SumerianGrammar

THE VERB 141
Note: There are spelling variants du-ni-ni ITT 3, 6332 r. 4; HLC 2, 58 85 r.
8; du-ni-ne RA 19, 43 XCII 7; in the latter form, the scribe probably added—
mechanically—pl. -(e)ne to sg. du-ni.
For plenty more Ur III examples (as of 1955) see T. Fish, MCS 5,
13–26; also Edzard 1972, 17–19.
12.14.4.12. deli-ĝu 10 -ne etc.
The formations B-a-∞gu 10 -ne etc. have an unexpected parallel in a
nominal compound where number “one” occurs in the position of
a verbal base:
deli-ni “he/she alone”, e.g., Angin dima 197.
deli-∞gu 10 -ne “I all alone” Lugalbanda II 328.
deli-zu-ne “you all alone” Lugalbanda II 356.
Most interestingly, the variant spelling -ne/-ni is shared by B-(d)agu
∞ 10 -ne/-ni and deli-∞gu 10 -ne/-ni. For discussion see 12.14.4.13.
deli-zu-ne mah-me-en “(Suen, . . .) (of/in) your sole self, you are
the greatest” ZA 63 (1973) 32 no. 5:20.
deli-zu-ni mah-me-en “(Nuska, . . .) (of/in) your sole self you are
the greatest” ZA 63, 17 no. 3a:11.
Note: Å. Sjöberg, not yet realizing the parallel between -ne and -ni, read dili-zu
ì-mah-me-en.
!
deli li -zu -ni mah-me = e-di-“e-ka ßí-ra-ta VS 2, 89 obv.() 7' // 9'.
Note: I owe these—and more—examples to the late H. Behrens.
12.14.4.13. Conjugated participles: unresolved questions
Taken by themselves, 3 rd sg. and pl. person class B-[a]-(a)ni, B-[a]-
(a)nene as well as B-[ed]-ani, B-[ed]-anene would most easily be
analysed as the ¢am†u or marû participles + possessive particles [ani]
or [anene].
Such an analysis is not compatible, however, with 1 st and 2 nd sg.
marû B-[ed]-a-∞gu 10 /-zu-ne or with 3 rd sg. non-person class marû B-
[ed]-a-bi. Here, before the possessive particle an element [a] is inserted
which would remind us, at first glance, of the supposed locative particle
in B-[ed]-a (see 12.14.3.2). But addition of a possessive particle
after a (dimensional) case particle would disagree with the supposed
hierarchy of suffixed nominal morphemes in Sumerian which is: possession—number—case,
e.g., ses-∞gu 10 -(e)ne-da “with my brothers” (see
above, 8). Therefore, the element [a] in question might as well be
of a different origin, with a different function. Or are B-[ed]-a-∞gu 10 ­
ne, B-[ed]-ani, B-[ed]-a-bi, of different origin, converging to form a
common paradigm, disregarding rules of suffix hierarchy