/ziPattann(i)-?/, zi-pa-ta-ní-

This lexeme is attested twice in the HLuw. corpus. It can be found in one inscription each from Maraş and Amuq, dating to the 9^th and probably 8^th century BCE respectively.

[AH.B.]

dat./loc. sg.?	/ziPattanni?/	(“LAPIS”)zi-pa-ta-ní-i	TELL TAYINAT 2, l. 1 §1b (Amuq)
abl./instr.	/ziPattannadi?/	(“*255”)zi-pa-ta-na-ti	İSKENDERUN, §4 (Maraş)

In İSKENDERUN, §4, [3123]Hawkins 2000a:259f. reads the determinative as “*256”, because the same inscription features what appears to be sign *255 just one clause earlier. However, both signs are now regarded as variants of each other and have been conflated under no. *255, see [1323]Payne 2010a:179 and [1869]van den Hout 2010b.

The order of signs in TELL TAYINAT 2, l. 1 §1b appears to be 〈zi-ta-pa-ní-i〉 rather than 〈zi-pa-ta-ní-i〉, which Hawkins 2000a:261 remarks on. For that reason, van den Hout 2010b:238 prefers to consider them different words instead of two forms from the same paradigm. His approach is certainly possible, but cannot be proved, and for the sake of economy the two words are put under one lemma here until evidence to the contrary surfaces; the TELL TAYINAT 2, l. 1 §1b clause is much too fragmented to permit any conclusions. In fact, the form itself may already be incomplete, as fragment 1b breaks off immediately after 〈-ní-i〉.

[AH.B.]

Both attestations of this noun occur in fully syllabic spelling, offering a reasonably good glimpse at its phonological make-up. Only the quality of the first stop remains somewhat opaque, because the Hittite cognate zipaddan(n)i- is usually spelt 〈zi-pát-...〉, which leaves the matter unresolved. The latter part of the stem including the endings have a relatively secure phonological interpretation, as both appear in numerous other HLuw. words.

With regard to the different logograms used as determinatives, Hawkins 2000a:261, 371 notes that *255 and LAPIS (*267) may constitute variants of the same sign in this case, rather than different signs altogether.

[AH.B.]

That /ziPattani-/ represents a measure term was clear from the start (see Hawkins 2000a:261) because of its obvious connection with Hittite zipaddan(n)i- ‘(a volume measure)’, cf. HEG W-Z:755 and van den Hout 2010b:235. Goedegebuure 2007a:323 incl. n. 19 suggests that it does not only denote the amount indicated by the volume measure, but also the measuring tool in itself, which she suggests to translate as ‘scoop’. This becomes evident in the İSKENDERUN, §4 clause after the author states he established a granary: wa/i-tu-u-ta^-i 4400 a-ta (“CAPERE”)u-pa-ha zi-i-na (“*256”)zi-pa-ta-na-ti, i.e. /wa=du=tta 4400 anta uppahha zin ziPattanadi/ ‘and I brought 4400 (measures of grain) into it, by this ziPattani- scoop’.

[AH.B.]

The attested case forms are underspecified for gender, but the Hittite cognate zipaddan(n)i- is a neuter noun, and the same may be assumed for the HLuw. form with reasonable certainty. The formation of the stem remains opaque save for the fact that it appears to be a noun in /-anni-/, cf. HEG W-Z:756f.

[AH.B.]