Differently Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 620 zi-l]a?-wa-an (followed by Groddek D. 2011a, 185), but the photographs show traces of two vertical wedges, rather than one.
Unless to be read -w]a+an, but this would be unique.
Sakuma Y. 2009b, II, 620 reads ⸢ú?-et?⸣, which would be expected, but the first sign is unlikely Ú. One can perhaps consider this a mistake for ú!-e[t?.
|