Hittite zinni-, tuwarni-, zig and related matters.

• Author: Barton, Charles R.

IN HIS VALUABLE AND STIMULATING Studies in Hittite Historical Phonology H. Craig Melchert (1984, 114-17) makes the important observation that the stem-final vowel of Hit. zinni-zzi because of the consistent spelling -NI-IZ- (never -NE-IZ-) must be /i/, phonemically distinct from the vowels of the csvv. lukke- wasse- (/e/ or secondarily /e/) and of the characterized stems in -ske- -ie- (/e/). His explanation that zinni-, tuwarni- 'break' and hulli- 'fight, destroy'(1) have /i/ from the duratives in -anni- (with inherited /i/) is offered with judicious hesitation, and he himself notes that the points of partial coincidence (only 2sg. pret. *yannis |approximately~ *zinnes, imv. *yanni |approximately~ *zinne, 2pl. *yanniten(i) |approximately~ *zinne-/zinna-ten(i) as against, e.g., 3sg. *yanni |is not equal to~ *zinnezzi, etc.) constitute "a rather slim basis," especially since the hi-inflection of the duratives is opposed to the mi-pattern of zinni-. It is especially disturbing that the supposed analogical process should have operated in prehistoric times with ironclad rigor in a single direction on only the timbre of the stem vowel--not on the endings or inflectional class. Hence the sporadic bi-directional class transfers like zinahhi and iyannizzi, cited by Melchert in support of "considerable mutual influence of these classes," are of later date ("within the historical period"), of different sort, and so neither parallel nor probative.

The source of these difficulties is the etymology. Melchert (1984, 29 n. 61, 95, 114-15) accepts Oettinger's (1979, 151-52) reconstruction of a set root |*seih.sub.1~ with nasal-infixed present stem *si-ne-|h.sub.1~-. This leads to proximate *zin(n)e- or *zin(n)e- and the need to appeal to analogy. Moreover, the etymology lacks adequate support, since the sole extra-Hittite comparandum offered by either scholar is Lat. sino 'permit', and the difficulties raised by this equation are prohibitive. If one speculates that the original meaning of putative |*seih.sub.1~- was 'let go of' (vel sim.), semantic comparison is probably possible, but even so, serious problems remain. Integral to the meaning of Hit. zinni- is a noematic feature of COMPLETION,(2) which is not an essential component of sino or its compounds.(3) Briefly to illustrate we can compare KBo 19.142 ii 20-22 mahhanmakan UDU arkuwanzi zinnanzi nu UZUNIG.GIG UZUSA happinit zanuwanzi UDU-makan hamandan markanzi 'when they finish gutting (i.e., removing the organs of) the sheep, they cook the intestines and heart with fire, but the entire sheep (torso) they butcher' (CHD 3.188) with Ter. Andr. 22-23 dehinc ut quiescant porro moneo et desinant male dicere 'I warn them (my critics) to be silent from now on and to stop speaking ill', further Lucr. 4.400-402 atria versari . . . fit uti pueris videantur ubi ipsi desierunt verti 'it seems to children that the hall keeps turning round when they themselves have discontinued (= are no longer) turning'. Hit. arkuwanzi zinni- designates completion of the process of removing the animal's organs, a necessary preliminary to further preparations.(4) In contrast Lat. desinere denotes merely discontinuance, the abandonment of or cessation from some activity: completion is not entailed. The distinction is important. For example KUB 30.15 obv. 7 (Otten 1958, 66) nu mahhan hastai lessuwanzi zinnanzi means 'when they have finished gathering up the bones', but not 'when they stop gathering . . .', i.e., leaving some bones uncollected. The semantic counterpart to zinni- in Latin is not (de)sinere but finire, finem facere.(5) By far the most serious difficulty with the connection of Hit. zinni- and Lat. sinere is formal. Not only are the conditions under which word-initial *s- appears as Hit. z- quite unclear,(6) but especially ruinous to the etymology is the patent fact that Lat. sinere cannot continue a set, i.e., H-final, base. The a verbo of sinere in Latin is an isolate without parallel, a datum indicative of archaic morphology.(7) In this light the extra-presential patterns pf. si-u-i : pf. sbj. si-r-i- : pple. si-tu-s, which can immediately and naturally be seen as the direct continuation of (anit) aor. *sei- : aor. opt. *sei-s-i|h.sub.1~- : pple. *si-to-, precludes any analogical explanation.(8) There are no grounds whatever for believing in a set root |*seih.sub.1~- or in a punati-type present stem *si-ne-|h.sub.1~-.

Although etymological connection of Hit. zinni- with Lat. sinere cannot be maintained, Oettinger has made a valuable advance in his recognition that zinni- originates as the transitive counterpart to the middle (tantum) verb 3sg. ze(y)-a 'is cooked, is done (food)'.(9) He compares the mechanism to the familiar hark- 'perish' |right arrow~ har-nin-k- 'destroy': from the perspective of Hittite, a derivational not an inflectional process.

Both the semantic and the formal facts pertaining to Hit. ze(y)-/zinni- are well accommodated by etymological connection with PIE *dhu-e|h.sub.1~-(i-), a base extended from the simple root *dheu- by suffix |*-eh.sub.1~-, with subsequent further extension to *dhue|h.sub.1~i- upon reanalysis of present stem **dhue|h.sub.1~-io- |right arrow~ *dhue|h.sub.1~i-, ablaut *dhui|h.sub.1~-.(10) Lat. fi-ni-s |is less than~ *dhui|h.sub.1~-(s)ni-(11) will then be cognate as also ON dvi-na 'hinschwinden', OE dwi-na-n 'dwindle, waste away', OIr. di-th (|is less than~ *dhui|h.sub.1~-tV-) 'destruction, death, loss', etc.(12) Hit. mid. ze(y)-a(ri)(13) continues reanalyzed *dhue|h.sub.1~i-o(-) (type *kei-o), earlier **dhue|h.sub.1~, without further ado and can be ascribed to the protolanguage. The derived transitive is evidenced only in Hittite and may be a formation posterior to the separation of Anatolian from the IE (proper) languages. However, the pattern *io-intransitive: N-transitive is archaic, recurring in Indo-Iranian (with minor adjustments) as the familiar type of Ved. ksiya-te 'perishes, disappears': ksina-ti 'destroys', etc.(14) In any case the infixed derivative 3sg. *dhue-n-|h.sub.1~i-ti |is greater than~ zinni-zzi, 3pl. *dhui-n-|h.sub.1~-enti |is greater than~ zinn-anzi is morphologically natural and accounts for the attested forms with a minimum of difficulty.(15) The reconstructions require merely the assumption that the infixing of *-n- took place after the secondary root /|d.sup.h~|weh.sub.1~y- |is similar to~ |d.sup.h~|wyh.sub.1~-/ with its accent-regulated metathesis of laryngeal and semivowel had established itself in the system.

The weak stem *dhui-n-|h.sub.1~i- finds a canonical parallel in *|q.sup.u~ri-n-|h.sub.2~-, reflected (with modifications) by Ved. krini-te, OIr. crenaid, Toch. B. karna-(sk-) 'buy(s)', type *CRi-n-H-.(16) The strong stem violates Strunk's (1973, 67) rule that *-n- occurs before the root-final segment when this is not immediately preceded by /e/, or before /e/ when it is.(17) Strict adherence to this rule would lead us to expect either *dhu-n-|eh.sub.1~i-ti, a patently impossible trisyllabic stem, or *|dhueh.sub.1~-n-i-ti. I think the latter is also unlikely, but in any case the leveling of *zeni-zzi (vel sim.) to zinni-zzi after pl. zin-nanzi would be natural.(18) There are no grounds for reconstructing a stem *dhui-n-|eh.sub.1~- parallel to *|q.sup.u~ri-n-|eh.sub.2~- (cf. RV krina-ti), for the fundamental full-grade root structures are entirely disparate: *|q.sup.u~ri(i)|eh.sub.2~- or *|q.sup.u~|reih.sub.2~- |is not equal to~ *|dhueh.sub.1~i-. The accent-ablaut structure of the reconstructions proposed here resembles that of the non-samprasarana set-root stems of the type *ster-n-|h.sub.3~- (Lat. 3sg. sterni-t, OIr. 3sg. sernaid): *str-n-|h.sub.3~-.(Ved. 3pl. strn-anti).(19) The canonical acceptability of a stem with major phase-structured/|C.sub.0~e-n-Hy-/ is solidly supported by the annai-duratives if Melchert's (1984, 116) reconstructions pres. 3sg. *ie-|nh.sub.2~i-ei |is greater than~ *yanni |approaches~ yannai, pret. 3sg. *ie-|nh.sub.2~i-s |is greater than~ yanni-s are correct.(20) The familiar samprasarana type CReC- |approaches~ CR-n-eC- is represented in Hittite by the type of huek-zi |approaches~ hunik-zi (Strunk 1979b) and of tarnahhi if from *tr-n-|eh.sub.2~- as widely believed. A possible further example of the *ster-n-|h.sub.3~-ti type in Hittite is 3sg. su-u-ni-iz-zi 'immerses, plunges; sows' KBo 6.26 i 34 (Laws 166 OH/NS, cf. pret. 3sg. -ni-(e-)it 39, 44), StBoT 17 B obv. 29' (OH/NS), if Melchert (1984, 29 with n. 61) is right to suggest that the synchronically disparate verbs suni(ya)- 'immerse, sow' and sunna- 'fill' originated in the ablaut variants of the n-present to a root *seuH-. The plene-spelled vowel of the singular su-u-ni- may well have been accented so that a reconstruction *seunH-ti (= ||sewn.sub.e~Hti~) |is greater than~ suni-zzi: *sunH-enti |is greater than~ sun-nanzi 'they fill' serves better than a sg. *su-n-eH-ti. The word for 'autumn', ze-e-na-, has been connected etymologically with zinni-, and I believe the connection should be maintained. The semantics are unforced, since the autumn as the final time for sowing,(21) i.e., the end of at least the agricultural year, can readily stem from a base meaning 'come to an end'. Formally a reconstruction *|dhueh.sub.1~-no-, i.e., an old derivative from the suffixed root *dhu-|eh.sub.1~- prior to its contamination by *i, originally at home in a verbal stem formant, seems equally natural.

The formal canon *|C.sub.0~eH-no- is firmly established in the function of deriving (substantivized) adjectives directly from verbal roots. Cf. *|h.sub.1~ei- 'go' |approaches~ suffixed root *|h.sub.1~i-|eh.sub.2~- |approaches~ *|h.sub.1~|ieh.sub.2~-no- |is greater than~ Ved. nt. yana- 'car, vehicle; course, way, journey' (earliest RV 4.43.6, the ajiram yanam of the Asvins),(22) *|steh.sub.2~-no- |is greater than~ Ved. nt. sthana-place, abode; standing' (RV +), OCS m. stan '(army-) camp', *|deh.sub.3~-no- |is greater than~ Ved. nt. dana-...