/bi-/ might have been stated to own locative-terminative force in place of purely locative force getting /ba-/, but Thomsen claims with the p. 184, this "is probably maybe not automatically employed for how come out-of concord with an excellent loc.-label. otherwise loc. noun, nevertheless alternatively caters to the newest semantic differentiation of one's verb. "
>ba(I): have an effective separative mode. From inside the OBGT they directly correlates having >Akkadian t-stems. (Thomsen, after the Jacobsen, confuses t-stems >for the Akkadian primary.) Its reputation are immediately after the fresh new ventive >marker yards and then the b was soaked up: m-ba- > m-ma, incase this really is >followed by a 2nd people pronoun, it gets meters-ma > m-mu (so ba >isn't necessarily quick to recognize). Regarding the absence of the latest >ventive marker they occupies the first reputation throughout the chain, right after which it >cannot always be recognized off ba(II). A clear situation is >ba-ne-su8-be2-en-de3-dentro de = ni-it-tal2-lak cu-nu-ci = we go away >on it (OBGT VII, 305). > >ba(II): has actually a good stative/couch potato setting. For the OBGT VI, it is made because of the >a c-stalk stative/passive, or an Nt-base passive. Frequently, ba(II) >occupies the initial updates on the strings. ba-ab-gar, ba-ab-gar-re-en >= cuckun, cuckunaku = he's been place / I have been placed >(from the some body unnamed). The fresh new versions ba-gar, ba-gar-re-durante, . ba-na-gar, >ba-na-gar-re-durante during the OBGT VI, traces 160-165, are unclear; they could >as an alternative feel interpreted since ba(I), especially the 2nd series, >which is one or two-new member, therefore the OB grammarian, whom made her or him >by Nt-stem passives, at the same time kept new ambiguity. > >Your statement clearly relates to ba(II), however, I do not think it is merely an excellent >question of preference, just after one has place ba(I) apart. Needless to say, it is >method away from my resources and you can my personal competence to evaluate my personal above >syntactical/lexical claims through the unilingual messages. > >With my all the best, >Peter J. Huber
I imagined of all the intransitive sentences you to definitely avoid that have ba-Sources, such as ba-gul, "it had been lost". Since you say, those fall-in the category of ba(II).
Many thanks for making the effort to try to clarify so it topic. I could try to summarize just what Hayes is wearing pages 162 and you may 256: The guy agrees that scholars provides speculated there can be a few ba- conjugation prefixes which can be homonyms. "One is viewed chiefly inside the couch potato sentences, the other for the shorter definable contexts." And additionally, the newest conjugation prefix bi2- both happens that have affordable phrases in the locative-terminative instance together with conjugation prefix ba- possibly happens having moderate phrases about locative case. "It datingranking.net/hot-or-not-review/ is primarily the pattern regarding co-occurrence with added several scholars in conclusion you to bi2- and you can ba- are not of the same review as the most other conjugation prefixes, and generally are most likely composed of more than one function." Therefore you to style of ba- are normally taken for an element you to signifies the newest locative instance. Having a beneficial separative meaning, you expect discover Sumerian moderate phrases ending for the ablative postposition -ta.
>I became wanting to know for many who you are going to respond to a question for me personally. I've understand someplace >that the name "Eden" try an excellent Sumerian term. > >At the very least, if the Eden, Adam, and/or Eve are Sumerian words, is it possible you >excite let me know whether they have an interpretation/meaning?
EDIN try an excellent Sumerian word, nonetheless it is the steppe belongings between them streams, the spot where the herd animals grazed.
