*li-lh3u̯-
‘to pour’
- Language
- Proto-Anatolian
- Grammar
- verb
- ID
- 3389
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Cuneiform Luwian
lilūwa-(i)
‘to pour’1.1.1Transmission
The attestations of the verb are restricted to a single song incipit within the Ištanuwa festival.
[E.R.]
1.1.2Forms
| 2sg. impv. act. | li-lu-u-wa | KUB 25.39 i 26’ | (CTH 773, NS) |
| KUB 25.39 i 27’ | (CTH 773, NS) | ||
| li-lu-u-wa-a | KUB 25.39 i 27’ | (CTH 773, NS) |
1.1.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.
[E.R.]
1.1.4Meaning
The semantic elucidation of CLuw. lilūwa-(i) ‘to pour’ goes back to Melchert 1998b:217. It is based on the co-occurrence with tāin- ‘oil’ as its direct object, and the match with Hitt. lilḫuwa-(ḫi) ‘to pour’ (the loss of lenited -ḫ- before -w- seen in lilūwa- in contrast with Hitt. lilḫuwa-(ḫi) is a well-known feature of Luwian, see Melchert 1994a:258f.). The translation found broad acceptance (CLL:128, HHw:94, HEG L-N:5, Shevoroshkin 2002a:229, Shevoroshkin 2002a:407, HED L:82, EDHIL:526, Frotscher 2012a:161, Dempsey 2015a:226, Sasseville 2021a:351). Whether lilūwa-(i) possesses an iterative meaning (as considered by Dempsey 2015a:226) is difficult to say.
[E.R.]
1.1.5Stem
Different from his earlier work, Melchert 2011a:127, 130 emphasizes that the Hittite and Luwian reduplicated formations were derived independently following the same productive pattern with partial i-reduplication and zero grade root (see also Dempsey 2015a:257, 293-295). According to Sasseville 2021a:351, the imperative ending in -a supports a classification as a ḫi-verb.
[E.R.]
1.2 Hittite
lilḫuwa-(ḫi)
‘to pour’1.2.1Literature / Comments
CHD L-N:59f.
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction ‘to pour’
Pace Melchert 2011a:130, who sees Hitt. lilḫuwa-(ḫi) and CLuw. lilūwa-(i) as two independent creations (likewise EDHIL:526 “quite recent”), nothing precludes reconstructing a Proto-Anatolian reduplicated formation with a vowel -i- in the reduplicated syllable, i.e. *li-lh3u̯-. Note that the exact ablaut pattern to be reconstructed here (regardless of I-E) is obscure, since both Hittite and Luwian appear to have generalized the zero-grade. Weak evidence for the synchronic presence of the accent on the reduplicated syllable might be adduced from the single Hittite attestation le-e-el-ḫu-an-zi (KUB 32.121 ii 36).
Differently Kloekhorst (EDHIL:526), who reconstructs the formation with the suffix -oi̯-/-i- (here rendered with *-ói(h1)-/-i(h1)-´). Its synchronic appurtenance of the class with the theme vowel -a- in the 3sg. pres. ending -ai is likely to be secondary in Hittite, whereas it is definitely secondary in Luwian (see Sasseville 2021a: Chapter 11).
On the retention of the sequence *-lHu̯-, see CLuw. malḫu-.
[D.S.]
For the lemma head see CLuw. lūwa-(i).