ARGENTUM-
‘(a weight measure), ingot (?)’
- Language
- Hieroglyphic Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, neuter
- ID
- 1772
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
ARGENTUM-
‘(a weight measure), ingot (?)’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested three times in inscriptions from Tabal and Karkamiš, dating to the mid- to late 8th century BCE.
[A.P.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | /…/ | “ARGENTUM”-sa | TÜNP 1 §6 (Karkamiš) |
| ARGENTUM-sa | KIRŞEHİR, §22 (Tabal) | ||
| abl./instr. | /.../ | ARGENTUM-ri+i | CEKKE, §8 (Karkamiš) |
The attestation in KIRŞEHİR, §22 is regarded as representing the direct object of the verb here as opposed to a graphemically possible genitive, This had first also been suggested for the form TÜNP 1, §6 by Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 1982a:99, long before the KIRŞEHİR letter was discovered. and the noun is hence deemed a neuter.
In their first investigation of the present noun and the very similar ARGENTUM- ‘silver’, Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 1982a:95-99 assigned all attestations then known to one paradigm. The later discovered KIRŞEHİR letter (see Akdoğan & Hawkins 2010a) made it possible for the forms to be recognised as belonging to two different, albeit probably closely related, lexemes.
[A.P.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
The phonological interpretation of this noun is unclear, cf. the discussion of the stem below.
[AH.B.]
1.1.4Meaning
Despite their inadvertent merging of the present word and ARGENTUM- ‘silver’, Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 1982a:95-99 realised that it must indicate a unit or weight measure in some instances. This becomes most apparent in the much later discovered KIRŞEHİR letter, §22: wa/i-mu-u 1 ARGENTUM-sa ARGENTUM-za-a NEG2 pi-ia-ta, approx. /wa=mu … …-s(a?) …=za na piyanta/, meaning ‘They (/he?) did not give me one measure/ingot? (of) silver’ (cf. Akdoğan & Hawkins 2010a:5). With the two ARGENTUM- words occurring in immediate proximity, their different stem formations and meanings are quite transparent (pace Akdoğan & Hawkins 2010a:5).
[AH.B.]
1.1.5Stem
If the analysis of KIRŞEHİR, §22 is correct and the word is indeed a neuter gender noun, the attested ending /-sa/ must be the neuter particle. Morphologically, it cannot be an a-, n-, or l-stem, because those would require the neuter particle to appear in the shape of /=za/, cf. Melchert 2003b:186f. If the adjective ARGENTUM.DARE-si(ya)- should be based on the present lexeme, it may hint at an s-stem, which would be compatible with the neuter particle taking the form /=sa/.
For a lack of syllabically spelt attestations, nothing further can be said about the shape of the stem.
[AH.B.]