Sample Page

Ugaritic^[2][3] (/ˌ(j)uːɡəˈrɪtɪk/ (Y)OOG-ə-RIT-ik)^[4] is an extinct Northwest Semitic language known through the Ugaritic texts discovered by French archaeologists in 1928 at Ugarit,^{[5][6][7][8][9][10][11]} including several major literary texts, notably the Baal cycle.^[11][12] The script is described as “a special alphabetic Cuneiform,” reflecting an idiom related to Canaanite and Hebrew languages.^[13]

Like Hebrew the short script of Ugarit has twenty-two characters: nearly identical to Hebrew in terms of their phonetic values (what they sound like) if not in terms of the visual elements or media of their inscription. Early samples of Hebrew are scratched on stone or potsherds whereas Ugaritic is punched on clay, like cuneiform.

A scholar of the period hailed Ugaritic as “the greatest literary discovery from antiquity since the deciphering of the Egyptian hieroglyphs and Mesopotamian cuneiform.”^[14]

The Ugaritic language is attested in texts from the 14th through the early 12th century BC. The city of Ugarit was destroyed roughly 1190 BC.^[15]

Literary texts discovered at Ugarit include the Legend of Keret or Kirta, the legends of Danel (AKA ‘Aqhat), the Myth of Baal-Aliyan, and the Death of Baal. The latter two are also known collectively as the Baal Cycle. These texts reveal aspects of ancient Northwest Semitic religion in Syria-Canaan during the Late Bronze Age.

Edward Greenstein has proposed that Ugaritic texts might help solve biblical puzzles such as the anachronism of Ezekiel mentioning Daniel in Ezekiel 14:13–16^[11] actually referring to Danel, a hero from the Ugaritic Tale of Aqhat.

Ugaritic had 28 consonantal phonemes (including two semivowels) and eight vowel phonemes (three short vowels and five long vowels): a ā i ī u ū ē ō. The phonemes ē and ō occur only as long vowels and are the result of monophthongization of the diphthongs аy and aw, respectively.

Consonants^{[citation needed]}

		Labial	Interdental	Dental/Alveolar		Palatal	Velar	Uvular	Pharyngeal	Glottal
				plain	emphatic
Nasal		m		n
Stop	voiceless	p		t	tˤ		k	q		ʔ
	voiced	b		d			ɡ
Fricative	voiceless		θ	s	sˤ	ʃ	x		ħ	h
	voiced		ð	z	ðˤ	(ʒ)[1]	ɣ[2]		ʕ
Approximant				l		j	w
Trill				r

The following table shows Proto-Semitic phonemes and their correspondences among Ugaritic, Akkadian, Classical Arabic and Tiberian Hebrew:

Proto-Semitic	Ugaritic		Akkadian	Classical Arabic		Tiberian Hebrew		Imperial Aramaic
b [b]	𐎁	b	b	ب	b [b]	ב	b/ḇ [b/v]	𐡁	b/ḇ [b/v]
p [p]	𐎔	p	p	ف	f [f]	פ	p/p̄ [p/f]	𐡐	p/p̄ [p/f]
ḏ [ð]	𐎏	d; sometimes ḏ [ð]	z	ذ	ḏ [ð]	ז	z [z]	𐡃 (older 𐡆)	d/ḏ [d/ð]
ṯ [θ]	𐎘	ṯ [θ]	š	ث	ṯ [θ]	שׁ	š [ʃ]	𐡕 (older 𐡔)	t/ṯ [t/θ]
ṱ [θʼ]	𐎑	ẓ [ðˤ]; sporadically ġ [ɣ]	ṣ	ظ	ẓ [ðˤ]	צ	ṣ [sˤ]	𐡈 (older 𐡑)	ṭ [tˤ]
d [d]	𐎄	d	d	د	d [d]	ד	d/ḏ [d/ð]	𐡃	d/ḏ [d/ð]
t [t]	𐎚	t	t	ت	t [t]	ת	t/ṯ [t/θ]	𐡕	t/ṯ [t/θ]
ṭ [tʼ]	𐎉	ṭ [tˤ]	ṭ	ط	ṭ [tˤ]	ט	ṭ [tˤ]	𐡈	ṭ [tˤ]
š [s]	𐎌	š [ʃ]	š	س	s [s]	שׁ	š [ʃ]	𐡔	š [ʃ]
z [dz]	𐎇	z	z	ز	z [z]	ז	z [z]	𐡆	z [z]
s [ts]	𐎒	s	s	س	s [s]	ס	s [s]	𐡎	s [s]
ṣ [tsʼ]	𐎕	ṣ [sˤ]	ṣ	ص	ṣ [sˤ]	צ	ṣ [sˤ]	𐡑	ṣ [sˤ]
l [l]	𐎍	l	l	ل	l [l]	ל	l [l]	𐡋	l [l]
ś [ɬ]	𐎌	š	š	ش	š [ʃ]	שׂ	ś [ɬ]→[s]	𐡎 (older 𐡔)	s [s]
ṣ́ [(t)ɬʼ]	𐎕	ṣ	ṣ	ض	ḍ [ɮˤ]→[dˤ]	צ	ṣ [sˤ]	𐡏 (older 𐡒)	ʿ [ʕ]
g [ɡ]	𐎂	g	g	ج	ǧ [ɡʲ]→[dʒ]	ג	g/ḡ [ɡ/ɣ]	𐡂	g/ḡ [ɡ/ɣ]
k [k]	𐎋	k	k	ك	k [k]	כ	k/ḵ [k/x]	𐡊	k/ḵ [k/x]
q [kʼ]	𐎖	q	q	ق	q [q]	ק	q [q]	𐡒	q [q]
ġ [ɣ]	𐎙	ġ [ɣ]	ḫ	غ	ġ [ɣ]	ע	ʿ [ʕ]	𐡏	ʿ [ʕ]
ḫ [x]	𐎃	ḫ [x]		خ	ḫ [x]	ח	ḥ [ħ]	𐡇	ḥ [ħ]
ʿ [ʕ]	𐎓	ʿ [ʕ]	ḫ / e	ع	ʿ [ʕ]	ע	ʿ [ʕ]	𐡏	ʿ [ʕ]
ḥ [ħ]	𐎈	ḥ [ħ]	e	ح	ḥ [ħ]	ח	ḥ [ħ]	𐡇	ḥ [ħ]
ʾ [ʔ]	𐎀	ʾ [ʔ]	∅ / ʾ	ء	ʾ [ʔ]	א	ʾ [ʔ]	𐡀/∅	ʾ/∅ [ʔ/∅]
h [h]	𐎅	h	∅	ه	h [h]	ה	h [h]	𐡄	h [h]
m [m]	𐎎	m	m	م	m [m]	מ	m [m]	𐡌	m [m]
n [n]	𐎐	n	n	ن	n [n]	נ	n [n]	𐡍	n [n]
r [r]	𐎗	r	r	ر	r [r]	ר	r [r]	𐡓	r [r]
w [w]	𐎆	w	w	و	w [w]	ו	w [w]	𐡅	w [w]
y [j]	𐎊	y	y	ي	y [j]	י	y [j]	𐡉	y [j]

The Ugaritic alphabet is a cuneiform script used beginning in the 15th century BC. Like most Semitic scripts, it is an abjad, where each symbol stands for a consonant, leaving the reader to supply the appropriate vowel. Only after an aleph the vowel is indicated (’a, ’i, ’u). With other consonants one can often guess the unwritten vowel, and thus vocalize the text, from (a) parallel cases with an aleph, (b) texts where Ugaritic words are written in Akkadian cuneiform syllables, (c) comparison with other West-Semitic languages, for example Hebrew and Arabic, (d) generalized vocalization rules,^[16] and (e), in poetry, parallelisms are also helpful to interpret the consonantal skeleton.^[17]

Although it appears similar to Mesopotamian cuneiform (whose writing techniques it borrowed), its symbols and symbol meanings are unrelated. It is the oldest example of the family of West Semitic scripts such as the Phoenician, Paleo-Hebrew, and Aramaic alphabets (including the Hebrew alphabet). The so-called “long alphabet” has 30 letters while the “short alphabet” has 22. Other languages (particularly Hurrian) were occasionally written in the Ugarit area, although not elsewhere.

Clay tablets written in Ugaritic provide the earliest evidence of both the Levantine ordering of the alphabet, which gave rise to the alphabetic order of the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin alphabets; and the South Semitic order, which gave rise to the order of the Ge’ez script. The script was written from left to right.

Ugaritic is an inflected language, and as a Semitic language its grammatical features are highly similar to those found in Classical Arabic and Akkadian. It possesses two genders (masculine and feminine), three cases for nouns and adjectives (nominative, accusative, and genitive [also, note the possibility of a locative case]); three numbers: (singular, dual, and plural); and verb aspects similar to those found in other Northwest Semitic languages. The word order for Ugaritic is verb–subject–object (VSO), possessed–possessor (NG), and noun–adjective (NA). Ugaritic is considered a conservative Semitic language, since it retains most of the Proto-Semitic phonemes, the basic qualities of the vowel, the case system, the word order of the Proto-Semitic ancestor, and the lack of the definite article. ^[18]

Ugaritic, like all Semitic languages, exhibits a unique pattern of stems consisting typically of “triliteral“, or 3-consonant consonantal roots (2- and 4-consonant roots also exist), from which nouns, adjectives, and verbs are formed in various ways: e.g. by inserting vowels, doubling consonants, and/or adding prefixes, suffixes, or infixes.

Ugaritic verbs are based on mostly three-literal roots (like all Semitic languages) (a few verbs have two- or four-consonant roots). For example, r-g-m, ‘to say’. By adding prefixes, infixes, and suffixes, and varying the vowels, the various verbal forms are formed. (Because in Ugaritic vowels are hardly written, these vowel variations often are not clearly visible).

Verbs can take several of a dozen stem patterns, or binyanim, that change the basic meaning of the verb, and make it for example passive, causative, or intensive. The basic form (in German: Grundstamm) is the G stem.

The verbal forms for each stem can be divided in five verbal form groups:

• the suffix conjugation, also called qtl (pronounced qatal), or perfect;
• the prefix conjugation, also called yqtl (pronounced yiqtol), or imperfect;
• imperatives;
• two different infinitives;
• an active and a passive participle.

Verbs have one of three different vowel patterns, -a-, -i-, and -u-:

• in the qtl (G stem): qatala, qatila, or qatula (cf. Hebrew qaṭal, kavēd, qaṭon);
• in the yqtl (G stem): yiqtalu, yaqtilu, or yaqtulu.

There is no one-on-one link between morphology and tense (past, present or future). This is because Ugaritic is an aspect language: verbal forms do not primarily indicate the timing of activities, but they indicate aspect: the suffix conjugation (qtl) has perfective aspect, it is used when viewing an activity as having a completion; the prefix conjugation (yqtl) has imperfective aspect, it is used when it is deemed irrelevant whether the activity has an end or beginning.

Ugaritic verbs can have several moods, both indicative and injunctive (jussive, cohortative). Moods are most clearly visible in the prefix conjugation (see below).

The suffix conjugation (qtl) has perfective aspect. Taking the root RGM (which means “to say”) as an example, ragama may be translated as “he says” (at this very moment), or “he has said” (and has finished speaking).

The vowel between the second and third root consonant can be -a-, -i-, or -u-. Most verbs describe an activity (so-called “active verbs”) and have -a-. Verbs describing a state or property (“stative verbs”) have -i- or (rarely) -u-.

The paradigm of the suffix conjugation (or Perfect) is as follows for the a-verb RGM, the i-verb ŠBᶜ (“to be (become) satiated”), and the u-verb MRṢ (“to fall ill”):

Morphology of the Ugaritic suffix conjugation (in the simple active pattern, G stem)

			model	a-verb			i-verb		u-verb
Singular	1st	masc. & fem.	STEM-tu	rgmt	RaGaMtu	“I say, have said”	šabiᶜtu	“I am satiated”	maruṣtu	“I fall ill, have fallen ill”
	2nd	masculine	STEM-ta	rgmt	RaGaMta	“you (m.) say”	šabiᶜta	(etc.)	maruṣta	(etc.)
		feminine	STEM-ti	rgmt	RaGaMti	“you (f.) say”	šabiᶜti		maruṣti
	3rd	masculine	STEM-a	rgm	RaGaMa	“he says”	šabiᶜa		maruṣa
		feminine	STEM-at	rgmt	RaGaMat	“she says”	šabiᶜat		maruṣat
Dual	1st	masc. & fem.	STEM-nayā	rgmny	RaGaMnayā	“the both of us say”	šabiᶜnayā		maruṣnayā
	2nd	masc. & fem.	STEM-tumā	rgmtm	RaGaMtumā	“you two say”	šabiᶜtumā		maruṣtumā
	3rd	masculine	STEM-ā	rgm	RaGaMā	“they both (m.) say”	šabiᶜā		maruṣā
		feminine	STEM-tā	rgmt	RaGaMtā	“they both (f.) say”	šabiᶜtā		maruṣtā
Plural	1st	masc. & fem.	STEM-nū (?)[1]	rgmn (?)	RaGaMnū (?)	“we say”	šabiᶜnū (?)		maruṣnū (?)
	2nd	masculine	STEM-tum(u)	rgmtm	RaGaMtum(u)	“you (m. Pl.) say”	šabiᶜtum(u)		maruṣtum(u)
		feminine	STEM-tin(n)a	rgmtn	RaGaMtin(n)a	“you (f. Pl.) say”	šabiᶜtin(n)a		maruṣtin(n)a
	3rd	masculine	STEM-ū	rgm	RaGaMū	“they (m.) say”	šabiᶜū		maruṣū
		feminine	STEM-ā	rgm	RaGaMā	“they (f.) say”	šabiᶜā		maruṣā

The prefix conjugation yqtl- takes three forms: yiqtal-, yaqtil-, and yaqtul-. The specific pattern is determined by the stem consonants.^[19] Therefore, there is no simple one-on-one relation with the three qtl vowel patterns, qatal, qatil, and qatul, because the qtl vowel pattern depends not on the consonant pattern, but on a verb’s meaning (active or stative).

For example, the following three verbs all have a qtl of the qatal type, but their yqtl patterns differ:

verb		qtl		type	yqtl
QRᵓ	“to call, invoke”	qaraᵓa	“he calls”	yiqtal-	yiqraᵓu	“he will call”
YRD	“to go down”	yarada	“he goes down”	yaqtil-	yaridu	“he will go down”
RGM	“to say, speak”	ragama	“he says”	yaqtul-	yargumu	“he will say”

The Imperfect paradigms for the three patterns are as follows, for the verbs RGM, “to say” (yaqtul- pattern), Š’iL, “to ask” (yiqtal- pattern), and YRD, “to go down” (yaqtil pattern):

Morphology of the Ugaritic prefix conjugation (in the simple active pattern, G stem)^[1]

			model	yaqtul pattern			yiqtal pattern		yaqtil pattern
Singular	1st	masc. & fem.	ᵓa/ᵓi–STEM–(u)	ᵓargm	ᵓaRGuMu	“I will say”	ᵓišᵓalu	“I will ask”	ᵓaridu	“I will go down”
					ᵓaRGuM	“may I say”	ᵓišᵓal	“may I ask”	ᵓarid	“may I go down”
	2nd	masculine	ta/ti–STEM–(u)	trgm	taRGuMu	“you (m.) will say”	tišᵓalu	(etc.)	taridu	(etc.)
					taRGuM	“may you (m.) say”	tišᵓal		tarid
		feminine	ta/ti–STEM–ī(na)	trgmn	taRGuMīna	“you (f.) …”	tišᵓalīna		taridīna
					taRGuMī	“may you (f.) …”	tišᵓalī		taridī
	3rd	masculine	ya/yi–STEM–(u)	yrgm	yaRGuM(u)	“… he …”	yišᵓal(u)		yarid(u)
		feminine	ta/ti–STEM–(u)	trgm	taRGuM(u)	“… she …”	tišᵓal(u)		tarid(u)
Dual	1st	masc. & fem.	na/ni–STEM–ā (?)	nrgm (?)	naRGuMā (?)	“… the both of us …”	nišᵓalā (?)		naridā (?)
	2nd	masc. & fem.	ta/ti–STEM–ā(ni)[2]	trgm(n)	taRGuMā(ni)	“… you two …”	tišᵓalā(ni)		taridā(ni)
	3rd	masculine	ta/ti–STEM–ā(ni)[2]; also ya/yi–STEM–ā(ni)[2]	trgm(n) or yrgm(n)	taRGuMā(ni) or yaRGuMā(ni)	“… they both (m.) …”	tišᵓalā(ni) or yišᵓalā(ni)		taridā(ni) or yaridā(ni)
		feminine	ta/ti–STEM–ā(ni)[2]	trgm(n)	taRGuMā(ni)	“… they both (f.) …”	tišᵓalā(ni)		taridā(ni)
Plural	1st	masc. & fem.	na/ni–STEM–(u)	nrgm	naRGuM(u)	“… we …”	nišᵓal(u)		narid(u)
	2nd	masculine	ta/ti–STEM–ū(na)	trgm(n)	taRGuMū(na)	“… you (m. Pl.) …”	tišᵓalū(na)		taridū(na)
		feminine	ta/ti–STEM–na	trgmn	taRGuMna	“… you (f. Pl.) …”	tišᵓalna		taridna
	3rd	masculine	ta/ti–STEM–ū(na); rarely: ya/yi–STEM–ū(na)	trgm(n) or yrgm(n)	taRGuMū(na) or yaRGuMū(na)	“… they (m.) …”	tišᵓalū(na) or yišᵓalū(na)		taridū(na) or yaridū(na)
		feminine	ta/ti–STEM–ū(na)	trgmn	taRGuMū(na)	“… they (f.) …”	tišᵓalū(na)		taridū(na)

The prefix conjugation takes four or five different endings (yqtl, yqtlu, yqtla, yqtln). There are three clear moods (indicative, jussive, and volitive or cohortative). The so-called energic forms, yqtln, with an -n suffix (-an, -anna; possibly also -un, -unna), apparently have the same meaning as the shorter forms without the -n suffix.^[20]

Form	Name	Mood	Tense	Aspect	Example	Translation	Notes
yqtlu	Imperfect	Indicative	Present – Future	imperfective	yargumu	“he says, will say”
			Past	continued action		“he used to say, is wont to say”
yqtl	‘short form’	Indicative	Past	imperfective	yargum	“he said”
		Jussive	—	—		“may he say, let him say”
yqtla	Volitive	Volitive (Cohortative, Subjunctive)	—	—	yarguma	“may he say, he shall say”
yqtln	Energic	Jussive	—	—	yarguman(na)	“may he say”
	Energic #2	Indicative	Past	imperfective	yargumun(na)	“he said, says”	existence doubted

The imperative takes three forms, qatal, qitil, and qutul, where the vowels are equal to the second vowel of the imperfect. So, if the imperfect is yaqtul-, the imperative is qutul; if yaqtil-, then qitil; if yiqtal-, then qatal.

Examples (the verb YRD “to go down, to descend” is a so-called ‘weak’ verb, the first consonant Y disappears in the imperative):

		a-type		i-type		u-type
	verb:	PTḤ, “to open”		YRD, “to descend”		RGM, “to say, speak”		(speaking to:)
(Imperfect, 3 Sg. m.:)		yiptaḥu	“he will open”	yaridu	“he will descend”	yargumu	“he will say”
Imperative, 2 Singular	masculine	pataḥ	“open!”	rid	“descend!”	rugum	“say!”, “speak!”	a man
	feminine	pataḥī		ridī		rugumī		a woman
2 Dual	masculine	pataḥā		ridā (?)		rugumā		two men
	feminine							two women
2 Plural	masculine	pataḥū		ridū		rugumū		three or more men, or men and women
	feminine	pataḥā (?)		ridā (?)		rugumā (?)		three or more women

The paradigm of the active participle of G stems is as follows (verb MLK, “to be king”):

Singular	masculine	māliku	“reigning (king)”
	feminine	malik(a)tu	“reigning (queen)”
Plural	masculine	malikūma	“reigning (kings)”
	feminine	mālikātu	“reigning (queens)”

The passive participle is quite rare. There seem to be two forms (verbs RGM “to say”, ḤRM “to divide”):

		u-form		i-form
Singular	masculine	ragūmu	“said, spoken”	ẖarimu	“divided”
	feminine	ragūm(a)tu		ẖarim(a)tu
Plural	masculine	?		?
	feminine	ragūmātu		ẖarimātu

Other stems than the G (and N) stem form their participles by means of a m- prefix; for example mulaḫḫišu (“conjuror”, D stem LḪŠ “to whisper”), mušamṭiru (“[the god] who rains”, Š stem, MṬR “to rain down”).

Like other Semitic languages, Ugaritic has two infinitives, the infinitive absolute and the infinitive construct. However, in Ugaritic the two have an identical form. The usual form is halāku (“to go”, verb hlk), but a few verbs use an alternative form *hilku, for example niģru, “to guard” (verb nģr).

The infinitive absolute is often used preceding a perfect or imperfect verbal form, to put emphasis on that following verbal form. Such an infinive absolute may be translated as “verily, certainly, absolutely”. For example, halāku halaka, “he certainly goes” (literally, “to go! he goes”). An isolated infinitive absolute may also be used instead of any perfect, imperfect, or imperative verbal form.

The infinitive construct is often used after the prepositions lê (“to”) and bi (“in, by”): bi-ša’āli “in asking, by asking, while asking” (verb š’al “to ask”; note that after the preposition b (bi) the genitive of the infinitive is used).

Ugaritic verbs occur in about a dozen reconstructed patterns or binyanim (verb RGM, “to say”, unless indicated otherwise):^[21][22] The large majority of verbal forms (about 70%) belong to the G stem (German: Grundstamm, “basic stem”).

	Hebrew equivalent	Verb	Perfect (3rd sg. masc.)	Imperfect (3rd sg. masc.)	Imperative (2nd sg. masc.)	Infinitive	Participle Active (sg. masc.)
G stem (simple)	qal	“to say”	ragama, “he says, said”	yargumu, “he will say, said, used to say”	rugum, “say!”	ragāmu, rigmu, “to say”	rāgimu, “saying; one who says”
Gp stem (passive of G)	qal passive	“to be said”	rugima	yurgamu	—	?	ragūmu / ragimu
(?) C stem (causative internal pattern)	—	MLK, “to reign” → “to enthrone”	—	yamliku[1]	—	—	—
Gt stem (simple reflexive)	—	“to speak to oneself”	ᵓirtagima[23]	yirtagimu[24] (or yirtagamu?)	ᵓirtagim	?	?
N stem (reciprocal or passive)	niphʻal	“to speak to each other; to be said”	nargama	yirragimu (< *yinragimu)	ᵓirragim	nargamu	nargamu
D stem (factitive / causative, or intensive)	piʻʻel	“to speak loudly”	raggima[25]	yaraggimu	raggim	ruggamu	muraggimu
Dp stem (passive of D)	puʻʻal	“to be said loudly”	ruggima	yuraggamu	—	?	muraggamu
tD stem (reflexive of D)	hithpaʻʻel	“to speak loudly to oneself”	taraggima	yataraggimu	taraggim	?	?
L stem (intensive or factitive)	pôlel	RWM, “to raise up”	?	yarāmimu	rāmim	rammu	murāmimu
Lp stem (passive of L)	pôlal	RWM, “to be raised up”	?	yurāmamu	—	?	murāmamu
Š stem (causative)	hiphʻil	“to make someone speak”	šargima	yašargimu	šargim	šurgamu	mušargimu
Šp stem (passive of Š)	hophʻal	“to be made to speak”	šurgima	yušargamu	—	?	mušargamu
Št stem (causative reflexive)	hištaph‘al	“to make someone speak to himself”	ᵓištargima	yištargimu	?	?	muštargimu
R stem (factitive) (reduplicated roots)[2]	—	KRKR, “to twiddle one’s fingers”	karkara	yakarkaru	?	?	?
Rt or tR stem (factitive-reflexive) (?)	—	YPY, “to be beautiful” → “to make yourself beautiful”	?	yîtapêpû or yîtêpêpû[3]	?	?	?

---

In Ugaritic, “weak verbs” are verbs whose roots contain a weak consonant, that is, a consonant that may disappear in some forms (in particular the imperative), or change into another consonant (some imperfect forms). Weak consonants are w and y, and also n if it is the first root consonant. Verbs with only two root consonants are weak too.

Due to their weak consonants, weak verbs can undergo phonetic changes, such as the assimilation of waw (w) to yod (y), especially in the absence of an intervening vowel. This characteristic impacts the verb’s inflection, resulting in variations that are atypical compared to regular (strong) verbs.^[26] This phenomenon is akin to that observed in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew.

The following list shows the various classes of weak verbs. Weak forms are shown in bold, the strong verb RGM is shown for comparison:

Class	Characteristics (weak consonants)	Example		Perfect (3 sing. masc.)	Imperfect (3 sing. masc.	Imperative (2 sing. masc.)	Infinitive	Participle (sing. masc.)
strong		RGM	“to say”	ragama	yargumu	rugum	ragāmu, rigmu	rāgimu
I-n	1st root consonant n; also h in HLK and l in LQḤ	NPL	“to fall”	napala	yappulu	pul (?)	napālu	nāpilu
		HLK	“to go”	halaka	yaliku	lik	halāku, hilku	hāliku
		LQḤ	“to take”	laqaḥa	yiqqaḥu	qaḥ	laqāḥu	lāqiḥu
I-wy	1st consonant w or y	YRD	“to descend”	yarada	yaridu	rid	yarādu	yāridu
II-w	2nd consonant w	QWM (QM)	“to stand”	qāma	yaqūmu	qum (?)	qāmu / qūmu	qāmu
II-y	2nd consonant y	BYN (BN)	“to understand”	bīna (?)	yabīnu (?)	bin	bînu	bīnu / bēnu (?)
III-y	3rd consonant y (or w)	ᶜLY	“to ascend”	ᶜalaya, ᶜalâ	yaᶜlû	ᶜilî	ᶜalāyu, ᶜilyu	ᶜāliyu
II-gem	two root consonants, 2nd cons. doubled (“geminated”)	SBB	“to turn around”	sabba	yasubbu	sub (?)	sibbu (?)	sabbu

In Ugaritic there also exist “doubly weak verbs”, which contain two weak consonants.

Nouns (substantives, adjectives, personal names) in their basic form (nominative singular) end in -u. Nominal forms are categorized according to their inflection into: cases (nominative, genitive, and accusative), state (absolute and construct), gender (masculine and feminine), and number (singular, dual, and plural).

Here is the full paradigm for a masculine substantive (malku, “king”) and a feminine substantive (malkatu, “queen”).^[27][28]

		Masculine						Feminine
		ending		malku, “king”				ending		malkatu, “queen”
number	case	abs. state	cs. state	absolute state		construct state		abs. state	cs. state	absolute state		construct state
Singular	nominative	-u		mlk	malku			-u		mlkt	malkatu
	genitive	-i		mlk	malki			-i		mlkt	malkati
	accusative	-a		mlk	malka			-a		mlkt	malkata
Dual	nominative	-āma (or -āmi?)	-ā	mlkm	malkāma / malkāmi	mlk	malkā	-āma / -āmi	-ā	mlktm	malkatāma / malkatāmi	mlkt	malkatā
	gen. & acc.	-êma (or -êmi?)	-ê	mlkm	malkêma / malkêmi	mlk	malkê	-êma / -êmi	-ê	mlktm	malkatêma / malkatêmi	mlkt	malkatê
Plural	nominative	-ūma	-ū	mlkm	mal(a)kūma	mlk	malakū	(*)-u		mlkt	mal(a)kātu
	gen. & acc.	-īma	-ī	mlkm	mal(a)kīma	mlk	malakī	(*)-i		mlkt	mal(a)kāti

Note (*): with lengthening of the final vowel of the stem: mal(a)kat– > mal(a)kāt-.

Ugaritic has three grammatical cases corresponding to: nominative, genitive, and accusative. Normally, singular nouns take the ending -u in the nominative, -i in the genitive and -a in the accusative. After prepositions as a rule the genitive is used. The accusative is also used adverbially (ṭābu, “good” > ṭāba, “well”) and as a kind of locative (šamîma = “to the heavens, in heaven”). More often, a locative is formed by appending a suffix -h to the accusative: ’arṣu, “earth”, accusative ’arṣa, locative ’arṣah, “earthward”. There is no dative; instead the preposition lê, “to, for”, + genitive is used.

As in Arabic, some exceptional nouns (known as diptotes) have the suffix -a in the genitive. There is no Ugaritic equivalent for Classical Arabic nunation or Akkadian mimation.

Nouns in Ugaritic occur in two states: absolute and construct. The construct (or ‘bound’) state indicates that a noun is closely linked to the following noun. For example, “the house of the king” could in Ugaritic in principle be expressed in two ways:

1. “the house” (absolute state) “of the king” (absolute state, genitive). This might be called the ‘Latin’ way of expression (domus regis);

2. “the house of” (construct state) “the king” (absolute state, genitive). This might be called the ‘Hebrew’ way of expression (bēt hammelek).

The construct state is also the basic form used when a personal pronoun is suffixed: malakūma = “(the) kings” (absolute state, nominative) > malakū (construct state) > malakūhu = “his kings”; similarly malakĩhu = “(of) his kings” (genitive, accusative).

Ugaritic, unlike Arabic and Hebrew, has no definite article.

Nouns which have no gender marker are for the most part masculine, although some feminine nouns do not have a feminine marker. However, these denote feminine beings such as ʼumm- (mother). /-t/ is the feminine marker which is directly attached to the base of the noun.

Ugaritic distinguishes between nouns based on quantity. All nouns are either singular when there is one, dual when there are two, and plural if there are three or more.

The singular has no marker and is inflected according to its case.

The marker for the dual in the absolute state appears as /-m/. However, the vocalization may be reconstructed as /-āma/ or /-āmi/ in the nominative (such as malkāma, malkāmi “two kings”) and /-êma/ or /-êmi/ for the genitive and accusative (e.g. malkêma, malkêmi). For the construct state, it is /-ā/ and /-ê/ respectively.

Masculine absolute state plurals take the forms -ūma in the nominative and -īma in the genitive and accusative. In the construct state they are -ū and -ī respectively. There are a few irregular (or broken) plurals; for example bt (bêtu), “house”, plural bhtm (bahatūma); and bn (binu), “son”, plural banūma (with Ablaut).

The female afformative plural is /-āt/ with a case marker probably following the /-t/, giving /-ātu/ for the nominative and /-āti/ for the genitive and accusative in both absolute and construct state.

Adjectives follow the noun and are declined exactly like the preceding noun.

Independent personal pronouns in Ugaritic are as follows (some forms are lacking because they are not in the corpus of the language):

person	gender	case	Singular		Dual		Plural
1st			ᵓn (ᵓanā) and ᵓnk (ᵓanāku)	“I”	?	“we two”	ᵓanḥn? (ᵓanaḥnu?)[1]	“we”
2nd	masculine		ᵓat (ᵓatta)	“you (m.)”	ᵓatm (ᵓattumā)	“you two”	ᵓatm (ᵓattumu)	“you all (m.)”
	feminine		ᵓat (ᵓatti)	“you (f.)”			ᵓatn? (ᵓattina?)	“you all (f.)”
3rd	masculine	nominative	hw (huwa)	“he”	hm? (humā?)	“them two”	hm? (humū?)	“they”
		gen., acc.	hwt (huwāti)	“him”			hmt (humutu?)	“them”
	feminine	nominative	hy (hiya)	“she”	hm? (humā?)	“them two (f.)”	hn (hinna)	“they (f.)”
		gen., acc.	hyt (hiyāti)	“her”	hmt (humāti?)		hmt (humūti?)	“them (f.)”

Suffixed (or enclitic) pronouns (mainly denoting the genitive and accusative) are as follows:

Person	Gender	Case	Singular			Dual		Plural
			after nouns, prepositions	after verbs
1st	m. & f.	nominative	-— (-î)	-n (-nī)	“me, my”	-ny (-nayā / -niyā)	“us, our”	-n (-nā / -nū)	“us, our”
		gen., acc.	-y (-ya)
2nd	masculine		-k (-ka)		“you, your”	-km (-kumā)	“you, your”	-km (-kumū?)	“you, your”
	feminine		-k (-ki)		“you, your (f.)”			-kn (-kin(n)a)	“you, your (f.)”
3rd	masculine	nominative	-h (-hu)		“him, his”	-hm (-humā?)	“them, their”	-hm (-humū?)	“them, their”
		gen., acc.	-h (-hu) (also -nh, -n, -nn: -annahu, -annu, -annannu)
	feminine	nominative	-h (-ha)		“her”			-hn (-hin(n)a)	“them, their (f.)”
		gen., acc.	-h (-ha) (also -nh, -n, -nn: -annaha, -anna, -annanna?)

The relative (or ‘determinative’) pronoun is d (dū), “that of, of which”; often simply translatable as “who, which”. It introduces a specification, property, or action by the subject and is congruent with the governing noun. Declension: dī, dā; feminine dt (dātu, dāti, dāta); plural dt (dūtu, dūti(?)).

The demonstrative (or ‘deictic’) pronouns are hnd (hānādū), “this”, and hnk (hānākā) “that”. Extended forms are hanadūna, hanadūti, hanamati.

Interrogative pronouns are my (mīyu) “who?”, and mh (maha) “what?”.

Indefinite pronouns seem to be derived from the interrogative pronoun by appending to them the particles -n(a)-, -k(a), and/or -m(a) (in that order). Thus, for example: mnkm (mīnukumu?) and mnm (mīnama?) “anyone, someone”, mhkm (mahkīma?) and mnm (mannama?) “anything, something, whatever”.

The following is a table of Ugaritic numerals (some vocalisations are conjectural):^[29]

Number	used with Masculine nouns only		used with Masc. or Fem. nouns		used with Feminine nouns only		notes
1	ʼaḥd	ʼaḥḥadu			ʼaḥt	ʼaḥḥattu
2			ṯn	ṯinā (+nominative), ṯinê (+gen., acc.)	ṯt	ṯittā (+nominative), ṯittê (+gen., acc.)
3	ṯlṯt	ṯalāṯatu	ṯlṯ	ṯalāṯu			“3” … “10”: seemingly feminine forms, ending in -t, are used with masculine nouns, and vice versa (Semitic gender dissymmetry)
4	ᵓarbᶜt	ᵓarbaᶜatu	ᵓarbᶜ	ᵓarbaᶜu
5	ḫmšt	ḫamišatu	ḫmš	ḫamišu
6	ṯṯt	ṯiṯṯatu	ṯṯ	ṯiṯṯu
7	šbᶜt	šabᶜatu	šbᶜ	šabᶜu
8	ṯmnt	ṯamānîtu	ṯmn	ṯamānû
9	tšᶜt	tišᶜatu	tšᶜ	tišᶜu
10	ᶜšrt	ᶜašratu	ᶜšr	ᶜašru
11	ᶜšt ᶜšrh	ᶜaštê ᶜišrêh (ᶜašrihu?)	ᶜšt ᶜšr	ᶜaštê ᶜašru
12	ṯn ᶜšrh / ṯn ᶜšrt	ṯinā ᶜišrêh (ᶜašrihu?) / ṯinā ᶜašratu	ṯn ᶜšr	ṯinā ᶜašru
13	ṯlṯt ʻšrh / ṯlṯt ᶜšrt	ṯalāṯatu ᶜišrêh (ᶜašrihu?) / ṯalāṯatu ᶜašratu	ṯlṯ ᶜšr	ṯalāṯu ᶜašru			“14” … “19” similarly
20			ᶜšrm	ᶜašrāma			dual of ᶜašru, “10”
30			ṯlṯm	ṯalāṯūma			«plural» form of ṯalāṯu, “3”; “40” … “90” similarly
100			mᵓit	miᵓtu
200			mᵓitm	miᵓtāma			dual of miᵓtu, “100”
300			ṯlṯ mᵓat	ṯalāṯu miᵓātu			“400” … “900” similarly
1000			ᵓalp	ᵓalpu
2000			ᵓalpm	ᵓalpāma			dual of ᵓalpu, “1000”
3000			ṯlṯ ᵓalpm	ṯalāṯu ᵓalpūma
10,000			rbt	ribbatu
20,000			rbtm	ribbatāma			dual of ribbatu, “10,000”
30,000			ṯlṯ rbbt	ṯalāṯu ribabātu

Numerals are declined just like other nouns, for example ᵓarbaᶜu (“4”): genitive ᵓarbaᶜi, accusative ᵓarbaᶜa.

The following is a table of Ugaritic ordinals. The vocalisations (predominantly based on comparison with Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic) are very uncertain:^[30]

Number	written as	vocalisation (??)
1st	prᶜ or ᵓaḥd	parīᶜu or ᵓaḥḥīdu
2nd	ṯn	ṯanû
3rd	ṯlṯ	ṯalīṯu
4th	rbᶜ	rabīᶜu
5th	ḫmš	ḫamīšu
6th	ṯdṯ	ṯadīṯu
7th	šbᶜ	šabīᶜu
8th	ṯmn	ṯamīnu
9th	tšᶜ	tašīᶜu
10th	ᶜšr	ᶜašīru

Among particles in Ugaritic the so-called enclitic particles deserve special note, especially -n (-na) and -m (-ma). These particles do not seem to change the meaning of words, but create confusion between different forms, and thus complicate the analysis and interpretation of words, in particular verbal forms. For example, rgmtm can be ragamtumu, “you (plural) say”, but it can also be ragamtu-ma, an extension of ragamtu, “I have said”. And mlkm (malkuma), can be the plural malkûma, “kings”, but it can also be an extended singular, malku-ma, “the king”.

The enclitic particles can be stacked on top of each other. An extreme example is hnny (hannaniya), “behold!, here is”, that is analyzed as a four-step extension of the presentative particle h (ha): hnny (hannaniya) = ha + -n + -na + -ni + -ya. h and hnny have the same meaning, “behold!, here is”.

Techniques often encountered in Ugaritic poetry are repetition, parallelisms, chiasms, epithets, and what might be called ‘numerical stairs’.^[31][32]

An example of repetition is in a part of the Ba‘al myth cycle, where Ba‘al’s fight with the Sea god Yammu (also known as Naharu) is described (KTU 1.2, tablet 2, col. 4).^[33] Divine artisan Kothar makes a magic mace for Ba‘al and, speaking to the mace, instructs it what to do:

Ugaritic	vocalized	English
(14′-15′) hlm . ktp [.] zbl [.] ym [.] bn ydm / [ṭp]ṭ . nhr	hulum katipa zabūli Yammi, bêna yadêma ṭāpiṭi Nahari	“Strike! the shoulder of Prince Yammu!, between the arms of Ruler Naharu!”

The phrase is repeated, with subtle variation, to describe the fight:

(16′-17′) ylm . ktp . zbl ym . bn [.] ydm [.] ṭpṭ / [nh]r

yallumu katipa zabūli Yammi, bêna yadêma ṭāpiṭi Nahari

It [the mace] struck the shoulder of Prince Yammu, between the arms of Ruler Naharu.

When the fight ends in a draw, Kothar makes a second mace for Ba‘al. This mace too is instructed:

(21′-22′) hlm . qdq/[d] . zbl ym . bn . ᶜnm . ṭpṭ . nhr

hulum qudquda zabūli Yammi, bêna ᶜênêma ṯāpiṭi Nahari

“Strike! the head of Prince Yammu!, between the eyes of Ruler Naharu!”

The fight is then described thus:

(24′-25′) ylm . qdqd . zbl / [ym .] bn . ᶜnm . ṭpṭ . nhr

yallumu qudquda zabūli Yammi, bêna ᶜênêma ṯāpiṭi Nahari

It struck the head of Prince Yammu, between the eyes of Ruler Naharu.

This time Ba‘al indeed succeeds in killing Yammu.

In the quoted section several parallelisms may be noted: “shoulder” // “between the arms”; “head” // “between the eyes”; “Prince” // “Ruler”; and Yammu // Naharu.

An example of a chiasm is (Dan’il curses vultures after he has found out that they have scavenged the body of his dead son Aqhat):^[34]

knp . nšrm / bᶜl . yṯbr	kanapē našrīma Baᶜlu yaṯbur	“The vultures’ wings may Ba‘al break,
bᶜl . yṯbr . dᵓiy / hmt	Baᶜlu yaṯbur diᵓya humutu	may Baᶜal break their flying!”

The use of stereotyped epithets is very common in Ugaritic myths. For example, El is regularly called “the Compassionate” (laṭīpānu ᵓIlu) or “the Bull” (ṯôru ᵓIlu), Baal is routinely called “Most Powerful” (Baᶜlu ᵓalᵓiyānu), “Rider of the Clouds” (rākibu ᶜurpāti), or “Prince Baal” (Zabūlu Baᶜlu), Sea too is called “Prince” (Zabūlu Yammu), and Asherah usually is “Asherah of the Sea” (ᵓAṯiratu Yammi) or “Creatress [i.e., Mother] of the gods” (qāniyatu ᵓilīma).

The epithet of a young prince, Athtar “the Terrible”, “the Awesome” (ᶜAṯtaru ᶜarrīẓu), may be a joke, for when he is made king and is put on Baal’s throne, his feet do not reach the ground, and his kingship is ended abruptly.^[35]

‘Numerical stairs’ or ‘progressions of numbers’^[36] are of the form “N (times) X, N+1 (times) Y”, or “100 (times) X, 1000 (times) Y”. An example, where the huge size of Kirta’s army is portrayed:^[37]

hlk . lᵓalpm . ḫḏḏ	halakū le-ᵓalpīma ḪḎḎ	They will go in thousands, a downpour (?)[38],
wlrbt . kmyr	wa-le-ribabāti kama YR	and in ten thousands, like the early rain (?);
ᵓaṯr . ṯn . ṯn . hlk	ᵓaṯra ṯinê ṯinā halakū	two by two they will go,
ᵓaṯr . ṯlṯ . klhm	ᵓaṯra ṯalāṯi kullūhumū	[three] by three, all together.

Here is a fragment from the epic “Baal” cycle (KTU tablet 1.4 column 5). Ba‘al, son of Supreme God El, has rebelled, he wants a palace of his own. After some blackmail – Ba‘al withholds his rain from the land – El agrees. Ba‘al’s sister Anat brings him the good news:

Ugaritic[a][39]	vocalized	English
(25) ṣḥq . btlt . ᶜnt . tšᵓu	ṣaḥāqu batūl(a)tu ᶜAnatu ; tiššaᵓu	Maiden Anat laughed, she raised
(26) gh . w tṣḥ . tbšr bᶜl	gâha wa-taṣīḥu : tabaššir Baᶜlu ;	her voice and cried out: “Receive the good news, Baal!
(27) bšrtk . yblt . y[tn]	bašūr(a)tūka yabiltu ; yû[tanu]	Good news for you I bring; there will be gi[ven]
(28) bt . lk . km . ᵓaḫk . w ḥẓr	bêtu lêka kamā ᵓaḫḫûka , wa-ḥaẓiru	to you a house like your brothers, and a court
(29) km . ᵓaryk . ṣḥ . ḫrn	kamā ᵓaryuka . ṣiḥ ḫarrāna	like your clansmen. Call a caravan (or wooden planks?)
(30) b bhtk . ᶜḏbt . b qrb	bi bahatīka , ᶜḎBT(?) bi qirbi	into your houses, supplies(?) into
(31) hklk . tblk . ġrm	hēkalika ; tabilūka ġūrūma	your palace; the mountains will bring you
(32) mᵓid . ksp . gbᶜm . mḥmd	maᵓda kaspa , gab(a)ᶜūma maḥmada	much silver, the hills [will bring] desirable
(33) ḫrṣ . w bn . bht . ksp	ḫurāṣa , wa-banā bahātī kaspi	gold, and build houses of silver
(34) w ḫrṣ . bht . ṭhrm	wa-ḫurāṣi , bahātī ṭuḥūrīma	and gold, houses of pure
(35) ᵓiqnᵓim	ᵓiqnᵓīma […]	lapis lazuli.”

From a list describing the organization of wine deliveries for royal sacrificial rites (KTU 1.91). Wine is to be consumed when …:

k . tᶜrb . ᶜṯtrt . šd . bt . mlk k . tᶜrbn . ršpm . bt . mlk

kî taᶜrubu ᶜAṯtaratu-Šadi bêta malki, kî taᶜrubūna Rašapūma bêta malki

“… when Athtart of the Field enters the house of the king, when the Reshaphim enter the house of the king […]”

From a letter legally confirming the manumission of a royal slave (KTU 2.19):

nqmd . mlk . ᵓugrt / ktb . spr hnd

Niqmaddu malku ᵓUgarīti kataba sipra hānādū

“Niqmaddu, king of Ugarit, has written this document.”

An official document, bearing the seal of king Niqmaddu (II), stating the conditions of a so-called ‘redemptionʼ^[40] (KTU 3.4):

l . ym hnd / ʼiwrkl . pdy	lê yômi hānādū ’Iwrikallu padaya	“From this day Iwrikallu has ‘redeemedʼ (paid ransom for the release of)
ᵓagdn . bn . nwgn	ᵓAgdena bina NWGN-i,	Agdenu the son of NWGN,
w ynḥm . ᵓaḫh	wa Yanḥama ᵓaḫahu,	and Yanḥamu his brother,
w . bᶜln ᵓaḫh	wa Baᶜalāna ᵓaḫahu,	and Baᶜlānu his brother,
w . ḥtṯn . bnh	wa Ḥattuṯāna binahu,	and Ḥattuṯānu his son,
w . btšy . bth	wa BTŠY-a bittahu,	and BTŠY his daughter,
w . ᵓištrmy / bt . ᶜbdmlk ᵓaṯt[h]	wa Ištarᵓummīya bitta ᶜAbdumalki ᵓaṯṯatahu,	and Ištarᵓummīyu, daughter of Abdumalki, his wife,
w snt / bt ᵓugrt	wa SNT-a bitta ᵓUgarīti;	and SNT, “daughter” (inhabitant) of Ugarit;
w . pdy . h[m] / ᵓiwrkl . mᵓit / ksp .	wa padayahumū ᵓIwrikallu miᵓita kaspa	to wit, Iwrikallu has ‘redeemedʼ (paid) for them 100 (shekels of) silver
b yd / bᵓirtym	bi yadê Biᵓirātiyyīma;	to (lit.: in the hands of) the Beirutians;
[w ᵓu]nṯ inn / lhm	wa ᵓunuṯṯu ênuna lêhumū	and there will be no ᵓunuṯṯu [a tax?] obligation for them
ᶜd tṯṯbn / ksp . ᵓiwrkl	ᶜadê taṯaṯibūna kaspa ᵓIwrikalli	until they have paid back (lit.: returned) the silver to Iwrikallu;
w . ṯb . l ᵓunṯhm	wa ṯābū lê ᵓunuṯṯīhumū.	and [only then] they will return to (again pay) their ᵓunuṯṯu obligations.”

• Ugarit
• Ugaritic alphabet
• Northwest Semitic languages
• Central Semitic languages
• Semitic Languages
• Proto-Semitic language

Citations

Bibliography

• Bordreuil, Pierre & Pardee, Dennis (2009). A Manual of Ugaritic: Linguistic Studies in Ancient West Semitic 3. Winona Lake, IN 46590: Eisenbraun’s, Inc. ISBN 978-1-57506-153-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
• Cunchillos, J.-L. & Vita, Juan-Pablo (2003). A Concordance of Ugaritic Words. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. ISBN 978-1-59333-258-7.
• del Olmo Lete, Gregorio & Sanmartín, Joaquín (2004). A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition. Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-90-04-13694-6. (2 vols; originally in Spanish, translated by W. G. E. Watson).
• Gibson, John C. L. (1977). Canaanite Myths and Legends. T. & T. Clark. ISBN 978-0-567-02351-3. (Contains Latin-alphabet transliterations of the Ugaritic texts and facing translations in English.)
• Gordon, Cyrus Herzl (1965). The Ancient Near East. W. W. Norton & Company Press. ISBN 978-0-393-00275-1.
• Greenstein, Edward L. (1998). Shlomo Izre’el; Itamar Singer; Ran Zadok (eds.). “On a New Grammar of Ugaritic” in Past links: studies in the languages and cultures of the ancient near east: Volume 18 of Israel oriental studies. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-57506-035-4. Found at Google Scholar.
• Hasselbach-Andee, Rebecca (2020). A Companion to Ancient Near Eastern Languages. Wiley Blackwell. ISBN 978-1119193296.
• Huehnergard, John (2011). A Grammar of Akkadian, 3rd ed. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-1-5750-6941-8.
• Moscati, Sabatino (1980). An Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of Semitic Languages, Phonology and Morphology. Harrassowitz Verlag. ISBN 3-447-00689-7.
• Pardee, Dennis (2003). Rezension von J. Tropper, Ugaritische Grammatik (AOAT 273) Ugarit-Verlag, Münster 2000: Internationale Zeitschrift für die Wissenschaft vom Vorderen Orient. Vienna, Austria: Archiv für Orientforschung (AfO). P. 1-404 Archived 2014-01-07 at the Wayback Machine.
• Parker, Simon B. (ed.) (1997). Ugaritic Narrative Poetry: Writings from the Ancient World Society of Biblical Literature. Atlanta: Scholars Press. ISBN 978-0-7885-0337-5. {{cite book}}: |author= has generic name (help)
• Schniedewind, William M. & Hunt, Joel H. (2007). A Primer on Ugaritic: Language, Culture and Literature. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-5217-0493-9.
• Segert, Stanislav (1997). A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-03999-8.
• Sivan, Daniel (1997). A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (Handbook of Oriental Studies/Handbuch Der Orientalistik). Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 978-90-04-10614-7. A more concise grammar.
• Tropper, Josef (2000). Ugaritische Grammatik. Ugarit Verlag. ISBN 978-3927120907.
• Woodard, Roger D. (ed.) (2008). The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-68498-9. {{cite book}}: |author= has generic name (help)

• Pardee, Dennis. “UGARITIC PROPER NOUNS”. In: Archiv Für Orientforschung 36/37 (1989): 390–513. UGARITIC PROPER NOUNS.
• Josef Tropper, Juan-Pablo Vita (2020). Lehrbuch der ugaritischen Sprache. Münster: Zaphon. ISBN 978-3-96327-070-3.
• Watson, Wilfred G.E. “From Hair to Heel: Ugaritic Terms for Parts of the Body“. In: ”Folia Orientalia” [pl] Vol. LII (2015), pp. 323–364.
• Watson, Wilfred G.E. “Terms for Occupations, Professions and Social Classes in Ugaritic: An Etymological Study“. In: Folia Orientalia Vol. LV (2018), pp. 307–378. DOI: 10.24425/for.2018.124688
• Watson, Wilfred G.E. “Terms for Textiles, Clothing, Hides, Wool and Accessories in Ugaritic: An Etymological Study“. In: Aula Orientalis 36/2 (2018): 359–396. ISSN 0212-5730.
• Watson, Wilfred G. E.. “Ugaritic Military Terms in the Light of Comparative Linguistics”. In: At the Dawn of History: Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of J. N. Postgate. Edited by Yağmur Heffron, Adam Stone and Martin Worthington, University Park, USA: Penn State University Press, 2021. pp. 699–720. coaccess

• Ugarit and the Bible. An excerpt from an online introductory course on Ugaritic grammar (the Quartz Hill School of Theology’s course noted in the links hereafter). Includes a cursory discussion on the relationship between Ugaritic and Old Testament/Hebrew Bible literature.
• “El in the Ugaritic tablets” on the BBCi website gives many attributes of the Ugaritic creator and his consort Athirat.
• Abstract of Mark Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Text.
• Unicode Chart.
• RSTI. The Ras Shamra Tablet Inventory: an online catalog of inscribed objects from Ras Shamra-Ugarit produced at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
• Introduction to Ugaritic Grammar (Quartz Hill School of Theology)
• Introduction to Ugaritic Grammar Archived 2022-02-13 at the Wayback Machine (University of Chicago)