I9IS.] PRINCE— PRONOUNS AND VERBS OF SUMERIAN. 31 



yoked.' The only possible explanation is that the translator delib- 

 erately transferred the persons. The possibility that the -n- and 

 -b- elements were originally used to denote the remote and nearer 

 subject or object respectively, has already been pointed out by 

 Thureau-Dangin, ZA. XX., pp. 380-404, and fully discussed by 

 Poebel (ZA. XXL, pp. 218-230; Prince, AJSL., pp. 364-365)- 

 This theory, although not yet capable of entirely satisfactory dem- 

 onstration, lends itself more readily to credence than the animate- 

 inanimate idea. In the later language, which represents a period of 

 grammatical decay, the n and ^-suffixes appear to be used arbitrarily. 

 it is probable, however, that in the earlier phases of Sumerian, these 

 endings must have had the force of remote and nearer demonstra- 

 tives respectively. 



Me-ne, mc-en-ne, ' we.' Poebel gives me-en-de, me-de, 'ine-en- 

 de-en, which, however, should be read me-en-ne, me-ne, nie-en-ne-en. 

 He uses the (/-element, because he finds the oblique form me-en-da- 

 na, 'without us' (p. 47) and also nam-da-me-en-da-na, 'without 

 us ' ; viz., nam negative -\- prep, -da -]- first person plural me-en -[- 

 prep, da repeated -|- -na, probably negative, repeated. Poebel's own 

 form me-da-nii (p. 34, line 34), 'without us' clearly shows that the 

 me-en in these me-en-da-forms is the me-en of the first person. 

 Thus, me-en-da-nu = men first person -|- prep, da -{- negative nu. 

 A form me-en-de eliminates the evident combination of w^^ first 

 person + plural -ne. Similarly, Poebel's separate forms me-de-en- 

 de and me-de-en-de-en must be read me-ne-en-ne and me-ne-en-ne- 

 en, respectively; me-en-ne = ^ mtq.' -\- en, element of the verb to be; 

 lit. 'it is we who are' (cf. m,u-me-en, s.v. md-e above). 



According to Delitzsch, -me-ne, etc. = ma -\- ene, ' I and he,' a 

 sort of exclusive ' we.' But if this were the case, we should expect 

 to find also an inclusive ' we ' = ' I and thou,' which would have the 

 form me-en-si-en (or me-se), but this form actually occurs with the 

 equation attunu 'you,' plural (just below). It is much more likely 

 to suppose that me-en-ne, me-en-ne-en represent a pure plural of the 

 first personal me(n) ; i. e., me{n) -\-ne or ne-ne-\- the verbal -en, 

 when the form ends in -n. The pluralizing of the first person 

 singular occurs for example in Central American Tule an-jnala = an 

 ' I ' -j- the collective -mala. Indeed, the form men-men is actually 



