xixba-^(ti)

This lexeme is found in various grave inscriptions as well as on 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.]

3sg. pres. ind. act.

xixbati

TL 44c.35 (Xanthos)

Meriggi 1936b:274 rightly analyzes xixbati as a reduplicated verb. For a derivational base, he adduces Lyc. A xba-^(ti) ‘to inflict (vel sim.)’ (followed by Schürr 2016d:177, 178, who even takes the first part xi as a separate lexeme), which is contextually inappropriate. Likewise strange and unsupported is the meaning ‘to honor’ used by Gehrisch 2018a:82, probably following Shevoroshkin apud Neumann 2007a:123. A more promising approach  to the base of the reduplicated verb would be the Lycian A verb xuwa-^(ti) ‘to be close to, to attend’ as suggested by Sasseville 2021a:56. Since the verb xuwa-^(ti) is intransitive, the reduplication must cause the verb to become transitive; cf. Hitt. ēš- ‘to sit’ → ašāš-/ašēš-^(mi) ‘to cause to sit’. Therefore, the meaning of the reduplicated formation could be ‘to cause to attend’. Considering that the verb denotes the action the Storm-god performs to the deities before granting the right to speak to the assembly of gods, a meaning such as ‘to summon’ is almost inevitable, while the other interpretations mentioned above would not make sense in the context.

trqqiz=kke=pe me=de zppli xixbati qetbeleimis si=ke tesi uwedris erẽpliz sebe leli pinati masasi tulijel^![i] (TL 44c.34-36)

‘The Storm-god, on the other hand, summons for the zppli and for this oath all invigorating deities and then he grants speech in the assembly of gods.’

For the translation, see Sasseville 2021a:57.

[D.S.]

For the base of the derivation, see Lyc. xuwa-^(ti).