aršulāi-^zi

This word only appears once in a NS oracle report on Arma-Tarḫunta und Šaušgatti (CTH 569).

[A.B.]

3sg. pres. ind. act.

ar-šu-⸢la⸣-iz-zi

KUB 16.32+KUB 50.6 obv. ii 26’

(CTH 569, NS)

The attestation follows CLL:31, HW 2nd ed. A:346 and HEG U–Z:373 (cf. Ünal 2007a:62, Ünal 2016a:85, van den Hout 2007a:249 and Rosenkranz 1950a:190, not included in Laroche 1959a). The transliteration has been checked against the photos of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.
It remains unclear to which word this form belongs, in particular whether or not the beginning of the written sequence shows some kind of mistake (cf. below for discussions).

[A.B.]

The first sign of the form is usually interpreted as a gloss marker, cf. HW 2nd ed. A:346, CLL:31, Rosenkranz 1950a:190, Werner 1967b:14, Ünal 1974a:108, van den Hout 1991a:295, van den Hout 1998b:180, van den Hout 2007a:249, Ünal 2007a:62, Ünal 2016a:85, Tischler 2008a:27, Tischler 2016a:32, and Zorman 2007a:757.

HEG U–Z:373 reads the first sign as wa^! and cautiously suggests an otherwise unattested verb waršulāi-, instead. However, according to the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, the first sign of this form is clearly different from wa (cf. e.g. wa in wa-ar-ši-ia-⸢an⸣-za in line 22’) and appears with some spacing before the rest of the word, which rather points to a gloss marker and thus a form ar-šu-⸢la⸣-iz-zi. For the interpretation of the form and the possible function of the gloss marker in this instance cf. under Meaning.

[A.B.]

CLL:31 does not indicate any meaning, and the word is also often left untranslated (cf. below). The context of KUB 16.32+KUB 50.6 obv. ii 26’ (the transliteration is based on the photos of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, and in addition to that, the hand copies [note, that the hand copy of KUB 50.6 has a different line numbering than the one indicated in the literature; the lines corresponding to this text passage in the hand copy are: 25’–27’] as well as the transliterations and translations of Werner 1967b:14f., Ünal 1974a:108f., van den Hout 1991a:295f., van den Hout 1998b:180f. and HEG U–Z:373 been taken into account) shows the following:

^(24’)[UR^]Uki-i-ú-ta-an-kán uru-an ⸢a⸣-na ^mgal.^d10 ar-⸢ḫa⸣ me-⸢an⸣-zi ^(25’)[n]a-an a-na gidim šum-an-zi ^mka-ta-pa-dingir-lì-iš ka-ru-ú ^(26’)[w]a-tar-na-aḫ-ḫa-an-za nu gidim a-pa-a-aš ar-šu-⸢la⸣-iz-zi

^(24’)They take away Kiuta, the city, from ^mgal.^d10 (=Talmi-Teššub^?, cf. van den Hout 1995a:158 and van den Hout 1998b:71, 223) ^(25’)[a]nd they give it to the deceased, Katapaili already ^(26’)has been [as]signed, he will aršulāi- the deceased.

Werner 1967b:14, Ünal 1974a:109 and van den Hout 1998b:181 do not translate the form under discussion; van den Hout 1991a:296 and HW 2nd ed. A:346 consider a meaning “zufrieden stellen” (cf. Tischler 2008a:222, Tischler 2016a:32, Ünal 2007a:62, Ünal 2016a:85), which is possible with regard to the context (something is given to the deceased, who will thus be appeased).

As already mentioned, instead of a Glossenkeilwort aršulāi-^zi, HEG U–Z:373 cautiously suggests that the form belongs to an otherwise unattested denominative verb waršulāi- with a tentative meaning “zufrieden stellen (?)” of Hitt. waršula- ‘drop, humidity’, which is also attested with a secondary meaning ‘pleasant (appeasing) aroma’, (cf. HEG U–Z:370–373). This would fit the context, but as explained under Graphic features, the attested form is rather ar-šu-⸢la⸣-iz-zi. There are, however, no other attestations of a Hittite verb aršulāi-^zi (with or without gloss marker) or a similar base. Instead, a similar verb *waršulāi-^zi ‘appease’ (or sim.), of which at least the base is known, would fit also semantically.

In this case, one could consider a certain kind of use of the gloss marker that has already been pointed out by Güterbock 1956a:119 and is also attested for the form za^!(ḪA)-an-ki-la-tar in KUB 16.77 obv. ii 47’ (cf. the discussion under the lemma †ḫankilatar-). The scribe who wrote (or copied) the text perhaps marked a mistake or at least a suspicious form (probably present in a Vorlage), considering the text type: oracle summary) with a gloss marker. The details for the emergence of the attested written form ar-šu-⸢la⸣-iz-zi remain, however, unknown.

[A.B.]

The attested form of this word is clearly Hittite (cf. CLL:31) but it also appears in the list of Luwianisms of van den Hout 2007a:249 (though not in that of Melchert 2005a). The use of the gloss marker could point to a Luwian origin but as described under Meaning, this is not the only attested function of this marker (cf. Schwartz 1938a:75, 78 and Melchert 2005a:445).

CLL:31 considers an unattested Luwian verb *arsulā(i)- (with unknown meaning) as the source for this word. This is possible; for the Luwian suffix -ā(i)- forming denominal verbs cf. Melchert 2003b:199, in this case the Glossenkeilwort would be a Luwian loan word in Hittite. But it could also be an otherwise unattested Hittite verb with the Hitt. suffix -āi- (forming denominal verbs, cf. Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:176f.).

As mentioned under Meaning, a formally similar and semantically fitting Hittite verb *waršulāi-^zi (a denominative of Hitt. waršula- according to HEG U–Z:373) could also be considered a source for the attested form with gloss marker.

[A.B.]