Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65
c d e
MQL Stela 6 B1b TIK Temple 1 Lintel 1/3 F4 TIK Temple 4 Lintel 1/3 G8
<u.<CHIT:ti>>:CH’AB <u:CHIT:ti>.CH’AB <u:CHIT:ti>.CH’AB
Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65
h i m
YAX Stela 11 “H3-G4” YAX Lintel 10 D6b TRT Stela (Monument) 6 J16-I17
<u:BAAH>.<u:CHIT:ki/ta> CH’AB.<ch’a?:ho?{m}> <u:BAAH:ji>.<u:<[CHIT]CH’AB>> u.<BAAH:hi> u.<CHIT:CH’AB>
USE LATER DRAWING
Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65
a b j l
CPN Stela P Kuna-Lacanja Lintel 1 CPN Altar U PAL TS C11-D11
u:<BAAH:ji.{u}CH’AB:k’i?> u.<ya?:CH’AB[*AK’AB?]:li> u.<ba:hi> u.CH’AB u.<BAAH[ji?]:hi> u.CH’AB
USE LATER DRAWING
Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65
f g k n
YAX Stela 7 pD8 YAX Stela 10 PAL TC Tablet E3 YAX Stela 7 pC6
<u:si:ji>.<u[CHIT?]:CH’AB> <u:si:ji>.<la?:CH’AB> <u:BAAH>.<u:CH’AB[AK’AB]:li> <u:BAAH:hi>.<u:CH’AB[AK’AB?/CHIT?]>
Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65 = Coll-1
o-1 o-2 o-3
Stokes Panel MQL Stela 11 A6b ITB Stela 17
u.<si:ji> u.<ch’a:ba> u.<si:ji> u.<chi:ta?/ti?>.<CH’AB:ba> u.<si:hi> <u:CHIT>.<ch’a:ba>
Coll-1 Graham
PUS Stela E Fp8 TRT Monument 6
u.<CHIT:ti:CH’AB> u.<CHIT:CH’AB>
· The history of decipherment:
o Stuart-TPM.p123 (2006) gives u-B’AAH u-CH’AB’(AK’AB’)-li è u-b’aah u-ch’ab’-ak’ab’il = "His person is the creation, the darkness of".
o EB (2009) lists ch’ab-related compounds under “child (of parent)”, but not the specific ones with ak’ab.
o Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65 lists at least two (fig65k = PAL TC E3 and fig65n = YAX Stela 7 pC6), giving explicitly the meaning “child of”.
· Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65 gives many variants of this:
o uchit uch’ab – the most basic and straightforward form.
o ubaah uchit uch’ab – to what extent is this simply “(This is the) image of the child of”? the ubaah doesn’t belong with the “child”, it’s just “the image of” (“the child’).
o usih uch’ab / usij uch’ab – is the first word the possessive of sih / sij “birth” / “gift”?
o usij uchit ch’ab.
o uch’ab ak’ab.
· Two of the CH’ABs seem to have an infixed AK’AB (k, n. and perhaps b).
· Two of them have the hand variant of ji (a, g) and one has the mammal head variant of ji (f).
· Is this an example of “diphrastic kenning”, where a single concept is expressed as a phrase containing two either parallel or opposing concepts, as a metaphor or in poetic usage?
· Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65 explains that it be found preceding the name of a male or female parent:
o Male parent: a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i.
o Female parent: j, k, l, m, n.
o Not specified o-1, o-2, o-3.
· Comments:
o b: This is possibly not chit ch’ab, but perhaps uch’ab yak’ab.
o g: The la is possibly part of ch’abil.
o i: This is a very special case. There is a rat-head glyph, but it clearly has an infixed AK’AB not K’AN. Therefore, it cannot be part of the ubaah part of the expression. Furthermore, there is a ji underneath rather than a hi on top (though that could be a result of the Late Classic merger). Sergei Vepretskii: this [= the “rat head” glyph] is in fact a very rare form of si, making this usij uchit (u)ch’ab = the child of. This is cited in Kettunen&Helmke-RoB-MotT2020.p34.fig65i.
o n: the “ni” as the very last element (bottom right) is perhaps just part of the CH’AB, not to be pronounced, same as I; the infix is more likely to be CHIT than AK’AB.
o o-3: ITB (the -B is needed in the 3-character code of the toponym/polity because there are 2 Itzimte’s – Itzimte’-Bolonchen and Itzimte’-Sacluk).
o Do not confuse this with usiij “vulture” (with a long final vowel -ii-) – this one is related to sih / sij = “birth” / “gift” (with a short final vowel -i-).
· In the fixed combination chit ch’ab, when written as a CHIT, it is almost invariably the abstract variant (resembling lo) which is used.
Coll-2 has many later versions.