August 2019
Vol. VII, No. 8
Concepts and Metaphors in Sumerian
By Erika Marsal
Introduction
Sumerian was a language used in southern Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) from ca. 3000 BCE to ca. 1800 BCE. Despite the numerous attempts to relate Sumerian with other languages, it is still, as far as we know, unconnected with any other known language, dead or alive.
Map showing the location of Sumer.
Over a century after Sumerian was deciphered, more efforts are now being made to approach it using modern linguistic methods. Cognitive linguistics has been ignored in the study of Sumerian language and culture but offers important new avenues for understanding what ancient writers were actually talking about and their patterns of thought. Some of these are surprisingly familiar to us, while others are not.
Conceptual metaphor theory
George Lakoff and Mark Johnson first articulated the idea of conceptual metaphors in their 1980 book Metaphors We Live By. A conceptual metaphor identifies a pattern of thought from a number of actual instances of metaphor. Later developments of this approach stress the idea that the experiential basis of conceptual metaphors should be conceived as deeply shaped by interpersonal and cultural dynamics.
A conceptual metaphor is one that identifies a pattern of thought from a number of actual instances of metaphor. This schema takes the form TARGET DOMAIN IS SOURCE DOMAIN. We use the term ‘source domain’ to refer to the literal meaning; the metaphoric sense that differs from the common or basic sense is known as the ‘target domain.’
Ideas are light.
Conceptual metaphor patterns in Sumerian language
What are some examples of conceptual metaphors that can be identified in the Sumerian language?
GOOD IS UP AND BAD IS DOWN
Generally, a positive element is associated with the UP pole and a negative to the DOWN pole. In English, there are many examples of metaphors that use height as a source for positive meanings such as high-powered, or upper class. We also say that the sky is the limit to express that there is nothing that can prevent success, whereas a glass ceiling describes an invisible barrier that keeps a given minority from rising beyond a certain level in a hierarchy. These metaphors and the notion of VERTICALITY make “height” a distinct symbol of power and importance.
The amazing thing is that this kind of conceptualizations can also be found in languages as distant in space and time as Sumerian.
GOOD IS UP and BAD IS DOWN.
In Sumerian, the eye is connected with the direction UP. This is also connected with the idea of choosing: the god chooses the ruler for his kingship by the act of lifting the eye upon him (Sumerian igi il).
dam igi il2-la dinana
“Spouse chosen by the goddess Inana.”
Inscription to Ur-Ninurta, (Frayne 1990: E.4.1.6.1: 12–13)
The loss of power, on the other hand, is the movement downwards. The lexical unit šub can be translated as “to fall,” “to drop,” “lay (down),” but also “to thresh (grain).”
uƞ3-un-be2
⸢ŋiš tukul⸣ ḫe2-en-da-šub-be2
uru-ne2 e2-ri-a ⸢ar2 ?-ar2 ? ⸣ ḫe2-im
kalam-ma-ne2 ḫe2-en-šu2
uƞ3-un-be2
“May it fell its people with weapons. May his city become a ruin… May his land tumble down.”
Inscription to Sîn-iqišam, (Frayne 1990: E.4.2.11.1, ii 2’–6’)
BODY IS A CONTAINER FOR EMOTIONS
As we know, the human body acts as a resource for conceptualizing many aspects of human experience. This is often reflected in the use of body-part terms to conceptualize our feelings and thoughts. Such metaphors are, however, far from universal but are culturally specific.
Body parts are an important element of Sumerian metaphorical language and are often used to indicate spatial metaphors. Hence, the concept “inside,” ša3, uses the same word as for “heart”, (ab ša3 = “center of the sea”), while the concept the “top” uses the word saŋ (= “head”, “roof”).
The heart as a container for positive emotions
The heart (Sumerian ša3) is by far the most frequently attested CONTAINER structure. The lexical unit ša3 can be translated as “heart”, “inner body”, “in”, “inside”, “womb.”
The body is a container.
The lexical unit ša3 ḫul2 is a compound verb that can be translated as “to be happy,” “happy heart.” It is formed by the elements ša3 “heart” + ḫul2 “to rejoice.”
niŋ2 ša3 ḫul2–ḫul2 dnin-lil2-la2-ka
“Who causes joy for the heart of the goddess Ninlil.”
Inscription to Išme–Dagān (Frayne 1990: E.41.4.8: 23)
The heart as a container for negative emotions
The lexical unit lipiš-bala can be translated as “anger.” The primary meaning is “inner body” or “heart.” Once again ša or heart located that emotion.
ša3 ib2-ba lipiš-bal-a-ne2
aš2-gig-ga ḫe2-en-e
“[May the goddess Inana] with anger in her heart and in her wrathful mood utter a terrible curse.”
Inscription to Rīm-Sîn (Frayne 1990: E.4.2.14.23: 49–50)
The eye as a container for emotions
The act of directing the eye towards or against something can have positive and negative connotations in Sumerian literary sources. Active viewing is mainly understood as a divine power, a kind of influential gaze shared in a very small number of examples by human kings. The act of viewing is connected with theory that connects CONTAINER, PATH, and FORCE.
The eye is a container.
The eye can also be related to the “eye of life,” which has also a positive nuance. Igi bar means “to gaze at some object in a certain manner.”
igi sag9-ga-zu nam-til3 si-a lugal-ra igi-zid bar-mu-un-ši-ib
“With your favorable eye full of life, you rightly look upon the ruler!”
Rīm-Sîn B (ETCSL c.2.6.9.2, 50)
Eye metaphors with negative meaning
The conceptualisation of the eye as a source for evil and envy exists in different languages and cultures. However, the exact nature of these conceptualisations differs from one language to another. In Sumerian, verbs of unfavorable vision occur in only a very small number of attestations in the entire literary corpus.
The lexical unit igi ḫul (igi “eye”+ ḫul “bad”) can be translated as “to look malevolently”, “to glare”, “to look with envy.”
igi ḫu-luḫ-ḫa-zu-ne gu2-erim2-ŋal2 su ḫe2-ḫe-em-da-sag8-ge-de3
“When you make all enemies tremble with your frightening look.”
Lipit-Eštar D (ETCSL c.2.5.5.4, 18)
This example is a good example of the EMOTIONS ARE FORCES metaphor. This metaphor relates that enemies tremble as a result of the frightening look.
PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS
PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS is a very common conceptual metaphor in which people are perceived as possessing the characteristics of different animals. The metaphor PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS occurs in many different languages and is probably a statement of a universal basic concept.
Sumerian language has no generic term for “animal.” The conceptual metaphor PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS follows therefore a classification made ad hoc from our external or etic point of view. Here, “animal” is understood as the sum of the different Sumerian categories for the various kinds of animals, mostly (but not exclusively) classified according to their function and appearance in lexical lists.
Old Babylonian list of animals. Collection of the University Pennsylvania Museum (UM 29-16-31), drawing by N. Veldhuis.
The metaphor of a lion is common to many languages. In ancient Mesopotamia, lion metaphors were applied to the king in both Sumerian and Akkadian texts. The metaphor of the lion was employed to convey the ideas of a frightening and awesome force.
Detail of Ashurbanipal on his horse in the lion’s hunt scene at the British Museum. (Wikipedia)
Another animal that is often used in a metaphoric sense is the lexical unit maš2 or “goat.” It is remarkable is its metaphorical use as an image of leadership. This is related to the fact that the Sumerian society was highly dependent on agriculture and animal husbandry. From this concept comes the conceptual metaphor CITIES ARE ANIMALS that can be found in some inscriptions:
nibruki maš2 ⸢saŋ⸣ [kalam-ma]
“Nippur: the lead goat of the Land.”
Inscription to Ur-Ninurta (Frayne 1990: E.4.1.6.2: ii 14′)
Conclusions
Many conceptual metaphors can be traced in Sumerian inscriptions and hymns and provide useful framework for understanding the Sumerian conceptual system. The prominence of terms related to body parts in the Sumerian lexicon, especially verbal compounds, connects well with the basic tenet of cognitive linguistics that meaning is highly embodied. In turn, conceptual metaphors like THE BODY IS A CONTAINER FOR EMOTIONS, which have particular cultural interactions with the eye and the heart, provide further support for the claim that there is close interaction between language, body and culture.
Erika Marsal is a doctoral student at the University of Vienna.
Note
The examples here follow the translations of Frayne, D. (1990). Old Babylonian Period (2003-1595 BC). (Vol. 4) and The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature (ETCSL).
