pariyanalla/i-

All attestations come from manuscripts of the Kuwattalla tradition, the earliest showing MS.

[E.R.]

nom./acc. sg. n.	⸢pa-a-ri-ia⸣-na-a-al	KUB 35.43 ii 4	(CTH 761, NS)
	[pa-ri-i]a-na-al-la-〈an〉	KUB 35.43 iii 31’’	(CTH 761, NS)
	pa-ri-ia-na-al-⸢la-an⸣	KUB 35.45 ii 1	(CTH 761, NS)
	[pa-ri-i]a-na-al-la-an	KUB 35.49 i 6’	(CTH 761, MS)
	[pa-ri-i]a-⸢na⸣-al-⸢la⸣-an	KBo 29.11, 8’	(CTH 760, N/A)

The morphological analysis in Otten 1953a:97 (followed in DLL:78f.) is outdated. Instead, the morphosyntactic agreement with the neuter acc. sg. forms tapāru, tatariyamman, and ḫīrūn determines all attested forms of puwatīl(i)- and pariyanalla/i-. The doublet pāriyanāl and pariyanallan emerged by the secondary apocope in pāriyanāl in analogy to its antonym pūwatīl.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – The reading at KUB 35.43 iii 31’’ follows CLL:169.

[E.R.]

The first semantic interpretation was proposed in Starke 1990a:454f. n. 1645. Among a series of merisms, pariyanāl/pariyanallan and the adjective pūwatīl(za) ‘past’ form yet another one, which led Starke 1990a to conclude that the former is also an adjective and must be the antonym of pūwatīl(za) ‘past’, meaning ‘future’. The translation is adopted in CLL:169, Shevoroshkin 1994a:142 and 163, Hutter 2003a:262, HHw:s.v., EDHIL:635f., Mouton & Yakubovich 2019a:213.Only Puhvel (in HED PA:127) rejects this translation, arguing that the word for ‘future’ is apparant(i)-, which is certainly true, but does not prevent the Luwians to have another synonymous expression for the same concept.

[E.R.]

Melchert (in CLL:169) derives the word semantically from pariyan ‘beyond, exceedingly’, i.e. ‘of the beyond’ → ‘future’, which is also morphologically the most plausible and economical process. Puhvel (in HED PA:127) adduces tarriyanalla/i- ‘third-rank’ as a parallel formation.Less likely Shevoroshkin 1994a:142, 163 with a morphological analysis presupposing a stem *pariya- and a -na- suffix: pariya-na-alli-.

[E.R.]

In Hittite context, the lexeme occurs only once in the fragment of a purification ritual.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

In CHD P:153 (followed in HEG P:461 and Ünal 2007a:518), it is assumed that pariyanalla- is an evil listed among other evils to be removed in a purification ritual. While it is true that the word is part of such a list, it need not itself be a noun denoting an evil but may also modify such a noun as an adjective. In this vein, Fuscagni 2016c plausibly restores and translates the context from its two manuscripts (KBo 47.23 i 16’-20’ and dupl. KBo 12.139, 6’-10’): [ ... ] ^(16’)pa-an-ga-wa-a[(z eme-az x) ... ka-ru-ú-i-li-ia-az ki-nu-un-tar-ri-ia-l(a-az)] ^(16’)pa-ri-ia-n[(a-al-la-az) ...] ... (20’)⸢tu-li⸣-[(ia-az) pár-ku-wa-e-eš a-ša-an-du] “[Let them be purified] from the slander of the multitude, ..., [from the past, presen]t and future [law-suits and] the trials of ... [ ... ]!” Accordingly, an interpretation that permits to equate pariyanalla- in Hittite context with pariyanalla/i- in Luwian contexts is possible.

[E.R.]

For the derivational process, see under CLuw. pariyanalla/i-.

[E.R.]

The derivation with the productive Luwian adjectival suffix -alla/i- and the occurrence of the same word in Luwian transmission points to its Luwian origin (CLL:169, HHw:s.v., HEG P:461).

[E.R.] 

For the lemma head see CLuw. parī.