prwãν (porl(i)-)
‘year’
- Language
- Lydian
- Grammar
- subst
- ID
- 2284
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Lydian
prwãν (porlλ)
‘year’1.1.1Transmission
The forms come from inscriptions attested in a wide variety of locations. Some of them (LW 2, 3, 41, 50, 110) can be dated rather precisely based on the information of the dating formulae. In all these cases their date appears to fall within the second half of the 4th century BCE (Gusmani & Akkan 2004a:141). Other inscriptions can be dated only more loosely, either to the 4th century BCE or within the broader period of 5th-4th century BCE.
[I.Y.]
1.1.2Forms
|
acc. sg. (?) |
porfcν |
||
|
dat. sg. |
porlλ |
||
|
LW 41.1 (Falaka) |
|||
|
[p]orlλ |
|||
|
forlλ |
LW 50.1 (Tire) |
||
|
dat. pl. |
prwãν |
||
|
prwã(ν) |
|||
|
poss. adj. |
prulliṣ̌[ |
Gusmani 1964a:84-86 provisionally assigns the forms prwãν and porlλ to two separate lemmata. The same implicit analysis is found in Neumann 1961a:74-76 and Gérard 2005a:40, where porlλ is directly compared with Hitt. purulli- ‘yearly festival’. The stem porli- is regarded as the adjectival derivative of prwa- in Carruba 1969a:47 and Hajnal 2004a:198f., but the latter work emphasizes the lack of semantic difference between the two forms. According to Melchert 1997a:36 the difference between porlλ and prwãν is that of the grammatical number. This solution is also adopted here, with the formal assumption of anticipatory assimilation in porlλ (cf. below). On prwã=s, see Melchert 1991a:133f. The assignment of the forms porfcν and prulliṣ̌[ to the paradigm under discussion remains necessarily tentative, since their meaning cannot be independently confirmed, cf. Gusmani 1980a:43f. Consequently, the common gender of the lemma is likewise an uncertain matter.
[I.Y.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
For the anticipatory assimilation *porwλ > porlλ, cf. the paradigms of wisw(i)- and niwisw(i)-. For the syncope in prwãν, cf. the paradigm of širma-. For porfcν, cf. likewise the paradigm of niwisw(i)-, but note that unlike niwiscν, the form porfcν can hardly be phonetically derived, one would have to assume the analogical extension of -cν. Alternatively, it remains possible that porfcν simply belongs to a different lemma (e.g. the adverbial derivative ‘yearly’).
[I.Y.]
1.1.4Meaning
The meaning ‘year’ was guessed for both porlλ and prwãν in the dating formulae already in Littmann 1916a:50, 55. It was, however, originally assumed that they represent two synonymous forms. A variant of this solution is the hypothesis that porlλ reflects the original adjectival derivative of prwãν (cf. the discussion above). If one is claiming that the two forms belong to the same paradigm, which seems to be the most straightforward formal solution, it is necessary to explain the distribution between singular and plural forms. The suggestion that this distribution correlates with the character of the dating formula is found in Melchert 1997a:36, but the proposed correlation has an exception (cf. ibid. n. 6). Therefore one can suggest a different distribution, namely the use the plural with the numerals between two and five vs. the use of the singular with numbers higher than 10. The proposed distribution does not seem to feature exceptions in those dating formulae where numbers have been identified. The use of singular rather than plural with higher numbers is a typologically common phenomenon, within the Anatolian group, cf. Bauer 2011a for Luwian and Rieken 2013a for Hittite. The literal meaning of both prwãν X and porlλ X should be “in X years”, which, however, must be pragmatically interpreted as ‘in year X’. This idiomatic expression presumably arose in the context of counting years since some memorable event, such as the ascension of a king to the throne. For example, LW 3.1 prwãν III II aλikšãntruλ dãν is to be understood as “in five years under Alexander” meaning “in year five in the reign of Alexander”.
[I.Y.]
1.1.5Stem
The paradigm collected above suggests that the stem is a semi-vocalic, or perhaps consonantal stem with the mobile accent. The earlier assumption of the a-stem prwa- was based on an incomplete paradigm.
[I.Y.]