wisw(i)-

The attestations of the forms are limited to Sardis. They occur in prosaic burial inscriptions, always within stereotypical curse formulae, in poetic burial inscriptions, also as part of the final formulae, and in the text of the agreement LW 22, found in the precinct of Artemis.

[I.Y.]

Whether the form wis[- can be assigned to this lemma is uncertain, since it occurs outside the stereotypical contexts. The appurtenance of wiswid to this paradigm is doubted in Shevoroshkin 1978a:236, whose alternative interpretation of wiswid as an indefinite pronoun is followed in Gérard 2005a:76. Cf. further doubts in Schürr 2006b:1574f. The form wiswid, however, cannot be separated from niwiswa, which apparently occurs in a curse formula (LW 44. 17). Cf. further under niwisw(i)-.

A separate problem is the co-existence between nominal and adjectival forms. The forms wis(s)iš syntactically function as nouns, whereas wiswid behaves like an adjective. Similar problems also concern niwisw(i)-. The apparent nouns and adjectives are considered here as one lemma on the assumption that any adjective can be elliptically used as a noun, but the question cannot be regarded as fully settled.

[I.Y.]

The degemination of ss in LW 7.5 probably represents a mere simplified spelling.

[I.Y.]

The basic meaning ‘good’ was proposed in Gusmani 1961a:197 based on the pragmatic analysis of the standard curse formulae that had already been reached in Littmann 1916a:45f. It traditionally derived further support from external comparison, although at the cost of some formal complications (Gérard 2005a:42), but the same Anatolian and Indo-European forms meaning ‘good’ can be alternatively compared with Lyd. wesfa-. Since the historical derivation of wesfa- ‘good, dear (?)’ does not entail formal difficulties, a second look at the meaning of wisw(i)- appears to be warranted.

The interpretation ‘pious’, entertained in Carruba 1969a:71f. n.31, would fit well the context of the curse formulae, yielding the approximate meaning ‘Let the pious one assault him as the impious one’.  But the translation ‘holy, sacred’ would make a better sense in the context of the lex sacra LW 22, where this adjective is applied to the agreement itself. Cf. further under Lyd. niwisw(i)-.

The translations ‘legal’, adopted for wiswid in Schürr 1997a:210, and ‘justice’, offered for wissiš in Schürr 2006b:1576, appear to separate the two forms of the same paradigm without necessity. The interpretations of wisw(i)- in all of its attestations as indefinite pronoun (Brandenstein 1929a:281) or ‘progeny’ (Haas 1962a:186f.) are not conducive to identifying the negative morpheme in niwisw(i)- and therefore remain unpersuasive.

[I.Y.]

Synchronically one has to assume a semi-vocalic stem wisw(i)-. It is, however, to be noted that the cluster sw is rare in Lydian, presumably because the etymological *sw developed into sf (Gérard 2005a:69). Therefore one probably has to assume that the morphological change that yielded wisw(i)- on the basis of the earlier u-stem *wisu- is a fairly late process.

[I.Y.]

1. niwisw(i)-