no-

Hapax in a votive inscription on a bronze vessel of unknown provenance and of unknown date (Adiego 2019a:32 dated it to the late 6^th‒5^th c. without providing any argument, he refers to Gusmani 1978c, who, however, did not date the inscription). Meier-Brügger 1994a:113 suggested Caria because of the similar inscription of C.Ha 1; Schürr 2010e:134 argued for Egypt based on the similarity with E.xx 7; and Adiego 2019a:32f. added the phrase alosδ k̑arnosδ of this inscription, what he has been connecting with Halikarnassos, in support of the Carian origin. Unfortunately, none of these are arguments are conclusive, since the similarities do not extend beyond their genre as votive inscriptions, C.Ha 1 is probably of Egyptian origin (see s.v. san[939]), and the identification of alosδ k̑arnosδ with Halikarnassos is heavily debated (see most recently Simon 2021b:56 n. 6).

[Zs.S.]

3sg. pret. act.

not

C.xx 2

The attestation follows Adiego 2007a:388, checked against the photograph of Gusmani 1978c:Pl.III. The segmentation is probably correct: not is followed by word dividers and preceded by ýśbiks, a compound name probably with biks (see s.v. piks) as its second member and not with bik in s-dative. For its grammatical definition see under Meaning.

[Zs.S.]

Adiego 2000a:153‒155, Adiego 2007a:284f., 388 proposed a 3sg. pret. verb in the meaning ‘llevar, conducir, traer / bring’ as a cognate of Hittite nē-, nai-/ni- ‘to turn, to send’ and CLuw. nana- ‘to lead’ (see s.v.), deriving all from PIE *nei̯H- ‘to bring’, which is, however, more precisely *nei̯h_1/3- ‘führen, leiten’ (LIV²:450f.). Despite this, Simon 2020d:401 refrained from translating not.

The idea that we are dealing with a verb is definitely supported both formally (cf., e.g., ýbt ‘offered’, s.v.) and syntactically (not stands in the second position of the inscription after the subject). The problem is in the semantics: First, the proposed and formally fitting Hittite, Luwian as well as PIE cognates do not provide direct evidence for the meaning ‘to bring’ (which, however, appears in the Indo-Iranian cognates). Second, the meaning of the inscription is completely unknown, since setting aside ýśbiks, a personal name, the remaining words are either of unknown meaning (jzpe) or heavily debated (alosδ k̑arnosδ and mδane, see s.vv.). All in all, a meaning ‘to bring’ is contextually fitting, but it cannot be proved at the moment (cf. already Simon 2020d:402).

[Zs.S.]