*di̯éu̯-/diu̯-´
‘god’
- Language
- Proto-Anatolian
- Grammar
- subst
- ID
- 2665
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
*/tiw-/
‘deity’1.1.1Derivatives
1.2 Cuneiform Luwian
*tiw-
‘god, deity’1.2.1Derivatives
1.3 Lycian B
ziwi
‘divinity (vel sim.)’1.3.1Transmission
This lexeme is found in various grave inscriptions as well as on 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.]
1.3.2Forms
| dat. sg. | ziwi | TL 44c.54-55 (Xanthos) |
1.3.3Meaning
Korolev & Shevoroshkin 1969a:527 (followed by Shevoroshkin 1971a:217 and Shevoroshkin 1977a:139, Gehrisch 2018a:87) suggests translating dat. sg. ziwi as ‘god’, which would be supported from the Indo-European perspective (the root *di̯eu-, as in Hitt. siu(n)- ‘god’, Lyd. ciw- ‘id.’). Melchert (DLL:138) finds the etymology unpersuasive, probably on account of the phonology. However, Sasseville 2021d brings evidence that the initial sequence *di-/di̯- in Lycian B would have behaved differently from Lycian A (adducing the personal name tiwi-θθeimija-/tiwi-θθeimi) and a potential second example of this sound law in Lyc. B zireime/i-. Thus, the Lycian B phonological development of this sequence would be parallel to the Lydian one.
On contextual grounds, Sasseville 2021d points out that the meaning assigned to ziwi is contextually adequate as something belonging to a sanctuary and receiving post-war amendments.
[D.S.]
1.3.4Derivatives
1.3.4.1Uncertain derivatives
1.4 Lydian
ciw-
‘god’1.4.1Transmission
This lexeme is found in a decree (LW 23) recently dated to 542-41 BCE (Euler & Sasseville 2019a:134f.). The other inscriptions have not yet been dated accurately.
[D.S.]
1.4.2Forms
| acc. sg. | ciwν | LW 10.11 (Sardis) | |
| nom. sg. or pl.(?) | ciwš | LW 44a.17 (Magnesia on Mt. Sipylos) | |
| dat./gen. pl. | ciwaν | LW 23.12 (Sardis) |
1.4.3Meaning
The word ciw- c. has been recognized to mean ‘god’ on contextual grounds in inscription LW 23, where dat./gen. pl. ciwaν refers to the deities Qλdãns and Artemis, by Grumach 1934a:190 and Meriggi 1935a:87 (followed by Kretschmer 1939a:113, who etymologically connects it to Hitt. šiu(n)- c. ‘god’, Heubeck 1959a:64f., Gusmani 1964a:92, Dusinberre 2003a:230, Gérard 2005a:127, Euler & Sasseville 2019a:132). Thus, the meaning of the word has been generally accepted.
[D.S.]
1.4.4Stem
Synchronically, Lyd. ciw- c. seems to inflect like a consonantal stem. There is not yet any proof of i-mutation (unless ciwš is nom. sg.(?)), and from a comparative perspective it may have been originally an n-stem; cf. ciwνal(i)-.
[D.S.]
1.4.5Derivatives
1.6 Hittite
šiu(n)-
‘god’1.6.1Literature / Comments
CHD Š:461-486
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction ‘god’
The comparison between Hittite šiu(n)- ‘god’, Pal. tiunaš ‘the one of the god, bull’, Lyd. ciw- ‘god’ and Lyc. B ziwi (dat. sg.) calls for a reconstruction with an initial *di̯-, which has commonly been connected with the PIE (reanalyzed) root *di̯eu̯- (see Neu 1974a:121-123 and HEGS:1084-1086 with further literature). Regarding the n-stem seen not only in Hittite but also in Pal. tiunaš and Lyd. ciwνališ, scholars previously agreed that it is a secondary innovation (Neu 1974a:121-123, Rieken 1999a:36,EDHIL:763) in analogy to n-stems such as ḫaraš, haranaš ‘eagle’ (Rieken 1999a:36), although the motivation in the case of the god-word might have lied in the morphological isolation of the stem. As a different approach, Melchert 2019d:243 suggests that it is the acc. sg. form *di̯ū́n, which was reinterpreted as the stem already in Proto-Anatolian and adduces a similar phenomenon in the paradigm of Greek Zeus. In any case, since traces of the n-morpheme can be found in almost every Anatolian language, a “common” Anatolian phenomenon, if not Proto-Anatolian, must be acknowledged.
An ablauting paradigm *di̯éu̯-/diu̯-´ is reconstructed especially from an Indo-European perspective (see Rieken 1999a:35f.).Kloekhorst (EDHIL:763) reconstructs the nom. sg. as *di̯ēus (as in PIE) based on Hitt. nom. sg. šīuš with its plene spelling of the -ī-, which is hardly a solid basis for a lengthened grade in this case. The syllabification of the glide reflected in the different ablaut grades must have been responsible for the various outcomes. Whereas the Hittite initial *š- of šiu(n)- must come from *di̯- (but cf. Melchert 1994a:118f., Kimball 1999a:259 and PAnat. *di̯éu̯-ot-/*di̯ut-´), Pal. tiunaš and Lyd. ciw- must rather continue *di- as in *diu̯-. In any case, levelling in such paradigms is so trivial that it is difficult to verify what initial *di̯- would have had yielded in every Anatolian language.
For the semantics of Proto-Anatolian *di̯éu̯-/diu̯-´, see recently Melchert 2019d:242f.
[D.S.]
3. Proto-Indo-European
3.1Semantic Reconstruction
The meaning of PAnat. *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ ‘god’ can be connected with the one of PIE *di̯éu̯‑/*diu̯‑´ ‘day-lit sky’Cf. Ved. dyáuṣ, gen. divás ‘day-lit sky’, Gk. adj. εὔ-διος ‘calm, fine, clear [of air, weather, sea]’, εὐ-δία f. ‘fair weather’, OCS dŭždĭ m. ‘rainstorm, bad weather’, etc.which is the most original of the three meanings reconstructable already for the proto-language. Secondarily, PIE *di̯éu̯‑/*diu̯‑´ ‘day-lit sky’ was used as a divine nameCf. *di̯éu̯- *ph2tér- ‘father heaven’ > Gk. Ζεὺς πατήρ, Ved. dyáuḥ pitā́, Lat. Iūpiter, Umbr. iuve patre. Cf. Strunk 1982a with lit.and, on the other hand, developed the meaning ‘day’,Cf. Ved. dyáuṣ/divás ‘day’, Lat. dies ‘id.’, Gk. ἔν-διος ‘at midday, at noon; midday’, etc.cf. Rau 2010a:307. Whether and why PAnat. *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ ‘god’ is derived from ‘day-lit sky’ as ‘the celestial one’ or from the divine name ‘god of the day-lit sky’ > ‘god (generic)’, remains a matter of debate, cf. Melchert 2019d:246: “The reason for the specific change to ‘god, deity’ remains to be found.” What is unambiguous is the fact that this word is derived from the root noun PIE *déi̯‑/*di‑´ ‘day’, cf. Rau 2010a. It may further be hypothesized that this root noun originally rather meant ‘daylight’ (< ‘what is shining’) and the derivative *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ ‘what is connected with daylight’, thus ‘day-lit sky; sky deity; day’.
3.1.1Root etymology
The root underlying PIE *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ ‘day-lit sky’ and thus PIE *déi̯‑/*di‑´ ‘day’ (or ‘daylight’) is continued also as the basis of the stems *di-n- ‘day’ (cf. OCS dĭnĭ m. ‘day’, Ved. adj. sudína- ‘bringing good days’, Lat. noundinum ‘period of nine days’) and *dei̯-h2- ‘to be light, shine’ (cf. Gk. δῆλος ‘visible, conspicuous’, etc.). The meaning of PIE *dei̯- can thus be reconstructed as ‘(to be) light, bright’ (NIL:69–81).
3.2Morphological Reconstruction
PIE *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ can be analyzed either as an é/Ø-ablauting root-noun *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ formed to a root *di̯eu̯- ‘to shine, light up’ or as an exocentric hysterokinetic u-stem *di̯-éu̯-/*di-u̯-´ derived from an underlying root noun. Rau 2010a opts convincingly for the latter option. The u-stem would “have been substantival and had exocentric semantics vis-à-vis its basis—viz. *déi̯-/di-´ ‘day’ → *di̯-éu̯-/di-u̯-´ ‘the one who is connected with the *déi̯-/di-´’” (Rau 2010a:317f.). The derivational base of *di̯-éu̯-, the root-noun *déi̯-/*di-´ is continued in forms such as Ved. adv. sadyás ‘on the same day’ (RV+) < *sm̥=di̯-és (Rau 2010a:314; cf. also EWAia II:694, NIL:69f.) and PIE *g̑h-di̯-és ‘yesterday’, lit. *‘on that day’ (Rau 2010a:315; cf. also NIL:69f., Hackstein 2014a). Furthermore, the extended n-stem *di-n- (cf. OCS dĭnĭ m. ‘day’, etc., cf. NIL:70) can be explained as a backformation from a loc. sg. *di̯-én ‘during the day’ formed to the root-noun *déi̯-/*di-´ (as per Rau 2010a:316).
PIE *di̯éu̯-/*diu̯-´ itself served as derivational base of several formations, cf., e.g. the vr̥ddhi derivative Core IE *dei̯u̯-ó- ‘heavenly, god’Cf. Ved. devá- ‘heavenly’, m. ‘god’ RV+, Av. daēuua- m. ‘demon, false god’, Lat. deus m. ‘god’, OIr. nom. sg. día ‘god’, gen. sg. dé, PGerm. *tejwa- > *tīwa- in ON nom. pl. tífar ‘gods’, Lith. diẽvas ‘god’, etc.< *‘belonging to heaven’; The motion feminine Core IE *déi̯u̯-ih2-/*diu̯-i̯éh2- f. ‘goddess’.Cf. Ved. devī́- f. ‘heavenly’, f. ‘goddess’ RV+, YAv. daēuuī- f. ‘she-devil’, Gk. δῖα f. ‘goddess’ [Eur., Hsch.], etc.For further derivatives of *di̯éu̯-, cf. NIL:71–73.
3.2.1Root etymology
On the root etymology, cf. above sub Morphological reconstruction (with additional lit.).
3.3Syntactic Reconstruction and Phraseology
Two PIE collocations that contain *di̯éu̯- are reconstructable for Core IE:
- *di̯éu̯- *ph2tér- ‘father heaven’ (cf. Gk. Ζεὺς πατήρ, Ved. dyáuḥ pitā́, Lat. Iūpiter, Umbr. iuve patre; cf., e.g., EIEC:230f.)
- *dhugh2tḗr *diu̯ós ‘daughter of the day-lit sky’ (cf. Ved. duhitā́ divás f. RV+, epithet of uṣás-, the goddess of dawn, Gk. θυγάτηρ Διóς f. Il.+, epithet of different goddesses “that fulfill different inherited functions of Eos” [Jackson 2006a:53 with refs.] and perhaps Lith. diẽvo duktė̃ f., an epithet of Saulýte, a mythological figure; cf., e.g., NIL:126, EIEC:231).
[S.S.], [T.S.], [A.O.]
4. Transmission
Ved. dyáv-, div-´ m./f. ‘heaven, day; god of heaven, father heaven’ (RV+); YAv. gen. sg. diiaoš ‘of the (breed of) hell’ (Yt 3.13), OAv. fraidiuuā ‘always again’ (Y 32.14)
EWAia I:750f.
Myc. gen. sg. di-wo /diu̯os/, dat. sg. di-we /diu̯ei̯/ m. ‘?Zeus’; Gk. (Hom.) nom. sg. Ζεύς m. god name ‘Zeus’, gen. sg. Διός, Ζηνός, dat. sg. Διί, Ζηνί, acc. sg. Ζῆν (cf. εὐρύοπα Ζῆν, e.g., Il. 8.206), Ζῆνα, Δία, voc. sg. Zεῦ (all Il.+)
GEW I:610f.
Arm. tiw ‘day’, abl. sg. towē, gen. dat. loc. sg. towǝnǰean
EDAIL:616, Olsen 1999a:176
Lat. Iuppiter, Iouis m. divine name ‘Jupiter’ (Naev.+): nom. sg. Iūpiter, later Iuppiter, also Iouis (Enn., Acc.+), acc. sg. (inscr.) Diovem (Praeneste), Iouem, gen. sg. Diouos, Iouos, Diouo (Praeneste, Norba), Diouis, Iouis, dat. sg. Diouei (Falerii, Mesagne), Iouei (Praeneste, Spoleto), Iouī, abl. sg. Ioue, nom. pl. Iouēs (Cic.); Osc. nom. sg. dípatír, gen. sg. διωϝηις, iúveís, zoves (Presam. διπoτερες, Marr. ioues patres), dat. sg. διoυϝει, ζωϝηι, ιoυϝηι, diúveí, iúveí, iuveí (Mars. ioue); Umbr. voc. sg. iupater, di, dei, gen. sg. iuvip(atres?), dat. sg. iuve, iuue, iuvepatre, iuve patre
EDLIL:315f.
?OCS dŭždĭ m. ‘rainstorm, bad weather’, Russ. nom. sg. doždĭ, gen. sg. doždja, SCr. dȁžd, gen. sg. dàžda ‘id.’, etc.
EDSIL:131
tiwataniye/a-