MOST PROBABLY

L A N G UA G E S O F
TH E A NC I E N T N E A R E A S T
Editorial Board
Gonzalo Rubio, Pennsylvania State University
Editor-in-Chief

James P. Allen

Gene B. Gragg

John Huehnergard
Manfred Krebernik
Antonio Loprieno
H. Craig Melchert

Piotr Michalowski

P. Oktor Skjrv
Michael P. Streck

Brown University
The Oriental Institute, Univ. of Chicago
Harvard University
Friedrich-Schiller-Universitt Jena
Universitt Basel
University of California, Los Angeles
University of Michigan
Harvard University
Universitt Leipzig

1. A Grammar of the Hittite Language, by Harry A. Hoffner Jr. and H. Craig Melchert
Part 1: Reference Grammar
Part 2: Tutorial
2. The Akkadian Verb and Its Semitic Background, by N. J. C. Kouwenberg
3. Most Probably: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian, by Nathan Wasserman
4. Conditional Structures in Mesopotamian Old Babylonian, by Eran Cohen

Most Probably
Epistemic Modality in
Old Babylonian

by

N athan Wasserman
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Winona Lake, Indiana

Eisenbrauns
2012

 2012 by Eisenbrauns Inc.

All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
www.eisenbrauns.com

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Wasserman, Nathan
Most probably : epistemic modality in Old Babylonian / by Nathan Wasserman.
p. cm. (Languages of the ancient Near East; 3)
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBN 978-1-57506-198-6 (alk. paper)
1.Akkadian languageModality. 2.Akkadian languageVerb. I.Title.
PJ3291.W372012
492.156dc23

2011045654
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for
Information SciencesPermanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

To Hillel-Alexander and Amalia-Helena,

the two particles who modified me,
with love.

Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
What is Modality? A Preliminary Definition 2
Sketching the Outlines of Modality: Deontic vs. Epistemic Modality 3
Verbal Modes and Modality in Old Babylonian 5
Root Modality in Old Babylonian: Will, Ability, and Obligation 6
Mental State Modal Verbs (verba sentiendi) in Old Babylonian 6
Deontic Modality in Old Babylonian Expressed Lexically 7
Epistemic Modality Expressed Periphrastically 8
Modal Polysemy 9
Co-occurrence of Modal Expressions 10
The Uniqueness of Each Modal System 11
Modal Particles in General Linguistic Literature 12
Epistemic Modal Particles in Semitic Studies 13
The Corpus of the Study 14
1. The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 17
Previous Studies of pqat17
A Semantic and Functional Definition of pqat18
1. Weak Doubter 18
2. Disjunctive Construction: Optative 20
3. Semiconditional Constructions 22
4. Lowering the Level of Certitude:
from Presumption to Doubt 23
5. Vox populi: pqat in Public Opinion as Reported Speech 25
The Syntactic Profile of pqat26
1. Discourse Domains 26
Excursus: Subjectification and Perspectivization 29
2. Verbal Tenses 30
3. Negation 32
4. Position of the MP within the Clause 32
5. Phrasal Arrangement 33
6. pqat and Other Particles 34
The Etymology of pqat37
Grammaticalization 38
vii

viii

Contents

The Grammaticalization of pqat39

List of Attestations of pqat41
2. The Modal Particle midde. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 44
Previous Studies of midde45
A Semantic and Functional Definition of midde47
Excursus: Unilateral vs. Bilateral Possibility:
The Case of the Latin Modal System 48
1. midde Between Probably and No Doubt 49
2. Quasiconditional Constructions 52
3. Disjunctive Construction: Optative 53
The Syntactic Profile of midde54
1. Discourse Domains 54
2. Verbal Tenses 55
3.Negation 57
4. Position of the MP within the Clause 58
5. Phrasal Arrangement 59
6. midde and Other Particles 60
The Grammaticalization of midde61
List of attestations of midde63
3. The Modal Particles wuddi and anna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 65
Previous Studies of wuddi65
A Semantic and Functional Definition of wuddi66
1. Past Certainty 66
wuddi vs. anna: Doubt-and-Denial vs.
Promissory-Declarative Particles 69
2. Future Certainty: Promissory 71
3. Conterfactual Certainty 72
The Syntactic Profile of wuddi73
1. Discourse Domains 73
2. Verbal Tenses 74
3.Negation 74
4. Position of the MP within the Clause 74
5. Phrasal Arrangement 76
6. wuddi and Other Particles 78
The Grammaticalization of wuddi79
List of Attestations of wuddi and anna80
4. The Modal Expression l ittum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 82
Previous Studies of l ittum83

Contents

ix

A Semantic and Functional Definition of l ittum83

The Syntactic Profile of l ittum85
1. Discourse Domains 85
2. Verbal Tenses 87
3.Negation 87
4. Position of the Expression within the Clause 88
5. Phrasal Arrangement 88
6. l ittum and Other Particles 89
The Grammaticalization of l ittum89
List of attestations of l ittum93
5. The Modal Particle tua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 95
Previous Studies of tua95
A Semantic and Functional Definition of tua97
tua vs. -man97
The Syntactic Profile of tua99
1. Discourse Domains 99
2. Verbal Tenses 102
3. Negation 104
4. Position of the MP within the Clause 106
5. Phrasal Arrangement 106
6. tua and Other Particles 111
tua vs. tua-ma112
The Etymology of tua112
List of attestations of tua114
6. The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions
ibai, l, and aar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Preliminaries115
Types of Irrealis 116
Irrealis and Tense: Future and Past Irrealis 116
Irrealis in Old Babylonian: The Modal Particle man118
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 118
Previous Studies of the Modal Particle man118
A Semantic and Functional Definition of -man119
The Syntactic Profile of -man119
1. Verbal Tenses: Tense Relations Between Protasis and Apodosis 120
2. Irrealis and Precative 125
3. Position of the MP within the Clause 129
Excursus: A Typological Comparison with the Irrealis Particle
by in Russian 130
4. man and Other Particles 131

Contents

Other Expressions of Potentialis and Irrealis 132

The Particle l Expressing Irrealis 133
The Conjunction aar Expressing Irrealis 135
7. The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a . . . . . . . . 138
Synthetic ka or Analytic k a?138
Etymology141
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 143
Previous Studies of ka143
A Semantic and Functional Definition of ka143
1. ka Denoting Irony and Sarcastic Objection 144
2. ka as a Certifier 146
ka and k/kma a vs. tua148
The Syntactic Profile of ka150
1. Discourse Domains 150
2. Verbal Tenses 152
3.Negation 152
4. Position of the MP within the Clause 152
5. Phrasal Arrangement 153
6. ka and Other Particles 153
8. The Modal Particle assurr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 154
Previous Studies of assurr155
A Semantic and Functional Definition of assurr156
Is assurr an Epistemic Modal Particle? 160
The Syntactic Profile of assurr 162
1. Discourse Domains 162
2. Verbal Tenses 163
3.Negation 166
4. Position of the MP within the Clause 166
5. Phrasal Arrangement 167
6. assurr and Other Particles 169
Special Meaning of assurr in Royal Letters
and in Governors Speech 170
The Etymology of assurr 172
The Grammaticalization of assurr175
9. The Modal Particle -mi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution 179
Previous Views Regarding -mi180
Direct Speech, Indirect Speech, Style indirecte libre:
Some Clarifications 182
A Semantic and Functional Definition of -mi 182

Contents

xi

1.mi in Epistolary Texts: A Spacer 184

2.mi in Literary Texts: Apostrophe 188
3. -mi and verba dicendi in Literary Texts and in Letters 193
4. A Test Case: mi in the Code of Hammurabi 196
The Syntactic Profile of -mi198
1.Negation 198
2. Position of mi in the Clause 199
Average number of occurrences of -mi in the Clause 203
10. Conclusions: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Some Less-Attested Modal Particles in Akkadian 206
Summary208
An Outline of the Epistemic Modal System in Old Babylonian 215
Axis I: Possibility Certainty 215
Axis II: Refutation Affirmation 216
Axis III: Nonrealization Realization 216
Axis IV: Subjectification Perspectivization 217
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
List of Texts Cited in the Study (with the MP indicated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
Index of Topics 240
Index of Personal Names and Akkadian Words 243
Index of Texts Cited 243

Preface
The journey into the field of epistemic modality that terminates in the present volume
began with an article on the particle assurr (Wasserman 1994) written during my postdoctoral stay in Paris. Surprised by the lacunas I blithely traversed while writing that
article and the potential scholarly importance of the subject, a more systematic approach
to researching modal particles seemed necessary.
Consequently, with the help of a generous three-year grant from the Israel Science
Foundation (ISF grant 782/98, 19982001), the project Studies in Old-Babylonian
Epistolary Syntax: Modal Particles in the Mari Letters was launched, allowing me to
examine the entire published body of Mari letters, to analyze the relevant passages syntactically, and to create the a database holding the hundreds of passages pertaining to
the research.
In the course of this largely preparatory work, it became clear that the complexity of
the subject requires a thorough examination of the entire Old Babylonian epistolary and
literary corporanot only the Mari letters. This led to a wider examination in which the
results of the 19982001 research were incorporated into a more extensive and comprehensive study, which is presented here.
In bringing this work to conclusion, it is a pleasant duty to thank those who helped
me throughout this long period. First among these is Jean-Marie Durand, who set me
on my journey by inviting me to participate in the M. Birot Memorial Volume, where
the assurr article, the starting point of this study, was published. More than ten years
later, it was again Durand who, together with Dominique Charpin, provided the necessary impetus to conclude this work by inviting me to deliver a course on the subject in
the spring of 2006 at the cole pratique des hautes tudes. This book owes much to Durands sagacity, generosity, and unwavering readiness to discuss all sorts of problems,
both on and off the subject.
Dominique Charpin shared willingly and often his vast knowledge of Old Babylonian
texts and his acute historical understanding of the period.
To both of themto Durand and CharpinI am deeply grateful for their scientific
support, trust, and, above all, for their abiding friendship.
I am happy to acknowledge the help of other colleagues and friends. Marten Stol
sent me his list of references of various modal particles, thus helping me to complete
my database, and Nele Ziegler discussed various Mari passages with me and allowed
me to incorporate them into my study prior to their publication. I also wish to extend
my thanks to the late Dietz Otto Edzard, who supported this research in its early stages.
Regrettably, he did not see it accomplished. Michael P. Streck and Gonzalo Rubio have
both carefully read the manuscript, offering very valuable remarks. I have also benefited
xiii

xiv

Preface

from the assistance of my students, Guy Ron-Gilboa, Rani Shlivinski, and Zhang Bo,
who helped me in various technical matters and offered useful remarks. Eran Cohen of
the Department of Linguistics at the Hebrew University assisted me in the early stages
of compiling the database for this study. As always, Doron Narkiss offered me much
needed help in all editorial matters in an experienced and sensitive way.
Last, but not least, I wish to express my deep gratitude to Anastasia Keshman, my true
companion through life, for her perceptiveness, sharp criticism, and enduring patience.
Despite the help I have received, and although striving to present for the first time a
systematic examination of epistemic modality in Akkadian, this study does not pretend
to answer all questions, leaving not a few of them unresolved. In the slippery reaches
of modality, where philology, linguistics, and psychology intertwine, definitive answers
are not always attainable. I hope that others will deal with these issues in the future.
Nathan Wasserman, Jerusalem

Ceux qui veulent combatre lusage par la grammaire se moquent

Michel de Montaigne, Essais, Au lecteur III, 5

INTRODUCTION
The focus of this study is to present the main components of the system of epistemic
modality in Old Babylonian (OB), mostly expressed by means of modal particles (MPs).
The aim is to delineate a large, though not complete, set of MPs and other modal expressions, one by one, in order to achieve a broad perspective of epistemic modality in OB.
The Introduction contains preliminary remarks on modality in general and on the
corpus used for this research. Nine chapters follow, each of which is dedicated to a
particular MP or to a MP and related modal sentential expressions. Concluding observations regarding the system of epistemic modality in OB, as laid out in this study, are
found in the last chapter, Conclusions.
Something must be said about the nature of the examples used in this book. This
study is corpus-driven. The majority of the examples are taken from epistolary sources,
because this kind of text supplies most of the examples of MPs in OB. In this sense,
the present volume intends to shed new light on the syntax, style, and etiquette of OB
letters. Nonetheless, nonepistolary genres in which MPs are found are also part of the
corpus, and special attention was given to literary texts, including incantations and royal
inscriptions. I tried to find suitable examples to illustrate the employment of the different MPs. At times, a wide context seemed appropriate; at other times, the citation was
limited to the bare minimum. Following the saying nur das Beispiel fhrt zum Licht;
vieles reden tut es nicht, my main purpose was to gain the best insight possible into the
use and meaning of the MP under discussion. Some of the examples are quite opaque,
and I do not claim always to have interpreted them with absolute success. This is, in fact,
precisely one of the characteristics of modality: modal sentences are often open to more
than one interpretation, even in real-life circumstances.
This monograph is intended mainly for Assyriologists, fully acquainted with the various Akkadian genres, especially with epistolary and literary texts. However, philological commentaries have been reduced to a bare minimum, and the focus of the study is
unequivocally linguistic. In many cases, my conclusions regarding the OB corpus are
framed with a more general linguistic audience in mind, drawing attention, where possible, to similarities or differences between OB and other modal systems. Thus, at least
some of the discussions will, it is hoped, be relevant also to linguists not specializing in
Akkadian.
1

Introduction

To facilitate the use of this study, which contains about 600 different passages as
examples,1 all the references relevant to each MP discussed are listed at the end of
every chapter. A general index of the entire body of the registered examples is found at
the end of the volume. All references, except for text series, are given in social-science
(author-date) style. The latter are referred to by their common abbreviation. When a
passage is cited from a text series (such as AbB or ARM) or from a text edition where
texts are numbered consecutively (e.g., Shemshara Letters), the reference, in bold characters, relates to the text number and the relevant lines (e.g., AbB 1, 37: 810). When
a study is not part of a series and it contains successively numbered texts, the number
of the text is specifically indicated (e.g., Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70: 24). Finally, when a
passage stems from a study that is not part of a series and does not contain consecutively
numbered texts, then it is the page number that is cited (e.g., Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii
1317). In ambiguous cases, as when a text is found in a series but is not consecutively
numbered, then the page is clearly indicated (e.g., ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2): 617).
Akkadian readings that are confirmed by collation, often changing the readings found in
earlier editions, are marked by a small circle (e.g., a-ka-a-a-ad-ma up-pa-tim).
The English sentences that are used to illustrate general aspects of modality are my
inventions. I tried to keep these constructed sentences as simple as possible, without any
pretension to hide their artificial character (e.g., John may come on Tuesday).
What is Modality? A Preliminary Definition
Though often described in textbooks, for the sake of completeness, a short general description of the linguistic category of modality is not out of place. In order to tackle modality in a systematic manner, one turns first to the doyen of modality studies,2 Frank
Palmer, and his Mood and Modality (1986), published in the Cambridge Textbooks in
Linguistics series. Though first published in the mid nineteen-eighties (and extensively
modified in 2001), this lucid and balanced cross-linguistic typological study remains, as
many scholars agree, the best available presentation of the subject of modality in modern linguistics.3 Other studies dealing specifically with different languages and language
families were also consulted: Mitchell and Al-Hassans (1994) treatment of modality
in colloquial Arabic, which is helpful in explicating modality in the framework of the
Semitic languages; and Shlompers (2005) perceptive monograph, Modality in Hindi,
whichalthough treating Hindi, a language remote from Akkadian by any standardis
also of much use in its methodological discussions. Both of these studies are especially
refreshing because they divert from the ever-present emphasis in linguistic literature on
English as the exclusive language used to provide examples of modality. In addition,
Hoyes (2005) review article contains a comprehensive survey of current directions in
the field of modality.
1. Known unpublished texts were analyzed but not presented, nor included in this account.
2. Hoye 2005a: 1300.
3. See, e.g., Hoyes evaluation (2005a: 1317).

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

Sketching the Outlines of Modality:

Deontic vs. Epistemic Modality
What, then, is modality? Along with the linguistic category of tense, which, broadly
speaking, captures grammatically the notion of time and aims at placing the action on
the time-axis and the category of grammatical aspect (not to be confounded with Aktionsart), which generally describes different manners in which the action is performed,
there isin all languages4the category of modality. These three categories are not
separate or mutually exclusive; ample data proves their interdependence.
As a preliminary definition, I claim that modality concerns personal stances and attitudes. Where aspect and tense are used to define a specific state of affairs through the
categories of time and manner, modality is used to present the speakers attitude(s)
toward this state of affairs, toward the addressee, and expectation of the addressees attitudes in response. Hence, a modal statement springs out from some kind of reflection,
of introspection of the speaker vis--vis a given state of affairs, and aims to convey his
notion regarding the situation, often trying to affect the addressees opinions toward the
state of affairs at stake.
Modality revolves around the individual subject: Modality ... [is] concerned with
subjective characteristics of an utterance [...], subjectivity is an essential criterion for
modality.5 A wide range of linguistic means can serve this purpose: specific verbal
forms, words, phrases, and certain syntactic formations. In fact, one must remember
that, in actual utterances, modality is often not encoded grammatically but expressed
prosodically: by stress, intonation, gesture, and mimicry.6 These important means of
expressing modality are rarely echoed in written form. Hence, they are virtually untraceable in languagesmodern and living, ancient and extinctthat are recorded only in
written sources. Plene-writing in Akkadian, however, may furnish some indications of
this almost transparent stratum of modal expression.
Modality will be treated here from a cognitive-pragmatic theoretical perspective. This
approach is especially useful when dealing with epistemic modality. Pragmatics and
modality are closely related, since modality is an inherently pragmatic phenomenon. It
involves the many ways in which attitudes can be expressed toward the pure referenceand-predication content of an utterance.7 Accordingly, the cognitivepragmatic approach focuses on the cognitive mechanisms that become activated once speakers express evaluations of given states of affairs....8 Specifically, in many cases, epistemic
modality is concerned with the linguistic expression of ... [the] concepts of possibility,
probability, certainty, and necessity [and how they] are actually deployed in everyday
human thought and talk.9
4. Palmer 1986: 7; Shlomper 2002: 21.
5. Palmer 1986: 16.
6. Lyons 1996: 331; Shlomper 2002: 2122.
7. Verschueren 1999: 129.
8. Hoye 2005a: 1295.
9. Hoye 2005a: 1298.

Introduction

Historically, modality entered the arena of linguistic discussion, as did other productive concepts, through the gate of philosophical and logical inquiry into language. The
Danish linguist Otto Jespersens 1924 study, The Philosophy of Grammar, is a convenient starting point for the description of the development and acceptance of the concept
of modality in modern linguistics.10 Jespersen and others identified a linguistic class,
modality, that gathers utterances that do not contain propositions on reality (i.e., John
is married) but deal with opinions, evaluations, attitudes, and feelings of the speaker
regarding such propositions (i.e., I am afraid John is married, or John is obviously married, or John cannot be married). Crucial to this dichotomy is the question whether a
proposition can or cannot be examined and valued as true or false. Take for instance
John is married. After talking to John himself and even going through the municipal archives, one may say that this nonmodal statement is wrong, since John is still a bachelor.
Modal statements, on the other hand, do not yield easily to such true-false examination.
The statement I am positive that John is married cannot be easily classified as true or
false, unlike the statement John is married (unless one is deliberately lying, an option
that linguistic mechanisms do not usually account for).
Modality, following Jespersen, is divided into two subcategories: the deontic set,
which comprises different elements of will and obligation regarding reality, and the
epistemic set, which contains no element of will but of judgments and assessments regarding reality.11 Palmer defines deontic modality as including directiveswhere we
try to get our hearers to do things, and commissiveswhere we commit ourselves to
do something.12 Epistemic modality concerns the speakers knowledge and belief. It
comprises evidentialscommitment of the speaker to the truth of what he is saying13
(i.e., It must be John who broke up the marriage) and judgmentswhere one presents
hesitations vis--vis the contents of ones utterance14 (i.e., I wouldnt be so sure that it
was really John who caused their marriage to break up). The definition of the two orders
of modality provided by Mitchell and Al-Hassan (1994: 44) is worth citing in full:
Deontic modality has to do with the necessity or possibility of acts performed by oneself
or others in response to some recognizable source of authority, moral or legal, or simply
to physical or psychological need. It concerns the use of languages to express intentions,
wants, desires, needs, etc., all subsumable under the heading desiderative, and since one
is unable to intend or will a state of affairs to come about in the past, this modal category
has much to do with imperatives and, more generally, with statements of permission and
obligation relating to future occurrences. ... Epistemic modality, for its part, relates to
what one knows to be in fact the case or to what one judges to be possible or likely on the
basis of prior experiential knowledge. It concerns statements which assert or imply that a
state of affairs is known to exist or is believed to exist. As deontic modality is concerned
with making a state of affairs possible, so epistemic modality relates to ones understanding of what is or may be assumed to be.
10. Palmer 1986: 910. See also Cohen 2005: 10.
11. Palmer 1986: 1820, 96.
12. Palmer 1986: 97.
13. Palmer 1986: 21.
14. Cf. Palmer 1986: 5153, 5861.

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

Rubio (2007: 1340), in his introductory remarks on Sumerian modality, mentions

another partition of the field of modality. Beginning with the traditional distinction between epistemic and deontic modality, he remarks that
[A]lthough very productive in modal logic, the deontic modality has proven to be more
difficult to translate into linguistic categories than the epistemic one. Thus, many linguists
prefer to distinguish three general modal categories instead of two: (a) agent-oriented modality, which expresses the conditions of an agent with regard to the completion of an
action (obligative, desiderative, potential, etc); (b) speaker-oriented modality, in which the
speaker tries to cause the addressee to do something (as expressed with the imperative and
optative moods); and (c) epistemic modality.

Despite splitting the deontic into agent-oriented versus speaker-oriented, Rubio does not
follow this tripartite model, and in his description of Sumerian modality he adheres for
practical reasons to the long-established duality of deontic versus epistemic modality.
This approach is taken in this study as well.
Verbal Modes and Modality in Old Babylonian
This leads to an associated distinction, the distinction between mood and modality.
The term mood, Latin modus, is restricted in Akkadian, as is common in Indo-European
and Semitic grammars, to verbal paradigms and involves mainly the contrast between
the indicative and other verbal forms, like the subjunctive.15 With von Sodens GAG,
Edzard (1973), Cohen (2005), and others, the following modi can be distinguished in
Akkadian: the Indicative (ima: he has hit), the Precative (lima: let him hit!,
may he hit!, so that he will hit, etc.), the Cohortative (i nima: let us hit!), the
Imperative (maa: hit!), the Prohibitive (l tamaa: do not hit!), the Vetitive (
tama: may you not hit!), the Positive Affirmative (l ama: I did hit) and the
Negative Affirmative (l amau: verily, I did not hit). In general, the indicative in
Akkadian is nonmodal. Yet, in specific circumstances, some indicative forms do carry
modal meanings. The present-future indicative tense imaa, he will hit, bears at
times clear modal functions such as obligation, will, possibility, and eventuality,16 and
in other cases past tense forms are assigned to denote the performative.17 It is further
noticeable that in the precative, cohortative, imperative, prohibitive, and in the vetitive,
there is an essential component of willtherefore, they all belong to the deontic set of
modality. Only two verbal modi in Akkadian belong to the epistemic set of modality:
those that denote a strong commitment of the speaker to the validity of a proposition that
was said or to an action that was done: the positive affirmative (l ama: I did hit) and
the negative affirmative (l amau: verily, I did not hit).
As Hoye (2005a: 1300) sensibly notes, it is useful to distinguish between the modal
systemthe various lexico-grammatical and prosodic means by which modal contrasts
15. See Hoye 2005a: 1486; Mitchell and Al-Hassan 1994: 12 (2.3.2); and recently Rubio 2007: 1338
n.21.
16. Streck 1995: 9498.
17. For performative in Akkadian, see Wasserman 2003: 16869 (and further bibliography there).

Introduction

are madeand to contrast this term with mood, where such contrasts may be signaled
through verbal inflection. Furthermore, as suggested by Palmer (2003: 3) and summarized by Hoye (2005b: 1486):
[M]ood and modality represent two types of modality and these are mutually exclusive:
languages either opt for the subjunctive (mood) or modality (the modal system, comprising the modal auxiliaries). Thus, for instance, whilst Romanian, in line with French and
Italian, would tend to use the subjunctive mood as a generalized marker of modality, English deploys a select group of auxiliary verbs.

Where does Akkadian stand in this typological divide? Since the subjunctive in Akkadian does not function modally (with the clear exception of oath sentences, where it is
clearly modal) but as a syntactic marker of subordination, it seems that Akkadian ought
to be placed among the group of languages in which modality is operated through a
modal system and modal auxiliaries.
Root Modality in Old Babylonian: Will, Ability, and Obligation
In Akkadian, as in other languages, there is a group of verbs whose basic lexical
meaning is modal. These verbs are commonly subsumed under the rubric of root modality.18 In many European languages, root modality verbs constitute a fundamental triad
of will ability obligation: e.g., German wollen knnen mssen/drfen; French
vouloir pouvoir devoir; English will can must. Such a triad of verbs, it is important to note, cannot be fully found in OB. The main operative verbs in OB that belong to
root-modality are: lem, to be able to, lemm, to be unwilling, and muum (used
with the negation l), not to want (to)all treated by Veenhof (1986). Other verbs
that generally mean to wish are: erum, aum, abm, amrum, and umm.19 It
turns out that the set of modal verbs in OB is incomplete: there is no direct correspondence in OB to mssen / devoir / must. Obligation in OB is expressed only by means
of the imperative and not with the help of a special auxiliary modal verb. The nearest
candidates for root modality verbs denoting obligation in OB are the pair (l) wasmum
and (l) na, to be (un)fitting, (un)suitable for,20 to be (in)appropriate, but these fall
short of true obligation verbs, since their use is restricted and they resemble adverbs.
Mental State Modal Verbs (verba sentiendi) in Old Babylonian
Another domain that deserves attention in the field of epistemic modality in Akkadian
is that of mental state modal verbs, or verba sentiendi: to know, to believe, to doubt, to
guess, to suppose, to think, etc.21 This set of verbs plays an important role in epistemic
modality in any language. From a birds-eye view, it is clear that the OB modal system
leans especially on the epistemic verb par excellence idm, to know, less strongly
on assum to think, and much less on qipum to believe and taklum to trust.
Another set of verbs relevant here are those whose basic meaning is seeing, hence
18. See, e.g., Papafragou 1998 and Quattara 2001: 5, who uses the term modalit factuelle.
19. See ARM 28, 52: 5.
20. E.g., AbB 6, 76: 4; AbB 9, 198: 10; AbB 11, 51: 5.
21. See Deutscher 2000: 10223,

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

understanding, assessing, and comprehending.22 There are sufficient attestations

of amrum, nalum, sanqum, and ubb being employed with modal coloring. To the
verbs that designate evaluation one ought to add the verb knum, whose basic meaning
to be firm, solid, often carries the meaning of being reliable, true,23 (and in D-stem
to prove, establish).24 The role that these verbs play in Akkadian modality warrants an
in-depth lexical exploration, which is beyond the scope of this study.
Deontic Modality in Old Babylonian Expressed Lexically
Modality can be expressed not only by grammatically-marked forms (specific verbal
forms, particles, etc.) but also indirectly, by periphrastic means.25 One may say, e.g.: I
really want Manchester United to win tonight. Similarly, one could say: If only Manchester United would win tonight! Both sentences carry the same meaning, and they are
both modal, reflecting the speakers wishes and hopes. Yet only in the second sentence
is there a grammatically-assigned deontic modal form (if only ... would). In many languages, nonassigned grammatical ways to express modality are just as productive as, if
not more than, the grammatically encoded ones. In Akkadian, as was mentioned above,
verbal paradigms are the main channels through which deontic modality is expressed,
especially when obligation is concerned. However, deontic modality in OB can also be
constructed not by verbal forms but with the help of specific lexical expressions such as,
e.g., kma l libbi ila, alas! unfortunately!,26 or the interjections aulap, mercy!, and
apputtum, please!, it is urgent!, to quote to the most common.
Why is OB deontic modality so reliant on verbal paradigmsin fact, integrated into
themwhile epistemic modality is expressed mainly through lexical means? The explanation may ultimately lie in the natural evolution of human language. It seems sound
to assume that in Akkadian, as in other languages, deontic modality developed prior to
the epistemic modality, although this claim is not easy to prove.27 Yet intuitively it is
plausible to imagine that notions that involve will, such as permission (do / dont do it!)
22. Often observed. See, e.g., Wittgenstein 1974 (1949): 90: I know has a primitive meaning similar
to and related to I see (wissen, videre).
23. A few examples for the epistemic meaning of knum will suffice. Shemshara Letters 70: 67 reads:
ki-na-tim a-na [pi-i] a-wa-ti-ka {x} / a-n[a-ku a-na] li-[i]l-li-im a-tu-r, Trusting your words (taking them for solid, true) I turned out to be a fool!; Shemshara Letters 71: 4: a-wa-tum i-i ki-na-at, this
matter is correct, or, ARM 1, 47: 918: i-na a-wa-a-tim i-na-ti / 1 a-wa-tum ki-it-tum / []-ul i-ba-a-i/
[k]a-lu-i-na wa-at-ra-[a]/ ... a-wa-a-tum i-na / ka-lu-i-na re-qa / mi-im-ma [(1) a-wa-tum k]i-it-tum/
-u[l i-ba-a-i], In these words there is even not a single true word, all of them are exaggerated.... These
words, all of them are empty; there is not even a [single] true [word] (in them) (cf. CAD R 372e). Note the
expression a kinntim, for real (FM 9, 4:1920), and the term takittum, confirmation. The concept of
truth in Mesopotamian was examined extensively in Lmmerhirt 2010.
24. For more on proving verbs (kunnum and burrum) and their syntax, see Deutscher 2000: 5457;
16869.
25. Palmer 1986: 5.
26. For this expression, see now AbB 14, p. 208.
27. See, however, Shlomper 2002: 22 and Papafragou 1998. The corollaries of this statement in the
cognitive development of children are complicated and go beyond the scope of this study, see Matsui, Yamamoto, and McCagg 2006.

Introduction

and wish (I want to do it!) preceded notions that involve judgment (I believe that this is
so and so), or doubt (is it possible that this is so and so?).
Epistemic Modality Expressed Periphrastically
OB mainly uses specific particles in order to express epistemic modality. But here
too, as in the case of deontic modality, there are ways to denote evaluations and judgments that are not grammatically encoded but periphrastically constructed. A case in
point is the curious declaration found in some OAkk royal inscriptions: DN1 u DN2 ma
l surrtum l kni, I swear by DN1 and DN2: (all this) is not false! It is true!28 An
almost identical Sumerian assertion is found in ulgis and Ime-Dagans royal hymns:
DN1 ... DN4 lul ba-ra-na -ge-en, (By the names of) the gods ... : this is not
false! It is true!29 I am not convinced by Ludwig (1990: 56) that these statements are
devoid of truth-value meaning and that they were intended only to stress that the specific
text adheres to royal archetypes and writing norms, without referring to external historical facts. Although the exact ideological background of these propagandist statements
is hard to fathom, and even if such periphrastic formulas as (all this) is not false! It is
true! function occasionally as dead modals, they still derive from and contain the
structure of epistemic modal statements.30 The origin of these declarations in public historiographic records supports the assumption that they had genuine epistemic functions.
The Sumerian proverb (SP 13:42) l-gab-b a k -dIn an n a-k a -b -i n -g u b d u m u m unus - a- ni rin-na a n-na -a b-b inim? am a-g u10 l u l -a g e-n a-[m ]-e- e,
When the ecstatic stood at Inannas gate, his daughter said: my mothers word is not
false, it is true! points in the same direction.31 As I understand it, the proverb is sarcastic: the performance at Inannas gate receives a support from a woman who presents
herself as the daughter of the goddess, while she is no other than the diviners daughter
whose motivation to help her fathers divinatory act is clear. The irony of the proverb
only strengthen the notion that statements like it is not false, it is true were meant at
their face value.
A letter of Sams-Addu bolsters the suggestion that the OAkk and Ur III expressions
just mentioned carry modal significance, made deliberate by repetition. In the letter,
Sams-Addu assesses the reliability of another person, making use of clear-cut epistemic
terms:
Shemshara Letters 4:312:
tup-pa-ka a tu-a-bi-lam e-me / a-wa-[t]u-ka ma-al ta-a-pu-ra-am s-an-qa/
a-wa-at ia-u-ub-dIM li-il / qa-at dingir e-li-u e4-em-u ma-q-it / a-wa-ti-u
-ul i-di / ni-i dingir a i-za-ka-ru / -ul i-di/ ki-ma a i-na u-ut-ti-u / ni-i
dingir i-za-ka-ru / i-na-a li-il-lu e4-em-u ma-aq-[t]u,
28. Attestations conveniently collected in Kienast and Sommerfeld 1994: 272 s.v. surrtum.
29.E.g., ulgi B: 319, see Ludwig 1990: 5455.
30. Liveranis (1995) discussion is a convenient summary of the problems involved in the false statements in royal inscriptions.
31. Alster 1997: vol. 1, 212. ETCSL 6.1.13 somewhat differently.

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

I heard your letter which you have sent to me. Your words, as much as you have
written to me, are accurate. (As for) the words of Yaub-Adduhe is mad! The
hand of the god (is) on him. His reason has diminished. He doesnt know his
(own) words. Truly he doesnt know the oath he takes: as if he took the oath in
his sleephe keeps forgetting (it). A mad man: truly (u) his wits are diminished.32
An interesting case in which the writer raises the hypothetical option of lying to the king
is found in a letter from Mari:
ARM 27, 26:2829:
[a-na mi-ni]m i-na s-ar-tim an-ni-tam a-na e-er / [be-l-ia a]-pu-ra-am . . .
[Why] would I write such lies to my [lord]? . . .
Modal Polysemy
Modality, therefore, can be elusive. The same form or expression can be interpreted
as modal and as nonmodal, depending on the speech-situation. If we know from a given
context that John has a wife and that polygamy is illegal in Johns culture, than the verb
can in the sentence John cannot be married may carry a nonmodalmore preciselya
root-modality meaning: John cannot be married (in the sense of an objection to an action) simply because he is already married. Can in this case presents an extralinguistic
fact, just like dogs cannot fly. But if John is seen in the company of many different
women, then the verb can in John cannot be married, carries a modal epistemic meaning, by which the speaker evaluates Johns behavior and commits himself to the unlikelihood of a particular fact: Johns being married.
Moreover, modal forms can carry also different modal meanings. Other mental-state
verbs are also prone to this sort of ambiguity. Let us imagine our John running accidentally into a woman whom he dated a year ago:You wouldnt believe me, but I was
thinking about you all that time. The woman replies:You are right. I dont believe you.
Thus, believe is used as an epistemic modal verb in Johns words, an assertion that was
meant to overcome a possible rejection form the woman, a tactical withdrawal intended
to gain a common ground that would allow a safe advancement in the course of the discussion. The same verb, believe, in the womans response was nonmodal. It was used at
its lexical meaning, as a root modality verbhence the sarcastic effect.33 Consider also
the following anecdote, cited in more than one study on modality:34
Castro visits Moscow and is taken on a tour by Brezhnev. First they go for a drink and
Castro praises the beer. Yes, it was provided by our good friends from Czechoslovakia.
Next they go for a ride in a car and Castro admires the car. Yes, these cars are provided by
our good friends from Czechoslovakia. They drive to an exhibition of beautiful cut glass,
32.For mu maqit in line 6 (cf. line 12), I follow Stol 2002: 109. i-na-a in line 12 remains difficult. I
suggest, hesitantly, considering a corrupt form of mam, to forget.
33. See Bhatt 1997.
34. See Papafragou 2000: 21.

10

Introduction
which Castro greatly admires. Yes, this glass comes from our good friends from Czechoslovakia. They must be very good friends says Castro. Yes, they must, Says Brezhnev.

Must in Castros words is used as an emphatic evaluation, an evidential that belongs

to the epistemic set of modality. The same verb must in Brezhnevs answer carries the
meaning of directive, and it belongs therefore to the deontic set of modality.35 The humorous effect is achieved precisely by this unexpected switch from one modal meaning
to another. It is thus clear that modal polysemy does exist and that the same form may
bear different modal meanings.
Co-occurrence of Modal Expressions
Modal expressions can be clustered together, augmenting and reinforcing each other
or at times contradicting each other. Some MPs are loners; others associate more easily with their homologues. Generally, however, one may say that components of the
same section of modality tend not to interact with each other at close range, since such
interaction risks blurring or even compromising the specific modal meaning carried by
each of them. Hoye (2005b: 1498) quotes a wonderful satirical example of excessive
co-occurrence of modal expressions from the 1986 British comedy Yes, Prime Minister!
In this episode (The Grand Design) Sir Humphrey, now Cabinet Secretary, tries to
persuade the Prime Minister to opt for the Trident nuclear missile:
Sir Humphrey: With Trident we could obliterate the whole of Eastern Europe.
Prime Minister: I dont want to obliterate the whole of Eastern Europe.
Sir Humphrey: Its a deterrent!
Prime Minister: Its a bluff . . . I probably wouldnt use it . . .
Sir Humphrey: Yes, but they dont know that you probably wouldnt.
Prime Minister: They probably do.
Sir Humphrey: Yes, they probably know that you probably wouldnt but they cant certainly know!
Prime Minister: They probably certainly know that I probably wouldnt!
Sir Humphrey: Yes, but even though they probably certainly know that you probably
wouldnt, they dont certainly know that, although you probably wouldnt, theres no
probability that you certainly would!
Prime Minister: What?!
Sir Humphrey: It all boils down to one simple issue. You are the Prime Minister of Great
Britain . . .

Hoye (2005b: 1498) summarizes this scene:

35. Of course, this polysemy is found in other English modal verbs as well. Consider, e.g., you should
do it! (deontic) vs. I should be able to do it (epistemic). For the deontic/epistemic polysemy in colloquial
Arabic, see Mitchell and Al-Hassan 1994: 43.

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

11

The PMs initial use of the epistemic frame probably wouldnt triggers off the modal (and
largely) epistemic flak, which so clearly marks the conflicting views of the two protagonists and their desire to change the others mind. The modal expressions deployed (modal
lexical verbs, modal auxiliaries, and modal adverbs) exhibit a mix of (primarily) epistemic
and deontic functional values: their concatenation, crescendo-fashion, results in strings of
harmonic and non-harmonic combinations ... the latter, such as They probably certainly
know, being the source of much of the humour the sketch generates.

In real, not satirical, every-day texts it is hard to find such an avalanche of epistemic expressions. Indeed, most OB MPs tend to be loners. But in one OB letter, a similar spiral
of MPs, on a smaller scale of course, is found:
ARM 28, 179:3141:
Perhaps (pqat) you will say: he tried but got tired. (His) units do not carry
provisions, not even for a day. Had they (umma) carried many provisions it
is certain (wuddi-man) that I could have walked continuously for one month in
midst of the steppe. I fear (assurr) you would say: Zazia did not go. I swear
by Adad if I did not (umma l) go!
I shall return to this passage in the coming chapters.
The Uniqueness of Each Modal System
Each language has its own modal system. The English epistemic modal system, for
example, has only judgments.36 By contrast, Germans epistemic modality has both
judgments and evidentials.37 Similarly, English modal verbs (that is, root-modality
verbs) are linguistically more distinguished than French modal verbs, which are less easily discerned from other verbs in French.38 Methodologically, the principles of a modal
system attested in one language cannot automatically be applied to another. This weakens, if not undermines, the possibility of gaining insight from comparing the Sumerian
and Akkadian modal systems.39 Consequently, Sumerian (directly or through bilingual
texts) remains mostly irrelevant for this discussion.
But the pitfall of translation is unavoidable. When one examines a language different
than ones own, one is inevitably armed with the preconceptions of another linguistic
system. Yet, this is exactly what is required: placing millennia-old data into the conceptual matrix of modern linguistics. Having no other path to resort tono intrinsic theoretical paradigm of Akkadian modality exists, and the relevance of Sumero-Akkadian lexical lists is very limitedwe are left with a set of philological tools, linguistic concepts,
textual sensitivity, and common-sense to penetrate into Akkadian epistemic modality.

36. See Hoye 2005b: 15001501.

37. Palmer 1986: 53.
38. Palmer 1986: 5. For the central role of auxiliary verbs in English modality, see Hoye 2005a: 1299;
for the inner development of auxiliary verbs in English and German, respectively, see Abraham 2002.
39. For Sumerian modality, see Civil 2000 and recently Rubio 2007: 133645.

12

Introduction

Modal Particles in General Linguistic Literature40

With these general notions of modality in mind, we may ask, what is a particle? A
broad definition can be offered (with Izre'el 1991: 200): a particle is a nondeclinable part
of speech that is not a noun, nor an article, nor pronoun, nor a verb.41 What remains is
to differentiate between a particle and an adverb. This problem will be tackled below.
Over the last three decades, particles in general, and modal particles in particular,
have been at the center of scientific interest.42 Nonetheless, few of the resultant studies
bear directly on the study of Akkadian MPs, because the phenomenon of a wide scope
of MPs is very much characteristic of Germanic languages. Semitic languages do not
exhibit a wide spectrum of MPs. No statistics regarding the number of MPs in different
Semitic languages are available, so any comparison of Akkadian to Semitic languages
would be imprecise. Nevertheless, Akkadian evidently is not poor in MPs, exhibiting a
wide range of epistemic MPs. Is this an exceptional phenomenon in Semitics? Should it
be related to the deep and ancient linguistic connection of Akkadian to Sumerian? If so,
MPs in Akkadian may analytically mirror some of agglutinative prefixes in Sumerian.
But this conjecture deserves a separate investigation.
Another reason for the relatively small relevance that studies in general linguistics
bear for research into Semitic MPs is methodological. In general linguistics studies,
which often focus on English as their primary language, treatments of modal adverbs
abound. The reason for this is that many of the modal expressions in English are formally adverbs (e.g., obviously, certainly, really, honestly, sincerely, etc.).43 In other languages, expressions of this sort do not necessarily take the form of adverbs and have
different morphological constructions. A number of Semitic studies, including some
dealing with Akkadian, also tend to classify MPs as adverbs.44 Consequently, research
on MPs conducted outside the boundaries of the Semitic languagesmainly in the field
of Germanic languages, where MPs are more common than in Englishseems not to
apply to Semitic studies. This is not merely a question of linguistic nomenclature. Adverbs are normally regarded as influencing only their immediate surroundings, usually
the verbal component of the sentence, whereas MPs are considered to have a wider and
deeper effect on the whole phrase. As put by Palmer (1986: 2): modality ... does not
40. Some of the remarks in this section were published with some modifications in Wasserman 2006:
150151.
41. Cf. also van Baar 1996.
42. E.g., Discourse Particles, Modal and Focal Particles, and All That Stuff..., conference held at the
University of Groningen, December 89, 2000, and a complete list of abstracts of the papers read, see http://
odur.let.rug.nl/%7Evdwouden/particles/prog02.htm.
43. See, e.g., Capone 2001: 34 and passim. Note Hoyes (2005b: 1485) interesting observation that in
certain instances, modal adverbs can be treated as modal particles. This is certainly true of such idiomatic
combinations as may/might + well ... or couldnt/cant + possibly... , the adverb has become fully de
lexicalized and integrated within the verb group.
44. See, e.g., Groneberg 1987: 121. Note also Wilcke 1968: 230 and passim, referring to MPs more as
adverbs than as particles. Last, Reiner refers to ta as an adverb that Benno Landsberger studied in connection with other modal particles for volume M of the CAD. (Reiner 2002: 8). A discussion of particles
in contrast to adverbs is found in van Baar 1996: 27785.

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

13

relate to the verb alone or primarily, but to the whole sentence. Some features in the
Semitic languages have been inadequately described or simply ignored because of this
terminological convention.45
Epistemic Modal Particles in Semitic Studies
Several major studies dealing with MPs in the ancient Semitic languages should be
mentioned in the context of the mounting interest in modality in general linguistics in
recent years: Aartuns (1974) monograph on particles in Ugaritic, Bravmanns (1977)
study on the particle dalm, lest, in Syriac, Ullmanns (1984) investigation of an MP
designating perhaps in Classical Arabic, and, recently, Novicks (2009) study of ark
in Tannaitic Hebrew. In addition, for Akkadian, we have von Sodens (1949) pioneering lexical survey mentioned earlier, Vielleicht im Akkadischen. One of the particles treated by von Soden (assurr) was taken up by me (Wasserman 1994). Krebernik
and Streck (2001) presented a detailed study of irrealis constructions in OB. The main
topic of their article was the enclitic particle man, but other MPs, especially tua, were
treated there as well.
As for modern Semitic languages, we have Mitchell and Al-Hassans (1994) extensive study of mood, modality, and aspect in spoken (Egyptian and Levantine) Arabic,
Kaddaris (1991) study of the MP waday in rabbinic literature (etymologically connected to Akkadian wuddi), and Livnats (1999) and Bars (2001) studies of epistemic
modality in Modern Hebrew. Modality in modern Semitics allows a glimpse of the dramatic diachronic changes, but also of the surprising continuity, that Semitic languages
have been subject to throughout the ages.
In this study, only the epistemic part of OB modality is examined; the deontic, which
has been well covered, is not included. Since it was immediately recognized that deontic
modality is part of Akkadian verbal paradigms, this part of Akkadian modality has been
studied since the early stages of Assyriology and is now relatively well understood.46
Epistemic modality in Akkadian, in contrast, escaped thorough investigation and still
lacks systematic description. More than half a century has passed since von Sodens
Vielleicht im Akkadischen appeared, yet this 1949 paper remains the sole attempt to
present a comprehensive description of epistemic modality in Akkadian. The issue of
epistemic modality has become more acute with the spectacular pace of publication of
epistolary texts, especially those from Mari. Because letters are the main source of attestation for epistemic MPs in Akkadian, hundreds of attestations of MPs in OB letters
have become available. As long as no systematic analysis of this range of particles is
offered, these MPs are bound to be translated intuitively, ad sensum. This is a troubling
situation that I hope this study will remedy.

45. It must be stressed, however, that in the main Akkadian manual, von Soden aptly dedicated a section to MPs, titled Satzdeterminierende und modale Partikeln (GAG 121), distinguishing them from his
discussion of the various Akkadian adverbs.
46. See Edzard 1973 and Cohen 2005.

14

Introduction

The Corpus of the Study47

For the sake of clarity and completeness, some remarks on the texts upon which this
study is based follow. The available body of texts, the large majority of which are letters, reflects the linguistic nature of MPs, which in OB and in other languages as well
are characteristic of conversational situations with particular discursive functions. It is
noteworthy that, more often than not, even when attested in literary texts, OB MPs are
found in the context of conversation between two individuals.
The large and varied body of letters from the OB period (ca. 19001500 b.c.e.) can
be roughly divided into four main linguistic and geopolitical subcorpora.48 The first includes letters from sites in the Mesopotamian plainfrom the South (especially letters
from Ur, Uruk, Larsa), and the North (Sippar, Babylon, Ki, Dilbat, Kisurra, Lagaba,
and nearby sites). The second group comprises letters originating from the Diyl region, east of the heart of the Mesopotamian plain (mainly Enunna, Ishchali, and TellHaddad). The third group is made up of letters from sites from the mountainous fringes
of Mesopotamia (like Tell-Rim and emra). The fourth subcorpusespecially important for this studyis the group of letters excavated in Tell arr, ancient Mari, the
capital of the Kingdom of Border of the Euphrates. Though strictly speaking located on
the western edge of Mesopotamia, this principal corpus cannot be considered peripheral,
since Mari was a major center of Mesopotamian culture from time immemorial. Mari
letters show sufficient features pertaining to content and style to allow us to distinguish
them from Babylonian letters. In this corpus, approximately 20,000 different cuneiform
tablets and fragments,49 including about 5,000 letters, were unearthed. These finds comprise one of the most extensive and best-preserved epistolary corpora of the OB period
and in antiquity in general, second only to the corpus of Old Assyrian documents from
Anatolia that were found in Kltepe, ancient Kani, which amounts to about 22,000 or
more.50 The specific geographic and ethnographic position of the kingdom of Marion
the main trading route of the Fertile Crescent, connecting lower Mesopotamia, the Zagros foothills with the Syrian Desert and the Mediterranean coast51is reflected in the
Mari texts, in which influences of Hurrian and various Amorite dialects can be detected
in the language and in the onomasticon.52
Compared to the letters from central Mesopotamia, Mari letters include more informal figures of speech and include vivid colloquial idioms and proverbial sayings. To this
relative informality one may add the morphological characteristics of the Mari documents, their lexical and syntactical peculiarities, and the occasional nonstandard (that
47. Parts of this section have been published in Wasserman 2006: 149150.
48. The most complete and up-to-date list of the extent and the geographical distribution of the OB
cuneiform findings is Charpin 2004a: 40380. More specifically, for an introduction to OB letters, see Sallaberger 1999 and recently Pientka-Hinz 2007 and Ziegler 2006.
49. Charpin and Ziegler 2003: 1. Many more tablets are continuously being found at this site.
50. Michel 2001: 9 lists 20,000 tablets; Michel 2003: v lists 22,300 (by the beginning of the year 2002).
Veenhof and Eidem 2008: 41, 45 list ca. 23,000 tablets.
51. Durand 1997: 4156
52. See, e.g., Charpin 1989; Charpin 1993; Durand 1984; Durand 1988; Durand 1992b; Lambert 1967.

Sketching the Outlines of Modality

15

is, deviating from Babylonian) usage of verbal forms.53 The explanation for the special
character of the Mari epistolary documents, in comparison to the letters of central and
lower Mesopotamia, is manifold. First, one should not underestimate the weight of the
diglosia in which Marian scribes were operating, for a number of Amorite dialects spoken in the Syrian Jezirah no doubt interfered with Akkadian, the main linguistic vehicle
used for writing in the period. Second, the scribes schooling in upper Mesopotamia was
different, probably less rigid and standardized, than in central and lower Mesopotamia,
as reflected in the formulaic style of the Babylonian letters and their fossilized patterns.54
The third reason for the unique character of the Mari documents is that no royal archive
analogous to that of Zimr-lms chancellery55 has been found in Babylonia proper,
where mainly local archives with predominantly administrative interests have been unearthedhence their typical official tone.56 In the Mari corpus, in contrast, one finds not
only the correspondence of local and royal officials of various echelons of power but
also letters from other strata of society: commoners, men, and women writing petitions
to their superiors; colleagues asking for favors from one another; prophets and ecstatics
reporting their visions and oracular messages in written form to local or central authorities; Amorite dignitaries communicating with the king, etc. The abundant body of Mari
texts is probably the nearest we will get to what might cautiously be called colloquial
OB Akkadian.57 In conjunction with the other subcorpora of Babylonian, Diyl-region
and peripheral OB letters, this corpus enables, for the first time, thorough research into
OB epistemic modality.
53. To name just a few, see, e.g., the inconsistent use of the subjunctive in subordinated verbal clauses,
or just the opposite situation: the unexpected use of the subjunctive in umma clauses; the different vowel
classes in certain verbs; and the occurrence of certain forms, like the D-stem infinitive, which formally resemble Assyrian morphology. These and other morphological and syntactic peculiarities of the Mari letters
are beyond the scope of this work.
54. For the question of the Babylonian scribal tradition at Mari, see Charpin 1992 and Guichard 1997.
See also Waetzoldt 1990.
55. The records of Sn-kid from Uruk are also an important source of knowledge, but not on the same
scale as the archives of Mari.
56. A letter sent by Anam, king of Uruk to Sn-muballi, Hammurabis father, king of Babylon, found
in southern Mesopotamia, shows many features that closely resemble Mari letters (see Falkenstein 1963).
57. For the question of colloquial vs. standardized epistolary language, see the reservations of Sallaberger 1999: 1012.

We teach a child that is your hand, not that is perhaps (or probably) your hand.
Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty

Chapter 1
THE MODAL PARTICLE pqat IN OLD BABYLONIAN
The first MP to be treated in this study is pqat. It belongs to a quartet of particles that
constitute the group of inferentialsexpressions by which the speaker expresses his
estimation regarding a particular state of affairs based on the (usually limited) knowledge available to him.1 This foursome includes: pqat, midde, wuddi, and anna. Each of
these particles will be addressed separately.
In an OB dialogue, UET 6/2, 414, a pedantic customer enters the cleaners shop. He
brings his cloth to be cleaned but, as it turns out, what he really wants is to teach the
fuller how to do his job. The dialogue between the annoying client and the fuller reaches
a climax when the fuller finally explodes in anger and frustration. The client is driving
him mad by giving vexing instructions about how to clean the cloths. One of his suggestions begins with the MP pq, a by-form2 of pqat:
Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414):17:
p-q s-im-tam te-me-s! ... tu-na-[d]a-[ad,
Perhaps you will apply an ornament on (the cloth) ... and comb (it) ...!3
What is the exact meaning of pq, or pqat, rendered here perhaps? A better translations will be offered below. In this chapter, I will explore the meaning and usage of pqat
in OB sources, trying to isolate this MP and define it better against other MPs.

1. Cf. Sanders and Spooren 1997: 96 (evidentials); Shlomper 2005: 121 (inferentials).
2. For an analysis of this form, see below, in the discussion of the etymology and grammaticalization
of pqat.
3.For pqa in this line (translated as really), cf. Livingstone 1988: 181. Note that AHw 865a raises
the possibility that pq here is a mistake for minde. It seems that von Soden felt that the MP pq(t) is too
mellow an expression to come from this tiresome person.

16

Previous Studies of pqat

17

The Attestations:
Generic and Geographical Distribution
The particle pqat is common in OB letters. I have collected some hundred OB examples of this MP.4 Two-thirds of the examples, about 60 cases, are from Mari. The
other one-third is from central Babylonia. Only four examples come from emra, at
the fringes of the Mesopotamian linguistic and cultural zone. Only one attestation of
pqat in nonepistolary sources has been found: the dialogue between the launderer and
the customer just mentioned. This text, however, resembles letters because it records a
colloquial conversation about daily matters. Thus, as far as the present data goes, pqat
is restricted to texts of interlocution between two parties in epistolary, or epistolary-like,
textsnever in descriptive or narrative speech. Hence, pqat is a typical evidential, a
category of modality that is to a considerable extent, if not exclusively, a feature of
discourse.5
The orthography of this MP varies in accordance with the local chancellery customs:
/pi/ in southern Babylonia and /p/ in northern Babylonia and in Mari, /q/ in the South
and /qa/ in Mari. In emra, the spelling is mixed: /qa/ as in Mari, but /pi/ as in southern Babylonia, but also /p/ as in northern Babylonia and in Mari.
There is no OB example in which pqat is written with a long vowel (*pi-i-qa-at). In
fact, the explicitly long writing of the /p/ in pqat is only found in a later lexical list:
i gi- in- zu = p-i-q.6 This rare spelling is exceptional, and it is not substantiated by
OB spellings. The lengthening of the a at the end of pq, by contrast, is found explicitly
in a letter from Kisurra: p-q-a.7
Previous Studies of pqat
Different meanings for pqat have been offered by various scholars. In 1907, Zimmern
rendered pqat as frwahr. Thureau-Dangin translated it vraiment, and en vrit;
Jean translated it sans doute; Dossin and Durand with certainement. On other occasions, Durand preferred il est vraisemblable que....8
Ungnad was probably the first to recognize that in some cases pqat functions as a
conditional, similarly to umma.9 In Vielleicht im Akkadischen (1949), von Soden
accepted this meaning but stressed that it is found only in a limited number of cases.10 In 1956, Landsberger suggested, without elaborating further, that pqat and pq,
as attested in the lexical list known as Neo-Babylonian Grammatical Texts, mean it
4. The list of attestations is found at the end of the chapter.
5. Shlomper 2005: 124.
6. MSL 17, 50 (Erim-u III):91.
7. Kienast 1978: vol. II, 156:24.
8. Zimmern 1907: 21618; see Thureau-Dangin 1935: 308, where a short discussion of this MP is
found; Thureau-Dangin 1943: 111:119; Jean 194244: 67:14; Dossin 1938b: 182; Durand in LAPO 16:434,
in contrast with, e.g., LAPO 17:602.
9. Ungnad 1928: 71.
10. von Soden 1949: 386.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

18

does not matter if.11 CAD P refers to pqat as an adverb, defining it as perhaps, it

may be that (epistolary expression).12 In the same way, Heimpel translates pqat
as perhaps; and Ziegler as peut-tre.13 However, in one place, Durand states
that Piqat ne signifie pas peut-tre..., mais coup sr; cest lquivalent du
franais sans aucun doute.14
It is clear that the meaning of this MP has not been firmly established and that it
requires a deeper investigation.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of pqat
1. Weak Doubter
The main function of pqat in the OB epistemic modal system is that of a weak
doubter, a MP classified under the category of potentials. This MP is used when
the speaker has only a very limited knowledge of the state of affairs or no information at all, but he is nevertheless interested, or obliged, to assess some unknown
(future or past) event, without committing himself to the possibility raised. To put
it simply, pqat is the basic perhaps in OB, used in sentences such as: perhaps
it will rain tomorrow, or perhaps he will come on Monday, perhaps on Tuesday.
This interpretation is bolstered by common statements of ignorance that occasionally accompany pqat: mannum l di, who knows? ul di, I dont know,15 ina
tamtiya, according to my calculations,16 or luul, let me see.17
By way of anticipation, it can be said that pqat is placed lower than midde on the
scale of confidence of the speaker regarding his assessment of reality. While pqat
is a weak doubter, midde is a scalar MP whose semantic range stretches between
the functions of a deductive and a certifier, an epistemic MP by which the speaker
evaluateswith some degree of certitudethe likelihood of some state of affairs.
The MPs anna and wuddi are higher on the scale of confidence. These MPs are
presumptives, presenting an indisputable fact, insofar as the speaker understands it.
Let us examine some examples of pqat. In a letter from the chief administrator
Yasm-smu to the king, we read,
ARM 13, 25:516:18
gu4 a r--l-u / a-na be-l-ia --a-u- / i-nu-ma --a-u-[]u-ma / a-aa! a-na be-l-ia / a-na qa-b-e-em / az-zi-iz-ma / um-ma a-na-ku-ma / p-qa-at
11. MSL 4, 189.
12. CAD P 386.
13. See, for example, Heimpel 2003: 208 and passim; FM 6, 25:2229.
14. LAPO 18, p. 310, d.
15. ARM 26/2, 354:1220; ARM 26/2, 489:4144; FM 6, 25:2229; Shemshara Letters 11:1622.
16. FM 6, 25:2229, cf. also ARM 2, 23:1516.
17. AbB 6, 125:1625.
18. LAPO 18:970.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofpqat

19

i-ba-al-lu-u / u 4-2-kam u 4-3-ka [m l]i-zi-iz-ma / wa-ar-ka-a[s-s] li-ip-pa-ris/ i-na-an-na gu4 u- / i-ta-a

The bull that Warad-iliu has given as a present to my lord, just as it was given to
him, got sick, and when I was about to talk to my lord (about it), I said to myself:
perhaps he will get well, so let it stand 2 or 3 days and let its decision be taken.
Now this bull is still sick.
The destiny of this poor bull is a good starting point for the discussion of pqat. The
writer uses this MP to express his lack of information regarding the future: will the bull
live, or will it die? Based on his state of not-knowing, he preferred not to predict.
Another telling example is a letter from unura-al, the kings right-hand associate, to Zimr-lm:
FM 7, 45:4246:
[i-na-a]n-na p-qa-at a-wa-tam a-a-ti da-di-a-du-[u]n / [iq-b]i-um um-ma
a-wa-tum i-in be-l-ia m[a-a]-[ra-at] / [a-na] a-ma-ar a-wa-tim a-a-ti a-na [dadi-a]-du-un / [ke-em lu]-uq-bi um-ma a-na-k[u-m]a [um-ma a-w]a-tum i-in-ka
ma-a-ra-at / [a-um e4-m]i-im a i-ma-arki a-[na ]a-[m]u-ra-bi lu-uq-bi
Now, perhaps Dd-adun said to him (ammurabi of Yamad) this word. If it
pleases my lord, I can talk to Dd-adun to test this issue, saying: If it pleases
you let me talk to ammurabi about the issue of Imar ...
This example proves that pqat renders an open hypothesis. unura-als suggestion
that his assumption be tested proves that pqat should be classified under the epistemic
category of speculatives: assessments of reality that are not based on any deduction
from previous knowledge or that are based on very limited knowledge. So also in a letter
from Buqqum to Zimr-lm:
ARM 26/2, 491:3437:19
a-na-ku l ki-za-am / a-di i-tu-ul-limki a-ru-ud um-ma a-na-ku-ma / pqa-at i-me-dda-gan da--um-ma i-da-a / al-ka e4-em pa--ar l -n u n naki pu-ur-sa
So I sent a groom to itullum thinking: perhaps Ime-Dagan is deceiving us
completely. Go and verify the news about the leaving of the Enunneans.
The writer uses pqat to express his lack of knowledge of the real actions of Ime-Dagan.
He, too, urges his addressees to verify his assumption, thus proving the epistemic character of pqat.
One more example comes from a letter of Sams-Addu to his incompetent son
Yasma-Addu:
19. Heimpel 2003: 38889.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

20

ARM 1, 32:720:20
p-qa-at u- a-na na-da-nim / -ul i-re-ed-du / -ba-a-ka-ma i-na a-watim/ ki-a-am i-a-ba-at-ka / um-ma-a-mi lugal na-da-nam / [i]-pu-ra-ak-kum /
at-ta -ul ta-na-ad-di-in / [an]-ni-tam i-qa-ab-bi-ik-kum-ma / [i-n]a bu-u-ti-ka
ta-na-ad-di-in-um / [u]m-ma u- a-na na-da-nim / i-ri-id-du-um i-di-inum/ um-ma u- a-na {la} na-da-nim / la i-ri-id-du-um / la ta-na-ad-di-inum
Perhaps this house is not fit to be given and he will shame you by saying: The
king (Sams-Addu) has written to you to give, but you do not give! This is what
he will say to you and you will give him (the house only) after being put to
shame. If this house is fit to be given to himgive (it) to him; if this house is not
fit to be {NOT} given to himdo not give it to him.
Using pqat, Sams-Addu, who was located in ubat-Enlil in the north, expresses his
doubts regarding the situation in Mari: the house may be fit for dwelling, or it may not
be. His state of not-knowing is amplified by continuation: if the house is ... do one
thing; if it is not, do another. Clearly, pqat presents an open possibility in which the
speaker is not committed to either of the two options he has put forward.
Finally, the letter of a commercial agent charged with a mission to bring grain to the
temple of ama:
AbB 6, 125:1625:
[m i-na] kar uruki / []a [w]a-a-[b]a-ku -u[l] i-ba-a-i / um-ma a-na-k[u-ma] / lu-u--ul p-q-a[t] / m i-ma-q-tam-ma / e-am an-ni-a-am -a-arka-ab / [m] -ul im-q-ta-am / [m] q-du-um ra-ka-bi-a / i-na k ar Sipparki
ag-ra-am-ma / i-di-a a-na-ku lu-ud-di-in
There is no ship in the quay of the town where I sit. I said (to myself): let me
look (around), perhaps a ship will show up, so that I will load this grain (on
it). (But) no ship has shown up. Hire for me a ship with its crew in the quay of
Sippar; I will pay its fee.
This last example demonstrates precisely that pqat was used to express basic doubt, an
open possibility for which the speaker vouched and vouches no guarantee: perhaps a
ship will arrive? ... well, it did not.21
2. Disjunctive Construction: Optative
Another function of pqat that derives directly from its role as weak doubter is its employment in the construction pqat A pqat B.22 There can be no doubtas established

20. LAPO 17, 750.

21. Similarly ARM 2, 121:912 (with LAPO 16, 434).
22. So in ARM 2, 66:1213; ARM 26/1, 121:1821; ARM 26/2, 354:1220.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofpqat

21

by von Soden23that in this kind of construction pqat renders the logical relationship
of disjunction: perhaps A, perhaps B,24 as in the following letter from an unknown
sender to the king Sams-Addu,
MARI 6, 272:417:
i-tu na-a[k-ru-um] i-na i-l[a ... ki] / i-[]e-e-em [e4-e-e]m-u mi-im-[ma] /
-ul e-me um-ma a-[n]a-ku-ma p-q[a-at] / a-na b d du t u -i-dIMki / it-ta-laak p-qa-at a-na za-[al-ma-q-imki] / p-qa-at a-na tu-ut-tu-ul[ki] / p-qa-at a-na
na-we-e-[im] / a-a--im it-ta-la-[ak] / da-lu-um-ma a-da-al / [u4]-um up-p
an-n-e-e[m] / [a-n]a e-er be-l-ia -a-b[i-lam] / [ma-am]-ma-am i-na l za-al[ma-q-im] / [i-n]a mu-u-la-li-[im ... ] / [im-q]-ut-ma [ ... ]
Since the enemy departed from Ila ... I heard no report about it. (I said to
myself) as follows: perhaps it went to Dr-Sams-Addu, perhaps to Zalmaqum,
perhaps to Tuttul, perhaps it went to plunder the pasture land. I turn round and
round (in vain). But, on the day that I have sent this tablet to my lord, somebody
arrived from the Zalmaqum, at noon-time....
The explanatory remark, I turn round and round (in vain), demonstrates that pqat carries the meaning of: I dont know which of the various options is correct. The similar
construction, pqat A ... l-ma, which is also attested in the corpus,25 confirms the
disjunctive meaning of pqat A pqat B:
FM 6, 25:2229:
p-qa-{x}-at a-b[u-u]m u- / a-na ka-ra-na-aki -l[u-ma] / a-na an-da-ri-igki
i-[l]i / -ul i-de i-na ta-i-m[a-t]i-ia-ma / p-qa-at aq-ba-a-am-mu {x} / i-puur-ma a-bu-um u- / a-na ta-re-e aq-ba-a-am-mu / e-le-em
Perhaps this army goes up to Karan or to Andarig. I dont know. In my
calculations, perhaps Aqba-amm has written and this army goes up to bring
Aqba-amm?
It is notable that, based on existing data, all cases of disjunctive pqat are attested only
in letters from Mari.26 The disjunctive function in Babylonian letters is not expressed
through pqat but through the typical Babylonian construction l..l ... , as in:27

23. Von Soden 1949: 386.

24. In late Babylonian medical texts, the construction pqa(m) l pqa(m) carries another, not disjunctive meaning. Mayer (1989: 15354) translates pqa(m) l pqa(m) with occasionally, irregularly. CAD
P 384c) renders this construction sometimes. This meaning is not known in OB. If this interpretation is
correct, then at this later period pqa(m) loses its epistemic modal force and behaves as an adverb.
25. See also ARM 26/1, 84:818; MARI 5, 181:924.
26. For this construction see also ARM 2, 66: 513; ARM 26/1, 84:818; ARM 26/1, 121:1821; ARM
26/2, 354:1220; ARM 26/2, 489:4144; MARI 6, 272:417.
27. So also, e.g., in AbB 14, 145:825 and AbB 3, 39:1217.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

22

AbB 1, 51:2336:
[p-q-a]t l[u]- a-bu-a / [l]u-[ um-ma-a] k -b [ab b a]r -k[a]-a[l]-lu-ni-ikki-im / um-ma u-nu-ma ma-ra-at-ni / ni-pa-a-a-ar la ta-ma-ga-ri / s ag -g em e
pa-aq-da-ak-ki-im / a-na sag-geme la te-gi-i / p-q-at a-wi-lum i-a-ap-pa-raak-ki-im / um-ma u--ma lu- sag-geme / lu- k -b ab b ar -ka-al-la-ak-ki/
la ta-ma-ga-ri / p-q-at i-na p-i-im i-a-ap-pa-ra-ak-ki / um-ma at-ti-ma a-na
a-a-ti-ia / -ul ad-di-in a-na ka-a-um / a-na-ad-di-na-ak-kum
Perhaps either her father o[r her mother] will offer to you silver, saying: we shall
redeem our daughterdo not agree. I have entrusted you with the slave-girl,
do not be negligent about the slave-girl. Perhaps the gentleman writes to you,
saying: I will offer to you either (another) slave-girl, or silverdo not agree.
Perhaps he will send you a message by word of mouth. You will say: to my
sisters I didnt give (her), shall I give (her) to you?!
3. Semiconditional Constructions
In some cases, pqat is found in bi-partite constructions, where it is hard to avoid the
conclusion that this construction creates a semiconditional phrase.28 A good example is
found in a letter from Namratuma woman, judging by her nameto Bunn-ab, who
seems, from the tone of the letter, to be a family member:
AbB 1, 71:1824:
pi-q-at la-lu-um / i-a-ab-ba-at-ka-ma / a-na ki-di-im tu-I-i / pa-ga-ar-ka
--ur / a-na ki-di-im la tu-I-i / a-na la te-gi / a-na u4 5-kam ma-a-ri-ka
a-na-ku
Perhaps desire takes hold of you and you will go outwatch for yourself! Do not
go out! Dont be negligent about the house. In five days time I will be with you.
A plausible, even tempting interpretation of the first sentence is: if (lit., perhaps =
pqat) desire takes hold of ... (then) watch for yourself!. A more complex syntactic
construction, in which pqat follows immediately after umma, is found in the following
letter.
Christian 1969: 18:2338:
um-ma i-na ki-it-tim / a-bi at-ta / a-na larsaki -ur-da-u-nu-ti-ma / i-na bi-it
d
utu / di-na-am li-a-i-zu-u-nu-ti-ma / um-ma i-bi-il-ta-u-nu/ i-ba-a-i /
i-na di-[i]n dutu li-il-qu- / la x-la-ma a-di-u am-mi-ni / i-bi-il-ta-am ra-bita-am / i-a-ab-ba-lu / um-ma pi-q-at u-nu a-la-ak-u-nu / -u-ur / a-wilam li-i-ru-du-nim-ma / u-nu [i-n]a a-la-ki-im / di-[nam] li-a-i-zu-u-nu-ti
28. See AbB 1, 51:2336; AbB 1, 68:49; AbB 1, 71:1824; AbB 1, 135:2527; AbB 1, 139:610;
AbB 4, 49:513; AbB 4, 50:710; AbB 9, 31:1022; AbB 12, 13:618; AbB 14, 145:825; AbB 14,
164:2533; Christian 1969: 18:2338; MARI 8, 383:1022.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofpqat

23

If you are truly my father, send them [the people with whom the writer has a
legal dispute] to Larsa so that they will be sentenced in the temple of ama. If
they were wronged, let them take (compensation) according to the judgment of
ama.... Why do they commit such a grave injustice? Ifperhaps (umma
pqat)they, their departure will be postponed, let them send here a gentleman
and when they depart let them go to trial.
Because this construction is unique in the entire corpus, it is difficult to pinpoint the exact nuance it carries. It is not impossible that umma pqat is a scribal mistake: the scribe
may have hesitated between the two particles and ended up recording both of them.
However, if we accept this text as a legitimate example, the usage of these two particles
together proves that, although pqat is used in conditional clauses, it carries a different,
additional meaning to umma.
Our first example from the dialogue between the fuller and the client (Livingstone
1988: 177:17) can also be explained, I suggest, as a semiconditional construction and,
consequently, be translated: If you remove (?) the (laundry) mark, then you must ...
and you will have to comb (the fabric). (More on this text in a forthcoming study.)
It is noteworthy that all of the textssave one, where pqat is used as a semiconditional markercome from Babylonia. Only the letter of Sams-Addu to his son YasmaAddu (MARI 8, 383) breaks this rule. As we shall see, the letters of Sams-Addu contain
numerous idiosyncrasies and unique expressions.29
4. Lowering the Level of Certitude: from Presumption to Doubt
The particle pqat can also be employed to lower the intensity of the speakers utterance. Pragmatic reasons stand behind this shift from certitude and presumption to doubt.
At times, even though the speaker may have sufficient information about the state of
affairs, enough to allow him some confidence in his assumptions, he nonetheless finds
it preferable to avoid presenting his assumptions in an emphatic manner or committing
himself to his assumptions vis--vis his interlocutor, because of the hierarchical difference between him and his addressee. This kind of act could be considered as transgressing the power relations that exist between the speaker and the addressee.30
An example of this pragmatic use is found in a letter in which Dd-adn, a Mariote delegate to Yamad, tells ibtu, the queen of Mari, about his conversation with
ammurabi, king of Yamad, stressing that he has managed to iron out a past misunderstanding between the queen and the king. In what follows, Dd-adn cites his dialogue
with the king of Yamad:
ARM 10, 156:1230:31
a-da-ag-di-im-[ma] / pa-am-mu-da-d[u-um] / ki-a-am it-ta-a-ba-a[m] / umm[a] [u-]-m[a] / [be?-l?] a-a[m-mu-ra-bi] / [i-p]u-ur-ma ki-ma f[i29. See chap. 5 on tua, (5): Phrasal Arrangement [of tua Passages], pp. 106110.
30. Some cases of pqat used in this way are found in ARM 5, 53:614; ARM 26/1; 148:514.
31. LAPO 18, 1134.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

24

ib-tu] / da-a-as-s -ul i-[a-lu] / li-ib-bi ma-di-i / iz-zi-iq i-na an-ni-t[im]/

p-qa-at ka-ar-i-[a] / i-ku-lu-ni-kum-[ma] / li-ib-ba-ka -a-a[z-zi-q] / um-ma
a-am-mu-ra-bi-m[a] / ki-na-at an-ni-tum / ka-ar-i-a i-ku-lu-nim-ma / -a-alli-im-i-im / i-na-an-na li-ib-ba-u / ut-te-e mi-im-ma i--um / -ul i-ba-a-i
In the previous year, ammu-ddun ..., said that my lord ammurabi wrote
that ibtu pays no heed to him. I (Dd-adn, the writer of the letter) became
very angry. Concerning this, perhaps somebody slandered her (ibtu) before you
(ammurabi) and vexed your heart. ammurabi (said): this is true. They have
slandered her and I became very angry toward her. Now I have appeased his
heart and there is no grievance.
It would have been more rhetorically effective for Dd-adn to employ midde, a MP
with a higher degree of confidence, to convince ammurabi of the innocence of his
queen, ibtu. (Realizing the special use of the MP in this letter, Durand stresses that
pqat here means a coup sr ... sans aucun doute, and not peut-tre.)32 In fact, the
meaning of pqat is not different here than elsewhere: the writer employs the weak evidential in talking to a foreign monarch about a grave personal and diplomatic matter,
wishing to reduce the potential tension by using a neutral doubter pqat.
In a letter from the prince Ime-Dagan to his father, the awe-inspiring king SamsAddu, we find a similar use of pqat:
ARM 4, 60:513:33
a-um u-bu-ur-na-at / i-na pa-[ni-t]im i-na k as k al / p-ab-e-[l]i-um-ma-niu / a-pu-ra-ak-kum / [u]m-ma a-na-k[u]-ma p-qa-at / [a]-li-ik-tum i-i/
ut-ta-s-[ik] u--ma / {x} it-ta-[]-ma / -ul t[u-]a-bi-lam
Previously, in the expedition of b-eli-ummniu, I have written to you
concerning the flasks of oil, saying: perhaps the caravan was assigned (to carry
oil). He (b-eli-ummniu), however, has left and you did not send (him) to
me.
Again, out of respect for his august addressee, the writer mitigates his emphatic tone
which in the standard OB epistolary parlance would be expressed by the MP midde or
perhaps even wuddiand uses pqat instead. In this way, the speaker does not force his
assumptions on the high-ranking addressee. (The MP that assumes that the addressee accepts the speakers point of view is wuddi, as we shall see.)
The same pragmatic approach is found in the correspondence between I-Addu of
Qana and Yasma-Addu of Mari. The two monarchs, though at odds, try to maintain a
polite relationship:

32. LAPO 18, p. 310 note d.

33. LAPO 18, 914.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofpqat

25

MARI 5, 168:2941:34
a-nu-um-ma i-na-an-na / pa-ag-ri al-ta-ma-ad ki-ma a-na a-i-i-im / l naak-ri-im ta-a-ku-na-ni-ni5 / a li-bi-ku-nu a-na-ku i-di / p-qa-at an-ni-tam i-na
li-bi-ku-nu a-ab-ta-tu-nu / um-ma at-t[u]-nu-ma as-s-ri a-wa-tam an-ni-tam /
a-na i-i-dIM ni-a-ap-pa-ar-ma / pa-n-u a-na su-mu-e-pu-u a-na sa-li-miim/ i-a-ak-ka-an i-na bi-ri-u-nu i-sa-li-mu / an-ni-{x}-tam i-na li-bi-ku-nu
a-ab-ta-tu-nu / um-ma dutu-i-dIM it-ti su-mu-e-pu-u / i-sa-al-lim a-na-ku
a-di ba-al-[]-ku / it-ti su-mu-e-pu-u -ul a-sa-al-lim
Now I realized myself that you (pl.) consider me to be a stranger and an enemy.
What is in your heart I know: perhaps you say in your heart as follows: It is to
be feared that we(!) shall write this thing to I-Addu and he will make peace
with Smu-epu and that they will make a treaty between them. Thats what
you (pl.) think in your heart. I solemnly declare that even if Sams-Addu will
make peace with Smu-epu, I, as long as I live, will not make peace with Smuepu!
I-Addu has no doubts about the political calculations of his Mari ally, but he refrains
from using a strong certifying MP, such as midde or wuddi, and instead employs the
weak doubter pqat, out of courtesy.35 (Cases in which pqat is used instead of the expected volitive MP assurr will be treated below.)
5. Vox populi: pqat in Public Opinion as Reported Speech
In a small group of letters, all from Mari, pqat is found in a specific contextin the
reported speech of the general public or of a specific person. In all of these cases, the
words of the general public or of the individual are negative and upsetting to the speaker
who reports them. Note the complaint of the governor Zimr-Addu:
ARM 27, 151:100104:36
ma-am-ma-an a-na e-ri-ia / [-ul] i-e4-e-em i-nu-ma u-- ma-am-ma-an
it-ti-ia -ul u- / [e-re]-e-i-ia-ma ki-ma ta-mi-im at-ta-na-al-la-ak ka-lu-u/
[ki-a]-am i-da-bu-ub um-m[a]-mi p-qa-at zi-im-ri-dIM a-na g al -m ar-t u / []-ul
a-ki-in
[No]body approaches me; when I go out nobody goes out with me. I keep going
around in my nakedness, like a man cursed, and everybody says: perhaps ZimrAddu is not ranked as a general?
A similar use of pqat is found in a letter of Tamarzi, king of Naur, to his lord, Zimrlm of Mari:

34. LAPO 17, 490.

35. Note the exceptional use of plural verb forms, probably another sign of politeness.
36. Heimpel 2003: 46163.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

26

ARM 28, 145:1218:

ki-ma i-na na-u-urki u-a-ku / i-qa-ab-bu- i-tr-s-du / -[]e-[]-u -ul
i-qa-ab-[bu-] / [p]i-qa-at! a-na b[e-l]-u mi-im-ma / -ga-li-il-ma-mi -su-mi/
i-ki-mu-u / be-l li-is-ni-iq
They say that I was expelled from Naur: Itr-asdu expelled him. Would they
not say: perhaps he committed a sin against his lord and they took his house?
Let my lord examine (it).
Another letter from this group is ARM 10, 156:1230 (cited above, p.23), where
Dd-adn manages to debunk a calumny against ibtu, the queen of Mari, in his interview with ammurabi of Yamad. There, too, when the possibility of slander is mentioned, the MP pqat is employed.37 All these cases reflect the same chancellery custom:
pqat is used to lessen the harshness or lower the strength of the reported words and
to render them more acceptableto the writer as well as to his addressee. Thus, pqat
functions here as a perspectivizing particlea term that will be elaborated presently
disassociating the writer from and so reducing his responsibility for the speech reported
in his letter. Furthermore, looking at these examples from a wider angle, one cannot fail
to recognize that this particular use of pqat bears similarities to the use of the enclitic
particle mi, discussed in chap. 9.
The Syntactic Profile of pqat
The syntactic profile of pqat will be outlined by checking the following parameters:
(1)operative discourse domains, (2) verbal tenses, (3) negation, (4) position of the MP
in relation to other components of the clause, (5) the phrasal arrangement of the passage
under discussion, and (6) the grammatical elements attached to the MP under investigation. This grammatical protocol will also be used in examining the other MPs discussed
in this study.
1. Discourse Domains
In an overwhelming majority of the casesalmost 80% of the collected published
texts (the examples are listed at the end of the chapter)pqat relates to a remote, hypothetical occurrence, or to an individual who is not involved directly in the conversationthat is, a third party, neither the speaker nor the addressee. In the following
example, a letter, the governor Zakira-amm presents himself as a connoisseur of good
food who is dedicated to the culinary pleasures of his king:
ARM 27, 54:618:
l- me a-na ka-am-a-tim le-q-em / a-ru-ud-ma um-ma a-na-ku-ma / p-qa-at
ka-am- i-ta-at a-l[imki] / i-ba-a-u- li-il-q-i-na-ti-ma / [a-n]a e-er bel-i[a]/ [li]-a-bi-i[l] / il-li-ku-ma gi-ip-i / ta-am-i-il ka-am-i / ub-lu-nim-ma
37. See also ARM 2, 40:418 (LAPO 17, 602).

The Syntactic Profile o pqat

27

l me u-nu-[ti] / -te-er [u]m-ma a-na-ku-ma / i-tu gi-ip- ib-ba-u- / kaam-i a-ta-am-ma-ra / il-li-ku-ma ka-am-i i-[t]am-[m]a-ru
I sent people to pick truffles thinking to myself: perhaps there are kam-truffles
around the city; let them pick them so that I will send them to my lord. They
went and brought me gip, (which are) like kam-truffles. I made these people
return, saying: since gip were available, find kam-truffles! They went and
found kam-truffles.
In about a one-third of this group of texts, in which pqat refers to a third person, the
MP relates to both the addressee and to a third party, namely to the allocutory and the
delocutory discourse domains.38 In this sub-group the speaker expresses, with the help
of pqat, his doubts and hesitations vis--vis a certain state of affairs that concerns both
his addressee and a third party involved, as for instance in the following letter, which
curiously enough contains a request to destroy the tablet after hearing it:
AbB 14, 112:3642:
up-p i-me-e-ma i-p / up-p ma-li -a-ab-ba-la-ak-kum / la ta-na-a-a-ar/
pi-q-at pdEN.ZU-re-me-ni / a-ar wa-a-bu a-na -d u b -b a / a-na e-ri-ka
i-re-ed-du-ni-i-u / la te-gi-i-u 2 sla ka li-i-ti
Hear my letter and destroy (it). Do not keep any of the letters I am sending to
you. Moreover, perhaps one will bring Sn-rmn from the place where he stays
to the Edubba, to you. Do not be negligent toward him; may he drink two quarts
of beer.
In less than 20 texts in the corpus, pqat refers only to the addressee.39 As in the cases
that refer to the delocutory discourse domain, in these cases, too, the speaker transmits
his uncertainties regarding the thoughts and actions of his interlocutor. The addressees
intentions and actions are usually clearer to the speaker than those of a third party, who
is not present in the immediate interaction. Nonetheless, at times the speaker is unaware
of them, a situation that encourages him to employ pqat.
In other words, pqat is mainly found in contexts where the actions and thoughts of
people and situations are remote from the speaker himself, with reference to another
persons inner thoughts, decisions, or future actions. In these circumstances, the speaker

38. AbB 1, 51:2336; AbB 1, 68:49; AbB 1, 139:610; AbB 4, 150:2538; AbB 7, 42:1320; AbB
9, 150:59; AbB 10, 56:2125; AbB 14, 112:3642; AbB 14, 114:2429; AbB 14, 145:825; ARM 1,
32:720; ARM 2, 21:17 (with LAPO 16, 350 n. 256); ARM 2, 66:513; ARM 4, 54:814; ARM 10,
156:1230; ARM 26/2, 469:2735; Christian 1969: 22:1122; Kienast 1978: 156:1624; Dossin 1973:
185:2831; MARI 6, 26364:419; Shemshara Letters 41:1720; CAD P 386 a1a (Susa letter).
39. AbB 1, 71:1824; AbB 9, 31:1022; AbB 14, 37:912; AbB 14, 110:3640; ARM 1, 1:1012;
ARM 1, 2:1113; ARM 2, 40:418; ARM 2, 23:1016; ARM 5, 53:614; ARM 26/1, 78:1013; ARM
26/1, 84:818; ARM 26/1, 148:514; ARM 26/1, p. 42:711; ARM 27, 57:913; ARM 28, 179:3141;
MARI 5, 168:2941; UET 6/2, 414:17 (Livingstone 1988: 181); Ziegler 2004: 96:1319.

28

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

is suspended in epistemic noncommitment and opts to use pqat, the basic doubter in
OB, which conveys his state of not-knowing.
Curiously enough, in four texts, pqat refers to the locutory discourse domain
namely, to the speaker himself.40 This small subgroup is especially interesting: psychologically, one would not expect to find pqat used in such circumstances. Isnt the
speaker aware of his own thoughts and actions? Why then is the MP pqat used in these
cases?
Let us examine part of this rare group of texts, starting with a letter from Yamum, a
loyal functionary, to the king Zimr-lm:
ARM 26/2, 302:915:41
e4-ma-am a ki-ma an-na-nu-um an-na-nu-um / e-e-em-mu- i-na-ia i-imma-ra / a-di wa-ar-ka-at e4-mi-im a-a-tu la [a-pa-ar-r]a-s / a-na e-er be-lia -[u]l a-a-ap-pa-[ra-am] / p-qa-at ur-ra-a[m] e-ra-am wa-ar-ka-[at
e4-mi-im] / [-ul ap-t]a-ra-s-ma mi-im-ma a-wa-tum s-ar-tu[m -ul i-ba-i
sa-ra-ra-am] / [a-na be-l]-ia -ul e-le-i
The news that I hear here and there and the things that my eyes see, until I
examine carefully this news, I do not write to my lord. Perhaps one day I will not
examine the news carefully, but this is by no means a lie! I am not able [to lie] to
my lord.
We notice first the atypical use of pqat here: although it can still be translated perhaps, it is much closer to it is to be feared that....42 The conversational situation
may explain this irregularity. The speaker assumes an unwanted future situation. He
detaches himself from this situation by referring to himself as another person. The use
of pqat, therefore, although unusual, is logical and makes sense in its context. A similar
case is found in a letter from central Babylonia:
AbB 9, 78:2023:
p-q-at [ a ma -a pin / a pma-[a]-ta-ni-im / -ul e-ri-i / U-it-te-tim
ubi-lam
And perhaps I did not ask for the plough- ... of Maatnum, but (nevertheless)
send me the handles.
Here the writer states overtly that he did not ask for a specific implement, admitting that
the problematic situation he currently is in was his own fault. Consequently, he refers to
his own actions in the past as unknowable, thus making a distinction between himself in
40. AbB 9, 78:2023; ARM 4, 86:5254; ARM 26/1, 242:1214; ARM 26/2, 302:915.
41. Heimpel 2003: 28990.
42. Heimpel (2003: 289) also takes pqat as expressing hopes or fears. He restores [ap-ta-na-a]r-ra-sma (instead of [-ul ap-t]a-ra-s-ma, as the editor does) and translates accordingly: I hope that.... Seen
from the perspective of the range of usage of pqat, Charpins translation is preferable, because it is unlikely
that this MP, which denotes doubt and unknowing, would be used for positive situations.

The Syntactic Profile o pqat

29

the present circumstances and himself in the past, when he was forgetful. Again, the use
of pqat can be logically explained.
But in the next example, a letter to the king from a servant whose name is broken off,
the irregular use of pqat is more difficult to explain:
ARM 26/1, 242:614:43
- ge tin ep-te-[e] / 4 dug-getin s-a-mi-im a a-te-e be-l-[ia] / 4 d u g ge tin s-a-mi-im s / []a a-te-e be-l-ia-ma u-ta-i-iq-ma / a-na sa-g[a-r]
a-timki u-ta-a-i / [b]e-l ge tin a [a]-t[e-u li-im-u-ur] / [p]-qa-at an-ne-[em dam-q-i] / [i]t-ti an-ni-i-im u-ta-[i-iq-ma] / ka-la-u be-l-ma i-[leem-mu]
I opened the wine house (and) blended four containers of smum wine of my
lords drinking and four containers of smum wine of second quality of my lords
drinking. I had them ported to Saggartum. [Let] my lord [receive?] the wine for
drinking. Hopefully (lit., perhaps, pqat) I blended this (wine) with this (wine)
[well] and my lord will co[nsume] all of it.
It is noticeable that in this passage it is more difficult to translate pqat with the standard translation perhaps. Through pqat, the speaker expresses not his estimations
and judgments of an external state of affairs but his wishes and hopes for the future, that
the king will perhaps find favor with his actions, thereby retaining some of its honorific
rhetorical function.44 The unavoidable conclusion is that in this letter pqat is used as a
deontic MP. More accurately, pqat is used here similarly to the volitive assurr, with
which hopes and fears are commonly expressed in OB letters.
Is this a mistake, or is this a rare, perhaps nonstandard yet normative use of pqat? I
opt for the latter solution. As I understand it, the writer of this letter refrains from raising the horrifying possibility that he has handled the kings beverage incorrectly (which
might result in accusation of poisoning), and he therefore employs the neutral doubter
pqat, not the expected MP assurr, which would express his worries but also might
raise hypothetical guilt.
Excursus:
Subjectification and Perspectivization
At this point, it is opportune to introduce two terms that will accompany us throughout the discussion: subjectification and perspectivization.
When a statement is explicitly connected to the speaker in a given speech-act, we
say that subjectification takes place. When, on the contrary, a statement is connected
to a concrete or abstract person other then the actual speaker, then we say that perspectivization has occurred. These two terms summarize the status of the subject, of the
43. Heimpel 2003: 269; Chambon 2009: 183.
44. Chambon (2009: 183) translates pqat here with jespre que . . ..

30

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

I involved in the statement45 (and are clearer than other, less intuitive labels such as
vantage point and referential center found in some studies).
The close connection between epistemic modality and the notion of the speaking I
is stressed by Quattara (2001: 3): epistemic modality prescribes in terms of modes of
thinking the degree of adhesion of the I to his own proposition. The strength of this degree of adhesion is carried out on a gradual spectrum of the concept of knowing.46 So a
perspective means that the claim of validity that the speaker makes with respect to some
element in a given situation is restricted in some respect to somebody else, usually a
person other than the actual speaker of the utterance. Perspective ascribes authority for
the validity of the statement to a subject other than the current speaker.47
Subjectification is at the opposite end of the range of adhesion: in it, the current
speaker is expressly shown to be the I who makes the statement. The current speaker
then adds the degree of certainty to his statement. Subjectification and perspectivization
are established by various linguistic means. The most explicit means of perspectivization is the use of direct quotation: the speaker puts all discourse in the voice of another
subject, thus creating a separate I who is the source of the statement. More implicit
ways of creating a perspective are to use indirect speech or specific verbal forms (like
the Konjunktiv II in German)48 or different epistemic MPs.49
The interplay of these two terms is intimately connected to epistemic modality, since
a pronounced subjectification involves a greater degree of the speakers commitment to
his statements, whereas perspectivization diminishes the speakers commitment. Hence,
if pqat relates mostly not to the speaker but to a third party that is not involved in the
conversation (and is rarely also to the addressee), then we may say that pqat is clearly
a perspectivizing MP.
* * *
2. Verbal Tenses
The MP pqat takes only indicative verbal forms.50 Like other MPs, pqat is part of
epistemic modality in Akkadian and as such is incompatible with deontic modal verbal
forms (such as the precative, imperative, prohibitive, etc.). Epistemic and deontic modalities in Akkadian are mutually exclusive.

45. Sanders and Spooren 1997: 86ff.; Smith 2003: 15, 155184.
46.[T]raduit en termes de modes de pense le degr dadhsion du Je son propos. La dtermination
de ce degr dadhsion est effectue laune de la notion graduable de savoir [my translation].
47. Sanders and Spooren 1997: 90.
48. See Palmer 2001: 113.
49. Sanders and Spooren 1997: 89. The use of the enclitic MP -mi is especially relevant here; see
chap.9.
50. The form i-ri-u-ka in AbB 1, 139:9 is not a subjunctive but a 3 m. pl. form serving as impersonal:
Perhaps they (sic!) will ask you for silver; dont give him [any]! The same applies to Dossin 1973: 185:17,
where -a-as-s-s-ma (3 m. pl.) designates the impersonal.

The Syntactic Profile o pqat

31

There is no restriction on the tense of the main verbal form in pqat clauses. A clear
propensity, however, can be identified: almost half of the examples in the corpus (unpublished examples not included) are in the present-future tense.51 The other half is
divided between past forms,52 stative,53 nominal phrases,54 and perfect forms.55
The fact that pqat takes the present-future tense more than any other is because,
more than other tenses, the present-future tense expresses contingencies.56 Other persons choices and actions that have still not taken place, or have already happened in circumstances unknown to the speaker, are beyond the speakers certain knowledge. The
tendency of the doubter pqat to attract present-future forms is therefore not surprising.
Nonfuture verbal forms with pqat (past tense or perfect forms) refer to events that
may have already occurred but of which the speaker is unsure, and because he is unsure,
he also does not know their consequences. One example of the perfect will suffice here:
AbB 8, 109:3439:
a-wi-il-dIM ugula mar-tu / a ta-a-pur-am -ul is-u-ur-ma / -ul it-ra-a-u
/ a-na-ku-ma a-la-ak-ma at-ar-ra-a-u / p-q-at i-na be-l-u / it-ta-ru--u
e4-em-u u-up-ra-am.
p

Awl-Adad, the general, about whom you wrote to me, did not look around for
him and did not fetch himshall I go and fetch him? (Yet) perhaps they have
(already) taken him (perfect) from his lords house? Write to me (your) decision
about his matter.57
51. AbB 1, 51:2336; AbB 1, 68:49; AbB 1, 71:1824; AbB 1, 135:2527; AbB 1, 139:610; AbB
3, 53:1924; AbB 4, 50:710; AbB 6, 125:1625; AbB 7, 42:1320; AbB 9, 150:59; AbB 10, 56:2125;
AbB 10, 103:38; AbB 12, 13:618; AbB 14, 112:3642; AbB 14, 114:2429; AbB 14, 145:825; AbB
14, 164:2533; AbB 14, 37:912; ARM 1, 2:1113; ARM 1, 32:720; ARM 2, 66:513; ARM 4, 54:814;
ARM 13, 25:516; ARM 18, 5:1019; ARM 18, 7:1119; ARM 26/1, 78:1013; ARM 26/1, 80:47;
ARM 26/1, p. 42:711; ARM 26/2, 408:5559; ARM 26/2, 469:2735; ARM 26/2, 483:3539; ARM
26/2, 491:3437; ARM 27, 54:618; ARM 27, 57:913; ARM 27, 77:68; ARM 28, 179:3141; Charpin
1991: 155:iv 2123; Christian 1969: 22:1122; FM 6, 25:2229; MARI 6, 263264:419; MARI 8,
383:1022; OBTR 56:59; Shemshara Letters 41:1720; CAD P 386 a1a (Susa letter); UET 6/2, 414:17
(Livingstone 1988: 181); Ziegler 2004: 96:1319.
52. AbB 4, 152:1421; AbB 9, 78:2023; ARM 2, 21:17; ARM 2, 23:1016; ARM 5, 53:614;
ARM 10, 156:1230; ARM 26/1, 242:1214; ARM 26/1, 84:818; ARM 26/1, 148:514; ARM 26/2,
328:2629; ARM 26/2, 489:4144; ARM 28, 145:1218; FM 7, 45:4251; Dossin 1973: 185:1719;
MARI 5, 181:924; Shemshara Letters 11:1622.
53. AbB 9, 145:1317; AbB 10, 56:2125; ARM 1, 1:1012; ARM 2, 40:418; ARM 2, 49:11; ARM
2, 121:911; ARM 4, 86:5254; ARM 6, 30:710; ARM 26/1, 148:514; ARM 26/2, 354:1220; ARM
27, 151:100104; Christian 1969: 18:2338; Kienast 1978: 156:1624; MARI 5, 168:2941; Shemshara
Letters 21:1016.
54. AbB 3, 39:1217; AbB 4, 49:513; AbB 4, 150:2538; AbB 9, 31:1022; ARM 26/1, 121:1821;
Dossin 1938b, 181182:1822 (cf. ARM 26/1 p. 160 note b).
55. AbB 8, 109:3339; AbB 14, 110:3640; ABIM 22:2530 (or: Gt separative past?); ARM 4, 60:5
13; ARM 26/2, 302:915; MARI 6, 272:417 (or: Gt separative past?).
56. See, e.g., Chung and Timberlake 1985: 243: Any future event is potential rather than actual. More
recently, see Dahl 2006.
57. See CAD T 246, 1a.

32

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

The stative is neutral with respect to time. Its use is probably motivated by lexical
and idiomatic considerations: verbs of stateespecially abtum, aknum, wabum,
bum, uurum, and marumtend to appear in the stative.
3. Negation
The present data show that the negation particle employed in pqat sentences is exclusively ul, never l.58 The absence of the negation particle l in pqat clauses conforms
to the finding that pqat does not govern relative but only main clauses.59 It also shows
that this MP, though it may carry a quasiconditional meaning, is differentsyntactically
as well as semanticallyfrom umma, if, which requires, almost obligatorily,60 the
negation particle l.
4. Position of the MP within the Clause
In an overwhelming majority of the cases (almost 80 out of ca. 100 different cases),
the particle pqat opens the clause it governs. The cases in which pqat is preceded by
inanna, now,61 or u, and,62 do not break this rule. In the cases when pqat does

58. AbB 4, 152:1421; AbB 9, 78:2023; AbB 10, 56:2125; ARM 1, 32:713; ARM 2, 66:513; ARM
4, 54:814; ARM 4, 86:5254; ARM 5, 53:614; ARM 26/1, 78:1013; ARM 26/2, 302:915; ARM 27,
151:100104; Dossin 1973: 185:1719. Note that in AbB 7, 42:1320 the negation l is found in proximity
to pqat: ki-ma a-lam la wa-a-ba-ta / aq-bi / p-q-at a up-p luga l / ub-lam / i-sa-a-[u]-ur-k[a] / la
ta-an-na-ku-ud / mi-im-ma up-pu-um / a-u-mi-ka -ul il-li-[ik?]. But, as Kraus rightly understood, l tannakkud is not part of the pqat clause but opens the next clause: I have said that you are not in town. Perhaps
the (one) who carries the letter of the king will look for you. Dont worry: this letter doesnt concern you at
all. The sole example where pqat l is allegedly found is AbB 14, 186:1724: um-ma i-e4-er up-p-ni
/ i-na pa-nu pda m a r-u tu-a-zi-ir / lu-di-in-ma / p-qa-at i-na bi-ti / []a-p-ri-ia la! - / [u]m-ma i-na
pa-ne-ni! / i-na up-p pda ma r-u tu-a-zi-ir / a-e4-er mi-im-ma la a-di-a-an, which Veenhof translates: If
we have a (relevant) written record, I am ready to confront Marduk-zir in a lawsuit. But, perhaps he has not
yet left the household of my superior. If, contrary to what we assume, he is indeed registered in the records
of Maruk-zir, I can in no way start a lawsuit. Regarding the use of l in line 20, Veenhof would take l
in a main clause, with Stol, OB History 53 n. 30, as not yet. But this reading cannot be accepted. First,
there is no other example of pqat accompanied by l in the entire corpus. The introduction of a pqat phrase
in this context is not warranted and makes no sense. The speaker poses two mutually exclusive alternatives:
either a document proving that a certain individual is registered to the estate of his superior is foundor no
such document exists. In the first case, a legal process against the man who presently holds this individual
may begin; in the latter case, no legal process will take place. Therefore, the sentence, as found in Veenhofs edition (but, perhaps he has not yet left the household of my superior) only interrupts the flow of
the speakers words. (Furthermore: whoor whathas not yet left the household of the superior? neither
the abducted man nor the document fits here.) Hence, Veenhofs edition calls for correction. If one prefers
to keep the MP pqat in the text, then the following l is a mistake for ul (probably inspired by the l in
line 24). A smoother solution is to abandon pqat altogether and read: I am ready to confront Marduk-zir
in a lawsuit, so that (-ma) he will not get out of the controlindeed, the houseof my supervisor (i-na
qa-at i-na bi-ti a-p-ri-ia la -. (I wish to thank J.-M. Durand, with whom I have discussed this passage.)
59. Syntactically, it is not impossible for a relative clause to be embedded in a pqat clause, as in AbB
1, 68:49. Nonetheless, the MP does not affect the relative clause.
60. In the Mari letters, there are cases where umma takes ul; see Wasserman 2006: 157 n. 37.
61. ARM 2, 49:11 and ARM 26/1, p. 42:711
62. AbB 9, 78:2023; AbB 14, 110:3640; ARM 2, 21:17 (with LAPO 16, 350).

The Syntactic Profile o pqat

33

appear in second position, it is after a topicalized nominal constituent, as in a letter that

describes an oracular procedure:
ARM 4, 54:814:63
a-ma!-an li-ib-bi-im / i-mi-tam-ma ta-ri-ik / li-ib-bu-um u- / i-mi-tam /
u-me-lam ta-ri-ik / i-it-u-um a-ki-in / t[e]-ri-ik u-me-lim / p-qa-at -ul
-q-at-ti-ka
The fat of the heart at the right is dark. This heart is dark at right and left, and
there is a protruding scar mark. The dark spot in the leftperhaps (it) did not
satisfy(?) you.
5. Phrasal Arrangement
The same principle applies to the arrangement of the pqat clause in relation to other
clauses in the text: the pqat clause occasionally follows a topicalizing phrase that opens
with a topicalizing remark, such as ina anntim, as for this (issue),64 or aum ... because ..., concerning ..., as in the following examples:65
AbB 9, 150:59:
ki-a-am aq-bi-kum um-ma a-na-ku-ma / it-ti pdIM-ri-im--l / ki-i-ma pa-ni-i-ka /
na-an-me-er-ma / a-um pdEN.ZU-i-me-ni i-a-as-s / pi-q-at -e-lu-ni-kum
Thus I said to you: Meet with Adad-rm-il as before. And because Sn-imnni
was taken into account, perhaps they will present (him) to you.
Note that the aum clause, formally a relative sentence, can be inserted into the main
pqat clause. This creates an embedded circumstantial construction:
AbB 1, 68:49:
p-q-at a-um a-wi-lu[m] / i-na k-dingi r-raki wa-a-bu / a-na-ku it-ti a-wilim wa-a-ba-a-[k]u / ma-am-ma-an a-um a--im / i-a-ap-pa-ra-ki / ma-amma-an a-an-nam la [t]a-pa-li,
Perhapsbecause the gentleman stays in Babylon and I stay with the gentleman
somebody will write to you concerning the field. Do not say yes to anybody!
Another interesting case is found a letter from Sams-Addu to Yasma-Addu concerning three musicians who ran away. The MP pqat here serves as the apodosis of the
umma clause:
MARI 5, 181:924:
um-ma a-na e-ri-ka / it-ta-al-ku-nim / ku-su-u-nu-ti a-na e-ri-ia / u-ri-u-nu63. LAPO 18, 952.
64. ARM 10, 156:1230.
65. See also AbB 3, 53:1924.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

34

ti / um-ma a-na e-ri-ka / la i-la-ku-nim / [p]-qa-at a-na ma-a-at / ia-am-a-ad

-lu-ma / a-na ma-a-at qa-ta-nimki / il-li-ku / sa-ak-bi da-an-na-tim / u-ku-unma / l- m e u-nu-ti / li-i-ba-tu-ma / a-na e-ri-ia / u-re-e-u-nu-ti
If they left toward you, bind them and send them (to me). If they did not go to
youperhaps toward the land of Yamad, or toward the land of Qatna they have
gone. Install strong patrols in order to get hold of these people and send them to
me.
I believe that this unusual usage reflects Sams-Addus actual speech, because, as I have
remarked elsewhere,66 the royal scribes in ubat-Enlil did not dare to paraphrase SamsAddus dictation and recorded the kings words verbatim.
Another case where pqat comes as a response to umma is found in a letter from
Kisurra. The writer complains about his addressees incompetence and uses pqat with
a clear ironic tone, probably with an exclaiming intonation:67
Kienast 1978: vol. II, 156:1624:
a-wi-lum at-ta / um-ma a-pa-ra-am / la te-le-i / q-bi-am-ma / ma-ma-an
a a-ka-ni-ia / a-a-ak-an-ma / li-a-li-ma-an-ni / um-ma ma-ar-a-a-ti /
p-q-a ma-ru-u
You are a man (after all)! If you cannot do the job, say it to me and I will install
somebody (else) from my recruitment and he will satisfy me! If you suffer (from
the work)perhaps (you think that) he will suffer (too)?
6. pqat and Other Particles
Unlike the MPs tua and assurr, which will be treated later on, there are no attestations of the enclitic particles ma, or man attached to pqat. But pqat is found at times
in the context of other MPs. Note the letter from Zazia, king of the Turrukeans, to Meptum, a high official in Mari. In a strange mixture of boastfulness and abjectness, Zazia
explains why he did not carry out his military ambitions in full. He does this by presenting his addressees hypothetical inner thoughts and rebutting them:
ARM 28, 179:3141:
p[]-q[a-a]t / ki-a-am ta-qa-ab-[b]i um-ma-mi / il-tu-kam-ma it-tu-u[!] umma-na-tum / ninda u4 1-kam [ul] na-[e]-e / um-ma -d[i]-tam ma-dam
na-e-e/ wu-di-ma-an iti 1-ka m / i-na -b a ka--im / at-t[a-a]l-[l]a-ak/
as-s[]-u[r-r]i ke-em la ta-qa-[a]b-bi / pza-zi-ia-mi -ul i[l-li]-ik / dIM at-ma
um-ma a-na-ku-ma [l]a al-li-ik

66. Wasserman 2006: 159.

67. Additional cases of irony expressed by means of pqat: AbB 1, 51:2336; AbB 4, 150; AbB 9,
78:2023(?).

The Syntactic Profile o pqat

35

Perhaps you will say: he tried but got tired. (His) units do not carry provisions,
not even for a day. Had they carried much provisions it is for sure (wuddi-man)
that I could have walked continuously for one month in midst of the steppe. I fear
(assurr) you would say: Zazia did not (really) go! I swear by Adad if I did not
go!
In this fantastic string of MPs, we find: the doubter pqat; the strong certifier wuddi;
the irrealis particle man; and finally, the semideontic volitive MP assurr and the
enclitic MP mi.68 The only evidential that is absent here is midde, the MP that holds a
middle position between the doubter pqat (designating weak possibility) and the presumptive wuddi (denoting strong certainty). The semantic difference between pqat and
midde is hard to pin down, but luckily we have a letter in which the two MPs are found
one after the other, allowing us to differentiate them semantically.
In the following text, a letter from Babylonia sent by a certain ablum to Tayyarat
and t-Dagan, two female addressees, the writer severely reproaches them regarding
their management of the fields that were put under their care. In the beginning of the
text, midde is used:
AbB 1, 135:612:
mi-id-de a-um a-wa-tim / a ta-a-me-a um-ma-mi ID x [x x] .... / ni-di a-iim ta-ra-e20-ma a- uku-si a AB KI im / -ul tu-ka-ma-sa / a-na e-im
ku-um-mu-si-im / ni-di a-[i-i]m la ta-r[a]-a-i-a,
Concerning the matter that you (f. pl.) heardprobably (midde) you will say ...
there is negligence on your part and you will not pile up the field of.... Do not
be negligent in piling up the barley!
And toward the end of the letter we find the MP pqat:
AbB 1, 135:2527:
p-q-at a-um e-im -pa-ra x x [0] / e-a-am li-q-u-ma / i-na na-a-pa-ki-im
u-up-ka
Perhaps because of the barley (that?) he ... take it and heap (it) up in a silo.
The relevant passages of the letter are badly preserved, but what is left allows us to
distinguish between midde and pqat. ablum, the speaker, employs midde when he has
some background information, which allows him some confidence in his assumption
regarding the state of affairs to which he is referring. By contrast, pqat is used when
no such information is available. Hence, on a scale of the speakers commitment to his
words, midde designates stronger commitment than does pqat.

68.For pqat ... assurr, see also MARI 5, 168:2941 and ARM 18, 7:1119; for assurr ... pqat,
see ARM 26/2, 469:2735.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

36

Nonetheless, it is important to note that in some cases pqat is used where one expects
to find midde or even wuudi or anna. In a letter to Yadun-lm, Ab-Samar, a vassal of
the king of Mari, recounts his political woes to his sovereign. The grateful king declares
that he has managed to survive only due to Maris help:
ARM 1, 1:1012:69
a-la-nu a ki-ma -u-ru -e-zi-i[b] / na-pa--ti -ba-li-i p-qa-at azi-r[a]-at
And I have managed to save the towns (those) that were left and (barely) rescued
my life. Surely (pqat) [sic!] you are the savior.
Pqat in this case cannot be read as perhaps but as a certifier, meaning surely. The
location of Ab-Samars tiny kingdom in the northwest corner of the Syrian Jezirah, near
Karkemi and Yamad, may explain this exceptional usage of pqat. It is possible that
this usage reflects local speech or even the peripheral scribes idiolect.
In addition, we have already seen that in some cases pqat is used in contexts where
one expects assurr, which designates hopes and fears. In these cases, the hypothetically unwelcome situation is normally introduced by the MP assurr. But sometimes
the speaker prefers to minimize this undesirable possibility and the consequences it
carries by turning to the neutral perhaps, the weak doubter pqat. Judging by the statistics from the corpus at hand, I suggest that this use of pqat instead of assurr, which
is attested only twice in each corpus,70 was not normally considered acceptable in the
epistolary style of the period.
Are there collocations of pqat and the irrealis particle man? No such combinations
are attested in the OB corpus, but in a bilingual SB proverb the two MPs are found side
by side (pqat appears in its later form pq):
BWL, 24445:iv 4245:
ga- nam ga-ug5-ga-en-d-en

pi-qa a-ma-at-man

gi-en ga-an-k
lu-ku-ul
ga-nam ga-ti-le-d-en
pi-qa a-bal-lu-u
gi-en ga-b-b-gar lu-u-kun

Perhaps I (Sum. we) should diethen let me spend; perhaps I (Sum. we) should
get wellthen let me store (my property).71
From the standpoint of standard usage as we have seen it in the OB corpus, the presence of the two MPs is redundant and proves that at this late stage of Akkadian either
pqa or man has already lost some of its semantic vitality, so much so that the scribe
felt it necessary to provide two MPs in order to achieve the desired modal function. After examining the various pqat constructions, we can say that this proverb exhibits the
69. LAPO 16, 305.
70. ARM 26/1, 242:614 and ARM 26/2, 302:915, treated above (p.28).
71. See Thureau-Dangin 1935: 30710; Speiser 1947: 323; CAD P 384 s.v. pqa lex. sec.

The Etymology of pqat

37

well-attested disjunctive construction pqa(t) A ... pqa(t) B ..., perhaps I will die ...
perhaps I will get well.... It is, therefore, the irrealis MP man that seems out of place.
The expected irrealis construction, as will be demonstrated in the chapter dedicated to
this MP (chap. 6), is amt-man lkul aballu-man lukun, had I been dyingI would
have spent; had I been getting wellI would have stored (my property). The amalgamation of the two MPs in this proverbial saying is intuitively understood yet exhibits
awkward syntax.
The Etymology of pqat
AHw and CDA both derive pqat from piqum.72 This etymologythough not contested hereis worth examining. According to the dictionaries, piqum is a poorly attested verb; in fact, only a handful of attestations of piqum are known, the most famous
being in a line in the Gilgamesh Epic (George 2003: 176:88 = Gilg. P. iii 4) where
Enkidu is said to be looking hard at the bread that has been presented to him, trying
to understand what it is.73 Second, piqum is mostly used for actions of the eyes, eyeshaped artifacts (such as the holes of a net), and eye-like natural phenomena (such as
water sources). Occasionally, it may also refer to actions of another spherical organ, the
mouth.74 It is therefore to be distinguished from siqum, the verb that generally means
to be narrow.75 Piqum specifically describes a movement of the eye, perhaps to
squint, or a condition of the eye, probably screwed-up eye.76 Etymologically, piqum
should be connected to late post-Biblical Hebrew phq, to yawn (a physiological action, which to the best of my knowledge is not known in Akkadian lexicography).77 If
so, phq in late Hebrew describes an involuntary opening of ones mouth in order to
inhale deeply, while the same Semitic root in Akkadian describes a voluntary narrowing
of ones eye in order to see more clearly (but also, twice, opening of the mouth). Semantic shifts from eye to mouth among different Semitic languages are not unknown (an
obvious example is Akk. amrum vs. Hebrew mr), as are semantic transformations
between narrowness and wideness (e.g., Akk. paqum vs. Hebrew pq).
The CAD refrains from suggesting an etymology for pqat. However, AHw and CDA
both derive this MP from piqum, to be, make narrow.78 Consequently, pqat should
be analyzed as the 3rd feminine singular stative form of piqum, she/it is narrow.
Furthermore, if pqat is a 3 f. s. stative of piqum, then pq, a rare by-form of pqat,

72. AHw 861b; CDA 274a.

73. A certainly related verb, better attested than piqum, is puqqu, to heed, to be attentive to, to be
concerned, to be anxious (CAD P 512). It is mentioned in a synonym list as the equivalent of ubbu, bitr,
nalum, and daglum, proving its relation to the faculty of seeing (An IX: 28ff., cf. CAD P 512 lex. sec).
74. CAD P 394c), s.v. pqu.
75. AHw 1039a s.v.: eng, schmal sein, werden.
76. In fact, CDA 274a lists as the secondary meaning of piqum screw up (eyes, to see).
77. Other Semitic cognates (but not Akk. piqum) are listed in Militarev and Kogan 2000: 315.
78. AHw 861b s.v. piqum, pqu; CDA 274a s.v. piqum. Verbal derivation for pqat was also suggested
by Speiser 1947: 32223.

38

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

ought to be analyzed as 3rd feminine plural stative form79 or, better, a dual stative form:
theythe twoare narrow. This leads to the conclusion that the elliptic antecedent of
pqat is very likely num, eye (f.), and not anntum, this, or awtum word, affair,
as might be thought at first glance. As a result, I suggest that originally the MP pqat was
a verbal predicate in the expression num pqat, the eye is squinting (or, in the case of
the dual form pq: the two eyes are squinting). This precise expression is recorded
only in physiognomic texts and in topographic designations. But it is possible that in
vernacular usage it was used to designate the eye is examining, considering, surveying, namely, it seems that ..., apparently, lo and behold! or the like (cf. German
augenscheinlich). There is ample evidence from many different languages that the eye is
an organ that is regarded as not only responsible for the faculty of seeing but also for the
epistemic capacity of understanding. This is also the case in Akkadian, where phrases
such as awlum alla awlim ina nka akin, the man is not considered a gentleman
(lit., in your eyes the man is considered a not-man),80 or awltum ul ka nki libbai,
the lady is not herself, pay attention to her (lit., keep your eye on her),81 prove that
the eye- and sight-related words were used to construct epistemic expressions. If this
hypothesis holds true, then the first, pregrammaticalized stage of the MP pqat has now
been identified.
Grammaticalization
MPs in many languages tend to acquire their function by a process of grammaticalization (e.g., German etwa, lexically somewhere, grammaticalized as perhaps; or
blo, lexically naked, grammaticalized as only, etc.).82 This complex process by
which a formerly autonomous word receives a formative grammatical character can
be summarized as a gradual decrease in the lexical value of a noun, verb, or a short
phrase and in an increase in their abstract meaning.83 This often involves a shift from
one part of speech to another (as, e.g., body parts that shift from the category of nouns
to the category of prepositions).84 In addition, the syntactic freedom of the given element decreases in the process of grammaticalization, and its bonding to other parts of
the sentence increases.85 Briefly, the grammaticalized unit or structure is divested of its
original lexical denotation and assumes a grammatical function. It tends to be connected
to a limited set of components, in certain syntactic arrangements, and occupies a specific
position in the sentence.

79. As suggested to me by D. Charpin, private communication. Cf. Mayer 1992: 37.

80. BIN 6, 119:810 (OA letter cited in CAD I/J 156 b1).
81. AbB 2, 145:1820 (OB letter cited in CAD I/J 156 b1 as CT 29, 15).
82. See, e.g., Abraham 1991; Lehmann 1995.
83. See Stevens 1992: esp. 300302. More generally, see Heine, Claudi, and Hnnemeyer 1991: 126,
and Hopper and Traugott 1993: 117. A detailed discussion of the grammaticalization process that Akkadian quotatives (enma, umma, umm) underwent is found in Deutscher 2000: 6891.
84. Rubin 2005: 4648.
85.Van Baar 1996: esp. 26061; Lehmann 1995: 12269.

The Grammaticalization of pqat

39

Negation in French furnishes an excellent illustration of the historical process of

grammaticalization. Most, if not all, auxiliary particles (or adverbial complements)
that reinforce ne, the French original negation particle, were initially regular substantives used at first with their lexical meanings: pas, point, mie, goutte, mot, noix, pois, d,
bouton, denier, pomme, grain, cive, ftu, ail (meaning respectively: step, point, crumb,
drop, word, nut, pea, die, button, penny, apple, grain, chive, straw, garlic). At some time
between the 13th and 15th centuries, through the process of grammaticalization, these
lemmasaside from their basic meaningsbegan to serve as auxiliary particles of negation: for example, il ne marche pas, he does not walk at all (lit., a step); ile ne boit
goutte, he does not drink at all (lit., a drop); il nestime noix, he does not appreciate
at all (lit., a nut); il ne mange mie, he does not eat at all (lit., a crumb), etc.86 Rubin
(2005: 3) conveniently presents the main stages of this grammaticalization process regarding pas, the main auxiliary particle of negation in modern French. First, a verb of
motion is negated by ne and optionally extended by pas: Je ne vais (pas), I dont go
(a step). Secondly, pas was reanalyzed and grammaticalized. It lost its lexical meaning
and obtained the grammatical function of reinforcing the negation: Je ne vais pas, I
dont go. Then pas was used by way of analogy with nonmotion verbs as well: Je ne
sais pas, I dont know. Finally, pas went through a second stage of grammaticalization
and became the main marker of negation. The original particle of negation, ne, became
optional and even redundant: Jsais pas, I dont know; pas encore, not yet, etc.
It is important to note that a grammaticalized form does not necessarily lose its pregrammaticalized meanings. In fact, the grammaticalized form often stands at some point
on a scale of different usages and meanings. This scale is an arrangement of forms
along an imaginary line at one end of which is a fuller form of some kind, perhaps lexical, and at the opposite end a compacted and reduced form, perhaps grammatical.87
A prime example of this phenomenon, where a specific form synchronically maintains
both its pregrammaticalized and grammaticalized meanings (known as divergence) is
described in detail by Deutscher in his analysis of the quotative umma.88 Most, if not all
OB epistemic MPs, underwent some sort of grammaticalization. However, as we shall
see, earlier, pregrammaticalized stages of meanings of certain MPs can sometimes be
detected.
The Grammaticalization of pqat
I have suggested above that pqat is to be connected to the verb piqum. If this suggestion is correct, the initial stage of grammaticalization of this MP is a 3 f. s. stative
form of piqum, she/it (i.e, the eye), is narrow. The advanced stage of the grammaticalization process that pqat underwent is particularly evident from the fact that this MP
can follow a preposition. In other words, pqat, which started as a verbal form, behaves
86. Nyrop 1930: vol. 6.3133 (2224); Grevisse 1980: 107172 (2189).
87. Hopper and Traugott 1993: 67.
88. Deutscher 2000: 7679.

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

40

in the end as a substantive. Note the following letter, where first pqat appears, then is
replaced by ana pqat:
AbB 14, 145:825:
li-p-it-itar dumu ip-q-a / tap-pu-u il-li-ku-nim-ma / i-na Sipparki renam a a-a-ru-u-nu-i-im / i-sa-a-u-ru / p-q-at a-na e-ri-ka i-il-la-kunim-ma/ na-ap-a-ri-ia -da-ab-ba-bu / ki-a-am q-bi-u-nu-i-im / um-ma
at-ta-a-ma/ a-wi-lum bi-is-s bi-ti / a-na u4-um tam-li-tim re-e-ku-nu -ka-a-al
/ a-al-q-ti-ku-nu-ma s-u-ra / ki-a-am q-bi-u-nu-i-im / la -da-ab-ba-bu
/ a-na p-q-at i-la-ku-nim / i-nu--ma i-te-er-bu-nim / a-na na-ap-a-ri-ia
q-bi-ma / -a-ra-am sag-gme-me / i-dam li-a-a-bi-tu
p

Lipit-Itar the son of Ipqua and his colleagues arrived, and they are now moving
the men who were assigned to them around in Sippar. Perhaps they come
to you and annoy you about my residence(in this case) say to them: The
gentlemanhis house is my house. I am ready to comply with you on the day of
recruitment, (but first) look for those who are missing!tell them so. Let them
not bother the house. And in case (ana pqat) they arrive and when they actually
enter (the house), tell (the men at) my residence that they keep the boy and the
slave-girls out of sight.
The appearance of ana pqat is not restricted to Babylonia.89 It is known in Mari as
well, as shown in the following letter from Sams-Addu to Yasma-Addu:
Ziegler 2004: 96:1319:
up-p an-n-e-em / [pl]a-e-em u--mi-ma / an-ni-tum lu- pa-a-at la-i-im/
a-na p-qa-at at-ta a-na tu-ut-tu-ulki / -lu-ma k as k al a-yi-i-ma ta-al-la-ak/
a-na u-ta-wi l-me su-ti-iki / kaska l a-a-ti ka-a-ri a-ra-an la-i-im
Make Lm hear this tablet of mine so that this affair will be his responsibility.
Perhaps (ana pqat), you shall go to Tuttul or to another direction. (Thus), it will
be the charge of Lm to dictate (a letter) to the Suteans and to organize this
expedition.
The last step in the grammaticalization process is documented in the cliticized form
appqat (<ana pqat):
Dossin 1973: 185:1735:90
p-qa-at be-l -ul -a-as-s-s-ma / be-l a-na e-er ia-ri-im-li-im / a-um
e4-mi-im a-a-tu -ul i-pu-ur / i-na-an-na be-l li-i-ta-a-al-ma / a-na e-er
ia-ri-im-li-im / ki-a-am li-i-pu-ur um-ma be-l-ma / i-na ni-ku-ra-tim i-tu u4 2
mu / e-bu-ur u-ul-mi-im ze-er ma-ti-ia / -ul i--id e-um i-na ma-t[i-i]a i-[]
89. See also AbB 3, 39:1217; AbB 3, 53:1924.
90. LAPO 16, 230.

The Grammaticalization of pqat

41

a-[d]i-i[d] / a-na i-i la i-i be-l a-pa-rum-ma / li-i-pu-ur / ap-p-qa-at a-na

ma-t[i] ma-[t]i-ma ia-[ri-im-li-im] / [a-w]a-[t]am ki-a-am a-na be-l-ia i-a-abba-at / [um-ma-mi e-um li-i]q-tu-um / i-n[a l]i-[i]b-bi ma-ti-ka i-a-di-id/
a-na mi-nim [na-a-pa-a]r-tam / la ta-a-pu-ra-am / ne-me-et-tam be-l
e-li-u / li-ir-u
Perhaps they didnt mention (it) to my lord and my lord didnt write to Yarmlm concerning this issue. Now, let my lord think it over and write to Yarim-lim
as following: Due to hostilities, it is two years now that a peaceful harvest, the
grain of my land, he (Zimr-lm) did not reap and the barley has become scarce in
my land. This way or some other let my lord write. Perhaps (appqat) sooner or
later Yarm-lm will transmit a message to my lord as following: (Even) gleaned
barley in the heart of your land became scarce. Why (then) didnt you write me a
letter?
The compound appqat proves that at this stage of OB the MP pqat was considered a
substantivized form that can depend on another grammatical element, namely, a preposition. The difference between pqat and regular substantives is, of course, that pqat is not
inflected according to case (that is, no genitive ending is found in ana pqat). The joining of pqat to ana carries no meaning additional to the use of pqat alone. In fact, ana
pqat and appqat are redundant forms, built by way of analogy to, for example, ana er,
to, or aum (ana um), concerning. The use of pqat with the preposition ana only
demonstrates the semantic erosion of pqat that led some speakers to use it with ana.
As we shall see, the same process of joining an epistemic MP to ana as a final stage
in its of grammaticalization also occurs with the MPs assurr and midde.
List of Attestations of pqat
(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

*AbB 1, 51:2336
*AbB 1, 68:49
*AbB 1, 71:1824
AbB 1, 121:36
*AbB 1, 135:612
*AbB 1, 135:2527
AbB 1, 139:610
AbB 3, 39:1217
AbB 3, 53:1924
AbB 4, 49:513
AbB 4, 50:710
AbB 4, 150:2538
AbB 4, 152:1421
*AbB 6, 125:1625
*AbB 8, 109:3339
AbB 7, 42:1320
AbB 9, 31:1022
*AbB 9, 78:2023

19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.

AbB 9, 145:1317
*AbB 9, 150:59
AbB 10, 56:2125
AbB 10, 103:38
AbB 12, 13:618
AbB 14, 110:3640
*AbB 14, 112:3642
AbB 14, 114:2429
*AbB 14, 145:825
AbB 14, 164:2533
AbB 14, 186:1724
AbB 14, 37:912
ABIM 22:2530
*ARM 1, 1:1012 (LAPO 16, 305)
ARM 1, 2:1113 (LAPO 16, 306)
*ARM 1, 32:720 (LAPO 17, 750)
ARM 2, 21:17 (LAPO 16, 350)
ARM 2, 23:1016 (LAPO 17, 590)

The Modal Particle pqat in Old Babylonian

42
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.

ARM 2, 40:418 (LAPO 17, 602)

ARM 2, 49:1112 (LAPO 16, 309)
ARM 2, 66:513 (LAPO 18, 1251)
ARM 2, 121:912 (LAPO 16, 434)
*ARM 4, 54:814 (LAPO 18, 952)
*ARM 4, 60:513 (LAPO 18, 914)
ARM 4, 86:5254 (LAPO 17, 772)
ARM 5, 53:614 (LAPO 16, 261)
ARM 6, 30:7 10 (LAPO 17, 565)
*ARM 10, 156:1230 (LAPO 18, 1134)
*ARM 13, 25:516 (LAPO 18, 970)
ARM 18, 5:1019 (LAPO 17, 666)
ARM 18, 7:1119 (LAPO 18, 909)
ARM 26/1, p. 42:711
ARM 26/1, 78:1013 (Heimpel 2003: 208)
ARM 26/1, 80:47 (Heimpel 2003: 208)
ARM 26/1, 84:818 (Heimpel 2003: 209)
ARM 26/1, 121:1821 (Heimpel 2003:
22223)
ARM 26/1, 148:514 (Heimpel 2003:
232)
*ARM 26/1, 242:614 (Heimpel 2003: 269)
*ARM 26/2, 302:915 (Heimpel 2003:
28990)
ARM 26/2, 328:2629 (Heimpel 2003:
3045)
ARM 26/2, 354:1220 (LAPO 17, 551;
Heimpel 2003: 313)
ARM 26/2, 408:5559 (Heimpel 2003:
348349)
ARM 26/2, 469:2735 (Heimpel 2003:
38081)
ARM 26/2, 483:3539 (Heimpel 2003:
385)
ARM 26/2, 489:4144 (Heimpel 2003:
387)

64. *ARM 26/2, 491:3437 (Heimpel 2003:

38889)
65. *ARM 27, 54:618 (Heimpel 2003: 429)
66. ARM 27, 57:913 (Heimpel 2003: 42930)
67. ARM 27, 77:68
68. *ARM 27, 151:100104 (Heimpel 2003:
46163)
69. *ARM 28, 145:1218
70. *ARM 28, 179:3141
71. CAD P 386a1a (Susa letter)
72. Charpin 1991: 151:iii 1822
73. Charpin 1991: 155:iv 2123
74. *Christian 1969: 18:2338
75. Christian 1969: 22:11 22
76. Dossin 1938b: 181182:1822 (cf. ARM
26/1 p.160 n. b)
77. *Dossin 1973: 185:1735 (LAPO 16, 230)
78. *FM 6, 25:2229
79. *FM 7, 45:4246
80. FM 9, 57:15
81. *Kienast 1978: vol. II, 156:1624
82. *Lambert 1960: 244245:iv4245
83. *Livingstone 1988: 176:17 (UET 6/2, 414)
84. *MARI 5, 168:2941 (LAPO 17, 490)
85. *MARI 5, 181:924 (LAPO 16, 13)
86. *MARI 6, 272:417 (LAPO 17, 463)
87. MARI 6, 263264:419 (LAPO 18, 1084)
88. MARI 8, 383:1022
89. OBTR 56:59
90. Shemshara Letters 11:1622
91. Shemshara Letters 21:1016
92. Shemshara Letters 24:6
93. Shemshara Letters 41:1720
94. *Ziegler 2004: 96:1319

Definitely Maybe
Oasis

Chapter 2
THE MODAL PARTICLE midde
In the previous chapter, pqat was defined as a weak doubter, reflecting the speakers
state of not-knowing and denoting the small amount of background information the
speaker has, as well as his low commitment, if any, to his evaluation of present reality.
It has been demonstrated that, in addition to its main function as a doubter (translated
as perhaps), pqat can be used in semiconditional constructions (translated as in case
that ...) and in optative constructions (pqat A pqat B ... translated as perhaps A,
perhaps B, or simply: A or B). I have further shown that in some conversational
circumstances pqat is used to diminish the emphatic tone of the speaker (when he is
writing to an addressee whose authority is higher than his) or at times used to lessen
the gravity of unpleasant rumors said about the speaker or his addressee. In these cases,
the weak doubter perhaps is used where the context calls for a stronger MP, such as
surely or no doubt.
In OB modality, surely opens a wider epistemic domain than appears at first glance.
At least three MPs play a role here: midde, a deductive MP that denotes strong probability (its translations range from probably to surely); wuddi, a presumptive PM that
denotes certainty; and anna, a declarative certifier. The two latter MPs express full
commitment of the speaker to his words.
A passage from Gilgame that involves him and his mother Ninsun will serve to
introduce us to midde, the MP on which this chapter focuses. Having dreamed of a
falling celestial object too heavy for him to lift, Gilgame goes to his mother to get an
interpretation of his dream. The wise Ninsun reveals the meaning concealed in her sons
nocturnal vision and says:
George 2003: 172 (Gilg. P): i1719 (//174: i83 //178: v186):
mi-in-de dGI a ki-ma ka-ti / i-na e-ri i-wa-li-id-ma / -ra-ab-bi-u a-du-
Different translations have been offered for this line. Hecker translates: Wer wei, Gilgamesch, wurde einer wie du in der Steppe geboren und zog ihn das Bergland gro?.1
Similarly, CAD: who can tell whether one like you, Gilgme, was born in the steppe?2
1. Hecker 1994: 649.
2. CAD M/2 84e).

43

44

The Modal Particle midde

Others opt for a more forceful reply from Ninsun. George prefers: for sure, Gilgamesh,
one like yourself was born in the wild and the upland reared him,3 as do Tournay and
Shaffer: Srement, Gilgamesh, cest quelquun comme toi; il est n dans la steppe.4
The exact meaning of minde, or midde, is hard to define. In the example just cited,
midde is translated in very contradictory ways, by who can tell? on the one hand and
by for sure on the other. As we shall see, this case is not unique, and we will have to
deal with the reason for this confusing situation.
The Attestations:
Generic and Geographical Distribution
The corpus that served as the basis for investigation consists of 45 published cases
of midde. Most of the examples comes from epistolary texts. Of the latter, 28 examples
stem from southern and central Babylonia; 16 examples originate from upper Mesopotamia: 13 from the Mari archives (not all written in Mari; ARM 28, 50, e.g., stems from
Alak), and 3 from emra.5 Only 3 cases of midde are gathered from nonepistolary
texts.6 In commemorative, official, or technical texts, midde is not found. This distribution strongly suggests that midde is principally characteristic of letterstexts that transmit face-to-face, spoken utterances into standardized written form.7 Even in the example
from the Epic of Gilgame, midde is found in a context of direct speech between two
protagonists, Gilgame and his mother Ninsunnot in a descriptive section. Briefly,
midde, like many of the MPs treated in this study, is a modifier of spoken utterances
between two communicating parties.
The spelling of midde varies. The defective spelling mi/m-de is attested 15 times,
mainly in Babylonian sources (but 2 times also at emra);8 the explicit writing miinde
is found 11 times, in central and southern Babylonia (but, again, once also at emra);9
a spelling that mediates between these two spellings, mi-id-de, is found 15 times, mainly
in sources from upper Mesopotamia.10 At Mari, this spelling predominates and is almost
the sole form attested. Of interest are the few cases where the spelling mi-de-e is found.11
3. George 2003: 173. See also George 1999: 102.
4. Tournay and Shaffer 1994: 62.
5. Shemshara Letters 11:1617 is not included in this count, because the MP midde is not attested
thereonly the periphrastic expression mannum l ide.
6. George 2003: 172 (Gilg. P): i 1719; TIM 2, 129:1415; and TIM 2, 129:20 (students exercise).
7. Sallaberger 1999: 1012; Wasserman 2001: 637.
8. AbB 1, 37:810; AbB 1, 119:1117; AbB 3, 11:4647; AbB 8, 99:1213; AbB 9, 83:1524; AbB
10, 15:2532; AbB 10, 16:1618; AbB 12, 38:2627; AbB 12, 78:1826; CAD M/2 84a (Unpubl. letter);
Shemshara Letters 35:3340; Shemshara Letters 52:2734; TIM 2, 129:1415; TIM 2, 129:20 (unpublished
texts not included).
9. AbB 1, 39:615; AbB 6, 162:1215; AbB 10, 166:612; AbB 10, 170:1720; AbB 11, 84:1117;
AbB 12, 113:1721; AbB 13, 124:3334; AbB 14, 70:1821; Falkenstein 1963, 57: ii 1317; George
2003: 173 (Gilg. P): i 17; Shemshara Letters 55:523.
10. AbB 1, 135:67; AbB 8, 109:910; AbB 12, 63:1821; AbB 12, 63:2227; AbB 12, 145:3133;
ARM 14, 112:2430; ARM 26/2, 391:1518; ARM 26/2, 393:610; ARM 26/2, 511:1215; ARM 26/2,
515:49; ARM 26/2, 522:1013; ARM 28, 50:1013; FM 1, 128:2325; FM 2, 55:2126; MARI 6, p.83
n. 213:515.
11. AbB 3, 41:511; AbB 12, 78:1826; RA 64 104:2327.

Previous Studies of midde

45

An analysis of the different spellings of midde indicates that the differences cannot be
fully accounted for by geographic distribution or by diachronic development. Some tendencies, however, can be established. In central Babylonia, the scribes showed no clear
preference and used all four spellings as free, probably unmotivated, variants. At Mari,
only mi-id-de (and once mi-de-e) was used. At emra, where only three examples are
known, both the defective writing m-de and the plene m-in-de are found.
Previous Studies of midde
Research into the syntax and semantics of midde first of all must confront the different, even contradictory, translations of this MP in previous literature.
It was Landsberger who kindled, it appears, the semantic schism by proposing two
different etymologies for midde. The first (wrong) etymology connected midde directly
to Late Hebrew wadday, surely (and to the MP wuddi).12 The second (correct) etymology analyzed midde as stemming from man de, who knows.13 The two different
analyses yielded, in turn, two different lines of translations: surely and probably.
The following three groups of translations summarize the different ways midde has
been rendered:
1. The first group of translations considered midde to denote certaintysicherlich
and the like in German; en verit or srement in French; and for sure or
surely in English. This line of translations goes back, apparently, to Zimmern, in
1894, who probably was the first Assyriologist to discuss this lemma thoroughly
(critically reviewing suggestions of previous scholars such as Delitzsch).14 Zimmern understood midde as denoting frwhar, gewiss, gewissermassen, etwa,
wenn etwa.15 He was followed by Ylvisaker, Jensen, Bezold, Thureau-Dangin,
Stamm, Jacobsen, Speiser, Landsberger, Frankena, Kraus, Cagni, Tournay and
Shaffer, and recently George.16
2. The second group of translations treated midde as denoting uncertaintyviel
leicht in German; peut-tre, il est vraisemblable que ..., il se peut toute-fois
que ..., il est possible que ... in French; and perhaps, possibly, who knows?
who can say? in English. In the early stages of research, these translations were
12. Landsberger 196466: 70 n. 82.
13. An important step in the correct assessment of the etymology of this MP was taken by Speiser
(1947: 322 n. 6), wholike von Sodenstill hesitated between who knows? and what is known? This
etymology is found, in slight modification, in the various editions of GAG 121e. In the earlier editions,
midde < man de, but in the third edition of GAG, following AHw, this etymology was changed to midde <
mn de, was wei ich?
14. Delitzsch 1889: 210: warum? based on the assumed Hebrew etymology madd, why.
15. Zimmern 1894: 1047.
16. Ylvisaker 1912: 6465:gewisslich, sicherlich; Jensen 1924: 130: es wird gewut, sicherlich,
gewi; Bezold 1926: 18a s.v. mand, mandma, mend: bekanntlich, gewi, sicher, nun; Thureau-Dangin 1934: 30: en verit; Stamm 1939: 161 n.3: gewiss, but also hoffentlich; Jacobsen 1946: 137:
surely, verily; Speiser 1947: 322 n.6: verily; Landsberger 1923: 72 (with reservations): sicherlich,
Landsberger 1956: 188: naturally, Landsberger 1964: 70 n. 82: selbsverstndlich, bestimmt; AbB 3,
11:46: sicher, and AbB 6, 162:12: zweifellos; AbB 10, 16:17 sicher; AbB 8, 99:13: Selbstverstndlich; Tournay/Shaffer 1994: 62: srement; George 2003: 173:17: for sure.

46

The Modal Particle midde

offered by Ungnad, Landsberger, and P. Kraus.17 A crucial juncture for the acceptance of this interpretation, which became the customary translation of midde, was
reached when von Soden18 discussed this MP in 1949 in his paper Vielleicht
im Akkadischen and established its meaning as perhaps. Thence it was carried
over to the standard dictionaries. It is therefore no surprise that in recent studies
this translation of midde prevails, represented by scholars such as (to name just a
few): Sallaberger, van Soldt, Eidem and Lssoe, Kupper, Lafont, Charpin, Durand, Heimpel, and Veenhof.19
3. The third group of translations handled midde as a conditionalwenn in German and if, suppose in English. This line of translations commenced in 1890
with Jensen,20 was accepted by Zimmern,21 and was followed years later by Kraus
and van Soldt.22
This detailed bibliographical survey demonstrates that many scholars translated this
lemma differently in various contexts, a fact that emphasizes the inherent difficulty of
assessing this particles meaning. It also should be noted that midde occupied scholarly
attention from the early stages of Assyriology. This special interest was due, no doubt,
to the fact that midde is included in VAT 244, a lexical list known as The Berlin Vocabulary, a text that attracted much interest by German scholars at the end of the 19th century
and the beginning of the 20th century.23 Second, the bibliographical survey also demonstrates that modern scholars are more comfortable with the translation probably,
which they understand as a near-synonym to perhaps, rather than with the meaning
surely, which is found more frequently in earlier studies. In the second half of the 20th
century, it appears that Assyriologists found it difficult to ignore von Sodens definition
of midde and the ensuing canonical definitions in the dictionaries, all of which approximate the meaning perhaps. What is puzzling in this state of affairs is not so much
the wide range of translations offered by different scholars but the fact that none of the
opposite translations can safely be considered as wrong. Furthermore, it is impossible
to extract from all of the proposed translations a core meaning for this MPthe basic
meaning from which all other translations can be derived.24
17. Ungnad 1922: 17: vielleicht; whol.; Landsberger 1923: 73: vielleicht (but note that Landsberger
1923: 72 hesitantly suggests the meaning sicherlich!); P. Kraus 1932: 64: vielleicht.
18. Von Soden 1949: 387: vielleicht.
19. Sallaberger 1999: 127 n. 181 (also pp. 24950): vielleicht; AbB 12, 63:18 and AbB 13, 124:33:
perhaps; Shemshara Letters: 35:37 and 55:14: perhaps; ARM 28, 50:12: peut-tre; ARM 26/2,
511:1215; 515:9; 522:1013: peut-tre; ARM 26/2, 393:610: peut-tre; Durand 1990b: 83: peuttre, Durand 1994: 97: il est vraisemblable que ...; LAPO 18, 855: il se peut toute-fois que...,
noteg): mind est la particule qui exprime une possibilit ouverte, LAPO 18, 1174: il est possible que
...; Heimpel 2003: 339 and passim: possibly; AbB 14, 70:20: possibly.
20. Jensen 1890: 403: wenn, weil, gemss dem, dass, in Folge davon.
21. Zimmern 1894: 1047: wenn etwa.
22. AbB 10, 15:29: wenn; AbB 12, 38:26: if, AbB 12, 78:20: suppose, and AbB 12, 113:17; AbB
12, 145:31: should ... (then)....
23. See Reisner 1894 and Zimmern 1894: 10711.
24. So already Zimmern 1894: 1045: Dagegen enthalten die brigen genannten Deutungen alle et
was Richtiges, ohne dass aber jede einzelne fr sich der Bedeutung dieser Partikel in allen ihren Nancen
gerecht wrde.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofmidde

47

Only a few scholars who have opted to translate midde probably or perhaps or
surely have gone to the trouble of explaining how their preference accommodates the
opposite translation. Frankena was the first in modern scholarship partially to meet this
challenge.25 His 1978 discussion made it clear that midde oscillates between probably
and surely and that it does not simply mean perhaps; that is, it is not a neutral, nonvariable marker that conveys a very weak (or no) commitment by the speaker to the truth
of what he is saying.
Another scholar whose insight shed light on the poorly-understood nature of midde
was Jacobsen. More than 60 years ago, treating the Sumerian verbal element n an g a-/
namga-, which parallels Akkadian tuama, midde, appna, and pqat in lexical lists,
Jacobsen wrote:
Basic in these [Akkadian] words is an appeal to the listeners own judgment and experience; they present a fact or conjecture as evident, obvious, as a necessary inference
from the premises, but they tend to shade off into the more general, affirmative meaning
surely, verily.26

This observation was inaccurate with regard to the MPs tua, appna, and pqat. Nonetheless, Jacobsens description was accurate for midde. He realized that midde does not
simply question whether a particular event will or will not happen (like perhaps) but
signifies a higher degree of the speakers assuredness regarding a possible event.
Following this detailed bibliographical introduction, which illustrates the frustrating
semantic difficulties that midde poses, I wish to turn to the definition of midde, based on
the corpus of collected examples.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of midde
1. Scalar Certifier
The examination of the collected material shows that midde serves as an inferential
MP by which the speaker evaluates, with different levels of certitude, the likelihood of
an action or opinion of his interlocutor or of another person involved in the matter or
the realizability of some state of affairs. The difference between midde and pqat is that
midde is higher on the range of certitude: it marks a situation in which the speaker has a
stronger belief in the veracity of his words. While pqat is a doubter, designating nothing more than potentiality, the function of midde floats between the speculative and the
deductive, marking partial certitude.
A speaker deeming a specific action as probable may be confident in the truth of
what he is saying, based on a deduction from facts known, or may lack confidence in
the proposition expressed.27 The higher the speakers confidence, the closer midde is to
no doubt and to deductive, and vice versa; if the speaker lacks confidence regarding
the addressees or another persons actions, midde draws nearer to probably and to the
25. Frankena 1978: 4142.
26. Jacobsen 1946: 137 n. 17. See also, along these lines, Thureau-Dangin 1935: 308 and Speiser 1947:
32223.
27. Palmer 1986: 64; cf. Chung and Timberlake 1985: 24250.

48

The Modal Particle midde

surely

most probably

more probably
probably

Fig. 1. The Intensification

of the MP midde.

(see fig. 1). Hence, the apparently conflicting, even contradicting, translations of middeprobably and surelycan be reconciled once it becomes clear that
these translations reflect different degrees of confidence with which the speaker expresses his evaluation. Therefore, midde does not carry a fixed semantic value; instead,
it is a scalar MP the meaning of which fluctuates along an intensifying continuum
designating the speakers confidence vis vis reality. To illustrate the ambiguity of this
kind of continuum, we may compare, mutatis mutandis, the behavior of midde with the
way the semantic registers of probably are exploited in the common advertisement
that qualifies Carlsberg Beer as Probably the best beer in the world.
To clarify further the complex issue of scalar vs. nonvariable MPs, and the difference
between subjective (i.e., inferential) and objective types of possibility, a cross-linguistic
comparison with another modal system, that of Latin, may be helpful.
speculative

Excursus:
Unilateral vs. Bilateral Possibility: The Case of the Latin Modal System
In a study on epistemic modality in Latin, Bertocchi and Orlandini have offered a
penetrating terminological deliberation:
Le latin ... oppose nettement au niveau lexical lexpression du possible (pur possible
et possible contingent), quil ralise par la tournure potest, fieri potest, exprimant la modalit pistmique objective et excluant la prise en charge du locuteur, celle scalaire, du
probable, pour lexpression de laquelle il dploie toute une gamme dexpressions lexicales
ayant des proprits syntaxiques, smantiques et pragmatiques particulires. Parmi ces
expressions lexicales on trouve pour lexpression de la notion de probable, des adverbes
modaux (fortasse, certe, profecto), exprimant la modalit pistmique subjective, des adjectifs (probabile, necesse), exprimant la modalit infrentielle, et des prdicats (oportet,

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofmidde

49

debet), exprimant une modalit qui est tantt purement subjective, tantt infrentielle, base sur des donnes objectives.28

Thus, Bertocchi and Orlandini define two types of possibility: possibilit unilatrale,
qui nest pas borne vers le haut, et qui peut virtuellement rejoindre le ncessaire, and
possibilit bilatrale qui exclut le ncessaire, et prsente un double bornage (vers le
ncessaire et vers limpossible).29 The first type of possibility (possibilit unilatrale,
which does not exclude the necessary) is nonvariable, whereas the second type (possibilit bilatrale, which excludes the necessary) is scalar. Summing up, Bertocchi and
Orlandini distinguish between:
La notion pistmique de probable (exprimant un jugement gradu de locuteur sur la
probabilit de p: improbable, peu probable, plus ou moins probable, probable, trs
probable) et la notion ontique de possible. [emphasis original]

This multifaceted cleavage in Latin between objective possibility (i.e., independent of

the speakers commitment) and subjective (i.e., inferential, or entirely personal) probability has typological similarities in Akkadian and is applicable for the most part to OB.
Examining the available material allows to say that midde is a bilateral scalar epistemic
MP, with subjective and inferential characteristics, denoting gradation of likelihood
(from probability to certainty); it is not tangential, however, with the notion of necessity
(which is not fully covered in Akkadian; perhaps, to some extend by the MP wuddi)
Thus, typologically, midde can be compared to Latin fortasse, certe, profecto, etc. The
MP that is used in OB for the unilateral type of possibility (comparable to Latin potest)
is pqat.
* * *
1. midde Between Probably and No Doubt
There is, admittedly, no clear-cut criterion to differentiate between cases where midde
means probably and cases where it means no doubt. Often, this decision still dependsdisappointingly, perhaps, for the linguist but expected for the philologiston
experience, common-sensical interpretation, and acquaintance with the subtleties of the
ancient text. Nevertheless, in many cases, a simple rule can be applied in order to distinguish between probably and no doubt: if the midde clause is followed by direct orders or instructions to the addressee, then it is logical that the speaker is fairly confident
in his assumptions and that midde should be understood as no doubt. Lack of this sort
of instruction in the sentence may suggest that midde is closer to probably.
In the following letter, midde is clearly low on the scale of the speakers confidence.
No instructions from the speaker follow his assumption about reality,

28. Bertocchi and Orlandini 2001: 48.

29. Bertocchi and Orlandini 2001: 47.

50

The Modal Particle midde

AbB 1, 37:810:
a-um gu4- a ma-a-ri-k[a] mi-de ki-a-am ta-q-ab-bi / um-ma at-ta-ma
a-wi-lu- a wa-a-bu / [i-b]u-tam i-ka-a-du g u4- i-pa-q-du
Concerning the oxen which are with you, you will probably say the following:
the men who are present (here) will reach their destination and will hand over
the oxen.
The absence of background information and of instructions is noticeable. The speaker is
raising a hypothetical possibility without committing himself to its realization.
A medial, somewhat more forceful, position of midde on the scale of the speakers
confidence is found in my interpretation of the next letter:
AbB 10, 15:2532:
5 e gur i-na gim -gur e-nam-ma 10 ag a-u -m e / q-du git u k u l-u-nu 10
er im - me e-li bd / a-na a-LUM a-da-di-im i-im-ma li-bi ur-ra-am / a-na
uru
m- laxki li-is-ni-q-nim / mi-de u4 1-k am ta-ka-la-u-nu-ti / g u4- i-ri-[q]
e- gi - a i-na gim -[] / e-nu []a-mu-um i-ka-a-dam-ma / i--um
i-ba-a-i
Load 5 kor of grain on a cargo ship, add 10 soldiers with their weapon(s) and 10
wall-guards to tow, so that by tomorrow they will get to Mala. (However), you
will probably withhold them for one day(in which case) the oxen will be idle
and the sesame, which is loaded on the ship, will catch rain and damage may
ensue.30
In this text, the speaker is raising a negative possibility that he deems realistic, since he
delineates its detrimental consequences: the addressee will not be efficient enough, the
plowing oxen will be idle, and the sesame will be rained on and rot.
A case that demonstrates midde being placed high on the scale of the speakers confidence and being rendered no doubt is found in a Mari letter:
Dossin 1970: 105:2327:
a-ni-tam an-na-ak-u-nu- / a-u-u-ma -ul ak-nu-uk / a-um up-pa-tim
-ba-a-i-[]u-nu-ti / um-ma a-na-ku-ma mi-de-e / []up-pa-tim a-ye-e-ma
-e-te-q
Another matter: I respected their (shipment of) tin and didnt seal (it). As for
lettersI did search them, saying to myself: they no doubt transfer letters (to)
somewhere.

30. For this passage, see Sallaberger 1999: 249 (no. 197), where midde is translated: Hltst du sie
vielleicht....

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofmidde

51

Meptm, the speaker in this missive, considered it very likely that some secret letters were hidden in the commercial shipment, and this evaluation drove him actively to
search the load of tin surveyed by him.31 Note also:
AbB 1, 39:615:
a-um s ag- r a -na-i-du-ki / sag-r u-a-ti mi-in-de i-bi-i / i-il-la-kam-ma/
ba-lu i-a-la-an-ni / -e-e--u / sag-r u-a-ti ap-pa-tim / u-uk-ni-u /
kaan-nam a urudu / a e-zi-ba-ak-ki / u-uk-ni-u
Concerning the slave about whom I gave you (f.) instructions; as for that slave,
Ib will no doubt come and without asking me (make them) release him
(therefore) put the leash on this slave and put on him the copper fetters which I
left for you.
Here, too, the speaker estimates a future event as so likely that he leaves clear instructions to his subordinate about what to do when it comes to pass: since a certain Ib will
most probably try to release a slave owned by the writer, the addressee should take all
the necessary precautions to prevent this from happening. In this case, midde clearly
functions as a certifier.
Thus, in contexts where midde leads directly to list of actions or instructions, we may
conclude that the speakers evaluation regarding a future event can be rendered as very
likely or no doubt rather than probably. In any case, midde serves as a committing modifier, a deductive, or a certifier, and not the noncommitting, neutral indicator
perhaps.
A special case of midde denoting certitude is found in the following letter:
AbB 1, 119:1117:
i-[n]a ma-ar dutu damar-utu / be-l-ia dbu-ne-ne / a-ka-ar-ra-ba-ku /
a-ma-tam a a-pu-ra-ak-ku / la ta![Text: U]-a-a-i / mi-de a-ma-tum ma-ari-tum / i-na li-ib-bi-ka ib-ba-la-ka-at / a-ta-ap-ra-ak-kum
I pray in front of ama, Marduk, and my lord Bunene for you; Do not be
careless (about) the matter that I have written to you! The earlier matter will no
doubt (i.e., hopefully) cross over in your mind. Herewith I write to you. . . .32
Since this letter is a petition in which the speaker is imploring the addressee to fulfill his
needs, midde here expresses the speakers wishes, rather than his estimations. Therefore,
midde here does mean no doubt but with an undertone of hope instead of certitude. In
fact, we may call this use of midde presumption.

31. Durand LAPO 18, 912: Il nest pas impossible quils fassent passer des tablettes pour quelque
part.
32. The expression ina libbim nabalkutum is not easy to decipher. CAD N/1 15 i suggests: The earlier
matter will perhaps occur to you, while CAD M/2 83 a translates: possibly the previous affair will penetrate your heart.

52

The Modal Particle midde

2. Quasiconditional Constructions
Alongside its epistemic function as a scalar certifier designating partial certitude
(ranging from speculative and a deductive), midde is found also in bi-clausal structures
that bear a resemblance to conditional phrases.33
AbB 10, 16:1618:
a-um gu4- a pin- a uruumbin-dza-ba4-ba4 / urula-ba-sa-arki mi-de i-ta-appu-ru-um-ma / ta-a-ta-na-ap-pa-ar-ma e4-ma-am -ta-ar-ru-ni-kum
As for the plowing oxen of upur-dZababa and Labasar, you will no doubt write
repeatedly (about them)(in this case) they will return you a report.
It is hard to ignore the sequential relationship that exists between the initial clause (midde
itappurum-ma tatanappar-ma) and the following clause (mam utarrnikkum). This
dependence between the midde clause and the following clause approximates genuine
conditional sentences that exhibit the causal relation of a umma protasis preceding an
apodosis. We could argue that the enclitic ma between the two clauses creates a logical
consecutiveness between the two clauses, but in all the other examples that semantically
belong to this group, ma is absent:
AbB 11, 84:1117:
p
-l-i-q-a-am / i-na- -sag-l-numun / ka-ni-kam li-zi-bu-ma / um-ma 1
e gur um-ma 1 gur e-mu 5 / li-id-di-nu-u-nu-i-im-ma / ne-me-et-tam la
i-ra-a-u- / mi-in-de u-nu-ti -ul ta-q-a-ap / i-na e-e a ma-a-ri-ka / ki-ma
a-lim li-i-ru-
Let Il-iqam and Ina-Esagil-zru produce a sealed document and let someone
give them either one kor of barley or one kor of bitter barley. They should have
no reason for complaints. No doubt you will not trust them(in this case) let
someone deduct from the barley at your disposal according to the city (rules).
Here, as in the rest of the cases of semiconditional constructions with midde, the enclitic
ma does not coordinate the two parts of a sentence. If anything, ma only consolidates
the relationship between the two parts of the sentence, but it certainly does not form it. A
question arises immediately: what is the difference between quasiconditional midde sentences of this sort and umma-sentences? The answer lies in the specific modal character
of midde, which renders a more intense commitment by the speaker regarding the likelihood of a future event. Conditional sentences with umma usually imply a causal connection between two events (factual or contra-factual), without expressing the speakers
certainty concerning the ensuing result. In contrast, midde sentences stress not so much
the necessary evolution of the apodosis from the protasis but the speakers assurance, his
commitment to its actualization.
33. See AbB 1, 39:615; AbB 6, 162:1215; AbB 10, 15:2532; AbB 11, 84:1117; AbB 12, 38:2627;
AbB 12, 78:1826.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofmidde

53

It is worth mentioning that this specific use of midde in quasiconditional constructions is found hitherto only in letters from central Babylonian, not in letters from Mari
or emra.
3.Disjunctive Construction: Optative
Another use of midde, found in a Mari letter, is used to mark the speakers hesitation
between two contrasting options in the formula midde A u B:
FM 1, p. 128:2325:34
mi-id-de n a4-du8--a / i-na ma-a-tim a-a-t[i] / ma-ad i-i ma-an-nu-um
l[u- i]-de
And who may know if rock-crystal is rare or abundant in that country? Who
(can) know?
A similar construction is midde A ... lu-ma B...:
ARM 26/2, 391:1518:
mi-id-de r-me-u / [i]-da-an-ni-nu-um-ma a a-na 5 u4-mi 6 u4-mi / li-p-it nap-i-tim i-ra-a-i / -lu-ma na-p-i-ta-u -ul i-la-ap-pa-at
Probably his servants put pressure on him(?) so that in five or six days he will
take an oath, or that he will not take the oath (at all).
This brings to mind the emra letter where the periphrastic expression mannum l de
... mannum l de ... is used instead of the MP midde:
Shemshara Letters 11:1617:
a-wa-tu-u-nu ki-na s-ar-ra / ma-an-nu-um lu- i-de ... ma-an-nu-um lu-
i-de
Who (can) know if their words are true or false? ... Who (can) know?35
These indisputably similar cases can be paralleled to a construction typical of Mari letters, pqat A ... pqat B, perhaps A ... perhaps B,36 discussed in the previous chapter
(see pp.2022). Hence, midde A u B; midde A ... lu-ma B ...; pqat A ... pqat (or
lu-ma) B ..., and sometimes also umma A ... umma B ...,37 all imply potentially
34. See LAPO 18, 855.
35.For mannum l de, see also, e.g., Lacambre 1997: 446:16.
36. ARM 2, 66:1213; ARM 2, 135:1220; ARM 26/1, 121:1821; ARM 26/2, 354:1718 (only published texts are listed). Interestingly, the idiom mannum l de, Who (can) know? accompanies some
cases of pqat A ... pqat B as well: ARM 26/2, 354:1718; ARM 26/2, 489:4144.
37. The sequence umma A ... umma B, which often renders two equally possible (not necessarily
mutually exclusive) options (cf. GAG 162b), is also relevant here. This disjunctive construction, however,
can be also used differently. Unlike pqat A ... pqat B, umma A ... umma B may render two possibilities
and their respective consequences, namely, if A then A1; if, on the other hand B then B1. See, e.g.,
the Mari letter A.2704:1922 (Villard 2001: 103 n. 649): [um]-ma i-du-um a ma-tim a-a-ap-[pa-ar-

54

The Modal Particle midde

alternative circumstances when the speaker, due to his limited knowledge of the facts, is
obliged to use a neutral, entirely open formula.
An exact duplication of the expression pqat A ... pqat B ... is found only in one
example, in the students exercise:
Edzard 1970, 97 (TIM 2, 129): 1415:
mi-de damar -utu mi-de dnin-ur-sa g- g / lu-uq-bi lu-ta-
Be it Marduk, be it Ninursagmay I speak, may I say ...
The trainees use of midde was no doubt triggered by attraction to the much more common idiom pqat A ... pqat B. The expression was probably considered flawed, because it is unknown in any other text. Hence, although midde could perhaps be used
to mark alternatives, in practice, this use is very limited and was probably considered
substandard.
The phenomenon of different particles appearing in similar constructions with similar
significance ought not surprise us, since, on the functional level, there is a partial overlap
between the semantic meaning of different MPs in Akkadian (as is in modal systems of
other languages as well). This partial semantic overlap is echoed in evidence from bilingual lexical lists, which often equate a row of various Akkadian words and particles with
a single Sumerian equivalent. Thus, appna, midde, kam, tua, pqat, uK, and lmatar
are all equated with a single Sumerian adverbial expression i -g i(4)-i n -zu,38 Sumerian tukum-bi matches both umma and assurr,39 and Sumerian g a - n a m corresponds
to Akkadian midde, tuama, uK, and pqa.40 It is, I believe, parallel idiomatic use of
midde and pqat such as the examples discussed just above that served as a trigger for
the correspondence of these two MPs with Sumerian i -g i(4)- i n - z u, although, in reality,
midde and pqat had different modal meanings and in OB were as a rule semantically
distinguished and functioned differently.
The Syntactic Profile of midde
1. Discourse Domains
The MP midde functions mainly, although not exclusively, in relation to the addressee
(the allocutory discourse domain) or to a third person (the delocutory discourse domain). A reference to the locutory discourse domain is very rare in the collected examples. Only in very few cases is midde related to the speaker himself: once, in an unpublished letter, which until fully published should be treated with caution,41 and twice
ma]/ [p]su-mi-ia ma-ah-ri-ka li-[zi-iz] / [um]-ma i-du-um a ab-bu ha-[i-ih-ma] / [pma]-i-a ma-ah-ri-ka
li[ziiz], In case (that what is required is) knowing the countryI will send PN1 to serve before you; In
case (that) knowing the fathers of the house is re[quired]I will send PN2 to se[rve] before you.
38. Reisner 1894: 159:19. See Wilcke 1968.
39. MSL 15, 172 (Diri V): 11920).
40. Izi V (= MSL 13, 165): 16064.
41. CAD M/2 84a, Unpubl. let.: mi-de-ma-an anku ul i?-me (translation is not warranted).

The Syntactic Profile ofmidde

55

in the faulty students text that was mentioned above:42

Edzard 1970: 97 (TIM 2, 129):1415:
mi-de damar -utu mi-de dnin-ur-sa g- g / lu-uq-bi lu-ta-
Be it Marduk, be it Ninursagmay I speak, may I say ...
and later in the same text:
Edzard 1970: 97 (TIM 2, 129):20:
mi-de i-na i-im-ti-ia ub-lam
Probably I will have been carried away by my fate (by that time).
The fact that midde is always uttered by the speaker in relation to other people yet
almost never refers to the speaker himself clearly shows that midde is not connected
with the part of the modal system that deals with will, wish, or fear. If midde were
involved with these feelings or similar inner notions, we would expect many more instances of first-person voice associated with it. This observation reinforces the notion
that the examples from TIM 2, 129 cited above are atypical, perhaps a result of a flawed
style. The bulk of examples proves that, as already noted, midde is an inferential MP
that is connected with judgment, understanding, and estimation regarding the world, a
MP conveying an evaluation of occurrences based on deduction from past experience
or known facts.
This andeven morethe predominance of the allocutory and the delocutory domains indicates that middeless than pqat but still in the same general domain as
pqatcreates perspectivization; that is, it shifts the responsibility for a statement from
the actual speaker to another concrete or abstract person.43
2. Verbal Tenses
From the point of view of verbal system, the corpus at hand shows that midde takes
only indicativenever subjunctiveforms. In more than half of the examples, the verbal
form used with midde is in the present-future tense (28 cases).44 This tendencyfound
also in the case of pqatreveals the connection of midde to nonpast circumstances,
namely, to open-ended actions or situations with some inherent element of uncertainty.45
42. Edzard 1970: 97 n. 2.
43. Sanders and Spooren 1997.
44. AbB 1, 37:810; AbB 1, 39:615; AbB 1, 119:1117; AbB 3, 11:4647; AbB 6, 129:1520;
AbB 6, 162:1215; AbB 8, 109:910; AbB 9, 83:1524; AbB 10, 15:2532; AbB 10, 16:1618; AbB
10, 166:612; AbB 10, 170:1720; AbB 11, 84:1117; AbB 12, 38:2627; AbB 12, 63:1821; AbB 12,
63:2227; AbB 12, 78:1826; AbB 12, 113:1721; AbB 12, 145:3133; AbB 14, 70:1821; ARM 14,
112:2430; ARM 26/2, 391:1518; ARM 26/2, 393:610; ARM 26/2, 515:49; ARM 28, 50:1013; RA
64, 105:2327; Shemshara Letters 35:3340; Shemshara Letters 52:2734.
45. [The] close connection between future tenses and modals is probably to be attributed to the relative
uncertainty inherent in both future event and most of the categories subsumed under the general heading

56

The Modal Particle midde

Seven times in the corpus midde is attested with past verbal forms.46 Some of these examples can be explained. For instance, in a Mari letter:
FM 2, 55:2126:
mi-id-de be-l a-um i-u- / pka-a-la-AN a-na kur-daki i-ti-iq / i-ba-al-p-AN
i-na -ba-timki / wa-i-ib up-p be-l-ia / a a-na e-er i-ba-al-p-AN / be-l
-a-bi-lam ki-ma pa-ni-u-ma i-ti-iq
No doubt it has totally escaped my lord that Kala-El has (already) continued
his way to Kurda, and that Ibl-p-El is staying in btum(hence,) the letter
of my lord that my lord has sent to Ibl-p-El has made its way as usual (to
btum).
The letter was written by Lum, the governor of the district of Qaunn, trying to explain an administrative gaffe to the king while getting more and more entangled in his
justifications.47 The use of the past tense in this case refers to an event that has already
taken place, with actual ramifications on the state of affairs (i.e., the kings forgetfulness,
according to the writer). A similar case is the use of the past tense in Ninsuns answer
to Gilgame:
George 2003: 172 (Gilg. P): i1719 (//174: i83 //178: v186):
mi-in-de dGI a ki-ma ka-ti / i-na -ri i-wa-li-id-ma / -ra-ab-bi-u a-du-
for sure, Gilgamesh, one like yourself was born in the wild and the upland reared
him.
Strong support for taking midde as for sure and not as who knows is furnished by
the standard version of the epic. In Gilg. SB X:13 Sabtu says, upon seeing Gilgame
advancing toward her: mi-in-de-e-ma an-nu- mu-na--ir rm(a m - m [ e ]), For sure
this man is a slayer of wild bulls.48 Clearly, who knows or the like is impossible here,
since the Bull of Heaven was already slain and there is no question about this deed.
Sabtu uses midde to express an idea very much like the African explorer Stanley, who
supposedly said, upon meeting Livingstone in the middle of Africa: Dr Livingstone, I
presume?
Turning back to the OB version of the epic, the past verbal form accompanying midde
in the passage just cited could be explained as a way to refer to an event that has already
occurred but has only now been revealed to the speaker. In fact, in all of the cases where
midde is found with past forms, the action associated with it results in a specific moment
in the present, namely, the speakers evaluation of the current state of affairs. Thus, the
of modals [i.e., obligation, volition, uncertainty or unrealityN.W.]Ultan 1978: 118. See also Palmer
1986: 200: The future may be thought to be the most modal....
46. AbB 3, 41:511; CAD M/2 84a; Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii1317; FM 2, 55:2126; George 2003: 172
(Gilg. P): i1719; TIM 2, 129:20.
47. Sasson 2002: 21721.
48. George 2003: 679:13.

The Syntactic Profile ofmidde

57

semantic function of midde extrapolates to the present and the future, even when the
original action was in the past. This makes it clear that the cases with past forms do not
alter the picture that midde generally is accompanied by nonpast verbal forms.49
In one occurrence in the corpus, a stative accompanies midde,50 and there are two
occurrences in nominal phrases.51 In the student exercise TIM 2, 129:1415, an erroneous precative form is found: the deontic elementthe precativeis incompatible with
the epistemic elementthe MP midde and this proves the faultiness of this example.
3.Negation
The current data show that the negation particle employed in midde sentences is ul,
never l.52 However, both the CAD and the AHw list in their minde entry the text CT
46, 44, an OB dialogue between two friends, in which midde is supposedly followed
by the negation l. However, a collation of the relevant passage makes it clear that not
midde but the interrogative minu, why,53 is to be read here,54 thus confirming that
only ul occurs (never l) occurs with midde. A couple of examples will sufficeone
from Babylonia, the other from Mari.
AbB 12, 78:1826:
u4-ma-ka-al la te-n-zi-ba / ar-i-i pa-ni-ku-nu / lu-mu-ur mi-de-e u4 5 -k am /
ta-GA-ru-ra -ul a-wa-ta-a-a / i-q-bu-ma ar-du-um / i-na a-li-i e-le-em / { m a
ti} i--ri-i[m] / i-na ma-ti i-ra-e-e / i-a-ba-at
Do not be delayed (even) a single day. I want to see you (pl.) immediately. In
case you turn (there) round and round for five days, would people not say the
words: A slave strives to go up to the city, but in the country he inseminates (and
eventually) get caught?55
49. I owe this observation to W. Sallaberger (private communication).
50. FM 1, p. 128:2325 (note also Shemshara Letters 11:1617, where mannum l de is found).
51. AbB 8, 99:1213; MARI 6, 83, no. 213:515.
52. AbB 10, 166:612; AbB 11, 84:1117; AbB 12, 78:1826; ARM 26/2, 393:610; and Shemshara
Letters 35: 3340.
53. Cf. CAD M/2 89 s.v. minsu (SB, NB) and CAD M/2 130 s.v. mium (OAkk., OA).
54. CT 46, 44: ii 1113 reads (contra CAD M/2 84 e) and AHw 655a b), but following CAD Q 166 2):
ru-e m[i]-in-u la we-du i-li-u / da-bi-ib mi-a-ri-im / [m]u-ki-il ki-na-tim, why is it, my friend, that no
one speaks truth (to) his god, keeping justice? See now, independently, George 2007: 69.
55. The verb q/garrum (AHw 902a) denotes a motion of rolling, revolving, or rotating, said of water,
parts of the body, individual human beings, as well as masses of people. In this passage, the verb q/garrum
is used metaphorically, describing dragging feet, ineffective presence, a boondoggle. A similar use of this
verb can be found in a recently published letter from Mari where the writer reports on his insistence to
accomplish his diplomatic mission and deliver the message of his king to the king of Yamad in Aleppo,
regardless of the rejection and obstacles he met there: qa-du a-na na-da-ni-u aq-ru-ru aq-ru-ru-ma ...
yet, when I kept turning around (i.e., when I was dragging my feet, not willing to accept the refusal I had
received ...) Durand 2002, 1:14.
The interpretation of the proverb cited in this passage is not easy to grasp, especially because its reading
is uncertain (note the difficult form a-wa-ta-a-a, found also in line 33, and the redundant signs in line 24).
Like van Soldt (AbB 12, 78:2425), I suggest that the writer insists that his addressees should not tarry but

58

The Modal Particle midde

ARM 26/2, 393:610:

i-na pa-ni-tim-ma a-na e-er be-l-ia a-pu-ra-am / um-ma a-na-ku-ma mi-id-de
a-am-mu-ra-bi ni-i dingir-lim / -ul i-za-ak-ka-ar -lu-ma l - [u -g i -m e
m]a-ti-u / i-da-an-ni-nu-u-um-ma ni-i d i n g i r-lim [a-a-ti -ul i-z]a-ak-ka-ar/
[p]u-ru-us-s-a-u -ul a-mu-ur
Formerly I wrote to my lord as follows: ammurabi will probably not take an
oath by the gods, or the elders of his land will insist that he doesn't take an oath
by the gods. I have not yet seen his decision.56
4. Position of the MP within the Clause
As noticed by Hallo and Moran, the particle [middeN.W.] always introduces statements, whether assertions or conjectures....57 Indeed, midde is normally found immediately at the head of the clause it governs. Its syntactic range does not exceed the
boundaries of the clause.58 The commonly accepted etymology of this MPderiving
from mn de, what do I know?59supplies a good explanation for its typical frontal
position. If the original meaning of midde was a rhetorical question, then it is only natural that midde, once grammaticalized, would maintain the position it originally held, at
the head of the clause, like many rhetorical questions.60
In two texts, both from emra, midde is relegated to a noninitial position, preceded
by a short topical comment.
Shemshara Letters 52:2734:
a-ni-tam a-um g m-de / um-k[a] ta-a-ak-ka-an / ma-tum i-na--la-akkum / e-am u-u-i-a-am-ma / a-na wa-ar-ka-at / u4-m-ni lu u-mu-um /
at-ta a-na-ku -ul / i-it-na-nu
Another matter: concerning the tributeyou will no doubt gain renown. The
country looks to you! Have the barley transported here, and in future we shall
have renown! You and I are not opponents.
Shemshara Letters 55:523:
a-um pa-bu-ur-a-tal / a ta-a-pu-ra-am / um-ma at-ta-a-ma / a-na e-gi-buum i-ri-u-u / -ur-da-a-u-ma / li-i-ib a-nu-um-ma / a--ar-da-ak-ku-/
come to see him at once. The general idea conveyed by this colloquial saying is therefore something like
diligence is the mother of good luck.
56. See Heimpel 2003: 339. A very close passage is found in ARM 26/2, 391:1518.
57. Hallo and Moran 1979: 94 n. 46.
58. P. Kraus 1932: 64: ... leitet es [middeN.W.] aber einen ganzen Satz ein, so mu es immer mit
vielleicht wiedergegeben werden.
59. See Speiser 1947: 322 n. 6, AHw 655a, and CDA 210a. CAD M/2 83 makes no commitment on this
point. GAG 121e has minde < man de, wer weiss? but this statement is corrected in a note to this paragraph in the third edition of GAG: midde is analyzed there, following the AHw, as mn de, was weiss ich?
60. My thanks to W. Sallaberger, who shared with me his ideas on this point.

The Syntactic Profile ofmidde

59

ki-ma e-li-ka -bu / e-pu- / lu-ul-lu?-? m-in-de / ma-at e-gi-buki a-na

za-zi-ia in-ad-di-nu / l-me a-u-u / a-ti-ma a-a-u-u / -ru-s-[m]
a / a-ni-a-um / wa-ar-ka-nu-um / lu- u-mu-um / l -m e ma-ru e-gi!(Text:
RI)-buki / i-ra-mu-
Concerning abur-atal about whom you have written me as follows: They want
him (to be sent) to egibum. Send him there and let him stay. Hereby I have sent
him to you. Do as you see fit. No doubt the Lulleans will give?61 the country of
egibbum to Zazi[ya ...] and his brothers ask only for him. (Therefore) send him
(there) and for us there will be later a good reputation. The people of egibum
love him.
The practical purpose of introductory comments such as these, not infrequent in OB
epistolary style, is to introduce a new topicthe Lulleans in the case of Shemshara Letter 55and to expand on a previous point, the tribute, which sums up the wool and the
barley listed earlier in Shemshara Letter 52.
5. Phrasal Arrangement
Like the two passages from emra just presented, where a component can be shifted
to the head of the midde clause to serve as a topical comment, we can on occasion find
an entire explanatory clause, not just a single word, preceding the midde clause. We shall
label this kind of clause as referential or a topical. This referential phrase presents the
background on which the speakers estimate is based. A clear case comes, again, from
emra:
Shemshara Letters 35:3340:
a-ni-tam e15-te-n-me-ma / pzu-zu-um le-em-ni-i / i-te-n-p-e ma-at -teem / -da-ba-ab udu--u-nu / i-la-qa-at m-de ma-am-ma-an -ul i-qa-bia-kum / -a-ru-ka i-na pa-ni-u -da-pa-ru / ma-am-ma-an -ul i-qa-bi-aku[m]
Another matter. I keep hearing that Zuzum is up to no good. He troubles the land
of Utm and takes away the sheep (of) its (people). No doubt no one will tell you
(about it); since your retainers are afraid of him, no one will tell you (about it).
The information on Zuzums behavior, which is presented before the midde clause, prepares the addressee for the speakers estimation and serves as a justification for it. But in
some cases, a more complex arrangement is found. In the following letter, from Babylonia, the midde clause is encapsulated in a nesting sentence:

61. This restoration, suggested in Shemshara Letters, p. 125 n. 14f., though contextually plausible, is
hard from a paleographical point of view: there is hardly room for number of signs suggested. I have no
better solution.

60

The Modal Particle midde

AbB 10, 166:612:

up-p i-na a-ma-ri-ka / mi-in-de pna-bi--l-u / a - ?-u i-na-ad-di-i-ma / -ul
-e20-i-a-u / 1(?) gn k-ba bbar gu-mu-ur-ma / pden . zu-a-mu- / pu-ura-a-u
As (soon as) you read my letterno doubt Nabi-iliu neglects his field62 and
does not send him (Sn-amu?) out(therefore) release Sn-amuh by fully
paying him 1(?) shekel of silver.
Here, contrary to regular syntax, the nested midde clausedescribing the negligence of
Nabi-iliusupplies the background, the explanation for the main clause: the order to
release Sn-amu and pay him his due money. Similar syntax is found also in Shemshara Letters 55:523 cited above. In this letter, Talpu-arri is informing his colleague
Kuwari that, following his request, he has sent him a certain abur-atal, who is needed
in the land egibbum. The writer is polite and leaves it up to his addressee to decide
what to do next, but he is urging Kuwari to send abur-atal further along to the place
where he is very much expected. Talpu-arri makes his point by stating his conviction,
expressed by the nested midde clause, that a political change is about to occur in the
land egibbum. He adds also that the brothers of abur-atal are asking for him, and for
him only.
6. midde and Other Particles
Twice in the corpus, the irrealis particle man is attached to midde. This combination
is difficult to interpret. One example is unpublished and cannot be adequately examined,63
so we are left with a passage from the well-known letter of Anam, king of Uruk, to Snmuballi of Babylon, in which Anam apologizes at length for not letting the army of the
Amorite tribe Amnn-Yarrum into his fortified city. In his editio princeps, Falkenstein
translated it without an irrealis coloring, rendering minde-man simply with vielleict,
perhaps.64 CAD offers: who can say whether the considerations which I made are
the same PN made?65 My translation below attempts to take into account the semantic
value achieved by the accumulation of the two MPs, midde and man:
Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii 1317:
mi-in-de-ma-an i-tu-ul i-na li-ib-bi-ia ib-u- / i-na li-ib-bi pdam ar-u t u-muba-li- ib-i-ma / ak-ki-a-am-ma e4-ma-am an-ni-a-am a er n - / a-na li-ibbi a-lim la e-re-bi-im / ab-bu- e rn- -wa--ra-am

62. Reading with CAD M/2 84a.

63. Unpublished letter cited in CAD M/2 84a.
64. Falkenstein 1963: 61:1314: Vielleicht war auch die berlegung, die ich angestellt hatte, dieselbe,
die Mardukmuballi angestellt hatte. Krebernik and Streck 2001 did not treat this example.
65. CAD M/2 84a.

The Grammaticalization of midde

61

And no doubt nobody could say whether the consideration which was in my heart
existed also in Marduk-muballis heart. That is why I have given this order to the
heads of the army not to (allow) the army to enter to the interior of the town.
It is noteworthy that, unlike the MPs assurr and tua, there is no attestation in the
OB sources of the enclitic particle -ma attached to midde. Only in late Babylonian texts,
when the semantic load of each of the MPs involved has eroded, can we find the combination midde-ma.66
The Grammaticalization of midde
The question of the grammatical childhood of midde, namely the diachronic process
of grammaticalization that this MP went through, is not irrelevant for the comprehension
of its syntactic and semantic characteristics in the OB period.67 The communis opinio
concerning the origin of midde is that it derives from mn de, what do I know?68 It
would be, however, simplistic and even erroneous to posit that if midde stems from mn
de, the MP should, in all circumstances, also carry the same meaning as the expression
what do I know? from which it has derived. In what follows I suggest the main stages
of grammaticalization of the MP midde can be delineatedwithout, it must be stressed,
suggesting a precise diachronic description. The first detectable stage is the periphrastic
phrase mannum l de, who (can) know?, or who knows?,69 which is attested in OB
letters without and with midde.70
Next, moving from the full-blown expression mannum l de to the shortened expletive *mn de. This interim stage is reconstructed and not attested hitherto.
In turn, the shortened expression is fused into minde, or even further phonologically
reduced to midde. This stage is expected, since, as noted regarding other languages,
particles in process of grammaticalization tend to become syllabically shorter, and even
lose stress (Note e.g., English going to that tends to be performed as gonna, when
used as an auxiliary modal denoting intention).71
In the last documented stage, witnessed by only one case, middesimilarly to pqat
follows the preposition ana:
AbB 3, 11:4649:
a-na mi-de wa-i-tum i-pa-ra-as / a-am-mi u-ku-um / i-nu-ma ke-er-re-tum ipta-ar-sa gi- zi- u-ub-i / ki-ma gu4- z-m a - a-at-ti-u-nu u-ul-lumi-im e-[pu]-u

66. AHw 655a 4)

67. For a general discussion of grammaticalizaion in Semitic languages, see Rubin 2005.
68. Earlier views (cf. Zimmern 1894) suggested a verbal derivation, but this idea was later abandoned;
cf. Landsberger 1923: 73; Speiser 1947: 322 n. 6.
69. Cf. AHw 188a 3.
70. Shemshara Letters 11:1622; Lacambre 1997: 446:16.
71. Van Baar 1996: 26364. Cf. Deutscher 2000: 76.

62

The Modal Particle midde

For sure the coming out (caravan) will break(thus) pile up the fodder. When
the caravans have (already) brokentake care that reed is available. Do so that
the cattle and the goats will reach to the end of the year (in good health).
This compound usage confirms the complete grammaticalization of the MP. Syntactically, midde behaves here as a substantivized form that can be leaned on a preposition.
The same development was identified in the case of the MPs pqat and surr, which are
patently attested as appended to ana, resulting in appqat and assurr. The combination
of a preposition + substantivized form results in many cases in a compound that functions much like adverbs. English for sure or Hebrew l-bea, securely (lit., for
sure) furnish exact parallels for this development in other languages.72 I consider it
only a matter of chance that no example of *ammidde, parallel to appqat and assurr,
has been attested thus far.
The syntactic properties of midde also prove its advanced stage of grammaticalization. Unlike mannum l de, an idiom that is placed freely in the sentence,73 midde
almost obligatorily occupies the head of its clause; it is therefore syntagmatically tied.
Furthermore, midde has a strong tendency to call for the present-future tense, and it
requires only the negative particle ul. It requires, therefore, a specific slot in the verbal
paradigm and is reliant on a particular negation element; in other words, it is paradigmatically bound.
Semantically, midde gained the modal function of a speculative, mounting to a deductive, hence designating partial certitude, with a scalar meaning rising from probably
to no doubt. In the OB corpus, this meaning is already detached from the rhetorical
question who knows? or who can say? in which the MP originated. However, in
one case, midde still carries its pregrammaticalized meaning:
FM 1, p. 128:2325:74
mi-id-de n a4-du8--a / i-na ma-a-tim a-a-t[i] / ma-ad -lu i-i ma-an-nuum l[u- i]-de
And who may know (midde) if rock-crystal is rare or abundant in that country?
Who (can) know? (mannum l de)
In this text, midde ought to be translated who knows?in contrast to all other collected examples. This is probably due to the fact that in this text midde redundantly
accompanies the expression mannum l de, which triggered this semantic atavism. As
I have shown, in the course of grammaticalization of midde, this MP came to be used
in other contexts as well: in quasiconditional clauses (so far attested only in central
Babylonia) and in disjunctive phrases (typical of upper Mesopotamia).

72. Cf. Anderson 1985: 165: Particles ... are ... prime candidates to become clitics.
73. Employed as a synonym to midde in FM 1, 128:2325 and alone in Shemshara Letters 11:1622.
74. See LAPO 18, 855.

The Grammaticalization of midde

63

List of attestations of midde

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

*AbB 1, 37:810
*AbB 1, 39:615
*AbB 1, 119:1117
AbB 1, 135:67
*AbB 3, 11:4649
AbB 3, 41:511
AbB 6, 129:1520
AbB 6, 162:1215
AbB 8, 99:1213
AbB 8, 109:910
AbB 9, 83:1524
*AbB 10, 15:2532
*AbB 10, 16:1618
*AbB 10, 166:612
AbB 10, 170:1720
*AbB 11, 84:1117
AbB 12, 38:2627
AbB 12, 63:1821
AbB 12, 63:2227
*AbB 12, 78:1826
AbB 12, 113:1721
AbB 12, 145:3133
AbB 13, 124:3334
AbB 14, 70:1821
ARM 10, 152:1012 (LAPO 18, 1174)
ARM 14, 112:2430 (LAPO 17, 720)

27. *ARM 26/2, 391:1518 (Heimpel 2003:

337)
28. *ARM 26/2, 393:610 (Heimpel 2003:
339)
29. ARM 26/2, 511:1215 (Heimpel 2003:
395)
30. ARM 26/2, 515:49 (Heimpel 2003: 397)
31. ARM 26/2, 522:1013 (Heimpel 2003:
401)
32. ARM 28, 50:1013
33. CAD M/2 84a (Unpubl. letter)
34. *Dossin 1970, 105:2327 (LAPO 18, 912)
35. *Edzard 1970, 97:1415 (TIM 2, 129)
36. *Edzard 1970, 97:20 (TIM 2, 129)
37. *Falkenstein 1963, 57: ii1317
38. *FM 1, p. 128:2325 (LAPO 18, 855)
39. *FM 2, 55:2126 (Heimpel 2003: 517)
40. *George 2003, 172: (Gilg. P) i1719
(//174: i83 //178: v186)
41. MARI 6, 83, n. 213:515
42. *Shemshara Letters 11:1617 (mannum l
de)
43. *Shemshara Letters 35:3340
44. *Shemshara Letters 52:2734
45. *Shemshara Letters 55:523

... zuerst habe sie sich selbst gesagt, natrlich ist es seine (meine) Rettung,
soll Konrad zu Wieser gesagt haben, dann, schon nach einem halben Jahr,
mglicherweise ist es seine (meine) Rettung, dann, nach einem Jahr,
wahrscheinlich ist es seine (meine) Rettung ...
Thomas Bernhard, Das Kalwerk

Chapter 3
THE MODAL PARTICLES wuddi AND anna
A third inferential MP in OB is wuddi. The treatment of this MP will be accompanied
by a discussion of another MP, anna, which has a meaning and use relevant to a better
understanding of wuddi.
As with pqat and midde, I will cite literary texts as a way of introducing this MP,
before turning to the main body of evidence, the epistolary corpus. In a fragmentary OB
lamentation, the sorrowful situation of the sufferer who has offended the god Enlil is
described as follows:
UET 6/2, 397:1619:
u-um-ru-u ta!-ki-ik e20-bi-ir / u--du-ur / wu-di im-ta-a-ar / 1 u-i su-puda-a[m?]
He (the sufferer) is very sick, depressed, broken, very frightened. Surely he has
approached (the god with) sixty prayers(?).
In another OB literary text, glorifying the deeds of the great conqueror Sargon, we
read:
Westenholz 1997: 62: i 1014:
i-na-an-na-a-ma a-a-re-du-um iz-za-[k-k]a-ar / te-er pa-ag-ru-uk u-ku-ut-taka / t[i-i]l-li-ka / wu-di at-[t]a a e-mi...,
Now the hero speaks: return to your body your jewelry, your appendage. Surely
you are a (man) of reason ...
In UET 6/2, 397: 1619, wuddi is used to present an indisputable fact. The speaker
describes the situation as he sees it: the sufferer, in his deplorable condition, approached
the gods innumerable times. In this case, it denotes past certainty. By contrast, in
the Sargon text, wuddi is found in a dialogue in which the speaker wishes to call the
64

The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution

65

attention of his addressee to a shared piece of information.1 The speaker uses wuddi to
transmit his own notion of the state of affairs to the addressee, using this MP to convince
him that his evaluation of reality is valid. The pragmatic strategy in this case is to create a basis for the conversation to continue by offering common ground, an agreement
regarding perspective that allows the interlocutors to proceed with their dialogue. As we
shall see, wuddi carries these modal and pragmatic functions in epistolary texts as well.
The Attestations:
Generic and Geographical Distribution
This analysis of wuddi is based on a corpus of almost 50 occurrences. Unlike pqat
and midde, wuddi is commonly used at Mari and in upper Mesopotamia:2 only 4 examples are not from Mari or emra.3 It is interesting that two of the texts from locales
other than Mari or emra are literary texts. It is also of great interest that wuddi, in
stark contrast to other MPs, is absent from traditional scribal lexical lists and has no
known Sumerian equivalent. This point will be discussed further in the conclusion of
this book. Thus, based on the available data, it appears that wuddi is common in the epistolary parlance of Mari and upper Mesopotamia and is nonlocal in lower Mesopotamia,
with the result that it penetrated into the higher, literary registers of Babylonian.
In OB sources, wuddi is always written WU-di. As a result, it could theoretically
be read wu/wa/wi-di, and the actual pronunciation must be decided on grammatical
grounds. Von Soden (AHw s.v. wuddi and GAG 121d) interpreted wuddi as a grammaticalized imperative form of wadm-D: be it known!, recognize! In some Old
Assyrian sources, an unambiguous spelling, -di, is found. Interestingly, Frankena has
suggested that in some cases the MP midde, written mi-de, should be emended to we-de,
an alternate spelling for wuddi.4 However, this proposal cannot be sustained, because
the evidencelexical, semantic, and etymologicalmanifestly shows that there are two
different MPs involved.
Previous Studies of wuddi
For the majority of the Mari examples, the French translators render the word with
assurment (see, among others, Dossin and Durand).5 Charpin in one case translated
it ah bien.6 Sasson, who translated wuddi in a Mari letter with certainly, in addition
remarked that it can also be translated with notice.7 Heimpel understands the word
similarly: he translated it beware in one Mari letter and indeed in another.8 None1. For comparison, cf. Shlomper 2005: 125.
2. So also AHw 149697 s.v. wuddi.
3. ABIM 26, 2023; Ellis 1972: 66: 412; Goodnick Westenholz 1997: 62: i 1014; UET 6/2, 397:
1619. Note OBTR 2: 35, a letter unearthed at Tell Rimah but sent there from Mari by Zimr-lm.
4. Frankena 1978: 4142 (probably following Landsberger 1964: 70 n. 82).
5. Dossin 1956: 66: 1921; Durand: e.g., LAPO 17, 471.
6. ARM 26/2, 380: 1016.
7. Sasson 1985: 240 n. 12.
8. Heimpel 2003: 373; cf. p. 330.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

66

theless, we may conclude that, unlike other MPs, there is general agreement regarding
the basic meaning of wuddi, a particle denoting assurance and certainty on the part
of the speaker.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of wuddi
The MP wuddi carries various modal functions. Common to all of these functions is
the fact that wuddi is a deductive, that is, an inferential MP reflecting strong personal
commitment.
1. Past Certainty
The primary use of wuddi is to express past certainty. When referring to past events,
it expresses personal conviction in connection with an event that has already occurred.
When a speaker expresses a high level of commitment to his own evaluation of reality,
a strong degree of confidence that his perspective on a past event is accurate, he renders
past certainty. When a speaker uses wuddi, he usually refers to his own experience
as the basis for his evaluation.9
FM 6, 52:510:
a-um an e a-ga-lim ki-ma 1-u / wu-di 5-u -ta-ap-ra-kum / i-na-an-na 1
an e a-ga-li a-di me-e / -ra-ma-ku-ni-i-u / im-tu-ut wa-a-am / -ul a-la-i
Regarding the aglum-donkey, oncesurely (even) five timesI kept writing to
you. Now my only aglum-donkey, while they bathed him in water, died, and I
cannot go out (of here).
In this example, we encounter numerical constructions, which are typical of this MP:
wuddi (kma) iti-u in-u ..., surely once, twice ...; wuddi (kma) iti-u (adi)
ham-u ..., surely once, (until) five times ...;10 or wuddi(-ma) -u ..., surely
sixty times.... Numerical constructions of this sort combined with wuddi are found in
more cases,11 almost one-third of the collected examples. Let us examine some of them.
ABIM 26:2023:
wu-di ki-ma i-ti-i-u a-di a-am-i-u / a-na b-e-l-i-ni ni-iq-ta-bi-ma / b-e-l
dam- gr - me wu-u-u-ra-am? / i-q-ab-bi-ma / -ul -[ta-a]-a-ru
Surely, (my lord knows) that we have told our lord once, even five times: my
lord says to release the merchants but they are not released.
9. A similar pragmatic strategy is achieved by the use of kma td, as you know ... or ul td, dont
you know that ...; cf., e.g., AbB 14, 107:810; AbB 14, 109:46; AbB 14, 111:2122 and 4950; AbB
14, 112:2831.
10. In AbB 14, 149:41 and ARM 1, 58:6, the emphatic expression five times is mentioned without
wuddi. For the expression three times, nine times used in Ugarit, see Watson 2005.
11. ABIM 26, 2023; ARM 1, 22:49; ARM 18, 8:46; ARM 26/2, 449:3744; ARM 28, 155:612;
FM 6, 52: 510; FM 7, 35: 47; FM 8, 24: 512; OBTR 2: 35; UET 6/2, 397: 1619; Ziegler and
Charpin 2007: 61:12.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofwuddi

67

OBTR 2:35:
ki-ma a-bu-um l -nun-naki a-na [pa-ni-ia] / e-li-e-em wu-di i-na pani-t[im-ma] / 1-u 2-u -ma-am ga-am-ra-am -tap-ra-kum
I have surely written to you before a complete reportonce, twicethat the
army of the man of Enunna came up against me.
FM 7, 35:47:
50 a-[b]u-u[m] / e-li 3 me a-bi-im im--[ma] / du-li-a-tim an-n-tim sa-amsi-ia-ad-d[u i-pu-] / wu-di 1-u 2-u a-na be-l-ia a-p[u-ur um-ma-mi]
And 50 persons out of 300 persons are lacking. It is Sams-Addu who [caused?]
this mess. Surely, once, twice I wrote to my lord [saying: . . .].
ARM 28, 155:612:
a-um -em tu-ru-uk-ki-im i-wi-la-ta-yiki / a a-bi i-pu-ra-am um-ma-a-mi/
a-ba-am a-a-ti tu-e-bi-ir-ma udu- i-i- / an-ni-tam a-bi i-pu-ra-am/
wu-di 5-u -ap-la-ti-ia ma-a-ar a-bi-ia / i-ku-nu-ma a-bi i-e-em-me u-taku-nu-um / -ul i-ba-a-i
Regarding the news of the Turukkeans and the people of Hiwilat that my father
wrote me about, saying: you have helped these people cross (the river) and
they have attacked the sheep. Thats what my lord wrote to me. Surely on five
(different) occasions they stated slander against me before my lord, and my father
was listeningbut (nothing of it) exists!
These numerical constructions emphasize the speakers certitude when communicating
with his addressee.12 The pragmatic strategy is clear: wuddi presents a specific event
as a well-known fact that the speaker imposes on his interlocutor: the addressee is presented with a fact and is forced to accept the reality of its occurrence. By gaining his
addressees agreement regarding this event, the speaker improves his position in the
conversation, because the agreed-upon event has immediate and direct bearing on the
continuation of the conversation. The value of this pragmatic approach is that the event
anchoring the continuation of the conversation cannot be questioned or refuted. The
personal conviction of the speaker makes accepting it obligatory,13 as expressed in the
insistence: surely once, twice ...; surely once, even five times.... References to
commonly-known facts, such as current weather conditions or the season of the year,
are also attested:
Shemshara Letters 59:1516:
a-mu-um wu-di i--u-nim / i-na zi-gu-la-aki
The grazing (season)surely (you know that) it is approaching us in Zigul.
12. Wittgenstein 1974 (1949): 194: With the word certain we express complete conviction, the total
absence of doubt, and thereby we seek to convince other people. That is subjective certainty.
13. Wittgenstein 1974 (1949): 272: I know = I am familiar with it as a certainty.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

68

Shemshara Letters 59:2324:

e-bu-ru-u[m] / wu-di i--i-a-am
Surely (you know that) the harvest is (already) approaching.
ARM 4, 62:310:14
[w]u-di ku-ux(I)--um ik-ta--da[m] / e-em a a-na ta-zu-wa-aki /
ta-za-bi-lu am-mi-nim a-u-n-e / ta-za-bi-il ane--tam / a-ba-am gu-mira-[a]m-ma / pmu-tu-bi-si-ir pa-an a-bi-[i]m / [l]i-i-ba-at-ma e-ma a [i]t-ti{x}-u-nu / [i-te-ni-i]-ma li-i-i
Surely (you know that) the winter has arrived. And (as for) the barley that you
carry to Tazuwwhy do you carry (it) separately? Organize donkeys and men
and let Mutu-bisir lead the men and let him carry with them the barley [at one
time].
There is no informative value to the statements the harvest is approaching or the
winter / spring has arrived. The addressee knows these everyday facts just as much
as the speaker does and does not need to be told these facts. But the statements appear
precisely because of their noninformative, nondisputable character: by accompanying
wuddi they form a basis for the continuation of the dialogue. This conversational technique is especially important in cases of dispute between two parties. In such cases, the
commonly agreed upon piece of information gains the speaker who first raised it an
advantage in the rest of his arguments. Consider also:
Ellis 1972: No. 66, 66:412:
da-mi-i-iq i-nu--ma / a an-na-nu-ia ul-la-nu-ia / a-tu--ma a- li-i-a-liq/ wu-di a-ad-da-ag-di-im / i-na i-ir-ti-ka e-ru-r-ma / a- li-i-ta-li-iq i-naan-na/ i-na pa-tim a-ni-tim-ma / e-ri-i-ma a-na i-te-e / me-e ta-na-ad-di-in
Is it nice when those from here and those from there are watered and (only my)
field they cause to perish? Surely last year, in front of you, it (also) was dry(?),
yet did the field perish? Now on the other border it is cultivated and you give
water to the neighbors.
This letter records a sharp disagreement between the writer and his addressee regarding
the watering rights pertaining to the writers field. The undisputed factat least from
the perspective of the the writerthat the field in question was watered during the prior
year allows him to develop his arguments further.
Now, this function of wuddi as denoting past certainty brings it close in meaning to
another particle, anna. In OB sources, anna has a modal function and meaning that is
proximate to that of wuddi. It can be roughly translated indeed.15 In the following section, we will define the meaning and use of anna vis--vis wuddi.
14. LAPO 17, 770.
15. CAD A/2 12526. See also Durand, LAPO 18, p. 181, who translates anna and its variant ann
with certes.

wuddi and anna: Doubt-and-Denial vs. Promissory-Declarative Particles

69

wuddi vs. anna:

Doubt-and-Denial vs. Promissory-Declarative Particles
A useful way of defining the difference between these two particles is to examine them
in comparative contexts. Fortunately, in the following letter both particles are found:
ARM 1, 52:3641:16
an-na a-na an-da-ri-igki / a-ka-a-a-ad-ma up-pa-tim / a -qa-bu
-[a-b]a-l[a-k]um / te-e-em-me?-ma wu-di i-nu-ma ti-[ri-im] / a-wa-tam anni-tam ma-a-ri-ka / a-ku-un igi la-i-im a-ku-un i-na-an-na a-na u-s-[ska] / a-pu-ra-am lu- ti-de -em-ka a-bat
Indeed (anna), I will arrive at Andarig and will bring you the letters about which
I talked to you (in order that) you will hear (them). Surely (wuddi), in the (month
of) Trum, I have (already) presented the matter before you, and I have presented
(it) before Lm. Now I have written to you to (freshen) your memory. May you
be informed. Take your decision!
The position of anna and wuddi is identical: each stands at the head of its clause. Both
seem to carry a similar meaning of commitment and assurance. But a closer look reveals
the differences. First, anna is conversationally independent and concerns the speaker
alone; wuddi, on the other hand, is bilateral, linking the speaker and his addressee. In
other words, unlike wuddi, which refers to a fact or an action that involves both the
speaker and his addressee, anna expresses the speakers intent that he, on his own initiative or based on his personal judgment, will act in a particular way, regardless of other
factors in the situation. The promissory aspect of anna can also be demonstrated in a
letter sent by Ime-Dagan to Kuwri of emra:
Shemshara Letters 26:412:
a-um -em [m]a-a-tim a i-ta-ni-[i]mki / a ta-a-pu-r]a-am / -ta-pa-ar
wa-ar-a-tam i-pa-ra-s-[n]im / a-na-ku an-ni-[n]u-um / e4-mi a-ab-ta-ku/
an-na wa-ar-ki up-p-ia / an-ni-i-im / a-na qa-ab-ra-a-ki / a-ka-a-ad
Regarding the report about the land of Itnum that you wrote to me, I have
written that they will check the matter. And as for myself I deal with the matter
here. Indeed, (anna) after (sending) this letter of mine I will reach Qabr.17
By using anna, Ime-Dagan indicates that he has made up his mind to go to Qabr. Even
though his decision is based on Kuwris report, his action depends entirely on his own
choice. Another example:
Goetze 1958: 23, No. 5:49:
i-na li-ibi-bu ga ba -r mu-un-na-ab-tu / i-mi-du--ma / i-tu-lam ki-a-am a16. LAPO 16, 1.
17. My translation differs from the translation proposed by the editors.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

70

ba-at / um-ma a-na-ku--ma an-na mu-un-na-ab-tu im-ti-du / g ab a-r a a-na

ka-ap-ri-u i-la-ku / a-di ka-ni-ki la na-u- la i-la-ak
Among the messengers the fugitives have become numerous. I have considered
(the matter) with myself: Indeed, the fugitives have become numerous.
(Hence), a messenger who goes to his village, unless he carries a sealed
document from me, should not go.
In the two letters just cited, anna comes after self deliberation that leads to a decision:
u anku ... m abtku ... anna ... (Shemshara Letters 26:78) and itlam kam
abat ... anna ... (Goetze 1958: 23, No. 5:67). Consequently, anna has a manifest
declarative characterat times, even a solemn overtone. Consider the royal letter
from Anam to Sn-muballi:
Falkenstein 1963: 56: ii 13:
an-na urukki k[-dingir-r]aki bi-tum i-te-en-ma li-ib-ba-am g[a-am-ra-am]
i-ta-wu-
Indeed, Uruk and Babylon form a single house, talk to each other frankly.
Another case of anna functioning as a strong declarative particle is found in another
armal letter:
Goetze 1958: 70, No. 45:610:
a-um ib-ni-dTipak sa nga / a-na 1 iku a- na-da-ni-im / a-pu-ra-ku-nu-iim / q-bi-ta-am -ul ta-a-me / an-na i-na-an-na / tu-sa-ar-ra-ra
I have written to you (pl.) concerning Ibni-Tipa the ang-priest, to give (him)
one iku of field, (yet) you have ignored the order. Indeed (anna), now you are
(even) contesting (it)! ...18
The angry speaker is not looking for the consent of his addressees or for them to join
him on common ground. On the contrary, by using anna he expresses his firm opinion
about the state of affairs, not taking into consideration his addressees words (later in the
letter, he even issues threats). As a matter of fact, anna is not an inferential particle but
a MP that stems from ones own mental state; it evolves from the personal assessment
of the external state of affairs.
In contrast, wuddiwhether used in a context of subtle disagreement or open disputeis typically a negotiating particle, a means of finding a basis, or a fact, on which
the two parties can agree. As such, wuddi is a reactive particle used when the speaker
is responding to, or sometimes challenging, an explicit or implicit assumption on the part
of the addressee (as perceived by the speaker). Thus, wuddi is used when the speaker
attempts to convince the addressee of the speakers viewpoint and sometimes even to
18. With CAD S 175 b s.v. sarrum.

wuddi and anna: Doubt-and-Denial vs. Promissory-Declarative Particles

71

rebuff the addressees assumptions. On the other hand, anna carries no sense of an attempt to persuade or convince the other party.
To elucidate this point further, and to sharpen the different modal characteristics of
wuddi and anna, it is useful to introduce the term Doubt-and-denial. This terminology, taken from the field of discourse analysis, is defined by Capone (2001: 28):
[I]t is unusual to say out of the blue under ordinary circumstances I am absolutely convinced that this is my sister or I am absolutely convinced that this is my father, for these
utterances would be very likely to cause the stupor of the addressee. It seems ... that the
circumstances in which these expressions are usually uttered are not the normal ordinary
circumstances in which an assertion is uttered with the purpose of informing the addressee
of p. However, they might be quite appropriate in contexts where someone challenged the
proposition p. In other words they are associated with what Grice calls a Doubt-and-denial
implicature.

Doubt-and-denial implicature fits the available evidence for wuddi quite well. In
practically all of the cases we have of wuddi, this challenging function can be identified (except when it describes self-evident matters, such as, e.g., the arrival of winter,
mentioned in ARM 4, 62:310, cited above). To exemplify the last point, note that in a
case where the speaker turns to his lord, saying, for example, Surely, (my lord knows)
that we have told our lord once, even five times that.... (ABIM 26:2023, cited above,
and passim), wuddi is brought up as a challenge to the implied words of the addressee,
the speakers lord: why didnt you tell me this until now?! Similarly, in a letter from
emra we read:
Shemshara Letters 1:45:
wu-[d]i ni-ku-r-ti ia-u-ub-dIM / l a-za-a-jiki te-e-me
Surely you have heard about the enmity of Yaub-Addu, the Ahzean ...
The MP wuddi challenges the lords implicit denial What?! I have not heard about the
enmity of the Ahzean!
2.Future Certainty: Promissory
Sometimes, wuddi is used in connection to a future event. In these cases, wuddi carries a promissory function, similar to that of anna. In the following letter, arrumandull reports to Zimr-lm regarding Ibl-p-Els reprimanding the army officers:
ARM 26/2, 380:1016:19
l i-ba-al-p-AN gal-ku 5-me ka-a-ia-an-tam / ki-a-am -sa-an-na-aq-u-nu-ti
um-ma-a-mi / am-mi-nim l-me ta-ak-lu-tim tu-wa-a-e-ra-ma / l d u m u m e e-e-e-ru-tim a-na pu-i-im / ta-at-ta-ra-nim wu-di i-na-an-na-ma / balum be-l-ia ninda i-na b-ri-ku-nu na-p-i7-tam / a-da-ak

19. Heimpel 2003: 32930.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

72

The honorable Ibl-p-El keeps approaching the officers, saying: Why do you
release trustworthy persons and recruit inexperienced (lit., young) instead?
Surely, now, (even) without the knowledge of my lord, I will spare no life and let
you hunger for bread.
A similar case is found in a letter in which an ecstatic approaches the amazed governor at the city gate, promising to perform a dramatic act of divination:
ARM 26/1, 206:512:
1 l-mu-u-u-u[m a dda-gan] / il-li-kam-ma ki-[a-am iq-bi] / um-ma u--ma
w[u-di mi-nam] / a zi-[im-ri-li-im] / a-ka-al 1 s i [l i-di-in-m]a / lu-ku-ul 1 s i l
[ad-di-in]-um-ma / ba-al--us-s-ma [i-n]a [p]a-an a-bu-lim / [i]-ku-ul-u
An ecstatic [of Dagan] came to me and [spoke to me] as follows: S[urely] I will
eat [something] of Zi[mri-lim! Give me] one lamb to eat! [I gave] him one lamb
and he ate it alive in front of the city gate.
In these cases of future certainty, the certitude of the speaker regarding the event
that will take place derives from the fact that the action will be preformed by the speaker
himself.20 In these circumstances, wuddi carries a clear performative force, closer to the
sense of the particle anna, as noted above.21
3.Conterfactual Certainty
In one case, wuddi is found combined with the irrealis particle man:
ARM 28, 179:3141:
p[]-q[a-a]t / ki-a-am ta-qa-ab-[b]i um-ma-mi / il-tu-kam-ma it-tu-u[!] um-mana-tum / ninda 1-kam [ul] na-[e]-e / um-ma -d[i]-tam ma-dam na-e-e/
wu-di-ma-an iti-1-kam / i-na -ba ka--im / at-t[a-a]l-[l]a-ak / as-s[]-u[r-r]i
ke-em la ta-qa-[a]b-bi / pza-zi-ia-mi -ul i[l-li]-ik / dIM at-ma um-ma a-na-kuma [l]a al-li-ik
Perhaps you will say: he tried but got tired. (His) units do not carry provisions,
not even for a day. Had they carried many provisions it is certain (wuddi-man)
that I could have walked continuously for one month in the midst of the steppe. I
fear you would say: Zazia did not go. I swear by Adad if I did not go!
This wonderful sequence of four different MPs (pqat, wuddi, -man, and assurr) has
already been treated in the chapter on pqat. At this juncture, however, I wish only to
note that this passage proves that wuddi can be used in counterfactual sentences:
certainty in situations that could happen but ultimately did not occur.

20. See also ARM 28, 154:811; ARM 28, 179:3141.

21. See Wasserman 2003: 16869.

The Syntactic Profile ofwuddi

73

In summary, the MP wuddi is not restricted with regard to tense and can be employed
at different points on the time axis. It can express past certainty, referring to events
that have already occurred; future certainty, referring to actions that the speaker
commits himself to perform; and even counterfactual certainty, when referring to
events that would certainly have taken place had the necessary conditions existed.
The Syntactic Profile of wuddi
Expanding on the usage of wuddi in one Mari letter, Sasson noted that it is extraordinarily versatile in terms of position, types of sentences, verbal relationships, associations with coordinating particles, or the like.22 In what follows, I will try to shed light
on the syntactic profile of this MP.
1. Discourse Domains
The MP wuddi is operative in relation to all three discourse domains:23 the locu
tory, the allocutory, and the delocutory.24 In addition, in many cases, wuddi refers to both the first and the second personsthat is, it opens a statement that includes
the locutory and the allocutory domains25or it combines the second and the third
personsthat is, the allocutory and the delocutory domains.26 Taking the cases
with combined discourse domains into account, we can say that almost one-half of the
examples (15 cases) includes the locutory domain; the same proportion (16 cases)
includes the delocutory domain; and more than half of the corpus (22 cases) includes
the allocutory domain. These numbers represent a rather even distribution between
the three discourse domains. (Note that some texts are counted twice because they include two different discourse domains.)
Allowing the concepts of subjectification and perspectivization, which we met
earlier,27 into the discussion, we can say that the even distribution of wuddi in all three
discourse domains means that this MP, unlike pqat and midde, is not a perspectivizing MP; on the contrary, wuddi involves strong subjectification. Through wuddi,
the current speaker is being foregrounded as the I who is responsible for the statement.
The relatively low number of cases in which wuddi refers only to the third person (the
22. Sasson 1985: 240 n. 12.
23. To avoid misunderstanding: the discourse domain is determined by what the wuddi phrase refers to,
not by whom it is uttered; wuddi phrases are always in the mouth of the speakerthat is, they are always
in the first person.
24. Locutory: ARM 26/1, 206:512; ARM 28, 154:811; ARM 28, 179:3141. Allocutory: ARM
1, 72:45; ARM 28, 53:615; Goodnick Westenholz 1997, 62: i 1014. Delocutory: ARM 1, 22:411;
ARM 1, 39:1015; ARM 1, 83:1522; ARM 4, 21:517; ARM 4, 59:512; Shemshara Letters 59:1516;
UET 6/2, 397:1619.
25. ABIM 26, 2023; ARM 1, 22:49; ARM 1, 52:3641; ARM 2, 29:1214; ARM 4, 26:48; ARM
18, 8:46; ARM 26/2, 380:1016; ARM 26/2, 449:3744; FM 6, 52:510; FM 7, 35:47; FM 8, 24:5
12; OBTR 2:35.
26. ARM 4, 62:310; ARM 28, 155:612; Ellis 1972: 66, 66:412; Shemshara Letters 1:45; Shemshara Letters 59:2324; Shemshara Letters 63:6770; Dossin 1956: 66:1921.
27. See chap. 1 (pqat), p. 30.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

74

delocutory domain) proves its outlying position relative to the perspectivizing MPs
pqat and midde.
2. Verbal Tenses
Examination of the corpus reveals that wuddi is present predominantly in sentences
having tenses other than the future tense: only in 8 cases are present-future forms found,28
whereas past verbal forms are attested 16 times29 and perfect forms 8 times.30 As a matter of fact, there are additional nonfuture cases: in 3 cases, the stative is found31 and
in 1 case wuddi governs a nominal sentence.32 These data are important, because they
confirm the assumption that wuddi carries with it a high degree of certainty and places
wuddi in a stark contrast to pqat and midde, which are used to express doubt and probability and therefore show a clear tendency for verbs in the present-future tense.
3.Negation
Only one case of negation has been found so far in the corpus, and in this case, wuddi
occurs with the negative particle ul:
ARM 1, 72:4533
wu-di a-na -nun-naki -ul ta-al-la-ak / ta-at-ta-ak-la
Surely you will not be going to Enunna, (since) you were occupied.
It is of course risky to base a conclusion on a single example, but if we compare the negation particle connected to wuddi with occurrences of pqat and midde that are negated,
we may confidently say that all three inferential MPs in OB share a single negation
particle, ul.
4. Position of the MP within the Clause
In about three-quarters of the examples collected (29 out of 40 attestations), wuddi is
found in initial position, at the head of the sentence it governs.34 In some of these cases,
28. ARM 1, 72:45 (present + perfect); ARM 26/1, 206:512; ARM 26/2, 380:1016; ARM 28,
53:615; ARM 28, 154:811; ARM 28, 155:612 (past + present); Dossin 1956: 66:1921; FM 9, 41:68
(present + present). Note that in ARM 28, 154:811 the reading for wuddi is restored in a broken context. A
different reconstruction is not impossible.
29. ABIM 26, 2023 (not perfect: qabm Gtn past, with AHw 890a and 1496b); ARM 1, 22:49; ARM
1, 39:1015; ARM 1, 52:3641; ARM 18, 8:46; ARM 2, 29:1214; ARM 4, 21:517; ARM 4, 26:48;
ARM 26/2, 449:3744; ARM 28, 155:612 (past + present); ARM 28, 179:3141; FM 6, 52: 510; FM 7,
35: 47; FM 9, p. 75 n. 256: 12; Shemshara Letters 1:45; UET 6/2, 397:1619 (marum Gtn past with
AHw 1496b, 2f): imta()ar).
30. ARM 1, 72:45; ARM 1, 83:1522 (with LAPO 16, 255, contra AHw 1496b, 2f); ARM 4, 59:512
(with AHw 1496b, 2f); ARM 4, 62:310 (with AHw 1496b, 2f); FM 8, 24:512; OBTR 2:35 (with AHw
1496b, 2f); Shemshara Letters 59:1516; Shemshara Letters 59:2324 (with AHw 1496b, 2f).
31. ARM 1, 22:411; Ellis 1972: 66, 66:412; Shemshara Letters 63:6770.
32. Westenholz 1997: 62: i 1014.
33. LAPO 16, 403.
34. Cases in which u precedes wuddi are also considered as part of the initial-wuddi group.

The Syntactic Profile ofwuddi

75

a verb of knowing or hearing is directly dependent on wuddi, as in the following letter,

cited aboved (p.71):
Shemshara Letters 1:45:
wu-[d]i ni-ku-r-ti ia-u-ub-dIM / l a-za-a-yiki te-e-me
Surely you have heard about the enmity of Yaub-Addu, the Ahzean ...
Or, wuddi may refer elliptically to a verb of knowing, as in the following text, a rare case
of wuddi in a letter that does not come from Mari:
ABIM 26:2023:
wu-di ki-ma i-ti-i-u a-di a-am-i-u / a-na b-e-l-i-ni ni-iq-ta-bi-ma / b-e-l
dam- gr - me wu-u-u-ra-am? / i-q-ab-bi-ma / -ul -[ta-a]-a-ru
Surely, (my lord knows) that we have told our lord once, even five times: my
lord tells to release the merchants but they are not released.
When wuddi is found in noninitial position, varied syntactic formations result and,
consequently, merit our attention. In two emra letters, wuddi is placed in between the
subject and the predicate of the sentence:
Shemshara Letters 59:2324:
e-bu-ru-u[m] / wu-di i--i-a-am
Surely (you know that) the harvest is approaching.
The actual phrasing of this sentence is: The harvestsurely (you know that) it is approaching. A similar construction is found in another emra letter:
Shemshara Letters 63:6770:
at-ta ti-be-ma at-la-kam / e-am i-pa-ni-ka u--i-a-am / ap-pu-tum ar-i-i
la tu-a-ra-am / a-bu-um wu-di q-ru-ub
... you must get ready and set off. But have the grain brought in advance! Please
(make) haste! Do not tarry! Surely (you know that the arrival of) the army is
imminent!
Here, too, the actual word order is: the armysurely (you know that its arrival) is
imminent; that is, wuddi is placed in noninitial position. These two examples are syntactically interesting because the MP wuddi splits the subject from its predicate. Seen
from a communication perspective, wuddi in these examples cleaves the theme from
the rheme. This cleavage causes topicalization and, at the same time, emphasis on the
rheme: The harvestthemesurely (you know that) it is approachingrheme, and as for
the armythemesurely(you know that) it is imminentrheme. A comparison with a text
(already presented above, p.68) in which wuddi is found in initial position, not splitting
the subject and the predicate, illustrate and clarify this mechanism.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

76

ARM 4, 62:310:35
[w]u-di ku-ux(I)--um ik-ta--da[m] ...
Surely, the winter has arrived ...
Note the regular, nonemphatic construction: MP subject predicate (and in the parallel communicative terms: MP theme rheme) versus the nonregular, emphatic
construction in Shemshara Letters 59:2324 the harvestsurelyis approaching
(ebrum wuddi iahiam): subject MP predicate. Other cases of topicalization are
found in two Mari letters:
ARM 1, 22:911:36
e-z[u-ub a]n-n-tim / u-ul-lu-um a ma-a-at nu-ru-g[i-imki] / wu-di u-ul-lu-um
Besides that everything is well, and as for the land of Nurugum, surely it is well.
ARM 4, 59:512:37
a-wa-tum a in-ne-ep-u / wu-di i-te-ti-iq / a-na-ku ut-ta-we-er / at-ta-{AK}q/ at-ta nu-ta-we-er-m[a] / r-me -ka -we-er / qa-tam pa-ni-tam-ma/
[i]-si-na-ti-ka e-pu-
What happened has surely passed (already). As for me, I became happy and
offered sacrifices. And as for you, make yourself happy and make your servants
happy, and just as before make your celebrations.
Again, wuddi stands between the theme and the rheme, emphasizing the latter and
topicalizing the former: a mt Nurgim wuddi ullum, and awtum a innepu wuddi
ittetiq.
5. Phrasal Arrangement
What about the relationship of the wuddi clause to other clauses in the text? It appears
that the wuddi clause follows a content clause that usually starts with aum. This syntactical sequence is known in 6 cases; examples follow:38
ARM 1, 22:49:39
up-pa-ka a tu-a-bi-lam e-me / a-um a-bi-im ar-i-i a-na e-ri-ka / -radi-im ta-a-pu-[ra]-am / wu-di 1-u 2-u a-um i-na-a[n-n]a a-bu-[u]m a-n[a ]
e-ri-ka / la a-la-ki-im a-na re-e iti ga-ma-ar-ti [a-bi-im a-na ]e-ri-ka/
ka-a-di-im up-pa-tim -a-bi-la-ak-kum

35. LAPO 17, 770.

36. LAPO 17, 476.
37. LAPO 18, 962.
38. See also: ARM 18, 8:46; FM 6, 52:510; FM 9, p. 75 n. 256: 1112.
39. LAPO 17, 476.

The Syntactic Profile ofwuddi

77

I heard the letter that you have sent to me. You have written about sending you
quickly an army. Surely I have sent you once, twice, letters about (the fact that)
now the army cannot go toward you, and (that only) toward the end of the month
[the army] will reach you.
ARM 2, 29:1214:40
a-um l a p[a-g]a-ar-u a-na mi-im-ma / i-s-s wu-di i-na pa-ni-tim-ma
a-na e-er be-l-ia / a-pu-ur
I have surely written to my lord before concerning the man whom he (the king)
has mentioned in some way himself.
FM 8, 24:512:
a-um n- k n- a ta-a-ta-na-ap-pa-r[a-am] / wu-di 1-u 2-u a-pa-raam an-n-e-e[m] / be-l i-ta-ap-ra-am um-ma-a-mi / a-bu-um a a-al--ka
-ul [i]-re-e[d-du-] / ta-al-la-am -u[l i-na-di-nu] / n -k n - li-pu-[u]/
[m]a-an-nu-um a-bu-um an-n[u-um] / [a i-na a]-al--ka
Concerning the grindstones about which you write to me repeatedly. Surely, once,
twice, my lord has written to me, saying: the people of your district are not
competent, they [dont bring] beam(?). Let them prepare grindstones! What (is it
with) this people in your district!
Unfortunately, the state of preservation of this tablet is poor, and it is difficult to be
sure about the contents of the later lines. I believe that wuddi was used here as a tool of
rhetorical manipulation: the speaker presents the admonitions of his king as an accepted
fact, for it was impossible to deny them, but neutralizes their reproaching effect by circumventing the situation to his own benefit.
Alternatively, wuddi may follow a content clause beginning with kma:41
ARM 4, 26:48:42
ki-ma qa-du-um [a-b]i-im a-na ni-i-ra-ri-im / a-na re-e sa-mu-[d]IM kuul-l[im] / a-na ka-ra-na-aki al-li-kam / wu-di i-na pa-ni-tim-ma / a-pu-ra-kum
I surely wrote to you before that I went to Karana with an army as a help ready
for Samu-Addu.
On the other hand, a wuddi clause can include a content clause introduced by aum:
ARM 1, 22:49:43
up-pa-ka a tu-a-bi-lam e-me / a-um a-bi-im ar-i-i a-na e-ri-ka / -radi-im ta-a-pu-[ra]-am / wu-di 1-u 2-u a-um i-na-a[n-n]a a-bu-[u]m a-n[a
40. LAPO 16, 288.
41. See also: OBTR 2:35.
42. LAPO 17, 534.
43. LAPO 17, 476 and so also MARI 4, 316 n. 107: 47.

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

78

]e-ri-ka / la a-la-ki-im a-na re-e iti ga-ma-ar-ti [a-bi-im a-na ]e-ri-ka

/ ka-a-di-im up-pa-tim -a-bi-la-ak-kum
I heard the letter which you have sent me. You have written about sending to you
quickly an army. Surely I have sent you once, twice, letters about (the fact that)
now the army cannot go toward you, and (that only) toward the end of the month
[the army] will reach you.
A wuddi clause can also depend on a temporal clause:
ARM 4, 21:517:44
na-ak-rum tu-ru-[uk-ku-] / --ma a-na m[a-a-tim ] / [i]k-u-[d]u-n[im] // //
gu4- a-a[l-la-tam] / il-q-[] / i[-t]u a-la-ki-im an-[n-e-em] mi-nu-um u-ul
ra-bi-b[u] wu-di i-ti-ru ir-u-bu a-ta-lu-[ka-am] / -ta-al-ma -ma-am [gaam-ra-am] / a-a-ap-pa-ra-kum
The enemy, the Turukkean, came out and arrived to the cou[ntry] ... they
took cattle and booty. Since this expedition, (their) number is not high: surely
there was more (of them); they started coming up again and again. Once I have
examined (the situation) I will send you a [complete] report.
Temporal or conditional clauses are also found nested in the wuddi clause in ARM 1,
52:3641 and in ARM 28, 179:3538, two letters already cited above (p.69 and p.72,
respectively).
6. wuddi and Other Particles
In two cases, enclitic particles are attached to wuddi. In ARM 28, 179:3141, treated
more than once already (see p.72), the irrealis particle man is found. In the second case,
the enclitic particle ma is attached to wuddi:
ARM 18, 8:46:45
[a-um] ndu-u-i-im n k-ZI / [a k]u-ub-i-im / wu-di!-ma 1 u-[i!]-u
aq-bi-ik-kum {x}/ um-ma a-na-ku-ma u-us-s-s-an-ni-m[a] / ku-ub-um i-i lii-a-[k]i-in / a-um ku-ub-i-im a-a-tu / -ul tu-a-as-s-s-an-ni
Surely, sixty times I spoke to you about the rock-crystal, the stones and the gold
of the crown, saying: remind me that the crown will be prepared, but you did
not remind me about this crown.
I cannot detect any difference in meaning between the single known appearance of
wuddi-ma and the regular use of wuddi by itself.

44. LAPO 17, 493.

45. LAPO 16, 111.

The Grammaticalization of wuddi

79

The Grammaticalization of wuddi

The MP wuddi originated as the 2nd-person masculine singular imperative of the
D-stem verb wadm, to identify, to make known. This is the second case of a grammaticalized epistemic MP derived from a verbal form. The first was pqat, which we
analyzed as originating from a 3rd-person feminine singular stative form of piqum, to
be narrow, or, more precisely, to squint, referring to the eye as an evaluating and examining organ. In the case of wuddi, however, the semantic shift from the verbal form to
the MP is easier to explain because the verb wadm itself carries clear epistemic meaning. As a result, the grammaticalization process is less complex in this case.
The basis for the process involving wuddi is the simple meaning of the imperative form: make it known / recognize + direct object. Next, this basic meaning went
through minor abstractization, and wuddi became a syntactic component that opened
a content clause, thus losing the deontic force of the imperative. At this stage, wuddi
already meant: make it known that ... / Recognize that.... This stage is still evident
in the following cases, where wuddi carries the meaningsuccinctly captured by Veenhofof nota bene:
AbB 14, 63:411:
e-um a ur uki i-ri-im-tum / 840.0.0 gur ib-[b]a-i-i / wu-di-i e-a-am / 5
u i gur / a-na a-a na-ri-im u-te-e- / gim -[ n]a-a-pa-ak 1 -t am /
eb-bu-tum li-il5-li-ku-nim-ma / e-um i-[n]a a-a na-ri-im / la it-[t]a-ab-ba-ak
The barley of the town of irimtum proved to be 840 kor. And, nota bene, I have
now moved out to the bank of the river an amount of 300 kor of barely. Let the
cargo boats, one administrator and some checkers come so that the barely does
not remain piled up on the river bank.46
More clearly still, in two other letters (one of which is ABIM 26:2023, cited and
discussed above), wuddi governs a kma content clause, with a similar meaning:
ARM 26/2, 449:3744:
a-um a-bi-im/ -ra-di-im ta-a-pu-ur-ma / a-ba-am dam-qa-am be-l ip-rusa-am-ma i-ru-da-ak-kum / wu-di ki-ma 1-u 5-u ma-dam-ma ki-a-am adda-ba-ab-ba-ak-kum / um-ma a-na-ku-ma um-ma-ma-an{x} be-l i-ta-na-appa-ra-ak-kum / a-wa-a-at be-l-ia -ul te-le-eq-q be-l i-na li-ib-bi-ka wa-/
lu- ti-di i-na ur-ru-ki-im-ma be-l ta-am-ma-ar / i-na du-um-mu-qa-tim-ma
be-l i-le-i-ka
You have written about sending an army, and my lord has assigned for you a
good army and sent it to you. And surely (you remember) that I kept telling you
once, five times and many times: even if my lord keeps writing to you, and
46. Trans. Veenhof. Note that after the sentence governed by wuddi comes a passage with the MP
assurrnot a common combination!

The Modal Particles wuddi and anna

80

you would not take (seriously) the words of my lord, and my lord is not on your
mindmay you know that in the long run you will realize (how good) my lord
is, and my lord will overcome you with his good deeds.
Note that in these three letters (two of which are not from Mari), wuddi (or wuddi kma
...) can still be translated literally, as an imperative verbal form: recognize (the fact)
that ...! and not as a fully grammaticalized MP. The final stage of the process of grammaticalization occurs when wuddi means surely: a modal particle governing a modal
clause.
In the first three chapters, we have surveyed a series of inferential MPs in OB, commencing with pqat, the weak doubter, denoting perhaps; moving next to the scalar
MP midde, whose semantic range stretches from speculative to deductive, designating partial certitudethat is, probably and even no doubt; and ending in
this chapter with wuddi, the strong certifier conveying surely, and anna, meaning
indeed, in a declarative manner. To reach an even higher degree of certainty does not
require another MP but no MP at all, for the highest degree of certainty is achieved by
a nonmodal statement.47 Thus, the whole range of certainty is present: Perhaps he
will come tomorrow He will probably come tomorrow Surely/indeed he will come
tomorrow He will come tomorrow.
47. Cf. Capone 2001: 28: Could anyone say that by saying ... I am absolutely convinced that Angela
is my sister I am making a stronger statement than Angela is my sister? Or suppose I said: I am absolutely
convinced that this is my father, would I then be making a stronger statement than This is my father? Similarly, Shlomper 2005: 109.

List of Attestations of wuddi and anna

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

*AbB 14, 63:411

*ABIM 26, 2023
ARM 1, 10:10 (LAPO 17, 475)
*ARM 1, 22:49 (LAPO 17, 476)
*ARM 1, 22:911 (LAPO 17, 476)
ARM 1, 29:17 (LAPO 17, 474)
ARM 1, 39:1015 (LAPO 17, 471)
*ARM 1, 52: 3641 (LAPO 16, 1) (wuddi
and anna)
*ARM 1, 72:45 (LAPO 16, 403)
ARM 1, 83:1522 (LAPO 16, 255)
ARM 1, 91:12 (LAPO 16, 321)
ARM 1, 102:911 (LAPO 18, 907)
*ARM 2, 29:1214 (LAPO 16, 288)
*ARM 4, 21:517 (LAPO 17, 493)
*ARM 4, 26:48 (LAPO 17, 534)

16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.

*ARM 4, 59:512 (LAPO 18, 962)

*ARM 4, 62:310 (LAPO 17, 770)
ARM 4, 88:510 (LAPO 17, 540)
*ARM 18, 8:46 (LAPO 16, 111)
*ARM 26/1, 206:512 (Heimpel 2003:
256)
*ARM 26/2, 380: 1016 (Heimpel 2003:
32930)
*ARM 26/2, 449: 3744 (Heimpel 2003:
373)
ARM 26/2, 464:28 (Heimpel 2003: 379)
ARM 28, 53:615
ARM 28, 154:811
*ARM 28, 155:612
*ARM 28, 179:3141
Dossin 1956: 66:1921 (LAPO 16, 251)

The Grammaticalization of wuddi

29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.

*Ellis 1972: 66, 66: 412

*Falkenstein 1963: 56: ii 13 (anna)
*FM 6, 52:510
*FM 7, 35:47
*FM 8, 24:512
FM 9, 41:6
FM 9, p. 75 n. 256: 1112
*Goetze 1958: 23, No. 5:49 (anna)
*Goetze 1958: 70, No. 45:610 (anna)
MARI 4, 316:47 (LAPO 17, 478)
MARI 5, 172:10 (LAPO 16, 36)

81
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.

MARI 7, 3:47 (LAPO 16, 439)

*OBTR 2:35
*Shemshara Letters 1:45
*Shemshara Letters 26:412 (anna)
*Shemshara Letters 59:1516
*Shemshara Letters 59:2324
*Shemshara Letters 63:6770
*UET 6/2, 397: 1619
*Westenholz 1997: 62: i 1014
Ziegler and Charpin 2007: 61:12

But I understand that signs must be human

Czesaw Miosz, Veni Creator

Chapter 4
The Modal Expression l ittum
The expression l ittum is attested in a number of OB letters, both from Mari and vicinity and from southern Babylonia. Most of the relevant passages of l ittum were collected in 1988 by Durand1 and later treated almost simultaneously by van Soldt (1992),
who rendered this expression let me remind you that ..., and Durand (1992a), who
translated it cest un fait avr, indiscutable....2
The syntactic analyses of l ittum offered in these two studies are straightforward and
clear, but they do not consider the fact that l ittum is part of a broader OB epistemic
modal system. My goal in this chapter is to examine l ittum from a wider angle and
to place this epistemic expression in the context of OB epistemic modality, alongside
other MPs and expressionsa context that was not considered in previous discussions
of l ittum. The context of epistemic modality is essential to fully grasp its meaning and
function in OB texts.
The Attestations:
Generic and Geographical Distribution
Van Soldt (1992) collected 13 examples of l ittum: 8 from Mari, 1 from Tell Rimah,
and 4 from Babylonia. Durand (1992a) noted another example from Tuttul. Recently, 2
more attestations of l ittum were published by Joanns (2006) in texts from arrdum,
in the Suhm region, on the middle Euphrates.3 All together, I know of 19 examples of
l ittum available for study.
The expression l ittum is not confined to the region from which OB texts come.
Michel (2010: 72:12) has found l ittum in an OA document, and Dercksen (2004) has
identified OA l uturum as a semantic and functional equivalent of OB l ittum, rendering it it surely was a sign.4 Cole (1996: 60) noted that the expression under discussion
1. ARM 26/1, pp. 38384.
2.The two translations are not dramatically different from each other; see Durands (1992a) te
souviens-tu du moment ou.... Cf. also LAPO 17, p. 486.
3. References courtesy of M. Stol.
4. Especially important is one OA attestation, BIN 6, 52:10, where l uturum is followed by the adverbial phrase ina kittim, truly, thus clinching the modal character of l uturum (and, secondarily, of OB
l ittum as well).

82

Previous Studies of l ittum

83

continued to be used up to the Neo-Babylonian period, where it is found in a few letters

as idatumma, this is to attest that....5
Thus, though not extensiveno literary texts using this expression are known!the
extant body of OB examples is coherent and allows us to draw reasonable conclusions.
Previous Studies of l ittum
I have already cited Durands and van Soldts treatments of the expression, and references to earlier studies of l ittum can be found in van Soldt (1992: 30). Durands
earlier interpretation, cela fait un long temps,, was later amended by him to cest un
fait avr, indiscutable ... or cest un fait connu,6 renditions that he repeated in later
publications.7 Later, in a short note, Durand stresses that ittum in l ittum is derived from
idm, to know, not from ittum, a (divine) sign.8 This point will be discussed below.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of l ittum
Whether l ittum derives from the epistemic verb par excellence in Akkadian, idm/
wadm (like the MPs wuddi and, indirectly, midde), is far from certain. Nevertheless, l
ittum clearly stands semantically next to wuddi in the OB epistemic modal system. Like
wuddi, l ittum is a deductive expressing past certaintythat is, an unequivocal
reference to some past event. I translate l ittum with mark that ..., notice that ...,
pay attention that.... The conversational strategy of wuddi and l ittum is also similar: by using l ittum or wuddi, the speaker commits himself to the fact that a past event
occurred and attempts to draw the addressee to his own perspective of this undisputed
event, thus creating a common ground for the continuation of the conversation.9 This is
amply clear in the following letter, in which the princess, Kir of Iln-r, reproached
her father, King Zimr-lm, for not heeding her advice:10
ARM 10, 31:511:11
[lu]- it-tum i-nu-ma i-na ki-sa-al / [0]-iB-tim ki-a-am aq-b-kum / [um-m]a
a-na-ku-ma ta-at-ta-la-ak / [ mi-i]m-ma ma-a-tam -ul tu-u-te-e-er / [(?)
wa]-ar-ki-ka-a-ma ma-a-tum / [i-n]a-ak-ki-ir an-ni-tam a-na a-bi-ia / be-l-ia
aq-bi-ma -ul -me-en-ni

5. Reference courtesy of M. Stol.

6. ARM 26/1, pp. 38384.
7. Durand 1992a; LAPO 17, p. 486; LAPO 18, pp. 283, 460. So also Heimpel (2003: 395) ad ARM
26/2, 511): It is indeed a known fact that..., and FM 6, 18:515.
8. LAPO 17, p. 486. Morphologically, this suggestion seems to indicate derivation from a Gt form, but
idm is not attested in this stem.
9. This was already understood by Durand (1992a): le caractre senti comme naturel de liens pistolaires aprs la rappel dun fait pass en l ittum....
10. For Kir, see Ziegler 1999b: 64.
11. See LAPO 18, 1223.

The Modal Expression l ittum

84

Mark (that) when (we were) in the court of ... thus I said to you: should you
leave [wit]hout putting the country in order, [(and) s]oon after the country will
revolt. This is (what) I said to my father and lord, but he did not listen to me.12
Invoking an event from the past by using l ittum serves to create a basis for conversation, agreed upon by both the sender and the addressee, consolidating good terms between the two parties and smoothing the way for the less pleasant arguments that follow.
A similar situation is found in a letter from Erra-abit to abduma-mlik:
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2):617:
lu- it-tum i-nu-ma a-na u-ba-at-de[n-ll]ki / ta-al-li-kam-ma um-ma at-taa-[m]a / ma-a-tum ib-ba-la-ka-[at] / a-na-k[u] ki-a-am aq-b-kum um-ma
a-na-[ku-ma] / [am]-mi-nim an-ni-tam ta-aq-bi / [as-s]-ur-re i-e-mu-ka/ [i-naan]-na a-[n]a-ku u-lum-ka / [u-lum] ?-ka u-lum / [fu]m-mi-ka a-na qa-at /
a-la-ki-im -ta-na-ap-pa-a[r] / at-ta ma-ti-ma a-na u-u[l-mi-ia] / -ul ta-apu-ra-a[m]
Mark (that) when you came to ubat-Enlil, you said: the country will revolt,
and I said to you as following: why did you say this? It is to be feared that they
might hear you! Now, I keep sending you inquiries through messengers about
your well-being, the well-being of your house and the well-being of your mother.
You, however, never sent me a letter (asking) about my well-being.
Once a past event was cited (the writers concern about the political situation in the
country and his good advice to the addressee), the writer can, by using l ittum, raise
his complaint that the addressee never goes to the pain of asking about his well-being.
Another illustration of this phenomenon is found in Smu-lanasis letter to Zimr-lm:
FM 6, 18:515:
lu- i-tu-um i-nu-ma / i-na ki-ri-im a-na-ku a-ta / be-l i-na l ka-ar-ka-misiki / i-na mu-s le-[q-em -e]m-ni ba-ar-[ma] / ni-id-bu-bu i-[na-an-n]a/
i-lu-um a a-bi-ka a-na gigu-z a / a a-bi-ka -e-ri-ib-ka / a-na-ku a-na bi-it
a-bi-[ia] / ak-u-da-am-ma i-[na a-l]i-ia / pyu-um-ra-a-[AN] / wa-i-ib
Mark (that) when I and you, my lord, were in the garden, at (the presence) of
the sire of Carchemish, while getting (the news of) his death, our mind was
determined(?) and we had a talk. Now, the god of your father has made you enter
the throne of your father. As for me, I reached the house of my father, but in my
town Yumra-il is staying.
However, the semantic functions of l ittum are more limited than those of wuddi,
which is more versatile than l ittum and can be employed to express meanings other
than past certainty, namely, future or promissory certainty, and contra-factual
12. See Durand, LAPO 18, 1223.

The Syntactic Profile ofl ittum

85

certainty. In other words, sentences such as *l ittum I will teach you a lesson should
you not comply with my orders and *l ittum had I seen you yesterday, I would have
returned you the money are not attested and probably never will be attested: these expressions would require a construction with wuddi.
The Syntactic Profile of l ittum
1. Discourse Domains
In most cases, l ittum combines the locutory and the allocutory discourse domains (i.e., the first and second persons). This phenomenon parallels our findings with
regard to wuddi sentences, where the locutory and the allocutory domains often
meet. Consider, for instance:
ARM 26/2, 511:38:
dumu i-i[p]-ri-im []a a-am-mu-ra-bi l [u g a]l kur-da[ki] / a a-na [e-er]
i-me-dda-[gan] wu--ru il-l[i-kam-ma] / wu--ur-t[a-]u a a-na i-me-dda-ga[n]
a-[ap-ra-at] / a-na a-kur-d[IM i]d-bu-ub um-ma-a-mi a-am-[mu-ra-bi] / a-na
i-me-dd[a-g]an i-pu-ra-an-ni lu- it-[tum-ma] / a i-na ra--imki a-na-ku atta ni-[in-na-am-ru?]
The messenger of ammurabi, king of Kurd that was sent to Ime-Dagan has
arrived, and he told Akur-Addu his message, which was written to Ime-Dagan:
ammurabi sent me to Ime-Dagan to say: Mark that I and you have m[et] in
Ram!
As this passage demonstrates, by bringing up a past occasion in which both the writer
and the addressee participated, l ittum forms a conversational bond between the
speaker and his interlocutor. The modal expression l ittum thus furnishes proof of the
old amity between the two communicating parties.13 Functionally, and in fact also literally, Akkadian l ittum can be compared to Greek symbolon, originally a mark or an
object that served as a material indication of the identification of two individuals or two
states; the symbolon either sealed an agreement between the two or denoted the fact that
they had enjoyed friendly terms in the past.14
In this respect, l ittum has a more restricted use than wuddi, which also can refer
to a past event with strong conviction but not necessarily to a past event in which both
the writer and his addressee participated. See the following letter, cited already in the
chapter on wuddi (p.79):
13. Note a very similar formulation found in AbB 6, 128:68; the phrase comes immediately after the
opening blessings, but without l ittum: i-na k -d in g r -raki ni-in-na-mi-ir-ma / ki-a-am aq-bi-kum / um-ma
a-na-ku-ma..., We have met in Babylon and thus did I say to you:... The absence of l ittum here is
probably to be explained by the fact that the social difference is too great between the writer and the addressee, whose title is simply awlum, master.
14. Hammond and Scullard 1970: 1026 s.v. symbolon; Morier 1989: 1146, s.v. symbole. I am indebted
to J.-M. Durand (private communication) for this parallel. Interestingly, Kraus (apud van Soldt, AbB 12,
p.151, note b ad 195), also understood l ittum in this way.

86

The Modal Expression l ittum

AbB 14, 63:411:

e-um a ur u ki i-ri-im-tum / 840.0.0 gur ib-[b]a-i-i / wu-di-i e-a-am / 5
u- i gur / a-na a-a na-ri-im u-te-e- / gim -[ n]a-a-pa-ak 1 -t am /
eb-bu-tum li-il5-li-ku-nim-ma / e-um i-[n]a a-a na-ri-im / la it-[t]a-ab-ba-ak
The barley of the town of irimtum proved to be 840 kor. And, nota bene, I have
now moved out to the bank of the river an amount of 300 kor of barely. Let the
cargo boats, one administrator, and some checkers come so that the barely does
not remain piled up on the river bank.
In this letter, wuddi functions similarly to l ittum as mark that ..., but contrary to l
ittum, it refers to an occasion in which only the writer was involved.
Some of the past events introduced by l ittum seem to be casual events having no
solemn character or direct bearing on the current discussion. Consider:
OBTR 153:410:
a-nu-ma -ab-da-ur -tap-ra-ki / lu- it-tum i-nu-ma i-na an-da-ri-ig /
m unus - tur il-li-kam-ma sg az-zu-e-na / tu-a-bi-lam / i-na-an-na / a-nu-umma an e a-na qa-at / -ab-da-ur / a--ar-da-am
I have just sent b-Aur to you. Mark (that) when the slave-girl went to
Andarig you had Azzu-ena bring wool. Now I sent a donkey with b-Aur ...
Nevertheless, even mentioning commonplace circumstances can create a conversational
bond between the sender and the addressee. It is not the character of the event that matters; it is the certainty of the sender of the letter about the existence of this moment in
the past and his strong conviction that the addressee is also aware of that same event and
shares the same (positive) perspective as the sender.
Rarely, l ittum refers to an external event, an event that did not involve the speaker and
the addressee directly; these occurrences involve the delocutory discourse domain:15
ARM 10, 141:2030:
a-ni-tam u-um-ki / fitar-dutu-i e-me-ma li-ib-bi / ma-di-i i-du i-na e-re-biki / i-na wa--ki / ap-p-ki a-na dnin- -g al-lim / lu-up-ti lu- it-tum / i-nu-ma
a-mu- iz-nu-nu / u-us-s-ni-ma / la ta-ma-a-e-ni,
Another thing: I heard your name, Itar-am, and my heart rejoiced. In your
coming and going pray to Blt-Ekallim. Do you remember (lit., mark that ...)
when it rained? Think of me and dont forget about me!

15. So also, partially, in AbB 12, 160:15, where l ittum appears twice: first, referring to the delocutory
domain, and second, only then to the locutory domain. Similarly, in a letter from arrdum (Joanns 2006:
62 no. 15:1618), l ittum refers to the second person exclusively, mentioning not the speaker but two other
persons involved in the situation.

The Syntactic Profile ofl ittum

87

Durand suggested that the sentence that l ittum introduces, am iznun, it rained,
is a proverbial saying meaning prosperity is here.16 However, I understand the phrase
differently, in accord with the general semantic behavior of l ittum: the expression
generally introduces a pleasant event from the past at which both the speaker and the
addressee were present, thus cementing the amicable bond between them. My reading
presupposes that the l ittum phrase poses a rhetorical question. It should be noted that
ARM 10, 141:2030 is the sole case where l ittum refers to an external conditiona
specific weather eventand not to a past encounter between the writer and the addressee. However, there is no doubt that the rain mentioned is introduced as a token of
intimacy shared between the writer and his addressee. In fact, the entire letter is very
personal, and its tone and contents demonstrate the close ties between the writer, Blum,
and his sisters.
With regard to the axial concepts of subjectification and perspectivization, l
ittumjust like wuddi but unlike pqat and middecreates strong subjectification.
By using l ittum, the speaker is unequivocally the I responsible for the statement.
Furthermore, the I is the same person involved in the past occasion and who will be
involved in the matter raised in the letter. The speaker is not separating himself from this
past I or from the future I: on the contrary, l ittum stresses the unity of these Is.
2. Verbal Tenses
As observed by van Soldt (1992: 35) and Durand (1992a), l ittum, almost without
exception, takes the past tense. This clear preference resembles the tendency of wuddi to
take nonfuture verbal forms and points to the semantic and syntactic proximity between
the wuddi and l ittum.
3.Negation
Three texts indicate that the negation used with l ittum is ul:
Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70:24:
lu it-tu-um a-na b[i]-ti-ka / a-na -nun-na-akki / -ul ta-a-pu-ra-an-ni
Note (that) you did not send me to your house, to Enunna.
UET 5, 2:59:17
lu [i?/it?]-tum i-nu--ma a-na-ku [at-ta] / i-na Ur ( e?. ab)?ki ni-in-naam-[ru] / ki-a-am -la aq-bi-ku--[um?] / um-ma a-na-ku--[ma]
Note (that) when I and you have met in Urdid I not tell you as follows? ...
Joanns 2006: 60, No. 14:512:
lu it-tum-ma a ka-a-am-mi-u / a-a-ka 2 up-pa-tim [u]-ta-bi-lam / at-ta
16. LAPO 18, pp. 48586.
17. Reference courtesy of M. Stol.

The Modal Expression l ittum

88

a-na a-l[i?...] / -ul te-ru-ba-am / -a-ra-am a tu-a-bi-lam / a-na a-iada-du / l i-id-da-anki / ad-di-in
Note that I have sent to you, through Kaammiu, your brother, two lettersbut
you did not enter to.... The servant that you have sent to me, I have sold to AyaDdu, the man of iddn.
Interestingly, wuddi (and the two other inferential OB MPs, pqat and midde) also employs the negation ul, even though both wuddi and l ittum rarely take any negation.
This syntatical detail is not accidental: the main function of both wuddi and l ittum is to
express past certainty, and it is more logical to refer to the occurrence of a given event
rather than to its nonoccurrence.
4. Position of the Expression within the Clause
The expression l ittum stands at the head of its sentence, a typical location for OB
epistemic MPs (including wuddi). The only exception to this ruleif this qualifies as an
exceptionis when precedes l ittum.18
5. Phrasal Arrangement
In general, sentences with l ittum tend to open a conversational flow; hence, syntagmatically, they have no backward connection. In fact, l ittum sentences tend to stand at
the very beginning of a letter19 (there are exceptions),20 and when it does not, l ittum
introduces a new topic in the conversation. Therefore, unlike the other MPsand, most
importantly, unlike wuddino topicalizing sentence (which often begin with aum)
precedes the l ittum sentence.
As described by van Soldt, l ittum may stand alone in the sentence or it can be followed by a, a inma, or just inma. When we consider the entire available corpus, it
appears that the different syntactical sequences can be grouped geographically. In van
Soldts (1992: 33) words:
In Mari and Rim, l ittum is as rule followed by a or inma or a combination of these
and a is obligatory in the case of l ittumma.... In the examples from Babylonia, on the
other hand, l ittum is directly followed by the sentence.21

The example of l ittum inma from Tuttul identified by Durand (1992a) and the couple
of cases from arrdum published by Joanns (2006) reinforce this conclusion and indicate that local chancelleries of the middle Euphrates added redundant conjunctions after
l ittum. Usually, these conjunctions did not carry additional meaning, but occasionally
they were used with their normal meaning: so, in ARM 10, 141:2030 and in UET 5,
2:59, both cited above, inma meant simply when. The first letter is from arrdum
18. AbB 12, 160:7; ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1321.
19.AbB 12, 160:1; ARM 6, 76:525; ARM 10, 31:511; ARM 10, 117:48; ARM 26/1, p. 383,
No.(2):69; ARM 26/1, p. 384, No. (3):46; Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70:24; FM 6, 18:515; OBTR 153: 412.
20. AbB 12, 195:917; AbB 13, 136:1114; ARM 10, 141:2528; ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1321).
21. See also Durand 1992a: note b.

The Grammaticalization of l ittum

89

and the second, based on the fact that it mentions Ur, also seems not to be from the
South but from some other locality, perhapsif van Soldts and Durands observations
are validfrom some site in the vicinity of Mari or somewhere else in the North. This
geographical distribution leads us to suggest that l ittum originated in Babylonia. Later,
when it came to be used in the middle Euphrates (Mari and its surroundings), it was felt
that the locution l ittum(-ma) alone was not strong enough, and redundant conjunctions
were added to it.
Twice in the corpus, l ittum sentence leads the way to another l ittum sentence:
ARM 6, 76:514:22
[lu-] it-tum-ma a i-nu-ma / [i-na me-e]-re-et ku-ul-i-timki / [la-ma i-]i-i
a-am-i-im / [-a-b]i-it-ma ap-si-in-ma / [e-te]-le-em / [ a-um ia-g]i-i-dIM
be-l iq-b-em / [ lu- i]t-tum i-nu-ma [i-na ka-ra-a ap]-pa-anki / [a-na be-l-ia
k]i-a-am aq-[b]i / [um-ma a-na-ku]-ma
Note (l ittum-ma) that when I began to go up secretly from Kultum before
sunrise, my lord talked to me about Yagi-lm. And note (u l ittum inma) (that)
when (we were) at the camp of Appn, I talked to my lord as follows....23
6. l ittum and Other Particles
In addition to l ittum, there are also cases of l ittum-ma.24 But, as with the other
MPs examined in this work, I am unable to detect any difference in nuance when ma is
attached to l ittum.
The Grammaticalization of l ittum
The expression l ittum is the only member of the epistemic modal system in OB that
is analytic, a combination of two constituents.25 Thus, unlike other MPs, no morphological analysis is necessary. The components of l ittum are self-evident: the particle l and
the lemma ittum.26 The fact that l ittum is formed analytically seems to indicate that
22. LAPO 17, 732.
23. So also in AbB 12, 160:115.
24. ARM 6, 76:514; ARM 10, 117:48; ARM 26/1, p. 384, No. (3):46; ARM 26/2, 511:610 (ma
in break).
25. The expressions kma a and k a are treated in the chapter on the irrealis particle man, but unlike
l ittum, they do not function as full-blown modal expressions.
26. With regard to the nominal component of the expression, Landsberger (196466) offered a lengthy
and dense discussion of ittum. The present lexical situation is as follows: AHw (405b and 406a) distinguishes between ittu(m) I, das Besondere, and ittu(m) II, Zeichen, as does CDA 137a. Three arguments
have been put forward in favor of the separation of the two lemmas. (1) Two nominal bases can be identified: sg. idat-; pl. idtum = ittu(m) I in AHw and sg. itta-; pl. itttum = ittu(m) II in AHw (but note that
the separation between the two nominal bases is not entirely neat and there are cases that cannot be easily
distinguishedAHw 405a: i[ttu(m)] I u. II nicht immer sicher unterscheidbar). (2) In lexical lists, ittum
has two different Sumerian equivalents: corresponds to ittu(m) I, and (g)iskim to ittu(m) II (but note that
i/ e equals ittu(m) I and ittu(m) II). Finally, the members of this homonymic couple are offered separate

90

The Modal Expression l ittum

it was a recent development in the OB modal system and that it did not circulate long
enough in the vernacular of the period to fuse its two constitutions.27 Another indication of the relatively late grammaticalization of l ittum is the fact that it does not have
any Sumerian correspondent in the known lexical lists (of course, ittum alone is attested
abundantly in the bilingual tradition).
In support of this hypothesis, I have already suggested that the geographical distribution of l ittum (Babylonia) and l ittum a / inma a (Upper Euphrates) may point to
Babylonia as the locale where l ittum entered the modal system. As I see it, originally,
in Babylonia, the expression l ittum had sufficient semantic power unescorted, but in
more-distant regions it was felt necessary to intensify it and to accompany it with nominalizing particles.
Thus, I postulate that l ittum underwent several stages of grammaticalization, outlined below, until it became a genuine modal expression. As in the studies of other
modal particles presented here, a word of caution is in order: the stages that will be delineated are not intended to represent diachronic development. Instead, they outline the
main theoretical steps in the process of grammaticalization of each modal expression.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the material collected in the dictionaries shows
that the lemma ittum became common only in post-OB periods; it is poorly attested
in the OB documentation.28 Thus, some of the proposed stages that pertain to the OB
period are hypothetical and make use of later sources, because the OB material is often
incomplete.
As expected, at the starting point of this semantic process stands ittum, used in its
primary lexical meaning sign, mark, information. Next, nominal sentences evolved
in which ittum had a more abstract meaning of the kind: (1a) l ittu, this shall be
a mark29 or (1b) anntu l ittu, these are a sign.30 These sentences resemble other
nominal sentences using the particle l, as, for example, (2) Anum u Ellil l rbi
etymologies: ittum I, or idatum (pl. idtum) is connected to idum, hand, while ittum II (pl. itttum) related
to Hebrew t, sign, mark.
CAD I/J 30410 analyzed the material differently, as a single lemma (translated: 1. mark, sign, feature,
characteristic, diagram, 2. omen ominous sign, 3. password, signal, inside information, 4. notice, acknowledgment, written proof), with two status constructus forms itta- and idat-. The formation of the plural of
ittum forked at some point. One fork took ittum as its starting point and arrived at itttum (from OB onward).
The other fork formed idtum, from which later scribes derived the singular idatum as a back-formation (see
CAD I/J 30910, note). Lately, Durand (LAPO 17, p. 486) has proposed that the etymology of ittum (I or
II) is the verb idm, to know (ittum < *idtum). This suggestion, though fitting the semantic range of ittum
well (and though it strengthens the connection of l ittum to wuddi), is difficult to accept on morphological
grounds: from idm-Gt (unattested) one expects *e/idtm > e/ittm, with a long vocalized ultima syllable
(like enm-Gt: etnm, etc.) and not the short ultima form we have, ittum.
27. It may be that l ittum was not fused into a single particle on analogy to the verbal system, where l
often stands separatelythat is, l ittum ~ l iprus.
28. In OB, ittum mainly is found in literary texts and in omens, much less frequently in Babylonian letters: AbB 6, 22:6; AbB 6, 148:12 (for which cf. CAD I/J 305b and CAD N/2 104 s.v. na (idtu)); AbB 12,
160:1215. Mari letters: Dossin 1938a: 126:78. emra: Shemshara Letters 11:24, 27, 32.
29. Enma eli V:76 (cited in CAD I/J 304b5a).
30. HSS 15, 291:4, 19 (Nuzi; cited in CAD I/J 308, 3a).

The Grammaticalization of l ittum

91

lemuttiu, May Anu and Enlil be his evil lurkers31 and (3) l arru zninu ... anku,
the providing king ... am I.32 How are we to analyze these bipartite nominal clauses?
Which component is the subject and which the predicate? It is not always easy to answer. Huehnergard (1986: 225) has formulated a rule: in normal declarative verbless
clauses, a noun or noun phrase as subject precedes the predicate, while a pronoun as
subject follows the predicate. If Huehnergards observation applies (and I agree that it
does), then the above examples are to be analyzed as following: (2) Anum u Ellil(subject)
l rbi lemuttiu(predicate) and (3) l arru zninu(predicate) anku(subject). But what about (1a)
l ittu or (1b) anntu l ittu, where the pronoun stands first? I can see no possibility
other than that in (1ab) the pronoun is the subject, regardless of its position; hence:
(subject) l ittu(predicate). Pragmatically, in all of the above examples(1ab), (2), and
(3)the subject is also the theme and the predicate serves as the rheme, introducing new
information about the theme.
At some time during the OB period, probably in Babylonia,33 l ittum shifted to the
head of the sentence, which is a typical locus for OB MPs. The syntactic and pragmatic
role of l ittum in a nominal clauses, such as l ittua predicate and a rhemewas
transformed. Now l ittum started to function as the theme, complemented by a nominalized phrase, which served as the predicate and the rheme. Consider, for example, one of
the examples treated before (4): l ittumma a ina Ramki anku u atta ninnamr, l
ittum that I and you have met in Ram!34 Contrary to (1a), where the topic was this
() and the new information, the comment or the rheme, was it is a sign (l ittu), in
(4) it is the other way around: l ittum is the head of the clause, complemented by the
new information, which is: I and you have met in Ram. Thus, the final stage of the
grammaticalization process of l ittum was achieved by the shift of this expression to
the initial position in the sentence, accompanied by a switch of syntactic and pragmatic
functions: from complement to head, from rheme to theme.
At this point, l ittum introduces, what Deutscher refers to as a functional domain of
complementation (FDC).35 The resulting construction is comparable to other sentences
that employ knowledge verbs (mostly edm, but also lamdum, qipum, and the like).36
The way to adjoin the complementing phrase to l ittumwhich, we should not forget,
is also derived from the knowledge verb edm!may vary. In Babylonia, paratactic juxtaposition of the complementing clause directly after l ittum was the main construction.37
In the middle Euphrates, as has already been noted, it was customary to coordinate the
31. GAG 127d.
32. VAB 4, 84: ii 24 (Nbk.).
33. One ought not to forget the parallel OA expression l uturum, it surely was a sign (see Dercksen
2004), which seems to develop independently of the Babylonian l ittum. In later periods one finds l idti
(BIN 1, 9: 19, cited in CAD I/J, 309 4b).
34. ARM 26/2, 511:78.
35. Deutscher 2000: 95101, and passim.
36. Deutscher 2000: 1045.
37. E.g., Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70:24: lu it-tu-um a-na b[i]-ti-ka / a-na -nun-na-akki / -ul ta-a-pura-an-ni, Note (that) you did not send me to your house, to Enunna.

92

The Modal Expression l ittum

complementing clause with a, inma, or both a and inma.38 It is worth mentioning

that the common method of complementation in OB lettersnamely, the use of the conjunction kmais not attested in l ittum phrases.39
Unlike the MPs pqat, midde, and wuddi, which originated in verbal forms and eventually, going through various stages of grammaticalization, reached a seminominal status, l ittum followed a quite different process: it was an originally nominal construction
that went through various stages of grammaticalization to attain a verblike status. To
clarify this point further, consider two examples adduced by Deutscher in his discussion
of complementation of knowledge verbs: kme td ina lim marika imrya izzazz,
As you know, my asses are staying with you in the city40 and kam awssu l tde,
Such was his statement; you should indeed know.41 The main similarity between these
sentences and the l ittum passages is the one just described: complemented by a content
phrase, l ittum functions very much like other constructions with edm. However, the
differences between l ittum and regular sentences with knowledge verbs are also very
clear. First, the position of l ittum in the phrase is invariably initial, like most OB MPs,
in contrast to regular sentences with edm, where the verb tends to be placed at the end
of the sentence. Second, unlike regular sentences with edm, there are more syntactic
and semantic constraints on the expression l ittum: it mostly takes past-tense verbs
and depicts a situation that refers to both the speaker and the addressee, as described at
length above. All these restrictions are a result of the grammaticalization process that l
ittum has undergone.
Interestingly, there is a letter that uses ittum in its pre- and post-grammaticalized
stages: twice in the modal expression l ittu(m) and twice in its lexical meaning:
AbB 12, 160:115:
lu- it-tu / 1 ma-na sg nu-r-di[]-a-ra / id-di-nam / 3 u8-u d u - / pderum-ba-ni i[d]-di-n[a]m / i-nu-ma ma-ar-[] / lu- it-tu / i-na -ri-i[m s ] g /
3? u8.[ udu.] / a-na dnin.s.an.na / ni-q-a-am ta-q / it-tu-a ki-it-ta-am /
u-[u]p-ra-a-nim / a-na it-ti ki-it-ti / l-u[l]-li-ka,
Note (that) Nr-Iara gave me one mina of wool and rum-bani gave me three
sheep when he (i.e., rum-bani!42) was ill. And note (that) you made offering
38.With a: Joanns 2006: 60, No. 14:56: lu it-tum-ma a ka-ha-am-mi-u / a-ha-ka 2 up-pa-tim
[u]-ta-bi-lam, Note that I have sent to you, through Kaammiu, your brother, two letters.
With inma: ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2):67: lu- it-tum i-nu-ma a-na u-ba-at-de[n-ll]ki / ta-al-li-kamma um-ma at-ta-a-[m]a, Note (that) when you came to ubat-Enlil, you said: ...
With both a and inma: ARM 6, 76:59: [lu-] it-tum-ma a i-nu-ma / [i-na me-e]-re-et ku-ul-itimki/ [la-ma i-]i-i a-am-i-im / [-a-b]i-it-ma ap-si-in-ma / [e-te]-le-em, Note that when I began to
go up secretly from Kultum before sunrise....
39. See Deutscher 2000: 107 and passim.
40. AbB 12, 72:11 = Deutscher 2000: 107, (185).
41. Whiting 1987: 44:10 = Deutscher 2000: 106, (180).
42. Contra van Soldt (1992: 32) and Durand (1992a), I consider it more logical and more in line with the
grammar that inma maru (not mar!) refers to rum-bani, not to the sheep.

The Grammaticalization of l ittum

93

of wool and three sheep to Ninsianna on the roof.43 Write to me about her
(Ninsiannas) trustworthy sign, (for) I would like to part with a trustworthy sign!
Another case that is evidence of the semigrammaticalized situation of l ittum is
found in a Mari letter sent from Warad-Sn, the governor of Andarig or Allaad,44 to
Yasma-Addu, king of Mari. In this letter, we find the surprising expression k ittum in
a direct question, very likely meaning is this a fact?:
Ziegler 1999a: 57:419:
i-na up-p-im a be-l -[]a-bi-lam / be-l ki-a-am i-pu-ra-am um-ma-a-mi/
am-mi-nim a-na dIM-mu-ba-l-i[] / [t]a-a-pu-ra-am um-ma-a-mi / d u m u m unus ia-a-du-li-im [l]a-mi ta-a-a-az / be-l i-pu-ra-am / [k]i-i it-tum-ma
an-ni-tam aq-bi / [i-n]a ma-a-ak a-wi-la-ti-i-im / [be]-l d u m u -m u n u s ia-a-duli-im i-na-di-in-um / [i-n]a-an-na a-[n]u-um-ma / a-na dIM-mu-ba-l-i / a-tapa-ar / i-tu-ma na-da-an-a / a-na be-l-ia / []-bu / [d u m u -m u n u s a-a-ti
li-u-us-s] / [0 0 0 0 0 0 0 be]-l lu i-de
In the letter that my lord (Yasma-Addu) has sent, my lord wrote to me: Why
did you write to Addu-muballi as following: You should not marry the daughter
of Yadun-lm!(thus) my lord wrote to me. (But) it is a fact that I said that in
the lack of ladies my lord should give him to marry a daughter of Yadun-lm?
Now, presently, I have written to Addu-muballi: since giving her is pleasing my
lord, may he marry this daughter ... May my lord be informed.
Now that we have analyzed the strong-evidential l ittum, we may turn in the next
chapter to a MP whose function is somewhat opposite that of l ittum: tua, which functions as a refuter, rebuffing a previously assumed opinion or understanding of a given
state of affairs.
43. I maintain van Soldts translation (repeated in 1992: 32).
44. Ziegler 1999a: 57.

List of attestations of l ittum

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

*AbB 12, 160:115

AbB 12, 195:918
AbB 13, 136:1115
*AbB 14, 63:411 (wuddi)
*ARM 6, 76:514 (LAPO 17, 732)
*ARM 10, 31:511 (LAPO 18, 1223)
ARM 10, 117:48 (LAPO 18, 1011)
*ARM 10, 141:2030 (LAPO 18, 1256)
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1321
*ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2):617

11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

ARM 26/1, p. 384, No. (3):46

*ARM 26/2, 511:38
*Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70: 24
*FM 6, 18:515
*Joanns 2006: 60, No. 14:512
Joanns 2006: 62, No. 15:1318
Krebernik 1991: 64:411
*OBTR 153:410
*UET 5, 2:59
*Ziegler 1999a: 57: 419

To refute him is to become contaminated with unreality.

Jorge Luis Borges, The Avatars of the Tortoise

Chapter 5
The Modal Particle tua
In this chapter, we turn to a modal particle that primarily expresses refutation, tua.
This MP conveys the idea of refuted expectations and carries the complex meaning of
assuming A, but in fact B. The function of tua can be therefore labeled as counterassertion, or a refuter.
In spring 2006, there appeared in Paris a series of advertisements promoting the
menswear company Jules.1 One publicity photo for this campaign featured a virile
young man hugging and cuddling an affectionate woman. The caption said: Il parat
que les hommes sont machos ... (il parat).2 Thus, the expression il parat appeared
twice in the advertisement. First, it raised an assumptiona conjecture regarding some
general characteristics of mens behavior. Then il parat served to refute the assumption just raised, almost ridiculing it. Briefly, it functions as a counter-assertion. The
repetition of the exact expression carried an ironic effect: it seems that ... (well, perhaps) it seems, (but in fact it is not so). counter-assertion is a known component in
various modal systems.3 In some languages, such as French, this category is revealed
through periphrastic expressions. In Akkadian, however, this function is grammaticalized through the MP tua.
As with the other MPs discussed hitherto, a literary figure is called for in order to
introduce the MP under discussion. In the OB pseudo-epigraphic composition Sargon
the Conquering Hero, the heroic founder of the Old Akkadian Empire is described in
one of his daring exploits in a Macbeth-like scene:
Westenholz 1997: 6870:5759:
it-ta-a-ba-at ar-rum-ki-in / a-na ma-tim a -ta-ra-pa--tim / tu-a ge-ri-ma
q-i-tum ig-re-e-u
1. http://www.jules.fr (accessed 2 June 2006).
2. It seems that men are macho (it seems)the second il parat was typeset in smaller letters. Similarly, two other ads in the campaign featured a young couple leaning on one other. The accompanying text
was: Il parat que les hommes naimet pas la mode ... (il parat), It seems that men do not love fashion
... (it seems) and Il parat que les homes sont insensibles ... (il parat), It seems that men are insensitive
... (it seems).
3. Palmer 2001: 17, 59.

94

The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distributiontua

95

Sargon had (barely) ventured into the land of Uta-rapatim, (when), as if he were
hostile, the forest waged war against him.
The forest seemed to be hostile (as human beings are), but in fact it only seemed so,
whereas in fact it was not. In this chapter, I will describe this interesting MP, delineate
its syntactic characteristics and semantic scope, and linger over its relation to other MPs,
especially to the irrealis particle man.
The Attestations:
Generic and Geographical Distribution
The corpus for study of this MP consists of 27 published cases of tua: 16 examples
are gathered from Mari documents and 11 from texts originating from central Mesopotamia (3 of which were found in literary texts).4 This distribution suggests that, as with
pqat, midde, and wuddi, we are dealing with a MP that is principally characteristic of
epistolary discourse.5 Note, however, that, contrary to pqat, tua in the literary texts
is not found in dialogues but in a descriptive phrase6 or in an inner deliberation monologue.7 A few more cases of tua in post-OB literary texts, some of which are very fragmentary, are known.8 These are not treated here.
Normally, the spelling of tua is simply tu-a-(ma), but occasionally the last vowel
is lengthened: tu-a-a-ma.9 These sporadic attestations do not provide enough evidence
to support the idea that the vowel was generally long; in all likelihood, these spellings
should be considered as prosodic lengthening, which may be caused by the enclitic
particle ma.10 The available data also does not support the transliteration of this MP
with doubled : even if explicit spelling of doubled consonants is not too common in
OB, one nevertheless expects at least occasional attestation of plene writing of this sort.11
The occasional occurrence of the spelling with doubled consonant results from the (no
doubt correct) etymology, which connects tua with tuum, hostile, malicious talk.
But again, the examples at hand do not support this hypothetical spelling as the standard
spelling and the MP should simply be read tua (short vowel, no doubling of the //).
Previous Studies of tua
Various scholars who have attempted to define the meaning and function of tua
von Soden, Landsberger, Held, Lambert and Millard, and Durand12reached roughly
4. In AnSt 33 (1983) 146:10, tua does not occur. The line reads [i]-tu a-ma -q-at-tu- zi-ik-ra.
5. Counter-assertion is an important component in discourse systems; see Palmer 2001: 59.
6. Westenhotz 1997: 6870:5759.
7. Lambert and Millard 1969, 94: iii 4850, Held 1961: 8: iii 2023.
8. See Krebernik and Streck 2001: 67 n. 88, 71, and now also CAD T 495 (c) s.v. tua.
9. AbB 9, 39:6 ... 21; Sumer 14, 28:1319.
10. Contra Speiser 1947: 32324 and LAPO 17, p. 415.
11. Contra LAPO 17, 415 and Krebernik and Streck 2001: 66ff. Note that even in later sources there is
no explicit attestation of the spelling *tua.
12. Von Soden 1949: 385 n. 1; 1950: 18790; 1971: 68; AHw 1374a; MSL 4, 190; Held 1961: 22; Lambert and Millard 1969: 162; LAPO 18, pp. 599600.

96

The Modal Particle tua

the same conclusion, namely that this MP denotes irrealis or potentialis. The CDA
translates tua with it could have been that, it was as though.13 More refined definitions of tua, based on the verbal tense accompanying the MP, are also offered. A
distinction has been made between tua followed by the past tense and tua followed by
the present. The former denotes, following Durand, irrel du pass, and the latter irrel du prsent, translated with on aurait dit que, on dirait que.14 In the same way,
the perfect tense occurring with tua is said to denote, according to von Soden, Irrealis
der Vergangenheit.15 Recently, CAD T proposed a range of translations tua: as if, in
faith, perhaps.16 Strangely enough, the actual translations of many of the OB examples
in the CAD article do not make use of the suggestions found at the head of the article but
render tua with different translations, probably fitting better the given subject of each
particular text (so, e.g., do you suppose that ..., certainly ..., I seemed ...,
must I ..., in my opinion ...). This situation makes it clear that further study of
this lemma is needed.
Finally, some suggestions have taken tua to be a synonym of midde, with all the array of translations offered for midde. Hence, Jacobsens verily or surely, Lamberts
indeed, Wilckes gewi, Charpins assurment, George and Al-Rawis surely,
and Finets peut-tre.17
Theoretical analyses of the role that tua holds within the OB modal system must
examine its relation vis--vis the enclitic particle man, indisputably the principal means
of denoting irrealis in OB. The problem, simply put, is to explain how two different
MPs, tua and man, each of which having distinctive syntactic and contextual characteristics, can appear in the same corpus with seemingly identical semantic and modal
signification: irrealis. As already noted,18 it is quite possible that two different elements
may function synchronically in the same paradigm. However, from a functional point
of view, one expects that the two elements would not be equally productive (i.e., one of
them would be predominant, in the process of replacing the other) or that they would not
be operative in the same environment (i.e., the use of each of the elements will be determined syntactically or contextually). Just as likely, a simpler possibility is that there
are semantic differentiations between the two apparently equivalent elements that may
explain their coexistence in the same system.
A way out of this quandary was suggested in 1994 by Leong. In his unpublished
(and unjustifiably neglected) dissertation, Leong proposes differentiating between
13. CDA 411a.
14. Durand 2000: 599600.
15. Von Soden 1950: 188.
16. CAD T 494, s.v.
17. Jacobsen 1946: 137 n. 17; Lambert 1960: 35:83; Wilcke 1968: 230; ARM 26/2, 323:4; George and
Al-Rawi 1998: 197:119 (in my opinion, surely for tua-ma in this line misses the point. The sufferer goes
to sleep hoping that his troubles will pass in the morning. However, as he himself finds out, his bad luck
continues. Thus, his previous assumption is refuted by his own experience, leading to the use of tua). Finet:
ARM 15 27374.
18. Wasserman 2006: 153.

A Semantic and Functional Definition oftua

97

counterfactual conditionals, which are indicated by man, and suppositional clauses,

which, especially in OB letters, are indicated either by the expression kma a, as that,
as if, or by the MP tua.19 The importance of this distinction lies in the fact that it
breaks the all-too-general term irrealis into semantic and modal subcategories. Once
it is recognized that there are crucial differences between hypothetical, suppositional,
speculative, and assumptive sentencessubcategories that should be kept apartthe
coexistence of different irrealis MPs in the same modal system are easily explained.
The first step in this direction was taken by von Soden, who pithily pointed out that
tua should be distinguished from other irrealis constructions (marked with man) because the latter form a subgroup of conditional sentences, whereas tua sentences are
not conditionals.20 Von Sodens and Leongs approach has not only the methodological
advantage of analyzing more accurately the general term irrealis but also accounts
more satisfactorily for the OB data and manages to assign a different function to two
separate MPs.
Recently, a few analytical studies of tua have been published. Krebernik and Streck
in their study of OB irrealis constructions also treated the particle tua (therefore postulating a functional proximity between man and tua, not taking Leongs discussion into
account). The authors summed up earlier studies, proposed an etymology for the MP,
and offered for tua the meaning of falsche Meinung, or falschen Anschein, similar
to the use of scheinbar in German.21 Triggered by Krebernik and Streck, I published in
2002 a short note on the syntax of tua22 and in 2006 a comprehensive study of this MP.23
A Semantic and Functional Definition of tua
The main topic of this section is the relationship of tua to the MP man or, in other
words, the question whether tua is a MP denoting irrealis.
tua vs. -man
At the outset, tua has been tagged as a counter-assertion or a refuter because
this MP is used in verbal interactions between two parties, signifying that an assumption of one participantan assumption that had actual consequences on the state of
affairswas eventually refuted. A crucial point in adequately understanding this MP is
that tua concerns notionsnot direct events; presuppositions about realitynot reality
itself. As an epistemic particle, tua refers to judgments, beliefs, and assumptionsnot
to propositions about the actualization or nonactualization of events. This is the crucial
distinction between tua and the enclitic MP man: the latter deals with nonactualized
events, not with beliefs. In some cases, however, the distinction in use of the two MPs is
19. Leong 1994: 123, 224. Cf. AbB 14, 125:19.
20. Von Soden 1950: 189: [tua] ist ... eine besondere Art von Irrealispartikel auerhalb von konditionalen Satzgefgen.
21. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 67.
22. Wasserman 2002.
23. Wasserman 2006.

98

The Modal Particle tua

hard to discern. Let us examine two passages, both of them describing a person who appears to be asleep: the first passage uses tua, the second uses the irrealis particle man:
ARM 27, 115:1326:
i-na u4-mi-im a a-na nu-ku-r[i-im] / [p]a-nam i-ku-nu / mu-u-la-lam i-na
na-ap-[-ri-]u / -a-ar-bi-im-ma il-KI-ma d u m u-u / ki-a-as-s i-na g r
zabar / ik-ki-s a-na-ku i-tu a-[-li]m / mu-u-la-lam ak-u-dam-ma / u-
ki-ma pa-ni-u a-na e-ri-ia / s-u-ra-am-ma a-na -tim i-te-er-ba-am / a-na
i-ni-u tu-a-ma a-al-la-ku / a-na da-ki-ia / pa-ni-u [i]-ku-nam a-i-i / l
[]a-a-tu a-ba-at-ma / a-na ne-pa-ri-im -e-ri-i[b-]u
On the day when he intended to go, in the siesta, he took a deep sleep in his
lodgings, when his son cut his throat with a bronze dagger. I had ( just) arrived
from the field at noontime, when he, he turned to me, entered the housein his
eyes I was seemingly asleepand turned to kill me. I pounced, caught that man
and arrested him.
The MP tua in this passage designates the deranged mans false assumption that the
speaker was asleep, although in fact he was not and eventually managed to arrest his attacker. The other passage from the OB Epic of Gilgame, which uses the enclitic man,
recounts Gilgame telling the wise alewife Siduri his sorrows, seeing Enkidus body
lying in front of him:
George 2003: 27879 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii 59:
ur-ri mu-i e-li-u ab-ki / -ul ad-di-i-u a-na q-b-ri-im / ib-ri-ma-an i-taab-bi-a-am a-na ri-ig-mi-ia / se-b-et u4-mi-im se-b mu-i-a-tim / a-di tu-ultum im-q-tam i-na ap-p-u
I wept over him day and night. I did not give him up for burialhad only
my friend risen at my cry!for seven days and seven nights, until a maggot
dropped from his nostril.24
Both texts describe a basic similar situation. In the Mari letter, the man is not asleep but
awake; in the Gilgame passage, Enkidu is not asleep but dead. What is the difference
between these two similar scenes? Why is tua used in the first case, while the enclitic
irrealis particle man is used in the second? The main difference lies in the fact that tua
is a two-stage particle, which signifies a sudden increase in the amount of knowledge
available to the speaker regarding the state of affairs: at first, one assessed the state of
affairs as A, but ultimately it became evident that it is in fact B.25 In contrast, man is a
24. Note that I translate this line with Hecker (1994: 665), in contrast with Tournay and Shaffer (1994:
203) and George (2003: 279). As I understand it, the sentence in line 7 is not a citation of Gilgames
actual speech while crying over Enkidu but an exclamation said in retrospect, at the time of the meeting
with Siduri, when the improbability of this past action was already evidenthence the use of the irrealis
particle man.
25. Wittgenstein 1974 (1949): 160: doubt comes after belief.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

99

one-stage, post hoc particle: it does not involve any sudden shift in the speakers standpoint, allowing him a new appreciation of the situation, nor does this enclitic particle
render any dramatic augmentation in the amount of available knowledge. In narrative
terms, this results in the apparently sleeping man in the Mari letter awakening suddenly
(tua), while Enkidu does not and will never not come back to life (-man). In mental and
emotional terms, the difference between the two MPs is that between surprise and re
assessment (tua) and giving way, disappointment, and sorrow for something unfulfilled
(-man). So, the two MPs do share an irrealis component, but in tua this nonreality
aspect refers only to the first stage of the assessment of the state of affairs; the second
stage cuts through nonreality and returns to reality. As for man, this MP remains in
the domain of nonreality.
I have already stressed that tua concerns assessments of reality, while man concerns
reality itself or, more accurately, nonactualization of reality. In the Gilgame passage,
there is no evaluation of reality and no refuting of an assumption about reality: the particle man refers to reality itself as it is known to the speaker, conveying that a certain
eventEnkidus resurrectiondid not happen, although the speaker was hoping very
much that it would. If, hypothetically, a witness could observe Gilgame while he was
crying over Enkidus body and refusing to let him be buried, he would have probably
described this scene with tua: Gilgame was crying over Enkidu, trying to wake him
up, assuming (tua) that he is only asleep. However, the passage in the epic does not
present an evaluation of Gilgames assumptions or behavior but focus on his actual
deeds. This is a classical case of counterfactuality.
With this lengthy discussion of the differences between tua and man, we now turn
to the syntactic and semantic description of tua.26
The Syntactic Profile of tua
1. Discourse Domains
The MP tua is operative in relation to all three discourse domains: the locutory,
the allocutory, and the delocutory.27 In other words, the false assumption, marked
by tua, can be of the speaker,28 the addressee,29 or a third party involved in the matter.30
26. An outline of the syntactic and semantic profile of tua is found in Wasserman 2002.
27. To avoid confusion, it must be kept in mind that the discourse domain is decided by checking who
makes the false assumption, not whom this assumption concerns. Thus, e.g., in MARI 6, 338:3341 the
false assumption concerns the addressee (the king) but it is attributed to the general public; hence, this case
belongs to the delocutory domain. In FM 1, 115:47 and in FM 1, 127:418, the false assumption concerns
the speaker but it is attributed to the addressee; hence, it belongs to the allocutory domain.
28. AbB 6, 194:2226; ARM 3, 64:916; ARM 27, 151:2331; Held 1961: 8: iii 2023; Lambert and
Millard 1969: 94: iii 4850 (and one unpublished text).
29. AbB 5, 76:43; AbB 7, 60:510; AbB 7, 60:1116; AbB 9, 39:6 ... 21; AbB 9, 6:624; ARM 1,
21: 5 ... 15; ARM 2, 6:416; Durand 1991: 57:2930; FM 1, 115:47; FM 1, 127:418; FM 8, 19:48.
30.ARM 1, 08:510; ARM 1, 62:514; ARM 1, 73:1423; ARM 26/2, 298:2939; ARM 26/2,
323:35; ARM 27, 115:1326; Dossin 1973: 18485:413; Westenhotz 1997: 6870:5759; MARI 6,
338:3341; Sumer 14, 28:1319.

100

The Modal Particle tua

An examination of the various examples shows that, when tua refers to the speaker
or the addressee, it is usually best translated by the expression I / you assume / (have
assumed) that ..., (but in fact ...). When tua is applied to the third person or impersonal voice, it is best translated by the expressions (it is/was) as if ..., (but in
fact....), or rumor has it that ..., (but in fact....), or seemingly.31 A good example for tua used in the locutory domain, where the false assumption is made by the
speaker himself, is found in a love dialogue, where the woman expresses her longing to
the beloved one in the following terms:
Held 1961: 8: iii 2023:
an-a(Text:n[a]) i-na-ia da-an-ni-i {i}/ da-al-pa-a-ku i-na i-ta-ap-lu-si-u / tua i-ba-a ba-ab-[t]i / u4-mu-um it-ta-la-ak a-li [ma-ri or: be-l]
My eyes are very tired, I am weary of looking out for him. It seems (to me) that
he is walking in my quarter. The day has gone by: where is [my darling]?
The use of tua in the allocutory domain is found in a Babylonian letter:
AbB 9, 39:621:
i-na bd- tibiraki ni-in-na-me-er-ma / 1 g u ru d u e-ri-i-ka-ma / ...... -la
tu-a-bi-lam / [t]u-a-a-ma urudu a tu-a-ba-lam / [a-n]a a-ka-li-ia / [x] x-ma
urudu
tn- s al urudumar / [a-n]a ma-na-a-ti ni-a-ka-nu-ma / [ e]-a-am nu-e20el-li-a-am-ma / [m]i-im-ma a e-li-ni ti-u- / [n]i-ip-pa-lu-ka
We met in Bad-tibira and I asked you for one talent of copper.... You did not
send (it). (You act) as if the copper that you are sending me was for my (personal)
use. We have sworn to provide hatchets and hoes as equipment to produce barley
and to pay you off whatever we owe you.
Another example of tua referring to the second person is found in a Mari letter:
FM 1, p. 127:418:32
a-um na 4 - du8--a a be-l -a-bi-lam / k -b ab b ar-u i-si-ka-am umma-a-mi / k-ba bbar na 4 -du8--a a-a-tu i-na a es-si-ka-kum / wa-tarum-ma li-te-r ma--um la i-m[a]-a- / an-ni-tam be-l i-pu-ra-am um-ma
i-na k-babb ar na 4 -du8--a / a be-l i-si-ka-am 10 s u -lu-ma 1/3 m a - n a
k- babbar / -ma-a-u-nim lu- ki-i e-mi tu-a-ma / -g al-lam la am-ra-kuma a-pa-ra-am an-n-em / be-l i-pu-ra-am -l u -m a um-ma a-na-ku-ma/
na 4 - du8- -a a be-l -a-bi-lam / e-li k -b ab b ar a be-l i-si-ka-am lu-uddi-in-[]u-ma / 10 su -lu-ma 1/3 ma-na k -b ab b ar lu wa-te-er-ma / lu-ul-q
in-na-an-na / ki-ma na-a-pa-ar-ti be-l-ia / n a 4 -d u8- -a a-a-tu a-na-ad-diin-ma ...
31. Cf. MSL 4, 190 and Held 1961: 22.
32. LAPO 18, 855.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

101

Concerning the rock-crystal with which my lord has sent me and whose price
he fixed to me, saying: the price of that rock-crystal may be higher than what I
have fixed for you but it should not be lower! Thats what my lord wrote to me.
If they try to reduce 10 or 20 shekels off the price of the rock-crystal that my lord
has fixed for medont I have my orders? You (the king) must have assumed
that I am not acquainted with the (practice of the) palace, that my lord has sent
me this message or that I said (to myself): the rock-crystal which my lord has
sent through meI may sell it for a higher price than that which my lord has
fixed for me, so that there will be a benefit of 10 or 20 shekels that I will take
In accordance with the missive of my lord I will sell the rock-crystal.
Finally, an example of tua used in the delocutory domain is found, e.g., in a letter
sent by Sams-Addu to his son Yasma-Addu, with the typical severe reproaching tone
of the mighty monarch:
ARM 1, 62:514:33
a-ni-tam a-um a-ab-[du-ma-dda-gan du m u] / pa-ia-la-su-mu- a-na [me-eru-tim] / a-ka-nim ta-a-pu-ra-am ki-ma a t[a-a-pu-ra-am] / pa-ab-du-mad
da-gan-ma a-na me-er-u-[tim] / a-ka-nim i-re-ed-du mi-nu-um a-p--uss/ tu-a-ma ma-tam ra-pa--tam i-a-ap-pa-[a]r / tu-ut-tu-ulki li-i-pu-ur
me-er-u-tam li-pu- / ki-ma l-me tap-pu-u ma-tam ra-pa--tam i-a-appa-ru / u-[ t]u-ut-tu-ulki li-i-pu-ur ki-ma ma-tim / a tap-[pu-u] i-a-appa-ru u-
Another thing. You have written to me concerning the appointment of abdumaDagan [the son of] Ayla-sumu for the office of Merm. As you have written
to me, abduma-Dagan is indeed adequate for the office of Merm. What is his
(unimportant) governership?! (It is) as if he governs a vast country! He should
govern Tuttul and exercise the Merm-office! Just as his colleagues govern a
vast country, so should he govern Tuttul. And just as the land that his colleagues
govern, (so should) he.
If we introduce the categories of perspectivity and subjectivity to the discussion,
we realize that, because tua operates in all the three discourse domains, it is hard to
define it as a typically perspectivizing or subjectivizing particle. The false assumption or
belief that is eventually refuted can belong to the addressee, a third person involved, or
even to the speaker himself. In the latter case, the speaker is split as if in two: he is one
subject who previously held the wrong assumption and also the second subject who refuted it. Thus, tua creates a fascinating double process: perspectivization (regarding the
consciousness that held the refuted belief) and subjectification (regarding the consciousness that refuted the wrong belief). Consider the following letter sent to Zimr-lm:
33. LAPO 17, 639.

102

The Modal Particle tua

ARM 3, 64:916:
f
ku-un-i-ma-tum / i-tu u4 4-ka m mar-a-at / a-na-ku tu-a ha-u-um-ma / a u4
1- kam lu u4 2-kam / im-[hu-u]s-s-i[m-m]a / a-di i-n[a]-an-n[a a-na be-l-ia]
/ -ul a-[pu-ur] / i-na-an-na [be-l lu i-de]
The lady Kunm-mtum is sick for 4 days now. I assumed it was (only) a minor
disease that struck her for 1 or 2 days. Hence, up to now I didnt w[rite to my
lord], now [let my lord be informed].
In these lines, Kibr-Dagan, the writer, proves to be a shrewd courtier, well acquainted
with bureaucratic subtleties: he takes responsibility for the decision not to inform the
king about the disease of the princess (thus showing his concern to the king, who should
not be bothered with trivialities), but at the same timeby using tuahe admits that
his previous assumption was wrong: Kunm-mtum was more ill than he believed at
first. The acknowledgment of his mistake is formulated elliptically: I assumed A, hence
I didnt write to my lord. Now I have writtennamely, now my previous assumption
proved to be wrong, but this is not explicitly said
2. Verbal Tenses
Verbal forms in tua phrases are always in the indicative, never in the subjunctive. In
addition, tua is entirely incompatible with deontic verbal forms (precative, imperative,
and prohibitive). This constraint has also been identified in the case of the quadriad of
evidential MPs: pqat, midde, wuddi, and anna.34 On the other hand, there is no restriction on the tense of the verbal forms in tua clauses.35 The present tense is attested 10
times, the past tense 9 times, the stative attested 4 times, and the perfect is found in 3
times. In 2 cases, tua governs a nominal phrase.36 Note the following example with a
past tense verb:
ARM 27, 151:2331:
a-um up-pi l-me [ pa]-e4-ri a-di i-na-an-na / [a]-na e-er be-l-ia la
[u-b]u-lu i-na a-ni-im u4-mi-im a a-na k -d i n g i r-raki ni-ru-bu / []a-ba-am
ip-q-id-ma a-bu-um ma-du-um pa-e4-er up-p pa-e4-ri i-na qa-ti-u il-q-e
34. This restriction is not valid in the case of the irrealis particle man; see ARM 26, 469:1016 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 59).
35. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 67: Die verwendeten Verbalformen sind dieselben, die man aufgrund
des jeweiligen Sachverhalts in gewhnlichen Hauptstzen erwarten wrde. Cf. also Metzler 2002: 644
(3.2.4.4) and 690 (3.3.2.4).
36. Present tense: AbB 7, 60:510 (in broken context); AbB 7, 60:1116; ABIM 4:1113; ARM 1,
08:510; ARM 1, 62:514; ARM 1, 73:1423; ARM 2, 6:416; Durand 1991: 57:2930; FM 1, 115:47;
Held 1961: 8: iii 2023.
Past tense: AbB 9, 61:624; ARM 3, 64:916; ARM 26/2, 298:2939; ARM 27, 151:2331; Dossin
1973: 18485:413; FM 8, 19:48; Westenhotz 1997: 6870:5759; Sumer 14, 28:1319 (and one unpublished text).
Stative: ARM 2, 6:416 (a present form comes after the stative); ARM 27, 115:1326; FM 1, 127:418;
Lambert and Millard 1969: 94: iii 4850.
Perfect: AbB 6, 194:2226; ARM 1, 21:5 ... -15; MARI 6, 338:3341.
Nominal phrase: AbB 9, 39:621; ARM 26, 323:35.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

103

/ [t]u-a i-na u4-mi-u-ma up-pa-am a-ti a-na e-er be-l-ia -a-bi-lam i-na
li-ib-bi-u/ [k]i-a-am i-ba-at um-ma u-ma up-p l -m e pa-e4-ri a-na e-er
lugal -a-ba-al-ma / [it-t]i a-bi-im u-te-le-me-en6 a-di a up-p ba-a-dili-im il-li-kam ki-ma up-p pa-e4-ri / [la u-bu-l]u -ul i-de-e e-me-ma a-na
i-ba-al-p-AN ki-a-am aq-bi um-ma a-na-ku-ma / [o o o o] x a-ba-am ta-ap-qid a-bu-um ma-du-um pa-e4-er am-mi-nim a-[d]i i-na-an-na / [up-p pa-e4-ri
a-na ]e-er luga l la tu-a-bi-il5 an-ni-tam aq-bi-[um]-ma i-[q-u]l
Concerning (the fact that) the list of absentees was not sent until now to my
lordthe day after we entered Babylon, he (Ibl-p-El) inspected the army and
many soldiers were absent. He kept the list of absentees in his hands. I assumed
that on that day he had sent this list to my lord, (but) in his heart he must have
thought: if I send the list of missing people to the king, my relations with the
army will be ruined. Until the letter of Bad-lm arrived here, I did not know
that the list of absentees [was not yet sent]. When I heard (this) I told Ibl-p-El:
You have inspected the army and many soldiers were missing. Why did you
not send [the absence list t]o the king until now? This I said to him and he kept
silent.
Yamum, the speaker in this text, is trying to maneuver himself out of an embarassing
situation. He explains to the king that he had naively assumed that an important document was sent by his colleague, when in fact, as he learned later, the document was not
sent at all. In this case, all the components governed by tua are in the past: the wrong assumption (Ibl-p-El sending the document), the event to which the assumption referred
(the large number of absentees), and even the sudden awareness that refuted the original
assumption (Bahd-lms letter)all happened in the past.
The same MP can refer not only to a past assumption but also to a future event;
consider:
ARM 1, 8:510:
a-um dumu-me ya-i-la-nim a ma-a-ri-ka / tu-a wa-ar-ka-nu-um sa-limu-um / ib-ba-a-i-ma i-na qa-tim ku-ul-la-u-nu aq-bi / i-na-an-na mi-im-ma
sa-li-mu-um / it-ti ya-i-la-nim -ul i-ba-a-i / a a-ba-ti-u-ma a-da-ab-bu-ub/
dum u- me ya-i-la-nim ma-la ma-a-ri-ka / a-u-n-e i-ba-a-u- / wu-e-erma! i-na mu-i-im-ma li-mu-tu
Concerning the people of Yailnum: assuming that there will be a peace treaty
in the future, I have ordered to have them at hand. Now, there will be no peace
treaty whatsoever with the Yailnumit is their capturing that I plan. Give
orders, so that the people of Yailnum, as many as they are before you, will be
put to death tonight.37
37. Cf. Rainey 1976: 55: As for the Yilnum tribesmen who are with you, I had said to hold them
just in case peace should be established. Now, there is not peace with Yilnum; it is to seize them that I
am planning.

104

The Modal Particle tua

Sams-Addu presents his former political assessment, according to which peace with
the Ya'ilnum tribe was at hand. This presupposition, as the king himself admits, now
proved to be wrong, and hence the royal orders are changed. Thus, past assumption, referring to a future event, with a sudden reassessment in the present. The transition from
past to presentor in modal terms from nonreality to realityis marked by the switch
from tua to inanna.38 We see that tua is indifferent to tense: this MP can be used with
regard to past events or to present-future events. The function of this MP is to denote
nonfulfillment of previous expectations, whether past or present.
3. Negation
There are five cases of negation in the corpus of tua examples. In four texts the negation particle l is used (once in a relative clause).39 Note the following clear case:
AbB 9, 61:624:
ab-nu- a i-na x [...] / a-i-i-im ta-m[u-ri] / ta-a-ta-na-pa-[ri-(im)] / tu-a
i-na q-ti-ia i[b-b]a-[i-a-(ma)] / ak-k[i]-ir-ki-ma a-na i-ta-pu-[r]i / a ta-a-tana-pa-ri / a-mi-id-ma la ad-di-ik-ki-ma / an-ni-a-tim ta-a-ta-na-pa-ri / ab-ni
a-ar ta-mu-ri-i-na-ti / a-na ia-i-im -ul id-di-nu-nim / a-ar i-ba-a-i-a-ma/
lu-u-ta-a-i[z-ma] / lu-mu-ur-i-na-ti-ma / 10 g n k -b ab b ar lu-u-q-ul-ma/
lu-ul-q-a-i-na-ti / ur-ra-am i-nu-ma ni-na-m[a]-ru / ki-ma i-na q-ti-ia / la
i-ba-a-i-a-ma / la a-mi-du ta-la-ma-di
(Concerning) the stones that you saw in another place, you write me again
and again. As if I had the stones in my hands and I denied (them) to you, and
responding to the constant requests that you keep writing, I hid and did not give
(them) to you. These you keep writing to me. To me they did not give the stones,
in the place you saw them. I would like to know the (exact) place where they are
and see them, (and then) I would pay ten shekels of silver and take them. And
tomorrow, when we meet, you will learn yourself that they are not in my hands
and that I did not hide (them from you).
At the end of its article on tua, CAD T 495 notes:
Since the negative particle used in clauses with tua is la and not ul, the most likely function of tua(ma) is that of an interrogative particle, usually introducing rhetorical questions to which a negative answer is expected.

The present examination of this MP does not accord with this comment. First of all,
the contexts of most tua clauses in our corpus does not support interpreting them as
rhetorical questions. Second, there are other MPs that may take the negative l, such as
ka and occasionally man, without expressing rhetorical questions. And third, in one
38. AbB 7, 60:1116; ARM 1, 8:510; ARM 3, 64:916; (ARM 27, 151:2331); MARI 6, 338:3341.
So already Durand, LAPO 18, p. 16 note f: De faon normale, inanna marque le retour la ralit, aprs
lexpression de lirrel.
39. AbB 7, 60:1116 (in a relative clause!); AbB 9, 61:624; FM 1, 127:418; Sumer 14, 28:1319.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

105

case of tua, the negative particle ul is found (although very likely a result of a scribal
mistake). This letter, from Sammetar to Zimr-lm, presents the writers deliberations
about the relations between the king of Mari and the king of Yamad:
Dossin 1973: 18485:413:40
i-na pa-ni-tim a-um e-em a-na e-er / pia-ri-im-li-im a-pa-ri-im / e4-maam ma-a-ar be-l-ia ki-a-am a-ku-un / um-ma a-na-ku--ma / tu-a e-bu-ur
ze-er be-l-ia mi-lum it-ba-al / -lu-ma i-na ri-i--im ir-ra-i-i-ma / be-l
ku--u-dam -ul i-le-i/ -ul i-na qa-at nu-ku-ra-a-tim / ze-er ma-a-at be-l-ia
e-bu-ur u-ul-mi-im / []-ul i--id
Previously I have submitted a report to my lord about writing to Yarm-lm
concerning the barley in these terms: (it is) as if a seasonal flood carried away
my lords crop of grain, or an inundation washed it away, and my lord couldnt
arrive (there in time). (But) is it not due to hostilities that he (i.e., Zimr-lm)
didnt reap a peaceful harvest, the grain of my lords land?
How are we to explain the irregular appearance of ul in this text? In the Mari epistolary
corpus, one can sporadically find the negation ul in a context where l is normally expectedfor example, in umma sentences.41 It appears that the grammatical rules that
distinguished between ul and l were less strictly applied in Mari than in central Babylonia, where schooling and letter writing were more standardized. This may explain the
appearance of ul after tua in Dossin 1973: 18485:413. In this particular text, however, an additional explanation can be offered: grammatical attraction of the negative
particle to its immediate surrounding, namely, to the lma that is found within the tua
clause and to the two occurrences of the negative ul that are found in the next clause:
tua ebr zr bliya mlum itbal lma ina riim irraima u bl kuudum ul ilei ul
ina qt nukurtim zr mt bliya ebr ulmim ul id.
Although we would prefer to have more attestations, the examples at hand indicate
that l, not ul, is mainly employed as a negative particle in tua clauses. This finding stands in contrast to the situation in the other MPs treated thus far, for in the case
of pqat, midde, and wuddi, the negative particle was, without exception, ul. Looking
for comparable contexts in OB grammar, CAD T 495 identified parallels between tua
clauses and interrogative sentences, where the negation l is also required. This comparison, as I have stressed above, is not convincing and fails to result in satisfactory translations. Another context where l is obligatory and which offers a better semantic and
syntactic comparison with tua clauses is that of the conditional umma clauses. This is
true because tua clauses contain an inherent conditional component, juxtaposed with
an element of irrealis: as if.... The affinity of tua to umma is further treated below.
40. LAPO 16, 230. CAD T 495a fails to capture the special nuance of tua and translates this passage as
a rhetorical question: was it a flood that swept away the crop in my lords field?
41. See, e.g., ARM 26/1, 5:67; 66:24; 108-bis: 2627; 127:2021; 171:1011; ARM 27, 80:3536;
136:2527.

106

The Modal Particle tua

4. Position of the MP within the Clause

In all but three cases, tua is found at the head of the clause it governs. Subjectifying
glosses, which explicate and amplify the modal function of tua, may precede tua: ina
tamtiya tua ..., according to my estimations ...,42 and ana nu tuama ...,
in his eyes....43 An interesting case of this kind of subjectifying remark is the use of
the first-person independent pronoun: The lady Kun-mtum is sick for four days now.
I (for myself) assumed (anku tua) that it was (only) a minor disease that struck her
for one or two days....44 This personal pronoun magnifies the epistemic role of tua
as denoting the speakers (soon to be refuted) view on reality. Naturally, these ancient
explicative remarks are very helpful for modern scholars who struggle to discover the
full spectrum of tua.
Summing up the syntactic profile of tua presented until now, it appears that the syntax of tua bears some resemblance to that of the conditional particle umma. Both tua
and umma usually stand at the head of the clause they govern. Both particles allow a
wide variety of verbal tenses but preclude precatives or imperatives. Both particles without exception take indicative, not subjunctive verbs. And finally, and most importantly,
both tua and umma require the negation l, in contrast to all other epistemic MPs
hitherto examined, which take ul. However, tua has a more restricted syntactic usage
than umma. It is never attested in double constructions, such as umma A ... umma
B.... Thus, unlike umma and the MPs pqat and midde, tua cannot render alternative
or concessive clauses. Furthermore, in contrast to umma,45 no cases of tua preceded
by ua combination denoting concessionare known. So, after all, Speisers initial
notion, which led him tentatively to compare umma and tua on an etymological basis
(a suggestion he himself rejected),46 is not so far from the point, at least as seen from the
point of view of syntax.
5. Phrasal Arrangement
The typical construction of most tua passages is basically tripartite: the matter at
hand is described first, the false assumption regarding this matter (and occasionally
also the acts taken in consequence) come next, and the clause that recounts the facts
that refute the previous assumption are described last. This phrasal construction is more
precisely described as a topical clause (top. cl.), which specifies the background for the
tua clause, followed by a false assumption clause (f. ass. cl.), which finally leads to a
contrastive clause (contr. cl.) affirming the invalidity of the preceding false assumption and usually sealing the phrasal arrangement of tua passages. The false assumption
clause, or the contrastive clause, may lead to various corollaries in the form of orders or
42. ARM 1, 21: 5 ... 15. The same expression is also found in connection with the MP pqat; see FM
6, 25:2229.
43. ARM 27, 115:1326.
44. ARM 3, 64:916.
45. E.g., ARM 26/1, 207:29; FM 7 45:25
46. Speiser 1947.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

107

actions. These are found in a clause that I tag as a consequential clause (cons. cl.). The
contrastive clause is crucial in the modal role of the MP tua. It can be compared to a
category known in linguistic literature as counter-assertion. As defined by Palmer,
counter-assertion contradicts a previous statement or is intended to counter some presupposition the speaker suspects his addressee of entertaining.47
Three marks of demarcation (dem.) of the tua clause from the contrastive clause are
found. In the clear majority of the cases, the end of the tua clause is marked by that
is, the contrastive clause immediately succeeds the false assumption clause.48 In the rest
of the cases, the demarcation is obtained either by the conjunction inanna, now, or
but now,49 or, rarely, by contrastive u, but.50 (The enclitic particle ma serving as a
demarcation for the tua clause is not usually found; see, however, two such cases in 6
below.)
We can now examine closely the phrasal arrangement of tua passages. Let us examine first the basic phrasal arrangement at work, reintroducing a text already cited above:
ARM 1, 8:510:
Concerning the people of Yailnum, (top. cl.) assuming that there will be
a peace treaty in the future, (f. ass. cl.) I have ordered to have them at hand
(cons. cl.). Now (dem. inanna), there will be no peace treaty whatsoever with
the Yailnum: (contr. cl.) it is their capturing that I plan. Give orders, so
that the people of Yailanum, as many as they are before you, will be put to death
tonight. (cons. cl.)
Similar arrangement can also be identified in anoter letter already treated:
ARM 27, 115:1326:
On the day when he intended to go, in the siesta, he took a deep sleep in his
lodgings, when his son cut his throat with a bronze dagger. I had ( just) arrived
from the field at noontime, when he, he turned to me, entered the house, (top.
cl.) in his eyes I was seemingly asleep, (f. ass. cl.) and he turned to
kill me (cons. cl.). (dem. ) I pounced, caught that man and arrested him.
(contr. cl.)
In an alternative phrasal arrangement, the false assumption clause is preceded by a
contrastive question (contr. quest.), which is used to stress the fact that the previous
assumption was wrong. Consider the following:

47. Palmer 1986: 92.

48. AbB 6, 194:2226; AbB 9, 39:621; AbB 9, 61:624; [ABIM 4:1113]; ARM 1, 21:5 ... 15;
ARM 1, 73:1423; ARM 27, 115:1326; ARM 27, 151:2331; Dossin 1973:18485:413; [Durand 1991:
57:2930]; FM 1, 115:47; FM 1, 127:418; Goetze 1958: 28, No. 10:1319; Westenholtz 1997: 68
70:5759; Held 1961: 8: iii 2023; Lambert and Millard 1969: 94: iii 4850.
49. AbB 7, 60:510; ARM 1, 8:510; ARM 2, 6:516; ARM 3, 64:916; MARI 6, 338:3341. (See
again Durand, LAPO 18, p. 16 note f.)
50. [AbB 5, 76:43]; ARM 1, 62: 514; ARM 14, 27:48; ARM 26/2, 323:35(?).

108

The Modal Particle tua

ARM 1, 21:515:
a-um dumu i-ip-ri-im l te-el-mu-ni-i-imki ... am-mi-nim a-di i-na-an-na la
ta-a-ru-us-s / i-na ta-i-ma-a-ti-ia tu-a i-tu u4 20- k a m / ta-{x x}-a--ra-ass / [am-mi-nim -u]l ta--ra-a[s-s-m]a
Concerning the messenger of Dilmun ... (top. cl.) why havent you sent him
until now? (contr. quest.) According to my estimations I had assumed you
had sent him 20 days ago! (f. ass. cl.) (dem. ) Why dont you send him? ...
(contr. quest.)
In the following text, it impossible not to notice the ironic tone of the contrastive
questions that envelope the false assumption clause.
ARM 1, 73:1423:
a-ia-nu-um i-le-eq-q-e-em / -ul i-na e-im g e[ t i n] / a-na k -b ab b ar
it-ta-na-[d]i-in-ma / k-ba bbar a-a-ti i-ka-a-ra-am-ma -[-i-a-am] / .../
tu-a u-ur-ru-um a k-ba [bba r] / i-na a-al--u i-ba-a-i-ma / k -b ab b ar
i-le-q-a-am-ma ub-ba-lam / -ul i-na e-im g e t i n / k -b ab b ar a-a-ti
i-ka-a-ra-am-ma ub-ba-lam
Where would he take (the silver) from? Is it not from the grain, oil and wine
that he sells regularly, that he collects that silver and c[arries it to me]? (contr.
quest.) (It is) as if there is a mine of silver in his district, and he takes and
carries (the silver) to me! (f. ass. cl.) (dem. ) Is it not from the grain, oil,
and wine that he collects and carries that silver?! (contr. quest.)
A more elaborate alignment consists of a combination of the two phrasal arrangements just described, as in another letter from Sams-Addu to his son:
ARM 2, 6:516:
a-um a-la-ki-ka a-na e-ri-ia / ta-a-pu-ra-am / ki-i a-na e-ri-ia la ta-al-lakam / tu-a-ma i-na u-ba-at-den-llki-ma / wa-a-ba-ku / a-na e-ri-ia / ta-alla-kam-ma / u4 15-kam mi-im-ma ma-a-ri-ia/ tu-u-a-ab / [i-n]a-an-na i-na
re-e itiki-nu-nim / [a-na ka skal] a-al-la-ak / [at-ta a]-na ma-riki a-li-ik...,
You have written about your coming to me (top. cl.) What?! You should not
come to me! (contr. quest. with prohibition) You have assumed that since
I stay in ubat-Enlil you will come to me and stay with me for about 15 days
(f.ass. cl.). In fact (dem. inanna), in the beginning of month Kinnum I will
make [a journey]. [You,] go to Mari ... ! (contr. cl. with order)
It is to be noted that ARM 1, 21:515, ARM 1, 73:1423, and ARM 2, 6:516 reflect
a distinct personal epistolary style: all of these letters were written by Sams-Addu to
his maladroit son Yasma-Addu. The unique and unmistakable phrasal arrangement of

The Syntactic Profile oftua

109

these letters is characteristic of the kings phraseology.51 The idiosyncrasy of SamsAddus letters are due, I believe, to the fact that royal scribes did not dare to change the
monarchs dictation, which was recorded with special accuracy, if not verbatim. The
kings imposing personality may have deterred the clerks from altering his style to conform to the common epistolary norms of the era.52
To sum up the findings thus far: with some minor alternations, a fixed tripartite phrasal
arrangement is prevalent in tua passages: a topical clause, leading to a false assumption clause, culminating in a contrastive clause. This tripartite arrangement is typical of
epistolary texts but is also found in the literary text Held 1961: 8: iii 2023. Only two
passages in the epistolary corpus do not conform to this formula. In a letter of KibrDagan to Zimr-lm, the letter starts in medias res, without a topical clause, immediately
presenting the false assumption clause and the contrastive clause:
FM 8, 19:48:
t[u]-a-ma a-n[a qa-a]--na-anki / al-li-ik [u]p-p be-l-ia a-um gim / a
a-na [na4] le-q-e-em i-ba-tu / a-na ia-s-ad-di-ANki il-li-kam / mi-im-ma a-na
qa-a--na-anki -ul al-li-ik
You have assumed that I went to Qaunn (f. ass. cl.) , but (dem. u) the letter
of my lord concerning the ship that came to fetch the stone(s) reached to YasaddiEl (contr. cl.). (Hence,) I did not go at all to Qaunn. (cons. cl.)
The other letter that exhibits a different phrasal arrangement is a letter from Tell
armal, ancient aduppm, alongside the Diyl river in eastern Mesopotamia. In this
case, all the constituents of the tripartite arrangement exist, but in an unusual order. The
contrastive clause precedes the false assumption clause:
Goetze 1958: 28, No. 10:1319:
-ku-ul-tum / a ta-a-ma-am / a-na a-b-u-nu / ub-lu-ma -ul im-u-ru / tua-a-ma / e-am la ta-am-du-ud
The food that you bought for me, (top. cl.) they carried (it) to their fathers
house, and they did not receive (it) (contr. cl.) (dem. ) It is as if you have
(never) measured out barley (before)! (f. ass. cl.)
There is no parallel to these unusual phrasal alignments in other letters, but similar
uncommon arrangements of tua phrases can be found in the few literary texts of the
corpus. In the passage from the epic of Atra-hasis, the topical clause is absent and the
tua clause makes part of a contrastive question (a rhetorical question that requires no

51.On Sams-Addus letters language and style, see also Durand 1992b: 124. Eidem has noted the
unique form of Sams-Addus letters (Shemshra Letters, pp. 6869).
52. If indeed this is the case, one wonders whether Sams-Addu would demand his scribes to read back
to him the letters he has dictatedor, perhaps, was he able to read them himself?

110

The Modal Particle tua

answer). Here, too, the passage terminates with the false assumption clause, an arrangement that does not conform to the use of tua in letters:
Lambert and Millard 1969: 94: iii 4850:
e-te-el-li-i-ma a-na a-ma-i / tu-a wa-a-ba-a-ku / i-na bi-it na-ak-ma-ti
Shall I go up to heaven, (contr. quest.) as if I were to live in a treasure house?
(f.ass. cl.)

Equally interesting is the tua passage from the OB legend of Sargon, mentioned at
the beginning of this chapter:
Westenholz 1997: 6870:5759:
it-ta-ah-ba-at ar-rum-ki-in / a-na ma-tim a -ta-ra-pa--tim / tu-a ge-ri-ma
q-i-tum ig-re-e-u
Sargon had (barely) ventured into the land of Uta-rapatim, (top. cl.) (when),
as if he were hostile, the forest waged war against him. (f. ass. cl.)
The first sentence presents the protagonist and the circumstances of his actions, and it
therefore serves as a topical clause. A false assumption clause follows, without a contrastive clause, which is considered unnecessary, because it is clear to the audience that
the forest is not really an enemy and that its hostility is metaphoricalit is only as if
fighting against the king. In fact, tua functions in this text like k a, as if, thus creating a special kind of simile.53 It is worth comparing the use of tua in this literary text to
its employment in an OB letter:
AbB 6, 194:2226:
an-ni-a-tum wa-ar-ka-s-na / -ul ip-pa-ar-ra-as / {ip-pa-ar-ra-as} / tu-a-ma
am-tu-ut / ba-la-a-a-ku
Concerning these (things) one should not worry. (top. cl.) (It is) as if I am
dead (f. ass. cl.) (dem. ) (but) I am alive! (contr. cl.)54
This text supplies a good example of the difference between literary and epistolary
style. In the account regarding Sargon, when tua presented a manifestly improbable
assumption (the forest fighting against Sargon), the epic refrained from introducing the
contrastive clause after tua and trusted the common sense of the audience to fill the
information gap. By contrast, in the letter just mentioned, when the writer says that one
could consider him a dead mana blunt exaggerationhe does not leave any subtleties
to his addressee, but explains himself: I am alive!55
53. It is important to note that the construction k a is not found in the inventory of simile-markers in
OB literary texts (cf. Wasserman 2003: 131). For the relationship between the MP tua and the comparative
k a, as well as the question of the semantic proximity of tua and ka, see chap. 7 on ka.
54. CAD T 494 (a) translates this as a rhetorical question: am I dead perhaps? I am very much alive.
55. The idiomatic contrast dead-alive as a way to present ones difficulties is known from other OB
letters as well; see, e.g.: ARM 1, 57:516; ARM 10, 39:713; FM 2, 11:1415; MARI 6, 631:2123.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

111

6. tua and Other Particles

The combination tua-man
The collected material shows that tua is a solitary MP.56 In Babylonian, as far as the
evidence goes, it is never found in the company of other MPs.57 In Mari letters, however,
the irrealis MP -man can be appended to tua:
ARM 26/2, 298:2939:
f
um-mi fbe-el-tim a i-tu qa--nim / il-li-ka tu-a-ma-an / i-tu fbe-el-tum
-e-re-et / m i-i -ra-ab-bi-i / e4-em-a am-ra-at / m u n u s e-ti u4-um
wa--e / fbe-el-tim i-tu qa--nimki / pa-ra-su-um-ma ip-ru-su-ni-i-ma / a-na
ma-riki it-ti fbe-el-tim / i--ar-du-n-i-im mi-im-ma e4-em -g al-lim -ul
am-ra-at
The nurse of Bltum who came with her from Qana, if only (tua-man)this
woman brought Bltum up since she was young, and she knows her habits(if
only) they had separated this woman the day Bltum left Qana! But (ma) they
have sent her to us with Bltum to Mari, and so (u) she does not know anything
at all about the customs of the palace.
A close reading of this passage demonstrates that it is entirely unlike other tua passages
in the corpus. More specifically, the syntax and the modal function of tua in this passage are different from other tua passages. The tua clause in ARM 26/2 298:2939
is split in two, and the encapsulated clause that is inserted between the two parts of the
tua clause (itu bltum eret sinnitum urabbi u ma amrat) is not affected by the
MP but belongs to the background sentence preceding the tua clause. Furthermore, this
is also the only case in the corpus where ma serves to mark the end of the tua clause.58
But more importantly, in this case, tua cannot be translated as if or assuming that,
as in all the other cases we have met. As a matter of fact, tua in this letter is not translatable at all, since the passage does not concern assumptions but factuality: the speaker
expresses his wish that a certain event had not happenedalthough it did. Briefly, this
is a typical irrealis construction. The only way, therefore, to give this phrase a reasonable meaning, in accordance with the rest of the corpus, is to ignore the tua particle and
relate only to the man. Thus, contrary to Krebernik and Streck,59 who thought that man
in this case is used to emphasize the MP tua and that the main modal meaning of the
56. The combination, or the cooccurrence of different modal expressions in a given phrase, have been
examined in various general linguistic studies: see, e.g., Hoye 2005b: 149495.
57. The enclitic man can be appended to other MPs. For minde, see Falkenstein 1963: 57, ii: 13ff. and
IM 67230:20 cited in CAD M/2 84a; for wuddi, see ARM 28, 179:36; for l, see Lambert 1989: 326:71 and
YOS 11, 24: i 7. Other MPs, however, such as assur, are not compatible with man; see Wasserman 1994:
334 n. 74 and Krebernik and Streck 2001: 56 n. 22.
58. Similarly Charpin, ARM 26/1 27 note g.
59. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 62: es sah so aus, als htte man diese Frau, als Bltum Qan verlie,
abgesondert. Note that Ziegler (2006: 72), not fully in line with Krebernik and Streck, translates: wenn
es auch sein mag, da diese Frau die Herrin von klein auf erzogen hat und sie sehr gut kennt,so htte man
diese Frau doch an dem Tag, da die Knigin Qan verlie, von ihr trennen sollen.

The Modal Particle tua

112

sentence is expressed by tua,60 I suggest that this passage that it should be understood
in precisely a reverse sensenamely, it is in fact an irrealis clause governed by man.
Interestingly, ARM 26/2 298:2939 is not the only case of tua-man found at Mari.
This combination is also found in another letter: a-na A.-ia me-e / -ul i-na-addi-nam / tu-a-ma-an we-du-um i-di-ma ep-e-tim / a ki-ma al-ma-tim i-te-ne-p-u-niin-ni and he does not let water flow to my field. Had only the (person) responsible (for
the irrigation) known that they treat me like a widow!61
One notices immediately that, as in ARM 26/2 298: 2939, it is the MP man that
bears the modal weight in this sentence, not the MP tua. Or, in other words, this sentence is also an irrealis sentence that concerns nonfactuality, events that eventually did
not take place (i.e., the widow was treated in an abusive manner, not nicely, not in a way
that poor widows ought to be treated)and it does not refute previous assumptions, as
does the MP tua.
These two cases prove that the combination tua-man is not accidental.62 I suggest
that this combination is typical of Mari chancellery usage, which in some cases preferred employing tua-man rather than man alone. Similar stylistic preferences of the
Mari scribes were noted in the case of the MP wuddi.
tua vs. tua-ma
As in the case of assurr vs. assurr-ma, which will be discussed separately, no difference in meaning between tua and tua-ma can be detected.63 If the enclitic particle
ma did add some emphatic nuance to the tua clause, this coloring escapes us today.
It is not impossible that the difference between tua and tua-ma had already faded out
in OB times and that the choice between the two forms was left entirely to personal
preferences.
The Etymology of tua
Speiser, in his pregnant and still basically pertinent discussion of umma, compared
the conditional particle to tua, proposing that the latter particle originally derives from
ym in the D stem.64 This proposal did not find favor in later research, leaving the
question of the etymology of tua open.65 In recent studies, two different opinions regarding this question have been expressed. The first, formulated by Durand say: tua
... signifie le plus souvent on aurait dit que, en conformit avec son tymologie
60. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 65: In Nr. 41 unterstreicht man die Funktion der Irrealispartikel tua.
61. The text was presented by J.-M. Durand in his seminar at the Collge de France and will be published by him.
62. G. Rubio has suggested (private communication) that it is perhaps possible to see tua-man as a
mistake for tua-ma. This elegant solution, however, does not solve the problem, since this is an irrealis
sentence that requires man, not tua.
63. So von Soden 1950: 189.
64. Speiser 1947: 32223. According to Speiser, tua has been explained as oath particle and as an
adverb of strictly attributive character.
65. For a proposed etymology of umma, see Voigt 1995.

The Syntactic Profile oftua

113

(tuum, bruit non fond).66 Thus, as already suggested more than fifty years ago by
von Soden and repeated in GAG,67 tuaaccording to Durandderives from the noun
tuum, hostile, malicious talk, or slander. The CDA, with some hesitation, takes the
same path.68 (Morphologically, one may add, according to this opinion, tua is to be
analyzed, with GAG 113c, as ending with the adverbial accusative in -a(m), lit., as a
slander; in a hostile manner, or the like.69)
Krebernik and Streck, in their 2001 study on irrealis, also suggested that tua is connected to tuum, noting that the etymology of the latter noun is still enigmatic, deriving probably from the unidentified verb w?, not from the unattested verb taum.
Krebernik and Streck claimed that tu- in tua is related to the element -zu at the end
of i- gi4-in-zu (which designates, according to these authors, the second-person pronoun, not the Sumerian verb to know). Hence, according to them, tua begins with the
second-person conjugation prefix tu-.70 If so, argue Krebernik and Streck, the MP tua
has a verbal origin. Furthermore, they postulate the possibility of a nominalization of the
particle into the noun tuum.71
Looking at the question from a wider angle, one finds that in different languages MPs
tend to acquire their function by a process of grammaticalization, starting as regular
lexical items (nouns, adverbs, conjunctions) and then become MPs.72 The other direction, namely, a MP that loses its grammatical function and gains specific lexical meaning, is unknown to me and is certainly less common. As for the etymology of the MP, the
undeniable semantic proximity between tuum and tua makes the etymology proposed
by von Soden and followed by Durand and Krebernik and Streck very plausible. The
suggestion made by Krebernik and Streck to connect tua to Sumerian i -g i4-i n -zu is
questionable, especially because no other case of an Akkadian MP that is etymologically connected to Sumerian is known to me.
In the following chapter, we will examine various MPs and compounds that carry an
irrealis meaning, some of which are connected to tua.

66. LAPO 17, p. 138 note b.

67. Von Soden 1950, 190; GAG 121f.
68. CDA 411a, s.v.: < tuu ? Worth mentioning is the appearance of both the noun tuum and the MP
tua in Ludlul bl nmeqi (George and Al-Rawi 1998: 19394:69, 83, 119). This collocation seems to be
intentional and based on the ancient analysis that the two lemmas are etymologically connected.
69. So also Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68.
70. As noted by G. Rubio (private communication), this suggestion is weakened by the fact that Sumerian i - g i4- i n - z u is translated not only by tua but also by many other Akk. particles, such as midde, pqat,
umma, and more. Another bilingual text that equates Sumerian i-gi4-in-z u and tua is the bilingual emesal text K.8427+ K.20358 (unpublished; courtesy U. Gabbay).
71. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68.
72. See Abraham 1991: esp. 352.

114

The Modal Particle tua

List of attestations of tua

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.

AbB 5, 76: 43
*AbB 6, 194:2226 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68 (54))
AbB 7, 60:510 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (55))
AbB 7, 60:1116
*AbB 9, 39:621 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (56))
*AbB 9, 61:624 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (57))
ABIM 4:1113 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 67, n. 88)
*ARM 1, 8:510 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (58))
*ARM 1, 21:515 (LAPO 16, 418; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68 (52))
*ARM 1, 62:514 (LAPO 17, 639; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (59))
*ARM 1, 73:1423 (LAPO 16, 29; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 70 (60))
*ARM 2, 6:516 (LAPO 18, 1003; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 70 (61))
*ARM 3, 64:916 (LAPO 16, 175; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 70 (62))
*ARM 26/2, 298:2939 (Heimpel 2003: 288; Ziegler 2006: 72 (6.5))
ARM 26/2, 323:35 (Heimpel 2003: 302)
*ARM 27, 115:1326 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68 (53))
*ARM 27, 151:23- 31
*Dossin 1973: 18485:413 (LAPO 16, 230; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 70 (64))
Durand 1991, 57:2930 (LAPO 16, 65)
FM 1, p. 115:47
*FM 1, p. 127:418
*FM 8, 19:48 (LAPO 18, 996; Krebernik and Streck 2001: 70 (63))
George 2003: 27879 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii 59 (-man)
*Goetze 1958: 28, No. 10:1319 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 71 (65))
*Westenhotz 1997: 6870:5759 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 71 (67))
*Held 1961: 8: iii 2023 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 71 (66))
*Lambert and Millard 1969: 94: iii 4850 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 71 (68))
MARI 6, 338:3341 (LAPO 17, 545)

Falling towers / Jerusalem Athens Alexandria / Vienna London / Unreal.

T. S. Eliot, The Wasteland

Chapter 6
The Modal Particle -man
and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

Preliminaries
Imaginary Sentences and Real and Unreal Conditionals
Human language, though structured and rule-bound, is an autonomous system. One
proof of this freedom, if any proof is required, is the ability of a given linguistic system
to detach itself from the actual world, to describe events that did not occur, will not occur, or even events that under any possible set of circumstances cannot occur. Human
language is able not only to describe the world and act within it and to manipulate it but
it may also create new, coherent worlds. In a potential world, the sentence horses dive
in the deep sea may very well be possible, or even actual. In our world, as we know it
when we are sober and awake, this sentence must be tagged as untrue and impossible or,
simply, unreal. But, it is important to note that, as imaginary as these sentences may be,
there is nothing in their grammar that marks them as imaginary; thus, they do not form
a separate category from a linguistic point of view.1
Another linguistic group, related to imaginary or impossible sentences, is that of conditionals. We follow Palmer, who, in his introductory remarks (1986: 189), says:
Conditional sentences are unlike all others in that both the subordinate clause (the protasis) and the main clause (the apodosis) are nonfacutal. Neither indicates that an event has
occurred (or is occurring or will occur); the sentence merely indicates the dependence of
the truth of the one proposition upon the truth of another.

That is, conditionals present nonfactual sentences that are not necessarily impossible
or imaginary. The spectrum of truth in conditionals is wider than in other types of sentences. In conditionals, the examination of truth applies not only to the contents of the
sentence (e.g., is it true, or not, that horses can dive in the deep sea) but it also extends to
the logical relationship between two clauses, e.g.: If evolution had developed differently,
horses could dive in the deep sea.
1. On possible worlds in literature and in linguistics, see, in general, Semino 2006.

115

116

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

Palmer (1986: 189) continues, noting that this leads to a

... distinction that is undoubtedly important typologically, that between real and unreal
conditions, the latter being used to refer to events about which the speaker expresses some
kind of negative belief.

Because conditionals are not necessarily dependent on reality, then

Modality seems ... to be doubly marked in conditionals: not only are they nonfactual, but
in addition there is the distinction between real and unreal, indicating the speakers degree
of commitment.

The commitment of the speaker refers mostly to the occurrence of a given event. However, it is more than this: it is the speakers assessment that creates the specific logical relation between the protasis and the apodosis. An event that seems possible to the speaker
will result in a sentence: If I make more money, I will buy a house. An event less likely to
happen, in the speakers mind, would result in the sentence: If I lost all my money in the
casino, I would sell the house. The less a situation is likely to happen, the farther is the
sentence from the indicativethat is, it is more modally and aspectually marked.
In many languages, real conditions are unmarked for modality ... in that both protasis and apodosis are presented in the declarative form, the indicative in languages with
morphological mood.2 This is indeed the case in Akkadian, where umma sentences
require the indicative and (at least theoretically) never the subjunctive.3 Thus, real conditions will not concern us in this studyonly unreal conditions, the irrealis.
Types of Irrealis
There are different types of irrealis, labeled differently in various linguistic studies.
A convenient and self-explanatory set of terms of the various types of irrealis is found
in Larreya (2003), where the following categories are listed: (1) absolute, that is, fully
counterfactual irrealis, as in I wish I could do that (but I cant); (2) relative, as in
If I won bigger money . . . (but Im not likely to win it); (3) direct, as in I wish I could
do that; (3) indirect, as in They might have been like this for some time and could
be for longer.4 Special attention is given in OB to counterfactuality, which is clearly
encoded grammatically by the enclitic MP man. Hence, the following discussion will
mainly concern counterfactual sentences, and a distinction will be maintained between
counterfactual sentences embedded in conditionals and counterfactual sentences that are
not part of conditional sentences.
Irrealis and Tense: Future and Past Irrealis
There is common agreement regarding the meaning and function of man in OB texts:
it serves to mark unreal conditions.5 Now, as noticed by Palmer, at least in European
2. Palmer 1986: 189.
3. Exceptions exist of course. See, e.g., ARM 26/1, 155:79, where a tamtu-formulation with umma
l followed by a subjunctive appears.
4. For a concise discussion of these categories, see Hoye 2005b: 1487.
5. GAG 152 de, 162a, 170h; Edzard 1973: 133.

Preliminaries

117

languages, unreal conditions can be divided to two subgroups according to the verbal
tense involved: improbable conditions in the future and impossible or counterfactual ones in the present or past.6 In other words, contrary to conditions in the past,
where counterfactuality is generally known or intuitively understood (e.g., If Julius Caesar had not been murdered, the career of Octavian would have taken a different course),
the logical status of counterfactuality in future conditional sentences is harder to establish (e.g., if Russia were to join NATO, relationship with China would take a different
course).7 The philosophical problem involved in unreal sentences with nonpast tenses
lies mainly in that future conditions cannot, by definition, be counterfactual if it is assumed that the future is unknown and that no statement about it can be true.8 If truthvalue cannot be determined in such statements, then they cannot justly be called unreal.
Irrealis in OB, expressed through man, virtually always denotes past realitythat is,
real counterfactuality.
But a more pressing and crucial matter must still be addressed: should irrealis constructions be considered part of the category of modality?9 The consensual definition
of epistemic modality presented in the first chapter of this study (Introduction) is that
this domain of modality concerns mainly the speakers knowledge and belief regarding
some state of affairs and occasionally also his degree of commitment to his knowledge
or belief. Does irrealis fit this definition?
Palmer (1986) discusses conditionalreal and unrealsentences in his chapter on
Oblique Clauses, without justifying this inclusion.10 In his 2001 publication, Palmer
is overt about this issue and dedicates two chapters in the second edition of Mood and
Modality to various aspects of the category of irrealis.11 In a more recent study, Palmer
states again that a modal system (in contrast with mood, which, according to Palmer,
consists of specific parts of the verbal paradigm) always subsumes a set of modal (irrealis) forms vs. nonmodal (realis) forms.12 Shlomper, in his discussion of modality
in Hindi (2005), goes in the same direction. In a section dedicated to Counterfactuals, he introduces two key terms that permit the tagging of irrealis as part of epistemic
modality: imagination and possibility. His presumption is that epistemic modality
comprises the following qualificational categories: the speakers commitment to the
truth, validity or factuality of propositions.13 Irreality falls naturally in the third categorythat of factuality or nonfactualityof particular states of affairs, as understood
6. Palmer 1986: 191.
7. Palmer (1986: 191) stresses that this division (improbable future conditions vs. impossible or
counterfactual past conditions) has more to do with the essence of futurity and it relation to truth rather
than to conditionals.
8. Palmer 1986: 191.
9. The fact that the MP man, contrary to all other OB epistemic MPs treated in this study, is not incompatible with the precative, i.e., with a chief component of Akkadian deontic modality, is another indication
of the unique status of this MP. More on this below.
10. Palmer 1986: 18899.
11. Palmer 2001: 145201
12. Palmer 2003: 2. See also Hoye 2005b: 1486.
13. Shlomper 2005: 105.

118

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

by the speaker. Thus, though perhaps still not fully satisfactorily, it seems that the above
discussions allow us to proceed to consider irrealis as part of the domain of epistemic
modality.
Irrealis in Old Babylonian: The Modal Particle man
Analysis of irrealis in any languageand OB is no exceptionis complex and requires a broad approach, combining linguistic and logical aspects. In the framework of
my research, which is concentrated on textual evidence, such a broad-ranging approach
is not possible. My aim is not to provide a comprehensive description of irrealis in Akkadian. Instead, I would like to present the necessary grammatical components involved
in various irrealis sentences in OB, to delineate some syntactic mechanisms operative in
such sentences, and to discuss some of the questions triggered by the phenomenon of irrealis. The complex philosophical and logical problems raised by the category of irrealis
will not be discussed here; these questions are within the competence of philosophers
and logicians and ought to be left to them.
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution
The available body of evidence is quite extensive: there are about 90 published examples of irrealis sentences in OB sources, most of them unreal conditions marked with
the MP man. More examples will no doubt be found, since this MP is quite productive
in OB. Almost 40% of the examples we have are found in Mari letters, and the rest
come from other sites in central Mesopotamia. This percentage roughly approximates
the relative size of the Mari epistolary corpus when compared with all OB archives.
The implication is that man is employed equally in all OB subcorpora, geographically
plotted. Furthermore, man (and its OA counterpart min14) is very much characteristic
of this period: thus far, it is not found in Sargonic or in Ur III Akkadian texts, while in
later, post-OB, texts, it is found mainly as an archaism, often in literary texts.15 Unlike
other MPs in the OB period, man is not especially characteristic of epistolary texts:
about 20% of the collected examples stem from literary texts. The MP man is used
even in one legal memorandum (CT 48, 23:115). Again, these findings exemplify the
productivity of man in the OB period.
Previous Studies of the Modal Particle man
A general description of this MP can be found in most Akkadian manuals, grammars, the dictionaries, and in various studies.16 Earlier bibliography on this particle has
been summarized by Gterbock (1938: 128, ad 11ff.).17 As for more recent studies, two
14. GAG 152d and GKT 139.
15. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 53. See especially KAR 158, vii:41 (Limet 1996: 158) and KBo I,
11:rev. 1013 (Gterbock 1938: 120:1213; and now, Hoffner and Melchert 2008: 31516).
16. See, e.g., Edzard 1973: 133.
17. The parallel of Akkadian man to Hittite man, which also serves to express potentialis and irrealis,
is mentioned by Gterbock and briefly discussed in later studies (e.g., Friedrich 1960 (1974): 139, 265).

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-man

119

remarks on this MP by Buccellati can serve as specimens. First, Buccellati (1972: 34)
addressed the issue in his article on infinitive constructions in Akkadian, differentiating
between potentialis (ippeman, he could build) and irrealis, which is activated when
[an] implicit condition is conceived as unrealizable at the same time it is posited ...
(puman, he could have built [if he wanted, but he didnt]). Almost a quarter of a
century later, in his A Structural Grammar of Akkadian (1996), Buccellati formulated
his ideas again, as follows:
The enclitic man ... is used to indicate unrealizable potentiality..., either referring to
the past (then with the preterite of the verb) or to the future (then normally with the present); the enclitic may be added to the predicate or to a noun. It may occur after any element in the sentence, and no other change occurs as a result of the transformation.18

But synthetic studies of man are scarce. An exception is the paper of Krebernik and
Streck (2001), where an extensive body of evidence, more than 50 examples of irrealis, was collected, sorted according to the different arrangements of verbal tense, and
semantically analyzed. Some other irrealis constructions and expressions, such as the
MP tua, were also briefly described. The present chapter has benefited much from their
study.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of -man
Unlike other MPs, whose meaning is at times vague, the semantics of man, as already mentioned above, is clear: man is used to render irrealis in its wider sense. This
therefore enables us to turn immediately to the syntactic profile of man, where some
uncertainties remain, calling for a close examination of the available data.
The Syntactic Profile of -man
There are four possible arrangements of irrealis sentences marked with the enclitic
MP man. (1) They can be built as straightforward conditionals, in which case man is
attached to umma, resulting in umma-man or being further fused into umman. This
bipartite construction, where man appears in each part of the sentence, is not the only
way to construct irrealis sentences. Other constructions exist: (2) bipartite unreal conditional sentences where only one man, without umma, is found. Alternatively, (3) a
single MP man can be attached to ummathat is, to the protasis, without an apodosis
following. Conversely, (4) the MP man can be attached to an element in the apodosis,
while the preceding protasis is elided and understood only elliptically. These four possibilities will be examined one by one, starting with (1), the bipartite, protasis-apodosis
construction.
The main issues that will be discussed here are the verbal tenses that are involved in
unreal conditionals and the syntactic locus of the MP manthat is, we will examine
what part of the sentence man is attached to and, if possible, also, why.
This etymology is questionable and will not be addressed here.
18. Buccellati 1996: 422 (73.4).

120

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

1. Verbal Tenses: Tense Relations Between Protasis and Apodosis

First, let us examine the different possible arrangement of verbal tenses in OB irrealis
sentences. Krebernik and Streck (2001) parsed the body of examples that they have collected according to the tense of the subordinate clause (the protasis) and the main clause
(the apodosis). This division will be followed here. Twelve tense arrangements were
found, and a specimen of each is given below.
(1) Past in ProtasisPast in Apodosis19

AbB 3, 33:912:
um-ma-ma-an i-bu-tam la i-u / ma-ti-i-ma-an a-pu-ra-ak-kum / ma-ga-al tusa-pa-a / a-na ia-i-im -ul ta--ra-[ni]m-ma
Had-man there been no need, would have I ever-man have written to you? You used
to spend a lot, but you (pl.) do not pay attention to me.
(2) Present in ProtasisPast in Apodosis20

AbB 10, 5:1822:

u-pur dumu i-din-dza-b-b e ns u- / ka-ni-ik l u g al a in-na-ad-nu-u[m] /
li-il-q-a-am-ma a-wa-tam pa-nam lu-a-ar-i / um-ma ki-ma aq-bu-kum am-ali it-ti-ia / i-la-kam mi-im-ma-an u4-ma-am ia-ti ik-la-an-ni
Write (so that) this son of Iddin-Zababa the overseer would take the sealed
document of the king, which was given to him, so that I might clarify the affair.
If, as I told you, he (had) come with me yesterday, what-man (possibly) could have
stopped me today?!
(3) Past in ProtasisPerfect in Apodosis21

ARM 26/2, 412:2224:

um-ma-ma-[an la] a-bu-um a be-l-ia / [qa--r]a-aki i-ba-at ma-a-at akur-dIM / [ka-lu-u-ma]-an it-ta-ba-al-ka-at
Had-man the army of my lord [not] won Qatar, the [enti]re-man land of AkurAddu would have fall into revolt.

19. AbB 6,188:3940; ARM 26/1, 170:28; ARM 26/2, 313:2731; ARM 28, 159:1013; Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii 1317; FM 2, 71:915; Groneberg 1997: 114:8788; Lacambre 1997: 446:912. In the
new example CUSAS 10, 51:16, we find past in the protasis and vetitivei.e., formally past formin the
apodosis.
20. ARM 2, 117:415; ARM 26/1, 37:1216; ARM 26/2, 541:59; MARI 8, 44849:3841; Charpin
and Durand 2002: 96:2023.
21. AbB 14, 61:48; MARI 6, 33839:7276.

The Syntactic Profile of-man

121

(4) Present in ProtasisPerfect in apodosis22

FM 8, 19:1322:
1 gim a 20 ugar a-na i-[m]a-arki/ [u]-ta-[a]-bi-it / i-t[u gim] i-i / ga-nib[a-t]amki i-ti-q / up-p be-l-ia a-um esir / a-na gim u-ur-ku-bi-im / ik-udam um-ma-an la-ma a-ba-at gim / up-p be-l-ia i-ka-a-a-d[a]m / es i r a
ki-ma i-na qa-ti-ia i-ba-a-u- / u-ta-ar-ki-ma-an
And I made one boat of 20 ugar go to Imar. (Only) after this boat has passed
Ganibtum, did the letter of my lord, concerning the transport of asphalt by boat,
arrive to me. Had-man the letter of my lord arrived to me before the dispatch of the
boat, asphaltas much as I have in my handsI would have transported-man.
(5) Stative in ProtasisPast in Apodosis23

Dossin 1956: 66:1418:

ma-an-nu-um gi-mi-il-lum a i-na gitukul-[ ] d[I]M / ia-ri-im-li-im / a-lam
k- dingir - raki -e-zi-bu / na-p-i-tam a-na ma-ti-i-ka / ka-ta ad-di-nu
um-ma la dIM / ia-ri-im-li-im / a-LAM de-erki i-tu mu 15- k a m na-i-ip-tama-an / ki-ma p-e-em -la-ma-an -ta-u / -ul at-ta-ma-an ki-a-am te-pu-aan-ni
What (for was) the favor whichby the help of Adad and Yarm-lmsaved
Babylon, and (during which) I have given life to your country and to you? Was
it not for Adad and Yarm-lm, fifteen years ago you had winnowed-man away the
city of Dr like chaff; I would have not been able to find it, and you-man couldnt
have (the possibility) to act toward me in such a way.
(6) Stative in ProtasisPerfect in Apodosis24

Goetze 1958: 2122, No. 4:3738:

um-ma-an a-lu-um a-na -bu-ti-u / la nu-z-uz4 i-di-s-ma-an ih-ta-li-iq25
Had-man the city not granted him what he needs, it would cause him to lose his
provisions-man (to the enemy).
(7) Past in ProtasisPresent in Apodosis26

ARM 26/2, 412:5965:

[a-um a] be-l ki-a-am i-pu-ra-[am um]-ma-a-mi k as k al-a te-b-e q-ru-ub/
[pa-kur-dI]M i-na a-wa-tim u-ta-[a?-bi?-it? ]a-ba-am bi-ir-tam / [e-zi-ibu-ma] pa-an a-p-il-[ti a-b]i-ka a-ab-ta-am-ma at-la-kam / [an-ni-tam be-l]
22. AbB 14, 58:510; ARM 27, 132:512; FM 1, 11517:2430; Kienast 1978: 174:1421.
23. Lambert 1987: 192:5051.
24. ARM 28, 105:2526.
25. Cf. CAD 172b, s.v. sidtu, CAD N/2 141a, s.v. nazzu, AHw 753b, I D (1), s.v. nassu.
26. I know of no other example of this tense arrangement.

122

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

i-pu-ra-am um-ma-[ma-an e4]-mu-um an-nu-um / [in-n-p]-e a-wa-tam-maan a-n[a a-kur-d]IM a-ba-at-ma-an / [at-ta-al]-kam i-tu e4-mu-um a[n-nu-um]
it-te9-en-p-e / [s?-a?-am? n]a-pa-ar-ka-am -u[l i-n]a-ad-di-na-an-ni
[As for what] my lord has written to me, saying: taking-up the journey is near!
[Giv]e orders to Akur-Addu, [leave him] the garrison-units and head the rest of
your army and depart! [My lord] has written to me [this]. Had-man this order been
[execu]ted, had I talked-man to Akur-Addu (and) departed after this order (had)
been executed[it] would not have given me (the opportunity) to put an end to
[the rebellion]!
(8) Present in protasisPresent in apodosis27

ARM 10, 74:1037:28

[i-n]a-an-na a-na -[l]a-ka-aki/ e-ru-ub-ma mu-ru-u li-ib-[b]i-im / ma-di-i
a-na-a--al / fa-a-at i-ba-al-dIM / i-ma ar-ra-at ... i-ia-ti i-na tu-ub-qim/ -e-i-ba-an-ni-ma / ki-ma munus le-el-la-tim / i-na qa-ti-ia le-ta-ti-ia/
[u]-ta-a-bi-ta-an-n[i] ... um-ma-an i-ir be-l-ia i-r[a-a]m / [] i-ia-ti-ma-an
gme-ka-a [i!-r]a!-[m]a!-an-ni
Now, I have entered Akaka and I experience much sorrow. The wife of IblAddu, she is the queen ... and mehe made me sit in the corner and rest my
cheeks in my hands as (if I were) a foolish woman.... Had-man he (really) loved
my lord in person, he would have loved me-man, your servant!
(9) Stative in ProtasisPrecative in Apodosis29

ARM 26/2, 469:1015:

i-na u4 25-kam na-p-i-ta-u / -ul il-pu-ut um-ma u-ma / um-ma-an dEN.ZU
i-na up-p li-p-it na-p-i-tim / la ku-up-pu-UD i-na u4 25- k a m-ma na-p-i-ti
/ lu-ul-pu-ut i-na-an-na dEN.ZU uk-ta-ap-p-ID / i-na u4 25- k a m na-p-i-ti
-ul a-la-ap-pa-at
On the 25th, he (ammurabi) did not take his oath, saying: had-man Sn not been
mentioned (lit., honored(?)) in the tablet of the oath, I would have been willing
[precative!] to take my oath. Now, Sn is mentioned (lit., honored(?)), (hence) I
will not take may oath.
(10) Past in ProtasisStative in Apodosis30

ARM 10, 92:914:

pd
EN.ZU-mu-a-lim ih-bu-l[a-a]n-[n]i-ma fta-ri-ti il-q i-na-[an-n]a / i-na -ti27. ARM 26/2, 449:3745; OBTR 161:825; Ziegler 2001: 498:1014
28. LAPO 18, 1242.
29. I know of no other example of this tense arrangement.
30. AbB 5, 157:115; ARM 26/2, 411:3942.

The Syntactic Profile of-man

123

u wa-a-ba-a[t] / um-ma-an i-na-an-na be-l [il-q]-i / i-na be-l-ia wa-aba-a[t] / li-ib-bi-ma-an -[a]b
Sn-muallim has wronged me and took away my wet-nurse and now she is
staying in his house. Now, if-man (at least) my lord had taken her and had she been
staying in the house of my lord, my heart-man would have been glad.
(11) Present in ProtasisStative in Apodosis31

ARM 10, 20:1319:32

[ a]t-ta ti-de ki-ma ane - g-un [i-na] qa-tim la i-ba-a-u- / [um-ma-an
a] n e- g-un / [i-na -ka] i-ba-a-u- [mi-im-m]a a u-bu-lim [a-n]a e-rika ka-a-ia-an-ma-an
[And y]ou know that there are no pack-donkeys available at hand. [Had-man there
b]een pack-donkeys available [in the house], whatever there is to send would
have been (sent) to you regularly-man.
(12) Stative in ProtasisStative in Apodosis33

ARM 26/1, 57:511:

a-um m un us a i-na -ga l i-a-am-taki / e-di-i-i-a wa-a-ba-at / a-wa-tum
i-nam -ul ma-a-ra-at / um-ma-ma-an 5 m u n [u s ]-m e / a s g - ma-a-ria / i-p-a wa-a-ba / da-mi-iq-ma-an
As for the woman who dwells all alone in the palace of Hiamtathis is not
acceptable. Were-man there five women sitting in front of her and weaving wool
(then) it would have been alright-man.
Next, I would like to summarize the above examples using the terms Tense Rising
(TR), Tense Descent (TD), Tense Equation (TE), and Tense Neutralization (TN). These
terms define the temporal relations between the tenses in the bipartite (protasis-apodosis)
sentences collected above, arranging them on a temporal axis. Tense Rising designates a
tense sequence that moves from the past to the present (by which I mean the focal point
of the narrative, not necessarily the coding time). Conversely, Tense Descent is applied
to sentences with the opposite tense sequence, namely, from the present to the past.
Tense Equation is used when the two parts of the sentence use the same tense. Finally,
Tense Neutralization is found when a stative form is used in one of the parts of the sentence. All of the tense sequences seem to be self-explanatory except for one, the combination of past (iprus forms) and perfect (iptaras). How is this sequence be analyzed?
What is the temporal relationship between these two verbal forms? The use and meaning
of the t-perfect in OB introduces a complex discussion, and I do not wish to enter into
31. I know of no other example of this tense arrangement.
32. LAPO 18, 1187.
33. I know of no other example of this tense arrangement.

124

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

this debate. For our purposes, it is enough to refer to the latest discussion on the matter.
Loesov (2004: 172) concludes his study of the t-perfect in OB as follows:
Synchronically ... the primary meaning of the Perfect can be described as now extended
past-wise. ... [T]he Perfect denotes (1) a past fact (2) possessing a resultative component
(3) that is temporalized at the moment of observation coinciding with the coding time.
This meaning can be labeled! present perfect... These three elements of grammatical
semantics are equally essential.34

Thus, the perfect in OB, following Loesov, is used for past events that are perceived by
the speaker as having direct relevance (circumstantially or consequentially) to his present time. In this sense, the tense sequence past (protasis)perfect (apodosis) is Tense
Rising.
This inventory of tense correspondences is summarized in the following table:
Table 1. Tense Relations between Protasis and Apodosis

Protasis

Apodosis

Tense Axis*

Present

Past

TD

Present

Perfect

TD

Past

Past

TE

Present

Present

TE

Present

Stative

TN

Stative

Past

TN

Stative

Perfect

TN

Stative

Stative

TN

Stative

Precative

TN

Past

Stative

TN

Past

Present

TR

Past

Perfect

TR

* TD = Tense Descent; TR = Tense Rising; TE = Tense Equation; TN = Tense Neutralization (when at least
one components is stative)

The conclusion from the data plotted above is unambiguous: the prevalent tense sequences (from protasis to apodosis) in OB unreal conditions using man are Tense Descent, Tense Equation, and Tense Neutralization. That is, unreal conditions clearly tend
to be constructed not with Tense Rising. Two options for TN were identified: past in the
protasis, leading to present in the apodosis, and past in the protasis, leading to perfect in
the apodosis. Going through all of the collected examples, it can safely be said that these
34. Kouwenberg 2010 was not consulted, because his work appeared after the present work had been
prepared.

The Syntactic Profile of-man

125

sequences are rare, and only a handful of them are known to exist. As a matter of fact,
ARM 26/2, 412:5965 is the only case in which past leads to present. The sequence past
leading to perfect is better attested but still very uncommon.
A simple rule can therefore be formulated: past or future unreal sentences in OB
tend to employ nonfuture tenses (past and perfect) or verbal forms that are unmarked
on the time-axis (stative).35 This tendency means that unreal conditional sentences do
not cross the threshold of the coding time, the present time of the speaker/writer, as in
sentence (a) Had we won the game we would have opened a bottle of Champagne. On
the contrary, (b) *Had we won the game we will go to a restaurant, is awkward, if not
nongrammatical. This is not merely a matter of tense concordance, which is, naturally,
specific for each different language. It is a matter of the logic: there is an essential reluctanceindeed, a barrierto create a circumstantial link between unreal sentences and
potential, open-ended situations. Impossibility and possibility tend not to be combined.
This is in accordance with the tendency identified in other languages as well: past tense
... is in fact mostly interrelated with modality, and particularly with unreality, and
there [are] examples from a number of languages of past tense forms being used to
indicate unreal conditions.36
If we expand the rule just formulated, turning to the categories of possibility, impossibility, unreality, and certainty (which is an opposite of possibility) by examining the tense tendencies in other OB MPs already treated, the following results emerge:
Table 2: Possibility vs. Impossibility: Tense Tendencies

possibility: pqat, midde, assurrTendency to nonpast tense

impossibility and unreality, but also certainty (which stands also on the opposite pole
to possibility): -man, wuddiTendency to past tenses
counter-assertion: tuaNo clear tendency detected

There will be further discussion on the relationship between the various MPs and verbal
tenses in the concluding chapter of this volume.
2. Irrealis and Precative
An important difference between the MP man and all other OB epistemic MPs is that
man is not incompatible with the precative. There are 9 cases of man sentences that
involve the precative: in the protasis, in the apodosis, or in both.37 This finding points to
the fact that man is a borderline particle, not a typical epistemic MP, for other epistemic
35. Note, however, the use of present tense in umma clauses denoting unreal conditionals of the past
(Krebernik and Streck 2001: 66).
36. Palmer 1986: 210. See also Larreya 2003.
37. AbB 14, 67:515; AbB 14, 204:1321; ARM 26/1, 37:2027; ARM 26/2, 468: 2024; ARM
26/2, 469:1015; Dalley 2001: 164; Kienast 1978: 174:413; Rowton 1967: 269:2730; YOS 11, 24: ii 13.
Note also the vetitive in the apodosis in CUSAS 10, 51:16..

126

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

MPs are incompatible with the precative, an essential component of OB deontic modality. One possible explanation for the fact that precative forms are congruous with man
is that precative forms by themselves may carry irrealis meaning (see below) and that on
the other hand man can function as potentialis, similar to the precative.38 In any event,
the appearance of deontic form into the domain of epistemic modality is noteworthy and
is another indication of the special notional position of irrealis in the domain of modality.
2. Phrasal Arrangement

I have discussed the bipartite man sentences (types (1) and (2) above) at length,
and there is no need to rehearse the description of the protasis-apodosis type of irrealis
sentences, which is prevalent in OB. Instead, we may proceed to other forms of irrealis
sentences with the MP man.
Irrealis Sentences without an Apodosis (umman l ...)

Our type (3) consists of unreal conditional sentences in which only the protasis opens
with umman and the apodosis is understood elliptically. These sentences are typical of
personal names of the kind umman-l-DN:39 for example, umman-l-dama, Were
it not for ama! or Were it not for the god!40 These names serve as exclamations,
in which the protasis is understood by itself: Were it not for the god (a big trouble
would have happened), or Were it not for ama (our rescue would not have occurred), etc. This phraseology is explicit in a letter from Babylonia:
AbB 5, 232:2327:
pd
IM-ra-bi x x ba x x x x x / ka-li-a-[u-m]a um-ma-an la du t u / dam ar-u t u 1
l -ul-ma-an ib-lu-u / dutu damar-ut u iq-bu-ma / ki-ir-rum i-i -ul -
Adad-rabi ...... held him back and were it not for ama and Mardukeven
one man would not have been alive! But ama and Marduk have spoken and this
caravan did not leave.41
An almost identical counterfactual construction is umma l....namely, the same
construction as the one just cited but without the MP man.42 An example is the OB PN
umma-l-dMarduk-manni, Whoif not Marduk! which is clearly almost identical
38. Buccellati 1972: 34.
39. Cf. Stamm 1939: 136. See also AHw 1273 s.v. umma-man, umman (2b).
40. To the three examples cited in Krebernik and Streck 2001: 61 (nos. 3739), add also, e.g., AbB 7,
101:10; AbB 13, 46:8, 16; Durand 2009; Mayer 2005: 324:20 and ARM 23 in PN index. (PNs with the
component umman- ... / umman-l ... are not included in the index at the end of the chapter.)
41. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 55.
42. Cf. CAD /3 278b, s.v. umma prep.; considering, (negated) barring, AHw 1273a D Besondere Gebrauchweisen (1) als Prp. (b) . l auer ... and GAG 114i. See also Sallaberger 1999: 18285
(Thema niemand auer Dir) and 240 (ezub l jti/unti ...). Note also the remark of von Soden in
GAG 161b that umma ul in Mari is immer hypothetischer. This statement ought to be reconsidered,
because it is clear that not all cases of umma ul in Mari are hypothetical sentences but often merely a nonstandard (i.e., non-Babylonian) usage of umma sentences.

The Syntactic Profile of-man

127

in form and meaning to the umman-l-DN PN-type just discussed. A complete irrealis
conditional phrase making use of umma l (without the enclitic man!) is found, e.g.,
in the following letter:
AbB 14, 205:1921:
ki-a-am pe-ga-tum a-pu-ul / um-ma la k-b ab b ar u-a-ti a-na i-bu-ti-ka / a-na
10 gn k- babba r ta-a-tap-ra-am e-p-a-am -ul e-le-i
Thus I answered to Egatum: Were it not (umma l) for this silver, I could not
have done anything for your need when you have written to me for 10 shekels of
silver.43
It is difficult to decide whether umma l is just a scribal mistake for umman l or
whether both umma and umman were equally able to build this type of counterfactual
sentences. A diachronic process may explain the latter possibility, namely, that in the
early stages of OB, umma and umman were semantically distinguished but later the
differentiation between the two constructions was bleached out, resulting in umma/
umman l....
Irrealis Sentences without Protasis

Other irrealis sentences are those built without umman. Normally, these are not conditional sentences but denote the speakers dissatisfaction, or even anger and frustration,
in the face of an impossible state of affairs. The best-known example of this type is the
locus classicus from the epic of Gilgame:
George 2003: 27879 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii 59:
ur-ri mu-i e-li-u ab-ki / -ul ad-di-i-u a-na q-b-ri-im / ib-ri-ma-an i-taab-bi-a-am a-na ri-ig-mi-ia / se-b-et u4-mi-im se-b mu-i-a-tim / a-di tu-ultum im-q-tam i-na ap-p-u
I wept over him day and night. I did not give him up for burialhad only
my friend risen at my cry!for seven days and seven nights, until a maggot
dropped from his nostril.
Clearly, this is not a conditional sentence: Enkidu is dead and cannot hear his crying
friend. The irrealis particle serves here only to express deep, though unrealizable, wish.
In a Babylonian letter, a strong ironic tone is achieved by this construction:
AbB 9, 240:2130:44
a la ia-ti / ma-nu-um a-a-at-ki / lu a-ab-ki-im / a-am-i-u--ma-an / i-tia-an-ni / qi-bi-um-ma / 1 gn k-ba bbar / li-a-bi-lam / la e-ni-i / ap-pu-tum

43. See also Dossin 1956: 66: 1418.

44. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 62.

128

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

Who is your sister, but me? It would have pleased you, even if he had failed me
five times-man. Tell him to send me one shekel of silver. I must not grow weak.
Please!
A similar phrasing in a similar context is found in another Babylonian letter:
AbB 11, 17:414:45
da-mi-[K]I-im ki-a-am / psag-den-ll-l / -ul ni-i-pu-ra-ki-im / a-na mi-ni-im
k- babbar-am / lu 1 gn lu 2 gn / la tu-a-bi-li-im / a-um re-di-im / a-na
k- babbar-im-ma-an / a-a-pa-ra-[a]m / 2 ma-na k -b ab b ar / ih-ta-li-iq
Is it good like this to you? Did we not send Sag-Enlila to you? Why did you not
have (him) bring one or two shekels? Would I write for silver-man to appropriate
(it)? Two minas of silver have been lost.
In these two letters, one could perhaps expect the MP wuddi, but if that were the case, no
sarcasm would have been expressed. The MP wuddi functions to establish a consensus
between the writer and his addressee, while man, in these cases, is used to stress the
writers frustration and discontent. The not too common MP ka could replace man,
with its strong ironic force. Finally, let us take a look in a letter from Mari, where the god
Dagan is speaking in an oracle:
ARM 26/1, 233:2431:46
dum u- me i-ip-ri / a zi-im-ri-li-im / ka-ia-ni-i ma-a-ri-ia a-na m[i]-nim
[l]a wa-a-bu-ma / e4-em-u ga-am-ra-am ma-a-ri-ia am-mi-nim / la-a i-aak-ka-an / -ul-la-ma-an i-tu u4-mi ma-du-tim / l u g al -m e-ni a d u m u -m e
[ia]-m[i]-na / a-na qa-at zi-im-ri-li-im um-ta-al-li-u-nu-ti
Why are messengers of Zimr-lm not staying with me regularly, and why does he
not place his full report before me? Otherwise-man I would have handed the kings
of the Benjaminites over to Zimr-lm many days ago!
The god expresses his anger and frustration vis--vis the inattention of Zimr-lim. Again,
the sentence is not built as a conditional but as a protest, confronting the present situation and an unreal state of affairs.
man followed by l and Arabic l al-nfiya lil-jins

In some cases, substantives, nouns, or pronouns that follow umma/umman l stand

in the oblique case. We have already encountered this phenomenon in AbB 14, 205:19
21 cited above. See also:
ARM 26/1, 189:1823:
a-ni-tam [um-ma]-an be-l-ia q-ru-[ub] / e-um i-na qa-tim -ul i-b[a]45. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 63.
46. Heimpel 2003: 266.

The Syntactic Profile of-man

129

a[-]i/ dumu-me ia-mi-na l bi-ir-tim-m e / a -bu e-em ug-dam-meru/ um-ma-an la u-nu-ti e-um na-ba-al-ka-at / [m]a-du-um-ma ib-ba-i
Another thing. The army of my lord is close by, but there is no available
grain. The Benjaminites and the garrison-men, which are located here, have
just finished the grain. Was it not for these menthe grain would have been
abundant. Plenty of grain would have been available!
The explanation for the accusative forms47 after l may be sought in the comparable
Arabic construction known as l al-nfiya lil-jins, the negation that denies absolutely the
class or the specie.48 This usage is not obligatory in OB, but it is occasionally attested,
mainly in fixed phrases such as umma/umman/a/lman l jt/kti, if not me/you
..., 49 or (ina/kma) l (libbi) ila, unfortunately, lit.: contrary to the (will) of god.50
This syntactic phenomenon deserves a study of its own.
3. Position of the MP within the Clause
An essential question to be addressed in our effort to comprehend the syntax of man
is the usual location of this MP in the sentence. More precisely, to what component of
the sentence is man usually attached and, more interestingly, why.
Going through the sample of examples that we have already listed, we can easily
see that man can be attached to any part of speech: to verbs (with a wide spectrum of
tenses), to adjectives, substantives (in different inflected cases), to adverbs, to pronouns,
to conjunctions, and even to the negation particle.51 Other examples show that man can
be attached to other particles as well, such as to l, resulting in lman,52 and even to the
epistemic MP tua, resulting in tua-man.53 In short, man appears to be an adhesive
MP, ready to anchor onto any component in the sentence. But is this anchoring entirely
random, or can we discern a rule for the position of man in the sentence? Or does it
exhibit a tendency for location and attachment?
In the entry for man in the AHw, von Soden writes that man comes after the emphasized, or stressed, word (nach dem betontem Wort). Elaborating on von Sodens often
47. Careful differentiation should be made between forms that stand after l in the genitive case
namely, as attributes (e.g., CH XIV: 7: ina l m; cf. GAG 151a), and those constructions with accusatives.
48. Wright 1874 (1967): 2.98A. See Ergnzungen zu GAG 147b (cf. also 44e, 114i).
49. Letters: AbB 9, 63:5; AbB 9, 240, 21; AbB 14, 149:6; AbB 14, 190:1315; AbB 14, 205:1921;
OBTR 134:2426; literary texts: Lambert 1989: 326:71 (lament); Livingstone 1988: 177:28 (wisdom). Note
finally the lexical section in MSL 4, 5253:475482: me-en-d-da nam-me-a, um-ma-an la ni-a-ti,
if it were not we, etc.
50. Letters: AbB 14, 83: 16; ARM 26/1, 275:8; ARM 26/2, 405: 21; ARM 26/2, 409:41; ARM 28,
49:18; literary texts: von Soden 1961: 71 (CT 42, 32): 17 (incantation).
51. Verbs: e.g., FM 8, 19:1322; adjectives: e.g., ARM 26/2, 412:2224; substantives: e.g., ARM 10,
92:1214; ARM 26/2, 412:2224; adverbs: e.g., AbB 3, 33: 912; ARM 10, 20:1319; pronouns: e.g.,
AbB 10, 5:1822; ARM 10, 74:3637; conjunctions: e.g., Goetze 1958: 2122, No. 4:3738; negation
particle: e.g., AbB 6, 188: 3940; ARM 5, 20:2935; ARM 26/2, 541:59; Dossin 1956: 65:1618; FM
2, 71:915.
52. Lambert 1989: 326:7172; YOS 11, 24: i 7, i 12.
53. ARM 26/2, 298:2938.

130

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

correct intuition, I suggest that the position of man in the sentence is not constrained
syntactically but pragmatically. This MP is found attached to the component on which
the speaker wishes to lay special stress. In ARM 26/2, 412:2224, it is the entire country; in AbB 10, 5:1822 it is what (possibly) could have stopped me. In ARM 26/1,
233:2431, affixing man to the negation ula stresses the unrealized possibility that could
have taken place had the state of affairs been different (Otherwise I would have handed
the kings of the Benjaminites over to Zimr-lm many days ago!), thus creating a highly
empathic construction. In Goetze 1958: 2122, No. 4:3738, the speaker wishes to put
forward specifically that the provisionsnot anything elsewould have been lost had
the city not supported the protagonist. In ARM 10, 74:3637, there is a rhetorical contrast between the relation of a third party to the speaker and to the addressee (my lord).
This contrast is made clear by the position of man on the pronoun jti, me.54
Another consideration that may be at work is the natural tendency of a speaker to distribute the MP man at even intervals in the sentence so that the addressee will retain the
irrealis mode in his mind, throughout the flow of his speech. This is especially relevant
in long sentences, such as in ARM 26/2, 412:5965. A parallel mechanism with a similar rational is to attach man at opposite loci of the sentence, the beginning and the end.
This makes good sense, because more often than not man is attached to umma, which
takes initial position in a conditional sentence. Thus, when the sentence is not too long,
the second man tends to be found toward the end of the sentence.55
Excursus:
A Typological Comparison with the Irrealis Particle by in Russian
The Russian particle by offers an interesting typological comparison with the MP
man. Like man in Akkadian, by in Russian expresses irrealis (and different kinds of
conditionals). In addition, like man, by is an enclitic particle (although graphically it
is written separately from the word that precedes in many cases).56 But more important
is the typological resemblance regarding the position that by and man tend to take in
the sentence. Garde, who has devoted a detailed study to the syntax and semantics of
by, notes that by is usually placed aprs le premier mot accentu de la proposition....
Quand elle chappe lattraction du premier mot de la proposition, la particule by tombe
presque immanquablement dans celle du verbe et se place aprs lui.57 Or, as succinctly
put by Semeonoff in her grammar of Russian: [by] may appear after any word in a
sentence, making this word emphatic....58 Viewing these definitions from a pragmatic
54. Nevertheless, it would be wrong simply to say that man is attached to the rheme in the sentence,
since there are clear cases that prove the contrary, such as, e.g., ARM 10, 92:914, treated above: Snmuallim has wronged me and took away my wet-nurse and now she is staying in his house. Now, if-man (at
least) my lord had taken her and had she been staying in the house of my lord, my heart-man would have been
glad. Cleary, the second man in this sentence is not attached to the rheme but to the theme (my heart).
55. See ARM 10, 20:1319; ARM 10, 92:914; ARM 26/1, 57:511; FM 8, 19:1322.
56. Garde 1963: 13, 15.
57. Garde 1963: 13.
58. Semeonoff 1962: 164.

A Typological Comparison with the Irrealis Particle by in Russian

131

angle, it is not difficult to see that they are not so different from the evidence we have in
the case of Akkadian man: by, like man, tends to follow the semantically foregrounded
component in the sentence: a substantive, or a verb which often carries the main weight
of the information in the sentence, and therefore is also apt for holding the irrealis.
4.man and Other Particles
The MP man is usually not attached to other MPs, except for tua-man, found at
Mari and treated above in chap. 5 6 (pp. 111112) and l-man, treated further below.
Yet, in many instances, man is found in the surroundings of other MPs. An important
example offers a clear contrast between man and tua, enabling us to differentiate these
two MPs semantically, because both, it has been claimed,59 denote irrealis. In a letter
from Yaqqim-Addu to Zimr-lm, two royal missives that were sent to Yaqqim-Addu are
mentioned as failing to arrive in time, for different reasons. The first royal missive uses
tua:
FM 8, 19:48:
t[u]-a-ma a-n[a qa-a]--na-anki / al-li-ik [up]-p be-l-ia a-um gim / a
a-na [na]4 le-q-e-im i-ba-tu / a-na ia-s-ad-di-ANki il-li-kam / mi-im-ma a-na
qa-a--na-anki -ul al-li-ik
You must have assumed that I went to Qaunn, and the letter of my lord
concerning the boat, which was sent to take the stones, went to Yasaddi-El.
(However), I did not go at all to Qaunn.60
The writer tries to make it clear to his addressee, the king, that he, the king, was mis
informed as to his whereaboutsassuming wrongly (tua) that he went to Qaunn. In
the continuation of the letter, another royal missive that failed to reach Yaqqim-Addu in
time is mentioned, this time with the help of man:
FM 8, 19:1322:
1 gim a 20 ugar a-na i-[m]a-arki/ [u]-ta-[a]-bi-it / i-t[u gim ] i-i / ga-nib[a-t]amki i-ti-q / up-p be-l-ia a-um es i r / a-na gim u-ur-ku-bi-im / ik-udam um-ma-an la-ma a-ba-at gim / up-p be-l-ia i-ka-a-a-d[a]m / es i r a
ki-ma i-na qa-ti-ia i-ba-a-u- / u-ta-ar-ki-ma-an
And I made one boat of 20 ugar go to Imar. (Only) after this boat has passed
Ganibtum did the letter of my lord, concerning the transport of asphalt by boat,
59. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 66ff.
60. This translation of the tua phrase differs from that of LAPO 18, 996. Durand translates: Je devais
aller Qaunn mais la tablette de mon Seigneur ... est arrive ... (in FM), or Jaurais d aller
Qaunn mais, etc. (in LAPO). However, this usage of tua is unknown to me. This MP does not denote unfulfilled wishes but wrong assumptions. Therefore, tua must refer to what the king has incorrectly
thought was the location of the speaker at the moment he sent his orders to him. The continuation of the
letter makes it clear: mimma ana Qaunn ul allik, which is a typical contrastive phrase, refuting the false
assumption that precedes.

132

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

arrive to me. Had-man the letter of my lord arrived to me before the dispatch of the
boat, asphaltas much as I have in my handsI would have transported-man.
The similarity of the situations described in the two passages is obvious. However,
in the second passage, the writer does not wish to refute a previous assumption of the
king (probably because doing so twice in a single letter was too much). Instead, this time
Yaqqim-Addu says that he could not possibly fulfill the royal order. Had the circumstances been different, he stresses, he would have done so: a typical usage of man in an
unreal conditional sentence.
The MP man deserves further research. One path that ought to be investigated is the
relationship of man to the other enclitic particles in Akkadian: ma, m, and mi. Is
the phonetic resemblance between these particles merely accidental? Or do these four
enclitic MPs form a (historically) coherent subcategory? These questions will be left out
of this discussion, but it is certainly true that man is not the only means that OB has for
creating hypothetical and counterfactual sentences. It is time to present briefly the other
ways to denote irrealis in OB.
Other Expressions of Potentialis and Irrealis
Potentialis and Irrealis with ibai
In some cases, the verbal form ibai, lit., (it) happens, serves to denote a possibilityrealizable, remote, or even unreal. This was already understood by Finet in his
Laccadien des lettres de Mari, where we read: ibai ... joue le rle dun adverbe
avec le sens de cest possible, cest vrai .61 A few examples will suffice:
ARM 5, 9:527:62
30 udu- 50 dug getin ma-lu- / dam a l m -l a 4-l a 4 / i-na tu-uttu-[u]lki / ik-ta-lu- ... i-ba-a-i-ma {NA} a-i li-i-pu-ra-a[m] / li-wa-e-ru-niu-nu-ti
They have retained in Tuttul thirty sheep, fifty full jars of wine, and the wife of
a sailor.... Is it possible (ibai-ma) that my brother will write so that they will
release them?
Durand, in two treatments of ARM 5, 9:527, oscillates between two options. In 2000:
Cest un fait: il faut que mon frre ecrive qu'on les laisse aller!63 and in 2002: Il est
possible que mon frre ecrive afin quon les delivre.64 In my opinion, Durands more
recent translation is correctnamely, ibai serves as a periphrastic idiom, on the way
to being delexicalized and fully grammaticalized, that belongs to the group of epistemic
MPs, together with pqat, midde, wuddi, and assurr. Another example:
61. Finet 1956: 126 c.
62. Cf. LAPO 18, 915.
63. LAPO 18, 915 (2000).
64. FM 7, p. 102, note (c).

Other Expressions of Potentialis and Irrealis

133

AbB 14, 154:412:65

i-ba-a-i an-nu-um e-q-el / bi-ra-am a-la-ka-am-ma / na-az-ka-ku-ma wa-arka-ti / -ul ta-pa-ra-s / a-na-ku mu-a-am ka-a-tam / u-na-ti-ka-ma a-na-aal / e-ma-ka at-ta ki-ma / la ni-in-na-am-ru-ma / la a-ba-a-u-
Is it possible that I come a distance of two-double hours, very worried, but you
do not show any interest in me? I dream of you night and day and I am your sonin-law, but you (behave) as (if) we never met and that I a do not exist!
The modal function of ibai in these two cases is strengthened by the fact that this
semiparticle stands at the head of the clause (unlike, e.g., the nonmodal use in AbB 14,
113:57).66 The negative formulation, ul ibai, also exists:
FM 7, 26:4952:
a-um 0,0.1-m ti-na-tim a-mu-ur-re-tim / a-na e-er be-l-ia u-bu-li-im be-l
i-pu-ra-am / a-ta-a-al-ma -ul i-ba-a-i / [gi]p a-mu-re-em lu--m[u-u
l]i-il-q-nim
My lord has written to me about sending to my lord ten liters of Amorite figs. I
have checked (it) out and it is impossible (ul ibai) that I will pick an Amorite
fig and that they will take it.
A parallel case of a grammaticalized verbal form that serves as a conjunction or an interjection is ezub, or ezib, lit., (it) is left, or: leave (it).67 Unlike ezub, however, ibai
and ul ibai function as particles-to-be, because they prefer, if not require, a relative
clause68 or precative verbal forms (which are verbal forms in a relative position).
The Particle l Expressing Irrealis
Another OB irrealis construction employs the particle l.69 A Babylonian letter that
praises the culinary value of mice reads:
AbB 14, 67:515:70
i-tu urutu-ur-d-gul-lki / 7 -u-um-mi tu-tu-ma-gir / -e-bi-lam-ma / 6 a-na
d
UTU-la-ma-s-u za-bar-da-bi-im / u-ta-bi-il / i-te-en a-na a-ka-li-ia / ak-lama-a / ma-di-i -ab / ki-ma -bu lu- i-de-e / mi-im-ma-ma-an a-na du t u -lama-s-u / -ul -e-bi-il
Tutu-magir sent me seven uummu-mice from Tur-Ugulla. I had brought six to
the Zabardabb ama-lamassau; one I kept for my consumption and it was
65. Ref. E. Cohen. See similarly AbB 4, 64:1415.
66. Ref. E. Cohen.
67. Cf. CAD E 429 s.v. ezib and Veenhof 1982: 13435 (see also OBTR 134:24; FM 9, 24:11; FM 9,
36:39; ARM 30, p. 388:6).
68. E.g., Eidem, Shemshara Letters 63:22.
69. GAG 121c, 152f, 158c (with Erg.) Krebernik and Streck 2001: 72 (4.2).
70. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 61f.

134

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

delicious! Had I known (l de) how tasty they are, I would have sent none-man at
all to ama-lamassau!
The irrealis force in this passage is achieved by the MP man but also by the precative
form l de. As Veenhof notes in his edition of the text,71 the regular use of l de as
affirmative makes little sense here.72 It is better understood as denoting an irrealis conditional meaning, had I only known.... A similar construction, of l and man is found
in a letter cited above:73
AbB 9, 240:2130:74
a la ia-ti / ma-nu-um a-a-at-ki / lu a-ab-ki-im / ha-am-i-u--ma-an / i-tia-an-ni / qi-bi-um-ma / 1 gn k-ba bbar / li-a-bi-lam / la e-ni-i / ap-pu-tum
Who is your sister, but me? It would have pleased you (l), even if he had failed
me five times-man. Tell him to send me one shekel of silver. I must not grow weak.
Please!
And, a case of l alone with an irrealis meaning:
AbB 14, 140:511:
p-q-tu a re n-me i-a-ki-im-ma / a - a-na a-ba-ti-im i-ba-a-i / a
k- babbar na-u- i-ru-up-ma i-a-ba-at / a- ma-a-re-em-ma a-na q-ruub-ti-ki / im-q-ta-am-ma i-ma-ki k-bab b ar a-ta-na-a- / ba-lu mu-we-rum
an-na-am ap-la-an-ni / 1 gn k-ba bbar lu na-i-a-ku
The inspection of the working-troops has be carried out and there are (still) fields
to take. Anyone who has silver, if he is early takes (one). At first a field in your
vicinity fell to my share, but for lack of silver I was very distressed (and did not
take it). Give me an OK without the (approval) of the director. Had I had one
shekel of silver...!
The same use of l de as irrealis is found in SB Gilgame:
George 2003: 63637 (SB VII):4749:
lu- i-di gi -ig ki-i an-nu-[ gi-mil-k]i?: / k i m i n (= l di dalat k ann) dumuq-k[i] / lu- -i pa-a- lu- ak-ki!-sa k[a-a-i]
Had I but known, O door, that this would be your [reward,] had I but known, O
door, that this would be your bounty, I would have picked up an axe, I would
have cut you down.
71. AbB 14, p. 61, note (e).
72. Veenhof renders this affirmative form as I should have known, but verily, I do know is more
accurate.
73. Note that l in OB sources can denote irrealis by means of the combination of the two particles,
resulting in l-man (GAG 121c and AHw 563).
74. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 62.

Other Expressions of Potentialis and Irrealis

135

It is difficult to avoid comparison with Biblical Hebrew, which commonly uses the
particle l to create unreal conditionals, as in l ydat, had I known. But this comparative Semitic reference is not necessary, because Akkadian itself furnishes adequate
explanation for this usage. It is well known that the synthetic precative forms liprus and
the analytic l forms canas a corollary of their concessive functionserve in conditional sentences.75 Because they carry conditional meaning, precative forms were also
ready to express irrealis meanings, as the following example shows; it is a letter sent
by Rm-Sn of Larsa to his representatives in Enunna, citing the words of the Larsan
representatives to Dadua, the king of Enunna:
Rowton 1967: 269:2030:
i-tu iti 5- kam wa-a-ba-nu-ma / me-e -ul ta-ad-di-na-an-ni-a-i-im / a-na
i-di-ni a-di ni-nu a-ni-ki-am / wa-a-ba-nu / b-e-el-ni a-na ar-ri-im ra-bi-i-im/
a elamki i-pur-ma / i-ni-u it-ta-al-ku it-tu-ru-nim / a-na di7 g al a ra-piqumki / b-el-ni li-i-pu-ur / me-e -la-ma-an ik-lu-ni-a-i-im / it-ta-ad-nu-ni-ai-im-ma-an
(Although) we have been (here) five months, you (Dadua) still have not granted
us the (the right to travel and transport the merchandise by) water. (But) while
we were staying here, our lord (Rm-Sn) wrote on our behalf to the great king
of Elam; twice (already) they have departed and returned. Had (only) our master
appealed (lipurs) to the great River god of Rpiqum (i.e., turning to the riverordeal in order to settle the matter), they would not have withheld the (right to
travel by) water from us; they would have given it to us-man!76
A similar range of modal functionsobligation, concession, and conditional, both
deontic and epistemicis detected in the Sumerian modal prefix -.77 This resemblance, hardly accidental, calls for investigation, though the scope is beyond this study.
The Conjunction aar Expressing Irrealis
The last means, which renders irrealis in OB is recorded in an early letter from
Enunna: the conjunction aar, lit. in place where ... followed by a verb in the subjunctive. A similar use of aar is known mainly, if not exclusively in OA sources.78
Whiting 1987: 6:314:
a-lu-um / i-na ir-ni-ti / a-mu-ri-im / a-ki-in / a-na be-l-a / -da-na-an /
-ni-in / at-wu-i / -la a-na-d-in / a-ar la -da-ni-nu-na / [be-l] kia-d[] / [i-t]a-ki-[is?]
75. Cohen 2005: 14454.
76. Charpin and Durand 1991: 62: si notre matre avait crit au grand dieu Id (= Fleuve) de Rpiqum,
on ne nous aurait pas retenu leau, mais on nous laurait donne.
77. See Civil 2000: 3135 and, recently, Rubio 2007: 1341.
78. Whiting 1987: 43 ad line 12. Also: Rowton 1967: 269.

136

The Modal Particle -man and the Irrealis Constructions ibai, l, and aar

The city is under (the threat) of an Amorite victory. I am stressing (the urgency
of the situation) to my lord. I will not let two (things) to be discussed. Had I not
(aar) stressed (the urgency of it), my lord would have cut off my neck.
The verb in the apodosis (ittakis) is in the perfect tense, exhibiting the tense descent
documented above.
The last three special ways of expressing unreal conditionals in OB just discussed
ibai, l, and aarprove that irrealis occupies a wide spectrum within the domain of
modality. However, only the MP man was fully grammaticalized and used freely in the
OB period.
List of attestations of irrealis constructions: man, ibai, l, and aar
(PNs with the element umman are not listed.
Passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.

*AbB 3, 33:912
AbB 5, 157:115
*AbB 5, 232:2327
AbB 6,188:3940
AbB 9, 41:2432
*AbB 9, 240:2130 (also l)
AbB 9, 255:415
*AbB 10, 5:822
AbB 10, 169:68
*AbB 11, 17:414
AbB 13, 6:2627
AbB 14, 58:510
AbB 14, 59:1824
AbB 14, 61:48
*AbB 14, 67:515 (l)
*AbB 14, 140:511 (l)
*AbB 14, 154:412 (ibai)
AbB 14, 190:618
AbB 14, 204:1321
*AbB 14, 205:1921 (umma l)
ARM 2, 117:415 (LAPO 18, 1187)
*ARM 5, 9:527 (ibai)
ARM 5, 20:1417 (LAPO 16, 256)
ARM 5, 20:2935 (LAPO 16, 256)
*ARM 10, 20:1319
ARM 10, 27:2729 (LAPO 18, 1136)
*ARM 10, 74:1037 (LAPO 18, 1242)
*ARM 10, 92:914 (LAPO 18, 1211)
ARM 14, 83:1419 (LAPO 17, 568)
ARM 26/1, 28:512
ARM 26/1, 37:1216
ARM 26/1, 37:2027
*ARM 26/1, 57:511

34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.

ARM 26/1, 66:14

ARM 26/1, 170:28
*ARM 26/1, 189:1823
*ARM 26/1, 233:2431
ARM 26/2, 298:2938 (Ziegler 2006: 72
(6.5)
ARM 26/2, 313:2731
ARM 26/2, 329:5765
ARM 26/2, 390:17
ARM 26/2, 411:3942
*ARM 26/2, 412:2224
*ARM 26/2, 412:5965
ARM 26/2, 449:3745
ARM 26/2, 468:2024
*ARM 26/2, 469:1015
ARM 26/2, 541:59
ARM 27, 132:512
ARM 28, 105:2526
ARM 28, 159:1013
ARM 28, 179:3141
CAD M/2 84a
CT 48, 23:115
Charpin and Durand 2002: 9596:2023
Dalley 2001: 164, No. 3:23
*Dossin 1956: 66:1418
Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii 1317
FM 1, pp. 11517:2430
FM 2, 71:1015
*FM 7, 26:4952 (ibai)
*FM 8, 19:48 (tua)
*FM 8, 19:1322 (LAPO 18, 996)
*George 2003: 27879 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii
59

Other Expressions of Potentialis and Irrealis

65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.

*George 2003: 63637 (SB VII):4749 (l)

George 2009: 51:16
*Goetze 1958: 2122, No. 4:3738
Groneberg 1997: 112:8788
Kienast 1978: 174:413
Kienast 1978: 174:1421
Lacambre 1997: 446:912
Lacambre 1997: 448:3839
Lambert 1987: 192:5051
Lambert 1989: 326:6972
Lambert 1989: 327:106
Lambert and Millard 1969: 96: iv 5
MARI 6, 33839:7276

137
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.

MARI 8, 44849:3841
OBTR 161:825
*Rowton 1967: 269:2030 (precative)
UET 6/2, 396:19
UET 6/2, 399:21
Westenholz 1997: 216:1417
*Whiting 1987: 6:314 (aar)
YOS 11, 24: i 7
YOS 11, 24: i 1213
YOS 11,24: ii 12
Ziegler 2001: 498:1014

I must be able to satisfy myself that I am right.

Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty

Chapter 7
The Modal Particle ka and
the Expressions k a and kma a
To embark on the study of the MP ka necessitates some preliminary investigations.
First, we must confirm that we are not in fact dealing with the analytic syntagm k a,
thus ascertaining the very existence of a separate MP ka. Subsequently, we must examine the OB modal expression kma a. This path will lead us to tackle the issue of the
etymology of kamuch earlier than was the case for the modal particles discussed in
the previous chapters. Finally, the analysis of ka will help us sharpen the differences
between ka and tua.
Synthetic ka or Analytic k a?
As an expansion of the conjunction k, various dialects of Akkadian create the pleonastic expression k a. Dietrich (1969: 7778) has treated this expression in NeoBabylonian and Neo-Assyrian, identifying its temporal meaning: when, as soon as.
OB letters attest this use of k a as well:
ARM 4, 28:2125:1
ki a a-b-e-em / -wa-e-ra-kum /// a-na a-pa-a-na-s-imki / ta-na-a-ee[em]
As soon as (k a) I order you to move the army ... change (your) position to ap-Nsim.
More relevant for our study is the use of the syntagm k a with a comparison force,
meaning just as.2 In the same Mari letter just cited, we read:
ARM 4, 28:1014:
i-nu-ma a-lamki a-a-t[i ta-a-ba-tu] / ki a pa-na-nu-um / ka-la-u [ki-la] / la
tu-wa-a-e-er-[u] / tu-ka-al-[u] ...
1. LAPO 17, 472.
2. CAD K 320 b; AHw 469b 6b: (ebenso) wie.

138

Synthetic ka or Analytic k a?

139

Now that you have captured that town, [hold] it entirely just as (k a) before, do
not drop [it], you should hold to it.
In this passage, k a is nonmodal and makes a simple comparison.3 But in some cases,
k a uncontestedly carries the modal meaning as ifthat is, it introduces a suppositional clause. Note the Middle Babylonian letter from Turatta, king of Mittani, to the
Egyptian pharaoh, Amenhotep III:
EA 20:1112:
[]a-a-pa da-an-ni-i-ma a-ma-a-ti-[]u a e-ia ki-i a e-ia-ma / a-mu-ru
a-ta-du i-na u4-mi [a-a]-i ma-a-ta da-an-ni-i
Very pleasing indeed were the words of my brother. I rejoiced on that day as if (k
a) I had seen my brother in person.4
More common than k a, OB sources employ kma a to express the same modal
function:5
AbB 1, 46:89:6
[um-m]a at-ta-a-ma ki-ma a a-na-ku al-li-kam / u-du-u e-um a i-ma-a-r
ia-
[Thu]s did you say: Rejoice on it (the grain?), as if (kma a) I came (myself),
further: the grain that he will receive is mine!
AbB 1, 53:2326:7
i-tu pa-na-nu-um wa-ar-ka-nu / ki-ma a be-l ba-al- a-na be-el-ti-ia-ma/
ta-ak-la-a-ku am-mi-nim be-el-ti / a-a-a i-li-ia id-di-ma
Just as before, as if (kma a) my lord were still alive, on my lady I trust. Why
does my lady neglect me?
AbB 9, 148:2023:8
a-nu-um-ma ka-al-la-at-ni / i[t]-ta-al-ka k[i]-ma / []a a-na-ku wa-a-ba-a-ku/
ne-e-

3. An interesting case, in which k a is used in a complexnot simplecomparison is found in an OB

incantation, where it means instead. Farber 1989: 34:78: ki-i a du-um-q-am [t]e-pu-u a-ba-k[a] /
s[u-q]-am a ni-i um-ma-ka tu-u-bi-u5 Instead of (k a) doing good to your father, letting your mother
pass (quietly) in the peoples street. . . .
4. Moran 1992: 47 and Adler 1976: 13637.
5. In some cases, kma alone (and not kma a) can build an irrealis sentence: e.g., AbB 14, 190:1011:
[a]-wi-lum ki-ma na-di-tim / [i]l-ta-pa-s-i-ma, the man has laid a hand on her as if (kma) she were a
nadtum (note the classical irrealis sentence in lines 1315). See also AbB 14, 154:10 (with note).
6. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 73 (No. 73).
7. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 73 (No. 76).
8. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 73 (No. 77).

140

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

Now, our daughter-in-law has departed. Make it easy for her, as if (kma a) I
myself were present (before you).
AbB 11, 187:828:9
a-na a-li-im / a-la-ka-am / -ul e-le-i / a-na a-li-[im] / a-li-ik-m[a] / bi-it kunu!-[uk-ki-im] / pi-te-e-[ma] / . ... . / ap-pu-tum / ki-i-ma a a-na-ku- / al-liku-/ a-ta-ka-la-ku
I cannot go to the town. Go to the town and open the sealed storeroom....
Please! I rely on you, as if (kma a) I had come myself.
AbB 14, 125:1820:
la tu-u-ta-a-a-i / ki-ma a a-na-ku wa-a-ba-a-ku / pa-nu-a lu na-at-x
Dont fraternize with her.10 She should be treated correctly, as if (kma a) I
myself were present!
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1419:
a-na be-l-ia / ki-a-am aq-bu- um-ma a-na-ku-ma / -lu pu-a-at ln ag ar lu-uddi-i[n] / -lu-ma 13 ma-na k-ba bbar lu-u-q-u[l] / be-l i-zi-za-am um-maa-mi ki-m[a a] / k-babba r-a-am a-ia-i-im ta-a-aq-qa-l[u]
I spoke to my lord as follows: either I would give you a replacement for the
carpenter or I pay third of mina of silver, but my lord got angry with me and
said: as if you would pay money to me!
Shemshara Letters 4:312:
tup-pa-ka a tu-a-bi-lam e-me / a-wa-[t]u-ka ma-al ta-a-pu-ra-am s-an-qa /
a-wa-at ia-u-ub-dIM li-il / qa-at dingir e-li-u e4-em-u ma-q-it / a-wa-tiu -ul i-di / ni-i dingir a i-za-ka-ru / -ul i-di / ki-ma a i-na u-ut-ti-u /
ni-i dingir i-za-ka-ru / i-na-a li-il-lu e4-em-u ma-aq-[t]u
I heard your letter which you have sent to me. Your words, as much as you have
written to me, are accurate. (As for) the words of Yaub-Adduhe is mad! The
hand of the god (is) on him. His reason has diminished. He doesnt know his
(own) words. Truly he doesnt know the oath he took: as if he took the oath in his
sleephe forgets. A mad man: truly his reasons are diminished.
As these passages demonstrate, the meaning of kma a is straightforward. It presents a
nonreal, suppositional situation, parallel to that which actually occurs: the writer is present as if by the grain (AbB 1, 46:89); the imaginary situation, in which it is as if the
speakers former master is still alive (AbB 1, 53:2326); the unreal situation, in which
9. Krebernik and Streck 2001: 73 (No. 74).
10. The writer informs the addressee that he sent his sister to him, yet he warns him not to treat her too
in a too-friendly manner (uthm) but to be business-like with her and try to bind her by contract regarding
a date plantation that the addressee and the writer together manage.

Etymology

141

it is as if the speaker himself accompanies his daughter-in-law (AbB 9, 148:2023); the

hypothetical possibility, in which it is as if the speaker set off to the town with his addressee (AbB 11, 187:814 ... 2528); the unthinkable situation in which it is as if the
underling patronizes his lord by paying him money (ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1419);
and the absurd case in which it is as if an oath is taken while asleep (Shemshara Letters
4:312).11 This suppositional use of the syntagm k a, as if, and of the more-comon
kma a, is, I submit, the origin of the OB MP ka.
An intermediate case, where it is hard to tell whether the syntagm k a or the MP ka
is entailed, can be found in another royal letter from the Middle Babylonian period, sent
from the Babylonian king Burnaburia to the Egyptian pharaoh. This intermediate use
strengthens our argument in favor of the transition from k a to ka:
EA 7:6970:
gu kin ma-a-ra-a a a-u--a -e-bi-la ki-a a-u--a ul i-mu-ur / q-a-a-panu-um-ma a a-i-ia ik-nu-uk-ma -e-bi-la
Certainly my brother did not check the earlier (shipment of) gold that my brother
sent to me. It was only a deputy of my brother who sealed and sent it to me.12
This passage, however, can also be interpreted, without any violation of its contents or
tone, as containing not the MP ka but the expression k a:
(It is) as if my brother did not check the earlier (shipment of) gold that my
brother sent to me, and it was only a deputy of my brother who sealed and sent it
to me.
The vacillation of the CAD regarding the translation of these lines proves the difficulty
of choosing between these two options.13
Etymology
The conclusions from these examples directly affect our understanding of the etymology of ka. If the analysis presented above holds true, then the ambiguity concerning
the first consonant of the MP under discussionnamely, whether it is /k/ (ka) or /q/
(qa)is resolved.14 Furthermore, the grammaticalization process identified, according
11. At present, the irrealis use of kma a seems to be more typical of Babylonian epistolary style. In
Mari, kma a is usually used literally: (to be) as it is/was ..., e.g., ARM 13, 37:79: ki-ma-a a i-na
pa-ni-tim b - / u d u - i-na qa-a--na-anki dan-na / i-na p ri-ti-ma ih-li-q, would it be as before
that the cows and the sheep in Qaunn almost perished because of (lack) of pasture? (cf. LAPO 17, 755,
with notes c and d).
12. So Moran 1992: 14 (with n. 20). Cf. Aro 1955: 83.
13. CAD K 445, s.v. ka: evidently my brother has not checked the gold that my brother has sent me
..., vs. CAD K 320 b, s.v. k a, which translates: because my brother did not inspect (it). The spelling
ki-a (without the lengthening ki-i a) seems to indicate the MP ka. Nonetheless, in OB sources ki a may
stand for ka as well as for k a.
14. Goetze (1958: 43), based on the variant ka-a-ma of ki-a-ma (The Babylonian Theodicy, cited in
CAD K 445), also concluded that the MP should be read with /ki/, not /q/.

142

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

to which k a led to ka, excludes the analysis of ka as deriving from a verb,15 namely,
from the imperative of qium, to give, to presentthat is, give me! This suggestion was raised by von Soden in his early studies,16 maintained in the first two editions
of the GAG,17 held by some contemporary scholars,18 but eventually aborted by the
redactors of the third edition of the GAG.19 Thus, although there are some arguments
that provide support for this idea,20 the connection that links k a with ka rules out
von Sodens etymology. Likewise, the possibility that the verb kium, to help,21 is
the source of ka should be rejected. This possibility, offered with some hesitation in
the AHw,22 should be abandoned not only because of the connection of k a to ka but
also because kium is, in my opinion, a byform of the more common verb ium, to
hurry, to hasten,23 and it is unlikely that a MP would derive from the secondary instead
of the primary form of the verb. In addition, from a semantic point of view, it is hard see
how to hurry, to hasten or to help can be the origin of the MP under consideration.
Weighing the various arguments, the possibility that the MP ka resulted from the
fusion of two small particles, k and a, seems most likely.24 Its construction has a parallel in the omnipresent kma (<k+ma)25 and to the adverb ka()u/kaa (<k+a,
or kam+u), meaning like that.26 The adhesive character of a is manifest in the
rare conjunction ia (<in(a)+a), whereas, although.27 Analyzed in this way, ka
15. As far as I could find, Dossin (192930: 200) was the first to offer a verbal origin for ka(m)ma,
suggesting that this MP should be analyzed as a stative form of kum. Goetze (1958: 43) followed Dossin and accepted this derivation. Note, however, that the lexical knowledge regarding kum and qum
available at that time was insufficient and impeded these scholars from getting the correct meaning of these
verbs.
16. First, hesitantly, in von Soden 1933: 114 n. 2; then, with more confidence in von Soden 1952: 430.
17. GAG 121d (schenke mir, gib mir zu und).
18. Supported by Aro 1955: 83 but rejected by Goetze 1958: 43.
19.GAG3 121d clearly holds that the MP under discussion is ka, not qa, and that it ought to be
translated as gewi.
20. The first argument in favor of the etymology of ka as a grammaticalized imperative form of qium
is that there are other epistemic MPs in OB that evolve directly from verbal forms: wuddi, a grammaticalized imperative of wadm, and pqat, a grammaticalized stative of piqum. Similarly, ezub or ezib, apart
from (CAD E 429 and AHw 270 s.v.), a stative or imperative form of ezbum, can also be mentioned here,
although they are not MPs stricto sensu. In addition, from a semantic point of view, qa, lit., give me!
may be parallel to the late Akkadian exhortative conjunction binna, ibinna < in-inna (Aram. hib + Akk.
idna/inna), please!, come on! lit., give (me)! (AHw 126b, s.v. bn; CAD B 216f. s.v. b and GAG 107w).
21. CAD K 295; AHw 463a; CDA 155. As already mentioned, based on incomplete lexical knowledge,
Dossin (192930: 200) and Goetze (1958: 43) both took ka to be a derivative of kum.
22. AHw 490, s.v. ka(m)ma: (Imp. zu kium?).
23. CDA 114, s.v.; AHw 343a, s.v. For arguments against this suggestion, see W. Mayers note in Or.
77 (2008) 352 n. 6.
24. Cf. von Soden 1933: 114 n. 2, where ka is tentatively said to originate from k+iam, a distributive
enclitic particle. This proposal was later discarded (probably because it became clear that kam is only a
byform of ka, hence iam cannot be involved here).
25. AHw 476b, s.v.
26. CAD K 329; AHw 470b, (4) s.v. kam; CDA 155 s.v. ka()u (<kam+u). For k a (separated) with
a comparison meaning as ..., see GAG 178f.
27. CAD I/J 262 s.v. whereas, although; AHw 398a, s.v; CDA 134 s.v.

The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution

143

supplies another example of one of the two mechanisms that Akkadian employs to create MPs: welding smaller elements to a MP (as in assurr < ana/ina surr and midde
< mn de). The other mechanism is adapting existing verbal forms, without changing
them, and altering their meaning through grammaticalization (as with wuddi and pqat).
The case of tua is somewhat unique, since this MP is a result of grammaticalization of
a nominal, not verbal, form, tuum, calumniation, slander.
It is time now to take a closer look at the examples of ka from the OB corpus.
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution
The MP ka is not particularly common: I know of approximately 10 occurrences of
this MP in OB sources.28 In later texts it is also quite rare. As already mentioned, ka
is probably found in EA 7, and it is also found in The Babylonian Theodicy in the form
ka-ma (in an unpublished duplicate of this composition, the variant ka-a-ma is attested29). The available data shows that ka, like other OB MPs, is typical of epistolary
texts and can be safely tagged as a conversation particle. Even in The Babylonian Theodicy, the sole literary text in which ka is found, it is employed in a dialogue between
two friends. According to the published material, ka is attested mainly in Babylonian
sources. However, additional attestations in unpublished letters (not included here) are
known.
Previous Studies of ka
The MP ka (or kam, or kamma) is translated by the CAD: certainly, evidently.30
AHw assigns a special meaning to it: but excuse me!a polite objection to the addressees words.31 This interpretation of ka was developed by von Soden in his Der
Hymnisch-epische Dialekt.32 CDA follows this analysis and offers: forgive me ... implying polite contradiction.33 A survey of the available material proves that in many
cases von Soden has captured well the subtle nuances of this MP but also that in other
cases the more general meaning proposed by the CAD can be justified.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of ka
An examination of the collected examples reveals a complex situation. This is due to
the fact that not many cases of ka are available and, in addition, some of the attestations are badly preserved. More problematic still is the fact that ka passages are highly
modal, containing a swirl of arguments and irony, and as a result they do not yield easily
to unequivocal interpretation. Despite these difficulties, the material at hand allows us to
construe its meaning with a fair degree of assurance.
28. According to Durands collations (LAPO 18, 1217), ka is not found in ARM 10, 102:16.
29. Cited in CAD K 445.
30. CAD K 445.
31. AHw 490b s.v. ka(m)ma: verzeih mir! (im Sinn von doch wohl).
32. Von Soden 1933: 114 n. 2.
33. CDA 163b s.v.

144

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

It is clear that in some cases ka does not function merely as a certifier (so the
CAD). Instead, in this group of texts, the speaker uses ka to raise a polite yet sharp
objection to the addressees words, resulting in phrases with unmistakable ironic overtone or even a teasing effect. However, in the rest of the cases, ka does function as a
certifier, in manner similar to the way that the MP wuddi is used. Let us begin with
some examples of the first group, where ka raises an ironic suppositional statement,
resulting in a sarcastic objection to the addressees words.
1. ka Denoting Irony and Sarcastic Objection
Irony is a subtle concept, difficult to pin down. This is especially true when ancient
texts are the object of analysis. We cannot easily distinguish between a straightforward
expression, such as what a beautiful woman she is! and the ironic use of the same phrase,
meaning precisely the opposite: that this woman is not beautiful at all. An especially
careful reading is needed in such cases. The following examples are interpreted as ironic.
The justification for this reading is that they contain a phrase that is found in a context
that calls for a nonliteral reading.
AbB 2, 108:412:
pa-a-ta-am ki-a-ma / a-na-ku i-na -bi-ia / a-ru-da-a-u(sic) / um-ma i-ima/ a-a-um a be-el-ti-ia / e-li-ia na-di-a-at / lu-ul-{li}-lik e-ep / be-el-ti-ia
lu-I-ba-at-ma / lu-ub-lu-u
Aatumsurely you must be thinking that (ka-ma) I have sent her (text: him)
out of my good will. (In fact) thats what she said: the rod of my lady is pending
on me: let me go and grasp the foot of my lady so that I may live!
In this letter, the writer opposes the idea, probably expressed orally by his addressee or
mentioned in their previous correspondence, that he acted toward Aatum out of sheer
kindness. He stresses that in fact the woman left him no option but to let her go. It is hard
to ignore the cynical tone in this passage. Similarly:
AbB 9, 63:819:
i-na a-at-tim an-ni-tim / ti-ri-in-ni-i-ma / na-ra-am u-bi-ri-in-ni / i-b[a]-a-ti
a-na pa-ni-ia / ep-i-i-ma / la a-a-[a]-a / 10 m a-n a s g -g i n pgi-mil-la-at-30/
i-na-ad-di-ik-k(sic) / a-um pa-pil-dba!(text: LU)- / n i n d a u- a i-ka-lu / kia-ma la ma-ak-ku-ur-ki / ninda a-a-ti la tu-wa-a-a-ri-u
This year bring me back and have me cross the river. Do (what is necessary)
before I arrive so that I will not feel discomfort. Gimillat-Sn will give you 10
minas of ordinary wool. As for Apil-Bau, that bread which he is eatingsurely
he must be thinking that (ka-ma) it is not your property! Do not allow him that
bread!34
34. Von Soden (1933: 114 n. 2) suggested, following Landsberger, rendering ka here as wenn etwa.
Dossin (192930: 200), on the other hand, translated kama here as en vrit, which fits better.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofka

145

Starting with words of petition, the speaker gains confidence, and his words culminate
in a sarcastic accusation against Apil-Bau whoin the view of the speakeris shamelessly consuming the property of the addressee (which of course, would leave less for
the anticipated consumption by the speaker). See also:
AbB 1, 122:418:
at-ma / i-nu-ma a-a-lu-ka / ki-ma a-na -g u4ki / -wa-e-ru-ka/ la
i-du--ma / la a-i-q-ka / [k]i-a a-na k -d i n g i r-raki / ta-la-ak / a-a-al-ka/
a-di tu-tu-i-ti-kl / iq-bi-am / la i-du- / um-ma a-i at-ta / ki--ir li-bi-im/ la
ta-ra-a-e20-em
damar - utu

I swear by Marduk (that) when I asked you, I did not know that they have
sent you to Kullizum, and I did not kiss you.35Surely you are going (ka)
to Babylon, I teased you. Until Tutui-tikal told me I did not know (that you
actually went to Kullizum). If you are my brother, do not hold anything against
me in your heart.
At the beginning of the passage, lum means simply to ask. But in the remainder of
the text, this verb develops a more emphatic coloring: to interrogate someone unpleasantly, to investigate, to probe (and even to torture).36 Another case of ironic use of
ka is found in the following letter:
AbB 9, 184:1825:
i-tu -bu-tam / a-ti i-te-ep-u gukin / KU wa-ar-ki a-ni-i-ma / -ul i-la-ak
ki-[a]-ma / i-na la i-di-im a-pu-ra-ku / pr-NI-tim a-al-ma / li-iq-bi-ku-um kima / a it-ti-ka a-da-bu-bu la wa-at-ra
After he has done that business, gold ... will not come here?!37 Evidently (you
think) (ka-ma) that I wrote to you without knowing! Ask Warad- ... and he will
tell you that what I am saying is not exaggerated!38
In the two letters just cited, ka is associated with the speakers state of not-knowing.
In AbB 1, 122:418, the speaker was not aware of the true destination of his addressee (l
d-ma ... ka), thus picking on him unjustifiably. In AbB 9, 184:1825, the speaker is
angered by the addressees assumption that he is talking without a factual basis (kama
35. The subjunctive form l aiqu is erroneous and caused by way of attraction to the two subjunctive
forms that precede: aluka (depending on inma) and l d (depending on the oath formula Marduk atma
...).
36. This expanded meaning of lum is mainly attested in Mari (see conveniently, LAPO 18, pp.590
91, s.v. and also CDA 352). A similar semantic path, leading from asking to torturing, can be recognized in other languages as well. Consider French: infliger la question, soumettre la question, and Slavic
languages, notably Russian, where pitat meant originally to ask, and from the 15th century onward came
to denote to examine a matter in a court and to torture (see Preobrazhensky 1951: 160 and Chernykh
1999: II, 8889).
37. A difficult phrase. Stol translates it differently.
38. Stol (AbB 9, p. 119 note a) also notes: Ironic.

146

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

ina l idm). What these two texts have in common is that ka is employed when some
new piece of information is suddenly revealed, either to the speaker (AbB 1, 122) or to
the addressee (AbB 9, 184). This information sheds a new lightan ironic lighton the
previous assessments. We have already met a MP that denotes a rapid changeover from
the state of not-knowing to the state of knowing: tua. The resemblance and differences between ka and tua will be discussed shortly.
One last case of the ironic use of ka:
AbB 14, 182:815:
ren ka-lu-u a a-p-ri-ia-ma / a-na-ku s ag - r ki-nu-u[m ]a be-l-[ia] / ammi-ni a-wi-le pa-nu-ti-im a-p-r[i] / -te-ra-am-[ma i]t?-ti-u-nu-ma / li-ru-bu
li-- / ki-a-ma a-p-ri i-na BI-ir?-tim? / la! i-ha-ra-a-u-nu-ti / ren
ka-lu-u a a-p-ri-ia-ma,
The entire group is under my supervisors control, and I am a loyal servant of my
lord. Why has my supervisor returned the pervious gentlemen, so that they go
in and out with them? Evidently (ka-ma), my supervisor will not deduct them
from the garrison! Indeed the entire unit is under my supervisors control!39
As I understand this passage, the writer is bitter about what he considers an unjust diminishing of his authority by allowing other persons to interfere in his local command.
The ka phrase, embedded between two identical phrases of loyalty (bum kalu a
piriya), is used sarcastically, because, evidently, the personnel under the writers authority were already reduced in number.
2. ka as a Certifier
Now let us review the cases in which ka is employed with the meaning of certifier, without any ironic shading, similarly to wuddi:
Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510:
a[-u]m pbe-el-[u-nu] / ki-a-ma l[a ku]--um / gi-m[i-i]l-la-am / e-li-[u u]ku-un / a-um-mi-ia / wu-e-er-u
Concerning Blunu, surely (ka-ma) he does not belong to you! Have mercy on
him; release him for my sake.
By employing ka, the speaker opposes an administrative decision of the addressee
concerning a certain Blunu. The MP is used to form a shared perspective between
the speaker and the addressee, much like wuddi. It is possible, however, that this MP is
stronger than wuddi, perhaps insinuating something like: how possibly could you even
think that Blunu belongs to you. In the next letter, also from the Diyl region, ka
is used a bit differently than wuddi:
39. Veenhof translates ka-ma apparently.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofka

147

Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515:

a-um e4-mi-im a mu-ru-u4 / li-bi-ia ma-a-ri-ka / a-ku-nu / ri-a-am a-pura-ku-ma / g me -ul ta-d[i]-in / ki-a-ma i-na i-ni-ka / a-na a-ni-i la! (text: BA)
i-ba-i / li-bi -ib / i-na bi-tim -bu-tum / ki i-ma-a-a / g m e la ta-ka-la-am
As for the report of my troubles that I have presented to youI have sent you
a slave,40 but you did not give (me) a slave girl. Surely (ka-ma) your mind
doesnt go in my direction.41 Appease my heart: at home the work is so pressing.
Dont withhold the slave girl from me!
Here ka affirms a fact, or an assessment, that the speaker considers to be well known,
even self-evident. Yet, contrary to the common use of wuddi, where the MP is used by
the speaker to force the addressee to agree with him (surelywuddimy lord knows
that I have written to him ..., etc.), in the case of ka the speaker expects his addressee to refute his words. By saying evidently (ka-ma) your mind doesnt go in my
direction, the speaker leads the addressee to say: No! Why do you say this? Of course
I have my eyes in your direction!
But in some cases, it is really impossible to find any difference between the use of
wuddi and the use of ka, as the following Mari letter demonstrates:42
ki-a 1-u 2-u 3-u / [a-na be-l-i]a a-pu-ra-am / um-ma-a-mi b d i-q-upp/ [l] - itim be-l li-i-r[u-d]am / l-m-la-u-um / l[i]-i[l-l]i-kam-ma / u4
10-kam gi -m li-pu-
Certainly (ka) once, twice, (even) thrice I have written [to my lord], saying:
The wall has collapsed. Let my lord send a builder and let a boat-man come and
within ten days construct the boat.
We have already met numerical constructions of the type iti-u in-u ..., once,
twice ...; or iti-u (adi) ham-u ..., ... once, (until) five times ...; or even
-u ..., ... sixty times ...; all of these were typically used with the MP wuddi,
where the constructions emphasized the basic meaning of this MP by stressing the assurance of the speaker with his own words. The appearance of the numerical construction in
combination with ka is instructive and proves the semantic affinity of wuddi and ka,
at least in some of the cases of the latter. It is not hard to explain how the suppositional
function of ka evolved directly from the syntagm k/kma a. But how does ka, with
its meaning certainly, evolve from k a? I submit that the semantic weight of ka in
this meaning lies in k, while a only serves to mark the relative status of the statement
that follows. I connect the origin of the certifying function of ka to the use of k as an

40. Or perhaps: I have sent you the report through (ram, acc.) the slave?
41. Following CAD A/2 133 (b) s.v. anni: in your eyes there is no (looking) in my direction (see also
CAD K 445 (a) s.v. ka).
42. Example from the seminar of J.-M. Durand, Collge de France, 2007, to be published by him.

148

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

affirmative, reassuring particle.43 This is clearly exemplified in the well-known answer

of the clever slave in the Dialogue of Pessimism: arad mitanguranni ann bl ann
umma srtam lpu k-mi epu bl epu, Listen to me, slave! Here I am, my lord,
here I am. I am going to lead a revolution. Certainly (k-mi)! do it my lord, do it!;44
or: arad mitanguranni ann bl ann ummna luddin k-mi idin bl [idin], Listen to
me, slave! Here I am, my lord, here I am. I will give loans as a creditor!, Certainly
(k-mi)! Give my lord, [give!].45 Note that, in a manuscript from Babylon, k alone, not
k-mi, is used for the same function: umma epra ana mti luddin k idin bl idin, I will
load food to the country! Certainly (k)! Loan my lord, loan!46
In addition to this function of k, another use of the same particle may be relevant to
ka in its meaning certainly: the use of k as that, namely, as introducing content
sentences (German: Da-Stze), much like a alone.47 Admittedly, this specific use of k
is attested mainly, if not only, in later phases of Akkadian, from the Middle Babylonian
and Middle Assyrian periods onward, so its relevance to the OB corpus is unclear.48
ka and k/kma a vs. tua
The lexical correspondence between tu-u- and ki-i-a attested in Malku-arru
VIII:114 is our next topic.49 The analyses of the syntagmas k a and kma a (above)
and the earlier discussion of the MP tua will enable us better to assess this lexical
equivalence.
At the beginning, we are once again confronted with the persistent question of
whether tua is parallel to ka or to k a. As noted in chapter 5, the main function of
tua is to refute prior assumptions or presuppositions; it signifies a transition from the
hypothetical (proven erroneous) to the real. On the other hand, the syntagm kma a
(and the less common k a) presents unreal situations; it points from the real to the
hypothetical. Furthermore, tua carries a meaning of contrast between nonfactual
reality and actual reality, whereas kma a carries a meaning of comparison between
nonfactual reality and actual reality. In the case of kma a, the rhetorical effect is that of
accumulation: the nonfactual situation is not refuted and is not removed from the discussion; instead, the unreal situation is added and used as a means to bolster the speakers argument. In the case of tua, on the other hand, the nonexistent situation (the assumed assumption proved wrong) is pushed aside, and the sudden switch of knowledge
43. CAD K 322 (e).
44. Lambert 1960: 146:3940 (var. e).
45. Lambert 1960: 148: 6263.
46. Lambert 1960: 148:30 (and see also BWL 148:7071).
47. AHw 469b, (5); CAD K 319, 4; GAG 177c.
48. It is worth noting, nonetheless, that in many cases k in this use is governed by verbs that carry epistemic value, such as edm: e.g., arru da k muknu ankuni, the king knows that I am destitute (ABL
421:18, trans. CAD K 319, 4); or amrum: e.g., murma Bbil k uballau dMarduk, the Babylonians saw
that Marduk is able to restore to life (BWL 58:29, trans. CAD K 319, 4); thus, it is not impossible that k
in these circumstances also carries a secondary epistemic nuance of a certifier (the king certainly knows
that I am destitute, and the Babylonians certainly saw that Marduk is able to restore to life).
49. Hra 2010: 425.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofka

149

marked by tua creates a rhetorical effect of replacement. It seems, therefore, that the
lexical correspondence tu-u- = ki-i-a points not to k a (or kma a) but to the selfstanding MP ka.
The propinquity between tua and ka has already been mentioned above. The MP
tua and some cases of ka designate a sudden change of knowledge available to the
speaker or to another person involved in the circumstance. This increase of knowledge
leads to an instantaneous reassessment of the situation. Thus, what tua and ka (again,
only in some cases) have in common is that they are both operative in what I suggest
calling metastable assessment of the state of affairs.
Another point of affinity between tua and ka is that both allow, or even call for,
ironic use. See the following texts, the first, already cited above, with ka, the second
letter with tua: 50
AbB 2, 108:412:
pa-a-ta-am ki-a-ma / a-na-ku i-na -bi-ia / a-ru-da-a-u(sic) / um-ma i-ima/ a-a-um a be-el-ti-ia / e-li-ia na-di-a-at / lu-ul-{li}-lik e-ep / be-el-ti-ia
lu-I-ba-at-ma / lu-ub-lu-u
Aatumsurely you must be thinking that (ka-ma) I have sent her (text: him)
out of my good will. (In fact) thats what she said: the rod of my lady is pending
on me: let me go and grasp the foot of my lady so that I may live!
ARM 1, 73:1423:
a-ia-nu-um i-le-eq-q-e-em / -ul i-na e-im g e[ t i n] / a-na k -b ab b ar
it-ta-na-[d]i-in-ma / k-ba bbar a-a-ti i-ka-a-ra-am-ma -[-i-a-am] / .../
tu-a u-ur-ru-um a k-ba[bbar] / i-na a-al--u i-ba-a-i-ma / k -b ab b ar
i-le-q-a-am-ma ub-ba-lam / -ul i-na e-im g e t i n / k -b ab b ar a-a-ti
i-ka-a-ra-am-ma ub-ba-lam
Where would he take (the silver) from? Is it not from the grain, oil and wine
which he sells regularly, that he collects that silver and c[arries it to me]? (It is)
as if there is a mine of silver in his district, and he takes and carries (the silver) to
me! Is it not from the grain, oil and wine that he collects and carries that silver?!
However, as already stressed, in some cases, ka functions as a certifier (much like
wuddi), without rendering a situation nonreal or hypothetical. In these cases, therefore,
the connection to tua, which does not function as a certifier, is difficult to explain.
Furthermore, there are texts where tua can be replaced with k a or kma a. A clear
example comes from a literary text:

50. Especially in Sams-Addus letters, tua is used ironically, even sarcastically, see: ARM 1, 62:5
14; ARM 1, 73:1423; ARM 2, 6:416.

150

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

Westenholtz 1997: 6870:5759:

it-ta-a-ba-at ar-rum-ki-in / a-na ma-tim a -ta-ra-pa--tim / tu-a ge-ri-ma
q-i-tum ig-re-e-u
Sargon had (barely) ventured into the land of ta-rapatim, (when), as if (tua)
he were hostile, the forest waged war against him.
A similar case is found in an epistolary text:
AbB 6, 194:2526:
an-ni-a-tum wa-ar-ka-s-na -ul ip-pa-ar-ra-as / tu-a-ma am-tu-ut / ba-la-aaku
Concerning these (things) one should not worry. (It is) as if I am dead, (but) I am
alive!
Indisputably, one could use k a or kma a, as if, instead of tua in these cases without much change in meaning. Indeed, already in 1994, Leong suggested putting tua
and kma a in the same category of suppositional clauses (in contrast to counterfactual
conditionals, represented, according to him, by the irrealis particle man).51
The results of this part of the discussion remain somewhat confusing. On the one
hand, as the lexical list Malku reports, tua bears a substantial semantic affinity to ka.
Another important indication that tua and ka are closely connected is the fact that tua
and ka, and only these two MPs, employ the negation particle l, in contrast to the rest
of the OB MPs we have examined, all of which employ ul (more on this below). On the
other hand, the resemblance between tua and ka is restricted only to one aspect of the
two MPs, namely, that both are transitional MPs, describing metastable states of affairs.
Other cases clearly show that tua is semantically close to k a, not ka. These cases
probably reflect a partial grammaticalization of k a to ka.
The Syntactic Profile of ka
Having examined the etymology and semantics of ka, we now turn to outline its
main syntactic features.
1. Discourse Domains
The MP ka is used in all three discourse domains. It is found in relationship to the
first-person voice: AbB 9, 184:1825 (Evidently (you think) (ka-ma) that I wrote to
you without knowing!), and in a Mari letter:52
FM 9, 56:315:
[a-um] -ra-ab-ba-a-na-luga l a-lu-zi-nim / be-l up-pa-am -a-b[i]-l[am/
i-nu-ma l u- il-li-[kam] / ki-a-ma a-na e-er k as k al u l-d[n i n - u b u r] /
51. Leong 1994: 123, 224.
52. My thanks to N. Ziegler for drawing my attention to this letter.

The Syntactic Profile ofka

151

il-li-ik a-na e-ri-ia-m[a] / a-na mu-um-mi-u it-ta-al-[kam] / i-nu-ma il-li-kam

ma-a-ri-[ia] / mu-ru-u li-ib-bi-[u] / i-ku-un-ma ki-a-am aq-bi-[um] / um-ma
a-na-ku-ma li-ib-ba-k[a] / u-ni-i-ma {x x} lu-u-ru-ud-ka / []-lu up-p p-qit-ti-ka / a-na be-l[-i]a lu-a-[b]i-il
My lord has sent me a letter [concerning] Urabba-ana-arrim the aluzinnum.
When this man came (here I thought that) surely he came to the expedition of
Ibbi-Ilabrat, but he came to see me in person, to his mummum-workshop. When
he came to me he presented before me his worries. I said to him as following:
relax your heart. Either I will send you or I will dispatch to my lord a document
concerning your assignment.
The term is also attested in relation to the delocutory domain, with a third person
involved in the state of affairs, as in a letter already cited, AbB 9, 63:819: As for ApilBau, that bread that he is eatingsurely he must be thinking that (ka-ma) it is not
your property! Do not allow him that bread! More commonly, ka is related to the second personnamely, the allocutory domain: AbB 1, 122:418; AbB 2, 108:412;
Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510; and Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515. Another case of ka
relating to the second person is found in a difficult letter sent from a certain Smu-li
to his sister:
AbB 6, 63:57:
mi-nu-um a-pa-ru-um an-nu-um / a ta-a-pu-ri-im / um-ma at-ti-ma -lu-ma/
a-na um-mi-ka du-mi-iq / -lu-m[a] a-na a-a-ti-ka / [du-mi-iq? ...] / UD x [
x x x x x 0] / ki-a-ma x x [x x 0] / i-di-nam ag-mu-u[r] / -lu ki-a-ma [it-t]i /
dam- gr k-ba bbar [k]i-ma k-babba r / a-di ma-di ta-a[l-q]-ma / ag-muur-ki-ma
What is this message that you (f.) sent to me, saying: Either you are kind to your
mother or [you are kind] to your sister?. . . Surely, you were thinking that (kama) ... he gave me and I have paid in full, or else you were thinking that (l
ka-ma) you could borrow (lit., take) silver from the merchants, instead of the
silver and the other things,53 and I would pay you in full.
(Note that in AbB 14, 182:815 the speaker employs ka when referring indirectly to
the addressee; that is, the third-person voice is used only formally as a manner of respect; in fact, this is another case of a allocutory domain.)
The modal functions of ka, denoting either the certainty of the speaker or an objection to the addressees words, explain the predominance of the locutory and allocutory discourse domains in the use of this MP. The speaker himself may be certain
of some fact or assumption, or he may contest his interlocutors words or actions. The
semantics of ka do not favor the delocutory domain.
53. For the expression adi mdi, the rest, and others, see CAD M/1 24, 4.

152

The Modal Particle ka and the Expressions k a and kma a

2. Verbal Tenses
The small corpus available to us shows that ka is more often than not accompanied
by the past tense (always in the indicative, never in the subjunctive; deontic forms, i.e.,
precative, imperative, and prohibitive, are never attested). Only in one case is it found
with the present tense (Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515) and once with a nominal sentence
(AbB 9, 63:819). These data strengthen the relationship of ka to counterfactuality,
since, as already stressed in chapter 6, in many languages past tense is ... mostly interrelated with modality and particularly with unreality.54 Furthermore, the propensity of
ka for the past tense is important in defining the differences between this MP and tua,
a MP that shares some semantic aspects with it. Unlike ka, tua shows no predilection
for the past tense and in fact seems indifferent to verbal tense. On the other hand, wuddi,
another MP with semantic affinity to ka, clearly favors the past tense. thus, in regard to
verbal tense, ka behaves much like a certifier.
3.Negation
Four cases show that the MP ka requires the negation l.55 However, in Middle
Babylonian, this rule seems to have eroded, since the royal letter EA 7:6970, sent by
Burnaburia to the king of Egypt, employs the negation ul. As already mentioned above,
the use of l groups the MPs ka and tua together in contrast to the rest of the MPs
examined, which show a clear preference for the negation ul. Thus, in terms of negation,
ka is closer to tua than to the certifier wuddi. Does this observation indicate that
tua and ka should be considered as transformers of content-sentences (da-Stze)
that begin with a (you assume that ... but in fact ...), for which Akkadian syntax
unequivocally requires the negation l? I have raised this possibility regarding ka, but
is it also the case for tua? If so, then the suggested etymology that considers tua to be
a grammaticalization of tuum, hostile, malicious talk, must be reconsidered. However, I take the phonetic resemblance between ka and tua to be purely accidental and,
consequently, they do not have a common etymology.
4. Position of the MP within the Clause
Usually, ka holds an initial position in its clause.56 Rarely, however, ka is preceded by a topicalizing comment in the form of an extraposition.57 In this regard, ka
behaves much like both wuddi and tua, since these two MPs are manifestly found at the
head of their clause (as, in fact, is true of most other OB MPs).

54. Palmer 1986: 210.

55. AbB 9, 63:819; AbB 14, 182:815; Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510 (in nominal formation: l km);
Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515.
56. AbB 1, 122:418; AbB 6, 63:57; AbB 9, 184:1825; AbB 14, 182:815; FM 9, 56:315; Goetze
1958: 42, No. 19:510; Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515.
57. AbB 2, 108:412; AbB 9, 63:819.

The Syntactic Profile ofka

153

5. Phrasal Arrangement
There is no fixed arrangement for ka passages. Nonetheless, like wuddi, ka clauses
tend to follow a content clause starting with aum, usually aum PN (Apil-Bau/
Blunu / Urabba-ana-arrim), but note also aum mim a muru libbiya....58 On
one occasion, there also is a temporal clause after the content clause and before ka:
aum PN ... inma ... ka....59
6. ka and Other Particles
Only the enclitic particle ma can be attached to ka.60 Furthermore, ka does not
tend to have any other MP in its surroundings. As with the other MPs treated in this
study, I could not detect any difference due to the addition of ma, between ka and
ka-ma.
Now that we have treated ka, we have surveyed a large portion of OB epistemic
modality, which we have shown was mainly concerned with certainty and uncertainty,
reality and counter-reality. The chapters that follow will deal with MPs that denote other
modal categories.
58. AbB 9, 63:819; FM 9, 56:315; Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510; Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515.
59. FM 9, 56:315.
60. AbB 2, 108:412; AbB 6, 63:57; AbB 9, 63:819; AbB 9, 184:1825; AbB 14, 182:815; FM 9,
56:315; Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510; Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515.

List of attestations of ka and kma a

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

AbB 1, 6:16 (ka)

*AbB 1, 46:89 (kma a)
*AbB 1, 53:2326 (kma a)
*AbB 1, 122:418 (ka)
*AbB 2, 108:412 (ka)
*AbB 6, 63:57 (ka)
*AbB 6, 194:2526 (tua)
*AbB 9, 63:819 (ka)
*AbB 9, 148:2023 (kma a)
*AbB 9, 184: 1825 (ka)
*AbB 11, 187:828 (kma a)
*AbB 14, 125:1820 (kma a)
*AbB 14, 182:815 (ka)
AbB 14, 190:1011 (kma)

15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

*ARM 1, 73:1423 (tua)

*ARM 4, 28:1014 (k a)
*ARM 4, 28:2125 (k a)
*ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1419
(kma a)
*EA 7:6970 (ka)
*EA 20:1112 (k a)
Farber 1989 (OECT 11,2) 34:78 (k a)
FM 9, 56:315 (ka)
*Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510 (ka)
*Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515 (ka)
*Shemshara Letters 4:312 (kma a)
*Westenholtz 1997: 6870:5759 (tua)

Fear and desire are the same

Czesav Miosz, Readings

Chapter 8
The Modal Particle assurr
The particle assurr is widely attested and has been a matter for occasional remarks
and different translations in various articles, as well as in the Akkadian dictionaries.
Some systematic examination of it can be found, but all are outdated in some points and
often restricted to only a single dialect. Von Soden (1949) treated this MP in the context
of other lexemes presumably denoting perhaps. Lewy (1960) treated it in the context
of Old Assyrian. The latest treatment of this MP is my own (Wasserman 1994), where
a detailed analysis of this MP in the Mari corpus is offered.1 This chapter aims to complete my 1994 study, first, by adding Babylonian sources to the Mari texts, and second,
by analyzing it in a systematic manner, making use of the method developed and applied
regarding the other MPs treated in this monograph.
The Attestations: Generic and Geographical Distribution
Quantitively, assurr is the best-attested particle in the entire corpus of OB MPs. My
1994 study of assurr was based on less than 200 occurrences in the Mari letters. Since
1994, more letters have been published and more attestations of assurr have been found,
mainly in Mari sources but also from other sites, such as emra, where 7 instances of
assurr were discovered. Because the available corpus is considerable and now consists
of more than 200 passages (in OB alone), I have not attempted to exhaust the materials: the material at hand is no doubt sufficient and allows us to reach sound conclusions
without making the effort to track down every occurence of this commonMP.
More than other MPs, assurr is typical of Marian epistolary style. Nonetheless, it
is difficult to say whether its common occurrence in Mari is a sign of a local dialect
or merely a result of the genre of textsletters of functionaries and courtiersthat
1. I would like to correct here some of the mistakes in my 1994 article that were pointed out to me by
William Moran in a private letter dated 8 July1994. In Nos. 16 and 30, mentioned in FM 2, p. 327 n.40,
the verbal forms are only preterite in form (ay + preterite) and should not be considered as genuine past
forms. In ARM 13, 104 (mentioned in FM 2, p. 327 n.41), the form it-ta-la-kam is not perfect (one expects
ittalkam) and, similarly, i-a-ba-t[u-ma] in ARM 5, 81 cannot be a prefect (one expects iabtma). As
for it-ta-da-ru-ma, in No. 31, mentioned also in FM 2, p. 327 n.41, Morans suggestion that this form be
emended to it-ta-na-da-ru-ma makes better sense than the unexplainable existing perfect form.

154

Previous Studies of assurr

155

were the primary texts found in the royal archives of Mari, texts that call for the use of
thisMP.
Finally, the great majority of the attestations of this MP is from epistolary texts, a
discovery that ought not surprise us, because OB epistemic MPs are particles that we
expect to be used frequently in conversational contexts.
Previous Studies of assurr
From the first treatments of the particle it was evident that assurr conveys some
modal function in Akkadian. That is, it was understood as defining the speakers particular attitude to the reality of certain events. It is, however, the exact meaning of this
particle that has long puzzled Assyriologists. Various translations have been suggested.
On the one hand, neutral translations such as perhaps,2 peut-tre, (Dossin 1938a:
122:19), vielleicht, mglichst, (AHw 1062 s.v. surri) and more-nuanced translations, such as heaven/god forbid that...,3 Il faut esprer que non, pourvu que ne
pas, (Finet 1956: 51) and hoffentlich nicht exist as well (AHw 76; GAG 121e).
The confusion grows greater when one realizes that even conflicting definitions are offered, such as sicherlich,4 assurment and certainement (ARM 5, p. 131 ad line
7), positively (Lewy 1960: 31), adopted later by the CAD as surely (Parpola 1988:
297), certainly, and (with negation or prohibitive) on no account (CAD S 410ff.) or
by no means (CAD I/J 172ac).
Some of the reasons for this confusing situation lie in the overemphasis given in some
studies to the difficult etymology of assurr as a way to assess its basic (i.e., implicitly,
sole) meaning (e.g., Held 1961: 21), while underrating the importance of its various syntactic constructions. That is not to say that the syntactic approach has not been adopted.
To mention only some examples, Finet, in his LAccadien des lettres de Mari, has drawn
a clear distinction between assurrpeut-tre (= il faut esprer que non) and assurr
accompanied by a negationpourvu que ne pas (Finet 1956: 51b). This syntagmatic differentiation is still maintained by Veenhof (1982: 126). The dictionaries offer
a differentiation between assurr in positive formulation and assurr with negation,

2. This translation is best exemplified by the volumes of the State Archives of Assyria, where the particle is always rendered by perhaps (cf. the indexes in SAA vols. I, III, V, VIII, and X, s.v. issurri). This
generic translation is sometimes inaccurate and ought to be modified. See already Morans (1988b: 308)
pertinent remarks in this direction.
3. For the translation heaven/god forbid that ... (originally from Held 1961: 21 and followed by
others, e.g., Laesse and Jacobsen 1990: 158:32), see Moran 1984: 299 n.2; Moran 1988b: 308; and Stol
2002: 110. This dramatic translation stems from the fact that assurr is occasionally accompanied by ilum
ay iddin god forbid! (see ARM 6, 50:5; ARM 14, 81:11; Wasserman 1994: Nos. 9 and 21. See further
ARM 14, p.216 ad letter 6 and ARM 26/1, p.310 note f), to which add also Dossin 1938a: 122:19).
Nevertheless, even though the idiom ilum ay iddin serves only as a parenthesis to emphasize the statement
governed by assurr, the two expressions should certainly not be confused. Cf. von Soden 1949: 389 and
Charpin 199394: 23.
4. Suggested tentatively by Landsberger (1923: 72) and found also, e.g., in Hecker 1968 106b, who
translates: bestimmt, sicherlich, gewiss, and also auf jeden Fall.

156

The Modal Particle assurr

prohibition, or vetitive sentences.5 It is therefore no surprise that syntagmatic distinctions are essential for understanding assurr. In what follows, this approach will be fully
exploited.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of assurr
As I demonstrated in Wasserman 1994, assurr in OB epistolary texts expresses the
volitive, that is, the mode that deals with hopes and fears.6 In Palmers words: Under
Volitive should be included expressions of fear.... But fear is essentially the counterpart of hope ..., always toward what is real or possible (Palmer 1986: 11819).
Namely, unlike impossible wisheswhich are expressed regarding counter-factual or
unreal (mostly past) eventswishes, expressions of fear, and their counterparts, statements of hope, have to do with real, possible situations and can be introduced to the
modal system by the volitive. In many languages, the volitive is indicated by root modality, that is, by a volitional modal verb such as want (Sanders and Spooren 1997:
109 n. 12). In Akkadian, interestingly, there is a special MP that is regularly used for
this purpose: assurr.
As noted by Moran, the topics that are introduced by assurr can be generally defined
as less-than-happy situations.7 This MP denotes the speakers fears vis--vis unwanted
situations.8 Nonetheless, as hinted above, the exact meanings of assurr must be established according to the combinations of this MP with various negation particles. In this
respect, assurr is unique, because there is no other MP in the entire epistemic system
of OB that is so variable regarding negation and whose meaning is so dependent on it.
The different combinations of assurr with negation particles in OB can be presented in
the following quadripartite chart:
Table 3. Various assurr formulations.

Eventuality

Speakers Attitude to the Negative EventFear

(1)

[+]

assurr +: I am AFRAID that something UNwanted might happen

(~ vereor ne ...)

(2)

[-]

assurr ... ul: I am AFRAID that something WANTED might NOT

happen (~ vereor ut ...)

Eventuality

Speakers Attitude to the Negative EventHope

(3)

[-]

assurr ... l : I HOPE that something UNwanted will NOT happen

(~ volo ne / ut ne)

(4)

[-]

assurr ... ay : Would only that something UNwanted NOT happen!

5. CAD S 410ff. s.v. surri and AHw 76 s.v. assurri/.

6. Palmer 1986: 116ff., 152ff.; Sanders and Spooren 1997: 109 n. 12.
7. Moran 1988b: 308; Moran apud Laesse and Jacobsen 1990: 160 ad line 32.
8. A detailed thematic division of these unhappy situations is found in Wasserman 1994: 334.

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofassurr

157

In the following, some examples of assurr sentences, according to the four possibilities outlined in Table 1, can be considered.
First, here is a letter from li-adun to Zimr-lm that demonstrates combination (1),
assurr +, expressing the speakers worries that a negative event might occur:
FM 2, p. 321, No. 3:1924:
u4-um be-l a-na a-da-ni-u ik-ta--dam / a-na-ku a-na e-er be-l-ia at-taal-la-kam / ? a-na-me wa-ar-ki-ia i-ka-am-mi-sa-am / um-ma la ke-em-ma
a-na-m e -pa-a-a-ar-ma / as-s-ur-re be-l a-na a-da-ni-u u4 1-k am -lu
u4 2-kam / -la-ap-pa-ta-am-ma a-na-me i-te-eb-bi-ma it-ta-al-la-ak
Once my lord arrives at the appointed time, I would leave toward my lord, and
the ana would assemble after my departure. Otherwise, if I would have to
assemble the ana, it is to be feared that if my lord should be delayed by one or
two days, the ana might get up and leave.
li-adun tries to arrange a meeting of the king with the gathering Amorite tribes,
suggesting that the ana will begin to assemble when he, the writer, had already begun
to travel to meet the king and when Zimr-lm is near the meeting place. The other possibility, the less desirable option, is that li-adun himself will assemble the tribes and
only then will depart to meet the king to escort him to the assembly. The risk in this
case is that the king will be delayed and the Amorites will lose patience and leave. This
unwelcome possibility is expressed with the MP assurr.
Construing the combination assurr ... ul, combination (2) in our table, as I am
afraid that something wanted might not happen, provides an insight into some subtleties of the Mari diplomatic style. In a letter to Zimr-lm, the Rabbean prince of Abattum,
Dd-adun, deliberates over the terms of the loyalty treaty (imdatum) that should take
place between him and the king of Mari:
FM 2, pp. 32829, No. 36:3139:
a-ni-tam ka-ia-an-tam / a-ba-ka [a]-na -l-tim / tu-a-at-ba / as-s-rema/ ka-ia-an-tam / a-ba-am te-ri-a-an-ni / -ul a-na-di-na-kum / a-na ba-ab
da-na-tim a-ba-am / a-na-di-na-kum
Furthermore; you summon regularly your army to fight and I am afraid that if
you demand from me an army regularly, I would not (be able) to give (it) to you.
(Only) in case of emergency shall I give you an army!
In this letter, Dd-adun makes it clear that he is in fact obliged to send troops to support Zimr-lm in case of emergency. The assurr ul passage allows him, however, to
express his reluctance to do so on a regular basis. By employing the volitive assurr, he
opposes the king through words that do not express bad intentions but express his fears
and inability to help.
A speakers concern that some desired event might not occur, formulated with assurr
... ul, is also demonstrated by a letter from Akak-mgir to Zimr-lm:

158

The Modal Particle assurr

FM 2, p. 328, No. 35:2331:

i-na-an-na / a-[la-ak be]-l-ia a-na ka-a-atki / e-t[e-n]e-em-me as-s-ur-re-ma/
a-na -gal qa-u--naki / be-l i-ta-ak-ka-al-ma / -di-tam na-ap-ta-na-tim/ itu ma-riki -ul ub-ba-lu-nim / l-lungi -ul i-ba-a-i / l -m e e4-i-nu -ul
i-ba-a-u-
Now, I keep hearing about the arrival of my lord to Kaat. I am afraid that
my lord, relaying on the palace of Qaunn, might not (order that) they bring
provision and meals from Mari. There is no brewer! There are no millers!
Another case of this formulation is found in a letter from Yamm to Zimr-lm concerning the siege of Razama. After the besieged defenders of the city managed to burn
the tower of the attackers, Yamm expresses his concern that the king will arrive at the
scene of action but gain no glory, since the enemy would leave the battlefield before his
arrival. He recommends that the king not tarry but present himself quickly in front of the
besieged city walls:
ARM 26/2, 318:2632:
a-lum da-an / as-s-ur-re a-tam-rum a-bu-u / la-a-ma ka-a-ad be-l-ia
i-pa--ar-m[a] / be-l um u-zu-ub-tim / -ul i-a-ak-ka-an / be-l e4-em-u
li-i-ba-tam-ma / a-i-i li-ik-u-dam
Indeed, the city is sound. It is to be feared, however, that Atamrum and his army
would give up the siege before the arrival of my lord, and my lord might not be
endowed with a reputation of a savior. Let my lord take a decision concerning
him and let him arrive here quickly!
Combination (3) in the above table, assurr ... l, presents the speakers hope that
something unwanted not occur. Consider, e.g.:
FM 2, p. 324, No. 20:3538:
u4-um a-bi-im i-ta-ar-ku-ma / a-bu-um i-ta-na-a-a-a / a-s-re-ma i-zi-bu-niin-ni-ma / [i-na e-di]-[]i-[ia] la a-za-az
The days of the armys (service) are long and the army keeps complaining.
Should they leave me, hopefully I would not stand alone!
Another example of this combination comes from emra, a letter from Sn-imeanni
to his colleague Kuwri:
Shemshara Letters 35:914:
as-s-re la ta-qa-bi-a-ni-m ki-a-am / wa-a-ba-ta-a-ma wa-ar-ka-at / -tim -ul
ta-pa-ra-s / a-na -ti-ka e-ru-um-ma / ka-la-tam pti-du-ri / a-a-al-ma
I hope you (pl.!) will not say thus to me: you are living there yet you do not look
after my estate. I entered your estate and questioned the daughter-in-law and
Tidduri....

A Semantic and Functional Definition ofassurr

159

The final combination in our table, no. (4), assurr ... ay, means Would only that
something unwanted not happen! In other words, assurr ... ay carries a meaning
similar to assurr ... l, but with a different coloring. Note the letter of Ibl-p-El to the
king:
FM 2, p. 323, No. 16:1017:
dingir-lim di-a-am it-ta-di-in a-di u4 5-k a m / ri-tam u d u - i-e-ebb-e/...... i-na-na / a-a-ri-i -ta-ar na-wa-a-am / -ka-am-ma-sa-am-ma
i7a-bu-ur / -e-eb-bi-ir e -em dumu-ia-mi-na be-l i-de / as-s-ur-re l -m e
4
u-nu i-na na-we-e-em / a -ga-al-li-lu
The god has just given grass. The sheep will be sated with the pasture for five
days.... And now I will bring (the men and herds) back into place and gather the
(men and herds of) the pasture-land and make them cross the abur. Yet, my lord
knows the nature of the Benjaminites: If only those men would not cause damage
in the steppe!
See also the letter of Hl-adun:
FM 2, p. 326, No. 30:415:
it-ti l- m e s-ga-gi / a-na-me ke-em -ta-al / um-ma a-na-ku-ma l
-nun-naki / qar-ni-li-im i-na u-ba-at-[den-l]lki / wa-a-bu as-s-ur-re /
a-na dumu-me ia-mi-na i-a-ap-pa-ru-ma / d u m u -m e ia-mi-na ki qar-ni-liim/ l -nun-naki in-n-m-du-ma / i-te-et e-li -i-ni d u m u -m e si-im-aal/ a i-pu-u an-ni-ta-am / i-na li-ib-bi-ia / -i(erasure)-im-ma / na--da-ku
(erasure)
With the Sugg and the ana, thus have I consulted: The man of Enunna and
Qarn-lm are present in ubat-[Enl]il. And once they write to the Benjaminites,
and the Benjaminites meet with Qarn-lm and the man of Enunnawould only
that they not unite as a result and act against the flocks of the Simalites! Thus
did I ponder in my heart and was very worried.
The difference in meaning between the sequence assurr ... l and assurr ... ay is
presumably one of an expression of wish (hopefully, something unwanted will not happen) versus an exclamation (would only that something unwanted not happen!). In
other words, the formula assurr ... ay is more emphatic and carries a stronger declarative force.9 In fact, this semantic differentiation is a reflex of the regular OB usage of
the negation particles l versus ay. As could be expected, paradigmatic differentiation in
one section of a given grammatical system is mirrored in another section of this system.10
Of the four combinations of assurr listed above, only one results in a positive formulation: assurr +, in which the speaker describes his concern regarding the eventuality
9. Cf. CAD S 412b, note: When assurri is followed by a prohibitive [i.e., vetitiveN.W.], it seems to
express an emphasis, such as ...definitely should not happen.
10. For the difficulties in the two examples of assurr ay, see Wasserman 1994: 330.

160

The Modal Particle assurr

of the unwanted event. All the other formulations employ some negative particle. But
what about situations in which the speaker has positive hopes witih regard to a desirable
events, such as, for example, I hope that I will gain a lot of money? Precative forms,
the verbal forms dedicated for expressing positive wishes, hold this slot in the deontic
modal system of OB. The following letter is a clear-cut example of the paradigmatic opposition between assurr + and precative forms:
FM 2, p. 322, No. 9:1118:
dingir-lum a b[e-l-ni5 i-n]a i-di-ni / li-il-li-ik-ma i-te-et a-na be-l-ni5 / i
nu-da-mi-iq as-s-ur-re / be-l ki-a-am i-na-a4--id um-ma-a-mi / [a]s-s-urre i-na ki-di-im a-bu-um ma-du-[u]m / lk r-m e a-na pa-ni-u-nu i-e-erma/ dingir-lum a-yi-id-di-in i--tum ib-ba-a[-i] / a-na [an]-ni-tim be-l la
i-na--id
May the god of our lord walk by our sides, and let us carry out a unique
achievement for our lord. I am afraid, however, that my lord might become
worried, saying: It is to be feared that, should a large enemys troop attack them
in the open country, a great lossGod forbid!might be incurred. For that
matter, my lord should not worry!
The opposition between hope for the occurrence of a positive event, expressed by precative forms (lillikma ... i nudammiq), and fear of the occurrence of negative events,
expressed by the MP assurr, is plainly evident in this passage.11
Is assurr an Epistemic Modal Particle?
At this point, however, an attentive reader might rightly raise the crucial question of
whether a volitive is an epistemic MP at allor does it in fact belong to the deontic
part of modality. Palmer (1986: 203) assigns the volitive mode to the deontic section of
modality but notes that expressions of fear may have the meaning of Im afraid or even
of perhaps. The juncture between the deontic and epistemic subsections of modality is
thus explained by Mitchell and Al-Hassan (1994: 44):
[T]he two orders of modality [deontic and epistemicN.W.] are linked by the fact that to
render something possible can be thought of as permitting it to come about, whereas to
make it necessary can be seen as obliging it to be.

Indeed, in some languages, both European and nonEuropean, epistemic and deontic
modality often share the same expressions and make use of the same verbal forms.12
Consider, for example, the knife should be in the drawer, or John may come on Tuesday,
or Patrick must be in his room. These sentences can all be interpreted deontically or
epistemically, depending on their context. Deontically understoodthe knife should
be in the drawer, since the chef gave strict instructions about this expensive knife; John
11. See also AbB 14, 63:819.
12. Palmer 1986: 12125, and esp. 203.

Is assurr an Epistemic Modal Particle?

161

may come on Tuesday, because the doctor permitted him to visit his niece who was hospitalized in isolation; and Patrick must be in his room, because he behaved very badly
throughout the whole afternoon and his mother punished him by sending him up to his
room. Understood from an epistemic point of view, the knife should be in the drawer,
becauseif one is looking for itthis is the most likely place to find it in the kitchen.
Similarly, John may come on Tuesday, because, if one is wondering when John will arriveTuesday is Johns free afternoon and it is likely that he will travel then. Finally,
Patrick must be in his room, because he was seen playing there five minutes ago.
The same semantic duality applies to the volitive. The sentence I am afraid that Beatrice might come this summer can be assigned to both the deontic and the epistemic
modality. Taken deontically, the speaker does not want Beatrice to come this summer,
since he planned to go abroad this year. However, without waiving the previous understanding, this sentence can also denote the speakers evaluation of the possibility of
Beatrices arrival, in addition to the speakers unwillingness regarding this event: I am
afraid that Beatrice might come this summer can mean according to my estimations it
is more than likely that Beatrice will come this summer. Thus understood, the sentence
clearly belongs also to the epistemic portion of modality. Indeed, the MP assurr is
placed on a similar juncture with regard to the deontic and epistemic sections of OB
modality. Expressing the speakers hopes and fears, assurr belongs to deontic modality, where the crucial axes are action and will. However, assurr can also express the
speakers estimations and evaluation regarding reality, which means that this MP belongs to epistemic modality as well.13
Note the following examples, in which assurr denotes the speakers estimations,
thus proving its epistemic character. A letter of Yassi-Dagan to Sammtar reads:
FM 2, p. 324, No. 21:1221:
a-na u-ul-lum a-a pu-ra-at-tim a-a-ka la-ta-na-ad-[di] / a u-ul-lum a-a
pu-ra-at-tim / mi-im-ma i--tim la na-ab-i-i-im e-pu-[] / e4-em a-bi-im
l -nun-naki a pa-a-ru-[m]a / a-na e-le-e-im tu-uk-ka-u na-du- / li-il-teeq-q-ni-ik-kum-ma e4-em-u ma-a-re-e-em-ma / ma-li te-e-em-mu- a-na
e-er lugal u-up-r[a-a]m / as-s-ur-re d i n g i r-lum a-i id-di-in a-bu-um [l]
nun-naki / i-a-ar-ru-a-am-ma a-na a-a pu-ra-a[t-ti]m / a-na e-le-e-em
panam i-a-ak-ka-n[u]
Do not neglect the safety of the (kingdom) of Bank of the Euphrates. Take
measures for the safety of the (kingdom) of the Bank of the Euphrates and that
no misdeed takes place! And let them compose a report for you about the army
of Enunna, which has gathered and has been called to arms in order to come up,
and send an immediate report to the king of whatever you hear about it. For it is
13. Conversely, epistemic expressions can have deontic meaning as well. Note, e.g., how maybe,
with its uncontested epistemic meaning, often serves deontically: maybe you finally shut up and listen! Here
maybe does not posit an estimation about reality but expresses the speakers strong feelings and wishes
regarding the situation.

162

The Modal Particle assurr

to be feared that the army of Enunna mightGod forbid!decide to come up

silently toward the (kingdom) of Bank of the Euphrates....
The writer gives a list of immediate military precautions to be taken in order to be prepared for the threat posed by Enunna. At the end of his speech, Yassi-Dagan arrives
at what seems to be the imminent danger facing Mari: Enunna is probably planning a
surprise attack. This estimation is introduced with the MP assurr.
Another such case is found in a letter of Sams-Addu, who, after telling Yasma-Addu
all about the recent developments in the war against the Turukkeans, is worried that his
incompetent and inexperienced son might stupidly pass this information to Ii-Addu,
the king of Qana:
FM 2, p. 326, No. 32:5961:
as-s-ur-re ki-ma a i-na up-p-ia / a-a-[ru ta-a-ap-pa-ar-u ki-a-am u-puur-u / um-ma at-ta-a-ma...
I am afraid that you might send to him exactly what is written in my letter. You
should write to him the following, thus you:...
Sams-Addu is using assurr here both deontically, to express his fears, and also epistemically, for he surely knows his son and estimates that it is not unlikely that he will
leak the information to Qana. Thus, the double nature of assurr, as belonging to both
the deontic and the epistemic sections of OB modality, is an essential feature of this MP
and may supply an explanation for the widespread usage of this MP in Mari letters.
Having presented the semantics of assurr, we can turn now to examine the syntax
and pragmatics of this MP.
The Syntactic Profile of assurr
1. Discourse Domains
From a discourse-analysis point of view, assurr sentences occasionally take the
form of inner monologues:
FM 2, p. 321, No. 4:410:
p-q-it-tam a i-na u4-mi-im [ma-a-ri-im] / d u m u a-am-mu-ra-bi ap-q-du/
i-na pa-ni-tim a-na e-er be-l-ia a-pu-ra-am / i-na a-ni-i-im u4-mi-im -taal-ma / um-m[a] a-na-ku-ma as-s-ur-re qa-tam a am-a-li-ma / p-q-it-tam
-a-ab-ba-al-ma / a-na li-im-di-im i-ta-a-ar
Before, I sent to my lord (a report about) the delivery which I assigned to
ammurabis son on the first day. On the next day, however, I said to myself the
following: It is to be feared that, if just as yesterday, I order to bring the (same)
delivery for him, he might be considered as a trainee.
Furthermore, it is important to note that almost all assurr attestations in the corpus
are found in first-person speech, the locutory discourse domain. The speaker might

The Syntactic Profile ofassurr

163

be worried regarding what might happen to him or regarding an occurrence that might
befall his addressee or some third party involved in the affair. Nevertheless, assurr
sentences are usually stated from the point of view of the speaker: it is the speaker who
is concerned about himself or his situation. Quite often, the writer puts an assurr sentence in the mouth of his addressee. But even in these cases, the assurr sentences are
constructed in a direct discourse of the first person, in a hypothetical monologue given
by the addressee, in the form that the speaker assumes it would take. Simply put, it is
rare to find a text in which assurr is used for statements such as: You will be afraid that
..., or He will be afraid that.... A clear exception to this otherwise consistent rule is
found in a small group of texts14 whose writer is a high official or even the king and the
addressee is a person of lower status. In these texts, assurr is employed in exactly the
opposite manner than is usually the case: not I am afraid that.... but you better take
good care that ... (lit., you be afraid that ...). This group is treated below.
Let us note that assurr is the sole MP that we have met thus far that is restricted in
its discourse domain in this manner. The reason behind this clear tendency is not difficult to grasp: the deontic component, so central in the meaning of assurr, inhibits
its use in other discourse domains and links it to the speakers wishes and hopes. This
discovery means that, more than any other MPs examined hitherto, even more than in
the case of wuddi, assurr is a MP that builds strong subjectificationnamely, this
MP foregrounds the current speaker as the subject who stands at the focal point of the
current state of affairs.
2. Verbal Tenses
As noticed by von Soden (1949) and others, assurr is mostly accompanied by verbs
in the present-future tense. Indeed, in the vast majority (more than 95%) of the collected
examples, the present-future tense is found.15 The semantic function of the presentfuture tense with assurr is self-explanatory. This tense refers to events that have not
yet taken place or to situations that happen concurrently with the speakers speech even
though the speaker has no knowledge of their occurrence.
FM 2, p. 329, No. 37:115:
[a-um fs-um-mu-du-um] / []a ta-a-pu-ri-i[m] a[-um mu-ur--im] / a
m unus a-a-ti munus-me ma-da-[tum] / s-im-ma-am a-a-tu i-ma-ar-ra-a/
i-na 1 -tim pa-ar-s-im munus i-i l[i-i-ib] / ma-am-ma-an la i-ir-ru-ub-i-im
as-s[-ur-re] / pa-ar-su-um -ul i-ba-a-i / i-nu-ma te-re-tum a su-mu-duu[m] / -ul a-al-ma / (3 erased lines) / munus a-a-ti li-pu-u -lu-m[a li-muut] / -lu-ma li-ib-lu-u[ munus-me ] a-na pu-a-at i-na s-im-mi-i[m a-a-tu]/
i-mar-ra-a / munus i-i-ma li-mu-ut16

14. FM 2, p. 325, Nos. 25, 28; p. 329, No. 37; FM 6, 80:1416.

15. Out of the almost 220 available cases, only 9 texts are not in the present-future tense (passages
where the verb is broken are not included). The full list of examples is not presented here.
16. For collations, see LAPO 18, 1165.

164

The Modal Particle assurr

[Regarding Summudum], about whom you have written to me, concerning the
disease of that womanmany women are sick of that Simmum-disease. Let that
woman stay in a separate house. No one should enter (to visit) her! Ifas I am
afraidthere isnt a separate house (for her), once the oracles of Summudum are
unfavorable (it wont matter) if they treat her: she will live or die. The (rest of)
the women, however, would certainly fall sick. Let then only that woman die....
In this letter, the writer, using the present-future tense, refers to an existing state of affairs for which he has no direct source of information: is there no separate room for the
sick lady? The intermingling of deontic and epistemic modality in this use of assurr is
very clear: the writer is worried that no separate room would be available to isolate the
sick woman but he also estimates that this would be the case.
In the following example, the present-future form is referring to a situation that has
not yet taken place but that might, very likely, happen.
AbB 14, 63:819:
gi - m -[ n]a-a-pa-ak 1 -tam / eb-bu-tum li-il5-li-ku-nim-ma / e-um
i-[n]a a-a na-ri-im / la it-[t]a-ab-ba-ak / ar-i-i [l]i-it-ba-lu-ni-i-u / a-a-ar
e-u[m] ta-ab-ku- / -la a-lu--u[m] / -ul a-tum / as-s-ur-re [e]-um 1 s l a/
i-a-al-li-iq-ma / li-ib-ba-ka i-ma-ar-ra-a / g i -m - ar-i-i / li-il5-li-kanii-i
Let the cargo boats, one administrator and some checkers come so that the barley
does not remain piled upon the river bank. Let them take it along quicklywhere
it is piled up there is no village. It is not appropriate. I am afraid that the barely
(even) one quartmight get lost and you would be angry! Let the boats arrive
here quickly.
Stative is attested in a handful of cases.17 As expected, the stative denotes a permanent
state of affairs. A letter from Sams-Addu to Yasma-Addu furnishes a good example:
ARM 1, 39:414:
[]-ab-e-li-um-ma-ni-u il-li-[kam-ma] / a-um a-la-at-re-eki -ta-a-al-[u]/
ki-a-am id-bu-ba-am um-ma-a-m[i] / a-la-at-ru-ki ku-u--ur b d-u pa-nuum-ma / mi-im-ma bd a-ni-im -ul i-pu-u / a-lamki a-a-ti a-ta-m[u!]-raku/ ki-ma 1-u 2-u 3-u e-ti-iq / ti-lu-u a!-s-ur-re e-li-i / b d-u mi-ne-tumma / a-lumki u- !-ul! i!-ka!-an! i-a-ri-i-ma / a-na ma-ti-[ka a-la-a]m
tu-e-er-reeb18

17. Other cases are FM 2, p. 329, No. 39:1218 (where the stative is coordinated with present-future);
FM 2, p. 323, No. 15:1418. Note that in ARM 10, 73:15 a stative [ma-li] is restored, but a present-future
form is just as possible. See now also Arkhipov 2010: 412:1518.
18. LAPO 17, 471.

The Syntactic Profile ofassurr

165

b-eli-ummniu came [here] and I interrogated him about the city of Alatr.
Thus did he say to me: Alatr is fortified, (but) its wall is old and they did not
do any other (wall). Indeed, I know that townI have passed (there) once, twice,
and thrice: its hill, I am afraid, is high, (but) its wall is of a regular size. This
town will not hold well and you will be able to annex the town to your country.19
Past forms are rare, and mostly are found accompanying a verb in the present-future.20
FM 2, p. 323, No. 14:1321:
a i-na pa-ni-tim / ki-a-am iq-bu- um-ma-a-mi / ki-i it-ti-ku-nu lu-u-li-im/
[a]s-s-ur-re a-na l-me e]la m / [p]i-me-dda-gan k[ar-i-i]a / i-ka-al ne-meet-tam-[x x ] / i-ba-at
Regarding what he has said in the past, as following: What?! I would make
peace with you!? I am afraid that Ime-Dagan might calumniate me in front the
Elamites, and get (past!) support.
From the perspective of the rest of the corpus, it is not impossible to see a scribal mistake here and think that we should change the past form ibat to a present-future form
iabbat. Another past case (as-s-u) accompanying assurr is found in a letter whose
context is unfortunately broken off:
FM 2, 53:58:
6 l- me 2 munus 3 tur / a ba-za-a-tu-ia / -te-ra-nim / as-s-re as-s-u
(continuation lost)
6 men, 2 women (and) 3 children which my commando-unit have broughtI am
afraid that if I transport (them)....
The vetitiveformally a past from (ay ugallil)is found in the following letter:
FM 2, p. 323, No. 16:1017:
dingir-lim di-a-am it-ta-di-in a-di u4 5-k a m / ri-tam u d u - i-e-eb-b-e/....
i-na-na / a-a-ri-i -ta-ar na-wa-a-am / -ka-am-ma-sa-am-ma i7a-bu-ur /
-e-eb-bi-ir e4-em dumu-ia-mi-na be-l i-de / as-s-ur-re l -m e u-nu i-na
na-we-e-em / a -ga-al-li-lu
The god has just given grass. The sheep will be sated with the pasture for five
days.... And now I will bring (the men and herds) back into place and gather the
(men and herds of) the pasture-land and make them cross the abur. Yet, my lord
knows the nature of the Benjaminites: If only those men would not cause damage
in the steppe!

19. Translated differently from Durand (LAPO 17, 471).

20. See also FM 2, p. 321, No. 2; 322, No. 6.

166

The Modal Particle assurr

As for the perfect, only one certain case of this tense is found in the corpus.21 Judging
from this sole example, the function of this tense is aspectual:
ARM 26/2, 319:1116:
la-wi-na-dIM / [qa-d]u-um a-bi-u e-li-i / [pa-n]-u i-ku-un as-su-re / [a-na
n]a-u-urki pa-n-[]u / i-ta-ak-na-am be-l / e4-em-u li-i-ba-as-s-um
Lawina-Addu made up his mind to go with his army to the upper-land. It is to
be feared that he has already decided to go to Naur. Let my lord take a decision
concerning him!
The minimal pair pnu ikun vs. pnu itaknam crystallize the distinction between
the general (imperfective/durative) intention to go to the upper-land by using the past
and the operative (perfective/punctual) decision to go specifically to Naur by using the
perfect. In one case, assurr governs a nominal sentence:
FM 2, p. 321, No. 1:1314:
[...] a-pu-ur um-ma a-na-ku-ma .../ [a]s-s[]-ur-re i-na a-la-ki-ka ba-ar-tu[m]
... I have written saying: ... It is to be feared that, while you are going, there
might be a rebellion.
3.Negation
As stated above, all three known negation particles, ul, l, and ay, are found in combination with assurr. No other MP that we have examined is so variable in its use of
negation. Other MPs allow only a single kind of negation: pqat, midde, and wuddi take
ul, while tua takes l. In this sense, assurr, with its lack of restriction on negation
particle, stands apart. It must be stressed, though, that the choice of different negation
particles is not random and that each of the combinations of assurr with a different
negation particle carries a different, well-established, meaning (see above).
4. Position of the MP within the Clause
Not unlike other MPs we have examined, the head of the clause tends to be the preferred position for assurr. At times, assurr is preceded by another preposition or conjunction such as , inanna, or umma.22 Conversely, in its initial position, assurr can
govern subordinate conjunctions, resulting in relative, object, conditional, or temporal23 clauses (assurr a kma ...; assurr kma (/a) ...; assurr aum ...; assurr
21. See n. 1 above (p. 154), where I correct my mistakes in FM 2, p. 327 n. 41.
22. Examples with : FM 2, p. 324, No. 21:19; FM 2, p. 326, No. 30:8; ARM 1, 112:7; ARM 18, 14:6;
MARI 4, 406:17; MARI 6, 339:84.
Examples with inanna: FM 2, p. 325, No. 29:22; ARM 3, 18:17; ARM 13, 104:2; MARI 4, p. 410,
155:29; MARI 6, 51, 54:13; Finet 195457, 135:25.
Examples with umma: Cf. FM 2, p. 323, No. 15:1415.
23. Relative clauses: assurr a kma: ARM 14, 77:23; assurr kma: ARM 26/2, 388:1927; ARM
26/2 , 469:2740; assurr kma a: FM 2, p. 326, No. 32:59 and ARM 26/2, 418:1014.

The Syntactic Profile ofassurr

167

umma ...; assurr inma ...; assurr warki....). Noticeably, the MP assurr may
even introduce another assurr sentence, as is shown by a letter from Ibl-p-El sent to
the king:
FM 2, p. 322, No. 8:37:
as-s-ur-re be-l ki-a-am i-qa-bi / um-ma-a-mi [a]s-s-ur-re r-m e-ia i-a-raru-ma / i7- da i-bi-ru-ma gitukul-me it-ti lk r i-p-u / a-di la ki-bi-i[t-t]-i aab a-am-mu-ra-bi la i-pa-u-ru / [ma-t]i-ma a-na pa-an lk r -ul a-pa-r[i-i]k
I am afraid that my lord might say the following: It is to be feared that, even
before the main body of ammurabis army would assemble, my servants would
(decide to) distinguish themselves, cross the river and might start a battle with the
enemy. At any time I will not confront he enemy!
5. Phrasal Arrangement
In his grammar of the Mari letters, Finet perceptively made a brief remark regarding
the syntactic behavior of assurr when it governs two coordinated clauses (Finet 1956:
51b). He compared these cases to umma sentences,24 suggesting that assurr refers to
the second clause and that the first clause functions as a hypothetical proposition. The
interplay of hypotaxis and parataxis, so typical of Akkadian syntax, is at work here.25 It
is a quite typical construction for an assurr sentence: the sentence begins with the MP,
followed by one or more (formally or informally) subordinate clauses, and only then
arrives at the clause that relates directly to the particle.26 The encased clauses are often
marked with the enclitic ma, which probably indicates their embedded status. These
embedded statements do not, however, mark hypothetical propositions (as Finet and
others have defined it)27 but, instead, the prerequisite circumstances of the unwanted
situation. In fact, the encircled phrases comprise a concessive statement in schematic
form: it is to be fearedif situation X has already happened/will happenthat situation Y might occur. A letter from Zimr-Addu to the king, in which the writer reports
Object clauses: assurr aum: cf. ARM 1, 90:23; ARM 13, 36:14; ARM 26/1, 21:1819; ARM 26/2,
357:1516; ARM 26/2, 548:4 (in broken context); Dossin 1938b: 180:12.
Conditional clauses: assurr umma: ARM 10, 97:17 (umma in a break).
Temporal clauses: assurr inma: ARM 3, 15:9ff.; ARM 26/1, 45:4. assurr warki: FM 2, p. 325, No.
26:1718.
24. The semantic affinities between surre and umma have been formulated in Diri V (MSL 15, 172:119
20), which mentions the two particles side by side as equivalent to Sumerian tukun. Nevertheless, Erim-u
II (MSL 17, 42:27880) mentions t u k u n = sur-[ru/e] immediately after (in a separate section, however!)
u d - d a = um-ma-an and - e = lu-ma-an, two irrealis particles. It appears that the compilers of the various
lexical lists were interested in different semantic aspects of the particle. The first stresses its similarity to
conditional umma (for which see Speiser 1947), whereas the other points to its potentiality force.
25. Poebels (1947) insights fundamentally remain valid. A modern approach to paratactic versus hypotactic constructions is found in Halliday 1985:198ff., 252ff.
26. See FM 2, pp. 32129, Nos. 24, 6, 89, 1214, 17, 1921, 23, 26, 2830, 3840.
27. Sasson 1988: 34849 ad ARM 14, 5:8 and 6:20 respectively.

168

The Modal Particle assurr

the capture of Numa tribesmen in somewhat obscure circumstances, furnishes a good

example demonstrating this typical phrasal arrangement of assurr:
FM 2, p. 329, No. 41:3740:
as-s-ur-re-ma be-l i-na a-wa-tim -ul ux-[]-ma / be-l i-a-pa-ra-am-ma lme munus i-ta-ru-nim-ma / ma-a-ar be-l-ia i-ka-mi-su-ma m u n u s qa-qa-ass-nu / i-ma-a-a-ma wa-ar-ka-nu-um a-wa-tum i-ra-ab-bi
Furthermore, it is to be feared that if my lord does not (manage to) come out of
the affair (straight away), once my lord writes that they bring the men and the
woman and they gather in front of the king and the woman would accuse them
eventually, the whole affair might blow up!
The phrasal scheme of this passage is delineated below:
It is to be feared that (assurr-ma)
(if) my lord does not (manage to) come out of the affair(-ma)
(once) my lord orders that(-ma)
they bring the men and the woman(-ma),
and they would gather in front of the king(-ma)
and the woman would accuse them,(-ma)
eventually (warknum)
the whole affair might blow-up!
We see that the main clause that opens the entire phrase, governed by assurr-ma, radiates to the end of the phrase: It is to be feared that ... the whole affair might blow-up.
The clauses that are inserted in between the two first and last clause of the passage are
circumstantial and are syntactically dependent on assurr (thence their marking by the
enclitic ma).
The same phrasal arrangement is found in FM 2, p. 328, No. 35:2331, cited above:
I am afraid that my lord, (assurr-ma)
relying on the palace of Qaunn(-ma),
might not (order that) they bring provision and meals from Mari....
Occasionally, such hypotactic chains are alternately construed with paratactic (syndetic or asyndetic) constructions.28
ARM 6, 19:1222:
[pia-a]r-pa-dIM dumu i-ip-ri lqa--nimki /... l a-a-tu ak-la um-ma
28. For similar terminology, see Frankena 1978: 28, ad lines 16ff.

The Syntactic Profile ofassurr

169

anaku-ma / as-s-ur-re-ma a-bu-um til-la-tum / ma-a-ar be-l-ia -ul pa-ara / l a-a-tu a-na e-er be-l-ia a--ra-ad-ma / wa-ar-ka-at a-bi-im i-pa-raas/ a-um an-ni-tim ak-la-u
Yarpa-Addu the messenger of Qana ... that man I have detained, saying: It is
to be feared that, as the auxiliary forces have not gathered yet in front of my lord,
should I send that man to my lord, he might realize the situation of the army.
Because of this I have detained him.29
The phrasal arrangement of this text is onion-like:
It is to be feared that (assurr-ma)
as the auxiliary forces have not gathered yet in front of my lord(-)
and (u) should I send that man to my lord(-ma),
he might realize the situation of the army.
The main clause, governed by the MP assurr, is divided to two. In between the two
wings of the main clause, circumstantial phrases are insertedonly one of which is
marked with ma, the other remains loose.
A slightly different phrasal layering is found in FM 2, p. 326, No. 30: 416, which we
have already met. In this case, a topicalizing clause (marked with +) anticipates the
main assurr clause. Circumstantial clauses are encased in the main assurr clause:
The man of Enunna and Qarn-lm are present in ubat-Enlil(-)
And would only that they (u assurr ... ay)
in case they write to the Benjaminites (-ma)
and the Benjaminites meet Qarn-lm and the man of
Enunna (-ma)
not unite as a result and act against the flocks of the Simalites!
There is ample evidence indicating that a topicalizing clause introducing the main
assurr phrase is a preferred phrasal arrangement in the Mari epistolary style.
6. assurr and Other Particles
The question of the function of the enclitic particle -ma in combination with assurr
still remains. Thus far, as with other MPs that have been examined, I have not found
any semantic or functional difference between assurr and assurr-ma. It is very likely
that, if there ever was a difference between the two forms in earlier stages of Akkadian,
already by the beginning of the OB periodand certainly in the time of the Mari archivesthis supposed difference was no longer productive or understood.
29. LAPO 16, 429.

170

The Modal Particle assurr

There are, however, some indications that individual style was a factor that could
be at play in the preference of different scribes (or the senders of letters) in the use of
assurr versus assurr-ma. For instance, in Bad-lms letters, assurr-ma is almost
always used, while in the letters from Kibr-Dagan, Ibl-p-El, Yamm, and Sammtar,
assurr-ma does not appear. On the other hand, in letters sent by Yaqqim-Addu and
Yasm-El, one can frequently find both assurr and assurr-ma, without a clear difference in meaning. It is striking that in the entire examined corpus no text contains both
assurr and assurr-ma.30 When both assurr and assurr-ma exist in the correspondence of a specific sender, such as Yaqqim-Addu (in different text, however!)I would
dare to say that different scribes were involved in the composition of the letters.31
No attestations of assurr in combination with the enclitic particle man, which indicates irrealis, exist in the corpus. This is only to be expected, because assurr signifies
concrete and immediate fears and hopes of the speaker toward real, tangible events.
Hence, the use of assurr is incompatible with irrealis constructionsm and the suggestion of CAD S 410 2(c)1 and 414 to emend the difficult passage in AbB 9, 255:12 to
umman as!-s-r-ri must be rejected.32
Special Meaning of assurr in Royal Letters
and in Governors Speech
Sasson (1988: 34750) has touched upon various points of personal style in the correspondence of unuhra-hl. As he has perceptively demonstrated, a letter to a colleague
in the royal administration is formulated in a different manner than a letter addressed
directly to the king. Correspondingly, Yaqqim-Addus letter to Zimr-lm (ARM 14, 5) is
constructed of three(!) abrupt assurr passages that reflect the governors nervousness,
while in the parallel letter (ARM 14, 6) that he sent to unura-l, trying to persuade
him to help him out of an embarrassing situation, he uses assurr only once, building a
much more elegant and compact phrase.
Personal epistolary styles and the practices of local chancelleries are not the main
topics of this study.33 One case, however, of a special nuance of the MP assurr should
be mentioned: its use in royal letters, or in letters of high officials, that are addressed to
lower-rank persons. At least in some of the letters belonging to this category, the usual
meaning of assurr cannot be adequately applied. In this case, assurr instead seems to
denote the nuance of an emphasized recommendation, an order, or even a subtle threat.
Therefore, translations such as beware of... or you better not... seem to capture
better the special semantic coloring of the particle. Note the following letters, all three
from the king Zimr-lm to Mukannium:
30. Note ARM 27, 116, where assurr-ma appears four times.
31. For a similar approach, see Sasson 1988: 344.
32. So already Wasserman 1994: 334 n. 74. Cf. also AHw 1063a and 1588b s.v. surrm II berprfen.
33. For a specific feminine epistolary style, see Durand 1984. Aspects of idiosyncratic regional styles
were treated by Durand (1988) and Charpin (ARM 26/2, pp. 5152, as well as in Charpin 1989, 1993). See
also Kupper 1992.

Special Meaning of assurr in Royal Letters and in Governors Speech

171

FM 2, p. 332, No. 42:420:

da-an-na-tim u-uk-na-a-ma / gia-mu-um- mi-im-ma / ma-riki a-ap-li-i/ la
i-tu-uq ... / ... p[]-qa-at be-el gia-mi-im / ke-em i-qa-ab-b-ek-kum / um-ma-ami -di-tam -ul i-u-ma / a-na -di-ti-i[a le-q]-em / a-la-ak ... / ... as-sur-re-e-ma / i-qa-ab-bu-ni-ik-kum-ma / 5 6 gia-ma-tim- tu-wa-a-a-ra/ i-na
u4 1-kam -lu--ma i-na u4 2-kam / a-wa-at gia-ma-tim- a tu-wa-a-a-ra /
e-e-me-ma a-na 1 gia-mi-im / a tu-wa-a-a-ra / 1 m a-n a k -b ab b ar -aa-qa-al-ku-nu-t[i]
Give (pl.) strict orders so that no raft passes neither Mari nor downstream ...
Perhaps, a rafts owner will say to you as follows: I have no provisions and I am
going to take my provisions. In case they tell you (these words), you better not
let pass five or six rafts in one day or two! For, once I am informed about the fact
of rafts which you let pass, I would make you pay one mana of silver for each
raft that you let pass!
FM 2, p. 332, No. 43:412
sil z]a-ba-lim / ar-i-i a-n[a] e-ri-ia / u-bi-lam as-s-ur-re / a!-a-tu
qa-du gi - -u / tu-a-ba-lam / gi--u a-nu-um-ma-nu-um-ma / zu-ke-eem-ma / 5 sil zu-ka-am / u-bi-lam la -la-pa-tu-nim
Send me quickly 5 quarts of juniper-oil! But you better not send me the oil with
its wood! Refine the oil there and send to me 5 quarts of refined oil. They should
not be delayed!
Durand, LAPO 16, p. 274 no. 42:4550:
as-su-ur-re / a-na tg a-a-tu [a]-te-e-em / bi-it-tam u-ta-ba-at-tu-ma/
i-na zu-na-tim a-ka-ki-im / zu-na-tum i-ka-ab-bi-ta-ma / t g u-ta-ar-ra-a
dan-na-tim
And beware that (when), in order to weave this cloth, they would place (it) in the
frame(?), and while attaching the ornaments, the ornament would be (too) heavy,
and the cloth would be torn.
Translating mechanically the aforementioned assurr passages I am afraid that...
or the like would result in translations that do not accurately convey the kings words.
Clearly, in these passages Zimr-lm is not afraid; it is instead the bureaucrat Mukanni
um, the addressee, who should be worried. Fully aware of the clumsy way his administration functions at times, the king mentions a predictable situation, which he tries to
avoid by means of an implicit warning.
This nuance of assurr can be found in other, nonroyal, letters. It is noticeable that
the writers status in these letters is always superior to that of the addressees. This is
the case in a letter from Kibr-Dagan to the king in which the governor of Terqa cites
the harsh words he has spoken to his subjects (no doubt trying to impress his lord with

172

The Modal Particle assurr

his firm handling of the region, especially because the kings name was raised in the
peoples oath):
FM 2, p. 325, No. 29:2234:
um-ma a-na-ku-ma as-s-ur-re i-na-an-na / a-wa-tim tu-s-am-ma-a-ma/ urra-am e-ra-am 1 gn a - i-im-ti / pzi-im-ri-dIM i-le-em-ma / ar-na-am e-tu
i-mi-du-ku-nu-ti / an-ni-tam aq-b-u-nu-i-im-ma l-me u-nu / ki-a-am i-pulu-ni-in-ni um-ma-a-mi / ur-ra-am e-ra-am 12 g n / i-im-ti zi-im-ri-dIM / li-leem-ma ki-ma a-sa-ak / be-l-ni5 ni-ku-ul / li-pu-u-n-ti ar-na-am ra-bi-a[m]/
li-mi-du-n-ti an-ni-tam i-pu-lu-ni-in-ni-ma
Thus did I say: Now, beware that should you conceal anything (regarding the
rights of the field) and one day (even) one acre of the field, the purchase of ZimrAddu, shows up (in a legal claim), they would impose on you that guilt. Thats
what I have told them. And those men have answered me as follows: Should
(even) half an acre show up one daylet them treat us as if we had transgressed
the kings strictest prohibition and let them impose on us the ultimate
punishment! Thats what they have answered me.
In this passage as well, assurr has an unequivocal meaning of threat. The governor has
made it perfectly clear to his audience that if someone would hide anything regarding
a certain field and should a legal claim turn up later, they would be severely punished.
The conditions necessary for this shift in meaning of assurr are easily defined. When
the king writes to his servants, he expresses his wishes by means of orders or threats. If
there are hesitations or fears in the kings mind, he transfers them onto his addressee.
This also holds for the governors speech to his servants. In other words, this special usage of assurr in the kings or governors discourses semantically reflects their unique
social status. The special meaning of assurr does not differ therefore in essence from
the regular meaning of the particle, as discussed at length above. It is rather a semantic
catapulting of its basic meaning (it is to be feared that...) from the high-ranking speaker
to his socially inferior addressee.
The Etymology of assurr
There is no reason not to accept the common view that assurr is a result of the cliticization of surri to the preposition an(a), or ad(i).34 But what is the root of surri, and what
is its basic meaning? Commenting on a line in an OB love dialogue, where an-s-ur-re
is mentioned, Held (1961: 21) suggested that assurr derives from the verb sarrum, to
cheat, to be false, rendering assurr as would that this statement were false, comparing it to (Biblical and Modern) Hebrew ll and Arabic arm forbiddenthat is,
far be it, God forbid. In 1960, a year before Helds suggestion, Lewy (1960: 38) put
forward another interpretation and etymology of assurr. Based on his examination in
34. LAPO 17 p. 32 note c; Durand, FM 7 p. 27 note 3.

The Etymology of assurr

173

OA sources, Lewy maintained that assurr carries the meaning surely, certainly,
for certain, or unquestionably, comparing it to German bestimmt, certainly, definitely, an adverb that derives from the verb bestimmen, to determine, to decide, to
fix. Lewy went one step further and offered that the Semitic cognates of assurr are
Ethiopic ara to set, to establish, to decree (Leslau 1987: 532 s.v.) and Arabic
araa, to begin, to enact, to establish a law (Wehr and Cowan 1980: 465; Hava
1964: 360, s.v.).
The editors of the CAD, reluctant to rely on Semitic etymologies, do not mention any
of the above etymologies. The CDA is similarly silent regarding the origin of assurr
and surri. However, AHw 1062 s.v. surri (cross-referenced from assurri) accepts Helds
suggestion and derives surri, which is translated perhaps, from the verb sarrum, to
cheat, to be false. In what follows, I will examine the various etymologies proposed.
My opening observation is that there are two homonymic surru in Akkadian, and perhaps even more.35 The first surru means deceit, treachery (CAD S 413; AHw 1063a
surru I, Unrecht), a substantive based on the verb sarrum, to cheat. Other lemmas
connected to this rootalso carrying an unmistakably epistemic modal meaningare
surrtum (pl. tant.), lies, treason (CAD S 40910) and surramma, a particle reinforcing prohibition (CDA 329a s.v.), also translated (CAD S 410, 2) surely, certainly
(with negation or prohibitive). The second surru is revealed in the temporal conjunction (ana/adi) surri, immediately, in a moment (CAD S 410, 1a), in the adverb surri,
in a moment, for a moment, quickly, (CAD S 412) and in the rare OA adverb of time
sarm, early, in advance (CAD S 191s.v. [mng. unkn.]; CDA 318b s.v.). This group of
temporal expressions are etymologically connected to the tertia infirma root sr, which
is attested in Arabic sarua, to hasten, to be quick, sraa, to hasten toward, etc.36
In addition to these temporal adverbs, evidence for this root in Akkadian is sparse. It is
possible that the root sr is also found in the OA verb surrm/sarrm (CAD S 41314:
mng. uncert).37 I suggest that surrm means to make hurry, to hasten, a meaning
that fits well in the OA documents where this verb is used.
At this point, the suggestion of Lewy, according to which Arabic araa, to begin,
to enact, to establish a law is the Semitic cognate of assurr, must be rejected. As
can be checked in every comparative Semitics textbook,38 the Akkadian sibilant /s/ corresponds to Arabic /s/, not to //, and Akkadian surri cannot therefore be etymologically
related to Arabic araa. What led Lewy astray, is, I believe, the semantic analogy with
German. Because he took assurr to denote surely, certainly, this alleged meaning
triggered in his mind the German adverb bestimmt, certainly, definitely, and bestimmen, to determine, to decide. This in turn drove him to look for a parallel Semitic
35. Including the verb sarrurum/surrurum, attested only in NA, which means to pray, and its derivative surrum, prayer (AHw 1031a and 1062a; CAD S 407a and 414a).
36. Hava 1964: 318. My thanks go to Cyril Aslanov, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, for his pertinent remarks on this point.
37. Note AHw 1063a, which follows Lewys etymology, and translateswrongly in my viewsurrm
II, as berprfen, to examine.
38. E.g., Lipiski 2001: 157.

174

The Modal Particle assurr

root that roughly means both to decide and certainly, arriving at Arabic araa.39
Helds idea concerning assurr, which means hopefully not ... and it is to be feared
that ... (and certainly not certainly), is therefore principally correct: surri in assurr
derives from sarrum, to cheat.
This leads to my second observation. In some cases, when the enclitic ma accompanies assurr40 or when the word that follows the MP begins with a vowel,41 assurr
ends with a long anceps vowel : as-s-ur-re-e-ma. This spelling indicates that the ultimate vowel in the MP is e, not i.42 More importantly, it proves that surr is a plural
substantive that does not end with mimation, since a singular form should have resulted
in *assurrmma, a spelling that is not attested, not even once, in the examples at hand.43
The use of the plural in assurr should be compared to another word used modally,
deriving from sarrum, namely surrtum, lies, treason, which is always found in the
plural. I do not have a satisfactory answer for the question why this plural form is recorded as surr and almost never surr. Do we have here an Assyrian plural form used
in Mari sources? This situation is not impossible, especially because the sole example of
the MP assurr accompanied by ma, which explicitly shows a lone (a-na s-ur-ri-ima), stems from Larsa.44 But in another Babylonian letter, a spelling with a lone final
is foundassurr-ma45so the picture remains unclear. Or, perhaps, does the spelling
of assurr hint at contamination between the two roots sarrum and surrm, namely
between srr and sr? For the time being, the question must remain open.46

39. A strikingly similar line of argumentation was followed by Speiser (1947: 323) regarding the possible etymological connection of umma and the verb ym on the basis of the semantic parallel with German setzen: gesetzt. Unlike Lewy, however, Speiser was aware of the weak basiseven irrelevanceof
this parallel to Akkadian etymology and aborted it.
40. Cf. ARM 6, 23:10; ARM 14, 1:20; ARM 14, 81:11; ARM 14, 127:21; ARM 18, 7:20, ARM 26/2,
416: 8. For some OB examples outside of Mari, see Shemshara Letters 56:7; AbB 11,11:12 and asx(us)-sur-re-e-ma in the clumsily written AbB 11, 156:15 (for which, see AHw 1438b and 1545a).
41. See the two OA examples, CCT 2, 19a:17 and CCT 4, 7c:4, cited in CAD S 411, 3a, which end
with a long without being followed by ma. In both cases, however, a word starting with a vowel follows
the particle assurr. This fact leads to the conclusion that, like -ma, a contact of the ultimate vowel of the
particle with a following initial vowel, that is, a hiatus, might also trigger the long final -.
42. In the entire corpus, there is, to the best of my knowledge, only one case of assurr-ma that ends
in a long //: a-na s-ur-ri-i-ma (AbB 14, 166:28; RA 15, 179: v 7), read in AHw 1062b (a) as a-na s-ri(i-ma), but should be read, with CAD S 410, 1.a and with Groneberg 1997: 86:7 as a-na s-ur-re ki-ma.
Note, however, that in many cases the enclitic ma is attached to assurr without being spelled with a long
//: cf., e.g., ARM 5, 52:8; ARM 6, 50:5; ARM 26/1, 10:9; ARM 26/1, 37:19; ARM 26/2, 411:65; ARM
26/2, 475:9; and more.
43. Note the obvious singular form of surramma, verily(?), a word, also related to sarrum, attested
only in OAkk and OA, perhaps to be compared also withi urrumma, certainly, attested in OB (see, e.g.,
CUSAS 10 10:46).
44. AbB 14, 166:28.
45. Cf. PBS 1/2, 7:15.
46. Another, less likely, possibility, but one that still deserves attention, is that surri in assurr derives
from srum D, to make circle. What is tempting about this suggestion is the semantic correspondence
to Biblical Hebrew pen, lest, which is a grammaticalized imperative form of the verb panah, to turn.

The Grammaticalization of assurr

175

The Grammaticalization of assurr

The MP assurr, like other MPs treated in this study, arrived at its final attested phase
through a process of grammaticalization. I suggest the following stages for this process.
At the outset stood the substantavized adjective surrum, deceit, deceitful. The
plural of this adjective was the abstract surrtum, lies, treason (pl. tant.). Nonetheless, surrum could take a nonadjectival plural formation: *surr. This form, *surr,
not attested hitherto, was, I propose, the base onto which the preposition an(a) or ad(i)
as cliticized. The result was assurr, literally, would it be a lie! later gaining the full
modal meaning hopefully not! it is feared that, lest. This crucial stage took place
in the middle of the OB period, perhaps at Mari, since it is noticeable that assurr is
not attested in OAkk, where only surramma, verily(?), is known. The final stage of
grammaticalization was attained when assurr was felt to be a stand-alone lemma that
could be preceded by another preposition, adi assurr,47 like appqat and ana midde,
discussed above.
47. MARI 7, 60, n.93: 25.

List of attestations of assurr

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1. AbB 11, 156:1117
2. *AbB 14, 63:819
3. AbB 14, 166:2229
4. Arkhipov 2010: 412:1518
5. ARM 1, 2:813 (LAPO 16, 306)
6. ARM 1, 5:416 (LAPO 17, 517)
7. ARM 1, 14:1922 (LAPO 16, 17)
8. ARM 1, 22:1620 (LAPO 17, 476)
9. ARM 1, 33:1424 (LAPO 17, 624)
10. *ARM 1, 39:414 (LAPO 17, 471)
11. ARM 1, 75:2730 (LAPO 17, 658)
12. ARM 1, 90:1526 (LAPO 17, 497)
13. ARM 1, 103:814 (LAPO 17, 469)
14. ARM 1, 106:78 (LAPO 17, 625)
15. ARM 1, 109:4455 (LAPO 16, 70)
16. ARM 1, 112:511 (LAPO 16, 204)
17. ARM 1, 118:2030 (LAPO 16, 48)
18. ARM 2, 13:811 (LAPO 17, 457)
19. ARM 2, 15:3036 (LAPO 16, 61)
20. ARM 2, 21:2328 (LAPO 16, 350;
Heimpel 2003: 47273)
21. ARM 2, 25:713 (LAPO 17, 587;
Heimpel 2003: 477)
22. ARM 2, 27:911 (LAPO 17, 687)
23. ARM 2, 30+:15 (LAPO 17, 581;
Heimpel 2003: 47879)

24. ARM 2, 33:1116 (LAPO 17, 583;

Heimpel 2003: 47980)
25. ARM 2, 34:2631 (LAPO 17, 582)
26. ARM 2, 49:510 (LAPO 16, 309;
Heimpel 2003: 480)
27. ARM 2, 69:410 (LAPO 16, 412)
28. ARM 2, 87:2334 (LAPO 16, 163)
29. ARM 2, 106:1523 (LAPO 16, 214)
30. ARM 2, 126:1320 (LAPO 18, 1079)
31. ARM 3, 3:417 (LAPO 17, 798)
32. ARM 3, 11:731 (LAPO 16, 161)
33. ARM 3, 15:920 (LAPO 17, 726)
34. ARM 3, 18:527 (LAPO 18, 1060)
35. ARM 3, 70+:1719 (LAPO 16, 75)
36. ARM 4, 15:513 (LAPO 18, 1288)
37. ARM 4, 27:1824 (LAPO 16, 32)
38. ARM 4, 27:2937 (LAPO 16, 32)
39. ARM 4, 31:522 (LAPO 17, 32)
40. ARM 4, 43:211 (LAPO 17, 609)
41. ARM 4, 72:612 (LAPO 18, 1282)
42. ARM 4, 78:1214 (LAPO 17, 507)
43. ARM 4, 88:819 (LAPO 17, 540)
44. ARM 4, 88:2026 (LAPO 17, 540)
45. ARM 5, 25:518 (LAPO 18, 986)
46. ARM 5, 52:512 (LAPO 17, 669)
47. ARM 5, 67:1426 (LAPO 17, 852)

176
48. ARM 5, 81:819 (LAPO 17, 723)
49. ARM 5, 85:916 (LAPO 17, 765
50. ARM 6, 18:917 (LAPO 16, 319;
Heimpel 2003: 48384)
51. ARM 6, 23:612 (LAPO 17, 851)
52. ARM 6, 50:56 (LAPO 17, 618)
53. ARM 6, 56:2325 (LAPO 16, 67)
54. ARM 6, 62:3135 (LAPO 16, 360;
Heimpel 2003: 48889)
55. ARM 10, 3:1720 (LAPO 18, 1194)
56. ARM 10, 73:617 (LAPO 18, 1249)
57. ARM 10, 97:1020 (LAPO 18, 1215)
58. ARM 10, 97:2327 (LAPO 18, 1215)
59. ARM 10, 123:49 (LAPO 18, 1169)
60. ARM 13, 9:1930 (LAPO 16, 104)
61. ARM 13, 36:916 (LAPO 16, 242)
62. ARM 13, 104:15 (LAPO 17, 725)
63. ARM 13, 141:528 (LAPO 18, 1026)
64. ARM 14, 1:424 (LAPO 16, 215)
65. ARM 14, 5:513 (LAPO 18, 972)
66. ARM 14, 5:1419 (LAPO 18, 972)
67. ARM 14, 5:2025 (LAPO 18, 972)
68. ARM 14, 6:529 (LAPO 19, 973)
69. ARM 14, 14:525 (LAPO 18, 802)
70. ARM 14, 18:532 (LAPO 17, 808)
71. ARM 14, 29:2228 (LAPO 18, 998)
72. ARM 14, 51:2841 (LAPO 18, 1054)
73. ARM 14, 70:1318 (LAPO 17, 698)
74. ARM 14, 77:2125 (LAPO 17, 928)
75. ARM 14, 78:413 (LAPO 17, 929)
76. ARM 14, 80:420 (LAPO 17, 742)
77. ARM 14, 81:917 (LAPO 17, 752)
78. ARM 14, 127:523 (LAPO 16, 430)
79. ARM 18, 1:524 (LAPO 16, 109)
80. ARM 26/1, 10:511 (Heimpel 2003: 181)
81. ARM 26/1, 14:1015 (Heimpel 2003:
18384)
82. ARM 26/1, 17:2026 (Heimpel 2003:
18485)
83. ARM 26/1, 18:4246 (Heimpel 2003:
18587)
84. ARM 26/1, 21:1623 (Heimpel 2003:
18788)
85. ARM 26/1, 37:1020 (Heimpel 2003:
19596)
86. ARM 26/1, 45:312 (Heimpel 2003: 200)
87. ARM 26/1, 68:68
88. ARM 26/1, 76:1735 (Heimpel 2003:
207)
89. ARM 26/1, 199:2428 (Heimpel 2003:
25254)

The Modal Particle assurr

90. ARM 26/1, 199:2934 (Heimpel 2003:
25254)
91. ARM 26/1, 207:3539 (LAPO 18, 1144;
Heimpel 2003: 257258)
92. ARM 26/1, 222:1625 (LAPO 18, 1220;
Heimpel 2003: 263)
93. ARM 26/1, 225:612 (Heimpel 2003:
264)
94. ARM 26/1, 247:520 (Heimpel 2003: 271)
95. ARM 26/1, 275:724 (Heimpel 2003: 281)
96. ARM 26/1, 283:1319 (Heimpel 2003:
283)
97. ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2) :611
98. ARM 26/2, 292:1524 (Heimpel 2003:
286)
99. ARM 26/2, 311:2328 (LAPO 17, 554;
Heimpel 2003: 295)
100. ARM 26/2, 315:5358 (Heimpel 2003:
29899)
101. ARM 26/2, 315:6467 (Heimpel 2003:
29899)
102. *ARM 26/2, 318:2632 (Heimpel 2003:
300)
103. *ARM 26/2, 319:1116 (Heimpel 2003:
300)
104. ARM 26/2, 357:1418 (Heimpel 2003:
31416)
105. ARM 26/2, 358:812 (Heimpel 2003:
316)
106. ARM 26/2, 380:512 (Heimpel 2003:
32930)
107. ARM 26/2, 388:1927 (Heimpel 2003:
335)
108. ARM 26/2, 402:2532 (Heimpel 2003:
343)
109. ARM 26/2, 404:5255 (Heimpel 2003:
34346)
110. ARM 26/2, 404:5659 (Heimpel 2003:
34346)
111. ARM 26/2, 407:811 (Heimpel 2003: 348)
112. ARM 26/2, 411:6267 (LAPO 17, 594;
Heimpel 2003: 35253)
113. ARM 26/2, 416:311 (Heimpel 2003:
35657)
114. ARM 26/2, 418:1014 (Heimpel 2003:
358)
115. ARM 26/2, 419:813 (Heimpel 2003:
35859)
116. ARM 26/2, 420:2328 (Heimpel 2003:
359)
117. ARM 26/2, 426:610 (Heimpel 2003: 362)

The Grammaticalization of assurr

118. ARM 26/2, 436:4345 (Heimpel 2003:
368)
119. ARM 26/2, 450:516 (Heimpel 2003: 374)
120. ARM 26/2, 469:2740 (LAPO 16, 287;
Heimpel 2003: 38081)
121. ARM 26/2, 475:618 (Heimpel 2003:
38283)
122. ARM 26/2, 480:421 (Heimpel 2003:
384)
123. ARM 26/2, 502:1528 (LAPO 18, 1179;
Heimpel 2003: 39293)
124. ARM 26/2, 521:1420 (Heimpel 2003:
400)
125. ARM 26/2, 533:28 (Heimpel 2003:
406)
126. ARM 26/2, 548:210 (Heimpel 2003:
410)
127. ARM 27, 25:1018 (Heimpel 2003:
41920)
128. ARM 27, 27:2635 (Heimpel 2003:
420421)
129. ARM 27, 44:1922 (Heimpel 2003: 426)
130. ARM 27, 76:2126 (LAPO 16, 240;
Heimpel 2003: 437)
131. ARM 27, 84:520 (Heimpel 2003:
43940)
132. ARM 27, 99:1728 (Heimpel 2003:
44243)
133. ARM 27, 112:2932 (Heimpel 2003: 449)
134. ARM 27, 116:2830 (Heimpel 2003:
45051)
135. ARM 27, 116:3336 (Heimpel 2003:
45051)
136. *ARM 27, 116:3740 (=FM 2, p. 329, No.
41; Heimpel 2003: 450451)
137. ARM 27, 116:4446 (Heimpel 2003:
45051)
138. ARM 27, 163:29 (Heimpel 2003: 468)
139. ARM 28, 51:613
140. ARM 28, 165:1229
141. ARM 28, 179:3141
142. Charpin 1992: 98: 412
143. Dossin 1938b: 180:815
144. Dossin 1981: 3:2326
145. *Durand, LAPO 16, p. 274, n. 42:4550
146. Finet 195457, 135:2530
147. FM 1, p. 108:1224 (LAPO 16, 225 =
FM11, 187)
148. *FM 2, 53:58
149. FM 2, 54:815
150. FM 2, 82:49

177
151.
152.
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
169.
170.
171.
172.
173.
174.
175.
176.
177.
178.
179.
180.
181.
182.
183.
184.
185.
186.
187.
188.
189.
190.
191.
192.
193.
194.
195.
196.
197.

FM 2, 82:1621
FM 2, 118:24
*FM 2, p. 321, No. 1:1314
FM 2, p. 321, No. 2:2731
*FM 2, p. 321, No. 3:1924
*FM 2, p. 321, No. 4:410
FM 2, p. 322, No. 5:1823
FM 2, p. 322, No. 6:3437
FM 2, p. 322, No. 7:1418
*FM 2, p. 322, No. 8:37
*FM 2, p. 322, No. 9:1118
FM 2, p. 322, No. 10:611
FM 2, p. 322, No. 11:513
FM 2, p. 323, No. 12:611
FM 2, p. 323, No. 13:118
*FM 2, p. 323, No. 14:1321
FM 2, p. 323, No. 15:1418
*FM 2, p. 323, No. 16:1017
FM 2, p. 323, No. 17:1722
FM 2, p. 323, No. 18:4041
FM 2, p. 324, No. 19:1015
*FM 2, p. 324, No. 20:3538
*FM 2, p. 324, No. 21:1221
FM 2, p. 324, No. 22:48
FM 2, p. 324, No. 23:512
FM 2, p. 325, No. 24:911
FM 2, p. 325, No. 25:517
FM 2, p. 325, No. 26:1321
FM 2, p. 325, No. 27:2528
FM 2, p. 325, No. 28:3244
*FM 2, p. 325, No. 29:2234
*FM 2, p. 326, No. 30:415
FM 2, p. 326, No. 31:2634
*FM 2, p. 326, No. 32:5961
FM 2, p. 326, No. 33:2633
FM 2, p. 326, No. 34:916
*FM 2, p. 328, No. 35:2331 (= FM 2, 50)
*FM 2, pp. 32829, No. 36:3139
*FM 2, p. 329, No. 37:115
FM 2, p. 329, No. 38:1521
FM 2, p. 329, No. 39:1218
FM 2, p. 329, No. 40:2632
*FM 2, p. 332, No. 42:420
*FM 2, p. 332, No. 43:412
FM 6, 50:49
FM 6, 80:1417
FM 6, p. 71, No. [2]:2931 (LAPO 16,
249)
198. FM 9, 16:16
199. FM 9, 20:13
200. FM 9, 51:10

178
201.
202.
203.
204.
205.
206.
207.
208.

The Modal Particle assurr

Guichard 2004: 20:6062
Guichard 2009: 104:1318
Held 1961: 8:iii1115
MARI 4, 406:1322
MARI 4, 410, n.155:2934
MARI 6, 296:532
MARI 6, 51, n. 54:616
MARI 6, 291:417

209.
210.
211.
212.
213.
214.
215.
216.

MARI 6, 339:8487
MARI 7, 60, n.93:2529
MARI 7, 200:6368
MARI 8, 387:1012
Shemshara Letters 8:1218
Shemshara Letters 8:4850
*Shemshara Letters 35:914
Shemshara Letters 56:511

Whats the use of a good quotation if you cant change it?

Robert Holmes, Doctor Who: The Two Doctors

Chapter 9
The Modal Particle -mi
The last MP to be treated is the enclitic mi. This MP, which has hardly ever been
discussed systematically, is generally considered by scholars of Assyriology to be a
marker of direct or reported speechbut certainly is not thought to carry any modal
meaning. Nonetheless, this chapter shows that mi fills an important slot in the OB epistemic modal system, denoting, especially in the language of letters, noncommitment of
the speaker to his words, creating distance between the speaking I and the contents
of his speech. This function, which I label spacer, stands in opposition to other MPs
in the system, mainly wuddi and l ittum. The role of mi in literary texts is to mark an
apostrophe, a somewhat different function that will be discussed separately.
The Attestations:
Generic and Geographical Distribution
First, I wish present some intial observations about the majority of the examples of
mi gathered from both OB epistolary and literary texts (including royal inscriptions).1
The total number of different OB texts, epistolary and literary,2 in which mi is attested is
approximately 60 (note that in some texts, such as Atrasis, there are many attestations
of mi). The total number of attestations of mi from all periods known to me is more
than 130. Even if it is likely that some OB examples of mi have slipped my attention,
these figures fit well within the framework of the quantity of attestations of other MPs
treated in this volume. These figures, however, are much lower than what one would
expect had mi been a quasiautomatic marker of direct or reported speech.
It is also interesting to note the relatively even distribution of the attestations of this
particle between the epistolary (39 passages) and literary (45 passages) corpora. In no
other MP studied here does the number of attestations in literary texts exceed the number
1. The particle mi is found also in SB sources, such as the example found in the bilingual proverb collection published by Lambert (1960: 241:4042) and the funerary parallel inscriptions treated recently by
Khait (2009: 11). The SB corpus was not treated here and would require a separate study.
2. Legal records were not systematically searched. No doubt, -mi will be found in them as well, as is
implied, for example, by the MB court protocol BE 14, 8:6, 8 (ref. courtesy M. Stol).

179

180

The Modal Particle -mi

of attestations in epistolary texts. Even the MP man shows a ratio of ca. 100 (epistolary):ca. 15 (literary)a ratio that does not approach the prevalence of mi in literary
texts. As the following discussion will make clear, the reason for this situation is the fact
that mi went through an interesting semantic development before it attained its modal
role. Thus, because it was not originally modal, its generic distribution is different from
other MPs in that it has no preference for epistolary texts.
Finally, and most peculiarly, -mi exhibits a functional dichotomy, which was not discerned in any other part of the OB modal system, between epistolary and literary subcorpora.
Previous Views Regarding -mi
As is the case for most other OB MPs, the particle mi has not been investigated
systematically thus far. Nonetheless, various ideas have been expressed regarding it. In
GAG 121(b) and 123(c), von Soden listed this particle with other particles that introduce cited direct speech (Einleitung der zitierten direkten Rede). Similar to AHw 650a
and CDA 209b s.v., CAD M/2 46 s.v. offers a general and vague designation: (indicating direct speech), thus abandoning von Sodens insistence that mi marks cited direct
speech.
It is useful to present some examples from Akkadian grammars regarding this particle. Ungnad and Matou, in their manual of Akkadian (1964: 110 96), conclude: -mi,
zur Kennzeichnung der zitierten Rede. Reiner, in her analytic description of Akkadian
(1966: 104), states that mi
...indicates that the clause that precedes is direct citation. The clitic occurs also with the
indeclinable umma which in itself indicates that what follows is direct citation. Rarely the
clitic is suffixed to any member of the clause which constitutes the citation.

Huehnergard, in his grammar (1997: 136), summarizes:

Sometimes direct speech is indicated by another means [i.e., not verba dicendi, umma,
kiam, etc.N.W.], namely the addition of the particle mi to a word at or near the beginning of each clause of the quotation (sometimes to more than one, or even to every, word
in a clause).

In Buccellati (1996: 366 65.5), we read:

Two special markers characterize direct speech: they vary depending on whether the sentence introducing direct speech comes first or else the direct speech itself. If direct speech
is first, then the suffix mi may be added to one of the constituents of direct speech (occasionally even more than once if direct speech includes in turn several sentencesbut note
that the suffix is optional).

Generally, the same view is found in various commentaries on OB letters. To name just
two recent studies, Veenhof says, the postfix mi, indicating direct speech ...,3 and
Charpin, la particule ... du discours rapport4 and dans les citations du discours
3. AbB 14, p. 195 note c.
4. ARM 26/2, p. 58, note h.

Previous Views Regarding -mi

181

direct....5 In one place, Charpin is more explicit: Noter lemploi de la particule mi

du discours cit ... il sagit ... de citations, dans le discours de Yarm-Lim, du discours prte au roi dEnunna.6 With regard to literary texts, Farber (1996) has offered
a discussion of mi in OB and OA incantations,7 and Krebernik (20034: 17), referring
to an example of mi in an OB hymn to Mama, commented: Die enklitische Partikel
mi markiert eine direkte Rede.... Lambert and Millard (1969: 187), in their index of
words, designate mi as a particle appended to word of direct speech.
Thus, most if not all scholars have followed this path, some stressing that mi marks
cited direct speech and others being content to note that mi marks any direct speech.
Some oscillate between mi denoting reported speech and direct speech (see, e.g.,
Deutscher 2000: 68; see also p. 75).
However, there are other opinions regarding the precise significance of the particle
mi. Groneberg, commenting on one case of mi in an Aguaya hymn (1997: 92 n. 52),
suggests that die Partikel mi betont hier den Vokativ, having in mind, presumably, the
(different?) particle m (GAG 123d). Farber (1996) also raised some doubts regarding
the common opinion about mi designating direct speech. An important distinction was
raised by Finet, who suggested a possible connection of mi to ma. In his grammar of
the letters from Mari, Finet (1956: 281 100h) offered this interesting new path: dans
les discours rapports, la particule enclitique ma se prsente parfois sous la forme mi
... Groneberg (1997: 51 n. 171), commenting on a line in the lament Itar-Louvre,
moves in the same direction: -mi steht hier wahrscheinlich fr ma. Lipiski (2001:
483 49.8) expresses a similar perspective regarding this particle in the El-Amarna letters: the enclitic particle mi which is a variant of ma.8 I will return to these suggestions, whichthough not satisfactorypoint to the weakness of the common explanation of mi.9
Although not rejecting the common opinion regarding -mi, this chapter aims to modify previous views to a large extent. In what follows, I will present the semantic development of mi and, consequently, the divergence in meaning of this particle in literary and
in epistolary texts. In particular, I will claim that -mi was originally a discourse marker
of reported direct speech, a function evident in early stages of Akkadian and retained
in OB literary texts, and only secondarily developed its modal meaning, a function that
evolved in OB letters.

5. ARM 26/2, p. 60, note e.

6. Charpin 1991: 162 ad 24, 33. And so, almost verbatim, also Durand, LAPO 16, p. 443 note c.
7. Note that, in some OA incantations, the literary figure apostrophe is introduced by ma, not mi, as in
OB, see Veenhof 1996: 432; and see below.
8. This raises the question of whether mi resulted from ma being modified through i-modus (F. Kraus
1973). This possibility must, however, be rejected, because all of the examples of this alleged modus are
found at the end of verbal forms not involving ma.
9. Not necessarily connected is the change of ma to mu (sic), documented in SB literary texts; cf.
George 2003: 799 (ad SB Gilg. I 203).

182

The Modal Particle -mi

Direct Speech, Indirect Speech, Style indirecte libre:

Some Clarifications
Before plunging into the details of our investigation, it is important to take a quick
look at some of the terms used from the Semitic and general linguistic point of view.
A good starting point for this brief clarification is Goldenbergs 1991 article, On Direct Speech and the Hebrew Bible.10 As amply shown by Goldenberg, the terms direct speech and indirect speech are anything but straightforward oppositions. In fact,
in many languages, one finds alongside the pure structures of direct speech (Yes, he
decided, she will be my wife) and indirect speech (He decided that she would be his
wife) a subset of verbal expressions that combine features from both direct speech and
indirect speech (e.g., Yes (he decided,) she will be his wife). This hybrid structure
is often labeled as style indirecte libre, or semi-indirect style, but even this tagging is not
accurate enough.11 As noted by Goldenberg:
The formation and status of direct-speech constructions, the problem of differentiating between direct and indirect, the possible combinations of direct and indirect elements in various proportions, and the practical meanings of quotatives in language use, as we have
seen them, do not leave much sense in sticking to the simplistic description of two categories, the one of a direct-literal-asyndetic quotation and the other of an indirect, deicticallyswitched and syntactically-transposed embedding, even if these are supplemented with a
third category of semi-indirect, half-switched and asyndetic veiled speech.12

The implication of these words of caution is that a detailed and carefully documented
study of the development of various mechanisms of quotation and reporting in Akkadian
(through all its dialects and genres) and the various strategies by which this language
employs complementing clauses of report is still wanting.13 This desideratum will not be
fulfilled here. This chapter does not pretend to present and examine all available verbal
expressions of direct and indirect speeches in Akkadian in general nor even in OB in
particular but will examine (with some unavoidable simplification) direct, reported, and
indirect speech only through the prism of the particle mi, its history, and function as
attested in OB epistolary and literary sources.
A Semantic and Functional Definition of -mi
The Particles -mi and -ma
Before trying to establish the meaning(s) of mi in OB, the relationship of mi to the
omnipresent enclitic ma needs to be examined. It is a well-known fact that Akkadian is
10. Goldenberg 1991 (reprinted in Goldenbergs collected essays, Studies in Semitic Linguistics (1998:
197214; reference courtesy Mr. Yaar Hever). For some more recent studies on direct speech, see Miller
2006 (Achaemenid Aramaic), Zuckermann 2006 (Modern Hebrew), and Clarke 2005 (contemporary
Russian).
11. Goldenberg 1991: 8081, the source of examples and terms cited.
12. Goldenberg 1991: 9192.
13. The following works are the starting point for future study: Sonnek 1940; Gerardi 1989; Vogelzang
1990; Deutscher 2000.

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

183

prolific in suffixes starting with mem: -ma, -m, -mi, -m, -muk, and -man (not to mention the mem of mimation, the mem that is part of the locative adverb, and the ventive).
The question of whether all or some of these suffixes have a common origin is beyond
the scope of this study and will not be treated here.14 I restrict myself to the suggestion, raised by Finet and others, that -ma becomes mi in the context of direct speech
namely, that mi is a syntactically conditioned byform of ma. Suggestive as this notion
may be, it must be rejected. In the first place, there are clear cases of ma in direct speech
where, according to Finets suggestion, one would expect mi. See, e.g.:
George 2003: 180 (Gilg. P.): vi 232234:
d
en-ki-du10 a-na a-i-im/ is-s-qar-am a-na dGI/ ki-ma i-te-en-ma um-maka/ -li-id-ka
Enkidu said to him, to Gilgame: As one unique your mother bore you...
More importantly, there are many cases where ma and mi are concatenated, resulting in ma-mi,15 thus proving that ma and mi do not preclude each other paradigmatically. Note the following examples:
ARM 28, 145:1218:
ki-ma i-na na-u-urki u-a-ku/ i-qa-ab-bu- i-tr-s-du/ -[]e-[]-u -ul
i-qa-ab-[bu-]/ [p-qa-at! a-na b[e-l]-u mi-im-ma/ -ga-al-li-il-ma-mi -sumi/ i-ki-mu-u/ be-l li-is-ni-iq
When I was forced to go out of Naur, they were saying: Itr-asdu expelled
him. Would they not say: perhaps he committed a sin-ma-mi against his lord so
they took his house?-mi My lord may examine (it).
Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414):3334:
al-kam e-le-nu-um a-li-im i-na li-it a-li-im/ ma-a-tu-tam lu-ka-al-li-im-kamam
Go, above the city, at the environs of the city, let me show you a washing-place!
These and similar examples prove that mi and ma are not only compatible but also that
they are operative on different levels: -ma functions on the syntactic level, creating logical consecution between two clauses (perhaps he committed a sin against his lordso
(-ma) they took his house), while mias will be presently shownimparts a modal
coloring to the entire statement. The different levels at which ma and mi are operative
is proved by the freedom with which these two enclitic particles can be combined with
14.On mem suffixes in Semitics in general, see, somewhat outdated, Hummel 1957 (reference courtesy
of Ami Gai). On the enclitic particle m in Neo-Assyrian, see Worthington 2006. This particle appears
in earlier periods: e.g., FM 9, 25:21 (OB Mari) and YOS 11, 24:117 (OB literary) and in OA letters: e.g.,
Larsen 2002: 39 (no. 25): 1415.
15. AbB 1, 27:69; AbB 7, 8:512; AbB 10, 57:628; AbB 11, 172:617; Lambert and Millard 1969:
52:159; 68:376. See also an OAkk example (Sommerfeld 2000: 423: 28).

184

The Modal Particle -mi

each othernamely, by the fact that, in addition to ma-mi, the combination mi-ma is
also attested.16
Having ascertained that ma and mi do not preclude each otherthat, indeed, the
two particles are operative on different levels of the textwe now turn to the main task:
analyzing the semantics of mi within the framework of OB modality.
1.mi in Epistolary Texts: A Spacer
A fresh and impartial examination of the evidence shows that mi in epistolary texts
does not fundamentally indicate direct or reported speech. No doubt, this context is necessary for the appearance of this particle, but the role of mi is not to mark it. In order to
substantiate this statement, it is important first of all not to ignore the scores of examples
of reported speech that lack mi. Its paucity and irregular appearance in OB letters17 and
literary texts shows that not only is mi not obligatory, it is not even an optional indicator of direct speech.18 It follows from this thatif mi is not a relicthe particle must
carry another meaning that is activated in the surroundings of direct speech, answering
specific needs of the speaker.19 Looking at the data from the standpoint of epistemic modality, I conclude that mi in OB letters denotes the noncommitment of the speaker to his
words, creating distance between the speaker and the contents of the report embedded
in his speech. Thus, mi fills the slot opposite wuddi, anna, and l ittum, functioning as
a spacer: a particle that creates separation, distancing the speaker from his own words.
By using mi, the speaker indicates that the main I of his speech (representing him in
his flow of speech) is different from the secondary I embedded in his words and that
he, the speaker, is not responsible, not committed to, and does not vouch for the words or
actions of the I he is reporting. The modal function of reports as complement clauses
was characterized by Palmer (1986: 134) as: reporting attitudes and opinions ... of
the subject of the main clause of the sentencethe original, as opposed to the actual,
speaker.20
Looking at the matter from a systemic point of view, one can say that mi is found in
the surrounding of reported direct speech because reported speech is a typical context for
different mechanisms of perspectivization,21 similar to, for example, Konjunktiv II in
German, which is used to express doubt, uncertainty, a contrary-to-reality condition, or
to indicate that what is said or was said ... is not part of the writers or speakers own
16. ARM 26/1, 12: 515.
17. Just one example, out of many others: AbB 13, 21:4 and 18; in this text, a long and detailed reported
speech is framed between the repeated identical phrase kam ulammidanni, thus he informed me. No mi
is used.
18. So designated by Buccellati (1996: 366 65.5).
19. A case in point is the attestation of mi in CH. This particle appears thrice in 9, where it is followed
by iqtabi, suggesting the validity of the common opinion that mi is a marker of a reported direct speech.
However, there are 11 cases of similar reported direct speech in the CH, also marked by iqtabi but without
mi (47, 126, 141, 142, 159, 161, 168, 170, 171, 192, 282). This situation clearly implies that, at least in
this text, the function of -mi is not merely to mark direct speech but to do something else. An analysis of the
attestation of mi in CH is offered below.
20. See also Palmer 1986: 16367 and Goldenberg 1991: 8788.
21. This concept is explained in the chapter on pqat.

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

185

statement.22 Indeed, OB uses mainly mi for this strong perspectivization but, optionally and less frequently, other MPs (as pqat) can also be used for this purpose.23 Similar
mechanisms denoting perspectivization in reported speech are found in other Semitic
and non-Semitic languages as well.24
Let us examine closely some examples that demonstrate the modal function of mi as
a spacer, which isit is important to stress once moreparticularly evident in letters,
not in literary texts.
ARM 1, 118:414:
p
a-ar-da-nu-um l-sipa a-um b-[] / ma-a-ar ik-u-ud-ap-pa-u imu-[ra-an-ni]/ um-ma u-ma b-[] a -g al-lim ba-n-[tum]/ im-ma-aqq-[ta]/ a-na 1 li-im 2 me-at b- 3 l-ka-pa-[ru]/ it-ti-ia-mi iz-za-az-[zu]/
ul-li-i mi-im-ma -la-mi i-b[a-a-e20]/ ba-lum l -s i p a-m e i-na a-a-ri[im]/ ip-lu-u-ma 5 b- i-na ma-a-[tim]/ ---/ 5 b - u r-m a i-na
gi
tir u[l-li-it]
ardnum the shepherd turned to me (Yasma-Addu) through Ikud-appau
concerning the cows, saying: the nice cows of the palace are negligently treated.
For 1,200 cows (only) three shepherd-boys serve with me-mi. Soon (reportedly)
none-mi will be left. And (as) there are not (enough) shepherds (to accompany the
cows to pasture) they have made a breach in the enclosure and let five cows go
out to the country (alone) and a lion devoured (those) five cows in the wood.25
The letter presents three layers of direct speech. The first layer is Yasma-Addus writing to Sams-Addu, his addressee. The second and the third layers are interwoven: a
report from ardnum, the chief shepherd of the royal herds, to Yasma-Addu through
Ikud-appau. Ikud-appau was clearly not too happy to have to announce the bad news
about the lamentable situation of the royal cows, culminating with the news about the
five cows devoured by the lion. He expressed his distance from the words of ardnum,
who had sent him, by using mi, thus making it clear that he is not responsible nor committed to the content of this speech.
ARM 10, 129:120:
[a-na f]i-ib-tu/ [q-b]-ma/ um-ma be-el-ki-i-ma/ e-me-e-ma fna-an-na-m/
s-im-ma-am mar-a-at/ it-ti -gal-lim/ ma-ga-al wa-a-ba-at-ma/ m u n u sm e ma-da-tim it-ti-a-ma/ i-sa-ab-bi-ik/ i-na-an-na dan-na-tim u-uk-ni-ma/
22. Palmer 2001: 113.
23. See chap. 1 on pqat (Semantic and Functional Definition of pqat 5. Vox populi: pqat in reported
speech, pp. 25ff.).
24. See in general Palmer 1986: 90, and more extensively Palmer 2001: 4042. For Semitic, consider
the case of Syriac, where lam serves instead of inverted commas to mark a quotation or oblique oration
(Payne Smith 1903: 242 s.v.). Note the periphrastic use of perspectivization found in John 19:20: Then
said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, the King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the
Jews (King James Version).
25. See LAPO 16, 48.

186

The Modal Particle -mi

i-na ka-s i-a-at-tu-/ ma-am-ma-an la i-a-at-ti/ i-na gig u -za a -a-bu/

ma-am-ma-an la -a-ab/ i-na gin a it-ti-il-lu/ ma-am-ma-an la it-te-e-elma/ munus-me ma-da-tim/ it-ti-a-ma/ [l]a i-sa-ab-bi-ik/ [s-im-m]u-um u-
mu-u-ta-a-i-zu
Say to btu, this is your lord: I have heard that (reportedly) Nann-mi is sick
with the simmum-disease, and that she frequents the palace a lot, and that many
women were in contact with her. Now, give strict orders so that nobody should
drink from the cup she drinks; nobody should sit in the chair she sits; nobody
should sleep in the bed she sleeps, so that she will not be in contact with the
many women who are with her. This simmum-disease is contaminating!26
In this letter, Zimr-lm gives detailed instructions to his wife concerning a sick woman.
Yet, he stresses that his knowledge of the situation in the palace is not direct but secondary and based on occasional hearing (emma), probably not even an official report.27 By
employing the MP mi, he makes it clear that he is not committing himself to his own
words. Other similar examples exist as well:
ARM 5, 59:121:
a-na be-l-ia ia-s-ma-a-dIM/ q-b-ma/ um-ma r-den . zu-ma/ iti tam-i-ri u4
21- kam ba-z al-ma/ e4-ma-am i-tu ia-an-ki!-aki/ ki-a-am ub-lu-nim um-mami/ a-bu-um l -nu-naki/ i-na [k]a-bi-it-ti-u/ i-na ma-an-ki-siki/ i-pa-a-uur/ da-nu-um ta-a-az-mi/ it-ti-u/ [] d i-bi-ir-ma/ a-[na] ra-p-q-imki-mi/
[i]-la-ak/ [e4-ma-a]m-ma a a-na ra-p-q-imki i-la-[k]u/ [-ul] -ki-nu-nim/
[]-ka-nu-nim-[m]a/ [a]-a-pa-ra-a[m]/ a-na i-i la i-i/ e4-em-ka lu a-bi-it
{TUM}
Say to my lord Yasma-Addu, this is Warad-Sn. Day 21 of the month Tamirum
has passed when they have brought (this) report from Yankia: The army of the
sire of Enunna with (all) its might is assembling in Mankism, and (reportedly)
Dannum-taz-mi has crossed the river with them and he is heading to Rpiqum.
The report according to which he is heading to Rpiqum they did not confirm.
Once they will give me a confirmation (about it) I will write to you. This way or
othertake your decision.28
Warad-Sn, Yasma-Addus high official, wishes to pass crucial information about the
advancement of the Enunneans to his lord, yet he tries eagerly to distance himself from
the unconfirmed report about the presence of Dannum-taz in the Enunnean camp, using mi for this purpose. The epistemic function of mi becomes clear in its contrast with

26. LAPO 18, 1164.

27. In this case, one would expect the name of the reporting source in the form PN ipuranni or some
reference to a mam wablum or the like (cf. Durands remark in LAPO 18, p. 345 note a),
28. LAPO 17, 535.

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

187

the knum-D, to confirm (PN-mi ... mam ... ul ukinnnim ukannnim aapparam).29
In the following Babylonian letter, a more complex situation is found. The writer
is referring to his own speech, as cited by his addressees in the presence of a certain
Blunu, but the use of mi clarifies that the writer is not content with the way his words
were cited, thus stressing his desire to distance himself from them:
AbB 1, 27:69:
a-um munus si-ip-p-ri-tim a ta-a-pu-ri/ am-mi-nim a-na be-el-u-nu
ta-aq-bi-a/ g me -la-a-mi a-na-ad-di-na-ku-nu-i-[im]/ a-na-ku-ma-mi a-na
a-a-ti-ia -ta-[a]r-ra
Regarding the girl from Sippar; why did you (pl.) say to Blunu (that I said): I
will not-mi sell to you (pl.) the slave-girl! I-mi will return (her) to my sister?30
There is no doubt that the primary role of mi in OB letters (mainly in Mari letters) is
that of a spacer.31 Examining sentences marked with mi in OB letters from a semantic
point of view, one notices that quite a few of the examples concern unfortunate and
grave issues: death or disease (of cows/lion/person);32 administrative misunderstandings, mishaps, negligence,33 and military or political bad news.34 Not all examples fall
within this category, but the number of passages that do is significant and cannot be
dismissed as accidental. Keeping in mind the modal role of mi, this finding is only
natural: one is more likely to wish to distance oneself from bad news than from cheerful
accounts. A nice example of this tendency is found in the following Mari letter:
ARM 26/1, 275:518:
u4-um up-p an-n-e-em/ a-na e-er be-l-ia u-a-bi-lam/ psu-um-u-ra-bi/
ki-ma la li-ib-bi i-la/ la u4 1-ka m la 2-k a m/ [i]m-ra-a i-na u4-mi-im-ma
29. A wonderful case of unconfirmed reports is found in the letter from Ibl-El to Zimr-lm about the
different rumors regarding the manner in which Zuzu died (see, conveniently, Sasson 2001: 337). The fact
that mi is not used in the letter does not go against our understanding of the particle. On the contrary, it
reaffirms its modal character: Ibl-El is not trying to alienate himself from the various mismatched reports.
There is no need for this: Zuzu is dead; this is a known fact. What is unclear is the way he died, and the
writer wants to present the various reports about the incident. The very fact that there are various options
make it unnecessary for him to stress that he is not committing himself to one of them.
30. So also Pientka-Hinz 2007: 30: warum habt ihr dem Blunu erzhlt (ich htte gesagt): Die Sklavin
werde ich euch keinesfalls geben, (sondern) ich selbst werde sie meiner Schwester zurckbringen?
31. Other letters with mi functioning as a spacer are: AbB 7, 8:512; AbB 11, 172:617; AbB 14,
217:2030; AbB 14, 217:519; ARM 5, 9:519; 120; ARM 14, 1:1725; ARM 26/1, 12:515; ARM
26/1, 13:8; ARM 26/1, 16:415; ARM 26/1, 140:140; ARM 26/1, 275:518; ARM 26/2, 303:717;
ARM 26/2, 304:3746; ARM 28, 39:511; ARM 28, 147:48; Charpin 1991: 161:2736; FM 1, p.82:40
50; FM 8, 49:515; OBTR 144:1622; Shemshara Letters 28 B:412; Shemshara Lettters 35:517; Ziegler
1999a: 57:419.
32.ARM 1, 118:41; ARM 10, 129:120; ARM 14, 1:1725; ARM 26/1, 275:518; ARM 26/2,
304:3746.
33.ARM 5, 9:519; ARM 26/1, 12:515'; ARM 26/1, 16:415; ARM 26/2, 303:717; FM 1,
p.82:4050; FM 8, 49:515; Shemshara Lettters 35:517; Ziegler 1999a: 57:419.
34. ARM 5, 59:121; ARM 26/1, 140:140.

188

The Modal Particle -mi

aati/ um-ma-mi e-p/ mar-a-at-m[i]/ a-di-ma e-p-u-x/ um-ma-mi ri-i[tti]/ mar-a-a[t-m]i/ qa-tam a-na qa-tim-ma/ na-pi-i7-ta-am/ i7-ta-ka-an
The day I sent this letter of mine to my lord, Sumu-rabigod forbid!became
ill, not (even) one day, not two days (have passed), the very day he said: my leg
hurts!-mi and soon after his leg he (said): my hand hurts!-mi and immediately
he rendered his soul.
The writer is anxious to keep himself apart from the disturbing event he reports (kma
l libbi ila), attaching mi to the frightening words of the miserable Sumu-rabi, thus
indicating: his leg, his handnot mine; he diednot me, god forbid.
2.mi in Literary Texts: Apostrophe
Examining the use of mi in nonepistolary texts leads to the important observation
that there is a sharp distinction between OB literary texts (including royal inscriptions)
and OB epistolary texts in their use of mi. In fact, in none of the forty-odd OB literary
passages where mi is found does it function in the way we have observed in epistolary
texts. As many examples prove, -mi in literary texts does not create perspectivization,
nor does it indicate that the speaker is trying to distance himself from the content of
what he reports, stressing his noncommitment to his words. Not a few of the collected
examples that include mi refer directly to a god, a goddess, or the king,35 clearly not entities from which the speaker would like to estrange himself but, on the contrary, entities
to which the speaker strives to express his utmost devotion and commitment.
If mi is not a spacer in this subcorpus, what then is its role here? Obviously, it has to
do with direct speech, since mi is found in the environment of direct speech. But, as in
OB letters, this observation has a limited value, since there are many examples of direct
speech in literary texts unaccompanied by mi.36 One cannot be content to say that mi
simply marks direct speech; it must express something that, though connected to direct
speech in some way, is different from or additional to direct speech.
What all of the examples of mi in literary texts have in common is that they break, or
alternate with, the flow of narrative discourse by creating a sudden turn, a direct address
to a person (human or divine) who is present in the situation: in short, an apostrophe.37
35. Some examples: Groneberg 1997: 81: vii 2022 (Aguaya A hymn); Thureau-Dangin 1925: 172
74:1314 (hymn to Itar) (to the goddess), 5556 (to the king); Rmer 1967: 18586: i 17, ii 1316 (hymn
to Adad); Krebernik 20034: 15: ii 36 (hymn to Mama); Lambert and Millard 1969: 60:246.
36. Two examples, out of many: George 2003: 172 (Gilg. P.): i 15: it-b-e-ma dGI u-na-tam i-paa-ar/ is-s-qar-am a-na um-mi-u/ um-mi i-na a-a-at mu-i-ti-ia/ a-am-ha-ku-ma at-ta-na-al-la-ak/
[i-n]a bi-ri-it-e-lu-tim, Gilgame arose to reveal a dream, saying to his mother: O mother, during the
course of this night I was walking about lustily in the company of young men ... (trans. George); and
YOS 11, 86:1621.
37.A succinct and adequate description of apostrophe is found in the Dictionnaire de potique et
de rhtorique: Figure par laquelle lorateur, au milieu de son discours, se dtourne de son public pour
sadresser quelque personne ou objet particulier. Lapostrophe peut prendre pour objet les tres prsents
ou les absents, les vivants ou les morts, enfin des tres anims ou inanims ... (Morier 1989: 123). The
New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics gives a somewhat different definition of apostrophe,

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

189

Thus, unlike its modal role in OB letters, in literary texts -mi is a pragmatic device,
marking a shift from narrative mode to conversational mode. Consider the following
examples:
van Dijk 1972: 34344 (VS 17, 34):113 (incantation for a cow in labor):
ar-u-um e-ri-a-at ar-u-um ul-la-ad/ i-na ta-ar-ba--im a du t u/ s-pu--r
d
akan/ i-mu-ur-i-i-ma dutu i-ba-ak-ki/ i-mu-ur-i-i-ma el-lam-me-e i-il-la-ka/
di-i-ma-a-u/ am-mi-nim-mi dutu i-ba-ak-ki/ [e]l-lam-me-e i-il-la-ka di-ma-u/
[a-n]a ar-i-ia-mi la-a pe-ti-i-tim/ -ni-q-ia la wa-li-it!-tim/ [ma-na]-am-mi luu[-pu-ur]/ [ lu-w]a-e-[er ]/ [ a-na ma-ra-a]t a-ni-im se-bi s[e-bi]
The cow is pregnant, the cow is giving birthin the pen of ama, the fold of
akan. When ama saw her he was crying. When the pure-of-rites saw her,
he was shedding tears.Why-mi does ama cry, the pure-of-rites shedding
tears? For my cow-mi, not open (yet), my kid, (who did) not give birth (yet).
Whom-mi should I assign and send to the Daughters of An, seven and seven?
This example serves well for an analysis of mi in literary texts. The incantation recounts a short story in a narrative mode. Then, the flow of the story, constructed in the
third-person singular, breaks and switches to conversational mode, marked with mi.
Because the participants recounted in the situation (the cow, the Sun-god, akan) cannot logically be the addressees of this call, one is left with the speaker himself as the
only possible object to which this set of rhetorical questions is addressed. However, the
self-deliberation of the speaker is achieved through an address to the audienceactual
or hypotheticalof the speaker in the incantation. The technique of turning orally to the
audience is well known from folk performative compositions, such as, for example, in
the Commedia dellarte, where the characters often consider their next steps by asking
the public for advice. If this understanding of mi in literary texts holds true, then the
opening line of these OB and OA incantations, which begin with a noun with suffixed
mi (e.g., eretum-mi eretum, uzum-mi uzum, and qnum-mi qnum, etc.),38 should be
understood in the same way, namely, as apostrophes addressed directly to or invoked
before some natural phenomenon (earth, fire, reed, etc.).39
Charpin 1986: 327 (UET 6/2, 402):2629:
ka-a-ti ma-ru-ka/ la a-a-ba-lu-ka-ma it-ma/ d i n g i r-e-n e an-nu-tum/ lu
i-bu--a-mi iq-bi

which fits Babylonian literature less well: A figure of speech which consists of addressing an absent or
dead person, a thing, or an abstract idea as if it were alive or present ... (Perminger and Brogan 1993: 82).
38. Listed in Farber 1996.
39. This stylisticbetter, performativeprocedure provides the key for the opening line of the incantations that begin with a repeated noun, in status rectus and in status absolutus. They too are very likely to be
understood in the same way, as apostrophes, with the status absolutus serving as vocatives, as, for example,
in the OA incantation arum ara, Cow, hey cow! (see Michel 2004: 396:1).

190

The Modal Particle -mi

I will not wrong you and your son(s)! he swore.These gods (which are
mentioned before) are my witnesses-mi! he said.40
In this text, there is a sequence of reported direct speeches all dependent on itma, he
swore (lines 18, 20, 25, 27), none of which has mi. The MP is attached only to the
direct call to the gods (line 29), which breaks the narrative flow (I did so and so ...
he said so and so ...). This use of mi in literary texts as an apostrophe that breaks the
narrative flow and switches to the conversational mode can be illustrated by additional
examples:
Groneberg 1997: 81 (VS 10, 214): vii 2022 (Aguaya A hymn):
i-ga-at il-tum te-re-ta-a ra-bi-a/ be-le-et-mi la ip-ru-ku [x x?]/ pa-ni-i-a maam-ma-[an]
She is a leader. The goddess, her decisions are great.You are the lady-mi! No
one ever opposed her.
Thureau-Dangin 1925: 172:1314 (hymn to Itar):
il5-tu-um i-ta--a i-ba-a-i mi-il-ku-um/ i-ma-at mi-im-ma-mi q-ti-i-a taam-ha-at
The goddess, with her good advice is found:The destiny of all-mi is gathered
in her hand! (They say to her).
Thureau-Dangin 1925: 174:5556 (hymn to Itar):
-me-e-ma ta-ni-it-ta-a-a i-ri-us-su/ li-ib-lu-u-mi ar-ra-u li-ra-am-u ad-dari-i
When he heard her (song of) praise he was pleased with it:Long may he
live-mi! Let his king love him for ever!41
Charpin 2004b: 155: xvi 36 (Ddua of Enunna):
a-um er-re-tim a-ni-a-am/ -a-a-a-zu/ [u-um]-u-mi a-a-ra-am/ pi-i-ma u-mi u--ur
And (if) because of the curse (on the stele) he will fetch someone else:
erase-mi his written name and write my name (instead).
In the last example, the switch from narration to conversation refers to a hypothetical
person. Formally, this person is not present but will possibly come in the future. Nonetheless, from the point of view of the stele, which continuously exists in present time,
40. This example is valuable, because it is a letter to the godformally a letter but in fact a purely
literary composition. In this text, mi is fully congruent with its behavior in literary texts, thus proving the
literary character of this genre (see Wasserman 2003: 178).
41. Hecker 1989: 723, in the note to line 56 suggests that he in this line is the singer of the hymn (cf.
Foster 1993: 67 [II.1]).

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

191

this future evildoer and his words to his collaborator exist here and now.42 Consider
also:
Lambert 1989: 326:8487 (lament-prayer to Anna):
in-u i-na-u(-)-a-an-n[a...]/ -gal-li-il-mi gi-il-l[a-tam...]/ Itr -dammi-q-am a-n[a]-a[] ki a [x x ]/ []-ul ak-ku-ud-[mi] -ul e-e-er ba-ab-[a ]
He recounts the strives he has passed through:I have committed a [...] sin-mi,
but Itar treated me kindly.... I did not worry-mi, did not go to her gate ...
As expected, mi here marks a departure from the narrative mode to the conversational
mode. Moreover, as in some other texts we have already encountered, the speaker turns
to some unknown listeners, not to the goddess (who is referred to in the third-person
singular).
It is evident that the study of mi can reveal the often-hidden existence of audience in
OB literature. Let us examine another text where the existence of audience is exposed
by the use of mi:
George 2003: 178 (Gilg. P.): v 17585:
i-il-la-ak d[en-ki-du10]/ a-am-ka-t[um wa-ar-ki-u/ i-ru-ub-ma a-na
urukki ri-bi-tim/ ip-ur um-ma-nu-um i-na e-ri-u/ iz-zi-za-am-ma i-na sq-im/ a urukki ri-bi-tim/ pa-a-ra-a-ma ni-u/ i-ta-wa-a i-na e-ri-u/ a-na-mi
d
GI ma-i-il pa-da!-tam/ la-nam []a-pi-il/ e-e-em-tam [pu-u]k-ku-ul
There goes Enkidu with amkatum following him. He entered Uruk-Main-Street,
a crowd gathered around him. He stood there in the street of Uruk-Main-Street,
the people, gathered together, talked about him: in build he is the equal-mi of
Gilgame (but) shorter in stature, sturdier of bone.43
Whom do the people of Uruk address? Though Enkidu is the first candidate that comes
to mind, this option cannot be correct, because the speech of the crowd is not constructed in the second-person singular, as would be expected were Enkidu the addressee
(you are equal of Gilgame in built....). The same objection applies to the possibility
that Gilgame is the addressee: were Gilgame the addressee, one would also expect the
second-person singular, deictically rearranged (he is equal in build to you). Georges
translation reveals that he is aware of the problem: he translates ittaw ana riu with
talked about him, without comment. There is only one option left: the crowd is talking
to the transparent participant in the situation: the audiencethe actual ancient audience
or the hypothetical future hearers or readers of the text.
Another related function of mi can be identified in UET 6/2, 414, a text commonly
referred to as At the Cleaners. The text begins straightaway with the words of a fussy
42. See a similar case in George 2003: 200 (Gilg. Y.): iv 14650, where Gilgame hypothesizes on the
future words of people who will be amazed by his heroic deeds, after his death.
43. Translation by George.

192

The Modal Particle -mi

customer, who instructs the cleaner (l-tg, alkum) how to wash his cloths. In the
course of this long speech, constructed with imperatives, -mi is not used. Only when the
cleaner, no longer able to restrain himself, replies to the customerthat is, when there
is a switch to the second participant in the situationdoes -mi appear twice:
Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414):3342:
al-kam e-le-nu-um a-li-im i-na li-it a-li-im/ ma-a-tu-tam lu-ka-al-li-im-ka-mam/ ma-na-a-tim ra-bi-tim a i-na q-ti-ka i-ba-a-i-a i-na ra-ma-ni-ka u-kuun-ma/ na-ap-ta-nu-um la i-ba-a et-ru-ba-am-ma/ q-e l -t g ma-du-tim
pu-u-ur/ um-ma la at-ta li-ib-bi ra-ma-ni-ka tu-na-ap-pa-a/ l -t g a i-naa-i-da-kum -la i-ba-a-i/ i-me-e-u-ni-ik-kum-ma li-ib-ba-ka-mi/ i-aam-ma-a te-er-i-tam/ pa-ga-ar-ka te-mi-id
Go, above the city, at the environs of the city, let me show you a washingplace!-mi. Set yourself (to do) the great work you have in your hands! Come on!
Dont let the meal pass! Release the strains of the cleaner! If you will not relieve
yourselfthere will be no cleaner who will bother for you. They will despise
you and your heart-mi. will be burned and you will cause rush (to appear on) your
body.44
Though not completely congruent with the use of mi in the other literary texts presented
above, this particular function can be explained: because the narrative mode is absent
from this text, -mi cannot designate a switch between the narrative and conversational
mode but rather a switch to another speaker in the conversation. Note, nevertheless, that
the MP still maintains it function of marking an apostrophe. The next text is similar:
George 2003: 200 (Gilg. Y.): iv 14650:
lu-ul-li-ik-ma i-na pa-ni-ka/ pi-ka li-s-si-a-am e-e e ta-du-ur/ um-ma am-taq-ut u-mi lu-u-zi-iz/ dGI-mi it-ti du-wa-wa da-pi-nim/ ta-qum-tam i-tu
I will walk in front of you, you can call to me, Go to, do not fear! If I fall,
I should have made my name: (men will say) Gilgame joined battle with
ferocious Huwawa!45
Here, too, the passage is constructed as verbal exchange between two protagonists: the
passage contains only conversational mode, a fact that dictates the function of mi. The
particle is not used in Gilgames long speech to Enkidu; only in the change to another
speakerthe future person who will admire Gilgames deeds by reading his stele46
does mi occur. But not all examples are so clear. Note the following text:
44. See George 1993: 7374.
45. Translation by George.
46. The motif of the future person, often an evildoer, originates in OAkk royal inscriptions, where a
passage employing mi is typically found; see, e.g., Kienast and Sommerfeld 1994: 381:7281 (Narm-Sn
C 30). A similar passage is found in the Ddua stele (Charpin 2004b: 155: xvi 36) and in the epilogue to

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

193

Landsberger and Jacobsen 1955: 14:128 (incantation against a stye):

er--tum-mi er--tum/ -li-id lu-a-ma/ lu-u-mu-/ -li-id i-i-na/ i-i-nuum -li-id/ u-bu-ul-tam {TUM!}/ u-bu-ul-tum/ -li-id me-er-a/ i-na-mi
a- den-ll/ mi-it-a-ri-im/ 7 bur a-/ dEN.ZU i--di/ du t u -a-ap-a-ar/
a-na-mi igi guru/ i-te-ru-ub/ me-er-u-um/ ma-na lu-u-pu-ur/ luwa--ir/ a-na dumu-sal a n 7 7/ li-il-q-a-nim/ e-g u b a sa-am-ti/ d u g a
u-la-lim/ li-sa-ba-nim/ me-e! tam!-tim/ [e]l-lu-tim me-er-a/ [l]i-e!-li-a?/
[i]-na igi guru
(Listen oh) Earth!The earth bore the dirt, the dirt bore the stalk, the stalk bore
the ear, the ear bore the stye. In-mi the square field of Enlil, seven bur in width,
Sn was reaping, ama was harvesting. To-mi the young mans eye then entered
the stye.Whom should I assign and send to Daughters of An? Let them take
for me a vessel of carnelian, a pot of alabaster, let them draw for me pure water
of the sea, let them take out the stye from the young mans eyes!47
The first instance of mi in the text poses no problem: as in some other incantations, the
speaker turns directly to a natural phenomenon immediately in front of him, in this case
the earth. Next comes a passage in narrative mode, divided in two units: a short story
of creation (lines 18) and a minor mythological account about Sn and ama, leading
to the attack of the ailment (merm), probably stye, on the young mans eyes (lines
916). Finally comes the well-known mannam lupur section, the apostrophe through
which the speaker summons the Daughters of An to help him to heal the sick mans eye
(lines 1727). It is precisely in the mannam lupur motif that one expects to find mi (as
is the case in other incantations),48 yet here the MP is missing; instead, it appears twice
in the preceding narrative section. A possible motivation for the unusual placement of
mi in this particular text could be the the scribes desire to divide his narrative into three
subsections (lines 18: creation; lines 913: the gods actions; lines 1416: the attack
of the merhm on the young mans eye). This use of mi is not known elsewhere in the
collected examples.
3. -mi and verba dicendi in Literary Texts and in Letters
It is important to note that -mi and verba dicendi tend to exclude each other in OB
literary texts or, more precisely, that mi is usually not directly dependent on speechrelated verbs. Only in 5 (perhaps 6) OB literary texts does mi follow a verb of speech.49
Thus, one cannot say that mi is totally incompatible with verba dicendi, but a strong
CH (but in the latter case, the anticipated future person standing in front of the stele is not an evildoer but
an admirer of the king): see Driver and Miles 195255: vol. 2: 9698: rev. xxv: 340 (for which see below).
47. Foster 1993: vol. 1: 118 (II.16).
48. See van Dijk 1972: 34344 (VS 17, 34):713 and Farber 1989: 36 (OECT 11, 2):1921; see also the
OA incantation (Michel 2004: 396:8).
49. Frayne 1990: 669: 812 (inscription of Ipq-Itar of Malgium) [atwm]; Lambert 1989: 326:8487
(lament-prayer to Anna) [unnm]; George 2003: 178 (Gilg. P.): v 182183 [atwm]; Vogelzang 1988:
97:3133 (Anzu) [zakrum] and 4448 [atwm]; Groneberg 1997: 81: vii 1322 (Aguaya hymn) [wuddm].

194

The Modal Particle -mi

tendecy is certainly at work. However, when looking for the collocation of mi and qabm, the Akkadian verb of speech par excellence, the picture becomes clear: qabm is
absent from all of the literary texts in our collection that have -mi. The reason for this
exclusion must be the fact that, in the OB literary texts subcorpus, the basic meaning
to say is embedded in mi itself, rendering the verb qabm redundant (and vice-versa:
qabm precludes the appearance of mi or makes it superfluous). Consider the following
text, where all the sustaining conditions for the appearance of mi are present (apostrophe, switch from narration to conversation), yet the MP is absentdue to the existence
of the imperative qibma:
Sigrist 1987: 85:47 (an incantation against a dog):
a-nu-um-ma a-na a-ri-im/ a-li-ki-im q-bi-a-ma/ ni-i-ik ka-al-bi-im/ me-ra-ni
e i-ib-ni
Now say to the blowing wind: May the dogs bite not create puppies!
The same process was identified by Deutscher (2000: 73) in his diachronic analysis
of the quotative umma:
... the enma/umma clause initially encapsulated the meaning of speech. It is therefore
important to notice that in the earliest Old Babylonian texts ... umma appears after speech
verbs such as write (aprum) or answer (aplum), but it does not appear after the
unmarked speech verb qabm. The reason why umma does not initially appear after say
must be that whereas paratactic sequences such as apurakkum umma anku-ma ... would
have meant I wrote to you, this is what I said..., the sequence aqbikum umma anku-ma
... must have seemed redundant, because it would mean I said to you this is what I said.

But this is only part of the picture, because the tendency speech-related verbs and mi
to be mutually self-limiting is found only in literary texts. In letters, the situation is diametrically opposed: in most cases where mi is found, it is dependent on a speech-related
verb, usually qabm. This perplexing situation must be clarified, not only in order to
grasp the functional distinction between the use of mi in these two corpora but also in
order to understand correctly the complex historical process that mi underwent in the
OB period.
Bringing the OAkk corpus into the discussion proves beneficial at this juncture. Fortunately, unlike other MPs treated in this study, mi is relatively well documented in
OAkk: there are 10 cases of mi (attested in 7 different letters) in the not-too-large collection of Akkadian letters from this early period50 and 10 cases of mi (spelled also me)
in OAkk royal inscriptions (all in OB copies of original stelae).51 In all of these texts, mi
is unequivocally used to mark direct speech and it is mostly placed immediately after
enma, the element that introduces speech in this period (Deutscher 2000: 6771). In one
50. Kienast and Volk 1995: 90:7, 22 (Gir 19); 143:12, 15 (Ki 2); 153:4 (Di 1); 158:8 (Di 4); 160:4, 6 (Di
5); 169:4 (Di 11); 175:6, 15 (E 4).
51. Gelb and Kienast 1990: 194:109 (Rmu C 1); 209:121 (Rmu C 6); 258:132 (Narm-Sn C 5);
Kienast and Sommerfeld 1994: 36061:910, 29 (Narm-Sn C 20); 381:72, 79, 81 (Narm-Sn C 30);
Sommerfeld 2000: 423:28 (Narm-Sn).

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

195

letter,52 and in virtually all the cases from royal inscriptions, the mi phrase depends the
verb qabm.53 The fact that in OAkk mi is used as a syntactic marker of direct speech
is evident also from its high rate of occurrence (noted just above: 20 cases altogether)
versus only 35 cases in OB letters, which come from a much larger corpus (on the other
hand, note that most of the cases of mi found in royal inscriptions are formulaic phrases
found just prior to the curses section, and they are therefore repetitive, not independent
examples).
It appears that, in the earliest attested stage of the use of mi, it is operative at the
pragmatic level of the text: in letters, it is a quotative, marking direct speech, and in
royal inscriptions, it signifies a discourse switch, from narrative to conversational mode.
In other words, in none of the OAkk sources is it possible to detect a modal meaning.54
This situation is mirrored in OB literary texts, but it stands in stark contrast to the function of -mi in OB letters, where the particle carries the clear modal meaning of a spacer.
The protohistory of mi, which led to the situation attested in OAkk, is unknown, and
speculations about it are better left out of this discussion. What one may safely conclude
is that the original role of mi in Akkadian was to be an additional, strengthening marker
of direct speech (additional, or perhaps optional, marker, since in all attested cases
in OAkk, -mi depends either on enma, which by itself introduces direct speech, or on
qabm). The point bears reiteration: originally, mi did not carry any obvious modal
meaning, and this role is first attested in the OB period, though even then only in letters,
not in literary texts.
The implication of this analysis is that epistolary texts proved to be innovative, while
literary texts retained archaic style; and this conclusion indicates that OB letters were a
dynamic segment of Akkadian, susceptible to novelties, perhaps even based on real spoken vernacula. What led to this innovation, the introduction of the modal function of mi
in OB letters? The answer must be connected to changes that occurred in the language
of letters during the OB period and, more specifically, to the grammaticalization process
of the quotative umma (or ummami). As stated by Deutscher (2000: 75):
52. The famous Gutium letter from the time of ar-kali-arr (Kienast and Volk 1995: 90:7, 22 [Gir
19]), a relatively late letter, and in an OB copy of Narm-Sns inscription (Kienast and Sommerfeld 1994:
381:7283 [Narmsn C 30]).
53. This is true in all of the cases listed above (n. 51) except for Kienast and Sommerfeld 1994: 36061:
910, 29 (Narm-Sn C 20), where mi depends on other verba dicendi: aprum to write/send in a written
form and arrum, to curse. (This passage, however, is not well preserved, a fact that may hinder its full
understanding.)
54. The situation, though, might be more complex. As already mentioned above, phrases with mi in the
OAkk royal inscriptions typically refer to the evildoer, to the person who wrongfully appropriates the kings
inscription (It is my inscription! he will say). Thus, one could argue that already in the OAkk period
the modal function of mi as a spacer is recognizable and that the writer indicates his wish to be separated
from the statement of the evildoer by his use of mi. One could further argue that although mi originally did
not carry a modal function, but only a syntactic function of marking direct or reported-direct speech, yet,
because all of these -mi phrases were attached to the evildoer, the modal function of distancing oneself from
this speech developed secondarily. Nonetheless, because no reported speeches of other persons (other than
the evildoers) are attested in the corpus, a fact that prevents a balanced comparison, a prudent stance is to
say that it is impossible to tell whether a modal meaning of mi existed in this period.

196

The Modal Particle -mi

By the middle of the Old Babylonian period, umma X-ma has established itself as the common and unmarked way of introducing direct speech. Direct speech without any marker,
or with the enclitic marker mi, becomes rare in the colloquial language of the letters,
compared to the ubiquitous umma.

The pieces of the puzzle now seem to fall into place. Because umma and ummami became the main vehicles for the introduction of direct speech in OB letters, this discourse
function could be dispensed with as far as mi was concerned. As the particle was liberated, so to say, from its original role of marking direct speech,55 it was able to assume
anothermodalrole, that of a spacer. In literary texts, on the other hand, the role of
introducing direct speech was not assigned to umma and ummami (quotatives that hardly
ever appear in literary texts),56 hence, mi retained its original role of marking direct
speech in this genre. However, as in OB literary texts there were already other stylistic
means for introducing direct speech at hand (as the formula ana PN zakrum and the
like), -mi was differentiated from these other means for introduction of direct speech,
and started to mark a sudden break in the narrative flow, a switch to conversational
mode, briefly, to designate an apostrophe. Table 4 summarizes the above findings:
Table 4. Functional development of mi in various Akkadian Dialects.

Old Akkadian

Quotative
used
Function of
-mi

Old Babylonian

epistolary texts
-mi

literary texts
-mi

epistolary texts
umma/ummami

literary texts
-mi

discourse
(direct speech)

discourse
(direct speech)

modal (spacer)

discourse
(direct speech
and apostrophe)

4. A Test Case: mi in the Code of Hammurabi

The 3 attestations of mi in CH 9 (which were not considered in the list of literary
texts hitherto) are worth separate discussion. This well-known legal case involves two
persons: the owner of lost property and a person in whose possession the lost, or stolen,
property has been found. The latter claims to have bought this property from a third
party and declares: na-di-na-nu-um-mi id-di-nam ma-ar i-bi-mi a-a-am iq-ta-bi, A
seller sold it to me, I paid for it before witnesses (he said). The owner of the lost good
insists, however: i-bi mu-de u-ul-q-ia-mi lu-ub-lam iq-ta-bi, I will bring witnesses
who know my property (he said). As the case goes, the third party, the seller, turns
out to be the thief and is duly executed. The testimonies of the owner and the buyer
55. Especially because mi was commonly present in quotatives when attached to umma, resulting in
ummami. In these cases, one can fully appreciate GAG 123c, where von Soden argued that mi served as a
marker of reporting another persons words when the use of umma was avoided for some reason.
56. So also Moran 1988a: 26: umma, conventionally thus never appears in this position [i.e., introducing direct speechN.W.], and is virtually unknown in literary texts.

A Semantic and Functional Definition of-mi

197

are syntacticallly similar, and the use of mi is commonly interpreted as denoting reported direct speech, anaphorically dependent on iqtabi, he said. Yet, in CH there
are 11 other cases of reported direct speech, also dependent on iqtabi, but with mi
missing!57 The use of mi, therefore, does not yield to this simple explanation, and the
question of its meaning must be confronted. Why is mi used in the declarations of the
disputing persons in CH 9 but not in the words of the cultivator in 47: eqlam(a - )
e-ri-a-am, I will cultivate the field, or in the statement of the person in 126, who
declares (falsely) that something that he gave for safekeeping is lost: mi-im-me-e ali-iq, something of mine is lost!? Why are the wifes words in 142 spoken to her
hated husband: -ul ta-a-a-za-an-ni, You shall not take me (sexually), lacking mi?
Why is this particle missing in the declaration of the adopted son to his parents in 192:
-ul a-bi at-ta -ul um-mi at-ti, You are not my father! You are not my mother! The
reason for the difference cannot be syntactic, because the constructions of all these statements are practically identical. Instead, the reason lies in the semanticmore precisely,
modaldomain. In all of the legal cases with direct speech in CH, except for 9, the
declarations cited are factual and form an essential part of the circumstances presented
in the case. In fact, these declarations are performative: their very utterance incites the
legal case and calls for legal deliberation and decision. This is true of the cultivators
demand to hire the field for another year (47), the owners claim that some of his goods
were lost (126), the wifes declaration about her aversion from her husband (142),
the sons deliberate estrangement from his adopting parents (192), and the rest of the
cases listed above. Only in 9 are the declarations of the two persons involved not performative but argumentativethat is, they do not cause the intervention of the law but
evolve from it. These declarations are not taken for granted but are examined and can
possibly be proved false. The language of the lawgiver in 9 expresses his hesitation
regarding the testimonies of the two parties by employing mi, thus distancing himself
from their words. Thus, the particle is used here modally, as a spacer, stressing that the
words of the disputing persons are only their claims, not statements for which factuality
is assured. Accordingly, the sentences with mi must be understood not as simple reported speech but as containing an element of doubt, of subjectivity. A possible English
equivalent of iqtabi ... -mi would be allegedly ... but it must be proven!. Thus, in
the scale of doubt of OB epistemic modality, -mi stands between the factual statements
marked by the indicative (in the case of CH: simple iqtabi without mi) and the refuter
tua, which denotes counter-assertion, false, or unfounded accusations.
Returning now to the two main subcorpora examined hitherto, namely, the epistolary
and literary bodies of texts, it becomes apparent that, with regard to the use of mi, the
language of CH 9 is similar to the language of OB epistolary and differes from that
of literary texts. This conclusion, which strengthens the notion that much of the text of
CH was adapted from daily-life texts, is bolstered by the other attestation of mi in CH,
which is found not in the body of case law but in the epilogue:
57. CH 47, 126, 141, 142, 159, 161, 168, 170, 171, 192, 282.

198

The Modal Particle -mi

Driver and Miles 195255: vol. 2: 9698 (CH epilogue): rev. xxv:340:
a-wi-lum a-ab-lum/ a a-wa-tam/ i-ra-a-u-/ a-na ma-a-ar al am-ia/
lugal mi-a-ri-im li-il-li-ik-ma/ na-ru-i/ a-a-ra-am/ li-ita-a-si-ma/ a-wati-ia u-q-ra-tim/ li-ime-ma/ na-ru-i a-wa-tam/ li-kl-lim-u/ di-in-u limu-r/ li-ib-ba-a-u/ li-na-ap-p-i-ma/ a-am-mu-ra-bi-mi/ be-lum a ki-ma
a-bi-im/ wa-li-di-im/ a-na ni-i/ i-ba-a-u- ... / li-iq-bi-ma....
May the oppressed man who has a legal case go before my statue King of Justice
and have my written inscription read out to him, and may he hear my precious
words, and may my inscription show him his case and may he see his law. May
his heart be appeased and may he say: ammurabi-mi is a lord who is like a
begetting father for his people....
Here the use of mi is nonmodal. The particle does not designate a spacer, because the
text recounts the admiration of the king, surely not something from which the writer
wishes to distance himself, but, on the contrary, a statement that he strives to emulate.
The particle mi here marks an apostrophe, a sudden switch from the narrative mode to
a direct call to someone present in the situation, in this case ammurabi, represented by
his stele. Thus, unlike CH 9, where mi was used modally, as in the epistolary texts, in
the epilogue the same particle is used as a discourse marker, much like the way it functions in other OB literary texts, thus proving yet again the separate, literary origin of this
section of the CH.58
The Syntactic Profile of -mi
Syntactically, the particle mi shows no preference with regard to discourse domains
or to verbal tense. All discourse domains, as well as all verbal tenses (as well as nominal
clauses), can be found in sentences with mi. Other syntactic categories, however, are
more restricted and consequently will be discussed.
1.Negation
There are 12 examples where negation is found in a sentence with mi (10 in letters,
2 in literary texts). In 7 of these, the negation particle is ula;59 in 4 cases, it is ul.60 The
negation ula is therefore preferred to some extent (note that it is virtually never used in
combination with other MPs). However, in 2 cases, the negation l is found in a sentence
marked with mi.61 Let us examine one of them:
58. For a discussion of the nonlegal sections of CH, see Hurowitz 1994: esp. 1023.
59. AbB 1, 27:69; AbB 7, 8:512; AbB 10, 190:1131; ARM 1, 118:414; ARM 28, 147:48; Held
1961: 8: iii 67 (love dialogue), MARI 6, p. 291:1516.
60. ARM 5, 9:519; ARM 28, 179:3141; Lambert 1989: 326: 87 (lament-prayer to Anna). In ARM
26/2, 303:717, ul is found adjacent to mi but syntactically independent of it.
61. The other case is the anomalous letter AbB 10, 190 (where both l and ula are found). The lines
in this peculiar letter are entirely out of order and it contains 18(!) mi particles. It is probably a students
practice tablet.

The Syntactic Profile of-mi

199

Ziegler 1999a: 57:419:

i-na up-p-im a be-l -[]a-bi-lam/ be-l ki-a-am i-pu-ra-am um-ma-a-mi/
am-mi-nim a-na dIM-mu-ba-l-i[]/ [t]a-a-pu-ra-am um-ma-a-mi/ d u m u m unus ia-a-du-li-im [l]a-mi ta-a-a-az/ be-l i-pu-ra-am/ [k]i-i it-tum-ma
an-ni-tam aq-bi/ [i-n]a ma-a-ak a-wi-la-ti-i-im/ [be]-l d u m u -m u n u s ia-a-duli-im i-na-di-in-um/ [i-n]a-an-na a-[n]u-um-ma/ a-na dIM-mu-ba-l-i/ a-tapa-ar/ i-tu-ma na-da-an-a/ a-na be-l-ia []-bu/ [d u m u -m u n u s a-a-ti
li-u-us-s]/ [0 0 0 0 0 0 0 be]-l lu i-de
In the letter which my lord (Yasma-Addu) has sent, my lord wrote to me as
following: Why did you wrote to Addu-muballi as following: You should
not-mi marry the daughter of Yadun-lm!thus did my lord write to me. (But)
is it a fact that I said that in the lack of ladies my lord will give him to marry a
daughter of Yadun-lm? Now, presently, I have written to Addu-muballi: since
giving her is pleasing my lord, may he marry this daughter.... May my lord be
informed.
Hence, although ula is the preferred negation for mi, any negation particle can be used
in its context, depending on the syntactic requirements of each sentence. In the specific
case just cited, l is used, since the reported speech is an affirmative prohibition in which
l is the common negation. Another observation is that, in 6 out of 11 cases of negation
in the corpus, the particle mi is found attached directly to the negation particle,62 suggesting that it tends to dock on the rhematic components of the sentence.
2. Position of mi in the Clause
Is there a preferred location for mi within the sentence? Can one define a rule, or at
least a preference, regarding the element to which mi attaches? Since mi is an enclitic
particle, it is logical to compare its position to that of another enclitic modal particle,
the irrealis marker man. In the chapter dedicated to -man, it was shown that there are
no morphological or syntactic constrains regarding the element to which man is attached, and every part of speech can harbor this enclitic particle. As I suggested in the
discussion of man, the operative mechanism is principally pragmatic: -man tends to be
attached to the more prominent (semantically speaking) element in the sentence. In addition, we noted a tendency to place man at regular intervals throughout the sentence, to
help the hearer keep in mind the irrealis mode throughout the sentence. Turning back to
mi, the examples at hand show that mi, just like man, is anything but limited and can
be attached to any part of speech: to verbs (regardless of tense), to adjectives and substantives (in different cases), to pronouns, to PNs, to adverbs, to interrogatives, to prepositions (even to the nonadhesive ana and ina), to conditionals, to deictic, anaphoric, or

62. AbB 1, 27: 69; AbB 10, 190: 1131; ARM 1, 118: 414; ARM 28, 147: 48; Held 1961: 8:iii67
(love dialogue); Ziegler 1999a, 57: 419.

200

The Modal Particle -mi

temporal elements, and to negation particles.63 There is no question about the position
of mi in (mainly literary) texts with very short direct speeches, in, for example, incantations that begin with eretum-mi eretum, uzum-mi uzum, or qnum-mi qnum,64 or in
the cry blet-mi, You are the lady!65 and arn-mi, (it is) my sin.66 In these cases,
-mi is attached to the sole, or nearly sole, word of the short apostrophe it marks. It is
more difficult, however, to account for the cases where mi is found in longer phrases.
Consider the two following texts:
Farber 1989: 36 (OECT 11, 2):1521 (incantation to put baby asleep):
[m]a-an-na-am lu-u-pu-ur/ a-na en-ki-du10/ a-ki-in a-la-a-a-ti/ a-na ma-aa-ra-tim/ li-i-ba-as-[s]--mi/ []a i-ba-tu- m a -d / l[i]-ka-as-s-[]u-mi/
[a] -ka-as-s- ar-wi-[am]
Whom should I assign and send to Enkidu, the Creator of the three (night)watches? May he who caught the deer catch him-mi, may he who have bound the
gazelle bind him-mi.
van Dijk 1972: 34344 (VS 17, 34):713 (incantation for a cow in labor):
am-mi-nim-mi dutu i-ba-ak-ki/ [e]l-lam-me-e i-il-la-ka di-ma-u/ [a-n]a ar-iia-mi la-a pe-ti-i-tim/ -ni-q-ia la wa-li-it!-tim/ [ma-na]-am-mi lu-u[-pu-ur]/
[ lu-w]a-e-[er ]/ [ a-na ma-ra-a]t a-ni-im se-bi s[e-bi]
Why-mi does ama cry, the pure-of-rites shedding tears? For my cow-mi, not
open (yet), my kid, (who did) not give birth (yet).Whom-mi should I assign
and send to the Daughters of An, seven and seven?
The two passages are similarly constructed, yet mi is found in different locations in
them. In the former text, the particle is attached to the direct call of the speaker, libassu
and likassu, May he catch him! May he bind him! In the latter text, mi stands at the
head of the direct speech, attached to the opening interrogatives amminim and mannam,
as well as to the answer to the rhetorical question: ana ariya, for my cow. Though
mi stands in different locations, it is easy to note that all are clearly semantically foregrounded loci in the sentence.
And what about the location of mi in letters, where the particle is used modally as
a spacer? There is enough evidence to show that -mi is attached to the component of
63. Verbs: AbB 7, 8:512; ARM 26/1, 275:518; adjectives: ARM 26/1, 140:140; substantives: AbB
14, 217:2030; ARM 26/2, 303:717; pronouns: AbB 10, 190:1131; ARM 28, 48:2134; Lambert and
Millard 1969: 62:289; PNs: ARM 5, 59:121; ARM 10, 129:120; ARM 28, 179:3141; adverbs: ARM
26/1, 140:140; interrogatives: ARM 26/1, 12:515; Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:128, [129], [130],
[14042]; prepositions: AbB 11, 172:617 and Shemshara Letters 28 B:412 (ana-mi); ARM 1, 118:414
(itti); Landsberger and Jacobsen 1955: 14:9 (ina-mi), 14:14 (ana-mi); conditionals: AbB 10, 57:628; deictic, anaphoric, temporal elements: FM 1, p. 82:4050; Shemshara Letters 28 B:412; Shemshara Letters
70:4245; negation particles: ARM 28, 147:48, and see above.
64. Listed in Farber 1996.
65. Groneberg 1997: 81: vii 2022 (Aguaya A hymn), cited above.
66. ARM 26/2, 303:717.

The Syntactic Profile of-mi

201

reported speech from which the speaker wishes to distance himself the most. The following text supplies a good example:
ARM 26/2, 303:717:
i-na a-ni-im u4-mi-im ul-lu-ri/ i--e-em-ma e4-em-ma-am/ a be-l ipu-ra-a-u ma-a-ri-u {x}/ ni-i-ku-un it-bi-ma um-ma [u-m]a/ ma-le-e
u-ub-ra-am sa-am-m-tar/ tu-e-zi-ba i-ia-ti tu-e-ze-ba-ni-in-ni/ it-bi-ma
ul-lu-ri ap-pa-ni-u/ -ul at-ta []a d-a4-ti-im/ ta-a-ku-un-ma tu-a-alli-iq-u-nu-ti/ et-bi-ma a-n[a-k]u um-ma a-na-ku-ma/ a-na ar-ni-ka ar-ni-mi
-ul ta-qa-bi
On the next day Ulluri came to me and we have presented to him the missive
which my lord has charged him. He (aya-smu) stood up and said: As much
as you (pl.) have saved ubram and Sammetar, so you (pl.) will save me?!
And Ulluri stood up in front of him (saying): isnt it you who caused ... and
destroyed them? And I stood up and so did I say: to your sin you do not say:
(it is) my sin-mi!67
This is a valuable example, demonstrating once more that mi does not merely mark direct, or reported, speech in letters. There are three sequences of reported direct speech in
the passage: the first speech presumably belongs to aya-smu, the second is Ulluris,
and the third is the writer himself. In the first two reported speeches, mi is missing (a
fact that does not hinder fully grasping these passages as reported speech, although
umma -ma appears only once). The particle mi appears only in the third reported
speech (introduced by umma anku-ma), where the writer is quoting himself; thus, it is
clear that mi carries the modal meaning of a spacer. Yamum, the writer of this letter, is
eager to distance himself from the contents of his words to aya-smu. He uses mi to
assure that his addressee will be aware that the I who never admits his own mistakes
is not the I who is telling the story, but aya-smu. The component to which mi attaches is the one from which the speaker wishes to distance himself: my sin.
Another example of this strong tendency is found in ARM 26/1, 275:518. In this
letter (cited above), the writer reports that the unfortunate Sumu-rabi died from a mysterious disease in a matter of two days: my leg hearts!-mi, ... my hand hearts!-mi).
The particle -mi is attached to the elements from which the speaker wishes to distance
himself, eager to make it clear that it is not his but Sumu-rabis hand and leg that hurt.
But is the propensity to attach mi to emphatic elements in the sentence the only
mechanism at work here? Examining the corpus turns up surprising results. In OB letters, the particle mi is found at the end of lines at a higher rate than one would have
expected had this location been random. Consider Table 5:

67. See Heimpel 2003: 290.

202

The Modal Particle -mi

Table 5. Number of mi in letters and its location in lines (by provenance).

Babylonian
letters

Mari letters

Shemshara and
Rima letters

No. of passages

25

No. of mi

32

43

12

Average no. of mi in a passage

(total/no. of passages)

4.6

1.7

No. of mi at the end of lines

21

22

Frequency of mi at the end of lines in

each group of texts (end of lines/total)

66%

51%

25%

The three subcorpora of the collected letters differ regarding the preference just presented. The fact that the location of mi at the end of lines in Babylonian letters is
nonaccidental cannot be disputed (66% of the attestations). In Mari letters, the number
of occurrences of mi at the end of lines is a bit lower (51% of total attestations) but is
still significant, making it clear that this location is not unintentional. In the Shemshara
letters, the frequency of mi at the end of lines seems average, probably indicating that
in this subcorpus there was no intentional attempt to place mi at the end of lines. Note,
however, that the relatively low number of attestations of mi in the Shemshara letters
may stand in the way of a more accurate analysis of this small corpus. Table 6 parses the
epistolary corpus without consideration of provenance:
Table 6. Occurrences of mi in letters and its location in lines (all locations).

Epistolary texts (from all locations)

No. of passages

37

No. of mi

87

Average no. of mi in letters (total/no. of passages)

2.3

No. of mi in end of lines

46

Frequency of mi at the end of lines (end of lines/total)

52%

Slightly more than half of the cases of mi in OB letters are found in the end of line, a
number which cannot be incidental.
Let us turn now to literary texts, and examine in the same way the location of mi in
this group of texts. Surprisingly, as Table 7 proves, the preferred location of mi in literary texts is not the end, but the head of lines. The data regarding literary texts is remarkable. Almost all (more than 90%) of the attestations of mi in nonepistolary texts are
found at the head of the line (first or second word). However, it must be borne in mind
that in many literary texts the lines are shorter than in letters, containing at times only
two to four words; thus, it is perhaps better to formulate this judgment differently and

Average number of occurrences of -mi in the Clause

203

Table 7. Occurrences of mi in literary texts and its location in the lines (all genres).

Literary texts (of all genres)

No. of passages with -mi

45

No. of mi

52

Average no. of mi in literary texts (total/no. of passages)

1.1

No. of mi in head of lines (first, or second word)

47

Frequency of mi in head of lines (head of lines/total)

90%

state that, in stark contrast to the epistolary texts, except for very few cases,68 in literary
texts, mi is never found at the end of the line.
How are we to explain this dichotomy between epistolary and literary texts with regard to the location of mi? This is not the first time we have noticed variation between
the two groups of texts regarding mi; the most salient distinction is functional. As I have
argued above, in OB literary texts, -mi maintained the early discourse function that originated in OAkk to mark direct speech. Once the quotatives umma and ummami became
widespread in the middle of the OB period, and the role of mi as marking direct speech
was transferred to umma and ummami, mi could be assigned the new modal function of
spacer. Thus, I suggest that the different location of mi in letters (predisposition for the
ends of lines) versus literary texts (avoidance of the ends of lines) ought be connected
to the different function of mi in letters versus literary texts. Where mi continued to
function as a discourse marker of direct speech (i.e., in literary texts), the particle kept
its initial position, maintaining its original location as a quotative. On the other hand,
in OB letters, the role of mi, like its sentence-initial position, was taken by umma and
ummami. Thus, when mi lost its function as a direct speech marker in OB letters and
assumed a modal function, it was relegated to sentence-final position. Finally, note that
sentence-final position is totally atypical for OB MPs, which as a rule tend to occupy a
frontal position in the sentence.
Average number of occurrences of -mi in the Clause
Another quantitative aspect of the particle mi, which can be seen in Tables 46
above, is the average count of the particle in the various subcorpora. Though the corpus
is not large enough to allow a conclusive statistical analysis, it is difficult to avoid noticing that, as far as the data goes, there are differences in the way mi is attested in the
various text groups. In the Babylonian letters, the average number of -mi is about double
(4.6) that in other epistolary corpora (1.7 and 2). But again, it is difficult to interpret this
data, because the calculations are heavily influenced by a few cases in which mi is found
68. See Lambert and Millard 1969: 52:159 and Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414): 3342, a text
whose resemblance to daily-life texts has already been noted, as well as George 2009: 34:79.

204

The Modal Particle -mi

Table 8. Comparison of the function and position of mi (by genres and dialects).

OAkk epistolary
texts

OAkk literary
texts (royal
insc.)

OB epistolary
texts

OB literary texts

Function of -mi

Discourse: direct Discourse: direct Modal: spacer

speech
speech

Discourse:
apostrophe

Position in line/
clause

initial

initial

final

initial

Quantity of mi
in a passage

(corpus too
small)

(corpus too
small)

optional
(average > 2)

minimal
(average ca. 1)

many times.69 Thus, more important, and probably more significant, is the discovery
that, on average, mi is found in letters (regardless of provenance) twice as frequently as
in literary texts (2.3 : 1.1). This discovery also seems to result from the fundamental distinction between the epistolary and nonepistolary texts: since mi in literary texts is used
as a discourse particle to mark direct speech and apostrophes, it is usually found only
once, at the head of the phrase ( just like the quotatives umma and ummami in letters). In
OB letters, where mi is used modally, the particle is more likely to be used repeatedly,
reflecting the wishes and emphasis of the writer. Table 8 summarizes these conclusions.
Are the different locations of mi an indication that this particle is in fact a grapheme (reflecting scribal conventions, similar to quotation marks in modern practice) and
not a fully functioning morpheme? Or does it, on the contrary, hint that the seemingly
arbitrary parsing of the text into line-units is not merely technical but carries linguistic
meaning? This idea is not new to the consideration of literary texts, but it is less evident
for epistolary texts. Whatver the conclusion may be, the particle mi is a fascinating and
complex component of the OB modal system.
69. AbB 10, 190:1131 (16); ARM 26/1, 140:140 (13); Shemshara Letters 70: 1228 (5).

List of attestations of -mi

(passages fully cited and translated are preceded by *)
1. *AbB 1, 27:69 (Pientka and Hinz 2007:
30 (10.2))
2. AbB 7, 8:512
3. AbB 10, 57:628
4. AbB 10, 190:1131
5. AbB 11, 172:617
6. AbB 14, 217:0519
7. AbB 14, 217:2030
8. *ARM 1, 118:414 (LAPO 16, 48)
9. ARM 5, 9:519 (LAPO 18, 915)
10. *ARM 5, 59:121 (LAPO 17, 535)

11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

*ARM 10, 129:120 (LAPO 18, 1164)

ARM 14, 1:1725 (LAPO 16, 215)
ARM 26/1, 12:515 (Heimpel 2003: 182)
ARM 26/1, 13:8 (Heimpel 2003: 18283)
ARM 26/1, 16:415 (Heimpel 2003: 184)
ARM 26/1, 140:140 (Heimpel 2003: 229)
*ARM 26/1, 275:518 (Heimpel 2003:
281)
18. *ARM 26/2, 303: 717 (Heimpel 2003:
290)

Average number of occurrences of -mi in the Clause

19. ARM 26/2, 304:3746 (Heimpel 2003:
29192)
20. ARM 28, 39:511
21. ARM 28, 48:2134
22. *ARM 28, 145:1218
23. ARM 28, 147:48
24. ARM 28, 179:3141
25. *Charpin 1986: 327: 2629
26. Charpin 1991: 161:2025 (Ziegler 2006:
5354 (4.1))
27. Charpin 1991: 161:2736 (Ziegler 2006:
5354 (4.1))
28. *Charpin 2004b: 155: xvi 36
29. *Driver and Miles 195255: vol. 2: 9698:
rev. xxv: 340
30. Durand 1990a: 102:1224
31. *Farber 1989: 36:1521
32. FM 1, p. 82:4050
33. FM 8, 49:515
34. Frayne 1990: 669:812
35. *George 2003: 178 (Gilg. P): v 17585
(//George 2003: 174 [Gilg. P: 80])
36. *George 2003: 180 (Gilg. P.): vi 23234
(-ma)
37. *George 2003: 200 (Gilg. Y): iv 14650
38. George 2009: 34:79
39. Goodnick Westenholz 1997: 182: v 13
40. Groneberg 1997: 28: ii 4
41. Groneberg 1997: 30: iii 8
42. Groneberg 1997: 36: v 38
43. *Groneberg 1997: 81: vii 2022
44. Held 1961: 8: iii 67
45. Krebernik 20034: 15: ii 36
46. *Lambert 1989: 326: 8487
47. Lambert 1989: 327:1045
48. Lambert 1989: 327:11213

49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.

205

Lambert 1989: 327:12021

Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:128
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:[129]
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:[130]
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:[140]
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:[141]
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50:[142]
Lambert and Millard 1969: 52:159
Lambert and Millard 1969: 60:246
Lambert and Millard 1969: 62:289
Lambert and Millard 1969: 68:370
Lambert and Millard 1969: 68:376
Lambert and Millard 1969: 80:14
Lambert and Millard 1969: 82:28
*Landsberger and Jackobsen 1955: 14:1
*Landsberger and Jackobsen 1955: 14:9
*Landsberger and Jackobsen 1955: 14:14
*Livingstone 1988: 177:3334
*Livingstone 1988: 177:3942
MARI 6, p. 291:1516
OBTR 144:1622
Rmer 1967: 18586: i 17
Rmer 1967: 186: ii 1316
Shemshara Letters 28 B:412
Shemshara Letters 35:517
Shemshara letters 42:3645
Shemshara Letters 70:1228
Shemshara Letters 70:4245
*Thureau-Dangin 1925: 172:1314
*Thureau-Dangin 1925: 174:5556
*van Dijk 1972: 34344:113
Vogelzang 1988: 97:3133
Vogelzang 1988: 97:4448
Whiting 1985: 180:1
*Ziegler 1999a: 57:419

Fashion your weapon from ambiguous words. /

Consign clear words to lexical limbo.
Czesaw Miosz, Child of Europe

Chapter 10
Conclusions:
Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian
The main components of the epistemic modal system in OB that we have encountered
are: the quadriad of evidentials pqat midde wuddi and anna; the nongradual triad
of committing certifiers wuddi, l ittum, and ka; the particle mi, serving as a spacer
(in opposition to the certifiers); the irrealis man and the related irrealis constructions
l, aar, and ibai; the refuter tua, which is close to man and can be considered to
form a nonreality dyad with it; and the volitive assurr (see Summary Table 1, p.207).
Before turning to our final taskrecapitulating the main characteristics of these particles, looking for general tendencies in their syntactic behavior, and setting them in
relation to one anotherit is time to outline very briefly some, though not all, of the
least-known particles found at the outskirts of OB epistemic modality.
Some Less-Attested Modal Particles in Akkadian
(1) The particle rai/rau is rare. CAD rendered it hesitantly as indeed(?), surely
(CAD R 80 s.v.). CDA and AHw suggested something like definitely, without question (CDA 296a; AHw 944a : etwa unbedingt). It is attested thus far only in lexical
lists, where it is recorded as one of the synonyms of pqat.
(2) A synonym to rai is rabtat, which CAD considers to be an adverb, offering no
translation (CAD R 27). AHw, followed by the CDA, does not list it as a separate lemma
at all (but note that it is mentioned in the list of corrections to the CDA1). Morphologically, rabtat is a third-person feminine stative form, like pqat. It could be based on the
verb *rabtum, which is not attested in Akkadian, though rapt/um, mng. uncert., is
recorded. It is also possible that the particle is to be derived from rapdum, to run, to
roam, etc. Whatever the case, the meaning of this particle cannot be established at present; only contexts in which it is actually used will allow its meaning to be determined.

1.http://www.trin.cam.ac.uk/cda_archive/default.htm.

206

Some Less-Attested Modal Particles in Akkadian

207

Summary Table 1. The Main Epistemic Modal Particles,

Their Basic English Translations and Modal Functions

Basic English Translation

Main Modal Functions

pqat

Perhaps

Doubter. Optative. Semiconditional.

midde

Probably / No doubt

Scalar/partial certifier. Speculative. Optative.

Semiconditional.

wuddi

Surely

Deductive. High certainty. Strong personal

commitment.

anna

Indeed

Declarative certainty. Strong personal

commitment.

l ittum Mark that ...

Deductive. Past certainty. Strong personal

commitment.

tua

It is as if ... But ... /

Apparently ... But ... /
Seemingly ... But ...

Refuter. Counter-assertion.

man

Had it (not) ... /

Were it (not) ...

Irrealis. Counterfactuality.

ka

Surely (ironicnon ironic) /

Sarcastic objection. Simple Certifier.
Evidently (ironicnon ironic)

assurr

I am afraid that ... /

I hope that ... not happen

Volitive expressing hopes and fears (epistemic

and deontic).

-mi

Allegedly ... /
According to him ...

Spacer: distancing the speaker from his own

words. Personal Noncommitment.

(3) An additional MP with an unclear meaning is maitum, which is defined by the

CAD as an adverb meaning again(?), moreover(?) (CAD M/1 367 s.v.). It is attested
only in lexical lists, as a synonym of kam-ma, tua-ma, and pqa-ma, a collocation that
suggests that it is a MP, not an adverb, as understood also by the CDA (202a s.v.).2
(4) Another particle is urrumma/arrumma, which is attested in various Akkadian
dialects from the OB period onward.3 CAD took it to be an adverb meaning something
like promptly(?), forthwith(?), indeed(?) (CAD /3, 361f. s.v.). The adverbial character of urrumma/arrumma appears in later dialects. A connection with surri, immediately, in a moment (CAD S 410; the lemma upon which assurr is based), is very likely.
OB sources show that urrumma/arrumma has a modal function.
(5) A related particle is OAkk surramma, truly, attested once in an OB copy of an
inscription of Rmu: Rmu ar kitim s-ra-ma arrtam dEnlil iddinuum, Rmu
is the king of the universe, truly Enlil gave him kingship.4 The lemma has the form
2. See, for example, George 2009: 64:46 (OB love-lyric).
3. See, on this particle, Hra 2010: 83.
4. Kienast and Sommerfeld 1994: 272: wahrhaftig; Frayne 1993: 47: indeed.

208

Conclusions: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian

of an adverb, and its meaning, based on its sole attestation, is that of a strong certifier, amplified by the accompanying asseverative subjunctive. However, due to lack of
additional examples, it is hard to pin down the exact nuance that surramma carries, in
contrast to other MPs that have a similar function.
(6) Yet another rare particle, attested to the best of my knowledge only three times in
the Mari corpus, is ka.5 The CDA notes that this particle is used to introduce speech but
refrains from translating it (CDA 419b). It has been suggested that ka is composed of
u, and, and ka, the 2nd-person masculine attached suffix,6 but judging by the spelling
of the late lexical lists, it is qa (with /q/).7 In order to establish a meaning, one must
also take into consideration the lexical evidence, where Ka is found in collocation
with midde and tua.8 The Mari letters where ka is found demonstrate that its meaning consists of a blend of possibly with a strong coloring of resentment and protest
on the part of the speaker, denoting something like: OK, perhaps it is so, but I am very
offended by that. More examples are required before a solid understanding of this MP
can be gained.
(7) An interrogative, minsu, what is it that?, why?, also carries a modal nuance of
protest and an undertone of blame (CAD M/2 89 with note). Again, lexical lists attest to
the modal character of this interrogative: in Malku = arru III 11011 it is found together
with tua, pqa as a synonym of kam.9
(8) Another particle is ali, meaning surely (CDA 12a); it is attested at Mari (see
Ziegler 1999b: 162 ad line 24).
(8) Finally, the enclitic particles m, me, mme, and mku, all treated by Adler
(1976: 8291), are found in post-OB dialects: El-Amarna, Mitanni, Boghazkoy, and
occasionally also in late Babylonian. In OB sources, these enclitic particles are mostly
unknown, but it is important to be aware that they may appear in late OB sources. Some
of these particles are very likely to have a modal function.
This list of less-known particles or, perhaps, adverbs proves that our data on the system of epistemic modality in Akkadian are only partial and that this field is wider than
the surviving written sources enable us to grasp. Future textual discoveries will surely
change this situation.
Summary
It is time to offer an overview of the previous nine chapters. In the following concluding remarks, I want to provide an overview of the mass of details presented in the previous chapters from a more general perspective, providing an outline of the grammatical
landscape traversed hitherto. First, let us turn to the syntactic profile of the various MPs,
5. ARM 1, 58:8 (LAPO 16, 71); ARM 26/1, 397:419; ARM 26/2, 404:1331.
6. LAPO 16, p. 199 note b; see also Charpin, ARM 26/2, 231 note c; Joanns, ARM 26/1, 262 (referring to Durand).
7. Reanalyzed, perhaps, as deriving from waqm, to wait for, expect?
8. MSL 4, 175 (NBGT IX); MSL 13, 165 (Izi V); ZA 9, 159:8.
9. Hra 2010: 366.

Tendency to futurepresent

Mostly futurepresent

Mostly past

Mostly past

Complex. Mostly
tense descent (i.e.,
apodosis leans to
past)

Mostly futurepresent

No preference

Mostly past

Mostly 3rd-person
domain

Mostly 2nd and 3rdperson domains

No preference

Restricted: 1st and

2nd-person domains

No preference

Restricted: 1st-person
domain

No preference

No preference

No preference

pqat

midde

wuddi

l ittum

-man

assurr

tua

ka

-mi

No preference

Verbal Tenses

Discourse Domains

l (1)

ula/ul,

l (1 ul)

l (1 ul)

Complex: ul,
l, or ay

Complex: ul
or l

ul (1)

ul (1)

ul

ul

Negation

Tendency to follow a
topicalizing phrase.

Complex. Tendency to
topicalizing phrase >
false assumption phrase >
refuting phrase.

Complex. Tendency to
split and to encapsulate
circumstantial clauses.

Complex. Tendency to
be placed on focalized
components, spread
in intervals over the
sentence.

Leads to topicalizing
phrase.

Tendency to follow a
topicalizing phrase

Tendency to follow a
topicalizing phrase

Tendency to follow a
topicalizing phrase

Phrasal Arrangement

Split. In letters, mostly No preference.

final position. In
literary texts, mostly
frontal position.

Mostly initial position

Mostly initial position

Tendency to initial
position

Free. Mostly protasisapodosis; but also

only protasis or only
apodosis

Mostly initial position

Tendency to initial
position

Mostly initial position

Mostly initial position

Position of MP in
Clause

Summary Table 2. Overview of Grammatical Features of the Various Modal Particles.

Enclitic particles
occasionally attached (mima; or ma-mi).

Enclitic particles
occasionally attached (only
ma).

Enclitic particles
occasionally attached (ma
often).

Enclitic particles
occasionally attached (only
ma).

Mostly not attached to

other MPs, but can be
attached to l or l. (2
tua-man).

Enclitic particles
occasionally attached (only
ma).

Enclitic particles rarely

attached (1 ma; x1
man).

Enclitic particles rarely

attached (2 man:
mistakes?)

No enclitic particles
attached.

Combination with
OtherMPs

Summary
209

210

Conclusions: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian

which has been examined by means of the grammatical protocol employed throughout
this study. A synopsis of the features of each MP is found in Summary Table 2 (see
p.209). This table allows us to draw the following conclusions:
1. There are two MPs that present clear-cut cases regarding discourse domains:
assurr is restricted to the speakers fears and worries, that is, to the locutory domain; and pqat, which mostly refers to unknown actions of a third person involved
in the situation, that is, to the illocutory domain. Translating this conclusion to
the binary concepts of perspectivization and subjectification, we can say that
assurr is the most clearly subjectifying MP, whereas pqat is the most perspectifying particle. Other MPs have no clear-cut tendencies.
2. With regard to the verbal tenses, the MPs examined here divide into three groups.
The first group includes pqat, midde, and assurr, with which mostly presentfuture verbs are used (the meager corpus in which anna occurs perhaps points
to a preference for present-future verbs for this MP as well). The second group
comprises wuddi, l ittum, and ka, which mostly are accompanied by past tense
verbs. The third group of MPs shows no preference for a specific tense: tua and
the two enclitic particles man and -mi. This tense division reflects a fundamental
notional differentiation between possibility (of different intensity), which tends
to take open-ended verbal forms, especially the present-future tense, and certainty, which tends to employ delimited verbal forms, especially the past tense.
3. It is important to realize that in the OB modal system MPs cannot themselves
be negated; they can only govern a negated clause. In other words, pqat ul ...,
midde ul ..., wuddi ul ..., tua l ..., etc., are all possible and indeed attested,
but *ul pqat ..., *ul midde ..., *ul wuddi ..., *l tua ..., etc., are not attested and simply not possible. In Akkadian, as in other languages, negations of
this kind are ungrammatical. The reason for this ungrammaticality is that an epistemic statement results from an actual mentaljudgment or evaluationprocess.
Thus, despite the fact that one may be hesitant, dubious, or uncertain regarding a
given state of affairs, ones mind is nevertheless still actively relating toward it.
This positive mental action can be reduced, hindered, or stopped, but it cannot
be denied. Capone (2001: 48) treated this point with regard to English modality,
saying that speech act adverbs cannot be negated, demonstrating this statement
with the following two examples, both of which are ungrammatical: Not honestly
Sam rejected the analysis and I am not honestly telling you that Sam rejected the
analysis. Furthermore, negation treats MPs and adverbs differently: unlike MPs,
Akkadian adverbs can (although rarely) be negated (e.g., l damqi).10 Specifically, the evidentials pqat, midde, and wuddi all unequivocally employ ul, a fact
that makes the semantic and functional relationship between these three gradual
MPs explicit. The negation particle l can modify tua and ka. Hence, tua and

10. CAD D 68 1. s.v. damqi.

Summary

211

katwo MPs that are paired in the lexical list Malku= arruare treated in OB
much like the conditional umma, which also requires the negation l.11
4. All of the MPs examined show a clear propensity for location at the front of the
sentence. Only mi breaks this rule: in epistolary texts, this enclitic particle is
found mostly at the end of the sentence (in literary texts, it conforms to the general
rule for MPs, because it is mostly found at the head of the sentence). This conclusion introduces another syntactic criterion that sets MPs apart from other parts of
speech, for example, from adverbs, which are rarely found at the head of the sentence, and from interjections, such as apputum, please, it is urgent, which tend to
be located at the end of the sentence.
5. There is no common phrasal arrangement typical of all the MPs treated in this
study. Nonetheless, there is a general preference for epistemic MPs to follow a
topicalizing phrase that presents the matter to which the speaker is referring in his
evaluation. This foregoing topicalization is expected, as epistemic locutions are
typically rhematic in nature. In other words, the gravity point, semantically speaking, is found in the speakers evaluation; thus, the matter that is evaluated must first
be well-defined and described.
6. MPs tend not to cluster together. The reason for this is clear: each MP renders a
specific meaning, too delicate and unique to be interfered with by the presence of
another particle. Occasionally, however, enclitic particles, mainly ma, can be affixed to some MPs without any discernible change in meaning. The easy affixation
of ma proves that in the OB period this enclitic particle has no modal meaning
(if it ever had one in previous layers of Akkadian) and that it functions only at the
syntagmatic level of the text.
Next, we turn to assess some quantitative aspects of the various MPs in the OB corpus
(Summary Table 3, p.212). This data should be treated with caution. The corpus is constantly growing, and the figures mirror only the present state of knowledge, which new
sources may alter dramatically. With due caution, however, some general conclusions
can still be drawn.
7. There are significant differences in the number of attestations of the various MPs:
assurr is by far the most frequently attested particle, with more than 200 occurrences. Next come pqat and man, each with about 100 attestations. The particles
mi and midde are next, with 5070 attestations. Then wuddi, tua, l ittum, and
ka follow, with 2050 attestations. Other MPs mentioned in the course of this
study, such as anna and ka, are much less common, with the count of occurrences
about 10. The high frequency of assurr can be explained by the nature of our
sources. The well-documented correspondence of court and local officials, especially from the Mari archives, abounds with concerns, hopes, and fearsemotions
that call for the extensive use of the volitive assurr.
11. Hra 2010: 82:109, 425:114.

212

Conclusions: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian

Summary Table 3. Some Aspects of the Attestation of the Various Modal Particles.

Total no. of Appearance in

Attestations Literary Texts

Geographical
Distribution

Equivalence in Lexical Lists

(cf. Summary Table 4)

assurr

ca. 220

-/-

Mari > Babylon

-/- (surru = tukun; a-pa-a.

In Malku: surru = zamar)

pqat

ca. 100

Few: 1

Mari > Babylon

nam-ga; i-gi(4)-in-zu

-man

ca. 100

Some: ca. 15

Babylon > Mari

gi-en (KI.TA); u4-da

-mi

ca. 70

Widespread:
about half of the
attestations

In letters:
Mari > Babylon
In literary texts:
Babylon > Mari

e-e

midde

ca. 50

Few: 3

Babylon > Mari

ga-nam; nam-ga; i-gi(4)-in-zu;

e-en-te-e-m

wuddi

ca. 50

-/-

Mari > Babylon

-/-

tua

ca. 30

Few: 3

Mari > Babylon

ga-nam; nam-ga; i-gi(4)-in-zu

l ittum ca. 20

-/-

Mari > Babylon

-/- (ittum alone: giskim; ;

e-e; zig)

ca. 20

-/-

Babylon > Mari

(In Malku: ka = tua)

ka

Note: The counts in this table are usually higher than those listed in the chapters above where each particle is
discussed because the numbers have been rounded up here to take into account unpublished texts that were left
out of the discussion.

8. The MPs treated in this study are seldom attested in literary texts, with two exceptions: the obvious case of the particle mi and, to a lesser extent, the particle man.
This conclusion confirms what has been stressed more than once throughout this
study, namely, that MPs are quintessentially elements of conversation, which in
our case means that they are typical of epistolary texts. The case of assurr is remarkable: of the more than 200 examples, the evidence of our corpus is that none
is found in literary texts.
9. Evaluating the geographical distribution of the MPs is difficult, if not impossible.
The available data is arbitrary in many ways, dependent on the uneven pace of
excavations at the various sites and on the rate of publication of the results of these
excavations. Thus, the figures are hardly adequate to support a balanced interpretation. Nonetheless, two MPs can cautiously be pointed out as typical of the Mari
epistolary texts: wuddi and assurr. It is probably not accidental that these MPs
have no Sumerian counterparts in the bilingual lexical lists (see the next point).
10. Four of the MPs in our corpus are not found in the bilingual scribal tradition:
wuddi, assurr, l ittum, and ka.12 One could perhaps connect the absence of
12. Note that ittum, a sign, is widely attested in the lexical tradition and that surru, deceit, falsehood, a word related to assurr, is also found in the lexical lists. Likewise, surru and ka have Akkadian
synonyms in the Malku = arru list (see Hra 2010: 364:77, 366:109) but no Sumeran counterparts.

Summary

213

wuddi and assurr from the lexical tradition to the fact that these two MPs are
typical of Mari discourse. This argument, however, is harder to sustain with regard
to ka and l ittum, because these two are well attested in Babylonian sources.
However, it is remarkable that assurr and wuddi, MPs that are very commonly
attested, are not present in the lexical lists. This leads me to suggest that these MPs
were doomed to oblivion by the (mainly Babylonian) compilers of the bilingual
lists because they were more frequently used outside of Babylonia. Another possibility is that these lemmas attained their status as MPs relatively late, missing, as
it were, the train of lexical tradition.
The last point leads us to examine the various MPs from the standpoint of lexical tradition (see Summary Table 4, p. 214).
11. In most cases, the MPs appear in the lexical lists in clusters. This is a most valuable datum that vouches for the shared semantic properties behind the various particlesnot only according to modern analysis but also in the grammatical thinking
of the ancient scribes. Furthermore, there are two groups of MPs according to the
lexical lists: (1) pqat, midde, tua, Ka (and also appna),13 and another (2) that
includes surru, the basis of assurr, and umma, if. Remarkably, by our modern
analysis, assurr is also to be separated from pqat, midde, and tua, because the
volitive assurr is the only epistemic MP that stands on the border between the
deontic and epistemic sections of Akkadian modality.
12. It is crucial to realize that the lexical tradition viewed the Akkadian MPs from
the Sumerian perspective, not from the Akkadian side. This is evident from the
fact that the lexical lists group the various Akkadian MPs around a single, or at
most two, alternating Sumerian lemmas. This understanding allows us to reduce
the importance of the testimony of the lexical lists as a means of establishing the
semantic interdependence of the various MPs.14 Simply said: because the particles
are grouped together according to the Sumerian term, the fact that a certain Akkadian MP is found following another and that both match the same Sumerian lemma
does not necessarily mean that they are synonyms. For example: in the list known
as Neo-Babylonian Grammatical Texts, midde is found after tua, both translating
Sumerian nam-ga. Does this mean that midde is a synonym of tua? Examination
of the material proves clearly that this is not the case and that the meaning and
usage of the two MPs is different. The lexical lists group the two MPs one after
the other not because they have the same in Akkadian meaning but because in certain Sumerian contexts they are both possible equivalents of Sumerian n a m - g a.
13. Landsberger 1936: 73: Wenn wir den Listen vertrauen, hat appna aber auerdem modale Funktion, da es ein Synonym von minde ist....
14. So already, most perceptively, von Soden (1950: 187): Da die Adverbien, mit denen zusammen
tua(ma) dort meistens aufgefhrt ist (vor allem mind(ma), piqa(t), appna ...), in ihrer Deutung ebenfalls
noch unstritten ... und auch sicher alles andere als bedeutungsgleich sind, ist es zweckmig, die Listen
zunchst ganz beiseite zu lassen und nur die zusammanhngenden Texte zu prfen. See now also the remarks of Hra (2010: 234) on this matter.

214

Conclusions: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian

MSL 4, 160 (NBGT III): ii1922

ga-nam = mi-[in-de]
i-gi-in-zu = mi-[in-de]
ga-nam = tu-[a-ma]
i-g[i-i]n-zu = tu-[a-ma]
MSL 4, 163 (NBGT IV):1115
(see also Civil 2005: 245)
i-gi-in-zu = tu--ma
nam-ga = MIN (tu--ma)
nam-ga = mi-in-de
nam-ga = ap-pu-na
nam-ga = pi-q-at
MSL 4, 175 (NBGT IX): 26569
ga-nam = pi-[qa]
ga-nam = mn-[de]
ga-nam = -[qa]
ga-nam = tu--[ma]
ga-nam = ap-pu-[na]
MSL 13, 161 (Izi V): 2930
i-gi-in-zu = mn-de
i-gi-in-zu = tu-a-ma
MSL 13, 165 (Izi V): 16064

gaga-x-nam = mi-in-de
ga-nam = tu-a-ma
ga-nam = -qa
ga-nam = pi-qa
ga-nam-me!-a = pi-qa-ma

MSL 13, 184 (Izi D): iv 2627

e-en-te-e-m = me-nu-u MIN
(ka-a-am)
MIN MIN (e-en-te-e-m) = mi-in-da
MIN (ka-a-am)
MSL 4, 149 (NBGT II): ii1314
e-e = mi-i KI.TA
gi-en = ma-an KI.TA

ZA 9, 159 (The Berlin Vocabulary):

111
i-gi-in-zu = ap-pu-na
i-gi-in-zu = mn-de
i-gi-in-zu = ma-an-da
i-gi-in-zu = ki-a-am
i-gi-in-zu = tu-a-am
i-gi-in-zu = tu-u-a-ma-ki
i-gi-in-zu = u-u-a-ma
i-gi-in-zu = -KA-a
i-gi-in-zu = la-ma-tar
i-gi-in-zu = pi-qa
i-gi-in-zu = pi-qat
MSL 5, 43 (HAR-gud I):6
U.NG.TUR.L = sur-ru = za-mar
MSL 13, 203 (Izi G): 24042
[a]-pa-a = i-bi-it a[p-pi]
a-pa-a = za-ma[r]
a-pa-a = sur-ru
MSL 15, 172 (Diri V): 119120
tu-ku-un = U.NG.TUR.L = surrum
tu-ku-um-bi = U.NG.TUR.L.BI =
um-ma
MSL 17, 42 (Erim-hu II): 28082
tukun = sur-[ru]
tukun-di = ki-in-[nu?]
tukun-di-di = sur-sur-[ru/tu]
Malku=arru III, 10911
tu-a-a-ma = ki-a-a-am
mi-in-su = ki--a-[]
pi-qa-ma = ki-MIN
Malku=arru III, 11415
mi-in-su = am-mi-i-ni
ul-la = mi-in-su
Malku=arru VIII, 114
tu-u- = ki-i-

Summary Table 4. Modal Particles in Lexical Lists.

An Outline of the Epistemic Modal System in Old Babylonian

215

Another example of the rationale of the ancient lexicographers is furnished by the

appearance of mi immediately after man in the Neo-Babylonian Grammatical
Texts,15 both paralleled to Sumerian e- e. Evidently what has driven the lexicographer to place these two MPs one after the other is not their modal meaning but the
fact that they are both enclitic particles, one of which means (as) they say ...,16
which fits mi well, but not man. The conclusion is simple: in order to establish
the meaning of a given Akkadian lemma, one ought to turn to the Akkadian sources
and not rely blindly on the (Sumerian) lexical evidence. This admonition is true
generally in Akkadian lexicography, but it is especially important in the case of
modal particles, because modality is a linguistic domain that, perhaps more than
any other, is specific to its language and therefore prone to translation hazards.
An Outline of the Epistemic Modal System in Old Babylonian
After sailing through the many-islands sea of modal particles, providing a map of
the archipelago would certainly be beneficial. The main epistemic particles in OB can
be divided into four groups, representing, respectively, four conceptual axes. Note that
some MPs exhibit a wide range of meaning and consequently are located on more than
one axis. The way in which the various axes are arranged in relation to each other creates the notional matrix of epistemic modality in OB. It is sufficient to say here that these
axes intersect, which is to say, again, that some MPs are found on more than one axis.
Axis I: Possibility Certainty
The first group consists of the MPs pqat, midde, wuddi, and anna. These MPs belong
to the subcategory of inferential epistemic modality, by which the speaker expresses
his judgments and assessments of a specific state of affairs against a background of full,
partial, or totally lacking information (Shlomper 2005: 12). We may also refer to these
MPs as gradual evidentials: expressions that present the amount and source of evidence a speaker has for a particular statement (Sanders and Spooren 1997: 96). The
notional axis of certainty and doubt is especially relevant in our corpus; hence, Akkadianmore accurately, OBcan be safely labeled as an evidential language (cf. Palmer
1986: 91). From the point of view of the system, the MPs pqat, midde, wuddi, and anna
form a scalar quadrad, a set of graduations, that are arranged along the notional axis the
two poles of which are possibility and certainty.17 This intensifying scale represents
the speakers confidence in his own assessment of reality, from the weaker MP to the
stronger: possibility (pqat) probability, or predictability (midde) certainty (wuddi
and anna). These MPs, in turn, can be assigned to two epistemic categories: a weak
certainty, which can be labeled potential (Shlomper 2002: 18085) or speculative
15. MSL 4, 149:1314.
16. Cf. Alster 1996: 6.
17.Cf. Palmer 1979: 8: possibility and necessity are central to our discussion; they are the core of
the modality system. Certainty and necessity, though related, are surely not identical terms; the former
belongs fully to epistemic modality; the latter has much to do with deontic modality.

216

Conclusions: Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian

(2002: 176), and a stronger certainty, which can be labeled deductive (2002: 187) or
presumptive (2002: 189). The elusive line that divides the two categories passes
through the middle of the semantic realm of the MP midde: this MP is itself scalar. See
fig. 2.
pqat
possibility

midde
probability

wuddi/anna
certainty

(deductive/presumptive)

(potential/speculative)
Figure 2.

Axis II: Refutation Affirmation

The second group of MPs consists of tua, ka, wuddi, and l ittum on the other. The
MPs located on this axis have no magnitudethat is, their meaning does not develop
gradually, as in the case of the triad pqat, midde, and wuddi; instead, they conglomerate
near the two extremes of this notional axis: asseveration or affirmation of a particular event (wuddi, l ittum, anna, and to some extend also ka) and the refutation or
counter-assertion of a given event or state of affairs (tua and ka). See fig. 3.
tua, ka
refutation

ure 1.

wuddi, l ittum, anna, ka

affirmation
Figure 3.

Axis III: Nonrealization Realization

The third group of MPs concerns improbabilty (referring mainly to future events),
impossibility, and counterfactuality (referring mostly to past events). It consists
of the enclitic particle man and the modal expressions associated with itibai, l,
and aar, all of which broadly speaking denote irrealis.
This axis forms a vector: it begins in reality and evolves in the direction of nonreality. Hence, the MPs on this axis stand apart of the entire field of nonmodality, which
in Akkadian is expressed through indicative verbal forms. The notional opposition here
is between that which has been realized (fulfilled, accomplished, brought about) and
that which has not. See fig. 4.
Counterfactuality/Improbability

Reality

-man, ibai, l, aar

Figure 4.

An Outline of the Epistemic Modal System in Old Babylonian

217

Axis IV: Subjectification Perspectivization

The fourth notional axis along which OB MPs are arranged expresses the gradual
degree of participation of the speaker in the state of events to which he refers or, in other
words, the level of identification of the speaker with the I embedded in his account.
This magnitude can be defined by the terms subjectification and perspectivization,
which was elaborated in chap. 1 (pqat). To avoid reiteration, it is enough to say here
that, when the actual speaker identifies himself as the I in his speech, then one may say
that subjectification has taken place. Conversely, when the speaker separates himself
from the I reported in his speech, perspectivization is at work. The MPs relevant
here are on the one extreme assurr, l ittum, and, to a lesser extent, also wuddi and ka,
and on the other extreme: the enclitic particle mi and, to a lesser extent, also pqat and
midde. See fig. 5.
assur, l ittum

wuddi, anna, ka

pqat, midde

subjectification

-mi

perspectivization
Figure 5.

*****
I cannot conclude this book without mentioning Palmers seminal work once more.
In his final observations (1986: 224), he concluded that, in spite of some reservations,
in many languages modality has been adequately demonstrated as a linguistic category
similar to tense, aspect, gender, person, or number. More than twenty years later, this
statement seems somewhat banal. No one, it appears, would deny today that modality
is a central constituent of most, if not all, linguistic systems. (Interestingly, Palmer cautiously avoided the term general category; therefore, I have refrained from using this
term as well, although this is probably overly cautious.)
Turning to the language treated in this book, there is no doubt that modality, including
its two main types, epistemic and deontic, is an essential category of Akkadian in the OB
period and in other layers of Akkadian as well. Focusing on the theme of this volume,
it can be safely said that it is impossible to penetrate the subtleties and complexities of
Akkadian epistolary (and, sometimes, literary) texts without arming oneself with an array of epistemic notions relevant to the system and familiarizing oneself with the main
epistemic categories that were operative at the time. To state this principle positively, the
OB epistemic matrix is the playground of epistolary discourse; to ignore it will prevent
genuine understanding of these fascinating texts. I hope that this volume offers a gateway to this field, while awaiting further data and new studies.

Bibliography
Abbreviations follow the conventions of the CAD and the AHw, with the following
additions: FM = Florilegium Marianum; LAPO 16, 17, 18 = Durand 1997, 1998, and
2000, respectively; and Shemshara Letters = Eidem and Laesse 2001.
Studies that are part of a text series (e.g., AbB, ARM) are cited by their series identifications and are not listed in the author-year bibliography below.
Aartun, Kjell
1974 Die Partikeln des Ugaritischen. AOAT 21/1. Neukirchen-Vluyn Neukirchener Verlag/ Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker.
Abraham, Werner
1991 The Grammaticization of the German Modal Particles. Pp. 33180 in Approaches to
Grammaticalization, edited by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine. Typological Studies in
Language 19/2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2002 Modal Verbs: Epistemics in German and English. Pp. 1950 in Modality and Its Interaction with the Verbal System, edited by S. Barbiers, F. Beukema, and W. van der
Wurff. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Adler, Hans-Peter
1976 Das Akkadische des Knigs Turatta von Mitanni. AOAT 201. Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchner Verlag.
Aikenvald, Alexandra
2006 Evidentiality in Grammar. Pp. 32025 in Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics,
edited by K.Brown. 2nd edition. Oxford: Elsevier.
Alster, Bendt
1996 Literary Aspects of Sumerian and Akkadian Proverbs. Pp. 121 in Mesopotamian
Poetic Language: Sumerian and Akkadian, edited by M. E. Vogelzang and H. L. J.
Vanstiphout. Cuneiform Monographs 6. Groningen: Styx.
1997 Proverbs of Ancient Sumer: The Worlds Earliest Proverb Collections. Bethesda, MD:
CDL.
Anderson, Stephen R.
1985 Inflectional Morphology. Pp. 150201 in Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. III, edited by T. Shopen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arkhipov, Ilya
2010 Les vhicules terrestres dans les textes de Mari, I: Le nublum. Pp. 40520 in Babel
und Bibel 4, edited by L. Kogan et al. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Aro, Jussi
1955 Studien zur mittelbabylonischen Grammatik. Studia Orientalia 22. Helsinki: Societas
Orientalis Fennica.
Bar, Tali
2001 Expression of Temporality, Modality and Perfectivity in Contemporary Hebrew Conditionals as Compared with Non-Conditionals. WZKM 91: 4983.
218

Bibliography

219

Baar, Tim van

1996 Particles. Pp. 259301 in Complex Structures: A Functional Perspective, edited by
B. Devriendt, L. Goossens, and J. van der Auwera. Functional Grammar 17. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Bertocchi, Alessandra, and Anna Orlandini
2001 Lexpression de la possibilit pistmique en latin. Pp. 4765 in Les verbes modaux
dans les langues germaniques et Romenes, edited by P. Dendale and J. van der Auwera. Cahiers Chronos 8. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Bezold, Carl
1926 Babylonisch-assyrisches Glossar. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Bhatt, Rajesh
1997 Obligation and Possession. Pp. 2140 in Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on
Argument Structure and Aspect, edited by H. Harley. MITWPL 32. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
Bravmann, Meir M.
1977 Syriac dalm Lest, Perhaps and Some Related Arabic Phenomena. Pp. 32237 in
Studies in Semitic Philology, edited by M. Bravmann. Studies in Semitic Languages
and Linguistics 6. Leiden: Brill.
Buccellati, Giorgio
1972 On the Use of Akkadian Infinitive After a or Construct State. JSS 17: 127.
1996 A Structural Grammar of Babylonian. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Capone, Alessandro
2001 Modal Adverbs and Discourse: Two Essays. Pisa: Edizioni ETS.
Chambon, Gregory
2009 Les archives du vin Mari. FM 11. Paris: SEPOA.
Charpin, Dominique
1986 Le Clerg dUr au sicle dHammurabi (XIXeXVIIIe sicles av. J.C.). Geneva: Libraire Droz.
1989 LAkkadien des lettres dIln-ur. Pp. 3140 in Reflets de deux fleuves: Volume de
mlanges offerts Andr Finet, edited by M. Lebeau and P. Talon. Akkadica Supplementum 4. Leuven: Peeters.
1991 Un trait entre Zimri-lim de Mari et Ibl-p-el II dEnunna. Pp. 13966 in Mar
chands, Diplomates et Empereurs: Etudes sur la civilisation msopotamienne offertes
Paul Garelli, edited by D. Charpin and F. Joanns. Paris: ditions Recherche sur les
Civilisations.
1992 De la valle du Tigre au Triangle du Habur: Un engrenge gopolitique. Pp.97102
in Recherches en haute Msopotamie: Tell Mohammed Diyab Campagnes 1990 et
1991, edited by J.-M. Durand. Mmoires de NABU 2. Paris: SEPOA.
1993 Usages pistolaires des chancelleries dEnunna, dEkalltum et de Mari. NABU
1993/110.
199394 Compte rendu du CAD volume S (1984). AfO 4041: 123.
2004a Histoire Politique du Proche-Orient Amorrite (20021595). Pp. 5484 in Mesopotamien: Die altbabylonische Zeit, edited by P. Attinger, M. Wfler, and W. Sallaberger.
OBO 160/4. Fribourg: Academic Press Fribourg.
2004b Chroniques bibliographiques, 3: Donnes nouvelles sur la rgion du petit zab au
XVIIIe sicle av. J.-C. RA 98: 15178.
Charpin, Dominique, and Jean-Marie Durand
1991 La suzerainet de lempereur (Sukkalmah) dElam sur la Msopotamie et le nationalisme amorrite. Pp. 5966 in Msopotamie et lam: Actes de la XXXVIme Rencontre

220

Bibliography

Assyriologique Internationale, Gand, 1014 juillet 1989, edited by L. De Meyer and

H.Gasche. Mesopotamian History and Environment 1. Ghent: University of Ghent.
2002 Sil y avait eu des porteurs, je taurais offert davantage ...: changes de prsents
entre dignitaires dAlep et de Mari. Pp. 95104 in Ex Mesopotamia et Syria Lux: Festschrift fr Manfried Dietrich zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, edited by O. Loretz, K.A.
Metzler, and H. Schaudig. AOAT 281. Mnster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Charpin, Dominique, and Nele Ziegler
2003 Mari et le Proche-Orient lpoque amorrite. FM 5. Paris: SEPOA.
Chernykh, Pavel I.
1999 Istoriko-etimologicheskii slovar sovremennogo russkogo iazyka: 13,560 slov. Moscow: Russkii iazyk.
Christian, James B.
1969 Some Unpublished Old Babylonian Letters at the University of Chicago. M.A. thesis,
the University of Chicago.
Chung, Sandra, and Alan Timberlake
1985 Tense, Aspect, and Mood. Pp. 20258 in Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, edited by T. Shopen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Civil, Miguel
2000 Modal Prefixes. AS 22: 2942.
2005 Late Babylonian Grammatical Texts. Pp. 24447 in Literary and Scholastic Texts of
the First Millennium b.c. Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art 2, edited by I.Spar and W. G. Lambert. Turnhout: Brepols.
Clarke, Jonathan E. M.
2005 Speech Report Constructions in Russian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 52: 36781.
Cohen, Eran
2005 The Modal System of Old Babylonian. HSS 56. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Cole, Steven W.
1996 Nippur, Volume 4: The Early Neo-Babylonian Governors Archive from Nippur. OIP
114. Chicago: The Oriental Institute.
Dahl, sten
2006 Future Tense and Future Time Reference. Pp. 7046 in Encyclopedia of Language &
Linguistics, edited by K. Brown. Oxford: Elsevier.
Dalley, Stephanie
2001 Old Babylonian Tablets from Nineveh; and Possible Pieces of Early Gilgamesh Epic.
Iraq 63: 15567.
Delitzsch, Friedrich
1889 Assyrische Grammatik mit bungsstcken und kurzer Literatur-bersicht. Porta Linguarum Orientalium 10/2. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard.
Dercksen, Jan G.
2004 Old Assyrian uturum characteristic, mark and l uturum it surely was a sign.
NABU 2004/9.
Deutscher, Guy
2000 Syntactic Change in Akkadian: The Evolution of Sentential Complementation. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Dietrich, Manfried
1969 Untersuchungen zur Grammatik des Neu-babylonischen, I: Die neubabylonischen
Subjunktionen. Pp. 6599 in lin miturti: Festschrift W. von Soden, edited by

Bibliography

221

W.Rllig. AOAT 1. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag / Kevelaer: Butzon &

Bercker.
Dijk, Jan van
1972 Une variante du thme de lEsclave de la Lune. Or. 41: 33948.
Dossin, Georges
192930 Sur deux passages de lettres de Larsa. Babyloniaca 11: 199205.
1938a Les archives pistolaires du Palais de Mari. Syria 19: 10526.
1938b Signaux lumineux au pays de Mari. RA 35: 17486.
1956 Une lettre de Iarm-Lim, roi dAlep Iab-Iaad, roi de Dr. Syria 33: 6369.
1970 La route de ltain en Msopotamie au temps de Zimri-lim. RA 64: 97106.
1973 Une opposition familiale. Pp. 179188 in La voix de lopposition en Msopotamie,
edited by A. Finet. Bruxelles: Institut des Hautes tudes.
1981 Secrets detat.... Akkadica 25: 17.
Driver, Godfrey R., and John C. Miles
195255 The Babylonian Laws. Ancient Codes and Laws of the Near East. Oxford: Clarendon.
Durand, Jean-Marie
1984 Trois tudes sur Mari. Annexe I: Remarques propos de la langue de Kir et dautres
femmes. MARI 3: 17479.
1988 Les anciens de Talhaym. RA 82: 97113.
1990a Fourmis blanches et fourmis noires. Pp. 1018 in Contribution lhistoire de lIran:
Mlanges offerts Jean Perrot, edited by F. Vallat. Paris: ditions recherche sur les
civilisations.
1990b La cit-tat dImr lpoque des rois de Mari. MARI 6: 3992.
1991 Prcurseurs syriens aux protocoles no-assyriens. Pp. 1371 in Marchands, Diplomates
et Empereurs: Etudes sur la civilisation msopotamienne offertes Paul Garelli, edited by D. Charpin and F. Joanns. Paris: ditions recherche sur les civilisations.
1992a l ittum. NABU 1992/35.
1992b Unit et diversit au Proche-Orient lpoque amorrite. Pp. 97128 in La circulation des biens, des personnes et des idees dans le Proche-Orient ancien: Actes de la
XXXVIIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 810 juillet 1991), edited
by D.Charpin and F. Joannes. Paris: ditions recherche sur les civilisations.
1994 Administrateurs de Qaunn. Pp. 83114 in Recueil dtudes a la mmoire de Maurice Birot, edited by D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand. FM 2. Paris: SEPOA.
1997 Documents pistolaires du palais de Mari I. Littratures anciennes du Proche-Orient
16. Paris: Les ditions du Cerf.
1998 Documents pistolaires du palais de Mari II. Littratures anciennes du Proche-Orient
17. Paris: Les ditions du Cerf.
2000 Documents pistolaires du palais de Mari III. Littratures anciennes du Proche-Orient
18. Paris: ditions du Cerf.
2002 Le Culte dAddu dAlep et laffaire dAlatum. FM 7. Paris: SEPOA.
2009 AbB 4 124 = OECT 3 46:6. NABU 2009/27.
Edzard, Dietz O.
1970 Altbabylonische Rechts- und Wirtschaftsurkunden aus Tell ed-Der im Iraq Museum,
Baghdad. Munich: Beck.
1973 Die Modi beim lteren akkadischen Verbum. Or. 42: 12141.
Eidem, Jesper, and Jrgen Laesse
2001 The Shemshara Archives 1, The Letters. Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter 23. Copenhagen:
Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab.

222

Bibliography

Ellis, Maria de J.
1972 Old Babylonian Economic Texts and Letters from Tell Harmal. JCS 24: 4369.
Falkenstein, Adam
1963 Brief Knig Anams an Snmuballi von Babylon. BagM 2: 5671.
Farber, Walter
1989 Schlaf, Kindchen, Schlaf! Mesopotamian Civlizations 2. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
1996 qanuummi qanuum. NABU 1996/80.
Finet, Andr
195457 Les mdcins au royaume de Mari. Annuaire de lInstitut de Philologie et dHistoire
Orientales et Slaves 14: 12344.
1956 LAccadien des lettres de Mari. Bruxelles: Palais des Acadmies.
Foster, Benjamin R.
1993 Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. Bethesda, MD: CDL.
Frankena, Rintje
1978 Kommentar zu den altbabylonischen Briefen aus Lagaba und anderen Orten. Leiden:
Netherlands Institute for the Near East.
Frayne, Douglas R.
1990 Old Babylonian Period (20031595 BC). RIME 4. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press.
1993 Sargonic and Gutian Periods. RIME 2. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Friedrich, Johannes
1960 Hethitisches Elementarbuch. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Reprinted, 1974.
Garde, Paul
1963 Lemploi du conditionnel et de la particule by en russe. Publication des Annales de la
Facult des lettres, N.S. 36. Aix-en-Provence: Ophrys.
Gelb, Ignace J., and Burkhart Kienast
1990 Die altakkadischen Knigsinschriften des dritten Jahrtausends v. Chr. FAOS 7. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
George, Andrew R.
1993 Ninurta-Paqidats Dog Bite, and Notes on Other Comic Tales. Iraq 55: 7374.
1999 The Epic of Gilgamesh: A New Translation. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
2003 The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2007 The Civilizing of Ea-Enkidu: An Unusual Tablet of the Babylonian Gilgame Epic. RA
101: 5980.
2009 Babylonian Literary Texts in the Schyen Collection. Cornell University Studies in
Assyriology and Sumerology 10. Bethesda, MD: CDL Press.
George, Andrew R., and Farouk N. H. Al-Rawi
1998 Tablets from the Sippar Library VII. Three Wisdom Texts. Iraq 60: 187227.
Gerardi, Pamela
1989 Thus, He Spoke: Direct Speech in Esarhaddons Royal Inscriptions. ZA 79: 24560.
Goetze, Albrecht
1958 Fifty Old-Babylonian Letters from Harmal. Sumer 14: 378.
Goldenberg, Gideon
1991 On Direct Speech and the Hebrew Bible. Pp. 7996 in Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic
Syntax Presented to Profesor J. Joftijzer on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday,
edited by K. Jongeling, H. L. Murrevan den Berg, and L. Van Rompay. Leiden: Brill.

Bibliography

223

Grevisse, Maurice
1980 Le bon usage: Grammaire franaise, avec des remarques sur la langue franaise
daujourdhui. Paris: Duculot.
Groneberg, Brigitte R. M.
1987 Syntax, Morphologie und Stil der jungbabaylonischen Hymnischen Literatur. FAOS
14/12. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
1997 Lob der Itar: Gebet und Ritual an die altbabylonische Venusgttin, Tanatti Itar.
Cuneiform Monographs 8. Groningen: Styx.
Guichard, Michal
1997 Copie de la supplique bilingue sumro-akkadienne Les malheurs dun scribe (texte
no. 6). Pp. 7580 in Recueil dtudes a la mmoire de Marie-Thrse Barrelet, edited
by D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand. Paris: SEPOA.
2004 La maldiction de cette tablette est trs dure! Sur lambassade dItr-Asd Babylone en lan 4 de Zimr-lim. RA 98: 1332.
2009 uduhum: un royaume dIda-Mara et ses rois Yatr-malik, Hamm-kn et Amudp-El. Pp. 75120 in Entre les fleuves, I: Untersuchungen zur historischen Geographie Obermesopotamiens im 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr., edited by E. Cancik-Kirschbaum,
N.Zieglier, and H. Khne. BBVO 20. Berlin: Gebr. Mann.
Gterbock, Hans G.
1938 Die historische Tradition und ihre literarische Geschichte bei Babyloniern und Hethitern bis 1200 (2 Teil). ZA 42: 45149.
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1985 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Hallo, William W., and William L. Moran
1979 The First Tablet of the SB Recension of the Anzu-Myth. JCS 31: 65115.
Hammond, Nicholas G. L., and Howard H. Scullard, eds.
1970 The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon.
Hava, Joseph G.
1964 Al-Faraid Arabic-English Dictionary. Beirut: Catholic University Press.
Hecker, Karl
1968 Grammatik der Kltepe-Texte. AnOr 44. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum.
1989 Der Ischtar-Hymnus des Ammiditana. Pp. 72124 in Lieder und Gebete I, edited by
W. H. P. Rmer and K. Hecker. TUAT 2. Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlaghaus
1994 Das akkadische Gilgamescsh-Epos. Pp. 646744 in Mythen und Epen II, edited by
K. Hecker, W. G. Lambert, G. G. W. Mller, W. von Soden, and A. nal. TUAT III/4.
Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus.
Heimpel, Wolfgang
2003 Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, with Historical Introduction, Notes,
and Commentary. Mesopotamian Civilizations 12. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi, and Friederike Hnnemeyer
1991 Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Held, Moshe
1961 A Faithful Lover in an Old Babylonian Dialogue. JCS 15: 126.
Hoffner, Harry A. Jr., and Melchert, H. Craig
2008 A Grammar of the Hittite Language. Languages of the Ancient Near East 1. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

224

Bibliography

Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth C. Traugott

1993 Grammaticalization. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Hoye, Leo F.
2005a You may think that, I couldnt possibly comment! Modality Studies: Contemporary
Research and Future Directions, Part I. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 12951321.
2005b You may think that, I couldnt possibly comment! Modality Studies: Contemporary
research and future directions, Part II. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 14811506.
Hrua, Ivan.
2010 Die akkadische Synonymenliste malku = arru: Eine Textedition mit bersetzung und
Kommentar. AOAT 50. Mnster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Huehnergard, John
1986 On Verbless Clauses in Akkadian. ZA 76: 21849.
1997 A Grammar of Akkadian. HSS 45. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Hummel, Horace D.
1957 Enclitic Mem in Early Northwest Semitic, Especially Hebrew. JBL 76: 85107.
Hurowitz, Victor Avigdor
1994 Inu Anum rum: Literary Structures in the Non-Juridical Sections of Codex Hammurabi. Philadelphia.
Izre'el, Shlomo
1991 Amurru Akkadian: A Linguistic Study, With an Appendix on the History of Amurru by
Itamar Singer. HSS 4142. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Jacobsen, Thorkild
1946 Sumerian Mythology: A Review Article. JNES: 12852.
Jean, Charles-F.
194244 Lettres de Mari. RA 39: 6382.
Jensen, Peter
1890 Die Kosmologie der Babylonier. Strassburg: Trbner.
1924 Akkadisch mud. ZA 35: 12432.
Jespersen, Otto
1924 The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen & Unwin.
Joanns, Francis
2006 Haradum II: Les texts de las priode palo-babylonienne (Samsu-ilunaAmmiaduqa). Paris: Culturesfrance.
Kaddari, Menahem Z.
1991 Waday (bewaday). Pp. 93109 in Post-Biblical Hebrew Syntax and Semantics, edited
by M. Z. Kaddari. Studies in Diachronic Hebrew 1. Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University.
Khait, Ilya
2009 The Funerary Inscription at the Pushkin Museum, Moscow. NABU 2009/5.
Kienast, Burkhart
1978 Die altbabylonischen Briefe und Urkunden aus Kisurra. FAOS 2. Wiesbaden: Franz
Steiner.
Kienast, Burkhart, and Walter Sommerfeld
1994 Glossar zu den altakkadischen Knigsinschriften. FAOS 8. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
Kienast, Burkhart, and Konrad Volk
1995 Die sumerischen und akkadischen Briefe des III. Jahrtausends aus der Zeit vor der III
Dynastie von Ur. FAOS 19. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner

Bibliography

225

Kouwenberg, Norbert J. C.
2010 The Akkadian Verb and Its Semitic Background. Languages of the Ancient Near East
2. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Kraus, Fritz R.
1973 Ein altbabylonischen i-Modus? Pp. 25365 in Symbolae biblicae et Mesopotamicae
Francisco Mario Theodoro de Liagre Bhl dedicatae, edited by M. A. Beek, A. A.
Kampman, C. Nijland, and J. Ryckmans. Leiden: Brill.
Kraus, Paul
1932 Altbabylonische Briefe aus der Vorderasiatischen Abteilung der preussischen Staatsmuseen zu Berlin. II Teil. MVAG 36.
Krebernik, Manfred
1991 Schriftkunde aus Tell Bia 1990. MDOG 123: 4170.
20034 Altbabylonische Hymnen an die Muttergttin (HS 1884). AfO 50: 1120.
Krebernik, Manfred, and Michael P. Streck
2001 umma l qabit ana balim.... Wrst du nicht zum Leben Berufen...: Der Irrealis im Altbabylonischen. Pp. 5178 in Sachverhalt und Zeitbezug: Semitistische und
alttestamentliche Studien Adolf Denz zum 65. Geburtstag, edited by R. Bartelmus and
N. Nebes. Jenaer Beitrge zum Vorderen Orient 4. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Kupper, Jean-Robert
1992 Lettres barbares de Shemshra. NABU 1992/105.
Lacambre, Denis
1997 La bataille de Hirtum. MARI 8: 43154.
Laesse, Jrgen, and Thorkild Jacobsen
1990 ikabbum Again. JCS 42: 12778.
Lambert, Wilfred G.
1960 Babylonian Wisdom Literature. Oxford: Clarendon.
1967 The Language of Mari. Pp. 2938 in La civilisation de Mari: XVe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale organise par le Groupe Franois Thureaud-Dangin, Lige,
48 juillet 1966, edited by J.-R. Kupper. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
1987 A Further Attempt at the Babylonian Man and his God. Pp. 187202 in Language,
Literature and History: Philological and Historical Studies Presented to Erica Reiner,
edited by F. Rochberg-Halton. AOS 67. New Haven: American Oriental Society.
1989 A Babylonian Prayer to Anna Pp. 32136 in Dumu--dub-ba-a: Studies in Honor of
ke W. Sjberg edited by H. Behrens, D. Loding, and M. T. Roth. Philadelphia: University Museum.
Lambert, Wilfred G., and Alan R. Millard
1969 Atra-ass: The Babylonian Story of the Flood with the Sumerian Flood Story by
M.Civil. Oxford: Clarendon; reprinted, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999.
Lmmerhirt, Kai
2010 Wahrheit und Trug: Untersuchungen zur altorientalischen Begriffsgeschichte. AOAT
348. Mnster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Landsberger, Benno
1923 Review of A. Ungnad, Altbabylonische Briefe aus dem Museum zu Philadelphia,
Sutttgart, 1920. OLZ 26: 7174.
1936 Die babylonische Theodizee (akrostichisches Zweigesprch; sog. Kohelet). ZA 43:
3276.
1956 Neobabylonian Grammatical Texts. MSL 4. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum.
196466 Einige unerkannt gebliebene oder verkannte Nomina des Akkadischen: Exkurs: ana
ittiu. WO 3: 6279.

226

Bibliography

Landsberger, Benno, and Thorkild Jakobsen

1955 An Old Babylonian Charm against Meru. JNES 14: 1421.
LAPO = Durand 1997, 1998, 2000
Larreya, Paul
2003 Irrealis, Past Time Reference and Modality. Pp. 2145 in Modality in Contemporary
English, edited by R. Facchinetti, M. Krug and F. Palmer. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Larsen, Mgens T.
2002 The Aur-nd Archive. Old Assyrian Archives, Studies 1. Leiden: Netherlands Institute for the Near East.
Lehmann, Christian
1995 Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Lincom Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 1. Munich: Lincom Europa.
Leong, Tien-Fock
1994 Tense, Mood and Aspect in Old Babylonian. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Leslau, Wolf
1987 Comparative Dictionary of Geez (Classical Ethiopic) : Geez-English, English-Geez,
with an Index of the Semitic Roots. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Lewy, Julius
1960 Signification and Etymology of assurri and Related Terms. Or. 29: 2938.
Limet, Henri
1996 Le texte KAR 158. Pp. 15158 in Collectanea Orientalia histoire, arts de lespace et
industrie de la terre, edited by H. Gasche and B. Hrouda. CPOA 3. Neuchtel-Paris:
Recherches et Publications.
Lipiski, Edward
2001 Semitic Languages: Outline of A Comparative Grammar. Second Edition. Leuven:
Peeters.
Liverani, Mario
1995 The Deeds of Ancient Mesopotamian Kings. Pp. 235366 in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, edited by J. M. Sasson. New York: Scribners.
Livingstone, Alasdair
1988 At the Cleaners and Notes on Humorous Literature. Pp. 17587 in Ad bene et fideliter seminandum: Festgabe fr Karlheinz Deller zum 21. Februar 1987, edited by
G.Mauer and U. Magen. AOAT 220. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag.
Livnat, Zohar
1999 Epistemic Modality as Materialized in Modern Hebrew. Pp. 34554 in Studies in Ancient and Modern Hebrew in Honour of M. Z. Kaddari, edited by S. Sharvit. RamatGan: Bar-Ilan University Press.
Loesov, Sergey
2004 T-Perfect in Old Babylonian: Current Debate and a Thesis. Babel und Bibel 1/5: 83
181.
Ludwig, Marie-Christine
1990 Untersuchungen zu den Hymnen des Imedagan von Isin. SANTAG 2. Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz.
Lyons, John
1996 Linguistic Semantics: an Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Matsui, Tomoko, Taeko Yamamoto, and Peter McCagg
2006 On the Role of Language in Childrens Early Understanding of Others as Epistemic
Beings. Cognitive Development 21: 15873.

Bibliography

227

Mayer, Werner R.
1989 Die Verwendung der Negation in Akkadischen zur Bildung von Indefinit- bzw. Totalittsausdrcken. Or. 58: 14570.
2005 Die altbabylonischesn Keilschrifttexte in der Sammlung des Ppstlichen Bibelinstituts.
Or. 74: 31751.
Metzler, Kai A.
2002 Tempora in altbabylonischen literarischen Texten. AOAT 279. Mnster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Michel, Ccile
2001 Correspondance des marchands de Kani au dbut du IIe millnaire avant J.-C. Littratures anciennes du Proche-Orient 19. Paris: ditions du Cerf.
2003 Old Assyrian Bibliography of Cuneiform Texts, Bullae, Seals and the Results of the
Excavations at Aur, Kltepe/Kani, Acemhyk, Aliar and Boazkoy. Old Assyrian
Archives, Studies. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.
2004 Deux incantations palo-assyriennes: Une nouvelle incantation pour faciliter la naissance. Pp. 395420 in Assyria and Beyond. Studies Presented to Mgens Trlle Larsen,
edited by J. G. Dercksen. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.
2010 Deux Textes atypiques dcouverts Kltepe. JCS 62: 7180.
Militarev, Alexander, and Leonid Kogan
2000 Semitic Etymological Dictionary, I: Anatmoy of Man and Animals. AOAT 278. Mnster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Miller, Cynthia L.
2006 Variation of Direct Speech Complementizers in Achaemenid Aramaic Documents
from Fifth Century b.c.e. Egypt. Pp. 11943 in Variation and Reconstruction, edited
by T. D. Cravens. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mitchell, Terence F., and Shahir A. Al-Hassan
1994 Modality, Mood and Aspect in Spoken Arabic, With Special Reference to Egypt and
the Levant. London: Kegan Paul.
Moran, William L.
1984 Additions to the Amarna Lexicon. Or. 53: 297302.
1988a Notes on Anzu. AfO 35: 2429.
1988b Review of Stol, AbB 11. JAOS 108: 3078.
1992 The Amarna Letters. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Morier, Henri
1989 Dictionnaire de potique et rhtorique (4e dition). Paris: Presses universitaires de
France.
Novick, Tzvi
2009 The Modality of ark in Tannatic Hebrew. JSS 54: 14960.
Nyrop, Kristoffer
1930 Grammaire historique de la langue franaise. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske boghandel.
Palmer, Frank R.
1979 Modality and English Modals. Longman Linguistics Library 23. London: Longman.
1986 Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2001 Mood and Modality. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
2003 Modality in English: Theoretical, Descriptive and Typological Issues. Pp. 117 in Modality in Contemporary English, edited by R. Facchinetti, M. Krug, and F. Palmer.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

228

Bibliography

Papafragou, Anna
1998 The Acquisition of Modality: Implications for Theories of Semantic Representation.
Mind & Language 13: 37099.
2000 Modality: Issues in the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Parpola, Simo
1988 Proto-Assyrian. Pp. 29398 in Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft von Ebla, edited by H.
Waetzoldt and H. Hauptmann. HSAO 2. Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag.
Payne Smith, Robert, and Jessie Payne Smith
1903 A Compendious Syriac Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon; reprinted, Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1998.
Perminger, Alex, and Terry V. F. Brogan, eds.
1993 The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Pientka-Hinz, Rosel
2007 Altbabylonische Briefe. Pp. 2137 in Briefe edited by B. Janowski and G. Wilhelm.
TUAT Neue Folge 3. Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus.
Poebel, Arno
1947 The Schachtelsatz Construction of the Naram-Sin Text RA XVI, 157f. Pp. 2342 in
Miscellanious Studies, edited by A. Poebel. AS 14. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Preobrazhensky, Aleksandr G.
1951 Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Quattara, Aboubakar
2001 Modalits et verbes modaux dans les crits de Bernard Pottier. Pp.116 in Les verbes
modaux, edited by P. Dendale and J. Van der Auwera. Cahiers Chronos. Amsterdam:
Rodopi.
Rainey, Anson F.
1976 Enclitic -ma and the Logical Predicate in Old Babylonian. Israel Oriental Studies 6:
5158.
Reiner, Erica
1966 A Linguistic Analysis of Akkadian. Janua linguarum, Series practica 21. The Hague:
Mouton.
2002 An Adventure of Great Dimension : The Launching of the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 92/3. Philadelphia, PA:
American Philosophical Society.
Reisner, George A.
1894 The Berlin Vocabulary V.A.Th. 244. ZA 9: 14964.
Rmer, Willem H. Ph.
1967 Studien zu altbabylonischen hymnisch-episch Texten. Pp. 18599 in Heidelberger
Studien zum Alten Orient: Adam Falkenstein zum 17. September 1966, edited by D. O.
Edzard. Heildelberger Studien zum alten Orient 1. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Rowton, Michael B.
1967 Watercourses and Water Rights in the Official Correspondence from Larsa and Isin.
JCS 21: 26774.
Rubin, Aaron D.
2005 Studies in Semitic Grammaticalization. HSS 57. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Bibliography

229

Rubio, Gonzalo
2007 Sumerian Morphology. Pp. 132779 in Morphologies of Asia and Africa, edited by A.
S. Kaye. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Sallaberger, Walther
1999 Wenn Du mein Bruder bist... Interaktion und Textgestaltung in altbabylonischen
Alltagsbriefen. Cuneiform Monographs 16. Groningen: Styx.
Sanders, Jose, and Wilbert Spooren
1997 Perspective, Subjectivity, and Modality from a Cognitive Linguistic Point of View.
Pp. 85112 in Discourse and Perspective in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by L. WolfAndreas, G. Redeker and L. Waugh. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 151. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sasson, Jack M.
1985 Yarim-Lims War Declaration. Pp. 23755 in Miscellanea Babyloniaca: Mlanges offerts Maurice Birot, edited by J.-M. Durand and J.-R. Kupper. Paris: ditions Recherches sur les Civilisations.
1988 Shunukhra-khalu. Pp. 32951 in A Scientific Humanist: Abraham Sachs Memorial
Volume, edited by E. Leichty, M. deJ. Ellis, and P. Gerardi. Philadelphia: The University Museum.
2001 On Reading the Diplomatic Letters in the Mari Archives. Pp. 32937 in Mari, Ebla et
les Hourrites: dix ans de travaux, edited by D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand. Amurru 2.
Paris: ditions Recherches sur les Civilisations.
2002 The Burden of Scribes. Pp. 21128 in Riches Hidden in Secret Places: Ancient Near
Eastern Studies in Memory of Thorkild Jacobsen, edited by T. Abusch. Winona Lake,
IN: Eisenbrauns.
Semeonoff, Anna
1962 Russian Syntax: Being Part III of a New Russian Grammar. London: Dent / New
York: Dutton.
Semino, Elena.
2006 Possible Worlds: Stylistic Applications. Pp. 77782 in Encyclopedia of Language and
Linguistics, edited by K. Brown. Oxford: Elsevier.
Shlomper, Genady
2002 Modality in Hindi. Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University.
2005 Modality in Hindi. Munich: Lincom.
Sigrist, Marcel
1987 On the Bite of a Dog. Pp. 8588 in Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in
Honor of Marvin H. Pope, edited by J. H. Marks and R. M. Good. Guilford, CT: Four
Quarters.
Smith, Carlota S.
2003 Modes of Discourse: The Local Structure of Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Soden, Wolfram von
1933 Der hymnisch-epische Dialekt des Akkadischen (II). ZA 41: 90183.
1949 Zum akkadischen Wrterbuch 3140: Vielleicht im Akkadischen. Or. 18: 38591.
1950 Ein Zwiegesprch Hammurabis mit einer Frau ZA 49: 15994.
1952 Zu den Amarnabriefen aus Babylon und Assur. Or. 21: 42634.
1961 Review of H. H. Figulla, CT 42. BiOr 18: 7173.
1971 Der grosse Hymnus an Nabu. ZA 61: 4471.
Soldt, Wilfred H. van
1992 A Note on Old-Babylonian l ittum Let Me Remind You. ZA 82: 3038.

230

Bibliography

Sommerfeld, Walter
2000 Narm-Sn, die Grosse Revolte und MAR.TUki. Pp. 41936 in Assyriologica et Semitica: Festschrift fr Joachim Oelsner anlsslich seines 65. Geburtstages am 18.
Februar 1997, edited by J. Marzahn and H. Neumann. AOAT 252. Mnster: UgaritVerlag.
Sonnek, Franz
1940 Die Einfhrung der direkten Rede in den epischen Texten. ZA 46: 22635.
Speiser, Ephraim A.
1947 A Note on the Derivation of umma. JCS 1: 32128.
Stamm, Johann J.
1939 Die akkadische Namengebung. MVAG 44. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
Stevens, Christopher M.
1992 Grammaticalization in Spatial Deixis: A Case Study. Pp. 299313 in On Germanic
Linguistics Issues and Methods, edited by I. Rauch, G. F. Carr, and R. L. Kyes. Trends
in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 68. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter
Stol, Marten
2002 Review of J. Eidem and J. Laesse, The Shemshara Archives 1, The Letters (2001).
BiOr 59: 10810.
Streck, Michael P.
1995 Zahl und Zeit, Grammatik der Numeralia und des Verbalsystems im Sptbabylonischen. Cuneiform Monographs 5. Groningen: Styx Publication.
Thureau-Dangin, Franois
1925 Un Hymne Itar de la haute poque babylonienne. RA 22: 16977.
1934 Encore une fois la tablette de Strasbourg no. 11. RA 31: 70.
1935 Deux proverbs babyloniens. AnOr 12: 30711.
1943 Le terme ipum dans les lettres de Mri. Or. 12: 11012.
Tournay, Raymond J., and Aaron Shaffer
1994 Lpope de Gilgamesh. Littrature anciennes du Proche-Orient 15. Paris: ditions du
Cerf.
Ullmann, Manfred
1984 Arabisch as vielleicht: Syntax und Wortart. Beitrge zur Lexikographie des Klassischen Arabisch Nr. 5. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophischhistorische Klasse, Sitzungsberichete 1984, 4. Munich: Beck.
Ultan, Rssel
1978 The Nature of Future Tenses. Pp. 83123 in Universals of Human Language edited by
J. H. Greenberg. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ungnad, Arthur
1922 Zwei neue Verffentlichungen der Yale-Universitt. ZA 34: 1523.
1928 Das Chicagoer Vokabular. ZA 38: 6579.
Ungnad, Arthur, and Lubor Matou
1964 Grammatik des Akkadischen. Munich: Beck.
Veenhof, Klaas R.
1982 Observations on Some Letters from Mari (ARM 2,124; 10, 4; 43; 84; 114) with a Note
on tillatum. RA 76: 119140.
1986 Two Akkadian Auxiliaries: lem to be able and muum to want. Pp. 235251
in Scripta Signa Vocis, edited by H. L. J. Vanstiphout, K. Jongeling, F. Leemhuis, and
G.J. Reinink. Groningen: Egbert Forsten.
1996 An Old Assyrian Incantation Against a Black Dog (kt a/k 611). WZKM 86: 42534.

Bibliography

231

Veenhof, Klaas R., and Jesper Eidem

2008 Mesopotamia: The Old Assyrian Period. OBO 160/5. Fribourg: Academic Press-Fribourg.
Verschueren, Jef
1999 Understanding Pragmatics. Understanding Language. London: Arnold
Villard, Pierre
2001 Les administrateurs de lpoque de Yasma-Addu. Pp. 9140 in Mari, Ebla et les
Hourrites: dix ans de travaux, edited by D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand. Amurru 2.
Paris: ditions Recherches sur les Civilisations.
Vogelzang, Marianna E.
1988 Bin ar dadm: Edition and Analysis of the Akkadian Anzu Poem. Groningen: Styx.
1990 Patterns Introducing Direct Speech in Akkadian Literary Texts. JCS 42: 5070.
Voigt, Rainer M.
1995 Akkadisch umma wenn und die Konditionalpartikeln des Westsemitischen. Pp. 17
28 in Vom Alten Orient zum Alten Testament: Festschrift fr Wolfram Freiherr von
Soden zum 85. Geburtstag am 19 Juni 1993, edited by M. Dietrich and O.Loretz.
AOAT 240. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag.
Waetzoldt, Hartmut
1990 Zu einer Schlertafel aus Mari. NABU 1990/97.
Wasserman, Nathan
1994 The Particle assurre/ in the Mari Letters. Pp. 31935 in Recueil dtudes a la mmoire de Maurice Birot, edited by D. Charpin and J.-M. Durand. FM 2. Paris: SEPOA.
2001 Review of W. Sallaberger, Wenn Du mein Bruder bist, ... Interaktion und Textgestaltung in altbabylonischen Alltagsbriefen. Cuneiform Monographs 16. Groningen:
Styx, 1999. BiOr 58: 63739.
2002 The Modal Particle tua in Old-Babylonian: A Syntactic and Semantic Synopsis.
NABU 2002/47.
2003 Style and Form in Old-Babylonian Literary Texts. Cuneiform Monographs 27. Leiden:
Brill.
2006 The Modal Particle tua in Old-Babylonian. Pp. 14968 in Egyptian, Semitic and General Grammar: Workshop in Memory of H. J. Polotsky (812 July 2001), edited by
G.Goldenberg and A. Shisha-Halevy. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and
Humanities.
Watson, Wilfried G. E.
2005 The Prostration Formula Once Again. NABU 2005/16.
Wehr, Hans, and J. Milton Cowan
1980 A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic (Arabic-English). Beirut: Librairie du Liban.
Westenholz, Joan Goodnick
1997 Legends of the Kings of Akkade: The Texts. Mesopotamian Civilizations 7. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Whiting, Robert M.
1985 An Old Babylonian Incantation from Tell-Asmar. ZA 75: 17987.
1987 Old-Babylonian Letters from Tell Asmar. AS 22. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Wilcke, Claus
1968 Das modale Adverb i-gi4-in-zu im Sumerischen. JNES 27: 22942.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig
1949 On Certainty. Edited by Gertrude E. M. Anscombe, and Georg H. von Wright. Reprinted, Oxford: Blackwell, 1974.

232

Bibliography

Worthington, Martin
2006 Clause Grouping in Neo-Assyrian on the Evidence of the Direct Speech Marker m.
Or. 75: 33458.
Wright, William
1874 A Grammar of the Arabic Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reprinted, 1967.
Ylvisaker, Sigurd C.
1912 Zur babylonischen und assyrischen Grammatik: Eine Untersuchung auf Grund der
Briefe aus der Sargonidenzeit. LSS 5/6. Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der DDR.
Ziegler, Nele
1999a A Questionable Daughter-in-Law. JCS 51: 5558.
1999b Le harem de Zimr-Lm. FM 4. Paris: SEPOA.
2001 Zwei Shne Samsi-Addus. Pp. 493505 in Languages and Cultures in Contact: At the
Crossroads of Civilizations in the Syro-Mesopotamian Realm, edited by K. van Ler
berghe and G. Voet. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 96. Leuven: Peeters.
2004 Sams-Addu et la combine sutenne. Pp. 95109 in Nomades et sdentaires dans lee
Proche-Orient ancien: Compte rendu de la XLVIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 1013 juillet 2000), edited by C. Nicolle. Amurru 3. Paris: ditions
recherche sur les civilisations.
2006 Briefe aus Mari. Pp. 3876 in Briefe, edited by B. Janowski and G. Wilhelm. TUAT
Neue Folge 3. Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus.
Zimmern, Heinrich
1894 Zu ass. mindma, aram. mindaam, meddem. ZA 9: 10411.
1907 Sumerisch-babylonische Tamuzlieder. Berichte ber die Verhandlungen der Knigl.Schsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Philologisch-Historische Klasse 59:
20252.
Zuckermann, Ghilad
2006 Direct and Indirect Speech in Straight-Talking Israeli. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 53:
46781.

List of Texts Cited in the Study

(with the MP indicated)

Passages fully cited and translated are marked by *

AbB 1, 6: 16 (ka)
AbB 1, 27: 69 (Pientka-Hinz 2007: 30 (10.2)) (-mi)*
AbB 1, 37: 810 (midde) (midde)*
AbB 1, 39: 615 (midde) (midde)*
AbB 1, 46: 89 (kma a)*
AbB 1, 51: 2336 (pqat)*
AbB 1, 53: 2326 (kma a)*
AbB 1, 68: 49 (pqat)*
AbB 1, 71: 1824 (pqat)*
AbB 1, 119: 1117 (midde)*
AbB 1, 121: 36 (pqat)
AbB 1, 122: 418 (ka)*
AbB 1, 135: 2527 (pqat)*
AbB 1, 135: 612 (pqat)*
AbB 1, 135: 67 (midde)
AbB 1, 139: 610 (pqat)
AbB 2, 108: 412 (ka)*
AbB 3, 11: 4649 (midde)*
AbB 3, 33: 912 (-man)*
AbB 3, 39: 1217 (pqat)
AbB 3, 41: 511 (midde)
AbB 3, 53: 1924 (pqat)
AbB 4, 49: 513 (pqat)
AbB 4, 50: 710 (pqat)
AbB 4, 150: 2538 (pqat)
AbB 4, 152: 1421 (pqat)
AbB 5, 76: 43 (tua)
AbB 5, 157: 115 (-man)
AbB 5, 232: 2327 (-man)*
AbB 6, 63: 57 (ka)*
AbB 6, 125: 1625 (pqat)*
AbB 6, 129: 1520 (midde)
AbB 6, 162: 1215 (midde)
AbB 6, 194: 2226 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68 (54))
(tua)*
AbB 6, 194: 2526 (tua)*
AbB 6, 188: 3940 (-man)
AbB 7, 8: 512 (-mi)
AbB 7, 42: 1320 (pqat)
AbB 7, 60: 1116 (tua)
AbB 7, 60: 510 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (55))
(tua)
AbB 8, 99: 1213 (midde)
AbB 8, 109: 3339 (pqat)*
AbB 8, 109: 910 (midde)
AbB 9, 31: 1022 (pqat)

AbB 9, 39: 621 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (56))

(tua)*
AbB 9, 41: 2432 (-man)
AbB 9, 61: 624 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (57))
(tua)*
AbB 9, 63: 819 (ka)*
AbB 9, 78: 2023 (pqat)*
AbB 9, 83: 1524 (midde)
AbB 9, 145:1317 (pqat)
AbB 9, 148: 2023 (kma a)*
AbB 9, 150: 59 (pqat)*
AbB 9, 184: 1825 (ka)*
AbB 9, 240: 2130 (-man, l)*
AbB 9, 255: 415 (-man)
AbB 10, 5: 822 (-man)*
AbB 10, 56: 2125 (pqat)
AbB 10, 57: 628 (-mi)
AbB 10, 103: 38 (pqat)
AbB 10, 15: 2532 (midde)*
AbB 10, 16: 1618 (midde)*
AbB 10, 166: 612 (midde)*
AbB 10, 169: 68 (-man)
AbB 10, 170: 1720 (midde)
AbB 10, 190: 1131 (-mi)
AbB 11, 17: 414 (-man)*
AbB 11, 84: 1117 (midde)*
AbB 11, 156: 1117 (assurr)
AbB 11, 172: 617 (-mi)
AbB 11, 187: 828 (kma a)*
AbB 12, 13: 618 (pqat)
AbB 12, 38: 2627 (midde)
AbB 12, 63: 1821 (midde)
AbB 12, 63: 2227 (midde)
AbB 12, 78: 1826 (midde)*
AbB 12, 113: 1721 (midde)
AbB 12, 145: 3133 (midde)
AbB 12, 160: 115 (l ittum)*
AbB 12, 195: 918 (l ittum)
AbB 13, 6: 2627 (-man)
AbB 13, 124: 3334 (midde)
AbB 13, 136: 1115 (l ittum)
AbB 14, 37: 912 (pqat)
AbB 14, 58: 510 (-man)
AbB 14, 59: 1824 (-man)
AbB 14, 61: 48 (-man)
AbB 14, 63: 411 (wuddi)*

233

234
AbB 14, 63: 411 (wuddi)*
AbB 14, 63: 819 (assurr)*
AbB 14, 67: 515 (-l)*
AbB 14, 70: 1821 (midde)
AbB 14, 110: 3640 (pqat)
AbB 14, 112: 3642 (pqat)*
AbB 14, 114: 2429 (pqat)
AbB 14, 125: 1820 (kma a)*
AbB 14, 140: 511 (l)*
AbB 14, 145: 825 (pqat)*
AbB 14, 154: 412 (ibai)*
AbB 14, 164: 2533 (pqat)
AbB 14, 166: 2229 (assurr)
AbB 14, 182: 815 (ka)*
AbB 14, 186: 1724 (pqat)
AbB 14, 190: 1011 (kma)
AbB 14, 190: 618 (-man)
AbB 14, 204: 1321 (-man)
AbB 14, 205: 1921 (-umma l)*
AbB 14, 217: 519 (-mi)
AbB 14, 217: 2030 (-mi)
ABIM 22: 2530 (pqat)
ABIM 26: 2023 (wuddi)*
ABIM 4: 1113 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 67, n. 88)
(tua)
Arkhipov 2010: 412:1518 (assurr)
ARM 1, 1: 1012 (LAPO 16, 305) (pqat)*
ARM 1, 2: 1113 (LAPO 16, 306) (pqat)
ARM 1, 2: 813 (LAPO 16, 306) (assurr)
ARM 1, 5: 416 (LAPO 17, 517) (assurr)
ARM 1, 8: 510 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 69 (58))
(tua)*
ARM 1, 10: 10 (LAPO 17, 475) (wuddi)
ARM 1, 14: 1922 (LAPO 16, 17) (assurr)
ARM 1, 21: 515 (LAPO 16, 418; Krebernik and Streck
2001: 68, (52)) (tua)*
ARM 1, 22: 1620 (LAPO 17, 476) (assurr)
ARM 1, 22: 49 (LAPO 17, 476) (wuddi)*
ARM 1, 22: 911 (LAPO 17, 476) (wuddi)*
ARM 1, 29: 17 (LAPO 17, 474) (wuddi)
ARM 1, 32: 720 (LAPO 17, 750) (pqat)*
ARM 1, 33: 1424 (LAPO 17, 624) (assurr)
ARM 1, 39: 1015 (LAPO 17, 471) (wuddi)*
ARM 1, 39: 414 (LAPO 17, 471) (assurr)*
ARM 1, 52: 3641 (LAPO 16, 1) (wuddi) (anna)*
ARM 1, 62: 514 (LAPO 17, 639; Krebernik and Streck
2001: 69 (59)) (tua)*
ARM 1, 72: 45 (LAPO 16, 403) (wuddi)*
ARM 1, 73: 1423 (LAPO 16, 29; Krebernik and Streck
2001: 70 (60)) (tua)*
ARM 1, 73: 1423 (tua)*
ARM 1, 75: 2730 (LAPO 17, 658) (assurr)
ARM 1, 83: 1522 (LAPO 16, 255) (wuddi)
ARM 1, 90: 1526 (LAPO 17, 497) (assurr)
ARM 1, 91: 12 (LAPO 16, 321) (wuddi)
ARM 1, 102: 911 (LAPO 18, 907) (wuddi)
ARM 1, 103: 814 (LAPO 17, 469) (assurr)
ARM 1, 106: 78 (LAPO 17, 627) (assurr)
ARM 1, 109: 4455 (LAPO 16, 70) (assurr)

List of Texts Cited in the Study

ARM 1, 112: 511 (LAPO 16, 204) (assurr)
ARM 1, 118: 2030 (LAPO 16, 48) (assurr)
ARM 1, 118: 414 (LAPO 16, 48) (-mi)*
ARM 2, 6: 516 (LAPO 18, 1003; Krebernik and Streck
2001: 70 (61)) (tua)*
ARM 2, 13: 811 (LAPO 17, 457) (assurr)
ARM 2, 15: 3036 (LAPO 16, 61) (assurr)
ARM 2, 21: 17 (LAPO 16, 350) (pqat)
ARM 2, 21: 2328 (LAPO 16, 350; Heimpel 2003:
472473) (assurr)
ARM 2, 23: 1016 (LAPO 17, 590) (pqat)
ARM 2, 25: 713 (LAPO 17, 587; Heimpel 2003: 477)
(assurr)
ARM 2, 27: 911 (LAPO 17, 687) (assurr)
ARM 2, 29: 1214 (LAPO 16, 288) (wuddi)*
ARM 2, 30+: 15 (LAPO 17, 581; Heimpel 2003:
478479) (assurr)
ARM 2, 33: 1116 (LAPO 17, 583; Heimpel 2003:
479480) (assurr)
ARM 2, 34: 2631 (LAPO 17, 582) (assurr)
ARM 2, 40: 418 (LAPO 17, 602) (pqat)
ARM 2, 49: 1112 (LAPO 16, 309) (pqat)
ARM 2, 49: 510 (LAPO 16, 309; Heimpel 2003: 480)
(assurr)
ARM 2, 66: 513 (LAPO 18, 1251) (pqat)
ARM 2, 69: 410 (LAPO 16, 412) (assurr)
ARM 2, 87: 2334 (LAPO 16, 163) (assurr)
ARM 2, 106: 1523 (LAPO 16, 214) (assurr)
ARM 2, 117: 415 (LAPO 18, 1187) (-man)
ARM 2, 121: 912 (LAPO 16, 434) (pqat)
ARM 2, 126: 1320 (LAPO 18, 1079) (assurr)
ARM 3, 3: 417 (LAPO 17, 798) (assurr)
ARM 3, 11: 731 (LAPO 16, 161) (assurr)
ARM 3, 15: 920 (LAPO 17, 726) (assurr)
ARM 3, 18: 527 (LAPO 18, 1060) (assurr)
ARM 3, 64: 916 (LAPO 16, 175; Krebernik and Streck
2001: 70 (62)) (tua)*
ARM 3, 70+: 1719 (LAPO 16, 75) (assurr)
ARM 4, 15: 513 (LAPO 18, 1288) (assurr)
ARM 4, 21: 517 (LAPO 17, 493) (wuddi)*
ARM 4, 26: 48 (LAPO 17, 534) (wuddi)*
ARM 4, 27: 1824 (LAPO 16, 32) (assurr)
ARM 4, 27: 2937 (LAPO 16, 32) (assurr)
ARM 4, 28: 1014 (k a)*
ARM 4, 28: 2125 (k a)*
ARM 4, 31: 522 (LAPO 17, 32) (assurr)
ARM 4, 43: 211 (LAPO 17, 609) (assurr)
ARM 4, 54: 814 (LAPO 18, 952) (pqat)*
ARM 4, 59: 512 (LAPO 18, 962) (wuddi)*
ARM 4, 60: 513 (LAPO 18, 914) (pqat)*
ARM 4, 62: 310 (LAPO 17, 770) (wuddi)*
ARM 4, 72: 612 (LAPO 18, 1282) (assurr)
ARM 4, 78: 1214 (LAPO 17, 507) (assurr)
ARM 4, 86: 5254 (LAPO 17, 772) (pqat)
ARM 4, 88: 2026 (LAPO 17, 540) (assurr)
ARM 4, 88: 510 (LAPO 17, 540) (wuddi)*
ARM 4, 88: 819 (LAPO 17, 540) (assurr)
ARM 5, 9: 519 (LAPO 18, 915) (-mi)
ARM 5, 9: 527 (ibai)*

List of Texts Cited in the Study

ARM 5, 20: 1417 (LAPO 16, 256) (-man)
ARM 5, 20: 2935 (LAPO 16, 256) (-man)
ARM 5, 25: 518 (LAPO 18, 986) (assurr)
ARM 5, 52: 512 (LAPO 17, 669) (assurr)
ARM 5, 53: 614 (LAPO 16, 261) (pqat)
ARM 5, 59: 121 (LAPO 17, 535) (-mi)*
ARM 5, 67: 1426 (LAPO 17, 852) (assurr)
ARM 5, 81: 819 (LAPO 17, 723) (assurr)
ARM 5, 85: 916 (LAPO 17, 765 (assurr)
ARM 6, 18: 917 (LAPO 16, 319; Heimpel 2003:
483484) (assurr)
ARM 6, 23: 612 (LAPO 17, 851) (assurr)
ARM 6, 30: 7 -10 (LAPO 17, 565) (pqat)
ARM 6, 50: 56 (LAPO 17, 618) (assurr)
ARM 6, 56: 2325 (LAPO 16, 67) (assurr)
ARM 6, 62: 3135 (LAPO 16, 360; Heimpel 2003:
488489) (assurr)
ARM 6, 76: 514 (LAPO 17, 732) (l ittum)*
ARM 10, 3: 1720 (LAPO 18, 1194) (assurr)
ARM 10, 20: 1319 (-man)*
ARM 10, 27: 2729 (LAPO 18, 1136) (-man)
ARM 10, 31: 511 (LAPO 18, 1223) (l ittum)*
ARM 10, 73: 617 (LAPO 18, 1249) (assurr)
ARM 10, 74: 1037 (LAPO 18, 1242) (-man)*
ARM 10, 92: 914 (LAPO 18, 1211) (-man)*
ARM 10, 97: 1020 (LAPO 18, 1215) (assurr)
ARM 10, 97: 2327 (LAPO 18, 1215) (assurr)
ARM 10, 117: 48 (LAPO 18, 1011) (l ittum)
ARM 10, 123: 49 (LAPO 18, 1169) (assurr)
ARM 10, 129: 120 (LAPO 18, 1164) (-mi)*
ARM 10, 141: 2030 (LAPO 18, 1256) (l ittum)*
ARM 10, 152: 1012 (LAPO 18, 1174) (midde)
ARM 10, 156: 1230 (LAPO 18, 1134) (pqat)*
ARM 13, 9: 1930 (LAPO 16, 104) (assurr)
ARM 13, 25: 516 (LAPO 18, 970) (pqat)*
ARM 13, 36: 916 (LAPO 16, 242) (assurr)
ARM 13, 104: 15 (LAPO 17, 725) (assurr)
ARM 13, 141: 528 (LAPO 18, 1026) (assurr)
ARM 14, 1: 1725 (LAPO 16, 215) (-mi)
ARM 14, 1: 424 (LAPO 16, 215) (assurr)
ARM 14, 5: 1419 (LAPO 18, 972) (assurr)
ARM 14, 5: 2025 (LAPO 18, 972) (assurr)
ARM 14, 5: 513 (LAPO 18, 972) (assurr)
ARM 14, 6: 529 (LAPO 19, 973) (assurr)
ARM 14, 14: 525 (LAPO 18, 802) (assurr)
ARM 14, 18: 532 (LAPO 17, 808) (assurr)
ARM 14, 29: 2228 (LAPO 18, 998) (assurr)
ARM 14, 51: 2841 (LAPO 18, 1054) (assurr)
ARM 14, 70: 1318 (LAPO 17, 698) (assurr)
ARM 14, 77: 2125 (LAPO 17, 928) (assurr)
ARM 14, 78: 413 (LAPO 17, 929) (assurr)
ARM 14, 80: 420 (LAPO 17, 742) (assurr)
ARM 14, 81: 917 (LAPO 17, 752) (assurr)
ARM 14, 83: 1419 (LAPO 17, 568) (-man)
ARM 14, 112: 2430 (LAPO 17, 720) (midde)
ARM 14, 127: 523 (LAPO 16, 430) (assurr)
ARM 18, 1: 524 (LAPO 16, 109) (assurr)
ARM 18, 5: 1019 (LAPO 17, 666) (pqat)
ARM 18, 7: 1119 (LAPO 18, 909) (pqat)

235
ARM 18, 8: 46 (LAPO 16, 111) (wuddi)*
ARM 26/1, 10: 511 (Heimpel 2003: 181) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 12: 515 (Heimpel 2003: 182) (-mi)
ARM 26/1, 13: 8 (Heimpel 2003: 182183) (-mi)
ARM 26/1, 14: 1015 (Heimpel 2003: 183184)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 16: 415 (Heimpel 2003: 184) (-mi)
ARM 26/1, 17: 2026 (Heimpel 2003: 184185)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 18: 4246 (Heimpel 2003: 185187)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 21: 1623 (Heimpel 2003: 187188)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 28: 512 (-man)
ARM 26/1, 37: 1020 (Heimpel 2003: 195196)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 37: 1216 (-man)
ARM 26/1, 37: 2027 (-man)
ARM 26/1, 45: 312 (Heimpel 2003: 200) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 57: 511 (-man)*
ARM 26/1, 66: 14 (-man)
ARM 26/1, 68: 68 (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 76: 1735 (Heimpel 2003: 207) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 78: 1013 (Heimpel 2003: 208) (pqat)
ARM 26/1, 80: 47 (Heimpel 2003: 208) (pqat)
ARM 26/1, 84: 818 (Heimpel 2003: 209) (pqat)
ARM 26/1, 121: 1821 (Heimpel 2003: 222223) (pqat)
ARM 26/1, 140: 140 (Heimpel 2003: 229) (-mi)
ARM 26/1, 148: 514 (Heimpel 2003: 232) (pqat)
ARM 26/1, 170: 28 (-man)
ARM 26/1, 189: 1823 (-man)*
ARM 26/1, 199: 2428 (Heimpel 2003: 252254)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 199: 2934 (Heimpel 2003: 252254)
(assurr)
ARM 26/1, 206: 512 (Heimpel 2003: 256) (wuddi)*
ARM 26/1, 207: 3539 (LAPO 18, 1144; Heimpel 2003:
257258) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 222: 1625 (LAPO 18, 1220; Heimpel 2003:
263) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 225: 612 (Heimpel 2003: 264) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 233: 2431 (-man)*
ARM 26/1, 242: 614 (Heimpel 2003: 269) (pqat)*
ARM 26/1, 247: 520 (Heimpel 2003: 271) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 275: 518 (Heimpel 2003: 281) (-mi)*
ARM 26/1, 275: 724 (Heimpel 2003: 281) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, 283: 1319 (Heimpel 2003: 283) (assurr)
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1): 1321 (l ittum)
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1): 1419 (kma a)*
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2) : 611 (assurr)
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2): 617 (l ittum)*
ARM 26/1, p. 384, No. (3): 46 (l ittum)
ARM 26/1, p. 42: 711 (pqat)
ARM 26/2, 292: 1524 (Heimpel 2003: 286) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 298: 2938 (Ziegler 2006: 72 (6.5) (-man)
ARM 26/2, 298: 2939 (Heimpel 2003: 288; Ziegler
2007: 72 (6.5)) (tua)*
ARM 26/2, 302: 915 (Heimpel 2003: 289290) (pqat)*
ARM 26/2, 303: 717 (Heimpel 2003: 290) (-mi)*

236
ARM 26/2, 304: 3746 (Heimpel 2003: 291292) (-mi)
ARM 26/2, 311: 2328 (LAPO 17, 554; Heimpel 2003:
295) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 313: 2731 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 315: 5358 (Heimpel 2003: 298299)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 315: 6467 (Heimpel 2003: 298299)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 318: 2632 (Heimpel 2003: 300) (assurr)*
ARM 26/2, 319: 1116 (Heimpel 2003: 300) (assurr)*
ARM 26/2, 323: 35 (Heimpel 2003: 302) (tua)
ARM 26/2, 328: 2629 (Heimpel 2003: 304305) (pqat)
ARM 26/2, 329: 5765 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 354: 1220 (LAPO 17, 551; Heimpel 2003:
313) (pqat)
ARM 26/2, 357: 1418 (Heimpel 2003: 314316)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 358: 812 (Heimpel 2003: 316) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 380: 1016 (Heimpel 2003: 329330)
(wuddi)*
ARM 26/2, 380: 512 (Heimpel 2003: 329330)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 388: 1927 (Heimpel 2003: 335) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 390: 17 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 391: 1518 (Heimpel 2003: 337) (midde)*
ARM 26/2, 393: 610 (Heimpel 2003: 339) (midde)*
ARM 26/2, 402: 2532 (Heimpel 2003: 343) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 404: 5255 (Heimpel 2003: 343346)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 404: 5659 (Heimpel 2003: 343346)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 407: 811 (Heimpel 2003: 348) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 408: 5559 (Heimpel 2003: 348349)
(pqat)
ARM 26/2, 411: 3942 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 411: 6267 (LAPO 17, 594; Heimpel 2003:
352353) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 412: 2224 (-man)*
ARM 26/2, 412: 5965 (-man)*
ARM 26/2, 416: 311 (Heimpel 2003: 356357)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 418: 1014 (Heimpel 2003: 358) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 419: 813 (Heimpel 2003: 358359)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 420: 2328 (Heimpel 2003: 359) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 426: 610 (Heimpel 2003: 362) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 436: 4345 (Heimpel 2003: 368) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 449: 3744 (Heimpel 2003: 373) (wuddi)*
ARM 26/2, 449: 3745 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 450: 516 (Heimpel 2003: 374) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 464: 28 (Heimpel 2003: 379) (wuddi)
ARM 26/2, 468: 2024 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 469: 1015 (-man)*
ARM 26/2, 469: 2735 (Heimpel 2003: 380381) (pqat)
ARM 26/2, 469: 2740 (LAPO 16, 287; Heimpel 2003:
380381) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 475: 618 (Heimpel 2003: 382383)
(assurr)
ARM 26/2, 480: 421 (Heimpel 2003: 384) (assurr)

List of Texts Cited in the Study

ARM 26/2, 483: 3539 (Heimpel 2003: 385) (pqat)
ARM 26/2, 489: 4144 (Heimpel 2003: 387) (pqat)
ARM 26/2, 491: 3437 (Heimpel 2003: 388389)
(pqat)*
ARM 26/2, 502: 1528 (LAPO 18, 1179; Heimpel 2003:
392393) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 511: 1215 (Heimpel 2003: 395) (midde)
ARM 26/2, 511: 38 (l ittum)*
ARM 26/2, 515: 49 (Heimpel 2003: 397) (midde)
ARM 26/2, 521: 1420 (Heimpel 2003: 400) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 522: 1013 (Heimpel 2003: 401) (midde)
ARM 26/2, 533: 28 (Heimpel 2003: 406) (assurr)
ARM 26/2, 541: 59 (-man)
ARM 26/2, 548: 210 (Heimpel 2003: 410) (assurr)
ARM 27, 25: 1018 (Heimpel 2003: 419420) (assurr)
ARM 27, 27: 2635 (Heimpel 2003: 420421) (assurr)
ARM 27, 44: 1922 (Heimpel 2003: 426) (assurr)
ARM 27, 54: 618 (Heimpel 2003: 429) (pqat)*
ARM 27, 57: 913 (Heimpel 2003: 429430) (pqat)
ARM 27, 76: 2126 (LAPO 16, 240; Heimpel 2003: 437)
(assurr)
ARM 27, 77: 68 (pqat)
ARM 27, 84: 520 (Heimpel 2003: 439440) (assurr)
ARM 27, 99: 1728 (Heimpel 2003: 442443) (assurr)
ARM 27, 112: 2932 (Heimpel 2003: 449) (assurr)
ARM 27, 115: 1326 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 68
(53)) (tua)*
ARM 27, 116: 2830 (Heimpel 2003: 450451) (assurr)
ARM 27, 116: 3336 (Heimpel 2003: 450451) (assurr)
ARM 27, 116: 3740 (= FM 2, p. 329, No. 41; Heimpel
2003: 450451) (assurr)*
ARM 27, 116: 4446 (Heimpel 2003: 450451)
(assurr)
ARM 27, 132: 512 (-man)
ARM 27, 151: 100104 (Heimpel 2003: 461463)
(pqat)*
ARM 27, 151: 23- 31 (tua)*
ARM 27, 163: 29 (Heimpel 2003: 468) (assurr)
ARM 28, 39: 511 (-mi)
ARM 28, 48: 2134 (-mi)
ARM 28, 50: 1013 (midde)
ARM 28, 51: 613 (assurr)
ARM 28, 53: 615 (wuddi)
ARM 28, 105: 2526 (-man)
ARM 28, 145: 1218 (-mi)*
ARM 28, 145: 1218 (pqat)*
ARM 28, 147: 48 (-mi)
ARM 28, 154: 811 (wuddi)
ARM 28, 155: 612 (wuddi)*
ARM 28, 159: 1013 (-man)
ARM 28, 165: 1229 (assurr)
ARM 28, 179: 3141 (assurr)
ARM 28, 179: 3141 (-man)
ARM 28, 179: 3141 (-mi)
ARM 28, 179: 3141 (pqat)*
ARM 28, 179: 3141 (wuddi)*
CAD M/2 84a (-man)
CAD M/2 84a (Unpubl. letter) (midde)
CAD P 386 a 1a (Susa letter) (pqat)

List of Texts Cited in the Study

Charpin 1986: 327: 2629 (-mi)*
Charpin 1991: 151: iii 1822 (pqat)
Charpin 1991: 155: iv 2123 (pqat)
Charpin 1991: 161: 2025 (Ziegler 2007: 5354 (4.1))
(-mi)
Charpin 1991: 161: 2736 (Ziegler 2007: 5354 (4.1))
(-mi)
Charpin 1992: 98: 412 (assurr)
Charpin 2004b: 155: xvi36 (-mi)*
Charpin and Durand 2002: 9596: 2023 (-man)
Christian 1969: 18: 2338 (pqat)*
Christian 1969: 22: 11- 22 (pqat)
CT 48, 23:115 (-man)
Dalley 2001: 164, No. 3: 23 (-man)
Dossin 1938b: 180: 815 (assurr)
Dossin 1938b: 181182: 1822 (cf. ARM 26/1 p.160
n.b) (pqat)
Dossin 1956: 66: 1418 (-man)*
Dossin 1956: 66: 1921 (LAPO 16, 251) (wuddi)
Dossin 1970: 105: 2327 (LAPO 18, 912) (midde)*
Dossin 1973: 184185: 413 (LAPO 16, 230; Krebernik
and Streck 2001: 70 (64)) (tua)*
Dossin 1973: 185: 1735 (LAPO 16, 230) (pqat)*
Dossin 1981: 3: 2326 (assurr)
Driver and Miles 1955: vol. 2, 9698: rev. xxv: 340
(-mi)*
Durand 1990a: 102: 1224 (-mi)
Durand 1991: 57: 2930 (LAPO 16, 65) (tua)
Durand, LAPO 16, p. 274 n. 42: 4550 (assurr)*
EA 7: 6970 (ka)*
EA 20: 1112 (k a)*
Edzard 1970: 97: 1415 (TIM 2, 129) (midde)*
Edzard 1970: 97: 20 (TIM 2, 129) (midde)*
Ellis 1972: 66, 66: 412 (wuddi)*
Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70: 24 (l ittum)*
Falkenstein 1963: 56: ii 13 (anna) (wuddi)*
Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii 1317 (-man)
Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii 1317 (midde)*
Farber 1989 (OECT 11, 2) 34: 78 (k a)
Farber 1989: 36: 1521 (-mi)*
Finet 195457, 135: 2530 (assurr)
FM 1, p. 108: 1224 (LAPO 16, 25 = FM 11, 187)
(assurr)
FM 1, p. 115: 47 (tua)
FM 1, p. 115117: 2430 (-man)
FM 1, p. 127: 418 (tua)*
FM 1, p. 128: 2325 (LAPO 18, 855) (midde)*
FM 1, p. 82: 4050 (-mi)
FM 2, 118: 24 (assurr)
FM 2, 53: 58 (assurr)*
FM 2, 54: 815 (assurr)
FM 2, 55: 2126 (Heimpel 2003: 517) (midde)*
FM 2, 71: 1015 (-man)
FM 2, 82: 1621 (assurr)
FM 2, 82: 49 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 321, No. 1: 1314 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 321, No. 2: 2731 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 321, No. 3: 1924 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 321, No. 4: 410 (assurr)*

237
FM 2, p. 322, No. 10: 611 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 322, No. 11: 513 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 322, No. 5: 1823 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 322, No. 6: 3437 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 322, No. 7: 1418 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 322, No. 8: 37 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 322, No. 9: 1118 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 323, No. 12: 611 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 323, No. 13: 118 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 323, No. 14: 1321 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 323, No. 15: 1418 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 323, No. 16: 1017 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 323, No. 17: 1722 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 323, No. 18: 4041 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 324, No. 19: 1015 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 324, No. 20: 3538 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 324, No. 21: 1221 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 324, No. 22: 48 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 324, No. 23: 512 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 325, No. 24: 911 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 325, No. 25: 517 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 325, No. 26: 1321 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 325, No. 27: 2528 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 325, No. 28: 3244 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 325, No. 29: 2234 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 326, No. 30: 415 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 326, No. 31: 2634 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 326, No. 32: 5961 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 326, No. 33: 2633 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 326, No. 34: 916 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 328, No. 35: 2331 (=FM 2, 50) (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 329, No. 37: 115 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 329, No. 38: 1521 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 329, No. 39: 1218 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 329, No. 40: 2632 (assurr)
FM 2, p. 332, No. 42: 420 (assurr)*
FM 2, p. 332, No. 43: 412 (assurr)*
FM 2, pp. 328329, No. 36: 3139 (assurr)*
FM 6, 18: 515 (l ittum)*
FM 6, 25: 2229 (pqat)*
FM 6, 50: 49 (assurr)
FM 6, 52: 510 (wuddi)*
FM 6, 80: 1417 (assurr)
FM 6, p. 71, No. [2]: 2931 (LAPO 16, 249) (assurr)
FM 7, 26: 4952 (ibai) (-man)*
FM 7, 35: 47 (wuddi)*
FM 7, 45: 4246 (pqat)*
FM 8, 19: 1322 (LAPO 18, 996) (-man)*
FM 8, 19: 48 (LAPO 18, 996; Krebernik and Streck
2001: 70 (63)) (tua)*
FM 8, 19: 48 (tua) (-man)*
FM 8, 24: 512 (wuddi)*
FM 8, 49: 515 (-mi)
FM 9, 16: 16 (assurr)
FM 9, 20: 13 (assurr)
FM 9, 41: 6 (assurr)
FM 9, 51: 10 (assurr)
FM 9, 56: 315 (ka)
FM 9, 57: 15 pqat)

238
FM 9, p. 57 n. 256: 1112 (wuddi)
FM 11, 187; cf. FM 1 p. 108: 1224 (assurr)
Frayne 1990: 669: 812 (-mi)
George 2003: 172: (Gilg. P) i1719 (//174: i83 //178:
v186) (midde)*
George 2003: 178 (Gilg. P): v175185 (// George 2003:
174 [Gilg. P: 80]) (-mi)*
George 2003: 180 (Gilg. P.): vi232234 (-ma)*
George 2003: 200 (Gilg. Y): iv146150 (-mi)*
George 2003: 278279 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii 59 (-man)
(tua)
George 2003: 278279 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii59 (-man)*
George 2003: 636637 (SB VII): 4749 (l) (-man)*
George 2009: 34: 79 (-mi)
George 2009: 51: 16 (-man)
Goetze 1958: 2122, No. 4: 3738 (-man)*
Goetze 1958: 23, No. 5: 49 (anna) (wuddi)*
Goetze 1958: 28, No. 10: 1319 (Krebernik and Streck
2001: 71 (65)) (tua)*
Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19: 510 (ka)*
Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44: 515 (ka)*
Goetze 1958: 70, No. 45: 610 (anna) (wuddi)*
Groneberg 1997: 112: 8788 (-man)
Groneberg 1997: 28: ii4 (-mi)
Groneberg 1997: 30: iii8 (-mi)
Groneberg 1997: 36: v38 (-mi)
Groneberg 1997: 81: vii 2022 (-mi)*
Guichard 2004: 20: 6062 (assurr)
Guichard 2009: 104: 1318 (assurr)
Held 1961: 8: iii1115 (assurr)
Held 1961: 8: iii2023 (Krebernik and Streck 2001: 71
(66)) (tua)*
Held 1961: 8: iii67 (-mi)
Joanns 2006: 60, No. 14: 512 (l ittum)*
Joanns 2006: 62, No. 15: 1318 (l ittum)
Kienast 1978: 174: 1421 (-man)
Kienast 1978: 174: 413 (-man)
Kienast 1978: vol. II, 156: 1624 (pqat)*
Krebernik 1991: 64: 411 (l ittum)
Krebernik 20034: 15: ii36: ii36 (-mi)
Lacambre 1997: 446: 912 (-man)
Lacambre 1997: 448: 3839 (-man)
Lambert 1960: 244245: iv4245 (pqat)*
Lambert 1987: 192: 5051 (-man)
Lambert 1989: 326: 6972 (-man)
Lambert 1989: 326: 8487 (-mi)*
Lambert 1989: 327: 104105 (-mi)
Lambert 1989: 327: 106 (-man)
Lambert 1989: 327: 112113 (-mi)
Lambert 1989: 327: 120121 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50: 128 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50: [129] (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50: [130] (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50: [140] (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50: [141] (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 50: [142] (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 52: 159 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 60: 246 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 62: 289 (-mi)

List of Texts Cited in the Study

Lambert and Millard 1969: 68: 370 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 68: 376 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 80: 14 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 82: 28 (-mi)
Lambert and Millard 1969: 82: 28
Lambert and Millard 1969: 94: iii4850 (Krebernik and
Streck 2001: 71 (68)) (tua)*
Lambert and Millard 1969: 96: iv5 (-man)
Landsberger and Jacobsen 1955: 14: 1 (-mi)*
Landsberger and Jacobsen 1955: 14: 14 (-mi)*
Landsberger and Jacobsen 1955: 14: 9 (-mi)*
Livingstone 1988: 176: 17 (UET 6/2, 414) (pqat)*
Livingstone 1988: 177: 3334 (-mi)*
Livingstone 1988: 177: 3942 (-mi)*
MARI 4, 316: 47 (LAPO 17, 478) (wuddi)
MARI 4, 406: 1322 (assurr)
MARI 4, 410, n.155: 2934 (assurr)
MARI 5, 168: 2941 (LAPO 17, 490) (pqat)*
MARI 5, 172: 10 (LAPO 16, 36) (wuddi)
MARI 5, 181: 924 (LAPO 16, 13) (pqat)*
MARI 6, 51, n. 54: 616 (assurr)
MARI 6, 83, n. 213: 515 (midde)
MARI 6, 263264: 419 (LAPO 18, 1084) (pqat)
MARI 6, 272: 417 (LAPO 17, 463) (pqat)*
MARI 6, 291: 417 (assurr)
MARI 6, 296: 532 (assurr)
MARI 6, 338: 3341 (LAPO 17, 545) (tua)
MARI 6, 338339: 7276 (-man)
MARI 6, 339: 8487 (assurr)
MARI 6, p. 291: 1516 (-mi)
MARI 7, 60, n.93: 2529 (assurr)
MARI 7, 200: 6368 (assurr)
MARI 7, 3: 47 (LAPO 16, 439) (wuddi)
MARI 8, 383: 1022 (pqat)
MARI 8, 387: 1012 (assurr)
MARI 8, 448449: 3841 (-man)
OBTR 144: 1622 (-mi)
OBTR 153: 410 (l ittum)*
OBTR 161: 825 (-man)
OBTR 2: 35 (wuddi)*
OBTR 56: 59 (pqat)
Rmer 1967: 185186: i17 (-mi)
Rmer 1967: 186: ii1316 (-mi)
Rowton 1967: 269: 2030 (precative)*
Shemshara Letters 4: 312 (kma a)*
Shemshara Letters 8: 1218 (assurr)
Shemshara Letters 8: 4850 (assurr)
Shemshara Letters 28 B: 412 (-mi)
Shemshara Letters 35: 517 (-mi)
Shemshara letters 42: 3645 (-mi)
Shemshara Letters 70: 1228 (-mi)
Shemshara Letters 70: 4245 (-mi)
Shemshara Letters 1: 45 (wuddi)*
Shemshara Letters 11: 1617 (mannum l de)*
Shemshara Letters 11: 1622 (pqat)
Shemshara Letters 21: 1016 (pqat)
Shemshara Letters 24: 6 (pqat)
Shemshara Letters 26: 412 (anna) (wuddi)*
Shemshara Letters 35: 3340 (midde)*

List of Texts Cited in the Study

Shemshara Letters 35: 914 (assurr)*
Shemshara Letters 41: 1720 (pqat)
Shemshara Letters 52: 2734 (midde)*
Shemshara Letters 55: 523 (midde)*
Shemshara Letters 56: 511
Shemshara Letters 59: 1516 (wuddi)*
Shemshara Letters 59: 2324 (wuddi)*
Shemshara Letters 63: 6770 (wuddi)*
Thureau-Dangin 1925: 172: 1314 (-mi)*
Thureau-Dangin 1925: 174: 5556 (-mi)*
UET 5, 2: 59 (l ittum)*
UET 6/2, 396: 19 (-man)
UET 6/2, 397: 1619 (wuddi)*
UET 6/2, 399: 21 (-man)
van Djik 1972: 343344: 113 (-mi)*
Vogelzang 1988: 97: 3133 (-mi)

239
Vogelzang 1988: 97: 4448 (-mi)
Westenholz 1997: 62: i1014 (wuddi)*
Westenhotz 1997: 6870: 5759 (Krebernik and Streck
2001: 71 (67)) (tua)*
Westenholz 1997: 182: v13 (-mi)
Westenholz 1997: 216: 1417 (-man)
Whiting 1985: 180: 1 (-mi)
Whiting 1987: 6: 314 (aar)*
YOS 11, 24: i1213 (-man)
YOS 11, 24: i7 (-man)
YOS 11, 24: ii12 (-man)
Ziegler 1999a: 57: 419 (l ittum)*
Ziegler 2001: 498: 1014 (-man)
Ziegler 2004: 96: 1319 (pqat)*
Ziegler and Charpin 2007: 61: 12 (wuddi)

Indexes
Index of Topics
absolute irrealis 116
accumulation148
addressees agreement 67
adverbs210
affirmation 5, 216
affirmative 5, 148, 216
alas!7
allocutory 73, 85
anceps vowel 174
apostrophe188
argumentative197
assertions58
assessment 7, 99, 116, 147, 149
assumption 97, 145
wrong103
assurance 66, 69
attraction105
background 60, 111
beliefs97
Biblical Hebrew 135
calumny26
certainty 3, 43, 45, 66, 74, 80, 125, 210, 215
contra-factual85
counterfactual 72, 73, 117, 126, 127, 132, 150,
156, 216
future 71, 72, 73, 84
past 64, 66, 68, 73, 83, 84
promissory84
certifier 18, 36, 51, 80, 144, 146, 148, 149, 152,
206
declarative43
scalar 47, 52
strong35
certitude 67, 72
partial 47, 52, 62, 80
clause
circumstantial 33, 124, 168, 169, 209
concessive106
contrastive 106, 109, 110
false assumption 106, 107, 109, 110
nominal91

clause (cont.)
quasiconditional62
suppositional 97, 139
topical 33, 106, 109
Code of Hammurabi 196
comment, topical 58, 59
commitment 5, 35, 51, 66, 69, 116, 117
commonly-known facts 67
comparison 139, 148
comprehending7
conditionals 17, 23, 46, 52, 78, 105, 106, 112,
115, 116, 117, 119, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130,
132, 135, 136, 166, 167, 199, 211
counterfactual 72, 97, 116, 150
quasiconditional 32, 52, 53, 62
semiconditional 22, 23, 43, 52, 207
conditions
unreal116
confidence 23, 24, 35, 49, 50, 66
conjectures58
construction
bi-partite22
disjunctive 37, 53
numerical 66, 67, 147
content sentences 77, 79, 92, 148, 152, 153
conversational bond 65, 85
counter-assertion 94, 97, 107, 125, 216
counterfactual irrealis 116
counterfactuality 99, 117, 152, 216
Da-Stze 148, 152
declarative character 70
deductive 18, 43, 47, 51, 52, 62, 66, 80,
83
delocutory 73, 74, 86
deontic force 79
deontic MP 29
deontic set 4
dictation34
difference
hierarchical23
of style 110
direct irrealis 116

240

Indexes
direct speech 181, 182, 200
cited181
reported181
discourse analysis 71
disjunction 21, 62
divergence39
doubt 20, 74
doubt-and-denial 69, 71
doubter35
basic28
neutral 24, 29
weak 18, 20, 25, 36, 43, 80
emphasized, or stressed, word 129
emphatic nuance 112, 145
epistemic set 4
estimation 29, 55, 59
estimations29
evaluation 7, 56, 65, 66
events, nonactualized 97, 99
eventuality156
evidential, weak 24
evidential MP 102
evidentials 11, 206
facts, everyday 68
factuality 111, 117
fear 29, 36, 55, 156, 160, 170, 211
functional domain of complementation (FDC) 91
gradation of likelihood 49
grammaticalization 38, 39, 40, 61, 62, 79, 89, 90,
91, 92, 113, 141, 143, 150, 152, 175, 195
hope 29, 36, 156, 160, 170, 211
humorous effect 10
hypothetical proposition 34, 50, 97, 126, 132,
141, 148, 149, 167
ignorance 18, 19, 20, 28, 43, 145, 146
imagination117
imperative 6, 102, 152
impossibility 117, 125, 216
impossible wishes 156
improbabilty216
improbable conditions 117
indicative 5, 116
indirect irrealis 116
indirect speech 182
inferential MP 47, 66
inferentials16
information, background 50
irony 34, 128, 143, 144, 146

241
irrealis 35, 72, 116, 119, 206
Irrealis der Vergangenheit 96
irrealis particle by in Russian 130
irrel du pass 96
irrel du prsent 96
it is not false! 8
it is true! 8
it is urgent! 7
judgments 11, 29, 55, 69, 97
knowing 19, 20, 28, 43, 145, 146
knowledge verbs 91, 92
Konjunktiv II in German 30, 184
l al-nfiya lil-jins (Arabic) 128, 129
l-bea (Hebrew)62
locutory 73, 85, 86
mental state modal verbs 6, 9
mercy!7
metastable assessment 149
modal adverbs 12
modality
deontic 156, 160, 161, 162
epistemic 160, 162
in Hindi 117
in Latin 48, 49
in Sumerian 5
modifier, committing 51
monologue163
necessity3
negation
in French 39
in Arabic 128, 129
negative affirmative 5
nominalization113
noncommitment184
nonfactuality 117, 148
nonreality 99, 104
nonrealization216
nota bene79
oath 6, 112, 141, 145, 172
objective possibility 49
obligation6
open-ended actions 55
optative 43, 53
particle
inferential70
negotiating70

242
particle (cont.)
perspectivizing26
promissory-declarative69
reactive70
perfect 123, 124
performative197
performative force 72
periphrastic means 7, 8
personal epistolary style 108, 170
perspectivization 29, 30, 55, 73, 74, 87, 101, 184,
185, 188, 210, 217
please!7
plene-writing3
positive affirmative 5, 216
possibilit bilatrale 49
possibilit unilatrale 49
possibility 3, 117, 125, 215
potentialis 18, 47, 96, 119, 125, 132, 215
potential world 115
pragmatic strategy 65, 67
precative 102, 117, 125, 152
predictability215
present-future5
presumptive 18, 35, 43, 216
presumption 23, 51
presuppositions97
probability 3, 49, 74, 215
strong43
prohibitive 102, 152
promissory 69, 71
protasis-apodosis construction 52, 116, 119, 120,
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 209
proverbial saying 87
public opinion 25
question
contrastive 107, 109
rhetorical 58, 62, 87, 109, 110
quotative 39, 195
reality, nonfactual 148
realization216
reassuring particle 148
referential59
referential center 30
refutation 94, 216
refuter 93, 94, 97, 197, 206
relative116
replacement149
reported speech 25

Indexes
retour la ralit 104
rheme 75, 76, 91
root modality 6
root-modality verbs 11
Sams-Addu 108, 109, 149
sarcastic effect 9
sarcastic objection 144
scalar MP 18, 48, 80
scale of confidence 18
seeing6
self deliberation 70
simile110
slander 26, 113, 143
spacer 179, 184, 185, 187, 188, 195, 196, 197,
198, 200, 201, 203, 204, 206, 207
speculative 19, 47, 52, 62, 80, 215
stative 32, 123, 125
style indirecte libre182
subjectification 29, 30, 73, 87, 106, 163, 210, 217
subjective49
subjectivity101
subjunctive 5, 6, 116, 152
Sumerian 11, 12
Symbolon, Greek 85
tense 73, 125
Tense Axis 124
Tense Descent (TD) 123, 124
Tense Equation (TE) 123, 124
Tense Neutralization (TN) 123, 124
Tense Rising (TR) 123
theme 75, 76, 91
topicalization 75, 76, 211
transition from the hypothetical 148
uncertainty45
understanding 7, 55
unfortunately!7
unreal situations 125, 148
vantage point 30
verba dicendi 193
verba sentiendi 6
verb of knowing or hearing 75
verbs of state 32
volitive 25, 29, 35, 156, 160, 206, 211, 213
wishes29

Indexes

243

Index of Sumerian and Akkadian Words

(other than MPs)
amrum37
appna213
apputum211
binna142
enma195
ezib142
ezub142
g a - n a m 54
ium142
idatumma83
idm 83, 90
i- g 4- i n - z u 54, 113
inanna 104, 107, 166
inma 88, 92
ia142
kium142
kma 77, 139
kma l libbi ila188
kma a 89, 139, 140, 141
k a 89, 141
l 133, 206, 216
l uturum91
l uturum, OA 82
ma 132, 167, 174, 181, 183
m 132, 183
mku208
mme208
-man, Hittite 118
man de58

mannum l de 61, 62
maitum207
me208
-m 183, 208
mn de 58, 143
minsu208
-muk183
na nga-/na mga-47
piqum 37, 39
puqqu37
q/garrum57
qium142
rabtat206
rai/rau206
surramma207
surru213
lum145
urrumma/arrumma207
tukum-bi54
tuum 143, 152
166
ka 208, 211
Ka213
umma 195, 196, 203
ummami 195, 196, 203
wadm79
wadm-D65

Index of Texts Discussed

AbB 1, 27:69 187
AbB 1, 37:810 50
AbB 1, 39:615 51
AbB 1, 46:89 139
AbB 1, 51:2336 22
AbB 1, 53:2326 139
AbB 1, 68:49 33
AbB 1, 71:1824 22
AbB 1, 119:1117 51
AbB 1, 122:418 145
AbB 1, 135:612 35

AbB 1, 135:2527 35
AbB 2, 108:412 144, 149
AbB 3, 11:4649 61
AbB 3, 33:912 120
AbB 5, 232:2327 126
AbB 6, 63:57 151
AbB 6, 125:1625 20
AbB 6, 194:2226 110
AbB 6, 194:2526 150
AbB 8, 109:3439 31
AbB 9, 39:621 100

244
AbB 9, 61:624 104
AbB 9, 63:819 144
AbB 9, 78:2023 28
AbB 9, 148:2023 139
AbB 9, 150:59 33
AbB 9, 184:1825 145
AbB 9, 240:2130 127, 134
AbB 10, 5:1822 120
AbB 10, 15:2532 50
AbB 10, 16:1618 52
AbB 10, 166:612 60
AbB 11, 17:414 128
AbB 11, 84:1117 52
AbB 11, 187:828 140
AbB 12, 78:1826 57
AbB 12, 160:115 92
AbB 14, 63:411 79, 86
AbB 14, 63:819 164
AbB 14, 67:515 133
AbB 14, 112:3642 27
AbB 14, 125:1820 140
AbB 14, 140:511 134
AbB 14, 145:825 40
AbB 14, 154:412 133
AbB 14, 182:815 146
AbB 14, 205:1921 127
ABIM 26:2023 66, 75
ARM 1, 1:1012 36
ARM 1, 8:510 103, 107
ARM 1, 21:515 108
ARM 1, 22:49 76, 77
ARM 1, 22:911 76
ARM 1, 32:720 20
ARM 1, 39:414 164
ARM 1, 52:3641 69
ARM 1, 62:514 101
ARM 1, 72:45 74
ARM 1, 73:1423 108, 149
ARM 1, 118:414 185
ARM 2, 6:516 108
ARM 2, 29:1214 77
ARM 3, 64:916 102
ARM 4, 21:517 78
ARM 4, 26:48 77
ARM 4, 28:1014 138
ARM 4, 28:2125 138
ARM 4, 54:814 33
ARM 4, 59:512 76
ARM 4, 60:513 24
ARM 4, 62:310 68, 76
ARM 5, 9:527 132
ARM 5, 59:121 186
ARM 6, 19:1222 168

Indexes
ARM 6, 76:514 89
ARM 10, 20:1319 123
ARM 10, 31:511 83
ARM 10, 74:1037 122
ARM 10, 92:914 122
ARM 10, 129:120 185
ARM 10, 141:2030 86
ARM 10, 156:1230 23
ARM 13, 25:516 18
ARM 18, 8:46 78
ARM 26/1, 57:511 123
ARM 26/1, 189:1823 128
ARM 26/1, 206:512 72
ARM 26/1, 233:2431 128
ARM 26/1, 242:614 29
ARM 26/1, 275:518 187
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (1):1419 140
ARM 26/1, p. 383, No. (2):617 84
ARM 26/2, 298:2939 111
ARM 26/2, 302:915 28
ARM 26/2, 303:717 201
ARM 26/2, 318:2632 158
ARM 26/2, 319:1116 166
ARM 26/2, 380:1016 71
ARM 26/2, 391:1518 53
ARM 26/2, 393:610 58
ARM 26/2, 412:2224 120
ARM 26/2, 412:5965 121
ARM 26/2, 449:3744 79
ARM 26/2, 469:1015 122
ARM 26/2, 491:3437 19
ARM 26/2, 511:38 85
ARM 27, 26:2829 9
ARM 27, 54:618 26
ARM 27, 115:1326 98, 107
ARM 27, 151:2331 102
ARM 27, 151:100104 25
ARM 28, 145:1218 26, 183
ARM 28, 155:612 67
ARM 28, 179:3141 11, 34, 72
BWL, 24445:iv 4245 36
Charpin 1986: 327 (UET 6/2, 402):2629 189
Charpin 2004b: 155: xvi 36 190
Christian 1969: 18:2338 22
Dialogue of Pessimism 148
Dossin 1956: 66:1418 121
Dossin 1970: 105: 2357 50
Dossin 1973: 18485:413 105
Dossin 1973: 185:1735 40
Driver and Miles 195255: vol. 2: 9698 (CH
epilogue): rev. xxv:340 198
Durand, LAPO 16, p. 274 no. 42:4550 171
EA 7:6970 141

Indexes
EA 20:1112 139
Edzard 1970: 97 (TIM 2, 129):20 55
Edzard 1970, 97 (TIM 2, 129):1415 54, 55
Ellis 1972: 66, No. 66:412 68
Ellis 1972: 67, No. 70:24 87
Falkenstein 1963: 56: ii 13 70
Falkenstein 1963: 57: ii 1317 60
Farber 1989: 36 (OECT 11, 2):1521 200
FM 1, p. 127:418 100
FM 1, p. 128:2325 53, 62
FM 2, 53:58 165
FM 2, 55:2126 56
FM 2, p. 321, No. 1:1314 166
FM 2, p. 321, No. 3:1924 157
FM 2, p. 321, No. 4:410 162
FM 2, p. 322, No. 8:37 167
FM 2, p. 322, No. 9:1118 160
FM 2, p. 323, No. 14:1321 165
FM 2, p. 323, No. 16:1017 159, 165
FM 2, p. 324, No. 20:3538 158
FM 2, p. 324, No. 21:1221 161
FM 2, p. 325, No. 29:2234 172
FM 2, p. 326, No. 30:415 159
FM 2, p. 326, No. 32:5961 162
FM 2, p. 328, No. 35:2331 158
FM 2, p. 329, No. 37:115 163
FM 2, p. 329, No. 41:3740 168
FM 2, p. 332, No. 42:420 171
FM 2, p. 332, No. 43:412 171
FM 2, pp. 32829, No. 36:3139 157
FM 6, 18:515 84
FM 6, 25:2229 21
FM 6, 52:510 66
FM 7, 26:4952 133
FM 7, 35:47 67
FM 7, 45:4246 19
FM 8, 19:48 109, 131
FM 8, 19:1322 121, 131
FM 8, 24:512 77
FM 9, 56:315 150
George 2003: 172 (Gilg. P): i1719 (//174: i83
//178: v186) 43, 56
George 2003: 178 (Gilg. P.): v 17585 191
George 2003: 180 (Gilg. P.): vi 232234 183
George 2003: 200 (Gilg. Y.): iv 14650 192
George 2003: 27879 (Gilg. VA+BM): ii 5
9 98, 127
George 2003: 63637 (SB VII):4749 134

245
Goetze 1958: 2122, No. 4:3738 121
Goetze 1958: 23, No. 5:49 69
Goetze 1958: 28, No. 10:1319 109
Goetze 1958: 42, No. 19:510 146
Goetze 1958: 69, No. 44:515 147
Goetze 1958: 70, No. 45:610 70
Groneberg 1997: 81 (VS 10, 214): vii 2022 190
Held 1961: 8: iii 2023 100
Joanns 2006: 60, No. 14:512 87
Kienast 1978: vol. II, 156:1624 34
Lambert 1989: 326:8487 191
Lambert and Millard 1969: 94: iii 4850 110
Landsberger and Jacobsen 1955: 14:128 193
Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414):17 16
Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414):33
34183
Livingstone 1988: 177 (UET 6/2, 414):33
42192
MARI 5, 168:2941 25
MARI 5, 181:924 33
MARI 6, 272:417 21
OBTR 2:35 67
OBTR 153:410 86
Rowton 1967: 269:2030 135
Shemshara Letters 1:45 71, 75
Shemshara Letters 4:312 8, 140
Shemshara Letters 11:1617 53
Shemshara Letters 26:412 69
Shemshara Letters 35:914 158
Shemshara Letters 35:3340 59
Shemshara Letters 52:2734 58
Shemshara Letters 55:523 58
Shemshara Letters 59:1516 67
Shemshara Letters 59:2324 68, 75
Shemshara Letters 63:6770 75
Sigrist 1987: 85:47 194
Thureau-Dangin 1925: 172:1314 190
Thureau-Dangin 1925: 174:5556 190
UET 5, 2:59 87
UET 6/2, 397:1619 64
van Dijk 1972: 34344 (VS 17, 34):113 189
van Dijk 1972: 34344 (VS 17, 34):713 200
Westenholz 1997: 62: i 1014 64
Westenholz 1997: 6870:5759 94, 110, 150
Whiting 1987: 6:314 135
Ziegler 1999a: 57:419 93
Ziegler 1999a: 57:419 199
Ziegler 2004: 96:1319 40