wida-

Hapax in a Luwian ritual (MS?).

[Zs.S.]

dat.-loc. pl.

ú-i-da-an-za

KUB 35.45 ii 6

(CTH 760, NS)

The attestation follows CLL:270 (cf. Laroche 1959a:111; HEG U-Z:434, the word is mainly written on the edge of the tablet, which is not visible on the photograph of the Konkordanz). witam[ in KBo 29.37, 4’ cannot belong to this paradigm for morphological reasons, contra CLL:270, see s.v.

[Zs.S.]

Early research assigned the meaning ‘water(s)’ (Forrer 1922a:220; Meriggi 1957b:68; Laroche 1959a:111, but see also Kammenhuber 1986a:87; Tischler 2008a:228; Ünal 2016a:976), entertaining also ‘marsh’ (Meriggi 1957b:68; cf. Poetto 1997a:238), but the proposal of Watkins 1975a:373 as ‘watery’ has recently gained more supporters (CLL:270; Marcuson 2016a:296), just like the meaning ‘wet’ (Starke 1990a:567; EDHIL:1015; Tischler 2016a:443, HEG U-Z:434, latter adding ‘fertile’, too). Unfortunately, the relevant passage, a series of dat.-loc. plurals, is not that clear (KUB 35.45 ii 5-6, Starke 1985b:151):

“(5) (…) parrayanza ḪUR.SAG^MEŠ-za (6) […]payanza zarriyanza ÍD^MEŠ-anza Ú.SAL^ḪI.A-anza widanza” ‘to the high mountains, […]payanza zarriyanza, the rivers, the meadows, widanza’

Watkins 1975a:373 argued that the substantives are usually combined with epithets in such a toposlike description, and thus widanza would be the epithet of meadows as ‘watery meadows’. Setting aside that the meaning ‘watery’ is exclusively based on the assonance with the word for ‘water’ in Hittite and with the Glossenkeilwort wita- ‘water or wave’ (which may or may not be a Luwian loanword, see s.v.), since meadows can be characterized in many other ways, too (e.g. ‘green’ or the proposed meaning ‘fertile’), Watkins’s suggestion has a theoretical and a syntactic problem: although substantives can indeed be combined with epithets, this is by no means obligatory and in fact the word ‘rivers’ is not combined here with an epithet, since zarriya- is a substantive (CLL:279; Yakubovich 2017c:11 n. 11; Steitler 2017a:398 […]payanza zarriyanza may refer to the ‘deep valleys’, see Marcuson 2016a:296 n. 310 and s.v.). In other words, beginning with zarriyanza at least this description seems to list substantives only. This is the first hint that widanza is yet another substantive. The second hint is the syntactical problem. Adjectives normally precede their head nouns in Luwian (cf. parrayanza ḪUR.SAG^MEŠ-za in the present passage), but widanza would stand after its head noun: although this is not unknown in Luwian, in clear cases it appears only under certain conditions (personal names and quantifiers as head nouns as well as the influence of foreign syntax) that do not apply here (Bauer 2014a:229–235; Giusfredi forthcoming; cf. also Poetto 1997a:238). All in all, it is improbable that widanza is an adjective referring to the meadows. Accordingly, it is probably yet another substantive in the list of topographic features. Since water is already included in this list with the ‘rivers’, it reduces the chances that also this word refers to the waters, despite the assonance with the Glossenkeilwort. At this juncture the completely new suggestion of Yakubovich 2017c:11 with n. 11 must be mentioned, who tentatively suggests ‘steppe’. Although he adduces only etymological arguments (assumed cognacy with German Weide ‘pasture’ of unknown origin), this meaning would fit quite well in the above list of topographical features.

[Zs.S.]

Last updated: 28 April 2020