*tedorii̯a-⁽ⁱ⁾

This lexeme is attested four times in inscriptions from Tell Ahmar and Karkamiš, dating to the late 10^th or early 9^th century BCE.

[A.P.]

[A.P.]

The meaning was first suggested by Meriggi 1934b:37 and Meriggi 1934a:152 and has been widely accepted since. It is borne out by the contexts of attestation, e.g. in the apodosis of the curse formula in KARKAMIŠ A2+3, §21: *a-pa-pa-wa/i za-a-sa (DEUS)TONITRUS-sa (LOQUI)tá-tara/i-ia-tu, approx. /aban=ba=wa zas Tarhunts tadariyattu/, meaning ‘(… and takes them away from this storm-god Tarhunt,) this Tarhunt shall curse him!’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:110).

[AH.B.]

The verb appears to be a reduplicated formation and a root cognate of Hittite tar- ‘to say’,Kloekhorst (EDHIL:870f.) raises some doubts about this. although the simplex is not attested in HLuw. (cf. HEG T:171f. and Dempsey 2015a:245). Sasseville 2021a:410 classifies it as a formation in /-iya-⁽ⁱ⁾/. Recognition of this class for the present verb was first made possible as a consequence of the sign now read 〈ia〉 by Neumann 1973a:248.

[AH.B.]

1. tātariyamman-

This lexeme is found in the inscription of 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.]

On Lycian verbs ending in -e, see recently Sasseville 2021a:416f. The interpretation of the word dderije as dat./loc. pl. or dderijemeje as dat. sg. of a PN is formally possible, but not attractive (pace Neumann 2007a:39, Schürr 2007b:117 and Gehrisch 2018a:71).

[D.S.]

Melchert (DLL:9) suggests a verbal form related to Luw. /tadariya-^(i)?/ ‘to curse’ (i.e. dderije- (with syncope and assimilation) < *tderije- < *tederije-), which is phonologically and morphologically attractive (followed by Vernet 2018a:367, doubted by Frotscher 2012a:158). For the Lycian verbal stem class in -ije-^(ti) matching the Luwian one in -iya-⁽ⁱ⁾, see Sasseville 2021a:401-404. Differently, Hajnal 1995a:15f. suggests an etymological connection with the intransitive verb Hitt. tarāi-/-i(ya)-^(ḫi) ‘to exert/weary oneself’ (cf. EDHIL:833-835), which is possible but less attractive from a semantic point of view, since Lyc. dderije is used with an accusative object xawales (contra Vernet 2018a:367, who attaches the following mej=e to dderije, which would imply that dderije belongs to the next sentence. This is not possible on syntactic grounds, since Lyc. me is a sentence introductory particle). Despite the attractiveness of the scenario, the fragmentary context calls for caution.

[D.S.]

For the stem formation, see under Meaning.

[D.S.]