xñtaba-^(ti) 

This lexeme is found in the inscription of the inscribed pillar of Xanthos dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE and stylistically to around 400 BCE (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.).

[D.S.]

3sg. impv. act.

xñtabatu

TL 44d.71 (Xanthos)

Carruba 1969b:99 n. 100 takes xñtabasi as a 2^nd singular present form of the verb xñtaba-^(ti). This is possible in view of the fact that a direct speech passage occurs immediately after. For the other possible interpretation as a genitival adjective, see xñtaba-.

[D.S.]

Different segmentation, viz. xñtaba and tu…, in Schürr 2018b:99, which is however unmotivated.

[D.S.]

The interpretation of the denominative verb xñtaba-^(ti) is dependent on the semantics of its derivational base. Gusmani 1968c:9-12 translates xñtaba- as ‘ruler’ and translates xñtaba- as ‘to determine’. He admits that since the direct object of xñtabatu is tuwiz ‘offerings’, a meaning ‘to rule’ is not possible. Melchert (DLL:136) suggests ‘to regulate’.Gehrisch 2018a:91 keeps the meaning ‘to rule’, but leaves tuwiz untranslated. Sasseville 2021a:54f., equating xñtaba- with Hitt. ḫandāwar ‘arrangement, preparations’, translates the denominative verb as ‘to arrange, prepare (the offerings)’, which is contextually supported, since the derivational base xñtaba- found in the same context refers to sacrificial offerings.

[D.S.]

Sasseville 2021a:54f. argues for a factitive in -a-^(ti) derived from xñtaba- c. Contra Hajnal 1995a:212 n. 252, who posits a denominative in -a(i)-^(di) because of the word xñtabaime/i-. However, one should not assign xñtabaimi to the same lexeme as xñtabatu; see under lemma.

[D.S.]

For the derivational base see Lyc. B xñtaba-.