patalla-

Attested in the Hittite military oath and in an inventory text, both in NS.

[Zs.S.]

Attestations following CHD P:238 (see here for other alleged examples and their criticism and Oettinger 1976b:26 on outdated readings; cf. also HEG L-S:536; Ünal 2007a:533, Ünal 2016a:409; HED Pa:200) checked against the photographs of the Konkordanz. KBo 6.34 and KUB 40.13 are duplicates, thus allowing the reconstruction of the word.

[Zs.S.]

Setting aside those scholars who do not translate the term (Hoffner 2003b:85*) or give only a general definition (Werner 1956a:169 [but also “stocking” with double question mark]; Siegelová 1986a:433, 611 [a type of foot garment]) and Košak 1982a:161, who identifies it with GAD.DAM ‘gaiter’ (but with question mark in Košak 1982a:231 and only as ‘foot garment’), although this is not possible, since the two terms are distinguished in KBo 7.25 (CHD P:238; HEG L-S:536 [cautiously]; HED Pa:200), there are two trends of translation:

Most of the scholars translate this term as ‘fetter’ (Otten apud Kühne 1972a:249 [but only “vielleicht” according to Kühne]; Oettinger 1976b:7, 26, 111; Reichardt 1998a:61; Starke 1990a:251; Rieken 1999a:119, 444 [but here ‘leg wrapping’ too]; Haas 2003a:549, Haas 2006a:231; Melchert 2005a:449; Christiansen 2009b:38, Christiansen 2012b:355; similarly García Trabazo 2002a:527 with n. 21 [“grillete”]), HEG L-S:535, Tischler 2008a:142, Tischler 2016a:269 adds ‘foot bracelet’ as well. The other group of scholars translate it as ‘puttee, leg wrapping’ (CHD P:238; Ünal 2007a:533, Ünal 2016a:409 [but also ‘foot garment’]; EDHIL:658 [with question mark]; HED Pa:200; similarly Collins 2003c:165 [“wrapping”]).

All interpretations are based on the Hittite military oath, where the hands and the feet of the oath breakers are tied, the latter with patalla- (KBo 6.34 i 23-24 with dupl. KUB 40.13 rev.^! 6-7). This logically led to the translation ‘fetter’. Nevertheless, the inventory list KBo 7.25 clearly shows that this is a piece of garment too. A semantically perfect solution is provided by Tischler (as per above), who suggests that this word means not only ‘fetter’, but also ‘foot bracelet’ (“Fußfessel, Fußring”). The problem of the alternative translation ‘puttee, leg wrapping’ is that there is no reason why the feet would be bound with a puttee and not with a fetter.

[Zs.S.]

1. patalliya-

This word is assumed to be Luwian by Melchert 2005a:449, without reasoning (but not listed in the list of Luwianisms of van den Hout 2007a), although virtually all other scholars assume a Hittite origin (Oettinger 1976b:26 with n. 16; Starke 1990a:251; Rieken 1999a:119, 443f.; HEG L-S:536; EDHIL:658; HED Pa:200). It is beyond doubt that it derives either from Hittite pāt-/pat- ‘foot’ or from Luwian pāta- ‘foot’ (Kühne 1972a:249; Oettinger 1976b:26; Rieken 1999a:119, 443f.; HEG L-S:536; EDHIL:658; HED Pa:200), the solution depends on the interpretation of the suffix -alla-. This suffix is generally supposed to be Luwian, not Hittite (Hoffner & Melchert 2008a:55) and probably that’s why Melchert 2005a:449 assumed Luwian origin.

There are three further suggestions: Oettinger 1976b:26 n. 16 suggested that the geminate -ll- is only analogical to the Hittite nomina agentis in -talla-. This cannot be a priori excluded, although the Luwian derivation does not require such a hypothetic step and thus it is obviously more economical. Starke 1990a:251 proposed that patalla- continues the Hittite cognate of Luwian patalḫa- (see s.v.), which would be phonologically regular. Finally, Rieken 1999a:119, 443f. suggested that there is a Hittite -alla- suffix too and as evidence she adduced tarnattalla- ‘partner, sharer’ and the Hittite suffix complex -(a)t(t)alla- of agent nouns. However, it is not possible to exclude in either of these cases the presence (or in case of the suffix complex, the influence) of the Luwian suffix (and tarnattalla- can be analysed also with -(a)t(t)alla-), and thus there is no independent evidence for a Hittite -alla- suffix.

Since both the Luwian suffix and Starke’s Hittite derivation result regularly in patalla-, currently there is no way to decide if patalla- is indeed a Luwian loanword.

[Zs.S.]