†=λ

Hajnal & Zipser 2017a:277 cautiously saw an (enclitic) personal pronoun “ihm” in =λ of “m=λ” of C.Ha 1 referring to the (alleged) indirect object of the sentence (this was presented as a fact in Hajnal & Zipser 2017b:316). The inscription has, however, mδ (for the very different proposed analyses of this mδ see s.v. im(n)-), as it is visible, e.g., on the drawing of Adiego 2007a:144 and on the photo Jucker & Meier(-Brügger) 1978a:Tafel 2.1. and 2.2c. The transliteration of Adiego 2007a:144 under his drawing has indeed “mλ”, but this is a misprint, which was uncritically adopted by Hajnal and Zipser.

[Zs.S.]