tarpanuti(ya)-

The occurrences of the lexeme are limited to cadastral texts.

[E.R.]

nom./acc. sg. n	tar-pa-nu-ti-ia-an	KUB 8.78 v 1, vi 16	(CTH 239, NS)
	[ta]r-pa-nu-ti-an	KBo 19.19, 4’	(CTH 239, NS)
	[ta]r-pa-nu-ti-an	KBo 19.19, 7’	(CTH 239, NS)
	tar-pa-nu-t[i-ia-an]	KBo 19.25, 3’	(CTH 239, NS)

The morphological analysis posits a problem. In a field list, one would expect an adjectival attribute to show the nom. sg. c. in agreement with 1 a.šà (see, e.g., 1 a.šà ašanaššiš at KUB 8.75 ii 6). While Ünal 2007a:699 gives preference to gender agreement and assumes an acc. sg. c., Melchert (CLL:215, DCL:s.v.) opts for a nom.(/acc.) sg. n., i.e. ranking case agreement higher. This implies that either the grammatical agreement is neglected or the Hittite word behind a.šà is different in the case of tarpanuti(ya)-. A solution could be that tarpanuti(ya)- represents a neuter substantivization, syntactically beginning a new clause or functioning as an apposition.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv.

[E.R.]

Typical for the cadaster texts, the context does not provide many clues for the interpretation of the lexemes used for the description of fields, in this case: 1 a.šà tarpanutiyan (KUB 8.78 v 1, vi 16). Accordingly, the word long remained untranslated (DLL:94, HW:333, Souček 1959a:30, 34, CLL:215, HEG T:211, HHw:169, Ünal 2007a:699, DCL:s.v.). However, with the broad classification as a type of field, the segments of the stem formation suggest the following analysis: root tarp- + causative suffix -nu- + abstract suffix -tt(i)- + adjectival suffix -i(ya)- (+ substantivization). Assuming that the root tarp- represents the zero-grade reflex of *trep- ‘to turn, plough’ and -nu- recharacterizes the transitive semantics, the meaning of tarpanuti(ya)- comes close to ‘(the one) related to ploughing (?)’ which is more than appropriate for a type of field.

[E.R.]

See under Meaning.

[E.R.]

On account of the gloss wedge marking, the word is regarded as Luwian in DLL:94, CLL:215, HHw:169, van den Hout 2006a:241, DCL:s.v. As pointed out by Melchert (DCL:s.v.), the general shape also speaks for Luwian origin. More specifically, the lack of assibilation of -t- in the suffix is indicative here, as well as the -i(ya)- suffix.

[E.R.]