. as follows’ ‘thus. apiya ‘there. etc. kuinna ‘each’ ‘whoever’ anyone’ (com. apeniššan maḫḫan. nu šarnikdu -i⸗ma⸗apa lē kuitki ‘then let (the offender) compensate. kuiēš kuiēš [] m.7. in the mān ‘how?’ ‘as’ manqa preceding ‘anyway. kuwapi kuwapikki ‘when?’ maḫḫan. kuwapi(t) kuwapikki.) (com.16 iii 60 (OH/NS).) (com.9 8. (com.1+ iv 21 (OH/NS). kuitki. manner’ anyhow’ 00-HittiteGrammar. can be translated ‘someone/something’ or ‘anyone/anything’: naššu --ni kuiški peran wašti ‘(if) either someone sins before a deity’ KUB 1. kuinki kuišša.8. kuinki. apūn kuiš. nu . iv 71–72. Proximal Medial Generalizing demonstrative demonstrative Interrogative Relative Relative Indef. every place. let there not be anything)’ KUB 11. kuedani kuwapi(t) ‘somewhere. Sometimes with imma but no repetition of the relative: kuēl imma -ruwaš ḫaḫḫallaš alil ‘The flower of the ḫaḫḫal of whatever tree’ KUB 24.9. kuwapi kuwapi(t). with or without an intervening imma: nu⸗kan kuiš kuiš -aš anda ×-ri ‘Whatever town is determined within (that radius of the crime site)’ KBo 6.) Local kā ‘here. ‘because’ šer ‘for reason’ apezza ‘for kuit ‘why?’ whatever that reason’ reason’ Ablatival kēz ‘from apēz ‘from kuēz kuezka here. ‘in any side’ direction’ from where?’ direction’. kuwapitta adverb hither’ thither’ ‘where?. whither’ ‘nowhere’ Causal kedani šer. kūn apāš.&. 8. kuiški. kuin kuiš (imma) kuiški. The generalizing relative concept is expressed by the repetition of the relative pronoun or adjective. nu ḫantezziyaš -aš kuit kuit p[ešta] ta⸗šše šarnikzi ‘he shall give as compensation to him whatever the first man [gave]’ Laws §28a. kuit kuedanikki kēz ‘for this (šer).  everywhere’ where. apadda(n) kuwat. 151 Relative and Indefinite Pronouns 8.4 i 12–13 (NH). maḫḫan kuwatqa. kuedani šer.  kuezka ‘in no direction’ Temporal kinun ‘now’ apiya ‘then’ kuwapi mān. kuedanikki. pron. kuwapikki. The following is a chart of correlatives for Hittite similar to those given in tra- ditional Latin and Greek grammars (see also Laroche 1979). 8.14 i 8. ‘in each/ whither?’ pedi ‘in/to ‘wherever’ anywhere’. but to the king let there be no responsibility (lit.d-d ‘Whatever cities belong to Armatarḫunta’ Ḫatt. kuwapi ‘anytime’.indb 151 6/5/08 4:16:25 PM . on this there. kuin kuiš. in that ‘whence?. Distributive Pronoun kāš.

15 11. 15. See §1. nom. nom. neut.13. damāiš.10 Relative and Indefinite Pronouns 152 Other Stems with Partial Pronominal Inflection 8. ta-ma-a-i dapida dapin 11 gen. dapianteš. neut dam-me-el and a discussion of this word see LH 20. gen. Güterbock 1943.‘all. tamēdaš KUB 13. com. For sg.-acc. It was thought by some13 that the adjective dam(m)eli-.32. tamētani) all.2 ii 29 (in parallelism with  d) cited by HW 207 is a late rarity. nom. com.‘entire’. partly like the pronouns kā-. com. entire’. first appears in texts in NS. dapian tamāuš. damāi dapi(y)an. The adjective tamai. nom. damauš acc.indb 152 6/10/08 7:41:56 AM . a synonym of ḫūmant-. neut. ta-ma-e-eš. HW 207.2. damedani dapī damedaš dapiyaš (damētani. p.2a on this “pronominal- ization”). 12. 92). pl.-a. dammaiš da-ma-e-eš. inflects partly like a noun in -ai.‘other’ (for the stem see §5.and kui-.-acc. dammel. anderer).or dapi(y)ant-.takes the place of dapiya-. But since the meaning of dammeli. 132). 32). tamēl 12 dapiyaš dapidaš d. tamāin. p.is rather ‘virgin (land).10. dapi(y)an could belong either to dapi(y)a. an extended stem dapi(y)ant. abl. dapi- yanza. was derived from the stem tamai- (perhaps by way of the genitive pronominal form damel). pl. Also partly pronominal is the inflection of dapi(ya).-l. perhaps under the influence of its synomym ḫūmant-: sg. 8.76 (p.14 it is doubtful if it can be derived from tamai-. 00-HittiteGrammar. tamāiš. which they translated ‘another kind of’ (German andersartig.12. d. tamai. But the correct analysis of dam-me-el in Laws §6 (late parallel) continues to be ignored and the old incorrect one perpetu- ated (see Bernabé and Álvarez-Pedrosa 2000: 181: “un campo a otro”). tamaīn. dapidaz 8. The following shows their inflections: 11 12 Singular Plural nom. The adjective dapiya. In some places in the paradigm. tamedaz(a) dapiza.11. 8. unworked or uncultivated (land)’. tamaiš. damauš dapiuš damāin n. 172–73. 8. apā. com. dapianda. tamatta. tameda Numerically Indifferent abl. pl. 14. Güterbock 1964: 153.-l.-acc. neut. 13. dapiandaza. dapiandaš.(see §4. following a pattern found in other early IE languages (see Sihler 1995: 385 §374. The sg. Nom.

see now also Hoffner 2007. or two? Is the complement -iš an abbreviated writing of one of the other two longer complements? These difficult questions and many more like them beset the study of Hittite numbers. A major obstacle to modern research into Hittite numbers is the fact that the scribes made extensive use of ciphers. triple). three). 9.1 and ‘four’ meu-.2. 1. Inferred from the genitive teriyaš. Hittite possesssed cardinal numbers (one. It appears that in PIE only the words for the cardinal numbers ‘one’ through ‘four’ were declined (Watkins 1998: 67. since the number words are almost always written with ciphers and the complements consist of only one or two signs. Chapter 9 NUMBERS 9. the ordinals ḫantezzi(ya).in dāyugaš ‘two- year-old’. 9. Like most Indo-European languages. The number ‘seven’ may be attested in the beverage name šiptamiya-. third. For this reason the pronunciation of most Hittite numbers is unknown to us. Szemerényi 1996: 221.(see §2. Beekes 1995: 212–13). and factitive verbs based upon numerical-de- rived adjectives (make one. since many different numbers can have the complements -ki-iš. three each). ‘three’ teri-. We have conclusive evidence that ‘one’ through ‘four’ also were declined in Hittite. ordinal numbers ( first. 56). The principal prior study of Hittite numbers is by Eichner (1992). Furthermore. derivative nouns. second. quarter ).1. double.(Goedegebuure 2006). Complements reflecting case inflection in some numbers above four may reflect declen- sion of higher cardinals but more likely belong to forms with the “individualizing” suffix -ant.25. it is ex- tremely difficult to determine what information the complement provides.indb 153 6/5/08 4:16:27 PM . Does the complement consist of: (1) The case ending alone? (2) The end of the suffix plus case ending? (3) The entire suffix plus case ending? Or (4) the end of the numerical root plus entire suffix plus case ending? For example. are we to assume the presence of three suffixes here. and ad- verbs to express what we call fractions (half. unify. two. third ). and the beverage name teriyalli-. Form and Declension of the Cardinals 9. Of the few number words which are written syllabically we may mention: the cardinals ‘one’ šia. -li-iš. adjectives. and the compounding form dā.3. 153 00-HittiteGrammar. the ordinal adverb terin ‘thirdly’.4. p. multiplicatives (“x-times”) and distributives (two each. and -iš.‘first’ and dān ‘second’.

which likewise shows pronominal inflection except for the sg. 1-iš replaces 1-aš KBo 4. Two words for ‘one’ are presupposed by Indo-Europeanists (see. 10. 4. 1-in 4 -n apūn n. Compare the endings in the center column with the forms of the demonstrative pronoun apā. follows its noun in KBo 18. see also KBo 5.23 ii 20. 1-e-da. 1-an 5 -n 6 gen. neut. 1). proposed by Goedegebuure (2006).compare apadda beside apēda and tamatta beside tameda (see §§8. 727). The most promising candidate is šia-.9 v 4 in its dupl. For 1-ela see §9. com. 1-iš 3 -š apāš acc. 1-e-el. neut. with a single exception. but further research is needed to validate this explanation.remains unclear. neut.9–8. 9.2 iii 41. 9..69 rev.‘one’. 00-HittiteGrammar.and ā-. stressing singleness or isolation.76 rev. stressing togetherness or unity. nom.5. 57 and Miller 2004: 450 n. but some candidates that are put forward. In OS it is found in KBo 25. where two palace men escort the . 3. 7. 1-el.29 v 11ʹ. one on each side holding her (the context is restorable from the NS dupl.5 Numbers 154 9.42 left col. 1-iš precedes its noun in HKM 46:4–6 (MH/MS). nom. 1-e-et-ta(?). *šia. 1-an. The number ‘two’ follows exclusively the pronominal declension. Though far less common than 1-aš. 1-aš. 1ʹ–8ʹ and two parallel passages in KBo 25. nom.31 ii 9 (Neu.2): *oinos.61 (p. ‘One’ 9. Szeme- rényi 1996: 222 §8. StBoT 26:283 with n. and Goedegebuure (2006). 11 and KBo 18. For the alternate ending with geminate -tt.e. 1-e-da-ni -edani apedani 7 all. HKM 47:49 (MH/MS). For the e-vocalism versus the other two forms in -tta compare perhaps alter- nations like iētta beside iyatta. ékam. com.-acc. We tentatively list it here as a variant of the allative 1-eda. KUB 11. ši-e-et-ta(?) -eda apeda 2. and occurs as a predicate adjective in 1-iš kišat KUB 41. such as šani. form 1-iš is distinguishable from the multiplicative 1-iš (i.. whose formal and functional relationship to the stem *sia.2 There are also i-stem forms. It ought to mean ‘into one’.74 iii 15–16). and *sem. 5. Compare for this pattern Sanskrit éka. ši-e-ta-ni. Eichner (1992: 39–40).6. 170). nom.indb 154 6/5/08 4:16:28 PM .‘one’ declines like the pronouns with the exception of the sg.-l. ši-e-da-ni. 6. neut. 1-an. The sg. as does ‘one’.-acc. ši-i-e-el -el apēl d. 1-iš is attested from OS on. e. 151–152).g. while ‘three’ and ‘four’ follow that of the adjectives.5. an allative function.10. pp.46:6–7 and KBo 23. KBo 25. of the numeral by Eichner (1992) is very likely a personal name mAtta (i ) (see Ünal 1996: 21 n.7. contra Melchert (1977: 376–78). 1-kiš) only by context. no trace of it has yet been found in published texts. It is possible that in Hittite also there were two words.. have proven uncertain.to the right. again with a single exception. The form read “1-at(-ta)” and claimed as a sg.-a. The analysis of 1-ētta as an instrumental with the geminating conjunction -a ‘also’ does not account for its meaning in context. com. If there was a neuter form *1-at. 3 4 5 6 7 Case Writing Ending apa- nom.

27 (p.172 obv. joined. p. on a basis of equality. 285. 1- an uttar ‘one thing’ KUB 24. The number ‘one’ is used in reciprocal constructions: 1-aš 1-an walḫzi ‘the one hits the other’. as you have the oath as one. English insignia which for most current speakers has no singular insigne. 1-e⸗ma 1 . .10 Case Writing Ending apa- abl.30 iii 16–17 (fest. apez ins. 291. But 1-aš-ša. 155 Numbers 9. united.119.1 rev. 320). neut. Likely instances of this usage thus far attested all appear to be predicative.8 1-e-ez. as one’. of which one (is/consists of) two . 1-e-da-az/-za. A special distributive value was assigned to 1-aš-ša in KUB 43.10 as in KBo 5. See 1-e-da-az 1-e-da-az ‘on one side . 10. NH): [nu⸗šmaš]  - kuit 1-an  nu⸗šmaš  - maḫḫan 1-an 1-[ ⸗y]a⸗šmaš ēšten ‘because I have given you (pl. 9–10 (Targ.. 25 (MH/MS) is another example of 1-e ⟨-da⟩-az.. For the distributive use with other numbers compare 2-at 2-at (§9. 9.9 Some instances of 1-an probably represent the sg. and in distributives (§18. Nor is a plurale tantum for a word of this meaning unexpected: cf.29. 16 is used to modify a noun that is a col- lective plurale tantum: 2 GIŠ - 1 2 . the accusative 1-an 1-an is found in: n⸗ašta  . p.8. As Neu (1992) has shown.see further §9. 320.-trees.12).29.4 iii 5–6 in §25. ši(-i)-e-ez.23 rev. 1-aš 1-edani pāi ‘the one gives to the other’. while one (consists of) one . 21 by Eichner (1992: 41). of the derived stem 1-ant-. .31 iii 21). .4 rev. .-tree. nom. §24. coll. p. The sg. In the context it should mean ‘together.7: “Designating a complex whole or entity in which a plurality of components or entities are united or put together.12. 9. 160). šarikuwan 1-an 1-an anda tarniškezzi ‘and the army commander admits the šarikuwa-troops one by one’ VS 28. nom.4 iii 52. and 1-e ⟨-da⟩-az .1+ iii 76. neut.verb form (see §24. one to one’ KUB 21.10. both in KUB 43. probably means ‘even one’. on (the other) one side. For the equivalence of Akkadographic 1- and Hittite 1-ant. apedanda neut. 9. [1-]e-da-az also in correlation in KUB 30. ši-e-et. 1-e -e apē 8 9. 21 and in KUB 13. ‘two emblems. p. There is no reason to doubt this analysis (against Eichner 1992: 33).-acc.g. 27–28. 1-e-ta-an-da.) an oath as one. p.9. which expresses the sense of ‘one’ as a unit. še-e-et(?) -et apet. may you too be one’ (see also KUB 9.12. form 1-an is used for ordinary neuter nouns: e. Uncorrelated 1-e-az KUB 14. 1-aš 1-el -un dāi ‘the one takes the other’s sheep’. še-e-za -edaz. §19.).- acc. . 384): 1-aš 1-aš (or 1-an 1-an) as a unit means ‘one by one. reciprocal. In the formulation of the Oxford English Dictionary under “one” III. 8. §28. -ez apedaz. jointly. .” 00-HittiteGrammar.3 iii 62.23 rev. comparing kuišša ‘each’. p.15 obv.1 ii 3 and apāt 1-an ‘that one (thing)’ KUB 14.indb 155 6/5/08 4:16:29 PM . The formally plural 1-e in KBo 18.10. 336). Note that the ‘one by one’ aspect is further indicated by the imperfec- tive -ške. one at a time’ or ‘each in his turn’ (for the nominative see KUB 13. col- lective pluralia tantum are not rare in Hittite.

*tereš or *terieš ) acc. OH/NS) is not. the NS duplicate of KBo 3. but it clearly has the meaning ‘together. as in šākuwat (see §3. com. 12. te-ri-ya-aš Of these forms.13. 11 (OS) and KBo 20.? 2-itanta13 9.-a.35 ii 9ʹ (OS). 536. is probably instrumental. 11. Compare in the following table the plural endings of ‘two’ with those of apa. 3-e-eš (i. com. Cf. The existence of this ending in OS suggests that apēdanda in KUB 26. as HE §131 claims. 3-e 15 gen.8 obv. only nom. apē. 3-e shows the pronominal ending. com.3.indb 156 6/5/08 4:16:29 PM . 2-e in the construction -uš 2-e ekuzi ‘the king drinks two’ could either refer to two vessels (-ri) or be adverbial (‘two times’). may go back to an OS archetype. The declension of ‘two’ shows the plural endings of the pronominal declension.1 ii 14 (NH) awaits explanation.’ The phrase in question translates as ‘but if (the cohabitation of a man with two sisters occurs) in the place of the two (2-el pedi).26 iii 35 (Laws §191.? 1 (OH/NS) in broken context. apēdaš. neut. 2-uš (post-OH) 11 n. or for *2-elan. 13. com. a sg. and apēdanda (see §7.83 i 4ʹ (OH/NS). neut. 3-uš n.11. p. 00-HittiteGrammar.12. in view of apedanda. 11 12 13 nom. 2-etaš.14 The writing 2-an might stand for takšan ‘together’. 2-e12 gen. p.71 i 7ʹ.203 obv. The form 2-el KBo 6. 9. 12 above. 9.11 Numbers 156 ‘Two’ to ‘Ten’ 9. 2-el d. See n. both’.35. so that he knows (that his partners are sisters)’: see LH 151 n.-l. apel. 143). 2-i-ta-an-ta in KBo 25. is perhaps an instrumental form with an ending -at. 14.e. The distributive form 2-at 2-at KBo 20. 77). 2-aš ins. which appears to mean ‘by twos’ or ‘two by two’. neut.22: 58 (OS). 2-uš but in that passage is the regular pronominal genitive ‘of two’ meaning ‘in the place of the two (women). 171).-acc. used ad- verbially (see a different interpretation in Eichner 1992 63). 2-uš in some contexts could be merely a shorter writing of 2-eluš (§9. 15. p. a rare alternate form to the nom.. also 1-e-ta-[a]n-da KBo 22. The example 2-ēl in the passage [URUḪakpiš(šaš⸗ma⸗kan URUIšt)]a[(ḫar)]ašš⸗a 2-ēl išparzer ‘But Ḫakpišša and Išḫara together/both escaped’ KUB 1.-a.‘that’: apūš.61. The following case forms of ‘three’ are attested: 15 nom. neut.

. 18. .29.35 (p.67 iv 13ʹ. 160). mi-e-ya-wa-aš. .. 4-aš gen.15. &.indb 157 6/5/08 4:16:30 PM . O Sungod. 9.18 The complementation of 7-an ‘ten 16. 10. mi-i-ú-wa⟨-aš ⟩ d.500 captives’ KUB 14. 1 - for ‘one thou- sand’. 18ʹ (ed. com.(§§9. Siegelová 1971: 40–41). nu mān D-uš āššu kued [ani] paitti tug⸗a 9-an pāu kuiš LÚ.14.17 9.000 fat-tailed sheep’ KBo 32. give goods to someone. need not indicate that the Hittite number ‘thousand’ ended in -t. 163). mi-e-wa-aš acc.17 Large numbers are written with combina- tions of these logograms plus their preceding ciphers: 1 7 5 - 5  . thousands with -. ‘10.000 annually’ KBo 25. (but) if it is a poor man. Without preceding ‘one’ in the “Song of Release”: nu 7-an .‘thousand’. nu⸗tta 1  pāu ‘And if you. it means that the title LÚ - cannot mean ‘overseer of a thousand’. and units of ten thousand with 7. . On the dative-locative form 9-anti see §9. mi-e-ú-uš.000 oxen .13 ii 15–17 (MS).&.17. 17. p. Hundreds are written with the Akkadogram . let him give you one sheep’ VBoT 58 iv 11–12. --ti-li ‘by the thou- sands’ KUB 8. 4-it abl 4-az Since ‘four’ shows no other trace of pronominal endings.&.or -ti-.. let him give you nine (animals).-l. .with cardinal numbers.000 oxen . The first two of these three logograms are always preceded by a number. For example. 9.123:9 (OS). mi-ú-wa-aš ins.-un ḫatteš . ‘15.. . The cardinal number ‘eight’ has the following complementation in the dative- locative or accusative 8-taš (OS).16 iii 20.-un ḫatteš 3 7  .27–9.-n⸗a ḫatteš ‘She slaughtered 10. 30. 157 Numbers 9. ‘Four’ has the following forms (Eichner 1992: 75): nom. The phonetic complement -an is used in OS and MS only. dative-locative 4-taš is probably not a pronominal ending (*-edaš) but rather a number extended by the “individualizing” -ant. In spite of the tempting connection of the -t. 9-an seems to be the cardinal number ‘nine’.16 ‘Ten thousand’ can be written either 1 7(-an) or just 7(-an). with preceding ‘one’ in 1 7-an . If this rule applied also in compounds. 00-HittiteGrammar. 9. even for the unit ‘one’: 1  for ‘one hundred’. and 1  - 6 ‘166’ KUB 42. See Germanic *thūs-hundi. 7-an .to the PIE final consonant of ‘eight’ or the use of a pronominal ending -edaš here (unattested in numbers higher than ‘two’ in Hittite).33:11ʹ (NH). The semi-logographic writing of the adverbial form of ‘thousand’. .16. 4-uš. this is probably another instance of the “indi- vidualizing” -ant. com.

All examples of the numbers ‘two’ through ‘nine’ + - (‘thousand’) take logograms as their head nouns. ‘thousand’. nine hundred- thousands(?) (of them)’. 324) was confirmed by collation S. Number Agreement with Non-Collectives 9.g. 1-edani -ni KUB 23.-an KBo 10.13 + KBo 10. Any number above nine requires switching to a higher count-unit (e. but the number ‘nine’ itself in Hittite counting system represents the highest number usable for each of the count-units ‘hundred’. KBo 20.20 What appears to be two signs “.88 + KBo 24. 1-an uttar ‘one thing’ KUB 24.1 ii 3 (see also i 16). Their syntax. nine ten-thousands. The head nouns can be written singular or plural. research on Hittite numbers has focused on their morphology. which can be labeled purely descriptively. and I defeated it’ KBo 5. as 7-šessig (see Hoffner 2007).).6 ii 9–10 (NH). ten hundreds = one thousand. 9.18.116 iii 9ʹ.. only Carchemish.indb 158 6/5/08 4:16:31 PM . etc.12 ii 41. tēriyaš -aš mi-i-ú-wa⟨-aš ⟩ -aš -an pāndu ‘Let them travel a journey of three days (or) of four days’ KUB 43. the one town.000-man army which Pigattalli led joined battle with me. When non-collective head nouns appeared with the numbers larger than ‘one’. 00-HittiteGrammar. See Hoffner 2007. Not only are these ascending numerical units very large.60 i 10–11 (OH/NS). is beginning to come into focus (see Hoffner 2007). 9. did not make peace with him’ KBo 5.21. the head noun could occur either in the singular or plural. 21-aš MUNUS. But the only attestation of Hittite agreement for such a head noun shows it be singular: nu uni kuin 9 - .10 iii/iv 7.18 Numbers 158 thousand’ reveals relatively little about its stem. “+” was an even higher num- ber such as ‘hundred thousand’. 19.8 iii 24–26 (AM 158–59). mPitaggatalliš uwatet n⸗aš⸗mu zaḫḫiya tiyat n⸗an zaḫḫiyanun ‘That 9. Until recently. As a consequence. and ‘ten-thousand’. while unclear in many points. using the Mesopotamian system of sign names.19. always agree- ing with their head noun in case: nu⸗šši   URUKargamiš URUKargamišaš⸗pat 1-aš -aš ` takšulait ‘In the country of Carchemish. The Syntax of the Cardinals 9. this pattern may suggest that “+” is ‘one hundred thousand’ and not a still higher unit such as ‘one million’. Agreement in Case 9. 324 iv 23).102 i 15. The reading [7-a]n in both lines for “d[a-a]n” in the critical edition by (Klinger 1996: 318.67 iv 23 (= StBoT 37:318 iii 10ʹ. Judging from the ascending progression 9-an - 9-an 7-an 9-an “+” 19 in KBo 17.20. ‘(Let the gods send years to the king and queen)—nine thousands. 20.” in this MS copy is undoubtedly a scribal misreading of a single OS sign. 1-an . Cardinal numbers were declined like substantives or pronouns.MEŠ zintuḫiyaš  URUKalpaššanaḫila KBo 10. Košak (7-27-2005).

com. 2  . etc. 10 NINDAḫaršin (OS). 3 .’s (and) two ḫ.23 This way of writing the number with 21.-vessels’ (OS). There are quite a few post-OS examples: KUB 30. 2 tu[n]ingaš  ḫaršauš ‘two thick loaves (made) of tuningaš ’. etc. ḫulḫuliyanteš ‘two men fighting (each other)’. 00-HittiteGrammar.: (a) with: 2 . Logograms with numbers above 1 can either have or lack the plural markers  and &. 11 (OH/MS) (and compare possibly 1 7 l [aplipuš⸗tuš kar(a)p] ‘lift your ten thousand eyelids’ KBo 27. 10 NINDAtūnik ‘ten t.&. 2 ḫūppar ‘two ḫ.-garments (are) turned’.-vessels’. Collective nouns can be counted as well as “count plural” ones.-breads’. 9. ‘thirty sheep’. the effect is the same: both x-ta (for -anta) and x- indicate that sets are being numbered. Number Agreement with Collectives 9. 8 TÚGišḫimaneš neyanteš ‘eight i.MEŠpi [tt]iyanduš ‘two fugi- tives’.  as  in inventory texts (Siegelová 1986: 704–5) is due to the nature of those late texts. 3 GIŠzaluwaniuš (OS).-it ‘(together) with the nine body parts’. ‘seven persons’. 30 NINDAḫāliš (OS). Often abbreviated to 1-. ‘five male sheep’. 100 GIŠgipeššar (OS). ištēnūtum). teššum- miuš 4-uš ‘four cups’ (OS).26. 7 GIŠḫattalu ‘seven bolts’. But with the former what is counted are either sets or numbers comprising a single set: logo- graphically ‘one’ is written 1-` 21 (Akk. 3 . The abbreviation of Akkad.1 iv 15 (see Melchert 2000: 60 n. Some syllabic forms are ambiguous as to number. 3 NINDAwageššar (OS). 7 . 2 GIŠzaluwaniuš 2 ḫupparuš ‘two z.32 obv.26 9.36 obv. 19. 2 MUŠENpartūniuš (OS). 2 LÚ. lift (your) thousand eyelashes’ KBo 7. nom.⸗ lāk ƒ laplippuš kar (a)p ‘turn (hither) your benevolent eyes. 3  ān ‘three warm breads’. 10 DUGḫaršiš (OS). KBo 10. (b) without: 7 .3 + KUB 28. and all numbers above ‘one’ are numeral + : 22 2 . This is not to say. 9. however. 3 NINDAḫaršaēš (OS).&. āššū . 20 [pur]puruš (OS).87 rev. 5 . 2 zipattanni (OS). such as neuters: 2 gipeššar ‘two ells (of field)’. KBo 37. 8 wakšur (OS).18:4). 28). according to our understanding). There is a different method of indicating the numbers with collective nouns (Neu 1992).24. ‘two men’. that  never occurs in Hittite with the number ‘one’. ‘two beehives’. 2 . 5. 3 NINDA kištun (OS).-deities’ (OS). however. ‘three men’. 9. ‘seven gods’.23. Old Hittite syllabic evidence shows declined singulars: 5 gāpinan ‘five threads’ KBo 17. 23. 2 KUŠannanuzziuš ‘two leather harnesses’ (OS). as seen by the wholesale abbreviating of words in them.. 3 ši-i-ú-uš ‘three deities’ (OS). 14. 3 GIŠpalzaḫuš (OS).&. 6 ḫarnāišar.22. 22.indb 159 6/5/08 4:16:33 PM . [(5 )] šaudišza ‘five wean- ling oxen’ Laws §57 (OS) (tāyugaš and šaudišza are both sg. 30 . With numbers greater than ‘one’. Logographic writings reinforce the clear evidence of the syllabic writings. We also find plurals: 2 Dḫantašepuš ‘two figurines of ḫ. 159 Numbers 9. 22. 3 puššaleš ‘three p.-garments’.25. 2 NINDAwagataš (OS). 5  tāyugaš ‘five two-year-old oxen’ Laws §§57–58 (OS).28 obv. 9-it UZU.

but it does not account for all in- stances of numbers with collectives nor for all uses of 1-` and  with nouns.27 In NH. It can be seen that in this case the head noun ḫarpa has an overt collective ending -a. numbering sets) is found with both logographically and syllabi- cally spelled counted nouns: 1- / 4  GIŠ.7 rev. 9. The endings on the -ant.24 This -ant.-š⸗a 1-anta kitta ‘As for wood- piles. Hence. and one (at that) of the queen’ KBo 17. 25. But the neuter plural ending -anta marks the number of sets. showing a neuter form either when marking a formally singular but semanti- cally collective noun (e. one could translate ‘that four monthly festivals for you had been neglected’ 00-HittiteGrammar.e. not just to those nouns that occur only as collectives. The singular linking verb (ēšta) in turn caused the predicate adjective karšan to be singular. 27. ‘one tent/four tents’ and 1- widār ‘one portion of water’ 14  šeḫelliya⟨š ⟩ widār ‘fourteen por- tions of water of purification’. 9. 9.3 iv 25–26 = StBoT 8 iv 28–29 (OS). See §9. Alternatively. The form m(i)uwaniyanteš used in the horse-training texts for a team of four chariot horses (Eich- ner 1992: §3.4.. 164). when counting collective nouns. which might be the neuter singular of -ant-.suffix.27. This analysis seems correct for many examples of collectives.  kuit karšan ēšta KUB 5. it takes its number with the stem form -anta.27 Numbers 160 collective nouns (i. not ‘a single group/set of four festivals’ which would have been written *4-an 4 . 24. if correctly analyzed as a participle (so CHD L–N 308–9).stem is the Hittite equiva- lent of Akkadographic writings with 1-` or numbers greater than ‘one’ followed by .g..&.stem agree in gender and case with the counted collec- tive noun.26 The full complement 1-anta clarifies shorter writ- ings of the numeral with simple -ta in older texts.40 (p.4. Note that the second example—widār.3). *padišši. The possessive clitic -ši shows that the complete form was singular. paḫḫur or ḫappeššar) or when modifying a marked neuter plural head noun..1 and §3.37 (p. Examples of numbers ending in -anta.) takes the singular verb ēšta by the rule of neuter plural subject taking singular verb. the formal plural of the already semantically collective wātar—shows that this practice applies to all collective plurals. The phrase 4-ta  4 . This is the simplest accounting.3 i 14. But since no example of ‘1 ’ is yet atttested in Old Hittite Script. one (set of unspecified number in the set) lies at the foot25 of the king. 163) and §9. 30 means ‘that four monthly festivals had been neglected’. marking the number of sets or groups: GIŠ ḫarpa⸗ma 1-anta -aš ⸗ši kitta . since taking 4-ta as 4-anta makes it redundant with immediately following . 26. complementation of the numeral. As noted by Melchert (2000: 59–60). shows a stem -ant-.4.28.) In this passage the collective subject (4-ta  4 . it is possible that it was introduced later on (false) analogy with the numbers greater than ‘one’. however. (The four festivals are conceived of as four sets of festival activities. 9. unattested in Ak- kadian. would have nothing to do with the collective (‘a team of four [horses]’).29. See 2- KUB 38.4. which shows the same false analogy.. in spite of the -ant. while the number of components in a single set is marked by an ending -an.indb 160 6/5/08 4:16:34 PM .

but he does not elaborate this idea. This provi- sional solution. let him give you a single sheep’ VBoT 58 iv 11–12. The shorter ending -an occurs in 7-an modifying the head noun paḫḫur.v. nu mān D-uš āššu kued [ani] paitti tug⸗a 9-an pāu kuiš LÚ. It is likely that the beverage name šiptamiya.11 ii 5–6 and saw that the -an could not be a reflex of PIE septṃ. but see CHD L–N s. but also because 7-an can hardly be the simple cardinal. requires assuming that the graphic nexus between the numeral and the logogram  (which corresponds only to a stem on the declined number) could be broken by the enclitic pronoun. where possibilities of paleographic confusion (TE for in- tended KI) are raised. 9. we can- not be sure that the  sign is not an abbreviation for -.31 and especially in administrative texts. 28.31.4. 167. which shows no overt collective end- ing. Both solutions have their difficulties. and speaks the same way’ KBo 11. kattanta šippandanzi ‘But afterward for the Sungoddess of the Netherworld one black sheep. = singular neuter šuppal implied?). karšan KBo 14..-l.  .11 ii 5–6. (But) he who is a poor man.⸗ya 7-an D Ḫebat paršiyannai memiškezzi⸗ya  ‘as for thick breads. two white sheep. although it is collective in sense:  . 161 Numbers 9.21 i 8 (NH).shows the a before the m because it was formed early enough to retain the regular internal treatment. 10–11 (MH/NS). which in speech would follow the stem and ending. 9. n.&. 30. where abbreviated writings are common. see p.30. 00-HittiteGrammar.stem” meaning ‘seven at a time’. we find two with the number 7-an and one with 9-an. let him give you a set /group of nine (of animals.. Eichner (1992: 83–84) cited 7-an in KBo 11. For example. A third example is: -anda⸗ma taknaš D-i 1  6 2   9-an -un tekan paddānzi nu⸗kan . The alternate reading 4⸗ta with d.7 rev. and another group of seven fires on the other side’ KBo 11. The second example is not contextually as clear but fits the pattern observed elsewhere: . give goods to someone. 44.indb 161 6/5/08 4:16:35 PM .6. and a group of nine sheep—they dig (a hole in) the ground and sacrifice the sheep down in it’ KBo KUB 5. however. As for examples of numbers ending in -an.34 rev. not only because groups or sets are so clearly visualized. nu⸗tta 1  pāu ‘And if you.14 ii 30–31 (MH/NS).29 A second example is: GIŠzupari 2⸗ 9-an kez! 9-an lukkanzi [k]ezzi⸗ya 9-an lukkanzi ‘torches: two sets of nine: on this side they light (one) set of nine.” The number 7-an seems to show the singular collective ending.⸗ma kēz 7-an paḫḫur kēzzi⸗ya 7-an paḫḫur pariaḫḫi ‘On the third day I kindle a (single) group of seven fires on one side.3.28 Each group of seven fires is regarded as a “set. he breaks a set of seven for Ḫebat.‘-times’ one could invoke the variant ma-ši-ya-an-te for mašiyanki ‘however many times’. The examples with 9-an are less certain. For such an -nt. 29. and on the other side they light another set of nine’ KBo 20. -ta ‘for you (O god)’ could be defended on the basis of - ⸗ [] -⸗wa 4 . He thought it could have contained an “-nt. since the -an complementing ‘nine’ could also be the end of the cardinal number itself. marking the number of components in a set. Here the symbolic meaning of ‘nine’ in the sense of an unlimited number may be present. We adhere to the view of Melchert (AHP 181) and others that final -an is not the expected outcome of final syllabic  in *sept ‘seven’. O Sungod.

30 9.34. The third row is included here not to illustrate use of the collective suffixes but to show how the Hittites indicated both the number of sets and the number of items in each.. For an instrumental form see 10- antit: [ .32 obv. 9. The following two examples with oblique case endings represent numbers of components in a single set (row 2 in the table above). For this purpose they did not use the collective suffix on either number. takes -anta (even if its number is ‘one’!). is not expressed] 3 X set(s) of Y sheep [both X and Y X⸗ (or X-anki) Y  expressed] 9. while Y would be the normal cardinal number. the following table summarizes how these pattern.72 iii 28. 00-HittiteGrammar. Note here how the “Y number” (see the following paragraph) 9-an and the singular (collective) head noun -un point to a closed group of nine sheep sepa- rate from the enumerated single black sheep and two white ones. the ablative and instrumental cases do not show distinctive singular and plural endings.35. . X-anki is the regular for- mation for ‘X-times’. takes -an. For additional examples see KBo 11. each set of unspecified number X-anta (X  or 1-⟨ ⟩)  (Y) of sheep [Y is not expressed] 2 One set consisting of Y sheep [X. Numbering Sets/Groups in Nominative-Accusative X = number of sets. the stem of the number is enlarged by -ant-. In the latter example it is not ten “sets” of fingers.e.115:5–8. Y = number in each set 1 X set(s). ] 2 ⸗ 10-antit kalulup[it⸗titt⸗a . if it has any Hittite complement. Of course. Since only in the nominative-accusative and dative-locative cases can the dis- tinction between the singular and plural forms of the set-numbering (“collective”) num- bers be distinguished.suffix). In the oblique cases no distinctive collective ending shows on the head noun. 12. 9.33. while Y. In the first two rows of the table the number represented by X. .32. In row 3 neither X nor Y show collective suffixes. . ] ‘with your two hands. which calls for the collective form of the number (i. .indb 162 6/5/08 4:16:37 PM . [and] with your (set of) ten fingers’ KBo 17.10 ii 17–19. which Y-an  is always understood as ‘one’. with the -ant. but ten fingers comprising a single set. if it has a Hittite complement. KBo 13. but the semantics here favors the 30. using either the number of sets (“X”) or the number in each set (“Y”) or both numbers. but when the sense is collective.32 Numbers 162 11. 9.

11 rev. 1ʹ–3ʹ. *2-anta or reflect a genuine alternative use of the simple cardinal numbers with collectives. com. while kištunaš. Since in this case the number is ‘nine’. Counting Non-Decimal Sets 9. 163 Numbers 9.e. A rare exception to this is the expression 8-anki 8 ‘eight times eight’ KBo 53. the high- est of the multiplicands. The multiplier is regularly written with the Akkadian suffix -. Only with nine. 13 means ‘on a/the set of nine members.36.8 (p. two dozen).. 36. The PIE number nomenclature implies a ten-base system of counting.31 The dative-locative collective 9-anti ḫappešni KBo 21. that while the multiplicand varies (the favored numbers being seven and nine). 1 galgalturi beside 1-` galgalturi ‘one (set of) cymbals’. One also finds numbers without phonetic complement with nouns that appear to be collectives. This use might particularly be expected in the later language. and šarāma are unambiguously plural. not indicating how many members were in each set. form of the suffix. The form 10-anza in 10-an-za annan[ešḫi-. But just as in some IE languages other groupings can occur ( four-score. i. it is only the context that can show whether they are X or Y numbers. Whether the regular writing with - for the multiplier in this construction always stands for the adverb in -anki is quite uncertain. 00-HittiteGrammar.’ 9.37.38. nom. we cannot tell whether the -an ending is the final part of the simple cardinal or whether the number is in its singular collective form. When more than one set of a specified number is to be indicated. is a multiplier larger than 2⸗ used.32 But the alterna- tion with  in the first instance and 1- in the second show that these are X numbers. . Buck 1949: 936 #13. . 155). however. and on the other side they light a set of nine’.36 above).38 singular meaning. 32. 33. 31. Note.33 so also in Hittite larger numbers were sometimes expressed in multiples other than tens or hundreds. while the multiplied number has either no complement or rarely the regular complement -an (see 9-an and §9. and the multiplicand is always larger than the multiplier. When the numbers lack complementation.38 below): GIŠ zuppari 2⸗ 9-an—kez! 9-an lukkanzi [k]ezzi⸗ya 9-an lukkanzi ‘torches: two sets of nine—on one side they light a set of nine. numbering the sets. 10 could be the sg. makitaš. It is uncertain whether such writings are abbreviated for *1-anta. 9.47 obv. see Melchert 2000: 65 n. it is done by NUMBER+- preceding the number (row 3 in the table and see §9.] ‘a set of ten annan[ešḫi-s]’ KBo 24. indicating the number of items in the set.indb 163 6/5/08 4:16:38 PM . Of the syllabically written numbered items used in these expres- sions only kappin is unequivocally singular. the multiplier does not exceed four and rarely exceeds two.14 obv. both logograms and syllabically written words: 2 GIŠ alongside 2  GIŠ ‘two racks/stands’.31. For evidence of the latter see the example of 1-e cited in §9.

. shows that we cannot easily predict whether the Hittites viewed a particular composite object as a collective or set of discrete parts. this seems likely. as in Akkadian. yoke. for many examples attested as logograms with 1-` and .&. . 34. But one should not exclude the possibility that. whether we should assume collective or count plurals.indb 164 6/5/08 4:16:39 PM . 158–159) and does not argue against the idea that ‘necklace’ is a noun viewed as a unit (or set) consisting of many parts. These also are attested with 1-` and :34 1- ` manniniš ‘one necklace’. . 4⸗ 9 = 36 . pants). 00-HittiteGrammar. 35.⸗wa⸗kan [k]arū parā neḫḫun ‘I have already dispatched 20 teams of (chariot) horses’ HKM 19:21–22 (MH/MS). 20 ˆ . there are also examples that appear to be inflected only as count plurals. 9. team’ underlies 1- or X . Some words introduced by 1-` or number +  have meanings where ‘pair’ or ‘team (of two)’ would be suitable: &. 159) and following. see Latin aedēs ‘temple’ or English scissors.35 The contrast with 1-` ḫuḫḫurtalla. ‘shoes’. pp.4. GIŠ 2⸗ 9-an = 18 zupari 3⸗ 9 = 27 . NINDA 5. rather than a number in -ant-.⟨⟩ 10 = 50 šarāma Sets of Two (Pairs) 9. Many such nouns in Hittite clearly are treated as collective plurals and are counted as described above in §§9. Thus we do not yet know. On the other hand. pair’ (or logographically as number + ˆ) + the noun in the plural: 9 yugan LÚ. In these cases it is possible that some Hittite expression such as yugan ‘pair..MEŠḫunepiš LÚ. GIŠ 2-iš 8-taš = 16 kištunaš. 9. In many languages there are nouns referring to objects consisting of multiple parts that inflect only as plurals (the plurale tantum of the classical languages.&.26. scribes wrote the number + yugan ‘yoke. kappin. 159). ..MEŠḫalliyareš ‘nine pairs of ḫ-men (and) singers’. (GIŠ)ḫuḫupal ‘clapper’ (or similar concussive musical instrument).39. also ‘necklace’ of some kind. The formal singular manniniš merely reflects the fact that Hittite can use singular or plural with any number (§§9. 2 ˆ .. ‘oxen’. . makitaš 2⸗ 9 = 18 šalakar. p.A. ‘earrings’..23. tu-ri-ya-an-zi ‘they shall hitch up two pairs/teams of oxen’ Laws §166.39 Numbers 164 NINDA 2⸗ 4 =8 wageššar 2⸗ 7 = 14 ētri ḪI.&.. Although we have no evidence that the Hittite equivalent in this case was the number suffixed with -ant-.&.&. When numbers of “pairs” of objects or persons were expressed.. one always says/writes one pair of scissors/pants. In the case of the English examples cited. KUŠ. ‘pair’ was simply conceived as a ‘set (consisting of two)’ (see §9.26 (p.&. [x ] manniniuš ‘x necklaces’. paššilaš..40.21–9.

16 iii 20–21 (AM). But confused by two possible sources (n⸗at⸗šan and n⸗an⸗šan). fled alone’ KUB 23.6 + KBo 14.21 obv. E. 38. to see that these are really appositional see the unabbreviated form in [(mTapalazunauliš⸗ma⸗k)]an 1-aš . nu⸗šši   URU Kargamiš URUKargamišaš⸗pat 1-aš -aš ` takšulait KBo 5.36 Although the cuneiform writing system contained words and signs37 for other fractions. nu⸗mu⸗kan mPittaggatalliš⸗pat 1-aš išparzašta KBo 5. ‘halves’) or the Akkadian singular accusative phonetic complement - (- or ½- ) can be appended. and -li-eš. or ½.4 ii 77. he resolved one instance falsely as na-an-ša-an.8 iii 31–32. The underlying Akkadian noun is mišlu(m) ‘half’. The sign  (HZL #20.44 Word Order in Counting 9. which may also be transcribed as ½) serves to rep- resent the noun ‘half’.  ‘five-sixths’.g. as one) remained (loyal)’ KBo 10.99 ii 8–10.44. 00-HittiteGrammar.7 i 6ʹ. 31–32 (CTH 143). single’ (§9. Exceptions are appositional: n⸗ašta URU Ḫattušaš⸗pat -riaš 1-aš āšta ‘Ḫattuša the city alone (lit. p. 9. p.6 ii 9–10. which show the endings -iš. nu zik 1-aš ūnni ‘You drive here alone!’ KUB 21. -li. (.42. Although KuT 53 is an MH composition. Fractions 9. Eich- ner (1992: 89) plausibly suggests that these are fractional notations on the order of a 36. Note that all examples above are the number ‘one’.. Wilhelm 2002a: 342–43). All that can be determined at pres- ent is that it was neuter: kuit - ḫarzi n⸗at KUB 20. 9. -aš išparzašta KBo 3. Attributive-adjective forms of the fractions may be found in the quantitative notations used following baked goods. the unexpected resumption with -an (which contradicts the kuit!) may be due to a false resolution of a dictated na-aš-ša-an.500 captives to my house’ KUB 14.indb 165 6/5/08 4:16:40 PM .&. nu⸗za ammuk 1-aš  ⸗ 15.500 .38 they are so far unattested in Hittite texts.41. The same text just quoted for common-gender agreement has another example where assimilation of the sequence nš > šš shows a sur- vival of OH phonology in an MH/MS text: nu []-ni[t ⸗] ku-it ½- ḫar-zi na-aš-ša-an D-n[a-aš iš-ta-na-ni] []-az da-a-i -li-it-ta ⸗ k[u-it] ½- ḫar-zi na-aš-ša-an D-na-aš iš-ta[-na-ni] -la-az da-a-i KuT 53 ii 15–19. It is also possible that 1-aš here stands for šielaš ‘alone.43.6+ ii 69. Numbers precede their head nouns. 165 Numbers 9. and mMammališ⸗ma⸗kan 1-aš [.61. not a copy of an older text.&. the man of Arzawa. 37. For the Akkadian see GAG §70 f–m.-aš išparzašta] ‘Mammali as the sole per[son escaped]’ KBo 40. to which if needed the plural marker &. One example shows neuter kuit but n⸗an resuming: nu -ni-it [--] ku-it ½- ḫar-zi na- an-ša-an D-aš i[š-ta-na-n]i -az da-a-i -l[i-i]t-ta -- ku-it ½-[ ḫar-zi] na-an-ša-an i[š- t]a-na-ni -la-az d [a-a-i ] KuT 53 ii 43–46 (ed. [mKu] panta-d-aš⸗ma⸗kan  URUArzauwa 1-aš ḫūwaiš ‘Kupanta-Kuruntiya.  ‘two-thirds’.1 + KUB 19. 170). uwatenun ‘And I alone led off 15... 41). The assimilated form na-aš-ša-an dictated to the scribe in two parts of the text would actually be from na-at-ša-an (see §1.2 i 26 (OH/NS). No syllabic writing of the Hittite word underlying  has yet been identified.111.

47. Ordinal Numbers 9. twice’).16 (p. .120 i 33. This being the case. 57) but often means only ‘another’. . dān ‘second’ (indeclinable).). .2 ii 57–61.1 ii 4–11 or ḫubrušḫin KBo 5. 14-ma. or ‘fortieth’ of some unnamed unit of flour measure. 161). all ending in -an-na. also a second (time). . 9. If the dental is not part of the fractional suffix. 13-ma . . . (KUB 31. .) or ‘secondly. 17).41 But contrary to the claims of Sommer and Friedrich (e. . attested up to ‘ten’. But in the attested examples. thereafter’ (adv.e. . the form 3-an must be either a singular neuter used adverbally (‘thirdly’) or be indeclinable. . .. as used to be thought (HW and HW 2 sub voce. . There also exists in MH a form 10-ti-li-iš modifying 450 .‘one’ in Hittite. .) (Eichner 1992: 62. 8-n⸗a .‘ten’ or an ordinal suffix *-to-. . . iii 1–12. ‘Second’ is also written Ak- kadographically as 2-- (i. . HE §133 b). 9. . 146). 3-ann⸗a . āšma provides no evidence for a stem ā. Eichner 1992: 43–44). The form āšma is not the adverbial ordinal ‘firstly’. The only other option—that it refers to the third deity—would require that it agree with the instrumental noun nakkit DTašmit (which it patently does not). Since in KBo 5. šanû) or with cipher and Hittite complement as 2-an. . . The alleged examples all consist of the ending -an and the gemi- nating conjunction -a ‘also’ (attested in a series: ‘. . one could say that ordinal forms are attested even higher. . This is undoubtedly the same suffix.45. The question arises: were the ordinals greater than ‘second’ declined? There are a few examples of ordinals in series. 9-n⸗a .(an extension of the stem dā.indb 166 6/5/08 4:16:41 PM . and also a third (time)’. 40. . to another’ from this stem. 12⸗ma .. 42. Only the following primary ordinals are attested in syllabic writings: ḫantez- zi( ya).g. double.‘first’ (declinable).46. . .79:6. . 7-n⸗a . there is no Hittite ordinal suffix -anna. But 10-n⸗a is the highest ordinal attested with the explicit complement -an. It is not also a multiplicative (‘two-times. takiya ‘to one . 10-n⸗a continues with 11⸗ma (intending 11-an⸗ma) .39 9. 41. some if not all are of the “collective” type (see §9. 2-ann⸗a . On the adverb/interjection āšma see §7. ‘twentieth’.48. . etc. There are no ex- amples with neuter head nouns. The Hittite t/damai. . nothing proves that the final n is part of an ordinal stem or that the ordinals greater than ‘second’ did not decline. 9. Eichner 1992: 59 also derives takiya . 6-n⸗a . 00-HittiteGrammar. 67. 39.‘two’) can serve as a declinable ordinal ‘second’ (Eichner 1992: 54.30. crediting Hrozný for this analysis).49. . dān means ‘second’ (adj. p. Akk.40 On the other hand. 5-n⸗a .. In a passage from the “Song of Kumarbi.79:6.42 9. Another example of agreement with a singular accusative common head noun is 3-an -an ‘a third hand’ KBo 9. it might reflect the t in PIE *dekt.45 Numbers 166 ‘tenth’. these ordinal numbers all modify the common-gender noun zašḫain ‘dream’ KUB 17. 4-in . Other numbers with -an complementation are probably not ordinals but cardi- nals.2 ii 57–iii 13 the series ḫantezzin . .” 3-ann⸗a⸗tta armaḫḫun nakkit DTašmit ‘and thirdly I have impregnated you with the noble god Tašmišu’ KUB 33. .

The forms ‘third’ teriyan (also written 3-an). a writing - (number)- ‘x tablets’ or ‘tablet number x’. go! And hitch (them) up in the meadow—a third. since the number ‘nine’ is used in its symbolic sense of an incalculably large number (see Hoffner 2007: 377).-aš kappūwantaš DAlaluš -ši -uš ēšta 9-ti⸗an -ti DAlaluwi DAnuš menaḫḫanda zaḫḫain [pa]iš ‘For a mere nine years44 43. has the force of ‘a third time’. The original meaning of .-aš ‘in just a few days’ KBo 10. ‘city’. The ‘nine’ years of these heavenly reigns could be understood as expressing innumerable years. few’ (cf. would be re-hitched up. This needs explanation. . and šiptamiya).&.. Either analogy with teri( ya)n is at work. and of one non-temporal word .. 44. Similarly .’.. ‘fourth’ (4-an). and hitch up the fresh one!’ The appearance of -in with ‘four’ and ‘five’ indicates that these ordinals also ended in -i(y)an. in one context may mean ‘one day’ and in another ‘day number one’. .52. once given rest. By the same process they generated . ‘Thirdly’. ignorant of the real meaning of  in such constructions. Logographic writings of time expressions such as . etc. in the above constructions was the Sumerian genitive suffix -(a)k + the enclitic copula -am ‘it is’. but with no comment on neuter gender. See p. O Sungod. a fifth (time): unhitch the worn out one. have an ambiguity that only the context can resolve: they can reflect either cardinal or ordinal numbers. Ordinals in -t- 9.g. 29.(numeral).(numeral).1.(). Noted as syncopated ordinals by Eichner (1992: 67–68). URU-- KI KBo 3. The form of the ordinal numbers here is singular nominative-accusative used adverbially. construction was their generating by analogy with . fifth’ KBo 11. A second indication of their lack of understanding of the ().14 ii 15:43 ziqq⸗a D-uš īt nu terin 4-in 5-in wēllui tūriya lā dariyantan tūriya⸗ma waršiyantan ‘But you. especially with the use of kappuwant. abstracted from . ‘month’.51.59. ‘day’. the i not being a part of the root of these numbers..(numeral).indb 167 6/5/08 4:16:42 PM .&. ‘year’ and .52 9. as the immediately following context indicates.45:3ʹ) a logogram . and ‘fifth’ (5-an) also existed in syncopated forms terin 4-in 5-in ‘third.(nu- meral)..(number). 9. p. a fourth. But it is not excluded in this one case. 161. and . But Hittite scribes. because an unhitched animal. that the nine years are not ages but actual years and are meant to indicate truncated reigns. See Hoffner 1998b: 42 (‘for a mere nine years’). .2. They are probably not accu- sative common-gender forms modifying the animal in question. n. ‘first day’ or ‘day number one’ the discontinu- ous elements  and  and created a new logogram . 170.. ‘tab- let’. kappuwanta⟨š ⟩ . or one has to posit an initial i/ya to the ordinal suffix (see §9.1.50. Scribes also abstracted from the prefixed and suffixed determinatives of city names (e.‘count- able. but not *. 167 Numbers 9. can be either ‘two tablets’ or ‘tablet number two’ (= the second tablet). This fused in writing as the single sign . Thus .2 ii 17) and the asyndetically introduced following clause ‘in the ninth year . The only candidates for ordinals in oblique cases with Hittite complementation seem to show a stem containing -t-: 9 . fourth. 00-HittiteGrammar.

Multiplicatives 9. This is the expected function of an ordinal suffix in an older Indo-European language. But the adverb āšma no longer provides support for ā. 50. In der zehnten aber . +-iš šipanti seems to be equivalent to +- šipanti (‘-times’).portion is the end of the number ‘nine’ and the -ti the regular dative-locative singular termination of a -ta. 38 remains unclear. For another view see Eichner 1992: 86. with incorrect citation as “KUB IV 2 iv 36. but the 45. as is the ninth time the celebrant speaks. 49. See Goetze 1951: 469–70. 146). .47 In either case the function is that of an ordinal.54. As multiplicative adverbs in the meaning ‘x-number of times’ (for both tem- poral repetition and purely mathematical multiplication) we find numbers with phonetic complements in -anki 48 or -kiš/-iš 49 or written with the Akkadographic suffix - (GAG §71a). The ninth year is set off from the first eight.as an ordinal suffix see Meier-Brügger 2000: 219.55. on the other hand. A sense ‘an equal number of times’ for ānki (see (LÚ)ānt. The dental suffix—whether it is -ant. the conjunction -a/-ma marking the contrast. die Aufgabe zu.53. On šia.50 On possible adjectives in -(l)iš modifying bread names see §9. and one would have expected a hyper-plene writing *a-a-an-ki according to that theory. 00-HittiteGrammar. This is particularly clear where the two writings alternate in immediate context: nu 3⸗ ⟨⟩ memai § [] 3 -⸗ma 1-iš kiššan memai ‘He/She speaks three times in the same way. 68–69.‘equal’ [written hyper- plene as LÚa-a-an-za]. See the description of the ordinal in PIE: “Den Ordinalzahlen kam im Uridg.—serves here to differentiate the final member of a numbered sequence from its predecessors.46 If. the suffix is -ant-. One may compare for this alternation Greek πολλάκι/πολλάκις ‘many times’. García Trabazo 2002: 162–63 with n. it would serve an individualizing or demarcating function analogous to its use with nouns for seasons of the year: as ḫamešḫanti (‘in a particular spring’) differs from ḫamesḫi (‘in springtime = any spring’).stem (perhaps an inherited *-to-45). 31.53 Numbers 168 Alalu was king in heaven.indb 168 6/5/08 4:16:44 PM . 47. In the absence of contrary evidence we suggest that the Hittite suffix was -anki(š). .16 (p. ed. The meaning of the form a-an-ki in KUB 4. and the alternation of ‘once’ and ‘twice’ fits well in the context of dance moves.as the stem for ‘one’ see Goedegebuure 2006. The abbreviated complement -ki is known: 2-ki pāi ‘he shall give twice/twofold’ Laws §70. 9.or -t (a). The most likely scenario is that the scribe twice wrote a-an-ki for 2-an-ki. Eichner (1992: 42–43. in the ninth year Anu gave battle against Alalu’ KUB 33.1 iv 36. 9. The ‘2’ and ‘A’ signs are quite similar. . and we classify these examples as such.)” (Meier-Brügger 2000: 219). as per Goedegebuure 2002: 64–68) does not seem contextually likely. the reading for 1-anki. 38”) interprets ānki as ‘once’. See also: [(9-an-t)]i -ši⸗ma ‘but on the ninth time’ KBo 10. 9. but we cannot exclude the possibility that the -an.120 i 12–13 (Song of Kumarbi. Repetition focusing on the temporal aspect. 48. compare i 18 (9-ti⸗an -ti). This occurrence might show that the suffix was -ant-. . Wir waren neun Nächte unterwegs. For PIE *-th2o.45 ii 37 with dupl. 2003: 236. followed by Melchert 2000: 58–61. 46. den Abschluß einer Reihe anzugeben (vgl.as a stem for ‘one’: see §7. .58.

Such multiplicative numerals do not occur in clauses with imperfective (-ške-) forms. See for example: āššu⸗ya 3⸗ šarnikzi KBo 6. 320). But another line of evidence suggests shortened forms in -iš equivalent to longer forms in -liš. Likewise for +-anki: d.. It is therefore not certain that all numerals complemented by -iš are the same. OH/NS).1 + KUB 19. eight times eight)’ KBo 53. . 10-iš. Note that the ending -iš does not agree in gender or case with the noun wātar. Examples: 8-anki 8 ‘eight repetitions of eight (i. URUUlma -ya menaḫḫanda 2⸗ auer KBo 10.indb 169 6/5/08 4:16:45 PM . . 33–34 (Otten 1958 68–69).. 15⸗ ḫinkueni ‘We will bow five times at the araši. w]ātar ḫalkiya⸗ma⸗at 10-iš 20-iš naešḫu[t] ‘[Where . 3.29 obv.⟩. Above we suggested that one group may be multiplicative and the same as forms showing longer complements in -kiš. and 30-iš. . 3⸗ ekuzi IBoT 1.1 i 3–5 shows the numbers 30-iš. The sequence: 4⸗ 9 ⟨. ḫarpanza 20-liš KBo 41. Exceptions occur when in addition to the multiplicative numeral a distributive expression also is present (see §24.. The only number measuring bread weight or size that modifies a clearly neuter noun (NINDAwakiššar) is 10-li. not with the other mentioned neuter bread names NINDAtunik and NINDAkaḫaret. the tablets) aloud before you three times year by year’ KUB 21.. 10-iš. 10-li. Repetition of sets in mathematical multiplication.1b obv. 9.4 i 5 (late laws).e. 9. 30-iš 2  ḫarnantaššiš 10-iš 2   10-iš 2 NINDAwakiššar 10-li 2 . The theory is not without its problems: the -iš form is attested with NINDAtunik and NINDAkaḫaret. divert it to the crop(s) ten times. And the neuter form in -li only oc- curs with NINDAwageššar. An indefinite relative form based upon the stem maši..e. nu⸗za -an 2⸗ 3⸗ ēt KUB 1. Multiplicative adverbs mean- ing ‘x-times’ in the mathematical sense (i.16 iii 30 (OH/NS). Because any phonetic complement may exist in longer or shortened form. . It must therefore be a fixed (i.e.-aš GIŠarašiyaš 5-anki ḫinkueni .47 obv.58.58 third time (s)he speaks once as follows’ KUB 30.113 + KUB 36.of Ea . for example in n⸗e⸗tta⸗kkan . both of which look like neuters. but valor is given to him ten times over’ KUB 33. . twenty times’ KBo 12. and that these are adjectives modifying the bread names.57.40 iii 12 (= THeth 11:38 iii 6. ] there is water.106 ii 22–23.‘how many’ exists in the word mašiyanki ‘however many times’ (see CHD s.19 obv. we will bow fifteen times to Ea’ KUB 33. 00-HittiteGrammar.12. repetitions of ] two is four’) are also written logographically with  + Akkadian - and with +iš or +-anki. This suggests that the -iš forms are abbreviated for -liš. 3⸗ ḫarnikta KBo 12. indeclinable) form. nu  d.-tar⸗ma⸗šši 10-pa piyan ‘My brother—he has not even a little intelligence.-ti .6+ iii 74 (NH). The form 10-pa in ⸗ mal⸗wa⸗za tepu⸗ya `[ ša]kki .. 30-iš KBo 21. .12 i 35–36 seems to be a multiplicative. . nu⸗mu . [kuwapi⸗ma .56. 169 Numbers 9. 1ʹ–3ʹ. 9.. 27 (MH). 10-iš adannaš 9 . the shortened forms of two different suffixes may appear to be identical. .2 i 34–35 (OH/NS). 10-iš. And indeed the following passage seems to confirm this theory: 10 . .e.3 iii 5 (OH/NS).-ti peran 3⸗ [ḫalziškan]du ‘Let them read them (scil.15 + KUB 39. ‘two times [i.). p.v.

showing the regular nomi- native plural ending for a-stems in that period (see §3. Derivative Adjectives and Verbs 9. 184).is remodeled on analogy to 3-yaḫḫ-.52 derived from the genitive of the number ‘two’ (2-el).) and -. 70).44 + KBo 13.(name of a beverage). Distributives (‘two each’. p. we can assume that some form of šiela.1 i 54 edited by Otten and von Soden (1968: 17).+ -aḫḫ-). of that one’ (see §5. It is a necessary part of the “if” clause. multiply by four’ (< me(ya)w. etc.and 4-yaḫḫ. . literally ‘(they) of two’ (see Hoffner 2006). (signs: -.59 Numbers 170 9. ‘they of the two’)—Gilgamesh and Uršanabi went up into the boat’ KUB 8. unattached.‘to make threefold. it describes the legal status of a free man and slave woman prior to their contracting a marriage (n⸗an⸗za  ⸗ dāi).indb 170 6/5/08 4:16:45 PM .2.) (HZL 274. and §6. 11.and kwtur (i )yo-. An alternate account of 3-yaḫḫ.. who shows the IE ordinal sequence *tri-yo. of one and the same’ is derived from the genitive šiēl of šia. Hittite may have possessed another set of multiplicative adjectives (‘twofold’.51 Two of the three factitive verbs based upon num- bers known to date have this -yaḫḫ. ‘threefold’. p. 4-yaḫḫ. The exception.60.built to such adjectives exhibit a base ending in -(i)ya-. This behavior would not be unusual typologically for the number two. The same derivational suffix. -ela-. 00-HittiteGrammar. Distributives 9.+ (i)ya. mul- tiply by three’ (*teri.‘to make three(fold?)’.) are expressed with the Sumerian suffixes - (signs: -.59.16. ‘sevenfold’. 176). in twos’.+ -aḫḫ.was the Hittite read- ing underlying ēdēnu as a logogram elsewhere in Hittite texts.would assume that the former was built directly to the number teri.+ -(i)ya.could either be a shorter variant of the longer complement -yaḫḫ. 52.‘one’ (Hoffner 2006). and this division would be affected if the man (for example) had another wife with legal claim to part of his property.‘paired.4. occurs in the adjective apella.).‘single. because the focus of the law is upon the division of property when the marriage is dissolved.(compare the free variants 5-yaḫḫan/5-aḫḫan and 5-yaḫḫir/5-aḫḫir). ‘four apiece’. See Szemerényi 1996: 227–28.‘to make fourfold. na-at-kán 2-e-lu-uš-pát - GIŠ ša-ra-a [ pa-a-ir ] (19) d-uš mUr-ša-na-bi-iš-ša ‘And they—just (-pat) the two of them (lit. 2-aḫḫ. p. p.‘the . etc. or a factitive built to a special adjective ‘twofold’ not formed by derivation with -(i)ya-. . A “degenitival” adjective šiela.ending (§10.+ -aḫḫ-).9 with n.. show- 51. unmarried’ in the lexical text KBo 1.61. 9. Because of the equation ++ = šielaš in the lexical text. This possibility is suggested by the fact that all factitive verbs in -aḫḫ. We also assume an adjective 2-ela. sign #364). even for numbers whose stem in the cardinal form does not end in i/y: 3-yaḫḫ. In its nominative plural form šieleš in Laws §31 (LH 40. which directly attests a suffix -(i)ya-. and that 4-yaḫḫ. 137). This word is the Hittite translation of Ak- kadian ēdēnu ‘single. 2-e-lu-uš is a late Hittite nominative common plural. if as usually assumed it is derived from the PIE cardinal number ‘seven’. This second account cannot explain šiptamiya.50 iii 18–19 (NH). 133.

7 i 8ʹ–9ʹ (DŠ frag. Compound numbers are not the same as numbers in compound words. and the or- dinal tān ‘second’ occurs in the name of a cut of meat from an animal. both’.) [ ] together’) KBo 17.47. 00-HittiteGrammar. itself perhaps preceded by the cardinal number ‘one’ (šia-). (-)t]a LÚ. Compound Numbers 9. For other factitive verbs based upon multiplicative adjectives in -iya.49 iii 7. ‘second bone’). .. In combination ‘two’ occurs in tā-yugaš ‘two-year-old (animal)’. ½ . [1?]  5 - ½ - [. [ . A likely derivative from PIE *sem. In Hittite an example would be 6  5 gipeššar . 9. (and) the Storm-god of Heaven one at a time’ KUB 53.63.39 i 11... .9 iii 18.‘of one. 1 ½ . NH). . single’. Kataḫḫa.62.64. UZUdānḫašti (literally.  1  ½ . 27. where the 1 ½ is of a different commodity. šeppit expresses what in the spoken language was 19 . KUB 29. the tally proceeded from whole numbers to the noun for the fraction. seen in the factitive verb šumumaḫḫ.MEŠ 2-ila URUZuppara pānzi ‘the priests go to Zuppara in pairs (or ‘both of them’)’ KUB 60. [ .  GIŠ kinan.30 ii 3 (OS. n⸗uš 2-ila⸗pat šakuwanzi ‘They š. 2  1 ½  . . etc.59. an adjectival derivative (see §2. but see: 2  1 ½  . .152 i 6.is *šumuman-. Numbers in Compounds 9. pl.] KUB 58. šeppit (see HKM 111:11).64 ing the same suffix -ela. 54. . meaning respectively ‘one at a time’ and ‘together.attested in šiela. .‘to unite’ (Rieken 2000b). The variation in vocalism in 2-e/ila is unsurprising if the Hittite stem was as expected *dwela-: see AHP 144–45. .53 Examples: LÚ  -ašš⸗a d dKataḫḫa dx[ ] dTelipinu dḪalkin d - 1-ela akuwanzi ‘The priest and the prince drink the Storm-god. . Rather they are quantitative expressions involving two or more mathematical units. . 60) in -uman-.indb 171 6/5/08 4:16:46 PM . as a pair. SBo I 2 obv. The forms 1-ela and 2-e/ila represent an adverbial use of the nominative-accusative plural neuter of the same adjec- tives. although the unit () remained the same.54 In other words. See also n⸗aš 2  ½ ⸗ya pennai. where the larger unit is given first followed by the smaller one. n⸗at 2-ela  [⸗] kattan uēr ‘And they came to my father together’ KUB 19. 2]-ila⸗pat kar (ap)pianzi ‘The two lift [ ] together’ (or ‘They lift the two (nom.‘in fours’.see §9. ½ . for restoration see 2-ila in ii 1). neut. Although this suffix is not yet found on other numbers. From variant writings of the same expression we gather that what is sometimes written in numerical notation as (for example) 19 ½ . 1 ½  .‘in threes’. *4-ela. 171 Numbers 9.-acc. 12.17 iii 10ʹ–12ʹ (cited by Eichner 1992: 38 as Bo 2701 iii 12ʹ). (some form of punishment) them both together’ KUB 13. there is a priori nothing to prevent Hittite speakers from having formed *3-ela. parqašti 1 . This seems to be especially common when what is numbered is a unit of 53. p. . .

in which case 2  1  should not be read as ‘two’ plus ‘one and a half’. Why otherwise is 2  1 ½  .64 Numbers 172 measure rather than a simple commodity.indb 172 6/5/08 4:16:47 PM . but ‘two plus one half. iya[tten] or 3 ½  .39 i 11ʹ not written as 3  ½  . In expressions containing a whole number and a fraction. 9. iya[tten]? 00-HittiteGrammar.’55 55. sometimes the Sumerogram for ‘half’ is preceded by the  sign (‘one’). iya[tten] KUB 29.

v. Compare for the meaning HLuwian ha-ni-ya.2. 2. For this type of reduplication see EHS 120 and Raggi Braglia 1989: 208.see below.‘to arrive’. Some of these are ablauting: akk-/ek. partipartiške- ‘?’. ar. kuer. ar-/er. 10.‘to kneel’ < ḫaliya. p. eku. The finite verb form consists of a stem (a root with optional suffix) and an inflectional ending. ēpp. kikki. 3.‘to arrive’. Hittite verbs use a single stem (which may undergo ablaut. and walḫ. but the evidence is sparse and debatable.3 ḫašḫaš. The mineral name kunkunuzzi.‘to seat’ < aš-/eš. Rasmussen 2001).1.‘to be placed’ (see HED K s. eku-/aku-. kuen.‘to divide up’. See §14. ḫar(k).17 (pp.‘to die’.9 (p. 187– 196). katkattiya. mill about’.37.‘to tremble’.‘to whisper’ (onomatopoetic). see §3. Reduplicated verbal roots are encountered in Hittite (van Brock 1964. For their conjugation see §§12. perhaps because this particularly hard mineral (basalt?) was used for milling 1.‘to kneel’. ark.(unknown meaning.(/kwer-/) ‘to cut’.‘to strike’. represents a pair of “marker wedges. parip(a)rai.‘to scrape’. ēpp-/ app-.may be derived from a reduplicated form of the verb < kuen- ‘to strike’. The first shows reduplication of the entire root: ašaš-/ašeš.‘to be vexed(?). as in the CHD. Oettinger 1998.‘to sit’. The most important of these will be discussed below.). eš-/aš-.‘to dip’. Many Hittite verbs. For the transitive verb ḫaliḫla.‘to blow (a horn)’. however. taštašiya. This verbal reduplication is of two types.3. laḫlaḫḫiya.‘to fear’. kuen-/kun-. kuwaškuwaš-/kuškuš. anxious. or from adjectives.‘to die’. nāḫ. eš.(/kwen-/) ‘to strike.‘to stand’.and laḫḫilaḫḫeške- ‘to be agitated. ḫaliḫli(ya). For possible rare exceptions see Melchert 1997c. 2 ending) ‘you cause to fall down’. Oshiro 1995. Chapter 10 VERB FORMATION 10.< ki. 78) for all tenses and non-finite forms. Such verbs are characterized by suffixes or infixes which enlarge their stems. from nouns.‘malicious’.” 173 00-HittiteGrammar. kuer-/kur-.indb 173 6/5/08 4:16:47 PM .2 ¬ḫanḫaniya.1 and all verbal categories are expressed by inflectional endings (for the endings see chapter 11).‘to hold’. ḫan. We include under this stem only the intransitive medio-passive form ḫaliḫliyandāri and correspond- ing iterative ḫaliḫliskemi.2–12.‘to seize’. waltiwalteške. be dissatis- fied(?)’. laknuši consists of: lak (verb root) + -nu. Many verbs have root stems: akk.‘to be’. 233). sg. ar.(causative stem-forming suffix) + -ši (pres. For example.(/ekw-/) ‘to drink’.< parai.< kuwaš. The ¬ in front of transcribed Hittite words.‘to crush’. are derived from other verbs. perhaps ‘to rage’). kill’. Reduplicated Roots 10.

4 with arḫa (see a similar use of ḫala.‘to bend. then the -i. but ‘to flatter’ fits the context of KBo 3. takes several forms in Hittite: (1) re- duplication with the vowel e in the first syllable: wewakk. 4.‘to laugh’ (prob- ably also onomatopoetic). + arḫa ‘to put off (with flattery)(?)’.56 (p. this is not true for all (van Brock 1964: 144–45). for which see Schaefer 1994: 24. lelaniya/e. We reject the widely favored derivation of (transitive) ḫaliḫla. 6.< kiš.‘to cradle (a child). 62).‘(?)’.< šai. knock over’ and lelareške. but these could also be read as lilakk. 00-HittiteGrammar. While an “iterative” or “intensive” value may be shown for some cases (Hoffner 1975: 139–40 and Oettinger 1998).‘to go’ and kari-kṛ.< lip. For such a meaning from ‘to grasp lightly with the two hands’ compare English to stroke in the sense to flatter or alternatively the colloquial use of to play in to play (i.(< *še-šd.was suggested by Jay Friedman of the University of California at Los Angeles (in an unpublished paper delivered at the 2001 annual meeting of the American Oriental Society in Toronto).< arra.(< war-) ‘burning’ definitely shows a connective -i-. lillipa. 10.9 iii 9).‘to soothe. p.‘to cut up.from ḫala-/ḫalai. The reduplication pattern in mummiye. and waltiwaltiške.‘to flatter(?). (3) reduplication with the vowel of the root: ḫaḫḫarš. The common denominator of the uses of the base verb is ‘to grasp lightly with the two hands’. 204).6 The status of the first -i. pupušša.32. partial reduplication.is like that in wariwarant-.7 (2) reduplication with i and zero-grade of the root (see Melchert 1984b: 98–100): lilḫuwa. manipulate) someone.‘to crush(?)’. šiššiya.< gam. to roll (a wheel)’. kukkurš.(for which see §12. 7.< wek.4 Verb Formation 174 and pounding or required more than the usual amount of pounding to quarry. 5.and lilareške. There is no uniform pattern for the inflectional type of reduplicated stems.is also uncertain.of ḫaliḫla. rub clean’).‘to scrape off’ with arra. In any case.e.with i-reduplication. Probably also lelakk. but ḫaliḫla. The precise meaning of the reduplicated stem remains elusive.indb 174 6/5/08 4:16:49 PM .< laḫu(wa).could also belong to (2).4 Other instances of connective -i.with zero grade of the root *sed-) ‘to prosper’ possibly from an earlier meaning ‘to sit safely(?)’.‘to pour out (liquids)’. For reduplication in noun stems see §2.‘to kneel’. šešd.forms laḫḫilaḫḫiške-.< kuer.5.5 If ḫaliḫla. the derivation of transitive ḫaliḫla.is formed from the base ḫala-.‘to lick’. but it could also reflect mere copying of the stem-final -i.are uncertain: the transitive verb ḫaliḫla.‘to ask’. it would also show a connective -i-. kun(ni)kunk. titḫa- ‘to thunder’. 10. The task is made difficult by the small number of attestations for most reduplicated stems.that ap- pears before the -ške. The connective -i. papparš.‘to wash’ (both ‘to scrub. is reduplicated from ḫala/i. This derivation of arrirra. The second type.34 ii 21 and ‘to put off (with flattery/excuses)’ that of KBo 18.‘to make’.in KBo 5. The stem wariwarant-/uriwarant. The examples with -i. conciliate’.‘to become furious’. 10. kikkiš. mutilate’.‘to sprinkle’. If one connects arrirra.in the three reduplicated -ške. partipartiške-.is reminiscent of that in Sanskrit “intensives” such as gánigam.‘to become’.‘to press (as a creditor)’.< lak.78 obv.< kunk.is confirmed by the use of the reflexive -za with both.(middle) (< mau(š).‘to fall’) is unclear.4.could also represent full reduplication of the base ḫali-.from ḫaliya. It could be a connective -i-. Further research is needed to reach firm conclusions about the meaning and function of verbal reduplication in Hittite.

10. ḫuittiyanniškemi. . 226) of the above suffixes inflect according to the mi-conjugation (see chapter 12). The Individual Suffixes 10.when the latter has a durative or habitual sense: laḫlaḫḫeške-nu.can also be added to a stem with the imperfective suffix -ške/a.‘to cause to become light’ > ‘to illuminate’. 00-HittiteGrammar. ’.8.if this is based on noun šiuni. for simplicity. hemmed in’ > ‘to besiege’. . no yes no Causative (‘to cause to . The suffix -aḫḫ.9 Verbal Suffixes and Infixes Overview 10. yes no yes Stative/Fientive (‘to be(come) .and causative -nu-: ḫatk-eš-nu.14 (p. .‘to be(come) afraid’. 175 Verb Formation 10. 178) for a possible exception: ḫannitalwaešš-. no 9 no yes Fientive (‘to become . peššiyanneškezzi. .25. -ške. . See §10. Verbs using all but one (-anna-.‘to frighten’ < naḫšariya.and -anna-) can be added to the verbal stems formed with the other suffixes listed and the infix -ni(n)-. uške-nu.‘to cause to keep running’ > ‘to gallop’ (trans. 9. ’) (< adjective) -anna/i. The verbal suffixes (and infix) and their known combinations: 8 9 10 added to – Suffix nouns verbs adjectives function -aḫḫ.+ -ške. the imperfective suffixes -ške/a.‘bloody’ on the model of naḫšarnu. . .‘to bloody’ from ešḫar ‘blood’ may actually be formed from ešḫariya. no yes no Imperfective -ške/a.(here- after. Possible exception: šiuniyaḫḫ. no 10 yes yes Causative (‘to cause to . p.7. The apparent exception ešḫarnu.is added to the stems of adjectives or numerals in order to pro- duce verbs which mean ‘to make something what the adjective or numeral denotes’ or 8. no 8 no yes Factitive (‘to make .) -nu. yes no no Denominative -e. . . ) (< verb) Factitive (‘to make .). §13.9.‘to cause to inspect’. .‘divine(?)’. . ḫēwanešket. ’) -ešš. The motivation for the exceptions is reasonably clear. . The causative -nu. ’) 10. As deverbative suffixes.‘god(dess)’ instead of a postulated adjective *šiuni(ya). ’) -āi. One can combine the fientive suffix -ešš. 10.and -anna/i.in -annišket. Different imperfective suffixes co-occur: -anna. no yes no Imperfective -šša no yes no Imperfective Infix -ni(n).‘to cause to become narrow(ed).indb 175 6/5/08 4:16:50 PM . Other combinations of more than one suffix are for semantic reasons relatively rare.6. lalukk-eš-nu.

‘to make prosper’). 12. 10.59 (p. [3-i]a-aḫ-ḫa-an-zi 4-ya-aḫ-ḫa-an-zi KUB 9.as derived from the i-stem ḫaršnalli-.from ḫappinant.indb 176 6/5/08 4:16:51 PM . meyau-) 4-yaḫḫ.‘to make cold’ idālu. injure’ kattera. That some OH instances of -Ca-e.e. Alternatively.21.‘to besmear’) or GIŠtarma- ‘peg. §10.‘to regard/treat as important’ newa. or treat someone as) what the adjective denotes’.‘quarrel’ (> ḫalluwāi-‘to quarrel’). The suffix -āi. we assume consistently a long diphthong also for all verb forms with the suffix -āi-. p. vigorous’ mayantaḫḫ.‘to make fourfold’ 11 ‘fourfold’ For a summary of the use of this very productive suffix see Oettinger 1979: 239–54.47 (p.. 11 Adjectival Base Factitive Verb arawa.‘first’ ḫantezziyaḫḫ. p. This exceptional example is due to the fact that the verb is modeled on the matching Luwian type formed from the a-stem suffix -alla.‘evil’ idalawaḫḫ.‘to rejuvenate’ nakki.poses a problem. See also §2. We cite the suffix as -āi-. (4) from u-stems like lulu.‘prosperity’ (> luluwāi.‘to make first’ ḫappinant.‘excrement’ (> šalpāi.(§2.13 (3) from ai-stems like ḫalluwai. See Melchert 1984b: 74 –75 for discussion.127 iii 6 in Hittite context < *arkammanalla/i. Since Ca-(a)-e is attested as a spelling for what assuredly is a long diphthong /a:y/ in nouns (li-in- ga-en and ta-ma-a-e). But Hittite speakers surely viewed ḫaršanallāi. [3-i]a-aḫ-ḫa-aḫ-ḫu-wa-ni 4-ya-aḫ-ḫa-aḫ- ḫu-wa-ni ibid.g.‘new’ newaḫḫ. inheritance share’ 11.6. §9.‘three’.62 (p.‘tribute-bearing’. 55). the loser (in a suit)’ mayant.‘to make new’ šarazzi (ya). 170).‘to make rich’ *ḫaddul (a). 170).35.(> ḫaršanallāi. 4-waḫḫ or 4-yawaḫḫ-).is used to form denominatives from a wide variety of noun stems:12 (1) from a-stems such as šalpa. 00-HittiteGrammar. p.‘dowry. (2) from a single i-stem ḫaršanalli. The adjectival base is probably derived from the cardinal by a suffix -(i)ya.‘to treat evilly. 13.10. tar-ma-e-mi) represent uncontracted [Ca:_e] cannot be entirely excluded.or *meyawaḫḫ.‘to nail down.‘inferior’ katteraḫḫ.59.‘exempt (from)’ arawaḫḫ. diadem’ (§2. For the formal derivation of ḫappinaḫḫ.(i.(e. attested in Hittite form as an i-stem arkammanalli-. 171).10 Verb Formation 176 ‘to regard something/someone as (or declare someone to be..‘to make healthy’ ikuna. but 4-yaḫḫ.‘rich’ ḫappinaḫḫ. 60). 35.‘cold’ ikunaḫḫ. One would expect *meuwaḫḫ.(< meu-.4 ii 33. 58.‘to declare to be superior (in a suit or a contest)’ 3-ya. 10.‘important’ nakkiyaḫḫ.is fine for *teri. §9.2 (p.‘to wreathe’).‘to declare to be inferior.‘superior’ šarazziyaḫḫ.that took “i-mutation”: see ¬arkammanallawi ‘I make tribute-bearing’ KUB 23. The long diphthong is not always expressed by plene spelling (see AHP 149).‘healthy’ ḫaddulaḫḫ.‘youthful. the stem for ‘multiply by four’ may have been remodeled on that for ‘multiply by three’.see §2. The 3-yaḫḫ. which explains the y in 4-yaḫḫ-. itself a derived form in -alli. iwaru. harm.‘to declare someone exempt from’ ḫantezzi (ya).‘to make threefold’ 11 4-ya. fix’).‘wreath. 51).(*teriya-) ‘threefold’ 3-yaḫḫ. and §9. stake’ (> tarmāi.

šaḫeššar ‘fortress’ (> šaḫešnāi.20 (p. išḫaḫru.‘to bestow a dowry/inheritance share’). . (6) from t-stems such as šawitišt.‘to become old. (7) from the oblique stem of nouns in -ššar/-šn.14 10.‘to become a female slave’ 10.‘to fortify’). alliance’ (> takšulāi. 14. pointed’ *alpue. at peace’) and māl ‘intelligence.13.‘pity.‘to reveal’). . 219–20.see LH 138–39.122 iii 2 etc. 10. 15.‘pure. The following are examples of verbs derived from an adjectival base by the suffix -ešš.like ḫappeššar ‘body part’ (> ḫappišnāi. 15 16 Adjectival or Nominal Base Stative Verb alpu. (5) from l-stems such as takšul.‘to declare oneself free (from)’ 15 *aršan(a).‘envier’ (§2. For the original stem of this verb as being in -e. 16.‘to be proven guilty by ordeal’ parkui.‘old’ miyaḫunte.‘impure. For these classes and further examples see Oettinger 1979: 365–68. and Hoffner 1998d.‘to approve of’. 57).‘peace.‘weanling(?)’ (or ‘suckling(?)’) (> šawitištāi. The suffix -e-.‘to become false’ miyaḫuwant. called them “de- nominal statives.‘to dismember’).‘female slave’ -a/iššare.‘to become clear’ *-a/iššara.’). the former seems to have been replaced by the latter in the course of time (arawe. is added to adjectival (and a few nominal) stems to produce verbs which mean ‘to be(come) what the adjective or noun signifies’.and an ešš-verb exist for the same adjectival root.13 (> iwarwāi.‘sharp. and elaššar ‘sign. mercy’ (> genzuwāi- ‘to take pity on’). Hoffner (1998d) has shown that it is the fientive sense that predominates in Hittite and that.which mean ‘to become what the adjective signifies’. 76).‘envious’ aršane. (OS) and Neu 1983: 28–29.‘to become envious’ 16 ḫaššu. . For the latter see n. p.‘false’ marše. who identified this class of verbs in Hittite.‘king’ ḫaššūe. 00-HittiteGrammar. solidarity.(-(u)e-) ‘to become king’ lalukki.> arawešš-. like -ešš-.11. 17.32.‘exempt (from)’ arawe. For arawe. . Watkins (1973). genzu.‘to shed tears’). revelation’ (> elašnāi. For the inflection of these verbs see §12.(in alpuemar) arawa. see HED M 25–26.‘to become bright’ maršant. 20 below. etc. mind’ (> malāi. in those cases where both an e.” but recognized (1973: 67) that attested examples may have either stative or fientive meaning (‘to be . The base stem is also seen in aršanatalla.12.’ or ‘to become .‘tears’ (> išḫaḫruwāi.‘to wean(?)’ [or ‘to suckle(?)’]. clear’ parkue.indb 177 6/5/08 4:16:52 PM . guilty’ papre. -a/iššare. For the deletion of the suffix of the base adjective in some examples. see §2.‘bright’ lalukke.> -a/iššarešš-17). but not others.‘to be allied. live long’ paprant. 177 Verb Formation 10.2 (p. 197).see ar-ša-ne-e-ši KBo 25. 51).

‘poor’ ašiwantešš.44 (p.‘to become exempt from’ ašiwant. 12) on empty vowels in Hittite cuneiform. magnify’.‘to cause to burn (war-)’. parknu-21 ‘to make high (parku-)’.‘to become large.‘to become awesome’ idalu.‘to become pure’ šalli. linganu. present’. Verbs formed by suffixing -nu. 139.‘numerous’ makkešš.‘to become high’18 parkui. tekkušš(i)ye.‘to make small /few (tepu-)’. 10.11 (p. 51).and paḫḫašnu. parkunu.‘young’ mayantešš-‘to be(come) young’ mekki.‘to become numerous’ < mekki. warnu.14 Verb Formation 178 Adjective or Noun Base Fientive Verb arawa. 185–86. ešḫarnu.‘rich’ ḫappinešš.‘to make great (šalli-).‘to become white’ ḫaštali.‘to make pure ( parkui-)’. 10.2 (p.‘to guard’.‘to become evil’ mayant. paradigms). which was replaced in post-OH by -a/iššarešš-.‘brave’ ḫaštalešš. See Sihler 1995: §455 (PIE *-new-/*-nu-).‘to cause to swear (link-)’.indb 178 6/5/08 4:16:52 PM . grow’ *-a/iššara.14. 210. 263 and §10.can be either (1) causatives of other verbs or (2) factitives of adjectives.and tekkuš(a)nu.‘to cause to perish (ḫark-)’.‘much.‘narrow’ ḫatkuešš.‘awesome.‘to become narrow’ ḫatuka/i.‘evil’ idalawešš.14.and 18.‘to become poor’ ḫappinant.‘pure’ parkuešš.‘to cause to turn (weḫ-)’. 21. reveal. frightening’ ḫatukešš. waḫnu. Written pár-ak-nu. many’ shows not only deletion of the stem vowel but also an alternation in the root vowel reflecting an archaic pattern with a zero-grade root *mk. šallanu.‘large’ šallešš.15.‘to cause to arrive (ar-)’.and pár-ga-nu-.‘to become numerous’19 parku.‘to become a female slave’20 18 19 20 10.‘to become rich’18 ḫarki. For the deletion of the suffix of the base adjective in some examples see §2.12 above. For the inflection see §12. 10. see LH 43. For the deletion of the stem-final -u.‘to make bloody (ešḫar ‘blood’)’. Examples of the causative are: arnu.‘high’ parkešš. tepnu. Examples of factitives are: mališkunu.‘female slave’ -a/iššarešš.‘exempt from’ arawešš. The verb makkešš.16.‘to become a litigant’ < ḫannitalwa(n)-.‘to show.and inserted vowel. 00-HittiteGrammar. For -a/iššare-. 20. ḫarganu. Sometimes one can hardly detect any difference in meaning between the root verb and the extension in -nu-: paḫḫaš.‘to make weak (mališku-)’. See §10. indicating the absence of the apparent vowel before -nu-.‘to become brave’ ḫatku. daš(ša)nu- ‘to make strong (daššu-)’. see §1. 19.‘white’ ḫarkešš. There is one apparent example derived from a noun: ḫannitalwaešš.

10. 179 Verb Formation 10.22 On the derivation of ešḫarnu.‘to mobilize. From the examples it is apparent that its force is causative or transitivizing.” 22.‘to destroy’.indb 179 6/5/08 4:16:53 PM . 10.18. ištark. 51). The verbal infix -ni(n).2 (p.*‘rise’ > ninink. 175).see also n. A similar value for the PIE nasal infix is seen in examples such as Old Irish -roind ‘makes red’ to a root meaning ‘(be) red’.‘to make compensation’. *šark.of the base adjective in most of the examples see §2.‘to get sick’ > ištarnink- ‘to make sick’. -šša-.> šarnink.(see n.see chapter 24. *n(e)ik.17.18 -i.is inserted before the final consonant in certain verbs ending in -k-: ḫark. For the verbal suffixes -ške-.also shows the same alternation in its root vowel as in makkešš. 19 above). “Verbal Aspect.‘to perish’ > ḫarnink. The verb maknu. 10 (p.‘to make numerous’ < mekki. and -anna. set in motion’. 00-HittiteGrammar.

voluntative and exhortative first-person forms (§§23. 180 00-HittiteGrammar. present (for present or future time) and preterite (for past time). p. §19. p.7. 11. infinitives.9.5. 11. In the active voice finite verbs are inflected in one of two conjuga- tions. the mi.2. Finite verbs are inflected in the usual three persons and in two numbers. 291. see §3. p. 291. For the optional explicit marking of imperfective aspect see chapter 24. would.take -šten(i).10–23. pp. ought to.10. or adverbs such as imma ‘really’ (see §19. while in the second-person plural all mi-verbs and most ḫi-verbs take -ten(i).4.4–23. §27. indicative and imperative (by con- vention. 342. In addition there are “analytic” constructions (like English have/had gone and will go) that explicitly express the present and past perfect and the future tense. 350) and kuwatka ‘perhaps’ (see §16. 11.8. For their use see chapter 21. must. and for mood. The use of the present. 255. participles. p. The finite verb expresses only two moods.59. Non-geminate spellings are either faulty of “simplified spellings” (see 1.and third-person plural are identical in the two sets. In the indicative mood there are two tenses. and the analytic perfect will be de- scribed in chapter 22 and the periphrastic future in chapter 24 (see also §§22. singular and plural.indb 180 6/5/08 4:16:53 PM . 313) are in- cluded in the paradigm of the imperative). §26. In all finite forms of both voices and all tenses and moods of the vocalic-stem verbs. 1. The finite verb is not marked for gender. p. Subject marking. 343. Gender distinctions (common [or animate] and neuter [or inanimate]. p. and voice.2–3. §26.8.and ḫi-conjugations. The endings of the first.10.6. 308). Hittite finite verbs are inflected for the person and number of the subject (“sub- ject marking”). Modalities which in other Indo-European languages would be expressed by subjunctive or optative forms (could. while ḫi-verbs with stems ending in -i. tense. 11. p. p.1 There are also non-finite forms: verbal substantives. would like to) are conveyed in Hittite by means of modal particles such as man (§23. Hittite has no dual ending. 349). §27. The finite verb is inflected for two voices. named for the endings of the first-person singular indicative in each set.4. pp.8–22.16.3. the preterite.3. endings beginning with a stop or with ḫ regularly appear with geminate spellings. p. p. 314–316). active and medio-passive. and so-called supines (see chapter 25). Chapter 11 VERB INFLECTION Types of Verbal Inflection 11.1.5. 12). 64–66) exist in the participle by virtue of its status as a verbal adjective.

11.12 (-wani 13). 9. 1 -weni. AHP 175–76. 223). This ending is attested in MH/MS only in memišta. pešta ‘gave’. (-tani). 237. udašta ‘brought’. The following is the scheme of endings for the finite forms of the active verb.13 -wen. 10.g.30 iii 4 (OS).. The ending -weni can stand for either present indicative or imperative first-person plural. daišta ‘placed’. -meni. ḫāšta ‘gave birth’ (OS).21. 192. 3. 184). 31.6 (-t 7) 3 -zi 8 -i. Verb forms showing the -šta ending. 8. -t -ta. the rare NH form da-ma-aš-ti KBo 5. 17. 14. and -wen after verb stems in u is phonologically conditioned (§1. In other cases it is a NH in- novation. See Oettinger 1979: 41. who adds kar-aš-šu-u-ni. and pa-a-i-u-ni. (-e)9 -t. (-ta 11. Oettinger (1979: 333) has suggested *palkuešš-. p. -šteni -ten 16 -ten. 1 -mi -ḫi. p. 44). ḫa-a-ni-ya-ar ‘they dipped/drew’ (from ḫāniya-). merged(?)’. (-ar ) 17 2.g. The OS form pal-ku-uš-ta (CHD P 68) must contain a verbal stem in -š.10 (-š) -š.5 -šta. 2). sg. 7. either in sg. -u-ni. -nun -ḫun 2 -ši. etc.6 11.9 ii 26 for expected da-ma-aš-zi may be just a scribal slip. 2 or 3.) gave’ (NS). p. Scholars disagree whether the final a-vowel is real or merely graphic. 4.17 (p. tarnešta ‘released’. The ending -ten is can stand for either preterite indicative or imperative second-person plural. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ١٤ 15 ١٦ ١٧ Present Preterite mi-conjugation ḫi-conjugation mi-conjugation ḫi-conjugation 2 3 4 sg. -šta 6) pl. -wani. The two forms are distinguishable only by context. (-ḫe in OH) -un. and p. see Otten and Souček 1969: 56. are: memišta ‘spoke’.14 (-mani). This ending is spelled -ta in verbs whose stem ends in a stop or fricative: e-ep-ta. See p. In OS rather consistently showing the e-vocalization (sign -ḫé). The endings -meni (-mani) and -men are largely confined to the nu-causative verbs. 223.indb 181 6/10/08 7:43:20 AM . wa-ar-aš-še in KUB 29. n.6. Since the sequence šz is elsewhere quite stable. 181 Verb Inflection 11. 15. 12. uppešta ‘sent’. penništa ‘drove there’. and Kimball 1999: 193–194. Used with vocalic stems. n. This ending replaces -š in verbs whose stem ends in -š. wašta ‘bought’. For medio-passive endings see §11. and Yoshida 2002.126. 13. -men (-uni) 15 2 -teni. see zāit and ḫalzait in chapter 13 paradigms (§13. and ša-pa-ši-ya-ar ‘they scouted’ (from šapašiya-) see Neu 1989a. and pos- sibly aruešta ‘bowed(?)’. and Otten (1969: 26). 119. 43. 16.-ti -ti. 207. The two forms are distinguishable only by context. The use of the m-variants of -weni. (likewise when it occurs in the pret.) took’ (MH/MS) and paitta ‘you (sg. e-eš-ta. naišta ‘turned’. (-tani) -teni. tedašišta (meaning unclear).‘to see’). n. 6. ḫališta ‘cradled(?)’. such as ú-e-mi-ya-ar ‘they found’ (from wemiya-). ulešta ‘blended(?). -šten 3 -anzi -er. although one finds them also in umeni and aumen (from au. Attested in ḫi-verbs in -i-. Sturtevant and Hahn 1951: 141. Used with consonantal stems. 00-HittiteGrammar. Oettinger 1979: 9. For the endings -wani and -tani see AHP 138 with references to other viewpoints.. For the latter view see Pedersen 1938: 93. e. unništa ‘drove here’. -šti -š. 5. See dātta ‘you (sg. and for the former Eichner 1975: 79–80. Kronasser 1956: 31. There are enough attestations of this ending to suggest that it may be real and not merely the result of omission of the sign for e. For rare instances of an ending -ar. E.

210). Old Hittite copies tend to use the cuneiform sign  for this ending. the sign  was preferred. 1 -(a)llu.24 ḫar-za in KBo 9.7 Verb Inflection 182 Imperative mi-conjugation ḫi-conjugation sg. 25. p.42.. E. sg.. iš-ḫa-a-i (LH 126). This writing convention does not necessarily reflect pronunciation.2 obv. OS) for e-eš-zi ‘he/it is’ in the duplicate KBo 6.‘to give’) or pé-eš-ši-IR from peššiya. See also the atypical pres. 2 īt ‘go!’ from the unprefixed root i. since forms of that verb such as pé-eš-še-er and pé-še-et indicate that the e vowel in pé-eš-šer was real.2 iv 53–55 (Laws §98.3 iv 52–54 (OH/NS). -i. and the vari- ant uwatet alongside expected uwate from uwate. both from late NH texts. We should therefore likewise read pí-i-IR from pi. III) from stem ḫaš. 224. later.‘to throw’ as. (-lit.26 i 7 (Laws §158. An example from the ḫi-conjugation is the imp. e-ep-per ‘they seized’. respectively. p.22 Preterite third- plural active verbs ending in one of the signs . etc.28. 00-HittiteGrammar.9:5ʹ. 48–50. šēpan iš-ḫi-an-za (for šēpan išḫianzi ) KBo 6.41. 3 mi-conjugation ending -zi and the pres. 209. The forms ḫa-a-ši-ir ‘they gave birth’ KUB 21.8. p. or  should always be read with their alternate e vocalizations: šu-un-ner ‘they filled’.73 obv. Rare exceptions.).indb 182 6/5/08 4:16:55 PM .7. such as pé-eš-šer from peššiya. sg.‘to throw’ do not invalidate the majority of the evidence. In rare instances the pres. 11. . See also another likely occurrence of ḫar-za for ḫar-zi in KBo 24. and 18. the imp.25 ša-ku-wa-an-za (for ša-ku-wa-an-zi ) KUB 13. 151). See CHD nakkuš ‘loss(?)’ for discussion and literature. and §12. nn. IV) from stem wašta-. 21.and wa-aš-ti-ir ‘they sinned’ BrTabl i 10 (Tudḫ. 15 (OS). let us go to Neša’ KBo 22. 19.(the weak stem of pai. -t -∅. 2 tar-ni. Spellings such as e-še-er and ú-te-er with unambiguous Ce signs or da-aš-ke-e-er show that the ending is /-er/. the -i. 199). It is not intended to mark the  sign as containing -i-. sg. 20. -i 18 3 -d/tu20 -u pl. 60 (Hatt. 3 wašti of this verb in §8. e-šer ‘they were’. 20). ú-ter ‘they brought’. The preterite third-plural person ending is typically spelled with the ambigu- ous  sign (see §1. This ending is confined to the nu-causative verbs (e. parkunu-.g. 1 -weni . OH/NS) with dupl. pa-aḫ-ši.38 obv. are genuine exceptions.‘to bring’ (see §12.in these forms serves either to indicate the stem vowel or a glide connecting the stem vowel to the ending -er. See uwatten URUNēša paiwani ‘Come. That is. 22. . p. pl. -wani 21 12 2 -ten 16 3 -and/tu 18 19 20 21 imperative active paradigm 11.23 For monosyllabic dāir and pāir see p. ending -anzi are written -za and -anza respectively: e-eš-za in KBo 6. The fact that HZL fails to list an e-containing value for some of these Ci/er signs is of no consequence.8 (p.found in uezzi ‘comes’ and paizzi ‘goes’ (see §12. 23.21. 11. 12 (treaty with Ḫapiru. -lut) -allu 18 19 2 -∅.g. sg. e-ker ‘they died’. OS) for intended ḫar-zi. šallanu-. pí-i-er (beside pí-i-e-er ) and pe-eš-ši-er. 24. .2 iii 16 (MH/NS) (Melchert 1984b: 97).

. earlier šallanuš ‘you raised’. cannot be an archaism. 188. 3 -t: earlier ieš (OH) and iyaš (MH) ‘you did/made’. 27. There is a widespread intrusion of the ending -ti from the ḫi-conjugation dur- ing the NH period (see §12. daškeš ‘you were taking’. see also iii 7. one cannot detect the presence of the parenthesized vowel in -(a)llu: memallu (< mema.‘to cut off’). noun ac- cording to Pecchioli Daddi 1975: 108–9). wemiyallu (< wemiya. sg.27 and memanušgaš ‘you were making (me) talk (imperfective)’. sg. uwallu (< au-/u(w).8.34 iv 31–32 nu mān zik mKupanta-d-aš ap[edaš menaḫḫanda] idalawešzi. When the verb stem ends in a.28 rev. earlier aršanieš ‘you were envious’. ša-me-nu-uš KUB 31. šamenuš(?). But the single occurrence in a-ar-aš-za KUB 19. kuwayatallu (< kuwayata(i).10.‘to prepare’). In New Hittite (NH) compositions there is a marked tendency to replace the earlier pret. earlier paḫšanuš ‘you protected’.‘to be’). 183 Verb Inflection 11.‘to bring’).34. 14 (NH) for intended a-ar-aš-zi ‘it flows’.3. p. ḫaššiggallu (< ḫaššik. later tittanut ‘you made (something) stand’.9. sg. earlier imperfective stem + ending -škeš (MH: ḫatreškeš ‘you were sending’. 197. KBo 5. 00-HittiteGrammar.‘to see’). On rare occasions the pres. . 3 ‘he led there’ and is the result of late influence from the ḫi-conjugation on an otherwise mi-conjugation verb. 77). The imperative first-person singular is formed with the endings -(a)llu. §12. Imperfective stems in -ške/a. The ending -allu clearly occurs in cases where the verb sterm ends in a consonant: ašallu (< ēš. tepaweššallu (< tepawešš. 191. the latter two forms being much rarer than the first. 12 (NS) is by context pret. later paḫšanut.11 iš-tar-ni-ik-za for iš-tar-ni-ik-zi KBo 40. ed’) with the ending of the sg. 11.3 + KUB 40. The form pēḫuteš KUB 30. or -lit.indb 183 6/5/08 4:16:57 PM . 2 (‘you .‘to say’). p. 204). memiškeš ‘you were saying’).9 ii 16–17 zik⸗ma⸗[an] ištamašzi. tarkummiyaš ‘you announced’.appear as -ška-: ušgallu (< au-/u. it is likely that the writings with final -za for -zi reflect archaisms showing the regular loss of final -i in -zi from *-ti. The usual ending -zi has its -i restored after the rest of the present verbal endings. later -šket (NH). .112:11 (verb pret.‘to become less’). udallu (< uda. see §3. but later iyat. Since two of these examples are found in Old Hittite manuscripts which do not elsewhere betray a sloppy copyist. karšallu (< karš. 11. sg. 2 according to Oettinger 1976b: MSS 35 99.‘to find’). The ending -lut/-lit is attested only for ēš.‘to be feared/formidable’). as in the ablative ending -az (see -azzi⸗ya.20. 26. and KBo 4.‘to die’). §12.‘to be’.’) ends in -zi instead of the expected -ši or -ti: ištamašzi ‘you hear’ 26 (the same form as for ‘he hears’) for normal ištamašti (with the -ti ending of the ḫi-conjugation). p.11. p.23 obv. -lut. 2 in -š (‘you .272 left 5ʹ. ag- gallu (< akk.‘to satisfy oneself’).33. Irregularities in the mi-Conjugation 11. later šallanut. .‘to see’). šeggallu (< šakk.‘to know’). §12. The ending -llu occurs with nu-causative verbs: ašnullu (< aš(ša)nu. p.

-tat.13 (p. an ending -ai occasionally appears where one expects -i: šipanti and šipandai ‘he libates. 00-HittiteGrammar. -antati imp. 223). 219). 30. §13. -tumati 3 -aru. 1 -(ḫ)ḫa. -ḫaḫatti -waštat. 3. 11. 233).13. 29 3031 32 33 Singular Plural pres. -ḫat. -tari. 11.42 obv. the ending -i occurs in the pres. sg. preterite.33 -tati -antat. On the chronological distribution of the shorter and longer endings see §14. -tari.28 11. 9. 2 -tti with -šti after the pres. -ta.17. offers’. Obviously. and imperative (for a similar table see Neu 1968a: 19). and the ending is only -er. See the paradigms in §13. -tat. -ant/dāri 30 pret. -waštati 29 2 -ta. 32.31 -tati -dumat. -ḫaḫati. ḫi-verbs with stems in -i. 3 was replaced in later Hittite by -šta.21 (p. -tati -duma. In pa-iš-kat-tu-ma-a-a[t?] KBo 8. Oettinger (private communication) has pointed out the same pattern in earlier a-ar-ri ‘he washes” and later (a-)ar-ra-i. 3 instead of an expected -ai: waštai ‘he sins’ (the more usual form. -waštati 29 2 -at. In kištat KBo 6.23 (p. 1 -ḫaru. Conversely. sg. -ari. 2 in -šteni: paišti/pešti ‘you give’. in the pret. Only in NH or NS texts. -ḫaḫaru -waštati 2 -ḫut.12 Verb Inflection 184 Irregularities in the ḫi-Conjugation 11. since the normal stem is wašta-) and wašti (which shows that the earlier stem was wašt-).2 ii 12 = Laws §37 (OS). in forms such as dāir ‘they took’ the a is part of the verb stem. Medio-Passive Endings 11. -ḫāri.sometimes replace pres. -taru -antaru 28. ḫalzešti ‘you call’. The earlier ending -š of the pret. -tumari. In NH. -ta. -tāri -anta/-anda. tu(m)mat 3 -a. -antari. 224).1+ iv 13 (OS). In paišgaḫat in KBo 17. -ḫuti -tu(m)mat.indb 184 6/5/08 4:16:58 PM . -aer occurs alongside the more common -er: šipanter and šipantaer ‘they libated’ from the verb stem šipant-. -(ḫ)ḫari. 33. -ati. 1 -ḫati. In the pres. In kištanziattat KBo 3. Similarly. 29. -ḫaḫat. tuma. -ta. -tumāt (?)32 3 -at. 3. pl.14. 31.7 (p. pl. sg.22:46 (OS).12. -ḫaḫari -wašta. sg.15. 11. 11.16. -āri. N. The following is the scheme of endings for the medio-passive verb forms of the present. §13.

eku. 185 Verb Inflection 11. 223).‘to settle’ > ašešuwar. -anna) have different sets.‘to slaughter’ > ḫugatar. 8. -(u)manzi. p. participle. kuen. Verbal substantives are commonly attested only in nominative-accusative and genitive case forms.‘to see’ [see §13. -(u)manzi 2 -tar (gen. ḫuek-/ḫuk. ēš. 218] and wak. -annaš) -ant. 189). right 14ʹ (late NS). see §12.32 i 12 and the dative-locative   D šauwarri KBo 11. -tar) and infinitives (-wanzi. weḫ. p. verbal substantives (forms in -war. -(u)mar. The scheme of endings for the verbal substantive. -anna -wan 34 35 3637 11.‘to eat’. which lends support to the view that the regular ending -wanzi is an old ablative < *-wen-ti (Jasanoff 1973 and Melchert 1977: 411. 37.21. deriving it from a locative. 35. among others). A rare form of the infinitive ending (-wanta) occurs in ši-pa-an-tu-an-ta: maḫḫan⸗ma - uš šipantuanta irḫaizzi ‘But when the king finishes making offering’ KUB 10. such as the ablative šallanumarraza KUB 26. infinitive.‘to slaughter’. ḫandāi.‘to give’) show this pattern.‘to seize’. In verbs that show stem variation the verbal substantive. Some verbs switched classes over time and appear sometimes 34. ēpp. 11. There are four non-finite verb forms: (1) the verbal substantive and (2) the verbal adjective or participle. -wa-a-an-zi. but there may be rare isolated occurrences of other forms. (3) the infinitive and (4) the supine. 77.8 obv.32. 9 (OS) and ši-pa-an-du-wa-a-an-zi KUB 58. p.g. 125.‘to bite’ [see §13. Plene writings of the infinitive ending. participle. 74). 11. 00-HittiteGrammar. and infini- tive are regularly formed from the stem shown by the present third plural: ēpp-/app- ‘to take’ > appātar. both of which are declined. appanna.21 Verbal Substantive. piyawanzi. e. -wanzi -wan 37 1b -(u)mar (gen. which are indeclinable. Set 1 ap- pears on all other verbs. Infinitive. only two certain examples are known to us: pa-ú-wa-a-an-zi KBo 20. are extremely rare. Participle. and p. Although the endings of the participle and the supine (-wan) are the same for all verbs. This ending is prob- ably an archaic instrumental ending (see §3. See §4.‘to be’.‘to take’ [see §13. ḫandāuwanzi.71 obv.11.21 i 1–3.1. and Supine 11. In addition a few monosyllabic non-ablauting (such as dā.‘to turn’. Set 2 appears on all monosyllabic mi-verbs show- ing vowel gradation (ablaut). p.35. see §3. ḫuek.indb 185 6/5/08 4:16:58 PM . piyant-.19. 123) for the paradigm of the participle. -(u)maš) -ant. pai.1 obv. -waš) -ant. ašešuwanzi. and supine is as follows: Set Verbal substantive Participle 34 Infinitive Supine 35 36 1a -war (gen.25 (p. appant-. On their use see chapter 25. On the origin of the ending of the supine see §3.‘to give’ > piyawar/piyatar. 214]) and ablauting ḫi-verbs (such as au(š). n. 36.. kill’. ēd.25 (p.‘to drink’.97 (p. ḫandānt-. For another view.20. ḫugant-. 228] and pai-/piy.18. ašaš-/ ašeš.4 (p. kuer.‘to cut’. For exceptions to this pattern see the respective paradigms in chap- ters 12 and 13.‘to strike. arrange’ > ḫandāuwar. ašešant-.‘to prepare. 74). ḫuganna.

198).45:4. Occasionally. arnumar. See too in MH/ MS: šapašiyawa[n dāir] HKM 7:6. and wiškawan ‘send’.14 iii 19 (MH/MS).was originally a mi-verb but transfers to the ḫi-conjugation in NH. and išpar.67 ii 8–9 (restored by KUB 11.39 iv 8ʹ. šunna. kappueškewan. unna-. 11.24.g. one cannot make this claim for them. iyanniwan (MS).3 i 7 (AM 105).‘to build’ (see §12. In all cases but paišgauwan ‘go’.. The supine is usually (see §11. eššuwan (NS). piddanniwan (MS). uškiškewan.‘to devour’. At least twice it attaches to a reduplicated verbal root: lilḫuwan daiš KBo 32. uiškewan.7 iii 25 (OH/NS).or -šša.22 Verb Inflection 186 with -w/manzi and sometimes with -anna.‘to spread out. p.‘to conceal’.23. trample’. ] KBo 14. arra. [(n⸗aš -)-iš] kikkiššūwan dāiš KBo 3. ḫukkiškewan. tešḫaniškewan.‘to wash’.8 iv 21–22 (OH?/NS) (restored by KUB 43. §13.‘to procreate’.42 rev. šippanzakewan. the verb in the supine takes the -anna. piyanniwan KBo 8. wēšgawan ‘weep’. daškewan. . punuškewan. walḫanniškewan. 11. ḫatreškewan. memiškewan. šapašiya- ‘to scout’. arnu(w)ant-. paišgauwan (KBo 5. Quite rarely the verb shows no imperfective stem extension (Hoffner forthcoming: §129): karipūwan dāir ‘they began to devour’ KBo 3. waluškewan. šarra- ‘to divide’.‘to lead there’ and wete.21.stem. wašta. kururiyaḫḫiškewan. tarḫiškewan.) 11. šanna.8 ii 5).with e-vocalism. these passages were copied from OH or MH archetypes.stem: ḫurzakewan. p. But since others in the above list are actually attested with the overt imperfective marking (šarriške-. šanḫiškewan.‘to fill’. It is possible that in some of these cases the verbs themselves were felt to be inherently imperfective and needed no external marking (see Hoffner and Melchert 2002).‘to sin’. 00-HittiteGrammar. ḫašš. penna-. weškewan. pīyawa[n tiyaši] KUB 14. ḫannuan dāiš KUB 29. uppeškewan. tarḫūwan dāiš KBo 3. dameškewan. šarra/e.70a:2ʹ).indb 186 6/5/08 4:16:59 PM . 173). arnuman. the stem is -ške. ḫarninkiškewan. duškiškewan. miškewan.29 + KUB 19.22. [(šarriyawan)] dāir KUB 24. 4). . arnumanzi.13. 11. waḫnuškewan. Also ḫi-verbs such as tarna-. instead of the -ške. 219. aruweškewan. e. ḫanniške-).5 obv. and mi-verbs of the type peḫute.1 i 21 (OH/NS). With the exception of the last-cited passage (Mursili II). karpiškewan. (See [possibly earlier] šarranna and NH or NS šarrumanzi. tarḫeške-.24 below) found in the -ške. Such might be the case with karip. išparruwan da[i (?) .3 (p. Verbs in Set 1 whose stems end in u (especially the nu-causative verbs) take the 1b endings. See §10.stems: īššuwan. 2–3 (OS).

1. Factitive verbs in -aḫḫ. The verb šeš-/šaš.3. 78) for the notion of “ablaut”).. 204). p.2. and imperative second. p. But there are exceptions to this pattern. For attested forms see Oettinger 1979: 18–19. eku. This pattern reflects PIE ablaut between “e-grade” and “zero grade” respectively (§3. p.‘to seize’. apteni and ēpteni ‘you seize’. Among consonantal stems we may distinguish those without a suffix (so-called root stems).‘to be’.(see §12. and competing variants are found. ēd.33. p. The typical distribution is that e occurs in the present singular. In OH they are ḫi-verbs (§13.1 Root stems are subdivided into ablauting and non-ablauting classes (see §3. 187 00-HittiteGrammar. ēpp.are mi-verbs only in post-OH.and third-person singular and second-person plural. Hittite mi-verbs may conveniently be divided into those with stems ending in a consonant and those ending in a vowel. e. 217). 78). those with infixed -nin-.g. and in the non-finite forms of set 1 verbs (§11.‘to sleep’ follows the same pattern. appuen and ēppuen ‘we seized’. Chapter 12 CONJUGATION OF mi-VERBS 12. Vocalic stems also may be classified as ablaut- ing and non-ablauting types.‘to eat’.37. Consonantal Stems Root Stems Ablauting Stems with e/a Ablaut 12.37. Some monosyllabic root stems (ending in a single consonant) show an alterna- tion between e and a vocalism.6. Paradigms of root stems with e/a ablaut (ēš. and those with suffixed -ešš-. and a occurs elsewhere. 185). 12. 2.21. A similar distribution is seen in the ablaut of the im- perfective suffix -ške.‘to drink’):2 1. preterite singular and plural.indb 187 6/5/08 4:17:00 PM . p.

6. not booked in HED or HW 2. ēzza).10 (p. For the stem as ez-/az. 3 of ‘to be’. the unusual spelling might reflect a pronunciation [kwiski(y) e:stsi] with an inserted yod.6 ekušši. akuwani. 44). HED E/I 262 lists e-ú-uk-zi from unpubl. ēzzi † 9 ekuzzi Plural 10 11 1 ešuwani eppueni. On the variant endings -wani and -tani see §1.are not to be confused with ak-ku- u-e-ni ‘we die’ with geminate -kk-.143. The attested first-person plural forms represent rather /agweni/ and /egwen/. For the source of the form ēzzazzi and its pronunciation as /e:ts. /e:pweni/.3 ekuzi. appueni ad/tueni. 9. 8. ekuwani 2 ēptni.12 edue[ni ] ekueni.126. end). HKM 57:33 (MH). (ēšza) 8 ēpzi ezazzi. 12. 3. Neu (StBoT 26:39) lists i-eš-zi as pres. 31). eukzi. 4. In later Hittite the stem in /e:ts-/ was generalized. p. 44). Written e-ep-pu-u-e-ni and ap-pu-ú-e-ni respectively. sg. but all solid examples of such insertions involved clitics (see §1.4 ēšti† (NH) ēpši.125 (p. not the verb ‘to be’. HED E/I 275. eduwāni. eukši. and in the process the verb was transferred to the ḫi-conjugation (hence ēzzai. HW 2 2:93b. The forms a-ku-e-ni and a-ku-wa-ni ‘we drink’ with single -k. not as evidence for metathesis (of a nonexistent */egu-/ to */eug-/).125 (p.6).as attempts to write /egw-/. copy A (OS). atānzi eku(w) anzi 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 New n. ezzatteni. If it is correct. not a sequence /gu/. the first-person plural forms would be *a-ku-me-ni and *e-ku-me-en (§1.60 ii 1. ezatti † 5 ekutti † 7 3 ēšzi. See Puhvel. However.18 i 7. 7. the latter in KUB 35.. cited by Singer 1975: 90.30 (p.indb 188 6/5/08 4:17:00 PM . 00-HittiteGrammar. the crucial evidence is given by the first-person plural forms a-ku-e-ni and e-ku-en. For intrusive -ti see §11. 12. p. The broken context leaves the identification uncertain. 362). In a-ku-e-ni / a-ku-wa-ni the labial component in the labiovelar is lost before the -w. we assume likewise /eswani/. p. akueni. 49. HED E/I 285. Based on the evidence of the first-person plural forms. ēpti† (NH) ēzši. The OS forms e-eš-ši and e-eš-zi belong to the verb ‘to be sitting’. we may also view the variant OS spellings e-uk. 5. aku(w) anzi.115 iii 5 (OS. atanzi. apteni. 49). [ēzz] ašši. As per Lindeman 1965.143.beside e-ku. OH only. Written e-šu-wa-ni KUB 44. with loss of the labial articulation of the labiovelar before /w/. 183). See §28. see for text StBoT 26:368). text Bo 2692 V 23.69 (p.tsi/ see §1. no form *ešweni (*e-šu-e-ni ) is at- tested yet. 44). Rare variant e-eš-za in Laws §97. If the stem were */agu-/ ~ */egu-/.3 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 188 Present Indicative Singular 1 ēšmi ēpmi ētmi ekumi 3 2 ēšši. 3 above. pronunciations /esuwani/ or /e:puweni/ cannot be definitively excluded (§1. 3 above) and kuewen < *kuenwen (§12. ēzzaš. based on [ ] / ku-iš-ki i-eš-zi [ ] in KUB 34. 10. We follow others in assuming that this stem ends in a labiovelar consonant /gw/. 11.before -t.of the ending. See n. with sequences of consonant plus /w/. ēzza(z)zi. azzaštēni ekutteni ēptani 13 3 ašanzi appanzi adanzi. 3. etc. Based on /agweni/ (see n. 13.see §1.

ezzašta Plural 1 ešuen ēppuen. azzi(k)ke-.14 ii 8. (class 2) appātar. both already in OS. 00-HittiteGrammar. akuwant-. 23 (MH/MS). adātar.. 17. In NS also spelled e-eš-tu4. this class does not select the imperfective suffix -anna-. §§11. See §1. 16. ēpdu ēzdu. 226).4 Preterite Indicative Singular 1 ešun ēppun edun ekun 14 15 2 ēšta ēpta ezatta ekutta 3 ēšta ēpta ēzta. p.31. Infinitive (class 2): appanna (with rarer class 1 eppuwanzi). ēzatta. OS written e-eš-tu.21. akkuške-. Written e-še-er and e-šer. ēzzandu aku(w)andu 12.4. 19). ēzza eku 19 3 ēšdu. The second-person plural ending is spelled exclusively -te-en in OS. -te-en or -tén thereafter. KUB 14. See §13. ašallu 2 ēš ēp ēd. Although it is the only example with w in OS to date. ekutten ēzzašten 3 ašantu. ašandu appantu. ezzaddu. 15. KBo 5. it must be admitted. and §25.2. the on-line photo shows without question that this is OS. 19. appandu adandu.20 Participle: ašant-. KBo 25. adanna. 14. appant-/ appānt-. 18. Written e-du-u-en 477/u 13. akuwātar (see §3. 76. ekuddu ezzašdu Plural 2 ēšten ēpten ēzten. Despite the question mark on ‘ah?’ in Konk. ēšlit. ekutta ezzaš. 185.1 rev.indb 189 6/5/08 4:17:01 PM . Verbal substantive: (class 1) ešuwar. 20. Imperative Singular 1 ēšlut. p. KBo 4. ezatten.9 i 16. ed-.25 (p. We ignore this difference in the paradigm entries. aku(w)anna.20–11. 330). 189 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12. appuen eduen 16 ekuen 17 2 ēšten ēpten 18 3 ešer ēpper eter ekuer 14 15 16 17 18 19 paradigms: epp-.72:26 [a-k]u-wa-an-na ú-e-ek-zi. Imperfective: appiške-.24 (p. ezatta. eukta. p. ēštu ēptu.

HED K 217–18. The verb ḫuek.5. A different treatment is seen in kuennummeni (NH) for expected *kueweni. and kuinnummen (NH) for the attested variant kuewen. while kuen. kueši. 00-HittiteGrammar. but for all practical purposes all these verbs pattern alike.23 obv? 6ʹ (OS) ku-e-ru-u[n?] or (less likely) ku-e-ru-e?-n[i?].6. See Oettinger 1979: 119 vs. sg. 3 ḫuēkta/ḫuekta. p. 12. ḫūkanzi/ḫukanzi. kurzi 24 ḫukzi.‘to exorcise’23): Present Indicative Singular Plural 1 kuemi kuermi ḫuekmi. kunanzi. Strictly speaking. kuennummeni ḫuekuwani ḫukmi 2 kueši.‘to slaughter’ shows forms homophonous with those of ‘to exorcise’ except in the -ške. where ‘to exorcise’ has consistent geminate k versus a usual non-geminate in ‘to slaughter’ (but note ḫukkiškanzi ‘they slaughter’ in KUB 9. m.‘to exorcise’ ḫue.2 ii 48 remains unclear. ḫūganna. kuerun 25 kuewen. imperf. kuerer kuenta.3 iv 7). The online photo in Konk. ḫuekta kuener. ḫūkzi/ḫukzi. The form ku-er-ri in KUB 24.stem. KBo 17. as do the non-finite forms.represents an initial sequence of /h/ and /w/. kuenatteni kuenti. kuranzi ḫkanzi kuenzi ḫkzi kuennanzi 24 25 kuen: preterite paradigm Preterite Indicative Singular Plural 1 kuenun. kuewen. The origin of the variant stem kuennV. sg. kuerta kunner 28 kuinta 21.5 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 190 Stems with ue/u Ablaut 12.‘to slaughter’ and ḫuek. in the verbs ḫuek.indb 190 6/5/08 4:17:02 PM . Attested forms of the latter verb are: ḫuēkmi/ḫuekmi. ḫugant-/ḫūkant-.37.‘to strike’ and kuer. 1 kuēršun in KBo 10. As attested. ḫuganniwan. kuērta. 22. Three Hittite verbs reflect PIE e-grade vs. cited by HED K 213. and š which begin some verbal endings: kuemi. ḫuekdu. u.21 In the verb kuen. 78) as ue vs. ku-e-ru-un 315/u 6.† kueti † 3 kuēnzi. Paradigms of the monosyllabic mi-verbs containing the sequence -ue.‘to strike. shows extraneous wedges: the RI is apparently written over an erased sign. 12. kuer. pret.‘to cut’. The latter show u. ḫuēkku[eni ?].remains unclear. kill’ the final n of the stem usually22 is lost when followed by the w. ḫuek. kuwaške-. ḫugawen 26 kuenunun kuinnummen 2 kuinnešta. ḫuēkzi/ḫuekzi. 23. hit. 25. these verbs show ue in all finite forms except the present and im- perative plural third-person.‘to cut’ probably show a single initial labiovelar /kw-/.12 iii 19 is faulty. The status of the pret. zero-grade ablaut (§3.(kuen- ‘to strike’. 24.† kuenten kuenta 27 3 kuēnta.

are the older forms. 26 12.is a NH “regularization. For syllabary limitations in expressing sequences of three consonants see §1.‘to get sick’. of which kureške. šalk.indb 191 6/5/08 4:17:03 PM . Infinitive: ḫūganna.g.8.30 kar-ap-zi na-ḫi.verbs.‘to perish’. The im- perfectives kuwarške. 28. attested already in the early language.and kuwaške.(see §3..‘to fuck’.‘to bathe’. kar-ap-ši ša-an-aḫ-ti.” The kuwar-. na-a-ḫi. ḫandāwen. as is ḫuk-/ḫūk. kunanna. 29. and kuennummanzi (§3. e. ḫūkkiške-/ḫukkiške-.25. 76. Written ku-e-ne-er and ku-e-ner. 78.(ku-wa-ar-aš-ki-iz-zi 169/x i 7 cited in Oettinger 1979: 119). ku(w)aške. šanḫ. 187). kunant-. 3 na-a-ḫi.7. kurk. Some of these forms were booked as imperatives in CHD L–N s. p. Verbal substantive: kue(n)numar.‘to slaughter’.11 (p. §§11. 330). probably indicates that this 00-HittiteGrammar. p. ku-(e)-en-ne-er and ku-en-ner. parḫ.† ša-an-ḫa-ti.‘to store’. Also written logographically as &-ḫi.37. which shows a supine ḫuganniwan.‘to chase’. kuenten kuenni 3 kuendu.‘to lift’.‘to associate (with)’. ḫark. 191 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.1 rev.(from kuen-).2.‘to swear’.(from kuer-). Many mi-conjugation consonantal root stems are non-ablauting.stem is the outcome of the zero-grade form of the root. Present Indicative Singular 1 na-aḫ-mi wa-al-aḫ-mi ša-an-aḫ-mi kar-ap-mi 2 na-aḫ-ti † wa-la!-aḫ-ši ša-an-ḫa-ši.‘to strike’. This class does not select the imperfective suffix -anna. Non-Ablauting 12. In order to express precisely the spelling of verbs with such sequences we have used narrow transliteration instead of the usual broad transcrip- tion in the following paradigms.20–11. 23 (MH/MS). But since the sg. ša-an-aḫ-zi na-a-ḫi-i †29 u-wa-al-aḫ-zi 29 26. These include na(ḫ)ḫ. p. See also (u)wanšikanzi ‘they fuck’ from wen. This form is analogical to the preterite first-person plural forms of the -ā(i). 12). karp. kuenta KUB 14. §12. 27. ištark. p. Imperfective: kuwarške.‘to fear’ and virtually all monosyllabic stems ending in a sequence of two con- sonants: walḫ.† ša-na-aḫ-ti † 3 na-aḫ-zi.v. ḫūkātar. kuwa(n). ḫarp.† wa-la-aḫ-zi. 185.† ša-an-ḫa-at-ti.(see §13. p. kuranna. kureške. p.‘to knead’.‘to seek’.31. warp. and §25. kurdu ḫuekdu kunandu kurandu kuindu 26 27 28 New n. 226) except for ḫuek. link. kuinnešta KUB 17.2. ša-aḫ-zi. kurant-.3 iii 4 (NH).21.† wa-al-aḫ-zi. Participle: ḫūgant-.8 Imperative Singular Plural 2 kueni.

n. ša-anaḫ-ḫu-un 3 na-aḫ-ta wa-al-aḫ-ta ša-aḫ-ta.2:6.indb 192 6/5/08 4:17:04 PM . wa-al-ḫu-u-e-ni. nāḫi in lē⸗ta nāḫi is the regular indicative third-person singular with the ḫi-conjugation ending in an impersonal construction: ‘Let there not be a fearing to you’.see §1. ka-ra-ap-ta KUB 36. see Hoffner 1997b. kar-ap-ta ša-an-na-aḫ-ta Plural 1 wa-al-ḫu-u-en 2 wa-al-aḫ-tén ša-an-aḫ-tén kar-ap-tén 3 wa-al-ḫe-er ša-an-ḫe-er kar-pé-er Imperative Singular 2 wa-al-aḫ ša-a-aḫ. wa-al-ḫu-un ša-an-ḫu-un.30 ka-ra-ap-ta. with references. ša-an-ḫa-te-ni. ša-an-ḫa kar-ap 3 wa-al-aḫ-du ša-aḫ-du kar-ap-du end marker verb was originally a ḫi-verb. 31. could be an error for &-u-e-ni or an example of a real ending -uni . kar-pa-an-zi.49 i 8 (OS). 181. 46). see p. wa-al-ḫu-wa-ni 2 na-aḫ-te-e-ni wa-al-aḫ-ta-ni ša-an-aḫ-te-ni. HKM 48:25 (MH/MS). kar-ap-pu-un na-aḫ-ḫu-un ša-aḫ-ḫu-un. ša-an-ḫa-at-te-ni 3 wa-al-ḫa-an-zi ša-an-ḫa-an-zi. [ša-a]n-ḫu-e-ni 32 &-u-ni 31 wa-al-aḫ-ḫu-e-ni. This interpreta- tion avoids both the irregular use of imperative + lē and the unparalleled use of a singular enclitic personal pronoun as a reflexive. ša-an-aḫ-ḫa-an-zi 30 31 32 33 walah preterite paradigm Preterite Indicative Singular 1 na-a-ḫu-un.135 (p. 32.8 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 192 Present Indicative Plural 1 na-a-ḫu-u-e-ni. For the loss of -n. 12. 15 (div.. 30. kar-ap-pa-an-zi.33 ša-an-aḫ-ta. 10. 00-HittiteGrammar. NH). ša-a-ḫa-an-zi. 15. KUB 5. kar-(ap-)pí-an-zi ša-a-an-ḫa-an-zi. Accidentally omitted in CHD Š 163 top left. ša-an-ḫa-a-an-zi. 33.

mazzi † išparzai †. n. 12 (OS). p.1:31 (OS). Written ma-az-zu-u-e-ni. manzazzi. Sg. 5 (OS). 42. 00-HittiteGrammar.(< *mat-)36 and išpart.38 mazze†.125.10. naḫḫān. See p. išparzizi.(§1.here and in the CHD. leaving no attested example of *mat-. walḫanna/i-. ḫar-ú-e-ni. False HED H 156. and ḫar-u-en. For divergent historical accounts of this pecularity see Watkins 1970: 71 and Cowgill cited by Eich- ner 1975: 90.72 rev.2. The ḫi-conjugation form išparzai does not occur before NH.39 išparzaizzi. kar-pu-wa-an-zi. 9. 348). ḫarza mazza(z)zi. 12. because the dissimilation has spread in this word to all environments (e. karpi/eške-. šanḫant-.10 Imperative Plural 1 2 wa-al-aḫ-tén ša-a-aḫ-tén. 38.35 while the verbs maz.9. walḫant-.before endings beginning with a consonant. išpartīēzzi 40 Plural 41 1 ḫarueni.73+ obv. neut. not *ḫa-ru-e-ni and *ḫa-ru-en. ḫarti † ma-za-at-ti † 37 3 ḫarzi. 35. p. Imperfective: naḫḫeške-.and transfer to the ḫi-conjugation began already in OH.g. 1 ma-az-zu-u-e-ni). 39. The appearance of mazze in OS shows that in this verb the spread of the stem mazz. Written ḫar-u-e-ni.show the same dissimilation as et. šanḫiške-. The verb stem is written maz.indb 193 6/5/08 4:17:05 PM . This example shows lengthening of the final syllable vowel as part of interroga- tive intonation/stress (see §27. šanḫeške-. 36. ḫarwani mazzueni 42 2 ḫartenī 43 3 ḫarkanzi 34.. Participle: naḫḫant-34. 43. išparzazi. ša-an-ḫu-wa-an-zi. Infini- tive: wa-al-ḫu-wa-an-zi. The verb ḫar (k). KBo 9. kar-ap-tén (ša-an-ḫa-at-tén) 3 wa-al-ḫa-an-du ša-an-ḫa-an-du 12. Written iš-pa-ar-zi-zi KUB 4. 188. 44): 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Present Indicative Singular 1 ḫarmi 2 ḫarši. 193 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12. For the present third-person singular forms see Kühne and Otten 1971: 42. KBo 22. 37. 41.).‘to hold. karpant-. Verbal substantive: na-a-ḫu-u-wa-aš and na-aḫ-ḫu-u-wa-aš (gen. pl. The išparzazi writings are attested in MH. walḫi/eške-. 40. have’ is exceptional in that it deletes the final -k.

indb 194 6/5/08 4:17:06 PM . 2 li-i-ik. KUB 25.12. KUB 31. 50. li-in- kat-ta. li-in-ik-ta. pret.47 ḫardu išparzašdu. imp. with footnotes). part. li-ku-wa-an-ni. 26.‘to swear’: pres. KUB 19. linkant-. pl. Participle: išparzant-. Forms of link. sg. In the case of tarku. li-in-ik?-zi.show forms with and without deletion of the -n- (see §1.13. see Oettinger 1979: 13. 48. But the appearance in NS of pret. 49. not a consonantal sequence /kw/. 46) and various ways of spelling /-nk-/ and /-ng-/ when it is retained. sg. imperf. 47. 3 watkut for earlier watkutta suggests that /kw/ was eventually reanalyzed as /kw/ in this word (Oettinger 1979: 237). 3 li-ik-ta. pl. 1 li-in-ku-u-e-ni. 188.1 obv. 3 li-in-kán-zi. We find the same kind of spellings and the same delabialization of the labiovelar as in eku. pl. p.(/watkw/) ‘to leap’. CTH 524 Kaška treaty). 62 (MS). le-en-ik-tén. 3 li-in-ke-er. See p. 3 išparzaš. 2 li-ik-te-en. išpartieddu Plural 2 ḫarten 3 ḫarkandu 44 45 46 47 hark paradigm end 12.(/tarkw/) ‘to dance. 44. le-en-ga-u-en.48 12. Verbal substantive: gen. 45. p.11. but these are shown to be secondary by išparzazi.49 i 6 (NH).81 obv. li-in- ki. pret. li-in-ga-zi. 191. The verbal substantive and infinitive are unattested. 00-HittiteGrammar. 12. 3 li-ik-zi. sg. išparzer Imperative Singular 2 ḫark 3 ḫartu.‘to drink’ (§12.3. 46. n. sg. linkiške-. sg. the stem ends in a labiovelar k w. 1 li-in-ku-un. 3 li-ik-du. 3 (OS). sg. Root stems ending in -ink. 12. išparzašta (OS) and išparzašdu. 3 li-in-kán-du.21 iii 14 (HW 90. A ḫi-conjugation form (for expected *išpartun).49 pl. pl. sg. išparzaš Plural 41 1 ḫaruen 2 ḫarten 3 ḫarker išparter. 1 li-in-ku-en.135. KUB 14.11 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 194 Preterite Indicative Singular 1 ḫarkun išparzaḫḫun † 44 2 ḫarta mazzašta 45 išparzašta 46 3 ḫarta ma(z)zašta išparzašta. mazzuwaš. as is pret.50 pl. whirl’ and watku. This is a Luwianized form.

12). takkeššanzi) and preconsonantal takš.see AHP 150–52. takkeššanzi takkēšzi. 2.16 12. Present Indicative Singular Plural 51 1 taggaš[mi?] 2 takkišši.. (see p. The w becomes u before endings beginning with a consonant. 188.indb 195 6/5/08 4:17:07 PM . taggašši 52 takkišteni.(§1. 4 (OS). taggašta takšer. takkizzi 54 Preterite Indicative Singular Plural 3 takkišta. Restored arbitrarily as tág-ga-aš [-ḫi ] in KBo 5. takkešzi.‘to roast’. either e or i (§1. p. sg. But if one restores le-e ku[-it-ki] there.1 ii 42–45. taggašteni [taks.106 rev. In the verb tarḫw.1 ii 15.3 iv 43ʹ (= KBo 5.‘to be able. 195 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12. Another group of mi-verbs have stems that end in a sequence with w as its final component: tarḫw. takkišzi.sometimes occurs. šanḫw. n.16. For the geminate -šš. pl.11. 194). In the case of takš.metathesis to taruḫ.. 54. KUB 36.as opposed to eukzi and tarukzi (see §1. 12. 48. be in charge/control’. 3 (by Oettinger 1979: 217–18 as an error. construct’ the combination of the stem- final sequence of stop plus š followed by the consonant of various consonantal endings leads to an inserted vowel.14. takkešta. pl. takšanzi.beside a prevocalic stem takš-.130 (p.‘to put together. where one would expect pres. p. 52. 3 for the reasoning). pret. taggašteni 53 3 takkiš[zi ]. Competing efforts to generalize one stem or the other lead to instances of prevocalic takke/išš.3 iv 59) (Ḫukk. 1 *šanḫumen.(e. takkiššanzi. p. 00-HittiteGrammar.(e. Proof for this claim is lacking.in takke/išš.12. since the crucial forms with endings having initial /w/ are not yet attested.g. takkešteni. takkēššer 51 52 53 54 Imperative Singular Plural 3 taggašdu 12. treated as sg. producing a preconsonantal stem takke/išš. takkeške-.) by SV 2. Infinitive takšu(w)anzi . For the second-person formulation see KBo 3.81. 34). Supine takkiškewan.is necessarily written as tág-ga- aš. etc. KBo 3. tág-ga-aš-ši can easily be taken as the regular and expected pres. 45). 53. by Neu 1974: 91 as assimi- lated *takšzi ) when restoring le-e ku[-iš-ki ] in the preceding line.12 + KBo 5. See §1. and §12. 51.g. 1 *šanḫumeni. Preconsonantal takš. Participle takšant-. We assume a sequence /hw/ in these cases (not /hw/) on historical grounds and thus also assume a real metathesis in taruḫ. p.140. Imperfective stem takkiške-.15.steni]).

55 tar-ru-uḫ-ḫa-an-zi Preterite Indicative sg. p.alternating with zero-grade infix *-n. 179).8 (p.272 left 5ʹ.105 iii 3 (MH/MS). see §11. For the meaning of the infix see §10. 56. nininkanzi šarnenkanzi Preterite Indicative Singular 1 ḫarninkun šarninkun nininkun 2 ḫarnikta 3 ḫarnikta šarnikta ninikta 55.17.17 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 196 Present Indicative sg. See §1. 00-HittiteGrammar. tar-ḫu-id-du pl. 3 ša-an-ḫu(-wa)-an-zi. These verbs show the form -nink. tar-ḫu-uz-zi pl. ta-ru-uḫ-zi. 3 ša-an-ḫu-u-wa-an-du 12. 58. 1 ta-ru-uḫ-ḫu-un pl. Paradigms for stems with nasal infix -ni(n)-. ša-an-ḫu-un-zi. This ablaut pattern reflects a considerably modified PIE ablaut with e-grade infix *-ne. 3 tar-ḫu-e-er Imperative sg.indb 196 6/5/08 4:17:07 PM . probably for ištarnikzi.57 58 Present Indicative Singular 1 ḫarnikmi šarnikmi ninikmi 2 ḫarnikti † ninikši ištarnikši 3 ḫarnikzi šarnikzi nīnikzi. 3 tar-ḫu-du.76 (p. ninikzi ištarnikzi 58 Plural 1 šarninkueni nininkuweni 2 ḫarnikteni šarnikteni ninikteni 3 ḫarninkanzi šarni(n)kanzi. 182). 57. KBo 17.37.18.before endings beginning with a vowel or /w/ and -nik. ša-an-ḫu-un-t°. For the rare form iš-tar-ni-ik-za KBo 40. 32).(see §3. tar-ru-uḫ-zi.17 (p. Participle: ša-an-ḫu(-u)-wa-an-t°. 3 ša-an-ḫu-uz-zi. 56 Affixed Stems Stems with Infixed -ni(n)- 12. 78). 12.elsewhere. 55 tar-ḫu-an-t°.

ḫadukišzi. kallarešzi. šarninkant-. makkešzi. idālaweššanzi.). -aššarešzi. idālawešta. maršeššer. 177). nininkant-. šarninkuwanzi. 00-HittiteGrammar.20 Plural 1 šarninkuen ištarninkuen 3 ḫarninkir šarni(n)ker nininkir harnink: preterite paradigm Imperative Singular 2 ḫarnik ninik 3 ḫarnikdu šarnikdu Plural 2 ḫarnikten ninikten 3 ḫarninkandu šarninkandu nininkandu harnink end 12.13 i 46). The replacement of -ši by ḫi-conjugation -ti appears to have been systematic in this class. tepawešzi. idalawēšti. Non-Ablauting Stems in -ešš- 12. šarninkuwaš (gen. Plural 1 [išḫa]ššarweššue[ni] 2 idālawešteni.19. šalleššer 59. *kardimmešti (. tarḫuileššun. 60. nininkuwanzi. maninkueššanzi. parkuešzi.20. For the meaning of the suffix see §10. idālawešzi. 5960 Present Indicative Singular 59 2 *ḫappinešti (. dannatešzi. ḫadduliššun 3 arawešta.-ti). parkuešteni 3 [innar ]aweššanzi. Infinitive I: ḫarninkuwanzi. *kunnešzi (-nešzi ). mayateššer. warḫuešzi.13 (p. nininkuwaš (gen.-eš-ti ) 3 innarawešzi. mi(ya)ḫu(wa)ntešzi. kartimmēšta Plural 60 2 nakkeš [ten] 3 araweššer. -liššun.).indb 197 6/5/08 4:17:08 PM . Verbs in -ešš. Participle: ḫarninkant-. CHD L–N 371 (KUB 14. tepaweššanzi Preterite Indicative Singular 1 parkūēššun. 197 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12. Verbal substantive: ḫarninkuwar.(Oettinger 1979: 238–55). etc.

parkuēštu Plural 3 makkeššandu Vocalic Stems Ablauting Stems with e/a Ablaut 12. 12. p.‘to lead here’.indb 198 6/5/08 4:17:09 PM . peḫute.‘to build’. 64.21 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 198 Imperative Singular 2 miyeš 3 ḫaddulešdu. 63.126 (p. pēḫu⟨t ⟩ettani uwadateni 3 uwadanzi pēḫudanzi. 44).‘to build’ comes to be influenced by the originally separate verb wi/eda (i).‘to lead there’. pēḫūtezi Plural 1 uwateweni. 193) and ḫat. peḫute(z)zi. The following mi-verbs are univerbations with a prehistoric root *dheh1.37. wetezzi. išpart-. wedai † urizzizz[i ]62 pēḫuttezzi.sign. weritiz[zi].(ḫazzizzi ). Spelled [ pé ]-e-ḫu-te-en-zi KBo 25. p. peḫutenzi 64 61. pēḫutummēni wedumēni uwatewani. §3. *mat. peḫudanzi. uwadazzi pēḫute(z)zi.(ezzazzi) ‘to eat’ (§1.‘to bring’ and vice versa. [w] itezzi. pēḫutetteni.48. werita[nzi ] peḫutanzi. p. not with the -tén. p. See §1. uwatummeni 63 2 uwatetteni. wete.21.125. The forms werizzašti and urizzizzi (if the latter indeed belongs here) suggest a NH reinterpretation of the stem as *werit(t)-. 36.10 and n. werite. 44). uwatettani.50 left edge 7. The stem wete. mi(y)ēštu. and Oettinger 1979: 125–26): uwate. 62. See the treatment of ēd.‘to be afraid’. 00-HittiteGrammar. 78) is fairly predictable: 61 62 63 64 Present Indicative Singular 1 uwatemi pēḫutemi witemi. wedaḫḫi † 61 weritemi 2 uwateši peḫuteši wedaši werizzašti † 3 uwatezzi.(see §12. uwatezi.‘to put’ (see §12. wedanzi waritanzi. 211. The descriptive ablaut e/a (reflecting PIE e-grade versus zero-grade.

zinne.‘to clothe’ (Melchert 1984b: 31–35.indb 199 6/5/08 4:17:09 PM .‘to be(come) wanton. turn back.‘to spread (something) out. wašše. Oettinger 2002: p. 66. wedau † Plural 2 uwatetten. forfeit.† wetun 2 uwatet peḫutet wedaš † 3 uwatet peḫutet. We prefer to avoid the label “simple thematic” class (Oettinger 1979: 24.126 (p.‘to put on (footwear)’. Other mi-verbs with vocalic alternating stems ending in e/a are of diverse origin:66 arkuwe. werit[e. weriteške-.‘to besprinkle’.‘to finish’. defeat (an enemy). šarkuwe.‘to steal’.23 Preterite Indicative Singular 1 uwatenun peḫutenun wetenun. 19.is yet attested. *uwatu(m)manzi(?). 199 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12. In addition to the preceding verbs which 65. *uwatummar. .22. peḫuti wete uwatet 65 3 uwateddu peḫuteddu weteddu.‘to finish’ (Oettinger 2002: p. and peḫuteške. kappuwe.‘to clothe’.‘to be(come) wanton. peḫutetten wetatten uwatatten. ḫulle. disrespectful’ (Melchert 2005a).‘to make a plea’. repudiate. šulle. ] Plural 1 uwatewen wetu(m)men† 2 peḫutetten 3 uwater. 257–314). Participle: peḫudant-. wašše.is rare. wetant-. Imperfective: weteške-. 182. cancel (an agreement)’. wedaḫḫun. ambitious’.‘to divide’. 00-HittiteGrammar. šuwaye. uwatēr peḫuter weter 65uwatet alongside uwate Imperative Singular 2 uwate. .. trample(?)’. uwatitten 3 uwadandu peḫudandu wedandu 12. duwarne- ‘to break’. Infinitive: we- tu(m)manzi (ú-e-tu4-ma-an-zi). 12. zinne. wiritešta†. uwati.‘to count’ (see Oettinger 1979: 332–33).‘to repulse. We use “alternating stems ending in e/a” merely as a neutral descriptive device. But all these form a single class in Hittite. reverse. It is cer- tain that many do not: e. lukke.‘to push/drive away. divorce’. widant-. No iterative of uwate. It is debatable whether any attested Hittite verbs with stems ending in e/a reflect PIE verbs that fit this definition. ḫarne. 44).‘to ignite’. tāye. wedaš † weritešta†. išpa(r)re. peḫuteš † wetet.. xx). See p.g. šuwe.‘to count’. For the (m) in these forms see §1.‘to look’. Verbal substantive: wetu(m)mar (ú-e-tu4-mar).(NH) from peḫute. peḫute. disrespectful. šarre.23. n. xx) and šulle. kappuwe.

77 ḫullazzi.26. 1. 12. it may or may not be significant that the variants with -e- in the pres. after Watkins 1973). and pret. ašiwantezzi. pl. p. ḫullezzi. KUB 37. 00-HittiteGrammar. 76.indb 200 6/5/08 4:17:10 PM .(for whose mean- ing see §10. NH šulliyaši. ḫullaši. 2 is *-a < *-e. 70. verbs with the suffix -e.).from the denominative stems in -e. *-allu *-a -attu *-aweni -e/atten -antu 69 70 12. -ami -e/aši -e/a(z)zi -aweni. and imp.may be the participle to papre. or in OH and MH. We base this claim on the fact that šulle. copy aa iii 24 (OS). waššezzi. Contra Oettinger 1979: 259 and AHP 183 the expected outcome of the imv.73 šulleši. 68. Assured forms with stem ending in -a. 12.81 zinne(z)zi 82 67.25. but it could also be an adjective in -ant.79 paprezzi. For a more complete survey see Oettinger 1979: 261–312. Examples for the active voice of the mi-conjugation of alternating vo- 71 72 73 747576 calic stems in e/a. In view of the diverse origins of this class. Footnotes below offer only a selection of such secondary forms. sg. 2. while waššiya (NH) belongs to a stem waššiya-.(see §2.114 ii/iv 6 (OH/MS or MH/MS). NH waššiyaši.are not yet attested. cited when unpublished as 1808/c 5ʹ by Oettinger (1979: 307).80 šullēzzi. šarrumen.(see Oettinger 1979: 291–92).272 6ʹ. ḫi-verbs in -a-. etc. 72.71 zinnami 72 2 aršanēši.67 Many of these verbs follow this conjugational pattern only in OH. changing in NH to other patterns (mi-verbs in stem -āi-. -anun *-eš(?) -et *-awen 69 -e/atten -er 70 active imp. šarrzzi. We find only the replacement form -umen of the ḫi-verbs in -a-: ḫu-ul-lu-mi-en. The basic vocalic stems show an alternation between e and a that only partly reflects prehistoric ablaut.37. KUB 36. pl.78 lukkezzi. 74 waššaši 75 3 arāwezzi. not the predicted forms of the alternating vocalic stems in -e-/-a-.derived directly from a base adjective *papra. The stem paprant. sg. 78. 75.24. -atteni -anzi -ewani active pret.223 A7 (OS). 69. NH zinnaḫḫi. ḫar-na-mi KBo 40. and in some cases we find both e and a (see §3. ḫu-ul-le-ez-zi Laws §173a.76 ḫullēzzi. 2 all belong to stems reflecting prehistoric *-eh1-. The predicted preterite first plural form is not yet attested. and this stem does show šulla.11. 56). 74. Present Indicative Singular 1 ḫarnami. and the idealized schema in Oettinger 1979: 259–60):68 active pres.in the participle šullant.‘to be(come) wanton’ reflects the same suffix (see Melchert 2005a: 96. For some members of the paradigm we have attested only examples of the latter classes. The attested example šarri (NH) shows the form of a ḫi-verb in -a. 71. p. 177) also are probably inflected as alternating stems ending in e/a. p.‘to be proven guilty’.(see tarni to tarna-). 73.24 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 200 have no suffix from the Hittite point of view. pres.

KUB 4. NH and NS also waššiezzi. waššandu 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 mi-conjucation paradim hulla preterite paradigm 77. 201 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.indb 201 6/5/08 4:17:11 PM . NH ḫu-ul-la-(a-)i and ḫu-ul-li-ya-az-zi. 91. šarrer 95 Imperative Singular 96 3 ḫulladdu Plural 2 zinnatten 3 šarrandu.87 [lu] qqanun 88 3 ḫullet. OH/NS ḫu-ul-li-ya-nu-un. MH/MS also šarraš.84 zinnaweni 85 83 2 ḫullatteni. 82.93 šuwatten. šūwandu. 96. “šullānzi ” in KBo 43. lu-uk-ki-iš-zi ‘he sets fire to’ in Laws §100 is a NH scribe’s error for correct lu-uk-ke-ez-zi. NH zinnāi.25 Present Indicative Plural 1 ḫušuewani. šulletten 94 3 ḫuller.86 zinnanzi Preterite Indicative Singular 1 ḫullanun. See p. šarratteni 3 ḫullanzi. 93. 39 (OH/NS). 89. lukket. 200. 92.91 zinnit Plural 1 — 92 2 ḫuišweten. 85. maršer. and waššiyaizzi.90 šullēt.77: 7 cited when unpublished as 38/g by Oettinger (1979: 291) is irrelevant here. 88. Contra Oettinger. NH šarraḫḫun and zinnaḫḫun.and therefore has to belong to some other inflection class. NH also has waššueni. 94. NH zinnummeni. šar-ri-ya-iz-zi. 69. 78. 95. and NH šarriyēt. 87. 80. lukkanzi. NH also šulliyat and šullāit. lu-ki-iš-zi belong to an intransitive verb ‘to become bright’. n. šarranzi. waššiyaz(z)i.89 ḫurnit. waššaweni. šullānun in KBo 5. [ḫ]u-šu-e-wa-ni KBo 3. 79. NH has additional form šar-ri-i-e-er. since it is shown by duplicates to be read [ pá ]r-šu-ul-la-a-an-zi. 00-HittiteGrammar. 86. šarraweni.1 ii 11 (MH/NS). ḫu-ul-la-az-zi KUB 37. 81.8 ii 2 belongs to šullā (i ). 83.223 C4 (OS). šarret. OH/NS ḫu-ul-li-iš.‘to give (as) a hostage’ and gives no evidence for an a-stem variant of šulle-.46 rev. šar-ri. 84. which cannot possibly belong to the inflection in -e-/-a. NH has the additional forms šar-ra-(a-)i. NH zinnau. NH forms lu-uk-zi. šar-ri-ya-zi. 90. Written ḫu-iš-ú-e-te-en.

102. Forms of išpar(re).‘to reject’. meet’. išparrezzi (MH/MS!). line 14ʹ) ú-[d ]a-a-i. 3 daparriyaēr.97 Verbal substantive. among others. išparḫun. tread (on).‘to draw. these verbs were given singular third-person forms in -iyaizzi (pret. pl. 00-HittiteGrammar. malluwar. ḫaliya.(all examples are in NS):99 malli. wemiya. urkiya.27. mallezzi.(henceforth simply -iya-) include basic verbs such as iya.and some other stem for the same verb.‘to step. išparanzi.indb 202 6/5/08 4:17:12 PM . Melchert 1977: 32. mallai. ḫullumar. drag’. and zaḫḫiya. but in some this status is unclear. Houwink ten Cate 1970: 16. šarriške-. The restored form m[a-al-l]a-a-i listed in CHD L–N 125 from KBo 15. mallan. waššan. išparratti. Infinitive: waššauanzi. išparḫut.‘to sell’.35 + KBo 15. malluwanzi. but probably to be interpeted as noun māl with ‘and’ māll⸗a ‘and māl ’ (CHD L–N 124). spread out(?)’ and mall(e). malliške-.100 mal- landu. are very similar to those of mi-verbs with alternat- ing stems ending in e/a. šarreške-. tiya.‘to prostrate oneself’. 12. mālla. and these endings then came to be used occasionally with native Hittite stems in -iya. išparriyazzi. The expected verbal substantive in *-awar is not yet attested.(all NS un- less marked): išpar(a)ḫi.‘to mill’ may have originally been consonantal ḫi-verbs (thus Jasanoff 2003: 77–78 contra Oettinger 1979: 266–71. ḫariya. Carruba 1966b: 79–80. however. laḫ(ḫ)iya- ‘to campaign’. waššeške-. ḫappariya. Ablauting Stems in -iye/a- 12. An example of a Luwian ḫi-verb with third-person singular in -iyai is taparriyai. altered to Hittite taparriyaizzi.‘to name’. išparrant-.‘to dig’. markiya. and they are thus cited here. išpāri/išpari.102 97. 38. 98.76:5ʹ. Their currently known forms. ḫuett(iya). and also denominals such as ḫaḫḫariya.26. Imperfective stems: šarraške-. išparraḫḫun. 12.‘to battle’. sg. šarran.‘to do.98 Participle: lukkan. Read rather with Glocker (1997: 60. The verbs išpar(re). The e-grade forms with /-ye-/ (-Ci-(i-)e-) are more frequent in the older language and gradu- ally disappear from use during NH.‘to rake(?)’. mallēt. išperten. make’. cited as Bo 1709 by Oettinger (1979: 301). 99. 101. One also finds a few preterite third-person plural forms in -iyaer.(already in OS urkiyaizzi ‘tracks down’). išparranzi. išparrandu. We frequently find both a stem in -iya. So Oettinger 1979: 278 n.26 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 202 12. whence also pret.appears to be the innovation.‘to kick. enter’. On the genesis and spread of the forms in -iyai. In some cases the dearth of evidence from OS or even MS makes it diffi- cult to determine the original stem class of the verb. išparriyawar. mallazi.‘to find. 277–79).‘to track down’. waššiške-. 100. išparrer.33 i 11 (MS) does not exist. and Oettinger 1979: 344. tāya. 3 -iyait). We find only forms in -umar with the form of a ḫi-verb in -a-: šarrumar. mallanun. mallanzi. In NS we find šarrumanzi with the form of a ḫi-verb in -a-. Forms of mall(e). išparruwan.see Melchert 2005b revising Oettinger 1979: 382–85. wa-aš-ša-u-an-zi KUB 54.101 When Hittite began to borrow Luwian ḫi-verbs with singular third-person forms in -iyai (which did not exist in Hittite).28. In many cases the stem in -iya.‘to steal’. lam(a)niya. malliyazzi. See on this point. Ablauting verbal stems in -(i )ye/a.

wemiya. See p. 105. drag. make’. ḫuittiyazi. 00-HittiteGrammar. 17. make’. tiyanzi wemiyanzi ḫuittiyanzi tiya: preterite paradigm Preterite Indicative Singular 1 iyanun. iya(z)zi. ḫuittiyat Plural 1 iyawen tiyawen wemiyawen ḫuittiyawen 2 iyatten 3 iēr tiyēr. ti(y)ēzzi.51. 104.indb 203 6/5/08 4:17:14 PM . p.‘to do.29 12. iyaši tiyaši wemiyaši ḫuittiyaši 3 iē(z)zi.‘to step. wemiyat ḫuitti(e)t. wemiezi. Rarely also i-ad-du.(see also §§12. meet’. iyami. i-e-[m(i )] StBoT 8 ii 22 (= StBoT 25 #3 ii 9ʹ) (OS). 181. perform. attract’.‘to find. n. 103 Present Indicative Singular 103 1 iemi. wemiya(z)zi ḫuittiyai† Plural 1 iyaweni tiyaweni wemiyaweni 2 iyatteni tiyatteni ḫuittiyatteni 3 ienzi. iyanzi ti(y)enzi. tiyami wemiyami ḫuittiyami iya(m)mi 2 ieši. tiyat wemi(e)t. tiyandu wemiyandu iyaddu 105 iyandu 105 103. enter’. tiyezzi.50– 12. Paradigms for the unmixed mi-conjugation stems in -iya. Another common verb belonging to this class is aniya. iyaizzi tiezi. wemiyar 104 ḫuittier 104 Imperative Singular Plural 1 iyallu 2 iya tiya. iyaun tiyanun wemiyanun ḫuittiyanun 2 iyaš. iyat tīēt. 212): iya. tiyazi wemiēzzi. ḫuittiezzi. tiya. 203 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.29. tiyaddu iendu. tīya ḫuitti iyatten tiyatten 3 iēddu. tiyer wemier. wemiezzi.‘to do. iyat tiyat 3 iēt. ḫuittiya- ‘to draw.

Most stems in -ške.29).indb 204 6/5/08 4:17:15 PM . 323): e.also is extended to the -ške/a. ornament’. In view of plene spellings such as 00-HittiteGrammar.31.and wen-are exceptional: kuwaške.< ḫuek. 12. tiyawa- nzi wemiyawanzi. The form ú-nu-uš-ke-ez-zi is found in KBo 38.use -i-: memiške.25. p. which can be read either kat or ki/et6. The confusion between -i. 12. The following combinations of thematic vowel and endings are known:107 106.‘to speak’.has not yet been studied diachronically in as much detail as in -iye/a-.28– 12.32. 11 ʹ shows that in this case unu.(note the special gemination in the -ške. The ki/et6 value is attested in Hit- tite almost exclusively in these -ške. a -ške.‘to seize’).g.‘to eat’.suffix shows e/a ablaut similar to the stems in -iye/a. azzikke. Some forms are transliterated in order to show unambiguously the nature of the vowel following -šk-.suffix is regularly an -i. 43).< aniya. The verbs kuen. If future study should establish what we feel the present incomplete assemblage indicates—namely.‘to curse’).stems formed to verbs in -iya.or -i-: arwiške.‘to let’ see §1. 34) and §1.(§§12.< ēpp. tiyant-. 12.< mema. ḫuittiant-.form of aniya-).stem functions as the basic form of the verb (see §24. p. The matter is further complicated by the polyvalence of the  sign.< pai. Verbal substantive: iyawar.‘to do rever- ence’. one also finds -e.(*ḫurtške-) < ḫuwart. that in resolved writings of the endings where the sign  is otherwise used those found in pre-NH show an a vocalization. ḫi-conjugation verbs with -a-/-i. those in -iye/a.‘to smear.265 i 13 ʹ. appiške.‘to give’.to -i-: wemiške. uwanšikke- < *wan-ške-. Occasionally. tiyawar. Their formation is as follows. Base verbs with e/a ablaut in their stems add -ške.and -e. ient-.was the original base stem and unuwa. ḫuittiyawanzi. Stems in -ške- 12. The -ške/a.‘to judge’ and tarna.to the a-form: akkuške.later.81 (p.81. Infinitive II: tiyanna.‘to exorcise’. 107. but the distribution of e/a in -ške/a. For the -ške-stems of ḫanna. Infinitive I: iyawanzi.(*ad-ške-) < ēd. ḫi-conjugation verbs with -ai-/-i.< *d-ške-. Those with we/u or wa/u use the u-form: ḫukkiške. au(š)-/ u. tint-. In order not to cloud the issue.secondary.use -i-: piške.in the old language (§1.are derived imperfective stems. ḫuittiyant-. The non-iterative form ú-nu-uz-zi ibid. ḫurzakke. forms written with the  sign are assigned an indeterminate vocalization in the table below. Although the vowel which connects a verbal base ending in a consonant to the -ške/a.33.< ar (u)wāi. The stem dai.‘to find’.(*ak w-ške-) < eku. 34): wekiške-.120 (p. while those in NH show e. The following table shows the regular inflection of -ške.‘to drink’.are usually reduced to -e.(uške-). Verbs that have acquired a non-original stem in -a.forms..30 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 204 12.‘to decorate. then it would be possible to conclude that the NH forms written with  should be read ket6 while the pre-NH examples should be read kat. for whose use see chapter 24 on verbal aspect.30. Participle: iyant-. Base stems in -āi. iške.uses u.(Melchert 1984b: 134 –35.stems. anoint’.and anniške-/anneške.revert to the original base: unuške-106 < unu(wa).< wemiya. ḫukkiške-. ḫuittiyawar. 147–50): tiške-/teške- < tiya.‘to place’ is usually reduced to just d-: zikke.< *kwanške-.

3 iii 6 (MH?/NS). pišgaweni 2 -šketteni da-aš-ke-et-te-ni. Another indication of the a-vocalization of the latter form is the plene writing of the following syllable: compare da-a-aš-qa-te-e-ni and the alternation of da-aš-ke-wa-ni and da-aš-ga-u-e-ni.4 ii 4 (NH). uš-kat-te-e-ni in i 14) can be vocalized with a. iškiyaizzi. išḫiškīmi. p. See §11.110 uškateni.33 ii 11ʹ (OH/NS).4 obv. 30).112 ša-aš-nu-uš-ga-at-te-ni. which in post-OH is normally written ideographically. šeškiyawar to šeške. 108. akkuškeši. ú-e-ki-iš-ke-et-te-ni -škettani ak-ku-uš-ke-et-ta-ni. 110. peškezzi. KUB 31.10 (p. peškanzi.are secondarily inflected as stems in -iya-: iškiyazi.56A i 7 is exceptional. išgāmi 2 -škeši akkuškēši. paradigm da-aš-ke-e-mi we read non-plene forms with ambiguous -ke/i.consistently with e-vocalism (see §1. peškemi. KBo 3.‘to smear. The example ḫu-u-e-eš-ki-iš KBo 24. to which perhaps this a-vocalization is due. up-pí-iš-ke-et-ta-ni. 205 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.‘to sleep’).indb 205 6/5/08 4:17:16 PM . uškeši 108 -ške/atti uš-ke/at-ti† 3 -škezzi daškezzi. šanḫiškeweni -šgaweni dašgaweni. ú-e-te-eš-ke-ta-ni. KUB 24.113: 4ʹ. ša-aš-nu-uš-ke-et-ta-ni -ška(t)teni dāšqatēni. 10 (MH/MS). ta-me-eš-ke/at-te-ni -ške/atteni da-aš-ke/at-te-ni.g. many of the spellings indicate a much older original. piškeši. 111. which suggest that (in older Hittite) the a vocalization occurred when the stress fell on the following ending instead of on the /ske/ syllable.‘to rejoice’. daškemi. pí-iš-ke/at-te-ni. 109. 112. iškiyanzi to iške. KUB 13. 113. uškanzi. uš-ke/at-te-ni. the form is immediately preceded by a syllabic writing of na-at-ta. 7ʹ.64. While the ductus of the tablet is NS. uš-ke/at-te-e-ni 113 3 -škanzi daškanzi. akkuškanzi 108 109 110 111 112 113daske. piškanzi. ūškezzi. On the strength of this form. akkuškeuwani. daškewani -škeweni daškēweni.(imperfective stem of šeš. peškeši. There are a few instances where stems in -ške. daškeši.109 da-aš-ga-at[-te-ni].. duškiyazi to duške. 00-HittiteGrammar. KUB 14. akkuškezzi Plural 1 -škewani akkuškēwani. memiškēmi -škami ḫandāišqami. anoint’.111 uš-ka-at-te-ni. other ambigu- ous writings in this tablet using the  sign (e. 183).33 Present Indicative Singular 1 -škemi daškēmi.

12 iv 17 (NH).34 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 206 Preterite Indicative Singular 1 -šganun dašganun -škenun peškenun. 117. The ablaut -āi-/-ā. Supine: -škewan. uškandu. n. akkuškandu 12. 181.114 ḫatreškeš.‘to put’). -škawan (written: -š-ke-u-an. Both of these forms are found in KUB 14. ḫatreškeš is found in HKM 30:15 (MH/MS). which is MH in MS. KUB 38. since the -nu-causatives in OH probably carried the stress on the nu syllable. da-aš-ke-et-tén. 116. pešket. (-škiš) daškeš. Here there is a good chance that the a vocalism is to be preferred. epurešgawen. ušket. uškenun. uš-ke/at-te-en. [w]ešgawen -škewen wekiškewen 116 3 -šker daškēr. -š-ga-wa-an). pí-iš-ke/at-tén.34. dašket.35.3 i 17 (NH). ak-ku-uš-ke-ed-du Plural 2 -šketten ak-ku-uš-ke-et-tén. daškenun 2 -škeš. 17. Participle: -škant-. Most mi-verbs in -āi.92 24–25 (MS). zikkš (*d+škeš < dai. -š-ke-u-wa-an.are part of a very productive class of verb stems formed from nouns and adjectives by means of a suffix. ḫuēškiš 3 -šket zikkēt. On the reality of the a vowel see Neu 1989a. 00-HittiteGrammar. akkuškenun. akkušker -škar pí-iš-kar 117 114 115 116 117 formation of ske forms verbs in -ske-: p preterite paradigm Imperative Singular 1 -škellu piškellu 2 -ške peške. KBo 14.2 obv. Ablauting Stems in -ā(i)- 12.reflects 114. Verbal substantive: -škewar (written: -š-ke-u-wa-ar ). akkuške 3 -škeddu da-aš-ke-ed-du. da-aš-ke/at-te-en. piškandu. šanḫišgawen. -š-ke-wa-an. akkušket -ške/at ša-al-la-nu-uš-ke/at 115 Plural 1 -šgawen ušgawen. 21 and 35).1 (rev. But see the different treatments of ša-aš- nu-uš-ga-at-te-ni and [t]a?-aš-nu-uš-ke-et-ta-ni in KBo 7.indb 206 6/5/08 4:17:16 PM . pí-iš-ke/at-te-en. uš-ke-ed-du. uške. Infinitive: -škewanzi (written: -š-ke-u-wa-an-zi). KBo 22. 12. See also p. On the preterite third-person plural ending in general see Yoshida 1991. 115. ak-ku-uš-ke/at-te-en 3 -škandu daškandu. pešker.28 + KBo 8. pí-iš-ke-tén -škatten dāšqaten -ške/atten me-mi-iš-ke-et-te-en. 7 (OS).

sg.indb 207 6/5/08 4:17:17 PM . discard.e-/ not yet contracted to /tarma:y-/. harbor’.‘to remove. [ḫ]atrāuni KUB 14. 15.‘to pre- pare something.‘to invoke’. For all the preceding see Oettinger 1979: 30–34. The following are some of the verbal stems in -āi-:118 ḫandāi. dammešḫāi. and imp. munnāi. sg. mutāi. tuḫḫāi. The ablaut form -āi.‘to make rounds’. 207 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.36. ḫatrāuni ḫandāuni 119 2 ḫatrātt[eni] 3 ḫatrānzi ḫandānzi irḫanzi. irḫān[zi] handai: preterite paradigm Preterite Indicative Singular 1 ḫatrnun ḫandanun 2 ḫatrāeš 3 ḫatrit. malāi. 12. 2 and 3 (ḫatrāeš and ḫatrāit). ḫatrāi/eš† ḫandit irḫāit Plural 1 ḫandāwen 2 ḫatrātten 3 ḫatrāer ḫand/taer Imperative Singular 2 ḫatrāi ḫandāi 3 ḫatrāu† ḫand/taiddu 118. Paradigms of the verbal stems in -āi-. ḫandazi. cited by Otten (1969: 26) and HED H 98.‘to approve. dispose of’. write’. joined’. ḫandāi † irḫāizzi. consent to’. 00-HittiteGrammar. irḫāi. n. matched. 3 (ḫatrāizzi). mugāi. to be fitted. sg.is found only in pres. irḫaiz[zi]. See also p.‘to oppress’. It is possible that OS spellings such as tar-ma-e-mi represent a se- quence /tarma:. ḫantezzi. 36 (MH/MS). pret.‘to tend (medically)’. 181.‘to send.1 rev. arḫāizzi. šaktāi.36 PIE *-āye-/-āyo-. ḫandāuni 1691/u ii 15. irḫāi † Plural 119 1 ḫatrāweni. 119. 119 Present Indicative Singular 1 ḫatrāmi ḫandāmi irḫāmi 2 ḫatrāši ḫandši 3 ḫatrāizzi ḫand/tizzi.‘to hide.‘to be short of breath’. Oettinger (1979: 30–34) interprets the stem as -ae-. 2 (ḫatrāi) and 3 (ḫantaiddu). ḫatrāi.

Note also pres. šānun . lāūn.38. 00-HittiteGrammar.21. lāi. they conjugate almost identically in most periods of Hittite. Paradigms: Present Indicative Singular Plural 1 lāmi. šāizzi lanzi. ḫā lātten.20–13. see HKM 30:19ʹ (MH/MS). Although Oettinger (1979) assigns lā. 121. ḫānt-.‘to be angry. ḫatrāu) there is no confusion in Hittite between mi-verbs in -āi. p. they were influenced by the ḫi-conjugation. ḫāit. irḫawanzi.and šae. lānzi. ḫānun.(pp. 64–67) and ḫae. rage’. lāi †. Aside from the very few singular third-person forms listed above (ḫandai. Participle: lānt-.are not formed with the suffix -āi- but originally had the same inflection as those with the suffix: lāi. Verbal substantive: ḫandawar.‘to loose’. lāwar. irḫant-. lāwen 2 laīš. šāi. Infinitive: lāwanzi.39.and ḫi-verbs in -ai. šāyit. 222). forms of which are marked below with †. ḫāmi lāweni 121 2 lāši.in OS texts regularly write the neuter singular participle with a plene final syl- lable: ir-ḫa-a-an.(for which see §§13.indb 208 6/5/08 4:17:18 PM .40. 12. ḫāer Imperative Singular Plural 2 lā. Imperfective stem: la-a-(i-)iš-ke-. Infinitive I: ḫandawanzi.(sic) (pp. Participle: ḫatrant-120. 12. šāit. mi-verbs in -ā(i). Verbal substantive: šāwar. sg. irḫawar. ḫāiš ḫatten 3 lāit. ḫāši 3 lāizzi. If correctly read. ḫātten 3 lāu. šāiš† lāer. believe’. 12. šānt-.37. ḫandnt-. 120.37 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 208 Plural 2 ḫatratten 3 ḫand/tandu irḫandu 12. 3 iškallāizzi alongside iškallai ‘he tears’. 360–64) to different classes. irḫai. But because their stems were monosyllabic.‘to trust. la-[a-i]š-ši. ḫāi. etc. šānzi 121 Preterite Indicative Singular Plural 1 lānun . lāddu 12. The following monosyllabic stems in -āi.

The combination of ablaut and contractions of vowels led to compli- cated paradigms. ú-wa-nu-nu-un in BoTU 57 I 10. pāizzi uēzzi. is more likely in view of the plene writing ú-e-ez-zi. 388–89. pār uēr 127 128 Imperative Singular Plural 127 2 īt eḫu ītten.and u.as monosyllabic /we-/ and ú-wa. ú-et-te-en. pāimi. 128. See CHD P 21 for occurrences of imperative paitten.‘to come’122 exhibit many irregularities in inflection. 198. but uenzi is much less common than uwanzi in NH. 286) and the inherited motion verb *h1ei. uwaši. We interpret ú-e/iC. For paradigms and discussion see Oettinger 1979: 131–32. uwāši paitteni. The former. 124. uwāmi.as disyllabic /uwa-/. found only once. 209 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.(see §12. uwattēni paitti† 3 paizzi. uezzi.41 pai. pit uet. is probably a scribal error for ú-wa-nu-un.‘to go’ and ue-/uwa. in an NH copy of an OH text. uwaš uwatten 3 paīt. They are univerbations of the motion prefixes pe.41. walk. pāūn. In OS ‘to go’ has a consistent alternation of pai. Both uenzi and uwanzi occur in all periods. pāndu uwandu. pāiši.and pā-. pāwen uwawen uwānun 126 2 paitta† uēš. 123 124pai and uwa: preterite Present Indicative Singular Plural 1 paimi. In the spelling ú-i/ez-zi it cannot be determined if the form was read /wezzi/ or /wizzi/. 123. paittani 123 uwtteni.32. paiwani. The i writ- ing is the traditional (or “default”) writing by Hittitologists. move’. 125. except for the pret. later replaced by payer ( pa-i-er) and pār based on pai + ēr and pā + ēr. paši. 3 pāir ([pa:yr]).or ú-e-eC. See Melchert 1984b: 40 –41. uwadu 122. may be a scribal error.21. ( paitten) uwatten. paittu ueddu pāntu.124 pānzi. (uetten) 128 3 paiddu. pānun uwanun. payer. pāmi uwami.‘to go. uēt pāir. panzi uenzi. See AHP 140. p. pāiweni. uwanzi 125 uwazzi 125 126 Preterite Indicative Singular Plural 1 pāun. to our knowledge.indb 209 6/5/08 4:17:19 PM . cited HW1 238. 127. 00-HittiteGrammar. and §18.and ue- 12. The forms paittāni and paittēni are found only in MH/NS. 126. ú-wa-at-te-en occurs twice in the immediate context. uwaweni uwammi pāweni 2 paiši. however. p. pl. piwen. The extremely common verbs pai.

3 i-ez-zi in KUB 33. and the imperative second-person plural paitten occurs just once. arnutti † waḫnuši 131 aš(ša)nuši 3 arnu(z)zi waḫnu(z)zi. *uwa) are not attested. laknuši.‘to ar- range. 7 (OS) and pres. 2 ītten (written i-it-tén/i-it-te-en). Also written -nu-ši KBo 4. waḫnummeni aššanummeni 2 arnutteni waḫnutteni paḫšanutteni. For uwa. aš(ša)nu.‘to go’: pres. unprefixed forms of *h1ei. 00-HittiteGrammar. Other verbs: ḫatkišnuši.indb 210 6/5/08 4:17:20 PM . karšanuši. 178).include: arnu. The latter is backformed from the third plural. ārnumi waḫnūmi. paḫšanumi aš(ša)numi waḫnumi 2 130 arnuši.129 For pai.42.the forms are sg. arnūwanzi aššanūwanzi 129.‘to turn. For the meaning of the suffix see §10.2 obv.333 iii 6.44. waḫnuwanzi paḫšanuwanzi aš(ša)nu(w)anzi. ašnu(z)zi. Participle: pānt-.(*pai. uwawar. etc. 12. 2 īt (written i-it) and pl. change’. pl. tinnuši.are used for the imperative of ‘to go’. and a special suffixed form for the imperative second-person singular of ‘to come’.‘to protect’. pāwanzi. Sample causative verbs in -nu. There are also two other attested forms of unprefixed reflexes of *h1ei. 130. tittanuši. and waḫnu. aššanu(z)zi. aš(ša)nutteni paḫḫašnutteni 3 arnu(w)anzi.and uwa. Infinitive: pa(u)wanzi. provide’. The expected imperative second-person singular forms of pai.‘to transport’. replacing historically expected but synchronically irregular *ezi. ašnumeni. waḫnuzi āššanuzi. nuntarnuši. Instead. ārnuwanzi. uwa- wanzi.42 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 210 12. āššanuwanzi.66 + KBo 40. Non-Ablauting Stems in -nu- 12. 2 is eḫu.15 (p. Verbal substantive: pāwar. ḫarganuši. Paradigms: 130 131 Present Indicative Singular 1 arnum(m)i. 3 ya-an-zi in KBo 22. āšnuzi Plural 1 arnummeni waḫnumeni.14 ii 34. 131.43. 12.the sg. sg. see Hoffner 1997c. paḫḫašnu-/paḫšanu. uwant-.

46.48 Preterite Indicative Singular 2 paḫšanuš 3 arnut.indb 211 6/5/08 4:17:21 PM . ašša- nuwawar. aš(ša)nuške-. p. paḫḫaššanumanzi. aš(ša)nut paḫšanut 3 arnuddu waḫnuddu paḫšanuddu.132 waḫnuwant-. 44).. see §12.in forming a complete paradigm for this verb of speech. -men. gen.21. paḫšanuwant-. For the forms in -meni. etc. aššanummanzi. waḫnummanzi. For a dis- cussion see Oettinger 1979: 109–10. ašnumanzi. 12.‘to say’(originally *‘to put’. paḫḫašnuwant-.48. ārnut waḫnut paḫḫaššanut aš(ša)nut Plural 1 arnummen waḫnum(m)en aššanummen 2 paḫšanutten 3 arnuer waḫnuer paḫšanuer. waḫnumar. paḫšanutten 3 arnu(w)andu waḫnuwandu paḫḫašnuandu 12.47. 198) is supplemented by the stem ter-/tar. waḫnuške-. 12. -manzi. aš(ša)nuwant-. Infinitive: arnumanzi. Imperfective stem: arnuške-. waḫnuwar. paḫḫaššanuwant-. 211 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12. paḫšanummanzi.45. 132. Participle: arnuwant-.‘to say’ 12. aš(ša)numaš. arnuant-. Suppletive Verb te-/tar. On this form in Laws §77 manuscript A (OS) see discussion in LH 194. Verbal substantive: arnummar. -mar. aššanuddu paḫḫašnuddu Plural 2 arnutten waḫnutten paḫḫašnutten. 00-HittiteGrammar. paḫšanummar.126 (p. The stem te. see §1. aššanuer paḫḫašša[nuer] warnu: preterite paradigm Imperative Singular 2 rnut waḫnut paḫḫaššanut.

tēši tarteni. mi-verbs with stems in -āi. Participle: tarant-. pp.49.‘to raise. tardi taranzi tt terer 133 134 paradigm of te. 134.‘to cultivate’.‘to sicken’. read z[i-i]k-ke-e-eš. with later replacement forms duly noted. šarlāi-/šarliya. park-/parkiya. duwarna-/duwarniya- 133.(§§12.30. In some cases one stem is clearly a chronological replacement of another. magnify’.(§§12.‘to create’. Often. tarkummāi-/tarkummiya. but in other cases the temporal relationship is less clear. -āi-. however. 00-HittiteGrammar. ḫark-/ ḫarkiya. sell’. one stem of a root belongs to the mi. 12.and other(s) to the ḫi-conjugation: Consonantal ḫi-stem and mi-stem in -iya-: ānš-/ānšiya. This unusual and unexpected form appears to be a Luwian present third-person singular form in -ti. 9. 206–208) and -iya. karš-/karšiya. (tēten) 3 tddu darandu 12.37.‘to cut’.‘to perish’.‘to spin’.35–§12. tar-aš-ke-. 12.150 obv. mi-verbs with stems in consonant and -iya-: malk-/malkiya. A number of Hittite verbs are attested as belonging to more than one stem- class. rise’. Verbs whose original stem class is reasonably clear have been treated under that class. ḫapparāi-/ḫappariya. See [t]e-eš KUB 60.50. end Imperative Singular Plural 2 tt tetten. ištark-/ištarkiya.28– 12. teš — 134 3 tezzi.‘to elevate. parš-/paršāi-/paršiya. tēteni. In HKM 48:17 instead of - te-e-eš. šamnāi-/šamniya. mi-verbs with stems in consonant.‘to wipe’.‘to break’.49 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 212 Present Indicative Preterite Indicative Singular Plural Singular Plural 1 tēmi. tarupp-/taruppāi-/taruppiya- ‘to assemble’.‘to leave. trade.indb 212 6/5/08 4:17:21 PM . Verbs with Mixed Stems 12.‘to proclaim’.and mi-stems in -iya-: dala-/daliya. pp. and -iya-: ištalk-/ištalkāi-/ištalkiya. ḫi-stems in -a. temi tarueni tnun — 133 2 teši. Imperfective stem: tar-ši-ke-.51.‘to make smooth’. What follows here are examples of verbs with multiple stems whose chronology is indeterminate.‘to do business. 202–204): aršāi-/aršiya.

(and šartāi-) ‘to wipe’. In this case two originally separate verbs have merged: šai. p.‘to cut up’ versus markiya.‘to disapprove of.(see §12.‘to reap.21 (p.52 ‘to break’.136 12. arš. 213 Conjugation of mi-Verbs 12.‘to praise’.‘to be satiated’. išpai-/išpiya. reject’. cultivate’. 136. ḫi-stems in -ai. harvest’ versus waršiya.‘to throw.indb 213 6/5/08 4:17:22 PM . p.‘to bind’.and neya.‘to pacify. seal’ (ḫi-verb in -ai-) and šiya. and warš. 206): duwarnez(z)i. See also nai.23. 223).(see §12.and mi-stems in -iya-: išḫai-/išḫiya.‘to press.35. cause to fall’). shoot’ (see peššiya. Not all apparent examples of the above are really the same verb: mark.52. 135. walla-/walliya.‘to throw (away). 00-HittiteGrammar. 199) and to a mi- stem in -āi. This verb also shows some forms belonging to a stem in -e-/-a. šai-/šiya-.135 šart-/šartiya. soothe’.§13. care for.‘to flow’ versus aršāi-/aršiya- ‘to tend. duwarnazi alongside duwarnāizzi.

‘to dry up.1. šaggaḫḫi ākmi † 1 ārḫi 2 šakti. While there are exceptions such as šekk. Written ak-ku-(u-)e-ni. There is a tendency in this class for -ta to replace -š as the preterite third-person singular ending and for the e vocalism to spread at the expense of a. ar-/er.‘to come to. n. 214 00-HittiteGrammar. ākteni ārteni. ḫašš-/ḫeš. instead of expected ḫi-conjugation *ākḫi or *aggaḫḫi. in contradistinction to a-ku-e-ni ‘we drink.’ Note that the first five stems show an ablaut a/e with a distribution nearly completely oppo- site that of mi-verbs in e/a. ašaš-/ašeš. 12. and §1. Written e-ru-u-e-ni and er-u-e-ni. sg. ḫēšanzi 123 1.‘to open’. So. šektni erteni 3 šakanzi. arrive at’. ḫād. šakteni.‘to die’ and the frequent contrast between present third-person sin- gular and present third-person plural: ištāpi/ištappanzi ‘to shut/stop up’. ḫašš. ḫāši/ḫaššanzi ‘to give birth’ and zāḫi/zaḫḫanzi ‘to strike’.indb 214 6/5/08 4:17:23 PM . Chapter 13 CONJUGATION OF ḫi-VERBS Consonantal Stems 13. Note aki and a/eker to akk.‘to give birth’. ḫašzi † Plural 2 1 šekkueni. Since the mi-conjugation forms are all in late texts. 3.’ See p.‘to settle’. Other mi-conjugation forms of akk.‘to know’. 35). artni.‘to know’. 188. akk-/ek. šekkanzi akkanzi aranzi ḫaššanzi. The stems of many ḫi-verbs end in a single consonant that may be geminate or non-geminate: šakk-/šekk. ‘to know’ ‘to die’ ‘to arrive at’ ‘to open’ Present Indicative Singular 1 šākḫi. there is also a regular alternation by which stems ending in a geminate consonant show a non- geminate in the present third-person singular and preterite third-person plural.‘to die’. See AHP 80–81. 3 akta. we can assume singular first-person ḫi-forms in OH and MH.84 (p. šekti ākti ārti 3 šakki aki