English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This article discusses the use of the sign &lt;URBS&gt; (L.225) in Anatolian Hieroglyphic. In particular, it analyzes the attestations and contexts of use of the sign employed in combination with &lt;mi&gt; (L.391) (§ 2). It is well-known that the self-standing sign &lt;URBS&gt; was used as a determinative for city names, while the form with ligature + MI  was employed as a logogram. A systematic analysis of the Anatolian Hieroglyphic corpus shows that this convention was very consistent. This article provides an updated corpus of attestations of the logographic usage; it is also shown that a less common form of this sign combination, without ligature (&lt;URBS- MI &gt;), was an alternative logographic writing in the early stage of the script, but the form with ligature (&lt;URBS+ MI &gt;) became the standard after the 12 th  century. Possible exceptions to this convention and other inconsistent or problematic uses are discussed (§ 3). Conclusions include some considerations on the possible phonetic quality of the ligature + MI,  and on the form of the Luwian word for “city” (§ 4). The final section discusses the use of the sign &lt;URBS&gt; in the spelling of the name Mursili, in light of the present analysis (§ 5).

Notes on the Use of the Sign URBS (L.225) in Anatolian Hieroglyphic