*k^u̯ér-/*k^u̯r-´

This lexeme is attested in two different texts from Maraş and Cilicia, one from the 9th century, the other from the very end of the HLuw. era in the 7th century BCE.

[AH.B.]

In a preliminary analysis, the KARATEPE form (*486)kwa/i-tu-na had been viewed as a verbal noun, not necessarily connected to the verb /kwar-/, but to a putative verb /kwat-/ (Hawkins 2000a:65). Separating the words seemed likely in light of what Melchert 2003a:179f. states about rhotacism in Luwian, viz. that the change in spelling is unidirectional d > r, i.e. intervocalic /d/ is frequently replaced with /r/ but not vice versa. However, this has since been disproved by Rieken & Yakubovich 2010a:216-218, who have shown that the signs used to represent original /lV/, /rV/, and /da/ were virtually interchangeable in late texts because the underlying sounds had then fully merged into the flap [ɾ]; and there is no reason to assume a priori that this would be different before /du/. Indeed, KARATEPE is one of the inscriptions where such interchanges occur (see the examples cited in Rieken & Yakubovich 2010a:206f., 215), and so it seems possible to take the form as a regular infinitive of the verb /kwar-/, not least since CLuw. displays a similar infinitive, /kuruna/, albeit with a zero-grade root no longer maintained in HLuw. (CLL: 116).

[AH.B.]

Despite the small number of attestations, the meaning of this verb is clear from the contexts it occurs in and its strong cognate links to CLuw. kuu̯ar-/kur- ‘to cut’ and Hittite kuer-/kur-/kuu̯ar- ‘to cut’. The infinitive is attested in the KARATEPE bilingual and translates, in a syntactically rather opaque context, one of two Phoenician words, viz. qṣr ‘reaping’ or the partially broken off ḥ]rš ‘ploughing’, with the former being the more likely choice (Hawkins 2000a:65). From the context it appears that the infinitive is used as a noun.
As is apparent in the MARAŞ 4 context, the meaning of the verb can be further specified by the use of a preverb, in this case ARHA, /ahha/ ‘off, away’.

[AH.B.]

Attested in a ritual with Luwian spells (NS) and in an Ištanuwan song (MS^?).

[Zs.S.]

Attestations following CLL:116 (with slight corrections, cf. Laroche 1959a:58, 59f.; HED K:215) checked against the photos of the Konkordanz, restorations following Starke 1985b:157. Melchert also calls attention to ku-ra-an-t[e- in KUB 35.160, 2’ as a possible further form, which is not impossible, but the tiny fragment does not allow any conclusion and even if it belongs here, it is rather a nominalized form kurant-. Furthermore, he cautiously (“perhaps”) proposes that ku-ú-ri-x[ in KBo 29.29, 4’ may also belong here. Due to the fragmentary context this is impossible to assess and considering the vowel [i], it may rather belong to the verb kūri-/kur(a)i- ‘to cut into slices, pieces’^? (see s.v.), if at all.

In accordance with CLL:116, ku-wa-al-ti of KUB 35.48 iii 18’ has not been corrected here to ku-wa-ra^!-ti (contra Starke 1985b:157), since an r/l variation in preconsonantal position is not unknown to Luwian, even if this requires further research.

[Zs.S.]

There has been a general agreement since Meriggi 1957a:207 n. 40 (cf. also Starke 1981a:149 n. 28; HEG A-K:608, Tischler 2008a:89, Tischler 2016a:186; CLL:116; HED K:215; EDHIL:486) that this word means ‘to cut’ (but without meaning in Laroche 1959a:59f. and in Ünal 2016a:962). Although it definitely fits with the Hieroglyphic Luwian form (see s.v.) as well as the Hittite cognate and it is possible contextually, too, it is worth noting that the context (the two preserved and presumed objects of the verb in KUB 35.48 iii 19’-20’, waḫra- ‘woe, misfortune vel sim.’ and ḫīrūn- ‘oath’, see s.vv.) does not really provide a perfect semantic match. The objects rather point to a meaning ‘to break’, which is supported now by its participle kuramma/i- in Hittite transmission (see s.v.).

[Zs.S.]

Derivatives:

1. kūramman-
2. kurraštarr(i)-
3. *kurattar / kuratn-
4. gurta-
5. kuršammaliya-
6. *kuršammašša(/i)-
7. kuršawar / kuršawan-

Possible derivatives:

1. ku(wa)rša-

Rejected derivatives:

1. †kuranna/i-
2. kurimma-/kurimpa-
3. kuršā-

Hapax in a cult inventory from Kayalıpınar (LNS).

[Zs.S.]

Attestation following Cammarosano 2018a:406, 414. No hand copy or photo has been published as of today (12 August 2019).

[Zs.S.]

The word appears in the following context (Kp 15/7+ ii 4-5, text and translation following Cammarosano 2018a:406f.): ALAM LUGAL-aš arḫa 2^? kuramman n=at EGIR-pa GAR-ri ‘There are 2 pieces cut off of the statue of the king. They are put back (on)’. Cammarosano 2018a:414 argues that this word is a noun in all other occurrences (as Luwian kuramman-), not a participle, which is supported here by the preceding numeral 2. This is correct, but the word kuramman- means ‘cut(ting)’ in all other occurrences (see s.v.), which does not fit here, because the context including the presence of the preverb arḫa requires a participle. Note that the context allows or even better supports a meaning ‘broken (off)’.

[Zs.S.]

Cammarosano 2018a:414 claims an identity with Luwian kuramman- (kuramma- in his notation), but as it has been shown under Meaning, the two words are not identical (since the text was first published in 2018, there is no earlier discussion). However, since the context requires a participle, only the Luwian participle -mma/i- fits. Luwian also provides a suitable stem kuwar-/kūr- ‘to cut, to break^?’ (see s.v.), thus it is indeed a Luwian loanword in Hittite.

[Zs.S.]

1. tere(/i)-
2. tetere/i-

1. kere(/i)-

1. qira-

1. kūra(k)a-^(di)

EDHIL:486f., HEG I-K:607-610