niwallant(i)-
‘good-for-nothing’
- Language
- Cuneiform Luwian
- Grammar
- subst
- ID
- 1661
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Luwian in Hittite transmission
niwallant(i)-
‘good-for-nothing’1.1.1Transmission
The word is rarely attested, once in a ritual and twice in duplicates of a lexical list.
[E.R.]
1.1.2Forms
| dat./loc. sg. | ⸢ni⸣-wa-al-la-an-ti | KBo 21.13 iv 15’ | (CTH 449, NS) |
| gen. sg. or pl. | ne-wa-la-an-ta-aš | KBo 1.35, 5’! | (CTH 301, NS) |
| ⸢ne-wa⸣-al-la-an-da-aš | KBo 26.26 ii 3 | (CTH 301, NS) |
1.1.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.
[E.R.]
1.1.4Meaning
The dat./loc. sg. form at KBo 21.13 appears in fragmentary context so that the semantic elucidation must rest on the attestation in the lexical list. However, it is far from clear that the Hittite scribe understood the Akkadian entry. Thus, in the preceding line (4’!), the scribe translated Akk. ṣi-du (= ṣiddu ‘mob, riffraff’) into Hitt. parā=kan pāwar ‘to go out’, interpreting the Akkadian word as ṣītu (derived from wāṣû ‘to go out’). Therefore, CHD L-N:459f. rejects interpretation of Laroche 1966a:164 concerning Akk. bi-ir-tù (birtu ‘mob, riffraff’) equating to Hitt. newalantaš/newallandaš ašatar as ‘repair de brigands’, and specifically niwallant(i)- as ‘vaurien, Taugenichts’ (but accepted in CLL:159 ‘ineffectual, good-for-nothing’, Starke 1990a:452, HED N:101, Rieken 1999a:44, Tischler 2008a:125, undecided HEG L-N:323f.). The latter analysis relies on an etymology-based segmentation into the Luwian privative prefix ni- ‘un-’ plus wall-ant- ‘having value, strength’ vel sim. Although one cannot deny a certain circularity for this argument, it is certainly attractive and, therefore, accepted here with due caution.
[E.R.]
1.1.5Stem
For the analysis as ni- ‘un-’ plus wall- ‘value, strength’ plus possessive -ant(i)-, i.e. as an i-mutated stem, see under Meaning. The non-mutating genitive form is compatible with both Hittite and Luwian grammar.
[E.R.]
1.1.6Origin
Several arguments for a Luwian origin can be put forward: the Luwian privative prefix ni- ‘un-’, the i-mutation in the likely simplex wallant(i)- ‘fit, capable (?)’, and the relationship with Luw. 
niwalla/i- ‘innocent’. Since some of the intermediate steps are less than assured, the loanword hypothesis is mentioned only in Starke 1990a:452, CLL:159, Rieken 1999a:44, Tischler 2008a:125 (neutral report in HEG U-Z:260f.), and refuted in HED N:101 (since Puhvel assumes ne-/ni- to be Hittite).
[E.R.]
For the second member of the compound, see CLuw. niwalla/i-.