tarmattar/n-

Attestations are found in tablet catalogs, cult inventories and possibly an oracle report (all NS texts).

[E.R.]

nom./acc. sg.	tar-ma-at-tar	KUB 38.25 ii? 3’	(CTH 526, NS)
	tar-ma-at-tar	KUB 57.90 iv? 6’	(CTH 282, NS)
gen. sg.	tar-ma-at-na-aš	KUB 30.62 rev. 11	(CTH 282, NS)
	⸢tar-ma⸣-at-na-aš	KBo 21.81 obv. 12’	(CTH 527, NS)

Cf. also putative tar-ma-at-t[a-ra at KUB 5.7 rev. 8’ adduced in Starke 1990a:472.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv with the exception of KUB 30.62, which was checked against the handcopy only.  – The gloss wedges are imprinted partly on the right line of the column divider, as if they were added only after writing the word proper.

[E.R.]

None of the (mostly fragmentary) contexts allow a conclusive semantic interpretation. Awaiting further evidence, one must rely on the analysis of the stem formation. Starke 1990a:472 (following Laroche 1951a:67 semantically, but correcting his formal analysis) submits that the suffix -attar/n- makes an abstract meaning most likely. Thus, an abstract noun based on either tarm(i)- c. ‘nail, peg’ (CLL:213) or tarm(a)i-^(di) ‘to nail, fasten’ (Laroche 1965a:49, Starke 1990a:472, HEG T/D :190) would result in a meaning ‘nailing, fastening’; without specification of the derivational process, also Tischler 2008a:190, Ünal 2007a:865, Melchert 2003b:198, EDHIL:844, Kronasser 1966a:294.Laroche 1951a:472 feels obliged to concede that, at KUB 5.7 rev. 8’, the meaning was concretized, but as laid out below, this is not necessary.

However, it is possible to render the use of the abstract meaning more precisely. Two contexts point to, or are at least compatible with, the designation of a kind of ritual, which is not improbable given the importance of nails and fastening in rituals: KUB 30.62 rev. 10f. ⁽¹⁰⁾1/2 ŠU^!.RI.ÀM ṬUPPI AWATIM ⁽¹¹⁾ḫattili tarmatnaš “A half-tablet about the matter of fastening in Hattian manner” (slightly differently Dardano 2006a:241f.) and KUB 5.7 rev. 8’f. ⁽⁸⁾2 TAPAL EZEN₄ GURUN 2 tarmatta[ra … ] ⁽⁹⁾UL iyanteš “2 festivals of fruit (and) 2 fasten[ing rituals (…)] have not been celebrated” (Starke 1990a:412, Tognon 2005a:44). An epithet of the Storm-god, ^DU tarmatnaš ‘Storm-god of Fastening’, as attested at KBo 21.81 obv. 12’, is likewise plausible. Also for the instance with gloss wedges, the action of the ritual fastening of a deity (tarmattar ^DAMAR.UTU ^DKAL i-[) is a plausible interpretation, which at least does not contradict the interpretation.

[E.R.]

While scholars agree that tarmattar/n- is formed with the heteroclitic suffix -attar/n-, the base is still debated. The verbal stem tarm(a)i-^(di) is considered to be the starting point in Laroche 1965a:49, Starke 1990a:472, HEG T/D:190. In contrast, Melchert (CLL:213) claims that only the noun tarm(i)- provides a possible derivational base form and, indeed, neither stem allomorph of tarm(a)i-^(di), i.e. tarmi- or tarmai-, would yield the attested result. Moreover, there are several clear cases of denominal -attar/n- derivatives, e.g. āššiwantattar/-atn-‘poverty’ from āššiwant- ‘poor’, so that Melchert’s solution, tarm(i)- ‘nail, peg’ → tarmattar/-atn- ‘nailing, fastening’, is obviously correct.

[E.R.]

The Luwian origin of the word emerges clearly from the use of gloss wedges (see tarmattar/n-), the form of the suffix with geminate -tt-, and the typically Luwian preservation of the cluster -ttn-; cf. CLL:213, Melchert 2003b:198, EDHIL:844.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. tarm(i)-.