ir(ḫū)wašša-

The word is found twice in manuscripts of the Puriyanni ritual (from MS onwards).

[E.R.]

adj. gen. nom./acc. pl. n.	ir-ḫu-u-wa-aš-ša	KUB 35.54 iii 4	(CTH 758, MS)
	ir-wa-aš-[ša]	KUB 35.53, 12’	(CTH 758, NS)

Contra Melchert 2012d:284 (followed in Mouton & Yakubovich 2019a:214), it is not necessary to assume an archaic adj. gen. nom./acc. sg. n. in -ašša < *-assad. Instead, a substantivized gen. adj. nom./acc. pl. n. (plurale tantum) ‘(the) exterior’ (← ‘being external’), functioning as an apposition to modify the head nouns, is fully compatible with the surrounding syntax; cf. also ibid. iii 3’ substantival nanuntarriša ‘(the) present’ (for the latter, see also CLL:155).

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

CLuw. irḫuwašša appears in the same context as ir(ḫu)walli(ya)-. Like the latter, it is the first member of a merism, viz. irḫuwašša parittarwašša, which hence can be assigned the same semantics as ir(ḫu)walliyan parittarwalliyan ‘interior and exterior’ (see Mouton & Yakubovich 2019a:214-220 and 224-229). The difference is syntactic in that irḫuwašša parittarwašša are neuter nom./acc. pl. forms that do not agree with their head nouns utarša ḫallišša parattan[za] (neuter nom./acc. sg). Therefore, they have to be analyzed as substantivizations functioning as appositions to their head nouns (‘the interior and the exterior’) as does puwatilza [n]anuntarriš[a] ‘(the) past (and the) present’ immediately preceding the present merism.

For the research history and the semantic line of argument by Mouton & Yakubovich 2019a:214-220 and 224-229 adopted here, see under the lemmata of ēr(ḫu)wa- c. and ir(ḫu)walli(ya)-.

[E.R.]

The neuter stem irḫuwašša- represents a substantivization of the genitival adjective in -ašša/i-, itself derived from ēr(ḫu)wa- c. ‘(the) interior’.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. *irḫ(i)-.