partipartiške/a-

The verb is a hapax attested in a Hittite adaption of the Gilgamesh epic (NS).

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – On the outdated readings by Friedrich 1929a:20f. and Stefanini 1969a:46f., see CHD P:199f.

[E.R.]

Unfortunately, the sole attestation of the word in the Gilgamesh epic occurs in broken context, which leads several scholars to avoid any semantic interpretation (thus more recently e.g. HEG P:509, Tischler 2008a:140, CHD P:199f., EDHIL:647, Dempsey 2015a:328). However, what is left of the context gives at least a decent idea of the semantic field of partipartiše/a-; cf. KUB 17.3 iii 7’-9’: ⁽⁷⁾GIM-an-ma lu-uk-kat-ta nu ^dGIŠ.GIM.MAŠ-uš i-wa-a[r                   ] ⁽⁸⁾pár-ti-pár-ti-iš-ki-iz-zi GIM-an-ma-aš-kán A-NA[                   ] ⁽⁹⁾a-ar-aš nu … “But when it dawned, Gilgamesh p.-ed lik[e a …], but when he arrived at [ …], then …”. In spite of the doubts on the relation between the simplex partā(i)- and the reduplicated verb partipartiške/a- expressed by Friedrich 1929a:20f. and Dempsey 2015a:328 or even its omission (EDHIL:647), both words are clearly connected, since both denote (the beginning of) motion (here: between the morning and the arrival at some place; for partā(i)- see under Lemma) and, most significant, the motion is described by a comparison with iwar ‘like’. The idiomatic parallelism can hardly be a coincidence and safely proves the relationship. Since at least the medio-passive base verb partā(i)- can be shown to mean ‘to set off for running/flying’, imperfective partipartiške/a- is likely to mean ‘to have set off and keep running/flying’ vel sim. (Oettinger 1979a:376 n. 243 and Oettinger 2015d:272, HED PA:173f., Raggi Braglia 1989a:208), which accords perfectly with the given context. The authors also adduce different etymologies in support of their semantic interpretations (Oettinger 2015d:272: *sperd^h- ‘to run, set off’; HED PA:173f. referring to Ivanov 1979a:145: Latin pars, partis ‘part’; Raggi Braglia 1989a:208: *per- ‘to fly’), but the context and the close inner-Luwian derivational relation back the claim sufficiently.

[E.R.]

The stem partipartiške/a- is based on the simplex partā(i)- (root part-) and its reduplicated structure has been convincingly compared with waltiwaltiške/a- (Dempsey 2015a:328), paripariške/a- ([4687] HEG P:509), kunikunkiške/a- (Oettinger 2015d:272), and furthermore with parip(pa)rai-, wariwarant- and wal(l)iwal(l)ai- (HED PA:173f.). The final suffix is the Hittite imperfective morpheme -ške/a-.

[E.R.]

A Luwian origin was first proposed in 2015. Oettinger 2015d:271f. argued that the Luwian root part- ‘to set off’ matches Hittite išpart- ‘to set off’. Luwian part- lost initial *s- before -p- by regular sound change, while Hittite employed a prothetic vowel to keep the cluster. The phonological contrast between the two verbs speaks for Oettinger’s explanation and is therefore given preference over the alternative that Hittite produced and kept a doublet. However, since partā(i)- and partipartiške/a- are fully integrated into the Hittite lexicon and derivational system, the borrowing must have taken place at a rather early period.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. part-.