]uwattar

The fragmentary forms occur in two ritual fragments from the Kuwattalla tradition (MS and NS).

[E.R.]

nom./acc. sg.	(-)w]a-at-tar-ša	KUB 32.8 (+) 5 iv 31’	(CTH 759, NS)
	]x-u-wa-at-tar-ša	KBo 9.143 iii 11’	(CTH 763, MS)

Given the loss of the word initial sign or signs, it is unclear whether the forms belong to the same lexeme.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – At KBo 9.143 iii 11’, the sign before -u- ends in a broken vertical compatible with A or ZA. Moreover, there is no space between this sign and the following -u-, which excludes a reading with initial u- as in uwattarša (thus since DLL:104). Accordingly, †uwattar must be regarded as a ghost word.

[E.R.]

All attempts at a semantic interpretation based on the equation with CLuw. ūtar/n- ‘word, spell’ (DLL:104, CLL:267) or Hitt. uttar, uddanaš n. ‘word, matter’ (Starke 1990a:564; more cautious HHw:s.v. u.B.) are obsolete considering the loss of the word initial sign(s) and the status of †uwattar as a ghost word (see under Graphic Features).

[E.R.]

With only the nom./acc. sg. attested, the underlying lexeme can either be an r/n-stem or an r-stem. If, however, Simon (pers. comm.) is right in that the secondary ending -ša/-za does not occur with the latter class, the r-stem could be excluded.

[E.R.]