Microsoft Word - Revised dissertation2.docx

(backadmin) #1

G279 C vi 22a ni-piš SV(1) – Possible lexical interchange.^655
T W 1 vi 7 ni-piš
j vi 16’^1 vi 6a’ n[i ni-piš
z vi 2’ pi?


(^) G280 T
j vi 3b’^1 vi 8 l]am-ma ]la-ma OV – z has CV-CV against CVC-CV in the other sources.
z vi 3b’ i-lam-ma
G281 T j vi 17’ 1 vi 8 šam-ma šam-mu OV(l) – j has the wrong vowel for the accusa-tive singular. (^656)
(^) G282 C vi 23a (^) ta˺-ri-šú (^) OV – The possessive pronominal suffix is
W 1 vi 7’ t]a-ri-˹šu˺ written with the sign ŠÚ in C.
z vi 4b’ ]šu
G283 T j vi 18’ 1 vi 9 ˹qu-lip-tum qu˺[ t]i for the accusative singular.OV(l) – T and j have the wrong case vowel (^657)
z vi 5’ ]ta
(^) G284 C vi 24a i]l-la-k[a (^) OV – The verb √alāku, “to go,” is written
W j vi 20’ 1 vi 9a DU-ka il-la-ka with a logogram plus phonetic complement in W.
(^) G285 j vi 21’ (^) ma-la-ḫu (^) OV – The noun √malāḫu, “boatman,” is writ-
z vi 7b’ MÁ.LAḪ 5 ten logographically in z.
(^) G286 C vi 25 (^) ma]n-ni-ia (^) OV – The 1cs pronominal suffix is written
W 1 vi 10a’ ma]n- ˹ni˺-iá with the sign IÁ in W.
G287 C vi 25 m ˹ur˺-šá[nabi OV – The proper noun Ur-šanabi is written
W j vi 22’ 1 vi 10a mm ur- ur-šánabi d šánabi in W. with the inclusion of the divine determinative
(^655) The sign at the end of line 2 in z is broken, but it is clearly not the sign NI and so cannot be read as
√nipšu, “snort, smell.” The logogram IR with the value nipšu is also unlikely. The composite logogram
PA.AN with the value napīšu, “breath, smell,” is the only possibility (though admittedly a remote one
based on the traces in A.R. George, Gilgamesh, pl. 33). If read as such then this variation reflects a lexical
interchange. 656
657 See also G273 above, and also note.
The form in T is listed among Kuyunjik texts displaying accusative forms with unexpected case vowels
in A.R. George, Gilgamesh, 439. On the blending of the nominative and accusative case vowels in j see
note above.

Free download pdf