†ziya-

It is a ghost word that has been assumed to appear in a Kizzuwatna ritual.

[A.B.]

Rosenkranz 1950a:197 read the sequence in KUB 30.31++ rev. iii 44 of CTH 479.1, NS as zi-an-za and in KBo 23.1++ obv. i 56 of CTH 472, NS (he refers to the fragment KUB 30.38 of the same tablet, where the form in question appears in line 36’) as ?zi-ia (with question mark). The photos of the Mainzer Fotoarchiv and the hand copies show a Winkelhaken as first sign of these forms, not a diagonal wedge. Accordingly, this sign can be interpreted in different ways. In his review of Rosenkranz’ paper, Otten 1952b:341 rejected the reading of this sign as a Glossenkeil. He refers to Sommer & Ehelolf 1924a:18f., who had read an U-sign at the beginning of the same sequence in other Kizzuwatnean rituals (KBo 5.1 obv. i 26, CTH 476, NS and KUB 7.52 obv. 7’ CTH 473, NS), although they considered it to be interpreted as a Sumerogram (U=bùr) and the rest of the word to be Hittite syllabic complementation. However, with regard to the attestations listed by Rosenkranz, Otten interpreted the whole sequence syllabically (u-zi-ia). In their editions of these texts, Lebrun 1977a:100, Lebrun 1979b:143, Strauß 2006a:262, and Strauß 2010a also transliterated syllabic u-zi-ia. Haas & Wilhelm 1974a:63–65 had already classified uziya- as a Hurrian lexeme appearing in Hittite texts. Likewise, Lebrun 1979b:157f. and Strauß 2006a:92–98 pointed out that the term is of Hurrian origin. Hence, the attested forms do not show a Glossenkeil and instead belong to the lexeme uzi(ya)- (cf. the respective lemma). Apart from that, a lemma ziya[- (of unknown meaning) without Glossenkeil is listed by Ünal 2007a:824 and Ünal 2016a:610, but no further analysis is possible (attestation is not provided). Consequently, †ziya- cannot be identified as a Glossenkeilwort nor as an existing Luwian lexeme on the basis of these attestations.

[A.B.]