17 viii 49

	There might be instance of a similar "redetermined" dative-locative 
in the final -ij  _ of the group av-ub-ub-ij / ig-ub-ub-ij _-_-_-_ / _-_-_-_ 
in the "A" syllabary, which so many people seem to suspect is the name of 
the divinity. If ij corresponds to the Cypriote li, the "P"-analogy is 
with forms like

E:	aisvale ( *a.isu-al-i)	 	"to the goddess Aisu-".
	lar_iale			"to Larth" etc.

Miss Kober suggested, a-ka-ka-li Akakali's. My guess would be Ammali,
tying up with the name of the mother-goddess, and with the Hesychian gloss 
Amrnaló' "festival in honour of Zeus at Troezen", which someone, I forget 
who, has suggested emending to "in honour of Demeter".
	Reduplicated consonants are unusual in Etruscan spelling, but may have 
occurred in the spoken or earlier forms of the language; and the reduplicated 
m in the Lallname for "mother" is perhaps to be expected anyway. But, of 
course, it may turn out that ub can't stand this m- value.
	The alternation of ig- and av- seems to show that the sounds represen-
ted must be fairly similar, and I'd be inclined to regard them both as vowels - 
av possibly being caused by the presence of words immediately preceding, in 
some way which does not occur in the "B" syllabary spelling, where initial av-
seems to be much more unusual.

	Have you any clues as to what the alternation of -_ and -_ repre
sents? Ive tried to list the possible alternatives:-
1)	Different cases of the same word.
2)	Different numbers of the same word.
3)	Alternative spellings or forms of the same case or number ending.
4)	Different ways of expressing the same idea, such as "Athens" and "the 
	Athenians".
(1) and (2) seem awkward because the contexts of the inscriptions in which the 
variations occur are apparently so similar. But you probably know a lot more 
about it than I've tried to guess at.

	Hrozny seems to have shown fairly good reasons for dividing off a word
ta in lines 2 and 12 of the long "man" tablet (his No 41), introducing the 
first actual entry in the last and 2nd paragraphs after the introductory phrase: 
 2	ab.ig-at-_1-ix	    XX 1	_-_-_-_-_    
12	ab.il-og-ag         XX 1	_-_-_-_

This Hrozny translates "here" , which gives a good "L"-analogy with the Hittite 
t a , and the IE pronoun stem t- in general (although it doesn't seem repre-
sented in Lycian).
	The "P"-analogy would be with the Etruscan pronoun ta, ita "this", 
whose emphatic form eit/_ , et/_  is used as an adverb "thus" to introduce 
a quoted speech. Perhaps Hrozny is right in regarding ab-oj _-_ con-
taining the same stem?

	I'm rather at a loss what to say to Hrozny in thanking him for the 
copy of his "Inscriptions Cretoises". One of the few points of detail on 
common ground is his discussion of the names for 'children'  _-_  and _-_ .
I wonder whether he is right in calling _-_ the masculine half of the pair. 
Apart from a prejudice I have to make _-_ a more feminine ending than _,
I look at it this way: On Evans' tablet fig 690 (Hrozny's 45) the _-_ are 
only included among the very young, and then not many of them; and they are 
named second. In a tablet dealing with women, presumably for some palace 
service, one would expect the girls to be of greater importance, since they 
would presumably by kept on with their mothers, whereas the boys would be 
taken off at an early age (somewhere about ¾ of the way through the _-_-_-_ 
grade?) to be trained for other work. From the alternation of _-_-_ and
_-_-_-_ I suppose one might assume that _ and _ share the same 
consonant, and that _  functions here as a diminutive ending ("P"-analogy
with Etruscan -l- , -z- , -v- ?). It is curious that _-_ and _-_ fol-
lowed by numbers show no plural ending: Pallottino mentions traces of an 
old Etruscan collective identical with the singular, such as tusur_i 
"spouses" , and avil- "years" when used with numbers.