*lala-

1. /lalatt(i)-/

Except for one attestation (with syllabic spelling) from the Ištanuwian cult texts, all evidence for this lexeme comes from incantations, overwhelmingly from the Kuwattalla tradition. The earliest manuscripts show MS. – Yakubovich, Mouton & Puértolas Rubio (pers. comm.), following Sasseville, consider KBo 53.228 to be part of the Puriyanni ritual (CTH 758). – The following list is a representative selection of the approx. 50 instances of the word.

[E.R.]

Reading ˹la^??-li˺-iš in KBo 29.38 rev. 18 (Starke 1985b:370) and assignment of the putative form to this lemma (CLL:122) more than doubtful. – Context of la-a-li-in in KUB 25.37 ii 38’ obscure, but assignment to this lemma probable (see CLL:122). – EME-an in KUB 35.58 iii 11’ instead of EME-in is unexpected. Without any reason to assume an adjectival form *laliyan or an entirely different lexeme, this is probably only a mistake for EME-in (see CLL:122 with an exclamation mark). ­– Assignment of ^Dla-la-aš-ši in KBo 4.13 i 5 confirmed by another divine name derived from a body part designation ibid. i 4 (^Dḫa-an-ta-aš-ša-aš). – EME-ma in KUB 35.54 ii 5’ is considered problematic by Otten (Otten 1953a:77: “Unklar in ihrer Bildung und Bedeutung”) and Melchert (CLL:122: “Unclear ...: ptc. of denom. verb??”). Yakubovich, Mouton & Puértolas Rubio (pers. comm.) analyze it provisionally as EME plus Hittite sentence connector =ma, which is adopted here.

[E.R.]

While the meaning of the logogram EME is clear, that of the syllabic spelling of la-a-li-in is not (see under Forms). Rosenkranz 1952a:22 is the first one to propose the equation of lal(i)- and EME, followed by others with varying degree of confidence (DLL:62, Starke 1982b:362, CLL:122; HED L:23, EDHIL:515f., still skeptical Otten 1953a:77).

[E.R.]

Classification as mutated stem based on appellative stem EME-i- vs. divine name ^DLalašši.

[E.R.]

Uncertain Derivatives:

1. lāliya(-)
2. lalin(i)-

Rejected Derivatives:

1. lalauna

This lexeme is found on the inscribed pillar of Xanthos, dated contextually to shortly after the ascension of Artaxerxes II in 405-404 BCE. and stylistically around 400 BCE. (Borchhardt & Eichner 1997-1999a:19f.).

[D.S.]

The meaning of Lyc. B lele/i- was discovered through an etymological comparison with CLuw. lāl(i)- c. ‘tongue’ and Hitt. lāla- ‘tongue, speech’ (Shevoroshkin 1993a:42 and Eichner 1993a:144f., followed by DLL:119, Neumann 2007a:185, Schürr 2016d:164). Eichner (ibid.) adduces contextual evidence from the first passage in which leli is attested:

trqqiz… sebe leli pinati masasi tulijel^![i] (TL 44c.34-36)

‘The Storm-god… and then he grants speech in the assembly of gods.’

Eichner recognizes rightly that the following portion of the text contains a discourse spoken by the Storm-god  and the gods of the assembly (see under pina-^(ti)). The second attestation also supports the semantic assignment, since leli is the direct object of the verb erme-^(di) ‘to transmit orally (vel sim.)’.

[D.S.]

1. leli-^(ti)

1. laλẽn(t)-

This lexeme is found in the festival for the Palaic pantheon.

[D.S.]

Checked against the photographs in the Konkordanz.

[D.S.]

The Palaic word lālan represents something that was uttered and that should be destroyed by a god. The equation between Pal. lāla- and Hitt. lāla- c. ‘tongue’ already mentioned by Kammenhuber 1959a:27 and Carruba 1970a:62 is accepted by Carruba 1972a:22 and Melchert 1984b:35. Melchert (ibid.) assumes a pejorative meaning, i.e. ‘(evil) tongue, gossip’, which is perfectly adequate in the context.

[D.S.]

CHD L-N:21-26.