*tasn̥tā-

This lexeme is attested in the trilingual inscription of the Letoon dated to 337 BCE. (Wagner 2011a:156 with further literature).

[D.S.]

Laroche 1974a:123 (and Laroche 1979c:68) reads the segment as se=t(e)=ahñtãi and recognizes a participle of the verb ‘to be’ by comparing Hitt. ašant- ‘existing’. Thus, he translates Lyc. ahñtãi as French ‘biens’, suspecting an imitation of Gk. τὰ ὄντα, ἡ οὐσία, which would show the Greek influence on the Lycian language. His semantic and morphological analysis is accepted by Melchert 1989b:44 n. 35 and Oettinger 1981a:10f., the latter of whom adduces further evidence to this assumption by pointing out that the older Anatolian languages built their word for ‘possession’ with a root meaning ‘good’ instead of ‘to be’. Unfortunately, this analysis is no longer tenable: Meriggi 1979a:260 n. 1 suggests the possibility of reading se se=tahñtãi instead of se=t(e)=ahñtãi (adopted by Neumann 2007a:337). Schürr 1998a:150 has the same interpretation, but it is more convincingly defended in Schürr 2014b:22 and Schürr 2016c:123-128. First, the particle =te would be unexpected in a conjoined noun phrase. Second, the equation with Lycian B tasñta- brings definite proof of the segmentation tahñtãi. Therefore, †ahñtãi is considered here to be a ghostword.

[D.S.]

In the trilingual inscription, the word tahñtãi is rendered by Greek τὰ οἰκήματα, which has a broad range of meanings, i.e. ‘dwelling-place, (bed-)chamber, cage for animal, shrine, room in a temple’. On contextual grounds, Neumann 2007a:337 and Schürr 2016c:125 suggest that the Lycian tahñta- refers to cultic buildings. For the more concrete interpretation ‘dwelling for cattle, stall’, see under the Lycian B lemma below.

[D.S.]

Contra Laroche 1979c:123 and Oettinger 1981a:10, ahñtãi cannot be attributed to the neuter plural. The nom. and gen. pl. ending -ãi are used for the common gender a-stems only, see Hajnal 1994a:156-158, DLL:xi.

[D.S.]

This lexeme is found in the inscription of the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE and stylistically to around 400 BCE (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.).

[D.S.]

The segmentation of tasñtuwadi into tasñt(u) uwadi is supported by the genitival adjective mẽmrezñ (acc. sg. c.), which needs a head noun, i.e. tasñt(u)… mẽmrezñ ‘the tasñta of Mẽmre’ (Schürr 2014b:22, Schürr 2016c:126). For outdated hypotheses on the segmentation, see Neumann 2007a:339.

[D.S.]

The meaning of Lyc. B tasñta- is co-dependent with the one of Lyc. A tahñta-, equating to Greek τὰ οἰκήματα ‘dwelling-place, (bed-)chamber, cage for animal, shrine, room in a temple’. In the Lycian B passage, the subject hands over the tasñta- belonging to an individual named Mẽmre together with the cattle. Therefore, it is safe to say that the tasñta- could be some kind of dwelling places or “cages” for the sacrificial cattle of a holy precinct. This would be supported first by the Palaic cognate tašura- ‘kennel’, which is also connected to cultic use, and second by the context of the Letoon trilingual inscription, which stipulates that cattle must be sacrificed each year, which implies that the holy precinct of the cult had its own dwellings for the cattle. Therefore, we translate tasñta- with ‘dwelling for cattle, stall, cowshed’.

[D.S.]