It is. Here's a professional translation for this [0]: ...they made bricks. I razed that small palace in its entirety, took a large area from the fields fo

It is. Here's a professional translation for this [0]: ...they made bricks. I razed that small palace in its entirety, took a large area from the fields for an addition, and added (it) to it (the palace). I laid its foundations with limestone, strong stone from the mountains, and raised the terrace. I summoned the kings of Ḫatti and Across the River (Syria-Palestine) Baʾalu, king of Tyre, Manasseh, king of Judah, Qaʾuš-gabri, king of Edom, Muṣurī, king of Moab, Ṣil-Bēl, king of Gaza, Mitinti, king of Ashkelon, ... Even if the translation wasn't very wrong, I'd be incredibly skeptical of this because Akkadian and Sumerian share a lot of words that are written the same way, but have very different meanings (which can even be mixed within a document!). They're usually documented separately in dictionaries and most translations will have a convention to denote each usage. [1] has a good example of how dense these sorts of notational conventions can get. [0] http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/Q003230 http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/rinap/Q003230 [1] https://brill.com/display/book/9789004417564/front-10.xml https://brill.com/display/book/9789004417564/front-10.xml