It appears to be to be used with certain verbs or in a good specific sense of the latest verb

It appears to be to be used with certain verbs or in a good specific sense of the latest verb

/bi-/ might have been reported having locative-terminative push as opposed to strictly locative push to own /ba-/, but Thomsen states on the p. 184, which “is probably not automatically used in the reason regarding concord having an excellent loc.-label. or loc. noun, nonetheless it alternatively provides the semantic differentiation of your verb. “

>ba(I): provides an effective separative setting. When you look at the OBGT they directly correlates which have >Akkadian t-stems. (Thomsen, adopting the Jacobsen, confuses t-stems >for the Akkadian prime.) Its status was after the latest ventive >marker m and therefore the b try soaked up: m-ba- > m-ma, and if this is certainly >followed by a 2nd individual pronoun, it becomes yards-ma > m-mu (thus ba >is not always easy to recognize). In the absence of the fresh new >ventive marker they occupies the first status from the chain, after which they >don’t continually be known of jswipe dating website ba(II). An obvious instance try >ba-ne-su8-be2-dentro de-de3-en = ni-it-tal2-lak cu-nu-ci = i disappear >to them (OBGT VII, 305). > >ba(II): has actually a stative/passive setting. Within the OBGT VI, it is rendered by the >a c-stalk stative/passive, otherwise an Nt-base inactive. Apparently, ba(II) >occupies the initial updates throughout the chain. ba-ab-gar, ba-ab-gar-re-en >= cuckun, cuckunaku = he’s got started set / I was place >(from the people unnamed). The newest versions ba-gar, ba-gar-re-en, . ba-na-gar, >ba-na-gar-re-dentro de in OBGT VI, outlines 160-165, is confusing; they’re able to >as an alternative become translated while the ba(I), particularly the 2nd show, >that’s a couple of-fellow member, in addition to OB grammarian, exactly who rendered them >from the Nt-stalk passives, and kept brand new ambiguity. > >Your own statement clearly applies to ba(II), but I really don’t found it merely good >matter-of liking, immediately after you have put ba(I) apart. Obviously, it’s >way outside my personal resources and my proficiency to test my personal a lot more than >syntactical/lexical claims through the unilingual messages. > >Using my all the best, >Peter J. Huber

I was thinking of all the intransitive sentences one to avoid which have ba-Resources, particularly ba-gul, “it had been lost”. Because you say, those individuals fall-in the category off ba(II).

I’d provides think it had been an excellent >Hebrew word, but then once again, I am not sure the relationship of the Sumerian >code and also the Hebrew vocabulary

Thanks for finding the time to try to clarify which issue. I can make an effort to outline just what Hayes is wearing profiles 162 and you can 256: The guy believes you to students keeps speculated that there tends to be a few ba- conjugation prefixes that are homonyms. “You’re viewed chiefly during the couch potato phrases, additional inside less definable contexts.” In addition to, the fresh new conjugation prefix bi2- possibly happen that have affordable phrases on the locative-terminative case and conjugation prefix ba- often takes place which have moderate sentences on the locative case. “It is primarily the pattern away from co-thickness with contributed numerous students to summarize you to bi2- and you can ba- are not of the same score given that almost every other conjugation prefixes, and are usually most likely composed of one or more feature.” Therefore you to definitely type of ba- may include an element one to means the brand new locative case. To own a great separative meaning, you would expect to find Sumerian nominal phrases ending toward ablative postposition -ta.

Note the fresh delicate improvement >manufactured in OBGT VI, traces 79-84, within normal G-stem stative >and C-stalk stative/passive: an-gar, an-gar-re-dentro de = cakin, >caknaku = he or she is put, I’m put, compared to

>I became curious for individuals who you certainly will answer a concern for me. We have discover someplace >that the term “Eden” are an effective Sumerian phrase. > >At the very least, in the event the Eden, Adam, and/otherwise Eve are Sumerian conditions, could you >excite tell me if they have an interpretation/definition?

EDIN are good Sumerian term, however it refers to the steppe residential property between the two streams, where herd dogs grazed.


Altri Posts