tappā-

The verb is found only in the rituals of the Kuwattalla tradition (from MS onwards).

[E.R.]

3sg. pret. ind. act.	tap-pa-at-ta	KUB 35.45 iii 24’	(CTH 760, NS)
	tap-pa-a-at-ta	KUB 32.6 iii 5’	(CTH 761, NS)
		KUB 35.43 ii 29	(CTH 761, NS)
	⸢tap-pa-at⸣-ta	KBo 29.19, 4’	(CTH 760, NS)
	⸢tap-pa-ad⸣-da	KUB 35.46 iv 11	(CTH 761, NS)
	⸢tap-pa-a-at-ta⸣	KUB 35.43 iii 36	(CTH 761, NS)
	[tap?]-pa-a-at-ta	KUB 27.26 r.col. 8’	(CTH 763, NS)
	tap-pa-a[t-ta]	KUB 35.59 ii 4’	(CTH 760, NS)
	tap-p[a-at-ta]	KUB 35.81, 3’	(CTH 759, NS)
	[tap-p]a-at-ta	KUB 35.81, 10’	(CTH 759, NS)
	[tap-pa-a-a]t-ta	KUB 35.21 ii 27’	(CTH 761, MS)
	[tap-pa-at-t]a	KUB 35.29 i 13’	(CTH 761, NS)
3sg. impv. act.	[tap-p]a-⸢ad⸣-du	KUB 35.28 i 9’	(CTH 761, NS)

The restoration [a-a]n^?-ta-pa-a-at-ta a-ú-in-t[a ...] at KBo 19.155, 9’ follows Sasseville pers. comm. Furthermore, the spelling ta-pa- instead of usual tap-pa- speaks against the assignment of the form to the present lemma.

[E.R.]

Already Rosenkranz 1952a:50 and Otten 1953a:93 saw the partial parallelism between the Luwian incantation ⁽²⁹⁾[a-ah-ra-a]n wa-ah-ra-an tap-pa-a-at-ta ta-a-pa-ru ⁽³⁰⁾[t]a-ta-ar-ri-ia-am-ma-an ḫi-i-ru-ú-un ma-a-ia-<aš>-ši-in eme-in “He spat (out) [woe (and) p]ain, (namely) illness(?), perjury, [cur]se, the tongue of the multitudes.” (KUB 35.43 ii 29f.; cf. Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:300f.) and Hittite āḫra wa[ḫ]ran allapaḫ dingir^MEŠ karpin {ap} pangauwaš eme-an 3-šu 4-šu allapaḫ “Spit (out) woe (and) pain, spit (out) the wrath of the gods, the tongue of the multitudes!” (KUB 9.34 iii 21ff.). However, only Meriggi 1957a: 207 n. 40 drew the plausible conclusion that CLuw. tappā- and Hitt. allappaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾ ‘to spit (out)’ represent a semantic match. Although Meriggi’s interpretation met with some skepticism (DLL:90 citing Meriggi, but without translation, CLL:206: ‘to spit (on)’ (?), Oettinger 1994a:317f. n. 48 with doubts), it can be regarded as generally accepted in the recent literature (HW: 385, Oettinger 1979a:456f., Melchert 1994a:273, HW 2nd ed. A:57, HHw:165, HED M:201, Melchert 2003b:181, Yakubovich 2010d:230, Sasseville 2021a:44, Yakubovich & Mouton 2023a:420f.). An argument that tipped the scales in favor of the translation ‘to spit (out)’ is certainly Melchert’s loan word hypothesis (Pre-Luw. *dapaḫḫ- → Hitt. allappaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾) and his plausible explanation of the different word-initial sequences (see below under allappaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾).

[E.R.]

Accepting the borrowing process of Luw. *dapaḫḫ- → Hitt. allappaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾, Sasseville 2021a:44 suggests that CLuw. tappā- should be assigned to the class of unlenited -a-^(ti) factitives, which, like Hittite verbs in -aḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾, arose from *-eh₂- stems. Accordingly, he posits as a derivational base a noun *tappā-.

[E.R.]

The verb is found already in Old Hittite texts and, due to its meaning, the more than one hundred attestations occur mostly in rituals.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

The translation ‘to spit’ goes back to Goetze (apud Sturtevant 1936b:19) and has been accepted since (HW:19, HEG A-K:15, HW 2nd ed. A:56f., HED A, E, I:30f., HHw:13, Ünal 2007a:15f.). In accordance with its meaning, the verb combines with a variety of local particles, viz. =an, =ššan and =kan, and postpositions/preverbs (Otten & Souček 1969a:82, 110, Josephson 1972a:49f., 339), in absolute use and with a direct object denoting the evil spat out in ritual actions.

[E.R.]

The stem belongs to the large class of -aḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾ factitives; cf. under Origin.

[E.R.]

While the etymological dictionaries were content to point out the likelihood of an onomatopoetic origin of the word (HEG A-K:15, HED A, E, I:30f.), Melchert 2003b:181 (followed by Sasseville 2021a:44) proposed that Hitt. allappaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾ represents a borrowing of Pre-Luw. *dapaH- (> CLuw. tappā- ‘to spit (on)’), adapted at a time when the factitive stem suffix *-aḫḫ- < *-eh₂- was not yet reduced to -a- (non-leniting) and Luwian had not yet replaced word-initial *d- with the fortis consonant. In Hittite, however, the latter change had already taken place so that the Hittite speakers were forced to replace word-initial *d- with l- and support it with a prosthetic vowel. The proposed scenario is certainly attractive, and all processes possess suggestive parallels. Nevertheless, the fact that Hitt. allappaḫḫ-⁽ⁱ⁾ features both the substitution and the prosthetic vowel still calls for a refinement of the argument.

For a likely onomatopoetic origin of the word, see HEG A-K:15, HED A, E, I:30f., Oettinger 1979a:456f. (cf. Melchert 1994a:273).

[E.R.]