mīlu-
‘fruits (?)’
- Language
- Cuneiform Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, c.
- ID
- 1620
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Cuneiform Luwian
mīlu-
‘fruits (?)’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is found in a mugawar for the Storm-god of Zippalanda (Sasseville 2021a:563-565 and Sasseville 2023b).
[D.S.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom. pl. | GIŠmi-i-lu-[i]n-zi | KBo 27.61 + KBo 48.85, 5’ | (CTH 756, NS) |
An accusative plural in -inzi as in the Empire Luwian dialect is also possible.
[D.S.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv). For the direct join of KBo 27.61 + KBo 48.85, see Sasseville 2021a:563-565.
[D.S.]
1.1.4Meaning
The word mīluinzi is attested here for the first time due to the joining of two Cuneiform Luwian fragments. It occurs within the context of a ritual feast prepared for the gods within the temple of the Storm-god of Zippalanda. The word is determined by the logogram GIŠ ‘wood’, and in the Hittite context occurring immediately before, one finds the Akkadogram GIŠINBIḪI.A ‘fruits’ (KBo 46.28, 4’ see Sasseville 2021a:563-565), also determined by GIŠ. Equating the two words, the resulting semantics are further supported by the compelling etymological connection between Luw. mīlu- and Hitt. mīlūli- n. ‘soft tissue, soft body part’ (see under mi(ya)ša-), because fruits are typically covered with a peel, i.e. a soft skin. Therefore, interpreting Luw. mīlu- as ‘fruits’ would be supported from both the contextual and the etymological perspective (Sasseville 2023b). Nevertheless, the fragmentary state of the context demands caution.
[D.S.]
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction
The Luwian u-stem mīlu- ‘fruits (?)’ can be reconstructed as a substantive in -u- based on an adjectival formation in *-lo-, i.e. *mei̯h1- + -lo- + u-. This formation can be posited for the Proto-Anatolian stage in comparison to Hitt. mīlūli- n. ‘soft tissue, soft body part’, which shows the presence of the base *mīlu- prior to the second derivation in *-lo-, which was then substantivized and transferred to the paradigm of neuter i-stems (for the general process, see Rieken 2009b).
[D.S.]
For the lemma head see CLuw. *mī-.
3. Proto-Indo-European
3.1Semantic Reconstruction
The Anatolian adjective *mih1-ló- means ‘soft, gentle’, a meaning that is reconstructable for the Balto-Slavic cognates, too. The Balto-Slavic lexemes mean ‘nice, sweet, dear’ and reflect a meaning that shifted further to the emotional sphere in comparison to the Anatolian ones. It is thus most suitable to reconstruct PIE *mih1-ló- as ‘soft, gentle’.This meaning is also reconstructable for the u-stem PAnat. *méih1‑u‑/*mih1‑éu̯- ‘soft’, cf. s.v. for the further semantic reconstruction and root etymology.
3.1.1Root etymology
For the meaning of the underlying root, cf. PAnat. *mei̯h1- ‘soft’.
3.2Morphological Reconstruction
There are several reasons to assume that the Lithuanian forms with ‑ý- (< *‑ī- < *‑iH‑) are original in contrast to the ones with ‑íe- (< *‑ei̯-), cf. the denominative verb Lith. mylė́ti ‘to love’ (not †mielė́ti). Based on this observation and on the Slavic comparanda that may be exact cognates, too, BSl. *miHlo- ‘dear, gentle’ may be reconstructed and ultimately be equated with PAnat. *mih1lo- ‘soft, gentle’. It is thus possible to reconstruct an adjectival lo-stem PIE *mih1-ló- ‘soft, gentle’.
3.2.1Root etymology
For the phonological form of the underlying root, cf. PAnat. *mei̯h1- ‘soft’.
[A.O.]
4. Transmission
BSl. *miHlo- ‘dear, gentle’, cf. Lith. (Žem.) mýlas, Lith. (sec.) míelas ‘nice, sweet, dear’, (?)Latv. mĩļš ‘id.’, OPr. mijls ‘(ModHG) lieb, dear; (ModHG) lieber, dearer (III.89.8)’, Lith. mylė́ti ‘to love’ (EDBIL:316, PKEŽ² s.v. mijls (2021-04-27), ALEW 2.0 s.vv. míelas, mýlas [2021-02-24], Smoczyński 2005a:238f.), OCS, ORuss. milŭ ‘pitiable’, Russ. mílyj, SCr. mȉu, mȉla, mȉlo ‘sweet, dear’, etc. (EDSIL:317, Vasmer II:134)
Trautmann 1923a:174f.