*ápo

This lexeme is attested four times in inscriptions from Karkamiš, Tabal and Tell Ahmar, dating to between the 10^th or early 9^th century and the late 8^th century BCE.

[A.P.]

The spelling in BOHÇA, §4 is misleading, since the full string is 〈za-ri+i-ia-pa-a〉, i.e. /zadi=appa/ ‘back here’, and uses 〈ia〉 to represent the glide between the two vowels.

The attestation in TELL AHMAR 6, §34 is recognised against Hawkins 2006a:30.

[A.P.]

With the word well-known from CLuw. and Hittite, its meaning was clear, once the word was found to exist in HLuw. (Melchert, pers. comm. in 1988 apud Hawkins 2000a:493). The meaning assignment is borne out by the two attestations that are not fragmented. Thus TELL AHMAR 6, §34 runs: á-na(REGIO)-i-ta-pa-wa/i NEG₃-sa a-pa (PES₂)i-ti za-a-na (DEUS)TONITRUS-na ^Iha-mi-ia-ta-si-i-na wa/i+ra/i-ARMA-na, approx. /Anaitta=ba=wa nis appa idi zan Tarhuntan Hamiyattassin warpin/, translating as ‘He shall not walk back to the (land of) Ana this (Storm-god) Tarhunt, this weapon of Hamiyatta’ vel sim. (cf. Hawkins 2006a:30f.).

The attestation at BOHÇA, §4 shows a univerbation with the abl./instr. of the demonstatrive pronoun /za-/ ‘this’: (DEUS)CERVUS₃-ti-pa-wa/i-ta-a za-ri+i-ia-pa-a (BONUS)wa/i-su-wa/i, approx. /Runti=ba=wa=tta zadi=appa wassuwi/, meaning ‘But I am dear to (the Stag-god) Runtiya here’ (cf. Hawkins 2000a:479).

[AH.B.]

Like its cognates in CLuw. and Hittite, the adverb shows the typical /-a/ ending found in several other adverbs, both in Luwian and Hittite, cf. e.g. /anta/ ‘in(to)’ and Hittite arḫa ‘away’. See also /appan/ and /appi/.

[AH.B.]

1. /appanta/

1. /appara/i-/

2. /appari/

3. /apparadi/

4. /apparanta/

The lexeme is attested in a broad range of rituals and a festival text (from MS onwards).

[E.R.]

For another possible instance of āppa, see appa.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

Although the equation of CLuw. āppa and Hitt. āppa was recognized as early as 1919 (Forrer 1919a:1034; cf. also Hrozný 1920a:27, Schwartz 1938a:350), it came with a number of erroneous assumptions, so that Otten 1953a:48 n. 135 preferred to leave open the question of its function. Only since DLL:29 and Laroche 1958b:184 (egir-an = /appan/), the interpretation as a preverb, adverb and postposition meaning ‘back, again, after’ can be regarded as established (also in Kronasser 1956a:160, Kammenhuber 1959b:222f., CLL:20, HW 2nd ed. A:161, HEG A-K:42, HED A:93, HHw:s.v., EDHIL:193).

CLuw. āppa is found close to the beginning of the clause, which contains a negation in all clear cases. A translation of the two as ‘not again’ agrees with the contexts, although the semantically close ‘not back’ cannot be entirely excluded for sentences with a motion verb. Either one is compatible with directional semantics. The early position close to the left clause boundary together with the assumed temporal meaning may indicate that āppa is still a relatively independent adverb.

[E.R.]

CLuw. āppa is based on locational āpp- with final -a, as opposed to =appi and āppan.

[E.R.]

1. EGIR-anda

1. appar(a)i-^(di)

2. āpparant(i)-

Contra Neumann 2007a:58, the word nepe at TL 44b.50 does not contain the adverb epe, but is rather the emphatic negation ne + =pe ‘not’. His argument regarding Wackernagel’s Law of clitics does not apply here, since emphatic =pe can occur anywhere in the sentence and, in the case of nepe, it is univerbated at any rate. See Lyc. B epe.

[D.S.]

1. epewẽtlm͂mẽ(i)-

2. epn͂te

1. epre/i-

2. epri-^(ti)

This lexeme is attested in the inscription of the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE and stylistically to around 400 BCE (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.), as well as in the poetical inscription engraved on the lion sarcophagus of Antiphellos, dated on stylistic grounds to the beginning of the 4^th century BCE (Zahle 1979a:318, Mühlbauer 2007a:91).

[D.S.]

Schürr 2005a:137 suggests seeing an example of epe in the word epede. which he reads together with Kalinka 1901a:54 (and Schmidt 1868b:Pl.  IV) as epedes: (thus also DLL:115, contra Gehrisch 2018a:107 “se=pedes”); however, the traces of the s are dubious, but even if it is really there an emendation to epede{s} would be fine, provided that the predicate is found in the lacuna between prijãmi : [...] qrbblali). This is convincing, although we provisionally assume a particle chain, i.e. epe=de, introducing a new clause.

[D.S.]

Shevoroshkin 1979a:179 posits the existence of a Lycian B adverb epe related to Hitt. āppa meaning ‘after, then’ without any contextual reasoning (likewise Serangeli 2019a:240). Melchert (DLL:115) sees more concretely a case of the adverb in the word sequence epe palarã (TL 55.5) (thus also Gehrisch 2018a:110), which, as he points out, could also be taken as a compound, i.e. epepalara- (cf. Lyc. B palara-). Likewise, the sequence epeqzz[.] can be taken as a compound epeqzze (see Shevoroshkin 1969b:341, followed by Gehrisch 2018a:91; cf. Schürr 2005a:137 and Schürr 2018b:67 and see under Lyc. B qzze(/i)-) or as two words, i.e. epe qzz[.], in which epe may function as a preverb together with the following predicate trppalau. Pending more evidence, these cases of epe are separated here. The meaning given to epe rests mainly on etymological grounds and is therefore adopted here with caution; cf. Lyc. epi.

[D.S.]

Hapax in the so-called Longer Strategos Votive Inscription of unknown date (see the discussion s.v. śa) from Side, if it exists, see the discussion under Form.

[Zs.S.]

The attestation follows Pérez Orozco 2007a:136, 138f., Pérez Orozco 2020a:165 checked against the photographs in Darga 1967a:Res. 8 (= Neumann 1968a:Taf. I.2 = Brixhe 1969a:Planche II) and Zinko & Zinko 2019a:426 Fig. 21.5. Most of the scholars segment opebijase from the completely opaque sequence ewśako³pebijaseñnebarśaka (Neumann 1968a:91f., Neumann 1978b:874; Ševoroškin 1975a:163f.; Eichner 1993a:127; Nollé 2001a:635f.; Zinko & Zinko 2019a:421) based on the observation that °ase is identical to the ending of jewase and abase (see s.vv.), but Pérez Orozco 2007a:136, 139 went one step further and segmented ope ‘después, detrás’(cf. Luwian āppan ‘behind, after’). This is a formally fitting solution (bijase might have resulted from the apocope attested in Sidetic, since initial voiced consonants are normally secondary in the Anatolian languages), which is semantically plausible and syntactically possible, and thus, it is followed here (Pérez Orozco cautiously [“podría”] maintained his opinion in a later publication [Pérez Orozco 2020a:165 with n. 101], but only as the part of a substantive “opeñijas-” [<*appan-iya-ssi/o-] of uncertain [political or military] meaning, but this word does not exist, see the criticism in Simon 2021a:381–383).

[Zs.S.]

See under Form for the suggestion of Pérez Orozco followed here. Already the form opebijase was identified as an adverb by various scholars, see s.v. bijase.

[Zs.S.]

HW 2nd ed. A:148-162