/tamihid-/, tá-mi-hi-sá
‘non-mobile wealth’
- Language
- Hieroglyphic Luwian
- Class
- Derivative
- Grammar
- subst, n.
- ID
- 307
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
/tamihid-/, tá-mi-hi-sá
‘non-mobile wealth’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is attested once on each side of the Karatepe bilingual inscription (late 8th BCE).
[D.S.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | /tamihi=sa/ | tá-mi-hi-sá | KARATEPE 1 Ho. §51 (Cilicia), KARATEPE 1 Hu. §51 (Cilicia) |
1.1.3Meaning ‘non-mobile wealth, abundance’
The meaning of the Phoenician equivalent is debated, whence it is not helpful at determining the meaning of the Luwian lexeme (Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 1987a:272-275). The passage, in which /tamihid-/ occurs, is a beneficial formula. Thus, it is expected to mean something positive. Hawkins and Morpurgo Davies (loc. cit.) argue for an etymological connection with Hitt. tamētar- ‘non-mobile wealth’ and translate the Luwian lexeme accordingly. Hawkins 2000a:55 translates it with ‘abundance’ (likewise Payne 2012a:41).
[D.S.]
1.1.4Stem
This lexeme is a neuter stem in /-id-/ (Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 1987a:272-275). Starke 1990a:386 n. 1397 refutes the idea that tá-mi-hi-sá is a neuter abstract noun. He already takes the first word in the sequence sa-na-wa/i-sá=ha=wa/i tá-mi-hi-sá to be an abstract noun in /-id-/, whence he excludes the possibility that the second beneficial element can be an abstract noun as well. However, one cannot exclude a case of asyndeton between two nouns belonging together semantically, cf. Hitt. iyata tamēta ‘mobile wealth (and) non-mobile wealth’ (KBo 12.42 rev. 4), Hitt. ez-za-an GIŠ-ru ‘straw (and) wood’ (KUB 1.1. iv 83) or the multiple attestations of GU4ḪI.A UDUḪI.A ‘bulls (and) sheep’. Starke (loc. cit.) also argues based on the presence of the particle /=wa/ that the sequence sa-na-wa/i-sá=ha=wa/i tá-mi-hi-sá must be a new nominal sentence. Hawkins 2000a:65 rejects rightly Starke’s argument by pointing out that the particle /=wa/ is used here to mark the final element in a coordinated series, consisting of three elements “LONGUS”-lá/í-ia (DIES)há-li-ia mi-ia-ti-zi-ha (ANNUS)u-si-zi sa-na-wa/i-sá-ha-wa/i tá-mi-hi-sá ´long days (and) many years and goodness (and) non-mobile wealth´. This shows that /sanawi=sa/ and /tamihi=sa/ are considered to be one element (contra Yakubovich 2016b:466). In conclusion, /tamihid-/ is a substantive.
[D.S.]
1.2 Hittite
tamētar-
‘non-mobile wealth’1.2.1Literature / Comments
HEG T, D:81-83, Watkins 1979a:280-287
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction ‘non-mobile wealth’
Nikolaev 2010a:71 argues that Hitt. tamētar and HLuw. /tamihid-/ reflect a hysterokinetic collective *dmḗh2 independently enlarged with the abstract suffix -tar and /-id-/ respectively, which is the most convincing account. On the purely graphical geminate -mm- in tamētar, one should consult Melchert 1991b:126, EDHIL:413, Nikolaev 2010a:59 n. 16.Outdated Kronasser 1956a:91.
Watkins 1979a:282f. explains the -ē- in Hitt. tamētar as the stative suffix *-eh1. However, Nikolaev 2010a:69-71 argues convincingly that there is no evidence in Indo-European for a stative formation derived from the root *dem- ‘to build’. Moreover, he points out that the /i/ between the root /tam-/ and the end part /-hid-/ in HLuw. /tamihid-/ cannot reflect phonologically the sequence *-eh1- (Melchert 1994a:245, pace Hawkins & Morpurgo Davies 1987a:272-275).
From the Luwian perspective alone, /tamihid-/ could have been explained as follows: /tam(i)-/ ‘building’ → /*tami(ya)-/ (*-i̯o-) ‘of the building’ → /*tamiyahid-/ (+ contraction) > /tamihid-/ ‘non-mobile wealth’. However, by assuming a common origin with Hitt. tamētar, this putative derivation is unpersuasive.
[D.S.] [A.O.]
For the base of the derivation see PAnat. *dem-.
/