Editing Sumerian language (section)

===Orthography===

Sumerian writing expressed pronunciation only roughly. It was often [[morphophoneme|morphophonemic]], so much of the [[allomorphy|allomorphic]] variation could be ignored.<ref>Zólyomi (2017: 18)</ref> Especially in earlier Sumerian, coda consonants were also often ignored in spelling; e.g. /mung̃areš/ 'they put it here' could be written 𒈬𒃻𒌷 ''mu-g̃ar-re<sub>2</sub>''. The use of VC signs for that purpose, producing more elaborate spellings such as 𒈬𒌦𒃻𒌷𒌍 ''mu-un-g̃ar-re<sub>2</sub>-eš<sub>3</sub>'', became more common only in the Neo-Sumerian and especially in the Old Babylonian period.<ref>Jagersma (2010: 19-24)</ref>

Conversely, an intervocalic consonant, especially at the end of a morpheme followed by a vowel-initial morpheme, was usually "repeated" by the use of a CV sign for the same consonant; e.g. 𒊬 ''sar'' "write" - 𒊬𒊏 ''sar-ra'' "written".{{efn|This is most consistent with stops. With other consonants, there is some vacillation depending on the consonant, the following vowel, the relevant morpheme, the time period and the region; overall, sonorants favour doubling more than fricatives (especially sibilants) and affricates do, /a/ favours it more than /e/, and doubling is more extensive in Old Sumerian than in subsequent periods.<ref>Sallaberger (2023: 38), Jagersma (2010: 154-158, 175-176, 356-358, 641-642, 720)</ref>}} This results in orthographic gemination that is usually reflected in Sumerological transliteration, but does not actually designate any phonological phenomenon such as length.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://cdli.ox.ac.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=sumerian:transliteration_and_the_diacritics|title=Transliteration and the diacritics [CDLI Wiki]|date=October 26, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211026164324/https://cdli.ox.ac.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=sumerian:transliteration_and_the_diacritics |archive-date=26 October 2021 }}</ref>{{efn|Nonetheless, some Sumerologists also posit genuine geminate consonants in Sumerian, as exemplified later in the article,<ref name=":47"/> but orthographic doubling as seen above usually is not sufficient to se predict its presence.}} It is also relevant in this context that, as explained [[#Consonants|above]], many morpheme-final consonants seem to have been elided unless followed by a vowel at various stages in the history of Sumerian. These are traditionally termed [[wikt:Auslaut|Auslaut]]s in Sumerology and may or may not be expressed in transliteration: e.g. the logogram 𒊮 for /šag/ > /ša(g)/ "heart" may be transliterated as ''šag<sub>4</sub>'' or as ''ša<sub>3</sub>''. Thus, when the following consonant appears in front of a vowel, it can be said to be expressed ''only'' by the next sign: for example, 𒊮𒂵 ''šag<sub>4</sub>-ga'' "in the heart" can also be interpreted as ''ša<sub>3</sub>-ga''.<ref>Foxvog (2016: 15)</ref>

Of course, when a CVC sound sequence is expressed by a sequence of signs with the sound values CV-VC, that does not necessarily indicate a long vowel or a sequence of identical vowels either. To mark such a thing, so-called "plene" writings with an ''additional'' vowel sign repeating the preceding vowel were used, although that never came to be done systematically. A typical plene writing involved a sequence such as (C)V-'''V'''(-VC/CV), e.g. 𒂼𒀀 ''ama-'''a''''' for /ama'''a'''/ < {ama-'''e'''} "the mother (ergative case)").<ref>Jagersma (2010: 25-26)</ref>

Sumerian texts vary in the degree to which they use logograms or opt for syllabic (phonetic) spellings instead: e.g. the word 𒃻 g̃ar  "put" may also be written phonetically as 𒂷𒅈 ''g̃a<sub>2</sub>-ar''. They also vary in the degree to which allomorphic variation was expressed, e.g. 𒁀𒄄𒌍 ''ba-gi<sub>4</sub>-'''eš''''' or 𒁀𒄄𒅖 ''ba-gi<sub>4</sub>-'''iš''''' for "they returned". While early Sumerian writing was highly logographic, there was a tendency towards more phonetic spelling in the Neo-Sumerian period.<ref>Rubio, G. (2000). «On the Orthography of the Sumerian Literary Texts from the Ur III Period». ASJ, 22, pp. 203-225. P. 215-217, 218-220.</ref> Consistent syllabic spelling was employed when writing down the Emesal dialect (since the usual logograms would have been read in Emegir by default), for the purpose of teaching the language and often in recording incantations.<ref>Viano (2016: 141)</ref>

As already mentioned, texts written in the Archaic Sumerian period are difficult to interpret, because they often omit grammatical elements and [[determinative]]s.<ref name=":7" /><ref name="krecherUGN" /> In addition, many literary-mythological texts from that period use a special orthographic style called UD.GAL.NUN, which seems to be based on substitution of certain signs or groups of signs for others. For example, the three signs 𒌓 UD, 𒃲 GAL and 𒉣 NUN, which the system is named for, are substituted for 𒀭 AN, 𒂗 EN, and 𒆤 LIL<sub>2</sub> respectively, producing the name of the god ''[[Enlil|<sup>d</sup>en-lil<sub>2</sub>]]''. The motivation for this practice is mysterious; it has been suggested that it was a kind of [[cryptography]]. Texts written in UD.GAL.NUN are still understood very poorly and only partially.<ref>Thomsen (2001: 22)</ref><ref name=krecherUGN>Krecher, J. 1992: UD.GAL.NUN versus ‘Normal’ Sumerian: Two Literatures or One? Fronzaroli, P. (ed.). ''Literature and Literary Language at Ebla.'' Firenze. 285-303. [https://www.academia.edu/14612978/UD_GAL_NUN_versus_Normal_Sumerian_Two_Literatures_or_One Online]</ref><ref>Michalowski (2004)</ref>