knor

Hapax in a compound name from Krya, perhaps from the 4^th c. BC (Roos 1985a:51).

[Zs.S.]

unknown

knor

C.Kr 1

The attestation follows Adiego 2007a:374, checked against the photograph of Deroy 1955a:Pl.II.2 (squeeze only). Its segmentation is relatively assured, since it is preceded by mnoś, the gen. sg. of mno ‘son and/or servant’ (see s.v.) and followed by norilams: while its segmentation and meaning are unknown, the initial sequence nor° rather points to a wordplay with the preceding word, since “knornor°” would imply some kind of irregular reduplication. The same segmentation is assumed also by Duhoux 2008a:66 and Schürr 2013c:26 (but not by O. Henry 2007a:96 and Kloekhorst 2008a:143, who did not separate knor and norilams).

[Zs.S.]

Although the tomb inscription C.Kr 1 has been studied several times, no interpretation of this section has been attempted (Adiego 2007a:292, 374; O. Henry 2007a:94‒96; Duhoux 2008a:66; Kloekhorst 2008a:143; Schürr 2013c:26; Simon 2019b:3‒5).

Adiego 2007a:292 n. 20 calls attention to Lycian A nere/i- of debated meaning (perhaps a kinship term, see s.v.) “as a purely assonant connection”. However, in order to do so, he had to segment it as k=nor, but there is no evidence for a Carian particle or word †k- and the cautious translation provided by him (“and(?)”) is clearly false (‘and’ is expressed by sb and =q in Carian, see s.vv.).

Simon 2008b:462, Simon 2011b:540 n. 8 suggested “very tentatively” that it may represent the Carian reflex of PIE *h₂ner- ‘man, person’, but admitted that it does not shed more light on the inscription and, accordingly, although this would be formally possible, it is not adopted here.

[Zs.S.]