ñtenẽ

This adposition is found in a grave inscription as well as 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.).

[D.S.]

indecl.	ñtenẽ	TL 84.5 (Sura)
	ñtẽnẽ	TL 44a.13 (Xanthos)

This lexeme is not to be confused with the sentence initial ñte=(e)ne (as in TL 28.1), containing the enclitic pronoun =ene ‘him, her’; pace Neumann 2007a:249f. and Tekoğlu 2017a:65 “inside”.

[D.S.]

Carruba 1977a:286 analyzes ñtenẽ as a preposition modifying xruwi, which is attractive, although it does not give us its exact meaning (cf. Carruba ibid. “presso/sotto”, Schürr 2006a:129 “unter/in”, Gehrisch 2018a:131 “down/below”). For a summary of outdated hypotheses, see Neumann 2007a:249f.

[D.S.]

Lyc. ñtenẽ is analyzed as a univerbation of ñte ‘in’ and ẽnẽ ‘under’ (Melchert in DLL:20); a frequent process among adpositions in Lycian.

[D.S.]

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.).

[D.S.]

indecl.

ñt[e]nẽ

TL 44d.46-47 (Xanthos)

A restoration with [ẽ] is also possible; cf. Lycian A ñtenẽ beside ñtẽnẽ.

[D.S.]

Despite the obscurity of the context, Lyc. B ñtenẽ is surely the same as Lyc. A ñtenẽ (unclear Schürr 2018b:74, but Gehrisch 2018a:91 “underneath”). Nevertheless, no concrete meaning can be assigned to the adposition.

[D.S.]

For the lemma heads, see Lyc. ñte and Lyc. ẽnẽ.