*mān
‘if’
- Language
- Proto-Anatolian
- Grammar
- part
- ID
- 195
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
/man/, ma-na
‘if, whether’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested 35 times in inscriptions from Tabal, Tell Ahmar, Aleppo, Emirgazi, Commagene and Karkamiš, dating from the 13th to possibly the mid-8th century BCE.
[A.P.]
1.1.2Forms
The above table offers a representative selection, omitting broken attestations.
In the large majority of instances, /man/ constitutes the first stressed word in the clauses it appears in and hosts the clitic chain, whose first clitic, usually /=ba/ ‘but’ or the quotative particle /=wa/, begins with a consonant and hence obscures the final /n/ of /man/ at least in spelling, cf. Melchert 2003b:182.
The table above includes two attestations of /man/ in an enclitic position in ALEPPO 6 in the string 〈zi-ma-pa-wa/i-sa〉 at §7, repeated verbatim at §11 and representing /zin=ma=ba=wa=as/. The adverbially used /zin/ ‘on the other hand’ seems to take precedence in hosting the chain over /man/.
[A.P.] [AH.B.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
The phonological interpretation of this word is secure. It has cognates in several Anatolian languages, e.g. CLuw. mān ‘if, whether’, Palaic mān ‘if, whether’, and Hittite mān ‘how, if, whether’. When not followed by a clitic chain with initial consonant, the word-final /n/ is spelt out: 〈ma-na〉 (e.g. in ANKARA 1, §7).
[AH.B.]
1.1.4Meaning
The semantic interpretation of this word has long been clear, see already Forrer 1932a:36f., followed and amended by scholars since, e.g. HHG:81. In most cases, /man/ occurs at the very start of the clause (and hosts the clitic chain), but it can also occur later, usually in second position, and apparently also as an encliticIn the cases in question, /man/ is preceded by the adverbially used /zin/ ‘on the other hand’. within the clitic chain itself. These three syntactic positions can be observed in ALEPPO 6, §§5-8 in close proximity to one another: *a-wa/i-sa ma-na REX-t[á-s]a BOS-i-pa-wa/i OVIS.[(ANIMA)] ka+ra/i-tu zi-ma-pa-wa/i-sa REX-lu/a/i-sa (VIR2)INFANS.NÍ-sa ma-pa-wa/i-sa REGIO.DOMINUS, approx. /a=wa=as man hantawattis wawin=ba=wa hawin karidu zin=man=ba=wa=as hantawattallis nimuwizzas man=ba=wa=as wattaniniyas/, translating as ‘(He who comes to this temple to celebrate the god), if he (is) a king, he shall sacrifice a bull (and) a sheep. On the other hand, if he (is) a royal son, or if he (is) a country-lord, (or if he is a river-country lord, he, too, shall sacrifice a sheep)’ (cf. Hawkins 2006a:44f.). As evident from the cited example, adjoining instances of /man/ can be paired into a disjunction of /man … man=ba …/, see Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 2010a:115 incl. n. 22.
[AH.B.]
1.1.5Stem
The word is indeclinable. It is also found in the compound adverb HLuw. /kuman/ ‘when, while’ (seeLaroche 1979c:70), similar to its cognate in Hittite with kuitman ‘while’ etc., cf. e.g. HEG L-M:117.
[AH.B.]
1.1.6Compounds
1.2 Cuneiform Luwian
mān
‘if, whether... or...’1.2.1Transmission
This conjunction is found in various ritual texts in the corpus.
[D.S.]
1.2.2Forms
| indecl. | ma-a-an | KBo 29.52 r.col. 6’ | (CTH 766, MS) |
| KBo 35.39 iii 8’ | (CTH 759, LNS) | ||
| KUB 35.43 ii 1 | (CTH 761, NS) | ||
| KUB 35.43 ii 8 | (CTH 761, NS) | ||
| KUB 35.68, 12’ | (CTH 763, NS) | ||
| ma-a-n(=) | KUB 35.24 rev. 5’ | (CTH 761, MS) | |
| KUB 35.45 ii 25 | (CTH 760, NS) | ||
| KUB 35.45 ii 26 | (CTH 760, NS) | ||
| KUB 35.88 ii 2 | (CTH 766, NS) | ||
| KUB 35.88 ii 2 | (CTH 766, NS) | ||
| ˹ma˺-a-n(=) | KUB 35.24 rev. 4’ | (CTH 761, MS) | |
| ma-˹a˺-n(=) | KUB 35.24 rev. 4’ | (CTH 761, MS) | |
| ˹ma-a˺-n(=) | KUB 35.24 rev. 5’ | (CTH 761, MS) | |
| ma-a-am(=) | KBo 29.10 ii 9’ | (CTH 760, MS?) | |
| [ma-]˹a˺-n(=) | KBo 22.254 iii? 10’ | (CTH 762, NS) | |
| ˹ma-a-an˺ | KUB 35.125 r.col. 2’ | (CTH 766, NS) |
The word ma-na-am-pa-t[a (KUB 35.98, 5’) is not counted here as an attestation of mān (see manam(=)). The word ma-a-am(=) with final m is a case of assimilation before the CLuw. particle =pa, which is not always spelled accordingly.
[D.S.]
1.2.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv).
[D.S.]
1.2.4Meaning
CLuw. mān ‘if, whether… or…’ was equated early on to Hitt. mān ‘if’, which facilitated its elucidation, also made obvious by certain contexts and thus never doubted (Rosenkranz 1952a:43f., Otten 1953a:96, Kronasser 1956a:226f., Laroche 1959a:67, CLL:135, Melchert 2003b:207).
[D.S.]
1.3 Lycian A
=mẽ
‘likewise’1.3.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested 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.), as well as in the trilingual inscription of the Letoon dated to 337 BCE (Wagner 2011a:156 with further literature).
[D.S.]
1.3.2Forms
| indecl. | mẽ | TL 44b.47 (Xanthos) |
| TL 44b.61 (Xanthos) | ||
| TL 44c.7 (Xanthos) | ||
| TL 44c.9 (Xanthos) | ||
| TL 44c.10 (Xanthos) | ||
| TL 44c.11 (Xanthos) | ||
| mẽ or <km̃>mẽ (?) | N 320.34 (Xanthos) |
The particle =mẽ is usually positioned after the verb, except in TL 44c.11, which accompanies a coordinated sentence in which the verb was omitted; see Sasseville 2021a:235f.
[D.S.]
1.3.3Graphic Features
Laroche 1979c:74 emends ppuwẽti=mẽ to ppuwẽti=<km̃>mẽ based on line 23 of the same inscription (followed by Eichner 1983a:52 n. 16, Hajnal 1995a:165 n. 196), but this is seriously questioned by Gusmani 1979c:225f., who points out that the two separate words mẽ and km̃mẽ have similar meanings. Laroche’s emendation is not followed in DLL:39 nor in Gehrisch 2018a:189. Pending further evidence, the decision to emend or not is left open; see also under Meaning.
[D.S.]
1.3.4Meaning
Thomsen 1899a:46 takes mẽ to be an adverb meaning ‘also, again’, which is contextually supported since it always refers to an additional but parallel action that has been performed. Melchert (DLL:39) translates it with ‘likewise’, which is the most suitable translation so far (accepted by Schürr 1998a:151, Neumann 2007a:212, Euler & Sasseville 2019a:149 n. 91; cf. Hajnal 1995a:165 n. 196f. “additionally”, Gusmani 1979c:226-228 “as much as”). For the debated occurrence at N 320.34, Melchert 2018b translates =mẽ with ‘as’, which would be the sole attestation of this function, although the attestation may have to be emended to km̃mẽ ‘as much/many as’; see under Graphic Features.
For a summary of outdated hypotheses, see Neumann 2007a:212.
[D.S.]
1.4 Palaic
mān
‘if, whether, or’1.4.1Transmission
This lexeme is only found in the festival for the Palaic pantheon and in an obscure song attributed here to the Palaic language (cf. Schuster 2002a:546f. n. 1119).
[D.S.]
1.4.2Forms
| indecl. | ma-a-an | KUB 35.165 obv. 7 | (CTH 751, OS or MS) |
| ma-a-an | KUB 35.165 obv. 7 | (CTH 751, OS or MS) | |
| ma-a-n(=) | KUB 35.165 rev. 23’ | (CTH 751, OS or MS) | |
| ma-a(=) | KBo 19.160 ii 8’ | (CTH 754, NS) | |
| ma-a(=) | KBo 19.160 ii 11’ | (CTH 754, NS) | |
| ˹ma˺-a(=) | KBo 19.160 iii 1 | (CTH 754, NS) | |
| ma-a(=) | KBo 19.160 iii 4 | (CTH 754, NS) |
The loss of final -n in mān preceding the particle =wa(r) in Palaic (KBo 19.160) is comparable to the same situation in Hittite.
[D.S.]
1.4.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photograph in the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv).
[D.S.]
1.4.4Meaning
Kammenhuber 1955b:361 equates Pal. mān with Hitt. mān ‘if’ (followed by Carruba 1970a:63; cf. Kammenhuber 1959a:17, Carruba 1972a:29, Yakubovich 2005c:114). His status as conditional marker is supported by its repetition mān … mān … ‘whether… or…’ in KUB 35.165 obv. 7.
[D.S.]
1.5 Hittite
mān, man
‘if, like, whether... or... (optative particle)’1.5.1Literature / Comments
Hoffner 1982b, CHD L-N:139-161, HED M:40-43, HEG L-M:116f.
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction ‘if’
Comparing Hitt. mān (man)The word is likely polysemous: man as the optative particle is taken here as a secondary function acquired by mān ‘if’ within Hittite, see HEG L-M:115 with further literature; contra LIPP II:519f., CLuw. mān and HLuw. /man/, Pal mān, all marking conditional clauses, as well as Lycian A =mẽ ‘likewise’Concerning Lycian A mẽ, Hajnal 1995a: 165 n. 197 and Melchert (DLL:39) convincingly suggest an etymological connection with the Hittite modal particle man. A conjunction **mei often etymologically adduced here does not exist, but is rather to be analyzed as me=i (thus DLL:38, against e.g. Laroche 1979c:94f. with further literature), a Proto-Anatolian adverb *man or *mon can be reconstructed (nothing certain can be said about the length of the vowel from the Anatolian perspective, since the plene spelling of Hitt. and CLuw. mān may simply express the tonic character of the word and the weight of the particle chain it often carriesIn any case, no inner *h2 as in *meh2m is necessary (pace Hajnal 1995a:186 n. 196, LIPP II:520).). In any case, *mān and *mōn are also viable options (cf. Szemerényi 1979a:620f., HED M:42f.). A final *-m instead of *-n is also possible (thus Hajnal 1995a:186 n. 196, LIPP II:519f.). Despite the vocalism ẽ in Lycian, an original a-vowel should not readily be discarded (contra LIPP II:519), since particles and conjunctions may have been influenced by vowel harmony, one outcome of which was then generalized. For the Proto-Anatolian reconstruction, we leave it as *mān (as preferred by Szemerényi 1979a:620f.though adding an apocopated morpheme -i, i.e. *māni, which is possible but unprovable and Melchert 1994a:236) on comparative grounds, without further indication on the vowel quality, although a reconstruction with *-o- should not be excluded.
A summary of the various, sometimes outdated, etymological hypotheses is given in HEG L-M:115-117.
[D.S.]