trbẽtadra-

This lexeme is found in a grave inscription.

[D.S.]

For a recent collation of the passage where the word is found see Christiansen 2020a:255. Carruba 1974a:582 takes the word to be trbẽtadrazata, i.e. a whole compound consisting of trbẽtadra and zata (thus also Christiansen 2020a:254). However, considering that the vowel harmony stopped before -ẽt-, it is more likely that the separation of the compound is trbẽt- + adra- or better trbẽ- + tadra- (cf. trbbẽ). Therefore, the two words trbẽtadra and zata are kept separate here (thus also Melchert in DLL:70). The spelling with one -b- after -r- must be defective for *trbbẽtadra-.

[D.S.]

Because of the following zata-, scholars have assumed that trbẽtadra denotes a sort of penalty (Carruba 1974a:582) or time frame (Shevoroshkin 1979a:189). Yet the recognizable element trbẽ- (cf. trbbẽ) has caused Melchert to suggest a meaning such as ‘counter-x’. Following the trbẽ-approach, Christiansen 2020a:254f. translates it with ‘re-scission/re-allocation’, thinking that it might refer to the rescission of the tomb owner’s will or the reallocation of the tomb. No meaning is given in Neumann 2012a:395 or in Gehrisch 2018a:164. Unfortunately, no meaning can be assigned to this word based on the current state of research, except that it refers to some kind of “delivery” (zata-) that is prohibited (Christiansen 2020a:254f.). The whole etymological discussion of Neumann 2007a:4 surrounding a putative lexeme adrazata- is void, since a separation into trbbẽt(a) (requiring at least *trbbãt(a)) + adrazata is, though possible, very unlikely; see under Forms.

[D.S.]

Shevoroshkin 1979a:189 recognizes the abstract formation in -dr- comparable to Hitt. -ātar/n-, followed by Melchert (DLL:70), who further adds the Lycian cognates huwedre/i-, wawadra- and tukedre/i-.

[D.S.]