Hold that hand for a while!

Master of deception!

The most spectacular find of all Sumerian Akkadian parallel worlds is the name for the hand. It is the most bizarre name in Sumerian because its ideogram is very poorly represented as if there is no relationship between the marker and the marked object. The cognate for [hand] is the ultimate proof that archaic Sumerian was created by a single author. Not only he spoke Akkadian but also all other Semitic tongues that surrounded him. What this author did not predict was the fact that Sumerian mirrors by default Akkadian grammar. Obviously he tried to hide the origin of the cognate [hand] but he never predicted the advent of computers while he manipulated both Sumerian and Akkadian.

It is surprising to find out that Sumerian ideogram [šu] functions and sounds the same as Akkadian [ša] (determinative-relative pronoun).

Many researchers complained that Sumerian has no clear cut grammar. That is true, Sumerian looks like an agglutinative language but bears the hallmarks of Akkadian grammar.

Akkadian:

ša  (determinative-relative pronoun)

who, which, that; and "the one of, of" as a relative pron.

Comparison with other Semitic languages :

Hebrew : še

kiri šu ĝal [PAY HOMAGE TO] (48x: Old Babylonian) wr. kiri₃ šu ĝal₂ "to pay homage to" Akk. labānu ša appi

(kiri[nose] + šu[hand] + ĝal[be])

kiri šu tag [PAY HOMAGE TO] (5x: Old Babylonian) wr. kiri₃ šu tag "to pay homage to" Akk. labānu ša appi

(kiri[nose] + šu[hand] + tag[touch])

šu gur [PICK] wr. šu gur "to pick grapes" Akk. qatāpu ša karāni

(šu[hand] + gur[turn]) = is an Akkadian abbreviated sentence ša karāni

šu RI [WRING HANDS] wr. šu RI "to wring the hands" Akk. šute'ulu

(šu[hand] + RI[cry])

As we can see Sumerian phrase:[šu RI] is a rebus representation of Akkadian šute'ulu

where r/l are allophones.

See also Akkadian eʾēlu : G. to bind, tie up Gt. to tie all round D = G ; to make binding (contract) Št. to link (hands) N. to be attached ; to infect (illness)

Proto-Semitic: *si(n)ṭ-

Meaning: flat hand with wrist

Hebrew: PB *sīṭ in ha-ssīṭ 'the distance between the tip of the thumb and that of the index finger when held apart, or between the root of the thumb and the tip of the index finger when the former is leaning against the latter' [Ja 977].

    Cf. sēṭ 'handle; swinging the forefinger' [Ja 972]

Syrian Aramaic: sīṭā 'palmus' [Brock 469]

Arabic: sinṭ- 'poignet, os qui joint l'avant-bras à la main' [BK 1 1151]

Notes: C. SEM only.

    Cf. MHR šēṭǝr 'measure, span between the end of the thumb and the forefinger' [JM 396]; related with -r to be treated as a suffixed element. One also wonders whether this word can be compared to HBR PB sṭr 'to strike sideways, slap' [Ja 973] and JUD sṭr (aph) 'to strike with the flat hand' [Ja 973] to make another SEM root *sVṭ(V)r- {} *cVṭ(V)r- 'flat hand, span'.

The author of Sumerian language has been careful not to include in Akkadian glossary the Semitic root:

*siṭ-: flat hand with wrist + Akkadian eʾēlu: to bind, tie up = Akk. šute'ulu

I understood that Sumerian cognate [šu] stood for an Akakdian determinative [ša] when suddenly I struck gold:

Akkadian

ša-qāti

[Feeding → Cooking]

bowl for washing hands

This cognate meant (of washing hands). Both these parts have become the respective phonetic values of the ideogram that stands for Sumerian and Akkadian.

Sumerian

ŠU

šu

šu [HAND].

šu [HANDLE] (^ĝeššu).

Akkadian:

Also: kat₇, qad, qat, qata, sagi_x(ŠU).

It is one of the most interesting ideograms of Sumerian language because as we shall see in the future the largest phonetic value of an ideogram becomes the basis of word allophones marked by the same ideogram. It is one of the very few, or let's say one of a kind ideogram where the determinative becomes part of the phonetic value to create the largest phonetic value of the ideogram. What I mean is that the author added the determiner of the word to the phonetic value of the word to create the consonant link from one phonetic value to another as the largest denominative in the ideogram.

Let us see the demonstration:

The largest phonetic value of the ideogram is [^ĝeššu] where [^ĝeš] is the determiner of the word [šu]

The phonetic transformations from one cognate to another is represented as the following:

KAT₇, QAD, QAT, QATA, SAGI_X(ŠU) < [^ĜEŠŠU] > ŠU where [K/Q], [Š/S] are allophones.

Without the help of computers it is impossible to arrive at such a conclusion. How Sumerians achieved such accuracy with mud tablets, where phonetic values were identified as pictograms rather than separate letters, remains a mystery.

But the story does not end there because one of Sumerian pictograms is actually an abbreviation of Semitic cognate for the left hand. As we know the left hand was used to write on a mud tablet. Akkadians used the right hand to write and the left hand to hold the mud brick. What an ingenious idea! Of course, Sumerian gods perceived the left hand as the legitimate hand of their language, the written idiom.

Proto-Semitic: *ŝimaʔl- {} *ĉimaʔl-

Meaning: left (side, hand)

Akkadian: šumēlu, šumīlu 'left side, left hand' OB on [CAD š 267], [AHw 1271].

    The irregular -ē-/-ī- (instead of the expected *-ā-) may be explained from the change *ŝimaʔl- > *šimiʔl- > šumīl- (*-i- > -u- near -m-)

Ugaritic: šmʔal 'die, das Linke' [Aist 307].

    To be normalized as ši/umaʔl-

Hebrew: ŝǝmō(ʔ)l 'left side, left' [KB 1332].

    Note -ā- in ŝǝmā(ʔ)lī 'left' (adj.) [ibid. 1333], which is usually explained as a regular reflex of *ā in an unstressed position (versus -ō- in ŝǝmō(ʔ)l where *ā is stressed). It seems more plausible, however, not to connect this discrepancy with accentual phenomena, but rather to regard the adjective as derived after a different pattern (probably *CaCaCiyy-, сf. yǝmānī 'right' with -a-, which neither can go back directly to its presumed prototype yāmīn 'right side')

Judaic Aramaic: sǝmālā 'left side' [Ja 1002].

    Orthographically also with both ŝ and (ʔ) ЛУЧШЕ ИХ ПРИВЕСТИ [Ja 1591], [Sok 571]

Syrian Aramaic: sǝmālā 'sinistra', adj. 'sinister' [Brock 481]

Modern Aramaic: HRT šumala 'links' [J Hert 199] NASS simǟlä 'left hand, left side' [Tser 0148] MMND smāla 'left' [M MND 509

Mandaic Aramaic: smal(a) 'left (hand, arm, side)' [DM 332].

    Also asmala, ʕsmala (with the *ʔa- prefix)

Arabic: šimāl- 'main gauche' [BK 1 1273], šamāl- 'côté gauche' [ibid.]

Mehri: ŝaymǝl 'left, left hand' [JM 380]

Jibbali: ŝĩyɛ̄l 'left-hand, left (direction)' [JJ 253], ŝǝmli, ŝǝmlɛ̄t 'left' [ibid.]

Harsusi: ŝémel 'left, left-hand' [JH 120]

Soqotri: ŝímhil (ŝémhel, ŝémel) 'gauche' [LS 430] (also [SSL LS 1473; SSL 4 97])

Notes: Postulating the succession *-aʔl- in the protoform is the only non-contradictory way to explain ō in HBR.

    On the possibility of suffixed *-l see Introduction; cf. ARB šaʔmat- 'côté gauche' [BK 1 1179], SAB s2ʔm 'North' [SD 130] and JIB ŝiñ (a correct transcription is ŝĩn, see [SSL 2 247]) 'gauche' quoted in [LS 64] under ʔímhel (influenced, according to Leslau, by iñ 'droite', cf. notes to *yamīn~ *yamān-, No. ).

    See metathesis with a meaning shift in ARB šaʔamal- 'vent du Nord' (also šamʔal- do.) [BK 1 1273] and ESA: SAB h-s2ʔml 'be northward' [SD 130], MIN s2ʔml-s1 'vers le nord' [LM 85] (note s2mʔl-s1 quoted [ibid. 86] as a contextual form).

    Note BERB *a-zǝlmaḍ 'left', *z- yielding AFRAS *ĉ. With three identical root consonants out of four, though in a metathetic order, and such specific meaning as 'left', the SEM and BERB roots are very likely related; BERB -ḍ in Auslaut, though, remains unexplained (<*a-zǝlmaʔ-t <*-ĉilmaʔ-t < metathetic *ĉimʔal-t ).

    [Holma 3]: AKK, HBR, ARB, SYR; [KB 1332]: HBR, UGR, AKK, ARM, ARB, ESA; [Brock 481]: SYR, ARB, HBR, AKK; [LS 430]: SOQ, MSA, ARB, HBR, SYR, AKK

Now all Sumerian cognates make perfect sense:

Sumerian šu; sum₅; šu-x "hand" Akk. qātu

where Sumerian sum₅ stands for Semitic root: šumēlu

As we can see after this demonstration the author of Sumerian idiom has been playing with Semitic derivatives in general not just with Akkadian alone. The Sumerian world must fit the Akkadian world like parallel universes.

The truth of the matter is that the Sumerian author is only playing with the reader. Actually Sumerian verbs reveal the partial rebus manifestation of Sumerian into Akkadian, as both cognates complement each other. Let us see the demonstration as sometimes the compekemt is total and sometimes partial just to confuse the reader.

šu bala [CHANGE] (85x: ED IIIb, Lagash II, Old Babylonian) wr. šu bal "to change" Akk. šupêlu

(šu[hand] + bala[turn])

šu dag [ABANDON] wr. šu dag "to cut off, abandon" Akk. batāqu

(šu[hand] + dag[demolish])

[1]

šu dag

šu du [COMPLETE] (306x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu du₇ "to complete, perfect; to be in working order (of tools)" Akk. šuklulu

(šu[hand] + du[push])

šu dub [PULL OUT] (6x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu dub₂ "to pull out" Akk. napāşu

(šu[hand] + dub[tremble])

[1]

šu dub2

1 distinct form attested; click to view forms table.

1. to pull out

~  šu dub₂ = ^pu-KU-tum Nigga 181; šu dub₂ = ^pu-šu-ru-um Nigga 182.

šu e [BLESS] (22x: Ur III, Old Babylonian) wr. šu e₃ "to bless; to go out; to terrify" Akk. waşû; palāhu; karābu

(šu[hand] + e[leave])

šu gi [REPAY] wr. šu gi₄ "to repay; to return something to someone, settle an account" Akk. gimillu turru; šullumu

(šu[hand] + gi[turn])

šu gur [PICK] wr. šu gur "to pick grapes" Akk. qatāpu ša karāni

(šu[hand] + gur[turn])

šu gur [ROLL UP] wr. šu gur "to wipe off; to roll up" Akk. qarāru; qebēru

(šu[hand] + gur[turn])

šu ĝar [CARRY OUT] (105x: Old Babylonian, unknown) wr. šu ĝar; šu ĝa₂-ĝa₂ "to carry out (a task)" Akk. gamālu

(šu[hand] + ĝar[place])

šu huz [BURN] (4x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu hu-uz "to burn" Akk. šūhuzu

(šu[hand] + huz[cvve])

huz [CVVE] wr. hu-uz "(compound verb verbal element)"

See šu huz[burn].

[1]

hu-uz

It is an ideogram created to complement Sumerian with Akkadian idiom.

šu kar [SPARE] (9x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu kar "to spare" Akk. šūzubu

(šu[hand] + kar[flee])

šu la [DEFILE] wr. šu la₂ "to defile" Akk. lu'û; lupputu

(šu[hand] + la[hang])

šu la [PARALYZE] wr. šu la₂ "to paralyze" Akk. eşēlu; kasû

(šu[hand] + la[hang])

šu niĝin [MAKE A ROUND TRIP] (37x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu niĝin₂; šu niĝin "to make a round trip" Akk. sahāru

(šu[hand] + niĝin[encircle])

šu RI [WRING HANDS] wr. šu RI "to wring the hands" Akk. šute'ulu

(šu[hand] + RI[cry])

šu si sa [PUT IN ORDER] (15x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu si sa₂ "to put in order" Akk. šutēšuru

(šu[hand] + si[horn] + sa[equal])

šu sub [GATHER UP] wr. šu su-ub "to gather up, to collect, to scrape together" Akk. esēpu

(šu[hand] + sub[rub])

šu tubul [MIX] (1x: Old Babylonian) wr. šu tu-bu-ul; šu tu-bu-ur "to mix" Akk. šutābulu

(šu[hand] + tubul[cvve])

tubul [CVVE] wr. tu-bu-ul "(compound verb verbal element)"

See šu tubul[mix].

[1]

tu-bu-ul

It is an ideogram created to complement Sumerian with Akkadian idiom.

šu us [PUSH OPEN] wr. šu us₂ "to push open (a door)" Akk. se'û

(šu[hand] + us[lean])

It is obvious that both Sumerian and Akkadian are created by the same author and Sumerian verbs complement Akkadian verbs. Anyway Sumerian does not have a verb pattern which makes it prone to suspicion that might by a trick language.

Sometimes this author loses his grip and shows that the word for hand in Akkadian takes the same ending as the word hand in Sumerian, grammatically they are identical. Remember that the word [šu] in Sumerian derived from Akkadian [ša] meaning [to, from] and it always came after the Akkadian noun qātu [hand]. Because Sumerian words are in fact Akkadian sentences: Akk. qātu [hand] [ša] + object [ša] + object where the subject precedes the object and then it is ommited to erase any doubts that Sumerian is Akkadian in disguise.

Therefore the Sumerian expression:

šu gur [PICK] wr. šu gur "to pick grapes" Akk. qatāpu ša karāni

(šu[hand] + gur[turn]) = is an Akkadian abbreviated sentence ša karāni

This was the design of the secret author who was in a hurry to prove that he was a special person so at the beginning he made some mistakes by copying Akkadian grammar.

The initial Sumerian was very much like Akkadian in structure because the author had no time to hide his tracks. Yet, he never told the truth his fellow brothers. He said to them that he was a prophet and he could talk to gods in their language. He had had a foretelling dream and he was taught by gods a very special tongue. Sumerian is the invention of a single man. Other scribes were deeply confused and they tried to identify the cognate of [hand] with other Semitic words for hand through folk etymology.

Semitic scribes decided to link this cognates with another word:

TAG׊U

tibir₂

tibir [HAND].

where the ideogram TAG stands for Akkadian qatu `hand' plus the Sum. ideogram ŠU `hand'

In order to create:

tibir [HAND] (26x: Ur III, Old Babylonian) wr. tibir; tibir₂; tibir₄; tibir₃ "hand; fist" Akk. qātu; rittu; upnu

See haš tibir rah[slap the thigh].

[1]		tibir
[2]		tibir2
[3]		tibir4
[4]		tibir3

Therefore the cognate for hand has passed the formal test during which the Akkadian cognate has been represented with a pictogram that has homonymy with the prime Sumerian pictogram:

Hence

Sum. TAG׊U
= Sum ŠU
= Akk. qatu `hand'

The best way to avoid being lost in the Sumerian labyrinth is to compare word clusters:

Akk.

šumēlu 
gab [LEFT] wr. gab₂-bu; gab₂ "left (hand)" Akk. šumēlu

šumeritum 
emeĝir [SUMERIAN] wr. eme-gi; eme-ĝir₁₅ "the Sumerian language" Akk. šumeritum; šumerû

šumerû 
emeĝir [SUMERIAN] wr. eme-gi; eme-ĝir₁₅ "the Sumerian language" Akk. šumeritum; šumerû

It is clear that the words šumēlu / šumeritum / šumerû are allophones, which means that Sumerian was the language written on the left hand which was holding the tablet and the word hand in Sumerian means left hand in Akkadian. Sumerian language liked chopping down Akkadian words and create from them new cognates. Hence Sum. šu; sum₅; šu-x are rebus representation of Akk. šumēlu / šumeritum / šumerû.

However the Akkadian scribe offers another explanation for the phonetic value of the word hand. We must remember that Sumerian was a puzzle that offered several options to the same question. A Sumerian diagram works in that way that you can approach a solution from different angles. It is an artificial language and functioned as such.

The apparent seal of the Sumerian scribe was the phonetic value SAGI from which the phonetic value SU was obtained. If a scribe offers this explanation than it must be true because Sumerian language does not offer a logical etymology of a word. It is an artificial language and the decision for creation phonetic values for words is completely arbitrary. Therefore we must take the explanation of a scribe at face value.

sagi = SILA₃.ŠU.GABA

sagi_x = SILA₃.GABA

sagi_x = ŠU

SILA₃

qa

(see full listing)

sal₄

sal [WINNOW].

sila₃

sila [CUT].

sila [FRAGMENT].

sila [STREET].

sila [UNIT].

Full listing.

Also: qû, ga₅, ka₄, sala₄, sil₃, šal₂.

sila [STREET] (238x: ED IIIb, Old Akkadian, Ur III, Old Babylonian, Middle Babylonian) wr. sila; sila₃ "street" Akk. sūqu

[1]		sila
[2]		sila3

8 distinct forms attested; click to view forms table.

1. street (238x/100%)

~ LEX/Ur III/Nippur ^si-lasila = šu-lu-u₂-um PBS 05, 136 [OBGT XI] iv 16'.  [[sila]] = si-la = TAR = su₂-u₂-qum OB Aa 198:1; [[sila]] = = = šu-lu-umOB Aa 198:2. ELA/Old Akkadian/Lagash ku₃ sila-ta e₃-a BM 028784 2. ELA/Old Akkadian/Nippur ku₃ sila-a gal₂-la OSP 2, 068 15; še sila-a gal₂-la OSP 2, 069 9; ur₅-še₃sila-a an-gal₂ OSP 2, 070 r i 12. ELA/Old Akkadian/Sippar sila-a gal₂-la-am₃ CT 50, 080 2. sila-a SIG₇-a AUCT 1, 171 1; ib₂-tak₄ nig₂-ka₉ ak sila-a SIG₇-a AUCT 1, 178 3; sila-ta e₃-a AUCT 1, 632 2.  1(geš₂) 2(u) 6(aš) 2(barig)3(ban₂) gur sila-a gal₂-la ASJ 02, 19 56 9; 5(diš) guruš sila-a dab₅-ba [...]-ta ASJ 03, 054 03 r ii 3; 1(diš) nin-za₃-ge-si sila-a dab₅-ba Berens 040 1.  sila-amu-gal₂ bi₂-du₁₁ BE 03/1, 070 1; ku₃ sila-a gal₂-la NATN 012 1; ku₃ sila-a gal₂-laNATN 012 3; 1/2(diš) ma-na ku₃ sila-a gal₂-a NATN 355 5; 2(u) la₂ 1(diš) gi sila-agub-ba NATN 448 2.  5(diš) sila kaš sag₁₀ 5(diš) sila₃ ninda 5(diš)gin₂ [sum] AAS 032 7; 1(gešʾu) 8(geš₂) gur še ur₅-ra sila gal₂-la AAS 081 3; sila-agal₂-la AAS 132 3.  sila-a gal₂-la MVN 03, 318 4; sila-a gal₂-[la] UET 3, 1634 2; u₃ kišib₃ ra-a še sila-a gal₂-la UET 3, 1781 3; kišib₃ ra-a sila-a gal₂-la YOS 04, 289 1.  sila-a SIG₇-a AUCT 1, 354 11; sila-a gal₂-la Orient 16, 104 165 9.  1(diš) sar e₂ du₃-a da sila OB Contracts. pl. D7 no. 29 12'. unknown/Old Babylonian/Tell Hammam et-Turkman [[sila]] = [si-la] = [TAR] = su-qumStudio Historiae Ardens, 289-291 ii 9; [[sila]] = [...] = [X] = ri-bi-tum Studio Historiae Ardens, 289-291 ii 10.  [[sila]] = TAR = su-[qum] MSL 09, 124-137 ix 606; [[sila]] = ri-bi-tum MSL 09, 124-137 ix 607. unknown/ED IIIb/Girsu 1(aš@c) maš ^den-ki sila dagal DP 043 o i 8; ^den-ki sila dagal DP 197 2'; geš-zi sila dagal-še₃ gal₂-la-bi DP 613 o iii 9. unknown/Old Akkadian/unknown še sila-a gal₂-laBIN 08, 221 4; i₃ sila-a gal₂-la BIN 08, 340 1. unknown/Ur III/Drehem šu la₂-a sila-a SIG₇-a Princeton 1, 011 2; sila-a pa₃-da Utah 01 2; sila-a pa₃-da SAT 2, 0484 2; sila-a SIG₇-aSAT 2, 0861 6; sila-a pa₃-da SAT 3, 2035 3. unknown/Ur III/Girsu 1(aš@c) lu₂-dingir-rasila-a dab₅-ba ASJ 11, 129 59 5; še-bi 2(gešʾu) 1(geš₂) 1(u) 3(diš) 6(diš) sila ASJ 16, 165 BM 87494 o vi 29; še ur₅-ra sila-a gal₂-la ASJ 18, 167 9 o ii 8; še ur₅-ra sila-a gal₂-la ASJ 18, 167 9 o i 6; 5(diš) sila₃ kaš 5(diš) sila ninda 1(diš) i₃ id-gur₂ BM Messenger 078 2; sila-a dab₅-ba-ta Princeton 1, 570 1.  la₂-ia₃ sila-a gal₂ASJ 19, 225 75 3; še gub-ba sila-a ur₄ MVN 15, 255 o ii 24; sila-a gal₂-la MVN 21, 343 r ii 13. unknown/Old Babylonian/Nippur ki [e₃]-bi sila-da hal-la-še₃ SAOC 44, 31 16.

~ kur[enter]LEX/Middle Babylonian/Nippur sila-ta kur₉-ra Gilgamesh II 021, CBS 14167 4. sila-ta ku₄-ra u₄ 1(u) 8(diš)-kam AUCT 1, 427 7; sila-ta ku₄-ra u₄ 2(u)5(diš)-kam AUCT 2, 170 6; sila-ta ku₄-ra u₄ 2(u)-[kam] YOS 04, 217 10; sila-ta ku₄-rau₄ 2(u) 4(diš)-kam YOS 04, 247 4. unknown/Ur III/Drehem sila-ta ku₄-ra u₄ 2(u) 3(diš)-kam SAT 3, 1911 6.

See: peš dug sila gaz.

Akk. sūqu "street".

cut	[[tar]]	ta-ar	TAR	na-[ka-su]-um
street	[[sila]]	si-la	TAR	su2-u2-qum
street	[[sila]]			šu-lu-um

What is the relationship between the word horn or finger and the word street? It is not rocket science to solve this puzzle. A street branches out the same as a horn or a finger. The name street in Sumerian sila was a pun of the words si-la [finger-hang].

si [HORN] (262x: ED IIIa, ED IIIb, Old Akkadian, Lagash II, Ur III, Early Old Babylonian, Old Babylonian, Middle Babylonian, unknown) wr. si "horn; finger; fret" Akk. qarnu; ubānu

See si e[sprout], si gu rah[blow the horn], si mu[sprout], si sa[straighten], šu si sa[put in order].

[1]

la [HANG] (1399x: ED IIIa, ED IIIb, Old Akkadian, Lagash II, Ur III, Early Old Babylonian, Old Babylonian) wr. la₂; la; lal₂ "to supervise, check; to weigh, weigh (out), pay; to hang, balance, suspend, be suspended; to show, display; to bind; binding, (yoke-)team; to press, throttle; to winnow (grain); to carry" Akk. alālu; hanāqu; hiāţu; kamû; kasû; şimittu; kullumu; šaqālu; šuqalulu; zarû

See a la[bind], gu la[embrace], ĝeš la[listen], ĝeš la[silent], ĝeštug la[deaf], HI la[cover], igi la[watch], igi tum la[spy], ki la[dig], ki la[fall to the ground], sa la[bind], sa la[sweep], šu la[defile], šu la[paralyze], šu la₂[to entrust], taka la[open], umbin la[scratch].

[1]		la2
[2]		la
[3]		lal2

The diagram
la = hang is of a later date than the diagram
finger. Clearly the pictogram
<
.

Clearly the phonetic value of Sumerian la "to weigh, pay, hang" < Akkadian šaqālu "to weigh, pay";

The only way of weighing the goods in ancient times was by hanging and then weighing them at the same time.

LA

la

la [HANG].

lala [PLENTY].

lalamu [BUTTOCKS].

šika

šika [SHERD].

Akkadian:

Also: šik_x(LA).

Clearly the Sumerian cognates šika, la derived from Akkadian šaqālu "to weigh, pay". Obviously the scribe chopped down the Akkadian word to form Sumerian phonetic values.

We can also note that Sumerian pictogram
< Sumerian pictogram
just like
<
. Clearly the Sumerian scribe wanted to make a logical conncection between the name street and the name finger.

si-la [STREET] Akk. sūqu

la [HANG] Akk. alālu;  kasû; šaqālu = šik_x(LA).

ŠU

šu

šu [HAND].

šu [HANDLE] (^ĝeššu).

Akkadian:

Also: kat₇, qad, qat, qata, sagi_x(ŠU).

According to Semitic scribes the phonetic value sagi_x was abbreviated into ŠU. The sign [ _x ] according to my research means applied phonetic value. Why did the ideogram for hand get this particular value? The answer as usual comes from the name of a compound. The initial name for hand was Akk. qātu.

Where did the value [sagi] come from?

sagi = SILA₃.ŠU.GABA

sagi_x = SILA₃.GABA

sagi_x = ŠU

It apparantly comes from si-la [STREET] Akk. sūqu

The Akkadian value sūqu [street] was transferred the name of Akk. qātu [hand] by means of association, an arbitrary decision of a Semitic scribe who left clear fingerprints of his enterprise and his intentions. The relations between street and finger is the manner a street branches out and the association of the street and hand is by the means the word street was formed in the first place.

In order to grasp the depth of deception perpetrated by Semitic scribes in the heart of Akkadian empire we must understand that the fraud was committed in a grand scale. Let me demonstrate the phonetic switches from one group of Akkadian words to another in order to create wide spread semantic destruction. Akkadian scribes worked switching not just words alone but entire sentences from Akkadian to Sumerian.