/nann(i)-/, (DOMINUS)na-ni-i-
‘master’
- Language
- Hieroglyphic Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, c.
- ID
- 2813
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
/nann(i)-/, (DOMINUS)na-ni-i-
‘master’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested 57 times across the hieroglyphic corpus. Attestations survive from many regions, namely Konya, Emirgazi, Commagene, Tell Ahmar, the Amuq, Aleppo, Tabal, Karkamiš, Maraş, and Malatya, and date from the Bronze Age to the late 8th century BCE.
[A.P.]
1.1.2Forms
The above table offers a selection of attestations, excluding broken examples.
[A.P.]
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
The reading of the present lexeme was first proposed by Oreshko 2014a:619-621, and revised to /nann(i)-/ by Yakubovich 2019a:554 n. 47 following Melchert (pers. comm.) who proposed a link with Hittite nanna-/-i(ya)-(ḫi) ‘to drive’. It is worth pointing out that the word never occurs in purely logographic writing in the inscriptions but is always attested with phonetic complementation or in full phonetic spelling. In analogy to similar spellings such as LABARNA.LA and MONS.TU, Oreshko 2014a:620 proposes to reanalyse the oldest Bronze Age spellings of DOMINUS with 〈na〉 (sign *35) as a suspension writing DOMINUS.NA, which is followed here.
The attestations of the present lexeme are separate from the noun /niya-/ ‘lord’, which is also typically spelt with the logogram DOMINUS, but shows different phonetic complementation, see under lemma; Yakubovich 2019a:554 n. 47 regards them as cognates. However, it should be mentioned that it is not always possible to differentiate reliably between /nann(i)-/ ‘master’ and /niya-/ ‘lord’, because some spellings appear to be ambiguous.The partly damaged attestation in CEKKE inscr. 1, §2 is ˹DOMINUS˺-ni, which could also be interpreted as DOMINUS.NI and would thus represent an analogous construction to DOMINUS.NA.
[AH.B.] [A.P.]
1.1.4Meaning
The meaning of this lexeme is largely clear, just like its putative cognate /niya-/ ‘lord’ which it was long conflated with into a single lexeme (thus still in Giusfredi 2010b:126-130); both words are similar in spelling and semantics. Despite the lexeme conflation, the meaning was first identified by way of the logogram DOMINUS by Jensen 1894a:300, and has been accepted by scholars since. The semantic difference to /niya-/ ‘lord’ is not clear-cut, but it becomes evident from the contexts of attestation that /nann(i)-/ occurs frequently – but by no means exclusively – in reference to one or more deities, a typical example being KARKAMIŠ A11b+c, §9: *a-mu-pa-wa/i *a-mi-i-sa (DOMINUS)na-ní-i-sa CAELUM (DEUS)TONITRUS-sa (DEUS)kar-hu-ha-sá (DEUS)ku+AVIS-pa-pa-sa-ha *a-mi-ia-ti “IUSTITIA”-wa/i-na-ti (LITUUS)á-za-tá, approx. /ammu=ba=wa ammis nannis tippasassis Tarhunzas Karhuhas Kubabas=ha ammiyadi tarrawannadi azzanta/, meaning ‘My master(s?) the storm-god Tarhunt of Heaven, Karhuha, and Kubaba loved me because of my justice’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:103). In contrast, the referents of /nanninzi/ in KARKAMIŠ A31+, §8 are very unlikely to be any deities: wa/i-tú REX-zi GRAVIS-wa/i-zi-ha DOMINUS-zi “ADORARE”-su-na a-ta-na PES2.PES2-ti, approx. /wa=du hantawattinzi kwanzuwinzi=ha nanninzi …-suna antan …-danti/, meaning ‘Kings and important (lit.: heavy) masters went inside to worship her (scil. Kubaba)’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:142).
The meaning ‘master’ is assigned to reflect the lexical difference between /nann(i)-/ and /niya-/, but it does not necessarily capture the exact semantic difference between the two words.
Rejected is the view presented by Poetto 2010a:272f. that the title should be linked to the CLuw. noun nān(i)- ‘brother’.
[AH.B.]
1.1.5Stem
The noun is clearly a common gender stem that undergoes i-mutation, as evident from the attested forms. Oreshko 2014a:620f. suggests that it derives from an unattested verb */nana-/ vel sim. ‘to lead’ (matching CLuw. nana-). This is taken up by Yakubovich 2019a:554 n. 47, following Melchert (pers. comm.) who proposed a link with Hittite nanna-/-i(ya)-(ḫi) ‘to drive’, and he further explains it as built on the reduplicated stem of a likewise unattested verb that is cognate with Hittite nāi-/niya-(ḫi) ‘to lead’ (but cf. CLuw. nanna-(i)), thereby linking it directly to its cognate /niya-/ ‘lord’. As attractive as this connection may be, it remains unclear what kind of derivational process would hide behind the title /nann(i)-/, if it really is derived from the imperfective stem */nanna-/ ‘to drive’.
[AH.B.]
1.1.6Compounds
The word is also found as the second member of a compound: 〈DOMUS-ni-DOMINUS-ni-i-sa4〉 (KULULU 4, §8)Similarly in KULULU 5, § 2, but slightly damaged: 〈DOMUS[-x-]DOMINUS-ni-sá-’〉., i.e. /parninannis/ ‘house master’.
[AH.B.]