Skip to main content

Zsolt Simon

Universitat de Barcelona, Departament de Filologia Clàssica, Romànica i Semítica, Faculty Member

Universitat de Barcelona, Institut Universitari del Pròxim Orient Antic, Faculty Member

Followers

2,836

Following

1,426

Co-authors

9

Public Views

If you need any of those papers of mine that are not downloadable (due to legal restrictions), send me an email.

less

Christina Williamson

University of Groningen

Caroline J . Tully

University of Melbourne

Università di Bologna

University of Reading

Roland Schuhmann

Sächsische Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig

Andrea Squitieri

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Alexander Lubotsky

Universiteit Leiden

Piotr Michalowski

University of Michigan

Alexander Fantalkin

Tel Aviv University

Ilya Yakubovich

Philipps University Marburg

InterestsView All (10)

Uploads

Papers by Zsolt Simon

Nikarawas Reconsidered

In: Mariona Vernet – Ignasi-Xavier Adiego – José Virgilio García Trabazo – María-Paz de Hoz – Bartomeu Obrador-Cursach (eds.): Gods and Languages in Ancient Anatolia. BMO 25. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 5. Barcelona: Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2024, 205-215.

Indo-European Substrates: The problem of the Anatolian evidence

Guus Kroonen (ed.): Sub-Indo-European Europe. Problems, Methods, Results. Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 375. Berlin – Boston, Walter de Gruyter, 351-378

The following study addresses the problem of whether the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European la... more The following study addresses the problem of whether the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European language family shares a substrate with any other Indo-European branch or language. The first section briefly outlines the methodology employed in this study, the second section contrasts this methodology with the limitations imposed by the philology of the Anatolian languages, and the third section provides the relevant etymological material. In the fourth section, I summarize the results.

Lit. tautà und ung. tót. Ein slawisch-ungarischer Beitrag zu einem alten baltischen etymologischen Problem.

In: Santeri Junttila (ed.): E litoribus Balticis etymologiae. Uralica Helsingiensia 15. Helsinki, Finno-Ugrian Society / Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura, 2024, 255-272.

Anatolian Theonyms in the Aramaic Version of the Letoon Trilingual

In: Szilvia Sövegjártó – Márton Vér (eds.): Exploring Multilingualism and Multiscriptism in Written Artefacts. Studies in Manuscript Cultures 38. Berlin – Boston, Walter de Gruyter, 331-346.

This paper discusses the formal adaptation of the local theonyms in the Aramaic version of the Le... more

Anatolian names

In: Caroline Waerzeggers – Melanie M. Groß (eds.): Personal Names in Cuneiform Texts from Babylonia (c. 750–100 BCE). An Introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2024, 213-223.

A Goddess and a City or How to Read the Hieroglyphic Luwian Sign MANUS+MANUS

Asia Anteriore Antica. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Cultures 5 (2023) 131-138.

This paper argues that the unusual determinative MANUS+MANUS of the goddess Pahalati in Hama that... more This paper argues that the unusual determinative MANUS+MANUS of the goddess Pahalati in Hama that resisted explanation until now can be understood due to its new attestation in the logographic spelling of a Cilician toponym. It will be shown that an earlier attempt that identified MANUS+MANUS as a variant of MAGNUS, the city as Urušša, and the name of the goddess as a Phoenician-Luwian mixed phrase meaning 'Great Lady' , is palaeographically, linguistically, and geographically impossible. A clue to the decipherment of MANUS+MANUS is provided by the homo(io)phonous settlement in Cilicia, Pahra-, which explains how the same sign could have been used both as a determinative and as a logogram in accordance with the regular rules of the usage of the determinatives.

On the Armenian – Kartvelian Loan Contacts: Words with Initial *γw-

Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 76 (2023) 571-584.

Four Proto-Kartvelian words with initial *γw-are traditionally held to be borrowings from either ... more Four Proto-Kartvelian words with initial *γw-are traditionally held to be borrowings from either Proto-Indo-European or Proto-Armenian. Based on recent progress in Indo-European and Kartvelian linguistics, this paper argues that all four proposed PIE loanwords in PK are untenable; two out of these cannot be Proto-Armenian loanwords either. The third one, the word for 'wine' , could be a Proto-Armenian loan in PK, but it has formal problems and the alternative proposed here, a Proto-Zan loan in Proto-Armenian, provides a more regular solution. Combined with the last case (the word for 'juniper'), which also receives a regular solution only as a Proto-Zan loan, we have two Proto-Zan loans in Proto-Armenian instead of PIE/ Proto-Armenian loans in Proto-Kartvelian.

Egyptian in Carian transmission: Towards a better understanding of Carian vocalism

In: José Virgilio García Trabazo – Ignasi-Xavier Adiego – Mariona Vernet – Bartomeu Obrador-Cursach – Susana Soler (eds.): New approaches on Anatolian linguistics. Barcino Monographica Orientalia 22. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 4. Barcelona: Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 241–252.

The Hurro-Urartian loan contacts of Armenian: A revision

Hungarian Assyriological Review 3 (2022) 63-89.

The present paper critically revises the Hurro-Urartian loanwords of Armenian as well as the alle... more The present paper critically revises the Hurro-Urartian loanwords of Armenian as well as the alleged Armenian loans in Urartian. It argues that while the existence of the Hurro-Urartian loanword layer in Armenian is undeniable, the number of the certain cases is much smaller than previously assumed. Furthermore, none of the proposed Armenian loans in Urartian can be maintained on linguistic grounds.

Carian ś(j)as and σοῦα(ν)

Gephyra 25 (2023) 1-7.

The Carian word śjas is attested in the Greek-Carian bilingual of G 1. 1 It has a by-form śas in ... more The Carian word śjas is attested in the Greek-Carian bilingual of G 1. 1 It has a by-form śas in C.Eu 1, which was convincingly explained by D. Schürr with the simplification of the initial cluster. 2 There is a general and justified agreement that this word means 'funerary monument' (or similar) based on σεμα (= σῆμα) in the Greek version of G 1, as already established by M. Meier-Brügger 3 and followed by almost all scholars. 4 The similarity of śjas to σοῦα(ν), a Carian word meaning 'tomb' preserved by Stephan of Byzantium s.v. Σουάγγελα 5 was recognised long ago, 6 but their relationship has remained unclear. 7 We have the following possibilities: 1. Their similarity is due to chance. This is the implicit view of M. Meier-Brügger and H. C. Melchert, who provided etymologies only for ś(j)as, which (*tasá-< *d h h 1 só-/ *d h h 1 siyóm, resp. 8) are, furthermore, incompatible with σοῦα(ν). Such a view cannot a priori be excluded, but the words' formal and semantic closeness is remarkable. Therefore, if a regular explanation can be found to explain their differences, it will be superior to the assumption of chance. 2. Setting aside the final consonant, they are different (Carian and Greek) spellings of the same word. Considering the shape of the words this can be excluded.

Sipis ‒ yet another Phrygian name in the Neo-Hittite world? With commentaries on some recent discoveries of Phrygians in Hieroglyphic Luwian texts

In: Bartomeu Obrador-Cursach – Ignasi-Xavier Adiego (eds.): Phrygian linguistics and epigraphy: new insights. Barcino Monographica Orientalia 20. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 3. Barcelona, Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2022, 155-171.

Hittite and Luwian Loanwords in Armenian: An Update

Hungarian Assyriological Review 2 (2021) 283-294.

This paper provides a critical overview of the research on Hittite and Luwian loanwords in Armeni... more This paper provides a critical overview of the research on Hittite and Luwian loanwords in Armenian since 2013. It argues that most of the suggestions cannot be upheld and there is still no conclusive evidence for Hittite loanwords in Armenian, nevertheless, the case of Luwian loanwords in Armenian can further be strengthened.

Who is a mdayn / mdaýn? On the Carians in Egypt

Egitto e Vicino Oriente 44 (2021) 175-189.

The term mdayn / mdaýn (gen. sg. mwdonś / mudonś) is well attested in the Carian funerary stelae ... more The term mdayn / mdaýn (gen. sg. mwdonś / mudonś) is well attested in the Carian funerary stelae from Memphis. Its precise meaning has not yet been established, but it is generally supposed to be an ethnic adjective referring to the Carian city from where the Carian mercenaries arrived to Egypt. Based on the contextual and morphophonological analysis of this word, this paper argues that we are in fact dealing with two different words: mdayn / mdaýn, an ethnic adjective indeed referring to a Carian city (the identification of which is hampered by the circumstance that none of the proposals fit formally), and mwdon / mudon, a profession, probably 'mercenary'.

401 BC – The year the Neo-Hittite statehood ended

In: Annick Payne – Šárka Velhartická ‒ Jorit Wintjes (eds.): Beyond All Boundaries: Anatolia in the First Millennium BC. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 295. Leuven ‒ Paris ‒ Bristol, Peeters, 2021, 675-688.

as well as an associated researcher of its Center for Global Studies. Her research focuses on Ana... more

Hinduwa: Kindye oder Kandyba?

Hungarian Assyriological Review 2 (2021) 197-203.

This paper argues that the linguistically impeccable identification of Ḫinduwa with Kindye is exc... more This paper argues that the linguistically impeccable identification of Ḫinduwa with Kindye is excluded by geography and the identification of Ḫinduwa with Kandyba is problematic both linguistically and geographically. Only a third settlement that must be close to Tlos fits the attested geographical information.

On the Origins of the Hieroglyphic Luwian Writing System: The Chronological Problem

Chatreššar 3/2 (2020) [2022] 42-56.

This paper critically examines the key problem in the origins of the Hieroglyphic Luwian writing ... more This paper critically examines the key problem in the origins of the Hieroglyphic Luwian writing system, namely that of chronology. It argues that the sign CAPERE and the inscriptions of the stagshaped silver vessel and from Kayalıpınar require dating its emergence to the Old Hittite period at the latest. Nevertheless, the signs INFRA and PES still imply a Hittite contribution, which can only be assumed in a Hittite-Luwian bilingual context, which, in turn should be dated already to the Old Hittite period because of the Luwian grammatical influence documented from Middle Hittite onwards. Finally, the (lack of) evidence from the Old Assyrian Colony period will be discussed and the question why the emergence of the Hieroglyphic Luwian writing system cannot currently be dated to this period.

The alleged Anatolian loanwords in Etruscan: A reconsideration

In: Federico Giusfredi ‒ Zsolt Simon (with the editorial assistance of Elena Martínez Rodríguez) (eds.): Studies in the languages and language contact in Pre-Hellenistic Anatolia. BMO 17. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 2. Barcelona, Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2021, 227-253.

Zum Verhältnis der palaischen und hurritischen Wörter für ‚Dolch‘

Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2021/3: 180-183 (Nr. 78).

L'expression louvite zāwi 'voilà!' (Ro.? 7ʹ) est employée régulièrement dans les deux rituels en ... more L'expression louvite zāwi 'voilà!' (Ro.? 7ʹ) est employée régulièrement dans les deux rituels en question. De plus, le mot [waššar]aḫītat[i] 'avec bénévolence' correspond exactement aux passages tels que celui de KUB 35.24++ ro. 35ʹ-37ʹ, où on trouve une série de bénédictions. Bibliographie BAUER, Anna (2020): eDiAna s.v. /zantanta/, INFRA-tá-ta. http://www.ediana.gwi.unimuenchen.de/dictionary.php?lemma=869.

The indefinite pronoun in Cuneiform Luwian

Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2021/1: 34-36 (No. 15).

Cuneiform Luwian =ku(wa): form and meaning

Hungarian Assyriological Review 1 (2020) 39-42.

This paper provides a new attempt at defining the form and meaning of an unclear Luwian particle.

Nikarawas Reconsidered

In: Mariona Vernet – Ignasi-Xavier Adiego – José Virgilio García Trabazo – María-Paz de Hoz – Bartomeu Obrador-Cursach (eds.): Gods and Languages in Ancient Anatolia. BMO 25. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 5. Barcelona: Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2024, 205-215.

Indo-European Substrates: The problem of the Anatolian evidence

Guus Kroonen (ed.): Sub-Indo-European Europe. Problems, Methods, Results. Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 375. Berlin – Boston, Walter de Gruyter, 351-378

The following study addresses the problem of whether the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European la... more The following study addresses the problem of whether the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European language family shares a substrate with any other Indo-European branch or language. The first section briefly outlines the methodology employed in this study, the second section contrasts this methodology with the limitations imposed by the philology of the Anatolian languages, and the third section provides the relevant etymological material. In the fourth section, I summarize the results.

Lit. tautà und ung. tót. Ein slawisch-ungarischer Beitrag zu einem alten baltischen etymologischen Problem.

In: Santeri Junttila (ed.): E litoribus Balticis etymologiae. Uralica Helsingiensia 15. Helsinki, Finno-Ugrian Society / Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura, 2024, 255-272.

Anatolian Theonyms in the Aramaic Version of the Letoon Trilingual

In: Szilvia Sövegjártó – Márton Vér (eds.): Exploring Multilingualism and Multiscriptism in Written Artefacts. Studies in Manuscript Cultures 38. Berlin – Boston, Walter de Gruyter, 331-346.

This paper discusses the formal adaptation of the local theonyms in the Aramaic version of the Le... more

Anatolian names

In: Caroline Waerzeggers – Melanie M. Groß (eds.): Personal Names in Cuneiform Texts from Babylonia (c. 750–100 BCE). An Introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2024, 213-223.

A Goddess and a City or How to Read the Hieroglyphic Luwian Sign MANUS+MANUS

Asia Anteriore Antica. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Cultures 5 (2023) 131-138.

This paper argues that the unusual determinative MANUS+MANUS of the goddess Pahalati in Hama that... more This paper argues that the unusual determinative MANUS+MANUS of the goddess Pahalati in Hama that resisted explanation until now can be understood due to its new attestation in the logographic spelling of a Cilician toponym. It will be shown that an earlier attempt that identified MANUS+MANUS as a variant of MAGNUS, the city as Urušša, and the name of the goddess as a Phoenician-Luwian mixed phrase meaning 'Great Lady' , is palaeographically, linguistically, and geographically impossible. A clue to the decipherment of MANUS+MANUS is provided by the homo(io)phonous settlement in Cilicia, Pahra-, which explains how the same sign could have been used both as a determinative and as a logogram in accordance with the regular rules of the usage of the determinatives.

On the Armenian – Kartvelian Loan Contacts: Words with Initial *γw-

Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 76 (2023) 571-584.

Four Proto-Kartvelian words with initial *γw-are traditionally held to be borrowings from either ... more Four Proto-Kartvelian words with initial *γw-are traditionally held to be borrowings from either Proto-Indo-European or Proto-Armenian. Based on recent progress in Indo-European and Kartvelian linguistics, this paper argues that all four proposed PIE loanwords in PK are untenable; two out of these cannot be Proto-Armenian loanwords either. The third one, the word for 'wine' , could be a Proto-Armenian loan in PK, but it has formal problems and the alternative proposed here, a Proto-Zan loan in Proto-Armenian, provides a more regular solution. Combined with the last case (the word for 'juniper'), which also receives a regular solution only as a Proto-Zan loan, we have two Proto-Zan loans in Proto-Armenian instead of PIE/ Proto-Armenian loans in Proto-Kartvelian.

Egyptian in Carian transmission: Towards a better understanding of Carian vocalism

In: José Virgilio García Trabazo – Ignasi-Xavier Adiego – Mariona Vernet – Bartomeu Obrador-Cursach – Susana Soler (eds.): New approaches on Anatolian linguistics. Barcino Monographica Orientalia 22. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 4. Barcelona: Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 241–252.

The Hurro-Urartian loan contacts of Armenian: A revision

Hungarian Assyriological Review 3 (2022) 63-89.

The present paper critically revises the Hurro-Urartian loanwords of Armenian as well as the alle... more The present paper critically revises the Hurro-Urartian loanwords of Armenian as well as the alleged Armenian loans in Urartian. It argues that while the existence of the Hurro-Urartian loanword layer in Armenian is undeniable, the number of the certain cases is much smaller than previously assumed. Furthermore, none of the proposed Armenian loans in Urartian can be maintained on linguistic grounds.

Carian ś(j)as and σοῦα(ν)

Gephyra 25 (2023) 1-7.

The Carian word śjas is attested in the Greek-Carian bilingual of G 1. 1 It has a by-form śas in ... more The Carian word śjas is attested in the Greek-Carian bilingual of G 1. 1 It has a by-form śas in C.Eu 1, which was convincingly explained by D. Schürr with the simplification of the initial cluster. 2 There is a general and justified agreement that this word means 'funerary monument' (or similar) based on σεμα (= σῆμα) in the Greek version of G 1, as already established by M. Meier-Brügger 3 and followed by almost all scholars. 4 The similarity of śjas to σοῦα(ν), a Carian word meaning 'tomb' preserved by Stephan of Byzantium s.v. Σουάγγελα 5 was recognised long ago, 6 but their relationship has remained unclear. 7 We have the following possibilities: 1. Their similarity is due to chance. This is the implicit view of M. Meier-Brügger and H. C. Melchert, who provided etymologies only for ś(j)as, which (*tasá-< *d h h 1 só-/ *d h h 1 siyóm, resp. 8) are, furthermore, incompatible with σοῦα(ν). Such a view cannot a priori be excluded, but the words' formal and semantic closeness is remarkable. Therefore, if a regular explanation can be found to explain their differences, it will be superior to the assumption of chance. 2. Setting aside the final consonant, they are different (Carian and Greek) spellings of the same word. Considering the shape of the words this can be excluded.

Sipis ‒ yet another Phrygian name in the Neo-Hittite world? With commentaries on some recent discoveries of Phrygians in Hieroglyphic Luwian texts

In: Bartomeu Obrador-Cursach – Ignasi-Xavier Adiego (eds.): Phrygian linguistics and epigraphy: new insights. Barcino Monographica Orientalia 20. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 3. Barcelona, Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2022, 155-171.

Hittite and Luwian Loanwords in Armenian: An Update

Hungarian Assyriological Review 2 (2021) 283-294.

This paper provides a critical overview of the research on Hittite and Luwian loanwords in Armeni... more This paper provides a critical overview of the research on Hittite and Luwian loanwords in Armenian since 2013. It argues that most of the suggestions cannot be upheld and there is still no conclusive evidence for Hittite loanwords in Armenian, nevertheless, the case of Luwian loanwords in Armenian can further be strengthened.

Who is a mdayn / mdaýn? On the Carians in Egypt

Egitto e Vicino Oriente 44 (2021) 175-189.

The term mdayn / mdaýn (gen. sg. mwdonś / mudonś) is well attested in the Carian funerary stelae ... more The term mdayn / mdaýn (gen. sg. mwdonś / mudonś) is well attested in the Carian funerary stelae from Memphis. Its precise meaning has not yet been established, but it is generally supposed to be an ethnic adjective referring to the Carian city from where the Carian mercenaries arrived to Egypt. Based on the contextual and morphophonological analysis of this word, this paper argues that we are in fact dealing with two different words: mdayn / mdaýn, an ethnic adjective indeed referring to a Carian city (the identification of which is hampered by the circumstance that none of the proposals fit formally), and mwdon / mudon, a profession, probably 'mercenary'.

401 BC – The year the Neo-Hittite statehood ended

In: Annick Payne – Šárka Velhartická ‒ Jorit Wintjes (eds.): Beyond All Boundaries: Anatolia in the First Millennium BC. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 295. Leuven ‒ Paris ‒ Bristol, Peeters, 2021, 675-688.

as well as an associated researcher of its Center for Global Studies. Her research focuses on Ana... more

Hinduwa: Kindye oder Kandyba?

Hungarian Assyriological Review 2 (2021) 197-203.

This paper argues that the linguistically impeccable identification of Ḫinduwa with Kindye is exc... more This paper argues that the linguistically impeccable identification of Ḫinduwa with Kindye is excluded by geography and the identification of Ḫinduwa with Kandyba is problematic both linguistically and geographically. Only a third settlement that must be close to Tlos fits the attested geographical information.

On the Origins of the Hieroglyphic Luwian Writing System: The Chronological Problem

Chatreššar 3/2 (2020) [2022] 42-56.

This paper critically examines the key problem in the origins of the Hieroglyphic Luwian writing ... more This paper critically examines the key problem in the origins of the Hieroglyphic Luwian writing system, namely that of chronology. It argues that the sign CAPERE and the inscriptions of the stagshaped silver vessel and from Kayalıpınar require dating its emergence to the Old Hittite period at the latest. Nevertheless, the signs INFRA and PES still imply a Hittite contribution, which can only be assumed in a Hittite-Luwian bilingual context, which, in turn should be dated already to the Old Hittite period because of the Luwian grammatical influence documented from Middle Hittite onwards. Finally, the (lack of) evidence from the Old Assyrian Colony period will be discussed and the question why the emergence of the Hieroglyphic Luwian writing system cannot currently be dated to this period.

The alleged Anatolian loanwords in Etruscan: A reconsideration

In: Federico Giusfredi ‒ Zsolt Simon (with the editorial assistance of Elena Martínez Rodríguez) (eds.): Studies in the languages and language contact in Pre-Hellenistic Anatolia. BMO 17. Series Anatolica et Indogermanica 2. Barcelona, Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2021, 227-253.

Zum Verhältnis der palaischen und hurritischen Wörter für ‚Dolch‘

Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2021/3: 180-183 (Nr. 78).

L'expression louvite zāwi 'voilà!' (Ro.? 7ʹ) est employée régulièrement dans les deux rituels en ... more L'expression louvite zāwi 'voilà!' (Ro.? 7ʹ) est employée régulièrement dans les deux rituels en question. De plus, le mot [waššar]aḫītat[i] 'avec bénévolence' correspond exactement aux passages tels que celui de KUB 35.24++ ro. 35ʹ-37ʹ, où on trouve une série de bénédictions. Bibliographie BAUER, Anna (2020): eDiAna s.v. /zantanta/, INFRA-tá-ta. http://www.ediana.gwi.unimuenchen.de/dictionary.php?lemma=869.

The indefinite pronoun in Cuneiform Luwian

Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2021/1: 34-36 (No. 15).

Cuneiform Luwian =ku(wa): form and meaning

Hungarian Assyriological Review 1 (2020) 39-42.

This paper provides a new attempt at defining the form and meaning of an unclear Luwian particle.

Zwei Armreife mit karischer Inschrift aus der Archäologischen Staatsammlung in München

In: Mark B. Garrison – Wouter F. M. Henkelman (eds.): The Persian World and Beyond. Achaemenid and Arsacid Studies in Honour of Bruno Jacobs. Melammu Workshops and Monographs 6. Münster, Zaphon, 2023, 163-176.

The Etymology of Vedic brav ‘to say, to speak, to tell’

Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 74 (2021) 555-563

Th is paper argues that the standard etymology of Vedic brav i 'to say, to speak, to tell' from P... more Th is paper argues that the standard etymology of Vedic brav i 'to say, to speak, to tell' from Proto-Indo-European *mleu ̯ h 2-'to speak' (and its connection with Avestan mrao-'to say, to speak') cannot be upheld, since it is based on an irregular consonant change that cannot be independently motivated and explained. As an alternative, two diff erent PIE verbal roots will be proposed, *melH-u-→ mleu ̯ H-'to say, to speak' and *bleu ̯ h 2/3-'to speak or to call' , that provide phonologically and semantically regular bases for the words involved.

Das Glossenkeilwort ḫarpušta-

by Zsolt Simon and Anja Busse

Aula Orientalis 36 (2018) 249-255.

Zu “CAPERE”(-)sa-ru-sa in der hieroglyphen-luwischen Inschrift İSTANBUL 2

by Zsolt Simon and Anja Busse

Entries published in the Digital Philological-Etymological Dictionary of the Minor Ancient Anatolian Corpus Languages (eDiAna) by Zsolt Simon

Version April 2023. These are synchronic entries. Reconstructions, if available, can be found und... more Version April 2023. These are synchronic entries. Reconstructions, if available, can be found under the same URL but written by my colleagues. ‒ This is a continuously updated list. Updates will be uploaded approx. at the beginning of every month. New entries are marked by red. ‒ Note the distinction between “Cuneiform Luwian” (i.e. Luwian in Luwian clauses) and “Luwian in Hittite Transmission” (i.e. alleged Luwian in Hittite clauses) as well as “Glossenkeilwörter” (any word marked in this way at least once in Hittite texts). ‒ To open directly the entries you need to use the URL given in the file, where X should be replaced by the ID number of the entry as shown below in the file.

Review of Annick Payne: Hieroglyphic Luwian: An Introduction with Original Texts (3rd edition)

Review of Sylvie Vanséveren: Nisili. Manuel de langue Hittite II. Le système verbal hittite

Review of Itamar Singer (ed.): ipamati kistamati pari tumatimis. Luwian and Hittite Studies presented to J. David Hawkins on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday.

Review of Thomas Zehnder: Die hethitischen Frauennamen. Katalog und Interpretation.

Review of Maciej Popko: Völker und Sprachen Altanatoliens.

Review of Reinhold Plöchl: Einführung ins Hieroglyphen-Luwische

Review of Rita Francia: Lineamenti di grammatica ittita

Review of John Marangozis: A Short Grammar of Hieroglyphic Luwian

Review of Jörg Klinger: Die Hethiter

Review of Ignacio J. Adiego: The Carian Language

Review of Benjamin W. Fortson: Indo-European Language and Culture. An Introduction

Review of H. Craig Melchert (ed.): The Luwians

Review of Elisa Lucchesi – Elisabetta Magni: Vecchie e nuove (in)certezze sul Lapis Satricanus

Review of Ivo Hajnal: Troia aus sprachwissenschaftlicher Sicht. Die Struktur einer Argumentation