Download pdf - Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic

Ritual, Religion and Reason

Studies in the Ancient World in Honour of Paolo Xella

Edited by Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini,

Wilfred G.E. Watson and José Á. Zamora

Alter Orient und Altes Testament Veröffentlichungen zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients und des Alten Testaments Band 404 Herausgeber

Manfried Dietrich • Oswald Loretz • Hans Neumann

Lektor

Kai A. Metzler Beratergremium

Rainer Albertz • Joachim Bretschneider Stefan Maul • Udo Rüterswörden • Walther Sallaberger Gebhard Selz • Michael P. Streck • Wolfgang Zwickel

2013 Ugarit-Verlag Münster

Ritual, Religion and Reason

Studies in the Ancient World in Honour of Paolo Xella

Edited by Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini,

Wilfred G.E. Watson and José Á. Zamora

2013 Ugarit-Verlag Münster

Ritual, Religion and Reason. Studies in the Ancient World in Honour of Paolo Xella

Edited by Oswald Loretz, Sergio Ribichini, Wilfred G. E. Watson and José Á. Zamora

Alter Orient und Altes Testament, Band 404 © 2013 Ugarit-Verlag, Münster

www.ugarit-verlag.de

Alle Rechte vorbehalten All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Herstellung: Hubert & Co, Göttingen Printed in Germany ISBN 978-3-86835-087-6

Printed on acid-free paper

Paolo Xella

(photo by Gesualdo Petruccioli)

Contents

Introductory

Ritual, Religion and Reason: Rarefied regions of research ..................................... xi

Publications of Paolo Xella ..................................................................................... xv

Section I. Archaeology – Art History – Numismatics

Paolo Matthiae La déesse nue et le dieu au panache. Aux origines de l’iconographie de l’Ishtar d’Ébla .................................................... 1

Gabriella Scandone Matthiae Hathor e il cigno. Su un reperto egiziano dall’ipogeo reale di Qatna ..................... 25

Claude Doumet-Serhal – Jwana Shahud A Middle Bronze Age temple in Sidon. Ritual and communal feasting ................. 33

Valérie Matoïan « Du vin pour le délice de l’assoiffé » .................................................................... 61

María Eugenia Aubet Cremation and social memory in Iron Age Phoenicia ............................................ 77

Roald Docter Bichrome ware amphorae from Al Mina, Kition, and Carthage ............................. 89

Cecilia Beer Amulettes phénico-puniques entre vie et mort (entre quotidien et tophet) ........... 103

Gioacchino Falsone Sul culto dei betili a Mozia. A proposito di un cono sacro ................................... 125

Francesca Spatafora La necropoli di Palermo tra primo ellenismo ed età repubblicana. Nuovi dati preliminari ........................................................................................... 137

Francisca Chaves Tristán – Mª Luisa de la Bandera Romero Pequeño hallazgo de plata en Boos (Valdenebro, Soria, España), finales del s. III a. C. ............................................................................................. 149

Nabil Kallala À propos d’une attestation nouvelle du signe de Tanit à el-Gouisset (l’antique Vcubi), dans la région du Kef, au N–O de la Tunisie ........................... 163

Contents

viii

Section II. Philology – Epigraphy

Maria Giovanna Biga Ancora sul sacrificio umano nel Vicino Oriente antico ........................................ 167

Francesco Pomponio A fragment of a Neo-Sumerian barley record ....................................................... 175

Giuseppe F. Del Monte Due note sul “Canto di Ullikummi” ...................................................................... 181

Pierre Bordreuil Baal l’accusateur ................................................................................................... 189

Gregorio del Olmo Lete KTU 1.107: A miscellany of incantations against snakebite ................................ 193

Manfried Dietrich – Oswald Loretz Mustertext einer Beschwörung gegen Zauberer (KTU 1.169 = RIH 78/20) ........ 205

Dennis Pardee On the edge again .................................................................................................. 229

Josef Tropper – Juan-Pablo Vita Verschlissene Kleider in Ugarit. Bemerkungen zu den Wirtschaftstexten RS 19.104, KTU 4.168 und 4.182 ........ 237

Kevin J. Cathcart Offences and curses in Northwest Semitic inscriptions ........................................ 243

Maria Giulia Amadasi Guzzo “Re dei Sidonii”? .................................................................................................. 257

Rossana De Simone Un alfabetario punico da Selinunte ....................................................................... 267

Josette Elayi Un nouveau sceau phénicien inscrit ...................................................................... 271

Mhamed Hassine Fantar Propos sur la toponymie d’Afrique du Nord ......................................................... 277

André Lemaire ʿOzibaal de Byblos ? (XIe s. av. n. è.) ................................................................... 289

Herbert Niehr Die phönizische Inschrift auf dem Sarkophag des Königs Ešmunazor II. aus Sidon (KAI 14) in redaktionsgeschichtlicher und historischer Sicht ............. 297

Wolfgang Röllig Die phönizische Inschrift der Reliefstele von Ivriz, Türkei .................................. 311

Hélène Sader Two Iron Age stamp seals from Tell el-Burak, Lebanon ..................................... 321

Contents

ix

Wilfred G. E. Watson Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic ..................................................................... 327

José Á. Zamora The Phoenician inscription on an alabaster urn from the “Laurita Necropolis” in Almuñécar (Granada, Spain). A new edition and interpretation ...................... 347

Paolo Merlo L’iscrizione presunta fenicia AHI 8.015 di Kuntillet ʿAjrud. Un riesame dei dati 371

Fiorella Scagliarini L’alfabetizzazione nella religione araba preislamica e nei primi secoli della civiltà islamica ................................................................. 381

Section III. History – History of Religions – Historiography

Anna Maria Gloria Capomacchia I temi eroici nelle religioni del Vicino Oriente antico .......................................... 387

Maria Grazia Masetti-Rouault Le dieu de l’orage, la grêle et le « Grand Froid ». Notes sur la continuité de la culture syrienne antique et ses relations avec la civilisation du Proche-Orient ancien ................................ 397

Marie-Claude Trémouille Remarques sur Comana de Cappadoce et sa déesse ............................................. 407

Simon Wyatt – Nicolas Wyatt The longue durée in the beef business .................................................................. 417

Paola Negri Scafa L’ambito religioso a Nuzi. Questioni concernenti il personale cultuale ............... 451

François Bron Divinités féminines en Arabie du Sud préislamique .............................................. 461

Sergio Ribichini Agros e Agruheros. Immagini e gente d’un tempo che fu .................................... 467

Federico Mazza A proposito di letteratura fenicia e punica. Riflessioni su alcuni aspetti della produzione intellettuale nel mondo fenicio e punico e sul ruolo della cultura ellenistica ........................... 479

Marie-Françoise Baslez Du marzeaḥ aux « confréries joyeuses ». La commensalité sacrée dans le Proche-Orient hellénisé ..................................... 491

Giampiera Arrigoni Il giuramento di Cidippe nell’Artemision di Delo ................................................ 505

Marisa Tortorelli Ghidini Uovo, tunica splendente e nuvola. Una triade orfica in Damascio ....................... 519

Contents

x

Giuseppe Garbati Tradizione, memoria e rinnovamento. Tinnit nel tofet di Cartagine ..................... 529

Mohamed Tahar De la prosternation des Carthaginois .................................................................... 543

Giuseppe Minunno A note on Ancient Sardinian incubation ............................................................... 553

Mª Cruz Marín Ceballos La diosa astral ibérica y sus antecedentes orientales ............................................ 561

Francisco Marco Simón Salpina, ¿Proserpina? A propósito de un texto execratorio de Córdoba (AE 1934, 23) ........................... 581

Nicholas C. Vella Vases, bones and two Phoenician inscriptions. An assessment of a discovery made in Malta in 1816 .......................................... 589

Massimo Cultraro Angelo Mosso e la “religione mediterranea”. Alla ricerca delle radici del sacro tra materialismo e scienze neurobiologiche .... 607

Riccardo Di Donato Il giovane Pettazzoni, l’antico e le religioni. Premesse di storia della cultura ..... 619

Nicola Cusumano Aspetti della storiografia moderna su ethne e religioni nella Sicilia antica .......... 629

Hedwige Rouillard-Bonraisin Alberto Giacometti et les Baʿalim du Levant. Rêveries sur une possible inspiration .................................................................... 643 Indices

Topics .................................................................................................................... 659

Texts ...................................................................................................................... 663

Words .................................................................................................................... 674

Loanwords in Phoenician and Punic

Wilfred G. E. Watson, Northumberland

Questa modesta nota è in omaggio al mio amico e collega Paolo, con cui avevo scambiato lettere già prima del nostro primo incontro alla RAI di Münster, tanti anni fa. Mi aveva invitato infatti a contribuire al primo numero di Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico e, dieci anni dopo, anche a fare parte del Comitato Scientifico della stessa rivista. Per riflettere su quanto Paolo abbia arricchito la nostra conoscenza delle lingue fenicia e punica, ho preparato un catalogo ragionato delle parole straniere, adottate come prestiti o in traslitterazione, che appaiono in queste lingue.

1 Introduction

As yet, there has been no comprehensive study of loanwords in Phoenician and Punic1. Stieglitz (1998) explained three Phoenician month names as loans from Hurrian and Muchiki discussed only two words2. Several Greek loanwords were identified by Dothan (1985) and Mankowski (2000) included Phoenician words in his survey of loanwords from Akkadian3. Since Phoenician and Punic are relatively late Semitic languages, it is more likely that they borrowed Semitic and non-Semitic words from Akkadian, Ugaritic and even Aramaic4.

It is well known that there are several bilinguals or quasi-bilinguals involving Phoenician: notably, the inscriptions from Çineköy (with Luwian)5, Karatepe (with Luwian)6 and Pyrgi (with Etruscan)7 and some inscriptions are also in Greek, Latin or Numidian8. There is even a trilingual, in Neo-Assyrian, Luwian and Phoenician,

1 Note that the very term “Punic” may derive from the non-Semitic word puwwā, “red dye, madder”; cf. Astour 1965, 346 and HALOT, 918. 2 Muchiki 1999, 45; the words are Phoen. ʾy, “coastland” and ḥtm, “seal”. However some of the Egyptian loanwords in Hebrew discussed by Muchiki (1999, 236–258), also occur in Phoenician and Punic. For Ugaritic–Phoenician isoglosses, see del Olmo Lete 1986. On Eg. ʿr.t, “upper room” as a loan from Semitic see Xella 1996. 3 A brief survey of loanwords in Phoenician and Punic are given in PPG, 141 §208; see also Watson 1996,711 and Gzella 2012, 72–73. 4 See Healey 1983. For a list of Phoenician and Punic loanwords in Egyptian see Hoch 1994, 538–539 and for Semitic influence on Egyptian spells see R. C. Steiner 2011. For Semitic loans in Greek see Masson 1967 (my thanks to Sergio Ribichini for help with this reference). 5 Tekoğlu – Lemaire 2000, a reference I owe to Paolo Merlo’s contribution in this volume. 6 See Bron 1979 and Lawson Younger 1998. 7 Schmitz 1995. 8 See KAI 42, 47, 52, 66, 127, 139, etc.

Wilfred G. E. Watson

328

that was found at Incirli9. All these indicate that there was an interchange of languages which resulted in loanwords10.

2 List of loanwords

Here is a list of loanwords in Phoenician and Punic that have been proposed, based on the two standard lexica (CSL and DNWSI) with additional material. Not all these suggestions are correct and some new ones have also been included11. For lack of space, the discussion is very limited12 and calques are not discussed13. It is important to differentiate between reasonably clear loanwords (2.1), uncertain entries (2.2) and transcriptions from Greek or Latin (2.3). However, occasionally the distinctions are blurred. There are also several incorrect entries (2.4), listed for the sake of completeness.

2.1 Clear loanwords

There are several words that are clearly borrowed from a range of languages and these are listed here. ʾgnn, “krater” (DNWSI, 9) ultimately derives from Hurr. ag-, “to carry” and was

borrowed by Semitic, e.g. Akk. agannu, “Schale” (AHw, 15) and Ug. agn, “cauldron, bowl” (cf. DUL, 26)14. ʾdn, “platform” (KAI 37A 14), is a loan from Hurr. adani, “stool”15 as has been

proposed16. The word is clearly Hurrian, as it derives from the root ad-, “to support”17. It was also borrowed as Heb. ʾeden, “pedestal, base” (cf. HALOT, 16).

ʾy, “coastland”18, like Heb. ʾî, “coast, island” (HALOT, 38) and Ug. iht, “islands, coastal region” (DUL, 32), is borrowed from Eg. iw, “Insel”19. ʾmn, “craftsman, etc.”20, comes ultimately from Sum. ummia, via Akk. ummânu,

“craftsman, artisan etc.”21.

9 Kaufman 2007. 10 On the Çineköy and Karatepe inscriptions, Payne (2006, 134) commented:

Cilicia preserves two Luwian-Phoenician bilinguals and because we have no reason to believe that large groups of Phoenician speakers settled there, we are led to conclude that Phoenician was adopted as a prestige language, replacing the former lingua franca Akkadian in the coastal region.

11 These new proposals are for ʾdrt, gl(ʿn), ḥṣ, ḥrz, kndr, kpln, lqnh, mzrḥ, nn, skʾ, sml(t), ʿgʾ, ʿqrt, ʿrpt and pqt. 12 Unless marked “Punic”, all the words listed here are Phoenician. For occurrences, cf. DNWSI and KAI. 13 Clearly the expression in the Karatepe inscription ʾrk ymm wrb šnt wrʾšytnʿmt w ʿz ʾdr, “length of days and many years and a pleasant old age and powerful strength” (KAI 15 A iii 5–6) is a calque on balāṭ ūmē rūqūti šebê littūtu ṭūb šēri u ḫūd libbi, “a life of many days, the satisfaction of growing very old, good health and happiness” used in Assyrian royal inscriptions (see CAD L, 220a and Malamat 1982). For possible Latin calques in Punic, which cannot be discussed here, see De Simone 2003. 14 See the discussion in Mankowski 2000, 21–22. Note, also, perhaps, Gk ἂγγος (Mycenaean a-ke-ha), “vessel” (EDG 1, 10). 15 “Schemel” (Wegner 2000, 39). 16 Watson 1997, 92–93. 17 Cf. Görke, 2010, 132 with further references and examples. 18 CSL, 12–13; DNWSI, 4. 19 Wb 1, 47.4–113. Cf. Lambdin 1953, 147; Muchiki 1999, 239.


329

ʾšt, “pillar(ed-hall)”22 is a loan from Akk. asaʾītu, “tower (of fortification wall)”23. As Mankowksi notes, Akk. asaʾītu does not occur before MA, is only written syllabically, has a range of spellings in the plural24 and has no Akkadian etymology, so it must be a loanword in that language25. ʾtnm, a month name (KAI 37A 41), corresponds to the non-Semitic month name

Attana (also written Attannati and Attanašwe) used in Alalaḫ and Nuzi (CDA, 31), which derives from Hurr. attan, “father”26.

brzl, “iron”, occurs in several other Semitic languages27, but Rendsburg concludes that it was originally a non-Semitic triconsonantal word (a Wanderwort or Kulturwort) with an affixed –l28. It is probably Luwian in origin29

bt ʾḥd, “one household”, is an expression that occurs only in the Luwian-Phoenician bilingual (line 10) and corresponds to Akk. bītum ištēn, “one family”30.

dt, “decree” (KAI 37B 1), is probably an indirect loan from Persian dāt (cf. DNWSI, 263). It was also borrowed as Akk. dātu, “law, decree” (CDA, 58) and Heb. dāt, “order, law” (HALOT, 234b). ḥyr, “(month of) ḫiyaru”31, is a loan from the Hurrian month name ḫiyaru, which

also occurs at Ugarit as ḫyr, syllabically ḫiyaru32. ḥrd, “guard” (KAI 145:5, fem. plural) may be a loan from Hurrian ḫuradi-,

“warrior” via another Semitic language33. ḥtm, “to seal”34: “This root and its derivatives are found extensively throughout

the Semitic languages... All of these correspond to Eg. ḫtm, “a seal, signet ring”, attested from the earliest stages of the language”35. ṭbʿt, “signet ring” (KAI 51:10), comes from Eg. dbʿwt, “signet, seal” (FCD, 322),

also borrowed as Heb. ṭabbaʿat, “signet-ring” (HALOT, 369)36. As Muchiki notes:

20 KAI 178:2–3; DNWSI, 71. For the occurrence, in Latin characters, in an inscription from Libya, see Mankowski 2000, 34 n. 90. 21 Cf. CAD U/W, 108–115. 22 KAI 10:14; 37A 14, B 5. Perhaps it is also to be read in the new Bodashtart inscription line 5; cf. Xella – Zamora 2004, 289 and 297 n. 52. 23 CDA, 25b; cf. CSL, 36–37; DNWSI, 130. 24 Note the spellings asaʾittu, asītu and isītu in the singular (CDA, 25b; CAD A/2, 332b). 25 Mankowski 2000, 40–41. It was also borrowed in Hebrew, Syriac, Mandaic, Arabic, etc. Is there any connection with Gk ἄστυ “town”, which has a good IE etymology (EDG 1, 158–159)? 26 Stieglitz 1998, 213, who also discusses whether Heb. hāʾētanîm is Semitic. Note also Gk ἄττα “father” (EDG 1, 165) which is Indo-European. 27 Akkadian, Arabic, Aramaic, Hebrew, Mandaic, Syriac, Ugaritic, etc.; cf. Rendsburg 1982, 54. For Phoen./Punic cf. CSL, 55; DNWSI, 196. 28 Rendsburg 1982. “The ultimate source of the word is unknown”, according to Mankowksi (2000, 50), who cites Artzi 1969 but not Rendsburg 1982. Similarly, “Das Wort wurde im 3. Jt. v. Chr. aus einer unbekannten Sprache ins Semitische (vermutlich ins Akkadische) entlehnt und von dort ins Westsemitische” (Sima 2000, 327). 29 From Luwian *parzil(i)-, as shown by Valério – Yakubovich 2010, although they do not mention Rendsburg 1982. 30 CAD B, 293 (6b). The equivalence was identified by Tekoğlu – Lemaire 2000, 998. 31 KAI 40:1; 49:38; 81:5; 119:3. 32 DUL, 416–417; cf. Stieglitz 1998, 214–215. 33Possibly from Ugaritic ḫrd, “(royal) guard, militia troop(s)” (DUL, 403); see Stieglitz 1981. Schmitz (2011, 74) notes: “The relation to BH ḥǎrādâ "trembling, fear" (HALOT: 351) is uncertain”, but he makes no mention of Hurrian. 34 CSL, 116–117; DNWSI, 413–414. 35 Lambdin 1953, 151; see also Muchiki 1999, 246–247 and R. C. Steiner 2011,


330

“the absence of a proper Heb. etymology... makes the Eg. origin of this word most likely”37. ṭnʾ, “basket”38, like Heb. ṭeneʾ “basket” (HALOT, 377), is a loan from Eg. dnit,

“basket”, “bowl”39. yn, “wine” (DNWSI, 455), is ultimately a Kulturwort transmitted to Hittite as

u̯iyan(a)-, to Hieroglyphic Luwian as wiyan(i)- and to Indo-European and Semitic40. kndr, “pot(stand)” (KAI 139:2)41, is borrowed from Akk. kandurû, kandarû,

“rhyton”, “potstand”42. This is a new suggestion. kr, “a dry measure” (KAI 43:14)43, is probably a loan from Akk. kurru(m),

“measure of dry capacity” (CDA, 168b), which in turn was borrowed from Sum. gur with the same meaning. It may be a culture word44.

krr, “name of a month”45, is the Hurrian month name kirāru (CDA, 159)46. ktn, “linen tunic”47, was borrowed in Greek as χιτών (also as κιθών), “body-

garment, shirt”, and is probably a Pre-Greek (Anatolian) culture word48. lyškh, “chamber”49, corresponds to Heb. liškāh, “hall”, a by-form of niškāh with

the same meaning50, and to Gk λέσχη “lounge, public building”51, all possibly borrowed from Anatolia (cf. EDG 1, 850).

lly, “demon”52, like Heb. lîlît, “Lillit” (HALOT, 528), was borrowed from Akk. lilium, lilītu, “storm demon” (cf. CDA, 182) which in turn comes from Sum. líl, “wind, breath” (cf. CAD L, 60b).

lp, “cooking pot”, may correspond either to Gk λοπάς “dish” (EDG 1, 849) or to Gk λέβηϛ “kettle, cauldron” (EDG 1, 840)53.

lqnh, “basin”54, may come from (Pre-)Greek λεκάνη, “basin, dish” (EDG 1, 847). mgn, “to offer”55 and mgn, “gift”56 are loans “from Indic magha- ‘wealth, riches;

gift’ … The word was in turn borrowed by the Akkadians from Hurrian, see [Akk.]

36 See Lambdin 1953, 151; CSL, 119. 37 Muchiki 1999, 247, who adds: “It is almost certain that Semites borrowed ṭbʿt 'signet-ring' as well as ḥtm 'seal'”. See previous entry. 38 CSL, 121; DNWSI, 426. 39 FCD, 314; “bowl, vase, basket” (DLE II, 250). Cf. Lambdin 1953, 151 and Muchiki 1999, 247. It also occurs as Chadic *din-, “cooking pot”, as dinai and dəәnai (cf. Orel – Stolbova 1995, 163 §712). 40 See EDG 2, 1059 and Brown 1969, 147–151 and the survey in Zamora 2000, 266–277. 41 For other proposals see CSL, 145; DNWSI, 518. 42 Cf. CDA, 145b; CAD K, 149. It may also have been borrowed as Ug. kdr, “rhyton” (KTU 1.50:10; 4.275:8; 5.22:3,10) and is a loanword in Greek as κάνθαρος “drinking cup” (EDG 1, 634–635). 43 CSL, 148. However, it may be an abbreviation of krš or of kkr (see DNWSI, 538 with references). 44 Cf. Mankowski 2000, 73. It was also borrowed as Gk κόρος with the same meaning (cf. EDG 1, 754–755). 45 KAI 159; 277; CIS I 92. 46 Stieglitz 1998, 215. 47 KAI 24:12; CSL, 151; DNWSI, 547–548. 48 See EDG 2, 1635, with discussion and references. 49 Neo-Punic; CSL, 161; DNWSI, 576. 50 Cf. HALOT, 536–537, 730. 51 See Brown 1969, 151–153. 52 KAI 29:14; cf. CSL, 158; DNWSI, 578. 53 See Dothan 1985, 87–88; DNWSI, 580. 54 As lqnʾt in KAI 162:5, Punic; cf. DNWSI, 584.


331

mag/kannu, mag/kannutu ‘gift’ … The -ann(u) ending clearly shows the Hurr- ian intermediacy”57.

mzl, “luck, fortune”58, is a loan from Akk. mazzaltu, “position” of divine constellations (CDA, 205). The belief that one could ask favours of astral deities “led to the meaning 'luck' (good or ill) attested in Phoenician and later Hebrew and Aramaic”59.

mḥz, “forum”60 is borrowed from Akk. maḫāzu, “(market) town, quay” (CDA, 190a): “The fact that the Aramaic, Hebrew and Punic forms lack the aleph [as in Ug. ma/iḫd] suggests that they descend ultimately from Akkadian”61.

mynkd, “imperial chief”62, is a loan from Libyan63. mlḥ, “sailor”64, is from Akk. malāḫu, “sailor, boatman”, which in turn is a loan

from Sum. má.laḫ4, “boatman”65. It was also borrowed by Arabic, Aramaic and Hebrew66. It is uncertain whether the Phoenician word was borrowed directly from Akkadian or through an intermediate language.

mr, “lord” (KAI 145:7) is a loan from Aram. mryʾ, “lord”67. mt, “land”, found only in the Incirli Inscription (back: line 11) is Akk. mātu,

“land, country” (CDA, 204b), also a loan in Aramaic (DNWSI, 706–707). Kaufmann comments that its use in the trilingual “relates exclusively to the names of Assyrian political units... Thus we must still treat this as a foreign word rather than as a loanword in Phoenician”68.

mtn, “pestilence” (Incirli Inscription, right: line 4), from Akk. mūtānu, “epidemic, plague” (CDA, 224a), is a common loanword in Aramaic as mwtn69.

nbl, “dry land”, occurs in the Bustān eš-Šēḫ (Bodashtart) inscription and is a loan from Akk. nābalu, “dry land, mainland” (CDA, 228a)70.

nzq, “to suffer damage” (KAI 24:14): Tropper notes that as the verb nzq with this meaning is otherwise confined to Aramaic (cf. DNWSI, 724), so it must be an Aramaism71.

sgn, “governor”72, may be a loan from Akk. šaknu, “governor” (CAD Š/1, 180), as are Aram. sgn, “prefect, governor” (DNWSI, 777) and Heb. *segen, “official, principal” (HALOT, 742).

55 KAI 29:1–2; cf. CSL, 165; DNWSI, 593. 56 Also as mgnh, “gift, offering”, unless it is a PN; cf. DNWSI, 594. 57 Bush 1973, 43 n. 39; also Kaufman 1974, 67. For arguments that the word is Semitic see O’Connor 1989. 58 KAI 42:5; cf. CSL, 168; DNWSI, 609. In KAI 43:1 read mš l nʿm, “effigy for good fortune” (cf. DNWSI, 590). 59 Mankowski 2000, 87. 60 Parallel to Lat. forum in KAI 124:2; cf. CSL, 169; DNWSI, 611. 61 Mankowski 2000, 90. 62 Neo-Punic: KAI 120:1–2; CSL, 175; DNWSI, 621. 63 Alternatively, it may derive from Punic ngd, “to report”; cf. DNWSI, 621 with references. 64 CSL, 179; DNWSI, 632. 65 Cf. CAD A/1, 149–152; cf. AHw, 592b. 66 As mentioned by Mankowski 2000, 93, although he makes no reference to Phoenician. 67 HALOT, 1921–1922. See Schmitz 2011, 75. 68 Kaufman 2007, 23. This may apply to other so-called loanwords discussed here. 69 Kaufman 2007, 25; contrast Kaufman 1974, 74. It occurs in line 2 of the Bukān Inscription; see Cathcart’s contribution to this volume. 70 In line 4; cf. Xella – Zamora 2004, 297 n. 45. 71 Tropper 1993, 44; but cf. CSL, 211.


332

slmt, “stairs”73, like Heb. sullām, “stepped ramp” (HALOT, 757), is possibly a loan from Akk. simmiltu, “ladder, stair” (CAD S, 273), which may be Anatolian. Mankowski concludes that either there were two different words (Semitic sullam and an unknown Anatolian word borrowed as Akk. simmiltu) or an original sullam was preserved in Phoenician, etc., which underwent some changes in Akkadian74.

ss, “horse”75, has equivalents in several Semitic languages and seems to have been borrowed quite early, possibly from Proto-Indo-European *h1eḱu-, “quick, swift”76. It occurs in Hittite as ekku- but also as Luwian *azzu- or *ašu- and as Hieroglyphic Luwian ásu-, all meaning “horse”77. ʿbrt, “(the metal) lead” (KAI 89:6), from Akk. abāru, “lead” (CDA, 2a), possibly

via Heb. ʿoperet, “lead” (cf. HALOT, 863) and ultimately from Sumerian. Probably a Kulturwort. ʿgʿ, “cake of bread”78, like Heb. ʿugāh, “round flat loaf” (HALOT, 784) and

Mari Akk. ḫūgum, “a loaf or cake” (cf. CDA, 119), corresponds to Eg. ʿg(w)t, “Röstkorn”79. ʿqrt, “granary, storehouse” (KAI 26A i 6), may be a loan from Akk. qarītu,

qirītu, “grain-store” (CDA, 285), with prothetic ʿayin80. This is a new proposal. ʿrpt, “porch, portico”81 is not necessarily a loan from Akk. urpatu, “tent, canopy”

(CAD U/W, 236) as both derive from Common Semitic ʿrp, “to cover”, although the specific meaning “porch” may come from Akkadian82. Note also Gk. ἐρεφω “to cover, provide with a roof”, from IE *h1rebh, “cover, roof” (cf. EDG 1, 456).

pḥ, “metal plate” (DNWSI, 904) is borrowed from Eg. pḫ3, “small board (of wood)”83. It was also borrowed by Heb. *paḥ, “thin plate of metal” (HALOT, 922a)84.

plg, “district”85, is possibly a loan from Akk. pilku, “boundary, district” (CAD P, 373)86.

72 KAI 146:4; cf. CSL, 225. The reading is uncertain; cf. Mankowski 2000, 106 n. 380. 73 CSL, 229; DNWSI, 788. 74 Mankowski 2000, 118. 75 KAI 26A i 6–7; cf. CSL, 231; DNWSI, 795. It also occurs in the Incirli Trilingual. 76 As shown by Kloekhorst 2008, 10, 239. According to Beekes: “This form must have been thematicized in PIE to *h1eḱuo- after the separation of Anatolian”, and from this are derived Sanskrit áśva, Gk ἳππος, Latin as equus, etc. (EDG 1, 598). See also SED II No. 199 (Semitic terms for “horse” were borrowed from an IE satəәm-language) and the comments by Takács 2012, 116 on its occurrence in Egyptian. 77 In fact, it occurs in the Karatepe Inscription and in the Çineköy bilingual: see Tekoğlu – Lemaire 2000, 978. 78 KAI 138:4; cf. CSL, 237; DNWSI, 824. 79 Hannig 1995, 164; also Eg. ʿwg, “(Getreide) rösten” (Wb I, 173); however, cf. Heb. ʿûg, “to bake” (HALOT, 794b). 80 See also Akk. karû, qarû, “grain-heap, grain-store” (CDA, 149b). For other derivations of ʿqrt see CSL, 256 and DNWSI, 883. 81 KAI 10:6, 12; 19:1; 23:2; 118:1; 122:2; 129:2; cf. CSL, 258; DNWSI, 889. 82 For a fuller discussion see del Olmo Lete 1998a. 83 Eg. pḫ3 derives from pḫ3, “to split wood”; cf. Lambdin 1953, 153; EDE II, 500. 84 Cf. Muchiki 1999, 253; EDE II, 499–500. 85 KAI 18:3; cf. CSL, 264; DNWSI, 913. 86 Or it may simply be cognate, as noted by Mankowski 2000, 130 n.474.


333

qnh (also qnʾ), “reed”87, has equivalents in Akk. qanû, “reed, cane” (CDA, 284), Ug. qn, “cane, etc.” (DUL, 704), Heb. qaneh, “reed” (HALOT, 1113), etc.88 It also occurs as Myc. ko-no-ni-pi and Gk κάννα (Ionian κάννη), “reed”89. šyš, “alabaster”90, like Heb. šayiš, “alabaster”91, is a loan from Eg. šs, šst,

“alabaster” (FCD, 270, 271). šky, “ship”92, is from Eg. skty, “ship”, sktt, “boat, ship”93 possibly indirectly

through Ug. tkt, “a type of boat” (DUL, 904) or Heb. śekiyyāh, “ship” (HALOT, 1327a). šryt, “beam”, is a loan from Akk. šārītu, “metal beam or bar”94, borrowed from

Aram. šāritā, “beam, architrave”95. šrn, “monument”96, is probably a loan from Akk. šurinnu, “(divine) emblem”

(CDA, 387)97. ššmn, “sesame” (DNWSI, 1197), like Ug. ššmn, “sesame”98, is a loan from Akk.

šamaššammū, šamšammū, “sesame” (CDA, 353)99. tw, “cella shrine”100, may be a loan from Aram twʾ, “chamber”101. tklt, “expenses” (KAI 37A 1), may be a loan from Akk. takīltu, a mathematical

term of some kind (cf. CAD T, 73)102. tmʾ, “commander”103, is either from Akk. tamû, “to take an oath, to swear” (CAD

T, 159) or it is a form of Gk ταµία, “housekeeper, conductress” (EDG 2, 1447). tnr, “oven” (DNWSI, 1224) has equivalents in Semitic104 but also in several

other languages105. trtn, “commander” (Incirli Inscription, line 7), Heb. turtān, “commander in

chief” (HALOT, 1798–1799) and Akk. tartānu, turtānu, ta/urtannu, turtennu, “a

87 See CSL, 289; DNWSI, 1014. 88 It may be Proto-Semitic (*ḳanaw-); see Kogan 2012, 235–236 (§15), although he does not refer to Greek. 89 As Beekes states, the word may originally have been Anatolian, adding: “note further the Mycenaean form pointing to variation α/ο, which is also a sign of Pre-Greek origin” (EDG 1, 636). 90 For the text, now in a private collection, see Heltzer 1998, 77. 91 HALOT, 1483. In later Hebrew also as šēš, “alabaster” (HALOT, 1663). 92 Punic: cf. DNWSI, 1133; not in CSL. 93 DLE II, 88; FCD, 252; cf. Lambdin 1953, 154–155 and Muchiki 1999, 255–256 with further references. 94 CAD Š/2, 63b; cf. AHw, 1187. 95 DJBA, 1181a; DJPA, 566b; cf. Bonnet 1995. 96 For the text (the word occurs in line 4) cf. Xella – Zamora 2004 and 2005. 97 As proposed by Bonnet (1995) and accepted by Xella – Zamora 2004, 297 n. 41 and 2005, 121 n. 4. See also Zamora 2007, 102–103. 98 According to Tropper (UG, 277, cf. 108), probably a loanword from Akk. šam(aš)šammu, “sesame”, lit. šaman + šamni, “plant oil” (CDA, 353a). 99 Also borrowed in Greek as σήσαµον “seed and fruit of the sesame plant” (EDG 2, 1325); see Masson 1967, 57–58. 100 KAI 277:5; cf. DNWSI, 1204–1205. 101 Jastrow 1903, 1649. See the discussion in HALOT, 1672 under Heb. tāʾ and cf. Watson 2009, 20. 102 For discussion see Watson 1997, 90. 103 KAI 1:2; CSL, 341; DNWSI, 1218–1219. Alternatively it may be read t + mʾh , i.e. as the accusative marker + mʾh, “centurion”. 104 Akk. tinūru, “oven, kiln” (CAD T, 420); Heb. tannûr, “oven” (HALOT, 1763), etc. 105 Including Armenian, Persian and Turkish; cf. Greppin 1991, 204; Kaufman 1974, 108.


334

high military official” (cf. CAD T, 489) or “field marshal” (CDA, 401) are all loans from Hurr. ta/e/u/urtānu, with similar meanings106. This is the first occurrence of the word in Phoenician.

2.2 Uncertain entries

Some suggestions that have been made are no more than uncertain, but further discoveries may show that they are correct. They are listed here. ʾdrt, “metal vessel”107 corresponds to Akk. adaru, “(silver) vessel” (CDA, 4b;

AHw, 11) and Aram. ʾdrh, “a type of container” (DJPA, 36b). This is a new suggestion, but whether these are loans or simply cognate is uncertain. ʾṭwmṭʾ may come from Gk. ἔντοµιδα, “incision” or εντοµατα, “testicles” (cf. L-S,

488) or even Gk ἀτµητός “uncastrated” (L-S, 244), although explanations from Semitic have been proposed108.

bṣ, “byssus” (KAI 24:12-13), Punic bwṣ, “byssus” (KAI 76A:6)109 also occurs as Akk. būṣu, “fine linen, byssus” (CDA, 50b), Heb. bûṣ, “byssus” (HALOT, 115b) and Gk βύσσος “‘Byssos’ flax and the linen made from it” (EDG 1, 249), which “is ultimately Indian”110.

ggp, “(round) vase”, corresponds to Akk. kukkubu, “rhyton” (CDA, 165)111 and to the Ug. PN kkbn, “Flask”(KTU 4.734:2) as suggested by Xella112. It is not clear whether it is a cognate or a loanword.

hbrk, “steward”113, has three explanations114: (i) It is a loan from Akk. abarakku, “steward, housekeeper” (CDA, 1b), itself a loan from Sum. agrig, “housekeeper”. However, as Lawson Younger notes: “the interpretation of hbrk as a loanword from Akkadian abarakku is not proved, simply unproven”115. (ii) It means “blessed” from brk, “to bless”116. (iii) It is a loan from Eg. ib-r.k, “attention!”, also borrowed as Heb. ʾabrek, “watch out!” (HALOT, 10). On the basis of the Hieroglyphic Luwian text, Phoen. hbrk bʿl probably means “the blessed of Baʿal”117 and so it may not be a loanword. ḥṣ, “arrow” (DNWSI, 397) would seem to be Common Semitic118, but note Gk

ἰός “arrow”, from IE *(H)isu, Sanskrit íṣu- (cf. EDG 1, 595).

106 As shown by Wilhelm 1970. 107 Line 5 of the Akko inscription; see Dothan 1985, 83. 108 Cf. CSL, 12; DNWSI, 43. 109 CSL, 45; DNWSI, 185. 110 HALOT, 115b; cf. Wyatt 1995, 68. Note that Ph. glʿn, “one-eyed”, which occurs in the second Arlan Tash Inscription (line 4) and perhaps as km glt (rev. 7) and corresponds to ʿnytm, “orphan eye” and ʿn bdd, “lone eye” (rev. 2)—discussed by Avishur 1978—is curiously similar to Gk γιλός (adj.) “one-eyed” (EDG 1, 273), which in turn is of uncertain derivation. 111 Also spelled kukkupu, quqqubu, etc.; cf. CAD K, 499; AHw, 500b. 112 Xella (1992, 85–86), who posits the root as *gb(gb), “to be round”. As an alternative, he suggests “bracelet” or the like, based on Akk. guggubu, gubgubu, “(a precious ornament or gemstone)” (CDA, 95). Note also Akk. gugupinnu, “ornament” (CDA, 96b). 113 KAI 26 A i 1; cf. CSL, 80; DNWSI, 269. 114 See Arbeitman 1980; Lambdin 1953, 146; Lawson Younger 1998, 33–35; Mankowski 2000, 16–20 and Muchiki 1999, 236 with earlier bibliography. 115 Lawson Younger 1998, 34–35. 116 Bron 1979, 28–32. 117 As Lawson Younger (1998, 35) concludes. 118 Akk. ūṣu, uṣṣu (CAD U/W, 289) Heb. ḥēṣ (HALOT, 342) but Ug. ḥẓ and ḥd (DUL, 382).


335

ḥrz, “parapet, bastion, etc.”119. The meaning comes from context. Whether there is any connection with Akk. ḫurīzu, “villa, palace” (CDA, 122), a loan from Hurrian, is very uncertain indeed.

kbrh, “side”120, may be a loan from Akk. kibru, “bank, shore, rim, border, edge” (CDA, 156) or the two words may simply be cognate.

kpln, “amphora”, written on an amphora (DNWSI, 530), has equivalents in Ug. dugkap-pa-al-la-nu, “jar” (PRU 6, 158:5) and Gk κύπελλον, “bulbous drinking vessel, beaker, goblet”, which is “a widespread ‘Wanderwort’” (EDG 1, 804)121.

krs, “vase, amphora” (DNWSI, 536) and Punic krsy, “vase” (DNWSI, 537) may be loans from Gk κρωσσός “water-pail, pitcher”122. However, the equivalents in Aram. qwrz/krwzʾ, “jug, jar” (DJPA, 503) and Ug. krs/śu, “container” (DUL, 457), indicate that the word may be Semitic.

krsy, “throne” (DNWSI, 537) may be a loan from Aram. krsʾ or kwrsy, “chair, throne” (DJPA, 254b)123, but this meaning is uncertain. It only occurs in the expression mlṣ krsym, which may mean “interpreter of the Cretans”124.

mply (or mpl), “huts, cottages”, may have been borrowed from Lat. mapalia (DNWSI, 673), but it seems to be a Punic word (cf. LD, 362)125.

mzrḥ, “native”126, like Heb. ʾezraḥ, “the native, full citizen” (HALOT, 28b), may be a loan from Akk. umzarḫu, unzarḫu, “native, house born (slave), homebred (animal)” (CAD U/W, 156–157), which seems to be a Hurrian loanword127.

mšṭr, “official” (Punic myšṭr) and mšṭrt, “administration” (DNWSI, 1123), also borrowed as Eg. mas=ti3=ra, “office” (Hoch 1994, 154)128. According to Mankowski129: “… the intrusive y mater in Punic myšṭr … certainly points to a borrowing”. See on šṭr below.

nḥr, “dolphin”130, corresponds to Akk. nāḫiru, “dolphin” (CDA, 232), though whether it is a loan is uncertain131. 119 KAI 81:4; cf. DNWSI, 404. Unless it means “fence”, based on Aram. ḥirzaʾ, “a thorny bush used for hedges”, and other cognates (cf. CSL, 113), although this is doubtful. 120 KAI 19:1; cf. CSL, 138; DNWSI, 487. 121 If related to Semitic *kap(a)l, “groin, buttocks, back” (SED II, 332) it may be correspond to Eg. kf3 (< *kfl), “Hinterteil, Boden (eines Topfes), Ende” (Wb V 120, 6–8); “hinder-parts of bird, bottom of jar” (FCD, 285), on which cf. Takács 20012, 123 (but with no reference to Sem. kpln, “amphora”). 122 L-S, 851; EDG 1, 788. Or it may correspond to Gk χρῆσις “loan, etc.” (EDG 2 , 1649); cf. DNWSI, 536. 123 For possible relationships to Akk. kussû, kussīum, “chair, throne” (CDA, 170), Ug. ks/śu, “seat, throne” (DUL, 460) and Heb. kissē, “throne” (HALOT, 487) and to Sum. guza, see Mankowski 2000, 70–71 and Kaufmann 1974, 28. According to G. Steiner (2003, 633 §2.1 25) Sum. guza is a loan from Semitic. 124 For discussion see Piacentini 2003, 23. 125 On mrzḥ, “religious feast/guild” (DNWSI, 691), Avigad – Greenfield (1982, 125 n. 32) note: “the two spellings mrzḥ and mrzʿ in Ugaritic raise the possibility that this is a non-Semitic word”. However, no further explanation is available. 126 CSL, 168–169; DNWSI, 609–610. 127 Although Deller 1990 noted: “Das Wort ist sicher nicht semitisch; eine vermutete ḫurri-tische Herkunft liess sich bisher nicht beweisen”; similarly, Deller 1974, although he makes no reference to Phoenician (my thanks to Jordi Vidal for this reference). However, it may be Semitic and correspond to Latin turma; see the discussion in Schmitz 2011, 68–69 and 70–71. 128 For a possible Hebrew equivalent see HALOT, 645a and Mankowski 2000, 143 n. 533. 129 Mankowski 2000, 143 n. 532. 130 Punic: KAI 165:3; cf. DNWSI, 725, unless it means “youth” (CSL, 212).


336

nn, “descendant” (DNWSI, 734), like the Ugaritic PN nn, “Descendant” (KTU 4.52:11), may be a loan from Eg. nn, “son” (GHWb, 415), but this is very uncertain.

pqt, “rations”132, could be a loan from Akk. piqittu, “provisions” (CAD P, 388), but the meaning and derivation remain obscure. This a new proposal.

prmn, “servant” (KAI 37A 11), may be the meaning here if it is a loan from Hurr. purame, “servant”, unless it is a personal name with the same meaning133.

skʾ, “to die”: the meaning is from the context. In the absence of cognates, one could suggest a loan from Eg. ski, “to perish”134, but this is very uncertain.

sml, “image”, occurs several times135 and corresponds to Heb. semel, “image, sculpture” (HALOT, 760) but has no clear etymology. It is uncertain whether there is any connection with Gk σµῑλη “knife, wood-carving knife, scalpel, chisel, instrument for artisans, physicians, sculptors, etc.” (cf. EDG 2, 1368).

smlt, “image, statue”136: see previous entry. šdḥ, “wine (?)” from Eg. šdḥ, “pomegranate wine” (DLE II, 141)137. šṭr, “to write” (as šʿṭr, a participle)138, from Akk. šaṭāru, “to write” (CAD Š/2,

225–241), may have been borrowed by Hebrew, although more probably they are simply cognate139. See above under mšṭr.

tpp, “to strike”, as mtpp, “drummer” (polel participle) in KAI 49:7 (CSL, 344; DNWSI, 1226) seems to be Common Semitic140. However, Brown has argued that, like Gk τύπτω “to beat with a stick”, Semitic tpp derives from an Anatolian language141. In fact, verbs are rarely borrowed.

2.3 Transcriptions

The following are transcriptions of words that are Greek, Latin or Libyan. ʾksdr, “chamber”142, also written ʿksndrʿ (KAI 129:2) = Gk ἐξέδρα “hall, arcade,

parlour, saloon” (L-S, 498). ʾmprʿṭr, “emperor”143 = Lat. imperator, “a commander, leader” (LD, 289). bʿṣṣ, “pedestal” (DNWSI, 185) = Lat. basis, “a pedestal, base” (LD, 74). dygmʿ, “sample” (DNWSI, 245) may be the same as Greek δεῖγµα “sample,

pattern, proof, specimen” (L-S, 328; cf. EDG 1, 309). dnr, dnʿr, “denarius”144 = Gk δηνάριον borrowed from Lat. denarius, “denarius”

(L-S, 340).

131 See also perhaps Ug. anḫr, “dolphin” or “sperm whale” (DUL, 79). 132 KAI 151:3; cf. CSL, 271; DNWSI, 784–785. 133 As first proposed in Watson 1997, 92 and 95 with discussion and references. 134 FCD, 251; also Eg. sk3, “untergehen, zu Grunde gehen” (Wb 4, 311.9–312.17); Eg. sk, “to destroy, perish” (DLE II, 85–86). 135 E.g. KAI 12:3–4; 13:2; 26C iv 15, 19; 40:3; 41:1; 43:1–2; 91:1; 145:7; cf. CSL, 230; DNWSI, 792–793. 136 KAI 33:2; cf. CSL, 230; DNWSI, 792–793. 137 Although the inscription may be in Hebrew and the interpretation is very uncertain; see DNWSI, 1111. 138 See DNWSI, 1123 139 HALOT, 1475–1476. For discussion, see Kaufman 1974, 101 and Mankowksi 142–143. 140 Borrowed by Greek as τύµπανον “kettledrum, hand drum”; cf. Masson 1967, 94–95. 141 Brown 1969, 165. This may be IE *steup-, “to push, beat” (EDG 2, 1518). 142 Punic; cf. DNWSI, 52. 143 Punic: KAI 173:2; cf. DNWSI, 73b. 144 Punic: KAI 130:1–3, etc.; cf. DNWSI, 83, 256; PPG §208c.


337

drkmn, “drachm” as either a weight or a coin145 is identical with Greek δραχµή “drachm” (EDG 1, 352). ḥnwṭ, “statue”146 = Gk χωνευτά “formed of cast metal”147, although this

is uncertain148. ṭmʾ, “section”149 is either from Gk τόµος, “a cut, slice” (L-S, 1563; cf. EDG 2,

1465), or Lat. tomus, “a cutting, chip, shred” (LD, 607). kwlb, “capital (of a column)”150, is from Lat. columna, “a pillar, column”

(LD, 117). klyṭʾ, “capital” (DNWSI, 512), is from (Pre-)Greek κάλαθος “basket; capital of a

pillar” (EDG 1, 620). kl[n]pyš, “cabinet-maker, carpenter”, which occurs in line 4 of a fragment of text

related to the Karatepe inscription, is not Luwian but, as proposed by Schmitz151, a transcription of Gk κλινοποιός “maker of bed(stead)s, cabinet-maker” (cf. L-S, 815).

knprs, “basket carrier”152 = Gk κανηφόρος “carrying a basket” (cf. EDG 2, 1563). knṣwlʿt, “consulate”153, is from Lat. consulatus, “the office of consul” (LD, 144). lgm, “flask”, is from Gk λάγυνος “flask, flagon; a measure”154, as proposed

by Dothan155. lṭr, “kilo”156, is equivalent to Gk. λίτρα “a pound” (L-S, 898), “a Mediterranean

word, originating from Sicily”157. lyṭʾ (DNWSI , 574): see on klyṭʾ above. mmry, “memorial”158 = Lat. memoria, “memory, remembrance” (LD, 368). mṣṣkwy, “architect (?)” = Libyan mṣṣkw with the same meaning (cf.

DNWSI, 677). nmrsy, “(a profession)” = Libyan nmrsh (DNWSI, 733). sdl, “sandal” (Punic), is from (Pre-)Greek σάνδαλον “sandal(s)” (EDG 2, 1305),

as is Lat. sandalium, “a slipper, sandal” (LD, 533)159. synṭr, “senator”160 = Lat. senator, “a senator” (LD, 546). ʿydls, “public officer”161 = Lat. aedilis, “a public officer” (LD, 24). ʿksndrʿ: see ʾksdr above.

145 Weight: KAI 60:3; coin: KAI 60:6; cf. CSL, 76; DNWSI, 262; PPG §208b. 146 KAI 12:1; 64:1; cf. CSL, 109; DNWSI, 388. 147 L-S, 1749; cf. EDG 2, 1654. 148 Dussaud (1925, 273) commented: “En hébreu et en arabe, la racine ḤNṬ se rattache aux pratiques d’embaumement et aux plantes aromatiques. Le vocable ḥanouṭim, «les embaumés» convient parfaitement aux autels sur lesquels on brûle les parfums et l’encens” and he translated: “autels à parfums”. 149 Neo-Punic; cf. CSL, 120; DNWSI, 424. 150 CSL, 140; DNWSI, 493. 151 Schmitz 2008, 6, with further references. 152 KAI 40:2; cf. DNWSI, 520; PPG §208a. 153 CSL, 146; DNWSI, 520. 154 Cf. L-S, 869 and EDG 1, 820. 155 Dothan 1985, 88; however, see DNWSI, 566. 156 Punic: KAI 66:1, etc.; cf. CSL, 157; DNWSI, 574; PPG §208b. 157 EDG 1, 867. See the discussion in Schmitz 1994, 9. 158 Punic: DNWSI, 647. 159 A “mot voyageur” according to Dupont-Sommer 1968, 117, 130–131: cf. also CSL, 225–226; DNWSI, 778. 160 Punic; cf. CSL, 227; DNWSI, 784; PPG §208a. 161 Punic: KAI 125; cf. DNWSI, 839; PPG §208a.


338

pʾdy, “platform”162= Lat. podium, “a balcony” (LD, 454)163. pyqʾ, “horseman”164, is a form of Gk ἱππικός “belonging to a horse” (cf. EDG

1, 597). pkš, “pyksis” = Gk πύξος “a box of boxwood”165, as proposed by Dothan166. plyṭm, “citizenry, government” (KAI 145:9) = Gk πολίτευµα, “the business of

government” (L-S, 1240b; cf. EDG 2, 1220), as identified by Schmitz167. psṭy, “position” (Punic) = Lat. positio, “a placing, putting, posture” (LD, 458),

but this is very uncertain (DNWSI, 922). qwʿṭrbr, “four magistrates”168, is equivalent to Lat. quattuorviri, “a college of

four magistrates” (LD, 491). qlʿrnt, “cellar”, Heb. qîllārîn, from Gk κελλάριον and Lat. cellarius, “relating to

a store-room” (LD, 97) as proposed by Schmitz169. qnṭnry, “fortified boundary line”170, is Lat. centenarius, “containing or relating to

a hundred” (LD, 98). qʿdrygʿ, “four-horse chariot” (KAI 122:2), is from Lat. quadrigae, “a team of

four horses abreast”171. qʿysr, “Caesar”172 = Lat. caesar, “Caesar” (cf. LD, 84), possibly via Gk καῖσαρ. qrṭr, “krater” (Punic), is possibly identical with Gk κρατήρ, “mixing bowl” (EDG

1, 675) but the reading is uncertain (cf. DNWSI, 1033). qrqyn, “herald’s staff”, may be from Gk κηρυκήϊον “herald’s wand”173, but is

probably a PN (cf. DNWSI, 1036). tbl, “tablet”174= Lat. tabula, “board, plank, writing-tablet” (LD, 591). trpy, “victory monument”, in an inscription from Cyprus, is identical with Gk

τρόπαιον “trophy” (EDG 2, 1503)175.

2.4 Incorrect entries

Incorrect lemmata that have been proposed are listed here. ʾdln, is not borrowed from Akk. dullu(m), “work”, as dl, with prothetic aleph and

nunation176. Rather, it is the perfect of the verb *ʾDL, “to (en)close”, cognate with Akk. edēlu, “to shut” (CDA, 65)177.

162 Neo-Punic: KAI 126:10; cf. CSL, 262; DNWSI, 900; PPG §208c. 163 Note that Punic pws, “tomb” may equal Lat. fossa, “a ditch, trench, channel” (LD, 254b), but this is unlikely and the context is difficult (cf. DNWSI, 903). 164 KAI 153:3; for other proposals see DNWSI, 910–911. 165 L-S, 1347; probably a loanword from Italy, where the box tree is native; cf. EDG 2, 1259. 166 Dothan 1985, 87; cf. DNWSI, 911. 167 Schmidt 2011, 76, with many additional references. 168 Punic: KAI 125; cf. DNWSI, 1019; PPG §208d. 169 Schmitz 2010, 34 n. 11; cf. DNWSI, 886 (under ʿrbh) for discussion. 170 Punic: KAI 179:2, etc. 171 Ph. qps is not a loan from Eg. qps, “basket” (cited in DNWSI, 1018, under qs) since that word was borrowed from Semitic as kupta (cf. Hoch 1994 §456). 172 Neo-Punic: KAI 120:1; 122:1; 173:2; cf. CSL, 291. See also DNWSI, 1018 (under qsr). 173 Proposed by Garbini 1975, 437ff. For the Greek cf. EDG 1, 690. 174 Punic; cf. DNWSI, 1202. 175As proposed by Yon – Sznycer 1991, 806–808, 818. 176 As proposed by van Selms 1971. 177 Peri 1996, 67–70.


339

ḥzʿn (KAI 34:5) is not a loan from Akk. ḫazzānu, “mayor” (CSL, 101) but divided as ḥz ʿnm means “inspector of wells” (DNWSI, 361).

m(ʾ)š, “statue”178, may be a loan from Eg. mswt, “Gestalt, Form, Aspekt (e. Gottheit)”179. However, having surveyed all the proposals, Xella considers as “possibile, e meno priva di problemi di quanto non sembri” the suggestion by Rocco (1970) that mš and mʾš derive from Semitic *ʾw/yš180.

mzzt, “doorpost” (CSL, 168), occurs in the Arslan Tash inscription, which may not be authentic181. In any case, it is not a loan from Akk. mazzāzu, “position, etc.” (CDA, 206), since, like that word and Heb. mezûzāh, it derives from Proto-Semitic *ZWZ, which in the N-form means “to stand”182.

mrnr (KAI 179) is unlikely to be Gk µάρµαρος, “white stone, marble” (cf. EDG 2, 907), as has been proposed and remains unexplained (cf. DNWSI, 694).

mšr, “wealth”, is not a loan from Akk. ma/ešrû, “riches, wealth” (CDA, 203) but derives from Phoen. *šry/w, “to be rich”183.

skn, “steward”184 is not a loan from Akk. šāknu, “governor”185. In fact, Akk. sākinu (and sūkinu), “prefect, governor” are loans from West Semitic (cf. CDA, 312, 327)186. See above on sgn.

spr, “document”187 is not a loan from Akk. šipru, “message”, but, like Heb. sēper, “inscription, letter, etc.” (cf. HALOT, 766) derives from Common Semitic spr, “to count”. In fact, Akk. sipru, “document” (CDA, 324) is borrowed from Aram. spr with the same meaning188. Phoen. spr, “scribe”, is also Common Semitic.

qps, “basket” is not a loan from Eg. qps, “basket”189, since that word was borrowed from Semitic as kupta, “basket”190. šp, “oil-lamp”, does not correspond to Akk. šappu(m), “bowl” (CDA, 358),

which is equivalent to Ph. sp, “bowl” (DNWSI, 796)191.

178 As mš in KAI 5:1; 6:1; 43:2, 7; as mʾš in KAI 118:1; 119:1, 4; 127; 161:3; 172:4; 277:9; etc.; cf. CSL, 200; DNWSI, 590. Xella (2001, 38) concludes: “sulle etimologie astratte – in più tutt’altro che dimostrate – devono prevalere i dati testuali. Da questo punto di vista, a mio avviso, non vi sono dubbi che il fenicio m(ʾ)š significasse primariamente non già «dono», bensì «statua», certo oggetto non raro di offerte votive effettuate dagli uomini alle divinità”. 179 Hannig 1995, 362. More correctly, Eg. ms.wt (OK), msj.t (NK), “Gestalt o.ä. (eines Gottes)” (Wb II 140–141); see EDE III, 555. Note that P. Montet (apud Cumont 1928, 172) rejected the meaning “statue” for Eg. mś. 180 In a “Postilla etimologica” (Xella 2001, 37). My thanks to Sergio Ribichini for help with this reference. 181 See Amiet 1983; Teixidor 1983 and van Dijk 1992. 182 Mankowski 2000, 85, following Huehnergard 2002, 161–178. 183 As explained by Peri (1996) with the cognates Arab. tariya (trw), “to be rich” and Akk. šarû, “to become rich” (CDA, 361b); see also del Olmo Lete 1998b. 184 KAI 1:2; 31:2; 103:2; cf. CSL, 228. 185 See Kaufman 1974, 98. 186 For discussion, but with no mention of Akk. sākinu or sūkinu, cf. Mankowski 2000, 112–114, with further references. 187 CSL, 232–233; DNWSI, 798–801. 188 See the argumentation by Mankowski 2000, 121–123, although curiously he makes no mention either of Akk. sipru, “document” (cf. CAD S, 304) or of Akk. sepīru, “scribe writing alphabetic script” (CAD S, 225), both loans from Aramaic. 189 As cited in DNWSI, 1018, under qs. 190 Cf. Hoch 1994 §456. 191 As explained by Amadasi Guzzo 1990, 25; cf. DNWSI, 1181.


340

trš, “must, new wine” (DNWSI, 1234), like Ug. trt, “new wine” (DUL, 880)192, seems to be Semitic193. Further support for this comes from a possible equivalent in Mari Akk. turšummu, “a type of wine” (CAD T, 489).

3 Conclusions

The probable ultimate origins of loanwords are set out here in the first two tables (with uncertain words in brackets). The third table lists words in Phoenician and Punic that are transcriptions from Greek and/or Latin and Libyan, although these are loans only in a rather loose sense.

source language loanwords in Phoenician / Punic Akkadian bt ʾḥd, (ggp), (kbrh), kndr, mzl, mḥz, (mšṭr), (mšṭrt), mt,

mtn, nbl, (nḥr), sgn, slmt, ʿqrt, plg, (pqt), (šṭr), šryt, šrn, ššmn, tklt, tmʾ

Aramaic (krsy), ktn, mr, nzq, šryt, tw

Table 1: Loans from Semitic languages.

source language loanwords in Phoenician / Punic Anatolian lyškh, (slmt), qnh, (tpp) Egyptian ʾy, ḥtm, ṭbʿt, ṭnʾ, (nn), (skʾ), ʿgʿ, pḥ, (šdḥ), šyš, šky Greek (ʾṭwmṭʾ), (gl[ʿn]), (krs), lp, lqnh, (sml), (smlt), tmʾ Hurrian ʾgn, ʾdn, ʾtnm, ḥyr, (ḥrd), (ḥrz), krr, (mzrḥ), (prmn), trtn Indian (bṣ), mgn Indo-European (ḥṣ), ss, ʿrpt, (tpp) Latin (mply) Libyan mynkd Luwian brzl Persian dt Sumerian ʾmn, kr, lly, mlḥ, ʿbrt unknown ʾšt, hbrk, yn, kpln, tnr

Table 2: Loans from non-Semitic languages.

source language loanwords in Phoenician / Punic Greek ʾksdr, dymʿ, ḥnwṭ, klyṭʾ, kl[n]pyš, knprs, lgm, lṭr, sdl,

pyqʾ, pkš, plyṭm, qrṭr, qrqyn, trpy Latin ʾmprʿṭr, bʿṣṣ, kwlb, knṣwlʿt, mmry, synṭr, ʿydls, pʾdy,

pṣty, qwʿṭrbr, qnṭnry, qʿdrygʿ, qʿysr, tbl Greek or Latin dnr, dnʿr, drkmn, ṭmʾ, qlʿrnt Libyan mṣṣkwy, nmrsy

Table 3: Loan-transcriptions from Greek, Latin or Libyan.

192 See Brown 1969, 168–170; Gordon 1978; Zamora 2000, 243–246. 193 Xella 2003; he concludes (685): “la scoperta che già a Ebla esisteva un dio del vino di nome Zilašu implica l’ammissione dell’origine semitica del teonimo e, di conseguenza, del personaggio… Come si sia passati da Zilašu a trt / tyrwš e, attraverso l’ittita tuwarsa, al "tirso" con tutte le sue implicazione resta ancora un processo in gran parte inafferrabile”.


341

It is important to distinguish between words in Phoenician and Punic that are borrowed directly from another language (e.g. the month name krr) and indirect loans, i.e. loanwords already current in a Semitic language that are then transferred to its sister or daughter languages (e.g. ʾmn, “craftsman”, from Sumerian). Surprisingly, many words come from Hurrian (probably via Akkadian or Ugaritic) and from Egyptian, possibly directly, but remarkably, in view of the bilinguals and trilinguals (see above), there is only one loanword from Luwian (brzl), which may have been borrowed indirectly.

Out of the approximately 1000 Phoenician and Punic words recorded in DNWSI, 30 or so are loans from non-Semitic and about 25 are either loans from or cognate with other Semitic languages. A few, such as kpln, “amphora”, tnr, “oven” and yn, “wine” may simply be Wanderwörter. There seems to be some clustering of loanwords in at least two inscriptions, namely, the Kition Tariff194 and the Incirli Trilingual. Also, several month names were borrowed from Hurrian195.Table 3 shows that 14 loan-transcriptions come from Greek, 14 are from Latin and another five may come from either language. Two or three are from Libyan. It is a pity that some words, almost certainly borrowed from Phoenician, such as *nbl, “harp”, *qnmn, “cinnamon” and *tklt, “purple wool”, do not occur in that language196, but they may appear in texts yet to be discovered197.

References AHw: W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch, 3 vols. Wiesbaden 1965–1981. Amadasi Guzzo, M. G., 1990: “Noms de vases en phénicien”, in Semitica 38, 17–20. Amiet, P., 1983: “Observations sur les ‘Tablettes magiquesʾ dʾArslan Tash”, in Aula

Orientalis 1, 109. Arbeitman, Y., 1980: “E Luvia Lux”, in Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society

12, 9–11. Artzi, P., 1969: “On the Cuneiform Background of the Northwest-Semitic Form of

the Word brdl, b(a)rz(e)l, ‘Iron’”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 28, 268–270.

Astour, M. C., 1965: “The Origin of the Terms ‘Canaan,’ ‘Phoenician,’ and ‘Purple’”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 24, 346–350.

Avigad, N. – Greenfield, J. C., 1982: “A Bronze phiale with Phoenician Dedicatory Inscription”, in Israel Exploration Journal 32, 118–128.

Avishur, Y., 1978: “The Second Amulet from Arslan-Tash”, in Ugarit-Forschungen 10, 29–36.

Bonnet, C., 1995: “Phénicien šrn = accadien šurinnu? À propos de l’inscription de Bodashtart CIS I 4”, in Orientalia 64, 214–222.

Bron, F., 1979: Recherches sur les inscriptions phéniciennes de Karatepe. (Hautes études orientales 11). Geneva – Paris.

194 See already Watson 1997. 195 Possibly directly or through Ugaritic; see Stieglitz 1998. These month names are not listed in DNWSI. 196 Cf. Masson 1967, 69; EDG 1, 707 and HALOT 1732–1733 respectively. 197 My thanks go to Kevin Cathcart and Nick Wyatt, who read through early drafts, made helpful comments and provided references.


342

Brown, J. P., 1969: “The Mediterranean Vocabulary of the Vine”, in Vetus Testamentum 19, 146–170.

Bush, F. W., 1973: “The Relationship between the Hurrian Suffixes ne / -na and -nni/e / -nna”, in H. A. Hoffner (ed.), Orient and Occident. Essays presented to Cyrus H. Gordon. (Alter Orient and Altes Testament 22). Neukirchen- Vluyn, 39–52.

CAD: I. J. Gelb et al. (eds.), The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago IL 1956–2010.

CDA: J. Black – A. George – N. Postgate (eds.), A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian (SANTAG Arbeiten und Untersuchungen zur Keilschriftkunde 5). Wiesbaden 2000.

CIS: Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum. CSL: R. S. Tomback, A Comparative Semitic Lexicon of the Phoenician and

Punic Languages (Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 32). Missoula MT 1978.

Cumont, F., 1928: “Nouvelles archéologiques”, in Syria 9, 166–172. De Simone, R., 2003: “Traduzione nelle epigrafi neopuniche nordafricane?”, in R.

Regalzi (ed.), Mutuare, interpretare, tradurre: storie di culture a confronto. Atti del 2o Incontro «Orientalisti» (Roma, 11–13 dicembre 2002). Rome, 155–168.

del Olmo Lete, G., 1986: “Fenicio y Ugarítico: correlación lingüística”, in Aula Orientalis 4, 31–49.

del Olmo Lete, G., 1998a: “Le phén. ʿrpt, l'acc. urpatu(m) et le groupe lexical ʿ/-r-b/p”, in Transeuphratène 14, 167–174.

del Olmo Lete, G., 1998b: “Notes on Semitic Lexicography I (*trr, try/w)”, in Aula Orientalis 16, 187–192.

Deller, K.-H., 1984: “Assyrisch um/nzarḫu und Hebräisch ʾäzraḥ”, in Zeitschrift für die Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 74, 235–239.

Deller, K.-H., 1990: “aB umšarḫum, mA umzarḫu, nA unzarḫu/unzaḫḫu, nB unzaraḫ”, in Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 1990, 63 Nr. 85.

DJBA: M. Sokoloff, A Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic. Ramat Gan – Baltimore MD 2002.

DJPA: M. Sokoloff, Dictionary of the Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period. Ramat Gan 1990.

DLE: L. H. Lesko, A Dictionary of Late Egyptian, 2 vols. Providence 2002, 2004. DNSWI: J. Hoftijzer – K. Jongeling, Dictionary of the North-West Semitic

Inscriptions 2 vols (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/21). Leiden 1995. Dothan, M., 1985: “A Phoenician Inscription from Akko”, in Israel Exploration

Journal 35, 81–94. DUL: G. del Olmo Lete – J. Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in

the Alphabetic Tradition (English Version Edited and Translated by W. G. E. Watson), 2 vols. (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/67). Leiden 20042.

Dupont-Sommer, A., 1968: “Une nouvelle inscription punique de Carthage”, in Comptes rendues de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 112, 116–133.

Dussaud, R., 1925: “Inscription phénicienne de Byblos d’époque romaine”, in Syria 6, 269–273.

EDE: G. Takács, Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian, vols. I-III (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/48). Leiden 1999, 2001, 2008.

EDG: R. Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, 2 vols. (Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series 10). Leiden 2010.


343

FCD: R. O. Faulkner, A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford 1962. Garbini, G., 1975: “Studi di epigrafia fenicio-punica”, in Annali dell’Istituto

Universitario Orientale di Napoli 35, 433–442. Gordon, C. H., 1978: “The Wine-Dark Sea”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies

37, 51–52. Görke, S., 2010: Das Ritual der Aštu (CTH 490): Rekonstruktion und Tradition eines

hurritisch-hethitischen Rituals aus Boğazköy/Ḫattuša (Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 40). Leiden.

Greppin, J. A. C., 1991: “The Survvial of Ancient Anatolian and Mesopotamian Vocabulary until the Present”, in Journal of Near Eastern Studies 50, 203–207.

Gzella, H., 2012: “Phoenician”, in H. Gzella (ed.), Languages from the World of the Bible. Boston – Berlin, 55–75.

HALOT: The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 5 vols. (translated and edited under the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson). Leiden 1994–2000.

Hannig, R., 1995: Die Sprache der Pharaonen (2800-950 v.Chr.). Großes Hand-wörterbuch Ägyptisch-Deutsch (Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 64). Mainz.

Healey, J. F., 1983: “Phoenician and the Spread of Aramaic”, in P. Bartoloni et al. (eds.), Atti del I Congresso Internazionale di Studi Fenici e Punici. Roma, 5-10 Novembre 1979. Vol. 3. Rome, 663–666.

Heltzer, M., 1998: “Phoenician Epigraphic Miscellanea”, Aula Orientalis 16, 77–84. Hoch, J., 1994: Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third

Intermediate Period. Princeton NJ. Huehnergard, J., 2002: “izuzzum and ītulum”, in T. Abusch (ed.), Riches Hidden in

Secret Places: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honor of Thorkild Jacobsen. Winona Lake, 161–178.

Jastrow, M., 1903: Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi and the Midrashic Literature. New York.

KAI: H. Donner – W. Röllig, Kananäische und aramäische Inschriften,3 vols. Wiesbaden 1962–1964.

Kaufman, S., 1974: The Akkadian Influences on Aramaic (Assyriological Studies 19). Chicago IL.

Kaufman, S., 2007: “The Phoenician Inscription of the Incirli Trilingual: A Tentative Reconstruction and Translation”, in Maarav 14, 7–26.

Kloekhorst, A., 2008: Etymological Dictionary of the Hittite Inherited Lexicon (Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series 5). Leiden.

Kogan, L., 2012: “Les noms de plantes akkadiens dans leur contexte sémitique”, in R. Hasselbach – N. Pat-El (eds.), Language and Nature. Papers Presented to John Huehnergard on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 67). Chicago IL, 229–269.

Krahmalkov, C. F., 1974: “A Carthaginian Report of the Battle of Agrigentum 406 B.C. (CIS I 5510.9–11)”, in Rivista di Studi Fenici 2, 171–177.

Lambdin, T. O., 1953: “Egyptian Loan Words in the Old Testament”, in Journal of the American Oriental Society 73, 145–155.

Lawson Younger, K., 1998: “The Phoenician Inscription of Azatiwadda. An Integrated Reading”, in Journal of Semitic Studies 43, 11–47.

LD: D. P. Simpson, Casell’s Latin – English / English – Latin Dictionary. London 19875.

L-S: H. G. Liddell – R. Scott, Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford 1940.


344

Malamat, A., 1982: “Longevity: Biblical Concepts and Some Ancient Near Eastrn Parallels”, in H. Hirsch – H. Hunger (Hrsg.), Vorträge gehalten auf der 28. Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale in Wien, 6.-10. Juli 1981 (Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 19). Horn 1982, 215–224.

Masson, E., 1967: Recherches sur les plus anciens emprunts sémitiques en grec (Études et Commentaires LVII). Paris.

Mankowski, P. V., 2000: Akkadian Loanwords in Biblical Hebrew (Harvard Semitic Studies 47). Winona Lake IN.

Muchiki, Y., 1999: Egyptian Proper Names and Loanwords in North-West Semitic. (SBL Dissertation Series 173). Atlanta GA.

O’Connor, M., 1989: “Semitic *mgn and its Supposed Sanskrit Origin”, in Journal of the American Oriental Society 109, 25–32.

Orel, V. E. – Stolbova, O. V., 1995: Hamito-Semitic Etymological Dictionary. Materials for a Reconstruction (Handbuch der Orientalistik I/18). Leiden.

Payne, A., 2006: “Multilingual Inscriptions and Their Audiences: Cilicia and Lycia”, in S. L. Sanders, ed., Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures (Oriental Institute Seminars 2). Chicago IL, 121–136.

Peri, C., 1996: “A proposito dell’iscrizione di Tabnit”, in Rivista di Studi Fenici 24, 67–72.

Piacentini, D., 2003: “Il verbo «tradurre» ed il termine «traduttore» nel Vicino Oriente. Tre esempi: sumerico, eblaita, fenicio”, in R. Regalzi (ed.), Mutuare, interpretare, tradurre: storie di culture a confronto. Atti del 2o Incontro «Orientalisti» (Roma, 11-13 dicembre 2002. Roma, 13–38.

PPG: J. Friedrich – W. Röllig, Phönizisch-punische Grammatik. 3. Auflage, neu bearbeitet von M. G. Amadasi Guzzo (Analecta Orientalia 55). Rome 1999.

Rendsburg, G. A., 1982: “Semitic PRZL/BRZL/BRDL, « Iron »”, in Scripta Mediterranea 3, 54–71.

Rocco, B., 1970: “Alla ricerca di un’etimologia (mʾš/mš)”, in Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli 30, 396–399.

Schmitz, P. C., 1995: “The Phoenician Text from the Etruscan Sanctuary at Pyrgi”, in Journal of the American Oriental Society 115, 559–575.

Schmitz, P. C., 2008: “Archaic Greek Words in Phoenician Script from Karatepe”, in American Society of Greek and Latin Epigraphy Newsletter 12/2, 5-9.

Schmitz, P. C., 2010: “Late Punic Words for Textiles and Their Production”, in Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 27, 33–38.

Schmitz, P. C., 2011: “The Large Neo-Punic Inscription from Hr. Maktar. A Narrative of Military Service”, in Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 28, 67–93.

SED II: L. Kogan – A. Militarev, Semitic Etymological Dictionary. Vol. II. Animal Names (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 278/2). Münster 2005.

Sima, A., 2000: Tiere, Pflanzen, Steine und Metalle in den altsüdarabischen Inschriften. Eine lexikalische und realienkundliche Untersuchung (Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Mainz. Veröffentlichungen der Orientalischen Kommission 46). Wiesbaden.

Steiner, G., 2003: “Akkadische Lexeme im Sumerischen”, in P. Marrassini (ed.), Semitic and Assyriological Studies Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues. Wiesbaden, 630–647.

Steiner, R. C., 2011: Early Northwest Semitic Serpent Spells in the Pyramid Texts (Harvard Semitic Studies 61). Winona Lake IN.


345

Stieglitz, R. R., 1981: “Ugaritic ḫrd ‘Warrior’: A Hurrrian Loanword”, in Journal of the American Oriental Society 101, 371–372.

Stieglitz, R. R., 1998: “The Phoenician-Punic Menology”, in M. Lubetski – C. Gottlieb – C. Keller (eds.), Boundaries of the Ancient Near Eastern World. A Tribute to Cyrus H. Gordon. Sheffield, 211–221.

Takács, G., 2012: “Semitic Fauna Terminology and Afro-asiatic”, in F. Corriente –G. del Olmo Lete – Á. Vicente – J.-P. Vita (eds.), Dialectology of the Semitic Languages. Proceedings of the IV Meeting on Comparative Semitics Zaragoza 11/6-9/2010 (Aula Orientalis Supplementa 27). Sabadell, Barcelona, 113–129.

Tekoğlu, R. – Lemaire, A., 2000: “La bilingue royale louvito-phénicienne de Çineköy”, in Comptes rendus de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres 144, 960–1006.

Teixidor, J., 1983: “Les tablettes d’Arslan Tash au Musée d’Alep”, in Aula Orientalis 1, 105–108.

Tropper, J., 1993: Die Inschriften von Zincirli (Abhandlungen zur Literatur Alt-Syrien-Palästinas 6). Münster.

UG: J. Tropper, Ugaritische Grammatik (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 273). Münster 2000.

Valério, M. – Yakubovich, I., 2010: “Semitic Word for ‘Iron’ as an Anatolian Loanword”, in T. M. Nikolaeva, ed., Исследования по лингвистике и семиотике: сборник статей к юбилею Вяч. Вс. Иванова [Studies in Linguistics and Semiotics: A Collection of Articles for the Anniversary for Vyacheslav V. Ivanov] (Languages of Slavonic Culture). Moscow, 108–116.

van Dijk, J., 1992: “The Authenticity of the Arslan Tash Amulets”, in Iraq 54, 65–68. van Selms, A., 1971: “Akkadian dullu(m) as a Loan-word in West Semitic

Languages”, in Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 1, 51–58. Watson, W. G. E., 1996: “Non-Semitic Words in the Ugaritic Lexicon (2)”, Ugarit-

Forschungen 28, 701–719. Watson, W. G. E., 1997: “Comments on the Phoenician Tariff Inscriptions from

Kition”, in Die Welt des Orients 28, 89–95. Watson, W. G. E., 2009: “Jottings on Some Ugaritic Words”, in Studi epigrafici e

linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 26, 15–21. Wb: A. Erman – H. Grapow, Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, 7 vols. Berlin

1926–1963. Wegner, I., 2000: Einführung in die hurritische Sprache. Wiesbaden. Wilhelm, G., 1970: “ta/erdennu, ta/urtannu, ta/urtānu”, in Ugarit-Forschungen 2,

277–282. Wyatt, N., 1995: “Jonathan’s Adventure and a Philological Conundrum”, in

Palestine Exploration Quarterly 127, 62–69. Xella, P., 1984: “Sul nome punico ʿbdkrr”, in Rivista degli Studi Fenici 12, 21–30. Xella, P., 1992: “Matériaux pour le lexique phénicien – I”, in Studi epigrafici e

linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 9, 81–93. Xella, P., 1996: “Ägyptisch ‘r.t «Obergemach, Dachterrasse» und semitische

Parallelen”, in Studi epigrafici e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 13, 19–24. Xella, P., 2001: “Fenicio m(ʾ)š, «statua» (Matériaux pour le lexique phénicien. III)”,

in K. Geus – K. Zimmermann (Hrsg.), Punica – Libyca – Ptolemaica. Festschrift für Werner Huß, zum 65. Geburtstag dargebracht vom Schülern, Freunden und Kollegen. Leuven, 21–40.


346

Xella, P., 2003: “Sulla più antica storia del vino”, in P. Marrassini (ed.), Semitic and Assyriological Studies. Presented to Pelio Fronzaroli by Pupils and Colleagues. Wiesbaden, 680–689.

Xella, P. – Zamora, J. Á., 2004: “Une nouvelle inscription phénicienne de Bodashtart sur la rive du Nahr al-Awwāli près de Bustān eš-Šēḫ”, in Bulletin d’Archéologie et d’Architecture Libanaises 8, 273–299.

Xella, P. – Zamora, J. Á., 2005: “L’inscription phénicienne de Bodashtart in situ à Bustān eš-Šēḫ (Sidon) et son apport à l’histoire du sanctuaire”, in Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 212, 120–129.

Yon, M. –Sznycer, M., 1991, “Une inscription phénicienne royale de Kition, Chypre”, in Comptes rendues de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 135, 791–823.

Zamora, J. Á., 2000: La vid y el vino en Ugarit (Banco de Datos Filológicos Semíticos Noroccidentales, Monografías 6). Madrid.

Zamora, J. Á., 2007: “The Inscription from the First Year of King Bodashtart of Sidon’s Reign: CIS I, 4”, in Orientalia 76, 100–113.