|
ИСТИНА |
Войти в систему Регистрация |
Интеллектуальная Система Тематического Исследования НАукометрических данных |
||
The Weapon of Ninurta mi-tum and g̃iš.mittu (Lugal-e), Akkadian miṭṭu(m) and its Semitic Parallels: aspects of etymology and poeticsстатья
- Автор: СвятополкЧетвертынский Игорь Анатольевич
- Сборник: Krieg und Frieden. 52e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (International Congress of Assyriology and Near Eastern Archaeology), Münster, 17.-21. Juli 2006
- Серия: Altes Orient und Altes Testament
- Том: 401
- Год издания: 2014
- Место издания: Ugarit-Verlag Münster, Germany
- Первая страница: 779
- Последняя страница: 794
- Номер статьи: 51
- Аннотация: The analysis of the lexeme predominantly deals with the data from Sumerian, Akkadian, Hebrew (Biblical & Aggadic Midrashim) Languages. The material was drawn especially from literary & religious texts with special interest to Poetics.1. Sumerian and Akkadian languages come forward here as the pair of mutually nontranslatablebut yet connected with the cluster of languages’ translation. According to thefamous Russian and Estonian specialist in semiotics Professor Lotman, such mechanism isa minimal cell of new communications (Nachrichten in German). At the same time it is aminimal unit of such semiotic object as culture (Lotman 2000, 151). In that case not theexact translation could emerge. Yet this is an approximate equivalence that emerges. It isdetermined with the common for both systems cultural-psychological and semiotic context.Such irregular and inaccurate, but with definite conceptual respect an equivalent translationconstitutes one of essential elements of any creative thinking. They are ‘irregular’connections that stimulate off emerging of new notional connections and fundamentallynew texts.In the text of later tradition alliterative and phonetic we can see re-comprehension of theSumerian notion of the wave: at first, to kurku2, denoting the notion of rage (Late SumerianText A) and then in the Akkadian translations it would be broken to syllabic componentskur-kur-ra, containing the idea of the mountain being split and torn up.2. The staff to be of Moses was made from the stone of sanfarnon that may show the bestcorrelation with the stone of lapis-lazuli. Only ‘with the help of the Lord (i.e. God)’ Mosescould tear off this rod-staff. Hebrew motive of the lapis-lazuli branch-staff52 transformationmattē into the snake-tannīn (Ex. 7, 10) is compared to the Sumerian kenning fromLugal-e 10:su6 nun-e a-za-gin3 ru-a ušum ni2-ba gur-gurThe prince’s beard, generated by the Father-Lapis-lazuli, is the coiled up Dragon(akk. The prince’s beard, that was begotten by the pure seed of someone, on whosebody there hair were sprouted in abundance.)nB var. su6 nun-na za-gin3-na a-ri-a munšub2-bi ni2-bi […-l]um?nB var. The mouth of a lion: serpents stretching their (forked) tongues; (this mouth)roars violently.(akk. Vigour of a lion that overcame the Great Snake (and) split the Mountains.)Hebrew motive of the lapis-lazuli branch-staff transformation mattē into the snaketannīn(Ex. 7, 10): ‘and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants,and it became a serpent’ is worth to be compared to the Sumerian kenning from Lugal-e 10:‘The prince’s beard, generated by the Father-Lapis-lazuli, is the coiled up Dragon’ togetherwith its Sumerian variant (nB) ‘The prince’s beard from lapis-lazuli is verdure which hair[sprouted] by itself [in abun]dance’. This Sumerian kenning is incorporated together withthe weapon of Ninurta mi-tum into a united poetical system.
- Добавил в систему: Святополк-Четвертынский Игорь Анатольевич