wici-

The assured attestations of the relevant lexeme are limited to one instance in a poetic inscription from the Sardis cemetery. Its second occurrence, tentatively reconstructed in Adiego & Ivantchik 2016a, is possible but not assured.

[I.Y.]

inf.	dawicil	LW 13.7 (Sardis)
	[dawi]cil	LW/N 117.2 (Kelainai)

The present interpretation of da-wicil as the infinitive form differs from ist analysis as 3sg.pret. adopted in Gusmani 1964a:96. The rationale for the new interpretation is the prevalence of 1pl.verbal forms before and after the relevant passage in LW 13. The sentence LW 13.6-7 apparently represents an interpolation, where one finds only one subject koττis tarplas and only one assured predicate pitat. Under such conditions, the non-finite interpretation of ul and da-wicil remains the only available solution.

[I.Y.]

Positive combinatory evidence for the meaning of da-wici- is lacking, except for the ramifications of its ditransitive use in LW 13. The early translations of this verbal form included ‘to occupy’ (Meriggi 1935a:106), ‘to dispose’ (Carruba 1960a:48f.), and ‘to erect’ (Gusmani 1964a:96). The first two hypotheses are devoid of etymological support, while the third one relies on the existence of the Lydian verbal stem wic- ‘to build’, which is falsified by the new grammatical interpretation of wicν.  If da-wici- is etymolofically related to wicν ‘for’, it is likely that it had broad benefactive (or malefactive) meaning, which would then agree with its syntactic frame. Beyond this, however, it is difficult to proceed.   

[I.Y.]

The verb da-wici- is formed by joining the common prefix da- to the i-stem wici-. The absence of diagnostic forms precludes assigning this stem to either t- or d-conjugations.   

[I.Y.]

Despite the fact that wicν can no longer be regarded as a verbal form, the etymological connection between the adposition wicν and da-wici- remains the most likely hypothesis. While the Anatolian local adverbs are normally not derived from verbal root, the derivation in the opposite direction is attested (Melchert 2009c). Therefore one can cautiously hypothesize that da-wici- represents a derivative of a pre-Lydian local adverb, which otherwise yielded both the adposition wicν and the prefix wc-. The fact that we are dealing with a derived i-stem supports the conjecture that the base local adverb likewise ended in -i in Pre-Lydian (cf. Melchert 2009c on Hitt. āppai‑).

[I.Y.]