·     Stuart-ACTaP.p2.para5.l-1 (in reference to PAL Bench 1 L): tu-u-pa-ti, for tu-paat, literally “on the back of…”. When combined with temporal statements in other inscriptions from the Palenque area, this carries the sense of “right after,” in references to dates that occur only a handful of days after a period ending (Stuart 1990). There is good reason to suppose, then, that the throne was dedicated within a very short time (perhaps days or months) following the K’atun ending.

·     In AT-E1168-lecture14.t0:29:57-32:39 Tokovinine discusses what he terms “relational nouns”: [R]elational nouns are nouns which basically connect different sentences, most of the time. Or they describe relationships in space, or between agents. […]. So in the hieroglyphic inscriptions, we have at least three identified relational nouns [yichnal, yitaaj, tu paat]. […] // And then “ti plus ergative plus paat”, say, tu paat, for example, “on somebody's back”. It actually refers to spatial position, so “behind me”. You can say u bi ta ni paat or ti ni paat, literally “in my back”. But it can also mean time. So you can say tu paat k'in – “behind the day”, which means “yesterday”. Or you can say tu paat haab juunajaw “behind the year juunajaw”. So in a sense that it “happened after that year”. So relations in space primarily, but also, by extension, in time.

·     Sim:

o Neither Stuart-ACTaP.p2.para5.l-1 nor AT-E1168-lecture14.t0:29:57 mention the phonological rule where in combining the preposition ti or tu (“with”, “at”, “on”, etc) with a possessed noun (ti-u-<noun> or ta-u-<noun>), the vowel of the preposition is dropped (to avoid a diphthong, as Classic Maya doesn’t have diphthongs) and the u gets a glottal stop after it.

o The example shown on the slide in AT-E1168-lecture14.t0:29:57 seems to have only u-pa-ti, not tu-pa-ti.