īnta

The lexeme occurs only in MS manuscripts of ritual texts.

[E.R.]

indecl.	i-in-ta	KUB 32.10 + 35.19, 12’	(CTH 761, MS?)
	in-da	KUB 35.90, 7’	(CTH 766, MS)
		KUB 35.109 iii 2	(CTH 765, MS)

The assignment of in-ta=ḫa at KUB 35.137 obv. 4’ to the present lemma (thus CLL:89) is far from certain in view of the lack of any space between preceding -a]r-wa and in-ta-ḫa.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – The restoration [i]n-da= at KUB 35.109 iii 2 is probably correct although almost no trace of the initial [i]n- remained. However, the end of the lower final horizontal still visible is slightly slanted, which points to IN or NI. – Starke’s (Starke 1990a:149) reading ti-wa-ta-i-in-ta= at KUB 32.10 + 35.19, 12’ can safely be excluded on account of the large space between -ta and i-.

[E.R.]

Neither any translation nor analysis are offered in DLL:51 and HHw:62, whereas CLL:89 identifies the clitic particles. In fact, the word is found only in sentence initial position with clitics attached to it, twice preceding the name of the Sun-god. Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:204 restore the context at KUB 32.10 + 35.19, 12’ as [… šar-r]i ti-wa-ta i-in-ta-ḫa ⸢ti-wa-ta⸣ […] arguing that the double mention of the Sun-god recalls the dichotomy of the Sun-god of Heaven above and the Sun-goddess of the Earth below. Consequently, they interpret īnta as the antonym of šarri ‘above’ and translate ‘below’. This proposal is attractive. However, since the only trace of a final vertical šar-r]i consists of the final vertical, it should be received with due caution.

[E.R.]

If the analysis by Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:206 as an adverb proves to be correct, it belongs synchronically to the sub-group with final -nta like ānda, zanta, and tuwanta.

[E.R.]