^{page 113 note 1} The correct reading and interpretation of this line is due to Professor Ehelolf, to whom I am also indebted for most of the references here used. The frequency of the phrase wappuwaŝ IM (see below) suggests that we have here not the Hittite word imma, which yields no satisfactory sense, nor yet IM with adversative -ma, which is not only meaningless but also an impossible position for the particle, but the nom.-acc. of an r/n stem from which the final -r has been dropped; cf. Götze-Pedersen, , Murŝilis Sprachlähmung, pp. 30–1Google Scholar. To this stem belongs very probably the instr. IM-ni-it, Bo. 2357 i 7 ff.: na-at IM-ni-it iŝ-ta-ap-aḫ-ḫi (verb restored from a similar passage in Bo. 5810 iii 11 ff.); and the dat./loc. IM-ni (Bo. 2357 i 5, Bo. 5810 iv 11). However, an a- stem nom. IM-aŝ is also attested, e.g. xv 39 ii 15, and ace. IM-an vii 55 ii 3, xii 58 i 9, 19. Cf. ḫmnḫueŝŝar and ḫunḫuesna-, Ehelolf, Kl.F., i, 395 ff.

^{page 114 note 1} Cf. Götze, , Mu. Ann., 215. wappu also as masc, Bo. 635 obv. 10, nu-za-kan ÍD-aŝ wa-ap-pu-unGoogle Scholar.

^{page 114 note 2} Misread by Forrer (loc. cit., p. 149) as a-ar-ŝe-e-ŝu-ri. “The word appears written ar-ŝar-ŝu-u-ra, Bo. 5063 obv. 15. This perhaps suggests a derivation from the root arŝ- ‘flow’; cf. formations like (ÍD-aŝ) ú-e-elú-i-la-aŝ, xxiv 9 iv 10, and probably also ḫu(wa)nḫueŝŝar ‘wave’; for arŝ-, see Friedrich, ZA., N.F., v, 45⁴; said of a river ix 3 i 10, and further Bo. 4990 obv. 13 (ap. Ehelolf, , ZA., N.F., ix, p. 177)Google Scholar. Bo. 4990 obv. 19, twice as a word for ‘current’ the interesting neuter arŝanu, written a-ar-ŝa-nu, also in the closely related text Bo. 706 rev. 9, ar-ŝa-nu.” [Ehelolf.]