labarna

Just FYI, "to wear (out)" has an irregular past tense, and past participle forms: "wore" and "worn". So:

1) These disk, because of constant throughput, wore out.

2) These disk, because of constant throughput, are worn out.

I haven't seen it in my texts, and actually perusing the dictionaries and sign-lists right now, I think I'm getting a sense for how the derivation came about.

I modern reading of the signs that make up the word they're talking about "irrû" in Akkadian, are: ḪUL₂.GIL₂, but the context of its use suggests a bitter cucumber like plant (also a tangled plant, because "irrū" means intestines).

As to the name "joy plant" if you were to read the signs as ḪUL₁!.GIL₁! (notice the 1's) then that would be correct, but instead they are the second versions of each sign, and cannot be read as "joy" or "plant".

Totally agree, there are publications out there that are starting to bridge the gap. But really now more and more academics are taking to twitter and sharing their research in a more public way often with much of the field specific jargon tempered because of the platform.

I just published an article in an open-access book on digital methods in my field which is available here: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/books/b97890...

I'm working on editing my PhD dissertation into a book right now and I'm dealing with this exact problem. I work on Babylonian astrology and the text I studied for my PhD was a complex table of astrological material including "medical" ingredients. Right now I'm finishing off correcting and translating all of the medical ingredients in the text.

I've chosen to rather than try to convert the Sumerian/Babylonian names of ingredients into assumed parallels leave them all in their native language. Identifying ancient ingredients is really hard (for many of the reasons given in the blog post). Most all, how can we sure than any of the descriptive adjectives (especially sensory observations) have modern equivalents that we can relate to. We know for instance that color words can differ quite a bit between languages, and that's thanks to living speakers who can show us what they mean by a certain word. How do we do that for long dead languages? For instance try explaining the scent of cedar wood without using the word cedar... and imagine all the culturally specific adjectives you'd have to use to approximate the smell.

To be sure, it's not a hopeless task. Some ancient names can be identify with modern parallels, but on the whole it's a very fraught task.