/hanhaniwan-/, (“MALUS2”)ha-ha-ní-wa/i-
‘bad thing’
- Language
- Hieroglyphic Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, n,
- ID
- 698
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Hieroglyphic Luwian
/hanhaniwan-/, (“MALUS2”)ha-ha-ní-wa/i-
‘bad thing’1.1.1Transmission
This lexeme is a hapax legomenon, and its sole attestation can be found in Tell Ahmar in an inscription on an orthostat. It is believed to date to the late 10th or early 9th century BCE.
[AH.B.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | /hanhaniwan=za/ | (“MALUS2”)ha-ha-ní-wa/i-z[a] | TELL AHMAR 1, §20 (Tell Ahmar) |
1.1.3Graphic Features
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
The phonological interpretation of this lexeme is mostly certain because of its fully syllabic spelling. However, one point remains unclear, for while it is highly likely that the reduplication syllable is /han-/ rather than /ha-/, the spelling is ambiguous in this case. In HLuw. spelling conventions, pre-consonantal /n/ is consistently omitted at least on the graphemic level, suggesting – but by no means proving – an underlying phonological rule (Melchert 2003b:182). A similar formation in CLuw., i.e. the verb /hanhaniya-/ ‘be malicious’, shows the reduplication to include the /n/ of the root coda (CLL:51). The attested form also shows the /-sa/ particle typical for neuter nouns in the nom./acc. sg., which becomes /-za/ after /n/ and /l/ (Melchert 2003b:183).
[AH.B.]
1.1.4Meaning
While it clearly belongs to the word family around the – in HLuw. unattested – verb */haniya-/ (Sasseville 2021a:405f.), the exact meaning of the present lexeme remains somewhat unclear. It is used in a historical passage in a long inscription, detailing the ill that befell the speaker at the hand of his new ruler after the old ruler had died. The preceding clause includes the neuter abstract noun /attuwal-/ ‘evil’, again pairing a lexeme from the word family around /haniyatta-/ ‘bad thing’ with a similar formation from the family around /attuwal(i)-/ ‘evil’, just as in the case of /haniyattastarr(i)-/ ‘badness’ and /attuwalatastarr(i)-/ ‘viciousness’ in the KARATEPE bilingual. Regarding the present lexeme, it appears that /attuwal-/ ‘evil’ combined with the verb /tabari(ya)-(ti)/ ‘to rule’ denotes a generally evil disposition on the side of the new ruler, whereas the use of /hanhaniwan-/ with the verb /zarti-(ti)/ ‘to desire’ indicates bad intent tied to actions. The clearly related CLuw. verb ḫanḫaniya-, used once in the Hittite instructions for the temple (CTH 264) and marked with Glossenkeilen as a Luwian loan, supports the interpretation of /haniyatta-/ and related words as incident-based rather than describing a disposition, because it denotes an action performed by DINGIRMEŠ-aš ZI-an-za ‘the souls of the deities’ (translation Miller 2013a:259f.).
[AH.B.] [I.Y.]
1.1.5Stem
An abstract noun, this lexeme is built with the suffix /-wan-/, very likely from an earlier heteroclitic /-war/wan-/, but heteroclisis had largely vanished in late Luwian. The reduplication of the root syllable strongly indicates a deverbal origin for the lexeme, because reduplications typically occur in the verbal domain.
Dempsey 2015a:168f. appears to suggest the opposite for the CLuw. verb found in Hittite transmission marked with Glossenkeilen, ḫanḫaniya- and proposes the meaning ‘to be vexed, dissatisfied’ for it.
[AH.B.]
For the lemma head see PAnat. *Hón-/Hn-´.