lelipā-⁽ⁱ⁾

All attestations of the verb are found in New script ritual texts.

[E.R.]

3sg. pres. act.	li-li-pa-a-i	KBo 56.39, 3’	(CTH 470, NS)
	le-el-li-pa-a-i	KUB 8.67 iv 18’	(CTH 348, NS)
3pl. pres. act.	li-li-pa-an-ti	KBo 11.14 i 21	(CTH 395, NS)
3sg. impv. act. impf. (Hitt.)	le-li-pa-iš-ke-ed-du	KBo 11.14 i 22	(CTH 395, NS)
	le-li-pa-aš-ke-ed-du	KUB 43.57 i 23’	(CTH 395, NS)

Checked against the photographs in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. – The first sign LI is ambiguous, representing both /li/ and /le/ depending on the context. In the table under Forms, the choice is somewhat arbitrary in that li- is transliterated when the form shows an indicator of Luwian origin (the gloss wedges or the 3pl. pres. act. ending -anti), since /e/ does not exist in Luwian.

[E.R.]

The semantic interpretation as ‘to lick (up)’ emerges from the ritual context at KBo 11.14 i 21, in which sheep are said to lilipa- salt and, by analogy, spells should be licked up and thus disappear the same way. The structure of the verb points to a base verb lip- with reduplication, which is attested in Hittite and likewise compatible with this meaning (see Otten 1961a:preface to Nr. 14, HW:342, Hoffner 1967a:53f. with n. 95, Watkins 1975d:182, CHD L-N:61 and 71, HED L:100-102, HEG L-N:62f.). Oettinger 1976a:31f. assumes iterative semantics for the reduplicated verb in contrast with the simplex ‘to touch with the tongue’ (similar already van Brock 1964a:133f.).

[E.R.]

The word represents a reduplicated stem of lip(p)-^(mi), lipā(i)-^(mi), though inflected as a ḫi-verb (Kronasser 1966a:473, Hoffner 1967b:355, see also under Meaning). Apparently, the reduplication can be reinforced by the imperfective suffix -ške/a- (van Brock 1964a:133).

[E.R.]

Normally, the use of the gloss wedges (li-li-pa-a-i at KBo 56.39, 3’) in combination with a form with a Luwian ending (li-li-pa-an-ti at KBo 11.14 i 21) would suffice to propose a Luwian originIt is unclear what HW:342 wanted to indicate with “luw.” in quotation marks. However, the unambiguous e-vocalism of the reduplication syllable (le-el-li-pa-a-i at KUB 8.67 iv 18’) casts doubt on this assumption, and Watkins 1975c:182 (followed in HED L:101) even resorts to an archaism without assibilation, although the oldest archaic reflex is -anza. It is much more likely that the form in the NS copy of the Middle Hittite text is a hybrid consisting of a Hittite stem with a Luwian ending (thus CLL:127, HEG L-N:62, Ünal 2007a:403, DCL:s.v.). Only van den Hout 2006a:248 lists the word as Luwian.

Since the root lab- is probably of onomatopoetic origin (see under Reconstruction), the same may apply to lib-, which would not undergo the typical ablaut. There is no way to decide whether lilip- is Hittite or Luwian or both and in what way the putative cognates would have influenced each other in a bilingual context.

[E.R.]

For the lemma head see CLuw. *lapa-.