6 Sumerian verbal morpho-syntax: an overview
6.4 Oblique cases and oblique case pronouns
Five or six oblique cases are represented in the paradigms. The table gives the case morphemes and their combination with pronouns:
Singular Plural
Case Morpheme 3rd 1st 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd
comitative /da/, /di/ (n)da ? eda ? ? ?
dative /*ra/ na ma ra ? ? ?
terminative /ši/ (n)ši m.muši m.ueši (neši) m.meši m.ueneši locative /ø/, /a/ (na) ? ea ne(a) me(a) ene
“locative-2” /ø/? (ni) ? ri ? ? ?
ablative /ta/ (b)ta ? ? ? ? ?
Among the Sumerian oblique cases, the comitative is rendered by the Akkadian accusative, the others ordinarily by the Akkadian dative. If the locative refers to the end point of a motion, the Akkadian dative is used, if to the start point, the accusative.
The paradigms do not quite suffice to establish the meaning of the cases, so some names and interpretations were borrowed from the modern grammars. But on the basis of the paradigms alone one can show that for verbs of motion the terminative refers to the end point of the motion, while the locative can refer either to the start or the end point. It is difficult to avoid the impression that the dative refers to the beneficiary of an action, and spotty occurrences of /ta/ suggest an ablative function.
It is not entirely clear whether /ri/ is a mere variant of the dative /ra/, or more likely, whether it has a function comparable to that of the locative. For clarity, I list /ri/ in a separate row entitled “locative-2”, borrowing a term used by Edzard (2003: 93)[6] for a variant of /ni/ (which, however, is not attested in our paradigms). On the basis of the paradigms, the name “dative-2” would also have been possible.
Very often the pronouns /n/ and /b/ (for the latter see Section 9.4.4) are not expressed in the writing.
Often this will be due to elision or assimilation, but conceivably the inclusion of self-evident pronouns is optional.
Note that the OB grammarians keep the 1st person pronoun separate from the ventive /m/, see Section 8.5 for the terminative case and Section 9.2.1 for the dative case. This goes against the modern view.
OB Sumerian Grammar 6. Sumerian verbal morpho-syntax: an overview.
Some comments on the spelling, use, and other peculiarities of the cases follow.
Comitative. When followed by the subordinative marker /ni/, the comitative marker /da/ becomes /di/.
Dative. The Sumerian dative seems to use three different forms for the three persons, but behind them a hypothetical morpheme /*ra/ can be reconstructed. The restoration of the 3rd person dative as *n-ra >
n-na > na is based on otherwise unmotivated occurrences of double-n writings as in VI§11: gar-mu-un-na-[ab] = šuknaššum = “place it for him here!”. For the restoration of the 1st person dative as *m-ra
> ma-ra > ma see Section 9.2.1. I reconstruct the 2nd person dative as *we-ra > ra.
Terminative. 1st and 2nd persons require ventive /m/. Plural forms are attested in N3513+N3592 only.
Locative. Plural forms are attested in OBGT VII, see Section 5. The 2nd person singular /ea/ is attested in IX§35-36, see Section 10.5.3. This shows that the OB grammarians distinguished 2nd person
singular locative from dative /ra/. The 3rd person singular is expected to be /na/. Its occurrence is expected but unproven, since in the paradigms it cannot be separated from the homographic dative, see the ambiguous examples in Sections 10.4 and 10.5. Therefore I have enclosed it in parentheses.
OBGT VII does not use /ši/ with plural objects and mostly leaves the case unmarked. With plural objects and imperatives the OI recension (only that recension, and only with imperatives) uses a marker /a/ in place of /ši/. I assume that the marker of the unmarked case really is /a/, but that the vowel mostly is elided. This unmarked case can also have ablative meaning, when combined with /ba/, see Section 8.7. Apparently this case can reference both the starting point and the end point of a motion, and to distinguish it from the terminative, “locative” therefore seems to be an apposite name.
Locative-2. The morpheme /ri/ is curious. In the paradigms, half of its occurrences apparently have a subordinative meaning, referring to a 2nd person subordinate subject:
VI§19, VI§20=X 18, VIII§10, IX§20, IX§45, IX§47.
This is plainly evident in the causative indicative paragraph
IX§45 sa2 i-ri-ib2-du11 u2-ša-ak-ši-id(!)-ka somebody(b) made you reach Pt Š 2A
sa2 i-ri-du11 (ušakšidka) I made you reach Pt Š 2A
which displays a transitive construction with infix conjugation, and is probable in the others.
Another half clearly have a different meaning, referring to a 2nd person indirect object:
VIII§20-23, IX§42-43, IX§46, of which a clear example is given by
VIII§20 kas4 mu-ri-in-du11 ⸢il⸣-su-ma-[kum] he ran to you here Pt G V 2D kas4 mu-ri-d[u11] (alsumakkum) I ran to you here Pt G V 2D Two more paragraphs (VIII§12 and IX§22) are ambiguous. See the discussion of these paragraphs in Section 10.4.2. Thus, it appears that there are two homophonous or homographic morphemes /ri/, belonging to different slots: one refers to a 2nd person subordinate subject, the other to a 2nd person indirect object.
OB Sumerian Grammar 6. Sumerian verbal morpho-syntax: an overview.
But what is the meaning of /ri/? In principle, when referring to an indirect object, /ri/ might be an alternative to /ra/, maybe merely an alternative spelling (remember that the comitative /da/ has the variant /di/). But note that in IX§31 /ra/ and in IX§46 /ri/ are used with identical Akkadian
translations:
IX§31 sa2 ma-ra-an-du11 ik-šu-da-ak-ka he reached for you here Pt G V 2A sa2 ma-ra-du11 (akšudakka) I reached for you here Pt G V 2A IX§46 sa2 mu-ri-in-du11 ik-šu-da-ka he reached you here Pt G V 2A sa2 mu-ri«-in»-du11 (akšudakka) I reached you here Pt G V 2A The fact that the two forms occur in the same paradigm may suggest a differentiation in meaning, rather than merely in spelling.
With verbs of motion /ri/ might also be used as an alternative to /ši/. Compare in particular the two paragraphs:
VIII§20 kas4 mu-ri-in-du11 ⸢il⸣-su-ma-[kum] he ran to you here Pt G V 2D kas4 mu-ri-d[u11] (alsumakkum) I ran to you here Pt G V 2D VII§31 mu-e-ši-gen il-li-ka-ak-kum he came to you Pt G V 2D mu-e-ši-gen-en al-li-ka-ak-kum I came to you Pt G V 2D The correponding case here overlaps with the terminative and may suggest a locative function. In my opinion the use made of /ri/ in OBGT VIII and IX therefore suggests locative rather than dative use, but the evidence does not suffice to prove it.
In this connection I must draw attention to a remark by Edzard (2003: 99)[6]. He proposes homography (not necessarily homophony) between his “directive” /ni/ (a case covering my “subordinative”) and what he calls “locative-2” /ni/. He points out that they may follow each other and do not fall into the same slot, so that they definitely have to be kept apart (p. 102). Our paradigms do not offer instances of Edzard’s “locative-2” /ni/, and Edzard does not list /ri/ in the “locative-2” column (p. 93). But in our paradigms an analogous homography/homophony and differentiation of slots would seem to apply to /ri/. In any case, they document a clear separation between the subordinative /ri/ and the
“locative-2” /ri/, placing them in different slots and using causative or non-causative translations, respectively.
Ablative. The case morpheme /ta/ is peculiar and shall be discussed in detail in Section 9.4.4. It occurs in three paragraphs only and according to them must have ablative/separative meaning. In our
paradigms it is the only indirect object case morpheme used with impersonal reference. Note that according to Thomsen (1984: 230)[21] the ablative-instrumental prefix /ta/ has inanimate reference only.
OB Sumerian Grammar 6. Sumerian verbal morpho-syntax: an overview.