E-ana-tum and the ruler of Arawa

UET 6, 124 = U 16900E CDLI P346209 Lamentation over Sumer and Ur 1f., Michalowski MC 1, source BB, Attinger La lamentation sur Sumer et Ur (2.2.3) obverse 1. ud šu bal ke3 -de3 [...]-lam? -e-de3 In order to overturn the day, in order to destroy the plans 2. ud -de3 mar-rux(TE)-gin7 [...] x-gu7-e The storm ravages like a stormwind 3. me ki -en-gi-ra šu bal ke3-de3 In order to overturn the cosmic powers of Sumer 4. bal sag9-ga e2 -ba gi4-gi4-de3 In order to confine the good reign in its house 5. iri gul -gul-u3-de3 e2 gul-gul-u3-de3 In order to destroy the city, in order to destroy the temple 6. tur3 gul-gul-u3-de3 amaš tab-tab-be2-de3 In order to destroy the cattlepen, in order to flatten the sheepfold 7. gud-bi tur3-bi-a nu-gub-bu-de3 So that the ox does not does not stand in its cattlepen 8. udu-bi amaš-bi-a nu-daĝal-e-de3 So that the sheep does not expand (in number?) in its sheepfold 9. id2-bi a mun4-na tum3-u3-de3 So that the canal irrigates with (only) brackish water 10. gan2-ne2 zid-de3 u2 hirim mu2-mu2-de3 So that hirin grass grows in the fertile field 11. eden-e u2 a-nir mu2-mu2-de3 So that the "lamentation plant" grows in the plain 12. ama dumu-ni-ir ki nu-kiĝx-kiĝx(UR4-UR4)-de3 So that the mother does not seek the whereabouts of her child 13. ad-da a dam-ĝu10 nu-di-de3 So that the father does not say "ah, my wife" 14. dam banda3 ur2-ra nu-hul2-le-de3 So that the junior spouse does not delight in (his) lap 15. TUR-TUR dub3-ba nu-buluĝ3-ĝe26-e-de3 So that the little ones do not grow on the knee 16. emeda da -e u5-a nu-di-de3 So that the nursemaid does not sign a lullaby 17. nam-lugal-la ki -tuš-bi kur2 -ru-de3 So that the dwelling of kingship is changed 18. eš-bar kiĝx(UR4)-ĝa2 [...]-e-de3 In order to paralyze/actively diminish(?) decision making note: For the debated meaning of eš-bar kiĝ₂ (... dug₄), see Attinger ELS, 508, Steinkeller RAI 60, 8-9.

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2005

This eagerly awaited grammar presents an account of the Sumerian language in eighteen chapters: the first three provide an introduction to the features, affiliation and sounds of Sumerian, plus a guide to how it was written; these are followed by twelve chapters on the various parts of speech; the book rounds off with three further chapters to discuss Emesal and the influence of Akkadian on Sumerian, and to offer a few words to tie up loose ends. The book is modern in a number of ways. As could be expected, it incorporates recent advances in our understanding of the language, including some that have very recently appeared and even some yet to appear (the long-awaited results of the sixth Sumerian grammar discussion group, held in Oxford in 1999). It also draws on the ISSL (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/psd/ www/ISSL-form.html) and provides references to ETCSL (http://www-etcsl. orient.ox.ac.uk/), demonstrating the utility of Internet-based Assyriological materials. But more striking is the adoption of the transliteration style which has started to become more common among Sumerologists in recent times, giving us readings such as ninta 'male' and ses 'brother'. Looking for criticisms, one might point to proofreading. Works intended as reference tools-especially those aimed at students-require even more rigorous attention than others, since students can easily be confused. Spare a thought for the beginner who learns that 'city' is read eri (passim; p. 19 URU), as in the name of the ED ruler of Lagas (pp. 19, 104, 124, 153 Lagaš), Irikagina (p. 102, Erikagina), whose inscriptions are referred to using the abbreviation Ukg. Likewise, 'wood' is g teš and G t EŠ (except for: pp. 103, 146 giš ; p. 8 GIŠ; p. 31 g t iš-gi-g t iš-gi 'cane-brakes'), as used phonetically in g téštug (p. 8; passim g téštu and g t éštu(-g)), which is written GIŠ.TÚG.PI (pp. 8, 150) and may alternatively be rendered giš-túg g t eštug (p. 8). Again in the interests of student sanity, perhaps it would have been better to have kept length marks off Sumerian vowels, e.g. p. 13, where some vowels have length marks, others accents; note also '50' read ninnû (passim; see esp. p. 65), although [û] is absent from the repertory of Sumerian vocalic phonemes listed in 3.1.1. Given that the author extends his remit to take in elements of the writing system, a brief note on modern transliteration habits-especially with reference to accents and subscript numbers-would have been welcome. That the author does extend his remit in this way is a positive thing, however, since he thus greatly facilitates the difficult journey from transliteration to the transcription of grammatical analysis. There are a few slips of the pen. In the list of determinatives, LÚ (the use of which is not actually reserved for male professions) is exemplified with (p. 9) lú nu-kiri 6 , although the lú determinative in Sumerian texts is not normally, REVIEWS An example for the ventive dimensional indicator for 3 rd pl. dative-locative (33 on p. 93) is provided by NBC 8058 ((6.1.02) proverb 2.7 source WWWW): zu-a ùr-ra mu-ne-a-e 11. The ventive 1 st pl. comitative indicator (38) might also be found as meda, as in 1.8.1.5 Gilgameš and Huwawa A 10: d utu šul d utu h b é-me-da-an-zu 'Utu, der junge Utu, sollte es von uns erfahren haben' (p. 171). Both meda and mueda are more commonly found marking 2 nd sg. forms. An example for the ventive 2 nd pl. dative-locative indicator may be found in proverb 5 A 71 = B 74: g tá-e ga-mu-e-ne-h b a-la 'Let me share out for you' (said by a fox to nine wolves). A possible example of a personal pronoun with terminative ending (see p. 56) might be found in (6.1.13) proverb 13.26: g t á-šè. Diachronic and geographic variations in Sumerian receive little attention but a sensible balance must be struck, as it has been here. To provide a coherent, comprehensive, detailed introduction to Sumerian in 200 pages is no mean feat. Inevitably the author did not have space to discuss issues in as much detail as one might have liked, but there are plenty of references to more detailed discussions and divergent opinion elsewhere. The HdO series aims carefully to select 'scholarly reference works of lasting value, under the editorship of major scholars in the field', criteria easily fulfilled by this volume. Throughout the book, one is struck by the learning and insight, as well as the humanity, which the author injects into his work. This grammar is a must for anyone concerned with Sumerian, at whatever level.

Since the ground-breaking and penetrating study of the typology of the Ur III royal inscriptions by William Hallo (1962), a number of surveys of the literary structure of Sumerian and Akkadian royal inscriptions of the third and early second millennium has appeared. 1 Some of these surveys are limited to a particular group of inscriptions, others are general, comprehensive discussions appended to anthologies of modern translations of the entire corpus, or presented in the form of encyclopedic articles. With the recent publication of all available source material in highly reliable editions within the FAOS 2 and RIME 3 series, we are now in a position to examine some of the literary features of these inscriptions in a more systematic way and to investigate the history of this genre. 4 The purpose of this study is to re-examine some typological features of the third and early second-millennium (Sumerian and Akkadian) royal building and votive inscriptions, on the basis of all hitherto available source material. 5 BASIC SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE It is common knowledge that the general word order in a Sumerian independent sentence with a finite transitive verb is SOV (i.e., Subject-Object-Verb [= predicate]), unless some part of speech is placed at the beginning for focus. 6 The same is true for a standard sentence with a finite verb in the Akkadian language, whose syntax was clearly influenced by that of Sumerian. 7 We can find this regular word order in, for example, a cone inscription of Ur-gigira (Frayne 1993 no. E2.13.1), which commemorates the building of a temple for the goddess Nin-šeše-ĝara in Bad-tibira. To illustrate our point, we quote this inscription in transliteration and translation, indicating its syntactic structure .

Journal of the American Oriental Society, 2002

Buccellati, G. 2002. Review of A Sketch of Neo-Assyrian Grammar. State Archives of Assyria Studies, Vol. 13. Helsinki: The Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, 2000, by J. Hämeen-Anttila. Journal of the American Oriental Society 122 (4): 874–75. https://doi.org/10.2307/3217645.

2017

This textbook provides an introduction to the grammar of Sumerian, one of the oldest documented languages in the world. It not only synthesizes the results of recent scholarship but introduces original insights on many important questions. The book is designed to appeal to readers of all backgrounds, including those with no prior background in Sumerian or cuneiform writing. It is written for undergraduate students and structured for a semester-long course: the order of the topics is determined by didactic considerations, with the focus on syntactic analysis and evidence. It explains the functioning of Sumerian grammar in 16 lessons, illustrated with more than 500 fully glossed examples. Each lesson ends with a series of tasks; a solution key to selected exercises can be found at the end of the volume. Above all, this is the first Sumerian textbook that introduces and utilizes the online assyriological resources available on the internet. An Introduction to the Grammar of Sumerian has been written on the assumption that after decades of grammatical research it has become possible now to teach a general framework of Sumerian grammar that may function as the basis of further, more intensive and elaborate studies.

CDLB 2014:2 (preprint)

Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, 2018

Journal of Near Eastern Studies 73_2 (2014) 211-18, 2014

An interesting Middle Assyrian letter from the Leuven collection (NP 46) was recently published by H. Hameeuw. Soon after having seen the publication of the tablet, the present authors joined their e!orts to better understand the grammar and content of this fascinating letter.

Journal of Cuneiform Studies