In Part I, the present writer has treated Karnamak i Artaxšer i Papakan (KN), §168 (Nosherwân's ed.)=chapt. XII 5 (Sanjana's ed.) where is read
'be y'lymwn 'amdb 'ap i 'to pat kar 'ne apdyet. In
y'lymwn he has recognized a verbal form of Aramaic RWM (
rum/rim) ‘to be high’, rather than that of 'LM, the hilp
e'al of which means ‘to be silent. If the p
e'al form of’ LM can mean the same,
y'lymnin comes near to
yele mun impf. 3rd pers. pl. masc. and the Pahlavi passage then would mean ‘Be silent! For us thy water is of no use.’, seemingly suitable to the context. But the second
yoδ of y'lymwn cannot represent the shäwa mobile in
yelemun. In Part II, the present writer has given a general survey on the wide employment of Aramaic RWM and its various derivatives. Among others it may be of some interest to note that in the 3rd line of the Aramaic inscription of Asoka near Qandahar, Afghanistan, Prof. Franz Altheim has successfully pointed out R'M as Aramaic
ra'em. In the last Part, the present writer has come to the conclusion that
'be y'lymwn in KN § 168=XII 5 is nothing but
'be yabarimtin, yabarimun being haf'el imperfect 3. p1. masc. of RWM ‘to be high’, whcih was so widely employed throughout the Official Aramaic in Achaemenian period. Of the
yabarimun, what is then the Pahlavi equivalent? In KN we have ‘she was drawing the water’
'ap hame bext-§166), ‘I will draw the water’(
'ap banjam-§167), ‘draw the water!’(
'ap abanjet-170), ‘it was unable to draw up the
bezak’(
bizak.'ul kašitan 'ne šayast-§171), ‘it was unable to draw the
bezak’(
bezak. bextan 'ne šayast-§172), ‘'he drew up the
bezak’(
bizak.ul bext-§172), of which verbal expressions, Frahang i Pahlavik has the logoram YZLWNtn for
kašitan ‘to draw’(cf. KN §171). Then the reading
bextan or
(a) banjitan for YHLYMWN (
yabarimun) tn seems preferable. The present writer, therefore, would like to interpret KN § 168 in this way:
'be (a) banj!'amab 'ap i 'to pat kar'ne apayet ‘Draw [up the
bezak]! We have no need of thy water.’ Needless to say, there is another way of possible interpretation: the af'el form of RWM is attested in the sense of ‘to remove’. The meaning of KN § 168 would be something like this: ‘Remove [the
bezak]! We have no need of thy water.’, taking
'be as meaning ‘off, away’. To the present writer, however, this interpretation seems no preferable. Seeing that the girl was going to thraw down the
bezak into the well, Shahpuhr said: ‘Thou shouldest not thraw down the
bezak but pull it up: we have no need of thy water.’-so interprets the present writer.
抄録全体を表示