12

That Akkadian word-final -u is the Nominative case ending, the other case endings being -a for Accusative and -i for Genitive. Thus, the case forms of the noun bētu 'house' are: Nom.: bētu Acc.: bēta Gen.: bēti Exactly the same case endings are still present in Literary Arabic (Modern Standard Arabic), although in most spoken Arabic dialects they are ...


11

As noted by Draconis, this is not a Sumerian but an Akkadian word, specifically a form of the verb banû, "to build". Specifically, I would analyze it as the G-durative (for the D-stem, the 2nd person prefix should be tu- instead of ta-) with a subjunctive marker -u- and an enclitic second person feminine object pronoun -ši,1 i.e. as tabanni+u+ši → ...


9

This is an Akkadian word, a form of banû "to build". My grasp of Akkadian conjugation isn't the best, especially for "weak" verbs that lose one of their consonants, but it looks like a second singular feminine D-stem form: "you (female) are building". (Question for someone who's better at Akkadian: where's the S coming from?) ...


7

... is said to derive from ... This is folk etymology. In a case like this, where it's a similar sounding word in many unrelated languages across a region, you should be especially skeptical. The Wiktionary entry for kömény: A wanderword, arrived to Hungarian possibly via German, but a West Slavic borrowing cannot be excluded, either. Compare German ...


6

ś is the conventional transliteration for Hebrew שׂ ( śīn ), and is used also for its Semitic source, now more usually transcribed as s₂. It is believed that Old Akkadian (at least) still retained the Semitic distinction of s₁, s₂ and s₃ and used different signs for syllables containing each of these. This is reflected by the transcription of those signs.


5

This is an interesting question. On the whole, Sumerologists read Sumerian thru the window of Babylonian phonetics. Quite clearly, this means that Sumerian as per Sumerology is not genuine Sumerian. I've been working on reconstructing the real phonetics of Sumerian. It seems that Sumerian had two "secret" laryngeals, not just ḥ which is e-coloring, ...


5

The ending of the nominative singular -u, -un, -um is visible in Akkadian, Arabic, and Ugaritic. It was probably spoken in other languages (e.g. Ancient South Arabian, Ancient Aramaic), but not visible because of the consonantal script.


4

Just to add a bit to Adam's excellent answer: "Cumin" is what's called a Wanderwort or wander-word: it's a word associated with some sort of trade good, which spreads from language to language along with the thing it describes. A famous modern example is "tea"; almost every language in the world now refers to the drink with a word that ...


4

A is the conventional name for a particular cuneiform glyph, typically its most common or best-known pronunciation. But the sign A can be read as a, aya₂, e₄, ea, ŋa₁₀, or many others. The JSON is mapping the name to a list of all these possible readings. Sometimes, though, a cuneiform glyph is made from other glyphs joined together. There are a variety of ...


4

In Akkadian, Ca-a, Cu-u, Ci-i are often used to indicate Semitic long vowels, but this is not consistent. For example, dabābu “word” is usually written as da-ba-bu, but sometimes it appears as da-ba-a-bu. Use of the "plene" spelling is positive evidence for a long vowel, but non-use does not by any means prove that the vowel is short. Double a-a for ay (...


4

Gelb proposes that there were four sibilant series, somewhat confusingly named z, š₁₂, š₃, and š₄. The z series was written with signs ZA, ZÉ, ZI, ZU, and represented the outcome of what Semiticists now generally consider affricates (i.e. PSem *s, *ṣ, etc). The š₁₂ series was written with signs SA, SE₁₁, SI, SU, and represented the outcome of Semitic s₁ (...


4

This wikipedia page on Eblaite is unfortunately full of garbage. Many claims are outrageously false. I have personally written a book on Eblaite cuneiform and lexicon: https://www.thebookedition.com/fr/lions-d-urkesh-et-cuneiforme-eblaite-p-125021.html Originally, I wanted to know if Hurrian cuneiform had anything to do with Eblaite. My book summarizes the (...


4

The word pāqidūtum is not listed in the CAD, which suggests that it's likely not historically attested. But the word pāqidu(m) = "provider, overseer, caretaker", also included in the exercise you cited, is listed on CAD volume 12 (P) page 137. One page 35 of the lecture notes you linked, you will also find the abstractifying suffix -ūtum, used to ...


3

pāqidūtu(m) is the nominative plural of pāqidu(m), the active participle of the verb paqādu “to entrust etc.” (In theory it could also be an abstract noun in -ūtu, as suggested in the other reply, but such a word, if it existed, would have merited a separate entry in the lexica. Also, the fact that the author does not introduce this suffix until a later ...


3

Vowel length is a fairly complex issue in Cuneiform. To begin with, there are plenty of Cuneiform scribal traditions that do not use the same signs nor use them in the same way. So it is hard to make definitive statements on Cuneiform in general. Some people claim that Archaic Akkadian in the 3rd millennium BC distinguished signs with short or long vowels. ...


2

It can be noted that this system Sg -u (short), Pl -aw (> long u:) is also attested in Hieroglyphic Egyptian.


2

According to Huehnergard's grammar (appendix D.1.d), Babylonian scribes distinguished the sign 𒄴 from the sign 𒀪. The former was used for VH, and the latter for the glottal stop—some authors call it ', others call it 'V, V' (so na'du "pious" would be transliterated either na-'-du or na-a'-du). In earlier periods and other regions, the two were ...


2

I think you have examined this issue thoroughly. I was misled by von Soden's confusing notation. It does indeed seem that no known variant of Akkadian distinguished between Semitic s1 and s2.


2

Jagersma agrees with Gelb that Sumerian had "hidden" phonemes /h/ and /ʔ/, but disagrees about /ħ/. He points out that transcriptions of É (or É.GAL) generally use /h/, even in languages where /ħ/ was available: see the Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic loans mentioned in the question, but also Hurrian haikalli (mentioned by Fournet) and Ugaritic hkl. ...


1

Hasselbach 2005 discusses the use of ś in OAkk transcription, which she says was introduced by von Soden, but ultimately rejects it as unclear. According to her, modern (post-Gelb) scholars generally reconstruct three sibilant "phonemes" for Sargonic Akkadian, which are consistently written differently. There may have actually been more phonemic ...


1

In Middle Babylonian the sign uh was specialized into writing ʔ specifically. But as a rule, glottal stop has no explicit graphemic expression. It's a hidden potential phoneme. I think the equation PIE *H1 = ʔ is false, anyway. What is your reference on Kloekhorst?


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible