| gram_tags | form_voc | translit | uncertain | uncertain_note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| {'form': 'infinitive'} | ܡܶܩܛܰܠ | meqṭal | ||
| {'form': 'participle', 'voice': 'active', 'gender': 'm', 'number': 'sg'} | ܩܳܛܶܠ | qāṭel | True | Only the top line of a visually two-line cell was read; the second line (likely f.sg or a plural form) is not captured in this record — see the coverage note above. |
| {'form': 'participle', 'voice': 'passive', 'gender': 'm', 'number': 'sg'} | ܩܛܺܝܠ | qṭīl | True | Same two-line-cell caveat as the active participle above. |
Same plate as p043-1/-2/-3. Infinitive block: single form per stem, high confidence. Participle block: 'active' / 'passive' column headers directly above the data, each cell showing what appears to be two stacked sub-forms not individually broken out here — flagged as a follow-up target, not guessed at.
CONFIRMED for infinitive (meqṭal-shaped, m-prefix clearly visible on both plates) and passive participle (qṭīl-shaped). Active participle roughly consistent but not pinned down as precisely. ⭐ Nöldeke's plate resolves this record's own coverage gap: his Participle block prints exactly TWO forms per active/passive cell — m.sg and f.sg (e.g. active m. qāṭel-shaped / f. qāṭlā-shaped) — confirming the 'second stacked sub-form' this record's coverage note flagged as unbroken-out IS the feminine singular, not a plural or something else. Land as a follow-up: add gender=f cells using Nöldeke's f.sg forms as the guide.