kumez(e)i-^(di)

This lexeme is well attested in various inscriptions of Lycia.
[D.S]

3sg. pres. ind. act.	kumezidi	N 320.26 (Xanthos)
		N 320.29 (Xanthos)
3pl. pres. ind. act.	kumezeiti	TL 26.16 (Tlos)
		TL 44b.39 (Xanthos)
		TL 84.5 (Sura)
	kumezei{:}ti	TL 65.21 (Isinda)
	kumeẓẹịṭị	TL 149.11 (Rhodiapolis)
	[k]umezei[ti]	N 304.1 (Sura)
	[kum]e[ze]iti	TL 65.15 (Isinda)
	kumezeijti	N 348 (Aloanda (Pinara))
inf.	kumezeine	TL 150.9 (Rhodiapolis)
	kumez[e]ine	TL 44b.44-45 (Xanthos)
	kumezeiṇ!ẹ?	TL 149.17 (Rhodiapolis)
	kumezeijna	N 348.10 (Aloanda (Pinara))
unknown	ḳumezeini	TL 65.12 (Isinda)

The grammatical assignment of the form kumezeini is disputed: Carruba 1968a:21 parses it as 1pl. pres. Starke 1990a:533 n. 1963 posits a dative singular form of a verbal substantive. Serangeli 2018a:323 assumes likewise a nominal form or an infinitive.
[D.S.]

For the latest reading of kumeẓẹịṭị in TL 149.11, see Christiansen 2020a:224-227. Regarding kumezeị[n]e in TL 149.17, Christiansen (ibid.) reads kumezei:ẹ?, although she translates it as an infinitive. Friedrich 1932a:87 restores the the letter [n] needed to obtain an infinitive. Thus, we emend to kumezeiṇ^!ẹ^?. For the tentative restorations of N 304.1 and TL 65.15, see Neumann 2007a:177. For the two new attestations containing the strange spelling of the diphthong as -eij- (N 348), see the new inscription published in Onur & Tekoğlu 2020a.
[D.S.]

The semantic elucidation of the verb kumez(e)i-^(di) as “to sacrifice” was facilitated by the discovery of the trilingual inscription of the Letoon (Laroche 1979c:109 followed by DLL:34, Neumann 2007a:177, Onur & Tekoğlu 2020a:20). It takes most of the time a sacrificial animal as direct object, but it may also take ara- ‘rite’ or uhazata- ‘yearly payment’ as direct object, whence the meaning ‘to perform (sacrificially)’ is also adequate.
[D.S.]

For the lemma head see PAnat. *kummo-.