*u̯Es-o-

‘goodness (vel sim.)’

Language
Proto-Luwic
Grammar
subst
ID
1812

1. Individual Anatolian Languages

1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian

/was(s)a-/, wa/i-sà-

‘goodness, favor, respect (?)’

1.1.1Transmission

The four attestations of this lexeme can be found in inscription in Konya and Emirgazi, dating to the 13th century BCE, and in one inscription from Tabal, whose dating is unclear but seems quite early. It is possible that this lexeme is exclusive to Bronze Age Luwian times, and is later replaced by HLuw. /wassranu(wa)-(i)/, (BONUS)wa/i-sa5+ra/i- ‘to treat favourably, make respectful (?)’.

[AH.B.]

1.1.2Forms

abl./instr. /was(s)adi/ (BONUS2)wa/i-sà-ti KIZILDAĞ 4, §2a (Tabal)
    wa/i-sà-ti YALBURT frag. 1, §2a (Konya)
      YALBURT frag. 1, §3a (Konya)
      EMİRGAZİ 3, §1a (Emirgazi)

1.1.3Graphic Features

1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation

The phonological interpretation of this lexeme is reasonably secure, because it belongs to the word family around /wass-/ ‘to be dear; to be respectful’ and /wasu/ ‘well’, besides being connected to CLuw. waššar ‘favour’ (CLL:263) and related words.

[AH.B.]

1.1.4Meaning

The meaning ‘favour’ proposed by Hawkins 1995a:78, 84 results from contextual and cognate analyses of the word.Previously, scholars had suggested various other meanings mostly based on a different morphosyntactic analysis of the passages in question, cf. e.g. E. Masson 1988a:149 incl. n. 6 who viewed it as a verb. While the stem of the present noun /was(s)a-/ clearly differs from that of the later attested /wassar-/, the meanings of both words appear to be very similar and may in fact be the same, cf. Yakubovich 2002a:200f., and Schürr 2017b:35 suggests ‘grace’ (NHG ‘Güte’). It is hence possible that /wassar-/ replaced older /wassa-/ around the turn of the millennium, resulting in (largely) identical meanings.

[AH.B.]

1.1.5Stem

Scholars have proposed different analyses regarding the stem formation of this noun. Rieken 2010b:358f. regards it as deriving from the adjective /wasu-/ ‘good’ (only attested as adverb /wasu/ ‘well’ in HLuw.), because the spelling consistently uses 〈sà〉 rather than any other SA sign, indicating a palatal fricative instead of an alveolar one from a previous sequence *su̯o, which developed into /ʃa/.Thus also Brosch 2011a:64 with an additional example. In contrast to that, Yakubovich 2002a:200 views the noun as a direct derivation from the root verb /wass-/ ‘to be dear’. In either case, the suffix used is /-a-/, leaving the gender unclear, until further, unambiguous attestations surface.

[AH.B.]

1.2 Lycian B

wese(/i)-

‘grace, goodness’

1.2.1Transmission

This lexeme is found once in the poetical inscription engraved on the lion sarcophagus of Antiphellos dated on stylistic grounds to the beginning of the 4th century BCE (Zahle 1979a:318, Mühlbauer 2007a:91). It is also attested in a personal name in the grave inscription TL 9 aus Kirme; Wesepije (PN) (see DLL:107, Neumann 2007a:424, Schürr 2013d:260).

[D.S.]

1.2.2Forms

abl./instr. wesedi TL 55.5 (Antiphellos)  

1.2.3Meaning

The word wesedi is found in a sacrificial context. In the previous sentence, it says that the Storm-god and the gods require a sacrifice as payment. Then, the kind of sacrifice demanded is explained more accurately in the following sentence cited below. Schürr 1997b:62 compares it etymologically to HLuw. wa/i-sà-ti ‘with goodness’. He translates Lyc. B wesedi as ‘with grace’ (followed by Gehrisch 2018a:108 and DLL:134, but Shevoroshkin 2014a:252 takes it instead as an adjective ‘good’, which is not supported). Despite slight divergence between the scholars in the translation of the sentence, the semantic assignment of wesedi, which would refer to the grace or goodness of the gods, is contextually appropriate.

me=i=(e)bei=pe tuwi=be=w(e)=ẽnẽ : slatu : wesedi (TL 55.5)

‘Exactly here, he must give in sacrifice an offering because of (their) grace…’

[D.S.]

2. Reconstruction

2.1Reconstruction ‘goodness (vel sim.)’

If one takes Hieroglyphic Luwian /was(s)a-/ in (BONUS2)wa/i-sà-ti at face value and equates it to Lyc. B wesedi, a Proto-Luwic reconstruction of a thematic noun in *-o- imposes itself. However, due to the nature of the Hieroglyphic script, it is not possible to verify whether Čop’s Law operated in the noun formation, e.g. *u̯és-o- > PLuw. *u̯ésso-. Therefore, the exact stem formation is not assured on synchronic grounds. The suggestion of Rieken 2010b:358f. (followed by Brosch 2011a:64) that (BONUS2)wa/i-sà-ti represents the ablative-instrumental form of /wasu-/ is made less credible by the Lyc. B cognate wesedi, which reflects an actual thematic stem. Further, the ablative-instrumental of a u-stem would have yielded Lyc. B *wasbadi (or with implied sound change *wasadi), which would prohibit the assumption of the same sound change having occurred in pre-Lycian; cf. Lyc. A xahba- and Lyc. B urtuwa-.

[D.S.]

For the lemma head see PAnat. *u̯és-o/to-.

Cross-references

Articles referring here