/tiwandalla/i-/

This lexeme is attested six times in inscriptions from Tabal, dating to the second half of the 8^th century BCE. 

[A.P.]

nom. sg.	/tiwa(n)tallis/	ti-wá/í-ta-li-sa	AKSARAY, §4a (Tabal)
		ti-wa/i-tá-li-sa	AKSARAY, §4b (Tabal)
		[t]i-wá/í-tá-li-sá	AKSARAY, §4c (Tabal)
		[ti-wa/i]-ta-li-sa	BOR, §7 (Tabal)
		ti-wa/i-[ta]-l[i-s]a	BOR, §7 (Tabal)
acc. sg.	/tiwa(n)tallin/	ti-wa/i-ta-li-na	SULTANHAN, §25 (Tabal)

[A.P.]

The present meaning was assigned by Hawkins 1986b:98f., correcting an earlier erroneous identification by Poetto 1982c:278f. as ‘like the sun’. Most instructive in this respect are price comparisons such as those found at AKSARAY, §4a: a-wa/i á-[pa]-tá-za_x (“ANNUS”)u-sá-za (OVIS.ANIMA)ha-wa/i-i 30 ti-wá/í-ta-li-sa “179”-za CRUS+RA/I, approx. /a=wa abattanz ussanz hawi … tiwattallis …=za …/, meaning ‘In those years, (one) sheep stood for 30 t.-measures of barley’ (Hawkins 2000a:476). It is not clear, however, what one /tiwattalla/i-/ measure amounts to in modern terms; see also the discussion of the stem below.

[AH.B.]

The word appears to be a common gender noun, based on an adjective in /-alla/i-/, which underwent substantivisation. Since the suffix forms adjectives of appurtenance, the putative, but unattested base would be */tiwa(n)ta(/i)-/, provided the spelling of the word is correctly interpreted as /tiwa(n)talla/i-/. Hawkins 1986b:99 entertains the idea that it could be related to the name of the sun-god, /Tiwad-/, but rightly states that it remains entirely unclear what the connection could be, cf. the discussion of the phonological interpretation above. It is hence assumed here to be unrelated to /Tiwad-/, until proven otherwise.

If the phonological interpretation should represent /tiwittalla/i-/, however, the word could be a loan based on Akkadian tiʾītu (also tiwītu) ‘food’ (cf. CAD T:398f.); in that case, a suitable meaning for the present lexeme would be ‘portion’.

[AH.B.]

All attestations come from the same tablet, a NS letter fragment.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – Starke 1985a:369 (followed in CLL:229) restored as [ti-wa-a]n-˹na˺-a-al-li-iš at KBo 29.38 obv. 4’, but neither -na- nor -da- can be squared easily with the visible rest of the sign. Also, there is surely not enough space for an additional -a-, even with a reading -na-. In view of lapanalliš ibid. 6’, another noun in -alla/i-, it is likely that we are dealing with a different lexeme at 4’ (]x-⸢al-li-iš⸣), too. – At KBo 29.38 obv. 5’, the final vertical is positioned much too high for -na- (thus the reading by Starke 1985a:369, followed in CLL:229). Therefore, the assignment is not assured. The same goes for ti-wa-a[n- at KBo 29.38 obv. 3’. – Given the fact that there is no clear attestation left of a word beginning with tiwanna-, it must remain open whether the reading of -na- in ti-wa-an-n[a- at KBo 29.38 obv. 7’ is correct (thus Starke 1985a:369, followed in CLL:229). Otten’s drawing of word final -l]i-zi in the hand-copy cannot be confirmed by collation on the photograph. Accordingly, putative tiwannalla/i- (CLL:229, HHw:178) may well be a ghost word.

[E.R.]

The fragmentary context does not permit a semantic interpretation. Only the determinative GIŠ provides some information by implying that the lexeme denotes a tool or plant.

[E.R.]

Although the base is not known, an analysis as *tiwa- + -nt(i)- + -alla/i- seems obvious. However, a comparison of the first part of the word with Hitt. ^MUNUSšiwanzanna- (a kind of priestess) or ^NINDAšiwandannanni- (a type of bread) must remain speculative. One should also compare HLuw. /tiwa(n)talla/i-/.

[E.R.]