SUMERIAN

The verbal template
In ex. (97) the Agent (= Ningirsu) is cross-referenced by the prefix /n/ in
S12, and the verbal participant in locative2 (= the city of Umma) is crossreferenced
by a composite adverbial prefix /b-i/ in S5 and S10. The noun phrase
in the ergative, and the noun phrase in the locative2 are “missing” from the
sentence. Both verbal participants were mentioned in the text previously, they
are therefore referred to only by pronouns, as in other languages. The
independent personal pronouns of the English translation correspond to the
verbal affixes. Some scholars translate sentences like ex. (97) with pronouns in
brackets, assuming and indicating that they are not present in the Sumerian
sentence. This assumption is unfounded, the pronouns are there, but they are
part of the finite verbal form.
(97) En-metena 1 1:28–29 (RIME 1.9.5.1) (Lagash, 25th c.) (Q001103)
inim d en-lil₂-la₂-ta, sa-šuš-gal bi₂-šuš
inim enlil=ak=ta sašušgal=ø S5b- S10 i- S11 n- S12 šuš- S14 ø
word DN=GEN=ABL battle.net=ABS 3.SG.NH-L2-3.SG.H.A-cover-3.SG.P
“By the order of Enlil, he (= Ningirsu) threw a battle net on it (= the city Umma).”
Occasionally adverbial prefixes occur without referring to any verbal
participant. In this case their function is to modify the meaning of the verb,
similarly to the verbal prefixes of German verbs, like aus- oder weggehen, see,
e.g., ex. (96) above, and ex. (98) below, in which the ablative prefix modifies
the meaning of the verb sa₁₀ “to barter” to “to sell”.
(98) TMH NF 1-2, 53 obv. 8 (Ur, 21st c.) (P134365)
ni₂-te-ne-ne ba-ra-an-sa₁₀-aš₂
nite=anenē=ø S5 ba- S9 ta- S11 n- S12 sa- S14 eš
self=3.PL.POSS=ABS MID-ABL-3.SG.H.A-barter-3.PL
“They sold themselves.”
Further readings
The rule that only the first of the adverbial prefixes of a finite verb may be
preceded by a pronominal prefix, i.e., that a finite verb may only contain one
composite adverbial prefix, was explicitly formulated by Joachim Krecher (1985:
133 1 ) for the first time; see also Attinger 1993: 206 (§134 R1). The consequences
of Krecher’s rule are discussed in Zólyomi 1999: 220–224.
87