SumerianGrammar

94 CHAPTER TWELVE
12.8.1. Non-ventive indicators (1–26)
12.8.1.1. [era, (V)ra]:
e-ra-an-du 11 “he told (it) to you” Inanna/Enki, StPohl 10, 32 II i 15.
Note: Spelling does not allow us to decide whether [era] was preceded by the
indicator [e, i] (12.9), but non-ventive e-na-, ì-na- “to him/her” (12.8.1.2) rather
favours a positive answer.
ga-ra-ab-“úm “let me give it to you”.
ki a-ra-du 11 -ga : a“ar aqbûkum “where I told you” MSL 5, 196:12.
For mu-ra- and ma-ra- see (28)
Note: [era] has mostly been analysed as [e] + [a] with [r] as a Hiatustilger. See
the discussion above, 12.7.3, note to 2 nd sg.
12.8.1.2. [na]:
“to him/her” is the most easily predictable dimensional indicator when
the phrase contains a noun in the dative (with case particle -ra).
e-na(-n)-“úm “he/she gave (it) to him/her”.
na-e-a [na-b-e-a] “what you will say to him/her (is this)”, OS letter
opening formula, written na-ab-bé-a from Ur III on.
Note: It is interesting to note, diachronically, that the verbal-base [’e] turned into
[e], the latter no longer causing a hiatus between absolutive [b] and the base.
ù-na-a-du 11 [u-na-e-dug] “(after you said to him/her =) please say
to him/her” (polite imperative, see 12.11.2.2).
For mu-na- see (29).
12.8.1.3 [ba] : [ba] is treated here on the assumption that it is composed
of [b] and [a], in accordance with the general pattern of nonventive
and ventive dimensional indicators.
Doubts have been raised about this interpretation, e.g., by M.
Civil apud Postgate 1974, 20 fn. 11: “(while) the prefix ba- has no
connection with a locative element /a/”, and Thomsen 1984, 176
ff., treats ba- (as well as bí-) as “conjugation prefixes”.
OS texts from ”uruppag (Fàra) and Abu Íalàbì¢ as well as
Sumerograms used in Ebla lexical and administrative texts use both
BA (ba) and GÁ (ba 4 ) as verbal prefixes in a distribution still imperfectly
understood. They do not seem to be mere graphic variants:
“u ba 4 -ti “he received” has no correspondence “u *ba-ti and ∞ge“ batuku
“he heard” is not paralleled by ∞ge“ *ba 4 -tuku.
Note: See d’Agostino 1990, 77–82 (monolingual and bilingual lexical entries
ba-B) and 83–87 (monol. and bil. lex. entries ba 4 -B) with no overlap (with the
seeming exception of ba-DU and ba 4 -DU where we should possibly reckon on
two different readings of DU). See also Krebernik 1998, 287.