pūš(i)-

The attestations come from two NS duplicate texts of the ritual for a sick child (Tauriša tradition).

[E.R.]

The acc. pl. c. form in -inzi (instead of -inza) probably results from the influence of an Empire Luwian scribe as per Yakubovich 2010d:35-38.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

Both pūš(i)- and its diminutive pūšann(i)- occur before a series of identical manipulations of several tools, and it is likely that pūš(i)- and pušann(i)- likewise denote tools (Yakubovich 2019a:554): ⁽⁶⁾a-an-ni-eš-ku^!-wa-ti pu-ši-in-[za (dupl. -zi)] ⁽⁷⁾pu-ú-ša-an-ni-in-⸢za la⸣-a-du ⁽⁸⁾pu-ri-in-ti-ia-an ku-iš a-[ta] ⁽⁹⁾a-ti pu-ri-in la-a-ad-⸢du⸣ “the mother shall take the pūš(i)-’s and little pūš(i)-’s for herself. Who made the pur(i)-tool, shall take the pur(i)-tool for himself” (KBo 13.260 ii 6-9 with dupl. KBo 29.27 i 3’f.). Regarding the type of tool, pušūri(ya)- ‘rubbing substance, polish’ (see under Lemma) comes to mind, but the plene spelling of the first vowel, which goes back to an anaptyxis, cautions against the connection.

[E.R.]

The mutated acc. pl. in combination with the derivative pūšann(i)- with an unmutated base constitutes evidence for an i-mutated stem pūš(i)- (CLL:180, HHw:137).

[E.R.]

1. pūšann(i)-