*h₂ét-/h₂t-´

The verb Hitt. ḫatt-^(mi) (ḫatta-^(ḫi)) and its numerous derivatives (notably ḫatrā(i)-^(mi) ‘to write’) can be etymologically compared to Luwian root ḫatt- and the Lyc. one xtt-, which are not attested as primary verbs, but rather as derivatives (see below). Based on the Hittite material, a root verb of the mi-conjugation, i.e. *h₂ét-/h₂t-´ (Hitt. ḫatt-^(mi)), and one of the ḫi-conjugation, i.e. *h₂ót-/h₂t-´ (Hitt. ḫatta-^(ḫi)), can be reconstructed.Pace EDHIL:331, Hitt. ḫa-az-zi-zi does not reflect *h₂t-i̯é/ó-, but rather *h₂ét-ti. Furthermore, a radical formation in *-i̯e/o- can be posited on account of Hitt. ḫazziye/a-^(mi) and HLuw. /hazzi-/ < *h₂(e)t-i̯e/o- (with accent on the root in Oettinger 1976c:125 and Melchert 1994a:62, but on the suffix in EDHIL:331); see also Hitt. ḫazziye/a-^(mi).

In Luwian and Lycian, a collective noun is attested as ḫatta- and xtta- respectively, which can be reconstructed as *h₂ot-éh₂-, next to a denominative formation in *h₂ot-éh₂-i̯e/o-. The initial laryngeal can be reconstructed as either *h₂ or *h₃ based on current research (cf. EDHIL:331). We may however exclude that the root ended in *-tH-, because of the assibilation of *-t-i̯- to -zziy- in Hitt. ḫazziye/a- (as opposed to Hitt. ḫuittiye/a-^(mi) ‘to drag’ with a root-final laryngeal). The Hittite half-consonantal stem ḫatta-^(ḫi) is only found so far in New Script texts, and would therefore be secondary to ḫatt-^(ḫi). Overall, the root has been generally reconstructed as *h₂et- (Oettinger 1976c:125, LIV²:274, EDHIL:331; cf. HED H:254f., HEG A-H:216f.).

[D.S.]

The root is securely attested only in Anatolian, where ‘to pierce’ seems to be the basic meaning. If we project this back to a potential Proto-Indo-European root *h₂et- ‘to pierce’, one might connect Vedic atasá- n. ‘bushes, shrubs’ under the premise that it continues *h₂et-es-ó- ‘prickly’ (i.e., derived from an s-stem *h₂ét-es- n. ‘piercing, stinging’ in the same way that Vedic rabhasá- ‘impetuous, violent, fierce’ is derived from rábhas- n. ‘violence, force’). For the semantics compare Hittite ^GIŠḫat(t)-alkiš(n)- ‘hawthorn’ which might contain *h₂et(-o)- ‘thorn, prickly, piercing (vel sim.)’ (as per HED H:257; pace Melchert 2012e:175f. who assumes *h₂ed^(h)- as in Old Irish ad ‘hawthorn’, which eDIL s.v. ad, however, lists merely as “some kind of tree”). On Greek ἄττομαι see the comment above.

[S.H.]

Hittite ḫatt-^(mi), ḫatta-^(ḫi) ‘to pierce’, ḫatrā(i)-^(mi) ‘to write’, Hitt. ḫazziye/a-^(mi) ‘to pierce, engrave’, Cuneiform Luwian ḫatta- ‘the piercing/striking (one)’, Hieroglyphic Luwian /hatta-^(di)/ ‘to ruin’, Hieroglyphic Luwian /hazzi-/ ‘to engrave’, Lycian A xtta- c. ‘damage, harm’, xtta(i)-^(di) ‘to damage, do harm’.See above and EDHIL:330–332 s.v. ḫatt-^a(ri), hazzii̯e/a-^zi; 335f. s.v. ḫatrae-^zi, LIV²:274 s.v. ?2.*h₂et-

(?) Vedic atasá- n. ‘bushes, shrubs’ (if *h₂et-es-ó- ‘prickly’).Cf., e.g., EWAia I:57 s.v. atasá- “Unklar”.

(?) ἄττομαι ‘set the warp in the loom, i.e., begin the web’ (Hermipp.), διάζομαι ‘id.’ (Nicopho), ἄσμα, δίασμα n. ‘warp’ (Call., LXX, Nonn., etc.).Thus van Beek apud EDG:167 s.v. ἄττομαι, but traditionally ascribed to a root *h₂ent- ‘to warp, weave’, as in LIV²:269 (with potential cognates with a textile meaning in Vedic átka- ‘garment’, etc.), which is only possible if Rix’s Law did not operate in Greek, as per Nikolaev 2007a;Nikolaev 2010d:238–291, 328–333.