Abstract
The sentence apearing in lines 74-75 of P. Hermitage No. 1115 has been understood as a negative construction of a progressive sentence, nn sw ḥr sḏm, in many studies. This understanding is based on an assumption that the sign A1 tn the original text is so wrongly written that we should omit it or should emend it to A2. In this way, the transcription nn wi ḥr sḏm st is derived.
However, in my opinion, the sign A1 in the original papyrus is the 1st person suffix pronoun=i and the text should be understood as a sentence with an adverbial predicate, nn wi ḥr sḏm=i st, “I am not in the situation that I hear it.” In this sentence sḏm=i st is thought of as an unmarked complement clause.
As not even one correct example of the nn sw ḥr sḏm has been attested, I would like to propose that this constriction is a ghost form invented by modern scholars. As a result, the paradigm of the imperfective aspect, including the progressive form, would look like this:
imperfective aspect (intransitive)
habitual progressive
affirmative iw(=f) sḏm=f iw(=f) ḥr sḏm
negative n sḏm.n=f
