Jump to content

Ugaritic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ugaritic
Clay tablet of Ugaritic alphabet
Native toUgarit
Extinct12th century BC[1]
Ugaritic alphabet
Language codes
ISO 639-2uga
ISO 639-3uga
uga
Glottologugar1238
This article contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters. For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA.

Ugaritic[2][3] (/ˌ(j)ɡəˈrɪtɪk/ (Y)OOG-ə-RIT-ik)[4] is an extinct Northwest Semitic language known through the Ugaritic texts discovered by French archaeologists in 1928 at Ugarit,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11] including several major literary texts, notably the Baal cycle.[11][12] The script is described as “a special alphabetic Cuneiform,” reflecting an idiom related to Canaanite and Hebrew languages.[13]

Like Hebrew the short script of Ugarit has twenty-two characters: nearly identical to Hebrew in terms of their phonetic values (what they sound like) if not in terms of the visual elements or media of their inscription. Early samples of Hebrew are scratched on stone or potsherds whereas Ugaritic is punched on clay, like cuneiform.

A scholar of the period hailed Ugaritic as "the greatest literary discovery from antiquity since the deciphering of the Egyptian hieroglyphs and Mesopotamian cuneiform.”[14]

Corpus

[edit]

The Ugaritic language is attested in texts from the 14th through the early 12th century BC. The city of Ugarit was destroyed roughly 1190 BC.[15]

Literary texts discovered at Ugarit include the Legend of Keret or Kirta, the legends of Danel (AKA 'Aqhat), the Myth of Baal-Aliyan, and the Death of Baal. The latter two are also known collectively as the Baal Cycle. These texts reveal aspects of ancient Northwest Semitic religion in Syria-Palestine during the Late Bronze Age.

Edward Greenstein has proposed that Ugaritic texts might help solve biblical puzzles such as the anachronism of Ezekiel mentioning Daniel in Ezekiel 14:13–16[11] actually referring to Danel, a hero from the Ugaritic Tale of Aqhat.

Phonology

[edit]

Ugaritic had 28 consonantal phonemes (including two semivowels) and eight vowel phonemes (three short vowels and five long vowels): a ā i ī u ū ē ō. The phonemes ē and ō occur only as long vowels and are the result of monophthongization of the diphthongs аy and aw, respectively.

Consonants[citation needed]
Labial Interdental Dental/Alveolar Palatal Velar Uvular Pharyngeal Glottal
plain emphatic
Nasal m n
Stop voiceless p t k q ʔ
voiced b d ɡ
Fricative voiceless θ s ʃ x ħ h
voiced ð z ðˤ (ʒ)[1] ɣ[2] ʕ
Approximant l j w
Trill r
  1. ^ The voiced palatal fricative [ʒ] occurs as a late variant of the voiced interdental fricative /ð/.
  2. ^ The voiced velar fricative /ɣ/, while an independent phoneme at all periods, also occurs as a late variant of the emphatic voiced interdental /ðˤ/.

The following table shows Proto-Semitic phonemes and their correspondences among Ugaritic, Akkadian, Classical Arabic and Tiberian Hebrew:

Proto-Semitic Ugaritic Akkadian Classical Arabic Tiberian Hebrew Imperial Aramaic
b [b] 𐎁 b b ب b [b] ב b/ḇ [b/v] 𐡁 b/ḇ [b/v]
p [p] 𐎔 p p ف f [f] פ p/p̄ [p/f] 𐡐 p/p̄ [p/f]
[ð] 𐎏 d;
sometimes [ð]
z ذ [ð] ז z [z] 𐡃 (older 𐡆) d/ḏ [d/ð]
[θ] 𐎘 [θ] š ث [θ] שׁ š [ʃ] 𐡕 (older 𐡔) t/ṯ [t/θ]
[θʼ] 𐎑 [ðˤ];
sporadically ġ [ɣ]
ظ [ðˤ] צ [sˤ] 𐡈 (older 𐡑) [tˤ]
d [d] 𐎄 d d د d [d] ד d/ḏ [d/ð] 𐡃 d/ḏ [d/ð]
t [t] 𐎚 t t ت t [t] ת t/ṯ [t/θ] 𐡕 t/ṯ [t/θ]
[tʼ] 𐎉 [tˤ] ط [tˤ] ט [tˤ] 𐡈 [tˤ]
š [s] 𐎌 š [ʃ] š س s [s] שׁ š [ʃ] 𐡔 š [ʃ]
z [dz] 𐎇 z z ز z [z] ז z [z] 𐡆 z [z]
s [ts] 𐎒 s s س s [s] ס s [s] 𐡎 s [s]
[tsʼ] 𐎕 [sˤ] ص [sˤ] צ [sˤ] 𐡑 [sˤ]
l [l] 𐎍 l l ل l [l] ל l [l] 𐡋 l [l]
ś [ɬ] 𐎌 š š ش š [ʃ] שׂ ś [ɬ]→[s] 𐡎 (older 𐡔) s [s]
ṣ́ [(t)ɬʼ] 𐎕 ض [ɮˤ]→[dˤ] צ [sˤ] 𐡏 (older 𐡒) ʿ [ʕ]
g [ɡ] 𐎂 g g ج ǧ [ɡʲ]→[dʒ] ג g/ḡ [ɡ/ɣ] 𐡂 g/ḡ [ɡ/ɣ]
k [k] 𐎋 k k ك k [k] כ k/ḵ [k/x] 𐡊 k/ḵ [k/x]
q [kʼ] 𐎖 q q ق q [q] ק q [q] 𐡒 q [q]
ġ [ɣ] 𐎙 ġ [ɣ] غ ġ [ɣ] ע ʿ [ʕ] 𐡏 ʿ [ʕ]
[x] 𐎃 [x] خ [x] ח [ħ] 𐡇 [ħ]
ʿ [ʕ] 𐎓 ʿ [ʕ] / e ع ʿ [ʕ] ע ʿ [ʕ] 𐡏 ʿ [ʕ]
[ħ] 𐎈 [ħ] e ح [ħ] ח [ħ] 𐡇 [ħ]
ʾ [ʔ] 𐎛 ʾ [ʔ] ∅ / ʾ ء ʾ [ʔ] א ʾ [ʔ] 𐡀/∅ ʾ/∅ [ʔ/∅]
h [h] 𐎅 h ه h [h] ה h [h] 𐡄 h [h]
m [m] 𐎎 m m م m [m] מ m [m] 𐡌 m [m]
n [n] 𐎐 n n ن n [n] נ n [n] 𐡍 n [n]
r [r] 𐎗 r r ر r [r] ר r [r] 𐡓 r [r]
w [w] 𐎆 w w و w [w] ו w [w] 𐡅 w [w]
y [j] 𐎊 y y ي y [j] י y [j] 𐡉 y [j]

Writing system

[edit]
Table of Ugaritic alphabet

The Ugaritic alphabet is a cuneiform script used beginning in the 15th century BC. Like most Semitic scripts, it is an abjad, where each symbol stands for a consonant, leaving the reader to supply the appropriate vowel. Only after an aleph the vowel is indicated (’a, ’i, ’u). With other consonants one can often guess the unwritten vowel, and thus vocalize the text, from (a) parallel cases with an aleph, (b) texts where Ugaritic words are written in Akkadian cuneiform syllables, (c) comparison with other West-Semitic languages, for example Hebrew and Arabic, (d) generalized vocalization rules,[16] and (e), in poetry, parallellisms are also helpful to interpret the consonantal skeleton.[17]

Although it appears similar to Mesopotamian cuneiform (whose writing techniques it borrowed), its symbols and symbol meanings are unrelated. It is the oldest example of the family of West Semitic scripts such as the Phoenician, Paleo-Hebrew, and Aramaic alphabets (including the Hebrew alphabet). The so-called "long alphabet" has 30 letters while the "short alphabet" has 22. Other languages (particularly Hurrian) were occasionally written in the Ugarit area, although not elsewhere.

Clay tablets written in Ugaritic provide the earliest evidence of both the Levantine ordering of the alphabet, which gave rise to the alphabetic order of the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin alphabets; and the South Semitic order, which gave rise to the order of the Ge'ez script. The script was written from left to right.

Grammar

[edit]

Ugaritic is an inflected language, and as a Semitic language its grammatical features are highly similar to those found in Classical Arabic and Akkadian. It possesses two genders (masculine and feminine), three cases for nouns and adjectives (nominative, accusative, and genitive [also, note the possibility of a locative case]); three numbers: (singular, dual, and plural); and verb aspects similar to those found in other Northwest Semitic languages. The word order for Ugaritic is verb–subject–object (VSO), possessed–possessor (NG), and nounadjective (NA). Ugaritic is considered a conservative Semitic language, since it retains most of the Proto-Semitic phonemes, the basic qualities of the vowel, the case system, the word order of the Proto-Semitic ancestor, and the lack of the definite article.

The word order for Ugaritic is verb–subject–object (VSO) and subject–object–verb (SOV),[18] possessed–possessor (NG), and nounadjective (NA). Ugaritic is considered a conservative Semitic language, since it retains most of the phonemes, the case system, and the word order of the ancestral Proto-Semitic language.[19]

Word order

[edit]

The word order for Ugaritic is Subject Verb Object (SVO), Verb Subject Object (VSO), possessed–possessor (NG), and nounadjective (NA).

Morphology

[edit]

Ugaritic, like all Semitic languages, exhibits a unique pattern of stems consisting typically of "triliteral", or 3-consonant consonantal roots (2- and 4-consonant roots also exist), from which nouns, adjectives, and verbs are formed in various ways: e.g. by inserting vowels, doubling consonants, and/or adding prefixes, suffixes, or infixes.

Verbs

[edit]
Introduction
[edit]

Ugaritic verbs are based on mostly three-literal roots (like all Semitic languages) (a few verbs have two- or four-consonant roots). For example, RGM, ‘to say’. By adding prefixes, infixes, and suffixes, and varying the vowels, the various verbal forms are formed. (Because in Ugaritic vowels are hardly written, these vowel variations often are not clearly visible).

Verbs can take several of a dozen stem patterns, or binyanim, that change the basic meaning of the verb, and make it for example passive, causative, or intensive. The basic form (in German: Grundstamm) is the G stem.

The verbal forms for each stem can be divided in five verbal form groups:

  • the suffix conjugation, also called qtl (pronounced qatal), or Perfect;
  • the prefix conjugation, also called yqtl (pronounced yiqtol), or Imperfect;
  • imperatives;
  • two different infinitives;
  • an active and a passive participle.

Verbs have one of three different vowel patterns, -a-, -i-, and -u-:

  • in the qtl (G stem): qatala, qatila, or qatula (cf. Hebrew qaṭal, kavēd, qaṭon);
  • in the yqtl (G stem): yiqtalu, yaqtilu, or yaqtulu.

There is no one-on-one link between morphology and tense. This is because Ugaritic is an aspect language: verbal forms do not primarily indicate the timing of activities (in the past, present or future), but they indicate aspect: the suffix conjugation (qtl) has perfective aspect, it is used when viewing an activity as having a beginning and an end; the prefix conjugation (yqtl) has imperfective aspect, it is used when it is deemed irrelevant whether the activity has an end or beginning.

Ugaritic verbs can have several moods, both indicative and injunctive (jussive, cohortative). Moods are most clearly visible in the prefix conjugation (see below).

Suffix conjugation
[edit]

The suffix conjugation (qtl) has perfective aspect. Taking the root RGM (which means "to say") as an example, ragama may be translated as “he says” (at this very moment), or “he has said” (and has finished speaking).

The vowel between the second and third root consonant can be -a-, -i-, or -u-. Most verbs describe an activity (so-called “active verbs”) and have -a-. Verbs describing a state or property (“stative verbs”) have -i- or (rarely) -u-.

The paradigm of the suffix conjugation (or Perfect) is as follows for the a-verb RGM, the i-verb ŠB‘ (“to be (become) satiated”), and the u-verb MRṢ (“to fall ill”):

Morphology of the Ugaritic suffix conjugation (in the simple active pattern, G stem)
model a-verb i-verb u-verb
Singular 1st masc. & fem. STEM-tu rgmt RaGaMtu “I say, have said” šabi‘tu “I am
satiated”
maruṣtu “I fall ill,
have fallen ill”
2nd masculine STEM-ta rgmt RaGaMta “you (m.) say” šabi‘ta (etc.) maruṣta (etc.)
feminine STEM-ti rgmt RaGaMti “you (f.) say” šabi‘ti maruṣti
3rd masculine STEM-a rgm RaGaMa “he says” šabi‘a maruṣa
feminine STEM-at rgmt RaGaMat “she says” šabi‘at maruṣat
Dual 1st masc. & fem. STEM-nayā rgmny RaGaMnayā “the both of us say” šabi‘nayā maruṣnayā
2nd masc. & fem. STEM-tumā rgmtm RaGaMtumā “you two say” šabi‘tumā maruṣtumā
3rd masculine STEM rgm RaGaMā “they both (m.) say” šabi‘ā maruṣā
feminine STEM-tā rgmt RaGaM “they both (f.) say” šabi‘tā maruṣtā
Plural 1st masc. & fem. STEM-nū (?) rgmn (?) RaGaM (?) “we say” šabi‘nū (?) maruṣnū (?)
2nd masculine STEM-tum(u) rgmtm RaGaMtum(u) “you (m. Pl.) say” šabi‘tum(u) maruṣtum(u)
feminine STEM-tin(n)a rgmtn RaGaMtin(n)a “you (f. Pl.) say” šabi‘tin(n)a maruṣtin(n)a
3rd masculine STEM rgm RaGaMū “they (m.) say” šabi‘ū maruṣū
feminine STEM rgm RaGaMā “they (f.) say” šabi‘ā maruṣā
Prefix conjugation
[edit]

The prefix conjugation yqtl- takes three forms: yiqtal-, yaqtil-, and yaqtul-. The specific pattern is determined by the stem consonants (laryngals‘ ’ h ḥ ḫ –, and weak consonants). Therefore, there is no simple one-on-one relation with the three qtl vowel patterns, qatal, qatil, and qatul, because the qtl vowel pattern depends not on the consonant pattern, but on a verb's meaning (active or stative).

For example, the following three verbs all have a qtl of the qatal type, but their yqtl patterns differ:

verb qtl type yqtl
QR’ “to call, invoke” qara’a “he calls” yiqtal- yiqra’u “he will call”
YRD “to go down” yarada “he goes down” yaqtil- yaridu “he will go down”
RGM “to say, speak” ragama “he says” yaqtul- yargumu “he will say”

The Imperfect paradigms for the three patterns are as follows, for the verbs RGM, “to say” (yaqtul- pattern), Š’iL, “to ask” (yiqtal- pattern), and YRD, “to go down” (yaqtil pattern):

Morphology of the Ugaritic prefix conjugation (in the simple active pattern, G stem)[1]
model yaqtul pattern yiqtal pattern yaqtil pattern
Singular 1st masc. & fem. ’a/’i-STEM-(u) ’argm ’aRGuMu “I will say” ’iš’alu “I will ask” ’aridu “I will go down”
’aRGuM “may I say” ’iš’al “may I ask” ’arid “may I go down”
2nd masculine ta/ti-STEM-(u) trgm taRGuMu “you (m.) will say” tiš’alu (etc.) taridu (etc.)
taRGuM “may you (m.) say” tiš’al tarid
feminine ta/ti-STEM-īna trgmn taRGuMīna “you (f.) ...”;
“may you (f.) ...”
tiš’alīna taridīna
3rd masculine ya/yi-STEM-(u) yrgm yaRGuM(u) “... he ...” yiš’al(u) yarid(u)
feminine ta/ti-STEM-(u) trgm taRGuM(u) “... she ...” tiš’al(u) tarid(u)
Dual 1st masc. & fem. na/ni-STEM-ā (?) nrgm (?) naRGuMā (?) “... the both of us ...” niš’alā (?) naridā (?)
2nd masc. & fem. ta/ti-STEM-ā(ni) trgm(n) taRGuMā(ni) “... you two ...” tiš’alā(ni) taridā(ni)
3rd masculine ta/ti-STEM-ā(ni);
also ya/yi-STEM-ā(ni)
trgm(n)
or yrgm(n)
taRGuMā(ni)
or yaRGuMā(ni)
“... they both (m.) ...” tiš’alā(ni)
or yiš’alā(ni)
taridā(ni)
or yaridā(ni)
feminine ta/ti-STEM-ā(ni) trgm(n) taRGuMā(ni) “... they both (f.) ...” tiš’alā(ni) taridā(ni)
Plural 1st masc. & fem. na/ni-STEM-(u) nrgm naRGuM(u) “... we ...” niš’al(u) narid(u)
2nd masculine ta/ti-STEM-ū(na) trgm(n) taRGuMū(na) “... you (m. Pl.) ...” tiš’alū(na) taridū(na)
feminine ta/ti-STEM-na trgmn taRGuMna “... you (f. Pl.) ...” tiš’alna taridna
3rd masculine ta/ti-STEM-ū(na);
rarely: ya/yi-STEM-ū(na)
trgm(n)
or yrgm(n)
taRGuMū(na)
or yaRGuMū(na)
“... they (m.) ...” tiš’alū(na)
or yiš’alū(na)
taridū(na)
or yaridū(na)
feminine ta/ti-STEM-ū(na) trgmn taRGuMū(na) “... they (f.) ...” tiš’alū(na) taridū(na)
  1. ^ The so-called “long” forms (e.g. 1 Singular ’argumu, ending -u; 3 Plural targumūna, ending -na) are Imperfect, the “short” forms (’argum, without -u; targumū, without -na) Jussive.

The prefix conjugation takes four or five different endings (yqtl, yqtlu, yqtla, yqtln). There are three clear moods (indicative, jussive, and volitive or cohortative). The so-called energic forms, yqtln, with an -n suffix (-an, -anna; possibly also -un, -unna), apparently have the same meaning as the shorter forms without the -n suffix.[20]

Form Name Mood Tense Aspect Example Translation Notes
yqtlu Imperfect Indicative Present - Future imperfective yargumu “he says, will say”
Past continued action “he used to say, is wont to say”
yqtl ‘short form’ Indicative Past imperfective yargum “he said”
Jussive “may he say, let him say”
yqtla Volitive Volitive (Cohortative, Subjunctive) yarguma “may he say, he shall say”
yqtln Energic Jussive yarguman(na) “may he say”
Energic #2 Indicative Past imperfective yargumun(na) “he said, says” existence doubted
Imperative
[edit]

The imperative probably takes three forms, qatal, qutul, and *qitil, where the vowels correspond with the vowels in the imperfect.

Examples (the verb YRD “to go down, to descend” is a so-called ‘weak’ verb, the first consonant Y disappears in the imperative):

a-type i-type u-type
verb: PTḤ, “to open” YRD, “to descend” RGM, “to say, speak” (speaking to:)
(Imperfect, 3 Sg. m.:) yiptaḥu “he will open” yaridu “he will descend” yargumu “he will say”
Imperative,
2 Singular
masculine pataḥ “open!” rid “descend!” rugum “say!”, “speak!” a man
feminine pataḥī ridī rugumī a woman
2 Dual masculine pataḥā ridā (?) rugumā two men
feminine two women
2 Plural masculine pataḥū ridū rugumū three or more men,
or men and women
feminine pataḥā (?) ridā (?) rugumā (?) three or more women
Participles
[edit]

The paradigm of the active participle of G stems is as follows (verb MLK, “to be king”):

Singular masculine māliku “reigning (king)”
feminine malik(a)tu “reigning (queen)”
Plural masculine malikūma “reigning (kings)”
feminine mālikātu “reigning (queens)”

The passive participle is quite rare. There seem to be two forms (verbs RGM “to say”, ḤRM “to divide”):

u-form i-form
Singular masculine ragūmu “said, spoken” ẖarimu “divided”
feminine ragūm(a)tu ẖarim(a)tu
Plural masculine ? ?
feminine ragūmātu ẖarimātu

Other stems than the G (and N) stem form their participles by means of a m- prefix; for example mulaḫḫišu (“conjuror”, D stem LḪŠ “to whisper”), mušamṭiru (“[the god] who rains”, Š stem, MṬR “to rain down”).

Infinitives
[edit]

Like other Semitic languages, Ugaritic has two infinitives, the infinitive absolute and the infinitive construct. However, in Ugaritic the two have an identical form. The usual form is halāku (“to go”, verb hlk), but a few verbs use an alternative form *hilku, for example niģru, “to guard” (verb nģr).

The infinitive absolute is often used preceding a perfect or imperfect verbal form, to put emphasis on that following verbal form. Such an infinive absolute may be translated as “verily, certainly, absolutely”. For example, halāku halaka, “he certainly goes” (literally, “to go! he goes”). An isolated infinitive absolute may also be used instead of any perfect, imperfect, or imperative verbal form.

The infinitive construct is often used after the prepositions l (“to”) and b (“in, by”): bi-ša’āli “in asking, by asking, while asking” (verb š’al “to ask”; note that after the preposition b (bi) the genitive of the infinitive is used).

Weak Verbs
[edit]

In Ugaritic, "weak verbs" are verbs whose roots contain a weak consonant, that is, a consonant that may disappear in some forms, or change into another consonant. Weak consonants are w and y, and also n, h, and in one case l (lqḥ, “to take”), if these are the first root consonant. Weak verbs exhibit irregular patterns in their conjugation due to the inherent instability of the weak consonants, often leading to phonetic variations. This phenomenon is akin to that observed in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew.

For instance, the Ugaritic verb yrd, “to go down”, is a weak verb: its imperative is rd /rid/ “go down!”, without the y consonant. The verb hlk, “to go”, has the imperative lk /lik/ “go!”, without the h. Due to their weak consonants, weak verbs can undergo phonetic changes, such as the assimilation of waw (w) to yod (y), especially in the absence of an intervening vowel. This characteristic impacts the verb's inflection, resulting in variations that are atypical compared to regular (strong) verbs.[21]

In Ugaritic there also exist "doubly weak verbs", which contain two weak consonants.

Patterns (stems)
[edit]

Ugaritic verbs occur in about a dozen reconstructed patterns or binyanim (verb RGM, “to say”, unless indicated otherwise):[22][23]

Hebrew equivalent Verb Perfect
(3rd sg. masc.)
Imperfect
(3rd sg. masc.)
Imperative
(2nd sg. masc.)
Infinitive Participle
(sg. masc.)
G stem (simple) qal “to say” ragama,
“he says, said”
yargumu,
“he will say, said, used to say”
rugum,
“say!”
ragāmu,
“to say”
rāgimu,
“saying; one who says”
Gp stem (passive of G) qal passive “to be said” rugima yurgamu ? ragūmu / ragimu
(?) C stem (causative internal pattern) MLK, “to reign” → “to enthrone” yamliku[1]
Gt stem (simple reflexive) “to speak to oneself” ʼirtagama yartagamu ʼirtagim ? ?
N stem (reciprocal or passive) niphʻal “to speak to each other; to be said” nargama yirragimu (< *yinragimu) ? nargamu nargamu
D stem (factitive / causative, or intensive) piʻʻel “to speak loudly” raggima yaraggimu raggim ruggamu muraggimu
Dp stem (passive of D) puʻʻal “to be said loudly” ruggima yuraggamu ? muraggamu
tD stem (reflexive of D) hithpaʻʻel “to speak loudly to oneself” taraggima yataraggimu taraggim ? ?
L stem (intensive or factitive) pôlel RWM, “to raise up” ? yarāmimu rāmim ? murāmimu
Lp stem (passive of L) pôlal RWM, “to be raised up” ? yurāmamu ? murāmamu
Š stem (causative) hiphʻil “to make someone speak” šargima yašargimu šargim šurgamu mušargimu
Šp stem (passive of Š) hophʻal “to be made to speak” šurgima yušargamu ? mušargamu
Št stem (causative reflexive) hištaph‘al “to make someone speak to himself” ʼištargima yištargimu ? ? muštargimu
R stem (factitive) (reduplicated roots)[2] KRKR, “to twiddle one's fingers” karkara yakarkaru ? ? ?
  1. ^ The i-form imperfect of the G stem (or D stem?) sometimes has causative meaning. It probably is not a separate stem: Sivan (2001), pp. 116-117.
  2. ^ This includes reduplicated bi- (like KRKR, “to twiddle one's fingers”) and triconsonant roots (ṢḤRR, “to scorch”), as well as other four-consonant roots (PRSḤ, “to bow, collapse(?)”). A factitive-reflexive tR or Rt stem may also exist (attested only once: Bordreuil & Pardee (2009), pp. 44-45).

Nouns and adjectives

[edit]
Paradigm
[edit]

Nouns (substantives, adjectives, personal names) in their basic form (nominative singular) end in -u. Nominal forms are categorized according to their inflection into: cases (nominative, genitive, and accusative), state (absolute and construct), gender (masculine and feminine), and number (singular, dual, and plural).

Here is the full paradigm for a masculine substantive (malku, “king”) and a feminine substantive (malkatu, “queen”).[24][25]

Masculine Feminine
ending malku, “king” ending malkatu, “queen”
number case abs. state cs. state absolute state construct state abs. state cs. state absolute state construct state
Singular nominative -u mlk malku -u mlkt malkatu
genitive -i mlk malki -i mlkt malkati
accusative -a mlk malka -a mlkt malkata
Dual nominative -āma (or -āmi?) mlkm malkāma / malkāmi mlk malkā -āma / -āmi mlktm malkatāma / malkatāmi mlkt malkatā
gen. & acc. -êma (or -êmi?) mlkm malkêma / malkêmi mlk malkê -êma / -êmi mlktm malkatêma / malkatêmi mlkt malkatê
Plural nominative -ūma mlkm mal(a)kūma mlk malakū (*)-u mlkt mal(a)kātu
gen. & acc. -īma mlkm mal(a)kīma mlk malakī (*)-i mlkt mal(a)kāti

Note (*): with lengthening of the final vowel of the stem: mal(a)kat- > mal(a)kāt-.

Case
[edit]

Ugaritic has three grammatical cases corresponding to: nominative, genitive, and accusative. Normally, singular nouns take the ending -u in the nominative, -i in the genitive and -a in the accusative. After prepositions as a rule the genitive is used. The accusative is also used adverbially (ṭābu, “good” > ṭāba, “well”) and as a kind of locative (šamîma = “to the heavens, in heaven”). More often, a locative is formed by appending a suffix -h to the accusative: ’arṣu, “earth”, accusative ’arṣa, locative ’arṣah, “earthward”. There is no dative; instead the preposition , “to, for”, + genitive is used.

As in Arabic, some exceptional nouns (known as diptotes) have the suffix -a in the genitive. There is no Ugaritic equivalent for Classical Arabic nunation or Akkadian mimation.

State
[edit]

Nouns in Ugaritic occur in two states: absolute and construct. The construct (or ‘bound’) state indicates that a noun is closely linked to the following noun. For example, “the house of the king” could in Ugaritic in principle be expressed in two ways:

1. “the house” (absolute state) “of the king” (absolute state, genitive). This might be called the ‘Latin’ way of expression (domus regis);

2. “the house of” (construct state) “the king” (absolute state, genitive). This might be called the ‘Hebrew’ way of expression (bēt hammelek).

The construct state is also the basic form used when a personal pronoun is suffixed: malakūma = “(the) kings” (absolute state, nominative) > malakū (construct state) > malakūhu = “his kings”; similarly malakĩhu = “(of) his kings” (genitive, accusative).

Ugaritic, unlike Arabic and Hebrew, has no definite article.

Gender
[edit]

Nouns which have no gender marker are for the most part masculine, although some feminine nouns do not have a feminine marker. However, these denote feminine beings such as ʼumm- (mother). /-t/ is the feminine marker which is directly attached to the base of the noun.

Number
[edit]

Ugaritic distinguishes between nouns based on quantity. All nouns are either singular when there is one, dual when there are two, and plural if there are three or more.

Singular
[edit]

The singular has no marker and is inflected according to its case.

Dual
[edit]

The marker for the dual in the absolute state appears as /-m/. However, the vocalization may be reconstructed as /-āma/ or /-āmi/ in the nominative (such as malkāma, malkāmi "two kings") and /-êma/ or /-êmi/ for the genitive and accusative (e.g. malkêma, malkêmi). For the construct state, it is /-ā/ and /-ê/ respectively.

Plural
[edit]

Masculine absolute state plurals take the forms -ūma in the nominative and -īma in the genitive and accusative. In the construct state they are and respectively. There are a few irregular (or broken) plurals; for example bt (bêtu), “house”, plural bhtm (bahatūma); and bn (binu), “son”, plural banūma (with Ablaut).

The female afformative plural is /-āt/ with a case marker probably following the /-t/, giving /-ātu/ for the nominative and /-āti/ for the genitive and accusative in both absolute and construct state.

Adjectives
[edit]

Adjectives follow the noun and are declined exactly like the preceding noun.

Pronouns

[edit]
Independent personal pronouns
[edit]

Independent personal pronouns in Ugaritic are as follows (some forms are lacking because they are not in the corpus of the language):

person gender case Singular Dual Plural
1st ’n (ʼanā) and
’nk (ʼanāku)
“I” ? “we two” ’anḥn? (ʼanaḥnu?) “we”
2nd masculine ’at (ʼatta) “you (m.)” ’atm (ʼattumā) “you two” ’atm (ʼattumu) “you all (m.)”
feminine ’at (ʼatti) “you (f.)” ’atn? (ʼattina?) “you all (f.)”
3rd masculine nominative hw (huwa) “he” hm? (humā?) “them two” hm? (humū?) “they”
gen., acc. hwt (huwāti) “him” hmt (humutu?) “them”
feminine nominative hy (hiya) “she” hm? (humā?) “them two (f.)” hn (hinna) “they (f.)”
gen., acc. hyt (hiyāti) “her” hmt (humāti?) hmt (humūti?) “them (f.)”
Suffixed (or enclitic) personal pronouns
[edit]

Suffixed (or enclitic) pronouns (mainly denoting the genitive and accusative) are as follows:

Person Gender Case Singular Dual Plural
after nouns,
prepositions
after verbs
1st m. & f. nominative -— () -n (-nī) “me, my” -ny (-nayā / -niyā) “us, our” -n (-nā / -nū) “us, our”
gen., acc. -y (-ya)
2nd masculine -k (-ka) “you, your” -km (-kumā) “you, your” -km (-kumū?) “you, your”
feminine -k (-ki) “you, your (f.)” -kn (-kin(n)a) “you, your (f.)”
3rd masculine nominative -h (-hu) “him, his” -hm (-humā?) “them, their” -hm (-humū?) “them, their”
gen., acc. -h, -nh, -n, -nn
(-hu, -annahu, -annu, -annannu)
feminine nominative -h (-ha) “her” -hn (-hin(n)a) “them, their (f.)”
gen., acc. -h, -nh, -n, -nn
(-ha, -annaha, -anna, -annanna?)
Other pronouns
[edit]

The relative (or ‘determinative’) pronoun is d (), “that of, of which”; often simply translatable as “who, which”. It introduces a specification, property, or action by the subject and is congruent with the governing noun. Declension: dī, dā; feminine dt (dātu, dāti, dāta); plural dt (dūtu, dūti(?)).

The demonstrative (or ‘deictic’) pronouns are hnd (hānādū), “this”, and hnk (hānākā) “that”. Extended forms are hanadūna, hanadūti, hanamati.

Interrogative pronouns are my (mīyu) “who?”, and mh (maha) “what?”.

Indefinite pronouns seem to be derived from the interrogative pronoun by appending to them the particles -n(a)-, -k(a), and/or -m(a) (in that order). Thus, for example: mnkm (mīnukumu?) and mnm (mīnama?) “anyone, someone”, mhkm (mahkīma?) and mnm (mannama?) “anything, something, whatever”.

Numerals

[edit]

The following is a table of Ugaritic numerals (some vocalisations are conjectural):[26]

Number used with Masculine nouns only used with Masc. or Fem. nouns used with Feminine nouns only notes
1 ʼaḥd ʼaḥḥadu ʼaḥt ʼaḥḥattu
2 ṯn ṯinā (+nominative),
ṯinê (+gen., acc.)
ṯt ṯittā (+nominative),
ṯittê (+gen., acc.)
3 ṯlṯt ṯalāṯatu ṯlṯ ṯalāṯu “3” ... “10”: seemingly feminine forms, ending in -t, are used with masculine nouns, and vice versa (Semitic gender dissymmetry)
4 ʼarbʻt ʼarbaʻatu ʼarbʻ ʼarbaʻu
5 ḫmšt ḫamišatu ḫmš ḫamišu
6 ṯṯt ṯiṯṯatu ṯṯ ṯiṯṯu
7 šbʻt šabʻatu šbʻ šabʻu
8 ṯmnt ṯamānîtu ṯmn ṯamānû
9 tšʻt tišʻatu tšʻ tišʻu
10 ʻšrt ʻašratu ʻšr ʻašru
11 ʻšt ʻšrh ʻaštê ʻišrêh (ʻašrihu?) ʻšt ʻšr ʻaštê ʻašru
12 ṯn ʻšrh / ṯn ʻšrt ṯinā ʻišrêh (ʻašrihu?) / ṯinā ʻašratu ṯn ʻšr ṯinā ʻašru
13 ṯlṯt ʻšrh / ṯlṯt ʻʻšrt ṯalāṯatu ʻišrêh (ʻašrihu?) / ṯalāṯatu ʻašratu ṯlṯ ʻšr ṯalāṯu ʻašru “14” ... “19” similarly
20 ʻšrm ʻašrāma dual of ʻašru, “10”
30 ṯlṯm ṯalāṯūma «plural» form of ṯalāṯu, “3”;
“40” ... “90” similarly
100 mʼit miʼtu
200 mʼitm miʼtāma dual of miʼtu, “100”
300 ṯlṯ mʼat ṯalāṯu miʼātu “400” ... “900” similarly
1000 ʼalp ʼalpu
2000 ʼalpm ʼalpāma dual of ʼalpu, “1000”
3000 ṯlṯ ʼalpm ṯalāṯu ʼalpūma
10,000 rbt ribbatu
20,000 rbtm ribbatāma dual of ribbatu, “10,000”
30,000 ṯlṯ rbbt ṯalāṯu ribabātu

Numerals are declined just like other nouns, for example ʼarbaʻu (“4”): genitive ʼarbaʻi, accusative ʼarbaʻa.

Ordinals
[edit]

The following is a table of Ugaritic ordinals. The vocalisations (predominantly based on comparison with Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic) are very uncertain:[27]

Number written as vocalisation (??)
1st pr‘ or ’aḥd parī‘u or ’aḥḥīdu
2nd ṯn ṯanû
3rd ṯlṯ ṯalīṯu
4th rbʻ rabīʻu
5th ḫmš ḫamīšu
6th ṯdṯ ṯadīṯu
7th šbʻ šabīʻu
8th ṯmn ṯamīnu
9th tšʻ tašīʻu
10th ‘šr ‘ašīru

Particles

[edit]

Among particles in Ugaritic the so-called enclitic particles deserve special note, especially -n (-na) and -m (-ma). These particles do not seem to change the meaning of words, but create confusion between different forms, and thus complicate the analysis and interpretation of words, in particular verbal forms. For example, rgmtm can be ragamtumu, “you (plural) say”, but it can also be ragamtu-ma, an extension of ragamtu, “I have said”. And mlkm (malkuma), can be the plural malkûma, “kings”, but it can also be an extended singular, malku-ma, “the king”.

The enclitic particles can be stacked on top of each other. An extreme example is hnny (hannaniya), “behold!, here is”, that is analyzed as a four-step extension of the presentative particle h (ha): hnny (hannaniya) = ha + -n + -na + -ni + -ya. h and hnny have the same meaning, “behold!, here is”.

Poetic techniques

[edit]

Techniques often encountered in Ugaritic poetry are repetition, parallellisms, chiasms, and what might be called ‘numerical stairs’.[28][29]

An example of repetition is in a part of the Ba‘al myth cycle, where Ba‘al’s fight with the Sea god Yammu (also known as Naharu) is described.[30] Divine artisan Kothar makes a magic mace for Ba‘al and, speaking to the mace, instructs it what to do:

Ugaritic vocalized English
(14′-15′) hlm . ktp [.] zbl [.] ym [.]
bn ydm / [ṭp]ṭ . nhr
hulum katipa zabūli Yammi,
bêna yadêma ṭāpiṭi Nahari
“Strike! the shoulder of Prince Yammu!,
between the arms of Ruler Naharu!”

The phrase is repeated, with subtle variation, to describe the fight:

(16′-17′) ylm . ktp . zbl ym .
bn
[.] ydm [.] ṭpṭ / [nh]r
yallumu katipa zabūli Yammi,
bêna yadêma ṭāpiṭi Nahari
It [the mace] struck the shoulder of Prince Yammu,
between the arms of Ruler Naharu.

When the fight ends in a draw, Kothar makes a second mace for Ba‘al. This mace too is instructed:

(21′-22′) hlm . qdq/[d] . zbl ym .
bn . ‘nm . ṭpṭ . nhr
hulum qudquda zabūli Yammi,
bêna ‘ênêma ṯāpiṭi Nahari
“Strike! the head of Prince Yammu!,
between the eyes of Ruler Naharu!”

The fight is then described thus:

(24′-25′) ylm . qdqd . zbl / [ym .]
bn . ‘nm . ṭpṭ . nhr
yallumu qudquda zabūli Yammi,
bêna ‘ênêma ṯāpiṭi Nahari
It struck the head of Prince Yammu,
between the eyes of Ruler Naharu.

This time Ba‘al indeed succeeds in killing Yammu.

In the quoted section several parallellisms may be noted: “shoulder” // “between the arms”; “head” // “between the eyes”; “Prince” // “Ruler”; and Yammu // Naharu.

An example of a chiasm is (Dan’il curses vultures after he has found out that they have scavenged the body of his dead son Aqhat):[31]

knp . nšrm / b‘l . yṯbr kanapē našrīma Ba‘lu yaṯbur “The vultures’ wings may Ba‘al break,
b‘l . yṯbr . d’iy / hmt Ba‘lu yaṯbur di’ya humutu may Ba‘al break their flying!”

Numerical stairs’ or ‘progressions of numbers[32] are of the form “N (times) X, N+1 (times) Y”, or “100 (times) X, 1000 (times) Y”. An example, where the huge size of Kirta’s army is portrayed:[33]

hlk . l’alpm . ḫḏḏ halakū li-’alpīma ḪḎḎ They will go in thousands, a downpour (?)[34],
wlrbt . kmyr wa-li-ribabāti kama YR and in ten thousands, like the early rain (?);
’aṯr . ṯn . ṯn . hlk ’aṯra ṯinê ṯinā halakū two by two they will go,
’aṯr . ṯlṯ . klhm ’aṯra ṯalāṯi kullūhumū [three] by three, all together.

Sample Texts

[edit]

Here is a fragment from the epic “Baal” cycle (KTU tablet 1.4 column 5). Ba‘al, son of Supreme God El, has rebelled, he wants a palace of his own. After some blackmail - Ba‘al withholds his rain from the land - El agrees. Ba‘al's sister Anat brings him the good news:

Ugaritic[a][35] vocalized English
(25) ṣḥq . btlt . ‘nt . tš’u ṣaḥāqu batūl(a)tu ‘Anatu ; tišša’u Maiden Anat laughed, she raised
(26) gh . w tṣḥ . tbšr b‘l gâha wa-taṣīḥu : tabaššir Ba‘lu ; (her) voice and cried out: “Receive the good news, Baal!
(27) bšrtk . yblt . y[tn] bašūr(a)tūka yabiltu ; yû[tanu] Good news for you I bring; there will be gi[ven]
(28) bt . lk . km . ’aḫk . w ḥẓr bêtu lêka kamā ’aḫḫûka , wa-ḥaẓiru to you a house like your brothers, and a court
(29) km . ’aryk . ṣḥ . ḫrn kamā ’aryuka . ṣiḥ ḫarrāna like your clansmen. Call a caravan (or wooden planks?)
(30) b bhtk . ‘ḏbt . b qrb bi bahatīka , ‘ḎBT(?) bi qirbi into your houses, supplies(?) into
(31) hklk . tblk . ġrm hēkalika ; tabilūka ġūrūma your palace; the mountains will bring you
(32) m’id . ksp . gb‘m . mḥmd ma’da kaspa , gab(a)‘ūma maḥmada much silver, the hills [will bring] desirable
(33) ḫrṣ . w bn . bht . ksp ḫurāṣa , wa-banā bahātī kaspi gold, and build houses of silver
(34) w ḫrṣ . bht . ṭhrm wa-ḫurāṣi , bahātī ṭuḥūrīma and gold, houses of pure
(35) ’iqn’im ’iqn’īma [...] lapis lazuli.”

From a list describing the organization of wine deliveries for royal sacrificial rites (KTU 1.91). Wine is to be consumed when ...:

k t‘rb ‘ṯtrt sd bt mlk
k t‘rbn ršpm bt mlk
kî ta‘rubu ‘Aṯtaratu-Sadi bêta malki,
kî ta‘rubūna Rašapūma bêta malki
“... when Athtart of the Field enters the house of the king,
when the Reshaphim enter the house of the king [...]”

From a letter (KTU 2.19):

nqmd mlk ’ugrt ktb spr hnd Niqmaddu malku ’Ugarīti kataba sipra hānādū “Niqmaddu, king of Ugarit, has written this document.”

From a “contract” (KTU 3.4):

l ym hnd ’iwr[k]l pdy ’agdn le-yômi hānādū ’Iwrikallu padaya ’Agdena “From this day, Iwrikallu has redeemed Agdenu.”

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Ugaritic text does not include many vowels which would have been present in spoken language

References

[edit]
Citations
  1. ^ "Ugaritic". Archived from the original on 22 March 2021. Retrieved 2024-04-07.
  2. ^ Rendsburg, Gary A. (1987). "Modern South Arabian as a Source for Ugaritic Etymologies". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 107 (4): 623–628. doi:10.2307/603304. JSTOR 603304. Archived from the original on 2023-11-26. Retrieved 2023-11-26.
  3. ^ Rendsburg, Gary A. “Modern South Arabian as a Source for Ugaritic Etymologies”. In: Journal of the American Oriental Society 107, no. 4 (1987): 623–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/603304.
  4. ^ "Ugaritic". Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster.
  5. ^ Watson, Wilfred G. E.; Wyatt, Nicolas (1999). Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Brill. p. 91. ISBN 978-90-04-10988-9.
  6. ^ Ugaritic is alternatively classified in a "North Semitic" group, see Lipiński, Edward (2001). Semitic Languages: Outline of a Comparative Grammar. Peeters Publishers. p. 50. ISBN 978-90-429-0815-4.
  7. ^ Woodard, Roger D. (2008-04-10). The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia. Cambridge University Press. p. 5. ISBN 9781139469340.
  8. ^ Goetze, Albrecht (1941). "Is Ugaritic a Canaanite Dialect?". Language. 17 (2): 127–138. doi:10.2307/409619. JSTOR 409619.
  9. ^ Kaye, Alan S. (2007-06-30). Morphologies of Asia and Africa. Eisenbrauns. p. 49. ISBN 9781575061092.
  10. ^ Schniedewind, William; Hunt, Joel H. (2007). A Primer on Ugaritic: Language, Culture and Literature. Cambridge University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-1-139-46698-1.
  11. ^ a b c Greenstein, Edward L. (November 2010). "Texts from Ugarit Solve Biblical Puzzles". Biblical Archaeology Review. 36 (6): 48–53, 70. Retrieved 16 July 2019.
  12. ^ Ford, J. N. (2013). "Ugaritic and Biblical Hebrew". In Khan, Geoffrey; Bolozky, Shmuel; Fassberg, Steven; Rendsburg, Gary A.; Rubin, Aaron D.; Schwarzwald, Ora R.; Zewi, Tamar (eds.). Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. doi:10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000287. ISBN 978-90-04-17642-3.
  13. ^ Donald B. Redford (1992). Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in ancient times. Internet Archive. Princeton University Press. p. 144. ISBN 978-0-691-03606-9.
  14. ^ Gordon, Cyrus H. (1965). The Ancient Near East. Norton. p. 99.
  15. ^ Huehnergard, John (2012). An Introduction to Ugaritic. Hendrickson Publishers. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-59856-820-2.
  16. ^ An example of this last method in Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language, p. 116: "[The] pattern of correspondences between the thematic vowel with the second radical and the prefix vowel (thematic u and i taking prefix vowel a; thematic a taking prefix i) is helpful in reconstructing the vocalized forms of the G stem prefix conjugation." Two more examples of rules of thumb are: abstract nouns preferably have the vowel -u- (Pierre Bordreuil & Dennis Pardee, A Manual of Ugaritic (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2001) p. 33); and stative verbs in the perfect use the qatila vowel pattern.
  17. ^ Coogan, Michael D.; Smith, Mark S. (2012). Stories from Ancient Canaan (2nd ed.). Louisville Kentucky: WJK. p. 9. ISBN 9780664232429.
  18. ^ Wilson, Gerald H. (1982). "Ugaritic Word Order and Sentence Structure in KRT". Journal of Semitic Studies. 27 (1): 17–32. doi:10.1093/jss/27.1.17.
  19. ^ Segert, Stanislav (March 1985). A Basic Grammar of Ugaritic Language by Stanislav Segert – Hardcover – University of California Press. ISBN 9780520039995.
  20. ^ Daniel Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (HdO 28; Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill, 2001), pp. 99-106, 116-119.
  21. ^ Gordon, Cyrus Herzl (1998). Ugaritic Textbook. Roma: Gregorian Biblical BookShop. p. 13. ISBN 88-7653-238-2.
  22. ^ Daniel Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (HdO 28; Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill, 2001) pp. 96-177.
  23. ^ Pierre Bordreuil & Dennis Pardee, A manual of Ugaritic (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2009), pp. 43-45.
  24. ^ Bordreuil, Pierre; Pardee, Dennis (2009). A Manual of Ugaritic. WInona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. pp. 28–35. ISBN 978-1-57506-153-5.
  25. ^ SIvan, Daniel (2001). A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (2nd ed.). Leiden / Boston / Köln: Brill. pp. 61–85. ISBN 9004122931.
  26. ^ Sivan, A grammar of the Ugaritic language (2001), pp. 86-92; Bordreuil & Pardee, A manual of Ugaritic (2009) pp. 35-37 and vocalisations pp. 161ff; Segert, A basic grammar of the Ugaritic language (1984), pp. 53-54.
  27. ^ Sivan, A grammar of the Ugaritic language (2001), pp. 92-94; Bordreuil & Pardee, A manual of Ugaritic (2009), pp. 293-355 (Glossary).
  28. ^ Coogan, Michael D.; Smith, Mark S. (2012). Stories from Ancient Canaan. Louisville Kentucky: Westminster John Knox. pp. 9–13. ISBN 9780664232429.
  29. ^ Gordon, Cyrus H. (1965). Ugaritic Textbook. Roma: Pontifical Biblical Institute. pp. 130–137. Retrieved 2025-11-30.
  30. ^ KTU 1.2, tablet 2, col. 4: Bordreuil (2009), pp. 159-164.
  31. ^ Aqhat tablet 3, col. 3, lines 42-43: Gordon (1965) p. 137 (= p. 246 lines 148-150).
  32. ^ Sivan (2001) p. 5.
  33. ^ Kirta, tablet 1, column 2, lines 39-43 = Gordon (1965) p. 250 lines 92-95.
  34. ^ Coogan & Smith (2012) p. 75. Others translate ḪḎḎ and KMYR as a kind of soldiery.
  35. ^ Sivan, Daniel (2001). A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Brill. pp. 207–210.
Bibliography
  • Bordreuil, Pierre & Pardee, Dennis (2009). A Manual of Ugaritic: Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic 3. Winona Lake, IN 46590: Eisenbraun's, Inc. ISBN 978-1-57506-153-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  • Cunchillos, J.-L. & Vita, Juan-Pablo (2003). A Concordance of Ugaritic Words. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. ISBN 978-1-59333-258-7.
  • del Olmo Lete, Gregorio & Sanmartín, Joaquín (2004). A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition. Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-90-04-13694-6. (2 vols; originally in Spanish, translated by W. G. E. Watson).
  • Gibson, John C. L. (1977). Canaanite Myths and Legends. T. & T. Clark. ISBN 978-0-567-02351-3. (Contains Latin-alphabet transliterations of the Ugaritic texts and facing translations in English.)
  • Gordon, Cyrus Herzl (1965). The Ancient Near East. W. W. Norton & Company Press. ISBN 978-0-393-00275-1.
  • Greenstein, Edward L. (1998). Shlomo Izre'el; Itamar Singer; Ran Zadok (eds.). "On a New Grammar of Ugaritic" in Past links: studies in the languages and cultures of the ancient near east: Volume 18 of Israel oriental studies. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-035-4. Found at Google Scholar.
  • Hasselbach-Andee, Rebecca (2020). A Companion to Ancient Near Eastern Languages. Wiley Blackwell. ISBN 978-1119193296.
  • Huehnergard, John (2011). A Grammar of Akkadian, 3rd ed. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-5750-6941-8.
  • Moscati, Sabatino (1980). An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of Semitic Languages, Phonology and Morphology. Harrassowitz Verlag. ISBN 3-447-00689-7.
  • Pardee, Dennis (2003). Rezension von J. Tropper, Ugaritische Grammatik (AOAT 273) Ugarit-Verlag, Münster 2000: Internationale Zeitschrift für die Wissenschaft vom Vorderen Orient. Vienna, Austria: Archiv für Orientforschung (AfO). P. 1-404 Archived 2014-01-07 at the Wayback Machine.
  • Parker, Simon B. (ed.) (1997). Ugaritic Narrative Poetry: Writings from the Ancient World Society of Biblical Literature. Atlanta: Scholars Press. ISBN 978-0-7885-0337-5. {{cite book}}: |author= has generic name (help)
  • Schniedewind, William M. & Hunt, Joel H. (2007). A Primer on Ugaritic: Language, Culture and Literature. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-5217-0493-9.
  • Segert, Stanislav (1997). A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-03999-8.
  • Sivan, Daniel (1997). A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (Handbook of Oriental Studies/Handbuch Der Orientalistik). Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-90-04-10614-7. A more concise grammar.
  • Tropper, Josef (2000). Ugaritische Grammatik. Ugarit Verlag. ISBN 978-3927120907.
  • Woodard, Roger D. (ed.) (2008). The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-68498-9. {{cite book}}: |author= has generic name (help)

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]