nānuntar(r)iyāl(i)-
‘present’
- Language
- Cuneiform Luwian
- Grammar
- adj
- ID
- 1317
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Cuneiform Luwian
nānuntar(r)iyāl(i)-
‘present’1.1.1Transmission
Most of the 16 instances of the word are found in the Kuwattalla tradition, from MS texts onward. However, it also occurs once in a birth ritual and once in a letter, which indicates a broad use as can be expected for a grammaticalized adverb.
[E.R.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. pl. n. | [na-a-nu-un-t]a-ri-ia-a-[la] | KUB 35.39 i 31 | (CTH 759, LNS) |
| [na-a-nu]-un-t[a-ri-ia-la] | KUB 35.14 iv 3’ | (CTH 760, NS) | |
| na-a-nu-un-tar-ri-ia-l[a] | KBo 9.141 iv 16’ | (CTH 761, MS) | |
| na-a-nu-um-ta-ri-ia-l[a] | KUB 35.15 iii! 3 | (CTH 761, MS) | |
| [n]a-a-nu-un-tar-ri-i[a-la] | KBo 29.23, 3’ | (CTH 763, MS) |
The form [na-a-nu-un-t]a-ri-ia-a-al listed in CLL:156 and cited in Melchert 1994a:364 is a ghost form and must be deleted, see under Graphic Features.
[E.R.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – The reading of Starke 1985b:125, i.e. [na-a-nu-un-t]a-ri-ia-a-al at KUB 35.39 i 31 with final -al, must be rejected. The tablet breaks off immediately after -a-.
[E.R.]
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
Contra Kloekhorst (EDHIL:478f.), -um- in na-a-nu-um-ta-ri-ia-la! at KUB 35.15 iii! 3 is probably only a spelling mistake caused by nanum=pa in the following line ibid. iii! 4’, or it is influenced by the frequent allomorph of nānun, i.e. nānum with assimilation of its final nasal to following =pa.
[E.R.]
1.1.4Meaning
CLuw. nānuntar(r)iyal(i)- was interpreted as a derivative of nanun ‘now’ by Laroche in DLL:74. Although its morphology with the oppositional suffx -tarra/i- and the appurtenance suffixes -iya/i- and -(a)la/i- (following Melchert 1979a:262, Starke 1990a:369f.) was not entirely transparent to scholars at the time, Laroche´s conclusion that the word is an adjective meaning ‘present’ was generally accepted already at that point (still hesitantly Friedrich 1952a:425, but without doubts Čop 1970a:87, Melchert 1979a:262, Starke 1990a:368f., CLL:156, HEG L-N:348, Tischler 2008a:110, HED N:130, EDHIL:478f.).
[E.R.]
1.1.5Stem
After the ghost form in -al has been discarded (see under Forms), it is unproblematic to pose an adjectival stem in -āl(i)-, which is derived from a substantivized adjective nanuntarri(ya)-. This, in turn, is based on nanuntarr- with the oppositional suffix -tarr- (< *-téro-; see already Čop 1970a:87 and Melchert 1994a:237; more recently HED K:184 and Oettinger 2012b:206-208 with references. Starke 1990a:366 also considers *-tro- beside *-tero- in order to explain the spelling -ta-r°, but this is unnecessarily complicated, because -ta-r° may simply be a defective spelling. For *-tro- in *nuntar-, see Oettinger 2012b:206-208. – Outdated van Brock 1962a:93 with the proposal that -i- in nuntarri- goes back to locatival -i.
[E.R.]
For the lemma head see CLuw. *nun.