niwalla/i-

The only attestation with a gloss wedge comes from the Hittite version of the Gilgamesh epic (NS), whereas without it is found in manuscripts of various texts, i.e. instructions, prayers, myths and a festival.

[E.R.]

nom. sg. c.	ni-wa-al-l[i-iš]	KUB 8.48 i 13	(CTH 341, NS)
acc. sg. c.	ni-wa-al-la-an	KUB 13.7 i 19	(CTH 258, NS)
	[ni-wa-a]l-la-an	KBo 16.25 iii 6’	(CTH 251, MS)
	ni-wa-al-li-in	KUB 14.4 iv 20	(CTH 70, NS)
	ni-wa-al-[	Bo 7785, 7’	(CTH 70, NS)
nom./acc. sg. n.	ni-wa-al-la-an	KUB 23.115, 7’	(CTH 375, NS)
nom./acc. pl. n.	ni-wa-al-la	KUB 36.38 rev. 10	(CTH 342, NS)
unclear	[n]e-⸢wa-al-la-an⸣(-)[	KBo 23.74 ii 1	(CTH 627, MS)
	ni-wa-al-la-an	KBo 34.29, 5’	(CTH 370, MS)

The attestation ni-wa-al-[ … ] (Bo 7785, 7’) is cited after Miller 2014a:539.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – Nothing remains visible of the sign LI in KUB 8.48 i 13, except that break-off line is diagonal where the upper left edge of the winkelhaken is to be expected. In contrast, a horizontal of 〈la〉 would have left a trace or a different break-off line. Therefore, the restoration of Friedrich 1930b:18 is followed here. Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – Restoration of [ni-wa-a]l-la-an at KBo 16.25 iii 6’ after the parallel at KUB 13.7 i 19 (Rizzi Mellini 1979a:530f., 549 with n. 38).

[E.R.]

The meaning was first elucidated by Friedrich 1926a:176 on contextual grounds and later applied by him to the passage of the Gilgameš epic (Friedrich 1930b:18f., 50). The text at KUB 8.48 i 13f. runs as follows: “Have they (sc. Gilgameš and Enkidu) not killed the bull of heaven and Ḫuwawa at your command?)” (13)ki-nu-un-ma ni-wa-al-l[i-iš] (14)^Den.ki.du₄-uš a-ki “And now shall the innocent Enkidu die?” (see CHD L-N:459). The translation has been accepted since (e.g. HW 2nd ed.:152, van Brock 1962a:116, DLL:75, Kronasser 1966a:247, CLL:323, 337f., CLL:159, HED N:100f., Ünal 2007a:491). Only Starke 1990a:452 claims that ()niwalla/i- means ‘weak’, probably for etymological reasons, but this can safely be refuted, because in almost every instance the context is about guilt and punishment meted (cf.CHD L-N:459).

[E.R.]

The combination of a- and i-stem forms is indicative of a mutated stem niwalla/i-, as would be expected for an adjective.

[E.R.]

1. niwallant(i)-
2. Niwallā- (PN) (Laroche 1966b:131, 336)

Generally, a Luwian origin is assumed for niwalla/i-; cf. DLL:75, van Brock 1962a:116, Kronasser 1966a:247 (with question mark), Starke 1990a:452, CLL:159, HEG L-N:337f., Melchert 2005a:449,450, van den Hout 2007a:242. As Tischler (HEG L-N:337f.) points out, the gloss wedges and the privative prefix ni- are strong arguments in favor of the borrowing hypothesis (differently Puhvel in HED N:100f., who regards privative ni-/ne- also as Hittite and accordingly does not follow the communis opinio). Moreover, the NH i-mutated forms support the claim. A plausible scenario is that, in the early period, the Luwian mutated stem was first “Hittitized” and transferred to an a-stem in Hittite (van Brock 1962a:116), but in the NS documents, it features several i-mutated forms again.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. *wall-.