Neue Untersuchungen zum sDm.t=f im älteren Ägyptisch
Authors: Brose Marc 
Published: November 2024

“New discussions on the sDm.t=f verb form in Old and Middle Egyptian”
This article discusses several issues about the sDm.t=f verb form in Old and Middle Egyptian. As starting point, in chap. 2, an overview of all facts about the sDm.t=f considered as valid by the author is presented, based on the prominent publication of Louis Zonhoven, “Studies on the sDm.t=f verb form in Middle Egyptian” (1997): (1) there are only three secured syntactical usages, i.e. n-sDm.t=f “he has not yet heard”, r-sDm.t=f “until he hears/has heard”, Dr-sDm.t=f “before he hears/has heard”; (2) the main or one main semantic feature is the “relative future”; (3) the verbal stems are: III. inf.: jr+.t, II. gem.: m#.t; Anormal: rD+.t, j+.t/jw+.t; (4) a distinctive passive form existed, which is characterised by a specific morphological type jr+.yt, ms+.yt etc. at the III. inf. roots; (5) several phenomena do not belong to the sDm.t=f form, i.e. the supposed “narrative usage” in some literal texts such as Sinuhe and in connection with other prepositions, i.e. m, mj, m-Xt etc.; a specific type wn.t, appearing after some prepositions and in the negative construction n-wn.t “there is not” can be identified as a specific verbal noun wn.t, used also as a particle for introducing noun clauses und building conjunctions; some other usages with a verbal form ending on t, e.g. as object of verbs of perception, can be more accurately analysed as verbal noun sDm.t/jr+.w/yt; the extraordinary verbal types jw+.t=f and jn+.t=f,
used as a subjunctive verb form, are, at least on the synchronic level, simple allomorphs of the subjunctive, and should be excluded from the discussion.
Thereafter, the following issues are under discussion, including detailed overviews about the research history, for a better understanding of the complex matter: Chap. 3 deals with the supposed connection of sDm.t=f with other verb forms, especially the verbal noun sDm.t/jr+.w/t (the so-called “complementary infinitive”) and the future participle sDm.tj=fj, a discussion which was revived some years ago by J.P. Allen and A. Stauder. However, it is argued that – on the synchronic level – there was no real (or no longer significant) connection between the sDm.t=f and the verbal noun, and that both also are not connected to the sDm.tj=fj, which seems to be in morphological relation to the prospective sDm=f/jr+.w=f and the verbal noun sDm(.w)/jr+.w (the so-called “negative complement”). Chap. 4 presents a new proposal for the anormal passive form; it is argued that it may be a kind of V-passive, like the perfective sDm.w passive and the prospective sdmm passive. Chap. 5 concentrates on semantics and aims to show that the significant semantic value of the sDm.t=f is not only “relative future”, but “relative future-perfect”, a bi-referential form which always relates to two reference points in the context. The final chapter (chap. 6) discusses the formula r-Hz+.t(-wj)-NN “so that NN praises/d (me)”; here the sDm.t=f was only one candidate under discussion, but it is argued that the infinitive would be the better solution.