Month Names and Year Names
Date Formulae Involving Month Names
Month Names
Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN(*) | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘in the month X’ | gu4-ra2-bi2-mu2-mu2 | Gurabimumu[1][-‘a] | MN.L1 |
(*) See Jagersma 2010, 151. Sallaberger 2000, 3.5.4 makes it clear that, grammatically, the month names should have a locative (Ur III admin. texts only lack this because they are not grammatical).
Example 2
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti diri(*) | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘in the intercalary month’ | diri | dirig[excess] | N.L1 |
(*) Following ePSD2 which specifies that diri in this context is a noun: diri [EXCESS] N ‘excess, intercalary month’.
Date Formulae
Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN-ta(*) ‘from month X’ | iti | iti[month] | N |
| masz-da3-gu7-ta | Maszdagu[1]-ta | MN.ABL |
(*) For an example of this sequence in translation see P106228. The month name iti min-esz3 occurs 1,072 times in the CDLI Ur III admin. corpus without -ta, and is explicitly written with -ta 52 times (in these 52 occurrences iti min-esz3-ta is part of the sequence under discussion). It would seem that in ‘from month X to month X’ statements, the scribes made ablative and terminative case markers explicit; month names lacking such case markers should, perhaps, be assumed to be of the iti MN[-’a] ‘in the month X’ type, with locative. For the reconstruction of the genitive after the month names, see Jagersma 2010, 251 (33); however, contradicting this (and followed here), Jagersma 2010, 697 (120) does not reconstruct a genitive in the same situation.
Example 2
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN-sze3 ‘to month Y’ | iti | iti[month] | N |
| sze-sag11-ku5-sze3 | Szesagku[1]-sze3 | MN.TERM |
Example 3
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti #-kam ‘a period of # months’ | iti | iti[month] | N |
| 1(u) | 1(u)[ten] | NU | |
| 2(disz)-kam | 2(disz)[one][-ak]-am | NU.GEN.COP-3-SG |
zal ‘Time Passed’ Expressions
zal A — Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN u4 zal-la-ta(*) | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘from month X, # days passed’ | ezem-{d}nin-a-zu | ezem-Ninazu[1] | MN |
| u4 | ud[day] | N | |
| 1(u) 8(disz) | 1(u) 8(disz)[one] | NU | |
| zal-la-ta | zal[pass]-a-ta | NF.V.PT.ABL |
(*) The sequence seems to be a variant of the basic ‘from month X, to month Y’ temporal expression. Examples occur in CDLI: P101388, P102524, P105222. For analysis, see Jagersma 2010, 250 (28).
zal A — Example 2
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN-sze4 | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘to month X’ | sze-sag11-ku5-sze3 | Szesagku[1]-sze3 | MN.TERM |
zal A — Example 3
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti # u4 #-kam | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘it is X months Y days’ | 7(disz) | 7(disz)[one] | NU |
| u4 | ud[day] | N | |
| 1(u) | 1(u)[ten] | NU | |
| 2(disz)-kam | 2(disz)[one]-ak-am | NU.GEN.COP-3-SG |
zal B1 — Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN-ta u4 # zal-la-a(*) | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘when out of month X day Y had passed’ | Sze-il2-la-ta | Sze-ila[1]-ta | MN.ABL |
| u4 | ud[day] | N | |
| 1(u) | 1(u)[ten] | NU | |
| zal-la-a | zal[pass]-a-`a | NF.V.PT.L1 |
(*) As discussed by Jagersma 2010, 652 (133), the written locative -a indicates that zal B1 is, in fact, a temporal clause. zal B1 contains an ablative after the month name ‘when out of the month X day Y …,’ while zal B2 (see P106456 has no ablative: ‘when day Y (of) month X …’.
zal B2 — Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN u4 3 zal-la-a(*) | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘when day Y (of) month X had passed’ | sze-sag11-ku5 | Szesagku[1] | MN |
(*) See the note on zal B1 above.
zal C — Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| iti MN-ta u4 #-am3 zal-la(*) | iti | iti[month] | N |
| ‘from month X, day Y which is passed’ | min-esz3-ta | Minesz[1]-ta | MN.ABL |
| u4 | ud[day] | N | |
| 5(disz)-am3 | 5(disz)[one]-am | NU.COP-3-SG | |
| zal-la | zal[pass]-a | NF.V.PT |
(*) English translation is uncertain, but based on a similar line from P131739 (line 11). The presence of final locative –‘a is doubtful for this sequence: of the 27 instances of #-am3 zal-la in the CDLI Ur III administrative corpus, none is written zal-la-a; #-am3 zal-la and zal-la-a seem to be in complementary distribution.
Year Names
Type A: final -a not written, not subordinate (no .SUB)
Zólyomi: “In type A , the clause is not subordinate, mu ‘year’ and the actual year name with the finite clause stands in apposition, like: “the movie ‘Paris can wait’”. In type A year names the actual year name functions as a proper name. This is also indicated by year names with a non-verbal predicate: mu amar-{d}suen lugal. Proper names as a rule drop the copula, cf. my copula book pp. 22–23 or Jagersma’s dissertation p. 718, he calls this type nominal clause.” (Gábor Zólyomi, personal communication, 3 July 2018).
Example 1
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu OBJ ba-ab-du8(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘in the year the boat of Enki was caulked’ | ma2 | ma[ship] | N |
| {d}en-ki-ka | Enkik[1]-ak[-ø] | DN.GEN.ABS | |
| ba-ab-du8 | ba-b-du[spread][-ø] | MID.3-SG-NH-L3.V.3-SG-S |
(*) On analogy with Zólyomi 2017, 217 #432, slot 11 is interpreted as 3.SG.NH.L3. See Jagersma p. 95 who sees a nominalizing -a at the end of year names. Sallaberger 2000, 3.5.4 makes it clear that, grammatically, the year names should have a nominalizing -a after the verb (Ur III admin. texts lack this only because they are not grammatical). See further Horsnell 1977. However, influencing the reconstruction here, Zólyomi does not reconstruct a nominalizing -a, see Zólyomi 2017, #251, #252, and #332; his type A does not have a subordinate (Zólyomi personal communication, 6 July 2018).
Example 2
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu SN ba-du(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year SN was built’ | puzur4-isz-{d}da-gan | Puzuriszdagan[1][-ø] | SN.ABS |
| ba-du3 | ba-du[build][-ø] | MID.V.3-SG-S |
(*) Note: all passive forms are formulated as intransitive verbs (Jagersma 2010, 494). Example text: P100159. Zólyomi’s type A year names do not have a subordinate (Zólyomi, personal communication, 6 July 2018). Note: Zólyomi 2017, text example #228 with S14 marked 3-SG-P, is an error; it should be 3-SG-S (Zólyomi, personal communication, 25 July 2018).
Example 3
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu us-sa X(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year following X’ | us-sa | us[follow]-a | NF.V.PT |
| an-sza-an{ki} | Anzan[1][-ø] | SN.ABS | |
| ba-hul | ba-hulu[bad][-ø] | MID.V.3-SG-S |
(*) Note: all passive forms are formulated as intransitive verbs (Jagersma 2010, 494). For us-sa, see Zólyomi 2017, #48. For final -a or not: see Jagersma p. 95 who sees a nominalizing -a at the end of year names; Sallaberger 2000 3.5.4 makes it clear that, grammatically, the year names should have a nominalizing -a after the verb (Ur III admin. texts do not only because they are not grammatical). See further Horsnell 1977. However, influencing the reconstruction here, Zólyomi does not reconstruct a nominalizing -a, see Zólyomi 2017, #251, #252, and #332; his type A do not have a subordinate (Zólyomi personal communication, 6 July 2018). Note: Zólyomi 2017 text example #228 with S14 marked 3-SG-P is an error; it should be 3-SG-S (Zólyomi personal communication, 25 July 2018).
Example 4
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu RN lugal(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year: RN (became) king’ | amar-{d}suen | Amar-Suen[1] | RN |
| lugal | lugal[king] | N |
(*) While this form may seem ungrammatical (‘year: RN king’), Jagersma discusses it on page 718 calling it a “clear example of a nominal clause” and “not some phrase”. Such constructions mark the first year of the reign of a king.
Example 5
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu RN lugal-ta(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘since the year: Szu-Suen (became) king’ | {d}szu-{d}suen | Szu-Suen[1] | RN |
| lugal | lugal[-ta][king] | N.ABL |
(*) This understanding of mu RN lugal-ta follows the example in Zólyomi 2017, #332. Such constructions read ‘since the year: RN (became) king.”
Example 6
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu RN lugal-am(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year: Amar-suen is king’ | amar-{d}suen | Amar-Suen[1].[-ø] | RN.ABS |
| lugal.am3 | lugal.ø.am | N.ABS.COP-3-SG |
(*) Following Jagersma 2010, 718. Note: although Zólyomi 2017 interprets copular phrases to end in null am-ø, glossed COP-3-SG-S, ETCSRI consistently has -am (no null) and glosses COP-3-SG (followed here).
Example 7
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu PN DN ba-hun(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year: PN (the priest) of Inanna was hired’ | en-unu6-gal | Enunugal[1] | PN |
| {d}inana | Inana[1][-ak][-ø] | DN.GEN.ABS | |
| ba-hun | ba-hug[hire][-ø] | MID.V.3-SG-S |
(*) Note: all passives are formulated as intransitive verbs (Jagersma 2010, 494). An analysis of this year name type is not available in Zólyomi 2017 or Jagersma 2010, however, it would appear to be an abbreviated version of the year name seen in P218067: mu en-unu6-gal-an-na {d}inanna en {d}inanna ba-hun “the year: Enunugalana of Inanna, the priest of Inanna, was installed”. The genitival relation between PN and GN is frequently observed in CDLI translations of this year name “Enunugal(ana) of Inanna” and may be an example of a modifying genitive (Zólyomi 2017, 53) – some translations attempt to reconstruct the sense of the unabbreviated version: “the year: Enunugal(ana) (the priest of) Inana was hired”.
Example 8
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu RN bad3 SN mu-du3(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year: Szulgi the king build the wall of the land’ | {d}szul-gi | Szulgi[1] | RN |
| lugal-e | lugal[king]-e | N.ERG | |
| bad3 | bad[wall] | N | |
| ma-da | mada[land][-ak][-ø] | N.GEN.ABS | |
| mu-du3 | mu[-n]-du[build][-ø] | VEN.3-SG-H-A.V.3-SG-P |
(*) For an analysis of a very similar year name, see Jagersma 2010, 485 (34a).
Example 9
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu us2-sa X-ta(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘from the year X happened’ | us2-sa | us[follow]-a | NF.V.PT |
| bad3 | bad[wall][-ø] | N.ABS | |
| ba-du3-ta | ba-du[build][-ø]-ta | MID.V.3-SG-S.ABL | |
| mu X-sze3 | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘to the year X happened’ | ur-bi2-lum{ki} | Urbillum[1][-ø] | SN.ABS |
| ba-hul-sze3 | ba-hulu[destroy][-ø]-sze | MID.V.3-SG-S.TERM |
(*) Example text from P100764. See Jagersma 2010, 94 (45) for an analysis of a similar year name.
Example 10
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu SN u SN ba-hul(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘year SN and SN were destroyed’ | Ki-masz{ki} | Kimasz[1] | SN |
| u | u[and] | CNJ | |
| Hu-ur5-ti{ki} | Hurti[1][-ø] | SN.ABS | |
| ba-hul | ba-hulu[destroy][-ø] | MID.V.3-SG-S |
(*) In coordinate noun phrases (featuring the coordinator u) case markings usually appear only after the last of the coordinated items, in this case, SN u SN.ABS. For an example see Jagersma 2010, 100 (84).
Example 11
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu us2-sa SN X mu us2-sa-bi(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year after: the year after X happened’ | us2-sa | us[follow]-a | NF.V.PT |
| ki-masz{ki} | Kimasz[1][-ø] | SN.ABS | |
| ba-hul | ba-hulu[destroy][-ø] | MID.V.S-SG-S | |
| mu | mu[year] | N | |
| us2-sa-bi | us[follow]-a-bi | NF.V.PT.3-SG-NH-POSS |
(*) For an analysis of some of these forms see Jagersma 2010, 640 (60) and 643 (67). Jagersma reconstructs a nominalizing -a, perhaps on the basis that it appears to be written in his text example 60. However, Zólyomi 2017, 100 (121), followed here, does not reconstruct a nominalizing -a.
Example 12
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu en SN ba-hul(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year: the en of Eridu was hired’ | eridu{ki} | eridu[1][-ak][-ø] | SN.GEN.ABS |
| ba-hun | ba-hun[hire][-ø] | MID.V.3.SG.S |
(*) Text example: P142818. Some variants may have PN SN ba-hul, in which case en is implied and the understanding is ‘PN (the priest) of SN was hired’. The genitive must still be reconstructed after SN. Some variants may include both PN and en: ‘PN the priest of SN was hired’. The genitive relationship between en and SN is attested seventeen times in the CDLI Ur III administrative corpus by the spellings eridu{ki}-ga and unu{ki}-ga.
Example 13
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| mu a-ra2 # SN ba-hul(*) | mu | mu[year] | N |
| ‘the year: SN was destroyed for the X time’ | a-ra2 | ara[times] | N |
| 3(disz)-kam-asz | 3(disz)-ak-am-sze | NU.GEN.3-SG-COP.TERM | |
| si-mu-ru-um{ki} | Simurrum[1][-ø] | SN.ABS | |
| ba-hul | ba-hulu[bad][-ø] | MID.V.3-SG-S |
(*) Text example: P101347P101347. The use of the sign asz to convey the terminative may seem unexpected. The unexplained -a- vowel before sze may be a reflection of the original spelling of -kam, which was -kamma; see Jagersma 2010, 260 (85).
Type B: final -a is written, subordinate (include .SUB)
Zólyomi: “In type B year names, the clause is subordinate, it functions as a relative clause modifying the head mu “year”: “The year in which the king built the temple.” (Gábor Zólyomi, personal communication, 3 July 2018).
Seal Inscriptions
Royal Titulary
| Context | FORM | SEGM | XPOSTAG |
|---|---|---|---|
| lugal an-ub-da limmu2-ba(*) | lugal | lugal[king] | N |
| ‘king of the four quarters’ | an-ub-da | anubda[quarter] | N |
| (lit.: ‘king of the quarters, four of them’) | limmu2-ba | limu[four]-bi-ak | NU.3-SG-NH-POSS.GEN |
(*) Often at CDLI, an-ub-da is segmented an ub-da. This is in the process of being updated to an-ub-da; all instances of an ub-da should be segmented an-ub-da at MTAAC. This brings treatment of this sequence in line with ePSD (anubda[quarter]), BDTNS, and Zólyomi 2017, 73 (83).