*u̯és-o/to-

The 22 attestations for this lexeme are found mainly in inscriptions from Karkamiš, but Tabal and Malatya as well as Aleppo and Tell Ahmar in the south are further sources. The relevant texts date to between the 10^th and the 8^th centuries BCE.

[AH.B.]

The meaning of this lexeme has seen some discussion among scholars. Mittelberger 1963a:105 was the first to suggest ‘to favour’ on the one hand (i.e. downward in a hierarchy), and ‘to respect’ on the other (upward in a hierarchy), a view later taken up again by Yakubovich 2002a:201. Whereas the translation given by Starke 1990a:353 implies transitivity, Sasseville 2021a:273f. points out the consistently intransitive contexts of this verb, frequently featuring a dative denoting the source or target of the benevolent action.

The number of finite verb forms attested for this lexeme is rather small compared to nearly twenty participles, most of which are used in appositions to personal names. A typical example can be found in KARKAMIŠ A11a, §19: za-zi-pa-wa/i (DOMUS)ha+ra/i-sà-tá-ni-zi ^Iá-na-ia BONUS-sa-mi-i FEMINA-ti-i (DOMUS+SCALA)tá-wa/i-ni-zi i-zi-i-ha, i.e. /zanzi=ba=wa haristaninzi Annaya wassammi wanatti tawaninzi izziha/ ‘These balconies I made for Anna, (my) dear wife, as places to stand on’.

[AH.B.]

The lexeme is an athematic root verb. Its suffix-less stem becomes evident in the spelling alternation 〈wa/i-su-〉 before the ending starting with /w/ in the 1sg. pres. act. as opposed to 〈wa/i-sa-〉 (using one of various SA signs) before everything else (Sasseville 2021a:273f.; pace Yakubovich 2002a:198 and others). A brief first taxonomy of the word family was undertaken by Mittelberger 1963a:105, who identified several of the derivations around /wass-/, both nominal and verbal ones.

[AH.B.]

1. /was(s)a-/
2. /wassar-/
3. /wasszza-⁽ⁱ⁾/
4. /wassiyazza-⁽ⁱ⁾/
5. /usnu(wa)-⁽ⁱ⁾/

1. ušmant(i)-
2. wašat(i)-
3. waššar-
4. waššārāḫit-
5. wāšu-
6. wašumman-
7. wašummaniyaul(i)-

This verb is attested in a ritual of the ḫuwaššanalli-priestess Bappi (CTH 431), pertaining to the cult of the Luwian deity Ḫuwaššanna in the Lower Land (cf. Hutter 2003a:246f. and Hutter 2004b:243–247) and on a Sammeltafel containing a ritual and hymn to Ištar (CTH 717).

[A.B.]

3sg. pres. ind. med.	wa-aš-ša-a-ri	KUB 17.12 rev. iii 13’	(CTH 431, NS)
	wa-aš-ta-a-ri	KUB 24.7 obv. i 43	(CTH 717, NS)
3sg. impv. med.	wa-aš-ša-a-ru	KUB 17.12 rev. iii 15’	(CTH 431, NS)

The attestations follow Laroche 1959a:109, CLL:262, HEG U–Z:383f. (cf. Neu 1968a:192, Ünal 2007a:792f.; Ünal 2016a:587; Rosenkranz 1950a:197; Güterbock 1956a:125f.,137; Starke 1990a:352f.; Sasseville 2021a:273f.; van den Hout 2006a:247 and Zorman 2016a:596). The transliterations have been checked against the photos of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

For the fragmentary attestation wa-aš-x[- in KUB 36.96 13’ that could perhaps also be connected cf. under the lemma waš[-. Starke 1990a:352 n. 1244 cautiously suggests adding wašdumati, cf. Ünal 2007a:792f. and Ünal 2016a:587 (with question mark), which is however unclear, cf. under the respective lemma.

The stem of the verb is either wašš- or waššā- (differently, Laroche 1959a:109 assumes that these forms belong to a verb “waššar-”, which is unlikely), cf. under Origin.

[A.B.]

The meaning of waššā- is generally assumed as ‘be favorable’ (or sim.), cf. CLL:262, Melchert 2005a:452, Laroche 1959a:109 (“être favorable”), Neu 1968a:192 (“angenehm sein”, cf. Starke 1990a:352f., Neu 1968a:192). HEG U–Z:383f. adds “gefallen” (cf. Tischler 2008a:222, Tischler 2016a:428, Görke 2015b, Zorman 2016a:596), Ünal 2007a:792f. adds ‘to move, influence’ (cf. Ünal 2016a:587), similarly Del Monte 2004a:343, 347 “essere accetto, gradevole” and Sasseville 2021a:273f. ‘to be pleasing’; more generally Güterbock 1956a:125f. ‘be good’.

The context of KUB 17.12 rev. iii 8’–15’ shows the following (the transliteration is based on the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, an in addition to that, the hand copy, the transliterations and translations of Del Monte 2004a:341, 343; Hutter 2004b:254; Görke 2015b; Neu 1968a:192 and HEG U–Z:383 have been taken into account):

^(8’)nu ⸢ki-iš-ša⸣-an me-ma-a-i ki-i GIŠpèš ^(9’)ma-aḫ-ḫa-an li-im numun šà-it ḫar-zi ^(10’)GIŠgeštin ḫád.du.a-ia ma-aḫ-ḫa-an šà-it ^(11’)geštin ḫar-zi dingir-lì-ia-wa gašan-ia ^(12’)en siskur qa-tam-ma aš-šu-li ḫar-ak ^(13’)ì-ia-wa làl ma-aḫ-ḫa-an wa-aš-ša-a-ri ^(14’)en siskur-ia-wa-kán a-na dingir-lì qa-tam-ma ^(15’)wa-aš-ša-a-ru

^{(8’–9’)}She speaks as follows: “As this fig holds a thousand seeds with(in) its heart ^{(10’–12’)}and as the raisin holds wine (with)in its heart, in the same way you, goddess, my lady, shall hold the lord of the offering in goodness. ^{(13’–15’)}And as oil (and) honey are pleasant/favoured, in the same way the lord of the offering shall be pleasant/favoured to/by the goddess”.

According to Hutter 2003a:247 the purpose of the purification ritual is “to cure a ‘sick’ person who is affected by the anger of the goddess”. The recitation is done while oil, honey, fig and raisin are burnt for the goddess to appease her anger. The connection of this verb to (sweet scented) oil also appears in a ritual and hymn to Ištar, the context KUB 24.7 obv. 43’–44’ shows the following (the transliteration is based on the photo of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv, and in addition the hand copy, the transliterations, restorations and translations of Archi 1977a:306, 308f.; Güterbock 1983a:157 and Neu 1968a:192 have been taken into account):

^(43’)ì.dùg.ga na-at wa-aš-ta-ri tu-uk-ma-kán […] ^(44’)[a-aš-]ši-ia-at-ta-ri

^{(43’–44’)}sweet-scented oil and it is pleasant/favoured, but you […] is [be]loved (…)

Regarding the semantics, Starke 1990a:352f. suggests a connection to a Luwian noun waššar- with the meaning “das Angenehme; Gunst, Respekt” (cf. Laroche 1959a:109, Starke 1990a:350–353 and under the lemma CLuw. waššar- ‘favour vel sim.’ (?)) and points out that the verb waššā- is not to be separated from the adjective “wāšu(i)- ‘gut’”. Furthermore, HEG U–Z:383 considers that waššar- could be interpreted as a deverbal abstract noun but the details of the proposed derivations remain unclear (cf. also a summary of these and further etymological proposals in HEG U–Z:387f.).

Nevertheless, the Glossenkeilwort wašš- or waššā- could still belong to this family of words: it could be a derivative of a Luwian noun *wašš(a)-, which is probably attested in HLuw. /was(s)a-/, wa/i-sà- ‘goodness, favor, respect (?)’ (cf. under the respective lemma), or it could belong to the same verb as HLuw. /wass-/, (BONUS)wa/i-su- (cf. under the respective lemma) as assumed by Sasseville 2021a:273f. (see under Origin for the morphological details). This would also fit semantically and support a meaning ‘to be pleasant, favoured’ (or sim.).

[A.B.]

The word is usually assumed to be Luwian (cf. Starke 1990a:352f., Görke 2015b, Güterbock 1956a:125 and Tischler 2016a:428). It appears in the Luwian dictionaries of Laroche 1959a:109 and CLL:262 as well as in the lists of Luwianisms of Melchert 2005a:452 and van den Hout 2006a:247. On the other hand, HEG U–Z:384 assumes a Hittite verb, pointing out that in CLuwian there is “keine verbale Entsprechung zum primären heth. Verbum ()was(s)”.

One reason for assuming the word to be a Luwianism is the gloss marker and although its use does not constitute proof of a word’s Luwian origin (cf. Schwartz 1938a:75, 78 and Melchert 2005a:445), the vast majority of words provided with this marker are in fact of Luwian origin. Another point is that the text CTH 413 belongs to the cult pertaining to the Luwian goddess Ḫuwaššanna (cf. under Transmission) and KUB 17.12 contains many (unmarked) Luwianisms.

Regarding its stem formation, Laroche 1959a:109 assumes that the forms belong to a verb “waššar-” (rejected by HEG U–Z:383f. as the -r- belongs to inflectional endings), based on a connection with an assumed derivative Luw. waššārāḫit- ‘favour’ (cf. Güterbock 1956a:125f.). This is, however, unlikely since the Luwian suffix -aḫit- forms abstract nouns from other nouns and adjectives (cf. Melchert 2003b:198), but not from verbs, and waššārāḫit- must go back to Luwian waššar-.

Another possibility would be that the Glossenkeilwort belongs to the same verb as the similar HLuw. verb /wass-/, (BONUS)wa/i-su- as assumed by Sasseville 2021a:273f., who suggests a Luwian root verb “/wass-^(ti)/”. In this case, the Glossenkeilwort was probably Hittitized, since the inflectional endings -ari and -aru are not attested with plene spelling in Luwian but appear optionally in Hittite.

If the plene spelling is, however, not a Hittite influence on the verb, waššā- could also show the Luwian suffix -ā- (forming verbs from nouns, cf. Melchert 2003b:199) and be derived as a denominative from a Luwian noun *wašš(a)-, which is probably attested in HLuw. /was(s)a-/, wa/i-sà- ‘goodness, favor, respect (?)’

To conclude, the Glossenkeilwort wašš- or waššā- is most probably of Luwian origin and appears as loan and/or foreign word in Hittite.

[A.B.]

1. wese-

1. wisw(i)-

1. wāšu-
2. wāšukini-/wāšuniki-
3. wašūḫ-