mašḫama-

This existence of this lexeme is questionable, but it is potentially attested in a votive text.

[D.S.]

The reading follows a suggestion by Melchert (pers. comm.) and has been checked against the photo in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv), but it must be considered very tentative due to the damaged surface of the tablet. The restoration of the sign 〈aš〉 between the first and second sign would be supported at least by the space. Ünal 2003a:383, 388 tentatively reads i[š^?]-ḫa-ma-an-zi (likewise Tischler 2016b:27), which is not quite supported by the traces left, especially since there is only one vertical bar in the first sign. de Roos 2007a:249 reads x-ḫa-ma-an-zi, without suggesting anything for the beginning. Melchert (pers. comm.) also suggests as an alternative reading GAM-a[n] ḫa-ma-an-zi. The verb katta ḫamank- would indeed make sense in the context, although the form ḫa-ma-an-zi would be peculiar and have to be emended to ḫa-ma-an-〈ak〉-zi or better ḫa-ma-an-〈kán〉-zi for the expected plural (cf. HW 2nd ed. Ḫ:111-120). In sum, more evidence would be welcome.

[D.S.]

The verb represents an action performed towards a festival in favor of the Storm-god. On contextual grounds, Ünal 2003a:386 translates it with ‘to dedicate’. Considering that the reading of the word mašḫama- is correct, the base *mašḫa- would surely be related to CLuw. mašḫāḫi(t)- ‘favor (?), prosperity (?)’. From this point of view, we would expect the verb to have positive semantics, which is also supported contextually. Nevertheless, more evidence is needed to extract the exact meaning.

[D.S.]

Since the verb has been hittitized, it is not possible to tell which Luwian verbal stem formation it originally had: A denominative verb in -a-^(ti) or -ā(i)-^(di) based on a formation in -ma(/i)- is equally possible.

[D.S.]

For the lemma head, see CLuw. *mašḫa-.