*uréti̯ā-

The lexeme is contained in inscriptions from Emirgazi, Tabal, and Tell Ahmar, dated between the 13^th and the 8^th century BCE.

[AH.B.]

The attestation in TOPADA, §16 is followed by a string of clitics: 〈-pa-wa/i-mu〉, i.e. /=ba=wa=mu/ ‘but for me’ with the quotative particle /=wa/ intervening. The form as such appears to be a stem form whose ending has been left out, unless the sentence requires a different translation after all.

[AH.B.]

It is highly likely that the present word was originally an adjective (cf. the lemma /urazza(/i)-/ ‘very great’ and see the discussion of the stem below), but the contexts show that it is used substantively in most inscriptions, cf. Giusfredi 2010b:131f. who deems it a title. This becomes apparent e.g. in EMİRGAZİ 1A, §§13-14: ma-pa-wa/i-ta POST-sa CAPUT a-la-ri+i *a-wa/i-na MAGNUS-zi/a tá-tu-tá-tu-tu, approx. /ma=ba=wa=tta apparis … aladi a=wa=an urazza tattuttattuntu/, meaning ‘But if a lesser prince makes a mistake, they will make him pay(?) to the “greatest” (i.e. the chief)’ (cf. Hawkins 1995a:89).

The two attestations in TOPADA are difficult to interpret (as is much of the inscription), but both feature what seems to be a set phrase: MAGNUS+ra/i-za/i=clitics EQUUS(ANIMA)-sa in §16 and MAGNUS-za/i EQUUS(ANIMA)-za/i in §21. It is commonly, albeit tentatively, translated as ‘the Great (of the) horse’, see Hawkins 2000a:453, 457, who wonders if it may be the title of a military commander.

[AH.B.]

The word is clearly a derivation from /ura/i-/ ‘great’ with the suffix /-zza-/ and does not undergo i-mutation, see Rieken 2005b:68 followed by Yakubovich 2013b:160 and Sasseville 2014-2015a:108f. Regarding the nature of the suffix, however, the latter two scholars have proposed different interpretations. Sasseville 2014-2015a:107-109 suggests that the word is an agent noun formed with the suffix /-zza-/ (< *-ti̯eh₂-), whose exact cognate -aza- is used for the same purpose in Lycian. In contrast to that, Yakubovich 2013b: 160 regards the suffix /-zza-/ as a marker of adjective gradation (*-ti̯o-), here as the superlative. The views of both scholars are, from a semantic viewpoint, reconcilable at least in the case of /urazza-/, for an agent noun denoting a high(er) status can easily be drawn from the adjective domain, esp. in the form of a the superlative, cf. Yakubovich 2013b:164-167.Cf. also Modern Standard German Oberst ‘(a military rank)’, derived from the superlative of the now archaic adjective ober ‘above’.

[AH.B.]

*This lemma was co-written with the trainee Marian Wehrstein.

The adjective is found in three duplicate manuscripts of the Zarpiya ritual and one other ritual fragment (all NS).

[E.R.]

The nominative functions as a vocative in the fragments of CTH 757.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – Following the collation of Otten, Starke 1985b:55 reads ụ́[-ra-]za-aš at KUB 35.9 ii 3’, but this can be excluded because there is not enough space to accommodate both the longer signs ú and ra. Instead, the photograph suggests initial u-. – Emendation at KUB 9.31 ii 30 and HT 1 ii 6’ with Starke 1985b:55 and Starke 1990a:594 against Eichner 1985b:98f.

[E.R.]

Although tainted by the erroneous morphological analysis of the faulty spelling uraz, the early claim by Bossert 1933-1934a:109, 113 that ura- is the Luwian lexeme for ‘great’ proved to be correct and is now generally accepted (e.g. Laroche 1950a:43-45, DLL:102, HW:427, CLL:244, HEG U-Z:88). For its derivative urazza-, which is used as an epithet in the address of the Sun-god (urazzaš ^DTiwaz), the same meaning has been assumed (see literature above). However, Yakubovich 2013b:160 (followed in Simon 2017a:39) saw that the -azza- suffix should cause a difference in meaning and argued for an interpretation as a grammaticalized superlative stem ‘greatest’. In contrast, Sasseville 2014-2015a:107-109 regards the suffix as a formant for agent nouns, pointing to the lack of attested neuter adjectival forms. Unfortunately, he does not offer a translation for the epithet of the Sun-god, but both ‘greatest Sun-god!’ and ‘Chief Sun-god!’ vel sim. are suitable for the context.Outdated Friedrich 1931a:372, Otten 1953a:53 “Himmels-”.

[E.R.]

The lexeme is a non-mutated a-stem, derived with the common -azza- suffix from the base ura/i- ‘great’ (seeStarke 1990a:63, Rieken 2005b:68, Yakubovich 2013b:160, Sasseville 2014-2015a:107-109).Outdated DLL:102, Kronasser 1966a:90, Starke 1985b:98f.

[E.R.]

1. Urza-maššan(i)- (Hutter 2003a:219)

1. urazi(je)-

This word is only attested as a Pisidian personal name in the genitive singular Ουρζες (N 34). Simon 2017a:39 suggests an etymological connection with Luw. /urazza-/, which is entirely plausible. Although, it is not clear whether the stem *oυρζε- represents the substantival a-stem /urazza-/ or the expected adjectival mutated stem */urazza/i-/, which might be attested in Hieroglyphic Luwian (see /urazza(/i)-). Furthermore, Simon compares the personal name Aτουρζετα (N 33) (see Brixhe 2016a:90), which may also contain the same lexeme, although it remains unprovable based on the current state of research.

[D.S.]