Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 77

Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian1

by N. J. C. Kouwenberg Leiden

Among the functions which are usually ascribed to the Akkadian Gt-stem, the separ-
ative and the intensive (durative/habitual) functions are problematic because they do
not recur in any other Semitic language, and because their relationship to the basic de-
transitive meaning of the t -infix is unclear. It is argued here that the Gt-stem does not
have a separative function, and that the alleged separative Gt-stems represent a typologi-
cally not uncommon extension of a reflexive marker to motion verbs, which gives them
a basically ingressive meaning. Moreover, the intensive function is argued to be a sec-
ondary development specific to literary Babylonian and largely unrelated to the original
function of the t -infix.

1 Review article of M. P. Streck, Die akkadischen Verbalstmme mit ta-Infix, AOAT 303
(Mnster 2003). Research for this paper was carried out as part of the project The
Akkadian Verb and its Semitic Background, which is financed by the Netherlands
Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). I am grateful to Klaas Veenhof for rea-
ding and commenting on section 2.5.
For bibliographical abbreviations, see the list in AHw. III p. IXff, with the following
additions:
AKT 3: E. Bilgi/C. Gnbatt, Ankaraner Kltepe-Texte 3. FAOS Beiheft 3 (Stuttgart
1995).
CDA: J. Black/A. R. George/N. Postgate (eds.), A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian,
2nd ed. Santag 5 (Wiesbaden 2000).
CTMMA I: I Spar (ed.), Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art I (New
York 1987).
Gilg.: A. R. George, The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic (Oxford 2003).
LAPO: Littratures anciennes du Proche-Orient (Paris 1967).
OAA: Old Assyrian Archives (Leiden 2002).
Prag I: K. Hecker, G. Kryszat and L. Matous, Kappadokische Keilschrifttafeln aus den
Sammlungen der Karls-Universitt Prag (Prague 1998).
SAA: State Archives of Assyria (Helsinki 1987).
St. Alp: Hittite and other Anatolian and Near Eastern Studies in Honour of Sedat Alp,
ed. by H. Otten et al. (Ankara 1992).
St. Nimet zg: Aspects of Art and Iconography: Anatolia and its Neighbors, Stu-
dies in Honor of Nimet zg, ed. by M. J. Mellink et al. (Ankara 1993).
St. Reiner: Language, Literature, and History: Philological and Historical Studies Pre-
sented to Erica Reiner, ed. F. Rochberg-Halton, AOS 67 (New Haven 1987).
TPAK: C. Michel and P. Garelli, Tablettes palo-assyriennes de Kltepe, volume I (Kt
90/k) (Paris 2001).
TUAT: Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments (Gtersloh 1982).

Zeitschr. f. Assyriologie Bd. 95, S. 77103

Walter de Gruyter 2005
ISSN 0084-5299
78 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

1. Introduction

Among the verbal stems of Akkadian, the Gt-stem is one of the most
problematic. In the early days of Assyriology, this was largely caused by
the failure to distinguish it from what we now know to be the iptaras -per-
fect, which in spite of its t -infix belongs to the paradigm of the G-stem.
But even after Landsberger had identified the perfect as a category in its
own right, the problems were not over. In his monumental grammar of
Akkadian, the Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik of 1952, von Soden
makes no attempt to hide his perplexity about the function(s) of the verbal
stems with infixed -t-, and about the Gt-stem in particular (GAG 92). He
basically distinguishes three different functions of the Gt-stem. Two of
these seem rather straightforward in themselves: the reflexive and recip-
rocal function on the one hand, and the separative function in motion
verbs on the other. The problem is rather how they are semantically re-
lated to each other. Von Soden tries to solve this by assuming that they are
both instantiations of a more basic function of the t -infix, namely that of
indicating a change of direction. Yet we are left with a significant number
of Gt-stems to which none of these functions is applicable. For these
cases, von Soden tentatively posits a durative or habitual function, and
observes that especially in literary texts it is often hard to detect any dif-
ference between a Gt form and the corresponding G form.
Apart from the question to what extent these functions themselves
can be justified on the basis of the available texts, there is the obvious
problem of how to relate them semantically to each other. Von Sodens
change of direction as the common source of the reflexive/reciprocal and
the separative functions looks like a desperate attempt to reconcile them
and does not even include the putative durative/habitual function. Un-
surprisingly, it has convinced few people and was brushed aside by
Streck (1995, 217), without being replaced by a plausible alternative.
Nevertheless, all text books published after the appearance of the Grund-
riss slavishly copy von Sodens list of functions of the Gt-stem, as
Strecks short but illuminating Forschungsgeschichte shows (Streck,
pp. 68).2
The appearance of a new study by the hand of Streck dedicated to
the stems with infixed -t- in Akkadian and to the Gt-stem in particular
presents a suitable opportunity for a reconsideration of some of the estab-
lished ideas on these stems. I realize that a full treatment of this subject is

2 Passages in the book under review are referred to by Streck plus page number.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 79

far too ambitious for a review article, yet I will try to make a start by
presenting some of my own ideas, while reserving a fuller treatment for
later (or for somebody else). I will discuss the merits of Strecks book at
the end of this article.
In marked contrast to Akkadian, the use of -t- as a verbal morpheme in
other Semitic languages, where it is widespread as both prefix and infix,
is rather straightforward: it has the uniform function of a voice marker,
and indicates passive, reflexive, reciprocal and similar notions (Streck,
pp. 103 ff). The corresponding stems in Akkadian can express the same
notions, with the exception that the Gt-stem is used for reciprocal and re-
flexive, but not for the passive. The problematic aspects of -t- in Akka-
dian, therefore, primarily concern the separative and the durative/habitual
functions. If we can get rid of these, the Gt-stem becomes an ordinary
marker of detransitivity. This may seem a quite arduous undertaking, but
if we look at the verb forms in question with an unbiased eye, the separ-
ative function of the Gt-stem turns out to be based upon a very shaky
foundation indeed, and the durative/habitual function (which Streck, p. 53
and passim, calls Intensiv(?), always with a question mark) can easily be
explained as a secondary development typical of literary language.

2. The alleged separative function of -t-.

2.1. I will start with the separative function of the -t- infix. Before
being canonized by von Soden in GAG 92c, it was introduced into
Akkadian grammar by Goetze (1936, 324332);3 earlier grammars of
Akkadian do not mention anything of the sort.4 However, most of the in-
stances that Goetze adduces in support of this function of the -t- forms,
and the Gt-stem in particular, can now easily be exposed as regular ipta-
ras perfects. This applies to all non-motion verbs he quotes (nadanum

3 Almost as early as Goetze, Poebel (1939, 28 note 1) gives a number of separative

interpretations of t - forms, such as itmusu to move away, to move on (actually the
perfect attumus), tabalu to carry away and atluku to go away; cf. also atlak = go
away! (ibid. 18). Poebels interpretation of sitkun as it is lying off the road or out of
the way as opposed to sakin it is situated (ibid. 48 note 1) is not confirmed by its ac-
tual use, cf. CAD S/1 151 f s. v. sakanu 8 and Streck, p. 109 note 58. It is more likely to
be a literary alternative to sakin (see section 3 below).
4 Cf., for instance, Ryckmans (1938, 67 f). If they say anything at all about the meaning
of alakum Gt, which is the separative Gt-stem par excellence, they call it medial or the
like, e. g. Ungnad (1949, 54): ittalak er ging sich, er ging fr sich dahin. The revised
edition of 1964 by L. Matous closely follows GAG, as in almost all respects (cf. p. 78
67d).
80 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

to give, leqm to receive, wussurum to release, and susurum to put

in order), and also to the motion verbs alaqum to disappear, to run
away, redm to follow, to accompany and nasm to carry.5 The re-
maining verbs with an alleged separative Gt are the motion verbs alakum
to go/come, elm to go/come up, wabalum to carry, to take, to
bring, warm to lead, to take, to bring, and wasm to go/come out.
If there is such a thing as a separative function of -t-, these verbs should
constitute the key evidence; however, if we consider them in their con-
texts, the evidence they are supposed to provide vanishes into thin air.
Let us consider them one by one. By far the most frequent of all verbs
concerned is atlukum, the Gt-stem of alakum, traditionally described as
separative, e. g. in GAG 92e and in the main dictionaries.6 Streck (1995,
218 note 503) notes that 70 % of all separative t -forms mentioned in
AHw. come from this verb, and since it is not easy to relate this function
to other functions of -t-, he suggests that the separative is im wesent-
lichen eine Sonderentwicklung von alaku, which was analogically ex-
tended to a few other verbs (ibid. 217 f). It is clear, therefore, that the
exact meaning and use of atlukum is crucial for the acceptance of the sep-
arative function of -t-, and of the Gt-stem in particular.
The main source of instances of atlukum are Old Babylonian (OB) and
Old Assyrian (OA) letters.7 A close look at these texts reveals that atlu-
kum is not separative at all but ingressive: it focuses on the starting point
of the motion and basically means to start going, whereas alakum is
neutral in this respect. No more than alakum does atlukum specify the di-
rection of the motion: this is indicated by other means, such as the con-
text, an adverbial phrase or, most importantly, by the ventive ending. The
ventive indicates motion towards the location of the speech event, i. e. to-
wards speaker and/or hearer. By contrast, the absence of a ventive de-
notes motion away from this location, towards a third person; therefore,

5 All preterite forms that he quotes of these verbs are perfects without any doubt. The
non-preterite forms are to be interpreted otherwise than separative: it-ta-an-di-in KH
117: 60 is an N perfect; -ta-as-sar KH 20: 13 is an intransitive Dt present, us-te-es-
se-ru- LIH 92 = BB 68 = AbB 2, 74: 15 is an idiomatic St2-stem; te-er-te-ed-di in VS 16
149 = AbB 6, 149: r. 4 is presumably a Gtn preterite (but the context is fragmentary);
it-ta-as-su- Meissner 97 = Bu. 88-5-48 (sic!): 19 (no copy available) does not seem to
be very clear on the tablet: Meissner himself restores [it-ta-ab-lu? ]-u, Schorr, VAB 5,
10: 19 prints [it](?)-ta-as-su-.
6 AHw. 33b s. v. Gt weg-, davon-, fortgehen; CAD A/1 322b s. v. 5 to go away;
CDA 11a s. v. Gt go off, away.
7 According to the dictionaries, atlukum is surprisingly rare in literary texts, cf. AHw.
33b s. v. Gt and CAD A/1 323 f s. v. 5e.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 81

alakum with and without ventive broadly corresponds to come and go in

English (Kouwenberg 2002, 205). In this respect there is no difference at
all between alakum and atlukum.
I will first examine atlukum with a ventive. Consider the following
examples, the first two of which are from OA, the rest from OB:8
(01) CCT 2, 23: 36 f adi 3 ume PN i-ta-l-kam in three days PN will set off to (meet)
you
(02) Prag I 485: 16 ff atta ina emarika rikbamma a-tal-kam mount your donkey and come
here!
(03) AbB 11, 110: 26 ff suaram turdimma aris ana res ari lu-ut-ta-al-kam send (fem.)
the servant to me so that I can set off to (meet) you promptly before the beginning of
the month (the servants task was apparently to accompany the sender of this letter)
(04) TCL 17, 60: 7 f usamma at-la-kam awat nakrim imqutanniasim come here immedi-
ately, a rumour about the enemy has reached us!9
(05) YOS 10, 41: 74 f alum sa ana lawsu tallaku gisimmarsu tan [akk ]isamma ta-ta-la-
ka-am as for the city you are going to besiege: you will cut down its date palm(s)
and go on your way (back) home

Although from a directional point of view to come is an adequate

translation in these passages, the translation to depart, to set off, in
German abreisen, reflects the basic ingressive meaning of atlukum
more accurately. These are also the terms which are most favoured by
the editors of OB and OA letters and by CAD; luttalkam in (03), for in-
stance, is translated quite aptly I shall depart to come to you in CAD
A/1 323a s. v. alaku 5b.
The use of atlukum with a ventive presents an obvious problem for its
alleged separative function, since the notion of separation clashes with
the function of the ventive to denote motion towards the speech event.
One could argue that a form such as the imperative atlakam (Ass. atal-
kam) actually combines both elements, meaning something like come
(here/to me) away from there!, in contrast to simply come here! of the
neutral G form alkam. This has been attempted, for instance, by von
Soden in AHw., where he glosses atlukum with ventive as fortgehen
her zu (AHw. 33b s. v. Gt 1b), by Streck (p. 48/9), who translates the
common OA expression tib<amma atalkam as Mach dich auf und
komme (von dort) weg her, and also by Frankena in:

8 I have avoided quoting preterite Gt forms, since they are homonymous with G per-
fects. However, if we assume that atlukum is ingressive, it is often possible to decide
whether the ambiguous forms come from the G-stem or the Gt-stem.
9 I assume that the combination of nasaum and atlukum intends to give emphasis, cf.
the translation in CAD A/1 322 f s. v. 5b depart immediately (which leaves the ven-
tive untranslated). Other instances of atlakam in OB letters are AbB 1, 133: 11; 3, 2: 30;
7, 81: 20 and 24; 7, 101: 23; 8, 25: 16; and 13, 171: 12.
82 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

(06) AbB 6, 8: 20 f. simam asammamma a-ta-la-ka-am ich werde mir Einkufe machen
und zu dir weggehen.

It is difficult to prove that these forms do not have this specific mean-
ing, but the contexts in which they are used give no reason at all for the
addition away from there. If we try to impose such a separative in-
terpretation on such passages, the result is invariably strained and un-
natural. For tib<amma atalkam, the translation set off to meet me or the
like is much more natural than Strecks komme (von dort) weg her,
and in (06) a simple abreisen or kommen would be much better than
weggehen.10 This applies to atlukum with ventive in general, but within
the scope of this article it is obviously not possible to discuss the dozens
of instances attested in OB and OA.11
If atlukum has no ventive, on the other hand, it denotes motion away
from the speech event and basically means to start going, but in prac-
tice the renderings to go (away), to leave, German weggehen, are
perfectly adequate, as in:
(07) KH 142: 4 f ana bit abisa it-ta-al-la-ak she (the divorced wife) will go (away) to her
fathers house
(08) ARM 4, 22: 22 f urram ulu ullitis asar at-lu-ki-im ni-it-ta-la-ak tomorrow or the day
after we will go (away) wherever we like

In the same vein, we find the imperative of atlukum without ventive

for go (elsewhere)! in contrast to (02) and (04) with ventive for come
here/to me!, e. g.:
(09) ARM 1, 60: 4 at-la-ak ana GN depart for GN!12

However, these instances do not justify the conclusion that the t -infix
in atlukum has separative meaning. First, any notion of separation that
may be present in them should rather be ascribed to the absence of a

10 See, for instance, also AbB 9, 130: 13 aris at-ta-la-kam in the same context as (06),
which Stol aptly translates as I shall set out towards you soon (apart from the fact that
the italics are superfluous). The same expression occurs in AbB 11, 110: 28 and in 12,
52: 12; 53: 30 f; 55: 21 f and 58: 24 f.
11 If atlukum were separative, it may be presumed to focus on the location from which
somebody is separated and therefore to be specified regularly (though not necessarily
always) by a noun indicating this location. This is indeed the case with the separative
verb par excellence in Akkadian, wasm to go/come out: this verb is often qualified
by a prepositional phrase or sometimes by an accusative to specify the source of the
motion: ina bitim wasm to leave the house (passim), and ina/isti p wasm to come
out of the mouth (cf. CAD A/2 371 f s. v. as 5b1). With atlukum, such qualifications
are also found but not more frequently than with any other motion verb (an example is
AbB 2, 80: 12 f).
12 Similar instances include AbB 8, 89: 10; 10, 180: r. 11; 12, 133: 17, and 12, 195: 17.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 83

ventive, since this also explains the different meaning of atlukum with
a ventive. Second, to conclude that -t- has a separative function on the
basis of the fact that to go away is often a suitable translation equivalent
of atlukum (without ventive) amounts to confusing the grammatical value
of a morpheme with its use in a specific instance.

2.2 The typical use of atlukum can be characterized as follows. It is

mainly used in contexts of undertaking a journey; alakum is also possible
here, but atlukum is more specific and therefore perhaps also somewhat
more urgent and emphatic.13 It only takes human beings as subject, a fact
which is important for explaining the presence of the morpheme -t- from
a diachronic point of view, as I will argue below in section 2.4.14 The
G-stem alakum can be used in the same context but has a less specific
meaning and accordingly a wider range of possible subjects (natural phe-
nomena, body parts, time periods, roads, etc., see CAD A/1 308 ff. s. v.).
Furthermore, atlukum is typically used without an explicit indication
of the goal, in marked contrast to alakum, which often has specifications
with ana maar-, ana ser- or a dative suffix pronoun. It is certainly poss-
ible to specify the goal of atlukum (e. g., in (07) and (09)), but it is far
more typically left implicit, in clauses such as (01)(06) above.15 This
agrees with the idea that atlukum focuses on the beginning of the motion
rather than on its goal, whereas the neutral G-stem alakum, other things
being equal, may focus more on the goal by its contrast to atlukum.
Admittedly, the difference between the locational concept of separ-
ation and the temporal concept of ingressivity is rather subtle in a motion
verb, and may make very little difference in practice. Accordingly, most
of the verbs that are currently used to translate atlukum, such as to de-
part, to set out and abreisen and even to go away are usually per-
fectly adequate. The great advantage of exchanging the separative func-
tion for the ingressive is that it delivers us from a vexing anomaly among
the functions of the derived stems in general and of the Gt-stem in par-

13 At least, this is the impression one gets from a comparison between the use of the im-
peratives alik and alkam on the one hand and that of atlak and atlakam (Assyrian atal-
kam) on the other.
14 atlukum always has a human subject in OB and OA according to the instances collec-
ted in CAD A/1 322 f s. v. 5a/b, in AHw. 33b s. v. Gt and also in the letters of AbB
113 (if we allow for a few personifications of numinous concepts). The (very few) ap-
parent exceptions can be explained as Gtn preterites (BIN 6, 56: 4 i-ta-lu-ku [OA] in
CAD A/1 322b s. v. 5a), or G perfects (BIN 4, 98: 29 i-tal-kam [OA] in AHw. 33b s. v.
Gt 1b). In SB this restriction is somewhat relaxed (e. g. KAR 25: I 15 [days]).
15 Note that the ventive does not specify the goal of the motion, but only its direction.
84 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

ticular. As noted above, the separative function of -t- has no obvious

semantic relationship to its reciprocal and reflexive functions, and has no
parallels at all in other Semitic languages (Streck, pp. 105 f).
A second anomaly is that the alleged separative function can only be
defined in semantic terms, whereas the derived stems of Semitic can gen-
erally be defined in purely grammatical terms: passive, reflexive, ingress-
ive, causative, iterative, etc.16 This is not accidental but a consequence of
the way in which these categories emerge. Morphosyntactic markers such
as -t- tend to evolve from independent lexemes as a result of a grammati-
calization process. In order to be eligible for such a process, the meaning
of a lexeme must meet three conditions: first, it must be very general
so that it is applicable in a large number of contexts. Second, it must be
identifiable for the speakers as carrier of a specific function. Third, it
must be sufficiently relevant to the meaning of the element(s) which it ac-
companies to ensure that they frequently occur together.17 If these con-
ditions are not met, a lexeme will not easily undergo a grammaticaliz-
ation process that makes it into the marker of a morphosyntactic
category. This is the reason that in languages all over the world we find
the same or very similar types of morphosyntactic categories, among
which the ones just mentioned are prominent. These are precisely the
categories that meet the conditions specified above. A causative and an
iterative can be formed from almost any verb, a passive from most tran-
sitive verbs, etc.
Semantic characteristics, however, do not meet these conditions
easily, since they usually apply to a specific and therefore much smaller
range of verbs, so they are far less general and have a correspondingly
smaller chance to be grammaticalized. This also applies to the notion of
separative: separative is only relevant to motion verbs, which represent
no more than a small fraction of the complete verb inventory. So the oc-
currence of a grammaticalization process leading to a separative function
seems unlikely a priori.18

16 Exceptions are some derived stems which are denominal or expressive in nature, such
as Stem IX (if >alla), which mainly denotes colours and physical defects, and the rare
Stems XI to XV in Arabic (Fleisch 1979, 328332). This does not apply to any stem
with infixed -t-, however.
17 See Bybee (1985, 1319).
18 On the other hand, it is conceivable that a verb develops a separative meaning by a
process of lexicalization and subsequently influences other verbs. In that case, there
need not be a functional relationship between the verbal marker that the verb happens
to have and the normal use of this marker. This is apparently what Streck (1995, 217 f)
has in mind when he calls the separative a Sonderentwicklung of alaku.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 85

2.3 Now that we have disposed of atlukum as a separative Gt-stem,

the remaining evidence for the separative function of -t- can be sum-
marily dealt with. From all verbs with an alleged separative Gt-stem listed
by Streck (pp. 4853), there are only two which are common enough to
merit discussion: elm to go/come up and wasm to go/come out.
elm Gt only occurs in an idiomatic expression with the preposition ina
to lose (money, etc.), in which elm G is also possible (albeit rare).19
Since ina, literally out of, from, is separative itself, this idiom cannot be
used as evidence for a separative meaning of the verb (cf. Streck, pp. 49 f
nr. 95). Only if we know on the basis of other evidence that the Gt-stem has
a separative function, can we say that in this case, too, elm Gt is separative
and therefore strengthens the separative notion expressed by ina.
An instructive parallel is offered by a common idiom which I already
mentioned in passing in 2.1. It consists of atlukum combined with tebm
(OA taba<um) to rise, especially in the imperative, both without ven-
tive: tibema atlak stand up and go (there) and with ventive: tib<amma
atalkam stand up and come here (the forms quoted are OA).20 Once
we know on other grounds that atlukum is ingressive, we understand why
it is preferred to alakum here: the ingressive meaning of atlukum per-
fectly matches the inherently ingressive meaning of tebm, so that the
two verbs in combination strengthen each others meaning. However, we
cannot use this combination as an argument for the ingressive meaning
of atlukum, since we do not know in advance to what extent this meaning
depends on tebm alone.
On the same principle, we cannot use the Gt-stem of elm ina to
lose as evidence for a separative function of Gt.21 The same reasoning
applies to wasm Gt to go/come out, which is inherently separative be-
cause of its meaning.22

19 Cf. AHw. 208a s. v. el(m) IV G 8.

20 It is especially frequent in OA but not very common in OB, cf. AHw. 1342a s. v. teb(m)
G 3a/b. As far as I know, the G-stem of alakum is not attested in this expression.
21 The fact that in OB the Gt-stem of elm seems to be restricted to this idiomatic ex-
pression is a remarkable instance of lexicalization: presumably, it was originally in
more general use, but became fossilized in this specific environment.
22 The attested Gt forms of wasm (cf. AHw. 1477 f s. v. Gt) do not justify positing a se-
condary verb *tasm (in contrast to tabalum and tarm to be discussed below). They
can all be explained as regular Gt forms. We ought to find preterite forms of the form
*issi, pl. *iss, etc. to be certain that such a verb existed. The existence of an imperative
with ta- (tasi and tasab) is not enough to prove the existence of tas(m) and *tasabu(m),
pace AHw. 1337 f ss.vv. These forms are built on the model of tabalum and tarm: the
coexistence of bil and tabal and of ru and taru gave rise to tasab (later also tisab) beside
sib and tasi beside si.
86 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

The remaining verbs listed as separative by Streck (pp. 4853) are too
rare and/or too uncertain of interpretation to be used as evidence for a
grammatical function whose existence is not proved beforehand on the
basis of more solid evidence.23 For two other verbs often regarded as
separative, tabalum and tarm, see section 2.5.

2.4 By rejecting the separative function of the Gt-stem, however, we

are creating a new problem: what is the grammatical function of -t- in
these motion verbs, if it is not separative? For alakum, I have claimed
that it is ingressive, but this is not applicable to elm and wasm, at least
it is not obvious from their use. This suggests that ingressive is not the ac-
tual function of -t- but a specific realization of something different.24
The three verbs discussed so far belong to a small group of intransitive
motion verbs that also include at least two other verbs, erebum to enter,
which occasionally occurs in the Gt-stem in OB and Standard Babylonian
(SB) for no apparent reason, and itulum to lie down, a lexicalized Gt-
stem of nlum/nialum.25 erebum and itulum cannot be interpreted as separ-
ative, so that Streck (p. 66 no. 164 and p. 68 no. 171, respectively) is forced
to classify them among the Gt-stems which are funktionell unklar. Once
we give up the separative meaning of the other three, we can combine them
properly in a single group because they show the same characteristics: they
are intransitive motion verbs which are typically used with a personal sub-
ject and which are largely restricted to OB and SB. In later non-literary dia-
lects only alaku Gt just manages to survive as an isolated form.26

23 There is one additional verb listed by Streck (p. 51 f. no. 101) as a separative Gt-stem
which should also be mentioned: patarum Gt to leave. It seems more likely that this
idiom results from a lexicalization of a reflexive verb: to free oneself > aufbrechen
than that it testifies to a separative function of Gt. However, the fact that only Gt pre-
terite forms are attested makes one suspicious whether it really concerns Gt stems
rather than G perfects used intransitively (although for some of them Streck adduces
good reasons to reject an interpretation as perfect).
24 The ingressive -t- is also attested a few times in motion verbs that only occur in the
N-stem: naprusu to fly and izuzzu to stand (up); this gives rise to a kind of Nt-stem
(Streck, p. 129 ff). naprusu has a derived form itaprusu, interpreted as davonfliegen in
AHw. 740b s. v. Nt. izuzzu is a fossilized N-stem (Huehnergard 2002, 161178; Streck,
AfO 44/5 (1997/8) 321 f), but there is also an OB N present ittazz translated as ingres-
sive (er tritt hin) by AHw. 410a s. v. Gt. Streck (p. 129 no. 415) classifies it under the
-t- forms with unknown function, just as itulu (see above). The t -infix of these verbs is
semantically parallel to that of the Gt motion verbs.
25 Huehnergard (2002, 178184); Streck, AfO 44/5 (1997/8) 321.
26 The dictionaries mention instances of alaku Gt for Middle and Neo-Babylonian and
for Middle and Neo-Assyrian (AHw. 33b s. v. Gt 1; CAD A/1 323 f s. v. 5d/e/f); Neo-
Assyrian normally uses the Gtt-stem instead, see section 3 below.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 87

Linguistic typology can help to shed some light on these verbs. In her
ground-breaking study of the middle voice, Kemmer (1993, 56 f and es-
pecially 156 ff.) points to the occurrence of motion verbs with reflexive or
middle morphemes that focus on the initiation of the motion activity,
whereas the corresponding unmarked forms often refer to the inter-
mediate or final stage of a journey (ibid. 157). A prominent example is
Old French, where some intransitive verbs of motion develop a reflexive
counterpart, marked with the reflexive pronoun se: sen aller to leave, to
go away, sen venir to come, sen fur to flee, to run away, but some
other Indo-European languages also provide instances: Spanish irse
to go away, Old Norse ganga-sk to go away and hlaupa-sk to run
(away), and Rumanian se duce to go (ibid. 57).27
We have no direct information about the etymological background
and the original function of the morpheme -t- with detransitive function.
However, there is a lot of typological evidence concerning reflexive
markers in general suggesting that -t- goes back to a reflexive noun or
pronoun and gradually acquired other detransitive functions.28 This is
the way in which the Latin reflexive pronoun se has developed in the
Romance languages and its Proto-Germanic counterpart *sik in many
Germanic languages (Kemmer 1993, 182 ff). The parallels between these
pronouns and the t -infix suggest that the latter underwent a functional
evolution very similar to that of the former and also expanded its domain
to include intransitive motion verbs, giving them the nuance of denoting
the initiation of a motion performed by human beings. Kemmers defini-
tion fits the use of alakum and itulum perfectly and also accounts for the
other verbs, in which the focus on the beginning of the motion is less evi-
dent because they are inherently ingressive. So the Akkadian Gt-stems of
the atlukum group fit into a cross-linguistic pattern.
Quite a different matter is how to explain this remarkable expansion
of a reflexive or middle marker to intransitive verbs where it seems quite
out of place. It goes far beyond the boundaries of this article to discuss
the intricacies of reflexive expressions, but an answer to this may be
found in the peculiar nature of reflexivity. The basic feature of a reflexive
situation is that the subject is coreferential with another participant,

27 The parallel between atlukum and these verbs is also commented upon by Streck,
p. 108 ff. His objection to Kemmer is that the separative does not express just any mo-
tion but only motion away from a reference point and that also transitive verbs can be
separative. Again this shows how much easier things become if we give up the sepa-
rative function of the Gt-stem altogether.
28 See Kemmer (1993, 151 ff, esp. 196 ff); Faltz (1985, 208 ff); Heine (1999); Schladt (1999).
88 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

usually the direct or indirect object. It is important to distinguish between

prototypical reflexive situations, which involve two-participant verbs that
are normally not reflexive (e. g. English kill oneself, blame o. s., see o. s.),
and natural reflexive situations, which involve verbs that are more often
reflexive than non-reflexive, such as verbs of body care: wash (o. s.), dress
(o. s.), shave (o. s.). In the latter type of verb, the reflexive marker is pre-
dictable to a certain extent and therefore liable to lose part of its force.
Since natural reflexive verbs are semantically similar to ordinary one-
participant, i. e. intransitive, verbs, there is a possibility of extending the
use of the reflexive marker as a mainly formal exponent of intransitive
verbs. This happens in particular when the frequent use of the reflexive
marker in natural reflexive situations has weakened its expressive capac-
ity to such an extent that it has triggered a renewal of the reflexive marker
in prototypical reflexive clauses. In that case, the older, weakened reflex-
ive marker becomes available to accompany both natural reflexive verbs
and intransitive verbs in general.29 This process has occurred in many
languages, and Kemmer (1993, 41 ff) has shown that the intransitive
verbs affected by it, the middle verbs, tend to belong to specific sem-
antic classes, comprising also the motion verbs with which we are con-
cerned here.
Natural reflexive actions are by definition performed by volitionally
acting human beings; accordingly, the middle verbs that in some lan-
guages develop from these natural reflexives, including the atlukum
group, typically have a human subject. It is conceivable, therefore, that -t-
expanded to these verbs to underline the human, volitional nature of the
subject, in contrast to the basic stems of these verbs, which can often
have a much wider range of subjects and therefore of meanings (see, for
instance, section 2.2 about alakum).30

29 A good example of this development is Dutch, which has two reflexive markers, zich
and zichzelf. The strong marker zichzelf (originally emphatic) is used in prototypical re-
flexive situations; the older and weaker form zich can only be used in natural reflexive
situations (zich aankleden to dress (o. s.), zich wassen to wash (o. s.), but is also used
in intransitive verbs such as zich vergissen to make a mistake and zich schamen to be
ashamed, which are reflexive only in form (there are no corresponding verbs without
zich). In Akkadian, the strong marker for reflexivity is ramanu (and in OB also
pagru), which already in the oldest texts has largely replaced the t -infix in its reflexive
function (cf. Streck, pp. 3844, where, however, several verbs are listed which are not
strictly reflexive). The same happens eventually to -t- as a reciprocal marker, but only
after the OB/OA period (and not in literary Babylonian).
30 The motion verbs are not the only class of verbs which occur in the Gt-stem without
obvious reason. Another class of verbs which in many languages tend to be characte-
rized as middle verbs are the emotional speech verbs (cf. also Streck, p. 109). In OB,
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 89

2.5 There are two other verbs which are often mentioned in relation
to the separative function of -t-: tabalum and tarm. They are not Gt-
stems, but root variants of the corresponding I/w verbs wabalum to
carry, to bring, to take and warm to lead, to bring, to take (mostly
with persons as object) (Streck, pp. 102 f). Yet there is a widespread idea
that the radical t - imparts a separative meaning to these verbs as well, as
suggested by the translations in the dictionaries and by the words chosen
to render them in text editions.31
This claim does not stand up to closer scrutiny, however. If we con-
sider the use of tabalum and tarm in OB and OA letters, a different
meaning turns out to be much more appropriate: without ventive, they
mean to take along (German mitnehmen), with ventive to bring
along (German mitbringen); in other words, they underline that the
subject is actually going somewhere or coming to the location of the
speech event with the items to be transported under his care (or, in the
case of tarm, accompanying the persons to be transported). Just as ala-
kum, these verbs lack an inherent direction: it is the presence or absence
of the ventive which determines the direction of the motion. For reasons
of space, a few random examples from OA ((11)-(13)) and OB ((14)(17)),
and one from Sargonic Akkadian (10) must suffice:

many such verbs occur in the Gt-stem (the page numbers refer to the book under re-
view): ()alalu Gt (no G) to boast, to shout, to rejoice (p. 40 no. 73), karabu Gt to
pray (p. 63 no. 149), samaru Gt to praise (p. 66 no. 163), samaru Gt to rage, to
be(come) excited (p. 57 no. 128), sap Gt to be loud, thick, etc. (p. 57 no. 129), sa-
rau Gt to have a pre-eminent, glorious status (p. 58 no. 131). They also typically
have a human subject. On the other hand, the two most common speech verbs in the
Gt-stem, atwm (always Gt) and zakarum (Gt in literary texts) should rather be explai-
ned as original reciprocals that have lost their reciprocal value (cf. Streck, pp. 84 ff); in
the case of atwm the replacement was doubtless stimulated by its triply weak cha-
racter. The motion verbs and the emotional speech verbs do not yet exhaust the full ar-
ray of Gt-stems: some other Gt-stems that fall under none of these categories include
bar Gt to see (p. 47 no. 87 and p. 61 no. 141), enesu Gt to be weak (p. 54 no. 113),
eresu Gt to ask (et-ru-sa- [a ]t YOS 10, 36: II 41; et-ru--sa- [a ] YOS 10, 46: III 44, not
mentioned by Streck), abasu Gt etwa schwellen/to be elated, (p. 54 no. 114), ka-
sadu to reach, to obtain, Gt ? (p. 68 no. 172), paqadum Gt to act with caution
(p. 39 no. 71), re< Gt to herd, to tend (p. 64 no. 156), sap Gt (no G) to become si-
lent (p. 70 f no. 186).
31 For tabalum cf. AHw. 1297a s. v. wegnehmen, wegtragen, an sich nehmen, CDA
392a s. v. to take away, carry off , Streck, p. 103 no. 273 wegnehmen, wegtragen;
for tarm cf. AHw. 1336a s. v. tar(m) I and Streck, p. 103 no. 278 (weg-, fort)holen,
CDA 401a s. v. tar(m) I to lead away.
90 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

(10) OAIC no. 7: 22 ff (the utensils of PN1) sut PN2 jilqeamma it-ba-lu which PN2 re-
ceived and took along (cf. also MAD 3, p. 293 f s. v. TBL)
(11) TC 3, 252: 21/24 summa ina gamar warim annm 15 gn k.babbar simisa i-tab-
lu-nim u i-ta-ru--s if at the end of this month they have brought along (vent.) 15
shekels of silver, her (the slave girls) price, they may take her along (no vent.)
(12) BIN 6, 195: 25f mimma isu<u ummianusu i-ta-ab-lu everything he had his creditors
have taken along (or: taken away, carried off )
(13) BIN 6, 18: 18 ff tamalakki sa tasisa [tim ] tab-li-im bring along (fem.) the containers
with the memoranda!
(14) AbB 3, 65: 4 f 4 eleppate putri () usqamma ta-ab-lam select four boat loads of
manure () and bring (them) here
(15) KH 49: 25 ff se<am u lu samassammam sa ibbass esip ta-ba-al collect and take along
as much barley or sesame as will grow (similarly 66: 1013)32
(16) JCS 17, p. 77 no. 5: r. 8f (if you intend to send him here) ana PN piqdassu li-it-ra-
as-su entrust him to PN that he may bring him along to me
(17) Gilg. p. 172: I 23 {ta}-tar-ra-as-{su ana} se{rija} you will bring him to me

For tarm, this meaning is confirmed by the fact that it is often accom-
panied by a prepositional phrase with itti with, e. g.:

(18) AbB 4, 22: 26 ff (persons) ittikunu ta-ra-a-nim-ma ana GN ana marija alkanim bring
(them) along with you (pl.) and come to me in Sippar (German: bringt sie mit).

However, when these verbs are used without a ventive, they can easily
be interpreted as to take away rather than to take along, just as alaku
without ventive can be interpreted as to go away.33 This was already

32 This expression shows that the ambiguous form itbal (preterite of tabalum or perfect of
wabalum) in a clause such as RA 90, 125: 11 f se<am sa ina eqlija ibbas isipma it-ba-al
he collected the barley that grew on my field and took it along is from tabalum with
the meaning proposed here. Extending this argument, it becomes likely that itbal in
clauses such as KH 11: 6265 summa bel ulqim sibi mud ulqisu la it-ba-lam if the
owner of the lost property has not produced (lit. brought along) witnesses who can
identify his lost property (note the negation) is also a preterite of tabalum with ventive
to bring along (likewise in 9: 23 and 26; 10: 53 and 56, 112, 63). In fact, the only
places in KH where we find itbal as perfect of wabalum are 45: 44 and 48: 6 (it-ba-al
coordinated with irtais) and 169: 29 and 33 (because of the parallelism with la ublam
in 168: 21). For the use of itbal rather than the expected ittabal as perfect of wabalum
there are two explanations: either it is a surviving biliteral Gt form that has acquired
perfect meaning along with other Gt preterites, or it is a secondary use of the preterite
itbal caused by the similarity in meaning of wabalum and tabalum.
33 Cf. also KH 26: 12 munaggersu bissu i-tab-ba-al the person who denounced him shall
take along his house/estate, where tabalum has a slightly extended meaning, in so far
as it is not literally possible to take along a bitum. In such contexts, it seems to have
acquired the technical meanings of to confiscate (if the judicial authority is subject)
and to take legal possession of (if an individual benefits from a verdict), always with-
out ventive. This use also occurs in omens, e. g. YOS 10, 23: 10 erset nakrika ta-ta-ab-
ba-al you will take possession of the land of your enemy.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 91

observed by Poebel (1939, 48 note 1), but he apparently did not realize
the decisive impact of the ventive.
Actually, it seems that in SB tabalu has lost the capacity of occurring
with a ventive and has been specialized for indicating direction else-
where, so that it effectively means to take away in SB. At least, this is
suggested by the rather limited selection of attestations in AHw., which
does not include any real ventive among the SB ones.34 Cf. for instance:
(19) Maql III 8 f sa etli damqi dussu ikim sa ardati damiqti inibsa it-bal she (the sorceress)
took away the virility of the handsome young man, she took away the attractiveness
of the beautiful young woman,

where the parallelism of tabalu and ekemu illustrates the semantic shift
from take along to take away. However, this is a secondary development
which has no direct relevance for the grammatical value of the t -infix in
earlier periods.35 Some earlier instances suggest that this shift started al-
ready in an earlier period, cf. the following OA passage:
(20) EL 247: 12 (x tin and y texiles have come out [lit. down] from the palace safely) 12
subatu ta-b-lu (but) 12 textiles have been taken away (cf. Veenhof 1972, 442).

Consequently, -t- in these verbs is not separative either, but it has the
familiar detransitive meaning realized as an indirect reflexive: the subject
performs the action in his own interest or in his own sphere.36
If wabalum and tabalum are used in their literal, concrete meaning,
there is often little difference in meaning observable between them; it is
mainly in their metaphorical use that they differ: wabalum occurs in nu-
merous expressions with metaphorical meaning, many of which imply an

34 Cf. AHw. 1297 s. v. G. There are a few instances with an ending -a, but none of them
can be interpreted as a ventive indicating motion towards the location of the speech
event ([i-t ]a-ab!-ba-la AGH 110: 24; it-ba-la Ee I 68; RA 46, 34: 34 // AfO 33, 17: 87
and elsewhere in this text; lit-b-alla AOAT 2, 48 no. 115: 4 and i11-ta-b-b-alla SpTU
1, 33: 12 (colophons).
35 tarm is hardly attested at all after OB/OA, cf. AHw. 1336b s. v. tar(m) I G 4 (two in-
stances, one in an Amarna letter and one ambiguous).
36 The indirect reflexive meaning of -t- is not attested in the historical period of Akkadian
(Streck, p. 109 note 58); it is completely replaced by the analytical expressions ana
ramani- and ana pagri-, just as the direct reflexive is almost replaced by these reflexive
nouns. There are two reasons to assume that it did exist in an earlier stage of the
language: first, because of the typical polysemy of reflexive markers, which usually
serve to indicate a wide spectrum of detransitive categories, and second, because of
the very existence of tabalum and tarm, which are so typically used as indirect refle-
xives. There is therefore no reason to doubt that -t- could still have indirect reflexive
function at the moment in prehistory when these two verbs emerged (see the end of
this section).
92 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

inanimate or abstract subject.37 tabalum is mainly used in its literal mean-

ing of transporting something from one place to another, and normally
has a human subject.38
There are two important exceptions to the restriction of tabalum to
human subjects, however. First, it is used in OB and SB with water as
subject. Here the interpretation to take along fits perfectly: the flood or
river does not take away the debris but takes it along in its water,39 cf.:
(21) VOM 184: 8 tussa ebur ze-er belija milum it-ba-al if the flood had taken along (> car-
ried off) my lords grain harvest (OB Mari)
(22) AOB 1, 76 = RIMA 1, 144: 40 (the wall became weak, collapsed and) milu it-bal-su
the flood took it along (or: carried it off , according to CAD M/2 72a s. v. milu A
2e-2; royal inscription of Adad-narari I, also ibid. 142: 8).

The second exception is found in OA in relation to prices (Veenhof

1972, 438 ff): tabalum (without ventive) denotes the cost of a purchase, as
in (23). In contrast, wabalum (also without ventive) is used to denote the
price (a piece of) merchandise will yield, as in (24):
(23) Prag I 480: 12 f 16 gn emarum it-ba-al sixteen shekels was the price of (lit. cost) a
donkey
(24) TC 3, 114: 9 f emarum 10 gn k.babbar ula ula -ba-al the donkey will not fetch
a price of ten shekels of silver (tr. Veenhof 1972, 438).

On the basis of the semantic relationship between wabalum and

tabalum proposed here, we might take wabalum in relation to prices as
simply to carry (no ventive denoting the absence of direction) and
tabalum als to carry along or to carry off, but in this case the taking
along or away of the price that is actually done by the seller is transferred
to the purchased item, so that it is personified to a certain extent.40 What
is important is that none of these cases speaks against the basic meaning
of tabalum proposed here.41

37 For metaphorical uses of wabalum, see CAD A/1 10 ff s. v. abalu A, with large concen-
trations under nos. 1c, 3 and 5. For tabalum, see below and note 41.
38 The pair warm/tarm does not show a corresponding difference, but this is doubtless
due to the fact that both verbs are gradually becoming obsolete: for warm, an unusu-
ally large part of its attestations come from Akkadian texts of the third millennium, cf.
AHw. 1473a s. v. war(m) II G; in OB and OA, it is already rare. tarm is still common
in OB and OA, but hardly attested later, cf. note 35.
39 In this context wabalu may also be found, cf. AHw. 1451 f s. v. G 9.
40 Merchandise is often personified in OA, at least to the extent that it commonly appears
as subject of verbs that normally have animate subjects, such ela<um to go/come up
and paarum to come together.
41 The intransitive use of tabalu with celestial bodies as subject in the meaning to disap-
pear or the like (AHw. 1297b s. v. G 7) is no exception since they are personified.
Moreover, all instances are SB, except ZA 43, 310: 9, where ilum is subject.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 93

As to the formal background of tabalum and tarm, they can be ex-

plained as Gt-stems of biliteral G-stems with -t- in its original prefixed
position: itbal < *ji-t-bal, itru < *ji-t-ru (cf. GAG 103g). These forms
have the same structure as the G preterite of triliteral verbs and were
therefore reinterpreted as such: *ji-tbal and ji-tru, which led to a new
paradigm based on the roots TBL and TRu. Likewise, the imperatives
tabal and taru are originally biliteral Gt imperatives with prefixed ta-: ta-
bal, ta-ru.42

3. The alleged durative/habitual function of the Gt-stem

The second problematic function of Gt is the durative/habitual func-

tion, posited (with clear reservations) in GAG 92 f. Streck lists 55 Gt-
stems under the label intensive (p. 5365), but he consistently provides
this term with a question mark, and there are at least two very good rea-
sons for doing so. The first is that degrees of intensity are subjective and
very difficult to infer on the basis of context alone; we have to rely on in-
direct evidence such as co-ordination with other intensive forms (which
obviously raise the same problem), contrast with basic forms to express a
climax and correspondence with reduplicated forms in Sumerian
(Streck, p. 86 f). The second reason is that it is unclear how this function
is related to the other, basically detransitive, function of -t-.
In order to understand the use of the Gt-stem in SB in general and its
alleged intensive function in particular, we have to examine the develop-
ment of the infixed -t- forms in a wider diachronic perspective. As
already noted above in 2.4, we can only speculate about the origin of
-t-, but it is certainly one of the oldest formatives of Afroasiatic. By the
time of the emergence of Proto-Semitic as a (sub)family, it must have had
a considerable period of development behind it. In fact, there are indi-
cations that as an affix to the basic stem it had lost part of its strength al-
ready in Proto-Semitic and was being replaced by other markers.43

42 If tarm were an original triliteral verb with t as first and u as third radical, its impera-
tive should be turu, like udu rejoice! from adm (u/u). Actually, turu is used beside
taru, which shows that tarm is gradually losing its status as a secondary verb and
is adapted to the regular paradigm (e. g. amtam ittika tu-ru AbB 1, 30: 10 take the slave
girl with you, but awilam ta-ru AbB 1, 50: 15 take the man along!, not: bringe den
Mann!, as Kraus translates, since there is no ventive; the context is unclear, however).
43 There is no opportunity to elaborate here, but I hope to come back to this issue in the
near future in a more complete study of the derived stems.
94 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

In Akkadian, the Gt-stem is already in decline in the earliest available

documents. In its passive function, it has been replaced by the N-stem
so completely that it is not even certain that the Gt-stem was ever used
for the passive of the G-stem in the first place (cf. Streck, p. 108). In its
reflexive and reciprocal function, it is challenged by analytical markers,
such as reflexive ramanu and reciprocal aum aam and later aamis
(Streck, pp. 9698). In OB and OA, the Gt-stem still manages to hold its
ground against these markers, mainly as a reciprocal. In the later periods,
there is a sharp contrast between non-literary and literary texts. In the
non-literary texts that we have from Middle Babylonian (MB) and Middle
Assyrian (MA) onwards, the analytical markers dominate the scene al-
most completely.
In literary texts of SB, on the other hand, we witness a remarkable
upsurge of Gt forms, amply documented by Streck (e. g., pp. 8992, es-
pecially the table on p. 90). This must be regarded as a literary and
(partly) artificial phenomenon, not only because the forms in question
(disregarding a few ambiguous instances) only occur in literary texts, but
also because they show two rather peculiar features.
The first one is that many of the SB Gt-stems, in particular the new
ones which did not yet occur in earlier periods, conspicuously lack the
reflexive and reciprocal function which characterizes the vast majority of
older Gt-stems. Actually, they are used without any observable differ-
ence from the corresponding G form. Common Gt G pairs that show
this alternation are litbus labis is dressed in, wears (Streck, p. 42 f no.
76 and p. 46 f no. 86), itmutis atmis quickly (p. 55 no. 116), bitrum
barim is multicoloured (p. 54 no. 109), kitmus kamis kneels down
(p. 55 no. 118), litmud lamid is acquainted with (p. 63 no. 151), ritpus
rapas is wide (p. 56 no. 125), sitkun sakin is situated, provided with
(p. 64 no. 158), sitmur samur is raging (p. 57 no. 128), sitru sari is
proud, glorious (p. 58 no. 131), and various others.
Generally speaking, these are the cases for which von Soden in GAG
92 f tentatively suggests the meaning etwas fr die Dauer tun and
which Streck (p. 53 ff) lists under the heading Gt als Intensiv(?) in Op-
position zu G. The contexts of many of these Gt forms, however, con-
tain few or no indications pointing to a higher degree of durativity or in-
tensity than the corresponding G forms. Rather, their essential semantic
feature seems to be their otherness, i. e. the fact that they are different
from the forms used in everyday language. There are various indications
that this was a quality which was highly appreciated by the creators
of Babylonian literature. Recall the well-known use of the elative
forms with the pattern suprus (Speiser 1952), the use of the S-stem as a
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 95

literary alternative to the factitive D-stem (Kouwenberg 1997, 271 ff) and
the purely literary SD-stem (GAG 95a/b; Kouwenberg 1997, 336 ff).
The elatives in particular are closely parallel to these literary Gt forms,
and raise the same problems with regard to their interpretation as inten-
sive (see Kouwenberg 1997, 291 f note 39). Whether these forms are
intensive or not may be hard to establish on the basis of the context, but
they were certainly felt as more expressive, not only because they have
more substance, but also because they sounded different from the usual
forms.
How can we explain that these forms gave up the normal function of
the Gt-stem? An important factor in this process was doubtless the
weakening of reciprocal meaning signalled by Streck (p. 84 ff): in prin-
ciple, a reciprocal action requires at least two participants who act upon
each other and are therefore both subject (A and B speak with each
other); however, many reciprocal verbs in Akkadian are also used in the
singular, with one participant encoded as subject and the other intro-
duced by itti (isti in Assyrian): A speaks with B; finally, the reciprocal
marker is also used if there is no other participant and becomes a fossil-
ized part of the verb, as happened with atwm.44
Several of the intensive Gt-stems may be derived from weakened
reciprocal forms. Streck (p. 84 f) mentions, among others, the statives
mitgur, qitrub, kitmul, pitrus and sitnu, which are used in SB in contexts
where the G-stem would also be appropriate. One could perhaps add
kissur it is joined (p. 46 no. 85) and kitmur it is heaped up (p. 62 no.
147). Far more common than these words are the originally reflexive
pairs litbus labis (see above) and itlup alip is dressed in, wears
(p. 45 no. 84), which are also used indiscriminately.45
Even a small number of such roughly equivalent G/Gt pairs are suf-
ficient to provide a model which the Babylonian scribes could exploit to
create further Gt forms that are synonyms of the corresponding G form.
These forms need not show any functional resemblance to the original

44 A clear example of the weakening of reciprocal force is the quadriliteral S-stem suplu
to (ex)change. It has a derived -t- form which in OB is reciprocal or passive (cf.
CAD S/3 321a s. v. 1a and 323a s. v. 3), but in SB it is also used in the same way as the
S form (ibid. 322b s. v. 2, the examples following the remark note with reciprocal(?)
-t-form [there is no way in which the examples in question can be interpreted as re-
ciprocal]).
45 An instance of the lexicalization of a reflexive Gt-stem in SB may also be the use of
lapatu Gt in the meaning of lapatu G to anoint, to rub (someone else) (Streck pp. 68 f
no. 176).
96 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

Gt-stems.46 This kind of development accounts for the existence of liter-

ary Gt forms without the actual Gt function.
The artificial nature of these forms is also demonstrated by a second
feature which is even more peculiar: as already observed by von Soden
(GAG 92 f) and confirmed by Streck (e. g. p. 87 f), there is a striking
preponderance of non-prefix forms among them: statives, verbal adjec-
tives, imperatives and infinitives. This is a very unusual situation, since
normally the finite forms (in Akkadian the prefix categories) are far more
frequent than the (originally) non-finite deverbal forms.
The explanation for this phenomenon can be found in another devel-
opment affecting the t -infix, namely the ever increasing importance of
the perfect with infixed -t- (in the G-stem iptaras, etc.). In MB and MA,
iptaras has developed into the regular past tense in affirmative main
clauses and has relegated the old preterite iprus to secondary (i. e. subor-
dinate, negative and interrogative) clauses.47 The resulting increase in fre-
quency of the perfect48 had a major effect on the small minority of forms
in which -t- had a different function: the prominence of -t- as a perfect
marker made it increasingly unfit for the expression of other grammatical
functions. This effect was felt in particular in the prefix conjugations of
the present (Gt: iptarras) and preterite (Gt: iptaras), which are formally
very similar (in the case of iptarras) or identical (for iptaras) to the G per-
fect. On the other hand, it hardly applies to the non-prefix forms of the
Gt-stem, which cannot possibly be confused with the G perfect.
It seems a plausible assumption that the Babylonian scribes of the
post-OB period avoided the Gt prefix forms (which hardly existed in
their everyday language), but introduced the non-prefix forms as literary,
stylistically motivated alternatives to the G-stem forms. This explains
why many of the new Gt-stems only occur in non-prefix forms.49

46 A nice witness to the artificial (in more than one sense) nature of these Gt forms may
be the stative st-nu-uq (p. 60 no. 137): the scribe in question seems to have applied the
model paris f pitrus to saniq mechanically and came up with sitnuq, forgetting to apply
the metathesis which is required in verbs starting with s (GAG 36a): the grammati-
cally correct form (which is also attested) is tisnuq.
47 See GAG 80 f and the grammars of the separate dialects.
48 From this period onwards, the term perfect is obviously inappropriate and no more
than a meaningless label. It should rather be called simple past or preterite, if this
were not to cause confusion, cf. Streck (1995, 212 note 487).
49 This explanation seems more likely than Strecks tentative suggestion (p. 88) that
many of these Gt forms come from lexical lists where they are quoted in the infinitive,
and that statives and verbal adjectives are particularly suitable for describing, which is
an important task of the intensive Gt. Both these claims are highly disputable.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 97

So there is a causal relationship between the virtual extinction of the

Gt-stem in the latest stage of Akkadian and the rise of the perfect: the
Gt-stem, which was in decline anyhow, started declining even more
when iptaras became the primary category for the past tense. This is con-
firmed by the fact that not only the Gt-stem but also the Dt-, St1- and
St2-stems have virtually disappeared in the MB and MA period, except
from literary texts.50
The most eloquent illustration of this development is the emergence
in Neo-Assyrian of forms with a double -t- infix: in this dialect, the
simple -t- could only be used as perfect; all its other functions were
given up. However, where detransitive -t- was functionally indispensable,
as in the Dt-stem and the St1-stem, which are the only means of passiv-
izing a D-stem and an S-stem, respectively, it was differentiated from the
perfect marker -t- by doubling it: -tat-, doubtless on the model of the
perfect Dt, which had a double -t- all along (uptatarris). This led to the
appearance of the Dtt-stem (e. g. ug-da-ta-me-ru CTN 5, p. 41: 11 they
have been finished off), the Stt-stem (lu-u-sa-te-li SAA 16, 207: 9 let
him be promoted, i. e. /lussateli/ < *lustateli, from el S to promote,
lit. to cause to go up) and the Gtt-stem (mainly in the former Gt-stem
of alaku, e. g. li-it-ta-at-lak SAA 15, 24: s. 1 let him go (away), but
also li-sa-ta-al-s CTN 5, p. 65: 4 let (the king) interrogate him, i. e.
/lissatalsu/ < listatalsu).
So there are two peculiarities about the literary Gt forms the ab-
sence of its detransitive function and the predominance of non-prefix
forms which lend strong support to the claim that the use of the Gt-
stem in literary style is partly archaizing and partly artificial. The archaiz-
ing part comprises those Gt-stems (mostly reflexive and reciprocal)
which were also pack and parcel of the OB everyday and literary lan-
guage and continue to be used as part of the literary vocabulary of SB.
The artificial part concerns the use of Gt as it was extended to new verbs
that are neither reflexive nor reciprocal but simply literary, i. e. extraordi-
nary (in the primary sense of the word) alternatives to the G-stem. This
also explains why the alleged intensive/durative function suddenly ap-
pears in SB, although there is not a single convincing instance in earlier
dialects.

50 For the rapid decline of St2 after the OB period, see Streck (1994, 190 f).
98 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

4. Conclusion

The conclusion of this lengthy account about the separative and du-
rative/intensive functions of the Gt-stem is that the former does not exist
and the latter is a secondary development largely unrelated to the original
function of the t -infix. The functions that remain are unproblematic: they
reveal the Gt-stem as a straightforward marker of detransitivity, the very
function it also has in other Semitic languages. This does not mean that
all problems concerning the t -infix have been solved: the questions of
how the preterite of the Gt-stem could become a member of the G-stem
paradigm as a kind of perfect, and how -t- could acquire iterative function
in the non-present forms of the -tan-stems still need to be answered.
This, however, goes far beyond the scope of this article.

5. Review of Strecks Die akkadischen Verbalstmme mit ta-Infix

As indicated above, the occasion which has prompted these reflections on the Gt-stem
is the publication of a new study of the t -stems in Akkadian, Strecks Die akkadischen
Verbalstmme mit ta-Infix. This short book mainly consists of a catalogue and (where
necessary) a discussion of Akkadian verb forms belonging to the derived stems with
infixed -t-, the Gt-, Dt-, St- and Nt-stems. It springs from the same source as Strecks
well-known study of the St2-stem (Streck 1994), and is roughly organized in the same
way. The greatest part is taken up by the Gt-stem, which has so far not been dealt with in
detail. Streck discusses some problematic aspects of its form, gives a list of attested Gt-
stems according to function, and further devotes some pages to its relationship to the
N-stem, to a comparison with t -stems in other Semitic languages, and to the question of
the Grundfunktion of the t -infix. His account of the other t -stems is basically limited to
an enumeration of new instances, which have been collected from an impressive number
of text editions published in the last few decades, and a discussion of the problematic
ones.
As a catalogue of Belegstellen on the basis of the established ideas about the t -stems,
this book is a useful supplement to the existing grammars and dictionaries and will be
welcomed by the linguist as well as the philologist. The linguist will be glad to have a de-
tailed description of the use of the Gt-stem in the different periods of Akkadian and an
up-to-date collection of material; the philologist will profit from consulting it when con-
fronted with one of the many ambiguous and difficult verb forms with infixed -t-. On the
other hand, as a contribution to our understanding of the nature of the Gt-stem, it falls
short of expectations. What I miss in particular is a critical reflection on the functions
themselves which are traditionally ascribed to this stem. I hope to have shown in the
preceding sections that such a reflection may be quite a profitable activity.

Finally, I would like to comment on a few points of detail, arranged according to page
number:
P. 22 no. 8: I see no reason why we should derive i-t-a-za in Sargonic royal inscrip-
tions from maasum (with the change imtasa > ittasa which is unlikely for the third mil-
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 99

lennium) rather than from aazum Gt, the existence of which is proved indirectly by taa-
zum battle.
P. 24 no. 17: The stative forms of atu partners attested in OA and OB do not justify
positing a Gt-stem verb at, as assumed by Streck, following AHw. 22b s. v. [a II]:
they are derived from the noun atu, as correctly noted by CAD A/2 493a s. v. at. This
cannot be inferred from the OB forms, which are ambiguous in this respect, but it is
shown by the OA form at-u-a-ni /atu<ani/ BIN 6, 16: 7 we are partners, where the
regular Gt form should be *ata<ani (cf. pitrus versus pl. pitarsu, i. e. 1st p. pl. *pitarsani).
This being said, there is a perplexing OA form which may even be a Gtn-stem of such a
verb: in kt n/k 404: 5 we read istu saaranini a-ta-u-a-ni since we were young, we have
been partners. This form can only be interpreted as /atau<ani/, with geminated --,
and is therefore similar to a Gtn stative (*pitarrusani ) (i. e. we have always been
partners?). Does this mean that there is a verb *a after all, which also has a Gtn-
stem?51 Or should we derive a-ta-u-a-ni directly from a plural noun *atau, with a gemi-
nated plural like au brothers and abba<u fathers?
P. 31 no. 41: The form (i) ni-is-sa-bi-it ARM 28, 155: 19 let us contend with each
other cannot be a Gt form, but must be a N-stem on account of i (the Gt-stem has issa-
bat), even though this makes it the only example of sabatu N with reciprocal meaning in
OB (while it is common in OA).
P. 35 no. 53: The form to which this item refers (i-t-zi-bu- ArOr. 41, 312: 3 // 313: 10
they have divorced) is not a reciprocal Gt-stem of ezabum to leave each other but an
N perfect /ittezibu/, cf. the N preterite i-n-{zi }-bu (/innezibu/) St. Alp, p. 484: 3 they di-
vorced. It is parallel to the N perfect ittaprusu with the same meaning (e. g. TC 3, 214a: 3),
cf. Streck, p. 94 no. 232. As a Gt form, it could only be a present (*itezzibu), which is in-
appropriate in the context.
P. 4853: Here the alleged separative Gt-stems are listed, the most important ones of
which were already discussed in section 2; for pataru Gt, see note 23. There is one point
of detail which calls for additional comment, namely, the use of Gt present forms (all in
late literary texts) in contexts where we would expect a Gtn present. The two main
examples are alaku Gt in expressions such as idaka ni-it-tal-lak Ash. Nin. A i 62 we will
walk on your side (p. 49 no. 93), and red Gt in omen apodoses of the type Enlil matati
ana lemutti us-ta-di SpTU 2, 35: 1 Enlil will lead these lands to misfortune (p. 53 no.
106). This us-ta-di interchanges with us.mes (cf. SpTU 2, 35: 43, for instance), which is
the logogram of red Gtn (irteneddi), cf. CAD R 233b s. v. red A 1d. Therefore, it is likely
to be a semi-logographic spelling of irtaddi, the Gt present of red, as Streck (p. 53) ar-
gues. Both Gt present forms, ittallak and irtaddi, are interpreted by Streck as separative
(pp. 49 and 53, respectively). I would rather suggest that they are additional instances of
the phenomenon discussed by Streck on pp. 1013 under the heading Gtn statt Gt,
namely the confusion which arose in the later period of SB between the Gt-stem and the
Gtn-stem. These Gt present forms illustrate the same confusion but the other way
around: Gt instead of Gtn. Since in this period the Gt-stem was virtually extinct in every-
day language (cf. section 3), it is hardly surprising that the writers of these literary texts do
not always strictly adhere to distinctions existing in a much earlier period of the language.

51 Note that normally the Gtn-stem is iterative to the G-stem and that there is not a single
(other) instance (dubious cases and peripheral Akkadian excepted) of a Gtn form that
is iterative to a Gt-stem.
100 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

P. 52 no. 103: Instead of assuming a separative Gt-stem of abaku to transport,

I prefer to derive the forms quoted by Streck from a verb tabaku to weaken, to bring
down, or the like, as proposed by J.-M. Durand, ARM 26/1 p. 170 note 18 (branler)
for the two OB instances from Mari.52 There may also be an instance in Neo-Assyrian (ta-
ta-ab-kan-ni SAA 13, 190: 25e), and two instances of the D-stem, one in OA (-ta!-bi-ik-su
TPAK 1, 70: 7 according to J. G. Dercksen, AfO 44/5, 336b) and one in Ugarit (-tab-
bi-ka4-an-ni Ugar. 5 p. 268 no. 162: 37).
P. 78 no. 207: rmum Gt to love each other: contra Streck and CAD R 140b s. v.
rmu A 1b, I agree with W. Mayer, Or. 72 (2003) 234, that the forms lu-ur-ta-a-ma MIO
12, 50: 14, lu-ur-{ta-a-ma} ibid. 48: 3 and lu-ur-ta-ma St. Reiner p. 422: i 3 should be ana-
lyzed as Gt rather than Gtn forms and therefore belong to the reciprocal instances of no.
21 on p. 25 f, for the following reasons. First, the Gtn-stem of II/< verbs always has a
strong < in OB.53 Therefore, lu-ur-ta-a-ma is ambiguous but lu-ur-ta-ma can only be Gt;
the principle of simplicity suggests that all three forms are Gt-stems. Second, the inter-
pretation as Gtn leaves the ending -a in all three forms unaccounted for. Third, the most
straightforward translation is let us love each other or let us make love, as in MIO 12,
50: 14 ti-bi lu-ur-ta-a-ma come on, lets make love. A similar form occurs in an OB
letter from Mari:

(25) ARM 26/2, p. 259 no. 404: 5 f alkamma ina GN lu-na-am-ra come here that we may
meet in GN.54
At first sight, these translations might seem inappropriate, because the prefix points to
a first person singular. Consider, however, the following OB clause:

(26) YOS 11, 24: 22 lu-u-ta-al-sa suis ina majjalim kilallani let the two of us merrily
make love in bed55

52 However, the forms quoted by Durand are not Gtn presents of abaku (which would be
itanabbak) but G presents of this verb tabaku.
53 Cf. GAG 98h, where it is stated that < in der Regel fest [ist]. Many examples can be
found in CAD S/1 282a s. v. slu A 5 and 357a s. v. smu A 2b. Actually, there do not
seem to be any weak Gtn forms of II/< verbs in OB. I do not agree with any of Strecks
eindeutige Belege (p. 80) of such weak forms: the four OB instances are perfectly ex-
plainable as Gt forms: a pret. in ABIM 34: r. 9 and TIM 4, 33: 22 (dajjanu) is-ta-lu-
the judges deliberated, an imp. pl. in Frank, Strassburger Keilschrifttexte 12: r. 5
(better known as AbB 10, 163: 18) si-ta-la deliberate!, and a present subjunctive in
ARM 5, 81: 22 is-ta-lu (i. e. /istallu/ ) (which) he will consider (cf. J.-M. Durand,
LAPO 17, p. 473: (la dcision) laquelle aboutira sa rflexion). The two OA instan-
ces of ni-is-ta-la- which Streck quotes as weak forms must be cancelled: KTS 1, 21b: 17
is now read ni-is-ta-na-me-ma according to K. R. Veenhof s collation apud C. Michel,
LAPO 19, p. 312 note 297, and KTS 1, 11: 17 has ni-is-ta-{al}-ma according to Larsen,
OAA 1, 100: 11, i. e. it is a G perfect (/nista<al/) or a Gtn preterite (/nista<<al/).
54 Joanns (ad 1. p. 261: 6) translates: Viens, que je (te) rencontre GN, smuggling in a
2nd p. object which is not in the Akkadian text, and ignoring the -a ending.
55 The verb alasum in this meaning is a hapax (cf. Streck p. 67 no. 165), but the context
leaves little doubt about its overall meaning. There is a verb alasum to press, to
squeeze, which Hecker (TUAT II/5, p. 749) also posits for this passage in a metapho-
rical meaning. I do not find the extraction of oil from sesame seed a very appropriate
metaphor for love-making, and I would rather suggest that this alasum is a by-form of
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 101

The form kilallani in (26) is a nominative dual with the suffix pronoun -ni, proving that
lu-u-ta-al-sa cannot be singular. Actually, its ending looks like a dual as well. Since the
other instances also involve two persons, it seems that these forms can be analyzed as 1st
p. sg. precatives which have been made into dual forms by the addition of the dual ending
-a, apparently for specific use in reciprocal verbs, which often have a dual subject. More-
over, this seems to be the only possible way to account for the -a ending of these forms:
rmum and amarum N do not normally have a ventive, and even though ventive endings
occasionally appear in contexts where they seem to have little or no motivation (Kouwen-
berg 2002, 231 ff), it is hardly conceivable that precisely all these forms should have such
a ventive, and all of them without the mimation which we would expect in these OB texts.
I propose, therefore, that we analyze these forms as 1st p. dual forms specifically used in
reciprocal verbs.56 Admittedly, to be quite certain of the correctness of this idea we have
to wait for the appearance of some additional forms.57
P. 79/80 no. 212: for the alleged weak Gtn forms quoted by Streck, see note 53.
P. 98: qaqqadum head as reflexive noun is also found occasionally in OA, cf. Veenhof
(1972, 265 f). An additional instance is AKT 3, 67: 31 a-q-q-d-k la tasaut do not fear
for yourself .
P. 99/101: I agree with Streck that there are several reasons (in particular, a handful of
plene spellings and parallels in Arabic) to assume that the pattern pitras has a long a.
However, OA reminds us not to take anything for granted: cf. m-it-i-ri-is Prag I 837: 19
and St. Nimet zg p. 143: 15, i. e. mitiris < *mitaris with vowel assimilation and
therefore with short a!
P. 111 no. 281: The form -ta-a-ru-ni (OA) is difficult to fit into the context and ir-
regular in form (no vowel assimilation): J. G. Dercksen (AfO 44/5 [1997/8] 335a) plaus-
ibly suggests -ta-e!-ru-ni from tuarum D to return, to give back.

elesum to swell, to rejoice, which can have an erotic meaning judging by its deriva-
tion ulsu in ulsa epesu to make love (CAD E 224a s. v. epesu 2c ulsu). Similar doublets
include enebu and anabu to sprout, to flourish, ebelu and abalu to bind, lmu and
laamu to eat, etc. I must admit, however, that Heckers metaphorical interpretation
is supported by a striking parallel in Mehri: Johnstones lexicon contains a verb segat
(Akk. saatu to press!), which he glosses to sleep with (a woman); to squeeze
s[ome]t[hing] so that the butter or oil is pressed out of it (Johnstone 1987, 360 s. v. se-
gat).
56 They may be secondary forms derived from 1st p. sg. forms simply by adding the dual
ending -a. It should not go unmentioned, however, that Modern South Arabian
languages have exactly the same form for the 1st p. sg. dual subjunctive; cf. Mehri l-er-e
kezo:, Harsusi elbedo: (cf. Johnstone 1975, 17). It also combines the dual ending -o (<
e e e
a) with the prefix of the 1st p. sg. These dual forms are not restricted to reciprocal con-
texts, so perhaps the Akkadian forms are the last vestige of an earlier more widespread
1st p. dual form. However, such a form is not normally reconstructed for Proto-Semi-
tic, cf. Lipinski (1997, 370 f).
57 The more so because the text containing my trump card lutalsa also contains a similar
form, but with -m: YOS 11, 24: 20 alkam lu-un-ne-ed-ra-am kima libbi iqbiam i nipus
come, let us(?) embrace and do what my (sic) heart has told me. As it stands, this
is an unambiguous ventive; however, a ventive has no obvious function here, and the
resulting translation (come here, that I may be embraced and let us do , or: so that
we may do , or the like) sounds rather awkward. So I would prefer to regard this
form as a hypercorrect spelling (lu-un-ne-ed-ra-am) of lunnedra, parallel to lutalsa.
102 N. J. C. Kouwenberg

P. 112 no. 299: For the Dt form ut-ta-<a-pa in SpTU 3, 100: 15, the meaning zum Ver-
dorren gebracht werden is inappropriate in the context (nairasu ut-ta-<a-pa his nostrils
). The gloss na<apu = sas in the next line indicates that there is also a homonymous
verb which denotes a sound. This is in keeping with the fact that verbs denoting sounds
have a certain predilection for occurring in the Dt-stem, cf. Kouwenberg (1997, 283 and
333 s. v. na<apu).
P. 119 no. 364: The form ultassas, occurring in omen apodoses and usually rendered by
translations such as he will become worried, is analyzed by Streck (and the diction-
aries) as a St2-stem of asasu to be(come) worried. This is possible, since ultassas can
stand for earlier *ustassas. However, in an OB letter we find the verb forms la -la-as-sa-
su-ni-in-n [i ] (write to my ugulamartu) that they (the soldiers) do not me (RA 90, 122:
13) and la ul-ta-as-sa-as let (PN) not be -ed (ibid. 18). These are apparently a D- and
a Dt-stem of a verb lussusu, for which the context suggests a meaning to trouble, to
hassle. So nothing prevents us from deriving ultassas from lussusu, as long as no other,
unambiguous, St2 forms of asasu and no spellings with us- appear.58

Bibliography

Bybee, J. (1985): Morphology. A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Ty-
pological Studies in Language 9. Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Faltz, L. M. (1985): Reflexivization. A Study in Universal Syntax. New York/London.
Fleisch, H. (1979): Trait de Philologie Arabe, vol. II: Pronoms, Morphologie Verbale,
Particules. Beyrouth.
Goetze, A. (1936): The t-form of the Old Babylonian Verb, JAOS 56, 297334.
Haspelmath, M. (1990): The grammaticization of passive morphology, Studies in Lan-
guage 14, 2572.
Heine, B. (1999): Polysemy in African languages, in: Z. Frajzyngier/T. Curl (eds.), Recip-
rocals, Forms and Functions. Typological Studies in Language 41. Amsterdam/Phil-
adelphia, 129.
Huehnergard, J. (2002): izuzzum and itulum, in: T. Abusch (ed.), Riches Hidden in Secret
Places. Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Memory of Thorkild Jacobsen. Winona Lake,
161185.
Johnstone, T. M. (1975): The Modern South Arabian Languages, Afroasiatic Linguistics
1/5, 93121.
Johnstone, T. M. (1987): Mehri Lexicon and English-Mehri Word-list. London.
Kemmer, S. (1993): The Middle Voice. Typological Studies in Language 23. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia.
Kouwenberg, N. J. C. (1997): Gemination in the Akkadian Verb. Studia Semitica Neer-
landica. Assen.
Kouwenberg, N. J. C. (2002): Ventive, Dative and Allative in Old Babylonian, ZA 92,
200240.

58 Since ultassas only occurs as a complete omen apodosis, the range of possible mea-
nings is unduly large. In a commentary (Izbu p. 212: 26 f), it is equated with is-sal-la-a<
and is-sal-la-a< with i-mar-ra-as he will be ill, distressed, disappointed, etc. This ex-
cludes neither asasu nor the proposed meaning of lussusu.
 Reflections on the Gt-stem in Akkadian 103

Lipinski, E. (1997): Semitic Languages. Outline of a Comparative Grammar. Orientalia

Lovanensia Analecta 80. Leuven.
Poebel, A. (1939): Studies in Akkadian Grammar. Assyriological Studies 9. Chicago.
Ryckmans, G. (1938): Grammaire accadienne. Louvain.
Schladt, M. (1999): The typology and grammaticalization of reflexives, in: Z. Frajzyn-
gier/T. S. Curl (eds.), Reflexives, Forms and Functions. Typological Studies in Lan-
guage 40. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 103124.
Speiser, E. A. (1952): The Elative in West Semitic and Akkadian, JCS 6, 8192 (reprinted
in Oriental and Biblical Studies [Philadelphia 1967] 465493).
Streck, M. P. (1994): Funktionsanalyse des akkadischen St2-Stamms, ZA 84, 161197.
Streck, M. P. (1995): Zahl und Zeit. Grammatik der Numeralia und des Verbalsystems im
Sptbabylonischen. Cuneiform Monographs 5. Groningen.
Ungnad, A. (1949): Grammatik des Akkadischen. Mnchen.
Ungnad, A./L. Matous (1964): Grammatik des Akkadischen. Mnchen.
Veenhof, K. R. (1972): Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and its Terminology. Studia et
Documenta ad Iura Orientis Antiqui Pertinentia 10. Leiden.