ašḫaimmattar/n-

The lexeme is attested once in a land register.

[E.R.]

Checked against the photograph in the Konkordanz.

[E.R.]

Several authors have regarded the word as a functional equivalent and etymological cognate of Hitt. išḫammenaš[ša- (ibid. i 49), another cadastral term that is used as specification of a field and translated as ‘rope-related, line-shaped’ (vel sim.) because of its obvious relationship with išḫima(n)-, išḫamina- c. ‘rope’ (Laroche 1948-1949a:20, Souček 1959a:10, Starke 1990a:484f., Rieken 1999a:469f.). However, there is not the slightest contextual indication that the two words should be related. Moreover, it has been recognized that initial ašḫa- cannot equate Hitt. išḫa-, since loss of initial /s-/ before obstruent would be expected. Also the functional equivalent, reduplicated Luw. ḫišḫiya-⁽ⁱ⁾, differs considerably (Starke 1990a:484f., HEG A-K:380, HED E and I: 400). Consequently, Starke assumes a “falsche ad hoc-Bildung”, but the lack of semantic evidence and the formal problems clearly justify serious doubts as to connecting the two forms. Accordingly, most scholars refrain from any assignment of meaning (CLL:33, 35, HW (2nd ed.) A:399, Starke 1990a:484f.).

[E.R.]

Starke 1990a:484f. first recognized the heteroclitic base ašḫaimmattar/n- of the genitival adjective.

[E.R.]

The combination of gloss wedges and stem formation leave no doubt about the Luwian origin of ašḫaimmattar/n-.

[E.R.]