Johnson 2004 - CDLI - UCLA

(30) Lugalbanda II [1.8.2.2], ll. 207-208 (Wilcke 1969a; Karahashi 2000, 119)
207. [mußen.e an].ta igi mi.ni.in.il 2
As for the bird, who was looking from
erin 2.e igi bi 2.in.du 8.ru above, she saw the troops,
208. [lugal].≠ban 3±.da ki.ta As for Lugalbanda, who was looking from
igi mi.ni.in.il 2 sa˙ar erin 2.e below, he saw the troops enveloped in
du 8.a igi bi 2.in.du 8.ru dust,
The lack of a direct object with the first of the two perception verbs in each line provides
some evidence in favor interpreting igi-√du 8 as “to see” (achieved perception) as opposed
to igi-√il 2 “to look at” (attempted perception). As in the previous example, some
justification for the translation of igi mi.ni.in.il 2 as a relative clause is offered in chapter 4
in an extended discussion of the *mini-√ prefix; my interpretation of igi mi.ni.in.il 2 as a
relative clause also provides some justification for the progressive form of the verb in the
English translation: since the relative clause in *mini-√ provide background information,
they must be translated into English in the progressive aspect even through the Sumerian
verbal form is ˙amt≥u and would, typically, be translated with a past or perfect verb. The
fact that √du 8 is followed by the plural suffix /eß/ with the orthographic form du 8.ru
indicates that the perceived object is erin 2.e “the troops” rather than a cloud of dust.
Partial justification for interpreting du 8.ru as the verbal root followed by the plural suffix
rather than, for example, the marû marker, *-e, is offered in chapter 2. For additional
examples of igi-√du 8 in BNBV inal configurations, see Karahashi (2000, 118-122).
57