SumerianGrammar

THE VERB 99
Note: The bilingual grammatical lists abound in ‘equations’ between a Sumerian
verbal form with -ni- or bi- and an Akkadian ”-form. See, e.g., MSL 4, 79 ff.,
OBGT VI 19 ∞gar-ma-ab: “uknam “set (it) to me”, ∞gar-ma-ni-ib: “u“kinam “have (it)
set to me”, and passim; see, generally, Black 1991, 27–35. Black, however, admits,
p. 34, that “All in all, the Sumerian of the causative sections ...is complicated
and awkward. We can only say that the Babylonian grammarians seem to have
tried to force Sumerian into a straight jacket by devising un-idiomatic forms
which would correspond to those of the complex and productive causative system
possessed by their own language”.
It is uncertain whether the directional indicator for locative 2, [ni]
(26), is secondary in the system and a deviant of the directive set
(21–25), or whether it is original to the system and there was perhaps
homography (not necessarily homophony) between [ni a ] (22)
and [ni b ] (26). See the discussion below.
12.8.1.21 [(e)ri]: d Utu-eri(URU)-è “the Sungod has risen next to you”
(PN).
Note: In OS, URU = eri occurs as one of the extremely rare bisyllabic syllabograms;
see also Sollberger 1952, 78.
nam ge 4 -rí-íb-tar ar nam-dùg gú-mu-rí-íb-tar ar “let me make a firm
promise for you, let me make a benevolent firm promise on your
behalf ” ”ulgi D 384 f. (Klein 1981, 88).
Note: The contrast of non-ventive [eri] and ventive [muri] implies growing
intensity.
∞gá-e ga-ri-ib-zu-zu “let me make it all known to you” TMH NF 3,
!
25:13 f. (Akkadian gloss lu-uq -bi-ki ); see C. Wilcke, AfO 23 (1974)
84–87.
Note: [eri] may be analyzed as e+r-i/e with -r- as a Hiatustilger. Cf. above [era]
(1), and ibid. for Krecher’s interpretation of [er] as an indissoluble unit.
12.8.1.22 [ni]: (PN 1 -e PN 2 -ra object) al ì-ni(-n)-du[g 4 ] “(PN 1 ) demanded
(object) [to =] from PN 2 ” NRVN 1, 247:3.
túg ì-ni-in-dul “he draped a garment over her” ZA 55 (1962) 70,
1:10.
I cannot offer non-ventive examples for person class [ni] in causative
function; for ventive mu-ni- see (57).
12.8.1.23 [bi]: [bi] is, next to [mu] and [ba], the most frequent
opener of Sumerian verbal forms.
In Pre-Sargonic Girsu, there was an orthographic distribution of
bé- [BI] and bí- [NE] which Kramer 1936, following Poebel 1931,
explained by way of regressive “vowel harmony”: V 1 occurs if the
following syllable contains V a ; and V 2 if there is V b . bé-, according
to Poebel, stood before a syllable with a vowel close to the opening