/tanid-/
‘a cult object, stele (?)’
- Language
- Common Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, n.
- ID
- 2128
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
/tanid-/, (STELE)ta-ni-
‘stele, installation (?)’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested four times in two related inscriptions from Hama, dating to the 9th or 8th century BCE.
[A.P.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | /tani(d)=sa/ | (STELE)ta-˹ni˹-sà | SHEIZAR, §4 (Hama) |
| /tanisan=za/ | (STELE)ta-ni?-sà-za | MEHARDE, §1 (Hama) | |
| (STELE)ta-ni-sà-za | MEHARDE, §7 (Hama) | ||
| dat./loc. sg. | /tanisi/ | (STELE)ta-ni-si | MEHARDE, §3 (Hama) |
[A.P.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
Considering the fully syllabic spelling, the phonological interpretation of this noun should be straight-forward, yet the obvious stem allomorphy complicates matters, cf. the discussion of the stem below. However, the noun /tanid(i)-/ ‘hierodule’ is related, and the CLuw. cognate dānit- (see under lemma; Starke 1990a:205-207, CLL:205, Melchert pers. comm.) aids substantially in the interpretation. It is possible that the sign 〈sà〉 is used here to represent /ʃ/, the sibilant palatalised in the vicinity of /i/ (see Rieken 2010b:657f.).
The logogram STELE (sign *267), consisting of a ligature of the signs LAPIS and SCALPRUM, is used consistently as a determinative for this word, but can also be found with other words from the same semantic field, e.g. /wanid-/ ‘stele’ and /kuttassar(i)-/ ‘orthostat’.
[AH.B.]
1.1.4Meaning
With the word limited to two related inscriptions on stelae, its general semantics are reasonably clear. Various scholars have suggested ‘stele’ (e.g. Hawkins 2000a:418), which is entirely possible and an apt description of the carriers, but the denotation may also cover a broader range such as ‘installation’ vel sim., which would fit well with the related verb /tanissa-(i)/ ‘to install’. However, since /tanid-/ is the only word from this semantic field used in the two inscriptions, no comparison is possible that would support a semantic delineation. In MEHARDE, §7, the context runs: z[a]-pa-[wa/i] (STELE)ta-ni-sà-za kwa/i-i-sa LOCUS-la/i-za SA4-ni-ti, approx. /zan=ba=wa tanisan=za kwis allan=za sanidi/, meaning ‘(He) who removes this stele (?) to/from? a place, …’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:417).
[AH.B.]
1.1.5Stem
The noun is clearly a neuter, as proved by the presence of the neuter particle /=sa, =za/ in the nom./acc. sg., but different analyses have been proposed for the stem, because the loss of final stops and the subsequent addition of the neuter particle has led to stem allomorphy. Moreover, issues with decipherment of the MEHARDE text resulted in a conflation with the related, but distinct noun /tad-/ ‘block (?)’, which was resolved by Hawkins 2000a:418.
Based on the attested spellings, Melchert 2004d:473 regarded the word as an s-stem, mostly with secondary thematization, i.e. /tanis(a)-/. However, with CLuw. dānit- as a cognate (for which see Starke 1990a:205-207, Melchert 1997d:48 and pers. comm., Rieken 2006a:292), it is rather more probable that the word should likewise be analysed as /tanid-/, a typical neuter formation whose final stop is lost as per usual in Luwian (cf. Melchert 2003b:182) in the endingless nom./acc. sg. of this neuter noun, before the neuter particle becomes ubiquitous. The resulting nom./acc. sg. /tani=sa/ is later reinterpreted as the new stem and inflected accordingly.
[AH.B.]
1.1.6Derivatives
1.2 Cuneiform Luwian
dānit-
‘(cult object)’1.2.1Transmission
This lexeme is only attested once in a properly Luwian context, appearing in a Hittite ritual fragment, but see the further attestations under the corresponding lexeme for Luwian in Hittite transmission.
[O.B.]
1.2.2Forms
| nom./acc. pl. | [d]a-a-ni-ta | KUB 35.70 ii 15 | (CTH 762, NS) |
1.2.3Graphic Features
The form has been checked against the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv).
[O.B.]
1.2.4Meaning
The form [d]a-a-ni-ta on KUB 35.70 ii 15 is the direct object of the following du-ú-un-du ‘they shall place’ (cf. CLuw. dūwa-(i)), implying that a dānit- is an object that may be placed, erected, etc. (cf. the corresponding HLuw. entry). See also Meaning under the corresponding lemma for Luwian in Hittite transmission.
[O.B.]
1.2.5Stem
See Stem under the corresponding lemma for Luwian in Hittite transmission.
[O.B.]
1.3 Luwian in Hittite transmission
tānit-
‘(cult object)’1.3.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested in the Kizzuwatnean ritual of Maštigga (CTH 404) and in a Hittite ritual fragment (CTH 763).
[O.B.]
1.3.2Forms
| nom./acc. pl. | [d]a-a-ni-i-ta | KUB 35.70 iii 12 | (CTH 763, NS) |
| ta-a-ni-ta | KUB 12.59 iii 8’ | (CTH 404, NS) | |
| KBo 2.3 iii 18 | (CTH 404, NS) | ||
| KBo 53.27 iii 28 | (CTH 404, NS) |
Melchert 1997d:48 tentatively suggests that Luw. tānit- may be a plurale tantum.
[O.B.]
1.3.3Graphic Features
All forms have been checked against the Konkordanz (Mainzer Fotoarchiv), except for ta-a-ni-ta on KBo 2.3, for which there is no image available.
[O.B.]
1.3.4Meaning
A comprehensive overview of the meaning of Luw. tānit- is available in Starke 1990a:205f. A religious connotation of the word is confirmed by its connection to NA4ḫuwaši-stones on KUB 12.59 and the derived term dāniti(ya)-, a type of priestess. Starke 1990atentatively suggests that tānit- might refer to a type of stele (likewise Melchert 2005a:449, cf. also the corresponding HLuw. entry), but in either case some sort of cultic object is likely (thus also in HEGT/1:105, CLL:205,Melchert 1997d:48).
Miller 2004a:190 rather interprets some instances of the form tānita as a verb in the 3sg. pret. ind. act. ‘to set up, arrange (?)’, see the discussion in Miller 2004a:122.
[O.B.]
1.3.5Stem
Luw. tānit- is a neuter stem in -id-. According to Starke 1990a:206, the base of tānit- may be found in a Luwian word dān-, denoting some sort of ritual (thus tentatively also in CLL:204). However, the existence of this word is dubious. The attestation on HT 78.5 cited in CLLis now invalidated by a join of HT 78 and KUB 25.38 by Jared Miller – the full sequence reads as da-a-an-ta. Moreover, the only other attestation on KUB 35.57 i 5 adduced by Starke 1990ais fragmentary, the line reading as ] SISKUR da-a-an ḫal-zi-iš-˹ša-an-zi˺[. Although Starke 1990aregards an analysis of da-a-an as Hitt. dān ‘for a second time, twice’ as unlikely, it cannot be excluded.
[O.B.]
1.3.6Derivatives
1.3.7Origin
The Luwian provenance of this lexeme is confirmed by its appearance in a Luwian context (see the corresponding Cuneiform Luwian lemma) and the strictly Luwian suffix -id- (analyzed as Luwian also in Starke 1990a:205ff., HEGT/1:105, CLL:205, Melchert 2005a:449).
[O.B.]
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction
Melchert 1997d:49f. suggests for the base of CLuw. dān-it- (Luw. /tan-id-/), which represents a cult object (perhaps a stele), an etymological connection with the root *dheh1- ‘to place’ and its s-extension *dheh1-s- and more specifically the formation *dhEh1-s-no-, which has a sacred connotation in Indo-European (cf. Lat. fānum ‘sanctum, temple’). However, he admits that the deletion of the -s- in the consonant cluster *-sn- to obtain the sequence dān- < Pre-Luwian *Tasn- is not independently supported (cf. Luw. /tarkasna-/; although the morpheme boundary may have played a part here).
EDHIL:828 assumes the same root etymologically, but a different formation type, i.e. *dhoh1-ni-d-, which is morphologically less convincing. If the root assignment is correct, we definitely need a suffix *-no-, from which the productive Luwian abstract suffix /-id-/ was derived (though possibly through a denominative verb in -i-(ti) < *-i̯é/ó-; see 
taninuwa-(i)). Whether the -s- was present earlier and subsequently deleted as per Melchert 1997dis difficult to prove, but remains the most attractive reconstruction; see also PAnat. *dhh1-s-ó- and PAnat. *dhéh1-/dhh1-´.
[D.S.]