Sumerian language
Sumerian | |
---|---|
𒅴𒂠 Emeg̃ir | |
Native to | Sumer and Akkad |
Region | Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq) |
Era | Attested from c. 2900 BC. Went out of vernacular use around 1700 BC; used as a classical language until about 100 AD.[1] |
Dialects | |
Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform | |
Language codes | |
ISO 639-2 | sux |
ISO 639-3 | sux |
uga | |
Glottolog | sume1241 |
Sumerian (Sumerian:
Stages
The history of written Sumerian can be divided into several periods:[8]
- Archaic Sumerian – c. 2900 BC to c. 2600 BC
- Old or Classical Sumerian – c. 2600 BC to c. 2100 BC
- Neo-Sumerian – c. 2100 BC to c. 1700 BC
- Post-Sumerian – after c. 1700 BC.
Archaic Sumerian is the earliest stage of inscriptions with linguistic content, beginning with the Early Dynastic period from about 2900 BC to 2600 BC. It succeeds the
The term "Post-Sumerian" is meant to refer to the time when the language was already extinct and preserved by Mesopotamians only as a
Classification
Sumerian is accepted to be a
It has also been suggested that the Sumerian language descended from a late
Writing system
Development
From about 2900 BC, the cuneiform symbols were developed using a wedge-shaped stylus to impress the shapes into wet clay. This cuneiform ("wedge-shaped") mode of writing co-existed with the
The cuneiform script was adapted to Akkadian writing beginning in the mid-third millennium. Over the long period of bi-lingual overlap of active Sumerian and Akkadian usage the two languages influenced each other, as reflected in numerous loanwords and even word order changes.[32]
Transcription
Depending on the context, a cuneiform sign can be read either as one of several possible
Not all epigraphists are equally reliable, and before publication of an important treatment of a text, scholars will often arrange to collate the published transcription against the actual tablet, to see if any signs, especially broken or damaged signs, should be represented differently.
Historiography
This section needs additional citations for verification. (December 2023) |
The key to reading
In 1838
By 1850, however,
In 1855 Rawlinson announced the discovery of non-Semitic inscriptions at the southern Babylonian sites of Nippur, Larsa, and Uruk.
In 1856, Hincks argued that the untranslated language was agglutinative in character. The language was called "Scythic" by some, and, confusingly, "Akkadian" by others. In 1869, Oppert proposed the name "Sumerian", based on the known title "King of Sumer and Akkad", reasoning that if Akkad signified the Semitic portion of the kingdom, Sumer might describe the non-Semitic annex.
Credit for being first to scientifically treat a bilingual Sumerian-Akkadian text belongs to Paul Haupt, who published Die sumerischen Familiengesetze (The Sumerian family laws) in 1879.[36]
Ernest de Sarzec began excavating the Sumerian site of Tello (ancient Girsu, capital of the state of Lagash) in 1877, and published the first part of Découvertes en Chaldée with transcriptions of Sumerian tablets in 1884. The University of Pennsylvania began excavating Sumerian Nippur in 1888.
A Classified List of Sumerian Ideographs by R. Brünnow appeared in 1889.
The bewildering number and variety of phonetic values that signs could have in Sumerian led to a detour in understanding the language – a
François Thureau-Dangin working at the Louvre in Paris also made significant contributions to deciphering Sumerian with publications from 1898 to 1938, such as his 1905 publication of Les inscriptions de Sumer et d'Akkad. Charles Fossey at the Collège de France in Paris was another prolific and reliable scholar. His pioneering Contribution au Dictionnaire sumérien–assyrien, Paris 1905–1907, turns out to provide the foundation for P. Anton Deimel's 1934 Sumerisch-Akkadisches Glossar (vol. III of Deimel's 4-volume Sumerisches Lexikon).
In 1908, Stephen Herbert Langdon summarized the rapid expansion in knowledge of Sumerian and Akkadian vocabulary in the pages of Babyloniaca, a journal edited by Charles Virolleaud, in an article "Sumerian-Assyrian Vocabularies", which reviewed a valuable new book on rare logograms by Bruno Meissner.[38] Subsequent scholars have found Langdon's work, including his tablet transcriptions, to be not entirely reliable.
In 1944, the Sumerologist Samuel Noah Kramer provided a detailed and readable summary of the decipherment of Sumerian in his Sumerian Mythology.[39]
Friedrich Delitzsch published a learned Sumerian dictionary and grammar in the form of his Sumerisches Glossar and Grundzüge der sumerischen Grammatik, both appearing in 1914. Delitzsch's student, Arno Poebel, published a grammar with the same title, Grundzüge der sumerischen Grammatik, in 1923, and for 50 years it would be the standard for students studying Sumerian. Poebel's grammar was finally superseded in 1984 on the publication of The Sumerian Language: An Introduction to its History and Grammatical Structure, by Marie-Louise Thomsen. While much of Thomsen's understanding of Sumerian grammar would later be rejected by most or all Sumerologists, Thomsen's grammar (often with express mention of the critiques put forward by Pascal Attinger in his 1993 Eléments de linguistique sumérienne: La construction de du11/e/di 'dire') is the starting point of most recent academic discussions of Sumerian grammar.
More recent monograph-length grammars of Sumerian include Dietz-Otto Edzard's 2003 Sumerian Grammar and Bram Jagersma's 2010 A Descriptive Grammar of Sumerian (currently digital, but soon to be printed in revised form by Oxford University Press). Piotr Michalowski's essay (entitled, simply, "Sumerian") in the 2004 The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's Ancient Languages has also been recognized as a good modern grammatical sketch.
There is relatively little consensus, even among reasonable Sumerologists, in comparison to the state of most modern or classical languages. Verbal morphology, in particular, is hotly disputed. In addition to the general grammars, there are many monographs and articles about particular areas of Sumerian grammar, without which a survey of the field could not be considered complete.
The primary institutional lexical effort in Sumerian is the Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary project, begun in 1974. In 2004, the PSD was released on the Web as the ePSD. The project is currently supervised by Steve Tinney. It has not been updated online since 2006, but Tinney and colleagues are working on a new edition of the ePSD, a working draft of which is available online.
Phonology
Assumed phonological or morphological forms will be between slashes //, with plain text used for the standard Assyriological transcription of Sumerian. Most of the following examples are unattested.
Phonemic inventory
Modern knowledge of Sumerian phonology is flawed and incomplete because of the lack of speakers, the transmission through the filter of
Consonants
Early Sumerian is conjectured to have had at least the consonants listed in the table below. The consonants in brackets are reconstructed by some scholars based on indirect evidence; if they existed, they were lost around the Ur III period in the late 3rd millennium BC.
Bilabial | Alveolar | Postalveolar | Velar | Glottal | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nasal
|
m ⟨m⟩ | n ⟨n⟩ | ŋ ⟨g̃⟩ | |||
Plosive
|
plain | p ⟨b⟩ | t ⟨d⟩ | k ⟨g⟩ | (ʔ) | |
aspirated | pʰ ⟨p⟩ | tʰ ⟨t⟩ | kʰ ⟨k⟩ | |||
Fricative
|
s ⟨s⟩ | ʃ ⟨š⟩ | x ⟨ḫ~h⟩ | (h) | ||
Affricate
|
plain | t͡s ⟨z⟩ | ||||
aspirated | t͡sʰ? ⟨ř~dr⟩ | |||||
Tap
|
ɾ ⟨r⟩ | |||||
Liquid | l ⟨l⟩ | |||||
Semivowel | (j) |
- a simple distribution of six stop consonants in three places of articulation, originally distinguished by aspiration. In the late 3rd millennium BC, the unaspirated stops are thought to have become voiced in most positions (although not word-finally):[41]
- p (voiceless aspirated bilabial plosive),
- t (voiceless aspirated alveolar plosive),
- k (voiceless aspirated velar plosive),
- As a rule, /p/, /t/ and /k/ did not occur word-finally.[42]
- b (voiced unaspirated bilabial plosive), later voiced;
- d (voiced unaspirated alveolar plosive), later voiced;
- g (voiced unaspirated velar plosive), later voiced.
- p (
- a phoneme usually represented by <ř> (sometimes written dr), which became /d/ or /r/ in northern and southern dialects, respectively, after the Old Akkadian period. It was first reconstructed as a voiced alveolar tap /ɾ/, but Bram Jagersma argues that it was a voiceless aspirated alveolar affricate because of its reflection in loanwords in Akkadian, among other reasons,[43] and this view is accepted by Zólyomi (2017: 28).
- a simple distribution of three nasal consonantsin similar distribution to the stops:
- m (bilabial nasal),
- n (alveolar nasal),
- g̃ (frequently printed ĝ due to typesetting constraints, increasingly transcribed as ŋ) /ŋ/ (likely a velar nasal, as in sing, it has also been argued to be a labiovelar nasal [ŋʷ] or a nasalized labiovelar[44]).
- m (
- a set of three sibilants:
- s, likely a voiceless alveolar fricative,
- z, likely a voiceless unaspirated alveolar affricate, /t͡s/, as shown by Akkadian loans from /s/=[t͡s] to Sumerian /z/. In early Sumerian, this would have been the unaspirated counterpart to <ř>.[45] Like the stop series /b/, /d/ and /g/, it is thought to have become voiced /dz/ in some positions in the late 3rd millennium.[46]
- š (generally described as a voiceless postalveolar fricative, /ʃ/, as in ship)
- ḫ (a velar fricative, /x/, sometimes written <h>)
- two liquid consonants:
- l (a lateral consonant)
- r (a rhotic consonant), which Jagersma argues was realised as a tap [ɾ] because of various evidence suggesting its phonetic similarity to /t/ and /d/.[47]
The existence of various other consonants has been hypothesized based on graphic alternations and loans, though none have found wide acceptance. For example,
Very often, a word-final consonant was not expressed in writing—and was possibly omitted in pronunciation—so it surfaced only when followed by a vowel: for example the /k/ of the genitive case ending -ak does not appear in e2 lugal-la "the king's house", but it becomes obvious in e2 lugal-la-kam "(it) is the king's house" (compare liaison in French). Jagersma believes that the lack of expression of word-final consonants was originally mostly a graphic convention,[52] but that in the late 3rd millennium voiceless aspirated stops and affricates (/pʰ/, /tʰ/, /kʰ/ and /tsʰ/ were, indeed, gradually lost in syllable-final position, as were the unaspirated stops /d/ and /g/.[53]
Vowels
The vowels that are clearly distinguished by the cuneiform script are /a/, /e/, /i/, and /u/. Various researchers have posited the existence of more vowel phonemes such as /o/ and even /ɛ/ and /ɔ/, which would have been concealed by the transmission through Akkadian, as that language does not distinguish them.[54][55] That would explain the seeming existence of numerous homophones in transliterated Sumerian, as well as some details of the phenomena mentioned in the next paragraph.[56] These hypotheses are not yet generally accepted.[44] Phonemic vowel length has also been posited by some scholars.[57]
There is some evidence for
Syllables could have any of the following structures: V, CV, VC, CVC. More complex syllables, if Sumerian had them, are not expressed as such by the cuneiform script.
Grammar
Ever since its decipherment, research of Sumerian has been made difficult not only by the lack of any native speakers, but also by the relative sparseness of linguistic data, the apparent lack of a closely related language, and the features of the writing system.
Sumerian verbs have a
Nominal morphology
Noun phrases
The Sumerian noun is typically a one or two-syllable root (igi "eye", e2 "house, household", nin "lady"), although there are also some roots with three syllables like šakanka "market". There are two grammatical genders, usually called human and non-human (the first includes gods and the word for "statue" in some instances, but not plants or animals, the latter also includes collective plural nouns), whose assignment is semantically predictable.
The
noun | adjective | numeral | genitive phrase | relative clause | possessive marker | plural marker | case marker |
---|
An example may be /dig̃ir gal-gal-g̃u-ne-ra/ ("god great (
The plural markers are /-(e)ne/ (optional) for nouns of the human gender. Non-human nouns are not marked by a plural suffix. However, plurality can also be expressed with the adjective ḫi-a "various", with the plural of the copula /-meš/, by reduplication of the noun (kur-kur "all foreign lands") or of the following adjective (a gal-gal "all the great waters") (reduplication is believed to signify totality) or by the plurality of only the verb form. Plural reference in the verb form occurs only for human nouns.
The generally recognised case markers are:
case | ending |
---|---|
absolutive | /-Ø/ |
ergative | /-e/ (only with animates) |
allative | /-e/ (only with inanimates) |
genitive | /-ak/[a] |
equative | /-gin/ |
dative | /-r(a)/ |
terminative | /-(e)š(e)/ |
comitative | /-da/ |
locative | /-a/ |
ablative | /-ta/[b] |
More endings are recognised by some researchers; e.g. Bram Jagersma notes a separate adverbiative case in /-eš/ and a second locative used mostly with infinite verb forms.[65]
Additional spatial or temporal meanings can be expressed by genitive phrases like "at the head of" = "above", "at the face of" = "in front of", "at the outer side of" = "because of" etc.: bar udu ḫad2-ak-a = "outer.side sheep white-genitive-locative" = "in the outer side of a white sheep" = "because of a white sheep".
The embedded structure of the noun phrase can be further illustrated with the phrase sipad udu siki-ak-ak-ene ("the shepherds of woolly sheep"), where the first genitive morpheme (-a(k)) subordinates siki "wool" to udu "sheep", and the second subordinates udu siki-a(k) "sheep of wool" (or "woolly sheep") to sipad "shepherd".[66]
Pronouns
The attested personal pronouns are:
independent | possessive suffix/enclitic | |
---|---|---|
1st person singular | g̃e26-e | -g̃u10 |
2nd person singular | ze2-e | -zu |
3rd person singular animate | a-ne or e-ne | -(a)-n(i) |
3rd person singular inanimate | -b(i) | |
1st person plural | -me | |
2nd person plural | -zu-ne-ne | |
3rd person plural animate | a/e-ne-ne | -b(i) |
3rd person plural inanimate | -b(i) |
For most of the suffixes, vowels are subject to loss if they are attached to vowel-final words.
Numerals
Sumerian has a combination decimal and sexagesimal system (for example, 600 is 'ten sixties'), so that the Sumerian lexical numeral system is sexagesimal with 10 as a subbase.[67] Numerals and composite numbers are as follows:
number | name | explanation notes |
---|---|---|
1 | diš, deš,[68] dili | |
2 | min, mina[69] | |
3 | eš[70] | |
4 | limmu, lím[71] | |
5 | ia, í[72] | |
6 | aš[73] | ía 'five' + aš 'one' |
7 | imin[74] | ía 'five' + min 'two' |
8 | ussu[75] | |
9 | ilimmu[74] | ía/í (5) + limmu (4) |
10 | u, hà, hù, a, u[72] | |
11 | u-diš (?) | |
20 | niš | |
30 | ušu | |
40 | nimin | 'less two [tens]' |
50 | ninnu | 'less ten' |
60 | g̃iš(d), g̃eš(d)[76] | |
600 | g̃eš(d)u | ten g̃eš(d) |
1000 | lim | |
3600 | šar |
Verbal morphology
General
The Sumerian
The Sumerian verb also makes a binary distinction according to a category that some regard as tense (past vs present-future), others as
The verbal root is almost always a monosyllable and, together with various
slot | modal prefix | conjugation prefix | pronominal prefix | dimensional prefix | pronominal prefix | stem | future/imperfective | pronominal suffix | nominalizer |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
common
morphemes |
Ø-, ḫa-, u-, ga- |
mu-, i- (e-,a-), ba-, bi- |
-Ø-, -e-/r-, -n-, -b- |
-a-, -da-, -ta-, |
-Ø-, -e-/r-, -n-, -b- |
-e(d)- | -en -en -Ø, -e -enden |
-a |
Note also that more than one pairing of a pronominal prefix and a dimensional prefix may occur within the verb chain.
Modal prefixes
The modal prefixes are :
- /Ø-/ (indicative),
- /nu-/ and /la-/, /li-/ (negative; /la/ and /li/ are used before the conjugation prefixes ba- and bi2-),
- /ga-/ (cohortative, "let me/us"),
- /ḫa-/ or /ḫe-/ with further assimilation of the vowel in later periods (precativeor affirmative),
- /u-/ (prospective "after/when/if", also used as a mild imperative),
- /na-/ (negative or affirmative),
- /bara-/ (negative or vetitive),
- /nuš-/ (unrealizable wish?) and
- /ša-/ with further assimilation of the vowel in later periods (affirmative?).
Their meaning can depend on the TA.
"Conjugation prefixes"
The meaning, structure, identity and even the number of "conjugation prefixes" have always been a subject of disagreements. The term "conjugation prefix" simply alludes to the fact that a
The starting point of most analyses are the obvious facts that the 1st person dative always requires mu-, and that the verb in a "passive" clause without an overt
Pronominal and dimensional prefixes
The dimensional prefixes of the verb chain basically correspond to, and often repeat, the case markers of the noun phrase. Like the latter, they are attached to a "head" – a pronominal prefix. The other place where a pronominal prefix can be placed is immediately before the stem, where it can have a different allomorph and expresses the absolutive or the ergative participant (the transitive subject, the intransitive subject or the direct object), depending on the TA and other factors, as explained below. However, this neat system is obscured by the tendency to drop or merge many of the prefixes in writing and possibly in pronunciation as well.
The generally recognized dimensional prefixes are shown in the table below; if several occur within the same verb complex, they are placed in the order they are listed in.
dative | comitative | ablative | terminative | directive |
---|---|---|---|---|
/-a-/?[c] | -da- | -ta- | -ši- (early -še3-) | /-i-/? |
The pronominal prefixes are:
prefix | Notes | |
---|---|---|
1st person singular | -Ø-?, -e-? | Sometimes thought to represent a glottal stop /ʔ/ (so Zólyomi, e.g. 2017, and Jagersma, e.g. 2009). |
2nd person singular | -e-, -r- | |
3rd person singular animate | -n- | |
3rd person singular inanimate | -b- | |
1st person plural | -me- | For a subject or object (immediately before the stem), the singular is used instead. |
2nd person plural | -re-? | |
3rd person plural | -ne- |
The morphemes /-n-/ and /-b-/ are clearly the prefixes for the 3rd person singular animate and inanimate respectively; the 2nd person singular appears as -e- in most contexts, but as /-r-/ before the dative (-ra-), leading some[83] to assume a phonetic /-ir-/ or /-jr-/. The 1st person may appear as -e-, too, but is more commonly not expressed at all (the same may frequently apply to 3rd and 2nd persons); it is, however, cued by the choice of mu- as conjugation prefix[82] (/mu-/ + /-a-/ → ma-). The 1st, 2nd and 3rd plural infixes are -me-, -re?- and -ne- in the dative[82] and perhaps in other contexts as well,[83] though not in the pre-stem position (see below).
An additional exception from the system is the prefix -ni- which corresponds to a noun phrase in the locative – in which case it doesn't seem to be preceded by a pronominal prefix – and, according to Gábor Zólyomi and others, to an animate one in the directive – in the latter case it is analyzed as pronominal /-n-/ + directive /-i-/. Zólyomi and others also believe that special meanings can be expressed by combinations of non-identical noun case and verb prefix.[84] Also according to some researchers[85] /-ni-/ and /bi-/ acquire the forms /-n-/ and /-b-/ (coinciding with the absolutive–ergative pronominal prefixes) before the stem if there isn't already an absolutive–ergative pronominal prefix in pre-stem position: mu-un-kur9 = /mu-ni-kur/ "he went in there" (as opposed to mu-ni-kur9 = mu-ni-in-kur9 = /mu-ni-n-kur/ "he brought in – caused [something or someone] to go in – there".
Pronominal suffixes and conjugation
The pronominal suffixes are as follows:
marû | ḫamṭu | |
---|---|---|
1st person singular | /-en/ | |
2nd person singular | /-en/ | |
3rd person singular | /-e/ | /-Ø/ |
1st person plural | /-enden/ | |
2nd person plural | /-enzen/ | |
3rd person plural | /-ene/ | /-eš/ |
The initial vowel in all of the above suffixes can be assimilated to the root.
The general principle for pronominal agreement in conjugation is that in ḫamṭu TA, the transitive subject is expressed by the prefix, and the direct object by the suffix, and in the marû TA it is the other way round; as for the intransitive subject, it is expressed, in both TAs, by the suffixes and is thus treated like the object in ḫamṭu and like the subject in marû (except that its third person is expressed, not only in ḫamṭu but also in marû, by the suffixes used for the object in the ḫamṭu TA). A major exception from this generalization are the plural forms – in them, not only the prefix (as in the singular), but also the suffix expresses the transitive subject.
Additionally, the prefixes of the plural are identical to those of the singular – /-?-/ or /-e-/, /-e-/, /-n-/, /-b-/ – as opposed to the -me-, -re-?, -ne- that are presumed for non-pre-stem position – and some scholars believe that the prefixes of the 1st and second person are /-en-/ rather than /-e-/ when they stand for the object.[86] Before the pronominal suffixes, a suffix /-e(d)-/ with a future or related modal meaning can be inserted, accounting for occurrences of -e in the third-person singular marû of intransitive forms; because of its meaning, it can also be said to signal marû in these forms.[83]
The use of the personal affixes in conjugation can be summarised as follows:
ḫamṭu | marû | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Direct object | Intransitive subject | Transitive subject | Direct object | Intransitive subject | Transitive subject | |
1st sing | ...-en | ...-en | -Ø/-e-... | -Ø/-e-... | ...-en | ...-en |
2nd sing | ...-en | ...-en | -e-... | -e-... | ...-en | ...-en |
3rd sing
animate |
...-Ø | ...-Ø | -n-... | -n-... | ...-Ø | ...-e |
3rd sing inanimate | ...-Ø | ...-Ø | -b-... | -b-... | ...-Ø | ...-e |
1st pl | ...-enden | ...-enden | -Ø/e-...-enden | -Ø/-e-...? | ...-enden | ...-enden |
2nd pl | ...-enzen | ...-enzen | -e-...-enzen | -e-...? | ...-enzen | ...-enzen |
3rd pl (animates only) | ...-eš | ...-eš | -n-...-eš | -ne-...? | ...-eš | ...-ene |
Examples for TA and pronominal agreement: (ḫamṭu is rendered with past tense, marû with present): /i-gub-en/ ("I stood" or "I stand"), /i-n-gub-en/ ("he placed me" or "I place him"); /i-sug-enden/ ("we stood/stand"); /i-n-dim-enden/ ("he created us" or "we create him"); /mu-e?-dim-enden/ ("we created [someone or something]"); i3-gub-be2 = /i-gub-ed/ ("he will/must stand"); ib2-gub-be2 = /i-b-gub-e/ ("he places it"); /i-b-dim-ene/ ("they create it"), /i-n-dim-eš/ ("they created [someone or something]" or "he created them"), /i-sug-eš/ ("they stood" or "they stand").
Confusingly, the subject and object prefixes (/-n-/, /-b-/, /-e-/) are not commonly spelled out in early texts, although the "full" spellings do become more usual during the Third Dynasty of Ur (in the Neo-Sumerian period) and especially during the Late Sumerian period. Thus, in earlier texts, one finds mu-ak and i3-ak (e-ak in early dynastic Lagash) instead of mu-un-ak and in-ak for /mu-n-ak/ and /i-n-ak/ "he/she made", and also mu-ak instead of mu-e-ak "you made". Similarly, pre-Ur III texts also spell the first- and second-person suffix /-en/ as -e, making it coincide with the third person in the marû form.
Stem
The verbal stem itself can also express grammatical distinctions. The plurality of the absolutive participant
With respect to TA marking, verbs are divided in four types; ḫamṭu is always the unmarked TA.
- The stems of the 1st type, regular verbs, do not express TA at all according to most scholars, or, according to M. Yoshikawa and others, express marû TA by adding an (assimilating) /-e-/ as in gub-be2 or gub-bu vs gub (which is, however, nowhere distinguishable from the first vowel of the pronominal suffixes except for intransitive marû 3rd person singular).
- The 2nd type express marû by partial reduplication of the stem, e.g. kur9 vs ku4-ku4.
- The 3rd type express marû by adding a consonant, e.g. te vs teg̃3.
- The 4th type use a suppletive stem, e.g. dug4 vs e. Thus, as many as four different suppletive stems can exist, as in the admittedly extreme case of the verb "to go": g̃en ("to go", ḫamṭu sing.), du (marû sing.), (e-)re7 (ḫamṭu plur.), sub2 (marû plur.)
Other issues
The nominalizing suffix /-a/ converts non-finite and finite verbs into participles and relative clauses: šum-ma "given",[87][d] mu-na-an-šum-ma "which he gave to him", "who gave (something) to him", etc.. Adding /-a/ after the future/modal suffix /-ed/ produces a form with a meaning similar to the Latin gerundive: šum-mu-da = "which will/should be given". On the other hand, adding a (locative-terminative?) /-e/ after the /-ed/ yields a form with a meaning similar to the Latin ad + gerund (acc.) construction: šum-mu-de3 = "(in order) to give".
The
The imperative mood construction is produced with a singular ḫamṭu stem, but using the marû agreement pattern, by turning all prefixes into suffixes: mu-na-an-sum "he gave (something) to him", mu-na-e-sum-mu-un-ze2-en "you (plur.) gave (something) to him" – sum-mu-na-ab "give it to him!", sum-mu-na-ab-ze2-en "give (plur.) it to him!" Compare the French vous le lui donnez, but donnez-le-lui![82]
Syntax
The basic word order is
Dialects
The standard variety of Sumerian was Emegir (𒅴𒂠 eme-gir₁₅). A notable variety or sociolect was Emesal (𒅴𒊩 eme-sal), possibly to be interpreted as "fine tongue" or "high-pitched voice".[90] Other terms for dialects or registers were eme-galam "high tongue", eme-si-sa "straight tongue", eme-te-na "oblique[?] tongue", etc.[91]
Emesal is used exclusively by female characters in some literary texts (that may be compared to the female languages or language varieties that exist or have existed in some cultures, such as among the Chukchis and the Garifuna). In addition, it is dominant in certain genres of cult songs such as the hymns sung by Gala priests.[92] The special features of Emesal are mostly phonological (for example, m is often used instead of g̃ [i.e. [ŋ]], as in me instead of standard g̃e26 for "I"), but words different from the standard language are also used (ga-ša-an rather than standard nin, "lady").[93]
Syllabary
The table below shows signs used for simple syllables of the form CV or VC. As used for the Sumerian language, the cuneiform script was in principle capable of distinguishing at least 16 consonants,[94][95] transliterated as
as well as four vowel qualities, a, e, i, u.
Ca | Ce | Ci | Cu | aC | eC | iC | uC | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a 𒀀, á 𒀉 |
e 𒂊,
|
i 𒄿, í=IÁ 𒐊 |
u 𒌋, |
a 𒀀, á 𒀉 |
e 𒂊,
|
i 𒄿, í=IÁ 𒐊 |
u 𒌋 , |
|||
b- | ba 𒁀, |
be=BAD 𒁁, |
bi 𒁉, |
bu 𒁍, |
ab 𒀊, áb 𒀖 |
eb=IB 𒅁, éb=TUM 𒌈 |
ib 𒅁, íb=TUM 𒌈 |
ub 𒌒, úb=ŠÈ 𒂠 |
-b | |
d- | da 𒁕, dá=TA 𒋫 |
de=DI 𒁲, dé , |
di 𒁲, dí=TÍ 𒄭 |
du 𒁺, |
ad 𒀜, ád 𒄉 |
ed=Á 𒀉 | id=Á 𒀉, íd=A.ENGUR 𒀀𒇉 |
ud 𒌓, úd=ÁŠ 𒀾 |
-d | |
g- | ga 𒂵, gá 𒂷 |
ge=GI 𒄀, |
gi 𒄀, |
gu 𒄖, |
ag 𒀝, ág 𒉘 |
eg=IG 𒅅, ég=E 𒂊 |
ig 𒅅, íg=E 𒂊 |
ug 𒊌 | -g | |
ḫ- | ḫa 𒄩, ḫá=ḪI.A 𒄭𒀀, U 𒌋 ,ḫa4=ḪI 𒄭 |
ḫe=ḪI 𒄭, ḫé=GAN 𒃶 |
ḫi 𒄭, ḫí=GAN 𒃶 |
ḫu 𒄷 | aḫ 𒄴, áḫ=ŠEŠ 𒋀 |
eḫ=AḪ 𒄴 | iḫ=AḪ 𒄴 | uḫ=AḪ 𒄴, úḫ 𒌔 |
-ḫ | |
k- | ka 𒅗, |
ke= KI 𒆠 ,ké=GI 𒄀 |
ki 𒆠 ,kí=GI 𒄀 |
ku 𒆪/𒂠, |
ak=AG 𒀝 | ek=IG 𒅅 | ik=IG 𒅅 | uk=UG 𒊌 | -k | |
l- | la 𒆷, |
le=LI 𒇷, lé=NI 𒉌 |
li 𒇷, lí=NI 𒉌 |
lu 𒇻, lú 𒇽 |
al 𒀠, ál=ALAM 𒀩 |
el 𒂖, él=IL 𒅋 |
il 𒅋, íl 𒅍 |
ul 𒌌, úl=NU 𒉡 |
-l | |
m- | ma 𒈠, má 𒈣 |
me 𒈨, |
mi 𒈪, mí= MUNUS 𒊩 ,mì=ME 𒈨 |
mu 𒈬, mú=SAR 𒊬 |
am 𒄠/𒂔, ám=ÁG 𒉘 |
em=IM 𒅎 | im 𒅎, ím=KAŠ4 𒁽 |
um 𒌝, úm=UD 𒌓 |
-m | |
n- | na 𒈾, |
ne 𒉈, né=NI 𒉌 |
ni 𒉌, ní=IM 𒉎 |
nu 𒉡, nú=NÁ 𒈿 |
an 𒀭
|
en 𒂗 ,én, |
in 𒅔, |
un 𒌦, ún= U 𒌋
|
-n | |
p- | pa 𒉺, |
pe=PI 𒉿, pé=BI 𒁉 |
pi 𒉿, |
pu=BU 𒁍, |
ap=AB 𒀊 | ep=IB 𒅁, ép=TUM 𒌈 |
ip=IB 𒅁, íp=TUM 𒌈 |
up=UB 𒌒, úp=ŠÈ 𒂠 |
-p | |
r- | ra 𒊏, rá=DU 𒁺 |
re=RI 𒊑, |
ri 𒊑, |
ru 𒊒, |
ar 𒅈, ár=UB 𒌒 |
er=IR 𒅕 | ir 𒅕, ír=A.IGI 𒀀𒅆 |
ur 𒌨, úr 𒌫 |
-r | |
s- | sa 𒊓, |
se=SI 𒋛, sé=ZI 𒍣 |
si 𒋛, sí=ZI 𒍣 |
su 𒋢, |
as=AZ 𒊍 | es=GIŠ 𒄑, és=EŠ 𒂠 |
is=GIŠ 𒄑, ís=EŠ 𒂠 |
us=UZ, |
-s | |
š- | ša 𒊭, |
še 𒊺, šé, |
ši=IGI 𒅆, ší=SI 𒋛 |
šu 𒋗, U 𒌋
|
aš 𒀸, áš 𒀾 |
eš 𒌍/𒐁, éš=ŠÈ 𒂠 |
iš 𒅖, íš=KASKAL 𒆜 |
uš 𒍑, úš=BAD 𒁁 |
-š | |
t- | ta 𒋫, tá=DA 𒁕 |
te 𒋼, té=TÍ 𒊹 |
ti 𒋾, |
tu 𒌅, |
at=AD 𒀜, át=GÍR gunû 𒄉 |
et=Á 𒀉 | it=Á 𒀉 | ut=UD 𒌓, út=ÁŠ 𒀾 |
-t | |
z- | za 𒍝, zá=NA4 𒉌𒌓 |
ze=ZI 𒍣, zé=ZÌ 𒍢 |
zi 𒍣, |
zu 𒍪, zú=KA 𒅗 |
az 𒊍 | ez=GIŠ 𒄑, éz=EŠ 𒂠 |
iz= GIŠ 𒄑, íz=IŠ 𒅖 |
uz=ŠE&HU 𒊻 |
-z | |
g̃- | g̃á=GÁ 𒂷 | g̃e26=GÁ 𒂷 | g̃i6=MI 𒈪 | g̃u10=MU 𒈬 | ág̃=ÁG 𒉘 | èg̃=ÁG 𒉘 | ìg̃=ÁG 𒉘 | ùg̃=UN 𒌦 | -g̃ | |
ř- | řá=DU 𒁺 | ře6=DU 𒁺 | -ř |
Sample text
Inscription by Entemena of Lagaš
This text was inscribed on a small clay cone c. 2400 BC. It recounts the beginning of a war between the city-states of Lagaš and Umma during the Early Dynastic III period, one of the earliest border conflicts recorded. (RIME 1.09.05.01)[96]
𒀭𒂗𒆤
den-lil2
𒈗
lugal
𒆳𒆳𒊏
kur-kur-ra
𒀊𒁀
ab-ba
𒀭𒀭𒌷𒉈𒆤
dig̃ir-dig̃ir-re2-ne-ke4
𒅗
inim
𒄀𒈾𒉌𒋫
gi-na-ni-ta
𒀭𒊩𒌆𒄈𒋢
dnin-g̃ir2-su
𒀭𒇋𒁉
dšara2-bi
𒆠
ki
𒂊𒉈𒋩
e-ne-sur
"
𒈨𒁲
me-silim
𒈗
lugal
𒆧𒆠𒆤
kiški-ke4
𒅗
inim
𒀭𒅗𒁲𒈾𒋫
dištaran-na-ta
𒂠
eš2
𒃷
gana2
𒁉𒊏
be2-ra
𒆠𒁀
ki-ba
𒈾
na
𒉈𒆕
bi2-ru2
"
𒍑
uš
𒉺𒋼𒋛
ensi2
𒄑𒆵𒆠𒆤
ummaki-ke4
𒉆
nam
𒅗𒈠
inim-ma
𒋛𒀀𒋛𒀀𒂠
diri-diri-še3
𒂊𒀝
e-ak
"Ush, ruler of Umma, acted unspeakably."
𒈾𒆕𒀀𒁉
na-ru2-a-bi
𒉌𒉻
i3-pad
𒂔
edin
𒉢𒁓𒆷𒆠𒂠
lagaški-še3
𒉌𒁺
i3-g̃en
"He ripped out that stele and marched toward the plain of Lagaš."
𒀭𒊩𒌆𒄈𒋢
dnin-g̃ir2-su
𒌨𒊕
ur-sag
𒀭𒂗𒆤𒇲𒆤
den-lil2-la2-ke4
𒅗
inim
𒋛𒁲𒉌𒋫
si-sa2-ni-ta
𒄑𒆵𒆠𒁕
ummaki-da
𒁮𒄩𒊏
dam-ḫa-ra
𒂊𒁕𒀝
e-da-ak
"Ningirsu, warrior of Enlil, at his just command, made war with Umma."
𒅗
inim
𒀭𒂗𒆤𒇲𒋫
den-lil2-la2-ta
𒊓
sa
𒌋
šu4
𒃲
gal
𒉈𒌋
bi2-šu4
𒅖𒇯𒋺𒁉
SAḪAR.DU6.TAKA4-bi
𒂔𒈾
eden-na
𒆠
ki
𒁀𒉌𒍑𒍑
ba-ni-us2-us2
"At Enlil's command, he threw his great battle net over it and heaped up burial mounds for it on the plain."
𒂍𒀭𒈾𒁺
e2-an-na-tum2
𒉺𒋼𒋛
ensi2
𒉢𒁓𒆷𒆠
lagaški
𒉺𒄑𒉋𒂵
pa-bil3-ga
𒂗𒋼𒈨𒈾
en-mete-na
𒉺𒋼𒋛
ensi2
𒉢𒁓𒆷𒆠𒅗𒆤
lagaški-ka-ke4
"Eannatum, ruler of Lagash, uncle of Entemena, ruler of Lagaš"
𒂗𒀉𒆗𒇷
en-a2-kal-le
𒉺𒋼𒋛
ensi2
𒄑𒆵𒆠𒁕
ummaki-da
𒆠
ki
𒂊𒁕𒋩
e-da-sur
"fixed the border with
See also
- List of languages by first written accounts
- Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary
- Sumerian literature
References
Notes
- ^ In some cases k is omitted. For example as in "e2 lugal-la (The house of the king, originally it should be e2-lugal-ak but because of auslaut and k omission, it turned into e2 lugal-la)". However k reappears if another grammatical marker is added as in "e2 lugal-la-ke-ne (with the plural marker -ene)"
- ^ The naming and number of cases vary according to differing analyses of Sumerian linguistics.
- ^ But apparently -e in the plural, see below.
- ^ The reduplication of the consonants m in this example is an auslaut. Find more info in this link #
- ^ A newer interpretation is that the last syllable in such examples is to be read -ne, i.e. 3rd person possessive -ni plus directive -e. In contrast, in the 1st and 2nd persons, we find this apparent -ni attached to 1st and 2nd person pronouns (zig-a-g̃u-ni 'as I rose'), which leads Jagersma to interpret it as an otherwise obsolete locative ending: lit. 'at my rising' (Jagersma 2009: 672–674).
Citations
- ^ "Sumerian". Archived from the original on 27 June 2013. Retrieved 2024-04-07.
- ^ JSTOR 592740. Retrieved 2023-05-09.
- JSTOR 592549.
- ^ a b c Woods C. 2006 "Bilingualism, Scribal Learning, and the Death of Sumerian". In S. L. Sanders (ed) Margins of Writing, Origins of Culture: 91–120 Chicago.
- ^ Joan Oates (1979). Babylon [Revised Edition] Thames and Hudston, Ltd. 1986 p. 30, 52–53.
- ^ The A.K. Grayson, Penguin Encyclopedia of Ancient Civilizations, ed. Arthur Cotterell, Penguin Books Ltd. 1980. p. 92
- JSTOR 23284567.
- ^ Hallo, William W., "On the Antiquity of Sumerian Literature", Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 167–76, 1962
- ^ Michalowski, P., 2006: "The Lives of the Sumerian Language", in S.L. Sanders (ed.), Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures, Chicago, 159–184
- ISBN 978-0-9927257-4-7
- ^ Piotr Michalowski, "Sumerian," The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's Ancient Languages." Ed. Roger D. Woodard (2004, Cambridge University Press). Pages 19–59
- ^ Georges Roŭ (1993). Ancient Iraq (3rd ed.). London: Penguin Books. p. 80-82.
- ^ Joan Oates (1986). Babylon (Rev. ed.). London: Thames and Hudson. p. 19.
- ^ John Haywood (2005). The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Civilizations. London: Penguin Books. p. 28.
- ^ Dewart, Leslie (1989). Evolution and Consciousness: The Role of Speech in the Origin and Development of Human Nature. p. 260.
- ^ DIAKONOFF, Igor M. (1997). "External Connections of the Sumerian Language". Mother Tongue. 3: 54–63.
- ISBN 978-1-85201-024-9.
- Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Moscow. (work in process)
- ^ Gostony, C. G. 1975: Dictionnaire d'étymologie sumérienne et grammaire comparée. Paris.
- S2CID 143879460..
- ^ Bobula, Ida (1951). Sumerian affiliations. A Plea for Reconsideration. Washington D.C.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) (Mimeographed ms.) - ISBN 83-87111-32-5..
- ^ "Urges Turks to teach culture of their race, Kemal says historians have maligned people, Sun Language revived". The News Journal. 2 March 1936. p. 24.
- ISBN 9781521532362.
- ISBN 9789027235190.
- ^ Ruhlen, Merritt (1994). The Origin of Language: Tracing the Evolution of the Mother Tongue. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p. 143.
- ^ Piotr Michalowski, "Sumerian," The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's Ancient Languages (2004, Cambridge), pg. 22
- ^ Høyrup, Jens (1998). "Sumerian: The descendant of a proto-historical creole? An alternative approach to the Sumerian problem". Published: AIΩN. Annali del Dipartimento di Studi del Mondo Classico e del Mediterraneo Antico. Sezione linguistica. 14 (1992, publ. 1994). Istituto Universitario Orientale, Napoli: 21–72, Figs. 1–3. Available in: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED368171.pdf
- ^ Monaco, Salvatore F., "Proto-Cuneiform And Sumerians", Rivista Degli Studi Orientali, vol. 87, no. 1/4, pp. 277–82, 2014
- S2CID 163985956.
- ^ Whittaker, Gordon (2008). "The Case for Euphratic" (PDF). Bulletin of the Georgian National Academy of Sciences. 2 (3). Tbilisi: 156–168. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 October 2022. Retrieved 11 December 2012.
- ^ Edzard, Dietz Otto, "Wann ist Sumerisch als gesprochene Sprache ausgestorben?", Acta Sumerologica 22, pp. 53–70, 2000
- ISBN 978-0-7914-0168-2.
- ^ Mémoires. Mission archéologique en Iran. 1900. p. 53.
- ^ Kevin J. Cathcart, "The Earliest Contributions to the Decipherment of Sumerian and Akkadian", Cuneiform Digital Library Journal, 2011
- ^ In Keilschrift, Transcription und Übersetzung : nebst ausführlichem Commentar und zahlreichen Excursen : eine assyriologische Studie (Leipzig : J.C. Hinrichs, 1879)
- ^ Prince, J. Dyneley, "The Vocabulary of Sumerian", Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 25, pp. 49–67, 1904
- ^ "Sumerian-Assyrian Vocabularies".
- ^ Kramer, Samuel Noah (1961) [1944]. Sumerian Mythology. Archived from the original on 2005-05-25. Retrieved 2005-09-23.
- ^ "Diakonoff 1976:112" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-08-03. Retrieved 2018-09-23.
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 43-45)
- ^ [Keetman, J. 2007. "Gab es ein h im Sumerischen?" In: Babel und Bibel 3, p.21]
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 43-45)
- ^ a b Michalowski, Piotr (2008): "Sumerian". In: Woodard, Roger D. (ed.) The Ancient Languages of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Aksum. Cambridge University Press. P.16
- ^ Jagersma, Bram (January 2000). "Sound change in Sumerian: the so-called /dr/-phoneme". Acta Sumerologica 22: 81–87. Archived from the original on 2023-03-19. Retrieved 2015-11-23.
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 42-43)
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 53)
- ^ a b "Sumerian language". The ETCSL project. Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of Oxford. 2005-03-29. Archived from the original on 2008-09-02. Retrieved 2011-07-30.
- ^ Attinger, Pascal, 1993. Eléments de linguistique sumérienne. p. 212 [2]()
- ^ [Keetman, J. 2007. "Gab es ein h im Sumerischen?" In: Babel und Bibel 3, passim]
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 38-41, 48-49, 53-54)
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 62-63).
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 35-36, 38)
- ^ a b c Smith, Eric J M. 2007. [-ATR] "Harmony and the Vowel Inventory of Sumerian". Journal of Cuneiform Studies, volume 57
- ^ a b c Keetman, J. 2013. "Die sumerische Wurzelharmonie". Babel und Bibel 7 p.109-154
- ^ "Zólyomi, Gábor. 2016. An introduction to the grammar of Sumerian. P. 12-13" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2018-09-16. Retrieved 2018-09-16.
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 56-57)
- ^ Keetman, J. 2009. "The limits of [ATR] vowel harmony in Sumerian and some remarks about the need of transparent data ". Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2009, No. 65
- ^ Michalowski, Piotr (2008): "Sumerian". In: Woodard, Roger D. (ed.) The Ancient Languages of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Aksum. Cambridge University Press. P.17
- Open Accesstextbook, Budapest 2017
- ^ Introduction to Sumerian grammar by Daniel A. Foxvog at CDLI
- ^ "Kausen, Ernst. 2006. Sumerische Sprache. p.9". Archived from the original on 2009-09-27. Retrieved 2006-02-06.
- ^ Zólyomi, Gábor, 1993: Voice and Topicalization in Sumerian. PhD Dissertation [3] Archived 2008-10-01 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ a b Johnson, Cale, 2004: In the Eye of the Beholder: Quantificational, Pragmatic and Aspectual Features of the *bí- Verbal Formation in Sumerian, Dissertation. UCLA, Los Angeles [4] Archived 2013-06-22 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 137)
- ISBN 978-3-11-040169-1. Retrieved 21 July 2016.
- ISBN 978-0-521-87818-0. Retrieved 2021-02-25.
- ^ Halloran pdf 1999, p. 46.
- ^ Halloran pdf 1999, p. 37.
- ^ Halloran pdf 1999, p. 8.
- ^ Halloran pdf 1999, p. 35.
- ^ a b Halloran pdf 1999, p. 11.
- ^ Halloran pdf 1999.
- ^ a b Halloran pdf 1999, p. 59.
- ^ Halloran pdf 1999, p. 20.
- ^ Jagersma (2010: 244)
- ^ See e.g. Rubio 2007, Attinger 1993, Zólyomi 2005 ("Sumerisch". In: Sprachen des Alten Orients, ed. M. Streck), PPCS Morphological model Archived October 25, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ E.g. Attinger 1993, Rubio 2007
- ^ Rubio 2007 and references therein
- ^ Zólyomi 1993; Also Woods, Cristopher, 2008: The Grammar of Perspective: The Sumerian Conjugation Prefixes as a System of Voice
- ^ a b E.g. Zólyomi 1993
- ^ a b c d e f Rubio 2007
- ^ a b c Zólyomi 2005
- ^ a b Zólyomi (2000). "Structural interference from Akkadian in Old Babylonian Sumerian" (PDF). Acta Sumerologica. 22. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-02-28. Retrieved 2008-07-20.
- ^ Zólyomi 1993, Attinger 1993
- ^ Attinger 1993, Khachikyan 2007: ("Towards the Aspect System in Sumerian". In: Babel und Bibel 3.)
- ^ "Epsd2/Sux/šum[give]". Archived from the original on 2021-09-26. Retrieved 2021-02-21.
- ^ a b Zólyomi 1993
- ^ Johnson 2004:22
- ^ Rubio 2007, p. 1369.
- ISBN 978-3-11-019400-5.
- ^ Hartmann, Henrike (1960). Die Musik der Sumerischen Kultur. p. 138.
- ISBN 978-1-57506-109-2.
- ^ Foxvog, Daniel A. Introduction to Sumerian grammar (PDF). pp. 16–17, 20–21. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 3, 2017 (about phonemes g̃ and ř and their representation using cuneiform signs).
- ^ Jagersma, A. H. A descriptive grammar of Sumerian (PDF) (Thesis). pp. 43–45, 50–51. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 25, 2015 (about phonemes g̃ and ř and their representation using cuneiform signs).
- ^ a b "CDLI-Found Texts". cdli.ucla.edu. Retrieved 2018-03-12.
- ^ "Cone of Enmetena, king of Lagash". 2020. Archived from the original on 2020-02-27. Retrieved 2020-02-27.
Bibliography
- Attinger, Pascal (1993). Eléments de linguistique sumérienne: La construction de du11/e/di. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht. ISBN 3-7278-0869-1.
- Delitzsch, Friedrich (1914). Grundzüge der sumerischen Grammatik. J. C. Hinrichs. OCLC 923551546.
- Dewart, Leslie (1989). Evolution and Consciousness: The Role of Speech in the Origin and Development of Human Nature. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-2690-7.
- Diakonoff, I. M. (1976). "Ancient Writing and Ancient Written Language: Pitfalls and Peculiarities in the Study of Sumerian" (PDF). Assyriological Studies. 20 (Sumerological Studies in Honor of Thorkild Jakobsen): 99–121. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-08-03. Retrieved 2018-09-23.
- Edzard, Dietz Otto (2003). Sumerian Grammar. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 90-04-12608-2. (grammar treatment for the advanced student)
- Halloran, John (11 August 1999). "Sumerian Lexicon" (PDF). Sumerian Language Page. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 January 2021. Retrieved 20 February 2021.
- Halloran, John Alan (2006). Sumerian Lexicon: A Dictionary Guide to the Ancient Sumerian Language. Logogram Pub. ISBN 978-0978-64291-4.
- Hayes, John (1990; 3rd revised ed. 2018), A Manual of Sumerian: Grammar and Texts. UNDENA, Malibu CA. ISBN 978-0-9798937-4-2. (primer for the beginning student)
- Hayes, John (1997), Sumerian. Languages of the World/Materials #68, LincomEuropa, Munich. ISBN 3-929075-39-3. (41 pp. précis of the grammar)
- Jagersma, B. (2009), A Descriptive Grammar of Sumerian, Universitet Leiden, The Netherlands.
- Jestin, J. (1951), Abrégé de Grammaire Sumérienne, Geuthner, Paris. ISBN 2-7053-1743-0. (118pp overview and sketch, in French)
- Langdon, Stephen Herbert (1911). A Sumerian Grammar and Chrestomathy, with a Vocabulary of the Principal Roots in Sumerian, and List of the Most Important Syllabic and Vowel Transcriptions, by Stephen Langdon ... P. Geuthner. OCLC 251014503.
- Michalowski, Piotr (1980). "Sumerian as an Ergative Language". Journal of Cuneiform Studies. 32 (2): 86–103. S2CID 164022054.
- Michalowski,Piotr, (2004), "Sumerian", The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's Ancient Languages pp 19–59, ed. Roger Woodward. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-05-2156-256-0.
- Pinches, Theophilus G., "Further Light upon the Sumerian Language.", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1914, pp. 436–40
- Prince, John D. (1908). Materials for a Sumerian lexicon with a grammatical introduction. Assyriologische Bibliothek, 19. Hinrichs. OCLC 474982763.
- Prince, J. Dynely (October 1914). "Delitzsch's Sumerian Grammar". American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures. 31 (1). U of Chicago: 67–78. S2CID 170226826.
- Rubio, Gonzalo (2007), "Sumerian Morphology". In Morphologies of Asia and Africa, vol. 2, pp. 1327–1379. Edited by Alan S. Kaye. Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, IN, ISBN 1-57506-109-0.
- Thomsen, Marie-Louise (2001) [1984]. The Sumerian Language: An Introduction to Its History and Grammatical Structure. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag. ISBN 87-500-3654-8. (Well-organized with over 800 translated text excerpts.)
- Volk, Konrad (1997). A Sumerian Reader. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico. ISBN 88-7653-610-8. (collection of Sumerian texts, some transcribed, none translated)
- Zólyomi, Gábor. 2017. An Introduction to the Grammar of Sumerian. Open Access textbook, Budapest. Link 1 Link 2
Further reading
- Friedrich Delitzsch (1914). Sumerisches glossar. J. C. Hinrichs. p. 295. Retrieved 2011-07-05.
- Ebeling, J., & Cunningham, G. (2007). Analysing literary Sumerian : corpus-based approaches. London: Equinox. ISBN 1-84553-229-5
- [5] Archived 2023-03-11 at the Wayback MachineGeng, Jinrui, "An Outline of the Synchronic and Diachronic Variations of Sumerian", 2nd International Conference on Education, Language and Art (ICELA 2022). Atlantis Press, 2023.
- Halloran, J. A. (2007). Sumerian lexicon: a dictionary guide to the ancient Sumerian language. Los Angeles, Calif: Logogram. ISBN 0-9786429-1-0
External links
- General
- Akkadian Unicode Font (to see Cuneiform text) Archive
- Linguistic overviews
- A Descriptive Grammar of Sumerian by Abraham Hendrik Jagersma (preliminary version)
- Sumerisch (An overview of Sumerian by Ernst Kausen, in German)
- Chapter VI of Magie chez les Chaldéens et les origines accadiennes (1874) by François Lenormant: the state of the art in the dawn of Sumerology, by the author of the first ever [6] grammar of "Akkadian"
- Dictionaries
- Electronic Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary (EPSD)
- Electronic Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary (EPSD) 2
- Elementary Sumerian Glossary by Daniel A. Foxvog (after M. Civil 1967)
- The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL). Includes translations.
- CDLI: Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative a large corpus of Sumerian texts in transliteration, largely from the Early Dynastic and Ur III periods, accessible with images.
- Research
- Online publications arising from the ETCSL project (PDF)
- Structural Interference from Akkadian in Old Babylonian Sumerian by Gábor Zólyomi (PDF)
- Other online publications by Gábor Zólyomi (PDF)
- The Life and Death of the Sumerian Language in Comparative Perspective by Piotr Michalowski
- Online publications by Cale Johnson (PDF)
- Eléments de linguistique sumérienne (by Pascal Attinger, 1993; in French), at the digital library RERO DOC: Parts 1–4, Part 5.
- The Origin of Ergativity in Sumerian, and the Inversion in Pronominal Agreement: A Historical Explanation Based on Neo-Aramaic parallels, by E. Coghill & G. Deutscher, 2002 at the Internet Archive
- Online publications arising from the ETCSL project (