kumẽd (kẽmẽd)

The only attestation of this form occurs in the inscription LW/N 110 found in the valley of Kaystros and likely datable to the mid-4^th century BCE (Gusmani & Akkan 2004a:147f.).

[I.Y.]

The text of the inscription appears to contain kẽmẽd, but such a form would be phonotactically quite unusual, since the sequence of two nasal vowels is not expected in the inherited Lydian forms (Eichner 1986b). Therefore, the form kẽmẽd must probably be taken as an error of anticipation for kumẽd (the sign ‹ẽ› is distinguished from ‹u› by only one extra stroke).

[I.Y.]

As recognized in the editio princeps, the form ku^!mẽd occurs in a sentence that immediately follows the dating formula (17th regnal year of Artaxerxes) and mentions the satrap Rosaces. The immediately following context contains a different personal name, possibly that of the commissioner of the stele. Under such conditions one expects that the sentence represents an extension of the dating formula and can be translated along the lines “when Rosaces became satrap”. For a typological parallel to such a dating cf. the beginning of the Lycian inscription N 320: “When Pixodaros became satrap in Lycia”. Of all the forms in the Lydian clause under discussion, ku^!mẽd is the only one to qualify as a potential relative adverb, both by method of exclusion and because it begins with k-.

The editio princeps takes kẽmẽd as the direct object referring to something that the satrap Rosaces made (Gusmani & Akkan 2004a:146), but such a solution does not gain support from either broader contextual interpretation or etymological considerations.  

[I.Y.]

The relative adverb ku^!mẽd must not be separated from the likely Lydian preposition amẽd ‘before, in the presence of’. It can be reconstructed as the historical compound *kud-amẽd, which was affected by the syncope of unstressed medial syllable and consonant cluster simplification. The only Lydian stem that preserves the consonant combination dm is šadmẽ-, but here d secondarily developed from *i̯ (Melchert 2004b:142). With regard to semantics, one could suggest the original meaning ‘where-at’ for the historical compound, but it is however likely that it acquired a broader temporal meaning as a result of univerbation; cf. Lyc. A km̃me/i- for a different perspective.

[I.Y.]