šappa- or šippa-

This word is attested with gloss marker only once in a NS manuscript of the Hittite version of the epic of Gilgameš.

[A.B.]

3sg. pret. ind. act.

šap/šìp-pa-at-ta

KBo 22.91+KUB 8.50 rev. iii 23’

(CTH 341, NS)

The attestation follows Laroche 1959a:85, CLL:187, CHD Š:202f. (cf. HEG U–Z:493, HED Sa:134, Friedrich 1929a:24, Friedrich 1947b:7, Friedrich 1968a:38, Rosenkranz 1950a:195, Güterbock 1956a:127, van den Hout 2007a:247, and Zorman 2016a:590).

The transliteration has been checked against the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. The form can be read as šap-pa-at-ta or šìp-pa-at-ta (for the reading of the sign ŠAB cf. Rüster & Neu 1989a:175, Catsanicos 1994a:313, and Tischler 2010a:314 n. 18).

Götze 1947a:319 with n. 71 suggests the reading šip-pa-at-ta because he assumes that the form belongs to the Hitt. verb šippa- ‘to peel’. But in contrast to the Hittite verb, which belongs to the -mi-conjugation (cf. CHD Š:202f.), the form with gloss marker šìp-pa-at-ta shows geminate -tt- which rather points to a Luwian form (it is clear from the context that it must be a 3rd sg. preterite due to the preceding verb form kar-aš-ta ‘cut’, cf. under Meaning). Accordingly, the two words should be kept separate. Laroche 1952c:162 suggests to retain the reading šap-pa-at-ta because of the typical Luwian a-vowel, since he considered the form to belong to a verb šappa- of Luwian origin (with question mark), which could be the equivalent of Hitt. šippa- (cf. Laroche 1959a:85). But this is not a compelling argument for the reading of the CVC-sign ŠAB since there are also Luwian words with i-vowel. Hence, the reading of this Luwian verb form remains ambiguous as either šap-pa-at-ta or šìp-pa-at-ta.

[A.B.]

The verb describes an action to prepare punting poles for a boat. The context of KBo 22.91+KUB 8.50 rev. iii 22’–23’ shows the following (the transliteration is based on the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, and in addition to that, the hand copy as well as transliterations, restorations and translations of Friedrich 1929a:24f. (including the corrections of Ehelolf in the appendix of the same paper); Starke 1990a:313; CHD Š:202; Beckman 2001a:165; Beckman 2019a:49,51; Rieken et al. 2009b; Tischler 2010a:314 and HED Sa:134 have been taken into account):

^(22’)nu-kán ⸢wi₅⸣-na-la^! ša 50 gi-pé-eš-na-aš ^(23’)kar-aš-ta na-at šap/šìp-pa-at-ta pa[š^?- …] ^(24’)na-at-kán ⸢a⸣-na GIŠmá ša-ra-a da-a-i[š …]

^{(22’–23’)}and (Gilgameš) cropped poles of (measuring) 50 gipeššar; he scraped them (off), pa[š^?- …] ^(24’)he too[k] them up to the boat […]

Already Friedrich 1929a:56 pointed out the contextual equivalence between Akk. ikpur and šap-pa-at-ta or šìp-pa-at-ta in the present text (cf. Friedrich 1968a:38) and translated it as “schlug ab”. In the Akkadian version of Gilgameš (cf. George 2003a:688f.), the corresponding passage states that the poles (cf. under the lemma winal-) are trimmed off (branches or bark), Akk. kapāru B ‘to strip, clip, to trim down’, (cf. under kapāru B in CAD K:180). Hence a meaning ‘to peel, scrape off (tree branches or bark)’ would also fit in the Hittite version (cf. CLL:187; CHD Š:202f.; Güterbock 1956a:127; Melchert 2005a:452; Laroche 1959a:85 “écorcer”; Friedrich 1968a:38 “abschälen”; HEG L–S:844 “schälen, abschaben”; cf. Tischler 2010a:314; Götze 1947a:319, n. 71 “entrinden”; cf. Tischler 2008a:160, 171, and Tischler 2016a:303, 325).

The Glossenkeilwort is often listed together with several similar stems and meanings: HEG L–S:844 lists the stems “sap-, sapai-/sapiya- und auch sippai-” with the meanings “‘schälen, abschaben’, dann ‘säubern’; auch ‘entrinden, behauen’, Grundbedeutung wohl ‘(heftig) bewegen, schütteln’”. Similarly, HED Sa:133f. assumes that the stems “šap(p)-, šappai-, šippai-” belong to the same word and gives a variety of meanings ‘pluck, peel, strip, trim, pare, scrape, swipe, stroke, strum, skim’, but separates “sapi(y)a- (perhaps) ‘scrub, lather’”. Ünal 2007a:603 (cf. Ünal 2016a:457) conflates all these stems: šap-/šapiyai-/šappai-/šippa-/šippai- assuming a variety of meanings: ‘scale, shell, scrape, scrub, clean, cleanse, trim, hit, churn, dash, strike making circular movements, peel’. The connection to šapp- ‘to hit’ (or sim.) is also considered by Güterbock 1967a:141f. (he assumes that “to beat milk means to churn it, with a beating, plunging movement of a stick called plunger or dasher, which is here designated as ‘the wood of beating’”) who considers that the Glossenkeilwort from the Gilgameš text “could well be from the same root if ‘to hit’ here is comparable to German ‘behauen’, i.e., to trim by knocking the branches off” also pointing out that the “removal of the bark with an axe or adze involves a hitting movement”. Differently, CLL:187f. assumes that šapp(a)- ‘to hit, to churn (milk or rather butter)’, should be kept separated (cf. CHD Š:201f.). Friedrich 1968a:38 cautiously assumes that it is probably related but has been semantically specialized in a different way (cf. CHD Š:201f.; Götze 1947a:319, n. 71; CLL:187f.). Since the semantics of Hitt. šapp(a)- ‘to hit; to churn (milk)’ are quite different and the Glossenkeilwort šappa- or šippa- with the meaning ‘to peel, trim, scrape (off)’ is clearly a Luwian foreign word, these words should be kept apart. CHD Š:202f. lists the Glossenkeilwort together with Hitt. šappai- and šippāi- which seem to have a similar meaning: ‘to peel, scrape’ and could be related, but as noted under Forms we are dealing with a separate Luwian word here. Friedrich 1947b:7 assumes that it belongs to a Luwian verb with a more general meaning “rein halten(??)”, cf. Friedrich 1968a:38 who suggests that the Luwian verbs šappa- and šapiyāi- belong together considering a meaning “(Unreinheit von einem Gegenstande) abkratzen, abschaben; (Baumstämme) von Rinde befreien; – (allgemein) abwischen, säubern” (and that Hitt. šippāi- is “wohl verwandt”). A connection to Hitt. šapiya- ‘to scrub^(?), rub^(?)’ (cf. CHD Š:205f.) is unlikely (cf. CLL:188) due to the formal differences. The source of this word is rather CLuw. šapiyā(i)-(^di) ‘to scrub, rub, cleanse’ (cf. under the respective lemma).

To sum up, the following words should be distinguished:

• Luwian Glossenkeilwort šappa- or šippa- ‘to peel, scrape (off)’
• Hitt. šappai- ‘to peel, trim, scrape’
• Hitt. šapiya- ‘to scrub(?), rub(?)’ from CLuw. šapiyā(i)-(^di) ‘to scrub, rub, cleanse’
• Hitt. šapp(a)- ‘to hit, to churn (milk or rather butter)’

[A.B.]

The word is generally assumed to be of Luwian origin (already Friedrich 1929a:56 considered it as “wohl unhethitisch” and Friedrich 1968a:38 as “luwisch”), it appears in the Luwian dictionaries of Laroche 1959a:85 and CLL:187 as well as in the lists of Luwianisms by Melchert 2005a:452 (marked as genuinely Luwian) and van den Hout 2007a:247. It is also assumed to be of Luwian origin by CHD Š:202f; Güterbock 1956a:127 (Luwian form in Hittite context); Oettinger 1979a:11, 377, 382f.; HEG L–S:844 (cf. Tischler 2008a:160, 171 and Tischler 2016a:303, 325), and HED Sa:134 “Luwoid”. The form shows Luwian inflection and is accordingly a Luwian foreign word in Hittite context.

[A.B.]