trbb(e)i-^(di)

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.]

3pl. pret. act.

trbbeite

TL 44c.10 (Xanthos)

The verbal interpretation follows Meriggi 1937a:511 n. 2, Shevoroshkin 1969a:270, Hajnal 1995a:145, Schürr 2004b:188, 190. Melchert (DLL:69) objects to the verbal interpretation arguing that a preterit form is unlikely in a context surrounded by present verbal stems and suggests instead an adjective in -nt(i)- (dat. pl.). However, since the context is entirely narrative, and the verbs conjugated in the present are basically “historical presents”, this objection is untenable. Moreover, other preterit verbs do occur a few clauses earlier, i.e. TL 44c.3, 5. Contra Neumann 2007a:371, it cannot belong to the same stem class as trbbetẽ (see under lemma).

[D.S.]

Starke 1990a:292 n. 994 and Hajnal 1995a:145 connect trbbeite to HLuw. /tarb(a)i-^(di)/ ‘to trample’ and thus assign a similar meaning (likewise Gehrisch 2018a:78). However, this is hardly appropriate within a context of post-war rewards offered by the Persians to the Lycians (Schürr 2004b:188 n. 11, who suggests “abtreten” as a compromise). Indeed, since the direct object is ddeu ‘gift(s)’, the meaning ‘to hand over’ is more adequate (thus Sasseville 2021a:235-237, who adduces as cognates Lyc. B trbbdi (see below), Lyd. tro-^(d) ‘to hand over’ and CLuw. tarāwi-^(ti) ‘to hand over’).

[D.S.]

The verbal stem class is -(e)i-^(di), an iterative formation (thus Sasseville 2021a: 233-238).

[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.]

3sg. pres. act.	trbbdi	TL 44c.37 (Xanthos)
		TL 44d.27 (Xanthos) TL 44d.34 (Xanthos)

Eichner 1993a:145 n. 131 rejects rightly the idea of seeing an abl./instr. here instead of a verbal form (communis opinio).

[D.S.]

Based on the context of TL 44c.37, the action denoted by lacra trbbdi, uttered by the Storm-god(?) in the assembly, should have semantics similar to the same action expressed by lacra zazati, uttered a few lines earlier by the narrator (Sasseville 2021a:236). Shevoroshkin 2002b:142f. suggests convincingly the meaning ‘to hand over’ comparing Lyd. tro-^(d) ‘to hand over’ (followed by Melchert in DLL:131 and Sasseville 2021a:235-237; cf. also Schürr 2016d:171 and Schürr 2018b:81 “to provide, supply”). The meaning ‘to hand over’ is also adequate for the two other attestations, which take cultic items as direct objects (i.e. tasñt(u) ‘cow shed (for the sanctuary)’ and tuwi uwadra ‘cattle herd offering’). The following semantic interpretations also encountered in the literature are contextually inadequate and thus considered outdated; Shevoroshkin 1969a:270 “to sanction”, Eichner 1993a:145 n. 131 “to overturn” based on an etymological connection with Lyc. A trbbi ‘against’, Hajnal 1995a:169 n. 212 and Serangeli 2018a:326 “to step against”.

[D.S.]

Hajnal 1995a:146 takes trbbdi to be an athematic root verb. Likewise, Serangeli 2018a:326 assumes a root verb, which would have undergone historical anaptyxis followed by lenition of the ending and a late loss of the anaptyctic vowel; unfortunately, this chain of sound changes is no longer tenable (see Sasseville 2021a:261f. with further literature). Instead, it is preferable to assume a late leftward shift of the accent followed by the syncope of the stem vowel (which may or may not be metrically motivated), see Sasseville 2021a:236f. Based on the equation with Lyc. A trbb(e)i-^(di), the same stem class is posited here for Lyc. B trbbdi, i.e. *trbbidi → trbbdi.

[D.S.]

For the lemma head see Lyc. *trbb-.