zamniyan

Within the Hittite corpus, the word is found only once in a ritual of the Tunnawiya tradition (NS).

[E.R.]

acc. sg.

za-am-ni-ia-an

KBo 21.6 obv. 9

(CTH 409, NS)

For the form zamnišan, which, according to several scholars, presupposes zam(ma)ni(ya)-, see instead under the lemma of zam(ma)n- in Hittite transmission (with references).

[E.R.]

The lexeme occurs in depictive position or as an apposition following its head noun: UR.MAḪ za-am-ni-ia-an pé-e-da-ú ur.bar.ra tá[k-ša-an] “Let it carry away the lion as damaging/as the damager, together with the wolf!” (KBo 21.6 obv. 9). The analysis of its word formation, i.e. zam(ma)n- ‘damage’ plus relational suffix -i(ya)-, is common sense (DLL:113, Hutter 1988a:93f., Starke 1990a:278 with n. 947, CLL:277, HEG U-Z:647f.). The adjectival meaning as assigned here is derived from that of the base zam(ma)n- ‘damage’ (see under Lemma; similar Hutter 1988a:44f., 93-95: ‘schädigend’). Alternatively, under a substantival interpretation, zamniyan is an acc. sg. of an individualizing formation in -a- c. (non-mutating) ‘the one damaging, damager’. The result of the formal analysis is more than compatible with the fact that zamniyan is used to modify the negatively connotated ur.maḫ ‘lion’.

[E.R.]

The word can be analyzed as a relational adjective with the suffix -i(ya)-, but then the form itself must be Hittite since, in spite of the acc. sg. of the common gender head noun ur.maḫ, the form shows no i-mutation (CLL:277). Alternatively, an individualized zam(ma)niya- c. (non-mutating stem) is possible (see under Meaning).

[E.R.]

The lexeme is generally assumed to be a borrowing from Luwian; cf. DLL:113, Hutter 1988a:93, Starke 1990a:278 with n. 947, CLL:277, HEG U-Z:645).

[E.R.]

For the lemma head, see CLuw. zam(ma)n-.