Indo-Aryan and the Linguistic History and Prehistory of North India 3447120142, 9783447120142

Citation preview

Neuindische Studien 20 Claus Peter Zoller

Indo-Aryan and the Linguistic History and Prehistory of North India

Harrassowitz Verlag

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Neuindische Studien Herausgegeben von Heidrun Brückner, Almuth Degener und Hans Harder Band 20

2023

Harrassowitz Verlag · Wiesbaden

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Claus Peter Zoller

Indo-Aryan and the Linguistic History and Prehistory of North India

2023

Harrassowitz Verlag · Wiesbaden

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Printed with the financial support of the Helmuth von Glasenapp-Stiftung.

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über https://dnb.de abrufbar. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the internet at https://dnb.de.

For further information about our publishing program consult our website https://www.harrassowitz-verlag.de © Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden 2023 This work, including all of its parts, is protected by copyright. Any use beyond the limits of copyright law without the permission of the publisher is forbidden and subject to penalty. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. Printed on permanent/durable paper. Printing and binding: Prime Rate Kft. Printed in Hungary ISSN 0340-6385 eISSN 2940-3111 ISBN 978-3-447-12014-2 eISBN 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Contents

Introductory Language abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notes on transcriptions and translations . . . . . Grammatical abbreviations and phonetic symbols Abbreviations of ancient and new works, authors, Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . texts and websites . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . .

XIII . XIII . XX . XXI XXIII XXVII

North India and the arrival of Indo-Aryan

1

1 An Indo-Aryan history 1.1 The scope of the book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.1 The argument structure and sequence of topics in the book . . 1.1.2 Summary of the historical linguistic developments . . . . . . . 1.1.3 On Outer and Inner Languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1.4 Some common Outer Language features . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.1 Subdivision I: The linguistic development . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.2 A timeline for development of stridents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.3 Multiple affricate orders in G¯andh¯ ar¯ı, Dardic and West Pah¯ar.¯ı

3 3 3 10 14 18 22 22 29 37

2 A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South 2.1 Affricate and sibilant subsystems . . . . . . . . 2.2 Kartvelian vestiges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 Subdivision II: The historical-geographic

43 43 46 52

Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . development . . . . .

3 Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan 3.1 Germanic and Pelasgian? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 A Mediterrannean substrate? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Two onomatopoeic(?) roots *geu-, *keu- and *leup-, leubh . . . . . . 3.4 Pre-Greek and Indo-Aryan: more potential parallels . . . . . . . . . 3.5 Indo-Aryan words with other cognates not deriving from PIE . . . . 3.6 Proto-Indo-Iranian and its descendants in contact with Finno-Ugric 3.7 Ancient contacts with Tocharian? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

. . . . . . .

55 55 58 59 65 69 71 75

VI

Contents

4 Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals 4.1 The historical background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.1 Various aspects of satemization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants . . . . . . . 4.2.1 Dardic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.2 West Pah¯ ar.¯ı . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.3 Nuristani, Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (and Iranian) . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.4 Deaffrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters . . . . . 4.3.1 Dardic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.2 West Pah¯ ar.¯ı . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.3 Non-satemized and satemized doublets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.4 Additional non-satemized examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.5 Examples for linkage words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.6 Indo-Iranian satemizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.7 Dentalized affricates in Khowar and Kalasha . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.8 Non-dentalized reflexes of palato-velars? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.9 Prehistoric dentalized affricates in East Iranian languages . . . 4.3.10 Dentalized affricates in Balti and Bun¯ an (Northwestern Tibetan) 4.3.11 Historic dentalization of languages with one palatal affricates order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

79 79 80 90 91 102 105 116 121 122 123 124 127 128 136 139 141 144 147 147

5 On aspiration in Indo-Iranian 151 5.0.1 Loss of aspiration and ‘spontaneous’ aspiration: lenition and fortition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 5.0.2 Sanskrit aspiration alternations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 6 Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications 161 6.1 Inherited consonant clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 7 Segmental and suprasegmental processes 7.1 Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Dardic . . . . . . . 7.2 Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Chittagongian . . . 7.3 Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Rohingya language 7.4 Partial and indirect preservation of inherited accent patterns in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı 7.5 Former tripartite subsystems also in varieties of West Pah¯ar.¯ı . . . . . 7.6 Preservation of OIA medial stops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.7 Alternations y ∼ v ∼ h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

185 188 193 196 198 201 206 209

8 Developments of inherited syllable structures 8.1 Syllable structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1.1 Some remarks on the disparate fate of geminates in Indo-Aryan 8.1.2 The two-mora rule and its different evolutions . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 Geminates and Vedic accent in non-inherited Sanskrit words . . . . . . 8.3 Overview of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı geminates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

211 212 212 212 216 217

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

VII

Contents

8.4

Examples for preservation of geminates in Rohingya . . . . . . . . . . 219

9 Three sundry topics 9.1 Some principles of phonological and semantic changes . . . . . . . . . 9.2 Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects . . . . . . 9.3 Origin and development of the Middle Indo-Aryan -ll-suffix . . . . . .

II

North India and the arrival of Austro-Asiatic

10 Ideophones/expressives 10.1 Phonological impact of Austro-Asiatic . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1.1 Consonant variation in Munda and Outer Languages 10.1.2 Sesquisyllabic words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1.3 Sindh¯ı, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, West Himalayish and Munda . 10.2 ‘Defective’ words in the CDIAL of Austro-Asiatic origin . .

III

221 221 225 237

243 . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

247 271 272 274 276 278

North India before the arrival of Indo-Aryan, AustroAsiatic and Kartvelian 281

11 A North Indian substratum 11.1 History of syllable structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1.1 Word and syllable languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2 Northwestern and central IA syllable structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2.1 The SARVA Project (‘macro lemmata’) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3 Laryngeal processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.1 Glottalization of vowels, checked consonants and ‘spontaneous aspiration’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.2 Glottalization (laryngalization) and checked consonants . . . . 11.3.3 ‘Spontaneous aspiration’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.4 Aspiration fronting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3.5 NW deaspiration and ‘phoneme split’ of voiced aspirates . . . . 11.3.6 Deaspiration in other languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4 ‘Spontaneous’ affrication of sibilants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4.1 Voiceless affrication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4.2 Word-internal voiced and unvoiced affrication . . . . . . . . . . 11.5 Affrication, apicalization and lateralization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5.1 Different types of word-medial consonant weakening processes . 11.6 Changes of other consonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.1 Voicing of surds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.2 Devoicing of sonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.3 Devoicing of sonants and laryngealization . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.4 r fronting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.5 Nasal consonant variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

283 284 284 286 287 291 292 293 298 309 315 322 322 322 326 327 332 334 334 337 340 342 344

VIII

Contents

11.6.6 Voice variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.7 Place of articulation variations of sibilants/affricates . . . . . . 11.6.8 OIA s.ya > śa or s.a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.9 A variant of Grassmann’s Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.10 Coronal consonant harmony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6.11 Irregular developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7 Similar phonetic variations in Niya Prakrit and Khotan Saka . . . . . 11.7.1 Niya Prakrit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7.2 Khotan Saka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8 Vowel changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.1 Change of a > u or o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.2 Change of a > i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8.3 Change of a > e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 Loss or weakening of word-initial consonants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9.1 Dardic and Burushaski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9.2 Deśya Prakrit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.10The interface of linguistic prehistory and history: hedgehog and peacock

IV

Morphological processes

12 Different past forms 12.1 Past forms built with liquids . . . . 12.1.1 Past forms built with l . . . . 12.1.2 Past forms built with r . . . 12.1.3 Past forms and converbs built 12.1.4 Past forms built with -i˜ u. . .

350 351 356 357 359 363 364 365 368 369 369 376 378 379 380 382 383

387 . . . . . . . . . with . . .

. . . t .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

13 Further morphological issues 13.1 The auxiliary ta, t¯ u etc. ‘is; was’ . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2 OIA superlative in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, Dardic (and Konkan ˙ .¯ı?) 13.3 Reflexes of OIA -(i)tavya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4 OIA vártate in the sense of ‘becomes’ . . . . . . . . 13.5 Some remarks on future, present and past paradigms 13.5.1 Future tense with l and m grammemes . . . . 13.5.2 Future tense and other grammatical functions 13.5.3 Future tense with sibilant . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6 Composite verbs with ‘light’ adverbs . . . . . . . . . 13.7 Interrogative words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.7.1 A particular modal verb . . . . . . . . . . . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

389 389 389 393 396 400

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . with . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . b . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

403 403 405 408 408 409 409 410 410 410 412 415

. . . . .

. . . . .

V

Contents

IX

Language theories and models

417

14 General theories 14.1 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.1.1 Some remarks on ‘language’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.2 The Social Network Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.2.1 A short critique of the historical-comparative method 14.2.2 Principles of the Social Network Model . . . . . . . . 14.3 Cultured koinés and country patois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.4 The cultural character of the high mountains in South Asia . 14.4.1 Zomia highland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.5 Excursus: The “Gandh¯ ara thesis” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective 15.1 Old and Middle Indo-Aryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1.1 Cardona and Masica . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1.2 Hoernle’s map and its successors . . . . . . 15.2 Vedic dialects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3 Old Indo-Aryan Dialects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3.1 Asko Parpola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3.2 Ralf Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3.3 Thomas Burrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3.4 Reiner Lipp and non-application of RUKI? 15.3.5 Thomas Oberlies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.3.6 K. R. Norman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.4 Indigenous substrates? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.4.1 Bertil Tikkanen on substrates and isoglosses

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

16 Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages 16.1 Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani 16.1.1 Degener and Cardona on Nuristani . . . . . . . 16.1.2 Strand on Nuristani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.2 Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic . 16.3 Outer Language features in R¯ ajbanshi . . . . . . . . . 16.3.1 Lexicon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.3.2 Phonology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.3.3 Morphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.3.4 Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.4 Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages . . . . 16.4.1 Lateral or vertical borrowings? . . . . . . . . . 16.4.2 Brajbh¯ as.a¯ vs Modern Standard Hindi . . . . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

419 419 419 419 419 420 428 432 432 435

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

439 439 440 443 446 447 447 449 449 453 456 458 459 460

. . . . . . . . . . . .

465 465 465 467 482 492 492 494 495 496 497 497 499

X

VI

Contents

Language data lists

507

17 Outer Language word list 509 17.1 Ban˙ga¯n¯ ı affixes and phonemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509 . 18 Linguistic data I 18.1 Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.1.1 A few more interesting (and problematic) lemmata . . 18.2 Common words without OIA etymology . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.3 Iranian words in Indo-Aryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.4 Proto-Indo-European . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.5 Supplement to CDIAL asterisk entries with likely PIE origin 18.6 Reflexes of PIE in South Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

Linguistic data II 18.7 Munda/Mon-Khmer traces in South Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.1 Burushaski parallels with Mon-Khmer and mostly also with Munda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.2 Burushaski parallels with Munda but not with Mon-Khmer . . 18.7.3 Old reverse borrowings from Indo-Aryan into Burushaski and Munda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.4 Purik and Balti parallels with Mon-Khmer and mostly also with Munda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.5 Purik and Balti parallels with Munda but not with Mon-Khmer 18.7.6 West Himalayish parallels with Mon-Khmer and mostly also with Munda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.7 West Himalayish parallels with Munda but not with MonKhmer (except uncertain cases) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.8 Kham and Austro-Asiatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.9 Chepang and Austro-Asiatic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.10 Tani Apatani, West Himalayish and Austro-Asiatic . . . . . . . 18.7.11 Tani Tangam, Lower Adi and Austro-Asiatic . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.12 TB NE Indian area group and Austro-Asiatic . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.13 New (and a few Old) Indo-Aryan parallels with Mon-Khmer and frequently also with Munda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.14 New Indo-Aryan parallels with Munda but not with Mon-Khmer 18.7.15 Some (potential) Austro-Asiatic borrowings into Dravidian Kurukh and Malto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.16 Common or similar Austro-Asiatic and Tibeto-Burman etyma and hybrid compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7.17 Some Austro-Asiatic words also in East Iranian . . . . . . . . . 18.7.18 Some similar Austro-Asiatic and Indo-European etyma . . . . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

519 519 744 745 764 775 862 864 873 873 873 887 894 896 898 899 918 921 930 944 946 948 950 992 1009 1010 1014 1015

XI

Contents

Linguistic data III 18.8 Kartvelian traces in northwestern South Asia . . 18.8.1 Burushaski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.8.2 Nuristani, Dardic and New Indo-Aryan . 18.8.3 Iranian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.8.4 Northwestern Tibetan . . . . . . . . . . . 18.8.5 Language of BMAC and Old Indo-Aryan

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

References

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

1019 1019 1019 1023 1031 1032 1033 1037

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Language map Nuristani and Dardic (© Yuri Koryakov [Russian Academy of Science])

Language map Central and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (© Yuri Koryakov [Russian Academy of Science])

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Introductory

Language abbreviations A. Assamese1 Alb. Albanian AMg. Ardham¯ agadh¯ı Prakrit AN Austronesian (see http://www.trussel2.com/ACD/) Ap. Apabhramśa ˙ Apa. Apatani (Tibeto-Burman) Ar. Arabic Arm. Armenian Aś. Aśokan, i. e. the language of the Inscriptions of Aśoka ¯ . kun.u-v¯ıri) (Nuristani) Ash. Ashkun (As same as San.. As. Asuri (Munda) Av. Avestan Aw. Awadh¯ı B. Bengali B.chit. the Chittagong dialect of Bengali B.roh. the Rohingya dialect of Bengali2 Bal. Bal¯ uč¯ı (Iranian) Balt. Balti (Western Tibetan) Bar. Bartangi (Iranian)

Bar¯ a. the Bar¯ ar.¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (see T. Grahame Bailey 1915) Bashg. Bashgal¯ı (also Kati, K¯amk"ataMumks."a-vari) (Nuristani) Bau. the Bauri dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı3 Bagh. Baghel¯ı Bar. Baram (West Himalayish4 ) Bght.. the Bagh¯ at.¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhad. the Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhal. the Bhales¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhas. Bhat.seri (West Himalayish) spoken in the village of the same name in the Baspa Valley Bhat.. the Bhat.¯ıse dialect of Indus Kohistani (Ind.) (Dardic) Bhat.e. the Bhat.e¯ al¯ı sub-dialect of D . ogr¯ı dialect of Panj¯ ab¯ı Bhid.. the Bhid.là¯ı sub-dialect of the Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhil. Bh¯ıl¯ı Bhil.MBh. Bh¯ıl¯ı Mah¯ abh¯ arata5 .

1 Note that spoken Assamese does not differentiate between dental and retroflex consonants whereas written Assamese does show such historical differences. The Assamese examples in this book usually give both forms wherever necessary. 2 Data from Rohingya have been collected from https://www.rohingyalanguage.com/ and from a Rohingya to English dictionary found here: https://sites.google.com/site/rohingyalanguagewebsite/dictionary-book1 (last accessed: 18.6.22). Transcription and transliteration of Rohingya words into Roman alphabet deviates partly from Indological standards. It is easy to find relevant keys in the internet. 3 The notion West Pah¯ ar.¯ı is also used in this book when the exact provenance of a West Pah¯ ar.¯ı word cannot be determined. 4 West and East Himalayish are sub-branches within Tibeto-Burman. 5 This refers to Patel, Bhagwandas. 2000. Bhilon ka Bharat (Bhili Mahabharat)

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XIV

Introductory

Bhil.wag. the Wagdi dialect of Bh¯ıl¯ı BHS Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Bhoj. Bhojpur¯ı Bhum. Bhumij (Munda) Bi. Bih¯ ar¯ı Bir. BirhOr (Munda) Blt. Baltic

BMAC (language of the) BactriaMargiana Archaeological Complex Bng. the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bon. Bonda, Bondo (Munda) Brah. Brahui (Dravidian) Brj. Brajbh¯ as.a¯ Brj.-Aw. Brajbh¯ as.a¯-Awadh¯ı6 Bro. the Brokp¯ a (or Brok-skad) dialect of Shina Bshk. Bashkar¯ık (Dardic) same as Klm. Bulg. Bulgarian Bun. Bun¯ an (West Himalayish), same as Gar. Bund. Bundel¯ı Bur. Burushaski of Hunza Bur.ng. the Nagar dialect of Burushaski Bur.ys. the Yasin dialect of Burushaski (same as Werch.) Bush. the Bushahari dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Cam. the Came¯ a.l¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Chak. Ch¯ akm¯ a Chant. Chantyal (Indo-Aryan, Nepal) (see Michael Noonan) Chatt. Chatt¯ısgar.h¯ı Chep. Chepang (Tibeto-Burman) Chil. Chil¯ıs (Dardic) Chin. the Chinali dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Chit. Chitkuli (West Himalayish) Chu. Chura (a ‘Gypsy’ language in Punjab)7 Cl. Celtic Cur. the Cur¯ ah¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı D . D um¯ a ki . . 6 7 8 9

Dara. Dar¯ ag¯ı (Dardic) Dard. Dardic Dari. Darai (Indo-Aryan, Nepal) (see Paudyal and Kotapish & Kotapish) Dash. Dashwa Kohistani (near Kalam) (Dardic) Deg. Degano similar to Paš. (Dardic) Deog. the Deog¯ ar¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı8 9 Desh. Deshya Prakrit, Deśya Prakrit Desh.M. Deshya Mar¯ at.h¯ı D un.d.¯ı-Kar.i¯ al¯ı dialect of . hu-kar.. the D . h¯ Lahnd¯ a (L.) Dir. D¯ır Kohistani (Dardic) D . og. the D . ogr¯ı dialect of Panjabi Dm. Dameli (Nuristani-Dardic) D ab¯ı . og. the D . ogr¯ı dialect of Panj¯ Eng. English Est. Estonian Eur. European Romani Fi. Finnish FU Finno-Ugrian G. Gujar¯ at¯ı G.pars. Parsi Gujar¯ at¯ı G.saur. Saurashtra Gujar¯ at¯ı (Učida [1990]) Ga. Gadba (Dravidian) Gadd. the Gaddi dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Gan. G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Gar. Gari or Gahri (Tibeto Himalayan, same as Bun.) Garh. Gar.hv¯ al¯ı (Central Pah¯ar.¯ı) Garh.n¯ a. the N¯ agpuriy¯ a dialect of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı Garh.pau. the Paur.¯ı dialect of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı Garh.r. the R¯ at.h¯ı dialect of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı Garh.t.. the T a.l¯ı dialect of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı . ihriy¯ Gau. the Gauro (also Gowro or Gab¯ ar) dialect of Indus Kohistani (Ind.) (Dardic) Gaw. (Dardic) Georg. Georgian Germ. Germanic

Words tagged in this way stem from Callewaert and Sharma 2009. See T. Graham Bailey 1928. The area is located directly south of Bangan. Most quoted examples are from Bhayani 1988.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Language abbreviations

Glan. ˙ Glangal¯ ˙ ı (also Grangal¯ı and Ningal¯ am¯ı) (Dardic) Gmb. Gamb¯ır¯ı (Nuristani) Gr. Greek Gta" Munda Gu. Gutob (Munda) (also Gadaba) Guj. Gujur¯ı of East Hazara and Swat H. Hindi H.bgh. Baghelkhan.d.¯ı Hindi10 H.chg. Chatt¯ısgar.h¯ı Hindi11 H.kau. the Kaurav¯ı dialect if Hindi Han.d.. the Han.d.u ¯r¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Him. Himachali (Tika Ram Joshi) Hind. Hindko Hind.man. Hindko of Mansehra Hind.pesh. Hindko of Peshawar Hitt. Hittite Ho Ho (Munda) Icl. Icelandic IIr. Indo-Iranian IL Inner Languages Illyr. Illyrian Ind. Indus Kohistani (Dardic) Ind.dub. the Dub¯er dialect of Indus Kohistani Ind.ky. the Kanyaw¯ al¯ı dialect of Indus Kohistani Ind.seo the Seo dialect of Indus Kohistani Insir. the Inner Sir¯ aj¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Ir. Iranian Ish. Irish Ishk. Ishk¯ ashm¯ı (Iranian) IVC language of the Indus Valley Civilization Jad.. J¯ ad. (West Himalayish) Jat.. the Jat.k¯ı dialect of Lahnd¯ a (L.) Jaun. the Jauns¯ ar¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Jav. Jungavestisch, same as YAv. Jen. Jenisch of South Germany JM. Jaina-M¯ ah¯ ar¯as.t.r¯ı JŚ. Jaina-Śaurasen¯ı Ju. Juang (Munda)

XV

Jur. Juray (Munda) K. Kashmiri K.d.od.. D . od.¯ı dialect of Kashmiri K.pog. Pogul¯ı dialect of Kashmiri K.r¯ am. R¯ amban¯ı dialect of Kashmiri K.sir. Sir¯ aj¯ı dialect of Kashmiri (same as Sir.d.od..) Kab. Kabuli Persian Kai. Kaike (Tibeto-Burman, spoken in Nepal) Kal. Kalasha (Dardic) Kal.rumb. The Rumbur dialect of Kalasha Kal.urt. the Urtsun dialect of Kalasha Kalk. K¯ alk¯ ot.¯ı (Dardic) Kamd. K¯ amdeshi (Nuristani) Kan. Kanarese Kana. Kanashi (also called Malani) (West Himalayish) (West Himalayish) Kann. Kannauri (West Himalayish) Kc. the Koc¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Kgr. the K¯ angr¯ ˙ a sub-dialect of D . ogr¯ı dialect of Panj¯ ab¯ı Kh. Kharia (Munda) Khand. Kh¯ andeshi Khas. Khasi (Mon-Khmer) Khaś. the Khaś¯ al¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Khaśdh. the Khaśdh¯ ar¯ı sub-dialect of Bang¯ an.¯ı Kh¯ aśi. the Kh¯ aś¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Khet. the Khetr¯ an¯ı dialect of Lahnd¯ a (L.) Kho. Khow¯ar (Dardic) Kho.kiv the Kivi dialect of Khow¯ar Khot. Khotan Saka, Khotanese (Iranian) Khm. Kham (Tibeto-Himalaya, Nepal) Khz. Khwarezmian (Iranian) Kiś. the Kasht.aw¯ ar.¯ı dialect of Kashmiri Ki˜ ut.h. the Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Klm. Kalami (Dardic), same as Bshk. Ko. Konkan ˙ .¯ı Ko.chr. the Christian community dialect

10 Grierson 1920. 11 Grierson 1920.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XVI

Introductory

of Konkan ˙ .¯ı (see Madtha 1984) Ko.coch. same as M.coch. Ko.kan.. the Kan.kon. dialect of Konkan ˙ .¯ı (see Ghatage 1968) Ko.kun.. the Kun.ab¯ı dialect of Konkan ˙ .¯ı (see Ghatage 1966) Ko.S. Konkan ˙ .¯ı of South Kanara (see Ghatage 1963) Koh. Kohistani (Dardic)12 Kod. Koda (Munda) Kol Kol (Munda) Kor. Korwa, Korku, Kurku (Munda) Ks. Kundal Shahi (probably Dardic but strongly influenced by Kashmiri and Hindko) Kt. Kati (same as K¯atá vari or Bashgal¯ı) (Nuristani) Kt.g. the K¯ ot.gar.h¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Kt.gu. the K¯ ot.gur¯ u dialect of West Pah¯ar.¯ı Kt.kh. the K¯ot.kh¯ a¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ar.¯ı Ku. Kumaun¯ı Kul. the Kul.ui dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Kurd. Kurdish (Iranian) Kurkh. Kurukh (also Uranw and Jhangad) (Dravidian) (see Uranw, Ram Kisun) Kv. Kartvelian13 Kva. the Kv¯ ar¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı14 L. Lahnd¯ a Lad. Ladakhi Lagh. the Laghmani dialect of Pashai L¯ ah. L¯ahul¯ı (West Himalayish) Lam. Lamuti Kohistani (Dir) (Dardic) Lat. Latin Latv. Latvian Lhd. Lahnd¯a Lith. Lithuanian L.pot.h. the Pot.hw¯ ar¯ı dialect of Lahnd¯ a

(L.) LwAd. Lower Adi (Tani group of TibetoBurman, Post 2017) M. Mar¯ at.h¯ı M.ber. the Ber¯ ar.¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (Grierson 1920) M.coch. the Cochin dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (Ghatage 1967) (same as Ko.Coch.) M.hal. the Halab¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (Grierson 1920) M.kas. Mar¯ at.h¯ı of Kasargod (Ghatage 1970) M.kud.. the Kud.a¯l.¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (Ghatage 1965) M.n¯ ag. the N¯ agpur¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (Grierson 1920) M.w¯ ar. the W¯ arl¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (Ghatage 1969) Ma. Malay¯ a.lam Mag. Magah¯ı (modern form of M¯ aghadh¯ı [Mg.]) Mah Mah¯ ar¯as.t.r¯ı Prakrit Maha. Mahali (Munda) M@nt@ra of Malac., Chabau15 - two dialects of the Malacca groups (now more commonly called Aslian) M¯ al. the M¯ alw¯ a¯ı dialect of Panjabi Malt. Malto (Dravidian) Man.d.. the Man.d.e¯ al.¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Marw. M¯ arw¯ar.¯ı Marm. the Marmat¯ı sub-dialect of Khaś¯ al¯ı Md. Maldivian Mg. M¯ aghadh¯ı Mgr. Magar (Tibeto-Burman) MIA Middle Indo-Aryan Minj. Munˇȷ¯ı (Iranian)

12 Used only with words, usually from Leitner, where it is not quite clear whether Ind., Sh.koh. or another small language from that area is meant. 13 The names of the different Kartvelian and other Caucasian languages are not abbreviated because they are not yet common in the Indological literature. 14 Spoken in village Kv¯ ar to the north of Bangan. 15 Pinnow 1959: xiii. 16 The names of the different Mon-Khmer languages are not abbreviated because they are not yet common in the Indological literature (the only exception would be Khasi).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Language abbreviations

Mj. Munˇȷ¯ı (Iranian) MK Mon-Khmer16 MP, MPers. Middle Persian Mth. Maithil¯ı Mu. Mundari (Munda) Mult. the Mult¯ an¯ı dialect of Lahnd¯ a (L.) N. Nep¯ ali NAG “Naga” Areal Group17 NAG.Ao Ao (a Central Naga language listed in STEDT sub 1.3.1) NAG.poch. Pochuri language of AngamiPochuri-Gro subbranch of NAG (listed in STEDT sub 1.3.2) NAG.yim. Yimchunger language of NAG.ao subbranch. Nars. the Narisati dialect of Gawar-Bati (Dardic) New. New¯ ar(¯ı) (Tibeto-Burman) NI North Indian (refers to North Indian words and their cognates which cannot be allocated to a known language family) NIA New Indo-Aryan Nih. Nihal¯ı language isolate in Maharashtra?18 Nim. Nim¯ ar.¯ı (New Indo-Aryan, Maharashtra) Ning. ˙ Ningal¯ ˙ am¯ı (Dardic) Niy. Niya Prakrit NPers. New Persian Nur. Nuristani NW languages of northwestern South Asia O old stage of a language OAv. Old Avestan OAw. Old Awadhi OCS Old Church Slavonic OG. Old Gujarat¯ı OIA Old Indo-Aryan OL Outer Languages OMarw. Old M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı OP. Old Panjabi

XVII

OPr. Old Prussian Or. Or.iy¯ a Ora. Oraon (Dravidian) ¯ Orm. Ormur .¯ı (Iranian) Osir. the Outer Sir¯ aj¯ı dialect West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Oss. Ossetic (Iranian) P Pah¯ar.¯ı P. Panjabi P.pot.. the Pot.oh¯ ar¯ı dialect of Panjabi Pa. Pali PAA Proto-Austro-Asiatic PAN Proto-Austronesian (see http://www.trussel2.com/ACD/) P¯ ad.. the P¯ ad.ri dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Pal. Pal¯ ula (also Pal¯ oa¯, Phal¯ ur.a, Aćhar¯et¯ a) (Dardic) Palp. the P¯ alp¯ a dialect of Nep¯ ali Pang. the Pangw¯ ˙ a.l¯ı sub-dialect of the Cam. dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Par. Parachi (Iranian) Paš. Pashai (Dardic) Paš.ar. the Areti dialect of Pashai Paš.DN. the Darrai-i N¯ ur dialect of Pashai Paš.deg. the Deg¯an"o dialect of Pashai Paš.laur.. the Laur.ow¯ an dialect of Pashai Paš.weg. the Wegali dialect of Pashai Pat.t.. Pat.t.an¯ı (also called Manchad or L¯ ahul¯ı) (West Himalayish) PEC Proto-East Caucasian Pers. Persian PIA Proto-Indo-Aryan PIE Proto-Indo-European PIE (WC) the western-central area of Proto-Indo-European PIIr. Proto-Indo-Iranian PIr. Proto-Iranian Pk. Prakrit PKar. Proto-Karenic (Tibeto-Burman?) PKC Proto-Kuki-Chin (Tibeto-Burman) PKT Proto-Kamta (Indo-Aryan) (see Toulmin 2006)

17 This term is taken from STEDT. It intends to convey the fact that the striking number of languages found in the small state of Nagaland in the Republic of India cannot be subsumed under a simple branch of Tibeto-Burman languages. 18 But see Holst 2017.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XVIII

Introductory

PMU Proto-Munda PN Proto-Nostratic Pog. the P¯ ogul¯ı dialect of Kashmiri PPC Proto-Peripheral-Chin PPIIr. Post-Proto-Indo-Iranian Pr. Prasun (also P¯ aruni, V¯ as"i-vari) (Nuristani) Pr.Ar. Proto-Aryan PSC Proto-Sino-Caucasian Psht. Pashto Pt. Portuguese PTani Proto-Tani (Tibeto-Burman) PTB Proto-Tibeto-Burman19 Pth. Parthian PTk. Proto-Tangkhulic (Tibeto-Burman) Pur. Purik (West Himalayish) R. Rushani (Iranian) Ra. Raji (spoken in Kumaon and of unclear provenance) Rab. R¯ ajbansh¯ı (East Pah¯ ar.¯ı) R¯ aj. Rajkoti Kohistani (Dardic) R¯ amb. the R¯ ambani dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Ramp. The Rampur dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (see T. Grahame Bailey 1915) Rem. Remo (Munda) Rj. R¯ ajasth¯an¯ı Rj.ah. the Ah¯ırv¯ at.¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.ajm. the Ajm¯er¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.bik. the Bik¯ an¯er¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.dng. the D¯ ang ˙ dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.har. the H¯ ar.aut.¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı20 Rj.jaip. R¯ ajasth¯an¯ı of Jaipur Rj.mal. the M¯ alv¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.mev. the M¯ev¯ at¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.r¯ aj. the R¯ aj¯ av¯ at¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.shekh. the Shekh¯ avat¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı Rj.tor¯ a. the Tor¯ av¯ at¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı

Roh. the Rohru¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Rom. Romani (without reference to separate dialects, but including dialects from South Asia) Rom.Arm. the Romani of Armenia Rom.As. the Asiatic dialect of Romani Rom.B. the Romani of Burgenland (Austria) Rom.F. the Romani of Finland Rom.G. the Romani of Greece Rom.Germ. the Romani of Germany Rom.Eur. European Romani Rom.N. the Romani or Tater language of Norway Rom.P. the Romani of Palestine Rom.Q. the (secret words in the) ‘Romani’ of the Qasai butchers in Panjab (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 273ff.]) Rom.S. the Romani or Tater language of Sweden Rom.W. the Romani of Wales Rp. ROnpO

bh asa (West Himalayish) Rudh. the Rudh¯ ar¯ı sub-dialect of Khaś¯ al¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ar.¯ı (with the variants ‘high’, ‘low’ and ‘n¯ al¯ a’) S. Sindh¯ı S.kcch. the Kaccch¯ı dialect of Sindh¯ı Sad. Sadani Sain. the Sainj¯ı sub-dialect of Khaś¯ al¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı San.. San.uv¯ıri (Nuristani) same as Ash. Sang. Sanglechi (Iranian) Sant. Santali (Munda) Sar. Sarikoli (Iranian) S as. S as  (spoken by the Panjab community of the same name)21 SCA South Central Asian (see Witzel 2015) Sh. Shina (Dardic) Sh.ast. Shina of Astor Sh.chil. Shina of Chil¯ as

19 In quoting PTB reconstructions, I follow the STEDT convention of writing a lemma as “#digits PTB reconstructed form ‘gloss’.” 20 Sometimes also written ‘Hadoti’. 21 All quoted S as  forms are found in T. Grahame Bailey 1908.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Language abbreviations

Sh.dras. Shina of Dr¯ as Sh.gil. Shina of Gilgit Sh.gult. Shina of Gultar Sh.gur. Shina of Gures Sh.jij. Shina of Jijelut Sh.koh. the Kohist¯ an¯ı dialect of Shina Sh.koh. (RSup) the Kohist¯ an¯ı dialect of Shina22 Sh.k¯ ol. the K¯ ol¯ a dialect of Shina Sh.pales. the Pales¯ı dialect of Shina Sh.saz. Shina of Sazin Sh.tang. Shina of the Valley of Tangir Šat.. the Š¯ at.o¯t.¯ı dialect of Indus Kohistani (Ind.) (Dardic) Śeu. the Śeut.¯ı sub-dialect of Khaś¯ al¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Shgh. Shughni (Iranian) Shor. the Shor¯ acol¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Shum. Shumashti (Dardic) Si. Sinhalese Sir.d.od.. the Sir¯ aj¯ı dialect of the D . od.a area (of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı?) (same as K.sir.) Sir.shim. the Sir¯ aj¯ı dialect of the Shimla area of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Sir.Suk. the Sir¯ aj¯ı dialect of Suket Sira. Siraik¯ı (roughly the same as Lahnd¯ a) Sirm. the Sirmauri dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Slav. Slavonic So. Sora (Munda) Sod. the S˘od¯ oc¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Sogd. Sogdian (Iranian) Sp. Spitian (West Himalayish) Srk. the Sir¯ aik¯ı dialect of Sindhi Suk. the Suket¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Sun. Sunwar (West Himalayish) Surkh. Surkhul¯ı dialect of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Sv. Savi (Dardic) Taj. Tajiki (Iranian) Tam. Tamil Tang. Tangam (Tani group of TibetoBurman - Post 2017) Td. Tod (West Himalayish)

XIX

Tel. Telugu Thak. Thakali (Tibeto-Burman) Thal. Thal Kohistani (Dir District) (Dardic) Thar. Tharu (Indo-Aryan)23 Tib. Tibetan Tinau. the Tin¯ aul¯ı dialect of Lahnd¯ a (L.) Tir. Tir¯ ah¯ı (Dardic) Toch.A Tocharian A Toch.B Tocharian B Tor. T¯ orw¯ al¯ı (Dardic) Tor.cail. the Cail dialect of T¯ orw¯ al¯ı (Dardic) Treg. Treg¯ am¯ı (Nuristani) Tu. Tul.u (Dravidian) Tur. Turi (Munda) Turk. Turkish Ur. Urdu Ush. Ushu Kohistani (Dardic) W languages of western South Asia W¯ am. W¯ ama = San.uv¯ıri (Nuristani) Wan. Wanetsi (Iranian) Waz. the Waziri dialect of Pashto Werch. Werchikw¯ ar or Wershikw¯ ar (Yasin dialect of Burushaski, same as Bur.ys.) Wg. Waigal¯ı (also Kalas.a-al¯ a) including the dialect of Nisheygram/Nishigram (Nuristani) WH Western Himalayish Wkh. Wakhi (Iranian) Wot.. Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı (and Kat.a¯rqal¯ ai) (Dardic) WPah. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı YAv. Young Avestan, same as Jav. Yazgh. Yazghulami (Iranian) Yghn. Yaghnobi (Iranian) Yid. Yidgha (Iranian) Zb. Zebaki (Iranian) Zaz. Zazaki (Iranian) Zz. Zhang Zhung (West Himalayish [extinct])

22 These forms from the Kohist¯ an¯ı dialect of Shina stem from unpublished manuscripts written by Ruth Laila Schmidt. The manuscripts are with me and Schmidt generously allowed me to quote from them in this book. 23 Data in this book are only from the Chitwan dialect of Tharu, see Dorothy Leal.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XX

Introductory

Notes on transcriptions and translations Dealing with a great number of languages for which there exist different traditions of written presentation of words (e.g. according to IPA, according to Iranianist or Indological transliteration conventions, mixture of transliteration conventions and IPA, etc.) has led me to unify the many different representations to some extent. But the following different representations have been left as such: 1. In case of w and v I have usually written v if the concerned language does not differentiate between the two 2. Palatal affricates: č = ć 24 = c,25 ž = j = ˇȷ. Note also that theoretically č denotes a palato-alveolar affricate and c a palatal affricate. However, in the northwest and west of South Asia from where most of the data of this book stem there is not only considerable fluctuation between these two very similar pronunciations but also, ignoring phonetic facts, the steady habit to use č for every East-Iranian, Nuristani and Dardic language and c for the rest 3. V retroflex vowel in some Dardic and Nuristani languages 4. Retroflex affricates:26 z. = dz. = .j 5. Velar voiced fricative G = gˇ 6. Retroflex spirants: (a) unvoiced s. = š. = x ˇ, (b) voiced z. = ž. = gˇ 7. Dental affricates: c˙ = ts, z = ż = ¨ȷ27 8. C is sometimes used to write implosive consonants in Sindh¯ı and it is sometimes used to write uvular fricatives (borrowings from Persian and Arabic) 9. Palatal sibilants: š = ś = (s)sh = sch = sh Bashg. zh corresponds to voiced palatal sibilant ž 10. Velar consonants: n˙ = N 11. In Parsi Gujarati a dental stop as e.g. t contrasts with an alveolar t (S. N. Gajendragadkar 1974: 14f.) 12. In Bang¯ an.¯ı and other varieties of Pah¯ ar.¯ı the sound s. is not a phoneme but allophone of ś before retroflex stops and nasal consonants 13. Words quoted from Hindi and other NIA sources with diphthongs transliterated or transcribed as au or ai are usually actually pronounced as [ O] or [ E]. 14. Words with subscript figures – mostly from Bang¯ an.¯ı – indicate (near) homonyms. 24 This graphemic equalization is due to different academic traditions. However, it is very important to note that in Proto-Indo-Iranian contexts *ć indicates a palato-alveolar affricate whereas *č indicates a palatal affricate. As if that wasn’t enough, Richard Strand uses the grapheme ć for dental affricates. However, this has been regularly replaced by me with commonly used c˙ . 25 Morgenstierne usually writes c for the dental affricate (most other authors use c˙ ). It is also important to note that in Kartvelian scholarship c denotes a “voiceless pre-alveolar (aspirated) hissing affricate” (Chukhua [2019: 17]). that is, Kartvelian c is close to c˙ . 26 Systemic affricates can be pronounced as fricatives under certain conditions. Therefore it is important to distinguish always clearly between phonological systems and phonetic realizations. 27 Strand uses ź. Note also that in many northwestern languages z = ż = ¨ȷ is pronounced as an affricate [dz] word-initially but elsewhere as a fricative.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Grammatical abbreviations and phonetic symbols

XXI

In a number of cases not only English but also Hindi translations – e.g. from dictionaries or from other Hindi sources – have been given in this way: original word ‘(Hindi)meaning – (English) meaning’. In other cases German and Germanand-English translations are given. I have usually translated German words and phrases from German secondary sources in (proximate) English. The reader finds occasionally a meaning rendered both into German and English in those cases where a precise English match for a German rendering does not exist. A long dash — is used in the discussion of lemmata to roughly separate words from Pah¯ ar.¯ı (but including sometimes Panjabi and other western languages) from the Dard, Nuristan and other northwestern and Outer Languages (on this notion see below p. 14) or, more generally, also to distinguish other language groups. Words written as “word” either come from phonologically underspecified sources or indicate a literal translation. All data from Bang¯ an.¯ı, Khaśdh¯ ar¯ı, Deog¯ ar¯ı, Bauri, Gauro, the Cail variant of T¯ orw¯ al¯ı and from the West Himalayish J¯ ad. language are from my own field work. Also from my own field work are data tagged with “Garh.t.. poet.” They stem partly from songs and ballads sung by the Gar.hv¯ al¯ı professional bards Mizajilal Das and Shivjani Das. I want to express here my gratitude to both. Words marked only as “Garh.t..” stem, however, from Gar.hv¯ al¯ı dictionaries. In addition, the study contains my field notes from various other languages of the northwest and Romani. Since in many cases there already exist publications on them (see bibliography),28 words collected by me are indicated by (Z.); this pertains also to data tagged as “Rom. (Z.)” which refer to words collected by me from a Romani speaker hailing from former Yugoslavia but now living in Germany. Data from Kv¯ ar¯ı have been collected by my MA student Thomas Christian Nicolas Jouanne. I want to express my thanks at this place for allowing me to use some data not yet published by him.

Grammatical abbreviations and phonetic symbols " generally indicates a following accented syllable in Dardic and Nuristani, but in case of Kashmiri " indicates palatalization and in Kham " indicates a “marked tone” (Watters [2004: 5]) C’ indicates a glottalized (ejective) consonant – in this book only in Caucasian

languages. Empty square brackets [ ] in AustroAsiatic reconstructions mean ‘uncertainty’ † in Shorto’s dictionary means MonKhmer reconstructions with Munda parallels

28 In the text, explicit references to the sources are only given when they are not obvious. 29 I have tried without a speech analyzer to mark tone-bearing words with one of three or four tonemes. However, until an electronically based analysis has been done, I prefer to just indicate the presence or absence of a toneme. Note that in many, however not all, cases tone in Bang¯ an.¯ı is a reflex of a former aspiration. Conversely, in a few cases, especially cases where a PIE derivation appears likely, an expected tone can be absent. In fact, this holds also sometimes true for words

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XXII

Introductory

v ` in Bang¯ an.¯ı words indicates presence of a (usually falling) tone without specifying which toneme it is29 v. indicates a retroflex(ed) vowel found in some Nuristan and Dard languages; it typically echoes a former following consonant. The same diacritic is used by Bodding in his Santali dictionary. He calls such vowels “resultant vowels” which seem to be schwa-like palatalized vowels (see Arun Ghosh in Anderson [2008: 21] and Santosh Soren [1999: 12]) a x b means ‘a is contaminated by b’ < historically deriving from > historically developing into ← (a) borrowed from another language (b) deriving from another word class of the same language (c) having been modified in some way without having changed the word class → (a) changing into another word class in the same language (b) modifying the word in some way but not changing the word class ABS absolutive ad. adapted from, adaptation of adj. adjective AUX (quasi-aspectual) auxiliary C consonant C𝑢 unvoiced consonant C𝑣 voiced consonant C in Sanskrit syllabic consonant; else where partially devoiced consonant CAUS causative CCH coronal consonant harmony30 CONJ.PTCL conjunctive participle CONV converb (absolutive)

d implosive retroflex voiced consonant  media D DAT dative DEM[prox] demonstrative (proximate) DEM[rem] demonstrative (remote) DIM diminutive ECHO echo word EMP or emp. emphatic, emphatic particle ERG or erg. ergative ex. example EXCL exclamation F or f. grammatically feminine gender FIL filler word FUT future tense GEN genitive GER gerundivum H “high” tone in Klm. HL “high-low” tone in Klm. H(L) “delayed high-low” tone in Klm. Hy vowel lengthening of “high” tone in Klm.31 IMP, imp., imper. imperative INF, inf. infinitive ind. indeclinable INJ injunctive int. intensive interj. interjection i. q. idem quod (‘the same as’) itr. intransitive é means normally ‘voiced palatal plosive’. However, it is also used by various scholar writing on Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Munda language where the meant sounds are certainly affricates. K dorsal consonant (velar, labiovelar, palatal)

of OIA origin. A telling example is this: Bng. dutti ‘type of witch’ has a parallel in Garh. dutt¯ı ‘bawd, wench’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola). The words derive< OIA dhu
rta-1 ‘cunning’ (6865) where one finds e.g. S. dh¯ ut¯ı ‘bawd’. Whereas loss of aspiration in mediae is regular in Bng., in Garh. it is much less common (because of the much heavier influence from standard IA). But in addition, the Bng. word has no tone. Thus the two forms may be survivals of very early loss of aspiration without any trace which is a characteristic of some Outer Languages. 30 Place (and repeatedly also type) of articulation harmony. 31 “. . . the word’s last vowel undergoes lengthening if the word occurs in non-final position in the sentence (vowel lengthening: yes)” (Baart 1997: 74).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Abbreviations of ancient and new works, authors, texts and websites

XXIII

ˆ palatal consonant PPR present participle K L “low” tone in Klm. PR present tense LH “low-high” tone in Klm. PS plosive-sibilant cluster LOC locative case PTCL participle lw. loanword PSM passive marker (has in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Ly “low tone with vowel lengthening” in mostly lost this old function) PST past tense Klm. M media (voiced obstruent) ř oral apico-alveolar approximant m. grammatically masculine gender S sibilant n. noun or neuter gender SCE speech community event ň nasal apico-alveolar approximant sfx. suffix N nasal consonant SG singular NCLS noun classifier T dental/alveolar consonant or tenuis NEG negative particle TS tenuis-sibilant cluster nom. nominative T. retroflex stop NP proper name tr. transitive OBJ object uV unvoiced affricate OBL oblique case v. verb P plosive V vowel PASS or pass., passive voice vA voiced affricate PERF perfect (tense) v.l. varia lectio PERFPRET perfective preterite -vlla- abbreviation for the MIA PL plural -illa/alla/ulla- suffix POP or pop., postposition VOC vocative PP past participle VS verb stem or V¯ adh¯ ula-śrautas¯ utra PPP past passive participle

Abbreviations of ancient and new works, authors, texts and websites ACD Austronesian Comparative Dictionary ¯ Apastamba-dharmas¯ ¯ Ap utra ¯ ¯ ApŚr Apastamba-śrautas¯ utra ATLAS Fussman 1972 AV Atharva-veda AVP Atharva-veda Paippal¯ ada B¯ alar. B¯ alar¯ am¯ayan.a Bhadrab. Bhadrab¯ ahu-caritra Bhar. Bharata-n¯ at.yaś¯ astra Bhartr. Bhartrhari avya Bhat.t.Bhat.t.i-k¯ Bhil.MBh. oral Mah¯ abh¯ arata in Bh¯ıl¯ı (see

Bhagwandas Patel) BhP Bh¯ agavata-pur¯an.a Bhpr. Bh¯ avaprak¯ aśa Car. Caraka Caurap. Caurapañc¯ aśik¯a CDIAL A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages ChUp. Ch¯andogya Upanis.ad CINCL see Bomhard 2015a. A comprehensive introduction to Nostratic comparative linguistics: With special reference to Indo-European (Second revised, corrected,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XXIV

Introductory

and expanded edition).32 CLLR Comparative Lexicon of LSI Rajasthan Part 1 Daś. Daśakum¯ aracarita DEDR A Dravidian etymological dictionary 33 Deś. Hemacandra’s Deś¯ıśabdasamgraha ˙ Dh¯ atup. Dh¯atup¯ at.ha Dh¯ urtas. Dh¯ urtasam¯ agama Div. Divy¯ avad¯ ana DK Doh¯ a-kos.a (inc. Cary¯ a-g¯ıti) (see e.g. M. Shahidullah) DKS see Harold Walter Bailey Dictionary of Khotan Saka DN see Deś. EWA Manfred Mayrhofer. Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen FLII Manfred Mayrhofer. Die Fortsetzung der indogermanischen Laryngale im Indo-Iranischen 34 Gaut. Gautama-Dharmaś¯ astra G¯ıt. G¯ıta-govinda GED A Gothic etymological dictionary (see Lehmann) GN C. Shackle. A Gur¯ u N¯ anak Glossary Gobh. Gobhila-śr¯ addha-kalpa GrS Grihya S¯ utra  Harav. Haravijaya Hariv. Harivamśa ˙ Hit. Hitopadeśa HPariś. Hemacandra’s Pariśis.t.a-parvan HŚS Hind¯ı śabdas¯ agara (see Das, Shyamsundar) IB i
sE kO bOkh an ‘The prophecy of the

Lord’35 IEW Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (see Pokorny) IGN see Wolfram Euler 1979 IIFL Indo-Iranian Frontier Languages (Georg Morgenstierne) K¯ ad. K¯ adambar¯ı K¯ alid. K¯ alid¯ asa K¯ aran.d.. K¯ aran.d.a-vy¯ uha K¯ aś. K¯ aśik¯avrtti asarits¯agara Kath¯ as. Kath¯ K¯ atyŚr. K¯ aty¯ ayana- Śrautas¯ utra Kauś. Kauśikas¯ utra KET “Kohima Education Trust” (editor of Key words. A glossary of sixteen Nagaland languages, see Literature) KEV Edzard J. Furnée Die wichtigsten konsonantischen Erscheinungen des Vorgriechischen. KEWA Manfred Mayrhofer. Kurzgefaßtes etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen Koebler Indogermanisches Wörterbuch: http://www.koeblergerhard.de/idgwbhin. Kull. Kull¯ uka Bhat.t.a’s commentary on Manusmrti Krs.. Krs isamgraha

 Lalita-vistara 

Lalit. lex. lexicographic36 LingP. ˙ Linga-pur¯ ˙ an.a LIV Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben (see Rix) MaitrS. Maitr¯ ayan.¯ı-sam a . hit¯

32 The lemmata are found under the respective numbers. Note also that Allan Bomhard uses the alternative system of PIE reconstruction of Gamkrelidze and Ivanov. 33 Also called Deś¯ın¯ amam¯ al¯ a, here abbreviated as DN. An abbreviation like ‘DN: . . . ’ refers to the page of Bhayani’s 1988 book from which a word is quoted. 34 Quotes are given according to the paragraphs. 35 This is a song consisting of creation myths. It is performed annually in Bangan in February by ‘low caste’ professional bards. Published in Zoller 2014a. 36 The reader will find in this book many examples of modern reflexes of OIA lex. words in the Outer Languages (on this notion see the introduction) but much fewer reflexes in the Inner Languages. Since the Outer Languages are, at least by trend, the non-dominant languages that have always been poorly represented in texts written in Inner Languages, this is not surprising. One may imagine that some of those lexicographers wrote in the prestigious idiom of Sanskrit, yet knew also other similar but non-prestigious tongues of which they availed themselves.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Abbreviations of ancient and new works, authors, texts and websites

Mallav. M¯ alavik¯ agnimitra MBh Mah¯ abh¯arata Mcar. Mah¯ av¯ıra-caritra Megh. Meghad¯ uta MKH Mohie ki Har, or Bar, an oral ballad from Ki˜ uthal37 Mn. Manu’s Law-book MW Monier-Williams Naigh. Naighan.t.uka Nal. Nalop¯ akhy¯ ana Nalac. Nalacamp¯ u or Damayant¯ıkath¯ a NiDoc. Language of ‘Kharos.t.h¯ı Inscriptions discovered by Sir Aurel Stein in Chinese Turkestan’ edited by A. M. Boyer, E. J. Rapson, and E. Senart. Npr. Nighan.t.u prak¯ aśa ODBL Origin and development of the Bengali language (see S. K. Chatterji) PAN P Onduan the Bang¯ an.¯ı oral

38

Mah¯ abh¯ arata PañcavBr. Pañca-vimśa-br¯ ˙ ahman.a Pañcad. Pañcadan.d.acchattra-prabandha Pañcat. Pañcatantra P¯ an.. P¯ an.ini P¯ arGr. P¯ araskara-grhya-s¯ utra  Pat. Patañjali PMWS Proto-Munda words in Sanskrit (see F. B. J. Kuiper 1948) poet. documented only in oral poetry Prab. Prabodha-candrodaya PREG Robert Beekes Pre-Greek: Phonology, morphology, lexicon PSM P¯ aiasaddamahan.n.avo R. R¯ am¯ayan.a Ragh. Raghuvamśa ˙ Rasik. Rasikaraman.a R¯ aj. R¯ajatarangin¯ ˙ ı RSup see in above list of languages Sh.koh. (RSup) RV Rg-veda 

XXV

S¯ ay S¯ ayan.a S¯ ah. S¯ahitya darpan.a Śak. Śakuntal¯a Śam arya . k. Śam . kar¯ac¯ Ś¯ ankhŚr ˙ Ś¯ ankh¯ ˙ ayana Śrauta-s¯ utra ŚBr Śatapatha-br¯ ahman.a Sch. Scholiast SEAlang Mon-Khmer Languages Project: http://sealang.net/monkhmer/dictionary/ SEAlang Munda Etymological Dictionary: http://sealang.net/munda/dictionary/ Ś¯ıl Ś¯ıl¯ anka ˙ SILUS Studien zu den älteren indoiranischen Lehnwörtern in den uralischen Sprachen (see Hartmut Katz) Śr.S. Śrauta S¯ utra Subh. Subh¯as.it¯ avali Suśr. Suśruta TA Taittir¯ıya-¯ aran.yaka T¯ an.d.yabr. T¯an.d.ya-br¯ ahman.a Tattvas. Tattvasam¯ asa TBr. Taittir¯ıya-br¯ ahman.a TOB The Tower of Babel: http://starling.rinet.ru/ TS Taittir¯ıya-samhit¯ ˙ a TuAdd Addenda and Corrigenda in the CDIAL UGK D. D. Sharma Uttar¯ akhan.d. gy¯ ankos. Un.a¯. Un.a¯di-s¯ utra VarBrS. Var¯ aha-mihira’s Brhat Sam a . hit¯  V¯ as.  V¯asavadatta Vcar. Vikram¯ ankadeva-carita ˙ by Bilhan.a Vikr. Vikramorvaś¯ı Vop. Vopadeva VS verb stem or V¯ adh¯ ula-śrautas¯ utra W. Horace H. Wilson Wackernagel Altindische Grammatik (quotes refer to §s)

37 See H. A. Rose; the ballad was published in three parts, therefore the references have the form MKH 1/2/3: page . . . 38 It is performed annually in February by ‘low caste’ professional bards. Published in Zoller 2014a. Quotes from the PAN in this book are tagged with small size figures in square brackets showing the place of the quote in the text both in Bang¯ an.¯ı original and German translation.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XXVI

Introductory

WALS The world atlas of language struc- Y¯ ajñ. Y¯ ajñavalkya tures online Yaś(ast). Yaśastilaka of Somadevas¯ uri

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

“We shall find a large number of important words differing in every village” Hardev Bahri (1962: xv) on ‘Lahnd¯ a’ “The Austronesian and Algonquian cases exemplify a long-recognized rule of thumb: the area of a phylum which shows the greatest diversity is likely to be its homeland” Malcolm Ross (1997: 255)

Acknowledgements This book is rather a preliminary report than a codified textbook. The reason for this is that a comprehensive study of Indo-Aryan, if it really tries to somehow do justice to this enormous field, is simply an overload for any single person, no matter how much support the person receives from other persons, from institutions and various sources of information. Therefore this book is very imperfect. It contains mistakes which I did not see and it certainly contains many gaps of information of which I was not aware. Yet I hope that the study will be a step towards a better understanding of this field. Over the years I have received constant support in South Asia and Europe from very many people. It is impossible to name all of them here, but my gratitude includes also those unnamed persons. I first want to thank the following persons for their help as language consultants: Gabar Singh Chauhan (Bang¯ an.¯ı), Trilok Singh Pamvar (Bang¯ an.¯ı), Shamsher Singh Chauhan (Deog¯ ar¯ı), Balvir Singh Chauhan (Kot.gar.h¯ı), Uma Shankar Satish (Jauns¯ ar¯ı), Data Ram Purohit and Ram Prasad Bhatt (Gar.hv¯ al¯ı), Maheshvar Prasad Joshi (Kumaun¯ı), Dhrub Ghimire (Nep¯ ali), Safia Nuristani (Waigal¯ı), Meah Mostafiz (Chittagongian). I am very indebted to Anvita Abbi for conducting her own field research in many villages in Bangan along with her linguistics students. The study, which lasted several months, independently proved that the linguistic data I published in 1988 and 1989 are real. I want to thank Ruth Laila Schmidt for proof reading the manuscript and for many suggestions and corrections. I am very grateful to Almuth Degener for her careful and critical reading of the book manuscript, and for her many suggestions and corrections. I am also grateful to Reiner Lipp for correcting misunderstandings on my part on Proto-Indo-European matters and for many useful suggestions regarding tricky ProtoIndo-European phonetic processes. My thanks also go to late Georg Buddruss and late Roland Bielmeier many for their suggestions and correction. I would also like to thank the editors of Neuindische Studien, Heidrun Brückner, Almuth Degener and Hans Harder, for including the book in this series. My special thanks also go to the Chairman of the Helmuth von Glasenapp Foundation Jürgen Hanneder for generously providing financial means for the Harrassowitz printing cost subsidy. I would also like to thank Elena Bashir for allowing me to publish Khowar words she has collected in this book before she herself publishes all the material in a KhowarEnglish Glossary. Special thanks also go to Dag Langmyhr of the University of Oslo (Institutt for informatikk), who never failed to solve even the most intriguing problems

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

XXVIII

Acknowledgements

with LaTeX, the typesetting system used to write this book. Of course, many thanks also go to Stephan Specht and Michael Fröhlich from Harrassowitz Verlag for the excellent cooperation during the preparations for printing. Claus Peter Zoller University of Oslo, May 2023

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Part I

North India and the arrival of Indo-Aryan

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 1 An Indo-Aryan history

1.1 1.1.1

The scope of the book The argument structure and sequence of topics in the book

Argument structure The following concentrated summary is written like a picture description without citing sources and authors and without explaining arguments. Of course, all of this is there throughout the rest of the book. The book is based on a system of interrelated arguments and theses. Already in the time of the Proto-Indo-Aryan language there was a splitting into two Indo-Aryan branches, which differ significantly from each other until today. Since the language of the first Indo-Aryans to arrive in South Asia – the ancestor of the so-called Outer Languages – was more archaic than the Indo-Aryan of the later arriving Vedic IndoAryans – the ancestor of the so-called Inner Languages –, this language was not as completely separated from Iranian as Vedic. This concerns the issues of aspiration and preservation of the phonological difference between the inherited palato-velars and (labio-)velars. The first Indo-Aryans to arrive in South Asia got into an intensive exchange with Kartvelian speakers and Austroa-Asiatic speakers. Therefore, unlike Vedic, this Proto-Indo-Aryan is not only characterized by inherited Proto-Indo-European features. On the one hand, we are dealing here with many loanwords from AustroAsiatic languages (i.e. from both Munda and Mon-Khmer languages) in the Outer Languages. On the other, there are loanwords from Kartvelian (a Caucasian language family), but their number is much smaller than the loanwords from Austro-Asiatic and their geographical range is also much more narrowly limited to the mountain languages of northwestern South Asia. While the first contact between speakers of Proto-IndoAryan and speakers of Austro-Asiatic did not occur until the former had reached northwestern South Asia, it is quite possible that the first contact between speakers of Proto-Indo-Aryan and speakers of Kartvelian occurred already in the BactriaMargiana region, i.e. in the cultural domain of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complez (BMAC), although the evidence for this is (so far) very limited.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

While it is obvious that the speakers of Kartvelian migrated to the mountainous regions of northwestern South Asia, it took a long research process to unequivocally establish that the speakers of Austro-Asiatic also migrated to northern India from outside South Asia (possibly from the Mekong Valley area). In contrast to this strong linguistic influences outlined here, the influence of Austro-Asiatic and Kartvelian on Vedic and its daughter languages is almost negligible. Since Indological philology has long focused on Vedic and Classical Sanskrit, on Pali, and on the non-G¯ andh¯ar¯ı Prakrits, it is no surprise that potential Munda influence on Indo-Aryan languages has been considered rather minor. And nobody could have imagined the possibility of a historical linguistic influence on Indo-Aryan through Mon-Khmer or even Kartvelian. Contact with speakers of Kartvelian led to an assimilation of the phonological system of the ancestor of the Outer Languages to the phonological system of ProtoKartvelian. That is why even today the phonological system of an archetypal Outer Language like Khowar is strikingly similar to that of Proto-Kartvelian. A major difference is that in the very slots where Khowar has aspirated plosives, ProtoKartvelian has ejectives. The clear difference between the phonological systems of the ancestors of the Outer and Inner Languages, which goes back to the ProtoIndo-Aryan period, deepened even later. A major contrast concerns the different development of consonant clusters, which I call assimilation versus simplification. A consonant group like *tr- is assimilated to t.s.- in Outer languages, but simplified to tin Inner Languages. Contact with speakers of Austro-Asiatic led to a whole series of phonetic developments and variations in the Outer Languages that are little or not known from the non-G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Prakrits. The same variations are well known from the Munda languages (see end of this subsection). Since these phonetic variations do not exist in the Mon-Khmer languages, it can be concluded that the ancestors of the Outer Languages and the Proto-Munda speakers were influenced by the same or a similar prehistoric substrate. Of course, all of this also implies that Proto-Munda was once widespread across much of northern India. There is an abundance of evidence for this. Once more: There were at least two Indo-Aryan immigrations to northern India. The language of the first immigration (ancestor of the Outer Languages) was close to Proto-Indo-Aryan and the language of the later immigration was Vedic Old-IndoAryan (ancestor of the Inner Languages). The period between the two immigrations is estimated at 500 years. Typical Outer Languages are Middle Indo-Aryan G¯ andh¯ar¯ı and Dardic Khowar, but also Chittagongian and Rohingya language have retained some Outer Language features. Typical Inner Languages are Middle Indo-Aryan Pali and Hindi. The Proto-Indo-Aryan speakers who arrived first spread over much of northern India. This means that when the Vedic speakers arrived, Proto-Indo-Aryan was still spoken in large parts of northern India. For reasons that can no longer be reconstructed in detail, Vedic language and culture largely displaced Proto-IndoAryan. Most of the features that characterize the Outer Languages are preserved in the mountain languages of northwestern South Asia. But since Outer Languages were once spoken over large parts of northern India, there are also Indo-Aryan languages that have retained a greater or lesser number of distinctive characteristics of the

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

5

Outer Languages. They, too, are typically found in peripheral areas and typically are languages that have neither been standardized nor have a written tradition. In addition to the fact that in smaller languages of peripheral areas, different numbers of Outer Language features have been preserved, the Outer Languages themselves were not without influence on the daughter languages of Vedic Indo-Aryan. This influence was first visible in the works of Prakrit grammarians. The fact that both Austro-Asiatic and Kartvelian – along with Indo-Aryan – are migrants to North India naturally leads to the question that there must have been indigenous languages of autochthonous populations before their arrivals. A few statements about very general structures of that prehistoric North Indian language landscape are possible, since on the Indo-Aryan side there was a clear development from so-called word languages to so-called syllable languages – a development almost unknown from the development of Iranian languages – and there was a similar development from Proto-Munda with typical sesquisyllabic structures also to syllable languages. In this prehistoric period, therefore, a number of prehistoric north Indian languages must have belonged to a type of syllable languages.

A selection of Outer Language features The following features are not or only rarely found in Inner Languages, that is, they are not or rarely mentioned for instance in the Sanskrit grammars of William Dwight Whitney or Jacob Wackernagel, in the Middle Indo-Aryan grammars of Richard Pischel or Ganesh Vasudev Tagare, and in an overview of the history of Indo-Aryan like that of Colin Masica, some of the following features are collected under the rubric “exceptions to the mainstream developments” which is misleading. Archaisms 1. 2. 3. 4.

preservation of the distinction between inherited palato-velars and (labio-)velars preservation of Vedic accent preservation of three (or two) of the OIA sibilants ś s. s preservation of PIA *gz. as (d.)z.(h) or jh (but OIA ks.)

Innovations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

dental ∼ retroflex consonants voice and aspiration fluctuation aspiration fronting1 ‘spontaneous aspiration ‘spontaneous’ affrication devoicing (and deaspiration)

1 I use ‘fronting’ in the sense of movement of a phonological element from the middle or end of a word towards its beginning and not, as others do, for ‘fronting’ of a point of articulation e.g. with affricates. For this I use the term dentalization (which includes alveolarization).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

loss/weakening of initial consonants (survival of) sesquisyllabic word structures pronunciation of retroflex nasal consonants as nasalized vowel plus oral flap pronunciation of velar nasal consonant a n˙ (and not as ng) ˙ alternations between aspiration h and glottal constriction P alternations between h and v and y

Topics in the book The book comprises six parts. The first chapter in the first part deals with many aspects concerning Indo-Aryan from its inception to the historical phase. Instead of the traditional Indo-Iranian dichotomy(Iranian – Indo-Aryan) or tripartition (with Nuristani somewhere in between), the concept of a linkage of lects2 is introduced, which is closer to the linguistic realities. I would like to make it clear at this point that there is no privileged position for Nuristani in the concept of a linkage of lects between the poles of Iranian and Indo-Aryan. This is explained in more detail already in this chapter on the basis of phonetic features that Nuristani shares with the linguistic surroundings usually not mentioned in the literature (see 1.1.3). The historical development from Proto-Indo-European to Old Indo-Aryan etc. is divided into two subdivisions. Subdivision I presents a purely historical linguistic perspective. Subdivision II (in the second chapter) deals with the migrations of the ancestors of the Indo-Aryans from their Proto-Indo-European homeland in the Yamnaya culture until their arrival in the upper Indus Valley. It has only been known for a few years that this migration was not in a straight line from the area of the Yamnaya culture to the upper Indus Valley, but first moved west towards Europe and then back east, where the Proto-Indo-Aryans became archaeologically tangible for the first time in the Sintashta culture. One speaks here of a loop, in the course of which the ancestors of the Indo-Aryans certainly were in contact with speakers of Finno-Ugric languages (third chapter) but probably also must have come into contact with nonIndo-European languages and cultures in connection with the Corded Ware Culture. Possible borrowings from this early period are discussed in the third chapter in the first part. The migration from Sintashta to the upper Indus Valley did not proceed in one go either. That is to say, there was an eventful stopover at the BMAC. The Indo-Aryans were influenced by the BMAC culture and they adopted regional terms. Importantly, however, they came into contact with Kartvelian speakers either here or not much later in the highlands of northwestern South Asia (second chapter). The profound influence that the Proto-Kartvelian phonological system had on the phonological system of a non-Vedic Proto-Indo-Aryan dialect set the course for the split into Outer and Inner languages. This split manifested itself, for example, in the diverging tendencies in the consonant clusters referred to above as assimilation versus simplification. It is known that at the time when Indo-Aryans were in the BMAC kingdom, there were contacts and exchanges between that kingdom and the kingdoms of the Tarim Basin. 2 The term ‘lect’ is repeatedly used in the appropriate contexts as a cover term for dialect and language. It goes back to Malcolm Ross.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

7

It is therefore possible that Tocharian loanwords entered Indo-Aryan at that time and vice versa. This is discussed in the third chapter. The main theme of the fourth chapter is the preservation of the phonological distinction between inherited palato-velar and (labio-)velar plosives as two separate orders of affricates in some (not all!) Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages. Finding some ‘Iranian’ features in (north)western Indo-Aryan languages is inversely equivalent to observing ‘Indo-Aryan’ features (e.g. aspirated plosives) in eastern Iranian languages. Of course there were and are countless mutual borrowings in this linguistic border region. But that is not what the phenomena discussed here are about. Rather, the mutual overlaps can be explained by the fact that among the lects of the IndoIranian linkage there were a few Iranian and Indo-Aryan lects that have not completely separated from each other. The theme of incomplete separation of language families leads to the issue of incomplete satemization discussed in the same chapter. We are dealing here with so-called Kentum words in Outer Languages. Their existence has not yet been definitively explained. However, the phenomenon seems comparable to the phenomen of Kentum words in Balto-Slavic. There have already been a number of attempts to explain their existence. But, it seems, no attempt at an explanation has met with general agreement. The fifth chapter deals with the topic of aspiration. Phonemically distinctive aspiration probably only developed in the late phase of Proto-Indo-European or in the Indo-Iranian phase and it is likely that a few Indo-Aryan lects in the IndoIranian linkage of lects never developed aspirated mediae. For this then explains that there are Dard languages in which the loss of aspiration has left traces (e.g. in the form of tonemes) and other Dard languages where there is no evidence that they ever had aspirated mediae.The same is arguably true of the Nuristani and eastern Iranian languages. Some of them have (optional) phonetic aspiration (so it is not phonologically distinctive), others have no phonetic aspiration. This is also an example of partial Iranian and Indo-Aryan mutual overlay. Throw back of aspiration in Sanskrit in case of mediae (e.g. bodhati but future bhotsyati) is explained by saying that aspiration of mediae is located on a separate tier while aspiration of tenues belongs to the consonant and vowel level since it never shows throw back in Sanskrit. There are similar effects in the mediae of Dard and West Pah¯ar.¯ı languages. However, it seems that this ‘phoneme splitting’ (e.g. Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı b¯ ahr¯ a ‘a load’ < OIA bh¯ ará-) extended to aspirated tenues over time (e.g. Kumaun¯ı cvahalan. ‘to peel’ < OIA *chilla- ‘torn, cut’ [5051]). The sole topic of the sixth chapter are the different developments of Old IndoAryan, Proto-Indo-Aryan and Proto-Indo-European consonant clusters which are termed assimilation and simplification. The main topic of chapter seven is the Vedic accent which is most authentically preserved in various Dard languages and at the eastern edge of Indo-Aryan in Chittagongian and Rohingya language. Otherwise, the Prakrits have not preserved this accent. A section in this chapter presents examples for the preservation of wordmedial single consonants. In the Prakrits, usually word-medial consonants were lost (e.g. most plosives). The impressive number of word-medial consonant preservation

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

8

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

(the section contains only a selection of examples, many additional cases are foud in various word lists in Part VI) is again an example for preservation of an archaism. Chapter eight is devoted to historical trends in syllable structures (again with pointing out occasional archaisms) with a broad tendency from word languages, which are hearer friendly, to syllable languages, which are speaker friendly. Since the latter type of languages is also characterized by a prevalence of geminates, this is also a topic of this chapter. The ninth chapter highlights three very different sets of themes. The first shows with a number of examples how diverse phonological and semantic processes can be in the history of the Indo-Aryan language. The second presents a small list of words that must have a Sanskrit origin, but they are not attested anywhere in Sanskrit sources. The third theme, origin and development of the -alla/illa/ulla- suffix, is of particular relevance to the theory of Outer and Inner Languages. The origin of this Middle IndoAryan suffix has long been a matter of controversy. Proposed here is a formation from the two Sanskrit suffixes -la- and -ya, to which there is a parallel in Tocharian B. It is important to note that although this strange-looking suffix is first found in Middle Indo-Aryan, it is found in modern languages from Dardic to Rohingya. The evidence forms almost a circle around the middle Ganges valley (ancient Madhyadeśa) where the suffix does not occur in modern languages. All this can only mean that it is an innovation of the Outer Languages that slowly penetrated into the Prakrits belonging to the Inner Languages during the Middle Indo-Aryan period. All of this is a good example of the veracity of the theory. Part II consists of just one chapter. A major concern in this chapter is an advocacy of the grammatical relevance of ideophones in all modern South Asian languages. For example, while the number of ideophones inherited from Proto-IndoEuropean is ridiculously small, the Munda languages are overflowing with ideophones. In general, ideophones are considered useless for the history of language. This prejudice is counterargumented in this chapter. Part III also consists of only one chapter, albeit a very long one. It explores the question of what can be said about the prehistoric linguistic landscape of North India before the arrival of the Indo-Aryans, Austro-Asians and Kartvelians. The online dictionary SARVA Project, founded and operated by Franklin Southworth and Michael Witzel, is linked to this topic. The majority of the lemmata compiled there cannot be assigned to any known language family. On the one hand, the predominant syllable structures of this substrate are analyzed, on the other hand, the concept of ‘macrolemmata’ is introduced, with which another characteristic of this prehistoric North Indian substrate is recorded. In addition to these two characteristics, there are also many examples with other phonetic variations and peculiarities, quite a few of which are already included in the list above. Some of these phonetic features have also left traces in Niya Prakrit in the Tarim Basin and even spread into Khotan Saka through language contact. However, in both Niya Prakrit and Khotan Saka, the number of such evidence is relatively limited. Part IV comprises two chapters. The first chapter deals with different past tenses and absolutives built with several grammemes, which are usually not found in the literature on Indo-Aryan language history. Since they typically appear in Outer

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

9

Languages, they too seem to be a characteristic of Outer Languages. In the second chapter there are several very different grammatical topics. Especially remarkable are auxiliary verbs without aspiration but cognate with Sanskrit sthitá-, and a section listing various interrogative words, some of which are found between Nuristani and Rohingya, but not in Turner’s Comparative Dictionary or in other textbooks on the history of Indo-Aryan. Part V, consisting of three chapters, deals with theoretical questions, some of a general linguistic nature and some to do with Indo-Aryan language history. The first chapter introduces Malcolm Ross’ Social Network Model. It was developed for the description and analysis of the Austronesian languages, whose older history is virtually unknown. This theoretical model is therefore particularly suitable for the treatment of Outer Languages, which are generally only known since the 19th century at the earliest. The second chapter gives an overview of previous approaches to the description and interpretation of the Indo-Iranian language history. This chapter is useful in showing how the positions and interpretations presented in this book are similar to and different from those of other researchers. The third chapter again deals with questions about the linguistic positions of Nuristani and Dardic. In addition, data from R¯ ajbansh¯ı spoken in southeastern Nepal – which has striking similarities with West Pah¯ar.¯ı – is used to demonstrate how at individual points in the IndoAryan language area there are languages with Outer Language features, but which are surrounded by languages with Inner Language features. A comparable example with R¯ ajbansh¯ı is the relationship between Brajbh¯ as.a¯ and Hindi, where Hindi is an archaetypal Inner Language, but Brajbh¯ as.a¯ has a striking number of Outer Language features, although the geographical expanses of Hindi and Brajbh¯as.a¯ overlap to a large extent. The sixth and last part consists of four chapters. The first chapter is just a long list of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı grammatical affixes. Since Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı is an important Outer Language, which I studied particularly intensively, there is a lot of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı language data in the book, which is often formed with all kinds of affixes. The list helps to understand more complex Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı formations. However, the most extensivesections of Part VI are the chapters Linguistic data I, II and III. Linguistic data I deals with language data related to Old Indo-Aryan, to Iranian and to Proto-Indo-European. As for the latter, for example, I hold that the Outer Languages have a considerable body of words derived from Proto-Indo-European but not found in Vedic Sanskrit. In view of the early non-Vedic immigration of ProtoIndo-Aryan speakers, this is not very surprising. In addition, Linguistic data I is also a kind of continuation and extension of Ralf Turner’s Comparative dictionary of the Indo-Aryan languages (CDIAL). The various sections contain a large number of lemmata that are documented in many Outer Languages but have not found their way into either the CDIAL or SARVA. Although their documentation does not contribute in any particular way to the theory of the Outer and Inner Languages, it proves the extraordinary linguistic wealth of the many small Indo-Aryan languages without written traditions. Linguistic data II contains lists of Austro-Asiatic loanwords, classified according to whether the loanwords are generally of Austro-Asiatic origin (that is, attested

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

10

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

in both Mon-Khmer and Munda languages) or whether they occur only in Munda languages. In the latter case there are always lemmata where it remains unclear whether they are genuinely Austro-Asiatic or come from an unknown North Indian substrate. Recipient languages for these Austro-Asiatic loanwords are Burushaski, the Tibeto-Himalayan languages between Balti in Gilgit-Baltistan and Apatani in Arunachal Pradesh, and Outer Languages from Nuristani to Rohingya. A few AustroAsiatic loanwords have also made it into some East Iranian languages. While in the Tibeto-Himalayan languages there seems to be a tendency for the borrowed words to come predominantly from the Mon-Khmer branch, it is rather the opposite in the Outer Languages, where there are predominantly loan words that are only known from Munda languages. This could indicate that Mon-Khmer languages were once also widespread in distant prehistoric northern India. Linguistic data III documents Kartvelian loanwords in the languages of northwestern South Asia. Burushaski shows the clearest connections with Kartvelian. Whether Burushaski is a direct descendant of Proto-Kartvelian or a language isolate heavily influenced by Kartvelian is currently unclear. Kartvelian loanwords are geographically much less widespread than the Austro-Asiatic loanwords. They are found in Dard and Nuristan languages, in northwestern Tibetan languages and in eastern Iranian languages. It is possible that Old Kartvelian was also spoken in the civilization of the Bactria-Margiana Archeological Complex. However, the evidence for this is currently sparse. There also seems to be evidence that a few Kartvelian loanwords entered Sanskrit early on. 1.1.2

Summary of the historical linguistic developments

This book is not a textbook on Indo-Aryan in the sense of a presentation of the approved results of the scholarship in the field. The task I have set myself rather concerns two longstanding problems in two fields where the opinion of the academic community continues to be divided. The first pertains to the question of the validity of the theory of a difference between the so-called Outer Languages (OL) and the socalled Inner Languages (IL). The theory claims that the immigration of speakers of Old Indo-Aryan into South Asia was not a singular event and that this more than onetime immigration event has left traces even in the New Indo-Aryan languages. I will explain the distinction in terms of earlier language immigration (Outer Languages) and later language immigration (Inner Languages). The earlier immigration can be equated with the Proto-Indo-Aryan phase and the later immigration with the OldIndo-Aryan phase (documented as Vedic Sanskrit). However, the central difference between Outer and Inner Languages is not simply based on a temporal or geographical difference of (at least) two immigration events. This is the traditional view held by August Friedrich Wilhelm Hoernle (1880), George Abraham Grierson (1927) and Franklin Southworth (2005). The key difference between Outer and Inner Languages is that early Proto-Indo-Aryan-speaking migrants came into close contact with ‘expatriate’ speakers of Kartvelian on their way to or in northwestern South Asia. The later arriving Vedic speakers, however, did not come into contact with a Kartvelian language. Although the origin of Burushaski

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

11

has long been disputed or Burushaski was classified as a language isolate (see Zoller 2014b), two publications by Jan Henrik Holst (2014a, 2017) have clearly shown that Burushaski is related to Kartvelian. Holst sees Burushaski as a descendant of ProtoKartvelian. At this point, however, I would be more inclined to say that Burushaski is the visible survival of a hitherto invisible substrate that is geographically much larger than the area of expansion of the three Burushaski dialects. The Kartvelian substrate is found in Dard languages, in Nuristani, in northwestern Tibetan languages, and in eastern Iranian languages. Traces of Kartvelian are also likely to be found in the extinct language of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex with which the Proto-Indoarians came into close contact on their way from the Sintashta culture (north[-east] of the Caspian Sea) to northwestern South Asia. All of this makes it likely that the Kartvelian substrate is very old. Linguistically, the Kartvelian substrate is of great historical mportance, since it was the main reason for the separation of Outer and Inner Languages in Proto-IndoAryan times. Out of a certain number of Proto-Indo-Aryan dialects, some came under the influence of the Kartvelian phonological system (see next section). As a result, not only the phonological system of Burushaski but also the phonological systems of Dard and Nuristani languages, of eastern Iranian languages and of northwestern Tibetan languages have great similarities ultimately with the phonological system of ProtoKartvelian. While the phonological systems of the Inner Languages (e.g. Classical Sanskrit, Pali, Hindi) simply evolved directly from the Proto-Indo-Iranian system, the Dard, Nuristani, and Eastern Iranian languages did not. The same observation applies in principle also to the northwestern Tibetan languages. Ultimately, based on the blueprint of the proto-Kartvelian phonological system, the Outer Languages, in contrast to the Inner Languages (but together with the neighboring Iranian and Tibetan languages), developed complex phonological subsystems in stops, affricates and sibilants. As a result of this divergence, different linguistic processes developed for the Outer and Inner Languages as early as the Indo-Iranian period (because some processes relevant for Outer Languages affected also various Iranian languages), which continue to have an impact until today. The two most important processes that distinguish Outer and Inner Languages I call ‘assimilation’ and ‘simplification’. An example for a simplification would be the change from OIA gr- to MIA g- whereas the same cluster underwent an assimilation in several Outer Languages into dl-. Many examples for this type and other types of historical linguistic change will be discussed in the following sections and chapters. Another important aspect concerning the distinction between Outer and Inner Languages relates to the fact that, in my opinion, not all dialects completely separated from each other in the post-proto-Indo-Iranian phase. This concerns several archaisms and innovations usually considered as characteristic for either Iranian or Indo-Aryan. Here I do not mean the well-known and extensive mutual borrowings between languages close to the border between the Indo-Aryan and the Iranian sphere. I do not mean mutual borrowing, but the fact that in the early phase of the split between Iranian and Indo-Aryan there were also non-Vedic dialects that shared some Iranian innovations with the Iranian side. Conversely, the same is true for a few Iranian languages that have participated in some Indo-Aryan innovations. Among

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

12

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

other things, this primarily affects aspiration loss and gain as well as the manner of development of the inherited gutturals. Although we are still at the very beginning of the book, it is already clear that my understanding of the nature of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages differs fundamentally from previous models of linguistic history, according to which Indo-Iranian simply falls into two or three branches. The division between Iranian and Indo-Aryan always seemed clear and distinct, only the position of the Nuristan languages remained a point of controversy. In the variant of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages that I advocate, the Nuristan languages have no particular linguistic significance. Before I turn to the question of what kind of linguistic landscape the first IndoAryans encountered when they arrived in northwestern South Asia, I would like to add that I examine below the question of how the ancestors of the Indo-Aryans came to the Panjab from their original homeland in the Pontic-Caspian steppe. It is now known that they did not simply come from there by the shortest route to South Asia, but that they first moved west towards Europe, but then turned back east to reach the area north-east of the Caspian Sea where they became for the first time archaeologically tangible as Indo-Iranians in the Sintashta culture. From there, Iranians and IndoAryans parted ways and the latter came to North India via the BMAC intermediate station (the fact that they also came to the Mitanni Kingdom to build a superstrate plays almost no role in the present book). It would not be surprising at all if the ancestors of the Indo-Aryans while travelling along these long and tangled paths, which led them towards Europe, also came into contact with various Eurasian preIndo-European substrates. By the time the Indo-Aryans arrived in the Panjab, their language had already brought loan words with it. Several such very early loanwords are presented and discussed below. Now to the question regarding the nature of the linguistic landscape of North India3 before the arrival of speakers of Old Indo-Aryan. My answer is that large parts of North India from the Hindu Kush to the borders of Myanmar were dominated by Austro-Asiatic languages. That is, not just by para-Munda languages (Witzel 1999) mainly characterized by some specific phonetic features and some prefixes and suffixes with parallels in Munda languages. Nor do I wish to say that the current Munda languages were spread over much larger regions of northern India in prehistoric times than today (see Peterson 2017). Rather, I am saying that precursors both of Munda and of Mon-Khmer languages were spoken in this area. While the evidence for the Kartvelian substratum is geographically and quantitatively limited (so far not much more than around 160 lemmata – see Linguistic data III)), there are hundreds of specimens from the Austro-Asiatic substratum. These substrate words are found not only in Indo-Aryan, especially in Outer Languages, but also in large numbers in all Tibetan Himalayan languages between Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh (see Linguistic data II). Similar to the speakers of Indo-Aryan, the speakers of Austro-Asiatic also immigrated to India from outside (Sidwell and Blench 2011), however, long before the Indo-Aryans. This, in turn, implies the question regarding the nature of the 3 Throughout this book I will use this term in a traditional sense, i.e. ignoring modern political boundaries.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

13

linguistic landscape of North India before the arrival of speakers of Austro-Asiatic. It will turn out that we here reach a largely unexplored and arcane world about which pro tempore very little can be said. I see two areas from which we can gain some first insights: (a) from similar changes Indo-Aryan and Munda languages have undergone after reaching Indian territory; (b) from some cultural/religious vocabulary which seems to not have been imported either by immigrant Indo-Aryans or by immigrant Austro-Asiatic speakers. With regard to point (a), it can be argued by utilizing the dual concept of word and syllable languages (for more details see below p. 284) that in both cases a clear drift from a word language4 to a syllable language structure occurred. Taking for instance the feature ±geminate one can see that geminates were rare in Old Indo-Aryan (and probably absent in Proto-Indo-European), but abound in a modern Inner Language like Hindi (see Kümmel [2014]). Similar statements can be made about Proto-Austro-Asiatic, and here the result is that, apart from a few exceptions, geminates are untypical in modern Mon-Khmer languages but they abound in a modern Munda language like Santali (see Donegan [1993: 2]). The Austro-Asiatic vestiges are especially numerous in the Tibeto-Himalayan languages, i.e. roughly from West Himalayish in the west to Apatani in the east, perhaps somewhat less borrowings are found in (Kartvelian-related) Burushaski, and even less in Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı,5 even though a Pah¯ ar.¯i language like Gar.v¯ al¯ı has certainly more borrowed words from Munda than Sanskrit. This cline from Tibeto-Himalayish to the Indo-Aryan ‘Northwestern branch’ seems to correspond with a trend from a prevalence of borrowings from Mon-Khmer to a prevalence of borrowings from Munda. For instance, Tibeto-Burman Chepang (spoken in Central Nepal by a small community of former hunters and foragers) has borrowed mostly words from Mon-Khmer without parallels in Munda, whereas in case of Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı Gar.hv¯ al¯ı it looks the other way round: the majority of borrowings are from Munda and only few words have also (or only) parallels in Mon-Khmer. These very preliminary and intuitive observations nevertheless allow the proposal of two hypotheses: (a) In a similar way as the language immigration of speakers of Indo-Aryan into North India was not a singular event, the language immigration of speakers of Austro-Asiatic languages – coming so-to-say from the opposite direction – was also not a singular event. And it seems that at the arrival of the ancestors of the Munda languages there were already speakers of Austro-Asiatic languages in North India (including the high mountains); (b) e.g. Burushaski or Gar.hv¯ al¯ı share many words with Munda but not with Mon-Khmer, yet only sometimes it is clear that they must be of Munda origin (e.g. when words have a sesquisyllable-like structure). This then can mean that the words actually have been borrowed both into Munda and into Burushaski, Gar.hv¯ al¯ı etc. from that very language (area) that must have existed in North India before the arrival of Austro-Asiatic and Indo-Aryan. These proposal are tentative and vague but, after all, they are based on more than 700 borrowings into all these languages, the majority of which is certainly of Austro-Asiatic origin. 4 In case of Proto-Austro-Asiatic this includes a main phonological feature, namely its sesquisyllable structures. 5 The least number I found in East Iranian languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

During the early encounter between speakers of the two language families, Austro-Asiatic ideophones (expressives) – regarded by some as a word class different from nouns and verbs – must have played an influential role vis-à-vis speakers of – as much as we know – a relatively poor language regarding endowment with and usage of ideophones in oral communication (see Mallory and Adams [2006: 360 and 363] for the ridiculously short PIE lists of mostly onomatopoetic words). Being iconic (not just in a superficial sense), Austro-Asiatic ideophones are (and were) extraordinarily malleable. The first-arriving Indo-Aryan Outer Languages must not only have absorbed Austro-Asiatic vocabulary and certain grammatical features, but the ‘IndoAryan way of speaking’ must also have become deeply influenced by that outlandish grammatical category of ideophones.

1.1.3

On Outer and Inner Languages

Due to the long documentation of – usually standardized and koinéized6 forms of – Indo-Aryan together with a wide geographical diffusion of the language family and its many speakers, due to the largely unknown histories of many members of this family and last not least due to the – generally presumed – considerable number of contact languages which speakers of Indo-Aryan languages encountered on their ways into and through South Asia, the history of Indo-Aryan is certainly more puzzling than the history of Latin or Greek or Germanic. Pischel notes (§ 6) that it is not possible to lead all Prakrit languages back to one source, least of all just back to Sanskrit. And he continues to observe (ibid.) that, rather, all Prakrit languages share a number of common features not found in Sanskrit. Further below I will introduce a theoretical tool how to explain all this, including the presence of Indo-European but non-Indo-Aryan words in South Asia. Notwithstanding Pischel’s concerns, the common model of Indo-Aryan history is basically the view underlying historical dictionaries like Ralf Turner’s Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages or Manfred Mayrhofer’s Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. Of course, Turner’s main perspective is from Old Indo-Aryan towards New Indo-Aryan whereas Mayrhofer is on the look-out for Indo-European origins and for parallels in other Indo-European languages even though also he sometimes looks at later developments and innovations. A sizable part of the linguistic data I am going to discuss has already been published (see bibliography), but no comprehensive attempt at analysing the historical background of modern Indo-Aryan languages as the one developed here has been made before. This material is supplemented by much additional data from my own field research on different Indo-Aryan and West Himalayish languages. This data has been collected, with intervals, over years. This book is inspired by but substantially extends and modifies August Friedrich Rudolf Hoernle’s (1880) and Abraham Grierson’s old thesis of a distinction between Outer and Inner Languages (1927c, Linguistic Survey of India 1.1: 116–118 and his article 1931-33). For a long time the thesis was not accepted until it was taken up again 6 This term and the term koiné are discussed in the next section.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

15

by Franklin Southworth (2005a,b,c). The present core area of the Inner Languages is roughly constituted by the Hindi belt plus perhaps western parts of Panjabi, northern parts of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, western Bih¯ ar¯ı etc., but it will be seen that it is impossible to draw a sharp line between Inner and Outer Languages. Nonetheless, in any case it is as if this central area were encircled by the Outer Languages from all sides. However this is, if one can say so, an ‘optical’ illusion: There is strong evidence that Outer Languages once were also dominant in the area now occupied by the Inner Languages. I will prove this claim further below (p. 499ff.) by contrasting Modern Standard Hindi respectively Khar.¯ıbol¯ı (basically a Western Hindi dialect) with Brajbh¯ as.a¯ (another Western Hindi dialect) (and partly Awadh¯ı [an Eastern Hindi dialect]).7 If we take Delhi as the centre of Khar.¯ıbol¯ı then we see that the core area of (spoken rather than literary) Brajbh¯as.a¯ between the cities of Mathura, Agra, Etah and Aligarh is directly adjacent to the south of Khar.¯ıbol¯ı and the core area of Awadh¯ı is not very far further east in Uttar Pradesh. Despite this close geographical vicinity with Brajbh¯ as.a¯, Hindi/Khar.¯ıbol¯ı is an archetypal Inner Language whereas Brajbh¯ as.a¯ (and similarly Awadh¯ı) has (preserved) a stunning number of Outer Language features. The variety of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages presented in this book is very different from Hoernle and Grierson (even though both speak also of prolonged language immigrations), it has little to do with the various other attempts of a geographical segmentation of the New Indo-Aryan languages based on overlapping bundles of different features but without taking the inner-outer distinction into their account – it even sometimes describes cross-language(-family) linkages (e.g. Indo-Aryan - Iranian; Dardic - Chittagongian/Rohingya) – but it is close to a model suggested by Southworth, namely that of an earlier (Proto-Indo-Aryan) and a later (Old Indo-Aryan) languagee immigration (see Southworth 2005b: 8). One consequence of this approach is that the surface of the landscape of the Indo-Aryan languages gets out of focus, in a way. For instance, Indus Kohistani and Chittagongian are regarded as Outer Languages because they share a number of features (both linguistic innovations and archaisms) not found in the Inner Languages, even though the grammars of Indus Kohistani and Chittagongian have precious little in common. As an alternative worth considering, one could regard the Outer Languages – which never underwnt significant standardizations – as the third branch of IndoIranian instead of Nuristani. They form a link between Iranian and Indo-Aryan: they are closer to Indo-Aryan than to Iranian but they share some features with Iranian not found in Indo-Aryan. In addition, they have clear evidence for non-satemized forms. The historical development of the Outer Languages following the Proto-IndoIranian stage differed considerably from the development of the Inner Languages like Vedic and Clasical Sanskrit, and their daughter languages like Pali and Hindi.The first wave of Indo-Aryans reaching South Asia spoke Proto-Indo-Aryan which ws slightly more archaic than the Old Indo-Aryan of the later arriving speakers of Vedic Sanskrit. However, it was only the close contact of Proto-Indo-Aryan speakers with Kartvelian speakers, certainly in the northwestern South Asian high mountains, but perhaps 7 But ‘Western’ and ‘Eastern’ are here only used in a geographical sense.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

also quite earlier in the Bactria-Margiana culture, that led to a massive change in the Proto-Indo-Aryan phonetic system and to an alignment with the Kartvelian phonetic system. The phonetic system of the later arriving Vedic speakers was not subjected to any comparable influence. As a result, the two sound systems developed very differently from this early point in time, which I primarily describe with the two terms assimilation and simplification. Apart from these very different linguistic-historical developments, these two Indo-Aryan dialects were not only different from each other in terms of antiquity, but also in terms of non-identical vocabulary and different grammatical forms. A particularly illustrative example of the latter concerns the contested historical origin of the Middle Indo-Aryan -alla/illa/ulla- suffix. As a grammatical element, the suffix is of great diagnostic value for supporting the theory (see p. 237). The core of this new theory consists of two propositions the fulfillment or non-fulfillment of which decides on its validity or invalidity. Here is a summary of the two propositions: (a) Especially – but not only – peripheral New Indo-Aryan languages have to show evidence for OIA and PIE features neither found in Vedic nor in Classical Sanskrit. (b) South Asia has long since been recognized as constituting a linguistic area (Sprachbund).8 Its formation is usually ascribed to interactions between IndoAryan and Dravidian. Influence through Munda is regarded as less important and even less important is the influence through Tibeto-Burman. This situation makes it safe to assume that before the advent of Indo-Aryan (and Dravidian?9 ) northern India was characterized by a substantially different type of linguistic landscape. This is standing to reason vis-à-vis the very long history of human habitation in South Asia. Hence, the second proposition predicts that the earlier immigration – namely of the ancestor of the Outer Languages – must have experienced a strong impact from linguistic features of the prehistoric linguistic area, and which has left clear traces in the modern Outer Languages, whereas the later Vedic language immigration led to a weak impact on Vedic and its followup languages. It is standing to reason that this strong impact deepened the rift 8 I need to make clear here that I indeed accept Emeneau’s (1956, 1969, 1971), Masica’s (1976) and Abbi’s (see among many other publications most recently 2018) theories of South Asia as a linguistic area. However, not everyone does so. Critical voices are expressed e.g. by John Peterson (2017: 214, fn. 6), Jana Kellersmann (2017: 246) and by Jeroen Van Pottelberge (2001). For instance, Van Pottelberge believes that the concept can be challenged because it is nowhere defined which and how many linguistic features are necessary as a minimum for the safe establishment of a linguistic area. The main problem I see with Kellersmann and Van Pottelberge is their absence of intensive experience in linguistic fieldwork in South Asia. Of course, I will and cannot present a list of features characterizing all South Asian languages. Nevertheless, I think that this book contains many examples of sweeping linguistic processes that have strongly influenced large parts of northern South Asia and which, after millennia of language contacts, have something like an unmistakable ‘barn smell’. 9 Whereas some Dravidologists, like Bhadiraju Krishnamurti (2003), are agnostic on the question of the origin of Dravidian, I may also mention G. Uma Maheshwar Rao (University of Hyderabad) who pursues Dravidian and Mongolian comparative studies, and the publication of Jaroslav Vacek (1989). But in any case, this question is not of central relevance for the argumentation of this book because it is most unlikely that early Dravidian was once spoken all over the same area where now Indo-Aryan is spoken.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

17

1.1. The scope of the book

between Outer and Inner Languages for centuries. In fact, the theory of the Outer/Inner Languages predicts that a number of OIA words and other reflexes of PIE words come to notice only in Middle Indo-Aryan times when they are registered by MIA grammarians (like the PIE-derived suffix -illa/alla/ulla-) or in the present age when they are discovered in small and peripheral and non-koiné languages, although it is common practice in Classical Indology and in Comparative Indo-European Studies to be skeptical in case of words which surface only late in the known history of a language. The below graph shows how Morgenstierne and others conceptualized the Indo-Iranian family tree:

Iranian

Nuristani

Indo-Aryan

Graph 1: The standard model Here follows my modified concept for the Indo-Iranian family tree:

 

HHH

HH  H HH  H  HH  H

    

     ------Ir.

HH H





HH H

HH H

   Ol Nur.

? OL 2

? OL 3

? Ol 4etc.

HH j

IL IA

Graph 2: The synchronic model of linkage of lects The full-length linkage-line at the bottom of the above diagram indicates that Nuristani, Dardic and the other Outer Languages are closer connected through a linkage of lects with Vedic Sanskrit (IL IA) and its descendants than with Iranian

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

and its descendants (- - - -). According to this model, only Nuristani and Dardic have an own homeland. The other Outer Languages do not have an own homeland because they and the Inner Languages are found in the same geographical area of the northern parts of South Asia (see my map p. 445). 1.1.4

Some common Outer Language features

The fact that it is more appropriate to view Eastern Iranian, Nuristani and Dardic as a geographical area with fluid transitions from branch to branch, rather than as three branches quite sharply differentiated from each other, is also supported by the following observations. Nuristani shares, e.g. the following features with its wider surroundings: (1.) In Nuristani, or at least in the Waigal¯ı variety of Nišigr¯ am, a short a is pronounced quite back as [A] as e.g. in Pashto and other Iranian languages, but not as in IA where a short a is typically pronounced more centrally. (2.) At least in the Nišigr¯ am variety of Waigal¯ı there exists a pitch accent at the word level. The accent appears usually, but not always, on the last syllable. Whether or not it has a distinctive function is not quite clear, but apparently it can shift its position in a word (Degener 1998: 36ff.). Thus this Nuristani accent system is very similar to accent systems in East Iranian languages like Pashto. Above we have seen (p. 188) that Nuristani by and large has preserved the Indo-Iranian accent by way of having the accent mostly fixed on the ultima, whereas many Dard languages plus Chittagonian and Rohingya language have preserved the older stage of different accent positions in the words. (3.) In the Nišigr¯ am variety of Waigal¯ı vowel nasalization is contrastive; the language shares this feature with many IA languages, but in Pashto, Wakhi, Shughni etc. there exists no contrastive vowel nasalization. (4.) Elfenbein states about Pashto and Lahnd¯ a (1997: 745): “There is also, as in Lhd, a spontaneous change of n. to v ˜r., e.g. ru r < r¯ un.r. < *r¯ uxšna-.” Exactly the

same phonetic phenomenon is known from Nuristani (see e.g. Degener on Waigal¯ı [1998: 27]) and from Dardic languages like Indus Kohistani, occasionally it is found in the poetic language of the T a.l¯ı dialect of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı (Garh.t.. . ihriy¯ poet.) as in OrE lEgE ‘¯ ane lag gaye – (they) started to come’, quite frequently

ı as in k ar  ‘a long deep basket’ < OIA káranda- ‘basket’ (2792), in Braj-Awadh¯ ..  m ar O ‘pavilion; canopy’ < OIA man.d.apa- ‘open temporary shed, pavilion’ (9740); m a r , m ad  ‘starch’ < OIA man.d.á-1 ‘scum of boiled rice’ (9735); hãr.anh ‘bone’

da- ‘bone’ (13952), etc., and also in Nep¯al¯ı, Bih¯ar¯ı, Bhojpur¯ı, Beng¯al¯ı < OIA had .. as e.g. in r ar ‘widow’ < OIA ran.d.a- ‘maimed’ (10593) and in Assamese as e.g. in kãr (k ar) ‘arrow’ k a
nda- ‘arrow’ (3023) or garu (g¯aru) ‘pillow’ < OIA 4006

found in Standard MIA and IL languages like Hindi, gan.d.u- ‘pillow’. It is not but is typical for Munda languages and they are obviously the source of this phenomenon which has affected the Outer but not the Inner Languages. Pinnow was the first Munda specialist who has recognized the – basically phonetic – phenomenon (1959: 338). Thus, he states (ibid.) that the transcriptions of

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

19

previous authors show a lot of fluctuations like ãóã, ãóa, aóã but phonemically nasalization is distinctive feature of phonetic ó. Note: The same phenomen is even reported from (West Iranian) Balochi. Korn writes (2003: 238): “ ‘According to Grierson 1921:394, 401 and Elfenbein 1990/II:XVI, vowel + n often appears as a nasalised vowel in Eastern Balochi.” Since this only affects Eastern Balochi, it is likely a contact phenomenon.

(5.) Non-release of velar nasal consonant ng ˙ into n˙ in Outer Languages is also widespread: it is found from Nuristani to Assamese, cf. e.g. Kt. mron˙ ‘female ibex’ < OIA *marg¯ a- ‘wild goat’ (9885) (but H. mangn¯ ˙ ı ‘betrothal’ < cognate OIA m¯ argan.a- ‘inquiry’ [10073]) and Ash. an a
‘fire’ < OIA áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’ (125),10 Garh. an˙ ‘body’ (but H. ang), ˙ 11 A. kona ˙ ‘having crooked fingers’ (p. 205), a¯nuli ˙ ‘finger’ < OIA angúli˙ ‘finger’, gan˙ ‘Ganges’, etc. (more examples are found in Kakati 1972: 151). (6.) The geographical spread of the next feature in this list includes not only the direct neighbors of Nuristani but also Chittagongian and the Rohingya language at the eastern fringe of the IA language area, and Nepali. It has to do with the unusual change of OIA ng, ˙ nk ˙ and gn to dental n, ň nasal flap or even nasalized vowel. Examples: OIA agní- ‘fire’ (or áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’) — Wg. a¯˜ı ‘fire’ and with suffix Pr. an"eg, an"ig ‘fire’ — B.chit. Oin ‘fire’, B.roh. ooin ‘fire’; OIA angúli-, ˙ *ang¯ ˙ ud.i- (135) ‘finger, toe’ — Wg. aňu ‘digit; finger; toe’ — N. jet.hi a˜ uli ‘thumb’ with first component < OIA jyés.t.ha- ‘eldest’ (5286) — B.roh. o˜ ul ‘finger’; B.roh. mona ‘vagina’ < OIA m¯ arga- ‘track, road’ (10071) but B. more common change into m¯ an˙ ‘vulva’, B.roh. k˜e˜ıl ‘waist’ < OIA kank¯ ˙ ala-1 ‘skeleton’ (2603, see there A. kãk¯ al ‘waist’), cf. also B.roh. rãgk˜ u˜ır ‘wolf’ which seems to derive < OIA r¯ aks.asa-*kunkara˙ ‘demon-dog’ (10672 and 3329). It appears that in B.roh. śúrum ‘tunnel’ (< OIA surung¯ ˙ a- ‘subterranean passage, mine’ [13506]) a similar ‘de-velarization’ process was at work. (7.) Buddruss und Degener state about the weak phonemic status of the retroflex nasal consonant in Prasun (2016: 43) that n. appears exclusively in association with retroflex d. as n.d.. If original d. disappears, n. appears as n as can be seen in [email protected]. ∼ d.@n ‘punishment’. Something comparable can occasionally be seen in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Koc¯ı/Kot.gar.h¯ı e.g. in µannO ‘bright; violent’ < (at least with second meaning) OIA cán.d.a-1 ‘passionate, fierce, cruel’ (4584). (8.) Strand observes that in Nuristani K¯ amdeshi postvocalic *r is lost in some cases (Encyclopedia Iranica), and Grierson observes (LSI ix,iii: 2): “Medial r is frequently elided as in Sindh¯ı, Lahnda and Piś¯ aca as well as in some dialects of Bengali (notably R¯ajbangś¯ı).” Here follow samples from a number of different

10 Instead of ng ˙ > n, ˙ Prasun has sometimes ng ˙ > g as can be seen e.g. in u g u ‘finger’ < OIA angúli-‘finger, ˙ toe’ (135). A ‘dislike’ for a nasal plus a velar consonat can also be seen in Pr. aneg ‘fire’ < OIA agní-. 11 Not only did I hear many times this slight difference between Gar.hv¯ al¯ı and Hindi pronunciation, it was also confirmed to me by some Gar.hv¯ al¯ı native speakers.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

20

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

languages. The examples include not only word-medial and final r but also l, t. and d.: Kt. sai, s¯e, s¯ u ‘sun’, Tor. s¯ı ‘sun’ < OIA su
ra- ‘sun’ (13574); Kamd. d"o
‘mountain’ < OIA dh ara- ‘edge; mountain edge’ (6793) and an"o

, Ash. an¯ ˙ a, Kt. an


O, Gmb. an a
and Tor. ang¯ ˙ a all ‘fire’ < OIA áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’ (125), Pr. la- < OIA dhárati ‘holds, keeps’ (6747) (see Paš. d¯ ar- ‘to have’, Buddruss [1959b: 38]) and ist"¯ık, išt"¯ık ‘star’ which is cognate with OIA (RV) stŕ- ‘star’ (13713); Wg. maloda, malda ‘rich; in  feast-giver’s rank’ (Klimburg 1999 I: 391) the past also an important and Ash. "maladä ‘rich’ cf. H., Pers. m¯ ald¯ ar ‘wealthy’; Wg. b¯ a ‘load’ < OIA bh¯ ará- ‘burden’ (9459); Wg. k-, Ash. k¯ o -, Paš. ka-, Shum. käy-, Paš.DN. ka- ‘do’, Tor. kov, Pal. k¯ um ‘I do’ (k-¯ um), Chil. ke-, P¯ ad.. ka-n¯ u all ‘to do’, Cam. and Pang. ka- ‘do’, in the R¯ at.h¯ı dialect of Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı ka- ‘do’, in Garh.t.. poet. kandi ‘kart¯ı hai – (she) does’, in the Gangoli dialect of Ku. ka- ‘do’, Brj.-Aw. k¯ av ‘to do’ and A. kOi ‘conjunctive participle used in comparison for kari’ (Kakati 1972: 232), B. k¯ ott¯e (via kOirt e < kOrit e ‘to do’12 < OIA karóti ‘does’ (2814), but cf. also S.kcch. picho ken.u ¯ ‘to chase’ (7990) and there are also Wg. kö ‘work; Werk’ which is < OIA k a
ri- ‘action, work’ (3064) and Orm. k- ‘to do, make’; Tor., Chur., Cam. and Pang., in the Gangoli dialect of Ku. ma- ‘die’ and Western Nepal shamanic language k¯ al many¯ a ‘those who died at the right time’ (Maskarinec 1998 index) < OIA márate ‘will die’ (9871), and in the R¯ ar.th¯ı dialect of Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı m¯ a- ‘strike’ < OIA m¯ arayati 1 ‘kills’ (10066); Kt. “dâ” ‘mountain’ (Biddulph), Ash. da, Wg. d¯ a < OIA dh a
ra- ‘edge’ (6793); Ash. dau ‘wood’ < OIA d a
ru- ‘piece of wood’ (6298); Tor. šet ‘autumn’ < OIA śarád- ‘autumn’ (12329) with word-final devoicing, u ¯g¯ u ‘heavy’ < OIA *udguru- ‘very heavy’ (1962); Ind., Gau., Bhat.. gh o and Tor. gh¯o ‘horse’ < OIA ghot.a- ‘horse’ (4516); probably also in the following lemma: Bng. c O n ‘cattle’, Kt.g.,

Kc. poet. c Onkr

o ‘raw hide of cattle’, Sir.Suk. cain.e ‘sheep’, Jaun. ca¯ın

‘animal’ and cO nd ‘cattle’ (Z.), Garh. c On ‘godhan - herd of cattle’ — Jat.. caun¯ a ‘herd of cattle when going to graze’ all < OIA (RV) carán.i“movable’, active’ or (RV, AV) caran.yú- ‘movable’ or some similar form; Pang. h¯enu ‘to see’ < OIA *herati ‘looks for or at’ (14165); R¯ aj. če and Kalk. c eP ‘ashes’ (Z.) < OIA ks.a¯rá-1 ‘corrosive’ (3674); Ind. s e kar
2v  ‘to look at, watch; to see’ (first word is a borrowing from Psht. sail [Ar. sair] in the sense of ‘view’, cf. Paš. s ail-@ kar"am ‘I will look at, watch him’ and Dm. säyel ‘regarding, looking’); Tor. c.h¯ u ‘a dagger’ < OIA ks.urá- ‘razor’ (3727), c.h¯ı ‘milk’ < OIA ks.¯ırá- ‘milk’ (3696); Gau. “daiy” ‘beard’ (Biddulph) < OIA *d¯ ams ˙ . t.ra- ‘beard’ (6250) (cf. H. 12 According to Chatterji (ODBL § 294), intervocalic r is normally preserved in B. but disappeared in preconsonantal position. This may hold true also for some of the forms quoted here, but more likely is the above described principle of Malcolm Ross according to whom one diagnostic feature of language innovations is present when certain sound changes have affected only some words in the lexicon (p. 423).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.1. The scope of the book

21

d¯ ar.h¯ı), “ow” ‘flour’ (Biddulph) < OIA *¯ arta-2 ‘flour’ (1338); Tor.cail. kh¯ u ‘foot’ < OIA khura- ‘hoof’ (3906); Kal. anú ˙ ‘vine’ ← Pers. ang¯ ur ‘grape’,
angu

‘finger’ < OIA angúli˙ ‘finger’ (135), čav ‘four’ (same as Tor. and there are also Garh. cau ‘four’, Old G. cau ‘four’, Ap. and AMg. cau and other mainly Outer Languages like A. saita [c¯ ait.a¯] ‘four’ < older c¯ arit.a¯), Pr. do and Kt. du both ‘door’ < OIA dúr-‘door’ (6423), Pr. čp¯ u ‘four’, Kamd. št"o and Kt. štav"o and San.. c˙ a¯t"a¯ and Wg. čat¯ a all ‘four’, Kal. čav ‘four’ < OIA catv a
rah ‘four’ (4655); Kal. čev ‘woven woolen dress of Kalasha women’ < OIA cela- ‘clothes’ (4910);13 ; Sirm. don¯ a ‘to run’ (cf. H. daur.n¯ a); Bhad. and Sirm. kui ‘girl’ < OIA kud.¯ı ‘girl, daughter’ (3245); P¯ ad.. n¯ aa ‘s¯ ukh¯ı chot.¯ı nad¯ı – dry small river’ < OIA n ad
-1 ‘tube’ (7047); Cur. c¯an¯a ‘to graze’ < OIA cárati 1 ‘grazes’ (4686); Chin. c˙ au and Jaun. c¯ au ¯ both ‘rice’ < OIA *c¯ amala-, c¯ avala‘husked rice’ (4749), gh¯ a ‘pitcher’ < OIA ghat.a-1 ‘pot’ (4406); Bhad. k@pa ‘forehead’ < OIA *kapp¯ala- ‘skull’ (2744); Rudh. pa ‘but’ < OIA param ‘but’; Brah. maga ‘but’ ← Pers. magar; Brj.-Aw. b¯ a ‘time(s)’ < OIA v¯ ara-2 ‘appointed time, one’s turn’ (11547), Man.d.. and Suk. ś¯ıkh¯ a ‘meat’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 215]) ← Pers. śik¯ ar ‘game, prey’, and many other examples in Brah., etc.; B.roh. aháiya ‘person not dined yet; not taken food yet’ cf. OIA an¯ ah¯ ara- ‘one who abstains from food’ and Myanma ‘Myanmar’. The phenomenon is, as some examples above show, also found in Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı. D. D. Sharma writes (1983. 47): “In many dialects of western and northern Kum¯ aun¯ı and in the R¯ at.h¯ı and Badh¯ an.¯ı dialects of Gar.hw¯ al¯ı /r/ tends to be elided before a consonant. . . ” Thus, elision of medial r is a feature that has affected a great number of Outer Languages. Also worth noting is change of r or l(l) > r. or d. also with parallels in Pashto (Konow 1911: 28) and even Dravidian Brahui (see Denys Bray’s vocabulary for many examples). Examples:

Nuristani Kt. dyur. ‘far’ < OIA d¯ urá- ‘distant’ (6495) and bar. ‘outside’ < OIA *bahira- ‘external’ (9183).

West Pah¯ ar.¯ı P¯ ad.. phy¯ ur., Bhal. ph¯ urr.u ¯, Bhad. ph¯ ur.u, "phur.õ ‘flower’ < OIA phulla- ‘fullblown flower’ (9092); Chin. d¯ ar. ‘pulse’ < OIA d¯ ala-2 ‘split pea’, aspt¯ ar. 1 ‘hospital’ ← Portuguese, pir.a¯ ‘yellow’ < OIA p¯ıtala- ‘yellow’ (8233), kh¯ or. ‘open’ (imp.) < OIA *kholl- ‘to open’ (3945), ghor.b¯ a ‘to mix’ < OIA *gholayati ‘mixes’ (4526) (note -b¯ a infinitive).

13 The lateral is preserved in Dm. čel ‘dress, cloak’ to which is to be added Ku. cv¯ al ‘clothes’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

22

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı (a few examples out of very many): Joh¯ ar¯ı dialect of Ku.: b¯ akar.o ‘goat’ < OIA bárkara- ‘kid’ (9153), ghar. ‘house’ < OIA ghara- ‘house’ (4428), tyar. ‘your’ (cf. H. ter¯ a).

1.2

From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

The topic of this section has two aspects. First aspect: The historical linguistic development can be seen under a purely linguistic perspective. This is the topic of subdivisionn I in which I sketch my view of how this development from Proto-IndoEuropean to Proto-Indo-Iranian took place. When the Aryans took leave from their Proto-Indo-Aryan home they did not, as pointed out above and described below in more detail, move directly towards India but followed a big detour. During this long trek, they must have come in contact with non-Indo-European languages before their arrival perhaps on or close to eastern Europe and at their arrival in South Asia. This is the topic of subdivision II.

1.2.1

Subdivision I: The linguistic development

As stated above, my view on the development from Proto-Indo-European (PIE) to Proto-Indo-European (PIIr.) and the Old and New Indo-Aryan languages (OIA, NIA) is different from textbook lines because it is informed by the theory of Outer and Inner Languages which is based on the two facts that there was not only one Indo-Aryan language immigration and that the first (Proto-Indo-Aryan, pre-Vedic) immigration came in strong contact with two substrates: a Kartvelian substrate (limited in size to northwestern South Asia) and a much larger AustroAsiatic substrate covering the whole of North India including the high mountains between Hindu Kush and Arunachal Pradesh. These two substrates have left not many traces in the later arriving Vedic language and its descendants. Even though the view of a non-singular immmigration has long been advocated by representatives of classical Indology such as Alfred Hillebrand, Rainer Stuhrmann and especially Asko Parpola, with the specification that the Vedic speakers (IL linguistically younger - daughter languages e.g. Pali and Hindi) wer the rear guard of an earlier wave of immigration (OL - linguistically older - daughter languages e.g.Ga¯ndh¯ ar¯ı and Shina) – separated, according to Asko Parpola, by about 500 years" (see e.g. 2015: 76).14 However, the question of whether such a non-singular language immigration can still be detected in the modern Indo-Aryan languages is still 14 Because of the centuries-old mutual influence, there is in my opinion no strict separation as to which New Indo-Aryan languages (NIA) belong to the OL and which to the IL. According to the number of certain linguistic features – e.g. divergent developments of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) plosives, divergent developments of consonant clusters since Proto-Indo-Aryan times, divergent morphological developments and characteristic vocabulary – a language is more OL or more IL. Languages with more OL characteristics are mainly found in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, but also, albeit to a much lesser extent, at the eastern end of the Indo-Aryan language range in the Bengali dialect of Chittagong and in the Rohingya language.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

23

controversial.15 If this thesis of earlier and later immigration proves to be robust, the question arises whether this has any impact on our understanding of the development from Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian to Ola dnd New Indo-Aryan. 1.2.1.1

Further objections to the previous historical models

There are indeed serious objections against the traditional models (see e.g. George Cardona & Dhanesh Jain The Indo-Aryan Languages, Colin Masica The Indo-Aryan Languages) according to whom there is a neat separation between the Indo-Aryan and Iranian branches (with Nuristani as a more or less independent third ‘branch’). The Nuristani languages are considered particularly archaic mainly because of their preservation of the PIE distinction between palato-velar and (labio-)velar stops in the form of two phonologically contrasting affricate (resp. fricative) series: e.g. K¯ amdeshi ˇȷ"at ‘body’ is cognate with OIA j¯ıvantá- < PIE *gu ih3 wós vs. z¯ an ˘"a- ‘know’ which is related to OIA j an a
ti < PIE *ˆgneh3 -. This ‘Iranian’ type of reflex also exists in some Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, though not in all. It does not exist, for example, in Khowar and Kalasha (Kal. ˇjhand ‘body’ and ˇjhónik ‘know’), but it does exist in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Kul.ui, which, like Nuristani K¯ amdeshi, distinguishes between palatal j¯ıv ‘animal’ and dental dza¯nn¯ a ‘know’.16 Of course, this is not the only example of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, and it is easy to show that many members of both Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı language groups have from the Proto-Indo-Aryan period to the present day three (or two) affricate and sibilant classes in contrast to Vedic and its daughter languages with only one affricate class and very early reduction from three to one sibilant. This ‘Iranian interference’ and vice versa an ‘Indo-Aryan interference’ in eastern Iranian languages (which cannot be traced back to borrowings) can be explained by the fact that not all Proto-Indo-Iranian dialects completely separated from each other in the post-Proto-Indo-Iranian period. Regarding a phonological opposition between dental and palatal affricate orders, my present understanding is this: • This distinction is not (yet) found in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı even though G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı has dental and palatal affricates. 15 The idea goes back to August Friedrich Rudolf Hoernle (1880). Since it was supportedf by Abraham Grierson, one can also speak of the Hoernle-Grierson thesis (see below p. 443). The thesis of the Outer and Inner Languages is partly different from the old claim that the immigration of speakers of Indo-Aryan into South Asia was not a singular event. A few years after Hoernle, Alfred Hillebrand maintained (1889 I: 16): “In the settlements and during their further incursions into the land the R . gvedic tribes came into contact with an Aryan population which had migrated earlier. These contacts did not remain without influence upon the language of the R . gveda. In the absence of any information this population of early immigrants is indistinguishable for us from the original inhabitants.” Similar claims have been made by Rainer Stuhrmann (2016), Michael Witzel (see literature) and Asko Parpola (2015). Alf Hiltebeitel explains (1991: 385): “Parpola has attempted to show that the D¯ asas or Dasyus, mentioned frequently in the R . g Veda as the enemies of the Vedic Aryans, were an earlier wave of Aryans that entered northwest India carrying the Bronze Age culture of greater Iran (known archaeologically as Namazga V) and speaking a pre-Vedic Aryan language.” However, none of these authors is interested in the question whether this non-singular immigration has left linguistic traces in the New Indo-Aryan languages or not. 16 See Kullui-English-Russian Dictionary: http://pahari-languages.ru/?page_id¯ 55&lang¯ en (last accessed 13.3.23).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

24

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

• It is not found in Khowar, Kalasha and Pal¯ ula (perhaps apart from a few borrowings). Even though they have dental, palatal, and retroflex sibilants, dentalization of inherited (Proto-)Indo-Aryan words is (almost) absent. The fact that they otherwise share a whole gamut of common features with other languages of the area must be due to a long shared linguistic history, and permanent contact and exchange.17 • It is found in Dardic Indus-Kohistani, Brok-skad, Pashai, Shina(?), Shumashti, Tirahi(?), Dameli. • It is found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bang¯ an.¯ı, Kot.gar.h¯ı-Koc¯ı, Kul.ui and perhaps P¯ ad.ri.

According to Georg Morgenstierne and others, Nuristani, like Iranian, lost the aspiration of the mediae very early and without leaving any traces – in contrast to Dard languages without aspirated mediae, which lost their aspiration late and preserved traces of that former aspiration (e.g. in the form of tonemes). However, this claim is only partially true for there are also Dard languages, such as some dialects of Shina, that do not have aspirated mediae and where there is no evidence of former aspirated mediae either. In principle, the same is probably true for the Bengali dialect of Chittagong. Clear traces of an earlier */dh / pattern are found e.g. in Dardic Kalami (e.g. b¯ at L[ow toneme] ‘boiled rice’ < OIA bhaktá-) and in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı b at ‘boiled rice’ (with high-low toneme contour) in contrast to the Shina of Gilgit b¯ at ‘boiled rice’ without toneme or any other phonetic telltale sign. Thus, in addition to the widespread system of four plosive classes (/t th d dh/), there are also systems with three plosive classes (/t th d/) in Indo-Aryan, some of which show traces of a former four-classes-system and some do not. Contrary to traditional Indo-European studies, which assumed that the reconstructed Proto-IndoEuropean language had a system with three plosive classes, one of which was aspirated (i.e. */t d dh /),18 some Indo-European researchers now assume that aspiration did not play a phonological role in Proto-Indo-European, but only in Indo-Aryan after the separation from Iranian. As an alternative, a system with voiced implosives (Brett Miller, Martin Kümmel) (thus */t *d *â /) or a system with voiced pre-glottalized plosives (Alwin Kloekhorst) (thus */t d ¼d/) have been proposed. Both phonetically  Indo-Aryan languages have systems with similar propositions may explain why some three plosive classes (/t th d/) with traces of an earlier /dh/ phoneme whereas some others do not. This is because the Indo-Aryan languages, in which there are no traces of an earlier /dh/ phoneme, such as the Shina of Gilgit and presumably also the Chittagong dialect (also with /t th d/), never possessed aspirated mediae just like Nuristani Prasun. Before a */dh / could develop from */d/ in Proto-Indo-Aryan in a subset of still geographically close Proto-Iranian, Proto-Nuristani, and Proto-IndoAryan dialects it collapsed with inherited */â / (or */¼d/) to /d/. Therefore there  */â / changed into */d/ are no traces of an earlier */dh / in this subset. Elsewhere h and */d/ into */d / (Lipp [2016: 274f.]). This Proto-Indo-Aryan subset of lects without traces of aspirated mediae must have influenced another subset of Proto-Indo-Aryan lects in such a way that those 17 For a description of this complex phenomenon see Liljegren 2017. 18 In cases where the reconstructed character of an item is clear, I do not always use the asterisk.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

25

lects started to loose aspiration (probably over the course of centuries) in their mediae, traces of which can still be noted. A counter trend to the loss of aspiration in mediae was the appearance of aspirated tenues, most likely in the Proto-Indo-Iranian period because of their phonetic echo in Pashto and Balochi and because in Khotanese th had probably phonemic status. Such aspirated tenues evolved in Proto-Indo-Aryan partly from the combination of a voiceless plosive with the still existing inherited laryngeal *h2 (e.g. in OIA prthú- ‘broad’ < PIE *plth2 -ú-), in a few cases through Siebs’s law  (e.g. PIE *s-bh rHg- > OIA sph¯ urjati ‘thunders’) and partly through loanwords from  indigenous North Indian sources, as a look into the Comparative Dictionary of IndoAryan Languages (CDIAL) clearly shows. This ‘Indo-Aryan’ feature, in turn, has left traces in some Nuristani and East Iranian languages but not in all. For example, in Nuristani Waigal¯ı and in Iranian Pashto, tenues that are phonologically not aspirated are optionally pronounced with a slight aspiration, in contrast to the mediae. Thus we have here with ([t ∼ th ] [d]) on the phonetic level a comparable system to the above systems with three phonemic plosives (/t th d/). Coming back to the loss of aspiration in mediae, this impetus must have appeared very early, as briefly mentioned above, otherwise a /t th d/ system in Chittagongian could not be explained. Even though such a system is more natural than a /t d dh/ system (Jakobson [1958: 23]), it is unlikely that it developed ‘spontaneously’ or due to contact with a non-Indo-Aryan environment. The latter was apparently the case with Sinhalese which is believed to have lost all aspiration due to contact with Dravidian. Moreover, the inclination for developing /t th d/ systems must have been very pronounced, because such systems are also found in the wider area in Nuristani and in East Iranian. However, it is also found in non-cognate northwestern Tibetan languages (and in Lhasa Tibetan). It is not so self-evident that there is also a /t th d/ system in these unrelated languages, since Proto-Tibeto-Burman had only a /t d/ system (Matisoff [2003: 15]). Below I will argue that this must be due to a Kartvelian language substrate with a tripartite system /t t’ d/ where instead of the aspirated tenuis there was a voiceless ejective plosive. But before just a few words on the massive Austro-Asiatic substrate on which much will be said in other sections of the book. Many years ago, F. B. J. Kuiper assumed that the oldest Vedic loanwords came from Munda or from Austro-Asiatic (AA) and that therefore there must have been a clear presence of AA speakers in the Panjab in the second millennium BC. Michael Witzel argues in a very similar way and speaks of a Para-Munda substrate, which is mainly recognizable by prefixes and suffixes, some of which are also known from modern Munda languages. However, this position has been strongly criticized by the Munda specialist Toshiki Osada, and indeed Manfred Mayrhofer in the Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen has in many cases retracted his suggestions made in the Kurzgefaßtes Wörterbuch des Altindischen about the Munda origin of many non-inherited Sanskrit words. This corresponds to Osada’s verdict: “. . . I generally find that the role of Munda languages for the South Asian linguistic area is overemphasized . . . ” (2006: 2). Within the framework of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages, it is not surprising that Vedic and its daughter languages (e.g. Pali, Hindi) contain relatively

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

26

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

few borrowings (i.e. lexemes and not prefixes or suffixes). However, there is a large number of lexemes from Munda and Mon-Khmer languages in the geographically peripheral Outer Languages and – which also appears to be relevant for the linguistic prehistory of North India – there is a large number of borrowings of the same kind in the many small Tibeto-Himalayan languages between Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh (see Linguistic data II). Here I can only say very briefly first that specialists in Munda and Mon-Khmer languages such as Paul Sidwell, Roger Blench and Gregory Anderson are now certain that representatives of this language family came to North India from Southeast Asia, probably from the Mekong Valley area. Second, it can be postulated that at the time of the first immigration of Indo-Aryans, the entire Himalayas were inhabited by Tibeto-Burmese- and Austro-Astiatic-speaking people. The latter thus influenced the Tibeto-Himalayan languages before they influenced Indo-Aryan Outer Languages. To date I have collected about 540 Munda and Mon-Khmer loans in Tibeto-Himalayan languages and about 370 loans in Indo-Aryan Outer Languages (mainly Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı). Two small examples: Tibeto-Himalayan Byangsi19 nOnkrO

‘ant’ — Sre20 ñOñ ‘ant’.21 22 Dardic Brok-skad p@yu ‘salt’ — Souei23 p"Oh ‘salt’.

The assumption of a prehistoric dominance of Austro-Asiatic languages repeatedly expressed by Kuiper, Witzel and the Indian linguist Anvita Abbi is given a solid basis by the publication of a large number of Austro-Asiatic loanwords in New IndoAryan and Tibeto-Himalayan languages.

1.2.1.2

Loss of aspiration in mediae in Chittagongian

My theoretical point of view on the history of Indo-Aryan is also informed by two of Henry Hoenigswald’s historical linguistic concepts: “subgrouping in the genealogical sense” and “isoglottic overlapping in a graded area” (1966: 1). Regarding the IndoIranian language sphere, subgrouping in the genealogical sense concerns the question of the respective historical developments of the Iranian and Indo-Aryan languages from their common Indo-Iranian origin. I have dealt with this issue already above. An isoglottic overlapping in a graded area is to be expected in northwestern South Asia because Iranian and Indo-Aryan never lost direct contact with each otheR. Such isoglottic overlapping includes – as has been shown above – Indo-Aryan features in adjacent Iranian languages and Iranian features in adjacent Indo-Aryan languages.24 However, since I also discuss non-graded isoglosses, i.e. discontinuous isoglosses shared by some Iranian, Nuristan, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages on the one hand and 19 20 21 22 23 24

Uttarakhand. Vietnam. This AA lemma was also borrowed into North Dravidian Kui (Odhisha) as ñkrOOñ ‘ant (big)’. Ladakh. Laos and Vietnam. I do not mean here the many mutual borrowings over the centuries which have nothing to do with isoglosses.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

27

Chittagongian and Rohingya language in the southeast of the Indo-Aryan languagescape on the other, I use in addition the complementary notion of isoglottic overlapping in discontinuous areas.25 Discontinuous linguistic areas emerge when a continuous linguistic area delimited by closely related languages X and Z at the opposite ends of the area gets divided by an intervening linguistic ‘vector’ Y which is less related or not at all related with X and Z. In the present context I argue that an early immigration wave of speakers of Proto-Indo-Aryan, which had spread over large areas of northern India, was followed by (at least one) other immigration wave of Vedic Indo-Aryan speakers. Traces of non-Vedic features in Middle Indo-Aryan were first noted by medieval Indian grammarians. Through the lasting expansion of Vedic and post-Vedic language and culture, earlier and later immigrants were in constant contact and exchange, leading to the emergence of Outer Language features in the Middle Indo-Aryan grammars of medieval Indian grammarians. This expansion also brought about a marginalization of Outer Languages. Therefore, one finds traces of some old sound changes and specific vocabulary on the one side in Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, and on the other in Chittagongian and Rohingya, but much less often in-between. Hence, we must also distinguish between the existence of a visible linguistic history (in form of written documents of koinés like Sanskrit, Pali, Ardha M¯ agadh¯ı, etc.) and a largely uncharted and invisible history of vernaculars without written documents. Chittagongian (also called Cat.gãia) is historically connected with the tripartite /t th d/ pattern found (either with phonemic or phonetic status) in hill languages between West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and eastern Iranian. Between these two geographical ‘endpoints’ all Indo-Aryan languages (including Standard Bengali with which Chittagongian is closest related after Rohingya) have quadripartite /t th d dh/ patterns. The tripartite characteristic cannot be explained through language contact, as will be schown below. Even though Burmese (Arakanese) has also aspirated tenues, its phonological system is very different from Indo-Aryan Chittagongian. The tripartite phonological pattern of Chittagongian is an example for a discontinuous isogloss. According to Norihito Učida, Chittagongian does not have aspirated consonant phonemes (1970: 8). However, he claims that from among the eight stop phonemes (p, t, t., k, b, d, d., g) the phonemes t and t. are word-initially aspirated if the following vowel carries a falling (/`/) or a complex (/¨/) accent.26 Voiced stop phonemes are never aspirated. He provides the following examples (pp. 9 and 11, and Glossary) to which I add their etymologies:

25 In terms of language geography, Sinhalese and Divehi are discontinuous in relation to the main area of Indo-Aryan. Discontinuous phenomena do not, however, deal with cognate languages completely isolated from each other but deal with specific phonetic/phonological features found scattered across different languages of Indo-Iranian pedigree like different types of loss of inherited aspiration or of inherited clusters, or inversely preservation of inherited accent at the northwestern and southeastern borders of the Indo-Aryan language-scape, or development of whole new consonant classes, or presence of vocabulary unknown from Sanskrit, Pali and Hindi, but documented in Dardic and Chittagongian. 26 According to Učida, Chittagongian has three distinctive accents (p. 8).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

28

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

/t` Al/

`d.Ar/ /t.A

/t.ùni/

[th` A;l] ‘plate’ < OIA sth al
- ‘earthen dish’ [thAxOn] ‘to stay; to bear’ < OIA *sthakk- ‘stop, halt’ (13737) [thAmOn] ‘to keep, hold’ < OIA *sth¯ amya- ‘placed’ (13761) An] ‘to stand, get up < OIA sthitá- ‘standing, settled’ [thìj` [th O:] ‘tobacco’ is a direct borrowing from Persian tam ak¯ u ‘Nicotiana persica’; . b¯ an aspiration – which is missing for instance in Hindi tamb¯ ak¯ u – is also found in Munda Santali thamakhur ‘tobacco’ and Kharia tamkhu (also Sadani); the form [th O:] is either an example for spontaneous aspiration or for aspiration fronting, two processes typical for Outer Languages [úh` AãAr] ‘thunder’ is not found in OIA but has phonetically similar forms in Munda Santali úherúher ‘to pea1, as thunder, to boom’, Mundari úhEr ‘to thunder, lightning’, Kharia dhadhir ‘thunder’ and ãheãhrel ‘thunder’ etc. [úhArOn] ‘to believe; to note’ < OIA *stabhira- ‘fixed, firm’ (13680) [úhìk] ‘good; fixed, established’ < OIA *t.h¯ıkka- ‘firm, right’ (5503) [úhùni] ‘post, pole’ < OIA sthu
n a- ‘post, pillar’ [úhelOn] ‘to push’ < OIA *t.hell- ‘push’ (5512) [úhèillj` A] ‘twig’ is somehow cognate with OIA *t.h¯ala- ‘branch’ (5546) [úhOrda] ‘grandfather’ is a compound not built with OIA t.hakkura- idol, deity’ (Učida) but < OIA sthaurá- *‘strong’ (13780) because of many semantic parallels in Outer Languages (see p. 610); [-da] < OIA *d¯ adda- ‘father or other elderly relative’ (6261).

All above examples from Učida derive without exception from older forms with aspiration.27 Učida’s explanation of the aspiration as a purely phonetic (predictable) phenomenon must thus be questioned even though there may be some relationship between aspiration and accents. However, I cannot find in Učida any Chittagongian form beginning with t- or t.- having arrived from an older form with initial aspirated tenuis. Moreover, my language consultant, whose mother tongue is Chittagongian, insists that there are minimal pairs contrasting in aspiration with initial tenues but not with initial mediae. We noted:

1. [t(h)ala] ‘plate’ (see above) vs. [tala] ‘palm of hand’ < OIA t¯ ala- ‘palm of hand’ 2. [t(h)ama] ‘to stop’ (see above) vs. [tama] ‘copper’ < OIA t¯ amrá- ‘coppercolored’ 27 Regarding drift towards aspiration neutralization in tenues, a somewhat different pattern is reported by Vaux and Samuels for Kashmiri: Whereas phonological contrast is preserved wordinitially and -medially, it is neutralized at the end of a word and every tenuis is automatically (slightly) aspirated, e.g. nominative sg. vath ‘way’ and kath ‘story’ but dative pl. vat-an versus kath-an (2005: 420), reflecting original OIA vártman- ‘path’ and borrowing of OIA tatsama kath a
‘story’ (not historically reflected as wrongly claimed by Vaux and Samuels). The Kashmiri pattern is practically identical with the situation in Indus Kohistani (Zoller 2005) and yet another case of Indo-Iranian inconstancy of tenues.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

29

Even though Chittagongian mediae never contrast regarding aspiration as the tenues do, there are minimal pairs based on accent contrasts:28

[bat] ‘rice’ < OIA bhaktá- ‘boiled rice’ vs. [bat] ‘tumour’ < OIA vardhman- ‘hernia’ (with word-final devoicing and deaspiration)29

1.2.2

A timeline for development of stridents

This section provides a historical-linguistic timeline for development of stridents (affricates and fricatives) in Indo-Iranian-derived languages. 1. Avestan had two voiced fricative phonemes z and ž reflecting the Indo-Iranian voiced affricate phonemes *´ȷ(h) and *ˇȷ(h) as in z@r@d- ‘heart’ < PIIr. *´ȷh ŕdayaand in mižda- ‘reward’ < PIE *misdh ó-’. Proto-Indo-Aryan had three voiced fricative sounds. Two of them, *[z] and *[ü] were allophones of the phonemes /s/ and /s./ as can be seen in the older form of OIA edhí ‘be!’ in PIA *az-dhi (Lipp [2009 i: 229 fn. 186]) and in OIA m¯ıd.há- which reflects PIA *miz.d.há- and PIE *misdhó- (see EWA with additional literature and Lipp [2009 i: 145]). In addition, Proto-Indo-Aryan had for some time also a palatal aspirated voiced fricative */źh / phoneme < PIE *ˆ gh (which had coalesced with *žh, see Lipp h [2009 i: 145]) in PIA *wáź ati (OIA váhati ‘drives’) < PIIr. *wá´ȷh ati < PIE *weˆ gh - ‘carry; ride’. In Vedic Sanskrit, these voiced affricates had disappeared. 2. In Dardic languages, underlying voiced (± aspirated) dental affricate phonemes – pronounced either as fricatives or affricates30 – do contrast with palatal and retroflex voiced affricates, and in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties underlying voiced (± aspirated) dental affricate phonemes contrast with palatal voiced affricates. In a few cases, they reflect the PIE differences between palato- and (labio-)velars. One example is Dardic Indus Kohistani zh a
r ‘the heart’31 < a related form of h PIIr. *´ȷ ŕdaya- versus ˇȷondún ‘life’ which is cognate with PIIr. *ˇȷiHwás ‘alive’.  3. The Proto-Indo Aryan consonant system included a retroflex aspirated voiced affricate phoneme d.z.h [ãüh ] typically reflecting an aspirated voiced PIE cluster 28 Since I could not yet work more intensively on the Chittagongian accent system, I can only say that there do exist slight audible suprasegmental differences between [bat] ‘rice’ and ‘tumour’ (and other similar minimal pairs). 29 Here probably also cognate Rohingya bãt ‘pimple’. 30 Some simple rules for the different pronunciation in Dardic languages are given below p. 40 Note, however, that in all these language groups, borrowings from Persian and Arabic containing an original z fricative are always pronounced as dental/alveolar voiced fricatives (not so, for instance, in Hindi dialects). Regarding inherited words and borrowings from other sources, there are authors on Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages who keep voiced affricates and fricatives separate (or mention two pronunciations), for instance in their word lists. In such cases it is most unlikely to find minimal pairs. 31 The word is not a borrowing from Nuristani because of preservation of the aspirate (already discussed above p. 92‘).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

30

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

like *dh gu h .32 For instance, OIA ks.¯ıyáte ‘is injured’ with an initial unvoiced cluster derives (very precisely) < late PIA *gz.h ai-/gz.h i- < early PIA *d.z.h ai /d.z.h i- < PIIr. *džh ai-/džhi- < *djh ai-/djh i-33 < *déh ai-/déh i- < *d´ gh ai-/d´ ghi    < PIE *dh gu h ei- ‘perish’ (see LIV: 150f.).34 Since, however, there is the MIA  cognate Pk. jhijjaï ‘wastes away’ (< OIA *jh¯ıyate [5396]), the direct precursor here was PIA *d.z.h ai-/d.z.h i- and not ks.¯ı-. In other words, there was an early  - in a lect35 different from the precursor of Vedic, which did reflex of PIE *dh gu h ei  *gzh ai-/gzh i- to OIA ks¯ı-, but from retroflex *dzh¯ıyate not change to later PIA . . . ..  ıyate ([Ãhi:-]).36 ([ãühi:-]) directly to palatal *jh¯ This means first that the change from prehistoric retroflex to historic palatal affricates was caused by the adaptation to the single palatal affricate order in Vedic Sanskrit. Second, this means that before the arrival of Vedic speakers, Dardic-like lects with retroflex voiced affricates were spoken over large areas of northern India. Third, this means that there once existed pre-Vedic lects in northern India with preservation of a difference between voiced and unvoiced affricates as in Avestan but not as in Vedic (Kobayashi [2004: 64). For instance, OIA lex. (!) and Mah¯ av¯ıra-caritra (8th Century) jhara- ‘waterfall’ (5343), which is cognate with OIA (Śvet¯ aśvatara upanis.ad) ks.ará- ‘melting away’, has modern reflexes spread between Khetr¯ an¯ı (spoken in Pakistani Eastern Balochistan) and Assamese (spoken in the northeast Indian state of Assam as the easternmost Indo-Aryan language).37 This discrepancy between late documentation but very wide geographical distribution excludes possibility of a recent spread of the lemma but rather suggests its oversight in the literary history of the Indo-Aryan koinés. > This alternative process from **dh gu h ei- to *dzh and directly to jh was a straight 

coronal assimilation process from a biphonemic cluster to a monophonemic (aspi32 A retroflex affricate < OIA dr (and br, vr?) has survived as such in the Š¯ at.¯ ot.¯ı dialect of > > Indus Kohistani dzu as ‘grape’ < OIA dr a
ks a-) and in borrowings in Burushaski: dzan ‘office >





of a village headman’ borrowed < OIA dranga˙ ‘frontier watch-station’, dze
ek man
- ‘to stretch >

o.s. out’ borrowed < OIA dairghya-, dzun
uu siq
a ‘Rumex acetosa’ borrowed < OIA *draman.a>



‘Artemisia indica’ (6620), dzuk ‘kidney’ borrowed < OIA vrkká-.



 h 33 Prepalatal spirant [j ] due to post-occlusive affricate simplification from [éh ]. 34 However, according to Caley Smith (in Klein et al. [2017: 425]) and in my eyes less convincing, “[t]he Old Indic from which P¯ ali [jh¯ ayati ‘burns’] is descended evidently deleted the initial dental resolving *dh gwh - into *gwh -.” 35 The term ‘lect’ was coined by Malcolm Ross (1997) as a cover term for language and dialect – two terms that are often difficult to separate. I use both lect and dialect in this book depending on when which term fits better. 36 Pischel has described the development thus (§ 326): “Geht ks.a auf altes źz.a [i.e. Gza] zurück, so

wird es im Pkt. durch źz.ha, źjha zu jjha [also *Gzha > *Gjha > jjha].”

37 Here to be added is Kal. d.áran ‘flood, flash-flood, mud slide’ – not directly < palatal OIA jharan.a- ‘falling water’ (5344) documented in Pk. and in the Nighan.t.uprak¯ aśa (in the compound jharan.odaka- ‘water from a cascade’). — but < initial retroflex PIA *j.h árana-. The loss of friction corresponds with Richard Strand’s Nuristani sound change “[i]nitial affricates lose spirancy to become d or t . . . ” (2010) (see p. 474‘). Also this Kalasha word can be interpreted as an echo of the closure of the Proto-Indo-Aryan retroflex voiced affricate like the above-quoted forms from Š¯ at.¯ ot.¯ı and Burushaski.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

31

rated38 ) affricate. This corresponds with the ‘Iranian’ monophonemization of homorganic consonant clusters mentioned by Helmut Rix (1998: 151). Note: Discussing different MIA forms directly preserved from PIA like the above verbs with initial jh- or MIA idha ‘here’, Kobayashi arrives at the following conclusion which I fully endorse (2004: 7): “Since Middle Indo-Aryan cannot skip a node and ‘look back’ directly to Proto-Indo-Iranian, the language at the node through which Middle Indo-Aryan had developed is not Vedic Sanskrit, but either some form of pre-Vedic Indo-Aryan, or a language which developed from the common Proto-Indo-Iranian parent language but, unlike Vedic, was not recorded.” The topic of non-record of so many Indo-Aryan lects is in the background of my entire book.

4. This preservation of an archaic aspirated voiced retroflex affricate belonging to the Proto-Indo-Aryan stage – now mostly pronounced as retroflex fricative [üh] (but see above counterexamples in Š¯ at.o¯t.¯ı, Burushaski and possibly Kalasha) in Dardic and as a palatal affricate [éh] in ‘mainstream’ Indo-Aryan39 – is structurally different from the similar-looking post-Vedic innovation in Dardic > and Nuristani of an unvoiced retroflex affricate c.(h) [úù(h)] and to an unvoiced palatal (c)ch [tS(h)] in large parts of ‘mainstream’ Indo-Aryan deriving from the biphonemic OIA cluster ks. via (*)t.s. (von Hinüber § 235). However, also here a coronal monophonemizing assimilation process took place which suggests that all Prakrit (c)ch forms with this type of derivation must have derived from unattested OIA words with retroflex affricates. Thus, this supports the above thesis of pre-Vedic OIA lects in northern India with a retroflex affricate order. One can see that Dardic and Nuristani unvoiced retroflex affricate c.(h) is not only > found in PIE-derived lemmata like Ash. c.u ¯ ‘last night’ < older *[úùuwa] < OIA ksap a
- ‘night’ < PIE *k(u) sep- (EWA) but also in quite many words without known

etymology, e.g.: Dm. c.hup- ‘to wash (clothes)’ and palatal Ku. chapchap¯ an., chap¯ or.an. ‘to wash clothes’ < OIA *ks.upyate ‘is pressed’ (3719). The process ks. > (*)t.s. > (c)ch has additional parallels in the other two OIA TS clusters ps and ts: OIA apsarás- ‘nymph, fairy’ > Pa., Pk. acchar¯ a-; OIA tsaru‘handle of a sword’ > Pk. charu-. For Dardic, one should also here expect retroflex affricate outcomes of OIA ps and ts. One example for ts > c.h is Khowar bac.h"ol. ‘calf (to 1 year)’ which Strand derives < OIA vats"a-kud.a-.40 I am not aware of any example for OIA ps > c.(h), but there is a different type of transformation of ps found in G¯ andh¯ar¯ı, namely as ps > ts in Gan. jugutsida- ‘disgusting’ < OIA jugupsitawith place assimilation (but Pa. jigucchita-) which is discussed again below p. 38. A 38 As has been shown above (p. 158), aspiration of voiced consonants is located on a separate tier. 39 The number of such lemmata in Dardic and the Prakrits appears presently to be quite limited. 40 Regarding MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Gérard Fussman opines (1989: 441): “évolution spécifique d’un tout petit nombre de groupes consonantiques du vieil-indien (ks. > c., c˙ . . . ” This is almost always not correct for G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, however, there exists also one “unusual shift from ks. to s” noted by Harry Falk (see p. 123). Apart from this, a change of ks. > c˙ is well-documented in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı lects as in Bng. c On ‘moment’ < OIA ks.an.a-.



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

32

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

related strategy is ps > sp as found in PIE *uopseh2 ‘wasp’ > OIA *vaspi- ‘wasp’ (11451) with reflexes not only in Nuristani (see p. 498). Some examples in this paragraph show that Kobayashi’s observation of the “extensive neutralization of place and laryngeal contrasts [in Sanskrit] is unique” (2004: 64) could have also included the later neutralization between the remaining clusters ks., ps and ts.41 This drift towards coronal assimilation is rooted in the Proto-Indo-Aryan phase but continues well after Old Indo-Aryan and is thus an Outer Languages characteristic. 5. Whereas the innovation of OIA ks. > c.(h) with preservation of place of articulation of the strident component could only occur in Nuristani and Dardic languages which already contained such a third category of retroflex affricates, the change of OIA ks. > (*)t.s. > MIA c(h) only echoed in its adaptation to the one-palatal-affricate order of Sanskrit the former existence of retroflex affricates in pre-Vedic northern India. One more source for stabilizing a three-tier affricate order (or two-tier in case of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı42 ) was the post-Vedic emergence of new retroflex affricates (or new palatal affricates in case of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı) from Cr consonant clusters as demonstrated with many examples below. I should add that the very similar developments (discussed below) of Sr, ST, SN and similar clusters in East Iranian, Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı stand in sharp contrast to ‘mainstream’ Indo-Aryan developments and thus provide even more evidence for the distinction between Outer and Inner Languages. 6. The alternative and most likely later process of OIA kds > (k)kh, which is structurally identical with the common process of OIA ST > MIA TTh (e.g. asti > atthi) and of OIA Cr > MIA C (e.g. Pa. tayo- ‘three’ < OIA tráyah., but Ind. c a < OIA tr¯ayah. [5994] and Pa. t¯ın.i- but Bng. c¯ın both < OIA tr
ni- ‘three’), is

limited to what I call Inner Languages. The other processes leading

to retroflex and palatal affricates (illustrated above with just few examples but supported by many additional examples following in this book) are again innovations that are structurally linked with the above cases of retroflex affricates and are thus again examples for Outer Language processes. It is now clear that there is a striking structural difference between the affricate systems of Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ar.¯ı vis-à-vis the affricate system of Sanskrit regarding the relationship between the respective affricate and fricative sub-systems. Whereas Proto-Indo-Iranian and Proto-Iranian had almost perfect symmetrical affricate-fricative systems, the Vedic and Classical Sanskrit affricatesibilant system had an extremely asymmetric affricate-fricative system with three 41 Only OIA ts could be occasionally preserved unchanged in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, a feature both share with Nuristani. 42 Von Hinüber notes (§§ 96, 232) that in the northwest (he means the area where G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı was, and the Dardic languages are spoken) the difference between OIA ks. and ch has been preserved. However, this holds also for some varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı as can be seen e.g. in Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı mãch¯ı ‘honey’ (< OIA m¯ aks.iká-) versus bi˙cu ¯ ‘scorpion’ (< OIA vŕścika-).



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

33

voiceless sibilants – dental s, palatal ś, retroflex s. – but just one order of palatal affricates with aspiration and voice oppositions: c ch j (jh43 ). This strong asymmetry might have been a triggering factor in the collapse of the three fricatives into one (s or ś) in most varieties of early Middle Indo-Aryan (von Hinüber §219) and in all their modern descendants. However, the collapse did not occur in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, in Dardic (and Nuristani) and in West Pah¯ar.¯ı. On the other hand, both Masica (loc. cit.) and Lipp (2009 i: 111, fn. 40) seem to assume that both Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı had originally just one Vedicderived order of palatal affricates which was dentalized sometime during the Middle Indo-Aryan period (ca. 600 BCE to 1000 CE) and therefore had nothing to do with the dental affricate orders in Nuristani and Iranian whose origin is much older. A luttle later, the ‘palatal slots’ (whatever that means) in Dardic and West Pah¯ar.¯ı were refilled with loanwords with palatal affricates. But then the question arises, why the ‘palatal slots’ were only filled again in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı but not in the many other languages (e.g. many Nepali dialects), whose old palatal series were also dentalized. The here offered alternative explanation of particularly close ties between East Iranian, Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, based on specific developments going back to the Proto-Indo-Iranian period, is certainly more convincing. 1.2.2.1

PIA-inherited voiced affricates in MIA and NIA

Pischel lists the following lemmata (§ 326), here not literally enumerated but used as guidance: 1. jharaï = ks.árati ‘flows’ (a) Ind. zh
2r ‘gush’ is used only in the phrase v  zh
2r h o
th ‘water gushes down’.



However, it has a parallel in Dardic Khowar in uz.ur- ‘to sprinkle’ for which Strand suggests derivation < PIA *ud-gs.har- ‘pour out’ which is also reflected in OIA *ujjharati ‘pours out, places, touches’ (1675), and both of which derive < PIA *gz.har-. Whereas Nuristani owes its exceptional position mainly due to its preservation of the Proto-Iranian occlusion in reflexes of PIE (labio-)velars, some Dardic languages occupy an equal exceptional position due to their preservation of Proto-Indo-Aryan voiced sibilants and voiced aspirated sibilants. For zh
2r

the derivation is < PIA *gz.har- < PIIr. *gžhár- < PIE *gu gˆh er- ‘to drift along in water; to float’ (LIV: 213, Lipp [2009 ii: 269ff.]). OIA ks.árati ‘trickles; melts away, perishes’ (3663), ks.a¯ra- ‘juice, essence; treacle, molasses’, etc., Pa. kharati ‘flows, streams’, paggharati ‘oozes, trickles, flows’, Pk. jharaï ‘jharn¯ a, t.apakn¯ a, c¯ un¯ a, girn¯ a – to flow, trickle, drip; to drop, leak; to ooze; to fall, debouch’. (b) The parallel form OIA *ks.irati ‘flows’ (∼ *jhirati 1 [3689] with vowel alternation as in OIA tárati ∼ tiráte) is reflected in Ind. zh erz
2v  (with -z- passive

marker) ‘to trickle, flow down very slowly’ (itr. ‘to take off, skin, strip [e.g., leaves from a tree])’ which corresponds with H. khern¯ a ‘to run, flow’ and kher¯ı 43 The sound *jh must have existed in Proto-Indo-Aryan (see Cardona in Cardona and Jain [2003: 25]) but was extremely rare in Vedic (because of *jh > h), but was reintroduced and spread in later Indo-Aryan.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

34

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

‘afterbirth’ (cf. e.g. Pk. kheri ‘kalus.t¯ a – dirt, impurity’ and K. ch¯ oru ‘diarrhoea’ 2 [latter quoted sub OIA ks.a¯ra- *‘flowing; juice, essence; treacle’ (3675)], etc.).
yate ‘is worn away, is injured’ 2. Mh., AMg. jhijjaï (∼ kh¯ıyaï) = ks

OIA *jh¯ıyate ‘wastes away’ (5396) and *jh¯ına ‘wasted’ (5395). As far as I know, none of them has reflexes in Nuristani, Dardic or West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. Whereas the ks
yate lemma derives < late PIA *gz.haj?-/gz.hi- < early PIA *d.z.haj?-/d.z.hi-
labdha-. Besides this very common pattern with aspirated mediae plus unaspirated tenues, the law applies also to aspirated mediae plus sibilant as can be seen in OIA ápi gdha ‘he may consume, eat up’ (‘er verzehre, fresse auf’ [EWA i: 514]) < *gzdha- < *ghs-ta- (OIA GHAS ‘eat’). Voiced (and aspirated) sibilants were deleted in Vedic. An example for preservation of the voiced precursor sibilant is OIA váujhak (besides váus.at., see EWA) ‘a call during sacrifice’ whose exact meaning is, according to Lipp (pers. comm.), ‘shall summon (the gods to sacrifice)’ (‘soll [die Götter zum Opfer] herbeifahren’). The regular, but not surviving form was, according to Lipp, a subjunctive aorist váks.at < PIA *uágz.h ad < PIIr. *uád.z.h ad which – together with its  (‘will  bring out’) < PIr. *uzAvestan correspondence uzuuažat ‘wirdherausführen’ h  h uáˇȷad – derives < PIIr. *uáˇȷž ad < PIE ué˜ g -s-e-t (Lipp [2009: 151]). According to   the form váujhak either  Lipp, originatesfrom a dialect or a sociolect different from hieratic Vedic language. In any case, this is an example for preservation of a pre-Vedic word form in Vedic. The similar-looking example of OIA (RV 5,52,6) jájhjhat¯ı ‘a laughing (woman)’ against the Vedic standard form jáks.at ‘laughing’ and thus indirectly preserving the PIA cluster *-gz.h - in *ˇȷágz.h a- < PIA *éh ágz.h - < PIIr. *éágžh - (redupl. present of *éh as- / *gh as- ‘laugh’ (Lipp [2009: 253]) reflects, according to Lipp (2016: 259f.), different Vedic dialects. Contrary to the examples discussed further above, the two Old Indo-Aryan words váujhak and jájjhat¯ı, called by Lipp cases of “Vedic Prakrit” (pers. comm.), do not have modern reflexes. However, they suggest that the very first contact between speakers of Inner and Outer Languages indeed occurred already in Vedic times.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

36

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

1.2.2.3

Additional examples for etymologically unjustified voicing and aspiration

All the following examples deal with different origins of affricates like affrication of sibilants or Cr groups transformed into affricates, and ‘spontaneous’ voicing. Phonetically, the processes involved can be subsumed under the concepts of (retroflex) place assimilation and of fortition (already shortly discussed above p. 31).45 1. Bng. jìmor.i, Deog. jhimr.i ‘wasp’ – Him. cimr.i ‘the yellow wasp. The lemma is originally unvoiced as shown by older forms in Bhad. t..lemni ‘wasp’ (Kaul [2006 i: 332) and Low Rudh. trimr.i (Kaul [2006 ii: 187]). 2. (a) Whether OIA *jhapp-1 ‘sudden movement’ (5336) is the source for Pal. ˇȷh¯ ab‘to be quiet’ and ˇȷh¯ aba ‘be quiet!’ is not clear, but Pal. is cognate with Garh. jupp ‘quietly’ which correspond with H. cup ‘be quiet’, which derives < OIA *cuppa-1 ‘silent’ (4864). (b) Turner regards OIA *jhapp-1 as allomorph of OIA jhampa- ‘a jump’ (5336) — Pk. jhamp¯ a- ‘ekdam k¯ udn¯ a – to take a leap’; note also Ap. kampa- ‘uchal-k¯ ud – leaping and jumping’. There is, however, no OIA KS.AMP ‘jump’ but only OIA (Pañcadan.d.acchattra-prabandha) campana- ‘a jump(?)’ which cannot be cognate.46 3. OIA *jhapp-2 ‘cover’ (5337) has i.a. a modern reflex in N. jh¯ apo ‘lid’ and is also found in Munda Santali éh@pni ‘to cover, as with a lid; eye lashes’ and Korku éha:pna: ‘lid (clay baked cover)’. But there are also unvoiced Ku. and Garh. c¯ep ‘eyelid’, and Rp. cipO ‘eyelid’. The lemma seems to be originally unvoiced and is perhaps of Austro-Asiatic origin because of Temiar capOi ‘eyelid’ and Chrau c@:p [mat] ‘eyelash’ (with mat ‘eye’). 4. Jat.. vãjhl¯ı ‘flute’ (also with voicing but no aspiration in P. and Chin. b¯ej ‘flute’) < OIA vamś¯ ˙ ı- ‘flute’, GN vañjhu ‘long bamboo used as boating pole’ < OIA vamśá˙ ‘bamboo’. 5. P. ajh u, hãjh¯ u, ˜ıjh ‘tear’ < OIA áśru- ‘tear’. 6. GN hãjhu ‘wild goose < OIA hamsá˙ ‘goose’. 7. Bashg. jijil ‘loose’ (only Konow) < OIA *śrthilá- ‘loose’ (12601). 8. P. jhutt¯ a ‘vulva’ corresponds with H. c¯ ut‘vulva’ < OIA *cutta- ‘anus, vulva’ (4860). 9. M. jakal¯ a (vulgar) ‘all; the whole or everyone’ (Molesworth) < OIA sakála‘whole, all’ with preservation of medial stop. Central Asian Niya Prakrit dajha ‘slave’47 (Bynon [2005: 35]) < OIA d¯ asá- ‘a non-Aryan, slave’. 45 To what extent fortition applies to voicing of tenues is somewhat unclear. Whereas tenues tend to be pronounced with higher tension than mediae, in case of hearing loss, the ability to hear unvoiced sounds disappears before it disappears with voiced sounds. 46 This may have a linguistic reality if cognate with Bng. c OmbOt, c OmpOt ‘blow, jerk, stroke’ which

or noise’ (9365). However, itself looks like a compound built with OIA *bhat.t.- ‘sudden movement this is not certain. 47 tati´ gena dajha picavida ‘Tatiga handed over a slave’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

37

Borrowings from English Ku., N., Rp. and Dari. jhel ‘jail’ and New. jhy¯ alkh¯ an¯ a ‘jail’; note also Kurkh. jeh¯el ‘jail’ and Kh. jehel ‘lock s.o. in jail’; Garh. d.ibhijan ‘division’; N. bhikt.oriy¯ a ‘Victoria, late Queen-Empress of India’, etc.

In summary, it can be stated that the voiced affricates inherited from Proto-IndoAryan formed the basis for – or at least did not counteract – the development of many cases of spontaneous affrication and voicing not motivated by etymology which are mainly found in peripheral languages. Characterizing the above-presented data with the term ‘fortition’ certainly covers many of the phenomena. Whether there was a conspiracy between the PIA developments and prehistoric local linguistic conditions cannot be said at the moment but does not seem unlikely with regard to Kuiper’s observations of similar consonant variations in Munda languages (1965). Naby more examples are quoted ithroughout this book.

1.2.3

Multiple affricate orders in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

That Masica’s (and others’) opinion regarding the existence of dental sibilants in Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı – dentalization of inherited palatal sibilants and later emergence of new palatal sibilants (1991: 207) – is wrong, has already been shown and is also proven by the existence of survivals of inherited ts in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı had not only /s, ś, s./, it also had, different than previously thought, besides a palatal order of affricates an unvoiced dental affricate c˙ ([µ]) (Salomon [1990: 268 fn. 26]) and it had a dental voiced fricative z not only in borrowings from Iranian (Salomon [1990: 269]). Reiner Lipp has repeatedly pointed out that the inherited biphonemic dental affricate ts became monophonemic in Nuristani and Iranian but mostly changed into aspirated palatal (c)ch in Indo-Aryan (see e.g. 2009 i: 150). This is, however, not the whole picture. Monophonemic ts is also documented in parts of Indo-Aryan. However, one must distinguish between inherited dental ts preserved unchanged as in Dardic Tir¯ ah¯ı ba˙ca ’‘alf’ , and dentalized aspirated c˙ h (< palatal (c)ch) as in Bng. ba chO ‘calf’ (a language with two affricate orders), and dental sibilant as e.g. in Assamese b¯ as¯ a ‘affectionate address to a child’ (deaffricated < older aspirated and dentalized affricate *b¯ ac˙ h¯a), and Or.iy¯ a bacch¯ a ‘calf’ (a language with only one order of palatal affricates).48 Note: PIIr. watsás ‘yearling calf’ < PIE *wots-ó-s ← *wet- ‘year’ (meaning ‘year’ is still preserved in Pr. vu˙cu ¯, vus˙c ‘year’) developed into OIA vatsá- and PIr. vasa-. According to Parpola (2017: 272), the Indo-Aryan lemma was borrowed with both meanings into Nuristani (and into Iranian Pamir languages), whereby “Nuristani has substituted the [bimorphemic OIA] consonant cluster -ts- with its [monophonemic] dental affricate c˙ 48 Bengali and Or.iy¯ a vatsa ‘calf’ are obviously tatsamas.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

38

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history . . . ” 49 He adds that inherited Nuristani *µ reflecting PIE *kˆ is documented in several Nuristani languages but not in Dardic, which is not correct, as shown above). On the same page, Parpola lists several Dardic reflexes of OIA vatsá- whereby the random collocation of aspirated and non-aspirated dental affricate forms – e.g. Kal. ba˙chá and Tir. ba˙cá – obscures the fact that Dardic Tir¯ ah¯ı ba˙cá is like the Nuristani reflexes a form with a monophonemic [µ] whereas Kal. ba˙chá is a dentalized reflex of MIA aspirated palatal vacha-.50

The trichotomy of Iranian – Nuristani – Indo-Aryan is clearly too rigid and does not even do justice to the few data presented right above, and it does not match with Parpola’s otherwise correct conclusion “. . . that there was much and intensive contact between the Iranian and Indo-Aryan branches over vast areas in the second millennium BCE” (2017: 271, repeated p. 278). Consequently, I maintain that the concept of a linkage of lects (Zoller [2016: 104ff.]) describing the developments of significantly more than three ‘branches’ out of Proto-IndoIranian is of better explanatory adequacy. Since monophonemization of ts > µ – versus Proto-Iranian ts > s and versus Old to Middle Indo-Aryan ts > (c)ch51 – is found from eastern Afghanistan to the Valley of the Yamuna (for examples see right below.), it has obviously manifested itself in a linkage of lects reflecting an ancient language geography where the ancestors of Eastern Iranian, Nuristani and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı were in direct contact – as they still are. G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı As just pointed out above, Richard Salomon says that, contrary to previous opinions, tsa indeed reflects an actual G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı dental affricate phoneme. Examples: 1. cikiµa¯- (also cikisa-) ‘medicine’ < OIA cikits¯ a- ‘medical attendance’ (but Pa. tikicch¯ a, cikicch¯ a-, no modern reflexes). 2. jihiµa- ‘hunger’ < OIA jighats¯ a- (but Pa. jighacch¯ a-, no modern reflexes). 3. juguµida- ‘disgusting’ < OIA jugupsita- with place assimilation ps > ts (but Pa. jigucchita-, no modern reflexes). In the allomorphs juhośpi(*da), johośp(*ida) metathesis of -ps- > *-sp- > -śp- has taken place like PIE *uopseh2 ‘wasp’ > OIA *vaspi- ‘wasp’ (11451) and similar to Nur. *a˙cru > astru .52 4. maµa- ‘fish’ < OIA mátsya- (but Pa. maccha-); contrasts phonologically with Gan. cam . ma- ‘leather, hide’ with palatal affricate < OIA cárman-.

49 Whereas in the general development from Indo-Iranian to Old Iranian the change of µ > s has taken place millennia ago “already in (Pre-)Proto-Iranian” (Parpola [2017: 266]), it also occurred much later in Nuristani and Dardic in some cases. This suggests that the phonetivally natural change of µ > s has operated in the area continuously over centuries until today. 50 Since Kalasha reflects the different PIE velars in the IndoAryan way (as mentioned p. 23), ba˙chá is a borrowing from a Dardic language of the Shina/Pashai etc. type. 51 The much rarer change of OIA ts > MIA ss is not considered here. 52 This G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı change of -sp- > -śp parallels Nuristani “dissimilation of st (and later, čt) to št . . . .; e.g., K. [Kati] št"um ‘tree” ’ (Strand 2010) < OIA stambha- ‘pillar, post’, which is obviously not a unique feature of Nuristani.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

39

Note: mátsya has the following modern reflexes with preservation of monophonemic µ: Gaw. m¯ oc˙ , m¯ ac˙ , Paš. m¯ as, m¯ ac˙ , Klm. mä˙cin HL (with unclear suffix) and mas H all ‘fish’; they are different from similar-looking Bng. ma˙chi n.f. ‘fish’ which is a dentalized result of older Bng. *macchi; Kal. has both types: mu˙cí and ma˙chí both ‘fish’ which are both borrowings from other Dard languages.

5. maµari ‘stingy’ and amatsari [P@m@µ@Ri] ‘not stingy’ < OIA matsarín‘jealous, etc’ (but Pa. macchara- < OIA matsará-) also in [P@Di:V@m@ts@Rim@Di] adivamatsarimadi ‘having an exceedingly stingy disposition’ < OIA at¯ıva + matsari + mati-. 6. vaµiya- ‘female calf’ < OIA vatsik¯ a- and vaµagidhi- ‘longing for calves’ < OIA vatsagrddhin- (but Pa. vacchagiddhi-) and vaµadariga- ‘dear daughter’ < OIA arik¯a- (but Pa. vacchad¯arik¯a-). vatsad¯ 7. vicigiµa- (viyigiµa-) ‘uncertainty’ < OIA vicikits a
- (but Pa. vicikicch¯a-, no modern reflexes). ˜@µ@R@] ‘year’ < OIA samvatsará˙ (but Pa., Pk. samvacchara-) ˙ 8. sam . vaµara- [s@V with modern reflexes e.g. in S. chamcharu ‘annual ceremony performed by heir of deceased’, G. chamchar¯ı ‘anniversary’ (with CCH). Besides a G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı phoneme ts (/˙c /),53 the language had also a dental sibilant phoneme z as explained by Salomon (1990: 269): The conjunct YSA, as has long been recognized . . . was used in certain forms of Brahmi script to represent the voiced sibilant /z/, occurring in Iranian names and loan words in Sanskrit[!]. In Gandhari, however, this or a similar sound was a common phoneme native to the language itself, not just used in loan words; in the Kharosthi script it was most commonly represented by ja with a diacritic ¯ horizontal line above (Y).

Dardic 1. Ind. u tsh ,54 Pal. uts, Dm. u ¯c˙ , Gaw. u u c, vu u c, dialectal Kal., Kho. u˙c, Bshk. u ¯c˙ (also u ¯č < OIA utsíya- ‘coming from a spring (of water)’ [1869] with a parallel in Tor. ošo ‘spring [of water]’), Sh.gil. u ˜c˙ , Sh.koh., Sh.gur. u˙c ‘a spring’ all < OIA ùtsa- (but cf. e.g. Or. ucha). Ind. dental u tsh contrasts phonologically e.g. h with palatal lučà ‘meaningless’ < OIA *lucca- ‘defective’ (11073). 2. Wot.. dusún ‘moon’ < older *jutsún < OIA jyótsn¯ a- ‘moonlight’. Similar also Pa. d¯ osin¯ a-. 3. Tor.cail. b¯ as ‘male calf’, dialectal Paš. v¯ ac˙ @k and vas¯ak all < OIA vatsá- and Tor.cail. byas ‘female calf’ < vatsik¯ a- ‘heifer’. 4. Dialectal Paš. p¯ uč¯ı, p¯ uič¯ı, p¯ ueč¯ı, p¯eč¯ı, pïi č¯ı-ˇȷh¯ ole ‘juniper’ (Morgenstierne [1973a, vol. 3: 323]) < older *p¯ uc˙¯ı etc. (with repalatalization as in Paš. uč 53 That is, a monophonemic affricate /µ/ as in Nuristani and Proto-Iranian but different from Old Indo-Aryan where inherited biphonemic ts changed either into the cluster (c)ch or into the geminate ss (later widely simplified to s). 54 This aspiration is predictable and therefore here not relevant.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

40

Chapter 1. An Indo-Aryan history

ˆ 2 resp. *peuks ˆ ‘spring’ < OIA utsíya-) < PIIr. *pauč¯ı- (Strand) < PIE *peuk-eh ‘pine’. Note: Whereas the evidence of dialectal Paš. v¯ ac˙ @k etc. supports the assumption of a continuation of monophonemic Dardic G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı /µ/ also in modern Dardic languages, Shina ba˙chár ‘calf’ derives < older palatal *bačhár < OIA vatsatará- like Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı ba chO ‘calf’ < OIA vatsá-. However, the Shina word must be a borrowing since Shina follows the ‘Iranian type’ of PIE velar reflexes. This case is different from Khowar bac.h"ol. which derives < older retroflex *bac.hakud.a ‘calf’ < older *bacchakud.a- < OIA *vatsakud.a(with retroflexion caused by CCH?).

Excursus: Short notes on Dardic sibilants and affricates In many cases, phonological voiced affricates are pronounced as voiced fricatives in the Dardic languages, but similarly also in Pashto, as I will explain in Zoller forthcoming. There I suggest the following – partly idealized and depending on individual language – pattern with the sound units showing their phonetic realizations whereas their respective locations in the rows and columns showing their phonemic status:55

dental palatal retroflex

uA c˙ č c.

vA z ˇȷ z.

S s š s.

This chart can be read as an extended version of the PIIr. sibilant subsystem which comprised two affricate subsystems (voiced and unvoiced palatal and palato-alveolar) and one unvoiced dental fricative s (with allophone š) (Lubotsky [2018: 1875]), but now augmented into three affricate subsystems (a retroflex order in addition) and three unvoiced sibilants. The following chart shows how voiced phonemic affricates are predominantly realized as phonetic fricatives, depending on their place of articulation and on their position in a word.56 dental palatal retroflex

initial z ˇȷ z.

medial z ˇȷ z.

final z ž z.

Examples: Ind. zang


2l ‘forest’ < OIA j¯angala-; ˙ 2ng


2y ‘underpants’ ← Ur. j¯ amghiy¯ ˙ a; z g ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá-.

55 Since aspirated affricates and the fricatives h and x are not crucial for the following arguments, they are not visually presented here. 56 Also this chart gives a precise description only of the situation in Indus Kohistani but is a mere approximation of the situation in the other languages of the region.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

1.2. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Indo-Iranian

41

The above two charts explain implausible presentations of Dardic sibilant subsystems like Liljegren’s and Haider’s presentation of the Pal¯ ula sibilant subsystem (2011: xx) with three unvoiced affricates and with three voiced and three unvoiced fricatives. However, what we see is that in languages of northwestern South Asia voiced affricates turn faster into fricatives than unvoiced affricates. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı 1. u cOngO,

u cOngl

O ‘the effect of the influence of fairies or cremation ground ghosts

upon s.b. (usually upon women and children); a bad omen; the ingratiating of o.s., the creeping into (if one ‘behaves like a fairy’) < OIA utsanga˙ in the lexicographer sense of ‘embrace, association, union’. The OIA word is built with prefix and SAÑJ ‘cling to’; note also Paippal¯ ada Atharvaveda-samhit¯ ˙ a utsangin¯ ˙ ı- ‘designation of a female demon’ (EWA); note also cognate Kal. c.an˙ > hik ‘to embrace, hug’ < PIA *ut.s.anga˙ (cf. cognate Gan. s.aga- ‘attachment’ and OIA sangá˙ ’contact with’). 2. u c adO ‘rascally, roguish’ and u˙ca¯di ’roguery, rage’ are typically used in connection with uncouth boys as in ieu nanO bari u c adi kOrE ‘this boy is rampaging’, and u c adO nanO ’a roguish boy’. Is related with OIA uts
dati ‘destroys’ and uts a
dana- ‘destroying, overturning’. Turner gives meaning ‘putting away’ as reflected in Pali uss¯ adana- ‘overflowing’ (1879). 3. usn anO ‘to feel relief (e.g., after a heavy work)’ < OIA útsanna- ‘sunk, destroyed’,

See further parallels sub 1873. 4. usrEnO v.i. ‘to stretch, expand’ < útsarati ‘hastens away’. See further parallels sub 1874. 5. ko cnO ‘to reprimand or blame s.b.’ < kutsayati ‘abuses, blames’ (but Pa. kuc ‘contemptible?; Pk. kucchaï ‘abuses, blames’; S. kuchanu ‘to speak, talk’). chita. Bng. ko cnO contrasts with dental aspirated ko chO ‘armpit’ (< OIA kauks.á- ‘ab palatal gocnO ‘to pierce’ < OIA *ghocc- ‘pierce’ (4515) and palatal dominal’), caknO ‘to chew (food)’ < OIA *caks.ati ’tastes’ (4557, cf. there Wg. c.ac.- ‘bite,

which is cognate with OIA lex. caksana- ‘eating a relish to promote drinkeat’) . . ing’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 2 A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia

2.1

Affricate and sibilant subsystems

Within the Indo-Iranian languages carefully examined here, not only the plosive subsystems are of significance but also the closely associated groups of affricates and sibilants. Whereas Vedic and Classical Sanskrit had an asymmetrical system with one order of palatal affricates (c, ch, j, jh1 ), but a dental, palatal and retroflex sibilant (s, ś, s.). The three sibilants collapsed before Ashoka in most Middle Indo-Aryan languages into one, except for G¯ andh¯ar¯ı. For a not heavily sanskritized variety of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı I may now postulate the following stop, affricate and sibilant subsystem which is more symmetrical than the Sanskrit subsystem: bilabial p ph b

dental t th d c˙ z s

palatal č č ˇȷ š

retroflex t. t.h d.

velar k kh g

s.

So far, there is no direct evidence for a retroflex affricate subsystem (c., c.h .j), but I assume that such subsystems did exist at least in local spoken varieties of G¯andh¯ ar¯ı. Retroflex affricate subsystems are common in modern Dard languages, which are more or less direct descendants of Middle Indo-Aryan G¯ andh¯ar¯ı of the written tradition. The degree of symmetry and complexity of those plosive-affricate-sibilant subsystems varies from language to language. A particularly perfect and complex subsystem is found in Khowar: bilabial p ph b

dental t th d c˙ c˙ h dz s z

palatal č č ˇȷ š ž

retroflex t. t.h d. c. cj . .ȷ s. z.2

velar k kh g

uvular q x G

1 The phoneme jh had for a longer time a marginal status. PIA *jh was reduced to h in pre-Vedic times.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

44

Chapter 2. A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia

One can see that in comparison with G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Khowar has not only a ‘full set’ of affricates but also an (originally) separate order of voiced fricatives. And it has an additional order of uvular consonants (though x and G are pronounced as velars). Despite no phonological distinctive aspiration, Iranian Wakhi has quite similar phonological orders: /˙c dz; č ˇȷ; c. ˇ.ȷ/, /s š s./, /z ž z./, /q/ and several voiced and unvoiced velar and uvular fricatives /x  x, G  G/ (Yoshie [2005: 405]). Again similar, but somewhat less complex and closer to West Pah¯ ar.¯ı patterns is northwestern Tibetan Balti: /t th d/; /˙c c˙ h; č čh ˇȷ/, /s š/, /z ž/, /q/ and uvular fricatives /x G/ (Rangan [1975: 81). Here is a brief overview of the affricate sub-systems in Tibetan languages between Ladakh annd Himachal Pradesh: Dental ts dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz ts tsh dz

Old Tibetan Proto-Western-Tib. Balti Purik Ladakhi Bun¯ an Kinnauri Spitian Tinani

Palatal (z) (z) (z)

(z)

č čh dž (ž) č čh dž (ž) č čh dž č čh dž (ž) č čh dž č čh dž č čh dž vc čh dž

And here a brief overview of the unvoiced sibilant subsystems of the language families and groups in the area:

Northwestern Tibetan, West Himalayish Ladakhi s š s. s š [?] s. Bun¯ an Spitian s š s.

East Iranian Pashto Wakhi Yidhga-Munˇȷ¯ı Sanglechi-Ishkashmi ¯ Ormur .¯ı

s s s s s

š š š š š

s. s. s. s. s.

Nuristani, Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

2.1. Affricate and sibilant subsystems

Prasun Waigal¯ı Kalasha Indus Kohistani Kashmiri Kulu¯ı Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı

s s s s s s s

š š š š ś ś ś

45

s. s. s. s.

Note: One can see that in most cases, the number of affricate orders regarding place of articulation corresponds with the number of sibilant orders in Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (including Kashmiri) even though Wali and Koul suggest for Kashmiri (1997: 294) the following: three sibilants s z ś and five affricates c˙ c˙ h c ch ˇȷ. I disagree with this analysis because I regard phonetic Kashmiri [z] to be phonologically a dental affricate /¨ȷ/ because – apart from the many borrowings from Perso-Arabic – [z] usually derives historically < older *j(h), e.g. in z¯ alun ‘to burn’ < OIA jválati ‘burns brightly’, zang ‘leg’ < OIA jángh¯ ˙ a-‘shank’ etc. I therefore suggest the following sibilant-affricate sub-system for Kashmiri: s ś and c˙ c˙ h ¨ȷ c ch j. This is almost the same as found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties like for instance Koci and Kot.gar.hi (Hendriksen 1986) and Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı though Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı does not have an aspirated palatal affricate *ch (see e.g. Zoller 2011).

Finally, let us look at Burushaski, a language traditionally believed to be an isolate. Its corresponding consonant orders are: /t th d/; /˙c c˙ h dz ; č č ˇȷ; c. c.h ˇ.ȷ/, //s š s./, /z /, /q qh/ and uvular voiced fricative /G/. When comparing the above G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı and Khowar subsystems, the following questions immediately arise: How is it possible that Khowar as a more or less direct descendant of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı has a subset of plosives, affricates and fricatives consisting of 30 phonemes whereas G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı had only 20? What is the reason for the presence of a uvular order in Burushaski and in all Dard languages except Kalasha? What is the origin of the order of voiced sibilants which seem to have been contrastive without constraints in the past? What could all this have to do with a hitherto ununderstood relationship between Burushaski and its Indo-Aryan, Iranian and Tibetan neighbors? In the article, I emphasized the phonological embeddedness of Burushaski into its Indo-Aryan surroundings (2014: 103): I cannot trace a single phonetic or phonological feature that would distinguish Burushaski from IA languages (including Nuristani . . . ) in its surroundings. Like many Dard languages – e.g. Khowar and Shina – it has a stop system with three manners of articulation (t, th, d) and five points of articulation (p, t, t., k, q). And like many Dard languages – e.g. Indus Kohistani and Shina —-it has a pitch accent system with one rising and one falling accent . . . and each word carries either of the two on any of its syllables.

Of course, the facts listed here still apply, but I must revise my earlier assumption that Burushaski adapted perfectly phonologically to its Indo-Aryan environment. The

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

46

Chapter 2. A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia

question also arises as to why Burushaski adapted so perfectly to its linguistic environment only in terms of phonology, while its morphology and syntax have nothing to do with the morphology and syntax of the Indo-Aryan (and Tibetan) languages in its neighborhood. I now argue that the above-described linguistic features owe their similarities to a Kartvelian substrate that has remained invisible to this day, while Burushaski is the visible correspondent.

2.2

Kartvelian vestiges

In two recent publications, Jan Henrik Holst (2014, 2017) maintains that Burushaski is a member of the Kartvelian language family. There is no doubt that Burushaski is related with Kartvelian on the levels of phonology, grammar, and lexicon. However, in my opinion, there is still not enough evidence that would show that Burushaski is a direct descendant of Common Kartvelian. But the answer to this question is not of primary importance in the present context. What I want to emphasize and show, however, is that in antiquity there also lived speakers of Kartvelian in northwestern South Asia. Traces of this can be found in Dardic, Nuristani, eastern Iranian languages, and in northwestern Tibetan languages and perhaps also in the ancient language of the Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC). I connect this hypothesis with two publications by Alexander Lubotsky on the language of the BMAC (2001, 2020). In the 2001 publication, he identified BMACderived words by searching for common words in Vedic and Avestan sources that could not be inherited. While in his 2001 publication he thought that the language of Bactria-Margiana and the language of the (Indus Valley-)Panjab region were identical or at least closely related (2001: 306), he modified this view in his 2020 publication to the effect that towards the end of BMAC joint migrations of speakers of the BMAC language and speakers of Old Indo-Aryan to northwestern South Asia took place. He writes (p. 6): . . . the language spoken in the BMAC and the language which was spoken in the Swat valley and the Punjab were quite similar, if not identical. The similarity of the two languages is all the more surprising as the BMAC and the Indus Valley Culture do not have much in common archaeologically, and it seems unlikely that their inhabitants spoke the same language. It seems therefore worthwhile to seriously consider another scenario . . . It seems attractive to assume that the southward movement of Indo-Aryans was simultaneous with the decline of the BMAC and was even triggered by it, since the profound changes in the economy of the BMAC would have forced the Indo-Aryan pastoralists to look for new markets. In the situation of an economic and political crisis, it is only to be expected that in their movement, the Indo-Aryans were joined by a sizable group of the BMAC people, who would bring their culture and the agricultural lifestyle with them.

My interpretation of this quote is that if Indo-Aryans did in fact migrate into northwestern South Asia along with associates of the BMAC, then they must have

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

2.2. Kartvelian vestiges

47

been speakers of Proto-Indo-Aryan (i.e. the origin of the Outer Languages), while the Vedic Indo-Aryans arrived in the Panjab a few centuries later unaccompanied by speakers of the BMAC language. There are a few linguistic traces that indicate that there were also groups within the BMAC that spoke some form of Kartvelian. At the same time, however, it is also the case that speakers of Burushaski, and thus also of Kartvelian, lived in the mountains of northwestern South Asia long before the first wave of Indo-Aryan immigration (Tuite 1996). According to Parpola (1994: 142), “the earliest speakers of Burushaski entered their present homeland from the north after the inception of the North Neolithic and have never gone much further.” 3 Karl Lamberg-Karlovsky observes regarding exchange between BMAC and IVC (2013: 41): “Foreign objects recovered from the Indus Civilization [in the BMAC area] are relatively rare, however, BMAC statuary and seals are attested at Mohenjodaro and Harappa.” Since BMAC entertained extensive relations with other Asian civilizations including IVC, I wonder whether a migration process towards the end of the BMAC civilization en route for South Asia – prompted for whatever particular reasons – was actually initiated and carried out both by Indo-Aryans and by BMAC people – at least a section of the latter speaking an ancient form of Kartvelian and the former rather martial people with their war-chariots and the *ua¯ć¯ı weapon4 (which they  had acquired in the BMAC culture [Parpola 2015b: 15]) speaking Proto-Indo-Aryan dialects. However, Parpola’s somewhat different conceptualization of this migration is perhaps more plausible (2015: 71 and 76]): . . . an elite of Aryan-speaking pastoralist warriors from the steppes took over the leadership in the BMAC . . . it [the leadership] could have given the BMAC a more effective hierarchical leadership, which in turn would provide a plausible explanation for the BMAC’s increased dynamism and aggressiveness in the later part of its “urban” phase . . . [The archaeologist] Fred Hiebert agrees that the expansion of the BMAC people to the Iranian plateau and the Indus Valley borderlands at the beginning of the second millennium BCE is “the best candidate for an archaeological correlate of the introduction of Indo-Iranian speakers to Iran and South Asia” (Hiebert 1995: 192) . . . [because of] the necessity of having the Rigvedic Aryans as the second (later) wave of IndoAryan immigrants in South Asia . . . I remain convinced that an early wave of Proto-Indo-Aryan speakers took charge of the BMAC around 2000 BCE.

A scenario of Vedic speakers arriving several centuries later without Kartvelian company might explain that until now I could find only a few examples of Kartvelian borrowings in Sanskrit. Two are quoted below. With a list of about 160 lemmata so far, this Kartvelian substrate is comparatively small compared to the Austro-Asiatic substrate with hundreds of lemmata, which is distributed throughout northern South Asia. I start with a small list of one borrowing from Kartvelian in each of the justmentioned language groups (OIA two): 3 “North Neolithic” means late third millennium BC. 4 Of course, besides many others. The Rg-veda contains a quite impressive number of conflictrelated terms. See also Mallory 2006. 

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

48

Chapter 2. A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia • Burushaski s.iqár ‘shame’ — Svan šk’wir 5 ‘shame’. • Khowar xarúš ‘mange; eczema’ — Megrelian xvarc-a ‘mange; eczema’. • Prasun mar ‘cloud’ — Common Kartvelian *mar- ‘cloud’. • Wakhi gres. ‘itchy’ — Common Nakh6 *girc’ ‘itch’. • Balti zalzal ‘shrill’ — Common Kartvelian *zil- ‘voice of crying’. • OIA cákora- ‘partridge’ — Common Kartwelian *c1 q’ar 7 ‘quail’ (Klimov). • BMAC (OIA) *k¯ aca-2 ‘black’ (3008) — Abžui dialect of Apkhazian kwaj-čw’a ‘black’. • OIA kil¯ at.a- ‘inspissated milk’ (3181) has several reflexes in Nuristani without any trace of the -(¯ a)t.a- (which thus must be an IA suffix): Ash. c˙ elá, c˙ ilá ‘cheese’, Wg. kilá ‘cheese’ (Degener ‘cooked cheese’), Pr. k¯ıli, kil, k¯ıl ‘cheese’; Parpola regards the OIA lemma as a possible borrowing from BMAC (2015: 82) — Common Kartvelian *q’wel- ‘cheese’, Georgian q’vel-i ‘cheese’, Zan (Megrelian) Pval-i, Laz q’val-i, k’val-i, val-i ‘cheese’, Svan q’¯el- ← *q’wel-, li-q’¯el-e ‘cheese making or extracting’ (Chukhua [2019: 482]). The borrowing from Kartvelian must have taken place into a Sanskrit type of dialect and not in a type of Dardic dialect (because of q’ → k; however, there is also Laz k’val-i); something similar must also apply to Burushaski kiláay. ‘quark from colostrum’ which cannot be inherited.

The Caucasian languages are well-known for their ejective consonants.8 However, Burushaski does not have ejectives and Holst speaks of a shift in the plosives: Kartvelian /t t’ d/ > Burushaski /t th d/ (2017: 196). He holds that aspirated Burushaski plosives mostly correspond with plain Kartvelian plosives whereas plain Burushaski plosives mostly correspond with Kartvelian ejectives. Phonetically this is not convincing because, for instance, there are languages which phonological contrast ejective and aspirated plosives, e.g. the Dakota dialect Alexis Stoney (spoken in Alberta) distinguishes plain, aspirated and ejective series /t t’ th / (Rhyasen Erdman [1997: 8ff.]). Instead of ejectives alternating with aspirated plosives, we find the phonetically similar phenomenon of alternation between aspiration and glottal stop in some varieties of West Pah¯ar.¯ı (see p. 277f. where I, however, assume old Munda influence) and wordinitially probably in G¯andh¯ ar¯ı (p. 294). In the list of Kartvelian borrowings one finds the following (possible) correspondences between Kartvelian words with ejectives and words with aspirations in the receiver languages: 1. Bur. khakháayo ‘walnut (inside shell)’ — Georgian k’ak’al-i ‘walnut’. 2. Bur. qhéqhi ‘black; to defecate, pee; dirt, dirty, bad’ (child language)— Common Kartvelian *q’a-q’a- ‘dirt; filth’. 3. BMAC *kopha- ‘lump, hill’ (3521) — Bezhit k’up’i-jo ‘pile, heap (of things); hill’. 5 The apostrophe is the phonetic sign for ejective pronunciation. 6 Northeast Caucasian. 7 The symbol *c1 (not found in the IPA) denotes a voiceless (denti-)alveolar affricate. Gamkrelidze calls this class “mid series” (1966: 70 and 2008: 155. Gamkrelidze does not specify the phonetic differences between the three series, but the most likely seem to be front series = plain dental, mid series = apical, back series = dorsal.). In later stages, the mid series collapsed either with the front or the back series depending on individual languages. 8 Ejectives are usually unvoiced consonants that are produced with a glottalic egressive airstream.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

2.2. Kartvelian vestiges

49

4. Ind. khAp
2y  ‘a ladle’ — if borrowing from Common Kartvelian *k’op’- ‘scoop (for wine)’. 5. Kal. c˙ ha ‘pus’ — Common Sindy *c’a ‘pus’. 6. Bur. c˙ hil, Werch. c hEl both ‘water’ — Kv. c’q’al-i ‘water’. 7. Bur. ćhućháq man´- ‘to get dirty’ — Georgian-Zan *č’uč’aq-i ‘dirt’. 8. Bur. ćhulá ‘he-goat’ — Common Kartvelian *c’al-i ‘goat, he-goat’. 9. BMAC *handha- ‘place, house’ — if borrowed from Common Kartvelian *q’anda ‘fence type’. 10. Ind. h
2p-h2p kar
2v  ‘to bark (as a dog)’ (< older *kh
2p-kh2pℎ ?) — Common Kartvelian *q’ep- as in Georgian q’ep-, q’ep-a ‘barking’. 11. Bur.ys. -híl ‘lip’ — Common Kartvelian *p’il- ‘lip’. There are also not few examples where original Kartwelian words with ejectives are reflected in the receiving languages without aspiration (not relevant for Iranian). However, it is very likely that change of ejective consonants into aspirated consonants in the receiving languages must have been the rule in the initial phase of language contact. This, as it seems, obvious assumption leads to the follow-up question: Were BMAC words both with unvoiced and voiced aspirated consonants as identified by Lubotsky also aspirated in the original BMAC language or are they the result of an ‘Indo-Aryanization’ ? Lubotsky does not address the question of the phonological system of the BMAC language but on the basis of his reconstructed lemmata, it is practically identical with the Vedic system of four classes of plosives with aspiration and voice opposition, one class of affricates also with aspiration and voice opposition, and a (distinctive?) pitch accent. It stands to reason that this is the end of an adaptation process and not the beginning. From a Proto-Indo-Iranian perspective Lubotsky finds voiceless aspirates peculiar (2001: 303) but not voiced aspirates. Note: Since there is historical evidence for a change of ejective T’ > Th we may also hypothesize a similar change of pre-glottalized ¼M > Mh .9 In fact, as pointed out above, synchronic alternations between aspirated and pre-glottalized consonants are found in varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and seem to have existed also in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. Typologically related would be also the recent model for PIE */t/ */¼d/ */d/ > PIIr. */t/ */d/ */dh / (Lipp [2016: 274f]). Here comparable is also the development of inherited voiced initial consonants and of word-medially voiced geminates (inherited from Prakrit) into implosives in Sindh¯ı (see p. 276). Remarkable in this context is the fact that Sindh¯ı has also a small number of words with implosives ultimately borrowed from Munda words with glottal stops as e.g. in S. gu£an.u ‘to pound, thrash’ < OIA *gud.d.- ‘dig’ (3934.6) ← Bon. guP ‘to dig (earth, etc.)’.

Common Kartvelian had corresponding affricare series, i.e. a front series (dental) c˙ 9 Languages with both ejectives and implosives (injectives) in their sound systems are presently found in eastern and southerm Africa. Ian Maddieson WALS Glottalized consonsnts (2013) explains the phenomen thus: “The areal restriction suggests that the association between glottalized resonants and ejectives might best be viewed as a result of overlapping patterns of spread in a single area, and not as the consequence of any particular linguistic dependence between the occurrence of these two classes of consonants.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

50

Chapter 2. A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia

([µ]), dz (dz), c˙ ’, ([µ’]),10 a back series (alveolar) č ([Ù]), dž ([Ã]), č’ ([Ù’]), and a mid series (denti-alveolar) c1 , dz1 , c1 ’. In later stages, the mid series collapsed either with the front or the back series depending on individual languages. Common Kartvelian had also three orders of voiced and unvoiced fricatives11 (Gamkrelidze [1966: 70]). It is now clear that the whole phonological system of Proto-Kartvelian with three types of articulation of the obstruents (unvoiced, voiced, ejective [sibilants only two]) and three places of articulation (dental, denti-alveolar, alveolar) is not only strikingly similar with possibly cognate Burushaski, but also with Dard languages like Khowar and Indus Kohistani, and with East Iranian (Pamir) languages like Pashto or Wakhi (see p. 44). According to Lubotsky, there once existed many similarities between the language(s) of BMAc and the language(s) of the Indus-Panjab area at the time of the arrival of the first Indo-Aryan speakers. However, since there are Kartvelian traces in languages of northwestern South Asia and since it is almost certain that the language of BMAC was related with Kartvelian in one way or other (although many details are unknown), one wonders why there are so many structural similarities between the phonological system of Common Kartvelian and those languages in northwestern South Asia whereas such similarities are not found in Lubotsky’s reconstructed BMCA data which are characterized by peculiar syllable structures, sound sequences, peculiar word formations etc. but do not point to a non-Indo-Iranian sound system. The reason for this can only be that the “Indo-Iranian substratum” came into Vedic Sanskrit only indirectly via non-Vedic OIA dialects with phonological systems similar to some extent to the patterning of the Common Kartvelian phonological system. Schematically, this could be represented with this example:

Common Kartvelian *xwar- ‘holy, sacrificial animal’ (Chukhua) > Common Sindy *xw ar-ă ‘thoroughbred horse’ (regarding meaning cf. possible parallel in Northeas Caucasian Khvarshi xar-am ‘foal, donkey foal’) → non-Vedic OIA lect *xara- (Ind. xár ‘donkey’ might be a Kv. borrowing or borrowing from Psht.) → OIA khara- ‘donkey’ (lex. also ‘ass; mule’).

This strong encounter of ancient non-Vedic lects with ancient Kartvelian within the cultural and linguistic sphere of the BMAC was the (main) cause for the bifurcation of common Proto-Indo-Aryan into the ancestors of Outer and Inner Languages. The many different developments resulting from this in the shaping of Outer and Inner Languages are examined in more detail in the next chapter. To say that there are Indor-Arian features in East Iranian languages and conversely Iranian features in Nuristani and Dardic is all well and good and not surprising. What is surprising, however, is that another language family, namely Kartvelian, is responsible for characteristic features in Outer Languages that are not known either from Vedic and Classical Sanskrit or from Avestan and Old Persian. 10 In Kartvelian studies, an ejective consonant can also be written with a dot below the consonant, e.g. s.. 11 The ejective fricative slot was empty.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

51

2.2. Kartvelian vestiges

Finally I may add that regarding the uvual order in Dard languages (which is not inherited), it is hardly a coincidence that in the whole area of northwestern South Asia only Burushaski has not just one unvoiced unaspirated uvular plosive q, which is otherwise the rule, but also an aspirated qh phoneme. Proto-Kartvelian has at the same slot a plain q and an ejective q’ (Gamkrelidze [1966: 70]). Thus Burushaski q qh ∼ Proto-Kartvelian *q - q’. The Proto-Kartvelian consonant subsystem (see Gamkrelidze [1966: 70])12 bilabial p p’ b

dental t t’ d c˙ c˙ ’ dz s z

alveolar

palato-alveolar

c1 c1 ’ j1 s1 z1

č č’ ˇȷ š ž

velar k k’ g

uvular q q’ x G

Once more the Khowar subsystem bilabial p ph b

dental t th d c˙ c˙ h dz s z

palatal č č ˇȷ š ž

retroflex t. t.h d. c. cj . .ȷ s. z.

velar k kh g

uvular q x G

There is a long history of attempts to trace similarities and old relationships between the Indo-European language family and the language families of the Caucasus.13 These attempts were not very successful, as the review article by Gerd Carling (2021) shows. However, in her assessment she places emphasis on grammatical issues and not on phonological themes. She has no doubt that mutual borrowing in vocabulary and grammar must have taken place (including exchange with Semitic). Yet, “. . . grammar reconstruction, in particular typological impact at proto-language level, is much more difficult to prove.” Proto-Kartvelian was spoken south of the Caucasus and not far north of the Caucasus was the ancient homeland of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. A comparison between the consonant subsystems of plosives-affricates-sibilant between Proto-IndoEuropean and Proto-Kartvelian does not prompt a closer structural relationship. Therefore the great similarity of these subsystems in Proto-Kartvelian and Khowar is all the more striking. Proto-Indo-European did not have affricates, Proto-Kartvelian 12 As mentioned just above, the symbol *c1 denotes a voiceless (denti-)alveolar affricate of the mid series. 13 The majority opinion regarding the home of Proto-Indo-European is now the Pontic-Caspian steppe, roughly between the northern shores of the Black Sea and the northern area around the Caspian Sea. The home of Proto-Kartvelian is almost identical with the current location of the New Kartvelian languages. Kevin Tuite (2008: 145): “Most specialists locate the Proto-Kartvelian speech community either in or somewhat to the south of modern-day Georgia.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

52

Chapter 2. A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia

had nine and Khowar has nine. I may add here that according to Lubotsky (2001: 304), the language of BMAC was characterized by “[e]xtremely frequent palatal stops” 14 as e.g. anću- ‘Soma plant’ (OIA amśú-). ˙ Proto-Indo-European had just one voiceless dental sibilant, Proto-Kartvelian had six voiceless and voiced sibilants and Khowar must have originally also had six sibilants, even though extensive neutralizations with voiced affricates have obscured the original situation. The striking similarities between the Proto-Kartvelian subsystem and subsystems in Dardic, East Iranian, and northwestern Tibetan languages (not to mention Burushaski) is only conceivable under the above-sketched combined perspectives of Parpola and Lubotsky: A first (or early) wave of Indo-Aryans speaking Proto-IndoAryan encountered BMAC and they adapted to that culture.15 There they met with speakers of Kartvelian and moved together with them to northwestern South Asia towards the end of the BMAC culture.16 Since there is no evidence in Vedic and Classical Sanskrit for an inner-ProtoIndo-Aryan split in the post-Proto-Indo-Iranian phase into two dialects that would explain the fundamental differences in the phonological systems between e.g. Khowar and Bhojpuri – the latter with a common /t th d dh/ pattern, with one order of palatal affricates, and with one dental sibilant obviously representing a straight and direct descendant of Sanskrit via an (Ardha)m¯ agadh¯ı type of Prakrit – and since this split is emerging in the Middle Indo-Aryan phase and is provable by the many phonological and grammatical differences between modern Outer and Inner Languages, the postProto-Indo-Iranian phase must have led to the emergence of two profoundly different forms of Proto-Indo-Aryan: one under Kartvelian influence as source language for G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Dardic, etc., the other without Kartvelian influence as source language for Pali, Bhojpuri, etc. 2.2.1 2.2.1.1

Subdivision II: The historical-geographic development The loop from Yamnaya to Sintashta

There is wide agreement that the geographically very large Yamnaya culture in the Pontic-Caspian steppes (3.300-2.600 BC) was the home of the speakers of (late) ProtoIndo European (e.g. Parpola [2015: 296f.]). There is also agreement that the later and geographically smaller Sintashta culture to the east of the southern Urals (20501750 BC) was home of the Indo-Iranians (see Lamberg-Karlovsky [2002: 67] with further references). Indo-Iranian speakers of Sintashta were in contact with speakers of Uralic languages (Parpola [2015: 257]), Holopainen [2019]). The Sintashta culture was a descendant of the Faryanovo(-Balanovo) culture (via Abashevo culture) which 14 Reiner Lipp argues repeatedly in his 2006 publication for the early affricate character for comparable phonemes in PIIr.-inherited words. I find Lipp’s arguments convincing. 15 James Patrick Mallory uses the notion of ‘Kulturkugel’ (1998) to describe a process in which an ethnic group gives up its own material culture and takes up a foreign one. 16 Whereas there is ample evidence for a Kartvelian substrate in the high mountains of northwestern South Asia, evidence for a corroboration of the hypothesis that Kartvelian was perhaps also spoken in the BMAC is yet fairly thin. Regarding this substrate it was pointed out above: Burushaski with its undeniable close relationship with Kartvelian is believed to have arrived in the Karakorum more than 1000 years before the first Proto-Indo-Aryan speakers reached the same area.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

2.2. Kartvelian vestiges

53

was part of the European Corded Ware culture (ca. 3.000 BC -2.350 BC).17 Whereas the Corded Ware culture is thought to have originated from the westward migration of population groups associated with the Yamnaya culture, the Faryanovo(-Balanovo) culture was, on the other hand, the result of an eastward migration of population groups associated with the Corded Ware culture. In other word – and this is the reason for briefly touching these details – the ancestors of the Indo-Iranians neither moved directly from the Pontic-Caspian steppes to Northwest India, nor did they move directly from east of the southern Urals (Sintashta) to Northwest India. Rather, as part of the Yamnaya culture, they first went west towards Europe, only to turn back eastwards – maybe somewhere in eastern Europe – towards the steppe just east of the southern Ural Mountains, to get from there to northwestern India via BMAC. So there was a kind of elliptical migration of the Aryans from east to west and back to east again. Kerkko Nordqvist and Volker Heyd speak in this connection of a “big domino game of the Eurasian Bronze Age” (2020: 83) and that “[a] kind of continentalscale east–west loop closes in, finally, with the emergence of subsequent, ultimately C[orded]W[are]C[ulture] derived, cultures of Abashevo, Sintashta and Andronovo at 2200-1900 BC.” 18 These conclusions are confirmed by Morten Allentort et al. from the perspective of population genomics: “The close affinity we observe between peoples of Corded Ware and Sintashta cultures . . . suggests similar genetic sources of the two, which contrasts with previous hypotheses placing the origin of Sintashta in Asia or the Middle East. . . ” (2015: 169) and “From the beginning of 2000 BC, a new class of master artisans known as the Sintashta culture emerged in the Urals, building chariots, breeding and training horses . . . and producing sophisticated new weapons1. . . ” (2015: 168).

17 In terms of population genetics, Narasimhan et al. speak of “[a] distinctive ancestry profile stretching from Eastern Europe to Kazakhstan in the Bronze Age . . . including individuals associated with the Corded Ware, Srubnaya, Petrovka, and Sintashta archaeological complexes” (2019: 5). 18 There was, not mentioned in this paragraph, of course the very early first eastward movement of the Tocharians. The second eastward movement, which started as CWC and ultimately developed into Sintashta and Andronovo, is supposed to have started in the Carpatians around 2.700 BC.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

54

Chapter 2. A Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia

Figure 2.1: Loop from Yamnaya to Sinthashta and on (Courtesy Kerkko Nordqvist and Volker Heyd [see 2020: 84])

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 3 Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in IndoAryan

3.1

Germanic and Pelasgian?

This whole chain of events makes it very likely that the Indo-Aryans on their long and tangled trek from their ancestral PIE home encountered non-Indo-European languages and cultures from which they borrowed words, concepts, material items etc. Such borrowed words must have come from pre-Indo-European substrates in Eurasia. Gertjan Verhasselt gives a useful overview (2009) of different substrate theories that were developed in the 20th Century. At the suggestion of F. B. J. Kuiper (p. 222), there are three substrata: First, ‘Old European’ with traces in European river names and related, according to Theo Venneman, to Basque. Second: ‘pre-Germanic’: “This substratum . . . can be situated in the western and northern parts of central Europe. Though also attested in Italo-Celtic and Balto-Slavic, traces of this substratum can be found chiefly in the Germanic languages.” According to Guus Kroonen (on whom more below) (2012: 241): “. . . the Germanic substrate is related to the non-IndoEuropean layer of words in Greek (“Pelasgian”) and represents the linguistic residue of the first European farmers . . . ’. Third, ‘Atlantic’ or ‘(Central) European’. Some add as fourth substrate ‘Mediterranean’, associated with th names of Edzard Furnée and Robert Beekes. . Since there exist apparently lemmata in more than one substrate, the relation between them is not clear, but the differences were possibly not very pronounced. This is the position of Maria Gimbutas who used to insist that ‘Old Europe’ was archaeologically and, by implication, also linguistically, homogenous before the arrival of the Indo-Europeans (1999). I refrain from speculating from which of the three or four substrates the following lemmata, which are mainly documented in Outer Languages, come from. Here follows evidence of such borrowings that came into Indo-Aryan prior to its arrival in South Asia. The first five lemmata are regarded by Kroonen (2012) to be substrate words. For each lemma he gives several convincing arguments against their PIE status, e.g. non-PIE syllable structures, not really reconcilable parallels, etc. Most are not repeated here:

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

56

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

1. Proto-Germanic *edis- ∼ *disi- ‘lady’ reflected in Old English idis, Old High German itis, Old Saxon idis ‘woman, lady (of high standing), lady’ (p. 248). On the next page, Kroonen connects these forms with Old Norse dís ‘woman; goddess’ < *d¯ısi-. He further notes that in the First Merseburger Charm, “the idisi act as valkyries that actively interfere with the fate of the combattants during battle. This is in conformity with Old Norse mythology . . . ” Falk and Torp give for Norwegian dis the meaning ‘name for pagan tutelary goddesses’ (1960 i: 954) — Gar.hv¯ al¯ı dis¯ a-dhiy¯ an.1 ‘the word is used by village artisan class for addressing upper class married or unmarried girls of their village or area’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola [2014: 400]).2 Data Ram Purohit3 gives a slightly different explanation (pers. comm.): “Those called “disha” in the ritual disha dhankuri (see Bhatt, Ram Prasad, Heinz Werner Wessler and Claus Peter Zoller [2014: 132ff.] on the ballad with this name4 ) were in fact the unmarried and virgins who were apotheosized into fairies.” The Gar.hv¯ al¯ı word has probably a parallel in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı disi ‘an old and wise woman “who can guide”, a divine type of woman (in stories)’. It is phonetically not possible to derive the Bng. and Gar.hv¯ al¯ı forms < OIA dhis.án.a¯- “name of a goddess’ (6813) and the purported reflexes in Nuristani seem questionable to me. For the difficulties and ambiguities that this OIA lemma poses see EWA and see page 624 sub Bng. dis.n.i ‘witch’ further possible connections. 2. Under the section Proto-Germanic *gait- ‘goat’, Kroonen discusses in addition five more ‘goat’ words which have PIE status with Mallory and Adams, but this status is denied by Kroonen (p. 245ff.). Two of those five terms are found in Outer Languages. In this connection Kroonen speaks of “a culture familiar with goat-keeping” (ibid.) which might be relevant in our context. (a) Proto-Germanic *gait- ‘goat’ has only one cognate outside Germanic in Latin haedus ‘kid, young goat’. — Rab. ghudi ‘goat (female)’ has parallels in S.kcch. as gidho n.m., gidh¯ı n.f. ‘young goat’, in Bhil. g¯ıdly¯ o ‘kid’ (LSI ix,iii: 107) and in Bi. gad¯el¯ a ‘child’ (cf. the Hindu female name vatsal¯ a); in the Addenda and Corrigenda the word is derived (with question mark) < OIA grdhra- ‘vulture’  ‘kid’. Here (4233). This is not plausible and doesn’t go well especially with also Chin. gadi ‘shepherd’ and Kgr. gaddi ‘shepherd’ and name of a pastoralist 1 The second word derives < OIA *duhit¯ ajana- ‘daughter’s people’ (6479). Nautiyal and Jakhmola translate the Gar.hv¯ al¯ı word as ‘a word of respect for a married girl of the area’. In my understanding, the word is traditionally used in the sense of ‘sorority; all consanguine females of ego’, thus dis¯ a-dhiy¯ an. lit. ‘the unmarried and married ‘sisters’ of one’s village area’. 2 apne ks.etra y¯ a g¯ amv ˙ k¯ı aviv¯ ahit evam ˙ viv¯ ahit lar.kiyom ˙ g¯ amv ˙ ke aujiyom ˙ . . . va śilpak¯ arom ˙ dv¯ ar¯ a sambodhan ˙ śabd. For the designation Oj  of the low-caste professional musicians (‘artisans’) in Uttarakhand I suggest derivation < OIA abhiv¯ adya- ‘to be respectfully saluted’. 3 Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University. 4 I withdraw my previous proposal (2014: 133) for deriving dis¯ a < OIA duhit
r- ‘daughter’. Instead of my previous rendering ‘the (fairy) daughter (who is a) hill girl’ I think  more adequate is ‘the fairy - hill girl’. To my knowledge, the term dis¯ a for unmarried girls, which I have heard many times, is never pronounced with a palatal sibilant.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.1. Germanic and Pelasgian?

57

community in Himachal Pradesh?5 Note also Mult. gh¯esr.a¯ n.m. ‘young he-goat’ and g¯es n.f. ‘a kid (female) when she nears bearing young’ (O’Brien 1881: 26f.) which might be cognate with Paš. veri-gyost ‘he-goat’ (first word < OIA v¯ırá‘male of an animal’ [12056]), and H.bgh. and Bund. with retroflex suffix ghit.l¯ a ‘kid’ as in Ks. gy eet., ˇȷèét. ‘goat’. a” ‘goat’ (Konow)6 resp. das."o (b) Substrate *digh - ‘goat’ ? — Bashg. “dizh¯ ‘goats and sheep’ (Strand). Since Mallory and Adams reconstruct PIE *díks‘goat’ (but cf. Greek díza ‘she-goat’), the forms “dizh¯ a”/das."o seem to rather be borrowed ← substratal *díks ‘goat’ than ← substratal *digh -. The lemma is also found in neighboring Ishkashmi de˙c ‘goatskin bag’ (Mallory and Adams) respectively Sanglechi-Ishkashmi d¯ec˙ ¯ak ‘inflated skin (used for swimming)’ (Morgenstierne) and Wkh. Doµk ‘mussuck (carrying bag made by goat or sheep skin)’ (Yoshie). Thus, this could be a case of not uncommon [µ] – [úù, ù] alternation. Notes: (i) The non-PIE character of this ‘lemma’ has been noted also by others: According to Matasović (2012: 290), the word may be a borrowing from “Caucasian.” A reconstruction *dig/digh - ‘goat’ is also suggested by Martirosyan (2013: 120) who argues that the aspiration vacillation “points to a non-Indo-European origin” (ibid.), and according to Arnaud Fournet (2017), *dig- ‘goat’ has an abnormal form because of two voiced unaspirated consonants. His observation, “[i]t is quite clear that PIE did not know the domesticated goat” supports the thesis of non Indo-European origin. (ii) Almuth Degener has called my attention to a short Prasun myth (text 68 in Buddruss und Degener 2014) where the Goddess Disni (Pr. d"¯ısn¯ı, San.. dísa;i) appears in the shape of a female wild goat (markhor) man. ˙ This offers the (admittedly speculative) consideration that her name may not derive < OIA dhis.án.a ¯- (which is anyway uncertain) but may be cognate with Bashg. das."o ‘goats and sheep’ and thus derive < *di˙cani. The advantage – as I see it – of this interpretation is the fact that it would bring the goddess close to markhors and thus to fairies who themselves are closely associated with these animals (see Jettmar [1975] and Bhatt, Wessler, Zoller [2014]).

(c) Substrate *kag-o- ‘goat’ ? (cf. OIA ajá- ‘billy goat’ according to EWA < PIE *ag-ó-) — P¯ ad.. kaj ‘lambs’ (Kaul [2006 i: 70]) or ‘sheep and goat’ (op. cit.: 296) or koj ‘sheep/goat’ (op. cit.: 331) and kaj et ‘shepherd’ (loc. cit. and 327), but in 2006 ii: 10 he gives with dental fricative kaz¯et ‘gad.riy¯ a – shepherd; goatherd; cowherd’ which probably contains the MIA suffix -itta- ‘possessing, belonging to’ but with agentive function as in P¯ ad.. hãsan¯et ‘one who (always) laughs’; 5 Handa (2005: 29), while referring to Hermann Götz, states about the Gaddis that “. . . they are the descendants of the old Gadhaiyas, who were well spread in the parts of northwestern India.” However, Gadhaiya is usually used in the term Gadhaiya coins. These were defaced Sassanian coins used in western India in the first and early second millennium. 6 Unfortunately, Konow could not distinguish between Bashg. ž and z. in Davidson’s phonologically underspecified notes. A graph zh was used by some 19th Century travellers in the area for representin an unvoiced palatal or retroflex affricate. This is demonstrated with the next word.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

58

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

Rom. (variety of Jammu and Kashmir, Kaul [2006 i: 270]) kajv¯ a ‘cultivator’ — Rj.shekh. kh¯ ajru ‘a young sheep or goat’ and Marw. kh¯ ajr¯ u ‘kid’ (both with spontaneous aspiration). Are Paš. kan@r a, kanc@r a, Paš.deg. kanˇȷar."a¯ ‘goat’ and Pš.DN. kanˇȷar.a¯ ‘goat’ (Lehr [2014: 102]) also cognate?

3.2

A Mediterrannean substrate?

The works of Edzard Furnée (1972) and Robert Beekes (1996, 2014) have shown that ancient Indo-European languages do not only contain words of Proto-Indo-European origin. A well-known and much-discussed case is that of Greek 𝜋 𝜀´𝜆𝜀𝜅𝜐𝜍 ‘axe’ and OIA paraśu- ‘axe’ which reflect, according to Beekes (but also according to Mayrhofer), a common word which is not of PIE origin. Beekes says (1996: 216): “Historically it would not be surprising if European loanwords appear in Greek and Sanskrit. ProtoIndo-European was spoken in the Ukraine, that is in Europe, and it bordered, by definition, on non-IE languages in the west. Even at that stage there may, and I would say, must have been loans, especially if we realize that in the west the IndoEuropeans bordered on the Tripolye-Cucuteni culture, which was an advanced, very refined culture.” The following list suggests cognates between Ino-Aryan and, in most cases, words found in Greek. It is not always easy to distinguish between shared borrowings and wanderwörter, but I assume that parts of the suggested cognates below have the potential of belonging to the oldest loan word level in Indo-Aryan. For discovering non-Indo-European words in Greek, Furnée and Beekes employ two basic procedures. First, they ask, are there parallels in other Indo-European languages with the help of which proto-forms can be reconstructed? To answer this question they, of course, examine the root and word shapes. If they don’t fit with the structural templates of PIE root and word shapes, they are candidates for a substrate origin. Second, if words show allomorph alternations which are not typical for ‘normal’ Greek words, also then they are candidates for a substrate origin. Furnée suggests as diagnostic for pre-Greek the following consonantal sound alternations (1972: 84) which can be classified into three types: (a) voice alternations: g ∼ k, b ∼ p, d ∼ t, k ∼ kh, p ∼ ph, t ∼ th; (b) voice and aspiration alternations: g ∼ kh, b ∼ ph, d ∼ dh; (c) some other types: b ∼ m, p/ph ∼ m, b ∼ wau, p/ph ∼ wau, m ∼ wau. Interestingly, Furnée refers p. 84 as a further example for such types of alternation to Munda and the discussion of these found in Pinnow (1959) and Kuiper (1965). As against many other Greek scholars, Beekes (2014) accepts Furnée’s findings and extends them considerably with additional phonological alternations, with types of reduplication and suffixes and with specific word endings. He notes (2014: 1): “Pre-Greek words often show a type of variation which is not found in inherited words” but he also criticizes Furnée (2014: 2) because “. . . he considered almost all variation to be of an expressive character, which is certainly wrong . . . ”. This is an assessment with which I agree with regard to the prehistoric and early historic linguistic situation in northern India. Beekes continues (p. 4): “Voiceless, voiced and aspirated stops may interchange in Pre-Greek words without any apparent conditioning factors.” This is the same situation as in the Outer Languages, and e.g. in Niya Prakrit and even to some extent in Khotan Saka. Also metathesis of r and l and shift of aspiration in Pre-Greek words

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.3. Two onomatopoeic(?) roots *geu-, *keu- and *leup-, leubh

59

(Beekes 2014: 22) have many parallels in Outer Languages. The two complexes of pre-Greek and Munda/Mon-Khmer are associated with similar phenomena, but, of course, they are in no way genetically related. According to Beekes, the variations in the pre-Greek words are due to the fact that the phonological systems of Greek and of that largely unknown pre-Greek language must have been very different. Beekes attempts a reconstruction of this pre-Greek phonological system (2014: 4) which, he claims, did not have voiced consonants but all sub-classes had the same pattern of p py - pw . My second proposition in connection with the difference between Outer and Inner Languages (cf. p. 16) postulates a strong linguistic encounter with speakers of Munda/Mon-Khmer at the arrival of speakers of Outer Languages in northern South Asia. It is clear that also their respective phonological systems differed considerably from each other, thus explaining the quite similar results. However, the scenario of the encounter between the two groups must have been different in the two different places because in South Asia these alternations have affected both PIE-inherited words and non-inherited words. This is, I think, plausible if we assume that the initial spread of Old Indo-Aryan (Sanskrit) through northern South Asia was intimately correlated with people learning Indo-Aryan as a second language. There are indeed hints in this direction which I shortly discuss elsewhere in this book. Now follows the list of possible cognates.

3.3

Two onomatopoeic(?) roots *geu-, *keu- and *leup-, leubh

Beekes (1996: 223ff.) proposes, based on Pokorny’s two roots *geu- (IEW: 393) and *keu- (IEW: 588), a non-PIE root *k/guP- “. . . which indicates various bent forms and a large variety of meanings” (indeed). According to Beekes, words with this shape and from this lexical field are not inherited from PIE but are ancient borrowings. If the Indo-Aryan parallels quoted in this section are genuine – and I cannot see any reason, since they are found in many NIA languages, why this should not be so – they must have been borrowed during their long and tangled trek. Beekes presents examples from various IE languages (p. 224ff.). From Sanskrit he quotes ku
pa- ‘cave’, kumbhá- ‘jar’ (which, however, seems to be a wanderwort [see p. 801 and EWA]), kúmba- ‘kind of head-dress for women; thick end of a bone’ (not in Pa. and Pk.!) with modern reflexes in Wg. kúmtale ‘shoulder’ and N. kum ‘shoulder; the portion of a sloping roof midway between ridgepole and eaves’ (3307) to which is to be added Dari. kumbo ‘shoulder; kind of tree’ (see p. 382). This is apparently a lemma of the northwestern sub-branch and it coincides semantically with Pokorny’s characterization of PIE *keu-b- (IEW: 589) as “[i]n Anwendung auf Biegungen am Körper. . . ” (In application to bends on the body). On Beekes’ last OIA example kakúbh- see p. 564. On p. 227 he observes that the reflexes of the two PIE roots “are found abundantly in Germanic and in Greek. . . it is accepted that these words are loanwords. . . [h]owever, words of this type are also found in Semitic and several other languages (Basque, Caucasian, Mongolian).” Even though he allows an ideophonic factor for the words he discusses in this 5. section, he also says that they behave in a way typical for European words. Of course, there is also no doubt that the words discussed in this subsection

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

60

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

all look and behave typical for northern Indian languages. The question, however, remains that if the above words, which seem to concentrate in the northwest, are not reflexes of genuine PIE words, if they cannot simply be cleared into the sound symbol box (why should kuk- symbolize ‘nod off’ ?) and if they are not of Nostratic origin (Bomhard only quotes PIE *gem- ‘to grasp, squeeze, press together [2015: 570]) then one could only speculate that they entered parts of IE languages at a very early stage, perhaps in late Proto-Indo-European. But Beekes maintains on the following pages that the loanwords he discusses entered IE languages in Europe in the subsequent millennia. He suggests four semantic sub-fields, but I have sorted the following words only according to their shapes. With regard to meaning they anyway could hardly be divided into further subgroups. Thus semantically they belong more or less to his fourth category ‘hump, curved, hunched’, but also ‘hole, basket’. Note, however, that the following words may partly also display South Asia-specific extensions (see many examples in the CDIAL and p. 286ff.), and they may also have been influenced by similar IA forms of unknown origin. Note also that some of the below-quoted words are similar with ‘swelling’ words quoted by Turner sub OIA gúlma- ‘clump of trees’ (4217). Even though some contamination could have taken place, the big semantic and morphological field presented below can impossibly be derived < ‘clump of trees’; the same holds also true for the younger Sanskrit meaning ‘chronic enlargement of the spleen or any glandular enlargement in the abdomen’. On the other hand, the word lists in this book probably contain more words that may belong to this category of most ancient loans, but this is frequently difficult to determine.

gup-, gub(h)- (cf. PIE *gup¯ a- ‘burrow’ [IEW: 395] and Beekes [1996: 223])

1. Bng. gOb ar(O)1 , gOmb ar(O) n.m. ‘sprout, shoot; swelling, tumour; root’ (with arO suffix);7 P. gambh¯ır ‘an ulcer; a great boil on the back or neck’; Mult. g¯amb ‘pot belly’; P. g ab ‘a potbelly’ and Mult. “g¯amb, gubb” ‘ditto’ (O’Brien 1881: 39) — Psht. Gumba ‘gland, bubo, tumour’.8 2. Bng. gOmbO, gumbO n.m. ‘molar tooth’. I had suggested for this word (1988: 189) derivation < PIE gˆómbhos ‘tooth, set/row of teeth’, but the actual derivation is not quite clear. Also unclear are Bng. gumbi n.f. ‘gendarme, spine’ and gum(b)ialO ‘jagged, serrated (as a ridge)’ (with -alO suffix) which may be

Kal. gumph
 ‘split, cloven’ as in zem
n gumph
 s
au ‘the earth compared with is split (as from an earthquake)’. 3. Bng. gup ‘filled (up), protruding (e.g., belly, cheek)’, guplO, gumplO n.m.

(with ‘cutaneous tumour, tumour on trees; small dumpling (made from flour)’ 7 This is different from gOb arO2 ‘pregnant’ which may derive < OIA garbhadhar¯a- ‘pregnant’, but cf. also 4055 where there are modern reflexes with various extensions, and 9466 with a modern semantic parallel in Si. which is connected with Garh.r. bharyan. ‘paśu k¯ a garbh dh¯ aran. karn¯ a– to impregnate an animal’ which, however, is < OIA bh¯ arayati ‘causes to bear’ (9463). 8 Regarding doubtful etymological suggestions for the Psht. word see Elfenbein et al., and see Morgenstierne 1927b who suggests further IE parallels.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.3. Two onomatopoeic(?) roots *geu-, *keu- and *leup-, leubh

61

-l(O) suffix), gupliaO ‘swollen; s.o. afflicted by tumours’ (like preceding plus -iaO

past participle), geplO n.m. ‘tumefaction’, gupsO ‘filled (up)’ (with -sO suffix). There is apparently a base *gup ‘swell; protrude’ which compare with just above-quoted PIE *gup a ‘burrow’, Norwegian k¯ uven ‘rotund, vaulted’. 4. Here probably also M.w¯ ar. ghubd.a ‘hump-backed’ and ghubd.ya ‘hump-backed person’; Jat.. gobh¯ u ‘fat-bellied’; P.pot.. gub, gubbh (Jat.. ä ab, äub) ‘a potbelly’ (if not belonging to 1.). 5. With inverted semantics here probably Bro. gop n. ‘hollow’9

gug- (cf. PIE *gug¯ a- ‘ball’ [IEW: 394] and Beekes [1996: 227, fn. 6]) 1. Bng. gugO adj., n.m. ‘bent, stooping; (bent) back’ and gugua n.m. ‘a (bent) back’, the latter plus di kOrnO/ninO (lit. ‘[back] in to-make/to-depart’) ‘to carry

a baby on one’s back’; Jaun. ghughuv ado n EnO, gugv ado n EnO ‘ditto’ (Z.) (with

on which a baby

spontaneous aspiration?); Garh. ghuguti ‘back is carried’; Ku. ghuki ‘p¯ıt.h – back, hinder part’; also P. gugrail, gogar. etc. ‘a fat-bellied person, (spoken in derision)’ and perhaps gugh¯ı ‘a long-necked earthen vessel’ (is carried on the head), gog¯ı ‘a small thick cake’ and g¯ ogg¯ a ‘child’s word for bread’; Khaś. ghokk@r. ‘a man with a big head but short size’; Mult. g¯ og¯ a ‘scone’ and g¯ ogar. ‘pot-belly’; probably also Kal. gúngur ˙ ‘hollow (of trees)’ (but see p. 800) and Jat.. ghogh ‘hole made by scraping out earth for plastering’; Garh. ghongy¯ ˙ as¯ u ‘a long stick of a tree or a cane with one end hooked’ (-¯ asu may reflect OIA vetasá- ‘ratan, reed’).

kub(b)- (cf. PIE *keu-b- [IEW: 589] and keu-bh- [IEW 590] and Beekes [1996: 224f.]) 1. OIA *kubba- ‘hump’ (3301) (Pk.) has many modern reflexes and is certainly cognate with OIA kubhrá- ‘humpbacked bull’ which is further cognate with OIA kubja- ‘humpbacked’, and Mayrhofer (EWA) connects kubhrá- further with PIE *kubh -ró-. See also Lipp (2009 i: 181f.) on details of etymology. From Bng. I can add kubO adj.;n.m. ‘crooked, bent; hunchbacked; a heap, hill, top’, k ub, ku b ‘hunch, hump’ and with dimin. suffix kupsO ‘s.th. rounded or radiused’. The word has also been borrowed into Munda Korwa ku:ba:, ku:bu: ‘hump’ and Bodo-Gadaba kubóa giPãaN ‘hunchback’.

kuk- (cf. PIE *keu-k-- [IEW: 589] and Beekes [1996: 222, fn. 4]) 1. With velar extensions and frequently various suffixes: Bng. kokr.i d.˜ıngi ˙ n.f. ‘wooden stick formerly worn by men to indicate high social rank’ lit. ‘crooked 9 D. D. Sharma’s use of “n.” suggests meaning ‘a cave’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

62

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

stick’ with second word < OIA *d.inka˙ ‘stick’ (5547)10 ;11 Kal. kukúk hik ‘to play hide and seek’ and perhaps kukúik ‘to nod sleepily’ which is also found in Dm. as k¯ oky - ‘to lay down, go to sleep’; K. k˘ o.ku ‘contraction or drawing together all one’s limbs, and drawing one’s garments tight round one (e.g. under the influence of cold or of great fear)’ (c.f. e.g. German hocken); N. kokro and Ku. kokr.o ‘a basket for carrying a baby, carried on the back and supported by a thong round the forehead; cradle’; Ku. kukar., kvakar. ‘jhuk¯ a hu¯ a, kubr.a¯ – hunched, hunchbacked’, kukr.¯ın. ‘kubr.a¯ hon¯ a – be hunchbacked’; Garh. kukr.a¯m, ˙ kokr.a¯m, ˙ kvakr.a¯m ˙ ‘kamar jhuk¯ akar, bait.hne k¯ a ek d.hang ˙ – (squatting) huddled’ and kokd.u, kvakd.u ‘aumdh¯ ˙ a, jhuk¯ a hu¯ a – crooked, crouched’ (cf. e.g. Middle High German hocker, hogger, hoger ‘Buckel, Höcker; hunch, hump’ [IEW: 589]); Psht. kokorai . ‘a round cake of bread’; P. kok¯ı ‘the circular space between the thumbs and two fore-fingers’ as in kok¯ı vicc a¯un.a¯ ‘to be embraced in the Kok¯ı’, kokl¯ a ‘name of an ornament worn in the ear’ (it has typically a small hemispheric shape), kuk, kuk¯ an. ‘a date which has shriveled up while still on the tree’, Pr. rasik k(u)k"¯ı ‘raisin’ with first word meaning ‘grape’. Note: As pointed out above, *keu- and *geu- are semantically very similar. Under the latter lemma, Pokorny lists dental extensions (p. 393f.). A reflex may be seen in Pal. (Deg¯ anó) gat
 ‘arse’ (cf. Middle Low German kunte ‘female pudenda; buttocks’).

PIE *leup-, leubh-, cf. Beekes (1996: 221) PIE *(h3 )leubh- ‘leaf’ (p. 63) and *lep- ‘peel’ (p. 853) are probably cognates. Beekes notes (1996: 220–2.): “While 𝑜´𝜆 𝑜´𝜋𝜏𝜔 is connected with 𝜆´ 𝜖 𝜋𝜔 (‘to peel, to strip off the rind or husks . . . ’), 𝑜´𝜆𝑜 𝜐´𝜑𝜔 is connected with the root Pok. 690 *leup-, leubh. . . [t]he forms *leup- and *leubh- are traditionally seen as different extensions of a root *leu-, but the variation may be due to the fact that the root is of non-IE origin . . . [i]f one accepts, however, that most languages have a large number of loanwords, the conclusion is that the words are cognate but non-IE . . . [t]o reduce the conclusion to its kernel: 𝑜´𝜆 𝑜´𝜋𝜏𝜔 and 𝑜´𝜆𝑜 𝜐´𝜙𝜏𝜔 are cognate and therefore non-IE, and the latter word has cognates in Balto-Slavic, and probably in Germanic and Latin as well.” To these we add now additional data from Indo-Aryan: 1. Bng. labnO v.i. ‘to pull, drag downwards’, làbi n.f. ‘earlobe; earring’, labE n.m.;n.f. ‘thick loins, flanks’, lipr.u n.m. ‘penis, abusive term for female genital’, leb¯er n.m. ‘lip; lips of the vulva; prepuce’, lebru n.m. ‘penis’; Kt.g. lebro 10 The sticks were cut from the wood of the lev¯ eś tree (botanical identity unclear) and hardened in a fire which made them brown. Village and district elders (si anO) and warriors (kh¯ und) were allowed to carry them. However, it remains unclear why the stick is called ‘crooked stick’. 11 It is unclear whether here also Sad. kokt¯ a ‘stick, length of forearm, to throw to knock down fruit, etc.’ (which has also been borrowed into Kh. kotka ‘stick, small stick’). Note also that also in Nuristan warriors used to carry small sticks (Klimburg 1999: 108).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.3. Two onomatopoeic(?) roots *geu-, *keu- and *leup-, leubh

63

‘red (used about the lips)’ and l
Ot ‘lobe of the ear’ (< older *lObt); Jaun. labi



‘earring in the shape of a drop’; Deog. labi ‘eardrops that hang down below the ears’; Garh. l¯ ab¯ı ‘golden ear ornament’; the meaning ‘hang saggy’ also in the Deog. expression tErE lEbrE oth ‘your saggy/skew lips’; Kgr. l @bru and labbar.

— Jat. and M. lab ‘lip’; P. lab ‘the

lip; saliva, ‘lip’, Kh¯ aśi. limber/limer ‘lips’ . spittle’ — K. lab ‘lip’; Kal. .lápik ‘to hang’ (cf. Bng. labnO); Paš. lab ‘lip’; Wot.. and Sv. lepur ‘lip’ (see ATLAS entry 81 and note the striking similarity with Old Saxonian lepur ‘lip’ [IEW: 656]) — — note also Jen. “labbe” ‘mouth’ and halt die Lab (German ‘halt den Mund’ – ‘shut up’) (Lützenhardter Wörterbuch); Lith. lu
pa and Latv. l˜ upa both ‘lip’ < NW-PIE *leb- ‘lip’ ? But cf. also Pers. lab ‘lip’ and note Mallory and Adams (1997: 255) who write sub PIE ?*(s)leb‘hang down’, where they quote Greek 𝜆o𝛽ó𝜁 ‘lobe, earlobe’, “[a] problematic set of possible cognates. Some doubt whether Greek belongs here while others would add the series of words for ‘lip’, e.g. Latin labia. . . ” Cf. also Toch.B lymine and Toch.A lymem . both ‘lips’ which Adams derives < PIE *lemb- ‘hang down’ and where he refers to OIA lámbate ‘hangs down, loiters’, but the modern reflexes sub 10954 show almost no semantic concord with the above words; this is even less so in case of the two modern reflexes (M., Ko.) of OIA rámbate ‘hangs down’ (10631). Notes: (a) Is Sh.dras. l2p ‘loaf of bread’ (Rajapurohit [2012: 95]) cognate? (b) There are also Munda Sant. l@pói ‘(erect) penis’ and Korku lelebe ‘lips’ which are very likely borrowings from IA because there are no parallels in Mon-Khmer. (c) Note also Proto-Slavic *lupiti ‘to peel’, Lith. laupýti ‘break’, lùpti ‘peel, Latv. laupît ‘peel’, etc. which Matasović (2013: 96) regards as a possible substrate lemma. (d) Cf. also Toch.B lymine ’lip’ and Proto-Germanic *lep- ‘lip’ which (besides many other data, of course), indicate according to Hamp (1998), original close contact. (e) Perhaps also cognate Rom.Q. l˘ıpr.¯ı ‘skin’ and C¯ uhr.a ¯ sweeper caste l¯ıpr.a ¯ ‘skin’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 275]). Regarding semantics cf. Greek 𝜆𝜖 𝜋𝜄𝜍, 𝜆𝑜𝜋𝜄𝜍 ‘scale, flake, shell, husk’.

2. Perhaps here also Garh. l¯ abu ‘leaf’, l¯ ab¯ a ‘leaves’, l¯ ab ‘leaf, plate made of big leaves’, l¯ ab¯ı ‘golden ornament of ear’, laplapi, laplapo ‘(as a long and thin twig) full of leaves’ and perhaps lap¯ ar.u ‘skin of a fruit’; Jaun. labu, l¯ ab¯ u, labui, labo ‘leaf’ (usually it only means ‘a big leaf’);12 Deog. labu ‘big sized leaves’ — Jad.. lepti ‘leaf’; Bun. lap ‘leaf’; Pat.t.. l@b ‘leaf’ — Chin. lap ‘leaf’; N. lapes ‘a plate made of s¯ al leaves stitched together’. Rather unclear are Klm. läbän Hy ‘front part of qameez’, Gau. l2bl2bi ‘uvula’ (which may belong to 1. just above). But more likely is derivation < PIE *(h3 )leubh- ‘leaf’, cf. e.g. Lith. lãpas ‘Blatt; leaf’ and Latv. lapa ‘leaf’ 12 See Catak (1973: 179) quoting a line from a song probably from Rawa˜ı east of Bangan: eśo chino m¯ anus. jeśo d.¯ al¯ı r¯ a l¯ ap¯ u ‘man gets destroyed like the leaf of a tree’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

64

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

which Lanszweert (1984: 76 – see there further possible parallels) connects with PIE *leup- ‘abschälen; to bark’ where he points out that Pokorny’s allocation of these words sub *l¯ep- is wrong. Connection with Tib. ló-ma, *lób-ma ‘leaf’ is unlikely, but there is PTB *s-lap ‘leaf’ – which is strikingly similar to PMK *slaP ‘leaf’ – with many similar modern reflexes, cf. especially Gar. l@Pp ‘leaf’. 3. There are some words in the area that might belong to a lemma perhaps related to onomatopoeic PIE *lab-, lap(h)- ‘lick’ : Bng. lOpt er n.m. ‘one who licks’ (with -t er suffix); Deog. lOplOpaOnO ‘to lick’ — Kann. leb-mig ‘to lick, to take

at ‘poking one’s tongue’, laplap¯ani ‘poking in with the tongue’ — Ku. laplap¯ . one’s tongue like a snake’; perhaps Jaun. laboi and l¯ ava ‘saliva’ (Z.) — Sh. lăp ‘mouthful (of solid food); Bissen Mundvoll’ has a parallel in Ind. l apℎ ‘a piece of bread which is eaten with pulse, vegetables, etc.’ — K. le˘ v ‘licking’ — Mult. and P. labkan and Jat.. labkan. all ‘to lick’; Brj.-Aw. laplap ‘to flicker back and forth (as a snake’s tongue)’; Pk. libbhai ‘is licked’ (Sogani 2006: 157) — Orm. lip- ‘suck’ and lup-y¯ek ‘to be suckled’; cf. also e.g. Arm. la
p ‘lick’; Gr. l
aptein ‘lick, slurp’; Lat. lambere ‘to lick’, and for more examples see Mann (1963: 65). Mayrhofer (in Cowgill und Mayrhofer 1986: 98) considers this lemma to be an onomatopoeion (“Lautnachahmung”) linked to a Post-Indo-European period. Notes: (a) Here also Man.d.. l¯ ap ‘cammac – spoon’ (Jagatpal Sharma 2006: 328) which is an independent parallel formation to German Löffel ‘spoon’ < PIE *lap- ‘lick, slurp’. (b) There seem to be no Munda parallels, but there are some – most likely accidental – parallels in Mon-Khmer: PMK *li@p ‘to lick’, Bahnaric Sre liap ‘lick’, Khasi liap-liap ‘licking lightly, lapping, flickering’.

4. Note also the following semantically related words: Bng. lOplOpanO ‘to whisper’,

-t er suffix), lObnO ‘to move the tongue’, lObt er n.m. ‘a talkative person’ (with

lOblOb kOrnO v.i.(n.m.) ‘to babble, talk much, howl, flicker tongue (as snake)’,

piercing (as voice)’ (with -r ar suffix); Ktg./Kc. l@pOcc@r ‘talkative lObr ar ‘shrill, .



person, babbler’ (second component probably < OIA u
ccarati ‘speaks’ [1641]); Rp. l@pin ‘that what was said’ (< older *l@ppin ); Ku. lapk¯ a ‘one who deals in slander’ and lapr¯ a ‘ditto’ (also ‘glutton’ but that belongs to OIA *lappa-1 ‘sudden movement’ [10939]) — Pr. lupkoa ‘kafirischer Rezitationspriester; kafir recitation priest’, lup¯ uv- and lupku- ‘to recite, sing (kafir)’ — Rj.jaip. laplap ka- ‘to gabble’ and lab¯ al¯ı ‘talkative, garrulous’; P. labr.a¯ ‘a talkative person’; M. lablab ‘chattering’ — K. lalavun ‘to talk foolishly, to babble’ (perhaps contaminated by OIA *lalla- ‘inarticulate noise’ [10972]); Balt. lap-lap bya-en duk ‘keep up a meaningless conversation’, Pur. labalobe, lablop ‘(incoherent) sleep talking’ (Zemp [2018: 925]) — Psht. lawd@l ‘to speak’ (if not connected with Ar. lafz ‘word’). As seen just above, there is a certain semantic closeness to  some modern reflexes of OIA *lappa-1 ‘sudden movement’ (10939),13 but not 13 Emeneau regards some of the words quoted here as of Dravidian origin (1969: 297).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.4. Pre-Greek and Indo-Aryan: more potential parallels

65

more than that, but also connection with OIA * alapyati ‘speaks’ (1361) where Turner mentions lapyati, however, without listing this verb, and with * al apya‘to be spoken’ (1378);14 note also OIA lapana- ‘mouth; speaking, talking’. More is found sub Mayrhofer RAP ‘to speak confidentally’ which he characterises as belonging “[w]ohl zu einer Schallwurzel” 15 and sub PIE *lep- ‘onomatopoeia’ (IEW). Cf. also Proto-Celtic *lab(a)ro- ‘eloquent, talkative’, Modern Breton lavar ‘language, speech’ for which Matasović considers onomatopoeic origin. Note also Pers. lab¯ alab ‘lip to lip; brimful’. German labern is connected by Kluge with Lefze and Latin labium (see above the ‘lip’ words). The lemma is also found in FU (SILUS: 152): Ostyak l˘ op ‘say, speak’, .lăp@n˙ ‘scandal monger, talebearer’. Note: Èdel"man (1980: 303) about East Iranian languages who observes that “[i]n a number of words l has been noted that can be regarded as the reflex of IE *l which did not undergo rhotacism in a small lexical group: Sh[ughni] l u v- : u uv- : l¯ uvd, S[arikoli] lev- : levd, l vd, R[ushani] B[artangi] luv- : luvd, X[ufi] l¯ Y[azghulami] laf - : laft ‘to talk; to sing; to name’, EVSh 42, cf. Y l@v ‘voice’, NPrs l¯ af ‘chatter’; Sh l¯ afč ‘lip (of an animal)’, S lofč ‘inner part of a lip’. . . ”

3.4

Pre-Greek and Indo-Aryan: more potential parallels

1. KEV: 190 fn. 34 and PREG: 73 ´𝜄𝜈𝛿𝑜𝜐𝜌𝑜𝜍 ‘mole’ seems to corresponds with OIA undura-, ind¯ ura-, undaru-, unduru- n.m. ‘rat’. In EWA, Mayrhofer wonders whether this is a borrowed word (also assumed by Furnée for the Greek word), but in KEWA he considers connection with the Greek word even though he favors Austro-Asiatic origin and reconstructs *kundur n.f. Indeed, this reconstruction is supported by Munda So. guntúr- ‘rat’, Bon. kuntur ‘kind of rat’, Bodo-Gadaba kuntai ‘rat’, Juray Pun-tur ‘large rat’ and perhaps further cognate with Bahnaric Sedang k@nOt ‘rat’, Surin Khmer kn2r ‘a rat, mouse’, Khmer kAndol ‘rat’. Note also perhaps related dialectal Paš. kaur¯a, kav¯ ar"u ¯ ‘rat’ (Morgenstierne 1973a, vol. 3: 319). Thus a pre-Greek connection remains unclear. 2. KEV: 166 note 2: Furnée discusses 𝜖ˇ𝜋𝑜𝜓, 𝑜𝜋𝑜𝜍 ‘hoopoe’ whether it is, because of various allomorphs, pre-Greek, but he rejects this because of its being an onomatopoeic word. See p. 792 for the rich evidence of this PIE lemma in northwestern South Asia. ´ 𝜈𝛿𝛼𝜆𝑜𝜄 ‘a hollow’. Furnée refers with question mark to 3. KEV: 290 note 3 𝜅 𝛼 OIA kandará- ‘cave, glen’ (2724) (for Mayrhofer [EWA] origin is unclear but in KEWA he writes “[d]ie wahrscheinlichsten Verbindungen sind noch jene mit gr. ´ 𝜈𝛿𝛼𝜆𝑜𝜄”),16 Pa. kandara- ‘cave, grotto, glen’, Pk. kamdara𝜅𝛼 ˙ ‘hole, cave’, Bi. 14 But the prefix-less verb has indeed a modern reflex in Jat.. adh l¯ api, adh l¯ ap¯ a ‘a contract by which a person becomes proprietor of half a well or estate’ with first word < OIA árdha- ‘half’. 15 Probably onomatopoeia. ´ 𝛿 𝛼𝜆𝑜 𝜄. 16 The most likely connections are those with Greek 𝜅 𝛼𝜈

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

66

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

kãdr¯ı ‘well dug in a river bank into which river water infiltrates’, Si. ka˘ ndura ‘mountain stream or gorge’. I add here: Garh. kandr¯a ‘a cave’; Chin. kandr¯a ‘cave’ (Kaul 2006 ii: 35) — Kal. kandrák2 ‘fissure, cleft’; Kho. “kándrak.” ‘ravine’ (O’Brien); P. khundhar ‘hollow, a shallow ravine, a cave’ — B.roh. ku 
dah ‘cave’
and ku da
a
okkol ‘potholes’ (with second word classifier?) – Sant. kondha ‘a closet, corner (of a room), cave, hollow’17 — Psht. kand ‘ravine, a chasm, a cleft, a gorge, a channel made by a mountain torrent’ and kanda"h ‘cavity, a chasm, a cleft, a channel made by a torrent, an abyss, a ravine; large pit or ditch in which a number of dead bodies are buried after a battle’, cf. also Psht. gor-handa"h ‘a ravine, a chasm, a pit, a grave’ (which is a synonym compound with first word meaning ‘a grave, a tomb, a sepulchre’). Note: 𝛽´ 𝛼 𝜌𝛼𝜃 𝜌𝜈, 𝛽 𝜀´𝜌𝜀𝜃 𝜌𝜈, 𝛽 𝜀´𝜃 𝜌𝜈 ‘cleft, abyss’ (PREG: 48) compares perhaps with Jat.. bhandria  ‘raviny ground’.

4. KEV: 129: 𝜅𝛼𝜌𝜅´𝜄𝜈𝜍 ‘crustacean, crab’ regarding the difficulties in equation with OIA karkat.a- ‘crab’ see EWA. Furnée doubts that these can be inherited words because the Indian word is documented only since Classical Sanskrit. But this is no valid argument, as I repeatedly stress. According to Mayrhofer, the OIA word is probably a foreign word and he does not believe in PIE inherited cognates. Besides the more or less regular reflexes listed sub 2816 there are also more irregular ones like M. kirav¯em . ‘crab’ (see also Munda Juang kaóar ‘crab’ and below M. kural¯em . [9.]) and kh˜ekad. (again similar with Munda Kharia khaNka"óa ‘crab’), H. kekr.a¯, gegt.a¯ ‘crab’ etc. The here-quoted Munda words have a further parallel in Khmer kakkaPdaP ‘crab’. Furnée rightly considers for the Greek words a pre-Indo-European borrowing. Similar words – however meaning ‘scorpion’ and not ‘crab’ – are found in reflexes listed sub PKT *bi
s k akOdO ‘scorpion’

(with first word meaning ‘poison’ [OIA vis.á-]), also B. k¯ ankad ˙ . a¯ ‘scorpion’. The PKT form has an exact parallel in Munda Bodo-Gadaba bis kakóa ‘scorpion’. Clear MK ‘scorpion’ parallels apparently do not exist, thus we are perhaps dealing with an old and widespread wanderwort to which also belongs Or. “kan.kard.a¯bichh¯ a” ‘scorpion’ (Prajaraj) (a synonym compound with “bichh¯a” < OIA vŕścika- ‘scorpion’) and which may even allow inclusion of Martirosyan’s  Armenian-Greek reconstruction *karid- ‘crayfish’ (2013: 114). 5. KEV 𝜅 𝑎´𝜌 𝜒𝛼𝜌𝑜𝜄. ‘sharp, rough’(?) has been compared with OIA karkara- ‘hard, firm’ but as usual, Mayrhofer is skeptical because of the late documentation of the OIA word. The equation is anyway not accepted by Furnée and Beekes (2014). Note, however, that according to Turner (2819) this OIA word has allomorphs like kakkhat.a- and khára-, and since Furnée stresses the meaning of ‘stone’ I should add that Turner lists a second lemma karkara- ‘stone’ (2820) which, however, he thinks is probably the same as 2819 (here also Psht. klak ‘hard, rigid, firm, stiff’ ?). Here are again Munda parallels: Kor. kaóakko ‘strong; hard’ and Kor. khara ‘tough, hard; salty, brackish’. 17 Bodding refers with question mark also to Sant. kandha ‘room, chamber, apartment’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.4. Pre-Greek and Indo-Aryan: more potential parallels

67

Note: Regarding KEV: 131 𝜅 𝑜´𝜌𝜅𝑜𝜌𝑜𝜍 ‘plant name, Anagallis caerulea’ there are several similar-looking OIA plant names (see e.g. EWA karkat.a-2 ‘name of different plants’) but frequently their identity is unclear.

6. PREG: 52 𝜅𝛼𝜎𝜎´𝜄𝜏𝜖 𝜌𝑜𝜍 ‘tin’ is said to be pre-Greek, but the word was brought to India and is found as OIA lex. kast¯ıra- ‘tin’; note that Turner suggests in addition an allomorph *kastilla- ‘tin’ (2984). Note also that besides the reflexes quoted sub 2984, the lemma has also a reflex in Paš. k¯ otalak"a¯ ‘tin’. ´ 𝜌𝛼 ‘lyre’ is regarded by Beekes as pre-Greek even though it 7. PREG: 135 𝜅𝜄𝜃 𝛼 looks similar to 𝜅𝜄𝜈 𝜐´ 𝜌𝛼 ‘harp’ which has been compared with classical OIA kimnar¯ ˙ a-, kimnarik¯ ˙ a- ‘a kind of musical instrument’ and with kimdar¯ ˙ a- ‘lute of the Can.d.a¯l¯ a’ which, in turn, is believed to be cognate with OIA kimnara˙ ‘a centaur’. However, Parpola has convincingly shown (2015: 171f.) that the word, which has also been borrowed into Egyptian, Syriac, Arabic, Hebrew and Hittite, is a borrowing from the Indus Culture and thus, in his opinion, from Proto-Dravidian. See CDIAL 3145 for reflexes to which I add Bng. kind@r  n.f. ‘name of a string instrument played by Yogis’ (the string instruments I could see in the Himalayas sometimes had a scroll in form of a horse-head). For more details on the Indian sides see KEWA and EWA where Mayrhofer speaks of a “Kulturwort” (culture word). Note: OIA kimpala-, kimphala- ‘cymbal’ is a later borrowing from Greek 𝜅 𝜐´𝜇𝛽𝛼𝜆𝑜𝜈 ‘cymbal’ and has no modern reflexes.

8. KEV: 121 𝜅 𝜐´𝜋𝜂 ‘cave, hole’ regarding the difficulties in equation with OIA ku
pa‘cave’ see EWA. 9. KEV: 120 𝜅 𝜐´𝜆𝜆𝛼𝜌𝑜𝜍 etc. ‘a type of crab’: Classical Sanskrit kul¯ıra- ‘a crab; the sign of the zodiac Cancer’, kul¯ıraka- ‘a small crab’; see EWA with reference to Oberlies for consideration of relationship with OIA kuly a
- ‘a small river, canal’ which is certainly not convincing. The word is quite well-documented in MIA and NIA and in addition found with allomorphs in M. kural¯em . ‘a crab or crawfish’, Old M. k¯ır¯ıc¯ıla and Or. kurachilla both ‘a crab’, and in Munda Ju. kaíaã ‘crab’. ¯ 𝜍 ‘pit or cavern at Sparta into 10. KEV: 180, 349, PREG: 48f. 𝜅𝛼𝜄´ 𝛼 𝛿¯ 𝛼 𝜍, 𝜅𝛼𝜄´ 𝛼𝜏𝛼 which people sentenced to death (or their bodies) were thrown’. Beekes mentions also Furnée (PREG: 49) who had pointed out that “a crevice could be called 𝜅 𝜂ˆ𝜏𝑜𝜍.” The word is usually compared with OIA (RV vi,54,7) kévat.a- ‘a cave, hollow’ which itself is compared with OIA avatá- ‘well, cistern’ and avat.á- ‘hole in the ground’ (774). Furnée thinks that the Greek and the OIA words can be a common borrowing. Cf. Pal. keén. ‘cave’ (Liljegren 2008: 64) and Kal. k˜e. ‘cave; tunnel; groove’ with unclear origin of nasal. 11. KEV: 120 𝜅𝜏 𝜐´𝜋𝑜𝜍 is onomatopoeic with meaning ‘loud noise, din’ and is compared with 𝛾𝛿𝑜𝜐𝜋 𝜀´𝜔 and 𝛿𝑜 𝜐˜𝜋𝑜𝜍 ‘dull noise, din’; mentioned are further

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

68

12.

13. 14.

15.

16.

17. 18.

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

possible connections with Latv. dupêtiês ‘to sound dull’, Serb. du

piti ‘to sound (with a din)’. Such initial consonant clusters are very rare in IA and the following comparisons lack them but show other variations: New. k ant a dabdab ‘a hour-glass drum’, N. d.ampho, Ku. d.ãphr.i, Dari. d.ampha, B. d.amphu all ‘a (small) drum’, MKH (2: 45) d.haphr.u ¯ ‘kettledrum’, M.kud.. d@p ‘drum’, Kho. d.àf

‘frame drum’ and Kt. dáp, Wg. dap ‘frame-drum’ and perhaps v¯ aˇȷ-d¯ ap ‘harp music’, Pr. dap ‘big drum’, Pers. daf etc. KEV: 150 𝜋 𝜀´𝜆𝜀𝜅𝜐𝜍 ‘hatchet, axe, battleaxe’ is a complex word with a complex history. Furnée assumes a pre-Indo-European origin in the Middle East. See also p. 72 regarding Iranian *paraTu- (borrowed into Finno-Permic purt ‘knife’) parallel with OIA paraśu- p. 824 regarding West Pah¯ ar.¯ı belo ‘adze’ and further forms. KEV: 161f. and fn. 76 and PREG: 52 𝜋 𝜖´𝜆𝜆𝛼 ‘stone’: both authors claim preGreek origin whereas Mayrhofer (EWA) claims for the Greek lemma and for OIA p as
- and p¯as.a¯n.á- both ‘stone’ PIE origin (see p. 653).

and PREG: 160 onomatopoeic 𝜋 𝑜´𝜋𝑜𝜄, 𝜋 𝑜´𝜋𝛼 𝜒, 𝛽𝛼𝛽𝛼𝜄´ KEV: 155 𝛼 𝜒 ‘interjection of pain or surprise, disagreement, etc.’ are claimed to be pre-Greek, but there are close parallels in MIA and in many NIA languages – e.g. M. bobh¯ain.e ‘to shout’, P. bhubbh ‘crying violently, wailing; roaring (as a lion); sudden outcry’ (see p. 826) – however, I suggest for the IA forms derivation < PIE *weh𝑎 b‘cry, scream’. PREG: 159 𝛽 𝑜´𝜇𝛽𝑜𝜍 ‘noise with a low tone’ has been characterized by Beekes as pre-Greek but ultimately as onomatopoeic. The latter point is certainly true and the word resembles strikingly M. bh¯ omb¯ar¯a ‘a brass musical instrument; sounding the bass’. I have added this word to a large group of similar onomatopoeic words whose PIE background nevertheless appears likely to me (see p. 827). KEV: 132 𝜇𝛼𝜆´ 𝛼 𝜒𝑜𝜈 ‘a female ornament made of gold’ is a wanderwort and very wide spread from northwestern South Asia, as in Ind. m2lG2l
2r2y ‘a pearl necklace; a diamond (it is said that it emits light by itself at night)’ or Psht. marGalara ‘a pearl’, to Central Asia and Europe (see Zoller 2010). ´ ¯ 𝜉 ‘grape’ is possibly a pre-Indo-European wanderwort. KEV: 126 says that 𝜌 𝛼 It has, I suggest, a parallel in northwestern South Asia as *-ru˙c ‘berry’. This is discussed in a longer paragraph, therefore see p. 837. PREG: 111 𝜆´ 𝛼 𝜌𝜈𝛼 𝜒 ‘chest, box, coffer, coffin’ has been, on the suggestion of Szemereny, compared by Morgenstierne with dialectal Paš. l¯ ang, ˙ l¯ ung ˙ ‘chest, box’ (a dialect not with pr > l) and interpreted as an early Greek borrowing (Morgenstierne 1973a, vol. 3: 321). Note: Here perhaps also PREG: 99 kuphella ‘hollows of the ears’ which compare with the following NIA words: Bng. kumbO n.m. ‘the auditory canal’, Kt.g. kUmb ‘ditto’ perhaps also Kgr. kankuml.i ‘ear lobe’ — Rj.jaip. k¯ umplo ‘nostril’ — Kal. kumbá., kumbřä, Pal. kim"b¯ or., Kho. kum¯ al (Strand kum"l) all ‘smoke hole’ < OIA *kumpa-3 ‘hole’ (3306a).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.5. Indo-Aryan words with other cognates not deriving from PIE

3.5

69

Indo-Aryan words with other cognates not deriving from PIE

The following first group of words is cognate with Russian gad
at» ‘conjecture, create, invent’. Beekes writes in the section “6. Gr. ′ 𝛼𝛾𝛼𝛿 𝑜´𝜍 – Goth. gods” (1996: 228): “. . . Russ. gadat’ ‘to divine, guess’, may have a different origin.” This meets Pokorny’s doubting assessment regarding the Slavic words (IEW: 438) sub PIE ghend-, ghed- ‘to grab, grip’ also ‘to grasp s.th. mentally or spiritually’ (note here also cognate Russian pogadyvat’ ‘tell fortunes; guess’), and corresponds with Mayrhofer’s skeptical remarks on OIA GAD ‘to recite, utter’. Thus the following looks like a case of cognates of non-IE origin. 1. Bng. gOdO2 n.m. ‘spell, enchantment’ (caused, e.g., by a witch through p¯ ap ‘magical ‘sin’ power’)18 — Ko. g¯ ad ‘saying, proverb’. Both are cognate with OIA gada- ‘a sentence; disease, sickness’, gadana- ‘telling, relating’, gadgada‘stammering, stuttering’ which is probably reflected in Ko. g¯ age ‘stammerer’ (cf. also Hoffmann 1952: 263). According to EWA, the OIA lemma is perhaps Indo-Iranian but further connections are doubtful. Note also Kal. gh o
ik ‘to say, speak’ but LSI go˜e ‘(they) said’ (cf. also Morgenstierne [1973: 105] ghõi ‘at one’s free will’ which is probably a misinterpretation of the word) perhaps also < OIA GAD ‘to utter’ with spontaneous aspiration but without -d-. Oberlies has shown that OIA GAD has reflexes in MIA (e.g. Pa. and AMg.), however with a change of d > l (1995a: 190–91). Still, the Bng. and Ko. form can hardly be tatsamas. I would like to point out the possibility of a Kartvelian origin for the lemma: Common-Kartvelian *Gad-/Gd- ‘speak’: Georgian Gad-eb-a ‘to scream loudly, call’, Gad-Gad-i ‘to talk a lot and loudly’, Ga-yad-i ‘to scream, call’, Ga-Gad-is-i ‘proclamation; annunciator’, m-Gd-el-i ‘priest’); Laz God- as in o-God-u ‘he did to him, it happened to him, he told him’, b-God-am ‘I make’, God-am ‘you make’); Swan Gd- as in li-Gd-i ‘to judge, counsel’ (Fähnrich [2007: 475]). Notes: (a) A borrowing from Kartvelian most likely occurred during the period of the loop from Yamnaya to Sintashta. (b) Probably cognate though semantically somewhat different is B.roh. gudguti ‘backbiting person’ with a > u.

18 Not to be confused with the homonym gOdO1 n.m. ‘dirt’ which is < OIA *gadda-1 ‘sediment, mud’ (4011).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

70

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

2. Sir.d.od.. a¯kh ‘mouse’, M. a¯khu ‘a rat or mouse’ and Br.-Aw. a¯khu ‘mouse’ < OIA a¯khú- ‘mouse, mole’ (KEWA) (note preservation of the aspirated consonant).19 Here related is also OIA a¯khanika- ‘mouse’. Apart from Sir.d.od.., M. and Br.Aw., the lemma is otherwise not documented in MIA and without modern parallels, and thus looks like a loanword or wanderwort.20 Joshua Katz (2002) tries to show that OIA a¯khú- and nakulá- ‘mongoose’ are wanderwörter which are also found in Hittite, Galatian, Basque and Greek. He reconstructs * a
sku‘mole’ and *tásku- ‘badger’ and he postulates that the words were borrowed into pre-Vedic when its speakers passed towards south between the Caspian and the Black Sea (2002: 301), thus not far from the lands of the Hittites where this word was used in the form of a¯šku-. The semantic change from ‘mole’ to ‘mouse’ and from ‘badger’ to ‘mongoose’ is certainly not a problem. However, it is a problem to derive a¯khú- and nakulá- < * a
sku- and *tásku-. Whereas the second derivation is pursued by Katz with many ifs and buts, and thus not really convincing, for the first the change of -sk- > -kh- needs an explanation. Katz offers also here some options. Of course, the suggested change looks like a common MIA development (cf. e.g. OIA a¯skandá- ‘attack’ > Or. a¯khanda ‘the lying in ambush’ [1500]), but this option is rejected by him because “The problem with this is that (to judge from Turner 1966, plus addenda) there seems to be no evidence for the survival of this word for ‘mole’ in any Middle or Modern Indo-Aryan language.” However, this is obviously not correct, and therefore a very early Prakrit change seems the most plausible explanation. Among the synonyms of OIA nakulá- discussed by the author, there is also the Vedic hapax ka
s k a
- which has been rendered as ‘weasel, polecat, female ichneumon’ (2014: 303, fn. 37). This word does not seem to have reflexes in MIA and NIA, however Mayrhofer (EWA) points to OIA (YV) kaśa- ‘weasel’ which may indicate a wider spread of this lemma. I wonder whether Pashto kašaw ‘a kind of weasel or mongoose which bites, and from the bones of which rings are made as charms to drive away disease’ could reflect the hapax or YV kaśa-. The word was neither discussed by Morgenstierne nor by Elfenbein et. al. but it could be a borrowing from some unknown IA source because Pashto has also borrowed nakulá- from IA as nolaey. Finally I want to point out that Martirosyan (2013: 102) compares the OIA hapax and OIA káśa-‘weasel’ ´ 2 -, but he with Armenian ak"is ‘weasel’ for which he reconstructs PIE *Hkek-ih concludes: “We may be dealing with a common borrowing from an unknown source.”

19 Br.-Aw. ¯ akhu is perhaps a tatsama, but I cannot imagine how Sir.d.od.. ¯ akh could be a tatsama. Note also that ¯ akhu is the name of a n¯ aga godling quoted in a list found in the Kashmiri N¯ılamata pur¯ an.a. 20 Gamkrelidze and Ivanov note (1995: 450): “Mice and the female deity connected with them are conceived of as blind in Slavic and Germanic mythological beliefs. . . In Sanskrit tradition the mole is venerated together with the god of healing Rudra, to whom the mole (¯ akhú) belongs. . . ”.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.6. Proto-Indo-Iranian and its descendants in contact with Finno-Ugric

3.6

71

Proto-Indo-Iranian and its descendants in contact with Finno-Ugric

The presence of Proto-Indo-Iranian or Proto-Indo-Aryan21 words in Finno-Ugric (see e.g. Burrow 1959: 24ff., Parpola 2002, Harmatta 1999, Lubotsky 2001, Joki 1973, Reédel 1986, Korenchy 1972, Koivulehto 1999, Katz 2003, Kallio 2002, 2009, Holopainen 2019 etc.) and perhaps of Indo-Aryan words in Vogul (Nichols 1998: 257) is a reminiscence of socio-cultural interactions between people that were in contact for centuries. According to Petri Kallio (2002: 34), the Proto-Uralic speakers are to be identified with the Pit-Comb Ware culture and “. . . the Pit-Comb Ware innovation center in the Volga-Oka area can be considered the Uralic primary homeland. . . although the Uralic and the Indo-European primary homelands were not in direct contact with one another, they were not located far from one another either.” In his opinion (2002: 33) “. . . Proto-Indo-European was most likely spoken in the territory north of the Black and Caspian Seas at the turn of the 5th and 4th millennia BC. . . ” And (2002: 35) “. . . the earliest Indo-European loanwards in the Uralic languages point to the 4th millennium late Proto-Indo-European instead of the 3rd millennium Proto-Indo-European. In my view, as long as the shape of the loanword in question includes no distinctive Indo-Iranian features, there is also no justification for the concept of ‘Pre-Indo-Iranian’ or the like, but it is better to speak of Indo-European instead.” Among those words, some scattered pre-OIA remnants in Saami are phonologically close to the historical stage represented by Nuristani except that they have not undergone dentalization (all following examples are from Kallio 2009); PIE *k´ is reflected in Proto-Saami either as *c or *ć:


-uah2 > PIIr. *ćrv¯a- ‘horn’ → Proto-Finno-Ugric *śorwa > Proto-Saamic 1. PIE *kr  *ćoarv¯ e > North Saamičoarvi ‘horn’ — Wg. c˙ öv ‘ibex’ (see 12341). Note that here the North Saami affricate is due to a pre-vocalic shift *ś > *ć (Kallio p. 31f.). ¯ ‘shine’). 2. PIIr. *kać- → FU *kać ‘to look’ — Kt. k˙c - ‘to regard’ (OIA KAŚ ´ 3. PIE *pék-u‘lifestock’ > PIIr. *paću- > PIr. *pa˙cu- ‘cattle’ → Proto-FinnoPermic *počav > Proto-Saamic *poac¯ o-j > North Saami boazu ‘reindeer’ — Kt. pa c@-moc ‘shepherd’. ´ ‘ten’ > Early PIr. *de˙ca- → Proto-Finno-Volgaic *teksä, prefixed 4. PIE *dékm  with *käk(tä)/ük(ti) ‘2/1’ > Proto-Saamic *k¯ akc¯el/*ëkc¯e > North Saami gávcci/ovcci ‘8/9’ — Kt. du˙c ‘ten’. ´ 5. PIE *mok-o‘gnat, stinging insect’ > PIIr. *maća- > PIr. *ma˙ca- ‘gnat, mosquito, fly’ → Proto-Finno-Saamic *mačo > Proto-Saamic *muoc¯ o > North Saami muohcu ‘moth’ — Pr. mas"og, mas"eg ‘fly, mosquito’ < older *ma˙c -. Note that this word does not derive < OIA maśáka- ‘mosquito’ (9917) which is reflected as Pr. m¯ anˇȷag"u ‘bee, gnat, fly’. 21 Scholars working in this field use repeatedly the terms ‘Aryan’ and ‘Proto-Aryan’. My guess is that they correspond with ‘Indo-Iranian’ and ‘Proto-Indo-Iranian’. However, since this is not completely clear for me, I have left these terms unchanged in this section.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

72

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

The first of the following two words with affricatized palatal k´ is found in Saami but not in Nuristani because ‘hundred’ is expressed by the vigesimal system which is common in the area. The second word for PIE ‘horse’ has been perhaps borrowed into Caucasian languages but according to Gamkrelidze and Ivanov (1995: 478f.) and Matasović (2012: 291) this is not really clear. In any case – perhaps remarkable – the lemma does not have reflexes in Nuristani: ´ -tó- > PIIr. *ćata- ‘100’ → Proto-Finno-Ugric *śa/ëta > Proto1. PIE *h1 km  e > North Saami čuohti ‘100’. Here again *ś > *ć. Saamic *ćuot¯ ˆ 2. PIE *h1 ékwos ‘horse’ may have reflexes of PIIr. borrowings into Caucasian Abkhaz and Ubykh (a)čy ‘horse’, Avar and Lak ču, Akhvakh ičwa ‘horse’ etc.

In addition, there are some IIr. loans in FU whose modern reflexes are limited. 1. Cheremissian (Mari) marij ‘man, husband’ etc. is regarded by Joki (1973: 280) to have been borrowed either from Aryan or from (Middle) Iranian. OIA márya‘young man, stallion’ (9894) has no MIA reflexes but is found, according to Turner, in Nuristani Ash. and Kt. and in Dardic Shum. But it is also found in Kal. and perhaps in Rj. (see p. 695). Joki and EWA refer also to Kho. (and Sh.) maristán ‘slave’ < OIA *mariya-sth¯ ana- but Turner (9874) suggests cognate with OIA *mariy¯ ad¯ a- ‘boundary’. The fact that in IA the PIE lemma is found only in the Vedic period and not in Middle Indo-Aryan, the fact that modern reflexes are limited to Outer Languages and the fact that the lemma has quite a number of Iranian reflexes suggests that the FU borrowings stem from Iranian. 2. Finno-Permic Udmurtian purt ‘knife’ and Zyrian (Komi-Syrjänisch) purt ‘knife’ but dialectal also ‘sword’ are, according to Joki (1973: 305), borrowed from Iranian *par(a)ta- ‘axe’ as reflected e.g. in Sak. pad.a ‘axe’ and Oss. færæt ‘axe’; the word has also been borrowed into Toch.A porat and Toch.B pert, peret ‘ax’; here also Dardic Kal. polát ‘a kind of battleaxe’ (see p. 647). Mayrhofer (EWA) reconstructs Iranian *paraTu- parallel with OIA paraśu- ‘hatchet, axe, battleaxe’ and he says that Greek 𝜋 𝜀´𝜆𝜀𝜅𝜐𝜍 ‘axe, labrys, hatchet’ is of same origin. This means that Kal. polát was borrowed from an Iranian dialect which had not undergone PIE *l > r. The Greek form, in turn, strikingly resembles Dardic Ind. "pulUk ‘pestle’ (Hallberg [1992: 210]) whose first vowel, however, goes back to *o or *a. Joki quotes also the Iranologist Vasily Abaev (ibid.) who had argued that this Aryan(?) culture word spread through Khotan Saka and Tocharian mediation into Finno-Ugric and other languages, e.g. into Turkic as balta ‘axe’. But the word is also found in Siberia as in Tungusic purta ‘knife’ which, however, is a relatively recent borrowing. 3. Est. kuts ‘pooch, puppy dog’ with parallels in other FU languages. Joki (1973: 277) refers to Tomaschek who says that the lemma is “ein in ganz Vorder- und Nord-Asien, sowie in Ost-Europa verbreitetes Wort.” 22 Therefore it cannot be 22 A word spread all over Middle East and North Asia as well as eastern Europe.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.6. Proto-Indo-Iranian and its descendants in contact with Finno-Ugric

73

etymologized. Examples of parallels outside FU given by Joki are Kurd. k uçik ´ ‘dog’, Par., Orm. kučuk, Bal. kučak, Oss. kuj, Shgh. kut, kud (which resemble Hungarian kutya), Alb. kutš ‘dog’. I add here Common Kartvelian *kuc-ur‘dog; puppy’ with a number of modern reflexes (Chukhua [2019: 448]). The words are certainly cognate with OIA *kuccura- ‘dog’ (3219) with an -ura- suffix and with modern reflexes only in Nuristani and Dardic. Turner mentions also the Par.-Orm. form. Cf. there Tor. kuju
‘dog’ with Oss. kuj ‘dog’. These forms are probably also cognate through metathesis with the many reflexes usually derived from OIA lex. jakut.a- ‘dog’ (see p. 795). 4. Mordvinic tarvas ‘sickle’ is, according to Pokorny, a borrowing from Iranian *dargha- which he derives < PIE *dolgho-, an extension of a verbal root reflected in OIA DAL ‘to burst, spring open’ (EWA). Mayrhofer regards DAL just as a younger form of DAR ‘zersprengen, zerspalten; to scatter, split’ (indeed, it is testified lately in the written literature) but Mallory and Adams (2006: 373), following Pokorny, cautiously accept the difference between two roots also because of the semantic difference between ‘cut’ (*del-) and ‘tear, flay’ (*der-). They appear right because there exists no OIA *dargha- ‘sickle’ or a MIA reflex of it, but there are several NIA forms clearly deriving < PIE *dolgho-: Kho.kiv. duluG ‘sickle’, Kho. t(h)uláx, Paš. t(h)ul"a¯, Shum. túla, Kal. tul"ai (Cooper and Trail: tuláy ‘sickle, reaping hook’) — Ra. dEl ‘scythe’ (Krishan p. 479). It is clear that ‘sickle, scythe’ matches better with ‘cut’ than with ‘flay’ and although there is no evidence for Old Iranian and Old Indo-Aryan reflexes of PIE *dolgho- in the standard references, the modern data proves the existence of such words in lects different from Old Iranian and Vedic and Classical Sanskrit. This also prompts the conclusion that there existed an Old Iranian root DAR ‘cut’ derived < PIE *del- ‘cut’. Note: In SILUS (p. 218) it is argued that Mordvinic -rv- cannot reflect -rghand therefore connection with PIE *drep- (IEW: 211) is suggested where one also finds ‘sickle’ words. But this suggestion cannot explain the Dardic forms.

5. Mordvinic äšt".ır ‘gelt (barren)’ is, according to SILUS (p. 191), borrowing of an IIr. form going back to PIE *sterih2 - (EWA) and reflected in OIA star
 ‘barren cow’ (13688). Turner quotes N. th¯ ari ‘barren (of cows), abusive term for a barren woman’. However, the lemma is also reflected in Kal. istóra ‘barren’ (both humans and animals) and in Pr. ištür ‘infertile; castrated’ and ištüreli‘to castrate’, and in Kt. štr"us.a ‘castrated bull’ (built with a¯s."a ‘bull’). Since the OIA lemma has no MIA reflex and is found only in older Vedic, the lemma belongs to the Outer Languages. 6. Cheremissian pörš ‘hoarfrost’ is either a borrowing from OIA pr
usv a-, prusv a
or related

‘drop of water, rime, ice’ (8989) (IIFL i: 240, see also SILUS: 77) with Av. paršuya- ‘hoarfrost’. But whereas Iranian reflexes – all with x/ˇ x for š – are widespread, the OIA lemma – without MIA reflexes – has reflexes only in G. and Dardic (see also 8990). Also this lemma seems to belong to the Outer Languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

74

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

7. Finno-Ugrian *rep a (∼
c3) ‘fox’ is, according to Rédei (1986: 46),23 borrowing either of pre-Aryan or early Proto-Aryan *reup¯ ośo- ‘fox, jackal’. He refers to ´ OIA lop¯ aśá- (FLII 12.20 mentions the attempt to reconstruct PIE *h2 l¯ oup¯ek
) and ru paka-, Turner has in addition lop¯aka-, *rop¯akya- (11140) and *lopi-, *ropi- (11142). None of the forms has reflexes in MIA which instead continues OIA
srg al
a- ∼ srg al
a- ‘jackal’. Words with the palatal extension ś/c are found  only  in the northwest whereby there is frequently confusion between ‘fox’, ‘jackal’ and ‘musk-deer’. Turner quotes e.g. Wg. laúša ‘fox’, dialectal Paš. lowó˙c, l o
ec ‘jackal’ but the lemma is more widespread: Pal. r¯op¯as ‘fox’, West Himalayish Pat.t.. ropoc@ and Pur. ropo˙ce ‘musk deer’, and similar forms in Bun. and L¯ ah., and West Pah¯ar.¯ı Chin. ropaja “musk of deer (n¯ aph¯ a24 )” (Kaul 2006 ii: 44) which cf. with Iranian forms like Oss. rubas ‘fox’ (actually Ironian ruvas and Digorian robas), Shgh. r upc(ak) ‘vixen’ and Sar. rap˙c ‘fox’. For more details see p. 707. 8. Finnic-Permian *wermen(e) ? ‘cloth, clothes, armor’ borrowed < early ProtoAryan *vermen- (OIA várman- ‘armour’, see 11389). Even though there are reflexes in Pa. and Pk., modern reflexes are limited to Sinhalese and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. See p. 673. 9. Without being able to offer clarification regarding historical background of the following lemma, the assembly of the following words meaning ‘rumination’ at least suggests some old relationships: different dialects of Votyak (Udmurtian) have ˇZomeśti, žomeźti etc. ‘to ruminate’ which Rédei (1986: 66) regards –  mark – as borrowings from Middle Iranian *r¯omast (< Old with question Ir. *raum Ta). Besides regular OIA romantha-, Turner reconstructs also *romantra- (10852) in order to explain Ash. ž¯ om¯ otr, Kt. zemEtr and dialectal Paš. l oimu« ‘chewing the cud’. There are also Kal. ram kárik ‘to chew the a
s and orm a
s ‘rumination, chewing the cud’ with first syllable cud’, Ind. orm



metathesis and change of r- > -r.- probably as proto-stage of Ash. and Kt. ž-, and borrowed into West Himalayish Kann. rumci-mig (rum-chi-mig) ‘to ruminate, chew the cud’. The reflexes of *romantra- are limited to the northwest, but are obviously close to the Iranian words and the borrowings in FU. This again suggests an Outer Language lemma. Note also that according to Mayrhofer (EWA), the OIA lemma is cognate with r¯ umin¯ are ‘to ruminate’. 10. Votyak (Udmurtian) sur ‘beer’ and other FU parallels are according to Rédei (1986: 76f.) borrowing of early Proto-Iranian *sur¯ a or of an archaic Middle Iranian dialect form *sur. There is hardly any evidence for this word in modern Iranian languages, therefore one wonders why this is not regarded as a borrowing from Indo-Aryan súr¯ a- ‘spirituous liquor, wine (in ancient times ‘a kind of beer’)’ (Pa., Pk.) (13503) with modern reflexes in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (including Bng. s¯ ur ‘liquor’), M., Ko. 11. Votyak (Udmurtian) tuśti ‘Schüssel, Teller; bowl, plate’ is a borrowing from Old Iranian *tašta- (Avestantašta-, Wkh. tas.t ‘tray, saucer’ [Yoshie]). Cf. Prasun 23 See also Katz (2003: 115). 24 In Ayurveda a term for ‘musk gland/musk pod’ ← Pers. n¯ af ‘navel’ which parallels OIA lex. n¯ abhi- ‘musk’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.7. Ancient contacts with Tocharian?

75

to˙c"¯ı, t¯ oc˙ "¯ı ‘wooden pot (its main meaning; clay or earthen pots are called g@n); tureen, pot, bowl’ (see p. 808) which resembles Shgh. t oTc ‘wooden dish, tray’. The Shgh. word is, according to Morgenstierne, not cognate with Av. tašta-. ´ But the Pr. word derives directly < PIE *teksteh 𝑎 - ‘vessel made of wood; plate, bowl’ (Lat. testa-, Av. tašta-) because cf. similar Ash. da cu , d@ cu
n ‘right’ etc. ´ < OIA dáks.in.a- ‘right (hand)’ < PIE *déksinos ‘right’. 12. Fenno-Volgaic *wasta ‘(gegenüberliegende) Stelle; opposite place’ > dialectal Mordvinian vasta ‘stead, place, site; bed (for the night)’ etc. is, according to Vaclav Blažek (2005: 97), borrowing from Iranian *(a)va-st¯ a- ‘to place’ (despite Bailey, there is no Khot. vasta ‘place’) – which is formed like OIA ava-sth¯ a- ‘to go down into, reach down to’ – and not, as previously assumed by him, borrowing from OIA v a
stu- ‘site of house, house’ (11606) (Pa., Pk.) (with a modern reflex in Si.) which he has now reserved for dialectal Khanty wat@2 ‘vorn offene Hütte; hut with open frontside’. However, Hartmut Katz (2003: 235) prefers the OIA connection. The noun is usually connected with OIA VAS ‘dwell’. I cannot decide what is correct but I can add some interesting words which at least semantically also belong here: Kamd. v¯ astõ ‘place to spend the night’ < OIA *v¯ asa-sth¯ ana- or *v¯ asa-sth¯ apana-, Wg. v¯ as-t."a¯v ‘residence, domicile, the place where one has one’s house’ < OIA *v¯ asa-sth¯ apita- (?), Sh.koh. (RSup) b¯ asum ‘residence; abode’ perhaps < OIA synonym compound *v¯ asa-dh¯ aman- (here perhaps also Jat.. vaseb, vaseb¯ a, vasev¯ a ‘abode, dwelling’ ?); the exact derivations are also unclear in case of Kal. basikhéšti ‘place where one stays temporarily’ and similar Kho. b"asikh"isni ‘hunter’s overnight shelter’; Bng. baskrO ‘place for overnight stay (in forest)’ (with -krO suffix) is morphologically the same as Him. and H. bas¯er¯ a ‘a house or home’ for which McGregor suggests derivation < OIA *v¯ asakara-, Bng. basta ‘house’,25 b aslO ‘residence of a king, vizier or elder’ (same meaning as Deog. b¯ asa ‘house for overnight stay for a king’).

3.7

Ancient contacts with Tocharian?

There is ample evidence of mutual contacts and exchanges between speakers of Middle Indo-Aryan Prakrits (G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı and Niya), speakers of Middle Iranian languages (Khotanese, Sogdian) and speakers of Tocharian dialects durig the first Entury of the Commom Era in the oasis towns at the edge of the Tarim Basin. This evidence includes various signs of an emergin linguistic area (Zoller 2021) and there is an abundance of Indo-Aryan and Iranian loanwords in the Tocharian manuscripts. However, the question of very early contacts between Indo-Aryans and Tocharians is less clear. At least this possibility cannot be ruled out, because there are indications of possible pre-Vedic (and of course pre-Buddhist) cultural-religious contacts. Andrew Wigman writes (2016: 66): 25 Probably with the same suffix -tO1 as found in Bng. bastO2 ‘afterbirth; placenta’ which is related with (or an extension of) bastO1 , basiE ‘after’ which is < OIA v¯ asáyate2 ‘lodges’ (11435).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

76

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

Barber (1999:159-166) makes a crucial observation about the earliest remains in the Tarim Basin – those found around Loulan [Kroraina] . . . Almost every one of the graves belonging to the Loulan and Qäwrighul Cultures contain small bundles of ephedra. Ephedra sinica and other species of the genus are stimulants. . . ” 26 Regarding cultural use of ephedra, archaeologists found in Merv, the capital of the BMAC, in temple ruins from around 2000 BC “at some sites residues of ephedra and cannabis and at other sites ephedra and poppy. This demonstrates clear use of ephedra in a mixture with hallucinogens at early sites that would become home to Indo-Iranians.” This find has to do with “. . . the development of Vedic soma and Zoroastrian haoma. Botanical research has identified harmel (Peganum harmala)27 as the likely main ingredient of soma/haoma in its most developed form. It contains the powerful psychoactive compounds harmine and harmaline . . . Harmel, whose side effects include stomach cramps, vomiting, and diarrhea, was only used when the priest needed to contact the otherworld, but the consumption of soma/haoma was ritualized to a daily practice . . . i That the remains at Loulan were interred with ephedra suggests that it was also an aid to help them in reaching the otherworld.

There can hardly be any doubt that the immense influence of Buddhist religion in unison with Niya Prakrit administrative language during the first millennium in the Tokharian speaking kingdoms of the Tarim Basin was set in motion at the latest with the arrival of Proto-Indo-Aryans in the BMACaround 2000 BC. There must have been cultural links between Bactria-Margiana and the Tarim Basin, which are still recvognizable in the traces of the cultic use of ephedra and other hallucinogenic plants. This Soma cult was adapted by the Indo-Aryans and the Iranians. This was probably also one of the contexts that made early mutual borrowings possible. However, when exactly the following words were borrowed cannot be said (some of them are anyway just interesting parallels):

Lexical parallels and mutuual borrowings 1. The lema of BMAC language reconstruction *
carua- ‘name of a god’, which  people with arrows’ and is based on OIA śarvá- ‘name of a god who kills Yav. sauruua ‘name of a Da¯euua’ (Lubotzky [2001a: 310]), has long been compared to Toch.B śerwe ‘hunter’ (Toch.A śaru ‘hunter’) which Douglas Adams derives < PIE *ˆ ghu ¯erwo- (1999: 634). This is criticized with several arguments by Georges-Jean Pinault (he transliterates śærwæ‘) and he also righly rejects association with OIA śarabhá- ‘(a kind of) deer’. Association with OIA śaru‘missile’ is only secondary. As a convincing alternative, he proposes that the BMAC word is a borrowing from Tocharian (2003: 179ff.). I find this convincing.

26 Wigman (probably correctly) insists that the original inhabitants of Loulan were speakers of Tocharian and not of Iranian (who arrived much later) (see 2016: 40). 27 Peganum harmala is also called Syrian Rue (Z.).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

3.7. Ancient contacts with Tocharian?

2.

3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8.

77

The name of the OIA god śarvá- appears frequently together with OIA bhavá‘(name of) a deity attending on Rudra and frequently connected with Śarva (later N. of Śiva or a form of Śiva; or N. of a Rudra . . . )’.28 Thus it seems that both gods once were especially popular in the northwest of South Asia. This is also suggested by Morgenstierne who writes (1973a, vol. 3: 339): “Acc. to the S.ifat-n¯ ama (ed. Scarcia) the three deities worshipped in the Laghman were P¯ and¯ ad (for *P¯ an.d.a¯w; cf. P¯ an.d."au; List of Place-Names 216 b); Šarway (Skt. Śarva), and L¯ am¯ and¯e (with Pash. l- < br, from Brahma-deva . . . ”).” 29 Finally note also Pr. širt¯ a ‘hunter’ and Kt. sirt" ar ‘shooting, hunting’ (with second component also in Pr. t¯ a li- ‘to go hunting’).30 PIE *omsos or h1 / 4 ómsos ‘shoulder’ > Toch.B a¯ntse ‘shoulder’— many modern reflexes of OIA ámsa˙ ‘shoulder, shoulder-blade’ are also ‘irregular’ by showing typical OL features like spontaneous affrication and aspiration, e.g. S. hañjh¯ı ‘shoulder-blade’ (Stack [1949: 162]) (for similar ‘irregularities’ cf. e.g. p. 326). Note also that in Niya Prakrit there was a phonological change of OIA m .s > Niya m ara- < OIA sams¯ ˙ ara- ‘undergoing transmigration’ . ts as e.g. in Niya sam . ts¯ and m¯ am amsá˙ ‘flesh’. Howeverm the affricatized Tocharian form . tsa- < OIA m¯ appars to be an independent development. Toch.B ker¯ u* ‘drum’ see p. 810 sub OIA lex. drakat.a- for possible parallels in OIA lex., Kt.g., MKH, B., Mult., Psht. Toch.B a¯rkwi ‘white’ see p. 779 for parallels in Bng. and Deog. Toch.B kastuna ±‘threat’ (?) and Toch.A k¯ as. ‘reprimand, chastise’ see p. 789 for parallels in Bng., Bashg., Garh.t.. Toch.B kärkk¯ alle* ±‘swamp, marsh’. Adams: “It seems etymologically significant that kärkk¯ alle translates the otherwise isolated Sanskrit kardama‘mud, slime, mire; dirt, filth (cf. Mayrhofer, 1956: 173) with the requisite root structure. Tocharian and Indic together argue for a PIE *kerd- which is probably also to be found in Latin m¯ us-cerda ‘mouse-dung’ and s¯ ucerda ‘sheep-dung. . . Iranian shows (Bailey, 1979: 417) a root *xarD- in Khotan Saka kh¯ argga- (< *xarD-ka-) ‘mud’, sam . khal- (< *tsama-xarD-, with the prefix showing expressive strengthening beside regular *hama- < *sama-) ‘smear, defile,’ Modern Persian xard ‘clay’. . . The correspondence of Indic k- and Iranian x- is not regular but there are enough instances where Iranian shows an innovative (expressive?) x- where we would expect k- (e.g. Avestan xumba‘pot’ beside Sanskrit kumba- [sic]) that there is no reason to exclude the Iranian words from consideration here.” For further parallels in Bng. etc. see p. 767. Toch.B kuk-1 ‘call out, shout; entreat, seek out’, see two closely related lemmata p. 753 for parallels in IA languages etc. But note also PTB *k¯ uk ‘weep, wail’. ´ Toch.B kwäs- ‘mourn, lament’. Adams: “From PIE *kwes±‘breathe; sigh, groan’ [: Sanskrit śvásiti ∼ śvásati ‘blow, hiss, pant, snort; breathe; sigh, groan,’ Latin queror ‘complain, lament. . . ]” The OIA lemma is, of course,

28 Note also the reflex of bhavá- in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı boa ‘name of a deity’ with loss of aspiration (see Harry Falk [2009: 27f.]; see also Samad [2010: 20]). 29 The S.ifat-n¯ ama stems from 1582; see Jettmar 1982. 30 It seems quite unlikely to me that the Pr. and Kt. words contain reflexes of OIA śáru- ‘arrow’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

78

Chapter 3. Traces of a pre-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Aryan

9. 10. 11.

12.

very wide spread. However, modern reflexes with meanings related to ‘mourn’ as in Tocharian are limited to Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Nuristani (see p. 536). Toch.B päś-cane and Toch.A päś-śäm . (dual) ‘breasts’, for possible IA parallels see p. 454. Toch.B maśce ‘fist’, cf. a possibly relative close parallel in Wg. p. 452. Toch.B wertsiya ‘assembly, council, meeting, retinue, company’ is hesitantly connected by Adams with PIE *wordhyeha- ‘mass, multitude’, a derivative of *werdh- ‘grow, increase’. Etymologically related is OIA várdhati ‘grows’ but semantically perhaps closer is OIA lex. vardh¯apana- ‘festival on a birthday or any festive occasion’.31 According to Adams, Toch.A s.t¯ am and B st¯ am ‘tree’ “. . . have been connected with Proto-Germanic *stamma- ‘treetrunk’ (< *stamna-), Latin st¯ amen ‘warp,’ Greek st¯em¯ on ‘warp,’ Sanskrit sth¯ aman- (nt.) ‘station, place’ all reflecting a PIE *st(e)h2 -mn- ‘(something) standing’ (VW:462). The semantic similarity between Germanic and Tocharian is particularly noteworthy.” However, cf. also Bshk. tam ‘tree’, Paš. ust"u ¯m ‘tree’ and Wg. st Oma ‘stem, tree’ all < etymologically related OIA stambha- ‘pillar’ (13682) (p. 370 and 473).

31 The reality of this lex. meaning is confirmed by Jaina Sanskrit vardh¯ apana-, Pk. vaddh¯ avan.a‘celebration’, G. vadh¯ aman.u ˜ ‘celebrate’ (Bhayani [1988: 237]), H. badh¯ a¯ı ‘festivities’, etc. It is also used in Bhoja’s eleventh century Sanskrit gadya-k¯ avya Śrng¯ ˙ aramañjar¯ı-kath¯ a (Bhayani [1997:  122]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 4 Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

4.1

The historical background

As mentioned above, some of the modern Outer Languages – namely several but not all Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages – have preserved occasional traces of an ‘Iranian style’ of reflexes of the different Proto-Indo-European orders of gutturals, namely as an opposition between dental affricates (as reflexes of the palato-velars) and palatal affricates (as reflexes of the [labio-]velars) like Old Iranian and Nuristani. As is well-known in Indo-Iranian linguistics, a palatal(ized) PIE *kˆ 1 changed into PIIr. *ć, which became an important turning point because in Indo-Aryan *ć was deaffricated into the OIA fricative ś whereas it was dentalized to a dental affricate in Iranian – a stage still preserved in Nuristani c˙ – before further weakening to s (and h) in the Iranian languages area. As is also well-known, PIE velars and labio-velars were ˆ in Proto-Indo-Iranian *č under at a later stage also palatalized (i.e. later than PIE *k) certain phonetic conditions. However, different from the fate of PIIr. *ć, PIIr. *č was kept in Old Indo-Aryan and in Old Iranian in a very similar fashion as can be seen e.g. in OIA catv a
ras ‘four’ and Av. caTw ar o ‘four’ < PIE *ku etwóres, OIA ca ‘and’ and Av. ča, OIA sácate ‘associates with’ and Av. hačaiti, OIA j¯ıvá- ‘life’ and Av. ˇȷvaiti. Thus, whereas Iranian and Nuristani preserved to a certain extend the opposition between palato-velars and (labio-)velars as one between palatal and dental affricate (still preserved in Nuristani but debuccalized or changed into fricative in Iranian long ago), the same distinction was preserved in OIA as one between palatal sibilant ś and palatal affricate c.2 To my knowledge, this development in Indo-Iranian is unique and without parallels in other satem languages.3 However, a similar historical trend between the two Indo-European branches Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranian is the 1 With regard to the structure of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals I follow the model proposed by Vladimir Georgiev (1937), Ivan Duridanov (1993) and Reiner Lipp (2009) (discussed below in more detail), according to whom the kentum languages never possessed palato-velar stop phonemes, and whether some satem languages ever possessed palato-velar stop phonemes is at least questionable. 2 This is simplified and holds only for the unvoiced and unaspirated gutturals. 3 For apparently very different palatalization histories in Balto-Slavic cf. e.g. Iskarous and Kavitskaya (2018) and De Courtenay (1894).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

80

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

repetitive occurrence of palatalization or fronting of articulation point, leading again and again also to dentalization of palatal affricates and fricatives.4 De Courtenay proposes four ‘palatalization waves’ for Slavic, which could also lead to dentalizations. And for instance in a number of Pamir languages, the “Iranian ´ *´ velars *k, *g, *x were palatalized to *k, g (G
), *´ x, later to Shughni-Roshani č, ž, š, in the position before *a or *¯ a” (Wiczak and Novák [2016: 53]).5 Further below I will discuss in detail similar processes also in Indo-Aryan languages and their farreaching implications. But coming back to Old Indo-Aryan and Old Iranian and their different treatments of Proto-Indo-Iranian *ć (and related sounds), it is important to see that deaffrication in OIA and depalatalization (dentalization) in pre-OIr. resulted in different phonological subsystems in OIA and OIr., the former provided with one order of affricates (palatals) and the other with two (palatals and dentals).6 This ‘Iranian’ phonological subsystem is, however, also found – besides Nuristani – in several (but not all) Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties. So the question arises, whether Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı have also preserved the difference between palato-velars and (labio-)velars in oppositions between their dental and palatal affricate orders or whether their two (or three7 ) orders are simply due to contact influence (or other unknown reasons) without any relevance for the history of Indo-Iranian. The answer is that there is, on the one hand, high relevance for the history of Indo-Iranian because of traces of ‘Iranian’ features in Indo-Aryan (and vice versa),8 but on the other hand one must also notice that those Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages with such traces nevertheless remain structurally almost completely OL Indo-Aryan languages. 4.1.1

Various aspects of satemization

In the following section four thematically related themes are discussed: The question of the number of PIE guttural orders, some details of the Indo-Iranian satemization, significance of the Prasun ‘bear (animal)’ lemma and possible parallels in West Pah¯ar.¯ı. The concept of just two PIE guttural orders Jacob Wackernagel has given a detailed description of the many different linguistic conditions under which OIA (PIE-inherited) gutturals were palatalized in Old Indo4 In the literature it is generally claimed that dentalization took place very early in Nuristani and only quite lately in Dardic. But this is not quite right because we find traces of later dentalization also in Nuristani (e.g. Wg. c˙ at.k’a ‘sharp, keen, smart; scharf; scharfsinnig, klug’ is borrowed from Urdu cat.ak ‘quickness; brightness’). This can only mean that dentalization is a process that has been effective in the northwest for many centuries. 5 Palatalization before a is an exception, but is also known from French (Berns [2013]). 6 Here I look at the affricate subsystems only under the perspective of linguistic inheritance. The massive influence of Kartvelian phonology on Dard, Nuristani, eastern Iranian and northwestern Tibetan languages is described above page 51. 7 The retroflex order of affricates found in Dardic, Nuristani and East Iranian languages is at this point not relevant for the course of my arguments. 8 Above I have argued that such mutual interferences between Indo-Aryan and Iranian are due to the fact that some dialects between the two poles not all dialects completely separated from each other in the post-proto-Indo-Iranian phase (p. 11).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.1. The historical background

81

Aryan and Old Iranian (i §119ff.). For instance, in §123 he says that in Avesta gutturals never appear before i, ¯ı, y and in the Vedas only under certain conditions (which he lists). In §127 he makes the correct observation that since the thematic PIE vowel had the vowel gradation ˘e : o˘, there must have formerly been a regular alternation between palatal and guttural consonants in the concerned words. However, we will see that this simple principle got frequently distorted due to analogical generalizations, dialect mixture, etc. If there have been many distortions already in the documented classical satem languages, then it is not surprising that evidence for regular non-satemization – satemization alternations are not easy to discover in New Indo-Aryan languages. Still, there is evidence albeit not in large numbers, as will be seen below. In addition to a velar and labio-velar consonant order, a palato-velar order of consonants has been seen as a main characteristic of satem languages. However, the simultaneous presence of three guttural orders has frequently been questioned. Reiner Lipp lists several dozen names of proponents of two (only velar and labio-velar) and proponents of three PIE guttural orders (in addition a palato-velar one) (2009: 5f., fn. 1). See also Quiles et al. (2011: 18ff.) on “The three-dorsal theory.” Lipp defends the (odd enough) concept of originally two guttural order K and Ku with arguments shortly presented below, and his model is also the guiding principle followed in this book. Once more: Due to various causes, there developed in some areas within the ˆ out of velars *K, which, by moving ‘forward’, changed PIE world palatalized velars *K from stops into affricates. Despite some claims, there is no clear evidence that e.g. in Proto-Indo-Iranian there existed simultaneously in its phonological system three ˆ and Ku . It does not seem unlikely that palatalized different velar consonants K, K ˆ velars *K had an allophonic status for some time. Not later than when they had become palatal affricates they had acquired phoneme status.9 It seems that more or less simultaneously labio-velar consonants Ku lost their labial feature in Indo-Iranian and became ordinary velar consonants K. Apparently this made them suitable to become candidates for the second palatalization. Lipp makes it clear (2009: 30f.) that the total lack of any evidence for satemization in the kentum languages can only mean that kentum languages never possessed palatalized velars.10 In the first volume of Lipp’s publication from 2009, section 1.5 (pp. 62-98) is devoted to show that eight or nine cases of PIE words with alleged unconditioned palatals (frequently discussed in the relevant literature) are in fact conditioned. The only word of relevance for this ˆ 1 -es-ó- ‘hare’ which is discussed below p. 142. A good roundup for book is PIE *kh the sequence of events which led to the emergence of satem languages in some parts of the PIE language area is found on p. 53 of the first volume of Lipp’s work on palatals in Indo-Iranian. Here follows an English summary, which skips some complicated

9 There is disagreement about details of the nature of these sounds during that period. Klein et al. write (2017: 333): “Proto-Indo-Iranian had affricates *ć, *j, and *jh , and palatal stops *č, *ˇȷ, *ˇȷh .” 10 Of course, this holds true only for the prehistory and very early history of the kentum languages. Palatalization processes are extremely common in the languages of the world and also found in most of the kentum languages at later stages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

82

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

technical details: After the [first phase of] context-conditioned velar palatalization, the laryngeal-conditioned ‘vowel color’ adjustment initially caused a partial termination of the palatalizing context. This led to the phonematization of the palatals in the satem area of the Indo-European dialect continuum, where the palatals with context-sensitive origin were retained in the contexts, which were affected by the ‘vowel color’ adjustments. The resulting phonemic decoupling from the velars caused the advancement of the palatal to the medio-palatal articulation site within a framework of phonological polarization and provided the basis for their spreading beyond their context-conditioned area of origin. Thus, in forms that were paradigmatically or derivatively connected to forms that contained a phonetically motivated palatal, sound-law-informed sequences were often converted analogously [and thus could spread quite widely], but sometimes also residual forms with velar were preserved down to the individual languages.11

As mentioned above, two predecessors to Lipp’s comprehensive defense of the twoguttural model (2009) are Vladimir Georgiev (1937) and Ivan Duridanov (1993). Despite Wackernagel’s detailed investigation of the different causes for satemization processes, it was Vladimir Georgiev who for the first time (1937) offered convincing arguments for a PIE two-guttural order. For instance, on p. 111 Georgiev states that satem languages have many lemmata with palatal-velar alternations, a fact which contradicts the theory of the three guttural series. Moreover, in most of the living IE languages (including the kentum languages) one finds many cases of changes of gutturals into affricates and sibilant. This, in turn, can only mean that originally PIE had only two guttural series: velar and labiovelar (p. 112). On p. 120 he mentions the so-called second palatalization which affected velars and labio-velars after having lost their ‘labial’ features. It is important to point out here that first and second palatalization led to partly different end results in Iranian and in Indo-Aryan. They are listed in the relevant textbooks as main characteristics differentiating the Iranian from the Indo-Aryan branch of Indo-European. However, below we will see that the standard models are too simple and do not explain many linguistic phenomena represented below. Also Ivan Duridanov defends the thesis of only two PIE guttural orders (1993: 199). Consequently he claims that the repeatedly made claim of kentum words in Balto-Slavic – typically explained as a result of borrowing from a kentum language – is untenable. Since my name is linked with the thesis of kentum words in NIA languages, I will address myself to this issue very accurately. Lipp rejects (2009 i: 10) the old idea that satemization originated in Indo-Iranian and spread mainly into Balto-Slavic where it ebbed away and left back an incomplete 11 As I now see it, this historical-linguistic fact is the real background for my early publications on ‘kentum’ words in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı. The linguistic data I published back then (Zoller 1988, 1989, 1993) are real and continue to hold true (quite a few of them are reproduced in this book, in several cases together with parallels in other Indo-Aryan languages that I was not aware of at the time). The most determined attempt to dismiss my discoveries as non-existent was proven wrong by others (see Abbi 1997 and Zoller 1999) and can now, in retrospect, be considered an early example of cancel culture.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.1. The historical background

83

satemization. It has long been known that also in Indo-Iranian there are cases of absence of satemization, and below I will add additional evidence from NIA to the list. According to Lipp (2009 i: 11), it is more likely that in the various IE languages in which satem-palatalization occurred, diverging analogical leveling processes took place with the result that in some languages/dialects the palatal variant and in others the velar variant was generalized (sometimes also both variants in one dialect). For instance (the following example is simplified), satem Lithuanian p˜ekus ‘cattle’ goes ultimately back to an oblique stem PIE *péku-, which was generalized, whereas OIA páśu- (and Av. pasu-) ‘cattle’ have a sibilant deriving from a medio-palatal (slightly in front of velar) consonant, which was a bit fronted due to the effect of a dative, genetive or locative ending containing a high front vowel, which was generalized (more details 2009 i: 11f.). An example with a rich evolvement of forms into many NIA languages is PIE *leuk- ‘to shine’ and *lóuk(es)- ‘light’ with both velar and palatal reflexes in Indo-Iranian as well as in Balto-Slavic. According to Lipp (2009 i: 15f.), also here the alternations go back to different suffixes with different vowels.12 Lipp lists as Slavic example for velar reflex e.g. OCS luč» ‘beam’, and for palatal reflex Russian lýsyj ‘bleak’ and as Indo-Iranian examples he lists with velar reflexes Av. raočah- ‘light’, Old Pers. raucah- ‘day’, Vedic rúć- ‘light’, rukmá- ‘radiant, clear; an ornament of gold, golden chain’, róka-, roká- ‘light’, róćate ‘shines’ and with palatal reflexes Vedic rúśant- ‘shining, bright’, a-ruśa- ‘black’. Now follow examples of the reflexes of this PIE lemma *leuk- sorted according to the lemmata in the CDIAL: 1. OIA róka-, roká- ‘light, splendour’ (10826) has modern reflexes in Nur., Dard and WPah. (a) Additional WPah. instances are Bng. rOi n.f. ‘a type of coniferous tree’, Deog. r O ‘ditto’, Kt.g. r E and Kc. rOe, Him rai, Kul. r¯ai all ‘fir’, Rudh. re ‘a species of fir-tree’, probably also Pog. ray1l ‘birch’ with MIA -illa- suffix. In the whole area the lemma has the meaning ‘type of (fir) tree’. (b) Turner quotes as phonetically irregular Dm. r¯ ak ‘deodar’ and Kal.rumb. r¯ a, urt. (a)rak though Trail and Cooper note rha ‘cedar’ which may rather derive < OIA rohita(ka)- ‘a kind of tree, Andersonia Rohitaka’, etc. The ‘irregular’ forms are also found in the above WPah. cognates and the following two compounds from Dardic: Kal. ráges.t.i ‘early (morning)’ and Pal. raG
asti ‘early (morning)’

word < OIA lex. for which I suggest derivation < OIA *roka-us.t.a- with second 2 us.t.a- ‘burnt’ (2386). (c) With (preservation or suffixation of?) medial consonant besides Kho. rog, roG ‘light’, Dm. r¯ak, Kal.urt. (a)rak there are in addition Bashg. ruganâ ‘a firtree’ (with OIA -ina- suffix as in OIA *rohin.a- ‘red’ [10863]?), Garh. r ako ‘torch; bright light’ and N. r ako ‘torch’. (d) In New Iranian there are Yid. r oGo ‘deodar’ and Brah. and (Dravidian) Bal. r ok ‘light’.13 12 Many but not all of the following words are found in the relevant literature. Some words come from the fieldwork of this author. 13 But according to Bray, the Brah. word is ← Av. raoxšna-.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

84

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

2. Sub OIA rocá- ‘bright’ (10831) Turner lists Kal. roš ‘pleasure’ (Morgenstierne) which, however, better derives < OIA palatal reflex ruśat- ‘brilliant, bright, light-coloured, white’ despite its semantic closeness with OIA rucyate ‘is pleasant’ (10765) first because Trail and Cooper actually have tagged with same lemma number 10831 Kal. roš žal.ék ‘to bless’ (lit. ‘to bring light’ [with žal.ék ‘to take someone or something somewhere’]) and second because Kalasha can maintain the distinction between OIA -ś- and -c- as can be seen in Kal. .luš ‘very early morning’14 (palatal reflex) vs. Kal. .luč and Kal.urt. loč ‘torch; wood of the kuhérik pine tree’, .luč kárik ‘to shine or light a torch’ and .lučapatá ‘lit up, lighted up’ (with -apatá perhaps < OIA [Suśr.] abhipratapta- ‘intensely heated’) (with velar reflex), both words going back to OIA *lucya- (cf. OIA rucya- ‘bright’ and *locya- ‘bright’ [11131]). Kal. .l- can go back to OIA and PIE l-, c.f. .lavák ‘fox’ < OIA lop¯ aka- ‘a kind of jackal’ (11140) and perhaps < PIE *h2 loup¯ek- (see EWA and Katz [2003: 115f.]), .lek1 ‘to harvest by cutting’ and .láav ‘harvester, cutter’ < OIA *lavati ‘reaps’ (10986) < PIE *leuH ‘cut off’  etc. This (EWA ii: 476), .líik ‘to lick up’ < OIA lihati ‘licks’ < PIE *leigˆh - ‘lick’,  means that Kal. .luč and .luš reflect an older stage than OIA RUC and RUŚ. Whereas there is quite ample evidence for velar reflexes of OIA LUC , there is no clear evidence for the existence of an OIA LUŚ. 3. Kal. .luč and Kal.urt. loč ‘torch’ have a semantic parallel in K. laś ˙ i ‘a torch’ which ü means with verb diñ ‘to apply a torch; hence, to start a general conflagration, to set on fire’ and with verb hen u ‘to take a torch; to feel the great heat of fever, rage, sorrow . . . ’ The meanings are not unusual and have parallels of reflexes of the PIE lemma in other languages. The K. word shows the same ‘irregular’ vowel change to -a- as in several forms above. Whereas Kal. can preserve OIA -c- as č- it usually changes into -˙c - in K. as can be seen in ar¯ uc˙ u ‘unpleasing’ < OIA lex. arucya- ‘unpleasant’ (614) and in many other examples. This means that K. laś ˙ i must be a palatal reflex as against the Kal. word, which is a velar reflex. This confirms the above observation that variations between palatal and velar reflexes can also be found within one and the same language (branch). Thus the looked for palatal reflex of PIE leuk- with preservation of l- is not found in OIA but in NIA Kashmiri. 4. OIA LOK ‘see’ is, according to EWA, probably denominative of loká- ‘free space, world; space, territory; people’, which reflects PIE *lóuk(es)- ‘light’. OIA lokáyati and D¯atup. lokate (11122) have modern reflexes only in Dardic. Note in addition also S. lokn.u ‘to trace (outlines), to track’, Bng. l ukEnO ‘to look (at), peer, peep’ and Rab. “uluk-vulluk” ‘peeping’ (Roy 2011: 93). It is difficult to presume that the three words in S., Bng. and Rab., which are geographically far away from each other, should have a common -k- suffix, even though in case of Bng. this is a possibility (see the list of affixes in 15.1). For Sh. l¯el ‘visible’ Turner hesitantly suggests derivation < OIA lokita- ‘seen, beheld’. This has a parallel in Ind. l
l𝑖 ‘visible’ and was borrowed into Bur. leél man´- ‘to become known’. 14 This has an exact parallel in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhales¯ı luśi ‘early; quickly’ (Kaul [2006 i: 88]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.1. The historical background

85

5. There is a velar reflex with meaning ‘become visible’ in Nuristani Kamd. luč"a‘appear, come out (sun)’. The meaning ‘become visible’ easily extends into the meaning ‘morning’, which is found in Dardic Sh.koh. (RSup) l2s"ki ‘morning’. Because of the suffix "ki it cannot be decided whether the Sh.koh. word is a palatal or velar reflex. Meaning ‘morning’ is, besides the above-quoted forms Kal. ráges.t.i ‘early (morning)’ and Pal. raG
asti ‘early (morning)’, also found in

Kamd. ř"uc buli ř¯ ašto and Kt. řuč buli što both ‘morning star’ (lit. ‘morning15 thick-(bright)star’ [10833, 9194, 13713]), in Gaw. r¯ uc˙ , r¯ oc˙ ‘dawn’ and in San.. z.o˙ck"a¯ ‘in the morning’ (< OIA rocya- ‘shining’(?) [10835] or rocís ‘light, brightness’ [10833]).

The Indo-Iranian satemization Following Lipp (2009 i: 56). there existed in PIE times in the dialectal areas of the later satem languages series of mediopalatally raised plosive phonemes of type [kj] (after the phonetic palatalizing contexts were no longer needed ) – called simplified promary palatals – that contrasted with plain velar plosives of type [k]. Phonetic polarization and paradigmatic generalizations supported the installation of a phonological identity mark known as the distinction between satem and kentum languages. In the Proto-Indo-Iranian period, a palato-alveolar consonant series had emerged from the medio-palatal stop series, which probably already had the character of an affricate series *’c (see Lubotsky [2017: 1875]). This advancement of the position of stricture in the oral cavity was at least partly caused by the subsequent emergence of a secondary series of medio-palatal plosives from velar plosives in certain palatalizing environments. After the abandonment of the Proto-Indo-European distinction of the guttural type of articulation type (± labio-velar), a new place of articulation opposition (± raised back of the tongue) emerged in a first step and then in the Proto-Indo-Iranian period a further opposition between palato-alveolars affricates (articulated with the tip of the tongue) and palatal affricates (articulated with the back of the tongue) arose. The split into Iranian and Indo-Aryan took place through two very different linguistic-historical processes. While on the Iranian side – including some non-Vedic Indo-Aryan dialects – the phonological difference between palato-alveolar and palatal affricates continued to be retained in form of an opposition between alveolar and postalveolar affricates (see Klein et al. [2017: 482]) – that is, two different places of oral stricture were retained – whereas in Vedic Imdo-Aryan the palato-alveolar and the palatal positions merged into one common palatal position. However, the inherited distinction between palatovelars and plain velars continued in the new shape of an opposition between two types of articulations: affricate and fricative.16 15 OIA bahulá- ‘large, thick’ is sometimes the name for the Pleiades (see p. 582) and is perhaps also reflected in Ind. b o
l ‘morning star’, which fits here semantically. 16 This is an idealized and simplified description which only serves to show the underlying course for the drifting apartof of Iranian (including some non-Vedic dialects) and Vedic Indo-Aryan.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

86

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

As shown above (p. 52), Kartvelian phonology was decisive for the emergence of ‘Khowar type’ phonological subsystems (also in East Iranian languages) whereas lack of this influence led to ‘Bhojpuri type’ subsystems now found in the majority of New Indo-Aryan languages. Besides an adaptation to the wealth of Kartwelian affricate and fricative orders, one more characteristic of Proto-Kartvelian phonology fueled the process of drifting apart of the two Indo-Iranian branches. Whereas Thomas Gramkelidze divided the Proto-Kartvelian subsystem of plosives-affricates-fricatives in an abstract way into front, middle and back series, Merab Chukhua provides a corresponding but phonetically explicit tripartition (2019): c, Z voiceless and voiced pre-alveolar affricates17 ć, ´Z voiceless and voiced mid-alveolar affricates č, ˇZ voiceless and voiced post-alveolar affricates

After splitting into Iranian and Indo-Aryan, Proto-Iranian had these two affricate series: alveolar type ć and post-alveolar type č. Why was there a phonetically unnecessary further advancement of the positions of stricture from palato-alveolar and palatal to alveolar and post-alveolar ind Proto-Iranian? PIE *h2 ŕtkos ‘bear’ and structurally related words



´ ‘bear’ is reflected e.g. in Hitt. /hartka-/ Lipp points out (2009: 2) that PIE *h2 ŕtko K (dorsal) consonants, but that Gr. árktos without metathesis of the T (dental) and shows regular inner-Greek metathesis of TK > KT.18 There is also no form of any metathesis in PIIr. *Hŕtča- > *Hŕtša- (with post-occlusive affricate simplification) >  ŕksa- (*t pre-OIA *ŕt.s.a- > OIA . . s. > ks. as pre-OIA *ps. > OIA ks. in *ps.u > Vedic   form has apparently survived in Paš. pasav"a¯l ‘goatherd, ks.ú- ‘cattle’ – this pre-OIA . shepherd’ [besides regular pašval"a¯]) and perhaps in Orm. s.w¯ an ‘shepherd’ which is, however, very similar to Pers. šuw¯ an, šob¯ an ‘shepherd’.19 Aside from lack of metathesis of TK > KT in Vedic Sanskrit, there is a metathesis ´ > -TKr´ in Nuristani and Dardic languages. of the dorsal resonant -r- from -rTKIrén Hegedüs (2012: 147f.) discusses this different development with the same PIE ´ > Proto-Nuristani *irtko ´ (“loss h2 ŕtkos lemma. She suggests in detail: PIE *h2 ŕtko of the r”) > *irt˙cu (“affrication and ofinitial laryngeal followed by the prevocalization  fronting of kˆ > c˙ [µ], raising of *o > u”) > *ir˙cu (“assimilation of t to the following affricate [µ]”) > *i˙cru (“metathesis of preconsonantal r . . . probably an early process because c does not become retroflex due to the preceding r”) > Ash., Kt., Wg. *i˙cr 17 The sign Z is taken as affricate in Kartvelian studies and not as fricative as elsewhere. 18 See also Lipp (2009 i: 147) for further examples of regular inner-Greek metathesis TK > KT. 19 The old form is also preserved in Nuristani Pr. s.@ ‘cattle, animal’, s.¯ e ‘flock of goats’, but it is not possible to say whether it reflects *ps.- or ks.-. The former is perhaps little more likely because of closure preservation of OIA ks.- e.g. in Pr. c.n(e)- ‘to sneeze’ < OIA *ks.n.av¯ıti ‘sneezes’ (3758). Morgenstierne’s notation čne- is a hearing mistake. The Pr. form is possibly influenced by a Mon-Khmer lemma (see p. 969).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.1. The historical background

87

(“apocope of the final vowel [except in Prasun]; NB. *˙cr > c. [Morgenstierne 1945a: 229] does not apply in this form because the operation of this rule must have antedated the Nuristani metathesis *r˙c > c˙ r: otherwise Waigali, which persistently preserves retroflex c., would show oc. and not o˙c ”) > i˙c (“loss of final r . . . ”). For Prasun ütr"u ¯ Hegedüs correctly reconstructs older *itru < *its ru (2012: 148). I may add here the interesting fact that the segmental metathesis was accompanied by shift of the (probably inherited) accent from the first to the second syllable. In order to show historical parallels with Dardic, Hegedüs refers to Morgenstierne’s article ‘Metathesis of liquids in Dardic’ (1947). However, this is not quite apposite because Morgenstierne only discusses two types of Dardic r-fronting, namely -r- moving from -rC(-) or -Cr(-) to the onset of a word. In case of the Nuristani example, the opposite has occurred, namely the backing of a resonant.20 For examples of aspiration in various NIA languages see p. 312.21 I doubt the assumption that the Dardic forms ´ got their retroflex affricate from *˙cr because I do not know any of lemma *h2 ŕtkoclear examplefor such a process when the cluster is surrounded by non-high vowels. I found K. s¯ osu < OIA s¯ ahasrá- ‘thousandfold’ (13380), Sh. s¯ as < OIA sahásra- ‘1000’ (13308), K. bras < OIA visra- ‘musty’ (12025), Ind. sat2yr1 < OIA srastara- ‘litter’ (13883). In the only example Ind. s a
kh and Sh. s.ak ‘neck’ < OIA sŕkvan- ‘corner of

 this means that mouth’ (13576) the retroflexion must have been caused by the -v-. All the Dardic forms must have turned into retroflexes before the Nuristani forms were dentalized from *č > c˙ . Thus we note similar sound processes having taken place in Nuristani and in Dardic language areas simply at different points in time, but leading to dissimilar results.22 Since there does not exist even one example for -rč- > -c.- and since OIA does not tolerate *-čr-, we may assume that similar to the development in Nuristani Prasun there was in Dardic a development -[rÙ]- > -[tS r]- > -tr- > -c.-. An example for a phonologically simple type of metathesis is Ind. b ec2
v  ‘to cut into shape’ which must derive < older *b etr
2v  < further interstages and finally < OIA vikartati ‘cuts through’ (11621).23 Here we do not have an onset-fronting of an -rC(-) cluster but simply a metathesis of an -rC(-) cluster into a -Cr- cluster. A historically more complex process has to be posited for Ind. big os2
v  ‘to beg, go begging’ which reflects OIA *vigrucyate ‘is robbed’ (11671.3, regarding semantics see there e.g. P. viguccn.a¯ ‘to be in want of, be destitute’). The only way to explain the presence of the retroflex sibi-

20 I use ‘backing’ in the sense of movement of a phonological element from the beginning or middle of a word towards its end and not, as others do, for ‘backing’ of a point of articulation e.g. with sibilants. 21 Fronting of resonant or aspiration is, however, much more common in Outer Languages, as will be shown below. 22 Note Kal. i˙c versus Kal.urt. ic. ‘bear’ which are both reflexes of PIIr. *Hŕtča-, but whereas the  latter is direct reflex of OIA ŕks.a- the former is a borrowing from Nuristani. 23 Some more examples for -rt-– -tr- transpositions are quoted p. 205.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

88

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

lant is this: *vigrucyao > *vigruś(y)ao and with r-spreading24 > *vigruśr o25 > big¯ os.o . Note: OIA Dh¯ atup. grócati, glócati ‘steals or robs’, P¯ an.. aorist agrucat, agroc¯ıt and the *vi- prefixed reconstructions in the CDIAL may create – despite deficient evidence – the impression of a solid inherited verbal paradigm. But such an impression would be deceptive and for Mayrhofer (EWA) the background of the lemma is not clear. Indeed, lemma 11671 (including big os2
v ) appears to have a very tangled history, which is also

discussed p. 256. The verb grócati, glócati is etymologically connected with (but not a reflex of) OIA LUÑC ‘pluck out’ which also seems to have a tangled history connecting it on the one hand with OIA l¯ us.áyati1 ‘steals’ (11098) (see p. 256) and ultimately with AA forms going back to PMK *luc ‘to steal’. On the other hand LUÑC may also have – according to EWA – one of its linguistic ancestors in PIE *(H )reuk ‘to pluck’. AA  forms resembling OIA glócati are e.g. Proto-Monic and Proto-Pray-Pram *klac both ‘to steal’, Nyah Kur khlEc ‘to steal’, Mnong blac ‘to steal’, Katu NglAh ‘steal’, etc.

A close parallel to the development of the Prasun ‘bear’ lemma is Nuristani *astru< *aµru- (see Turner áśru- ‘tear’ [919]). Before we have a closer look at this reconstructed Nuristani lemma, I want to say first that the lemma is a reflex of PIIr. *Háćru- which is the direct antecedent of Dardic Ind. 2 c ‘tear’ and Sh. asu ‘tear’. This

than its Nuristani

 is one example for a Dardic form which is more archaic cognate discussed in this section. The Dardic lemma has been borrowed into Nuristani Kamd. a¯c."ü, Kt. acu  and Wg. üs.ük all ‘tear’.

Now to *astru-: The development *-µr- > -str- shows the bisegmental character of these affricates.26 Kamd. and Kt. with retroflex affricate present a ‘Dardic’ type of development with older *ačru- > a¯c."ü etc., whereas Kalasha ástru and D u . og. atthr¯ etc. are believed by Turner to be loanwords from Nuristani. However, it is more likely that these ‘Nuristani’ forms are remnants from a time of early OIA when just the first dialectal differentiations developed. This viewpoint is supported by the Dardic Kalami form äsum H(L) ‘tear’ with older *-tsr- > -str- > -s- as in Klm. is Hy ‘woman’ (< OIA str
- ‘woman, wife’ [13734]), which shows a different innovation starting from the same ‘Nuristani’ form. Note also that the Kalami form with the bilabial nasal consonant has a striking parallel in Old Greek 𝛿´ 𝛼 𝜅𝜌𝜐𝜇𝛼, which was borrowed into Old Latin lacruma, lacrima.27 The origin of this (probably common) suffix appears not to be clear, but the Kalami form has no parallel in Nuristani and cannot therefore be a borrowing. A similar example is Dardic Tir. str¯ u ‘to hear’ which is cognate with OIA śrutá‘heard’ (12714) but also derives < older *µr¯ u. I don’t know any Nuristani parallel. 24 Several cases of r-spreading are mentioned in this book. It is also documented in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, e.g. in Gan. tratra- < OIA tátra- ‘there’ (see Baums Outline of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Grammar ). Note also Sh.dras. c2z a
‘weaver’ (Rajapurohit [2012: 109]) probably < OIA tantrav¯aya- ‘weaver’ (5664) via

aya-.

*trantrav¯ 25 Also *vigrurś o would lead to the same result, but cases of rś > s. are very rare. 26 This holds true for the phonetic level but not for the phonological level as will be shown below. 27 The -m in Proto-Celtic *dakrom ‘tear’ (Thurneysen [1917: 67]) is the old neuter ending and thus different from the Greek and Kalami nasal consonant.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.1. The historical background

89

And another close parallel to the development of the Prasun ‘bear’ lemma is Dardic Kal. ustru 
‘hips’ which is cognate with OIA śrón.i- ‘hip and loins, buttocks’ (12729) but

which goes back to older *˙cron.i- (thus with [st] < mono-phonemic /µ/ and prothetic ´ vowel) < *čron.i- < PIE klóunis ‘±haunch, hip’. Here the Kal. word follows the ‘Iranian’ way because also YAv. sraoni- ‘buttock, hip, haunch’ is dental. This historical development is different from Nuristani Pr. t o ‘thigh’ (Morgen

stierne) respectively t.o ‘inner side of thigh; euphemistically for ‘vulva” (Buddruss und Degener) which goes back to older *c.on.i < *čron.i- (cf. Wg. cu , cru  ‘thigh, hip’



or Kamd. c."u ˜ ‘thigh and hip’) and thus follows here the ‘Indo-Aryan’ way.28 These forms are interesting insofar as Kal. reflects the primary dentalization stage whereas Pr. and Wg. indirectly reflect the stage before the first dentalization. Yet another interesting example of a similar type is Dardic Gauro b2c ac ‘a type

of pheasant’ which is related with OIA *v¯ aśukapaks.in- (Zoller 2005). The first part of the compound is related with OIA *v¯ aśuka- ‘crowing, calling (of birds)’ (14800) ¯ ‘cry (of animals)’. According to Mayrhofer (EWA, KEWA) the and thus with VAŚ lemma is a ‘sound root’ and thus of little use for historical comparison. However, there are several parallels in Nuristani: Kamd. v¯ ac˙ "ia, Kt. v¯ ac˙ "v, Niš. va˙c"öv etc. all ‘male monal (Impeyan) pheasant’ – and, with ‘Nuristani’ shape Dardic Gaw. v¯ ac˙ iv/u ‘golden oriole; peacock’ – and with second element not < OIA paks.ín- but perhaps < váyas-1 ‘bird’ (11304). Again, the Gauro form must go back to older *v¯ ačuo with retroflexion caused by the -u-. One more here relevant example is Dardic Ind. zhu z ‘birch tree’ which is exactly synonym with Ind. zhu s, and both of which reflect OIA bh¯ urja- ‘a birch tree’ (9570)

cases

(Zoller 2005). In both r-fronting must have taken place (in order to affricatize bh-), however at different points in time: again first the ‘Dardic’ fronting must have > > taken place (still visible in Pal. bhr"u ¯j): bh¯ urja > *bhr¯ uja > *ãüu ¯j > *ãüu ¯s. > zhu s



(with CCH and common word-final devoicing); the second ‘Nuristani’ fronting must have taken place at a later time when j had changed to dz, z in Ind. and thus the whole word to *Ãh¯ uza > *dzh¯ uz > zhu z. The different developments of Nuristani *-˙cr- to either -˙c - or -tr- suggests that affricates in Nuristani (and in Dardic) are not mono- but bisegmental and thus perhaps not mono- but biphonematic.29 This assumption is supported by a number of forms from Nuristani and Dard languages as e.g. Pr. dus"a ‘soup’ < older *us"a <



OIA y¯ us.a- ‘broth’ (10521). For a handful of additional examples see p. 475.

West Pah¯ ar.¯ı parallels with the ‘bear’ lemma? In West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties there are a few compounds built with OIA *kat.t.a-2 ‘young male animal’ (2645), however with meaning ‘human offspring’: K¯ aś. r.k¯ at.t. ‘widow’s 28 Even though Dardic Tirahi th¯ u ‘vulva’ (Morgenstierne (1934b) may appear to be sufficiently similar with Prasun t.o for comparison it is unclear how it could have derived < *čron.i-. It is more likely part of a lemma sub Bng. th o ‘hip, buttock’ (see p. 619. 29 For other examples of the phenomenon of ‘phoneme split’ – namely splitting of aspirated stops Ch into CVh – see p. 318.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

90

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

offspring’ (Kaul [2006 i: 303]) with first component r.- < OIA ran.d.a- ‘maimed’ (10593), parkat.t. ‘bastard’ (loc. cit.) with first component < OIA pára- ‘other’ (7793) which has a parallel in Jat.. par.kat.t. ‘step-son or daughter’ and in Nuristani Wg. parkat."ay ‘stepdaughter’ and parkat."¯e ‘stepson’ (Strand). Note also sub 2645 Bhal. sakat.t. ‘shebear with young’ and Bng. sOkti ‘female bear’ and sOkE ‘bear cubs’ (original meanings

understood correctly) with first component perhaps of Bng. are possibly not anymore parallel with Nuristani i˙c. Kaul quotes Pog. trakat. ‘female black bear’ (Kaul [2006 i: 331], but p. 232 he writes probably faulty trakad ‘she-bear’), and there is in (Old) Cam., Gadd. and Kgr. kal.otti ‘black bear’30 with first syllable influenced by k¯ ala ‘black’. One wonders whether Pog. trao and (Old) Cam., Gadd. and Kgr. o otti may have anything to do with Pr. ütr"u ¯ ‘bear’. This might appear improbable but it is not more improbably than ‘Nuristani’ words in the D . ogr¯ı dialect of Panjabi. Note: According to Turner, OIA *kat.t.a-2 is possibly a borrowing from Dravidian, for which see DEDR 1123 kat.avu, kat.a ¯, kat.a ¯y and there Ma. kat.a ¯, kit.a ¯, kit.a ¯vu i.a. ‘child, young person’. However, this is the only Dravidian example with the reflex(es) also meaning ‘young human’; in all other cases the meanings are more or less close to ‘(young) buffalo’. This suggests the possibility of partial interference of a borrowing from Munda, cf. Mahali kaúi boj ‘younger sister’, kaúi bojha ‘younger brother’, Sant. k@úi¼é ‘small, little, young’ (used with siblings), Sant. (Rashidpur) k1tiPbohin ‘younger sister’ etc. Since there do not seem to exist clear Mon-Khmer parallels, the ‘young(er) sibling’ lemma might be a ‘North(?) Indian’ word.

4.2

Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants In this section I show that parts of the Outer Languages in northwestern South Asia (i.e. parts of the Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages) share with Nuristani and Iranian as an archaism the separate representation of the primary and secondary palatals – here schematized as opposition between [µ/dz] and [Ù/Ã]. This differentiates the three from the Inner Languages (the descendants of Vedic Sanskrit). Ideally, and at the time of Old Indo-Aryan and Avestan largely factual, it is an opposition between dental(ized) and postalveolar (non-dentalized) affricates. The dentalized affricates (still frequently preserved in Nuristani) were deaffricated (and partly debuccalized) in Iranian languages. However, this ideal (quasi momentary) situation got blurred by the fact that with the passage of time also secondary palatals got partly dentalized, viz. in New Iranian and Nuristani languages, and in those Outer Languages. The situation on the Indo-Aryan side got historically even more blurred by influence of the Inner Languages on the Outer Languages and by a broad trend during the Prakrit phase also in those IA languages with only one order of affricates to dentalization (see Grierson [1913]). Whereas, to my knowledge, there is no evidence for two clearly separate Iranian language immigrations into the settlement zone of the Iranian languages, this is

30 Cannot be the same as Tam. karat.i ‘Indian black bear, sloth bear’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

91

very much so the case for Indo-Aryan, where one finds many clear traces for at least two separate language immigrations into the settlement zone of the IndoAryan languages. The earlier arriving Outer Languages shared with Iranian and Nuristani the separate representation of the primary and secondary palatals, but due to the later following interference by Inner Languages the linguistic situation became very complicated as demonstrated e.g. by many doublets. The here-suggested model has a further repercussion: Johanna Nichols’ axiom (1998: 252), “[t]he relative chronology for entries to India is therefore Indic, then Nuristani, then Iranian” is no longer tenable and ought to be replaced by: The relative chronology for entries to northwestern South Asia is Outer Languages Indic (including Nuristani) roughly simultaneously with Iranian, then Inner Languages Indic.31 This section is divided into three subsections: lemmata from Dardic, from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and lemmata found in Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. This ideal segmentation is occasionally infringed.

4.2.1

Dardic

Brok-skad palatal 1. zaro, zyaro ‘old man’ < OIA jára- ‘wearing out’, *‘old’ < PIE *´ gerh1 os ‘old man’ (Av. *zar@ta- ‘decrepid’). 2. zut ‘born’ < OIA j¯ atá- ‘born’ (5182), zus ‘to grow, to bear; to take birth’ < OIA j a
yate ‘is born’ (5204), zun ‘snake’ < OIA jantú- ‘any animal of lowest order, insect, worm’ (5110) all < PIE *´ genh1 - ‘to produce, to beget, to give birth’ (Av. z¯ ata- ‘born’). 3. sy@r@ ‘winter’ < older *˙cara like Nuristani Ash. sor o
‘autumn’. There is correspondence with OIA śarád- ‘autumn’ (12329) which goes back to PIIr. ´ ´ *ćarad-, *ćard- which may derive < PIE *kel-(e)d-, an extension of PIE *kelh1 - ‘cold; warm’ (see EWA; cf. Av. sar@ta- ‘cold’). 4. sva ‘boil, blister’ has probably many modern cognates: Ind. c 2 v ‘a small sore’, Gau. c u
2y , c u E
‘a wart’ and Bhat.. c v2i ‘a wart’, Pr. c˙ a¯v, c˙ a¯ ‘dug of udder’, Wg. c˙ a¯v ‘dug of udder; breast nipple of a woman’ (see p. 105) which correspond ´ h1 - (∼ *ku ´ eh1 -) ‘swell’ (Av. e.g. with OIA ŚVI ‘swell’ which derives < PIE *keu   sispimna- ‘swell up’ and Orn. s.us-uk ‘to swell’).

Brok-skad velar 1. č¯ or, čhar ‘four’32 < OIA catúrah. ‘four’ (4655) < PIE *ku etwóres (Av. caTw ar o). 2. piči ‘tail’ because of lack of aspiration perhaps not directly < OIA piccha- ‘tail’ (8151), which I take as allomorph of OIA púccha- ‘tail, hinder part’, and which 31 Maybe this is the background for the amazing number of apparently early Iranian borrowings into Indo-Aryan discussed below p. 766. 32 Also Kho. has aspirated čhor ‘four’ which is explained as due to influence of Kho. c.hói ‘six’, but Bro. ‘six’ is s.@.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

92

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

can derive, despite controversial discussions, < PIE *puk(eh𝑎 )- ‘tail’ (Mallory and Adams). Morphologically close to the Bro. form is Tor. p¯ uš ‘fox’, p¯ıš ‘vixen’.33 3. mučis ‘to leave’ < OIA mucyáte ‘is loosed; escapes’ 10181 < PIE (s)meuk- ‘wipe,  release’ (see EWA). u
4. jyut ‘living’ < OIA j vant- ‘living’ (5244) < PIE *g eih3 - ‘live’ (Av. ˇȷvaiti ‘lives’). Indus Kohistani palatal The area where Dardic Indus Kohistani is spoken is situated relatively far away to the east from the area where Nuristani is spoken. This lack of direct contact needs strong arguments for proving borrowing from Nuristani. 1. c h am ‘a cluster of houses with a common roof’ (Hallberg and Hallberg have c˙ h¯am ‘neighborhood’) probably < OIA chádman- ‘roof’ (4981) which derives possibly ´ < PIE *sked‘to cover’ (EWA). Regarding change of cluster cf. AMg. chaüma(Pischel §139) (but Pa. vivatta-cchadda- [Geiger § 53]) < OIA chádman- . Note that there are also non-dentalized parallels in Bhat.. č¯ am and Gau. čh¯ am with same meaning.
z a
n ‘a very big (prob. mythical) snake’ (Zoller) respectively z¯an(d) ‘snake’ 2. k2tu

(Hallberg and Hallberg) < OIA jantú- < PIE *´ genh1 -. 3. z
2v 1 ‘to give birth’ < OIA j a
yate ‘is born’ (5204) < PIE *´gnh1 -yé- (cf. Av. z¯ata ‘born’ etc.). 4. z
2v 2 n.f. ‘a cow having already calved’ perhaps < OIA lex. jani- ‘mother’ and thus same PIE lemma as the preceding. 5. zh az
2y ‘a brother’s wife’ < OIA lex. bhr¯aturj¯ay¯a- ‘brother’s wife’ (9660) with

OIA j ay a
‘wife’ probably < PIE *´genh - ‘be born’ (see EWA). 1 a
l ‘a marriage’, Ind.ky. zy¯al kar- ‘to marry’ (further parallels loc. cit.) < 6. zh janyay¯ atra- ‘ bridal procession’ (5118) and first component ultimately < PIE *´ genh1 -. 7. zh a ‘a yawn; doze’ < OIA jrmbhan.a- ‘yawning’ (5264) probably indirectly < PIE *´ gembh - ‘to show teeth,snarl’. 8. zh a
r ‘the heart’ is only used in m  zh a
r ph2yli -g a ‘my heart is broken’34 < PIIr. h ˆerd. *´ȷ ŕdaya- with ‘unexplained’ voiced and aspirated palato-velar < PIE *k¯  Note: Despite my suspicion (2005: 202), Ind. zha
r cannot be a borrowing from Nuristani because of the aspiration. Rather, preservation of aspiration distinguishes it as more archaic than other reflexes of this lemma in the Dardic/Nuristani/Iranian area (but note also remarkably archaic Shgh. z¯ ord i.a. ‘heart’ with preservation of rd cluster). According to Mayrhofer (EWA), the origin of the aspirated voiced PIIr. affricate > *´ȷh is unclear. However, Lipp suggests aptly (2009 i: 153) PIE *krd- x *ˆ gh rH - ‘yearn’   33 But Alexander Lubotsky thinks this word to be a IVC substrate word (2001a: 10). 34 With main verb < OIA phálati ‘splits, bursts’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

93

(OIA háryati ‘likes; yearns after’) → *ˆ gh rd- > Kt. ¨ȷire ‘heart’. The Ind. form dehave undergone a similar derivation as Av. h  rives, however, < PIIr. *
 a rd- but seems to z@r@Daiia-. OIA rd usually changed > Ind. r..35

Indus Kohistani velar 1. Ind. c2
l adj.m. and c2
yli adj.f. both ‘alone’, c
al2 v adj.m. and c
al  adj.f. both  ‘alone’ cf. with OIA caramá‘the outermost (first or last, opposed to the middle one); at the end’ etc. which may derive < PIE *kw el- ‘far away’. 2. žondún and ž¯ odún ‘life’ (Zoller) respectively ˇȷu"dun ‘life’ (Hallberg and Hallberg), Gau. z2vd
un ‘life’, Bhat.. zund^ ‘life’; Šat.. z a
nt ‘(the human) body’ (with semantic parallels [‘human body’] in Ash., Kamd., Wg., Kt., Shum., Kal., Khet.) all < OIA lex. j¯ıvantá- ‘long-lived’ (5244); Ind. z
li ‘life’ < OIA j¯ıvalá‘full of life’ (5247) all < PIE *gu eih3 - ‘live’ (*gu ih3 -ue-).  3. žhikàh ‘bowstring’ is probably a compound < OIA jiy a
- ‘bowstring’ (5227) + OIA punkha˙ ‘feathered shaft of an arrow, the lower part of an arrow which comes in contact with the bow-string and contains the feathers and shaft’ (8247), thus originally corresponding with the expression ‘bow and arrow’, cf. also Pa. ponkh¯ ˙ anuponkha ˙ m ˙ ‘arrow after arrow’.36 OIA jiy a
- derives < PIE *gu (i)eh𝑎 ‘bowstring’. Note that non-palatalized forms have been preserved in Dm. and Wg. g¯ı ‘bowstring’ (however, noted only by Morgenstierne and reproduced by Turner). 4. (a) zh
2r ‘gush’37 is used only in the phrase v  zh
2r h o
th ‘water gushes down’.



However, it has a parallel in Dardic Khowar in uz.ur- v.i. ‘to sprinkle’ for which Strand suggests derivation < pre-OIA *ud-gs.har- ‘pour out’ which is reflected in OIA *ujjharati ‘pours out, places, touches’ (1675). The lemma is an example for the retroflexion of a PIE labio-velar instead palatalization, and for the preservation of a pre-Vedic voiced sibilant.38 Whereas Nuristani owes its exceptional position mainly due to its preservation of the ‘pre-Vedic’ occlusion in reflexes of PIE (labio-)velars, some Dardic languages occupy an equal exceptional position due to their preservation of pre-Vedic voiced sibilants and voiced aspirated sibilants. For zh
2r the derivation is < PIA *gz.h ar- < PIIr.

h u h *gž ár- < PIE *g g´ er- ‘to drift along in water; to float’ (LIV: 213).39 OIA ks.árati ‘trickles; melts away, perishes’ (CDIAL),40 ks.a¯ra- ‘juice, essence; treacle, molasses’, etc., Pa. kharati ‘flows, streams’, paggharati ‘oozes, trickles, flows’, 35 This phonetic change of OIA rd > Ind. r. (also before t and slshapeD) is also found in Brahui, Pashto and Sindhi (Korn [2003: 182]). It parallels the ancient change of PIE *rs > OIA (r)s. as e.g. in PIE *ku els- > vernacular OIA kas.ati ‘scratches’. 36 Apart from a doubtful modern reflex in N. quoted by Turner, there are clear reflexes in Bng. p ungO

n.m. ‘shaft of an arrow’ and Brj. phõk ‘the feathered part of an arrow’. 37 This lemma is repeated with small differences p. 33. 38 On the Vedic elimination of pre-Vedic voiced sibilants see Lipp (2009 i: 143). h 39 Correct reconstruction is not, as suggested by Mayrhofer (EWA), PIE *dh gw  er- ‘flow, melt’. PIE *gu ´ gh er- is believed to be an extension of the PIE root *gu e´ gh - ‘to wade into water’. 40 This meaning is more accurate than LIV ‘flows, streams’ which itself is clearer preserved in cognate OIA ks.álati ‘flows’ (3664).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

94

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Pk. jharaï ‘jharn¯ a, t.apakn¯ a, c¯ un¯ a, girn¯ a – to flow, trickle, drip; to drop, leak; to ooze; to fall, debouch’. (b) Paralleling OIA *ks.irati ‘flows’ (∼ *jhirati1 [3689] with vowel alternation as in OIA tárati ∼ tiráte) are zh erz
2v  (with -z- passive marker) ‘to trickle, flow

off, skin, strip [e.g., leaves from a tree])’ which down very slowly’ (itr. ‘to take corresponds with H. khern¯ a ‘to run, flow’ and kher¯ı ‘afterbirth’ (cf. e.g. Pk. kheri ‘kalus.t¯ a – dirt, impurity’ and K. ch¯ oru ‘diarrhoea’ [latter quoted sub OIA ks.a¯ra-2 *‘flowing; juice, essence; treacle’], etc.). 5. Also the following is an example for the retroflexion of a PIE labio-velar instead palatalization: z ar ‘a string (especially of honey when taken out of a container)’

+ ho- ‘to form strings’; also borrowed into Bur. 2.jáal man´- ‘to pull strings (e.g. as honey, tarmac)’. They correspond with OIA GAL1 ‘drip’ with finite forms besides galati1 ‘drips, drops, oozes, trickles’ (4074) also in Samhit¯ ˙ a intensive variants jalgal¯ıti, jalgul¯ıti (see EWA) which suggest derivation < PIE *gu el‘to drip, flow’ (Pokorny) resp. *gu el(s)- ‘well up, flow’ (Mallory and Adams).41 Parallel to OIA g¯ ala- ‘flowing, dropping’ one has to reconstruct palatalized OIA *j¯ ala- ∼ *j¯ ara- as the source for the Ind. form and the borrowing in Bur. Whether the -r in Ind. is responsible for the retroflexion is not clear, but cf. the very similar change in Kamd. .ȷ"oř ‘row, commotion’ < OIA *jhagad.- ‘quarrel’ (5321.1) and in Kho. z."ar ‘poison’ which is a borrowing from Iranian: Morgenstierne reconstructs either NW Pahlawvi *ž¯ ar (1936) or Old Ir. *aDr a (1938: 278). Note: The verbs Ind. z orz
2v  ‘to drip (e.g., water from the ceiling)’ (with -zpassive marker) and perhaps Kal. zázik ‘to leak out through a hole’ (if < older *zárzik) which, however, must be borrowing from a Dardic language, which uses Sanskrit (-yá) passive (like Ind. which, however, is quite far away from Kalasha land), are most likely not cognates but belong to an etymologically somewhat obscure group of similar words discussed p. 265.

Kalasha palatal Kalasha is like Khowar an ‘Indo-Aryan’ type of language. The few instances of ‘Iranian type’ reflexes must therefore be remains of (or borrowings from) another Outer Language. This opinion differs somewhat from that of Morgenstierne who presents (1973: 198, § 22) a small collection of words containing c˙ and z which he all regards as borrowings from Nuristani. Where applicable they have been considered below and elsewhere in this book. 1. vã˙c ‘level, even, smooth, safe, easy’ + hik ‘to remain well, be careful’ as in vã˙c thi pári ‘may you have a good journey!’; + kárik ‘to do with care, to do well’ and negative nav a
c ‘difficult, dangerous, bothersome, inconvenient’ + hik ‘to be careless’, also ‘risky’ in the sense of ‘unwanted’: t
esomo, niam
at ubu
 s
an, se
he 41 Pokorny has also the meaning ‘to throw’ for which, however, Mallory and Adams set up separate PIE *gu elh1 - ‘throw’ (see also EWA on this distinction).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

95

thi nava
c ‘besides this, shoots of grain will have sprouted and with a situation like that, it’s risky (lest the goats eat them)’; + kárik ‘to bother someone, make it difficult for someone’ may correspond with OIA VAŚ ‘will’, although semantics do not fully match.42 Cf. e.g. anu vaśa ‘at pleasure’, Böthling and Roth present also examples with meanings ‘to like, love; gern haben, lieben’; note also Av. an-usant- ‘unwilling’, Old Pers. vašn¯a- ‘wish, favour’ (Cheung [2007: 427]). The ´ ‘to wish, want’. forms go back to PIE *wek2. Forms like zant ‘pregnancy, birth’, zánti ‘child-bearing’, zántyak hik ‘to give birth’ are according to Morgenstierne borrowings from Nuristani or Iranian. This may be so, but more likely is that they are remains of (or borrowings from) another Outer Language (cf. e.g. Ind. z
2v  ‘to give birth’) because most of the other Kal. words having dental affricates are not borrowings from Iranian or Nuristani. 3. ta˙círik ‘to be full (of food)’ (Trail and Cooper), c˙ a˙c¯ır- ‘to satisfy’ (Morgen´ stierne) corresponds with OIA *ś¯ aśar¯ıti ‘satisfies’ (12418) which is < PIE *ker‘grow’. According to Morgenstierne, this is a borrowing from an unknown Nuristani language. Note the similar-looking consonant alternation in Pr. c˙ u˙c"a ∼ tus"a ‘twoyear-old bull’ which may be related with OIA *duvatsara- ‘two years old’ (6456) even though the phonological details are not really clear. Note also the following pronunciations of the same Kalasha village name: čatrumá, c˙ atrumá, tatrumá. 4. Kal. drázik ‘to load (something) onto one’s own back for carrying’, drazék ‘to load something on the back of someone’ and drazavár hik ‘to hang on someone in a bothersome way’ (i.e. to ‘load’ sb. with s.th. unpleasant) and Kho. draz¯eik ‘to load up’43 < PIE *dh er´ gh - ‘bind fast’ (OIA DARH ‘be firm’44 which is perhaps an extension of PIE *dher- ‘support’ [EWA]). Iranian parallels are Av. dar@zaiia and participle dršta- ‘to attach’, and Psht. leˇ x - and l¯e.z@l ‘to load (a beast of burden)’ which  Cheung (2011: 189) derives < PIr. *darzaya-. Note Gan. dars.a-, das.a- ‘load’. 5. Kal. bazá ‘arm, hand’ is related with OIA b¯ ahú- ‘arm’ but has so far always been claimed to be a borrowing from Nuristani or Iranian (ultimately < PIE *bh a¯g´h ú- or *bh eh2 g´ ℎú-). But this is not compelling, indeed it is very unlikely. The word has its accent at the same place as OIA, as the PIE reconstruction and as Kho. baz"u and Dm. ba"z¯ o, and I cannot find the word in a Nuristan language. Had it been a borrowing from Iranian, one would need to explain either that the faint traces of free PIE accent found in Avesta survived mysteriously in modern 42 Nasalization in the Kal. form is problematic since in almost all cases it reflects a former nasal consonant. One possible exception might be Kal. udh o
‘dust’ < OIA *uddh¯ ud.i- ‘excessive dust

(2025). 43 Morgenstierne assumes borrowing from an Iranian language (1936), a possibility which cannot be completely excluded. 44 Mallory and Adams (2006: 381) wrongly quote OIA dh
rhyati.



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

96

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

East Iranian border languages or one would need to show that the words here under discussion are all old borrowings from Pashto, which I regard as unlikely. In any case, I cannot find any modern Iranian language with a reflex of Avestan b¯ azu- that is marked with an accent.45 The same lemma ‘arm, hand’ seems to be present also in Klm. b a bas, ba vas HL ‘upper arm’ (perhaps a synonym compound with first syllable < OIA b¯ ahú-?). The following forms appear to be old and indigenous compounds: bazáyak ‘front leg just above the foot of an animal’ probably with -yak ‘diminutive or endearment suffix’;46 bazagrén hik ‘to hold hands with someone’ would correspond with OIA *b¯ ahugrahan.a-; bazúm kárik ‘to dance alone raising arms and opening and closing hands in rhythm’ (with unclear origin of -úm); bázun˙ ‘branch of an evergreen tree; person’s loving care’ is the ‘Iranian’ equivalent of AV b¯ ahvanka˙ ‘the bend of the arm’. Any connection with OIA bhuja- appears most unlikely. 6. Kal. bos ‘thick’ as in ghu 
i bo bos hin ‘goat-hair coats are very thick’ and bos

kái bi hísti ‘sow the seed thickly’.47 The first example contains two different reflexes of PIE *bh ng
h -
u- ‘thick, dense’: bo is the reflex of the OIA reflex bahú (9187) and bos is the ‘Iranian’ type reflex (with word-final devoicing like in 26.) which cf. with OAv. b@zuuant probably ‘dense’ (EWA), Bal.[tic?] b¯ az ‘much, a

lot of’, baz ‘dense’; Lith. bãżmas ‘quantity, mass’.48

Kalasha velar Being (mostly) an Inner Language type regarding reflexes of the PIE gutturals, Kalasha reflects the PIE (labio-)velars regularly as palatal affricates. But the following word is here especially interesting: 1. c.hál.ik ‘to scold, discipline’ as in se may hátya insáv arav, ne ac.hál.av ‘he let me off, he didn’t scold’ may derive < older *sč(h)al- < PIE *(s)kw el- ‘call, cry’ where Pokorny quotes e.g. Old Icelandic skella ‘scold’ (IEW: 550). The Kal. word with retroflex affricate outcome similar as in Pr. p@s as  ‘evening star’
PIIR. *čray- > *-µrai- > *strai- > sai- similar as in Klm. is Hy ‘woman’ < OIA str
- ‘woman, wife’ (3734).55 4. su"c˙ iy@ ‘white’ and susig@ g¯ or.@, gen. susiky@ g¯ or.@s ‘the white horse’ is in a way cognate with OIA ŚUC ‘shine’. For the following cognates also with initial dental sibilant – Kal. suč ‘ritually pure’, sučék ‘to purify ritually, sanctify’ and súči ‘spirit or fairy which frightens people’, Pr. suč"u ¯ ‘(ritually) pure’, sučeli- ‘to make pure, purify’ and Him. sc¯eran. ‘purify’ – I have suggested derivation < OIA *suśucya- (2018: 194) which compares with cognates OIA suśukla- ‘very white’ and suśoka- ‘shining beautifully’. Shum. su"c˙ iy@ thus derives < older *sučukya´ and ultimately < PIE *keuk‘shine, burn’ (LIV 331, IEW 597, Lipp 2009i: 60).

Shumashti velar 1. l¯ oč ‘dawn’ < OIA *locya- ‘bright’ (11131) (cf. dentalized Gaw. r¯ oc˙ ‘dawn’ < OIA rocya- [10835]) < PIE *lóuk(es)- ‘light’.

Tirahi palatal 1. g o
za ‘dung of cows’56 is cognate with OIA go-śákrt- ‘cow dung’ with -za < *(-)µa ´ u -r-o-. Voicing to -za is paralleled by cognate Pr. zõ ‘manure, mud, < PIE kok earth soaked through animal hooves’. The same second element appears also in 55 Here also Paš. sig ‘woman’ (Buddruss [1959b: 62])? 56 The following data are, if not stated differently, all from Morgenstierne (1934b).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

101

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

2. 3. 4. 5.

Tir. gu𝑖 z ‘human excrement’ which is < synonym compound OIA *g¯ utha–śákrt ‘excrement-dung’ (see 4225). b¯ez- ‘to sit’ (also with -z < *-s) is cognate with OIA úpaviśati ‘sits down’ (2245); also cognate is Tir. baxta ‘sitting’ (< *vasta- < *vista). The two Tir. ´ ‘to settle’. words derive < older *(-)viµ - < PIE *ueik  sal¯ a ‘wood, tree’ (op. cit.) is cognate with OIA
sal a
k a- ‘any small stake or stick’ ´ ‘a thin shaft, (12349) but must have derived < older *µal¯ a probably < PIE *kelstalk’. s¯ı ‘is, exists’ is cognate with OIA śéte ‘lies down’ (12605 ) but goes back to older ´ (H?) resp. *key´ *µ¯ı and derives ultimately < PIE *kei ‘to be lying down’.  s¯en ‘bedstead’ is cognate with OIA śáyana- ‘lying down, bed’ (12323) but must ´ - ‘to lie, recline’. have derived < older *µ¯en < PIE *kei  Tirahi velar Most of the reflexes of the PIE (labio-)velars appear dentalized, e.g. paz ‘to cook, c Ov@r ‘four’ although Morgenstierne noted also čaúda ‘fourteen’ (But Grierson has µauda ‘14’ [1925b: 412]). Note also Tir. č¯ıne ‘old’ < OIA ks.¯ın.á- ‘worn away’ (3690) < PIE *dℎ gu ℎ ei- ‘to destroy, perish’.  Dameli palatal According to the Encyclopedia Iranica (sub Dardest¯ an), “[t]he attribution of the Dameli language, which exhibits both N¯ urest¯an¯ı and Dardic features, is not clear.” A similar opinion was originally held by Morgenstierne (1942b), but later he argued that it is a Dardic language with many borrowings form an unknown Nuristani language (1961: 138): “Dam¯el¯ı, [is spoken] in one village in an east side valley of Chitral, between Mirkhani and Arandu. It has adopted a number of K¯ afir¯ı [sic] words . . . ” However, none of the following words has anything exclusively characteristic for Nuristani languages. See also Perder (2013: 4ff.). Data from this language have been put together here in order to show that despite its dominant Dardic character it has clear evidence for the ‘Iranic type’ of reflexes of PIE glottal stops.

´ ‘bite’. 1. "za cin ‘nettle’ < OIA damśana˙ ‘biting’ (6112) < PIE *denk2. za"y- eci ‘she-bear with cubs’ with first word < OIA j ay a
- ‘woman, wife’ (5205,

j¯a ‘mother’) probably < OIA JAN ‘be born’ < PIE *´genh - ‘to give note H. 1

birth’. 3. z¯ an- ‘to know’ < OIA j an a
ti ‘knows’ (5193) < PIE *´gneh3 - ‘know’.
4. z am a ‘son-in-law’ < OIA j a
m atr- ‘daughter’s husband’ (5198) < PIE *´gomh 𝑥  ter- ‘son-in-law’.

Dameli velar 1. čakri ‘spleen’, Kal. č"akri ‘spleen’ (only Morgenstierne) < OIA cakríya‘pertaining to wheels’, *‘circular’ < PIE *ku eku lóm ‘wheel’. 2. ža´ ‘resin, gum’ < OIA játu- ‘lac’ (5093) < PIE *gu étu- pitch’. 3. z ata, z ata ‘alive’ < OIA j¯ıvantá- ‘living’ (5244) < PIE *gu ih3 -ue- etc.  © 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

102

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

4. z as- ‘blow out a fire’ < OIA JAS ‘be exhausted’ in jásate ‘is exhausted or starved’ (5169) and *j¯ asa- ‘exhaustion’ (5220) (in both cases only one reflex in A. at the eastern edge of Indo-Aryan) < PIE *gu es- ‘extinguish’. Note 5. ži"lä(i)ř ‘cream’, Pal. ˇȷi"l¯er.¯ı ‘cream’, Paš. ˇȷal ‘cream’ all < OIA *jalya- ‘collection of water’ (5165) and Kal. os.ála ‘cream from boiled milk’ < *us.a-jalya- (see 2385 and 5165) < PIE *gu el- ‘to drip, flow’ (Pokorny) resp. *gu el(s)- ‘well up, flow’ (Mallory and Adams)? 1. At the end of this subsection I add Tir. s¯en ‘bedstead’ (Morgenstierne [1934b]) which is cognate with OIA śáyana- ‘lying down, bed’ (12323) but which must ´ - ‘to lie, recline’, and Tir. sal¯ have derived < older *µ¯en < PIE *kei a ‘wood, tree’ (op. cit.) which is cognate with OIA
sal a
k a- ‘any small stake or stick’ (12349) ´ ‘a thin shaft, but which must have derived < older *µal¯ a probably < PIE *kelstalk’.

4.2.2

West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı palatal ´ 1. c On anO ‘to hurt, beat’ < OIA ks.an.óti ‘injures’ (3644) < PIE *tken‘strike’.57



2. c okO ‘cleanliness’ < OIA coks.a- ‘pure, clean’ (4918) which, if cognate with OIA ´ ŚUC ‘shine’, would derive < PIE *keuk‘shine, burn’. 3. dzOn-zOnO ‘different people’ < OIA jána- ‘race, person’ (5098) < PIE *´ genh1

‘be born’. Here cognate is also zOterO ‘bastard, natural child’ (Kt.g. zat.t.u

(5182). ‘illegitimate child’) < OIA j¯ atá- ‘born’  4. dzOm a garnO ‘to yawn’ < OIA *jrmbh¯ayita- ‘yawned, yawning’ (5266) probably

PIE *´gembh - ‘to show  teeth, snarl’. indirectly < 5. dzOrOnt ‘very old (e.g., trees, animals)’ and zOrzOrO ‘old, rotten, fragile’ < OIA jára- ‘wearing out’, *‘old’ < PIE *´ gerh1 os ‘old man’. 6. dzOrmEnO ‘to be born’ (and zOmnO ‘to grow [as crops]’, see Addenda and



Corrigenda) related with OIA jánman‘birth, creature’ (5113) < PIE g´enh1 ‘beget a child; be born’. For close phonetic parallels see p. 124. 7. dzannO ‘to know’ < OIA j an a
ti ‘knows’ (5193) < PIE *´gneh3 - ‘know’.

‘a claw’ < OIA JABH ‘bite’ < PIE *´gembh - ‘destroy’ (EWA); the only 8. dzabu semantic parallel known to me is Iranian Oss. zæmby, zæmbu ‘paw; Pranke’ (EWA). 9. Poet. dzal.i ‘skin (of a frog)’58 < OIA jar a
yu- ‘snake’s slough; covering of embryo; afterbirth’ (regarding liquid -r- cf. Pa. jal¯ abu- i.a. ‘placenta’) < PIE *´ gerh𝑎 ‘grow, age, mature’. 10. dza¯r ‘a paramour’ < OIA j¯ ará- ‘lover, friend’ (5206) and perhaps – if basically meaning ‘knowledgeable (regarding women)’ (EWA) – < PIE *´ gn.h3 -ró- (with parallel Av. zainio ‘knowledgeable’). ´ 57 Lipp shows clearly (2009 ii: 238f.) that the reconstructed root is PIE tken‘strike’ – also postulated by Mallory and Adams – and not *tken- as postulated e.g. by Mayrhofer (EWA). 58 In manu ki zal.i ‘the skin of a frog’ (Zoller [2014: 139]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

103

11. dz b ‘tongue’ < OIA jihv a
‘tongue’ (5228) < PIE *dng´h uh𝑎 - ‘tongue’.  12. dzuthO ‘contaminated, polluted’ < OIA jus.t.a-1 *‘enjoyed, *tasted’, ‘remnants of

a meal’ (5255) ← jus.áte ‘enjoys’ < PIE g´eus- ‘taste, enjoy’.

Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı velar 1. (a) cOk
sO, cOk
selO ‘shining, radiant’ and bicOkśO ‘alert, cautious’ perhaps cognate with OIA cás.t.e ‘sees, appears’ and thus with k¯ aśate ‘appears, is ´ g - ‘appear’. brilliant, shines’ < PIE *ku ek/´ (b) Here probably cognate is also c Og@
s ‘cautious’ which parallels H. caukas ‘cautious, observant, watchful’ etc. and both of which seem to derive < OIA *c¯ aks.us.ya- which cf. with OIA c¯ aks.us.a- jñ¯ ana- ‘ocular evidence or proof’. 2. c O ‘a heap’ < OIA cáya- ‘heap’ (4681), c¯ aś ‘a pile, stack (of bread, books, etc.)’ probably < OIA caitya- i.a. ‘a pile of stones forming a landmark’ (Apte), cirnO

‘to pile up (e.g. logs)’ < OIA c¯ ayayati ‘causes to be heaped up’ (4753) (with 59 u -r.-2 suffix ) all < PIE *k ei- ‘pile up, build’. 3. jOgrO adj.;n.m. ‘dirty, impure (e.g., menses); tiring, tedious, arduous; a person who again and again takes great pains and makes efforts, but all in vain’60 resembles OIA (RV 10,108,1) jáguri-61 probably ‘tiring, arduous’ which is ¯ ‘be weary’ < PIE *gu l-eH - (EWA, see also KEWA iii: related with OIA GLA 699). 4. jOsti, jOst n n.m.,n.f. ‘a very hard working, fighting or toiling person’ (with agent

suffixes)



noun < OIA ces.t.a¯- ‘action, effort’ (4913). It’s further origin is unclear, but Mayrhofer considers a reconstruction PIE *kei-s-t- ∼ *ki-eh1 - ∼ *ki-eu- (>  affricate was perhaps   also OIA CYAV ‘move’). Dentalization of Bng. initial prevented by CCH. 5. Bng. gOi n.f. ‘property, belongings; life, life power’ < OIA (RV, AV) gáya- ‘household; property’; cognate is probably also Bng. gO 1 n.m. ‘husband, ‘master”.62 The forms derive < PIE *gu óih3 -o- ‘life’ (LIV: 215).  Kot.gar.h¯ı-Koc¯ı palatal 1. dz@mha˜ı ‘a yawning’ < OIA jrmbhan.a- ‘yawning’ (5264) probably indirectly < PIE *´ gembh - ‘to show teeth,snarl’. 2. dzOnO ‘person’ < OIA jána- ‘race, person’ (5098) < PIE *´ genh1 - ‘be born’.

‘son’ < OIA j¯atá- ‘born; son’ (5182) < PIE *´genh - ‘be born’. 3. dzao 1 4. dzan.nõ ‘to know, understand, believe’ < OIA j an a
ti ‘knows’ (5193) < PIE *´ gneh3 - ‘know’. 5. dzanu, dzan.u ‘knee’ < OIA j a
nu- ‘knee’ (5195) < PIE g´onu- ‘knee’. 6. dzitn.õ ‘to conquer, win’ < OIA jitá- ‘won, conquered’ (replaced in MIA by jitta-) ¯ ‘loot s.o., use force against s.o.’ then there is the parallel (5224) if ← OIA JYA 59 60 61 62

See 15.1. For modern parallels see p. 602. Preservation of -gr- in Bng. and other parallels probably as cluster < -gur-. Further details of this Bng. lemma are found p. 574.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

104

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Young Av. zii¯ ani- ‘harm’ proving palatal origin of the OIA word. However, further cognates are not known for sure (see EWA). 7. dzîbbh, dz¯ıbh ‘tongue’63 < OIA jihv a
‘tongue’ (5228) < PIE *dng´h uh𝑎 - ‘tongue’. 8. dz utthO ‘polluted (of food or drink touched by others)’ < OIA jus.t.a-1 *‘enjoyed,



*tasted’, ‘remnants of a meal’ (5255) ← jus.áte ‘enjoys’ < PIE g´eus- ‘taste, enjoy’. 9. bhraudz ‘brother’s (esp. elder brother’s) wife’ < OIA lex. bhr¯ aturj¯ ay¯ a- ‘brother’s wife’ (9660) with OIA j ay a
‘wife’ probably < PIE *´genh1 - ‘be born’ (see EWA).

Kot.gar.h¯ı-Koc¯ı velar 1. ch On ‘leisure-time, opportunity’ < OIA ks.an.a- ‘the twinkling of an eye’ (3642)

probably ← aks.án-/áks.i- ‘eye’ with k- < PIE *h3 ku - (EWA). 2. j¯ at ‘mouth’ < PIE *gu et- ‘say’. For further parallels see p. 114. 3. jîśś@r, jinś@r ‘name of a god’ < OIA j¯ıviteśvara- ‘a name of Śiva’ (5252a) < PIE *gu eih3 - ‘live’. 4. j¯ıu ‘body’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 127] for Koc¯ı) < OIA j¯ıvá-1 ‘living’ and Barari sub-dialect jaid ‘body’ (1915: 185) < OIA j
vant- ‘living’ (5244) < PIE *gu eih3 - ‘live’ (*gu ih3 -ue-) (Av. ˇȷvaiti ‘lives’) with similar forms in Bro., Ind., Paš., Dm. (see section on Dardic guttural reflexes). 5. jEl ‘designation of the member of a ‘low caste’ of professional musicians and per

formers of the dangerous Himalayan rope-sliding ritual’ probably related with OIA HVAR ‘go swerving’ resp. hvala- ‘stumbling, staggering’ but semantically close to cognate Lith. žvalùs ‘skilful; agile; wide awake, perky, cheerful’ < PIE *´ gh uel ‘to bend, swerve’ (for more details and arguments see p. 802).  Kul.ui palatal 1. dza¯t64 ‘spezies, caste’ ad. OIA j¯ ati- ‘birth’ < PIE *´ genh1 - ‘be born’. 2. dza¯nn¯ a ‘to know’ < OIA j an a
ti ‘knows’ (5193) < PIE *´gneh3 - ‘know’. 3. dzonn¯ a ‘to give birth’ < OIA *j¯ anayati ‘begets, bears’ (5192) < PIE *´ genh1 - ‘be born’. 4. dz¯ıbh ‘tongue’ < OIA jihv a
‘tongue’ (5228) < PIE *dng´h uh𝑎 - ‘tongue’. 5. bhudzn.a¯ ‘to fry’ < OIA bhr.jjáti ‘fries, parches’ (9583) probably< PIE *bh er´ g /*bh rg´ - (EWA).  6. m adzn a ‘torub, clean’ < OIA m¯arjati ‘rubs, cleans’ (10080) probably < PIE

g - ‘to strip off, wipe’ (see EWA, IEW: 738, LIV: 280). *h2 mer´ 7. r¯ adz ‘Raja’ ad. OIA r a
jan- ‘chieftain, king’ < PIE h3 r
eg
s ‘ruler, king’. 63 Differing from Hendriksen’s notation, the high level tone – written by Hendriksen with a macron above a vowel – is written with a circumflex. Moreover, long consonants are written as double consonant. 64 The following data come from from a word-list found here: http://paharilanguages.ru/?page_id=55&lang=en (9.6.2020). The language has a strong tendency to generalize dental pronunciation.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

105

Kul.ui velar 1. (a) j¯ıv ‘animal’ < OIA j¯ıvá-1 (5239) ‘living being’ < PIE *gu eih3 - ‘live’. (b) j¯eu ¯ ‘body’ (1908: 62) same origin. 2. p¯ unch ‘tail of animal’ < OIA púccha- ‘tail, hinder part’ (8249) < PIE *puk(eh𝑎 )‘tail’ (Mallory and Adams [2006: 177]).

P¯ ad.ri palatal and velar 1. At the end of this subsection I add P¯ ad.. zöi li ‘wife’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 34]) probably < OIA j ay a
- ‘woman, wife’ (5205, note H. j¯a ‘mother’) probably ← OIA JAN ‘be born’ < PIE *´ genh1 - ‘to give birth’ versus j¯ an ‘body’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 82]) < OIA lex. j¯ıvantá- ‘long-lived’ (5244) < PIE *gu eih3  ‘live’ (*gu ih3 -ue-).  4.2.3

Nuristani, Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (and Iranian)

Here follow more lemmata, whose occurrence is not limited to one of the three groups.

Palatal ˆ ˆ 1. Reflexes of PIE *keuh 1 - ‘swell’ x *ken- ‘empty’ ?
Ind. c 2 v ‘a small sore’, Gau. c u
2y , c u E ‘a wart’ and Bhat.. c v2i ‘a wart’, Pr. c˙ a¯v, c˙ ¯a ‘dug of udder’, Wg. c˙ a¯v ‘dug of udder; breast nipple of a woman’ and probably also Dardic Bro. sva ‘boil, blister’ (D. D. Sharma [1998: 156]) — cf. ´ ´ PIE *keuh 1 -, *kuh1 -, etc. ‘swell’ which is usually said to be reflected in OIA
su
na- ‘empty’ (12567.2) where Turner quotes Wg. c˙ u ¯ ‘hole’. But note aspirated Ind. c h2 v ‘empty (as a container); poor, wretched, broke’ and its many aspirated parallels presented right below which perhaps suggest two lemmata, namely PIE 65 ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ *keuh (actually *skenmay be 1 -, *kuh1 -, etc. ‘swell’ and *ken-, kenós ‘empty’ reconstructed for the following words): Ind.seo tsh a ‘empty’; Šat.. c h a ‘empty’; Bur. c.han ‘empty’, Klm. c.hän LY ‘empty’, Sv. činikó, Wg. c  o both ‘empty’, K. chonu ‘empty, void’ and c˙ ho˙cun ‘to become empty’, Bng. c hOn- chOn ‘empty (only stomach)’ and

perhaps also c hOnnO ‘to miscarry, have a premature birth’. The Bng. word



is not < OIA ks.an.óti ‘injures’ because of Bng. c On anO v.t. ‘to hurt, beat’

because of its three without aspiration.66 This lemma is also interesting affricates c˙ , č, c.. 65 Regarded as a Greek-Armenian isogloss only. See also Martirosyan 2013: 116. 66 For a number of other unaspirated dental affricate reflexes of OIA ks. in Bng. and other languages see p. 589.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

106

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

2. Reflexes of PIE *bh elˆ gh - (*bh olˆ gh -) ‘swell’ 67 (a) OIA bársva- ‘gums; the socket of a tooth’68 is found in the V¯ ajasaneyisamhit¯ ˙ a, in the K¯ at.haka and perhaps in some other texts of this late Vedic period. The word has no MIA reflexes and is also not listed in the CDIAL. According to Mallory and Adams (2006: 176), it is a reflex of PIE *wolswom ‘gums’ (from *wels- ‘bulge’) with a parallel in Greek o ulon whose etymology is, according to Beekes, however uncertain. Mallory and Adams do not explain the change *-ls- > unusual OIA -rs-.69 Actually, this etymological suggestion goes back to Isidor Scheftelowitz (see KEWA), who postulated OIA *várs.va< *wolswom followed by vernacular change of -s.- > -s-. Mayrhofer appreciates Scheftelowitz, but prefers the suggestion of a borrowing from Iranian which goes back to Paul Thieme.70 Julius Pokorny (IEW) lists the lemma sub *bhel‘swell’. Mayrhofer points to Av. bar@sman- ‘bundle of sacred grass’ and b@r@ziš ‘bolster, cushion’ (OIA barhís.- ‘bed of grass’) which Pokorny lists sub *bhel´ gh‘swell’ which is an extension of *bhel-. But more correctly appears Kroonen’s reconstruction PIE *bh olˆ gh -is- (2013: 49). Borrowing of bársva- from Iranian is not plausible since the lemma is apparently not found in Nuristani and in East Iranian languages. More plausible is, I think, to suggest that the Old IndoAryan word is a borrowing from a non-Vedic Proto-Indo-Aryan lect which had preserved the Proto-Indo-Iranian voiced affricate *-´ȷh - of this specific lemma as devoiced affricate *-ć(h)-.71 For the below Dardic and West Pah¯ar.¯ı forms I suggest derivation from PIE *bh olˆ gh - > PIIr. *bar´ȷh - > PIA *bh rać- with aspiration fronting, r-metathesis, and devoicing (of affricates) as testified in many words found in Outer Languages, especially in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. A few illustrative examples out of very many: Aspiration fronting Kho. thurt ‘ford’ < OIA *t¯ urtha- ‘ford’ (5903); Kc. zhangn ˙ . õ ‘to kill’ < OIA jánghanti ˙ ‘kills’; B.roh. hana ‘blind’ < OIA andhá- ‘blind’. r-metathesis Kal. bronz ‘lawn’ < OIA *marja- ‘meadow’ (14738); Chin. drebu ‘husband’s younger brother’ < OIA devŕ- ‘husband’s younger brother’.  67 Note that Thomas Burrow (1976: 40) quotes, because of somewhat unusual initial b-, the alloform varsa- from the Mah¯ abh¯ as.ya. For possible but very convoluted traces of PIE *bhelˆ gh- in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı see p. 829. 68 Regarding semantics, compare OIA dantap¯ıt.h¯ ah. ‘tooth sockets’ and Maithil¯ı p¯ıd.hiy˜ u ‘molar tooth, gums’ < OIA p¯ıt.ha- ‘stool, bench’. 69 However, Burrow has shown (1976: 40) that this is indeed a regular outcome, and thus also bársva- could be a regular OIA form. 70 For the sake of completeness, Witzel should also be mentioned who quotes the OIA word in his list of South Central Asian substrate words (2015: § 7). 71 Note that for Proto-Indo-Aryan *-´ȷh - there are also still some traces of affricate preservation in Vedic Sanskrit as shown by Cardona (2005: 25).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

107

Devoicing Tor. ančik ‘darkness’ < OIA a¯ndhya- ‘blindness’; Kal. deč ‘loan, debt’ < Pk. dejja- < OIA déya- ‘to be given’ (6522); Bng. bur
sEnO and B.roh.

burúss both ‘to roast’ < OIA bhrjyate ‘is fried’.72  Modern reflexes of *bh olˆ gh - in the sense of ‘gums’ are known to me from Dardic 73 and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. I divide the words correspondingly in two groups because each group shows its typical phonological processes. This is probably a clue for early dialect differences in the Outer Languages linkage. Several of the following phonological processes are not described in the standard works on the history of Indo-Aryan. Nevertheless, they are all very typical for smaller or bigger areas of the Outer Languages. Since their detailed discussion in this section would be out of place (it follows in later sections of this book), only short comments are added as aid for understanding. But apart from this, the usual principles as they are known from the historical development from PII to OIA and OIr. are applied here. (b) West Pah¯ ar.¯ı ‘gums’ (S. Varma 1938: 54):74 1. Khaś. "bhrecu75 ‘gums of the teeth’ < *bh rač- (< *bh rarč-) < *bh arč- < *berˇȷh -76 < PIE *bh olˆ gh -. 2. High Rudh. "bhr acu ‘ditto’ deriv. as Khaś. 3. Low Rudh. "bhr ac hu ‘ditto’ deriv. as Khaś.77 but in addition with dentalization of the affricate.78 4. N¯al¯ a Rudh. prã˙chu ‘ditto’ deriv. as Low Rudh. but in addition with 72 In addition to h-metathesis, there are also – parallel to r-spreading – examples of h-spreading, e.g. Jauns¯ ar¯ı gh adh ‘smell, bouquet’ (Z.) < OIA gandhá- ‘smell’ (4014). But it is difficult to say whether the aspiration of the initial consonant is due to aspiration fronting or spreading or, as a third possibility, due to also common ‘spontaneous’ aspiration (without etymological motivation). It is also hardly possible to say when and in which chronology these different processes took place. 73 I could not find parallels in Nuristani (e.g. Pr. l@t@m mus"k, Kamd. d¯ adm"us, Kt. dutm"us and Wg. d˜ ut-mus all ‘gums’ mean simply, like in German, ‘tooth flesh’) and in New East Iranian languages, which is somewhat surprising if the OIA lemma should have been borrowed from Iranian. 74 Varma’s list is found in a printed letter to “The Members of the Linguistic Society of India” from 1930, and the words are quoted in Kaul (2006 ii: 212) and with misspellings p. 533. 75 Most Himachali varieties have maintained the old distinction between dental and (alveo)palatal affricates. Varma presents unvoiced palatal affricates as C and Ch, and apparently dental unvoiced affricates as c and ch (the latter also done by Morgenstierne). I have adjusted this to the more common practice. 76 I present here a case of the well-known ‘Dardic r-metathesis’ (which is not limited to Dardic) in the form of the three phases of *bhrač- (< *bhrarč-) < *bharč- because there are cases where one can see that r-fronting frequently (but perhaps not always) actually occurred in two steps: first r-spreading, then deletion of r at original position. An intermediate stage can still be seen directly in Bshg. drgr ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá- and indirectly in K. srog ‘cheap’ (Sachdeva et al. 2010: 42) < older *sramargha- < OIA samargha- ‘cheap’ (13187). 77 This form supports the alternative of h-spreading. 78 The process must have taken place -˙ch- < *-čh - < *-ˇȷh - and not -˙ch- < *-dzh - < *-ˇȷh - because of the Khaś. and High Rudh. forms. Dentalization of PIE ˆ g(h ) via *ˇȷ(h ) is the rule in Iranian and Nuristani (in a number of case also in several Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages). Hence, OIA barsvá- must have been borrowed from an OL form *bar˙ch - before aspiration was fronted.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

108

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

devoicing and deaspiration of initial consonant.79 5. Marm. br"h˜ uc˙ hu ‘ditto’ deriv. as Low Rudh. but in addition with word-initial ‘phoneme split’ which is discussed p. 318. 6.+ Śeu. "bhrãsu ‘ditto’ deriv. as Low Rudh. but in addition with c˙ h > c˙ > s (as also seen in OIA barsvá-). The last forms of this list show this historical change as synchronic alternation. > > 7. Bhad. dhlEsu and dhlEc h o ‘ditto’ deriv. as Low Rudh. and Śeu. but

with word-initial

 in addition apicalization.80 We turn now to the Dardic data which betray partly similar and partly different phonological histories. A bridge from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı to Dardic concerns my notion of ‘apicalization’. I am not aware of a standard definition, therefore I present here a very broad and preliminary characterization: Apicalization is the historical neutralization or collapse of the three places of articulation, namely [labial], [coronal] and [dorsal] into an apical (tongue-tip) articulation in case of morpheme-initial Cr clusters. Apical consonants are further characterized by the feature [-distributed] which is defined as: “. . . sounds are produced with a constriction that extends for just a short distance along the direction of the airflow” (Kenstowicz 1994: 30). Apical consonants with this feature are dental-alveolar and retroflex stops, affricates and fricatives. We find mostly retroflex apical articulation in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhales¯ı and Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı (see above last example) and mostly dental apical articulation in several Dard languages. For many illustrative examples see p. 168. Here an additional example from > Bhales¯ı with older b(h)r-: dh«2 u ‘eyebrow’ < OIA *bhrumu- ‘eyebrow’ (9688).

The only West Pah¯ ar.¯ı example known to me for dental articulation is P¯ ad.r¯ı drukkh ‘hunger’ < OIA bubhuks.a¯- ‘desire to eat, hunger’ (9286). Two examples from Dardic are K¯ alk¯ot.¯ı dr¯ a ‘brother’ < OIA bhr a
tr- ‘brother’ (9661) and dr¯am  ‘village’ < OIA gr a
ma- ‘village’ (4368).81 (c) Dardic ‘gums’. In the first three examples below the *-dh- (or more probably *-d.h-) of the original cluster was lost word-medially.82 I nevertheless reconstruct here former morpheme-initial aspiration not only because of the West Pah¯ar.¯ı parallels but also because of the fourth and fifth lexemes which are not compounds and which have initial aspiration. They seem to show the same initial ‘phoneme splitting’ as above example (5.) which, in addition, led to loss of word-initial *d.- for which there are many parallels discussed p. 380f. Again it is

79 This trend is shared with adjacent languages like D angr ˙ .¯ı or Panjabi. A similar trend is . ogr¯ı, K¯ observed in Kalasha, but there aspiration is retained. 80 Similar-sounding P. bar ach a ‘the corner of the mouth’ seems to be rather connected with OIA bhrst
- i.a. ‘corner’ and *bhraś- ‘sharpen’ (see EWA ii: 277).  analysis shows that Turner’s reconstruction *bl¯akkati ‘bleats’ (9326) for Dardic Bashkar¯ık 81 This l¯ ak- ‘to bleat’ is wrong. And note also Sh.dras. br
aki b2s
ono ‘to echo’ and Rajapurohit’s comparison of the second word with Urdu baj¯ an¯ a (2012: 77). In my eyes, the correct analysis is, however, that of a kind of synonym compound built with reflexes of OIA *br¯ akati ‘bleats’ (9326) and v a

syate ‘bleats’ (9326). 82 But note also Varma’s observation that e.g. in Śeut.¯ı words with initial ‘apical’ clusters are frequently heard as -l- (1938: 3).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

109

hardly possible to be sure of the relative sequencing of the different phonological processes. 1. Pal. d¯ anda-l"¯esi ‘gums’ with first word < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ and > second approximately like this: < *dh lesi < *bh ra˙c - (< bh rar˙c -)
‘freezing’ and ‘astonishment’ (1079),88 *¯ acchambhati ‘is stiff’ (1080) and *chambhayati ‘makes firm’ (4996) (Pa.). The fact that the lemma is not found in OIA and only the last allo-form is found in Pa. raises the suspicion that we are dealing with an OL lemma. Turner suggests for it derivation < PIE *skabh - ‘hold up’ (LIV reconstructs more correctly *?skebh H ‘to prop’) which is not implausible. A reflex of prefix-less PIE *skambhita- is found in Dardic Sh. c.h˘ upnos ‘having a cold’ and in Sh.koh. (RSup) c2"hu  ‘cold’

phoneme (< older *cham(b)u – here perhaps also Sh. c.áa ‘cold’) which displays

the originally aspirated initial retroflex affricate (see p. 318). The splitting of reflex of PIE *sk in Nuristani and Dardic as c.(h) against OIA ch (or kh or preservation) is a key feature that distinguishes Outer from Inner Languages. See also Lubotsky 2001b. (b) The lemma has in Sh. also the dental affricate allomorph c˙ h˘ upn¯ os, while Degener (2008) gives c˙ hipenóos and adds Bur. c˙ upunós ‘cold in head’ with change of a > u or i. (c) There is also with palatal affricate Sh. čhibí@n ∼ šibí@n ‘he keeps’ (Radloff) < OIA skabhn a
ti ‘holds up’. Note: If the forms sub (a) to (c) are indeed all reflexes of PIE *?skebh H - (which is not without doubt), then, because of preservation of the basic meaning and closer morphological similarity with the OIA verb, (c) must have originally belonged to a different dialect or derivation: whereas c. alternating with c˙ is typical for Outer Languages in northwestern South Asia, there is nothing against declar88 Again Turner quotes Wg. a cam a
‘ice, icicle’ whereas Buddruss und Degener provide the correct form Wg. ac.am"a ‘ice; s.th. frozen (Gefrorenes)’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

112

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals ing Sh. čhibí@n to be an Inner Language reflex.

6. Reflexes of PIE *sploi gh2 - e
n ‘spleen’ Sh.ast. pozi ‘spleen’ (Nayyar 1986: 10; cf. ATLAS 129) and Sh.dras. phusuló ‘spleen’ (Rajapurohit), and Paš. purz¯ u ‘spleen’ (Morgenstierne 1956: 230 stimmt nicht, korrekt: Paš. šparga ‘spleen’) compare with Pr. pštigë ‘spleen’ for which Turner (9028) reconstructs derivation < *priz+. But since Buddruss und Degener (2016) insist that pštig means ‘Galle’ (‘bile’) and not ‘Milz’ (‘spleen’) I suggest that the word is actually a quasi-synonym compound ‘spleen-bile’ with second component < OIA t¯ıks.n.á- ‘sharp; hot, pungent’ (regarding semantics cf. Ash. t et
 and San.. t t"i both ‘gall-bladder’ < OIA *taiktik¯ a- [5952] ← tiktá‘pungent, bitter’; note that Pr. -g is usually devoiced in isolate pronunciation). The Sh.ast. and Paš. forms – which are more archaic than OIA pl¯ıhán (cf. here Av. sp@rt@zan-) – do not look like direct borrowings from Nuristani Pr. but are different reflexes of PIE *sploi
gh2 -
en and must go back to *(s)prazaka- (cf. *spr¯ızn sub 9028.4), which seems also to be the origin for Paš. šparga. Regarding Dardic Gaw. and Sv. p¯enˇȷur."ik, dialectal Paš. pizur.ík and peˇȷor."ek and Nuristani Gmb. paer a
all ‘spleen’ Turner remarks that “[c]onnection, if any, is

obscure.” However, these forms are either built with one or several suffixes or, similar as in case of Prasun, may be old quasi-synonym compounds with second component perhaps < OIA trst
a- ‘harsh, rough’ (cf. e.g. Tor. t.¯ıt. ‘gall-bladder’ 

[5938]). Thus, all forms, including Pr. but except Sh., go back to an older proto-form *(s)priˇȷaka-. It is difficult to say whether the -i- has been preserved from PIE or whether it is a (relatively common) innovation. In the latter case this would indicate a dialectal difference with the Sh.ast. form. In any case, borrowing from Iranian looks very unlikely. Notes: (a) According to David Whatters and James Matisoff, TB Kham phis ‘spleen’ and Mikir pliha ‘spleen’ are borrowings from Indo-Aryan, for which there is therefore an entry in STEDT: #5636 IA *p(l/r)i:han ‘spleen’ (provisional). Other forms like phiyo in various TB languages in Nepal are clearly borrowings from Nep¯ ali, and Mikir pliha is quite obviously a borrowing from Bengali. But Kham phis appears to be an extremely early borrowing from an Outer Language into this West Himalayish language. A likely reconstruction for the Proto-Kham borrowing could be *splozi. (b) Note, however, also Wkh.89 pEzWv ‘heart, kidney’ which may indicate that the Sh. word is a borrowing from Iranian. (c) Another example of a Nuristani word in Shina seems to be Sh.pales. c.ringa ˙ ‘temples’ which, following Morgenstierne’s suggestion for borrowing, Turner connects with OIA
s
rnga

- ‘horn’ (12583).  (d) Lemma 9028 shows again r ∼ l both in Nuristani and the other IA languages. Like in case of above Pr. as.log ‘lame’ also here we have cases of preservation of 89 Spoken in the Wakhan, but also in Hunza.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

113

PIE *l and not an innovation of OIA r > l as in so many other cases in OIA and in later stages of IA. And since the Astor dialect of Shina is spoken quite far away from the next Nuristan language, these various features are another indication that the radical differentiation between Nuristani and Dardic, as suggested by Morgenstierne and others, is, in fact, not really correct. Also in Dardic are traces of pre-OIA even though perhaps fewer. Nuristani and Dardic do form a dialect linkage and the above-presented ‘Nuristani’ words in Dardic must not be borrowings. PIE *l has been preserved in a number of words in northwestern South Asia; and Proto-Aryan *´ȷ and *ć have been preserved in several Nuristani and Dardic languages.

7. Reflexes of PIE *h2 ueˆ g - ‘fresh, strong’  The RV lemma v a
ja- ‘strength, vigour’ (11477) (Pk.) has in the CDIAL just one modern reflex in the Nuristani Prasun adjective v@z ‘alive, healthy’ (Buddruss und Degener 2016 v@z"a ‘safe and sound, alive’). Yet, there are two other reflexes: (a) Bang¯ an.¯ı baznO2 ‘to be lively, active’ and b azO n.f. ‘energy, power;

with the OIA and Prasun meanings; (b) Kalasha swiftness; fight’ match well badz"ek, baz
ek90 (1) ‘to stack wood to build a fire’ and (2) ‘to feed a fire’ as in bazála ‘he/she fed the fire’ is semantically quite different. Manfred Mayrhofer points out (EWA ii: 540f.) that alongside the OIA noun and its nominal and adjectival derivations one reconstructs also a verbal root *VAJ, v¯ ajáyati ‘impels, accelerates’ as there is (RV+, TS+) úpa-v¯ ajayo ‘fans, kindles, inflames’. We see that the much more common OIA nominal form is reflected in Nuristani Prasun and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bang¯ an.¯ı whereas the rare OIA verbal form is reflected in Dardic Kalasha with the quite specific meaning of ‘fan/feed the flames’ which is also found in YAv. a¯[email protected] ‘fire-fan’ (Feuerwedel ). Mayrhofer explains (ibid.) that, even though both the noun and the verb have the same etymology, they are to be synchronic separated from each other. This statement of his implicitly confirms the presence of different OIA dialects. The difference is reflected still today in a Nuristani/West Pah¯ ar.¯ı versus a Dardic word. All three show dentalization of j > z(dz).91 But strangely enough, the Kalasha word continues the verb form whereas Prasun and Bang¯ an.¯ı continue the noun which is semantically different from the verb. Note: Morgenstierne suggests tentatively (1927: 107) that two different spellings of the name of the Kushana king V¯ asishka (ca. 247 - ca. 267), namely v¯ asis.ka ∼ vajhes.ka suggest an actual pronunciation *v¯ azis.ka, perhaps meaning ‘the strong one’. I think, Morgenstierne’s assumption is correct because in Middle Iranian Bactrian, attested by written documents of the Kushan period, one also finds the 90 Note that Kal. has preserved the occlusion of the original affricate even after dentalization. This it shares with other Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages. Word-initially in Kal. the relation of dz : z- is roughly 1 : 4. Still this is different from Nuristani and from Persian where, in the latter case, deaffrication of voiced affricates after dentalization occurred very early. 91 We will see below that this dentalization (depalatalization) of voiced Indo-Iranian palatals going back to Proto-Indo-European voiced palato-velars is fairly uncommon in Kalasha but is a distinctive feature of Iranian and Nuristani.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

114

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

following renderings of the names of Kushana kings: bazod¯eo for Vasudeva (ca. 190 - ca. 230) and baz¯eško for already quoted Vasishka (see entry ’Bactrian Language’ in the Encyclopædia Iranica and Tremblay [2005: 431]). Occasional voicing of word-medial -s- to -z- is also known from modern East Iranian and Dardic languages like Kal. mizók ‘mouse’ and Psht. maz.a ‘rat’ and maz.ak ‘mouse’, and an alternation of an original z with jh is phonetically also possible in IA languages with just one order of voiced affricates where a z may be pronounced as jh as e.g. in G.pars. jh@nano ‘harem’ ← Pers. zan¯ ana (quoted again p. 305).

Velar 1. Reflexes of PIE *ku e ‘and’ Kal. že ‘and’ (perhaps preciser < OIA caiva ‘and indeed’ [4916] like Kamd. ˇȷe ‘and’) and further depalatalized Gau. z
ah ‘also’, Bulg. če (Jav. -ča) < PIE *-kw e ‘and’. Av. ča does not seem to have reflexes in modern East Iranian, but the vowel raising in Kal. is unclear. 2. Reflexes of PIE *ku eih1 ‘rest, quiet’ Kal. vičáik ‘to rest from working’ as in adhék vičáio krom kári ‘take a little rest and then work’ and Kho. bičéik ‘to relax after being tired/exhausted’ ultimately < PIE *kw eih1 - ‘rest, quiet’, and not < OIA *viks.epayati ‘throws aside, sends forth’ (11656) for faultily transcribed Kho. bicc.héik ‘to take rest on the road’. The quoted words have the same prefix as OIA viśramate ‘rests’ (11949) – note Klm. bišim H ‘rest, break’ and Nuristani Kamd. us."ama- ‘to rest’ and Pr. vis.om‘to take rest’ – and note also that besides OIA
sr a
myati ‘is tired’ (12693) there is the apparent parallel OIA kl¯ amyati with same meaning (Miller 1076: 53). The Kho. verb has also a nominal derivation in bičán ‘place to rest (like a stopping place on the road)’ which can be compared wit OIA viśr¯ amasth¯ ana- ‘a place of rest or recreation’. I am not aware of Nuristani parallels and the verb is missing in OIA. But comparable are OCS pokoj˘ı ‘peace, quiet, rest’ and pocijo , počiti ‘to rest’, Old Pers. šiy¯ ati ‘comfort’, Av. šy¯ ata-, š¯ata- ‘pleased, delighted’. See also Cheung’s Proto-(Indo-)Iranian reconstruction *čaiH2 ? ‘to rest, sit’ with quite many New Iranian reflexes (2007: 29). Note: Whether the following West Pah¯ ar.¯ı words are cognate or not is not entirely clear: Chin. baś¯ ah and Bhad. bas¯ ah ‘a bit of rest’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 36]).

3. Reflexes of PIE *ku eh𝑎 s- or *ku eh2 s- ‘cough’ Gaw. c˙ asik ‘to cough’, Paš. čaš- ‘to cough’ and Paš.DN čoxs- ‘cough’, K. c˙ a¯s ‘a cough’ and z˘ osa ‘a cough’ and z˘ osun ‘to cough’. Regarding Paš. čašMorgenstierne writes (1956: 48): “Relationship with Skt. ka:s- < *qw a:s- is not clear.” Indeed, the lemma cannot derive < OIA k a
s a- (and thus < PIE *kw a¯s[see EWA and Ollett 2014: 157]) but must derive < PIE *kw eh𝑎 s- respectively *kw eh2 s- ‘cough’. The dental forms must be due to second dentalization. 4. Reflexes of PIE *gu et- ‘say’ Bng. j¯ at ‘mouth’ (not in the sense of OIA múkha- but rather like Bavarian

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

5.

6.

7.

8.

115

goschert ‘(impudent) blabbermouth’) and jOt er ‘chatterbox’, Kt.gu. and Osir. j¯ at ‘mouth’, Kt.g., Kc. Ía:t ‘mouth’ plus bakï ‘to open the mouth, to speak’ (< OIA *bakk- ‘chatter’ [9117]), Rudh. éat ‘mouth’, Satlaj Group j¯ at ‘ditto’, K. j˘ otha ‘a great talker of nonsense, a babbler’ < PIE *gu et- ‘say’. Here cognate perhaps also Nuristani ˇȷ"a ku ‘to say’ (with second word < OIA karóti ‘does’). Mallory and Adams quote as OIA reflex gádati ‘says’ but Mayrhofer (sub GAD) is skeptical because of the unusual OIA root shape. Indeed, the here-quoted forms are certainly different from clear reflexes of gádati which are discussed p. 69. Reflexes of PIE *gu érh3 - ‘swallow’ Kal. ˇȷárik ‘to be digested; to be absorbed or to be dissolved by osmosis’ and ˇȷaré hik ‘to digest; to be absorbed’ as in √ uk phávuna ˇȷári šíau ‘the water has been absorbed into the ground’, and Pr. -žor ‘digest’ may be etymologically related with Av. jaraiti ‘swallows’ (OIA giráti) which is < PIE *gw érh3 - ‘swallow’. Reflexes of PIE *gu el- ‘strike, stab’ Kal. ˇȷiráik ‘to patiently endure, take, tolerate, bear, put up with’ and ˇȷiré ‘food given to mourners who come to offer condolences’ with dek ‘to give a burial feast’ have parallels in Pr. žor- ‘to grieve’, zu r" u tiks- ‘to mourn’, žüruv-, žürv

but also (IEW) ‘pain, ‘to give grief to s.o.’ — cf. PIE *gw el- ‘strike, stab’ agony, death’ as reflected in “russ.-ksl.” zeleo , žel˘eti ‘mourn’, Old Czech želeti ‘bemoan’. Reflexes of PIE *gu h ér- ‘burn, shine’ Sub OIA GHAR ‘sprinkle’ Mayrhofer (EWA i: 512f.) states that a verbal use of GHAR2 ‘burn, shine’ is not verifiable in Indo-Aryan. It is only found in Dh¯ atup. and with grammarians (!) even though there was certainly an Indo-European verb *gwh ér- with this meaning, and he refers to Greek 𝜃 𝜀´𝜌𝑜𝜇𝛼𝜄 ‘warm me’ and Old Irish fo-geir ‘heated’. Despite Mayrhofers incredulity in Dh¯ atup. and Indian grammarians, there seem to be reflexes of this PIE verb. However, as is to be expected, only in Outer Languages. The grammarians have ghrnoti etc.  of the and there is P¯ an.. ghrta- ‘illumined’. If the last form should be the origin

following words, a northwestern-type of sound change should be assumed – like in Pal. gh¯ır ‘ghee’ < OIA ghrt
a- (4501) – but I am not sure about this: Kt.g. g@rauno ‘to bring into ecstasy’ (used about a shaman priest), Jaun. grhaivnu ‘to

cause a village deity to move or dance’, Ku. gir ‘fight, war’ and girkh¯et ‘battle 𝑎 ground’ (with -kh¯et < OIA ks.étra- ‘land’), K. g r ‘sudden display of energy (in one not previously energetic)’, prob. also Kho. giír bik ‘to flutter, palpitate’ (as in ma hardí giír bíti šeér ‘my heart is fluttering, palpitating’) and giír c.okík ‘for two bulls to fight’ (with c.okík ‘to be/become engaged in an activity’), Bng. g erO n.m. ‘battle intoxication, intoxication’ also used e.g. in s uri rO g erO ‘heat of the sun’, s urE rO g erO ‘intoxication through brandy’, agE rO g erO ‘heat of the fire’ (see p. 756).92 Reflexes of PIE *h1 eugu ℎ - ‘praise’ Kal. h o
zik ‘to say, answer’. Trail and Cooper note: “This seems to be used only

92 Note that the preceding paragraph is partially repeated below p. 756.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

116

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

in the past tense and is quite rare”, se ah o
zav ‘he said’; avõjo ‘(he) said’ (LSI w ℎ viii,ii: 77 et passim) < PIE *(h1 )eug - ‘to praise, worship, avow, speak formally’ with Av. aoˇȷai t¯e ‘proclaims, says, speaks’ (OIA óhate ‘praises, lauds’).93 Further details are found in IGN: 215f.

4.2.4 4.2.4.1

Deaffrication Deaffrication of µ

The tendency for deaffrication of dental µ - appears to be about equally common in Nuristani and Dardic. Here only a few examples: 1. Tir. san¯ a ‘dog’ (Grierson [1925b: 410]) but with preservation of initial affricate ´ on-. Wg. c˙ u ˜ ‘dog’ are cognate with OIA śván- ‘dog’ (12750) which is < PIE *ku  on 2. Ash. sal ‘cattleshed’, San.. s"a¯l ‘stable’ and dialectal Paš. s¯ al ‘cattleshed summer pasture’ are cognate with OIA
s a
l a- ‘shed, stable, house’ (12414) but ´ ‘to hide, conceal’. must derive < older *µa¯l and ultimately < PIE *kel3. Ash. s a-va cu
‘hen monal pheasant’ (with va cu
related with OIA *v¯aśuka-) but Wg. c˙ a¯m ‘hen golden oriole’ both cognate with OIA śy¯ amá- ‘dark-blue’ ´ eh1 -mó-. respectively śy¯ am¯ a- ‘hen cuckoo’ (12664) < PIE *ki 4. Ash. s ou, s2u ‘branch’ but Pr. c˙ a¯ and Kt. c˙ o¯v are related with
s a
kh a- ‘branch’ (12376),94 5. Ash. so.n-, s¯on- ‘to sweep’ and Gaw. s¯ ontamim ‘I sweep’ are cognate with OIA śúndhati ‘purifies’ (12530) but derive < older *µo¯nd𝑜 < PIIr. ćaudℎ -/*ćudℎ  ℎ -. ´ and perhaps < PIE (s)keu-d 6. Ash. sor o
‘autumn’ (also dialectal Paš. sarai) < older *µor o
< PIIr. *ćarad- etc. 7. Kt. st"a ‘vinegar’ is cognate with OIA śuktá- ‘anything fermented or sour’ (12504) but must derive < older *µta and ultimately < PIIr. *ćauk- ‘to turn ´ ksour’ which, if cognate with OIA ŚOC ‘burn, shine’ would derive < PIE *keu  ‘to glow, shine’. √ √ 2 8. Pr. zul(i) v.t. and zol v.i. ‘to break’ seems to be cognate with OIA *śalati ‘is ´ 2 - ‘to harm, injure’. Voicing in broken, falls’ which probably derives < PIE *kerh Pr. has a parallel e.g. in zõ ‘manure, mud, earth soaked through animal hooves’ (also with deaffrication) which is cognate with OIA *śakana- ‘dung’ (12238) ´ u -n-o- (see also p. 719).95 which reflects PIE *kok 9. PIIr. *máµia- ‘fish’ > Yav. masiia- — Pr. t-@w¯ a misü ‘fish’ (“water-fish”? but Turner: (t¯ oa¯- from to- ‘in’ with a¯- ‘water’ . . . ), dialectal Paš. m¯ as, Bshk. mäsin 93 Mallory and Adams (2006: 357) note PIE *h1 eugwh - ‘praise’ with Av. aojaite ‘says, pronounces’ and wrongly postulate OIA ójate ‘they praise’. Note also FLII 7.6 where Mayrhofer also quotes related Vedic v¯ aghát- ‘singer, priest’ which he derives < PIE *h1 uogwh -. 
ak 94 Note that Reiner Lipp rejects Pokorny’s reconstruction PIE *k - ‘branch’ for
s a
kh a- (Pokorny ´ 𝑥 - ‘nib, sharpen’ (2009: 1959: 523) and instead proposes more convincing derivation < PIE *(s)keh 59). 95 Also deaffricated but with preservation of voicelessness is Ash. ga-s¯ a ’cow dung’ (Buddruss [1977: 28]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

117

HL ‘fish’ — Bhad. mesli ‘fish’, Ko.S. masli and M.W¯ ar. maslã ‘fish’ (loss of closure and of aspiration [if < older *matshl¯ı due to -l-? )-; the nasal in Bshk. and M.w¯ ar. seems to be due to contamination for which cf. OIA matsyahán(9761) or (even less likely) with matsyaj¯ıvin- (9759) both ‘fisherman’), A. m¯ as, M. m¯ as¯ a, Si. mas¯ a, mah=a (cf. Middle Pers. m¯ ah¯ıg ‘fish’), Md. mas. 10. PIIr. *uátsa- ‘yearling, calf’ (with biphonematic ts as in Vedic vatsá-) > Khot. basaka- ‘calf’ — Paš.laur.. vas¯ak, Tor. b¯ as m. and bi¯ as f. ‘calf’, A. b¯ as¯ a ‘affectionate address to a child’, Si. vass¯ a; note also B.chit. bOsOr and B.roh. bosór both ‘year’ < OIA vatsará- ‘year’ (11242). Notes: (a) The affricate is preserved in Paš. va˙c@k ‘calf’, Sv. ba
c o ‘calf’, Tir. ba˙ca ‘calf’. These words are different from similar-looking but dentalized Bng. ba chO ‘one year old calf’ (which has, however, preserved the old basic meaning). (b) There is also Dardic Paš. vačula ‘calf’ (Morgenstierne [1956: 27]), corresponding with OIA vatsalá- *‘calf’ (11244) but phonetically clearly different from Pa., Pk. vacchala- ‘affectionate’ which show bi-phonematic development -ts- > -c-ch-. The form vačula shows secondary palatalization perhaps due to second high vowel (as in Paš. uč ‘spring’ < OIA utsíya- [1869]) which is very similar to e.g. Pr. ¯ıž¯ı, ¯ıž˜ı ‘eye’ but Kamd. a ¯c˙ "˜e. (c) Note also Dm. ‘Indian type’ ba"c˙ har ‘male calf’ versus ba"c.h¯ o ‘new born male calf’ both of which derive < older *baccho (Pa. vaccha- ‘calf’) with first form dentalized probably because of second -a- vowel and second form retroflexed because of second -¯ o vowel.96 (d) Somewhat unclear is Ku. vasar ‘bhaims ˙ jo pahl¯ı b¯ ar bh¯ı g¯ aban [g¯ abhin] na ho – a buffalo that is not pregnant for the first time’ (Paliwal [1985: 297]) < OIA vatsatará‘young bull or goat before weaning or copulation’ (11241) (Pa., Pk.)? Even though the semantics is not quite matching here, this is perhaps an archaism. It contrasts with normal Ku. b¯ ach, b¯ ach¯ ur, b¯ acho, b¯ achi all ‘calf’. (e) For nasalized Kamd. a ¯c˙ "˜e ‘eye’ (see note b)) Strand reconstructs Pr.Ar. *"acsi-na‘eye’. Similar nasalization is also found in the other Nuristani languages Kt., San.., Wg. and Pr. ¯ıž˜ı, and the nasal consonant is preserved in Gaw. i˙c"¯ın ‘eye’ (Nars. i˙cin ‘eye’) (OIA aks.án- or pl. aks.¯ın.i-?). ). This dental nasal consonant ending is certainly different from Pr.Ar. *"acsi-ma- with Dardic Klm. äsum H(L) ‘a tear’ with same bilabial nasal consonant as in Gr. 𝛿´ 𝛼 𝜅 𝜚 𝜐¯𝜇𝛼 ‘tear’.

4.2.4.2

Deaffrication of other affricates in the northwest

a”, Bur. śuqá, Ind. š¯ oqàh , Gaw. šu"kh¯ au etc. all ‘coat’ (cf. Nuristani Kt. “shug¯ e.g. H. coG a) (here and in several other cases deaffrication took place before a 96 Another example is Kho. z.üm dut ‘molar’ versus Wkh. zumpi ‘molar’ both going back to PIIr. *´ȷámbh as (and PIE ´ gómbh os) ‘tooth’. While the Wkh. form dentalized probably before a > u, in case of Kho. (which does not know dentalization of IA palatal affricates) retroflexion occurred after a > u.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

118

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

potential depalatalization); Kt. “shion” ‘life’ < OIA j
vana- ‘vivifying, life’ (5243) (with devoicing), “shosh” ‘a witness’ < OIA śúdhyati (śudhyate) ‘is purified’ (12527), “shtr¯ al” ‘Citral’, ser¯ı ‘apricot’ (see affricate parallels below p. 764); Pr. pšly¯ u√‘woman’s long hair’ (also Kho., see below) < OIA pracala- ‘shaking’ (8489) and -pšüv ‘to slip, slide; rutschen’ < OIA picchilá- ‘slimy, slippery’ (8156); Ash. p¯ os ‘axe’ (cf. Bng. pOcati ‘axe’, see below p. 644).

Dardic Sh.koh. and gur. yõs., pales. yos. ‘mill’ < OIA yantrá- ‘controlling device’ via *yac., yãc.; Sh.ast. sandr¯ al ‘Montag’ < OIA candrá- ‘moon’ (4661) plus a suffix; Sh. push ‘five’ (LSI viii, ii: 10) < OIA páñca- ‘five’ (7655), shudar ‘child’ (LSI viii, ii: 14 – i.e. šud¯ ar) < OIA ks.udrá- ‘minute’ (3712) (but cf. also Kal. súda ‘child’); K. and Tor. piśul u ‘smooth’ < OIA picchilá- ‘slippery’ (8156); Tor. siz ‘thing’ (cf. H. c¯ız, here deaffrication after depalatalization); Tor. š¯ uš ‘straight, upright’ < OIA *śucya- ‘to be purified’ (12511); Gau. kusur ‘dog’ < OIA *kuccura- ‘dog’ (3219), s¯ am (also Bhad. s2mm) ‘skin’ < OIA cárman- ‘skin’ (4701); Kal. roš žal.ék ‘to bless’ < OIA rocá- ‘bright’ (10831), šuthúr ‘umbrella’ < OIA cháttra-1 ‘parasol’ (4972) (with shift of aspiration and a > u change [see below p. 369]),97 sut
k ‘ashes’ < OIA *ks.uttik¯ a- ‘powder’ (3709.2) (with CCH);



Šat.. p as ‘wing’ (besides p2c) and Gau. p¯as.áv ‘feather’ < OIA p¯aks.a- ‘adj. from

paks.á- (8025). Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhal. aśo ‘strawberry’ < OIA a¯ks.ika- ‘the tree Morinda tinctoria’ (1025); Bhad. sir ‘delay’ < OIA cirá- ‘long’ (4824) (here and in several cases below with depalatalization); Chin. śohru ‘boy’ and Dardic Klm. š¯ orun. H ‘orphan’ < OIA *chokara- ‘boy’ (5070) (and in first word rightshift of aspiration);98 Chin. puzu, n¯ al¯ a Rudh. p os@r and P. p¯ uśal (T. Graham Bailey 1938: 249) all

n¯al¯a Rudh. p ‘tail’ < OIA púccha- ‘tail’ (8249); 2s ‘five’ < OIA páñca ‘five’ (7655); Khaś. and Bhad. "mõsnu (Śeu. mochnu) ‘to trim a lamp’ and Kgr. mos ‘ankle twist’ < OIA *mocc- ‘twist, wring’ (10351); Rudh. "
s2mmobali ‘a shoe used during the season of snow’ < OIA *carma-pula (4701, 8294a [8349]);99 R¯ amb. gasn.u ¯ and Sir.d.od.. gisn.o¯ ‘to go’ < OIA gácchati ‘goes’ (3955); Pog. raśnu ‘rakhn¯ a – to keep’ (also Dardic Paš. ras.- ‘to guard’) < OIA ráks.ati ‘guards’ (10547); Bng. śòr.i n.f. ‘axle of (hand)spindle’ < OIA *chat.a- ‘stick, cane’ (4966),
sO
sinO n.m. ‘oil for

massage, butter’ is a derivation < *ch¯ aś¯ı- ‘buttermilk’ (5012),
s  n.f. ‘pile, heap’ and
sanO1 ‘to pile up, accumulate’ < OIA cíti- ‘pile’ (4798), ni
sornO ‘to squeeze

n” ˙ ‘or(out)’ < OIA *niścot.ayati ‘causes to trickle out’ (7449); Kann. “shokrö phan’ < OIA *chokara- ‘boy’ (5070); Bng.
susnO ‘to drink or suck up’, Ku. śośan.

Marw. s¯os¯o ‘drink up!’ and s os a ‘to gulp down water’ and Sh¯ekh¯ av¯ at.¯ı dialect of ‘should drink up’ < OIA *c¯ us.yati ‘sucks’ (4898); Him. k¯ aśi ‘pasture; branches 97 Note also with initial deaffrication (and intrusive -r-) Kul. śtror ‘umbrella’ (Diack). 98 Or rather < OIA *śo-2 , *śorun.d.a- ‘orphan’ (12618)? It is well-known that in South Asia little girls can be addressed as ‘widow’ as a term of affection. The IA term ran.d.¯ı ‘widow’ looks suspiciously similar to *śorun.d.a- which thus may be an old synonym compound. 99 This has a parallel in Klm. čämpäl H ‘sandal’ if this is not a borrowing from Urdu.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.2. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar single consonants

119

of forest trees cut as fodder for goats, etc.’ < older *k¯ ach < OIA káks.a-2 ‘undergrowth; dead wood; grass’ (2589); Bng. śep¯er n.m. ‘gable of house’ < OIA chattvará- ‘house’ (4976),
sotianO ‘to beat s.o.’ < OIA *cot.t.- ‘strike’ (4857),

*kacc-1 ‘pull’ (2610),
selkO n.m. ‘(thin) bark’ kOsnO ‘to fasten a belt’ < OIA



(with -kO1 suffix) < OIA challi- ‘bark’ (5005); Ku. d E
sat ‘fear’ < OIA *dacc ‘fear’ (6126) (with non-deaffricated modern parallels in N. and M.), pa
sy an ‘to

cut (throat with a knife)’ < OIA pracchyati ‘scarifies’ (8505), Old Ku. śeta ‘agricultural land’ < OIA ks.étra- ‘land’ (3735), Ku. a¯mśi ˙ ‘eye’ < OIA áks.i- ‘eye’ (43), p¯ aśyal¯ a ‘buildings with wings’ < OIA paks.á- ‘wing’ (7627) plus some suffix; Bng.
settO n.m. ‘cone of various cedar trees’100 and śet.t.u n.m. “ ‘goitre” of hens’ has

parallels in Ind. s eth
li ‘a fir cone’, in Šat.. s e
t ‘a mushroom’, in Gau. s eth l ‘fir

set" a ‘ear of maize’ (but

dental stop is unclear) and

they cone’ and in Paš.deg. should derive < OIA *cet.t.a- ‘defective’ (4904) with modern parallels (with initial affricate) in Wg., Pr. and Paš., but, contradicting this, there are also S. cot.u ‘cone’, Kul. ś¯ekt.¯e ‘husks’ (LSI ix,iv: 683), Cur. sikr.¯e ‘husks’, Pang. ś¯ akr¯e ‘husks’ and Gadd. xagt.u ¯ ‘chip, splinter’; cf. also OIA *sit.t.a- ‘ear of corn’ (13396). Note: In case of OIA ks., one does not see always a process > *ch > ś (because of contamination) as in this example from Him. (Tika Ram Joshi, 1911): kcyu d ‘a squint’ which derives aus OIA ku- derogatory/prevention plus ¯ıks.a ¯- ‘sight, viewing’ plus Him. present participle.

We thus observe:to assume that in Proto-Nuristani depalatalization set in before deaffrication of palatals set in, but further east in the Proto-Dardic and Proto-Pah¯ ar.¯ı area it was the other way round would be too simple. The two processes continued in post-OIA times in all three language groups: in some cases there is deaffrication before depalatalization and in other cases depalatalization before deaffrication, and a process like Bhad. sir ‘delay’ < OIA cirá- ‘long’ reflects the same but in a number of cases just older process in Nuristani. Thus it seems that once deaffrication had taken place in Proto-Dardic and -Pah¯ ar.¯ı, depalatalization spread into their area from Proto-Nuristani and affected those words with palatal affricates which had not yet undergone deaffrication. However, the two processes were later not as comprehensive as in the earlier case of OIA and Old Iranian, which led to a rather chequered picture.

4.2.4.3

Deaffrication in other Outer Languages and Munda

A similar deaffrication tendency , which is seen in Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı, is also found in other Outer Languages to an extend, which is much more comprehensive than in typical Inner Languages. For instance in Hindi, there are very few such cases. The cause for this tendency and that it seems to be more common in the southern half of the Indo-Aryan language-scape than in Hindi, Bih¯ ar¯ı etc. are not really clear. To be sure, Pinnow notes (§ K239) that in Munda Kharia and Kurku there is a frequent 100 Unclear whether here also Klm. š¯ et. H(L) ‘pine wood’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

120

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

tendency for changing unvoiced palatal occlusives into palato-alveolar sibilants ([Ù] > [S]). In addition, there are tendencies in different Munda languages for [S] >] Ø not only word-medially – as frequently in Standard Prakrit as e.g. in OIA vacana- ‘speaking’ > Pk. vayan.a- (Masica [1991: 181]) – but also word-initially as can be seen in the following example: PMK *ciiP ‘louse’ – Semelai ci ‘head louse’ – Gta" si ‘louse’ – Sora iPi, i ‘louse’. Note also Grierson who observes (LSI v,i: 379) that for southern Oriya depalatalization and preservation of final vowels are typical, and in East Bengal depalatalization, deaffrication (also in Assamese) and debuccalization are common (see LSI v,i: 354-5). But since such processes are worldwide very common, it is difficult to establish a causal relationship between the tendencies in Kharia and Kurku and similar tendencies in southern and eastern NIA languages. In the following list, either a corresponding MIA form or a corresponding form from a typical Inner Language like Hindi was added. 1. G. a
s ‘eye’ < OIA áks.i- ‘eye’ (43) – Pa., Pk. acchi-; sor ‘thief’ (Marw. s¯or¯ı-p¯et.o¯ ‘thieving’) < OIA corá-1 ‘thief’ (4931) – Pa., Pk. c¯ ora. 2. Marw. sandan.-p¯ ur ‘Candanp¯ ur’ (name of a place); pas¯e ‘afterwards’ < OIA *paśca- ‘hinder part’ (7990) – Pk. paccha-; n¯ıs¯e ‘below’ (Garh. niss ‘ditto’ and B.chit. nisu ‘low’) < OIA n¯ıcá- ‘low’ (7540) – Pa. n¯ıca-, Pk. n.¯ıya-. 3. Rj.mal. s¯ uka l¯ a ‘chaff’ < OIA *cokka- ‘chaff’ (4917) – H. cõk. 4. Rj. sosbo ‘to suck up’ has an exact parallel in Bng.
sosnO ‘to slurp down; to empty’ and Him.
so
snu ‘to suck’, all derive < OIA cu
sati ‘sucks’ or *c usyati ‘is



sucked’ (4898) – H. c¯ usn¯ a. 5. Ko.S. uss@l ‘to surge up’ < OIA (BhP) uccalati ‘springs up’ (quoted sub 1642),

note preservation of double consonant – Pk. uccallaï; kas@v@ and M.w¯ ar. kasov ‘tortoise’ < OIA kacchapa- ‘tortoise’ (2619) – Pa. kacchapa-, Pk. kacchava-; m@s di ‘mosque’ ← Ar. masjid. 6. Ko. kus ‘bosom’ (archaic) < OIA kuca- (or *kucca-?) ‘female breast, teat’ (3216) – Pa. kuca-, Pk. kuya-; kus ‘side, direction’ < OIA káks.a-1 ‘armpit’ (2588) – Pa., Pk. kaccha-. 7. M.kud.. tas ‘to scrape and tasni ‘chisel’ < OIA táks.ati ‘forms by cutting’ (5620) – Pa. tacchati, tacch¯eti, Pk. tacchaï; pašit. ‘reaper’ somehow connected with OIA (K¯ aran.d..) paricchid- ‘to mow or reap (corn)’; suri ‘knife’ < OIA ks.urá‘knife’ (3727) – Pk. chura -. 8. M.w¯ ar. us ‘sugarcane’ < OIA iks.ú- ‘sugarcane’ (1550) – Pk. icchu-; sathi ‘chest’ < OIA *ch¯ atti- ‘chest’ (5014) – H. ch¯ at¯ı; šeput. ‘tail’ < OIA
sepy a
- *‘tail’ (12607) (Pa. chepp¯ a, Pk. cheppa-); sal ‘bark’ < OIA challi- ‘bark’ (5005) – Pa., Pk. challi-. 9. Ko.kun.. b@rsa ‘spear’ (cf. H. barch¯ a). 10. M.coch. l@ss @p@ ‘to burn’ < OIA laks.áyati ‘marks’ (10884) with a semantic parallel in Ku. lachy¯ un.o ([Turner] “caus. of pass. *l¯ ach¯ın.o”) ‘to brand, burn, lop branches from a tree’. 11. A. s¯ ari ‘four’ < OIA catv a
rah ‘four’(4655) – Pa., Pk. catt¯ar¯o -; p as ‘five’ < OIA

páñca- ‘five’ (7655) – Pa. pañca-, Pk. pamca-; ˙ s¯ aku ‘eye’ < OIA cáks.us- ‘eye’ (4560) (according to Turner probably ← Pk.)– Pa., Pk. cakkhu-; bus ∼ buc

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

121

‘(obscene) female organ’ < OIA *bucca-1 ‘defective’ (9266) and cf. there M. bucc¯ı, pucc¯ı ‘pudendum muliebre’ and Bshk. boč ‘vulva’; s 6ral ∼ cãr¯al < OIA c¯ an.d.a¯lá- ‘man of lowest and most despised caste’ (4740). Note: A different form of deaffrication is found in a few words in Nuristani K¯ amdeshi and Kati, here caused by vowel deletion between č and t:101 Kamd. št"a ‘to consider, think over; ponder’ < OIA cintáyati ‘thinks’ (4815), Kamd. št"o and Kt. štavó both ‘four’ < OIA catva
rah ‘four’ (4655),102 Kamd. štr"a bu- ‘to

turn color (as grapes)’ < OIA citrá- ‘conspicuous, bright; variegated’ (4803),103 Kt. čtr"ov- ‘to write; carve’ < OIA citráyati ‘decorates’ (4810).

4.3

Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

In this section I repeat the survey of the previous section with regard to the IndoIranian reflexes of PIE clusters *sk´ versus *sk/*sku even though it is generally accepted that in the Indo-European proto-language gutturals were neutralized after u- (there are at least no labio-velars) and after initial s- (Meillet [1894: 294ff.], see also Kortland [: 27f.] and Kloekhorts [2008]). Nevertheless the initial clusters were probably not reflected identically in Iranian and in Indo-Aryan, wherefore it makes sense whether or not also here ‘Iranian’ traces can be found in Dardic and WestPah¯ ar.¯ı. Cognates like OIA ch ay a
- ‘shade, shadow’ and Yav. a-saiia- ‘he who does not ´ shadow’ both < PIE (s)keh3 ih2 ‘darkness, shadow’, and OIA SKAMBH ‘make firm’ and Yav. fra-sk@mba- ‘porch’, fra-sčimbana- ‘prop, beam’ both < PIE *?skebh H - ‘to prop’ (LIV) suggest the same relationship of [µ/dz] versus [Ù/Ã] ‘Iranian type’ reflexes. Since there are not that many descendants of PIE lexemes containing these clusters, one cannot expect many traces in Dardic and West-Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages. It is not necessary to systematically look for preservations of PIE *sk/*sku which are found both in Nuristani and Dardic, cf. e.g. Kal., Kho. iskov ‘peg’ < OIA *skabha‘post, peg’ (13638) and Pr. üšky"öb, üs.ky"öb ‘bridge’ which Buddruss und Degener derive < OIA skambhá-1 ‘prop, pillar’ (13639). But usually the cluster was not preserved and in Prakrit OIA sk had always changed to kh (Pischel § 306). Besides preservation of PIE *sk- in OIA, it changed in three cases to (s)c-: ścandrá-/candrá‘shining, radiant’ (where, however, the ś o allomorph is retained only as final element in compounds) < PIE *skend- ‘to shine’ (LIV: 554) (IEW: 526); cárman- ‘hide, skin’ < PIE *(s)kér-men- ‘segment’ → ‘cut-off skin’ (*[s]ker- ‘to cut off’); COD ‘impel’ < PIE *(s)keud- ‘to shoot, throw’. This means that word-initially, the sibilant of PIE  deleted before k- was palatalized in Vedic Sanskrit. *sk- was first There are some Outer Language words with PIE *sk not > kkh but > (*)c(h) > -ś- or > (*)c.(h).

101 All etymological suggestions in this paragraph come from Strand. 102 But note that Prasun has preserved the affricate in čp¯ u ‘four’. 103 Strand writes mistakenly Turner 4013.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

122 4.3.1

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Dardic

Palatal 1. Bro. c˙ hini ‘chisel’ and c˙ hinis to cut, tear’ < OIA chedana- ‘cutting; instrument for cutting’ (5066) < PIE *sk´(h) eid- ‘to cut, separate’. But note also palatal čhin ‘rind’, which suggests dialectmixture. 2. Kal. c.av ‘very, bright, extremely’ as in c.av .lac.hía and c.u .lac.híak both ‘bright
- ‘shine, bright’ (see EWA II: ´ red’ < PIE *skóuwhich is related with *(s)keu  656f. śón.a- ‘red, crimson’). With retroflexion instead of dentalization because of high vowel. Note also that .lac.hía ‘red’ is < OIA l¯ aks.ika- ‘red’ (11003.2). 3. Ind. ch
2v (-ch2 v) kar
2v  ‘to milk (a cow that yields very little milk)’, Bur. c.áo -˙t


ou-k- ‘clean’ and Latv. slàukt ‘to ‘to milk’, Sh. c.áu or c.av ‘ditto’ — cf. PIE *kl milk’ and Lith. šlavù ‘to sweep, wipe’. Regarding the retroflex cf. Sh.pales. c.ringa ˙ ‘temples’ which, following Morgenstierne’s suggestion for borrowing, Turner connects with OIA
s
rnga

- ‘horn’ (12583). Thus the Dardic forms derive 
 < older *črou- < *kr ou-k-. 4. Dm. b¯ al"c˙ an ∼ ba˙can ‘ashes’ is possibly a hybrid MK-IA synonym compound. Regarding first syllable, cf. Proto-North- and -West-Bahnaric *blO: ‘ashes’and Cua blO: ‘ashes’ and Tarieng blO: ‘fireplace, hearth, ashes’, Katu álA: ‘ashes’, Proto-Vietic *p-lO: ‘cendres, ashes’. Second syllable derives < OIA chadana‘cover’ or ch¯ adana- ‘covering’ which cf. with OIA ch¯ adi- *‘covering’ (in ch¯ adimus.t.i- ‘handful of ashes’) (5020) with many modern reflexes meaning ‘ashes’; ´ OIA CHAD ‘cover’ derives < PIE *sked‘to cover’. 5. Kal. bí˙ca ‘gap, crack’ < OIA viccheda- ‘division, separation’ < PIE *sk´(h) eid ‘to cut, separate’. 6. Kal. bi˙chán bi˙chán hik ‘to shirk one’s work’ < OIA *vicchanda- which cf. with OIA aticchanda- ‘too much wilfulness or criticism’ and CHAND ‘pleasing’; ´ further derivation < PIE *skendwhose ‘identity’ is, however, vague (see EWA). ´ 7. Paš. va˙c"a ‘Kafir shoe’ < OIA upacchada- ‘cover’ (2167) < PIE *sked‘to cover’.

Velar 1. Wot.. ans, Shum. a˜ı˙c ‘eye’, Gaw. i˙c"n ‘eye’ (Nars. i˙cin ‘eye’) are cognate with OIA áks.i- ‘eye’. However, they rather show an ‘Iranian’ type reflex of PIIr. *áčsi-, *áčsana- < PIE *h3 óku s- ‘eye’. They differ from the derivation of aks.i- < PIIr. *Hákši- with regard to a secondary palatalization of PIE *-ku which, on the other hand, parallels the same process e.g. in Kamd. a¯c˙ ˜e ‘eye’ and other Nuristan languages, and resembles also Proto-Armenian *ačℎ a ‘eyes’ (Lipp [2009: 20]). Later-on, all forms underwent dentalization. This blurring of the original distinction between the reflexes of PIE palato-velars and (labio)velars is, however, a common process in the relevant Indo-Iranian languages. Since there are no unproblematic Iranian parallels, the forms are a common Nuristani-Dardic heritage. 2. Kal. číl.u ‘stomach worms, round worms’ compares with OIA lex. śil¯ı- ‘a kind of worm’. Possible connection with OIA k
rmi- (3438) and PIE *kw rmis ‘worm’   © 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

4.3.2

123

or e.g. with slovenish čˆrm ‘whitlow (‘Fingerwurm’), carbuncle’ is unclear. But note also Shgh. č¯ırm ‘worm’. Kal. čhiáik ‘to dry up (of a spring or an animal’s milk supply)’ as in c.hir čhiáis ‘it stopped giving milk’ < older *čhiváik < *čhil.áik < PIE *skel- ‘dry out’. Kal. čher ‘cut branches of holly oak, willow, almond, mulberry and other woods’ as in ek šon˙ čher óni ‘bring one cut branch’ < *sker- ‘cut’ (derivation < OIA chidrá- is not possible). Here perhaps also K. šr¯ akh ‘knife’ (Sachadeva 2010: 65).104 u- ‘to sneeze’ Dm. žiš- ‘to sneeze’, Klm. ˇȷis Hy ‘a sneeze’, and dentalized Pal. dzist¯ and Ind. zhíti ‘sneezing’ are perhaps cognate with OIA KS.AV ‘sneeze’, ks.áuti ‘sneezes’ (3754) < PIE *sk eu-, ks eu- (cf. Old Lith. skiaudžiu ‘sneeze’, IEW: 953). Whereas Dm., Klm. and Pal. would reflect PIE sk eu-, the forms collected sub 3754 rather reflect PIE *ks eu-. Mayrhofer (EWA) points to possible Iranian parallel *xšnauša-. However, borrowing from AA is also possible, cf. PMK *k[m]cas ‘to sneeze’, Proto-Bahnaric *-c@s ‘to sneeze’, Proto-Katuic *c@s, *c1@s ‘sneeze’, etc. Thus, the origin of this lemma is unsettled. Wot.. busáu, bisáu ‘hungry’ does phonetically not correspond with other desiderative reflexes of OIA BHOJ ‘enjoy’ like Tor. bus.a¯u; Sv. buch a
l; Pal.

h
buch a; Ind. buc.hà all ‘hungry’ which are cognate with OIA *bubhuks.aka

‘hungry’ (9284) but which compare better with non-reduplicated OIA *bhuks.a¯‘hunger, hungry’ (CDIAL p. 543). OIA BHOJ derives < PIE *bheug- ‘enjoy’  *bhuˇȷs-. whose Pr.Ar. reflex with PIE (h1 )se-desiderative suffix must have been Through dentalization of the secondary voiced palatal affricate and subsequent word-final devoicing Dardic Wot.. busáu, bisáu evolved. In a copper-plate inscription in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı there is “an unusual shift from ks. to s” (Falk 2010: 19): Gan. metreasa mosan.adae corresponding with OIA maitreyasya *moks.an.at¯ ayai ‘to the act of liberation of Maitreya’ (?). OIA moks.a- is desiderative (see Rix [1996: 444]) of the root MOC ‘liberate’ which derives < PIE (s)meuk- ‘to let loose, release’. The PIIr. reconstructed desiderative  *(s)maučs- which developed further with not uncommon stem must have been dentalization of the secondary palatal into Gan. mosan.a- (cf. OIA moks.an.a‘the act of liberation’) via *moµan.a-.105 This evidence from G¯ andh¯ar¯ı speaks against the attitude to ‘explain’ the presented Dardic words in this section as borrowings from Nuristani. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

Palatal 1. Bng. c hOta n.m. ‘umbrella’ < OIA cháttra- ‘parasol’ (4972) and cognate Bng. ´ c˙ h¯ an n.f. ‘alpine hut’ < OIA ch¯ adana- ‘covering’ (5017) < PIE *sked‘to cover’. 104 The word is perhaps a synonym compound with -¯ akh also deriving from a ‘knife’ word. Since there would be several possibilities, no suggestion is made here. 105 Regarding the existence of a dental affricate phoneme [µ] in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı see Stefan Baums (2009: 134) and especially Richard Salomon quoted already above p. 43 in the first paraghraph of ‘A Kartvelian substrate’. Note also Gérard Fussman who observes (1989: 441): “évolution spécifique d’un tout petit nombre de groupes consonantiques du vieil-indien (ks. > c., c˙ . . . faiblesse de l’aspiration)”.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

124

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

2. Bng. c hOdmO n.m. ‘feeling of sickness or nausea’ and c˙ h¯ ad n.m. ‘vomit’ (indirectly) < OIA chardí- ‘vomiting’ (4999) < PIE (s)kér-d- ‘’to defecate; dung, excrement’ (see EWA)? Here also Dardic Bro. c˙ h@is ‘to vomit’ ? 3. Bng. c˙ hã˜ı ‘shadow, shade, reflection’, Kt.g. c˙ ha˜ı ‘shadow’, cf. also parallel Dardic ´ 1 -iéh2 - ‘shadow’. Ind. c h o
l ‘shadow’ < OIA ch ay a
- ‘shadow’ (5027) < PIE *skeh  4. Bng. c˙ hev¯er. n.f. ‘girl, woman’ (for parallels see p. 593) < OIA *chedu‘cut, slit’ (5067b) (therefore also Bng. c˙ h¯ed ‘hole’ and c heulO ‘apart’) with a -t.a- extension and < PIE *sk´(h) eid- ‘to cut, separate’. 5. Bng. zamrO, zamri ‘the earth; soil’ (with -rO3 suffix?) possibly < OIA jm a
- ‘the earth’ < PIE *dh gˆh óm- ‘earth’ (see p. 144). Bng. zimi and P. jimi both ‘earth’ are probably borrowings of Pers. zam¯ı ‘earth’. Velar 1. Bng. poet. [email protected]. ‘grim-glowing’ (Zoller [2014: 400, 523]) < OIA cán.d.a-1 ‘passionate, fierce, cruel’ (4584) which might be cognate with OIA candrá‘moon’ (4661) as suggested by Turner because of S. can.d.ro ‘passionate’ ∼ can.d.ru ‘moon’ evidence (see EWA), and therefore [email protected]. ultimately < PIE *skend- ‘to shine’. Bng. has also a dental form c˙ ãdi ‘silver’. 2. Bng. caminO ‘to cut into the skin (while cutting hair or shearing sheep)’ < labial

extended PIE *(s)kerb(h)- ‘to cut’ (IEW: 943) 3. Kt.g. cit.o ‘white’ < OIA citrá- ‘conspicuous, bright’ (4803) < PIE *keit- ‘shining,  bright’.

4.3.3

Non-satemized and satemized doublets

For a detailed discussion of this phenomenon – also called Gutturalwechsel – see Lipp (2009), Steensland (1973: 101ff.). 1. Bng. gOnnO ‘to give birth’ and OgnO “ ‘unborn” (usually said about dead or dying immature delivery of sheep and cows)’ as in meri gaiyei dui bastu gOnOndi ‘my

cow delivered

cow delivered two calves’ and meri gai rO bastu OgnO uO ‘my



106 a still born calf’ — Bng. zOrmEnO ‘to be born, come into existence’ as in

in Rj.), Him. and Kann. zOlma, zOlmo zOrmOntO m or ‘born as hero’ (similar

‘born’ and Kann. also z˘ orm˘ennig ‘to be born’, Jaun. jaram ‘birth’, K. zarm ‘birth, nativity, origin, rise, production; life, existence’ and zury¯ ath ‘progeny, offspring; the offspring (of God), the whole world’ (< older *zurmy¯ ath), , B. jOrmO, B.chit. and B.roh. zOrmO ‘birth’ etc. Cf. also same dissimilation in the Lat. cognate germen ‘progeny’ and in Thracian zelmis ‘offspring, descendant’ < PIE g´enh1 - ‘beget a child; be born’. The relationship between the quoted satemized forms and OIA jánman- ‘birth, creature’ is not quite clear, but note

106 See Abbi http://www-personal.umich.edu/ pehook/bangani.abbi2.html.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

125

that most of the forms show dentalization. The dissimilation of -nm- > -rmand -lm- must have occurred before the MIA period (cf. e.g. Pa. jamman-). 2. Bng. gOmbO, gumbO n.m. ‘molar tooth’ and gOmbE ‘molar teeth and area of the hinges of the jaw’ and probably also gumbi n.f. ‘gendarme, spine’ and gum(b)ialO ‘jagged, serrated (as a ridge)’ < PIE g´ombhos ‘tooth, set/row of

teeth’ (derivation < OIA gúlma- ‘lump, cluster’ [4217] seems very unlikely to me)? — Bng. zOmbO n.m. ‘area of the hinge of the jaw’ < OIA jámbha- ‘tooth; jaws’ (5137) and nominal derivation zOmbi alO n.m. ‘dentition; cheek’. Another,

below p. 60. perhaps better PIE interpretation is suggested 3. Mayrhofer suggests (EWA) that HARS. ‘excite’ is reflex of contamination of PIE palatal g´h ers- and velar *g(u )h ers- ‘stiffen (of hair), bristle’ because there is also OIA ghŕs.u- ‘lively, agile, mirthful’, but Mallory and Adams present only the  (also found in Psht. ziz ‘rough, hard, rigid, stiff’). In fact, setting up first form . two very similar roots is unnecessary because the form ghŕs.u- is due to Weise’s  Law, which says that in OIA “a depalatalization of palato-velars has taken place before *r (but not before *l)” (Kloekhorst [20089], see also Weise [1881]). In other words, a palato-velar changed into a velar in this surroundings. However, besides this, here relevant is also PIE *´ gh eis- ‘frighten’: Bng. gOisinO ‘to get

bristly, frightened’, gOrs(E)nO ‘to feel sheer terror, be terrified’, gOrsinO ‘to be



spiny (e.g., as pig or porcupine)’ and gOsi adj.f.,n.f. ‘shocked, frightened, scared; fright, scare’ (with -i-1 and -E- grammemes before the infinitive) (already Zoller 1988: 189),107 Deog. gOisnO and gOrsionO ‘to get terribly frightened (with body

here probably

hair standing upright)’ — also cognate Kho. grís. ‘fear, suspicion’ — K. zarzar, zarazar ‘fear, apprehension’, Ind. zh
2r ho- ‘to get frightened, frighten, startle’ and zh
2r kar
2v  ‘to frighten or startle s.o.’, Kal. záraš žúni hik ‘to become frightened’108 and zran, zrand ‘afraid’ and zran hik ‘to become afraid or startled’ which are allomorphs of a form that must have been very similar to Av. zar@siiamna- (Mallory and Adams zaršayamna- [2006: 347]) ‘feathers upright’. The Av. form is reflected e.g. in Wanetsi zer"až ‘rough, stiff, rigid’. Notes: (a) There are also West Himalayish Byangsi jarmo ‘to be afraid’ and Darma j@r-mo ‘afraid of’. However, since I cannot find any plausible parallels in TibetoBurman, Munda and Mon-Khmer,109 these are either chance resemblances or borrowings from Indo-Aryan. (b) Čašule (2004: 63) connects Bur. gus
u- ‘to be afraid’ with PIE *g heis- respectively *gheis- (2010: 31). Cf. also Arm. garš ‘abominable; abominable thing or 107 I have rechecked this word many times, but it does not seem to have the same falling tone (or a falling tone at all) as the other here quoted Bng. words. 108 žúni < OIA yóni- ‘womb, birthplace, abode’, thus the phrase means literally ‘to be (in the) form (of) fear’. This has further parallels in burtúni žúni ‘person possessed by an evil spirit’ and pári žúni ‘person possessed by a spirit’ (i.e. most probably a fairy). 109 I will maintain the distinction between Munda and Mon-Khmer only in geographical terms and because the Munda languages have become heavily ‘Indianized’. Otherwise there is no linguistic reason for this distinction as has been convincingly shown by Paul Sidwell and Roger Blench (2011).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

126

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

person’ and garšim ‘to abominate, be disgusted’; Martirosyan discusses (2008: 186f.) this form also with apparent preservation of g-.

4. Bng. gesO, geslO n.m. ‘switch, twig; a stick used for driving cattle and for fighting’, Jaun. ghesli ‘m¯ arne ke lie d.an.d.a¯ – a stick for killing’ and ghesl  ‘fencingstick’ (LSI ix,iv: 420), Deog. gesr.i ‘a stick for fighting’ (see Pronk [2019: 136]) — Rj.mev. ghes@lo ‘long stick’ < PIE *´ gh aisós ‘spear’ but note Old Greek meaning ‘herdsman’s staff’ and note that Watkins (1985: 20) does not reconstruct a palatal but a velar initial consonant. Also Kroonen (2013) reconstructs PIE *gh aiso- ‘spear’. Kroonen refers also to Old Norse g
sli ‘staff, ski stick’ which, he argues, has preserved the more primitive meaning ‘tip’. Indeed, a ‘stick for fighting’ and a ‘ski stick’ both differ from ‘spear’. Cf. also Proto-Celtic *gayso- ‘spear’ which is presumed to be a borrowing from Germanic and note that Matasović (2009) regards the Celtic lemma as probably derived from the root *gh eys- ‘wound’, therefore c.f. Bng. gesnO, gesli anO ‘to beat s.o.’, Him.

(Nayak

et al.), P. ghiss karn¯ı ghesn.u ‘to crush, to bruise’, Pang. gh¯5s5 ‘punch’ ‘to beat one severely’ and Pr. güs- ‘crush, pound’. Traditionally, OIA HES. ‘injure, hurt, destroy’ is seen as the Indo-Aryan reflex, however, Kroonen argues (2013: 164), “[n]ote that the origin of Gr. 𝜒𝛼˜𝜄𝑜𝜍 m., 𝜒𝛼˜𝜄𝑜𝜈 n. ‘shepherd’s staff’ and Skt. hés.as- n. ‘quickness, vigour, fire, missile’ is semantically difficult.” The quoted words are well-known in Bang¯ ˙ an., perhaps less so in Jauns¯ ar. An example is found in a Jauns¯ ar¯ı arul song describing a deadly conflict between the two heroes Sitlu and Haku about grazing rights of their sheep on some alpine meadows (Joshi 2007: 46):

leu
si ri ghesli k ate muteia ri ch ti chitk are mutaia ri lai bheda p ti 110

GEN.POP.F



cut.PR.3.SG muteia GEN.POP.F stick Leush fighting-stick . stick mut.aia GEN.POP.F attach.PR.3.SG sheep kill ‘(Haku) cuts a fighting-stick from a Leush tree (and) a stick from a Muteia tree, (and) he is killing the sheep with the stick from the Muteia tree’111 Since the real nature of the initial PIE consonant is not unambiguous, here only with reservation some possibly etymologically related but satemized reflexes: Kal. bizbizáy kárik (also bazbazáy kárik) ‘to throw someone out (forcefully)’ (< older *bizaybizáy?) if with *vi-prefix, and uzákik ‘to throw away, throw out, spill; to scatter, sow’, uzukík ‘to spill (of liquid or dry goods)’, and uzukúna ‘spilled’ with u- < OIA ava- (as in uc.hárik ‘to scatter seed or other things’ < OIA avaks.a¯rayati ‘causes to flow down upon’ [736]) and with -k- ‘intensive’ suffix 110 With the old absolutive -i. Note that here is a compound verb with the light verb lai appearing before the main verb from which it is separated by bhed.a ‘sheep’. 111 The use of ch¯ıt.i instead of ghesli in the second line is merely due to the rhyme. Note that I have slightly changed the transcription of the Jauns¯ ar¯ı lines by writing only short word-final vowels as this reflects the actual pronunciation.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

127

(as in bas
kik ‘to boast’, see p. 676) perhaps < PIE g´hi- ‘throw’ (Mallory and

Adams 2006: 245) (IEW g´hei- ‘impel, hurl’) – reflected in OIA HAY – which cf. with Jav. frazaiiaii¯ ami roughly ‘I let urge towards’ (‘ich lasse hindringen’ [!]; √ EWA ii: 802). There is possibly also a√non-dentalized parallel in Pr. ˇȷ- ‘throw’ (Buddruss und Degener) respectively ˇȷ@ - ‘to put, place (?)’ (Morgenstierne) as e.g. with prefix in vij- ‘throw out, undress (o.s. or another)’ which corresponds exactly with Kal. bizbizáy kárik. Regarding the difficult relationship between HAY ‘impel, hurl’ and HES. ‘injure’ see EWA. On the other hand, a potentially further non-satemized reflex may be found in Psht. G@sai ‘arrow’ (Morgenstierne) or ‘an arrow, the pole of a plough or cart, the spoke of the wheel of a Persian wheel; swift, straight, direct’ (Raverty). Elfenbein et al. quote in addition forms with dental sibilant as Kakari Pashto G@say and Wanetsi G@sa both ‘arrow; plough-beam’, and there is ¯ also Ormur a
 ‘arrow’ (Morgenstierne [1932a]). Elfenbein et .¯ı of Kaniguram G es al. find Morgenstierne’s suggestion “doubtful.” 4.3.4

Additional non-satemized examples

1. Bng. kOkinO2 ‘to consider and reconsider s.th.’, kOk anO v.i.,v.t. ‘to sway, waver;



´ to make swing’ and kOkO n.m. ‘fear’ < PIE kenk- ‘tremble, sway, stagger’. ˙ ‘be frightened, According to Mayrhofer (EWA), the connection with OIA ŚANK ´ ´ ‘hang’ on p. apprehend s.th.’ is not sure and Mallory and Adams write *konk´ ´ ´ 387 but on the next page they give *konk-. IEW has *kenk-, konk-. 2. Because of Bng. kurO, kuru1 adj. ‘rough, rude, uncouth, slovenly’, which is < OIA kr¯ ura- ‘bloody, cruel; hard, solid’ (3602), it remains somewhat doubtful whether Bng. kurO, kuru2 adj.,n.m. ‘strong; hard; a brave man, hero’ (Zoller 1988), even though it is synonym with Bng.
surO ‘hero’, is a reflex of PIE ´ 1 ro-. Note, however, also Bng. kurrai˜ *kuh u ‘swollen’ ← kurr anO ‘to swell’ which

compare with Bng.
sObnO v.i. ‘to increase (in power), rise (as water), swell’,
sObO

n.m. ‘power, mightiness’ and
sObdO ‘increased, risen, swollen’ (with -(n)dO2 suffix) which seems to be a satemized parallel perhaps < OIA *śavyate ‘swells’ (cf. OIA [ChUp.] śavya- ‘cremation of a corpse, funeral’). OIA ŚAV ‘swell’ derives ´ < PIE *keuh su
ra- ‘strong, powerful; 1 - ‘swell’ which is also the origin of OIA
hero, warrior’. Note: A satemized ‘Nuristani type’ reflex may be present in Dardic Ind. c ay
2v  v.i. ‘to increase’ and in probably related c a ya  ma c ‘fertile soil’ (with second word < OIA *mr.ttya- ‘earth’ [10287]) with *-v- > -y- as in Ind. ghay
2v  ‘to become big’ ← gh2 v ‘big’.

3. Bng. kulnO v.t. ‘to listen’ as in kela nE kulindO ta ukE ‘why don’t you listen?’

´ (the sentence is a passive construction) cf. with PIE *kleu‘hear’ (OIA
srn
oti) 

which cf. e.g. with Old Prussian klausiton ‘to hear’ versus OCS slava ‘fame’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

128 4.3.5

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Examples for linkage words

These are examples of words which are not direct reflexes of Vedic or Classical Sanskrit but whose origin lies somewhere along the line of linkage lects between ‘Old Nuristani’ and Old Indo-Aryan. Most examples are from Dardic Kalasha. 1. For Kal. istálak ‘fontanel, fontanel area of head; palate’ Morgenstierne suggests borrowing ← an unattested Nuristani form related with OIA sthála- ‘flat surface, roof’ (13744) before change of ist- > išt (14563). But why should the Kal. word be a borrowing? The change st > št does not distinguish Nuristani from Dardic since both process and lack of process are found in both language groups and are thus a matter of intra-language group dialectal differences. Cf. also the many other Kal. ist- words. Moreover, the Kal. word should rather be connected with OIA sth¯ alya- ‘located on the hill’ (EWA ii: 764). Notes: (a) Kal. istáv1 ‘a set up target at which men shoot at festive occasions like marriage or birth of a son’ is connected with OIA sthala- or sth¯ ala- . This and the preceding word belong to the ta-past word group (which developed *st- > tbefore a change of *st- > th- could have taken place; see p. 403) and they must go back to PIE *steh2 - ‘stand’ and not to *sth2 - which was generalized in Vedic in word-initial position (Mayrhofer [2005: 81], see also Lipp [2009: 174]). Here probably also istáv2 ‘bare, without crops’ but actually more precisely meaning as a noun, as shown by the example given by Trail and Cooper, ‘empty field’. Semantically this can be compared with northwestern reflexes of OIA (RV) sth atr
a(13752a) ‘station, place’ as in Bng. th¯ ac ‘a (sacred) clearing or open space in high altitude forests’ and (as borrowing) Kann. thach ‘sheepfold’.112 Mayrhofer quotes (ibid.), of course sceptically, Dh¯ atup. stak- ‘to resist; to strike against, repel’ but which also belongs here because it compares semantically with OIA *sthakk- ‘stop, halt’ (13737) for which also a transitive form sth¯ akk- needs to be reconstructed because of Bng. thaknO v.t. ‘to place, hold’ (see p. 618) and of

Kul. th¯ ak ‘closed, reserved (of a forest . . . )’ and th¯ akn¯ a ‘to reserve a forest; to stop the exercise of rights’ (Diack). (b) It is unlikely that Kal. ist˜ıék ‘to ignore someone’ as in se may ist˜ıái pútras som mon prav ‘he ignored me while he talked to his son’ is yet another cognate deriving < an unaspirated parallel of OIA (grammarians) visth¯ ana- ‘belonging to another place or order of letters’ because it seems there is no parallel of a vibecoming i- in Kalasha.

2. Bng. us.n.a¯.lu ‘(s.th.) (having become) thick’ and us.n.a¯.lu c˙ hev¯er. ‘a pregnant woman’ — Kal. os.vál.i ‘pregnant (of women)’. The Bng. word is probably < OIA ucch¯ una- ‘swollen up’ (ut-ś¯ una- which is not a CDIAL lemma) and the Kal. word < cognate OIA *ut-śv¯ ata- ‘swollen’ (1867.3), and both have a kind of v¯ al¯ a -suffix. The same suffix seems also to exist in Wg. ganali, ganäli ‘pregnant’ 112 On the tendency for ‘automatic’ word-final aspiration in Kann. see T. Grahame Bailey 1911: 4.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

3.

4.

5.

6.

129

with lexeme probably < OIA ghaná-2 i.a. ‘densely filled’ (4424). A semantic parallel ŚVI ‘swell’ > ‘pregnant’ is otherwise not found in OIA but in Greek ´ h1 ‘to swell’). Thus the Kal.-Bng. lemma looks 𝜅𝜐 𝜀´𝜔 ‘am pregnant’ (< PIE *keu  like an OL linkage lemma. Kal. kunduéyak, kunduhéyak ‘firefly, lightning bug’ with kund- < PIE *(s)kand‘shine, glitter’, with -yak diminutive suffix, and -(h)é- perhaps ← Kal. ha ‘spirit’, thus perhaps basically meaning ‘little shining spirit’. Cf. OIA cándati ‘shines, is bright’ (4657) with a modern reflex in dialectal Paš. č¯ and- ‘to dawn’, but also in Garh. cak¯ ac¯ undh ‘a glittering light, the dazzling effect of light’ (regarding cak¯ a- cf. e.g. H. [colloquially] cakcak¯ a ‘glittering, bright, shining’ which is also found in other IA and MU languages; -c¯ undh shows a > u and spontaneous aspiration), and OIA (RV 5,43,4) intensive cániscadat ‘shimmering’ (EWA). Kal. kušék ‘to make smoke to quiet a fussy child and drive away its cause’ and kušóku kárik ‘to put smoke on a person to take away sickness or a spell’.113 The smoke comes from burning seeds or juniper. Said to be borrowing from Kho. which appears there as ks"oa- ‘smoke’. The forms are connected with OIA

lex. kas.a¯ku- ‘fire, the sun’ respectively kus.a¯ku- ‘burning, scorching, inflaming’. ¯ Sub KUD . ‘burn’ Mayrhofer mentions as possible reconstruction *kuz.d.- which he, however, doesn’t find satisfactory (EWA i: 385). However, the lexicographic and the Dardic forms exactly support this reconstruction. Could the words be either another case of non-satemization or go back to a non-palatal allomorph ´ of PIE *keu‘to ignite, burn’ with an -s- extension (and RUKI)? Note, however, that Mallory and Adams rather suggest (2006: 123f.) reconstruction of a nonpalatal velar, thus *keh𝑎 u- ‘burn’ as in Greek kaí¯o ‘burn’. Alternatively possible is derivation < PIE *ker-s-d- (< *ker- ‘burn’ see Mallory and Adams [2006: 125]) with loss of -r- after RUKI as in OIA KAS. ∼ KARS. ‘scratch’ (see EWA). Cf. ´ the Kalasha burning of sacred seeds with Greek (homeric) 𝜅𝜂 𝜛𝛿𝜂𝜍 ‘fragrant’ used in connection with *𝜅 𝜂˜𝜑𝑜𝜍 ‘incense materials’ (IEW: 595). Regarding the unmatched fragrance of burnt juniper leaves in Nuristan and Dardistan see Jettmar (1975: 217). K. kranz, krj anz ‘skeleton’ (Sachadeva 2010: 84) is a near synonym compound with second component < OIA pañjara- ‘skeleton’ (7685) and first component ultimately < PIE *kréps ‘body’. The OIA reflex (?) k
rp- ‘beautiful appearance, beauty, splendour’ does not otherwise have MIA and NIA reflexes and does not fit semantically with the extrapolated but quite obvious meaning of the first component of the K. word. K. krj u ¯c˙ h, kro˙ch ‘poker’ < older *khurc- followed by r-fronting and aspiration backing (the latter is common in Kashmiri as in some West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties) < PIE *sk˘eu-(t-) with -r- formans ‘to cut, separate, scratch’ (extension of *sek‘cut’) (IEW: 954) which is cognate with *sker- ‘cut apart’ but fits here semantically better. The affricate ending must be due to influence through OIA *khucc ‘pierce, tear’ (3890) which Turner regards as “[p]oss. formations fr. *sku-.” SKU

113 -óku seems to be a kind of adjectivization suffix: Kal. čún.d.ik ‘to sting, bite’ has the derivations čun.d.áki ‘prone to sting or burn’ and čun.d.óku ‘spicy, hot’. Thus kušóku kárik seems to basically mean ‘to make smoky’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

130

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

‘pick, poke, press, cover’ has many derivations and reflexes but there does not seem to exist a direct parallel to the K. form. It belongs therefore probably to the OL linkage. Note: Here also Kal. kandrák 1 ‘fissure, cleft’ as in bhónˇȷav dyái, kandrák drážav day ‘when the earthquake struck, a fissure has opened up.’ The Kal. word corresponds either with OIA kha
tra- ‘hole’ (3863, see there S. kh¯ at.ro ‘fissure’) or -dr- reflects OIA dh¯ ará- ‘containing’. In any case, there is little doubt about connection with OIA KHAN ‘dig’,114 and with Pers. kandan ‘to dig’. Mayrhofer suggests for the OIA root derivation < PIE *kenh1 - but the IA aspiration is a problem (see EWA and FLII 21.3.1.4) and he is at strife with himself whether OIA kha
- ‘spring of water, well’ is cognate with the verb root or not. In FLII he thinks KHA ∼ KHAN ‘dig’ is a possibility. This brings us back to PIE *sk˘eu-(t-) and its possible OIA reflex *khucc which, according to Strand, Buddruss und Degener, is the origin of Pr. kuč- ‘to dig’, Kamd. kč"a-, Kt. kč"e-, Wg. kuča- all ‘dig; quarry’. However, Turner listed them sub OIA *kocc- ‘thrust, pierce, dig’ (3489), including Dardic Kal. kóčik ‘to dig’. To perfect the confusion, Turner listed Dardic Gaw. kuča- ‘to scratch’ (without aspiration) sub *khucc-. The impression cannot be avoided that *khucc- and *kocc- are allomorphs of the same root, but it remains unclear how both could be connected with *sk˘eu-(t-).

7. Kal. ga.n˙ ‘hole which goes through an object’ and ga.n˙ kárik ‘to make a hole in something’ as in a čáku gri gã.n˙ áris ‘I drilled a hole with the knife’. The word is also found in Kal. nig a
ngik

‘to eat’ which Trail and Cooper explain:

“This is used in a joking way rather than being a serious word for eating.” And it is cognate with Kal. ga. ‘throat, front side of the neck’ which in turn is related with OIA gala- ‘throat’ which Mayrhofer (certainly correctly) assumes to be connected with OIA GAR ‘swallow’ and PIE *gu er3 - ‘swallow’. Pokorny (IEW: 475f.) suggests -gh- extensions for this PIE root, reflected e.g. in German Kragen ‘collar’. Kal. ga.n˙ and nig a
ngik

“to guzzle down, wash down” have the

same extension and the retroflex vowel mirrors PIE *-r-. 8. Kho. gan(d)zúl ‘narrow path or road with walls on both sides; narrow street, alley’ is cognate with Kal. granzú ‘passageway, path between houses in a village; place in a village to throw away trash’ which is also found in Kal. phonrós ˙ ‘traveler, someone passing through’ whose first syllable is connected with Kal. phon(d) ‘path, way; journey’ which is < pánth¯ a- ‘path, road’ (7785). The word phonrós ˙ must go back to older *phongrónz ˙ and *phondgronz. The element grónz/granzú derives < PIE *gh redh - ‘step, go’,115 more precisely perhaps < 114 Regarding semantics cf. OIA khanaka- i.a. ‘dividing’ and khanitra- i.a. ‘pickaxe’. 115 There is no OIA correspondence to this PIE root. However, it was once claimed to have a reflex in the Bhabra Edict of Ashoka in Bair¯ at. (Rajasthan). Long ago (1910), Thomas Michelson suggested that the usual reading of Aś. adhigicya- ‘concerning’ as corresponding with OIA adhikrtya- ‘having placed at the head’ is faulty and should correctly be read as adhigid.hya < adhigrdhya- which he compared with Av. gar@ d- etc. (see IEW for more parallels). deriving But this readinghas not been accepted, and Oberlies (in Cardona and Jain 2003: 175) explains the unusual change from -k- to -g- as a feature sometimes found in ‘eastern’ MIA.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

131

*ghradyat¯ a- ‘passage (to go)’ (‘passageway’) and *ghradhya- ‘relating to going’ (‘traveler’), built with -ya- gerund and -t¯ a- abstract? Since OIA -d(h)ya- is regularly reflected as -ˇȷ(-) in Kal., this lemma seems to be a borrowing from a lect with -d(h)ya- > -z (there are several around). Cf. Av. g@r@zdi- (*Antreten; the taking possession, the getting’ [IEW: 456]). This etymological suggestion is supported by the extended form Kal. granzúlak ‘a kind of dance done during the Joshi festival’ (Trail and Cooper), but Augusto Cacopardo has observed this dance being performed also during the Chaumos festival (2016: 152), in fact, this dance concludes the program of the day. Cacopardo translates the term as “chain dance” and describes the movements of long lines of dancers. 9. Kal. c.an˙ hik ‘to embrace, hug’ and Kho. c.ang bik ‘to embrace’ are reflexes of OIA sanga-: ˙ Sub sájati ‘is attached, embraces’ etc. (13085) Turner refers also to additional allomorphs of SAÑJ in MIA Gan. s.a´ ga- ∼ sangá-. ˙ Thus, Kal. c.an˙ hik and Kho. c.ang bik are cases of spontaneous affrication < older *s.an(g)-. ˙ For further details on on utsanga˙ in Bng. see p. 545. 10. Kal. nistríkik ‘to slip, slide; to slip out of one’s grasp; to unintentionally pass or slip by a place’ as in ozgah
abauna pak mo d
as, tay khur pe nistr
kis hav

ice, if your foot slips you will fall and get hurt’ p
ali zay
a his ‘don’t step on the is morphologically to be analyzed as ni-*stír-k-ik (thus in nistríkik the root vowel has been backed): ni- is the IA ‘down’ pre-verb, -ik infinitive, and -kis ‘intensive’ grammeme found suffixed both to verb stems and nouns. Two examples: (1) bas.íkik ‘to boast, praise oneself’ versus bas.ikék ‘to mourn and cry and eulogize a deceased person’ i.e. so-to-say ‘to ‘bespeak’ oneself’ versus ‘to ‘bespeak’ someone’. This verb goes back to OIA bh a
sate ‘speaks, says’ (9478). On the special meanings of this word in the OL see p. 676. (2) čhul.íkik ‘beloved daughter’ ← čhu ‘daughter’ and with oblique marker -l.- and a kind of v¯ al¯ a suffix -ik. The Kal. root -st(V)r- (without vowel on the phonetic level) derives < STAR ‘strike down, subjugate’ (PIE *ster-) which is different from homonymous STAR ‘spread, scatter’ (PIE *sterh3 -) (see EWA). Mayrhofer observes (ibid.) that the two roots overlapped already in the Vedas, but whereas the second root is widespread in IA, only Kal. is known to me for having separately preserved also the ‘strike down’ root. Since this root is not known with pre-verb from OIA, it must belong to a linkage lect. 11. Kal. parčám ‘head hair’ appears to be a compound word with second syllable paralleling Kal. čávar ‘human hair’; thus both -čám and čávar seem to derive < camará- ‘tail of the yak Bos grunniens’ (4677) somehow in the sense of ‘long hair’ or ‘ponytail’.116 Thus, par- may go back to PIE *pulos ‘(a single) hair’ and parčám basically mean ‘tail of (single) hairs’ (čávar could be a reduced or shortened form of the original compound *parčamar). Cf. e.g. OIA pulaka‘horripilation’ and old Indian personal names like Pulakeśin ‘name of a king’ (Raychaudhuri [1923: 172]), Kurd. p¯ ur ‘head hair’ and Mayrhofers comments in EWA sub pulastí- ‘wearing the hair straight or plain’. 116 Wearing of long hair was once widespread also for men in various parts of the high mountains of northwestern South Asia. O’Brien on male hairstyle in Chitral (1895: v): “:Many men wear their hair long and in curls. . . ”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

132

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Note: Kal. pilésk ‘rug or mat of woven goathair’ is said by Trail and Cooper to be a loanword from Khowar (but it is not found on Strand’s website or with Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics). It may be connected with PIE *pilos ‘single hair’ and further with *pil-so- which can be compared with Greek 𝜋˜𝜄𝜆𝑜𝜍 ‘felt’. Whereas parčám can be OIA-derived, pilésk seems to be a linkage word.

12. OIA p¯ as.i- ‘dry cowdung’ (8139) is found in Kal. pes. with the somewhat different meaning ‘manure’. The lemma is also found in Kal. pes.ghár ‘dew, moisture’ which literally means ‘rain of manure’ or ‘manure-water-fall’ (dew as ‘manuring’ the ground) (for northwestern parallels of -ghár see p. 457). Regarding phrasing cf. pes.ghár dyek ‘to fall (of dew)’ (with dyek ‘to give’) with bás.ik dyek ‘to rain’.117 OIA p¯ as.i- (note also lex. p¯ ars.¯ı- ‘dung’) is documented only lately from Buddhist Sanskrit onwards but has mainly modern reflexes in Dardic and Nuristani. Together with the somewhat deviating meanings in Kal. the question comes up whether this word may actually go back to OIA pravars.a‘rain’, pravars.ati ‘sheds or showers abundantly with (instr.)’ (here: manure?) and correspondingly also suggesting a semantic change from ‘liquid manure’ to ‘dry cowdung’. That the here-presented deliberations are standing to reason, is supported by Pr. vus.pus. ‘dew’ which is possibly a near-synonym compound with -pus. < p¯ as.i- and vus.- < vars.á- ‘rain’. Thus Pr. ‘dew’ basically would mean ‘rain-manure’. The idea that ‘dew’ is the result of (nocturnal and thus invisible) rainfall is shown by the Pr. sentence m ar u s-pan vuspus aty"og-layo ‘the cloud

2016).

has placed dew on the grass’ (Buddruss und Degener More information on this perception, which is going back to Ancient Indian thought, is found in Norelius (2016: 48) with additional literature. We see now that the late Sanskrit word is most likely a borrowing from a (northwestern) linkage lect.118 13. Kal. piždó, Kt. pizdO both ‘(dangerous) avalanche’ < PIE *pisd- ‘press’ apparently with ‘Iranian’ RUKI and not < OIA *piz.d.o (cf. OIA p¯ıd.áyati ‘presses’ and EWA sub P¯ID os and Kt. trus both . ). With semantics comparable with Wg. tr¯ ‘avalanche’ < OIA tr¯ asa- ‘fear’ (6013). To the latter lemma is to be added Pr. (v)ut"us ‘avalanche’ < OIA uttr¯asa- ‘fear, terror’.

Note: Kal. p
ik ‘to squeeze, press or tread grapes’ derives < OIA p¯ıd.áyati ‘presses,

squeezes’ (8226) (with disappeared second consonant reflected in retroflex vowel) as in Sh. (Lor.) pioiki ‘to press’. Here also Kal. pio
nyak ‘wooden tie piece or

brace which joins joists’ < OIA p¯ıd.ana- ‘an instrument for pressing’ and not ‘act of pressing or squeezing’ (8225).

117 On similar conjunct verbs built with reflexes either of OIA dád¯ ati ‘gives’ or dádh¯ ati ‘places, lays on, gives, seizes’ (which are sometimes difficult to keep separate from each other) that are typically found in Dardic and Romani see Zoller 2010: 53f. 118 The same Kal. word is discussed again in a different context below p. 824.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

133

14. Paš. purs a
n ‘a question’ (Buddruss [1959b: 61]) corresponds on the one hand with OIA prcchana- ‘asking’ (8353), but cannot be its reflex because Pashai principally  preserves inherited OIA palatal affricates without dentalization. On the other hand, the word compares with Proto-Iranian *fras/prs ‘to ask, inquire’ as reflected in OAv. p@r@s¯ a ‘I ask’, Khot. puls- ‘ask’, etc. However, I cannot find a direct Iranian precursor with a nominal -n- extension which would identify the Pashai word as an Iranian borrowing. Thus, it appears to be a linkage word ´ deriving ultimately < PIE *prek-. 15. Kal. ph"¯ısta ‘penis’ (Morgenstierne), phísta ‘genital organs’ (Trail and Cooper) with spontaneous aspiration but probably not directly < OIA pásas- ‘penis’ because regarding -ta cf. very similar Gr. 𝜋 𝑜´𝜎𝜗𝜂 ‘penis’. All derive < PIE *péses‘penis’. Note also preservation of inherited accent position in Kal. Notes: (a) Sub OIA pela- ‘testicle’ (8381) one finds (1) reflexes like P. pehl¯ a, pihl¯ a, Bhal. p
Ellho and Si. pella, pilla ‘testicle, penis’ to which is to be added Bng. pelu ‘penis’. But there are also with ‘retroflex’ .l the following forms (2): Or. pel.a and G. pel.. Whereas the (2) forms derive < pela-, the (1) forms cannot. The (1) forms rather go back to *pas-illa- with MIA suffix and preservation of debuccalized -sas -h- in P. and Bhal. One such form deriving from *pas-illa- was early borrowed into Classical Sanskrit (with -ll- > -l-) and from there borrowed into Or. and G. The form *pas-illa- resembles superficially Old High German fasel ‘penis’ but the two lateral suffixes have different origins. Note also Walther Wüst (quoted in EWA) who had suggested for pela- derivation < PIE *pezla-. (b) The lemma, which is certainly of Indo-European origin, seems to have also been borrowed into Munda Ho through ‘Indianization’119 (example from Kuiper [1965: 68]): peúo, peóo ‘egg, testicles’.

16. Kal. pherkík ‘to cut off; to cut or bite into wood’ (with ‘intensive’ -k-) as in this riddle: pherkíu pherkíu ne ta˙círav ‘it chops and it chops but it is never satisfied’ (answer: badók ‘an axe’) is certainly < PIE *bher- ‘strike through, split, cut’120 but hardly derives < OIA BHR¯I ‘injure, hurt; cut’ which, as bhr n a
ti ‘in

jures, hurts’ and *bhr¯ın.a- ‘cut’ (9687), is reflected in Kho. Note that Mayrhofer (EWA) regards relationship between PIE *bh r(e)iH - and *bh er- only as a possibility which he does not repeat in FLII. Note: Here probably also Kal. ph(r)él.ik ‘razor blade’ with -l.ik suffix either like in phrel.ík ‘light’ < *prabh¯ ala- (8711)121 or rather as in gan.d.ál.ik ‘statuette’ < gan.d.a- ‘trunk of tree from root to branches’ (3998.1) perhaps diminutive. Note ´ ‘barber’ (IEW: also the remarkable similarity with Greek (Thrakian?) 𝛽 𝜚𝜄𝜆𝜔𝜈 166).

119 With this I mean the overstepping of regular sound changes. The term is discussed p. 223. 120 Pokorny has ‘scrape, cut’ and, significantly, ‘treat sth. with a sharp tool’. 121 But OIA BHAL is a problematic ‘root’, see the discussion p. 676.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

134

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

17. Kal. man.d.avarvác. ‘big round loaf of bread with a hawk or eagle design on it’. Trail and Cooper explain: “This is made during čavmós ‘the winter festival’ and is made from wheat flour. It is considered to be pure.” The word is perhaps a compound consisting of three parts: (1) -vác. ← pach
yak ‘bird’ <

paks.ín- ‘winged’ (7636) with dimin. suffix; (2) man.d.av- which certainly carries the meaning ‘big round loaf of bread’ derives < older *man.d.ala- ‘bread, cake’ and is close to Pk. mamd ˙ . illa- ‘a cake’ and Pal. m¯ an.d.ili ‘very soft bread’ < man.d.á-1 ‘a sort of pastry or baked flour’ (9735); man.d.avarvác. is related with Kal. man.d.avár ‘kite, hawk’ and it is thus likely that the latter word is a wrong abstraction from man.d.avarvác.; (3) thus it is standing to reason that only -ár had originally the meaning ‘kite, hawk’ or rather, I would suggest, the meaning ‘eagle’ and thus derives < PIE *h3 or- ‘eagle’. OIA rjipy
a- ‘going quick, striving upwards’ is traditionally, but controversially, alsoassociated with *h3 or-, but it is most likely not the direct precursor of the somewhat hidden Kal. word form. Indeed, there are also the full forms Kal. váraš and Kho. yúruž, yúruš both ‘hawk; falcon’ (also second element in Kho. bov"orˇȷ ‘kind of small hawk’ [but Bashir notes Kho. borˇȷ ‘female of falcon species’) and in kol.órˇȷ ‘male of a species of falcon whose female is sayúrˇȷ’, and related also Sir.d.od.. brij¯ ad.i ‘eagle’ (Kaul [2006 i: 148]) and perhaps Bro. -h2ris in ch alh2ris ‘vulture’ (Ramaswami [1975: 34]), all of which derive ultimately < PIE *h2 r
gipi
o- ‘eagle’ (see p. 853, see also EWA and Schmitt [1970] on Elamite precursor). It is certainly not an everyday matter to bake breads with eagle designs. Karl Jettmar says (1975: 217) that among the Shina speakers sometimes the sacredness and invulnerability of the eagle is mentioned. Also fairies appear sometimes in the shape of eagles (op. cit. p. 221) and therefore eagles are never hunted (ibid.). Note: The last element -vác. in man.d.avarvác. is, as stated above, certainly reflex of OIA paks.ín- ‘bird’ (7636) as can also be seen from Kal. kírik vác. ‘bird that appears in winter’. This form with weakened initial consonant has probably parallels in Dm. vas.e"¯ı, va"s.e¯ı ‘hawk’ and in Pr. vuz., vuz."u ¯ ‘a black bird, raven(?)’ and as element in Pr. [email protected]¯ı ‘a black bird’ (not identical with vuz.).

18. Kal. mál.i ‘measure of flour that fills the flour bin in a mill to the brim’ is related with OIA mar¯ aya- ‘type of measure of capacity; grist, (heap of) cereal’ which Mayrhofer (EWA) derives < PIE *melh1 - ‘grind’ (Mallory and Adams reconstruct *melh2 -) and which continues in form of reflexes of (a.o.) *marati, malati ‘crushes, rubs’ (9870). None of these reflexes resembles semantically the Kal. word which differs from semantically similar mar¯ aya- by preservation of the lateral. Thus it is probably a linkage word. 19. The following three Kal. words possibly form one lemma: liš ‘sliver, splinter; ray of light; single strand of beads’ as in may á.nguna ˙ liš dyái šíau ‘I got a sliver in my finger’ and suri líš ‘sun’s rays’; lišék ‘to close something tightly; to lengthen by adding more’; líšik ‘to be against or so close to something as to touch’. The examples of the last verb form actually seem to have a basic meaning ‘attractive

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

135

closeness’, e.g. tu istrižáas som líši, ko nísi áas ‘why are you sitting close to a woman?’ or ítu líši d.úd.i, may tramóna káriu day ‘sleep up next to me, I’m cold’. Several of the Kal. meanings suggest more or less close relationship with OIA ra
san a
- ‘a rope, cord, line; woman’s zone or girdle; finger’ (Naigh. ii,5) and raśmí- which, besides usual meaning ‘rope, bridle; ray of light’, also means ‘finger’. Note also raśan¯ a-kal¯apa- ‘a woman’s girdle formed out of several strings or threads’ and raśmi-kal¯apa- ‘a pearl-necklace &c. consisting of fifty-four (or according to others fifty-six) threads’. Mayrhofer reconstructs (EWA ii: 440) ´ which he finds reflected IIr. *rać- ‘bind’ and reflects upon an original PIE *lakin Lat. laqueus ‘noose, snare’ and lacere ‘entice, ensnare’. This fits well with the Kal. evidence which, because of preservation of l- (and absence of a suffix), is older than the two OIA forms. 20. Kal. .lúik ‘to sprout or to appear as a fruit; to come out (of the new moon)’ looks like an older stage of OIA ROH ‘to grow’ which goes probably back to PIE *h1 leu´ gh - ‘to rise’. Note: The historical relationship between l- (as in the previous item) and .l- (as here) is not really clear. One finds OIA derivations going back to l- in both cases. Therefore, the most plausible explanation seems to me dialect mixture.

21. Sub OIA *stankati ˙ ‘sprinkles’ (13665) Turner quotes dialectal Kal. ist¯ ongem ˙ ‘I sprinkle’. He connects the reconstructed verb with OIA TAÑJ ‘contract, coagulate’. This is accepted by Mayrhofer (EWA) only with question mark. Indeed, it would be difficult to harmonize the two quite different meanings. 122 Moreover, Trail and Cooper give istóngas ˙ kárik with the preciser meanings ‘to ritually purify men by sprinkling goat’s blood’ (on them, I guess) and ‘to offer sacrifice in order to be healed or rescued from an evil condition.’123 A semantically more satisfying alternative would therefore be comparison with OIA *tuks.a¯- ‘strength’ (5849) which is reflected in K., B. and Or. with meanings ‘strong, power’ and which Turner connects with OIA TUJ ‘push, urge’. According to Mayrhofer (EWA), TOJ (TUJ) is possibly root variant of TOD (TUD) ‘strike’ and thus reflex of PIE *(s)teu-d-, *(s)teu-g- ‘push, thrust’. Sub *(s)teu-g- Pokorny not only mentions OIA tujáti but also – however with reservations – Old Icelandic støkkva v.t. ‘ to sprinkle, besprinkle’ besides ‘to cause to spring, make to start, drive away’ (IEW: 1033, see also Zoëga). Note especially PP stokkinn of støkkva as in bl
oDi stokinn ‘sprinkled with blood, blood-stained’ (Zoëga [1910: 62]). If Kal. ist¯ ongem ˙ and istóngas ˙ is rather connected with OIA TOJ (TUJ) than with TAÑJ, then it must have originated from a linkage lect different from OIA. Further comparison with Old Icelandic støkkva ‘to sprinkle, cause to spring’ and its questionable relationship with Proto-Germanic *stinkwan- ‘to thrust, clash; to stink’ (Kroonen) and PIE *stengu - ‘to push’ (see LIV: 597, note 2 and Thomas Klein [2007: 28]) is, nevertheless, speculative. 122 -as appears to be a nominalizing suffix similar to Bng. ˙ abstract suffix -asO. 123 Here no meaning ‘sprinkle’ or ‘coagulate’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

136 4.3.6

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Indo-Iranian satemizations

Following Lipp (2009 i: 56). there existed in PIE times in the dialectal areas of the later satem languages series of mediopalatally raised plosive phonemes of type [kj] (after the phonetic palatalizing contexts were no longer needed ) – called simplified promary palatals – that contrasted with plain velar plosives of type [k]. Phonetic polarization and paradigmatic generalizations supported the installation of a phonological identity mark known as the distinction between satem and kentum languages. In the Proto-Indo-Iranian period, a palato-alveolar consonant series had emerged from the medio-palatal stop series, which probably already had the character of an affricate series *’c (see Lubotsky [2017: 1875]). This advancement of the position of stricture in the oral cavity was at least partly caused by the subsequent emergence of a secondary series of medio-palatal plosives from velar plosives in certain palatalizing environments. After the abandonment of the Proto-Indo-European distinction of the guttural type of articulation type (± labio-velar), a new place of articulation opposition (± raised back of the tongue) emerged in a first step and then in the Proto-Indo-Iranian period a further opposition between palato-alveolar affricates (articulated with the tip of the tongue) and palatal affricates (articulated with the back of the tongue) arose. The split into Iranian and Indo-Aryan took place through two very different linguistic-historical processes. While on the Iranian side – including some non-Vedic Indo-Aryan dialects – the phonological difference between palato-alveolar and palatal affricates continued to be retained in form of an opposition between alveolar and postalveolar affricates (see Klein et al. [2017: 482]) – that is, two different places of oral stricture were retained – whereas in Vedic Imdo-Aryan the palato-alveolar and the palatal positions merged into one common palatal position. However, the inherited distinction between palatovelars and plain velars continued in the new shape of an opposition between two types of articulations: affricate and fricative.124 As shown above (p. 52), Kartvelian phonology was decisive for the emergence of ‘Khowar type’ phonological subsystems (also in East Iranian languages) whereas lack of this influence led to ‘Bhojpuri type’ subsystems now found in the majority of New Indo-Aryan languages. Besides an adaptation to the wealth of Kartwelian affricate and fricative orders, one more characteristic of Proto-Kartvelian phonology fueled the process of drifting apart of the two Indo-Iranian branches. Whereas Thomas Gramkelidze divided the Proto-Kartvelian subsystem of plosives-affricates-fricatives in an abstract way into front, middle and back series, Merab Chukhua provides a corresponding but phonetically explicit tripartition (2019):

c, Z voiceless and voiced pre-alveolar affricates125 ć, ´Z voiceless and voiced mid-alveolar affricates č, ˇZ voiceless and voiced post-alveolar affricates

124 This is an idealized and simplified description which only serves to show the underlying course for the drifting apartof of Iranian (including some non-Vedic dialects) and Vedic Indo-Aryan. 125 The sign Z is taken as affricate in Kartvelian studies and not as fricative as elsewhere.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

137

We can see that, at least in terms of terminology, there is a striking resemblance between the Proto-Kartvelian and the Proto-Itanian (or ‘Khowar type’) subsystems, where both posses a post-alveolar series of affricates. Proto-Kartvelian is somewhat more complex compared to the single Proto-Iranian alveolar series with two ProtoKartvelian series of pre-alveolar and mid-alveolar series. However, for the modern Kartvel languages, Heinz Fähnrich only differentiates between pre-alveolar and postalveolar affricates and spirants (see Fähnrich 2002)).126 This intra-systemically unmotivated further advancement of the position of stricture of the two arrficatesibilant series in Proto-Iranian can only be explained by influence of the Kartvelian affricate system. This system is widespread until today not only in modern Iranian languages but also in other language families and groups in northwestern South Asia. For Iranian and Indo-Aryan, preservation of the two series is an archaism, in case of northwestern Tibetan languages it is an adaptation to a linguistic area. Unquestionably, not all Indo-Aryan dialects located somewhere along the linkage of lects (see above p. 17) followed the pre-Vedic innovations of collapsing the two affricate stricture places into one together with fricativation of the primary palatals. Comparable with the development of the palato-velar and velar Indo-European plosives up to the Proto-Iranian phase – whose separate character has been preserved in the Nuristani and some Outer Languages to this day – there were tendencies in later times in these language groups towards dentalization also of palatal affricates. These can be called secondary dentals. While the phonetic circumstances for the formation of the secondary palatals can be described precisely, the reasons for secondary dentalization tendencies are not obvious, which is why the reality of the phenomenon is only referred to here with the help of a few examples. They include also non-inherited lemmata:127 Iranian: Psht. c˙ a ‘what’ < Av. či-, Psht. c˙ al¯ or and Wkh. c˙ @ "b¯ ur both ‘four’ < Av. caTB ar o-, Psht. c˙ arman ‘skin, leather’ < Av. čar@man- (also Ind. c a m ‘skin’, Bng. c ambrO ‘leather’ < OIA c¯ armá- ‘leathern’), z¯ezma ‘eyelid’ < Av. čašman-,

e tc. Nuristani: Wg. c˙ at.- ‘to lick’ (also Ind. and Bng. c˙ at.- ‘lick’) is cognate with OIA *cat.t.- ‘’lick, taste’ (4573) and c˙ iliv ‘tapeworm’ is cognate with OIA cillat.a‘a creeping animal’ (4828) and c˙ in- ‘to cut’ is cognate with OIA chindáti ‘cuts off’ (but Kho. čhin-); San.. c˙ ad"us ‘fourteen’ (also Ind. c 2nd2s) is cognate with OIA cáturvimśati˙ and c˙ a ¯r"a ‘a spy’ is cognate with OIA c¯ ará- ‘one who moves about; spy’ (with preservation of Vedic accent position). Dardic: Ind. c 2ur ‘four’ (also Kul. and Bng. c˙ a ¯r ‘four’) < OIA catúrah., c ak
2v  ‘to taste’ (also Kul. c˙ a ¯khn¯ a and Bng. c akhnO ‘to taste’) < OIA *caks.ati ‘tastes’

126 Since there is no doubt that some Proto-Indo-Aryan dialects possessed retroflex affricates and sibilants, it should be pointed out here that instead of the Indological term ‘retroflex consonants’ in phonetics for these sounds the term ‘sublamino-postalveolar consonants’ is used. Sublaminal articulations are realized by raising the tip of the tongue and pointing it upwards or backwards (hence the term ‘retroflex’) so that the underside of the tongue articulates with the postalveolar or prepalatal zones. Could this similarity of technical terms be an indication that the Kartvelian substrate played a role in the emergence of the Indo-Aryan retroflex affricates and sibilants? 127 Secondary dentalization seems to be more common with tenues than with mediae.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

138

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals (4557), c ar
2v  ‘to graze’ (also Kul. c Orn a and Bng. c OrnO ‘to graze)) < OIA carati,

h zá ‘also’ < OIA ca, etc. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: Kul. c˙ hon.a ¯ ‘roof’ < OIA ch¯ adana- ‘covering’, Bng. dzOgali ‘night

watch’ < OIA *j¯ agratp¯ ala-, etc.

With regard to the behavior of the inherited gutturals, Khowar and Kalasha behave like an Inner Language like Hindi with only one order of palatal affricates. Still, also in these two languages there are words with dental affricates. These are words with original palatal affricates which were either directly borrowed from Kartvelian (with Kartvelian dental/alveolar affricate) or from some Austro-Asiatic languages via Kartvelian substrate or from some pre-Austro-Asiatic substrates as found as asterisk words in the CDIAL again via Kartvelian substrate. Different from other Dard and several West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, which possess three (or two) affricate classes since Proto-Indo-Aryan times, Khowar and Kalasha have integrated the dental and retroflex affricate orders only after arrival in the present region.

4.3.6.1

Two affricate orders also in non-inherited words

Out of the many and partly complex innovations from Indo-Iranian to Old Iranian and Old Indo-Aryan (e.g. loss of voiced fricatives in Indo-Aryan), which are summarized e.g. by Thomas Oberlies (in Klein et al. [2017: 334]) and partly discussed further below (together with some important archaisms), most had lost their formative influence by then, except for two processes: dentalization of palatal affricates and deaffrication of palatal affricates. This is to say that dentalization and deaffrication started to impact vocabulary which had nothing to do with PIE velars and thus also included many borrowings. This impact is largely absent in Vedic and Classical Sanskrit, in the Prakrits and in an Inner Language like Hindi. Here follow two types of examples: 1. OIA kaśyápa- ‘tortoise’ has a cognate in YAv. kasiiapa- ‘tortoise’ and is therefore of Indo-Iranian ancestry. Even though the lemma is not of PIE ancestry,128 Lubotsky (2001: 304, 2020: 9) and Kulikov (2017: 208) reconstruct justifiably PIIr. *kaćiápa- ‘tortoise’ (Lubotsky has shown that this word is a borrowing from BMAC). This shows that a loanword, which entered the Indo-Iranian language was treated in the same way as inherited words with the same phonological pattern. Besides OIA kaśyápa- there is also OIA kacchapa- with same meaning. Whereas the former is first documented in the K¯ at.haka-samhit¯ ˙ a- the latter is documented in Manu-smrti and thus much later but is currently much  of kaśyápa- (see 2619 and 2969). Regarding more widespread than the reflexes the origin of -cch- I suggest borrowing from Proto-Iranian *kaµiápa- (see Manu 128 According to Witzel (2015 § 7), this is a South-Central Asian substrate word for which he reconstructs *kašya-pa. See also Kroonen et al. who reconstruct similar to Lubotsky and Kulikov *kaćyapa- (2018: 13).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

139

Leumann [1941: 14]129 ) which might also be found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Khaś. kas@b ‘the K¯ aśyapa gotra’ (Varma [1938: 46]). Note: Basically the same historical development seems to be found in OIA va

s ‘axe, knife’ (borrrowing from BAMC *ua ¯ć¯ı, see p. 47) if cognate with YAv. v¯ as¯ı ‘sharpening knife’(?) and Oss. wæs ‘ax for splitting wood’.

2. The following words derive from an older form *čir- ‘apricot’. Most likely it is a borrowing from an unknown source and not PIE-derived. None of the previously offered etymologies are convincing (Fussman [1972: 39], Strand130 ). Reflexes are found in eastern Iranian, Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. They are here sorted according to the initial consonants č- (= c-), c˙ - and s-, š- (= ś) and not according to language groups. Borrowings within this limited geographical area are likely but difficult to prove. In any case, they are good examples for the two processes of dentalization (and subsequent deaffrication) of palatal affricates (‘Iranian style’) and direct deaffrication of palatal affricates (‘Indian style’), however, two processes that do not care about the distinction between ‘Indian style’ and ‘Iranian style’ in the treatment of this lemma: č- (= c-): Yid.-Mj. "č¯ırë ‘apricot’ (also čiray), Yazgh. či’rai — Pr. čir"@ ‘apricot’ — Bhad. "čirõ ‘apricot’.131 c˙ - and s-: Kt. "c˙ ir@, Ash. c i"r a, Kamd. ćar’˜ı all ‘apricot’; Bashg. ser¯ı ‘apricot’ and c˙ iren ‘peach’ and c˙ iri ‘apricot’ — K. c˙ ¯er ‘apricot’ — Bhal. c˙ erun.t.i ‘apricot tree’, P¯ ad.. c˙ yarh ‘small apricot’ (also palatal cyar¯ ah ‘apricot’), Chin. c˙ ir ‘apricot’. š- (= ś): Bng. śir¯ o.l and Deog. śir¯ o.li both ‘apricot-like fruit’ (with -(r)¯ o.l suffix); Khaśdh. śir¯ o.l ‘kernel of an apricot’.

4.3.7

Dentalized affricates in Khowar and Kalasha

The following words must have been borrowed into the language which was spoken in the area before the arrival of Proto-Khowar and Proto-Kalasha speakers: 1. Kho. tsaq ‘little’ < OIA *cikka-3 ‘small’ (4781) — Wkh. dzaq ‘few, little, a bit, some’ — cf. Common Kartvelian *cik- (i.e. [µik] ‘small; a small amount, little’. 2. Kho. c˙ irir"i and c˙ r"ik both ‘kind of bird’ (Strand) — Sant. c˜eó˜e ‘bird’ and cerobero ‘to twitter, as birds’ and cErE-cErE ‘to twitter, twittering’ (also Mu. cErE-bErE) and cirioN cirioN ‘chirp of birds’, Kh. cErbErae ‘to chirp’ — cf. Katu cacu:l ‘bird call’, Car cEhEco:n ‘bird’. We deal here probably with a kind of macro-lemma which is discussed in several paragraphs in this book. See p. 757, 880. 129 However, unlike me, he sees this as a phonetic substitution (“Lautsubstitution”) and not as a regular sound change. 130 Strand refers to Armenian tsiran(i) ‘apricot’ which might be a parallel but can hardly be the source for the here quoted forms. 131 Bhadrav¯ ah¯ı distinguishes phonologically between c˙ and č.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

140

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

3. Kho. c˙ ùk ‘vagina’ not directly < OIA *cukka- ‘anus; vulva’ (4860) — Sant. cucu¼k, cocko and coko all ‘the female organ’ and Singhbhum dialect cucuP ‘pubes, pudenda’, Korwa coco¼, co¼ ‘vulva (only of a small girl)’ — here perhaps Mlabri cEEP ‘vulva’ and Muong cE:3 ‘vulva’. Further cognates are possibly cucu ‘vagina’ in Tibeto-Himalayan Dhimal, c˙ u ˘kśi- ‘to copulate’ in Kinnauri ((T. Grahame Bailey c˙ u ˘kśimi¼g ‘to commit adultery’)) and cuP 55 ‘vagina’ in Burmish Achang for which STEDT reconstructs #3589 PTB *dzyuk ∼ *tsyuk ‘vulva, vagina; mouth, lip’. Very likely, the lemma is actually pre-IA, pre-AA and pre-TB. 4. Kho. c˙ eq ‘child’ — cf. Proto-Mon-Khmer *ceP ‘great-grandchild’, Ngeq ceP ‘child’, Khmu cèP ‘grandchild’. 5. Kho. c˙ en˙cen kor- ‘smash to pieces’ is different from Kho. čhin- ‘to cut, break, pluck’ (< OIA *chindati ‘cuts off, splits’ [5046]) and was originally possibly an ideophone — Sant. ceñceñao¼k, cheñcheñao¼k ‘to scold in a high shrill voice, said only of women’ derives ← ceñceñ ‘hissing sound produced by dipping hot iron in water; tinkling sound, as that of cracked cymbals, or steel struck by steel’ — cf. Bahnar chOñ ‘to tease in a bad way’ and Nyah Kur ch@Péñ ‘noisy, deafening’; questionable is connection with Khmu ch rO:ñ ch rO:ñ ‘sound of silver or gold against each other’. 6. Kho. c˙ rax"ey ‘drizzle’ is part of a macro lemma with clear Austro-Asiatic correlations (see p. 591). 7. Kho. c˙ h"ok ‘wood chips collected for fire’ — Sant. ch@il@¼k ‘a chip of wood, or shaving’ — Nyah Kur cháak ‘chip off’, here perhaps also Tampuan srak ‘pierce (of splinter or sliver)’ and Sedang ùak ‘splinter’. Note: Relationship with Kho. išlók ‘wood chip’ (only Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics) and Pr. i˙c"ag ‘splinter of wood, wood shavings’ is unclear.

8. Kal. zázik ‘to leak out through a hole’ ← Common Kartvelian *zwezwel‘dripping; draining, seeping, leaking’, Common Sindy *źw ăź- ‘dripping; draining, seeping, leaking’ (Chukhua [2019: 194]). 9. Kal. zankiá ˙ ‘poison’ cf. OIA lex. jangula-, ˙ j¯ angula˙ ‘poison, venom’. 10. Kal. dzal.ákik ‘to shake (as from wind or earthquake)’, dzal.akék ‘to shake s.th.’ < OIA *jhal-2 ‘sudden movement’ (5351). 11. Kho. dzáh ‘wet, moist’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics)132 — ProtoNorth-Bahnaric *éo:h ‘wet’, Katu éoP ‘wet’, Proto-Khasic *éh EEP ‘wet’, Khasi éiw éiw éaw éaw ‘drizzling, wet’ and éhieP knep knep ‘very (wet clothes)’, Pnar éh eP ‘wet’. Probably cognate is also Proto-Kherwarian *éObE ‘to get wet’ and its Munda reflexes Sant. jab jab ‘damp, wet, moist’, jehe jobe 133 ‘very wet, or damp, drenched, dripping’, Pre-Mu. éObE ‘to get wet’. 12. Kal. zukék, dzuk dyek ‘to push’ < OIA *jhukkati ‘stoops, breaks’ (5399) 132 Her phonetic and semantic rendering is clearly more accurate than Strand’s z"a ‘wet’. This applies also to O’Brien’s rendering zah ‘wet, damp’ because both confirm preservation of the aspirate of the original AA lemma. 133 Perhaps an old echo formation with old h ∼ *v.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

141

13. Kal. dzúnik ‘to tread (grapes); to press on, massage s.th.’ and dzon ‘winepress’ — PMK *c@n ‘leg, foot’, Jahai and Kensiu and Tonga (Ten"edn) can ‘foot’, Khmer coan ‘to step on, trample on, walk on’, Muong c@n1 ‘leg, foot’. Semantically not so likely is Pnar ch On ‘to press with finger’. Note: Since the equations do not match perfectly, also borrowing drom Kartvelian should be considered: Adyghe z@-n, Kabardian z@-n ‘pressing, filtering; drainig’ (Chukhua [2019: 380]).

14. Kho. zumbul ‘curls’ (O’Brien) — probably cognate with OIA *jhuppa-2 , *jhubba-, *jhumma- ‘crowd, cluster’ (5404) — probably Sant. éhomble ‘to assemble, to make into a bunch’, Bir. éhump¯ a ‘cluster, bunch’, Korwa éh ompa: ‘a bunch of fruits and flowers’ — Semai éambul soUP ‘a lock of hair, a tree of hair’ (with second word meaning ‘hair [of the head]’) and figurative éambul bunga ‘bunch of flowers’, Semelai éambol ‘tuft’. There are more Kho. words with dental affricates. Sometimes they have parallels in East Iranian, even though origin remains unclear. Examples: bla˙céik ‘to collect’ (O’Brien) has a parallel in Yid. bl.a˙ca¯- ‘collect’; bla˙c ‘lump’; lO c ‘lucky’; c˙ at ‘correct; fit’; c˙ art ‘gap’ (also µaht ‘slit at sides of shirt; gap in a hedge’); tsremi cokik ‘to pinch’ cf. Wkh. c˙ @rüp- ‘to pinch’ and OIA *cimb- ‘pinch’ (4822); zàp ‘cloth; clothes’ (Strand) has a parallel in Yd.-Mj. zopë ‘clothes, quilt’ < OIA jhapp-2 ‘cover’ (5337); zurch (zurč) ‘fur’; zom ‘mountain; high, rocky mountain peaks’ and zomaálu ‘hill; large boulder’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics). The same holds true for comparable Kalasha words: Kal. dze
is(t) ‘wave’ has probably a parallel in Wkh. z¯ei ‘wave’ (Morgenstierne) resp. dzey i.a. ‘wave’ (Yoshie). Prehistoric dentalization of non-inherited words is, of course, also found in other Dardic languages. For instance there is Bro. c˙ ¯engi ˙ ‘mosquito’ which has the following parallels in Korku: cikhni ‘mosquito (a small type)’ and cikni, sikni ‘eye-fly or mosquito’. Second word is simply deaffricated with further parallels: Mu. sikïi ‘mosquito’, Sant. s˜ık"ïiP ‘mosquito’, etc. Since there is also TB Proto-Thangkhulic *caaN ‘mosquito’ (probably cognate with PTB *kraN ‘mosquito’) this seems to be ultimately a ‘North Indian’ word. 4.3.8

Non-dentalized reflexes of palato-velars?

The following lemmata are cases of apparent absence of dentalization. The forms may be due to repalatalization of dental affricates or of retroflexion of an earlier palato-alveolar affricate state. However, there is no clear explanation for each and every example that follows. In case of Kalasha and Khowar one might speculate that they borrowed such forms at the PIIr. palato-alveolar stage thereby freezing them as palatals at this stage. 1. Kamd. a¯v"eč ‘necessity’ (Strand) seems to correspond with OIA (Hit.) a¯vaśyakat¯ a- ‘necessity, inevitability’. The OIA verb VAŚ ‘will’ is a reflex of

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

142

2.

3.

4.

5.

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

ˆ ‘to wish, to want’ and thus of PIIr. *uáć- (see EWA). A case of PIE *uek  repalatalization? Kal. is.páz.ik ‘to comb one’s own hair’ and is.paz.ék ‘to comb someone else’s hair’ as in kandáyak gri čú.i is.páz.an day ‘the women comb their hair with a comb’ ˆ ‘plaiting’ as a side-form of PIE *plekˆ ‘plaiting’ which itself is < PIE **splekpossibly related with PIE *(s)plei-, *pl¯e- ‘split’ (see IEW). The outcome of -z.instead of -z- is the result of medial voicing of sibilant and of CCH. The change of *sp- > is.p- can be compared with Kal. is.marék ‘to count’ < OIA sm¯ arayati ‘causes to remember’. Vedic praśna- ‘basket-work, a plaited basket’ is regarded ˆ ‘braid, plait’, and regarding as an ‘isolated verbal noun’ (EWA) of PIE *plekquestionable later reflexes see KEWA. The Kal. lemma is most certainly not a reflex of the Vedic word. Kal. činét.uk ‘clitoris’ is a compound with second component < OIA *t.ukka‘piece’ (5466), it compares with Bng. śin.d.u n.m. ‘clitoris’ which is also a compound with second component < OIA *t.un.d.a- ‘defective’ (5468, see there H. t.unn¯ a ‘clitoris’, and note with same second element Deg. bonat."ek ‘child’s vagina’ [bona- is allomorph of Deg. b"u ¯n ‘vagina’ which cf. with semantically similar reflexes of OIA *ponda- ‘bottom’ 8379.2]).134 The two words are likely  3 (i)) ‘sharp(en), hone’. Cf. OIA *śinaˆ 𝑥 (i)- (EWA *keh to derive < PIE *keh ‘whetted’ (12441) with modern reflexes inAsh. c˙ inala, o lä ‘sharp’, Wg. c˙ enalä;135 cf. also Av. sa¯eni- ‘pointed’. Regarding meaning cf. B. k at ‘clitoris’ sub OIA *kan.t.a3 ‘backbone, podex, penis’ (2670) where Turner says that this lemma is possibly the same as kán.t.a-1 ‘thorn’. Repalatalization? Kal. ču. ‘the upper main trunk of a tree or the large branches of a tree above the main trunk’ parallels Kamd. c˙ óa, c˙ óv, Kt. c˙ ov, San.. s a
v, Wg. c˙ a¯v all ‘branch’ (see Strand Nuristân Site); there is also Pr. c˙ o ‘branch’. These words are derived by Strand, Morgenstierne and Turner (explicitly or implicitly) < Pr.Ar. *č¯ akhai‘branch’. Since the here-quoted forms with -v potentially rather reflect older *l- than -kh-, cf. also Sh. (Grahame T. Bailey) s.o¯l¯ u ‘small branch’136 and Iranian Wkh. s.olx ‘branch’ (Yoshie) resp. s.olx, z.olx ‘branche (sans feulles)’ (Grünberg and Stéblin-Kamensky).137 The forms point to OIA śákala- i.a. ‘chip, splint, log’ (but whose connection with
s a
kh a- is contested) and/or to OIA
su
la- ‘pike, spit, javelin’ (the latter form motivating the retroflexion as can be seen e.g. in Kal. s.u kárik ‘to snort (as a bull)’ [< OIA śv¯ asá- ‘breath’] and other examples). Garh. ch @su, Jaun. chaś¯ a and Rom.S. čòčha ‘hare’138 resemble dialectal Paš. č¯ aska, č¯ oska/@, c˙ húsak (Morgenstierne 1956: 47f.) with regard to initial affricate. The Paˇ v. forms č¯ aska, č¯ oska/@ have basically preserved the PIIr.

134 Also possible, but less likely because of the Kal. parallel is derivation for Bng. < OIA śun.d.¯ı- ‘the swelling or enlargement of any gland’ with vowel swapping. 135 But note that Buddruss und Degener (1998) derive the word < OIA *chindati, chinátti ‘cuts off, splits’ (5046) as agent noun which appears equally possible. 136 Which is unconvincingly quoted by Turner sub OIA *śot.ha- ‘stick’ (12622.2). 137 However, Morgenstierne notes with palatal fricative Wkh. šolx, š¯ olč ‘branch’ which he regards as borrowings from Pers., yet wonders about the “unexplained l”. This is not correct. 138 Also borrowed into Korwa ch ach a:n ‘a kind of hawk’ which goes back to OIA śaś¯ adana- ‘the brown hawk’ (12362) with a modern reflex in M. sas¯ an.¯ a ‘falcon’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

6. 7.

8.

9.

10.

11. 12. 13.

143

stage *ćasás. However, the Garh. and Jaun. forms are regular reflexes of OIA śaśá- since ‘spontaneous’ affrication of (mostly initial) sibilants is a common characteristic of Outer Languages (see 322). Since Garh. has only one sibilant phoneme but Jaun. has two, the respective outcomes are regular. Rom.S. has also two sibilant phonemes and therefore presents affricatized śaśá-. OIA śaśáˆ ‘hare’ derives < *śas-a- and according to traditional view < PIE *kasos ‘hare’ ˆ (but Lipp reconstructs *kh1 -es-ó- [2009 i: 74]). On the problem of the -a- vowel see Lubotsky (1989: 56f.). Lipp (2009: 74) reconstructs more plausibly instead ˆ 1 -(o)s/ *kh ˆ 1 -és- ‘greyness, grey colour’ as neutral s-stem of the PIE PIE *kéh ˆ 1 - ‘grey’. root *kéh1 / *kh1 - ∼ *kh Bng. japnO and Deog. jEpnO both ‘to gobble up, to smack’ — Kal. 
pas k
arik ‘to eat a little bit’ perhaps < PIE *ˆ gheh𝑎 w- ‘gape, yawn’ ? Kal. žindrík ‘to neigh’ and probably related Kal. žínkik, ˙ žénkik ˙ ‘to pant, breathe hard, gasp’, Kho. žindr- ‘to neigh’ (but Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics has z.indrík ‘to neigh [horse])’ — cf. PIE *g huen- ‘to sound’ and  “Baltoslav. Wurzelerweiterung” *g hueng- as reflected in Lith. žvéngiu, žengti  ‘to neigh’ (IEW). Kal. ˇȷiˇȷay žúk .labé. ‘game of hide and seek’ with second word meaning ‘to eat’ and third ‘game’. Trail and Cooper describe the game: “This is a kind of betting game in which a boy and girl eat part of a nut meat together and then hide from each other over night. In the morning, the first person to see the other wins the game.” First word is probably < PIE gˆh eh1 - ‘leave’ and not < OIA jáh¯ ati ‘leaves, emits’ (5173) because ˇȷiˇȷay is very similar to Av. ziz¯ ami ‘leave off’ (cf. also Greek kikh a
n o ‘meet with’). Kal. nis.piˇȷík ‘to be worthwhile or profitable’. The verb means ‘to be not (behave ˆ ‘be hostile, hate’ (Mallory not like) a scallywag’ and derives < PIE *peiˆg -, *peikˆ and Adams only *peik-). Pokorny specifies that the lemma expresses partly active hostility and partly passive repugnance or stupidity. The latter meaning applies to the Kal. verb. Here depalatalization may have been prevented by CCH. Kal. nihúˇȷik, nihúnˇȷik ‘to cool down, stop fighting, settle down, be quiet, subside’ and nihunˇȷék ‘to cause to come under control, to control’ derives < older *nivuˇȷ- and corresponds to OIA niv¯ aha- ‘leading down’ < PIE *ueˆ gh - ‘move, carry, drive’. Mayrhofer (EWA ii: 536) quotes also Mitanni pre-Indo-Aryan *u a
zh anasia- ‘of the racetrack, stadion’.  Pal. b¯eži ‘heifer’ (Liljegren 2008: 60) is probably < PIE *h1 eˆ gh- ‘cow’ but perhaps also influenced by OIA vatsá- ‘calf’. For a detailed discussion see p. 783. There are also reflexes of Pr.Ar. *pauč¯ı- in Dardic Pashai apparently with repalatalization (p. 818): dialectal Paš. p uc , p uic , p uec , p ec , p ic -h ole ‘juniper’. Pr. v@rˇȷim"¯ı, v@ˇȷˇȷim"¯ı ‘man, human being; husband’ and @rˇȷim"¯ı, @rˇȷ@m"¯ı ‘human being’ is partly listed by Turner sub v¯ırá- ‘man, hero, son’ (12056) (but the association was not accepted by Buddruss und Degener) with the remark “(+? NTS xv 276)”. I suggest for second part of the lemma derivation < PIE

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

144

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

*g h mm o
‘earthling’ < *dh gˆh m-on- ‘man’ which derives from *dh gˆh om- ‘earth’.  Further Theelement -ˇȷim"¯ı compares with Proto-Lith. žmuo ‘human being’. cognates are Latin hom¯ o (< *hem¯ o ), Old Irish duine ‘man’ and Old English guma ‘man’. Absence of dentalization must be due to the ending -"¯ı which might reflect (originally feminine) OIA ‘agent’ suffix -ika (see Burrow [1955: 196], Tagare [1948: 335]). Nuristani Pr. v@rˇȷim"¯ı is obviously not directly derived from OIA ks.ám‘earth’ but is close to OIA jm a
- ‘the earth’ (note also preservation of original palato-velar in OIA gmáh. ‘of the earth’ [or here dissimilation? S. EWA]) and pári-jman- ‘all around the earth’. Also closely related is Dardic Kal. čhom ‘earth’ (also ‘floor, ground inside a dwelling’, and see also Kal. diach
om ‘world, earth and sky’ with first component < OIA div
a- ‘sky’ [6331] and “tshòmm” ‘earth’ [Leitner]) which derives < PIIr. *džh ám- < *dˇȷh ám-139 < PIE *dh gˆh óm-. Regarding voiceless affricate in čhom, there are quite a number of stray cases for word-initial, -medial and -final devoicing in Nuristan, Dardic and other Outer Languages (see p. 337); alternatively, voicelessness of OIA ks.ám- had early influenced similar čhom. The vowel in čhom is not inherited but an innovation as can be seen in Kal. ˇȷhónik ‘to know’ < OIA j an a
ti ‘knows’ (5193). The palatal feature in čhom is retained because Kalasha is with regard to reflexes of PIE gutturals a predominantly ‘Indian type’ of language with very few cases of dentalization and many cases of non-dentalization of inherited palatal affricates. A dentalized reflex is probably found as second word in Kal. prágata c˙ him ‘the place where women wash themselves and their clothes’ (with same changed vowel as in Pr.; regarding first word see p. 659). 14. Kamd. vič"o ‘guest’ is compared by Strand with OIA videśyà- ‘foreign’ (11738). ´ ‘show’ (PIIr. *dićáti If correct, this would be a PIIr.-level reflex of PIE *deik‘[s]he shows’), but Turner considers in some of the reflexes sub 11738 also contamination with OIA DVIS. ‘hate’. 4.3.9

Prehistoric dentalized affricates in East Iranian languages

It is not always easy to determine in case of dentalized borrowings of Austro-Asiatic words with palatal affricates in East Iranian languages whether they were borrowed directly from Austro-Asiatic or whether they were borrowed via some Indo-Aryan languages. However, in any case they must have passed through a ‘Kartvelian filter’. In my eyes, the latter is more probable also because the number of such borrowings in East Iranian languages is – this is my subjective impresssion – much smaller than in Indo-Aryan and in the Tibeto-Himalayan languages. IA borrowings with dental affricates like Wakhi paµ ‘to cook’ or siµ ‘needle’ were certainly dentalized before the borrowing, more unclear is Wakhi pandz ‘5’. Note also Elfenbein et al. (p. 102) commenting on Psht. z"a¯ma = ž"a¯ma ‘jaw’: “Not a LW < IA, since we find z- in many dialects which do not have z- < IA j- . . . ” 139 But cf. for the Vedic evidence Lipp’s slightly different reconstruction PIIr. *ˇȷh más (2009 i: 179).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

145

Pashto 1. c˙ a¯per.a ‘slap’ ← OIA *cappet.a- ‘slap with open hand’ (4673) (according to Turner from Dravidian) — but cf. Gta" capoú ‘slap’, Korku capta ‘a slap’, etc. 2. c˙ a¯c˙ kai and Waziri dialect s¯ oskai ‘a drop, prinkle’, c˙ a˙c¯ed@l ‘to leak, drop, etc.’ (not in Morgenstierne and Elfenbein et al.) — Kho. čharás. ‘whey sprinkled on ears of grain in the field as part of the old customs observed on the day of phindík’ (phindík ‘ceremony held on the day when animals are sent to the high pastures’) — Sant. coro¼c coro¼c etc. ‘dripping, dribbling, water issuing in small jets, or drops; sound of dripping or falling water’ (note correspondence between position of glottal stop in Sant. and position of accent in Kho.), Korku cióisi ‘sprinkle’ and sisupini ‘sprinkle’, etc. — Semai c2PcaU ‘sprinkling, splashing’, Khmer cru@c ‘to sprinkle, splash, squirt (with water)’, Surin Khmer srO:c ‘to water (e.g. plants), to pour water (on); to sprinkle (as in certain ceremonies)’ and sAsr@c ‘in a continuously oozing, trickling, dripping, drizzling manner’, Bru cacAAj ‘drop the grain in the hole with one hand and cover hole with the other’, etc. 3. c˙ ap ‘winnowing tray; winnowing’ — cf. Semelai c˜ep ‘sound of rice being winnowed by someone inexperienced’. Somewhat uncertain. 4. c˙ apa ‘wave’ — cf. Sant. and Pre-Mu. cE-p-El ‘wave’. 5. c˙ at.wat. ‘apoplexy, sudden death’ — cf. H. cat. and cat.pat. ‘quickly’ — Sant. caúak mente ‘quickly, instantly’, Korku ceú. acuúu ‘quickly’ — perhaps because of Psht. meanings ultimate borrowing ← PMK *cat ‘to stab, pierce, stick in’, note also Semelai cpat ‘quick’. 6. c˙ rapedal ‘to flounder, flap about (as a fish in shallow water)’, perhaps also Wkh. c˙ rap, c˙ erap ‘smart, quick’ — Kal. c˙ rap ‘suddenly, quickly’ — cf. Sant. caóa¼p caóa¼p ‘to reply testily or snappishly, to speak back’. Alternatively, cf. Georgian s-c’r-ap-a ([sµ’rapa]) ‘fast, quick, swift’ (Chukhua [2019: 566]). 7. c˙ arwat.ka ‘an ember, burning coal, live ashes’ — Sant. caraú caraú, cara¼t capa¼t ‘scorching, burning, smarting’ — cf. Semai éôloUt ‘to scorch, to singe’. 8. zbešal (zbexal) ‘to suck, to draw into the mouth, to draw out, to imbibe, to inhale’ — Proto-Kherwarian *cEpEé (also *éEm(b)Ed) ‘to suck’, Sant. cepe¼c ‘to suck, as one does an orange’ and (same as Pre-Mu.) cEpEé ‘to suck’. 9. zmarai ‘a tiger’ (but Raverty has m"zaraey ‘a tiger, a panther; a lion’) — cf. either Munda So. éom-m2r-k1d ‘man-eating tiger’ with first word ‘food’, last word ‘tiger’ but unclear middle word (IA?) or cf. Halang é@mri: ‘tiger (large  species)’. 10. zyam ‘dampness of the ground, moisture, humidity, dankness, wetness’ has been interpreted by Morgenstierne as cognate with Psht. zimai (z"@may) ‘winter’ but this was rightly not accepted by Elfenbein et. al. I suggest it is a borrowing from AA — PMK *éiim ‘moist, swampy’, Khmer sa@m ‘damp, moist’.

Shughni 1. c˙ i˙cu ‘partridge’ belongs to OIA *cicc- ‘scream’ (4789) (see p. 596) — but cognate is e.g. first word in Sant. cicuói cipi cuói ‘call of the uói¼c . . . and certain

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

146

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

other small birds’140 and with infix ciri¼c ciri¼c ‘chirp of sparrow’ — Semnam ciceP ‘crested wood partridge (Rollulus rouloul)’, Khmer cr@c(-cr@c) ‘sound of a cricket chirping’. Note: The older form of pseudo-OIA *cicc- seems to be *tit(ir)- ‘partridge’ as reflected in Khmer tOtie ‘kind of partridge (Arborophila cambodiana; the male has a very loud, piercing cry)’, Sre ta:t ‘partridge (Tropicoperdrix merlini vivida), francolin (Francolinus sinensis)’, Proto-Kherwarian *citri- ‘partridge’ and early borrowing into OIA tittirá- ‘partridge’ (5809).141

2. c  a p-t ‘to feel, touch’ is certainly different from OIA CHUP ‘touch’ (5054) — Proto-Kherwarian *capO ‘to touch’ with modern reflexes in Sant., Mu., etc. 3. c˙ iraxak ‘spark’, c˙ irax ‘sunrise’, c @rox ‘spark’, Yd.-Mj. c˙ @"rox ‘spark’ etc. (a “common Hindukush word” Morgenstierne [1938: 200; 1973: 200; 1974: 24]) — Kal. µrek ‘sparks’, Kho. c˙ r"ex ‘spark’, Gau. c˙ urut.hi ‘sparks’ (see more parallels in Zoller [2005] under this last lemma also on -x/-k vs. -t. endings) — Balt. c˙ àrak ‘spark’ (Sprigg compares Western Tibetan me-˙chag ‘spark’) — Sant. cerceúe¼c ‘sparks to fly, as when thorns are burning, or when iron at white heat is hammered’.142 Note: According to Morgenstierne (1973: 200), the lemma traveled even to Ossetic as c˙ ä"xär ‘fire, glowing ember’. However, Fridrik Thordarson (2009: 59) considers borrowing of the Ossetic word from Kartvelian; moreover, he considers for the “Hindukush” words derivation < PIE *ker(@ )- ‘to burn, glow’ (IEW: 571f.), which is phonological very unlikely.

4. žind¯ urv n.m., -o¯ır n.f. ‘were-wolf’ and Rošan¯ı žänd¯ ur, Khuf¯ı-Rošan¯ı zindirG ‘a fantastic monster’ (Encyclopedia Iranica) — Ind. zin av
2r ‘a wild animal (prob. a type of wolf)’ probably < older zin a
rv with dissimilation; in Gau. it is called leváh , that is Psht. ‘wolf’. Morgenstierne (1974: 110) reconstructs for the Shgh. word *gandarba/¯ı- which corresponds with Avestan gandar@wa- (EWA: gand@r@Ba- ‘name of a monster’) — OIA gandharvá- ‘name of a mythical being’. On the vexed etymology see the Encyclopedia Iranica and Per-Johan Norelius (2015: 33f.) both with many literature references.

Yidgha-Munji Only unvoiced examples found. 1. c˙ i"p¯ o-um ‘to wink’ — cf. pseudo-OIA *jhapp-1 ‘sudden movement’ (5336) and there P. jhapakn.a¯ ‘to wink’ — Sant. jip@ (m.) and jipi (f.) ‘to blink with the eyes’ and with infix jili¼p jili¼p ‘to blink, as one who has looked at the sun’ and with expressive consonant swapping jilpi¼t jilpi¼t ‘to blink with the eyes, unable 140 The uói¼c is “a small bird, studied much as an omen.” 141 For Mayrhofer (EWA) the OIA lemma is onomatopoeic. 142 For further Santali examples of the same lemma with expressive morphological variations see p. 251.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

147

to open the eyes to the full’, etc. — Mlabri cip-cEp ‘to wink; blink’ (and Khsing Mul z@p zap mat ‘to blink, wink’ ?), Kensiu kıp l˜ıp ‘to wink’. Also the following words must have passed through the ‘Kartvelian filter’. 4.3.10

Dentalized affricates in Balti and Bun¯ an (Northwestern Tibetan)

In order to see that dentalization of borrowings of Austro-Asiatic words with palatal affricates not only started before the arrival of Indo-Aryan in northwestern South Asia, but that it also affected Western Tibetan languages (which most likely appeared in these high mountains also before the arrival of Indo-Aryan people), some examples have been collected from Balti and Bun¯ an. 1. Bun. c˙ aka˙coke ‘in small pieces’ — cf. Sant. chacha¼k, chacka¼k ‘to break, tear; to tear into shreds, or tatters’ — cf. Nyah Kur crí@k ‘split into small pieces’. 2. Balt. c˙ arang n. ‘ache’ — cf. Sant. chorvaN ‘to pain, etc.’ 3. Bun. c˙ ala˙cele ‘fuzzy’ — cf. Sant. cala cul@ ‘occupied with preparations for a journey, about to set out on a journey’ — cf. perhaps also Khmer crAlae - crAlAm ‘to be confused, lost’ and cruPl ‘to be in disorder, panic-stricken; to be troubled, upset’, Tampuan crol ‘foolish, careless’. 4. Balt. c˙ el˙cel ‘frivolous, not serious, thoughtless’ — cf. Sant. celko melko ‘wanton, flirting, smart, putting on airs to attract the attention of the opposite sex; applied only to females’. 5. Balt. c˙ hal˙chal ‘very bright (stars)’ — OIA *jhal-3 , *jhall- ‘flash; light’ — Korku jhala.jal ‘shining, very bright, polished’, Bodo-Gadaba jOlei ‘bright’ — Khmer ch@l ‘to be smooth, well-polished, (of the color red) bright’. Most likely the unvoiced forms are the older ones. 6. Bun. dziNdziN ‘dizzy’ — Sant. jinjin, jhinjhin ‘to feel faint, or dizzy’ — here perhaps also Nyah Kur ch@wíñ ‘feel dizzy, giddy’. 7. Balt. zizi ‘mother (rajah families)’, Pur. zizi ‘mother (polite)’ and Bur. zizí ‘mother’ (only at court and in Sayyid families)’; according to Berger the word is also found in Bur.Ys., Sh. and Kho. — New. juju ‘king, head of state’ (obviously reflecting a patriarchization, see Zoller [2018b: 252]) — Semai éaéa ‘a term of address to woman over 45 years of age’, Temiar éaéa:P ‘old woman’, Jahai éaé1P ∼ éaéaP ‘old woman’.

4.3.11

Historic dentalization of languages with one palatal affricates order

While classical Inner Languages such as Sanskrit, Pali and Hindi show no traces of dentalizations, there is a whole range of New Indo-Aryan languages that share the phonological characteristic of having only one set of affricates with the classical Inner Languages, but whose only palatal affricate series was dentalized. Masica quotes (1991: 94) “Nepali, Eastern and Northern dialects of Bengali (Dacca, Maimansing, Rajshahi), the Lamani and northwestern Marwari dialects of Rajasthani, the Kagani dialect of ‘Northern Lahnda’, Kumauni . . . ” I would like to claim that there is a

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

148

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

similar phenomenon here as with the different aspiration subsystems. I had argued that languages that never had aspirated mediae caused some, but not all, other IndoAryan dialects to abandon aspiration in their mediae (which usually left traces). In the present case it can be assumed that the intra-systemically unmotivated advancement of the palato-alveolar affricates to dental affricates also affected some but not all dialects of the Inner Languages at a very early stage. Wackernagel discusses several Indo-Aryan words found in Greek writings and representing Indo-Aryan affricates (1896 § 119) (see also Lipp [2009 i: 152]). He says that the Greek present IA c with 𝜎 𝜎𝜎 𝜁 𝜏𝜁 𝜏𝜄 and j with 𝜁 ´ 𝜎𝜎𝛼𝜆𝑜𝜄, Π𝛼𝜁 𝛼 ´ 𝜆𝛼𝜄 ‘Pañc¯ 𝛿𝜄. Examples: Σ𝛼𝜈𝛿 𝜚 𝑜´𝜒𝜐𝜋𝜏𝑜𝜍 ‘Candragupta’, Π 𝛼 ala’, ´ 𝜈𝛿𝛼𝜈𝑜𝜈 candana- (‘sandalwood’),143 𝑇 𝜄𝛼𝜎𝜏 𝛼 ´ 𝜈𝜂𝜍 cas.t.ana- (‘King Castana, founder 𝜏𝜁 𝛼 of the Saka era’ ?), ’𝑂𝜎 𝜂´𝜈𝜂 OIA Ujjayin¯ı, MIA Ujjen¯ı (‘name of a city’), Δ𝜄𝛼𝜇𝑜 𝜐´𝜈𝛼 Yamun¯ a (Pk. jamun.a¯-) ‘the river Jumna’. Grierson discusses the same words, but draws more extensive conclusions in his article on the pronunciation of Prakrit palatals (1913). However, he first starts with the statement of Vararuci that the class of affricates in M¯ agadh¯ı Prakrit is pronounced spas.t.at¯ a ‘with clearness’. According to Grierson, this must have meant at least this much that pronunciation of affricates in M¯ agadh¯ı was different from the pronunciation in Standard Prakrit.144 Some more light into this issue is shed by some s¯ utras also dealing with M¯ agadh¯ı affricates by the grammarian M¯ arkan.d.eya.145 One s¯ utra says in translation, “y is prefixed to c and j, as in yciram ˙ (or ycilam), ˙ ycia (? yj¯ aa¯), i.e. ciram, ˙ (?) j¯ ay¯ a” (1913: 392). Commenting on the pronunciation in northwestern Vr¯ acad.a Apabhramśa, ˙ M¯ arkan.d.eya says the same (in translation), “y is prefixed to c and j, as in ycalai (calati), yjalai (jvalati)” (ibid.). Finally, in Śaurasena-paiś¯ acik¯ı, which is a variety of the K¯ekaya-paiś¯ acik¯ı, the same is done, however only to unvoiced affricates since that tongue does not know voiced affricates: “ychale for chalam, ˙ laycchan¯e for laks.an.am, ˙ paycch¯e for paks.am” ˙ (ibid.). Grierson concludes that M¯ arkan.d.eya agrees with Vararuci (and Kramad¯ıśvara) “that in Prakrit the palatals had two sets of sounds, some dialects employing one and others the other” (p. 393). He continues to point out (ibid.) that the palatal pronunciation is common in Bihar and westwards until Panjab, thus bestriding the M¯ agadh¯ı and Ardham¯ agadh¯i and the northern Śaurasen¯ı areas. On the other hand, in Rajasthan (southern Śaurasen¯ı area) and in Gujarat both c and ch are pronounced as s, and in North Gujarat j and jh are pronounced as z (p. 393f.). “This s and this z are often pronounced as ts and dz respectively” (p. 394). This has certainly a parallel in Chittagongian initial s- as for instance saır ‘four’ was formerly pronounced as µaır (cf. Bng. c˙ a¯r). Now Grierson analyzes the same Indian words borrowed into Greek as those found with Wackernagel. However, hecomes to an important insight that Wackernagel did not. He notices, in my eyes (almost?) correctly, the Greek difference for transcribing “the Ganges Valley c . . . by 𝜏𝜄, and j is represented by 𝛿𝜄, and there is the dento-palatal set, in which ts is represented by 𝜎, 𝜎𝜎, 𝜁, or 𝜏𝜁, and z or dz by 𝜁” (p. 395). The reason for my “almost?” is that also Grierson apparently did not recognize ´ 𝛿 𝛼𝜈𝑜𝜈 and 𝜎 𝛼𝜈 ´ 𝜏 𝛼𝜆𝑜𝜈. 143 Mayrhofer (EWA) quotes in addition with same meaning 𝜎 𝛼𝜈 144 Which would have been so-to-say aspas.t.a ‘unclear’. 145 Who seems to have flourished at least a millenium after Vararuci.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

4.3. Reflexes of PIE palato- and (labio-)velar sibilant-stop clusters

149

that this Greek data is fairly clear proof for the existence of a Middle Indo-Aryan language with two affricate orders,146 a palatal and a dental one. This is different from his observation that there were Prakrit languages either with a palatal or a dental affricate order and with his conclusion (p. 396) that in Standard M¯ ah¯ar¯ as.t.r¯ı Prakrit and in Śaurasen¯ı affricates were probably pronounced as dentals but in M¯ agadh¯ı as palatals. We can compare the Greek transcriptions with modern languages with two affricate orders (e.g. Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı):

Greek tiastán¯es diamoúna

Palatal affricates Old/Middle Indic New Indic OIA cas.t.ana- ‘proper name’ cf. Ind. shu z ‘birch’ < bh¯ urja-*

‘herd’ < y¯ Pk. jamun.a¯- ‘river Jumna’ cf. Bng. juthO uttha-**

* The Ind. word is an example for coronal consonant harmony, a widespread characteristic in the history of Indo-Aryan, which seems to have also prevented dentalization in cas.t.ana-. See p. 359. ** In West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Dardic languages a j- < OIA y- is mostly not dentalized. This indicates that the depalatalization stopped in West Pah¯ar.¯ı before OIA y turned into j in the area.

Greek c˙ ándanon, sándanon, sántalon sandróxuptos pássaloi, pazálai "oz¯ene

Dental affricates Old/Middle Indic OIA candana- ‘sandalwood’ Candragupta pañc¯ alá- ‘name of a tribe’

New Indic K. c˙ andun S. sa˘ ndun cf. Tam. c¯ antam Bng. durpOti pOc iali*

city of Ujjain

*This Bng. term from the local oral Mah¯ abh¯ arata corresponds with OIA Draupad¯ı P¯ añc¯ al¯ı. This data preserved in Greek sources leaves little doubt that the words indeed belong to a Middle Indo-Aryan language with two affricate orders. Grierson compares M¯ arkan.d.eya’s prefixing of affricates with y- with the method introduced by the 19th Century Kashmiri grammarian Ishwara Kaula (1833-1893) to mark Kashmiri dental affricates with a dot (a kind of nuqta). Before Kaula, writers in Kashmiri either did  of the two orders or they wrote the palatals not graphemically mark the elements as ca or cya whereas the dentals were only written as ca (p. 395). In other words, whereas Kaula graphemically marked dental affricates, before him it was the other way round. Moreover, Grierson points out that whereas in traditional writing in 146 Of course, Gandh¯ ar¯ı is not included here.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

150

Chapter 4. Fates of the Proto-Indo-European gutturals

Kashmiri, palatal affricates were marked with a suffixed -y (which makes phonetically sense), M¯ arkan.d.eya marked them with a prefixed y- (which also makes sense with regard to functioning of aks.aras). That the palatal order was graphemically marked and not the dental order is also confirmed by Oskar von Hinüber (§ 193). Whereas the here-mentioned graphemic conventions for distinguishing dental from palatal affricates are naturally applied to one and the same language, Grierson seems to ascribe to the Indian grammarians (and von Hinüber does not seem to have a different opinion) the practice to write M¯ agadhan words with affricates tagged with a y- but not M¯ ah¯ar¯as.t.riyan words with affricates. This does not only contradict the practice carried out with writing Kashmiri but also the practice of writing Dardic languages in Urdu script (e.g. Shina) with tailor-made diacritic solutions. Conversely, “Marathi affricates have allophones that differ in the place of articulation. Devanagari script, employed by the Marathi language, does not provide any clue to a reader . . . about the allophone to be used” (Samudravijaya [2019?]). Whether M¯ arkan.d.eya tried to describe allophonic or phonologically distinctive affricate oppositions can hardly ever be known. On the other hand, it is very likely that he tried to describe variations found within individual languages. Therefore, the evidence from much earlier Greek writers and the indirect evidence from Chittagongian147 and some other modern languages leaves little doubt that previously Indo-Aryan languages with two palatal orders must have existed from the Indus Valley to the Bay of Bengal.

147 Chittagongian phonology does not have any more affricates. Instead, it has two sibilants, a dental s and palatal š, which do form a binary opposition. However, they do not reflect OIA s and ś as one can see immediately: B.chit. sO ‘hundred’ < OIA śatá- ‘hundred’ and šàt ‘seven’ < Pa., Pk. satta- < OIA saptá- ‘seven’ but sO ‘six’ < older * µhO < Pa., Pk. cha- < OIA *ks.at.or *ks.vat.- ‘six’ (12803 ). Regarding voiced fricatives, B.chit. has only z which regularly reflects OIA j(h) and y (besides the borrowings from Pers. and Ar.). However, it has an allophone é as in niée ‘self’ (Učida [1970: 13])) which is < OIA nijá- ‘one’s own’ (7181) with palatalization caused by the -i-. A very similar rule operated formerly in Mar¯ at.h¯ı and and Konkan ˙ .¯ı, but is now partly blurred “by dialect mixture” (Masica [1991. 94]), and one is also reminded of the ś-s allomorphs in Standard Bengali. Such phenomena are unknown from Inner Languages like Hindi where phonologically distinctive or merely phonetic allophonic binary oppositions with regard to [± anterior] between affricates or between fricatives are unknown. Since, on the other hand, binary oppositions with regard to [± anterior] do characterize twofold affricate and sibilant orders in the Outer Languages of northwestern South Asia, the conclusion is compelling that also languages like Mar¯ at.h¯ı and Chittagongian possessed formerly twofold affricate and sibilant orders. What we see today are the remnants of the old more complex systems.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 5 On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

It is important to make a categorical distinction between intrasystemic loss of aspiration – which is due, as I will argue below, to the different nature/behaviour of aspirated mediae and tenues in Indo-Iranian – and loss of aspiration due to contact with languages lacking aspiration as a phonetic or phonological feature. In case of Kashmiri, there is no known external factor which could be responsible for the disappearance of the aspirated mediae. However, in the Kasargod dialect of Mar¯ at.hi spoken in northern Kerala, the complete absence of any aspiration is due to the Dravidian language environment (see Ghatage [1970: iii]). Klein et al point out that in the development from Proto-Indo-Iranian to ProtoIranian aspiration of consonants disappeared “however, only the loss of the voiceless aspirates can be attributed to Proto-Iranian” (2017: 489f.). On the other hand, “we have evidence of the existence of voiced aspirates in Proto-Iranian at an early time” (p. 490). However, since Lubotsky and Kulikov insist that (the bulk of) Proto-Iranian lects never had aspirated tenuis phonemes (the above “set of two” lects), Klein’s statement only says that early Proto-Iranian had continued for a limited time the IndoIranian t d dh system. Besides these two perspectives, there is a third perspective advocated by Lipp which is, in my eyes, the most plausible. He says (pers. comm.): I do not share the opinion of Lubotsky, Kulikov and Kümmel that Proto-IndoIranian had no tenues aspiratae, but I postulate already for the Proto-IndoIranian stage monophonematic tenues aspiratae of the type Th , which in the course of the pre-Proto-Indo-Iranian language development usually emerged from a biphonematic sequence of the type Th2, but also from Proto-IndoEuropean allophones of the mediae aspiratae after initial *s- according to Lex Siebs.1

Whereas both Proto-Indo-Aryan and Proto-Iranian continued to preserve a protoIndo-European-inherited laryngeal h2 (or H ?) for some time, the reactions to direct contact between an unvoiced stop and laryngeal h2 (or H?) were different in the two branches: In Vedic Sanskrit and in the proto-forms of Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, and in several eastern Iranian languages (the latter four groups with linguistic 1 Lex Sieb postulates PIE *sDh > *sTh .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

152

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

roots in proto-Indo-Aryan and Proto-Iranian lects partly different from the ancestor lects of Vedic Sanskrit and Avestan [discussed below]), T plus laryngeal yielded Th as in OIA pánth¯ a-‘path’ < PIIr. *pathás < declined PIE *pnt-h2-és whereas in “set of  two” Iranian languages “T becomes a spirant before any consonant in Iranian . . . and it is more economical to assume that this also happened before a laryngeal (e.g., *tHa > *THa > PIr. *Ta just like *tra > *Tra or *tua > *Tua)” (Lubotsky [2017: 1879]).  in the whole of the ProtoThis ‘Indo-Aryan’ type of process T + h2 > Th occurred Indo-Aryan area but ‘spilled over’ also into neighboring Iranian dialect areas and is thus one example out of several for an isoglottic overlapping in a graded area. In previous discussions regarding the position of Nuristani, authors usually concentrated on the loss of aspiration as one feature demonstrating its closeness to developments in Iranian. This view has turned out to be too narrow and not fully adequate. In the history of Indo-Iranian daughter languages, not only loss but also gain of aspiration is a fact deserving a closer look.

5.0.1

Loss of aspiration and ‘spontaneous’ aspiration: fortition

lenition and

I suggest the data presented in this section, which document loss of aspiration and addition of aspiration, to subsume under the categories of lenition and fortition. Whereas lenition is a well-known concept both in historical and theoretical phonology, fortition is frequently regarded as something peripheral and exceptional. Thus, according to Patrick Honeybone (2008: 9), “. . . cases of real fortition are vanishingly rare, and it is by no means obvious that they really are the literal ‘opposite’ of lenition.” He is in so far correct that not every individual form of lenition has a fortition counterpart. For a discussion of these two types see Joan Bybee (2019 esp. pp. 278 and 283). The notion of fortition is largely absent from Indo-Aryan linguistics, even though stray cases of fortition are known from Pali and Prakrit (see below), and fortition is widespread in peripheral languages (usually without written literatures). It is thus no surprise that its relevance has usually escaped the attention of Indo-Aryan philology and linguistics. For instance, the term is neither found in Bloch nor in Masica, nor in Cardona and Jain nor in Hock and Bashir. But basically it looks like this that appearance of aspiration in stops is interpreted in linguistics as a (synchronic or diachronic) process of fortition. Thus, Mahmoud Mobaraki writes about modern Persian tenues that phonetic aspiration appears “in word-initial, onset position of stressed syllables in the most Persian words” (2013: 116). He interprets this as a case of fortition (p. 111). Also Bybee regards emerging aspiration as a case of fortition (2019: 269). And Javier Caro Reina writes (2019: 240): “Zu den Fortisierungsprozessen gehören die Affrizierung, die Aspiration, die Desonorisierung und die Geminierung . . . ” 2 And conversely (ibid.): “Zu den 2 Fortition processes include affrication, aspiration, desonorization, and gemination.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

153

Lenisierungsprozessen zählen die Deaffrizierung, die Deaspiration, die Degeminierung, die Sonorisierung und die Spirantisierung . . . ” 3 For New Indo-Aryan, it was probably Morgenstierne who first pointed out the existence of this phenomenon (aspiration as fortition) in Dardic Pal¯ ula. He notes (1941: 14):

As mentioned above ancient aspirates retain their aspiration and probably develop it into a separate phoneme. A secondary h occurs in many words after a media.

Some examples for etymologically unjustified aspirations: "bh¯ıra ‘he-goat’ < OIA v¯ırá-, "bhEs-um ‘to sit down’ < OIA úpaviśati; dh¯ ura ‘far’ < OIA d¯ urá-; gh¯ au ‘cow’ < OIA *g¯ ava- (4147), gh¯ os.t. ‘house’ < OIA gos.t.há- (if not here aspiration fronting). A general tendency for deaspiration (lenition) in Middle Indo-Aryan northwestern G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı has been pointed out repeatedly. For instance, Gérard Fussman speaks of a “faiblesse de l’aspiration” (1989: 441) and Richard Salomon observes a “a tendency to deaspirate Indic aspirates, apparently reflecting the phonetic structure of the (unattested) local dialects” (1998: 79). In my eyes, Ingo Strauch’s opinion on this matter is the most accurate when he states (2012: 147) that “. . . aspirated sounds . . . were probably originally unknown to the G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı language . . . ”, however, only with the caveat that ‘original G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı’ did not have aspirated mediae, and “[a] general tendency for deaspiration” is actually to be understood as a slow historical tendency towards integrating aspirated mediae visible in the plethora of aspirated mediae in Stefan Baum’s and Andrew Glass’ G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı dictionary4 which certainly reflect a Buddhist ecclesiastical language full of borrowings from Sanskrit rather than the local vernaculars.5 It is now important to distinguish this ‘mainstreaming process’ towards the more common MIA fourfold stop subsystems of the type /t th d dh/ from a pronunciation tendency to aspirate words with media where aspiration is etymologically unmotivated. Morgenstierne has pointed out this for Pal¯ ula, but this type of fortition is already found in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı and besides Pal¯ ula in many other Outer Languages regardless of whether they have /t th d/ or /t th d dh/ subsystems. For occasional spontaneous aspiration in Prakrit see Pischel (§ 211), for similar cases in Pali see Geiger (1916: § 40) and for some stray cases in Iranian Par¯ ač¯ı see 3 The lenization processes include deaffrication, deaspiration, degemination, sonorization, and spirantization. 4 https://gandhari.org 5 For a map showing the findspots of material written in Kharos.t.h¯ı see Andrea Schlosser (2014: 8). The biggest ‘spot’ of the area between Islamabad, Gilgit and Bamiyan is roughly the same as the area where Dardic languages are spoken. Even though the language of the G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı manuscripts is in some ways related with the dialects of the region, these dialects and written G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı were certainly not identical. Due to at least two factors: (1) the manuscripts were at least partly translations from central MIA languages, which is why Daniel Boucher suggests (1998: 474) that “[i]t is, of course, possible, perhaps even probable, that texts composed in Central Indian Prakrits were funneled through the North-west language on route to China”, (2) the history of Buddhist text in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı is one of increasing Sanskritization (Salomon 2001).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

154

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

Morgenstierne (1973a: 44). Since the tendency is almost absent in Vedic and Classical Sanskrit, we are seemingly dealing here with an Outer Languages phenomenon which slowly penetrated into MIA koinés. Since Fussman, Salomon and Strauch are not very clear about the details for G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı aspiration fluctuations, clarifying this issue would be called for. That (spoken vernacular) G¯ andh¯ar¯ı displayed a tendency for etymologically unmotivated aspiration of unaspirated mediae is suggested by Daniel Boucher in his article on Dharmaraks.a’s translation problems of Buddhist texts from Middle Indo-Aryan into Chinese.6 He writes (1998: 477): There are quite a number of mistakes in Dharmaraks.a’s translation that appear to be due to confusions between aspirated and unaspirated voiced consonants [my italics, Z.] in both initial and intervocalic position. Weakness of aspiration – discerned from occasional interchange of aspirated and unaspirated stops in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı texts and inscriptions – is frequently cited as a defining feature of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı among the Prakrits and is especially common among the consonants g/gh and d/dh . . .

For the latter consonants he gives several examples of “confusions”, e.g. between dhura‘burden’ and d¯ ura- ‘long distance’ (p. 477).7 Even though I am not sure whether Boucher is always correct with his interpretations of the individual words, he is correct that there are indeed not few “confusions” between (word-initial) non-aspirated and aspirated mediae; however, by implication, no or hardly any between non-aspirated and aspirated tenues. A screening of the unvoiced/voiced non-aspirated/aspirated consonants (mostly word-initially) of written G¯ andh¯ar¯ı showed that in comparison with loss of aspiration, etymologically not motivated aspiration is much more common. I found 21 words with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration but only 5 words with loss of inherited aspiration. Among the 21, there are just 2 with inherited tenues: OIA kúlaappears as khula-, khulana- etc. The second word appears in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı with irregular voicing of initial t-, and in modern reflexes – of which there are several – in addition partly with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration (first example right below). Therefore, here a list of 6 inherited G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı words with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration and with (in-)direct modern parallels known to me.8 6 We must not occupy us here with the question whether the starting point for translations was Central Middle Indo-Aryan via Northwest Middle Indo-Aryan or whether Northwest Middle IndoAryan was the point of departure. In any case, there are clear traces for an involvement of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. 7 Here the example is Aniks.iptadhuren.a ‘name of a bodhisattva: ‘whose burden is not abandoned”, but the Chinese translation says ‘not put down far away’ (1998: 477) which raises the suspicion that the -dh- was spoken without aspiration. Boucher says that audition followed by writing down by the Chinese counterpart was the normal practice (see e.g. 1998: 480). Even though I am not sure whether Boucher is always correct with his interpretations, it seems likely that there were indeed “confusions” between (word-initial) d- and dh- but not between t- and th-. Regarding Gan. daruna ‘severe’ Gandhari.org also quotes allomorph dharuna both of which are cognate with OIA d¯ arun.a-. Thus, pace Boucher, this is a case of ‘spontaneous’ aspiration (fortition) and not the opposite (lenition). 8 The others I could find are (for exact grammatical forms and provenance see the dictionary): drubhiks.a- ∼ loc. dhrohiks.u ‘famine’, dvara- ∼ dhvara- ‘door’, gada- ∼ ghadu- ‘gone’, gam . dhava- ∼

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

155

1. Besides Gan. taks.am . na- ‘carpenter’ also Niy. allomorph dak¯s.am . na- (OIA taks.an, Pa. taccha) — Mult. dhrikkh¯ an ‘carpenter’ and Jat.. cir.¯ı dhirkh¯ an. (“bird carpenter”) and kill¯ı dharkh¯ an (“noisy [?] carpenter”) both ‘woodpecker’, P. darakh¯ an and S. âakhn.u ‘carpenter’; initial aspiration is also found in Sh. thac.óon ‘carpenter’ and even in Iranian Par. th¯ a- ‘to cut, shave’ < Av. t¯ ašt¯ı. Note also another form of aspiration and voicing in Garh. tagh¯ an. ‘carpenter’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola). 2. Gan. dura = dhura ‘far away’ (OIA d¯ urá- ‘distant’, Pa., Pk. d¯ ura-) — Ind. dhu
r ‘get lost!’, Pal. dhúura ‘far away; away; far from, away from’, Tor. dh¯ u ‘far’ (Z.), S.kcch. dh¯ ur ‘far’, Mult. dhur dhur ‘get away!’, Ko. dh¯ ura and Ko.S. dh¯ ur@ ‘far away’, Brj. dhur ‘away’9 , different dialects of Bi. dhur, dh¯ ur ‘far’, Sar¯ aki dialect of western B. dhur ‘far’ and southwestern B. dh¯ ur ‘far’, and borrowed into Munda Santali dhur dhur ‘off with you’ and Mundari dhurdhur¯ ao ‘to hate; to drive out contemptuously’. 3. Gan. gam . dha- and ghadho-, ghadhro- ‘smell, incense’ (OIA gandhá-, Pa. gandha-) — Jaun. gh adh ‘smell, bouquet’ (Z.). 4. Gan. gasakara- ‘a poet, lit. maker of verses’ and pl. gen. ghasagharan.a (with -k> -gh-) athak¯ ara-, Pa. g¯ ath¯ ak¯ ara’) — cf. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı reflexes of same √ (OIA g¯ OIA GAI ‘sing’ in Chin. ghit ‘song’ and ghit¯ aru ‘singer’, and in Pang. ˙ gh¯ıt ‘song’. 5. Gan. gurukatava- and ghuruhatavu- ‘to be made a teacher’ (OIA gurukartavya-, Pa. guruk¯ atabba-) with first component < OIA guru- ‘heavy’ — cf. Jaun. ghOrvo ‘heavy’ (Z.) probably < Pk. garua-. 6. Gan. grama- and ghramu- ‘village’ (OIA gr¯ ama-, Pa. g¯ ama-) — Kal. ghrom ‘village’, Pal. ghr"o¯m ‘community; village; town’ and Brj. gham ‘village’.10 Here follows the much smaller number of words with loss of aspiration: dharidava- ∼ daridavo- < OIA dh¯ arayitavya- ‘to be kept’, dhunadi ∼ dun.adi < OIA dh¯ unoti ‘shakes’, ghasa- ∼ gassa- ‘fodder’ < OIA gh¯ asá- ‘pasture grass’, bhara- ∼ bara- ‘burden’ < OIA bh¯ ará- ‘burden’, bhramara- ∼ instr. bramareno ‘bee’ < OIA bhramará- ‘large black bee’.

For none of the above six fortition forms can I find parallels in Geiger, Pischel and von Hinüber even though several of them are found over wide areas in North India, and I assume that this is also true for the rest of the G¯ andh¯ar¯ı fortition forms. Moreover, the additional examples of fortition forms from peripheral languages presented below (selected from a much larger collection put together by me) give the same picture ghadhrarvo- ‘a Gandharva’, gilanaga- ∼ ghilan.o- ‘sick’, guta- ∼ ghutu- ‘guarded’, guna- ∼ ghun.a‘quality’, guham ˙ ‘s.th. . tara- ∼ ghuhatare ‘inside of a cave’, geha- ∼ loc. ghehami ‘house’, pinghayellowish’ < OIA pinga-, ˙ biya- ∼ bhija- ‘seed’, bosi- ∼ bhosi- ‘awakening’ < OIA bódhi- ‘perfect knowledge’ (here perhaps aspiration fronting), pres. sg. 1st bromi ∼ bhromi ‘call’. 9 Below (p. 499ff.) I demonstrate that Brajbh¯ as.¯ a, even though its geographical location largely overlaps with that of Hindi, has many more Outer Language features than Hindi. 10 Gopalakrishnan (2011: 152).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

156

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

of not uncommon but hardly noticed language dynamics. A few of them have been noticed by Indian grammarians of MIA languages (see below), but they only demonstrate that during the course from Vedic Sanskrit to the modern languages, influences from outside of the regular linear Indo-Aryan language development started from the Middle Ages to penetrate to a certain extent into the linguistic mainstream of the Prakrit koinés. The above examples from G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı show only fortition/‘spontaneous’ aspiration in case of word-initial mediae. As mentioned above, this has continued in Dardic Pal¯ ula which also displays ‘spontaneous’ aspiration only in case of mediae. In the next section, I will argue that this fact has something to do with differences in the ‘intrinsic natures’ of Old Indo-Aryan aspirated mediae and tenues, the former being in a way biphonemic and the latter monophonemic. This difference has been retained in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı and in Dardic Pal¯ ula but seems to have disappeared elsewhere already in Pali and Prakrit which have occasional cases of ‘spontaneous’ aspiration both with mediae and tenues. For Pali, Geiger (1916: § 40) notes that the number of words with etymologically unjustified aspirations is higher than the number of losses of aspiration. This is the same situation as in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. He lists the following inherited words with initial tenues: pharasu- ‘axe’ is cognate with OIA paraśu- (7799h) but Turner reconstructs in addition OIA *pharaśu- with aspirated modern reflexes in Ku., N., B., H. and M. According to Beekes and Mayrhofer, the OIA word is cognate with Greek 𝜋 𝜀´𝜆𝜀𝜅𝜐𝜍 but the words are not PIE inherited; pharusa (also Pk.) is cognate with OIA parus.á‘cruel’ and has possibly a modern reflex in Bng. phar
sO ‘strong, forceful’;11 phusita ‘drop’ is cognate with OIA prs.atá- ‘spotted’ and prs.ita- ‘rain’, and with OIA prs.a with initial aspiration  are not known to me, perhaps  *‘drop’ (8363); modern reflexes with the exception of K. phos ‘foam’ (Sachdeva et al. [2010: 55]). Geiger lists one inherited word with initial media: bhasta- ‘he-goat’ which is cognate with OIA bastá- ‘he-goat’ which Mayrhofer (EWA) interprets as (hiding?) change of an original reflex of PIE *pesd- ‘fart’ and thus bastá- would basically mean ‘stinker’. The PIE stem is otherwise not found in Indo-Aryan, but note that phonetically somewhat similar PIE *peis- ‘to blow to make a noise’ with reflexes e.g. in Middle High German v¯ısen ‘to break wind’, Norwegian fisa ‘quietly expel a flatus’, etc. seems to have many reflexes in Outer Languages, some of them with initial aspirated media: Ind. ph2si kar
2v  ‘to fart, Bur. phis. ét- ‘to fart’, S. ph¯ us ‘a dead fart’, Jat.. ph¯ us¯ı ‘wind escaping from bowel without noise’, P. ph¯ uss¯ı ‘making wind without a noise’, etc. Among inherited words with etymologically unjustified aspirations in Prakrit, Pischel mentions (1900: § 204) AMg. khutto which is cognate with OIA krtv a
- ‘hav ing done’ (cf. also aspirated cognate K. k˘eth ‘having done’), and Mg. nighasa- (= nikasa- = nihasa-) ‘smearing’ which is cognate with OIA KAS. ‘scratch’ and which cf. with Kho. khos.ik ‘to groom a horse’ (< OIA kas.ati ‘scratches’). For alarge collection of words with etymologically unjustified aspirations see p. 298ff. 11 Note also OIA (RV) parus.á- ‘spotted’ > P. phar¯ uh¯ a- ‘spotted cloth’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

5.0.2

157

Sanskrit aspiration alternations

This section deals with Sanskrit aspiration alternations of tenues and mediae under the perspective of autosegmental phonology. According to autosegmental phonology, which flourished mainly in the 1980s,12 phonological representations consist of more than one linear sequence. Use of more than one sequence (or tier) has proven especially advantageous for description of tone languages. The theory has, however, also been applied to aspiration alternations in Sanskrit. There has been a controversy regarding the correct interpretation which is associated with the names of Joseph and Janda (1988), Joseph (2002), Kaye and Lowenstamm (1985), Borowsky and Mester (1983) and others. Because of its complexity, the controversy cannot be presented here in detail; however, the gist of the matter is the question whether the intrinsic nature of Sanskrit aspirated mediae and tenues is identical or different. Borowsky and Mester, and Kaye and Lowenstamm argue that they differ whereas Joseph (and Janda) claim the opposite. For instance, Borowsky and Mester argue (p. 52) that . . . voiced aspiration [is represented] as an autosegment (henceforth “H”)13 and not as one of the features of the segmental matrix.

Regarding aspirated tenues, however, they state (p. 61): The voiceless aspirates do not take part in the alternations which we are discussing. In the future forms of the root prach “to ask”, e.g., the root-final consonant is deaspirated (and changed to a velar), but there is no throwback of the aspiration to the initial consonant: praks.yati, *phraks.yati. To account for the different behavior of voiced and voiceless aspirates, we have to represent them in different ways. Moreover, since our analysis relies on the assumption that only voiced stops are possible bearers for the autosegment H, we cannot represent voiceless aspirates by positing the same autosegment H, now associated to a voiceless stop. We propose to draw the distinction by treating voiceless aspiration as a component of the segmental matrix, and not as an autosegment.

Thus, in Sanskrit, aspiration shift takes place only in case of aspirated mediae. For instance, BUDH has regular bodhati but aspiration shift (throw-back of aspiration)14 in future bhotsyati, in root noun bhut (both with word-final devoicing), in 2nd pl. endings bhud-dhvam etc. This they describe thus (p. 53): Dissociation of the H can result in reassociation of the autosegment to a possibly non- contiguous position in the CV skeleton . . . and the phonological behavior 12 Later continued by Feature Geometry and Optimality Theory. 13 Not to be confused with the Proto-Indo-Aryan laryngeal H, which was the result of a merger of the three PIE laryngeals (Z.). 14 On this phenomenon in Sanskrit see also Lipp (2016: 259f.). He concludes (p. 260): “Thus the Vedic phenomenon described as aspiration throw-back is a result of a secondary analogical process after the operation of the aspiration dissimilation acc. to Lex Grassmann, which was already effective prior to the desonorization of postocclusive voiced aspirated sibilants. . . ”.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

158

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian of h [H], which alternates with various different segments, can be most easily exp1ained if we assume that the aspiration is independent of the segmental melody.

I agree with the analysis of Borowsky and Mester for which there exists additional support in form of a tendency for phoneme splitting in case of aspirated mediae in various Outer Languages (discussed below).15 Whereas there are many cases of PIE inherited words with root-final aspirated mediae there exists only a small number of PIE inherited OIA words with aspirated tenues where aspiration is due to a former laryngeal. Klein et al. explain (2017: 332): “/kh /, /th / and /ph / originate from combinations of PIE *k/*kw in non-palatalizing contexts, *t and *p plus *h2 , respectively . . . ” This can be misunderstood. By rule of thumb I estimate for older Old Indo-Aryan (EWA vols. i and ii) a ratio of roughly 1 inherited word with h2 after tenuis versus 6-8 words containing aspirated tenues mostly of unknown origin. In younger Old Indo-Aryan (EWA vol. iii) there is obviously an even greater discrepancy. It is thus not unlikely that Ch2 > aspirated tenuis Ch was a ‘convenient’ adaptation to the newly developing Old Indo-Aryan subsystem with four occlusion classes caused by an ever-growing number of borrowings of words with aspirated tenues from native sources. The obvious intrinsic difference between Old Indo-Aryan aspirated mediae and tenues (the former with transferable aspiration, the latter not) seems to have something to do with their different ancestries. The aspirate component of voiced aspirates was an autosegment whereas the unvoiced aspirates go back in a great majority of cases to borrowed words with tenues and with aspiration as part of the segmental matrix. The different biphonemic history of inherited tenues followed by a laryngeal phoneme had apparently no disturbing influence and we may conclude that Sanskrit aspirated mediae were biphonemic whereas the aspirated tenues were monophonemic. Leaving the impact of borrowings out of consideration, Mayrhofer concludes (in Cowgill und Mayrhofer [1986: 92]), . . . ved. /th/ . . . hatte . . . zwei Phoneme zur Ursache; der von H. M. Hoenigswald . . . überzeugend aufgezeigte einphonemige Status von ved. /th/ etc. war in diesen Fällen somit erst in der Einzelsprache eingetreten.16

Indeed, Hoenigswald has a list of ten arguments (1965: 94f.) to prove the monophonemic nature of this order,17 which leads him to the conclusion which is the exact opposite of Joseph’s position (p. 94): 15 Brian Joseph, who rejects, the idea of an intrinsic difference between aspirated mediae and tenues in Sanskrit, argues (2002: 18) with the two examples of OIA vidatha- ‘distribution’ < *vi-dh-atha(vi-dhá- ‘distribute’) and OIA kumbhá- ‘pot’ < *khumbhá- (because of Av. xumba-) and says that “. . . both voiceless aspirates and voiced aspirates . . . also triggered deaspiration via Grassmann’s Law.” However, the second word, which is usually (and correctly) equated with Greek 𝜅 𝜐´ 𝜇𝛽 𝜂 ‘cup, bowel’ is, according to Robert Beekes (2010: 802), not inherited but a ‘Wanderword’ and thus unsuitable for Joseph’s argument. 16 . . . ved. /th/ . . . was due to . . . two phonemes; the monophonic status of ved. /th/ etc. which was convincingly demonstrated by H. M. Hoenigswald . . . only appeared in the individual language [i.e. in OIA]. 17 Whether the prohibition of initial clusters like *thr-, *khn- (1965: 93) is an echo of the former biphonematic status is unclear.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

159

In all these respects the voiceless aspirates behave in a manner radically different from the behavior of the remaining stops, including of course the voiced aspirates.

The emergence of a new consonant order made the whole phonological system of Old Indo-Aryan more symmetrical. However, this process must have also affected a certain number of Old Iranian lects which, back then, were in close contact with Old Indo-Aryan lects. This is confirmed by the presence of inherited and borrowed aspirated tenues in Khotanese and Parachi (and Balochi18 ). This raises the question whether also some Old Iranian lects participated in the same process of fusion of unvoiced tenues with the laryngeal h2 or whether all aspirated tenues for instance in Khotanese are either of unknown origin19 or borrowings from Indo-Aryan. There seem to exist at least a few genuine cases: Old Ir. *x¯ ad ‘to devour, eat, gorge’ appears in Khot. khaca ‘food’ and Bal. kh aDaG ‘to eat’ and is cognate with ¯ ‘chew, eat, devour, etc.’ for which Mayrhofer (EWA) reconstructs PIE OIA KHAD *Kh2 a[h1 ]d0 ; Old Ir. *xad ‘to beat, strike, inflict a wound, hurt’ appears in Khot. khad- ‘to wound, hurt’ and seems to be cognate with OIA KHED ‘tear, press’ for which Mayrhofer (EWA) considers derivation < PIE *kh2 eid; Khot. phvai ‘spade,  shovel’ is cognate with OIA sphyá- *‘scapula’ (13839) for which Mayrhofer (EWA) considers derivation < PIE *sph2 -iio-. Besides such relatively clearcases, there are many words in Khotanese (and Parachi) where the origin of aspiration of a tenuis is unclear.20 Some examples: Old Ir. *xand ‘to laugh’ appears in Khot. khan- ‘laugh’ (see Cheung 2007); Khot. khavä ‘foam’ but Av. kafa- and OIA kapha- ‘phlegm’; Khot. ph¯ ana ‘dust, mud’ but Av. p snu- and OIA p¯ amsú˙ ‘dust’, etc. We can see that the origin of aspirated tenues in Khotanese is partially conditioned by historical sound laws shared with Old Indo-Aryan and partially unmotivated or ‘spontaneous’ aspiration. Occasionally, there are other origins as well. An example is Khot. thu ‘thou’ which, at first sight, seems to have several NIA ‘parallels’: Dardic Tor. tho ‘ye’ and Klm. thä pl. ‘you’, and perhaps Sh. thăi ‘thy’, and Marw. th˜ u ‘you’. The NIA forms – not listed in the CDIAL – do not derive directly < OIA tuvám ‘thou’ but < Pk. tuham ˙ (see Pischel § 420) which, according to Turner (CDIAL), changed -v- to -h- under the influence of ahám. In such a case, Khot. thu should be a borrowing from Indo-Aryan which is, however, implausible. An alternative explanation is this: In northwestern Indo-Aryan exists a tendency for change of -v- to -h-. Some examples: Kal. bišahúr ‘city of Peshawar’, ahú ‘bread’ < OIA ap˜ upá- ‘cake of flour’ (but Dm. awu
), Paš. sah a
r ‘in the morning’ (Buddruss [1959: 63]) < OIA *sav¯ ara- ‘in good time’ (13290), etc. Regarding the aspiration in Khot. thu, which Harold Walter Bailey does not explain, Nicholas Sims-Williams 18 Since Balochi is a West Iranian language, it is not clear whether its aspirated tenues are also part of an isoglottic overlapping in a graded area or not. 19 I could quote here Khot. khara- ‘donkey’ (also OIA khara-) because the origin of the word is considered unclear (see EWA). However, in my eyes borrowing from Kartvelian is possible (see p. 1036). 20 For occasional add or drop of initial and medial aspiration in Prakrit see Pischel (§§ 206-14).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

160

Chapter 5. On aspiration in Indo-Iranian

suggests derivation from nominative *tuwu-, and he explains that (1983: 48) “. . . the w before u was differentiated to a voiced fricative G or H, and that this was then lost after a transfer of friction to the initial . . . thus *tuwu > *t(u)Gu > *thu [Tu].” This looks strikingly similar to the tendencies in some Dardic languages. Since Dardic is the closest Indo-Aryan neighbor to the area where Khotanese was once spoken, it is unlikely that both processes developed independently. Sims-Williams’ notation “*thu [Tu]” seems to indicate his conviction that Khotanese graphemes were actually pronounced as fricatives. He wrote the article in 1983, and as it happened, his colleague Ronald Eric Emerick accepted the existence of aspirated and of retroflex consonants in Khotanese only between 1981 and 1989, as has been shown by Douglas Hitch (2016: 22f.). The presence of Iranian dialects with aspirated tenuis orders is imperative since otherwise the nature of phonetically aspirated tenues in Pashto, eastern Balochi etc. would remain more questionable. It is also reasonable to assume that Old Indo-Aryan and parts of Old Iranian developed together the new order when they still were in close contact. Thus, the most obvious assumption is that although over time various Iranian dialects with voiceless aspirated phonemes lost the phonemic distinctive function, they preserved the – frequently fluctuating – phonetic aspiration which then spread naturally over all tenues. The same process must also have happened in a Nuristani language like Waigal¯ı.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 6 Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

Whereas in the development from Old to Middle Indo-Aryan word-medial consonant clusters changed into geminates (palatalized and partly retroflexed in case of -Cr-), word-initially they were simplified: sC- > Ch-,1 Cr- and Cl- > C. Phonetically different is only palatalization of Cy- (e.g. OIA ty¯ agá- ‘abandonment’ > Pa. c¯ aga-, Pk. c¯ aya-). These sound changes apply without restriction only to the mainstream Prakrits with only one order of sibilants. In G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Nuristani, Dardic (and East Iranian) with three sibilants and in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı with two sibilants one finds additional developments of clusters changing into other clusters or into affricates. The general impetus underlying the superficially multifarious developments is assimilation, a strong tendency that started in Proto-Indo-Aryan. For instance, about the OIA cluster ks. Kobayashi notes that it “is the product of the most extensive neutralization in the consonantal phonology of Old-Indo-Aryan” (§ 45). In other words, ks. was the ´ *ćs, single end product of a number of different older Indo-Iranian clusters as e.g. *ks, *kš, *pć, *gh -s, *´ gh -s, *´ȷ(h) s (see Kobayashi § 45). While assimilation of initial clusters came to a standstill on the way from Vedic Sanskrit to the mainstream Prakrits, assimilation tendencies continued almost exclusively in all languages with two or three sibilant orders. The tendency started in Proto-Indo-Aryan as the first type of inherited consonant clusters shows right below. In short, there was a fundamental difference between a change of the type tr- > t- in the mainstream Prakrits, which was a simplification, and a change of type tr- > c.- in Dardic, which was an assimilation.

6.1

Inherited consonant clusters

This section investigates the very different developments of Old Indo-Aryan, ProtoIndo-Aryan and Proto-Indo-European consonant clusters. They are one factor besides several other factors which led to two distinct Indo-Aryan branches called Outer and Inner Languages. The ultimate trigger for these divergent developments was the strong influence of the Proto-Kartvelian phonological system on the inherited phonological system of a non-Prevedic Indo-Aryan dialect. As a result, two different 1 For occasional anaptyxis and other phenomena in case of s plus nasal consonant see von Hinüber (§ 230, 243, 245 etc.). Occasional preservation of clusters is not discussed in this section.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

162

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

development processes emerged in consonant clusters, which are referred to here as assimilation and simplification.

Inherited PS consonant clusters (a) PIA *gz. > z.(h) or > g(h) 1. Ind. zh
2r ‘gush’ is < PIA *gz.h ar- < PIIr. *gžh ár- < PIE *gu g´h er- ‘to drift along

in water; to float’ (LIV: 213 and Lipp [2009 ii: 269ff.]). See further derails to this lemma on page 33. 2. For the Burushaski loanword goór ‘falling water, waterfall’ Berger suggests derivation borrowed < *ghara- < PIA *´ gz.ara- ([Güara]) (see Lipp [2009 ii: 312 and 269 fn.2]) which compares with MIA paggharati ‘trickles’ (Pischel § 56) which itself parallels OIA (RV) práks.arati ‘flows forth’. Also note cognates √ OIA nirjhara-1 ‘waterfall, torrent’ resp. *nijjhara- (7327) built with OIA *jhar and Cheung’s Proto-Iranian reconstruction *gžar ? (*gzar ?) ‘to flow (fast ?)’ (2007). Possible borrowings from Proto-Iranian into Tibetic languages are Balti gzar ‘to flow’,2 Purik zar ‘id.’, Ladakhi zar-ces, dzar-cas ‘to drip, run down, trickle out’ (see Kogan [2020: 363]). Preservation of initial g- in Balti is, however, questionable, and therefore may be morphologically related with Khowar gˇoc.h"ar ‘waterfall’ for which Strand suggests derivation < OIA *udakaks.a¯ra-. The Kho. form was also borrowed into Bur.ys. Guch2r. Note also Orm. s.ar-y¯ek ‘to turn, revolve’ which Cheung quotes under the Proto-Iranian lemma *gžar ? (*gzar ?) ‘to flow (fast ?)’. Proto-Indo-Aryan had beside an unvoiced ‘velar’ cluster ks. also a voiced ‘velar’ cluster *gz.(h) which did not anymore exist in Vedic Sanskrit, but which continued to prevail in other PIA lects, notably in the ancestor of the Dardic and those pre-Vedic lects whose traces of *gz.(h) appeared only in Middle Indo-Aryan. Thus, unlike Vedic Sanskrit which constituted “just “. . . a dialect of Old Indo-Aryan which had a restriction against sibilant voicing” (Kobayashi § 45), Proto-Dardic preserved the inherited distinction between voiced and unvoiced clusters. This distinction has also not survived in Nuristani since none of those voiced reflexes discussed above has, to my knowledge, any parallels in Nuristani languages. In those non-Vedic lects, the PIA-inherited distinction between voiced and unvoiced retroflex clusters, which later-on changed into > > retroflex affricates [ãü], [úù] and sibilants [ü], [ù], was never lost in the emerging strident subsystems but in the centuries that were to follow, this long-lived phonematic feature, which was stabilized by the continued existence of three (or two) Old IndoAryan sibilants in Dardic and West Pah¯ar.¯ı, served the development of more and more voiced and unvoiced retroflex (and palatal) affricates, none of which are found in the mainstream Prakrits. 2 R. K. Sprigg (2002: 72) connects gzar ‘to flow’ with homonymous forms meaning ‘steep’, ‘slope’ etc. which is not convincing vis-à-vis the parallels in Purik and Ladakhi.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

163

Inherited PS consonant clusters (b) OIA ks. > t.s.(h) (> s. or š) The common MIA outcome of this cluster was (k)kh and (c)ch. The sound change presented in this section deviating from these has not been described by Indian grammarians or in modern textbooks, but note that according to von Hinüber and others, the sound change of OIA ks. > MIA cch took place via *t.s. (§ 235) for which there is no direct evidence in Sanskrit and in the non-G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Prakrits. He also leaves the question of the origin of the aspiration in *t.s. > cch unanswered. For G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Baums notes (2011: 7): “Where a plosive is followed by a fricative, it undergoes partial assimilation, adopting the point of articulation of the latter.” This holds true for OIA ks. > Gan. t.s. and for preservation of OIA ts as Gan. µ (as in Gan. maµa- ‘fish’). For a G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı treatment (metathesis) of OIA ps see p. 38. Here examples for OIA ks. > Gan. t.s. which Baums does not seem to interpret as a separate phoneme: 1. at.s.adi [P@úù@Di] ‘being without hurt’ < OIA *aks.ati- (cf. OIA áks.ata- ‘unbroken’) (but Pa. akkhata- ‘unhurt’). 2. at.s.aya- [P@úù@j@] < OIA aks.aya- ‘undecaying’ (but Pa., Pk. akkhaya-). 3. t.s.atriya- [úù@tRij@] ‘nobleman’ < OIA ks.atriya (Pa. khattiya-). 4. t.s.ipradara- [úùipR@D@R@] ‘more quickly’ < OIA ks.ipratara- (Pa. khippataram . but note Pk. chippa- < OIA ks.iprá-), Klm. c.hibdä LH ‘immediately’.3 5. t.s.¯ına- [úùi:n@] < OIA ks.¯ın.a- ‘worn away’ (Pa. kh¯ın.a-). Note without aspiration Tir. č¯ıne ‘old’ and with aspiration Him. ch¯ı˜ v ‘the shadow of the setting sun’; cognate Dm. c.hin ‘darkness’ (< *‘waning [of moon]’) derives < OIA *ks.in.n.a(3690) and all < PIE *dh gu h ei- ‘to destroy, perish’. Voicing is preserved in OIA  *jh¯ına- (5395). 6. t.s.udra- [úùudR@] ‘little’ < OIA ks.udrá- (Pa. khudda-), t.s.udraya- [úùudR@j@] ‘little’ < OIA ks.udraka- (Pa. khuddaka-), and with kh-: t.s.udradh¯ıda-, khud.adh¯ıda[úùudR@dH i:D@, kh uã:@dH i:D@] ‘little daughter’ < OIA ks.udrá-duhitŕ-.  7. t.s.evedi [úùe:Ve:Di] ‘spends’ < OIA ks.epayati (Pa. khepeti). 8. dat.s.ina [d@úùin@, d@ç:in@] ‘right; southern’ < OIA dáks.in.a- (but Pa., Pk. dakkhin.a-). 9. nat.s.atra- [n@úù@tR@] ‘constellation’ < OIA náks.atra- (but Pa. nakkhatta-). > 10. pračat.s.a- [pR@tC:@úù@] ‘illustrious’ < OIA pratyaks.a- (according to Baums, translation of Greek 𝜀´𝜋𝜄𝜙𝛼𝜈 𝜂´𝜍). 11. yat.s.a- [j@úù@] < OIA yaks.á- ‘a supernatural being’ (but Pa. yakkha-, Pk. jakkha-). 12. śit.s.adi [çiúù@Di] ‘learns’ < OIA śíks.ati (but Pa. sikkhati ‘learns’, NiDoc. imper. ´ śi¯chatu). 13. sat.s.ikarodi [s@úùik@Ro:Di] ‘realizes’ < OIA s¯ aks.a¯tkaroti (Pa. sacchikaroti). 14. sam t s eva[s @ïúù e :V@ ] < OIA sa mks ˙ epa‘epitome’ (but Pa. sankhepa˙ ‘abridge. .. . ment’). 3 Probably built with instrumental postposition (-)dä H and thus structurally corresponding with Ur. jald¯ı-se. The same postposition is found in Klm. ˇȷäbdä L ‘quickly, at once’ which derives < OIA javá- (java- [P¯ an..]) ‘swift; speed’ (5166). Similar reflexes are also Kamd., Kt. c."uňi ‘whip; switch’ < OIA ks.ipan.í- ‘stroke of a whip’ (3682).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

164

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

15. sat.s.ia- [s@úùi(j)@] ‘witnessing’ indirectly < OIA s¯ aks.ya-.4 16. sus.mela- ‘cardamom’ < OIA lex. s¯ uks.mail¯ a- ‘small cardamoms’. 17. sras.n.a- [sR@ùï@] (Baums [2019: 9] – OIA ślaks.n.á-) < PIIr. *slagžh nás ‘slippery’ < PIE *slegh2 snó- (EWA). Notes: (a) Slightly irregular with loss of affricate closure is Gan. is.mahukula- ‘name of a warrior-tribe’ < OIA iks.v¯ akukula- (but Pa. okk¯ akakula-). (b) Gan. chan.ati ‘hurts’ is cognate with OIA ks.an.óti ‘injures’ (3644) (Pa. khan.ati) and has an unaspirated parallel in Bng. c Ona nO ‘to hurt, beat’ and intensive with -k

c Onk anO ‘to hurt or beat s.o.’ and the synonym compound c Ont al ‘blow’ (OIA ta
da



‘blow’). See 3644 for aspirated reflexes to which is to be added Ind. cha ra
v  ‘to be



finished, destroyed, hit by a disaster or accident’. According to Lipp (2009 ii: 239), ´ the OIA root derives thus: PIE *tkén- ‘strike’ (formation with velar) > pre-PIIr. *tkén > pre-PIA *tšán- > *t.s.án- > ks.an-. Is the Gan. word a pre-PIA archaism or simply a MIA borrowing? Cf. Pk. chan.aï ‘hurts’.

Examples from Dardic and Nuristani: 1. Deg. (Paš.) ar"u ¯š ‘garlic’ < OIA *¯ ar¯ uks.a- ‘roughish’ (1327) and taš"a¯n ‘carpenter’ < OIA táks.an- ‘carpenter’ and deš"ek, doš"ek ‘grape’< OIA dr a
ks a- ‘vine; grape’

"îk ‘looking’ < (with unusual dr > d) and š?¯ır ‘milk’ < OIA ks.¯ırá- ‘milk’ and leš OIA *draks.ati ‘sees’ (6507.1) (+?). 2. Ind. ac
 and Gau. ayc.i ‘eye’ < OIA áks.i- ‘eye’ (but cf. with aspiration Gau. ac.háv ‘sour variety of strawberry (or tamarind)?’ < OIA a¯ks.ika- ‘the tree Morinda tinctoria’. 3. Kamd. us."aloã ‘waterfall’ (built with ’oa ‘water’ ?), Kt. us."ol and Ash. u"s.ul both ‘waterfall’ both < OIA *utks.a¯la- ‘pouring out’ (1747) (but H. ukh¯ al). Note that Werchikwar dialect of Burushaski Goch2r ‘waterfall’ is borrowing from Khowar gˇoc.h"ar ‘waterfall’ for which Strand suggests derivation < OIA *udaka-ks.a¯raand note Kal. uc.hár ‘waterfall’ which has either same derivation or derives < OIA *avaks.a¯ra- (735). 4. Kho. c.uc."u b- ‘to dry out; dry up’ < OIA *šuks.a- ‘drying up’ (12508) but aspirated in Kal. c.uc.hík ‘dried fruit’ (both with CCH). 5. Ind. cup
2v  ‘to press (into)’ < OIA *ks.upyate ‘is pressed’ (3719).

6. Šat.. d.z.ús. ‘grape’ and Bhat.. z.a¯s. ‘a grapevine’ both < OIA dr a
ks a- ‘grape’.

7. Kho. das.m"an ‘priest, mullah’ < OIA dáks.am¯ an.a- ‘being able’ (6117.2). 8. Šat.. p as ‘wing’ (and with preservation of affricate p2c and Ind. p2ychi both

West ‘wing’) and Gau. p¯ as.áv ‘feather’ both < OIA p¯ aks.a- are cognate with Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bng. pO
sO ‘side, direction’ < OIA paks.á- ‘wing; side’ (but Pa. pakkhaand Bhal. p¯ akhu, etc.). 4 But no palatal outcome of cluster because of northwestern -ia- pronunciation instead of -yapronunciation.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

165

9. B.roh. afiśśá ‘un-grinded’ probably < OIA *apis.t.a- with same prefix as in B.roh. adúiya ‘unwashed’ < OIA *adh¯ uya-.5
10. Ind. m as ‘honey’ < OIA *m¯aks.a- ‘honey’ (9989). 11. Kt. yus. ‘female demon’, Wg. y¯ us., Pr. yus. ‘demon’ but with preservation of affricate in Kal. d.z.ac. ‘male and female spirit beings by this name’ and Sh. yãc.h ‘type of spirit or demon’ all < OIA yaks.á- ‘a supernatural being’ (but Pa. yakkha-). 12. Ind. rùs. ‘barren and producing little yield (soil)’ < OIA r¯ uks.á- ‘dry, rough’. 13. Ind. lh
s ‘louse’ < OIA liks a
- ‘louse’ (with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration?).

or an animal with a stick’ < OIA Dh¯atup. vŕkdsate 14. Ind. v2s kar
2v  ‘to drive s.o.

 ‘keeps off’. 6 15. Pr. s.@ ‘cattle, animal’ (and s.¯e ‘flock of goats’) < OIA *ps.ú-; cf. Orm. s.w¯ an ‘shepherd’ < Av. fšu-p¯ ana- (Morgenstierne), Paš. pas.av¯ al ‘shepherd’ (< *ps.up¯ ala- like Kt. ps."a ‘shaman; seer’ < OIA SPAŚ ‘see’) and (with dental affricate) Kamd. p¯ ac˙ "a-vi;a¯a ‘shepherd’. 16. Pr. s.am, s.um ‘sacrifice (kafir.); tribute the Prasun had to pay to neighboring tribes’ and Kt. s."um < OIA ks.a¯má- ‘burning to ashes’ (cf. OIA praks.a¯ma‘[prob.] burnt, singed [said of a sacrifice]’). My suggestion differs from Turner’s interpretation who derives the forms < OIA ś¯ amya- ‘relating to peace’ (12397) and I suggest that the original meaning is ‘sacrifice’ and ‘tribute’ is derived. However, the preceding footnote shows that Prasun usually preserves OIA ks. as c.. unks ˙ . a- ‘straight’ (13548, note here Bshk. su c and s1 ‘straight’ < OIA *s¯ 17. Ind. su

unco both ‘straight’ and Pal. with aspiration fronting and CCH).

Pal. c.h¯ ..
ksma- ‘fine’, reflected in Gan. s2 ‘decent, fine, proper (person) < OIA su 18. Ind. su

‘fine’ (but Pa. sukhuma-). sus.maInherited Pr consonant clusters ˆ > PIIr. palatal *čr and palato-alveolar *ćr, the latter (a) PIE *kr and *kr then either > [*]˙cr (‘Iranian type’) or both > c. and s. (‘Indo-Aryan type’) Georg Buddruss notes (1977: 29) that the Nuristani languages differ from Indo-Aryan languages not only regarding their treatment of the inherited palato-velars but also ˆ > c. as can be seen e.g. in regarding the change of the PIE palato-velar cluster *kr Pr. c.a¯ ‘voice, shout’ (OIA śr¯ ava-), Wg. cu  ‘hip’ (also Psht. s.na ‘the hip bone’) which are cognate with OIA śrón.i-, Kt. ac.ü ‘tear’ < PIIr. *Háćru- (but also Dardic Ind. 2 c ‘tear’ and Sh.dras. 2
che ‘tears’ have the same origin and all three are cognate

 ci ‘log stairway’ (OIA śrití- ‘entrance’) , etc.7 Buddruss with OIA áśru- ‘tear’), Wg. . ˆ because assumes that c. in inherited words goes back to older *˙cr (and ultimately *kr) 5 B.roh. ãśt.o ‘eight’ might be a tatsama. 6 It is not certain whether Pr. s.@ reflects *ps.- or ks.- but the former seems more likely because of similar cognate Paš. pas.av"¯ al ‘shepherd’ and because there is closure preservation of OIA ks.- e.g. in Pr. c.n(e)- ‘to sneeze’ which is cognate with OIA *ks.n.av¯ıti ‘sneezes’ (3758). Morgenstierne’s notation čne- is a hearing mistake 7 On a thematically related discussion see p. 473.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

166

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

this cluster *˙cr is indirectly present e.g. in Ash. astr¯ u ‘tear’ which derives through 8 metathesis < older *a˙cru. In case of the just quoted examples, this would mean that, as said in the footnote, retroflexion of *µr occurred before metathesis to str. Since, however, str can never change into c. – in the few cases where it indubitably did change into a retroflex it changed into the sibilant s. (see below) – Buddruss’ assumption is implausible because it cannot explain why in some cases Nuristani words with *µr clusters turned into retroflex affricates and in other cases reshuffled into dental str clusters. More plausible is derivation from antecedents PIIr. palatal *čr and palato-alveolar *ćr. Since the former change is not ‘Iranian’ and the latter change not ‘Indo-Aryan’ (Sanskrit had no dental affricate phonemes), I suggest calling the former type of change ‘Proto-Indo-Aryan’ and the latter change ‘Proto-Iranian’. In other words, a Proto-Indo-Iranian cluster *čr or *ćr changed only in a particular section of the Indo-Iranian dialect area into c., namely in those lects of Proto-IndoAryan which later developed into Nuristani and Dardic. One finds, not surprisingly, both in Nuristani and in Dard languages also the ‘Proto-Iranian’ reflex of the ProtoIndo-Iranian palato-alveolar *ćr cluster. For instance, besides above-quoted Wg. c.i ˆ - ‘lean’) there is also cognate Nuristani San.. istr"¯ı ‘ladder ‘log stairway’ (< PIE *klei  made of a single log’ (Iranian Psht. has, however, borrowed the ‘Proto-Indo-Aryan’ 9 form s.@l ‘stair’), whereas Dardic Tir. str¯ u- ‘to hear’ reflects ‘Proto-Iranian’ *˙cruta-, ˆ - ‘hear’ (OIA śrutá-, Gan. s.uda-, see below). Proto-Indo-Iranian *ćruta- < PIE *kleu That regarding the process *čr or *ćr > c. also Dardic should be included is suggested by the following word: Kal. c.ákabronz ‘a kind of grass used as fodder for goats’ is cognate with Kho. c˙ rik"onzu ‘wild spinach’ (Strand)10 for both of which a possible reconstruction is older *čraka-marja- < *caraka-marja- *‘eatable-plant meadow’ (cf. *marja- ‘meadow’ [9886]). For caraka- Böthlingk and Roth note ‘a certain plant’ which they suggest to correspond with OIA parpas.t.a- ‘species of medicinal plants’; under lemma 7935 Turner points out OIA lex. parpa- ‘young grass’ and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhales¯ı pappr.i ‘a small shrub (eaten by goats)’. All this makes it likely that caraka- is cognate with OIA cáran.a- ‘grazing’ (4685) which goes ultimately back to PIE *ku el- ‘turn’ but appears with dental affricate in Indus Kohistani c ar
2v  8 He follows here Morgenstierne who has made the same suggestion (1945a: 229). I doubt the ˆ ‘bear’ got their retroflex affricate from assumption that the Dardic forms of lemma PIE *h2 ŕtko*˙cr because I do not know any clear example for sucha process when the cluster is surrounded by non-high vowels. For reflexes of comparable OIA sr I found K. s¯ osu < OIA s¯ ahasrá- ‘thousandfold’ (13380), Sh. s¯ as < OIA sahasrá- ‘1000’ (13308), K. bra s ‘to go musty’ probably < older *vrisra< OIA visra- ‘musty’ (12025), Ind. sat2yri ‘wooden cornbin’ < OIA srastara- ‘litter’ (13883). In the only two examples Ind. s a
kh and Sh. s.ak ‘neck’ < OIA srkvan- ‘corner of mouth’ (13576)

 the retroflexion must have been caused by the -v- and in Ind. tam2y 
si ‘dawn; twilight’ (< OIA

the adjacent high vowel. támisr¯ a- ‘dark night’) the retroflexion appears to be similarly caused by There is also G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı anavas.uda- ‘not rotten’ < OIA anavasruta- ‘unspotted’ (see Baums [2011: 9]), but again retroflexion was probably due to the -u- sound. All this means that the Dardic retroflex forms (no matter whether reflecting PIIr. palato-alveolar *ć or palatal *č) must have turned into retroflexes before the Nuristani forms were dentalized from palato-alveolar *ć > dental c˙ . Thus we note similar sound processes having taken place in Nuristani and in Dardic language areas simply at different points in time but leading to dissimilar results. ˆ ‘to lean’. 9 Note also cognate Gan. s.ayadi ‘leans on’ < OIA śrayati ultimately < PIE *klei  inherited dental 10 But the Khowar word is a borrowing because the language does noy have affricates. In fact, the same is also true for Kal. -bronz

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

167

kar
2v  ‘to graze’. This phenomenon of stray secondary dentalization of inherited (labio)velars is found in East Iranian, Nuristani and Dardic (in the latter case of course only in those languages with two inherited affricate orders). Thus, this is a certain tendency to partially neutralize the difference between the two inherited guttural orders, see p. 137 for examples. Another example comes from Dardic Indus Kohistani c.òes. ‘mother-in-law’ which is cognate with OIA
sva
sru
-. The initial retroflex affricate makes it very likely that it derived from older *c.òec., which is very similar with Nuristani c."uc. ‘mother-in-law’ for which Strand reconstruct Proto-Indo-Iranian (Proto-Aryan) *sva-čr¯ u- ‘spouse’s ˆ mother’ (better *sva-ćr¯ u-< PIE *suékuro-).  Unlike Buddruss, Strand mostly reconstructs for Nuristani c. not derivation < 11 *˙cr but < earlier *čr. This makes sense because it shows the closeness of ProtoNuristani to (certain dialects of) Proto-Indo-Aryan at a very early stage, e.g. Kamd. c."o via- ‘to shout’12 < PIIr. *ćr¯ ava- ‘hearing; distant sound’ and c."u ˜ ‘thigh and hip’ < PIIr. *ćráuni- ‘hip; buttocks’; Kt. a¯c.i"u ‘tear’ which parrallels Dardic Ind. 2 c ‘tear’ and Sh.dras. 2
che ‘tears’ < PIIr. *áćru- ‘tear’, etc. Thus, Proto-Nuristani *ćr > c. is  identical with Proto-Dardic *ćr > c.. They only parted ways in a later stage – I may call that Old Nuristani and Old Dardic – when Old Nuristani changed *ćr > *µr > str whereas Old Dardic changed *ćr > s. as seen in Gan. s.ava- ‘news’. This shows that retroflex affricates and sibilants came into existence in non-Vedic Aryan dialects in the phase between Proto-Indo-Iranian and Old IndoAryan and Old Iranian. However, since there were no strict boundaries in the Old Nuristani – Old Dardic contact zone, there is evidence for “isoglottic overlapping in a graded area” (see p. 26) with regard to the affricate clusters analyzed here, i.e. ‘Indo-Aryan’ *ćr > s. in Nuristani languages and ‘Iranian’ *ćr > *µr in Dardic languages. After a joint ProtoNuristani/Dardic phase began the first phase of mutual borrowings. For instance, above-quoted Dardic Tir. str¯ u- ‘to hear’ or conversely e.g. Kamd. s."u ‘news; awareness’ (see just above in footnote Gan. s.ava- ‘news’) and s.a¯č"a- ‘joint’ (OIA *śrathya- ‘to ˆ be tied; joint’ [12676] with phonetic Dardic parallels – PIE *kreth 2 [EWA]) and s . i"ol ‘wolf’ (OIA śrg¯ alá- ‘jackal’ with phonetic Dardic parallels), Wg. s.inar¯ ˙ a- ‘to make happy, satisfy(a woman) sexually’ (OIA śŕng¯ ˙ ara- ‘amorous pursuits’ without phonetic  Dardic parallels), etc. They confirm the long-standing and close relationship between Nuristani and Dardic. The only Middle Indo-Aryan language with šr > s. is G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. A few examples: s.adha- ‘faith’ < OIA śraddh´¯ a- ‘trust’ (Pa. saddh¯ a-), s.uda- ‘heard; famous’ < OIA śrutá- ‘heard’ (Pa. suta-), s.eya- ‘better’ < OIA śréyas ‘better’ (Pa. seyy¯ o ), us.ida‘exalted’ < OIA *ut-śrita-, úcchrita- ‘raised’ (1862) (Pa. ussita- ‘erected, high’, Pk. ucchiya-) and us.evedi ‘raises’ < OIA *ut- śr¯ apayati, ucchr¯ apayati ‘raises’ (Pa. uss¯ apeti) (1858), etc. Whereas Dard languages like Khowar and Kalasha have initial c˙ r- clusters in a few not inherited words (e.g. Kho. c˙ r"ex and Kal. c˙ rek both ‘spark’),13 the inherited 11 Without considering the difference to PIIr. *ćr. 12 Also note Pr. c.¯ a ‘voice, call, shout’ (OIA śr¯ ava-) versus MIA Gan. s.ava- ‘news’ (OIA śrávas‘sound’). 13 Cf. perhaps Georgian berµ’q’, brµ’q’ ‘a spark’ (Fähnrich [2007: 60]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

168

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

cluster *˙cr did apparently not survive in Nuristani but was either simplified to c˙ (cf. Pr. üč"ü¯ ‘tear’ with repalatalization) or scrambled into str as in Ash. istr"u ¯ ‘tear’. Whereas šr > s. is widespread in northwestern South Asian languages, there are only very few examples for palatalization or retroflexion of a str cluster. One is Sanglechi s.@c˙ ‘feminine’ (< Avestan *str¯ı-č¯ı-¯ a [cf. EWA ii: 763]) and @s.c˙ a¯k ‘girl’ (< *str¯ı-č¯ı-ˇ ak¯a[Morgenstierne 1938: 315]) and here also Pashto s.@ja ‘woman’ which is cognate with Dardic T¯ orw¯ al¯ı c.hi ‘woman’; another is Parachi G¯ıš ‘grass’ < Av. *w˘¯ astrya- (Morgenstierne [1950a: 207]). Parallel examples from Dardic are similarly rare. The only examples known to me is dialectal Pashai les.t. and leiš ‘dagger’ < *stras.t.r¯ı- < *straśtr¯ı< *śtrastr¯ı- < OIA śastrá- ‘dagger’ (12367)14 and – phonologically somewhat different – Indus Kohistani uch
2v  ‘to pick up (from the ground), to wake up s.o.’ < older

*uchr
2v  < OIA ucchr¯apayati ‘raises’. The same root with same prefix but without affrication and aspiration is found in Nuristani Waigal¯ı us.¯e- ‘to take on the back’ < OIA *ut-śrayati (úcchrayati) ‘raises’ (1858) and with morphologically similar OIA ¯ ‘become cooked’ Kati aus.o- ‘to boil’ < OIA *ut-śr¯ root ŚRA ayati ‘boils’ (1861).

Inherited Pr consonant clusters (b) Apicalization of OIA Pr For instance OIA tr- was simplified to t- in the mainstream Prakrits. In the languages associated with the Proto-Indo-Aryan *gz. > z.(h) pattern, different paths were followed leading towards apicalization and assimilation. Apicalization is found in a number of Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages. There exist three types of change: • P(h)r > [first stage] d(r) - or tr- > [second stage] *dl- or *tì - > l- or ì- (but *-dr- > -r-) • P(h)r > [first stage] d.(h)r or s.t.r > [second stage] d.(h)l or s.t.ì (word-medially also (*)-ll- > -l-) • P(h)r > [first stage] d.(h)r or s.t.r > [second stage] d.z.(h) - z.(h) or t.s. - c.

The first type without (traces of) retroflexion is found in Dardic languages only. The first stage of the first type resulting in an initial dental plosive is found in K¯ alk¯ ot.¯ı, Kalami, perhaps in Shina of Gures and Dras, and perhaps in Kalasha.15 One example each: Kalk. tram ‘work’ < OIA kárman-; Klm. d¯ or H(L) ‘elder brother’ < OIA bhra
tr
; Sh.gur. dayo  ‘rice’ and Sh.dras. dayõ ‘paddy’ if cognate with OIA vr¯ıhí-;
Kal. dracho yak ‘earring’ < OIA bhras.t.á- ‘fallen’ with cluster metathesis and

aspiration if cognate with dialectal Paš. lälst¯ı ‘earring’ which is < ‘spontaneous’ .. . *bhras.t.ik¯ a- (9655) (which Turner compares semantically with English ear-drop) . 14 Morgenstierne’s reconstruction is another example for type-of-articulation harmony mentioned further above. 15 The historical-linguistic change of Pr- > dr- was also noted and briefly described by Henrik Liljegren (2009) independently of me.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

169

Note: Also in Western Tibetan Balti there is a similar trend of change of gr to dr, e.g. Balt. dra-pa (Skardu dialect) ‘goitre, gizzard’ but Tib. gre-ba ‘throat’, Balt. drangs ‘be satisfied’ but Tib. grang ‘satisfy’, Balt. drul ‘to walk’ but Tib. grul ‘walk’, etc. (these and more examples are found in Spriggs [2002]). And according to Grierson (LSI ix,iv: 883), apicalization of bhr is due to Tibeto-Burman influence since “[i]n Western Tibetan br is pronounced dr in Ladakh¯ı and d. in the Lahul dialect . . . ” However, in my eyes this is rather evidence for a linguistic area phenomenon.

The second stage of the first type is found in Pashai, Shumashti, Gawar-Bati, Savi, Kalami, Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı and Ningal¯ ˙ am¯ı (examples follow below). The second type with retroflexion is found in two areas within West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, namely in the two sub-dialects of the Khaś¯ al¯ı dialect group Śeut.¯ı16 and Sun.d.hl¯ as¯ı, and in the adjacent varieties Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı, Bhales¯ı, Bhid.lai and P¯ad.ri (examples follow below). For almost all examples of the second stage of the second type which are quoted below, parallels between Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı are provided. The first stage P(h)r > d.(h)r or t.r in the second and third type results in an initial retroflex plosive for which evidence seems to be scattered much wider than in the case of initial dental plosive but it is also located outside the orb of the mainstream Prakrits. For instance: Kati pit.r, put.r ‘a son’ (only Konow), Wot.. voiced pur., ‘son’, Pashai put.hl¯e (LSI ix,iv: 884) and Gawar-Bati pult (LSI viii,ii: 86) both ‘son’,17 Sindh¯ı put.ru ‘son’ and kaput.u ‘a bad boy’ all < OIA putrá- (Pa., Pk. putta-) (second S. word with ku- prefix) and Brok-skad pot.o ‘grandson’ < OIA paútra- ‘son’s son’. The second stage in the third type (d.z.[h] - z.[h] or t.s. - c.), which results in a homorganic biphonematic cluster of retroflex (or palatal) closure and homorganic sibilant off-glide, is again widely spread and includes East Iranian languages but is again located outside the orb of the mainstream Prakrits. From among the Dardic languages it includes Indus Kohistani, Chil¯ıs, Torwali, Kalami, Gawar-Bati, Torwali and the Shina varieties of Gigit, Astor and Kohistan. From among the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties it includes Jauns¯ ar¯ı, Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, Deog¯ ar¯ı, Koc¯ı, K¯ ot.gar.h¯ı, S¯ od¯ oc¯ı, Kashmiri,18 and probably some more varieties. Here follow examples for ‘three’:

Bng., Kc., Sirm. and Man.d.. c¯ın ‘three’, Ki˜ ut.h., Simla Sir¯ aj¯ı, Kul.ui, Satlaj Group all caun [ÙO:n] ‘three’ < OIA tr¯ın.i- — Ind. ca ‘three’ < OIA *tr¯ ayah..

OIA tráyah. ‘three’ is also reflected with retroflexed dental in Sindh¯ı t.re (but Pk. ta¯ o) (with a similar retroflexion in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı terO ‘thirteen’ < older *trerO < OIA *trayedaśa>



but Pa. t¯elasa-). A further step in assimilation can be seen in t.r- > t..l with suppression of fluttering of the apical [r] naturally transforming it into an unvoiced retroflex lateral > /l./: West Pah¯ ar.¯ı P¯ ad.ri t..lai ‘three’.19 A still further step is seen in Dardic Pashai ì¯e 16 17 18 19

With a tendency for loss of initial stop like in some Dardic languages, see Varma (1938: 3). Not mentioned in the CDIAL. In my eyes transitional between West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Dardic. In the LSI (ix,iv: 863 and 883) one finds also dental Pangw¯ ˙ al.¯ı tl¯ a¯ı ‘three’ which might be a hearing mistake and thus requires a re-examination.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

170

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

> and Kalami ìa¯ both ‘three’ where older *[tl] simplified to an unvoiced dental lateral (which contrasts in both languages with a voiced dental lateral20 ). Besides Dardic change of tr > ì or l and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı change of t.r- > t..l there was a slightly different, but also common Dardic-West Pah¯ ar.¯ı change of t.r- > t.s. [úù] (c.) which was, however, later changed in West Pah¯ar.¯ı into the alveo-palatal affricate [tS] (c): Indus Kohistani c a ‘three’ < OIA *tr¯ayah. (5994) but Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı c¯ın ‘three’
l.- [ù-] in Ningal¯ ˙ am¯ı l ev
as

‘thirteen’.21 Whereas West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı and Bhales¯ı have IA standard subsystems (t th d dh) and consequently three retroflex Cr clusters (Indo-Aryan does not know *thr clusters), other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı lects display simpler patterns (e.g. Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has only some evidence for tr > c and dr > j) which is also the case in several Dardic languages which typically reflect old Cr clusters as differences between voiced and unvoiced laterals. Here follows a list mostly of lemmata that have West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Dardic parallels. In addition, I quote a few cases which lack such parallels. Note that not all following lemmata have OIA etymologies:

Older pr 1. (1) For Bhad. t.rl ara- ‘doing a . a¯r and Bhid.. t.rl . a¯ru ‘love’ < OIA < OIA priyak¯ kindness’ do not seem to exist parallel Dardic forms. 2. Bhad. t liu  ‘flea’ — dialectal Paš. las."u ¯k ‘flea’, Shum. ly¯ec˙ uk — Ind. c s ‘flea’,

Paš. also sis < older *cis all < OIA plúsi- ‘flea’ (9020) including

several dialectal .. . . . ‘irregular’ allomorphs. See also EWA for IE parallels. Note: Dardic Gauro phic.h ‘mosquito’ might be interesting as an example for a slight trend in Outer Languages for OIA pr- > ph- as e.g. in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı ph ang(O)

‘(small) branch’ < OIA *pr¯ anka˙ ‘something curved or hooked’ (8917a) and Assamese phor ‘slightly stitching together’ < OIA právayati ‘weaves on’. According to Bhayani (1997: 29), this trend is typically observed before a sibilant. See also Pischel (§ 209, 210).

Older bhr

> 1. Bhad. d.hl¯ a ‘brother’ (Kaul [2006 i: 53]), P¯ ad.. d.hlozi ‘brother’s wife’ (< OIA *bhr¯ atrj¯ ani- [or *bhr¯ at¯ aj¯ ani- ?] ‘brother’s wife’ [9662]) — Kalk. dr¯ a ‘brother’, Paš. l¯ a ¯ı ‘brother’, Ning. ˙ l¯ a, Shum. l¯ a, l¯ aa, Wot.. r.a¯ ( Khaś. "bhrEtCu > High Rudh. "bhr atCu > Low Rudh. "bhr atshu > N¯ al¯ a Rudh. pr atshu26 > 27 Marm.b"h utChu Śeut.. "bhrãsu

22 Besides type of place harmony (CCH). 23 Grierson, but according to Barth (and Morgenstierne) (1956) “z.h¯ at” ‘morning’. 24 According to Turner, the Tor. form provided by Barth (and Morgenstierne) derives < OIA *¯ ar¯ atrior *¯ ar¯ atra- ‘from after night, i.e. morning’ (1314) which looks phonetically unlikely and does not match semantically with San.uv¯ıri and Prasun. My suggestion for a ‘type of articulation harmony’ pattern does, however, probably not function in cases like Tor. žed and Wg. z.ata both ‘blood’ < OIA rakta- ‘blood’. Moreover, there are enough cases of preservation of OIA r as r e.g. in Tor. r¯ ajgana ‘a queen’ < OIA r¯ ajagan.ik¯ a- ‘courtezan of a king’. 25 In his publications, Varma uses the phonetic sign C incorrectly in the sense of ‘voiceless alveopalatal affricate’ instead of correctly ‘voiceless alveo-palatal sibilant’. I have corrected this in the following > examples where I use instead the sign tC. Moreover, With the phonetic sign c, Varma means the > alveolar affricate /˙c / (ts) as can be seen in Bhal. "bıccu ‘scorpion’ (1948: 15) rendered in the CDIAL as bi˙cc˙ u ¯- (12081). For the rest, his transcriptions are reproduced graphically unchanged. 26 On devoicing and deaspiration of aspirated mediae in some lects of the Khaś¯ al¯ı group see Varma (1948: 19). 27 On phoneme splitting of aspirated mediae (discussed above p. 298.) in Marmati see Varma (1938: 21).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

172

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

Here are the instances that I have collected for Dardic ‘gums’:28 Pal. d¯ anda-l"¯esi 29 Klm. dãris HL Ind. d2n2rsah Sh. hără˙c Šat.. h2r
2s30

6. Ind. zhu z ‘birch tree’ < older *bhr¯ uˇȷá- (cf. Pal. bhr"uj ‘birch’) < OIA bh¯ urjá(Pa. bh¯ uja- ‘a kind of willow’) < PIE *bh rHˆ g-ó-.31 No comparable morphological changes are known from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. 

Older tr 1. Bhal. at l ‘intestines’, High Rudh. atl a, Pang. anthuR ‘goat’s intestine’ (Nayak



ãz

 ´. ‘intestine’ et al.) — Bng.  anjE ‘intestines’— Ind. < OIA a¯ntrá- ‘entrail’ (Pa. anta-). 32 2. Bhal. karot.˚ .li ‘small saw’ — Sh. harác.i ‘large saw’, Bur. haríc.i ‘a saw’ < OIA karapattra- ‘saw’ (Pk. karapatta-). 3. S. khet.ru ‘field’ — Bhad., Bhal. c˙ het.˚ .l ‘field’ — Sh. c.héec. ‘field’ < OIA ks.étra(Pa. khetta-). 4. Bhal. jant.˚ aì, oì ‘mill’, Sv. y¯an˚ a l ‘mill’,33 — Ind. .l ‘spinning wheel’ — Gaw. z .l, y

yaz ‘water mill’ < OIA yantrá- ‘controlling device’ (Pa. yanta-).

5. Bhad. t.˚ .li ‘wife’ — Paš. ìek"a¯ ‘woman; wife’, Sv. ìer
 ‘wife’ — Tor. c.hi ‘woman’ < OIA str
- ‘woman, wife’ (Pa. th¯ı-), and note Psht. s.@ja ‘woman’. 6. S. t.r¯ amo ‘copper’ (with r-metathesis) — Bhid.. t.˚ ambO .la¯m ‘copper’ — Bng. c ‘copper’, Kc. cambo ‘copper’, Ki˜ ut.h. c¯ amb¯ a, Jaun. c¯ amb¯ a — Klm. ì am H(L) ‘piece of cedar wood’ < OIA t¯ amrá- ‘dark red, copper-coloured’ (Pa. tamba-).34 7. Low Rudh. trimr
 ‘wasp’, Bhal. t lenm@ni ‘wasp’, L. t@r"bhuri ‘wasp’ (Varma

(Joshi [1911]) cimr

i ‘the yellow wasp’, Deog.

[1948: 16]) — Him. jhimr.i ‘wasp’ . 28 The first three examples are compounds built with first component < OIA danta- ‘tooth’ which follow OIA patterns like dantap¯ ali- (6157a) and dantam¯ amsa˙ both ‘gums’. 29 Regarding phonetics cf. on the one hand above Bhad. dhl Esu and on the other above Paš. l¯a¯ı



‘brother’. 30 The last two forms suggest older *dharač < PIA *bhrać and are, besides examples of previous apicalization, also illustrations for occasional loss of word-initial closure. This is rare in Sanskrit – note e.g. OIA bh¯ an.d.a- ‘pot’ ∼ *h¯ an.d.a- ‘pot’ (14050) – but is common in Munda languages and in Prasun, and is found now and then also in Dardic languages and in Burushaski (see Zoller [2016: 88, 111]). 31 There is also, apparently belonging to a different subdialect but also displaying r-fronting, Ind. zhu s ‘birch tree’ < older *dzhu z < older *d.z.h¯ uˇȷá- < older *bhr¯ uˇȷá- < OIA bh¯ urjá- < PIE *bh rHˆ g ó-. Obviously, this retroflexed

form must have developed before the dentalized one and isalso found in Sh.gil. ˇȷ¯ us. ‘birch’ (Lorimer). 32 Here are two more examples for loss of word-initial closure. 33 Wot.. yan. ‘mill’ must have derived from a form close to Sv. 34 The entry in the CDIAL (5779) “l¯ am ‘copper, piece of bad pine-wood” is obviously not quite correct.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

173

— Sh.ast. z.ombuú ‘wasp’35 — Paš. ìimb"u ¯ ‘wasp’. Origin of the lemma is unknown. 8. Bhad. mut l ‘urine’— Him. and Bng. m¯ uc ‘urine’ — Shum., Gaw. mul, Wot..

36 mu˚ ul — Ind. mu z ‘urine’ < OIA mu
tra- (Pa. Pk. mutta-). .l, Bshk. m¯

Older d(h)r 1. OIA d a
tra-, *d¯atr¯ı- ‘sickle’ (6260) (Pk. dattiy¯a- ‘little sickle’) > Kt.g. d¯ac ‘large knife’, Bng. daci ‘sickle’ — with metathesis: Him. dra"s.t. ‘sickle’, Bhal. d..la¯t ‘sickle’ — with r-spreading K. drö˙cü ‘a kind of small sickle’ (< older *dr¯ atra-) — dialectal Paš. l¯ ait ‘sickle’. 2. S. d.reghu ‘height’ with common (north)western r-metathesis < OIA dairghá- or rather dairghya- both ‘length’ (with a parallel reflex in Pal. dhreég ‘lying’ and > original retroflex affricate preserved in Bur. borrowing d.z.eék man´- ‘to stretch o.s. out’) — Paš. lag"a¯ ‘long’, Wot.. lig ‘ high (of a building)’, Bshk. l¯ı"g, l¯ık — Tor. ˇȷ¯ık, Ind. z g ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá- (Pk. diggha-, d¯ıha-).

3. Bhal. d..lò¯ı ‘oath’ — Sh. z.óo ‘injury, deception, treachery’37 < OIA drógha‘injurious’ (Pk. d¯ oha-). 4. Bhal. d.hl.ubr.i ‘lawn grass’ — West Pah¯ ar.¯ı S¯ od¯ oc¯ı jub, Bng. j¯ ub ‘a grass used as fodder for horses’, Kt.g. j¯ ub ‘the grass Panicum dactylon’ — Ind. zu b ‘a long grass used as base for sitting’ all < OIA du
rv a- ‘the grass Panicum  dactylon’ with r-metathesis and ‘spontaneous’ aspiration in Bhal. 5. Bhal. d.hl.ekk ‘a push’ appears to be somehow cognate with OIA *dhakk- ‘push’ (6705) and *drakk- ‘drag’ (6613) and perhaps even with *jhikk- ‘bend, jerk’ (5384) (cf. N. jhiknu ‘to pull in’ and Kal. z.ikán ‘cowhide thongs for fastening shepherds’ footwear’) — Sh. z.akal and Ind. zhik
2v  ‘to pull’, Gau. zik o‘to pull’,38

LH ‘(he) is dialectal Paš. l¯ oik ‘to drag’, Wot.. likh- ‘to pull’,39 Klm. läkant pulling’. 6. OIA udrá- ‘an aquatic animal’ probably Lutra lutra’ (Pa. udda-) > S. ud.ru ‘glutton’, Bhal. ud..l ‘otter’ — Paš. “hul” (see Morgenstierne [1956]) and Klm. ul Hy both ‘otter’ — Sh.ast. uš ‘otter (< *už and probably < *ud.z.). > 7. OIA nidr a
- ‘sleep’ (Pa. nidd¯a-) > P¯ad.. nid..l sleep’ (Kaul [2006 i: 67) — Chil. “nîsh” ‘sleep’ (Biddulph), Sh.koh. níis. ‘sleep’, Ind. n z ‘sleep’ — Him. (Joshi

[1911]) n¯ıj ‘sleep’, Bng. poet. n j, nijO.

Note: From among the above-presented three types of apicalization (p. 168) that frequently affected the clusters pr, bhr, tr, d(h)r, kr, g(h)r in a number of Dard and West 35 36 37 38 39

Here the first vowel may be due to interference with OIA trúmpati ‘hurts’. Entry mul in the CDIAL does not correctly represent Buddruss’ transcription. > But old affricate character is again preserved in Bur. borrowing d.z.óo ‘sudden attack, injury’. Turner quotes a “Gau. žek- ‘to pull” ’ (6613) the source of which is unclear to me. Buddruss assumes for origin of aspiration influence through Wot.. likh ‘long’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

174

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

Pah¯ ar.i languages, only the first type and only word-medially and only with voiced -drclusters is occasionally found in ‘mainstream’ Prakrit. Bhayani lists less than one dozen such examples, e.g. OIA a ¯rdrá- ‘wet’ > Pk. alla- (1997: 5). It is clear, apicalization is an Outer Languages feature.

Older kr There are conspicuously few reliable examples. In fact, I know of only one reasonably certain example:

OIA KRAP ‘lament, implore, long for’ has unattested *krapyate ‘howls’ (3576) with modern reflexes in Paš. "ìap- and Shum. ìap- both ‘to cough’. According to Morgenstierne, here cognate is also Kho. kroph- ‘to crow’. However, Strand is skeptical and tags Kho. khrop- ‘to crow’ with a question mark. Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics note without initial aspiration krophík ‘to crow (of cock, rooster)’. Turner compares *krapyate with krádate v.l. for krándate ‘laments’ (3571) reflected in Kal.rumb. kr¯ alim ‘I cough’ but Trail and Cooper note khrál.ik ‘to cough’. A clearer reflex of *krapyate is found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (High or Low?) Rudh. krepl¯ at. ‘long winded talk or cry’ (Kaul [2006 i: 305]) which is a synonym compound with -l¯ at. < OIA lat.yati ‘prattles’. According to Mayrhofer (EWA), the OIA root is of Indo-Iranian origin, but further connections (e.g. with proposed Latin crep¯ are ‘crack, creak’) are uncertain. For Shum. lap- Morgenstierne not only proposed derivation <  origin, besides relationship with the Latin verb OIA krp- but suggested PIE  also with Latvian kr¯ep¯ at ‘to spit out viscous mucus’ (1945b: 271). However, according to Ahlmann (1872), the Latvian verb means also krächzen (‘to caw’) which matches semantically with the Dardic forms.

Older g(h)r 1. OIA gr a
ma- ‘village’ > Bhad. d.lãv ‘village’, P¯ad.. d.l¯av, d.l¯au ‘village’ (Kaul [2006 i: 66, 67]) — Kalk. dr¯ am ‘village’,40 various Paš. dialects l¯ am, l¯ ama, l¯ om, dl¯ om all ‘village’, Ning.. ˙ Shum. l¯ am village, Gaw. l¯ am, Klm. l¯ am H(L) ‘village’. 2. OIA *grun.a- ‘cord’ is allomorph of OIA gun.á- ‘single thread or strand of a cord, > rope’ (see 4190): Bhal. d..lun.o ‘rope of hemp; thread holding beam of a balance’ — Tor. lun. ‘thread’ (but Z. lun), Klm. lun.a¯r HL ‘piece of rope’.41 40 This apicalized form appears probably also in the name of village Bil¯ adr¯ am in revenue district Khwazakhela in the Swat Valley (De Chiara [2010: 89]). The meaning of Bil¯ a- is unclear to me. 41 There is also Klm. gun L ‘bow string (made from animal tendons)’ suggesting two ‘versions’ of the OIA lemma.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

175

Inherited Sr consonant clusters (a) OIA sr and sr > s. and š



Reflexes of these cluster are listed here because of their similarity with reflexes of Cr clusters discussed above. Examples: Wg. s.ü ‘narrow valley’ borrowed or < OIA srutí‘stream; road; path’; Pr. nis., n¯ıs. ‘gorge’ borrowed or < OIA nisruta- ‘flowed down or out’ and -s.u- ‘to suckle, suck’ borrowed or < OIA sr¯ aváyati ‘causes to move’; Pal. s.a¯k ‘back of the neck’ and Ind. s a
kh ‘neck’ both < OIA srákva- ‘corner of mouth,

jaws’; Kt. tremiš ‘evening’ and dialectal Kal. tr¯ omiš ‘darkness’ both cognate with OIA támisr¯ a- ‘dark night’. OIA SRU ‘flow’ has also palatal reflexes in Dardic Kal. patišói ‘river; ocean’ perhaps < OIA *pratisr¯ ava- ‘flow back’, and in Bng.
sOg ar and

Jaun.
sOg arO ‘spring of water’;42 K. paśpun ‘to ooze, drip, perspire’ < older *prasrap
< OIA prásarpati ‘glides into’; Ash. pas  ‘sister’s daughter’ and Kt. (Kamdesh) s.aps.ó ‘daughter’s son’, etc. < OIA svasr
ya- ‘sister’s son’ (13918) and note preservation of palatal-causing -r- in K. śravun ‘to drip, ooze, drop forth’ < srávati ‘flows’. Note: According to Turner, the Kalsi Ashoka rock edict contains the term śatas.ahas.a‘hundred thousand’ which derives < OIA śatasahasra- ‘100,000’ (12285, see also 13307). However, in the University of Oslo edition of the Ashoka rock edicts (Bibliotheca Polyglotta) Girn¯ ar, K¯ als¯ı, Sh¯ ahb¯ azgar.h¯ı rock edicts (M¯ agadh¯ı and English), the two Kalsi expressions for ‘hundred thousand’ are transliterated not with retroflex but with palatal sibilants: “. . . śat[e] bh¯ age v¯ a F śah[a]śa-bh¯ age v¯ a F” 43 and “ F p¯ ana-śat[a]śaha[ś]e F ye 44 [ta]ph¯ a apavud.he [F śa]ta- [śa]haśa-mite F.” The parallelism of the two sibilants in the second word is due to CCH. It is unclear whether the forms indicate that the author of the edict was a native speaker of Old West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, which nowadays is spoken in the Kalsi area (Dehradun District of Uttarakhand). I think this is quite possible and I do not agree with M. A. Mehendale’s scepticism (1942: 254).45

Examples of reflexes of OIA sr are dialectal Paš. a¯š ‘blood’ < OIA ásrj- ‘blood’ and asrkvika- ‘near the corner of the mouth’  (1497), Bng. Kho. as.ki, is.ki ‘jaw’ < OIA *¯ 
sOr k, Kt.g.
sOr@k and Bhad.
sirak all ‘road’ < OIA srtí- ‘road, path’, Bng.
sikO ‘top,

 peak; trophy’ and as borrowing in North Dravidian Brah. šik ‘pointed’ < OIA *srkka ‘arrow, spear’ (13575). Unsurprisingly, we find similar developments in adjacent Iranian languages, that is Avestan sr- > š- and s.. Examples: Wan. šukár, Psht. s.kar, Khot. s.u ¯ all ‘horn’ < Av. 42 The latter two lects have two sibilant phonemes s and ś like Kashmiri, and not three as Dardic. The ‘ending’ -g ar/-g arO is somewhat unclear. Neither a v¯al¯a suffix nor a compound formation

ara- ‘sprinkling’ is completely convincing. with OIA lex. gh¯ 43 https://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=record&view=record&vid=362&mid=634413 44 https://www2.hf.uio.no/polyglotta/index.php?page=record&view=record&vid=362&mid=634404 45 Mehendale quotes ibid. Eugen Hultzsch who had written: “In edicts I-IX the Kalsi dialect agrees with G[irnar] in replacing the two sibilants ś and s. by s (though -ś- occurs in K[alsi] IV twice cf. vaśa, Piyadaśin¯ a). In a few cases at K s is kept where Sk. requires it. But in the majority of instances ś and s. are phonetically and etymologically impossible.” This judgment was perhaps a bit premature since to my knowledge Hultzsch has never been in India and thus had no experiences of how Sanskrit words can be more or less correctly pronounced (and written) in different parts of the country.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

176

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

sr¯ u- ‘horn’ (cognate with OIA *śr¯ u- ‘horn’ [12715]); Psht. s.@l and its Waziri dialect š@l both ‘stairs’ < Av. *srita- ‘stairs’ (cognate with OIA śrití- ‘entrance’ and *śritr¯a‘ladder’ [12704]); Psht. s.na ‘hipbone’ < Av. sraoni- ‘hip’; for Psht. s.o¯wul ‘to show, teach’ Morgenstierne suggests (1927: 79) derivation < Av. sr¯ avaya- ‘to cause to hear, recite’ which would correspond precisely with OIA śr¯ aváyati ‘proclaims’.

Inherited Sr consonant clusters (b) OIA śr and śr > s. (and š)



Ind. 2sng

‘hollow of the knee’, Wg. as.an˙ "a, Dm. a¯s.ing ˙ ‘hollow of the knee’ all
s. stems from the  10th Century Jaina romance Yaśasatilaka in the word s.inga˙ ‘libertine, rake’. However, whereas OIA śŕnga˙ usually just means ‘horn’, Pk. siringa˙ is rendered as vit.a-,  lampat ˙ . a-, k¯ amuka- ‘sensualist, lecher, gallant’46 and compares with Kalasha al.as.ín˙ hik ‘to elope with a man’ and al.as.ín˙ kárik ‘to elope with a girl’ (built with al.a ‘him, her, it’). For discussions of s.inga˙ see Charpentier (1916: 249) and Mayrhofer (EWA) who quote also possibly cognate khinga-, ˙ khid.ga- with same meaning. Tentatively I also suggest comparison with Deśya Prakrit chimchao ˙ ‘adulterer’ and chimcha¯ ˙ ıy¯ a ‘prostitute’ which might (semantically) be compared with OIA ucchrngita˙ ‘having erected  horns’ and (combination with?) veśastr¯ı-, veśyastr¯ı- ‘prostitute’. But all this is quite uncertain.

Inherited St(h) consonant clusters OIA st(h) > śt, (s.)t., č(h) and c. The common MIA outcome of OIA st(h)- is th- or t.h- (see e.g. Masica [1991: 172]).47 According to Strand (Encyclopedia Iranica), st gets dissimilated to št in Nuristani Kati and Waigal¯ı, e.g. in Kt. št"um ‘tree’ < OIA stambha- ‘pillar, post’ or Pr. pušt"og ‘central pillar of a bridge’ < OIA p¯ adastambha-. However, this change does not distinguish Nuristani from Dardic since both process and lack of process are found in both language groups and are thus a matter of intra-language group dialectal differences. Cf. e.g. Dardic Kal. angaríšti ˙ ‘fireplace in a goat shed’ (with first element angár˙ ‘fire’ < OIA áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’) and -(í)šti < OIA sthíti- ‘station’. Von Hinüber has argued that the aspiration in the outputs th- and t.h- is result of debuccalization of the sibilant. This is supported by the Girnar Ashoka edict where 46 A ‘Sanskrit’ meaning closer to the Prakrit meanings is found in Viśvan¯ atha Kavir¯ aja’s 15th Century S¯ ahityadarpan.a where śŕnga˙ means ‘the rising of desire, excess of love or passion’.  the aspirated cluster is more frequently retroflexed than the 47 There seems to be a tendency that non-aspirated one.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

177

OIA s.t.h appears as t.s (§ 229),48 which von Hinüber interprets as metathesis with a faint rest of sibilant pronunciation and loss of aspiration. He provides the following evidence: OIA śres.t.ha- > set.sa-49 and tis.t.het > tit.seya (ibid.). Especially interesting is the third and last example OIA utth¯ ana- appearing in this edict as ut.s¯ ana- (ibid.) which is obviously a reflex of unattested OIA *ut-sth¯ ana- ‘act of rising’ (1901). The likewise unattested verbal parallel *ut-sth¯ ati ‘stands up’ (1900) has reflexes in many Outer Languages (including Romani) without metathesis but with palatalization or retroflexion and with loss of aspiration in the Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms. Turner quotes several Romani varieties ušt(i)-, and Wg. ošt¯ a-, Kt. ušt-, Pr. ušti-, Gaw. us.t.i-, Kal. ús.t.ik ‘to climb, ascend, stand up’. From West Pah¯ ar.¯ı I can add the following forms: Bng. ustEnO ‘to jump (up)’, Jaun. ust@nO ‘to jump up, bounce’ (Z.) (note also

up’), Him. ktnośtu



Jaun. u
snO ‘to get . ¯ ‘a stand for the spindle’ with first component of

this compound < OIA kartana- ‘act of spinning’; Bng.
sO
st er ‘weapon; one who bites (e.g., dog)’ with first meaning < OIA śastrá- ‘instrument for cutting’ and second < OIA śástr- ‘one who cuts up’.50  OIA sth can appear as ts in the MIA of Girnar, one could expect to When .. . find a similar change of s.t.h to t.s. (= c.) in Dardic and Nuristani. I only know very few examples from Dardic: Klm. äc. H and Kalk. ac. both ‘eight’ < OIA ast a
-, Klm.



mic.a¯r H ‘sweetness’ < OIA mrs.t.á- ‘sweet’ and Klm. -¯ar abstract suffix, and perhaps Klm. p¯ıc. H ‘side, direction’ ifcognate with OIA pradis.t.a- ‘directed, pointed out’ (cf. dis.t.i- ‘direction’).51 One more example is found in Burushaski 2 múc.i ‘plough handle’ borrowed < OIA mus.t.í- ‘clenched hand, fist’. There exist also a few reverse cases of metathesis of TS > ST in Nuristani and Dardic: (a) Palatal: Kamd. št"a- ‘consider, think over; ponder’ is cognate with OIA cintáyati ‘thinks’ and št"o ‘four’ (also Kt. štav"o) is cognate with OIA catva
rah;

Kt. štr"ov- ‘write; carve’ is cognate with OIA citráyati ‘decorates’; Turner lists Wg. pištik ‘goat or sheep dung’ sub OIA *pars.i- ‘cowdung’ (8139) which is phonetically problematic, borrowing from Psht. pača ‘dung’ is more plausible. (b) Dental: Retroflexed reflexes (s.t. of OIA st(h)- without metathesis and all without aspiration are found in Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: Kt. s.t."a ‘lump’ < OIA stábaka- ‘tassel’ and lex. ‘quantity, multitude’ (13675) and s.t."a ¯la ‘straight; true; honest’ < OIA sthála- ‘flat surface’; Wg. s.t.a “cord’ of wood; stored wood’52 < OIA stha
na- ‘storing-place’ ?53 But note with nasal consonant Wg. s.t.ana ‘cupboard on wall of beramganja [storage room]’; Pal. mus.t.ú ‘before; in front’ < OIA *mukhastha-.54 48 In the Girnar edict, OIA st is usually preserved and sth has changed into the usual th. 49 Metathesis and loss of aspiration but CDIAL gir. sest.a- is only (wrong rendering) of transcription (“. . . was aber nur die Transkription st. ist” [von Hinüber § 229]). 50 However, here the second palatal sibilant might also be due to CCH. 51 A comparable metathesis is also found in Iranian Pashto s.k¯ ul = ks.u ¯l ‘kiss’. 52 ‘Cord’ in the sense of German ‘Klafter’ which means ‘a cubic measure for firewood’. 53 In this case with loss of nasal consonant as e.g. in Pr. üšty’¯ u ‘post’ < OIA sthu
n a- ‘post, pillar’.

54 Other reflexes are Ind. mu 
th2 v ‘ahead, in front; front’, Wot.. mut.h ‘before; vor’ and perhaps

(2005) incorrectly reconstructed as *mukhasth¯ B.roh. muúntu ‘front’. In Zoller a-. The term is not found in the usual dictionaries, but according to Tennakoon Vimalananda (n.d., no pagination), traditional Brahmanic education of Ancient Ceylon is called until today mukhastha vidy¯ a.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

178

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

As can be seen in the following examples, in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı the retroflex sibilant was lost: timnO ‘to build, construct’ and timrO ‘construction (e.g., house, wall)’ < OIA

‘placed’ (13761, cf. there Or.

th¯ama ‘build’) via older *stim-; Bng. poet. *sth¯ amya. .. torO ‘buttocks’ < older *storO < OIA sth¯ urá- ‘the buttocks’.



Whereas in case of the sound change in the Girnar Ashoka edict with OIA s.t.h appearing as t.s the retroflexion of the dental stop must have occurred before the metathesis, there are also traces of metathesis before the retroflexion of the dental stop, thus OIA st(h)- > ts- and consequently > ch- (as in OIA tsaru- ‘handle of a sword’ > Pk. charu-). This seems to be the case in Brj. china ‘breast (male)’ (Gopalakrishnan [2011: 158]) for which I suggest derivation < older tsina < OIA stána- ‘female breast, nipple, udder’ with slight semantic change due to a number of other Brajbh¯ as.a¯ words for ‘female breast’ (including tatsama word asthan ‘breast of a woman’).55 Some more examples for this process, but in addition with deaffrication of ch > ś, are found in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı: śabru ‘old, useless; an old or useless man’ < older *chabru and < *ts(h)avru < OIA sthávira- ‘old, venerable’, śori ‘bull’ < older *chori and < *ts(h)ori < OIA lex. sth¯ ura- ‘bull’ or rather < OIA sthaurá- *‘strong’ (13780).56 Inherited Sk consonant clusters OIA and PIE (*)sk- > ś(k)-, s.k-, -s.The common outcome of this initial cluster in MIA and NIA is kh-57 (e.g. Masica [1991: 172] MIA khandha- < OIA skandhá- ‘shoulder’58 ) and in medial position it is MIA -kk(h)-. 1. However, Middle Indo-Aryan G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı has initial sk- > s.k- as e.g. in s.kabhadi < OIA skabhati ‘supports’. The same development is also found in Nuristani, e.g. Pr. üškyöb and üs.kyöb ‘bridge’ < OIA skambhá- ‘prop, pillar’, Kamd. s.k"ula- ‘to pick (teeth)’ (remove pieces of food from between teeth) < OIA *skavati ‘picks; pokes’ (13646) with extension perhaps < OIA tu
la- i.a. ‘pencil’ and suggested by Mayrhofer (EWA sub SKAV ) to derive from PIE *skeu(H) ‘to poke etc.’, and Kamd. s.k"ura ‘crooked’ probably < OIA s¯ ac¯ıkrta- ‘madecrooked’ (see 13329 and e.g. Wot.. kir ‘made’ < OIA krtá-); Pr. ps.l@‘sweepings’ < OIA *praskara ‘scattering’ (8854). 55 To my knowledge, Brajbh¯ as.¯ a has only a few cases of spontaneously aspirated unvoiced affricates but not of sibilants. Therefore, borrowing of Persian s¯ına ‘breast’ can be excluded. 56 Incidentally, there is also the ‘regular’ reflex of 13780 found in Bng. thorO, thori adj.,n.m.,n.f. ‘strong, young, potent; young deer, wild animal’ (cf. there Ku. thoro, thor¯ı ‘young buffalo bull’, Garh. thuret.u ‘the male calf of buffalo’ and here also Nuristani Pr. tr@ ‘bull’). The ‘young animal’ and ‘bull’ semantics can be compared also with MIA Gan. stora- ‘horse, packhorse’ and Av. staora‘large (domestic) animal’ deriving < PIE *steuros ‘ditto’. Contamination? 57 Occasionally, the cluster is also retained in Dardic languages, e.g. Kal. and Kho. iskóv ‘peg’ < OIA *skabha- ‘post, peg’ (13638) and Bro. sk@mba ‘nail of iron’ < OIA skambhá- ‘prop, pillar’. 58 Sub 13627, Turner writes “Absence of any trace of initial s- in Kafiri and Dardic supports possibility of IA. *kandha- – beside sko . . . ” In fact, reflexes of OIA *kandha- are also found in Brajbh¯ as.¯ a kaniy a, Doh¯ a-kos.a kandha, Bengali k adha, kandha etc., and Assamese kandH (also kan) all ‘shoulder’. This is a small but typical example for how the theory of Outer and Inner Languages works.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

179

2. Some examples for medial OIA -sk- > *-śk- > -ś- (and not to -kk[h]- as e.g. in Pk. n.amakk¯ ara- ‘obeisance’ < OIA namask¯ ará- ‘adoration’) are Bng. tO
ski arO ‘thief’ and tO
ski ari ‘theft’ (built with agent suffix -ki arO as in Bng. lu
skiarO ‘thief’ < OIA l¯ us.áyati ‘steals’) < OIA táskara- ‘robber, thief’, and Bng. cO
skO ‘a starting, recoiling, wincing (e.g. through chilly water or pain); a sudden and short apparition (e.g. of a ghost or of a god in a medium)’ < OIA *cassakk‘throb, twitch, sudden pain’ (4730) and similar Bng. ja
skO ‘wincing, startling’ < OIA *jhassakk- (cf. OIA *jhass- ‘sudden movement’ [5360]),59 Chittagongian B.chit. nO
sar ‘greeting’ (Učida [1970]) also < OIA namask¯ ará- (with preservation of inherited accent position), Rohingya B.roh. guś´í or górguśśi ‘family < OIA gos.t.h¯ı- ‘assembly, meeting place’ (and < OIA ghara- ‘house’), and afiśśa ‘ungrinded’ probably < OIA *apis.t.a- and perhaps hãsa ‘truth, fact, veracity’ < OIA astitva- ‘existence’. The same sound change is still occasionally operative as I could observe with some Hindu Mult¯ an¯ı speakers from Afghanistan who pronounce the tatsama word as.t.am¯ı ‘the eighth day of a lunar fortnight (especially that during navar¯ atri)’ as aśami (but Pa. at.t.ham¯ı-). Notes: (i) Regarding the etymology of OIA táskara-, I follow the interpretation of Paul Thieme who argued (1972: 79) that it is the outcome of metathesis of OIA *tsaraka- ‘lurker, sneaker’ ← TSAR ‘sneak, stalk’ which, for instance according to Mayrhofer (EWA), probably derives itself < PIE *t-sel- < *d-sel- ‘an-schleichen’ (‘sneak up’).60 This common interpretation was rejected by Lubotsky and Kroonen (2009), who for instance argue that a zero-grade of *h2 ed is almost unknown and this preverb is anyway not found in Indo-Iranian (ibid.). They argue that the ‘prefixed’ root (with parallels in Iranian Pamir languages like Shughni sa  r-d i.a. ‘to steal, lie in ambush’ < older *tsär-) must be of PIE origin because of parallels in Armenian, Irish, Lithuanian, and Germanic. However, in contrast with their lucid deconstructions of previous interpretations, their own conclusions are disappointing (2009: 240): “It seems plausible to assume that the PIE root *tsel- originally was a compound with a nominal first part (of which only *t- is left) and the aoristic root *sel- ‘to start moving’ . . . ” (ii) Ko. šempat.o ‘fin’ most likely derives < OIA *skambha-2 ‘shoulder-blade, wing, plumage’ (13640) with a semantic parallel in Mult. khambhar.a ¯ ‘fin’ (and apparently similar extension), but due to a rather confusing behavior and status of the Konkani phones [s] and [S], it remains unclear whether /sem-/ or /śem-/ is the correct phonological form. (iii) A sound change sk > šk is also known from Balochi, e.g. in išk¯ ar ‘(char)coal, ember’ (also Wakhi šok¯ arč ‘coal, ashes’ but Psht. sk¯ or and Pers. sik¯ ar ‘live coal’). (iv) Regarding Mult. aśami: The Mult¯ an¯ı dialect of Siraiki (or Lahnd¯ a) constitutes a southwestern form of Panjabi. Even though Mult¯ an¯ı distinguishes phonetically between a dental [s] and a palatal [S] the phonemic status of ś is somewhat unclear because it ist easy to see that the three OIA sibilants have collapsed into Mult¯ an¯ı s (e.g. Mult. âes 59 Or both rather cases of CCH? 60 More precisely: “. . . with . . . zero-grade of the PIE preverb *h2 ed, i.e. *h2 d-sel” (Lubotsky and Kroonen [2009: 237]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

180

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

‘country’). On the other hand, Christopher Shackle claims phonemic status for Panjabi /s/ and /ś/ (2003: 589) on the basis of minimal pairs like sal ‘year’ vs. śal ‘shawl’. Since the latter is a borrowing from Persian, this looks like a re-phonemization in the ways known from Hindi. However, the situation in Mult¯ an¯ı is slightly more complex. One feature characterizing Outer Languages is deaffrication (se p. 117ff., e.g., Kal. šuthúr ‘umbrella’ < OIA cháttra-, [apparently with rightshift of the initial aspiration]). This tendency is hardly ever found in Inner Languages like Sanskrit or Hindi, but it is found also in Mult¯ an¯ı. A few examples: kaśśak ‘rope of arch of saddle’ < Pa. kacch¯ a- ‘belt’ < OIA kaksya - ‘girdle, girth’, g¯ oś¯ a ‘cluster of flowers or fruits’ < OIA guccha- ‘bunch of

flowers’ (4172), śakl¯ o ‘the honey of wasps’ < OIA cakrá- ‘wheel’ (regarding semantics cf. e.g. H. mau-c¯ ak ‘honeycomb’), śat.al¯ı ‘falsehood, a lie’ < OIA c¯ at.a- ‘rogue, cheat’ (4735), śarn¯ a ‘pipe’ < OIA cáran.a- ‘course’.

Inherited Sp consonant clusters OIA and PIE (*)sp- > s.p, šp or > s, s.p > s. 1. Wg. s.p˜ek ‘spleen’ (Strand, but Turner has sp e ‘spleen’) and Paš. šparga ‘spleen’ derive more or less directly < OIA *spl¯ıhan- ‘spleen’ (9028). 2. Bng. u
spOdinO ‘to be (internally) excited’ — Kho. ušpunik, išpunik (Lorimer)

‘to dance about, buck (of a horse)’; išpunik (Morgenstierne) ‘to hop, dance’ < OIA *ut-spandati ‘jumps up’ (1909)? Turner: “(doubtful bec. of š, not s.: poss. < spandate, but if so why not is-?. . . )”. 3. Brj.-Aw. bas¯ a, bis¯ a ‘wasp’ (Callewaert and Sharma [2009: 1385]) may derive < OIA *vaspi- ‘wasp’ (11451) like Kho. bispí ‘wasp’. Regarding mainstream developments of rare OIA sp cf. OIA b
rhasp
ati- ‘name of a deity’ > Pk. Pk. bihassaï-. This is similar to the bihapp(h)aï but also, kind of remarkable, > occasional change of OIA ts > ss only at juncture of word components like OIA ut-s¯ aha- > Pa. uss¯ aha- (or OIA b
rhas-p
ati-) (von Hinüber § 237). 4. Gan. pus.u- ‘flower’ and Sv. pus. ‘blossom’ and Sh.gur. pus.u ‘flower’ and Bro. p¯ us.o ‘flower’ (Ramaswami [1975: 32]) < OIA pús.pa- ‘flower’ (but Pk. pupphaand puhapa-). Note also borrowing into Toch.B pus.* ‘albugo’ (a particular disease of the eye) ← OIA pús.pa- ‘albugo’.

Note: The following ‘flower’ words are with palatal (or dental) sibilant: Tor. pušu ‘flower’ (Z.), Wot.. puš ‘flower’, Ks. pooš ‘flower’, Dm. puš ‘flower’ and Mult. “puss¯ı” ‘flower of kar ” ’ (Capparis aphylla) (O’Brien) are probably not < OIA pús.pa- but < OIA pús.y¯ a- ‘a kind of plant’ with common (but not exclusive) change of s.ya > ša.

Inherited ST consonant clusters (a) OIA st > s The common MIA outcome of this cluster was th; examples with dental -st- clusters

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

181

reflected as -s- are common in Kalami but also in various other Outer Languages. The following sound changes have not been described by Indian grammarians or in modern textbooks. 1. Bhil. poet. asan¯ apur ‘Hastin¯ apura’ (capital of the P¯ an.d.ava heroes61 of the Mah¯ abh¯ arata) (Patel [2000: 38]). 2. Klm. is Hy ‘woman < OIA str
- with parallels in Kalk. and R¯ aj. is ‘woman; wife’ (Z.). 3. Klm. päläs Hy ‘goat-hair rug’ < OIA praty¯ ast¯ ara- ‘the carpet of a Buddhist Bhikshu’. 4. Kal. and Kho. pas ‘chest, breasts’ (Kho. also p¯ az [O’Brien] but Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics paz ‘chest’), Wkh. puz ‘rib, breast’, Yid. fiz ‘breast’ might be borrowings ← Pers. pist¯ an ‘female breast’ which is < PIE *psténos ‘woman’s breast’. However, semantics and lack of nasal consonant are problematic. Note: Somewhat similar-looking Pr. v"užik ‘breast’ might be rather borrowing from Kartvelian, cf. Zan (Laz) buZu, buZi ‘woman’s breast’ reflecting Common Kartvelian *buZ-ul- ‘woman’s breast’.

5. Klm. bis¯ın L ‘wide, broad’ < OIA vist¯ırn.a- ‘spread out, extensive’. 6. Bhil. maskal ‘head’ (Patel [2000: iii]) is a reflex of OIA *mastatalaka- ‘surface of head’ (9927) or a closely related form.62 7. Pal. síndu ‘wet’ < OIA *stinta- ‘wet’ (13693). 8. Brj.-Aw. hasi ‘hand’ < OIA hásta- hand’ (Callewaert and Sharma [2009: 2181]).

Inherited ST consonant clusters (b) OIa s.t. > s. (or > s in languages with one sibilant) The common MIA outcome of this clusters was t.h. The following sound changes have not been described by Indian grammarians or in modern textbooks. 1. Brj-Aw. anais ‘bad’ < OIA anis.t.a- ‘bad’ (but Pa. anit.t.ha-, Pk. an.it.t.ha-) (Callewaert and Sharma [2009: 66]). 2. Sh.koh. as. ‘eight’ < OIA ast a
-.

thi- with lex. meaning ‘bone of elbow or knee’. 3. Kal. as. ‘shoulder’ < OIA as .. 4. Bng. tO
stO
sO ‘rough, prickly, scratchy, uneven, rugged; dry and hoarse (as voice)’ < OIA trs.t.á- ‘harsh, rough’ (but Pa. tit.t.ha-).  61 The Bh¯ıl¯ı word is used in the Bh¯ıl¯ı oral Mah¯ abh¯ arata tradition. Interestingly, in an oral Mah¯ abh¯ arata tradition in the Kumaon Himalayas (Uttarakhand), the same name of the capital is pronounced as hatin¯ apur¯ı with standard Prakrit outcome (Pant [2018: 20]). 62 Cf. also Bhil. kasna ‘Krishna’ (Patel [2000: iii]) but Pa. kan.ha- ‘dark, black’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

182

Chapter 6. Consonant cluster assimilations and simplifications

5. Kamd. and Kt. ps."a ‘shaman; seer’, San.. “pas.â:r"a” ‘shaman; seer’ (Strand), Pr. [email protected]"¯ı ‘shaman’ and Pal. phus.’a ‘seer’ are all cognate with OIA (S)PAŚ ‘see’ but seem to derive (or are borrowed) < OIA (s)pas.t.á- i.a. ‘one who sees clearly’.63 6. Ind. bh as ‘filled air (in lungs, balloon, etc.)’ < OIA *bh¯as.ma- ‘vapour, steam’ (9223).64

7. Ind r
2s ‘light’ < OIA raśmí- ‘ray of light’. 8. Ind. l es ‘type of peacock’ < OIA *l¯ ohis.t.ha- ‘very red’ (11169.)

similar Gan. susma- ‘fine’ < OIA su 9. Note also
ksma- (but Pa. sukhuma-). .

Note: Regarding above-quoted OIA *bh¯ as.ma-, there are also Nuristani and Dardic reflexes with dental sibilant: Kamd. and Kt. b"os ‘steam; gas; power’, San.. b"a ¯s ‘ditto’, Ash. bas ‘steam’, dialectal Paš. b¯ as, base etc. ‘steam’. T. Burrow has suggested (see CDIAL 9223) relationship between OIA b¯ as.pa- (< *v¯ apsa- [comparable with OIA *vaspi- ‘wasp’ < PIE *uopseh2 ‘wasp’ ?]) and Latin vapor which is usually, but not  undisputedly, derived < *wáp¯ os ‘vapor, steam’ < Proto-Italic *kuap- < PIE *k(u)h2 iep  ‘smoke’ (see de Vaan [2011: 654]).

The same trend is also found in Pashto with old clusters with -s-. Two examples: 1. l¯ as ‘hand’ (but l¯ asta ‘direction’) is either borrowing from Pers. dast or < *Dastathrough dissimilation < Av. zasta-. 2. a¯s ‘horse’ < Av. aspa- (also Wkh. yaš and Khot. ašša- both ‘horse’). Inherited Sn and Sm consonant clusters OIA sn > š(v)n or š and s.m > s. (or > s in languages with one sibilant) and sm > s.m 1. Kal. is.marék ‘to count’ < OIA sm¯ arayati ‘causes to remember’ and Klm. “shimeroo-” ‘to remember’ (Biddulph) with svarabhakti < OIA smárati ‘remembers’ are the only examples known to me for OIA sm > s.m. 2. Jat.. v¯ıs¯ı ‘smile’ (Jukes [1900: 330]) < OIA vismaya- ‘wonder’.65 3. Rudh. śina and K. ś¯ın ‘snow’ < OIA snih- ‘wetness, moisture’ (via *šni-). 4. Shum. šinán, dialectal Paš. šen"a¯n etc. ‘a bath, swimming’ — Brj.-Aw. asn an

in ‘bathing’ (besides asan¯ an) (Callewaert and Sharma [2009: 130, 133]), and Mult¯ an¯ı of Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan šn¯ an ‘bath’ (Z.) is common parlance < OIA sn¯ ana- ‘bathing’.66 63 Also cognate seems to be Garh. pasv¯ a, paśv¯ a ‘jis par dev¯ atm¯ a prakat. hokar n¯ act¯ı hai — one [person] in whom a divine spirit appears and dances’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) with suffix -v¯ a← common -iy¯ a agent suffix. 64 Here cognate is also Šat.. b2sk2l
3 (with --k2l
3 prob. meaning ‘cloud’) and Pal. b¯ažg"al¯a

(Morgenstierne) resp. b¯ az.galô" (Strand) and Sh. bas.aloó all ‘steam’ < OIA *b¯ as.ma- (also 9223) (but Or. b¯ ampha). 65 On this special development of OIA (-)sm- in Pali see von Hinüber (§ 243). 66 For the palatal sibilant in the Shum. word Turner assumes – I think unnecessarily – interference of Pers. šin¯ a ‘swimming’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

6.1. Inherited consonant clusters

183

5. K¯ als¯ı rock inscription s.ineha- ‘affection’ < OIA sneha- ‘love’ (Hultzsch [1935: lxxiv, lxxvi, 45, 208]).. 6. Mult. huss ‘sultriness’, S. usa ‘sunshine’, L. huss, hussar. ‘sultriness’, Bhal. hussar. ‘heat’ < OIA u ¯s.mán- ‘heat, steam’ (2441) (note also Pa. usum¯ a- ‘heat’ but Pk. umha-).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 7 Segmental and suprasegmental processes

On the nominal accent system in Proto-Indo-European very briefly in sum: nouns typically bore an accent on the first syllable (barytone) or on the last syllable (oxytone) (very rarely also in-between). Thus, the position of the accent was not predictable and phonetically it rather seems to have been a pitch accent with characteristic F0 contours (e.g. ‘rising’ or ‘falling’) rather than a chromatic tone system. Moreover, any word could carry only one pitch accent. And if the phonological system had just one pitch accent ‘toneme’ – which seems to have been the case in Proto-Indo-European – then mono-syllabic words were unmarked with regard to pitch accent.1 I will deal in much more detail with the accent system in Indus Kohistani and other languages in that area in the second volume of my Indus Kohistani grammar and therefore limit myself here to some basic observations. Burushaski and Shina have nearly identical phonological pitch accent systems where an accent can, perhaps with some restrictions, appear on any syllable of a word (i.e. also in the second syllable of trisyllabic words, like Classical Sanskrit). In case of long vowels there is also a contrast between a rising and a falling contour. This is usually analyzed on the basis of the mora: if the pitch accent is on the first mora of a long monophthong, there is a falling contour, and if it is on the second mora a rising contour appears. Indus Kohistani has quite a similar pitch accent system, but with a major difference consisting in the fact that in case of short vowels there is not always etic neutralization of the two contours and the emic opposition is anyway preserved (Zoller 2005). A number of researchers on Dardic languages have adopted the ‘mora view’ and present pitch accents in this way: v ´v ‘falling contour on a long vowel’, v´ v ‘rising contour on a long vowel’. I, instead, use for Indus Kohistani this notation: v ´ ‘rising contour on a short vowel’, v ` ‘falling contour on a short vowel’, v
‘rising contour on a long vowel’, v ‘falling 1 A major difference between pitch accent and tone languages is a matter of pitch accent complexity. For instance, Pashto is a pitch accent language with probably only one pitch contour (see Cheung [2009-2010]), Indus Kohistani has two (Zoller [2005 and above note] and Kalam Kohistani distinguishes between five different contours (see Baart [1997]). In case of Pashto and Indus Kohistani, the position of a pitch accent in a word is basically free and not predictable. This is similar to the situation in Proto-Indo-European language, although I do not know any publication explaining the phonetic details of the PIE accent.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

186

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

contour on a long vowel’. This also means that in Indus Kohistani the system of contrastive barytonic versus oxytonic positions changed into a system in which almost always accentual minimal pair contrasts appear on the same syllable in barytonic or oxytonic position in case of polysyllabic word, but this opposition is also maintained on monosyllabic words2 (in contrast to Burushaski, Shina, Vedic and PIE) as e.g. in Ind. kh
2m ‘wooden fence around a grave’ (‘rising’) versus kh2m ‘a glutton’ (‘falling’). A very rare near-minimal pair with different accent positions is Ind. m2ruz ‘brown mustard’ versus m2ru z ‘a gold washer’. Here an example of a barytone versus oxytone opposition in Proto-Indo-European ´ and Old Indo-Aryan: PIE *déksinos ‘right’ (OIA dáks.in.a- ‘right [hand]; southern’) versus PIE *gordebhós ‘wild ass’ (OIA gardabhá- ‘ass’). There are many more such contrastive pairs in Vedic Sanskrit which confirm that Proto-Indo-European nominal accentuation is fairly authentically reflected in Vedic Sanskrit. Although in a lesser number of cases and not always as accurately as in Vedic Sanskrit, the same ProtoIndo-European accent system has survived in modern Dardic and somewhat less accurate in Nuristani and even less accurate in Pashto, but has also survived at the eastern edge of new Indo-Aryan in Chittagongian and Rohingya language, as many examples below will illustrate. With reference to the same two PIE lemmata ‘right’ and ‘ass’, cf. e.g. Dardic Kalasha dr a
cui ‘right hand’3 and Khowar gord"oG ‘donkey’

[4054]) or Nuristani Waigal¯ı gad"a ‘donkey’, (Strand reconstructs OIA gardhaba-kaetc. Since I have named also the two eastern NIA languages, there are also Rohingya doóinor ‘southern’ and Chittagongian dóin ‘southern; südlich’, and Rohingya gadá ‘donkey’. Pashto distinguishes between oxytone and barytone places of accent as in áxli ‘takes’ versus kawí ‘does’ and there are a few minimal pairs like áspa ‘mare’ versus aspá ‘a disease’ (Skjærvœ 1989b: 389). This is a little different from New Persian which has mostly oxytone accent, and barytone accent only in a few cases. Also Mayrhofer notes with regard to some eastern Iranian languages (1989: 13): ‘Although deviations must not be overlooked, the correspondence in informant languages such as Paš.t¯o, Wax¯ı and Yidgha-Munˇȷ¯ı with the Vedic tones is worthy of serious attention’.4 Here to be mentioned is also Fridrik Thordarson (1986: 502, 504f.) who discusses the possible continued existence of the Aryan free accent in the medieval Alan proto-dialect. In an apparently little-known article by Morgenstierne (1973d), a number of examples are discussed and the author states at the end of the article that “. . . it seems to me that the main fact, the survival in Psht. of traces of the IE accent, cannot be rejected.” 2 There are, however, also certain conditions under which accent contrasts get neutralized. 3 Which might have been built with a second component as there are several reflexes sub 6119 with nasal extensions and word-final accent which may be due to compounding with a reflex of OIA p¯ an.í- ‘hand’ (8045). A clearer example from Kalasha is e.g. ástru ‘a tear’, which is cognate with ´ OIA áśru- and PIE *(d)h2 ékru-. Traces of the Vedic accent in Kalasha have also been pointed out by Jan Heegård 2012. 4 Mayrhofer: “Wiewohl Abweichungen nicht übersehen werden dürfen, sind die Übereinstimmungen in Informantensprachen wie Paš.t¯ o, Wax¯ı und Yidgha-Munˇȷ¯ı mit den vedischen Tonstellen ernster Beachtung wert.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

187

Finally I want to mention the recent major publication on stress in Pasho by Cheung (2009-2010) who provides also a good survey of previous work. Whereas it seems that the ‘conversational language’ spoken at the time of P¯ an.ini in northwestern India – only centuries later called Sanskrit – still knew a distinctive accent (Houben 2017, footnote 5 [no pagination]), there are no traces left in simultaneously or slightly later spoken Pali, and therefore von Hinüber concludes (§ 159) that the Vedic accent cannot contribute anything to the development of the shape of the Middle Indo-Aryan languages. On the other hand, there cannot be any doubt that the Vedic accent continued to exercise its distinctive functions in peripheral languages including eastern Iranian and easternmost Indo-Aryan. It must have also continued to exist in G¯andh¯ ar¯ı or at least in the spoken Middle Indo-Aryan dialects based on which the written G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı canon was created and handed down. There is no other way to explain the partial survival of the Vedic accent in modern Dardic languages. This development from a system of free distinctive pitch accents in Vedic Sanskrit to their complete disappearance in Standard Prakrit (including Pali) must not have occurred instantly (see Wackernagel [1896 § 243]). Originally, the Proto-IndoEuropean free accent could realize minimal pairs as in PIE *tómh1 os ‘a cutting’ versus tomh1 ós ‘sharp’ (reflected in Greek 𝜏 𝑜´𝜇𝑜𝜍 versus 𝜏𝑜𝜇 𝑜´𝜍, see IEW: 1063). This pattern has partially survived in the languages and areas mentioned in the preceding paragraph. In contrast, the accent in Classical Sanskrit represents a kind of interim stage towards disappearance by maintaining its physical presence but losing its distinctive function. Mayrhofer describes it thus (1993: 25, § 31):

The Sanskrit stress is very similar to that of Latin: in polysyllabic words the penultimate syllable is stressed if it is natura or positione long; if the penultimate is short, the third from last is emphasized; unlike in Latin, the tone can move to the fourth from the last syllable if it is the root syllable and if the penultimate and third from last syllables are short.5

In other words: Like the loss of distinctive aspiration contrasts in Iranian and Nuristani (and some Dardic lects), the distinctive pitch accent contrast was lost on its way from Vedic to Classical Sanskrit. Again, like preservation of phonetic aspiration in Nuristani but loss of phonological distinction, a phonetic ‘pitch accent’ survived in Classical Sanskrit but also with loss of phonological distinctive power. This intermediate state resembles to some extend the traces one finds in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı as will be shown below.

5 Mayrhofer: “Die Betonung des Sanskrit ist der des Lateinischen sehr ähnlich: in mehrsilbigen Wörtern wird die vorletzte Silbe betont, wenn sie natura oder positione lang ist; ist die vorletzte kurz, wird die drittletzte betont; anders als im Lateinischen, kann der Ton auch auf die viertletzte Silbe rücken, wenn sie die Wurzelsilbe ist und wenn die vorletzte und drittletzte Silbe kurz sind.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

188

7.1

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Dardic

Before I start with a closer look at the state of preservation of the Vedic accent in Dardic, I want to mention for the sake of completeness that with reference to Masica and Bubenik, Kümmel points out (2014: 4 in the online version) that Mah¯ ar¯ as.t.r¯ı/Mar¯ at.h¯ı has partly preserved the Vedic position of stress. Bubenik, however, presents just two examples and one wonders how general the rule, namely that word-internal lenition was blocked when followed by the accent, applied (see 2003: 219 in Cardona and Jain). Out of the roughly one hundred Indus Kohistani words deriving from OIA words with accent marking, the accent location of the highest number corresponds with the position in OIA. I include here cases where trisyllabic oxytone OIA words got reduced to disyllabic words with accent now on the second syllable. This high percentage of correspondences cannot be an accident. Of course, there are many more accented OIA words with reflexes in Indus Kohistani, but most disyllabic OIA words became monosyllabic in Indus Kohistani and therefore do not disclose the older accent position. Note also that Indus Kohistani verb stems never carry the accent, except under specific phonological conditions when the accent is pushed from the grammeme ending onto the stem (described in the forthcoming second volume of the Grammar of Indus Kohistani). Here are some examples from Indus Kohistani:

2r2s ‘having bad taste’6 < OIA arasá- ‘sapless’ (606), t¯ambàh ‘copper’ < OIA t¯amrá‘copper-coloured’ (5779), pu ra v ‘pebble and small stones used as filler between outer and inner wall of a house’ (Bng. p¯ ur1 ‘ditto’) < OIA pu
rana- ‘act of filling’ (8332)

versus pur a ‘old’ < OIA pur¯an.á- ‘ancient’ (8283), kh2n-m2yu r ‘type of mountain pheasant’ (first component meaning ‘mountain’) < OIA mayu
ra- ‘peacock’ (9865), m2su r ‘type of pulse’ < OIA masu
ra- ‘lentil’ (9924), m olu
‘mother’s brother’ < OIA m¯ atulá- ‘mother’s brother’ (10009), mung2y

‘type of pulse’ < OIA mudgá- (10198) ‘the bean Phaseolus mungo’, mundr  and Gau. mudr
7 ‘an earring in lobe for women’ < OIA mudr a
- ‘signet-ring’ (10203), mùsul ‘pestle’ < OIA músala- ‘pestle’ (10223),
r an  ‘tomorrow’ < OIA rajan
 ‘night’ (10579). Among the less than a dozen cases where the Indus Kohistani accent does not appear a the ‘right’ place, there are several parallels in other Dard languages with the correct position of the accent: gùzur ‘a Gujar’ but Kal. guˇȷúr ‘ditto’ < OIA gurjará-; tam2y 
s1 ‘twilight’ but Kal. trómiš ‘evening’ < OIA támisr¯a- ‘dark night’ (also Psht.

tór-a ‘black’); m2k a ‘monkey’ but Kal. ma.kó.yak ‘ditto’ < OIA markát.a-; sut
2r ‘carpenter’s line’ but Pal. súutr ‘ditto’ < OIA su
tra- ‘thread’. Here follows a list, which is far away from exhaustive, with further examples from different Dard languages, in most cases with at least two modern reflexes. It will be 6 An accented short vowel before -s has always a falling contour. 7 Due to shortage of time I could not conduct a pitch accent analysis with Gauro with the help of a speech analyzer in the way I did with Indus Kohistani. Thus, v ´ means just an accented syllable in Gauro.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.1. Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Dardic

189

seen that, besides the many correspondences with OIA accent, there are also a few cases where several modern reflexes have the accent at the same place, but a different one at the OIA word. Repeatedly the place of the Nuristani accents differs from that of the Dardic correspondences. I assume that in Nuristani – at least in Waigal¯ı – the position of the accent became mostly frozen on the ultimate syllable, in typical Iranian fashion. Thus usually Nuristani forms are only quoted when their accents differ from the expected ultimate position. But not always all published Dard forms are quoted here. However, all deviations from the expected accent positions are quoted. Note also that I point out below some obvious mistakes found in the CDIAL. All Shina and Indus Kohistani forms below have only been taken from Schmidt and Kaul, from Radloff and myself, and all these persons have worked with a speech analyzer and their data are therefore more reliable than the ones found in the CDIAL. Especially unreliable in the CDIAL are the data from Bashkar¯ık (Bshk.) which is the same as Kalami or Kalam Kohistani. Since the works of Joan Baart we know that this is not a pitch accent language but a more complicated tone language with five contrastive surface tones. Thus, until the CDIAL data are rechecked with a speech analyzer, scepticism regarding the described deviating accent positions in the CDIAL is to be called for. 1. *angúd ˙ . i- (cf. sub 135 angúli˙ and *ang¯ ˙ ud.i-) ‘finger’ — Sh. hagúy, Pal. angúr ˙ . i, Ind. 2ngu

, Wot. angír ˙ . , Sv. angur ˙ . í, Pr. u g"u  , ig"¯ı (but in dialect of Is.t.ev¯ı " ugu  ) ‘finger, toe’, but Turner quotes also Bshk. áng¯ ˙ ır, all ‘finger’. His quote of Sh.jij. hágur.i ‘first finger’ appears incorrect because he also quotes hagúr.u ‘thumb’ and I am unaware of accent shifts in that region connected with change of grammatical gender; note also that Schmidt and Kaul actually give for Sh.koh. (which is basically the same as Sh.jij.) hagví ‘finger’ (2008: 258). 2. angus ˙ . t.há- ‘thumb’ — Bshk. angúc ˙ . , Tor. ang

u
th, Sh. agút.o all ‘thumb’; here perhaps also Psht. gúta ‘finger’ (Morgenstierne 1973: 62) or rather preceding entry? 3. áśru- ‘tear’ — Sh.  aa
so ‘tear’, Kal. ástru ‘tear’ (see 919) — Psht. óˇ xa ‘tear’

for which Morgenstierne (ibid.) suggests possible derivation < pl. *asruw¯ a. But note also Klm. äsum H(L) ‘a tear’ with same nasal consonant as in Gr. 𝛿´ 𝛼 𝜅 𝜚 𝜐¯𝜇𝛼 ‘tear’. 4. áśva- ‘horse’ — Sh.  a
spo ‘horse’, Kt. vús.up ‘horse’, Psht. áspa ‘mare’. 5. a¯k¯ aśá- ‘sky’ — Sh. hagaáy, Pal. aaghaá, Sv. aug a
s but Bshk. a
ga all ‘sky’ (cf. AMg. a¯g¯ as). 6. a¯n.d.á- ‘egg’ — Sh. han.eé, Pal. han.oó, Ind. 2 rah , Sv. an.d.ó but Kal. ón.d.rak, Dm.


ának, Shum. ara all ‘egg’.

7. a¯ntrá- ‘entrails’ — Pr. @tr"¯e ‘intestines’ — Pal. aandáaru intestines’, Kal. idr o


‘small intestines’ but Turner quotes Sh.jij.
Ozi which actually may derive from or be influenced by OIA ántara- ‘interior’ .

¯ . a¯d.ha’ 8. a¯s.a¯d.há- ‘the month June-July’ and *¯ as.a¯d.h¯ıya- ‘pertaining to the month As — Ind. 2h a
r ‘middle of summer’ and, with same accent position, Pal. aas.aár. and Kal. as.á. i both ‘apricot’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

190

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

9. ós.t.ha- ‘lip’ — Sh.  o
oto but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me.

10. kán.t.aka- ‘thorn’ — Sh. kón.o ‘thorn’ but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me. 11. gurú- and *udguru- ‘very heavy’ for which I suggest actually *udgurú- — Ind. ugúru , Gau. ugúr, Dm. ugúra, Urtsun dialect of Kal. agu
rak, Sv. ug@r
o all ‘heavy’, Sh. ăgúr˘ u and Kal. ungúri ˙ both ‘pregnant’ but also Pal. úguro ‘heavy’. 12. jára- *‘old’ — Sh. and Sh.pales. járo ‘old’ but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me. 13. j¯ ará- ‘paramour of a married woman’ (cf. Lat. gnarus ‘knowledgeable; kundig’) — Sh. jarí ‘paramour’, Sh.koh. jaró ‘ditto’. Kal. ˇȷaró.a ‘bastard, illegitimate child’ is < OIA *j¯ arakud.a- ‘paramour’s son’ (5207) but actually reflects *j¯ arákud.a-. Regarding origin somehow not as clear are Ind. z¯ aràh ‘adultery’ hi (< OIA j¯ aríya- ‘intimacy’ ?) and z ar
2t ‘paramour’ for which I tentatively suggested derivation < OIA *j¯ arabet.t.a- (there is also the regular monosyllabic reflex z a
r ‘paramour’). The Ind. form z ar
2thi appears to be especially close to Him. (Bashahar) jh¯ at.u ‘an illegitimate son’.

14. jus.t.á- *‘tasted’, ‘remnants of a meal’ — Pal. ˇȷhut.á ‘dirty; defiled’, Ind. zhuit a

‘dirty, defiled’ (both with fronting of debuccalized -s.-).
15. t araka- ‘star’ versus t¯araká- ‘belonging to the stars’ — Sh. táaro, Pal. tóoru, Kal. tári, Gaw. t a
ra- versus Wg. tará, t¯ará8 all ‘star’. 16. dharán.¯ı- ‘ground’ — Bshk. d2r
n, Sv. daharín. (with ‘phoneme splitting’), Pal. dhar
an, dahar a
n (also with phoneme splitting), Ind. dh2r  all ‘ground, earth’.

17. n
la- ‘dark blue’ — Pal. níilu, Kal. níla both ‘blue’ but Wg. nilí ‘black goat’ and Kamd. nil
@ ‘black’ are due to Iranian accent pattern. 18. páttra- ‘leaf’ — Sh. pát.o ‘leaf’, Pal. phút.i ‘blade’. 19. p¯ an.d.urá- ‘white’ — Pal. pan.áaru, Ind. p2n2r, Sv. paran.ó (with metathesis) all ‘white’. 20. picchilá- ‘slippery’ — Kal. pičhíla ‘to slip’, Ind. pi˙chíli , Bshk. pic a
l ‘slippery’. 21. paútra- ‘son’s son’ — Sh. póoc.o ‘grandson’ and note also Pal. púutri granddaughter’. 22. bhr a
tr- ‘brother’ — Bro. "baayo, Sir.d.od.. br a
u, Kal. báya all ‘brother’.  ‘thought, prayer, spell, counsel’ — Kho. mátruk ‘omen reading’ 23. mántra24. mástaka- ‘head’ — Sh. máto, Kal. másta both ‘brain’ but Gaw. masták. 25. m a
nusa- ‘man’ — Pal. móon.us., Sv. m
Onus, m
onus, Gaw. m a
nus, Bshk. m a
nus







all ‘man’.
26. mu sika- ‘mouse, rat’ — Sh. múuj.i ‘mouse, rat’ (regarding voicing cf. Psht. maz.ak

‘mouse’), Sv. mús.o ‘mouse’. 27. yantrá- ‘any implement or contrivance’ — Bhat.. z andra
h ‘a lock (for closing)’ but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me. 28. r a
tr - ‘night’ — Sh. ráati ‘night’ but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me.

8 I heard the first vowel as half long.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.1. Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Dardic

191

29. lavítra- ‘sickle’ — Sh.koh. léec.i but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me and the Sh.koh. accent cannot unambiguously allocated to the -a- or -í-. 30. vasantá- ‘spring season’ — Pr. vust"e ‘spring season’ — Ind. b2s a
n, Sh. bazo
ono,
Pal. basaánd, Wot.. basán, Sv. bas an but Kal. básond and Bshk. básan all ‘spring season’. ´ 31. v a
ri- ‘water’ — Sh. bári ‘pond’ and Sh.dras. b+iri ‘lake’, Bur. phári ‘pond’ (regarding the Bur. initial consonant cf. also Ind. bh2
yri ‘artificial pond’ which is, however, quasi monosyllabic, as well as Garh. bhOr ‘krtrim t¯ al¯ ab – artificial  pond’). 32. śaran.á- ‘shelter’ — Pr. šir"¯e ‘autumn’ — Sh. šaróon ‘roof’ but no further disyllabic parallels with accent marking are known to me. 33. śarád- and *śaradda- ‘autumn’ — Pal. šaraál, Sv. sar o
, Paš., Shum., Bshk. and Wot.. with same accent position šarád all ‘autumn’ but Ind. s2r2l and Kho. šóro ‘autumn’. 34.
s
rnga

- ‘horn’ — Sh.gil. s.íno, ˙ Sh.koh. s.ígo ‘ditto’.  35. śváśura‘father-in-law’ — Sh. šáyur, Kal. išpášur both ‘father-in-law’ but Gaw. plosu
r, Kho. išpašúr and Pr. i.a. čüˇȷ"o¯. .
36. su ra-, su
riya-, su
r - ‘sun’ — Pal. súuri, Kal. súri, Sv. su
ri, also Tir. and Shum.

but Ning. ˙ sur  and Gaw. s ur  all ‘sun’. 37. sthu
n a- ‘pillar’ — Pal. thúun.i ‘pillar’ but no further parallels with accent

marking are known to me. 38. h
rdaya- ‘heart’ — Sh. hío (Turner quotes Sh.koh. hió but this is certainly wrong  because Schmidt and Kaul quote for all Shina dialects only forms with accent on the first syllable [2008: 259]), Pal. hír.u (Liljegren, but Turner gives hir o
which also is probably a hearing mistake), Kal. hí.a, Ind. hìu, Tir. wúr.@, but Sv. hir.ó all ‘heart’. 39. hemantá- ‘winter’ — Pal. heevaánd, Ind. hiv a
n, Gaw. hemánd, Kho. yomún, Sv. hem a
nd, but Kal. héman, Shum. yéman and Tir.
eman all ‘winter’ perhaps due to influence of OIA hím¯ a- ‘winter’. The preservation of the Vedic accent is also quite clearly demonstrated with the cardinal numbers ‘eleven’ to ‘twenty’, even though there are some deviations from the original positions. In some cases the motive seems to be to generalize a certain position. 40. ék¯ adaśa- ‘11’ — Bro. "qudeš (note dental stop), Bshk. íkyah but Ind. 2g al2s, Sh. akáay and same ultimate stress position in Sv. and Phal. 41. dv a
da
sa- ‘12’ — Bro. "budeš (with -¯a- > -u- and note dental stop). 42. duv a
da
sa- ‘12’ — Ind. doA l2s, Paš. duv a
i. a
s. 43. tráyodaśa- ‘13’ — but Ind. cig ol2s and Gaw. lov

44. cáturdaśa- — Ind. c 2nd2s, Sh. coóndei, Sh.koh. cahu 
dee, but the other Dard and Nuristan numerals sub 4605, like e.g. Ash. c od
s, all with ultima accent.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

192

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

45. páñcadaśa- ‘15’ — Bhat.. p
anz s, Gau. pánˇȷis, Bro. "pããdeš, but Ind. p2nz
2l2s, 
Sh. panzéy, Sh.koh. panzílee, Tir. panz e and likewise with ultimate accent Dard Pash. and Ning., and Nuristani Ash., Pr. and Dm. 46. s.ód.aśa- ‘16’ — Ind. sov2ysi , Gau. su
2ys, Bro. "s.obeš, but accent on ultima

Shum., Ning, according to 12812 have ˙ Gamb., Gaw., Sv., Phal. 47. saptádaśa- ‘17’ — Ind. s2t al2s, Sh. sata
ay and the other Dard and Nuristan numerals sub 13146 all with ultima accent. 48. ast a
da
sa- ‘18’ — Ind. 2th al2s, Sh. asta
ay, Paš. ast
, Shum. and Gaw. ast a
s, etc.



also in Bshk.,



and Phal.

with same accent position Tor., Sv. 49. u ¯navimśati˙ ‘19’ without accent but cf. u ¯ná- ‘deficient’ and vimśatí˙ ‘20’ — Ind. a¯mbìš, Šat.. amb s, Gau. umbíš, but Bhat.. u bis.9 50. vimśatí˙ ‘20’ — Bro. bi"žaa, Wg. vis
, Ning. ˙ is
, Gaw. is
 but Shum. ís¯ı and Kho. bíšir. There remain a few cases where all or most modern Dard reflexes show the same accent position, but a different one than the OIA word. One can only speculate why this is so, an obvious hypothesis is that there were already in OIA times in the northwest sometimes dialectal differences also with regard to accent position. Two examples: 51. áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’10 — Pr. an"g, an"g ‘fire’ — Sh. hagaár, Pal. angóor, ˙ Kal. angár, ˙ Ind. 2ng

ar, Wot.. ang

a
r, Sv. hang


Or all ‘fire’ but all with oxytone accent which may be due to an old influence on accent and semantics by agní- ‘fire’.

Besides the above-mentioned occasional tendency for generalization there may also be sometimes an accent shift due to metathesis as the following example suggests: Pal. dhrígu, Kal. dríga ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá-.11 But why the accents in the following examples have shifted their position is not clear: Pal. dec.hín.u ‘right’, Dm. dac.háni ‘right hand’ < OIA dáks.in.a- (but Kal. dr a
cui); Kal. níndra ‘sleep’ < OIA nidr a
- ‘sleep’; Pal.

(but Ind. barís); Pal. óomu, Kal. áma ‘raw’ < béeris. ‘summer’ < OIA vars.yà- ‘rain’ . OIA a¯má- ‘raw’; Ind. p2p2 y ‘eyelash’ < OIA páks.man- ‘eyelashes’, Ind. s
s2 v ‘poplar’ < OIA śimśáp¯ ˙ a- ‘the tree Dalbergia sissoo’ (here influence through long vowel in Pers. š¯ıšam? Origin of this word is contested), Sh. káat.o ‘wood’ < OIA k¯ as.t.há-,12 Sh. áj.o ‘cloud’ < OIA abhrá- ‘cloud’, Sh. béej.i ‘blue sky’ < OIA v¯ıdhrá-, and perhaps some more cases. Finally here aretwo cases of parallels between Pashto and Dardic:

9 Sh. kunií, Sh.koh. ukan
 etc. ‘19’ seem to derive < OIA *ekka-¯ uná- ‘one less’. 10 The origin of this word is unclear. 11 But original accent position is retained in Pr. ˇȷign"¯ı etc. ‘long’ for which Morgenstierne had suggested derivation< OIA *d¯ırghan- (6368). 12 Also the etymology of this word is unclear.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.2. Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Chittagongian

193

1. Psht. wúč-a ‘dry’ (< Av. huška-) — Kal. s.ús.t.a- ‘dry’ < OIA *śus.t.a- ‘dried’ (12555) but more likely is *śús.t.a- because of OIA śús.ka- ‘dried’ which is reflected in Pal. šúku ‘dry’ (Liljegren and Haider). 2. Psht. to(w)d, tawdá ‘hot, warm’ is compared by Morgenstierne (1973: 63) with OIA taptá- ‘heated, hot’ — indirectly related are Wg. tap
e and Gaw. tap
 both ‘hot’ and Kal. tab
 ‘heat’ all < OIA tapyat
- ‘heat’ (5685).

7.2

Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Chittagongian

According to Norihiko Učida (1970), Chittagongian has tonetically three types of tones/accents, which occasionally form minimal pairs as e.g. in  a

s ‘air’ (for possible parallels in Dardic see p. 766) vs.  a
s ‘domestic duck’ (< OIA hamsá˙ ‘goose’ [13937]) (p. 5). An example for the third tone/accent is o¯ ‘father-in-law’ (< OIA śváśura‘husband’s or wife’s father’ [12753]). It is not clear if there are one or more underlying tonemes, but this is not important in our contexts where only the position of a tone/accent is of interest. The coincidences of Chittagongian and Vedic accent positions are clearly above statistical probability.13 Finding partly identical archaisms at the northwestern and eastern ends of the Indo-Aryan language area is a strong argument for the theory of Outer and Inner Languages. In many cases there are parallels in B.roh. and/or in Dardic. They are quoted below. Like e.g. in dialects of Or., OIA final short a is frequently preserved.14 Here follows a rather large number of examples of words which are inherited and not tatsamas and which frequently have precise parallels in northwestern IA languages. This subsection is thus important for understanding the early history of Indo-Aryan in South-Asia: 1. In OIA angus ˙ . t.hya- ‘pertaining to thumb or big toe’ accent position is not known but cf. angus ˙ . t.á- ‘thumb’ — B.chit. od ‘finger-ring’, B.roh. angut ˙ . há ‘thumb’ —

‘thumb’ words see previous subsection. Bhat.. angt ˙ . hùi ‘a ring’. For more Dardic 2. OIA ast a
da
sa- ‘eighteen’ — B.chit. ad.àr and B.roh. ãr.ára. Cf. in previous

Ind. 2th al2s etc. subsection

a
s a
h ‘wish, expectation’ — B.chit. a¯śà and B.roh. aśá both 3. OIA a¯śás, nom.sg.

‘hope’. 4. OIA icch a
- ‘wish’ — B.chit. issyà and B.roh. iśśá both ‘wish’. 5. OIA aus.adhá- ‘herbs in general, a herb’ — B.chit. ośùt ‘medical plant’. Seems to be a semi-tatsama. 6. OIA kamsá˙ ‘bell-metal’ or k¯ amsya˙ ‘made of bell-metal’ — B.chit. xãśà ‘a gong’. 7. OIA kan.t.há- ‘throat, neck’ — B.chit. xOntO ‘throat’ — Ind. k2ndah ‘the rim of



kat"a ‘canal’. a cup, bowl etc.’, Paš. kat a
‘irrigation channel’ (see 14349), Deg. .

13 Note, however, that, comparable with the situation in different varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, a second source of accent in Chittagongian is loss of aspiration and of the phoneme h. This phenomenon is not found in Modern Standard Bengali. Cf. e.g. B.chit. darì ‘beard’ with B. dar.i both < Pk. d¯ ad.h¯ a- < OIA *d¯ ams ˙ . t.ra- ‘beard’ (6250). 14 This is a feature more archaic than in some Nuristan and Dard languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

194

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

8. OIA kóśa- n.m. ‘case, cover; sheath’ but ko
s
- n.f. perhaps ‘sheath; Futteral’ — B.chit. xośà i.a. ‘water container; Wasserbehälter’ and xośì i.a. ‘spoon’ (thus here accent end position was generalized) — Pal. k"u ¯ši ‘pod’ but Kal. kažór.i ‘cloth bag for carrying flour or grain or materials; scabbard for a sword’. 9. OIA khura- ‘hoof’ with unknown accent position — B.chit. kùra ‘hoof’ — Sh. khúuri ‘heel’ but Paš. khur
 ‘hoof; heel’ with change of accent due to change to n.f.?15 10. OIA gojihvik¯ a- ‘a partic. kind of plant’ with unknown accent position — B.chit. xoB ‘cabbage’ — Sh. ph˘ ul gobí ‘cauli flower’. 11. OIA *cis.t.a- ‘message’ (4832) — B.chit. sid.ì ‘letter’, B.roh. ś˜ır.í ‘letter’ — Paš. čit."¯ı ‘letter’, Bur. ćut.í ‘letter’. The lemma is said to be a borrowing from Persian. If so, would this mean that, after receiving somewhere in northwestern South Asia an accent, the lemma spread to the east through IA languages which still had an inherited accent system? 12. OIA *chot.t.a- ‘small’ (5071) — B.chit. sodO ‘small’, B.roh.
s o
ro ‘small’ — Kal.

from Iranian. čút.yak ‘small, young’. Also this lemma is possibly a borrowing 13. OIA jyótsn¯ a- ‘moonlight’ — but B.chit. zosnà ‘moonlight’ — cf. Wot.. dus
un, d usu 
l ‘moon’. 14. OIA d as
- ‘slave girl’ — B.chit. daśì ‘slave girl’. 15. OIA duh.khá- ‘difficulty, pain’ — B.chit. dukkO ‘misfortune, pain’ (cf. Pa., Pk. dukkha-) 16. OIA dhánus.- ‘bow’ — B.chit. dOnu ‘bow’ (lw.?) — Sh. daáno ‘bow’. ´ .ï 17. OIA *dh¯ ud.i-, dh¯ uli- ‘dust, powder’ (6835) — B.chit. dùil ‘dust — Bhat.. dhür ‘dust’, Pal. d"ur.i ‘dust’. 18. OIA namask¯ ará- ‘adoration’ — B.chit. n O
sar ‘greeting’ with a sound change -sk> -ś- similar to sound changes in Dardic (see p. 99). 19. OIA paks.á- ‘wing’ and paks.ín- ‘winged; bird’ — B.chit. Faxà ‘a fan’ and Faxì ‘bird’ — Ind. p2nkh

a ‘a fan’, Kal. pach
yak ‘bird’.

— B.chit. Foiśà ‘money, B.roh. foisá 20. OIA *pad¯ amśa˙ ‘quarter part’ (7761) h ‘money’ — Gau. p es
a , p Es
ay ‘money; a paisa coin’, Kal. paysá ‘money’, Paš. pais"a¯ ‘money, pice’, Bur. paisá ‘gold’. 21. OIA buddhi- ‘intelligence, discernment’ with unknown accent position — B.chit. budd ‘device, stratagem; Kunstgriff’, B.roh. buddí ‘advice’ — Kt. bid"i ‘sense, heart, intention’ (quoted in Buddruss und Degener [2016: 625]) and bid"iva ‘wise; wisdom’ (Strand), Kamd. bid"i ‘mind’, San.. bad"i ‘wisdom’. 22. OIA máks.a¯- ‘fly’ — but B.chit. masì and B.roh. masí both ‘fly’ — word-final accent also in the following languages: Deg. m¯ečék ‘fly’, Sh. m as
 ‘fly’, but

maśákaGaw. has mása ‘mosquito’. Note also Wg. m¯ aš"a ‘fly’ which is < OIA ‘mosquito’. Whether both OIA words are cognate is unclear (see EWA). 23. OIA manus.yà- ‘human being, man’ — B.chit. manùś ‘human being’, B.roh. manúiś ‘man’ — Kamd. and Kt. m¯ anš"a ‘man, person, people’, Wg. moš"a ‘man; male’, Sh. m¯ anúz.u ˘ ‘man’. Note also Pal. m o
su ‘people’ which is < OIA m a
nusa

‘human; man’. 15 Lehr gives without accent marking korek ‘heel’ (2014: 118).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.2. Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Chittagongian

195

24. For OIA masta- ‘head’ accent position is not known, but there is on the one hand with accent cognate mastís.ka- ‘cranium’ but on the other hand there is also OIA (Mn.) mástaka- ‘head, skull’ (see 9926) — B.chit. matà and B.roh. matá both ‘head’ — dialectal Paš. mastrák ‘brain’, Wg. must"a ‘brain’, Kamd. and Kt. mř¯ ašt"a ‘brain’, San.. m¯ ast"a ‘brain’. However, word-initial accent in Pal. m a
tu and Sh. máta both ‘brain’. 25. OIA m¯ adhyà- ‘central, mid’ — B.chit. mezO ‘middle-’, B.roh. mazé ‘middle’. Even though OIA m¯ adhyà- has otherwise only one modern reflex in P. (10036), this must be the correct equation against the very widespread modern reflexes of OIA mádhya- ‘middle’ (9804). 26. OIA m¯ amsá˙ ‘flesh’ — B.chit. man


sO ‘meat’ — Pr. pud.og mus"uk, pud."og mus"u ¯, pud.og mus"ok etc. ‘calf (muscle)’ (with first word < OIA pín.d.a- ‘lump, clod, piece’. 27. OIA múkhya- ‘pertaining to face or mouth’ is used as a local adverb in a number of NIA languages (see p. 496) — B.chit. mìkkya ‘towards (direction); side’ — Kal. múki ‘dispositioned’ as in košanmúki ‘good-natured, happy-dispositioned’ or zangarmúki ˙ ‘sour-dispositioned’. 28. OIA mrs.t.á- ‘sweet, pleasant’ — B.chit. mid.yà and B.roh. mir.á both ‘sweet’.  29. OIA yuddhá‘battle’ — B.chit. zuddO ‘fight’, B.roh. juddó ‘war; revolution’. 30. OIA r¯ aks.asá- ‘demon’ — B.chit. raikyO
s ‘demon’. 31. OIA laks.á- ‘100,000’ — B.chit. lOkkO ‘100,000’ (cf. Pa. lakkha-). 32. OIA vamśá˙ ‘family, lineage’ — B.chit. bOn
sO ‘family line’. 33. OIA vatsará- ‘year’ — B.chit. bOsOr and B.roh. bosór both ‘year’ — Pr. vu˙c"u ¯ ‘year’. Pace Morgenstierne as well as Buddruss und Degener I don’t think that derivation < OIA vatsa-2 ‘year’ (11240) is correct. Instead, the Pr. form shows typical r-loss (for more examples see p. 20). 34. OIA vahyá- ‘a carriage’ x vod.hum ‘to bear’ (see 11465) — B.chit. bozà ‘load’, B.roh. fuñzá ‘load’. 35. OIA vrddhá- ‘grown, large; old’ (x *bud.d.ha-2 ‘old’ [9271]) — B.chit. bOrO ‘big’  ‘old’, B.roh. burá ‘old’ — Ind. bud a ‘an old man’; Pr. vur"¯ı and Kt. and burà

ur"a both ‘village guard’. 36. OIA śátru- ‘enemy’ — B.chit. ottru, Ottru ‘enemy’. Seems to be a semi-tatsama. 37. OIA s a
ra- ‘best part’ — B.chit. àra ‘whole’ — Kt.g. s
arO ‘all, whole’ — Kal. sára ‘whole, complete’, Pal. sóoru ‘whole’. 38. OIA s¯ımán- ‘boundary’ — but B.chit. śìmya ‘boundary’, B.roh. śíma ‘border’ — Ind. s
u  ‘border, boundary (of a district, area)’. Cf. also Psht. s"ima ‘region’ which is probably a borrowing from IA. 39. OIA su
rya- ‘sun’ — B.chit.
sujjO ‘sun’, B.roh. śújjo ‘sun’ — Tir. su
ri, Kal. súri, Pal. súuri, Sh. súuri all ‘sun’. Only Gaw. s ur
 ‘sun’ is an exception. 40. OIA sthu
na- ‘post, pillar’ — B.chit. t.hùni ‘post’, B.roh. t.úni ‘pillar’ — Pal.

pillar’. th"u ¯n.i ‘post, 41. OIA háran.a- ‘removing’ — B.chit. OrOn ‘abduction, removal’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

196

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

42. OIA *h¯ an.d.a- ‘pot’16 — B.chit. àri ‘earthenware cooking pot’ — Bur. hánik ‘platter’.

7.3

Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Rohingya language

Since there is no evidence that AA languages were spoken in Myanmar Arakan State before the arrival of the ancestors of the speakers of Rohingya language, they must have brought these borrowings from India from where they started their emigration perhaps many centuries ago. Correct inherited accent position17 1. OIA angus ˙ . t.há- ‘thumb’ and derivation angus ˙ . t.hya-, *angus ˙ . t.hiya- ‘pertaining to thumb or big toe’ (138) must have had same accent position — B.roh. angut ˙ .á ‘thumb’ and angut ˙ . í ‘ring’, B.chit. ant ˙ . í ‘finger ring’. Cf. above Bshk. angúc ˙ . ‘thumb’ etc. For ‘(finger) ring’ there are the following northwestern parallels: Kamd. a¯ks.t"u ˜ ‘ring’, Wg. anuštá, ˙ Bhat.. angt ˙ . húi ‘a ring’, Sh. hänusélo, ˙ Wot.. angír ˙ . ‘finger ring’, Paš. angus ˙ . "ak ‘finger-ring’. 2. OIA abhrá- ‘rainy weather’ — B.roh. abár ‘cloudy weather’ — cf. Ind. 2z2
v  ‘cloudy’ deriving from or indirectly related with OIA abhríya- ‘belonging to or produced from clouds’. 3. ábbud ‘amazed; surprised; wondered; astonished’ < OIA ádbhuta- ‘wonderful’ (240) (Pa., Pk.) with one modern reflex in G. a¯bh¯ u ‘astonished’. Preservation of original accent position, of MIA geminate and of -t- as -d- shows that the Rohingya word is significantly more archaic than the Gujar¯ at¯ı form. 4. udár ‘loan’ — Ind. udh a
r ‘loan’ < OIA uddh¯ará- a.o. ‘loan’ (2018) (Pa., Pk.). 5. okkór ‘letter and numbers’ < OIA aks.ára- ‘word, syllable’ etc. (38) (Pa., Pk.). 6. OIA kán.t.aka- ‘thorn’ — B.roh. kúduk ‘hedgehog’. Regarding dental instead of retroflex consonant see p. 450 in the note for similar examples. 7. OIA ks.urá- ‘knife, dagger’ — but B.roh. súri ‘knife’ and B.chit. sùri ‘knife’18 — Kt. c.ur"i ‘dagger’. 8. OIA gardabhá- ‘ass’ — B.roh. gadá ‘donkey’ — Kal. gordók ‘donkey’, Kho. gord
oG ‘donkey, ass’, Pal. gad"ar.o ‘donkey’. 9. juddó ‘war’ < OIA yuddhá- ‘battle’ (10499). 10. OIA jyes.t.há- ‘eldest’ (there is also jyés.t.ha-) — B.roh. jer.á ‘father’s brother’ — dialectal Paš. des.t."a¯ ‘elder’, also Kal. jes.t.áli ‘mother-in-law (if self is male)’. 16 Forms like Korku kaïãa ‘earthen pot’ and kanda ‘large earthen water pot kept and filled at the house’ seem to suggest Munda origin. But word-initial accent suggests rather ‘North Indian’ origin. 17 For practical reasons, sometimes the OIA form stands at the beginning of a lemma and sometimes the Rohingya form. 18 Since this is the only case where the accent of a B.chit. word does not match with the accent of a B.roh. word. Thus it is possible that B.chit. sùri is a hearing mistake of Učida.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.3. Partial preservation of inherited accent patterns in Rohingya language

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

23. 24. 25. 26.

197

OIA bhr a
tr- ‘brother’ — B.roh. bái ‘brother’.  < OIA v¯asá- ‘abode’ (11591). bahá ‘nest’ birís ‘teen aged cow’ < older bisír < OIA vatsatar
- ‘young heifer’. manúiś ‘man, mankind’ — Wot.. maníš ‘man’ < OIA manus.yà- ‘human’ (9828). mándara ‘magic work’ < OIA mántra- ‘spell’ (9834). rakkóś ‘monster’ < OIA r¯ aks.asá- ‘demon’ (10672). lad.d.ú ‘small sweet ball’ — Ind. laddu
‘a type of sweet’ < OIA *lad.d.u-2 ‘lump’



(10927) with unknown accent position. leká ‘writing’ — Gau. l¯ekháh ‘measuring; counting’ < OIA lekhya- ‘ to be written; writing’ (11108) with unknown accent position. OIA v¯ asá- ‘abode’ — B.roh. bahá ‘nest’. OIA viv¯ ahá- ‘marriage’ — B.roh. biá gor ‘to marry’ and biáta married’ (cf. OIA viv¯ ahita- ‘married [11924]). OIA śár¯ıra- ‘body’ — B.roh. śórir ‘body’. OIA śváśura- ‘father-in-law’ — B.roh. (h)óour ‘father-in-law’ — Kal. išpášur ‘father-in-law (if self is either male or female)’, etc. In other Dard and Nuristan languages the accent is, however, further back, e.g. in Kho. išpaš"ur ‘father-inlaw’ or Pr. cu "u  . sáti ‘umbrella’ < OIA cháttra-1 ‘parasol’ (4972). sída ‘straight’ — Ind. sìd¯ a ‘straight, direct’ < siddha-2 ‘accomplished’ (13401), also borrowed into Bur. sída ‘straight’. siní ‘sugar’ — Ind. cin
, Bhat.. cin 
 both ‘sugar’. Are cognate with OIA c¯ınaChina’. OIA sthu
n a- ‘post, pillar’ — B.roh. t.únih ‘pillar’.

Acquired accent position in loan words (mostLy in ultima position) Wherever possible, parallels from Dard and neighboring languages are quoted. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

indía ‘India country’ — Ind. in.d.ì¯ a ‘India’. uzón ‘weight’ — Ind. v2z
2n ‘weight’ ← Ar. vazn. ekt.ár ‘actor’ — Ind. ekt.ár ‘an actor (on a stage)’ ← Eng. kafér ‘non-believer’ — Ind. k¯ aphír ‘an infidel’; Kal. kawér, kaphér ‘Kafir, pagan, unbeliever (in God)’. kamrá ‘room’ — Ind. k2mrah ‘room’, Kal. kamrá ‘room’, Bur. kamará ‘room’. kissá ‘tale’ — Ind. q2sah ‘story’, Kal. khisá ‘story’, Paš. kis"a¯ ‘tale’, Bur. qisá ‘story, history’. g¯ olóiś ‘glass’ — Ind. gil as ‘glass’. zumá ‘Friday afternoon prayer’ — Ind. žumàh ‘Friday’. t.ikót. ‘ticket’ — cf. Ind. sin ax tik ath ‘an identity card’ with first word ← Pers.

šin¯ akht ‘knowledge’. ¯ ¯ i d.aból ‘double’ — Ind. dab2yl ‘a Rupee’, Kal. d.abáli ‘coin’ (and P. d.abbal pais¯ a

in comparison to Nanak Sh¯ ‘the current coin of pice ah¯ı pais¯ a ’). d.eróm ‘drum container’ — Ind. dh2r a
m ‘a (rain) butt’ both ← Eng. drum. bot.ón ‘button’ — Ind. b2t2
n.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

198

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

13. madarasá ‘religious teaching school’ — Ind. m2d2rsah ‘an Islamic school’ ← Pers. madrasa. 14. markét. ‘marked’ — Ind. m¯ arkít.hi . 15. mahér ‘expert’ — Ind. m¯ ahír ‘expert’ ← Ar. m¯ ahir. 16. lombór ‘number’ — Ind. lamb
2r ‘a number’, Bur. lambár, Kal. lambár. 17. vakí ‘really’ — Ind. v aq
2y ‘real(lly)’ ← Ar. v¯aqi‘. 18. votón ‘birth place’ — Ind. v2t
2n ‘native country’, Paš. vat"an ‘(home) land’, Bur. vatán ‘(home) country’. 19. sappól ‘sandal’ — Ind. c apu
li ‘sandals’, Gau. c˙ apléy ‘sandals’, Kal. čapl.éy ‘men’s Peshawari sandals’, Bur. ćapalí ‘sandal’. The lemma might be a borrowing from Dravidian. 20. súval ‘question’ — Ind. su al ‘a question’ ← Ar. su’¯al. 21. sehét ‘health’ — Ind. sih
2th ‘health’, Bur. sihát ‘health’ ← Ar.-Pers. s.˘eh.h.at. 22. saikél ‘bicycle’ — Ind. s ek
2l. 23. sofór ‘traveling’ — Ind. s2ph
2r ‘a journey’, Kal. saphár ‘journey’, Bur. safár ‘journey’ ← Ar. safar. 24. sosmá ‘eyeglass’ — Kal. češmák ‘eye glasses’, Kho. čašmá ‘eyeglasses’ ← Pers. caśma.

7.4

Partial and indirect preservation of inherited accent patterns in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı

As pointed out above, during development from Vedic to Classical Sanskrit the former distinctive accent lost this property but continued its ‘physical’ existence guided by rules which were similar to those in Latin. Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has indirectly preserved the Vedic accent when it was situated in an oxytone position. In such cases, Vedic á changed into Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı ¯e. Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı is a tone language of the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı type. This might have something indirectly to do with the fact that the reflex of the Vedic oxytone accent is a ‘special vowel’ but without a distinctive function. Such kind of reflex is usually not found when the Vedic accent was in a barytone position as can be seen e.g. in Bng. kOndOrO n.m. ‘a carrying basket (bulgy)’ with metathesis < OIA káran.d.a- ‘basket’

(2792), kangi ˙ n.f. ‘comb’ < OIA kánkata˙ ‘comb’ (2598), kOla n.f. ‘name of a goddess

(said to mean ‘dawn, sunrise’)’ < OIA kamal¯a- ‘pale-red, rose-coloured’ (cf. kámala[CDIAL 2763] but kamalá- [Mayrhofer]), etc. However, at the end of this subsection I have compiled a small collection of words from Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı and other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, Dard and Nuristan languages where a change of a > e correlates with a barytonic position of the Vedic accent. The difference between Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı and classical Sanskrit is that an accent in a Classical Sanskrit word does not allow the conclusion whether it occupied in Vedic Sanskrit a barytone or an oxytone position. However, in case of Vedic-inherited Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı words with a post-tonic ¯e, the chance is quite high that this ¯e points back to an oxytone accent position in that very Vedic word (or to an accent placed in the second part of a compound). Out of twenty-three lemmata presented below, nineteen reflect the correct Vedic oxytone accent position, three do not, one is unclear and in

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.4. Partial and indirect preservation of inherited accent patterns in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı

199

one case (OIA sárala- ‘Pinus longifolia’) previous speculation for PIE ancestry (see EWA) is incorrect because the lemma is a borrowing from Austro-Asiatic. 1. kak¯er. (also kak Or, k ak@r) n.m. ‘barking-deer’ < OIA kakkat.á- ‘a kind of animal

(offered at sacrifice to the goddess Anumati)’ (2585) but modern reflexes frequently meaning ‘barking-deer’. 2. kãb¯e.l n.m. ‘a blanket’ < OIA kambalá- ‘woolen blanket or upper garment’ (2771). 3. guż¯er n.m. ‘member of the pastoral wandering tribe of the Gujjars’ < OIA gurjará- (4210). 4. c Oit er n.m. ‘the month Caitra < OIA caitrá- ‘month in which full moon is in constellation of Citr¯ a’ (4915). 5. c˙ a˙c¯er. n.m. ‘name of a bird’ (als ‘cockroach’) < OIA (RV) cicciká– ‘a kind of bird’ — cf. Paš. čäčá ‘name of a small bird’. See p. 590. 6. c hOp er n.m. ‘small hut’, c˙ hap¯er n.m. ‘roof’ and śep¯er n.m. ‘gable of house’

are different reflexes (different sub-dialects?) < OIA chattvará- ‘house, bower’ (4976). For śep¯er see p. 118. 7. dzot¯er2 n.m. ‘rope (for binding), rope at the yoke below the throat of the ox)’ < OIA yoktŕ- ‘one who yokes’ (10522); cf. slightly differently pronounced (with  -¯e-) Bng. dzot¯er n.m. ‘s.o. who gapes or stares around’ ← Bng. slightly longer 1 zotnO ‘to gape, stare, look’ (for parallels and origin of the verb see p. 605), the noun derives perhaps < OIA *dyota-k¯ arín- (regarding peculiar semantics cf. OIA (GrS) dyot¯ a- ‘a squinting or a red-eyed or a red-haired woman’ which is cognateof OIA lex. dyota- ‘light, brilliance’). Notes: (a) Regarding formation cf. similar OIA dina-kara- “day maker’, sun’. (b) The same agent suffix as in Bng. dzot¯er1 is also found in Bng. jOt er n.m. ‘gasbag, one who talks much’ ← j¯ at ‘mouth’ (for further parallels see p. 114); therefore also analogically tOst er n.m. ‘expert’ but OIA tás.t.ar- ‘a carpenter’,

perhaps also pot¯er n.f./m. ‘grandchild’ somehow < paútra- ‘son’s son’ (8416) and pautr¯ı- ‘son’s daughter’ (8417),
sO
st er n.m. ‘weapon; one who bites (e.g., dog)’ < OIA śástr- ‘one who cuts up’ (12366) . 

8. that¯er n.m. ‘living place’ (also thatrO) < OIA sth¯ atrá- ‘station, place’ (13752a). 9. nind¯er n.f. ‘sleep’ < OIA nidr a
- ‘sleep’ (7200). 10. nìś¯en.1 n.f. ‘staircase, stairway’ < OIA ni
srayan
- n.f. ‘ladder, staircase’ (7458).

Note: Bng. nìś¯en.2 ‘guidance’ is cognate with Bng. nesnO, nisnO ‘to scent (out),



trace, trail, track down, detect, peep, peer; to observe’ which has a number of parallels but whose etymology is unknown (see p. 542).

11. bOk el n.m. ‘bark’ < OIA valkala- i.a. ‘bark, bark garment’ (11418) which cf. with OIA valká- ‘bark of tree’ (11417). 12. bO ch erO/-i n.m./f. ‘colt/filly’ < OIA vatsatará- ‘young bull or goat before weaning or copulation’ (11241).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

200

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

13. bOr et n.m. ‘fast, religious observance’ ardha-tasama (?) < OIA vratá‘ordinance, religious duty’ (12228). 14. bOl ed n.m ‘ox’ < OIA balivárda- ‘ox, bull’ (9176).

et n.m. ‘spring season’ < OIA vasantá- ‘spring season’ (11439). 15. bOs 16. bam¯en. ‘a Brahmin’ (besides bamOn) < OIA br¯ ahman.á- ‘a Brahmin’. 17. mit Or, mit er n.m. ‘brother-in-law’ is cognate with OIA mitrá- ‘friend’ (10124), for more background information see p. 234. 18.
sOp et n.m. ‘oath; deep sigh’ ardha-tatsama < OIA śapátha- ‘curse, vow’ (12290). 19. śam¯e.l n.m. ‘provisions for journey’ < OIA śambalá- ‘provisions for journey’ (12315). Unclear is Bng. dOlid er ‘poor’ because there is both OIA dáridra- ‘roving; poor’ (CDIAL 6195) and darídra- (EWA).19 As mentioned above, Bng. sOr el ‘pine tree’ cannot be a direct reflex < OIA sárala2 ‘Pinus longifolia’ (13253) because it is ultimately a borrowing from Austro-Asiatic (see p. 363, footnote). In the following three examples the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı reflex does not match with the original accent position: Bng. gOr en n.m. ‘solar or lunar eclipse’ < gráhan.a- ‘eclipse of sun

(of tree)’ < OIA páttra- ‘wing-feather’ (7733) and or moon’ (4364), pat¯er n.m. ‘leaf mOt er n.m. ‘sacred formula’ < OIA mántra- ‘thought, prayer, spell, counsel’ (9834).

Borrowings from English The following few Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı examples with striking similarities in other Outer Languages are perhaps due to a common old impression from prehistoric Austro-Asiatic languages with sequisyllabic word structures, which formerly dominated northern India. 1. t.imat.¯er n.m. ‘tomato’ — Ind. tam at2
r. 2. d.akt.¯er n.m. ‘doctor’ — Ind. d a gd2
r and Kal. d.akthár both ‘a doctor’ — B.roh.



daktor, d.akt.or. 3. bot¯el ‘bottle’ — Ind. b ot
2l, Kal. buthál — B.roh. botol. 4. mas.t.¯er n.m. ‘teacher’ — Ind. m ast2
r ‘teacher’, Kal. mas.t.ér ‘teacher of a school’

— B.roh. mast.or, mašt.or. 5. leb¯er ‘worker, labourer’ — Ind. l eb
2r ‘a porter, day laborer’.

Barytonic á > e? The number of the following cases is too small for drawing firm conclusions. 1. Bng.
set,
sethO n.m. ‘fibre, bark’ and Deog.
sektE pl. ‘chaff’ both < OIA śálka

(12350) with -t(O)/-ti suffix.

‘chip, shaving’



2. Bng. poet. dzerO n.m. ‘root’ < OIA ját.a¯- ‘fibrous root, root’ (5086).

19 The word goes back to dári-dr¯ a- ‘to run to and fro’ (EWA).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.5. Former tripartite subsystems also in varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

201

3. Rom. dženo ‘(male) person’ (Zoller [2010: 290]) — Kal.urt. ˇȷen ‘person’ both < OIA jána- ‘race, person’ (5098). But note a > u in Kho. žún, ˇȷun ‘persons, individuals (usually used with numerals)’. 4. Rom. deš ‘ten’ — Deg. and Kho. d¯e ‘ten’ and Pr. leze ‘ten’ all < OIA dáśa‘ten’ (6227).

7.5

Former tripartite subsystems also in varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

Most Nuristan and Dard languages have more or less complex tripartite systems of sibilants and affricates. The three sibilants s, š, s. are clearly shared retentions of OIA and G¯ andh¯ar¯ı s, ś, s.. Beyond these two language groups, OIA s, ś, s. had collapsed either into s or ś in most of the other MIA languages already in pre-Ashokan times. Notable exceptions are West Pah¯ ar.¯ı,20 most of whose varieties have inherited s and ś (here OIA ś and s. merged into ś) and D aki (the latter spoken now by a few . um¯ hundred people in Hunza in North Pakistan). Outside this undivided northwestern language area there is no other language, with the exception of Romani, where more than one OIA sibilant has been preserved. Whereas OIA had only one order of palatal affricates, as pointed out above, most Nuristan and Dard languages have three: dental, palatal and retroflex, e.g. c˙ , č, c.. According to Èdel"man (1983), the Dard languages Glangali and Tirahi do not have retroflex affricates and sibilants, to which Brok-skad is to be added. But the data he relies on is not always credible, and it appears quite likely to me that they too have a tripartite sibilant and affricate system.22 But even if they do not have a tripartite system but only a bipartite system they differ from OIA because of their 20 In its loanwords stemming from IA, also Brahui has preserved the distinction between two of the three OIA sibilants: samb¯ al ‘watching, guarding’ < OIA sambh¯ ˙ alayati ‘observes well’ (12962)
p but š¯ ev¯ al ‘the water-plant vallisneria octandra’ < OIA
s ala- ‘the waterweed Blyxa octandra’ (12493), pišš¯ı ‘cat’ < OIA *puśś¯ı- ‘cat’ (8298), tušš ‘bran’ < OIA tús.a- ‘chaff of grain’ (5892) etc. There is no agreement whether Brahui is a remnant of a former large Dravidian speaking area or whether it has come to Balochistan at a more recent time, say around 1,000 years ago. If the latter case would turn out to be true, then this would mean that also Sindh¯ı had two sibilants at least until 1000 years ago. Since also Romani has preserved two sibilants and since the ancestors of the Roma must have stayed for a very long time in the northwest of South Asia south of the great mountain chain before they left the subcontinent perhaps 1,200 years ago (Zoller 2010), we can safely assume that at that time the IA language in the plains of the Indus Valley still had two sibilants.21 Note also that eastern Middle Indo-Aryan D . hakk¯ı had preserved the two sibilants s and ś while s. got merged with s (Pischel § 228). That this fact apparently went unnoticed to the Prakrit grammarians, can only mean that the language situation in the Indus Valley was beyond their horizon. Note also that Chittagongian has two distinctive sibilants. However, the dental sibilant s derives usually < older *µ < OIA c (apart from tatsamas and borrowings from English). 22 Glangali is actually only spoken in the village of Glangal. Èdel"man has also claimed that Dardic Kalasha does not have retroflex affricates (1983: 202). This is of course not correct. But he is probably right in case of Tirahi because he states (1983: 21f.): “The Tirahi (Tir¯ ah¯ı) language is used by a small number of people among the Pushto-speaking population. It is the vernacular in several villages in Afghanistan, south-east of Jalalabad.” This looks as Tirahi has been influenced by Pashto phonology which has two series of affricates, dental and palatal.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

202

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

two types of affricates, namely dental and palatal, e.g. c˙ and č. This holds certainly true for Brok-skad which clearly has a bipartite system: zigo ‘high, tall, long, far’ < OIA d¯ırghá- ‘long’ (6368) via *žigo and not *z.igo. With regard to this phonological feature, we may say that Nuristani and Dardic belong to a single subgroup because they share the innovation of having phonological systems with mostly three types of affricates. This is without parallel outside this area. I assume that at least some West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties also had a tripartite system of sibilants and affricates until perhaps not a distant past. I want to quote here Turner who writes in connection with the OIA lemma sájati ‘is attached, embraces’ (13085): “Kaf., Dard., K. and WPah. presuppose MIA *s a(y)-, *s.ajj- (*s.acc-), *s.atta-.” But

there is also the fact that medieval inscriptions from Chamba contain personal names containing s.: m¯ os.u ¯n.a ‘name of a mythical ancestor’ (Vogel 1911: 141), s.ankal¯ ˙ ıśa ‘name of a deity’ (op. cit. p. 146).23 Let us take the case of Bangani.In a number of cases Bangani words with palatal affricates are either later borrowings or results of phonological processes, e.g. c¯ın ‘three’ goes back to OIA trín.i- ‘three’ (5994) (see a Dardic parallel p. 327) and janO ‘to become; to float; to go’ goes back to OIA dr a
ti ‘runs’ (6630).24 Besides these cases, Bangani has a few words with palatal affricates which have parallels in Dardic (usually without clear etymology where they appear, however, as retroflex affricates, for instance Bng. khOljO n.m. ‘resin from the sOr el pine tree’has

pine’. The only explanation for this is a parallel in Ind. k2chu
l ‘resin of the deodar

that Bangani (and probably some other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages as well) formerly had a tripartite sibilant and affricate system. Consequently, the former retroflex affricates changed to palatal affricates in the same way as the former retroflex sibilants changed into palatal sibilants. In fact, the simplification process from three to two affricates appears to me as the only plausible explanation for the retention of the two sibilants in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. It is thus not correct when Masica writes (1991: 94): “Internal developments in some West Pahari languages (*tr, t > č) have reintroduced a [č] and produced a č/ts contrast there also.” It might be objected that there are some West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties like Jauns¯ar¯ı or Man.d.e¯ al.¯ı) with two sibilants but only one order of palatal affricates. This parallels the situation of Dardic Khowar and Kalasha with three sibilants but also only one inherited order of palatal affricates. We might see in both cases old intrusive languages from outside the Dard and the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı areas which have patially adapted their phonological systems to their new surroundings. Note: Such a scenario can be compared with two other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties, the small variety Sainj¯ı (which must be different from the Romani language with the same name spoken in the Punjab), a form of Inner Siraji. Sainj¯ı has several ways of constructing 23 The term s.ankal¯ ˙ ıśa corresponds with OIA śam ej ‘rope’ and OIA . kará- ‘name of Shiva’ (cf. Him. l¯ rájju-) plus OIA ¯ıśá- ‘lord’, and interpretation of ś as s. is common in Dardic and Nuristani as e.g. in Wg. s.ab"as. ‘bravo!’ ← Pers. š¯ ab¯ aš. 24 The modern reflexes of this lemma seem to be limited to West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, K. and S., but there is also Sh. dădăr bo˘ıkı ‘shiver’ and dărdăr bo˘ıkı ‘palpilate (as heart)’, and Bng. dOr adOriE ‘quickly,  considers janO a borrowing  immediately’. Turner from H., but that is not possible for semantic

reasons, and, in fact, there is no direct reflex of OIA y a
ti e.g. in Bng., Kc. or Kt.g. The correct suggestion for the etymology of this lemma was made by Hans Hendriksen (1976: 53f.).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.5. Former tripartite subsystems also in varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

203

the future tense, one is with the grammeme -b in 1. person singular as in c˙¯ık¯ ub ‘(I) shall strike’ (LSI ix, iv p. 703); the second is Sirmauri which has in the 1. singular and plural future tense the forms k2ru-ba/k2rube ‘(I/we) will do’ (J. C. Sharma 2002) but in the rest of the paradigm an -l- formant as in k2rula ‘(he) will do’ is used. This bilabial stop looks to be the same as the future tense in Eastern Indo-Aryan languages (see Southworth [2005a: 137f.]). But things are even more confusing. Grierson points out (loc. cit.) that also Dardic Gawar-Bati employs the same -b future tense grammeme, to which Dardic Tirahi is to be added (Morgenstierne 1934a: 177 and LSI i,i: 292); and one other way of forming the future tense in Sainj¯ı is by using an -r element instead of the standard -l. Again Grierson points out (loc. cit.) that this has a parallel in Nuristani Veron (i.e. Prasun). Whether these are survivals of former more widespread patterns or whether they are local intrusions is not clear at the moment. Intrusion from languages from the plains may have happened in the whole of Pah¯ ar.¯ı at a fairly large scale; this has a parallel in the case of D aki in North Pakistan. Being . um¯ originally a North Indian plains language, it has considerably, but not fully, adapted to its Dardic environment (see Lorimer and Weinreich in the literature). The history of the Himalayas is a history of immigrations, immigrations from the northwest but also very much immigrations from the North Indian plains. Thus, the existence of a former tripartite sibilant and affricate system in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (the situation in Central and East Pah¯ ar.¯ı is even more unclear) can only be indirectly inferred, and in addition we have to assume that the “original” Pah¯ ar.¯ı has been severely diluted by linguistic structures introduced from the North Indian plains. Nevertheless do I insist that West Pah¯ ar.¯ı is part of the Outer Languages with originally three sibilants and affricate orders that distinguished them very early on from already in the post-Proto-Indo-Iranian time from the Inner Languages with much simpler sibilant and affricate subsystems. Continuing this perspective, I want to show now that there is evidence for showing that the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı cluster kś, which is found in around two dozen lemmata, reflects in a few cases a retroflex affricate *c..25 There exist stray cases for a ‘spontaneous’ change of a sibilant S of of an unvoiced affricate to kS: There is K¯ amdeśi r¯ ašt"o and r¯ akšt"o ‘star’. Strand reconstructs “ruc 𝑁 što 𝑁 [PIA st"R- ‘star’ T. 13713]”. In other words, this Nuristan word has š in free alternation with kš. This resembles the loanwords Vis.n.u ‘God Vishnu’ vs. Wiks.n.u ‘ditto’ in Toch.B. And there are Kalasha d.eksén ‘Datsun truck’, Garh. uks¯ as ‘quick breathing owing to hard labour or fast moving up & down’ < OIA *utśvasiti, ucchvasiti ‘takes a deep breath’ (1866), Ku. bukśat. for English ‘bush shirt’, and Rp. bhikcya = bhicya ‘alms’ (borrowed < OIA bhiksa
- ‘alms’ [9485]) and

1 r@kcO ‘protection’ (borrowed < OIA raks.a¯- ‘preservation, care’ [10551] but Pk. racch¯ a), and B.roh. b¯ akśá ‘king’ (cf. Pers. p¯ adš¯ ah). This shows the possibility of a velar kś/ks affricate having occasionally evolved out of an affricate or sibilant articulated more in the front area. In Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, an original palatal affricate c often changed into c˙ (secondary dentalization, see p. 137) as in c OmkEnO ‘to shine’ < OIA *cammakka‘sudden movement’ (4676). Usually, double affricates cc did not dentalize as in ucarnO

‘to peel, skin; pick through (a shell)’ < OIA ucc¯ at.ayati ‘separates from’. However, there are also exceptions. In addition, there are many cases of coronal consonant harmony (CCH) as in cundnO ‘to pinch’ < OIA cún.t.ati ‘cuts off’ (4857). Bng. c can also derive

‘sickle’ (cf. also Orm. of Kaniguram da s𝑟 ‘sickle’) < OIA da
tra< OIA tr as in daci

25 This cluster never reflects OIA ks. which usually appears as c˙ (h) in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

204

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes 2

‘sickle’ (6260). There are around two dozen Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı words containing medial -kśgoing back to different historical origins. However, among them are a few words where a development of *c. > kś is the most plausible explanation. This means that Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı kś occasionally reflects *c. which implies that Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı had formerly a tripartite system of affricates (and sibilants). Even though only some of the kś words are relevant in our context, I will demonstrate with some examples also different origins. There are no clear traces of a survival of OIA s. except, perhaps, the fact that the Bng. ‘palatal’ ś is, in fact, pronounced further back with the tip of the tongue than, for instance, the Hindi palatal sibilant. However, that Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı and some other West Pahari languages indeed had formerly a Dard language type of three different affricate positions is also suggested by Bng. c 
s n.f. ‘thirst’ and neighboring Roh. ciś ‘thirst’ which cf. with Ind. c
s ‘thirst’ and with palatal affricates as in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı in Wg. of

Wg. avčišt ‘thirsty’ [with first syllable meaning ‘water’]). They Nisheygram a vc
t and go back to OIA *trsy a- ‘thirst’ (5943), but for the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı form(s) Turner writes correctly “ < *c.iś.”

1. In a few cases we have simply a suffix -
sO or -kO added to a lexeme ending in -k. In the three examples here the suffix character is clear due to the variation -kś- and -śk-: (a) Bng. mik
sEnO = mi
skEnO v.t. ‘to mix’ from mi
snO1 v.t. ‘to mix’ (< OIA miśrayati ‘mixes’

-k- suffix.

[10137]) plus (b) Bng. lk
sO n.m. or l kh n.f. ‘a nit’ < OIA liksa
- ‘nit, young louse’ (11045) with -
sO suffix.

seduce into’, Deog.
si
sk (c) Bng.
sik
sanO v.t. ‘to lead s.o. astray, tempt, arnO ‘to goad or

incite s.o.’ — Bhil. “śiksh¯ a” ‘punishment’ (LSI ix,iii: 219) (similar M.Coch.), Ko. śiká ‘punishment’, Ko.S. siks@ korci ‘to punish’ < OIA ś¯ asyate ‘is punished’ with subsequent palatalization of vowel and second sibilant, and addition of suffixes? 2. In other cases there is variation between -kś- and -ks- which makes it also likely that the sibilants are suffixes: (a) Bng. uk
sEnO1 v.i. ‘to grow; to jut out, project, stand up (from the ground)’ (with -E Deog. uk
so nO ‘to jut out’) is probably the same as uksEnO v.i. ‘to grow’. A suffix) (and 2

ati ‘draws out, pulls off (a dress)’ (1715) seems

derivation < OIA utkars rather unlikely

and because of the -ś- alternating with -s-. Thus the words because of the semantics may derive < OIA *udg¯ ati ‘rises, comes forth’ (1954) containing the suffixes -
s- and -s-. 3. In other cases the historical background is difficult to disentangle: (a) Bng. kunk


sinO or kung


sinO v.i. ‘to cringe, contract’ (with -i- 𝑥 suffix), Khaśdh. kunkśin ˙ .a

‘to cringe (o.s.) together (e.g., due to severe cold)’ — here also and Deog. kukśin a both . West Himalayish Byangsi kOn


simo ‘to be bent’ and Chep. koN- ‘lean sideways, tipped (pot scales etc.), tilt, lean forward’ ? — appear to be cognate with OIA *krukn.a- ‘curved, twisted’ (3595) plus -ś- suffix. However, there is no trace of the -n.- in the three words. Note also Ku. kukar., kukaur. ‘crooked’, Garh. kukn.a ¯, kokn.a ¯ ‘jhukkar – bending’ and kukar., kukur. ‘jhuk¯ a hu¯ a – bending, bent’, Rp. k@rky a- ‘to twist, twirl’ and N. kakrinu ‘to curl up’ (some forms of which already discussed above p. 61). Moreover, there is also Bng. k ak
sinO v.i. ‘to contract (as a person) because of cold weather’ which may suggest that the -u- in kunk


sinO etc. is emphatic and the word thus unrelated to OIA *krukn.a-. Related, on the other hand, do appear P. kungur ˙ . n¯ a ‘to be shrunk, to be drawn in’ and

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.5. Former tripartite subsystems also in varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

205

A. kona ˙ (kon¯ ˙ a) ‘having crooked fingers’, kEna

(kEn

a) ‘bandy-legged’; in case of Kurkh. konko, ˙ konkr ˙ . o ‘curved’, Pfeiffer (1972: 169) quotes both Munda and Dravidian parallels (see DEDR 2032) and observes that, although the direction of borrowing cannot be determined, the Kurkh. form cannot be a direct reflex of Proto-Dravidian. See also Mayrhofer’s remarks (EWA) on OIA Dh¯ atup. KRUÑC ‘to crook, squirm’ and krukta‘crooked, curved’, but there may also be a relationship with the lemma below that starts with Kann. khong-mig ˙ ‘to bend, incline’ (p. 796). 4. In two other cases, however, the phonological history is traceable and quite remarkable: (a) Bng. poet. nOk
sotri n.f. ‘a magical ring or glove’. This word appears a number of times in the PAN always in scenes where Kunt¯ı puts on a nOk
sotri in order to perform a magical feat. E.g.:

zogro- u ke
sO zOm at sat ri
si- u ki,

sotri pOir-ieri g nOk
uthi- u di Yogis.OBL.PL GEN POP like group seven Rishi.OBL.PL GEN POP magical_ring wear.PERFPRET.F finger.OBL.PL on ‘The group of the seven Rishis (had sat down) like Yogis (use to sit)26 (when Kunt¯ı) put on the magical ring on (her) fingers’ (in order to do a very difficult preparation of food for the Rishis)[104] It is significant that the nOk
sotri cannot induce magical effects per se. In the scenes where Kunt¯ı puts on this ring it is regularly said that she then dances a variety of different dance types. Thus Kunt¯ı has to do a dance performance while wearing this ring in order to achieve the desired effect. I believe that nOk
sotri with all these associated meanings is basically the same word as Himachali nacchatr¯ı ‘type of medium’ (Joshi 1911b: 11).27 Both the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı and the Himachali words consist of a lexeme < OIA nartá- ‘dancing’ (6977) and a -trO agent suffix. Here there is no trace of a -kO suffix. Both words thus have a basic meaning ‘dancer’ or ‘dance-maker’. However, the more immediate predecessor of the two words from OIA nartá- was perhaps *natra-. There are parallels in the northwest for this type of r-metathesis, cf. sub OIA *vartadrun.a‘pellet-bow’ (11353) Ash. watranik, Dm. b adrun, br adun, Tor. b ard2n, D . . b2c2ni ‘disc

and fixed on large spindle’ quoted by Turner sub OIA vartana- ‘turning, rolling’ (11354) same change also in etymologically related Klm. ba  cu g HL ‘to spin, turn’.

Note: Compare with similar meaning and same suffix D . og. pæntra ‘a ring worn when performing some religious ceremony’ (Gauri Shankar [1931: 155]) which might have derived < OIA *p¯ avana-tra- ‘purifier’ which in turn cf. with OIA pavítra- ‘means of purification’, ‘a ring of Kuśá grass worn on the fourth finger on particular occasions’ and ‘sacred cord’. (b) Bng. duk
sO n.m. ‘twins, any object having two components or branches’. Example: dukśi zaga ‘a place with two or more seats’. Same as K. duce ‘a two, anything consisting of two, a pair, a double’ and Kal. ducho 
‘two parts’. Neither Bng. -kś- nor K. -c- can



go back to OIA -c-, which is corroborated by the Kal. word, and since there is no Bng. 26 This means side by side and not in a circle or facing each other. 27 Joshi gives also a nachhattrí ‘fortunate, born at a lucky time’ (in 1911a) which derives < OIA naks.atr¯ı. There is only a coincidental similarity with the ‘shaman’ word.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

206

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes *du
skO the -k- cannot be a suffix. Still it is difficult to offer a clear etymology. The most plausible is to derive both words from a side-form of OIA *duvrta- ‘twofold’ (6464),  artu- ‘triple’. Also namely < OIA *duvartu- ‘double’ (6457) built in analogy to RV triv
here a consonant metathesis *duvatru- has to be postulated. Moreover, it is necessary to presume that the K. word belongs to a layer that is older than the great majority of K. words which have preserved OIA tr- as tr-. Note that there are also Kt.g. dogrE ‘twins’ and Paš. duka ‘a pair’ which, however, appear not so closely related. Since dentalization seems to be an ongoing process in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı (c.f. e.g. Bng. c OtkilO ‘variegated’ ← H. cat.k¯ıl¯ a, Bng. c @tp@tO ‘hot, spicy’ ← H. cat.pat.a ¯), a likely reason for

and

duk
sO is that their older forms were *nOcotri kś in the above two words nOk
sotri

and *ducO.

7.6

Preservation of OIA medial stops This may appear to be a challenging topic. However, the only alternative would be to claim that all the following words are earlier or later borrowings from Sanskrit. But this is rather impossible as it would need an explanation for the fact that many of these words are only found among the most remote languages with small Brahmin populations (or no Brahmin populations at all in case of Dardic and Nuristani) who, until very recently, were largely illiterate. As a rule, the words are quite ordinary and not words where a culturally motivated ‘naturalization’ would be a plausible motive for borrowing. We also should keep in mind that the three language groups were originally in more or less close contact with speakers of Iranian languages. It would be strange to imagine that the Indo-Aryan loss of medial dentals spread into the remotest corners of the distribution area of all its languages only in order to stop all of a sudden in sight distance of the first Iranian speakers. Note the preservation of medial voiceless stops in Wkh. as in vrït ‘brother’ < Ir. *br¯ atar- and yupk ‘water’ < Ir. a ¯paka-; cf. also Pr. lüšt ‘daughter’ (< *duˇȷit¯ a-) with preservation of the dental stop.28 The most plausible explanation for the preservation of medial stops is to assume that the Outer Languages, especially the northwestern branch, are phonologically more conservative than the Inner Languages. We have already come across much data in the previous sections which corroborate this. With regard to the loss of single medial dentals in Prakrit, Woolner modifies this by quoting Hemacandra. Woolner writes (1917: 12): “The actual workaday dialects however were more conservative. In Apabhram . śa Hemacandra tells us k, t, p between vowels were not dropped but became g, d, b, respectively.” Woolner provides a number of examples on this and the next page, and his observation has been corroborated by Masica (1991: 199): “Intervocalic -t-, -d-, lost in the Literary Prakrits except for Sauraseni, lasted longer in the northwest. . . ” The same is stated by Pischel (§192) who, however, qualifies this by stating that there are not so many examples. Pischel quotes e.g. a ¯gado < a ¯gata- which cf. with Ash. ago
m and Dm. a¯gyem ‘I came’ sub 1045.29 If in the area of Mathura, where Śaurasen¯ı was probably spoken, medial dental stops were still lingering on at that late stage, then it is almost certain that

28 FLII 20.1.91A actually suggests contamination of *dh ugh ter- and *dh ugiter-. 29 Turner considers the possibility that the Dm. form is a compound verb, but this is quite unlikely as in Dardic compound verbs are very rare. Also the presence of the old personal ending militates against this interpretation.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.6. Preservation of OIA medial stops

207

they must have lingered on in the peripheral languages of the northwest for a much longer time with stray traces to be found even today. Pischel (§ 194) and others (Vit Bubenik [2003: 219] in Cardona and Jain) have observed that in Prakrit word-medial consonants get frequently doubled when followed by an accented vowel. However, this principle is not visible in the following few examples (most examples are in the regular language data lists below). Finally, I want to quote here Grierson who reports about Dardic Torwali (1929: 21) “. . . the fact that intervocalic single occlusives are not necessarily elided30 . . . ” 1. Pr. @b
ok ‘food’, Gaw. abok ‘piece of bread’ < OIA apakva- ‘unripe’ (413)? Note: For Pr. ab"@g etc. ‘bread, food’ Almuth Degener prefers derivation < OIA *ap¯ upik¯ a- (cf. OIA ap¯ upá- ‘cake of flour, meal’) which I endorse. 2. Wg. ada
‘mountain’ (Z.) < OIA *¯ adh¯ ar¯ a- ‘mountain (range)’ and modeled after/influenced by OIA a ¯dh¯ ara- ‘support, prop, stay; dike, dam’ (1165); the meaning ‘mountain (range)’ has otherwise modern parallels sub dha
r a-2 ‘edge of mountain’ (6793). 3. Rj. a ¯tas ‘heat, warmth, fire’ (Macalister 1898: 2) < *¯ atapasyati ‘is hot’ (1120) with one modern reflex in H.; the Rj. form appears to be the outcome of syllable reduction and not of consonant weakening; quoted again below (see p. 535). Alternatively this may be a borrowing ← Pers. a ¯tiš ‘fire; light splendor’. 4. G.pars. uk@l- ‘to be understood’ < OIA a ¯kalayati ‘observes’ (1003) with one modern reflex in M. with meaning ‘understand’; note a > u. 5. Kho. ug and Kal. uk ‘water’ (ug- in compounds) < OIA udaká- ‘water’ (1921) (Pa., Pk.). 6. Kt. u
d@r ‘high’, Nars. daro ‘high’ < OIA ud¯ ará- ‘lofty’ (1935). 7. Bshk. op¯ ar ‘shepherd’ (also R¯ aj. and Kalk. [Z.]) < OIA avip¯ alá- ‘shepherd’ (893). 8. Ku. khud ‘sugarcane juice’, N. khudo ‘syrup’ < OIA ks.oda- ‘anything ground or powdered’ (3749), Pk. khoda- ‘sugarcane juice’. 9. Ku. ca p ‘the sternal ribs of a goat’. Ruwali suggests derivation < OIA c¯ apa- ‘bow’ (4746). However, note also Paš. čapán. ‘bow’ (Buddruss [1959b: 36]) which might have its nasal consonant from OIA (R.) c¯ apagun.a- ‘bow-string’. 10. Pr. tip"a ‘tripod’ < OIA tripadik¯ a- ‘tripod stand’ (6029); borrowed from a language with tr- > t.-. 11. Bng. pothnO ‘to defeat s.o.; to put a strain on, place a burden on s.o.’ (also quoted in the regular list with possible parallels) < OIA pothayati ‘crushes, kills, destroys’. 12. B.roh. biyáta ‘married’ < OIA viv¯ ahita ‘married’ (11924). 13. Jat.. bauhkr¯ a ‘broom’ < OIA bahuk¯ ara- ‘broom’ (9188). 14. Pal. bidráagu ‘ill, sick’ < OIA *vidharga- ‘without movement’ (11751). Note: Here perhaps cognate Tor. hoGu ‘to drink (soup)’ (Lunsford [2001: 20]) if in the sense of ‘to draw’ (cf. German trinken) < older *dhrorg- < OIA *dharga(*DHARJ), see EWA sub DHRAJ.

30 Grierson: “Here, however, T¯ orw¯ al¯ı agrees with Apabhramśa ˙ Prakrit. As Apabhramśa ˙ was a North-Western dialect, it may be suggested that it has here fallen under the influence of Dardic.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

208

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes

15. Pr. begir ‘bastard, dissolute person’, Kt. bik"ara ‘ditto’ cf. OIA vik¯ ara- i.a. ‘spectre, grimace’ (11624). 16. Jat.. brajn¯ a ‘to live’ < OIA vrájati ‘goes, wanders’ (12225); regarding semantics cf. M. v¯ agn.˜e ‘to move, live’ < related *vagga-. Here remarkable is preservation of initial OIA vr-. 17. Ku. vop ‘rubbish ditch’, cf. OIA vapa
-2 ‘mound (of ants)’ (11288) where Turner mentions Pk. vay¯ a- ‘hole’; the Ku. form cannot be a recent borrowing because of meaning and -o- vowel. Unclear or problematic are:31 18. Bro. "qudes ‘11’ < OIA ék¯ adaśa-1 ‘11’ (2485), "pãdeš ‘15’ < OIA páncadaśa- ‘15’ (7662), saptans

‘17’ < OIA sapt
ada
sa- ‘17’ (13146), also @stun ‘18’ < OIA asta
da
sa- ‘18’ (946),

ıst” ‘nineteen’ < OIA u budeš ‘12’ < OIA dva
da
sa- ‘12’ (6658); Dir. “unb¯ ¯navimśati˙ ‘19’ (2411) and perhaps “shohud” ‘sixteen’ if actually (and by mistake) combined of “sho” ‘six’ and derivation < OIA śatá- ‘100’ (12278). Note also Chin. pojur¯ a ‘rectangle’ and śijur¯ a ‘triangle’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 44]) (with -jur¯ a perhaps < OIA YUT . ‘join’ ?) where śi- certainly derives < older *ci- < OIA tri- and po- < OIA catva
rah ‘four’ (4655 – cf. there Pr. čp¯ u ‘four’).

19. Bhal. d2gd ‘jealousy’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 142]) < OIA dagdhá- ‘burnt’ (6121). Must be a borrowing, but from which source? 20. Pang., Old Cam. and P¯ ad.. m¯egh ‘rain’, Dari. mek ‘cloud’, Rab. megh ‘cloud, sky’ and PKT *mEgH O, mEgH OlO ‘cloud’: because semantically they belong to OIA meghá‘cloud, rain’ (10302) and not to méghya- ‘being in or coming from a cloud’ (10304). But cf. also Chin. megh ‘snow’, Pang. and P¯ ad.. m¯egh ‘rain’ (LSI ix,iv: 886), Tor.cail mæk and Tor. mek ‘hailstorm’, Koh. mékh ‘hail’ (Leitner 1985: 14), Pr. (v)ud.mig ‘storm’ with first syllable < OIA *uddh¯ ud.i- ‘excessive dust’ (2025) — probably S. m¯ ak ‘dew, mist’ — Yid. miG/meG ‘cloud’, Wkh. m eG ‘cloud’, MPers., NPers. m eG ‘cloud, mist’, Arm. meg, migi, migav ‘mist, fog’, Rom. (Z.) magëa ‘fog’ (resembles Lith. miglà ‘fog’ [cf. Miller 1976: 53f.]) etc. Note also Kal. menˇȷ ‘cloud’ which may derive < OIA lex. meghaj¯ ala- ‘cloud-collection, a mass of clouds, thick clouds’. Here especially interesting is Klm. m¯ agäšur HL ‘cloud, fog’, which appears to be a synonym compound with -äšur probably cognate with OIA *¯ aks.ara- ‘flowing, dripping (1022) but actually deriving from older *žh ara- < PIIr. *gžh ara-; devoicing perhaps similar as in Kal. čhom ‘earth’ (p. 144). Regarding the underlying semantics of -äšur, it is also remarkable that a meaning ‘cloud’ for OIA KS.AR ‘float’ is only attested for the Śvet¯ aśvatara-upanis.ad and for modern reflexes of the Indo-Iranian-related form *žh ara-, namely Khet. jhar ‘cloud’ and Western Kc. hOro ‘clouded over’ as reflexes of OIA jhara- ‘waterfall’ (5343). Both Khet. and Kc. are spoken in peripheral areas. The megh-forms appear to be the results of repeated borrowings and not of different derivations. Note: The persistence for preservation of the middle consonant may also have something to do with the former existence of accidentally similar Austro-Asiatic words. Even though there is now no clear evidence from Munda, c.f. e.g. Mon31 Because Dardic language normally have vigesimal systems.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

7.7. Alternations y ∼ v ∼ h

209

Khmer Souei meek ‘cloud’, Bru mee:k ‘cloud’, Surin Khmer mı:P ‘a cloud, the sky’, Khsing-Mul mO:k ‘cloud, fog’, Phong mO:P ‘cloud, fog, mist’, Nyah Kur méek ‘cloud’ and Lawa Pmaïk ‘cloud, smoke’. Sometimes unusual archaic-looking forms are also found as apparently old borrowings in non Indo-Aryan languages in the west. Examples: Brah. and Bal. kap¯ıñjar ‘partridge’ ← OIA kapiñjala- ‘the francoline partridge’ (cf. below [p. 559], Mult. etc. kanjul ‘partridge’), Brah. kap¯ ot ‘pigeon’ (which appears to be the same as Kann. gupt¯ı ‘dove’) ← OIA kapóta- ‘pigeon, dove’; karp¯ as ‘cotton’ ← OIA karp¯ asa- ‘cotton’ (also found in Kt. karboš and regarded by Konow [1911: 16] as a loan word), p¯ ad ‘leg; foot’ (cf. Bal. ph aD) ← OIA pa
da- ‘foot’, r¯ am ‘dark patches on a pregnant woman’ ← OIA r¯ amá- ‘dark, black’. Notes: (a) Cognate with r¯ amá- are the following forms: Pr. z.@, s.˜@ ‘soot, sooty’, z.˜ı ‘rußig’ — Bng. rumO ‘reddish’, rumrO ‘shining reddish (usually evening sky, shimmering in front of one’s eyes)’, rumrumO ‘shining dark red, dim’; Ku. rumuk ‘coming up of twilight’ and r¯ atõ-ram ‘in the middle of night’, Garh. rumak ‘twilight’ (note several times change a > u); cognate are also OIA r am
- ‘night’ (EWA) and Un.a ¯. rumra- ‘tawny (or “the dawn”), beautiful’, but last meaning is, according to EWA, associated with OIA RAM i.a. ‘enjoy, please’. KEWA refers possible further parallels outside IE and, in fact, Bomhard (1995: 42) reconstructs PN *rum-/*rom- ‘to grow or become dark, to darken’ with possible parallels in Kartvelian and Finno-Ugrian. But note also PTB #2624 *r(u/i)m ‘dark; shade; dusk, twilight’. (b) Here perhaps also l ankur

O n.m. ‘Central and Western Himalayan name for

God Bhairava’ (he has frequently the function of a guardian god) if < OIA *l¯ ama-kud.a- ‘black boy, dark son’; regarding first word see OIA *l¯ ama- ‘defective’ (11021) where Turner suggests comparison with r¯ amá-, second word < OIA *kud.a-1 ‘boy, son’ (3245). Note also the well-known parallel name k¯ al bhairav, and in the temple of God Mah¯ asu in village Hanol in Bangan, Bhairava is also called Ong

arua b r “the coal-black hero” < OIA ang¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’ (123) (with -ua suffix) and v¯ırá- ‘hero’ (12056).

7.7

Alternations y ∼ v ∼ h There is repeated Kalasha h(u) < v(a) as e.g. in bišahúr ‘city of Peshawar’, ahú ‘bread’ < ap¯ upá- ‘cake of flour’ (491); duvdúv ∼ duhudúhu ‘hot to touch’ < d¯ uyate ‘is burned’ (6494) shows the complete alternation found in Kal.: h ∼ v ∼ y; note also sav ∼ s.av ∼ sáhu all ‘all’ < sárva- ‘all’ and siv ∼ síhu ‘bridge’ < sétu- ‘bridge’, yúru ‘vein’ (also Kho.) < OIA hira
- ‘vein, artery’ (14113). It might be accidental, but F. B. J. Kuiper finds exactly the same alternation in Munda, namely a “sporadic change of intervocalic y and w to h” (1948: 7 and 75). A somewhat similar change of h > y is found in Iranian Wkh. soyib ‘Sahib’, Kho. yom"n ‘winter’ < OIA hemantá- ‘winter’ (14164) and in Paš. y¯ım ‘snow’ (Buddruss [1959b: 72]) < OIA himá- ‘snow’ and Sh. y¯ onu ‘winter’ < OIA  © 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

210

Chapter 7. Segmental and suprasegmental processes hemantá- ‘winter’ (14164),32 , and of v > h in saha
r ‘in the morning’ (Buddruss [1959b: 63]) < OIA *sav¯ ara- ‘in good time’ (13290) with modern parallels in S. and G.; note also Bur. du-váltal-‘to roast (kernels etc.)’ but Bur.ys. du-háltal- ‘ditto’ (Berger [1998: 463]); and reverse h > v in Pr. vut¯ a ‘priest; priestess’ if < OIA hotraka- ‘assistant of the hotrr-, priest’ (14176), suv"an ‘metal file’ (Eisenfeile) ← Pers. s¯ uh¯ an and ˇȷav¯ as  Ar.-Pers. jah¯ ‘airplane’ ← az; Kt. gř"ov ‘cupped handful’ < OIA gr¯ aha- ‘seizing’ (4382) and in Pal. l ov st ‘male of Himalayan pheasant’ < OIA *lohis.t.ha- ‘very red’ (11169) and

in several D ar ‘thousand’, . ogr¯ı words: jvar ‘thousand’ < older *jhar < *hjar ← Pers. haz¯ bvana ‘pretext’ ← Pers. bah¯ ana ‘pretext’ (Gauri Shankar [1931: 165]), kvani ‘story’ < older *k(@)hani < OIA kathana- ‘narration’ (2702) (1931: 128), and many other similar cases. Note also Chin. yaka ‘chest’ < OIA váks.as- ‘breast, chest’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 37]) and note Nuristani Ash. v¯ u ‘louse’ < OIA yu
ka- ‘louse’ (10512) and same change in Kamd. a ¯v"es.i (ãv"es.i?) ‘unhealthy’ if < OIA an¯ ayus.ya- ‘not imparting long life, fatal to long life’, and inversely Kho. y"udur ‘clear sky’ < OIA v¯ıdhrá- ‘clear sky, sunshine’ (12051), and (p >) v > h > x is found in Kho. xúr ‘other; more’ < OIA apará- ‘other’ (434). Similar alternations are also known from Western Tibetan as in Balt. ha-bu ‘wolf’ but Tib. wa ‘fox’ (Spriggs [2002: 73]), and in eastern Iranian languages: Orm. w¯ o.k, wokh ‘water’ but Wkh. yupk ‘water’ both < Av. a ¯p-, Orm w¯ o.kă, wy¯ uk ‘dry’ < Av. huška-, and prothetic y- in Orm y¯ asp ‘horse’ < Av. aspa- etc. Note also that in many Romani lects there is e.g. besides (h)at(h) ‘hand’ also vat(h). And note Geiger (1916 § 46) for alternation y ∼ v in Pali (with many examples) and occasional examples from southeastern Rohingya like bivu 
s ‘unconscious’ ← Pers. behoś. A trace of a related but simpler process, namely historical change of v- > h-, is also known to me in just one example from Khotan Saka: Khot. hus.s.- ‘to grow’ < Av. vaxš-, uxš- which is cognate with OIA VAKS. ‘to grow’ (see also EWA). And inversely in Psht. wuč and Minj. wušk ‘dry’ < Av. huška-. Change of -y- > -h- in Chin. mohar ‘peacock’ < OIA mayu
ra- (Kaul [2006 ii: 42]).

32 Turner suggests for this Shina word and some related forms derivation < OIA *rtuvanta- which  is not necessary and semantically not convincing.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 8 Developments of inherited syllable structures

In the previous section, I showed that there is a large number of Indo-Aryan languages – admittedly not the focus of attention in Indo-Aryan philology to this day – that show a whole range of similarities in the historical development of consonant clusters that have hardly been registered in the relevant literature, and if so, then merely as “exceptions to the mainstream developments” (Masica [1991: 195ff.]). Although the differences between Outer and Inner Languages in the treatment of the development of syllable structures do not appear to be as contrasting as in the case of consonant clusters (even though both are inextricably interlinked), here again the clear distinction between Outer and Inner Languages can be seen. Wilhelm Geiger tries to subsume the development from Old to Middle Indo-Aryan consonant groups thus (1916 § 52): . . . assimilation of the consonant groups. It takes place in such a way that the consonant with lesser resistance force assimilates to the consonant with stronger resistance force. The resistance force decreases in the order mutae1 – sibilants – nasals – l, v, y, r.2 Richard Pischel, on whose book Geiger oriented himself, draws in addition a distinction that is important in our context, namely between regressive and progressive assimilation, i.e. e.g. between sákthi- ‘thigh’ > satthi- versus svápna- ‘sleep’ > soppa-. The direction of the assimilation is determined by the enforcement hierarchy. Oskar on Hinüber notes similarly (§ 225) that in Sanskrit consonants of different orders (varga) could combine in clusters, but in Middle Indo-Aryan this was not anymore tolerated, and consonant groups had to belong to the same order. This included genuine geminates, but also homorganic clusters with first element a nasal consonant. In such consonant sequences, the second element could be aspirated. Because of a shortening of maximally three moras in a Sanskrit syllable to two moras in (most of the) Prakrits (“Two-Mora Rule” only VCC or VVC) and because of a maximum number of one consonant in initial position, Sanskrit groups of more than two consonants had to be reduced in Prakrit,3 e.g. OIA k¯ aryà- ‘work to be done’ > 1 Plosives. 2 “. . . Assimilation der Konsonantengruppen. Sie erfolgt in der Weise, daß der Konsonant von geringerer Widerstandskraft sich dem Konsonanten von stärkerer Widerstandskraft angleicht. Die Widerstandskraft nimmt ab in der Reihenfolge Mutae – Zischlaute – Nasale – l, v, y, r.” 3 Hans Henrich Hock (2009: 160) distinguishes several types of this rule: vowel shortening, cluster simplification and anaptyxis and resyllabification.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

212

Chapter 8. Developments of inherited syllable structures

MIA kajja-, OIA d¯ırghá- ‘long’ > MIA d¯ıgha-, OIA má.tsya- ‘fish’ > MIA ma.ccha-, kráma- > kama-, r¯ ajñah. > r¯ ajin¯ o. From Middle to New Indo-Aryan, one of the most important and here relevant changes was reduction of MIA geminates to one consonant with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel. It is well-known that there were also exceptions to these common developments. For instance, consonant clusters were preserved in different peripheral areas (and in non-koiné lects) and the two-mora situation was preserved e.g. in Panjabi agg ‘fire’ < MIA aggi- and in other languages.

8.1

Syllable structures

8.1.1

Some remarks on the disparate fate of geminates in Indo-Aryan

Proto-Indo-European avoided geminates and one of the strategies was to insert -s- between two dental stops. Different treatments of geminates in the making in the Iranian and Indo-Aryan branches demonstrates a major contrast: PIIr. *číts tiš ‘thought’ > Av. čisti- with deletion of initial consonant but OIA cítti- ‘thought’ with deletion of the inserted sibilant. In this connection, Kobayashi notes (2004: 38): . . . Avestan strictly disallows gemination, whereas Old Indo-Aryan has geminates in profusion, and the Pr¯ atiś¯ akhya texts even prescribe gemination of etymologically single consonants in certain clusters. Some fundamental change in the restrictions on consonant clusters seems to underlie this divergence, and it must be within Indo-Aryan that the change took place. Already in Proto-Iranian, geminates were simplified (Skjærvø in Windfuhr [2009: 50, 63]), Sogdian and Khotanese had no geminates (Kümmel 2014), and in Persian it is a marginal feature (Windfuhr and Perry in Windfuhr [2009: 428]). Also Kümmel confirms (2014): Consonantal quantity, however, was not relevant in Old Iranian and most of Middle Iranian; geminates are mostly absent or isolated within the system. This state of affairs is probably inherited from Proto-Indo-Iranian and ProtoIndo-European . . . The Indo-Aryan geminates are clearly secondary; they arose from original clusters by assimilation or simplification . . . Non-phonological gemination was rather frequent since as a rule, the first consonant in clusters was lengthened . . . Regarding modern East Iranian languages, Josef Elfenbein notes on Pashto: “Consonant gemination is . . . unknown in Pashto” (1997: 737). Most likely, a similar situation also pertains to Wakhi, Yidhga-Munˇȷ¯ı, etc. At least, I cannot find any statement to the contrary in Morgenstierne’s and Yoshie’s publications on Iranian languages.

8.1.2

The two-mora rule and its different evolutions

It is now significant that also many Nuristani and Dard languages do not have geminates and usually there are no traces of former geminates in contrast to the situation for instance in Hindi.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

8.1. Syllable structures

213

1. Prasun Gemination is only found in particular combinations like čču(v)- (besides č@č¯ u- ‘to trim, comb [a beard])’ and rr is found only in ideophones like čerr ‘sound of flowing water’ (see Buddruss und Degener [2017: 63]); in Waigal¯ı there is occasional emphatic gemination in the word öčü ‘very’ as in öččü apal"a ‘very, very bad’ (Degener [1998: 29]). 2. Indus Kohistani There are very few long geminates and there are no examples of a minimal contrast based on short vs long consonants. Ind. c h2yttu
‘kid of a goat’ ← c h2tu
‘a die; a type of sweet’ not < *lad.d.u-2 but recent
plus dimin. suffix -tu
; laddu

borrowing from Urdu.

3. Kashmiri “There are no geminates in Kashmiri. The geminates in borrowed words are reduced to single consonants” (Omkar Koul [2005: 169]). Examples are as follows: Hindi (Urdu) – Kashmiri khaddar – kh@d1r ‘cotton cloth’ < OIA *khaddara- ‘coarse cloth’ (3808). bacc¯ a – bac1 ‘child’ ← Pers. bacca. gann¯ a – gan1 ‘sugarcane’ < gan.d.a-2 ‘joint of plant’ (3998). 4. Brok-skad “Gemination: It is not a significant feature of the speech” (D. D. Sharma [1996: 44]). 5. Shina Radloff observes (199: 43): “In the phonetically transcribed Gilgiti Shina data, there are instances of doubled (geminate) consonants, namely [ll] and [tt] , and also a word-medially trilled [˜r] . . . Investigation has shown that these are not phonemes, rather they are the result of vowel deletion in casual pronunciation or fast speech.” 6. Kalam Kohistani (Bashkar¯ık) Joan Baart (1997: 39): “Word-medial consonant clusters typically consist of a nasal or liquid, followed by an unaspirated obstruent.” No mention of geminates. 7. Kalasha Similar to Kashmiri, Indo-Aryan standard forms with geminates are simplified. Some examples: čúču ‘breast, nipple’ < OIA *cuccu- ‘female breast, nipple’ (4855). kháča ‘dangerous, wild, uncivilized, bad, strong’ < OIA *kacca- ‘mud, dirt’ (3153.2, 14343). .lúc.a ‘without filling, etc.’ < OIA *lucca- ‘defective’ (11073.1). pučúk ‘penis’ < OIA púccha- ‘tail, hinder part’ (8249). raˇȷhúk ‘rope made of goathair’ < OIA rájju- ‘rope, cord’ (10582). narku 
ku ‘rooster, cock’ < OIA kukkut.a- ‘cock’ (3208.).

8. Shumashti Morgenstierne (1945c: 248) lists four examples of geminates: utthal@ ‘high’ < OIA *utthala- ‘high’ (1804), phot.t.äy ‘to break’ < OIA *phat.t.- ‘crack!’ (9038), phaggu ‘fan’ < OIA paks.á- ‘wing’, etc. (7627 – cf. there e.g. similar P. phangh ˙ ‘wing’ and D og. ph2 ng

‘feather’) and banna ‘dress’ cf. perhaps WPah. poet. bamn o ‘to wear’ . . which is < OIA várman- ‘armour’ (11389). 9. Torwali Grierson notes (1929: 16): “As in Prakrit and Apabhramśa, ˙ the first consonant of the conjunct is usually dropped; but, as in other Dardic languages, the remaining consonant is not doubled.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

214

Chapter 8. Developments of inherited syllable structures

10. Savi According to Buddruss (1967: 17), no geminates were observed except in the borrowing mullá. ‘Mullah’. 11. Wotapuri-Katarqala According to Buddruss (1960: 19), geminates were not observed. 12. Pashai According to Morgenstierne (1956: 51), there are a few inherited cases, a few other cases are merely phonotactic. 13. G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Specialists on the language, e.g. F. E. Pargiter (1914: 128), agree that it must have had geminates. Also Ingo Strauch notes (2012: 153) that even though geminated consonants are not graphemically indicated as such, “a preconsonantal r and a post-consonantal v was also occasionally used to designate consonant clusters, including geminated consonants” (2012: 147). He quotes an example from a Mathura epigraph of the Kus.a ¯n.a period in which graphemic derya corresponds with MIA deyya ‘gift’(?). One more argument in favor of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı geminates has been pointed out by Stefan Baums (pers. comm.) that on a famous gold coin of Kan.is.ka one reads in Greek letters the name of the Buddha as 𝛽𝑜𝛿𝛿𝑜 with normal u > o in closed syllables.4 . However, despite these arguments in favor for geminates in written G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, it is not known whether also the local vernaculars had geminates for an observable amount of time. Still, the conclusion is unavoidable that these languages possessed geminates for at least a very short time. Otherwise the transition from OIA saptá- to sat could not be explained. Here to be considered is a veiling effect due to a certain tendency in several Nuristani and Dardic languages for neutralization of vowel length: The distinction has disappeared from Nuristani Prasun with the exception of short vowel a which is phonologically contrasting with long vowel a ¯ (Buddruss und Degener [2017: 51.]), which also seems to hold true for Waigal¯ı (Degener [1998: 28]) and for Gawar-Bati (Morgenstierne [1950b: 9]) and perhaps also for Savi (Buddruss [1967: 12]). According to Trail and Cooper, the distinction has completely disappeared from Dardic Kalasha which has no long vowels;5 Khowar knows phonetic vowel length differences, but Bashir concludes (in Cardona and Jain [2003: 843]): “It appears that length alone is not contrastive and that Khowar may be characterizable as a pitch accent system like that of Gilgit Shina.” Other Dard languages, for instance Kalami and Indus Kohistani, have kept relatively intact (of course, together with all kinds of changes and restrictions) the inherited vowel length contrasts. Masica observes (1991: 197f.):

The earliest and most characteristic NIA development, namely the shortening of MIA geminates with compensatory lengthening of the preceding short vowel . . . did not obtain (usually – there are always exceptions) in areas of the northwest centering on Punjabi and ‘Lahnda’ . . . For these two languages he quotes as examples P. and L. agg ‘fire’ and satt ‘seven’ and adds that they are usually pronounced with a short @ at the end. The same retention he finds in Sindh¯ı, in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı R¯ ambani, P¯ ogul¯ı, Kasht.aw¯ ar.¯ı and Sir¯ aj¯ı of D . od.a, in Dardic Shina of Gures, and in the Gojari dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı. I can add here 4 See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanishka#/media/File:Coin_of_Kanishka_I.jpg 5 Even though there seem to exist a few special contexts in which vowel length contrast is still effective. See Mørch and Heegaard (1997: chapter 7).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

8.1. Syllable structures

215

Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı,6 Kot.gar.h¯ı satt (also s¯ at) ‘seven’, Surkhul¯ı satt ‘seven’. Thus one finds in these languages preservation of a state of syllable structures corresponding with the state of development in Middle Indo-Aryan. Note: Related with the two-mora rule but also somewhat different is the preservation of OIA words with original geminates preceded by short vowels which otherwise also changed into single consonant with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel, as can be seen for instance in OIA pit.t.ayati ‘stamps into a solid mass’ > Pk. pit.t.aï > H. p¯ıt.n¯ a. Here the MIA stage is preserved in dialects of Mar¯ at.h¯ı and Konkan ˙ .¯ı,7 in Chittagongian and Rohingya language,8 and in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı plus adjacent variants.9 One takes one more step back into the linguistic past with reference to the question of preservation of OIA long vowels before clusters. Masica notes (1991: 198): . . . Sindhi, some ‘Lahnda’ and Punjabi dialects, and some Dardic and West Pahari dialects also show evidence of a much earlier retention, that of long vowels before double consonants (shortened in conjunction with the simplification of clusters in Pali and mainstream Prakrit) . . . He quotes i.a. L., P. p¯ ass¯ a < OIA p¯ arśvá- ‘side’ (but Pk. passa-, p¯ asa-; Or. p¯ asa, Kamd. p¯ as."ü ‘mountainside; slope’); P. a ¯t.t.a ¯ ‘flour’ < OIA *¯ arta- ‘flour’ (1338); P. a ¯n.d.a ¯ ‘egg’ < OIA a ¯n.d.á- (but Pa. an.d.a-);10 H.kau. g¯ ad.d.¯ı ‘cart’ < OIA *g¯ ad.d.a- ‘car’ (4116). A similar non-occurrence of the two-mora rule has been reported by Hans Hock for Western(?) MIA forms like a ¯tpa- ‘obtained, reached’ (OIA a ¯ptá-), n¯ asti ‘there is not’ (like OIA), etc. (Hock in Hock and Bashir [2016: 27, 260]). I can add here the following forms from Dard languages: Šat.. ko nd, dialectal Paš. k¯ an.d. and Gaw. k¯ an.d. all ‘arrow’ < OIA ka
nda




‘arrow’ (but Pa. kan.d.a- and Nuristani Kamd. ko"n.); Šat.. po nd ‘whey’ < OIA paun.d.rá- ‘pale



straw colour’; Dm. dr¯ıga ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá- (Pa. d¯ıgha-, Pk. diggha-, d¯ıha-); Pal. "b¯ıdri ‘clear, blue (sky)’ and Dm. br¯edi ‘clear sky’ < OIA v¯ıdhrá- ‘clear sky, sunshine’ (but Pa. biddha-). In all the here quoted languages, the common Middle Indo-Aryan stage has been preserved. The situation is different in case of Nuristani and Dardic. In case of OIA saptá-, the majority has preserved the short first vowel, but has reduced *-tt- to -t(-). Since this innovation is found between Nuristani and Kashmiri, it cannot be a recent change but is 6 Examples from Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, are: puttO ‘(a) fierce, grim (man)’ < OIA pus.t.á- ‘big; strong’; bOttanO

strike a match, spark’ < OIA vartáyati ‘causes to turn’; ratti

(also bOrtanO) ‘to light, set fire to,

OIA r a
tr - ‘night’; bOzzanO ‘to grow (as plant)’ < vardhyate ‘is caused to grow’. A ‘morning’ < dental voiced sibilant geminate is also found in Bhal. bhuzz ‘birch tree bark’ (Kaul [2006 i: 77) < OIA bh¯ urja- ‘birch tree’ and in Bhad. azz ‘today’ < OIA adyá-. 7 Some examples from Ko.S.: viccu ‘scorpion’ < Pa. vicchika- ‘scorpion’ (Pk. vicchia- but H. poet. b¯ıch¯ a), all E ‘ginger’ < Pa. allaka- < OIA *¯allaka- (1341) (but M. ¯al˜e) etc. 8 Cf. e.g. B.chit. àd.d.i and B.roh.  a
ddi both ‘bone’ < Pk. had.d.a- < OIA lex. had.d.a- ‘bone’ (but H.

h¯ ar.). 9 A few examples from Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı: tOkkO ‘miser, niggard’ < OIA (Kath¯ as.) t.akka- ‘a niggard (?)’ (see

EWA) with no known modern parallels but cf. difference with B. t.¯ ak ‘bald patch’ < OIA *t.akka‘bald’ (5422); kOttO ‘young buffalo’ < OIA *kat.t.a- ‘young male animal’ (2645) (but Ku. k¯ at.o),

(RV) nisatta- ‘sitting, seated’ (without known modern parallels), etc. ni
sOttO ‘tired’ < OIA . 10 Compare also trimoraic but with dental consonants West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Sir.Suk. ¯ anni ‘egg’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 225]). Mayrhofer mentions also with dental consonants Aitareya-¯ aran.yaka 3,2,1 ¯ anda- ‘egg’; and there is G.pars. d u ‘egg’ (Gajendragadkar 1974).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

216

Chapter 8. Developments of inherited syllable structures

possibly the result of contact with East Iranian languages. Examples: Kamd., Kt. s"ut, Pr. s@t"@ ; Kho., Pal. s"ot, Klm. sat Hy, Sh. sat. Lengthening of initial -a- is found in Nuristani San.. s´¯ ot and Dardic Ind. sa th . Between Vedic and Classical Sanskrit on the one hand and mainstream Prakrit on the other one can identify mainly in western and northwestern New Indo-Aryan languages (but to some extend also in Chittagongian and Rohingya) different stages of preservation of OIA syllable structures between the two poles of Old and mainstream Middle Indo-Aryan. The occasional preservation of inherited trimoraic syllable structures in Dardic and elsewhere but apparently not found in Nuristani is a reconfirmation of Kobayashi’s observation (2004: 7) regarding the linguistic principle that languages cannot skip a node in their historical development. Whereas Nuristani is archaic regarding preservation of some Proto-Iranian features, Dardic and some nearby languages are archaic with regard to preservation of some Proto-Indo-Aryan and Old Indo-Aryan features.

8.2

Geminates and Vedic accent in non-inherited Sanskrit words

Vedic accent has also spread onto words that are not inherited, e.g. OIA angan

a
- ‘(beautiful) woman’ for which Austro-Asiatic origin has been proposed, or kamsá˙ ‘bell-metal’ whose origin is unclear, etc. Whereas in case of inherited words with geminates (typically found at morpheme boundaries) there does not seem to exist any kind of relationship between accent position and a geminate, this seems to be relevant in case of borrowings. In all examples which I could find, the accent is in oxytonic position. Speculating that these words entered the language at a later stage of Sanskrit in a dialect area where the accent position got fixed somehow similar as in Latin where the accent was located on the “[p]enultimate or antepenultimate syllable . . . depending up the weight of the penult” (Sandell [2014: 2]) is very uncertain. Since practically all of the following lemmata are more or less certainly borrowings from Austro-Asiatic, it is more likely that Austro-Asiatic sesquisyllabic syllable structure had an impact on the interpretation of these words by Sanskrit lexicographers. 1. OIA cikkán.a- ‘slippery, unctuous’ (4782). Mayrhofer (EWA) considers Dravidian origin, but Munda origin appears more likely: Sant. cikãr., cikon ‘oily, greasy, polished, glazed, shiny, slimy, silky, smooth’, Gta" cikcik ‘shiny’ and perhaps cikni ‘dal and rice cooked together’, Korku cikna ‘(be) smooth’. 2. OIA Dh¯ atup. cukkáyati ‘inflicts or suffers pain’ (4849) with just one not entirely certain modern reflex in Pal. čuk- ‘to bite, sting’ to which I add P. (Potohari) cuk ‘a thrust (with a pointed instrument or stick)’ and cokn¯ a ‘to pierce; to plant seeds by making a little hole in the ground’. For Mayrhofer (EWA) origin is unclear, but again the lemma is very likely of Austro-Asiatic origin: cf. Proto-Pray-Pram *cuP ‘sick, pain’ and Proto Khmuic *c1 uP ‘sick, pain’ and Mlabri choP ‘ache; feel pain; ill’ and Khmu (deriv.) cúP ‘pain’ and T"in soP ‘to have pain’, Nancowry cOk ‘pain, ache’ and Car c@k ‘pain’, Lamet suP ‘pain’ — cf. also Proto-Kherwarian *hasO ‘pain, fever’ and Korku kasu ‘sick; ache; pain’ with same prefix as e.g. Mon-Khmer Wa hsau ‘pain, disease’ and Danaw k@ µu1 ‘to be ill, in pain, a sore’. 3. kut.t.áyati ‘pounds’ (3241). According to Mayrhofer (EWA), probably borrowing from Dravidian; cf. DEDR (1671) with many reflexes, but similar forms are also found in Munda: Sant. kuú@m ‘to hammer, to drive in, or give a blow with a hammer or mallet;

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

8.3. Overview of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı geminates

4. 5.

6.

7.

8.3

217

to fell, as an ox’ and Sant. of Paharpur kut1si ‘hammer’, Mundari koúasi ‘hammer’, Korwa koúe¼ ‘to hammer’. OIA Dh¯ atup. khat.t.áyati ‘hides’, *‘overcomes’. Origin is unclear for Mayrhofer (EWA) and I do not find parallels in other close-by language families. OIA ghat.t.áyati1 ‘rubs, touches, shakes’ (4417) but OIA (Suśr.) ghát.t.ate. To the CDIAL list is to be added Ind. ghat2
v  ‘to stir (e.g., soup)’. Origin of the OIA word is

Munda is worth considering (also in the opinion unclear for Mayrhofer (EWA). Again of Kuiper [1948: 56]): Bodo-Gadaba gaúei ‘to stir (liquid)’ and Bondo gaú- ‘to stir’, also Sant. ghan.t.a ‘to stir’ and a reconstruction Proto-Kherwarian *hOúaP ‘to stir’ which is incomprehensible for me. OIA Dh¯ atup. put.t.áyati ‘ is or becomes small’ (8256). Mayrhofer (EWA) considers quizzically Dravidian origin and refers to DEDR 4259 Ta. pot.i ‘that which is small, a little child’. But cf. also Sant. poúyo¼t ‘small, applied to children’, Korwa puãa ‘small in size’ and perhaps Bodo-Gadaba puãra/puãri ‘male/female buffalo calf’. Cf. perhaps also Bur. píto ‘small (boy, horse)’. This looks like a ‘North Indian’ word. OIA pittá- ‘bile’ (8181). According to Mayrhofer (EWA) the origin of the word is not clarified. Again Austro-Asiatic origin is not unlikely: Bodo-Gadaba pit ‘bile’, Sant. pit ‘gall, anger, wrath’ — Proto-Bahnaric *-m1t ‘gall, bile’, Proto-West Bahnaric pnat ‘gall, bile’, Proto-Katuic *m1t ‘gall, bile’, Surin Khmer pmat ‘bile’, Khsing-Mul m1t ‘bile, gall’, cf. Thavung bì: ‘gall, bile’.

Overview of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı geminates

Note that in the following examples in all cases final short OIA -a has been preserved as -O:

Velar stops tOkkO n.m. ‘miser, niggard’ — A. t6k6na (t.akan¯a) ‘wretchedly poor’ < OIA (Kath¯ as.) t.akka- ‘a niggard (?)’ (see EWA) — cf. also Pnar dOk ‘stingy’; dakkE lagnO ‘to

ãoko stagger’ < OIA *d.ag-1 ‘tremble’ (5522) plus -kO2 suffix — cf. also Sant. ãik@-ã. ake, ãiko‘unstable; shaky, loose; tossing, staggering’ and perhaps Korku tigi tigi ‘to tremble or shake from cold or fright; dokkO n.m. ‘fresh grass growing on a recently burnt meadow’11 < OIA *dukka- ‘second’ analogous with *trikka- ‘group of three’(?); mukkO n.m. ‘punch’ < OIA *mukka-1 ‘blow with fist’ (10150).

Retroflex stops kOttO2 n.m. ‘a young buffalo’ < OIA *kat.t.a- ‘young male animal’ (2645);



kuttO n.m. ‘a horned animal presently without horns’ < OIA *kut.t.a- ‘defective (hornless)’



(3238); kuddEnO ‘to glow, shine; to rejoice’ < Pa. kun.d.ati ‘burns’ (3399); khOddEnO ‘to

< OIA kandu



scratch, rub’ . . ¯yáti ‘scratches’ (2689) (perhaps contaminated); khad.d.i n.f. ‘loom’ < OIA *khad.d.a- ‘hole, pit’ (3790)12 — cf. Sant. khad ‘a mine, a pit’; khittO ‘old, fagged-out

a hoofed animal’ (as person)’ < OIA *khit.t.a- ‘secretion’ (3156); khuttO n.m. ‘hoof, leg of



2 < OIA *khut.t.a- ‘leg’ (3894); khot.t.i2 ‘odd (as numeral)’ < OIA *khot.t.a- ‘blemish’ (3931) 11 This [intentional] burning is a common herder’s technique. 12 Traditionally, weavers sit at the edge of a pit with one end of the weaving texture fixed to a belt, which itself is bound around the belly of the weaver.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

218

Chapter 8. Developments of inherited syllable structures

and zottO ‘even-numbered’ < OIA *yut.t.a- ‘joined’ (10496);13 gaddO n.m. ‘hole’ < *gad.d.a



‘hole’ (3981); c Odda n.m.,n.f. ‘person who lifts, steals, gossips’ probably < OIA *cad.d.- ‘eat’



(4577); puttO adj.;n.m. ‘(a) fierce, grim (man)’ < OIA pus.t.á- ‘big’ (8300); bOddu n.m. ‘pot

for cooking lentils’ < OIA *bhad.d.u- ‘cooking vessel’ (9368);
settO n.m. ‘cone of various cedar



trees’ and śet.t.u n.m. “ ‘goitre” of hens’ < OIA *cet.t.a- ‘defective’ (4904)? But cf. OIA *sit.t.a‘ear of corn’ (13396) and above p. 119. Note also Kt.g. zat.t.u ‘illegitimate child’ < OIA j¯ atá- ‘son’ (5182) (“with dimin. suffix -t.u. . . pejorative function?” [Hendriksen]).

Dental stops ni
sOttO ‘tired’ < OIA (RV) nis.atta- ‘sitting, seated’; bettO ‘(excessively) overdoing, exaggerating’ probably < OIA vyàkta- ‘adorned’ (12156) (cf. e.g. vyàkta-m¯ aricika‘much peppered’), note the idiomatic expression seu betti14 thokE15 laiO16 ‘he lets fly, or kicks

strike a match spark’ < OIA over the traces’; bOttanO (also bOrtanO) ‘to light, set fire to,



1 vartáyati ‘causes to turn’ (11356); ratti n.f. ‘morning’ < OIA ra
tr - ‘night’ (10702) (but gemination gets lost in rat¯ı-r¯ at adv. ‘very early in the morning’); lOtti n.f. ‘quick departure’ and lOtti dennO ‘to push off’ < OIA *latt¯ a- ‘kick’ (10931) — also found in Munda Bondo latek, lat ‘a kick’, Bodo-Gadaba lat marei ‘to kick, to stamp (the feet)’ and Korku ladde laddo ‘the sound of hitting or kicking’.

Labial stops Voiced stops are not documented: c appO n.f. (?) ‘hold, grip’ < *capp‘press’ (4674);17 c uppO n.m. ‘shock of hair; overgrown peak’ < (an unaspirated sideform of?) OIA *chupp- ‘cover, hide’ (5058).

Nasal consonants dennO ‘to give’ < PK. *dinna- ‘given’ (with vowel change due to parallel denO ‘to give’); khinnO, khinni n.m.,n.f. ‘udder of sheep or goat’ (Deog. khirni ‘ditto’)

< OIA ks¯ırín- ‘yielding milk’ (3704). somehow .

Liquids (a) There are no -rr-geminates which derive from OIA or MIA forms, but the second -r- is usually the emphatic -r- grammeme: kurr anO ‘to swell (part of the body)’ < ?;

etc. khOrr anO ‘to scratch, bruise’ < OIA *skar- ‘scrape’ (13645)

(b) ollO n.m. ‘a torch’ (connected with ulkEnO ‘to flame or blaze up’ and ulkO n.m. ‘a shooting

star; fire-light’ for which see p. 551 and Western Nepal shamanic language ulk¯ a ‘comet’ in index of Maskarinec 1998) connection with OIA ud.u- ‘star’ is unclear; kullO n.m. ‘live coals, embers’ probably < older *kurlO (for further IE connections see below p. 768); khOllO n.m. ‘temporary fence (for cattle) in the forest’ probably < OIA khalla-2 ‘trench’ (3849); poet. zallE lanO (H. lag¯ an¯ a) ‘(as two fighters) to bump together or collide (with the heads)’ not <

OIA jhalla‘a price-fighter, cudgel-player’ but (because of lack of tone) < Pa. jalla- ‘athlete, 13 The geminated consonant, however, changes into single consonant in zot.i-khot.i. According to a local legend the odd figures belong to the god of the dead and the even figures to God in heaven. 14 The feminine ending is perhaps due to unexpressed bu
sE n.f.pl. ‘talks’. 15 ← thoknO ‘to hammer’.

of l anO ‘to attach’. 16 Absolutive

to be a borrowing from Austro-Asiatic (see p. 927). 17 The lemma seems

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

8.4. Examples for preservation of geminates in Rohingya

219

acrobate’ respectively Pk. jalla- ‘tight-rope walker; Seiltänzer’; tOllE z or n.m. ‘lower back,

a- [10496]). area of the hips’ < OIA *talla-2 ‘base, bottom’ (5731) (second word < *yot .

Affricates (a) Unvoiced: bO cc a ‘tinder grass’ (also Kann. ba˙ch¯a ‘tinder’) related to OIA piccayati ‘presses flat’ ? (b) Voiced: uzzO ‘worn-down, run-down, exhausted (e.g., a knee-cap after a long walking tour)’ < OIA ujjháti ‘leaves, escapes’ (1674) (?), bOzznO ‘to grow (as plant)’ < vardhyate ‘is

caused to grow’ (11386a).

8.4

Examples for preservation of geminates in Rohingya

1. addók ‘half’ < OIA ardhá- ‘half’ (Pa. addha-) with preservation of inherited accent. 2. ábbud ‘amazed’ < OIA ádbhuta- ‘wonderful’ (Pa. abbhuta-) with preservation of inherited accent. 3. ammúk ‘amazed, surprised’ cf. OIA aunmukhya- ‘expectancy, proneness’. 4. juddo jihát ‘effort’ (second word ← Ar. jih¯ ad) < OIA yatta- ‘striving ’ (10404) (Pk. jattaï ‘strives’). 5. t.okkor ‘collision’ < OUA *t.akkara- ‘blow on the head’ (5424). 6. d.abba ‘box’ < OIA *d.abba-1 ‘box’ (5528). 7. nitti ‘always’ < OIA nıtyam ‘always’ (7190) (Pa. nicca-). 8. fonná ‘knowledge’ < OIA praj na
- ‘wisdom’ (8515) (Pk. pan.n.a¯-). 9. bálluk ‘a dangerous animal’ < OIA *bhallukka- ‘bear’ (9415). 10. bissás ‘belief’ < OIA viśv¯ asa- ‘trust, confidence’ (11966) (Pa. viss¯ asa- ‘trust’). 11. sóppon ‘dream’ < OIA svápna- ‘dream’ (13904) with preservation of inherited accent.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 9 Three sundry topics

9.1

Some principles of phonological and semantic changes

Among the presented linguistic data presented below in the section ‘Linguistic data I’. the reader will come across six types of historical linguistic changes: 1. Ordinary sound changes, i.e. the formerly so-called Lautgesetze (which are the most common changes described in historical linguistics including works on IA historical linguistics) 2. Changes affecting the word or syllable structure 3. Intra-Indo-Aryan ‘calques’ or Indo-Aryan calques based on Austro-Asiatic patterns 4. Linguistic naturalization (‘Indianization’) that oversteps regular sound changes 5. Semantic-morphological amalgamations 6. Permanent semantic-morphological recreations The ordinary, i.e. the regular, historical sound changes are the usual input for historical linguistic descriptions. The descriptions are then frequently supplemented by sections describing irregular or uncommon changes. The present study deals largely with uncommon changes, however, they need to be differentiated: some uncommon changes are indeed rare, whereas other uncommon changes are either geographically limited or they represent incomplete processes which have come to a premature halt before affecting all potential targets, usually for unknown reasons, or their actually widespread existence has not been noted because their traces are only found in little studied peripheral languages. Herman Berger writes about the history of Burushaski (2008: 2): Sound laws in the strict sense of the word can only be spoken of to a limited extent. Of course, the regularities no longer apply to loanwords from neighboring languages that entered later, and dialect forms with individually deviating developments may also have influenced one another within the inherited vocabulary, quite apart from corrective analogies. Often the phonetic changes are not real rules at all, but mere tendencies.1 1 Berger: “Von Lautgesetzen im strengen Sinn des Wortes kann nur in eingeschränktem Maße gesprochen werden. Die Regelmäßigkeiten gelten natürlich nicht mehr für später eingedrungene Lehnwörter aus den Nachbarsprachen, auch können sich innerhalb des ererbten Sprachguts mundartliche Formen mit im Einzelnen abweichender Entwicklung beeinflußt haben, von

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

222

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

Berger’s observations do not only hold good for Burushaski but, in fact, for large areas of Indo-Aryan, especially for the Outer Languages. They also find confirmation in H. C. Bhayani’s observation on linguistic-historical processes in Prakrit. According to him, besides the explanation of exceptions by analogy and borrowing in Prakrit, there are also mere tendencies that apply only to certain dialects, and not always without exceptions (1997: 1). In fact, Berger’s and Bhayani’s observations are of general relevance, as has been shown by Matthew Chen and William Wang (1975). They introduced the notion of ‘lexical diffusion’ which means that phonological changes – contrary to neogrammarian and generative assumptions – do not occur instantly by affecting all relevant segments at once, but spread gradually from one morpheme to another. The authors regard two principles as fundamental (1975: 256): “the temporal and the lexical dimensions of a phonological process.” There is a chronological profile “. . . of the gradual evolution, and expansion or regression, of a single phonological process” (ibid.) and “a phonological rule gradually extends its scope of operation to a larger and larger portion of the lexicon. . . [a] phonological innovation may turn out to be ultimately regular. . . [b]ut more often than linguists have thought, a phonological rule peters out towards the end of its life span or is thwarted by another rule competing for the same lexemes” (ibid.). Possible effects are inexplicable remnants, co-existent variants, etc. (see op.cit. p. 257 for additional literature). The present study contains ample data that confirm and illustrate the theses of Chen and Wang, but here follow the six types of historical linguistic changes which in addition play important roles in historical linguistic processes: 1. Ordinary sound changes: many sound changes are either transformations (e.g. tr > c, a > u) or weakening/deletion processes (e.g. d > D > Ø). They can be further subdivided: (a) They can be, as pointed out above, complete or incomplete. (b) There can be, even within one and the same language, opposite trends like voicing of unvoiced segments (see page 334) parallel with devoicing of voiced segments (see p. 337) or deaspiration of aspirated segments (see p. 316) parallel with etymologically unmotivated aspiration of unaspirated segments (see p. 301). 2. Changes affecting the word or syllable structure: we will see that in a number of cases syllable reductions are responsible for the deletion of phonological elements and not the more common phoneme weakening processes.2 3. Indo-Aryan ‘calques’ or Indo-Aryan calques based on Austro-Asiatic patterns: this means (a) a type of diffusion where a certain semantic pattern has spread over an area of languages: the semantic pattern remains constant but different languages use different words for its realization; (b) a type of diffusion where a certain sound pattern attached to a particular meaning has spread over a certain area of languages, but nonetheless the reflexes under scrutiny cannot unambiguously be derived from one common source according to Lautgesetze. First example for (a): There is a lemma ‘elder relative’ (see p. 610) where ‘elder’ is expressed by different words but all of which literally mean ‘thick’; another example would be ‘stepmother’ (see p. 711) where ‘step-’ and ‘-mother’ are expressed by different words but all of which literally mean ‘little mother’.3 korrigierenden Analogiebildungen ganz abgesehen. Oft handelt es sich bei den lautlichen Veränderungen gar nicht um wirkliche Regeln, sondern um bloße Tendenzen.” 2 The process is also known from Prakrit, see Pischel §149. 3 The term ‘calque’ is used here in inverted commas because, whereas normally it is clear which language is the copying language and which is the original language with the pattern, this is

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.1. Some principles of phonological and semantic changes

223

Second example for (a) with calque coming from Austro-Asiatic: There is OIA gala-gan.d.a- ‘neck and cheek, or neck and Adam’s apple’.4 Both renderings are somewhat curious and for reasons that are following immediately I suggest that the OIA term simply means ‘Adam’s apple’. There is also OIA *ghan.t.a- ‘throat’ (4420) with most modern reflexes meaning ‘Adam’s apple’. The lemma has, as we see, this asterisk unnecessarily even though there is no MIA reflex. Turner suggests (ibid.) – in my view correctly – to connect *ghan.t.a- with OIA kan.t.há‘throat, neck’. In this case, gala-gan.d.a- would simply be a synonym compound meaning literally ‘throat-throat’. In Munda Korku there is gh õgh a: ‘Adam’s apple’ which has a parallel in Mon-Khmer Temiar gaNgON ‘Adam’s apple’ which itself looks like a reduplicated form. I cannot find an exact morphological correspondence *gON ‘thoat, neck’ but there are pretty similar forms like Vietic Muong kh O:N46 ‘throat, gullet’, Proto-Palaungic *kO(O)N ‘neck’, Palaungic khroaN ‘throat’, Khasic Lyngngam kraN ‘neck’, etc. In the long list ‘Linguistic data II’ there are a number of examples where Austro-Asiatic k- is reflected as g-. It is therefore quite likely that Temiar gaNgON had also the basic meaning ‘throatthroat’ and was in this function the template for OIA gala-gan.d.a. The modern IA reflexes have retained only the simple form like Munda Korku gh õgh a:. Examples for (b) are words for ‘eagle’ (see p. 737) or ‘bedbug’ (see p. 737) or ‘centipede’ (see p. 555) – thus frequently animal words – which sound similar in several languages but still do not seem to have one common etymological origin, or words for ‘virile goat’ whose very similar looking forms derive either straight from OIA (p. 617) or from a so-called ‘defective’ lemma (p. 357). The next point demonstrates processes similar to (b): 4. Linguistic naturalization overstepping regular sound changes: this means that words can get an ‘Indian language’ shape even if this is not prescribed by the regular rules for sound change; such words tend to be classified as useless for etymological argumentation, but this is not necessarily so; a small example are words for ‘butterfly and ‘flutter’ (see p. 825): Kumaun¯ı purputa¯ı, Brahui pirrik, Ishk¯ ashm¯ı parparanuk all ‘butterfly’ look so to speak normal, whereas closely related words with a more emphatic meaning ‘flutter’ obviously look more ‘Indian’: Brahui par.par., R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı of Jaipur bharbhar, etc. This is certainly a very old proclivity which continues till today as may be demonstrated with two random examples from Mar¯ at.h¯ı: v¯ aghan. ‘a compartment of a goods train (wagon)’ and v¯ ad.ht¯ı ‘birthday’; the latter word is a combination of the English word and Mar¯ at.h¯ı vardh¯ apan ‘birthday ceremonies’ which is a tatsama(!) of OIA lex. vardh¯ apana- ‘festival on a birthday or any festive occasion’ (celebration of average people’s birthday is, as is well-known, alien unclear in all cases of calques in this book. Note also that in rare instances there are calques involving Iranian and Indo-Aryan languages: a word for ‘widow’ literally means ‘headless’. This is found in Kal. ás.is.a ‘widow’ < OIA aś¯ırs.án ‘headless’ (912) and in Yid.-Mj. wo"sorwo ‘widow; unmarried woman’ which, according to Morgenstierne (1973b: 263), is a borrowing from Kho. vesoru ‘widow’ which, in turn, got borrowed from Ir. *Be-sar ‘headless’. The formation is, however, semantically not very peculiar since in various IA languages the word for ‘widow’ is literally ‘(she) without husband’ as e.g. in OIA abhartrk¯ a- or K. b¯ e-khövind. On the other hand, the specific  meaning ‘headless’ may be due to old Buddhist language influence: cf. Niya sam . gha śiro ‘head of a monastery’ (Jamison 2000: 72). 4 MBh etc., see Monier-Williams.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

224

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

to traditional Hinduism and due to Western influence). S. K. Chatterji (ODBL § 236) describes this phenomenon with the following words in connection with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration: “It seems that contamination with other forms, plus a vague sense of onomatopoeia, which is so very strong as an indirect influence in Indian speech, had more to do in aspirating stops than the presence of any particular sound; especially in initial aspiration.” 5. Semantic-morphological amalgamations: this means that originally separate but similar lemmata have semantically and morphologically so strongly assimilated into a field of family resemblances that it is difficult to decompose the original lemmata again. An illustrative example for this is found on p. 290 with several morphologically similar lemmata ranging semantically between ‘beak’, ‘mouth’ and ‘(elephant’s) trunk’. Other examples are various onomatopoeia discussed below in various chapters and some lemmata where it is difficult to say whether they are of OIA origin or of PIE origin but not reflected in OIA. With regard to category 5., I may add that the historical relation between OIA and the NIA languages discussed in this book corresponds roughly to that between classical European languages and e.g. Albanian or Lithuanian. However, the linguistic situation in South Asia is far more complex due to the greater intensity of mixing and mutual influences. I will suggest below at various places possible interferences having taken place between PIE reflexes going back to OIA and PIE reflexes not really tangible in OIA. Deviating from the standard procedure, namely looking for straight NIA echoes of OIA words that are straight echoes of PIE words, I will also sometimes highlight NIA morphological and semantic anomalies which can be read as traces hinting at a bypass, so to say, around the OIA station on the way from PIE to NIA. 6. Permanent semantic-morphological recreations: besides the common phenomenon of tatsama words, there are also lemmata which look like tatsamas that got borrowed at a certain point in the nearer or more distant past, but where I assume that they were actually ‘kept alive’ without undergoing usual sound changes due to cultural, religious, economic or whatever other reasons. In many cases they may have regular tadbhava parallels. Here follow two examples: Sub Turner grhasta- ‘householder’ (4244) one finds K. gr¯ ustu with the somewhat  deviating meaning ‘farmer’. Turner suggests that Sh. grst u ‘farmer’ is a borrowing from K. and the K. word itself may be a tatsama; note that there is also gresto ‘industrious’ and perhaps here also Ko. grest ‘rich’. But the word is more widespread: Kiś. gurast"u , Bi., Mth. grhast, Mag. gira hast, northern

a dialect of B. gira hast all Bhoj. gira hast, southern Bhoj. gira hath, Siripuri¯ meaning ‘cultivator’ or, as in case of Thar. girahat ‘farmer’ and not ‘householder’. The word has also been borrowed with the same meaning into Munda Korwa girhat ‘farmer, a rich man’. N. grhastha, grihastha, girasta, giryasti means both ‘farmer’ and ‘householder’; the  meaning ‘farmer’ or ‘cultivator’ is not found in OIA, and regarding RV 10,119,13 grh
a-, allegedly meaning ‘an assistant, servant’, Mayrhofer (EWA) argues that the actual meaning is ‘(movable) house, trailer’. The meanings ‘farmer, cultivator; industrious’ can be compared with cognate Old Ir. *grdya- ‘household staff, labourer’, and the difference with meaning

may reflect the old dialectal difference between Outer and Inner ‘householder’ Languages. According to Patrick Olivelle (2019: 7), the inherited term OIA dámpati‘master of the house’ (Avestan d¯@n.g paiti-, Greek 𝛿𝜀𝜎𝜋 𝑜´𝜏𝜂𝜁) was about to disap-

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.2. Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

225

pear already in the Rg-veda and was replaced by grh
apati- ‘householder’ (4242).  meaning as above OIA gr This word has the same hasta- (but not as the modern tatsama meanings) which itself is documented  only since Gaut. On the other hand, grh
apati- has far fewer modern reflexes than grhasta- (actually just one).  The element grh
a- has a parallel in Avestan g@r@𝛿a-  ‘daevic dwelling’ and there  is indirect evidence for Old Iranian *gr𝛿apati- (ibid.). Olivelle suspects that the shift from dámpati to grh
apati- corresponds with a shift to a “lower sociological  register” (ibid.). The above-quoted modern meanings of grhasta- possibly support this since there is the well-known fact that Brahmins  were traditionally not supposed to plow fields.5

9.2

Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

In the following list are listed fourteen examples for reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan lemmata that seem to have come down from non-Vedic dialects. In other words, the reconstructions lead to OIA forms which are not found in the known OIA sources – or some are found but have not yet properly been interpreted. The examples have been selected to give an overview of the many different ways very old word forms are reflected in modern Outer Languages. These examples and many more quoted in this book build the basis for a central prediction of the theory, namely that Outer Languages are the space for many innovations that are different from innovations typical for Inner Languages. The following words with meaning ‘egg’ from northwestern South Asia are of clear IndoEuropean origin whereas the origin of apparently cognate OIA a ¯n.d.á- and the reconstructed *¯ an.d.ra- ‘egg’ (1111) are still contested: 1. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Khaś. ali, eli (also eta) ‘egg’ (Kaul 2006 i: 332), Rudh. a"li ‘egg’, Bhad. et ‘egg’ (Kaul 2006 ii: 43), Kh¯ aśi. ˜eta ‘egg’ (Kaul 2006 i: 185), Sir.d.od.. a ¯tu ‘poppy (capsule)’ (Kaul 2006 i: 146), Sir.Suk. a ¯nni ‘egg’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 225]) — Balakot variety of Hind. (Mansehra District) ath2ra ‘egg’, Gau. átah ‘egg’, Paš. o ¯luk ‘testicles’.6 Morgenstierne derives the Paš. word < a luk < *¯ andruk (see Turner 1111) to which lemma I add R¯ aj. and Kalk. 2n ‘egg’ (Z.), Tor. a n ‘egg’ (Z.) and Tir. a” ‘an egg’ (< *andra). an¯ a ‘an egg’, and perhaps Pr. v"@zig(@) ‘egg’ and Bashg. “azh¯ Regarding -l- forms, there is also Orm. wulk ‘egg’ which Morgenstierne, however, derives < *¯ awyalaka-. In the Addenda and Corrigenda Wright quotes Kal. o ¯ndrak, and Morgenstierne lists "on.d.rak, ondrak (this latter form taken from Leitner) and hã:trek (Urtsun variety), whereas Trail and Cooper only list ón.d.ak and hán.d.rak (Urtsun variety); note also Gau. at.a ‘egg’. Thus it is unclear whether these dental variants exist at all in Kalasha;7 yet, the form hã:trek has parallels in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı eta, ˜eta and  et 5 OIA grh
a- must reflect older *grdh
a-. More remarkable is the fact that the word is a velar  of palatal forms like Lith.  žárdas ‘pen, fold’, which is why Lipp correctly reconstructs allomorph (2009: 15) PIE ´ gh erdh - ∼ gh erdh - ‘enclose, fence in’ and i.a. a nomen rei actæ *gh órdh -/Obl. *´ gh erdh - → *gh rdh - ‘fence line, enclosure’. Here one sees the origins for the different reflexes in  OIA and Balto-Slavic. 6 Perhaps also found in Kho. kukul.‘uk ‘testicles’ if originally *‘cock’s testicles’. 7 But note also Psht. and ‘testicle, egg’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

226

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

(see beginning of this paragraph). Note that there is also Kal. drigólak ‘oval, eggshaped, oblong’ with first syllable corresponding to Kal. dríga ‘long’ (< OIA d¯ırghá‘long’ [6368]) and second syllable deriving < earlier *olak ‘egg’. Here perhaps also with prefix p- (< OIA api-) Bashg. pondo ‘round’ and pondrik ‘bullet’. The reconstructed PIE form is *h1 endrós ‘egg; scrotum’, and Mayrhofer mentions Aitareya-¯ aran.yaka 3,2,1 a ¯nda- ‘egg’; and there is G.pars d u ‘egg’ – accidentally being similar to Crim Gothian ada ‘egg’ – also with a dental stop. It is useful to add here Romani forms not quoted by Turner: Rom.Arm. anlu ‘egg’ (Finck 1906: 10) and Danish Rom. jaro, older antro ‘egg’, and Rotwelsch antru ‘egg’ (Iversen 1944: 77). The two latter words (the Armenian Romani word could go back to -t or -d) together with Kal. hã:trek and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı eta, ˜eta and  et suggest that besides the above reconstructed forms an additional *¯ antra- ‘egg’ needs to be set up, which is in accordance with the fact, stated by Mallory and Adams (2006: 184), that “[t]he word for ‘egg’. . . is built on a preposition and indicates ‘that which is inside” ’ (see OIA antár ‘inside’). This *¯ antra is geographically limited to the northwest and to Romani. Notes: (a) Kal. va. ‘scrotum’, Nars. “byoo” ‘egg’ (Biddulph), Kho. ayuk"un (also " ayukun [Morgenstierne 1936: 666]) ‘egg’ < PIE *h𝑎 o ¯(u)iom ‘egg’. For the Kho. word  Morgenstierne reconstructs (ibid.) *¯ a(v)yak which resembles his above-quoted 8 derivation of Orm. vulk ‘egg’ < *avyalaka-. He wonders about the origin of -un in ayuk"un and one can wonder about the origin of the -l- in vulk but the two words are perhaps synonym compounds with -l- and -un both being regular reflexes of *¯ antra- for which see (b). (b) Note also that an occasional change of OIA tr > l as seen in above Khaś. and Rudh. is also known to have occurred in West Pah¯ ar¯ı Śeu. in several words,9 > > . e.g. Śeu. lõpr.u and Khaś. dhlo pru, High Rudh. dhlopre, Low Rudh. dr2mt all

Psht. draparai ‘nettlerash’)



‘nettle-rash’ (also borrowed into < OIA trúmpati 10 ‘hurts’ (6070), lur.nu ‘to pluck grass’ < OIA trút.yati ‘is broken’ (6065) and lat.i ‘sickle’ (Kaul 2006 ii: 190) either < older *dlatri < older *dratri < OIA *d¯ atr¯ı‘sickle’ (6260) or < OIA lav
tra- ‘sickle’ (10988).11 However, the reconstruction *dratri ‘sickle’ is more likely because Kaul (ibid.) says that these quoted words “are heard as clear (l) sound, uncombined with any other sound, but before the 8 Cf. Av. -¯ avaya- ‘having eggs’ in ap¯ avaya- ‘emasculated; entmannt’ if from *apa-¯ avaya ‘without testicle; ohne Hode’ (IEW: 783) and note, as quoted in the preceding paragraph, semantic parallel of PIE *h1 endrós ‘egg, scrotum’. 9 It is also not uncommon in various Dard languages where a parallel to the above *¯ antra- is found in Bshk. el ‘guts’ which is < OIA ¯ antrika- ‘visceral’ (1186). Similar also Paš. “hul” (see Morgenstierne [1956]) and Bshk. u ¯l both ‘otter’ < OIA udrá-1 ‘an aquatic animal’ (2056). 10 This semantic development has a parallel in Mult. dhrapphar. ‘nettle rash’ (also with voicing of initial consonant and spontaneous aspiration) and Jat.. chap¯ ak ‘nettle rash’ (with affrication of trand spontaneous aspiration); note also Kal. trap
ui ‘disease which attacks the eyes and causes them

of the initial consonant in Mult. cf. dhrikkh¯an to stick shut and pain’. Regarding the development ‘carpenter’ and Jat.. cir.¯ı dhirkh¯ an. (‘bird carpenter’) and kill¯ı dharkh¯ an (‘noisy carpenter’ ?) both ‘woodpecker’ (P. darakh¯ an and S. d.akhn.u ‘carpenter’) which is < OIA táks.an- ‘carpenter’ (5621) (this initial aspiration is also found in Sh. thac.óon ‘carpenter; Zimmermann’ and even in Iranian Par. th¯ a- ‘to cut, shave’ < Av. t¯ ašt¯ı; note also the other form of aspiration in Garh. tagh¯ an. ‘carpenter’ [Nautiyal and Jakhmola]). 11 Cf. Fussman’s similar considerations with regard to the derivation of Pr. l atege ‘faucille’ (ATLAS

tra-. 54). For Pr. l@t@g ‘sickle’ Buddruss und Degener refer both to d¯ atr¯ı- and lav




© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.2. Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

227

(l) there is an infinitesimal silence which may indicate a ‘stop-stage’. . . ” The following lemma concerns OIA r ∼ l. Masato Kobayashi notes (2004: 144f.): “Whether Proto-Indo-European *l and *r have merged in Proto-Indo-Iranian is one of the most heavily discussed questions in the reconstruction of Indo-Aryan . . . the paucity of /l/ in the Rg-veda  may be explained as a characteristic of the Northwestern dialect, which has undergone a development parallel to Iranian, and the distinction between Proto-Indo-European *l and *r is preserved in the Eastern dialects . . . or . . . we assume two dialects for Proto-Indo-Iranian and Indo-Aryan, one with *r and *l and the other with merged *r . . . but under traditional assumptions of historical linguistics, allowing dialectal variation within a reconstructed language could undermine the theoretical rigor of comparative reconstruction . . . although there is no /l/ dialect firmly attested in Old Indo-Aryan, it is not necessarily a fiction, for /l/ has actually replaced all *r’s in Middle Indo-Aryan languages like M¯ agadh¯ı . . . Although Avestan and Old Persian lack /l/ almost completely, a few other Iranian languages such as Ossetic are said to preserve original *l in their vocabulary, e.g. Ossetic læsæg ‘salmon’, Persian lištan and Kurdish listin ‘lick’ . . . ” Kobayashi could have also mentioned Kt. lez- ‘to lick’ and other lparallels from Nuristani and other Outer Languages for which see p. 848, but the traditional distinction between Northwestern and Eastern dialects obviously neither works for r ∼ l nor for our concept of the difference between Outer and Inner Languages. A fairly similar opinion as that of Kobayashi’s is expressed by Parpola who observes (2002: 49f.) with regard to OIA: “. . . rhotacism . . . [is] the merger of the Proto-Indo-European liquids *l and *r so that PIE *l was systematically replaced with *r . . . Epic/Classical Sanskrit, on the other hand, has in many words preserved the original PIE *l, and there are traces of its preservation in some Iranian dialects as well. . . and in Nuristani . . . These dialects must have separated from Proto-Aryan before it innovated with rhotacism. . . Many authorities have long ascribed this state of affairs to the mixing of two basic dialects in Old Indo-Aryan.” On p. 62 he adds that, different from the Rg-veda, the Atharvaveda distinguishes between r and l. However,  according to Chatterji (ODBL § 291) and his idea of three different OIA dialects, “We can see from the inscriptions how the North-western dialect (which in the Vedic period was an dialect) fared during the First MIA. period: it took up the sound, apparently through ‘down-country’ influence.” Finally I want to refer to Southworth (2005: 161ff.) who has also given a fine overview of this complicated problem. The following example from Prasun has to be interpreted as a very early borrowing from Proto-Dardic into Nuristani as the -l- allomorph is found already in the Atharvaveda but has apparently been lost in post-Vedic times: 2. (a) Pr. as.log ‘lame’ and as.log-, as.ulog- ‘to limp’ < OIA ślon.á- ‘lame, limping’ but EWA gives ‘lameness’; the initial vowel of Pr. may be compared with AV aślon.a- ‘not lame’ but in Pr. the a- is perhaps just a case of prosthesis (cf. similar üs.ky"öb ‘bridge’ < OIA skambhá-1 ‘prop, pillar’ [13639]); according to EWA, ślon.á- is probably cognate with OIA śrón.i- ‘hip and loins, buttocks’ (12729) (Pa., Pk.) with modern reflexes in Nuristani, Dardic and Sinhalese, note there also with evolved retroflex consonant Wg. cu , cru  ‘thigh, hip’; under the same lemma Turner also quotes Pr. to  ‘thigh’, however,

Buddruss



und Degener note Pr. t.o ‘inner side of thigh; euphemistically for ‘vulva” without referring to this Turner lemma. (b) Kal. púri ‘full whole, entire’ derives < OIA p¯ ura- ‘filling’ (8330) and is cognate with Kal. pl.ik and prik both ‘all’ as in pl.ik kárik ‘to finish doing something’ (which equals H. p¯ ur¯ a karn¯ a) which, in turn, reflect OIA purú- ‘much, many’ and puluo ‘much’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

228

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

The background of the following lemma is somewhat unclear: 3. (a) Bng. tulkEnO and Deog. tulk onO and tulkaOnO ‘to swell, rise as water, brim over as

and various vowel

grammemes),

Bng. tolnO ‘to lift up s.th., raise a water’ (with -k2

agglomerate/accumulate; question or problem’, tolkinO ‘to stand’ — Pr. tol- ‘to swell,

anschwellen, sich zusammenballen’ as in a ¯v tol’ogso ‘water rose’ and vut."us tol"ogso ‘avalanche accumulated’, K. tulun ‘to lift, take up, raise, raise up, hoist’ — B. t¯ ol¯ a1 ‘to raise; to lift’, B.chit. tulOn ‘to lift up, raise’, B.roh. tul and uoretul ‘raise’ (with uore< OIA upári ‘above’ [2218]) — as loanword in Mu. tul ‘to lift; to raise by holding both ends of a thing’. These words contrast in meaning and with regard to the presence or absence of tone in case of Bng. with the following: (b) Bng. tulnO ‘to be weighed’ < OIA túlya- ‘equal to’ (5888), tol n.f. ‘a weight for

weighing’ (with kOrnO ‘to weigh’) < OIA tolya- ‘to be weighed’ (5980), tolO n.m. ‘a

tolnO , weight (around 10 grammes)’ < OIA tolaka- ‘a weight of gold or silver’ (5978), 1 tolinO v.t. ‘to weight’ (with -i- 𝑥 suffix) see 5980. Note also Pr. atul- ‘to weigh’.

Note: The (a) forms have preserved the original meaning of PIE *telh2 - ‘raising’ or ‘lifting’ (cf. Latin toll¯ o ‘lift’, Toch.A and B täl- ‘uphold, keep raised’) and therefore are different from the much more common (b) forms which all derive < OIA. However, whereas Mayrhofer (EWA and FLII 20.1.69) gives only meanings like ‘scales; holding the balance ; Waage; das Gleichgewicht haltend’, Monier Williams has also ‘to lift up, raise’, meanings which are otherwise not reflected in MIA and NIA with the exception of A. and Or. (5979). This is also confirmed in 5883 ‘lifting’ and 5884 ‘lifts; weighs’. Thus, these semantic differences either reflect two different OIA lects or the semantic differences exist because ‘lift’ is the original meaning out of which ‘weigh’ later developed in many but not all branches of IA. This would also mean that all Bng. words sub (b) would be borrowings. Cf. also PN *th ul- (CINCL 212) ‘to lift, to raise; to pile up, to stack (in a heap)’. Alternatively one could consider contamination with Austro-Asiatic, cf. Proto-South Bahnaric *[ ]tu@l ‘flood’. The following is an example for an IA word field without clear origin in Vedic OIA: 4. K. ny¯ as ‘lintel’, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı “nhas, nas, nias” ‘roof rafter; a wooden joist or beam’ (e.g. Handa 2005: 194), Him. n¯ a"s ‘beam of timber’, Bhal. nâs ‘the main beam of a roof’ (Siddheshwar Varma [1948: 23]), and Bng. and Deog. n¯ as ‘(four) sacred beams covering the four stone walls of a z¯ aga village sanctuary’ (see p. 541 and for a picture see Bhatt, Wessler, Zoller [2014: 111]), and Bng. ni asnO1 ‘n¯ as (pavitra kar.¯ı) sth¯ apit hon¯ a (language consultant) – to get a (sacred) beam on the z¯ aga village sanctuary fixed/established’12 — M. n¯ as¯ a ‘the upper piece of a door-frame, lintel’ — here also Kal. áspal.a ‘door header’ (i.e. ‘lintel’ and with second component OIA pha
la- *‘splitter’) regarding whose loss of initial consonant(s) see p. 379. The words do not (with the exception of M.) derive < OIA na
s a- ‘nose’ (7089) but, according to Grierson (1914), are < OIA n¯ asa- ‘lintel’. The Petersburger Dictionary has wrongly ‘ein nasenartig hervorstehendes Holz über einer Thür’,13 and equally wrong is MWs ‘a piece of wood projecting like a nose over a door’ (actually it is OIA lex. n¯ asad¯ aru-). One of the 12 Note with minimal difference in pronunciation Bng. ni asnO2 ‘to warm o.s. (e.g. by putting on

warm clothes)’ which is discussed p. 636. 13 ‘A nose-shaped [piece of] wood projecting above a door’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.2. Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

229

correct meanings ‘the upper timber of a door’ is only found in Apte’s dictionary and not in the others. Since the meaning ‘lintel’ is most likely not found in OIA na
s a- (see EWA), Apte’s (and the others’) meaning(s) must have been taken from lexicographers. Amarakośa contains the following definition: n¯ as¯ a d¯ ar¯ uparisthitam, and Grierson had gotten the Amarakośa translated into seven NIA languages which, as he points out (1914: 129), all render the phrase similarly as e.g. (in translation) ‘the stone of the top of the doorframe’ (H.), ‘the wood of the top of a doorway’ (Mth.). In Kashmiri this OIA word n¯ as¯ a- corresponds with ny¯ as (but from which it cannot derive) and is rendered in a dictionary as ‘lintel’ or more precisely as ‘a beam fixed across the top of a door’. Grierson then shows with several examples that Kashmiri – apparently deviating from mainstream MIA developments – has sometimes preserved OIA nyaunchanged (note that this has a parallel in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı “nias” and in Bng. ni asnO1 14 ). Yet, I think, the words could equally well derive with epenthesis < *niy¯ asa-. However, this would not reduce the plausibility of Grierson’s etymological suggestion for ny¯ as, namely derivation < OIA ni- + AS ‘throw’ in the sense of “the beam ‘deposited’ over the door” (ibid. p. 130). All this allows only one conclusion: the original word belonged to an OIA lect different from Vedic OIA. Then, at some time, it found its way into the dictionaries of lexicographers (the Amarakośa is said to be a work of the Gupta period) while simultaneously undergoing semantic and morphological contamination with OIA na
s a- ‘nose’. This conjecture is supported by the fact that n¯ as¯ a‘lintel’ is not found in MIA but only in Mar¯ at.h¯ı n¯ as¯ a which means that Mar¯ at.h¯ı must have gotten the word from a lexicographic source. On the other hand, Kashmiri ny¯ as, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı “nyas” and Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı ni asnO1 derive < *n(i)y¯ asa- ‘lintel, etc.’ and not <

OIA na
s a-. Thus the reflexes in Kashmiri, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı can only derive from an OIA lect different from Vedic.15 Finally, note also that the modern meanings ‘lintel’, ‘roof rafter; a wooden joist or beam’, ‘the main beam of a roof’, ‘logs covering the four walls of a roofless cubic-like village sanctuary’ and ‘getting a sacred beam on such a village sanctuary fixed’ probably do not only have religious significance in case of the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı z¯ aga: lintels, whether in houses or temples, may be marked in the Western Himalayas with coins or vermilion to indicate a sacred object or place (this holds especially true for the lintel of the very low kitchen door in traditional Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı houses). One thus may speculate that the original meaning of these words was not (only) ‘lintel’ but (also) ‘(sacred) roof ridge’ or verbal ‘to deposit a (sacred) lintel or roof ridge’. This would indicate a semantic connection with OIA ny¯ asa- i.a. ‘mental appropriation or assignment of various parts of the body to tutelary deities’, a term that is of great importance especially in Tantrism where it means ‘the placing/depositing of different deities in different body parts’. This meaning is in any case closer to the discussed forms than those presented by Turner, none of which has any religious connotations: OIA nyasta- ‘deposited’ (7612) with Si. natuva ‘inheritance’ and ny¯ asa- ‘deposit, pledge’ (7615). Note: I assume that a further cognate is Nuristani Gmb. nas.t."er ‘roof-beam’ (Morgenstierne [1952: 131]) where the retroflexion of the sibilant must be due 14 Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı certainly does not have a derivational infix -i-, thus this -i- seems to reflect the older pronunciation. 15 This statement actually does not collide with Grierson’s conclusion (1914: 130) that “N¯ as¯ a is therefore a Prakritism, being borrowed by Sanskrit from Prakrit when its original meaning had been forgotten” because it indeed must have been borrowed from some unknown Western Himalayan Prakrit which itself derived from an OIA lect different from Vedic.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

230

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

to the ‘suffix’ -dtér. Whether this is a reflex of OIA *sthara- ‘firm’ (13741), *sth¯ ara- ‘firm, firmness’ (13765) or of some other lemma is unclear. The following words with meanings ‘thunder’ and ‘bee’ are semantically closely related and have, at least according to a part of the academic community, the same PIE origin. But even if one would reject a common origin, this would only mean that the ‘thunder’ word is of PIE origin and not found in OIA, and the OIA ‘bee’ word is – to apply the simplest ‘explanation’ – an onomatopoeion: 5. Kho. bumburús. ‘thunder’ and, probably borrowed from Kho., Wkh. bumb@r¯ıš ‘thunder’ are synonym compounds with second component < OIA ghós.a- ‘noise’ (4528) (cf. Si. gosa ‘roar of thunder’). The first component derives < PIE *bhrem- ±‘make a noise’ but it cannot derive < OIA bhramará-2 ‘large black bee’ (9651) which is reflected in Kho. b"umbur ‘hornet’. Cf. Mayrhofer’s skeptical remarks on here unrelated OIA BHRAM ‘move unsteadily, flicker, flutter’ etc. (EWA) who speaks of ‘basic onomatopoeia’ but which probably has a semantically related reflex in different dialects of Paš. as blämúr and l¯ [email protected] ‘lightning’. However, Mallory and Adams quote this PIE form and, moreover, suggest that *bhrem- tends to mean ‘roar’ in Germanic (and similar in Latin and Polish) but means ‘bee’ in Sanskrit. Yet, the lemma for ‘bee’ has been listed by Turner separately as bhramará-2 ‘large black bee’ (9651) and Mayrhofer believes that the ‘bee’ word can be connected with BHRAM only in the sense of ‘to ramble erratically’. Thus we have here a situation where the evidence from NIA is quite clear whereas the evidence from OIA looks rather blurred. The meaning ‘thunder’ is also found in Greek 𝛽 𝜚𝑜𝜈𝜏 𝜂´ and in Latin (as Greek borrowing) front¯esia ‘thunder- and flash-sign; Donner- und Blitzzeichen’. The two Kho. words are thus clearly reflexes of an OIA Vedic and a non-Vedic (OIA?) lect even though a hornet is bigger than a bee. The proposal for two different lemmata is also supported by evidence from Iranian Par¯ ač¯ı where bham"bur ‘wasp’ contrasts with "bumbur.u ¯ ‘thunder’. Also the following words are semantically closely related, yet they betray contamination of two different OIA lemmata where later (2) seems to have influenced earlier (1): 6. (1a) Bng. bOrnO n.m. ‘offering of s.th. (to a deity)’ and Ku. bhair¯ at. ‘(animal) sac with a suffix morphologically corresponding with the Bng. suffix rifice’ (probably (i)athO which semantically parallels the Bng. -krO ‘nominalizer’ suffix) (also borrowed into Munda Korku bhar ‘a personal offering to the smallpox goddess’) are < OIA bhára- ‘carrying’, but due to their religious semantics ought to be compared with OIA bharatá- in the sense of ‘a priest called Bharatá- or bearer of the oblation’ and with RV prá-bhartar- ‘Voranbringer (von Indra); bringer, procurer’ and YAv. fra-b@r@tar‘designation of the third subordinate priest during sacrifice ‘conveyor”.16 Bng. and Garh. are further cognate, though without a prefix, with PIE *h𝑎 ed-bher- ‘sacrifice’ (lit. ‘bring to’) and *bhert¯ or ‘priest’; cf. also Lat. feri¯ o ‘to kill or slaughter animals for sacrifice’. (1b) Bng. bOrOkrO n.m. ‘a sacrificial animal or person’17 (with -krO suffix), bOrOtrO n.m. ‘s.th. given (usually by a god) (e.g., a child)’ and bOrati n.f. ‘indulgence’ (in the sense similar to Latin indulgentia and German Gnadenbezeigung) all without tone are 16 Mayrhofer: “Bezeichnung des dritten Unterpriesters beim Opfer ‘Zubringer.” 17 There are oral traditions in the Bangan area telling of human and cow sacrifices. On former human sacrifices in Himachal Pradesh see e.g. Handa (2001: 65).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.2. Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

231

< OIA vára-1 ‘gift’ (where Turner gives ‘choice, boon’ [11308]) with confusion in the two Bng. words bOrnO and bOrOtrO of whether the ‘gift’ or the ‘sacrifice’ is given by a

person to a deity (‘sacrifice’) or by a deity to a person (‘gift’). Closely related are also P. b¯ arn¯ a, v¯ arn¯ a ‘to dedicate an article (usually money) by passing it round the head of a friend or relative in token of attachment and devotion to him, after which it is given away to the poor’ and S. v¯ arn.u ‘to offer up (in sacrifice)’ which may derive < OIA v¯ arayati ‘chooses’. The forms without toneme must have partially replaced the ones with toneme when the archaic words were not fully understood anymore. (2) Closely related is also Bng. bàr¯ un.1 n.f. which has the two meanings ‘activities for appeasement of a p¯ ap’ and ‘care, concern’; the latter meaning has a parallel in Ku. bh¯ aran. ‘support, maintenance, means of support’ which derives < OIA *bh¯ aran.a‘supporting’ (9460); the former Bng. meaning refers to a complex spiritual-religious concept in the area (see Zoller 2007a): a p¯ ap is a spiritual residue of a dead person (it is not his/her soul) which attracts attention to itself (i.e. it starts bothering people by possessing them) in case some family problems have been left unsolved before the demise; in this case, a small shrine will be set up that will receive sacrifices in intervals the length of which depends on the strength of the p¯ ap. So also here we have an ‘offering of s.th. (to a spiritual force)’ and it is likely that the above OIA-PIE forms got contaminated both in Bng. and Ku. with the purely Indo-Aryan word. The following example dealing with ‘fairy’ words has already been published, with partially different text, in Bhatt, Wessler, Zoller (2014: 91f.). It is an illustration for the occasional difficulty in determining whether a word form is of OIA or of PIE but not OIA origin: 7. Bur. and Sh. baráai ‘pure supernatural being, fairy’ and ráac.i baráai ‘guardian spirit (of Bitans [sic] [shamans, soothsayers] and hunters)’ compare with Garh. bh(a)r¯ ar.i ‘par¯ı, apsar¯ a – fairy’ (also termed vis ma tri ‘venom fairy’). The ending -¯ ar.i seems

to be an agent noun suffix and the same as in the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı fairy name Ruśar.i ‘the angry one’ (< OIA ros.a- ‘anger’ [10856]). The Burushaski, Shina and Garhwali words derive perhaps not directly < OIA BHUR (bhuráti) ‘move quickly’ which, according to EWA (II 250), reflects PIE *bh rH -18 but may rather directly derive < PIE  *bh erH (see EWA ibid. BHAR1 ) ‘to swiftly agitate, hurry, bustle, convulse’. Cf. also PN *bur-a ‘storm, whirl, rage’ (CINCL 74). However, note also FLII 20.1.155: “Ved. bhari - ‘to move quickly back and forth, hurry, bustle’,19 bhuran.yú- ‘stirring, agile’,20 bhu
rni- ‘zestful, wild’,21 a.o.: Idg. *bh erh2 - (∼ heth. /parh-/ ‘instigate, attack’22 . . . ).”

Notes: (a) Even though OIA bhuráti ‘moves rapidly, palpilates’ (9535) has several modern reflexes, it cannot be the origin of this ‘fairy’ lemma because of different root vowel. This is to say that it is very unlikely that a very uncommon sound change (u > a) happened independently in two geographically distant places whereas the other reflexes of 9535 have all preserved the -u-. Besides the reflexes mentioned by Turner, the OIA word is also found in Bng. bùr ‘strong and quick floating of water (usually in water mill)’. But relationship with OIA *bhurvati ‘boils’ 18 According to Mallory and Adams, the PIE root is *bher- ‘seethe, bubble’. 19 Mayrhofer: “sich rasch hin- und herbewegen, eilen, sich tummeln.” 20 Mayrhofer. “rührig, beweglich.” 21 Mayrhofer: “eifervoll, wild.” 22 Mayrhofer: “hetzen, angreifen.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

232

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

(9536) is unclear, which itself may or may not have a Vedic precursor. For OIA *bhurvati Turner quotes only a modern reflex in dialectal Paš. Note also that the ‘fairy’ words baráai and b(h)ar¯ ar.i match neatly with YAv. [email protected] ‘if it storms’ (EWA II 250) which is cognate with OIA BHUR. (b) In the upper T ¯ns Valley north of Bang¯ ˙ an. there is an alpine lake called .o Bhar¯ ar.sar T¯ al which is a pilgrimage site for people of the region (UGK), but I have no information whether the lake is regarded as a dwelling place for fairies. Moreover, in Bud.a ¯ Ked¯ ar, a pilgrimage site in District Tehri in Garhwal, there is a dual mountain called Bhar¯ ar. and Bhigun. It is standing to reason that the name of the first mountain is related to the bh(a)r¯ ar.i fairies (fairies frequently inhabit mountains). (c) Jettmar (1975: 219) considers Bur. and Sh. baráai and ráac.i baráai to be a variant form of Iranian peri ‘fairy’. This has been rejected by Berger (1983: 29) who instead suggests derivation < OIA mántra- ‘thought, prayer, spell, counsel’ (9834). Yet, although this derivation is phonologically possible, semantically it is very unlikely. However, in the Garhwali hymn of the fairy ‘Daughter of the Hills’ (published in Bhatt, Wessler, Zoller [2014]) the group of the nine fairy sisters is called pir.i-bhar¯ ar.i, a synonym compound meaning ‘fairies-fairies’. So maybe pir.i is a genuine parallel to Iranian par¯ı which derives ultimately < PIE *pairik¯ a- ‘demonic courtesan’.23 The plausibility of etymology and meaning of bhar¯ ar.i is supported by Garh. bay¯ a.l ‘procession (of fairies), group of disembodied spirits’ for which I have suggested (p. 675) derivation < OIA v¯ ayú-2 ‘hunting’ or v¯ ayú-1 ‘wind’ (there are arguments for both).24 Even though there is perhaps no complete clarity about the actual origin of bh(a)r¯ ar.i and baráai, the terms do not seem to fit perfectly with OIA BHUR. Together with the fact that the fairy complex of the high mountains of South Asia is most likely considerably older than the coming of the Aryans and that it is also very different from fairy concepts in the cultural mainstream makes it very likely that also the linguistic forms, though they are of PIE provenience, are different from Vedic. (d) A modern reflex of OIA apsarás- ‘one of the female divinities connected with water’ (502) is found in S. as apchar a ‘fairy’ which Turner regards as contaminated by the OIA form. The S. word has a parallel in Ku. apchail¯ a ‘fairy’ which itself is cognate with Ku. apchail ‘a splendid but mischievous woman’. The latter word is built with OIA chalayati ‘deceives’ and commonly used OIA ap(a)-. This is the source for the contamination of the Ku. word and perhaps also for the S. word. The following example demonstrates relationship of different OIA lects under a yet another perspective: a PIE root is very imperfectly reflected in OIA but clearly reflected in NIA languages of northwestern South Asia: 8. Kal. mríši ‘mashed beans’ and mriš hik ‘to scold’ are cognate with OIA masmasa
-kar,



o o

also masmasa and (without RUKI!) mrsmrsa ‘to reduce to dust, grind to powder’  present  respectively *mas.ati ‘crushes’ (9919) but an older stage of development than all OIA forms. Thus, the Kal. forms are a reflex of a lect different from Vedic. Note, 23 On occasional change of r > r. in Outer Languages see p. 21. 24 Whether the second component of German Windsbraut is also connected with PIE *bℎ erH is contested.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.2. Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

233

however, that the Vedic lemma is very tangled – see Turner and EWA – with reflexes usually with different extensions (but note Bng. mO
sinO ‘to put or rub in [e.g., ghee on

skin]’ as the only other NIA reflex with palatal sibilant). Note: The OIA forms can be compared with the relationship between OIA KARS. and KAS. ‘pull’ (the latter considered to be a folk form). But Mayrhofer’s comparison with German Mischmasch as an ‘elementary parallel’ – probably animated by the OIA reduplications – is just a stopgap. Therefore note that IEW (737) suggests PIE *mer-s- ‘rub’ which Bomhard interprets as part of the PN lemma (CINCL 893) *mur- ‘to crush, to break, to destroy’. Here follows a lemma which clearly deviates from the common reflexes of OIA VAR ‘cover’:25 9. Pog. varn.i, varni ‘night’ (Kaul [2006 i: 301] etc., but Schmidt and Kaul [2008: 290] have Pog. varn1 ‘evening’) and probably Sh.gil. b¯ ur b˘ei ‘west’ (Bailey) respectively buúr b- ‘to set (sun)’ (Degener) which is also found in Bur. buúr ‘setting(sun, heavenly bodies); west’ (Sh.gil. and Bur. with a > u), and Sh.dras. súuri béen varí ‘west’ (Schmidt and Kaul op.cit.) < OIA v¯ arun.¯ı ‘the west’(?)26 (but cf. the Celtic loanword in Old High German verno-s ‘dark; dunkel’ [Schweitzer p. 373]). Regarding the next example it needs to be pointed out that OIA VAS 3 ‘shine’ has only in the Outer Languages prefixless reflexes (see Turner p. 667) in vásu-, vasutva-, vasar-, v¯ asaráand vasantá-: 10. (a) Jaun. c -bOsOt ‘riches’ (Z.) e.g. in a sentence from an oral story: pErE jo meri c bOsOt E, sev av tav bErey Erai deO ‘but those riches which I have I (will) show you’ with first word c¯ı probably not reflex of OIA CI 1 ‘heap up’ but borrowed from Pers. c¯ız ‘commodity’ as in the Kinn. parallel c¯ız băst ‘chattels, goods’; second word < OIA (RV) vasutva- ‘wealth, riches’. The expression has further parallels in Chatt. m¯ albast-l¯ a (‘property-riches-to’) ‘the property’ (LSI i,i: 239), in Ko. a ¯st ‘property, riches’ (v- is frequently lost in Ko. as e.g. in ik- ‘sell’ < OIA vikr¯ıyate ‘is sold’ [11642]), and has been borrowed into Sant. tij bOsut, cij bOsut ‘things, goods, property’ (cf. H. c¯ız ‘thing’) where Bodding also mentions H. c¯ıj bast and B. c j bOstu which, however, I do not find in my dictionaries. Here probably also P. bas¯ at¯ı ‘a petty merchant, a peddlar’. Note that modern reflexes of OIA vásu- ‘wealth’ (Pa., Pk.) are limited, according to Turner, to S., Ash., Kt., Wg., Paš., but here to be added are M.w¯ ar. bes and Ko.kun.. bEs ‘good’ and bes k@r ‘to heal’. It has also gone unnoticed that Wg. has the same word: b¯ osta ‘rich’ (LSI [viii, ii: 54]). Note: Here cognate is sub 11445 vás¯ıyas- ‘better, more prosperous’ (TS. vásyas‘better, more excellent or glorious, wealthier or richer than’) with a modern reflex in S. vãhyõ ‘wealthy’ to which is to be added Jat.. vasek ‘better’. 25 See also FLII 3.11: “Besondere Probleme bereitet ved. var- ‘umschließen’ mit seinem Zusammenfall von *uel- und *uer-, deren “Abgrenzung nicht eindeutig durchzuführen” ist . . . ” (with quote   from LIV). My approximate rendering: “Vedic var- ‘enclose’ causes particular problems with its coincidence of *uel- and *uer-, ‘the delimitation of which cannot be clearly defined’.”  ala of the  west, but the origin of his name is unclear. He is also the god of the 26 Varun.a is the lokap¯ underworld and, when opposed to Mitra, he is associated with the night.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

234

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics (b) Rj.jaip. b¯ ast¯e ‘fire’, Marw. b¯ asa d¯ev, Rj.mal. v¯ asa d¯ı, bast¯ı, Bhil. v¯ ahad¯ı, vistav, ist¯ u, Khand. vistav, Ko.kun.. vist@v, vistu, ist@v ‘coal, fire’ (also in the antonym compound istupani ‘fire, water etc.’), Desh.M. vist¯ u also vistav etc., N¯ agpur¯ı ist¯ o, and perhaps also S. b¯ ahi ‘fire’; all mean ‘fire’ and derive < OIA vasu- ‘N. of the gods (as the “good or bright ones”. . . ); n. of a particular class of gods’ and lex. also ‘fire’; several of the above forms seem to contain as second element devá-; there is another group of ‘fire-god(dess)’ words (see p. 605) which seems to indicate that a fire-god (occasionally also a fire-goddess) played an important role in the west and northwest of South Asia until the present. (c) Bng. basri pOsr at n.f. ‘certain part of dawn’ with first word < v¯ asará- ‘relating to morning’ (11602) (Pa., Pk.) with a doubtful modern parallel in Si.; regarding second word see p. 649. (d) “Pah¯ ar.¯ı/Kashmiri” subas ‘pr¯ atah. – morning’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 398])27 < OIA *suvasar- with parallels of vasar- only in Dardic and Nuristani (see 11442). But note also G. “ v ahnu ” ‘dawn’ (LSI i,ii: 351) and “ v ehnuk-v avu ” ‘to be the time of dawn’ (LSI

which might go back to older *vasan

i,ii: 352) and thus also to the heteroclite PIE *h2 ues-r-/-n- which is otherwise known to be reflected in OIA only as vasar- ‘dawn’. (e) Bng. bOs et n.m. ‘spring season’ < OIA vasant
a- ‘spring season’ (11439) (Pa., Pk.) with many parallels in Nuristan and Dard languages plus Si. A Bng. phrase:
sOrde bOste ri b erE (lit. ‘fall spring of sheep’) ‘the sheep (which are born) in fall and spring. . . ’

Note: Formations beginning with us.- are widespread in IA, whereas formations with prefix ati- or adhi- are reconstructed forms limited to the northwest with very few traces in OIA and MIA, see Addenda and Corrigenda 226a (see discussion p. 594) and 226b, and 280a (see discussion p. 595).

Preservation of old affine meaning in Outer Languages: 11. Bng. mitOr ‘brother-in-law; wife’s husband’, also Him.; Garh. mitr ‘sister’s husband’; in Deog. the meaning is ‘husband of sister and all his brothers; brother of wife and all his brothers’ — S. mit.ru ‘friend, relative’ — Kho. gom"it ‘brother-in-law’ (regarding first syllable cf. OIA gotrá- ‘family, clan’ [4279]), Pal. mitr ‘blood-brother (kidney-brother); close friend’, Bhat.. m
c ‘wife’s brother’ are cognate with OIA mitrá- ‘friend’ (10124) but the meaning ‘affine’ is restricted to the northwest and west. Since it is unlikely that OIA mitrá- ‘friend, friendship’ (10124) should have developed into a kinship term it is quite likely that the quoted forms show preservation of the meaning given for mitráin EWA, namely ‘contract, alliance, Vertrag, Kontrakt, Bündnis’. This means that the here quoted forms have the basic meaning ‘relative through contract’. It cannot be shown that the meaning ‘relative through contract’ is pre-Vedic but it is certainly non-Vedic because the concept of ‘relative through contract’ is, at least in the Western Himalayas among the Khasha people, linked with several other concepts that differ significantly from Vedic and post-Vedic concepts. Whereas it is heuristically useful to proceed from a single vantage point in linguistic reconstruction, there is no way to show that speakers of Indo-Aryan ever constituted a single homogenous society and culture and that at some time in the past a socio-political fissure occurred. In other words, there must always have existed predecessors of the socio-political correspon27 But in his Kashmiri dictionary Grierson has not subas but subah ‘morning from sunrise to 9 o’clock’ which may be – but this is disputable – the same borrowing as in H. subah which is from Ar.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.2. Words deriving from non-documented Old Indo-Aryan lects

235

dence of Outer and Inner Languages. They may be called in an abstracting and very generalizing way as martial and ritual societies. But here I just summarize the differences between Khasha Himalayan societies and mainstream Brahmanism/Hinduism as described in more detail by L. D. Joshi in The Khasha family law p. 49ff. (published in a similar way in Zoller [2018: 200f.], but there with more detailed comments):

Khashas marriage is a secular transaction wife is purchased through bride-price wife can divorce and remarry plurality of marriage relationships and levirate28 marriage is dissolvable no fiction of rebirth plough themselves the land

Brahmanism marriage is a sacrament wife’s family gives dowry wife cannot divorce and remarry monogamy and no levirate marriage is not dissolvable fiction of rebirth do not plough themselves the land

The following example illustrates a typical case of semantic-morphological amalgamation (see on this term p. 224) and possibly a case of non-recognition of a PIE root in an OIA word (AV and later) (see [c]): 12. Bng. serai(O) adv. ‘in/with same distance; in a straight line’ (with -a- and -iO suffixes added to an unattested verb *sernO), e.g. seraiO l anO ‘to keep regularly the same dis keep a straight line while planting’ (with l tance while planting (in a field), to anO ‘to

attach’) ultimately < PIE *ser- ‘line up’, but note also OIA lex. sarat-, sarit- ‘thread, string’ and OIA lex. saran.i- ‘a strait or continuous line’ which is reflected in Garh. sir¯ an.o ‘rope, cord’. Here perhaps also West Pah¯ ar.¯ı sareli, saral ‘python’ (Handa 2001: 66). In addition, Mayrhofer mentions (EWA) the semantic distinction between SAR1 ‘to run off; loslaufen’ and SAR2 ‘to extend; sich erstrecken’ (Gr. 𝜄´ 𝛼𝜆𝜆𝜔 ‘reach out, dispatch; strecke aus, entsende’), and the comments in EWA show that the OIA words are not easy to analyze and differentiate from each other. Therefore see also the comments in IGN: 106. Thus we probably deal here with a case of semantic-morphological amalgamation (see p. 224 and cf. also Toch.B s¯ ary- ‘to plant’ whose origin is, however, unclear). Some more words also may belong here: Notes: (a) Purohit and Benjwal make a distinction in their dictionary between saraun.1 ‘phail¯ an¯ a, rog ko d¯ usre tak pahumc¯ ˙ an¯ a – to spread out; to infect s.o. with a an¯ an – to remove, carry away’. Do they reflect the disease’ and saraun.2 ‘khisk¯ two OIA roots? (b) Pah¯ ar.¯ı serO, seri etc. which, at least in Gar.hv¯ al¯ı (including Bang¯ an.¯ı) and in Himachali, always means ‘an irrigable or irrigated field’ and not just ‘field’29 – 28 For example: monogamy, polygamy, polyandry. 29 Wg. ser ‘big Afghan field’ is unclear. Note also perhaps with somewhat different meaning Sh.koh. (RSup) s¯ er ‘collection of fields’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

236

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

this is against the suggestion in the Addenda and Corrigenda sub saira- ‘belonging to a plough’ (13602a). Wright’s argument against Hendriksen, who refers with skepticism to OIA sir¯ a- ‘stream’, that the “. . . sense ‘stream’ and variant śir¯ a are, however, unconfirmed” even though in the VarBrS. there is sir¯ a- ‘a veinlike channel or narrow stream of river water’ and there isOIA (RV i,80,5) sárma‘flowing’. Note also perhaps different Garh. s¯ ar(i) ‘cluster of terraced agricultural fields in hills’ (found also in the area name Jaunsar )30 which cf. with Munda Ju. and So. s2rO-ba ‘paddy field’ (first word means ‘paddy’), Proto-Mon-Khmer sreP ‘field’, Bahnar sar ‘unploughed field’ and Bahnaric Sre sre ‘irrigated rice field’, Katuic Bru saraj ‘upland field’, etc. However, Him. ś¯er, śeri ‘long field (usu. of rice)’ (wrongly tagged by Turner as Jauns¯ ar¯ı) with initial palatal is unclear. (c) Moreover, Mayrhofer mentions (ibid.) a possible SAR3 ‘to guard, protect; behüten, schützen’ as in AV (and later) pratisará- ‘cord of amulet, repellent, protection; Amulettschnur, Abwehrmittel, Schutz’. The prefix-less form is found in Gar.hv¯ al¯ı s¯ aru ‘g¯ amv ˙ k¯ı a ¯patti-vipatti d¯ ur karne ke lie samp¯ ˙ urn.a g¯ amv ˙ dv¯ ar¯ a k¯ı j¯ ane v¯ al¯ı t¯ amtrik ˙ p¯ uj¯ a (jismem ˙ g¯ amv ˙ k¯ı s¯ım¯ a par bakr¯ı ghum¯ a kar bali d¯ı j¯ at¯ı hai – a tantric p¯ uj¯ a performed by the whole village to remove the misfortune that has befallen the village (in this ritual, a goat is sacrificed at the village border)’ (Purohit and Benjwal 2007) and as allomorph s¯ ar¯ı in the Gar.hv¯ al¯ı hymn to the fairy ‘Daughter of the Hills’ with meaning ‘a kind of ritual conducted in villages to escape the demoniac powers of the a ¯char¯ıs, da gur s and m¯ atar¯ıs’31 (Bhatt,

Wessler, Zoller [2014: 133, 140]). The AV word continues also in the name of the great Buddhist tutelary goddess Pratisar¯ a so that one wonders why quite well-documented OIA SAR3 has not yet been derived < PIE *ser- ‘protect’ (otherwise found in Lat., Av. and Lydian). Note also Lipp’s discussion (2009: 81) of PIE *sor-uó- ‘guarding’ as typically used with dogs as in Av. sp¯ a viš.hauruu¯ o  ‘the yard guarding dog, yard dog’ and *sér-uó- ‘shepherd’ (Lat. servus ‘slave,  menial’). (d) It is unclear whether here are also related (as borrowings?) Korku sara:y ‘lines in a chilly field’ and Bon. ser ‘line on the palm of the hand’. The final example illustrates a special semantic connection between a lemma found in Nuristani and in some Outer Languages: 13. Bng. nOrdei n.f. is not an ordinary Bang¯ an.¯ı word but belongs to the diction of a shaman (mali) and thus into a religious sphere: ‘human creature, descendant (of God), human being, person; human skin’, “Koc¯ı-Kuari” (Bailey 1975[1915]: 168) n˘ ord¯e ‘body’ — Bhil.wag. nardoai ‘body’ — all with first syllable < OIA nára- ‘man; a male, a person’ (6970) and second at least in case of Bng. and Bhil.wag. not < OIA deha- ‘body’ (6557) but < dehin- ‘a living creature, man; the spirit, soul (enveloped in the body)’. Derivation < dehin-, which is not listed in Turner, perhaps also in Gau. di˜ u ‘human’ as in this example: muth di˜ u p¯ uc.h n¯ as (other human son[s] not-were) ‘there were no other human sons’ (Z.) and certainly in K. dih ‘the body; esp. the human body; the personal form taken by an impersonal deity’. There is some mingling regarding derivation in P. deh, dih ‘body’ but there is also deh¯ı ‘body’ as used in this example: sone varg¯ı deh¯ı ‘the body like gold’ i.e. ‘handsome or beautiful constitution of the body’. The meaning 30 Here perhaps related are also ser¯ a ‘even, plane; fertile land near the bank of river’ and ser¯ a, sy¯ ar¯ u ‘irrigated field, the land having irrigation facilitation’. 31 These are three different classes of fairies.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.3. Origin and development of the Middle Indo-Aryan -ll-suffix

237

of deha- ‘human (being)’ is found in OIA (Subh.) ‘person, individual’ but seems to have gone lost later-on. Anyway, in the northwest we rather come across reflexes of OIA dehin- which have religious connotations in Bng. and K., and the synonym compound is restricted to Outer Languages. These religious connotations connect these words with Pr. diz ‘kafirische Götterstatue; idol of the former Kafirs’ although nOrdei cannot be used in Bang¯ an.¯ı for ‘idol’. Note also Pr. dizg"a, dizg"a ¯ ‘creator, designation for God’, diz¯ıstog ‘creature’ and diz- ‘to create’, and sub OIA *dehati ‘makes, builds’ (14621) Turner lists Kt. diz-, dez- ‘to create’, dezéle ‘creator’ (→ Kal. diz- ‘to create’ and dialectal dezau, dezal ‘creator’), and there is also in a side-valley of the Bumboret Valley in Kalasha Land a rock face called “Dizila Wat” not quite correctly translated by Jettmar (1975: 382) as “Stein der Erschaffung” (‘stone of creation’). Ronald Trail and Gregory Cooper supplement, but with retroflex initial stop d.ízik ‘to create out of one’s mind things like designs, pictures, statues, beings’, d.ízil.a d.izáv ‘Creator God’, and d.izálik ‘spirit being for childbirth’; “[i]t is said that she is the sister of d.izáv ‘the Creator’. Women pray to her to make their birth easy.” Ultimately, all forms are < PIE *dhei´ gh- ‘work clay, build up’ but the diz/*dehi forms with their religious connotations differ from the remaining reflexes of DIH ‘smear’ and thus suggest an Outer versus Inner Languages contrast. Notes: (a) Shamanic Bng. nOrdei is different from Bng. poet. dOia, d@a n.f. ‘human body’ which indeed is < OIA deha-. An ex. from PAN which describes the looks of King Duryodhana:

sum@n ki dOia, sum@n ki mOia, sum@n ki d@tk l, sub@n ki pagri,

sub@ni sub@n kO;
sguthE teskE urE kE;

of gold, a soul of gold, ‘(He had) a body the row of teeth of gold, a turban of gold, (everything) was completely of gold; he had thick horns of a ram[78] (b) The above forms are different from OIA deh
 ‘mound, bank, surrounding wall’ (6562) with modern reflexes in S., L.?, N. to which Bng. d e n.f. ‘heap of earth’ ought to be added. (c) Regarding OIA nára- note Mult. n¯ ar¯ a ‘the first milk given by a cow or buffalo after calving’ (O’Brien 1881: 29) i.e. ‘beestings’ perhaps in the sense of ‘(having) vitality’ which cf. with OIA s¯ unara- ‘vital; lebenskräftig’.

9.3

Origin and development of the Middle Indo-Aryan -llsuffix

Regarding32 the subgrouping of New Indo-Aryan languages, Cardona starts with a truism (2003: 18): “That modern Indo-Aryan languages are divisible into affiliated subgroups is beyond doubt. Thus, it is reasonable to say that there are eastern, northwestern, 32 The following section is largely similar with Zoller (2016: 93ff.).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

238

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

southwestern, and midlands groups.33 On the other hand, the precise manner in which a family tree is to be drawn up as well as the exact affiliation of particular languages – such as Maithili, Magahi and Bhojpuri – are issues which have been not fully settled since the pioneering work of Beames, Hoernle and Grierson.” He continues (ibid.): “Grierson. . . divided Indo-Aryan into what he termed outer, mediate and inner sub-branches, the first subdivided into northwestern, eastern group, and southern groups and the inner sub-branch subdivided into central and Pah¯ ar.¯ı subgroups. A major criterion for recognizing an outer sub-branch was the occurrence of -l- in past participle forms, portrayed in a map (Grierson 1927: 140).34 Thus, Grierson notes. . . ‘Gujar¯ at¯ı is an Inner language, but, as we shall see, it has been superimposed on another language of the Outer sub-branch, of which traces can still be observed. One of these traces is the existence of this very l-participle, which is used much as in Sindh¯ı, as in m¯ ary¯ o or m¯ a¯e-l, stuck.’35 Grierson did not, however, establish how the formation in question could be a common innovation of all the languages concerned, and S. K. Chatterji (1926: 167) was without doubt justified when he denied that an -l-past was a valid criterion for an establishing of outer group, noting that it functioned as a past marker only in Eastern languages and Marathi and that it was an inherited adjectival (participal) suffix, with this function in Gujarati and elsewhere. Moreover, no historical evidence is cited to demonstrate how the use of such participle forms developed in late Pr¯ akrit or the earlier stages of languages like Gujarati, for which we have early sources.” Cardona then shortly discusses Southworth’s new book which was at that time not yet published. But since Southworth had provided Cardona with a manuscript, the latter knew already Southworth’s additional arguments on which he drew the following conclusions (2003: 19): “Although Southworth goes on, in his chapter six, to consider historical correlates of the conclusions he reaches on the basis of modern Indo-Aryan, I think it fair to say that these conclusions are not sufficiently backed up by detailed facts about the chronology of changes to merit their being accepted as established.” As much as I can see, this seems to be the formulation of a dominant point of view that has not substantially changed since 2003. However, I disagree completely with these conclusion but have to add immediately that problematic arguments are not only presented by Grierson, but also by Chatterji and Cardona. Pischel, discussing the Middle Indo-Aryan -l- suffixes (§ 595) states that the Prakrit grammarians teach that MIA -¯ ala, -¯ alu, -illa, -ulla are used in the sense of OIA -mat and -vat. That is adjectival like e.g. in OIA ks.¯ırávant ‘furnished with milk’ (3700). The oldest among the grammarians who dealt with these suffixes quoted by Pischel is Vararuci.36 It is unclear when he lived (also because there are several Vararucis) but in § 32 Pischel gives at least a hint regarding the life time of the Prakrit grammarian: ‘Bloch’s assumption37 that Vararuci could not have lived before the 5th Century AD is for linguistic reasons by no means necessary.’38 This means that Vararuci may have lived between the 3rd and 5th Century AD and that the -l(l)- suffixes were already

33 Cardona refers here implicitly to his own model from 1970. 34 The map has been reproduced in this book where it is found on p. 443. 35 I may point here quite similar Dardic Brok-skad mul ‘dead’, which appears also in mul@n ‘cremation ground’. This term, together with its parallels, is discussed p. 700. 36 None of them dealt with G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. However, what is more puzzling is the fact that until now I could not find any evidence for this suffix in written G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı sources even though there is plenty of evidence for the suffix in modern Dard languages. 37 He refers to the French linguist Jules Bloch. 38 Pischel: “Bloch’s Annahme, dass Vr. nicht vor dem 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. gelebt haben könne, ist aus sprachlichen Gründen keinesfalls nötig.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.3. Origin and development of the Middle Indo-Aryan -ll-suffix

239

known to the earliest Prakrit grammarians.39 The difference between -l- and -ll- suffixes has been explained by Pischel in historical terms, namely as parallel to other Middle IndoAryan processes of single consonants getting doubled instead of deleted due to following accentuated vowels (§ 194) (e.g. MIA duritta- < OIA duritá- ‘evil etc.’; more examples are provided in fn. 6 of § 595). In any case, it seems likely that the suffixes were originally single -l- grammemes. With regard to Apabhramśa ˙ Tagare notes (1987: 336) that primary suffix -illa means ‘agent, doer’ but the secondary suffix -illa (1987: 338) expresses, like the Prakrit suffixes, ‘pertaining to, possessing, having’. But there are also similar-looking secondary suffixes -ila, -la and -ulla which he characterizes as pleonastic. Coming back to Pischel, he observes the following additional functions (ibid.): m¯ıs¯ alia- is a preterital passive participle of a denominative *m¯ıs¯ ala- (OIA miśra-) thus probably meaning ‘was mixed’; a present participle function e.g. in s¯ asilla- (OIA śv¯ asin-) ‘breathing’; -illa is also used in the sense ‘located there’ as in g¯ amilla- ‘farmer’; it functions also pleonastic; a passive past participle function e.g. in then.illia- (see OIA stená- ‘thief’) ‘taken; timid’. Thus, the suffixes do not have temporal or aspectual functions but they can have participle functions. A combination with other suffixes can be seen e.g. in g˘ ot.t.hillaya˙ (OIA gaus.t.hin-) ‘relating to an assembly’ which is semantically exactly the same as gos.t.hika- with -ka- suffix. This suggests that the -ll- suffixes could combine with other suffixes quite freely with regard to sequencing. This is an important point because it suggests that the -ll- suffixes were, in case of verbal formations, not always automatically added to the past stems of verbs as assumed by Southworth and others. Compare, e.g. M. kel¯ a ‘made’ which derives < older *kayalla < *kr-t-alla (Southworth  2005: 132) with Ind. s
2y  karli ‘he did’ (< older *kar-illa) which alternates with s
2y  k
r ‘he did’ (< older *kari < *karia < *karita [cf. Turner’s reconstruction *karitaka- sub 2814] which is reflected in s
2y  kar
el ‘he has done’ < *karita-illa).40 The first form does not show vowel fronting and stem vowel lengthening because the -i- belongs to the suffix, but the second does because the -i- of *kari is part of the past stem. So this shows that the reflexes of the standard OIA past participles and the -ll- (past) participle can be found in one and the same language in complementary functions. Besides the few traces of past participle functions observed by Pischel, there are more such cases in Old Mar¯ at.h¯ı (i.e. Mar¯ at.h¯ı in use before the Muslim conquest soon after 1300 AD [Master 1964: v]). Master observes (1964: 123): “The -l¯ a suffix distinguishes participles which can be used as finite verbs from those which are only used as adjectives (or nouns).” Some of his examples: pait.h¯ a j¯ al¯ a ‘has become merged (in me)’, miliellau, milielaya ‘encountered’, rut.t.helau ‘angered’, a ¯lavilem ¯ike . a ‘he listens to what is said’ (cf. OIA a ¯lapati ‘speaks’ [1358]) etc. Thus it seems likely that the increased use of the -ll- suffixes in past participle constructions led them become tense and aspect markers. Discussing the possible historical origin of the suffixes, Southworth says (2005a: 133) that Chatterji “mentions possible OIA origins” but “he also notes (and rejects) the suggestion of a link between the Indo-Aryan -l- pasts and the pasts in -l- found in Slavic and elsewhere in Indo-European.” The relevant passages in Chatterji (volume iii: 943f.) read like this: “Another view about the origin of the NIA. > is that it is an independent affix occurring in Indo-European itself, preserved in NIA. but ignored or left unnoticed in OIA . . . But this connection is not proper. We have seen that the MIA. form of the suffix > is entirely different. The latter is a participle affix, forming nomina agentis, < OIA > and that it is adjectival (diminutive or pleonastic) in its nature, whereas the > affix that we find in Slav is entirely different. The latter is a participle affix, forming nomina agentis, with an active present participle sense, and in Slav it is used to form periphrastic tenses with the substantive verb.” Periphrastic tenses are actually found together with an -ll- grammeme e.g. in Ind. sanv¯ıl thu¯ı (H. ban¯ ay¯ı hu¯ı hai; cf. OIA sanóti ‘wins, gains’ [13126]) ‘has been made’ and in neighboring languages like Kalami and dialects of Shina. So it seems that the question regarding the origin of the -ll- suffix is still not known. It cannot have derived from Vedic Sanskrit because, even though also Vedic Sanskrit has quite a number of words showing the presence of a Proto Indo-European -l- suffix, this suffix did not possess the tremendous morphological and grammatical productivity inherent in the -ll- suffix. Therefore I suggest that the -ll- suffix is indeed of Proto Indo-European origin, however, not of Vedic Indo-Aryan ancestry. It originated from one or more Old Indo-Aryan lects that were different from Vedic. And it surfaced in the perception of the Indian grammarians around the same time when many other Outer Language features had begun to influence the Middle IndoAryan koinés. What do we know about this Proto Indo-European suffix? I summarize some points that are here relevant from Iván Igartua’s article The Indo-European adjectival class with the suffix *-lo and its development in Slavic. The *l-class of Indo-European adjectives was transformed into verbal forms in, basically, Slavic, Armenian and Tocharian. The suffix *-lo- attached to stems that could be nominal, verbal or adjectival; within the group of adjectives, many formations in *-lo- were functionally quite similar to those that were formed by adding the suffix *-ko- (see some of the above examples); in some cases the suffix had a diminutive or an expressive function, cf. e.g. Greek 𝜋𝛼 𝜒𝜐𝜆 𝑜´𝜍 ‘thickish’ and OIA bahulá- ‘thickish’; in many other cases it is difficult to determine a change caused by the suffix, thus, l-formations turn out to be very diverse. In Slavic -l- participles were combined with the finite forms of the auxiliary verb to create the periphrastic forms of the verb (above I quoted a similar example from Indus Kohistani), and Igartua points out (p. 308) that “. . . the change from a perfect to a past function is quite a common grammaticalization path” namely by losing the semantic feature of ‘current relevance of a past action’. If the -ll- suffix surfaced between the 3rd and the 5th century AD in the writings of the Indian grammarians with its various functions outlined above, then it took several more centuries until it developed a past function because Southworth notes a “. . . lack of evidence for the -l- past . . . before about the eighth century CE at the earliest.” This time frame may be comparable with the similar developments in Slavic. But now especially important for us is Igartua’s observation (2014: 306) that “. . . the suffix *-lo- could be extended by means of different preceding vowels, thereby yielding secondary formations . . . ” He lists the following forms (p. 306f.):

*-u-lo*-e-lo*-i-lo*-¯ a-lo- < *-ah2 -lo*-¯e-lo- < *-eh1 -lo-

Only *-u-lo- is found in OIA bahulá- (but of course there are more examples for this ending in OIA). However, Igartua’s reconstructed suffixes resemble strikingly the three MIA suffixes -illa/alla/ulla-. Note also that in Tocharian the suffix *-lo- produced verbal adjectives (gerundives), in Tocharian A the suffix was -l and in Tocharian B -lye and -lle. According to

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

9.3. Origin and development of the Middle Indo-Aryan -ll-suffix

241

Don Ringe (1996: 116), -lle developed from PIE *-lo- plus adjective suffix *-yo-.41 Instead of Pischel’s suggestion that the doubling of the lateral is due to a following accent or, perhaps more likely, besides this mechanism, the MIA forms go also back to *-il-ya-, *-al-ya-, *-ulya- built with the OIA gerund -ya-42 which makes ‘grammatical sense’ (regarding phonetics cf. e.g. Pa. kulla- ‘winnowing basket’ < OIA kulya- and Pischel § 286: “lya wird lla”). I neither know of any argument explaining the presence of several different vowels before the PIE *-l- nor seem there to exist language-specific restrictions (e.g. in Greek more or less all vowels appear), but the fact that in case of the three Middle Indo-Aryan suffixes the preceding vowels -e- and -o- are missing43 can have two unequally likely reasons: (a) the more unlikely reason is that there was only one ‘archimorpheme’ -alla- whose initial vowel sometimes changed to -i- or -u-. Such changes are well-known from IA history, but as a result one would expect either geographical or grammatical differences which seem not to be known. Moreover, under such a scenario also development of -a- > -e- and -o- should be expected which is also not the case. Therefore more likely is alternative (b), namely that e, * o with a. the lack of -e- and -o- is an effect of the common Indo-Iranian merger of PIE *  Coming back to Igartua, he points out (2014: 307) that the suffix is also found with Hittite adjectives and nouns, producing sometimes agent nouns through substantivization of adjectives with the meaning ‘pertaining to/who deals with . . . ’ Compare this with the above quoted example from MIA: g¯ amilla- ‘farmer’. He also calls attention to the observation (2014: 312) that in some cases Hittite forms are kind of l-participles (typologically) closely related to those in Slavic. “This functional development in Hittite seems to anticipate the evolution of l-formations in the other Indo-European languages in which participles and even finite verbal forms arose out of adjectival formations. . . ” (ibid.). He continues on the same page with this observation: “In Lydian, another Anatolian language, there are infinitival as well as past tense forms in -l, some of which are strikingly parallel in their formal structure to their Slavic correlates: cf. for example Lyd. esl ‘was’ and OCS byl» ‘(has) been’, coming from different roots of the verb ‘to be’.” In fact, there are further parallels in the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı variety Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı poet. bh¯ ul¯ a ‘was’ (LSI ix,iv: 552) (see p. 391), in Bih¯ ar¯ı bhela ‘became’ (LSI v,ii: 93); Pr¯ akrit bhaïla-, Maithil¯ı bhel ‘he became’, Bhojpur¯ı bhayal ‘finished’ (see OIA lex. bhavita- ‘been’ [9420]). Here with somewhat different meaning Rohingya ói(-)bella ‘to be’ ¯ : first word < OIA bhávati ‘becomes, is’ which is built with two different reflexes of BHU (9416) and second word < *bhavita-illa- (like the forms found sub 9420), bella is also found in B.roh. fari bélla ‘to be able’ with first word < OIA p¯ ayáyati1 ‘is capable of’ (8106) where Turner quotes e.g. Pr¯ akr.t p¯ ar¯ei, p¯ araï ‘is able’; many other examples suggest that the meaning of Rohingya bélla comes close to Hindi (hone)-v¯ al¯ a as can be seen e.g. in solibélla toiyar ‘operational’ (roughly H. calne-v¯ al¯ a taiy¯ ar) or in biai bélla ‘to give birth’ (with first word < OIA víj¯ ayate ‘is born’ [11701]) where the form has become close to an infinitive. In Dardic Pal¯ ula perfective bhíl-u (m.sg.) and bhíl-a (m.pl.) (Liljegren [2008: 84, 127, 148]) and same author for K¯ alk¯ ot.¯ı (2013a online, no pagination) äga bil ‘it rained’ (lit. ‘rain was’), in Shina 41 Compared with Ringe’s convincing explanation, that of Melanie Malzahn (2010: 49) is much less plausible: “The gerundive in -lle, TA -l is to be derived from a modal PIE verbal adjective in *-liio- . . . ”  42 Strings of grammatical (and pleonastic) suffixes are common in MIA, and an NIA language like Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has a plurality of suffixes/suffix clusters that can be decomposed into separate suffixes. Note also that the OIA rule that -ya- is to be affixed to verbs with prefixes only does not hold good in later OIA (see Whitney 1973: 355). 43 Note, however, that H. C. Bhayani says (1988: 158) that Haribhadra Suri mentions an -ella- suffix. Whether the -e- was due to a not uncommon change of -a- > -e- or whether – but very unlikely – the Pk. -e- reflects PIE *-e- is difficult to say. However, in any case, the form -ella- is apparently neither known to other Prakrit grammarians nor is it found in later reflexes.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

242

Chapter 9. Three sundry topics

“billé” ‘have become’ (Leitner [1889: 33]), in the Shina of Kohistan sa bílo ‘he became’ etc. (Schmidt [2008: 122]). A more precise look at the distribution and functions of this suffix in NIA languages follows below in the chapter on morphological processes pp. 237ff. I may close this section with a reference to Cardona regarding the relationship of Indo-Iranian with Slavic. He writes (2003: 20): “The most definitely established and accepted subgroup within Indo-European is Indo-Iranian, a subgroup adjacent to Slavic . . . ” It is, however, not possible to say whether there exist special genetic relationships between Slavic and (dialectal) Indo-Aryan regarding the PIE *-lo- suffix.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Part II

North India and the arrival of Austro-Asiatic

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Figure 9.1: Pinnow: Outline map of Austro-Asiatic languages (1959)

Franklin Southworth (2005a: 67ff.)1 refers to F. B. J. Kuiper’s claim (on whom more below) that the oldest loanwords in Vedic are of Munda or Austro-Asiatic origin and that therefore there must have been a “. . . presence of the speakers of these languages in the Panjab as early as the second millennium BCE. The Rigveda alone contains more than 300 such words.” However, this position has been sharply criticized by the Munda specialist Toshiki Osada (2006) who quotes his colleague Norman Zide (p. 1): “The identification of words in Indo-Aryan and Dravidian as Munda loans, even when this has been done by careful scholars, is not often convincing, in the light of newer data.” He himself sums up (p. 2): “. . . I generally find that the role of Munda languages for the South Asian linguistic area is overemphasized . . . the Munda or Austroasiatic role for convergence in South Asia including loan words is overestimated.” He then goes on to review the following words: plough, banana, pepper, lemon, cotton, gourd which, as formerly being seen as the clearest evidence, were widely accepted as being of Munda/Mon-Khmer origin. Osada arrives at the conclusion (p. 17) that “. . . Mayrhofer has drastically changed his position on the Austroasiatic origin for Sanskrit words from KEWA to EWA. When I examined the indexes of KEWA and EWA I saw that the number of entries for Austric are clearly diminishing; e.g., 278 in KEWA but 30 in EWA. That is to say, Mayrhofer apparently recognizes that both Kuiper and Przyluski works are not reliable at all. I, as a Munda specialist, agree with his basic position. It is no exaggeration to say that simple calculation has been done; i.e., foreign words in Sanskrit minus Dravidian origins equal to Munda origins.” Finally, he remarks (p. 1 The following paragraph is a slightly altered version of the corresponding section in Zoller 2016.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

246 17f.) that Donegan and Stampe (2002: 27) favor a South Asian origin for Austro-Asiatic whereas he is convinced of a westward movement from Southeast Asia to South Asia. Not surprisingly, Parpola welcomes this quite authoritative verdict (2015: 165). He takes up some examples from Witzel (see Witzel 2005a: 176-180) – who follows Kuiper’s thesis – in order to question their Austro-Asiatic provenance and offers his own ideas of Proto-Dravidian being the language of the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) and thus the appropriate candidate as source of borrowings.2 The old question of the homeland of Proto-Austro-Asiatic has been convincingly answered by Paul Sidwell (mainly 2010, 2013, 2015). He suggests “a stable long-term presence in Indo-China, probably centered on the Mekong River. The most geographically distant branch – the Munda of India – is treated as a highly innovative outlier . . . ” (2010: 117). He argues further (2010: 118) “that the thirteen AA branches3 radiated more or less equidistantly from Proto-AA. Consequently, since the greatest number of AA branches is spoken along an axis that runs roughly southeast to northwest along the middle course of the Mekong river, it is reasonable to suggest that the AA languages dispersed along and out from that axis. This theory is provisionally called the Austroasiatic Central Riverine Hypothesis.” Regarding the – in comparison with the relatively clear history of the IndoEuropean languages – great problems in identifying sub branching and nesting in the history of the thirteen branches of Austro-Asiatic, he proposes two possible explanations (2013: 454): “We can confidently distinguish 13 branches, but it is not clear at all how these might [be] related as nested sub-groups. It may be that the history of these languages is such that they did radiate rapidly to form a relatively flat tree, or it could be that the phylum is so old that contact, internal and external, has erased clear signs of nested relations.” Sidwell decidedly rejects Diffloth’s suggestion for locating the homeland proximal to the Bay of Bengal and he critically notes (2010: 119) that “ George van Driem has been actively promoting this view in print (especially his 2001 handbook). Van Driem makes much of the literature which p[ur]ports to identify an old Munda substrate in Vedic etc. (especially Kuiper 1955, 1967, 1991, and recently Witzel 1999).” Once again, van Driem is misguided in his speculations: my above-formulated two propositions (p. 16) predict also that traces of the Pre-Indo-Aryan linguistic landscape of North India – dominated by Austro-Asiatic – are clearer and more numerously preserved in Outer Languages than in Inner Languages (setting out from Vedic). However, that also Austro-Asiatic was intrusive into North India is also proven by the innovations Munda has undergone in comparison with the other Austro-Asiatic languages. This will be discussed in more detail beginning p. 465.

25 Parpola’s book, which is a kind of résumé of the decades of his research on this question, contains indeed a number of quite compelling arguments in favor of Dravidian, and in my eyes it is not unlikely that Dravidian was also spoken in the IVC, perhaps especially or exclusively by religious, political and economic elites. 36 Munda, Khasi, Palaungic, Khmuic, Mangic, Vietic, Katuic, Bahnaric, Pearic, Khmer, Monic, Aslian, Nicobarese.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10 Ideophones/expressives

A below sketched critique of Blench and Spriggs (p. 419) on the historical-comparative method and my own critique on the “Gandh¯ ar¯ a thesis” (see below p. 435) lead to yet another aspect of orality in South Asia which is of great importance for an understanding of the strong impact of certain linguistic features on the Outer Languages. It concerns ideophones.1 Ideophones – also called expressives or sound-symbols — are widespread in South Asia and especially frequent in Munda and Mon-Khmer, but also e.g. in Burushaski. Since this book contains a large number of ideophones and since I treat them as basically not different from ‘normal’ words – i.e. I do not discount them but use also ideophones for my historicalcomparative arguments – I have to explain why I think this can be done. Ideophones are sometimes erroneously subsumed under the term onomatopoeia even though onomatopoeia are just that sub-class within ideophones where sounds are imitated with words. The often wrong use of the term is frequently due to the prejudice that words characterized in this way are so-to-say of inferior quality and anyway useless for instance in historical linguistic studies. In other words, in many grammars and etymological dictionaries they have a marginal existence. One example for the casual treatment of such words is OIA *kutta- ‘dog’ in the CDIAL (3275) which is in the eyes of Turner an onomatopoeion. I don’t understand, however, how the word kutta- could be perceived as imitating the barking of a dog.2 Solveiga Armoskaite and Päivi Koskinen note (2017: 149): “All languages manifest two kinds of expressions, prosaic and iconic. In the prosaic layer, meaning-sound correspondences are arbitrary . . . Conversely, the iconic layer manifests sound-meaning correlations that are not arbitrary. There are two varieties of iconic expressions: onomatopoetic and ideophonic . . . Onomatopoetic expressions directly imitate sound . . . In contrast, ideophonic expressions do not directly imitate properties of the external world, but they do lead speakers to unconsciously endow particular sounds with specific sensory meanings . . . In their form, meaning, and distribution, ideophones usually defy grammar canons specific to a particular language.” They continue (p. 150): “. . . while ideophones can communicate fairly abstract meanings, they are not designed to do so. To really understand the nuances of ideophonic meanings, we need to attend to the details of their performance . . . ” The authors have a clear understanding that the characteristic domain for use of ideophones is oral communication. 1 On the massive problems in finding a consensual definition for ideophones see Kellersmann (2017: 22ff.), where the author presents an overview of the great semantic bandwidth and the divergent word classes and syntactic characteristics found in a great number of languages with a wealth in ideophones. 2 The lemma is certainly in some way connected with a geographically very widespread ‘dog lemma’ discussed p. 72.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

248

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

In the words of Mark Dingemanse (2009: 9):3 “. . . ideophones serve as a device for creating heightened interlocutory involvement . . . ” and they seem to strengthen a ‘communal ethos’ (ibid.). But coming back to Armoskaite and Koskinen, they also observe in Quechua (as a typical example) a loss of the use of ideophones in speech (ibid.) due to “. . . changes within Pastaza Quichuan society, which are leading to an increased dependence on written forms of communication that “erase” much of the malleability of language.” Besides strengthening a ‘communal ethos’, there is one more important aspect characterizing many ideophones: their esthetic quality. Paul Sidwell maintains with regard to the contributors to the book The aesthetics of grammar: Sound and meaning in the languages of Mainland Southeast Asia (2014: 2f.): “The essayists in this collection adopt an interpretative and explanatory stance in which ‘aesthetics’ holds fast to its original definition deriving from the Ancient Greek source 𝛼𝜄𝜎𝜃𝜂𝜏𝜄𝜅 𝑜´𝜍; of or relating to sense perception, sensitive, perceptive – referring to ‘things perceptible by the senses . . . as opposed to things thinkable’ . . . ” Thus, ideophonic allomorphy has nothing to do with ‘beauty’ but frequently with different degrees of intensity of feeling. Sidwell gives different definitions for the esthetic component in grammar (p. 4): “The aesthetic component of grammar: i is referential in the areas of sensory or perceptual intensity; ii is a mechanism to beautify speech in socially and culturally appropriate and meaningful ways; iii is manifested in everyday speaking as well as in ritualized, named genres; iv is productive or-semi-productive and rich in multible exponents; and v is psychologically real.” Shortly discussing former questionable studies of ideophones, Sidwell justly admonishes (p. 7): “. . . expressives, which are only ill-defined in most of these accounts, appear to be extragrammatical. If we allow ourselves to be convinced by these arguments, we will forever marginalize and exoticize languages (as well as speakers) such as Khmer, Vietnamese, Thai, and many other minority languages of Southeast Asia and beyond where expressive morphology . . . is central to the grammar.” With regard to Munda, Jacob Phillips and David Harrison find (2017: 221): “The Munda languages of South Asia exhibit sound symbolism in their use of mimetic reduplication, to which they devote a surprisingly large percentage of their lexicons, typically upwards of ten percent . . . Munda mimetic forms can depict sensory qualities of sound, space, movement, texture, smell, taste, temperature, feelings, and sensations. The typology of mimetic reduplication in Munda varies across syntactic class, semantic domain and phonological form.” And they explain (p. 222): “Here we use the term depict following Dingemanse (2009: 83), in which depiction “implies iconicity, a perceived resemblance between form and meaning’.” However, they do not agree with him in this regard (p. 223): “. . . Dingemanse (2009) . . . proposes that in addition to depicting sensory qualities, ideophones must be both marked and vivid . . . However, it is the case [in Munda] that many of these forms have been lexicalized, using the same phonemic inventory and the same inflectional morphology as the rest of the lexicon.” Regarding the Sora language they note (p. 225): “The Sora people’s rich connection to their environment is mirrored in their lexicon: an estimated 16% of its lexicon relates to or depicts the natural world (cf. 3.3% in Modern Standard Arabic . . . and 2.9% in French . . . ). Terms relating to the natural world in Sora, as in other languages – both Munda and otherwise – are ideophonic at much higher rates than the rest of the lexicon. 3 Pagination according to the online version.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

249

As ideophones in Sora often have structures containing reduplication, it is thus unsurprising that the Sora lexicon has a high proportion of reduplication.” And (p. 227): “While crosslinguistically, ideophones are typically limited to specific syntactic categories, often adjectives and adverbs, we see in the Munda languages that mimetic reduplicative forms span syntactic classes, from modifiers to nouns and verbs to determiners and adpositions.” On p. 229 they reproduce Dingemanse’s implicational hierarchy which pertains to African languages but which apparently also applies well for Munda: sound < movement < visual patterns < touch, taste and smell < inner feelings and cognitive states For Munda they suggest the following very similar hierarchy (p. 230): sound, manner, quantity/repetition, visual patterns, touch and scent and taste, temperature, and internal feelings and cognitive states. Whether or not ideophones/expressives form a third word-class besides nouns and verbs is probably language-dependent but certainly also a matter of the linguistic perspective. In a much-quoted article, Gérard Diffloth (1976) holds that in Austro-Asiatic Semai (spoken in Western Malaysia) and in most other Austro-Asiatic languages expressives are indeed a separate word-class. He was the first to use the term ‘expressives’ for a distinct class of complex words in languages of Southeast Asia (and South Asia), a class which has no comparable equivalent in the Indo-European language family. Expressives are characterized thus (p. 255-6): “One might expect, from the fact that expressives describe sensory perceptions, that they would function syntactically as adjectives or adverbs. This is not the case. Whereas adjectives and adverbs follow head nouns or verbs, expressives precede sentences or isolated noun phrases . . . Unlike adjectives and adverbs, expressives cannot be quantified; even their negation does not have the meaning of a negated predicate. They cannot be either the head or the modifier of any other part of speech; in fact, they are not at all integrated in the syntax of the language and function mostly in the manner of independent clauses, all by themselves . . . Since expressives accompany clauses where the main verb may be . . . ‘we see’, . . . ‘we feel’ or . . . ‘we hear’, and the like, they can be classified according to the various modes of perception they pertain to.” Sometimes the meanings they depict can overlap (p. 256-7): “For example, in /par par par na:y he:k/ (expressive + ‘they fly’) the expressive describes both the flapping movement and the sound of birds’ wings.” This lemma par par par is discussed p. 825. Regarding meanings of expressives, Diffloth observes (p. 257): “The meanings of expressives seem to be extremely detailed and idiosyncratic, describing a situation perceived as a whole, as an independent clause would. On the other hand, the same expressive can be used to describe a variety of situations which at first glance seem to be quite different but share a common core which could be defined as a cluster of elementary sensations. For instance, /klknare:/ is used to describe an arrow or knife stiffly vibrating after embedding itself into a piece of wood; it can also describe the walk of a tall, skinny old man. The cluster of sensations common to both meanings (and recognized by informants) are: stiffness, perpendicularity, and repeated small oscillations.” Regarding their morphological variations he notes (p. 260): “Initial consonants may disappear for no apparent reason: both /gl˜ı:l/ and /I˜ı:I/ describe the gait of a very fat person ‘throwing around’ a lot. Final consonants may also vary within a small range. Examples: /prbuñbuñbuñ/ ‘noise of bubbles in water’ /prbucbucbus/ ‘noise of small bubbles in mud’ /prbusbusbus/ ‘noise of big bubbles in mud’

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

250

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

. . . (p. 261-2): It should be clear from these examples that expressives are not subject to the condition of ‘lexical discreteness’4 and that the same exemption may apply to certain verbs and nouns related to expressives. It follows that the ‘roots’ of expressives have to be analysed into very small ‘morphemes’-elements as small, perhaps, as distinctive features. We must be prepared to see the expressive as a whole decomposed in such manner, to discard the conventional notions of root and morphology, and to treat expressives as micro sentences made up of distinctive features. This type of analysis will presumably be feasible when we know considerably more about the meaning of expressives than we do now. We should keep in mind, however, that this sort of segmentation might be a misguided approach: the reason for the lack of lexical discreteness is due not so much to the small size of the meaningful elements as to the presence of phonological symbolism. If the meaning of the expressive has some analogy with the substance of the word, then small differences in meaning will correspond to small differences in phonology.” What Diffloth states about Semai holds also good for Munda. If /gl˜ı:l/ and /I˜ı:I/ reflects a principle of expressive variation then we would have here the explanation for deletion or weakening of word-initial consonants not only in Munda but also in Outer Languages. Examples for this are discussed page 382f. As much as I can see, in northern South Asia ideophones are partly derived from ‘normal’ lexemes and partly they do not have a corresponding verb root or noun stem. An example for the former is a lemma ‘sound of galloping horse’ which is derived from a Munda word for ‘leg, foot’ (discussed p. 889). What Diffloth calls “small ‘morphemes’-elements as small, perhaps, as distinctive features” are also found in Munda, and I call them ‘ideophonemes’.5 For instance, Santali has a limited set of consonants that can be suffixed, infixed or prefixed and which create specific modifications of a basic meaning. These changes are usually accompanied by vowel change in the basic form (which is frequently repeated in the reduplicated form6 ) and sometimes by aspiration and change of place and/or type of articulation. Here follow two examples from Santali:

khad khadao ‘the bubbling noise made by water boiling’ khEdE¼c khEdE¼c ‘bubbling sound of water when boiling khEdEr khEdEr ‘with a bubbling, cracking sound (boil), with a cackling sound (women’s nagging)’ khEdE khEdE, khOdO khOdO ‘with a bubbling sound; to bubble (the sound when there is too little water)’ khudu khudu ‘with a bubbling sound; prepare (food); bubble’ phud phud, phud phuda.u ‘bubbling, boiling’ phak phak, phak phakao, phuk phak ‘to puff, to bubble when boiling’ 4 Diffloth seems here to refer to minimal pairs like ‘house’ ≠ ‘mouse’. 5 Much research has been done on the question if and which correlations may be found between sounds and meanings. Typical terms (apart from my ‘ideophoneme’) are ‘phonestheme’ or German Lautsymbol. Kellersmann prefers the term ‘submorpheme’ in the sense of certain phonemes or phoneme combinations, which are associated with a specific meaning (2017: 188). An example would be Malay -ah which is found affixed to lexemes related with the meaning of ‘wet’ (2017: 189). 6 Thus, these vowel changes are not distinctive as in English lap and lip, but they manipulate a basic meaning in certain directions. For instance, vocalic ideophonemes in Austro-Asiatic Amwi are described by Alfons Weidert (quoted in Sidwell [2014: 28]) in this way: “/a/, /e/, /E/ and /u:/: describe anything that is large, grown-up, old, strong, violent, thick, heavy, coarse, loud, wide, high, long, deep, heavy liquid, generally of large dimension.” See also the publications by Anvita Abbi on reduplications in South Asia.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

251

phEkE phEkE ‘with a bubbling sound; make a bubbling sound (Indian corn porridge, millets, clothes, etc., boiling)’ phok phok ‘to puff, puffing or bubbling’ as in éoïãra daka phok phok saãe¼k kana ‘the boiling Indian corn porridge is bubbling’ Note: The forms beginning with kh- are etymologically different from those with ph-. Nevertheless, they are both semantically and morphologically quite similar (but the ph- forms are meant to be more ‘dull’ than the kh- forms) and follow similar mutation patterns. But they are also different because the ph- forms do not have a known etymology whereas the kh-forms have. In the CDIAL there is *khadakhada- ‘bubbling noise’ (3803), but the lemma is clearly of Mon-Khmer origin: PMK *[k]hOOt ‘to dry up’, Bahnar khOOt ‘of water to become less and less’, Katuic Bru kh6:t ‘to evaporate’, perhaps Mon khOt ‘(e.g. plaster) to dry’. Thus, it seems that the original meaning of the lemmma was not ‘to boil, bubble’ but ‘to evaporate (through heat)’ which is still recognizable in Sant. khEdE khEdE, khOdO khOdO. caraú caraú, cara¼t capa¼t ‘scorching, burning, smarting’ cErcEúE¼c ‘sparks to fly, as when thorns are burning, or when iron at white heat is hammered’ cEúE ‘sparks, as from thorns when burning’ chu¼c (probably < older *c(h)uú) ‘to burn, burning, piping hot; to smart, as from the sting of a scorpion’ EóE¼c EóE¼c, EóE¼c pEóE¼c ‘to smart, to scorch, to burn; smarting or burning sensation’ cErE pEúE ‘roast with a crackling sound’ (Bodding) and ‘explosive sound produced by the wood of the Indian Ebony tree when burning’ (Campbell) cEúE ‘crackling (firewood, of the ebony tree) cEúEtE¼t ‘applied to the thin skin on the bark of the Indian Ebony tree (terel), which when burning produces slight explosions followed by sparks’ The examples presented above have to do with the pragmatics of a ‘special treatment’ of morphemes (e.g. different types of reduplications). Without being able to go here into detail, I nevertheless would like to point out that ideophones possibly constitute just one level of a linguistically more complex reality. Thus, not only the bodies of words can be reduplicated but also their meanings in form of synonym compounds. A simple example would be Hindi dhan-daulat ‘accumulated wealth’ (lit. ‘wealth-wealth’). The present book contains quite many such examples and, indeed, a number of etymological suggestions I make in those cases where the origin of a word is not immediately clear, are based on the reconstruction of old underlying synonym compounds.7 Also here the assumption of Austro-Asiatic origin – or, in case of words of IA origin, Austro-Asiatic model – appears to be obvious alternative. And a yet higher level for ‘reduplications’ would be the phrase level. Piers Vitebsky discusses formal and informal oral discourses and dialogues (the former in poetic form) of the Mundaspeaking Sora ‘tribal’ community in connection with the themes of mortality and death and rituals related with them (1993: 89ff.). He notes (p. 90): “The first property of verse is that it carries to its extreme a pervasive tendency in all Sora speech, a tendency to speak in grammatically parallel phrases or doublets: edate-gudate ‘he weeps he wails’. Sora call these doublets takud-ber, ‘finishing-off speech’ and they can encompass either single words or lengthy phrases.” Here an example of a more lengthy ‘finishing-off-speech’ (p. 91): ‘If you 7 A separate article of mine on this topic is found in Baart, Liljegren and Payne 2017.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

252

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

put the words into his mouth if you pour the words into his mouth, he won’t be frightened he won’t be nervous’. Such type of phrasings reminds me strongly of the language of the Bang¯ an.¯ı oral Mah¯ abh¯ arata (P Onduan, see Zoller 2014), and indeed Vitebsky points out

devices’ have been reported also for other Munda (1993: 267, note 4) that similar ‘speech languages, for Dravidian and Indo-Aryan, and for languages in southeast Asia (see the note for additional literature). Returning to ideophones, I want to assert that despite their intrinsic faculty for malleability, there is no reason for excluding expressives from historical-comparative studies. They may sometimes behave different from ‘normal’ nouns and verbs – see also the studies on Tamil ideophones by Emeneau and Hart (1993) and on American Iroquoian ideophones by Marianne Mithun (1982) — and their phonology and morphology may sometimes deviate from the general rules of a languages (see e.g. Buddruss und Degener on Nuristani Prasun [2017: 485]), but these are no principal objections against the use of ideophones in historical linguistics. In order to show the validity of my conviction I present here examples of ideophones found in Sanskrit, Prasun and Hindi that have all been borrowed into the three languages from Austro-Asiatic. Among the many thousand of Sanskrit words in the dictionary of Monier-Williams, there are only around seventy words tagged as onomatopoetic. In the Comparative Dictionary of Indo-Aryan Languages there are around hundred and thirty lemmata tagged as onomatopoetic.8 With regard to Monier-Williams’ dictionary, I doubt that this reflects the reality when Old Indo-Aryan was a spoken language, and with regard to Turner’s dictionary the reader can see that most of these lemmata are known only in NIA or from MIA onwards. In any case, here follow six examples from Monier-Williams – only two of which are also found in NIA – and then from Turner, almost all of which are reconstructions:

Sanskrit (Monier-Williams) 1. OIA (MBh. +) kat.akat.a ¯-, (Pk. +) *kat.akka- ‘sound of rubbing’ (2632), kit.akit.a ¯yate ‘gnashes the teeth’ — H. kit.kit.a ¯n¯ a ‘to grate (the teeth: in frustration)’ — Rudh. "kr2ttna (d2nt) ‘to gnash (the teeth)’ (Kaul 2006 ii: 271) — Sant. kiú kiú ‘be angry,

the teeth in a passion’, Kor. ka:óa:o ‘to gnash’, Bon. katOr- ‘to grind (teeth)’ gnash (also Or.) and cf. (apparently a different lemma) Kor. khoraú, khroú ‘rub’ — cf. Bahnar kr@P ‘noise of something rubbing together’, Surin Khmer krA:t ‘onomatopeia from the sound of grinding one’s teeth’, cf. also PMK *kr@c ‘to grind, gnash (teeth)’. Notes: (a) The H. word is listed sub OIA *kat.t.- ‘sound or result of striking’ (2644) but is certainly etymologically related with 2632, also because of the different meaning. (b) Mayrhofer (EWA) points to Dravidian Kan. kat.akat.a kad.i ‘to grind one’s teeth’ but this is probably a borrowing from IA. (c) There was perhaps a sesquisyllable-like borrowing (cf. OIA *kat.akka-) based on an AA sound-matrix. All in all, borrowing of the OIA word from AA is likely even though the AA source cannot be pinpointed with certainty. 2. OIA kuk¯ unána- ‘gargling’ — cf. So. koko-t2m- ‘to wash one’s mouth, gargle’, but there is no additional evidence. 8 The term ‘ideophone’ was only introduced into linguistics in 1935 by Clement Doke (see bibliography).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

253

3. OIA kuhaka-svana- or kuhaka-svara- ‘a wild cock, Phasianus Gallus’ is perhaps related with OIA kukkut.á-1 ‘cock’ (3208) even though it is claimed (EWA) to derive < older *kut.-kut.á- — Sant. kokokoko ‘cackling of a cock’, Kh. and Tur. kokro ‘cock’, Mu. kOkOrecOP ‘imitative word for a cock’s crow’, for more similar forms see Pinnow (211) — Aslian Jahai kokoP ‘to crow (of cock)’, Bahnaric Halang g@g@:k ‘rooster cackling’, Khmer kOOk ‘large rooster (esp. used in cock-fighting)’, Monic Nyah Kur Pék-k@Pée-Pék ‘sound of bantam rooster crowing’, Nicobaric Nancowry kake-P@k ‘crow as a cock’. 4. OIA krakara- ‘a kind of partridge, Perdix Sylvatica’, kákara- ‘a kind of bird’, víkakara‘a kind of bird’ — Sant. kirkir ‘call of partridge when disturbed’ and khE khE khE khE ‘the cry of certain birds’ and kErkeúa ‘the brown shrike, Lanius cristatus’ and kEr kEúE kEúE ‘the cry of the brown shrike’ — Khasi sPiar kh iar ‘bamboo partridge’, Palaung ki@r ki@r ‘partridge’, Bahnaric Alak kakar ‘to crow’, Katu kikar ‘to crow’. 5. OIA ghurughur¯ a- (expl.: ghora-nirghos.a- ‘great noise [produced by panting or puffing])’ and ghurghur¯ a- ‘growling (of a dog or cat)’, Pa. ghurughuru- ‘onomat. expression of snoring & grunting noise’, ghurughur¯ ayati ‘to snore’, H. ghurghur-1 a.o. ‘growling or snarling; purring- — Sant. gargor, kharkhor ‘sound of purring’ (only Campbell), ghur ghur@u i.a. ‘to whirr’ (again only Campbell), Bodo-Gadaba gur-murei ‘to growl’. The group apperas to be cognate with a similar group quoted below p. 877 in lemma starting with Bur. 1 qhor ét- ‘to snore’. 6. OIA t.irit.ir¯ a- ‘whispering’ — Bodo-Gadaba dire.dire sar-loN ‘to whisper’ (sar-loN ‘to talk’), but there is no additional evidence. 7. OIA (lex.) phalla-phala-, phulla-ph¯ ala- ‘the wind raised in winnowing grain’ — Aslian Semelai ph0l ‘blow up (of a breeze, wind)’; Bahnaric Tampuan phel phel ‘descriptive of something small flapping in the wind’, Katuic Pacoh ph 7l phâl ‘whoosh, air going out of dying animal’, Monic Nyah Kur phéel ‘swing back and forth (when the wind blows)’, probably also Palaungic Hu phél ‘wing’, Pear ph @:l ha:l ‘vanner le paddy; to winnow paddy’.

Old Indo-Aryan (Turner) 1. OIA *k¯ıkkati ‘screams’ (3192) and *k¯ ukkati ‘screams’ (Pk. kukkaï ‘calls, challenges’),  s. k¯ *k¯ ukk¯ a- ‘scream’ (3390), Sa ukn.a ¯ ‘to accuse, inform about’ — Sant. kiki@u ‘to scream’ — PMK *kuk, kuuk ‘to call’, Bahnaric Stieng ku:k [kwal] ‘to call out to’, Katuic Kui ko:k ‘to call out to’, Khmer ko:k ‘to call out to’, Middle Mon kwok ‘call, summon’ and Mon kok ‘call, to call’, Proto-Wa-Lawa and Proto-Waic *k6k ‘to call’. 2. OIA *khankh-, ˙ *khankh¯ ˙ ar ‘cough, hawk’ (3763) (or rather OIA *khokkh- ‘bark, cough’ [3926] or contamination of the two lemmata?) — Bur. qhoq ét- ‘to cough (jokingly)’ — Proto-Kherwarian k(h)ùP ‘to cough’, Pre-Mundari k(h)uP ‘to cough’, Jur. and So. ko-, koko- ‘to cough’, Mu. kuP ‘a cough, to cough’, Kor. kh o¼ ‘cough’, Sant. khara¼k ‘to clean the throat, phlegm, slimy matter ejected from the mouth’ and kho¼k ‘to cough’, Kh. khuP, khuP-khuP ‘to cough’, Bodo-Gadaba kukku ‘cough’ — PMK *kPOk ‘to cough’, Proto-North-Bahnaric *kPOk ‘to cough’, Proto-Katuic *kahaak ‘cough up phlegm’, Khasic Pnar kPOP ‘to cough’, Khmer khaak ‘to spit out; to clear the throat; to cough up (e.g. phlegm)’ and Surin Khmer kPA:P ‘to cough’, Mon kh3k kh3k ‘adverbial describing coughing’. There are also more or less similar Tibeto-Burman forms. 3. OIA khat.akhat.a ¯yate ‘crackles’ (3771) — Sant. khaó khoó ‘rustling, rattling, crackling sound’ and ki:ói:¼t marte ‘with a creak’, Kor. oúe¼ ‘to crackle’ — cf. PMK *kriit, *krit ‘to creak’, cf. also Katuic Kui kho:t ‘to scratch, scrape or rub against (e.g. tree branches against roof)’ and Bru khu:t ‘to scrape off, to grate’, Proto-Khasic *kh uut ‘to scrape off’ and Khasi kh u:t ‘to scrape off (with a sharp instrument)’, cf. Surin Khmer khet

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

254

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

to strike a light (with a match); to draw, scratch (lines), mark, score (with lines)’ and khu:t ‘to scratch; to scrape’, Khmuic T"in kho:t ‘to scrape, shave’, Monic Nyah Kur khíit ‘scratch’ and khúut ‘scrape, grate; comb (with a fine toothed comb); whittle (to make something easy to bend)’ and kh
OOt ‘scrape off’, Palaung khat, khut ‘to scrape (using knife or sharpened bamboo)’, Vietic Thavung khû:t ‘scratch’. Notes: (a) The above-quoted IA and AA forms do probably not derive from one ultimate source, rather some contamination is likely (cf. also in the preceding section the kat.akat.a ¯- lemma). Therefore cf. also OIA *kotr-, *khotr- ‘dig’ (3512) with reflexes also meaning ‘scratch’ and possibly related Sant. khayOt ‘to scrape’ (Campbell) and ‘what is rubbed, i.e., matches; to scrape off (cooking-vessels), rub (as a match)’ (Bodding). (b) Here also palatalized OIA *cat.a- ‘crackle’ (MBh. cat.acat.a ¯yate ‘rattles’) (4570) — Sant. caúa cuúu ‘to frizzle, to be crisp, to crackle’. 4. OIA c¯ır¯ı- ‘cricket’ (4845) — cf. Kor. citor ‘grasshopper’ and cf. Kor. kariroroc ‘cricket (black one), beetle’ with Sant. sOsrOé ‘locust’9 — PMK *criit cricket, to chirr’, Aslian Semai éaôEt ‘a cricket, a large insect’, Proto-West Bahnaric *[s]t[i/1 ]r ‘cricket’ and Bahnaric Cheng satir ‘cricket’, Khmer cr@c (-cr@c) ‘sound of a cricket chirping’, Monic Nyah Kur críit-críit ‘sound of cricket chirping’ and derived Mon k@rEt ‘cricket’, Pearic Chong has several compounds built with kre:t ‘cricket’. Thus the Kor., Mon and Chong forms suggest alternatively PMK *kriit ‘cricket’ which is (accidentally?) similar to MK words for ‘bee’: PMK *kru@t ‘kind of bee’, Proto-West Bahnaric *krO:t ‘bee (type of)’, Proto-Katuic *karOOt ‘bee (kind of)’. 5. OIA CUMB ‘kiss’. “[Onom. origin (EWA 395) is supported by meaning ‘suck, drink’ in K. A. M. and reduplication in Or.]” — cf. Proto-Kherwarian *cOP ‘to kiss’ and *cEpEé, *cOpOé ‘to suck’, Bir. ch¯ um¯ a ‘to kiss’, Sant. co¼k ‘to kiss’ and copo¼k ‘to kiss each other’ (with reciprocal infix), also cEpE¼c ‘to suck out (fruit etc.)’ and cOpO¼c ‘to suck, draw (into mouth)’ and chOp chOp with a smacking sound (calves sucking)’ — Bahnaric Tampuan cum ‘kiss’, Katu cEm, c1m ‘kiss, sniff’, Palaung cup to kiss; Vietic Thavung cû:p ‘to suck (a kind of shell), to kiss’.  Note: The existence of forms like TB Angami kemebo ‘kiss’, Pochuri küme ‘kiss’ and Zeliang kemam ‘kiss’ (KET but not STEDT) gives rise to the suspicion that they may constitute traces of borrowings of predecessors of CUMB, i.e. of PAA *KUMB ‘kiss’. As rather typical reflexes of historical phonological changes PAA *KUMB one could expect to come across forms like *HUM (B), PUM (B) and *UM (B). C.f. the following evidence: Nyah Kur h´ 7m ‘cuddle and kiss vigorously’, Car ham ku: ‘kiss’ (with ku: ‘face’ ?), Danaw k@ mu1 ‘a smell (good or bad); to kiss, to smell’. 6. OIA *jhamm-1 ‘sudden movement’ (5339) has e.g. the modern reflex H. jham-jham ‘sound of heavy rain’, but there is also Ku. cham¯ ak, chamm¯ ak ‘drizzle’ — BodoGadaba zimri borsa ‘drizzle’, Sora éeméem-da ‘drizzle’ — PMK *éuum ‘moist, swampy’, Proto-Khasic *éum ‘wet’, Khasi éhu:m ‘vapour’, Proto-Khmuic *éam ‘soak’. 9 The comparison suggests that the two words are old (synonym) compounds with second syllable meaning ‘cricket’ and looking almost like the inverse of c¯ır¯ı-.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

255

7. OIA t.hat.t.ha- ‘brass’ (5491). “[Onom. from noise of hammering brass? – *t.hat.t.h‘strike’ –]”, t.hat.t.hak¯ ara-, t.hat.t.hakara- ‘brass worker’ (5493) — Sant. úaúhe ‘to strike or beat with a stick, to strike with a stick at random’, úhaúori ‘a worker in brass, a gold-smith’, úhaúera ‘a brazier (Kupferschmied), a caste who manufacture and sell brass ware’ — Katuic Bru thOOt ‘to punch, to drill (with hot iron)’, Khasi th at th ari: ‘one who works in brass’, Pearic Chong th a:t ‘plateau de cuivre; copper plate’ (loan from Khmer). 8. OIA *t.hat.t.ha- ‘joke’ (5492). “[From noise of laughing? . . . ]” — Pur. t.h at.h a ‘joke, jest’ — Sant. úhaúha ‘to make fun, to make sport, to joke, to jest’, Ju. toúa ‘joke’ and perhaps Bon. ãOãOlO ‘a joking relation’ — here perhaps Khasi th a:t la:t ‘to become shameless, to put to shame’ and th a:t roN ‘to use low or obscene words, to tell tales’. 9. OIA pilippilá-, pilpilá- ‘slippery’ (8213) (see EWA regarding unclear origin) — H. pilpil-1,2 ‘slippery, smooth; soft, flabby; clammy’ (Kellersmann), pilpil¯ a, pulpul¯ a ‘slippery, smooth’, pilpil¯ an¯ a ‘to become soft or flaccid (esp. of penis)’, pulpul¯ an¯ a ‘to soften by chewing’ — Sant. pil pil@u, bil bil@u, pal palao all ‘be touched, rotten, decompose, go bad; spread, increase (sore)’ — cf. Proto-Katuic *phiil ‘smooth’, Katu phiil ‘smooth’. 10. OIA *pukk¯ ar- ‘shout’ (8246). “[Onom.: cf. p¯ utkaroti ‘makes a noise of loud breathing’ Pañcat.]”. MW p¯ ut ‘ind. an onomatopoetic word expressive of blowing or hard breathing, a puff’ — cf. Sant. puãru¼k puãru¼k, pOãrO¼k pOãrO¼k ‘to breathe heavily as a bear, etc.’ (Campbell) or ‘breaking wind’ (Bodding), Gta" punâa-sa- ‘to breathe (inhale and exhale)’, Bodo-Gadaba p˜ uãei, punãei ‘to breathe, to sigh, to pant, to rest’ — cf. PMK *puut to blow, Aslian Semai pu:t ‘to shoot with blowpipe’, Proto-Khasic *put ‘to blow’ and Khasi put ‘to sound a wind instrument’ and Pnar put ‘to blow’, Monic Nyah Kur púut-púut ‘sound of Centropus sinensis crying [crow pheasant]; sound of farting’, Proto-Palaungic *puut ‘to blow (instrument)’. 11. OIA *puśś¯ı- ‘cat’ (8298). “[Onom., cf. Psht. piš¯ o, Pers. pušek, Eng. puss]” — Proto Kherwarian *pusi ‘cat’, Mu. pu:si ‘cat’, Ho, Bir., Kor., Mu., Sant. etc. pusi ‘cat’, Kod., Maha., Mu., Sant. puSi ‘cat’, Sant. pusi¼c pusi¼c, pusi¼k pusi¼k ‘a shout to drive away a cat’ — Aslian Semai pis pis ‘to chase a cat away’. Notes: (a) There are also similar forms in some TB languages: Koch Atong pusipusi ‘interjection to call a cat’, Kan. piši ‘cat’, Tibetan of Spiti piSi ‘cat’, Written Tibetan (Jäschke) pí-`si ‘cat’. (b) Instead of onomatopoeic origin I suggest possible derivation from an AustroAsiatic lemma originally meaning ‘civet’, cf. Khasic War (Amwi) pch at ‘civet cat’ and Khasi bsa:t ‘civet’, cf. also Proto-Bahnaric *spi:k ‘civet; mongoose’ and Katuic Ngeq capiiP ‘civet cat’ and Bru sapiak ‘palm civet’, and Proto-Vietic *s-ba:k ‘weasel, civet’ and Vietic Maleng cup`@ak ‘weasel, civet’ with word structures that may have undergone consonant metatheses in borrowings as seen in the quoted Khasic forms which are closer to the ‘cat’ words; cf. Surin Khmer sam-pU:c ∼ spU:c ‘a palm civet’ (with sam- perhaps designating a certain tree) and Khmer sAmpouc ‘civet (this term probably refers to various small civet-like mammals of the genera Prionodon, Viverricula, Viverra, Paradoxurus, Paguma, and Arctogalidia, most of which produce musk)’. The proposal made here could also explain the difference between forms with dental and with palatal fricatives which would derive from the same palatal affricate *-c-. (c) Kamd. pi˙ca ¯n˙ ‘kitty’ (children’s word) and perhaps Gaw. pisa z"@ and Shum.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

256

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

pisa s"@ both ‘cat’ (both found in Morgenstierne [1950: 60]) are perhaps closer to the AA forms than OIA *puśś¯ı-. 12. Sub OIA luñcati ‘plucks out’ (11074) Turner lists WPah. (Joshi) luchn.u ‘to pull off’; Ku. luchn.o ‘to pull out, snatch at, take off forcibly’; N. luchnu ‘to pull out by force, snatch, claw’ which he explains as due to contamination with MIA *locchaï < lopsyati ‘will remove, will steal’. Here to be added are Garh. lucchy¯ a ‘a thug, cheat, one who deceives’, lucchan. ‘to take away, grab’ and lucchen. ‘to be grabbed extorted’. Instead of reconstructing contamination, it appears similarly possible that these Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms either display affrication of *luś- (see p. 322) – *luś- is reflected in Bng. lusnO

‘to steal, pinch’, lu
salu
siE ‘secretly, furtively, surreptitiously’, lu
skiarO ‘thief’, lu
skiari ‘theft’ – or they have even preserved the original AA -c- (see right below), which was ‘spontaneously’ aspirated (for which there are again parallels). OIA l¯ us.áyati1 ‘steals’ is only found in Vop. and lós.ati only in Dh¯ atup. (see 11098 ) with reflexes in Pk., Old G., M. In addition, there is possibly related OIA *lut.t.ati ‘plunders’; *l¯ ut.ati; lún..ati, lun.t.áyati, rún.t.ati, *lut.hati2 all ‘plunders’ (11078). The first to suggest AA origin was Kuiper (1948), later confirmed by Pinnow (1959: K 318b) and Mayrhofer (KEWA), and most recently by Shorto (2006: 253f.): PMK *luc (and other allomorphs) ‘to steal’, Khmer lu@c ‘to steal; to do something in a sneaky/underhanded manner’ and Surin Khmer lU:c ‘to steal; sneak (through, in, out); to do secretly’, Proto-Khmuic *l@:c ‘to steal’ and Khmu l@:c ‘steal’, Monic Nyah Kur lOOs ‘to steal’, probably Palaung lut ‘to steal’,10 Pearic Chong lùac ‘to steal’ — Kh. "lusi ‘to rob, plunder, snatch’, Mu. lusi ‘the habit of eating things on the sly, steal and eat things on the sly’. 13. OIA *s¯ıt.t.a- ‘whistle’ (13427). “[Onom. cf. ś¯ıt, s¯ıt]” (for further IA parallels see p. 730) — Bodo-Gadaba siPgol ‘to whistle’, So. sid-siN-gOl- ‘to whistle’, Jur. sisiN-gOl- ‘to whistle’ (note Proto-Kherwarian *gOlE ‘to whistle’), Kor. siúia:o ‘to whistle’, Sant. si¼c si¼c, si¼c sO¼c ‘hissing, whistling (through the teeth, not with lips)’, sisi sisi, sisO sOsO ‘whistling; to whistle through the teeth’, siu ‘to whistle, (imitative), to whistle through the teeth’, siu siu ‘whistlingly; to whistle (to call attention)’, siuó siuó ‘whistlingly, shrilly’, sujuó sujuó ‘whistlingly, rushingly; to whistle (loudly), to blow rushingly’ and probably sOjON sOjON ‘the sound of air rushing in or out of an opening; whistlingly; to whistle’; susu ‘whistlingly, making a whistling sound; to make a hissing sound (to child to make it pass stool)’, susu@, susu@u ‘to produce a hissing sound resembling susu susu’, susu susu ‘making a hissing, whistling sound’ — Aslian Semelai sOc ‘whistle’, Bahnaric Mnong co:c “to whistle’ and Tampuan swaac ‘whistle (using fingers)’, Katu cihuu@c ‘whistle’, Khasi siaw ‘to whistle’.

Prasun 1. Pr. c˙ ag, c˙ ak ‘hurriedly’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 485) — Sant. cagae cagae i.a. ‘quickly, hurriedly’. 2. Pr. c˙ im-˙cim li- ‘sound of whining of a baby; sound of cheeping of a chicken’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 484) — Sant. ciã.¼p ciã.¼p ‘cheeping of chickens’ (Campbell) — Bahnar cEEp-cEEp ‘cheep, cheep’ and Tampuan c@ip c@ip ‘cheep (of chicks)’, Mon cep cep ‘to cheep’; cf. also Nicobaric Nancowry cím and ci:m-[ñire] ‘to weep’. There is little doubt that the Sant. form is a morphological contamination of an AA ‘expressive’ *cVp ‘cheep’ and PMK *cim ‘bird’ (which is very widespread in AA languages), whereas in Pr. a semantic reduction or slight semantic shift has taken place from *cim 10 Regarding alternation c/t see Pinnow (1959, p. 276).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

257

‘bird’ (borrowed from AA into Pr.) into ‘activity of birds’, namely ‘cheeping’. The ‘expressive’ *cVp is found e.g. in Khmer as ceep-ceep ‘sound of birds singing, chirping’ √ and thus may be compared with Pr. -čip ‘let sound, play musical instruments’ as e.g. in išp¯ u čip- ‘to play the flute’ and with Yid. c˙ iw-˙ciwok ‘flute’. Note: There is also very similar Georgian-Zan *c’rip ‘to cheep, peep’, Georgian c’rip- ‘to squeak, cheep’; Laz c’ip- ‘to cheep, peep’. Klimov notes on this lemma (1998: 302): “It is an obvious onomatopoeic formation (cf. Lit. cypti ‘to cheep’).” 3. Pr. č "iem ‘sound of rushing water’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 484) — Sant. cEm cEóem ‘full, brimful, flush’ (as water tank), com combao ‘fill to the brim’, c@mã(h)ul ‘to float on the surface’ (of water), Kor. comka ‘float (on water)’ — Khmu cOm ‘sound of stone hitting water after it has been thrown’, Monic Nyah Kur cóm ‘sound of frog jumping or stone or fruit falling into the water’, Palaung com, tjom ‘to sink (in water)’, Vietic Thavung cum ‘to soak in water’. 4. Pr. čerr ‘rushing’ as in aw"@ čerr čobm"aso ‘the water rushes’ (lit. ‘the water sounds ‘rushing”) — Sant. cOrO cOrO ‘sound of falling, passing water’ (Bodding), ‘sound of pouring, or running of water, as from a pipe’ (Campbell) — Proto-Mon-Khmer *cu@r[ ] ‘to flow, to pour’, Katuic Pacoh c7r ‘swift water, rapids in stream’. It is likely that many semantically similar words in Indo-Aryan – discussed p. 591 – are based on this Austro-Asiatic ‘lemma’. 5. Pr. can ‘sound of strong impact on stone’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 484) and ‘crashing,

cracking sound’ — cf. Gta" cã ‘the sound of metal’ — cf. Khmer chooN-chaaN ‘sound of washing pots and pans or the clash of weapons’. 6. Pr. c.@p"ak t¯ı ‘quick’ — cf. Sant. cat.ak mante ‘quickly, instantly’ which itself reminds one of H. cat.pat. ‘quickly’ (Sant. sat. pat. ‘quickly’) — Aslian Semelai cpat ‘quick’, Pear ch ap ‘vite; quick’. 7. Pr. t.ana ˙ n˙ 11 is found in üčüm"üš t.ana ˙ n˙ čob"¯ı t@b"@g ay"ost ‘forthwith they fired off the guns with din’. Before looking at possible AA parallels, it needs to be pointed out that in a number of IA languages the meaning ‘sound of fired off/flying bullet’ is typically same as or similar with words meaning ‘buzz, chirp’, cf. e.g. Ind. c2 v ‘a chirp; whistle (of a bullet)’ and c2 v2
y  ‘loud chirping (of many birds)’ and c2 v-c2 v ‘sound of birds or

‘bee’,

Khmer NuuN-NuuN bullets flying past’ — Katu daNA:N ‘buzzing insect’ and NaNuN ‘sound of humming, buzzing’ and N11N-N11N ‘sound of buzzing’. 8. Pr. d.@b@d.@b@, d.ubed.ob"i ‘noise, din (while rolling, while appearing with much retinue)’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 484) — Sant. ã. aba ‘assemble, collect together, stay together’ — Aslian Temiar dab ‘to spread a mat, to unroll a mat’. 9. Pr. tap is found under the category ‘quick, suddenly’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 483) and e.g. in this sentence (text 61.76) tap čkva t.ag avoč"ogoso ‘in a tap short time (the seed) ripened’ — Sant. tap ‘moment, instant’— Bahnaric Cua ta:p ‘on, in time’, Katuic Pacoh tap ‘quickly; immediately, soon’. 10. Pr. taptap t¯ı is found in only one example (text 32.66): taptap t¯ı byenjivi-t.k"og-@d¯ı ‘she read through (the letter)’ (lit. taptap t¯ı read-letter-and) — Sant. “ta¼p is very frequently used as a part of a compound word, in the meaning that what the other part of the compound signifies, passes through” (Bodding): [email protected] ta¼p.ke¼tae ‘he bored through’, ñEl ta¼p.ketañ kicri¼c ‘I saw through the cloth (it was so thin)’, etc.; note that as a full verb ta¼p means ‘to put through, go, pass through, penetrate’ as in sat 11 With unusual phoneme structure.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

258

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

ta¼p.ena ‘the arrow went through’ — cf. Proto-Mon-Khmer *t1 ap ‘to pierce’, ProtoBahnaric *tap ‘to stab’ and Stieng ta:p ‘to pierce’, Proto-Khmuic *tap ‘to prick, pierce’. 11. Pr. tok ‘sound of hitting on wood’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 484) and t.ak-t.ak ‘knocking (at door)’ — related are Bur. d.ad.ák, d.okd.ók etc. ‘knocking (two stones) against each other, knocking at a door, cracking open nuts’ and t.hak -˙t- i.a. ‘drive home (nail)’ — Sant. úhakúok ‘imitative of the sound of hammering, mainly applied to hammering or striking wood’ (Campbell), ‘carpenter’s work; with rapping, cutting, hammering sounds; to cut, hew (mostly in wood)’ (Bodding), úekeúeke ‘to sound as a wooden bell on a cow’s neck, or as food being stirred in a small pot’ (Campbell) — Khmer tok-tok ‘sound of knocking’, Monic Nyah Kur ták ‘beat (wooden pegs into a tree)’ and t
OOk ‘beat (wooden pegs into a tree)’, Palaungic Riang t7k1 t@ rOl1 ‘wooden bell’. Note: This sound pattern characterizes also (the activity of) woodpeckers in a number of IA languages (see p. 611) (indirectly) reflecting OIA *t.hokk- ‘knock’ (5513). 12. Pr. reduplicated tyemtüm ‘with noise’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 483) as in g@ ozol"¯ı tyemtüm čobog-p"an (text 44.14) ‘when the pot broke noisily’ — perhaps Bir. t¯ umbid ‘to fall down with face downwards’ — Khmu tu:m ‘sound of rotten tree falling down’, Monic Nyah Kur túm ‘sound of heavy thing falling to the ground’ and ‘sound of something falling down from a very high place’ and t´ 7m-t´ 7m ‘sound of something heavy rolling down from high place’. 13. Pr. tyek t¯ı as in uy"u ¯ tyek t"¯ı ončinev"ogso ‘the basket became completely full’, tyek t¯ı s¯ ančiv"@ ‘fill (s.th.) full!’ — cf. Katuic Pacoh ta7:k na7:k ‘very full’ and tEk rEk ‘of being full of holes’. 14. Pr. renre ˙ n˙ ‘jangle, clatter (of a chain)’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 484) — Khmer raaN ‘sound made by hitting a thin brass plate or by rubbing dry palm leaves together’. 15. Pr. šorop t¯ı is found only in one example in the Buddruss-Degener material: a ¯š šorop t¯ı sops.(u)m"aso ‘let the water flow (into his mouth)’. Since the lemma is listed under the category ‘with noise’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 483), it is most likely a borrowing of a reflex of PMK *srup ‘to suck, drink’. It is thus close to the reflexes of PIE *srebh- ‘slurp; gulp, ingest noisily’ (see p. 855) but is different from those reflexes in inflected form because as an ideophone it cannot have a grammatical ending in Prasun. Despite this phonetic closeness, it is thus likely that Pr. šorop t¯ı is a borrowing from Austro-Asiatic. 16. Pr. s.errag t¯ı is found under the category ‘quick, suddenly’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 483) and only found in one example: su čamš s.err"ag t¯ı leks."¯ı ‘having flayed’ (text 22.65) — cf. Sant. sara¼k sara¼k ‘rustling, rasping, crunching (sound)’ and related s@ru¼k s@ru¼k ‘with crunching sounds’. The Prasun text does not require a translation ‘quick’ and the term may rather, similar as in Sant., express the sound of the flaying. 17. Pr. saksak ‘quick(ly), suddenly’ (Buddruss, Degener 2017: 483) — Bahnaric Sre suak ‘quickly, at once, instantaneously’.

Hindi 1: Diatka. Hindi is an archaetypal Inner Language. But since there do not exist watertight boundaries between Outer and Inner Languages, one can expect to find also in Hindi ideophones borrowed from Austro-Asiatic. The first comprehensive publication on ideophones in Hindi is by Vojtěch Diatka (2014), and the second – much more extensive —

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

259

publication is by Jana Kellersmann (2017).12 I have used both for the following section, which is divided in two subsections in order to facilitate counterchecks. Diatka points out that hitherto one could find only brief mentions of this topic – “[t]here has been no research on Hindi ideophones, except for analyses that focus only on onomatopoeic or reduplicated words” (p. 8) – he also refers to Annie Montaut (p. 7) who had observed in Hindi that “phonetic units may be evocative of feelings and perceptions rather than strictly iconic sounds” (2004: 160). Diatka himself suggests the following definition (p. 12): “Ideophones are the linguistic expression of sensory imagery closest to original perception.” On p. 20 he suggests that “[r]eduplication seems to be one of the most salient features of ideophones.” This holds certainly true for Hindi13 but not necessarily for other languages in South Asia as the above examples from Prasun show. Anyhow, in many of the examples following below in the first subsection, the ‘expressive function’ gets activated when a verb stem depicting some sensory event or state, like ‘glitter’ or ‘itch’, is reduplicated. Here it is indeed the phonetic structure that creates expressiveness. A similar effect occurs when two different verbs depicting something sensory are combined as e.g. in Hindi khat.pat. ‘noise, clatter’ (p. 20 and actually an onomatopoeion) which is ‘sound of knocking’ + ‘sound of beating’. This mechanism does not work e.g. in South Asian kinship terms which are frequently built in the same way, for instance Indus Kohistani dhizu
‘a younger daughter’ where the two syllables are phonetically different reflexes of the same source of origin, namely OIA duhitŕ-. This kinship term is not  an expressive, although one may speculate that it came into existence as a way of expressing endearment. In Hindi, ideophones can be(come) members of the classes of nouns, adjectives and verbs through suffixation of the appropriate grammemes (p. 22f.). But the following examples given in order to show cases of syntactically non-integrated or independent ideophones are not convincing, even though Diatka concedes (p. 25) that there can be syntactic ambiguities. This demonstrates again that the world of ideophones is orality and not written texts. I should mention that in Austro-Asiatic languages it is very common that syntactically non-integrated ideophones have a commenting or characterizing function for whole phrases. On p. 46 Diatka presents a table listing the different domains where Hindi ideophones are found: auditory, interoception, kinaesthetic, tactile, visual, high intensity, gustatory, olfactory. Of course, there are great differences in the frequency of their occurrence. But it seems that the situation in Hindi roughly corresponds with the above-quoted implicational hierarchy of Dingemanse. Here follow 16 out of Diatka’s list of 577 Hindi ideophones for which I propose Munda (and, sometimes, Mon Khmer) origin:

12 Diatka’s approach has received a thorough and critical investigation by Kellersmann (2017: 15ff.). 13 Diatka’s table (p. 22) shows that 12% of his corpus are non-reduplicated expressives. He quotes as an example tar.ap- ‘writhing’ (also ‘suffering, agony’) which is found in the √ CDIAL sub OIA *tad.apphad.- ‘agitate’ and for which Turner suggests comparison with OIA tad.-1 and trat.- but which actually is, I suggest, made up of *tad.ap- + *phad.-. The latter may reflect OIA Dh¯ atup. sphát.ati ‘bursts’ (13817). Through reduction from originally three syllables in Prakrit to two in the modern reflexes the original morpheme boundary *tad.ap#phad.- got blurred. The origin of *tad.ap- is not quite clear but I am sure that its form corresponds to very common mechanisms found in Munda expressives alternations like e.g. Sant. ca¼p ca¼p ‘gossip’ versus ca¼p caóa¼p ‘jabber, chatter’ versus caóa¼p caóa¼p ‘jabber, chide’. Thus, Santali -ó - can function as what I call an ‘ideophoneme’. The -r.- in Hindi tar.ap- must have a similar origin even though infixation of ideophonemes for creating or amplifying ideophones is not a grammatical option in Hindi. (For examples of vocalic ideophonemes in Austro-Asiatic Amwi see Weidert quoted in Sidwell [2014: 28]) Therefore the Hindi word must be a borrowing from some unknown source. The verb is probably connected with OIA *t.app-, *tapp- ‘drip, throb’ (5444), cf. also Sant. t@piï ‘beat the forehead in great grief’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

260

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

1. H. at.pat.a ¯ ‘confused’ (INTER) — Sant. ala¼t baka¼t, ala¼t olo¼t ‘bewildered, confused, silly, dull witted’, albaú salbaú ‘contradictory, confused’, @ú n@ s@ú, @ú s@ú ‘unintelligible, confused, weak, unintelligently, improperly’. Notes: (a) Here also Mu. laúpaúao ‘rolled up and confused, to twist something over itself, as in rope making, of snakes and creepers’, H. lat.pat.iy¯ a i.a. ‘double-dealing, devious’. More MU and IA forms sub Pinnow (K482). Pinnow argues that this PMU lemma was already borrowed into OIA lat¯ a-1 ‘creeper’ (10928) which is convincing, but for Mayrhofer origin of lat¯ a- is unclear. (b) More indirectly here also H. hakk¯ a-bakk¯ a ‘confused’ (INTER) — Sant. akbakao ‘confused’, akul b@kul ‘confounded, perplexed, confused, distressed’, ala¼t baka¼t ‘bewildered, confused, silly, dull witted’. 2. H. khicimici ‘congested, full’ (INT) — Sant. khici mici, kici mici ‘detained, hindered, uncomfortable; detain, delay, hinder, harass; be undecided, of two minds’ (Bodding) and ‘to be restive, as a horse or bullock’. Note: The H. word is not found in McGregor and Platts but may be connected with H. hickic¯ı ‘hesitation’ and thus perhaps with OIA *khiñc- ‘to drag, pull’ (3881). Cf. also Mon khìc ‘consider, think, intend to’. 3. H. gadbad¯ a ‘fat,clumsy’ (TAKT) and ‘plump’ (McGregor) — cf. Sant. gadha godho ‘heavy, out of sorts’ (Bodding) and ‘heavy, clumsy’ (Campbell). 4. H. gahgah¯ a ‘excited’ (INTER) and ‘rapturous, excited; festive’ (McGregor) — Sant. gah gahao ‘sing loudly, cry; blunder away, cry loudly, jabber’. Note: McGregor considers connection with H. gahakn¯ a *‘to be exhilarated, ecstatic’ and with question mark derivation < OIA *grdhati ‘desires’ (4230)  which does not match with the Sant. form. 5. H. culbul ‘itch, inkling’ (INTER) and ‘restlessness, fidgetiness’ (McGregor) — Sant. culuN bhuúuN, culur bhuúur ‘restless’, cuNgur muNgur ‘to be restless, moving here and there; never still’ (regarding second H. syllable cf. Sant. halbal ‘restless’ and regarding first syllable Sant. olocolo ‘restless’). It is likely that the Hindi word is of Munda origin. 6. H. t.amt.am¯ ahat. ‘get furious’ (INTER) (Diatka [2014: 71]), not found in McGregor and Platts but corresponding with H. tamtam¯ an¯ a ‘to flush; to glow; to sparkle; to flash’ — Sant. tam tamao ‘to become excited, angry’. Initial consonant variation in Hindi may actually suggest Munda origin. 7. H. tha  tha  ‘coughing’ (O) (Diatka [2014: 65], not found in McGregor and Platts) — Sant. úhã.i úhã.i, úhãe úhãe ‘dry (as cough)’ as in úhae kho¼k ‘a dry cough’ — cf. Bahnaric Halang tOh hOh hOh ‘sound of coughing’, Proto-Pray-Pram *-tuh ‘cough’ and T"in thO:î ‘to cough’. Note: Here also H. dha  dha  ‘coughing’ (O) (Diatka [2014: 65]), not found in McGregor and Platts but related with H. dha s ‘a cough (in animals)’.

8. H. d.agmag ‘trembling’ (INTER) and i.a. ‘totterring (gait)’ (McGregor compares with OIA *d.ag-2 ‘step, pace’ [5523]) — Sant. d ayO¼k dayO¼k ‘taking long steps (walk)’,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

261

perhaps Kor. daku: ‘to walk with small steps, to mince, to toddle’ — cf. ProtoBahnaric *twa:1 k ‘to step, stride’, Bahnaric Cua tawa:k ‘to step, go a step at a time’, perhaps Katu dak ‘step on’ and Khmuic T"in tOk ‘to step on, thresh’. 9. H. tirmir¯ a ‘dazzling light’ (V) and tirmir¯ an¯ a i.a. ‘to be dazzled; to be dizzy’ and tirmir¯ a i.a. ‘an extreme sensitivity of the eyes to strong light’ — Sant. tirmir@u i.a. ‘to be dizzy, to tremble, to flutter’ (Campbell), Kor. tir bir ‘to become dizzy, so that the eyes do not focus’ — cf. Proto-Bahnaric *-wir ‘to spin, dizzy’, Proto-Katuic *wiir ‘dizzy’, Khmu wW ` r-wW ` r ‘dizzy’, Pearic Chong wìr ‘dizzy’. 10. H. thalthal ‘flabby’ (TACT) and ‘shaking, quivering’ (McGregor), B. tOl tOl ‘shaky,

melted wavering’ — Kho. thalnatháli ‘quivering, as of a thick liquid (e.g. mercury, lead, oil spilled on dry soil)’ — Sant. thal thal, úOl úOl a.o. ‘restless, unsteady; to quiver, tremble’. Perhaps distantly related Nyah Kur thul-thul, thOl-thOl ‘(walking) bent forward (of an old person)’. 11. H. picpic¯ a ‘flabby, watery’ (TACT) and pic-pic ‘splashing or squelching sound’, and pacpac-1,2 ‘a splashing or squelching sound; soft, flabby; moist, clammy; watery, squelchy (soil)’, basically with same meaning also picar-picar (Kellersmann) — Sant. picir picir i.a. squirt, splash, spray’, picki ‘to squirt’ pickiri ‘to syringe, squirt out’, picOr pOcOr ‘squirting, watery discharges’; more indirectly parallel also Sant. paca¼k ‘make clots, spit out clots’, paca¼k paca¼k ‘spit out clots (all over)’, possibly also pã¼c p˜ u¼c ‘sound of breaking wind’, picki ‘to spray (with a syringe)’, Mu. pOúSa ‘rotten (fruit)’ — PMK *paac ‘to press, squeeze’, Bahnaric Tampuan paac ‘splash water on’, probably Proto-Khasic *pch ac ‘to splash’ and Khasi paSac ‘to splash up water by striking with the sole of the foot sideways against it to spatter’. Note: SEAlang reconstructs wrongly Proto-Kherwarian *pasir ‘to splash’ (Sant. and pre-Mundari pasir ‘to splash’) but this is simply the deaffricated allomorph. The lemma goes back to PMK *paac, *pac ‘to press, squeeze’. There seems to be relationship with OIA piccayati, picchayati ‘presses flat’ (8149) but details are unclear. The lemma has also been borrowed into TB Kham, see there for more details p. 927. 12. H. marmar¯ a ‘cracking, fragile’ (TACT) and ‘a rustling sound; crackling; crunching’ — cf. Sant. mar mar perseveringly, hard, vigorously, quickly’ (Bodding) and mar, marmar ‘quickly, instantly, rapidly, hastily’ (Campbell), Khasi ma:r ma:r ‘at once, without loss of time’ and mar do:r ‘with all haste at once’. Bodding refers to the Hindi word but connection remains unclear. 13. H. malmal¯ a ‘very soft, gentle’ (TACT) (also listed by Kellersmann) and malmal ‘muslin’ (McGregor) — Sant. malmal, malm@lia ‘fine, thin (cloth)’. According to Platts, the word means basically ‘very soft’ and thus derives perhaps < OIA mrdulá ‘soft, tender, mild’ (10293). 14. H. mahmah¯ a ‘sweet smelling’ and mahmah ‘with fragrance’ (OLF) is not found in McGregor and Platts but seems to be connected with H. mahak ‘fragrance, perfume, scent; aroma (as of spices)’, mahk¯ an¯ a ‘to exhale (a fragrance); to perfume, to scent’ and mahk¯ıl¯ a ‘fragrant, odoriferous; spicy, aromatic’ which are < (weird-looking) OIA mahakka- ‘a wide-spread fragrance, widely diffused perfume’14 — Sant. mahak, mOhOk ‘odour, scent, fragrance’, mahkao ‘to smell sweetly, emit sweet odour, scent’ and mahka 14 Unfortunately, Monier-Williams does not provide the reference. McGregor suggests incorrectly comparison with OIA maghá-, Mayrhofer does not even mention the OIA word.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

262

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

m@hki ‘smell sweetly, emit sweet odour, scent’, Kor. mahak ‘to smell’ — cf. Katuic Bru mahu@m ‘fragrant, sweet smelling’, Khmuic Phong hO:m ‘fragrant, sweet smelling’,  *mo ‘to be fragrant, sweet-smelling’, Palaungic Riang hOm1 ‘fragrant’ and Proto-Mon  Lamet mú: ‘fragrant, scented’, Bahnaric Laven ho:m ‘smell (nice) (v.i.); perfume’ and hPO:m ‘smell good’. The MK forms suggest that this lemma is a compound. 15. H. lijlij¯ a ‘clammy, sticky’ (TACT), ‘sticky, viscous’ (McGregor) and ‘sticky, viscous; soft, flaccid’ (Kellersmann) — Sant. leée peée ‘soft and sticky, viscous’, leéer leéer, leéer peéer ‘soft, muddy, flabby’, lepe peée ‘soft and sticky, viscous, gummy’ (< older *lepe leée with first word ← reflex of OIA LIP ‘smear’), Mu. leée peée ‘ditto’. Notes: (a) The above lemma has a ‘mirror lemma’: Proto-Kherwarian *éEr-ka ‘sticky’, Pre-Mundari and Sant. éEr-ka ‘sticky’, Sant. éEbEr éEbEr, éEvEr éEvEr ‘sticky, adhesive, clammy, doughy’, éEó éEó ‘viscid, sticky’, éEúkE ‘clayey, sticky’ — PMK *[dj][a]r ‘sticky (substance)’, Bahnaric Cua é2l ‘sticky, gummy’. (b) For H. lijlij-3 ‘weak, etc.’ see below next subsection. 16. H. sansan¯ıd¯ ar ‘exciting’ (INTER) and sansan¯ı ‘thrill (of delight, or apprehension), and (Kellersmann) sansan-1 i.a. ‘whizz, whistle; rustle; be beside oneself (with delight, or anger)’ appears to be a contaminated lemma with double origin in OIA and PIE (a), and in AA (b): (a) < OIA svaná- ‘noise’ (13901) (see EWA for potential IE parallels); (b) Sant. san san ‘furiously, excitedly; to be excited, frenzied’ and san sanao i.a. ‘to rustle, to be excited, frenzied’, beside oneself (cf. this meaning with N. sankanu ‘to get very angry’ sub 13901), Bon. san- ‘to scream off’ — cf. perhaps Katuic Bru sW:n ‘gay, cheerful, lively; delighted’, Khmu s1:n ‘enjoy, pleasure’.

Hindi 2: Kellersmann. After presenting an overview of previous work on ideophones mainly in South Asian languages (2017: 4ff.), Kellersmann discusses the many attempts at defining ideophones under a linguistic universals perspective (2017: 19ff.). The author arrives at the conclusion (2017: 28) that, at least at the present stage of research, there are for a number of reasons no realistic chances for arriving at an agreement on what ideophones ‘essentially’ are. Due to this fact, Kellersmann suggests that the best procedure for the time being is studying and collecting further linguistic data on ideophones. This is the major argument for having brought out the publication Hindi Ideophone. Not much less than half of the book comprises ‘the ideophone dictionary Hindi-German’. It contains 2.680 ideophones which, according to Kellersmann, can be ascribed to 1.377 ideophone bases with 609 phonologically distinct base forms (ibid.). The below following list compares 81 lemmata from the dictionary with parallels in Munda and, if existing, with Mon Khmer languages. For the compilation of the dictionary Kellersmann has exclusively used written sources15 Many or even most of the lemmata in the dictionary of Hindi ideophones are not found in McGregor, which may be an indicator for the traditionally stepmotherly treatment of these words in South Asian linguistics, rightly deplored by Kellersmann (2017: 4). The 15 The practical reasons for this decision are clearly understandable, even though there is no doubt that the world of Hindi ideophones is for the most part the spoken language and not the written texts (e.g. as distinct from the situation in Japanese).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

263

English renderings of the following Hindi lemmata are mostly my English translations of Kellersmann’s German renderings of the Hindi lemmata. Occasionally I have added additional meanings, usually found in McGregor. Several times I have brought together two (or even three) of Kellersmann’s listings of homonyms into one lemma, namely then when I had the impression of a certain over-differentiation. This is then thus depicted: word 1,2 . With regard to phonology, Kellersmann defines Hindi ideophones as consisting of two rime-identical syllables, which neither contain tautosyllabic consonant clusters nor nasalized or long vowels, nor diphthongs (2017: 44). This leads to theoretically four different types of ideophones in Hindi: CVC-CVC, CV-CV, VC-CVC, V-CVC (after resyllabification from *VC-VC), which are statistically distributed thus: 91,87%, 4,79%, 3,05%, 0,29% (2017: 44f.). Even though no comparable extensive and in-depth studies seem to exist for AustroAsiatic languages (see e.g. Phillips and Harrison 2017, and Peterson 2010 for Munda languages, Williams [ed., 2014] for Mon-Khmer and several other language families in East and Southeast Asia, and Williams [ed., 2021] for languages in South Asia), there is no doubt that the phonology of ideophones in Austro-Asiatic languages is much more complex and complicated than in Hindi. This is no surprise, as the slow increase from few and far between ideophones in Old Indo-Aryan to more and more in Middle and New-Indo Aryan is clearly traceable. When Indo-Aryan came in contact with the languages of North India, it slowly developed a simplified pattern of ideophone-making from its linguistic surroundings. In Hindi, ideophone bases are frequently built by a right-adjunction of the reduplicated syllable to the base syllable.16 There is a widespread assumption that neither the base syllable nor the reduplicated syllable carries for itself a meaning. However, as Kellersmann rightly points out (2017: 234), in Hindi there exist both morpheme-based and non-morpheme-based ideophone bases. A simple but typical example for the former is H. gupcup-1 i.a. ‘silent, secretly’ which is clearly a kind of synonym compound associated with OIA gopya- ‘to be kept secret or hidden’ and *cuppa-1 ‘silent’ (4864).17 Moreover, the lemmata in Kellersmann’s dictionary do actually not always go back to reduplications, e.g. H. nini(y¯ an¯ a) ‘to beg, whimper’ (for which there do no seem to exist AA parallels) possibly derives < OIA nihnavate ‘makes amends for, beg pardon for’ (7539), and laklak2 ‘stork’ is actually laqlaq and a borrowing from Ar. 1. H. akdhak-1 ‘fear, dread, scare’ — Sant. dhakcakao ‘to be paralyzed with fear’ — second component of Sant. probably in H. akcak-3 ‘einschüchtern; to intimidate, daunt’. 2. H. akbak-2 ‘(nervous) unrest, restlessness’ — Sant. ak bak ‘perplexity, bewilderment, confusion, restlessness’. 3. H. at.pat.-2 ‘restless, agitated, confused’ — Sant. (only Campbell) @ú p@ú, aó paóao ‘flustered, without resource, perplexed, troubled, distressed, restless’. 4. H. at.sat.-1 (note also McGregor at.t.-sat.t.!) ‘incoherent, nonsensical’ — Sant. @ú (n@ ) s@ú ‘improper, unseemly, unintelligible, confused, weak. 5. H. kackac-4 ‘sandy, granular, gritty, gravelly’ — Sant. kackac ‘dirty, muddy, miry; difficult, troublesome, annoying’, Kh. kickica ‘dirty’ — cf. PMK *kPaac ‘wet’ and *knaac ‘muddy place’ but I cannot find modern reflexes of the latter; Proto-Pramic *ka:c ‘sand’ and Phong ka:c ‘sand’, Vietic Muong ka:c7 ‘sable, sand’. v, kv, kev, 16 But note that when e.g. Ralf Turner claims that forms like Pk. kiv¯ a-, M. k v, k kev ‘piteous complaining, weeping’ (< OIA krp a
- ‘pity’ [3437]) are ‘onomatopoeic’, he willy-nilly  presupposes the existence of phonesthemes (which I call ‘ideophonemes’, see p. 250). 17 See also Kellersmann’s chapter 5 on the ideophonization of Hindi morphemes.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

264

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

6. H. kacpac-5 ‘crowd, dense mass’ — Sant. kacpac same as kackac ‘muddy’. For meaning ‘Pleiades’ (“crowded together”) see, besides H., also Brj.-Aw. kacpacinh ‘Pleiades’ (p. 584). 7. H. kankan-5 ‘shiver, shudder, feel chilly’ and kankan-6 ‘odaxetic, burning and biting’ — Sant. kankan ‘lancinating, or lacerating feeling, as of pain; penetratingly cold, icy cold; intensely (painful or cold)’ — perhaps also MK parallels: cf. Bahnaric Tampuan krun ‘cold, shivering’, Khasi kh ro:n ‘to become stiff with cold (especially of the hand), tobe benumbed’, Monic Nyah Kur khW ` n ‘shake, tremble, shiver (with fear or chill)’. 8. H. karvar-1 a.o. ‘(birds) twitter, chirp; (children) chatter’ — Sant. cerobero ‘to twitter, as birds; applied also to the chatter of children’18 and similar Iranian Wkh. čriw čriw x ˘ak ‘to sing, twitter’, probably Juang (of Keonjhar) kerab ‘to caw, to crow, to chirp, to cry’. 9. H. kurkur-4 , kurkur¯ı ‘horse disease’ — Sant. kurkuri ‘a disease affecting horses’. Because of Korwa kh urha: ‘a cattle disease’ there seems to be connection with OIA khura- ‘hoof’ whose origin is unclear (EWA). 10. H. khackhac ‘squelching or splashing noise; plumping noise’ — Sant. khackhOc ‘with a dull sound (of stabbing into anything soft)’ — cf. perhaps also Monic Nyah Kur khóoç-khóoç ‘sound of barking deer calling’. 11. H. khajbaj ‘be restless, nervous, confused’ — cf. Sant. khaïébaïé ‘to consult, discuss, think over, ponder, arrange, turn a matter over and over in the mind, settle’. 12. H. khadkhad and khadbad ‘sound of bubbling or boiling’ — Sant. khadkhad ‘to bubble, as boiling water, a bubbling noise’, Kor. kh atka:¼ ‘to sizzle (of water while boiling)’ and kudu-budu ‘sound of boiling water’. Here also with very similar meaning H. khudbud(apparently with a > u, as in many cases in Kellersmann’s dictionary [besides even more common change of a zu i]). 13. H. khickhic ‘cough slightly, hawk, harrumph’ — Sant. khi¼c-khi¼c ‘make a choking sound (fowls when they have got something in their throat)’ and khi¼c-khO¼c ‘cough when food is going the wrong way, rattle in the throat when something is sticking there; to choke (the sound)’ — Proto-Mon *khaic ‘to hawk, clear one’s throat (of  mucus)’. 1 14. H. khunkhun- ‘laugh, be cheerful, jest while making pleasant sounds’19 — Sant. khunu¼k-khunu¼k ‘gently (laugh or cry), chuckle, sob (audibly, but quietly)’. 15. H. gujmuj- ‘(crowd) murmur, hushed noise’ — Sant. guégué ‘crowded; thronged’. 16. H. gur.mur. ‘crinkled, wrinkled, crumpled-up’ — probably related with Sant. guãmu¼c guãmu¼c ‘round, spherical and small’. 17. H. ghacghac-3 ‘bore (drill, dig one’s way into sth.), penetrate’ — Sant. ghacpac ‘prick with a goad (in many places)’20 — regarding first component cf. perhaps also Bahnaric Mnong ghu:c ‘to be pie[r]21 ced by spear deeply’ and Tampuan klac ‘pierce through’. 18. H. ghighi-1 ‘stutter, stammer, halt, make a slip of the tongue’ and ghighi-2 ‘whine, whimper, wale, unable to speak (from emotion)’ are etymologically probably related. The lemma(?) is compared by McGregor with H. ghiggh¯ı ‘the larynx; a choking sensation in the throat’, and note OIA *gheggha- ‘swelling’ (4512) where Turner lists N. 18 Santali has many other more or less similar words. 19 I guess that khunkhun-1 with listed meaning ‘pleasant sound of metal’ is closer related with H. khunkhun-2 , khunkhun¯ a ‘a child’s toy, rattle’. 20 With -pac possibly related with Sant. caba¼c cubu¼c ‘pricking or tingling sensation’ going back to Proto-Kherwarian *cubué ‘to prick’, which cf. with MK Katu cabOk ‘prick’. The Sant. lemma is obviously a synonym compound, which was probably simplified on its way into H. 21 My amendment.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

265

gheg ‘goitre’; H. gheg(h)¯ a, gh˜eg(h)¯ a ‘tumour’ — Sant. ghigi@ ghigiyi ‘(to) importune, dun; whine, whimper’ and here perhaps Sant. ghEgnE ‘having a nasal twang (people with a cleft palate)’, ghENne ‘who speaks with a nasal twang (but is understood. Women)’, etc. — cf. Aslian Semai guNgut, guguNgut ‘to stutter, to stammer’, Bahnaric Halang g@gaw ‘to stutter’ and Sre gaP ‘stammer, stutter’, Palaung gWP, gWk ‘to stammer, stutter’. Note: There are also (partly) unvoiced parallels: Kho. kakh"ači ‘stuttering’ — Garh. kakr.a ¯t. ‘muttering’ — Temiar kag ‘to stutter, to stammer’, Phong kW:k ‘stammer, stutter’, Palaung gWP, gWk ‘to stammer, stutter’. 19. H. cakbak- ‘surprised, shocked, stupefied’ — Sant. cakb@ki ‘be benumbed (in fever)’, Gta" cak ‘limbs to become numb’. 20. H. cancan-2,3 ‘rage, be angry, revolt; quarrel, squabble” — Sant. cancan ‘stormingly; rampage, storm, rage’ — cf. Khmer cnaah ‘to be quarrelsome; quick to anger, bad tempered, mean (esp. of women); pugnacious (of chickens)’. 21. H. culcul-1,2 ‘(sexual) desire; itch’ derives certainly < OIA *cul- ‘fidget, itch’ (4874) — cf. Sant. culu ‘cunnus (word rarely used and only by men), i.e. vagina, female pudendum’. Further connections are unclear. 22. H. chakchak- ‘puff like a grampus (i.e. make sound of a steam engine) (also chukchuk); sound of falling water, splashing’, K. ch˘ekun ‘to squirt’ — Sant. cha¼kcha¼k ‘guzzling, or gobbling sound, as of a pig when eating’ — PMK *chaik ‘wet’, Aslian Jahai chok ‘sound of running water or waterfall’, perhaps Bahnaric Stieng chak ‘to spit’, Khmuic Mlabri chWkkOP ‘to wet’, Monic Nyah Kur chOkchOk ‘suck in (with a loud noise)’, Palaungic Lamet chAk ‘wet’. 23. H. chanchan-1 i.a. ‘sizzle, frizzle’ and (McGregor) chann¯ a ‘to be fried’ < OIA (Amarakośa) chanacchaniti ‘imitative of the noise of drops falling on anything hot’22 — Sant. chanchan, chanchanao ‘biting, smarting, twinging, stinging’ (several of Bodding’s examples have ‘burning pain’). 24. H. janjan-2 ‘act resolute, intrepid or fearless’ — Sant. éanéanao ‘drive in, press in, inform, lay information’.23 25. H. jigjig- ‘flattering’ — Sant. éigir, éigió, éigr@ éigri ‘persistently, urgently, hard; importune, beg hard, work hard’. 26. H. jhabjhab- ‘sound of falling of big amount of water or of a mushy substance’ and here also (McGregor) jh¯ abar ‘low land, marsh, swamp’ — Proto-Kherwarian *éObE ‘to get wet’, Sant. and Pre-Mundari éObE ‘to get wet’, Sant. éhabar éhubur ‘drenched, soaked, wet through and through’, Kor. éu:bh i: ‘swamp’ — cf. perhaps Bahnaric Tarieng é@éWp and @éWp both ‘wet’, and perhaps Surin Khmer tCU:p ‘soaking (wet)’, and Palaung tjup ‘wet (soaked with water), to temper (metal by dipping).’ 27. H. jhikjhik- ‘fret, whine, complain’ — Sant. éhikéhik@u ‘worry, harass, annoy’, Kor. ch aka:o ‘to harass’. 28. H. jhirjhir-1 ‘trickle, splash; blow gently, waft’ — OIA (Amarakośa!) jhalajjhal¯ a- ‘the sound of falling drops’ ← OIA *jhalati ‘flows’ (5353, cf. there Or. jhal.ib¯ a ‘to drip’), a side-form of OIA *jharati1 , jharant- ‘flowing down’ (5346), for whose PIE origin see OIA KS.AR in EWA. Phonetically similar Munda forms are probably result of 22 Turner lists this word sub OIA *channa-2 ‘jingle’ (4990), which looks to me like contamination of two separate lemmata. 23 The Sant. form is possibly contaminated by H. jan¯ an¯ a ‘to cause to be known’, therefore note also more intensive Sant. éankao ‘drive in, stick in’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

266

29.

30. 31.

32. 33. 34.

35. 36. 37.

38.

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives contamination of the OIA (ultimately PIE) lemma with an AA lemma: — Sant. éhiri hiri, éiri hiri ‘drip, trickle (in a constant flow, but only little)’, éOrO ‘to drip, drop, trickle, leak’, éhaóéhaó ‘heavy, peltingly (rain)’, éhoóo éhoóo ‘drip, drip (the sound of dripping water)’, éhOrOéhO¼c, éhOrO¼c éhOpO¼c ‘drenched, soaked; dripping’, Sant. (Singhbhum) éoro ‘to drop, drip, leak (for liquid)’, Mu. éOrO ‘leakiness of a roof’, Bir., Kor. éoro ‘to leak’, So. éo"ro:d ‘to drop, drip’ (Pinnow 1959: 115), Kor. éoro" ‘to leak, drip’, Ju. éOóO- ‘to drip, drop, leak’ — Aslian Semai é2ôaU ‘to leak’ and é2é2ôaU ‘leaking’, ProtoKhmuic *éar ‘leak, drop’ and Khmu éar ‘leak, drop’, Proto-Palaungic *éar ‘to leak; sap’. It is difficult to locate here similar Dardic Ind. z orz
2v  ‘to drip (e.g., water from the ceiling)’ (with -z- passive marker) and perhaps Kal. zázik ‘to leak out through a hole’ (if < older *zárzik) which, however, must be borrowing from a Dardic language, which uses Sanskrit (-yá passive . H. t.at.-1,2 (t.at.a-1,2 ) ‘ache (limbs or body); dried, dry out’ is < OIA *t.at.t.- ‘pain, smart’ (5438) with other reflexes in N. and B. — Sant. úaúao ‘too dry, parched (in the sun);24 be numbed, stiff, seized with cramp’ — cf. perhaps Bahnaric Mnong tiet éi: ‘very painfull, bit of ant or snake’, Katuic Ngeq tut éut ‘painful inside; aching’ and tu:t Pu:t ‘very painful’. H. t.imt.im-1 ‘a soft sound’ — Sant. úimpi úiri¼n ‘tinkling’. H. t.hant.han-2 ‘a have-not, poor devil’ — Sant. ãhan ãh@ni@ ‘indigent, penniless, destitute’, ãhanka ãh@nki ‘wander about (in search of food)’, ãankao ‘become destitute, wander about in search of food’ — cf. perhaps Proto-North-Bahnaric *dnuh ‘poor’, Bahnaric d@nuh ‘poor’, Halang d@nuuh ‘poor person’. H. t.hamt.ham-3 ‘stop (suddenly)’ — Sant. úhamae t.huk@i ‘be impeded’, úhamkao ‘to stop, stay, staunch’. H. d.abd.ab- ‘(to) drop, splash’ — Sant. ãaba¼c ãubu¼c ‘diving and coming up again; splash in the water in swimming’. It is unclear whether H. thasthas- ‘become slow or sluggish’ reflects OIA *thass- ‘press down’ (6094) where Turner suggests comparison with OIA *t.hass- ‘press down’ (5499); note dental reflexes in Rom.W., Rom.G. tas- ‘to be suffocated’ and Rom.P. tăsnauăr ‘throttles’ — Sant. thasao i.a. ‘to press clay into a crack of a wall’, thasóao i.a. ‘to fling down’, thasóa th@sói i.a. ‘to fling down’, thasóO¼k thasóO¼k ‘flinging oneself down again and again’, úhasao ‘to mend, repair (by pressing kneaded earth, etc., on to or into)’ — cf. Monic Nyah Kur thuas ‘knock down’. H. dandan- ‘fast(ness), quick(ness)’, note als H. dan se ‘briskly, promptly’25 — Sant. dana d@ni i.a. ‘rush about’, dan danao ‘in anger and hurry, rushingly’. H. daldal-2 ‘shake, quake’ — Sant. dala¼c dulu¼c ‘totteringly (small children)’, dalae dalae ‘waving, fluttering, shaking’, daldal ‘shaking; swaying’, etc. H. dhadh- (dhadha-) flare, blaze up’ is related with H. dhanakn¯ a ‘to be set on fire; to blaze’ — Sant. dhandha ‘blaze, flame up (Deś¯ı dhandha, not regularly used by Santals)’. H. dhapdhap- ‘dull sound of (heavy) steps or (door) snap shut; stamp, trudge, plod, trample, clomp’ < OIA *dhapp- ‘slap, drive’ (6729) which Turner compares with *thapp- ‘slap, pat’ (6091) — Bur. dápiski 26 ‘to give sb. a kick, kick or boot sb., sth.’ — Sant. dha¼p dha¼p, dha¼p dhu¼p ‘making a tramping, stamping sound; tramp, stamp with the feet (people)’ — PMK *t1 aap ‘to slap’, Aslian Semnam tpo:P ‘to slap’, Bahnar taap ‘to slap with hand’, Bahnaric Tampuan tapah ‘slap’ etc., Proto-

24 Regarding semantics cf. N. t.at.t.inu ‘to be exposed to hunger or sunshine’ 25 OIA *dan- ‘flash, bang’ (6151) is certainly a different lemma, as especially the reflexes show. 26 The element -iski is denominal suffix with several formation functions (see Berger).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

267

Katuic *kdaap, *hndaap ‘slap’, Katuic Ngeq hataap ‘hit (with hand, wings); slap’, Katu taap ‘hit (with hand, wings); slap’ etc., Proto-Khasic *th aap ‘to hit, slap’ and Khasi thab ‘to hit with hand, slap’ and th a:p ‘to give a slap, to brush past any object’, Mangic Bolyu tjap53 ‘to slap’, Monic Nyah Kur t
Op ‘slap, pat with fist’, Palaungic Riang tEp1 ‘to slap’, Vietic Thavung tapáh ‘to slap’ etc. 39. H. dhabdhab- i.a. ‘thud, fall heavily (as footsteps), stamp, trample’27 — Sant. dhabaó dhubuó ‘slowly and heavily (walk, heavy people, elephants)’ etc. 40. H. dhamdham-1 ‘a loud sound; bang, crash, thud; to stamp, tamp, trample’ < OIA *dhamm- ‘noise’ (6735) (Pa.) — Sant. dhama dhum i.a. ‘noisily’, dham dham ‘with a heavy hollow sound (of someone walking), with thuds’, dham dhum ‘noise, tumult’, dhamas dhumus ‘with a heavy lumbering gait’. Note: OIA *dhammakka- ‘threat’ (6736) is claimed by Turner to be an extension of OIA *dhamm-, but this is doubtful: cf. Sant. dhama dhur@ etc. ‘bully, demand blustering, browbeat’. 41. H. dhardhar- ‘sound of starting or the running (of) a motor, noise, etc.’ — Sant. dhar dhur ‘make a noise, frighten away’.28 42. H. dhukdhuk-1 ‘beat, hammer, palpilate, etc.’ < OIA *dhukk- ‘tremble’ (6820) (Pk.) — Sant., Mu. dhukdhuk ‘startle, palpilate, tremble, throb, flutter’, Sant. dhakdhak, dhakdhakao, dhakdhako¼k ‘to palpilate, go pitapat, flutter, throb; to be in trouble’ — Palaung dWk dWk ‘to flutter (of heart)’. 43. H. dhukdhuk-1 ‘an ornament usually worn at the base of the throat; the hollow at the base of the throat, jugulum’ — Sant. dhukdhuki ‘an ornament worn round the neck’ (very rare with Santals). Note: Could there be relationship with an AA lemma meaning ‘(nape of the) neck’ ? Cf. Sant. totka, Kor. totok, Pre-Mu. tud-ka all ‘nape of the neck’ — Vietic Proto-Pong *do:k7 ‘nape (of the neck)’, Pong dO:k and dOkdaok ‘nape (of the neck)’. Pinnow (1959: 132, entry 276) adds Bahnaric Halang takuè, Jarai t7koi, Cham taku@i all ‘neck’ and suggests for the lemma an old compound formation. 44. H. pat.pat.-3 a.o. ‘be in an awkward or nasty situation’ — Sant. paúpaú ‘distressingly (poor, starving), uninterruptedly’, paúpaúao ‘be distressed, famished’. 45. H. par.par.- ‘(tongue, mouth) to burn, prickle, tingle (after eating s.th. spicy or sour)’, semantically roughly same is H. parpar-; Bng. sirpiri, pirpiri ‘hot, spicy (e.g. as chilli)’ — Sant. paópaó ‘pungent, smarting’, probably Bon. per- ‘(salt, chili, etc.) to burn mouth’ — cf. Palaungic Danaw ph ri1 ‘hot, pungent’. 46. H. pucpuc- ‘(during kissing) to smack, smacking sound, smooch, snog’ — for many similar “puc” ‘kiss’ words in north-west Indo-Aryan languages see p. 814 — Khmer pcAp - pcAp ‘sound of kissing / lips smacking’, pApcAp ‘sound of smacking one’s lips’. 47. H. phakphak- ‘(steam locomotive) hissing’ (same as H. bhakbhak-1 ) — Sant. phakphak ‘puffing, bubbling’, bhak, bhakbhak, bhakaó bhakaó, bhakaó bhukuó all ‘to bubble, as a spring of water or as boiling water; to issue in puffs, as steam; to spurt, as blood from an artery; to rise as a smell, to issue forth’.

27 Overlapping with preceding lemma is obvious. 28 Second Sant. meaning certainly influenced by reflex of OIA d¯ urá- ‘distant’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

268

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

48. H. phacphac- ‘be perturbed, nervous, worried; be upset, shocked’ — Sant. phac phuci@ ‘timorous, easily frightened, terrified’ — cf. Bahnar phuuc ‘to be startled from almost falling, etc.’, Proto-Monic *phiic ‘to fear, be afraid of; to be afraid; to fear (someone, something, that something will happen)’, Monic Nyah Kur phiic ‘to fear’ and phiic ‘to be afraid; to fear (someone, something, that something will happen)’, Old Mon phøc ‘to fear’, Mon phAc ‘to fear’. 49. H. phadphad-1 ‘bubble (as boiling water); fizz, splutter (as a firework)’ — probably same as Sant. phadphad(ao), phad phud ‘with a flapping, fluttering, rushing sound, rattlingly’, phada phud ‘to flap, flutter’. 50. H. phadphad-2 ‘break out, erupt (as a rash); be inflamed; shoot luxuriantly (a plant)’ — Sant. phadphada ‘to break out or increase in size, as a sore’ — Aslian Semelai pdoP ‘break out (of a rash)’, Mon “batoh, batuih” ‘to suppurate, fester, to burst, break out’ (deriv. ← h@t6h ‘ditto’). 51. H. phasphas- ‘loose, soft’ and phusphus-2 ‘soft, slack’ < OIA *phass- ‘loose’ (9068) and *phuss-1 ‘be loose’ (9098) — Pur. ph osph os ‘soft (e.g. of bedding)’ — Sant. ph@suó, p@suó ‘let slip away; slip, remain behind, fail, be overlooked, miss, go empty-handed’, pis@ó pasaó ‘loose, loosely, non-cohesive, slack’, Kor. phusij ‘to slip off; to come off’. 52. H. phuphu-1 ‘puff, pant, snort’ < OIA *ph¯ utka- ‘blowing’ (9102) (Pk.) — Sant. phuphu ‘panting, hissing, breathing heavily’, phakar phukur ‘to breathe heavily’ — Khmu ph u: ph u: ‘sound of snake when it hisses (snake’s threatening sound)’, Monic Nyah Kur fúu-fúu ‘hissing sound of snake’ and semantically somewhat different Bahnaric Sre puP ‘swell, puff up’ and Cua p@jh ‘puffs of smoke (from pipe)’, Khmer phoj-phoj ‘in puffs (of smoke)’. 53. H. phusphus-2 ‘soft; crumbling; slack; flimsy, rotting, etc.’ < OIA *phussa- ‘defective’ (9100) — Sant. phus phusi@ ‘weak, fragile, frail’, phus ‘trivial’, phus-phas, phas-phus both ‘(very) slightly, trivially, very small in quantity’, Kor. ph usuri: ‘a small sore’. 54. H. bakbak-1 ‘chatter’ < OIA *bakk- ‘chatter’ (9117) (Pk.) — Sant. bakbak ‘without meaning, nonsensical; horribly (smell, of dead snakes, rotten matter)’29 , bhaknao ‘to chatter’, boko¼t boko¼t ‘to chatter, to jabber, always speaking, to scold’, boktao¼k ‘to chatter, to say off a rigmarole of prayers, to speak a great deal’ — Bahnaric Tampuan bOk-bOk baoj-baoj ‘talkative, chattering’. 55. H. bar.bar.-1,2 , bir.bir.-1,2 ‘mutter, grumble, babble’ < OIA *bad.abad.a- ‘grumble, mutter’ (9122) (Pk.) — Sant. baóbaó, baóabaóa ‘to gabble, chatter’, Kor. barbara:¼ ‘to jabber’, baóam ‘to utter meaningless talk, jabber’, bh urra:¼ ‘to gibe, chatter’ — Palaung b@r b@r ‘to mutter’, Khmu b1@r b1@r ‘talk in one’s sleep; speak while unconscious’. 56. H. badbad-1 is probably same as budbud-1 ‘mutter; speak unclearly’ and both derive < OIA *budabuda- ‘murmur’ (9274)30 — Sant. badbad, bhadbhad i.a. ‘(talk) rattlingly’, bhad bhadao i.a. ‘chatter, prate’, bhedar bhedar ‘to talk at random, to chatter, to prate’ and with initial devoicing phadphadao ‘to chatter, to gabble’, phedar phedar, phede phede, phed phedar ‘to chatter, gabble, prate, mutter, complain’, phodor phodor, phadar phodor ‘to chatter, jabber’. 57. H. bhadbhad-1 ‘knock (two objects) together with a thud; knock fruit down from a tree’ — Sant. bhad, bhadbhad ‘to make a pattering noise, as a shower of fruit from a tree; to patter, as hail stones; to patter’, bhad bhud, bhaã bhuã ‘to fall with a thud, to thud’. 29 This last meaning may be a separate lemma and may compare with Tonga (Ten"edn) phuk ‘to rot, decay’, Bahnaric Tampuan puk ‘rot’, Khmer puk ‘to be rotten, etc.’  30 There is only one IA parallel in N.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

269

58. H. bhanbhan-, bhinbhin-1 , bhunbhun-1 ‘buzz, hum’ < OIA *bhan-2 , *bhin-, *bhun‘buzz’ (9382) — Sant. bhan, bhanbhan, bhanbhanao ‘to hum, buzz, as flies, etc.; to drone, as beetles, etc.’31 59. H. macmac-1 ‘creaking sound (as of a bed)’ < OIA *macc- ‘sound of cracking or smacking’ (9709) — Sant. macmac ‘creaking, squeaking’. 60. H. masmas-1 ‘breathe hard, gasp, whoop, breathe intermittently’ — Sant. masmas ‘indisposed, out-of-sorts (especially about the preliminary symptoms of fever)’, mas masao ‘ditto’ and ‘be eager to’,32 Mu. masmasao and duru-musu ‘ill, indisposed’. 61. H. riri-2 ‘whine, whimper; beg, beseech’ — cf. perhaps Sant. riri riri ‘joyfully, gleefully, in high spirits, good humouredly’ ? 62. H. laklak6 - ‘long-legged and making big steps; long-necked’ — Sant. lak l@ki@ ‘tall and slim, lean and long (trees, young people)’, perhaps also lamka (m.) and l@mki (f.) ‘tall, tall and lank’ (e.g. l@mki @im@i ‘a tall and lank woman’). 63. H. lar.bar.-1(,2) ‘stutter, stammer’ perhaps < (little documented) OIA lat.ati *‘shakes’ (10916)33 — Sant. laóbaó ‘stammering, nonsensically’, laóbaóao ‘be restless; jabber (talk rapidly and incoherently); become poor.’ 64. H. ladlad- ‘sound of fruits falling on earth; sound of balls or several other objects falling on earth’ — Sant. ladlad ‘with a continuous popping or splashing sound (water in a thin stream falling down, a number of small fruits when shaken down; in crowds, large numbers, thickly’, ladladao ‘in crowds’, ladlud ‘thudding, splashing; fall or tumble down’, probably also Bodo-Gadaba lad ‘to flow strongly (of a river), flow over; to flush, drive out (birds from haystacks) by making a noise’; So. lad- ‘to throw mud’, Bodo-Gadaba lud.luda ‘soft’, Kor. ludu: ‘to feel soft’. 65. H. laplap-1 i.a. ‘repeated protruding or coming forth, sweeping and energetic reciprocating motion (of elastic stick or twig); brandishing’ — Sant. lap lapa ‘wide, broad, too broad; stretch out horizontally, be outstretched’, lablab, lab laba ‘broad, wide, applied to anything very broad, or wide; to flap the wings; to expand’ — cf. perhaps PMK *l[@ ]p, *lip ‘to spread (v.t.)’, Bahnaric Tampuan laap ‘spread on’, Mnong and Sre lip ‘to spread (v.t.)’, Mnong lWp ‘to spread on, spread out’, Katu leep ‘to spread’, Palaungic Wa lop ‘to spread’. 66. H. larjhar ‘(hair) matted, (en)tangled, knotted’ may (tentatively) derive < OIA *lad.a‘string, garland’ (10921) and *jh¯ at.t.ha- ‘hair’ (5334)34 — Sant. laréar ‘related by marriage’, Kh. lar éhar ‘brother’s family; extended family, family network’. 67. H. lijlij-3 ‘weak, limp, flabby, spongy, etc.’ — since Sant. leéer has the allomorph leïéer ‘smooth, slippery’ cf. Sant. leïéraha (= leïéraha) ‘weak, soft, poor, slovenly, pauper, indigent (men)’. 68. H. liblib-3,4 ‘sticky; slimy, viscous; pliable, smooth, etc.’ — Sant. liblib ‘soft, mellow, saturated’. 69. H. sat.pat.-1 ‘hiss; scuff(le), drag one’s feet, shuffle’ — Sant. saúpaú ‘moving making a slight noise’. 70. H. sat.pat.-2 ‘(nervous) restlessness, nervousness, etc.’ — Sant. saúpaú ‘quickly, expeditiously’. 71. H. sat.sat.-2 ‘quickly; immediately, etc.’ — Sant. saúsaú ‘quickly, forthwith’. 31 The inherited AA form is *rVrV ‘buzz’ as can be seen from Munda Korku rou rou ‘to swarm and buzz (of flies)’ and Palaungic Riang rOP ‘to hum, grunt, make a noise. 32 Bodding suggests equation of the Sant. with the here-quoted H. word. 33 Regarding second component, see above bar.bar.-1,2 , bir.bir.-1,2 . 34 Several reflexes of 5334 mean ‘matted hair’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

270

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

72. H. sar.sar.- a.o. ‘sound of different utensils or objects when they move’35 and sarsar¯ an¯ a ‘to produce a rustling noise’, sursur¯ an¯ a ‘to rustle’; further ‘rustle cognates are Bng. ziriziri ‘sound of rustle’ — Sant. saósOó, sOósOó ‘with a rustling sound’, Korku sarasur ‘the sound of rustling grass’ — Khmer sol-sol ‘slight rustling sound such as that of insects crawling into the ear’. There are obvious similarities with ‘drip’ and ‘sprinkle’ sounds discussed p. 591. 73. H. sarphar-1 ‘be restless, nervous, exited’ — Sant. sarphaó ‘act restlessly, toss about’. 74. H. sarsar-1 a.o. ‘rustling sound (as of leaves, wind)’36 — Sant. sar sarao ‘to rustle, shiver’, Kor. sarasur ‘the sound of rustling grass’. Note: There is also semantically (and etymologically?) related salsal-1 ‘rustle, roar, rush, bluster’ which looks close to the following MK forms: Khmer sol-sol ‘slight rustling sound such as that of insects crawling into the ear’, Nicobaric Car sa-lE-Pa ‘to rustle’. 75. H. sisi- ‘chitter; sob, snivel’ — Sant. susu susu ‘to chitter, the sound produced through the teeth when chittering or shivering’ — Pur. sisi ‘to whistle (through the teeth)’ (Zemp [2018: 926]). Borrowing from Kartvelian? Cf. Georgian-Zan *si- ‘to make noise, rustle’, Georgian siv-il- ‘to whistle; to rustle’, siv-il-i ‘whistling, whirring, screeching’. Note also Khasi and Pnar siaw ‘to whistle’. There are also similar TB forms. 76. H. han.han.-, hinhin- ‘(horse) neigh’ < OIA *hin- ‘neigh’ (14092) displays complex contamination (see p. 754), but has possibly an AA ultimate background: — Sant. hanhanao ‘to neigh, as a horse’, hihi hihi, h˜ıh ı h˜ıh ı ‘neighing’ — Bahnaric Sre hihih ‘to neigh’, Mon h@eh ‘to neigh’, Palaungic Riang hæ1 ‘to neigh’. 77. H. haphhaph-1 ‘pant, gasp’ derives < OIA *hamph-, *happh- ‘pant’ (13973), but there is possibly contamination with the above lemma sub H. phuphu-1 ‘pant’ — Sant. hãphni ‘panting after exertion, or through disease’ is clearly a recent borrowing of H. hamphn¯ ˙ ı “puffing, panting; shortness of breath’, but the following forms are not borrowed from H.: Sant. hapho, sEphO, h aeph oe ‘out of breath, breathless with exertion’, Kh. humber, humper, umper ‘to breath air into something; gasp for breath’ and note also Gta" humpar- ‘to blow (as wind)’ — Aslian Semai hoUp ‘to pant, breathe rapidly, gasp for breath, be breathless’, hoUhoUp ‘gasping, panting’ and Temiar hemhUm ‘to breathe, to inhale and exhale air’ and Semelai → deriv. (Shorto 2006: R:1299.B) PamhOm ‘to breathe’, Bahnaric Sedang hi@m ‘breathe, pant (verb)’, Nicobaric Car PuhO:m ‘breathe; breath, soul’, Pearic Chong he:m ‘to breathe’, Khmer heep-heep ‘to be very weak; breathing with great difficulty, gasping, panting’. Notes: (a) The OIA reconstruction *hamph-, *happh- seems to have faithfully preserved the allophonic dichotomy of the AA lemma (still without a reconstructed protoform) with reflexes several times ending either in the bilabial stop -p or the bilabial nasal consonant-m. (b) There exists probably another AA lemma with meaning ‘breathe heavily/deeply’, which, however, ends in a sibilant. Whether it is etymologically connected with the above lemma, is not yet clear: Proto-Bahnaric *-ho:s ‘to breathe deeply’ and Proto-South-Bahnaric *kso:s ‘breathe deeply’ — Nicobaric 35 There is some contamination with OIA *sat.t.-2 ‘slip away’ (13100). 36 The lemma is certainly different from OIA sarasara- ‘moving hither and thither’ (13257).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

10.1. Phonological impact of Austro-Asiatic

271

Nancowry Deriv. (Shorto 2006: R:1958.D) huãs ‘to pant’, Bahnaric Stieng cho:s ‘breathe deeply’ — Kh. humsay ‘to breathe, gasp’, Sant. h˜esrao ‘to pant, to breathe heavily, as one suffering from bronchitis’ and kh˜es kh˜es ‘to breathe with difficulty’. 78. H. harhar-1 ‘make a rushing sound (wind, water)’ — (a) Sant. harhar ‘sound produced by a moderately strong wind’, h@rhur ‘whizzing sound, as that produced by a body moving rapidly through the air’; (b) Sant. hoe ‘wind, air, climate’, hojoN ‘breeze, wind, air, draught’, Ho and Mu. hoeo ‘air’, Gta" hoeóia ‘wind, breeze’, Bon. uióak"- ‘(wind) to blow’; (c) Ju. kojo ‘air, breeze, wind’, Kh. kojo ‘air’, Kor. koyo1 ‘air; wind’. Pinnow (1959: 95, entry 138) lists Mu. iur (jur) ‘a cool breeze, wind or draft, in summer’ together with other words usually meaning ‘shake’, which is not convincing, and more likely is membership with the present lemma; moreover Pinnow (1959: 111) quotes Kor. kor¯ıo ‘wind’ with -r-.37 If (also) in Sant. harhar the -r(-) is inherited, one may be able to reconstruct Proto-Munda *kor(i)o ‘wind, breeze’ — cf. PMK *[ ]kuur ‘wind, storm’, Palaung kur ‘air, wind’, Tai Loi kurr ‘wind’, Riang kur1 ‘wind, air’. 79. H. hihi-2 ‘giggle’ < OIA h¯ıh¯ı- ‘an exclamation of joy etc., translatable by ha! ha!; hee! hee! ah; or any similar sound (as in laughing etc.)’ — Sant. hihi ‘giggling, laughing; neighing (see above in this section han.han.-, hinhin-)’, hihi koko 38 ‘flirting, laughing and speaking with men’ (apparently as girls and young women) — Khmer kh@k-kh@k ‘sound of giggling’, kh1k-kh1k ‘sound of giggling or sobbing’, Monic Nyah Kur h
i-h
i ‘giggling or tittering’, Palaung PiPoP PiPoP ‘to giggle’. 80. H. hukhuk-2 ‘sob’ — Sant. h˜ ukh˜ uk ‘imitative of weeping, bitterly; sobbingly, (sob) convulsively (about men), bitterly’, h˜ekoh˜eko ‘to sob as a child after a fit of crying’, h˜ uku¼t h˜ uku¼t ‘sobbing’ — Katuic Pacoh hEP ‘of sobbing or crying that way’, Mon h@oik ‘to sob voicelessly, sigh’. Note the similar forms: (a) OIA *hukku-, *h¯ unku˙ ‘jackal’s howl’ (14134) (Pa.) has modern reflexes in L., M. — Sant. huke huke, hu@ huke ‘imitative of the call of a jackal’ — Aslian Semelai PON ‘howl’, Monic Nyah Kur hóok-hóok ‘sound of dog howling’, Nicobaric Nancowry hoaN ‘howl (of a dog)’. (b) There is also H. hukk-hukk ‘snorting sound (of a pig)’ — Sant. hokao ‘grunt of a pig when enraged’, hokhok ‘grunt of a pig’, hoïãro¼k, huïãru¼k ‘noise made by a ˜ k ‘grunt (of pigs)’. pig; to grunt’ — Katuic Pacoh PW:k ‘grunt of pig’, Nicobaric Car hW:

10.1

Phonological impact of Austro-Asiatic

I do not claim that every single phonological/phonetic detail in this part is due to the strong encounter between Austro-Asiatic and Outer Languages, but I do hold that the large amount of data presented here shows undeniably Austro-Asiatic impact. In the introduction above I had formulated the hypothesis that similar to successive Indo-Aryan language immigrations into North India also the language immigration of Austro-Asiatic into North India does not seem to have been a singular event: whereas TB Chepang has mostly borrowings from Mon37 Cust, R. N. 1884. Grammatical note and vocabulary of the language of the Kor-k¯ u, a Kolarian tribe in Central India. In: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society xvi: 164–179. 38 Cf. Sant. kokokoko ‘cackling of a cock’ (Campbell).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

272

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

Khmer and not so many from Munda, in case of an IA language like Gar.v¯ al¯ı it is rather the other way round. However, since this part deals with phonological impact and not with borrowing of words, the question may be raised whether this impact could be assigned either to Munda or to Mon-Khmer. I cannot answer this question in each and every case but at least sometimes. The phonological variations in both branches of Austro-Asiatic appear – cum grano salis – so similar that an attribution to one of the two branches is not always possible. And even though the present-day Munda branch is perceived as “aberrant” within Austro-Asiatic (see introduction), we have very little knowledge of the inner structuring of the Austro-Asiatic language family several thousand years ago.

10.1.1

Consonant variation in Munda and Outer Languages

In Kuiper’s article on consonant variation in Munda (1965), he discusses the notion of ‘sporadic sound laws’, i.e. phonological changes limited to certain words only, which permeate the Munda languages. Without being aware of the crucial or even fundamental difference between ideophones and the word classes of ‘normal’ nouns and verbs, Kuiper has nevertheless made an important collection and morphological analysis of irregular forms and alternations in Munda. For these changes he usually cannot find any explanation (p. 55f. and 59); and “it is impossible to decide with certainty where the domain of variation ends and that of parallel rhyme words derived from etymologically different roots begins” (p. 56). Apparently, Kuiper was not really aware that in principle all sound variations are accompanied by more or less small changes in meanings. In any case, even though ideophones appear to be the motor for generating these irregularities, they are not limited to them. I reproduce here now examples from Kuiper’s article as illustrations for such variations without attempting to present all possible variations and without determining whether the examples are ideophones or not. The examples are frequently but not only from dialects of Mundari:39 1. Variations in voice and point of articulation: b- ∼ p- ∼ d-, ã(h)- ∼ t-, ú(h)- ∼ g- ∼ k-, ∼ é -, c-, etc. The alternations are limited per lemma to two and some more but, of course, not to all theoretical possibilities. I do not try to array the frequently accompanying vowel alternations: boka, doka, koka ‘idiot’; bucan, gucan ‘a smouldering log’; buturum, bupurum, guturum ‘a lair’ (← burm ‘to lie down’); bu¼é, ba¼é, ku¼é ‘(little) girl’; pEsOó, úhEsOó ‘to slip’; libur, éibur, lidhur, liãhur ‘too flexible’; condaP, gondaP ‘to wound slightly, etc. 2. Alternation with nasal consonants and nasal infixes (combined with other variations): ãuïãula, muïãula ‘without a top-knot’; bEdrE¼é, bEndrE¼é bEndrE¼d ‘insignificant’. 3. Weakening (usually to h-) or deletion of initial consonant: Ho éır, Mu. hır ‘to fan’; tomboP, homboP ‘to fall forwards’; Kor. ka:ko:, Sant. hako ‘fish’; Kor. kO:lO:m, Sant. hOlOn ‘flour’; caeka¼b, caeha¼b ‘one who stands with open mouth’; g@bur s@bur ‘what is left by others (food)’ and ubr@ subr@ ‘remnants, what is left or not consumed at a meal, etc.’, bhOsOr ‘slipping down, accidentally’ and hOsOr ‘to slip down, glide down, miscarry’ and many more. 4. Infixation and suffixation of different ideophonemes (combined with other variations): Sant. éhalur, éhalar éhulur, éh@lun éh@lun ‘to hang down’; dhorso¼d morgo¼d ‘untidy, out of sorts, dull’, thoso¼d morgo¼d and toso¼d morgo¼d ‘out of sorts, down-hearted’. 5. Aspiration variations (combined with other variations): bogor bogor ‘plungingly, sinking down (in mud)’ and bhOklaP bhOklaP ‘deeply (to plough)’; bıdió bıdió ‘eagerly (run 39 I have adapted Kuiper’s transcriptions to the standard ones in AA studies.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

10.1. Phonological impact of Austro-Asiatic

273

away)’, bhıdió bhıdió ‘impetuously’, etc. Similar variations as seen in the above examples are also characteristic for Mon-Khmer languages and again are closely associated with the pragmatic use of ideophones (see e.g. Williams [2014] with many additional literature references). There is no doubt that these variations and the category of ideophones is Austro-Asiatic-inherited and not borrowed e.g. from Tibeto-Burman, even though many Tibeto-Burman languages have comparable structures (Williams 2014). And there is also no doubt that many similar variations and irregularities that are common to the Outer Languages are due to a strong encounter with Austro-Asiatic. The number of different types of variations is clearly less than in AustroAsiatic but the types are quite similar and they are found (however in different numbers) practically over the whole periphery of Indo-Aryan. Even though the geographical extent of Outer and Inner Languages is practically the same (only Nuristani and Dardic have their own homeland), it is natural to see these features having survived in the shape of a circle, enclosing the Madhyadeśa, formerly the homeland of the Vedic Indians and now the area of the Hindi Belt, the core area of the Inner Languages. Here is the list with the common features which will be discussed in detail in the following long sections: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

p, t, k ∼ b(h), d(h), g(h) dental ∼ retroflex consonants spontaneous aspiration and aspiration fronting deaspiration voicing of surds and devoicing of sonants Partly related with preceding: phonetic or phonological glottal stops and word-final devoicing. Note: Glottal stops (and pre-glottalized) consonants are Proto-Austro-Asiatic heritage. Since they appear also frequently in word-final environments, there is the impression that in Austro-Asiatic languages word-final tenuis are much more common than mediae.

7. Affrication of sibilants 8. c > t, j > d 9. Loss/weakening of initial consonants. Notes: (a) This last item seems to be partially connected with the stray phenomenon of word-initial phoneme split in Outer Languages where aspirated mediae get ‘wedged’ by a vowel. In Indo-Aryan this was certainly one mechanism leading to reduced consonant systems of the type t, th, d (through loss of the separated -h-). But since also in Austro-Asiatic, where there are also quite many languages with t, th, d orders, aspiration seems to be a movable feature, Austro-Asiatic influence appears likely. An example is aspiration in Khmer. There the historical causes concerning the role of aspiration are, of course, completely different from Indo-Aryan, but note the following examples. Prakorb observes (1993: 252): “Aspirated stops can be split by infixes, which also shows the independence of the aspiration from the stop.” Two examples (ibid.): thom ‘big’ versus tÑmhom ‘size’, khi:t ‘to draw a line’ versus k@Nhi:t ‘a line’, etc. (b) Spontaneous affrication of sibilants is certainly much less common than de-

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

274

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives affrication of affricates.40 Yet, examples are also found in Indo-Aryan, e.g. in Hindi: the dental voiced fricative [z] found in Perso-Arabic loanwords is pronounced in Hindi dialects and in sub-standard Hindi as the palatal voiced affricate [Ã] as in s2bÃi ‘vegetable’ ← Pers. sabz¯ı. More interesting are IndusKohistani c a bu n ‘soap’ (Kal. and Bur. sabún ‘soap’), Bng. c˙ hab¯en. ‘soap’, A. chaban ‘soap’ ← Ar. s.a ¯b¯ un (but actually spread into many language through Portuguese expansion) because they (except A.) clearly show adaptation of the Ar. (Portuguese) word to sesquisyllable-like word patterns typical for AustroAsiatic languages (see p. 276). And even though I cannot find structurally similar forms in Munda – however note that in Gutob the phoneme /s/ has the allophones [s, µ, Ù] and the quite rare phoneme /z/ has the allophones [z, dz, Ã] (Griffiths 2008: 639), note also Kor. siN, ciN, µiN, SiN, si:ñé all ‘tree’ (Pinnow: 274) – affricatized and aspirated forms are also found in borrowings of ‘soap’ into Mon-Khmer languages: Bahnaric Halang é@áu: ‘soap’ and Monic Nyah Kur  ch@búu ‘soap’. These data suggest that the tendency for affrication of sibilants in Outer Languages was encouraged or facilitated by similar trends in AustroAsiatic.

There are many other phonetic variations and many other grammatical features characterizing the Outer Languages against the Inner Languages. Since they seemingly cannot be explained as a result of the strong encounter with Austro-Asiatic, they are dealt with in other places of this book.

10.1.2

Sesquisyllabic words

Sesquisyllabic41 words are a central characteristic of Austro-Asiatic. Their specific structure has left deep marks in all the different language families (perhaps with the exception of Tibetan) in northwestern South Asia and perhaps even in Sindh¯ı (for which see further below), and they are an unmistakable sign for the former presence of Munda/Mon-Khmer. This crucial feature has slipped the attention of previous scholars in the field of Munda and Indo-Aryan studies. Jenny and Sidwell write (2014: 15): “A characteristic feature of many Austroasiatic languages (although less so especially in Munda, Vietnamese, and Nicobarese) are phonological words that consist of two syllables, whereby an initial unstressed syllable (often called ‘minor syllable’ or ‘presyllable’) is followed by a stressed full syllable (‘main syllable’). This word structure has also been called ‘sesquisyllable’ (‘one-and-a-half’ syllables long) since Matisoff . . . [s]esquisyllabicity has also been postulated for Proto-AA”,42 and (p. 19): “Minor syllables that are created by partial reduplication of the main syllable are also attested in AA.” The fact that languages in northwestern South Asia have many words with sesquisyllabic-like structures does not mean that they can be called sesquisyllabic languages (like many AA languages in Southeast Asia). It is rather a phonotactic feature borrowed from Austro-Asiatic that has influenced these languages which otherwise have also many other types of phonotactic patterns. In case of sesquisyllabic-like bisyllabic words, the first syllable is ‘phonetically subordinate’ and the second syllable is ‘phonetically superordinate’. 40 On the similar mechanisms underlying the two processes see Shafer 2000. 41 The following section has been published with minor differences from here in Zoller 2016. 42 In some of the examples following below, the stress is on the third syllable or on the second syllable followed by a third unstressed syllable, but the mechanism seems to be basically the same as in AA.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

10.1. Phonological impact of Austro-Asiatic

275

Or in the words of Butler (2014: 9): “First, prosodic prominence (i.e. stress or tone) must be word-final” and (p. 10): “The second property of sesquisyllables is that non-final syllables are phonologically reduced. This includes segmental properties, syllable shape and weight.” Butler’s and my definitions are vaguer than the various standard definitions (see Butler 2014 for different definitions by different authors) which refer e.g. to reduced phoneme inventory (especially a tendency for schwa [@] as the only vowel) and mono-moric V, CV or VC tendency in the subordinate syllable and ‘fully developed’ syllable structure (whatever this means) in the superordinate syllable. Here for us important is also the following observation by Jenny and Sidwell (2014: 20): “. . . although it has been recognized that there is a tendency for sesquisyllabic words to become monosyllabic . . . sesquisyllabic words in AA appear to be diachronically very stable . . . ” This is possibly one condition for the survival of sesquisyllabic structures in northwestern South Asia. However, there is probably an additional factor which has supported their survival, namely the presence of stress and pitch accent in the languages of the area. It seems that in the discussions about sesquisyllabic structures in Austo-Asiatic languages the role of pitch accent is not of special relevance. But an important characteristic of the vast majority of the Nuristan, Dard and East Iranian languages, and Burushaski, is that they are pitch accent languages. Apart from the case of Burushaski, the pitch accent is historically frequently an inheritance of the Vedic accent43 (see p. 188) but the system was generalized and includes now also all non-inherited words (i.e. also words borrowed from English as some examples below show). Even though the position of the Vedic accent was free, as is well-known, my preliminary statistical surveys e.g. of Nuristani Prasun and Dardic Indus Kohistani clearly show that in case of bisyllabic words the pitch accent is much more often on the second than on the first syllable. My guess is, although more research will be necessary, that a phonetic conspiracy took place between the borrowed Austro-Asiatic sesquisyllable structures and the inherited Vedic accent which secured the survival of sesquisyllabic-like word patterns till today. Several examples below also show that originally non-sesquisyllabic words got transformed into sesquisyllabic-like words. I use the term sesquisyllabic-like because the languages in the northwest of South Asia have developed various phonetic strategies for marking the phonetically superordinate syllable in a sesquisyllabic word which are probably not current (or at least common) in Austro-Asiatic. I include here also the phenomenon of syncope of initial syllables which is an indirect way of identifying the former superordinate syllable. Here is a (perhaps incomplete) list of features for marking superordinate syllables: (a) Syncope of initial syllable (b) Pitch accent on superordinate syllable (c) The northwestern pitch accent corresponds frequently with Munda/Mon-Khmer glottal stop (or checked consonant) or, more rarely, with a raised vowel (e.g. a > o) (d) Change of a to ¯e (only in Bang¯ an.¯ı, but similar to the Munda a > O, o change) in superordinate syllable.

Examples:

43 In case of East Iranian, e.g. Pashto, one cannot, of course, speak of a Vedic accent. But even though the conditions regarding inheritance of the Old Iranian accent are less clear than e.g. in Dardic, there do exist some pretty clear examples.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

276

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

(a) Wg. pšík ‘cat’44 < OIA *puśśi- (8298); Him. rg¯ an.u ‘to color’ (cf. H. rang¯ ˙ an¯ a); Mult. of Afghanistan preš¯ an either ‘operation’ (← Eng.) or ‘troubled’ (← Pers. pareš¯ an);45 compare the latter variant with Kal. perišán and Ind. p2r esa n both ‘worried’ where the Persian word did not undergo syncope but got an accent attached to its superordinate syllable in the borrowing process.46 An example from the eastern fringe of the IA language area is Rohingya bísso ‘heaven’ < older *dvisá- < OIA divasá- ‘heaven’ (6333). (b) Ind. ekt.ár ‘an actor (on stage)’ (← Eng.) and k2z2
l ‘collyrium’ < OIA kajjala- ‘lamp¯ ‘a tear’ < pre-OIA *áčru- (cf. OIA áśru- and black’ (2622) (but H. k¯ ajal);47 Pr. üč"ü note shift of accent). (c) Bur. d.ad.aáko ‘severe labor pains; agony, death throes’ — Sant. ãhaóa¼k ãhoóo¼k ‘jerkingly, joltingly, limpingly; jolt, limp’;48 Bur. gad ˙ . agad ˙ . áp ‘sound of horse’s hooves’, Sh. gar.áp ‘ditto’, Ind. g2r2
p-g2r2ph ‘sound of clatter (of horses)’ — Sant. kaúa¼p kaúa¼p

animals

‘clattering (sound of hoofed walking; of wooden clogs)’. The historical origin of this last lemma is discussed p. 889. (d) Bng. ag¯e.l ‘door latch’ < OIA *argad.a- (629), bam¯en. ‘Brahmin’ < OIA br¯ ahman.á- (9327), gOr en ‘solar or lunar eclipse’ < OIA gráhan.a- (4364), t.imat.¯er ‘tomato’ (also Ind. tam at2
r



but H. t.am¯ at.ar) ← Eng.

10.1.3

Sindh¯ı, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, West Himalayish and Munda

1. Ralf Turner has shown (1924) that – put in a simplified way – in Sindh¯ı inherited voiced initial consonants changed into implosives (injectives) whereas the same happened word-medially with voiced geminates inherited from Prakrit which themselves derived from Sanskrit consonant clusters: äambh¯ıru ‘sedate’ < OIA gambh¯ırá- ‘deep’ (4031), uáa ¯ran.u ‘to save’ < Pk. uvv¯ ar¯ei ‘releases’ < OIA *udv¯ arayati ‘opens’ (2082). Some Indo-Europeanists tried to show that reconstructed PIE glottalized stops are reflected in Sindh¯ı implosives. However, this is very unlikely for good reasons named by Martin Joachim Kümmel (2012). However, besides the many IA inherited words displaying this sound change in Sindh¯ı, there is also a small number of non-inherited words (I have so far collected only a handful) with word-medial implosive corresponding with a Munda glottal stop. Examples: S. a£an.u ‘to build’ < OIA *ad.d.- ‘obstruct, stop’ (mentioned by Turner sub 188) ← Kh. aPãe ‘to stay, stand firm; block someone’s 44 On the possible Austro-Asiatic origin of this word see above p. 255. 45 The phenomenon is not found in the ‘homeland’ of Mult¯ an¯ı in Pakistan. Mult¯ an¯ı in Afghanistan is mainly spoken in Kabul, Kandahar and Jalalabad by Hindus and Sikhs (though most of them meanwhile have fled the country because of growing Islamic fundamentalism). The dialect has been considerably influenced by surrounding Pashto. I have heard the two quoted words and other structurally similar words in quite many talks from speakers now living in Germany. 46 That this phenomenon really has nothing to do with vowel length can be shown e.g. with this example of the borrowing reflexes of Ar. nazar ‘sight’: Kal. nizér, Ind. naz
2r, Munda Sant. najer.  47 Practically the same pronunciation is widespread all over the northwest and includes also Pashto. The word is possibly of Austro-Asiatic origin because of Sanskrit lex. ajjhala- ‘coal’ with loss of initial consonant; note also Ho kaéOr ‘lampblack’ suggesting second vowel as marked (Sant. kaéal, kaéar ‘collyrium’ is, on the other hand, apparently not sesquisyllabic) and PMK *kcaas, kcas, kcah ‘charcoal’, Katuic Ngeq kaéah ‘charcoal’, Monic Nyah Kur k@cáh ‘charcoal’. 48 There does not seem to exist a PMU or PMK reconstruction for this lemma. But since the Burushaski word shows partial reduplication resulting in a subordinate syllable and since both Burushaski and Santali have stress respectively checked pronunciation with the superordinate syllable (the second in case of Burushaski) it is clear that the words are of Munda origin.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

10.1. Phonological impact of Austro-Asiatic

277

way’, S. gu£an.u ‘to pound, thrash’ < OIA *gud.d.- ‘dig’ (3934.6) ← Bon. guP ‘to dig (earth, etc.)’. It seems that the prolonged delay in the release of the pre-glottalized Munda consonant led to the development of additional MIA geminates when such words were borrowed into Prakrits. Both are also articulatory similar in that for the articulation of an implosive a glottalic ingressive airstream is required. Note also that very many Austro-Asiatic languages have glottal stop phonemes, and also implosives are a feature of many languages of Mainland Southeast Asia (Jenny and Sidwell 2014: 23) even though they have disappeared from most Munda languages. Yet, I think it is worth considering that the historical development of the Sindh¯ı implosives was perhaps influenced by Austro-Asiatic languages once existing in its vicinity which still had implosives in their phoneme inventories. Conversely, it seems also possible that word-medial double consonants changed in Proto-Sindh¯ı first into glottal stops and only later into implosives also because glottal stops and related phonetic phenomena like checked consonants or creaky voice are quite widespread in Outer Languages of northwestern South Asia. 2. West Himalayish Kinnauri gaPd. ‘rivulet’ (D. D. Sharma 2003a: 14) has an almost exact phonetic parallel in Munda Kharia ga¼óha ‘river’ (Pinnow K498) respectively gaPãha ãhoúha ‘ravine; ravine in which a river flows; stream, brook’ (Peterson) and further corresponds with the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties K¯ ot.gar.h¯ı g¯ ahr. ‘brook’ and Inner Sir¯ aj¯ı g¯ ahd. ‘depth’ (see Hendriksen 1976: 39). They are perhaps connected with OIA *gad.d.a- ‘hole, pit’ (3981) but Pinnow (ibid.) considers the possibility of contamination of two different lemmata ‘river’ and ‘hole’.49 In any case, he regards Kharia ga¼óha to be a genuine Munda word. Glottal stop (respectively checked consonant) and aspiration stand phonetically in a mirror image relation to each other with regard to the laryngeal features ‘space between the focal cords’ and ‘tension in the folds’: aspiration has the features [-constricted] [+spread] and glottal(ized) articulation has [+constricted] [-spread]. In the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı variety between the towns of Jubbal and Shimla one finds g¯ oPr.o ‘horse’ (Hendriksen 1986: 23f.) which compares with goh¯ a ‘horse’ in the Chinali variety of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı.50 Both words derive < OIA ghot.aka‘horse’ (4516) and both display right-shift of the initial aspiration which is a common phenomenon in a number of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties. Another examples is Bar¯ a. “d¯ı"¯ı” ‘daughter’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 185]) where Bailey’s spelling with “. . . ". . . ” quite likely was intended to indicate a glottal stop which emerged after right-shift of aspiration. An aspirate -h- instead of a glottal stop is found at the same place in the same word in North Jubbal dialect d¯ıh¯ı ‘daughter’ (p. 197), whereas a more regular reflex is e.g. Ku. dh¯ı < OIA duhitŕ- ‘daughter’ (6481). The three examples quoted  of P ↔ h in West Pah¯ here indicate an occasional oscillation ar.¯ı. This can be compared with the above Sindh¯ı examples and thus again old Austro-Asiatic influence as ultimate cause seems likely (which is also supported by the form of the Kinnauri word). Note: Further examples presented by Hendriksen are d Pi ‘daughter’ < OIA duhit
r- ‘daughter’ (6481), giPu ‘ghee’ < OIA ghrt
a- ‘ghee’ (4501), m aPru ‘our’  asma
ka- ‘ours’ (988) (via Ap. amh¯ < OIA ara-)  (Hendriksen 1986: 23f.). Interestingly, Hendriksen remarks (ibid.) that in rOPno ‘to remain’ (H. rahn¯ a) “. . . it

49 Moreover, Nuristani Wg. gat.a ‘stream; feeder irrigation channel to a field’ (Strand) resp. gat."a ‘channel’ (Degener), Munda Sant. gat@ ‘a small stream or watercourse’ and Korku gada ‘river, stream’ suggest a somewhat different reconstruction. 50 Note also Garh. gun.t.t. and gun.t.h ‘horse’ with loss of original aspiration listed in Nautiyal and Jakhmola (2014), but their Devanagari rendering does not show a glottal stop.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

278

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

seems that a postvocalic */h/ had the same effect.” In fact, that is the point: the glottal stops in all above examples stand exactly there where there was formerly an h. Thus, g oPro < *g ohro (see Kc. g¯ ohr.o ‘horse’ in Bailey [1915: 128]))

< *gh oro. The connection of h not only with the development of glottal stop

tonogenesis has been pointed out by T. Grahame Bailey (1908: ii): but with “In Bhat.˘e¯ a.li and Cam˘ea ¯l.i. . . h is almost inaudible itself, but raises the tone of the syllable in which it occurs.” Further below (see p. 318) I will discuss the phenomenon of ‘phoneme splitting’ of word-initial aspirated voiced stops found in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, some examples of which we have just seen. Unfortunately, Hendriksen does not say whether the sound following the glottal stop becomes (partially) devoiced, but that is what is to be expected. Similar to Kalami, also in these West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties the laryngeal(ization) is accompanied by a type of high-falling tone. The ‘phoneme splitting’ with shift of the aspiration away from the onset in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı usually occurs before laterals, sibilants and nasal consonants, thus in the same environment where the Kalami laryngeal is found. However, the exact mechanisms relating laryngeals and/or tonal pitch accent systems are extremely complicated (even when trying, for instance, to compare two adjacent Dard languages) and it is difficult to see whether or not these are historically related or independent developments. Thus I will not attempt to do this here. Yet it remains a fact that laryngealization, devoicing and tonal accent systems are found over a large area in the northwest that includes West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, a number of Dard languages, Panjabi and Lahnda. As indicated above, there is no doubt that also Nuristani had been influenced by this complex in the past.

10.2

‘Defective’ words in the CDIAL of Austro-Asiatic origin

Very many of the so-called defective words in the CDIAL have word structures that are very similar with those described above. Only some of them are known from MIA, whereas the majority is only known from NIA. All this means that they usually belong to the ‘North Indian’ substratum. There is, however, a small group of ‘defective’ words which are of Austro-Asiatic origin: 1. OIA *t.akka-, *t.hakka- ‘bald’ (5422) — Pur. tant

an ‘bald, bare’ (Zemp [2018: 926])

adj. ‘bald; stringless (of mangoes)’, — Korku úaklu ‘bald’ and dialectal Korku takalu Juang úaNgra ‘bald headed’, Bon. ãaNãaN-bOPóa ‘man bald on the head’ and úaNru-bOb, úaNru-bOb-bai ‘a bald person’ — Bahnaric Halang t@PNaP t@PNO:l ‘bald head’, Katuic Ngeq toNP lonP ‘bald’, Surin Khmer tNO:l ‘to be bald’. 2. OIA *th¯ umma- ‘sexually vigorous’ (6105) — Bahnaric Sre tham ‘rape (of an young girl)’ and Tarieng truPm ‘to wrestle, attack (intending rape)’, Katuic Bru trWm ‘to  try to rape’. 3. OIA lex. phakka- ‘cripple’, *phikka- ‘defective’ (9037) (see EWA) — Sant. phakar phukur ‘without strength, weak, feeble, famished’ — Palaungic Riang p@k 1 ‘lame, crippled’, cf. Pear and Pearic Chong pi:ka:r ‘estropié (cripple), infirm’ (loan from Khmer). 4. OIA *phucca- ‘defective’ (9084): Ku. phucco ‘undersized, short, dwarfish’, etc. — Sant. bE¼c bEãrE¼c ‘puny, small, insignificant, (abuse) insufferable’, pEdE¼c pEdE¼c

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

10.2. ‘Defective’ words in the CDIAL of Austro-Asiatic origin

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

279

‘small (girls), scantily clothed’, phuci ‘small, little’, phucku¼c, phuck@ ‘too short, too small’, phusphas, phasphus ‘slightly, very slightly, trivially, very small in quantity’ — cf. Bahnaric Mnong phac ‘to break bread into small pieces’, Palaungic Lamet phíc ‘small’, Khasi boc ‘fabulous fairy of only a cubit in stature, lilliputian, small boy in the wár districts’. OIA *b¯ ajja- ‘defective’ (9200): P. b¯ ajj¯ a ‘fool, idiot’ — Sant. bhoco ‘stupid, foolish, ignorant’ and bhuc, bucuN ‘stupid, ignorant, foolish; stupidity, ignorance; an ignoramus, a fool’— Khasi biec ‘foolish, disabled, dumb’ and Pibiec ‘look like a fool, absurd’ and pa:c bh ur ‘common ignorant people’ and pa:c ka:r ‘people of no position, the mob, the masses’, perhaps Bahnar p@cEP ‘to lie, fool’. OIA *butta-, *buddha- etc. ‘defective’: P. butt ‘stupid, dumb’, H. budh¯ u ‘fool’— Sant. bhoto ‘stupidly ignorant, dunderhead’ and bodo ‘stupid, and unable to speak distinctly’ — Aslian Jahai and Kensiu bOdOP ‘stupid’ (borrowed from Malay). OIA *bhulla-, *bholla- etc. ‘defective’ (9539): Ku. bhulo ‘simple, frank, honest’, S. bholo ‘foolish’51 — Kor. bhula ‘to deceive, to fool’, Sant. bul@u ‘to deceive, to lead astray, to practice deception, to divert, to amuse’. OIA *rakka- ‘defective’, OIA ranká˙ ‘slow, dull’, Un.. ‘poor, hungry’, ‘starveling’ (see Kuiper 1948: 140) — Sant. reNge¼c ‘hungry, poor, to have need of’ and rENlE¼é ‘smooth, graceful’ and rENE¼é ‘want, hunger’ and reNgha ‘slender, slim, thin’, Kh. rENrE¼úa ‘lean’, Mu. rENgE, rENgE rENgE, rENgEóE, rENgEúa, rENgEúha ‘emaciated’, rENgE¼é ‘hunger, appetite, hungry’, Ho and Bir. reNge ‘hunger, poor’, Kor. raNge¼é ‘hunger’ (Pinnow: 166) — Bahnaric Stieng rNial ‘poor’ and Tampuan raNkaiP ‘thin’ and r1NkEP ‘slender’, Khasi raNli: ‘poor lonely woman’, Khmu ro:k ‘poor’, Bahnaric Halang r@rEk ‘to begin to be hungry’. OIA *reppa- ‘defective’ (10819): Or. repa ‘miserly, cruel’ — Khmer reipah to be low, cheap; mean, cruel; miserly’, perhaps < PMK *rap to seize, take hold of, catch’ (which has very many reflexes)? OIA *rocca-, *roñca- ‘defective’ (10834): G. roc˜ u ‘rustic, clownish, dried up, wrinkled’ and rõc˜ u ‘id.’ and r ocO ‘clown’ — Khmer rumcie ‘to kid, tease, joke by exaggerating facts’ and rumcEE ‘to joke, jest, tease someone in public’. OIA *lakka-, etc. ‘defective’ (10877): Ash. lakura 
‘small, narrow’, Ku. laklak¯ at. ‘weakness, faintness’, etc. and perhaps etymologically related OIA *laccha-, etc. ‘defective’ (10908): N. l¯ achi ‘weak, cowardly, worthless’, Sh. l¯ ac˙ h ‘impotent’ — Sant. laka¼c luku¼c ‘weak, applied to weakness of the loins’, leñéraha ‘weak, soft, sluggish, dirty, slovenly’, lesoói@ ‘weak, feeble, lazy’, lEúE¼c pEúE¼c ‘weak, emaciated, feeble and lean’, lic@ó ‘pliant, yielding, soft, of tender age, not full grown, weak, feeble’, liókO¼c lOókO¼c, likO¼c lOkO¼c ‘slack, loose (movement of head, as of a child whose neck is weak)’; Mu. lEñéEr ‘weak’ (Pinnow: 259), perhaps So. s2m-l2é- ‘to castrate’ (s2m- ‘to hammer, press, to castrate by hammering’) — Khasi lwac ‘fainting weak’, Proto-Bahnaric *lac ‘to castrate’, Proto-Vietic *lac ‘to cut off, pluck, castrate’. OIA *lappha-, etc. ‘defective’ (10943): H. laphang¯ ˙ a ‘lecherous’, etc. — Khmer louphiekeaPteP ‘the way of greed’, Palaung lO phaP ‘greed’. Note: Turner compares here OIA lampat.a- ‘lustful’, Pk. lampad ˙ . a- ‘covetous’, etc. which is also found in Sant. lampOú, lamOú ‘licentious behavior: levity, frivolity; playful, funny, lascivious, licentious, shameless, lewd’.

51 For having a more comprehensive understanding of this lemma note also H. bh¯ uln¯ a which not only means ‘to be forgotten’ but also ‘to go astray, err; to be deceived’ and bh¯ ul-bhulaiy¯ am ˙ ‘maze, labyrinth’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

280

Chapter 10. Ideophones/expressives

It is also perfectly possible that speakers of Dravidian had reached the northwest of South Asia before the arrival of the Indo-Aryans. But their more precise geographical extension at that time is contested.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Part III

North India before the arrival of Indo-Aryan, Austro-Asiatic and Kartvelian

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 11 A North Indian substratum

In above section 1.7 I have discussed the traces of linguistic substrata in northwestern South Asia. Those traces appear to be structurally different from those which can be identified in the more central and eastern parts of North India, i.e. in many MIA languages (except G¯ and¯ ar¯ı), in many NIA languages (but with less traces in Outer than in Inner Languages of central and eastern parts of North India), and, significantly, in Munda languages (but not in Khasic languages). Since there are similar tendencies in the development from OIA to large parts of NIA and from PAA to Munda, the assumption that these similar tendencies are due to influence of the same substrate is standing to reason. It is likely that this north Indian pre-Old Indo-Aryan and pre-Munda substrate, which must have comprised a group of languages of unknown origin but which constituted a prehistoric linguistic area. This prehistoric linguistic area had the following characteristics: 1. With regard to phonological typology, the languages must have been syllable languages and they must have had retroflex consonants. This contrasts with Indo-Iranian and Proto-Austro-Asiatic, both of which did not have retroflex consonants (for the latter see Jenny and Sidwell 2014). It is thus quite striking that Mon-Khmer Khasi has no retroflex consonants whereas some of the Munda languages (some of them spoken not far away from Khasi) have archetypal IA consonant systems with plenty of retroflex consonants (e.g. Kharia). Whereas CDIAL contains a very great number of reconstructed lemmata that contain retroflex consonants but are not of Dravidian origin, retroflex consonants are reconstructed for Proto-Dravidian. In addition, Pinnow has pointed out (1959) a number of Mon-Khmer lemmata with dental consonants having cognates in Munda with retroflex consonants. It is thus very likely that those Munda words with retroflex consonant but without Mon-Khmer cognates, and which have not been borrowed from Dravidian, must be of ‘North Indian’ origin. And those Munda words with retroflex consonant which do have cognates in Mon-Khmer must have received the retroflex feature due to ‘North Indian’ substrate influence. Whereas the development from OIA to NIA was basically one from a word to syllable languages (see p. 284), the development from PAA to modern Munda was similar insofar as most modern Munda languages do not allow sesquisyllabic word structures or word-initial and word-final consonant clusters. 2. Stress/accent: In the course of the MIA phase, the inherited accent got lost (Masica 1991: 183, von Hinüber [§ 159]), and Masica points out (1991: 184) that several developments from OIA to MIA (e.g. restricted clusters, lax intervocalic consonants,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

284

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

obligatory final vowels) have striking parallels with Dravidian languages which also do not have distinctive accents. Since again various of these features are also found in Munda – whereas direct influence of Dravidian on Munda is neglectable – the thesis of a North Indian substrate is indeed likely. 3. Vocabulary: I suggest that all those words found in the language data lists which have parallels in Munda but not in Mon-Khmer and which lack features that could indicate a Munda origin have at least preliminary the status of ‘North Indian’ words. It is also very likely that many reconstructed lemmata in the CDIAL belong to this group.

11.1

History of syllable structures

In order to understand the historical relationship between Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı and in turn their relationship with the other Outer Languages and with the Inner Languages we will now look at a list of phonetic, phonological and other features which are shared – to a more or less high degree – by the Outer Languages (partly also by Iranian) but not – or only to a small degree – by the Inner Languages:1

11.1.1

Word and syllable languages

The facts and data presented in several sections of this book can also be understood under the perspective of a phonological typology which distinguishes between so-called word languages and syllable languages (see Auer, Kümmel, Szczepaniak 2011, and Nübling/Schrambke). Here is a selection of features distinguishing the two language types that is relevant for our purposes:

5

classification parameter onsets/codas accent geminates consonant or vowel harmony epenthesis

6

sonority hierarchy

Nr. 1 2 3 4

word language

syllable language

complex word level no rare

simple phrase level yes possible

if, only for strengthening morphological structures2 little importance

for optimizing syllables important3

I summarize now some more characteristic features generally distinguishing word and syllable languages as described by the above authors. Syllable languages like Spanish, Norwegian, 1 Regarding stray tendencies like epenthesis, deaspiration and ‘spontaneous’ aspiration also in Inner Languages see e.g. Tagare (1987: 66ff.) and De Clercq. 2 An example would be German eigen-t-lich; I don’t know something similar from NIA. 3 This opposition explains why almost only in Nuristani OIA sC- somehow survived, however only either by what Strand calls “dissimilation of st. . . to št” or through epenthesis of a vowel before the cluster as in Kal. and Kho. iskov ‘peg’ < OIA *skabha- ‘post’ (13638); in Pk. the two consonants sometimes survived by epenthesis of a vowel between the cluster components as in Pk. sin.¯ a- ‘snow’ < OIA snih- ‘wetness’ (13798); otherwise and elsewhere the usual outcome was Ch. For more on this lemma see p. 477.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.1. History of syllable structures

285

Hindi and Kalam Kohistani are more or less easier pronouncable than word languages like High German, Danish or Old Iranian. Syllable languages are therefore speaker-friendly, but make it more difficult to recognize word and morpheme boundaries, whereas word languages are hearer-friendly, i.e. they facilitate the decoding of morphological structures and thus of information units. Only in word languages consonants are subject to distributional limitations; e.g. limitations on the distribution of aspiration in many northwestern languages (see p. 357) – but not e.g. in Hindi – are a word language feature. Even though it is clear that the development from OIA to NIA is basically one from a word to syllable languages (see below), one needs to be aware that frequently there exist also profound typological differences between genetically closely related languages and dialects, e.g. in case of the various Germanic languages, but also in case of High German and South German dialects (see Nübling and Schrambke), and – pace Morgenstierne’s dictum – also in case of the Nuristan or of the Dardic languages. In connection with the speaker friendliness of syllable languages, Peter Auer states (2010): “While the transition from syllable-language to word-language is unmarked in language change, the transition from word language to syllable-language only occurs – top/down processes of language planning and standardization excluded – as a consequence of genetic non-transmission/difficult communication (extensive migration, second language acquisition, etc.).” And on the next page he points out that the L2 German of immigrant workers has syllable language features and that “creoles with word languages as lexifier languages make the lexicon compatible with that of a syllable language.” This looks very much like the likely scenario of the early history of Indo-Aryan: a main cause for the marked shift (i.e. not naturally language-internal) from the OIA word language to the NIA syllable languages was that speakers of local non-IA languages began in increasing numbers to speak OIA as an L2. In this connection it does not make a difference whether they were speakers of Dravidian, Munda, Burushaski or any other unknown language. These remarks may also be taken as a commentary on the India Immigration - Out Of India controversy and they are supported by Kuiper who states (1991: 96): The contact [of local people] with the community of Indo-Aryan speakers must primarily have been maintained by bilinguals, particularly among the lower strata of artisans and peasants (an aspect often overlooked by Vedists) and these must have been the essential factor in conforming the Vedic language to foreign patterns of the Indian linguistic area. Concerning details on the side of the imigrants, Parpola opines (2015: 67f.): It is currently thought that the PIE language probably to a large extent spread through language shifts initiated by local leaders who came to the side of small but powerful groups of PIE-speaking immigrants. The latter would have an effective, strongly hierarchical social system, good weapons, and a military backing, plus coveted luxury goods as external markers of their power. With regard to the Iranian and the Indo-Aryan language areas, Kümmel (Syllable- and wordrelated developments in earlier Indo-Iranian) observes: Old Indo-Aryan (Vedic Sanskrit) and the Old Iranian languages (Avestan, Old Persian) are closely related and still quite similar, especially in morphology and syntax. Phonologically, their differences are much more pronounced. IndoAryan seems to show a drift towards a more syllable-oriented type. E.g., Old

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

286

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

Indo-Aryan has heavy restrictions on final consonants and is known for its well-developed sandhi across word boundaries, and in mainstream Middle IndoAryan, nearly all consonant clusters are assimilated. Most modern Indo-Aryan languages are often considered prototypical syllable languages. In contrast to that, Old and Middle Iranian allow many more consonant clusters and generally show more word-related features, especially in the East: Sogdian, Khwarezmian or modern Pashto may be characterized as quite typical word languages . . . Regarding NIA, I would like to slightly modify Kümmel’s statements and insist that word language features are also found in parts of NIA, but they are geographically unevenly distributed and thereby conserve the historical expansion of Indo-Aryan into South Asia: most word language features are found in the northwest4 but their number decreases towards the south-east roughly as far as the arc of languages that has preserved OIA geminates (for this phenomenon see p. 212). The languages further east and south-east display predominantly prototypical syllable language features. I illustrate this now with just three features and a selection of languages:

1. Onsets I have shortly described above (p. 321) fairly comprehensive changes starting in OIA from more complex to simpler onsets, a trend which intensified in MIA and NIA (Masica 1991: 154ff.). However, many northwestern languages continued to tolerate two consonant elements in the onset.

2. Accent Whereas the Vedic word accent has been partially preserved in Dardic till today (see above p. 188 and Heegård 2012) and indirectly perhaps in Mar¯ at.h¯ı (see Turner 1916), it had early disappeared in the inner language area more than two thousand years ago, e.g. in Pali (see von Hinüber [§ 159]). It has also been partly preserved in eastern Indo-Aryan Chittagongian and Rohingya Language (se p. 193) which I interpret as a confirmation of the veracity of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages.

11.2

Northwestern and central IA syllable structures

The article Syllable rimes in Old Indo-Aryan and Dravidian (2001) by Masato Kobayashi is, I believe, also helpful for understanding the language situation in the northwest. Kobayashi shows that certain restrictions on OIA syllable structures not found in other IE languages changed from earlier to later OIA, leading to new rules defining syllable well-formedness. Whereas in the older stage there was a strong tendency for avoiding overlong syllables, in the younger stage, in consonant clusters, consonants of the same stricture are preferred (or increasingly common). On p. 99 he states that “[c]omparison of Avestan with corresponding Vedic forms, however, suggests a difference between Iranian and Indo-Aryan ways of cluster syllabification. In syllable onset, Avestan allows more diverse obstruent clusters than Vedic”; and on the following page he says that “Avestan favors a zero or minimal coda while it allows consonants to be crammed in the onset.” He also mentions (p. 99) that Avestan has no geminates (see p. 212), and (ibid.), “[o]n the other hand, the variety of consonants occurring in word-final position is not as broad as in Vedic, given that many of them end in a sibilant and 4 For more features see Kümmel op. cit.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.2. Northwestern and central IA syllable structures

287

-t probably has no release (Morgenstierne 1942, p. 70f.).” These are interesting observations  because the different tendencies regarding syllable structures in Avestan and Vedic resemble differences in syllable structures found in the northwest, and may be correlated with typical northwestern syllable structure-affecting processes like r- and h-metathesis which have been discussed above p. 309 and p. 342. Since deferred release of closure of word-final stops is a characteristic of a number of Dard languages (but also of some Western West Himalayish languages, see p. 342), one wonders whether this could be an old and persistent substrate influence. Kobayashi concludes this section of his article with the following observations (p. 100): “Among the native grammarians’ restrictions on consonant clusters. . . , those of P¯ an.ini, and of the Rk-Pr¯ atiś¯ akhya to a smaller extent, resemble Avestan treatment of coda consonants. If the  descriptions of these grammarians reflect actual dialectal features of the schools they belong to, their dialects, which were probably distributed in the upper Indus Valley and the Punjab, might reflect a transitional state between Indo-Aryan and Iranian.” The following sections of the article deal with syllable structures in Dravidian. Important observations are, besides the fact that Dravidian allows only one consonant in word-initial position (p. 102): “Indo-European rules on vowel length are usually local and phonological. . . [w]eight rules in Dravidian, on the other hand, seem to operate on a morphemic basis”, and (p. 103) “. . . Dravidian allows only homorganic non-continuants across a syllable boundary”, and “[a] Proto-Dravidian vowel, whether short or long, can thus be followed by the sequences *-TT-, *-NT-, *-NTT-, *-RT-, *-RTT, *-RNT-.” 5 Kobayashi concludes (p. 104): “. . . Old Indo-Aryan as known from the Pr¯ atiś¯ akhyas shifts the emphasis of the criteria of well-formedness from the length of a rime to the agreement of strictures across a syllable boundary.” This is not the place to analyse the question, whether Dravidian itself received the above-described characteristics of its syllable structures from a pre-existing substratum. Still, this does not appear to be unlikely because the forms of the words collected at SARVA at which we now look, display conspicious similarities with the above-discussed Dravidian syllable structures.

11.2.1

The SARVA Project (‘macro lemmata’)

The goal of the South Asian Residual Vocabulary Assemblage (SARVA) project, which is headed by F. C. Southworth and Michael Witzel, is this (see “The SARVA Project” by F. C. Southworth):6 “Etymological research in South Asian languages has turned up large numbers of words in languages of all families which are of unknown origin, many of which are probably remnants of otherwise unknown ancient languages. In addition, there are language remnants (such as Nahali/Nihali) and isolated languages (such as Burushaski) which may possibly belong to formerly more widespread language families. The goal of the Project is to assemble all words showing early language contact among the (known and unknown) languages of the subcontinent, in order to provide data for the reconstruction of the history of language contact in the region, from the time of the earliest knowable South Asian linguistic strata, including inferences regarding the locations of these strata in time and space. . . SARVA Dictionary entries are composite entries containing material from two or more language families.” A first and major difference between the substrates which have been discussed above from page 46 onwards and the entries in SARVA is, that in the latter case words of un5 T: stops, N: nasal consonants, R: liquids and *y. 6 http://www.aa.tufs.ac.jp/sarva/

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

288

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

known origin are frequently found over the whole Indo-Aryan language scape. This ‘SARVA substratum’ does, of course, not suggest relics of one former language, not least as it obviously also contains words of IA (and of ‘aryanized”), Dravidian and Munda origin, as the editors themselves point out. The borrowing processes between the members of the known language families and members of unknown (prehistoric) languages must have been at times quite complicated, e.g. repeated borrowing of the same word between adjacent languages, leading to ever new allomorphs. In quite a number of cases the very many allomorphs seem to suggest an original synthetic character of the lemmata. The following “lump” words are certainly those with the highest number of allomorphs in the SARVA Project. Still they share a number of similar characteristics. Most have a reconstructed syllable structure of   the form C(h)VCC(h)V or C(h)VNC(h)V with CC as a rule geminates and not other clusters. Usually only liquids are permitted as singletons in medial position, in rare cases also a sibilant or a stop. In some cases a third syllable -ra- or -na- (apparently some kind of suffix – regarding -ra- see Kuiper 1991: 46) has been added. Examples: Lump1 : *d.ippa- ‘mound, hill’ (5549), S. £ipo ‘a kind of wen or swollen lump’; *d.happa- ‘lump’, *d.habba- ‘lump’, *d.halla- ‘lump’, *d.hikka-1 ‘lump’ (5585). Other word groups meaning ‘lump’ with initial d.h-, dh-, dd.-, d-, s.vv. *d.hicca- (*d.hiñca-), *d.h¯esa- (*d.h¯emsa-), ˙ *d.hed.d.ha-1 (*d.hen.d.ha-1 , *d.hin.d.ha-1 , *dhid.d.ha-), *d.happa- (*d.haba, *d.habba-, *d.hippa-, *d.hibba-, and *d.heppa-, *d.hempa-, *d.heba-, *d.hebba-, *d.hemba, *d.hubba-, *d.hompa-), *d.h¯ımma- (*d.h¯emma-, *d.h¯ omma-), *d.hera-1 (*dh¯era-), *d.ippa2 1 (*d.ibba- ), *d.ala- (*d.alla- , *d.illa-, *d.¯ella-, *d.halla-, *d.hilla-1 , *d.h¯ella-1 (also unvoiced *t.¯ela-), dala-1 , *dilla-), *dikka- (*digga-). - d.imba-1 , d.imbha-3 ? This super-lemma consists of the following components: unit 1 d., d.h, t. d

unit 2 a, i, u, e, o

unit 3 ppa, mpa, mma,(b)ba, mba, mbha cca, ñca d.d.ha, n.d.ha kka, gga (l)la, ra sa, msa ˙

Lump2 : *p¯ed.a- ‘lump’ (8377), *p¯ed.ha-2 , *pen.d.a-, *p¯entha-, *p¯enda-, *pud.a-, *pun.d.a-, *p¯ odda- (See OIA pín.d.a-). This displays a much simpler structure: unit 1 p

unit 2 u, e, o

unit 3 ntha, nda,dda (n.)d.(h)a

Lump3 : *bhakkha-, ‘lump’ (9330) *bhikkha, *bh¯ekkha-, *bh¯egga-, *bh¯enka-, ˙ *bh¯enga, ˙ *bh¯ella-. This has again a simple structure:

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.2. Northwestern and central IA syllable structures unit 1 bh

unit 2 a, i, e

289

unit 3 kha, nka, ˙ gga, nga ˙ lla

Lump4 : *mat.t.ha- ‘lump’ (9725), *mikkara- (*m¯enga-, ˙ *m¯engana-), ˙ *m¯eñca-, *m¯et.t.a- (*m¯en.d.a-), *m¯edda-, *mucca-, *mud.d.ha- (*mun.d.a-), *muttha- (*mutthara-, *m¯ otthara-, *modda-). This displays this structure: unit 1 m

unit 2 a, i, u, e, o

unit 3 dda, ttha d.d.ha, n.d.a, t.t.(h)a cca, ñca kka, nga ˙

unit 4 na, ra

Lump5 : *rut.t.a- ‘lump’ (10769),7 *r¯ od.a-, *r¯ od.d.a-, *rod.ha-, *lut.t.a-, *gut.t.ha-, *g¯ ot.t.a- (‘something round’), (*d.h¯ ot.t.a- ‘defective’). This displays this structure: unit 1 unit 2 unit 3 r, l u, o (d.)d.a, d.ha, t.t.a, t.t.ha g (d.ha) Lump6 : *lakka- ‘lump’ (10878), *lanka-, ˙ *lad.d.u- (*lan.d.a-), *ladda- (*landa-), *linga-, ˙ lit.t.a- (*lin.d.a, *l¯ed.a-, *l¯ed.d.a-, *l¯en.t.a-, l¯en.d.a-), *lidda- (*linda-, *l¯edda-, *l¯eddha-, *l¯enta-, *l¯entha-), *libba-, l¯ ogá-, *l¯ occa-, *lut.t.a- (lun.d.ika-), *l¯ ottha- (*l¯ odda-, *l¯ oddha-, *l¯ onda-), *lumba(*lumbara-). This displays this structure: unit 1 l

unit 2 a, i, u, e, o

unit 3 bba, mba dda, ddha, nda, ttha, nta, ntha cca (d.)d.a, n.d.a, t.t.a, n.t.a kka, nka, ˙ ga, nga ˙

unit 4 ra

The most common medial consonant clusters are retroflex ones, followed by velars, dentals, bilabials, etc. We also see that there is a smaller number of permitted syllables than what has been reconstructed for Proto-Dravidian. In the following, the non-permitted syllables have been put into parenthesis:8 *-TT-, *-NT-, (*-NTT-,) *-RT-, (*-RTT,) (*-RNT-). In 7 Note the similar semantics of K.r¯ am. and d.od.. rut. ‘head’, K.pog. rot. ‘head’ and K.sir. lot. ‘head’ (Schmidt and Kaul 2008: 284), which seem to have a parallel in Munda Sant. lut.kur.i ‘the part of the head in front of the ear and upwards to the hair.’ 8 Again Kobayashi’s abbreviations: T: stops, N: nasal consonants, R: liquids and *y.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

290

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

fact, *-NTT-, *-RTT and *-RNT- are permitted syllable structures neither in SARVA nor in the CDIAL. For more on this kind of syllable structures see Witzel Early Sources for South Asian substrate languages p. 50. A comparison with the syllable structures found in the IVC substrate (p. 46) shows at once significant differences: in the IVC substrate one doesn’t find a single word with geminates, but there exists a great variety of internal consonant clusters. In other words, the SARVA and the IVC substrate display significant differences in syllable structures. But there are also clear differences with regard to the different phonological systems. The most relevant for us are: 1. SARVA seems to have no syllabic r, but the BMAC substrate contains several, accord ing to Lubotsky; 2. IVC substrate has no retroflex sounds, which abound in SARVA. The distinction between the IVC substrate and the SARVA substrate corresponds at least roughly also with the typological distinction between word languages and syllable languages. For details on this distinction see below p. 284. If we now briefly compare features of the SARVA substrate with Austro-Asiatic, we find again very few correspondences: The sesquisyllabic word structures reconstructed for Proto-Austro-Asiatic cannot be compared with those of the SARVA substrate. Although one can find similar word patterns in Munda languages, they most certainly were acquired from the SARVA substrate because whereas it is hardly possible to keep track of the enormous number of ‘lump’ words in the SARVA substrate, the number of comparable words in Munda languages is very small. This can only mean that these ‘lump’ words are not of AustroAsiatic origin. There are just two types corresponding with above ‘lump 1’ and ‘lump 3’: Sant. ãhimba, ãumba, dhoma, ãhompo, Korwa ãℎ ela: and Sant. bhiïãa, Korwa bℎ ela:. Only ‘lump 1’ may have an Austro-Asiatic background if the forms are indeed cognate with Khmer dom ‘group, lump, wad, block’, but this evidence is very thin. SARVA is based on the CDIAL and the DEDR which means that it does not (yet) contain data from the very many works on Indian languages written in Western and South Asian languages. One small example to illustrate this: for ‘push’ Turner gives a lemma with the following allomorphs: *t.hecc, *thecc, *t.hess, *t.hoss. But there is e.g. also Kumaun¯ı t.hep with the same meaning. This may suggest that -cc, -ss and -p are very old suffixes. Whereas the above segmentation of the words displays their building structures, it will need further research to see whether various allomorphs of other reconstructed lemmata – also due to repeated borrowings – can be related to the linguistic features I regard as typical for the Outer Languages, e.g. change a > u, or to other phenomena, like coronal consonant harmony (CCH) which is discussed below (p. 359). Here I want to look just at one semantically more complex example which displays basically the same syllable structures as the above ‘lump’ words. Sub *cañcu- ‘beak’ Turner lists *cuñca, *coñca, *cucca- and sub *con.t.a- ‘beak’ he lists *cot.a-, *t.oñca-, *tocca- and refers to *cañcu- and tun.d.a- ‘beak, trunk, snout’ the latter of which is connected with the following ‘beak/mouth’ words: *tud.a-, *ton.d.a-, *tot.t.a-, *tonta-, *tutta-, *t.un.d.a-, *t.un.t.a-, *t.on.t.a-, *t.u ¯t.t.a-, *t.ot.t.a-, *thun.d.a-, *thuntha-, *thuttha-, *thod.a-, *thod.d.a-, thottha-, *thontha-, *then.t.ha-, *t.hun.d.a-, *t.hud.d.a-, *t.hon.d.a-, *t.hod.d.a, *t.hon.t.ha-, *dun.d.a-, *d.un.d.a-, *dutta-. Turner refers also to OIA trot.i- ‘beak’ and for *‘elephant’s trunk’ (elephant’s “beak”?) respectively *‘lip, *mouth, *navel’ to (a) ‘navel’ words sub tundi- ‘prominent or swollen navel’: *tondi-, *tun.d.i-, *t.un.d.i-, t.ondi, *t.on.d.i-,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

291

*t.hon.d.i-, *dun.t.i-, *d.un.t.i-, *dundi-, *don.t.i-, *d.hod.d.hi-, d.hon.d.hi-, dhundhi-, *t.unga˙ and (b) to śun.d.a ¯- ‘elephant’s trunk’ and śon.d.a ¯- *‘lip, *mouth, *navel’. Sub *tun.d.a- Turner refers to CCH, i.e. the change of t- > t.- and it is not unlikely that *cot.a-, *t.oñca-, *tocca- are intermediate forms on the way to *coñca, *cucca- which may show affricate harmony. Since there is besides tun.d.a- ‘beak, trunk, snout’, also OIA lex. tan.d.aka- ‘the upright post of a house; the trunk of a tree’, this lemma seems to display also a - u alternation typical for Outer Languages.9 Cognate is probably also dan.d.a- i.a. ‘trunk’ which is equated with śun.d.a ¯- ‘elephant’s trunk’. Since it is unlikely that all forms meaning ‘beak, mouth, trunk, snout, navel’ have one common origin,10 it suggests itself that they derive from several morphologically related lemmata which got morphologically further assimilated and in this way created a field of semantic family resemblances. Whereas the process from the word language Old Indo-Aryan to the syllable languages New Indo-Aryan can be followed through all phases, the SARVA substrate, or parts of it, reflects perhaps the end phase of a similar process. In other words, L1 speakers of Indo-Aryan borrowed words (and, of course, also grammatical patterns) from now unknown adjacent languages (which probably were spoken by the ancestors of those very L1 IA speakers) and modified them with syllable language features. Below in the section on possible PIE reflexes we will find a similar situation which makes it sometimes difficult to distinguish between a possible PIE reflex and alternative interpretations.

11.3

Laryngeal processes

Several of the historical phonological processes discussed in this section and elsewhere in this book are also known from Middle Indo-Aryan. What is more, it cannot be overlooked that the number of processes and probably also the number of affected words has steadily increased from earlier to later stages of Middle Indo-Aryan. Since these processes are almost unknown in the development from Old to Middle Indo-Aryan and since they are found in greater number in little-standardized forms of Prakrit like Central Asian Niya than in the Buddhist and Jaina koinés, the conclusion is just compelling that these processes must have had their origin in Old Indo-Aryan lects that were different from Vedic. Many of these processes are not ‘natural’ or unmarked and thus cannot be explained as examples for common or even universal phonological processes. In the course of centuries, mainly during the first millennium after the turn of the eras, the mutual interactions between the koinés and the many Indo-Aryan languages once lying outside their spheres of influence and characterized by lack of script and written literatures and spoken, from the perspective of the speakers of the koinés, by mlecchas or, from the perspective of scholars like Hörnle, by “the lower orders” (see p. 443), continuously increased and intensified. Here follows now a short compilation of phonological processes characterizing especially the later phases of Prakrit and of Apabhramśa ˙ before we turn to the New Indo-Aryan evidence. Prakrit knows the change of word-medial -ph- > -bh- (Pischel § 200), but otherwise Pischel teaches (§ 202) that except from a few cases “. . . ist Übergang der Tenues in Mediae und umgekehrt. . . nur vereinzelt und dialektisch.” One such case is e.g. AMg. n.ighasa- < OIA nikas.a- ‘smearing’ (§ 202) which displays in addition spontaneous aspiration. Other related but rather intermittently and 9 More examples for a - u alternation and front vs. back articulation are: jad.a- – *j¯ ud.a- ‘cold’; *didd¯ a- ‘elder sister’ – *j¯ıjja- ‘breast, mother, sister, relative’ – perhaps *cucci- ‘female breast’ and *kucca- ‘ditto’, etc.; cf. also Arm. c˙ i˙c ‘bosom’. 10 One source is Dravidian, as pointed out by Southworth (2005a: 81).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

292

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

erratically occurring processes are ka- > kha- (§ 206), t.a > t.ha (> d.ha) (§ 207), pa > pha and in AMg. (sometimes also in JM.) pa > bha (§ 208); rather rare is spontaneous aspiration of unaspirated mediae as ga > gha (§ 209),11 sometimes there is affrication of sibilants, thus OIA sa, śa, s.a via the regular reflexes > cha (§ 211; already discussed above p. 41); quite rare is shift of aspiration as in gh˘eppaï < *ghrpyati < OIA grhyate ‘is taken’ (§ 212); there   consonants (§ 213) and to is a tendency to lose aspiration in case of word-medial aspirated deaffrication of e.g. c > t (§ 215; also already discussed above p. 475) and, of course, there is the well known cerebralization of dental stops (§ 218) whereas the reverse process is rather rare (§ 225).

11.3.1

Glottalization of vowels, checked consonants and ‘spontaneous aspiration’

As shortly mentioned above, the interrelation between glottalization (also called by some laryngealization) and aspiration is clear from a phonological point of view with regard to the laryngeal features ‘space between the vocal folds’ and ‘tension in the folds’:

[−𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑] [+𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑]

[−𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑] [−𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑]

‘aspirated’ [ph ]

‘plain’ [p]

[+𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑] [−𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑]

‘glottalized’ [p¼]

This shows that loss of aspiration, which is also a central characteristic of Outer Languages and which will be discussed below (beginning p. 315), is a different phenomenon and has nothing do do with the apparent ‘mirror-process’ of increase in cases of aspiration. An important difference between glottalization and aspiration in languages of northwestern South Asia dealt with in this book is this: glottalization or glottal stop has only a phonetic and not a phonemic status, at least in IA languages. Joan Baart states about Kalam¯ı which has very many words with glottal stop (1997: 30): “The glottal stop [P] is not a phoneme. It is a concomitant feature of certain tones . . . ” Checked consonants are the counterparts of glottalized vowels. For instance in Munda, the consonant phonemes /d/ and /b/ are realized as follows (Gregory Anderson 2008: 102): “[T]he glottis is closed and the tongue or the lips simultaneously form an oral closure. The tongue or lip position is the same as that of the corresponding normal stops. Then the glottal closure is released, which is optionally followed by nasal release and voicing.” The outcome is [¼d] and [¼b] which could also be described as devoicing of the consonants.  Exactly the same  phenomenon, but without nasal release, is found in our northwestern area in various languages in case of word-final stops. Thus we see that the only difference between glottalization and checked consonants is whether the glottal stop precedes a vowel or a stop. Glottalization and checked consonants are not found everywhere in this area even though I 11 Note also Oberlies in Jain and Cardona (2003: 175) who observes that in Ashokan Prakrit and P¯ ali word-initial k-, t-, p-, b- are often aspirated when followed by a sibilant, an affricate or -l- as e.g. in Pa. khumseti ˙ ‘scolds’ < kutsayati.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

293

am convinced that they were very common in the past and that they were a central feature of the language(s) in this area which the first IA speakers encountered. It is known that in other languages glottal stops developed out of consonant phonemes through reduction of the number of active articulatory features. But this is not the case in our area which can rather be compared with the glottal stop articulation found in many German dialects with words beginning with a vowel, as well as in English dialects. There are many different and conflicting attempts for classifying the Sino-Tibetan language family which I do not want to evaluate here. But a classification of the Western West Himalayish languages, which is useful for our purposes, has been suggested by D. D. Sharma (1994: 10). He first separates them from Tibetan, and then suggests a western group including Kannauri and L¯ ahul¯ı, and an eastern group including the languages of Uttarakhand. The western group – but including Raji – has checked consonants (ibid. and see p. 13, 50) and glottalization, but not the eastern group (glottalized vowels are also well-known from Tibetan). Checked consonants are usually only voiced stops but on p. 50 Sharma quotes also /concoPk/ ‘god’.12 Sharma regards the phenomenon as originating from Munda, which is confirmed by Bhattacharya for Bonda (1965), and Anderson claims (2008: 384): “As is well-known, the pre-glottalized or ‘checked’ release of voiced obstruents in coda position is a family level characteristic of Munda, found in both North and South Munda, and indeed is one of the characteristic features of Munda phonology as a whole, distinguishing these languages in this way from Dravidian and Indo-Aryan languages of South Asia.” 13 According to Patricia Jane Donegan and David Stampe (1983), this is an inherited feature which the Munda languages share with Mon-Khmer languages. Therefore it is standing to reason that the existence of this phenomenon in West Himalayish and in a number of peripheral IndoAryan languages is due to the dominant presence of Austro-Asiatic languages over large parts of prehistoric northern India. It is not found in archetypal Inner Languages like Vedic14 and Hindi, this is one argument for the thesis of the arrival of OL speakers before the speakers of Vedic.

11.3.2

Glottalization (laryngalization) and checked consonants

The following examples (majority from Dardic and Nuristani) displaying these features can be described as single contour segments consisting of two phases (see Kenstowicz 1994: 498ff.) where the laryngeal features [spread glottis] and [constricted glottis] are realized on either the closure or the release position as pre-aspiration/pre-glottalization or as postaspiration/post-glottalization. Note, however, that in case of vowels, the closure and the release position are marked by a much less radical degree of constriction than in case of consonants. Yet the mechanism is apparently the same as the examples below show. Since in several of those examples word-final devoicing is noted I should also emphasize that the terms word-initial and word-final devoicing are actually misleading insofar as “word-finality has no consistent phonetic cue associated with it . . . we can say that devoicing in general 12 Some of these languages also have glottal stops which, at least in certain cases, have developed from stop consonants as can be seen in Tod and Spitian /laPpa/ ‘hand’. 13 But Anderson does not mention Tibeto-Burman. 14 There is, of course, also word-final devoicing in Sanskrit (see Hock 2009: 58f.). But word-final devoicing taken by itself is a widespread phenomenon in the languages of the world and Sanskrit is an example for this. This is different from the features and cases presented here, all of which are associated with glottalization and aspiration due to processes regionally limited to peripheral languages in peripheral regions, features which are not known from Sanskrit.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

294

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

began in utterance-final position, as that is a context where, due to the silence that follows the end of an utterance, with the vocal folds in a resting position, devoicing is phonetically motivated; word -final devoicing would thus represent a generalization from devoicing in utterance-final contexts to devoicing in word-final contexts” (Joseph 2010: 407).

11.3.2.1

G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı

It is most likely that also in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı initial vowels were preceded by an etymologically unmotivated glottal stop or an unmotivated aspiration.15 Graphemically, they are identified by an initial aleph which, according to Stephan Baums (pers. comm.), must have phonetically been either an initial glottal stop or a voiced aspirate. Thus Pa. imasmim ˙ (‘in this’) ∼ himaspi pronounced as [Pim@spi] ∼ [Himaspi]. This is a case of a pre-aspiration or pre-glottalization on the ‘closure’ (actually ‘narrowing’) position of the segment. This seems to be supported by H. W. Bailey’s observation (1946: 783) that intervocalic -t- was sometimes written with an aleph as e.g. in sagami ca¼udi
sami ‘in the sangha of the four quarters’. This, in turn suggests, that occasionally intervocalic -t- was not weakened to a fricative [T] but changed into a glottal stop as is e.g. known from British English dialects.

11.3.2.2

Kashgar and Yarkand

Doug Hitch writes (2009: 5): “Kashgar and Yarkand, on the western rim of the Tarim Basin, are exceptional in the basin in that they have had significant populations in the historical period yet have offered up no documents of any kind from the pre-Turkic period,16 not even Sanskrit or Chinese ones. I do not know if this has ever been explained. It is tempting to speculate that there was a Khotan Saka language arc, stretching from Khotan through Yarkand and Kashgar to Tumshuq . . . The eleventh century AD Turkic lexicographer from Kashgar, Mad.mud al-K¯ ašGar¯ı, includes a Turkic dialect called kanč¯ ak¯ı or k anca k  spoken in villages around Kashgar . . . He . . . might be suggesting that these people have an accent like those from Khotan when he says that both peoples put an [h] in front of initial vowels.” The Turkic examples given by Hitch are hata ‘father’ instead of ata, hana ‘mother’ instead of ana. In case of ühi for ügi ‘owl’ I wonder whether this, in fact, was not pronounced with a glottal stop. In any case, further below I present examples of h-prothesis in Khotan Saka which support Hitch’s assumption of Khotan Saka influence on this Turkish dialect.

11.3.2.3

Burushaski

In connection with Burushaski, glottalization was never mentioned. However, Karim Piar states (2012: 8, fn. 2): “Burushaski has glottal stops in word initial, medial and final position like [Pusy] ‘expression of cold’, [Pu Puy] ‘themselves’, [geP] ‘snow’. Glottal stops have not been mentioned in previous literature.” The last quoted word Berger connects with the verb stem 1 gíy.- which means i.a. ‘falls of rain, snow’ etc., thus here the glottal stop is reflex of 15 Whether or not also Persian has a glottal stop before words starting with a vowel is apparently contested (see Rahbar 2012: 22,fn. 6). 16 In the Yarkand area have been found Old Turkic and Arabic documents. Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Turfan Studies, p. 20.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

295

another consonant, but in the other cases it is not clear whether or not they are phonologically conditioned.

11.3.2.4

Pashai

About the Darrai Nur dialect of Pashai, Rachel Lehr writes (2014: 97): “In initial position vowels are pronounced with a glottal stop [P]; not pronounced in final position” and (p. 100): “Vowel-initial syllables are pronounced with an initial glottal stop.” She also notices (p. 72): “The segments [p] and [b] are bilabial stops. They are articulated without aspiration in any position. In word-final position they are not released.” Exactly the same she says about the segments [t], [d] and [ú] (but not [ã] which is apparently not found word-finally where only [ó] is found which is in complementary distribution with [ã]) (p. 77f.). The case of /k/ and /g/ is somewhat different: “Word-final [k] is pronounced with a release” but “[t]he contrast between intervocalic /k/ and /g/ is neutralized for some speakers” (p. 79). We see that in Pashai initial glottal stop and word-final checked consonants are not phonologically but phonetically conditioned. The non-release (or delayed release) means that e.g. Paš. /zeip/ ‘woman’ is realized as [zeip^] but actually it is [zeip¼]. The situation is partly different in Kalam Kohistani.

11.3.2.5

Kalam Kohistani

Baart states (1997: 45): “In Kalami, laryngealisation may occur on utterance-final syllables. It affects the second half of the vowel, and if a consonant follows, this consonant will be devoiced. Instead of laryngealisation, a temporary complete closure of the glottis (the opening between the vocal cords) may occur at the end of the vowel, giving a so-called glottal stop. . . If laryngealisation does not occur it is still quite usual . . . for voicing to be turned off shortly before the end of an utterance, leaving a partly or completely devoiced consonant in final position.” An example would be bäd.¯ır H(L) ‘sledgehammer’ phonetically transcribed as [b2"ãi:Pr] (where the P stands both for complete and incomplete closure of the glottis) which derives< OIA *vardhira- ‘hammer’ (11385). Laryngealization is typically found in Kalami words with an H(L) ‘delayed high-to-low falling pitch’, which, as much as I can see, is mostly found in words ending in laterals, sibilants and nasal consonants (thus not ending in voiced stops). Baart’s remark that devoicing in utterance-final position frequently takes place also when there is no laryngealization suggests that originally there was a general tendency for word-final checked stops which then extended to other word-final consonants together with the formation of the tone system in which the ‘delayed high-to-low falling pitch’ got correlated with a glottal stop.

11.3.2.6

Indus Kohistani

In the Bhat.¯ıse dialect of Indus Kohistani all stops in word-final position are not released: up^ ‘light (weight); disrespectful’, kiet^ ‘how much, how many’, amlùk^ ‘sloe’, ìrab^ ‘a hundred
d^ ‘name of the fourth month’ (‘the big ¯Id’), zh million’, gh
@ ag^ ‘froth on a wave or drink  or any other liquid’. This is accompanied by a tendency for devoicing. As in Pashai, also here we actually have e.g. [up¼] on hand.17 17 According to ODBL (§ 134), OIA word-final tenuis were first pronounced without release before they were lost in MIA. This process started already in late Vedic.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

296

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

In the Jij¯ al variety of Indus Kohistani word-final voiced stops, voiced continuants (only after long vowels and diphthongs) and short vowels get regularly devoiced (in case of vowels this sounds as if they were aspirated which is why they are written Vh ): z b ‘tongue’ (cf.  also the Gauro dialect of Indus Kohistani z¯ıph and Waigal¯ı ˇȷip both ‘tongue’), ad2d ‘a thing,  piece, part’, ù˚ g ‘hard on the stomach, not eatable; snow-water (which tastes bitter)’; kha n  h ‘mountain’, dhu m-dh am-na ‘grandly, with pomp and show’, 2sto r ‘the valley and village of   i h h h Astor’, k2yl ‘fight; war’; 2spa ‘cholera’, li-bili ‘certainly’, sù ‘he’. Word-final unvoiced  stops are always slightly aspirated: 2taph ‘(food) without ghee’, 2s2th ‘thin, slender’, 2
kh ‘one’. This automatic word-final aspiration is the phonetic mirror-image of the checked consonants.

11.3.2.7

Shina

In Gilgiti Shina the situation is similar to that in Indus Kohistani. Carla Radloff writes (1999: 32): “. . . voiced consonants in Gilgiti Shina tend to be devoiced when in word-final position . . . The sounds especially affected in Gilgiti Shina are the voiced plosives, affricates and fricatives . . . /d, d., g, ˇȷ, z, z./.” And (p. 33): “It appears that for many Gilgiti Shina speakers a small puff of air generally follows the pronunciation of a voiceless consonant into the silence following the stopping of speech . . . a devoiced consonant such as /g/, on the other hand, will generally either be unreleased in utterance-final position or have a very weak release, that is, with either no air released at all or just a very minute puff of air into the silence.”

11.3.2.8

Nuristani

The above-described situation does not seem to continue as clearly in Nuristani. For Prasun, Morgenstierne remarks about word-final consonants (1949 § 25): “. . . Voiced stops are, however, rare . . . and may denote unvoiced lenes, as variants of final tenues.” Buddruss und Degener comment on Morgenstierne’s observation (2017: 67): “Dieser Wechsel von auslautendem [k] oder [x] und [g] oder [G], [J] ist in allen Dialekten zu beobachten.” 18 Examples for word-final devoicing are: /opozG dur" u, opozG gul"ig/ → [opoz"ık tu-ãur] ‘name of a

meadow’, /büd/ ‘sense’ but Morgenstierne [büt], etc.19 However, there seems to exist in Prasun also a survival of glottalization: the language has two -a suffixes, one added to questions and requests, the other serves as a postposed subordination marker; both -a suffixes can also be pronounced with an ‘appended’ glottal stop as a kind of intensifier or emphatic marker (Degener pers. comm.). For Waigal¯ı, Degener only notes (1998: 25) that /g/ occasionally becomes [k] word-finally and /d/ and /b/ are very rare in this position. Slight aspiration of tenuis is found in Waigal¯ı (see e.g. p. 471 t.h un.t.h urá ‘coccyx’), but it seems to be realized randomly. Nevertheless, there is a certain similarity with the Jij¯ al variety of Indus Kohistani.

11.3.2.9

R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı

The M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı data in this book are from Kakali Mukherji (2011) and most other R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı data from G. Macalister (1898). Mukherjee writes (p. 58) about M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı: “All the stops are 18 ‘One observes in all dialects this alternation [of utterances] ending in [k] or [x] and [g] or [G], [J]’. 19 For a more detailed description see their grammar 2017 § 1.4.5.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

297

half-released in word-final position. The half-released consonantal sounds are represented by [ `] sign” as e.g. in [gulab`] ‘rose’, k@rot' ‘a saw’ etc.” To me it is not quite clear what is meant with “half-release”, but still this appears to resemble the above observations on word-final devoicing, delayed release of closure etc.

11.3.2.10

Mar¯ at.h¯ı

A. M. Ghatake notes about the Kud.a ¯l.¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı (1965: ii): “Final voiceless stops /p, t, c, k/ are unreleased and often difficult to be distinguished.” And (ibid.): “Final voiced stops /b, d, j, g/ are devoiced and become /p, t, c, k/.” 20

11.3.2.11

Bengali dialects

With regard to the Chittagong dialect of Bengali, Norihiko Učida observes (1970: 8ff.) that the tenuis are word-finally optionally not released. Sudhansu Tunga notes about various East Bengali dialects (Bishnupriya Manipuri and dialects in Cachar District) (1995: 122f.) that a glottal stop frequently appears before initial vowels (but mostly only a-) and after aspirated consonants. In initial position it is sometimes but not always a reflex of a former aspirate, after consonants it always reflects a former aspiration: Pat ‘hand’ < hat < OIA hásta- ‘hand’ (14023), P@l ‘arum’ < OIA a ¯lu- ‘esculent root of Amorphophallus campanulatus’ (1388) (but with prothetic aspirate e.g. in Kann. and Jaun. hal¯ u), Paite ‘to come’ probably < OIA a
y ati ‘comes near’ (1288) or a ¯payati ‘causes to reach’ (1200) (?), gPura ‘horse’ < ghot.a- ‘horse’ (4516).21 Note here finally also that syllable-final plosives /p/ /t/ /k/ are unreleased also in Assamese.

11.3.2.12

Dravidian Kurux

The language is spoken in the Chota Nagpur region in the districts of Ranchi, Raigarh and Sundergarh. It is known that the language has been heavily influenced by Mundari. All vowel-initial words begin with a glottal stop which is thus not phonemic (McAlpin 2003: 527). “However, if a glottal stop follows the initial vowel . . . the initial glottal stop dissimilates to an [h], which is phonemic in other environments” (ibid.).22 This suggests that also Kurux was influenced (probably quite directly by [Proto]-Munda) by phonological features of the prehistorical linguistic realm. In case the checked consonants of Munda are supposed to be a phonological prototype in terms of language history, then the variations between pre- and post- glottalization/aspiration in Dardic and Bengali dialects point to a typical language-encounter situation between speakers of two very different languages where phonetic pronunciation targets were frequently missed.

20 Since there is also fluctuation between voiced and unvoiced word-final pronunciation, the author uses partially capital letters. This practice has been retained in the present book. 21 Compare above the similar form of the ‘horse’ word with glottal stop in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı p. 277. 22 The glottal stop can also appear in other environments and its functioning in Kurux is complex. More is found in McAlpin.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

298

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

11.3.3

‘Spontaneous aspiration’

Above-sketched dissociation of aspiration in Sanskrit aspirated mediae (p. 157f.) was at least partly rule-based. One finds a typologically similar but seemingly random process of ‘phoneme splitting’ of aspiratd mediae especially in peripheral Outer Languages. This was again noted for the first time by Morgenstierne for Pal¯ ula (1941: 11f.): The voiceless aspirates, kh, etc., might be interpreted as single phonemes, just as is the case in the neighbouring Bashkarik. But the voiced aspirates appear to be consonant clusters. Phonetically they were frequently, and especially by 2 [native speaker Aslam X¯ an], pronounced with a short inserted vowel (e. g., duhumi [‘smoke’], guhumal [‘earthquake’], etc.). A comparable though somewhat different instance is found near the southern end of the IndoAryan language-scape, namely in Sinhalese. There, however, both mediae and tenues are affected. Since Sinhalese has, apparently long ago, lost aspiration in all aspirated consonants, it is standing to reason – because of northwestern parallels – that phoneme split started with the mediae and continued later also with tenues. Here follow some of the examples given by Geiger (1936: § 36.2): gahan.a ‘nose’ < OIA ghr¯ an.á- ‘nose’, daham ‘righteousness’ < OIA dhárma-; paharas ‘hard, solid’ < already above-quoted OIA parus.á- ‘cruel’ (7910) with etymologically unjustified aspiration, etc. Geiger believes (ibid.) that all his quoted examples were borrowings from some other Prakrit dialect at a time when Sinhalese had already lost all aspiration in tenues and mediae. This might be correct in some of the cases, but certainly not in all: phoneme split in Si. gahan.a has a parallel in Dardic Pal. grh¯ on. ‘stinking’ and is thus most likely not a borrowing. In contrast to the largely rule-based situation regarding dissociation of aspiration in Sanskrit mediae, this phoneme split, caused by the insertion of a vowel between the media and the aspiration (glottal fricative), is found quite irregularly in the various Outer Languages. The data quoted below provide additional evidence for the different intrinsic natures of aspirated mediae and tenues in quite many Indo-Aryan languages, differences which have been preserved through many centuries to the present. On the other hand, Sanskrit throwback of aspiration follows a different mechanism than the erratic phoneme split mainly found in modern Outer Languages. Neither of the two processes is known from Middle Indo-Aryan languages (including G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı) or from an Inner Language like Hindi. I would like to quote here also S. K. Chatterji what he says on deaspiration and ‘spontaneous’ aspiration (ODBL § 236): “The aspirates are a prominent class of sounds in IA., and they were passed on to all NIA., except Sinhalese, which quite early in its history ¯ .u stage . . . ) deaspirated them. Deaspiration of aspirates inherited from OIA. (before the El also occurs in NB. [New Bengali] . . . All NIA. languages possess some words in which there is aspiration, but their Sanskrit counterparts show absence of it. These words have aspiration in MIA.; and in certain cases the MIA. forms owe the aspiration conditions obtaining in OIA. itself.” We will see below that tendencies for deaspiration are much more widespread than it was known at the time of Chatterji. But his observation that ‘spontaneous’ aspiration in NIA goes frequently back to MIA supports my thesis that this was the time when OL features started to penetrate into IL koinés at a larger scale. For occasional cases of ‘spontaneous’ aspiration and deaspiration in Prakrits see also Geiger § 40. The type of ‘spontaneous’ aspiration presented in this section needs to be clearly separated from the very many cases of aspiration fluctuation that are found with the many ‘defective’ lemmata in the CDIAL which do not go back to OIA but only to MIA at the most. The principal difference between

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

299

the two is that in case of the latter we apparently see an inherent tendency for fluctuation between [+spread] and [-spread] glottis without an active role of the feature [+constricted] glottis whereas in the former case [+constricted] glottis is intimately connected, as we have seen above, with the feature [+spread]. Colin Masica says that Kalasha and Phalura have some words with historically unmotivated aspiration. He rightly rejects a suggestion made by Jules Bloch and Suniti Kumar Chatterji that the aspirations either reflect older *s or *r, or are reflexes of pre-Vedic consonant clusters. Also Bhayani (1997: 27f.) gives a list of Prakrit words with etymologically not justified aspirations where he points out that this kind of aspiration in Prakrit is due to a subsequent -s-. This may be true for, or at least a tendency in literary Prakrit, but it certainly does not apply to the examples following below.23 Masica wonders whether spontaneous aspiration is further connected with aspiration shift and a type of Grassmann’s Law (only one aspirated segment per word). Both topics will be treated further below (see below this section and p. 357). He treats these issues under the heading Regional and languagespecific innovations. This is different from my own position according to which spontaneous aspiration is extremely widespread in Outer Languages, and is here and there also found in adjacent non-IA languages like Munda (cf. e.g. Mu. kandhar ‘cave’ which is a borrowing related with OIA kandará-), Sant. bhuc@r. ‘butcher’, etc. It is a phenomenon intrinsically linked with glottalization and checked consonants, and it thus adds evidence to the thesis of the arrival of OL speakers before the speakers of Vedic because these features must have been widespread as language area phenomena long before the arrival of the speakers of Indo-Aryan. The many cases of spontaneous aspiration presented below are perhaps due to different aspiration systems in OL Indo-Aryan and the indigenous language(s) but this remains largely speculation. However, regarding Munda the general opinion is that it had no inherited aspiration opposition. Besides this, from a purely phonetic point of view one may also argue that enhancing the overall perceptibility – a typical feature of word languages – is also the motivation for the many cases of word-initial aspiration not justified by etymology.

11.3.3.1

Middle Iranian Khotan Saka and New Iranian Parachi, Bal¯ uč¯ı and Wakhi

Several of the above-listed distinctive features characterizing Outer Language do not contain themselves to borders of language families and there is evidence for prolonged preservation of (phonological distinctive) aspiration and of non-fricativization of stops in some Iranian languages. Lipp quotes (2009: 158): Khot. khara-, Par. khör and Bal. kar all ‘donkey’ (Av. 24 xara- and OIA khara-), Khot. tham . j- ‘pull’ (Av. -Tan.jaiieiti ‘to pull’), Par. khan- and Wkh. k¯ and- both ‘laugh’ (OIA *khandati ‘laughs’ [3815]), Bal. g¯ ut ‘excrement’ (Av. g uTaand OIA g¯ utha-). Another phenomenon concerns (partly spontaneous) aspiration in Par.: rhine ‘light’ < Iranian rauxšna,25 rh¯ az ‘to fly’ < Iranian fr¯ a-vaz, dhor. ‘seen’, nhomur. ‘forgetful’, thor. ‘he drank’, thor. ‘hole’, thana ‘thirsty’, rhagam ‘spring’, lhano ‘slippery’, dhar.i ‘beard’ (IA 23 See also p. 32 (in Bhayani) stray cases of prosthetic aspiration, similar to the many cases of prosthetic aspiration quoted in the present book. 24 The lemma of PIE origin does not seem to have an OIA parallel. De Decker (2015: 139) suggests the ‘incorrect’ PIE reconstruction *th engh - ‘pull’, but see Lipp (2009: 55f.) on the reality of such ‘incorrect’ word forms in PIE. 25 In this case the origin of the aspiration is the Iranian sibilant.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

300

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

loanword, cf. H. d¯ ar.h¯ı versus dialectal Paš. dh¯ ar.i and Pal. pan.ar"dh¯ or. ‘grey beard’ with first component < OIA pa
ndara- ‘white’ [8047]).

Lipp points also out ‘Indo-Aryan’ type of initial cluster preservation in these Iranian languages (2009: 159): Wkh. tru- ‘three’ (Av. Tr aii o and OIA tráyah.), Wkh. p@tr ‘son’ (Av. puTra- and OIA putrá-), etc. However, on the following page Lipp rightly points out that it is frequently not so clear whether these stops are indeed archaisms or results of later back conversions.

11.3.3.2

Deśya Prakrit

palah¯ı ∼ palasam ˙ ∼ phalah¯ı I guess Bhayani (1988: 44) means here pal¯ aśá- ‘leaf, foliage; Butea frondosa’ (7960) which cf. with Chin. ph¯ al¯ aś ‘specific tree with thick wide leaves’.

11.3.3.3

Dardic

Within Dardic, ‘spontaneous’ aspiration26 is especially frequent in Kalasha, Indus Kohistani and Pal¯ ula. Since it has been known for a long time that these languages are prone to this tendency and since meanwhile there exist good dictionaries for these languages, I will not try to present here a comprehensive overview of the situation in Dardic but rather concentrate on those Outer Languages which have yet not been known for displaying exactly the same tendency. Yet, also here the collections of examples are far from being complete. Additional examples are scattered throughout the whole book and in the word lists. But first here a small foretaste: E.g. Pal. gh¯ a"v ‘cow’ < OIA gava- ‘cow’ (4093) and ghr"o ¯m ‘community; village; town’ < OIA gra
ma- ‘troop; village’ (4368); Ind. t.hókh ‘clod’ < OIA *t.ukka- ‘piece’ (5466), phút.h ‘snowflake’ < OIA *put.t.a- ‘small’ (8256), bhal
2v  i.a. ‘to turn s.th. to and fro’ < OIA valayati ‘causes to curve, undulate’ (11405); Sh. thurúut.o n.m. ‘beak’ (Bailey th˘ ur˘ u"t.u ˘ ‘beak’) which Degener derives < OIA tun.d.a- n.n. ‘beak’ (58539) where Turner refers to OIA lex. trot.i- n.f. ‘beak’ which is, as I see it, the direct origin of the Sh. word – yet note that its connection with tun.d.a- is contested (see EWA); Kho. ph"ar ‘yonder’ < OIA p¯ ará-1 ‘bringing across’ (8100), khabul ‘city of Kabul’ and hav¯ az ‘echo’ (← Ur. a ¯v¯ az ‘sound; echo’); Kal. hárkin ‘elbow’ < OIA aratní- ‘elbow’ (cf. Kc. Ork@n ‘ditto’), hažáš ‘caraway seeds’ < OIA aj aj - ‘cuminum

‘horse’, h˜es(t) ‘plow tongue’ < OIA ŕsti- ‘spear, lance’, cyminum’, hãš ‘horse’ < OIA áśva. . ..  < OIA *udguruhúpal.a ‘scorpion’ < OIA utp¯ ataka- ‘a kind of animal’; Sv. huguró ‘heavy’ ‘very heavy’ (1962), hang ˙ "a.r ‘fire’ < OIA áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’ (125), phialó ‘yellow’ < OIA p¯ıtala-1 ‘yellow’ (8233); Kal. ghrom ‘village’ < OIA gra
ma- ‘village’ (4368) and marghás ‘jonquil’ ← Pers. nargis ‘narcissus’ is an example for the longevity of this process as can also be seen in Bur.ys. th2nu;r ‘oven’ ← Pers. tann¯ ur. Aspiration not justified by etymology is found scattered more or less abundandly in many other Outer Languages, e.g. in Hind. dhand ‘tooth’ < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ (6152); burkha ‘burka’ is a borrowing and common in Mult., Hind. etc.; Man.d.. mardh ‘man’ ← Pers.; Kiś. nasth ‘nose’ < OIA nasta- ‘nose’ (7031);27 26 For occasional word-internal ‘spontaneous’ aspiration in Pali see Oberlies (2019: 138). 27 Sometimes, as in case of burkha, the aspiration is a reaction to a foreign sound, in this case (and several other cases) to q. The Kiś. and Man.d.. examples shows that ‘spontaneous’ aspiration is not always just concentrated on the beginning of a word.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

301

Western Nepal shamanic language28 bh¯ arm¯ ath¯ı ‘doorstep’ with first component < OIA lex. v¯ araka- ‘door, gate-way’ (11550) with modern semantic parallels only in Pr. and Old Marw. and second component probably < OIA masta- ‘the upper part of anything’ (9926), etc. This process is even found in some dialects of Hindi, as I was told by Indian colleagues, and it is clearly an ancient feature of Outer Languages.

11.3.3.4

Western West Himalayish

Regarding the Western West Himalayish (West Himalyish) languages Sharma writes (1994: 47): “Speakers of most of the dialects of this group exhibit a strong tendency to pronounce the initial consonants, particularly voiced plosives, nasals and liquids or the semi vowel /y/ with copious aspiration.” The following examples are all borrowings:

khu rs  ‘chair’ (← Ar. k-r-s) (also Ku. khurs¯ı ‘chair’ which cf. with Jat.. xurs¯ı and H. kurs¯ı); Pat.t.. lh@s@n ‘garlic’ (cf. OIA láśuna-, H. lasun, lahsun and Pk. lhasun.a-), rhag@s ‘ghost’ (cf. H. r¯ akhas, or is this a case of h-metathesis?); Chin. ghit¯ aru ‘singer’ with OIA g¯ıtá- ‘singing’ (4167) (tatsama?) plus a -k ara suffix; Kana. jhub@ng

or zhub@ng

‘barley’ ← OIA y
ava‘barley’ (10431) (with characteristic OL feature a > u).

11.3.3.5

Pah¯ ar.¯ı

The following examples are from languages scattered over the whole area of West, Central and East Pah¯ ar.¯ı, sometimes also furnished with parallels from other areas: Sir.d.od.. bhõsr¯ı ‘flute’ (also Marw. bha sri) < OIA vamś¯ ˙ ı- ‘flute’ (11180), bhir ‘evil spirits or gods of cattle’ < OIA v¯ırá- ‘man, hero’ (12056); Rudh. bhaor ‘ripples or waves on water (caused by wind)’ < OIA v¯ atara- ‘windy, stormy’ (11497); WPah. lhuśn.u ‘to rob, plunder’ < OIA l¯ us.áyati1 ‘steals’ (11098); North Man.d.. andhar ‘within’ < OIA ántara-1 ‘the inside’ (357) (cf. with h-prothesis Sak. handara- ‘another’ < Av. antara-) and Man.d.. lhoth ‘corpse’ < OIA *lottha‘defective’ (11081) and lh¯ as ‘corpse’ ← Pers. l¯ aś; Him. jhaul. ‘fire’ < OIA jv¯ alá- ‘light torch’ (5312 ); North Man.d.. mhachl.¯ı ‘fish’ < OIA mátsya- ‘fish’ (9758); MKH (2: 45) d.h¯ akul¯ı and Kann. d.akhr¯ u both ‘small drum’ < OIA *d.akka-4 ‘drum’ (5525); Jaun. jhiś¯ a ‘early morning’, Kt.g. and Kc. jh

s ‘[early] morning’ < OIA d
r
s ka- ‘splendid’ (6514), note that N. jhisi-misi  ‘early morning twilight’ and P. jhusmusr.a ¯ ‘morning twilight’ are echo formations (cf. without aspiration Sod. jiśi, Kt.g. and Kc. also j

s, j 
s, Bng. j
sE all ‘(early) morning’); Kh¯ aśi., Dog., Bhad. thor.n¯ a ‘to knock at the door; to call’ (Kaul i: 192) < OIA t¯ ad.áyati1 ‘beats, strikes, punishes’ (5752); ; Jaun. bhirai ‘cat’ (Z.) < OIA bíd.a ¯la- ‘cat’ (9237), bh anno ‘to make’ (Z.)

or rather < tri(cf. H. ban¯ an¯ a ‘to make’), ghOrvo ‘heavy’ (Z.) < OIA gurú- ‘heavy’ (4209) syllabic Pk. garua- (cf. Ks. gUb ‘heavy’), bh Edoli ‘a braid’ (Z.) < OIA ven.i-1 ‘braided hair’

do¯l¯ (12093) plus second component probably < Pk. ˙ ‘shaking’ (see 6585), jha jnO ‘to . aamtaexamine’ (Z.) < OIA y¯ acyate ‘is asked’ (10449), ghu dO ‘knee’ (Z.) < OIA *god.d.a- ‘knee’ (4272); Bhad. gh or j atl ‘the Gaur. (Brahmin) festival’ < OIA gaud.a- ‘a region in Bengal’;

<

a ‘gathering’ ← Ar. jalsa, dham¯ ak Ki˜ ut.h. dh¯ıś¯ a ‘visible’ < OIA dŕśya- ‘visible’ (6515), jhals¯ ‘pain’ (Z.) if < OIA *d¯ uman  ‘distress’ (6493) (Pk.), etc.; Bhal. (Varma 1948: 18) ýh2ll = "ý2lnu ‘to burn’ < OIA jv
alati ‘burns brightly’ (5306); Chin. ph¯ al¯ aś ‘specific tree with thick wide leaves’ and H. phar¯ as ‘Butea frondosa’ < OIA pal¯ aśá- ‘Butea frondosa’ (7960); Khaś. 28 This language designation always refers to Maskarinec.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

302

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

ghl¯ as ‘glass’. In medieval inscriptions from Chamba there is dhurta i ‘to the very end’ which has parallels in Ind. dhu
r v.imp. ‘get lost!’, Pal. dh¯ oro, Sant. dhur dhur, ‘off with you’ and Pal. dhúura ‘far away; away; far from, away from’, Mult. dhur dhur ‘get away!’, Ko. dh¯ ura and Tor. dh¯ u (Z.) ‘far’, different dialects of Bi. dhur, dh¯ ur ‘far’, Sar¯ aki dialect of western B. dhur ‘far’, Ko.S. dh ur@ ‘far away’, Brj. dhur ‘away’, southwestern B. dh¯ ur ‘far’ and Munda Mu. dhurdhur¯ ao ‘to hate; to drive out contemptuously’ all of which are also < OIA d¯ urá‘distant’ (6495);29 Askot.¯ı dialect of Ku. jh¯ an ‘to go’ (cf. H. j¯ an¯ a); Sory¯ al¯ı dialect of Ku. dhekano ‘to see’ < OIA *deks.ati ‘sees’ (6507) (but here probably aspiration fronting); Ku. a khuv ‘sprout, seed bud’ < OIA ankurá˙ ‘sprout’ (109) (with typical Ku. lenition of -r- to -v-), khapp¯ ar ‘wound’ and with a similar form Dari. khurpi ‘kind of knife’, Khm. khur "pa ‘a curved knife or sickle’ and Magar khurpa ‘sickle’, Sant. khurpi i.a. ‘weeding-knife’ and Kor. khurpi ‘sickle’ < OIA kálpa- ‘capable’ (2941) plus a suffix (the Dari. word with a > u and regarding semantics cf. there S. kapu ‘knife’); Ku. parghat ‘last year’ (a tatsama) cf. OIA pary¯ agata- ‘passed (as a year)’, p¯ arbhati ‘Goddess P¯ arvat¯ı’, pinchan ‘pencil; pension’ (cf. similar Bur.ys. pEnsEn and Mu. pinsin both ‘pencil’). Whether in the Joh¯ ar¯ı dialect of Ku. lhi- ‘take’, which is < OIA lábhate ‘takes’ (10948), is a case of unjustified aspiration or of aspiration shift is unclear. Ku. phin¯ ar ‘calf (of legs)’ < OIA *pin.d.ara- ‘round like a lump’ (8171) (Pk.) with modern parallels only in Dm., Kho., Kal., Phal., bha c ‘hindrance; deceit’ < OIA váñcati ‘moves’ (11208), bh¯ın ‘handle’ < OIA *ven.t.a- ‘handle’ (12045), bhel ‘anus’ < OIA buli- ‘vulva, anus’ (9291); Kt.g. ekhulo ‘alone’ < OIA *ekkalla- ‘alone’ (2506); Bng. ph¯ az ‘footbridge’ perhaps not directly < OIA pády¯ a- ‘path, road’ (7778) (cf. there G. p¯ aj ‘bridge’ and to be added is Chin. paz, p¯ azu ‘bridge’) for which see p. 661. Such kind of aspiration is frequently found in Ku. and other Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages also in tatsamas and in borrowings as in Ku. t.elibhijan ‘television’ (cf. Munda Kh. t.ibhi ‘television’), in madhatg¯ ar ‘helping, assisting’ (← A. madad) there is simultaneously unjustified aspiration and devoicing and voicing; Rp. and Dari. jhel ‘jail’ (also Ku., and N. and New. jhy¯ alkh¯ an¯ a, note also Kurkh. j@h@l ‘jail’) and Kh. jehel ‘lock s.o. in jail’, bhot. ‘vote’ (also Garh. and Dari. but Thar. bhot); Garh. d.ibhijan ‘division’; N. bhikt.oriy¯ a ‘Victoria, late Queen-Empress of India’; Sant. d.hismis ‘dismiss’, bhim ‘beam’ etc.

11.3.3.6

Pah¯ ar.¯ı lemmata with more distant parallels

A number of Pah¯ ar.¯ı words with spontaneous aspiration have parallels in geographically more distant languages. Here follows a small compilation: 1. Jaun. th¯ al¯e ‘beneath’, Bhat.e. thall  e ‘down’, Pat.t.. th@le ‘below; behind; afterwards’, Mult. thall  e ‘below’, North Man.d.. th¯ all¯e ‘below’ and S. thel¯ı ‘the sole’ < OIA tala‘base’ (5731)30 (but cf. also Sainj. talha  ‘down’ which may suggest that the -h- is the leftover of a former postposition). 2. Ki˜ ut.h. jh˘ on. ‘person’ resembles strikingly Kal. ˇȷhon ‘person’, Garh. jhan.a ¯ ‘people, persons’, Ku. jhan., jhan.a ¯ ‘person(s)’, also Chatt. jhan ‘person’ (LSI i, i: 237, 239); Ora. jhan ‘person’; in Munda Kh. jhan, jan and in Sad. jhan is used as a classifier (only for humans) and there is the borrowed neo Sanskritism jhansankhya ‘population’ < OIA 29 But alternatively, the Chamba word can also derive < OIA dhúr- ‘yoke or yoke-pin’ (6826). 30 Regarding vocalism of S. thel¯ı cf. Rom.Eur. tel, tele ‘under’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

303

jána- ‘person’ (5098) (note also Ko. zon. ‘person’ regarding vowel).31 Note: Probably related is also Kal. (Birir Valley) “jhan"i” ‘winter celebration for little girls’ (Cacopardo 2016: xix, 76, 177, 180; but not found in Trail and Cooper) which apparently reflects OIA jáni- ‘woman, wife’ (5103). 3. Ku. bhaky¯ a, bh¯ ak ‘utterance, speech, word’, and M. a ¯n.bh¯ ak ‘a promise on oath’ and bh¯ ak ‘a solemn promise’ < OIA v¯ akya- ‘speech’ (11468) and first component in M. < OIA a ¯jñ¯ a- ‘command’ (1095). 4. Ku. bheś, bhes ‘dress’ (also P. bhekh, P., H. and Brj. bhes ‘dress’, A. bHex ‘disguise, dress’, see next paragraph) < OIA ves.a-2 ‘dress’ (12129).32 5. N. b¯ akhro ‘goat’ (Z.), Garh. bakharv¯ a.la ¯ ‘feeder of goats’, Kann. bakhör ‘female goat’, Western Nepal shamanic language b¯ akhr¯ a ‘goats’ (see Maskarinec 1998 index), Chant. bakhra ‘goat’ and Pal. (with aspiration fronting) bhakar-bh ana
l ‘goat-house’ (9442) <

OIA bárkara- ‘kid’ (9153).33 Note: The apparently paradoxical development of etymologically unjustified aspiration side by side with loss of aspiration (for which see below p. . . . ) is also reported from Garh. spoken in the Raw¯ ain-Jaunpur area (Sharma 1983: 113). These processes are occasionally also found in Pali and Prakrit, but obviously in much smaller number (see von Hinüber [§ 185]), and anyway, as pointed out above, etymologically unjustified aspiration is structurally related with glottalization and not with loss of aspiration which is a different story.

11.3.3.7

Panjabi, Jat.k¯ı and Mult¯ an¯ı

Again some of the lemmata have also geographically more distant parallels:

31 This process led also to the emergence of words with two aspirates. It seems that already in Pali Grassmann’s Law had stopped operating. According to Masica (1991: 172) “. . . the old late-*IE rule . . . prohibiting more than one aspirate in a stem was abrogated in the process” from Sanskrit to Pali. Certainly this process was massively intensified in the Middle Indo-Aryan period by the appearance of a large number of words with two aspirates. The CDIAL abounds in such forms marked with an asterisk. But also note that two aspirated phonemes in a morpheme were not tolerated everywhere in the Middle Indo Aryan language area. A kind of variant of Grassmann’s Law is found in some Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı lects, in Assamese and probably elsewhere: If a morpheme starts with an aspirated consonant, a second aspiration of a second aspirated consonant is deleted. Three examples (out of many): Indus Kohistani kh¯ okàh ‘hollow’ < OIA *khokkha- ‘hollow’ (3927); Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı khOk alnO ‘to wash clothes’ < OIA *khakkh¯alayati ‘rinses’ (3762); Assamese bHata ‘falling tide’ (this form according to Banikanta Kakati whose transcriptions frequently do not quite match with those of Turner) < OIA bhras.t.á- ‘fallen’ (9655) (cf. there e.g. Bi. bhat.t.h¯ a ‘fallen in [of a well]’). 32 The aspirated form is also found in many shamanic songs from Western Nepal, cf. Maskarinec 1998: N-300 and passim, and in Brj.-Aw. bhekh, bhes ‘appearance; likeness; (religious) dress; disguise’. The aspiration may not be spontaneous but rather due to contraction of a former compound as found in H. ves.-bh¯ us.¯ a ‘dress’. McGregor suggests for H. bhes derivation < ves.a-2 x bheda- which I find semantically unlikely. 33 The same trend also in Kann. animal word kukhrös ‘cock’ and kukhr¯ı ‘hen’ borrowed < OIA kukkut.á-1 ‘cock’ (3208).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

304

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

Jat.. bha s ‘bamboo’ < OIA vamśá˙ ‘bamboo’ (11175), hanjh ‘tear’ < OIA áśru- (919) (similar also P., L., Khet.), phos¯ı ‘fresh dung of cattle and buffaloes, excrement’ < OIA p¯ as.i- ‘dry cowdung’ (8139), bhon. ‘to sow’ < OIA vápati ‘sows’ (11282), u ¯bhek ‘retching, vomiting’ < OIA *ubbakka ‘vomited’ (2337), bh¯ au ¯ ‘father, sire’ < OIA *b¯ a ‘father’ (9198), bhat.h ‘mirage’ and ‘rarified air rising from a heated surface’ < OIA vivarta- ‘error, illusion, an apparent or illusory form’ and ‘turning round, rolling onwards, moving about’, bhet.u ¯ ‘whore-monger, pimp’ < OIA vit.a- ‘a voluptuary, sensualist, bon-vivant, boon-companion, rogue, knave’, bu gh ‘a roar, roaring of a lion’ < OIA búkkati ‘barks’ (9265), palaggh ‘a large bed-stead with coloured legs’ < OIA palyanka˙ ‘bed’ (7964), thith ‘appointed time’ is related with OIA sthíti- (13769), jhovan. ‘to yoke’ < OIA yugá- ‘yoke’ (10482), jh¯ıt ‘victory’ (cf. H. j¯ıt), k˜ıjh¯ ar ‘beard of wheat or barley’ < OIA kim


sa
ru- ‘beard of corn’ (3148 ), khitt¯ı ‘Pleiades’ < OIA k
rttik a- ‘ditto’ (3427), khad.h¯ a ‘steep hillside’ < OIA kád.a ¯ra- ‘having projecting teeth’ (2655)(regarding meaning see there e.g. N. kar¯ alo ‘steep, slanting’), ghob. ‘stab’ < OIA *gopp- ‘pierce’ (4296), m˜ ujhan. ‘to send’ < OIA muñcáti ‘releases, lets go, loses’ (10182), m˜ejh ‘fat’ < OIA medya- ‘fatty, thick’ (10326), vaghar ‘flock’ is early tatsama of OIA várga‘class, group’ (11331), h¯ arjh¯ıt ‘profit and loss’ (cf. H. h¯ ar-j¯ıt); Mult. (and L.) bighi¯ ar. ‘wolf’ and Khet. bhig¯ ar ‘wolf’ < OIA v
rka- ‘wolf’ (12062) (cf. Pk. viga- and Brj.-Aw. big, b¯ıgar  ‘[wolf]; jackal’) (quoted already above p. 304), Mult. phidd¯ı ‘robin’ < OIA *pidda- ‘a small bird’ (8195); P. and Jat.. adhrak ‘ginger’ < OIA a ¯rdraka- ‘fresh ginger’ (1341), bharin.d. ‘a red wasp’ which compare with OIA varen.a- ‘wasp’, phes ‘lepra; leper’ ← Pers. p¯ısa, rhan.d.a ¯ ‘widower’ < OIA *ran.d.a- ‘defective’ (10593) and probably mogh¯ a ‘small canal, channel’ (T. Graham Bailey 1938: 250, 248) which cf. with medicinal OIA m¯ arga- ‘a way, passage, channel (in any part of the body, esp. the intestinal canal, anus)’; Jat.. ajh¯ a ‘goat’ and ajha  ‘shegoat’ < OIA ajá- ‘goat’ (145) (Joseph [1910: 709]), kanth ‘husband’ < OIA k¯ anta-1 ‘husband’ (3029), gojh ‘pocket in a man’s coat’ < OIA guñja-2 m. ‘bundle’ (74) (G. gu j u ‘bag or pocket attached to a coat’), bharan ‘rain’ is either connected with OIA va
ri- ‘water, rain’ (11556) (cf. H. bar¯ an¯ a ‘to irrigate’) or is borrowing ← Pers. and reflected e.g. in H. b¯ ar¯ an¯ı ‘land depending on rain’ (for further parallels of reflexes of OIA va
ri- with aspiration see p. 191), sedh ‘disease, illness’ probably < OIA sakti- ‘connexion’ (13069, see there M. sa t  ‘epidemic disease’), also in borrowings: mirdh¯ a ‘land measurer’ ← Pers. m¯ırdeh (or rather metathesis?).

11.3.3.8

Two noticeable lemmata from Panjabi

 1. P. bh¯ın.d. ‘the penis of a dog’ and Sa s. b¯ an.d.a ¯ ‘penis’ (b¯ an.d.¯ı ‘vagina’) < OIA (LingP.) ˙ pin.d.ika- ‘the penis’ — cf. Kal. pindo
r ‘penis’ < OIA pin.d.ara- ‘round like a lump’ (8171). Bodo-Gadaba bããu, bããuP ‘penis’ and Gta" banâu ‘penis’, however, suggest Munda or ‘North Indian origin. 2. P. dhorm¯ a ‘a rupee, sometimes also a pice’ < OIA dramma- ‘a coin’ (6622) (actually ← Greek 𝛿𝜌𝛼 𝜒𝜇𝜂´ with h-fronting?) (besides damm ‘money, price’ which must be a borrowing from an Inner Language) — Ind. dh2mr  ‘a type of small old coin (half

in G¯ paisa)’, initial aspiration of this word is already found andh¯ ar¯ı. Note: Here remarkable is also Bur.ys. phalál ‘peppermint’ < OIA p
ppala- ‘peppercorn’ (8205) (regarding semantics cf. S.kcch. p¯ıpar ‘peppermint’).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

11.3.3.9

305

Sindh¯ı

v@kh@t ‘time’ (also P. bakht and Rj.jaip. bhagat) ← Ar. vaqt, ghet.i ‘ewe’ and ghet.o ‘lamb’ < OIA *gad.d.a-4 ‘sheep’ (3983), jhangl¯ ˙ ı ‘barbarous’ (cf. H. jangal¯ ˙ ı), pirbhu ‘festival’ (cf. OIA parva- ‘joint’ and H. parv ‘festival’), phudino ‘mint (the plant)’ ← Pers. pud¯ına, bh¯ at¯ı ‘messmate’ cf. OIA v¯ arttika- ‘a businessman, trader’.

11.3.3.10

Gujar¯ at¯ı

G.pars. kh@mis ‘shirt’ ← Ar. qam¯ıs.,34 , jh@nano ‘harem’ ← Pers. zan¯ ana, nhas- ‘to flee away’ and G. n¯ ah¯ asvuñ ‘to flee, escape’ < OIA náśyati (7027) (cf. Gadd. nhaxn.a ¯ ‘to run [away]’ [p. 311] and Ki˜ ut.h. nhot.n.u ‘to run’ < OIA nas.t.á- ‘run away’), G. mhais¯ ur ‘the city of Mysore’. Note especially: G.pars. th¯ ul ‘a tower, walled village’ (also t.hul, t.ulh), P. th¯ ul ‘a tower, a walled village’, Jat.. t.hul, S. t.hul𝑢 , Mult. “t.hulh”, Bal. thul and Brah. t.ul all ‘tower’ (here also Pr. ü"u ¯, üu, üy¯ u ‘tower’ ?) < OIA (BhP.) tolik¯ a- ‘a wall round a watch-tower’ (see EWA).

11.3.3.11

Dialects of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı

Rj. dhir¯ an.¯ı ‘mistress, wife’ < OIA *devaraj¯ an¯ı- ‘husband’s younger brother’s wife’ (6534) (regarding meaning cf. under this lemma Gaw. d era
n ‘co-wife’), bh¯ aky¯ a ‘word’ (a [semi]tatsama?) cf. OIA v¯ akya- ‘speech, words’ (11468) (same as Ku. bhaky¯ a, bh¯ ak ‘word’ p. 303), bh¯ at.o and Rj.mal. bh¯ at.a both ‘stone’ (Rj.mev. ‘whetstone’), Marw. bhatO, Rj.mal.

bh ata both ‘stone’ < OIA *varta-3 ‘stone’ (11348) (or rather < OIA *vartaka- where Turner

quotes Fredrik Barth’s rendering Ind. “bh¯ at” which not be confirmed by this author), bh t hvaibo ‘to be blind’ < OIA vinetra- ‘eyeless, blind’ without known modern parallels, lh¯ alasy¯ a kh¯ abo ‘to flatter, to entreat earnestly’ < OIA lásati1 ‘flashes, shines’ (10993) with reduplication and aspiration in this case probably due to debuccalization, lhuko ‘food which has not been steeped in ghee; unfriendly’ < OIA *lukka-1 ‘defective’ (11072), lhor.o ‘small, young’ < OIA *lud.a- ‘defective’ (11076); Marw. bh¯ al n.f. ‘wind’ < OIA v¯ atala- (11497) or rather < *v¯ atal¯ı- because of gender(?), mh˜ u ‘I’ < OIA ma- ‘base of singular oblique cases of 1st person pronoun’ (9691).

11.3.3.12

R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı lemmata with more distant parallels

1. Rj. bh¯ abh¯ u ‘mother, a title of honour given to a lady’ and Marw. (and G.) bh¯ a and dialectal bh¯ abh¯ a ‘father’ (see above Jat.. bh¯ au ¯ ‘father, sire’) < OIA *b¯ a¯ı- ‘mother’ (9198) with reduplication (but also S.kcch. bh¯ abh¯ı ‘mother’, reduplication in P. b¯ebbe ‘mother’, Gaw. b ob" a ‘paternal uncle’ and Shum. b¯ ab¯ a ‘father’). 2. Rj. har ‘and’35 (this is actually a case of h-prothesis) < OIA ápara- ‘posterior’ (434) with similar aspiration in Kho., Sir.dod., L., P., Pang., Cur., Bhal. and Ku. 3. Marw. th˜ u ‘you’ not directly < OIA tuvám ‘thou’ (5889) but < Pk. tuham ˙ (see Turner) (this has a parallel in the northwest, namely in Tor. tho ‘ye’, in Klm. thä pl. ‘you’, in Sak. thu ‘thou’ (check Chotano-Sogdica Author(s): Nicholas Sims-Williams) and 34 With typical change of q > kh. 35 Note also GN horu ‘other’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

306

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

perhaps in Sh. thăi ‘thy’), and in Or. tumbh¯e ‘you’ (ODBL § 281) (note that there is also a ¯mbh¯e ‘we’).

11.3.3.13

Mar¯ at.h¯ı, Konkan ˙ . ¯ı and Bh¯ıl¯ı

Mar¯ a.th¯ı M. a ¯jh¯ ad ‘free’ ← Pers. a ¯z¯ ad, kh˜ekad. (also G. khekrO) ‘crab, crayfish’ < OIA karkat.a-1 ‘crab’

a ‘whitish’ < OIA pa
ndara- ‘pale, white’ (2816), pa dhar ‘white soil’, pa dhr a ‘white’, pa dhurk





. nhyas ‘to wear’ (8047), sam ˙ ‘doubt’ (12905); M.kud . dhev¯ım . ‘in doubt’ < OIA samdehá. < OIA niv¯ asin- ‘dressed in, wearing’, phistul ‘pistol’; M.w¯ ar. uphli ‘lotus’ < OIA utpala-1 ‘blossom of the blue lotus’ (1815), khudza ‘dwarf’ < OIA kubjá- ‘humpbacked’ (3300), khuna ‘corner’ < OIA kon.a- ‘corner’ (3504), c˙ amkhil ‘wart’ (but Ko.kan.. c˙ amkil.) < OIA (Suśr.) carmak¯ıla- ‘a wart’, phul ‘bridge’ ← Pers. pul, s@mdhir ‘sea’ < OIA (or tatsama?) samudrá‘sea’ (13236), sakh@r ‘sugar’ < OIA śarkar¯ a-2 ‘candied sugar’ (12338); M.coch. lh¯ ovu ‘light’ < OIA *loka-2 ‘light’ (11120), vh lO ‘sickle’ < OIA il¯ı- ‘a kind of weapon’ (1592), vhOr etu

‘bridegroom’ < OIA vará-2 ‘bridegroom’ (11309). Note especially: (a) M.kud.. hundir ‘mouse’ (also Ko.kun.. hundir) < OIA undura- ‘mouse’ (2095) but note also Garh. cakcundaru ‘type of mouse’ and Kh¯ aśi. centlo ‘a variety of mouse with a long face’ (Kaul 2006 i: 187) with first component connected with OIA cikka-1 ‘muskrat’ (4779) and lex. cikk¯ a- ‘mouse’ and lukhandaru ‘mouse’ (with unclear first element), Brj.-Aw. chuchundari ‘musk rat’ and (also with unclear initial element) Gar. (Gahri) bandru ‘tailless mouse’. Cf. also Gondi cikk¯ al ‘muskrat’. (b) A semantic element *cikka- only ‘musk’ (but not ‘rat’) exists also more or less cleary in the following words: Bur. ćíki-mujúr ‘Moschustrauerweide; musk weeping willow’; Sh.gil.
c
ki mu
ch
uur, Sh.pal. cuki
-biya v ‘ditto’; Ind. chkhi ‘musk’ and probably cognate Ind. č(h)ikbiyᘠv ‘a type of weeping willow (its seeds are boiled and taken for “cleaning the blood”)’; Bur. ćíki ‘musk’ and Sh.
chi
ki ‘ditto’. Relationship with Yid. ciliky o and Kho. cil ki ‘weeping

willow’ is unclear. Konkan ˙ . ¯ı Ko. dhol ‘cave’ cf. OIA *dal¯ı- ‘crack; cave’ (6221) and *dalyate ‘is split’ (6222), mhel. ‘to be dirty’ < OIA *malin- ‘dirty’ (9904); Ko.kun.. ghEs ‘gas lamp’, d.hos ‘a dose’, mharg ‘road’ cf. OIA m¯ arga-; Ko.S. phinsO ‘mucus’ < OIA p¯ınasa- ‘cold in the nose’ (8237).

Bh¯ıl¯ı Bhil. kh¯ex ‘hair’ < OIA kéśa- ‘hair of the head’ (3471); Bhil.MBh. ajh¯ ar ‘1000’ ← Pers. h¯ az¯ ar, garjh¯ı ‘Guru ji’, gajhot.o ovo ‘to thunder’ < OIA gárjati ‘thunders’ (4046), jhagan ‘sacrifice’ tatsama of OIA yajñá- ‘sacrifice’, jharg¯ı ‘mother’ probably tatsama of OIA a ¯ryik¯ a‘respectable woman’ (1351), jhangal ˙ . ‘forest’ < OIA j¯ angala˙ ‘arid, sparingly grown with trees’ (5177), jha n ‘bridal procession’ < OIA janyay¯atr¯a- ‘bridal procession’ (5118) with aspiration parallel in Ind. zha 
l ‘a marriage’, jh¯ ug ‘aeon’ tatsama of OIA yugá- ‘an age of the world’, t¯ ajhn.õ ‘whip’ < OIA tarjana- ‘threatening’ (5720), tha p ‘pillar’ < OIA stambha‘pillar’ (13682) (with word-final devoicing, but here probably aspiration fronting), dal.jhojhan ‘Duryodhana’, dhammr¯ ajh¯ a ‘Dharmaraja’, satrAjhA “King’ Śantanu’, kheuro ‘dust’ < OIA *kerita- ‘scattered’ (3468) with a modern reflex in P. (the aspirated form exists probably also in M. pikharn.˜e ‘to scatter’). Since it is likely that the Bh¯ıl people formerly spoke a Munda

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

307

language, I add here Mundari hasur ‘name of a Munda community, the Asurs’ (see Standing 1976: 145ff.).

11.3.3.14

Bengali

The Chittagong dialect has lost all aspiration (Učida 1970), therefore I wonder which dialect Chatterji has in mind when he states (ODBL § 303): “South-Eastern Bengali of Chittagong has a large number of words with the intrusive initial .” But in Standard Bengali (as in Or.iya) this is only rarely observed. Chatterji quotes (§ 252): Middle B. khOstOr  ‘musk’ tatsama of OIA kast¯ ur¯ı- ‘musk’, khOrOlO < *kOrOlO < OIA garala- ‘poison’, (§ 264) B. jhut.h¯ a ‘orts, leavings of meal’ (also Deś¯ı jhut.t.ha-, P. jh¯ ut.a ¯ ‘enjoyment of self to the full; taste’, Pal. ˇȷhut.á ‘dirty; defiled’, Ind. zhuita ‘dirty, defiled’) < OIA jus.t.á- *‘tasted’, ‘remnants of a meal’

(also Rab.) < OIA lex. tanga2 ‘leg’ (5428), (§ 237) early (5255), (§ 236) t.h¯en˙ ‘shin, leg’ . ˙ Middle Bengali khOndhO36 ‘grain, corn’ according to Chatterji ← Pers. xand, note also there Middle Bengali h am(bh) rO ← Ar. am¯ır ‘wealthy’. I can add here Rohingya language dhośá ‘plight’ < OIA dos.a- ‘fault’ (6587).

11.3.3.15

Assamese

Standard Assamese gHeHu ‘wheat’ < OIA godhu
ma- ‘wheat’ (4287), then˙ (t.hen) ˙ ‘leg’ (also Rab. t.heng ˙ ‘leg’ and 3 ‘leg’ (5428), ph see previous paragraph) < OIA lex. t.anga˙ Esa (ph˜ec¯ a) ‘owl’ < OIA pécaka‘owl’, phEskuri (ph˜eckuri) ‘mucus of the eye’ < OIA *piccik¯ a- ‘mucus in the eyes’ (8150), kh6l6p ‘cycle’ is semi-tatsama of OIA kálpa- ‘an age’. K¯ amr¯ up¯ı (Km) and St. Coll (Sc) dialects (partly semi-tatsamas)37 Km and Sc solokh ‘Śloka’, Km xalkha and Sc x6lakha ‘bolt’ see OIA śákala- ‘log’, Km x˜ 6phra and Sc x˜ 6phura ‘casket’ < OIA samput ˙ . a- ‘hemispherical bowl’ (12941), Km HaldHi ‘turmeric’ < OIA haridr¯ a-1 ‘turmeric’ (13992). Note especially: Km and Sc bH6r6th “Bh¯ arata”; whether Kakati (1972: 168) means the epic or the country is unclear, but compare Bng. poet. bhartha ‘epic’ and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı devabharatha ‘biographical account of a snake deity uttered by a diviner’ (see Handa 2001: 54, 58 and Zoller 2014: 184). Cf. Pischel § 207 who mentions OIA suffix -tha instead of -ta in M., AMg., JM. Bh¯ araha. Proto-Kamti *bH aśa ‘nest’ < OIA v¯ asá-2 ‘abode’ (11591).

11.3.3.16

Some more examples from different languages

Here a few examples for word-initial ‘spontaneous’ prosthesis of h-. Dardic: Kho. hav¯ az ‘echo’ ← Ur. a ¯v¯ az ‘echo’; Kal. hárkin ‘elbow’ < OIA aratní‘elbow’,38 hãš ‘horse’ borrowed < OIA áśva- ‘horse’. 36 Chatterji’s transliteration is unclear. 37 Kakati 1972: 177. 38 Cf. phonetically similar but without initial aspiration West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Kc. Ork@n ‘ditto’. The Dardic form with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration has a parallel in Iranian Bal. haris ‘ell’ < Old Pers. arašni" (New Pers. araš).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

308

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

Other languages: Jat.. hanjh ‘tear’ < OIA áśru-, M.kud.. hundir ‘mouse’ (also Ko.kun.. hundir) < OIA undura- ‘mouse’; Middle Bengali h am(bh) rO ← Ar. am¯ır ‘wealthy’ (Chatterji [ODBL § 237]). The same tendency is also found in a few Iranian Parachi words: Parachi "h¯ aˇȷes ‘exhausted’ ← Ar. (Pers.) ‘¯ ajiz, h¯ a ‘yes’ ← OIA a ¯m ‘yes’ with emphatic h- or Hindi (?), hu"p¯er.- ‘to dig out’ ← OIA *utpat.ati ‘bursts open’ (1809). Some examples for ‘spontaneous’ word-medial and -final aspiration:

Aspirated burkha ‘burka’ is a borrowing and common in Mult., Hind. etc.; Man.d.. mardh ‘man’ ← Pers. mard; North Man.d.. andhar ‘within’ < OIA ántara‘the inside’ (cf. with h-prosthesis Khot. handara- ‘another’ < Av. antara-); Ku. p¯ arbhati ‘Goddess P¯ arvat¯ı’ and pinchan ‘pencil; pension’; Jat.. m˜ ujhan. ‘to send’ < OIA muñcáti ‘releases’; S. pirbhu ‘festival’ (cf. OIA parva- ‘joint’ and H. parv ‘festival’); M. pa dhr a ‘white’ < OIA p´¯ an.d.ara-; Bhil. gajhot.o ovo ‘to thunder’

< OIA gárjati ‘thunders’, etc. Especially remarkable is the following examples for ‘spontaneous’ word-medial aspiration: Chatterji quotes (ODBL § 237) from the Ashokan Hathigumpha inscription (near Bhubaneshwar) bharadha ‘prob. northern India’39 reflecting OIA bha
rata- ‘India’. The double aspirated MIA form bharadha has modern parallels in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, however there meaning ‘any epic’ and ‘the story of the sons of Bharata’: poetic Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı bàrtha ‘an oral epic’, Kul.ui b¯ arth¯ a ‘recitation of the history of a godling or devt¯ a’ (Diack [1896: 47]) and other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı lects deva-bharatha ‘biographical account of a snake deity uttered by a diviner’ (see Zoller [2014: 184] and Handa [2001: 54, 58]). The double aspirated allomorph is also found in the K¯ amr¯ up¯ı and St. Coll lects of Assamese as bha rath ‘Bh¯ arata’ (Kakati [1972: 168]).40 There are many cases for preservation of word-medial single stops in Outer Languages as distinct from their fate in the post-Sanskrit koinés. This also applies to the example presented here, because Pischel quotes (§ 207) from the koinés Mah¯ ar¯ as.t.r¯ı, Ardha M¯ agadh¯ı and Jaina-Mah¯ ar¯ as.t.r¯ı bharaha- ‘Bharata’.41 Clearly, both the reflexes in the koinés and in the vernaculars stem from a form *bh¯ aratha- that violates Sanskrit syllable rules, that is not mentioned in the CDIAL but that is found in the Un.a ¯di-s¯ utra and in the Scholiast with meaning ‘a world-protector’, in Wilson with meaning ‘a king’ and lexicographic with meaning ‘fire’. Finding an aspirated form of OIA jána- from northern Pakistan (Kalasha) to eastern India (Sadani) (see p. 302), finding a double aspirated form of OIA bha
rata- in Assamese, in Ashokan Prakrit of Orissa and in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı lects, and finding fortition tendencies in several Middle Indo-Aryan lects between G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı in the west and Ashokan Prakrit in the east, but missing the tendency in Vedic and Classical Sanskrit and in Hindi etc. is again a clear indication for ancient non-trivial lectal differences going back to Proto-Indo-Aryan. 39 See also Ajay Mitra Shastri (1969: 41, fn. 4) regarding the correctness of this meaning. 40 It is unclear whether Kakati means the country or the epic. 41 That here the word does not refer to the illustrious male name or the tribe but to the Great Epic is supported by Apabhramśa ˙ bh¯ araha- ‘Mah¯ abh¯ arata, war between P¯ an.d.avas and Kauravas’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

11.3.4

309

Aspiration fronting

According to Yoon, Hume (2001) or Hayes et. al. (2008) and many other linguists, an important motivation for metathesis to take place is to enhance the overall perceptibility of the sound sequence in question (e.g. by moving a segment into stress position). Metathesis is, in fact, a conservative process. There is therefore good phonetic plausibility for the shift of h into word-initial position. But this h-fronting can also be seen as an epiphenomenon of spontaneous aspiration. The h-fronting, when involving stop consonants, is also an indicator that in the concerned IA languages (at least voiced) aspirated stops are or were bi-phonematic. The process is quite widespread among Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages but also among other Outer Languages and East Iranian Khotan Saka. Again I will not try to give a comprehensive overview of the phenomenon in the Dardic languages as they are easily identified in the extant dictionaries. Here I want to just present a few examples.

11.3.4.1

Khotan Saka

Examples are also found in Middle Iranian Khotan Saka: hau ‘oats, or similar grain’ is  Mallory and Adams (2006: compared by Bailey with Av. av¯ o - ‘fooder’ and is also quoted by 166) as hau ‘some form of cereal’ who derive it < PIE *h𝑎 ewis ‘oats’,42 handara1 ‘another’ < Av. antara- and handara2 ‘within, interior’ < OAv. an.tar@ - ‘within, between’, hana- ‘blind’ < Av. anda-, h¯ ama ‘raw, unbaked, uncooked’, OIr. om < PIE *h2 omós ‘raw, uncooked’ (OIA a ¯má-) also with initial aspirate Arm. hum, perhaps also hamau- ‘bowl, goblet, vessel’ which may be compared with OIA ámatra- ‘drinking vessel, bowl’ and further with Arm. aman ‘vessel’ and Greek ám¯e ‘water bucket, pail’, and which are derived by Mallory and Adams < PIE h2 em- ‘hold, contain’ (but rejected by Beekes), for Khot. ham . gari ‘part of the body’ Bailey reconstructs Av. *angara- which would be cognate with OIA ánga˙ ‘limb’ which itself might be cognate with OIA angúri˙ ‘finger, toe’ (EWA), hala, h¯ alaa ‘half’ < Av. ar@Da‘side; half’, hälśti- ‘spears’ < Av. aršti- ‘spear’, h¯ u-duva ‘both’ (with first syllable < older *huv¯ a-) and Par. hu- in huddi ‘both’ < Av. uba-, uva- (OIA ubhá- ‘both’), hus.s.a- ‘to grow’ cf. Av. uxšiieit¯ı ‘grows’, ham . gus.t.a- ‘finger, finger-mark, signature’ < Av. angušta- ‘finger, toe’, hays- ‘to drive, conduct, transact, make’ < Av. az- ‘to drive, conduct’ (with devoicing), häysä ‘skin, hide’ and Bal. h¯ı(n)z ‘goatskin bag for ghee or butter’ < Av. *izyaka- (Elfenbein et al. [2003: 105] sub Psht. žay ‘leather bag’) (cf. Av. iza¯ena- ‘made of skin’), has.t.a ‘eight’, ašt, Wkh. hat and NPers. hašt, haskä ‘tusk of Av. ašta- but also with initial aspirate Orm. h elephant’ Bailey: “from as- ‘be sharp’ as in Av. tiži:as¯ ura- ‘sharp-tusked” ’ (OIA áśri- ‘edge, corner’), h¯ıśśana ‘iron’, dialectal Av. haosafna¯ena- ‘made of iron’ < PIE *h2 eyes- ‘a metal’. Borrowings from a Prakrit language: h¯ısa ‘envy, jealousy’ which cf. with reflexes of MIA * ıriss¯ a- (itself a reflex of OIA rsya
- ‘envy’ [1615]) like L. and P. hirs ‘greed’ (Konow

[1932: 144]); hur¯ a ‘the circle of hair between the Buddha’s brows’ ← OIA u
rna - ‘wool’ (ibid.).

11.3.4.2

Niya Prakrit

he"d.i ‘sheep’ < OIA ed.a- ‘a kind of sheep’ (2512) (according to Turner, a borrowing from Dravidian) has an exact parallel in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Chin. hud. ‘ewe’. 42 This derivation is regarded by some as doubtful and the lemma is rather regarded as a substrate word.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

310

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

11.3.4.3

Deśya Prakrit

aih¯ ar¯ a- < OIA acir¯ abh¯ a- ‘lightning’.

11.3.4.4

Dardic

Among the Dard languages h-fronting to word-initial position is especially prevalent in Indus Kohistani and Pal¯ ula, but note also the case of Pal. aaghaá ‘sky’ < OIA a ¯k¯ aśá- ‘sky’ (1008) with fronting of h, after debuccalisation from the third to the beginning of the second syllable which cf. with Sa. a ¯g¯ aśa- ‘sky’.43 Other examples are Khowar thurt (also th"uht) ‘ford’ (< OIA *t¯ urtha- [Morgenstierne 1973: 271] and not < OIA t¯ırtha- because of influence of dialectal Iranian purd ‘bridge’; but see also OIA *praturati ‘succeeds’ [8628]), kh"anj ‘wall’ (< OIA *kanthya- ‘pertaining to a wall’ [2722]) and Pal¯ ula lh¯ aya ‘will find’ (Liljegren 2008: 60) < OIA lábhate ‘catches, takes’ (10948) and lhad¯ u ‘to load’ < OIA labdha- ‘taken, seized’ (10946);44 Kal. bhut ‘traditional trousers’ < OIA vrtha- ‘covered’ (12071). Two more ex of black necklace’ < OIA kanthakaamples from the Dardic Bhat.¯ıse variety: khAnd  ‘a type ..

‘son’s wife’ < vadh¯ ‘necklace’ (2681) and, especially weird, bhu" a ¯it ut.¯ı- ‘son’s wife’ (11251) . with a ‘double epenthesis’; Kal. halík ‘to bring something (animate)’ < OIA a
labhate ‘takes hold of, obtains’, Sv. kha
nto ‘canal’ and Gaw. kha
nta ‘irrigation channel’ < OIA kan.t.há

a phonetically similar form in Dog. ‘narrowest part of a hole’ (2680b), Sv. ph¯ ant ‘way’ (with . ph 2dvar ‘exhaustion due to over traveling’ [Gauri Shankar 1931: 155]) < OIA pánth¯ a- ‘path,

road’ (7785). Note: Some OIA lemmata appear to be especially prone to this process. For instance OIA u ¯s.mán- ‘heat, steam’ (2441) has i.a. the following reflexes: L. huss, hussar. ‘sultriness’, Bhal. hussar. ‘heat’, EP. (Eastern Panjabi?) hummh ‘sultriness’. G. u ph ‘warmth’, h˜ uph ‘genial warmth’ has in addition a ‘consonant anaptyxis’ that resembles Or. tumbh¯e ‘you’ and a ¯mbh¯e ‘we’ (ODBL § 281) < Pk. tuham. ˙

11.3.4.5

West and Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Western West Himalayish

There are copious examples: In medieval Chamba inscriptions one finds dheotro ‘grandson’ < OIA daúhitra- ‘daughter’s son’ (6605) and dhi ‘abbreviation for diś¯ a-’ (< OIA díś- ‘direction’); Bng. c hOknO ‘to consume (s.th. tasty), enjoy (e.g., recital of a good story)’ and Deog.

chOknO ‘to eat one’s fill’ < OIA *caksati ‘tastes’ (4557) via Pk. cakhaï; Bng. phanO ‘heel’

pa
rsni- ‘heel’ (8124) via Pk. panhi,45 phOmOsnO ‘to remove, clean, rub in’ < OIA < OIA .



pha c ‘small blanket with two bags pr
amr
sati ‘touches, handles’ (8729) (cf. Pk. pamhusaï),  on back of sheep for transporting loads’ < OIA pracchada- ‘cover, wrapper’ (8496); Jaun. ghOtiavnO ‘to knot’ (Z.) < OIA grantháyati ‘ties’ (4353), dh¯ udi ‘nipple of female breast’

(Z.) < OIA dugdhin- ‘milky’ (6399); Ki˜ ut.h. dh 
sa
‘visible’ (?) < OIA d
r
sya- ‘visible’ (6515)  (with fronting of debuccalized sibilant, and with possibly just one modern parallel in Si.); 43 For Turner the “general retention of -k- as g in Dardic is obscure” but Pischel observes (§202) that in Amg., JM. and JŚ. word-medial -k- very frequently is not deleted but changes into -g- which he illustrates with OIA ¯ ak¯ aśá- > ¯ ag¯ asa. 44 But this form, mentioned by Turner, is better explained as deriving < OIA lardayati ‘loads’ (10966) and spontaneous aspiration. 45 On the unusual dental n in this word see p. 363.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

311

Jaun. jhu ga ‘moustache’ (but also j¯ ung) ˙ (Z.) < OIA *jungha˙ ‘beard, moustache’ (5254); P¯ ad.. ph¯ at. ‘hill’ with semantic parallel in MKH (1: 306) pit.t.h¯ı ‘(hill) forest’ < OIA prsth
a

‘back’ (8371) (regarding semantics cf. there Dm. pis.t. ‘hillside’);46 Jaun. ghu ‘excrement’ (Z.) < OIA g¯ utha- ‘excrement’ (4225), lhoi ‘blood’ (Z.) < OIA lohi- ‘*red, blood’ (11164) (with parallels in Kho. and Kal.), bh¯ ag ‘tiger’ (Z.) < OIA vy¯ aghrá- ‘tiger (12193), gha dh ‘smell, bouquet’ (Z.) < OIA gandhá- ‘smell’ (4014),47 h@rda, h@r Od ‘half-moon’ (Z.) (has a parallel in Munda Kharia haPd.o, haPdo, haPd.o ‘half’) < OIA ardh
a-2 ‘half’ (644), ghur¯ an. ‘malodour of a lavatory’ (Z.) < OIA *g¯ utha-ghr¯ an.a- ‘fetor of excrement’, dhOinE bila ‘right side’ (Z.) < OIA *d¯ aks.in.a- ‘relating to the right’ (6251), bh¯ anna ‘to bind, tether’ and bh adnO ‘to yoke, tether’ (Z.) both < OIA bandhati ‘binds’ (9139),48 bha vnO ‘to plough’ (Z.) < OIA v¯ ahayati1 ‘drives (a chariot)’ (11612); Kann. kham
ar (khA-m
Ar) ‘potter’ borrowed < OIA 49 kumbhak ara- ‘potter’ (3310); Bng. and Deog. thatnO ‘to decide, plan; pass judgement

R¯ upon’ < OIA tasta
- ‘fashioned’ (5743) via Pk. tat . t.ha-; amb. phakhru ‘birds’ (aspiration

paksín- ‘winged; bird’ (7636) (see below in this paragraph also Bhal. ph2ng spreading) < OIA

. ‘wing of a bird’); Kt.g. kh@nEiO ‘Krs.n.a’ (cf. H. kanhaiy¯ a), kh@rar ‘axe’ < OIA kut.h¯ ara- ‘axe’

(3244), zhann

o ‘to kill’, Roh., Kt.g., Kc. zhangn ˙ . õ ‘to kill’, Him. jh¯ angn ˙ . u ‘to kill’, MKH (2:

47) jh¯ angn ˙ . e ‘(in order) to kill’ < OIA jánghanti ˙ ‘kills’ (5081) (cf. also Bng. za ngn

O ‘to kill,

strike’ where loss of aspiration of *jh- generated the tone apparenly after depalatalization [loss of medial or final aspiration does not seem to lead to tonogenesis in Bng.] and without h-fronting but word-final devoicing here perhaps also M. jim . kn.em . ‘to vanquish’); Pat.t.. lhepči g ‘committee’ ‘to get, accept, catch’ borrowed < OIA labhyáte ‘is taken’ (10950); Jaun. bh Eta

a- ‘moonlight’ < OIA upavis.t.a- ‘seated’ (2245) (via Pk. bit.t.ha-), jh¯ un ‘moon’ < OIA jyótsn¯ (5301) with fronted aspiration deriving from the debuccalized sibilant (cf. Pa. jun.h¯ a-), phu c ‘tail’ < OIA púccha- ‘tail’ (8249); Ki˜ ut.h. mh¯ at.h¯ o and Satlaj Group mh atrO ‘small’ < OIA

*mat.t.ha-1 ‘defective’ (9723);50 Ki˜ ut.h. nhot.n.u ‘to run’ < OIA nas.t.á- ‘run away’ (7027) (via Pk. n.at.t.ha-); Bng. phOr ez , Deog. phOrdzO, Kt.g. p
Oh@, ph
Or@, Kc. ph@r e, Ki˜ ut.h. phr¯ez¯ o, Satlaj Group and Kul. phoroz all ‘day before yesterday’ < OIA *parahyas ‘the day before yesterday’ (7799l) (but a different development is shown in Chin. pras ‘ditto’); Kc. dh¯er.o ¯, Insir. dhy¯ ar.o ¯, Gadd. dhi¯ ar.a ¯ and several other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties all ‘day’ < OIA divasá‘day’ (6333) with fronted -h- as in Brj.-Aw. dhaus ‘day’ (or ← dyaus with dy- > dh-?) but with debuccalization; Han.d.. h¯ akh, Man.d.. h akkh( ), h acchi, Cam. h¯ akh, Gadd. h¯ akhar all ‘eye’ and Ku. h¯ ak ‘evil eye’ < OIA áks.i- ‘eye’ (43) via Pk. akkhi-, acchi-; Satlaj Group h ac O ‘good’ (and GN hacch¯ a ‘clean, pure’, also P. hacch¯ a with same meaning as H. acch¯ a) < OIA accha-1 ‘clear’ (142), h ubh  ‘up’ < OIA u ¯rdhvá- ‘being above’ (2426) via Pk. ubbha-, h und  ‘down’ < OIA avam¯ urdha- ‘head-down’ (804 via Pk. o ¯muddhaga-); Satlaj Group, Kul., Insir., Sain. all phu¯ al ‘shepherd’ < OIA paśup¯ ala- ‘herdsman’ (7987) (cf. Pat.t.. po-hal ‘herder’); Bhat.e. nhasn.a ¯, Man.d.. nh¯ aś-, Cam. nhasn.a ¯, Gadd. nhaxn.a ¯ all ‘to run (away)’ < OIA náśyati ‘runs away’ (7027) (cf. Pa. nassati, Pk. nassa which show that the fronted aspiration derives

46 These words seem to support Morgenstierne’s consideration that the words ‘Pashto/Pashtun’ are connected with Av. paršta- ‘back’ and that the Pashtun are ‘hill people’. 47 This example indicates that, as in the case of r metathesis (on which see below), there was an intermediate stage in which aspiration (resp. r) was ‘doubled’ and pronounced both at its original and new position; compare this with Bashg. drgr ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá- ‘long’ (6368). 48 This is an example (more will be given below) for northwestern languages basically not tolerating -nd- clusters in contrast to Inner Languages. 49 In the case of Kanashi, aspiration sometimes jumps back and forth (Sharma 1992: 325): kakh@ng

= khak@ng

‘mouth’, ghoda = godha ‘horse’, mhina = minha ‘month’ (H. mah n a); the same phenomenon is also found in Raji and Spitian (Sharma 1994: 48). 50 The Ki˜ ut.h. form shows again that phoneme fronting implies in the initial phase a duplication of the affected sound; more examples are found infra.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

312

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

< older *naśh-, *nash-); Bhal. ýh2Ng = ý 2Ng, Sir.d.od.. jhang ˙ ‘leg’ < OIA j
angha

‘shank’ (5082); Bhal. ph2ng

‘wing of a bird’, Bhad. phang¯ ˙ a ‘feather’, Ku. pha k ‘bird’s wing’ < OIA paks.á- ‘wing, feather, fin, shoulder, side’ (7627) via MIA pakkha-; Bhad., P¯ ad.. and Sir.d.od.. gh¯ ati, gh¯ ati¯ a ‘lengthy song’ probably tatsama of OIA ga
th a- ‘song’; for Cur. bhy¯ ag ‘morning’ and similar words in several other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties I suggest derivation < OIA *vyagr¯ aha(na)- (cf. OIA *pr¯ agr¯ aha- ‘the day in front’ [8917], cf. also OIA vik¯ ala- ‘twilight’ [11625]) (not all examples have aspiration): Kh¯ aśi. biegni, Bhad. bih¯ ag¯ a, and Bhad. and D . og. bi¯ ag¯ a ‘morning with a very little light’, Cam. bhi¯ ag¯ a ‘in the morning’ and bhi¯ ag ‘morning’, and Marm. biëgni and Pog. bi¯ agn ‘early morning’;51 Ku. ghucc ‘thumb’ < OIA angus ˙ . t.há‘thumb’ (137) (with only one phonetically similar form in Bshk. angúc ˙ . ‘thumb’),52 dhupari ‘midday’ (cf. H. dopahar); Bng. phO ck anO ‘to beat, thrash’, Ku. phacak ‘blow, knock’ and

- ‘be knocked, fall’ (8493) with loss of retroflex phack¯ an. ‘to beat, thrash’ < OIA *pracchat . stop due to syllable reduction (?) (but cf. below p. 984 Ku. bha can ‘to press flat; to break’);

Ku. phn ‘a mat made of mountain grass’ cf. OIA prós.t.ha-1 ‘bench, stool’ (9018) where

Turner quotes a direct parallel to Ku., namely L. ph¯ uhr. ‘matting’, bhipv¯ ar (Garh. bhipy¯ ar) ‘Thursday’ < OIA b
rhasp
ati- ‘name of a deity’ (9303) with no comparable modern reflexes  (but cf. here Pk. bhiapp(h)aï), hab¯ as ‘practice’ < (or ←?) OIA abhy¯ asa- ‘repeated exercise’, harar. ‘type of pulse’ same as H. arhar whose connection with OIA a dhak
- ‘the pulse Cajanus

indicus’ (1107) is not clear; Kann. (and Jaun. [Z.]) hal¯ u ‘potato’ < OIA a ¯lu- ‘ esculent root of Amorphophallus campanulatus’ (1388); Deog. h oc haunO ‘to set (sun)’ < OIA útsadati ‘sits up, rises’ (1871); Bhad. and Bhal. h¯ aj ‘mother’ < OIA a ¯ryik¯ a- ‘respectable woman’ (1351);  Ku. hangy

a t ‘branch, twig’ is probably a synonym compound (there is also ha ng

with same meaning) < OIA *anga-k¯ ˙ as.t.ha- (cf. 114 and 3120). Note: Occasionally also the reverse process – backing of aspiration – can be observed. Many of the following examples are from Bng.: c OnthO n.m. ‘broken piece (of molasses

a related form, k¯ıth n.m. ‘used up or lump of salt)’ < OIA *chan.t.- ‘scatter’ (4970) or . filter water in a hookah’ < OIA *khit.t.a- ‘secretion’ (3156) (cf. however B. k¯ at.i, k¯ aït., k¯ at. ‘dregs, dirt’ ODBL § 184), za th n.f. ‘pubic hair’ < OIA *jhan.t.a- ‘hair’ (5334),

z˜ uphr.i n.f. ‘stable; hut’ < OIA *jhumpa‘hut’ (5403); Sir¯ aj¯ı of Shimla has o ¯hn.u ¯ ‘to be’ (cf. H. hon¯ a ‘to be’); Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı Ohl ‘plough’ (< OIA halá1 - ‘plough’ [14000]); Kc.

aPr¯ ¯ıhndu ‘Hindu’ (Bailey [1915: 128]); m¯ u ‘our’ (Bailey [1915: 186]) and Kul. mhara ‘our’ (Hi. ham¯ ara) with aspirate replaced by glotstop (see p. 277 for explanation and further examples; see also Grierson [LSI ix, iv 377] and Kaul [2006 i: 163]). The same process is also found in Brj. burebhar ‘grey hair’ < OIA *bhr¯ ura- ‘brown’ (9690) (H. also ‘grey’) and va
la- ‘hair’ (11572). The same process is also common in Kashmiri. Finally, note also Rohingya zilha ‘flame’ (< OIA *jhal(l)- ‘sudden movement’ [5351]), but it is unclear how common this process is in Rohingya language.

51 But note GN bih¯ aga ‘dawn, daybreak’ for which Shackle considers derivation < OIA vibh¯ agya- in the sense of ‘separation (between day and night)’. 52 Further below in the book are some additional examples for s.t. > c. ([úù]) or c in other Outer Languages. According to Robin Shafer (2000), in the case of affricates the feature [cont] is dependent upon the primary feature [stop] but basically their sequencing is free. Consequently (2000: 62) the “. . . data indicate that affricate stricture features are ordered only late in the derivation, probably phonetically.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

11.3.4.6

313

Panjabi, Jat.k¯ı and Mult¯ an¯ı

Jat.. bhann¯ı ‘pond’ < OIA bandhá- ‘dam’ (9136), ghim ‘moisture, dampness’ < OIA gr¯ıs.má‘summer’ (4391) (Pa. gimha- ‘heat of summer’), huddh ‘stroke with the point of a stick or weapon, or shafts of a cart’ probably < OIA uddhata- ‘raised, high’ (2006) but cf. also OIA (Śak.) uddhati- ‘a stroke, shaking’; P. bhab¯ ut ‘ashes which Hindu devotees rub on their bodies’ which is tatsama of OIA vibh¯ uti- ‘the ashes of cow-dung & c’.; Mult. hath¯ al¯ a ‘shallow’ < OIA *ut-sthala- ‘shallow’ (1899), hek (also P., GN hikku, heku and Marw. hek) ‘one’ < OIA *ekka- ‘one’ (2462).

11.3.4.7

Sindh¯ı

hekalo ‘alone’ (also B.roh. hálika ‘alone’ with metathesis) < OIA *ekkala ‘alone’ (2506), hocho ‘mean’ (Kul. ho˙cha ‘small’ [pahari-languages.ru]) < OIA *occha- ‘small, thin, mean’ (2540).

11.3.4.8

Gujar¯ at¯ı and Khetr¯ an¯ı

G.pars. gh@ u ‘wheat’ < OIA godhu
ma- ‘wheat’ (4287), gh@dhero ‘ass’ (with aspiration spreading) < OIA gardabhá- ‘ass’ (4054); G.pars. gh@dd u, gh@rd u ‘old’ and G. ghard.o < OIA *grad.d.ha- ‘old’ (4347a); G.pars. gh@r@n ‘eclipse’ and gh@ren u ‘ornament’ both < OIA gráhan.a- ‘eclipse of sun or moon; putting on (clothes)’ (4364), ghusso ‘anger’ ← Ar. gus.s.a, vhagh ‘tiger’ (with aspiration spreading) (cf. Jaun. bh¯ ag ‘tiger’ [Z.]) < OIA vy¯ aghrá- ‘tiger (12193), vh etiy u ‘dwarf’ < OIA *vantha- ‘dwarf’ (11236); G. haji ‘still’ as in t¯ın¯ a p¯ a.l¯ıy¯ a haj¯ı che ‘their memorial stones are still there’ (LSI ix,ii: 434) < OIA adhyadhi- ‘on high’ (274) with modern reflexes in the northwest. Khet. phagar ‘sweat’ (LSI, but Turner gives pagghar like S. pagharu) < OIA *praghara- ‘flowing forth’ (8481).

11.3.4.9

R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı

Rj.tor¯ a. ghab¯ as ‘uterus of an animal’ < OIA garbhav¯ asa- “ ‘embryo abode”, the womb’, hander¯ a ‘darkness’ < *andh¯ık¯ ara- ‘darkness’ (386) (cf. with spontaneous aspiration borrowing into West Himalayish Kana. nihar@s ‘darkness’ [D. D. Sharma 1992: 309] and Iranian Sak. hana- ‘blind’ which is < Av. anda-); Marw. bhara man ‘Brahmin’; Rj.jaip. khum¯ ar ‘potter’

kham
< OIA kumbhak ara- ‘potter’ (3310) (cf. p. 311 Kann. ar ‘potter’); Rj. hug¯ ad.o (also ug¯ ar.o) ‘naked’ < OIA *utgh¯ at.aka- ‘open’ (1972).

11.3.4.10

Mar¯ at.h¯ı, Konkan ˙ . ¯ı and Bh¯ıl¯ı

M. ghom . s, ghos ‘bouquet; a bunch or cluster’ < OIA guccha- ‘bunch of flowers’ (4172); M.Coch. vh un@ ‘hot’ < OIA us.n.á-1 ‘hot’ (2389), h¯ adi ‘road’ < OIA ádhvan- ‘road’ (281), hung

@p@ ‘to smell’ < OIA *upagr¯ ahayati ‘smells at’ (2158) with a doubtful parallel in Ku.; M.kud.. hapis ‘office’, humro ‘threshold’ < OIA lex. umbara- ‘upper timber of a door-frame’ (2341), husko ‘anxiety’ < OIA *utsukya- ‘eagerness’ (1886), hovri ‘room’ < OIA apavaraka‘inner apartment’ (450); Ko. has ‘axle’ < OIA áks.a-1 ‘axle’ (21), hull@s ‘vigorous act’
u) (cf. Bng. and Deog. a
s1 “ ‘ritual” mourning after a death case’ [p. 536]).

11.3.4.11

Bengali

54 S.

K. Chatterji quotes prothetic aspiration also from Eastern Ashokan (ODBL § 303): h¯evam, ˙ hida, h¯edisa correspond with OIA evám ‘thus’, idha ‘here’ (this is actually a case of h-fronting), d
r
sa- ‘such, like this’ (1611).55 And he adds some examples from Bengali  full of anxious fear’ < OIA a¯kula- ‘confused’ (with analogical -kk-) (1012), (ibid.): h¯ akuli ‘be Old B. harit.ha ‘soap-nut’ < OIA áris.t.a-1 ‘soap-nut tree’ (610), hull asO < OIA ull¯ asa- ‘merriment’ (2375), h  eca k a ‘pull’ < OIA *atiyañcati ‘pulls across’ (210).56

11.3.4.12

Assamese

Habilax (h¯ abil¯ as.) ‘longing’ semi-tatsama of OIA abhil¯ as.a- ‘desire’, phisa (phica) ‘tail of a fish’ < OIA piccha- ‘tail-feather’ (8151) where one finds B. p˜ec¯ a ‘tail-piece (as of a fish)’ but cf. also Sh. ph2co
‘tail’ found (probably wrongly) sub OIA paks.á- ‘fin’ (7627), pondH6r6 ‘fifteen’ < OIA páñcadaśa- ‘fifteen’ (7662) (regarding debuccalization cf. e.g. K. pand¯ ah and note aspiration parallels in S. pandhra , West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Cur. pandhr¯ a and M. pandhr¯ a); Early Assamese bibh¯ a ‘marriage’ (Kakati 1972: 215) < OIA viv¯ ahá- ‘marriage’ (11920).

11.3.4.13

Change between v or p and bh in different areas

This is a somewhat different process from the above cases. Iranian Shgh. win r ‘stall, pen, manger’ versus Indus Kohistani bh2nv
ri ‘a small pen or manger with grass and fodder for keeping and feeding cattle’ < OIA *vana1 -mandura
-1 (see 11258, 9853) and spontaneous aspiration (there is also Kh¯ aśi. pand ‘barn’ but here a change of b > p has taken place as, for instance, in Kh¯ aśi. pën ‘sister’ [H. bahin]) (cf. also Jat.. bandur, bundur ‘manger’, [Kaul 2006 i: 178]); Ind. bh2
yri ‘an artificial pond for irrigation (is not filled by a brook but by a small spring)’, Bur. phári ‘pond’ (borrowed from a Kalasha-type language and looking strikingly similar with east NIA B.roh. foóir ‘pond’), cf. also P. bhar¯ o ‘a watering place for travelers’, Sh.gil. “bárri” and Sh.ast. “biri” ‘lake’ (Leitner), Bro. b¯ ari ‘lake’ all deriving < OIA v a
ri‘water, rain’ (11556), note also closely related Av. vairi- ‘lake; bay of a lake’ with similar 53 However, words beginning with reflexes of OIA pra- can also develop into pha-. 54 The following examples are partly h-fronting and partly spontaneous aspiration. 55 It is unclear whether the h-grapheme could sometimes also indicate a glottal stop. Incidentally, Eastern Ashokan h¯ edisa has a parallel in Kalsi hed.isa (Mehendale 1948: 3) which is yet another example for the penetration of OL features into ILs during the MIA period. 56 However, this word is probably rather connected with OIA *khiñc-, *kheñc-, *khaiñc-, *khañc‘pull’ (3881) and in this case would rather be an example of loss of initial aspirated stop for which there are a number of parallels in the northwest discussed p. . . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

315

epenthetic vowel movements. Note here also GN bharan¯ alu ‘sea, ocean’ < OIA varun.a ¯laya-; Pal. bh
ro ‘he-goat’ (cf. above p. 301 Sir.d.od.. bhir ‘evil spirits or gods of cattle’) < OIA v r
a- ‘male of an animal’ (12056); P. bhit.t. ‘defilement’ < OIA *vit.t.a- ‘impurity’ (11712), and the following alternation: P. arar.-popo ‘fortuneteller’ (probably a derogatory term with first component meaning ‘making a great noise’) versus Rj. bhopo ‘priest of a folk deity; bard; sorcerer, wizard’, S. ba bo and bhopo both ‘wizard, magician’, Brj.-Aw. bhop¯ a ‘magician’ and M. bhop¯ı ‘a devotee of a goddess’.57 For change of t- > dh- in other Outer Languages see below p. 336.

11.3.5

NW deaspiration and ‘phoneme split’ of voiced aspirates

Bertil Tikkanen suggests a very close relationship between loss of aspiration and the influence of different substrata: Thus he suggests (1988: 308) the loss of aspiration in Nuristani to be due to a different substratum from that which must have existed in the area of Burushaski and the Dardic languages, and it would need also to be distinguished from Old Iranian where the old aspiration opposition continued in the form of an opposition between (simple) stops and fricatives. Tikkanen wonders whether these deaspirations can be connected with the fact that in Tocharian “the distinction between voiced and voiceless stops was also lost” (ibid.). But loss of voice opposition is a different kettle of fish. If Old Iranian and Proto-Nuristani processes of deaspiration need to be distinguished, as Tikkanen notes, one wonders why there is the persistent claim that both processes need to be seen together as probably having taken place together at a very early date? This is usually contrasted with the claim that the loss of aspiration in the media of several of the Dard languages is a recent phenomenon. I regard both claims as a myth. Berger (2008: 19f.) points out that in Shina the system of simple tenuis, aspirated tenuis and simple media emerged through loss of aspirated media. We will see right below that this applies also to a series of other Dard languages. He further refers to an article of Roland Bielmeier (1988: 15ff.) who had argued that the present similar triple system in Tibetan had developed out of a simple twin system that only consisted of voiced and unvoiced-aspirated stops by adding a series of unvoiced and unaspirated stops. And for Burushaski Berger suggests this (ibid.): “Der Gedanke, daß das Bur., zwischen den beiden Sprachen liegend, die Dreiteilung erst in neuerer Zeit entwickelt hat, liegt nahe, und in der Tat scheint auch in der heutigen Verwendung der Verschlußlaute und Affrikata noch einiges darauf hinzudeuten, daß das ursprüngliche System nur auf der Unterscheidung aspiriert – nicht-aspiriert beruhte.” 58 Thus it seems that the northwest of South Asia was an area where languages with twin systems were prevalent before the arrival of Indo-Aryan. Since I hold that at least part of this language area was dominated in prehistoric times by AustroAsiatic languages, this does not come as a surprise. According to Heinz-Jürgen Pinnow (1959: 423), the aspirated consonants in modern Munda languages like Kharia or Santali are historically the result of a combination of non-aspirated stops and affricates with h, even though these sounds are now to be evaluated as mono-phonematic. Let us now look at the 57 It is unclear wheher here also Korku bhumka ‘village priest’. 58 My rough translation: “The idea that Bur., lying between the two languages, has only recently developed the tripartite division is obvious; in fact, also today’s use of the plosives and affricates still seems to indicate that the original system was based only on the distinction of aspirated – non-aspirated.” In fact, this has already been claimed by Morgenstierne who wrote (1945b: 75): “. . . it would seen (sic) that Bur. at a certain stage of development knew only an opposition media : aspirated tenuis (or perhaps better: unaspirated : aspirated) in the initial of verbal roots.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

316

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

situation of these systems in the Dard languages (statements in quotes are from Bashir 2003): Pashai (which comprises a large number of dialects): no aspirated consonants, but has h phoneme; also the Deg¯ anó dialect of Pashai has no aspirated stops or affricates as can be demonstrated with t¯ ar"¯ık ‘watching’ which is < OIA *stharati2 ‘looks at’ (13743); but p"a ¯l ‘ploughshare’ is probably not < OIA pha
la- ‘ploughshare’ (9072) but a borrowing ← Psht. p¯ ala ‘ploughshare’ which itself is a borrowing ← IA; Gawar-Bati: has aspirated tenuis, but “[v]oiced aspirates are probably extinct in GB; and even the status of voiceless aspirates is unclear” (p. 831), has h phoneme; Shumashti: has aspirated tenuis (but lacks aspirated k) but no aspirated media, status of h seems to be unclear; Glangal¯ ˙ ı: “Aspiration is completely absent”, has h phoneme; Dameli (a mixed Nuristani - Dardic language where the language affiliation of Proto-Dameli is still unclear): has aspirated tenuis but no aspirated media, has h phoneme; Khowar: has aspirated tenuis but no aspirated media, has h phoneme; Kalasha: has a kind of standard IA stop system with aspirated tenuis and media, has h phoneme, but voice opposition has been partially lost in case of aspirated stops (e.g. khas ‘grass’ < OIA gh¯ asa-; phan.d. ‘storage bin’ < OIA bh¯ an.d.a-, etc.); Tir¯ ah¯ı: has aspirated tenuis (with the exception of t.h) but no aspirated media, has h phoneme; Dar¯ ag¯ı: has aspirated tenuis but no aspirated media, has h phoneme; T¯ orw¯ al¯ı: has a kind of standard IA stop system with aspirated tenuis and media, has h phoneme; Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı (and Kat.¯ arqal¯ ai): “No voiced aspirates were noted; aspiration is phonemic for voiceless consonants but wavers” (p. 870), has h phoneme; Indus-Kohistani: has a kind of standard IA stop system with aspirated tenuis and media, has h phoneme; Shina: has aspirated tenuis but no aspirated media, has h phoneme; Pal¯ ula: “Aspiration is phonetically salient, notably for voiced stops but probably not phonological. . . Secondary aspiration has also developed . . . Morgenstierne considered voiced aspirates to be consonant clusters, a slight vowel sound appearing between the stop and h: [d𝑢 hum¯ı] ‘smoke’. . . ; however in my notes they are clearly aspirates.” Savi: has a kind of standard IA stop system with aspirated tenuis and media, has h phoneme;59 Brok-skad: has aspirated tenuis but no aspirated media, instead of retroflex stops it has alveolar ones, has h phoneme. Even a cursory look at the language map makes it clear that languages spoken in the bow formed by the Kabul and Kunar rivers do not have aspirated stops whether they are Nuristani or Dardic, thus besides the Nuristani languages also Dardic Pashai and Glangal¯ı. Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı (and Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai) represents a transitional form to the next group because of the fact that “aspiration is phonemic for voiceless consonants but wavers”. Several languages roughly located in a west-east line through the southern mountains have a kind of standard IA stop system: Savi, Pal¯ ula, Kalasha, T¯ orw¯ al¯ı and Indus Kohistani. The remaining Dard languages (including Burushaski) geographically roughly located to the north of the just mentioned 59 However, Liljegren (2009a: 31) writes with regard to Savi: “In fact, in none of the words that Buddruss (B) tentatively transcribes with an aspirated voiced plosive do I detect any aspiration... I do not exclude that these words were indeed still weakly aspirated by B’s informants half a century ago... but is altogether lost as a feature of modern-day Sw.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

317

west-east line have aspirated tenuis but lack aspirated media: Gawarbati (?),60 Shumashti, Dameli, Khowar, Tir¯ ah¯ı (geographically separate), Swat-Dir Kohistani, Brok-skad, Gilgiti Shina. Kohistani Shina is probably a transitional form between this group and the preceding one (see Schmidt and Kohistani 2008: 30ff.). This data shows that in our area of investigation loss of aspiration is primarily a matter of language geography and not just of historical phonology. To make my argument clearer: Had a Nuristani language survived in the upper Indus Valley, then it most likely would not have lost all traces of aspiration. As in the case of depalatalization, also here we have to assume that deaspiration is a process that was active over many centuries. Consequently there may be also some Dard languages (Shina?) where this process started fairly recently. Nevertheless it is certainly quite old in the Dardic area, as can be seen in the case of MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı where Gérard Fussman has observed (1989: 441) a “. . . faiblesse de l’aspiration”. Thus, deaspiration started in the Dard area more than two millennia ago. This may be supported by Sinhalese, probably another Outer Language, about which Sonja Fritz writes (2002: 28f.): “The change of the inherited aspirates into their non-aspirated counterparts can be regarded as a regular process already of the time of Sinhalese Prakrit (from 2nd century B.C. until 4/5th century A.D.). . . According to Masica (1991, 205), this development resulted from Tamil influence, the Tamil consonant system having no aspirates at all. . . Geiger (ib.) presumes that ‘. . . even Sinhalese Prakrit did not possess any aspirated consonant.’ If the loss of the aspirates actually took place in such an early period, it remains doubtful, however, whether the linguistic contact between Sinhalese and Tamil could have lasted long enough before in order to provoke such an extensive change. It is possible that already in early Sinhalese Prakrit there was a tendency towards deaspiration which then was reinforced by the influence of the Tamil sound system.” It is more difficult to say how far back in time deaspiration goes in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and occasionally also in Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı. However, since West Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms a contiguous language area with Dardic and Nuristani, and since we already have come across a number of innovations shared by the three groups, there is no reason to assume an independent origin of deaspiration for West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. It is part of one and the same deaspiration drift. Within this group it is found in Kh¯ aśi, in connection of which Siddheshwar Varma (1940: 480) says: “In Kh¯ aśi the sonant aspirates do exist, but in an extremely feeble form; they seem to be a transition to their utter loss in Dardic.” However, Kaul (2006 I: 162) quotes Kh¯ aśi giyav ‘ghee’ which is < OIA ghrt
a- ‘ghee’(4501). Deaspiration is also known to occur occasionally in P¯ ogul¯ı which has d¯ um ‘smoke’ (< OIA dh¯ umá- ‘smoke’ [6849]) and giu ‘ghee’ (Kaul 2006 i: 241). Grierson (LSI ix, iv pp. 377 and 478) speaks of a “. . . tendency exhibited by West Pah¯ ar.¯ı towards disaspiration” (see there also p. 378) and quotes examples from Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı and Simla Sir¯ aj¯ı: b¯ı for bh¯ı ‘too’, b¯ a¯ı for bh¯ a¯ı ‘brother’ – the same word is bar¯er¯ a in the Satlaj Group (LSI ix,iv: 648) – ba dnu for ba dhn a ‘to bind.’ Hendriksen (1986: 196) points out an absence of aspirated media in K¯ ot.gar.h¯ı and Koc¯ı: “[t]he voiced aspiration is unstable or missing. . . ” Kaul states (2006 I: 32): “Pah¯ ar.i dialects have a tendency towards dis-aspiration. Whereas surd aspirates . . . as a rule preserve their aspiration . . . [s]onant aspirates . . . show a tendency to drop it.” Deaspiration also occurs in Sir¯ aj¯ı of D ad.ri dlukh, . od.a as in bucho ‘hunger’, in P¯ <

in Kh¯ aśi buch all < OIA bubhuks.a ¯- ‘desire to eat, hunger’ (9286) (cf. H. bh¯ ukh), in Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı as in aran ‘deer’ (< OIA harin.á- ‘deer’ [13982]) and in Shor¯ acol¯ı as in a ¯hth and P¯ ogul¯ı a ¯ht both ‘hand’ (< OIA hásta- ‘hand’ [14023]).61 And there is Bang¯ an.¯ı where deaspiration of 60 Bashir puts the aspirated media into parenthesis but according to Edel’man (1983: 139) Gawarbati does not have them. 61 But here rather a case of aspiration transference.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

318

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

media has been executed practically 100% as in gOtnO ‘to happen’ < OIA *ghat.yate ‘is joined, is procured’ (4418).62 Three small modifications to this are that there are a few speakers who sometimes use aspirated media (which I heard the first time after years), (2) there are some forms of Bang¯ an.¯ı oral literature performed by professional bards who use aspirated media intentionally for aesthetic purposes, and that (3) in the slightly archaic Khashdhari variety of Bang¯ an.¯ı aspirated media have been occasionally preserved. Finally there is poetic Gar.hv¯ a.l¯ı (Garh.t.. poet., and not the ordinary spoken form) which displays by tendency loss of aspiration as in ca, cO ‘is’ (colloquial Gar.hv¯ a.l¯ı cha) < OIA a
kseti ‘abides’ (1031), b EraO

o h ‘Bhairava’, bimsEna ‘Bhimsen’ or in the following line from a song: at-d ari nep ali cumta

‘oh (you yogi) are carrying Nep¯

h o (H. h¯ ath-dh¯ ar¯ı) ali tongs’. Traces of this apparently old tendency are rarer in ‘normal’ Gar.hv¯ a.l¯ı – because of more massive influence from ‘standard’ Indo-Aryan – yet are also occasionally observable: Garh. kus¯ an.u ‘to get tired, be fatigued’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) derives < OIA *khasati1 ‘falls, slips’ (3856), shows OL change of a > u, and has a deaspirated parallel not only in Nuristani Ash. kaser- ‘to be tired’ but also in Dardic Paš. kasariv¯ o ‘tired’ (Buddruss [1959b: 49]), Shum. kaser ‘tired’ and Wot.. kasrél ‘(become) tired’ (all with -r- extension),63 Garh. jer ‘forest’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) < OIA jh¯ at.a- ‘forest, arbour’ (5362), sapeti ‘whitewashing’ (H. saphed¯ı), etc. My above use of the expression “kind of standard IA stop system” to characterize one of the three Dardic subgroups is not accidental. The reason is that in my eyes Morgenstierne’s observation of short vowels appearing more or less frequently between a media and subsequent aspiration in Pal¯ ula, which led him to the conclusion that voiced aspirates are consonant clusters, is of great importance.64 The same phenomenon is also known from Indus Kohistani and Kohistani Shina, from Savi, in a few instances from Khowar (and T¯ orw¯ al¯ı?), and from different varieties of West and Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı, and from some other Outer Languages like Sindh¯ı and Bh¯ıl¯ı. Note e.g. that Indus Kohistani ghù¯ı ‘mare’ has ergative guh e, Jij¯ al¯ı variety of Indus Kohistani dhua  ‘smoke’ versus Š¯ at.o ¯t.¯ı variety duha  ‘smoke’ whereas neighboring Bhat.¯ıse has d2"hu ‘smoke’ (this lemma with the same split is also found in Brahui duho  ‘smoke’ and in Bal¯ uč¯ı and Sindh¯ı du h o ‘smoke’, etc.); Indus Kohistani bh a
‘house’ but bahu 2th ‘terrible’ versus biha
th ‘terrifying’ or dhay
2v  ‘to catch’ and in
‘small house’,bhiy




dicative suℎ dh2ya tℎ ‘he catches’ versus e.g. irrealis suℎ d2h
el ‘if he had caught’, several varieties of Indus Kohistani have g2h u or g2h o or gohõ ‘big’ (Hallberg [1992: 219, 227]) (< OIA ghaná-2 ‘dense’ [4424]), gha
l ‘wound’ but g2hlit ‘wounded’ (Hallberg [1992: 228]), etc.; the Chilisso and the Bhat.¯ıse varieties of Indus Kohistani have d2her ‘belly’ (< OIA *d.hera-2

uv- ‘to frighten’;65 Sh.koh. ‘belly’ [5589]) (Z.); Savi has bhiy- v.i. ‘to be afraid’ but v.t. bih¯ (RSup) has bah¯ adro ‘a month’ (< OIA bh¯ adrapada- ‘the 5th month August-September’ [9447]); Khowar has daha
r ‘mountain range’ < OIA dha
r a-2 ‘edge of mountain’ (6793, perhaps borrowed); Pal¯ ula has brh¯ o ‘brother’ and brh¯ aputr ‘son of brother, nephew’ (< OIA bhra
tr- ‘brother’ [9661] and bhr atrputra- ‘brother’s son’ [9664]), and brhimb¯ or.i ‘wasp’ (< OIA  bhramará-2 ‘large black bee’[9651]); Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı has b¯ ahr¯ a ‘a load’ < OIA 9459 bh¯ ará‘burden’, b¯ehd. ‘sheep’ < OIA bhed.ra- ‘ram’ (9606) (both LSI ix,iv: 551) and d¯ ahr¯ o ‘a hill’ 62 Here loss of aspiration led to the emergence of a falling tone. This is different from Nuristani and partly different from Dardic where phonemic aspiration just disappeared without any compensation. 63 There is also Garh. khusn.u ‘slipping away of knot, falling of hair’ with preservation of aspiration, which indicates two Gar.hv¯ al¯ı dialects or language levels. 64 See also Pal. drháac. ‘grape’ (< OIA dr a
ks a- ‘grape’ [6628]) with spontaneous aspiration following

the trill. 65 As opposed to this, Brok-skad bihis ‘fear; fearful’ and bihisula ‘afraid, frightened’ (cf. OIA bibheti ‘fears’ [9241] and Pk. bih¯ ei ‘fears’) appear to be regular reflexes.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

.

11.3. Laryngeal processes

319

< OIA dha
r a- ‘edge of mountain’ (6793) (LSI ix,iv: 553); Chinali has badehal ‘ox’ (< OIA *badhilla-); Kul.ui has bahu ‘ brother’ (Diack); Marmat¯ı has bih¯ a ‘brother’ (whereas neighbouring Khaś¯ al¯ı has bhra), and Sir¯ aj¯ı of D od a and R¯ a mbani have barh¯ a ‘brother’ (Kaul . . 2006 i: 162) (but T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 43] gives for Sir¯ aj¯ı brh¯ a which is also found in R¯ ambani), note also Bh¯ıl¯ı b¯ ah¯ a ‘brother’ and with shift to the very end of the word West Pah¯ ar.¯ı B¯ agh¯ı dialect b¯ a˘ıh ‘brother’ (Bailey [1915: 144]) (all < OIA bhra
tr- ‘brother’ [9661]); Thar. b@ h at ‘rice’ (cf. H. bh¯ at); Marmat¯ı has gih¯ at. ‘water mill’ (alsoRudh¯ ar¯ı) (whereas neighbouring Khaś¯ al¯ı has ghr¯ at) (Kaul 2006 i: 124), and Rudh¯ ar¯ı gıhat.i ‘one who grinds corn’ (all < OIA *ghars.t.ra- ‘mill’ [4451]); Satlaj Group has b ahrtO and Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı b¯ ahr¯ a both ‘a load’ (< OIA bh¯ ará- ‘burden’ [9459] and suffix - here also Mult. b¯ ar ‘weight’), b¯ehr. ‘sheep’ (< OIA bhed.ra- ‘ram’ [9606]), and d¯ ahr ‘hill’ (also Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı d¯ ahr¯ o ‘hill’) (< OIA dha
r a-2 ‘edge of mountain’ [6793]) with a close parallel in Khowar dah"ar ‘mountain ridge’; Bagh¯ at.¯ı has bihtre and Ki˜ uthali vithku both ‘inside’ (< OIA *bhiyantara- ‘inner’ [9504]); Sir¯ aj¯ı of Shimla has g˘ ohr ‘house’ (< OIA ghara- ‘house’ [4428]), g¯ ohr.a ¯ ‘horse’ (also Bagh¯ at.¯ı and Kulu¯ı g¯ ohr.a ¯ ‘horse’) (< OIA ghot.a- ‘horse’ [4516]); Ku. cvahalan. ‘to peel’ < OIA *chilla-1 ‘torn, cut’ (5051); P.pot.. baboh¯ a ‘spider’ < OIA *v¯ abha- ‘weaving, spinning’ (11532) with a related modern reflex in Pal. tr¯ ahambú, tr¯ ambu ‘spider’ (which is a synonym compound built with tantra-); buhamb(h) ‘earthquake’ < OIA bh¯ umikampa- ‘ditto’ (9558). Note: A peculiar form of phoneme splitting has been described by Hendriksen for West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Koc¯ı and Kot.gar.h¯ı (1986: 26): “Shift of aspiration. The voiced aspiration only occurs immediately before or after the stressed syllable, i.e. in either ante-prominent or post-prominent position. If the stress is moved to a later syllable an ante-prominent voiced aspiration is shifted to the beginning of that syllable and it is changed to an unvoiced aspiration if appearing after an unvoiced stop, e.g. Kt.g Kc /bh er/66 ‘sheep’:

ettu/67 ‘the /b@rhalO/-o/ ‘shepherd’; Kt.g /bha t/ ‘a brahman of a certain caste’: /b@th







small son of a bhat.” ’. This kind of ‘phoneme splitting’ or ‘aspiration dissociation’ occurs only with voiced stops in initial position. It has to be seen together with the related phenomenon of aspiration metathesis respectively fronting (see above p. 309), where the aspiration component h of a stop or affricate shifts from the middle or end of a word into initial position where it ‘aspirates’ an initial stop or affricate. Morgenstierne’s view of considering voiced aspirates of Pal¯ ula to be consonant clusters is paralleled by the view of Eva I. Ejerhed who regards (both voiced and unvoiced) aspirates in Sanskrit as clusters of a consonantal segment /C/ plus a segment /h/, the latter being [-consonantal, -vocalic], and not as single consonantal segments with the feature [+aspirate], which is the usual analysis (1981) (see also Richard D. Janda and Brian D. Joseph 1988). What we see in the examples from Indus Kohistani, Kohistani Shina, Pal¯ ula and the various West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages is a synchronic oscillation between aspirated media and media plus vowel plus h. Without going into details it is clear that the oscillations are caused by morphonological processes (probably involving also pitch-accent changes). Also in case of the Morgenstierne Pal¯ ula example [d𝑢 hum¯ı] ‘smoke’  ‘smoke’) it is fairly clear that a similar type of process must be (compare above Š¯ at.o ¯t.¯ı duha involved: in the Š¯ at.o ¯t.¯ı example the -h- apparently shifted into the onset slot of the second syllable after it was ‘vacated’ by the disappearance of the -m-. The same phenomenon can 66 I have here adapted Hendriksen’s style of transcription to the more usual one. 67 Also here small graphemic changes: ê ‘front vowel with high level tone’ and t.t. ‘long retroflex unvoiced stop’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

320

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

be projected onto the dimension of historical phonology so that one then could say that this oscillation is a synchronic reflection of the first step in the history of Dardic languages towards the loss of aspiration in aspirated media. All this strongly suggest that the loss of aspiration in aspirated media took place in two steps in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: Mediae 1. Cv hV >Cv Vh (metathesis) 2. Cv Vh >Cv V (loss).68 L¯ ar.¯ı, which is spoken in lower Sindh, has, according to Grierson (LSI viii,1, p. 169) preserved “. . . ancient peculiarities that do not appear in the standard dialect [of Sindh¯ı]. The most important of these are the deaspiration of sonant aspirates, and the frequent change of r. to r. In both these particularities L¯ ar.¯ı shows its relationship with the Dardic languages of the North-West Frontier.” On the following page one finds examples for deaspiration. On pp. 234ff. in the same volume Grierson discusses again similarities between Lahnd¯ a and Dardic, and he gives examples for deaspiration, devoicing and epenthesis. On the other hand, it needs to be mentioned that Grierson’s above evaluation regarding Khetr¯ an¯ı is not shared by Morgenstierne (he does not comment on the other dialects) who says (1934a: 173): “Sir George Grierson considers the dialect to have Dardic affinities, but I was unable to detect any important variations from ordinary Lhd.” Since Morgenstierne had only occasion to work for a few hours on Khetr¯ an¯ı, the question has to remain open until new data clarify the situation. There are a few Dard languages which have also lost the aspiration of originally aspirated tenuis (Pashai, Glangal¯ı) whereas in other cases the aspiration is “unclear” or “wavering” (e.g. Gawarbati, Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı and Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai and Dar¯ ag¯ı). Obviously, the tenuis of these languages do not behave like the above media (i.e. an aspiration is either audible or not), and something very similar has been described above for Nuristani and Iranian. In other words, loss of aspiration in aspirated tenuis must be seen as a process without phoneme splitting but with frequently observable aspiration fluctuations which can lead (and has led in various languages) to loss of phonological distinctiveness of aspiration but apparently nowhere in our area to a complete disappearance of physical aspiration: Tenuis 3. ChV > Ch V There can also be no doubt of the temporal sequence of the three processes, which principally has to be 1. → 2. → 3. 68 As indicated just above and illustrated with a few words, the phenomenon is not limited to the northwest. Khetrani which, according to Grierson, has some close connections with Dardic and Nuristani (LSI viii,1, p. 372), displays a similar behaviour: it has a tendency for deaspiration of voiced media and there is also occasionally the same type of ‘phoneme splitting’ as above as in bah¯ a ‘brother’. This tendency appears also in loan words as in dih¯ an karan ‘to think’ tatsama of OIA dhy¯ ana- ‘meditation’. An example for h-metathesis (see the discussion p. 313) is found in phagar ‘sweat’ which is < OIA *praghara- ‘flowing forth’ (8481) (cf. Mult. paghar); an example for aspiration not motivated by etymology (see p. 304) is Khet. bhig¯ ar ‘wolf’ (versus L. and Mult. bighi¯ ar. ‘wolf’ and Jat.. pigghi¯ ar. ‘wolf’) which is < OIA v
rka- ‘wolf’ (12062) (cf. Pk. viga- and  Sak. birgga- ‘wolf’, and further Iranian parallels, also borrowings into FU Mordwinian, Joki 1973: 342f.). The origin of the suffix (?) is unclear. Comparable Pr. s.il ‘wolf’, z.uv"¯ı ‘fox’ and Gau. zuk
ulu ‘a wolf’ seem rather to contain or reflect an element -k
ulu which compare with ‘dog’ words

p. 795; cf. also Bashg. vrik¯ı ‘fox’ and Sang. vurk ‘wolf’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.3. Laryngeal processes

321

In many historical phonological processes an h is the outcome of a so-called debuccalisation process, for instance s >h. Debuccalisation means that as a result of this process the segment has lost its place (of articulation) component (Humbert 1995: 55). According to Humbert (ibid.), “all segment types except vowels and liquids may debuccalise.” The phenomenon is also well-known from IA, e.g. the widespread change of initial s to h in Kashmiri – probably with an intermediate stage x as it is found e.g. in Gaddi, Bh¯ıl¯ı, Sinhalese or Assamese. Note also changes from OIA to MIA like jus.t.i- ‘satisfaction’ >jut.t.hi- ‘remnants of food’. Obviously, there must have been an intermediate stage *juht.(t.)i-. This not being a permitted syllable structure in most IA languages, it led to jut.t.hi- in Central MIA but to *jhut.(t.)i- in Dardic, e.g. Indus Kohistani zhuitA ‘dirty’. There are many examples for this

ıra-, gr¯ısmá-, vismaya-, u Central MIA type of metathesis, e.g. OIA k¯ aśm¯ ¯s.mán-, vís.n.u, krsna
. , praśná-, sn¯ ana- > Pk. kamh¯ıra, grimha, vimhaya, umh¯ a, vin.hu, kan.ha, pan.ha, n.h¯ a n. a. 69 Also in these cases debuccalisation has led to a loss of place of articulation (and thus to a phonotactic simplification) which parallels the well-known historical tendency in IA from consonant clusters to double consonants.70 These processes are only plausible if h indeed has the status of an independent segment, even in the position of directly following a stop or affricate. In this case, the different behavior in Central MIA on the one hand and in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı on the other may be explained by the fact that Central MIA tolerated only one consonant segment in the onset position of a word-initial syllable, whereas the northwest tolerated two. This is, of course, an established fact, even though I am aware that my statement is somewhat imprecise, ignoring all kinds of specifications. But whereas there was a strong tendency in Central MIA towards a syllable type like CVCC(V) (with -CC- being preferably geminates), there was a strong tendency in the northwest to favor CCVC(V) (with CC- being clusters). Concrete individual cases of Central MIA developments towards CVCC(V) were: (a) Debuccalisation of clusters containing sibilants, leading to aspirated geminates; (b) Simplification of medial consonant clusters also leading to geminates (e.g. OIA kárman- > MIA kamma-); (c) Toleration of medial or final nasal consonant + stop clusters (e.g. OIA síndhu‘river, the Indus’ > Pk. simdhu ˙ ‘ditto’). Concrete individual cases of North-West MIA developments towards CCVC(V) were: (a1) Either debuccalisation of clusters with sibilants leading to aspiration metathesis and simple medial consonants;71 (a2) Or no debuccalisation of clusters with sibilants (e.g. Kal. as.t., Bshk. ac., Sh. as. all ‘eight’); (b) Simplification of medial consonant clusters leading to r-metathesis and simple medial consonants (e.g. Dm. kram ‘work’); (c) No toleration of nasal consonant + stop clusters (e.g. Kho. sin ‘river, esp. the Indus’ and Ku. n¯ın ‘sleep’ < OIA nidra
- ‘sleep’ [7200]). But again, these are only 69 Note also H. puhup, Brj.-Aw. pahup, puhup ‘flower’ < OIA pús.pa- ‘flower’ and Brj.-Aw. puhkar ‘Pus.kara (near Ajmer)’ which are so-to say located between Central MIA and Dardic. 70 For more on this see Bubenik (1996: 35), Kobayashi (2006) and Bhayani (1997: 3). 71 This metathesis is of course only a tendency, which is strongest in some Dardic languages but which gets much weaker in Pah¯ ar.¯ı and in other Outer Languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

322

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum tendencies with shrinking numbers of occurrences from northwest to southeast.72 It is clear that the Central MIA developments were the dominant ones which led to considerable erosion of the different developments in the northwest.

It needs hardly to be stressed that the above outlined historical processes are broad generalizations which neither cover all empirical data nor include the very many special developments of individual languages. Moreover, some of the above Pk. forms display a prolonged acceptance of initial consonant clusters, while some of the Dardic examples illustrate a certain tolerance for word medial consonant groups. And there are different historical behaviors of medial stop and liquid clusters (e.g. -tr- or -l- + t.) which I will not discuss here but which would need to be allocated to one of the two main syllable processes depending from case to case. Still, it is possible to affirm basic and far-reaching differences in phonological processes related to preferences for different syllable structures. More on syllable structures below (p. 286).

11.3.6

Deaspiration in other languages

Probably due to stronger influence through Inner Languages, loss of aspiration is not so frequently found in other languages as those on the northwest, but stray incidents indicate former wider spread than presently. Just a few examples: S. biru, biri ‘fearful, dreadful’ < OIA bh¯ırú- ‘timid’ (9516); Mult. g¯ ah- ‘thresh’ < OIA gh¯ atayati ‘kills’ (4463) (regarding meaning cf. OIA ávagh¯ atayati ‘causes to thresh’ [755] with right-shift of aspiration), b¯ ar ‘weight’ < OIA bh¯ ará- ‘weight’ (9459); Rj. papolo ‘blister’ < OIA *prasphot.a- ‘bursting forth’ (8883); Rj.mal. d¯ up ‘sunshine’ < OIA *dhupp¯ a- ‘sunshine’ (6825); Bhil. ba h¯ a ‘brother’ < OIA bhra
tr- ‘brother’ (9661) (‘phoneme split’); Ko. du ‘to wash’ < OIA *dhuvati2 ‘washes’ (6833). 

11.4

‘Spontaneous’ affrication of sibilants

Whereas above (p. 292) the two phonetic and phonological features ‘space between the vocal folds’ and ‘tension in the folds’, i.e. spread or constricted glottis, were of relevance, in the following sections in addition the features [±stiff vocal cords] = ‘voiced segment’ and [±slack vocal cords] = ‘unvoiced segment’ play a role. For instance, when we come across examples where an unvoiced sibilant has turned into a voiced affricate (e.g. s > jh), then not only the glottis plays a role but also the vocal cords, in case of s > jh there is also [-stiff vocal cords] > [+stiff vocal cords].

11.4.1

Voiceless affrication

A change e.g. of š > čh can also be interpreted as a sibilant S getting simultaneously glottalized and aspirated, thus S > ¼Sh (of course, aspiration is missing in Nuristani, Assamese, Chittagongian, etc.). In some other cases expected aspiration is missing for unclear reasons, and yet in some other cases the affrication is accompanied by voicing. The locus of the aspiration is mostly but not always word-initially, but besides ‘spontaneous’ aspirations 72 Pashto Ganam ‘wheat’ – cf. Pers. gandam – is, according to Morgenstierne, an old borrowing from IA. This seems unlikely and, indeed, Elfenbein et al. derive Psht. Gan"@m < Av. gan.tuma- but wonder about the loss of Av. -t-.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.4. ‘Spontaneous’ affrication of sibilants

323

there are frequently also aspiration frontings. In certain cases this process is not ‘really’ spontaneous but followed a previous process of coronal consonant harmony: thus in such cases one observes a combination of adjustment of place of articulation with type of articulation. Nevertheless, this does show that also the following examples belong to the same glottalization-aspiration complex as the examples above. And it also means that different types of affrications e.g. resulting from consonant clusters (like tr > c) or of single consonants getting affricatized do not belong here and are treated in other parts of the book. Yet, even though they do not belong here they have in some cases initiated affrication of other segments in the same word. In OIA, tendencies for affrication of sibilants are very rare, one example would be śaka- ∼ *chaka- ‘dung’ (see Turner). The following list is not ‘complete’, additional examples are given throughout the book. Note also that in the following language (area) sub-categorizations there are occasionally overlappings.

11.4.1.1

Niya Prakrit

satsara- is < OIA sams¯ ˙ ara- ‘undergoing transmigration’; mam amsá˙ . tsa- ‘meat’ < OIA m¯ ‘flesh’ (9982), cf. there Pal. mah¯ as and Turner’s observation “H. mass¯ a ‘fleshy excrescence’ suggests existence of MIA. *m¯ assa-” though more likely is OL *m ac ha-, this allomorph is still found in Shina “motz” ‘meat’ (Leitner 1985 [1893]: 5); note also sam . caya- ‘doubt’ < OIA samśaya˙ ‘danger’ (13030).

11.4.1.2

Deśya Prakrit

chimchao ˙ ‘adulterer’ derives hardly < OIA vyabhic¯ ara- ‘going apart’ (12169, see there Pk. vahic¯ ara- ‘adultery) but must be cognate with chimcha¯ ˙ ıy¯ a ‘prostitute’ which derives perhaps < OIA *s.ingaveś(i)y¯ ˙ a- (or -veśastr¯ı-, -veśyastr¯ı-) (with OIA [Yaś] s.inga˙ ‘libertine, rake’).73

11.4.1.3

Nuristani

Pr. č@čel, č@č@l, č@č"il ‘soft’ < *srcil"a ‘slack’ < OIA *srthil
a- (12601) This has following   parallels: Ash. c i cila 
, Wg. čičil, Pr. č𝑖 čil (Buddruss und Degener) and Kt. in addition voiced jijil all ‘soft’. Note also Pr. p˙cil ‘scree slope’ and ps˙cil, ¯ır ps˙cil ‘big stone heap (with stones collected from fields), scree slope’ < older *pra˙ci˙cila < OIA praśithila- ‘very loose’ but apparently belonging to a Prasun dialect different from Prasun č𝑖 čil documented by Buddruss. The words have a precursor in Niya and G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı śiśila ‘loose’. A further example is Ash. čuč¯ on˙ ‘boiled thick milk’ < OIA samsty¯ ˙ ana- ‘coagulated’ (13047)74 and another is Pr. par˙c"¯ı (besides pars"¯ı) ‘Persian (language)’.

11.4.1.4

Dardic

Ind. chica
v , Kal. c
chik, Dm. ch ec- and Tor. c.hiz.u all ‘to learn’ < OIA śíks.ate ‘learns’

Kho. chic ¯eik

‘to teach’ < OIA śiksayati ‘informs’ (12431) (cf. also the New. loan(12430); . . . word śikchen ‘the act of process of education’); Kal. benč ‘bamboo’ < OIA vamśá˙ ‘bamboo’ (11175); Pal. c.h¯ un.c.o ‘straight’ < OIA *s¯ unks ˙ . a- ‘straight’ (13548); Klm. čh¯ uč L ‘silk’ < OIA 73 Besides allomorphs s.id.ga, khinga-, ˙ khid.ga- (see EWA). 74 To this lemma belongs also Kho. zač ‘milch’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

324

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

lex. s¯ uks.ma- ‘woven silk’, c˙ ar.ak Hy ‘road’ < OIA srtí- ‘road, path’ (13577) and mä¯ıc. HL  75 Gau. b2ca c ‘a type of pheasant’ (besides mä¯ıs.) ‘buffalo’ < OIA mahis.á- ‘buffalo’ (9964),

< OIA *v¯ aśukapaks.in-; K. chatun ‘to become white’ < OIA śvitrá- ‘white’ (12772), Sh. c.ic. 76 ‘ladder’ < OIA *śritr¯ a- ‘ladder’ (12704) and Sh.dras. b
2nµ2ri ‘flute’ (Rajapurohit [2012: 135]) which cf. with H. ba sur  ‘flute’ and OIA vamśaka˙ ‘short flute (?)’ (11175);77 Paš.DN. čup¯ an ‘shepherd’ (Lehr 2014: 383) ← Psht. šp¯ un ‘shepherd’ respectively Pers. šp¯ un (here affrication perhaps influenced by Nuristan forms with affricates like Kt. p c O ‘shepherd’ related with OIA pa
supa
- ‘herdsman’ [7986]).

11.4.1.5

Pah¯ ar.¯ı

Bng. poet. c o cinO ‘to think, ponder’ < śocyate ‘is made to feel pain’ (12621) (here also as

borrowing Byangsi cìcimo ‘to think’ ?), Bng. c hi cO n.m. ‘lime’, c h  ci anO1 ‘to snow lightly’

and c˙ h¯ı˙ci¯ ar1 n.f. ‘first snow’ (with -¯ ar suffix) < OIA śvitrá- ‘white’ (12772) (besides c hitO

‘white’), c h  ci anO2 ‘to have cattle move around in a field in order to familiarize the animals with ploughing’ and c˙ h¯ı˙ci¯ ar2 n.f. ‘familiarization’ (with -¯ ar suffix) < OIA śiks.ayati ‘informs’ (12431); Ku. chaja n ‘to decorate’ ( H. saj¯ an¯ a and OIA sajjana-), apsoc ‘regret’ ← Pers.

m¯ afsos; Garh. m¯ archu, archo, m¯ arso ‘caul¯ a¯ı, r¯ amd¯ an¯ a – Amaranthus caudatus’ (widespread in the hills) cf. OIA (Bhpr.) m¯ aris.a-, m¯ ars.a- ‘Amaranthus oleraceus’ and OIA lex. m¯ ars.ika‘Amaranthus oleracetis’; Gadd. “dach” ‘ten’ < OIA dáśa- ‘ten’ (6227) (Kaul 2006 i: 34, 138);78 N. ch¯ asnu ‘to reprimand, punish’ < OIA
sa
sati ‘instructs, punishes, rules’ (12419) and chim¯ al ‘lichen on a tree’ < OIA
s
p la- ‘the waterweed Blyxa octandra’ (12493);79 , Kann. mec ‘chair’ ← Pers. mez.

11.4.1.6

Panjabi, Mult¯ an¯ı, Jat.k¯ı

Mult. chichr.a ¯, chachr¯ a ‘Butea frondosa’ < OIA kimśuka˙ ‘the tree Butea frondosa’ (3149) (its red flowers are, however, called with the regular form kes¯ u); Mult. “chit.t.hiã” ‘Pleiades’ (O’Brien) < OIA k
rttik a- ‘the Pleiades (3427); Jat.. v¯ achar. ‘shower’ < OIA varsya- ‘belonging

Chin. “b¯ej”  to the Rains’ (11402), vãjhl¯ı ‘flute’ (also with voicing but no aspiration P. and ‘flute’) < OIA vamś¯ ˙ ı- ‘flute’ (11180), GN hãjhu ‘wild goose’ < OIA hamsá˙ ‘goose’ (13937) and vañjhu ‘long bamboo used as boating pole’ < OIA vamśá˙ ‘bamboo (11175), and P. a jh u, h ajh u, jh ‘tear’ < OIA áśru- ‘tear’ (919).

75 Also possible is derivation < OIA (BhP) mahis.t.ha- ‘greatest, largest’ with swapping of affricate components as in Klm. äc. H ‘eight’ or mic.¯ ar H ‘sweetness’ (< OIA mis.t.a-1 ‘dainty, sweet’ [10299] with abstract suffix -¯ ar as in Klm. r¯ an H(L) ‘good’ → r¯ en¯ ar HL ‘goodness’). 76 See the morphological similarity (also with OIA
srit
 ‘entrance’ [12703]) with Lith. slt e ‘ladder’ (Gvozdanović 2009: 26). 77 One can reconstruct PIIr. *wanćá- and there is Nuristani Ash. van˙c ‘guitar’ but borrowing from Nuristani is unlikely because of the considerable geographic distance. 78 The case of Gadd¯ı is somewhat different because the OIA sibilant is usually reflected as kh. However, Kaul writes (p. 34): “In certain Western Pah¯ ar.i dialects S becomes Kh; sounding as /ch/ as in Gaddi dialect of Chame¯ ali, for example Sanskrit ‘daś’ (ten)-daŚ = ‘dakh’ (Pronounced as dach).” 79 Also many IA loanwords in New. show the same trend, but it is not clear whether it is a trend adapted from N. or whether there is a different background. One example would be alchi ‘a lazy person’  OIA ¯ alasya- ‘sloth’ (1371) (also K. ¯ alo˙ch𝑢 ‘lazy’).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.4. ‘Spontaneous’ affrication of sibilants

11.4.1.7

325

R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı

Rj.har. chUc@ma ‘spectacles’ ← Pers. caśma ‘glasses (and with OL a > u and ‘spontaneous’ aspiration); Rj. ch¯ unch ‘crocodile’ < OIA
sim


suka- ‘an aquatic animal; porpoise’ (12426). There are also Dm. žanč¯ unč ‘small lizard’ which is a compound with first syllable < OIA jantú- ‘any animal of lowest order, insect, worm’ (5110) and Wg. c˙ u˙cum¯ı ‘lizard’. Here also Bng. c heba r n.f. ‘lizard’, Kann. c˙ h˘emăr ‘lizard’ and Khm. chep@ra: ‘type of lizard (smooth

skinned)’; regarding Bng. and Khm., which may be synonym compounds, cf. OIA lex. ved¯ ara‘a chameleon, lizard’ whereas the Kann. is a borrowing deriving < OIA
sim


suma
ra- ‘porpoise, Delphinus gangeticus’ (12426) and regarding meaning cf. there Bal. š¯ ušm¯ ar ‘a large kind of lizard’; this is actually the origin of Wg. c˙ u˙cum¯ı ‘lizard’ (which is regarded as an IA borrowing). The two OIA lemmata got also borrowed into Psht.: c˙ u ¯c˙ ‘porpoise’, sams¯ ara ‘a kind of lizard, iguana’ (also Tir. samsa
ra ‘lizard’) and s¯ usar ‘porpoise’. The three borrowings belong to different historical levels or have been borrowed from different areas.

11.4.1.8

Mar¯ at.h¯ı, Bh¯ıl¯ı, Konkan ˙ . ¯ı

Bhil. ch¯ık¯ ar ‘game’ (LSI ix, iii: 42-43) ← Pers. śik¯ ar, kara ch¯ an ‘cultivator’ < OIA krsa na

‘ploughing’ (3447); Ko.kan.. khud.či ‘chair’ (also M. and note New. and Dari. kurci  ‘chair’, Bro. kurči ‘chair’, Sh.Dras. kurč¯ı ‘chair’) ultimately ← Ar. kurs¯ı.80

11.4.1.9

Bengali and Or.iya

B. chikal ‘chain’ < OIA
srnkhala

- ‘chain’ (12580), chep ‘spittle’ < OIA *śres.man- ‘mucus’ (12727); South-western B.ch¯ amu ‘before’, Or. and B. ch¯ amu ‘facing’ < OIA sammukha˙ ‘facing’ (12982), B. chOkkora ‘a ramshackle carriage’ < OIA śákat.a- (*chakkat.a-) ‘cart’ (12236) in fact with many ch- parallels; B. chut¯ ar and Or. chut¯ ara ‘carpenter’ < OIA s¯ utradh¯ ara‘carpenter’ (13563), B. ch(r) abOna < OIA
sra
vana-2 ‘the 20th or 23rd asterism’ (12699),

chOchOnda < OIA svachanda- ‘freely’, c(h)¯ ana ‘bathing’ (B.chit. sean ‘bath’)  OIA sn¯ ana‘bathing’; in loanwords: pOchOndO ‘liking’ ← Pers. pasand, chOyl ap ‘inundation’ ← Pers. sail¯ ab; michr¯ı ‘sugar candy’ ← misr¯ı, mocorman ‘Musalm¯ an’.

11.4.1.10

Assamese

Assamese lacks aspiration, and the examples show affrication that was followed by deaffrication: tisi ∼ tic¯ı ‘linseed’ < OIA *tiss¯ı- ‘flax, linseed’ (5838) and allomorph of OIA atas¯ı- ‘flax’, s6mbHale ∼ cambh¯ale ‘takes care of’ < OIA sambh¯ ˙ alayati ‘observes well’ (12962), sOmu ∼ camu ‘straight’ < OIA sammukhá˙ ‘facing, present’ (12982) (cf. above Middle B. ch¯ amu ‘in front’ and Or. ch¯ amu ‘situated in front’), sãse ∼ ca ce ‘scrapes’ < OIA táks.ati ‘forms by cutting, chisels’ (5620) (cf. Pk. cacchaï), semi-tatsama sos ∼ coc ‘bark, rind’ < OIA tvaca‘skin, hide’ (6087) (cf. Pk. ca¯ a); unclear whether here also s6ta ∼ cat.a ¯ ‘splinter of bamboo or wood’ < OIA tas.t.á- (5743) ‘fashioned’, pas6n (p¯ acan) ‘goad to drive cattle’ < OIA pr¯ ajana‘goad’ (8924), a ¯sõiba ‘to wash the face after eating’ < OIA a ¯camati ‘sips water from the hand for purification’ (1064a) (actually with -cc-), Hãsi (ha ci) ‘sneezing’ < OIA hañji- ‘a sneeze, sneezing’ (13941a).

80 Additional aspirated forms of this word in the northwest are found p. 301 and p. 301.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

326

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

11.4.1.11

Reflexes found in several languages plus some other examples

GN chamichar¯ı ‘for deceased ancestors, pitris’, S. chamcharu ‘annual ceremony performed by heir of deceased’, G. chamchar¯ı ‘anniversary’ < OIA samavatsará˙ ‘year’ (13011) (note also here related Inscriptional Prakrit samvachala˙ [Mehendale 1948: 17] and Deśya Prakrit samvacchara ˙ ‘astrologer’ [Bhayani 1988: 161] < OIA s¯ amvatsara˙ ‘astrologer’81 ); P. bich¯ uchak ‘cholera’ cf. OIA vis.u ¯cik¯ a- ‘cholera in its sporadic form’and chuch ‘congealed mercury (a state which alchemists suppose it to assume from the influence of a certain herb)’ and B. ch˜ uci ‘ceremonial cleanliness’ (ODBL § 262) < OIA *śucya- ‘to be purified’ (12511); Bhil. d¯ec ‘land’ (LSI ix, iii: 42-43, also borrowed into Nih.82 ) with a parallel in Sh.gil. súuri deéc ‘sunny side of mountain’ (Schmidt and Kaul 2008) < OIA deśá- ‘country’ (6547) (but there is also Bhil. d¯eh [LSI ix, iii: 50]); Brah. r¯ oca ‘fast’ (H. roz¯ a); Chatt. bachar ‘year’ (LSI i, i: 237) probably belongs to parallels deriving < OIA *varis.ya- ‘year’ (see p. 356);83 Rom. chachimos ‘truth’ < OIA satyá- ‘truth’ (13112); Dm. cu ci ‘needle’, Pr. ž¯ a-žižuk ‘big needle for the headscarf of the women’ and Kho. ćhóndz uúr ‘(shoemaker’s) awl’ (which seems to be a synonym compound with -uúr < OIA a
r a ‘shoemaker’s awl’ [1313]) — B. chu c ‘needle’ (ODBL § 262) and Kh. cuPci ‘needle’ < OIA *s¯ uñc¯ı- ‘needle’ (13551).

11.4.2 11.4.2.1

Word-internal voiced and unvoiced affrication Deśya Prakrit

dojjha ‘offence, treachery’ < OIA dos.a- ‘fault’ (6587).

11.4.2.2

Panjabi, Mult¯ an¯ı, Jat.k¯ı

Jat.. hanjh and Mult. hanj both ‘tear’ < OIA áśru- (919) (similar also P., L., Khet. and note here with initial aspiration M. hask¯ ar ‘tear’), k˜ıjh¯ ar ‘beard of wheat or barley’ < OIA kim


sa
ru- ‘beard of corn’ (3148); Salt Range dialect nijhak ‘without fear’ (but Jat.. otherwise nisang ˙ ‘without fear’) < OIA nih.śanka˙ ‘fearless’ (7106); Jat.. vãjhl¯ı ‘flute’ < OIA vamś¯ ˙ ı‘flute’ (11180) (does this indicate long preservation of ś?).

11.4.2.3

Sindh¯ı

S. kanjho ‘bell-metal’ and L. (Jukes) ka j a ‘of metal’ < OIA ka
msya

- ‘made of bell-metal’ (2987), sajhd.u ‘hare’ < OIA śaśá- ‘hare’ (12357) (cf. Brj.-Aw. śus¯ a and Jat.. s¯ us¯ a both ‘hare’), S. hanjhar ‘duck’ and hanju ‘wild goose’ < OIA hamsá˙ ‘goose’ (13937) (similar are K. ünzü [without aspiration] and Bro. ha z e ‘duck’ [LSI viii, ii: 492, 226], Brah. hanj ‘waterfowl, duck, goose, Bal. hanjar ‘ditto’).

81 Note also with deaffrication Ko.kun.. s@msar ‘the work at the beginning of new year’. 82 On the pronounced tendency in Ni. to affricatize the sibilant see Kuiper (1962: 18). 83 Derivation < OIA samvatsará˙ ‘year’ with loss of prefix could be imagined but is without parallels; moreover, there is Jat.. v¯ achar. ‘shower’ also with ch < OIA s.ya. This means that sometimes also NIA languages having just one sibilant can have traces of the old OIA system with three sibilants.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.5. Affrication, apicalization and lateralization

327

Note: In OIA, tendencies for affrication are very rare, which is not surprising. One example would be śaka- ∼ *chaka- ‘dung’ (see Turner).

11.5

Affrication, apicalization and lateralization

At first sight it just seems as if within the three groups of Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, consonant clusters consisting of stop plus r were either preserved or were simplified to simple stops or changed into affricates. However, if we start looking closer at the data, beginning with Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, we get a more structured picture. In case the clusters underwent some other change than simplification, there are basically two process types found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, Dardic and Nuristani. Process type (a) e.g. in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı:

pr, bhr. mostly simplified but sometimes preserved tr, dr simplified or changed into c, j kr, g(h)r mostly simplified but sometimes preserved Bng. examples for affrication are c n ‘three’ < OIA tr
ni ‘three’ (5994) and j
sE ‘(early) morn

ing’ < OIA d
r
s ka- ‘splendid’ (6514).  In various Dard languages all these clusters have frequently been preserved. However, in those Dard languages, where clusters got also changed into affricates, we find a similar process type (a) as in a number of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, however with more cases of change of clusters into affricates; here typical for Dardic is e.g. Indus Kohistani:

pr, bhr. mostly changed into c. and z.h (no evidence for OIA br, but z. should be expected), tr, dr mostly changed into c. and z. (but dr a few times also > d.) (no evidence for OIA dhr but z.h should be expected), kr, gr, g(h)r either preserved or simplified. Examples: c.a ¯lᘠv ‘to get’ < OIA pralabhate ‘seizes’ (8751), zha ‘brother’ < OIA bhra
tr ‘slope’ < OIA dron.¯ı-2 ‘valley’ (6644). ‘three’ < OIA *tr¯ ayah. (5994), zu ‘brother’ (9661), ca



In process type (a) Dardic Indus Kohistani, which has a fourfold opposition t, th, d, dh, has preserved aspiration opposition in case of affrication, but there is no evidence for this in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages with a threefold opposition t, th, d. The reason for this is that process type (a) reduces in both cases the number of oppositions by one: in Indus Kohistani from four to three and in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı from three to two. Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has practically no words containing ch or jh, and even though Indus Kohistani has a substantial number of words containing c.h, none of them goes back to one of the above consonant clusters. The majority of them goes back to OIA ks. (for which there exists no aspiration opposition) which apparently displays an erratic behaviour in Indus Kohistani and also other Dard languages. Compare: c ha 
r kar
2v  ‘to shake


 out or off’ < *ks.an.ati ‘is sifted’ (3643), cha rav  ‘to be finished, hit by a disaster’ < ksanut
e

(into)’ < *ksupyate ‘is pressed’ (3719). Here,

‘hurts oneself’ (3644), cup
av  ‘to fix; to press .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

328

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

however, OIA -u- may have caused retroflexion instead of dentalization. The background for the behaviour of process type (a) is the fact that OIA (at least as reflected in the CDIAL) knows many clusters consisting of voiced aspirated stops plus r but no clusters consisting of unvoiced aspirated stops plus r. As pointed out, northwest of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı there are more preservations of stops plus r, and tr, dr have changed into palatal affricates also in various other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı variants but not the other clusters. In quantitative terms, affrication of tr and dr is the most common process, and thus probably older than the less common affrication of pr and bhr. But note also that in Nuristani there is practically no evidence for the process types (a) and (b) (see next paragraph). As one (somewhat doubtful) case I may quote Wg. třöp ‘imitative interjection “quick” ’ which can also be pronounced with a voiced (!) fricative as z.öp. In process type (b) (which is also found in Indus Kohistani, see below) there is not affrication but lateralization. Within West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, well-known cases for lateral affricates are Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı and Bhales¯ı, but they are also found in Khaś¯ al¯ı. In Bhales¯ı we observe:

pr, br, bhr. mostly changed into t«, d«, dh«,

< < < tr, dr, dhr mostly changed into t«, d«, dh«,

< < < gr, ghr changed into d« and dh«.


l (see p. 226) as in various Dard languages.84

Examples from Bhales¯ı t«e i ‘spleen’ < OIA *pr¯ıhan- ‘spleen’ (9028), d.«a¯g ‘leopard’ < OIA


d.h in Jat.. d.hibb¯ı ‘hillock’ < OIA t.ibba- ‘hill’ (5446.4), and of c > jh as in P. jhutt¯ a ‘the vulva’ which corresponds with H. c¯ ut; P. car.h¯ aun.a ¯ ‘to cause to ascent or mount’ is the same as jhar.h¯ aun.a ¯ (H. car.h¯ an¯ a), and note also O’Brien (1881:5) who states that OIA udrá- ‘otter’ is reflected in P. both as u ¯t and udh; Mult. bh¯ ochan. ‘plain cotton wrap (of woman)’ (O’Brien 1881: 53) < OIA lex. pracch¯ adana- ‘an upper or outer garment’, ch¯embh¯ a ‘print, stamp on cloth’ (ibid.) compares with OIA chimpik¯ a‘dyer’ and Pk. chimpaya˙ ‘cloth printer’ and jhambh- ‘card cotton’ (O’Brien 1881: 58) is related with OIA *jhapp-1 ‘sudden movement’ (5336); here also Pal. ˇȷh¯ ab ‘to be quiet’ and ˇȷh¯ aba ‘be quiet!’, and Garh. jupp ‘quietly’ which correspond with H. cup ‘be quiet’, all of which are related with OIA *cuppa-1 ‘silent’ (4864). There are many other examples, and additional forms will be quoted further below.

11.6.1.4

Other languages

S. gaph ‘froth’ < OIA kapha- ‘phlegm’ (2756) with modern reflexes in Si. and Kho., z¯ apn.u v.i.,v.t ‘to congeal; to curdle or coagulate’ < OIA *śy¯ atva- ‘congealed’(?) (cf. *śy¯ ata- ‘cold’ [12662]), hadhu ‘hand’ < OIA hásta- ‘hand’ (14023); Rj. gilkat.y¯ a ‘laughter’ with first syllable < OIA kilikil¯ a- ‘cries expressing joy’ (3185 and 3180), ba phni ‘eyelash’ < OIA páks.man ‘mud’ < OIA pánka‘eyelash’ (7638); M. jakl¯ a ‘all’ cf. with OIA sakala- ‘all’; A. bõka ˙ ‘mud’ (7645). 107 M.w¯ ar. t.irgha ‘woodpecker’ does not belong here but compares with OIA d¯ arvagh¯ at.a‘woodpecker’ (T. Burrow 1971: 538) (not mentioned in MW) where the author connects the second component with OIA ¯ agh¯ ata- “a striker, beater” and (AV iv,37,4) ¯ agh¯ at.a- ‘cymbal or rattle’. If that is correct (also the claimed relationship between ¯ agh¯ ata- and ¯ agh¯ at.a-), M.w¯ ar. would display CCH, a > i and initial devoicing. 108 Note that also in etymologically related Psht. p"¯ an.a ‘leaf’ the initial consonant is voiced in sandhi. 109 For the latter see p. 226 with partly same and partly additional examples put together in connection with discussion of tr > l.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

11.6.2

337

Devoicing of sonants

For stray cases of devoicing of Pali mediae see Geiger § 39. The trend is occasionally also found in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı as in trat.s.i- ‘grape’ < OIA dra
ksa - ‘grape’. Here follow examples for word-(morpheme-)initial, medial and final devoicing:

11.6.2.1

Nuristani

och, shuj, shush” ‘battle’ < OIA *yudhya- ‘to be fought’ (10501) via Pk. jujjha-, Kt. “sh¯ “shion” ‘life’ < OIA j
vana- ‘vivifying, life’ (5243), “shosh” ‘a witness’ < OIA śúdhyati (śudhyate) ‘is purified’ (12527), “shta” ‘clean, pure’ (also Sh., see below), šut ‘luck’ and štal ‘true’ all < OIA śuddhá- ‘clean, bright, white’ (12520) with various suffixes, “shâtin, shotin” ‘contented, glad’ < OIA stabdha- ‘firmly fixed’ (13676) (regarding semantics cf. G. t¯ ad.h˜ u, t.a ¯d.h˜ u ‘sluggish, contented, cold’) plus a suffix, Kt. (Davidson) z¯ım = dz¯ım = c˙¯ım ‘snow’ (related with a proto-form of OIA himá- ‘snow’), taman ‘the skirt of a garment, trousers, pyjamas’ ← Prs. d¯ aman, tar- ‘to place, to put’ < OIA dh¯ aráyati ‘holds’ (6791), tor  e, tur e, tavar e ‘near’ < OIA dhaureyá- ‘foremost’ (6884)(?), tra ci ‘guarding, caretaking, careful’ a compound with tar- ‘to place’ plus RAKS. ‘guard’(?), trmir ‘an inflated skin for crossing (a river)’ a synonym compound < OIA d
rti- ‘leather bag’ (6511) plus *mana-5 ‘skin-bag’  < OIA da
rteya- ‘derived from skin’ (6303)(?), (10044), ti˙ca ‘a skin-bag (for carrying flour)’ t¯ os ‘shoulder’ < OIA dós.- ‘forearm’ (6586) (cf. similar Eastern Kt. tos ‘épaule’ [ATLAS 51]), tapip, tabib ‘doctor’ ← Ar. tab b, énč¯ uk (also Tor., see next paragraph), ančik ‘darkness’ <  OIA a ¯ndhya- ‘blindness’ (1187), “parch” ‘burn’ (Davidson) < OIA *prajvala- ‘burning’(?); Dm. bruš ‘birch tree’ (Z.) < OIA bh¯ urja- (9570).

11.6.2.2

Dardic

Sh.ast. “rash” ‘king’ (Leitner) and Sh.gur. raš probably tatsama OIA ra
jan- is same as Bng. j Or a
s ‘kingdom of Yama’ (OIA yamar¯ajya-); Kal. deč ‘loan, debt’ < Pk. dejja- < OIA déya- ‘to be given’ (6522), gas ‘ell’ ← Prs. gaz, bak ‘garden’ ← Prs. b¯ agh; Wot.. šid, šit ‘information’ in šit kar- ‘to ask’ and Tor šit ‘aware’ < OIA śúddhi- ‘cleansing, purity’ (12523) and Sh. šut ‘luck’, ‘true’ < OIA śuddhá- ‘clean, bright, white’ (12520); Tir. brEt@ ‘good’ (Morgenstierne [1934b]) < OIA bhadrá-1 ‘fortunate, delightful’ and bhadraka- ‘good’; Wg. grop ‘womb; cozy place’ < OIA gárbha- ‘womb’ (4055) and Paš. sal"a ¯p ‘pregnant’ < OIA sagarbh¯ a- ‘pregnant’ (13076); Kho. čàč ‘tray for winnowing straw’ < OIA *chajja- ‘basket’ (4964) (also with deaspiration); Tor. n2t ‘river’ (Z.) < OIA nad
- ‘river’ (6943); K. drot.u ‘firm’ < OIA drdh
a- ‘firm’

(6508); K. h¯ apat ‘a bear’, Sh. “hapótok” ‘bear’ (Leitner 1985: 26), Kiś. a p@t andPog. š¯ aput both ‘bear’ cf. OIA
sva
pada- ‘beast of prey’; Sh. and Bro. d¯ ut and Dari. dut all ‘milk’ (also in very eastern NIA B.roh. dut ‘milk’) < OIA dugdhá- ‘milk’ (6391); Sh. aš, ačho ‘today’ < OIA adyá- ‘today’ (242); Sh. čap-, čup- and K. c˙ op u ‘bite’ < OIA *cubb- ‘pierce’ (4866); Chil. “nîsh” ‘sleep’ (Biddulph), Sh.koh. n
is, n
s ‘sleep’ < OIA nidra
- ‘sleep’ (7200); Tor. ančik

‘darkness’ (see preceding paragraph); Sh. guláp ‘rose’ ← Pers. gul¯ ab also in various Western and Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties (Kaul 2006 i: 48, Sharma 1983: 51); Klm. kän.ak H ‘flock of sheep and goats’ < OIA gan.á- ‘flock’ (3988), kät.o ¯ H(L) ‘cattle, pieces of cattle’ < OIA (P¯ an..) gotr¯ a- ‘herd of cows’ (see 4279) with a fairly close parallel in Pr. gu
tu ‘cow’ (ibid.), khum LH ‘end, bottom’ < OIA gámbhan- ‘depth’ (4029) (with a > u); Tor. av¯ as ‘sound’ ← Pers. a ¯w¯ az; Dm. ša"r¯ ap ‘wine’ ← Pers. śar¯ ab; Paš. “ sa :t” and Garh. sOt ‘honey’ ← Ar. śahd (H.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

338

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

śahad); Kal. bisl
 ‘electricity’ < OIA vidyullat¯ a- ‘forked lightning’ (11745), bit(r) ‘clear (of the sky)’ < v¯ıdhrá- ‘clear sky’ (12051); Gau. z¯ıph but pl. z b2 ‘tongue’ < OIA jihva
- ‘tongue’ (5228); D . o;rp ‘rain’ < OIA abhrá‘rainy weather’ (549); Bur. paháat ‘mountain’ (H. pah¯ ar.). . .

11.6.2.3

Pah¯ ar.¯ı

aud and poet. aut ‘otter’ (Catak 1973: 158) < OIA udrá-1 ‘an aquatic animal’, sent¯ a ‘a thick rope for carrying away ferocious animal’ < OIA (Hariv.) samd¯ ˙ aya- ‘rein, leash(?)’ (12901) with one parallel in H. sa d a ‘rope to tie a cow’s legs with while milking’; Kann. mec(h) ‘table’, P. mec ‘table’ ← Pers. mez. (cf. H. mez) (also B.roh. mes ‘table’ and Khasic Pnar mec ‘table’); Bng. gòr¯et. n.m. ‘kind of deer’ < OIA *ghorad.a- ‘a kind of deer or wild goat’ (4523a), mOd Ot n.f. ‘help’ ← Ar. madad, bur
sEnO v.t. ‘to roast’ < OIA bhrjyate ‘is fried’ (9585), mO crO1 , mO cOvO, ma cO ‘drunk, inebriated’ and ma cnO ‘to be drunk’

[p. 693] which u) with a semantic parallel in Bhad. and Rom.P., sat ghal ‘to call’ < OIA śábda- ‘noise’ (12298), c @rap ‘fat’ ← Pers. carb¯ı etc.; Ko.kan.. r@ngit ‘vulture’ < OIA g
rdhra- ‘vulture’ (4233) (regarding

 first component see OIA rán.a- ‘battle’).

11.6.2.6

Assamese

A. gid, kit, kid ‘anus’ (cf. OIA gudá- ‘intestine, anus’ [4194] whose origin is not clear) may be tatsamas even though the high front vowel is inexplicable. Note: There are also many examples for devoicing in Brahui, some of them are borrowings like carp¯ı ‘grease, fat’ ← Pers. carb¯ı, and a similar, but perhaps weaker, tendency can also be observed in Pashto, e.g. in br¯ıt ‘boundary’ ← Pers. bur¯ıd, t.a ¯k¯ u ‘robber’ ← NIA d.a ¯k¯ u, gunbata ‘dome’ ← Pers. gumbad etc.

11.6.2.7

Rohingya

1. azat ‘independent’ — Bur. azáat ‘independent’. 2. andas ‘estimate; guess’← Pers. and¯ az. 3. abas ‘voice’ ← Pers. a ¯v¯ az 112 Since there is also fluctuation between voiced and unvoiced word-final pronunciation, the author uses partially capital letters.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

340

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

4. dut ‘milk’ — Sh. and Bro. d¯ ut and Dari. dut all ‘milk’ < OIA dugdhá- ‘milk’ (6391) and word-final devoicing. 5. demak ‘brain’ ← Ar. dim aG. 6. bak ‘tiger’ < OIA vy¯ aghrá- ‘tiger’ (12193). 7. bák ‘portion; share’ < OIA bh¯ agya-2 ‘divisible; entitled to a share’ (9435). 8. burúss ‘to roast’ < OIA bhrrjj
ati ‘fries, parches’ (9583). 9. bus ‘understanding’ < OIAbúdhyate (9279) ‘understands’. 10. borbat ‘destroyed’ — Orm. barb¯ at ‘destroyed’ — Bur. barbáato ‘destroyed’ (with Bur. -o suffix) ← Pers. barb¯ ad. 11. bolot gouru ‘bull cow’ < OIA balivárda- ‘ox, bull’ (9176) and gor¯ upá- ‘cow-shaped’ (4313). 12. mes ‘table’ ← P. mez but with unvoiced affricated parallels in P. mec ‘table’ and Khasic Pnar mec ‘table’.113 . 13. ruk ‘diseases’ < OIA lex. rogya- ‘producing sickness’ (10830) with modern parallels in Sh. and K. With word-final devoicing also Bur. róok ‘sick’. 14. rok ‘nerves’ ← Pers. rag. 15. sép ‘apple’ ← Pers. seb.

11.6.3

Devoicing of sonants and laryngealization

Bartholomae’s Law applies to Indo-Iranian. It states, slightly simplified, that in a word containing two or more stops, if one among them is a voiced aspirate anywhere in the sequence, then the whole cluster becomes voiced and aspirated. A typical example is PIE *bheudh‘pay attention’: the participle *bhudh-to- loses the aspiration of the first stop (Grassmann’s Law) and with Bartholomae’s Law the result is OIA buddha- ‘known’. However, that forms like Waigal¯ı l¯ atoy are the result of the non-operation of Bartholomae’s Law and thus an indication of a very early deaspiration in Nuristani, as suggested by Degener (op. cit. p. 109), is unlikely. Cf. also Rom.W. and Rom. (Ian Hancock, On Romani origins and identity.) lat(h)- ‘encounter, engage’, Klm. lat H ‘has found it’ and Mult. and Jat.. l¯ ath¯ a ‘kept, preserved, guarded, placed’; and cf. Kho. bot-ik ‘to bind’ and batim ‘I bind’ < OIA baddhá‘bound’ (9126). In Turner’s index one does not find even one word among the Nuristan languages with lexemes ending in a voiced stop. However, here and there one does come across Nuristani words ending with a voiced stop, e.g. Wg. l¯ ad ‘peace’ or ‘legislation’ (but Kamd. lot ‘peace, settlement’). Many more examples for devoicing in Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı have been presented above and many more can be found below in the language data lists. (Word-final) devoicing tendencies are geographically unevenly distributed within the three groups. Generally said, they appear less pronounced in Dardic than in Nuristani and even less in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, but become again more pronounced in Kumaoni. Word-final devoicing is also found in R¯ ajbansh¯ı and a number of other Outer Languages. Instead of drawing an absolute ± line between Nuristani and Dardic also in this regard it is more adequate to see the floating transitions of the processes of deaspiration, devoicing (and depalatalization): 1. Word-final deaspiration and devoicing of Proto-Nuristani *labdha- (same as ProtoAryan) led to Nuristani l¯ atoy. 113 Affrication of sibilants is a characteristic of Outer Languages but sometimes also found in Hindi dialects, e.g. B.roh. pur c ‘a saucer’ also in regional Hindi piric (← Eng. press

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

341

2. Word-final devoicing took also place in Nuristani in cases where no deaspiration was involved as in Ash. c˙ ot ‘noise’ for which compare OIA śábda- ‘noise’ (12298), but note also just above-quoted M.kud.. sat ghal ‘to call’ which is < OIA śábda-.114 3. There are sometimes cases of a wavering between voicing and devoicing of word-final stops: Pr. iškyöp and üšköb ‘bridge’ < OIA skambhá-1 ‘prop’ (13639); Pr. (LSI) melig ‘uncle’, but in an off-print of Morgenstierne’s article on the language of the Prasun Kafirs (which is with me) there is a handwritten addition by Morgenstierne: Kt. milik ‘uncle’ (OIA mahallaka- ‘old, feeble’ [9935]); however, according to Turner, the Pr. word is a borrowing from Dardic. Still, this data suggests that devoicing may not be so old in Nuristani or that it may not be much older than in Dardic. As already illustrated above, there is a general tendency among various Dard languages for word-final devoicing. Here follow some more examples: for instance in Brok-skad dut ‘milk’ (also Sh.gil., and Dari. dut ‘milk’);115 Kal. drakdrák ‘very tired’ (but also dhrák dek ‘to lie down’116 and Sh.gil. .jeék boók, Sh.koh. z.eék boón, Sh.ast. .jek boók all ‘to lie [down]’ – cf. OIA [Dhatup.] dra
ghate ‘is tired’ [14633] and dairghá- ‘long’ [6368] where Turner quotes Kal. dhrek ‘lying down, stretched out’; note also Mult. dragh¯er ‘to lengthen, protract’) (word-final aspiration is mostly missing in Dardic [except Tir¯ ah¯ı], but it is found in Kashmiri and parts 1 ‘fire’ (55) and burč ‘birch’, for latter see of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı); D um¯ a ki cf. ak ‘fire’ < OIA agní . Ind. zhu s above p. 89; Tir¯ ah¯ı e.g. “sinth” ‘river’ (Leech 1838c: 12); the Chatorkhand variety

sint ‘river’; Kho. s2f ‘all’, Gaw. saf ‘all’ and Dash. se;p ‘whole’ all < OIA sárvaof Kho. ‘all’ (13276); Hind. sur2c ‘sun’ (H. s¯ uraj). In Gilgiti Shina one only finds, with some very few exceptions, voiceless and unaspirated stops in word-final position and the same holds true for Burushaski (see Čašule 2010: 8). An exception is Sh. ag ‘people’ with a strongly devoiced -g; the word, however, is a loan of Sanskrit jágat- ‘menand animals’. In Kalasha the situation is very similar to that in Shina: no voiced and no aspirated stops in word-final position, instead there is devoicing even in loanwords like isáp ‘amount’ (Ar. h.is¯ ab), šagét ‘student’ (Pers. š¯ agird) and only word-final clusters of nasal consonant and voiced stop are tolerated as in pin, pin.d. ‘wooden ball for snow golf’ (< OIA p
nda- ‘lump’ [8168]) or in

on¯ gron, gron.d. ‘airport’ (English ‘ground’); cf. also in Mult. as in m¯ a ‘hornless’ (O’Brien 1 1881: 32) < OIA mun.d.a- ‘hornless’ (10191). Again in Indus Kohistani the situation is quite similar: no voiced and no aspirated stops in word-final position (even though stops are allophonically always slightly aspirated), word-final clusters of nasal consonant and voiced stop are mostly tolerated, but sometimes also here is devoicing as in co th ‘the bun of a

woman’ < OIA *con.d.a- ‘topknot on head’ (4883), etc., or the nasalization is deleted as in the borrowing rimad. ‘remand’ (Hallberg [1992: 247]). I have already pointed out that word-final devoicing is also found in Ku. as in śar¯ ap ‘wine’ (← Pers. śar¯ ab), gar¯ıp ‘poor’ (← Ar. gar¯ıb), and many more. Since devoicing and deaspiration are frequently found together in this area (but not in Kashmiri and usually not in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı even though devoicing is occasionally found in some varieties [Kaul 2006 i: 47f.]), the question comes up whether they have been put into operation by the same cause. In fact, there are two possible phonetic causes known to me with seem to be responsible for devoicing and deaspiration, and which 114 According to Mayrhofer, śábda- may be a derivation from OIA ŚAP ‘to curse’. 115 The process is also observed in other Outer Languages, cf. e.g. Hindko where some dialects have dUt ‘milk’. 116 Apparently the same is also Kal. brak hik ‘to become tired’ (which seems to be the same as Kal. z.ek hik ‘to become tired out’) as in a kalám khóˇȷi, khóˇȷi brak hávis ‘I looked and looked for the pen but got tired out (and could not find it)’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

342

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

are still found more or less clearly in various Dard languages: laryngealization (and glottal stop) and delayed plosion of word-final stops (also called checked consonants, which are discussed above p. 292). Delayed plosion of word-final stops is, for instance, very prominent in Bhat.¯ıse (here indicated with the sign ^): z ab^ ‘a swamp’ < OIA jamba- ‘mud’ (5128), zana
t^ ‘heaven, a paradise’ from Ar. jannat,
zg^ ‘long’ < OIA d¯ırghá- ‘long’ (6368). The last example demonstrates loss of aspiration, but there is no strong devoicing in Bhat.¯ıse through delayed plosion. Devoicing is stronger in Indus Kohistani even though there is no (or not anymore a) feature of delayed plosion: zg ‘long’. Note that delayed plosion of word-final

 stops is also found in some Western Tibeto Himalayan languages, for instance in J¯ ad. (also called Rangba) in the upper Bhagirathi Valley, where we find e.g. zOg^ ‘mud’ (Z.) pronounced with delayed plosion (for more examples see D. D. Sharma 1994). The feature of laryngealization is for instance found in Kalami. Baart states (1997: 45): “In Kalami, laryngealisation may occur on utterance-final syllables. It affects the second half of the vowel, and if a consonant follows, this consonant will be devoiced. Instead of laryngealisation, a temporary complete closure of the glottis (the opening between the vocal cords) may occur at the end of the vowel, giving a so-called glottal stop. . . If laryngealisation does not occur it is still quite usual . . . for voicing to be turned off shortly before the end of an utterance, leaving a partly or completely devoiced consonant in final position.” An example would be bäd.¯ır H(L) ‘sledgehammer’ phonetically transcribed as [b2"di:Pr] (where

 < OIA the P stands both for complete and incomplete closure of the glottis) which derives *vardhira- ‘hammer’ (11385). Laryngealization is found only in Kalami words with an H(L) ‘delayed high-to-low falling pitch’, which, as much as I can see, is mostly found in words ending in laterals, sibilants and nasal consonants. Baart’s remark that devoicing in utterance-final position frequently takes place also when there is no laryngealization could be an indication that the phonetic cause of devoicing is about to disappear, thus making devoicing a general feature in utterance-final position. It is thus not unlikely that the features of delayed plosion and laryngealization operated also in other Dard languages and in Nuristani in the past until they disappeared, leaving back the common innovation of word-final deaspiration and devoicing.

11.6.4

r fronting

This type of metathesis probably parallels the above h metatheses with regard to its linguistic function. There are many languages in the larger western and northwestern part of South Asia (including Gujar¯ ati) with cases of “intrusive” r (e.g. Ku. m¯ arc¯ıs ‘matches’, P. karp¯ al ‘skull’ < OIA *kapp¯ ala-, karop ‘anger, wrath’ < OIA kopya-, k¯ ars¯ı ‘the eleventh day of each half of the month’ is semi-tatsama of OIA ek¯ adaśá-, etc.) which reminds us of the above cases of aspiration not justified by etymology which may, however, geographically more limited. In any case, their number is much less even though a remarkable number is found in Braj-Awadh¯ı (see p. 504 for examples). Similarly, whereas h metathesis in South Asia has not yet found much scholarly attention, r metathesis is well-known and described. It is found in Sindh¯ı, Lahnd¯ a, Dardic (e.g. in Pal. urbh
i ‘to fly, flutter’ < OIA údbharati ‘raises’ [2038], and here in a few perhaps not so obvious examples in comparison to those found in the relevant literature:117 Kal. bronz ‘lawn’ < OIA *marja- ‘meadow’ [14738], brúmbu.a ‘burning coal’ < OIA múrmura- ‘expiring ember’ and dras., dras.k n. ‘small amount or bit of 117 Maybe also Old Oriya as an Outer Language participated in this process if the inscriptions indeed reflect it. Cf. e.g. krapadraka ‘a medal(?)’ which Tripathi (1962: 360) compares with OIA kapardaka- ‘cowrie shell’ (cowries were used as a currency in medieval Orissa).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

343

¯ ‘run’ in the intensive OIA something’ and adv. ‘quickly’ with the adv. reflecting OIA DRA dáridr¯ ati ‘runs’ and the n. reflecting in OIA daridrati ‘is in need or poor’ [note that -s.(-) here < older *-z.(-), cf. also 6195]118 ), Romani and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (Masica 1991: 209) and, but only very rarely, in Nuristani as in Kt. s.aps."e ‘claw’ (same as Wg. č¯ apt.a) < OIA carpa(t.t.a)‘flat’ (4696) via *šrarpa- (or is here a case of CCH?), and occasionally in Pashto as in bruj ‘tower’ ← Pers. burj. Actually, one may better talk of r-spreading than of metathesis, at least sometimes, as this example may suggest and which finds confirmation in Kt.g. b@r ur ‘powder’ < OIA *b¯ ura- ‘powder’ (9298) and in d.v¯ ar ‘cave’ < OIA *udd¯ ara- ‘cave’ (1988a) via *udr¯ ar-.119 Another type of r fronting is seen in Bng. pOrthanO ‘to spread (out) (e.g.

clothes)’ < OIA *prastarati ‘spreads out’ (8860). As pointed out above, r metathesis is still ‘virulent’ in the plains and lower hills of North Pakistan, and this may be a hint for its original core area. It existed already in MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı (dhrama- instead of dharma-, Fussman 1989: 487 – note that the same form is even found in Brj.-Aw. dhrãm ‘Dharma’). How old it is in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı is more difficult to say, but there is a lot of evidence in the first major medieval inscriptions from Chamba (Vogel 1911) where one finds tr¯ am¯ apat.(¯ a) ‘copper plate’ < OIA t¯ amrá- ‘copper’ (5779) + pat.t.a-1 - ‘slab’ (7699), also Kann. tr¯o mön˙ and Kgr. tr¯ amb¯ a both ‘copper’;120 tr¯ın.¯ı ‘pasturing tax’ < OIA t¯ıráyati ‘finishes’ (5844). More examples of r metathesis in Western West Himalayish and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı are: Kh¯ aśi. tramp- ‘to eat with hand or fingers any pastry dish’ < OIA tarpáyati ‘satisfies’ (5728) (?) – there are also Rudh. > dhl2na and Marm. "
s2ppnu etc. with same meaning (Kaul 2006 ii: 219) with at least the

latter

word < older *c2ppnu < older *tr2ppnu; Kh¯ aśi. bhrebhu ‘brown bear’ < OIA babhrú‘reddish brown’ (9149) (with a parallel; in P. barabbu ‘a grisly bear’; Wg. bro  ‘black bear’ derives < OIA *bhr¯ aru- ‘bear’ [9680]); Kh¯ aśi. tretala ‘a rope used for frightening animals, which produces great sound when waved’, Jat.. tar¯ at ‘a whip and goad combined’ and Sh. th˘ ur ‘whip’ < OIA tóttra- ‘goad for cattle or elephants’ (5966) plus an extension in case of Kh¯ aśi. – here also Bng. with a related meaning totrianO ‘to run amok as a wounded wild boar’

and Ind. "c.hac.u ¯r ‘whip’ (Hallberg and Hallberg) (< older *tratrara-?) and perhaps Kt.g. and Kc. ch
 u ‘whip’ and Sh.dras. c@
u  ‘whip’ < older *trottra- ‘whip’ plus an extension (regarding meaning cf. OIA *tottr¯ anta- ‘whip end’ [5967];121 the lemma is also found as a borrowing in Psht. tr¯ at. ‘a whip, goad’); Kt.g. karś ‘awn, beard of corn’ < OIA kim


sa
ru- ‘beard of corn’ (3148) (Pk.) (this example shows that parallel to vowel epenthesis and palatalization (see p. 488) there are also two types of r fronting with the r fronted either before or after the first vowel); Cur. bhrad.d. ‘sheep’ (cf. similar Paš.DN. bart.ek ‘sheep’ [Lehr 2014: e.g. 113]) < OIA bhed.ra- ‘ram’ (9606) and br¯ ahg (Bhad. d.hl.a ¯hg) ‘panther’ < OIA vy¯ aghrá- ‘tiger’ (12196); Bhad. and Bhal. dlebu, Khaś. dlebu der, Chin. drebu all ‘husband’s younger brother’ < OIA < <



dev
r- ‘husband’s younger brother’ (6546); Bng. birthanO v.t. ‘to spread (out), scatter’ < OIA

 vistarati ‘spreads out’ (12005). Notes: (a) Here some cases of h-spreading: Ki˜ ut.h. mh¯ at.h¯ o ‘small’ < OIA *mat.t.ha-1 ‘defective’ (9723); Khet. ph¯ ah¯ u ‘sheep’ < OIA paśú- ‘goat’ (7984); and Cur. bh¯ akh ‘statement of 118 It is worth pointing out that Kal. drasn
k ‘to come out, to emerge; to dislocate; to rise (of sun or moon)’ and drazn
ek ‘to take out’ are verbal compounds with first component being dras., dras.k

‘to emerge; to rise of sun and moon’ whose background is found p. 640. and second nih
k 119 But these could also be interpreted as cases of “intrusive” r. 120 Cf. Bng. c ambO ‘copper’ and Sh.gil. “tch¯ om” ‘copper’ (Leitner) respectively c.oóm ‘slag (while smelting down iron)’ (Degener). 121 Here probably related is also San.. s ac ost ‘whip; switch’ where -¯os.t. compares with OIA lex.



carmayas.t.i- ‘whip’ (4705).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

344

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

a party in a court’ < OIA v¯ akya- ‘speech, words’ with spreading of a spontaneous aspiration (most likely from left to right). (b) There are even stray cases of l metathesis: Kh¯ aśi. blun¯ a ‘whirlwind’ (Kaul 2006 i: 189), which has a parallel in P. balun¯ a ‘whirlwind’, < OIA lex. v¯ ataman.d.al¯ı- ‘whirlwind’ (11496). (c) And there are perhaps even rarer cases of metathesis of other consonants as can be seen in Kal. prás.mik ‘to forget’ which is < OIA *pramrs.ati ‘forgets’ (8730). The initial details of the process are explained loc.cit. by Turner. (d) Besides other OLs displaying r metathesis (quoted infra), the process is also very common in Braj-Awadhi (see p. 504). (e) The same process is even occasionally found in Avestan, there typically in borrowings from Sanskrit (see Jackson 1968): OIA átharvan- ‘priest’ — Jav. a Trauuan;122 ; OIA cáturdaśa- ‘fourteen’ — Av. catrudaso-.

11.6.5

Nasal consonant variations

The following paragraphs deal with various alternations of phonemes (typically, e.g., voiced versus voiceless, nasalized versus not nasalized, sibilants versus affricates, etc.) which characterize languages of the northwest and to a certain extend also other Outer Languages possibly partly due to ‘North Indian’ substrate influence which also affected the Munda languages. See above the section “Consonant variation in Munda and Outer Languages” (p. 272).

11.6.5.1

Various reflexes of OIA nasal-plus-occlusive clusters

Masica says (1991: 203) that the voicing of voiceless stops preceded by a class nasal consonant “. . . is definitely centered outside the mainstream area. . . ” and includes Panjabi, Sindh¯ı, Kashmiri, Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, but also Dardic Savi, Gojri (language of Gujars in Jammu & Kashmir), Romani, Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Nepali. Some languages in the area – Gawar-Bati, Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı, Khaś¯ al¯ı – have resisted this process (Masica loc. cit.), to which we have to add the Nuristan languages. On the other hand, in Bang¯ an.¯ı (and some other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages) one finds side by side both unvoiced and voiced forms. In a number of cases this may be due to rather recent borrowing from Hindi (for instance, Bang¯ an.¯ı has both da d and da t ‘tooth’ which are < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ [6152]). In the case of other doublets recent borrowing is not possible, as with the present participle where the standard Bang¯ an.¯ı ending is -(n)dO but where there are also many words with -Ont. The conclusion is that the origin of the voicing lay somewhere outside West Pah¯ ar.¯ı but that it spread into it more or less successfully (an incomplete voicing process). The same holds true, e.g. also for Panjabi, cf. e.g. dand ‘tooth’ versus d¯ atan. ‘a tooth-brush, rather a stick which serves that purpose’ which is < OIA dantapavana- ‘small piece of wood to clean the teeth with’ (6157). However, the behavior of reflexes of OIA nasal-plus-occlusive clusters in Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı and some other Outer Languages123 is more complex than Masica’s sketch gives reason to expect, because there one frequently finds NC either > N or > C. Note that NC comprises bilabial, dental retroflex and velar nasal-plus-occlusives with both voiced and unvoiced stops. For sake of brevity, in the following a formal writing like -ntincludes also -nd-. 122 I quote this example even though I think it is not convincing. 123 And occasional borrowings into neighboring language families like Tibeto-Himalayan.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

345

The general rule for the great majority of the other Indo-Aryan languages is that homorganic nasal-plus-occlusive clusters are always retained in MIA and largely retained in NIA (Masica [1995: 178f.]), e.g. OIA kámpate ‘trembles’ > Pa. kampati > Or. kampib¯ a. Occasionally there is progressive assimilation e.g. -mp- > -mm- and probably sometimes (*)-mm- > -m-. If a word in Nuristani, Dardic or Pah¯ ar.¯ı has preserved just the occlusive, we have a clear case of an Outer Language feature, which is not (or hardly ever) found in the Prakrits as e.g. described by Pischel. However, since it might be difficult to discern between the different developments of NC either > NN > N or NC directly > N, I will present as evidential examples only words from languages, which also have NC > C. Moreover, there are some cases where adjacent Vedic accent position has been preserved as e.g. below in Ind. k2m2l < OIA kambalá1 , where a reconstruction < earlier *kammal is impossible because there is no ´ -. evidence for OIA *-mmV

Bilabial clusters (a) -mp- > -p(b) -mp- > -m-

Dental clusters (c) -nt- > -t(d) -nt- > -n[(e) -nt- > -d(h)-]124

Retroflex clusters (f) -n.t.- > -t.(g) -n.t.- > -n.-

Velar clusters (h) -nk˙ > -k(i) -nk˙ > -n˙ The above patterns of change are also more complex than the patterns of change in the nonG¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Prakrits because, whereas here any of the two components can disappear, there it is only the nasal component of a vowel which can disappear under very specific conditions, as described by Pischel. First: short nasal vowel is occasionally lengthened before ra, sibilant and ha with loss of nasalization (§ 76), and second: occasionally deviating from the rule ‘long vowel gets shortened in closed syllable’ (§ 83), the long vowel is retained in some dialects, however, with loss of nasalization as in Mah m¯ asa- < OIA m¯ amsá˙ ‘flesh’ (§ 89). All these are conditions which have little to do with the phenomena treated in this subsection. Moreover, it seems that in MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı the processes of NC either to N or C were, at least in form of a tendency, structured: voicing of unvoiced consonants and deletion of preceding nasal consonant versus deletion of voiced consonants and preservation of the nasal consonant as in śadi ‘peace’ < OIA
sa
nti- ‘cessation’ (12391) vs. vinadi < OIA vindáti ‘finds, gets’ (11783) (Salomon 1999: 129). Kati, in fact, parallels G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı in both processes (except voicing), there is nt > t and nd > n (see Konow [1911: 25]). A similar alternation is 124 This pattern is not discussed here further, but for more examples see Grierson 1931: 353ff.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

346

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

found in Sh.pales. don ‘tooth’ vs. dódi ‘teeth’ < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ (6152). These processes seem to have something to do with a tendency for no toleration of nasal consonant + occlusive clusters (see above p. 321) and has even affected nasal consonant + occlusive clusters which were not inherited from OIA but which developed out of ‘spontaneous’ nasalization as can be seen e.g. in Ku. n¯ın ‘sleep’ < OIA nidra
- ‘sleep’ (7200) but Pa. nidd¯ a- and H. n¯ımd. ˙ Although we find similar tendencies also in other Nuristan, Dard and Pah¯ ar¯ı languages, the data in the following notes show also complex superimpositions and mutual influences. In not so few cases, OIA nasal-plus-occlusive clusters have also simply just been preserved or one language has both options (as in the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı example above). Note: As an illustration for this complexity we now look at the following OIA lemma which is only found in the northwest and in Sinhalese: vasantá- ‘spring season’ (11439). The Nuristan languages have, as to be expected, NC𝑢 (i.e. complete preservation) or C𝑢 , also Gmb. But Dm., Paš., Wot.., Kat.., Gaw., Kal., Kho., Bshk., Tor, Sv., Pal. and most Sh. dialects have N(C𝑣 ), however Sh. of Gilgit has bas odu (T. Grahame Bailey) and also bazoóno (Radloff), and  ‘spring season’ and baz¯ Sh.koh. has both baz¯ odo on ‘(in) spring season’ (RSup), and Sh.pales. has bazoódo; Bng. has bOs et ‘spring season’ and poet. bOstena

ar ‘spring season cultivation’ (< OIA vasantav¯ ahana- ?), and Khaśdh. has bOstu ‘spring season’ (< OIA *vasantak¯ ara- or rather *vasantav¯ ara-, cf. Ash. w@zd ar ‘spring’ for which Morgenstierne reconstructs the latter OIA form) both of which go well with the Nuristan forms; they are certainly not loan words. Examples for (a) -mp- > -p-. 1. Ku. kapan. ‘to tremble’ < OIA kámpate ‘trembles’ (2767) and Brj. kup-kuppi ‘shiver’ (with OL a > u) < OIA kampa- ‘tremor’ (2765). 2. Mult. khabh ‘feather’ < OIA *skambha-2 ‘wing, plumage’ (13640). 3. Bhat.. zäb^ ‘a swamp’ < OIA jamba- ‘mud’ (5128). Examples for (b) -mp- > -m-. 1. K. kamun, Ku. k¯ amn.o, N. k¯ amnu all ‘tremble’ < OIA kámpate ‘trembles’ are doubtful examples. 2. Ind. k2m2l, Bhat.. kamál, Gau. kam
2l, perhaps K. kamali ˙ all ‘blanket’ < OIA kambalá1 ‘ woollen blanket or upper garment’ (2771). Note preservation of accent position. 3. B.roh. keém ‘camp’ — Ind. k
em ‘camp’ but H. kEmp. 4. Ind. gum
av  ‘to thread’ < OIA gumpháti ‘strings together’ (4205). 5. Ind. cum
2v  ‘to prick (with a thorn, needle)’ < OIA *cumbhati ‘pierces’ (4872). 6. Ind. lem
2v  ‘to plaster, etc.’, Sh. (Lorimer) limoiki ‘to plaster with mud’ < OIA limpáti ‘smears’ (11066). Examples for (c) -nt- and -nd- > -t-. 1. Gan. gadharve reflects OIA gandharva- ‘a Gandharva’ (Fussman [1989: 478]). 2. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı R¯ amb. forms the present tense like this: marti ‘they beat’ which contrasts with K. m¯ aran ‘they beat’ whereby both reflect the same OIA participle ending -anta; similar is R¯ amb. kh¯ a-sati ‘are eating’ (see Kaul 2006 i: 173) which contrasts e.g. with P. sand¯ a ‘chattels’ both of which are < OIA santaka- ‘belonging to’ (13127125 ). 125 See there “Dm. -san affix denoting enduring state with verb or adjective.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

347

3. Bshk. mad- ‘to churn’ and Ind. kalay mad
2v  ‘to whisk butter’ < OIA mánthati ‘whirls, shakes’ (9839). 4. Ind. hidistA ust¯ an and has a parallel in Sak. H¯ıd¯ u ‘Hindu’. In n ‘India’ is ← Pers. hind¯ fact, this sound change is already known from Avesta (Morgenstierne [1973c: 44]). 5. Klm. mig¯ or HL ‘the town of Mingora in the Swat Valley’. 6. Jaun. b adnO ‘to bind’ (Z.) < OIA bandhati ‘binds’ (9139).

7. Name of King Indravarma (first century, Bajaur area) on his coinage is called Itravasu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indravarma) Examples for (d) -nt- > -n-. 1. Ind. 2ba
-sn “father Indus”.126 2. Wot.. ana
r ‘dark; darkness’ < OIA *andh¯ık¯ ara- (386); in similar ways Bng. and Kva. n arO adj.,n.m. ‘dark; darkness’, Deog. hinarO ‘darkness’ (with fronted aspiration of -dh), Jaun. in¯ aro, hiny¯ aro, hini¯ aro ‘dark’ (Z.), Ku. any¯ ar ‘darkness’. These word resemble the following words which, however, have preserved the cluster, namely Garh. indor¯ a ‘darkness’, Rj.mev. and Bund. indyaro because all display the shift a > i. Without this initial vowel shift but with same cluster simplification L. anh¯ ar¯ a ‘dark’ and Chin. an¯ aru ‘darkness’; a similar form was borrowed into Kann. any¯ arön˙ ‘darkness; dark’. 3. B.roh. kaárén ‘current’ and bijilir kaáron ‘electric current’. 4. Ind. za n, Bro. zun, Wot.. zyen all ‘snake’ < OIA jantú- ‘insect, worm ’ (5110). 5. B.roh. d.izni lén ‘Disney land’. 6. Ind. tuìni , Klm. tin H, Tor. t¯ın all ‘navel’ < OIA tundi- ‘navel’ (5860). 7. Wot.. dan ‘tooth’ < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ (6152); also West Pah¯ ar.¯ı P¯ ad.. dann ‘tooth’. 8. Ind. pa n, Dm. phan, Kho. pon, Tor. p¯ an all ‘path’ < OIA pánth¯ a- ‘path, road’ (7785). 9. Bng. bOna n.f. ‘fastening of animals’ < OIA bándhana- ‘tying’ (9140). 10. B.roh. ban ‘to tie’ — Jaun. bh¯ anna ‘to bind’ (besides b¯ adn¯ a)) (Z.) both < OIA bandhati ‘binds’ (9139). 11. B.roh. rifán ‘refund’. 12. B.roh. rikomán ‘recommend’. 13. The same also in Iranian Psht. Gan"@m < Av. gan.tuma-. Elfenbein et al. wonder about the loss of Av. -t-, but parallel with above-quoted Sak. H¯ıd¯ u it is clear that this historical development did not stop in front of language family borders in northwestern South Asia. Regarding examples for (e), see above. Examples for (f) -n.t.- > -t.-. 1. MIA Gan. an.asapid.iasa ‘in (the grove of) An¯ athapin.d.ika’ but Pa. an¯ athapin.d.ikassa (founder of Buddhist Jetavana Monastery). 2. Gau. at.áh ‘egg’ < OIA a ¯n.d.á- ‘egg’ (1111). For the complex and manifold reflexes of this ‘egg’ lemma see p. 225. 3. Kt. kat."¯ı ‘sound’, Pr. k¯ o.t., k¯ ut. ‘voice’ < OIA kan.t.há- (c)‘sound’ (2680). 4. Bng. kOddi ‘conical carrying basket’ (also kOndO, also borrowed into Kann. kot
 ‘kind





of long basket’ < OIA káran.d.a- ‘basket’ (2792). 5. Deog. pidi ‘calf (of leg)’ (but Brah. pinni ‘calf of the leg’) < OIA pín.d.a- ‘lump’ (8168) with dental consonant instead of retroflex as in the next group below. 126 On the background of s
ndhu- see e.g. Witzel (2001: 16). I may also point out here that the word is even found as a “Celtic” loanword sind¯ a ‘river’ in Old High German (Schweitzer p. 368).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

348

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

6. Ind. b2tah ‘a part, portion’ < OIA *van.t.ha-1 ‘share’ (11235.2).

ad2v ‘a courtyard’ < OIA mandapa- ‘pavilion ’ (9740). 7. Gau. m
..

Examples for (g) -n.t.- > -n.-. 1. Ind. k2n ‘a gorge, ravine’ < OIA kan.t.há- (a)‘throat, neck’ (2680) with dental consonant. 2. Ind. kan
2v  ‘to itch; to scratch’ < OIA kan.d.u ¯yáti ‘scratches; itches’ (2689) with dental consonant. 3. Ind. p2n2r ‘white’ < OIA pa
ndara- ‘whitish’ (8047) with dental consonant. 4. Bng. manu ‘(big) frog, toad’ < OIA mandu
ka- ‘frog’ (9746) with dental consonant.

a bread-cake is made’ < OIA *menda-2 5. Gau. mín.i ‘a lump of dough out of which .. ‘lump’ (10308.2). Examples for (h) -nk˙ > -k-. 1. A. xikOli ‘chain’ < OIA śrnkhala˙ ‘chain’.  ← a reflex of OIA mangalá2. Rp. m ag@v ‘marriage songs’ ˙ ‘auspicious sign’ (9706). 3. Garh. pigl¯ a ‘pale’ < OIA pingalá˙ ‘reddish-brown’ (8148). 4. Bng. kOlOk ‘sin’ < OIA kalanka˙ ‘stain’ (2911).

Regarding examples for (i) -nk˙ > -n-: ˙ This is due to non-release of velar nasal consonant ng, ˙ nk ˙ into n˙ in Outer Languages. It is very widespread and found from Dardic to Assamese (see p. 19). Note: In case of the following Himachali words (Tikaram Joshi [1911a]) with loss of inherited nasal consonant, the G¯ andh¯ aran principle of ‘voicing of unvoiced consonants and deletion of preceding nasal consonant versus deletion of voiced consonants and preservation of the nasal consonant’ was not at work, but it seems they are examples for the impact of prehistoric Austro-Asiatic sesquisyllabic word structures on OL OIA dialects (see p. 274): bhd.a ¯r ‘granary’ < OIA bh¯ an.d.a ¯g¯ ara- ‘treasury’ (9442), rg¯ an.u ‘to dye, to colour’ < OIA *rangayati ˙ ‘dyes’ (10570).127

Partly similar outcomes of OIA NCr (j) -ntr- > -t(r)(k) -ntr- > -n(l)-ntr- > -c.-, s. (m) -ntr- > -rIn MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı there is the personal name Idravarma < OIA Indravarman- (Fussman (1989: 469) as an example for early NCr > Cr. The last example of this section comprises reflexes of OIA MAN ‘speak’128 illustrating (j), (k), (l):

127 Discussed again p. 477. 128 This is probably a dominat OL meaning versus Vedic (IL) meaning ‘think’. All following words < (or cognate with) OIA mántra- ‘counsel’ (9834) and mantr
ayate ‘speaks’ (98379).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

349

(j) Niya matra ‘charm’ and matreti ‘they say’ (Jamison 2000: 71); Kal. m
atrik ‘speak’; Dm. matr- ‘read’; Wg. matr a ‘speech’ — A. mat (m¯ at) ‘call’. (k) Ind. man- ‘speak’, D . . mun ‘speak!’, Kal. mon dek ‘speak’ (also uncurtailed mondr ‘speak’), Bshk. man- ‘speak’, Sv. man- ‘speak, say, read’, Pal. man
i ‘to say, call, read; recite’, Paš. man- ‘speak’. (l) Bro. m¯ us. ‘language’ and Koh. mos. ‘word’.129 (m) ‘Iranian’ type130 Paš. also mar- ‘speak’, Sh. mor ‘word, thing’ — perhaps West Pah¯ ar.¯ı MKH [3: 71] mh¯ areo ran.a ¯¯ıko ‘said the R¯ an.a ¯’. Notes: (a) The same lemma was probably borrowed into West Himalayish Kann. manth
anang

(man-th
anang) ‘the Kinnauri language’ with preservation of -nt-. (b) Here probably also with different suffixes and extensions Bng. mOtu ath n.m. ‘stick

for beating s.o.’ (with -uath suffix), mOtkunO adj., n.m. ‘obedient, disciplined; a



child which is obedient, disciplined’ (with -kunO suffix) and Deog. m Ot ‘instruction’,

m OteOnO ‘to instruct s.o. (also by beating)’ (a causative derivation from the noun), and

O ‘intensive of preceding’ (with -ria- suffix) and Jaun. m Oti s mOteriaOn adnO ‘to ask for

(Joshi 2007: 64, 72); here perhaps

Ku. matk¯

an advice’ an. ‘to beat’ if < older meaning *‘to drub sth. into sb.’

Loss of nasal consonants in other languages S. etire m˜e ‘meantime, meanwhile’ < OIA ántara-1 ‘interior’ (357) with a similar formation in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhal. atru-ma¨ȷ ‘in the meantime’; G.pars. d uti ‘navel’ < OIA *dundi- ‘navel’ (5860); Rj. a ¯sango ˙ or a ¯sagyo ka- ‘to be too familiar with’ < OIA a ¯sanga˙ ‘attachment’ (1478) (Pa., Pk.) with one modern parallel in G.; Marw. ditta ‘tooth’ < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ (6152); Rj. picak ‘a group of five’ < OIA páñcaka- ‘consisting of five, a pentad’ (7656), sakbo, sak¯ abo ‘to be shy, be ashamed’ < OIA
sank

a
- ‘fear, distrust’ (12258). About the Kud.a ¯l.¯ı dialect of Mar¯ at.h¯ı Ghatage observes (1965: i): “The nasalization of the vowels in the speech of the uneducated is very weak and often completely absent.” Further examples: pa˙c ‘five’; Ko.kun.. l@goti ‘a piece of cloth worn round the loins’ < OIA

*langapat ˙ . t.a- ‘loincloth’ (10903); Bhil.wag. and various M. dialects dat ‘tooth, teeth’ < OIA dánta- ‘tooth’ (6152); Ko.S. magce ‘to borrow’ and m ag@ ‘beg’ (cf. H. m¯ angn¯ ˙ a), m¯ ugu ‘green gram’ (cf. H. m¯ ung ˙ ‘ditto’).

11.6.5.2

Partly similar outcomes in case of nasal + affricate developments

I have pointed out above a tendency in MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı regarding the treatment of OIA nasalplus-occlusive clusters towards voicing of unvoiced consonants and deletion of preceding nasal consonant versus deletion of voiced consonants and preservation of the nasal consonant. I had also pointed out with reference to Sten Konow (1911: 25) that modern Nuristani Kati behaves very similar in that OIA nt changes > t and nd > n. It appears that in the area sometimes similar historical processes took place with reflexes of OIA ñc versus ñj type clusters. Thus there is Sh.koh. (RSup) poš, Kamd. p"c˙ , Kt. p"uč, Pr. vuč"u ¯ all ‘five’ (but San.. and Wg. have preserved nasal[ized vowel]) versus Shum. 129 These forms derives < older *muc., moc. < *mutr, motr. 130 Cf. e.g. Khot. p¯ ura- ‘son’ but OIA putrá-.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

350

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

p¯ on and Kal.rumb. poñ which reflect older *ñj as still preserved in Deg. p"anˇȷ, Kho. and Pal. p"onˇȷ, Ind. pa z. Consequently, there does not exist anywhere *paj ‘five’ or a similar form. Whereas the above example is one with OIA-inherited ñc, which changed either into c or ñj, there is an almost mirror-image type of a secondary MIA ñj cluster in case of OIA m
adhya- ‘middle’ because also here we can observe a similar tendency for an opposition between vc (which emerged through common word-final devoicing) and v ˜j, vñj (with ‘spontaneous’ nasalization): (a) vc: Kt. p@m c ‘middle’, Kamd. p am" uc ‘in-between’ and mič"a gal ‘Middle Valley’, Kal. moc, moch
k ‘middle’. (b) vñj: Pr. mun ‘middle’, Wg. man- ‘middle’ (but also maˇȷ), Deg. manˇȷa ‘in the middle of’, Ind. mh2nzo
l ‘middle’, Tir. manzum ‘in’, Psht. myanj, manj ‘middle’ (IA loanword). Unfortunately, there is for secondary MIA nc cluster no clear evidence for a corresponding trend. There does exist a number of reflexes of OIA *rohitya- ‘a kind of deer’ (10868) (or rather *rohya- ‘a kind of deer’ [10870]), e.g. Kann. r oc ‘a musk deer’ (borrowed from IA) versus Sh.koh. ro 
oz ‘musk deer’ and perhaps dialectal Or. rojni ‘female of the d.uma deer’, but the overall evidence is too ambiguous (more reflexes are discussed p. 706).

11.6.6

Voice variations

These involve oppositions within individual lemmata between voiced (and aspirated) stops and fricatives, and unvoiced (and unaspirated) stops and fricatives. They resemble variations known from Munda (see above p. 272), which are ultimately of Austro-Asiatic origin. However, in many cases of the following lemmata their etymology remains unclear. These must then be candidates for North Indian’ membership, that is stemming from languages which were spoken in northern India before the arrival of speakers of Austro-Asiatic (and Indo-Aryan).

1. g(h) vs. k vs. q 1a. Mushroom Ind. g
 cℎ𝑖 ‘truffle’; Gau. ghukh c l ‘mushroom’; Sh.koh. (RSup) gug˙c¯ıli ‘wild mushrooms’; Kal. ku ci, ku c
 ‘mushroom, the morel mushroom which grows in the Kalasha Valleys’; Kho. qu ci ‘morel mushroom’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics qotsú ‘species of tree-shaped mushroom’); ; Wg. ka-ai-kü˙cok ‘morel’; Bhat.. ghuc  ‘morel mushroom’ — K. kana-ga ch ‘a kind of edible mushroom, morel, Morchella sp.’ — D . og. gucchi; Khaś. kecch ‘a variety of black jungle mushroom’; Deog. and Khaśdh. giccu ‘type of mushroom’ — Rp. g@jO ‘mushroom’. 1b. Duck Kgr. khEra ‘large duck’ (Wilson 1899a) has a parallel in OIA *ger¯ at.a ‘dove (?)’ (4250) with L. (Jat..) ger¯ a etc. ‘dove’. But Turner also mentions Winternitz’ suggestion of meaning ‘duck’ — Turi gere ‘duck’, Korwa geóe ‘duck’, Sant. geãe ‘duck’, Koda kEãE ‘duck’. 1c. Cf. also OIA kávaca- = kavasa- = kavas.a- (2957).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

351

2. j(h) vs. ś or c(h) 2a. Wasp Bng. jmori, Deog. jhimri ‘wasp’, Him. (Joshi) cimri ‘the yellow wasp’. This word (again discussed below p. 805) is found in an older form in Khaś. (low rudh.) trimri.

2b. Eyelid OIA *jhapp-2 ‘cover’ (5337) has e.g. the modern reflex N. jh¯ apo ‘lid’, but there is also Ku. and Garh. c¯ep ‘eyelid’. The Ku. and Garh. forms may, however, be borrowings from Austro-Asiatic (see p. 968).

3. t. vs. d . Bng. tOktOkO ‘dry, hard (as bread)’ same as dOkdOkO; Khaśdh. and Deog. dOkdOkO both ‘dry,

baur. tOktOkO ‘dry, hard’.





hard’, and



4. t. vs. d .h Fart: Ind.‘t2
r ‘a fart’; Psht. t.ar ‘flatus, explosion of wind from behind’; Kho. t.irík ‘to defecate’; K. t.a r ‘a spluttering sound from the anus at the time of defecating’ (but Paš. tri ‘flatus’); Kt. t.rák and Wg. t.rik both ‘fart (noisy/audible)’ and Kamd. t.r"al¯ asa- ‘to fart (audibly)’; Bng. tOr ‘a fart’; Ku. and N. d.hurr ‘fart’; P. t.arkal ‘in the habit of breaking wind’ and t.urkn. a ¯ ‘to break wind’; Pr. tür ‘fart (audible)’ — Sant. tara¼t tOrO¼t ‘to break wind’.



11.6.7

Place of articulation variations of sibilants/affricates

The great variety of forms of the many lemmata presented in this section, the etymology of which is not clear in many cases, is on the one hand a consequence of the principle of assimilation described above, which together with the principle of simplification (see p. 11) is an essential distinguishing feature for the difference between Outer and Inner Languages is. On the other hand, the great variety of forms is also a result of the many phonetic fluctuations and pronunciation trends that are characteristic of the Munda languages and the Outer Languages (p. 5) and which must have their origin in some prehistoric North Indian substrate. In most cases, the examples demonstrate differences between the three positions of articulation and voice differences. 1. To jump Bng. c hOpr al dennO ‘to jump (across)’ (with -r al grammeme); Deog. and Baur. with

chOpr al deno; Khaśdh. chOpr al ‘a jump, leap’; Ktg. c hOpko ‘jump’; — same meaning .



Ind. ch2pℎ ‘a jump, leap’; Sh. c.hup ‘jump’, Sh.koh. (RSup) c.hap ‘a jump’; Dm. trap‘run’; Kal. triptráp ‘quickly’; Gaw. Tlap ‘to run’ (LSI viii, ii: 86, 119); Klm. t.o ¯p ‘jump’; Pal. utrap- ‘to run’ (with some prefix) — S. t.ipan.u ‘to jump, bound’; Jat.. trapp ‘leap, jump’; borrowed into Iranian languages, cf. Psht. trapal ‘to jump’ and Orm. trap ka‘to run’. These and the forms beginning with tr- derive through r fronting < older *trarp- < OIA *tarpati ‘jumps’ (5727). Notes: (a) Kh¯ aśi. c˙ ¯er.c˙ aper ‘sound of fish movement in a pond’ (Kaul [2006 i: 305]) does not seem to belong here , but first syllable may derive < OIA *cat.a- ‘crackle’

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

352

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum (4570) plus unvoiced reflex of OIA *jhapp-1 ‘sudden movement’ (5336, see there B. jhap ‘splash’), and a similar background may hold for Rudh. ch2ich2ppal ‘sound of washing the feet with water’. (b) Another reflex of the OIA lemma in Bng. is tOpnO ‘to cross s.th., go across’

of the language. More examwhich is another example for the multilayeredness ples below (p. 607). (c) Turner has merged the OIA root TARP ‘to sate oneself, savor’ with *tarpati ‘jumps’ (5727) which he lists under the ‘root’ TRAP ‘jump, show feeling’ (p. 341). There he adds t
rpyati ‘enjoys’ (5932), trpr
a- ‘pungent’ (5934) and sev eral other forms. The  verb tarpati may be cognate on the one hand with PIE *trep-1 ‘trip, tramp, step – trippeln, trampeln, treten’ (cf. also *tropo-s ‘way’, Latin trepidus ‘ängstlich umherlaufend; anxiously wandering aimlessly’, Toch.B tr¯ app- ‘trip, stumble’ etc., IEW: 1094) and both Pokorny and Mayrhofer (EWA) wonder whether OIA trp
ala- and trpr
a- also belong here.  by Turner  are trápate ‘is ashamed, is perplexed’ (5991) (d) The other forms given with Kal. of Rumbur tróik ‘to cry, weep, shed tears’, tr¯ apáyati ‘perplexes’ (6012) with a doubtful modern reflex in K.; *avatrapate ‘is ashamed’ (779) with a modern reflex in Kho. ortréik ‘to shy’ and *avatrapya- ‘shame’ (780) with modern reflexes in Si. and G; without modern reflexes are OIA lex. apatrap¯ a- ‘shame’ and nirapatrapa- ‘shameless’. Mayrhofer writes about this verb (EWA): “Es wird auf idg. *trep ‘wenden’, im Medium auch ‘sich schamvoll abwenden’ bezogen. . . ” 131132 (e) According to some (e.g. IEW), PIE *trep- ‘trip’ is morphologically connected with PIE *trem- ‘shake, tremble (in fear)’, and Morgenstierne wonders whether Kal. tram"ona ‘a shivering; cold; fever; ague’ (Trail and Cooper give also meaning ‘chill’) could be connected with Lat. tremo but demurs that the PIE root is not found in IA. He also excuses Turner for having wrongly put the Kal. word sub OIA tr¯ asa- (6013) since this was due to his (Morgenstierne’s) terrible handwriting. So Morgenstierne’s question needs still to be answered.133 Moreover, it has parallels in several dialects of Sh.: Sh.koh. chahu 
u , Sh.gur. ca{u 
u , cav{u 
u ,





Sh.ast. cau u , Sh.dras. camu u  all ‘cold’ (Schmidt and Kaul 2008). All forms may go back to *tram-un(a) (where -un(a) may be a suffix of unclear provenance) and ultimately to PIE *trem-.

2. Sweat (a problematic example) Bng. pOlsEnO ‘to sweat (at hands and feet)’ and pOlsui ‘sweaty hands or feet’; Kt.g. p@rs
nO and P. pars¯ın¯ a both ‘sweat’ < OIA prasvinna- ‘sweated’ (8897). But Bng. does not fit here, therefore cf. the following sub Turner lemma OIA prasveda- ‘great sweat’ (8898): Dm. praspyel; Gaw. plas
ed; Kal. presp
El; Pal. prasp
l. Here to be added are Pr. ¯ıs., v¯ıs., vis.@ ‘sweat’; Sv. prašpil ‘sweat’— Chin. prased ‘perspiration’ — Brj.-Aw. prasev ‘sweat’. Note also Bhad. parśo ‘perspiration’, Brj.-Aw. pas¯ıj ‘to sweat; become wet’ and H. pas¯ıjn¯ a ‘to sweat’ the two latter of which derive < OIA *prasvidyati, and the parallel formation Psht. parxél ‘causing (an invalid) to sweat’ (with par- probably < Av. pairi); regarding Psht. cf. also Brah. x¯ed and Bal. h eD both ‘perspiration’ all of which are, according to Bray, < Av. xva¯edha-; note also Bng. sednO ‘to hatch eggs;

131 It is related to Indo-European *trep ‘turn’, in middle voice also related to ‘to turn away shamefully’. Thus compare PIE *trep-2 ‘to turn, to turn away shamefully’ (IEW ibid.). 132 It seems that Mallory and Adams do not postulate two homonymous but just one PIE root. 133 In fact, Mallory and Adams suggest (2006: 379f.) that PIE *trem- and *tres- may be cognates.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

353

to sit’ (there are also Khaśdh. sidaun.a with same meaning and Kt.g. sEdno  ‘to hatch

eggs’, discussed p. 742 where I suggest to derive the verb < OIA svedayati ‘makes sweat’ [13936] also, as in Brah., with preservation of medial dental voiced stop. 3. Female genital Bng. phusO, phusi n.m.,n.f. ‘(small) female genitals’; Kt.g. ph
Uss and phúśt.ı ‘female genitals’; Him. fusi ‘the female organ’; Rp. ph¯ usi ‘vaginal secretion’; Kann. ph¯ec˙ ‘vagina, with surrounding parts’; Pat.t.. ph@su ‘vagina’; New. pisi ‘vagina’ — Rj.jaip.

term for a woman’ — Kal. kaphúsi p¯ asv¯ an ‘a concubine’; S. phas¯ı ‘an abusive ‘witch’ (with negative prefix) and ph
sta ‘genital organs’ (cf. OIA bhasád- ‘pudendum muliebre’); Bur. and Sh. phós.i ‘vagina’ (Berger also refers [loc. cit.] to phás.i ‘whore’); perhaps Pr. pus"¯ı ‘poor woman, without children and relatives’ — Shgh. paš ‘vulva (a girl’s)’; Yghn. pussa ‘vulva’; Brah. pos ‘vulva’ — Jen. bos ‘Hintern; buttocks’ and bos mich ‘leck mich am Arsch; bugger me’ (there is also bosen ‘to lick’ but this must be a semantic shift caused by the defty expression) (see Lützenhardter Wörterbuch). According to Turner (Addenda and Corrigenda), many forms are < OIA *phussa‘genitals’ (9100) which is seen as related to OIA *phissa- ‘genital’ (9081) (see Paš. phis¯ u ‘vulva’ and just above Kt.g. phúśt.ı ‘female genitals’). I would suggest that this lemma is loosely connected with a whole bunch of similar words which further underlines its substrate background: OIA *pucca- ‘vulva’ (8248) with M. pucci ‘pudendum muliebre’; the words are related with Dravidian, e.g. Tam. poccu ‘woman’s pubic hair, vulva, anus’; OIA *bucca-1 ‘defective’ (9266) with Bshk. and Dara. boč ‘vulva’; Sv. boiču ‘vulva’ (cf. also Jen. doč ‘weibliche Scham; pudenda’); Garh. boñj ‘buttocks’; and, very questionable, OIA *bhucca- ‘defective’ (9524) with Wot.. baso
r ‘vulva’ and quoted here once again Bshk. boč ‘vulva’; OIA *bhussa-1 ‘defective’ with e.g. P. bhosr.¯ı ‘large vulva’ and bud.h bhas ‘old wretch’. None of these forms is found further in the east or south-east. Note that there is not only s vs. ś/š vs. s. but also p vs. ph vs. b vs. bh, which is perhaps due to the special meaning of this lemma. Cf. also Arm. pu˙c" ‘vulva’ which Martirosyan (2008: 441) equates with OIA buli- ‘buttocks; vulva’ (9291) (note here also Kal. nebulúk ‘virginal’ and Kamd. bulk"o ‘whore’) but which is in turn, according to Turner, probably a ‘defective’ word because of l ∼ r. in H.; note also, however, that the lemma is found in Europe not only in Rom. but there is also Jen. “bull” ‘Vagina; dummes Frauenzimmer; stupid wench’ and “phul” ‘after; anus’ (Lützenhardter Wörterbuch). 4. Fist Wg. m ust but Ash. must and m ust ‘fist’ < OIA musti- ‘clenched hand, fist’ (10221).

and in this connection Adam’s However note also OIA lex. mustu- ‘the closed hand, fist’ remarks on the antiquity of Toch. maśce ‘fist’. 5. Poison Dm. bis but (again) Ash. v s < OIA visa
- ‘poison’ (11968).



1c. Rain: Bro. azo or osa ‘rain’, Ind. 2z ‘rain’ < OIA abhr
a-1 ‘rainy weather’ (549). In this

example, however, the alternation is plausible because Bro. does not have retroflex affricates and the forms are therefore a result of depalatalization. Notes: (a) This alternation is also found with Western Tibetan words: Bro. rus ‘bone’

— Balti wa-rus ‘bone’, Tibetan rus-pa ‘bone’. (b) Note here also that the Kho. pronunciation of ‘Chitral’ is c.hetr¯ ar, that of Pal. is c.etr¯ ol, that of Savi is ca«a
l whereas the Sangl. pronunciation is c atr aD.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

354

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

Moreover, the Kalasha people call themselves kal.ás.a, whereas the Kati people call them kas"vo (-vo is an adjective suffix). I am not sure whether it is worthwhile to point out Kho. s.onthu (but Strand notes šont.hu) ‘raven’ vs. Wkh. šönd and Ossetic sunt ‘ditto’. (c) Note here also Bng. ustEnO ‘to jump (up)’, Jaun. ust@nO ‘to jump up, bounce’

hn¯



(Z.) (note also Jaun. uśn. o ‘ut ¯ ‘a stand . a – to get up’), here also Him. ktnośt.u for the spindle’ with first component of this compound < OIA kartana-2 ‘act of spinning’ (2857). Derivation of these words < OIA uccat.ati ‘goes away’ (1635) (or phonetically more plausible < *uccat.yate ‘is separated from’) is semantically problematic even though Turner quotes there Garh. ucar.nu ‘to jump’. Therefore cf. also OIA *ut-sth¯ ati ‘stands up’ (1900) where Turner quotes Gaw. us.t.i- ‘rise’. In addition to the above forms there are West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Kc. ust.o ‘high’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 128]), Ramp. (and Baghi) utst.(h)au ‘high’ (p. 145), Bar¯ a. uct.a ¯ ‘high’ (p. 186), and Man.d.. and Suk. ucht.a ¯ ‘high’ (p. 215). They all seem rather to derive < OIA *ucca-sth¯ aya- (see 13762). 6. Waterfall134 Ind. chA r; Dm. c.har(r), Kal. uc.hár (< *ut-ks.ar-); Pr. c.harr; Sh. c.hăr; Pal. and Gaw. c.h¯ ar all ‘waterfall’ but cf. Bro. čurut ‘waterfall’ (which is hardly Tibetan, cf. Bro. čhumik which is < Tib. ‘a spring’); Tor.cail. c2r ‘waterfall’ and Sh.pal. [c ℎ 2r] ‘stream of milk’ — Deog. c˙ h¯ ar. ‘waterfall’ (< older *ch¯ ar.); N. chaharo ‘waterfall’ — Rp. chOrO

‘small waterfall’ (IA borrowing)135 < OIA ks.ará- ‘melting away’ (3662). 7. Old hut Ind. ghus.íl𝑖 1 ‘an old hut or barn (for cattle, straw, hay, junk)’ with a parallel in Sh. g˘ us.púr ‘house for straw’ (regarding -púr cf. discussion p. 657) and same as gusìl𝑖 in the Šat.ot.i variety of Ind. Note that these words are conspicuously similar to BHS khusta- ‘old, worn out; bald’136 and khosayati ‘wears away, wears off (tr.)’, and AMg. khosiya- ‘old, discarded as being old’ (T. Burrow 1976: 34). 8. Share Ind. bh¯ asàℎ 1 ‘a share, portion’ but Kal. bas.1 ‘share, part, portion’. 9. Winnowing shovel d. ‘a winnowing shovel’ but Sh. b¯ ac˙ un < OIA *b¯ ahu-ks.un.n.a- (9229 and Šat.. b¯ ac.ún.˚ 3708), thus basic meaning ‘arm-sifter’. The difference may be explained here as an effect of coronal consonant harmony (see above p. 89). 10. Sputum Ind. x¯ arúis ‘sputum’, Bur. qhiris. ‘Auswurf; expectoration’, Bur.Yas. xerét. ‘ditto’. Perhaps < PIE *ker-(1) ‘to croak’, Germanic *hrekan ‘to clear one’s throat; to spit’(?); see below possible further parallels p. 567. I 11. Rainbow 
r and bizvo 
r ‘rainbow’. Here the alternation may have been caused by Ind. both bizva

RUKI?

137

a special form of

134 The reflexes of this lemma are partly regular and partly not. 135 N. and Rp. have only one affricate order. 136 This appears to bea case of two homonyms because the meaning ‘bald’ has a close parallel in Rom.boh. kušto ‘bald’ which Turner derives < OIA *kus.t.a- < kus.áti *‘strikes’ (3369). 137 The first syllable derives < OIA v¯ıdhrá- ‘clear sky’ (12051) (Zoller [2005]) and the two Ind. allomorphs must have developed < *viˇȷ𝑜 which could have been a borrowing.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

355

12. Hole Ind. sùr. ‘a (small) hole’ and s.ùr. ‘a hole’ (on a possible PIE etymology see below p. 728). The alternation of this lemma may be explained as occurrence and non-occurrence of coronal consonant harmony 13. Rumination Ind. both orma 
s and orma 
s ‘rumination, chewing the cud’ < OIA *romantra- ‘act of

(10852).

chewing the cud’ See preceding entry. 14. Tongs Šat.. cap2t but Kal. tsápi ‘tongs’. The alteration is probably again due to coronal

harmony.138 consonant 15. Chicken Bhat.. cal
2i ‘a young hen’; Ind. c2la
kh , Šat.ot.i variety of Ind. cal
2si ‘chicken’; Paš.deg. čel¯ an.t."ek ‘chick’ same as Paš.DN. čel¯ an.t.ek ‘chick’ (Lehr 2014: 113) but Paš. also čüčül"a ‘chicken or duck’ (Morgenstierne 1973a, vol. 3: 313 and 1956: 42); Gaw. c˙ alak"a ‘chicken’ — Western Nepal shamanic language call¯ı ‘chicks’ (Maskarinec 1998 index) and N. callo ‘chicken’139 — Jat.. cillu  cillu  ‘incessant chirping (as chickens in the absence of the hen)’ — Korku cilay ‘chicken’. This seems to e a ‘North Indian’ word, but borrowing from Kartvelian is also possible: Common Kartvelian *c’ic’il‘small; chicken’ ([µ’iµ’il]). Georgian c’ic’ili ‘hen’s offspring’ and its Gurian dialect c’ic’ila ‘chicken’. 16. Fight Dental affricate in Kt.g., Kc. c˙ u ¯dzhn.õ ‘to fight (of bulls, with their horns pressed against each other)’ — retroflex affricate in Wg. s.oč ‘quarrel, fight’ and in Kt. s.ač"e- ‘to fight’. This form is probably < older *c.oˇȷ or a similar form because there is also the Wg. name of a feast of merit c.a ¯garc.ašek lit. “to invite for a fight-feast” (Klimburg 1999 I: 109, fn. 263, but Degener has c.a ¯gar s.ač- ‘to host a merit feast’). Both words are certainly somehow connected with OIA yúdhyate ‘fights against’ (10502) but at least the Dardic and Nuristani forms may all actually derive < OIA *prayodhya- ‘to be fought or overcome or subdued’.140 17. Type of bush Gau. muz.kor.óℎ ‘a type of a bush (its leaves are used against fever)’ same plant as ¯. Ind. musk2ndaℎ and Bhat.. müs.kän.d´. a

18. Strong Ind. z2k  ‘strong; healthy; alert’; Bur. zaqc.áq ‘very strong’; Kal. z.ak ‘rich, strong’ (lw. Kho.).141 19. Type of gun Bhat.. p  end
a z ‘a type of 7 mm gun’ same as Ind. pind2
z  (Zoller 2005). The Bhat..

is perhaps result of CCH.

allomorph 20. Muzzle Shgh. nusk; Wkh. nck; Ishk. n@sk; Werch. nac.k (lw.) all ‘muzzle’. These forms appear



to be cognate with forms with initial m- as in muska etc. (see p. 698).

138 The lemma appears to derive < OIA *capp- ‘press’ (4674) which seems to be a borrowing from Austro-Asiatic (see p. 927). 139 In his Nepali dictionary Turner suggests “prob. < *carlo, extension with -la- of cat.a-”, whereas in the CDIAL he has placed it sub OIA cat.aka- ‘sparrow’ (4571). Both suggestions are not convincing 140 Cf. OIA prayudhyate ‘begins to fight, attack, fight with. 141 Strand has z."aq ‘thick (liquids)’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

356

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

21. Rhubarb Kho. riwis.; Pers. r¯ıw¯ as; Psht. rav¯ aś all ‘rhubarb’.142

11.6.7.1

Summing up

In the northwest there is a remarkable fluctuation/instability regarding phonological features like voice, aspiration, and point and type of articulation. In particular: Several of the above lemmata provide evidence for the claim that the area had retroflex affricates (and, by implication, also retroflex sibilants) in substrate language(s). OIA was not the first in the area to have this phonological feature. This is also the opinion of Kuiper (1991: 14).

11.6.8

OIA s.ya > śa or s.a

This small section deals once more with a feature not limited to Nuristani, but also found in Dardic. At least two times in his CDIAL, Turner refers to a sound change OIA s.ya > s.a originally observed by Morgenstierne. It concerns the entries vars.yà- ‘belonging to the Rains’ (11402), in connection of which Morgenstierne suggests for Pal. b¯eris. ‘year; summer’ derivation < OIA *varis.ya- (Morgenstierne 1941a: 15; cf. also Bng. bOr 
s ‘year’, Sh. b ars',

Ind. bar
s ‘summer’, Pk. varisa- and Sant. loanword b@ris b@ris ‘yearly, at intervals’), and

a mrsyate (1265) ‘bears patiently’ (modern examples are found in the next paragraph). This 

phonological change with preservation of retroflex feature is only found in some Dard languages. Turner has referred to Morgenstierne, I guess, because he must have known that the outcome of this process in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı is śa and not s.a: manuśa- ‘human being’ < OIA s ‘a man’). manus.yà- versus manus.a- ‘human’ < OIA ma
nusa- (also reflected in Bhat.. mu

The change of s.ya > śa is a natural palatalization process but apparently, for whichever reasons, it did not happen always in the area. One finds Kt. “machkur.” ‘man’ (LSI viii, ii: 12) (the second component -kur. is < OIA *kud.a-1 ‘boy, son’ [3245]), “m¯ och” ‘a man, a person’ (Konow) (cf. Kal. moč ‘man’), but also “manch¯ı” ‘a man, a human being; a male; people’ (Davidson and Konow) the last of which Turner derives < OIA mártya- (14739), perhaps contaminated by manus.yà-. This, however, is hardly correct because regarding the affricate cf. Bng. manuch, manu ch ‘man, person, human being’, Garh. m¯ an.ach and sub 10049 Sirm. m¯ an.ach, N. m¯ anche, P. manuch ‘a man’ and Inscriptional Or.iy¯ a m¯ an.ica ‘man’ (there is also corresponding Rj.jaip. min@kh ‘male person’). Thus, derivation < OIA mártya- is not possible143 because Garh., N. and P. do not know tr > c; moreover, in languages where this process is found the outcome is without aspiration as in Bng. m¯ uc n.m. ‘urine’ < OIA mu
tra- ‘urine’ (10234), therefore derivation of these words < OIA manus.yà- and spontaneous affrication (see p. 356) is likely.144 The two processes s.ya either > śa or > s.a 142 But note that in the copy of Morgenstierne’s article on Iranian elements in Khowar which is with me, Morgenstierne has crossed out with a pencil the meaning ‘rhubarb’ and replaced it with ‘fodder’ (1936: 659). 143 OIA mártya- is, however, reflected in Ind. m as ‘man, person’ and probably also in m2cu
‘pupil



of eye’ (lit. ‘little man’). 144 There is also Ks. m EEc ‘man’ but here the palatal affricate is due to the fact that the language does not have retroflex affricates (and sibilants). Also Ks. does not know a change tr > č as can be seen in traa ‘three’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

357

indicate the existence of more than one ‘G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı’ dialect.145 Therefore it is not surprising to find, as a result of dialect mixing, both processes in one and the same language or one process in one and the other in another language: Ind. r
ecℎ ‘protection, care’ < OIA raks.ya- ‘to be guarded’ (10557) and o s2
v  ‘to forget’



(Bshk. and Pal. amus.-) < OIA a mrsyate (1265) ‘bears patiently’, but Ind. m es ‘a

man’ (also Sh.koh. as in musu e ‘aman’s. . . ’ [Z.]) < OIA manus.yà- and sis2
v  ‘to 1 dry’ < OIA śús.yati ‘becomes dry’ (12559); Pal. š¯ı"š¯ u-m ‘to sigh’ < OIA śús.yati2 ‘hisses, pants’ (12545) but s.os. ‘summer’ < OIA śós.a- ‘summer’ (12642); Kho. diš ‘evil’ < OIA d¯ us.ya-1 ‘wicked’ (6506); Sh.gur. puš˘ u ‘flower’ < OIA pús.ya-1 ‘a kind of plant’ (8306) but Rumb¯ ur dialect of Kal. pus
k ‘flower’, Sh.koh. puz
 ‘having roasted’ (H. pak¯ a kar) (Z.) < OIA *prus.yati- 2 ‘burns’ (8988) with a modern parallel in dialectal Kal. also with palatal affricate (but note also Dm. lus.- v.i. ‘burn’); whereas Wg. mus.- ‘to cheat, play’ is found sub OIA m
rsa 

‘in vain; falsely’ (10298), Kamd. miži- ‘to play’ and most likely also Wg. müš‘to glitter; rock’ and müš¯ a- ‘to deceive, fool’ do not derive < OIA *mr
syate ‘is rubbed’ (10297) but < OIA mrsyate ‘is not heeded, is disregarded’,146etc. 

11.6.9

A variant of Grassmann’s Law

Grassmann’s Law, which applied to OIA, is a dissimilatory and regressive phonological process and says that if an aspirated consonant is followed by another aspirated consonant in the next syllable, the first one loses the aspiration. According to Masica (1991: 172) “. . . the old late-*IE rule . . . prohibiting more than one aspirate in a stem was abrogated in the process” from Sanskrit to Pali. In the northwest and also in some other Outer Languages – e.g. in the Harauti dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı (see Masica [1991: 204]) and in Assamese – one finds a similar law, however sometimes in an inverted form: if an aspirated consonant is followed by another aspirated consonant in the next syllable, the second one loses the aspiration (but e.g. in Assamese it seems to vary).147 We will see that this is probably an independent innovation. A complicating factor here is that there also seems to exist a general tendency for deaspiration word medially and finally. However, whereas this is just a trend, and there are in fact quite many words having preserved aspiration in these positions (e.g. Ind. k  ethaℎ

‘a husband’s brother’ < OIA lex. kanis.t.há- ‘younger brother’ [2718]), the variant of Grassmann’s Law operates almost without exception, at least in some languages of the northwest and in Assamese. Here follow examples from Indus Kohistani (but only such ones where the deaspirated consonant does not appear at the end of the word because in that position it is anyway never fully aspirated), Bang¯ an.¯ı (which can have word-final aspiration) and Assamese: Indus Kohistani bhak
2v  ‘to push, provoke’ versus intensive bh
b2kh kar
2v  (but no loss of aspiration in reduplication: bh
2k-bh
2kh , khang


2v  ‘to cough’ < OIA *khankh˙ ‘cough’ (3763), kh¯ okàℎ ‘empty; hollow’ < OIA *khokkha- ‘hollow’ (3927), tho
tℎ ‘virile and strong billy-goat’ < OIA *t.hot.t.ha- ‘defective’ (5506) (meaning



145 On this topic see also Salomon (2001). 146 However, Wg. meaning ‘glitter’ seems to be due to contamination with reflex of OIA MARJ ‘wipe’ (cf. mrsta- ‘cleansed, clean, pure’).  some examples for this type of aspiration loss in MIA (§ 213). Most examples 147 Pischel presents are late MIA, examples from Pa. are rare.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

358

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

perhaps influenced by OIA *todaka- ‘striker’ [5969] which has modern reflexes in the area), thùt¯ u ‘sound of spitting’ < OIA th¯ uth¯ u ‘imitative sound of spitting’ (6104), dhanàℎ , dhandàℎ ‘businesss’ < OIA dhandha- ‘awkwardness’ (6727). As the second last example shows, there is a strong tendency in Ind. to delete second aspiration in case of reduplications, but there are also exceptions like phúrphur ‘small’. Bang¯ an.¯ı khOknO ‘to laugh’ < OIA (Dh¯ atup.) khákhati ‘laughs’ (3761),148 khOk alnO ‘to



steep clothes into water repeatedly and wash’ < OIA *khakkh¯ alayati ‘rinses’ (3762), khoknO ‘to inhale air or smoke’ < OIA *khokh- ‘cough’ (3926), khoklO

*khokkha- ‘hollow’ (3927), zuthO ‘false’ < OIA *jh¯

‘hollow’ < OIA ut.t.ha- ‘false’

(5407) (this example looks like the real Grassmann’s Law, but see the explanation below), thatO, thattO ‘fun, joke’ < OIA *t.hat.t.ha- ‘joke’ (5492), dOndO ‘tom



cat’ < OIA *d.had.d.ha-1 ‘fat’ (5575),149 da nd ‘puddle, pool’ < OIA d.han.d.ha



‘pool’ (5578). In Bng. the Ind. tendency to delete aspiration in reduplications appears to be less common, but is also found occasionally: thOrthOr anO ‘to shake’

Ok corresponds with H. tharthar¯ an¯ a, but aspiration has been lost in thOkt anO ‘to

čp ‘to 1 knock at’ < OIA *t.hakk- ‘clatter’ (5487) which cf. with Pr. t.ak-t.ak knock, tap’. Note: The examples of Bng. zuthO, dOndO and da nd show that this form of Grass of aspiration

of the Bng. stops but younger mann’s Law must be older than the loss than the loss of aspiration of the Bng. affricates (note that the words left a trace of the aspiration in form of a tone). There may be a general tendency in the northwest that voiced affricates lost their aspiration earlier than the voiced stops. This could also be an indication that this type of Grassmann’s Law started only during MIA times and is thus an independent innovation and not a continuation of OIA Grassmann’s Law. Assamese150 kandH ‘shoulder’ (also kan) (and DK kandha ‘skandha’ and B. ka dha ) either < OIA skandhá- ‘shoulder’ (13627) (cf. Pa. khandha-) or < *kandha- which would mean that Assamese and DK parallel Dardic (see Turner ibid.), bHok ‘hunger’ < OIA *bubhuks.aka- ‘hungry’ (9284) (cf. e.g. P. bhukkh¯ a); t6dHa ‘amazed’ < OIA stabdha- ‘firmly fixed’ (13676) (cf. e.g. Pa. thaddha), ghag6r ‘small bells’ (Kakati differs from Turner) < OIA gharghar¯ı- ‘girdle of small bells worn by women’ (4444) (cf. e.g. S. ghaghiro), HEta ‘ladle’ < OIA hastaka- ‘hand’ (14025) (cf. e.g. H. hatth¯ a ‘handle’), bHata ‘falling tide’ < OIA bhras.t.á- ‘fallen’ (9655) (cf. e.g. Bi. bhat.t.h¯ a ‘fallen in [of a well]’). Note: As indicated just above, this historical process shown by the examples is, as in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı and some other Outer Languages, so to say supported by a strong tendency 148 Note also Garh. kikc¯ at., khikc¯ at. ‘laughter, noise, din’. The lemma may have an Austro-Asiatic background, cf. e.g. Sant. kha¼k kha¼k ‘boisterous, as laughter’, Bahnaric Tampuan kak@ik ‘laugh’, Katu kakr1@h ‘girls laugh loudly’, etc. 149 But with full preservation of aspiration in not far away West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bar¯ ar.¯ı dhOndh a ‘cat’ (T.



Grahame Bailey [1915: 185]). 150 See Kakati (1972: 172f.). Note also that the K¯ amr¯ up¯ı dialect does not follow the here presented trends (op.cit. p. 177).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

359

to delete aspiration anyway word-internally, e.g. śud¯ a ‘unmixed’ < OIA śuddhá- ‘clean’ (12520), śike ‘learns’ < OIA
s
ksate ‘learns’ (12430), etc.151

11.6.10

Coronal consonant harmony

The most comprehensive studies of coronal consonant harmony (CCH) in South Asia have been done by Paul Arsenault (2008, 2009, 2012). The concerned coronal consonants can be described in phonetic terms as posterior-laminal like palatal [Ù] and posterio-apical like retroflex [ú] (Arsenault 2012: 21). Most commonly in South Asia harmony processes involving retroflex segments are found. The emergence of retroflex segments was caused by a bundle of processes (op. cit. p. 75): RUKI (including Cr simplifications, e.g. tr > t. or c.), n-retroflexion, coronal assimilation (e.g. [ùt] > [ùú]), sibilant laxing and Fortunatov’s law (e.g. PIE *[ls] > OIA [ù]). It may be mentioned that according to Levitt (2010), the application of Fortunatov’s law in OIA is due to a Dravidian substratum, thus reflecting the way how speakers of Dravidian learned to speak Indo-Aryan. This may or may not have been the case and it would imply that speakers of Dravidian did not try to speak Old Iranian. It should also be noted that a considerable number of reconstructions in the CDIAL display retroflex consonant harmony and most of them are not borrowings from Dravidian. Regarding Burushaski retroflex consonants, Berger observes (2008: 19): ‘The retroflex plosives are probably also old, but their use seems to have been restricted to -t.in (word)-edial and final (position), a peculiarity that Burushaski shares with the oldest Sanskrit and Dravidian.’152 He further argues that, while c, ch, c˙ , c˙ h appear to be old, z, j, c., c.h, z. appear to be later borrowings, e.g. from Shina. This suggests that at the time of the arrival of speakers of Indo-Aryan, languages containing retroflex stops were spoken in the northwest of South Asia. Arsenault (op.cit. p. 28) says that consonant harmony “involves a phonological interaction between two or more consonants . . . ” and “is assimilatory in nature . . . and . . . it is a long-distance or non-local form of assimilation.” Regarding the cause for consonant harmony, Arsenault points out (op.cit. p. 44) that some linguists “suggest that agreement is grounded in the psycholinguistic domain of speech planning. When speakers are producing one segment, they are simultaneously planning the implementation of subsequent segments. Interference can occur if a segment that is being planned is highly similar to a segment that is being produced. One impinges on the other, resulting in familiar slips of the tongue, such as shubjects show for subjects show.” Below we will come back to this idea. Retroflex stops were quite rare in early OIA but their number increased in the course of time due to the well-known processes. Whereas the three OIA sibilants survived until today in Dardic and Nuristani, and two of the three in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and varieties of Romani (in the Indus Valley two sibilants must have survived at least until around 1000 years ago, see p. 201), they were elsewhere reduced in early MIA to one. Regarding the scope of CCH in South Asia, Arsenault summarizes (op. cit. p. 237; in the following quote he does not mention Burushaski, which was actually analyzed by him): 151 Pischel, quoting Wackernagel’s statement that Prakrit had an aversion to the succession of two aspirates- (“Abneigung gegen die Aufeinanderfolge zweier Aspiraten”), shows that this statement is not tenable (1896: § 214). 152 Berger: “Alt sind wohl auch die retroflexen Verschlußlaute, doch scheint ihr Gebrauch auf -t.im In- und Auslaut beschränkt gewesen zu sein, eine Eigentümlichkeit, die das Bur. mit dem ältesten Skt. und dem Dravidischen teilt.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

360

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

The present survey reveals that retroflex consonant harmony, as a static morpheme structure constraint resulting from diachronic assimilation, is widespread among South Asian languages. It applies to most Indo-Aryan languages of the Northwestern, Northern, Central and Eastern zones; most Dravidian languages of the Northern and South-Central groups; and the vast majority of Munda languages. It does not hold over Indo-Aryan languages of the Southern and Sinhalese-Maldivian zones, Dravidian languages of the South and Central groups (with the exception of Parji) or languages of the Tibeto-Burman family.” We can add here the East Iranian languages where CCH is largely missing. For instance in Pashto, the relatively few words displaying CCH are mostly IA borrowings and otherwise of unclear origin. Since CCH is obviously not a matter of language affiliation but of geography – it is found in the northern half of South Asia but not in the southern half – the question is, why is it almost absent in Iranian and Tibeto-Burman. This may have something to do with the above-described distinction between word and syllable languages but it would be premature to make more explicit statements. There are a number of IA languages which display the harmony between palatal or retroflex affricates and sibilants. This is usually possible with languages having two or three contrasting affricates and sibilants. This would include Dardic, Burushaski, West Pahar.¯ı, perhaps Romani, various Nuristan languages, and, at the Middle Indo-Aryan stage, Gandh¯ ar¯ı and Niya Prakrit. Here are examples: Niya and Gandh¯ ar¯ı Niya śaśana and G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı śaśan.a ‘punishment’ < OIA
sa
sana- ‘ditto’ (12420) which has a parallel in Rom.W. and Balkan Romani šaš- (but there is also šas-) < OIA
sa
sati ‘punishes’ (12419) with progressive assimilation as sporadically also in Dardic (note also N. ch¯ asnu ‘to reprimand, punish’ with initial affrication); Niya and Gandh¯ ar¯ı śiśila ‘loose’ < OIA *
srthil
a- ‘loose’ (12601) with  affricatized parallels in Ash. c i cila 
, Wg. čičil, Pr. č𝑖 čil and Kt. in addition voiced jijil all ‘soft’;153 here perhaps also G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı as.ajamana- < OIA asajam¯ ana‘unattached’ with a northwestern side-form *s.ajj- of OIA sájati ‘is attached’ (see 13085). These are innovations not found in Pali or the other Prakrits and therefore support the assumption that CCH may have set off in the northwest of South Asia. Romani Regarding Rom.W. šaš- see just above; Rom. čačo ‘true’ < OIA tathya- ‘true’ (5648)?, but here apparently a harmony not dependent on affricate place oppositions with many phonetic parallels sub OIA tucchyá- ‘empty’ (5850); affrication of OIA t-, d- as a result of harmony is also found e.g. in Kal. c
stik ‘to stand’ < OIA t
sthati ‘stands’ (5837) and in ˇȷés.t.ak ‘female spirit being of

< OIA (RV) destr
- ‘name of a female divinity’ (which, the home and clan’ if

however, is doubtful). 153 Note also Pr. p˙cil ‘a scree; Geröllhalde, Steinhalde’ and ps˙cil, ¯ır ps˙cil ‘a big heap of stones (with stones collected from the fields), scree’ < older *pra˙ci˙cila < OIA praśithila- ‘very loose’ but apparently belonging to a dialect different from Pr. č𝑖 čil.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

361

Nuristani Ash. čuč¯ on˙ ‘boiled thick milk’ < OIA samsty¯ ˙ ana- ‘coagulated’ (13047); Wg. c.ac.-, č¯ ač- ‘to taste’ < OIA *caks.ati ‘tastes’ (4557) (also Kho. [Lorimer] čhočik with aspiration fronting); Dm. cu ci ‘needle’ and Pr. ž¯ a-žižuk ‘big needle for the headscarf of the women’, and here also from eastern Indo-Aryan B. chu c ‘needle’ (ODBL § 262) < OIA *s¯ uñc¯ı- ‘needle’ (13551); Dm. s.a"ž¯ı ‘on account of’ < OIA sajyáte ‘hangs on’ (13085). Dardic, Burushaski and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Besides the examples from Ind. and Kal. given in Arsenault (2012: 190ff., 207, 209) I may also mention Kal. z.anz.ér ‘chain, zipper’ ← Pers. zanj¯ır which is reflected in Ind. as zh2nz r and which shows that occasionally also progressive assimilation occurs and that the harmony process was long-lasting; parallels in Bur.ys. are janjér, z.enz.ér. The following examples show that intervening segments can block assimilation: Bhat.. and Gau. c
s ‘13’ < OIA *trayedaśa‘13’ (6001) but Ind. cigo l2s (with unclear infix); dialectal Paš. z.o¯et."¯ı ‘yoke’ <

OIA yóga- ‘yoke’ (10526 ) with dimin. suffix; Ind. zhu z ‘birch tree’ < *žhuža (cf. Šat.. zo 
z) < *bhr¯ uja- < OIA bh¯ urja- ‘birch tree’ (9570) displays regressive assimilation and depalatalization, but the parallel Ind. zhu z ‘birch tree’ shows contrariwise progressive assimilation, whereas in Ind. zh a z
2y ‘a brother’s wife’ < OIA bhr¯ aturj¯ ay¯ a- (9660) assimilation may have been blocked by the morpheme boundary. Further examples of sibilant harmony are Kal. s.ábas. ‘bravo’ ← Pers. ś¯ ab¯ aś, Bur. s.ábas., śábaś ‘ditto’ but Ind. only s2b as  ‘applause’ (more examples op.cit. p. 196). An examples from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı is Bng.
sus
obO ‘beautiful’ which is cognate with OIA *suśobha- ‘splendid’ (13534) with modern parallels in Kal. and Pal.,154 and may be Bng. c¯ıś ‘thirst’ < OIA *trsy a- ‘thirst’ (5943) with a 

parallel in Ind. c
s ‘thirst’.



There are a number of cases in northwestern languages with phonemic oppositions between dental and palatal (and retroflex) affricates (and sibilants) where depalatalization of palatal affricates did not take place even when otherwise characteristic for them. The most plausible explanation for this is that a following palatal or retroflex sibilant or affricate has prevented depalatalization because of regressive harmony: Bng. cusnO ‘to suck’, Kt.g. and Kc. cuśn.õ ‘to

preserves c” – with a high level suck’ (Addenda and Corrigenda: “← some lg. or dial. which tone perhaps due to contamination with a homonym ‘to be burnt’), Ind. c.o ¯s.ᘠv ‘to wring out (clothes); to suck (out)’, Bur. ćus. -˙t- ‘to suck (breast milk out of the breast)’; Bng. jasnO ‘to singe s.o. (e.g., with an iron rod)’ and Kt.g. and Kc. jhuśhn.õ (sic) v.i. ‘to burn’: the latter verb is found sub OIA *adhyus.yate ‘is burnt’ (280) but also possible is derivation < OIA lex. jhas.a- ‘sun-heat’ (5359) and note also Bng. uja
sO ‘the power that induces spontaneous possession (e.g., during the approaching of a deity towards a village); splendor of the sun’ which is < related OIA *ujjh¯ as.a- ‘shining’ (1678) (see more on the Bng. word below p. 595); Bng. ju
sO (usually pl. ju
sE) ‘down, fuzz’ < OIA *jh¯ uśa- ‘hair’ (5412); Bng. cO
skO ‘starting, recoiling’ (and several allomorphs), Ind. c2s ‘sudden pain’ < OIA cas.ati2 ‘hurts’ (4727a)



which is probably cognate with OIA *cassakk(4730) reflected in Ind. c˙ às ‘pinch, sudden pull’, but sub 4727a also the allomorph chas.ati is mentioned which has a reflex in Bng. ja
skO ‘wincing, startling’ which compare with OIA *jhas- ‘sudden movement’ (5360) (with 154 I find it always difficult to accept modern word forms as tatsamas of reconstructed Sanskrit words.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

362

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

Bng. falling tone reflecting the OIA aspiration)) but parallel with OIA cas.ati2 derivation < *jhas.ati is more likely. It is not only likely that historically the first retroflexes in IA emerged in the northwest, but the above evidence also suggests, as pointed out, that this is the area where CCH had its roots. The expansion of CCH took place later than the expansion of IA into the subcontinent and began probably in late OIA or early MIA. CCH first spread through the languages that still preserved two or three distinctive sibilants (e.g. Proto-Dardic and Proto-West Pah¯ ar.¯ı) and then reached languages further in the south-east where meanwhile the three sibilants had collapsed into one. This is the likely reason that languages in the northwest preserved two or three sibilants because of the operation of CCH from an early time which created simple and robust syllables with palatal and retroflex sibilants and affricates – e.g. in Bng. depalatalization of affricates was prevented in these contexts together with the prevention of ś becoming s – whereas further in the south-east it was too late to preserve these syllable types. This postulated process finds a good illustration in the following example:

Sub OIA śús.ma- ‘exertion, roaring, rushing (of water)’ (12558) one finds Wg. sus
@ ‘rapids in a stream’, whereas sub *ś¯ us.ya- ‘blowing’ (12577) there is with

almost

same meaning Ku. sus¯ at. ‘noise of flowing water and of wind’; in addition there are Sh.koh. ch˘ um ‘rapids of river’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1924a: 265), Bshk. šaša"kar ‘waterfall’ and Garh. chachr.a ¯t., ch˜ıchy¯ at. ‘jharne k¯ a svar – rushing or roaring sound of a waterfall’ (Benjwal [2010: 206]) or chachr¯ ot. (Catak [1973: 161]) ‘roaring, rushing (as water)’; the Sh.koh. and Garh. forms displays typical affrication which must be old in this case (i.e. from the time when ProtoGarhv¯ al¯ı had s. or at least ś). Thus we can see here three steps in the expansion of CCH and it is likely that the Wg., Sh.koh., Garh. and Ku. forms have actually the same origin. Here also cognate are: sub 12558 Turner quotes with question-mark Si. susuma, susma ‘breath’ but note also Geiger’s verbal form in Si. susumlanav¯ a ‘to sigh, groan; seufzen, stöhnen’, the final syllable of the noun susum- may indicate a suffix or the word may be an early tatsama, but the Si. word matches quite closely with Bng.
su
smO ‘buzzing in one’s ears, buzzing sound of burning wet wood’ for which I suggest -mO suffix (see also below p. 726); moreover, there is Wg. (Buddruss/Degener) s.üs.ti ‘whooshing; rauschend’ (as sound of a flying raptor) with -ti absolutive of ti- which is < OIA sthitá(Degener, pers. comm.).

As phenomenological relatives of CCH appear certain forms of vowel harmony as they are e.g. found in Bengali nilimiśśi < (according to S. K. Chatterji) OIA *nir¯ ami.ya- ‘fleshless’(?), pit(t)ime = OIA pratim¯ a- ‘image’, ucchuggu ‘any offering before a deity’ < OIA utsargá‘setting free’ (ODBL § 192).155 According to Chatterji (ibid.), this type of vowel harmony “. . . asserts itself exceedingly in the speech of women, and of the uneducated classes generally ...”

155 Transliteration modified by me.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.6. Changes of other consonants

11.6.11

363

Irregular developments

As in MIA and in many NIA languages, OIA -n- and -l- are reflected as retroflex -n.- and -l.- in Bang¯ an.¯ı,156 e.g. in khOnnO ‘to dig’ < OIA khanati, kOlnO1 ‘to mumble’ < OIA kalate.

of words reflects this change,

there is a remarkable number Even though the great majority of words in Bang¯ an.¯ı where this change has not taken place. Since -n.- is also not found in the Outer Languages Kashmiri, Nepali, Assamese, Bengali and Sinhalese, the question is whether this fact points to an older layer of Proto-Bang¯ an.¯ı having only n and l. Here are examples from Bang¯ an.¯ı: Preservation of OIA -n Oin anO ‘to entice a woman’ < OIA *apanaya- ‘taking away’ (430); an@ni n.f. ‘type

not needing irrigation and regarded as sacred’ < OIA anuni- ‘millet’(195)

of rice . and same inversion of nasal consonants in c han@ni ‘tea strainer’ < OIA *ks.a ¯n.ana bring’ < OIA grhna
ti ‘takes’ (3643) (however c hannO ‘to strain’); ginnO ‘to

hut’ < OIA ch¯

 thun (4236); c˙ h¯ an n.f. ‘alpine a dana- ‘covering’ (5017); anO ‘to

sweet-talk, persuade s.o. in a loving/pleasant way’ if < OIA *stunoti ‘praises’ (13700); dana˜ u, danna˜ u n.m. ‘giant’ < OIA d¯ anavá- ‘class of demons’ (6268) with unclear gemination which is also found in P. d¯ anno ‘a demon, a giant’; phanO ‘heel’ < OIA pa
rsni- ‘heel’ (8124) via Pk. pan.hi; bOnnO ‘to be born’

< OIA *vijanati ‘gives birth’ (11695);157 binOsnO ‘disappeared, vanished (e.g.,

game in forest)’ < OIA vínaśyati ‘perishes’ (11770); minEnO ‘to build, erect (e.g., a house)’ and minan.i n.m. ‘carpenter’ probably < OIA *min¯ ati ‘measures’ (10132); lunO ‘shaven off, cut very short (hair)’ < OIA l¯ una- ‘cut’ (11094). Preservation of OIA -l thulO adj.;n.m. ‘thick; swell, rise (e.g., grain in water)’ < OIA sth¯ ulá- ‘thick’ (13776); baulO ‘much’ < OIA báhula- ‘large’ (9194); bulnO2 ‘to concentrate on

s.th., be intensively busy with s.th.’ and bulanO ‘to describe, explain’ probably

< OIA bhálate ‘describes’ (9406) and not bh¯ aláyate (9474) (but since there is also dekh-b al kOrnO ‘to take care of’ this shows the multilayeredness of Bng. his

lulku n.m. ‘earring for male Rajputs and for women (latter torical phonology); is made of brass and gems)’ < OIA lud.ati ‘stirs’ (11080) (but also Pk. l¯ ol¯ei); in
saulO n.m. ‘porcupine’, which is < OIA *ś¯ alala- ‘porcupine’ (12348) early syncope took place; sOr el n.f. ‘type of conifer’ < OIA sárala-2 ‘Pinus longifolia’ (13253).158 156 Whether “-l.-” is indeed everywhere where it is found a “retroflex flapped lateral” (Masica [1991: 97]) can be doubted. Hendriksen ascribes to Koc¯ı and Kot.gar.h¯ı .l a “retroflex articulation” (1986: 8), but the same -l.- is indeed a velarized lateral with tongue below the alveoles which is never flapped in Bang¯ an.¯ı. Kalasha -l.- is characterized by Trail and Cooper (1999: xxiii) thus: “Pronounce like the “l” in “tool” but the tongue tip touches the back of the front teeth.” This is exactly like in Bang¯ an.¯ı. We see that the parallel historical phonological behaviour of the two consonants n and l has led to overgeneralizations regarding their different geographical phonetic realizations. 157 Here also Garh.pau. bin¯ ar ‘gravid (as cattle)’ with -¯ ar suffix < OIA *vijan¯ a- ‘giving birth’ (11696), but cf. also OIA vijany¯ a- ‘pregnant woman’. 158 However, in this case *saralla- can be reconstructed because of shamanic language of Western Nepal sally¯ ar¯ı ‘pine’, saller¯ı ¯ amai ‘Mother Pine’ and s¯ at sally¯ a bajrab¯ an. ‘Seven Pines Thunderbolt (Barb)’ (Maskarinec [1998 index]), see p. 200. The lemma is connected by some with OIA sarala- ‘straight’ (see EWA and Oberlies [1995b: 139]) which looks academic. A more convincing

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

364

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

I assume that such irregularities are indeed more widespread and may, as suggested above, reflect different historical layers. In fact, they are already known from Classical Sanskrit. Oberlies presents a number of cases of non-cerebralization of n and s (2003: 51f.). However, this needs more careful investigation, and therefore here just a few additional examples from Garh.: danakan.(u) ‘to run, flee’ is < OIA dhanáyate ‘hastens’ (with loss of aspiration) and contrasts e.g. with Ku. dan.ak ‘blow, stroke’ (but with same suffix) which is < OIA *dan ‘flash, bang’ (6151); Garh. ph¯ ani ‘lakr.¯ı mem ˙ ched karne k¯ a auz¯ ar – a chisel for cleaving wood’ < OIA sph¯ ana- as in gaya-sph¯ ana- ‘ensuring an increase in goods and chattels’159 and *sph¯ anad¯ aru- ‘shovel’ (13830) with modern reflexes in Dm., Bshk., Phal.; Garh. phunajhi hon.u ‘rajodarśan hon¯ a – to menstruate’ is an endocentric compound with phun(a)- also related with OIA sph¯ ana- like preceding examples but with a > u (the basic meaning ‘increase’ parallels that of OIA (Suśr.) pús.pa- ‘the menstrual flux’),160 and -(a)jhi < OIA rajas ‘the menstrual discharge of a woman’ (with spontaneous aspiration); Garh.t.. t¯ un ‘rutting season of cattle’ < OIA tápana- ‘causing pain; heat’ (5672).

11.7

Similar phonetic variations in Niya Prakrit and Khotan Saka

Many of the phonological processes described above in this chapter, which have affected both Munda and Outer Languages, have also affected Middle Indo-Aryan Niya Prakrit and Middle Iranian Khotan Saka. For an overview of the development of the Middle Indo-Aryan languages see e.g. Pischel (1900), von Hinüber (1986), Bubenik (2007) and Oberlies (2007) (the latter two in Jain and Cardona), Southworth (2005a) etc. By and large, they are perceived as continuators of Old Indo-Aryan, despite all the known problems. Like Sanskrit, also these Prakrits are koinés, even though the degree of koineization was certainly not everywhere the same. For instance, it is generally assumed that G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı was less standardized than P¯ ali. But aside from such gradual differences, no-one, with the exception of Southworth, seems to have looked at the Prakrits from the standpoint of the difference between Outer and Inner Languages. Since these Prakrits are all koinés, this does not appear very prudent. And yet, from my point of view, there must also have existed Prakrits with typical Outer Language features which, however, never attained the status of literization or literacy (in the sense of Pollock). It therefore seems natural to have a closer look at those documented Prakrits which appear to contain more Outer Language features than the others. In my eyes, the best candidates are G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Niya Prakrit and Deśya Prakrit (on the specific function of Deśya Prakrit see Bhayani [1988: 150]). Since I deal with G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı in various places of this book, this chapter deals only with some grammatical aspects of Niya and Deśya Prakrit. I think I do not overgeneralize when I hold that Deśya Prakrit-related texts like the Deśin¯ amam¯ al¯ a are more ‘reliable’ from a philological perspective than texts in Niya Prakrit which contain numerous alternative is borrowing from Austro-AsiaticA, cf. Surin Khmer srAl ‘a pine tree’ and Pearic Chong sa:l ‘screw pine Pandanus’. 159 Mayrhofer (EWA): “für Mehrung von Hab und Gut sorgend”. 160 A similar periphrasis is found in Mundari b aP-gitil ‘placenta’ (lit. ‘flower-sand’, and note Korku phul1 ‘placenta’ ← IA phulla- ‘fullblown flower’). I may mention here also that Mundari b aP corresponds with Santali baha ‘flower’, which is a further example for the alternation h ∼ P. Note also Kal. niv e
san hik, niv
esan hik ‘to menstruate’ which might be cognate with OIA pus.pin.¯ı- ‘a

(but unclear prefix). woman during menstruation’

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.7. Similar phonetic variations in Niya Prakrit and Khotan Saka

365

philological problems. This means that the observations on Niya Prakrit I describe right below are only of a preliminary character.

11.7.1

Niya Prakrit

“Niya Prakrit or Niya G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı is a Middle Indian language from the 3rd and 4th centuries CE. Having its origins in Northern Pakistan, it came to the southern oases of the Tarim Basin in present-day North-West China, where it was the administrative language of the Shànshàn kingdom, a short-lived state on the Silk Road. The language is named after the archaeological site Niya in the Shànshàn area, where over 750 documents were found, written in the Niya Prakrit language and in the Kharoshth¯ı script.” 161 This section takes its data mainly from the publications of Boyer, Rapson and Senart (1920-29), Burrow (1936 and 1937), Caillat (1992) and Jamison (2000).162 As a very brief introduction into the language I start with two quite opposing-looking quotes: It might be going too far to say that Torwali163 is the direct lineal descendant of the Niya Prakrit, but there is no doubt that out of all the modern languages it shows the closest resemblance to it. [. . . ] that area around Peshawar, where [. . . ] there is most reason to believe was the original home of Niya Prakrit. That conclusion, which was reached for other reasons, is thus confirmed by the distribution of the modern dialects. (Burrow 1936: 419)164 La langue des documents de Niya, jargon administratif probablement artificiel dont on ne peut en tout cas prouver qu’il ait été une langue maternelle pour qui que ce soit. Il s’agit d’un mélange d’éléments gandh. (vocabulaire et peutêtre syntaxe) et de mots empruntés tantôt aux langues iraniennes, tantôt à la langue de la population locale (Kroraina). Je ne vois pas l’utilité linguistique de considérer ce parler comme une variété de gandh. [. . . ]. (Fussman 1989) There is no doubt that Niya had its roots in ancient Gandhara before it became a language of administration to oases in Chinese Turkestan. But whereas Burrow believes that there is a direct line from Niya to a certain Dardic language, Fussman expresses rightly doubts that it was used as a mother tongue. Niya has loan words from Iranian and Tocharian, and this is what Burrow writes in connection with the latter (1935: 667): “The rest consists of about 1,000 proper names and about 150 words. The latter consist of titles, names of agricultural products, articles of dress, etc., for which no doubt there was no Indian term that exactly corresponded. We may take this as representing the native language of the Shan-Shan kingdom, as opposed to the Indian Prakrit which was used as the official language. . . The material is sufficiently large to make definite statements about the phonetic structure of the language, and this turns out to be remarkably like the two dialects of Tokharian.” Here follow some features characterizing, according to Burrow, this unknown local language which it shares 161 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/626656/fr 162 See also A. Glass and S. Baums (comp.) online Bibliography of Gandh¯ ar¯ı Studies: https://gandhari.org/bibliography 163 A Dardic language spoken in the Swat Valley. 164 This quote of Burrow implies (correctly) that Niya Prakrit is a variant of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı but was used as an administrative language mainly in the third century AD in the ancient Shànshàn kingdom of Khotan with its capital Kroraina.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

366

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

with Tocharian: (a) absence of voiced stops, (b) lack of aspirated consonants and h, (c) retroflex consonants are very rare but c˙ is very common and apparently there is also c., suggested by ni¯ce < OIA niścaya- ‘conviction’, (d) palatalization of -l- before -i as in palyi ‘tax’ (< OIA balí- ‘tribute’), (e) a number of suffixes shared with Tocharian which are sometimes added to IA words as in pam a- ‘road’). . thaci probably ‘connected with a road’ (OIA pánth¯ Yet, “[th]ere do not seem to be many words which are obviously Tokharian.” Summing up, he states (1935: 675): “We may conclude then tentatively that the population of the ShanShan kingdom in the third century A.D. were a branch of the Tokharians probably speaking a different dialect from the two which are preserved for us in much later documents from Kuč¯ a and Karašar. If this is so it takes back the history of the Tokharian language 500 years earlier than the existing texts.” Here follow now examples for more or less all characteristics that are typical for Niya. It will be clear that many phonological/phonetic phenomena are not due to “Tocharian” influence but are the same as those described above in this chapter.

11.7.1.1

‘Spontaneous’ aspiration (and voicing)

Note that the following Niya words show only spontaneous aspiration with mediae: 1. Niy. dhamanaye < OIA daman¯ aya ‘to subjugation’. 2. Aspirated dhitu, dhida < unaspirated OIA dattá- ‘given’ is allomorph of devoiced tita-, tida- (with a > i also found in Pk. and for which see p. 376). 3. dajha ‘slave’ (Bynon 2005: 35) < OIA d¯ asá-1 ‘a non-Aryan, slave’ (6316). 4. bhiti (dviti, biti) < OIA dvit
ya- ‘second’ — with aspiration probably also in Brj.-Aw. dhagd.a ¯ ‘lover; adulterer’ (on the exact etymology of this compound see p. 621). 5. maghalartaya< OIA mangal¯ ˙ arth¯ aya- ‘for happiness’ (or aspiration shift? Note also not infrequent deletion of nasal consonant in nC clusters).165 6. lam ˙ (specific meaning unclear). . gho < OIA langa7. sam . ghalida < sam . kal- ‘to drive, put to flight’. 8. upaśam ˙ ‘suspecting’. . ghidavo < OIA upaśankNote also Khotan Saka borrowing dhinadi ‘he gives’ vs. Niya denati, and Graeco-Bactrian jham ata-) ‘born’ (Harmatta 1999: 414) which can be compared with M. ¨ȷh¯ al¯ a ‘born’ . da (*z¯ which is < OIA j¯ atá- ‘born’ (5182) with MIA -ll- suffix.

11.7.1.2

Loss of aspiration (and preservation of word-internal single stops)

Both features are typical for Outer Languages whereas ‘standard’ G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı shows the usual weakening of such consonants, e.g. OIA k > G > ultimately Ø.166 1. Niy. adicite ‘in higher thought’ < OIA adhicitte. 2. astam ¯st, ast) . ni ∼ OIA haste ‘in the hand’ (Dardic Tir. a 165 For parallels see p. 344. 166 See von Hinüber (§§ 170ff.). It is hardly worth mentioning that also Niya, like the Outer Languages, has also many examples showing the ‘mainstream’ developments.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.7. Similar phonetic variations in Niya Prakrit and Khotan Saka

11.7.1.3

367

r Fronting and backing

The so-called Dardic r-metathesis is already known from Niya and G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı (see p. 342). Here only examples from Niya (quoted from von Hinüber [§ 93]): 1. Niy. trubhićha-167 < OIA durbhiks.a- ‘scarcity of provisions’. 2. śirmitra- < OIA śr¯ımitra- ‘name of a poet’.168

11.7.1.4 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

Loss of aspiration or h and/or devoicing or voicing

Niy. tivajha- ‘day’ < OIA divasá-. śigra- < OIA ś¯ıghra- ‘quick’. pratama- < OIA prathamá- ‘first’. apyam . tara- ‘into’ < OIA abhyantara-. kilane < OIA gl¯ aná- ‘feeling aversion’ (with initial cluster separation as e.g. in widespread sumiran < OIA smaran.a- ‘memory’, kilesa < OIA kleśa- ‘distress’ etc.). tivya- < OIA divya- ‘divine’. cim . nita- = jinida- < OIA chinna- ‘cut off’. cotam . na- < OIA codana- ‘impelling’. tam . t.a- < OIA dan.d.a- ‘stick; punishment’. td."ima- < OIA d¯ ad.ima- ‘pomegranate (tree)’.169 taśavita- < OIA darśita- ‘exposed to view’. tos.a- < OIA dos.a- ‘fault’. dad."ita- < OIA t¯ ad.ita- ‘struck’. po´ ga-170 < OIA bhóga- ‘enjoyment’. Note: Whereas devoicing of single consonants is quite widespread in NW OL languages, this takes place less often in case of voiced aspirated stops. Whereas bh > p as in Niy. po´ ga has well-known parallels in modern Panjabi (cf. dialectal P. kár ‘house’ < OIA ghara-), in Kalasha the aspiration is always preserved, e.g. in khas ‘grass’ < OIA gh¯ asá-.

11.7.1.5

Further interesting words

1. Niy. i´ȷa ‘here’ — Gan. ia, idha, iPśa, iśe, iha and Ash. hida (with aspiration fronting) and further parallels with preservation of dental stop in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, in Śaurasen¯ı and M¯ agadh¯ı (Emeneau [1966: 131]) are cognate with OIA ihá and Pa. idha both ‘here’; Niy. i´ȷa is emphasized < *iyya — Jat.. ijho ‘here, yet, now’ and S. ijho ‘now’. Note: The old pre’Vedic form appears to be preserved in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Cur. idh¯ a ‘here’ (LSI ix,iv: 812) and Pang. idh 9Ri ‘of this place’ (Nayak [2010: 55]). 167 With great likelihood, graphemic -ćh- represents -c.h-. 168 Backing of liquids is typical for some varieties in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. 169 If this Niya form indeed shows syncope, then also this would be a feature found in many NW OL languages. 170 Letter ´ g is probably a voiced velar fricative.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

368

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

2. anu ‘millet’ < OIA án.u-1 ‘the grain-plant Panicum miliaceum’ (192) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in Pal. 3. ari and aryag"a ‘a title’ < OIA *¯ ariya- ‘noble, respectable’ (1347) (Pa., Pk.) with a possible parallel in Si. to which ought to be added Pr. iri ‘master’. 4. masu ‘wine’ (Burrow 1935: 672 and 1937) — cf. K. mas ‘wine’ which is related with OIA mádyaSumming up we can conclude that Niya is indeed a variety of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı converted to administrative practice and that the phonological peculiarities discussed above are partly the result of historical processes that had taken place on Indian territory and partly the result of contact with a Tocharian-related language. Otherwise its closeness to G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı or, for that matter, to T¯ orw¯ al¯ı, would remain a puzzle. Niya displays, in my eyes, more features that are typical for modern Outer Languages than G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı because, as a language of administration used by administrators it did not have P¯ ali, the language of Buddhism in those days, sitting on its neck as in case of the G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı used by Buddhist monks.171 Still, both varieties share also common features like ‘spontaneous’ aspiration as in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı dhaks.in.ami (OIA daks.in.a, Fussman 1989: 482; see also Salomon 2002: 132) or r-metathesis. These are features which Niya must have brought from Gandhara to the Silk Road since the indigenous language in Niya did not have aspirated sounds (see above). Perhaps less clear is the feature of devoicing. It is apparently not found in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı (see von Hinüber 1986 and Baums Outline of G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı grammar ), so this feature in Niya could have been an effect of the contact with the indigenous language in Niya. However, this appears unlikely to me because voiced consonants have not disappeared from Niya and, on the other hand, voicing alternation is a very widespread characteristic of Outer Languages (see p. 337). This voicing alternation in Outer Languages is in my view one of the effects of the strong encounter with Munda/Mon-Khmer because voicing alternation is an important characteristic of Munda (see Kuiper 1965), and, different from Tocharian, it has and always had also voiced consonants (see Pinnow 1959: 427).

11.7.2

Khotan Saka

Commenting on r-fronting and backing, von Hinüber considers the possibility that this and other special developments in Niya may be due to influence from Khotan Saka or Tocharian. But with regard to the here-discussed features, it may be in case of Khotan Saka just the other way round. Looking at Indo-Aryan borrowings into Khotan Saka, one finds also there several of the same special developments which are characteristic for Outer Languages. This concerns also some derivations from Avestan (Old Iranian?). This is indicative that the processes were not limited only to borrowings from Indo-Aryan. The following examples are taken from Konow (1949) and contain some small emendations:

11.7.2.1

Devoicing of sonants

1. Khot. ut¯ ara ← OIA ud¯ ara- ‘exalted’ . 2. up¯ ata ← OIA utp¯ ada- ‘rising, origin’. 171 Of course, there was also the renaissance of Sanskrit, but again, this certainly affected more the monks than the administrators.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.8. Vowel changes

369

3. ttan.d.a ← OIA dan.d.a- ‘punishment’ looks very similar to above Niya tam . t.a- which must be the direct source. 4. tham . ja < Av. Dan- ‘to pull out’ (recheck, probably wrong). 5. daśa ← OIA dhvaja- ‘flag, banner’ (but Gan. dhvaya- ‘flag’). 6. pata ← OIA pada- ‘a quarter stanza’. 7. p¯ uś¯ a" ← OIA p¯ ujya- ‘to be worshipped’. 8. prays¯ ata ← OIA pras¯ ada- ‘benevolence, favour’. 9. b¯ aysua ‘arm’ < Av. b¯ azu-. 10. vaśära ‘thunderbolt’ ← OIA vajra- (cf. Gan. vayirasam . ghana- ‘adamant agglomeration’). 11. vaysam a ‘initiation’ ← OIA upasam a-. . bat¯ . pad¯ 12. ham us.s.a ‘quarrel’ < Av. ham and druž-. . dr¯

11.7.2.2 1. 2. 3. 4.

Voicing of surds

Khot. chada ‘hurt, wound’ ← OIA ks.ata- ‘wounded’ (Konow [1949: 102]). gyagarra < Av. y¯ akar- ‘liver’. magar¯ amala ‘dolphin standard’ ← OIA makara-. mam . dra ‘formula, spell’ ← OIA mantra-.

11.8 11.8.1

Vowel changes Change of a > u or o

Traces of this change are found in East Iranian Languages and in Outer Languages, there especially often in Dardic and (West) Pah¯ ar.¯ı, also in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı (see Brough [1982: 68] for a few changes a > o) but even as far away from East Iranian as Bengali. In addition, the change of a > u is a main characteristic of Burushaski within its inherited Kartvelian vocabulary (Holms [2017: 181]). This fact supports my claim, that the process is rooted in North Indian linguistic prehistory and that it has wielded its influence over many centuries. However, since there are only few traces for such a sound change or similar sound changes in archaetypal Inner Languages like Vedic and Classical Sanskrit, Standard Prakrit (see von Hinüber [§ 121] again on a > o) or Hindi, and since there are also no clear traces in Austro-Asiatic and in the language of the IVC, the most plausible explanation in my eyes is substrate influence from a prehistoric language (area) in northwestern South Asia, which affected only early arriving speakers of ‘Outer’ OIA lects and certain Old Iranian lects. Speakers of ‘Outer’ OIA lects carried this rule along their way to the eastern end of the Indo-Aryan language-scape. The reader will come across examples of this sound change throughout this book. Here follows a very small selection from a greatnumber of cases from different languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

370 11.8.1.1

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

Nuristani and Dardic

Here follows a very small selection from a great number of cases:172 Pr. must (also most, m¯ o.st) ‘brain’ < OIA masta- ‘head’ (9926); Kamd. s"ut ‘seven’ and "ušpa ‘horse’ (cf. OIA áśva- and OIr. aspa-), Kt. "us.t. ‘eight’ (< OIA asta
-), and Wg. must"a ‘brain’ (< OIA masta‘head’ [9926]); Dardic Pal. baazúur ‘bazar’; Kal. udr
man ‘inside’ < OIA *antra- ‘inner’ (357) and šul.á ‘wood’ < OIA
sala
k a- ‘any small stake or stick’ (12349); Bro. yun.d.a ‘handmill’ < OIA yantrá- ‘handmill’ (10412), puns ˙ . ‘five’ (Ramaswami, but D. D. Sharma notes puns) ˙ and krum ‘work’ < OIA páñca ‘five’ (7655) and kárman- (Ramaswami 1975: 33 [97] and 81 – the latter word also with r-fronting), m¯ us ‘month’ < OIA ma
sa- ‘month’, kut.h ‘wood’ < OIA k¯ as.t.há- ‘piece of wood’ (3120), pun ‘path’ < OIA pánth¯ a- ‘path, road’ (7785) and probably gut.hul ‘testicles’ either < OIA gan.d.á-1 ‘boil’ (3997) (see there Ku. g¯ an.i ‘testicle’and potential cognate Pers. gund ‘testicle’, and cf. Kho. geéni ‘vagina’) or < ghat.a ¯- ‘collection, mass’ (4411) (see there Rom.P. gar ‘testicle’); Kalk. isun ‘moon’ (Z.) < OIA candrá- ‘moon’ (4661) (also with deaffrication); Bhat.. rumby ‘to bark’ < OIA rámbhate ‘bellows’ (10634) and ghun.d. ‘button’ < OIA grantha- ‘knot’ (4350) (also with aspiration fronting on which see p. 309); Gau. b¯ otul ‘bottle’ ultimately ← Portuguese; Paš. ust"u ¯m ‘tree’ < OIA stambha‘pillar’ (13682) and r¯ un (Tir. r¯ un. [Leech]) ‘thigh’ ← Pers. r¯ an via Psht. r¯ un, etc.

11.8.1.2

Pah¯ ar.¯ı

Some examples are:173 Kh¯ aśi. ukken¯ a ‘to vaccinate – indicative of existence of some kind of local form of vaccination’ (Kaul [2006 i: 192]) < OIA ankáyati ˙ ‘marks, brands’ (104) (Pa.) (note there e.g. L. angan ˙ . ‘to vaccinate’ and note loss of nasal consonant in Kh¯ aśi.); Thar. cundar ‘moon’ < OIA candrá- ‘moon’ (4661); Pang. ˙ kup¯ a.l ‘head’ < OIA *kapp¯ ala- ‘skull’ (2744); the linguistic variant P¯ ogul¯ı is spoken in the Pogul Valley which can be compared with Nuristani valley names like D"u ˜gul Valley (< OIA *ghala- ‘stream’ [4453]), and with place names in Kashmir like the “Wowirgul ” Pass, the “Basma Gul ” Peak and “Batgul ” Village; the name of the town Bhadarw¯ ah is pronounced as bhut.lùa in High Rudh.; High Rudh. gun.d.ori ‘ulcer’ < OIA gan.d.á-1 ‘boil’ (3997),174 mu"caki ‘snapping of the lips’ < OIA *macc‘sound of cracking or smacking’ (9709), pet.a ¯-bhurai ‘pregnant’ (Kaul [2006 i: 293]) with first 172 Regarding MIA e > i and o > u raising see Bubenik (1996: 31). Such raisings are phonetically natural, whereas a raising of a > u is not in any way natural. Pischel (§ 111) has only a few Prakrit examples for context free a > u otherwise they are conditioned (§ 104). Sometimes the change is observed in MIA in the neighborhood of bilabial consonants, i.e. near v, p, b(h), m (Norman [1976] who quotes a few dozen examples). The great majority of those examples are clearly phonologically conditioned: see Norman (reprint) 1990: 247 and 251 and there fn. 5 with different explanation attempts; see also Oberlies (2019: 145) on phonetic details. Also note Pa. sus¯ ana- < OIA śmaś¯ aná- ‘erection for burning dead, burial place for cremated bones’ (12658) which is further reflected in Mult. of Jalalabad sus¯ an ‘cremation ground’ (Z.) (see p. 742), where the -u- must have developed < -m-. This is the opposite of the here following cases where the great majority of changes are clearly context free. Context free types of vowel change are practically unknown from Vedic and Classic Sanskrit. Their appearance in a late phase of Indo-Aryan development is yet another example for the beginning of OL impact on IL during the MIA phase. 173 In a number of cases, parallels from other language groups are listed, demonstrating the wideranging spread of this trend. 174 EWA considers IIr. inheritance; cf. also Psht. G und ‘round’, G undurai ‘ball, globe’ etc. which is

actually looks like an Ir.-IA a- ‘ball of dough’ but which believed to be cognate with Av. gund

semantic-morphological amalgamation.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.8. Vowel changes

371

component < OIA *pet.t.a-2 ‘belly’ (8376) and second < bh¯ arin- ‘bearing a load’.175 Here probably also cognate Klm. bire H ‘girl; daughter’ and l¯ekb¯ ar H(L) ‘small child’ (← l¯ ok ‘small’) and perhaps lukut.or n.f. ‘children’ (← lukut. ‘small’), also Pal. ’bh¯ aräi n.f. and Dm. b"a ¯ri both ‘lamb, one year old’ which cf. with Pal. "bh¯ aru ‘burden’ and Norwegian ‘barn’ (see also Martirosyan [2013: 116f.] on related forms in Arm., Alb. and Gr.). Also with same semantics is Pal. "grh¯emin.o ¯ n.f. ‘kid, one year old’ which cf. with OIA gariman¯ a- ‘heaviness, weight’, Bng. gOrkeri (with parallel in S. garak¯ ur.¯ı) and Kva. g orui c hevEr both n.f. ‘pregnant



woman’, and M. garodar ‘pregnant (woman)’ < OIA gurú- ‘heavy’ (4209) and *kud.¯ı- ‘girl’ (3245). Note that all ‘child, kid, lamb’ words have feminine gender. Sir.d.od.. m¯ ud. ‘lap’ (with a parallel in Klm. m¯ ur H(L) ‘lap’) < OIA *man.d.a- ‘circle’ (9742, see there Sh. [Lorimer] muñi ‘woman’s lap’); Cam. lu¯ ao ¯ ‘put on!’ < OIA l¯ agáyati ‘lays on’ (1004) and ur¯e-par¯e ‘round about’ with first component < OIA ápara- ‘posterior’ (434) which has a parallel in MKH (1: 299) ure a ¯o ‘come hither’; Bng. ku clO n.m. ‘waste, garbage’ (besides kO crO, kO clO ‘bad, evil; dirty’) < OIA kaccara-1 ‘dirty, vile’ (2615), u ˜g¯ a.l n.f. ‘embrace; an armful’ < OIA ankap¯ ˙ ali- ‘embrace’ (103), bulnO1 ‘to concentrate on s.th., be intensively busy with s.th.’, bulOndO ‘busy’ and bulanO ‘to describe, explain’ derive more or less directly < OIA bhálate

‘expounds, describes’ (9406), rumO1 poet. ‘simple, easy, easily reachable’ (also Garh. rumailo ‘beautiful’ [Z.]) < OIA ramyà- ‘to be enjoyed’ (10636), lum(a)n.u ‘udder of a goat’ < OIA lambana- ‘hanging down’ (10955), bailurO n.m. ‘a dear brother’ is a compound < OIA bhra
tr ‘brother’ (9661) and lad.aha- ‘pleasing’ (10923) (Pk.) with a premodern parallel in Old G., ku
spu
sa nO ‘to dawn’ < OIA ka

sate ‘shines’ (3114) (Pa.) (with echo formation) with modern parallels only in Nuristani,176 ne¯ uz ‘(sacred) food’ < OIA anna
dya- ‘food’ (398) (or rather < OIA *anna-bh¯ ajya- [?], cf. Rj.jaip. nevaj ‘a portion of food set apart for the gods’), bu
sE n.f.pl.tant. ‘chat, discussion’ and with the verb lanO (H. lag¯ an¯ a) ‘to talk, gossip, discuss’,

Garh. poet. buśr¯ı ‘talk’ (Catak [1973: perhaps borrowed into Rp. bhisi l@l a- ‘to complain’, . 154])177 , Pal. bhóoša, bhúuše ‘to bark, bleat; talk (negatively)’ (Kt.g. búś n.f. and Kc. b¯ uś n.f. ‘chat, talk’ are wrongly derived in the Addenda and Corrigenda < OIA *bussa- ‘defective’ [9296] but actually derive < OIA bh¯ as.a ¯- ‘speech’ [note gender and tones,178 and cf. the semantics with Ind. bhas.ᘠv ‘to scold’, Kal. bas
kik ‘to boast, praise oneself’, Bhat.. bhas.y

to scold; to prate’]), note also Pk. (Deś.) ‘to talk trash’ and Ko. b¯ as kh¯ a ‘to get a scolding; bhasan.a ¯- ‘dogs’ (“barkers”) and OIA bhas.á- ‘barking, yapping; bellend, kläffend’;179 Bng. sudnO ‘to repair; eat up, finish’ < OIA sámdadh¯ ˙ ati ‘places on, combines’ (12898), pornO ‘to

a feather’ < OIA p¯ pluck at.áyati ‘plucks out’ (8032),180 Bng. poet. (PAN) g@gasuri n.f. ‘river Ganges’ with -suri < OIA sará- ‘going’, ‘course?’; Kt.g. mung@l

‘Tuesday’ < OIA mangalá˙ ‘the planet Mars’ (9706);181 Bng. postposition m uzE and Jaun. mujh (Kaul [2006 i: 50]) 175 See 9466 with same semantics in Kh¯ aśi. bhuru¯ ai ‘pregnant’, Si. bärin.¯ı ‘pregnant woman’ and Sh.gil. barádo adj.m. (!) ‘pregnant; schwanger’. Other words with the same PIE root and with this semantics are found in Psht. warla ‘pregnant’, Jen. pare ‘pregnant’ < older *phara (Lützenhardter Wörterbuch) and Swab. bärhafte ‘fertile’ (as woman). The Jen. word is a reflex of a Rom. form whereas the Swab. word reflects older Germanic forms with this meaning as in modern German gebären ‘to give birth’, more examples are found in IEW. 176 There are also other echo words in Bng. with -p-. 177 Because of lack of aspiration it is unclear whether this word is an old inheritance or a more recent borrowing from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. 178 Toneless Kc. b¯ uś must be a hearing mistake. 179 Regarding the controversial etymology of OIA bh¯ as.¯ a- see EWA and Lipp (2009: 35, fn. 79). Lipp suggests bh¯ as.¯ a- < *bh ars.¯ a- < *bh ols-éh2 (∼ Lith. ba˜lsas ‘voice’ < *bh óls-o-). But it is clear that the Dard, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Ko. forms differ semantically from those found sub Turner 9479. 180 Here with a > o and not > u perhaps due to the transitive meaning. 181 I have also repeatedly heard mungal ˙ ‘Tuesday’ from Mult¯ an¯ı speakers from Afghanistan.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

372

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

both ‘in’ (Jaun. also muj˜ey ‘from within’ [Z.]) with parallels in Paš.deg. muˇȷi ‘between’, Pr. “munj” ‘in’ (LSI viii,ii: 65) and Kho. mùžgris.pò ‘midsummer’ and muji ‘among’ (LSI viii,ii: 139) and muúž, múž ‘interior, inside; marrow’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics) < OIA mádhya- ‘middle’ (9804) and second element in Kho. < gr¯ıs.má- ‘summer’ (4391); Gadd. gh¯ um ‘hot’ (cf. H. gh¯ am heat’); Ku. th¯ un. ‘udder’ < OIA stána- ‘udder’ (13666) and perhaps thuran. ‘to beat’ if < OIA starati ‘strews’ (13687) (cf. H. tharn¯ a ‘to beat metal out with a small hammer’), kurburail ‘of greyish colour’ < (or tatsama?) OIA karbará- ‘spotted’ (2882) or rather < OIA karburá- ‘variegated’ (2885), bub ‘grandfather’ (Garh. buv¯ a, Garh.t.. poet. buba and Dari. bv¯ a all ‘father’, and Ra. buba ‘wife’s father, father’s father, mother’s father’) < OIA *b¯ appa- ‘father’ (9209), surv¯ al ‘loose cotton trousers worn by women’ ← Pers. śalv¯ ar; Rp.182 tupk@- ‘to drip’ (cf. N. tapkanu ‘ditto’) < OIA *t.app- ‘drip’ (5444), bhuta ‘bellows’ < OIA bhástr¯ a- ‘bellows’ (9424); N. bh˜ ud.i ‘stomach’ (Z.) < OIA bh¯ an.d.a-1 ‘pot’ (9440), churo ‘dysenteric stools consisting only of blood’ < OIA ks.ará- ‘melting away; water’ (3662), thun ‘teat, udder, nipple’ like above Ku. < OIA stána- ‘nipple etc.’ (13666); Sirm. muktab ‘school’ (Negi 1969: 436) ← Ar. maktab; Kgr. bhukr.a ¯n. ‘clod-crusher’ < OIA *bhakka- ‘lump’ (9330), pumb¯ a ‘who beats cotton, wool’ < OIA páks.man- ‘a thin thread’ (7638) with several modern reflexes meaning ‘wool’ or ‘cotton’ e.g. K. phamb ‘cotton-wool’, kukr.i ‘larynx’ < OIA (Car.) k¯ akala- respectively (Suśr.) k¯ akalaka- ‘larynx’ (note preservation of medial -k-),183 kúlla ‘loin’ probably < OIA kálatra- with lex. meaning ‘the hip and loins’; also P. e.g. kum¯ a¯ı ‘earnings’ (besides kam¯ a¯ı and H. kam¯ a¯ı) which is cognate with OIA *karm¯ apayati ‘works, earns’ (2897), burch¯ a ‘a spear’ (cf. H. barch¯ a ‘ditto’), buttn.a ¯ ‘vomit’ < OIA lex. v¯ anti- ‘vomiting’ (11518); Garh. gu thn a ‘to make garlands’ (Z.) < OIA granthana ‘stringing together’ (4351), bhunnu ‘wild boar’ (also with spontaneous aspiration) < OIA vanya- ‘a wild animal’, uriy¯ an.u ¯ ‘to begin’ < OIA a
rabhate ‘undertakes, begins’ (1305) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Old G., dhum-dhum¯ a ‘dawn’ < OIA dhamyáte ‘is blown on’ (6737), kund ‘sad, depressed’ < OIA kl¯ anta- ‘wearied’, bhurtu ‘labour’ (cf. OIA *bh¯ arta‘pertaining to servants’ [9468]), Garh.t.. t¯ un ‘rutting season of cattle’ < OIA tápana- ‘causing pain; heat’ (5672), Garh.t.. poet. gurEy alO ‘closed, shut’ < OIA g¯ ad.ha- ‘pressed together,

kavala- ‘mouthful’ (2960), and there are many thick, firm’ (4118), kul.u ‘mouthful’ < OIA other examples in this language. More Pah¯ ar.¯ı examples and examples from other Outer Languages are found infra. Note: However, one should beware of false cognates. For instance, there is B. usti ‘bone’ which looks like an old tatsama of OIA ásthi- ‘bone’ (982) with apparently typical OL change a zu u. The word is also found in Munda Sant., and since the Munda languages are saturated with IA word material this does not look surprising. However, the more precise meaning of Sant. usti is ‘a piece or pieces of bone of a cremated corpse rescued from the ashes of the funeral pyre’. Thus, this Sant. word parallels semantically H. ph¯ ul in the sense of ‘remains of bones after cremation’.184 Thus, the Sant. word is not a borrowing from IA but the B. word is a borrowing from Munda. It is quite likely that the Sant. form is a compound meaning ‘fire(wood)-ashes’, cf. PMK *[]Pus, *[]Puus, *[]Pu@s ‘fire, firewood’ with many modern reflexes like Aslian Semelai Pus ‘fire, flame, electricity’, Bahnaric Sre Pous ‘fire’, Katuic Bru Puus ‘firewood’, etc. Regarding the 182 The two following Rp. words are borrowings from IA. 183 Any connection with MK Proto-Khmuic *kO:k ‘larynx; Adam’s apple’ ? 184 In a number of NIA languages, which have reflexes of OIA phulla- ‘full-blown flower’, the reflexes mean also ‘spark (of fire)’ and something like ‘pieces of bone of a cremated corpse rescued from the ashes of the funeral pyre’. I have shown that these meanings, not found in the OIA word, are due to contamination with similar-sounding words from AA languages (Zoller [2018: 337ff.]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.8. Vowel changes

373

second syllable of the Munda word, cf. various Bahnaric languages having tuh ‘ashes’ and Khasic War twua ‘ashes’. The AA back vowel was perhaps fronted due to influence of OIA ásthi-.

11.8.1.3

Other Indo-Aryan languages

G.pars. ugamn˜ u ‘eastern’ (with unclear consonant behaviour),185 M. ugvat and M.w¯ ar. ung@v@t

both ‘east’ – cf. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı “agney-kon” (Handa 2009: 287) ‘the southwestern angle’ (of a temple in Himachal Pradesh) – Rj. ugun. ‘east’ (but Marw. @gunO resp. a gunO

Agni’;187 S. ‘east’ [CLLR])186 < OIA lex. agni-kon.a- ‘the south-east quarter, ruled over by ubhu ‘sky’ < OIA abhrá-1 ‘cloud’ (549) even though Turner suggests derivation < *up¯ abhra‘near the clouds’ (2307), ustupustu ‘lucerne (grass)’ cf. Psht. špešta, špeštarai ‘lucerne’ and Pers. aspist lit. ‘horse food’,188 u dh ao ‘dark’ and u dhai ‘darkness’ < OIA andhá- ‘darkness’ (385); G.pars. u ˜mbar ‘open space’ < OIA ámbara- ‘circumference’ (note also Si. ambura); ˘ S. cun.n.u ‘to build up’ (cf. Bng., Jaun. and Deog. cannO and further cognates [p. 757]), turho

belongs to tará- ‘raft’, and for related ‘raft’ because of -h- cf. OIA lex. tar¯ıs.a- ‘raft’ which words with same vowel change see below sub Bng. tungO

‘ford’ (p. 803); G. humlo ‘attack’ ← Ar. h.amla, nairutya ‘southwestern’ (Tisdall 1961) tatsama has a parallel in P. nairat kon. ‘the southwest point of the compass’ (and was borrowed into Munda Kh. nairitiya ‘southwestern’) cf. OIA (catalogues) nairrtya- ‘southwestern’, lul¯ı ‘tongue’ < OIA *lalla- ‘inarticulate noise’ (10972) or OIA lalalla
-  ‘imitation of the speech of someone condemned to babble by 189 biting off his tongue’; Mult. śôhur ‘village’ ← Pers. śahar; S. supho ‘page of a book’ ← Ar. s.afha, suphedo ‘white lead’ and similar Jat.. sufet ‘white’ ← Pers. safeda; S. huphijn.u ‘to pant’ and Ko. hume ‘to pant’ < OIA *hamph- ‘pant’ (13973);190 Rj. b¯ usbo ‘to be spoiled as food’ < OIA v¯ asa-3 ‘perfume’ (11592) (cf. H. b¯ as ‘stink’), mundr¯ a mundr¯ a ‘slowly’ < OIA mandara- ‘slow’ (9754), dur ‘burrow for rabbits, etc.’ < OIA dará-3 ‘hole in the ground, cave’, gurro ‘pride, haughtiness’ < OIA gauravá- ‘venerableness’ (4346), un.mun. ‘sad, sorab); Rj.mal. bh˜ us¯ ar and bh unOsra rowful’ (but H. anman¯ a); Rj.jaip. khur¯ ab ‘bad’ (Ar. khar¯ ‘morning’, and bh˜ us¯ ar t¯ ara ‘morning star’ are cognate with OIA *vibh¯ anih.s¯ ara- ‘coming forth of dawn’ (11813a) but instead of the -u- an -i- should be expected (note also Brj.-Aw. bhinus¯ ar ‘dawn’ and Kh¯ aśi. devoiced and deaspirated pi¯ anu ‘bright morning star- [Kaul 2006 185 A number of the following examples shows both depalatalization and/or deaffrication. 186 Also borrowed into Ora. argn¯ı(-tar¯ a) ‘east’. 187 Note also semantically related P. b¯ aibkon. ‘the northwest point of the compass’ < OIA v¯ ayavya‘the northwest (as presided over by v¯ ayu)’, and see an indirect and doubtful modern parallel in Si. sub OIA v¯ ayav¯ı- ‘the Northwest’ (11543), and Garh. ¯ıs¯ an. ‘the north-east quarter’ and P.

s ana- ‘ruling; an old ¯ıs¯ an.kon. ‘the northeast point of the compass’ with first component < OIA name of God Śiva and name of the ruler of this cardinal direction’. 188 This Iranian word, which has also been borrowed into Ind. as išpìth ‘a type of grass which has to be watered and which is fed to cattle’, must once have been geographically very widespread as it is also found in Kroraina inscriptions (Loulan Kingdom in Central Asia) of the 3rd Century AD as aśpista- ‘clover, lucerne’ (Baghbidi [2009: 38], H. W. Bailey [1949: 121]). 189 EWA: ‘Nachahmung der Rede eines durch Abbeißen der Zunge zum Lallen Verurteilten’. Cf. also Jat.. pal¯ al ‘vain, idle talking, speaking at random’ and pal¯ al¯ı ‘a babbler’ which are < OIA *pralalla- (this onomatopoeic word points back to PIE *lal- ‘babble’). 190 The lemma is perhaps of Austro-Asiatic origin, cf. Semai hoUp ‘to pant, to breathe rapidly, to gasp for breath, to be breathless’, Khmer haep ‘(of fish and other aquatic animals) to rise to the surface of the water in order to get air, come up for air’ and heep-heep i.a. ‘gasping, panting’, Nyah Kur h
OOp ‘asthma’. In case (parts of) these MK words are cognate with *hamph-, then they are not necessarily an example for a > u.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

374

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

i: 191]), u dh aval ‘storm’ is a synonym compound < OIA andhak¯ ara- ‘darkness’ (386) (cf. e.g. Bhad. a dharu ‘storm’) plus OIA lex. v¯ atala- ‘stormy’ (11497), khu kh aru  ‘cough’ < OIA khankh¯ ˙ ar- ‘cough’ (3763), ph¯ un, ph¯ und ‘anus’ < OIA *phan.t.a- ‘barren’ (9047) with parallel meaning in Dardic Dm. phan.d.a ‘anus, vulva’ but note dental coda in Rj.mal. which may indicate association with B. ponda ‘the anus; (vul.) the posteriors, the buttocks, the hips’ and K. pon ‘anus’;191 Rj.jaip. juv¯ ab and Rj.mev. jub¯ ab ‘answer’ (H. jav¯ ab) (also Sh. juv¯ ab and note Sh.gur. with spontaneous aspiration jhav¯ ab); Marw. dun.d.(-mun.d.) ‘punishment’ < OIA dan.d.á- ‘stick’ (6128), puca ‘five’ (cf. Sh. push ‘five’ [LSI viii, ii: 10], Kamd. p"u˙c, Kt. p"uč, Wg. p˜ uč, Pr. vus."u ¯ [with retroflex as in Dardic Bro. puns ˙ . 192 ] all ‘five’) < OIA páñca‘five’ (7655), rukhal@n ri vastE ‘for protecting’ < OIA *raks.ap¯ alana- ‘guarding’ (cf. OIA raks.ap¯ ala- ‘protector, guard’) – the Marw. form is cognate with the identically built Marw. expression richpal@n saru ‘for protecting’; Rj.ajm. m˜ ug"t¯ o ‘beggar’ cognate with OIA ma
rgati ‘seeks’ (10074) but with an agent or participle ending; Bhil.wag. gup-cup ‘whisper’ (cf. H. gap-śap), guder.u ‘donkey’ < OIA gardabhá- ‘ass’ (4054), kumbhya ‘pole’ < OIA skambhá‘prop’ (13639)(?), kuh¯ ab¯ a ‘to be called’193 < OIA katháyati ‘converses with’ (2703), guy¯ o ‘(s.o.) went’ < OIA gatá- ‘gone’ (4008); Ah¯ır¯ı dialect of Bhil. juml¯ an ‘from birth’ < OIA jánman- ‘birth’ (5113) (see similar cognates e.g. in Rj. or Bng. zOrmEnO ‘to be born’, Him. and Kann. zOlma, zOlmo ‘born’, Kann. also z˘ orm˘ennig ‘to be born’, Jaun. jaram ‘birth’, three dialects of Kamti spoken in Thakurgaon (Bangladesh) jOlmo, Rangpur (Bangladesh) dzOlmo and Bongaigaon (Assam) sormO all ‘birth’ (Toulmin 2006: 388), B. jOrmO, B.chit. zOrmO ‘birth’ etc., cf. also same dissimilation in the Lat. cognate germen ‘progeny, offspring’ and in Thracian zelmis ‘offspring, descendant’);194 Ko. hujir ‘in the presence of’ ← Ar. h.a ¯z.ir ‘present’, rum ‘gimlet’ < OIA *rampa- ‘knife, scraper’ (10629), gun.t.u ‘croup; protuberance’ < OIA gan.d.á-1 ‘goitre; boil’ (also with devoicing), gurgur ‘to grunt, snarl’ < OIA gharaghara‘grunt, rumble’ (4432) (also with loss of aspiration), put. ‘page’ < OIA páttra- ‘leaf of book’ (7733), kup ‘cloud’ < OIA k¯ al¯ abhra- ‘black cloud’ (3096) (also with word-final devoicing and with a modern parallel in Si.), kus ‘side, direction’ < OIA káks.a-1 ‘armpit’ (2588); Ko.S. m¯ usu ‘fly’ and mh@vE m usu ‘honey bee’ probably < OIA maśáka- ‘mosquito’ (9917); M.Kud.. d.umruk ‘kind of small drum’ < OIA *d.ambaru- ‘drum’ (5531); M.w¯ ar. mun.d.ulya ‘a serpent’ < OIA man.d.alin- ‘snake’ (9743) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in Si., mura ‘ankle’ probably < OIA lex. varambar¯ a- ‘Nux vomica’ (11321) with modern parallels in dialectal Paš. vur(u)m
, urumu
i.a. ‘ankle-bone’ (here also M.w¯ar. murum ‘rubble’ ?); M.coch. umm as@ ‘new moon day’ < OIA am av asya - ‘the night of the new moon’ (565) with same vowel change in Or.; Or. ud¯ a, od¯ a ‘wet’ < OIA a ¯rdrá- ‘wet’ (1340) (cf. Pa. adda-); B. cul, sul ‘hair’, A. suli ‘hair’, Rab. culi ‘hair’ (written “chuli” by Roy 2011: 82) < OIA *c¯ ala-1 ‘moving’ (4768) with modern semantic parallels in Dm., Paš., Kho. and Yid. to which is to be added Kal.

191 The lemma is also found in Munda Gta" punâo-maik ‘anus, rectum’ (lit. ‘hole-buttock’), but this is not enough to claim Munda origin. 192 So Ramaswami, but D. D. Sharma writes puns. ˙ 193 Note that several Mar¯ at.h¯ı and Konkan ˙ .¯ı dialects have an infinitive in -p@, one or two like M.kud.. also in -k as in some Dard languages and even in some dialects of Darai (see Paudyal and Kotapish & Kotapish). 194 The same dissimilation is also found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı zOgOrn at ‘Lord of the World’ which corresponds with OIA jagann¯ atha.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.8. Vowel changes

375

čal ‘mane’;195 eastern B. buin ‘sister’ (cf. Šat.. bhi u 
‘sister’)196 < OIA bhagin¯ı- ‘sister’ (9349).

Assamese In Assamese, some cases of a vowel raising are due to following a labial sound, like in Standard Prakrit, but this is not always the case: puva (puv¯ a) ‘morning’ < OIA prabh¯ ata‘daybreak’ (8707), puni (pun¯ı) ‘an aquatic plant; floating moss’ < OIA (Car.) parn.ik¯ a‘a vegetable’ (Kakati 1972: 102), bamun (b¯ amun.) ‘Brahmin’, gune (gun.e) ‘counts’ < OIA gan.áyati ‘counts’ (3993), bOrOxun (baras.un.) ‘rains’ < OIA vars.an.a- ‘raining’, muniya (mun.iy¯ a) ‘stunted’ < OIA *m¯ an.a- ‘defective’ (9723), nut.un¯ı ‘female dancer’ cognate with OIA nat.¯ı- ‘female dancer’ (6933). Notes: (a) In Bang¯ an.¯ı and probably also in other Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages there is also synchronic alternation between O and u, sometimes expressing ‘normal’ vs. ‘intensive’: zOrbOr anO

‘to crack’ vs. zurbur anO ‘to crack loudly’.

to say whether this change found over this large geographical (b) It is perhaps difficult area has a singular origin or not, and if it has just one, where is it to be found. But in any case, this change is a characteristic of the northwestern and the other Outer Languages, and is also found in adjacent Iranian language areas with a > u or o. In fact it appears that this change characterizes all eastern Iranian languages. Some examples for a > u in Iranian: Shgh. as in badaxsu
n ‘Badakhshan’, n¯ um ‘name’, p¯ und ‘road’ etc.; Wkh. wuˇ x ‘the Wakhi language’ < *vaxšu- ‘Oxus’ (Schmitt 2000: 94) (but here perhaps epenthesis), Bar. Dus and Yasgh. D us ‘ten’ (cf. Kamd., Kt. du˙c, San.. d"os [< older *do˙c ] all ‘ten’), R. p¯ un and Yashgh. p un ‘feather’ < *parna-, Shgh., R. and Bar. p¯ um ‘fluff’ < *pa(x)šman-, Psht. pu x"@y ‘rib’ (corresponds exactly with Wg. pus.t.í ‘rib’ [Z.] which is < OIA párśu-1 ‘rib’ [7948], but perhaps also here epenthesis). (c) Note also Dravidian Brah. jhur ‘small hill-stream’ borrowed < OIA *jh¯ ara-1 ‘flowing’ (5373) (but here the vowel changed perhaps under the influence of Brah. cur with same meaning).197 (d) That the change a > u is probably of considerable age in the Outer and northwestern languages is perhaps supported by the name of the ancient people kun.inda-/kulindawhich has been compared with kalinda- ‘name of a people’ (EWA) and with kalind¯ı‘name of the river Yamun¯ a’, i.e. the area where the Kun.indas ruled between 2nd Century BCE until 3rd Century AD in this part of the Himalayas and in the adjoining lowlands (see also Joshi [1989: 31] who points out that this suggestion has already been made by S. B. Chaudhuri in 1955; he himself suggests (ibid.) an alternative interpretation).198

195 However, for the A. form (which would include B. and Rab.) Kakati (1972: 106), following Turner, suggests derivation < OIA *c¯ ud.ik¯ a- i.e. < cu
da-1 ‘topknot on head’ (4883). On the other

hand, Chatterji (ODBL § 236) is not exactly sure about this idea. So, the matter is not really clear. 196 See p. 488 for my distinction between ‘epenthesis’ (fronting of -i(-) to the coda of the first syllable) and ‘palatalization’ (fronting of -i(-) to the onset of the first syllable). 197 See Mayrhofer sub KS.AR and Norman (1995: 283). 198 On the Kun.indas having probably extended their territory in that of the decaying Indo-Greek empire and on their uses of bilingual coins both in Brahm¯ı and Kharos.t.h¯ı which imitated probably the hemidrachm see Joshi 1989: 32ff.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

376

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

(e) The change is also sometimes found in Sinhalese, e.g. in guvana ‘sky, firmament’ < OIA gagana- ‘atmosphere’ (3950), nuvana- ‘eye’ < OIA nayaná-2 ‘eye’ (6968) etc.

Rohingya In both cases the vowel change is phonetically conditioned. 1. kup ‘cutting as an attempt to murder’ < OIA kalpáyati ‘trims, cuts’ (2944). 2. buk ‘chest’ < OIA váks.as- ‘breast, chest’ (11188).

11.8.1.4

Munda

There exists a considerable number of words in Munda languages with same change of a to u. However, my impression is so far that a substantial majority are borrowings from IndoAryan languages. For instance, one finds in Koda and Mahali guli ‘path’ which is borrowed ← a reflex of OIA gáti- ‘going, gait’ with extension-(l)la- (4009) (cf. H. gal¯ı ‘path, lane’). In Santali one finds bhurk@ ‘Venus (planet)’ ← a reflex of OIA bh¯ argava- ‘Venus’, gunti ‘to count’ borrowed from a reflex u) which can be compared e.g. with Jaun. bharc¯ a ‘nephew (brother’s son)’. Sh.koh. (RSup) kata
p ur ‘a small shooting tower built on the roof’ seems to be a

compound with second component -p¯ ur ‘storey; floor of a house’ (see p. 657 for parallels) and regarding first component kata
- cf. OIA at.t.a-2 ‘high; tower, watchtower’

pur¯ (180). A close parallel to kata
p ur is OIA (R.) at.t.a- ‘a watch-tower on a city-wall’207

(also with element pu initially). I surmise that that (k)at.t.a is a ‘North r, however Indian’ word. Sh.koh. (RSup) h2l"l  ‘liver’ cf. with OIA k¯ aleyaka- ‘a partic. part of the intestines; liver’ which is ← OIA k¯ ala- ‘black’ (EWA) (3103) (but note absence of otherwise common strengthening of -y- > MIA -jj-). Compare Bur. 1 hus. ‘dampness (in field, ground)’ with Sh. khúus. ‘damp’. Gaw. h"eriu ‘husband’ < OIA *bh¯ ariy¯ apa- ‘husband’ (9467). More doubtful is Kal. hoc. ‘oil, shortening, or clarified butter’ which can be compared with Ap. ghitta- for which Turner suggests with question mark derivation < *ghirta(4501); this would have a certain parallel in Ind. h
2p-h2pℎ ‘to bark (as a dog)’ versus Psht. Gap ‘the barking of a dog’ (also first element in Bro. g@bch@l ‘barking of dog’). Here perhaps also Karakorum language hil/hel ‘summer pasture’ (Schomberg 1936: 233) if < OIA khilá- ‘unploughed land, new ground’ but also according to some ‘pasture-land’. Quite a clear case is dialectal Paš. aste-lauru
‘ploughshare’ (Morgenstierne [1973a,

with OIA *k¯ vol. 3: 312]) where first word compares as.t.hak¯ ut.a- ‘wooden ploughshare’ (3122) whereas the second word must be a reflex of OIA lohá- ‘iron’. The compound is thus a succinct characterization of a traditional ploughshare. Notes: (a) The occurrence of quite a number of words with originally initial aspirated consonants may be an additional indication that the loss of aspiration in Nuristani happened in the not so remote past. (b) Since many cases can be interpreted as a kind of debuccalization (which

207 See Böthlingk und Roth sub at.t.a-2 .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

382

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

usually means change of a sibilant into h, but more generally a loss of articulation position), here a related example: sub Ind. dh s I have collected (Zoller [2005]) quite a number of words reflecting either śus.i 2 - *‘breath’ (12547) and *śus.yati2 (12545) or ś¯ us.a- ‘blowing’ (12577) which display many different stages of debuccalization (cf. e.g. Kho. h"ah ‘breath’ (Strand) and hah dik ‘to breathe out’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics) and Gadd. ha ‘breath’, here also P. hoh¯ a ‘slight puff of wind’ [T. Graham Bailey 1938: 244); for Ind. dh s I had tentatively suggested a synonym compound with first component < PIE

¯ ‘breathe’ for which cf. Sh.koh. d¯ *DHU onu ‘to blow (as wind)’ (with -¯ onu infini  tive – Bailey [1924: 254]), but also OIA dhamá‘blowing’ may have influenced the words; note related Mult. d.usk¯ ar¯ a ‘hurried breathing’. Cognate but more distantly related appear reflexes of Proto-Baltic *dausios ‘air; soul’.

11.9.2

Deśya Prakrit

H. C. Bhayani observes on Deśya words in Prakrit (1988: 150): “Many of these words are familiar to us from Prakrit and Apabhramśa ˙ literatures. They form a part of the common stock of the literary vocabulary and there is nothing regional or dialectal about them.” In other words, they are integral part of the MIA koinés. Nevertheless, many Deśya words are also typically found in peripheral modern languages, as many examples in this book will show. A striking feature of Deśya Prakrit is a relatively high number of words where the initial consonant has disappeared or left its former presence in the form of h- or a semivowel. Within the Inner Languages from Vedic via MIA to NIA, such examples are found only very rarely. Those which I could find are listed below. No example is known to me from Niya Prakrit or G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı. This may be due to different geographical distribution of different OL characteristics, it may be due to unequally distributed restitution tendencies, or due to other reasons. But this is, at this moment, just speculation. Here follow the examples: 1. mubbho, mobbho ‘the beam of a house’ without other MIA parallels < OIA kúmba‘thick end (of a bone or club)’ (3307); besides the quoted modern reflexes in Wg. and N., the lemma is also found in Dari. kumbo ‘shoulder; kind of tree’ and probably also in Bhil.MBh. khapo ‘shoulder’; the Deś. and the Bhil.MBh. forms suggest older *kumbha-.208 2. kankel¯ ˙ ı ∼ ankel¯ ˙ ı ‘Ashoka tree’ < OIA (B¯ alar.) kankeli˙ ‘the tree Jonesia Asoka’ apparently without modern reflexes. 3. caviam ˙ ∼ aviam ˙ ‘said’ < OIA *cavati ‘says’ (4724). 4. cull¯ı ∼ ull¯ı ‘fireplace’ < OIA cull¯ı- ‘fireplace’ (4879). 5. j¯ ua ¯∼u ¯a ¯ ‘louse’ < OIA yu
k a- ‘louse’ (10512); Turner asks, “[w]ith loss of y- (due to taboo?)”; modern reflexes without y- are found in Ash., Wg., M., Ko. Here probably also B.roh. matár uinn ‘louse’ (lit. ‘headlouse’, H. sir k  ju , with first word < OIA mástaka- ‘head, skull’ [9926] plus possessive pp.). 6. dhavvo ‘speed’ ∼ havva ‘speedily, quickly’ < OIA DHAV ‘run’. 7. pamhalo ∼ vamhalam ˙ ‘filament of lotus, etc.’ < OIA páks.man- ‘filament of a flower’ (7638) plus a suffix (with OIA ks. reflected as in Kh. ahambaP1 borrowed < OIA aks.ama-). 208 Almuth Degener has pointed out (pers. comm.) that the form mubbho could also be result of assimilation, i.e. *kumbha- > *mumbha-. This is true, and therefore this example is ambivalent.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.10. The interface of linguistic prehistory and history: hedgehog and peacock 383 8. palah¯ı ∼ valah¯ı ∼ phalah¯ı ‘cotton’ < OIA pallava-2 ‘strip of cloth’ (7970), regarding meaning see OIA 7967 *palla-3 ‘cloth’ with a reflex in Si. pala ‘cotton cloth’. 9. papp¯ıo ∼ bapp¯ıho ∼ vapp¯ıho ‘the c¯ ataka bird’ (i.e. sparrow) < OIA píppak¯ a- ‘a species of bird’ (8204). 10. pilan.a ∼ v¯ılan.a ‘slippery’ connected with OIA pilippilá- (also pilpilá-) ‘slippery’ (8213).209 11. phid.d.o ∼ hid.d.o ‘small, dwarfish’ cognate with OIA *put.t.a-2 ‘small, dwarfish’ (8256) and *hid.d.a ‘defective’ (14087) (Pk. hid.d.a- ‘dwarf’). 12. ph¯ uo ∼ h¯ umo ‘blacksmith’ cf. e.g. M. ph¯ um- ‘imit. of the hissing or puffing (of a snake &c.)’, OIA *ph¯ utka- ‘blowing’ (9102), PMK *puut ‘to blow’, etc. The form h¯ umo may go back to a synonym compound < OIA ph¯ ut- ‘blowing, puffing’ (cf. Kho. phuik ‘to blow’) or s.th. similar plus dhamá- in compounds meaning ‘blowing’ (6730).

11.10

The interface of linguistic prehistory and history: hedgehog and peacock 210

Above p. 46 I have discussed two publications by Alexander Lubotsky in which he explains and illustrates his tracing of BMAC words from analyzing Vedic and Avestan sources. I then showed that a few words may have been borrowed from Kartvelian, e.g. BMAC (OIA) *k¯ aca-2 ‘black’ (p. 48). Moreover, in my article ‘Northern India after and before the Arrival of Indo-Aryan’ (2017a)I have tried to show that two BMAC lemmata may have been borrowed from Austro-Asiatic: OIA jáhak¯ a- ‘hedgehog’ and OIA mayu
ra- ‘peacock’. Whereas the former lemma has a parallel in Avestan dužuka- ‘hedgehog’ the latter does not. That is no reason to say it cannot be a BMAC word, though, because Lubotsky argues (2001: 305): The phonological and morphological features of Indo-Iranian loanwords are strikingly similar to those which are characteristic of Sanskrit loanwords, i.e. words which are only attested in Sanskrit and which must have entered the language after the Indo-Aryans had crossed Hindukush. This applies to mayu
ra-, which I further maintain is a borrowing from Austro-Asiatic (see right below). However, I am no longer so sure about the origin of the word for ‘hedgehog’, since there are similar forms for BMAC *ajh a/uka - in Kartvel languages that I did not know in 2017: Bezhit-Georgian ˇ¸aˇ¸u ‘hedgehog’ which is a reflex of Common Kartvelian  Georgian zaz-un-a ‘hamster’, Kabardian ¸@¸ă ‘squirrel, *¸a¸ - ‘rat’. Other reflexes are e.g. pine marten’, etc. (Chukhua [2019: 545f.]). Now to the background of OIA mayu
ra-:211 Even though Lubotsky does not classify the word as belonging to the BMAC language because there is no Old Iranian parallel,212 he does include it in that class of “foreign vocabulary of Sanskrit” (2001a: 305) which is

209 The same variations like the two preceding one are found in Pk. uvv¯ alaï ‘says’ which probably derives < OIA úpabr¯ ute ‘speaks’ (2199) and corresponds with Deś. upph¯ al- ∼ upp¯ al- rendered as kath-. 210 This section has already been published in Zoller 2017a: 1-45 211 The following text on ‘peacock’ is also found in Zoller (2017a: 17ff.). 212 This may simply have something to do with the fact that the haunt of the Indian peacock (Pavocristatus) is India and Sri Lanka, and thus perhaps outside the paths of the Old Iranians.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

384

Chapter 11. A North Indian substratum

characterized by consisting of three syllables with a long middle syllable. Thus, mayu
rahas the same structure as OIA mayu
kha- ‘peg for stretching the woof’ which is a BMAC word because of the Iranian parallels (see 2001: 311). Even though this word for ‘peacock’ is missing in Old Iranian, I strongly assume that the word – foreign to Sanskrit – was in use in the upper Indus Valley already long before the arrival of the Indo-Iranians. This is standing to reason because it is well-known that the peacock had great cultural and religious importance in the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC). According to Parpola (2015: 186), it was the task of the peacock to carry dead people to the stars. Yet, it was not only the IVC where the peacock was of great significance but he also played an important cultural role in the neighboring though historically later Zhang Zhung Civilization (on whose language more below)213 even though he is not native to that country. John Vincent Bellezza notes (2014: 181) that the Zhang Zung goddess Trede Chenmo of Lake Teri Nam Tsho was said to be attired in peacock feathers. And I may add that a typical iconographic portrayal of the famous Guru Padmasambhava shows him wearing a hat with the feather of a vulture on top.214 This feather is called "phru215 and this word is widespread in the Central and Western Himalayas and Karakorum with a number of varying but closely related meanings, e.g., Bang¯ an.¯ı phuru or phurku ‘a kind of decoration fixed to a cap, headscarf or a sacred rod (e.g., the feather of a pheasant216 fixed to a cap or a jacket, jewelry fixed to a woman’s scarf, pieces of cloth fixed on top of a sacred rod representing a certain deity)’, Garhw¯ al¯ı phurku ‘a varicoloured tassel fixed by women on their top-knot’, Indus Kohistani phurgu
‘gold or silver jewelry in the turban of the bridegroom’, Shina phurgú ‘feather’, etc. I may mention here also Indus Kohistani m2yu ra  c 2ndu
‘the eye in a peacock’s feather’ (note preservation of accent

of OIA mayu
ra-) which is almost the same as Pali m ay ura-candaka- ‘eye in peacock’s tail’ and quite similar as Paš. čandra-kavay"a ‘black pigeon with white spots’. All or most of these examples underscore the importance allocated to the peacock217 in northwestern South Asia and adjacent regions like Upper Tibet and thus make it very likely that mayu
ra- is a BMAC word. There have been various attempts to clarify the etymology of this word, but Mayrhofer (EWA) thinks that suggestions to connect the word with Dravidian (Tamil) mayil or to other, also similar forms in Munda, cannot be proven. This opinion is basically shared by Hans Henrich Hock (1996: 38f.) who points out that mayil is only found in South Dravidian and therefore an unlikely candidate for the origin of mayu
ra-. Since the Dravidian word can also mean ‘cat’, he suggests that the various Dravidian words for ‘cat’ and ‘peacock’ and the OIA word may have an onomatopoeic origin. Note, however, that Sanskrit lexicographers 213 According to John Vincent Bellezza (2014: 75), the Zhang Zhung Civilization lasted roughly from around 1,200 BCE until the seventh century CE. The seventh century was probably also the time when the Zhang Zhung language slowly ceased to be used as the ‘official’ language of the kingdom. The Indus Valley Civilization, on the other hand, lasted roughly from 2,800 to 1,800 BCE. Note, however, that the river, after which the latter civilization is called, has its source inside the territory of former Zhang Zhung. 214 Harry Falk (1986: 25) points out that the peacock, as the arch enemy of the snakes, is a symbol for the overcoming of death. If so, then it seems possible that in the myth of Kadr¯ u and Vinat¯ a, Vinat¯ a’s one son Garud.a ‘mythical bird’ was originally a peacock. 215 Could this word be cognate with Kal. phur ‘peak, ridge’ and (borrowed into?) Kho. phúr ‘mountain top’ ? 216 Note that also peacocks belong to the family of the Phasianidae and in many parts of the Himalayas pheasants are highly cherished. Here worth mentioning is also Nuristani m"ü ‘a rank earned by giving a series of feasts to one’s community, the symbol of which was the crest feather of the male monal pheasant (pre-Islamic)’ which Strand derives < OIA mukut.a- ‘tiara; crest (10144). For more details regarding wearing of pheasant feathers and warrior ranks see Zoller (2018b: 205, 275, 285 fn. 313). 217 Respectively pheasant, and in Upper Tibet the vulture.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

11.10. The interface of linguistic prehistory and history: hedgehog and peacock 385 give also the forms maruka-, mar¯ uka- ‘peacock’ – also found in Or.iy¯ a in G. C. Praharaj’s Purnachandra Odia Bhashakosha – which match even less with the Dravidian form but which are remarkably close to the Austro-Asiatic forms: PMK (Proto-Mon-Khmer) *mraik[ ], Katuic Kui mariaP, Old Mon mraik, Pear morak all ‘peacock’. Munda: Kh. maraP, Sant.,  , etc., all ‘peacock’ (Pinnow 1959: 72). This Munda/Mon-Khmer word Mu. and Ho mara¼ is also found in West Himalayish Kinnauri moraPk ‘peacock’ (Sharma 2003a: 14, etc.).218 I suggest that also in this case, the Austro-Asiatic word was borrowed into the BMAC language where it underwent a syllable restructuring into a three-syllabic word with long middle syllable, which was apparently a typical phonotactic feature of the BMAC language, and was from there borrowed into Indo-Aryan. It is also possible that the ‘peacock’ word was borrowed later than the ‘hedgehog’ word into Indo-Aryan.

218 Kinnauri uses also the IA-like form m¯ orös.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Part IV

Morphological processes

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 12 Different past forms

12.1 12.1.1

Past forms built with liquids Past forms built with l

Above I have presented my view on the origin of the Middle Indo-Aryan -ll-suffix (see pp. 237ff.). This means that all grammatical -l-forms in this subsection must have derived of a geminate -illa/alla/ulla-. The double consonant has, however, been simplified in almost all the below following languages. This must have had different reasons: many languages in northwestern South Asia do not tolerate geminates (see above p. 212) and whereas e.g. Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has quite a number of geminates (see p. 217), in the below list of Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı affixes (pp. 511) there is not one affix with a geminate. Several West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Dard languages distinguish between two laterals l and .l, whereby l (almost) always reflects OIA ll and .l (almost) always reflects OIA -l-. Thus, in case of these languages we can be sure that the suffixes discussed below developed from older *ll. I know only one language where this Prakrit suffix seems to have survived as a geminate, namely in Rohingya language.1 This is suggested by forms like B.roh. nisoilla ‘lower’ which parallels H. nicl¯ a (for which McGregor offers no derivation), d.orulla ‘fearful’ which is synonym with d.orfuk which corresponds in turn with H. d.arpok ‘cowardly’ and usoilla ‘elevated’ which seems to be cognate with OIA uccarita- ‘risen’. In the following, we concentrate only on the past/perfective function of the suffix. Pace Southworth’s assessment that there is not enough data on the Dard languages for a useful utilization regarding the question of the -l- past or perfect grammeme, there are at least ten Dard languages plus probably a tenth language in the Dard speaking area but of somehow unclear provenance, plus two or more dialects of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı with a past tense -l- grammeme: The Brok-skad variety of Shina (Southworth 2005a: 131), Kohistani variety of Shina (Schmidt and Kaul 2008: 136), Pal¯ ula (Phal¯ ur.a), Kalami, Dar¯ ag¯ı, Indus Kohistani (Zoller 2005),2 Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı (and Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai), Savi, Kalasha and Kundal Shahi (which will be shortly discussed in the next paragraph on Indus Kohistani), Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı and the variety of Jauns¯ ar¯ı spoken in the area of the town of Lakhamandal.3 1 However, further below there is also one isolate example from Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı. 2 Since Grierson one finds in the literature the designation Mayan/May a which is, however, unknown to the local population. 3 Neither the LSI nor Satish mention this, but I recorded this from native speakers from this area in the early 1980s.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

390 12.1.1.1

Chapter 12. Different past forms

Dardic

Brok-skad has -l- as in g¯ alo ‘(he) went’ and in mul ‘dead’ (which is similar to S. m¯ a¯el ‘beaten’). Savi has a past participle with -ilo/-ili/-ile (m.s., f.s., pl.) (Bashir 2003: 888) or -lo (Buddruss 1967: 79). Pal¯ ula (Phal¯ ur.a) has past participles (a) with the markers -¯ olu/o (m.), -¯eli (f.) as in bhan ˇȷo ¯lo ‘beaten’ and khy¯eli ‘eaten’, and (b) with the markers -ilu/o (m.) and -ili (f.) as in p¯ı(e)lu ‘drunk’ and dhovili ‘milked’ (Èdel"man [1983: 271]; Buddruss [1967: 79]). Kalami has a perfective adjectival participle (Baart 1999: 53) with masculine -a  l and feminine - l suffix. But “[i]f the stem ends in a vowel, the suffixes are -ga  l and -g l” (ibid.). Shina of Indus Kohistan has a perfective participle in -l- which inflects like an adjective: mešílo, mešíla, mešíli ‘grown’4 (Schmidt 2008: 230). Dar¯ ag¯ı has a past participle in -äl as in p2ca l t2l un ‘cooked rice’. Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı (and Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai) has -(y)  el, e.g. attributively in dazyel gir¯er. ‘burnt bread’ or predicatively as in au py¯el th¯ u ‘I am lying’ (lit. ‘I am the lain one’) or in c.ir našél th¯ u (with naš- ‘to go bad, taint) ‘the milk has gone bad, is spoiled’. Gauro s2n al o ‘having made’ < OIA sanóti ‘gains’ (131269). Kalasha uses, according to Morgenstierne (1973: 231), in the so-called preterite II a past participle in narrative style. It comprises four allomorphs, all of which derive, according to Morgenstierne, < OIA -(i)taka or -(i)naka: (1) -ta, e.g. n"ašta ‘died’; (2) after a vowel, -la: g"ala (according to Morgenstierne < gataka)5 (we will come across similar forms in Indus Kohistani below); (3) after a consonant, -ila: čhinila ‘broke’; (4) from presents in -"em, -"alya: čandr"alya ‘shone’. Morgenstierne is not very clear in justifying the existence of two modern outcomes of the one OIA past participle form. For several (but not all) forms sub (1) he suggests various phonological processes which prevented the dental consonant from disappearing or changing into -l-. However, there is the fact of the past participle -ta found in all three language groups (see below p. 396) whereas the historical change t > l was probably more restricted with regard to involved languages. On the other hand, one may argue in favour of Morgenstierne’s claim by quoting parallel forms from Khowar with an expected -rinstead of -l-, e.g. in diru ‘gave’. However, there are -r- past participles in most West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages and in other Outer Languages, as we will see below. So the situation is somewhat confusing, at least at this stage. Interestingly, Morgenstierne mentions (1973: 237f.) an element -al- occurring in some verbal adjective formations,6 e.g. gher"alyak ‘wandering about’. This resembles e.g. Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai au py¯el th¯ u ‘I am lying’ and Pal¯ ula (Phal¯ ur.a) p¯ı(e)lu ‘drunk’. The suffix -(y)  el can hardly be explained along Morgenstierne’s lines but has interesting parallels in other languages of the area. Indus Kohistani uses frequently the grammeme -l- which fulfills several functions, but all apparently involving a dimension of perfectivity.7 For instance the verb kar
av  ‘to do’ can have the following forms with -l-: aorist 2
y  kArli ‘he did (s.th.)’, present conditional suℎ 4 Probably < OIA máñcate ‘grows high’ (see 9710). 5 Morgenstierne says (1973: 231, fn. 3) that he once recorded a phrase c.h"ir g"ali which he translates as ‘the milk went away’ and where he interprets (on p. 205) the final -i as a possible survival of a fossilized feminine form. This is, however, very unlikely as the ‘milk’ words in this area normally have masculine gender (in languages where this distinction is made). Also derivation < gataka- is not possible because OIA gatá- is reflected in Kalasha as gál.a ‘he/they went (hearsay)’. 6 He also says that the data at his disposal is insufficient for a more detailed analysis. 7 In this context fits Masica’s following observation where he discusses the similarities and differences between past participles and converbs (plus some participle-like forms) (1991: 276): “Too much need not be made of this difference, since the Simple Perfective and Perfect forms between them

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

12.1. Past forms built with liquids

391

kayrlu
‘if (he) does (s.th.)’, perfect participle or conditional feminine kar
li ‘(she has) done’ or ‘if (she) had done (s.th.)’, perfect participle or conditional masculine kAr
el- ‘(he has) done’ or ‘if (he) had done (s.th.)’. Some of the forms can also occur in composite tenses. The -lappears also as element of a suffix realizing converbs. The verb khᘠv ‘to eat’ has converb khah -gal
e ‘having eaten’. This resembles closely the above Kalami forms after verb stems ending in a vowel and one form from the tenth language Kundal Shahi (probably Dardic but strongly influenced by Kashmiri and Hindko) found on p. 19 in the 2004 wordlist of Khawaja A. Rehman and Joan L. G. Baart: phit.-g@l ‘broken’.8 Indus Kohistani has several ways of constructing converbs. Here relevant are these: transitive verb stem plus -a, intransitive verb stem plus -i, transitive or intransitive verb stem plus -¯e. Obviously, the -¯e in -gal
e is the same converb ending. There is a small group of -o- stem verbs (which always realize a habilitative aktionsart) which only add -l- for building a converb: ghay
av  ‘to become big; to grow’ becomes gha y
el ‘having become big (as usual)’. Parallel to Morgenstierne’s c.h"ir g"ali ‘the milk went away’ Indus Kohistani sometimes employs -gili , e.g. in d ol2th har2 y ink ar kara-gili ‘(he) refused to take the riches’ (riches to-take.OBL refusal do.PERF -gili ), suh sut b2ya
-gili ‘he has put (s.o.) to sleep’ (he sleep sit.CAUS -gili ). In a few cases this suffix has amalgamated with forms already containing an -l-, e.g. in case of the verb dᘠv ‘to milk’ (< OIA *dohati ‘milks’ [6592]) which has the perfect participle form d¯ olíli - which must go back to older *d¯ ol-gili .

12.1.1.2

Pah¯ ar.¯ı

Sir¯ aj¯ı of D ¯d.¯ a has k˘er¯ı-l¯ o ‘was made up’ (LSI viii,ii: 453). .o Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı poet. has bh¯ ul¯ a ‘was’ (LSI ix,iv: 552).9 Jaunsari (dialect around Lakhamandal) has uninflectable -lo as e.g. in saido bOj ar khOtOm kOri ga-lo ‘(he) has destroyed the whole market’, m¯ ari gala ‘beaten’, rur.ai gala ‘thrown down’, etc. Poet. Bang¯ an.¯ı (but not ordinary language) has inflective -lO as perfective marker as can be seen from these lines from the PAN where God N¯ ar¯ ayan.a wonders about the whereabouts of Bh¯ımsen:

zagnE khE milE-lO, katn E khE milE-lO

ki khan E khE milE-lO

kill.OBL.INF for find.PP.M.SG cut.OBL.INF for find.PP.M.SG or eat.OBL.INF for find.PP.M.SG “(either he) has found something to be killed, parallel the range of Tense-unspecified and Tense-specified forms using the Past participle in languages like Hindi and Marathi.” 8 The Indus Kohistani suffix -g- appears only after vowels as in above Kalami. On the other hand, the Kundal Shahi form shows that this is probably an historical development, namely *CgVl- > CVl- but retention of VgVl, and the -g- (which would be difficult to explain as a mere epenthetic consonant) is actually a grammeme. ¯ are found in Pal¯ 9 As pointed out above (p. 241), the perfective forms of OIA BHU ula bhíl-u and bhíl-a, in K¯ alk¯ ot.¯ı äga bil ‘it rained’, in Shina “billé”, in the Shina of Kohistan sa bílo, but then also in Bih¯ ar¯ı bhela, Pr¯ akrit bhaïla-, Maithil¯ı bhel, Bhojpur¯ı bhayal, and I quote there also Rohingya ói(-)bella. This data is clear evidence for the validity of the theory of Outer and Inner languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

392

Chapter 12. Different past forms

(or he) has found something to be massacred, or (he) has found something to eat” [260] Another example from the PAN is phukalO ‘blown up’ < OIA *ph¯ utka- ‘blowing’ (9102). The grammeme is otherwise sometimes found in adjectives like mi
slO, mi
salO, mi
sallO10 in ‘mixed; a mixture’ ← misnO1 ‘to mix’ < OIA miśrayati ‘mixes’ (10137).

Note: Bhatt (1975 [vikrama 2031]: 49) lists Gar.hv¯ al¯ı past forms like tvain par.h¯ı y¯ al¯ı which he renders into Hindi as a compound verb construction t¯ une par.h liy¯ a; but he also notes (ibid.) that instead of par.h¯ı y¯ al¯ı also par.hle is used in some places to realize the past tense. Clearer is e.g. this line from a song for the asura-fighting Goddess (Catak [1973: 223]): to j¯ anile sakal sams¯ ˙ ar up¯ ay¯ a ‘so (we) have understood (that you are) the designer of the whole world’. Another clear example is also Garh. diy¯ ali, d¯ıli ‘de diy¯ a hai – has given’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) which obviously cannot be a compound verb.11 Thus also Gar.hv¯ al¯ı has the above type of perfect marker, but partially lacks ‘linguistic awareness’ of it due to the impact of Hindi.

12.1.1.3

Examples from the ballad Mohiye ki har (MKH)

2: 41 cO sy ane . . . r aje khe mil-le ‘four elders met the king’.12 1: 306 ph ul  kar-lO phulru , ph ule kar-le Ol u ‘the flowers were blooming and the

potatoes were in blossom’. 3: 72 gill¯ a ro dhart¯ a r¯ an.e khe t¯ alm¯ı de-le ‘Gill¯ a and Dhart¯ a gave counsel to the R¯ an.a ¯’ (t¯ alm¯ı ‘counsel’ ← Ar. ta"l¯ım¯ı). Note: Here probably also Tharu of southwestern Nepal gel sal ‘last year’ which seems to correspond literally with H. *gay¯ a s¯ al. Note also Ch¯ akm¯ a ¯el ‘(they) were’ < OIA h bhávati ‘becomes’ (9416) which cf. with Indus Kohistani su ho 
l ‘he was’. Summing up this section, it appears very unlikely that the -l- grammeme of Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai and Indus Kohistani derive < OIA -(i)taka. The case of Kalasha is less clear, but above I have given some arguments against such a derivation. For Indus Kohistani we have found the following forms: -l-, -ili , -¯el, -gal¯e, -gili . The vowels -¯e- and -i- are also independent converb suffixes. Consequently it is very likely that -gal¯e and -gili basically consist of three grammemes: ga- (< gatá-) + -alla- + -¯e/i.13 This interpretation is supported by the fact of the Shina past participle -eg (1st conjugation) and -¯ıg (2nd conjugation, and actually < older *-egi < *-ega(y)i [cf. Èdel"man 1983: 289]) where the outcome of OIA gatá- has been added to the converb forms (which look to be the same as in Indus Kohistani). We conclude that an -l- grammeme for the realization of different past and perfect (and other) forms is limited in the northwest to a number of Dard languages plus Kundal Shahi plus a few varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, and probably to Gar.hv¯ al¯ı. The suffix in its function to realize past or perfectivity is, to my knowledge, neither found in Nuristani nor in Kumaun¯ı and Standard Nep¯ ali. It is also found at the eastern edge of the Indo-Aryan language-scape in Rohingya and a perfect 10 Here a rare case of survival of the MIA geminate. 11 The two authors keep also always Gar.hv¯ al¯ı l and .l separate. 12 The ballad is in the Ki˜ utha¯ı variety of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. 13 Corresponding to the Kalasha converb suffixes -ai/i (Morgenstierne 1973: Kat.¯ arqal¯ ai vowel -¯ e -, e.g. in py¯ el. See also Masic (1991: 323).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

236f.)

and the

12.1. Past forms built with liquids

393

¯ built with this suffix is found dispersed over different parts of northern form of OIA BHU India. It seems likely that in most cases (apart from some problematic forms as e.g. found in Kalasha) the suffix is the same as the Prakrit geminate suffix -illa/alla/ulla-. This supports Southworth’s thesis for a considerable age of the suffix which has penetrated from an Outer Language into Prakrit.

12.1.1.4

Rohingya

Perfective verbal function: ¯ ‘eat’ + -illa- + pronominal suffix . 1. a ¯i hailam ‘I had eaten’ < OIA KHAD 2. aiśśíl ‘(he/she/they) has/have been here’ (perfective) < OIA a
gacch- ‘come to’ (see 1044). Nomen agentisfunction:14 1. arailla farailla ‘the neighbors and villagers’ is built on the common pattern e.g. H. a ¯r-p¯ ar ‘the nearer and further sides’ (of s.th.)’ (< OIA a ¯rá [a ra
t] ‘near’ and p¯ ará ‘ further bank, furthest end’) plus -illa- suffix. 2. kétteilla ‘farmer’ < OIA ks.étra- ‘land’, cf. OIA ks.etrika- ‘farmer’ and Pa. g¯ amilla‘farmer’ < OIA gra
ma- ‘village’. 3. barúlla ‘fast body growing person’ (i.e. a fat person) with first syllable < OIA bh¯ arika2 ‘forming a load, heavy’ (9465) where Turner quotes Pk. bh¯ arilla- ‘heavy’, but here B.roh. built with -ulla-. 4. riśúllá ‘jealous’ < OIA rsya
- ‘envy’ x r
syati ‘is hurt’ and -ulla- suffix; the verbal combination has parallels in Garh., Kt.g., Kc. and Bng. 5. u ˜soilla ‘higher’ < OIA *ucca-tara-illa-? Cf. OIA *uparalla- ‘upper’ (2208).

12.1.2

Past forms built with r

There is a fairly large area in the mountains of northwestern South Asia where there are languages using past forms built with an element r. This element is also found in a number of other Outer Languages, including dialects of Bengali. The first small evidence known to me in the very northwest comes from the Majegal dialect of Nuristani Ashkun as shown below. Then follows Dardic Shumashti, also as shown below. This is followed by Kundal Shahi, spoken in the Neelam Valley in northern Azad Kashmir. Khawaja A. Rehman and Joan L. G. Baart quote in their short sketch from 2004 in their wordlist the form maarEE ru ‘killed’. The main mountain area for past forms built with r is, however, that of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. First ample evidence starts (south-)east of Kashmiri and continues southeast until approximately the area of Sirmauri. Bang¯ an.¯ı and Jauns¯ ar¯ı – the latter might be classified as a transitional form between West and Central/East Pah¯ ar.¯ı15 – however do not have it. And there is not a single variety of Garhwali or Kumaoni with such a form. But the same suffix reappears in some dialects of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı (see p. 395), in Bh¯ıl¯ı (see p. 396) and in the Sar¯ aki dialect of Western Bih¯ ar¯ı (see p. 396). 14 Note preservation of geminate -ll-. 15 Grierson’s old classification into the three groups of West, Central and East Pah¯ ar.¯ı is regarded by me and by various Indian colleagues (like M. P. Joshi) as obsolete and should be replaced by a dichotomy of West and East Pah¯ ar.¯ı.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

394

Chapter 12. Different past forms

For the origin of this suffix I suggest derivation from a morpheme cognate with OIA karóti ‘does’ (2814) in past tense ákarat or ákarot which developed > MIA *akar¯et > Kal. a ¯reu (Morgenstierne) resp. preciser árav ‘he/she did’ (Trail and Cooper with preservation of old accent position). This suggestion implies that the OIA verbal augment a-, which survived into Prakrit (e.g. in Pa. akaram ˙ ‘made’; see also von Hinüber § 485) but not into New Indo-Aryan with the exception of Kalasha and Khowar, in fact did survive in quite a number of New Indo-Aryan languages, albeit admittedly in a rather hidden form not as a full verb but as a suffix. The suggestion is also supported by the Hindi absolutive/converb kar ‘having done . . . ’ which displays the same ‘grammatical idea’. I will now succinctly list the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages and varieties16 and quote the technical terms I found used in the literature (as always I use the term converb in the same sense as others use conjunctive participle or absolutive):

12.1.2.1

Nuristani

About Nuristani Ashkun, Morgenstierne writes (1928: 221): “In M. [i.e. the Majegal dialect of Ashkun] we find the past tense with postfixed -ara . . . used in the sense of ‘having done’, or ‘when he had done” . . . ’ The first -a- is not part of the suffix but a kind of formant between verb stem and -ra; two examples (ibid.): yüš "lavara "kan.äi ‘having hit the goblin with an arrow’ and: istr ma"l  muci- era pa m@"r ak ai muc  ‘the woman, having fled, fled with the boy’.

12.1.2.2

Dardic

“Preterital forms with -ara probably are perfects” (Bashir 2003: 836): «am-a di bam-ara ‘I (m.) have gone to work’. Gauro s2n ar o ‘(when they) had built’ < OIA sanóti ‘gains’ (131269).

12.1.2.3

West Pah¯ ar.¯ı

P¯ ad.ri (transitional) has -¯ or in present perfect g¯ or ‘has gone’ (Kaul [2006 i: 99]), but compare perfect participle g¯ or ‘had gone’ (Kaul 2006 [i: 102]).17 Pangw¯ ˙ al.¯ı has a stative past -¯ or¯ a as in biś¯ or¯ a or bit.o ¯r¯ a ‘in the condition of being seated’. Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı has -oro to build a perfect participle together with an auxiliary, e.g. bhu-oro thio ‘(he) had become’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 109]). Khaś¯ al¯ı has -r¯ a to build a present perfect, e.g. bu-r¯ a ‘has become’ (Kaul [2006 i: 100]). High Rudh¯ ar¯ı has -ra, -ora, -ura for forming a static participle: bhu-ra ‘become’, g2-ora ‘gone’, boll-ura ‘said’ (Kaul 2006 [ii: 244]). It is used to form the present and the past perfect: 2 u k2sri bhu-ra es a ‘I have become ill’, te g2-ora thia ‘he had gone’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 239]). 16 Not unexpectedly, there are varieties between Kashmiri and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı which are difficult to classify (and have therefore sometimes become bones of contention for local patriots) but are actually nothing else than transitional varieties. I count those varieties from this transitional zone to a West Pah¯ ar.¯ı innovation zone if they share the r grammeme with the rest of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. 17 Several of the following forms contain additional grammemes; I have not attempted to analyze them all.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

12.1. Past forms built with liquids

395

Cur¯ ah¯ı, Man.d.e¯ a.l¯ı and Gaddi have a static participle: Cur¯ ah¯ı with -¯ or¯ a, e.g. m¯ ar¯ or¯ a ‘in the state of having been stuck’ (LSI ix, iv: 826); in Man.d.e¯ al.¯ı it is formed by adding converb -i to the verb stem and then adding -r¯ a, e.g. m¯ ar¯ı-r¯ a ‘in the condition of being beaten’ (LSI ix, iv: 724); in Gaddi -r¯ a is added to the past participle as in m¯ ar-¯ u-r¯ a ‘in the condition of one struck’ (H. m¯ ar¯ a hu¯ a). But Grierson raises doubts (ibid. p. 724) whether this static participle grammeme is the same as the suffixes above and below or rather a genitive postposition. Came¯ a.l¯ı has a stative participle in -¯ or¯ a as in t.ir¯ or¯ a ‘in the state of having fallen’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: i).18 Gaddi has a past participle -ura as in h¯erura ‘seen’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: 35) or a˜ u guch¯ ur¯ a ‘I went’ (LSI i, ii: 327). Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı and Patiali Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı form the converb respectively with -ro as in t.¯ıpe-ro ‘having struck’ and -r¯ o as in a ¯o-r¯ o ‘having come’ (LSI ix, iv: 570 and 582; also in MKH are many examples). Bagh¯ at.¯ı forms a converb with -ro, e.g. r¯ oe-ro ‘having remained’ (LSI ix, iv: 502). Patiala (Pinjaur) Bagh¯ at.¯ı has -r¯ o or -r¯e, e.g. a ¯e-r¯e ‘having come’ (LSI ix, iv: 514), r
rer o

‘having fallen’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: 5). Sirmauri Dharti and Sirmauri Giripari form the converb respectively with -ro as in t.¯ıp¯ı-ro ‘having struck’ (LSI ix, iv: 465) and -r¯ o as in d¯e-r¯ o ‘having given’ (LSI ix, iv: 485).19

12.1.2.4

Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı

The element r may not be found in ordinary spoken Gar.hv¯ al¯ı, but it is frequently used in Garh.t.. poet. as in ur.iara ‘ur.a ¯ diy¯ a – (has) raised’, ur.iaro ‘ur.a ¯ kar – having raised’ etc.

12.1.2.5

R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı

Rj.shekh. conjunctive participle hoy-ar and Rj.tor¯ a. hai-r, Rj.jaip. vhair, h¯ or ‘having been or become’; Rj.jaip. o ¯lar ‘having spoken’ < OIA a ¯lapati ‘speaks’ (1358); Rj. m¯ ar-ar ‘having struck’, h¯ alar ‘having gone’ < OIA hválati ‘goes wrong’ (14189)(?), regarding meaning see also OIA lex. hul- ‘to go’, anyway this seems to be an Outer Language word; here also Bng. o lnO ‘to bring along s.th. evil’; Marw. kara har ‘having made’ (note aspirate), Marw. l¯er ‘having taken’ (cf. H. len¯ a ‘to take’).

18 The book is a collection of articles and has therefore in the version which is with me recurring pagination. 19 Here do not belong the Bang¯ an.¯ı perfective preterite tense built in this way: verb stem + converb -i- + suffix -erO as in s Oc otri bOnaieri ‘(they) made (for themselves) oracle books’ (PAN), the
erE ern s
O K¯ ot.gar.h¯ı short gerund built with the “auxiliary” (Hendriksen [1986: 186]) ernõ as in t gOl t a kaE b@tau ‘he will explain the matter to you’ (with the accent indicating high-level tone), and similar forms in neighboring dialects, and the Nepali conjunctive participle in -era as in bh¯ at kh¯ aera ma ghar j¯ anch¯ u ‘having eaten dinner, I shall go home’ (Mathews [1998: 116]) and Ku. poet. e.g. l(h)iber ‘having taken; with’ (cf. H. lekar) (Meissner [1985: 206]) < OIA labhyáte ‘is taken’ (10950). It seems that all these forms are built with derivations < OIA *herati ‘looks for or at’ (14165) and are thus different from the above and below r forms.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

396

Chapter 12. Different past forms

12.1.2.6

Bh¯ıl¯ı

Bhil. j¯ ar ‘having gone’ < OIA ya
ti ‘goes’ (10452).

12.1.2.7

Dialectal Bengali

Sar¯ aki dialect of Western Bengali (Ranchi) haïy¯ ar ‘having been’ < OIA bhávati ‘becomes’ (9416), m¯ ariy¯ ar ‘having beaten’ < OIA m¯ aráyati1 ‘kills’ (10066), etc., Southwestern Bengali haï¯ ar¯e, m¯ ariy¯ ar¯e, etc.

It seems that the Nuristan languages, with the exception of Ashkun, have neither l nor r past grammemes, the l past grammemes are limited to the Dard and some West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, and the r past grammemes to large parts of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and several other Outer Languages. Even though Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı form one contiguous geographical area, there are, somehow surprisingly, no transitional zones there with regard to these grammemes.

12.1.3

Past forms and converbs built with t

In his 1973 article on ‘Archaisms in some modern northwestern Indo-Aryan languages’ Buddruss says (on p. 45) that “[t]he Kati absolutive in -t¯ı (cf. the northwestern versions of Ashoka’s inscriptions) has been compared with the Vedic absolutive in -tv¯ı by [Sten] Konow.” An example is Kt. patati ‘having kissed’ (Morgenstierne [1929a: 275]). Turner (2814) rightly derives the Kashmiri converb keth ‘having done’ < OIA krtva
-, and the Ashkun converb giti  (‘having gone’)20 < OIA gatv
- (4010). Both alloforms grammaticalized apparently at a very early stage as second elements of a small group of Sanskrit verbs with loss of their initial consonant (but preserved when appearing independently as full verbs). As in case of the l and r past grammemes, there is also here no clear distinction between converb and past tense function. I do not try to analyze in great detail fine grammatical and semantic differences between each language. I would also like to point out that some ‘endings’ are possibly the result of amalgamation of two or more suffixes, which can hardly be analyzed anymore. The following past forms and converbs – all with similar shapes – probably derive from several different Sanskrit verbs. As far as I can tell there are (at least) four possible OIA verbs later turning into past participle or conver endings: KAR ‘do’ (krtva
), GAM ‘go’ (gatv
-), BHAV ‘become’ (bh utva
), VART ‘turn’ (vrtt
a-).21 The phoneticoutcome of the three verbs-turned-suffixes is practically the same.  The differences between transitive and intransitive meanings in the following examples is possibly due the different use of one of the here mentioned OIA verbs. It is also important to distinguish between inherited -ita(ka) forms (the ditta ‘given’ type) which, usually through analogy, spread to a limited extent as petrified forms through all IA languages (Sindhi has employed this to a maximum, see LSI viii, i pp. 50ff. and passim) from productive t converb and past tense grammemes built with one of the four (or nore) OIA vebs. As much as I can see, the latter are found in the northwest in Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, and among the other Outer Languages in Gujar¯ at¯ı, Bh¯ıl¯ı and Eastern Bengali. 20 Èdel"man (1983: 103) has geti ‘having gone’. 21 This last verb is discussed again below p. 408.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

12.1. Past forms built with liquids

12.1.3.1

397

Nuristani

Kati (also called K¯ amk"ata-Mumks.t"a-vari or Bashgal¯ı) uses -ti as a converb to express anteriority as in kt"i ‘having done; having made; having said’ (Strand), udráti ‘having flown’ (Èdel"man [1983: 66]) but also to express simultaneity as in vúteti ‘putting’ (Èdel"man [1983: 70f.]). It has also a past participle in -ta as in oata ‘hunger’ < PIA a-bhuk-ta ‘not eaten’. Ashkun has already been quoted. It has the same past participle as Kati. Waigali also has the same past participles.

12.1.3.2

Dardic

Kalasha rhúik ‘to coat walnuts by dipping in a batter of flour and wine’ → rhúta ‘coated’, ita ‘having come’ (Heegård Petersen [2015: 101] and infra) ← ik ‘to come’ < OIA áiti ‘comes near’ (2534). The language has also a converb form ker.dita ‘having cut off’ (Èdel"man [1983: 206]) which can be analyzed as verb stem + converb1 -i- + converb2 -ta. Morgenstierne (1973: 237) regards Kalasha ita ‘having come’ (infinitive ik) as quite irregular. But we see now that this is not the case. Khow¯ ar has an adverbial-participial form-absolutive (Èdel"man 1983. 218) in -ti which is found only “in a small number of irregular verbs”, e.g. in žuti ‘having eaten’. In addition it has a past participle in -íru (on this see above p. 393) or -rdu as in raardu ‘said’ (Bashir [2003: 845]). This -rdu looks like a compound suffix of -íru + *-tu. T¯ orw¯ al¯ı has a past participle in -t, -d (Èdel"man [1983: 234], no examples) and an adverbial participle in -te, -de, e.g. bešte ‘going; having gone’, ginde ‘taking; having taken’.22 Bashkarik or Kalam Kohistani has a past participle in -t(@) as in y at(@) ‘come’. Savi has a past participle in -to/-ti/-te (m.s., f.s., pl.) (Bashir [2003: 888]). Pal¯ ula (Phal¯ ur.a) has a past participle in -¯ıtu (m.) and -(i)ti (f.) as in ur.¯ıtu ‘left’ and š¯ un.t.¯ı ‘heard’ (Èdel"man [1983: 271]). Also here, the palatal vowel of the suffix is in my eyes an old converb suffix.23 Brok-skad has a converb ending -to as in khya-to ‘having eaten’ (Sharma [1998: 114]). Note also Bro. suite, svit ‘pregnant (human)’ and zut ‘born’. Shina has a past participle in -¯ıtu which is simultaneously a noun of action (Èdel"man 1983: 288f.). The function of this form resembles closely West Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms which Varma and Kaul call static participles or passive voice and which indeed tend to have passive meanings in several languages (see below). Here an example from Èdel"man (loc. cit.): har¯ıtu ‘the taking away; in the state of having been taken away’. It is not clear whether this is the same ending as in Sh. lelíto and Bur. lalíto ‘blood-smeared, covered in blod’ both of which are from Sh. léel ‘blood’. Shina of Indus Kohistan has a conjunctive participle -t which is, however, only used with related actants in plural or when ‘politeness’ is expressed (Schmidt [2008: 220ff.]): haziít ‘having laughed’. There is also a perfective participle in -t- which inflects like an adjective (morphologically both participles are probably the same): díto ‘fallen’ (Schmidt [2008: 231]). Pashai has a past participle in -ta
as in avata
‘hungry’ (“not enjoyed”) and a converb in -ta as in kata ‘having done’ (Bashir [2003: 828]) which is very similar with further below quoted Bh¯ıl¯ı k¯ oit ‘having made’. 22 The examples are actually taken from Grierson and Stein (1929: 83). 23 For Savi and Pal¯ ula see also Liljegren (2009: 49). However, his assumption that these past grammemes derive directly from the “Sanskrit past (passive) participle -ta. . . ” (ibid.) is not correct.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

398

Chapter 12. Different past forms

Ningal¯ ˙ am¯ı has a past participle in -ta
as in vata
‘hungry’. Shumashti has a past participle in -ta as in avata ‘hungry; hunger’. Gawar-Bati has a past participle in -t/-d as in hawat/hawad ‘hungry’, but there is also Tlita ‘struck’ (Grierson [1906 (1969): 54]). Are they the same? Dar¯ ag¯ı has a past participle in t as in tu g¯ at ‘you have gone’. Tir¯ ah¯ı has a past auxiliary in ti as in u ¯-ti ‘he has come’ (Grierson [1925b: 410]) and xat ut-ti ‘a letter has come’ (p. 416 with phonetic ‘doubling’ of stop).

12.1.3.3

Adjacent languages

D un.d.¯ı-Kar.i¯ al¯ı (a “Lahnd¯ a” dialect spoken in the Murree Hills) and Punch¯ı (spoken in . h¯ the hills southwest of Kashmir) have conjunctive participles with -¯ıt¯e as in -m¯ ar¯ıt¯e ‘having beaten’. Kundal Shahi This mixed language has a conjunctive participle formed with a suffix -ti following the stem as in par.-ti ‘having read’ (Rehman and Baart [2004: 13]). It shows that this suffix is not limited to Nuristani.

12.1.3.4

Transitional languages

Kashmiri is a transitional language between Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. It has a conjunctive participle in -ith as in vuchith ‘having seen’ (Omkar Koul [1997: 245]). The -i- is the usual converb marker and the etymologically not motivated word-final aspiration is a typical feature of Kashmiri (and many West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages). Kashmiri has also a past participle in -t𝑢 (Kaul 2006 [ii: 441]) as in -dyut𝑢 ‘given’. The relationship between -ith and -t𝑢 is unclear to me. P¯ ogul¯ı forms its past participle with -tu as in baltu ‘burnt’ (Kaul 2006 [ii: 441]). Kasht.aw¯ ar.¯ı follows Kashmiri with a conjunctive participle in -ith or -it and a past participle in -t𝑢 as in c˙ o ¯t.it(h) ‘having struck’ and dyut𝑢 ‘given’.

12.1.3.5

West and Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı

R¯ ambani has a past participle in -tu as in bi¯ ahtu ‘married’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 172]) (similar Rab. “behati” ‘married’24 [Roy 2011: 74]). High Rudhari differentiates between two caste dialects, those of the R¯ ajp¯ uts and those of the Megh-T hakkur; in this connection Siddheshwar Varma makes the interesting remark . (quoted in Kaul [2006 ii: 227]): “As regards the Past Participle, the Megh-T . hakkur participle has “t” more frequently than the R¯ ajp¯ ut correspondent” as in R¯ ajp¯ ut dhou ‘washed’ versus Megh-T . hakkur "dhota ‘washed’. This suggests that this participle is part of the language of the ‘indigenous’ population and not of Rajputs who themselves claim immigration from the plains. Rudh¯ ar¯ı forms its conjunctive participle by adding the converb -i- to the root which is then followed by -ta (Kaul [2006 ii: 245]): "m2rita ‘having died’ k2ttita ‘having cut’.

Notes: (a) According to Kaul (2006 [i: 130]), the passive voice in the Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı and Khaś¯ al¯ı 24 Rab. “biyasti” ‘married’ (ibid.) seems to be somehow related.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

12.1. Past forms built with liquids

399

group of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties is formed “by the addition of e, i, o ¯ or o in both the groups”. I suggest that the Marmat¯ı -i- (and probably also the Kh¯ aś¯ı -e-) goes back to the OIA passive -yá-, whereas the -¯ o - forms may go back to the OIA causative element -paya-. For the phrase ‘(I am) beaten’ he quotes: Kh¯ aśi. mareta, Marm. mërita, Rudh. mer¯ ota, sundh. (unclear which variety is meant) mar¯ ota, Bhad. mërot¯ a. The list is repeated (partly with small variations) by Kaul (2006 ii: 206) and extended by the following forms: Marm. merEta or "mEr ta, Śeu. me.r¯ıda, sun. (?) ma"rõta. According to Kaul (ibid.), the following varieties build a passive with a similar meaning which I think is constructed thus: verb stem + -i- converb + ‘go’ past participle + -tha/ta/-da. These are the varieties: Khaś., Marm., Śeut.., Rudh., Sun. (unclear which variety is meant), Bhad. Examples always with same meaning ‘(I am) beaten’ (and genitive subject): Khaś. mere.¯ı gatha, Śeu. me.ri gada, Rudh. "maro¯ı gata. Kaul also quotes forms (2006 i: 131) which are apparently past participles: Bhad. dhoit¯ a, Kh¯ aśi. dhoty¯ a, Rudh. dhoty¯ a all ‘washed’. Genitive subject constructions are also found in other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, including Bang¯ an.¯ı (see Zoller 2008) but also in Dardic Gauro: t2s 2 y z2m n c olo s ‘he shakes this earth’ (he.GEN this earth shakes), c olo s corresponds to OIA c¯ aláyati ‘shakes’ (Z.). (b) A different historical background is in the following Him. forms with aspiration fluctuations (Tika Ram Joshi 1911): kc¯ aetu, kc¯ aethu, kac¯ aetu, kac¯ aethu all ‘undesired; not easy’ derive < OIA ku- derogatory/prevention prefix plus *icchita- ‘desired’ (see 1557). The reconstruction is supported by Pa. icchita-, Pk. icchiya- which make the Him. forms look like early borrowing from a Pali-like language. Sir¯ aj¯ı of D a (Kaul 2006 [i: 156]): marita . od.a has a conjunctive past participle (sic) in -ta/-t¯ ‘having struck’, a ¯rit¯ a “having come”,25 bhoit¯ a ‘having become’ (< OIA bhavita- ‘been’ + participle). Gaddi forms its past perfect by adding -t to the verbal root plus the auxiliary (Kaul 2006 [i: 145]): m¯ art th˜ u/thie ‘(he/she) had struck’. Southern Bhales¯ı forms its conjunctive participle thus: verb stem + -i- converb + -ta as in ‘khe.ita ‘having eaten’, le.r.ita ‘having fought’ etc. Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı forms its conjunctive participle in almost the same way (Kaul [2006 ii: 245]): ‘khe.it¯ a ‘having eaten’, le.r.t¯ a ‘having fought’. Kh¯ aś¯ı does quite the same: "kha¯ıta ‘having eaten’, l2rta ‘having fought’ (loc. cit.).

past conditional m¯ Cur¯ ah¯ı example m¯ an¯ u ‘to beat’ (< older *m¯ arnu) has ata (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 32]). Bhat.e¯ al¯ı has a stative participle in -d¯ a (with weakened stop) as in a ¯y¯ ad¯ a ‘in the state of having come’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: ii]). Bang¯ an.¯ı has past participle forms with -tO, -itO, -tu. The following examples do not belong to the common pool of inherited and generalized OIA past participles and are therefore regarded as belonging to the above type of innovation: tOxtO ‘carpentered’, nirgOtO ‘disappeared, missed’ (see also below p. 639 and cf. P. an.gat ‘in a bad state or condition, in a state of perdition’), bistitO ‘separated, removed’ (typically in bistitO thOu ‘keep it separated’

*apacchatt- ‘separate’ [421]] and inversion

of -ch- > -st- which is the < OIA *vichat.t. [cf. OIA .. .. opposite of e.g. Bshk. ac. ‘eight’ < OIA asta
-), mirtu ‘died’, liktO1 ‘licked off’ (versus liktO2

(e.g., a tree) < OIA *śauskya- ‘dryness’ (12652). ‘watery’ see p. 847),
soktO ‘dried, withered’ . In Bang¯ an.¯ı, the past participle -tO, -itO, -tu doesn’t seem to be productive (any more) and 25 The -ri- looks unclear, but this is probably due to the notorious unreliability of Kaul. On p. 365 of the second volume he translates the form as ‘having brought’, and this allows the interpretation that the form is actually an -r- causative followed by the usual building elements.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

400

Chapter 12. Different past forms

I am not aware of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties in the geographical area between Bangan and the above-quoted varieties having it. Gar.hv¯ al¯ı In this language examples seem to be very rare: cukt¯ a ‘cuk¯ ay¯ a hu¯ a – paid up, settled, adjusted’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) < OIA *cukk- ‘fall short of, stop’ (4848).

Other languages Bh¯ıl¯ı k¯ oit ‘having made’ (with loss of -r-, cf. parallels p. 20) – which is very similar with above quoted Pashai kata ‘having done’ – < OIA karóti ‘does’ (2814). Eastern Bengali hav¯ at¯e ‘having been’ < OIA bhávati ‘becomes’ (9416). At least many of these t grammemes derive < OIA -tva
- (e.g. Dardic and West Pah¯ar.¯ı) or -tv
- (e.g. Nuristani, Kundal Shahi) which got suffixed to a small group of OIA verbs. Was this a type of innovation that can be intterpreted as an early predecessor to the later emerging compound verbs (even though there are obvious differences)?

12.1.4 12.1.4.1

Past forms built with -i˜ u i˜ u past participle or converb

Languages in which this past participle is found: 1. West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has an -i˜ u past participle, e.g. Bng. kurrai˜ u ‘swollen’ ← kurr anO

‘to swell’. 2. Dardic Gauro has also -i˜ u e.g. in koli˜ u ‘stooping, bowed’. 3. The Kan.kod. dialect of Konkan ˙ . ¯ı has -˜ u as e.g. in k@r u ‘having done’. 4. Gujar¯ at¯ı has -y˜ u as in kahy˜ u ‘said’ and similar Old Gujar¯ at¯ı as in p¯ uji˜ u ‘worshipped’. 5. Bh¯ıl¯ı has -yu  as in p ap karyu  ‘a sin was done’ (LSI ix, iii: 183). 6. M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı has also -i˜ u as e.g. in d¯ekhi˜ u ‘was seen’ (< OIA *deks.ati ‘sees’[6507]) as e.g. in m ah ad ev-r u d er u d ekhi u ‘the temple of Mah¯ adeva was seen’ (LSI ix, ii: 94) (cf. PAN se merE dekhi u ‘they (nominative object)-I (genitive subject)-seen = ‘I have seen them [a moment ago]’), p¯ usi˜ u ‘was asked’ (with deaffrication < OIA prccháti ‘asks’ [8352]) as in b ama n e p usi u ‘by the Brahman it was asked’ (loc.cit.). 

Note that the conjunctive participle in Mar¯ at.h¯ı is -¯ un and in Old Mar¯ at.h¯ı -u , which seems to derive < Apabhramśa ˙ infinitive -iu (see Grierson 1905: 474, Tagare 1948: 321). Grierson points out (1905: 479f.) that in Apabhramśa ˙ the “infinitive and the conjunctive participle are confounded. The infinitive form iu, derived from the Skr. accusative tum, can be used as a conjunctive participle (Pischel, § 579).” Besides Mar¯ at.h¯ı, this Ap. infinitive seems to continue as an infinitive in modern languages like Waigal¯ı -˜ u which is suffixed to the present stem and which carries always the accent (Degener 1998: 64ff.) or Indus Kohistani -2
v  which always carries a rising accent.26 26 This is different from Sanskrit -tum infinitives where the accent is always on the lexeme (Whitney [1924: 347]), and at least in Indus Kohistani verbal conjugation the default position of an accent is on the grammeme.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

12.1. Past forms built with liquids

12.1.4.2

401

l perfective/conjunctive participle combined with i˜ u past participle

Gajendragadkar notes (1974: 84) that the declinable past participle in Parsi-Gujar¯ at¯ı has the form -el; G.pars. g˜ uthel˜ u ‘braided’ < OIA *guptha- (4205); G.pars. pakel˜ u ‘ripe’ < OIA pakvá- ‘ripe’ (7621); G. po hc el u ‘knowing, well-instructed’ (cf. H. pahumcn¯ ˙ a); G.pars.

(9397). The presence of the l perfective marker in Gujar¯ bh@rel u ‘full’ < OIA bhárati- ‘fills’ at¯ı is well-documented and needs no further proof of evidence. However, there are also some -el forms with unclear origin of the vowel which have parallels in Dardic Indus Kohistani, where -¯e- realizes transitivity/causativity: G. mar¯el ‘dead’ – Ind. suh marli ‘he died’; G. sutel˜ u ‘sleeping, asleep’ – Ind. s
2y  sut
el ‘he put (s.o.) to sleep’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 13 Further morphological issues

13.1

The auxiliary ta, t¯ u etc. ‘is; was’

We are dealing here with forms cognate with OIA sthitá- ‘standing, settled’ (13768), which goes back to PIE *sth2 tós (Ringe [2006: 161]). The striking feature about this auxiliary is that it appears in a considerable number of languages without the expected aspiration. Because of its wide geographical spread, it is unlikely that it is an old borrowing from a Nuristan language. Rather it must be a reflex of PIE *steh2 𝑜 and not of *sth2 𝑜 even though the exact old, and meanwhile disappeared, ending is unclear. Regarding the form of PIE *(s)teh2 - ‘stand’ note Rix (2001: 591) who states that ‘in Vedic word-initial position sth < *sth2 has been implemented.’1 An older unaspirated st- form is found both in Nuristani and Dardic: Strand (in his article on Nuristani in the Encyclopedia Iranica) writes that “. . . an evidential mode appears in forms consisting of past-stem plus sta ‘being’: tâp"i sta ‘[the one that has] gotten hot.’ Here sta represents the subject in its post-action state, providing the evidence for a previous change.” However, cf. Ashkun bu-stei ‘he has become’ (Morgenstierne 1928: 214), which shows that also in Nuristani the PIE-inherited word could have a past function. Apparently the same particle with the allomorphs -sta and f. -šti is found in the Nisheygram variety of Waigal¯ı where it is used in a very great number of functions (Degener [1998: 182ff.]). The same element sta is also found in Dardic Tirahi (spoken in Afghanistan’s Nangarh¯ ar Province). Grierson gives this sentence (1925b: 411): ao lemaji odasta-ni mar¯ a gam ‘I am dying here by (i.e. of) hunger’ (with -ni instrumental). In the phrase oda sta (corresponding with Strand’s tâp"i sta) the first word is reflex of OIA abhukta- ‘not eaten, who has not eaten’ (540) with modern reflexes only in Nuristani, Dardic and Rohingya (ábaitá ‘referring who has no food since long time ago; as if never eaten before’). Following Strand’s interpretation, Tir. oda sta can also be translated as ‘[the one who has] not eaten’. Note: OIA Dh¯ atup. stakati ‘resists; strikes against, repels’ is, according to Mayrhofer (EWA) ‘problematic’, but continues in Pa. thaketi ‘covers, conceals, stops up’. The semantic change in Pali may be due to contamination with OIA sthagayati ‘hides’ (which may or may not be further related with OIA *d.hakk- ‘cover’ [5574]; regarding involved phonology see Pischel [§ 221]). Since the present book has many examples where ‘Dh¯ atup.’ corresponds with Outer Languages, I propose to take Pokorny’s old suggestion for a reconstruction PIE *st¯ ak-, *stek- ‘to stand; to put’ (as extensions of *(s)teh2 ‘stand’) serious (IEW: 1011) and reconstruct just somewhat more accurately *steh2 -k1 Rix: “Im Ved. ist im Anlaut sth < *sth2 durchgeführt.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

404

Chapter 13. Further morphological issues

(see EWA iii: 522). OIA Dh¯ atup. STAK coincides with OIA *STHAKK ‘stop, halt (13737) precisely in the same way as above PIE *steh2 𝑜 with *sth2 𝑜 . Whereas the former OIA root has, besides Pali, probably a modern reflex in Kalasha, the latter ¯ is very widespread, but there is also Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı evidence for OIA *STHAKK ‘to place, hold’. See below p. 618.

Nuristani 1. Waigal¯ı has ti ‘be’ which is for instance used independently in the imperative ti ‘stay (on)!’2

Dardic 1. Dar¯ ag¯ı has tu (m.) and ti (f.) ‘is’ (Shah 2002: 124, 127). 2. Brok-skad has a past auxiliary in -to (sg.) and -ten (pl.) as in the following examples with as- ‘be’:3 paripho sini-k as-to ‘there was a river there’, te ane b@y@ as-ten ‘they lived here’ (D. D. Sharma [1998: 93]). The predicates correspond approximately with H. hot¯ a th¯ a and hote the. 3. Bashkarik (or Kalam Kohistani) has tu ‘is’ (Èdel"man 1983: 243). 4. Narisati has t¯ına ‘to be’ (Biddulph). 5. Bhat.¯ıse has both a past participle in t and an unaspirated past auxiliary: khaith ‘eaten’ (for an overview see above p. 396), ge;t ta ‘(s.o.) had gone’ (Rensch, Decker and Hallberg [1992: 244, 251]). 6. Khowar has -ta ‘past suffix’ (Strand). Note: Whereas Buddruss quotes aspirated present tense auxiliary forms for Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı and Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai like au th¯ u ‘I am’ (1960: 56), Morgenstierne claims (1952: 125) that in Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı the auxiliary is tu, which he illustrates with mai paš¯ u t¯ u ‘I have seen’ (which would correspond with Hindi maimne ˙ dekh¯ a hai).

Transitional language P¯ ogul¯ı has a past auxiliary a ¯ht¯ u ‘was’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 57]) which seems to be built like the Brok-skad form.

West Pah¯ ar.¯ı 1. Rudh¯ ar¯ı has tia ‘was’ in the pronunciation of Rajputs (Kaul [2006 ii: 243]). 2. R¯ ambani has similar to P¯ ogul¯ı a past auxiliary a ¯t¯ us ‘I was’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 47]) (< older *¯ ah-t¯ u-s < *¯ as-t¯ u-s). 3. Gaddi has t¯ u ‘(I) was’, ti¯ a ‘(they) were’ etc. (Kaul [2006 i: 37]). 2 This form is quoted only for the sake of completeness because lack of aspiration does not say here anything about PIE laryngeals. 3 Written together with as- by D. D. Sharma. Therefore I have inserted a hyphen.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

13.2. OIA superlative in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, Dardic (and Konkan ˙ .¯ı?) 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

405

Sir¯ aj¯ı of D o ‘was’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 39]). . od.a has t¯ Chameali has ti¯ a ‘(I) was’, tiy¯ a ‘(they) were’ etc. (loc. cit.). Man.d.e¯ a.l¯ı has t¯ a/ti ‘(I [m./f.]) was’, të ‘(they) were’ etc. (loc. cit.). Sainj¯ı has t¯ı ‘was’ (LSI ix, iv: 703). Kul.ui has ta/ti ‘(I [m./f.]) was’, të/tiy¯ a (they [m./f.]) were’ etc. (loc. cit.), but only t¯ı according to LSI (ix, iv: 676). The Satlaj Group has tO, tE, t  ‘was’ (LSI [ix,iv: 655]). Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı has ta ‘(I) was’, tay ‘(they) were’ etc. (Kaul 2006 [i: 38], LSI [ix, iv: 594]). Bagh¯ at.¯ı has t¯ a ‘(I) was’, të ‘(they) were’ etc. (Kaul 2006 [i: 38]). Outer Sir¯ aj¯ı has t O, t e, t  ‘was’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: 39). Simla Sir¯ aj¯ı has t¯ a or th¯ a (m.), and t¯ı or th¯ı (f.) ‘was’ (LSI ix, iv: 594). Sirmauri has t¯ a ‘(I) was’, të ‘(they) were’ etc. (loc. cit.). Rampur and B¯ agh¯ı have tO ‘was’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1915: 147). K¯ ot.gar.h¯ı has tO ‘was’ (Hendriksen 1986: 161, 177). K¯ ot.gur¯ u has t O, t E, t  ‘was’ (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: 281). Jauns¯ ar¯ı has t¯ a ‘(I) was’, të ‘(they) were’ etc. (loc. cit.).

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Central Pah¯ ar.¯ı (Garhwali) Badh¯ an¯ı dialect of Garhwali has ta ‘was’ (LSI [ix,iv: 327]). Note: An aspirated form with present tense meaning is found in P¯ ogul¯ı th¯ı ‘is’, but is also widespread among Dard languages, e.g. Indus Kohistani, and Sindhi and several other Outer Languages. This lack of aspiration is not limited to Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and a dialect of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı but is also found, according to Hendriksen (1986: 177), in the Sirohi dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı (to ‘was’) and in Awadh¯ı (t¯ a ‘was’). Here to be added are Gujar¯ at¯ı t¯ o ‘was’, t¯ a ‘were’ e.g. in the sentence ¯ek v¯ on.¯ıy¯ o to, t¯en¯ a c¯ ar s¯ oka r¯ a t¯ a . . . ‘there was a merchant, he had four sons . . . ’ which contrasts, e.g. with th(a)y¯ o ‘became’ (see, e.g., LSI ix, ii: 405ff.); Inscriptional Or.iy¯ a t¯ ai ‘exists’ (as in t¯ au ¯n.a ‘being present’) which alternates with th¯ ai ‘remains’ (Tripathi [1962: 350f.]); Bh¯ıl¯ı kh ata  ta  ‘(they) were eating’ (LSI [ix, iii: 178]) and mar¯ı gi¯ o t¯ o ‘(he) had died’ (LSI [ix, iii: 179]), etc.4 It seems that in a number of languages one finds both th- and tforms. Hendriksen considers (ibid.) for the unaspirated forms connection with derivations of OIA vrtt
a- ‘passed’ (12069) – as in Chinab Sir¯ aj¯ı but¯ o ‘was’ – but this is hardly likely vis-à-vis  the similar behavior of the aspirated and unaspirated forms with regard to realizing present and past tense over this large area. His suggestion was not accepted in the Addenda and Corrigenda.

13.2

OIA superlative in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, Dardic (and Konkan ˙ . ¯ı?)

(a) Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has preserved a number of words containing OIA -s.t.-. This means that the many other words containing the MIA outcome of this consonant group are all borrowings that 4 Note that there is also Nihal¯ı t¯ a ‘was; were’. According to Kuiper (1962: 100f.), the forms are IA borrowings. One example: bid¯ı m¯ ancuk¯ı ir l¯ an¯ a t¯ a ‘a man had two sons’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

406

Chapter 13. Further morphological issues

occurred continuously at different historical stages. This also means that, as already pointed out, Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı is a heavily layered language with an ‘original’ layer that does not simply leap to the eye. One element of this original layer is the preservation of OIA (-)s.t.-. Not all, but quite a number of these words are superlatives. Here follow all forms with this consonant group (i.e. not all are superlatives). Several of the following words are also discussed further below and they are thus furnished with a cross reference. Here are all the forms I could collect: 1. istO n.m. ‘god; lord, master’, is.t.¯er n.m,n.f. ‘the highest (god)’ discussed below (p. 541);

Garh. ist ‘mukhya; kuldevt¯ also a – supreme; family god’ (Benjwal 2010: 163, 172); .. 2. kOnistO ‘least, smallest’ with a close parallel in Paš. kan.is.t.h¯ a ‘younger’ (Buddruss

47])) < OIA kanisthá- ‘smallest’ (2718); [1959b: .. 3. kutistO‘impure; misshapen’, OpOtistO poet. ‘shapeless; terrible, horrible’, pOtistO ‘having

or form’;



shape 4. gOristO ‘heaviest, most powerful’ < OIA garis.t.ha- ‘heaviest; most venerable’;

tO n.m. ‘a youth’ is somehow connected with OIA yávistha- ‘youngest’ but 5. dzOnis ..

semantically influenced by zu¯ an ‘young’ < OIA *yuv¯ ana- ‘young’ (10510); 6. jOsti, jOst n n.m.,n.f. ‘a very hard working, fighting or toiling person’ (with agent noun



< OIA cesta¯- ‘action, effort’ (4913) – this has a parallel in Kal. čestákal ‘mid suffixes) .. .. morning (around ten o’clock)’ which refers to a time of the day for hard work; 7. jistO ‘fitting, fine, great; welcome, much-liked (as a person)’ < OIA drsta
- ‘seen’ (6518);

tO adj.,n.m. ‘oldest, wisest; village elder’ built with danO ‘old, 

8. dOnis spent; an old man’

ultimately ← Pers. d¯ an¯ a ‘wise; a wise man’; 9. distO and poet. dis.t.a n.f. ‘vision, sight, view’ probably < OIA drsta
- ‘observation’, but

also P. dist, dist ‘sight, vision which is a tatsama and Sh. 

t- ‘know, recognize’; note das . . . .. 10. bOristO adj.,n.m. ‘big, excellent, superior, experienced’ < OIA váris.t.ha- ‘the most

excellent or best’; is also used in adjacent areas of Himachal Pradesh; there is a possibility of being a tatsama, but H. varis.t.h ‘best’ is aspirated and without final vowel, moreover there are Bng. bOrO n.m. ‘gift or payment in kind to visitor or teacher’, bOrOkrO n.m. ‘sacrificial animal’ (with -krO suffix), bOrOtrO n.m. ‘s.th. given (usually by a god) (e.g., a child)’ (with -trO suffix), b Or n.m. ‘gift, giving; profit, booty’ and poet. bOrati n.f. ‘act of grace’ all of which go back to the same OIA root. 11. bistO1 adv. ‘apart, away’ as in bistO thOu ‘keep (s.th.) separate!’ < OIA vis.t.h¯ a- ‘to

or go apart’;

stand 12. bistO2 adj. ‘impure (e.g., certain food for Brahmans)’ < OIA vis.t.h¯ a- ‘excrement’

(11990); there is a possibility of this word being a tatsama as there are also K. v˘eś˘et.a ¯ ‘excrement, fæces, ordure’ and P. bist.a ¯, biśt.a ¯ ‘excrement, ordure’, but the Bng. meaning is different; 13. bista nO ‘to build (official) relations (between persons, families)’ and bis.t.¯ı n.f.



‘introduction, acquaintanceship (of two persons, families)’ verbal with l anO (H. lag¯ an¯ a) < OIA vis.t.á- ‘entered into’ (11986) (note OIA vis.t.atva- ‘the being connected or accompanied with’); 14. bis.t.i n.f. ‘help’ and subis.t.i ‘right guidance, pointing the right way or direction’; the word belongs to OIA vis.t.i- ‘forced labour’ (11989) but is semantically much closer to a form like OIA véves.t.i ‘is active or busy in various ways’; 15. mOgistO ‘the biggest (person) (e.g., in terms of power)’ possibly < PIE *me´ gh𝑎 - ‘large,

great’; 16. mOzistO ‘middlemost’ ← mOzgO ‘middle’ (see p. 774); 17.
sOrist O ‘most heroic, most powerful’ ←
surO n.m. ‘hero’ < OIA
su
ra-1 ‘hero’ (12569).



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

13.2. OIA superlative in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, Dardic (and Konkan ˙ .¯ı?)

407

Somehow comparable with Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı are superlative survivals e.g. in Kalasha est a
ngu

into

a ‘thumb, big toe’ < OIA jyés.t.ha- ‘first, chief’ (5286), brús.is. ‘precipice which drops off stream, river or gull’ < OIA *bhramśis ˙ . t.ha- ‘very steep’ (9645), Kal. gas.t. ‘early, soon, quickly’ if < OIA gamis.t.ha- ‘most ready to go, most willing to come’ (p. 578), etc. It appears as if the same suffix is found in Konkan ˙ .¯ı. However, the superlative meaning, if it was there formerly, has been lost. Therefore morphological chance similarity is possible, even though no alternative explanation is obvious. Some examples: r¯ agis.t. ‘angry’ ← r¯ ag (discussed again below p. 701), lajis.t. ‘shameful’ ← laz ‘shame’ < OIA lajj¯ a- ‘shame, modesty’ (10910), sal.is.t. ‘obstinate’ ← săl. ‘obstinate’ (there is also săl.a ¯vol. ‘intercourse’) < OIA śat.ha- or *śad.a‘defective’ (12270). Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı has perhaps also preserved some words with -sm- superlative as it is known from Latin and Celtic.5 Its formation is connected with the intensive (former comparative or rather < OIA -tama- superlative?) suffix -mO as found e.g. in rOgmO ‘very heroic’ which is ← rOgi ‘heroic’ (as mentioned in the previous paragraph, this lemma is discussed p. 701). Note, however, also Nuristani Kati b"elimo ‘most powerful’ (said about God Gy¯ıs.)’ (Morgenstierne 1951b: 180) which is < OIA *balitama- ‘very strong’ (9173) and Prasun God Munˇȷ@ Malik ‘Lord of the middle region’ with first word derived < OIA madhyamá- ‘middlemost’ (9810). Here follow two examples; there are probably more, but these two cases seem to be widely known in Bangan: 1. urismO ‘most heavily swollen; most impetuous’ ← urnO2 v.i. ‘to be angry, furious, harbour evil intentions’6 respectively its intensive form urnO ‘to swell (with anger); to

rush along (e.g., a herd); rush or dart at each other (e.g., two hostile warrior groups), to fix one’s eyes upon s.b.’ which may be connected with OIA úd¯ırte ‘rises’ (1939) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Paš. 2. khOrOsmO, khorismO ‘most quarrelsome, pugnacious; worst’ ← khorO ‘quarrelsome, pugnacious; bad, nasty’, khoriapi ‘heroism, belligerent attitude’, khoroslO ‘bad, nasty’ which may have a semantic parallel in P. khur¯ı ‘arrogant, conceited’, in Munda Sant. khara ‘acid, pungent, energetic, forcible’ and Korku khara ‘tough, hard’ (besides ‘salty, brackish’), and in Mon-Khmer Khasi kh ar kh ar ‘harshly’ and perhaps Surin Khmer kha:r ‘a bitter, acrid, biting taste’. Further reflexes are (at least partly) found sub OIA khára-2 ‘hard, sharp, pungent’ (Pa., Pk. khara- ‘hard, rough, cruel, sharp’).7 For Mayrhofer (EWA) the origin is unclear, but it seems to be of Austro-Asiatic or at least ‘North Indian’ origin. Note: According to Nishimura, OIA -is.t.a- reflects PIE *-ist(H)o- (2001: 41). A non-retroflexed reflex seems to have survived in Nuristani Ashkun nustar ‘first’, nusta
ri ‘before’, nustari e
‘formerly’ which are found quoted by Turner sub OIA návis.t.ha- ‘newest, youngest, last’ (7022). Other cases are Nuristani Kati a ¯vři"ust ‘kind of pheasant (tragopan?)’ (Strand) which is a synonym compound < OIA vártik¯ a- ‘quail’ (11361 – cf. there e.g. Ash. uvře [Morgenstierne u"vrE] ‘partridge’) plus a non-retroflexed parallel of OIA *lohis.t.ha- ‘very red’ (11169 – see there e.g. Kal.rumb. loh
st ‘male of Himalayan pheasant’), and San.uv¯ıri k¯ an."ist ‘brother

in-law (husband’s younger brother)’, and Wg. ka st ‘husband’s younger brother’ and ko st o ‘younger’ which are cognate with OIA kanis.t.há- ‘youngest’ (2718). 5 On the genesis of this superlative see Kanehiro Nishimura, see also IGN: 245f. 6 urnO1 means ‘to jump into water’.

words like Ku. kharo ‘honest’, etc. may indicate incrossing of another lemma. 7 But

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

408

13.3

Chapter 13. Further morphological issues

Reflexes of OIA -(i)tavya

Southworth shows (2005: 136) that modern reflexes of this grammeme8 are found in Gujar¯ at¯ı and Mar¯ at.h¯ı and in the eastern IA languages in various functions, but he also observes that some inner group languages/dialects also use this grammeme e.g. in gerundive function. I og o may add here an example from M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı (LSI [ix,ii: 81]): hu  ph eru  a p-k o b eto kuh ab a j

Rj.jaip. dall¯ı nah  hu  ‘I am again not worthy to be called (with change a > u) your son’ and d¯ekha b¯ a giy¯ o ‘(he) went (in order) to see Delhi’ (op.cit. p. 185). Note also that Macalister in the dictionary part of his book on R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı regularly uses -bo as the infinitive ending.

13.4

OIA vártate in the sense of ‘becomes’

There is a close parallel in the grammaticalization of OIA vártate ‘takes place, is situated’ (11352) between West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Ko¯¸ı, Nuristani Waigal¯ı and Bashgal¯ı, and the Bik¯ an¯er¯ı dialect of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı: 1. Hendriksen writes (1976: 183): “r.o m., r.e f. auxiliary in one of the (western) Kc. dialects; together with the short gerund of the main verb it indicates a perfective and actual past: mE ghoro dekhe ro ‘I have seen the horse’.” Compare this with Waigal¯ı: 2. Wg. or.-- ‘is; remains’ is used in present tense not as an auxiliary but in order to express the presence or existence of something; it is also used in preterite and imperfect sentences (Degener [1998: 115ff.]). For a non-grammaticalized continuators of this lemma in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı see p. 670, but note also the following reflexes of the nominal derivation of the verb: 3. Besides Kt.g. -r.o and Wg. or.- there is also Rj.bik. r.o ¯ used as past tense and perfective auxiliary also deriving < OIA vártate ‘turns, moves; takes place, is situated’ (11352) (cf. there especially Pk. vat.t.aï ‘exists, is’). An example from Rj.bik with bas¯ o-r.o ¯ ‘situated’: jat.hai ab¯ ar B¯ık¯ an¯er-r¯ o s¯ehar bas¯ o-r.o ¯ chai “where now stands the city of Bikaner” (LSI [ix,ii: 137ff.]). Notes: (a) Kamd. v"om, Kt. v"um, Wg. v¯ am all ‘free time’ for which Strand suggests derivation < OIA vártman- ‘path’ (11366) but compares the semantics with OCS vrem* ‘time’; Mayrhofer points out that one can compare also OIA pari-varta‘a period or lapse or expiration of time’ and one can add here Garh. b¯ at2 ‘the area of land which can be ploughed in one day’ and b at aun ‘to come in rut as cattle’ (i.e. more literally ‘[special] time to come’) (Nautiyal and Jakhmola). (b) Jat.. vattan “used as an auxiliary, it gives the sense of continuance” (Jukes 1961

[1900]: 317) appears to be on the way to grammaticalization whereas Inscriptional Or.iy¯ a brati ‘remains, endures, exists’ (Tripathi [1962: 353]) is not (yet) grammaticalized but is morphologically as conservative as Kho. (Lor.) bortik ‘to trample with the feet (in washing cloth)’.

8 Regarding the remarkably archaic character of -tavyá- going back to PIE with reflexes in Celtic; OIA and Gr. see IGN: 78.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

13.5. Some remarks on future, present and past paradigms

13.5 13.5.1

409

Some remarks on future, present and past paradigms Future tense with l and m grammemes

The commonest future grammeme in Pah¯ ar.¯ı is -l-; it is also found in the Nuristan languages Ashkun, Kati and Waigal¯ı, and probably also in Dardic (Shumashti) as well as in Mar¯ at.h¯ı, Konkan ˙ .¯ı and in several R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı dialects. Regarding its origin, Hendriksen writes (1986: 163): “The /lo/ . . . is undoubtedly originally a preterite participle. Bloch . . . suggests the verb /l¯ a-/ ‘to take’ to be the source. It is perhaps better to seek its source in the homonymous verb /l¯ a-/ ‘to apply, attach’. . . ” But this cannot be correct, because then instead of the actual Bang¯ an.¯ı future grammeme -l- a form -l.- would be expected. Thus, the -lcannot derive from a lexeme. It is therefore likely that the grammeme goes back to the adjective-forming MIA suffix illa/alla/ulla- (see Southworth 2005a: 132), which functions in the Outer Languages as a past/perfect marker. This past tense grammeme is also found in most Dard languages and some varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, as has been shown above, but in most varieties of Pah¯ ar.¯ı and some Nuristan languages it functions as a future grammeme. This double function for realizing both past and future resembles the same function of -gin Panjabi, Hindi and Brajbh¯ as.a ¯, although it is contested whether in both cases the -g- goes back to OIA gata(ka)- ‘gone’ (but see Masica 1991: 288 and Brj.-Aw. g¯ a ‘to become’ [H. ho j¯ an¯ a]). In Hindi, for instance, the -g- for building the future is added to the subjunctive (i.e. the remains of the old present personal endings), and consequently the future forms are conjugated ‘inside’ and declinated ‘outside’. This has a parallel e.g. in the Bang¯ an.¯ı future: a u pi- u-lE ‘I (m., f.) will drink’, tu piElO ‘you (m.) will drink’, tu pieli ‘you (f.) will drink’ etc., or in Bhadraw¯ ah¯ı: kut.-ma-l¯e ‘I (m.) will beat’, kut.-mai-lai ‘I (f.) will beat’ etc. The opposite (older?) way of formation is found in some Nuristan and Dard languages: first an -l- is added to the stem and then the inherited personal ending which, however, also inflects like an adjective: Nuristani Waigal¯ı t¯ a-l-am ‘I (m.) will place’, t¯ a-l-em ‘I (f.) will place’. A similar building principle is found in K¯ amdeshi o ¯n˙c v¯ı-l-am ‘I shall beat’.9 For Dardic are documented in Shumashti t¯ o-thare-l-am-u ‘I (shall?) see thee’ (thar- ‘to see’), in Ashkun ka-l-am ‘I shall do’ and in Gawar-Bati a -T-l- emo ‘I shall beat’. In several variants of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı also an -m- appears in the first person singular or plural either in addition or instead of -l-, e.g. Sir¯ aj¯ı of D alo ‘(I) will go’, g¯ amle ‘(we) will go’, Jaun. m¯ arm¯ a ‘(I) will beat’, . od.a g¯ m¯ ard¯ a ‘(you) will beat’ (with old present participle -d- with future function), Ki˜ uthal. t p- u

ma  ‘(I) will beat’ but t.¯ıp-¯e-l¯ a ‘(you) will beat’ etc. (for more examples see Hendriksen [1986: 165ff.]). The same is found in R¯ ajbansh¯ı (see below p. 495). At first sight this looks like the personal ending of the first person was reinterpreted as a future grammeme and therefore being somewhat a parallel to the above-mentioned Nuristani languages. However, with the exception of Sir¯ aj¯ı of D . od.a, which does resemble Nuristani, it is difficult to explain how a personal pronoun should take on a future function. Therefore Hendriksen suggests (ibid.) that the -m- in Ki˜ uth., Jaun. etc. derives in fact < MIA imperative -mha, and he states (p. 167): “Pischel derives §470 /-mha/ from OI /-sma/, the 1.pl. ending of the s-aorist, from which the ending of Pa. 1.pl. preterite also comes, e.g. /agamamha/, /agamimha/. Its use in Pk. as an imperative ending is due to the OI injunctive.” Note that this future suffix is also found in Inscriptional Or.iy¯ a: nema ‘he will take’, nemi (nem¯ı) ‘I will take’ < OIA náyati ‘carries off’ (6966), and in East and North Bengali 1st person future and Bih¯ ar¯ı dialects (ODBL § 288). 9 Degener has rightly pointed out to me (pers. comm.) that in Prasun in a similar-looking form like p@znig-l-am(o) ‘I shall go’ (here the suffixes are added to the infinitive) the origin of the -l- is different, namely probably deriving < OIA dhárati ‘holds, keeps’ (6747).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

410 13.5.2

Chapter 13. Further morphological issues

Future tense and other grammatical functions with b

West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Sainj¯ı uses the grammeme -b in 1. person singular future as in c˙¯ık¯ ub ‘(I) shall strike’; and Sirmauri has in the 1. singular and plural future tense the forms k2ru-ba/k2rube ‘(I/we) will do’ but in the rest of the paradigm an -l- formant as in k2rula ‘(he) will do’. Also Dardic Gawar-Bati and Tir¯ ah¯ı employ the same -b future tense grammeme, in Nuristani Ashkun “A kind of subjunctive is formed with ba. . . : a z ba ‘if thou dost come” ’ (Morgenstierne [1928: 216]) and similarly in Bashgal¯ı (Kati) g¯ u-j-b¯ a ‘if thou goest’. Chinali uses -b¯ a as infinitive as e.g. in pray¯ ai-b¯ a ‘to recognize’ as some R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı dialects do (see p. 408). These are features connecting the northwestern with the Outer Languages.

13.5.3

Future tense with sibilant

We deal here with survivals of the OIA -sya-, -is.ya- future suffix. According to Masica (1991: 289), the suffix has survived as fricative s or ś in Gujar¯ at¯ı, Eastern R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, Literary M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı, Gojri and some “Lahnd¯ a” dialects, and, debuccalized to h, in spoken M¯ arw¯ ar.¯ı, Bh¯ıl¯ı, Bundel¯ı, Braj, Awadh¯ı, Bhojpur¯ı and Maithil¯ı (Masica ibid.). It is thus not a feature distinguishing Inner and Outer Languages. But for several reasons, especially interesting are Indus Kohistani and Kalami which have also preserved the same OIA future suffix: Ind. future suℎ karas2tℎ or k
ars2tℎ ‘he will do’ and Klm. present inceptive (Baart 1999: 51)



gir¯ as.at (with gir¯ a- ‘to turn [s.th.] around’) ‘. . . going to turn s.th. around’ and past inceptive gir¯ us.aš ‘. . . was going to turn s.th. around’. The -à- in Ind. is a thematic vowel, and the two Klm. forms show that the grammemes in Ind. and Klm. consist of two elements: -s.- plus -at (Ind. and Klm.) and -s.- plus -aš. The element -s.- derives < OIA -is.ya-.10 The second consonant in the suffix -s2tℎ , -sat must be a past participle -t (see page 396), and Klm. -aš is



the same as -¯ aš- ‘was’ which must derive < OIA *¯ asyate ‘exists’ (cf. OIA a
sate ‘sits, exists, remains’ [1480]). The Indus Kohistani and Kalami suffixes are an example for the strong agglutinative tendency in the formation of tense and aspect systems in the northwest.

13.6

Composite verbs with ‘light’ adverbs

Composite verb constructions are fusions of a verb and one of a small group of local adverbs (instead of or rather supplementing fusions of verbs and light verbs) and are found in Bng. and its surroundings.11 As do most other NIA languages, Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı uses conjunct verbs consisting of a noun or adjective plus the finite verb (Masica [1991: 368]), and it uses compound verbs consisting of a main verb stem plus the ending -i (or -ui in case of verb stems ending with a vowel) plus a light verb. In addition, Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı makes extensive use of finite verbs plus one out of a group of half a dozen or so local adverbs for the formation of predicates. I call these formations composite verbs. Their grammatical function appears to be basically the same as that of compound verbs, i.e. they typically express an aktionsart. The most common four adverbs are oru ‘hither’, poru ‘there’, dOni ‘down’ and ubE ‘up’. As in the case of light verbs, these

10 See p. 356 on the different fates of OIA s.ya in Dardic. 11 The following passages are a shortened and slightly changed quote from Zoller (2007: 99ff.).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

13.6. Composite verbs with ‘light’ adverbs

411

adverbs loose their original meaning to some extent when used in composite verb constructions. As the third example shows, there can also be fusions of compound and composite verb constructions. The constructions frequently express the intensive or violent course of an action:

tE za ngO

seu poru then kill-M.S.PS.PT he there ‘Then (they) slaughtered (killed intensively) him’ tE a u es oru za ng

u but I him hither kill-1.SG.PRS ‘But I slaughter (kill intensively) him’ tini laa te
sE dOni ph a
si

he.ERG attach- M.S.PS.PT so down cut‘He hacked (them) through (cut down intensively) like. . . ’ Peter Hook (2001: 124f.) points out that the following languages spoken in southern and western Rajasthan and in southeastern Sindh lack the compound verb altogether and instead make use of constructions I have called here composite verbs: Bhitrauti, Gondwari, Pindwari, and Thari. He refers also to eastern Himachali (Kc. and Kt.g.) as a language area where instead of compound verbs composite verbs are used. But in Kc. and Kt.g. the same situation prevails as in Bng.: in order to realize aktionsarten all three languages make use of compound verbs (with light verbs) and of composite verbs (with ‘light’ adverbs). It is remarkable that Bhitrauti of Rajasthan uses just the two adverbs p@ru ‘away’ and (u)ru ‘hither’ for its composite verb constructions, which are the same adverbs used for the same purpose in Bangani and Eastern Himachali. Composite verbs formed with ‘light’ adverbs display a very similar asymmetric word order pattern as compound verbs formed with light verbs – however, in a mirror image way: the ‘light’ adverb keeps a tight configuration with the (main) verb only when it precedes it (that means, between the two usually no other words are allowed), but in case of light verbs it is just the other way round (that is, if the light verb follows the main verb, usually only particles can intervene, but in the inverse case many sentence elements are allowed to stand between the two verbal components [see Zoller 2007]). In case of composite verb constructions when the adverb does not directly precede the (main) verb, and when the adverb follows the (main) verb, it may (but must not always) be a light adverb. In most IA languages adverbs usually appear before verbs. Let us have a short look at the situation in Bhitrauti (Hook op. cit., p. 124f.):

mhu  H Uk aro de- uRO I humkaro give-1sg “hither”-m.sg. ‘I will accompany (your singing)’ H athi muO p@rO elephant died “away” ‘the elephant died’ Note that also in Bhitrauti the ‘light’ adverb follows the verb. According to Hook and Chauhan (1988), this construction realizes perfective aspect; however, I agree with Hendriksen (1986: 186) that, at least in Bng., Kc. and Kt.g., the construction is used as an

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

412

Chapter 13. Further morphological issues

“expressive” (Hendriksen), realizing the intensive or violent course of an action. Hook and Chauhan draw at the end of their article (p. 183) the following interesting – and I would say correct – conclusion: “The existence of cognate forms with parallel functions in Kotgarhi, a language spoken in a region hundreds of miles away from Bhitraut, would suggest that reflexes of Old Indic para- may at some time in the past have been geographically widespread rivals of the compound verb. Further work both in the field and with Middle Indic texts is indicated.” Meanwhile the number of known languages displaying this grammatical pattern has increased, and it is not unlikely that more Outer Languages will be added in the future.

13.7

Interrogative words

Here follows an incomplete overview of some interrogative words. They appear to be further examples of words belonging to the northwestern and other Outer Languages. The, although limited, variation in meanings connected to basically identical morphemes reflects the tendency that many Outer Languages were not standardized.

Why? Bng. kela, kelai ‘why?’, kelai ki ‘because’, kOlai ‘for what, what for’, Garh. kilai ‘why’, Kc. kela ‘why?’, Kt.g. killE ‘why?; because’, killE ki ‘because’, Garh. kilaik ‘because’, Ku. kil¯ a¯ı ‘what for?’, Wot.. kel, kyel ‘how, why?’ where Buddruss (1960: 107) points to further parallels in Tor. kal, kyul ‘how?’, Paš. k¯ al ‘what, how?’ and Shum. ky¯elä ‘what?’; Kal. kaváy ‘why?’; Wg. kil¯ aes-pat¯ı ‘because’ (LSI [viii, ii: 79]); R¯ amb. kil¯ a ‘because’, Him. (Basháhr) kilái ‘why?’ — A. kel ai, kelOi ‘why?’ and B.roh. kiálla, kiyólla ‘why’. All these forms are built with the OIA interrogative adverb kí- ‘why’12 plus the MIA suffix -alla – as most clearly seen in case of Kt.g. and B.roh. – on which (and on its allomorphs -illa- and -ulla-) Pischel comments (§595) that it can function like the OIA suffixes -matand -vat-. The former suffix can be added in Sanskrit also to the interrogative pronoun kí as in k
vant- ‘how great, how much etc.’ (see Macdonnel § 118c). The OL pronominal adverb *k
-alla- was thus similarly built like OIA interrogative pronoun k
vant-.

 Note: Of different origin are Sa s. kid¯ a ‘why’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1908: 96]) and K.r¯ am. and K.pog. kut ‘what’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1903: 49]), which may be cognate with OIA katha
‘how, whence, why’ resp. kathám ‘how, in what manner, whence’.

When? (a) Gaw. k¯ ol ‘when?’, Gau. kal ‘when’ and kal na ‘never’, Kal. kay ‘when?’, Ind. and Gau. k2l ‘when?’, Šat.. kal3 ‘when?’, N. kaile, kahile or kailhe ‘when’ are probably cognate with Paš. kim" a:l ‘when’ (transcription?) with first syllable < 12 Is frequently also used as interrogative pronoun.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

13.7. Interrogative words

413

OIA kim ‘particle of interrogation’ and with second component < OIA k¯ alá-2 ‘time’ (3084). (b) Similar looking but not cognate are Iranian Mj. k@lo ‘when?’, Yid. kelo ‘when?’, Psht. k"@la ‘when?; sometimes’ which derive < Av. kad¯ a for which there  are Indo-Aryan parallels in Jat.. and Sa s. kad ‘when?’, and Man.d.. kaddh¯ı ‘kab – when?’.

When and where? There is partial semantic overlapping with above ‘when’ forms: Sh.chil. "kudi ‘where’, Sh.saz. "k¯ oda ‘where’ etc., Sh.koh. kud
 ‘where’ (note also ad
 ‘here’ and sud
 ‘there’) (Z.), Bhat.. kædi ‘when’, kædi-kaedi ‘sometimes’ and kædi nœ ˜ ‘how long’, Kann. kädi ‘when?’, Bng. kOdi ‘when?’, kadu ‘when, at which time?’, kadu OrE since when?’, kad¯ı na ‘never’, Garh. k¯ adi ‘when; sometimes’, D u ‘when’ (Gauri Shankar [1931: 148]), Him. kadu and Jaun. kadí ‘when’, . og. kad˜ Kgr. kuth¯ u ‘where’ < OIA *kudha- (cf. OIA kúha ‘where’ [3384] and note that for cognate Lith. ku˜r ‘where’ Derksen suggests derivation < PIE *ku -dh e [2015: 265]),13 Kt.g. poet. kadu ‘when’ and Kc. kOdi ‘sometimes, ever’, Sir.d.od.. kad¯e ‘ever’ and with na ‘never’, Ki˜ ut.h. k˘ odd¯e ‘when’, Kul. and Man.d.. kadh¯ı ‘sometimes, ever’ (Kul. also kad¯ı ‘sometimes’ [Diack]), Han.d.. kad¯ı ‘ever’, Insir. k˘ odh¯ı ‘ever’, Cam. kad¯ı ‘sometimes, ever’ and kad¯ı na ‘never’ and kad¯ı na kad¯ı ‘sometimes’ (H. kabh¯ı kabh¯ı) and kadh¯ ar.¯ı ‘when’ and kud¯ı ‘where’ (LSI ix,iv: 774 and 775) and similar forms in other West Pah¯ ar.¯ı variants, also Garh. kadi ‘when’ — Rj.har. k@d ‘when’, G. kad¯ı ‘ever’ and negatively ‘never’, kad¯ı kad¯ı ‘sometimes, at times’, Jat.. kad¯ı n¯ a ‘never’, P. kad
 ‘ever, sometimes’, Mult. of Afghanistan kad¯ı kad¯ı ‘sometimes’ and kad¯ı na ‘never’ (Z.), Brj.-Aw. kadi ‘sometimes’, Ko. kedin c na  ‘never’, Ko.S. kEdn@ ‘when’ and H. poet. kad ‘when?’, and in many cases found together with correlative forms like e.g. Bng. zodi . . . tOdi ‘when . . . then’. — cf. Ind. gól, golàh ‘where?’ (regarding change of k- > g- in Ind. see next paragraph), Yid. k@la and Sang. k aDi both ‘when?’, Bal. kad¯ı ‘when’ and Av. kad¯ a, kaDa ‘when’ and kud¯ a ‘where’ which have their parallels in OIA kada
‘when’ and kúha ‘where’. Cf. also Lith. kadà and Latv. kad both ‘when’ and Derksen’s remark (2015: 216) that OIA kada
‘when’ is not an exact match. The origins of these modern forms, where apparently a lot of mixing occurred, but which prevail mainly in Outer Languages, is unclear. Note Pischel (§ 197) who suggests for Pk. katto ‘whence?’ derivation < OIA kad- + demonstrative tá- but of course this would have resulted in *katta.

13 See Glossary of words peculiar to the Kangra District and the neighbouring hill tracts. By the late Edward O’Brien, Esquire, c.s., Deputy Commissioner of Kangra, Revised with additional words by the Revd. T. Grahame Bailey, B. D., M.R.A.S., Wazirabad. 1903? Page 49. Note Mayrhofer’s observation on this word in EWA where he says that kúha was limited to the Rg veda and had a parallel in Old Avestan kud¯ a ‘where?’, but that evidence in living languages proves that it must have continued to exist. This is an indirect confirmation for the theory of Outer and Inner Languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

414

Chapter 13. Further morphological issues Note: It is unclear whether here cognate are Bng. ketkE ‘where’ and A. kOt ‘where’ (B. kothe ‘where’)14 if not developed somehow < OIA *kiyatta ‘how great?’ (3167).

Particle of interrogation OIA kim ‘particle of interrogation’ (MW) but sometimes more specifically meaning ‘whatever’ as in OIA kimicchaka- ‘what(ever) one wishes or desires, anything desired’; this meaning is reflected in the following forms: Rj.mev. kima˜ı ‘anything, something; whatever” (LSI [ix, ii: 223f., 229; 236]), j¯ o-kima˜ı ‘whatever’ (op. cit. p. 225) and ‘something’ (op. cit. p. 229), Bhil. k¯ım and similar forms ‘why’, Bhil.wag. kem ‘why’ and k¯ am ‘where’, dialectal M. kam(h)¯ un ‘why’, Brj.Aw. km ‘what? why?’, Jat.. kim ‘some’, kimme ‘sometimes, occasionally’, kimme kimme “occasionally, rarely’, kimme na ‘nowhere, not at all’ — Kal. kim¯ on ‘few; how many’ (LSI [viii, ii: 77, 104, 109]) but Trail and Cooper note kimón, kimónd ‘how much, how many?’ and ek kimón ‘some, a few’ whereas Morgenstierne gives with same meaning ‘how much, how many?’ slightly different k"imon, R¯ aj. k2mbaP ‘where’, Tor. nak¯ amna ‘nobody’ and k¯ am ‘who’, Klm. kh2m ‘who’, Ush. k2m ‘who’, D ama ‘who’, Paš. k¯em¯ı ‘anyone’ and k¯em¯e . . kimune ‘what’, Tir. k¯ ‘ditto’ respectively kem"e ‘some, any’ and kum"¯e ‘which, someone; whatever’ (see LSI [viii,ii: 101, 104]). The forms preserving the nasal consonant may go back to Pk. ablative kamh¯ a or locative kamhi. Turner mentions some forms related to those presented in this section (cf. e.g. 3164-66). Note: The similar-looking forms K.r¯ am. and K.pog. and Klm. kam ‘who’, and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı R¯ amb. kam ‘who?’ (Kaul [2006 i: 170]) are < OIA katamá ‘which out of several?’ (2692) (Pa., Pk.) with modern parallels in Wot.., Bshk., Tor., S. On the relationship between the OIA interrogative pronouns OIA ká- and kí- see EWA.

Various other forms in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı (a) jOichE. . . tOichE ‘jitne. . . utne – as many . . . so many’ < OIA (TS, ŚBr) y¯ avacchas ‘as many times as, in as many ways or manners as’ as in this line from the PAN:

zagi-erE jOichE tikE thE, tOichE kh@t@m kOri-erE

as-many crown-princes was.M.PL, so-many finished makekill-see.PP.M.PL see.PP.M.PL ‘As many crown princes there were, that many (he) killed’[962] (b) zOtha ‘wherever, wheresoever’ probably < OIA yátra-1 ‘where’ (10405) (Pa.) with a modern parallel in N; an example from the PAN: bElE, zOli zOtha ‘my dear ones, (I

wish that you) burn wheresoever!’ Here also poet. j oth@r ‘everywhere; here and there’ (probably with -r(O)1 suffix).15 An example from the IB where the appearance of the 14 Southworth (2005a: 146) compares the B. word with Or. kout.hi and M. kut.he both ‘where’ but they are certainly different from the Bng. form. 15 Words with non-depalatalized affricates in Bang¯ an.¯ı are only partly recent borrowings; there is a small group of such words which do not appear to be recent borrowings, and in some cases they

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

13.7. Interrogative words

415

Lord of the World is described:

bh@kt p@tua j oth@r jole Bhakta ? here-and-there roam.PR.3.SG ‘(Like) a Bhakta . . . he roams here and there’ (c) Besides above kOdi ‘when?’ there is also correlative zOdi. . . tOdi ‘when. . . then’ < OIA yad a
hi ‘when’ (10409) (Pa.) with modern parallels in L., WPah., B. but without preservation of the stop. But note A. zOdi (yadi) ‘if’. An example from the PAN:

phet! dada teri. zOdi kO ai u tu thO, tOdi kO ai u a u OdO, tE sunei-sune ki banu thO



Othna-zO ta Phew! O brother. When GEN POP.M.SG come.PP you was.M.SG, then GEN POP.M.SG come.PP I come.PPR.M.SG, then gold.EMP-gold GEN POP.F build.PR.1.SG H¯ astinapura ‘Phew! O brother. When I (too) would have come here (so long before), as (long before) you have come, then I (would have) built a H¯ astinapura of pure gold’[152] (d) Besides kadu ‘when, at which time?’ there are also zadu ‘if’ (cf. OIA yádi ‘if’ [10410]) and tadu, t¯ adu ‘then’, which is also found in Marw. t¯ ad ‘then’ (CLLR) and, despite different meaning, probably in Kal. thedi ‘now’ (cf. OIA tad a
‘then’ [5649] and Lith. tadà ‘then, thereupon; dann, alsdann’) as in the following mystical riddle sung at certain festivals by professional bards: zadu to z@rmile, tadu tir
s g@re ‘when but (they) are born, then (there are) thirty houses’. (e) Postposition zari ‘until’ may derive < the compound y¯ avat-antara- (or . . . -antarya?) and is used in ta zari ‘tab tak - until then’ (with ta < OIA t a
vat ‘so long’ [5804]) e.g. in the PAN:

zObE terO kirarO gOrE alO, ta zari garia na



when your grocer home.OBL come.FUT.M.SG, so-long until draw-out.IMP not ‘Draw not out (the sack) until the grocer will come’[510]

13.7.1

A particular modal verb

Gujar¯ at¯ı jo¯ıe ‘it is necessary, must’ — cf. Bng., Kc. and Kt.g. j¯ a ‘must’ which are modal verbs and derive according to Hendriksen < OIA dra
ti ‘runs’ (6630). It is also used as a main verb in K. and S., and there is also Ko. z¯ ai ‘is required’; example Bng.: leu
si rE ph angE

j a k atnE ‘the twigs of the leuśi bush have to be cut’ (see below p. 666), example Kc.: amm u

o kkha mOrno ‘we will have to die of starvation’ (Hendriksen 1986: 181). If the comparj a bh
ison is correct it would mean that also Gujar¯ at¯ı had formerly a change dr > j.

are used both with depalatalized and non-depalatalized allomorphs, cf. e.g. jnjralO, dznzralO (see



p. 601).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Part V

Language theories and models

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 14 General theories

14.1 14.1.1

Preliminaries Some remarks on ‘language’

The table of contents for instance in Cardona and Jain’s book makes no conceptual difference between e.g. ‘Sanskrit’, ‘Prakrit’, ‘Hindi’, ‘Dardic’ or ‘Kashmiri’. All are somehow ‘languages’ even though everyone knows that there is not just ‘the Prakrit’ or ‘the Dardic’. Of course, there were several Prakrits in different periods, the existence of a separate ‘Dardic’ group of languages is questioned by many, and Sanskrit is an ‘undead’ classical language still of importance. In addition it hardly needs to be said that all these languages are either composed of dialects or consist of a standard variety that is associated with a group of dialects. Such a rather implicit and intuitive categorization is, however, problematic, and for an understanding of the functioning of the historical relationships and interactions between Outer and Inner Languages it is not helpful. In order to understand these relationships and interactions, I suggest to replace the two terms ‘language’ and ‘dialect’ by the three terms ‘koiné’, ‘lect’ and ‘linkage of lects’. They will be explained in the following sections.

14.2 14.2.1

The Social Network Model A short critique of the historical-comparative method

Mathew Toulmin applied the Social Network Model to a group of northeastern Indo-Aryan languages (2006). He begins his study with a criticism of the historical-comparative method with which I agree. He says (2006: 2): “The philological approach is limited to lects1 possessing a historical corpus of written literature – which rules out the majority of New Indo Aryan lects – and even then the method is fraught with problems. Notable amongst these are: the difficulty of drawing conclusions from ancient writings about the vernaculars of the time when these writings are often intentionally archaic and artificially distanced from spoken norms.” Then he points out on the same page that there sometimes exist rival claims regarding text bodies. He mentions the case of the Cary¯ apadas, “an early New Indo-Aryan 1 Toulmin and Malcom Ross – whom I discuss right below – use ‘lect’ as an umbrella term for ‘language’ and ‘dialect’ in order to avoid a mutual differentiation between the two which cannot be made within a linguistic frame.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

420

Chapter 14. General theories

(NIA) collection of Buddhist mystic songs. They have variously been claimed to represent ‘Old Bengali’, ‘Old Oriya’, ‘Old Maithili’, ‘Old Asamiya’, and ‘Old Kamta’.” On p. 3 he correctly observes: “. . . linguistic changes are reconstructed by the Comparative Method, but all too often the sequencing of these changes cannot be established by that method alone.” This problem is caused by the fact that different lects in a continuum undergo identical innovations even after divergence and differentiation. Innovations with a wider range over a set of languages, or a geographical area, are not necessarily older than changes with a more restricted or localized range. One more problem pointed out by Toulmin (ibid.) are wrong linguistic classifications. As an example for this he mentions George van Driem’s book on Himalayan languages which contains a chapter on Rajbanshi which is actually spoken south of the Himalayas (some of its features are discussed by me p. 492) but it was included by van Driem – showing again his typical ideological mindset – because it is a Sino-Tibetan language.

14.2.2

Principles of the Social Network Model

As an exponent of this model, Ross (1997: 210) is “interested in the reconstruction of sequences of linguistic and speech community events (SCE) and their correlation with archaeologically reconstructed event sequences. . . ” He prefers (p. 211) the notions ‘linguistic prehistory’ and ‘linguistic prehistorian’ instead of ‘historical linguistics’ and ‘historical linguist’ because the methods he is discussing “rely only on present-day linguistic data and do not require the use of older written texts which, of course, are non-existent in many parts of the world.” In case of several of the following terms and models it will be shown how they can be applied to the languages discussed in the present book.

14.2.2.1

Language fissure and lectal differentiation

On p. 212 he defines two important terms which I also use: language fissure and lectal differentiation: “Fissure is reflected in discrete bunches of innovation, lectal differentiation is reflected in overlapping (bunches of) innovations. These two patterns reflect different SCEs. Language fissure is usually the result of a single event which divides one group of speakers into two, whilst lectal differentiation entails the (usually gradual) geographic spread of a group of speakers.” An example for a fissure thus is the division between Old Iranian and Old Indo-Aryan which is characterized by discrete bunches of innovations. An example for a lectal differentiation is the history from Old to New Indo-Aryan. However, I want to register already here the fact that sometimes innovations that have come up in one language (area) after a fissure nevertheless can go across the new border and spread into the other language (area). In order to overcome ambiguities in tree diagrams, which cannot graphically show the difference between fissure and lectal differentiation, Ross suggests the following graphic conventions (p. 213):

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.2. The Social Network Model

421

AB language fissure A

B

He rightly notes (p. 213): “The problem is that the family tree model is designed to represent processes of language divergence, not language convergence.” In the following diagram one sees what happens after a language fissure: it leads to lectal differentiation where, however, the different lects stay in contact. Their connection is graphically shown by the thick horizontal line.

A linkage A after lectal differentiation A1

14.2.2.2

A2

A3

A4

Social links between speakers

On the same page Ross quotes Lesley Milroy who describes network structure by characterizing the social links between speakers. Their characteristics: 1. density (number of relationships an individual has with others) 2. clustering (where a cluster is a network portion with relatively high density) 3. uniplexity/multiplexity (the number of purposes for which two people relate to each other) 4. intensity (the amount of time two people spend together and the intimacy of that relationship) Points 1 to 4 are all factors which determine e.g. the spread of sound changes: how fast and how far they spread and whether they spread at all. With regard to borrowings between languages in contact, Angela Marcantonio says (2014: 40f.): “This process of interference and subsequent borrowing takes place within the concrete ‘speech act’ of real speakers, that is, at the level of ‘parole’ (to use Saussurian terminology), with all its social and geographical variants, and not between and/or at the level of, abstract linguistic systems, as the like of reconstructed languages/language families. . . ”

14.2.2.3

Language, linkage and network

On the relationship between language, linkage and network Ross notes (p. 217): 1. A language is what we have before lectal differentiation occurs, a linkage after

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

422

Chapter 14. General theories

2. A network, whether it is a language or a linkage, may undergo division or reintegration. Division entails a reduction in the homogeneity of network structure, whilst reintegration entails an increase. This leads to the following scheme:

Language Linkage

division fissure breaking

reintegration fusion rejoining

If we apply the above definitions and models to Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı, we first see that there is not always a clear distinction between language and linkage, for instance because many language names were either rather arbitrarily introduced by scholars or because they have been simply harmonized with pre-existing political and state boundaries. The three groups certainly can be said to represent three (hybrid) linkages, and at least in case of Pah¯ ar.¯ı one can suggest two sub-linkages, namely West Pah¯ ar.¯ı versus the rest of Pah¯ ar.¯ı, which again can be divided into further sub-sub linkage areas. Also in Nuristani something comparable is there because Prasun stands in strong contrast (in vocabulary, grammar etc.) to the other Nuristan languages which are otherwise relatively similar among themselves. On the other hand, to regard also, perhaps from a slightly higher perspective, Nuristani and Dardic as a (hybrid) linkage area may appear to be not wrong. Nuristani got famous for its preservation of pre-Vedic phonological features. Yet first, preservation is not seen as diagnostic in distinguishing linkages and second I have shown above in detail that a differentiation between pre-Vedic Nuristani and Vedic Dardic is deceptive because first, also e.g. Dardic Kalasha has preserved quite a number of pre-Vedic language data, and because second, the Nuristani preservation of Indo-Iranian palatal affricates is also a matter of the temporal succession of two innovations both Nuristani and Dardic share(d), namely depalatalization (c > c˙ ) and deaffrication (c > ś): both processes are found in both groups in many or most of the languages with the only difference that in Nuristani depalatalization usually (but certainly not always) occurred before deaffrication (thus escaping deaffrication) and in Dardic (and many other Outer Languages) it was usually the other way round, but also not always. Otherwise Nuristani developed not a single innovation that would distinguish it from its surroundings (see p. 467ff.). Nuristani is thus a member of a NuristaniDardic linkage. Within these three groups one finds the above-mentioned distinction between Vedic and non-Vedic Indo-Aryan lemmata (but partly crossing boundaries). If we move our perspective yet to a higher level, we arrive at the level of Outer Languages versus Inner Languages: They are distinguished from the Inner Languages by a great number of linguistic features at all grammatical levels, i.e. from phonology to syntax. Most likely, there exist also corresponding religio-cultural differences. They are not topic of this book, but see Zoller . . . . Thus the difference between Outer and Inner Languages has to be seen as one between innovative features found in Outer Languages and the same features not or only rarely found in Inner Language (if found sometimes, then due to mixtures or occasionally also through independent innovations).

14.2.2.4

Language fissure and innovation-defined subgroups

We turn now to the topic of language fissure and innovation-defined subgroups. Ross characterizes them thus (218f.): “Language fissure is the SCE that is prototypically depicted

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.2. The Social Network Model

423

in a family tree diagram. It occurs when a network which has functioned as a fairly homogeneous unit is broken into two (or more) networks; in other words, when a subset of the links in the network undergoes a sharp reduction in density.” 2 This occurs e.g. “. . . when population growth induces part of a community to seek a new location.” Consequently, after language fissure, innovations occur independently in one or both lects leading to innovationdefined subgroups, and there is a reduction in the density of links, a weakening in their intensity and a reduction in multiplexity (see p. 219). It is useful to distinguish between dissociative and associative innovations. The wellknown innovations that separated Iranian from Indo-Aryan which then led to the development of separate subgroups are dissociative. However, Iranian and Indo-Aryan apparently existed after their separation never without a common language border. This fact facilitated associative innovations. For instance, retroflexion probably started in (pre-)Old Indo-Aryan (at least the earliest evidence comes from there) but spread into Eastern Iranian and is found e.g. in Khotan Saka, Pashto, Parachi and Ormuri (and, of course, in Nuristani).3 On the other hand, there are also few cases of non-retroflexion in Indo-Aryan where retroflexion should have been expected, e.g. in Prasun, Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, Jat.k¯ı, Braj-Awadh¯ı etc. (see e.g. p. 363). But whether or not they are indications of a distinct Indo-Aryan lect is not clear. Another example for an associative innovation is the change a > u (or o) which certainly started in Eastern Iranian (if Avestan is ‘eastern’) and spread far into Indo-Aryan (see p. 369).

14.2.2.5

Diagnostic substance of innovations

How to differentiate between genuine common innovations and innovations that occur independently from one another? Ross (p. 220) rightly points out that a change of p, b > v is so natural that it can occur independently in different subgroups. Less clear is the case of deaffrication. It happened from the times of Indo-Iranian separation subsequently in different periods and in different languages, but it did not happen, for instance, in the development from Old Indo-Aryan to Hindi. Changes in syntax and lexicon have little diagnostic substance by themselves, as they are often copied. Innovations which do have diagnostic substance include: 1. Sound changes which affect only some words in the lexicon. Examples in Indo-Aryan: loss of r or aspiration dissociation [i.e. e.g. dh > dVh] found in certain words in different languages (see p. 318) 2. Shared sequences of sound changes. Examples in Indo-Aryan: c > c˙ versus c > ś. Note: As pointed out above, old sound shifts can have extraordinary longevity. The sound change c > ś which characterized pre-Old Indo-Aryan, did not continue later into Middle Indo-Aryan as noted by Pischel (§ 184): “Anlautende Consonanten. . . bleiben in der Regel unverändert.” 4 But this does not hold true for many Outer Languages which continued this very process until today. An 2 See the diagram p. 218 which illustrates not how a language fissures into two but how a fairly homogenous networks fissures through speech community events. 3 Since the origin of the retroflexes is still disputed and since the Dravidian-origin thesis is very unlikely (see e.g. Hock’s publications), influence through a substrate cannot be ruled out. Yet, whatever the true origins of retroflexion are, they are clearly associative innovations in Indo-Aryan and Eastern Iranian. 4 Normally, initial consonants remain unchanged.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

424

Chapter 14. General theories instructive example is Nihali.5 Shailendra Mohan (Deccan College, Pune) observes (p. c.) that since the time F. B. J. Kuiper’s work on this language around sixty years ago, c has everywhere changed into s whereas Kuiper had found only a few instances. Here some of Mohan’s examples:

yesterday goat earth liquor

Kuiper che cheri cikal chid.u

now se seri (OIA *chagat.a-) sikal (OIA cikka-) sid.u

3. Changes in the use of bound morphemes. Examples in Indo-Aryan: the MIA ‘participle’ grammeme illa/alla/ulla- which functions in the Outer Languages as a past/perfect marker (see p. 237); grammaticalization of OIA VARDH ‘grow’ in Nuristani Waigal¯ı, in parts of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and in dialects of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı (see p. 408); adverbs functioning like compound verbs in parts of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and in dialects of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı (see p. 410), etc. 4. changes in the form or use of paradigms of morphemes. Examples in Indo-Aryan: use of certain interrogative adverbs in Outer Languages only or mostly (see p. 412). Regarding the varying cogency of the different types of innovations just listed, Ross states (ibid.): “Diagnostic substance is the probability that an innovation has been inherited into a set of lects from its common ancestor . . . a collection of independently occurring innovations has far more diagnostic substance than any single innovation.” This statement characterizes also a significant difference between the previous attempts for establishing a difference between Outer and Inner Languages, and the present one. In this book far more independent innovations are introduced than previous writers have done. The examples with possible diagnostic substance so far mentioned are so-to-say quite loose-knit, either relating to the whole area of Indo-Aryan or to big sections of the area. This is necessarily so because in order to show that the theory of the Outer and Inner languages is a viable alternative it is essential to demonstrate that the origin of at least the most comprehensive and important Outer Language innovations can be located in the earliest phase of the Indo-Aryan expansion into South Asia. However, this very condition does not yet explain the whole theory because it does not exclude the possibility that Outer and Inner Languages nevertheless had a common and singular linguistic origin and that the observable different innovations are just due to later developments that took place independently from each other. Therefore, the further necessary condition is to show that Outer Languages display Indo-Aryan features that cannot be derived from Vedic Aryan. This concentration on rather global frames does not mean that I am not aware of the sometimes enormous complex bundles of innovations having taken place (or seemingly having taken place) within much smaller geographical areas inside Indo-Aryan. To illustrate this I quote from the abstract of a publication by Henrik Liljegren on ‘Hindukush-Karakoram as a Linguistic Area: Problems and Prospects’ found at his Stockholm University website:6

5 Nihali is, of course, not an Outer Language but it has many loanwords from various languages, a.o. OL Indo-Aryan. 6 https://tinyurl.com/y5lhjxu8

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.2. The Social Network Model

425

On the one hand, there are linguistic features shared by a large number of the region’s languages . . . in some cases as the result of prolonged language contact, in others – such as in the so-called “Dardic” group of Indo-Aryan – due to shared retention . . . On the other, there is also a good deal of structural diversity. . . Certain features are identified as macroareal (i.e. as characteristic of a much larger area which this region forms only a small part of), other features as linking features (i.e. linking a part of the region with a geographically adjacent area), yet others as essentially regional (i.e. Hindukush-specific), or features with a significant sub-regional scope. . . Among the features discussed are: a tripartite differentiation within the affricate and fricative subsets . . . the emergence of tonal contrasts . . . the display and degree of ergativity . . . the presence vs. absence of gender distinctions, vigesimal numeral systems, multi-dimensional deictic contrasts, shared derivational pathways in kinship differentiation, doublemarked contrastive constructions, and the prevalence of complex predicates . . . ” Similar ‘thick feature bundles’ are also found outside Hindukush-Karakoram in other areas in South Asia and various features just listed will be treated in this book. Several features are not only macro-areal but also macro-temporal and some of them are nowadays not found in areas where they previously must have existed (e.g. ‘tripartite differentiation within the affricate and fricative subsets’ and dentalization). Somethings quite similar regarding the complex linguistic hierarchies and the frequently messy linguistic data situation has been pointed out by Southworth (2005a: 325) who says that “[i]n historic times in South Asia, in many areas there have existed three or even four levels of linguistic communication: (1) local village dialects and/or “tribal” languages, (2) dialects of wider use. . . , (3) regional languages . . . and (4) inter-regional or national languages. . . ” This also implies that some basic characteristics of the opposition between Outer and Inner Languages can in some circumstances even be captured within one village.

14.2.2.6

Shifts of innovations

On pp. 224-25 Ross discusses the problem of shifts of innovations (vs. shared innovations) which, he argues, is countered in case of identical bundles or bunches of innovations. Moreover, shift needs close contact of speakers of lects who, in addition, must perceive the area of shift as ‘the same language’. “These circumstances are likely to occur only rather early in a process of differentiation . . . ”

14.2.2.7

Network growth, lectal differentiation and innovation-linked subgroups

Besides diagnostic substance, the related topic of network growth, lectal differentiation and innovation-linked subgroups is also relevant here. Ross observes (pp. 222-24): “Genuine language fissure is probably a relatively rare event in the world’s linguistic history. A far more common scenario, at least in parochial traditional communities, is lectal differentiation. As a community grows, it establishes new settlements which remain in contact with each other . . . [there is] gradual reduction in intensity and multiplexity which shades into a reduction in network density . . . This is the kind of process which the ‘wave’ model was designed to capture. Over time, lects may come to differ from each other enough for us to speak of them

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

426

Chapter 14. General theories

as ‘separate languages’, but overlapping patterns of innovations remain. Such a linkage I will call an innovation-linked subgroup. . . it reflects the gradual geographic extension of their speakers’ habitat.” On pp. 225 and 228 he clarifies: “Linkage breaking is the event in a linkage which corresponds to fissure in a single language” and : “Language fusion and linkage rejoining are the reverse of language fissure and linkage breaking.” The scenario of lectal differentiation applies well to the – what I have called above – northwestern branch of the Outer Languages which includes Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı. An important actor in this process, characterized by community growing and the establishment of new settlements starting from the Karakorum area and then continuing throughout the Himalayas, is certainly found in the ancient Khasha people, in the past one of the most dominant people in that area (see Marie Lecomte-Tilouine [2009: 175ff.]]). This process is different from linkage breakings when, for instance, lects in the southern area of Konkan ˙ .¯ı, in the northwestern and western area of Assamese and Bengali and in the southern area of Or.iy¯ a developed tendencies for aspiration loss apparently due to contact with adjacent languages without aspiration even though loss of aspiration is an old and important feature of Outer Languages. Ross adds to the topic of language fusion and linkage rejoining (p. 229): “Language fusion represents one extreme of a continuum of linguistic reintegration; at the other end lies linkage rejoining . . . It is worth noting, incidentally, that linkage rejoining is only detectable linguistically if we have clear evidence of former linkage breaking . . . I suspect linkage rejoining is a process that has occurred much more often in prehistory than our largely divergence-oriented linguistic theories have allowed us to recognize, but it is one that has received little study.”

14.2.2.8

Emblematic features and acts of identity

This topic is relevant for the relationship between koinés and ‘ordinary’ languages. Ross defines (p. 232): “When a feature becomes associated with a particular group of speakers, it is said to be ‘emblematic’ of that group.” An example: In Indus-Kohistan I could observe that people could identify and localize within moments of listening to an unknown speaker his home in one of the valleys in the nearer or more distant surroundings. This is always due to tiny and accidentally generated innovations as linguistic emblems of the local community of a village or a valley. Ross adds: “I take it that such acts of identity can also hasten the processes of language fissure and lectal differentiation, although it is generally impossible to reconstruct the motivation itself.” On the other hand, emblematic features seem also be able to spread (op.cit. p. 233), in fact, Ross claims (p. 235) that “. . . apart from borrowed vocabulary . . . the only features which appear to spread across language boundaries in the absence of widespread bilingualism are salient, emblematic features . . . ” A small example: In the Gilgiti Shina language area south of the town of Gilgit, the Indus Kohistani dialect Š¯ at.o ¯t.¯ı is spoken in one village. Š¯ at.o ¯t.¯ı has abandoned the Indus Kohistani system of pitch accents and taken on the Shina system. Even though both systems actually are very similar the speakers of Indus Kohistani say that Š¯ at.o ¯t.¯ı sounds “funny” (Zoller 2005: 5). Such statements are not possible in case of koinés because emblematic features of that ilk and acts of regional identity are missing (or get systematically suppressed) in koinés.

Koineization Whereas emblematic features may be borrowed into neighbouring lects, thus leading to a certain degree of lectal levelling, “Koineization is also a levelling process, but its motivation

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.2. The Social Network Model

427

seems to be almost the opposite – namely, the avoidance of emblematic features. The classic case of koineization is the Hellenistic koiné of the Macedonian Empire. Ancient (pre-koiné) Greek formed a fairly complex and varied linkage of lects, one of which was Attic, the lect of Athens. During the Macedonian period, a form of Attic came to be used as the lingua franca of the empire, and continued in this function in the eastern Roman Empire. It was, however, in Hock’s words ‘de-atticized Attic’. . . Its emblematically Attic forms were eliminated in favour of forms that were emblematic of no particular lect . . . Koineization is not only an act of identity that rejects emblematic features, it is also a special case of reintegration, somewhere on the cline between language fusion and linkage rejoining, and one where some post-integration innovations are motivated by avoidance of emblematicity . . . Its identifying marks would be the irregular reflexes of proto-forms that result from mixing lectal forms that reflected the proto-language differently (e.g. as for language fusion), combined with the reduction in irregular grammatical forms that seems to be typical of koineization” (pp. 236-38). In the case of Greece, koineization happened through the historical process of dissolution of the Greek city states in the Macedonian Empire.7 A similar yet more complex and recurrent process happened in the history of the Indo-Aryan languages. This will be explained in the next section following the note. Note:8 There exist various definitions for the terms koiné and lingua franca which quite often either differ from each other or simply hold that both terms mean the same. Indeed, the terms seem to overlap. According to the definitions given by the German Duden editors, a koiné is ‘a language created by the leveling of dialect differences’ whereas a lingua franca is ‘an interlanguage of a larger multilingual space’. This means, koinés and lingua francas have different forms of genesis. Whereas a koiné is the outcome of a dialect selected, standardized and canonized (through standard grammar, canon of literature, etc.) within a community of speakers of closely related dialects, a lingua franca must and usually does not undergo this process of selection, standardization and canonization. On the contrary, speakers of a language A can agree with speakers of a language B to use any language C for their communication needs. Whereas a koiné has typically a touch of ‘elite’, like Sanskrit, there are among lingua francas – even though the term is used independently of the history and structure of such a language – also pidgins and creoles with inferior status like Pidgin English spoken in the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. But koinés and lingua francas share the feature that both can detach themselves from their original contexts. For instance, Sanskrit was and partly still is a koiné in the Dravidian language area. This leads to one more characteristic to be mentioned here: neither a koiné nor a lingua franca must be someone’s mother tongue. But what is about the very many ‘village dialects’ which are so characteristic for South Asia (and many other areas)? I suggest defining them negatively: they are neither koinés nor are they lingua francas, they are – languages. In this function, and under this perspective, a ‘village dialect’ from the Karakorum is, despite lack of detailed knowledge of its history, not necessarily less important for the reconstruction of the history of Indo-Aryan than Sanskrit is. Having clarified the terms koiné and lingua franca, I will now in the next section have a closer look at the great importance of a long succession of koinés for the history of Indo-Aryan languages.

7 For a a highly schematized diagram of a koineization process see Ross p. 237. 8 The following note is a partly modified excerpt from Zoller 2016.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

428

14.3

Chapter 14. General theories

Cultured koinés and country patois

14.3.0.1

Koineization and the so-called vernacularization

Uriel Weinreich (1953) defined a koiné as a standard language or dialect that has arisen as a result of contact between two or more mutually intelligible varieties (dialects) of the same language. This view, still widely held, is rejected here and the opposite definition by Ross as formulated in the previous section is used in this book. Once again, a koineization is a levelling process towards the avoidance of emblematic features, i.e. linguistic features characteristic for a specific language/dialect in a specific period and in a specific geographical region. Otherwise put, a koiné is a language that got ‘surgically’ removed of all spatiotemporal conditioning and dependencies. The prototypical koiné of South Asia is Sanskrit, the archetypal uncreated and eternal language which, from its timeless beginnings, set out – as described in great detail by Sheldon Pollock (2006) – to ultimately become a cosmopolitan language having metamorphosed from a liturgical idiom into a language of the arts, sciences and ‘secular’ political powers. Other South Asian koinés, discussed in more detail below, include Prakrit and Apabhramśa, ˙ and later medieval koinés (not discussed here) like Sadhukkar.¯ı, and in modern times e.g. Bhojpuri (see e.g. Mesthrie 1992), Fiji Hindi (see e.g. Barz and Siegel 1988), and I should also mention Urdu.9 The Middle and New Indo-Aryan koinés are less ‘ideal’ forms of a koiné from a South Asia point of view, first and foremost because they are not divine but human languages, and second, they do show (or at least seem to show) traces of spatio-temporal differences. However, the seemingly old and unresolvable philological problems in providing exact spatio-temporal definitions of e.g. Pali or Śaurasen¯ı are indirect testimony for great efforts in the past to ‘purify’ e.g. Pali or Śaurasen¯ı from their mundane spatio-temporal origins and relate them to Sanskrit either in terms of a religious counter-discourse (in case of Pali, Buddhism, see Pollock p. 51f.) or, in case of Śaurasen¯ı, by transforming the language into a sociolect to be used in drama literature by “the heroine and her female friends.” Pollock has, pace Cardona, rightly questioned the taken-for-granted view that Sanskrit was once a common spoken language (2006: 48f.): “It is significant, that, with the exception of the R¯ am¯ ayan.a, no remains of a nonsacral, this-worldly Sanskrit are extant from the early epoch of literacy (from the third century B.C.E. to, say, the first century C.E.), when, as some believe, Sanskrit was still supposed to have been an everyday idiom. . . It is not easy to believe that virtually every scrap of early evidence of such a usage has been lost. The materials from the early age of literacy are decidedly non- or un-Sanskrit, whereas everything in Sanskrit from this period indicates a radically delimited arena of use. . . Never in its history was Sanskrit the vehicle for memories of childhood and adolescence, or for a whole range of comparable life experiences associated with this-worldly language use. Sanskrit was never bound to the land, to the village, or to any specific regional community.” In his article on Early Sanskritization. Origins and Development of the Kuru State, Michael Witzel says that “[t]he emergence of the Kuru realm is of extraordinary importance as its civilization has influenced later Indian ritual, society and political formations, frequently 9 Urdu as a pivot point between Indo-Aryan and Persian – and itself certainly a good example for a koiné – raises here the question whether during the history of Iranian koinés developed in a way comparable to that in Indo-Aryan. Johnny Cheung (2013: 620, also fn. 20) points out that before the 9th Century, a form of New Persian developed in Khorasan into a koiné well before the language got exposed to the massive Arabian impact due to Islamization. And Brian Spooner and William Hanaway (2012) describe in detail the rise and fall of the Persian koiné which show little resemblance to the developments in Indo-Aryan.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.3. Cultured koinés and country patois

429

even until today.” In other words, this is the phase when Old Indo-Aryan in the shape of Sanskrit turned into a koiné. However, even if this was the most important koiné in the history of South Asian languages it was not the only one. A few centuries later, a competitor emerged and spread far and wide, namely so-called Buddhist Middle Indic as a new koiné which Bryan Levman (2010) calls a lingua franca.10 In other words, South Asia did not know just one koiné like the Mediterranean but, in fact, several at each stage of the historical development of Indo-Aryan. To assume that the few Prakrits listed by the grammarians are an authentic reflex of the North-Indian language map at that time is, to put it mildly, a wild and counter-intuitive conjecture. It is true that the grammarians probably didn’t know about Prakrit in Central Asia, but that doesn’t change their perspective in any particular way. In other words, our picture of the development from Old Indo-Aryan to New Indo-Aryan has largely been informed by the study of koinés and koiné-like languages. As we have seen above, a koinéization is a levelling process towards the avoidance of emblematic features. Accordingly, Levman (2010: 59) observes concerning Prakrit: “As early as 1916, Geiger surmised that it was a lingua franca containing elements of all dialects but free of the most conspicuous dialectal phenomena.” This can only mean that e.g. G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı language, whose corpus consists to the greatest part of Buddhist scriptures, reflects the actually spoken dialects of that area only very imperfectly. For many decades – at least from Bühler till Southworth – there has been a discussion how the ‘-e Prakrits’ and the ‘-o Prakrits’ reflect different dialect areas – with many different answers. However note what Richard Salomon has to say in the Encyclopedia Iranica about G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı: “G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı morphology is . . . similar to that of other MIA languages, but more flexible and less standardized. For example, the endings of the masculine and neuter nominative singular of noun stems in -a varies among -e, -o, -u, or -a, even within the same text, as a result of the neutralization of vowels in word final position with consequent graphic ambiguity . . . ” It would be wrong to assume that this levelling process faded out towards the end of the Middle Indo-Aryan period. H. C. Bhayani observes on Deśya words in Prakrit (1988: 150): “Many of these words are familiar to us from Prakrit and Apabhramśa ˙ literatures. They form a part of the common stock of the literary vocabulary and there is nothing regional or dialectal about them.” And Subasana Mahanta in her article on the ‘Braj¯ aval¯ı form of Early Assamese and Early Maithil¯ı’ writes (2015: 60): “[T]he role of Braj¯ aval¯ı diction in the languages used in medieval Indian Vais.n.ava literature has been significant. This is not a language spoken in any region; it is a literary form comprising elements of various languages prevalent in different regions of Northern India – Nepal, Orissa, Bengal and Assam were written in this form. However, regional differences of this form have also been evident.” Returning to Pollock, I would like to emphasize his argument that, as far as we can look back, there was always an opposition between the eternal Sanskrit, reserved for specific purposes which, however, expanded over the centuries, and demotic ‘Prakrit’ forms of everyday speech. Indeed, such a situation probably existed already much earlier than Pollock envisaged because, as Parpola notes (2002: 79): “According to the testimony of the numerous and partly very early Aryan loanwords in the Uralic (Finno-Ugric) languages spoken in the forest zone of eastern Europe . . . the Aryan proto-language was dialectally differentiated from the start.” Thus there existed already in Proto-Aryan a linkage of lects which, without doubt, continued into the time when Indo-Aryans entered South Asia. Only one of the lects of the linkage developed into the elevated role of the Sanskrit koiné. But, as we saw, this model had many emulators in the following millennia, because whenever once 10 But see the last note in the previous section regarding differences between lingua franca and koiné.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

430

Chapter 14. General theories

more one lect out of a linkage was elevated and ‘purified’ from its spatio-temporal origins, it nontheless continued to orbit around the central heavenly body called Sanskrit. Pollock defines ‘vernacularization’ (from Latin vernaculus ‘domestic, native, indigenous; pertaining to home-born slaves’) as “the term . . . for the literary and political promotion of local language” (2006: 283). We see that this definition is, on the one hand, not very different from koineization; it deviates from the koineization of Sanskrit in terms of its comparatively modest impact and its rather ‘secular’ agenda. And after all, its agenda was “to supplement and eventually supplant” (ibid.) the roles of older koinés. But on the other hand, even though ‘vernacularization’ implies no ‘purification’ from spatio-temporal origins but rather the opposite – namely the reinforcement of regional identity vis-à-vis Sanskrit cosmopolitism – Pollock observes correctly (2006: 287) that “. . . nowhere . . . has literature been coeval with its language, not even with its written form. The histories of vernacular languages in South Asia demonstrate this unequivocally, not least by the temporal gap mentioned earlier that separates the moment of literization, or the attainment of literacy,11 from the moment of literarization, or the attainment of literature – a gap that is often chronologically appreciable and always historically significant.” Also here we note a certain degree of decontextualization as the result of selecting one lect out of a linkage of lects but the regional tinge is clearly stronger than in Middle Indo-Aryan. As Pollock observes (2006: 295), the upcoming vernacular literatures “were modeled on Sanskrit” and (2006: 298) “. . . writing literarily can only emerge out of a matrix of other preexisting and dominant literatures.” Thus it is as if these new vernaculars also started to revolve around Sanskrit even though on a more distant orbit than the Middle Indo-Aryan languages. Yet, beyond this new horizon of literacy were and still are very many Indo-Aryan languages (linkages of lects) that failed, so-to-say, to undergo the two steps of literization and literarization. Pollock mentions (2006: 290) as examples Tulu and Konkan ˙ .¯ı but in fact most languages listed under the language abbreviations at the beginning of the present book belong to this category. In Ś¯ arad¯ atayana’s Bh¯ avaprak¯ aśa from the 12th Century eighteen Indian languages are enumerated which are said to be unfit for k¯ avya creation because they are mleccha ‘uncultured’ languages confined to the “domain of the sung, the unwritten, the oral” (Pollock 2006: 95, 299). But who were these people of song and verbal art? I suggest that they, or at least some of them, belonged to the counter-world versus Brahmanic erudition and courtly refinement. For instance, in his study of a recitation of a Tamang shaman in Nepal (1994), András Höfer contrasts on the one hand the persona of the shaman as a low-caste religious specialist with the typical persona of a high-caste Brahmin (he notes e.g. “the boisterous bonhomie of a ruffian versus the dignified reservedness of a priest” [p. 17]), and on the other, while discussing parallels to the low-caste Tamang religious specialists in other parts of South Asia, he notes in connection with the shaman’s “ornaments of the gods” (that is his ritual dress) that he shares this “. . . with a number of other specialists who are in a sense marginal: ascetics, exorcists and artists, the latter often of low-caste affiliation” (p. 70). Here I want to insist that Pollock’s vernacularization process must also be understood as a gradual opening of the religious and political elite towards ‘uncultured’ performers who typically spoke ‘uncultured’ languages. Thus the conclusion can hardly be avoided that most likely a large part of these ‘uncultured’ languages belong(ed) to the category of the Outer Languages whose characteristics are the main topic of this book. With regard to the relationship between Outer and Inner Languages I maintain that Inner Languages like Hindi are largely the outcome of Middle Indo-Aryan koinés whereas the Outer Languages are largely the outcome of Middle-Indo Aryan lects that originated from 11 Pollock here means textualization in the sense of acquiring the ability to write.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.3. Cultured koinés and country patois

431

Old Indo Aryan lects different from Vedic. Moreover, I maintain that the Outer Languages got influenced to different degrees by Inner Languages and their respective cultures, but I will also show that the inverse influence from Outer on Inner Languages can be shown with first traces already found in the beginning of the Middle Indo Aryan period. I aim to support this linguistic model with cultural data that are connected with my understanding of the distinction between the ‘little’ and the ‘great’ tradition. This distinction is certainly not equivalent with the opposition of Outer and Inner Languages even though there are points of contact. But the so-called little traditions are, for me, not ‘little’ in the sense of Robert Redford or Milton Singer by maintaining that the ‘little’ traditions imbibe cultural knowledge from the great tradition. They cannot also be grasped by such questions as A. K. Ramanujan’s “What happens when classical myths are borrowed and retold by folk performers?” (see Zoller 2001). The relationship between the two in India is rather one of mutual mirroring. I illustrate this principle by way of example below with a short discussion of professional musicians in the Himalayas whose socio-cultural functions have been labelled as ‘the Brahmanness of the Shudras’ (see p. 629). Right here I can exemplify my view with a small example that has been discussed by Pollock (2006: 302f.): The illustrious C¯ al.ukya king Someśvara III (1044-68) was a great promoter of Kannada literature, but he is also thought to have composed the Sanskrit Mah¯ ak¯ avya with the title Vikram¯ ank¯ ˙ abhyudaya. Both activities illustrate, according to Pollock (ibid.), the king’s efforts for fostering local identity (in form of promotion of Kannada literature) and for Sanskrit cosmopolitanism (in form of writing a Mah¯ ak¯ avya). In other words, Pollock sees this king as an example for acting at the intersection of the, back then, not anymore very new trend for vernacularization and local identity, and for the old ideal of Sanskrit cosmopolitanism: “The same ecumenical impulse seems to have prompted Someśvara to record and define the full range of cultural practices . . . from across India, from Bihar and Orissa to Maharashtra and Gujarat. The king clearly meant to show that he knew the whole world of culture and the character and proper place of each item within it, that he was indeed a true cosmopolitan of the vernaculars.” All this strikingly resembles the ways of the royal deity Mah¯ asu who rules a little kingdom in the Himalayas. That he too is located at the intersection of local identity and ‘cosmopolitanism’ finds expression during the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı festival dOkna can ‘dance of the



drummer’ (Zoller 2014). Various performances of ballads and oral epics explain the origin of the world and the establishment of various customs, and they celebrate Mah¯ asu as the successor of the P¯ an.d.avas and Kauravas (who were the successors of the giants, the first generation rulers). The festival is basically staged as an entertainment for the royal god in order to show him the world ‘how it is’. All this is framed by the singing of outlandishsounding Krishna love songs,12 and the festival includes on the last day a performance of the wives of the professional musicians during which they mockingly imitate the speeches of neighbouring districts. In a nutshell, Mah¯ asu lives a courtly life as a local ruler, but he is well-informed about the whole world around him. The sum of the contents of the above two sections with regard to the relationship between Outer Languages and koiné’s can be presented thus: Outer Languages: −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−→ prehistoric → historic Inner Languages: → prehistoric −−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−→ historic

12 There is no Krishna worship far and wide.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

432

Chapter 14. General theories

14.4

The cultural character of the high mountains in South Asia

14.4.1

Zomia highland

Since a large number of languages quoted in the present book – among them the most important for the basic theses of the book – are found in mountainous terrain, it is also important to understand their relationship with the great languages of the North Indian plains. The mountain patois spoken in the huge area of Zomia 13 can be, at least approximately, contrasted with the koinés of the plains. From Wikipedia we learn we learn Zomia is a geographical term coined in 2002 by historian Willem van Schendel of the University of Amsterdam . . . to refer to the huge mass of mainland Southeast Asia that has historically been beyond the control of governments based in the population centers of the lowlands . . . Professor James C. Scott of Yale University used the concept of Zomia in his 2009 book Yhe Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia to argue that the continuity of the ethnic cultures living there provides a counter-narrative to the traditional story about modernity: namely, that once people are exposed to the conveniences of modern technology and the modern state, they will assimilate. Rather, the tribes in Zomia are conscious refugees from modernity itself, choosing to live in more primitive, locally based economies. From his preface: [Hill tribes] seen from the valley kingdoms as ‘our living ancestors,’ ‘what we were like before we discovered wet-rice cultivation, Buddhism, and civilization’ [are on the contrary] best understood as runaway, fugitive, maroon communities who have, over the course of two millennia, been fleeing the oppressions of state-making projects in the valleys – slavery, conscription, taxes, corvée labor, epidemics, and warfare.14 Scott goes on to add that Zomia15 is the biggest remaining area of earth whose inhabitants have not been completely absorbed by nation-states, although that time is coming to an end. While Zomia is exceptionally diverse linguistically, the languages spoken in the hills are distinct from those spoken in the plains. Kinship structures, at least formally, also distinguish the hills from the lowlands. Hill societies do produce “a surplus”, but they do not use that surplus to support kings and monks. Distinction of status and wealth abound in the hills, as in the valleys. The difference is that in the valleys they tend to be enduring, while in the hills they are both unstable and geographically confined.” I add here some more relevant quotes from Scott’s book before I comment on his and van Schendel’s theses: P. 21 f.: Compare Braudel’s bold assertion that civilizations can’t climb hills to a nearly identical assertion made by Oliver Wolters, quoting Paul Wheatley, 13 This term means ‘highland’ and is used in Tibeto-Burman languages like Mizo or Kuki-Chin. Zomia is “the world’s largest mountain range” (van Schendel 2002: 654). 14 This quote is found 2009: ix. 15 See the map, originally published in The Journal of Global History (2010: 187), showing the outline of Zomia on the next page.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.4. The cultural character of the high mountains in South Asia

Figure 14.1: Zomia according to van Schendel (2002) and (2007).a a Courtesy Cambridge University Press.

about precolonial Southeast Asia: ‘Many people lived in the distant highlands and were beyond the reach of the centers where records survive. The mandalas [court centers of civilization and power] were a phenomenon of the lowlands and even there, geographical conditions encouraged under-government. Paul Wheatley puts it well when he notes that ‘the Sanskritic tongue was stilled to silence at 500 meters. P. 24: Regarding widespread ‘illiteracy’ Scott writes: “Virtually all hill peoples have legends claiming that they once had writing and either lost it or that it was stolen from them. Given the considerable advantages in plasticity of oral over written histories and genealogies, it is at least conceivable to see the loss of literacy and of written texts as a more or less deliberate adaptation to statelessness. The argument, in short, is that the history of hill peoples is best understood as a history not of archaic remnants but of “runaways” from state-making processes in the lowlands: a largely “maroon” society, providing that we take a very long historical view. P. 251: The great distinction, culturally, between the valley kingdoms and the hills is the striking uniformity of valley society religiously, linguistically, and, over time, ethnically as well . . . One could travel hundreds of miles within the padi [rice] state and still encounter religious practices, architecture, class structures, forms of governance, dress, language, and ritual that were strikingly similar from one end to the other. By contrast, traveling even a short distance in the hills would expose one to a crazy-quilt of languages, rituals, and identities [but this

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

433

434

Chapter 14. General theories

is not just a matter of a dual contrast:] . . . This cultural distinction not only marks off the hills from the great valley kingdoms of the Burmese, Thai, Han, and Vietnamese; it is just as notable in the contrast between the Shan statelets and their hilly neighbors. As suggested at the beginning of this section, the above selected quotes are indirectly yet closely related with the distinction between mountainous patois (free and untamed) and plains koinés (controlled and standardized). Paralleling the criticism of Blench and Spriggs (p. 419), and Toulmin (p. 419) against philologists’ predilection for written and elite literature, also van Schendel is critical for the widespread trend in anthropology, sociology etc. to concentrate on the “heartlands and centres of power and change” (2002: 661). It is almost needless to say that not only presently but also in the past, Zomia has and had states. Van Schendel notes (2002: 654): “In the past, Zomia was a centre of state formation (for example, the Nanzhao kingdom in Yunnan, Tibetan states, the Ahom kingdom in Assam), but today its prime political characteristic is that it is relegated to the margins of ten valley-dominated states with which it has antagonistic relationships.” Van Schendel modifies this statement somewhat by saying (ibid) that a certain exception is Bhutan with a local elite, however, an elite that is heavily controlled by India. Yet, van Schendel and Scott have a valid point: contrary to an evolutionistic concept of state formation, one has also to recognize the very many movements of resistance and escape against the seizure of the state or an all-encompassing ideology or religion. On the other hand, the opposition of plains versus mountains appears too simplistic to me. Large parts of Pakistan’s Balochistan, FATA, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Gilgit-Baltistan – which are only partly mountainous – constitute an area with state elements either limited or even absent. Or take mountainous Afghanistan with government control recently (2017) roughly over two-third of the country (Al Jazeera).16 Also the claim that the populations of Zomia typically consist of refugees and runaways appears too simplistic. There exist clues that speakers of Nuristani and Dardic languages have long ago been pushed into the high mountains of Hindukush and Karakoram, there is much evidence for the presently occurring strong pressure on the ‘heathen’ Kalasha by encroaching Muslims in the Hindukush (see A. S. Cacopardo 2016), and there exist many written and oral traditions that people (e.g. elite from Rajasthan) fled into the Himalayas from invading Muslims. Again it is also needless to say that also many peoples found their ways into the mountains of their own free will and not through outside coercion. Scott’s above-quoted thesis that refugees heading towards the mountains not infrequently lost literacy in the course of adaptation to statelessness which gave them “advantages in plasticity of oral over written histories” is just questionable. His observation that those hill people frequently relate stories about their former literacy reminds me of stories I heard frequently in the Himalayas about hidden (sacred) books which seem never to have existed, and it reminds me of widespread stories among lowcaste professional musicians about their former high-caste status.17 Scott’s concern about loss of literacy appears to be motivated by a fear that this loss would entail loss 16 https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2016/08/afghanistan-controls160823083528213.html 17 However, there are occasionally cases where such claims are not unfounded (see Zoller 2016b).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.5. Excursus: The “Gandh¯ ara thesis”

435

of literature. This is, of course, out of the way as one finds between Hindukush and Himalayas many places with an enormous wealth of oral literatures. Also his idea of (greater) plasticity – that is to say, manipulability – of oral over written histories is not supported by the facts (see e.g. Cacopardo and Schmidt 2006). His emphasis on valley uniformity versus mountain diversity can, of course, be easily demonstrated with reference to the fact that the greatest number of languages in South Asia are found in the mountains between Western Himalayas and Hindu Kush. This distinction also includes the fact – shown through very many data in the present book – that the “crazy-quilt of languages, rituals, and identities” includes also many more linguistic archaisms and innovations than found in the great languages of the plains where much of both trends has been leveled. Despite various criticisms against specific points presented by Scott, the theory of Zomia is all in all convincing and it supports my own theory of Outer and Inner Languages and increases its plausibility.

14.5

Excursus: The “Gandh¯ ara thesis”

I have decided to add here a small section on the topic of the Gandh¯ ara thesis since it deals with the question of orality which holds a central place in the present book. Basically the Gandh¯ ara thesis, set up by Michael Witzel and Steve Farmer (see Witzel 2011), claims that canonization of the Vedas as well as abstract philosophical and linguistic thinking in Indian antiquity is due to the import of script and literacy by the Achaemenids shortly after Gandh¯ ara became part of the empire in the second half of the 5th Century BC. Since the thesis is obviously closely related with the aboveintroduced concepts of koineization and vernacularization, the question arises whether the Gandh¯ ara thesis, in case the thesis proves to be robust, can contribute to our understanding of koineization and vernacularization. But first a few general sentences on Gandh¯ ara and the Achaemenid empire. The historian A. B. Bosworth writes about Gandh¯ ara under the Achaemenids (1996: 154): “Under the Achaemenids there were three Indian satrapies: Gandhara, Thataguš (Sattagydia), and Hinduš. Their control of the Indus valley was probably short-lived in fact, but, as with Maka (Oman) they never relinquished their claims to sovereignty, and all three satrapies figure consistently in the friezes and lists of subject peoples. Gandhara seems to have had closer ties than the rest, and, if not subject to Darius, the area was certainly allied and sympathetic.” Pollock’s two steps of literization and literarization (p. 430) characterizing the process of vernacularization – which is similar to the process of koineization – are certainly not only found in South Asia but describe a common and general development in many pre-modern cultures. But according to the Gandh¯ ara thesis, the history of the corpus of the four Vedas is different. They define the Gandh¯ ara thesis in the following way (p. 13): “In brief, our thesis entails that the canonization of the Vedas (e.g., involving the first formation of pada texts and the underlying grammatical analysis), abstract developments in Vedic thought seen in late layers of the Br¯ ahman.as, and critical developments in P¯ an.ini-style linguistics can all be pictured as secondary effects of the initial introduction of literacy into India via Gandh¯ ara during the early Persian era.” I present now various statements found in the article – together with some comments from my side – that are relevant for answering the above question: the Rg-veda and the other three Vedas were compiled under the Kuru kings around 1000  © 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

436

Chapter 14. General theories

BC, but even after that date small phonetic changes took place until the final redaction took place shortly before P¯ an.ini (ca. 350 BC) (p. 2). The final redaction took place in the extreme east (Bihar) and in the northwest, i.e. in Gandh¯ ara where there was a weak structure of Persian rule (p. 3).18 P¯ an.ini’s As.t.a ¯dhyay¯ı “was composed orally and taught orally” even though the grammarian knew of the existence of script and books (p. 4). On the same page it is stated: “The Persians are known to have exerted strong bureaucratic pressure on subjugated peoples with regard to local text collection, something not appreciated by Brahmins, who so far had enjoyed a monopoly on sacred texts.” It would have been helpful if this statement had been documented with historical sources (especially regarding Gandh¯ ara), but the following point is undisputed: the development of the Kharos.t.h¯ı script was based on the Aramaic script and the Kharos.t.h¯ı alphabet had similarities with the Aramaic alphabet and not with the Indian one (Śivas¯ utras) (p. 9). On p. 14 it is stated: “the evolution of the extreme Indian mnemonics used to canonize the Vedas developed in the northwest as a “counter literacy” of sorts, grounded in older and less extreme mnemonic techniques, but then (by the 5th cent. BCE) introduced by Brahmins to protect their ritual traditions from the threats of literacy emanating from the Persian conquests.” If the Vedas had already been transmitted at least for 500 years more or less unchanged one wonders what kind of threat literacy posed to the oral tradition causing the development of such extreme mnemonic techniques, and it is equally difficult to understand when after so many centuries of practically unchanged oral tradition the canonization should be “linked directly or indirectly to literate forces spread by the vast Persian empire with their use of light-weight writing materials” (ibid.). On p. 17 again the central claim of the Gandh¯ ara thesis is taken up: “indirect influence of writing on linguistic and phonological developments in northwestern India after c. 500 BCE looms large: here, Aramaic was used, the earliest truly Indian script, Kharos.t.h¯ı, was invented, and the most sophisticated Indian linguistic tradition (P¯ an.ini) evolved.” Again it remains unclear why these changes were caused by the introduction of script. If introduction of script has such far-reaching consequences, one wonders about the lack of a linguistic tradition in Persia comparable with the Indian tradition and when, at the same time, according to Hartmut Scharfe (quoted p. 7), the style of writing of the Avesta was due to Indian grammatical influence and not vice versa. On p. 17f. it is pointed out that the first Sanskrit inscriptions are not found in Gandh¯ ara but in Ayodhya, Mathura and the Deccan just before the beginning of our era whereas written text in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı language stem from the beginning of our era – as if there are no Ashoka edicts in G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı language. Despite all these facts, Witzel and Farmer repeat on p. 18 again their thesis that all this “certainly does not prove, but also does not entirely disallow, that someone did in fact use Aramaic or Kharos.t.h¯ı for writing down Vedic texts or P¯ an.inean grammar” which could have been used as a shortcut or a memory aide. Regrettably, all this reminds one of the lost libraries of the Indus Civilization.

18 This seems to be supported by the fact, mentioned p. 17, that no written documents of the Persian occupation of Gandh¯ ara have been found. In addition, one should be aware that degree and range of control of states in antiquity cannot at all be compared with modern states. Very frequently, authority could be effectively exercised only in a moderate range around the capitals. Thus, there certainly existed between the state-controlled areas also large inhabited regions with state elements either limited or even absent. And this view even does not take into account the role of steep and high geography (for more on these issues see Samuel 2005: 27-51 and 150ff, and on the role of the vertical dimension see p. 432.)

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

14.5. Excursus: The “Gandh¯ ara thesis”

437

Basically the Gandh¯ ara thesis, as set up by Witzel and Farmer, claims that canonization of the Vedas as well as abstract philosophical and linguistic thinking is due to the import of script and literacy by the Achaemenids shortly after Gandh¯ ara became part of the empire in the second half of the 5th Century. The nature of this thesis reminds one of the work of Walter Ong. His thesis was that the invention of script gave people not only a practical technical tool but that this invention also led to significant changes in human thinking consequently leading to deep cultural and social changes. According to Ong, ‘oral societies’ are characterized e.g. by the following features: rather aggregative than analytic, rather emphatic-participatory than distantobjective, rather situative than abstract. On the other hand, societies with written literature are characterized e.g. by the following features: greater distance between author and reader, emphasis on the visual, precision and multiplicity of detail, richer vocabulary, etc. Ong’s linear-progressivistic model is a variant form of a whole bunch of anthropological models distinguishing between ‘pre-logical’ mentality discovered in ‘primitive’ societies and ‘logical’ mentality typical for technically ‘advanced’ societies. Well-known representatives for this are e.g. Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Claude Lévi-Strauss and Norbert Elias (for more on this topic see e.g. Verrips 1994). In my opinion, such distinctions are untenable for the most part, and all of them have been criticized by others as being deterministic and informed by Western concepts of progression. In any case, right from the introduction of script in South Asia until today, the subcontinent was characterized both by orality and writing and by complex interactions between the two, and there is no doubt that the high regard for oral transmission has never lost its great importance. In conclusion, the Gandh¯ ara thesis is not helpful in explaining processes of koineization and vernacularization. Even though Middle and New Indo-Aryan koinés and koiné-like languages were and are interlinked with literacy, literacy is not a constituting factor even though it furnishes them with characteristic features. A more realistic and plausible thesis regarding the Iranian-Indian interactions during the Achaemenids would be based on Paul Hacker’s concept of Inklusivismus (see Oberhammer 1983). What I mean can be illustrated with a quote from Abdul Samad who writes about the archaeological site Kashmir Smast in the Mardan Valley in Northern Pakistan (2010: 4): “Kashmir Smast shows a strong and lively Hindu substructure in an apparently predominantly Buddhist cultured region. This had been supposed by many sculptural evidences and Kus.a ¯n.a numismatic iconography, but Kashmir Smast now leads the way to comprehending the syncretistic character of Gandh¯ aran Hindu Art. Besides the expected Śaiva there have been found Vais.n.ava, Buddhist and even Iranian Zoroastrian traces and the whole complex was also known under the name: ahuramayza-nagara “town of Ahura Mazd¯ a” (Falk 2003, 2006). This hybrid compound ahuramayza-nagara suggests inclusivism and not strong bureaucratic pressure. And script was not introduced in the area with the effect of fertilizing scientific spirit, for which there is no evidence, but probably just to increase the efficiency of administration. It is simply not imaginable that a substantial oral tradition like the Indian could have seriously been intimidated by the Persian writing culture, particularly since the latter was exclusively a chancellery tradition. And of course, the native Zoroastrian religion was handed down orally, as in India. Finally, there don’t exist any clues whether there was ever anything written except inscriptions and documents.19 19 The last three sentences summarize the opinion of Almuth Degener (pers. comm.) with which I fully agree.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 15 Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

15.1

Old and Middle Indo-Aryan

We know about the languages of ancient Europe that, for example, ancient Greek of the second and first millennium BC included a large number of dialects (see Woodard [2008: 50ff.]).Even though there is no direct evidence for a comparable situation in Vedic and pre-Vedic north India, the situation there cannot have been much different from ancient Greece and also there must have existed a plurality of Indo-Aryan dialects with Vedic just one of them. That Vedic itself contained dialectal differences is known since a long time (Cardona [in Cardona and Jain 2003: 18], Witzel 1989, etc.) but it was always assumed that Vedic is the only vanishing point for the comprehensive reconstruction of the history of Indo-Aryan. However, as already pointed out, this is to a large extend the reconstruction of the history of Indo-Aryan koinés. And even though authors like Masica are aware of “exceptions to the mainstream developments” the opinion of the majority of the community is that everything Indo-Aryan goes ultimately back to Vedic – including reconstructed forms of younger periods. I do not share this opinion but I can understand it. It is the consequence of the conjuncture that the ideas of Hoernle and Grierson – later taken up by Southworth – were actually brilliant but all three tried to substantiate them with largely faulty arguments and inadequate data. But this is not all, also their critics repeated some of those faulty arguments because none of them made a clear distinction between linguistic features marking dialect differences within (later stages of) Vedic OIA and other features marking dialect differences between Vedic OIA and other OIAs. This will be done in detail in the section after next but here just two examples which demonstrate what I mean: (1) the later reflexes of OIA r in form  of different vowels are found in different regions but are sometimes also phonetically motivated (namely when followed by i or u), i.e. they are basically normal isoglosses and have nothing to do with the Inner-Outer Language distinction because everything goes back to Vedic OIA. But if we find in such NIA languages which phonologically distinguish between n and n. words with n where the OIA correspondence has an n. going back to *n, then one should be suspicious that this difference may possibly reflect a difference between a Vedic OIA dialect with specific cases of n > n. and an OIA dialect different from Vedic where this particular innovation has not taken place. But let us first look now at the reactions of Cardona, Masica and Chatterji to the Hoernle/Grierson model.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

440

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

15.1.1

Cardona and Masica

George Cardona (2003: 19) notes that New Indo-Aryan languages surely can be differentiated into groups, but only in terms of geography, i.e. into northwestern, southeastern etc. On the other hand, he points out that previous attempts to correlate these groupings with a linguistic family tree have largely failed. He continues discussing Griersons model of outer, mediate and inner sub-branches (he does not mention Hoernle, the actual initiator of this idea), he mentions Southworth’s attempt to revive the old thesis,1 then mentions S. K. Chatterji’s objections against the relevance of the -l- formant (which I discuss further below), and finally arrives at the diplomatic conclusion (op.cit. p. 19) that he thinks “it fair to say that these conclusions are not sufficiently backed up by detailed facts about the chronology of changes to merit their being accepted as established.” Masica devotes even sixteen pages (1991, Appendix II) to the controversy and shows clearly all the weaknesses of the different attempts for classifying IA whether under the perspective of the Outer-Inner thesis or under the orthodox perspective. On p. 450 he lists four criteria that were used by Grierson to support his thesis and that were heavily criticized by Chatterji. Masica calls the criteria “a mixed bag of phonetic, morphological, and what would have to be called typological characteristics.” They are partly identical with Hoernle’s: Inner preservation of s (< s, ś, s.) vs. Outer substitution of other sounds (typically h), Inner loss vs. Outer retention of final short vowels2 , Inner past suffix -i- vs. Outer -l-, “analytic” Inner Languages vs. “synthetic” Outer Languages. This is followed by a list of Chatterji’s eight objections (ibid.): (1) Some Outer features are late, e.g. the Past in -l-, whereas the opposition with past suffix -i- was supposed to go back to OIA; (2) certain features are not found in all Outer Languages like the Past -l-; (3) the features (1) and (2) are also found in some Inner Languages; (4) the features simply reflect stages through which all NIA languages have passed; (5) in some cases the coincidences are superificial, e.g. in case of depalatalization of affricates caused by contact with Dravidian and Tibeto-Burman; (6) they result from universal phonological tendencies like s > h; (7) they represent a heterogeneous collection of features: Mar¯ at.h¯ı s > ś before front vowels is not the same as s > h which is not the same as s, ś, s. > s;3 (8) referring to Grierson’s fourth criterion: opposition between “agglutinative” and “synthetic” cannot be correlated in any way with an Outer-Inner Languages opposition and is anyway not relevant for genetic sub-classification. One sees, Chatterji’s critique was hefty enough to prevent a further discussion of the thesis for almost a century (more exactly from 1926 to 2005 [or 2003 if one wants]) because all those who made subsequent efforts – besides Chatterji himself e.g. Turner, Katre, Cardona, Nigam – contented themselves with suggestions for sub-classifications that all ultimately derive from Vedic OIA. Indeed, this turned out to be difficult enough for a multitude of reasons all mentioned in Masica’s Appendix which therefore do not need to be repeated here. I will also not repeat them here because the present book does nowhere attempt to draw yet another IA language map on the basis of OIA-derived isoglosses. Yet, I want to clarify here that Chatterji’s critique is itself critizable in a few points. It is an unjust simplification to speak of a Past -l- because this obliterates the 1 His book on linguistic archaeology was not yet published at the time of the appearance of Cardona and Jain’s book, but Cardona knew the manuscript. 2 Masica rightly remarks that this is a rather recent phenomenon. 3 For me this argument is confusing and I have no idea which culprit should have made the claim that these three processes are the same.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.1. Old and Middle Indo-Aryan

441

distinction between the PIE-inherited OIA -l- suffix and the MIA -illa/alla/ulla- suffix whose origin no-one so far has clarified. Chatterji rightly rejects the direct equation of the MIA suffix with the Slavic -l- suffix and instead he seems to assume that the MIA suffix just substitutes older OIA suffixes. However, the conclusion to say that this cannot be an Outer Language marker because it is not found in OIA is of course a fallacy because had it been part of Vedic OIA it could not simultaneously be an Outer Language marker. But since I show in below (see p. 237) that the MIA suffix is indeed of PIE ancestry, it is certainly an Outer Language marker. Also points (2) and (3) lose their relevance if one is ready to accept my proposal that the New Indo Aryan languages can only be classified into ‘more Outer Language than Inner Language’ and vice versa. This suggestion is somewhat similar to Grierson’s claim that Panjabi, R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı and Gujar¯ at¯ı were Inner Languages but superimposed on an Outer Language substratum (Masica 1991: 448). Point (5) is partly incorrect: Apart from a possible influence of Tibeto-Burman on the Eastern Bengali affricates, I cannot see why Southern Oriya dialects should have been influenced by Telugu whose affricates are characterized as palato-alveolar and not as dental-alveolar; also in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı where depalatalization is widespread, there is absolutely no indication of Tibeto-Burman influence and in my eyes this is rather a very old process going back to Indo-Iranian: many of these languages have phonological contrasts c˙ vs. č which they share with a number of West Himalayish and East Iranian languages.4 Southworth’s book Linguistic Archaeology of South Asia (2005a), which appeared after the critiques of Masica and Cardona, offers on the one hand a more sophisticated model of the Outer and Inner Languages than his predecessors by adding some new arguments (chapters 5 and 6).5 On the other hand, most of them too fail to fulfill the theoretical requirements formulated above (p. 16). For instance, new is his discussion of gerundive, nominal and future forms based on OIA -(i)tavya- (p. 136ff.). But this runs into the same difficulties: it cannot be linked with an unambiguous distinction between Outer and Inner Languages understood in the sense that the Outer Languages reflect an OIA dialect different from Vedic. As is well-known, Awadh¯ı has an infinitive in -b¯ a. The same infinitive is also found in some dialects of R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı but not in all. It is also found in the Chinali variety of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı but not in the other varieties. More promising is his discussion of i and u (p. 139f.) which do not show length contrast in Mar¯ a.h¯ı, Gujar¯ at¯ı, Konkan ˙ .¯ı, Old Bengali, Maithil¯ı, Or.iy¯ a and Assamese. I can add here as examples from the northwest Nuristani Waigal¯ı (Degener 1998: 29) and Dardic Kalasha (Heegård 2015: 33) where in both languages only the vowel a displays length contrast. On the other hand, Kashmiri has i and u length contrasts but they seem to underlie various restrictions (Kelkar and Trisal 1964: 18, Kaul and Wali 2006: 9). Also Bang¯ an.¯ı does have i and u length contrasts but these may have been reintroduced at some time as is suggested by allomorphs like i
s@r, 
s@r ‘lord’ (OIA ¯ıśvara). Since the phenomenon (significantly reduced number of vocalic length contrasts) is found between Nuristani and Assamese and since it is obviously not inherited, it seems to reflect a feature of an OIA dialect different from Vedic. In the discussion of the inherited OIA word accent (p. 140ff.) Southworth shows an innovation of an initial accent rule in Mar¯ at.h¯ı and Bengali which is reflected in certain vowel lengthenings not found in other languages. Here we have again the 4 For the latter see Skjærvø (1989a: 371). 5 See also the review by Leonid Kulikov 2007 [2008].

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

442

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective same problem. Nothing similar is found in the northwest.6 Basically the same holds good for the change l > n (p. 142ff.). This process and the initial accent rule appear to be very old, still they are post-Vedic. Summing up, diagnostic for the thesis of the Outer and Inner Languages as having developed out of a non-Vedic dialect and the Vedic dialect, are only two features from among the features discussed by Southworth: the MIA -illa/alla/ulla- suffix and i and u lacking length oppositions. This is not much but it is supplemented by additional features and data mentioned and discussed already above and discussed in detail below with large amounts of data. Since Southworth is, like me, an advocate of the Inner-Outer thesis, it is useful to see how he conceptualizes it in terms of history. He suggests two different scenarios, one of a northern versus southern immigration and another of an earlier versus later immigration. For me, the second scenario is now definitely more plausible than the first. He says (2005a: 181): “By 1500 BCE, when the first hymns of the Rigveda are believed to have been composed, that portion of the Indo-Aryan speech community which was associated with the OIA texts was located in the upper Indus Valley. . . Given the archaeological evidence for intrusive Central Asian elements on the lower Indus . . . it can only be assumed that OIA speakers also occupied this area by the end of the second millennium BCE . . . as the OIA ‘mainstream’ society expanded eastward across the Indo-Gangetic divide. . . its counterpart in Sindh probably did the same, following the route mentioned here, leading to Malwa, Gujarat, and the Deccan.” According to Southworth’s model, the southern migration movement turned south and ultimately east towards the eastern limits of the subcontinent, and both (language) movements met and mixed in the transitional area of Kosala (Avadh). In an article published in the same year as the book, Southworth, instead of referring to the geographical character of his understanding of the Inner and Outer Languages, suggests a temporal model (2005b: 8): “The language of the Rigveda, the oldest known form of Indo-Aryan, is datable to about 1500 BCE at the earliest. The proposed identification of Marathi speakers7 with the Jorve culture would imply that speakers of Indo-Aryan had already entered the Deccan at a time when the composers of the Rigvedic hymns were still located in the Panjab.If this were the case, then the assumed passage of the ‘outer group’ languages through Sindh would have had to begin at least several centuries earlier, say by 1800–1700 BCE, and the earliest stage, represented by the more widely shared words discussed in section 2 above, would need to be placed in the neighborhood of 2100–2000 BCE, implying that ‘outer group’ Indo-Aryan speakers entered the Indus Valley before the end of the Indus Civilization. While this is not impossible, there is no evidence to support such an assumption at present. Further work on reconstructing the earliest forms of the Indo-Aryan lexicon on the basis of the spoken language may help to provide light on this subject.” 8

6 On the other hand, the Vedic accent has partially survived as such (see above p. 188). It has also partially survived at the opposite end of the world of Indo-Aryan in Chittagongian (see above p. 193) and in Rohingya language (see above p. 196), which indeed is a strong argument in favor of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages. 7 “The Mitanni treaty of 1380 BCE mentions major Rigvedic gods, and shows a linguistic stage slightly older than the RV; the end of the Indus Civilization around 1900 BCE is presumed to have preceded the oldest RV hymns. Since the Sarasvati, which dried progressively after the mid second millennium BCE, is described as a mighty stream in the Rigveda, the earliest RV hymns must have been composed by about 1500 BCE” (Witzel 1995: 97-8). 8 The Jorwe culture is a Deccan Chalcolithic culture located in Ahmednagar district.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.1. Old and Middle Indo-Aryan

15.1.2

443

Hoernle’s map and its successors

The first scholar who formulated the model of the Outer and Inner Languages due to two waves of immigration was August Friedrich Rudolf Hoernle in his 1880 publication Comparative grammar of the Gaudian languages. It was later taken up, with some reservations, by Abraham Grierson (LSI i,i: 116ff.). Hoernle spoke of earlier and later “immigrants” either of which could be the ancestors of one of the two branches, though he tended to the view that the Outer Languages were associated with the earlier “immigrants” (Masica 1991: 448). Hoernle points out (1880: xxi): I have spoken of the Apabhram . s.a or Aryan vernacular. But it must not be supposed that it was everywhere identical. The Aryan immigration gradually extended over an area, too wide to remain the home of one single form of speech. Accordingly the term Apabhram . s.a must be understood to be the collective name of several Aryan vernaculars, spoken in various parts of North India. It is invariably used in this sense by Pr. grammarians. They always define it to mean the language of “the Abhíras and other similar people’[here Hoernle quotes some grammarian sources], i.e., briefly, of the lower orders. . . Thus it appears from philological considerations not less than geographical ones, that, at some former period of its history, North India was divided between two great forms of speech, which I call respectively the S.aurasení tongue and the Mágadhí tongue (op.cit. p. xxxif.) Hoernle regards, if I understand him correctly, “Mágadhí” as a reflex of the earlier immigration of people later regarded as belonging to the “lower orders”, and later understood to be part of the Outer Languages, which originally covered the whole of North-West India, and “S.aurasení” as a reflex of the later immigration, later called the Inner Languages, which divided the original language landscape like a wedge. Grierson accepted Hoernle’s thesis by and large (ibid.), but objected that the linguistic differences could also be due to a long-lasting immigration with earlier and later immigrants speaking different dialects of the same language. Here follows now a short recapitulation of the development of the visual conceptualization of the structure of New Indo-Aryan. The first is Hoernle’s map, followed by Gierson’s. For several other maps see Masica (1991: 451ff.)Among them, I find Cardona’s classification (1991: 455) the most realistic and closest to my own model (it does not divide Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı as Grierson, Chatterji, Turner and Katre do which is, in my view, unjustified). And finally there is a recreation of the original graphics by Southworth (2005a: 182) of his concept of a northern and a southern immigration. As pointed out, he also developed an alternative temporal model of successive immigrations which coincides with my own understanding. Instead of the other models I suggest the following model. The above map in three colors is to be read: the small green area in the northwest is the homeland of Nuristani and Dardic. The other Outer Languages do not have an own homeland because they and the Inner Languages are found in the same geographical area of the northern parts of South Asia. This map is neither a historical family tree nor a synchronic two-dimensional language map. It does not claim to display a specific moment in the history from OIA to NIA but endeavors to convey the underlying idea of the relationship between Outer and Inner Languages. Therefore it is three-dimensional. In the blue areas typical Outer Language features dominate and thus reflect the older OIA

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

444

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

Figure 15.1: Hoernle: Northern, Southern, Western and Eastern Gaudian (1880)

Figure 15.2: Grierson: Outer, Inner and Mediate Sub-Branches (1930)

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.1. Old and Middle Indo-Aryan

445

Figure 15.3: The immigration model based on Southworth (2005a: 182) layer, whereas in the crimson areas typical Inner Language features dominate and thus reflect the younger OIA layer. Changes of shadings of the blue from darker to lighter are meant to suggest a decrease in the number of Outer Language features from (north-) west to (south-)east. One can see areas where both colors interpenetrate and there are squirts of crimson all over the bluish area intended to illustrate the impact of the Inner Language over the whole Outer Language area. Thus, the map is designed to show that there is no clear distinction between Outer and Inner Languages: an individual language is either more Outer and less Inner Language or vice versa, depending on the amount of typical Outer Language features characterizing that individual language. Thus, when the terms Outer and Inner Languages are quoted they should always be understood as abbreviations for more Outer and more Inner Languages. What the map does not show: for instance, Hindi is a typical Inner Language but Braj Bhasha, whose spread is partially identical with that of Hindi, has many Outer Language features; Standard Bengali has only few Outer Language features, but some of its dialects (like that of Chittagong) have quite many, as Assamese has, etc. This is the linguistic situation as I understand it. Besides massive mutual influences between Outer and Inner Languages (with massive influence of Inner Languages on Outer Languages but moderate influences the other way round. The unsharpness of my model is also due to two more factors: (a) due to the effects of the above-discussed koineization; (b) due to the fact that details of the long pre-history (as against the frequent short history) of many small Outer Languages – also with regard to the question when did they move from where to where, when and where did they split up etc. – are largely unknown. Grierson includes among the Inner Branch besides Western Hindi also R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, Bh¯ıl¯ı, Gujar¯ at¯ı, Panj¯ ab¯ı and Pah¯ ar.¯ı, even though he stresses (ibid.), like Hoernle, that several of these languages were originally Outer Languages. He does not include Dardic (and Nuristani) into his model, whereas I

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

446

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

Figure 15.4: Outer and Inner Languages according to Zoller claim that Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı are not only part and parcel of the Outer Languages, but these three groups are so closely interrelated in so many ways that they can be seen as an own subbranch, the “northwestern branch”, within the Outer Languages.

15.2

Vedic dialects

Whereas the previous section was a brief review of the earlier history of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages, the section beginning here looks at the topic of Vedic dialects and how this issue has been dealt with by different authors. This is intended to help to clarify the distinction between the concept of OIA dialects and the concept of Outer and Inner languages. It seems that in Vedic and Sanskrit studies the idea of more than one language immigration, and consequently the existence of dialects within Vedic Sanskrit, is not anymore seriously challenged (see e.g. the publications of Parpola, Stuhrmann and Witzel, besides many others). However, among them are not many who would confirm that those old dialect differences have (a) left traces in the NIA languages and (b) that dialectal differences appear to have been of a dimension that has to be characterizes as Vedic versus non-Vedic dialects. Once again: Textbook histories of Indo-Aryan follow the language tree model with Old Indo-Aryan chronologically followed by Middle Indo-Aryan and then by New Indo-Aryan, even though it has long since been known that, whereas such divisions are not unreasonable, a strict chronological succession contradicts the facts (Cardona in Cardona and Jain 2003: 8). Also Masato Kobayashi observes (2004: 7): “Vedic was probably a specific dialect of Old Indo-Aryan; it was quite close to, but not identical with the language from which Middle Indo-Aryan developed.” The first traces of

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.3. Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

447

Middle Indo-Aryan features reach back into Vedic times; moreover, Middle Indo-Aryan has preserved Old Indo-Aryan and even pre-Vedic features; and whereas at the time of Ashoka most Middle Indo-Aryan languages had developed phonological and morphological features that are quite close to modern languages like e.g. Panjabi, there are modern Dard languages having preserved phonological features that existed elsewhere 2.500 years ago before they changed. We will now have a cursory look on two opposite phenomena known from historical linguistics: early traces of sound changes becoming regular only at later stages and vice versa occasional preservation of earlier stages at a later stage of language development. The study of these phenomena is, among many other scholars, related with the names of Asko Parpola, Ralf Turner, Thomas Burrow and Thomas Oberlies.

15.3

Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

15.3.1

Asko Parpola

I summarize here statements and observations from Parpola (2002a) (who himself quotes a number of other authors) on aspects of the history of Old Indo-Aryan which I regard as relevant for the line of argumentation of this book. In this article, he repeatedly stresses dialectal differences in Old Indo-Aryan (Vedic and Classical Sanskrit). Even though this is widely accepted and certainly supports my own conviction of a non-singular origin of Indo-Aryan, it should be clear that the dialect difference he mentions and discusses, and the linguistic features differentiating Outer from Inner Languages do not mirror each other. About dialect differences he says (verbatim statements are in quotes, the other sentences without quotes are summarizations): “Although Epic Sanskrit naturally has been much influenced by Vedic Sanskrit, it has some well known dialectal features which show that it entered South Asia separately from Old Vedic” (p. 49). The Rgvedic innovative double plural suf fix -¯ as-as disappeared quickly from the literary texts but survived in Pali and Ashokan inscriptions (p. 51ff.). “We have concluded above that the archaic Old Indo-Aryan dialect encountered by the immigrating P¯ uru and Bharata tribes in the Panjab was ancestral to Epic and Classical Sanskrit, and, secondly, that it was not the language of the Yadu, Turvaśa and Anu. These Indo-Aryan tribes had arrived earlier and stayed in the northwest, in and around the Swat Valley, although some of them had proceeded further south and east” (p. 61). “According to the testimony of the numerous and partly very early Aryan loanwords in the Uralic (Finno-Ugric) languages spoken in the forest zone of eastern Europe . . . the Aryan proto-language was dialectally differentiated from the start” (p. 79). On the very same topic he quotes Murray Emeneau (p. 50):9 The Rgvedic dialect, then, is clearly not the direct ancestor of classical Sanskrit.  must have been, even on this much evidence, several closely related There dialects in the period of the Rg-veda composition, one of which is the basic  9 The quote is from Emeneau 1966: 127.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

448

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

dialect of this text, another of which is basically the ancestor of the classical language of some centuries later. And he quotes Colette Caillat (p. 52f.):10 Since the time of Francke and others, it has generally been accepted that not a few features of Middle Indo-Aryan (MIA) are inherited from some form of Vedic rather than classical Sanskrit dialect(s). And (p. 53) he quotes Witzel who speaks of a “first wave” of Indo-Aryan immigration.11 Another relevant topic is the relationship between Rg-veda and Atharvaveda:  “It is also generally agreed that these latest hymns of the Rg-veda are the earliest  specimens of a great mass of oral traditions that was collected – most probably in the eastern Panjab, in Kuruks.etra – in the extensive Atharvaveda-Sam a . hit¯ during the immediately following Mantra Period . . . [the hymns] contain much ‘magical’ material (‘medical’ and love charms, sorcery and so on). . . ” (p. 62). “Some linguistic forms characteristic to the language of the Atharvaveda and differing from the language of the Rg-veda anticipate Middle Indo-Aryan . . . This  Atharvaveda had already for some time been suggests that the language of the subjected to the substratum influence of languages spoken by the earlier population of the Indus Valley, particularly Dravidian. . . For quite some time the Atharvavedic tradition was not fully accepted into the Vedic fold . . . ” (p. 62f.). “It is often suggested that the silence of the Rg-veda about magic, sorcery and  differentiation, which kept the many other Atharvavedic topics is due to social priestly religion apart from the ‘popular’ cults of the lower classes. Such a social stratification no doubt came into being in the course of repeated immigrations of small but powerful groups that gradually subdued earlier populations, not without keeping themselves aloof. But the royal rites of the Atharvaveda alone prove that it is not just a question of lower class religion. There are slight but clear dialectal differences in addition to religious divergences which point to a separate origin of the Atharvavedic traditions. To account for them, we have to posit an Indo-Aryan immigration to South Asia that preceded the coming of the ‘Rgvedic’ Aryans . . . several waves of Indo-Aryan speaking immigrants to South  have been distinguished on the basis of language, textual characteristics Asia and religion” (p. 65). On the relationship with Iranian(s) during that early period Parpola notes the following which confirms my point of view that speakers of Indo-Aryan and speakers of Iranian never lost direct contact: “Some lexical items and proper names in Rgvedic hymns composed in the north west suggest the presence of Iranian speakers in the neighbourhood at the time of their composition, ca. 14th century B.C.” (p. 69). And on the same page he formulates the hypothesis that Iranian horsemen forced the second wave of 10 The quote is from Caillat 1997: 15. 11 The quote is from Witzel 1989: 213 n. 281.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.3. Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

449

Rgvedic Aryans to move to India.12 

15.3.2

Ralf Turner

Some of the critical remarks formulated in the preceding section are also based on observations published by Turner in his paper Anticipation of normal sound-changes in Indo-Aryan (1937). Besides regular sound changes, he regards as influential factors e.g. frequency of the use of particular words, the effort to pronounce them correctly, dependency on the word class (easier affected are suffixes and postpositions as well as adverbs) leading to a whole bunch of abnormal developments like abnormal loss of phonemes, ‘spontaneous’ retroflexion and other consonant changes like unexpected voicing (weakening) and devoicing (emphasizing), aspiration (emphasizing) and deaspiration (weakening), etc. Turner’s conclusion (p. 10): “these changes have either anticipated similar changes that were normal at a later period or have repeated changes which were normal at an earlier period.” Regarding the notable time-frame of ‘earlier’ and ‘later’ sound changes Turner observes (p. 11) that “. . . at least a thousand years before the general change of -dh-, -bh- to -h-, this change has appeared in the adverbs sahá, ihá, kuhá . . . ” Of course this also means the inverse effect, namely occasional preservation of old historical stages even though in those cases different factors are responsible. Below we will see that the few here-quoted phonetic phenomena plus a great number of additional phenomena are also characteristic for many of the Outer Languages, however to a much greater degree. Frequently, as we will see, the processes occurred in both directions (e.g. spontaneous aspiration versus deaspiration). Here related is also the phenomenon of spontaneous retroflexion, mentioned by Turner and thoroughly investigated by Thomas Burrow (see next). This has also to do with early dialect differences or even with the distinction between Outer and Inner Languages because I will quote below a representative number of examples showing absence of expected retroflexion in languages which do have phonological n - n. and l .l oppositions (see p. 363).

15.3.3 15.3.3.1

Thomas Burrow Spontaneous cerebrals in Sanskrit (1971)

In this article, Burrow looks at a great number of OIA words with retroflexes that had till then not found satisfactory explanations, many of them cases of ‘spontaneous’ 12 On the same page Parpola somehow incorrectly suggests a derivation of the name of the Pashtuns and their language Pashto from *Parsa or *Parsu which, in turn, he equals with the name of a clan and/or of individual persons Párśu of the Rg-veda which Karl Hoffmann, however, connects  Morgenstierne, on the other hand, suggests to with the name of the Persians (see KEWA). Georg connect Pashtuns and Pashto with Avestan paršta- ‘back’ with the special meaning ‘hill people’. This is indeed supported by modern northwestern reflexes of the OIA parallel prsth
a- ‘back’: P¯ad..

t ‘hillside’ (the ph¯ at. ‘hill’ with a semantic parallel in MKH (1: 306) pit.t.h¯ı ‘(hill) forest’, Dm. pis .. words have been already quoted p. 311). Yet, Parpola’s suggestion is not completely far-fetched because OIA párśu- ‘rib’ has semantically similar reflexes again in the northwest: Bng. pO
sO2 n.m. ‘flank of a hill, mountain slope’ (regarding the rather unusual change of OIA s.t. > Bng. ś see more examples p. 477), Kal. praš ‘steep hillside’, Pal. praš ‘slope’; Pr. pas"u  ‘small mountain forest, grove’ is second element in names of mountains, e.g. in ob@str@g pas"u  ‘mountain right in front of

(village) Dewa’ and note also Oss. fars ‘area’ (IEW: 820).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

450

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

retroflexion. Apart from their apparent lack of phonetic motivation, they appear also only sporadically. Postulating for many of them original dentals, Burrow offers many new etymologies mainly connected with PIE. At the end he draws the following conclusions: “The number of spontaneous cerebrals which can now be established for Sanskrit is very much greater than the number of additional examples that can be gathered from Middle Indo-Aryan. . . From this we must conclude that, contrary to what was previously thought, this change is essentially not a Prakrit phenomenon, but a development affecting primarily Old Indo-Aryan.” Yet, most of Burrow’s suggestions were not accepted in EWA where we frequently read about the forms “nicht überzeugend geklärt” 13 or similar formulations. This means that Burrow’s proposal for a very early and broad wave of spontaneous retroflexion does not bear scrutiny. Chatterji (ODBL § 267), who advocates the ‘traditional’ position of a mainly MIA phenomenon, makes the interesting observation that spontaneous celebralisation was characteristic for the eastern (and possibly also Midland) dialects and not for those in the northwest and southwest. But let us look at the examples that are relevant in the context of this book and which do point to dialects different from Vedic OIA: 1. The following Dardic Kalasha words belong, despite a contrast -n.d.- versus -nd-, to the same lemma OIA ka
nda- ‘single joint of a plant; arrow; cluster, heap; a stalk or stem, a branch; the part of the trunk of a tree whence the branches proceed’ (3023) etc.: (a) -n.d.-: kan.d.álak ‘small tree of any kind’, kan.d.ár ‘shoot of a plant; sprout’, (b) -nd-: kandrák 2 ‘branch of a grape vine’, kundurík ‘statuette of wood placed by a field’. The origin of ka
nda- is rather unclear (EWA), but Mayrhofer thinks (ibid.) that Burrow’s suggestion (1971: 546f.) of derivation < *k¯ anda- < PIE *kondo- is still to be taken seriously. Although the origin of the OIA word is contested, cf. also Iranian Sang. kandak ‘thorn’ and Greek 𝜅𝜖 𝜈𝜏 𝜖´𝜔 ‘(I) sting’ (EWA). Turner sees relationship of ka
nda

with lex. gan.d.a-2 ‘joint of plant’ and gan.d.i- ‘trunk of tree from root to branches’. This is supported by Kal. kundurík which, in all likelihood, actually designates a wooden ancestor statue and is thus synonymous with Kal. gan.d.áv (Urtsun gan.d.áli)) ‘statue of a deceased person’ and gan.d.ál.ik ‘statuette’.See Zoller (2018b: 348f.) for a possible Mon-Khmer origin of kundurík. Notes: (a) Here to be noted are B.roh. kúduk ‘hedgehog’ and Garh. selkuntu ‘porcupine’s thorns’, the latter of which is a synonym compound < OIA śályaka‘porcupine’ (12353) and kán.t.aka- ‘thorn’ (2668) (with OL a > u). (b) Note also Munda Tur. pandu ‘white (hair)’, dialectal Sant. põd ‘white’, Kol and dialectal Sant. põth ‘white’ and Mu. pundi ‘white’ — Mon Khmer Aslian Kensiu paltaw ‘white’ and Semelai prntOh and putih ‘white’, Palaungic K"ala pan ‘white’ and U pán ‘white’. They are certainly cognate with OIA p¯ an.d.ú‘yellowish white, white, pale’ whose origin is, according to EWA, contested.

13 ‘Not convincingly resolved’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.3. Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

451

2. ghun.a- ‘woodworm’ (p. 538), not clear for EWA (note also without aspiration Pa. gun.ap¯ an.aka- ‘wood-worm’), Shahpur dialect of Jat.. ghun ¯ adh¯ a ‘decay of tooth, supposed to be caused by a worm’.14 3. p¯ an.í- ‘hand’ (p. 542) cannot, according to EWA, be equated with Lat. palma, but seems to go back to older *p¯ aní- due to evidence from modern east Iranian forms. 4. For van.ij- ‘merchant’ (p. 542) I am not aware of an NIA form preserving *-n- but the noun is derived < OIA VAN ‘win’. 5. For khan.d.- ‘tear, break into pieces’ Burrow suggests derivation < *khand- and (wrongly) refers to Jav. v -xaDa- ‘to squeeze apart; auseinanderquetschen’. But the Iranian word seems to be somehow connected with OIA KHID/KHED ‘strike, press, press down’ which is < PIE *kh2 eid (EWA). According to Toshifumi Goto (1987:  127 note 143), the OIA root was replaced by another homonymous root with a parallel in Yav. v -xaDa-; if so, then the following modern reflexes belong here: Bng. bikh adO n.m. ‘destruction (of living beings, things)’ (Zoller 1989: 171) (with bi- prefix), khadnO, khidnO ‘to throw s.o. down’, khadO n.m. ‘fight; throwing down (of an

bikh¯ enemy)’, P. ad ‘envy, hatred; quarrel, struggle’, bikh¯ adhan., bikhodhan. n.f. and bikh¯ adh¯ı, bikhodh¯ı n.m. ‘an envious person, a hater’, bikhodh ‘envy, hatred’ (all forms also with ba-), probably D ad ‘destruction by rats’ . og. khidd@na ‘to frighten’, M. und rkh (OIA undura- ‘rat, mouse’) and bakarkh¯ ad ‘depredations of goats’ (OIA bárkara- ‘kid, lamb’), Him. khand ‘discord, enmity’. Note also Kgr. khád ‘bodily pains’. These words can neither semantically nor phonetically derive directly < OIA *khadd- ‘drive away’ (3807) and its apparent allomorph *khedd- ‘drive, pursue’ (3921), even though contamination is possible. As noted, semantically and phonetically the forms are more clearly related with OIA khidáti ‘strikes, presses etc.’ (khintte ‘suffers pain’) and with OIA (Dhatup.) khadati ‘strikes, hurts, kills’; note also OIA (RV x,38,4) vikh¯ adá‘devouring, destroying’. See EWA and Ollett (2014b: 157f.) for the complexities of the OIA verb. Cf. also Sak. khad- ‘to hurt’. Further contamination of the Bng. and P. forms may have been caused by OIA viks.ipta- ‘scattered’ in ‘collaboration’ with ks.ubdha- ‘shaken; expelled’ which would parallel the contamination of OIA niks.ipta‘deposited, abandoned’ with ks.ubdha- as suggested sub 7154 and with modern reflexes in L., P., S.; still, also here cf. OIA (RV iv,28,2) nikhid- ‘to press down’. The same root is also found preserved in Kal. nighón ‘chisel’ (see p. 637). Note: Here perhaps also Garh.t.. poet. khandv¯ ari n.f. ‘destroyer’15 as in the following line from a P¯ an.d.ava J¯ agar (see Bhatt, Wessler, Zoller 2014):16

j E kh Et k  khandv ari, tum are dhy an sun j ag victory kh Et-mountain17 GEN POP.F destroyer, your contemplations

wake_up having_heard ‘victory (oh fairies who are) destroyers18 (hailing) from the kh Et-mountain,

(we) having heard your contemplations (tell you:) awake!’ 14 The idea that tooth trouble is caused by a worm is widespread in North India until today. 15 Derivation < OIA skándati ‘leaps’ is semantically questionable, but cf. also Munda Kod. kh anda ‘to cut something’ which is certainly allomorph of OIA KHAN .D . ‘break’ for which Turner considers Munda origin (see also EWA). 16 On the notion of J¯ agar ‘vigil song’ see UGK. 17 Name of a mountain in District Tehri Garhwal which is inhabited by fairies. 18 Fairies of the Himalayas are regarded to be ambivalent and potentially dangerous.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

452

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

6. Burrow mentions (p. 545) Aitareya-¯ aran.yaka 3,2,1 a ¯nda- ‘egg’ which contrasts with the much more common a ¯n.d.á-. The allomorph a ¯nda- is connected with a complex, mainly northwestern, word field for which see above p. 225. At least in above case 1, note (b) it seems possible that the Munda word for ‘white’ was borrowed first into indigenous ‘North Indian’ before it was borrowed from there into Indo-Aryan.

15.3.3.2

Sanskrit words having dental -s- after i, u, and r

In connection with several OIA words with non-occurrence of RUKI Burrow mentions Morgenstierne’s suggestion that they originally belonged to Nuristani dialects (p. 38). However, on page 36f. he adds that “It is probably simpler to assume that in Kafiri . . . there has been a secondary shift from -s.- to -s-, rather than there is a direct preservation of IE -s-. Since the change s > š is very ancient, and embraces not only Indo-Iranian but in all probability also Balto-Slavonic, the idea that isolated groups among the Indo-Iranians should have preserved IE -s- seems very unlikely.” Thus, at least in case of those words which do not have a PIE background, one should not exclude the possibility that some of them are of BMAC background. Parpola (2015: 97f.) suggests this e.g. for the OIA name (or rather title?)19 Brsaya where b- and  to an article by F. rs seem to look very ‘un-Indo-Aryan’. However, Burrow, referring Johansson (1976: 40), says that dental s after r or r is regular insofar as this depends . whether the cluster goes back to rs (normally > rš) or to *ls which does not change (for more details see loc.cit.).20 However, besides this, one finds a considerable number of words where there is not only non-occurrence of RUKI but unmotivated (context-free) variation of s ∼ ś ∼ s. – in several cases accompanied by voice alternations, as shown above wih many examples. Since place-of-articulation variations and voice alternations are characteristic features of Outer Languages (as a result of IA speakers encountering speakers of an Austro-Asiatic language), also some of the examples provided by Burrow belong to the same category, namely: misi-, miśi-, mis.i- ‘Anethum sowa (dill)’ (p. 33) (but cf. also lex. miśrey¯ a- ‘Anethum Panmori or dill’), vesara, veśara- ‘mule’, kosala, kośala- ‘name of a country’, trapusa- trapus.a- ‘colocynth’; tús.a-, *thus.a-, *dhus.a‘chaff of grain’ (but note Wg. t¯ us ‘straw’ !);21 busa- ‘chaff’ (p. 34), Turner adds buśaand lex. bu sa-, *bhusa-, *bhussa- and he regards as also related *bussa-, *bhussara-, *bucca- and b¯ uccara-, and because of Ku. buko he suggests another allomorph *bukkabut since there is also Garh.t. bukhu ‘chaff’ it is more likely that Ku. and Garh. actually reflect lex. bu sa-. Further Burrow examples of relevance here:

1. Wg. must ‘fist’ (p. 36), but actually there is also Wg. m ust ‘fist’ (Morgenstierne), Ash.

(10221). However note also must22 and m ust ‘fist’ < OIA musti- ‘clenched hand, fist’



OIA lex. mustu- ‘the closed hand, fist’ and in this connection Adam’s remarks on the antiquity of Toch. maśce ‘fist’. 19 KEWA: ‘Name of a demon’. 20 A probably better explanation is, however, mentioned e.g. by Gašper Beguš who points out that word-internally an -r- sometimes blocked RUKI (2017: 2). The same has been pointed out by Yasuko Suzuki (2016: 8) who also refers to Wackernagel. 21 This is possibly a Proto-Munda word (EWA). Cf. Ju. tuso ‘chaff’. 22 Can here be influence of Ir. mušt?

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.3. Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

453

2. Ash. musä ‘mouse’ (p. 36), there is also – besides Nuristani Kt. mu s@, Pr. müs, etc. – Dardic Brok-skad m¯ uzi ‘mouse’ (against Sh. múuz.i ‘mouse, rat’). Note: Here worth mentioning is also Pr. müs ‘adulterer’ and müs"ö ‘adultery’ which are cognate with OIA MUS. ‘steal’ as is confirmed by Ind. c o
r ‘a ‘thief’, i.e., a man who has committed a form of adultery and therefore can be killed any time’. 3. OIA bársva- ‘gums’ (p. 40) has been discussed in detail above p. 106. 4. Regarding kús¯ıda- ‘lazy, inert’ (p. 36), Burrow suggests that non-occurrence of RUKI is due here to the prefix with same behavior e.g. in kusrti- ‘a by-way’. The absence of  NIA words: Bng. nistOninO, RUKI because of the prefix may also explain the following

nist anO ‘to get tired, grow weary’, nisti adj.;n.m. ‘tired; tiredness; a sleepyhead’ and nistin O ‘lazy’, Insir. nist ‘lazy’, Garh. nesti ‘lazy; laziness; lethargic, slack, sluggish’

(cf. also Garh. nistuk ‘free from care’), Ku. nesti ‘lazy’, S. nest¯ı ‘indolence, laziness’ and probably Jat.. nist¯ a¯ı ‘slowly’ and Jat.. nestar ‘sluggish’, all of which seem to derive < OIA *nisatta- ‘seated’ (cf. RV prasatta- ‘satisfied, pleased’ and ‘regular’ nis.an.n.á‘seated’ [7464] and OIA nis.atta- ‘sitting, seated’).

15.3.4

Reiner Lipp and non-application of RUKI?

A number of scholars on Nuristani from Morgenstierne to Edel"man, to Buddruss und Degener have argued that in the pre-history of Nuristani the RUKI rule did not apply, wherefore Nuristani had preserved here a unique pre-Proto-Indo-Iranian feature. This opinion is not shared by Lipp for reasons given below. He arrives at the following conclusion: The assumption that in the prehistory of Nuristani s behind I, U, R, K was partially not converted to š, is thus apparently without any foundation and therefore offers no argument for allocating to Nuristani a special evolutionary position compared to Proto-Indo-Iranian (2009: 156).23 Lipp adopts Burrow’s above-quoted opinion and characterizes the forms under discussion as results of a partial sound change in Nuristani (2009: 155). However, Burrow’s and Lipp’s explanations and arguments are not simpler than those of the others and therefore not preferable. Not only has Yasuko Suzuki rightly pointed out (2016: 9) that besides non-occurrence of RUKI in several OIA words there are also retroflex sibilants in non-RUKI environments, but it is also necessary, as will be seen below, to study each single lemma individually instead of making a generalizing statement which questions the stringency of the rule. For both cases Suzuki presents several examples, e.g. k¯ıstá‘a praiser, poet’, barsá- ‘knot’ versus jala
sa- ‘medical drug’. Thus, the Nuristani cases

more reservations. Lipp suggests for the do not look that unusual. And there exist following three lemmata partial sound change (2009: 155f.): 23 “Die Annahme, daß in der Vorgeschichte des Nuristani s hinter I, U, R, K teilweise nicht zu š verwandelt wurde, entbehrt somit offenbar der Grundlage und bietet daher kein Argument dafür, dem Nuristani gegenüber dem Urindoiranischen eine entwicklungsgeschichtliche Sonderposition zuzuweisen.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

454

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

´ 𝑜 . The Prasun reflex is found sub 1. Pr. (v)ust¯ u ‘breast’ < PIIr. *pášt𝑜 < PIE *pékt ´ *pas.t.a- ‘breast’ (8013) where there is reference to Lat. pectus ‘breast and PIE *pek‘shoulder, hip, side’, but rightly described by Turner as “very doubtful.” Pokorny adds to this lemma OIA paks.á- ‘wing’ (IEW 792), which has – unlike *pas.t.a- – many modern reflexes. But Mayrhofer is uncertain regarding the etymology of paks.á- which makes a reconstruction *pas.t.a- even more doubtful. As an alternative, I suggest for (v)ust¯ u (and some more forms below) derivation < PIE *psténos ‘woman’s breast’ (resp. pst
en ‘breast, teat’).24 Regarding both Nuristani and Dardic st ∼ št see above p. 128 and regarding loss of nasal consonant cf. e.g. Pr. üšty"u ¯ ‘post’ < OIA sthu
na - ‘post, pillar’ (13774). The well-known Indo-Iranian reflexes are OIA stána- ‘female breast, nipple, udder’ (13666) (Kal. istón ‘udder’) and Av. fšt¯ ana‘female breast’ (and Middle and New Pers. pist¯ an ‘female breast’). The Pr., Kal. and Kho. words are with preservation of initial p- fairly close to the Iranian forms. PIE pst
en has also remarkable reflexes in Braj Bh¯ as.a ¯, in Yidgha and perhaps in K¯ angr¯ ˙ ı: (a) Brj. china ‘breast (male)’ with a parallel in Deśya Pk. sihin.a ¯- ‘breasts’ (probably < older *chin.a ¯) contrasts with common IA chatti ‘chest, breast’ (5014) – but in Brj. the meaning of 5014 is more narrow, namely ‘breast (female)’, which thus opposes ‘breast (male)’ – and which suggests that ‘younger’ chatti has semantically narrowed ‘older’ china which itself derives < OIA stána- ‘female breast, nipple, udder’ (13666, but which also means [Suśr.] ‘the nipple of the female or the male breast’) probably via *tsana- (with swapping of st- into biphonematic ts- and further into ch-; this swapping must have occurred very early because the few OIA words containing biphonematic ts clusters changed them soon). Note that the simplified form PIE *speno- of older PIE *psténos ‘woman’s breast, nipple’25 has e.g. a reflex in Old Irish sine ‘teat’. According to IGN: 33, *spenand *sten- correspond respectively with western and eastern Indo-European (see also IGN: 23). Brj. china is an example for an historical phonological change of st- not > usual th- but > c(h)- (via ts). It is thus an Outer Language word that has not directly derived < 13666 in the manner of the mainstream development. (b) Here cognate is also Pamir Yidgha “isch¯ına” ‘breast’ (Biddulph) resp. iš"č¯ın ‘female breast’ (Morgenstierne). (c) I wonder whether Kgr. b a
n ‘a woman’s nipple’ (Wilson 1899a: xxxix) could be a reflex of ‘western’ PIE *speno-. It would be phonetically fairly similar to Old Irish b¯ o-tri-phne ‘cow with three dugs’ (IEW: 990). ´ 1 . The 2. Pr. ast"@, a ¯st ‘eight’ (Buddruss und Degener) < PIIr. HaštáH < PIE *h2 októh PIIr. stage continuing basically unchanged26 are – apart from Iranian forms like Sogd. @št(a) or Yghn. ašt – also Dardic R¯ aj. ešt ‘eight’ (with vowel raising like in neighboring Kalk. es. ‘eight’ [Liljegren]), in Deg. "ašt ‘eight’ (for which Strand suspects borrowing from Iranian) and in Iskeni dialect of Paš. "a ¯xta ‘eight’. Phonetical ‘hybrid’ forms are Kho. "ošt. ‘eight’ and East Indo-Aryan B.roh. ãśt.o ‘eight’.

24 Wikipedia considers a preciser reconstruction *ph2 g
-sth2 -
en with *ph2 ´g - ‘to be affixed, firm’ and *steh2 - ‘to stand’ which has been taken from Guus Kroonen’s reconstruction for Proto-Germanic *fastu- ‘firm, solid’ (2013: 131). 25 Also here a consonant swapping has taken place with *speno- < older *spteno-. 26 Of course without laryngeals.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.3. Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

455

For the present Prasun form I suggest alternatively the following derivation: PIIr. HaštáH > *ača (in the fashion of Klm. äc. Hy ‘eight’ and Kalk. ac. ‘eight’ [Zoller])27 and then, like any palato-velar > *atsa and (in the fashion of Nuristani *astru- < *aµru‘tear’ [see above p. 88]) > ast"@. 3. Non-retracted forms for PIE *m¯ us ‘mouse’ are Nuristani Pr. müs, Kamd. mus"a, Kt. mas"a and Wg. pus"a, and Dardic Kal. mizók and Bro. m¯ uzi all ‘mouse’. Voicing of fricative is also found in Dardic Sh. múuz.i ‘mouse, rat’ and Iranian Psht. maz.a ‘rat’ and maz.ak ‘mouse’.28 Instead appealing to a very unlikely partial sound change or accepting non-execution of an otherwise very regular rule (but see below) one could also argue thus: Paš. m¯ uč ‘mouse’ derives according to Gérard Fussman < OIA *m¯ us.a ¯c¯ı (ATLAS 149). Also here a similar process could have taken place as in the previous lemma ending with deaffrication of *muts > mus.

15.3.4.1

Additional cases (including Iranian)

1. Ash. must, San.. m"u ¯st, Wg. mustik, Pr. müšt, Kamd. mr" ust, Kt. m"išt all ‘fist’ (cognate with OIA mus.t.í-). PIE affililation is not really clear even though relationship with PIE *m¯ us ‘mouse’ appears quite possible. In any case, one can safely reconstruct PIIr. *muští- ‘fist’ which is structurally similar with above PIIr. HaštáH (-št-) and thus must have followed the same development. 2. Curiously, reflexes of OIA *nis¯ıdati ‘sits down’ (7467) without RUKI are found in Dardic Shum. and Kal., whereas reflexes of regular nis.¯ıdati are mostly found in Nuristani languages. Could the Shum. and Kal. words be borrowings from Iranian? Cf. e.g. Proto-Khotan Saka *nišasta- (EWA ii: 692) and regarding examples for change of st > s see p. 181. 3. Paš. suz"a ¯ ‘daughter-in-law’ (Morgenstierne)29 resp. dialectal sonz (Lehr) corresponds
- ‘son’s wife’, but is phonetically close to PIE *snusós. It shows also with OIA snusa

of medial sibilant. Morgenstierne regards the form as phonetically ‘Dardic’ voicing irregular and I cannot add here anything more. 4. Paš. sus- ‘to dry up, become dry’ (Morgenstierne) resp. sos- ‘dry; thin’ (Lehr) and Tir. s@ka ‘dry’, also Nuristani San.. sus-i"e ‘become dry’ and Ash. su"s¯ uestä, susust@ ‘dry’. The forms are phonetically more similar to PIE *saus- ‘dry’ than to OIA ŚOS. and they are the opposite of Kal. s.ús.- ‘dry’ (acc. to Turner < OIA śús.yati ‘becomes dry’ [12559] and showing CCH)30 . OIA *śuks.a- is inverted allomorph of OIA śús.ka‘dried’ (12548). The non-retracted form of this is *súska- which we find reflected in Paš. susk¯ı ‘dry’ and Pr. üskyö ‘dry’, and prefixed in Kho. usukik, oso ‘to wither, cease suckling (a child), come to an end’ – according to Turner < OIA *ut-śus.ka- ‘dried up’ (1854) but more correctly < *uµuska- with ‘Iranian’ monophonemic -µ- (see p. 86) – and probably also in Kamd. s¯ ak"a- ‘dry up’ and Kt. sk"e- ‘dry up’. 27 Perhaps similar also Khaś. “ankhuchh” and Kiś. “ankhuc” ‘ring’ (Kaul [2006 i: 205]) which seem to derive < OIA angus ˙ . t.hya- ‘pertaining to thumb or big toe’ (138) where one also finds with affricate Paš.weg. anuč ˙ "ik ‘finger-ring’. 28 The voicing of medial sibilants is a characteristic of ‘Dardic’ G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı which was the only MIA language with a z sound (von Hinüber [§ 95]), traces of which are found e.g. in Sh. dez ‘day’ (OIA divasá-). 29 Morgenstierne rightly rejects borrowing from Persian. 30 Although regular outcome of OIA -s.ya- in Dardic is -š- there are also many exceptions (see p. 356).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

456

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective For Kho. c.uc."u ‘dry’ Turner reconstructs OIA *śuks.a- ‘drying up’ (12508) with -ks.- from desiderative śuśuks.ati ‘wishes to dry’ with parallels in Kal. c.uc.hú ‘dry, dried up’ and deaffricated s.ús.u hik, s.ús.i hik ‘to become dry’ etc. and Prakrit cumcha˙ ‘dry’, cumchia˙ ‘dried up’ (see Schwarzschild [1972: 102]). They can be compared with Psht. wuč ‘dry’ on which Elfenbein et al. comment “[t]he assimilation *šk > č must be early, not causing lengthening of u . . . ” (2003: 86). Here also Wkh. w@sk (Morgenstierne) resp. wesk (Yoshie) both ‘dry’. The origin of Psht. wuč shows that Turner’s derivation of OIA *śuks.a- from a desiderative is unnecessary complicated. Again we have the simple phenomenon of a sibilant-stop switch as possibly also in Kho. muc.hol.i ‘testicles’ < OIA *mus.kaput.ik¯ a- ‘scrotum’ (10219). Thus it is likely that there once existed in this area a form *čuč(k)a ‘dry’ with first affricate either through assimilation or induced by a template like OIA *ut-śus.ka- ‘dried up’ (1854). This lemma got later-on dentalized and deaffricated; Wkh. wesk must be a reflex of older *weµk. Note: Ash. su"s¯ uestä, susust@ ‘dry’ is related both with OIA *śus.t.a- ‘dried’ and with OIr. *sušta- as reflected in Pahl. xwšty, but appears again more archaic than OIA and OIr. because of the same similarity to PIE *saus-. Regarding dental suffix, the Ashkun forms appear especially close to Latin s¯ udus ‘dry (of weather)’ for which Lubotsky suggests derivation < PIE *suz-dos (1985: 1).

5. Rather doubtful and unclear is Dardic Bro. kazis ‘to rub; to sharpen’ (< earlier *kasis?) which seems to be cognate with Orm. xaž- ‘to rub’ (Morgenstierne [1932a: 35] who does not offer an etymology). Whether both words are reflexes of PIE *kes- ‘to scrape, comb’ (otherwise with -n- present PIIr. *kšnauti and OIA KS.NU ‘to whet, sharpen’),  (e.g. in Lith. kast ‘to rake’) and with where there are reflexes both with dental sibilant palatal sibilant (e.g. in Bulgarian čéšel ‘comb’), is unclear. 6. Wkh. D0s ‘dough’31 is cognate with Kho. gos. ‘dough’ (Strand) resp. goós. ‘dough’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics) and Psht. a Gaz@l ‘to knead’ (with root *garš- [Morgenstierne 1927]), all of which correspond with < OIA ghars.a- ‘friction’ (4448) which derives perhaps < PIE *gher-s- ‘to rub, stroke hard’ (cf. IEW: 440). Wkh. with absence of RUKI? 7. Tir. manas ‘husband’ is reflex of OIA manus.yà- ‘human being, man’ (9828) and is cognate also with many modern reflexes with affricatized sibilant, e.g. Bng. manuch,

manu ch ‘man, person, human being’, Garh. m¯ an.ach, P. manuch ‘a man’ and Inscrip

tional Or.iy¯ a m¯ an.ica ‘man’ (more parallels p. 356). Tir. manas is thus not a case of non-occurrence of RUKI but must have derived < older *manuč(h) followed by dentalization and deaffrication.

15.3.5

Thomas Oberlies

Thomas Oberlies begins his argumentative article Middle Indo-Aryan and (the) Vedic (dialects) with the observation (1999: 39) that “[t]he problem of the linguistic affinity of Pali and the other Middle Indo-Aryan (= MIA) languages is well-known and is undisputed: These languages are by no means straightforward continuants of the Old Indo-Aryan (= OIA) of the Vedic corpus, as in all of them words and forms turn up which cannot be the (regular) outcome of any attested OIA ones. But as to the 31 On apicalization also in Wakhi see p. 331.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.3. Old Indo-Aryan Dialects

457

particulars there is a wide range of opinions.” This assessment is not far from my own and differs from Oskar von Hinüber’s assessment (§ 12) that ‘so Middle Indo-Aryan is essentially derived from Vedic.’32 However, neither Oberlies nor von Hinüber consider it worth even just mentioning the existence of a theory of Outer and Inner Languages. In the remaining part of his article, Oberlies lists around fifty lemmata which, doubtless convincingly, corroborate his initial observation. Let us look at two of the quoted lemmata which are relevant for New Indo-Aryan:33 1. P. 44: “PIE *-rh2 - is continued by *-¯ ur in Pk. t¯ uha- from *t¯ urtha- (< *trh2 th2 ó-) and  not by -¯ır- asin Vedic t¯ırthá-.” Notes: (a) But note also Vedic a
t urta-, atu
rta- ‘nicht durchschritten; ‘not stridden through” (FLII 20.1.65) and see Mayrhofer’s comments in FLII 20.4.5 footnote and 20.4.5.2: “Probleme erwachsen vor allem aus den Fällen, in denen *RH FLII Stufen einer und derselben Verbalsippe sowohl ır als auch u r zeigen.” 34 In  20.4.5.2.2 he quotes Wackernagel who had suggested that “[d]as Schwanken zwischen ¯ır und u ¯r scheint z.T. mundartlich gewesen zu sein.” 35 And in footnote 43 of that paragraph he quotes Oskar von Hinüber, according to whom these forms originally belonged to North-west India (“. . . scheinen die u-Formen zunächst ursprünglich in den Nordwesten Indiens . . . ”). But in footnote 44 he quotes again von Hinüber with the different opinion that the different forms are rather correlated with different linguistic levels (“Sprachebenen”). (b) Sub OIA *t¯ urtha- ‘ford, crossing, landing place’ (5903) Turner quotes modern reflexes from Kho., Phal., Or., Si. To be added is Ap. t¯ uh ‘t¯ırth’. The forms are cognate with OIA *tura-2 ‘ford’ with a possible modern reflex in Kt. to which have to be added Pr. tur in a ¯v tur ‘ford’ (with first word ‘water’, now out of use) and the first element of the Bng. compound tura-tOgna ‘rope-bridge’ (discussed below p. 804) and Pr. a ¯v tur ‘ford’. Additional reflexes of *t¯ urtha- are ‘Karakorum language’ turt ‘crossing over’ (Schomberg 1936: 233) and Iranian Wkh. tUrt, t urt ‘ford’. We see that this lemma is not found in OIA and Pa. but only in Pk. and Ap. and in a number of (geographically) peripheral languages. 2. P. 45: “Both Pa. (ug-/pag)gharati ‘to ooze’ and Pk. jharai ‘to flow’ point back to √ pre-Prakrit *o gz.harati . . . which reflects the voiced cluster of PIE * dh gu h er . . . ‘to flow, move forcefully’ as against Vedic ks.árati . . . ” Notes: (a) Modern forms reflecting the voiced stop are again only found in the northwest and west: Him. gh¯ ar¯ a ‘a waterfall’ and Rudh. "ghrela ‘saliva, trickling down in slobbering’ (with a suffix) and, apparently indicating a different dialect, “jhál” ‘a water-fall’ — Kal. gárik ‘to flow down or drain into the ground’, Bur. goór ‘cascading water, waterfall’ — Jat.. (also with loss of aspiration) gargar¯ı ‘newly watered, wet’. Berger derives the Bur. word as borrowing < OIA *ghara, pre32 Von Hinüber: “Das Mi. [Mittelindische] ist also im wesentlichen aus dem Vedischen enstanden.” 33 My quotes from Oberlies are slightly modified and partly abridged. 34 My rough translation: Problems arise mainly from the cases in which *RH-stages of the same  ır and u verbal lemma show both r. 35 My rough translation: The wavering between ¯ır and u ¯r seems to have been part of the dialect.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

458

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

OIA *gz ˙ . ara and points to jhara- ‘waterfall’ (5343) where only modern reflexes of the voiced affricate are quoted which are geographically located south and south-east of reflexes of the voiced stop. This seems to indicate an additional dialectal differentiation versus the Vedic form and its reflexes. Cf. also IGN: √ 51 and note the LIV reconstruction not dh gu h er but *gu gh er- (also quoted in Ollett 2014: 159) which corresponds with Lipp’s reconstruction (2009 ii: 269). (b) Regarding Pk. jharai ‘to flow’ see OIA jhara- ‘waterfall’ (5343) and its modern reflexes; closer to pre-OIA *gz ˙ . hara is Dardic Ind. zh
2r (quoted above p. 93)

which is only used together with ‘water’ as in v zh
2r ho 
th ‘water gushes down’;

and Wkh. jurjur ‘waterfall’ here also Kal. bižár ‘wide shallow part of a stream’ (Yoshie); note also that the lemma has been borrowed into Munda Mu. jhor¯ a ‘river or waterfall’ and Dravidian Ora. jhar-jharrn¯ a ‘to trickle’. Note also that Deśya Prakrit in fact knows the process of PIA *gz. > (j)jh as e.g. in avayajjh ‘see’ which is < OIA avacaks.- ‘look down upon; perceive’ (Bhayani 1988: 32; see also Pischel §200, 326). (c) Sad. pajhr¯ a ‘source, spring’ (borrowed into Kh. pajhra and Mu. p¯ ajhr¯ a ‘spring of water’) derives < OIA *prajh¯ ara- which parallels praks.a ¯la‘flowing’. Oberlies’ conclusion (p. 48) is this: “Some of these forms and words – such as idha, – are phonetically older than even Vedic, while some must be the continuations of certain dialectical variations within Old Indo-Aryan.” And I would like to add that we should keep in mind that Pali and Prakrit were in use more than a millennium after Vedic and that some of the Pali and Prakrit forms go even back to pre-Vedic even though both koinés got purified of regional emblems similar like Sanskrit. o gharati/jharai

15.3.6

K. R. Norman

In this 1995 paper K. R. Norman views the issue of dialect variation in terms of a hypothetical series of immigration of speakers of OIA into the subcontinent. Much of the material he discusses is not new, as he himself observes (1995: 283); still he draws some interesting conclusions, and he anyway stresses that (1995: 283) “. . . I know of no attempt to make a complete and comprehensive collection of the evidence . . . the amount of material available will be underestimated.” He divides MIA into three component parts (1995: 281): “(1) those forms which can be derived from forms which are attested in OIA; (2) those forms which can clearly be seen to be of IA origin, but cannot be related to any OIA forms at present attested; and (3) those forms which are to be regarded as innovations. These fall into two classes: (a) those which arise by levelling and analogy from already existing forms, and (b) those forms which have no affinity with anything else in OIA or MIA, and must therefore be regarded as borrowings from a known or unknown non-IA source. These constitute the so-called deś¯ı forms.” On the second component he remarks (and furnishes this later-on with examples) (1995: 282), “[i]n the second category we can include those features which are clearly of IA, or even IE, origin but have no attested Skt equivalent, e.g. suffixes not, or only rarely, found in Skt, or those words which show a different grade of root from that found in Skt, but can be shown not to be MIA innovations, because the formation could only have evolved in a pre-MIA phonetic form, or because a direct

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.4. Indigenous substrates?

459

equivalent is found in an IE language other than Skt.” He continues on the same page, “[w]e can make use of the second category, i.e. those forms which are clearly IA but are not at present attested in OIA, to support a belief in the existence of different dialects of OIA, since we may assume that the forms in that category go back to ‘lost’ OIA dialects.” Then Norman continues to discuss the material at various grammatical levels out of which I just comment on a few. On p. 285 he (again) gives evidence for various MIA words in jh deriving from OIA *gz.. From among the vocabulary which he considers not to be found in OIA but of IE origin, the following words are, however, not correct: Apabhram asi ‘cheese’ in fact goes back to OIA *ch¯ acch¯ı- ‘buttermilk’ (5012), . śa Pkt. ch¯ and P¯ ali p¯ an.ika- ‘kind of spoon’ has been put by Turner sub OIA *p¯ an.ik¯ a- ‘spoon’ (8046). But for his other examples no ready counter-evidence is known to me. Norman draws the following conclusions (1995: 289) that “. . . the evidence for the derivation of MIA material from unattested OIA antecedents is more extensive than Emeneau thought . . . there can be little doubt that the majority of them belong to long-lost non-Rgvedic dialects of OIA. I take this dialect variety to support a view that  had already begun to take place among the speakers of IA languages dialect variation from a very early time, probably as a result of the fact that even before they moved into India they were already split into a number of groups, separated geographically. Such dialect variation was increased as a result of movement into India at different times, with further geographical separation after their arrival.” With regard to the languages of northwestern South Asia the following conclusion appears to be obvious: Already at an early stage of OIA a remarkable dialect diversity must have existed. But whether the speakers of the Nuristan languages are the descendants of the old D¯ asa, as claimed by Parpola (see, e.g., 2002: 85) or whether Dardic Pashai is a descendant of the language of the Hindu and Buddhist civilization of eastern Afghanistan, as claimed by Morgenstierne (1965: 138) is, in my opinion, not provable. I anyway think it is impossible to detect any ethnic and traditional cultural differences between Nuristani and adjacent Dardic communities.

15.4

Indigenous substrates?

In my opinion, the two most important substrates that penetrated north India from outside are the prehistoric Austro-Asiatic languages and the Kartvel languages. Of course, this does not mean that the North Indian language-scape does not also include other substrates that are not yet known in detail, whether they immigrated too from outside or were indigenous (that is, present in prehistoric India for so long that nothing at all can be learned about an immigration history). The following sections all deal with substrates ‘without a name’. That is, scholars find certain features in a certain region that do not look like they really match the native languages. Here and there I suggest that some such features could be derived from either Austro-Asiatic or Kartvelian. However, two points should be pointed out: First, we have seen that large amounts of vocabulary of completely unclear origin were collected in the SARVA project (see p. 287). Second, one can see that practically every dictionary of a New Indo-Aryan language is full of words of unknown provenance. There is a quite long line of authors who pursued the question of substrate languages in northern India. A selection: Berger 1960, Jettmar 1975: 190, Blažek 1998: 449f., Èdel"man 1968: 58. Fussman regards the existence of a substrate in the MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı-speaking area as rather likely (1989b:

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

460

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

446 fn.), and Witzel has discussed (Substrate Languages in Old Indo-Aryan [Rgvedic, Middle and Late Vedic], EJVS 1999) possible influences of Dravidian and  what he calls Para-Munda influences in the North-Western Frontier, in the Indus Valley and elsewhere. Regarding (assumed lack of) such influence, Gregory D. Anderson [2008: 4f.] states: “It is surprising that nothing in the way of quotations from a Munda language turned up in (the hundreds and hundreds of) Sanskrit and middle-Indic texts. There is also a surprising lack of borrowings of names of plants/animal/bird, etc. into Sanskrit (Zide and Zide 1976). Much of what has been proposed for Munda words in older Indic (e.g. Kuiper 1948) has been rejected by careful analysis.” My own opinion is a complete reversal of the prevailing opinion epitomized by Anderson in the preceding paragraph. I argue that in Sanskrit the influence of Munda is indeed quite thin. But this has to do with the circumstance that the Vedic Aryans were latecomers to South Asia. Before them (perhaps five hundred years earlier) other Aryans speaking dialects somewhat different from Vedic, had already arrived in North India. It was the speakers of the ancestor(s) of the Outer Language who came in intensive linguistic contact with speakers of Austro-Asiatic and Kartvelian and perhaps even more unknown languages. Now we find an impressive number of AA borrowings in Outer Languages. Interestingly, even more AA borrowings are found in Burushaski and in the Tibeto-Himalayan languages. Whereas there exists a tendency for more Munda and less Mon-Khmer word borrowings into Outer Languages, there is a tendency for more Mon-Khmer word borrowings into the Tibeto-Himalayan languages. The Munda branch of Austro-Asiatic entered northeastern South Asia from the east (probably from the Mekong Valley area), but the impressive evidence for Mon-Khmer words found in the Tibeto-Himalayan languages may be best explained by postulating that before the arrival of Proto-Munda speakers there were already other Austro-Asiatic speakers present over large parts of North India and in the Himalayan foothills. Since not only Indo-Aryan but also Austro-Asiatic and Kartvelian were intrusive in northern South Asia, the obvious question is, what was before them. Above I have noted that, since Indo-Aryan and Munda have undergone some similar phonetic developments, this must be due to the same substrate or similar substrates they encountered when they entered North India. These topics are discussed at various places in this book, but not in this chapter. What follows now is a discussion of what Bertil Tikkanen has to say of substrate traces in northwestern South Asia. Tikkanen, who discusses in two articles the possible existence of ancient substrata in northern Pakistan, comes to the conclusion that “there are also some indications of one or more ancient unidentified substrata in the Hindukush and the Upper Indus region” (1988: 304). Since various statements and observations of Tikkanen are of importance for us, I will quote them here and add comments and alternative suggestions wherever it seems useful.

15.4.1 15.4.1.1

Bertil Tikkanen on substrates and isoglosses “On Burushaski and other ancient substrata”

On p. 304f. he mentions the vigesimal systems of the area and says, “. . . Kashmiri is the only Dardic language that has not adopted the vigesimal system, which is an areal feature characteristic of Burushaski and most of the Hindukush and Pamir languages.” He adds some more details on this on p. 309; on this see also Zoller (2005: 13) and note

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.4. Indigenous substrates?

461

that vigesimal systems are also found in some Tibeto-Burmese languages like Dzongkha and Tamang (Martine Mazaudon 2002), but also in Lahuli (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: 49) and in varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, at least in form of relics, including Bang¯ an.¯ı, as well as in Jammu Pah¯ ar.¯ı, in the Punchi dialect of Lahnda (T. Grahame Bailey 1908: 30), and in D . ogr¯ı and Panjabi (Kaul 2006 i: 27). For vigesimal systems in Munda see D. D. Sharma (2003a: 63) and occasional occurrence in Dravidian (which has normally decimal systems) see op.cit. p. 65. Northwest Caucasian languages, e.g. Adyghe, use also vigesimal systems (see Colarusso [1992: 159]) . Note: The vigesimal systems in northwestern South Asia are certainly built according to different morphological principles, but there seems to be one principle characterizing some varieties of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and some Dard languages. The following data from Kv¯ ar¯ı were formerly also valid for Bang¯ an.¯ı, but in recent years I found it difficult to find a speaker who still remembers the old system. But in Kv¯ ar¯ı one finds e.g. das36 -tri-b¯ıś ‘30’ and dvi-tri-b¯ıś ‘40’. Whereas ‘30’ clearly translates as ‘ten above twenty’, the speaker of ‘40’ gave a kind of hybrid form because e.g. ‘80’ is c˙ a ¯r b¯ıś ‘four (times) twenty’. Thus ‘40’ should have been dvi-b¯ıś and ‘50’ ought to be dO
s-tridvi-b 
s. These inconsistencies prove the broken state of the old system. In any case, an apparently similar system is found e.g. in Dardic Kalk. traa-tee-dubiš and Klm. ìaa-tee-dubis both ‘43’ (Liljegren, Notes on Kalkoti: 4) and probably likewise literally meaning ‘three above two (times) twenty’. I presume that the ‘particles’ tri and tee are the same, going back to OIA tára- ‘passing over’. Regarding the well-known exceptional Kashmiri word order, Tikkanen remarks (p. 305), “Kashmiri is also the only language in the whole of South Asia except for Austroasiatic Khasi with a basic SVO word order, which is characteristic of the Austroasiatic and SinoTibetan languages outside South Asia.” However, this is not correct as I have shown that there are striking parallels to these V2 patterns in Bang¯ an.¯ı (Zoller 2007b), and in Outer Siraji (J. C. Sharma 2003); and in the Western Himalayan language Kanashi, spoken in the Parvati Valley (a side-valley near Kullu), one finds similar forms (D. D. Sharma 1992: 394) (Kanashi to ‘is, are’):

nu to ci ‘that is grass’ nu to kim ‘this is a house’ nu to sum kim ‘these are three houses’ y@ng

to @k@ mal ‘whatever is my property’ Note that Western Himalayan languages and Munda languages have usually also SVO word order (but at least with the exception of Kanashi). However, Mon-Khmer Khasi has preserved the old Austro-Asiatic SVO word order (see Jenny and Sidwell 2014: 59), and there are even some Austro-Asiatic languages in the same area like Pnar, Amwi and War with verb-initial word order (loc.cit.). Since the below word lists in “Linguistic data II” show a former massive presence of Austro-Asiatic in the Tibeto-Himalayan languages, the just above-mentioned SVO structures in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Kashmiri are possibly due to ancient Austro-Asiatic syntactic influence. However, at the moment I see no possibility how this can be proven for sure. Even though there are gaps with regard to V2 within West Pah¯ ar.¯ı with Bang¯ an.¯ı in the east and Kashmiri in the west, the impression can be hardly avoided that V2 was once a 36 Normally it should be dO
s.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

462

Chapter 15. Histories of Indo-Aryan: a retrospective

syntactic feature that characterized the whole of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Kashmiri. Clarifying this needs additional field work. Unfortunately, the situation further in the northwest among the Dard languages is less clear, but see below Koul and Schmidt (p. 483) on the occurrence of SVO in Kasht.aw¯ ar.¯ı and perhaps P¯ ogul¯ı. But it is worth pointing out that with regard to Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı Buddruss (1960: 69f.) mentions its very free word order. Most striking is the possibility of using modal verbs before the main verb: likh
 b an ‘can write’ but also b an parz
 ‘can understand’. Tikkanen also thinks that the “coreferential copulative-adverbial past ‘gerund” ’ (conjunctive participle), which is an innovation in Proto-Indo-Aryan, must have had its beginnings in the extreme northwest. It is shared by Burushaski, Indo-Aryan (including Dardic) and Nuristani, but is not found in (early) Iranian. On this see below p. 396. He further points out (p. 316 f.) that “[a] large proportion of the toponymy of Baltistan and Hindukush cannot be accounted for etymologically on the basis of Burushaski or any other existing South or Central Asian language” (see also Berger 1960). And he says (p. 317) that there is no evidence for any clear Dravidian influence on the northwestern Aryan languages, on Burushaski or on Tibeto-Burman. He also touches upon the issue of (loss of) aspiration. This is an important topic which has been already taken up above p. 315.

15.4.1.2

“Some areal phonological isoglosses”

The article begins (2008: 250) by stating that the highland region under discussion (North Pakistan and surroundings) “. . . displays a number of areal features that are found neither on the Indo-Pakistani subcontinent nor in Central Asia.” This also includes parts of the IndoGangetic region and the Western Himalayas. Other diagnostic features for South Asia like echo-words, compound verbs and converbs (Tikkanen 2008: 251) need not further concern us here. However, discussing the opposition between dental and retroflex stops (2008: 251f.) he points out that retroflex stops “. . . constitute an inherited feature in Dravidian and Burushaski, a proto-stage innovation in Indo-Aryan and Nuristani, an early innovation in Munda . . . [r]etroflex phonemes . . . seem to have once existed in all Pamir Iranian languages. . . ” This can be interpreted thus that substrate languages of the extreme northwest of South Asia and the adjoining Central Asian regions were conducive for the development of more complex consonant systems in those language on which they had a longer impact.37 Commenting on aspiration of stops, Tikkanen points out (2008: 252) that “. . . in the northwestern border zone of the subcontinent there are characteristically only voiceless aspirates (voiced aspirates being typically desaspirated).” This issue has been discussed p. 316. On pp. 253f. Tikkanen takes up the issue of the areal phonological feature of an opposition between velar and postvelar or uvular stops. According to Tikkanen, the ‘fault line’ of this opposition reaches from North Africa to North and Southeast Asia. On the other hand, I have pointed out above that the uvular order in the languages of that region are due to Kartvelian substrate influence (see p. 44). But perhaps below the Kartvelian substratum exists an even deeper substratum. Ignoring the large mass of loanwords from Arabic and Turkish, and a smaller number of loanwords from the Kartvelian substratum there still remains a considerable number of words in Nuristani and Dardic with uvular 37 It is well-known that the majority of loan words in OIA containing retroflex consonants entered the language when it had already reached the North Indian plains. So this is a different story.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

15.4. Indigenous substrates?

463

stops which defy etymological analysis, e.g. Indus Kohistani qò˜ec˙ ‘a thicket’.38 or Khowar qáq ‘dry’. Moreover, it seems as if sometimes a change took place from OIA k to q as in Indus Kohistani o
qh , Burushaski and Shina oq ‘vomit’ which are < OIA *okk- ‘vomit’ (2538). According to Turner, the lemma is onomatopoeic. However, cf. Munda Sant. o¼ko¼k ‘imitative of the sound produced when one is sick and about to vomit, to retch’, PMK *hOOk ‘to vomit’, Cua haP ‘to vomit’, Khmu Pu@P ‘sound of vomiting’, etc. Thus, Bur. and Ind. may have actually preserved a kind of older pronunciation of the AA lemma. There are no uvular stops in OIA, in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı or in any other Indo-Aryan language except the ones quoted above. It is not clear whether this means that speakers of OIA and Proto-West Pah¯ ar.¯ı did not stay long enough in the area with q-phoneme languages or whether they first integrated it but lost it fairly quickly. The next feature discussed by Tikkanen (2008: 254), namely the opposition between palatal and dental affricates, is of much greater relevance for us. I have shown above that the existence of two affricate orders has much to do with the different developments of PIE palato-velars versus (labio-)velars where one can distinguish between an ‘Iranian’ type (which is, however, also found in some Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages [see above p. 121]) and an ‘Indo-Aryan’ (with some features occasionally also found in Iranian languages). Tikkanen does not incorporate this historical aspect in his analysis which is rather synchronicdescriptive. He says that “[t]his isogloss extends from the western and northern edges of the transit zone over the Hindu Kush, the Kohistan, Karakoram, the Pamir, and the Himalayas all the way to China, leaving some empty patches in the Himalayas. . . This feature. . . continues further southeast to Kashmiri and many “West Pahari” (Himachali) dialects, which otherwise do not belong to the transit zone.” 39 Tikkanen also mentions another, independent convergence area with palatal vs. dental affricates in Central India (2008: 254).40 The opposition between palatal and dental affricates is, within this comprehensive convergence area of the north, within Aryan limited to Nuristani, Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. As indicated below (p. 482) there is certainly a correlation or symmetry between the number of affricates and the number of sibilants in the concerned languages. In other words, it is typologically not so likely that a language contrasts dental and palatal affricates if it has only one dental or palatal sibilant. Then Tikkanen takes up the opposition between dental and retroflex nasal consonants (2008. 256). He claims that there are some Nuristan and Dard languages lacking a retroflex nasal consonant. But the extant literature is not unanimous on this, and to me it looks that most Nuristan and Dard languages do in fact have retroflex nasal consonants (exceptions Prasun and Tirahi). This opposition is therefore not of further relevance for us. Similarly, the discussion of dental versus retroflex laterals (2008: 257) is not very fruitful for us (see also Masica [1991: 97] on the irregular spread of retroflex laterals in the northwest). In conclusion one can say that Tikkanen’s transit zone and my postulated northwestern branch of Indo-Aryan do not really match. This is not surprising because he concentrates on features which cover very large geographical areas and go beyond single language families. The geographical spread of the northwestern branch only partially overlaps with the transit zone.

38 However, this word may be a borrowing from East Caucasian (see Zoller 2014b: 106). 39 Tikkanen defines this transit zone (loc. cit.) as the zone of intersection of retroflex and uvular stops. 40 However, as much as I can see, at least the IA languages he lists and Munda, although having dental affricates do not phonemically contrast them with palatal affricates.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 16 Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

16.1 16.1.1

Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani Degener and Cardona on Nuristani

Almuth Degener proposes a model of the history of Indo-Iranian (2002: 116) in which Nuristani is positioned closer to Indo-Aryan than to Irania. This deviates somewhat from my position, since for me Indo-Aryan cannot be monolithically juxtaposed with Nuristani (see e.g. p. 16) and it deviates somewhat from the position of Rainer Lipp, who sees more similarities with Iranian than with Indo-Aryan for Nuristani (2009 i: 163ff.). Her model looks like this:

Iranian

Nuristani

Indo-Aryan

Degener concludes (ibid.) that “. . . Nuristani originally belonged to the Indo-Aryan branch but parted from it before the migration of the Indo-Aryans into India. Some of the features which seem to place Nuristani closer to the Iranian languages can be explained as the result of later intensive contact with Iranians.” 1 Another important conclusion made by her is this (2002: 115): “It must have been during the time of contact between Proto-Nuristani and Proto-Iranian that the deaspiration occurred in both languages. Although it cannot be ruled out that it may have come about in each group independently, it is more probable that it was one and the same sound shift in both Proto-Nuristani and Proto-Iranian.” However, this opinion, also shared by Georg Morgenstierne and Richard Strand, is not accepted by George 1 On the question of early versus late separation of Proto-Iranians and Proto-Aryans see Kuz"mina 2007: 3004f. who also favours the idea of “. . . long and close contacts between both Aryan branches.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

466

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

Cardona and me. Cardona observes (2003: 22): “Given that Nuristani lacks spirants f, T, and x typical of Iranian, which deaspirated voiced aspirates . . . it is reasonable to conclude that the deaspiration took place independently in Iranian and Nuristani. . . ” In his sketch of Nuristani linguistic characteristics, Cardona gives the following information showing Nuristani’s closeness to Indo-Aryan. He says (ibid.): As Buddruss has also noted . . . this [closeness to Indo-Aryan] accords with the fact that Nuristani does not show h for PIIr. s or another characteristic of Iranian: -st- for -tt- (cf. Morgenstierne 1926: 60). In addition, unlike Iranian, Nuristani does not show evidence that interior laryngeals were dropped (Morgenstierne 1926: 61). All this speaks against strong Iranian affiliation or admixture of Iranian through borrowings in Nuristani, although Nuristani shows, as does Iranian, different reflexes corresponding to Indo-Aryan ks. (Morgenstierne 1974: 7). On p. 24 Cardona criticizes Manfred Mayrhofer’s understanding of the Nuristani dentalization of palatal affricates by pointing out that also a language like Kashmiri displays the same process. In fact, many Dard, Pah¯ ar.¯ı and other Outer Languages (e.g. Assamese) have undergone the same process. However, above I have proposed a different perspective on the ‘Iranian’ pattern of dentalized reflexes of the PIE palato-velars against the not dentalized (labio-)velar reflexes since this ‘Iranian’ pattern has parallels in a number of Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, all of which have, like many Iranian languages, two affricate orders – in sharp contrast with Inner Languages like Sanskrit or Hindi (see pp. 90ff.). I have also argued that this ‘Iranian’ pattern of two affricate orders must have formerly characterized all Outer Languages, that is also Indo-Aryan languages at the eastern fringes of the IA language-scape. This contrasts with the fact that in Vedic and Classical Sanskrit dentalization is not known because of different treatment of PIE palato-velars (deaffrication instead of dentalization) which did not lead to the development of two distinct orders of affricates. Consequently, a modern Inner Language like Hindi remained faithful to the situation in Sanskrit by retaining one order of palatal affricates. Instead of the strictly segregating model of Proto-Indo-Iranian splitting up into three tidily separated branches, I suggest also here, as in case of the difference between Outer and Inner Languages, a ‘more or less’ perspective. This concerns the two processes ‘depalatalization’ and ‘deaffrication’. Speakers of (late) Proto-Indo-Iranian who were the first to arrive in northwestern South Asia changed their (primary, but at that time only) palatal affricate order into a dental order as a result of intensive encounter with speakers of Kartvelian either already during their stay in the region of the BMAC or little later in northwestern South Asia. Speakers of Old Indo-Iranian who arrived much later (perhaps a couple of centuries later) did not undergo the same intensive encounter with the Kartvelian substrate language of northwestern South Asia. However, parallelling the tendency for deaffricizing dental affricates into dental sibilants, there was a similar tendency for deaffricizing the PIIr.-inherited (primary) palatal affricate *ć into the palatal sibilant ś. In order to further substantiate his view that Nuristani and Old Indo-Aryan are regarding genetic relationship much closer than previously assumed, Cardona discusses (p. 25) some relevant details concerning Grassmann’s Law which would be too complex to reproduce here. The interested reader may read the relevant paragraph. However, Cardona clearly shows that a PIA *´ȷh phoneme can be reconstructed which is reflected both in OIA *jh (> h) and Proto-Nuristani *ˇȷ/ž, and he arrives at the following conclusion: “Thus, the apparently great difference in the treatment of PIE *k´ and so on cannot serve to demonstrate

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

467

that Nuristani languages are definitely to be considered a branch separate from Indo-Aryan.” I agree with this evaluation. However, I also have to make an objection to one statement that follows on the same page, namely that Nuristani “. . . and the main of Indo-Aryan body later underwent separate developments.” This is as true as Assamese is very different from Sindhi in developing particularities in grammar, vocabulary etc. However, I will argue below that from among the phonological developments ascribed to Nuristani as typical and characteristic (e.g. by Richard Strand) at later stages than the ones discussed here, there is not a single innovation found in Nuristani which is not also found in its linguistic surroundings. Innovations are frequently shared with Indo-Aryan and perhaps in a few cases with Iranian (see p. 467ff.). Note finally that apart from the linguistic arguments, various authors have also endeavored to buttress Nuristan’s linguistic independence with arguments from religion and culture. But also this is now seen by others (e.g. Lehr, Ovesen, Keiser, the Cacopardos and me) at least as an exaggeration. Why so, I have already discussed above p. 481. Thus I see Nuristani to be part of, or at least closely related with, the Outer Languages and here especially with Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı.

16.1.2

Strand on Nuristani

Richard Strand’s most comprehensive overview over the Nuristan languages appeared 2010 in the Encyclopedia Iranica. The following quotes are from the online edition which is without pagination. I am not discussing all linguistic details quoted by Strand, but only the most relevant for us. Since several of my explanatory notes are fairly long, I start with listing all of Strand’s statements relevant in our context and then comment on them one after the other. Strand divides the history of Nuristani into six phases,2 which basically represents a refinement of Morgenstierne’s model: (1) Aryan phase: Proto-Nuristani is more or less identical with Proto-Indo-Iranian. See right below. (2) Early Iranian phase: Proto-Nuristani shares some specific sound changes with Iranian. (3) Transitional phase: Proto-Nuristani shifts into the linguistic sphere of Indo-Aryan. The long discussion includes (2) early Iranian phase and starts p. 468. (4) Indo-Aryan phase: Proto-Nuristani shares a number of sound changes with Indo-Aryan. The discussion starts p. 473. (5) Nuristan phase: Proto-Nuristani develops a number of sound changes particular to Nuristani. The discussion starts p. 474. (6) Afghan-Islamic phase: Since the people of Nuristan were conquered by the Afghans in 1896 their languages adopted a large number of Persian and Arabic words. This will not be further commented.

16.1.2.1

(1) Aryan phase

“The First Palatalization:. . . (PIE) *k > *č, *g > *ˇȷ, and *gh > *ˇȷh.” ˆ *ˆ Mayrhofer writes (1989: 6) that the old palato-velars *k, g, *ˆ gh changed in ProtoIndo-Iranian into the palatalized affricates *ć. . . , *´ȷ. . . and *´ȷh . This was followed by a 2 At each of the six points a cross reference is given where I discuss aspects caracteristic of a specific phase.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

468

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

dentalization in Iranian and Nuristani, which I interpret as an adaptation to the phonological system of a Kartvelian substrate. Whereas in Avestan *µ was deaffricated to s, it changed into T in Old Persian; Nuristani preserved the dental affricates. In Vedic, this dentalization never took place, but basically preserved the palatal stage of Proto-Indo-Iranian: PIIr. *´ȷ was preserved unchanged, *ć lost its closure and turned into OIA ś, in *´ȷℎ the aspiration was preserved. Certain non-Vedic Proto-and (pre-)Old Indo-Aryan lects underwent a similar process as Iranian and Nuristani because also they arrived in South Asia long before the Vedic speakers. However, it is likely that dentalization (and deaffrication) spread over centuries through the lects of this early immigration. In connection with MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı Gérard Fussman speaks of an “évolution spécifique d’un tout petit nombre de groupes consonantiques du vieil-indien (ks. > c., c˙ . . . ).” Thus, already around 2,000 years ago one finds dental affricates (plus a unique z phoneme) in an Indo-Aryan language. Besides developing two affricate orders, the other distinguishing characteristic of Nuristani and the many other Outer Languages is their early and intensive encounter with the prehistoric languages of northern India. Before their arrival, northern India was dominated by Austro-Asiatic languages (plus there was a smaller and regionally limited Kartvelian substrate in northwestern South Asia). For that reason, Nuristani and the other Outer Languages have preserved a staggering number of borrowings from Austro-Asiatic languages whereas late-arriving Vedic was only slightly affected.

16.1.2.2

(2, 3) Early Iranian phase and transitional phase

I have already dealt with the intricate problem of los and preservation of aspuration in detail above (see p. 24ff.). Here I add some more aspects and data related to this topic. Strand allocates the loss of the aspiration in the Proto-Nuristani mediae to the Early Iranian phase, but the loss of the tenuis to the transitional phase. The relative sequencing is probably correct, as I show (again) in connection with developments in Dardic (p. 318ff.), yet again the sharp opposition – early loss of aspiration in Nuristani, but recent loss of aspiration of mediae in those Dardic languages where this is found – appears questionable. Instead, also here we have to assume a long ongoing process in the northwest with blurred transitions from Nuristani to Dardic to West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. What Morgenstierne claims for the ancient linguistic situation is still valid (1973: 342): But we do not even know whether there was an absolute borderline between Iranian and Indo-Aryan from the beginning, which included all the usually assumed distinctive features: Iranian s > h, loss of aspiration and development of fricatives, etc. Possibly there existed originally rather a bundle of isoglosses that never exactly coincided. We can still see today how the Sanskrit preterital participles in -na-, which are unknown in Old Iranian, spill over into Pamir Iranian ... it is even possible that Iranian Parachi, which has been close to IndoAryan since ancient times, has preserved aspirated tenues and not developed them anew from fricatives.3 3 Morgenstierne: “Wir wissen ja aber gar nicht, ob es von Anfang an eine absolute Grenzlinie zwischen Ir. und Indoar. gab, die sämtliche, gewöhnlich angenommene, unterscheidende Züge umfasste: Ir. s > h, Verlust der Aspiration und Entwicklung von Frikativen, usw. Möglicherweise gab es ursprünglich viel eher ein Bündel von nie genau zusammenfallenden Isoglossen. Wir sehen noch heute, wie die Skt. Präteritalpartizipen in -na-, die im Altir. unbekannt sind, ins Pamirir. übergreifen. . . es ist sogar möglich, dass das seit alters dem Indoar. angrenzende ir. Parachi anlautende aspirierte Tenues bewahrt hat und sie nicht aus Frikativen wieder neu entwickelt hat.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

469

Moreover, in his publication on orthography and sound system of the Avesta (1942c, 1973), he observes (1973: 63) “. . . the tendency to drop a h, perhaps especially prevalent among certain social strata, might also lead to a reaction. This would explain the development of . . . the unetymological initial h’s in many E. Ir. dialects.” On the one hand, aspiration has not completely disappeared from all Nuristan languages, and on the other hand there are traces, even if not very many, of aspiration loss of tenuis in Dardic languages (sometimes also in other Outer Languages, as words e.g., in the LSI – quoted in this book – prove). A clear case for complete loss of aspirated consonants in recent times is the Darrai Nur dialect of Dardic Pashai. Even though LSI and Morgenstierne still noted occasional preservation of tenuis in Pashai more than half a century ago, Rachel Lehr observes (2014: 12): “The loss of aspiration is a feature of some Dardic languages, to differing degrees. Pashai shows no evidence of an aspiration contrast.” This does not mean that aspiration has disppeared as a phonetic feature but only that it lost its distinctive function. Regarding Eastern Iranian languages it is well known that aspirated consonants are found in Parachi, and Morgenstierne notes (1936: 658) that “. . . in Badakhshi Prs. there is a tendency towards the aspiration of voiceless plosives. . . ” and concerning Yidgha he observes (1936: 663) “. . . h- appears in Yd. without any regard to etymology.” A very similar situation with regard to aspiration is found in neighbouring Nuristani. The following Nuristani data are from Davidson, Konow and from the LSI. In his publications, Morgenstierne does not present a single case of an aspirated Nuristani word. However, in his study on the language of the Prasun Kafirs (1949: 201) he notes: “H is not a phoneme, but was heard occasionally in the pronunciation of S:4 (h)ate ‘one’; (h)¯ agüd.- ‘to ask’.” The possibility cannot be ruled out that the process of loss of the distinctive function of aspiration ended in some parts of the Nuristani language area not very long before Morgenstierne’s research (and continues to this day in some Nuristani languages in form of facultative phonetic aspiration). There would be parallels to this: Liljegren (2009: 31) notes that he could no longer hear an aspiration in Savi words with voiced stops which still were heard by Buddruss: “Buddruss (1967: 15-6) expresses some uncertainty as to the phonemic contrast between some aspirated and unaspirated stops, such as between čh and č, between c.h and c. and more generally between unaspirated and aspirated voiced plosives. In fact, in none of the words that Buddruss . . . tentatively transcribes with an aspirated voiced plosive do I detect any aspiration.” And there appear to exist only few, if at all, minimal pairs involving aspirated and non-aspirated unvoiced stops. Quite similar is the situation in Wot.ap¯ ur and Kat.a ¯rqal¯ a, where Buddruss noted extraordinary variations in the aspiration of unvoiced stops which he illustrates with the allomorphs th¯ u and t¯ u, both meaning ‘is’ (1960: 17). For a long time I never heard aspirated mediae in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı, but in recent years I was in contact with some speakers who occasionally – actually quite rarely – pronounced aspirated mediae. Thus, in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı the deaspiration process is not totally completed and it is also not totally completed in the borderland of Dardic and Nuristani languages. Deaspiration processes in the three language groups must have continued over many centuries with a gradual expansion. Nuristani is so closely interlocked with Dardic that it is just counter-intuitive to assume that all Nuristan languages lost their aspiration in the hoary past whereas this happened to some extent in the immediate neighborhood only millennia later. It also needs to be noted that Davidson was apparently aware of aspiration in Nuristani, which means that the suspicious words cannot be simply argued away by imputing imperfect transcriptions. Konow notes (1911: 21): “Colonel Davidson. . . draws attention to the fact that some few examples of aspirates occur in his sentences. At the same time he reminds us that Dr. Trumpp and Sir G. Robertson 4 Morgenstierne refers here to an informant from the village of Säi˙ci.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

470

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

denied the existence of aspirates in the language.” This is what Davidson wrote (1902: xi): “Dr. Trumpp in his article in the Royal Asiatic Society Journal, 1862, remarks on the absence of aspirates in the K¯ afir language. Sir G. Robertson informs me he tried to teach some K¯ afirs to pronounce a few English words, such as ‘happy,’ ‘hard,’ but found it impossible.5 In my vocabulary of sentences a few will be found.” Several of the following examples display etymologically correct aspirations, but are also found in recent borrowings. This ought to be registered vis-à-vis Davidson’s statement (ibid.) “. . . I am not a linguist.” Konow remarks (ibid.): “Colonel Davidson’s material seems to confirm this statement.” What can nevertheless be stated with a high degree of probability is that phonetic (not phonologically distinctive) aspiration has been preserved in a part of the Nuristani languages. What is less clear at the moment is that while working with a native Waigali speaker, I got the impression that her aspiration fluctuations are erratic, in a rather conspicuous part of material collected by Davidson, the aspiration seems to be located at the etymologically correct place. This seems all the more remarkable given that Davidson had no knowledge of the history of the Indo-Aryan language. But here are examples from Bashgal¯ı (Kati):

16.1.2.3

Phonetic aspiration in parts of Nuristani languages

Konow comments on h in Nuristani Kati with the following words (1913: 125): “This consonant is apparently foreign to the language. It occurs as an initial in some loan-words, and is sometimes, cockney-way, added before an initial vowel.” But that is not all: Kati bh¯ım ‘soil, ground’ < OIA bhu
mi- ‘earth’ (9557), sabhu ‘wild rhubarb’ which appears to be a side-form of Kati c @va  ‘rhubarb’ < (pre-)OIA *śv¯ atara‘invigorating (of soma)’ (12762) (with deaffricatisation and with an alternation v vs. bh for which there are found more examples infra), andhar. and andar. ‘dark’ < OIA *andhak¯ ara- ‘darkness’ (386), atkh¯ı and attk¯ı ‘near’ < OIA antiká ‘near’ (377), hai hai interjection ‘alas!’ < OIA h¯ ayi ‘exclamation used in chanting a s¯ aman’ (14058), h¯e interjection ‘O!’ < OIA he ‘a vocative particle’ (14157), host ‘hand’ < OIA hásta- ‘hand’ (14023), th¯ u th¯ u interjection for ‘shame!’ < OIA th¯ ut ‘sound of spitting’ (6102), khel ‘sport, prancing’ < OIA *khel- ‘play’ (3918), khur ‘top’ < OIA ks.urá- ‘sharp barb of arrow’ (3727), machkur. ‘man’ (LSI viii, ii: 12) but also “manch¯ı” (Davidson, but cf. Pr. manč’¯ı ‘Mensch’) despite Turner probably not < OIA mártya- ‘man’ (9888) (the second component -kur. is < OIA *kud.a-1 ‘boy, son’ [3245]) (regarding the affricate cf. Bng. manuch, manu ch

being’ as

in ‘man, person, human being’, Garh. m¯ an.ach [also mankh¯ı ‘human H.chg. mankh¯ a, Sad. manukh and in M.hal. manukh: also borrowed into TB Khm. "munukhya ‘a human being’],6 Rab. manchi ‘man’ and sub 10049 Sirm. m¯ an.ach, N. m¯ anche and P. manuch ‘a man’). Regarding the actual background of these words see p. 356, Prasun g¯ ut.h ‘cow’ (LSI viii, ii: 14, 60) and g¯ ut.hõ 5 I may add here that I know Multani speakers from Afghanistan with the same pronunciation tendency. I heard, e.g., amburg ‘Hamburg’, Endu ‘Hindu’, elp ‘help’ etc. The stop system of Multani of Pakistan is of the Hindi type, but the stop system of Multani of Afghanistan (sad remains of this [Hindu] speech community still live in Kabul, Kandahar and Jalalabad) closely resembles the situation of several Dard languages. 6 Note also Sad. harakh ‘enjoyment, fun’ which is semi-tatsama of OIA hars.a- ‘bristling’. For the early tendency to pronounce s. (and apparently also c(h), c.(h)) as kh see below p. 680.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

471

‘cows’ (p. 60)7 but Morgenstierne notes g"u ¯t.u and Buddruss und Degener write g¯ o.t..8 It is difficult to assess these data as long as no renewed investigation has been undertaken. The data do not contain any minimal pairs. Therefore it is not unlikely that the aspiration in the above words has only a phonetic status and no phonemic function, and that the cases where aspiration looks historically justified are just coincidences. This possibility is supported by evidence from the Nišigr¯ am variety of Waigal¯ı.9 One of my Master students and I have collected much evidence from a native speaker hailing from this village but living now in Oslo. In the pronunciation of this speaker frequently a fluctuating aspiration is audible which has, however, neither a phonological function nor does it seem to be precisely predictable when it occurs. This fluctuating aspiration occurs only with the unvoiced stops p, t, t., k and the unvoiced dental affricate c˙ and never with voiced stops and affricates. In the following examples fluctuating aspiration is indicated by Ch , phonetically this means “vibration starts after the lips are opened” (versus C where “vibration starts as the lips are opened”) (Lodge 2009: 105). The following examples show that there are also slight differences besides aspiration fluctuation between our consultant and Buddruss’ consultants (found in Degener 1998a): ph a ¯ph o ¯ ‘sole of the foot’ – Degener p¯ a-po ‘sole of the foot’ < OIA padá-1 ‘footh step’ (7747); t uk ‘sputum’ – Degener tük ‘spittle’ and Wot. tuk ‘saliva’ < OIA  *thukk- ‘spit’ (6097); t.h un.t.h urá ‘coccyx’ (has a parallel in Sa s. t.¯en.d.a¯ ‘coccyx with flesh attached’ and in Par. "t.öngök ˙ ‘podex’ and t.u"t.ungak ˙ ‘hip’) – Degener t.ungt ˙ . ’ä ‘tail’ with suggested derivation < OIA *dumbha- ‘tail’ but more likely is derivation < OIA *t.un.t.a-2 ‘defective’ (5468); kh a ¯rí ‘left’ – Degener k¯ ar"i ‘left’ (regarding origin and parallels not only in Nuristani but also Braj see p. 503); mukh ‘face’ – Degener mük ‘face’10 < OIA múkhya- ‘pertaining to face’ (10174); ma˙ch ‘fish’ – Degener ma˙c ‘fish’ < OIA mátsya- ‘fish’ (9758). Further below (p. 320) I will show that in our geographical area of investigation the change from a Hindi type system t, th, d, dh to an Iranian type system t, d occurred always via t, th, d and there is clear evidence that aspiration of voiced stops gets lost before unvoiced stops lose aspiration. This must also have been the case in Old Iranian and Proto-Nuristani.11 In Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı one finds many cases of aspiration loss with voiced stops, but there exists also a lower yet quite remarkable number of cases of aspiration loss with unvoiced stops. I present them right below. Could it be that the fluctuating aspiration in Nuristani in case of unvoiced stops and affricates versus the total absence of any aspiration in case of voiced stops and affricates is a distant echo of stepwise loosing the aspiration? Dardic Savi appears, with regard to these phonetic features, almost like Nuristani. Buddruss may still have heard slightly aspirated voiced stops, but for Liljegren they have become inaudible. 7 There are several more Prasun words written with word-final -h which may be due to a similar phenomenon as the automatic word-final aspiration of tenuis for instance found in Nuristani Waigal¯ı (see next paragraph) and in Dardic Indus Kohistani. 8 Derivation < OIA grst
- ‘heifer’ (Pk. git.t.hi-) is semantically and phonologically problematic and  cf. also Ap. got¯a- ‘cow’ (mentioned by Pat. and quoted in Pischel §8) and therefore unlikely. But OIA animal names with suffix -ti- (for reference see EWA sub grst
-). Cf. also K.pog. g˘ oitri ‘cows’ 

(T. Grahame Bailey [1903: 59]). 9 The informant pronounces the name of this village in this way and not as Nišeygr¯ am. 10 Note that the pronunciation of umlaut also fluctuates in case of our consultant. 11 Note also Ancient Greek which had a t, th, d system but later lost all aspiration.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

472

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

This is not surprising because with regard to Savi affricates Buddruss may still have heard slightly aspirated unvoiced ones but the affricate subsystem (1967: 15) does not include aspirated voiced affricates. This corroborates the observations regarding a stepwise loss of aspiration, and it suggests perhaps that affricates lose aspiration before stops in this region. Interestingly, we find a similar behaviour regarding aspiration in Pashto. Morgenstierne and Lloyd-James write about the Pashto dialect of Hazara (1928: 54): “Unvoiced plosives have a tendency towards a slight aspiration. This tendency is most marked in the case of the labial, which is aspirated in front of all vowels, as well in initial as in intervocalic position. . . k, t, and t are, if at all, very slightly aspirated before wide vowels, and in intervocalic position.”

Voiced stops are apparently never aspirated. Basically the same observation has been made by Elfenbein (1997: 740ff.). It is also known that in many Iranian languages the voiceless stops are slightly aspirated, though aspiration is not distinctive. But, in contrast to Germanic languages like Norwegian or German, aspiration does not disappear after consonant clusters like (-)st-. If we look into the other direction towards Dardic, there are cases like Wot.ap¯ ur¯ı-Kat.a ¯rqal¯ ai on which Bashir notes (2003: 870): “No voiced aspirates were noted; aspiration is phonemic for voiceless consonants but wavers.” There is still more aspiration here, but the situation parallels the one in Nuristani and Iranian with regard of wavering aspiration, whether distinctive or not, being only found with unvoiced segments. It is thus not correct to state that aspiration was lost in Iranian and Nuristani whereas it was preserved in Indo-Aryan. We must rather say that the same process affected Iranian and Nuristani comprehensively, but the other parts of the northwestern branch (Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı) and the Outer Languages only partially. Moreover, the tendency for deaspiration petered out from northwest to southeast and did not have any effect on eastern Outer Languages like Oriya or Bengali. There was also no effect of deaspiration on the Inner Languages which is thus a feature distinguishing the two.

16.1.2.4

Aspiration loss in Dardic tenues

I would first like to refer to my above distinction between aspiration loss without traces (because there never was one) and aspiration loss with traces(p. 24ff.) in case of mediae. In addition see also p. 315ff. for additional discussions and examples regarding loss of aspiration and also on the opposite phenomenon, namely cases of aspiration not justified by etymology in a number of Dard and Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages and dialects. The gradual loss of aspiration in the northwest must be very old. In connection with G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı, Fussman speaks of a “. . . faiblesse de l’aspiration” (1989b: 441). Loss of aspiration in case of aspirated tenuis is untypical for Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, still it is occasionally found even in other Outer Languages and in this way underlines the geographic gradual character of this phenomenon. Here are examples:

There is K¯ ow¯ ar instead of Kh¯ ow¯ ar (LSI vii, ii: 133fn.): “The people of Chitr¯ al pronounce it ‘K¯ ow¯ ar’ or ‘Kh o ¯-w¯ ar’ being a slightly aspirated k”; Sh. ká, Bro. k¯e and Tor. “kow-” (Biddulph) all ‘eat’ (LSI viii, ii: 226) (also in Rj.jaip. kabo ‘to eat’ and kuabo ‘to feed’ [CLLR]) < OIA kha
dati ‘eats’ (3865), therefore here also Sh. “kyas” ‘food’ (Leitner 1889: 44) < OIA kh¯ adya- ‘food’ (3872) (< *ka˙c < *kadz < *kh¯ aj); Pal. k¯en., ky¯en. ‘cave’ and Kho. k¯en ‘cave’ (Strand: “k"En”); dialectal Paš. t¯ an ‘place’ < OIA stha
na- ‘place’ (13753), Paš. čaˇȷa¯ye¯ u ‘with (?) a winnowing fork’ (Morgenstierne 1973a, vol. 3: 313) with first component < OIA *chajja- ‘basket’ (4964), kun.d.ä ‘hill-pasture with sheep-pen and hut’

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

473

(Morgenstierne 1973a, vol. 3: 318) < OIA khan.d.á-1 (3792);12 Tor. pug¯ usa ‘to blow’ < OIA ph¯ utka- ‘blowing’ (9102); Bshk. tam H ‘tree’ < stambha- ‘pillar’ (13682) (where one normally expects th-),13 t.ik H ‘correct, fine’ < OIA *t.h¯ıkka‘right’ (5503), k¯ on H(L) ‘trench’ < OIA khaní- ‘mine’ (3813);14 Bhat.. p"a ¯i ‘father’s sister’, Gaw. p p" , Bshk. p¯ep ‘father’s or mother’s sister’, Tor. p¯ ap ‘father’s sister’, Sh.gur. pap¯ı ‘aunt’ < OIA *phuphu- ‘father’s sister’ (9089); Gau. and Narisati variety of Gaw. kur ‘foot’ < OIA khura- ‘hoof’ (3906); Bhat.. kurpy ‘to cut with scissors (e.g. cloth, hair)’ and Garh. kurpan. ‘to cut cloth into small pieces’ < OIA ks.urapra- ‘sharp-edged like a razor’ (3730) (one should expect ˙ alayati ‘rinses’ (3762) (the two l are kh-); Ind. k2ng

al ‘rinsed’ < OIA *khankh¯ not the same);15 Kal. cit
 ‘holiday’ ← Ur. chut.t.¯ı, k
lki ‘window’ ← Ur. khir.k¯ı

and perhaps karphás ‘phlegm, mucus’ if < OIA kharpara- ‘skull’ (3831) (but there is also an unaspirated OIA parallel, see 2876; cf. G. kh¯ apr¯ı ‘mucus crust in nose’) but with a different suffix; Bng. k undO ‘a bolt, lock’ (also Dm. kun.d.a

also Pr. kond"¯eg ‘door latch’) < ‘peg for fastening yoke to plough-pole’, but note 1 OIA *khunta- ‘peg, post’ (3893), k undO ‘protruding, standing out (e.g., a rock)’ if < OIA * khundha- ‘humpbacked’ (3902), kOrla ‘male given name’ is same as khOrla, c eltu ‘kid of goat’ < OIA chagal
a- ‘goat’ (4963), tunkO ‘ominous stroke,

< OIA *thuna- ‘striking, breaking’ (5507), kat

lO ‘a meadow near hurting o.s.’

a river’ and Nuristani toponym p¯ ap"ařo k¯ at.le ‘Paparo Pass’ (but Deog. khat.al ‘riverside’, Kva. kh¯ at.¯el ‘a plain’ [in the mountains] [T. Grahame Bailey 1915: 169] and Kann. khad.˘elön˙ ‘bank of river’) < OIA *khat.t.atala- ‘ravine’ (3778a),16 tobrO n.m. ‘(lower) lip’ < OIA *thobba- ‘snout’ (6109); Chin. and Bhad. k¯ ar¯ a ‘ass; pony’ < OIA khara-1 ‘donkey’ (3818) (Kaul 2006 ii: 42); P. cilittar ‘deceit’ and cilittr¯ı ‘deceitful’ related with OIA chala- ‘fraud, deceit’ (with common change a > i plus -tra suffix); M. k¯ ajv¯ a and Ko. k¯ ajjul.o both ‘firefly’ < OIA khadyota- ‘firefly’ (3809); Jat.. k¯ ar ‘sour (land)’ and k¯ ar¯ a ‘sour, saline’ (Joseph 1910: 727) < OIA ks.a ¯rá-1 ‘alkali’ (3674). Throughout this book there are more examples of IA languages with aspiration loss in tenuis.

16.1.2.5

(4) Indo-Aryan phase (a)

Strand accords to the Indo-Aryan phase of Nuristani among others the following processes which are, in fact, partly general IA and partly limited to languages in the northwest: “Retroflexion of tongue-end consonants next to r or after vocalic r. Examples with postcon Skt. ášru-, but initial tr sonantal r include *ćr > c. as in . . . *aćru- > K[¯ amdeshi] a ¯c.’ü ‘tear’, and dr remain unchanged. . . ” 17 12 The lemma is also found as borrowing in Psht. kan.d.ák ‘a flock of sheep, a herd of deer’ and reflected in Gadd. khand¯ a ‘a flock’ (LSI 7ix,iv: 794 and Kaul [i: 138]). 13 Note als Klm. täl H imp. ‘put!’ which seems to be cognate with OIA sthála- ‘place’. 14 Whether H is direct reflex of aspiration loss is difficult to say as this tone frequently also appears in Klm. words without originally containing an aspiration. 15 Ind. k2nd2
r ‘a ruin’ is probably not < OIA *khan.d.aghara- ‘ruined house’ (3794) but borrowed

kandar ‘ruins of a house or village’ which itself is a borrowing from IA. from Psht. . 16 The dental laterals in Bng. and Deog. are irregular and thus belong to a whole group of words with OIA -l- > -l- (see p. 363). 17 The Kamd. word is quoted above p. 88.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

474

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

This retroflexion is, one may say, an extended form of the RUKI rule and parallels the development of OIA sr > s. and of śr > s..18 It is not found in OIA, but in Nuristani, Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (with sr > ś) and Brahui (in form of loan words, see [partly same] examples p.  < OIA srut
- (13887) or srotiy¯ 724): Wg. s.u ¯¯ı ‘ravine’ a- ‘stream’ (13890)19 and probably Pr. nis., n¯ıs. ‘ravine, alluvial fan in a side valley; Schlucht; Schwemmterrasse eines Seitentales’ < OIA (Suśr.) nisruta- ‘flowed down or out’; Pal. s.a ¯k ‘neck’ < OIA srákva- ‘jaws’ (13576) (also found in Sh., Dm. and Ind.) and etymologically related Sh. suti
 n.f. ‘Ecke, corner’ and Wg. sut
 ‘corner’ (Z.) (Norwegian hjørne) < OIA (RV 7,18,17) srakt
- n.f. ‘a corner, edge’

727); Sh. a su ‘tear’ < OIA áśru- ‘tear’ (919). This suggests that retroflexes are very (see p.

 that Nuristani shares here a process only with Dardic, a process which old in Nuristani and therefore can hardly be called an Indo-Aryan process due to its linguistic and geographic confinement.

16.1.2.6

(4) Indo-Aryan phase (b)

“Nasal latency, with the nasalization of a preceding n spreading across a vowel to a following stop consonant; e.g., Skt. nadí- > *nand¯ı > K[¯ amdeshi] nan"i ‘river’. . . ” There are parallels in the following languages: Gaw. n¯endi, Tor. and Paš. nand
 both ‘river’, and in Rj.jaip. nand¯ı, in Ah¯ır¯ı dialect of Bhil. and in Brj.-Aw. nand¯ı ‘river’, Ko.kun.. n@ndi ‘river’; cf. also Kal. nangór ˙ ‘fort, castle’ < OIA nagará- ‘town’ (6924) and nánguš ˙ ‘fingernail’ < OIA *nakkha- ‘nail’ (6914). This process, because of its wide dissemination, can be called Indo-Aryan; cf. also Bng. nind¯er ‘sleep’ < OIA nidra
- ‘sleep’ (7200) and many other modern parallels. Note that the opposite process – loss of word-medial nasals – is also common.

16.1.2.7

(4) Indo-Aryan phase (c)

“Anticipation of r.” This is otherwise called Dardic metathesis and is widespread in Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, and occasionally also found in other western and northwestern languages. It is discussed p. 342. Now follow two processes accorded by Strand to the Nuristan phase:

16.1.2.8

(5) Nuristani phase (a)

“Initial affricates lose spirancy to become d or t: *źiź˜ u- ‘tongue . . . > *diź˜ u.” 18 This has a parallel in the historical development of Iranian Pashto phonology. The transliteration signs x ˇ and s. represent, according to respective dialects, either a retroflex-like fricative or retroflexlike sibilant. This phoneme has derived from one of the following old clusters: *sr, *str, *štr, *rs @ja ‘woman’ < *str¯ı-č¯ı-, uˇ x ‘camel’ < *uštraas e.g. in Psht. xw a
x e ‘mother-in-law’ < *hwásruy¯a-, x ˇ´ (Av. uštra-), weˇ xt´ @ ‘hair’ < *warsa- (plus?) (all examples from Cheung 2013: 620). I may use the occasion of the quote of Psht. xw a
x e ‘mother-in-law’ to point out that the position of its accent corresponds with the position of the accent in Dardic Ind. (i)c.òes. ‘mother-in-law’ which is related with OIA
sva
sru
- ‘husband’s or wife’s mother’ (12759). The position of the accent in Psht. and Ind. corresponds, however, with that of OIA śváśura- ‘father-in-law’. 19 But note also with initial palatal in the Zhönchigal variety of Wg. š¯ ot ‘ravine, chasm’ (Morgenstierne 1954).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

475

This is again not limited to Nuristani: Kal. danda.ú ‘chin’ is a hybrid synonym compound with first component dan- < IIr. *ˇȷ(h) anu- < PIE *´ genu- ‘jaw’ with d- < *ˇȷ- as e.g. in Wot.. dus
un, d usu 
l ‘moon’ < OIA jyótsn¯a- ‘moonlight’ (5301), Kal. ta˙círik ‘to be full (of food)’ (Trail and Cooper), c˙ a˙c¯ır- ‘to satisfy’ (Morgenstierne),20 Pr. dus"a ‘soup’ < older *us"a <

OIA y¯ us.a- ‘broth’ (10521)21 and also in Kal. das.góral.a ‘spirit being revered in Krakal village in Bumburet’ with first syllable < older *ˇȷac.(a) < OIA yaks.á- ‘a supernatural being’ (10395) and second part of the word < OIA ghorá-1 ‘awful’ (4522) plus a v¯ al¯ a suffix.22 The second component -da.u is < OIA *d¯ ams ˙ . t.ra- ‘fang, tusk, beard’ (6250, see there e.g. Ku. d¯ ar. ‘jaws’ but note also Ind. d
2 e ‘chin’).23 The same process is occasionally also found outside Nuristani and Dardic: S. chapru ‘highlands’, Kt.g.
sa p@r ‘rock’, Garh. tappar. ‘a flat area, grassy meadow’ (obviously in the mountains) and Pal. táapar. ‘rock, hill’ (for many more cognates see p. 772). The same process is also known from Vedic, at least documented with one case: jásate ‘is exhausted’ has also dásana- ‘wasting, perishing, destroying’ etc., present tense dásyati ‘wanes’ etc. (Lipp [2009: 107]).

16.1.2.9

(5) Nuristani phase (b)

“Initial spirants assimilate following occlusion to become affricates: *srcil'a ‘slack’ (< OIA  *srthil
a-) > V[¯ as"i-vari]. čic"il. . . ”  Buddrus and Degener give the following allomorphs for this lemma: Prasun (V¯ as"i-vari) č@čel, č@č@l, č@č"il ‘soft’ < *srcil"a ‘slack’ < OIA *srthil
a- (12601) This has following parallels: Ash.   c i cila
, Wg. čičil and Kt. in addition voiced jijil all ‘soft’. Note also Pr. p˙cil ‘scree slope’ and ps˙cil, ¯ır ps˙cil ‘big stone heap (with stones collected from fields), scree slope’ < older *pra˙ci˙cila < OIA praśithila- ‘very loose’ but apparently belonging to a Prasun dialect different from Prasun č𝑖 čil documented by Buddruss. The words have a precursor in Niya and G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı śiśila- ‘loose’. I do not believe that Strand’s example is a case of assimilation of following occlusion to become affricate. Rather, this and a great number of similar examples are cases of a ‘strong’ variety of coronal consonant harmony (CCH) in which not only place of articulation but also type of articulation are harmonized. This happens only with affricates and affricatized stops (frequently together with aspiration fronting). Many additional examples from many different languages have been presented above p. 322.

20 According to Morgenstierne, this is a borrowing from an unknown Nuristani language. But if this is so, the two allomorphs would have had to be borrowed from two different unknown Nuristan languages. The lemma has been discussed above p. 95. 21 Bur. júlus. ‘soup poured over chunks of bread, steam of fresh meat soup; soup that was cooked the whole night’ is probably a synonym compound with júl- connected with Bur. júuli ‘scrambled eggs; soup’ which is < OIA *jhola-2 ‘juice’ (5416) (also found in Ind. zu li ‘a sauce’) and -us. < OIA y¯ us.a- ‘broth’ (10521). 22 The same process, but with retroflex outcome, is also found in Kal. d.an.d.ék ‘furry growth on the sides of a goat’s neck’ < OIA *jhan.t.a- ‘hair’ (5334), in d.áran ‘flood, flash-flood, mud slide’ < OIA jharan.a-1 “falling water” (5344), d.henk ˙ ‘knee’ < OIA j¯ anghika˙ ‘relating or belonging to the leg’ (with similar parallels found p. 312). 23 Morgenstierne (1973a, vol. 4: 203) analyzes in the older form dandařı u ‘chin’ the ř not correctly as a suffix.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

476

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

16.1.2.10

(5) Nuristani phase (c)

Nurist¯ an phase: “dissimilation of st (and later, čt) to št in K. and Kal. [i.e. Wg.]; e.g., K. št"um ‘tree. . . ” which is < stambha- ‘pillar’24 (13682). Actually in Nišigr¯ am dissimilation is, according to my language consultant, a dialectal feature. There is, e.g., muštá ‘marrow, brain’ but also mustá. This preservation of initial sibilant with or without following stop (occasionally also preservation of sm- and change to š-) is not limited to Nuristani and some Dard languages – e.g. Sak. s.k¯ıma- ‘to heap up, build’ < Av. skamba- (note also Sak. haysgus.t.an¯ı- ‘violence’ vs. Pers. gust¯ ax¯ı ‘rudeness’). In Dardic st- has been preserved frequently but not always through prothesis: Kal. and Kho. istónik ‘to groan’ but Kt. “shtãr-” ‘to utter inarticulate sounds’ and Kamd. št"a ¯n ˘ã, št"a ¯n ˘ n. ‘moan’ all < OIA stánati ‘roars’ (13668);25 Kal. istóra ‘barren’ (both humans and animals) but Pr. ištür ‘barren, sterile; castrated’ and ištüreli- ‘kastrieren’ are cognate with OIA star
 ‘barren cow’ (13688); Bshk. “shimeroo-” ‘to remember’ (Biddulph) < OIA smárati ‘remembers’ (13863) (the “sh-” is probably a retroflex because cf. Kal. is.marék ‘to count’); Kal. istón ‘udder’ < OIA stána- ‘udder’ (13666); Kal. and Kho. iskóv ‘peg’ < OIA *skabha‘peg’ (13638); Kal. isnós ‘root of plant’ < OIA snas¯ a- ‘tendon’ (13784). But note also the variants of the sibilant in the following lemma: Pal. keri’šp¯ıka ‘spark’, Kal. kuluspík (also kulušpík, kulišpík) ‘sparks, flying ember’, Dm. kili’s.pik (discussed above p. 794), and in Pr. the variation bušt"u, bust"u both ‘rock shelter’ which possibly derive < OIA upa-vas- ‘to stay’ /(cf. OIA vasatí- ‘staying [esp. ‘overnight’]). Notes: (a) Also MIA Mg. preserved (not always) st both medially and initially or got it changed into śt, and sth changed to st (Pischel § 310);26 it also preserved sk and skh (§ 306), sp and sph (§ 311), and sn; note also dissimilation of s.n. > sn. (see § 311; Pischel also quotes there the 9th Century Prakrit grammarian Shilanka who maintained that words like akasm¯ addan.d.a- and asm¯ akam . “. . . would be spoken as Sanskrit in Magadha by everyone down to the shepherds’ wives” 27 ). (b) OIA ml- has been preserved in Kal. mráik ‘to wither or wilt like a flower’ which is cognate with OIA mla
yayati ‘withers’ (10387) but which has an -r- correspondence in Avestan. Are the Turner forms preserving ml- semi-tatsamas? (c) The above discussed process of “dissimilation of st” is also found in a few cases in 24 Cf. same change of a > u in Gadd. thumbi ‘wooden pillar or post’ (Handa 2005: 195). 25 But note that the PIE reconstruction for OIA stánati is *(s)tenh2 - resp. *(s)tenh 𝑥 - whereas there is the slightly different reconstruction PIE *sten- ‘moan’ (also reflected in German stöhnen, Old ´ 𝜔 ‘to moan, drone, groan, lament’ for Nordic stynja, Norwegian stønne ‘to moan’, Greek 𝜎 𝜏 𝜀𝜈 which Beekes reconstructs PIE *(s)ten- ‘groan’. Their (non-)relationship is unclear (Mallory and Adams [2006: 361], EWA), but it is perhaps significant that in Indo-Aryan the meaning ‘moan, groan’ is only found in Nuristani and Dardic. 26 Von Hinüber also confirms (§ 231) that according to the grammarians, OIA st is retained or changed into śt as e.g. in OIA hastin- elephant’ > Mg. hasti or haśti. However, this is only partly confirmed in Magadhi manuscripts. 27 Pischel: “. . . würden im Lande Magadha von allen bis herab zu den Hirtenfrauen als Skt. gesprochen.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

477

Ku. as in the tatsama word paśthan ‘setting out’ (OIA prasth¯ ana-) (Meissner 1985: 125) and in some inherited words in Bng. The low number of such examples found in Pah¯ ar.¯ı means that even though it shares, for whatever historical reasons, this process with Nuristani and M¯ agadh¯ı, it either came to an early stop in Pah¯ ar.¯ı due to heavy influences from the plains or most of the once existent forms got exchanged against the more common ones. (d) A related process to st > št is sp > šp. One example from Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı: u
spOdinO ‘to

be excited’ < *ut-spandati ‘jumps up’ (1909). (e) A related process to st > št is sn > šn and is found in Rudh. śina and K. ś¯ın ‘snow’ < OIA snih- ‘wetness, moisture’ (13798) via *šni- (see also p. 725); in Shum. šinán, dialectal Paš. sena
n etc. ‘a bath, swimming’, Brj.-Aw. asna n ‘bathing’ (besides

an ‘bath’ (Z.) is comasan¯ an), and in Mult¯ an¯ı of Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan šn¯ 28 mon parlance < OIA sn¯ ana- ‘bathing’ (13789); and there is K¯ als¯ı rock inscription s.ineha- ‘affection’ < OIA sneha- ‘love’ (13802). (f) Although having preserved only one sibilant s as a phoneme, various dialects of Mult¯ an¯ı spoken in Pakistan and Afghanistan29 display a similar process as the following tatsama examples show: parś¯ ad ‘food offered to an idol’ (Z.) (OIA pras¯ ada-), śn¯ an ‘holy bath’ (Z.) (OIA sn¯ ana-). A similar process is found in Konkan ˙ .¯ı (see p. 800) and probably also in other Outer Languages, thus suggesting that the former phonological distinction between dental and palatal sibilant has been preserved at least phonetically in a number of Outer Languages.

16.1.2.11

(5) Nurist¯ an phase (d)

“In V. [Prasun] syncope occurs ubiquitously in interior syllables, less frequently in initial syllables; e.g., pš"ik ‘cat’. . . ” This “syncope” is better explained as a tendency towards sesquisyllable structures, which was taken over by a number of Outer Languages from Austro-Asiatic languages spoken in prehistoric times over large parts of northern India (including Himalayas, Karakorum and Hindu Kush). Jenny and Sidwell write (2014: 15): “A characteristic feature of many Austroasiatic languages (although less so especially in Munda, Vietnamese, and Nicobarese) are phonological words that consist of two syllables, whereby an initial unstressed syllable (often called ‘minor syllable’ or ‘presyllable’) is followed by a stressed full syllable (‘main syllable’). This word structure has also been called ‘sesquisyllable’ (‘one-and-a-half’ syllables long) since Matisoff . . . [s]esquisyllabicity has also been postulated for Proto-AA.” This tendency towards sesquisyllable structures is found in different degrees in various Nuristan, Dard and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages as well as in Burushaski. See Zoller (2016a: 112ff.) for a discussion with examples. Here some additional illustrations: Strand’s example derives < OIA *puśś¯ı- ‘cat’ (8298) and is probably of Austro-Asiatic origin (see p. 255). Further examples: Kal. plo˙c ‘hockey ball’ which may contain as a first component a ‘polo’ word (as in Pur. and Chin. polo ‘ball’) and has a parallel in Kho. bl.ats ‘round, thick; round and smooth (e.g. football), lumpish; spherical’ — 28 For the palatal sibilant in the Shum. word Turner assumes – I think unnecessarily – interference of Pers. šin¯ a. 29 In Afghanistan by Hindu and Sikh communities mainly in Kabul, Jalalabad and Kandahar.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

478

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages Him. bl¯ aj ‘a night fair’ (OIA Vali R¯ aja), gl.a ¯"m ‘bridle’ ← Pers. lag¯ am, kbakht ‘unfortunate’ ← Pers. kambaxt ‘unfortunate’, rg¯ an.u ‘to colour’ (cf. H. rang¯ ˙ an¯ a), Kgr. cm¯ ar ‘cobbler’ (H. cam¯ ar), sny¯ ar ‘goldsmith’ (H. sun¯ ar), jlva
‘weaver’ (H. jul¯ ah¯ a), ts¯ıld¯ ar ‘Tehsildar (a sub-collector of revenue)’, kl.v¯ and¯ a ‘tooth ache’ probably < OIA (Suśr.) krmidantaka- ‘toothache with decay of the teeth’30 etc. The same trend in the speech  Panjabi and Mult¯an¯ı speaking Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan where one typically of hears e.g. st¯ ara ‘seventeen’ (Z.) < OIA saptádaśa- ‘17’ (13146), preś¯ an either ‘troubled’ (← Pers.) or ‘operation’ (← Eng.) (Z.).

The tendency towards sesquisyllable structures appears to have been a widespread trend in the northwest continuing over many centuries until today but, not surprisingly, Inner Language expansion thwarted this trend at various places.

16.1.2.12

(5) Nurist¯ an phase (e)

“In all dialects except K.km. [Kamd.] and Tr. the voiced apico-dental affricate ź laxes to z: K.km. ź"otr ‘kinsman’ but K.ktv. z"otr ‘affine’ . . . ” This deaffrication holds also true for many Dard languages, e.g. Ind. zᘠv ‘to give birth’ < OIA ja
yate ‘is born’ (5204). Note that there is a strong tendency for voiced dental and retroflex affricates in many Dard languages to deaffricate, whereas the palatal affricates are generally more stable (this will be treated in detail in the second volume of my Indus Kohistani grammar). In those West Pah¯ ar.¯ı variants with dental affricates usually the closure is retained word-initially but not internally. Thus, deaffrication is quite widespread (the reader will find infra more examples of c > ś) within the three language groups; deaffrication is also found in other Outer Languages like Bh¯ıl¯ı, Gujar¯ at¯ı and R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı (see the relevant volumes of LSI).31 In the Inner Languages deaffrication is, as much as I know, quite rare. Here follow more examples of different types of deaffrication in the northwest. Many examples also display depalatalization and naturally deaffrication is more common word-finally than word-initially. A broad overview of deaffrication is found above pp. 116ff.

30 Lit. ‘worm-tooth’ which exemplifies the widespread idea that tooth-ache is caused by a worm in the tooth. 31 Whether R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı is only strongly influenced by Outer Languages or whether it is one (Grierson and Southworth allocate it to the Inner Languages), has to be left open, but in this book many data from R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı are quoted, proving its closeness to the Outer Languages. In fact, this is supported by the following statements of Grierson (LSI ix,ii: 1f.): “As explained in the general Introduction to the Group, the areas now occupied by Panj¯ ab¯ı, Gujar¯ at¯ı, and R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, which are classed as languages of the Central Group, were originally occupied by languages belonging to the Outer Circle. Over them the language of the Central Group, now represented in its purity by Western Hind¯ı, gradually spread in a wave which diminished in force the further it proceeded from the centre. R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, therefore, and especially Western R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı presents several traces of the older outer language which once occupied Rajputana and Central India. Such are, in Western R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, the pronunciation of ¯ a like the a in ‘ball’. . . Such, too, are the common pronunciation of chh as s and the inability to pronounce a pure s when it really does occur, an h-sound being substituted. . . The theory also further requires us to conclude that as the Aryans who spoke the Inner Group of languages expanded and became more powerful, they gradually thrust those of the Outer Circle, who were to their south, still further and further in that direction.” The model suggested in this book is very close to Grierson’s model sketched here by him.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

16.1.2.13

479

(5) Nurist¯ an phase (f )

“Developments of r. Initial *r is strengthened to z. in A. [Ashkun] and V. [Prasun] (further to ž when palatalized in V.), .j in Tr. [Treg¯ am¯ı], . . . A.s. [San.uv¯ıri] za t- a:r ‘night’.”

This process has a parallel in Dardic Tor. žat ‘morning’ and ž¯ at ‘night’ (with at least the latter < OIA ra
tr - ‘night’ [10702] with same semantics in Ks. raadey, rEdh ‘morning’; cf. also Pr. z@t ‘night’), žed ‘blood’ (Biddulph) (< OIA rakta-1 ‘blood’ [10539]), žon ‘widower’

da- ‘maimed’ [10593]), [z@g] ‘vein’ ← Pers. rag, žit ‘brass’ (< OIA r¯ıti-2 ‘yellow (cf. OIA ran ..

 brass’ [10752] with preservation of medial stop). The historical details for the above forms are largely unclear and perhaps not monocausal. However, this innovation is shared between Nuristani Tr. and Dardic Tor. which are geographically not adjacent.

16.1.2.14

(5) Nurist¯ an phase (g)

“. . . [In Kamdeshi] [f]inal postvocalic *r is lost in some cases; e.g., [Dardic] Kal. dor but K. d"u ‘door’ . . . ” 32 Grierson observes (LSI ix,iii: 2): “Medial r is frequently elided as in Sindh¯ı, Lahnda and Piś¯ aca as well as in some dialects of Bengali (notably R¯ ajbangś¯ı).” With regard to characteristic features of Outer Languages, Grierson mentions on the same page deaffrication as in Gujar¯ at¯ı and R¯ ajasth¯ an¯ı, a > O as in many Outer Languages, s > H, x like eastern Gujar¯ at¯ı and Gaddi (x seems to reflect an intermediate state between s and h), depalatalization of c, j > c˙ , z as in Mar¯ at.h¯ı and some Gujar¯ at¯ı dialects (depalatalization in languages with only one sibilant may be a survival of former more complex sibilant systems). The trend for r deletion is also found in various Dard and Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, but includes not only word-medial and final r but also l,33 t. and d.. A broad overview of this type of deletion is found above pp. 20.

16.1.2.15

(5) Nurist¯ an phase (h)

Palatalization of velar stops before i. For Nuristani Ash. Strand describes cases of palatalization before i: čil¯ a ‘cheese’ but Kamd. kil"a ¯ř (< OIA kil¯ at.a- ‘inspissated milk’ [3181]). Similar palatalization processes are wellknown from Kashmiri, but also occasionally found in Dardic Kal. as in c
stik ‘to stand’34 <

OIA t
sthati ‘stands’ (5837) (Mg. cis.t.hadi [Pischel §45], AMg. cit.t.ha ‘to stand’; but note also

32 There is also Pr. do ‘door’ and note also that in Newari r-loss is extremely common for reasons that are not (yet) clear to me. 33 Loss of -l- or -l- > -v- is e.g. characteristic for Dardic Kalasha (e.g. -vav ‘watcher, agent’ < OIA p¯ alá- ‘protector’) and for a number of Gar.hv¯ al¯ı and Kumaun¯ı varieties (see e.g. Kaul 2006 i: 33). 34 The verb is probably also found as second member in Kal. pičís.t. s.át.ik ‘to attach to someone, to tag along or cling to someone’ with first member < OIA piccayati ‘presses flat’ (8149).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

480

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

Paš.DN. tost- and dialectal Paš. test- ‘stand’ (see also Burrduss [1959b: 67])) which strikingly resemble Aś. absolutives tistiti [Shahbazgarhi] and tistitu [Mansehra]) and which seem to reflect OIA tastháu ‘stands’ which itself reflects PIE perf. *ste-stóh2 /sth2 - (Lipp [2009i: 179]), Kal. ˇȷiék ‘to look at’ < OIA d
dheti ‘perceives’ (6346), ˇȷis.(t.) ‘hand-span measure’ < OIA dis.t.i- ‘a measure of length’ (6343), ˇȷés.t.ak ‘name of a goddess; female spirit being of the home and clan’ if < OIA destr
- ‘name of a female divinity (6556) and second component

pricking or prickling sensation’ which is connected with OIA in čapačun.d.ál.i dyek ‘to have a kan.t.ala- ‘Mimosa Arabica’, and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhal. t.ir ‘eye’ but pl. "cirã ‘eyes’ (Kaul 2006 ii: 143); Bhad. bhot@n ‘(they) become’ (m.) but bhoc@n ‘(they) become’ (f.) (Kaul 2006 ii: 183), and in Iranian Shgh. as in c˙ is. ‘sharp, bitter’ < *tixra- (?) (Morgenstierne), cebu
d ‘pigeon’ < *kapauta- (Morgenstierne). There are many more words in Shgh. and other Iranian languages displaying this type of palatalization, see especially Wiczak and Novák (2016). Note: The possible etymology for Kal. ˇȷés.t.ak ‘name of a goddess’ has puzzled many since Turner’s suggestion does not look very likely. I have previously suggested (2018: 210, fn. 111) relationship with OIA jyés.t.ha- ‘most excellent’. Another option could be connection with Khotan Saka gyasta, jasta ‘god’, Tumshuq Saka jezda which correspond with OIA yajatá- ‘adorable’ (Parpola 2015: 106). Could this be a case of ‘spontaneous retroflexion’ of jasta, jezda comparable to above-quoted retroflex-dental alternations as in Wg. m ust but Ash. must and m ust ‘fist’ < OIA musti- ‘clenched



hand, fist’ ?

16.1.2.16

Summing up: Nuristani and the rest

The above data displays a big variety of phonological processes which nevertheless show a striking concentration in the three language groups and to a lesser extend in other Outer Languages. There has been a tremendous amount of mutual influencing and of overlay. This factor is probably also responsible for the fact of the so many phonological processes that have apparently affected only more or less small parts of the languages. Through influences from outside they were brought to a stop – or items got replaced – before they had affected all targets. It is also important to keep in mind that the three language groups were hardly, actually in most cases never, exposed to standardization attempts – in contrast to many other Indo-Aryan languages. By and large, Nuristani has not developed striking linguistic innovations in phonology that would set it further apart from Iranian or Indo-Aryan. Apart from a few peculiar developments the linguistic identity of Nuristani is largely a matter of its ancientness. But this ancientness is inseparably connected with its linguistic surroundings with comparable though different archaic features. Note, however, that in case of one of the apparently most archaic Nuristani words – Prasun lüšt ‘daughter’ – which displays, according to Mayrhofer, a reflex of the Indo-European laryngeal *-h2 -, this reflex does not parallel the development in Vedic, as has generally been assumed, but follows an Old Iranian pattern, as has been clearly shown by Lipp (2009: 167f.). We have seen that almost all of the above phonological changes are shared at least with Dardic or with Dardic and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. And we will see that there is also a large amount of shared vocabulary and common morphological features in Nuristani, Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı. In my eyes there is no linguistic evidence that Nuristani was ever geographically, linguistically and culturally far away from the northwestern Indian world. From the point of view of the history of the discovery and analysis of these northwestern languages it is comprehensible that, e.g. Morgenstierne so much emphasized the peculiar

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.1. Additional views on the linguistic position of Nuristani

481

position of Nuristani since researchers before him had suggested wrong models. However, I would like to suggest that the construction of a fundamental difference between Nuristani and Dardic (not to speak of Pah¯ ar.¯ı) may have also something to do with an exaggerated view on the heathen culture of Kafiristan vs. the Muslim world of Dardistan, corresponding to an opposition of archaic vs. not so archaic. However, in his 2011 article Augusto Cacopardo states (p. 69): . . . though the first Islamic inroads started as we have just seen in the 1500’s, still three centuries later the peoples of the Hindu Kush chain from Nuristan to Gilgit were still largely unconverted. Though the ruling dynasties had pleaded allegiance to Islam some time earlier – at least in Chitral, if not in Hunza or Gilgit – it was only from the early 19th century that Islam really began to spread to the bulk of the population: through the efforts of the Kashmiri governor Nathu Shah in the area of Gilgit, and through the pressure of Pathan missionaries in the southern belt of our area, i.e. in Indus Kohistan, Swat Kohistan, Dir Kohistan, Southern Chitral, and the Kunar area. It is quite clear also that the pre-Islamic religions of those peoples were not a ‘medieval reformed paganism’, as Jettmar suggested in his latest writings, but were rather the ancient religions of the area which had never ceased to be practiced. A similar position is rightly taken by the anthropologist Jan Ovesen in his 1983 article where he compares the peoples of Nuristan with those of the Dardic Pashai language area. Also he stresses that Nuristani identity is a fairly recent phenomenon triggered by external factors: “A number of factors, I think, combined to produce the result that the Nuristani identity “caught on”. In the first place, the sudden and violent character of their conversion to Islam and the incorporation of their territory into the Afghan state may have impressed on these people a sense of common fate. . . Though the various tribal groupings had traditionally engaged in raids on each other’s villages, they now found themselves all in the same boat, and they were, moreover, treated en bloc by the Afghans, who made no fine distinctions between different kinds of (former) kafirs” (p. 324) and “. . . these events had a comparable effect in the world of scholarship; the Kafirs of the Hindu Kush had been ethnographically established as a special people, and this fame was readily conferred on their new identity, Nuristani” (p. 325). He summarizes on the same page: “We saw that, in the case of the Kafirs/Nuristani, a unitary definition was first imposed on them from outside. In the case of the Pashai, they were also first perceived as a unit by means of an external definition. However, this definition was not the result of specific historical events, but of linguistic investigations. The unity of the Pashai language was first established by Grierson (1919). . . ” Ovesen further points out that the Pashai speakers never call themselves by this name but use e.g. Kohistani ‘person from a mountainous area’, a self-designation also used in other parts of North Pakistan and thus formerly probably also used by Nuristani speakers. In footnote 6 (p. 331f.) Ovesen quotes Edelberg and Jones who had projected the Kafir identity thousand of years back to around the separation of Iranian and Indian and he remarks (ibid.) “. . . one can almost see it happening.” Ovesen continues (p. 326): “Morgenstierne certainly “generated” a good deal of history. His hypothesis, based mainly on linguistic evidence, was that Pashai was earlier spoken all over the upper part of the main Kabul Valley, being the language of ancient Kapisa and Lampaka-Nagarahara, “the two northwesternmost centres of pre-Muslim Hindu-Buddhist civilization” (1967: 11).35 In contrast, “the Kafirs have probably inhabited 35 According to Cheung (2013: 620), Pashto x ˇ¯ ahí ‘a certain historic coin’ seems to be a linguistic survival of the erstwhile Kabul-Shahi dynasty.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

482

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

their secluded valleys since time immemorial, and have never belonged to the community of civilised Indian peoples” (1944: vii). This supposition has been repeated by others, for example, Karl Jettmar (1959: 86), the historical ethnologist, who has published it as a statement of historical fact. However, the only two anthropologically trained persons who have done intensive field work in a Pashai community; Keiser (1974) and myself (Ovensen 1982), have both opposed the Pashai part of the theory and have argued, on the basis of broader, socio-cultural data, that the Pashai, like the Nuristani, should rather be regarded as representatives of the indigenous population of hill tribes in the Hindu Kush.” “Anthropologically, the Kafirs/Nuristani were, so to speak, over-publicized, partly at the expense of the Pashai. . . ” (p. 328). And commenting on Morgenstierne’s characterization of the Pashai dialect family, Oversen observes: “Although a certain similarity between Pashai and some of the Nuristani languages is thus implicitly acknowledged, Morgenstierne nevertheless saw fit to show the Nuristani languages as an entirely different branch of Indo-Iranian than that which contains Pashai” (p. 329). Out of all linguistic communities in this area it is the Kalasha Dard people having preserved their ancient religion to this day and not the “Kafirs”. The present book provides a large number of linguistic facts further supporting the views of Cacopardo and Ovesen.

16.2

Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic

Since the times of Morgenstierne it was generally held that whereas there are several phonological features in Nuristani reflecting a stage of historical development close to ProtoIndo-Iranian, this is not the case in Dardic. Above I have already presented much evidence which makes this position untenable. There is Morgenstierne’s well-known conclusion that “There is not a single common feature distinguishing Dardic, as a whole, from the rest of the Indo-Aryan languages . . . Dardic is simply a convenient cover term to denote a bundle of aberrant Indo-Aryan hill languages” (1961: 139). A similar view is taken by Fussman (1972: 12) who says that the term “n’implique pas, pour l’instant, que les parlers dardes aient une origine commune, différente de celle des autres parlers I-A” (i.e. indo-aryen). For Elena Bashir “[t]he meaning of the umbrella term ‘Dardic’ thus includes both ‘genetic’ and geographic components. The designation ‘Dardic’ implies neither ethnic unity among the speakers of these languages nor that they can all be traced to a single stammbaummodel node. . . The similarities of the Dardic languages today are due to differentially shared retentions, innovations affecting various subsets of these languages, and contact (areal developments)” (2003: 822). Among the more characteristic features of these languages Bashir enumerates (2003: 822f.) retention of three sibilants and of more consonant clusters than in the languages of the plains, (partial) loss of aspiration (especially of voiced aspirates),36 emergence of retroflex affricates, vowel fronting or raising or palatalization of consonants, pitch accent or tone systems, a three (or higher) term deictic system, and a vigesimal counting system. There are more particularities shared by only a few languages, but none of the just-mentioned features is found in all Dard languages in contrast to the other Indo-Aryan languages. Therefore, Morgenstierne’s, Fussman’s and Bashir’s quite similar evaluations appear justified. John Mock (see bibliography) presents a neat overview of the term darada, its occurrence in ancient sources and regional inscriptions, and the semantic changes of this term during the British Raj when largely unsubstantiated connections were made between 36 All three above-quoted authors think that the loss of aspiration is a recent phenomenon.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.2. Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic

483

the ancient references and modern peoples of this area. Grierson then gave the term a linguistic turn and he subsumed under a “Dardic” language group languages between eastern Afghanistan (like Waigal¯ı) and Kashmiri and its linguistic vicinity. He believed that this language group formed a third branch besides Iranian and Indo-Aryan, and he divided it into three geographical groups. It was only Morgenstierne who showed that only the so-called Kafiri languages (meanwhile Nuristani languages) may rightfully claim to present something like a third branch besides Iranian and Indo-Aryan (but see my reservations formulated above and the many data in this book which question this position); the other Dard languages of Grierson consequently received Morgenstierne’s above-quoted verdict. However, by correctly stating that the Dard languages are Indo-Aryan, not everything has been said. If ‘Dardic’ would just be an umbrella term one could wonder why Omkar N. Koul and Ruth L. Schmidt (1983: 7-9, 20) found phonological, morphological, syntactic and lexical features “. . . peculiar to the Dardic languages. . . (which) . . . may be considered to define them, not merely in terms of their geographical distribution, but as a linguistic grouping.” According to Mock, “[t]hey propose these features in order to encourage debate over Morgenstierne’s statement that “there is not a single common feature distinguishing Dardic, as a whole, from the rest of the Indo-Aryan languages”. Koul and Schmidt list the following features (1984: 7f.):

Phonological Features 1. Shortening, with or without devoicing, of word-final vowels. . . A companion feature consists in palatalization of word or syllable-final consonants. 2. Assimilation of vowels across syllable boundaries (also known as “epenthetic vowel change”). A companion feature is the development of unrounded back vowels W, G. . . 3. Retention of OIA consonant clusters. . . 4. Distinction between three sibilants. . . 5. Loss of aspiration of voiced stops 6. Development of contrastive tones

Morphological Features 7. Pronoun systems characterized by the following semantic distinctions (in at least threeterm sets): plus or minus near, and plus or minus visible. 8. Nominal systems characterized by case markers in an inflectional system of more than binary complexity (as opposed to the usual nominative : oblique opposition of noun case markers in other Indian languages). . . 9. Postpositions of the Dardic type. . .

Syntactic Features and vocabulary 10. Occurrence of SVO or SOV word order in sentences 11. Agreement in past tense transitive sentences between subject and verb (as opposed to agreement between object and verb) 12. Percentage of shared core vocabulary items. . .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

484

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

The authors analyze four dialects of Shina and four dialects of Kashmiri37 with regard to the above-quoted features. First they discuss features common to the two language complexes (1984: 16f.) and find (not all points are quoted here): Both display vocalic epenthesis and unrounded back vowels;38 both have retained OIA consonant clusters (but Shina not many); most varieties have lost the aspiration in case of mediae; all display the complex pronoun system; they have “well developed inflectional systems” and in past tense transitive sentences the subject agrees with the verb; all possess postpositions of the “Dardic type”. Then they discuss features separating the two language complexes (1984: 18): Palatalization of consonants occurs in Kashmiri varieties but not in Shina; in contrast to the Kashmiri varieties, Shina has no centralized vowels; in contrast to Kashmiri Shina has preserved OIA s.t.; Shina has preserved OIA s, ś, s., Kashmiri has only s, ś (with merger of OIA ś and s.); only Shina has developed contrastive tones;39 SVO occurs only in Kashmiri, Kasht.aw¯ ar.¯ı and perhaps P¯ ogul¯ı. In their conclusions (1984: 20) they point out that “[t]he phonological and morphological points of agreement between Shina and Kashmiri do not, for the most part, characterize Pahari or the languages of the plains. . . Thus, to the extent that these features are peculiar to the Dardic languages, they may be considered to define them, not merely in terms of their geographical distribution, but as a linguistic grouping. The shared core vocabulary would be another definite feature of the Dardic group.” One may question that Shina represents with regard to the above features all Dard languages. We will see that this obtains only to a limited degree. A second question is whether Kashmiri is at all a Dard language, as is usually claimed. As I will show in various places of this book, Kashmiri ought to be better classified as a transitional language between Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı, however characterized by many idiosyncrasies. Koul and Schmidt’s feature list deals both with archaisms and innovations. Here are some comments on the list:

1. Palatalization In this subsection we deal with different mechanism of palatalization (e.g. palatalization of stops, raising of vowels) of originally non-monosyllabic words which, despite considerable differences between the involved languages, seem to be reducible to just two basic mechanisms which I call ‘palatalization’ and ‘epenthesis’. In both cases a high vowel at or close to the end of a word is fronted or spreads towards a word-initial position. In case of palatalization the vowel moves/spreads to the onset edge of the first syllable (or the second syllable in triand higher syllabic words, in case of epenthesis the vowel spreads to the coda edge of the first syllable. The linguistic geography of this phenomenon is not limited to Dardic and may reach back in time to G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı (see Fussman 1989: 461, 468f.) or even – because of similar palatalization events at the eastern edge of the Indo-Aryan language-scape – reach back to Proto-Indo-Iranian. Lipp shows (2009 i: 151) that in Avestan – paralleling palatalizing effects of semivowel i – the palatals č, ˇȷ could exercise a palatalizing effect on vowel a. The  only incompletely through Old Avestan textual transmission. An effect, however, spread example is *ˇȷamati (OIA gámati) > OAv. ˇȷamait¯ı, ˇȷimait¯ı ‘will come’. Another example is *iama- (= OIA yamá-) > OAv. y¯@ma-, yima- ‘twins’, YAv. yima- ‘name of a mythical king’ 

37 It is not always clear whether some of these dialects are closer to Kashmiri or West Pah¯ ar.¯ı. 38 But not all varieties in every case. This also holds true for the following features. 39 This is controversial. The Shina varieties of Gilgit and Kohistan, with which I am somewhat familiar, have pitch accent systems which are, as I understand it, continuators of the Vedic accent.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.2. Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic

485

(Lipp, ibid.). This latter Iranian lemma has striking parallels in Nuristani and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: There is Nuristani Imr¯ a (see e.g. Jettmar [1975]) which parallels Bng. jim raza ‘God of the dead’ (Zoller 2014a: 111 and passim). Morgenstierne (1951b: 163) lists Kt. im"r¯ o, Kal. Urtsun imbro, Ash. im"r¯ a, Pr. yumr"a ¯. The lemma is also contained in Pr. imn"@ ‘graveyard’ for which I have suggested derivation < OIA *yama(r¯ aja)-layana- ‘graveyard of the god of the dead’ (Zoller [2018: 202]). Even though Avestan is the earliest evidence for palatalization of vowels through the palatals č and ˇȷ, most of the following examples display palatalization due to other mechanisms. The phenomenon is unknown in Vedic and Classical Sanskrit and has nothing to do with the Standard Prakrit development ty > cc. I cannot detect Munda or other AustroAsiatic influence, which is why ‘North Indian’ influence may be involved. Before the main bulk of examples follows below, here four examples of Kalasha, which can give a first taste of the type and geographical spread of the phenomenon: 1. Kal. géyni ‘vulva’40 and Or. g¯ a˜er., g¯ an.d.i ‘anus, vagina, buttocks’ and Si. gad.aged.iya ‘boils and pustules’ < OIA (Suśr.) gan.d.i- ‘goitre or bronchocele’ (3997), and probably borrowed into Psht. G en ‘penis’ and Orm. g¯en.d. ‘penis’. Regarding origin, there

Munda Bodo-Gadaba k˜ appear to be parallels in uãi ‘vagina’ and mul k˜ uãei, mul k˜ uãi? ‘rectum’ (with unclear first word), Bondo kuïãai ‘anus’, Kor. koã ‘penis’. This lemma seems to be of ‘North Indian’ origin. 2. Kal. preˇȷéy ‘sister-in-law (wife’s sister)’, Tor. bez
e ‘brother’s wife’ < OIA bhr¯ aturj¯ ay¯ a‘brother’s wife’ (9660). Most other reflexes, especially in the central areas (e.g. H. bhauj¯ a¯ı, bhauj¯ı, bh¯ auj) do not show this palatalization effect, but also not e.g. Ind. zh az
2y ‘a brother’s wife’. 3. For Kal. t¯ečin ‘chip’41 Turner suggests with question mark derivation < *taks.an.¯ı(sub OIA taks.an.a- ‘cutting, paring’ [5619]) which is plausible because there is also non-palatalized Kal. tánčik ‘to chisel, chip into shape, plane’ which derives < OIA táks.ati ‘forms by cutting, chisels’ (5620). Additional palatalized forms are Bshk. tec.h ‘adze’ and Jat.. tess¯ a ‘adze’ and teś¯ a, teś¯ı ‘a mason’s tool for shaping bricks’ which possibly derive < OIA taks.itr- ‘one who cuts, pares, &c.; a cutter’.42 4. Kal. c˙ aréyni ‘sill, threshold  of a door’ perhaps < OIA caran.ya- ‘foot-like, like a foot’ and here also cognate Paš.ar. c˙ o ¯rién ‘sieve’ < OIA *c¯ aran.¯ı ‘sieve’ (4759). From a synchronic point of view, Kashmiri indeed has palatalized consonants.43 But from an historical point of view we may not directly follow Koul and Schmidt who say that (1984: 7) “. . . at least some instances of palatalization appear to result from shortening and loss of final front vowels” but rather argue that there exists an explicit tendency for fronting of word-final i/y in a number of languages in the geographical area between western forms of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Nuristani, and there are stray incidences of the same process in some other IA languages (see below, see also Masica 1991: 210). Thus this is a typical geographical feature extending from the Western Himalayas to the Hindu-Kush. Not surprisingly, the linguistic effect of i/y-fronting looks different in the different languages where it is found:

40 See Trail and Cooper sub gušík ‘vulva’. 41 Trail and Cooper transcribe téyčin˙ ‘wood shavings’ with inexplicable final velar consonant. 42 The two sibilant allophones in Jat.. are possibly also a distant echo of former two affricate orders. 43 On the tendency for palatalization/epenthesis and labialization (see below) already in MIA G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı see e.g. von Hinüber (§ 157).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

486

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

(a) West, Central and East Pah¯ ar.¯ı There are only few examples in the very west: P¯ ad.. bhyin. ‘sister’ < OIA bhagin¯ı‘sister’ (9349) and pyitth n. ‘back’ probably < OIA prsth
a- ‘back’ (8371) x prst
 in Kumaoni one comes across  quite a number of words: 

‘back’ (8370). However, sitan. ‘to fall asleep’ < OIA supti- ‘sleep’ (13480) (the word is discussed again below p. 688), bh˜ı ‘earth’ < OIA bhu
mi- ‘earth’ (9557) (cf. Kt. bh¯ım ‘soil, ground’). (b) Kashmiri khav ‘ditch’ < OIA kh¯ atá- ‘dug up’ (3862) vs. kh"av ‘ate’44 < OIA kh¯ aditá- pp. of kha
dati ‘chews, bites’ (3865); b¯ agv¯ an ‘gardener’ vs. b¯ ag"v¯ an ‘lucky’ with the latter word being a borrowing going back to OIA bh¯ agyav¯ an-; c˙ hot. ‘short’ < OIA *chot.t.a- ‘small’ (5071) vs. c˙ h"ot. ‘polluted’ < OIA *chupti- ‘touch’ (5057) but with unexpected retroflex stop (Him. has dental stop: chotlí ‘defiled, polluted; menstruation’); n¯ ul ‘mongoose’ < OIA nakulá- ‘mongoose’ (6908) vs. n"u ¯l ‘blue’ < OIA n
la- ‘dark blue’ (7563) (here the original final vowel has pressed the front vowel to the periphery of the syllable; cf. also below the similar form in Nuristani Wg. ny l@ ‘blue’); zal ‘urine’ < OIA jala- ‘water’ (5155) vs. z"al ‘cream layer’ (dat. z˘eli) probably < OIA *jalya- ‘collection of water’ (5165) with close semantic parallels in dialectal Paš. ˇȷal, ˇȷol ‘cream’, Pal. ˇȷi"l¯er.i and Dm. ži"läř both ‘cream’; m @l ‘appetite’ vs. m @l" ‘fathers’ < OIA mahallika- ‘eunuch in a king’s palace’ (9935) with many modern forms ending in -i;45 parun ‘to read’ < OIA pát.hati ‘repeats aloud’ (7712) vs. par"un ‘sieve’ (but Turner paryunu ) < OIA paripavana- ‘winnowing basket’ (7843); vath ‘road’ < OIA vártman- ‘path’ (11366) vs. v"ath ‘river Vitasta’. (c) Dardic Lam. ky ãn.t. and Klm. khy 2nt ‘thorn’ (the latter form with spontaneous aspi (2679); Bhat. ghurgi El ‘a type of wild pigeon’ ration) < OIA kan.t.in- ‘thorny’ . vs. Dm. gur"gali and Pal. gurg¯eli both ‘pigeon’; Bhat.. c hi el n.f. ‘a goat’ < OIA  chagalik¯ a- ‘goat’ (4963) (compare this with Gau. c h aylih ‘a goat’ quoted below
al adj.m. but d under ‘2. Epenthesis’); Bhat.. d akh akh
i El adj.f. ‘beautiful’ (with lexeme [probably loanword] cognate with OIA dáks.a- ‘clever’ [6116]) where the
ali, r1 Ec ‘protection’ < OIA raks.ya- to be f. form must go back to older *d akh

i guarded’ (10557), k el gæry ‘to fight’ < OIA kalahin- ‘quarrelsome’ (2925); Šat..
i bh u  ‘sister’ < OIA bhagin¯ı- ‘sister’ (9349); Bhat.. madhi y e n.f. ‘a frog’ < OIA mandu k
 n.f. ‘frog’ (9746); Gau. lhi u
‘red’ < OIA lóhita- ‘red’ (here both fronting



of -i- and -h-); Bhat.. ka l adj.m. and ki y uEl adj.f. ‘black’ < OIA k¯ ala-1 (and k¯ al¯ı-)   i 1  ‘black’ (3083), m ak y
e n.f. ‘a monkey’ < OIA markat - n.f. ‘monkey’; Tor.cail. jyang ˙ ‘shin-bone’ < OIA *janghiya˙ ‘belonging to the shank’ (5084) (Turner has here Bshk. j¯eng ˙ ‘shin-bone’ which shows that the i fronting can also raise the affected vowel), thyel ‘sole of foot’ not directly < OIA tala- ‘sole’ (5731) but either < *tali- or *talya- plus spontaneous aspiration (aspirated forms of this word are also found in several West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties, see below p. 302), čhe¯ ar ‘vomiting’ < OIA chardí- ‘vomiting’ (4999), byas n.f. ‘calf’ (against b¯ as 44 The stress sign serves to indicate palatalized vowel in Kashmiri. 45 The lemma is perhaps also found in the Niya documents as mahuli for which T. Burrow (1937) hesitantly considers the meaning ‘grandmother’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.2. Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic

487

n.m.) < OIA vatsik¯ a- ‘heifer’ (11239), sy2l ‘ricestraw’ < OIA ś¯ ali- ‘growing or unhusked rice’ (12415), ky2ng

n.f. ‘comb’ < OIA kankat¯ ˙ ı- ‘comb’ (2598); Wot.. dy Ed ‘thick milk; dicke Milch’ probably despite problematic semantics < OIA dugdhin- ‘milky’ (6399), ly¯eš ‘grape’ according to Buddruss (1960: 112) < OIA *dr¯ aks.ik¯ a- but not accepted by Turner (cf. however Pal. k¯ ak-dhr¯ee c.¯ı ‘wild vine’ with final close front vowel), nyed ‘river’ and R¯ aj. nin ‘river’ (Z.) < OIA nad
‘river’ (6943) (borrowing?), Wot.. py an
 and Bhat.. p
i a ‘water’ < OIA p an
ya‘water’ (8082), Wot.. pyenth ‘Weg’ < OIA *panthik¯ a- (7785), ry¯ ad ‘Nacht’ < OIA ra
tr - ‘night’ (10702), zyen ‘Schlange’ < OIA *jant¯ı- (5110) with a close parallel in Nuristani Wg. (see below); Gaw. ziant ‘snake’ (see preceding); Gau. p2ry u  ‘sieve’ (see in the preceding paragraph the K. parallel). (d) Nuristani Here the evidence is rather thin as in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: Pr. sy¯ us ‘sister’ < OIA sv
asr  ‘sister’ (regarding palatal vowel cf. Gaw. sas¯ı ‘sister’); Pr. kyo sto ‘younger’ < OIA kanis.t.há- ‘youngest’ (2718); Wg. zyen ‘snake’ < OIA *jant¯ı- ‘worm’ (5110).

2. Epenthesis This type of i/y-fronting is widespread especially in Ind. and parts of its direct neighborhood, therefore here just some examples: (a) Dardic: Ind. su ri ‘sun’ < OIA s ur - ‘sun’ (13574), kutul adj.m. and kutuli adj.f. ‘strong



h (as a person)’, kur2t adj.m. and kur2ythi adj.f. ‘hard’, c uno
th n.m. and c unu
thi





n.f. ‘a small child of four to five years’; Gau. c h aylih n.f. ‘a goat’ (see above 1. [c]), Kho. diš ‘bad’ < OIA d¯ us.ya-1 ‘wicked’ (6506). (b) West Pah¯ ar.¯ı P¯ ad.. h¯ athi ‘elephant vs. haithi in ergative case, dhain.¯ı ‘husband’ < OIA dhanín‘rich’ (6722), p aEn, paEnyi ‘water’ < OIA p an
ya- ‘water’ (8082), zëg ‘leg’ < OIA

the shank’ (5084) with a parallel in Bshk.; Gadd. riso *janghiya- ‘belonging to ‘food’ < OIA rasavat¯ı- ‘kitchen’ (10656) and khe¯ıl ‘porcupine’46 < OIA śályaka‘porcupine’ (12353); Sir.d.od.. baig¯ı ‘land, field’ < OIA várga- ‘class’ (11331) plus diminutive ending; Bhad. mesli ‘fish’ < OIA mátsya- ‘fish’ (9758); whereas Rudh. and Khaś. have dhoty¯ a ‘washed’ it is dhoit¯ a in Bhad. In Khaś. this process has gone further in that final -i replaces the original vowel of a noun or adjective in plural: "m2chli ‘fish’ (sg.) vs. "michli (pl.), cer.i ‘broad’ vs. cir.i (pl.) etc. (Varma 1938 quoted in Kaul 2006 ii: 189); Ki˜ ut.h. k¯ıl¯ o ‘in the morning’ < OIA *k¯ alyaka‘timely’ (3105). By and large, however, epenthesis is known in quite a number of western and central West Pah¯ ar.¯ı varieties, but it is not very pervasive, and it is rare in eastern West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, one example being Bng. ba˜ıś ‘bamboo’ which is cognate with OIA vamś¯ ˙ ıya- *‘pertaining to bamboo’ (11181). However, it is widespread again further east in Kumaoni, e.g. in kyuma (or kimu) ‘mulberry’ < OIA *kimbu- ‘mulberry’ (3440) and very many other examples. 46 Should actually be xe¯ıl.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

488

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

Comparing the above examples for palatalization and for epenthesis one cannot avoid the impression that we are dealing here with two mirror-image processes,47 namely two different forms of [i/y/u]-fronting48 : 1. Epenthesis: CV1 CV2 > CV1 v2 C(V2 ) 2. Palatalization: CV1 CV2 > Cv2 V1 C(V2 ) Both processes appear in synchronic alternations and in historical developments and might reach back, as pointed out above, to G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı or even to Proto-Indo-Iranian. In both cases an [i/y/u]-fronting takes place: in case of (a) the final vowel spreads to the coda edge of the first syllable, and in case of (b) it spreads to the onset edge of the first syllable. In both cases the vowel of the second syllable then usually, but not always, gets reduced to a m¯ atr¯ a vowel or disappears completely. There might be a parallel to process (a) with the so-called r-metathesis. Modern reflexes of OIA da
tra-2 ‘sickle’ (6260) like S. £a tro, Jat.. dra t , Him. dra"t., Paš. dr¯ aet ‘sickle’ (Buddruss [1959b: 38]) or Gau. z.h¯ as. all ‘sickle’ make a proto-form *dr¯ atra- very likely, thus also here a spread to the front of the word, in this case by a liquid (see also Morgenstierne [1973: 9ff.]). And the same may hold good for the h-fronting (see above p. 309). In case of the following examples it is at first sight difficult to decide whether process (a) or (b) was at work: Klm. and Dara. s¯ır, Dir Kohistani s¯ı, Bshk. s¯ır, Wot.. sir all ‘sun’ < OIA s ur  ‘sun’ (13574) (cf. also K. siri ‘sun’); Bshk. čič, Tor. čiš, č¯ı, Pal. čič¯ı, Dara. č¯ıč all ‘breast, nipple’, etc. < OIA *cucci- ‘nipple’ (4855); Dara. and Bshk. tin, Tor. t¯ın both ‘navel’ < OIA tundi- ‘navel’ (5860), Garh. pisr.o ‘pimple’ < OIA pús.ya-1 ‘vigour’ respectively pusya
‘a kind of plant’ (8306), etc. However, at least in case of Klm. (and most probably also in case of closely related Dara. and Bshk.) it seems clear that (b) was at work. In Klm. one comes across the allophonic relationship of non-palatalized stops before back vowels vs. palatalized stops before front vowels, e.g. [khan] ‘mountain’ vs. [ky hän] ‘mountains’ (Baart 1997: 30). There are also other cases for the palatalization of consonants, but they do not alter the fact of their allophonic character. We thus see that [i/y/u]-fronting has led to allophonic alternations in Klm., in K. to phonemic contrasts, and e.g. in Wot.. probably to (yet) no palatalized units. Buddruss states (1960: 19): “The numerous conjunctions that appear word-initially and word-medially with y as second component (by Ena u. . . ) are probably no phonemic consonant conjunctions.” 49 In fact, there are many words in Wot.. with front vowels without preceding -y-. More difficult to explain than the preceding examples are S. siju, siêu, L. sijjh, P. sajj all ‘sun’, and Si. sivi ‘the sun’s ray’ all of which Turner derives < OIA su
rya- to which is to be added colloquial B. śujj¯ı ‘sun’ and B. Chit. suJJO ‘sun’. Si. (h)ira, Md. iru both ‘sun’ derive < OIA su
riya- and Si. ikiliya ‘vessel, pot’ derives < OIA úkhya- ‘being in a cauldron’ (1630). If the data discussed in the preceding paragraphs have some explanatory power with regard to the question of epenthesis or palatalization, then also here process (b) must have taken place. Intuitively this looks plausible because there are not a few parallels e.g. in the 47 Epenthesis usually means the addition of one or more sounds to a word, for which there is not a single example above. But, admittedly, it is also used in the sense of anticipation of a following vowel. 48 We ignore here the few cases where a former i/y has led, as in K., to the palatalization of a preceding consonant without shifting its place. 49 Buddruss: “Die im An- und Inlaut erscheinenden zahlreichen Verbindungen mit y als zweitem Bestandteil (by Ena u. . . ) sind wahrscheinlich keine phonemischen Konsonantenverbindungen.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.2. Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic

489

vocabulary between the northwest and the extreme south of IA (a topic still awaiting proper attention). But whether this can be taken as an indication for a great age for process (b) is another question; after all, ‘Umlaut’ processes are nothing unusual. Still it is worth pointing out that process (b) is perhaps still active (or was so until not so long ago) as can be deduced from loanwords reflecting it, like Wot.. my¯ ad ‘female; Weibchen’ which is a borrowing from Pers. m¯ ada, but to which an Indo-Aryan feminine suffix -¯ı must have originally been added. Note also that the S., Si., L. and B. forms are additional examples for the above-discussed loss of -r- (p. 20). Note: a mirror process to the ones described above involving a carrying back not of palatal vowels but of u/v can be seen in the following examples from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: Kt.g., Kc. tv¯ ar, tvaro, Jaun. tv¯ ar ‘incarnation’ are tatsamas of OIA avat¯ ará-; Kt.g. dv¯ as, Kc. d(h)v¯ as (with spontaneous aspiration) ‘sigh; indifferent, lazy’ cf. H. etc. ud¯ as ‘dejected, sad’; Kt.g., Kc. dhva r ‘loan’ < OIA uddh¯ ará- ‘loan’ (2018). We have seen that process (a) centers among the Dard languages within the Indus Kohistan area. Other areas where this process is found are that of western West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, Kumaoni, Sadani and different lects of Bengali. Kaul (2006 i: 46) gives a few Kumaoni examples like mvat. ‘fat’ (m.) vs. mvet.i (f.) < OIA *mot.t.a- ‘defective’ (10187), ujal ‘white’ (m.) vs. ujel (f.) < OIA ujjvala- ‘blazing up’ (1670). Masica (1991: 196) gives the examples of Sad¯ an¯ı a ¯ig ‘fire’ (< OIA agní-1 ‘fire’ [55]) and d¯ ail ‘split pulse’ (< MIA d¯ ali), and he quotes (1991: 208) the historical development of B. r¯ akhiy¯ a > r¯ aikhy¯ a > rekhe ‘having kept’. So we come to the conclusion that the (b) form of [i/y/u]-fronting is found in the northwest in Nuristani, Dardic, and Kashmiri, and as is shown below (p. 490), also in a number of Mar¯ at.h¯ı dialects, even though palatalization (and epenthesis) looks slightly different there. Finding it over a relatively big area with many languages may indicate that it is an old process which is perhaps still active. It seems to show parallels to other fronting processes in the area like rand h-fronting. Whether there is a historical connection with the most southern IA languages is for the time being an open question. Process (a) looks more “Indo-Aryan” as it is also found in the eastern parts of the North Indian plains. I will not comment on the feature of centralized and back unrounded vowels as there are various parallels in other Indo-Aryan languages. Epenthesis and palatalization – and word-initial labialization – are also found in varieties of Mar¯ at.h¯ı and Konkan ˙ .¯ı; there is also epenthesis in Or.iy¯ a and Assamese which, however, functions differently:

Epenthesis also elsewhere The following examples – not very numerous – come from a large geographical area between Punjab and Assam. Not surprisingly, there are practically no examples in the Central IndoAryan region. (a) Ko.kun.. @yran ‘forest’ (but also ran) < OIA áran.ya- ‘jungle’ (600) (similar is P. ern¯ a [goh¯ a] ‘a cake of cow-dung as found in its natural state’ with second word < OIA g¯ utha- ‘excrement’ [4225] and regarding first word cf. OIA [Bhpr.] a ¯ran.yopala- ‘dry cow-dung’ with second component < OIA *utpala-3 ‘a cake’ [1816] which is thus wrongly assumed by Turner to be a reconstructed form; cf. also Garh. gopal¯ a ‘cowpats’ [but it should be gopal.a ¯]); Ko.S. y@tt@r@ and M.kas. yettar1 ‘high, (tall)’ < OIA *uttarika- ‘upper’ (1779), yEl@ ‘cardamon’ perhaps

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

490

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

< OIA lex. el¯ık¯ a- ‘small Cardamom’ (or ‘Dravidian’ pronunciation?). (b) Or. k¯ ail ‘tomorrow (or yesterday)’ < OIA k¯ alya-3 ‘dawn’ (3104); Western Or. p¯ aen, p¯ ain ‘water’ < p an
ya- ‘water’ (8082), r¯ aet, r¯ ait ‘night’ < OIA ra
tr - ‘night’ (10702), etc.; A. 6yn ‘other’ < OIA anyá- ‘other’ (399), puin ‘virtue’ < OIA pún.ya- ‘beneficent act’ (8261), raiz ‘people’ < OIA r¯ ajyá- ‘kingdom’ (10694), baik ‘word, speech’ < OIA v¯ akya- ‘speech’ (11468), aikh¯ an ‘story, episode’ < OIA a khya
na- ‘tale’ (1043).50

Palatalization also elsewhere This is the result, at least in some cases, of i – a or a – i vowel harmony: M.kud.. pyeparã ‘flute’ < *pippa-1 ‘pipe (for playing)’, yel. ‘creeper’ < older *vyel. ← Tam. val..li ‘creeper’ (DEDR 5316) (M.kas. y el1 and M.w¯ ar. yel ‘creeper’ must, however, derive from the old borrowing into IA), yel.n.i ‘a kind of cover’ < older *vyel.n.i and connected with OIA Dh¯ atup. vilati ‘covers’ and *bila-2 ‘cover’ (9246) with a modern parallel in Kho. and a very doubtful one in P.; Ko.kan.. yel. ‘sun’ < older *vyel. < OIA vél¯ a- ‘time’, ‘sun’ (see 12115) (for more parallels see p. 686); yEdna ‘pain’ < older *vyedna is tatsama of OIA vedan¯ a- ‘pain’. Notes: (a) A similar process is found in Dardic: Gaw. hel, yel, yil ‘night’, Shum. vyel, Paš. vy¯ al ‘ditto’ < OIA vik¯ ala- ‘evening’ (11625).51 In M. ojhe ‘a load’, which is < OIA vahya‘to be carried’ with first vowel, according to Turner, taken from infinitive vod.um, the process has gone further: vahya- > *vyojha > *yojha > ojhe. (b) To this family of Sam aran.a-like alternations seems also to belong the following . pras¯ characteristic of Kashmiri: “Usually /y/ is added in the initial position of the words beginning with /i/, /¯ı/, /e/, /¯e/. Similarly /v/ is added to words beginning with /u/ and /¯ u/ (Omkar N. Koul in Cardona and Jain [2003: 901]). (c) Note also Iranian Psht. yer. ‘raft’ which is, according to Cheung (2013: 626), a borrowing of OIA lex. ved.a ¯- ‘boat’ (see 9308). (d) Somehow similar are the following cases from M.: u ‘a louse’ < OIA yu
k a- ‘louse’ (10512) where Turner asks whether the loss of y- is due to taboo (which is not the case), ut.¯ı ‘a mixture of sandal and other fragrant ingredients’ probably < OIA *yut.t.a‘joined’ (10496) and us.t.a ¯ ‘tasted’ < OIA jús.t.i- *‘tasting’ (5256). The last example shows that in all three cases actually j- was lost, probably like this: (yu- >) (*)ju- > *jiu- > *iu- > u-. Cf. here also Pr. üd ‘war’ < OIA yuddhá- ‘battle’ (10499). (e) OIA vél¯ a- is not borrowed from Dravidian, as Turner thinks, but it is an IA word of unclear origin: see EWA and the book review by Bir. Krishnamurti on the DEDR (1963: 564).

Word-initial labialization This is the result, at least in some cases, of the influence of a (near) word-final open vowel, 50 On epenthesis in MIA see Pischel (§176) and note Chatterji’s remarks on this phenomenon in Bengali: (1926: 378): “. . . but there it is not regular, not at all a characteristic of the language, only some sporadic instances being found.” 51 On v ∼ h (∼ y) alternations in Dardic and elsewhere see p. 143, footnote.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.2. Additional views on the linguistic position of Dardic

491

is in rare cases also found in other Outer Languages like Ku. vocch ‘small’ < OIA *occha‘small’ (2540): Ko.S. v@ll@ ‘wet’ < OIA *¯ alla- ‘wet’ (1340), v t@ ‘brick’ < OIA
stak a- ‘brick’

(1600); M.kud.. vutt@r ‘north’ (cf. just above the Ko.S. parallel); Ko.kun . . viččha ‘wish’ < OIA iccha
- ‘wish’ (1557); Ko.Coch. vull @yi ‘speak’ < OIA ullapati ‘coaxes’ (2370); M.kas. v¯ on.i ‘udder’ < OIA (K¯ alid.) a ¯p¯ına- ‘udder’ (1210a) with a modern parallel in Garh. Word-initial labialization is e.g. also known from Kashmiri, e.g. vubal¯ avun ‘to cause to boil’ < OIA *ubbal- ‘rise’ (2339), vud.un ‘to fly’ < OIA ud.d.¯ıyate ‘flies up’ and many other examples, and from Gar.hv¯ al¯ı, e.g. vOgan ‘to feel drowsy or sleepy’ < OIA *unghati ˙ ‘sleeps’ (1632), vOth ‘lip’ < OIA ós. t.ha- ‘lip’ (2563), etc. But labialization does not seem to be

a central feature characterizing the Outer Languages. The remaining features discussed by Kaul and Schmidt: 3. Retention of OIA consonant clusters needs not to be discussed here as this is done in other places of this study. But I may say here that it is a well-known fact that such retentions are found over a much larger area in the west and northwest of the subcontinent than that occupied just by the Dard languages. 4. Distinction between three sibilants and 5. loss of aspiration of voiced stops are discussed elsewhere (see e.g. p. 316). 6. Development of contrastive tones: this, in fact, characterizes most of the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages, where a main factor of the development of tones was the loss of mediae aspiration. In Dardic, however, there is mostly partial preservation of the Vedic accent (see p. 188ff.) whereas in some Dard languages like Kalami (see Baart), Phal¯ ur.a and perhaps some other languages in the group, loss of aspiration has led to similar results as in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (and Panjabi and Kangri).52 Unfortunately, the Nuristan languages are still under-researched in this regard. 7. Pronoun systems: West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Bhales¯ı and P¯ ad.ri seem to have (relicts of) a triple system (Kaul 2006 i: 83): i ‘this’ o ‘this/that’ - te ‘that’, better characterized on p. 94 as ‘this (in sight), that (in sight), that (out of sight)’. Further in the eastern parts of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı no more evidence is there for a triple system. I do not comment here on 8. and 9. as this would go beyond the scope of this study. 10. Occurrence of SVO and SOV: Kaul and Schmidt mention Kashmiri, Kasht.aw¯ ar.¯ı and perhaps P¯ ogul¯ı (1984: 18), to which have to be added several West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages: Bang¯ an.¯ı (Zoller 2007b) and some varieties in its surroundings, Inner and Outer Sir¯ aj¯ı, Sainj¯ı and Kanashi. In addition, SVO is found in Pothwari (also Pot.oh¯ ar¯ı) (see LSI viii,1: 478). There are apparently no SVO traces in Dardic and Nuristani. 11. On agreement in past tense: Several West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages – at least Kashmiri, Khaś¯ al¯ı and Bang¯ an.¯ı – follow in transitive constructions neither the Dardic subject agreement pattern nor the usual object agreement pattern, but the verb shows no agreement and, in case of pronouns, the objects are not marked (for more details see Zoller op.cit.). 12. Common core vocabulary: this study deals with this at length at various places. I have presented this retrospective here to show that my own position, set out above from 1.6 to 1.8, did not emerge from a vacuum. Summing up the results of the above-quoted 52 Frequently, these two very different phenomena – preservation of accents and development of tones – are not kept apart in the existing literature. Note further that in pitch accent languages every independent morpheme carries an accent, whereas in the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, Panjabi and K¯ angr¯ ˙ ı tone languages only a limited number of words is tone bearing. The fact that in Kalami each word bears at least one tone is probably due to the merger of inherited accents and more recently emerging tones.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

492

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

scholars, one can conclude that among the above-listed features the most important ones for arguing towards the relative separateness of Dardic are: the [i/y/u]-fronting, the distinction between three sibilants, loss of aspiration of voiced stops and shared vocabulary. It may be doubted that the nature and number of linguistic features discussed above are sufficient to establish a special status for the Dard languages, but the investigation of Kaul and Schmidt is important because it expresses a justifiable uneasiness with Morgenstierne’s too radical dictum. Vis-à-vis the above quoted negative definitions of Dardic as a possible distinctive linguistic branch because of supposed lack of unifying and distinctive features, I fail to understand why preservation of the distinction between palato-velars and (labio-)velars in Nuristani is more significant for Indo-Iranian language history than preservation of three sibilants in Dardic. I also wonder why it is so clear for linguists to determine which of the Indo-Aryan languages spoken in this very area are generally not considered as Dardic, as for instance D aki (see Buddruss 1985: 29). Mock observes that “Buddruss has removed . um¯ Dumaki from the Dardic languages entirely, and identified it as belonging to the Central Group of Indo-Aryan.” Thus, on a linguistic level, it is clear what is not Dardic but it is not clear what is Dardic. And in view of Morgenstierne’s expression “aberrant Indo-Aryan hill languages”, Fussman’s claim that the Dardic languages don’t have an origin “différente de celle des autres parlers I-A” and Bashir’s statement that these languages cannot “all be traced to a single stammbaum-model node” I am still waiting for someone to show that the two Nuristani languages, Prasun and Waigali, are much more similar than the two Dard languages, Khowar and Indus Kohistani.

16.3

Outer Language features in R¯ ajbanshi

The Indo-Aryan language R¯ ajbanshi is spoken in the extreme southeast of Nepal in the districts Morang and Jhapa. Even though Ethnologue classifies it as related with Assamese and Bengali, and Christopher Wilde writes (2008: 2): “R¯ ajbanshi merges into Assamese in the east, Maithili in the west and Bengali in the south”, there is the fact that R¯ ajbanshi has conspicuously more Outer language features than Modern Standard Nepali. Thankfully, Christopher Wilde pointed out to me the striking similarities between R¯ ajbanshi and West Pah¯ ar.¯ı.53 The following linguistic facts show this clearly.54 Note, however, that the language has preserved the aspirated media as such and it has only one (dental) sibilant (like the surrounding languages).

16.3.1

Lexicon

The language has quite a few remarkable words, partly with parallels in the northwestern and western languages (all following data are from Wilde 2008): 1. agra di- ‘to guard’ either < OIA ágra- ‘front’ (68) with preservation of the consonant cluster or, although semantically better fitting but requiring consonant metathesis, < OIA a ¯raks.a- ‘protection’ (1297). 53 R¯ ajbanshi is spoken in the plains. This shows that the largest part of the northwestern branch is found in the mountains, but not the whole. Conversely, there are in the southern foothills of North Pakistan several languages called Pah¯ ar.¯ı (see P. K. Kaul 2006 i: 248ff.), but in fact they are dialects of Panjabi. 54 Much of the following data has already been published in Zoller 2011a.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.3. Outer Language features in R¯ ajbanshi

493

2. 2nch(a)- ‘search’ < OIA anvicchati ‘searches’. 3. as- ‘to come’ (like Inscriptional Or.iy¯ a a ¯si ‘having come’ and a ¯sib¯ a ‘coming’) < OIA átyeti ‘comes upon’ (227). It has parallels in Bng. asnO, Jaun. a ¯śn.õ ‘to come’ and

Man.d.. aś- ‘to go’. Contrary to Turner’s assumption (ibid.), that these words would appear “. . . with abnormal ś for either c or ch. . . ” this is another case for the deaffrication process c > ś. 4. ukus ‘hawk’ < OIA utkros.a- ‘sea-eagle’ (1740) with two modern parallels in A. ukah ‘eagle’ and Si. ukuss¯ a ‘kite, hawk’, but here probably also S. uk¯ abu ‘eagle’ and Garh. uk¯ ab ‘eagle’; the Rab. word is perhaps an older borrowing from A. 5. uja- ‘to appear’ < OIA újj¯ ayate ‘is begotten’ (1666) with a modern parallel in K. vuzun ‘to appear’; Turner considers alternative derivation < údy¯ ati ‘rises’ (2051). 6. In ei-dh2r ‘in this very direction’, kun-dh2r ‘in which direction’ etc. the second element ‘direction’ derives < OIA dhúr- ‘yoke or yoke-pin’ (6826) with a semantic parallel in Jaun. dh¯ ur ‘direction’. 7. ekchin ‘one moment’ < OIA *ekka- ‘one’ (2462) and ks.an.a- ‘moment, leisure’ (3642); the historical change ks. > c(h)/c.h is typical for the northwest and within the ks.an.alemma there is just one phonetic parallel in Pal. c.h¯ an. ‘leisure’ to which is to be added (pointed out by Ruth Schmidt) Sh.koh. (?) ek chin mã ‘in a moment’. 8. eth2 ‘(socially) unclean’ < OIA *¯ ajus.t.a- ‘tasted’ (1093) with a modern parallel in S.

ho ‘impure, unclean’. aut . 9. k2nek ‘a little’ has a parallel in Bng. kOnek ‘a little bit’, but origin is unclear. 10. kamra- ‘to bite’ probably same as Kal. kham ‘a bite’ for which a PIE etymology is suggested p. 796. 11. ketr2 ‘how big’ has a parallel in Bng. ketrO ‘how much, how big’, connection with OIA káti ‘how many’ (2694)? 12. j2lluk ‘leech’ < OIA jal¯ uk¯ a- ‘leech’ (5161) with preservation of the stop? But cf. also Turner’s reconstructions *jokk¯ a-, *jonk¯ ˙ a-. The OIA lemma was certainly influenced by folk etymological speculations on connections with OIA jala- ‘water’. However, it might be of AA origin, cf. PMK *gl@w ‘(kind of) leech’, Aslian Semelai él@w ‘water leech’ (Hoe [2001: 117]), Bahnaric Tampuan chliiw ‘leech (water)’ and saliiw ‘leech’, Proto-Katuic *salii ‘water leech’, Proto-Khmuic *gliw ‘water leech (small)’and Khmu cl1@ ‘kind of land leech’. 13. nachra- ‘to claw’ is probably not < OIA nakhá- ‘nail, claw’ (6914) with an extension. Therefore cf. the following similar forms: Pr. n@š ‘finger nail’, Bng. nOkOsO dennO ‘to strike with extended nails (as leopard or bear)’, Paš. naku˙cik ‘nail’, etc., Chin. n¯ aš ‘nail of finger’; M.kas. naski ‘nail; claw’, Ko. n¯ akśi ‘nail (of the fingers)’. Note also apparently related H. nocn¯ a ‘to scratch, claw, etc.’ Any relationship with Lith. n¯ agas and Latv. nags both‘nail, claw’, and Lith. nagùtis ‘nail, claw (dim.)’ ? 14. b2ttu ‘goat (male/uncastrated)’ — Bng. bOrt alu ‘ram, billy goat’ (with a v¯ al¯ a Suffix)

probably with the basic meaning “(one with) eggs” (see p. 670 and cf. Jat.. bart. ‘half gelt bullock’), Bi. chik¯ a-chik¯ı b¯ otu ‘he-goat’, Kc. batto ‘testicle’, Man.d.. batt¯ı ‘egg’ and Bhad. (?) b¯ ati ‘bird’s egg’ (Kaul i: 185) < OIA vartaka-1 *‘something round’ (11349). 15. besi ‘more’ < OIA vás¯ıyas ‘better, more prosperous’ (11445) with just one modern parallel in S. vãhyõ ‘wealthy’; cf. below Jaun. c -bOsOt ‘riches’ (p. 233). 16. bhabna ‘worry’ has the folllowing parallels: Deog. bibralionO ‘to wake or jump up with shock’, Bng. bibasO ‘fear’ (with abstract suffix), Garh. bibOnu ‘to fear’, Bhat.. (simplified transcription) bh¯ıb ‘fear’ and bhibät. ‘fearful’, and A. bH ebuva ‘struck with fear’; all related with OIA bibhéti ‘fears’ (9241); Rab. shows aspiration metathesis.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

494

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

17. m2gi ‘wife’ probably not < OIA m atrgr ama- ‘woman’ (10020) because B. m¯ ag¯ u ‘a woman, wife (in contempt)’ is equatedby Chatterji with OIA m¯ arga- (ODBL § 184). 18. m 2t, m2t ‘liquor’ besides m2dhu ‘honey’ (loan word); cf. below (p. 693) Bro. m@t@ks ‘honey’ < OIA mádhu- ‘honey, mead’ (9784)? B.chit. mOt ‘alcoholic drinks’ is according to Učida (1970) a tatsama, B.roh. mot ‘alcoholic drink’. See Witzel (2005: 131) regarding the opposition -t- vs. -dh- in the lemma for ‘honey, mead’. 19. much- ‘to wipe’ < OIA mrsta
- ‘rubbed; sweet’ (10299) with inversion of -s.t.- > -t.s.- (=

c.) > -c(h)- with phonetic parallels e.g. in Klm. m¯ıc.h, muc. ‘sweet’, Sh. mic.o ‘good’. Same process also in Bur. muc.i ‘fist’, Brah. muč ‘fist’ (besides regular mut. ‘fist’), Kal. dr
amuc ‘claws’ (see p. 330), Kalk. ac. ‘eight’ < OIA asta
‘eight’ (941), and in M. p¯ astar

< *p¯

the spoke’ (8641). ‘a wedge’ ac˙ ar < *paccar < OIA *pratyara- ‘beside Notes: (a) There is some evidence that very rarely also the opposite process occurred: there is Sh.gur. “l¯ osht” ‘tomorrow’ (Wilson 1899b: 100) which derives < OIA *locis- ‘light’ (11129) (Pk.) with a semantic parallel in dialectal Paš. l¯ ui ‘tomorrow’. Here also close is Kal. .luš ‘very early morning’. Historic-phonetically more straightforward would of course be derivation < OIA *lohis.t.ha- ‘very red’ (11169) but that never means ‘morning’. However that may be, there are more examples: Sh. dăs.t.ó˘ıki ‘know, recognize’ < older *dac.a- < OIA dáks.ate ‘is able’ (6117). Note also similar metathesis in Bro. a ¯pš ‘horse’ < OIA áśva- (920) (Ramaswami 1975: 33) and Bro. @t.hi ‘eye’ < *as.t.i- < *ac.hi < OIA áks.i- and same process in Bro. @t.ho ‘walnut’ < *as.t.o < *ac.(h)o < OIA aks.ot.a- ‘walnut (48). (b) The same process of sibilant + stop > stop + sibilant is also found in modern East Iranian, e.g. Wkh. “möst” ‘fist’ and “mic” ‘a handful’ (but Yoshie writes m0c. ‘a handful of’) and similarly with šk > č in Psht. wuč ‘dry’ < Av. huška-. A similar change, namely s.t.h > t.s is also found in the western Ashoka inscriptions of Girnar (von Hinüber [§ 229]).

16.3.2

Phonology

Diasappearance of sonority (word finally) Is known especially from Nuristani, but also from Dardic and Pah¯ ar.¯ı (see above p. 340). Wilde about R¯ ajbanshi (2008: 24): “In most cases voiced plosives are devoiced or voiceless in word-final position. . . ” Here two examples with phonologized sound change: 1. ap ‘now’ < OIA evam eva ‘just so’ (2528), but cf. Bng. EbE and Kc. ebe ‘now’. 2. purat. ‘hard’ < OIA praud.ha- ‘strong’ (9021). Etymologically unmotivated aspiration (see above p. 299) 1. 2. 3. 4.

khissa ‘story’ ← Ar. qis.s.a. gh2ssi ‘dung’ < OIA go
sakrt- ‘cowdung’ (4333). t.heng ˙ ‘leg’ < OIA lex. t.anga˙  2 ‘leg’ (5428). thipr- ‘to jump’ < OIA *tarpati - ‘jumps’ (5727); even though the lemma has many modern reflexes, reflexes with initially aspirated stop are only found in the northwest: Bng. c hOpr al dennO ‘to jump (across)’ (with -r¯ a.l grammeme), Deog. and Baur. with

same meaning chOpr al deno, Khaśdh. chOpr al ‘a jump, leap’, Ind. ch2ph ‘a jump, leap’,



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.3. Outer Language features in R¯ ajbanshi

495

Sh. c.hup ‘jump’ and Gaw. Tlap ‘to run’ all < older *thrarp- (see above more forms p. 351). 5. dh2kra ‘carpet’ < OIA duk¯ ulá- ‘a kind of plant; fine cloth made of the inner bark of this plant’, here perhaps also Sir.d.od.. dhr¯ekd.a ¯ ‘clothes’ (Kaul 2006 i: 148), see with regard to semantics sub Turner 14609 Md. d¯ ulu ‘carpet’; according to Mayrhofer, the OIA lemma has been borrowed from Dravidian, cf. Tam. tukil, tuyil ‘fine cloth’, but preservation of the velar stop is remarkable. 6. dhamma ‘rope’ < OIA da
man-1 ‘rope’ (6283). Aspiration metathesis dhudi ‘goat (female)’ < OIA dugdhin- ‘milky’ (6399), cf. Jaun. dh¯ udi ‘nipple of female breast’. Epenthesis Epenthesis is predominantly found in parts of the northwestern language groups, however it occurs also in other IA languages. Since, on the other side, there are not many cases of epenthesis in R¯ ajbanshi, these appear as developments independent from the northwest: 1. gec ‘sprout’ < older *gaci < OIA *gaks.a- ‘tree’ (3949); even though belonging to the same lemma, it appears that Rab. gech, gach ‘tree’ has a slightly different origin. 2. suru ‘thin’ < OIA lex. saru- ‘fine’ (13264). Preservation of consonant groups and medial stops 1. khet.ia ‘jackal’ with an original meaning *‘hunter’ ? Cf. OIA khet.a- ‘hunt’, Bng. kh er dennO ‘to announce (a fight); to attack’ and Garh. khed.u ¯ ‘combing of wild animal for

hunting, encirclement, enclosing for hunting, driving out’; the OIA word has modern reflexes in NIA otherwise only as a ¯khet.a- ‘hunting’ (1037) and lex. ‘huntsman’, note also Ku. ahair.¯ı ‘a goddess’ (lit. ‘huntress’). However, note also Munda Mu. ka:úúiul ‘fox’ and Kor. khedya ‘hyena’. Note: Here also Sant. cor kheda ‘the planet Jupiter’ which Campbell explains thus: “The rising of this planet warns thieves that the night is almost past and dawn at hand.” 2. g2r2l ‘bunch’ < OIA gráha- ‘seizing’ plus -la- extension. 3. g2rha ‘dung stick’ < OIA gr¯ ahá- ‘handle of sword’ (4382). Devoicing and deaspiration 1. cat.i ‘moment’ < OIA *jhat.t.- ‘sudden movement’ (5327) (devoicing and deaspiration). 2. pur¯ at. ‘hard’ < OIA praud.ha- ‘strong’ (9021) (quoted above).

16.3.3

Morphology

Future and past In case of future tense, a grammeme -m- is added to the (partially extended) stem, in first

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

496

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

person singular and plural, otherwise everywhere -b-. The -m, respectively -b- is followed by different endings according to person and number. The endings are perhaps remnants of the old inherited present. However, that is not quite clear because the 2nd person plural ending -2n cannot be explained so. The -m- is again the well-known ending as found in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı (see p. 409). With -m- we thus have here a parallel for instance with Ki˜ ut.hal¯ı, there is also an -m- in the 1st person singular and plural, elsewhere there is -l-. If, however, the person and number endings are actually the (partial) remnants of the old inherited present, then R¯ ajbanshi could be rather compared with e.g. Waigal¯ı where the person endings are added to the future grammeme -l-. But see Hendriksen’s suggestion for the origin of the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı -m- (1986: 165). The two grammemes for marking the past tense are -n (1st person) and -l (2nd and 3rd person): kha-n-u ‘I ate’, kha-l-i ‘she ate’. The latter has also the function of a past participle: sasar-al alu-le ‘rotten potatoes’. Thus the -l grammeme is certainly identical with the -l grammeme in the northwestern area. However, since it is also found in the east, borrowing cannot be excluded. Local adverbials In R¯ ajbansh¯ı one finds compounded local adverbials with a second component makhe ‘direction’: up2r-makhe ‘upwards’, kun-makhe ‘in some direction’, hi-makhe ‘in this direction’ etc. This component derives < OIA múkhya- ‘pertaining to face or mouth’ (10174), which is found in quite a number of NIA languages with meaning ‘face’. However, as local adverbials the Rab. forms have mostly parallels in Nuristani: Kamd. pa-myuk ‘before’ (as against ‘behind’) resp. p¯ am"ük ‘in front of’ also in p¯ am"ük dut ‘front tooth’ (Strand) which seems to reflect OIA (R.) pramukhe ‘turning the face towards, facing’, Pr. ti-mikh ‘before’ (LSI) (which compare with phonologically similar Kt.g. poet. mikha ‘corner or end or top of a head-cloth’) and “K¯ ohist¯ an¯ı, G¯ arw¯ı” (i.e. Klm.) m¯ uka ‘before’ (LSI i,ii: 219), Wg. amükiv ‘in front’, but also G. mOkha r e ‘in front’ and M.coch. mukkari ‘in front’, B.chit. mìkkya ‘towards (direction)’ and Ko. muk¯ ar ‘further’ and muk¯ arik ‘next year’; related are also Ind. mu 
th2 v ‘ahead, in

eastern NIA front; front; to be ahead’, Pal. mus.t.ú ‘before’, Wot.. mut.h ‘before; vor’ and from B.roh. muúntu ‘front’ all < OIA *mukhastha-, whereas B.roh. uormikká ‘up; towards up’ derives < OIA upara-mukhya-;55 note that Sh. mucho
‘in front’ does not directly correspond

with the basic Ind. lemma but is an exact parallel to Ind. mu 
th -na  ‘before, in front of’ (with

second word meaning ‘from’) because the Sh. word can be decomposed into *mut. plus z.h¯ o
‘from’. Note also Kt.g. gOvh ‘ahead towards’ < OIA *agramukha- ‘facing forward’ and ga 
vh ‘ditto’ < OIA *agr¯ amukha- (77a) which has a mirror parallel in S. muhagu ‘front’ < OIA mukh¯ agra- ‘any extremity’ (10170), where Turner wonders why there is not -¯ a- in S., but cf. 77a. Note also P. mohrl¯ a ‘in front’ which appears also in muh¯ anjl¯ a ‘morning twilight’ (< múkha- and lit. ‘front twilight’) (T. Graham Bailey 1938: 248) with second component < OIA samdhy

a
- ‘twilight’ (12918).

16.3.4

Syntax

Postposition *khVn(V) *‘during, at the time of ’ Wilde writes (2008: 129) that the temporal postposition khuna ‘during’ can follow nouns, verbs and adverbs. Two examples (ibid.): s2ts2ng-er

khuna ‘at the time of (a) religious 55 In Zoller (2005) incorrectly reconstructed as *mukhasth¯ a-. The term is not found in the usual dictionaries, but according to Tennakoon Vimalananda (n.d., no pagination), traditional Brahmanic education of Ancient Ceylon is called until today mukhastha vidy¯ a.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.4. Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages

497

(gathering)’, as-ba-r khuna ‘when it is time to come’. This has a parallel in Dardic Shina which has an element kh¯en. ‘at the time of’ (Èdel"man 1983: 289, but Leitner [1985: 27] writes kên) which can be added to a past participle verb (see above p. 397), thus zam¯ıtu ‘the beating; in the state of having been beaten’56 becomes zam¯ıtei kh¯en. ‘at the time of his having been beaten’; note also Sh. and Bur.ys. khen, khE;n ‘time’. V2-like syntax The fronting of parts of the predicate, that is, V2-like syntactic structures, is not only found in many West Pah¯ ar.¯ı variants but also in R¯ ajbanshi. In some cases these syntactic forms may be the result of topicalization, rightward displacement or scrambling, but certainly not all. Note also that in case of verb fronting in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı the left verbal element keeps the desinence. Two examples from Wilde (2008: 303 and 304):

ni ja-b- r2h-a i-la jhag2ra d2n-2t NEG PASS.AUX-FUT-3 remain-PST.PTCL DEM[prox]-PL fight quarrel-LOC ‘One can not stay in this fighting’ cengra-d

2 dh2r-l- basi b2l-ba

young_man-NCLS begin-PST-3 flute play(instrument)-INF ‘The young man started to play the flute’ Compare this e.g. with the following sentence from Bang¯ an.¯ı:

tetkE erO seu pakri ti uE

he grab they.ERG there saw.PP.M.SG ‘There they caught him’

16.4 16.4.1

Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages Lateral or vertical borrowings?

In the version of the theory of Outer and Inner Languages that I espouse, the existence of (at least) two Indo-Aryan immigration events is postulated. A main concern of the present book is to show that this postulate is empirically correct and can be proved by clear traces in the modern Indo-Aryan languages. This approach corresponds to Parpola’s distinction between a first immigration of Proto-Indo-Aryan speakers (perhaps from 2000 BC onwards) and a later second immigration of Old Indo-Aryan speakers (2015: 71 and 76) and Southworth’s second model of two (or more) consecutive immigrations of Indo-Aryan speakers (2005b). With such a reconstruction, which also implies that earlier and later immigrations followed similar courses and similar dispersal patterns, one should also expect to find traces of Outer Language words even in the Inner Language core area, that is the area where presently Hindi, Awadh¯ı etc. with their dialects are spoken. I have not tried to do a comprehensive survey on this, but even a cursory look indeed seems to support this hypothesis. There exist a number of Hindi words of OIA origin which neither display the expected tadbhava 56 This ending looks like a static participle.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

498

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

outcomes nor can they be explained as borrowings from neighboring languages like Panjabi (such borrowings are otherwise found in Hindi in considerable number). The potential substrate words, however, pose the challenge to determine whether they are borrowings from some Outer Languages or whether they are genuine, i.e. regional vestiges. In some cases this can be decided, in other cases not. I begin with some ambiguous examples: 1. Aw. garer- ‘to surround’ and garer¯ a- ‘winding, spiral’ — M. gark¯ a- ‘a whirl’ and gargarn.˜e ‘to revolve’ — Pal. gir- ‘to turn round; to take round’ appear to be reflexes of OIA *ghir- ‘go round’ (4474) and thus all show loss of aspiration in a media. Influence through onomatopoeic OIA gárgara-1 ‘whirlpool’ (4042) (believed to be Dravidian by Emeneau [1969: 285]) or gargara-2 ‘churn’ (4043) is unlikely because the here-quoted forms are hardly onomatopoeic (perhaps with the exception of M.) and anyway do not match semantically with the modern reflexes quoted under the two entries. Bng. gag¯er ‘big (wooden or clay) water jar’ can be added to 4043. ˙ ‘fall to pieces’ has at least three different reflexes in H.: dhãsn¯ 2. OIA DHVAMS a, dhasn¯ a ‘to sink’, dasn¯ a ‘to be spread’, d.as¯ an¯ a ‘to spread’. The multiple forms anyway betray layering, and parallels with initial retroflex stop are found e.g. in L. and P. (see 6896 for possible explanations), but lack of aspiration is not to be expected in H. There are strong tendencies for deaspiration mainly of voiced mediae in the northwest (see p. 316), but the occasional loss of aspiration observed e.g. in G., M., Ko. etc. may indicate that it was formerly more widespread also there but was then overlain by strong Inner Language influences. 3. H. baraun¯ı ‘eyelash’ – also Thar. birni and Kva. bOrni both ‘eyelash’ – there are two possibilities for etymological interpretation: (a) a very old borrowing from Iranian: cf. e.g. Psht. b¯ an.a ‘eyelash’, found also in Pal. ac.hibéer.i ‘eyelash’; the Psht. form is derived by Morgenstierne (1927b) < Av. par@na- ‘leaf’ but Elfenbein et al. rather suggest derivation < Av. 2 pašna- *‘eyelash’: both suggestions are, however, fraught with phonological problems, therefore better (b): all the words derive < OIA lex. varan.a- ‘keeping off, prohibiting’ (i.e. VR1 ‘cover’ but not found as varan.a- in Turner), got borrowed into IIr. and from there back into NW IA (see Phal.); thus H. has preserved an OL word. 4. H. bing¯ ˙ ı ‘beetle’ < OIA bh
rnga

- ‘large black bee’ (9581) (cf. S. bh¯ıng¯ ˙ aro ‘beetle’ and H.  to be added is Deshya Prakrit bhing¯ bhg ‘black bumble-bee’; here ˙ ar¯ı ‘cricket’ [Bhayani 1988: 87]).

A few more uncertain examples for regional vestiges 1. H. gurg¯ a ‘a servant; a rascal’ ← N. Gurkha and regional H. g¯ ul ‘an irrigation channel’ < OIA kulya
- ‘channel’ (3352) are possibly echoes of the typical northwestern tendency for voicing of unvoiced consonants (see p. 334). 2. H. (Hind¯ı śabd-s¯ agar) gehuman ˙ ‘name of a part. (very poisonous) snake having a light brown skin’ < OIA (Suśr.) gavedhuka- ‘a kind of snake’ (4104) (with modern reflexes in Nuristani and Dardic, but also in Garh. g¯ a(g)g¯ u, ghaghy¯ u ‘snake’) and contaminated by godhu
ma- ‘wheat’ (4287) cannot be a northwestern borrowing. 3. Aw. bas¯ a ‘a wasp’ < OIA *vaspi- ‘wasp’ (11451). Can certainly not derive < OIA v
r
scika- ‘scorpion’ and note that preservation of sibilants in sibilant-stop clusters is  indeed more typical for some Nuristan and Dard languages but occasionally also found in other Outer Languages (see p. 180).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.4. Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages

499

4. Sub OIA *hud.a-2 ‘bolt or bar’ (14135a) Turner lists modern reflexes in J., Kt.g., Kc., and OIA lex. hud.ukka- ‘the bar or bolt of a door’ (which is obviously the correct meaning) has a modern reflex in Bi. Actually lemma *hud.a-2 is more widespread, its reflexes are also found in Kann., Him., Ku., B., Ind., Sh.koh., Kt., Psht. (see p. 745) and the forms look like reflecting an OL allomorph *hud.- ‘lock (a door)’ of IL allomorph *ad.- ‘obstruct, stop’ (187) (here typically OL with u instead of a).57 As a short look reveals, modern reflexes of 14135a and 187 do not match geographically but overlap only partly. It seems that *hud.- is not found in Hindi, the old IL core are, at least according to the dictionaries available to me; it is, however, as if the lemma exists but isn’t any more clearly discerned as such: in the Hindi short-story amrts ar a gay a hai by Bhishm Sahni there is the following part of a longer sentence:vah  a ¯dm¯ı . . . darv¯ aze k¯ a d.an.d.(a)har¯ a pakar. kar n¯ıce utar gay¯ a ‘that man grasped the door handle and dismounted (from the train)’; d.an.d.(a)har¯ a58 is obviously a synonym compound with first component < OIA dan.d.á- ‘handle’ (6128); the first component was perhaps added in order to keep the meaning comprehensible, the -r- of -har¯ a anyway betrays that this is not a regular Hindi tadbhava but most likely an OL relic.59 Note: The allomorphs *hud.- and *ad.- appear to be further cognate with OIA (K¯ atyŚr.) khad.aka- ‘a bolt or pin’ and may be an example for an ancient tendency for initial consonant deletion for which a few more examples are found in the northwest (see p. 380): the OIA form is found sub 3784 with the two meanings *‘erect’ and ‘bolt, post’ and whereas reflexes with meaning *‘erect’ are widespread, the meaning ‘bolt’ is not found in the modern languages quoted there; however this meaning is found in Pal. kharéer.i ‘bolt’ and Bur. kad.ákus ‘bolt; Riegel’, and it seems that Turner has conflated two distinct lemmata (see also PMWS 14). Note also that Pr. has preserved the lemma with dentals: kond"¯eg ‘bolt; Riegel’.

16.4.2

Brajbh¯ as.¯ a vs Modern Standard Hindi

Besides being seen as the predecessor of Hindi and despite Grierson’s classification of Braj Bh¯ as.a ¯ as a dialect of Western Hindi and thus of the Central Group, Braj Bh¯ as.a ¯ has clearly preserved more Outer Language features than Hindi.60 As I see it, the following data are additional evidence for the model according to which Outer and Inner Languages actually occupy the same geographical space over North India, with the exception of Nuristani and Dardic which have their separate homelands. Quite a number of the following examples are tatsamas. However, this is no issue with regard to the phonetic and phonological variations under discussion. Obviously, they can be observed both in case of tatsamas and tadbhavas. 57 An additional allomorph *had.- is suggested by Ind. h2r a
ng

‘a short stop or pause’, Bur. had.aái

-mán- ‘to rest for a while’, Sh. har.aán˙ ‘ditto’. 58 This word is found e.g. at p. 49 in the following book from 2013: bh¯ıs.m s¯ ahn¯ı: p¯ amc ˙ behtar¯ın kah¯ aniy¯ am. ˙ na¯ı dill¯ı: v¯ an.¯i prak¯ aśan. 59 However, Chatterji observes that the change of intervocalic l and d. > r “is not found in the Old Western Hindi of Canda Bard¯ a¯ı, nor is it much noticeable in Kab¯ır; but in the Braj-bh¯ akh¯ a of S¯ ura-d¯ asa and Bih¯ ar¯ı-l¯ ala, and the rest, it is very much in evidence” (ODBL § 291). 60 Many of the following entries are from Callewaert and Sharma’s Dictionary of Bhakti (2009) which includes not only Braj Bh¯ as.¯ a but also Awadh¯ı and Old Hind¯ı. Since the lemmata are usually very similar, the following words are not differentiated according to these three languages. Readers interested in more details may consult this dictionary.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

500

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

a

Figure 16.1: The Brajbh¯ as.a¯ area.a Courtesy Bethany World Prayer Center.

As a rule, they can also not be ascribed to scribal idiosyncracies since in a number of cases there are direct parallels in Outer Languages without written traditions. As is well-known, Bhakti traditions stand frequently in direct opposition to Brahmanism and Sanskrit erudition. This finds also expression in the use of many terms belonging to Brahminic religion. However, a Bhakta has his/her own way how to use and pronounce them.

Etymologically unmotivated aspiration and aspiration fronting 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

aghani ‘fire’ ← OIA agn
 ‘fire’; also Rab. “oghuni” ‘fire’ (Roy [2011: 86]). a ¯ghe ‘in front’ (H. a ¯ge) < OIA ágre ‘in front’ (68). a ¯dhi ‘steam’ < OIA a ¯rdrá- ‘wet’ (1340). kadh¯ı ‘sometimes’ (but also kadi) (for many modern parallels see p. 413). kh¯ adhuk ‘one who eats, or devours’ ← OIA kh¯ adaka- ‘eater’ (with a > u). khinth¯ a or kh¯ındh¯ a ‘a patched cloth or garment (associated with yogis)’ < OIA kanth¯ a‘a rag, patched garment (especially one worn by certain ascetics)’. This lemma may actually be of Austro-Asiatic origin. See p. 959. khirk¯ı ‘ploughing; cultivation’ < OIA krs
- ‘ploughing’ (here probably aspiration 

fronting). khumbh¯ı, khubh¯ı ‘a gold stud, or earring (with the shape of the head of a mushroom)’ < OIA ks.úmpa- ‘toadstool, mushroom’ (3724) (also S. khumbh¯ı). gham ‘village’ < OIA gra
ma- ‘village’ (4368). ghuthe ‘to be entangled in’ < OIA *guptha- ‘tangled mass’ (4205). ghok- ‘cowherd’ < OIA lex. goraks.a- ‘cowherd’ via Pa. gorakha- (4310) and aspiration fronting. cham ‘skin’ < OIA cárman- ‘skin’ (4701), ch¯ akh¯ı ‘to taste’ < OIA *caks.ati ‘tastes’ (4557). chech ‘beak’ < OIA cañcu- ‘beak’ (4569) via an intermediate form *cañci-.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.4. Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42.

501

ch˜et.t.i ‘ant’ corresponds with H. c t  ‘ant’.61

˙ jhang ˙ ‘a fight; quarrel’ ← Pers. jang. jh¯ al ‘heat’ < OIA jv¯ alá- ‘light, torch’ (5312). d.hill¯ı ‘Delhi’. dhandh ‘conflict’ < OIA dvamdvá˙ ‘quarrel’ (6649). dhur ‘away’ < OIA d¯ urá- ‘distant’ (6495) (for aspirated parallels of this word see p. 302), dhaus ‘a day’ < OIA divasá- ‘day’ (6333). patibhart¯ a ‘a faithful wife’ ← OIA pativrat¯ a- ‘a devoted and virtuous wife’. palagh ‘bed’ < OIA palyanka˙ ‘bed’ (7964). purodh¯ a ‘family priest’ ← OIA puróhita- ‘family priest’. pha s a ‘dice’ < OIA p¯ aśa-1 ‘die, dice’ (8132). ph¯ an¯ a ‘to drink’ (cf. H. p¯ın¯ a). phit.a ¯r¯ a ‘a large woven basket with a lid’ < OIA *pet.t.a ¯ra- ‘basket, box’ (8164 ). ph¯ uchati ‘to ask’ < OIA prccháti ‘asks’ (8352) (cf. dialectal Kal. phúčik ‘to ask’). phõk ‘the feathered part  of an arrow’ < OIA punkha˙ ‘feathered shaft of an arrow’ (8247). For a parallel in Bng. see p. 658. bhad.hi ‘woodpecker’ < OIA vardhaki- ‘carpenter’ (11375) (here rather aspiration spreading). bhokas ‘a class of demons (who originated from a nis.a ¯da father and a Ś¯ udra mother)’ (!) < OIA pulkasa- ‘name of a despised mixed tribe’ (EWA lists also lex. bukkasa- ‘a Can.d.a ¯la’, Pk. bokkasa- ‘a non-Aryan people’ and N. bokso ‘wizard’). This may be the same word as (apparently derogatory) Bhoksa, Boksa, the designation of a Scheduled Tribe in Dehradun and Nainital districts in the Kumaon foothills. bhoth¯ ar ‘a horse-doctor, or a partic. kind of Turkish horse (?)’ ← Ar. bayt.a ¯r. maghu ‘path; road’ < OIA m¯ arga- ‘track, road’ (10071). mulkhu ‘country; region’ ← Ar. mulk. s¯ akhat ‘a Ś¯ akta’. s˜endhur ‘red lead; vermillion’ < OIA sind¯ ura-1 ‘red lead, vermilion’ (13411). vidhya ‘knowledge; learning’ ← OIA vidy¯ a-. haram ‘rest’ ← Pers. a ¯r¯ am. haldo ‘half’ < OIA ardhá-2 ‘half’ (here aspiration fronting). hinch¯ a ‘desire; wish’ < OIA iccha
‘wish’ (1557) (actually with aspiration spreading). This word form has also been borrowed into Munda Santali h˜ıch@ ‘wish, desire, lust’. hik, hek ‘one’ < OIA *ekka- ‘one’ (2462). hin. ‘this’ < OIA ana ‘this’ (283).

Unexpected loss of aspiration 1. kaniya  ‘shoulder’ < OIA skandhá- ‘shoulder, upper part of back’ (13627). Turner observes: “Absence of any trace of initial s- in Kafiri and Dardic supports possibility of IA. *kandha-.” 61 McGregor’s tentative suggestion for the H. word to derive < OIA *cimb- ‘pinch’ (4822) cannot t  k  c al caln a be correct because of the Brj. geminate. Since there is also the H. expression c

‘to proceed slowly, or hesitantly’ I suggest instead, contrary to our ideas of the hurry-scurry of industrious ants, derivation < OIA cirá- ‘long, lasting; delay, delay in going’ (4824) plus suffix which also explains the Brj. geminate. Besides, both words demonstrate again the presence of both Outer and Inner Language features within the same geographical region.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

502

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

2. kamma ‘pillar’ < OIA skambhá-1 ‘pillar’ (13639) which has a parallel in Mult. k¯ amb ‘bent stick used as prop of tent’ (O’Brien 1881: 49) and in Bhil.wag. kumbhya ‘pole’. 3. kari ‘chalk’ is not < (standard) OIA khat.ik¯ a- ‘chalk’ (3773) but < OIA (W.) kat.hik¯ a‘chalk’. Actually, this lemma looks fairly regular. 4. k¯ a- ‘eat’ < OIA kha
dati ‘eats’ (3865) (for non-aspirated parallels of this word in Outer Languages see p. 472). 5. kir.ki ‘window’ < OIA khat.akkik¯ a- ‘side door’ (3770). 6. k¯et ‘field’ < ks
etra- ‘land’ (3735).

< OIA jh@rana-1 ‘water from a cascade’ (5344). 7. jarna ‘waterfall’ 8. tumurup¯ an (with devoicing), dumurup¯ an ‘smoke (of tobacco)’ corresponds with the H. neologism dh¯ umrap¯ an ‘smoking’. 9. dan ‘wealth’ < OIA dhána- ‘property’ (6717). 10. darti ‘earth’ < OIA dháritr¯ı- ‘earth’ (6750). 11. davti ‘dhoti’ see OIA *dhotta- ‘cloth’ (6881) and *dhauta-1 ‘cloth’ (6883). 12. dire ‘slowly’ < OIA dh
ra- ‘steady’ (6817). 13. dundra ‘cheating’ < OIA *dh¯ urtak¯ ara- ‘cheat’ (6866). 14. d¯ ur ‘dust’ < OIA *dh¯ ud.i- ‘dust’ (6835). 15. barat ‘India’. 16. began ‘sister’ is tatsama of OIA bhagin¯ı. 17. ber. ‘sheep’ < OIA bhed.ra- ‘ram’ (9606).

Spontaneous voicing a jE ‘to be’ (H. a¯chn¯ a) < OIA a
kseti ‘abides, dwells in’ (1031).

(2720). kandh ‘wall’ < OIA kanth¯ a- ‘wall’ god.h ‘cattle-stall’ < OIA gos.t.há- ‘cow-house’ (4336). god.¯ı ‘meeting; conversation’ < OIA gos.t.h¯ı- ‘assembly, meeting place’ (4339). ghata ‘donkey’ is < OIA *khotta ‘donkey’ (3932) where Turner remarks “[p]oss. ← same source as ghot.a.” 6. c ughE ‘to suck (milk)’ < OIA cu
sati ‘sucks’ (cf. H. c¯ ukhn¯ a).

(13753).
7. dh¯ an ‘place’ < OIA stha na- ‘place’

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Devoicing 1. op ‘lustre; radiance’ (also obh¯ a) ‘splendour’ probably < OIA udbh¯ asa- ‘radiance, splendour’ (semantically different from 2042). 2. kakah¯ı ‘comb’ (H. kangh¯ ˙ ı) < OIA kánkata˙ ‘comb’ (2598) (here with unusual preservation of -k-). 3. kurank ˙ ‘deer’ ← (or < ?) OIA kurangá˙ ‘antelope or deer (in general)’ (3320). 4. kenda ‘marigold’ is < OIA genduka- ‘ball for play’ (4248) with semantic parallels in P., B. Old Aw., Or. But Brj. k- is perhaps due to relationship with OIA kandúka‘ball for playing’ (see KEWA and EWA). 5. kerro h¯ at ‘left hand’ (CLLR) perhaps < OIA *karva- ‘perverse, left’ (2904) with a similar modern reflex in Bshk. k¯ or ‘left-hand’ and in Wg. k¯ ar"i ‘left’ (see p. 471). OIA *karva- is cognate with kharvá- ‘imperfect’ (3832), see there Turner’s comments on the relationship between the two lemmata. Yet, in any case the closest phonetic and semantic similarities for the Braj word are found in Nuristani.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.4. Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages

503

6. gandhrap ‘a heavenly minstrel, or musician’, cf. OIA gandharvá- and Pa. gandhabba(4017). 7. gulgund ‘goitre’ is a tatsama of OIA galagan.d.a- ‘goitre’ with a > u and unclear dentalization. 8. cir¯ ak ‘lamp’ ← Pers. cir aG. 9. puhumi, paham ‘land; earth’ < OIA bhu
mi- ‘earth’ (9557) (note also phoneme splitting). 10. sa t ‘bull’ < OIA sa
nda- ‘uncastrated (of bull)’ (13331) (C¯ ulik¯ apaiś¯ ac¯ı has san.t.ha- ‘bull’

[Pischel § 191]).

11. tank ˙ ‘anguished’ ← Pers. tang.

Epenthesis of a, i, u On this see also Masica (1991: 208f.). It is partly different from epenthesis and palatalization in the northwest (p. 488). 1. anais ‘bad’ < OIA anis.t.a- ‘bad’. For parallels of the unusual sound change s.t. > s see p. 181. 2. mis.t. ‘fist’ ← (or < ?) OIA musti- ‘clenched hand, fist’ (10221). 3. rait ‘night’ < OIA ra
tr - ‘night’ (10702) (cf. Dardic Wot.. ry¯ ad ‘night’ versus Or. r¯ aet, r¯ ait ‘night’). 4. sur ‘arrow’ < OIA śaru- ‘missile, arrow’ (12336) with a phonetic parallel in Kt. šuř ‘arrow’.

Phoneme splitting 1. bah¯ır ‘crowd’ < OIA *bhit. ‘meet, throng’ (9490). 2. b hu  ‘fear’ probably < OIA bh¯ıti- ‘fear’ (9512). 3. puhumi, paham ‘land; earth’ < OIA bhu
mi- ‘earth’ (9557) (also devoicing). See above.

a > u 1. uti ‘very much’ ← OIA áti ‘beyond, over’ (200). 2. kup-kuppi ‘shiver’ < OIA kampa- ‘tremor’ (2765) (note also loss of nasal consonant which has many parallels in the northwest). 3. gur.hi ‘old man’ < OIA *grad.d.ha- ‘old’ (4347a). 4. gun. ‘a group; attendant deities’ < OIA gan.á- ‘troop, flock’ (3988). 5. guninh ‘astrologer’ < OIA gán.aka- ‘astrologer’ (3989). 6. cukhni ‘to taste’ < OIA *caks.ati ‘tastes’ (4557). 7. juh¯ aj¯ u ‘ship’ ← Pers. jah¯ az. 8. bud. ‘great; good (fortune)’ < OIA vad.ra- ‘big’ (11225). 9. Bund. bukra ‘goat’ < OIA bárkara- ‘goat’. 10. m@sure ‘gums’ < OIA *m¯ amsadh¯ ˙ ar¯ a- ‘line of gums’ (9983). 11. muchandar ‘(Guru) Matsyendranath’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

504 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

murk¯ a ‘Marka (a demon, one of the four sons of Śukra and tutor of Prahl¯ ada’). supet , etc. ‘white’ ← Pers. saped, safed. susle, sus a, susE ‘rabbit’ < OIA śaśá- ‘hare’ (12357). suhE ‘to endure’ < OIA sáhate ‘bears, suffers’ (13304). h¯ ul ‘noise; commotion’ < OIA *halla- ‘movement’ (14017).

r-metathesis The following examples show either persistence of initial clusters in Madhyadeśa or are only due to writing conventions (but then metathesis should have been written consistently which is not the case). Almost all of the following examples look like older or younger tatsamas. Still, since r-metathesis is so widespread in Outer Languages, the following words may reflect a tendency for pronunciation typical among the “lower orders”, a tendency which is still alive in parts of North Pakistan and in the Multani of Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan. My conjecture is supported by the cases of intrusive r presented below this section. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

krãm ‘actions; (good) deeds’ — OIA kárman-1 ‘act, work’ (2892). krat¯ a ‘creator’ — OIA kartr- ‘doer, maker’. kr¯ıti ‘mention: fame; glory’— OIA k rt
- ‘fame’. kr¯ ulai ‘to call’ — H. kuraln¯ a, kurl¯ an¯ a ‘to call; to warble (birds)’. Cf. OIA *kululi‘outcry’ and many similar forms in Austro-Asiatic. grab ‘pride’ — OIA garvá- ‘pride’ (4064). grabh ‘the womb; a human birth’ — OIA gárbha- ‘womb’. Cf. similar Nuristani Wg. grop ‘womb; cozy place’. trambak ‘copper’ — OIA t¯ amrá- ‘copper’ (cf. Bng. cambO ‘copper’). trijag ‘slanting; crooked: those who take birth in the brute creation (as an animal, insect etc)’ — OIA *tiriyak, tiryák ‘across, obliquely’ (5825). Has a phonetic parallel in Sh.dras. trái ‘window’ (Rajapurohit [2012: 102], regarding semantics cf. in same entry Kt.g. tiri and Kc. tire ‘small windpw’). tron ‘quiver’ < OIA tu
n ra- ‘quiver’ (5899). drap ‘pride; arrogance’ — OIA darpá- ‘arrogance’ (cf. S. d.rapu ‘terror’ borrowed into Bal. drap ‘terrified’). drapan. ‘mirror’ — OIA dárpan.a- ‘mirror’. drab¯ ari ‘royal court; hall of audience’ ← Pers. darb¯ ar. drugandhi ‘bad smell’ — OIA durgandha- ‘bad smell’. drugam ‘inaccessible’ — OIA durgama- ‘inaccessible’. drug¯ a ‘(Goddess) Durga’. drubal ‘weak(ling)’ — OIA durbala- ‘weak’. drub¯ as¯ a ‘(Rishi) Durv¯ as¯ a’. drubudhi ‘foolishness; foolish; ignorant’ — OIA durbuddhi- ‘ignorant’. drumati ‘evil thought’ — OIA durmati- ‘bad disposition of mind’. drulambh ‘difficult to find, or obtain’ — OIA durlabha- ‘hard to obtain’. dhrãm ‘dharma’ (like G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı dhrama). nrak ‘hell’ — OIA naráka- ‘hell’. nradh¯ ar¯ a ‘not needing a support’ — OIA nir¯ adh¯ ara- ‘without a receptacle or a support’. prace ‘experience’ < OIA paricaya- ‘acquaintance with’ (7807). prajank ˙ ‘bed’ < (?) OIA palyanka-, ˙ paryanka˙ ‘bed’ (7964). prajant ‘boundary; up to; until’ < (?) OIA paryantá- ‘circuit’ (7936) (Pk. pajjamta-). ˙

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

16.4. Outer Languages substrate in Inner Languages

27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

505

prabat ‘mountain’ — OIA párvata-1 ‘mountain’ (7945). pramal ‘fragrant substance; perfume’ < OIA parimala- ‘fragrance’ (7854). vrip-n¯ ar¯ı ‘a Brahmin’s wife’ — OIA vipra-n¯ ar¯ı-. śrak ‘heaven’ — svargá- ‘heaven’ (13910). Note word-final devoicing. śrap, srap ‘snake’ — OIA sarpá- ‘snake’ (13271).62 śrab, srab ‘all’ — OIA sárva- ‘all, whole’ (13276).63 samrath ‘all-powerful (also a quality of God)’ — OIA samartha- ‘very forcible, etc.’

Intrusive r 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

dhrig ‘curse on!’ < OIA dhikk¯ ara- ‘reproach’ (6808) (if not a case of r-metathesis). pr an  ‘water’ < OIA p an
ya- ‘water’ (8082).

‘lightning’ — OIA vájra- ‘thunderbolt’ (11204). brajra brabat. ‘forcefully’ — cf. OIA bálavant- ‘strong’ (9166) but more likely is connection with OIA balabhrt- ‘powerful, strong’. nitr¯ıb ‘buttocks’— OIA nitamba- ‘podex’. nrigamE ‘Nigama; the Vedic texts’. nrihcal ‘unmoving’ — OIA niścala- ‘motionless’. śrur¯ a ‘liquor’ — OIA súr¯ a- ‘spirituous liquor’ (13503). śron. ‘blood’ < OIA śon.ita- ‘blood’ (12625). sardhanu ‘rich’ — OIA sadhana- ‘wealthy’.

Depalatalization Old depalatalization (possibly because of erstwhile two affricate orders) is suggested by words like r¯ as˜e ‘to protect; keep’ < *ra˙c - < *rac(h)- < OIA ráks.ati ‘guards’ (10547); r¯ us ‘tree’ < *r¯ uc˙ < *ruc(h)- < OIA *ruks.a- ‘tree’ (10757), etc.

A short list of notable words 1. agh¯ au ¯ ‘to shine (as weapons in the sun on a battlefield)’ < OIA lex. amhate ˙ ‘shines’ (regarding OIA m . h > Pk. gh see Pischel § 267). 2. anakh ‘rivalry; jealousy’ (also H.) < OIA lex. anaks.i- ‘a bad eye’. 3. avi1 ‘mountain’ and avi2 ‘sun’ are both OIA lex. 4. a n ‘the sheath of a sword’ < OIA a dha
na- ‘the place in which anything rests’ (1163)

(Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Kho. The meaning ‘sheath’ is only found in the two languages (otherwise Pa. ‘receptacle’, Pk. ‘refuge’). 5. a ¯li and Rj. a ¯.li ‘play’ < OIA aval¯ıl¯ a- ‘play, sport’. 6. kol ‘a hog; boar’ < OIA lex. k¯ akola- ‘a boar’. 7. garga ‘loom’ < OIA lex. gartik¯ a- ‘a weaver’s workshop’. The word is cognate with Kva. k argO ‘loom’. So called because a weaver sits at his loom with his feet in a hole below the level of the floor. This practice is widespread in South Asia as can be seen by the explanation on Brj.-Aw. g¯ ad. ‘a pit (for a weaver to keep his feet in)’ given by Callewaert and Sharma (2009). For a parallel basic meaning ‘hole, pit’ for ‘loom’ see Bng. khad.d.i n.f. ‘loom’ (p. 217) and Pr. udy"o  ‘loom’ (Morgenstierne) respectively üdyö ‘loom’ (Buddruss und Degener) both < OIA *khad.d.a- ‘pit’ (3790) which seems 62 Also here the allophones s ∼ ś may be echo of former two affricate orders. 63 See previous footnote and right below śrur¯ a and śron..

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

506

8. 9.

10.

11.

Chapter 16. Different subdivisions in Outer- vs Inner Languages

to be cognate with *gad.d.a- and kartá- (see also EWA sub gárta-); whereas Turner proposes for *khad.d.a- etc. Dravidian origin, a PIE origin, namely < *(s)kert- ‘cut apart’, is, because of the Brj. and Bng. evidence, more likely, and we are dealing here with another case of “Indianization” (see p. 223 on this term). cañcar¯ık ‘bee’, Garh. ca car  ‘bee’ < OIA (Udbhat.a – thus obviously northwestern) cañcar¯ı- ‘bee’ (see Bhatt, Wessler, Zoller 2014: 93). pat.t.ubisna ‘glow-worm’ has a parallel in H. pat.b¯ıjn¯ a ‘a firefly’ where McGregor rightly refers to H. b¯ıjn¯ a ‘a fan (hand-operated)’ which is cognate with OIA v¯ıjana- ‘fanning, wafting; a fan’ (12043) (Pa., Pk.) which itself derives from V¯IJ ‘fan’. Turner and Mayrhofer point out possible contamination of V¯IJ with etymologically unrelated VIC ‘blow, winnow’. The root with the unvoiced coda appears in the Brj. form which thus must have undergone depalatalisation and subsequent deaffrication, i.e. processes typical for Outer Languages. The first component of the two words goes back to OIA páttra- ‘wing-feather’ (7733). On p. 697 of CDIAL one finds there the subsection “Kaf. and Dard. forms with -t.t.-.” The geminate preserved in the Brj. word but not in H. has just one parallel in Shum. pát.t.a- ‘leaf’. Thus both Brj. and H. have preserved here a lemma with slightly different Outer Language features. Its basic meaning is approximately ‘leaf-fan’ or ‘leaf-wafting’. brabh-giy¯ an¯ı ‘one who knows Brahman’ < OIA bráhman-1 ‘hymn’ (9324) (Pa. brahma[← OIA]) ‘supreme good, Vedic text’, cf. also reflexes of OIA brahmán-2 ‘hymner, priest’ (9325): Pk. bambha˙ ‘Brahman’ and perhaps Rj. bhopa ‘low-caste singer-priest’ and Pr. bem ‘religious hymn to one of the pre-Muslim Kafir gods: myth about the gods told in prose; marvellous or enigmatic story outside the sphere of religion’ (Buddruss 1973: 40). pase ‘seeing; vision’ < OIA paśyá- ‘seeing, rightly understanding’ (8011) (Pa., Pk.), cf. Mun.d.aka-upanis.ad paśyaka- ‘seer’ which corresponds exactly with Pr. p@sk"  ‘shaman’

for which, however, I suggest derivation < OIA spas.t.á- (see p. 99 and note also Pk. p¯ aso ‘eye’). The word has perhaps been borrowed into West Himalayish Bun. pes ‘divination’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Part VI

Language data lists

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

Chapter 17 Outer Language word list

17.1

Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı affixes and phonemes

Since many language data of this book come from Bang¯ an.¯ı and since this language is my personal historical point of departure for writing this book, and since my work on Bang¯ an.¯ı is thus an example for an in-depth study of a peripheral Indo-Aryan language, it seemed natural to make a list of affixes and grammemes from this language because the many Bang¯ an.¯ı words quoted in the below long language data lists are composed of lexemes plus one or more affixes or grammeme. The list does not contain all Bang¯ an.¯ı affixes, but only those which turn up in the data of this book (which are the great majority). A large number but not all Bang¯ an.¯ı words with affixes have been explicitly tagged. Quite a number of the affixes are also found in other NIA languages. However, due to the immense number of allomorphs found in oral languages like Bang¯ an.¯ı, the forms of the affixes and grammemes listed below are frequently just approximations. Not explicitly explained here are also morphological changes caused on the lexemes when affixes are added (e.g. changes in vowel 4lengths). Note that suffixes can also agglutinate. Homophone affixes are enumerated with subscript numerals, suffix 𝑥 means that there is more than one homophone suffix and it is unclear which of them appears on the surface of the word under discussion.

Grammemes -O1

Function(s) added to verb stems to derive masculine nouns

-O2

past participle (deriving adjectives from verbs) ‘un-’

O-3 OdOn-, On

-Ont, -OndO

‘much’, ‘more’ ‘un-’

-OntO,

adjectivizer and nominalizer (present participle)

Examples ph atO ‘share (of a drink)’ from ph a tnO ‘to distribute, share’
r(h) is rare and in this case limited to parts of the Outer Languages. It is perhaps stimulated by Iranian influence, cf. e.g. Psht. w¯ or¯ed@l ‘to rain’. Morgenstierne (1936: 662) regards the Kho. form to be borrowing from Wkh. or some other Iranian dialect. But more likely is the interpretation that Iranian debuccalization has affected only a few Indo-Aryan words in the northwest (but Kashmiri has quite a number of such words). Jat.. a ¯l ‘yellow orpiment, kings yellow, trisulphide of arsenic’24 < OIA lex. ala- ‘yellow orpiment’. This word is an l-dialectal parallel to OIA hári- ‘golden, yellow, tawny, green’ (ultimately < PIE *´ gh elh3 - ‘yellow, etc.’) (with typical deletion of OL aspirate?) and has an exact semantic parallel in Middle Pers. *zarn¯ık ‘yellow orpiment’. Shum. "a ¯vas ‘yawn’ < OIA (S¯ ah.) av¯ añcita- ‘turned downwards (as the face)’. S. a ¯ś ‘gruel’ < OIA abhis.ava- ‘sour gruel’ ? Bng. and Deog. a
s1 n.f. “ritual’ mourning after a death case’,25 MKH 1: 301 s dhi a koto rO th akur l ag a a
su e r od a ‘Sidha the Thakur of Kot. began to weep’ — Wg. as"ü k

‘to mourn’, asod"a ‘mourning’ (Degener) and asü ‘mourning’ (Strand), and perhaps Pr. vuš- ‘to pant; to breathe; to sigh’ < OIA a ¯śv¯ asa- ‘breathing freely’ (1471) (Pa., Pk.) and modern parallels in Bhal., M., Si.26 There are also Bng. pipasnO ‘to feel very sad’

first component and pip¯ aś n.f. ‘much sorrow, dejection’ which are compounds with pip- < OIA paritápya- ‘felt or suffered pain’; here close is also Garh. up¯ as ‘kleś, śok, ghabar¯ ahat., j¯ı na lagne k¯ı sthiti – pain, affliction, distress, anguish, fear etc.’ with upperhaps deriving < OIA a ¯tapyate ‘suffers pain’ (1122) and change of a- > u-. Closely related is H. us¯ as ‘sigh’ < OIA *utśv¯ asa- ‘deep breath’ (1868) (Pa. uss¯ asa-), a reflex of which was borrowed into Munda Kh. usãs, usas ‘to relax, take it easy’. To this semantic sphere also belong etymologically probably unrelated Psht. aswel"ay ‘sigh’ and Pth. swhyšn ‘sigh’ (for details see Elfenbein et al.). Etymologically unrelated but similar sounding are Munda Pur. his ‘breath’ and Sant. hãhãs (also haso and hanas) ‘painful, smarting’ (Bodding’s examples are all about mental pain) which seems to have AA parallels: Aslian Semai hus hus ‘to sigh’, proto Central-Bahnaric *-ho:s ‘to breath deeply, sigh’. An ex. from Bng. involving a Kol.i named Rathu and his wife Rathuan.i:

23 It is unclear whether also Ko. v are ‘weather’ is related. 24 Traditionally used in mural paintings. 25 This is frequently done by women through singing and praising the deceased. ´ esh 𝑥 ‘±breathe; sigh, groan’. 26 Waigal¯ı -s- must go back to older *-˙c - < PIE ku



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

535

zO t  yE rOthuaniei a
s pai, tE goO z ani am u zO rOthu mOri goO

Rathuani.ERG mourning

when that.ERG throw.PP.F.SG, then go.PP.M.SG . know.VS we.OBJ that Rathu die.VS go.PP.M.SG ‘When the wife of Rathu expressed ritual mourning, then we came to understand that Rathu had died’ 117. Bng. and Deog. a
s2 - Ol ad ‘issue, progeny’, Ku. a
s2 - Ol aj and Garh. a¯s-aul¯ ad both ‘offspring, descendant’ are a hybrid synonym compound. The second word is same as H. aul ad ‘offspring’ (from Ar.), regarding the first cf. Pr. is" a ‘kid’ but more likely is derivation < OIA ápatya- ‘offspring’ (424) with early deaffrication; Pah¯ ar.¯ı a ¯ś is thus a linguistic cousin of North Indian bacc¯ a. In a well-known story about the advent of God Mah¯ asu in the Tons Valley the following sentence occurs: ti uri a
s2 - Ol ad nE nOthi thi (their progeny not not-is was)27 ‘they did not have progeny’. 118. Bng. a
sO ‘light’, a
srO ‘shining’ (with -rO grammeme), mOndru a
sO ‘a small window’ (cf. H. mandr¯ a ‘of low stature’), c Oka
sO n.m. ‘bad news, ill tidings; sheet lightning’ (with first component < OIA *camakka- ‘sudden movement’ [4676]); Jaun. a
so ‘light, brightness’; Baur. a ¯śilu ‘light’. That we deal here with ‘Sanskrit’ words becomes obvious when compared with Deog. pi a
so ‘dawn; light, brightness’, Khaśdh. piaśa ‘ditto’. The Deog. and Khaśdh. words are built like OIA *pik ala- ‘day’ (8143) where Turner points out the prefix in expressions of time, e.g. api
sarvar
am ‘early in the morning’.28 This OIA pik ala- lemma has perhaps one modern reflex in Shum. pi al ‘day’. Cf. also Bashg. “piash” ‘in the morning’ and “¯ıash” ‘morning’ and Wg. viyans ‘daylight’ (Z.) (Morgenstierne notes via s ‘light, brightness’, also Ash. vi"a s ‘ditto’ which go back to older ´ g - ‘appear’). The first Bashg. form begins with *-k¯ aµ- and ultimately to PIE *ku ek/´ one of the prefix forms pa-, ba-, bi- ‘in, on, towards’. Konow regards them as one morpheme with three allomorphs. However, I suggest – and some examples provided by him illustrate this – that they have emerged out of two OIA prefixes: api- ‘unto, a
saclose upon, on’ and vi- ‘away, out’. Thus Bashg. “piash” derives < OIA *(a)pik and “¯ıash” < OIA lex. vik¯ aśa- both ‘brightness’ (11629) with parallels for the latter in Ash., Wg. and Si.; the p- prefixed Bashg. form became an adverb because of the productive character of the prefix. The difference between vik¯ aśa- and *(a)pik a
sa- is paralleled in the difference between the Bng., Baur. and Jaun. forms on the one hand and Deog. and Khaśdh. on the other. Regarding the allomorph pi- instead of api- note Konow’s remark (1911: 16) that in Bashg. “[t]his preposition is very common. . . ”. It seems that these old formations later became overlaid by forms closer to Sanskrit models; thus there are Western Kc. pE
so, Kt.g. pr
E
s
sO, Kc. praśo, Kul. par¯ aś¯ a, pareś¯ a ‘light; a torch’ (Diakh); Kal. prav all ‘light’ < OIA prak¯ aśá- ‘lustre’ (8437), but Kc. pya
sO ‘light’ belongs, at least morphologically, to *(a)pik a
sa-. Here also Pal. rhootašíi ‘morning’ (rhootašíia, rhoošíia, rhoošée ‘tomorrow’) (Liljegren [2008: 155] – cf. rhootwith Bng. ràtti ‘morning’).

27 Double negation is very common in Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı. 28 Actually, however, this word has quite many parallels with worn prefixes partly going back to OIA. For a discussion see Seldeslachts (2006); cf. also M. pin¯ as ‘a nasal disease’ which is cognate with OIA (Suśr.) ap¯ınasa- ‘dryness of the nose, cold’. There is, however, also another possible explanation: the forms Toch.A p>𝑢 käl and Toch.B pikul both ‘year’ are derived by Joshua Katz (1994) < older *epi-ku l- with the *epi- of course paralleling OIA api-. On p. 157 he refers to George Dunkel who had argued that also such PIE prefixes must have originally shown *e/o/ø ablaut and that the Toch. lemma would precisely show this. But if this is so it still is unclear whether ablaut or simply wearout is the explanation for the IA words.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

536

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

Notes: (a) Almuth Degener called my attention to two further parallels found on Strand’s Nuristân website under the headword ‘sky phenomena’: Kamd. d"iõs ‘horizon’ (obsolescent), Bashg. d"i;us ‘dawn light’ as in d"i;us č"a pti tâ ‘when dawn came up’ both of which derive < OIA *diva-vik¯ aśa-. (b) Here also cognate is Garh. jun¯ asu ‘moonlight’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) which derives < OIA *jyotsnavik¯ aśa-. The different forms found between Nuristani and Central Pah¯ a.¯ı are again a case close to my concept of permanent semantic-morphological recreation, briefly introduced above (p. 224). Here a small example from Bng. which is followed by some additional aspects of the present topic:

a
sO lao ubE,29 inarO pOri30 goO

light attach.IMP up, darkness fall.VS go.PP.M.SG ‘put on the light, it has become dark’ There is, however, another common and perhaps cognate Bng. word for ‘dawn’: upk a
sO which coincidentally looks like OIA upak a
sa- ‘dawn’. I suggest, however, an analysis in upk a + a
sO. There is Bng. upk anO ‘to put upright s.th.’ and a participle adjective formed from it upkO ‘put upright’. The verb seems to derive < OIA u
tpatati ‘ascends’ (1810) or u
tp atayati ‘causes to rise’ plus a -k a- grammeme. There are several Bng. words which have up- without -k a- grammeme as prefix (see below upz¯ a.l p. 549). Besides an ‘upward movement’ the prefix also seems to express ‘continuous action’. Here is an example:

up
so
sO dennO ‘to slurp as a shaman the blood out of the trunk of a just sacrificed goat’ (with dennO/dennO/denO ‘to give’).31 Without prefix the first word

nO ‘to drink, suck up, slurp (down), empty’ (quoted appears as verb
susnO or
sos



cu also p. 120). It derives < OIA
sati ‘sucks’ or *c usyati ‘is sucked’ (4898) and

suck’ and in Baur.

c¯ has a close parallel in Him.
so
snu ‘to uśin.a ‘ditto’. The same prefix up- is also found in Ku. upś¯ aś¯ı ‘a lung disease’ with second component < OIA ŚVAS1 ‘breathe’ (cf. below p. 728 Bng. śuśu ‘throat’). 119. Dialectal Paš. a ¯s.par. ‘reaped rice’ (Morgenstierne [1973a, vol. 3: 312]) is a compound with first syllable < OIA (TS. ii,3,4,2) a ¯nus.u ¯ka- “after-shoot of rice’ or ‘in the manner of the after-shoot of rice’ i.e. shot after’ (cf. EWA a ¯nus.u ¯ka- ‘nachgetrieben’) and second syllable in a ¯s.par. < OIA p¯ atáyati ‘throws’ (8053) (cf. e.g. Bi., Mth. p¯ arab ‘to cut [sugarcane]’).

29 The preceding verb plus the adverb realize an inchoative aktionsart. 30 In compound verbs an -i is always added to the stem of the main verb. 31 A similar practice was formerly found in Chaprot (North Pakistan), see Nayyar (1986: 42), in the Gilgit area (Leitner [1889: 8]), and in Gar.hv¯ al where low-caste people cut the throats of buffaloes and drank the spurting warm blood, see UGK p. 5,1. See also Vogel (1926: 249) on the same practice in the Western Himalayas: At the occasion of a goat sacrifice in front of the temple of a snake deity, “[f]orthwith the head is struck off and presented to the god, and in some cases the chel.a [local priest] drinks the warm blood as it flows from the quivering carcass.” The same practice is also reported by H. A. Rose (1911: 149) form Chamba in Himachal Pradesh.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

537

120. Jat.. a ¯s ‘a piece of metal filling the mouth of the mould when molten metal is poured in, the last to enter the mold’ < OIA a ¯yasa- ‘made of iron or metal’. 121. PKT *a tO ‘narrow (road)’ < OIA a
vrta- ‘covered; surrounded’ (Pa., Pk.) with modern  Ash. aw@r
 ‘narrow [of a valley]’) and perhaps reflexes in Nuristani, Dardic (cf. e.g. Si. It is strange that despite the reflexes in Pa. and Pk. the modern reflexes are only found in these peripheral areas. 122. Kal. a 
cak ‘prickles, small thorns’, a
cak dyek ‘to prick’, a
cak av ‘bushy area covered

jh¯

by thorny or prickly bushes’ (< OIA at.a- ‘forest, arbour’ [5362]) and Gaw. ãc.h¯ ar. ‘thorn’ (quoted sub 1025) are cognate with OIA rksar
a- ‘a thorn’ (note also anrksara



‘thornless [as a path or a couch]’). 123. Garh. a si ‘flesh, piece of flesh from a goat’ < OIA a¯mis.á- ‘flesh’ (1256) (Pa., Pk.) with modern parallels in B., Or., A., M., Si., Md. 124. Marw. a ho ‘one’ < OIA éka- ‘one’ (2462) (Pa., Pk.) with parallels only in the Outer Languages: Ash., Kt., Wg., Pr., Paš., Kho., Tor., N., A. and Or. 125. Bng. ingn

O ‘to get excited and angry and tear one’s hair (usually ill-treated women who

express their feelings in a temple of God Mah¯ asu)’, ing

anO ‘to force (as a woman) a god to retaliate (after she has been ill-treated)’, ing

arinO-zing

arinO ‘the (combined) activity

of an excited and angry woman and a god (who is forced by her to retaliate)’ (with echo formation), ingu


sO2 n.f. ‘a blast, puff; a stroke’ (with unclear suffix), ing

olO n.m. ‘the jumping up of the men at whose calves the archers aim at the biśu festival; excited and angry leaping up (e.g. during a discussion)’, P. ingarn¯ ˙ a ‘to be proud and haughty, to be insubordinate’ and as adj. in P.pot.. ‘heated with sexual desire (spoken of a cow and buffalo)’ are related with OIA ingana˙ ‘shaking’ (1552) with a modern parallel in Paš. and perhaps another in a Mth. reflex of OIA lex. jyotiringan ˙ . a- “moving light’, a firefly’. See Wackernagel (§ 127) and EWA on OIA EJ ‘stir, move’. Alternatively, derivation < OIA
nkhati,


nkhati

‘moves, moves to and fro’, ¯ınkháyati ˙ ‘ swings’ is also possible. 126. Gaw. i˙c"¯ın ‘eye’ < OIA aks.in.¯ı-, aks.¯ın.i- ‘eye’ (see EWA). 127. Bng. poet. i chiO ‘desired, wished’ and Jat.. ich¯ı¯ a ‘wish, desire, will’ < OIA *icchita(see iccha
- ‘wish’ [1557] and there Si. isiya which Geiger also derives < *icchita-). An ex. from the PAN:

gali nE tes-kE bi na i chiE thi

diatribe not he.OBL-by.POP also not desired is.PP.F ‘the diatribe was also not desired by him’[1032] 128. Kal. ic.hóa hik ‘to stand on the hind legs with front legs on something’ (like a goat) is certainly cognate with OIA *adhis.t.hi- ‘standing firm’ (264) with not uncommon change of -s.t.- > -c.- (-t.s.-) in Dardic languages and with a modern reflex in P., but the suffix is unclear. 129. Jat.. ijho ‘here, yet, now’ and S. ijho ‘now’ (certainly not identical with Pk. ajjh¯ a ‘this’) and G¯ andh¯ ar¯ı iža ‘here’ < re-emphasized *iyya- < OIA ihá ‘here’ (1605). 130. Bng. indE ‘(on) this side’ < OIA antik
a- ‘near’ (377)? If so, then the word has parallels in Paš. ande ‘here’, Kal. ánda or andáy ‘here, in here’ and Pal.
nda ‘here’. I add here Gaw. ind@ ‘here’ (Morgenstierne [1950: 59]), which is very similar to the Bng. word. Turner quotes in addition Wg. t ‘now’ and Pr. it"  ‘now’ (plus a possible parallel in Si.). But this is confusing because Buddruss und Degener do not mention Wg. t but quote at"i ‘hither; hierher’ and the locative form at"iv ‘here, hither; hier, hierher’; they are one element of a two-part deictic system with the other element atuyv, atu meaning ‘thither; dorthin’. Buddruss und Degener note also it"¯ı, "it¯ı ‘now; jetzt’ (similar to

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

538

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I Turner’s form) which, however, contrasts with "ati, at¯ı ‘inside, indoor; innen, drinnen’; these latter Pr. forms coincide semantically with Wg. at"er ‘inside; innen’ wherefore the three forms all are < OIA ántara-1 ‘interior, near’ (357). In the Addenda and Corrigenda one finds in addition Kc. ida ‘here’ (plus some other more doubtful additions), but not Kt.g. indi ‘here’. A word idE ‘here’ is said to be used by members of the carpenter caste who live in western Bangan near the border to Himachal Pradesh, and idE ‘here’ is used in Khaśdh.; also ida ‘here’ in Bush., id¯ı in Chamb., idh¯ a ‘here’ in Cur.32 In addition there is also Orm. inda ‘here’ (a borrowing from Indo-Aryan?). Cognate is also Bng. postposition di ‘in, inside, into’ with a close parallel in Kt.g. di ‘in, at’. A question is whether there is in some of the quoted forms possible contamination by Pa. idha ‘here’ because note Bng. kindE bati ‘from somewhere’ (H. kah¯ım ˙ se) (second word < OIA vártman- ‘path’ [11366]) and Him. kind¯ a, kindu ‘where?’ which cf. with Pa. kudha ‘where?’ which Oberlies (1996: 46) derives < ku(tra) x (i)dha. Notes: (a) Bng. etE ‘here, this way’, etkE ‘here’, P. ethe ‘here’, Chamb. itt¯e ‘here’, Paš. et"a ‘here’ and Hind. ate, ito, itu, ete etc. all meaning ‘here’ are rather < OIA átra ‘here’ (228) (AMg. ettha) than, as suggested by Turner e.g. for L. itth ‘here’, < OIA itthám ‘thus’ (1564). However, presence and absence of aspiration suggest contamination. (b) Cf. also H. idhar ‘hither; here’ for which McGregor considers connection with OIA ihá ‘here’ and H. dh¯ ar ‘stream’.

131. Ku. indrain.i ‘rainbow’ < OIA indradhanús.- ‘rainbow’ (1577) with many parallels in the northwest and in N. indreni; Turner asks whether the N. -r- is borrowed from OIA, but more plausible is the assumption of cluster preservation shared by the languages of the northwestern branch. Note also West Pah¯ ar.¯ı indru n¯ aga ‘name of a snake god’ (Handa [2001: 58]) and borrowing into TB Kann. indr˘ omön˙ ‘month September-October’ (≃ OIA a ¯śvina-). 132. Pr. ibil ‘weak; schwach’ < OIA abalá- ‘weak’ (503) (Pa., Pk.) with modern parallels not preserving bilabial consonant and with different meanings. 133. Chin. im¯ a ‘like this’ < OIA ayám ‘this’ (587) with morphologically similar modern parallels in the northwest and Si. 134. P¯ ad.. and Bhal. imi ¯ ai ‘I(f.) have come’ (Kaul [2006 i: 309], S. Varma [1956: 5]) with first word < Pk. ahammi (< aham ˙ mi < asmi) (992). 135. Pr. iri ‘master’ < OIA *¯ ariya- ‘noble, respectable’ (1347) (Pa., Pk.) with a possible parallel in Si. 136. Pr. iriˇȷüg- ‘to dawn’ and ürˇȷu ¯g išt"¯ıg, irˇȷug išt¯ık ‘morning star’ (with second word < OIA st
r- ‘star’ [13713]) are either < OIA uparocate ‘shines, is brilliant’ or connected  a¯rocana- ‘shining’. with OIA 137. M.kas. irdE ‘heart, chest’ and Ko. h arde ‘bosom’ < OIA h
rdaya- ‘heart’ (14152) with the same “unexpl. -d-” (Turner) as in Ash., Shum., Ning., ˙  Gaw.; a similar form also in Chin. hitro ‘heart’. 138. Pal. iští ‘cream out of which butter is produced’ (Liljegren [2008: 120]) < OIA añjitv¯ a(cf. OIA [AV] añjivá- ‘slippery, smooth’).

32 Regarding aspiration cf. the parallel in North Man.d.. andhar ‘within’ < OIA ántara-1 .

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

539

139. Ind. išpìkh ‘the Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis)’, Gau. úšpuki ‘a type of kestrel’, Sh. us.p¯ uk ‘kestrel’, Kho. išpaqét.i ‘species of sparrow with black back and white breast’ (with unclear meaning of -qét.i) < OIA lex. aśvaka- ‘sparrow’. 140. Kal. ispr" @ri ‘flute’ (Morgenstierne) and isp o
 ‘flute; a kind of tree (the reeds of this are used to make flutes)’ (Trail and Cooper), Kamd. s.põ, Kt. sp@, Pal. šp¯el"i all ‘flute’ and probably Kho. išp¯el ‘whistling’ < SVAR ‘sound’. Note also Psht. špel@y ‘flute’ (borrowing?). And note that the Kal. meaning ‘a kind of tree (the reeds of this are used to make flutes)’ may be cognate with OIA sváru- ‘a large piece of wood cut from the trunk of a tree, stake, (esp.) sacrificial post or a strip of wood from it’. Notes: (a) According to EWA, origin of OIA sváru- is unclear but may be related with PIE *suér-u- as reflected e.g. in Middle High German swir ‘stake; Pfahl’ etc.; see also IEW: 1050. (b) Similar sounding Kal. sisprE ‘whistling’ (Morgenstierne [1936: 659, fn. 2]) appears to be amalgamation of the above lemma and the ‘hiss/whizz’ lemma quoted p. 726. 141. Bng. i
srO ‘fresh, strong; flowery, ripe (e.g., grain)’ < OIA is.irá- ‘fresh; flowering’. Hardly a tatsama but rather built with Bng. -rO1 suffix. See next, which seems to be cognate, and the note below. 142. Kal. is. ‘may your choking stop’. Trail and Cooper explain: “This is said to a small child who has choked on something, or to a person who is coughing or sneezing, while possibly pounding on their back’ < OIA IS. (ES.) ‘impel, set in motion’. Cf. OIA
s-krti  a ‘healing’ and Greek 𝜄´ 𝛼 𝑜𝜇𝛼𝜄 ‘heal’. It seems that Kal. is. is somehow connected with concept ‘attack/occurrence of respiratory distress’ because of is.t.ép hik ‘to get short of breath, gasp for breath’ and is.t.ép kárik ‘to suffocate someone’ with second component < OIA *t.happ- ‘strike, press’ (5495). Note: Even though Mallory and Adams list PIE *h1/4 eis- ‘healing’ – reflected in OIA IS. (ES.) – as one of two PIE terms for ‘healing’ (2006: 195), there is also OIA ¯ıs.ant ‘(adversarial) attacking’ which fits the Kalasha examples of respiratory distress. The two authors did not mention that the same PIE root is also used for expressing battle madness: OAv: a¯eš@ma- ‘fury, frenzy’, post-Homeric Greek 𝑜˜𝜄 𝜇𝛼𝜄 ‘attack, rush’, Latin ¯ıra ‘anger’, Old Nordic eisa ‘storm along’, etc. I have pointed out (Zoller [2017b: 80ff.]), that the same PIE lemma is probably reflected in the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı word for ‘battle frenzy’ O
si even though not all phonetic details are clear. There are two more Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı terms for ‘battle madness (warrior frenzy)’: m¯ır and g erO (both discussed p. 756). 143. Kt. "is.t. ‘a spear’ and P¯ ad.. it.t.h ‘plough’, H. ¯ıt.(h)¯ı ‘lance, spear’. The H. word is found with question mark sub < OIA is.t.í-1 ‘impulse’ (1602). A better alternative for all three words is derivation < OIA rs.t.í- ‘spear, lance’ (2461) (for Kt. already suggested  by Strand). 144. Bng. istO n.m. ‘god; lord, master’, is.t.¯er n.m,n.f. ‘the highest (god)’, also a designation for the cubical-like village sanctuary dzaga n.f. (see Zoller 2007a); kul.is.t. ‘name of a deity worshiped in the village of Khaśd(h)¯ ar’ (lit.: ‘god of the family’); Deog. is.t. ‘god’; Garh. is.t. ‘supreme; family god’ — here probably also cognate Kho. išt.aranúk ‘bread prepared for offering to fairies by shepherds at the time of first taking the goats to the

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

540

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

high pastures in the spring’ and išt.areék ‘to distribute/throw the išt.aranúk bread to each of the four directions to propitiate the fairies’ with the noun containing as second element Kho. avnár ‘small bread baked for goatherds’. The words may be influenced by OIA YAJ ‘worship; sacrifice’, but most clearly they appear to be cognate with OIA IS.2 ‘seek’ and thus with OIA is.t.á-1 ‘sought, beloved’ (1597) (Pa., Pk.) and is.t.í-2 ‘seeking after, wish’ (1603) (Pk.). Besides H. and Si., there are also modern reflexes in Bng. poet. (PAN) (h)¯ıt.h ‘a trustworthy person’, Dari. ist.a ¯ mitra ‘friends and relatives’ and Ku. is.t. ‘friend; dear one; chosen friend; a relative’, and Ku. anes.t.i ‘bad; agnostic’ derives < OIA anis.t.a- ‘unwished, bad’ (306) (Pa., Pk.) (H. an¯ıt.h, Si. anit.ubut with OL cluster development Brj.-Aw. 33 ‘bad’). Notes: (a) It is unclear whether Kt. etc. b¯ ag"is.t. ‘name of a pre-Islamic god’ with first component either < OIA bh¯ aghya-1 ‘fortune’ (9434) or rather < bhága- “dispenser’, gracious lord, patron’ is also cognate. (b) Here perhaps a word already quoted above: Bng. kutistO ‘impure; misshapen’,

Him. kthist ‘polluted, unclean’ (see p. 406). Instead of a prefix ku- the two words



1 may have been built < OIA *kuttha- ‘rotten’ (3279 ) and either with the above istO or superlative ending (see p. 405). But cf. also B.chit. OtstyO ‘unbearable;

unerträglich’ which Učida (1970) compares with OIA atis.t.ha- (for correct atistha


‘to jut over or out’ ?). (c) Here perhaps also Bng. nes.t.¯er n.m. ‘a nourisher, person who supports (e.g. father or brother of a deceased)’, nes.n.i ‘guidance; custody’ with initial syllable related with Bng. n anO ‘to measure volume (e.g. corn); to lead, guide’ whose

náyati ‘leads’ (6966). Cf. also Vedic néstar- which is latter meaning is < OIA .. quoted again below in the paragraph on Bng. nstEnO ‘to winnow’ (p. 640). Bng.

sounding word nesnO, nisnO nes.t.¯er ‘nourisher, etc.’ is different from the similar



sO ‘to scent (out), trace, trail, track down, detect, peep, peer; to observe’, ne
adj. ‘knowing a path, way (concrete or metaphorically)’ and nasnO adv. ‘similar,

alike’ (with -nO2 suffix) as in sE dui ek nasnE di
s en ‘the two (persons) look alike’,





Jaun. ne
snO l anO ‘to observe; to ask, investigate’, Him. neśn.u ‘to ask’, MKH 1:

a neśn

a¯ l¯ 299. . . r¯ akh¯ aśa- ‘horizon, range . ae ‘(s.o.) . . . began to enquire’ < OIA nik¯ of sight, sight, appearance, proximity’ which, at the end of a compound, means ‘similar, like’ (cf. OIA m¯ anus.a-nik¯ aśana- ‘human-like’). There is an a rul song called ked¯ ar b¯ ac˙ ha ‘the Ked¯ ar calf’ presenting in a nutshell a local version of the Mah¯ abh¯ arata story. One couplet goes like this (Lakshmikant Joshi [2007: 29]) which I give with Joshi’s imprecise Hindi translation:

m am a n ar ayna ne
snO l aO

o badh ezO p anduvo k a hars aO



m¯ am¯ a n¯ arad ne (sic) p¯ uch¯ a ki yah khuś¯ı, badh¯ a¯ı kis b¯ at k¯ı? Instead of ‘Uncle N¯ ar¯ ayan. asked (‘what [sort of] happiness and festivity of the P¯ an.d.avas is this?’) one can also translate ‘he observed/investigated . . . ’ since ¯ ‘to become visible, appear’: this coincides well with the meaning of OIA KAŚ

33 anais

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

541

‘Uncle N¯ ar¯ ayan.a observed: ‘such is the happiness and celebration of the P¯ an.davas” (d) Here cognate is also Kal. ónˇȷes.t.a ‘holy, ritually pure, sacred, taboo’ (Trail and Cooper, see there the more detailed meaning as well as in Jettmar)34 which seems to be a synonym compound with first word < OIA *avanijyati ‘washes’ (791) with dialectal Paš. o ¯nˇȷ- ‘to wash (clothes, hands)’ (but note OIA NIJ ‘wash, cleanse, purify’) and the second word like above Bng. istO etc.

(Una¯. i,144) ismá- ‘a (e) Note also that OIA IS.2 ‘seek’ is also found in OIA . . name of (the god of love) k¯ ama’ which may suggest a distant connection with the above Pah¯ ar.¯ı words referring to divine beings. Regarding wrong equations with supposed Greek parallels see IGN: 104f. 145. Kal. is.t.íl.ak ‘round or cylindrical stone for breaking or kneading things like walnuts or ¯ ‘firm up, stiffen, coagulate’ which is found in salt’35 < OIA *vis.t.y¯ a- ‘stiffen’ ← STYA OIA vis.t.¯ımín- ‘having an erect penis’. Note that PIE *sth2 ei- ‘become hard, fixed’ is generally seen as the origin of ‘stone’ (German Stein). 146. Kal. is.póna ‘hot, warm’ is probably a synonym compound < svéda- ‘heat’ and tapaná‘heat’. Same origin also of Kal. is.pónyak ‘type of porridge’ with -yak ‘diminutive or endearment suffix’ (“. . . is served hot with clarified butter” Trail and Cooper). For parallels of reflexes of OIA svéda- ‘heat’ versus the more commpon ‘sweat’ (13935) see p. 743. 147. Kal. iste
ink

‘bracelet, bangle’ is more or less directly < OIA hástiya- ‘being on the

hand’ (14041) plus angada˙ ‘bracelet on upper arm’. Regarding semantics cf. OIA *parihasta- ‘having the hand round it’ (7900) and there Ir. paridastya- ‘bracelet’. 148. Kho. ispr"u ‘smallpox’ (Strand) resp. isprú ‘blossom(s);36 smallpox pustules’ (Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics) < OIA visph¯ ara- ‘a dangerous fever’ (12016) (Pa.) with a semantic parallel in N. biphar ‘smallpox’. 149. Pat.t... (L¯ ah.) u r a, hyură? ‘day after tomorrow’ is perhaps loanword from West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and derives ultimately < OIA aparaśvas ‘the day after tomorrow’ (438) with modern parallels in Kal. and Ko. (but origin of nasalization in first allomorph is unclear). 150. Rj. ¯ıkh¯ an ‘faith, trust, vow’ < OIA ¯ıks.an.a- ‘look, view’ (1606) with one more modern reflex in Si. 151. Bng. u¯ an. and Deog. u ˜a ¯r. n.m. ‘a dry branch fixed upright in the ground so that creeper plants (e.g. beans) can grow up on it’ < OIA upadh¯ ana- ‘placing upon’. a ‘hast 152. (a) Bng. uijEnO or u jEnO ‘to sow’ — Kt. “ash, aj” ‘to throw; to sow’ as in b¯ı ajiss¯



thou sown’ (Konow [1913: 44]), cf. also Kal. uz
akik ‘to sow’ all probably < OIA ájati √ ‘throws’ which is also reflected in Pr. um"ı aj- ‘to sow (seed); (Saat) säen’ (Pr. -ˇȷ-

34 Morgenstierne gives uncorrect *onˇȷešta ‘holy, taboo, prohibited’, but in the copy of his own book (1993a), which is with me, he has written with pencil below the entry ¯ onˇȷes.t.a. Thus, this is the correct form. 35 -l.ak is possibly a v¯ al¯ a-like suffix with a parallel e.g. in dražáyl.ak ‘story-telling folksong sung in a drawn out manner at festivals’ ← drážik ‘to stretch oneself’ < OIA *dr¯ ahyate ‘is stretched out’ (14633). 36 Strand rightly keeps the ‘smallpox’ word separate from Kho. ispr"u ‘blossom’ which Morgenstierne (1936: 662) regards as a borrowing < older Iranian *spru G- as reflected e.g. in Khot. has.palgy‘issue, burst forth’ (Bailey). The Iranian lemma might be of PIE ancestry, for which see the note p. 665.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

542

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I ‘to throw; werfen’).37 Cf. also OIA a
jati ‘drives toward, comes toward’ (1090) with a modern reflex in Si. Alternatively, because of unclear preservation of -j-, the Bng. word derives perhaps < OIA utpadyate ‘arises, originates’ (1814) despite differentlooking West Pah¯ ar.¯ı reflexes because of DK uajjaï, ub(b)aj(j)aï ‘utpadyate’. But this alternative is semantically not adequate. A Bng. ex.:

tu b j dE mukE u ji, ba u aphui a u you see give.IMP with_me so.VS, plough.PR.1.SG self I ‘you sow close to me the seed, (while) I plough myself’ (b) S. ijinu ‘power of charming away pains by blowing on the spot, brushing it with skirt etc.’ because of different meaning rather < OIA a
jati (with a > i). 153. Garh. uk(a)t.ant ‘ruin, destruction’, uk(a)t.an. ‘to be rooted up, be destroyed’, ukat.ya ‘spoiled’, uk(a)ta t ‘downfall, damaging attitude’ and ukt Onu ‘to destroy, uproot com with a modern reflex in B. pletely’ parallel OIA *utkad.d.hati ‘drags up’ (1706) (Pk.) to which Bng. okrEnO ‘to wind (cord or thread), gather up, collect; to uproot’ ought

to be added. The Garh. forms show that OIA *KAD .D . H ‘pull’ (Turner: “Generally replaces kárs.ati”) has an allomorph *KAT .T . H which is also preserved in Pk. kat.t.h‘vilikhit, c¯ as¯ a hu¯ a – scarified, ploughed’ (Sheth, Päia-sadda-mahan.n.avo). Note here also the following Garh. words with OIA ud-: (a) ukh¯ıl, ukh¯el ‘restriction and neutralization of the opponent by charms and incantations’ and ukh¯elb¯ed ‘a Tantric process for removing evil designs of the enemies or acquiring a child’ < OIA *utkhilla- (see 3202); an ukh¯el is actually a magical incantation typically performed by Tantrics belonging to the caste of iron-smiths; (b) ugajnu ‘to climb the steps; to spit out; to disclose a secret’ probably < OIA *udgajj- (cf. *gañj-, *gajj-, *gadd- ‘press, ram’ [3960] where Turner also refers to OIA lex. GANDH ‘to injure, hurt, kill; to move, go; to ask or beg’). 154. Bng. ukcalnO v.t. poetic: ‘to wake up’, colloquial: ‘to lift up, pick up, pull out’, ukcalinO



v.i. ‘to be raised or lifted up’; Deog. ukc alnO ‘to lift up s.th.’ < OIA *ut-kacc- ‘to pull



1 up’ (with an -al.- causative grammeme), cf. OIA *kacc- ‘pull’ (2610). It is due to the -cc- double affricate that the typical loss of the closure did not occur. 155. Bng. uktO, uktolO ‘dry’ (with -tO and -ulO grammemes) and uktorO (in addition with

-rO2 suffix) ‘dry field or land’ (e.g., uktorE rO da n ‘paddy from a dry field’); Deog. ukht olO ‘unirrigable (as an agricultural area)’; Jaun. ukh@ri ‘an unirrigable field’ (Z.)



and perhaps also Thar. ukhami ‘dry season’ cannot be connected with K. h okhu ‘dried;

dry’ which is < OIA śús.ka- ‘dried’ (12548) but derive < OIA *ut-śus.ka- ‘dried’ (1854) with parallels in Pr. üškyö ‘dry’ and Kho. usukik ‘to wither’. 156. Garh. ukso, uksu, ugso, ugsu, ugs¯ a ‘mit.t.¯ı aur gobar k¯ a ek k¯ır.a ¯ – a worm found in earth and cow-dung’ < OIA (AV 6,50,2) upakvasa- ‘a kind of worm’. 157. Ash. uxat ‘question’, Tir. aka
t ‘word’, Paš. a G at < OIA *¯ akattha- (14261). Note that this lemma shows a certain morphological and semantic similarity with Kh¯ aśi. uv¯ ax and Bhad. uv¯ ak ‘proverb’ (Kaul [2006 i: 190]) which are perhaps < OIA (RV) upav¯ akya- ‘to be addressed or praised’. 37 Bng. u jEnO and Pr. um"ı aj- look similar, but if they are indeed the same the origin of um"ı ‘seed;

clarification. Borrowing from Austro-Asiatic? Cf. PMK *maP ‘seed’, Proto-Katuic Saat’ needs *hamaa ‘seed; strain/breed’ and Katu Pamaa ‘seeds, grains (kept for cultivating)’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

543

158. Bng. ukhr.i n.f. ‘a terrace field’ < OIA *utkhet.a-; cf. khet.a-2 ‘village (3916) and there Bshk. kh¯er ‘field’. 159. Kal. ugabát hik ‘to be taken away by the water (and drowned or lost)’ is a compound ← uk ‘water’ and < OIA apavrtta- ‘reversed, inverted, overturned; ended’ (454.2)  M., there, however, meaning ‘lap of dhot¯ı or s¯ (Pk.) with modern reflexes in G., ar.¯ı’. The same OIA participle is also found in Kal. ugav
at vaz
ak ‘bird that frequents the

water’s edge’ with second word < OIA paks.ín- ‘winged’.38 160. Jat.. uGach ‘vomit of birds or animals’ and uGchan ‘to ruminate, vomit (used of

Pk.) with a modern parallel in animals)’ < OIA údgacchati ‘comes forth’ (1945) (Pa., Gaw. 161. Kal. ugu.ík ‘to ache or be tired (as from over use)’ as in may s.is. ugu.íu day ‘my head aches (from so much thinking)’ (Trail and Cooper: “This is more like discomfort or mental fatigue”) < OIA *avagl¯ ayati (cf. vigl¯ apayati ‘wearies, distresses, afflicts’, áva gl¯ apayanti ‘they get tired’ [EWA] and *viglapayati ‘wearies’ [CDIAL]). 162. Kal. ugúz.ik ‘to become angry and threatened’ and uguz.ék ‘to anger, disturb’ (Trail and Cooper: “Actors are typically insects like ants and bees that can be stirred up”) are slightly different from ungúšik ˙ ‘to get angry and excited’ and ungušék ˙ ‘to anger or excite men’ (Trail and Cooper state that here it is humans who are agens or patiens of the action). The second pair derives < OIA anukruś- ‘shout at’39 whereas the first pair derives from the same root but seems to be cognate with OIA *kruks.ati ‘shouts’ (3596, RV aorist ákruks.at), thus perhaps < *utkruks.ati. The difference between human and animal agens (or patiens) – ‘shout at’ versus ‘shout’40 – is also illustrated by the reflex of 3596 in Wg. krc- ‘to bellow (e.g. as a bull)’ < *kruks.ya- (ibid.). 163. Jaun. ugl¯ o, Ku.,Dari. and N. alg¯ o all ‘high’, N. alginu ‘to grow tall; (met.) to rise’ and Dari. algaya basike ‘to perch (alight)’ < OIA udagra- ‘high, tall, long’ with -lextension. 164. Kal. ugh
uik ‘to repair a millstone’ and u.gúik ‘to chip a millstone to repair it’.41 Since the repair is done, according to Trail and Cooper, with the help of a nighón ‘chisel with narrow blade’, which derives < OIA *nikh¯ adana- (7156) (see Pa. nikh¯ adana- ‘a partic. sharp instrument, chisel’), it is standing to reason that ugh
uik derives < OIA utkhidati

‘draws out, extracts’. The very confusing historical background of OIA KHID/KHED ‘strike, press, press down’ has already been discussed above (p. 451). 165. Bng. u cOngO,

u cOngl

O n.m. ‘the effect of the influence of fairies or cremation ground

ghosts upon s.b. (usually upon women and children); a bad omen; the ingratiating of o.s., the creeping into (if one ‘behaves like a fairy’)’ (with -l[O] suffix) < OIA utsanga˙ but not with main meaning ‘the haunch or part above the hip; lap’ (1870) but rather with lexicographer (and rather literate) meaning ‘embrace, association, union’. 166. Rj. uc¯ındbo ‘to pull out in a disorderly manner’ has a parallel in Garh. uchy¯ ad ‘upadrava – turmoil’ (Benjwal [2010: 170]) < OIA ucchedayati ‘causes to be destroyed’ (1657); regarding semantics cf. P. uchehn.a ¯ ‘to separate the skin, scratch’. 167. Garh. uc(a)kan.d.u ‘a thorn’ is possibly a synonym compound < OIA rks.ara- ‘a thorn’ and kán.t.aka- ‘thorn’ (2668). Same compound but older-looking  is Garh. ucen.d.o ‘tearing of clothes due to entanglement with thorns’ where Nautiyal and Jakhmola 38 There is with exactly the same meaning ‘to be taken away . . . ’ also Kal. ugarói hik with -arói < OIA ápaharati ‘snatches away, plunders’ (472). 39 Regarding sound change cf. similar Kal. angá ˙ ‘alert’ < OIA anuj agr- ‘to watch as an attendant’  (p. 531). 40 *utkruks.ati would then roughly mean ‘screams out’. 41 Note alternate position of retroflex vowel.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

544

168. 169.

170.

171.

172.

173.

174.

175.

176.

177.

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

note also as synonym uparcen.d.u with upar- ← Garh. up(a)r¯ a ‘excessive, abundant, much, more than expected’ which is obviously related with OIA *¯ apura- ‘abundant’ (1211). Jaun. uchOnO ‘to set’ only used in connection with the sun: d¯ us uchai ‘the sun set’ (Z.) < OIA útsadati ‘rises; sinks’ (1871) with modern parallels in Paš. and Ku. Kal. učhúi dyek ‘to leak (of roofs)’ < OIA (ŚBr) a ¯ścutita- ‘trickled, tripped’ or a related form: regarding sound changes cf. Kal. učhundík “to descend (animate beings or water)’ < OIA *avaścandati ‘jumps down’ (854). Kal. učhúnyak ‘bosom, cradled arms’ and with kárik ‘to carry something or someone upright in one’s arms against the body’ < OIA (VarBrS.) utstana- ‘having prominent  breasts’. Rj.r¯ aj. ucherbo ‘to send cattle to graze’ < OIA *utks.a ¯rayati ‘sends out’; the correctness of this derivation is supported by Rj. cherbo ‘to have diarrhoea’ < OIA ks.a ¯ra-2 *‘flowing’ (3675) with K. chôru ‘diarrhoea’, and regarding meaning ‘send’ cf. Dm. c.h¯ ar‘to send’ which derives < OIA ks.a ¯rayati ‘causes to flow’ (3679); regarding change a > e in the northwest cf. Zoller (2010: 289ff.) and above p. 378. Kal. uc.hó.a hik ‘to stand up on the hind legs’ as in uc.hó.a thi pay prost kárin ‘the goats are standing on their hind legs (to get leaves)’ < OIA ucchraya- ‘rising, mounting’ or ucchriti- ‘rising upwards’. Garh. ujatO ‘face down; overturned, opposite’ < OIA *ujjhat.(t.)- which cf. with OIA

*jhat.ati ‘falls’ (5328) which may be cognate with *jhat.t.- ‘sudden movement’ (5327). 5328 has, according to Turner, reflexes in Pk. and Paš., but is also found in P¯ ad.. jhar.an. ‘girn¯ a – to fall’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 19]). Bng. utOngO

‘downwards, downhill’ as in utOngi

b at ‘a path that leads downhill’, ut.u¯ an.

O (H. parn¯ ‘ditto’, utm olO ‘bent, stooping’ with pOrnO/On a) ‘to stoop, bend down, . a/hon¯

first

and third word are clear

compounds

bow’; the built with anká˙ ‘curve, bend etc.’ (100) and mot.ati ‘twists’ (10186), the second is probably the -¯ an. suffix. The basic meaning of the forms seems to be ‘bent downwards’, cf. OIA lex. ot.hati, u ¯t.hati ‘strikes or knocks down’. Old Ku. ut.a ‘hermitage’ is most probably a (semi)tatsama- cognate with OIA ut.aja‘hut made of leaves’ (N. ut.aj) (1681) but Garh. or.u ¯ ‘thatched hut’ is certainly a genuine tadbhava. Bng. urkO1 n.m. ‘a small drum’ (a word from the neighbouring area Sera˜ı), Garh. and

kiya < OIA lex. hudukka- ‘a kind of rattle or small drum’. Mayrhofer thinks Ku. hur . . the word is onomatopoeic and points also to Tu. ud.uku ‘a kind of small drum’ and R¯ aj. hud.ukk¯ a- perhaps ‘a kind of bagpipe’. There are at least four Bng. words with a prefix *ut- which cannot be the same as OIA ud- but which may derive < OIA uttha- ‘standing up, rising; coming forth’: (a) utk¯ ar n.m. ‘rise, ascent’ (with -k¯ ar suffix) as in the PAN:

j
sE kE s@mE r at khuli goi,
surj raza utk ar deni goO

morning.OBL at time night open go.PP.F, sun king ascent go.PP go.PP.M.SG ‘In the morning night was over (and) the Sun God rose’[255] (b) utkh at(O) cannO/kOrnO ‘to waste s.th., to throw away s.th. heedlessly; destroy s.th.’, cf. OIA utkh¯ ata- which not only means ‘dug up’ (cf. 1753) but also ‘destroyed, annihilated’ but which cannot be the direct origin, rather this is a compound of Bng. *utplus a -tO past participle derived from Bng. kha nO, khanO ‘to dig’ (also Garh. khOn)



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

545

which itself is < OIA kh¯ atá- ‘dug up’ (3862). (c) utp¯ at n.f. ‘restlessness, bustle, bustling’ again with same prefix and also found in Garh. utp¯ at ‘upadrava – turmoil’ (Benjwal [2010: 170]) and in B.chit. utpat ‘mischief’ which, however, Učida (1979) regards as tatsama of OIA utp¯ ata- ‘sudden event’; cf. OIA utpatti- ‘arising’ (1812 has different meanings); the Bng. word is found in the PAN:

utp at thOi lai bustle keep.PP.F attach ‘There was bustling (all over)’[979]

178. 179. 180.

181.

(d) utlO ‘¯ upar v¯ al¯ a – (being) up, on, upon’ does not derive < OIA *utthala- ‘high’ (1804) but consists of Bng. *ut- plus -lO suffix as, e.g., in Bng. arlO ‘this side of (a valley, etc.)’ with first syllable ← arE2 ‘on this side’ < OIA a ¯rá-1 ‘near’ (1295). The same prefix is also found in Garh. udm¯ atu ‘intoxicated, frenzied, conceited’ (< OIA mattá- ‘delighted, intoxicated’ [9750]). Garh. ut Ov ‘impatient, excessively eager’ < OIA utt¯ apa- ‘heat, energy’ and lex. ‘exitement’ (1787) with two somewhat unclear reflexes in Or. and Si. Kamd. ut"a ˇȷukuř ‘an unmarried woman’ (with ˇȷukuř < OIA duhit
r- ‘daughter’ plus  *kud.¯ı- ‘girl, daughter’ [3245]) < OIA adatt¯ a- ‘not given in marriage’. Garh. uttr¯ asen.o ‘to be sad or aggrieved; to fear’, Kal. udrusík ‘to be frightened and run away’ and udrusék ‘to frighten and cause to run away’ < OIA uttrasati- ‘is afraid’ (1801) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Sh. Bng. udOnnO ‘to snatch or seize up s.b. (intensively)’ < older *udOn- < OIA úddhanti

‘lifts up’ (2007) (Pa.?) to which Kgr. u ¯ndhmukkh¯ a, undhr.a ¯ ‘pig, boar’ ought to be added which cf. with N. udhinne ‘pig’ (loc. cit.).42 Note: Here somehow related Jat.. udh¯ a, u ¯dh¯ a ‘boar’ (also in u ¯d-k¯ afir ‘giant’) can semantically hardly derive < OIA uddhata- ‘haughty, excited’ (2006), cf. therefore also OIA lex. uddh¯ ana- ‘the act of ejecting, vomiting’.

182. Bng. udOlnO v.i. ‘to break (as wood)’ is cognate with OIA uddalana- ‘the act of splitting,

burst’ which is related with OIA udd¯ causing to alayati ‘bursts, tears up’ (1992). 183. Garh. udank¯ ˙ ar ‘prak¯ aś, camak – light; brilliance’ seems to reflect OIA *udd¯ ata‘cleansed, bright, clear’ (1986), but since the nasal consonant would be unexplained cf. also OIA d¯ ana- ‘purification’ (EWA [iii: 264]) and perhaps OIA lex. udd¯ ana- ‘a fire-place; submarine fire’ which may contain the same OIA root DAI ‘purify, clean’. 184. Bng. udabudinO, udbudinO, udbudanO ‘to pulsate, beat (heart); to get nervous’ and

pete di (pulsation attach.PP.M belly.OBL in) udbudaO ‘pulsation’ as in udbudaO lagO ‘there was a pulsation in the stomach’ < OIA (Mcar.) ud-budbuda- ‘bubbling out forth’ (prefixed form of OIA budbudá- ‘bubble’ [9278]). An example from the PAN:

sur@z raza kO k@r@n raza udbudai lagO pete di

sun king of karna king nervousness/pulsating attach.PP.M.S belly in ‘The Sun King’s King Karna started to get nervous in (Kunt¯ı’s) belly’[135] 42 See Glossary of words peculiar to the Kangra District and the neighbouring hill tracts. By the late Edward O’Brien, Esquire, c.s., Deputy Commissioner of Kangra, Revised with additional words by the Revd. T. Grahame Bailey, B. D., M.R.A.S., Wazirabad. 1903? Page 52.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

546

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

185. Rudh. udãg ‘a very tall person’ < OIA *udanka˙ ‘upward curve’ (see CDIAL 1922). Unclear whether here also A. ud6n˙ ‘unrestrained, free’ which Kakati (1972: 107) connects with semantically parallel udd¯ ama- ‘unbound’. 186. Bng. ud anO ‘to lift up s.th. (intensively)’ < OIA *uddh¯ apayati ‘sets up’ (2017) with

modern parallels in A. and M. 187. Garh. udO n.m. ‘¯ ag phail¯ an¯ a – wide spread of fire’ < OIA *udd¯ ava- (cf. d¯ avá- ‘forestfire’). 188. Bng. ud ornO ‘to rip open, tear (e.g., a bear his prey) (intensively)’ has an exact parallel

anu ‘to rip, burst, unstitch’ < OIA *uddrta- (1983). Also the other forms of in S. u£or

 this OIA lemma have reflexes only in Outer Languages, but also in Pa. and Pk. 189. Bng. udb asinO ‘to feel very hot (in summer or in front of a fire)’, Deog. udb as ‘(suffering from) great heat’, Baur. udb¯ as ‘blistering heat’. Looks only coincidentally like OIA udbh asati ‘shines out’. There is a no longer productive prefix Od-, ud- in quite a number of other Bng. words which roughly means ‘much’ but whose origin is unclear (e.g. in Odri anO ‘to take out more’ ← ri anO ‘to take or bring out, draw’ [only rarely



may derive < OIA bh used independently].). The verb stem b asas
a- ‘light’ (9480)43 but the meaning ‘heat’ instead of ‘light’ is geographically limited: Kal. bhas ‘heat’ (in Trail/Cooper but Morgenstierne gives ‘flame’), Ind. bh2ysa ‘briefly heated and subsequently stored meat’ and loanword Brah. b¯ asing ‘to be hot, become hot’. Ex. from Bng.:

r at bOri udb asinO a u etra

night whole feel_hot.PP.M.SG I today ‘today I felt very hot the whole night’ na bo
s a gi kai, udb as l agE not sit.IMP fire near, great_heat attach.PR.3.SG ‘don’t sit near the fire, it is very hot’ 190. Bng. udrO n.m. ‘udder; bosom’ (used only rarely), Garh. udar ‘belly, abdomen’, Kann. udang ‘an udder’, N. o¯dr ‘womb’ (Ruwali [1983: 225]) — Dm. i"dEri and t, Pr. ¯ır"¯e‘udder’ (< * dr) — Rj. odar ‘womb’, N¯ agpuri¯ a dialect of Bi. odar ‘belly’, Marw. ud@r ‘womb’, G. odar ‘belly’. The Dm. forms are according to Turner < OIA *u dhriya‘pertaining to the udder’ with “ i"deri [sic] prob. dim. from * dr” (2404). That is, in fact, possible; this means that in Bng., Kann. etc. palatalization of the front vowel has not taken place, but it has also not taken place in Nuristani Wg. zö-v¯ atr ‘breast (of man); Brust (des Mannes)’. Is there a secondary extension with the -rO3 suffix? The wide geographical spread of the lemma makes it difficult to believe that it is a tatsama. 191. Jat.. udr¯ a ‘agitation, alarm, fear’ < OIA uttr¯ asa- ‘fear’ (1802) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Sh. 192. Sir.d.od.. udv¯ ar and Bhad. adhv¯ ar ‘highland pasture’ (Kaul [2006 i: 162]) (Schmidt and Kaul [2008: 292] write Sir.d.od.. adu"v¯ ar ‘highest summer pasture’). Derivation < OIA urvár¯ a- ‘fertile land’ (2356a) with dissimilation of the two trills is unlikely as well as relation with OIA uddhata- ‘high’ (2006) (cf. also OIA *utthala- ‘high’ [1804] with modern reflexes also meaning ‘high land’); more likely is a synonym compound < OIA u ¯rdhvá- ‘being above’ (Pa., Pk. uddha-) and an element *v¯ ar as it is found e.g. in Mult. b¯ ar ‘the dry uplands between the Punjab rivers’ which may either go back to 43 The Bng. word does not have an expected tone which may be due to the prefix, but this is unclear.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

547

OIA upári ‘above’ (2218) (cf. Pers. bar ‘on, upon, up, above’) or – in my eyes more likely –may derive < PIE *uer- ‘highland, high place, top, high’. Mayrhofer (FLII  12.7) suggests for the OIA word possible origin < PIE *h2 rh3 -uer-; cf. also similarly   above, highland’), built Alb. épërë ‘situated above; Illyr. Epirus (*epi-uerio ¯ ‘situated   Ériu ‘Ireland’ (*epi-uerio ¯ ‘enclosed land, hill, island’) (IEW: 324).   Note: Regarding 2356a, Turner quotes only one modern reflex in M., but there are also the remarkable H. tatsamas: urvar ‘fertile (of soil)’, urvarak ‘fertilizer’, urvart¯ a ‘fertility’ (besides urvar¯ a ‘fertile soil; the earth [as a source of plenty]’). 193. Rudh. and Khaś. uni¯ ao ‘sound indicative of sexual appetite of a goat’ < OIA unn¯ ada‘clamour’ (2104) (Pa.) with one modern parallel in S. 194. Bng. uni˜ u ‘woven’ (with -i˜ u past participle, cf. p. 400) < OIA *¯ una-2 ‘woven’ (2406) with a modern parallel in K. 195. Dm. undas- ‘(to) cough’ < OIA *uddhras¯ a- ‘coughing up’ (2030) (Pa.) with a modern parallel in G.; Turner, however, is skeptical about the derivation. 196. Jat.. unman ‘cloud’ < OIA (P¯ arGr.) undana- ‘wetting’ (2094) with partial consonant assimilation and one modern Parallel in Paš. undor.ó ‘cloud’. 197. Bng. upak(i)O ‘suddenly’ < OIA utpa
ta- ‘any sudden portent’ (1820) (Pa., Pk.) and -kO2 suffix with a modern parallel in G. The suffixless form of the word appears in some Bng. words as a prefix, e.g. in upz¯ a.l n.m.pl. ‘the dancing particles in a light ray’ which coincidentally resembles OIA upajvalita- etc., upd arO n.m. ‘a moving crowd of people; squeezing out/in, trickling out’ with a parallel in Garh. updar ‘upadravya – commotion’ (Benjwal 2010: 170) with unclear origin, upsOrO ‘a continuous flowing out (e.g., dysentry, vomit)’ which coincidentally resembles OIA upasara- ‘approach’, and ups asO ‘panting’ which is coincidentally similar to OIA (AV xi,1,12) upaśvasá- ‘breeze, draught of air’, uphornO ‘to unravel (a bundle)’ and uphurnO ‘to loosen, untighten’ < OIA *pharati ‘moves, turns’ (9050) with transitive -o-/-u- (no connection with OIA *ut-sphurati [1916]!). Further examples are found sub up
so
sO dennO (p. 538). 198. Ko.kun.. upal ‘pebble etc.’ < OIA úpala- ‘stone, rock’ (2223) with preservation of initial vowel and plosive; for additional parallels see p. 646. 199. Pr. up¯ a- ‘to banter; scherzen’ < OIA upah¯ asá- ‘sport’ (2282) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in Sh. but Pr. with preservation of stop. 200. Bng. up angO

‘fooling, duping, hoodwinking’ is probably same as Jat.. upang ˙ ‘footless, crippled, lame; so depending on others’. The words seem to be cognate with OIA pangú˙ ‘lame, crippled in legs’ (7647) plus a prefix (cf. Bng. intensive, iterative ud-). Note the following typical Bng. example: up angO

deni goO gOturei (lit. hoodwinking in monsoon when it go - gone - sky.Erg.) ‘the sky has hoodwinked (us)’ (this is said does not rain). 201. Garh. uper. ‘time of distress, misfortune’ < OIA utp¯ıd.a- ‘pressing out’ (regarding semantics cf. upap¯ıd.ayati ‘distresses’). 202. Bng. upsinO ‘to stretch o.s. and lounge around (after a heavy meal)’ < OIA *utpusati

‘swells’ (1828) (?) with parallels in Wg. and Kt. to which are to be added Chin. ubš ‘swelling’ and ubšb¯ a ‘to swell’, Bashg. aps- ‘to be swollen’ and probably Wg. apsümřand¯ ˙ am ‘gut, colon; Darm, Dickdarm’ where Degener refers to a language consultant who says that initial aps- means ‘swell’. Turner suggests for some forms derivation < OIA *utprus.ati ‘bubbles up’ (1832) for Wg. and Kt. but his arguments for irregulat phonetic developments are not convincing. Therefore cf. possible reflexes

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

548

203. 204.

205. 206.

207.

208.

209. 210. 211. 212.

213.

214.

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

of PIE *p(h)eu- ‘swell’ (discussed p. 659) and cf. Lat. pustula (Mallory and Adams [2006: 385]). Garh. uphat.t.¯ı, uph¯ at. ‘high jump’ < OIA *utphat.t.- (see OIA *phat.-1 ‘sudden movement’ [9038]). Jat.. uáatt¯ a, oáatt¯ a ‘nausea, qualm, retching, vomiting’ and verbal uáatte a ¯van. < OIA *udv¯ anta- (cf. OIA udvamita- ‘vomited’ and Turner’s comments on the origin of OIA *ubbakka- ‘vomited’ [2337]). The prefix-less OIA word is reflected in Jat.. uttõ ‘vomiting’. Jat.. reflects also OIA *ubbakka- (see p. 304). Jat.. uáa ¯si "a yawn, gape’ could derive < OIA udvasa- ‘empty’ but here origin of -vaswould be unclear. Kal. ubuník ‘to blow; to blow about in the wind’ < OIA *udv¯ ana- with -v¯ ana- = OIA v¯ ana-2 *‘blown’ whose nominal form *v¯ an¯ı- ‘wind’ has a modern reflex in Tir. b¯ ani ‘wind’ (11516). Alternatively, there could also be derivation < uddhm¯ ana- in the sense of *‘blowing up’; regarding sound change cf. S. a ¯bh¯ aman.u ‘to be swelled up’ < OIA a
dhm ayati ‘swells with wind’ (1170). For Wg. üb"˜e ‘both’ Buddruss (in Degener 1998) suggests gemination in derivation < OIA ubháya- ‘on both sides; beiderseitig’; the lemma is also found in Ash. "vadd¯ u ‘both’, Kamd. v"edü, Kal. av and av dú, Sh. bae, Sh.koh. bei and Sh.gur. b  ega  all ‘both’; Ash., Kamd. and Kal. are synonym compounds as can be seen in Ind. ℎ l2k d u ‘both boys’ and Sh.gur. probably contains as second element ga ‘also, and’; here also Ind. bhazdo
‘both’ as a synonym form built of three elements with -žultimately deriving < OIA dva- ‘two’ (see sub 6648 e.g. Kho. ˇȷu ‘two’, and there is Pr. imˇȷ’ü ‘dyadic, a pair [of things belonging together], twins’ which contains the same palatalized ‘two’ as second element and the first element goes back to OIA yamá‘twin’); the OIA form has otherwise survived in Pk. as ubao ‘from both sides’. Bng. ublEnO2 ‘to be able (to), be capable of’44 is perhaps the same as Wg. üb"al1 ‘toil,

Mühe, Anstrengung’ and both are < OIA udbala- ‘strong, powerful’; here exertion; perhaps also Ind. ub
l ‘instruction’. M. uma¨ȷn.˜e ‘to recover from sickness’ < OIA únmajjati ‘emerges’ (2110) with a parallel in Bng. poet. umzanO ‘to incite, rouse’ (with transitivization). M. umal.n.˜e ‘to wash (clothes or vessels)’ < OIA *unm¯ alayati ‘rubs’ (2119) (Pk.) with a parallel in Bng. um(b)la nO ‘to do the washing, clean cloth’ (with an ‘intrusive’ -b-).

liquid substance (with a receptacle)’ < OIA armana- ‘a Garh. um¯ an.anu ‘to measure . partic. measure = 1 dron.a’ (688) (Pa.) with a modern parallel in Si. Kal. umúru hik ‘to quiet down, to be comforted’ and umúru kárik ‘to quiet a crying or sad person’ look semantically and morphologically similar to Kal. urumík ‘to smother’ and urumék ‘to smother someone’ and all may derive (with consonant swapping) either < OIA uparam- ‘cease, end, terminate’ or udram- ‘to cease, leave off (speaking)’ (ŚBr vii,4,1,39) or viram- ‘stop, pause, end, come to an end’ and vir¯ am- ‘bring to an end, finish’; cf. also *viramyati ‘stops’ (11846). Bng. umnEnO ‘to string, thread (e.g., pearls)’ < Pa. amunanav¯ a- ‘to string together’

avun¯

ati ‘strings together’ (1439) where Turner suggests that the Pa. -m- is < OIA *¯ probably due to influence of *sam¯ una-. Kal. umbrášik ‘to expel, to banish someone from somewhere’ < OIA *utpramuñcati. Cf. OIA prámuñcati ‘drives away, banishes’ and prámucyate ‘is loosened’ (8727) with √ Pr. pu  ci ‘to flee’ (more precise: -püč(i) ‘to flee’ only in üpüč- ‘to flee, walk’ [with prothetic ü] [Buddruss/Degener 2017: 184]).

44 Is different from ublEnO1 ‘to bubble’ which is < OIA *ubbal- (2339) ‘boil’.



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

549

215. Bng. ur anO ‘to roar wildly’ < OIA a¯r¯ avá- ‘cry’ (1319) (Pa., Pk.) (with a ¯- > u-) with a

modern parallel in A. 216. Garh. ulOn ‘to cut; to clear the weeds; to prune the plants’ < OIA *ullavati. 217. Bng. ulkO, olkO ‘a shooting star; firelight’ and ulkEnO ‘to flame or blaze up’ (cf. p.

(Kaul [2006 i: 336]) which is 218); Garh. ulk¯ a ‘meteor’; Bhal. s¯ anhëlu ‘evening star’ a compound < OIA samdh

a
- ‘twilight’ (12908) plus OIA ud.u- ‘star’ (1694) (Pa., Pk.) (?); here also Jaun. ud.a ¯v kuria ‘pole star’ (with -¯ av probably a v¯ al¯ a suffix, second word < a side-form of OIA *kud.a-1 ‘boy, son’ [3245]) — Paš. ulík ‘spark’ (Buddruss [1959b: 28]). According to CDIAL, there is one possible modern reflex in Si., which is amazing as the OIA word is documented only lately; note however, S. ulo ‘spark’, G. “ uhla ku  ‘a rain of fire’ (LSI [i, ii: 347]) and M. ud.u ‘a star’ but ulk¯ a ‘a meteor’ (also

and cf. Ko. ulop, ulp¯a ‘inflammation; passion; heat’ and ulp¯ Ko. ai to scorch’ which may derive < OIA LIP ‘inflame, kindle, burn’) which, like the Bng. and perhaps Bhal. forms, is related with OIA ulka
- ‘meteor’ (2362). Here to be noted are also Deshi Prakrit ukkalo ‘heat’ (Bhayani [1988: 62]) and Ora. ullk¯ a ‘a burn’. Note that there are other remarkable West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and outer language words related to the night sky: Bhal. gu-rot ‘milky way’ (see p. 705), Jaun. via nia

‘morning star’ (see p. 714), Jaun. kirkit.i ‘the Pleiades’ (Z.) (OIA k
rttik a- [3427],  tatsama?), Sirm. “dhanishta” ‘asterism’ (Negi [1969: 433]) cf. OIA dhis.n.ya- with meaning ‘star, asterism (looking like the fire on the side altars)’ given by the astronomer Var¯ ahamihira; Mult. m ah o m ah a ‘the Gemini’ (O’Brian) a reduplication < OIA mithuna- i.a. ‘the sign of the zodiac Gemini’; Ind. p al
2ng

and Jat.. palaggh p¯ıhr.a ¯ (with second word < OIA p¯ıt.ha- ‘stool, bench’ [8222]) both ‘Ursa Major’ (lit.: ‘bedstead [seat]’) < palyanka˙ ‘chair of state, litter; Thronsessel, Tragsessel, Sänfte’ (7964) also found in Mult. and Kgr. as palag pihr.a ¯ and khat.t., Garh. kh¯ at., Brah. kat.t.a ¯k ‘Great Bear’ (< OIA khát.v¯ a- ‘bedstead’ [3781]) ‘constellation of Great Bear’, Shahpur dialect of Jat.. ma j a ‘constellation of Great Bear’ (< OIA mañca- ‘bed’ [9715]) and Kal. šen tári ‘big dipper constellation’ (literally ‘bed star’ with first word < OIA śáyana- ‘bed’). The quoted words have taken this meaning ultimately from Akkadian ereqqu ‘wagon; Ursa major’ (cf. in Europe Charles wain, Wotanswagen, gran carro etc., see p. 584 on more names of stars and asterisms). Some of the words are more or less old tatsamas. 218. M. uśipn.˜e, usapn.˜e ‘to draw up’ is quoted sub OIA utks.ipyate (1749) and has a close phonological parallel in Bng. u ch ep(O) n.m. ‘accusation; throwing’. 219. Bng. u
spOdinO ‘to be (internally) excited’ < OIA *ut-spandati ‘jumps up’ (1909) with

modern parallels in Kho. ušpunik ‘to dance about, buck (of a horse)’ (Turner wonders about the sibilant) and in A. 220. Kamd. "u štoa- ‘to have diarrhea’ appears to be related with OIA *¯ amaśaka- ‘dysenteric stool’ (1249) with a modern reflex in Or.; however, the Kamd. form must derive more precisely < OIA *¯ ama-śakrt- (see 12248) with preservation of -t- as in Tor. z.a ¯t ‘dung’ (discussed p. 331). If thisinterpretation is correct, the proper K¯ amdeshi form would be "uštoa. 221. Kal. us.t.ú ‘rock salt’ is possibly cognate with OIA as.t.hi- ‘seed; a kernel, a stone’; cf. also as.t.h¯ıl¯ a- ‘a globular body; a round pebble or stone; kernel; seed-corn’; it is possible that these OIA words are cognate with OIA áśman- ‘stone’ (see EWA sub as.t.h¯ıvánt‘the knee, knee-bone’).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

550

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

222. Bng. v.i. usnO ‘to shine’, adj. usnO ‘shining’ (with -nO3 participle ending) and usk arO

sunray in the morning’



n.m. ‘the first (with -k arO suffix) are < OIA usra- ‘ray, sun, day’ (2399) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in M. to which ought to be added Mult. “ass¯ ur a ¯l¯ a t¯ ar¯ a” (O’Brien) ‘morning star’. 223. Ko.kun.. usa and M.coch. vussE ‘pillow’ < OIA (Car.) up¯ aśraya- ‘pillow’ which is close to úpaśrayati ‘leans against’ (2254) (Pa., Pk.) with a doubtful modern reflex in Kal. 224. Kamd. usám¯ a ‘to yawn’ < OIA ujjrmbha- ‘parting asunder, open, apart’ with devoicing  mentions also -z-). Here also Bshk. "o¯san˙ ‘yawning’. and depalatalization of -jj- (Strand 225. Kal. usuagín, usuagín.d. ‘afternoon, about 1:30-4 p.m.’ Trail and Cooper derive -gín, gín.d. < OIA ghan.t.a ¯- ‘bell (stroke)’ (4421), which is not unlikely even though the lemma is not found independently in Kal. The first component usua- looks like Pk. visuva‘equinox’ – but which, I assume, is not the origin of the Kal. word – even though it fits semantically with OIA vis.uvánt- ‘midday, apex; Mitteltag, Scheitelpunkt’ (EWA) (MW gives vis.uva- ‘the shadow of the gnomon or index of a dial at noon when the sun is on the equinoctial points’) which is semantically somewhat different from CDIAL vis.uvánt, vis.uva- ‘equinox’. More promisising is comparison with Pr. v@s ‘day’ and the compound munˇȷes"u ‘noon’ with munˇȷ- < OIA mádhya- ‘middle’.45 Pr. v@s ‘day’ has parallels in Kal. bas1 ‘day, 24 hours’, Ash., Wg. v¯ as and Kt. vos all ‘day’. Turner derives the words < OIA v¯ asá-2 ‘abode, staying’ (11591), but this is implausible and in the NIA languages which are known to me in which this lemma is used it never means ‘day’ but always ‘overnight stay or place’. Therefore, Kal. usuagín, usuagín.d. may actually be a shortening of an expression originally having also started, like in Pr., with a reflex of OIA mádhya- ‘mid’ plus a *vas ‘day’ word. These words for ‘day’ are, I suggest, cognate with OIA *vasar- ‘morning’ (EWA [ii: 532]) which itself is cognate with VAS ‘shine, light up, get light (in the morning)’. Cf. also K. subas ‘pr¯ atah. – morning’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 398]), perhaps puilt after the borrowed word subah ‘morning’ from Ar. 226. Kal. ustúr ‘acne, pimples’ < OIA sth¯ avará- ‘stationary, fixed’ (13767) where Turner quotes M. t.h¯ avar ‘a renewed boil or tumour’ (13767). Kal. u- may be prothetic or reflects OIA upasth¯ avara- ‘stopping, not moving’. 227. Rj. u ¯kat.bo ‘to give a gift and boast about it’ < OIA utkat.a-2 ‘immense’ (1702) with one more modern reflex in Sir.dod. (= K.d.od..) ukr.o ‘height’; note however that there is also with latter meaning ‘high’ R¯ amb. ukkur.. 228. Jat.. u ¯g ‘collection, subscription’ < OIA udgh¯ ata- ‘raising’ (1974) (Pk. ugh¯ aa ‘collection’) with a modern parallel in A. 229. Jat.. u ¯di ‘a hole dug in the ground from which to shoot game, a pit’ — OIA (TBr.) u ¯ti- ‘a mole’s hole’. 230. Bng. u ¯r n.f. ‘anger, fury’, uru ‘a flood; a wild bull’ as in uru-suru lagE pani rE (flood

ECHO occur.PP.M.Pl water of) ‘a flood of water came’, u inflated rnO ‘to swell, become

(e.g., a river, breast); to storm ahead (as warriors or a herd)’ and ura-uriE ‘quickly, spontaneously’, Ku. ur¯ın. ‘to gather (as clouds)’ < OIA úd¯ırte ‘rises’ (1939) (Pa., Pk.) (see there also OIA úd¯ırayati ‘causes to move’) with one modern reflex in Paš to which Garh. u ¯ren.u ‘to start, initiate’ and u ¯r ‘start’ ought to be added; here also borrowing into Brah. (h)¯ uringing ‘to swell up’; the Bng. form uru-suru, which is not a normal echo word, might be influenced by sursuri ‘burbling (of water)’ < OIA sárati ‘flows’ (13250)?

45 The Pr. word is found sub 9812 as reflex of OIA *madhyavasar- ‘midday’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

551

231. Ku. u n ‘¯ an¯ a, upasthit hon¯ a – to come, be there or present’ < OIA úpay¯ ati ‘approaches’ (2207) (Pa., Pk.) with one possible modern parallel in Sh. 232. Garh. ekh¯ acu ‘curved, one-sided’ < OIA *ekka-añca-. See añca- ‘curve’ (165) with a modern reflex in A., and regarding aspiration cf. Garh. ikhuli ‘alone’ < OIA *ekkalla‘alone’ (2506). 233. Bng. eznO v.t. ‘to sweep’ and ezia uz ‘clean(s)ing process’ with -ia uz with -i- 𝑥 grammeme

and < (invented?) OIA mañjayati ‘cleanses or is bright’ (thus ezia uz is a synonym compound with u ˜ < a), Kt.g. and Kc. hezn.õ ‘to sweep’ which is not, as suggested by Hendriksen, < OIA *¯ akhiñc- (not accepted in the Addenda and Corrigenda), but all words < OIA abhimrj- ‘to wipe, cleanse’.  < OIA avak¯ırna- ‘poured upon’ which cf. with OIA avakirana234. Ramp. ¯en.n.o ‘to sow’ . . ‘sweepings’ (731) reflected in H. vairn¯ a ‘to pour (rice, &c.) from hand or vessel, to sow’. 235. Chin. ene ‘like this’ < OIA pron. stem ana- ‘this’ and kene ‘how’ ← ene; for further details see CDIAL 283 and EWA. 236. Bng. ernO ‘to do’, Bar¯ a. ¯e"rno ‘to do’, Kc. her.no ‘to do, to work’, Him. hern.u ‘to work’

— D . . iriná ‘to say, to do’. A derivation < OIA ¯ıráyati ‘causes to rise’ (1614) (Pa., Pk.) (with a doubtful modern parallel in Sh.) for the modern forms is questioned by Turner and he suggests derivation < karoti “with abnormal loss of k-.” 237. B.roh. aimme ‘opened mouth to release air due to sleepiness’ < OIA *avajrmbhita ‘yawned’ (cf. OIA avajrmbh- ‘yawn’).  238. Ku. ail (phonetically [El]) ‘this time, nowadays, this year’ and poet. @l(l)E, El@ ‘now’ < OIA *et¯ ak¯ ala-? Cf. OIA etatk¯ alam ‘now’. 239. B.roh. áil and with spontaneous aspiration háil ‘green (color)’ perhaps < OIA a ¯n¯ıla‘darkish- (1179) with modern parallels in Paš. and Shum. 240. Bng. oi chinO2 ‘to wish, long for, desire; to look at, aim (with a gun)’ probably < OIA

v
ksate ‘looks at, sees’ (12041) with modern parallels in the west and northwest.

241. Bng. og ar or og er n.m. ‘sweat’ < OIA *udgh ara- ‘pouring out’ (1977) with parallels in Pr. and Kt. (from the parallel form OIA*udgh ala- to which to be added is G. Ogala v u

‘to ooze’) and Kho. uğarà ‘watery; slushy’. A similar formation is found in Jaun. j@lg Or ‘sputum’ (Z.) (with first component < OIA jala- ‘water’ [5155]), cf. also Ku. garak ‘stream, flow’. A more distant parallel perhaps in Shgh. ažär- ‘to soak, wet (skin, clothes, etc.)’ for which Morgenstierne proposes *¯ a-g¯ araya- by pointing to a possible OIA parallel g¯ alaya- ‘to make stream, flow’. Ex. Bng.:

durki-durkiO og ar rOO lagi



run-run.CONV sweat stay.PP.M.SG attach.VS ‘after much running (he) began to sweat’ 242. Garh. oj, vOj ‘mumh ˙ se nikalne v¯ al¯ a jh¯ ag – foam or froth coming out of the mouth’ may have preserved the special RV (9,86,43) meaning of ucchv¯ asá- ‘froth, foam’ while the other modern reflexes are related to meaning ‘deep breath’ (see 1868). 243. G. or.i ‘hinder part of the neck’ is rightly derived by Turner (despite question mark) at - ‘part near the back of the neck’ (2147) because of similar P¯ ad.. < OIA *upakrk

 neck’ h ro-pu  r ‘on the (LSI [ix, iv: 912]) (the postposition with a > u  , cf. H. par). 244. Bng. od.a ¯.l n.m. ‘a battue’ < *ud.d.h¯ alayati ‘throws up’ (1698) with modern parallels in S. and N., the latter of which is doubtful. 245. Pr. ob"u˙c, bu˙c, @bu˙c ‘side; direction’ < OIA (TS) apipaks.a- ‘the region or direction to the side’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

552

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

246. Pr. obgi-, ig -p@gi- ‘to have sex’ with first form < OIA *abhigrdh- as found in Mbh. mithy abhigrdhna- ‘unjustly or eagerly covetous’ and secondform, which appears  formation with preposed echo word, < OIA *pratigrdhati (cf. OIA to be an echo  OIA *grdhatipratigrdhyati ‘is eager or greedy for’); the forms compare further with   ‘desires’ (4230) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in Or. gihib¯ a ‘to copulate’. 247. Garh. oy¯ a ‘leakage’ < OIA ap¯ aya- ‘departure, death, misfortune’ (481), Pa. ‘separation, loss, leakage, hell’ (Pk.) with a modern parallel in Si. 248. Bng. olnO ‘to pull out the weeds’ in the PAN also ‘to pick off rice ears’ < OIA *avalavati

(830) with modern parallels in Sh. and G., but the latter is doubtful. ‘cuts off’ 249. (a) Marm. olr.i ‘udder of goat and sheep’ (?), Rudh. "vala, Khaś. and Low Rudh. p2lla (with pra- prefix, see next [b]) all ‘udder of cattle’ — Bhat.. va
l ‘udder’, Kal. ol.ár ‘stomach (the organ)’, Pr. u  l ‘belly’ and probably Jat.. a¯lh¯ a ‘udder, mammary gland’. These forms are not directly < OIA udára- ‘belly’ (1932) (for which cf. also Ind. v2yri ‘belly; lap’, Šat.. v2ri ‘stomach’, Gaw. var ‘stomach’, Bro. va:r ‘stomach’ and S. urhu ‘bosom, breast’)46 but < the side-form OIA udála- ‘belly, womb’ which is also found in Ku. odili ‘pregnant’ (with preservation of stop) or partly < older *ular (see ATLAS, entry 160). Cf. also Orm. w  Or ‘guts’, Wkh. i"l¯ır and Sak. u ¯ra- ‘belly (exterior)’ which are < Av. *udara-. Apparently blendings have taken place. (b) Sub u
dhas- ‘udder’ (2403) Turner quotes some forms from Wg., Pr., Wot.., Shum. and Gaw., e.g. Wg. u ¯r. ‘udder’, which he regards as “doubtful” with regard to Buddruss’ suggestion of a derivation going back to earlier *¯ urd(h)- < *¯ ud(h)r-. The Nuristan and Dard words have parallels in Low Rudh. pr2uru, Śeu. priur.u, Khaś. and High Rudh.

is frequent confusion between u piur.u all ‘udder of goat and sheep’. Since there
dhas‘udder’ and udára- ‘belly’, the West Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms can derive < OIA (Pat.) prodara‘big-bellied’, and the other forms from the unprefixed lemma. 250. Bhil.MBh. ol.n.¯ı ‘comb’ n.f. < OIA a ¯lekhan¯ı- n.f. ‘brush’ (1382) with a modern parallel in Kho. Here to be added are B.chit. Oni ‘comb’ and B.roh. óni, hóni ‘a comb’. 251. Bng. o
sa nO v.i. ‘to burn down or out’ < OIA ós.ati ‘burns’ (2561) with modern parallels

in Dm., Kho. K. 252. Kal. os.árik ‘to complain, protest etc.’ < a ¯ghos.a- ‘calling out to, invocation’ plus kárik ‘to make’. Regarding semantics cf. OIA a ¯ghos.ayati ‘complains continually’. 253. Kal. os.ála ‘cream from boiled milk’ < *us.a-jalya- (see 2385 and 5165). 254. Kal. os.vál.i ‘pregnant (of women)’ — Bng. us.n.al.u ‘thick’ and us.n.al.i c˙ hev¯er. ‘a pregnant woman’ < *ucch¯ una- ‘swollen’ as in procch¯ una- ‘swelled, swollen’ plus v¯ al¯ a -suffix. But for a different interpretation of the Kal. word see p. 634. 255. Bng. osainO ‘to feel exhausted or worn out after strain’ < OIA avas¯ıdati ‘becomes exhausted or disheartened’. 256. M.w¯ ar. oh@l ‘stream’, ohli ‘rivulet’, oh@t ‘low tide’ hardly derive < OIA aughá- ‘flood, stream’ (2565) (Pa., Pk.) but compare with Chit. hOli ‘flood’ (D. D. Sharma [1992: 201]), Bng. ulnO1 ‘to well, break or burst out, shoot up or down’, u lE n.f.pl. ‘push,

shove, thrust (that comes out)’ and u lO n.f. ‘flood’ as in zOre ri u lE lagOndi (rain.OBL GEN POP.F flood attach.PPR) ‘floods of rain are coming down’, Kgr. ul¯ ar ‘a raise in a threatening manner’, Pog. ulrai ‘movement, instability’, Jat.. ul¯ aran. ‘to raise the arm to strike, to threaten’ and ulran. ‘to grow up, grow tall (of crops); to spring up (in order to strike), rush at one in a rage’. It seems that the Kgr., Pog. and Jat.. words contain as second element a reflex of OIA ¯IR ‘set in motion’. Cf. OIA (comment on 46 Initial v- in the Dard words looks unusual, therefore cf. Seldeslachts’ discussion (2006: 137f.) of a possible connection of the OIA form with lex. vidara- ‘crevice’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

257. 258.

259.

260. 261. 262.

553

MBh) ullola- ‘dangling, waving’ and OIA lex. ‘a large wave’ and hillola- ‘wave’, and comments in EWA sub kallola-.47 Kal. o 
a ‘strange’ as in o
a mon des ‘you speak strange words’ possibly < OIA anucita

‘improper, wrong, unusual, strange’. a Marw. o ¯jam t¯ o ‘extinguished’ as in jaga r¯ o s¯ ot.ava t¯ o t¯ o k¯e o ¯jama t¯ o t¯ o ‘the quarrel is at once ended or extinguished for good and all’ (LSI [ix, ii: 99f.]); note loss of aspiration in jaga r¯ o (H. jhagar.a ¯), use of past participle in -t- (see p. 396) and use of unaspirated past tense auxiliary t¯ o (see p. 403); the word o ¯jama t¯ o appears to be a contamination of derivation < OIA *avajjh¯ ayati ‘extinguishes’ (771) with one modern parallel in N., and < OIA upaś¯ amayati ‘extinguishes’. Pr. vuz"¯ı ‘barley’ < OIA atiyava- ‘a sort of barley’ ? There are somewhat similar Kumaun¯ı and Gar.hv¯ al¯ı forms, all or several of which appear, however, to be compounds of OIA yáva- ‘barley’ and OIA lex. umb¯ı ‘fried stalks of wheat or barley’ (2343 – also reflected in Garh. u ¯mi ‘roasted green wheat’): Ku. o ¯jau, o ¯j˜ u ‘a grain resembling to but different from barley’, h˜ ujau ‘a cereal whose shape resembles wheat and barley’, Garh. um ajO, uv ajO ‘coarse grain; a kind of barley’ and uv¯ a ‘a variety of barley’. Bng. o tnO ‘to disappear, clear off, push off’ < OIA *avaghat.t.ati ‘recedes’ (748) (Pk.)

with modern parallels in Ku., M. Related *avaghat.t.ayati has a modern reflex in N. Rj.ah. o ¯t ‘recovery’ < OIA upavartate ‘returns’ (2240) (Pa., Pk.) with modern parallels in Kho. and S. Bng. poet. k@tk@te ‘that which cannot be ground(?), hard’, Ku. kat.ak ‘pieces of sugar

k¯ molasses’ and kat ¯ ‘hard, strong, robust’. . un. ‘to crush with teeth’, P. kat.t.a Note: The quoted forms are possibly cognate with OIA kakkhat.a-, *kakkat.a‘hard’ (see 2587) and may be borrowed from Munda, see Proto-Kherwarian *kEúEé ‘hard’, etc.

263. Bng. kOtna O n.m. ‘a dog or animal flea’ < *kit.ana- ‘a tick’ (3155) and contamination with k at n O ‘to cut’ and with modern parallels in Bhal., N., Ku. Here also Paš. kateg" a

‘flea’.

264. Bng. kOnsu ar, kOn
su ar ‘centipede’, Ku. kansvain. ‘a very thin and long centipede’, Garh.

‘a centipede,

kan.asalah earwig’, Jaun. kansy on ‘centipede’, Ra. k@nessi ‘scorpion’ —



K. bum1sin, b1m1sin ‘worm’ (with first component < OIA bhu
mi- ‘earth’) (Sachadeva
i et al. [2010: 60]) — Bhat.. k2ns2l y E ‘a centipede’, Kal. šivil.á ‘centipede’ (several words are compounds with first element < OIA karn.á- ‘ear’ [2830]). Turner derives the Kal. form < OIA śipavitnuka- ‘centipede’ (12442) which is rightly doubted by Mayrhofer (EWA). Alternatively compare N. kansutlo ‘a part. kind of very thin centipede’ which is < OIA *karn.a-s¯ utra- (13561) plus a suffix, but there is no corresponding ‘cord’ word for the other forms; note also Ku. kakal-saun.¯ı ‘centipede’ and Garh. gol.a ¯syan. ‘centipede’. There are, however, apparently related Iranian forms: Shgh. šilut, Par. šil¯ an.d., Kab. šilend, Par. saibal, Psht. šobla (with -bla, according to Morgenstierne, < *pad¯ a-) and all meaning ‘centipede’. 265. Bng. kOthurO n.m. ‘musk-deer’, Jaun. k@thur ‘musk-deer’ (Z.) < OIA kast¯ ur¯ı ‘musk, musk-deer’ (2985) (Pa., Pk.) with other modern reflexes in S. and Kt.g. According to Mayrhofer a loanword from Greek kastór(e)ion ‘Bibergeil, Castoreum’. The

47 The idea that is is ultimately an Austro-Asiatic word is perhaps supported by Ra. bh@llo ‘flood’ (D. D. Sharma [1990: 174f.]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

554

266.

267.

268. 269.

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

geographical spread of this word may indicate old trading activities in the northwest with Greeks with this animal product. Bng. kOnOnO n.m. ‘a mountain (from which an echo comes back); a forest (on a mountain)’ with a parallel in Kc. k onaun ‘jungle’ and N. kandani ‘the slope of the

lower hills’(?) < OIA k¯ anana- ‘forest’ (3028) (Pa., Pk.). Bng. kOnp at n.m. ‘temple (of the head)’ (with -p¯ at. probably < OIA pat.t.a-1 ‘slab,

— Ind. kann
, Gau. kannéy both ‘temple (of head)’ are not, as suggested tablet’ [7699]) in Zoller (2005) < OIA kárn.ik¯ a- ‘round protuberance’ but < OIA (W.) kandala- ‘the cheek (or the cheek and temple)’ whose further origin is unclear. Bng. kOm Or n.m. ‘moist lumps of clay used for plastering house walls; white lime paint

for house walls’, cf. Dhatup. and P¯ an.. kumbati ‘covers’. Bng. poet. kOmlO n.m. ‘clan, lineage, dynasty; the own people’ (with -l(O) suffix) < OIA kadamba- ‘troop, herd’.48 Ex. from the PAN from a scene which describes the marriage of the Thunder God with the Flash Goddess:

bizo
siriE khaO aprE kOmlE kO m as

own.OBL clan.OBL GEN POP.M.SG meat flash.ERG eat.PP.M.SG ‘(the goddess named) Flash ate the meat of her own clan’[775] 270. Ko.S. kOytO, M.kud.. koyto and similar in other M. dialects ‘sickle’ < OIA *kartiya- ‘to be cut off’ (2864) (?) with modern parallels in Ash., Kt. 271. Bng. kOrnO n.m. ‘a sort of wooden clamp which connects the outer and inner boards in the house wall’, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı “karn” ‘angle, corner, corner wall-division, lateral offsets of the temple superstructure’ and “karnandak” ‘corner spirelet’ (with unclear second component if not meaning ‘egg’) (see Handa e.g. 2008 I: 261). Derivation < OIA kárn.a‘ear, handle of a vessel’ is not possible, but maybe we have here a special semantic development < OIA káran.a- ‘instrument’. 272. Bng. kOrpinO ‘to be in a miserable state, to become poor, thin, have bad health’ and

perhaps related k apinO ‘to shrivel, shrink’, connection with OIA *krapyati ‘howls’ (3576) (but note FLII 20.1.17 Vedic krapi - ‘to wail’) and krp
ana- ‘miserable’ ? Clear

reflexes of 3576 are quoted below p. 570. Cf. also Sh. krăp  ‘wrinkle, fold’. 273. Bng. kOla s n.m. ‘slime, phlegm’ < OIA *kaphila- ‘having phlegm’ (2756a) (regarding suffix -¯ a s see above p. 528) with one parallel in Garh. 274. Bng. poet. kOlu (also k@l@k) n.m. ‘a big sin; s.th. very bad’ < OIA kalus.a- ‘dirt; sin’

(Pa., Pk.).

275. Bng. kO
sO2 n.m. ‘a certain worm or insect, or its eggs found in meat and cereals’ (usually the plural kO
sE is used) cf. OIA (AV) kás.kas.a- ‘a kind of noxious insect or worm’. 276. Jaun. k@
sd@r ‘type of big snake’ (Z.) (origin of -d@r is unclear, but see below entry on

[p. 758]) — Wg. kos ‘snake’, Ash. k@res ‘snake’ according to Turner < jiśd.u ¯l ‘snail’ . OIA kars.á- ‘dragging’ (2905). 277. Bng. poet. kO
smOli n.f. and Deog. kO
sm Ol ‘a thorny shrub’, Him. kaśmal. ‘a thorny shrub

thorns and black berries

bearing long sharp which ripen in June’ (type of barberry?), Kgr. kasmal ‘Berberis aristata’, Sir.d.od.. kaśmilo ‘wild berries’ — Bur. gasmáli ‘type of aromatic flower, basil’, Sh.gil. “gasmali” ‘basil or mint?’ (Leitner), Ash. kašm¯ a"l¯ı ‘sweet basil’, Paš. kiselm al"  ‘jasmine; sweet basil’, Psht. kašm¯ al¯ u ‘name of a plant, holy basil’ < OIA kr s.n.a-m¯ al¯ uka- ‘a plant’; regarding meaning cf. similar sounding  48 Garh. kaum ‘a people, a community, a caste, a race’ (← Ar. qaum) is most certainly not the same as Bng. kOmlO.



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

555

OIA krs.n.a-vall¯ı- ‘a dark kind of Basil, Ocymum Pilosum’. There is also OIA lex.  ‘Ocimum Sanctum’ i.e. ‘holy basil’ or tuls¯ı. The second component of the m¯ al¯ ukaOIA word is also found in Munda Sant. m@li baha, mo(n)dor muli baha ‘a flower in high repute among Santai females, Ocimum Basilicum, Linn., var. thyrsiflorum’. Since there seem to be no cognates in Mon-Khmer languages we probably deal with a ‘North Indian’ word. However, on the sacredness of the basil plant reflected also in Mon-Khmer languages see Zoller (2018b: 291f.). 278. Bng. kOst en n.m. ‘a wooden pot’ < OIA *k¯ as.t.hadh¯ an¯ı- ‘wooden receptacle’ (cf. 3120

cf.

also Bng. k and 6775; ostO ‘wooden bin’); cf. the similary built Kho. c.hird"eni ‘milk pot’ with first syllable < OIA ks.¯ırá- ‘milk’ (3696) (a more recent formation) and truph"eni ‘salt box’ with first syllable trup ‘salt’ < OIA trpr
a-3 ‘salty’ (5934) (an older  formation), Kgr. dadhunu ‘milk pot’ and Ku. guv¯ an.i ‘an (Indian type of) chamber pot (for [human] shit)’ < OIA *g¯ uthadh¯ an¯ı-. 279. Bng. kOsl ai n.f. ‘coming up of bad smell’ is a compound made < OIA (Dhatup.) KAS ‘go, move’ (with derivations of OIA k
asati ‘goes, moves [2981] only in Kal. and Kho.) plus < OIA lagita- ‘entered, attached to’ (10892). The same word is also found in kOsl an ‘intensive and bad body odour’ with an end component < OIA ghr ana
- ‘smelling’

An independent derivation of the OIA noun seems not to exist in Bng., but (4531). there are two other compounds which contain it: kull an ‘s.th. burning with much

p. 768) and Bng. poet. smoke; a bad smell, stench’ (this word is discussed below mOrd an ‘smell of human beings’.

Ongtal 280. Bng. k

u n.m. ‘palate’ and Deog. kOkt alu ‘palate’ are, I suggest, synonym com

pounds ‘palate-palate’ with second component < OIA ta
lu- ‘palate’ (5803). They accidentally resemble OIA (comm. on P¯ an..) k¯ akat¯ alukin- ‘having the palate of a crow, contemptible’ — Bur.ys. -k2k ‘the crown of the head, top of the back part of the head’, Kho. kh2k, ka;k ‘crown of head’, Pal. kaka"rai ‘top of the head’ and Sh.jij. kake "r¯ı ‘ditto’; since there are also P. ghagg ‘palate’ and Kal. khak ‘uvula and palate’, connections with OIA kakubhá- ‘lofty’ (2584) and Pk. kakubha- ‘peak, hump’, or with OIA *k¯ akutstha- ‘palate’ (2996) are doubtful, but note also OIA (RV and lex.) k¯ akúd(a)‘the hollow of the mouth, the palate’; the morphology of the Bng. and Deog. words resembles Wg. kumtal"a ‘shoulder’ for which cf. CDIAL 3307 and ATLAS 51. Notes: (a) Garh.t.. kagar ‘loins, hip’ may be compared with related OIA kakundara‘the cavities of the loins’ if it is not just an adulteration of Pers. kamar; however, regarding voicing of stop cf. Garh.t.. kajar ‘p¯ an¯ı k¯ a kun.d. – water tank’ < OIA (Bhadrab.) kac¯ ara- ‘a pond’ which is cognate with OIA k¯ as¯ ará- ‘pond, tank’ (3139) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in L. (b) Cf. also OIA lex. kut.anka˙ ‘a roof, thatch’. In the Addenda and Corrigenda (3229a) kut.anka˙ has been mentioned with question mark concerning the origin of “WPah.poet.” kurad. (the word is in fact quite widespread) ‘long beam along the ridge of the roof of a temple’. For this word I suggest a different etymology, see p. 996. 281. Bng. kaO ‘black’ < OIA ka
pota- ‘grey’ (3041) (Pa.) with a modern parallel in K. (regarding OIA k¯ ala- ‘black’ note that Bng. does not historically delete -l-). 282. Words for cuckoo (or ‘cuckoo’ sounding words designating other birds) are certainly onomatopoeic. But this knockout argument does not mean too much. Within the northwestern and a few other Outer Languages they can be divided into a few groups,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

556

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

in this way disclosing some typological relationships. Note also that some languages have more than one word for ‘cuckoo’. (a) The OIA kokilá- type. The words of this group have not lost the medial -k- just like their Dravidian parallels: Pal. ka"k¯ uli ‘cuckoo’, Bhad. k¯ akoli ‘cuckoo’ (Kaul [2006 i: 107]), Kaul also gives without further West Pah¯ ar.¯ı language specification (2006 i: 32) gad.k¯ akoli ‘cuckoo of the rivulet’ (but 2006 ii: 395 he says it is from Bhal. meaning ‘paks.¯ı viśes. – type of bird’); in vol. i p. 187 there is the additional alloform Bhal. gad. kagholi (with first syllable < OIA *gad.d.a-1 ‘hole’ [3981] and note k – gh alternation); there is also the Bng. cuss p unsk oklO ‘flatterer, idiot, blockhead’ which cf. with S. kokid.¯ı ‘stupid as a fowl’; Him. kokl¯ a ‘the blackbird’, N. kok2le ‘cuckoo’ (Z.) and Western Nepal shamanic language kokals¯ ar¯ı ‘cuckoo’ — K. kukilü ‘cuckoo’, Ind. k2kuli ‘cuckoo’ and Bur.ys. káku, kúku ‘cuckoo’ (but note also p. 792 Bur. k
apo ‘cuckoo’ and Bur.ys. k
ki ‘falcon’) – Ko. kogul. ‘cuckoo’. Cf. OIA kokilá- ‘cuckoo’ (3483), kukubha- ‘the wild cock Phasianus gallus’ (3210), *k¯ ukkati ‘screams’ (3390), DN: 21 kokk-, kukk- ‘call’ and PMK *kuk, kuuk ‘to call’, but more significant are semantically close Dravidian parallels: Kan. kukil ‘cuckoo’, Tu. kogilè, kojilè ‘cuckoo’, etc. (b) The kuku type which does not have close Dravidian parallels: Ki˜ ut.h. k¯ uk¯ u ‘cuckoo’, Jaun. k¯ ukh¯ u ‘cuckoo’, N. kukku ‘cuckoo’— K. kuku ‘cuckoo’ — Bhat.. ba k uk
u ‘type of brown-coloured pheasant’ with first component < vána-1 ‘forest’ (11258) resembles K. van-k˘ okürü ‘a kind of wild bird resembling a barndoor fowl’ but both may rather contain the word for ‘hen’ — Gau. kukh ‘type of woodpecker’, Bur.ys. k
uku ‘cuckoo’, Kho. k
aku ‘cuckoo’ and nark"uku ‘rooster’ (with first syllable < OIA nára- ‘male’ [6970]) — Jat.. kak ‘large hill partidge’ — Yid. kak¯ uk ‘cuckoo’. Cf. PIE *kuk u ‘cuckoo’. (c) kuku with other extensions: Sutlej Group koklas ‘type of pheasant’ (Malhans [2002: 262]) and Sh.dras. k
2k@s ‘pheasant’ (Rajapurohit [2012: 43]) are probably built on the kokilá- basis with v¯ aśukaelement like other ‘pheasant’ words in the northwest (see p. 648 and Aw. kat.n¯ as ‘a kind of bird [? a jay]’ which may be a case of semantic-morphological amalgamation [on this term see p. 224]). N. k¯ ak¯ akul ‘a part. kind of bird’ has a close parallel in Nuristani Kt. kúku kuli ‘cuckoo’ (cf. OIA *kululi- ‘outcry’ [3347]). Kal. kokd.úm ‘cuckoo-like bird’, Kho. kokd"um ‘coocoo’ (‘cuckoo’) with unclear second component. Rp. k@kcil aru ‘a black chicken-like bird’ is a synonym compound: cf. Bng. c˙ il¯ ar. ‘cuckoo’

with first syllable < OIA cilli- ‘a kind of bird of prey’ (4829) and Jaun. bh u -c l ‘pheasant’ (with first word < OIA bhu
mi- ‘earth, ground’ [9557]). More unclear are Psht. k¯ uk¯ uk¯ utarah ‘a ringdove’ (probably k¯ uk¯ u plus kotar ‘pigeon’), and Mult. and P. kakuh¯ a ‘sandpiper’. 283. Bhil.MBh. kakuvar ‘saffron’ < OIA (Caurap.) kanakagaura- ‘saffron’ (“gold-white”). 284. S. kangan ˙ . kh¯ ar¯ u ‘borax’ < OIA lex. kanakaks.a ¯ra- ‘borax’ (cf. 2717 and 3674); borax is, or rather was, used in small-scale gold mining. 285. N. kat. ‘agreement’ and probably also H. kat.kin¯ a- ‘sub-contract’ (with unclear second component) — Ind. k a
th ‘an agreement, arrangement; a contract’, Bur./Sh. kaát.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

557

‘contract; Vertrag’, Sh. also ‘promise’ < OIA lex. kat.a-5 ‘agreement; Übereinkunft’. Mayrhofer refers to Oberlies’ discussion of Pa. katik¯ a- ‘agreement, contract’ who connects it with OIA KAR ‘to say, pronounce’. Note preservation of -t.- in the modern words. 286. Pr. k@t@ ‘straw, blades, stalks’ < OIA kát.a-1 ‘twist of straw’ (2629) has not only preserved as the only language (besides G.) the old meaning (cf. also lex. meaning ‘grass’) but also -t.- remains unchanged. EWA mentions Kuiper who gave up his former suggestion of Dravidian origin of the word and instead suggested a PIE origin *kalta´ 𝑥o which is apparently an allomorph of PIE *kólh ¯m ‘stalk, stem’ which matches well the Pr. meaning. Note: Bng. does not seem to have a reflex of 2629 but there is Bng. kOlmO n.m.

‘that part of a stalk of grain or rice between ear and lower leaves’ which may ´ 𝜆𝛼𝜇𝑜𝜍 ‘reed reflect OIA kalama- ‘reed pen’ (which is a borrowing of Greek 𝜅 𝛼 pen’) but which does not match semantically with Bng. Apparently interferences have taken place, but the wide spread of Ar. qalam ‘pen’ in South Asia is much later. 287. Kal. kad.í, ka.í ‘gravy made from meat juices and flour’ is cognate with OIA (Suśr.) khad.a-, khala- ‘buttermilk boiled with acid vegetables and spices’ (3783). Origin is unclear, but Mayrhofer (EWA) correctly refers to possible Dravidian origin; cf. e.g. Kan. kad.i ‘curds mixed with salt, chillies, mustard, etc., and some rice flour boiled and seasoned’ (DEDR 1128). 288. Ku. kar.i ‘the female genital’ is perhaps a derivation < OIA kálatra- ‘pudendum muliebre’ (2915) with a modern parallel in Paš. 289. Mult. kanjul ‘partridge’ < OIA kañjala- ‘the bird Gracula religiosa’ (2628) with modern parallels in Kt., Kal. and Kho.? But cf. above Brah. kap¯ınjar ‘partridge’ (p. 209) and below ‘rock sparrow’ (p. 572). 290. Sub OIA Dh¯ atup. kán.d.ati2 ‘is glad’ (2684) Turner quotes with question mark Paš. kan.d.- ‘to appear, seem, please’ but much better fits Pr. k@nd, k@nd"@, k@nt





‘Verdienstfest (merit celebration?), Totenfeier (funeral ceremony)’. Regarding same lemmma Mayrhofer (EWA iii: 50) mentions also lex. kad.anga˙ ‘an intoxicating drink’ and there is Dh¯ atup. kad.ati ‘is intoxicated’. 291. P. kathal ‘a plough; also the main shaft of a plough’ < OIA lex. kuntala- ‘plough’. 292. Kt. “kadr, kandr” ‘hole, hollow’ < OIA kartá-1 ‘hole’ (2851) — Addenda and Corrigenda state: Shgh. č¯ ag-dil ‘pit of stomach’ < *kart¯ a-. According to Mayrhofer, the OIA word is related with KART1 ‘to cleave, brek; spalten, brechen’ and ultimately with PIE *(s)kert-. Further possible parallels are found above on p. 506. 293. Ko.kan.. kanapal.i ‘lobe of ear’ < OIA karn.ap¯ ali- ‘the lobe of the ear’ or old tatsama? 294. Insir. kan¯et., kan.¯et. ‘ear’ (LSI ix,iv: 688)), Kva. kOndzOl ‘ear’, Kc. k˘ onth¯ u ‘ear’ (Bailey [1915: 127]), Garh. kand¯ ur. ‘ear’, Rp. (borrowing) k@n¯ un. ‘ear’ — cf. Ind. k2n d ‘ear’
u (see EWA).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

560

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

on a mountain’) and k adO2 n.m. ‘side (of a place)’;53 Bng. poet. khOdO ‘corner; end’,

-arO suffix?). and Bng. (2680.d) (Pk.) kOd(u)arO ‘side in a room where the door is’ (with

313. In the Gir¯ıp¯ ar¯ı variety of Sirm. one finds k¯ a ‘a house, home’ which is < OIA lex. k¯ aya-2 ‘dwelling’ (3050) with one parallel in Or., to which Kal. ku ‘pen, enclosure; (dwelling) place, house’ should be added, plus a grammaticalized form in Kt.g. and the Satlaj Group of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı: kaE ‘in . . . house’. 314. Garh. poet. k¯ akh ‘inner room’, as in the line of a song (Catak [1973: 156]) ter  m ay a pa j  rakhl u jikur  k a k akh ‘I will hold your love caring in the inner chamber of (my) heart’ derives < OIA káks.a-1 ‘armpit’ (2588) with very many modern reflexes related to meaning ‘armpit’, but the Garh. meaning coincides with OIA ‘a surrounding wall, a wall, any place surrounded by walls (as a court-yard, a secluded portion of a building, a private chamber or room in general)’ as found in Mbh. etc. Note: Degener raises the question whether Pers. k¯ ax (k¯ akh) ‘a palace, villa, summer-dwelling; an apartment at the top of the house open to the front’ etc. is a borrowing of OIA ‘a surrounding wall . . . ’ 315. Bng. k¯ at.hi n.f. ‘a wooden saddle for loads’ derives obviously < OIA k¯ as.t.há- ‘piece of wood (3120), however, this special meaning of ‘(wooden) saddle’ is only found in Garh. k¯ at.hi ‘saddle for horse’, Kt.g. kát.t.ı ‘saddle’, Cur. k¯ at.h¯ı ‘saddle’, Chit. k@ti ‘a

wooden saddle for loads’, R¯ amb. k¯ at.hi ‘saddle’, K. köt.hi ‘the old Kashmiri wooden riding-saddle’, Ind. k at  and Gau. k¯ at.h¯ı n.f. ‘a saddle’, Pal. k¯ at.i ‘saddle’, Bshk. k¯ at.äi ‘saddle’, Psht. k¯ at.¯ı ‘a wooden saddle’ and many other languages and dialects of this northwestern area, but also N., New. and H. 316. Rj.mal. k¯ anji ‘mouse’ < OIA lex. k¯ acigha- ‘mouse, rat’. 317. Jat.. k¯ amr.a ¯ ‘a stick or twig used as a whip’ < OIA lex. k¯ amr¯ a- ‘whip’. 318. Or. k¯ ampar ‘moss or scum on water’, noted as “doubtful” sub OIA lex. k¯ av¯ ara- ‘the water plant Vallisneria’ (3108), has a parallel in Kh¯ aśi. kembur.i ‘moss’ (Kaul [2006 i: 187]). Probably related is also Munda Korwa k㘠ur ‘moss’. 319. Ku. ka th ‘a high rockface’ < OIA lex. k¯ at.ha- ‘rock’ (3018) with one modern parallel

but here perhaps also Ind. k ar ‘a field full of small stones; many small stones in Bshk.,

together (also at a river bank)’. 320. Bhad. kizon.u ‘one nicknamed after his cant word uttering habit’ — Ind. and Gau. kiz
av  ‘to go off, get spoiled, decay; to shrink; to spoil’ < OIA k¯ıryate ‘is scattered’ (3201) with another modern reflex in Sh. (Lorimer) kriˇȷoiki ‘to rot, go bad’. 321. Bng. kitk anO ‘to frighten or beat s.b.’ < OIA *kit.yate ‘is afraid’ (3158) (with -k- +

a Dh¯ -a- suffix): atup. word with one modern parallel in A. However, note also Munda Sant. keúel keúel ‘to start, to be startled, to move suddenly as by an involuntary shrinking from sudden fear or alarm’. 322. Bng. kit.t.i n.f. ‘massed or pressed together earth; a crowd of people, throng’ and also first element in kOtki
sa lO n.m. ‘(constant) noise or row of a crowd of people’ (discussed

element

p. 826) with second perhaps < OIA kacati ‘sounds, cries’ plus -a lO suffix?54 Cf. also the following Bng. words with widespread parallels all over the northwest of South Asia and in other Outer Languages: kOtkO n.m. ‘group of men, army’ and

kutk"¯ı ‘army’, etc., OIA katakakOth k ‘a (warrior) group’: Ash. ka"t.ek ‘army’, Pr. . .

‘an army; a multitude; troop; collection’, Ap. kat.ak ‘army, royal camp’, P. kat.ak 53 Both words differ tonemically from each other. 54 The word has a parallel in poetic Him. of Shimla District as “kishau” ‘shrieks’ (Lalit [1993: 77]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

561

‘a multitude, an army; a band of robbers’, M. aspirated khat.k¯ a ‘clash, quarrel’, Ko. k¯ at.k¯ ai ‘revolution, revolt, stir’, etc. H. kat.ak ‘army’ is seen as a tatsama (McGregor), which may hold true for some of the other quoted forms.55 The two Bng. meanings suggest a common basis ‘conglomeration’ and are cognate with OIA (Krs..) kat.t.ayati  ‘heaps, covers with earth’. This is supported by Jat.. kat.¯ır. ‘swarm of creeping locusts’. There is further interference with OIA *ghat.t.a- ‘collection, mass’ (4411) reflected in Pk. ghat.t.a- ‘collection, troop’ and Bng. poet. g@tkO n.m. ‘army’ as in a PAN passage

so big that it did not have enough where it is said that the army of the Kauravas was room in Kuruks.etra:

p ElE kuE aO k Oru kO raO jiske g@tke uO ni thaO

beat.OBL

come.PP.M.SG kaurava GEN POP king first.OBL whose.OBL army.OBL be.PP.M.SG no place ‘(With) the first blow came the King of the Kauravas (for) whose army there was no place’[906]

323. 324.

325. 326.

327.

Could the unvoiced allomorph also be contained in OIA *kat.t.a ¯jya- ‘flock of rams’ (2647) with one modern reflex in K.? Turner derives the first component < OIA kat.t.a-2 ‘young male animal’ (2645), even though most of the modern reflexes mean ‘young buffalo’; the second component is < OIA *ajya- ‘flock of goats’ (163) with few modern reflexes in words for ‘shepherd’. Bng. kindu rO ‘strong (as a man)’ with metathesis < OIA lex. kun.d.¯ıra- ‘strong,

powerful’. Khaś. kite, Kh¯ aś. kide dative case postposition ‘to, for’ (Kaul [2006 i: 41]) — K. kyut, Wg. ket¯ı ‘ditto’ (for the former see Masica [1991: 245], for the latter LSI [viii, ii: 47]) are cognate, according to Masica (loc. cit.), with OIA krta-. This is a case of “changes  have diagnostic substance, in the use of bound morphemes” (Ross [1997: 220]) which in this case it is a feature distinguishing the language area between West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Nuristani from surrounding Indo-Aryan languages. Ko.kun.. kimli, kimbli ‘rotten straw used to cover the roof’, cf. Pr. kimog"u, kimog('@) ‘straw’ and OIA (W.) k¯ırm¯ı- ‘a house for straw (?)’. Bhad. kiran and Bhal. kir¯ an ‘wooden snow shovel’ derive < OIA kiri- ‘scattering’ (3175) which has many NIA reflexes; however, a meaning associated with ‘snow’ is otherwise limited to Dm., Kal. and Phal. ab kar det¯ a hai – a type of moth’ Ku. kirth ‘ek k¯ır.a ¯ jo kapr.om ˙ ko k¯ at.-k¯ at. kar khar¯ and Brj.-Aw. kr¯ıt. ‘insect’ are cognate with OIA k¯ıt.á- ‘insect; worm’ as is N. kithro ‘an insect like a cricket’ (cf. G. kill˜ u ‘grain-moth’) but they derive more directly < *k¯ır-tá- for which, according to Mayrhofer, an evident base is missing. There are also Ku. kurm¯ u/ kurmuv¯ a ‘a worm found at roots of plants’ and B.roh. kirmifuk ‘pinworm’ (with -fuk probably reflex of OIA plús.i- ‘a partic. noxious insect, (prob.) flea’ [9029]) < OIA k
rmi- ‘worm; insect’ (3438). This supports the old assumption of a relationship betweenk¯ıt.á- and k
rmi-, and the development to the Ku. vowels -i- and -u- is regular,  as the lemmata show. Notes: (a) K.pog. krimni ‘worm’ (Schmidt and Kaul [2008: 292]) may derive < OIA ¯ (ApŚr. xv,19,5) adjective krmin.a- ‘having worms’. 

55 Note that Ku. kat.aku means ‘hero ballad’ (UGK).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

562

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

(b) Bng. kiml¯ı n.f. ‘an ant’, Jaun. kimm¯ od.¯ı, Kc. and Kt.g. kımblı, kh¯ımblı, Garh. kirmal¯ı, Ku. kirmav, kirmal, N. kamilo ‘ant’, Pog. krimni ‘ant’ — M.kud.. kirma ‘a small insect’ — the Ku. and Pog. forms show that these words derive neither directly < MIA kipillaka- nor, as suggested by Turner for the N. form, < OIA karmín- ‘active’ but have been influenced by OIA k
rmi- ‘worm’ (3438). See also  and see Gamkrelidze and relatively similar Iranian forms in Cheung (2011: 196), Ivanov (1995: 445, fn. 45). 328. Bng. kirkatO or kirkiathO ‘area (or joint) of the neck’56 and kerkO, k er, keri ‘neck’,



and with another extension kernO ‘the area of the neck above the protruding cervi

cal vertebra; ridge of a steep mountain; a trophy (e.g. a head)’, OkerO, Ok er ‘a stiff neck or pain in the neck’ (with a prefix); Kc., Deog., Baur. and Khaśdh. k¯er ‘neck’, Deog. also kikrO ‘neck’ and k¯ekna, also Baur. kekna both ‘neck’ (suggesting older *kerka-na-), Chu. kOn a ‘back of neck’ (T. Graham Bailey [1928: 126]) and perhaps also Bush. king@r

‘neck’ all < OIA krk atik a- ‘joint of neck’ (3419) (Pk.)? But cf. also OIA kar¯ ukara- ‘the joint of the neck and the back-bone’ which is not found in the CDIAL. The lemma is also found in S., L. and P. (to which I add Paš. k¯ ar.iv¯ al¯ a ‘jaw’), all of which (quoted in the CDIAL), however, reflect Pk. ki¯ ad.i¯ a-, whereas the above Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms and Wg. kir¯ık ‘back of neck’ (quoted by Turner) and Gaw. k" erik ‘upper part of the neck’ (not quoted by Turner) clearly form a group distinct from Pk., S., L. and P. (and Khaś. which must be a borrowing from the plains): the western languages and Khaś. have ki- plus ‘suffix’ and the northwestern languages have k  er(k)-/kir(k)57 plus suffix or Ø. This clearly reflects two different historical developments and is thus yet another indication for the existence of Inner and Outer Languages. Turner refers under the same lemma to Kuiper (see also Kuiper [1991: 29]) who suggests a Munda origin, the word being prefixed by kr-, ka- plus OIA kan.t.há- (2680), but the above-quoted modern reflexes of 2680 (see  p. 561) are too different to support this. Further northwestern reflexes are probably Bng. kikrianO ‘to twist s.o. (in a fight)’

(prob. ‘to break the neck’) and Jaun. kikri ada ‘spine’ (second element < OIA hadda

‘bone’ [13952]) thus lit. ‘neck-bone’. Regarding problematic possibility of a PIE origin, see EWA which mentions Czech krk ‘neck, throat; Hals’, but there is also “Slavic” k˘ urk˘ u ‘throat, neck’ and Polish kark ‘neck’ which Gvozdanović connects with the OIA lemma and with Gaulish cricone, gricone ‘throat’ (2009: 187f.). But that is not all: Regarding Fi. kurkku ‘throat’, Aikio and Kallio (2005: 218) point out that this is a loanword which came into Finnish either from Common Slavic *k˘ urk˘ u ‘neck’ or from North Germanic *kwerku (Old Norse kverk) ‘throat’. If ‘loanword’ here means also wanderwort, then cf. also Common Kartvelian *q’orq’- ‘(animal’s) gullet’, Georgian q’orq’-i ‘throat’, Common Sindy *q’@rq’- ‘larynx; back or inside of throat’, etc. Ex. with Bng.:

es-rE kirkatE tOlE do le ri lao

POP.M.OBL



he.OBL-GEN neck.OBL on stone.OBL GEN POP.F attach.IMP ‘hit him on his neck with a stone’ 56 The suffix -atO, -iathO is very common in Bng. with an underlying meaning like ‘thing, item,

< OIA asth a- ‘support’ (1512). object’ and derives 57 The status of the -k- is not clear: it may have belonged to the original morpheme and was later-on reinterpreted as a suffix or, as suggested by Turner, may be a later suffix.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

563

Notes: (a) Ash. kaker
k ‘throat’, K. kukr.i ‘larynx’, Low Rudh. [email protected] ‘gaped mouth’

54]), Wg. kake"rik ‘throat’, and Orm. k¯ (Varma [1938: akur"tak ‘throat’ do . not seem to be cognate but derive < OIA (Car.) k¯ akala- respectively (Suśr.) k¯ akalaka- ‘larynx’ (note preservation of medial -k-);58 note also OIA lex. krka‘throat, larynx’. Cf. also Beekes’ discussion of OIA k¯ akúd- ‘gullet’ (1996:  222) which he equates, on the one hand, with OIA kakubhá- ‘lofty; peak’, and on the other (ibid. fn. 4), suggests possible connections which Germanic forms meaning i.a. ‘gullet; Schlund’ and deriving from possible reconstructions like *k¯ ug- or *k¯ uk-. His suggestion for meaning ‘gullet’ goes back, as he himself points out, to Stephanie Jamison who argues (1987: 75, fn. 10) that k¯ akúd- can, depending on the context, be translated both as ‘palate, oral cavity’ and as ‘gullet’. This Vedic word together with related kakubhá- are also cognate with NIA words, e.g. in Bng., meaning ‘palate’ (see p. 557). Thus it seems possible that the reflexes in Ash. and Bng. mirror the two different meanings of the one Vedic lemma. (b) However, note also #493 PTB *kak ‘throat’ (493) as reflected e.g. in West Himalayish Kann. kak"ts¿neck’. (c) Somewhat unclear, but perhaps also cognate, are Pal. kakar
i ‘skull’, Orm. kakari¯e ‘top of the head’, Yid. k¯ aka ‘top of the head’ and kaka ‘back of the head’ (two different informants of Morgenstierne), Kho. kh2k ‘skull; head’ resp. ka;k ‘crown of head’, Bur.ys. -k2k ‘the crown of the head, top of the back part of the head, vertex(?)’. 329. Marw. kirg atiyO, Rj. kirka tyo, Brj.-Aw., H. girgit. (also gird¯ an) and B. girgit.¯ı all

taka- ‘chameleon’ (3418); note phonetic similarity with ‘chameleon’ < OIA *krkkan 

Pa. kakan.t.aka- ‘chameleon’. 330. Bng. kir
sEnO ‘to make thin’, kir
sanO ‘to speak with a weak voice’, kirś¯ a.l ‘a weak voice’,



Khaśdh. kirśna ‘to acuminate or sharpen s.th.’, Deog. kir
sa no ‘to grow weak (e.g. due

to illness)’ (the nasalized infinitive ending in Deog. expresses, as in Bng., intensiveness). Because of P. kahir a ‘thin’ the -r- of the Bng., Khashdh. and Deog. verb stems may have the same secondary origin as the one postulated for P. by Mayrhofer (EWA) and Turner, see OIA kr
sa
- ‘lean, thin’ (3441) (Pa., Pk.).  Note: There is also Deog. kir
sa no ‘(the body hairs) to bristle (e.g. when seeing a ghost)’ which resembles Bng. gOrs(E)nO, gOrsinO ‘to feel sheer terror, be terri

fied; to be bristly, spiny (e.g., as pig or porcupine)’, gOisinO ‘to get frightened’;

was again discussed this Bng. lemma has been published by me (1988: 189) and above p. 125. 331. Bng. kiś¯ aru n.m. means ‘the broken part of an ear of corn’ and derives, despite semantic discrepancies, < OIA kim


sa
ru- ‘beard of corn’ (3148) (Pk.) with modern parallels in L. and K.; but there is also k¯ıś n.m. meaning ‘awn, beard’. Note also Kt.g. karś ‘awn, beard of corn’ and Jat.. k˜ıjh¯ ar ‘beard of wheat or barley’. 332. Bng. k¯ım n.f. ‘yeast’ for the production of brandy: it has the shape of a thick round n¯ an bread and consists, as much as I know, of different herbs, including hemp; ‘name of the brandy produced in this way’ cf. OIA lex. k¯ adambar¯ı-b¯ıja- ‘any cause of fermentation, ferment, yeast’ and note OIA k¯ adambar¯ı- ‘a spirituous liquor distilled from the flow58 Any connection with Mon-Khmer Proto-Khmuic *kO:k ‘larynx; Adam’s apple’ ?

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

564

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

ers of the Cadamba’, OIA lex. also meaning ‘wine, spirituous liquor’, Pk. k¯ ayambar¯ı‘spirituous liquor’. Notes: (a) There is also Jaun. kimod ‘name of a festival in August celebrating the preparation of k¯ım’ (with -od < OIA uddhava-1 ‘festival’ [2012]); according to UGK, k¯ım is prepared i.a. out of the roots of the following wild plants: Dolichos fabseformis (a type of bean), Jujube and cannabis. (b) The lemma has been borrowed into Bun. kem ‘barley, beer; liquor’. (c) It is unclear whether here is also related New. kim¯ an¯ a ‘yeast made of rice flour’. 333. B.roh. kuiśśól, kuiśśóil ‘sugarcane’ < OIA *kolhuś¯ al¯ a- pressing house for sugarcane or oilseeds’ (3538) with one modern parallel in Bi. 334. Bng. kuk¯ u.l ‘impure waste (e.g., hair, nails)’ is possibly cognate with Pa. kukkul.a- ‘hot ashes’ < OIA kuk¯ ula- ‘chaff’ and lex. ‘conflagration or fire made of chaff’. 335. Garh. kujer.i, kujyar.u ‘mist, haze; fog’ < OIA lex. kujjhat.i- ‘a fog or mist’. 336. P. kut.k¯ı ‘a gnat’ cf. OIA lex. kat.uk¯ıt.a- ‘a gnat or mosquito’. 337. Wg. kun.ak"a ‘puppy; Welpe, Hundejunges’, perhaps Kt. and Kamd. kuřuk and Ash. kur.okuk all ‘puppy’, Ind. kur.úkℎ ‘breeding (as chicken)’ (is morphologically different from Ind. kuk  ‘hen’), P. k¯ un.m¯ ar ‘a man who commits infanticide’ and perhaps Bng. kuni anO ‘to nag, carp, pester (usually as a child)’ all more or less directly < OIA

kunaka- ‘a young animal just born’ and either ultimately < OIA *kana- ‘young’ (BhP) . with the BhP form showing a ‘Prakritism’ or rather an Outer Language word, or ← Dravidian kuñci as e.g. in Kota kun ‘small’. Regarding first possibility, see also IGN: 74 for more cognates. Here also Bng. kOn alO ‘grandson’ and kOn ali ‘granddaughter’

(see EWA sub kanya - and kanya- ‘the which are cognate with OIA *kanyan- ‘young’ smallest’ [2732 – with a modern reflex in dialectal Paš.]) as well as Bng. kOni, kOnu adj.; n.f.,m. ‘small-grown: a petty-minded person’ and kunia n.m. ‘little lad’. The similar-sounding/looking forms quoted here have perhaps not all the precisely same origin. 338. Bng. kunkO2 ‘dull, muffled (as a sound)’ and kunmunanO ‘to rustle’ < OIA Dh¯ atup.

parallel



kun.áti ‘makes a certain noise’ (3256) with a modern in B. Examples from the PAN:

kunkO
sa d k uta matai
suni-erO se bi kunmuna , bi us@n bi bolE



thud sound Kunt¯ı mother.ERG hear-see.PP.M.SG she also rustle.PR.3.SG, Bh¯ımsen also say.PR.3.SG ‘Mother Kunt¯ı heard a muffled reverberation[340] the moment she (the fire goddess) rustles (surreptitiously), Bh¯ımsen says’[376] 339. N. kuthurke ‘woodpecker’ (Z.) (Turner: ‘a partic. kind of bird’) — Šat.. th2rcu n d

‘woodpecker’. The N. word with prefix ku- (also found in other IA animal words) and a suffix (thus ku-thur-ke), and the Šat.. word are probably synonym compounds < OIA *thar- ‘tremble’ (6092) (like N. -thur-) plus cún.t.ati *‘strikes’ (4857) in case of Šat.. 340. Tor. kun ‘deaf’ (Z.) (with typical change of a > u) is somehow related with OIA k¯ an.á‘one-eyed’ and kárn.a- ‘ear’; see in EWA Mayrhofer’s remarks on Vedic kárn.a- ‘deaf’,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

341.

342.

343.

344. 345.

346.

347. 348.

349. 350.

351. 352. 353.

565

but note also Psht. kan.á ‘deaf’ which Morgenstierne (1973: 63) compares with karn.á‘stub-eared’. Tir. kune ‘nineteen’ (Grierson [1925b: 412]) < OIA *ekonavimśati˙ ‘nineteen’ and not < OIA u ¯navimśati˙ ‘19’ (2411), i.e. < Pa. ek¯ una𝑜 < OIA ekona𝑜 ‘less by one’ (2494). With preservation of medial stop also in G. ogan.-. Khaś. kunj ‘seat mat’ < OIA kiliñja- ‘mat’. According to Turner, the OIA word is cognate with OIA kiliñca- ‘thin board, bamboo’ (3186) with a modern reflex in M. kil¯ıc ‘lath’, but this suggestion looks doubtful. Bng. kundli n.f. ‘an eddy, whirlpool’, cf. P. kundal¯ı ‘a rice stack, round in shape made of bundles’ and Paš. kandu
‘corn-bin’, probably cognate with OIA lex. kunda‘a turner’s lathe’ which itself is more or less clearly related with OIA kun.d.á-1 ‘bowl’ (3264) and kun.d.á-3 ‘clump’ (3266) with the modern reflexes only basically meaning ‘heap of grain stuff’. Khaś. kubhest¯ a ‘naughty person’ < OIA *kuvyavasth¯ a- (with spontaneous aspiration). Bng. kumbO n.m. ‘the auditory canal’, Kt.g. kUmb ‘ditto’ perhaps also Kgr. kankuml.i ‘ear lobe’ — Rj.jaip. k¯ umplo ‘nostril’ — Kal. kumbá., kumbřä, Pal. kim"b¯ or., Kho. kum¯ al all ‘smoke hole’ < OIA *kumpa-3 ‘hole’ (3306a). Dari. kumbo ‘shoulder; kind of tree’ and here probably also Bhil.MBh. khapo ‘shoulder’ < OIA kúmba- ‘thick end (of a bone or club)’ (3307) with modern parallels in Wg. and N. Bhil.MBh. may suggest an allomorph OIA *kumbha- (homonymous with OIA kumbhá- ‘pot, jar’); for a connection with OIA skambhá- ‘prop, pillar’ semantic parallels are missing. Ko.kan.. kurinz ‘deer’ < OIA *kurohya- (cf. 10870) with ku- prefix found in various IA animal names. Rj. kurn.a ¯bo ‘to moan’, S. karn.u ‘to grunt’, kurkuri ‘grumbling’ (with a > u) and perhaps also Mult. kurl¯ avan ‘to lament, to cry out’ — Bur. kuúr ét- ‘to groan, moan ¯ ‘to groan, grumble’59 one finds in Mayrhofer (EWA) (cry out in pain)’; sub OIA KUJ AV kurkur
au. . . ku
jantau; sofor kurkurá- ‘dog’ Mayrhofer suggests onomatoeic origin. Cf. onomatopoeic PIE *ker- ‘caw’ and above possible parallels sub *ker-(1) ‘hoarse, shrieking voice’ (p. 354); perhaps cognate with OIA karat.a-1 ‘crow’ (2787). For similarshaped ‘coo’ sounds of Austro-Asiatic origin and background of OIA *kuharayati ‘coos’ see below p. 937. M.coch. kurlO ‘crab’ < OIA lex. kurucilla- ‘a crab’, Pk. (Deś.) kuruvilla- ‘crab’ or rather < OIA kul¯ıra- ‘crab’. Kana. kult@n ‘the town of Kullu’ < OIA kul uta- ‘name of a people’ (3348). It should be noted that Xuanzang (Hiuen-Tsiang) had noted the name of this town in the 7. Century AD as kiu-lu-to with preservation of medial stop. Kal. kúšal.a ‘disagreeable’ < OIA akuśala- ‘inauspicious, evil’. Kal. kuškušék ‘to investigate, make an inquiry, search’ perhaps < OIA kúha ‘where?’ or kúha cid ‘somewhere’ plus is.yate ‘is searched’ ? Kal. kus.pík gón.d.ak ‘weaver’s heddle shaft or rod’ consists possibly of originally three partly synonym words: gón.d.ak ← gon.d. ‘pole, stick’ < OIA gan.d.a- ‘joint of a plant’ (3998.1), -s.pík < OIA sváru- ‘the sacrificial post’ (which is perhaps < PIE *swer- ‘post, rod’, see EWA) with sv > s.p as in first part of Kal. is.póna ‘hot warm’ < svéda- ‘heat’ (p. 543), and ku- perhaps < OIA kal¯ apa- ‘that which holds together the single parts,

59 The root is not known to have modern reflexes, however, cf. S. kañjhn.u, kañjhikn.u ‘to groan, moan’ and Kal. kučkarat.áv ‘unnecessary shouting and talking’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

566

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

a band, a bundle’ (Pa. kal¯ apa- ‘string’). Note: Whereas Kal. gón.d.ak certainly derives < 3998, this is – even though claimed so by Trail and Cooper – doubtful for Kal. gan.d.áv ‘statue of a deceased person’ (and gan.d.ál.ik ‘statuette’). They are rather etymologically connected with Kal. kundurík ‘statuette of wood placed by a field’ and with West Himalayish Bun. kun.d.a ‘statue, idol’, all of which are possibly of Austro-Asiatic origin: cf. Sant. kund@u ‘to turn, turn on a lathe, carve, engrave’ as in boNgako kund@u akat¼koa dhirire ‘they have carved bonga [spirit, godling] representations in stone (i.e., not Santal bongas)’, perhaps Khmer kAntouk ‘kind of lathe operated by a treadle’, Palaungic Danaw kUt3 ‘to carve’ and Vietnamese khót ‘to carve, chisel’. 354. S. kus¯ akh ‘a lie’ < OIA *kusamkhy¯ ˙ a-, cf. sámkhy¯ ati ‘reckons’ and Pk. sagghaï ‘says’ (12842) and further parallels below (p. 736). 355. Garh. kus¯ an. ‘thakn¯ a – to tire; be fatigued’ and kusai ‘thak¯ avat., thak¯ an – tiredness, fatigue’ < OIA (TS) kús¯ıda- ‘lazy, inert’ (3376) (Pa.) with a modern reflex in Si. which Turner, however, regards as a borrowing from Pa. Most likely the Garh. forms belong to group of words discussed sub Bng. sednO ‘to hatch eggs; to sit’ (p. 742) which is complex. See also EWA regarding possible reasons for absence of RUKI and possible connection with OIA lex. s¯ıdya- ‘slothfulness, idleness, insolence’. 356. Rj.mev. (CLLR) kuso ‘ugly’ < OIA kudr
sya- ‘ugly’. 357. Kal. kústav ‘the blunt end of an axeheador other instrument’ < OIA kastambha- ‘small stem’ (2983) (cognate with Vedic kastambh
- ‘prop for supporting carriage-pole’) with a semantically different modern reflex in M. k¯ athãb¯ a ‘plantain offshoot, sucker, stole’. 358. Garh.t.. kusnu ‘kohan¯ı – elbow’ < OIA *kaphonicik¯ a- (Morgenstierne) with metathesis and with modern parallels in dialectal Paš. like e.g. k¯ onči ‘elbow’ (see 2757). 359. Bng. k udO, k udi n.m.,n.f. ‘(fish) hook’, Deog. k¯ un.d.a ‘a hook’ — GN kun.d.¯ı ‘fish-hook’,



P. kun.d.¯ı ‘a fish hook’ — Ind. kun.d.àh n.m. and Bhat.. kun.d.áh n.f. ‘a fish hook’, Kal. kon.d.á ‘iron pin with eye for dragging lumber’, Psht. kun.d.a ‘hook’. Elfenbein et. al. derive the Psht. word from OIA *kunta-1 - ‘defective’ (3260) but this is unlikely

because of Kal. kónd.a ‘hornless’. Also unlikely is derivation < OIA *khunta-1 ‘peg,

post’ (3893) for semantic reasons and, actually, because of the initial aspirate, even though the form appears in Bng. without aspiration as k undO ‘a bolt, (traditional)

lock’ and Deog. kun.d.o ‘doorbolt’. I therefore suggest to derive the above forms < OIA ankut ˙ . a- ‘instrument for moving the bolt or bar of a door’ (108) (Pk.) with an intermediate form *ankun ˙ . d.a and subsequent loss of initial syllable due to reduction as in some derivations of OIA áng¯ ˙ ara- ‘glowing charcoal’ (125). 360. Deś. k¯ ulam ˙ ‘army’ < OIA lex. k¯ ula- ‘the rear of an army’; the origin of the lemma is unclear (see EWA [iii: 119]), but cf. Mon-Khmer Cua kaluh ‘hostile group, angry gang’. 361. K. “keyura” ‘arm-band’ (Handa [1998: 199]), also mentioned in the R¯ aj. and Pk. ke¯ uram ˙ ‘bracelet’, Klm. kärey H ‘bracelet’ and Brj.-Aw. key¯ ur ‘an armlet (worn on the upper arm)’ are < OIA key¯ ura- ‘bracelet on the upper arm’ (3466) with one other modern reflex in Si. keyura. Turner suggests Dravidian borrowing, but Mayrhofer assumes loanword. 362. Thar. kelon ‘toy’ < OIA kr¯ıd.ana ‘playing’ (3593) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Si. 363. Bng. kev el, kemalO n.f. ‘the Himalayan cedar’ (with consonant metathesis – see below



in this paragraph); Khaśdh. k¯eul., Baur. k elo , probably Old Cam. kalain (dimin.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

364.

365. 366. 367.

368. 369.

370.

567

kalan.t.¯ı) ‘a deodar’, Bush. k eulO b ut, Deog. k Elo  and k elO u (with dental lateral as

growing

in Garh. kail ‘a pine or fir tree in high altitude’ but also kul a , kulE ‘pine tree [Pinus roxburghii]’ [Nautiyal and Jakhmola]), Kann. kyalmön˙ ‘cedar or Cedrus Libani deodara’ or kel-mang ‘cedrus deodara’ (wrongly hyphenated, cf. e.g. kh e-lang ‘a play’), Chit. ky@lb@ng

‘cedar tree’ (D. D. Sharma 1992) or kElm@ng

‘the Himalayan cedar’ (Z.), Rp. k ovE ‘type of cedar’, and with different semantics West Pah¯ar.¯ı Bhad. kE;l2 u ‘deodar oil’ — P. kelõ ‘fir’ — Ind. k2ylo ‘deodar pine’ < OIA kilima- ‘a kind of pine’ (3187); Bhad. kE;l2 u ‘deodar oil’ has a semantic parallel in Dardic Kal. kélum ‘medicine that cures the skin disease of goats . . . ([t]his is obtained from the roots of cedar extracted by heat)’ (but why dental lateral?) and in Kho. k"¯ılum ‘turpentine’. There is also with loss of initial syllable Paš. lam"a ¯ ‘deodar’. Turner quotes also sub *kapilla- ‘brown, tawny, reddish’ (2750) Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms for ‘pine’ which appears unconvincing and they are mostly phonologically not matching with the here-quoted forms. In the Kuari dialect of Kc. there is k¯ec¯ı ‘how much’ which Bailey (1915: 167) compares with Sh. kač¯ ak, kač¯ a ‘how many’.60 Cf. also D . . ka"te2k ‘how many’. Similar to D . ., Bng. has keti ‘how many’ which is < OIA *kiyatta- ‘how great?’ (3167) (Pa., Pk.). But there is also Bng. kOichO ‘how much’ (typically used by the musician caste and not by the higher castes; but this word is also used in Deog., Baur. kOici, and in other parts in the neighbourhood). Here also K. ka ca ‘how many’. Most likely, the Kuari, Bng., Sh. and K. words have the same origin. A parallel to this ‘affrication’ is found in Kc./Kt.g. ecchE ‘hither’ and kecchE ‘whereto, where’ which are to be compared with Him. ethya-ágé ‘hereafter’ (?), Bng. ettE ‘here’, Ku. eti ‘here’, P. ethe ‘here’. The Him. word contains a palatal glide after the plosive, and similarly deriving from OIA *kiyatta- there is Pk. kittiya-. It is therefore very likely that the Kuari, Sh. and other forms with an affricate derive < older *kittya-, an idea already considered by Hendriksen (1976: 7). Him. kod.u ¯ ‘navel’ appears to be cognate with OIA lex. gon.d.a-2 ‘a fleshy navel’ (4277) with a modern parallel in B. Kal. kópuč ‘the stump of a branch’ is a compound < OIA *kot.a-2 ‘breaking’ (3492) and púccha- ‘tail’ (8249 – see there N. puchar ‘stump’). South-west B. koply a ¯ ‘wife’, cf. Ind. k opr
ed u n.m.dual ‘husband and wife’ which is a compound (indicated by the location of the accent), thus lit. ‘two skulls’ < OIA *koppara- ‘skull’ (3519) plus du two’. Note also OIA kap¯ alin¯ı- ‘a man or woman of low caste (son or daughter of a Br¯ ahman mother and a fisherman father)’. ajat. v, 325) kośa- ‘oath’. Kann. “k¯ osh” ‘oath’61 < OIA (R¯ Kal. kos., khos. ‘measure of two cupped and joined hands’ < OIA kis.ku- ‘forearm; handle of axe’ (3191) (Pa. kukku- ‘a measure of length [cubit?]’) with a modern (not quite convincing) parallel in Kh. Bhil.Mbh. kosv˜ u ‘kutarn¯ a - to gnaw’ < OIA kus.áti *‘strikes’, *‘kills’ (Bh.P. ‘gnaws’) (3369). The origin of this OIA word is unclear and problematic (see EWA). It may be of Austro-Asiatic because of many kOc, krac ‘gnaw, bite’ words, but this looks quite vague.

60 Ruth Schmidt (pers. comm.) gives the more precise form as kacáa-k ‘exactly how much/many’ with indefinite particle -k. 61 Kannauri has two sibilants s and ś, but T. Graham Bailey makes in addition a distinction between “sh” and “sh”.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

568

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

371. Kal. krátik, kátrik as in te káas thára krátan day? ‘who are they laughing about’ suggests that the preciser meaning is ‘to laugh at sb., deride’ and thus the word is cognate with OIA kumantra- ‘bad advice; evil counsel’. 372. Kamd. kř¯ ac˙ "a, Kt. kř˙c"a, San.. kři˙c"a all ‘hip; thigh’ appear to be reflexes of OIA krtsná ‘the flank or hip’ (with preservation of accent position). Even though Mayrhofer does not mention the meaning ‘flank, hip’ he considers the possibility of relation with OIA kŕp- ‘beautiful appearance’, thus older *krpsná- and thus reflex of PIE *krep Regarding semantics, cf. also derived Proto-Germanic  ‘body’. *hrefiz- ‘stomach’ and Old English hrif ‘guts, womb’. 373. Chin. krit.h¯ a ‘black’ (D. D. Sharma 1991) looks quite similar to Kal. krín.d.a ‘black’ both of which are < OIA krs.n.á- ‘black’ (3451).  374. Paš. kr¯ um ‘scorpion’ (?) compares with Sant. kamar kidiñ ‘a small species of scorpion’. The Paš. word and the first Sant. word reflect OIA karma
ra ‘blacksmith’ (2898) which seems to be a borrowing from Dravidian. Since Sant. kidiñ means ‘scorpion’ (with parallels in Munda and probably also in Mon-Khmer), this means that the designation of (some types of) scorpions as ‘blacksmith’ must have been a common metaphor in larger parts of prehistorical northern India.  s. kr¯ 375. Sa umbl.¯ı ‘scapula with flesh attached’ probably < OIA *kaurma- ‘appertaining to a tortoise’ (3415) with r fronting; cf. Kho. kr@m ‘back’. 376. Rudh. krepl¯ at. ‘long winded talk or cry’ (Kaul [2006 i: 305]) is a synonym compound < OIA *krapyati ‘howls’ (3576) (EWA: OIA KRAP1 ‘to lament, implore, long for; jammern, flehen, sich sehnen’) plus -l¯ at. < OIA lat.yati ‘prattles’. The lemma is otherwise attested in Paš. and Kho. However, Morgenstierne (1945: 271) considers Shum. «ape-am and dialectal Paš. «ap- ‘to cough’ to be cognate of OIA KRP ‘lament’ whose  reflexes are quoted in IEW: 569. Note:- Accidentally similar-looking Kann. krapśimig and skrapśimig ‘to weep, cry, mourn, mew’ (with intransitive/reflexive/passive suffix -śi-) is inherited < #1103 PTB *krap ‘weep’. 377. Bhal. krEnknu

‘to howl, roar’ in "C b2ner a "krEnko

‘the bear howled from the forest’

(Kaul [2006 ii: 158]) — Šat.. kink

aro
‘a group of singers, chorus’,62 Bur. qaán˙ ét- ‘to low (donkey)’, 2 qon˙ ét- and Sh. koón˙ ‘to low (cow)’, quan˙ ét- ‘to roar (lion)’, Paš. kinkel˙ ‘to neigh’ < OIA (RV 8,76,11) KRAKS. ‘to bluster, yell; lärmen, brüllen’ (EWA) which is said to be an onomatopoeic word form. Regarding phonetic development cf. e.g. H. a ¯mkh ˙ ‘eye’ < OIA áks.i-. Cf. also Rudh. koklian¯ a ‘growling sound’ with a different interpretation (p. 753, also found in Kaul [2006 ii: 218]), and OIA *kruks.ati ‘shouts’ (3596), which seems to display change of a > u, with a modern reflex in Wg. (CDIAL) and more reflexes in Kal. (discussed above p. 545). Note: It is not clear whether Dm. ca c, čač ‘to neigh, bleat’ reflects OIA kraks.

or kruks.-, but both OIA stems look anyway like allomorphs. 378. Rp. kv¯ ar.a ‘sprout, seedling’ probably borrowing < OIA koraka- ‘bud’ (3527) with one modern parallel in Si. and northwestern occasional change of r > r. (c.f. e.g. widespread par.d¯ a ‘purdah’). 62 Regarding semantics, cf. below (p. 579) Rom. basaldo ‘musician’ etc. which contains OIA v a

syate ‘roars, howls, bellows, lows, bleats, sings (of birds)’ (11589).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

569

379. Bng. kva sO ‘man’, Jaun. kvasa ‘boy’, Kann. and Him. khv¯ as ‘concubine (of raja)’, and probably Bhad. ku¯ ansh ‘wife’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 38]) (but cf. Marm. ku"lan.ś, ku"lan.iś ‘woman’ [Kaul 2006 ii: 193] which look different), P¯ ad.. kyohn. ‘lady, woman’ (Kaul [2006 i: 66]) and Gadd. ku¯ anaś ‘woman’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 152]) — here Bashg. kunz¯ a and Kal. khonzá both ‘queen’(?).63 The forms are related with OIA lex. kumbh¯ a‘harlot’ (3315) where Turner quotes Thieme according to whom the OIA word “is hypochoristic for kumbhad¯ as¯ı- ‘harlot’. The Kann. and Him. words apparently derive < OIA kumbhad¯ as¯ı- (with fronting of aspiration) whereas the Bng. and Jaun. forms are < OIA kumbhad¯ asa- with an original meaning something like *‘pimp’. 380. Garh. kva s  ‘sad’ (Z.) < OIA (MaitrS. iv,2,13) kumanas- ‘displeased, angry’. 381. Bro. ks.a ‘crane (bird)’ is possibly < OIA koyas.t.i- ‘the lapwing (or ‘a small white crane, commonly called a paddy-bird’) (“having legs like sticks”)’ (Pa. koyat.t.hi-, kot.t.haka‘the paddy-bird’). 382. N. kh2g2to ‘shell’ (Z.) < OIA *khogga- a side-form of OIA *ghoggha- ‘shell’ (4514).

O ‘to shake s.th. or one’s head; to magically clear away s.th. by turning it 383. Bng. khOzEn

around one’s head and then throw it away’ < OIA Dh¯ several times atup. KHAJ ‘to churn or agitate; umrühren’; cf. OIA (RB, Br) khajak
rt- ‘epithet of Indra: causing the tumult or din of battle’. For semantic reasons thereis no connection with similarly looking modern forms deriving < OIA skadyate ‘is spurted out’ (13624). 384. Bng. khOrzEnO2 ‘to resound (din of battle, battle-axes, guns)’ (with -E- suffix) cf. OIA kharjati ‘to creak (like a carriage-wheel)’ of which it perhaps cannot derive directly but < older *khOzEnO plus -r- extention as in khOrzEnO1 ‘to itch’ which is < OIA

kharju-1 ‘itching’ (3827) with the same extension (both words are pronounced slightly differently) (but note also Ko. korzai ‘to cause itch’ and khoroz ‘itch’, and Garh. khajiru ‘a red-and-white colored poisonous worm’), and as in gOrzinO v.i. ‘to roar’

which are < and gOrzEnO v.t. ‘to shout or bawl at s.o.’ (with -i-1 and -E- suffixes)

‘roars’ (4046). However, since there is K. grazun ‘to roar’ sub 4046 also OIA gárjáti Bng. may have preserved the -r- (through a two-time metathesis?). This is further supported by the boorowing of this lemma into Munda Bodo-Gadaba gorzei ‘to hiss, hum, roar’ and ãaP gorzei ‘water roaring’. 385. Bng. khOlOtO ‘material assets and food which low-castes demand at harvest times from Rajputs’, Deog. khOltha ‘comestible goods given one or two times per year after harvest

to those of low castes’, Khaśdh. khOlOthi ‘comestible goods given by high caste members annually to Brahmins’ (this change in meaning is due to immigration of Brahmins into the area), Garh. khulut ‘wages paid to artisans in kind at the time of harvesting’ and Garh. and Ku. khalait ‘designation of various groups of the fourth caste who receive (twice a year) a share from the grain threshed at the threshing floor’ (UGK, which also points out that term and custom are also found in Himachal Pradesh), western N. khalo ‘the payment in grain that a patron gives to blacksmiths and other craftsmen for a year’s work’ (Maskarinec [1998: 498]) — Ind. kh2l  ‘natural produce which has to be given in regular intervals to D . oms and smiths’. My Deog. language consultants say that the underlying meaning of khOltha is ‘share, allotment’, therefore all words

perhaps rather < *khála-bh¯ derive probably < OIA *khála-bhakta- or arta- (see 3834 ‘threshing floor’, 9331 ‘food’, 9468 ‘wages’).

63 Kho. kum¯ a ‘harlot’ (Lorimer), ‘concubine of the Mehtar’, quma"i ‘concubine; mistress’ (Strand), Bur. qumá ‘Nebenfrau, Konkubine’, Yid. kum¯ a ‘harlot’ are ← Pers. qumm¯ a ‘a concubine’ pace CDIAL 3315 (kumbh¯ a-) and EWA.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

570

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

Note: Him. śkoth¯ a, skoth¯ a ‘a gift of grain given to menials for their services at each harvest’ belongs semantically also here, but is a compound with first component belonging to a lemma discussed below p. 776 sub Jaun.
sa khO ‘harvest’. 386. Kal. khá.a. ‘shield’ < OIA kávaca- ‘coat of mail’ (lex. kavás.a- ‘shield’) (2957) (Pa.) with a modern parallel in Si. which is borrowed from Pa. 387. Bng. poet. khat.n.i n.f. ‘joint (Articulatio)’ appears to be related with OIA (Suśr.) khud.aka- ‘the ankle-joint’ and more distantly with OIA ghut.a- ‘ankle’ (4479) (cf. Pr. got."ug ‘joint’). In the PAN Bh¯ımsen curses Duh.ś¯ asan after he had cut the hair of Draupad¯ı among other words also with these words:

g udO u ki teri khatnia rOra ulE



your.F joint.PL push-away.FUT.1SG knee.OBL.PL GEN.POP.F ‘the joints of your knee I will push away’[609] 388. Ko.kun.. khad.ik ‘butcher’ < OIA lex. khat.t.ika- ‘a butcher’. 389. Garh. khanti, khandi ‘(heavy) stone, boulder’ and khander.o ‘a thick and big stone’ — cf. OIA lex. k¯ anta- ‘stone’ and OIA k¯ at.ha- ‘rock’ (3018) with a modern reflex in Bshk. 390. M.w¯ ar. khap@t ‘rock sparrow’ and khaprya c˙ or ‘robin’ perhaps cognate with OIA kapiñjala- ‘the francoline partridge, heathcock; name of a sparrow’ or dissimilated < OIA kakkat.a- ‘a species of bird’ (see EWA). 391. PKT *kh apOr ‘spear’ is certainly cognate with OIA karpara- ‘a kind of lance or spear’. 392. Ku. khapir ‘piece, fragment, part’, N. khapar¯ a ‘potsherd’ — B. kharpara, kh¯ apar¯ a ‘potsherd’ — K. khambürü ‘a sharp-pointed stone or potsherd’, Ind. kap2yri ‘a shard’
‘an eggshell’; also Sh.chil. and same as Bur. kaparáat.o ‘eggshell’ — and k2p2yrtu

‘shell’ and kopti ‘shell’ (of egg), Dari. khapeta¯ ‘shattered, broken’ — Thar. khopati . M. kapr¯ a ‘a chip’ and khapr¯ı ‘ditto’ and perhaps also Ko.kun.. kapar ‘stone in a field’ — B. kh¯ apa r¯ a ‘sherd, tile’, also borrowed into Tibeto-Himalayan Khm. kh@pta ‘shard, broken pottery’ and Munda Bon. kirpi ‘shell’, < karpara- ‘bowl’ (2876) which is cognate with OIA lex. kharpara-2 ‘bowl of a beggar’; Mayrhofer considers, because of frequent aspiration, derivation < PIE *(s)ker- ‘cut apart’, as Chatterji does (ODBL § 236 ‘cut off’) which is supported by Ku. and M. But there is also Dravidian Parji kipra ‘a snail’s shell’ (see DEDR 1555 for further Dravidian parallels). Notes: (a) There is semantically similar Mult. babbur ‘large potsherd’ and bibr¯ı ‘potsherd’, and Jat.. áaár¯ı ‘sherd, broken earthen vessel’ for which cf. PIE *bhreh 𝑥 i‘cut to pieces’ and OIA BHR¯I ‘injure’. (b) Regarding etymologically probably related Kal. čher ‘cut branches of holly oak etc. see above page 123. (c) Here also Bng. c amnO ‘to cut hair or grass until skin/ground’ and ch ambnO

c˙ hambnõ ‘to cut (hair), shear (goats, etc.)’, and with

‘to cut hair’, and Kt.g., Kc. . preservation of palatal pronunciation Bng. caminO ‘to cut into the skin (while cutting hair or shearing sheep)’ < labial extended PIE *(s)kerb(h)- (IEW: 943); nasal consonant due to contaminated by forms close to Bng. c ambrO ‘leather’

which is < OIA cárman- ‘hide, skin’ (4701) probably < PIE *(s)kér-men‘segment, portion’ → ‘flayed hide’. We have here yet another example for a difference between Outer and Inner Languages.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

571

393. Kal. khamék ‘to hit something in anger’ as in a bat gri, tása ek khamés ‘I took a stone and hit him with one shot’ < OIA (V¯ as.) kharma- ‘harshness’ which Mayrhofer (EWA) equates with OIA khára- ‘hard, sharp’ (3819). 394. Garh. and Ku. kh¯ an ‘mountain ridge’ is found in many place names like mangal¯ ˙ ıkh¯ an near Almora, jyol¯ıkh¯ an near Dwarahat, k¯ alik¯ akh¯ an near Pauri etc. (UGK) and has semantic parallels in Bshk. khan ‘hill’, Tor. khan, Chil. and Gau. kan,64 Ind. kha n ‘mountain’ and Si. ka˘ ndu ‘mountain’ which Turner derives < OIA skandhá- ‘shoulder, upper part of back’ (13627) but also considers derivation from or influence by khan.d.á‘broken’ (3792). 395. Garh. and Ku. kh¯ a.l ‘a rather flat stretch of land near a high mountain top’ (used in very many place names, see UGK), and perhaps shamanic language of Western Nepal nep¯ al kh¯ al ‘Valley of Nepal’65 (Maskarinec [1998 index]) perhaps < OIA *kh¯ alayati which is ← *khalati2 ‘rises’ (3838) with modern reflexes in Rom. and K. 396. Rom.Q. khăl¯endăr¯ı ‘liver’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 275]) is a synonym compound < OIA k¯ aleyaka- ‘liver’ (3103) with spontaneous aspiration) plus < *yakar¯ antra ‘liver and guts’ (10393) with a modern parallel in S. 397. Garh. khikc¯ at. ‘senseless laughing’ and khikt¯ at. ‘unrestrained laughing’, Rp. khikc¯ a- ‘to giggle, chuckle’ < OIA khákkhati ‘laughs’ (3761) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in H. and a doubtful one in Rom.W.; Bng. gOg anO ‘to giggle, titter’ is < related OIA lex.

gagghati ‘laughs’ and has no modern parallels. According to Mayrhofer (EWA) OIA KAKH is onomatopoeic and rests on ‘elementary parallels’, but Mallory and Adams reconstruct PIE *kha- ‘laugh’. 398. Bng. and Kva. khilkO n.m. ‘shirt’ — P.pot.. khilk¯ a, khalt¯ a, khilk¯ a ‘loose garment’ < OIA lex. khalla- ‘a kind of cloth or clothes’ and different suffixes. 399. Bng. khunO n.m. ‘guilt’ usually in the synonym compound d o
s-khunO ‘guilt-guilt’ perhaps < OIA *skupan¯ a- ‘pressing in’ (13653) with a modern parallel in G. 400. Bng. khuml.i, khumbl.i n.f. ‘assembly, council, meeting’, Jaun. khumr¯ı ‘a traditional panc¯ ayat institution for jurisdiction (organized at several levels)’ (UGK); a khuml.i takes place either in a house or, usually, inside a dza ¯ga, i.e. a village sanctuary consisting of four stone walls covered by beams and forming a quadrangle, perhaps < OIA ks.oma- ‘a room on the house-top’ or ks.auma- ‘building of a particular form, etc.’ 401. Ku. khuv¯ a ‘valley; direction’, N. khuv¯ a ‘small division of country, district, province’, MKH (1: 303) ayel u re ku   ‘the people of (village) Ayelo’ (i.e. its inhabitants) — Marw. khoh and Thar. khoh¯ a both ‘cave’, also Sh. kho ‘cave’ < OIA ku
pa-1 ‘hole,  cave; well’ (3400) with spontaneous aspiration (except MKH); the meaning ‘valley’ (with a comparable semantics in N.) is shared with Kal., Tor., Sh. (in Sh. also meaning ‘inhabited place, village’). 402. Bng. khernO ‘to drive s.o. somewhere’ and kh er dennO ‘to announce (a fight); to

attack’ — Bshk. khir.a ¯g ‘to chase (away)’ — Rab. khet . ia ‘jackal’ (with original meaning *‘chaser’ ?). Cf. OIA khet.a- ‘hunt’; the OIA word has modern reflexes otherwise only < prefixed a ¯khet.a- ‘hunting’ (1037). 403. Bhat.. khæri El ‘abuse’ (with di y verbal ‘to abuse’) may be cognate with OIA khala‘mischievous person’ and kharpara- ‘thief, knave; Dieb, Schelm’. 404. Bng. khokotO n.m. and Kva. khOkhOtO both ‘cheek’; Bhad. khakhor.i, High Rudh.

akhri, Bhad. "khE.khro, Old Cam. and Kgr. "khakhur.i, Bhal. khokhr.i, Sir.d.od.. kh¯ .

64 A parallel without aspiration where aspiration is to be expected is found in Brj.-Aw. kaniy a ‘shoulder’. 65 But this word is perhaps (also) related with OIA khalla-2 ‘trench’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

572

405. 406.

407.

408.

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I kh¯ akh, P. khakh, kh¯ akh all ‘cheek’ — Bhat.. k ok@i ‘area below the eyes’; Gau. khok¯ ar.i ‘cheekbone’ (contains as second element derivation < OIA had.d.a- ‘bone’ [13952]), Chil. koki, Pal. k¯ ogái ‘cheek’; Psht. koka¯ı ‘cheek’. A derivation < OIA *khokkha- ‘hollow’ (3927) is semantically implausible as the there-quoted meanings like e.g. ‘hollow, decayed’ etc. show. Therefore I suggest that the quoted forms derive < OIA kuks.í‘cheeks’. This meaning of kuks.í- is neither found in Monier-Williams nor in KEWA nor in Turner where the usual meanings are ‘belly, abdomen, cavity’. But EWA gives ‘cheek; later (dual) buttocks’.66 Mayrhofer refers here to Stephanie Jamison (1987: 71–77) who discusses the strikingly frequent use of dual of this word and she convincingly shows that the meaning ‘cheeks’ is found from RV to ŚB whereas the better-known meanings dominate in later Sanskrit. The here-quoted reflexes known to me are geographically limited to West Pah¯ ar.¯ı and Dardic (plus a borrowing into Pashto). This differs very much from the geographical range of OIA kuks.í- ‘belly’ (3213) which, apart from being documented in Pali and Prakrit, is found over a considerably larger area. The above examples show the typical Outer Language aspiration fluctuations, but whereas they all reflect OIA -ks.- as -k(h)(-), frequently followed by various suffixes, the reflexes of 3213 represent OIA -ks.- quite mixed as either affricate or kh, with affricate examples also in Dardic, and for West Pah¯ ar.¯ı note Bng. both k¯ ukh n.f. ‘belly, womb; armpit’ and ko chO n.m. ‘armpit; protrusion in side of jacket for carrying items’. All observations presented here lead to the conclusion that the modern reflexes of kuks.í- ‘cheeks’ are older (Outer Language words) than the reflexes quoted sub 3213 (including the just quoted two Bng. words) even though they reflect OIA ks. only as k(h) whereas sub 3213 the situation is mixed. This contradicts the general perception that the affricate reflexes have not only a tendency for concentrating more in the northwest and west than elsewhere but that they seem to be also older than the k(h) reflexes. Why this is different in this case I do not know. However, it is also remarkable that the ‘cheek’ forms do not display a similar semantic unfolding as the 3213 forms and that the meaning ‘cheek’ for kuks.í- anyway seems to soon have carved a peripheral existence in the Vedic world. All this may point to a pre-Vedic dialectal difference. Bar¯ a. kht.hăn.a ¯ ‘bad’ (T. Grahame Bailey [1915: 185]) < OIA ku-sth¯ ana- ‘a bad place’ (cf. OIA *kusthala- ‘bad place’ [383] with a modern reflex in G.). Him. khr¯eban. ‘a sling used for throwing small stones to frighten monkeys off the crops’ < OIA ks.epan.¯ı- ‘sling’ (R. ‘oar’) (3740) with similar meaning only in Pk. kh¯evan.a‘throwing, sending’. The -r- may be intrusive. N. khv¯ıle ‘bald’ (Z.) is with regard to aspiration related on the one hand to OIA khalatí- ‘bald-headed’ (without known modern reflexes) and on the other with regard to the -v- with OIA kulva- ‘bald’ (3355); however, Turner quotes only N. khalv¯ at. in his Nepali dictionary which is a tatsama — that N. khv¯ıle is nevertheless not a tatsama is supported by Kal. khalo
yak ‘bald’. The here quoted forms are anyway phonetically and semantically closer to the OIA form (which is a reflex of PIE *klh 𝑥 wos ‘bald’67 )  than the reflexes quoted by Turner. Bng. gOi n.f. ‘property, belongings; life, life power’ e.g. in the phrase gOi nE deni ni

(life-power not go.PP.F not) meaning ‘(I) could not go a step (because my life power had gone)’ or more literate ‘the life power has gone (away)’ < OIA (RV, AV) gáya‘household; property; Leben, Lebenskraft, lebendiger Besitz’; cognate is probably also

66 Mayrhofer: “Backe, Wange; später (Dual) Hinterbacke”. 67 Mayrhofer (FLII 20.4.3.4.B) considers *klHuo-.

 

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

573

Bng. gO 1 n.m. ‘husband, ‘master” which for Banganis has only positive connotations and is therefore different from reflexes of OIA góha- ‘hiding-place’, *‘bastard’ (4343) (Pk.) where Turner quotes M. goho, ghov ‘husband’ (also in Ko.chr. gov ‘husband’).68 409. Bng. gO r n.f. ‘a cluster of oblong, plane and fertile fields away from villages in a forest’ is cognate with OIA *g ada-2 ‘cultivated field’ (3968) with modern parallels in Ku., N.,

Dm., Kho. ( ‘small field [Bashir to appear in Himalayan Linguistics]), to which is to be added Palp. garah¯ a ‘field’; UGK has Garh. and Ku. gair which is rendered as ‘samtal krs.i yogya bh¯ umi jo c¯ arom ˙ or se jangalo ˙ m ˙ se bh¯ı ghir¯ı hu¯ı ho – a flat arable ground  which may be surrounded by forest’ or (D. R. Purohit, pers. comm.) ‘a high-lying field in a forest away from villages’. The word appears in many place names in Garhwal, e.g. nimugair near Ranikhet. The OIA lemma is perhaps of Munda origin, see p. 915. 410. Rp. g@da ‘swamp’ cf. Pk. ged.d.a- ‘mud’ quoted sub OIA *gadda-1 ‘sediment, mud’ (4011).

411. Ind. g2 p ‘vagina’ and P. gabbh¯ a ‘the midst; vulva, pudendum muliebre’, gabbh¯e ‘under armpit’ and gabbh¯ı ‘part between fingers and toes’ (last two words T. Graham Bailey [1938: 243]) perhaps also S. äip ‘a girl (a term of dissatisfaction or vexation)’, cf. OIA gabhá- “slit’, the vulva’; the Ind. form displays word-final delayed release; both words might be tatsamas, however, there is no evidence in Pa., Pk. See also Mayrhofer’s comments (EWA), also on gábhasti-, and possible connections with German Gabel ‘fork’. Note: Borrowed also into Western Tibetan Balt. gpi ‘vulva’ (Spriggs [2002: 68])? 412. Bng. gOmpinO, gOpnO ‘to bear s.th. (e.g., pain)’, Him. gampn.u ‘to bear, undergo; have

and gamp¯ patience, be patient’ avn.u ¯ ‘to cause or allow to bear or have patience’. Sub OIA gam-2 Monier-Williams refers to ks.ám- but one actually finds OIA lex. ks.ampati ‘suffers, bears’, and under this root Mayrhofer (EWA) refers to Burrow who has suggested a derivation for it < *zgham (Psht. zGam@l ‘to bear, suffer’) < *sgh-am (∼ SAGH ‘to bear; ertragen’). 413. Kt.g. g@r

stu ‘small quantity of cow dung’ < OIA lex. gopur¯ıs.a- ‘cowdung’ plus diminutive suffix. 414. Bng. gOrkO ‘heavy’ < OIA gurú- ‘heavy’ (4209) (Pa., Pk.) with parallel -kk- extensions (like Pk. garukka-) in N. and Kal., to which is to be added Man.d.. gark¯ a ‘heavy’; cf. also Iranian Sak. ggarkha- ‘heavy; difficult’. 415. Bng. gOrkeri n.f. ‘pregnant woman’ < OIA gurú- with lex. meaning ‘pregnant, a preg and kud¯ı ‘girl, daughter’ (3245); cf. Lat. gravidus ‘loaded, full, swollen; nant woman’ . pregnant with child’ borrowed into Eng. gravid ‘pregnant’ which is certainly a separate semantic development. Note: See also with same semantics Garh. asak ‘heavy, (sth.) which cannot be lifted’ and asakdi ‘pregnant’ for which I propose derivation < OIA *asubharak(k)a- ‘not easily carried’ which cf. with OIA *subhára- ‘easily carried’ (13486) with a modern reflex in Pr., and with regard to building pattern with OIA asukara- ‘not easy to be done’. For parallels of reflexes of OIA bh¯ arin- ‘bearing a load’ (9466) (Si. bärin.¯ı ‘pregnant woman’) see p. 370 Rudh. pet.a ¯-bhurai ‘pregnant’ and a number of further parallels.

68 Bng. gO 2 n.f. ‘step’ derives < OIA gáti- ‘going, gait’ (4009) (Pa., Pk.).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

574

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

416. Bng. gOrnO3 n.m. ‘mouthful, morsel, bite’ and derived from this: gOrnEnO v.t. ‘to

modern swallow down s.th.’ < OIA garan.a-2 ‘act of swallowing’ (4037) with one parallel in Wg. 417. Bng. gOrthO adj.,n.m. ‘fat(ty), heavy; fat, ghee’ and gOrth l adj. ‘heavy and fat (as person)’ (with -¯ıl- grammeme) derives not < OIA ghrt akta- ‘anointed with ghee’ (4507)

Turner quotes Ap. ghitta- and where Tor. gh¯ıt ‘ghee’ is quoted’. However, sub 4501 suggests with question mark a derivation for it < *ghirta-. This is indeed directly reflected in the Bng. word which, moreover, displays aspiration backing for which there exist parallels. 418. Bng. gOsiari-pOniari ‘rainbow’ (means lit.: ‘[woman who carries] grass and water’);

heri, p@nh Kt.g. and Kc. p@n ar etc. ‘rainbow’, Deog. pOniari ‘rainbow’, Him. panhyEr 



the ‘a rainbow’, Kc. p@h ar ‘rainbow’, Khaśdh. pOnd ar ‘rainbow’. According to Turner,

above rainbow-as-water-carrier words are < OIA p¯ an¯ıyah¯ ara- ‘water-carrier’ (8088) but Khaśdh. pOnd ar does not fit here. Turner has also OIA *p¯ an¯ıyadh¯ araka- ‘flow of

water’ (8083) which is, however, not the origin of the Khaśdh. form for which has to be reconstructed OIA *p¯ an¯ıyadh¯ ara- ‘holding water’ (< OIA dh¯ ara-1 in compounds ‘holding’ [6787]). I want to suggest that this is the correct reconstruction for these ‘rainbow’ words with Khaśdh. having preserved the medial stop. Regarding the second component of the Bng. form, see Kt.g. g@s Ere ‘a woman who cuts grass’ and H. ghasiy ar a ‘a cutter or scraper of grass’. Ex. from Bng.:

d arE undE gOsiari-pOniari rOi pOri

rainbow stay.PP.F.SG fall.VS ridge.OBL below.OBL ‘on the ridge a rainbow appeared’ 419. Bng. poet. g  OsEnO ‘to beat s.o.’ and P. ghasm¯ an., ghams¯ an. n.m. ‘uproar, noise, clamour, tumult, turning up side down; battle, engagement’ are perhaps cognate with OIA lex. ghasra- ‘hurtful’, but Mayrhofer (EWA) regards the word as ‘invented artistry; erfundene Kunstbildung’. 420. Bng. poet. (PAN) gagure-madure ‘(earthen) bowls and pots’ as in m@t phoro gaguremadure ‘don’t break the bowls and pots’ with first word69 < OIA gargara-2 ‘waterpot’ (4043) and regarding second word cf. OIA lex. mand¯ a- ‘a pot, vessel, inkstand’. 421. Garh. gaggu ‘snake’ < OIA gavedhuka- ‘ kind of snake’ (4104) with modern parallels in Ash., Kt., Wg., Kho. 422. Bng. gaji n.f. ‘maveś¯ı – lifestock, goats and sheep’, Rp. g¯ aji ‘domesticated animal’, Brj.-Aw. g¯ ajh¯ı ‘sheep’; cf. Rom. gadžo ‘a non-Roma’ which is believed to derive either < MIA *gajjha- (< OIA g¯ arhya- < grh
a- ‘house’) (related is also Chu. kajj¯ a ‘gentleman, any one of good social position’ [T.Graham Bailey 1928: 125]) or < OIA *gr¯ ama-ja‘hailing from a village’, but in the latter case there should have been depalatalization. 423. Pr. gat. ‘open cattle pen, cattle corral’ and gut., g¯ ut., gut.u ‘lower part of house, subterranian part of a house’ reflect respectively, I suggest, OIA (RV) gotrá- ‘protection or shelter for cows, cow-pen, cow-shed, stable for cattle, stable (in general), hurdle, enclosure’ (4279) and gos.t.há- ‘meeting place’ (4336); with gat. Pr. has preserved the older meaning instead of the younger meaning ‘family, clan’; note also that Turner quotes sub 4279 Pr. g ot, gu
tu ‘cow’ which cf. with OIA (P¯ an..) gotr¯ a- ‘a herd of kine’,



with Sad. and Kh. gõri ‘cow’. Pk. got¯ a- ‘cow’, and perhaps . 424. OIA gád.ati ‘drops etc.’ (3973) has many modern reflexes, but its Dh¯ atup. meaning ‘distils’ has not been preserved in MIA and NIA, but is found in two Bng. compounds: 69 In normal Bang¯ an.¯ı gag¯ er.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

575

kimagl.i n.f. ‘brandy produced from k¯ım n.f. ‘yeast” 70 and pOcagli n.f. ‘a twice distilled

brandy’, and in Ko.S. g¯ a.li ‘to filter’ and g alnE ‘strainer’.

Note: Bng. pOcagli with first component < OIA pacya- ‘ripening’ (7653)? How

ever, note also Munda Juang paci ‘beer’ and perhaps even Khmuic T"in puuc ‘alcohol’ and Khmu bu:c ‘liquor, rice wine’. A further parallel between Bangani and Munda spirits culture is Bng. ph¯ ul ki daru ‘brandy of highest quality’, Korwa ph u:li: ‘of good quality (ref. to liquor)’ and Santali phuli p@ur@ ‘the pure spirit distilled from matkom’.71 Could these forms be further connected e.g. with Korku phul ‘soul; spirit’, Aslian Semelai ph0l ‘blow up (of a breeze, wind)’, Proto-Bahnaric *p@hO:l ‘spirit, soul’, Bahnaric Jeh phO:l ∼ pahO:l ‘psyche, guardian angel’ and Cua phO:l ‘spirit, soul (leaves body when sleeping)’ ? See Zoller (2018b: 336ff.) on the confusion in Indian languages between an IndoAryan lemma for ‘flower’ and a partly similar Austro-Asiatic lemma for ‘soul’. 425. Bng. garnO ‘to take or bring or pull out, draw,extract, pick, buy’, Jaun. gh arnO ‘to



pull, to skim’ (with aspiration fronting) < OIA *gad.d.hati ‘pulls’ (3985) with parallels in Bshk. and Phal. 426. Jat.. gan.d.holak ‘time just after sunset’ perhaps < *gan.d.ha-ull¯ apa- “gong-noise”; cf. BHS gan.d.¯ı- ‘gong’ (4005) and OIA ull¯ apa- ‘calling out in a loud voice’. 427. Kal. gadáy hik ‘to become aimless or a wanderer’ and tirgadáy ‘vagabond’ derive perhaps < OIA g¯ urdati ‘leaps after’ and tir- is < OIA taralá- ‘trembling, moving to and fro’ (5703). Cognate with g¯ urdati are possibly also Kal. gadéri ‘crazy, wild, mentally disturbed’ and gadhyák ‘predator’ (with -yak suffix). 428. Tor. gan ‘a herd’ < OIA godhana- ‘herd of cows’ (4285) with a doubtful parallel in OAw. 429. Jat.. gan, ghan ‘cloud, gathering clouds’ < OIA ghaná-2 ‘compact, firm, dense’ (4424) but the meaning ‘cloud’ is only found in ŚBr and in Pk. ghan.a- ‘cloud’. In addition, (optional) loss of aspiration shows that the Jat.. word belongs to the Outer Languages. 430. Kal. -gáni is found in istorgáni ‘goat or sheep which leaves its flock and joins another’ (built with istóra ‘barren’; see p. 73) and in khavgáni ‘a death’ (with khav- probably with spontaneous aspiration < OIA k¯ alá-2 ‘death’ [3084]), whereas -gáni probably derives < gant
r- ‘who or what goes or moves’.  Ko.S. ga dilm 431. Ko. gàndil and a
si both ‘wasp’ < OIA lex. gandh¯ al¯ı-, gandhol¯ı- ‘wasp’ and Ko.S. second component < OIA m¯ aks.iká- ‘pertaining to a bee’ (9989). 432. Jat.. gambh¯ır¯ı ‘citron, large sour lime’ < OIA lex. gambh¯ıra- ‘the lemon tree’. The word is certainly cognate with OIA jamb¯ıra- ‘citron tree’ (5130). 433. Garh. garri ‘pregnant’ and Bng. gOrkeri n.f. ‘a pregnant woman’ (with second

OIA *udguru- ‘very heavy’ (1962) with component < OIA *kud.¯ı- ‘girl’ [3245]) < modern parallels in Dardic and Dm. to which is to be added S. äarkhud.¯ı ‘pregnant’. 434. Bng. garsO n.m. ‘courage’ perhaps < OIA g
rtsa- ‘clever; a sharp fellow’. Regarding  sound history cf. above discussion on Bng. khOrzEn O2 (p. 571).

70 On k¯ım n.f. ‘yeast’ see above p. 565. 71 Bodding explains matkom thus: “A large, very branchy forest tree, Bassia latifolia, Roxb; the flower of Bassia latifolia, which is used as a food.” Since there is also p@ur@ ‘liquor distilled from the flower of Basia latifotia’ and p@ur@ cu@ ‘to distil liquor’ it is unlikely that Sant. phuli refers here – at least originally – to ‘flower’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

576

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

Note: Here worth mentioning is semantically corresponding but not cognate Bng. gagsO n.m. ‘courage’ and ga g es n.m. ‘courage’ as in tE goO ai m u di ga g es (then go.PP.M.SG come I.OBL in courage) ‘then I got the courage’ which may have a parallel in P. gh¯ ag(h) ‘aged, experienced, wise, cunning, shrewd’, gh¯ ag¯ a ‘shrewdness, cunningness’ and gh¯ age h¯ ar¯ a ‘a shrewd fellow, a fraudulent person; a cheat a rogue’, and in Munda Sant. ghagor ‘shrewd, smart, scheming’. Origin of this lemma is unclear. 435. Kal. gas.t. (also g ast, ghas.t.) ‘early, soon, quickly’ cf. OIA gamis.t.ha- ‘most ready to go,

most willing to come’. 436. B.roh. gas kúit.t.oni faik ‘woodpecker’ is < OIA *gaks.a- kut.t.ana- paks.ín- ‘tree cutting bird’ (3949, 3239, 7636) and compares semantically with S. k¯ at.ha-kut.o- ‘woodpecker’ < OIA k¯ as.t.há-kut.t.a-1 ‘piece of wood cutting (bird)’ (3120, 3236). 437. Bng. poet. (PAN) g azO n.m. ‘storage box’ < OIA gañja-2 ‘treasury’, R¯aj. ‘grainstore’ (3961) with one modern parallel in Kho., but there is also P. gañj ‘a treasure; a granary, an emporium for grain’ and similar meanings in H. The meaning ‘treasure’ is probably due to borrowing of the Pers. parallel ganj ‘a store, hoard, hidden treasure’, and meaning ‘grain emporium’ is also reflected in Bng. ga zO, g azO n.m. ‘compartment in the storehouse used for storing grains and valuables’. 438. Ku. g¯ ad ‘skin’ has parallels in Gaw. ga« ‘skin’ and Dm. gadra ‘ditto’ which are quoted with question mark by Turner sub ga
tra- ‘body; limb’ (4124). 439. Ku. g¯ ani n.f. (sic) ‘penis’ is certainly connected with OIA gan.d.á-1 ‘boil’ (3997) but semantically closest are Psht. G en ‘penis’ and Orm. g¯en.d. ‘ditto’, and derivation from

cognate gan.d.i- ‘goitre’ is phonetically more plausible. Here also Gaw. g¯et.i ‘vulva’ and note also Pal. "xut.t.i ‘penis’ which seems also to be cognate through phonetically and semantically somewhat similar OIA *kan.t.a3 ‘backbone, podex, penis’ (2670). 440. Ko. and M. g¯ ar ‘hail(stone)’, Ko. also ‘ice; frost’, and Ko. g¯ ar podt¯ a ‘to hail’ (in the Addenda and Corrigenda the M. form is added with question-mark sub OIA lex. karaka- ‘hail’ which, however is reflected in Ko. karo, kăre, kore etc. ‘hail’); cf. OIA gra
van- ‘stone’ with a doubtful modern reflex in Paš. loo
‘ice’, and PIE *gr¯ odo- ‘hail’. 441. Kul. and Sainj. g¯ aś ‘rain’ < a ¯k¯ aśá- ‘sky’ (1008) (and contaminated by *¯ ak¯ aśiya- ‘of the sky’ [1009]?). Notes: (a) Under the same lemma 1008 Turner also quotes Bshk. a
ga, Tor. agh¯ a, Pal. aghá ‘cloud, rain’. To this to be added are Tor.cail. a ¯gh¯ a ‘rain; cloud’ (Z.), Dara. ag ‘rain, cloud’, R¯ aj., and Kalk. aga ‘cloud’ and Chin. kal ‘rains’; but at least the Tor.(cail.) form may be part of the group quoted in the next note; however note also the gross semantic contrast with Kva. Og a
sO ‘bright’. (b) There are Pr. ag
al, @g"al, G al ‘rain’, Kt. ag¯ ol (Biddulph has “ughul” ‘rain’ with gh probably for G) or a ¯gól (Strand). According to Turner < OIA ak¯ ala- ‘out of time’ (11) who says that the words are early borrowings from Indian (note there Pk. ay¯ ali ‘cloudy day’), but he quotes again the same words, except the Pk. form, sub OIA *udgh¯ ala- ‘pouring out’ (1977) which was accepted by Strand; note also Wg. k¯ al ‘weather’ (Degener [1998: 455]) where all the quoted examples built with this word show that the meaning is rather ‘bad weather’ and therefore here also k¯ al t.r¯ ank ˙ "ay ‘it thunders’ (Treg. kal-trenkyik"

O ‘thunder’) (see p. 617). (c) But cf. also PIE *h𝑎 eghlu (ˆ gh?) (Martirosyan [2013: 120] reconstructs *h2 (e)gh l- ‘darkness, fog, mist’) ‘rain; dark cloud, rainy weather; dunkle Wolke,

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

577

regnerisches Wetter’ with a reflex e.g. in Old Prussian aglo ‘rain’ (see also Lanszweert [1984: 109]). Bomhard regards this as a PN word reflecting PN *èag-a ‘ cloudy weather’ (CINCL 695). Čašule (2010: 31) derives from this PIE form Bur. hagúm ˙ ‘damp’ and hak ‘vapour’. It is likely that here semantic-morphological amalgamations (see p. 224) took place which might reach back into PIE. 442. Bng. ga z n.f. ‘gorge, ravine’ cf. OIA Dh¯ atup. ghams-, ˙ ghams ˙ . - ‘to flow, stream’. But note also High Rudh. "grecci * a narrow and deep way, a gorge’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 269])Note also semantically and morphologically partly similar but etymologically unrelated Sant. khoñja, khoñjaN i.a. ‘ravine, pit; to fall into a ravine, &c., to get bogged, to be in a tight place’ and khoñja khuñji ‘full of pits and ravines’ (Campbell) respectively ‘full of pits and holes’ (Bodding). 443. Mult. g¯ ah- ‘thresh’ (Wilson 1899a), cf. OIA ávagh¯ atayati ‘causes to thresh’ (755) “With anal. MIA. ggh: G. ogh¯ avv˜ u ‘to thresh (corn, &c.).” 444. The following section has already been published in a fairly similar way in Zoller 2010. In various dialects of West Pah¯ ar.¯ı the words for ‘singer’ have the form song-‘agentsuffix’, e.g. Bhas. gitk ar@s ‘singer’ (with g¯ıt ‘song’ plus a -k ar-like agent suffix); Bng. gitv¯ ar/git¯ ori ‘singer’ (the second element may either derive < OIA bh¯ arayati ‘causes to bear, engages for hire’ [9463] under which lemma there are forms like G. bh¯ arv˜ u ‘to charm, fascinate’ and M. bh¯ arn.˜e ‘to make strong by charms [weapons, rice, water], enchant, fascinate’ or is a kind of synonym compound ‘song singer’ with the second component of gitv¯ ar/git¯ ori being connected with Jaun. b¯ ar ‘song’ and other modern parallels for which see p. 832) etc. But more interesting forms are found further in the northwest and in Romani: Ind. gildo and Ind.dub. geldeo ‘singer’,72 Rom. basaldo ‘musician’ (cf. D . b2 s a;r ‘to play [music, drum etc.]’), Rom.T. bašado ‘violinist’ and . Rom.S. bàši-moš ‘gårdsmusikant; an itinerant musician(?)’; and there is Rom.S. ghildo ‘fest, party’ (with spontaneous aspiration of the first stop, but apparently fading of the original meaning). Several of these words are compounds with a second element “ -do”. The first element of the Ind. word is related to Ind. g l, Šat.. g li and Sv. g
li all ‘song’ and which are < OIA g ti- ‘singing’ (4168). According to Turner the Dard forms have an extension -l-, but this is untenable because of the final high front vowel in Šat.. and Sv., and because it would mean that the considerable number of words e.g. found in Indus Kohistani with -l- going back to a dental stop would all be borrowings from an unknown Dard language. In any case, this word is also the background of the Rom.S. form ghildo translated as ‘fest, party’. This, however, cannot be the original meaning which must have been ‘musician’. Compare the designation Ghilabari (cf. above Bng. gitv¯ ar/git¯ ori) for a Roma group living in Romania who are professional musicians (Berger [1985: 779]); their name corresponds to that of the South European Gitanes, which also means ‘musicians’ and Ghilabari has the same second element as the above Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı form with derivation < OIA bh¯ arayati. The aspiration in ghildo and in Ghilabari is either spontaneous with correspondences in West Pah¯ ar.¯ı Chinali ghit ‘song’ and ghit¯ aru ‘singer’, and in Pangw¯ ˙ al¯ı gh¯ıt ‘song’ (but note also Ku. gaha n

‘to sing’ [Paliwal 1985: 373]) or it shows aspiration fronting in case of Ghilabari, or it is due to contamination with OIA ga
th a- ‘song’ (4126) with which compare Kal. ghõ. ‘song, ballad, folk-song’. Turner quotes also Rom.Syr. gref and asks “whence f ?” 72 Unclear whether here related also Rab. “gidal” ‘singer’ (Roy [2011: 74]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

578

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

Compare this, however, with Rom.N. jili and jilipa, and Rom.S. gijepa all ‘song’ where two of them employ the well-known suffix -(i)pa. The first element of the first Rom. word basaldo probably contains a -l- transitive/causative grammeme and is cognate with Rom. basel ‘to bark, roar, howl’ which is < OIA va

syate ‘roars, howls’ (11589) (Pa., Pk.) (see also Metzger bašalel ‘to play [an instrument]’). Modern reflexes of OIA va

syate are limited to Nuristani, Dardic, West Pah¯ ar.¯ı, Kumaoni, Nep¯ ali and Gujarati. The second element derives < OIA d
adh ati ‘places, lays on, gives, seizes’ (6145) (also ‘accepts’), but regarding the exact meaning one needs to consider the meanings given for the precursor PIE *dheh1 -, namely ‘to put, lay down, sit down, produce, make, speak, say, bring back’.73 OIA d
adh ati has (almost) exclusively survived in Nuristani and Dardic – namely in Pr., Tir., Paš., Kal., Tor., Sh., Wg., while Ind. diyᘠv ‘to beat s.o.’ is to be added to this list – whereas in the other Indo-Aryan languages it got lost due to the very similar OIA d
ad ati ‘gives’ (6141).74 However, additional information gives us Ind. g lma r ‘singer’ whose second component comes from Ind. m ar
2v  ‘to kill’ < OIA m ar
ayati1 ‘kills’ (10066) which also means e.g. in Hindi m¯ arn¯ a ‘to perform an action with vigour’.75 So the underlying meaning of gildo , geldeo, ghildo and g lma r is something like ‘one who produces/belts out/performs a song’. All quoted evidence makes it clear that we are dealing here with a very old compound. And indeed, the compound has a striking parallel compound building in the Celtic word ‘bard’ which goes back to PIE *g𝑤 rh2  dℎ h1 -o- ‘praise-maker’ (West [2007: 27]). Whereas the first components of the above compounds obviously have several different words associated with ‘song’ (in case of the Celtic word it is ‘praise’, in case of the Indic words it is ‘sing’), it is remarkable that the second component in the PIE reconstruction is exactly the same verb which we identified above: PIE *dheh1 - ‘put, place’. Of course I am not in a position to say whether we deal here with a common Indo-European heritage or whether this is a matter of two independent developments at the two ends of the Indo-European world. Notes: (a) Kal. ghõ.dróv ‘singer’ also belongs here but has a somewhat different morphology: as already indicated above, the first syllable goes back to OIA ga
th a- with aspiration fronting and with retroflexion of vowel probably preserving a trace of the deleted dental stop – -dró- < *dh¯ atro < OIA dh¯ atár ‘maker, arranger’ etc. (regarding morphology cf. e.g. Pal. h am atro
‘son-in-law’) – (ó)v Kal. agent suffix. (b) There is P¯ ad.. g¯ıl˘er hor n¯ ac˙ n.˘er hak xuin.¯ı ‘a sound was heard of singing and of dancing’ (LSI [ix, iv: 912]) where g¯ıl- seems to match the above Ind. forms; in fact, it is the only West Pah¯ ar.¯ı parallel (involving a change of t > l) I have come across so far. (c) There is Dara. ro ‘song’ and roda ‘singer’. The word ro derives < OIA ráva-1 ‘roar, cry’ (10641) and parallels semantically Bshk. r¯ o ‘song’, Or. rua ‘recitation of a long prayer’, Old G. rava ‘song’. The agent ending -da may be the same as 73 A borrowing from Iranian cannot perhaps be ruled out; cf. Proto-Iranian *daH6 ? ‘to beat, hit, strike’ (Cheung [2007: 48]) which is semantically quite fitting. But the problem is that there are to my knowledge no modern reflexes of this Iranian verb in Dardic. 74 It may also have survived in Bng. dO ‘agreed, OK’ and with emphatic suffix dei ‘just a moment! wait a moment!’. 75 It seems that the Ind. word g lm ar has parallels in Bur. gaim
aal and Sh. gayam
al ‘singer’ but that is not quite clear.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

579

above, but I am not sure. 445. Bng. ginaulO n.m. ‘mistletoe’ < OIA lex. gandhaphala- “having a fragrant fruit”? But mistletoes do not smell. 446. Rj.mal. gir¯ asiyo ‘freebooter’. The Girasis of Rajasthan and Gujarat were formerly known for their predatory habits (see the story in LSI [ix,ii: 254ff.]); connection with OIA GRAS ‘swallow’, cf. grasta- ‘seized’ and Kal.urt grhas ‘wolf’ (4362)? However, similar-meaning M. mav¯ aś¯ı ‘a brigand’, mav¯ as ‘a freebooter’ is based on ← Ar. mav¯ aś¯ı ‘cattle’ and there is same semantic variation in OIA pin.d.a ¯ra- ‘cowherd’ but G. pdh arO

‘freebooter’ (8172). 447. Ko. girboji ‘sparrow’ cf. OIA lex. grhabalibuj- ‘a sparrow’ (lit. ‘enjoying domestic oblations’) which looks like creation of a wordsmith, but there is also Pk. (Deś.) gharaghan.t.ao m. ‘sparrow’ and gh¯ ar¯ı ‘hen-sparrow’. The Pk. word is clearly a compound with -ghan.t.ao reflected in Garh. ghen.d.r.u, ghen.d.v¯ a ‘a male sparrow’. Notes: (a) Here perhaps also Sant. ghar.va ‘the sparrow (Passer Indicus). (b) It is unclear whether here also Bur. gin.d.ávar c.hin ‘a type of bird’ is related with first word ‘Elaeagnos angustifolia’ (a type of silverberry) < OIA gun.d.a‘Scirpus kysoor’ (4199). Holst (2017: 166) proposes equation of Bur. *c.in ‘bird’ with Kartvelian prin- ‘bird’ which appears quite possible. 448. Bng. girnO1 adj.;n.m. ‘twirled, twiddled; twirled bark (for making cords), a cord’, Bhal. dlunO ‘a rope of hemp; the thread or rope holding the beam of a balance’. According


Lak qac ˙ . ‘bite; mouth’ (Bengston [2008]). 450. P¯ ad.. and Sir.d.od.. gujru ‘apricot’, Bhad. guér o ‘raw apricot’ — Bur. juróot.i ‘unripe apricot’, note also Bur.ys. .juú ‘apricots’ and with same meaning Dm. žuž¯ ui, Gaw. žüžor.¯ı, žüžor.¯ı and Sh.koh. (RSup) žo"r¯ ot.o ; Kal. ˇȷáˇȷey ‘apricot tree bearing fruit with edible pits’ (see ATLAS 1 for some more forms). It is unclear whether these forms are cognate with the ‘apricot’ words found on p. 764. 451. Bng. poet. gurkO2 n.m. ‘a tiny bit’. An ex. from the PAN:


surj raza ki n@z@r pOri goi,

goO eka gurkO
sagE kE lagi

GEN POP.F gaze fall go.PP.F sun king

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

580

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

just-one tiny-bit throat at attach go.PP.M.SG ‘the glance of the Sun King fell (on Kunt¯ı), just one tiny bit (of the glance) stuck (to her) throat’[124] Bng. poet. gurkO2 is cognate with Bng. gurmO n.m. ‘pimple; small scraped together

O suffix) which has a parallel in P. gurumm ‘hard swelling on the neck heap’ (with -m . from carrying heavy burdens’ (for the homonym of this form see p. 1017). The Bng. words correspond only partly semantically with OIA gad.u- ‘an excrescence on the neck (goitre or bronchocele); Auswuchs, Buckel’ (3977), whereas the quoted P. word fits semantically with 3977 but morphologically with Bng. gurmO.

452. Garh. gumn.a ¯t. ‘humming or buzzing sound of bees and bumblebees’ cf. OIA gum ‘imitation of the humming of bees’, Garh. ghamn.a ¯t. ‘sound of bell hanging on the neck of a buffalo’ cf. OIA ghamagham¯ arava- ‘a rattling noise’ plus *nat.ati ‘trembles, totters’ (6934). There is a strong onomatopoeic background. 453. Garh. gurau and Jaun. gurau ‘snake’ — cf. Pal. ghroók ‘worm’ for which Liljegren and Haider suggest derivation < OIA (Suśr.) gavedhuka- ‘a kind of snake’ (4104) (but see above Garh. gaggu), but this is doubtful because of the alveolar approximant, and therefore perhaps rather derivation < OIA (Suśr.) gaur¯ ahika- ‘a kind of serpent’. 454. Rp. gurmut.i ‘name of a certain star cluster’ with -mut.i < OIA must
- ‘handful’

(10221)76 corresponds exactly with Bur. gúre c˙ hal “heap pf wheat’ a constellation; 77 ‘Weizenhaufen’ ein Sternbild’ which is built with Bur. gur ‘wheat’ and c˙ hal ‘heap (especially of grain)’ and which must designate the Pleiades because of the Bur. synonym haríe c˙ hal ‘Pleiades’ with first word meaning ‘barley’78 ; Garh. gurmul.¯ı ‘krtik a  naksatra – Pleiades’.79 Bur. gur ‘wheat’, obviously reflected in Rp. and Garh., seems

a wanderwort and has perhaps further parallels in Arm. gari ‘barley’ which to be Hrach Martirosyan (2008: 186), while offering various PIE reconstructions, equates with Basque gari ‘wheat’, garagar ‘barley’ and considers further North Caucasian parallels (see also Martirosyan [2013: 117] where he only reconstructs PIE *gh r¯ı(dh ) ‘barley’ and does not mention Basque).80 In the section on Pleiades (pp. 605ff.), he discusses the Arm. term xek"-bazük’ ‘Orion and Pleiades’: the component bazük’ is cognate with Arm. bazum ‘many’, which must be a loan from an unattested Middle Ir. form. Martirosyan concludes (p. 606): “Thus, *bazuk ‘Pleiades’ (< ‘many’) is an old dialectal word preserved in. . . ” several Armenian dialects, and (ibid.) “[t]o my knowledge, no Iranian forms (neither with m nor with k suffixal elements) meaning ‘Pleiades’ have been mentioned in connection with the Armenian forms.” Discussing 76 The word -must
- at the end of a compound signifying a ‘cluster, collection’ as in N. june-mut ˙ . he ‘a

moustache’ and may also be found in H. jhurmut ‘dense crowd, large gathering; man with a large . dense undergrowth, a thicket’ with first syllable perhaps < OIA jh¯ at.a- (5362) ‘forest, arbour’. If the H. word is related with -must
- it must be a borrowing because of regular H. m¯ ut.h ‘fist’

with aspiration; that the word is indeed a borrowing is also suggested by t. > r, which is not normal Hindi but found in another borrowing H. d.an.d.(a)har¯ a ‘door handle’ discussed p. 499. The Rp. word is probably just accidentally similar with OIA g(u)rumus.t.i- ‘great handful’ which was typically used in darbha-gurumus.t.i- ‘great handful of sacrificial grass’ (MW). 77 West (2007: 352) mentions the Latin name for Ursa maior as Septentriones and he explains: “Triones were oxen, originally, it would seem, threshing oxen, who plodded round in a circle trampling the corn or turning a mill-wheel. . . ” Whether this image once was associated with the Pleiades as a heap of wheat is, however, not known. 78 Burushaski harí ‘barley’ is most likely cognate with Georgian-Svan *ker-i ‘barley’ (Holms [2017: 130]). 79 Garh. m¯ u.li ‘small boy’ (discussed p. 843) cannot be here the second element. 80 But see also Witzel [2009b: 80f.] on the complex history of related ‘wheat’ words.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

581

further possible semantic parallels, he arrives at the conclusion (ibid.) that “we are dealing with the same semantic development: ‘multitude, mass’ > ‘Pleiades’.” In order to see the affinity with further parallels, the semantics of ‘multitude, mass’ has to be extended to ‘multitude, mass, heap, quantity’. A first example for this is found in Nuristani Kati l¯ at.úk ‘Pleiades’ < OIA *lut.t.a-2 ‘lump’ (11077) whose modern reflexes have meanings like ‘heap or bundle of grass’. The Armenian forms based on the Iranian borrowing are further cognate with OIA bahú- ‘much, many’ (as pointed out by Martirosyan [p. 605]) which is the basis for OIA bahul¯ a- ‘the Pleiades’ (9195). The lemma has no Pa. or Pk. reflexes, and modern reflexes are only found in Kal. (but there b"ahul is probably a tatsama because there is also H. bahul ‘born under the Pleiades’ and bahul¯ a ‘Pleiades’), Kho., Sh., all meaning ‘Pleiades’, to which I add Ind. bo
l ‘morning star’ (lit. or originally ‘the thick one’), also Wg. bul ‘morning star’, and ´ bulic., buliwk´ ‘the Pleiades’ (Mann [1963: 43]).81 A parallel to the latter Arm. bujlk, is found in Kamd. (Strand) ř"uc buli ř¯ ašto and Kt. řuč buli što both ‘morning star’ (lit. ‘morning-thick-(bright)star’ [10833, 9194, 13713]). Thus, the semantics of Kamd., Kt. and Ind. reflect the semantic transition from ‘large, thick’ to ‘Pleiades’. There is also Dardic Gaw. b¯ ovul ‘n. of a constellation consisting of five stars (Kho. b¯ ol)’. Morgenstierne’s equation with the Kho. word is phonologically not possible, therefore I suggest for the Gaw. word derivation < OIA *bahu-pula- or *bahula-pula- with second component probably meaning – parallel with Kt. – ‘lump, pile, heap, bunch’ and for which cf. OIA Dh¯ atup. PUL ‘be piled or heaped up’ and pul¯ı- ‘a bunch’, and lex. trna-p ula- ‘a tuft of grass’.82 And there is also Gau. bul¯ aš2 ‘Pleiades’ for which I want  suggest a preciser derivation than before (Zoller 2005) namely < OIA *bahula-r¯ to aśi‘thick heap’. Notes: (a) There is AVP may¯ ara- translated by Lubotsky as ‘grain-basket’ (2010: 55). He espouses this meaning by pointing to AVP 19.38.13, where one of the Pleiades (k
rttik a-) is called may¯arak¯ ar¯ı- ‘may¯ ara-maker’ which “. . . thus must be a ‘wo intertwined object, like a wicker-basket.” Lubotsky is certainly right in ven,’ suggesting that the AVP word is the same as OIA lex. mar¯ ara- ‘corn-loft, granary’ and Vedic mar¯ aya- which Mayrhofer (EWA) translates as ‘a type of measure of capacity’ but the older meaning is ‘grist, (heap of) grain’. Both authors refer to Ingrid Eichner-Kühn (1976) who, however, had suggested only the meaning ‘grist, (heap of) grain’. It seems that Mayrhofer, pace Lubotsky, is correct in postulating an earlier and a later meaning. The earlier meaning ‘(heap of) grain’ fits well with above ‘heap of wheat’ etc. meanings for the Pleiades, thus suggesting that may¯ arak¯ ar¯ı- actually means ‘heap-of-grain-maker’. Regarding a later meaning ‘basket’, note first that Lubotsky does not accept an IE origin for may¯ ara- but instead suggests borrowing from an indigenous Indian language. In fact, the word is apparently reflected in Munda Sora mOrOj ‘bamboo basket, basket used as a measure’ and perhaps also Jurai mOrOñ ‘bamboo basket used as a measure’. Since there seem to be no further parallels in Mon-Khmer and since the two Munda words do not show any specific Austro-Asiatic features, they may 81 Regarding transliteration see op. cit. p. xxiii. 82 Alternatively, note also Martirosyan’s reconstruction (2010: 12f., 2013: 92) PIE *plh1 u- ‘Pleiades’   (← PIE *pelh1 - ‘fill’), Armenian alaw(s)unk’ ‘Pleiades’, New Pers. parv¯ın ‘Pleiades’, Greek Π𝜆𝜀 𝑎´ 𝛿 𝜀𝜁 , OIA purú- ‘much, abundant’. Relationship of this Greek word with slightly different Greek Π 𝜀𝜆𝜀 𝑎´ 𝛿 𝜀𝜁 ‘doves’ (the Pleiades after being transformed by Zeus).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

582

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

be, like OIA may¯ ara-, borrowings from an unknown north Indian language. (b) Sub Gaw. b¯ ovul Morgenstierne refers to kat.ak ‘name of a constellation’ and Dm. ‘army’. However, these are homonyms. For meaning ‘army’ see further parallels on p. 562, but the name of the constellation derives < OIA k
rttik ai ‘the ‘the Pleiades’ (3427) (Pa., Pk.) with a close phonetic parallel in Bng. kit . Pleiades’. (c) Another apparently old star name is Ind. cak2y ‘name of a constellation of

three stars; scales’ (ca ‘three’) which derives somehow < OIA *traikya- ‘group of

three’ (6047) and may refer either to Libra or to Orion’s belt; related Mult. and Kgr. trangar ˙ . means, according to O’Brien and Wilson (1899a), ‘Orion’ and literally ‘fork’; here also P. tarangar ˙ . ‘Orion’s belt’ (T. Graham Bailey [1938: 251]). Morpho-semantically it can be compared with OIA tis.yà- ‘name of a fixed star or asterism’ and Av. tištriia- designation of Sirius in the sense of ‘belonging to the Three Stars’ i.e. ‘Orion’s belt’, with M. trik¯ an.d.y¯ a ‘belt of Orion’ (three arrows of Shiva) and probably with Pr. t¯ or ‘a constellation with 3 stars (belt-stars of Orion?)’ which, however, must be a borrowing from another language. (d) I assume that the formations with gur- are very old since they are only found in the northwestern branch with gur- ‘wheat’ probably being an ancient and widely found word. Also old are formations deriving < OIA bahul¯ a- as the modern reflexes are limited to Dardic and Armenian. Modern reflexes of k
rttik a view, are found in S., M., P., Si., i.e. more south-east from the Dardic point of but also in Gaw. The origin of k
rttik a- is not really clear, but Mayrhofer (EWA) refers to suggestions of a basicmeaning *‘mesh; Geflecht’. This fits well with a number of the above meanings, and instead of characterizing bahul¯ a- as ‘another Indo-Aryan perception. . . ’83 I rather suggest to see in the forms discussed above yet another case of ‘calques’ (see p. 222). This is also corroborated by the following H. words: jhumk¯ a ‘Charles’s Wain, Ursa Maior; the Pleiades’ lit. ‘a bunch or cluster (of flowers or fruit); a tuft, a tassel; the bell-shaped pendant (of an ear-ring); the passion-flower; the flower Gloriosa superba’ < OIA *jhumma‘crowd, cluster’ (5404); kacpaciy¯ a ‘the Pleiades’ (Brj.-Aw. kacpacinh ‘ditto’) but lit. ‘crowded together’ as in H. kac¯ akac ‘densely crowded’ < OIA *kacc-2 ‘crush, press’ (2611); gicpiciy¯ a ‘the Pleiades’ < OIA *gicc- ‘press, crowd’ (4153), and gucch¯ a t¯ ar¯ a lit. ‘cluster stars’. (e) ‘Cluster’ is more abstract than ‘heap of wheat’ and it is well-known that the various zodiac signs are associated with a great number of myths which frequently are strikingly similar around the world. This holds true also for the Pleiades. Lewis Spence notes (1921: 140): “Ideas of the Pleiades as heaps of grain, swarms of small animals, birds, bees, kids, or groups of people playing, are universal.” He gives examples from South America to which I add some stray examples from Eurasia which are far from being comprehensive and here given without quoting all literature: H. (gagan. ke) bacce v¯ al¯ı murg¯ı ‘Pleiades’ lit. ‘the hen and chicken (of the sky)’ (cf. above Pleiades meaning ‘doves’). In Norse mythology they were Freyja’s hens, and according to Jacob Grimm (1835: 419), the image of the hen with the seven chicken as the Pleiades is also known in Germany and other European countries. In Ukrainian folklore the Pleiades are known as ‘granary’, ‘storehouse for hay and crops’, etc. (f) For the importance of the Pleiades (when the sun is in this mansion at vernal 83 Mayrhofer: “. . . eine andere indoar. Vorstellung.”

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

583

equinox and the moon at autumn equinox) in an old controversy regarding the age of the Rg-veda see a summary in Bryant (2001: 251ff.). Additional informa topic is found in Parpola (2015: 198). tion on this (g) The considerable number of different words for the Pleiades hints at the importance which must have been accorded to this star constellation in the northwest of South Asia over a very long time. There is indeed evidence for this: Rahman Akbar Khan Rahmat describes in his article “An account of the movements of the sun and the Pleiades in Chitrali tradition” (1996) a complex tradition in Chitral with the Pleiades as core factor in astrological, agricultural and other matters. For instance, the Pleiades influence the characters of different days which, in turn, affect various activities; they influence the sequence of the months and agricultural and domestic activities connected with specific months etc. 455. Bng., Khaśdh., Baur. g uzO ‘moustache’, Deog. g uzO or g uja < OIA gocch a- ‘furrow of upper lip’ (4269) (Pk.) with modern parallels almost only in the northwest: Ash., Kt., Wg., Gaw., Sav., K., to which I add Ora. mait¯ a gocc¯ o ‘moustache’, Rom.Arm. konč, kön´ g, g ue nc ‘beard’ and probably New. gv¯ ac- ‘moustache’. An ex. from Bng. which is a typical threatening expression used by female bards during a quarrel:

t eri da ri dO u g uzE kullu

burn.PR.1.SG moustache.OBL singe.PR.1.SG your beard ‘I burn your beard and singe your moustache’ 456. For Bshk. g¯ ut ‘excrement’ Turner postulates OIA *g¯ uttha- as side-form of OIA g¯ utha‘excrement’ (4225). The Bshk. form has parallels in Bhat.. g
ut^ ‘feces’, in Klm. g¯ ut H(L) ‘feces’, in the Klm. variant of Kukinel gabuth , in Ush. and Thal. guth , in R¯ aj. and Kalk. gu;t, and in Tor. Guth and Tor.cail. ghud ‘feces’ (with fronted aspiration) and Guth . Given the fact that in relatively nearby Iranian Shughni the medial consonant has not disappeared – it has also not disappeared in Iranian loanwords in Brahui (cf. e.g. x¯ed ‘perspiration’ or patan ‘wide, broad’)84 – I think that the above forms should be seen in this context and are thus yet other examples for recurrent survival of a medial stop in Outer Languages. Cf. also Bur. gutó, ˙ qutó ‘a stinky worm; a stinking (‘ekelhafte’) person’ (for which Čašule [2010: 35] suggests a direct PIE derivation) and Shgh. GaD ‘human excrements’ < *g uD a-, Av. g uDa-. Note: The lemma is also part of a fairly widespread expression for ‘earwax’ in the northwest: OIA karn.a-g¯ utha- ‘earwax’ but literally ‘ear-shit’ is reflected in Bng. kOn@g u, Ku. kang¯ u, Garh. kan¯ ag¯ u and Kho. k2r-g ulu all ‘earwax’ (in other modern languages the meaning is frequently expressed as literally ‘ear-dirt’); this lemma correlates morphologically and semantically with Iranian Yid. G ui-kis"G o ‘earwax’, and CDIAL 4225 appears also reduplicated in Brj. ghughu ‘earwax’. 457. Kh¯ aśi. get¯ ar, Bhad. git¯ aru, Chin. ghit¯ aru, Bhad. git¯ aru, Jaun. g¯ı¯ ar¯ı and Ku. gid¯ ari all ‘singer’ go back to OIA *g¯ıtak¯ aru- lit. ‘song artist’ (see 4167, 3066). The present forms appear to be an example of permanent semantic-morphological recreations (p. 224). 84 But it disappeared in other Iranian languages of the region.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

584

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

458. Khaś., Marm., Śeu. gelhori, g@lhori, Low Rudh. g@lhora all ‘cheek’ — Ind. m u2 y




i harg2yl ‘cheek’ (with m u2 y genitive of mu  ‘cheek’ < OIA múkha- ‘mouth, face’ [10158]), Tor. bogùl ‘cheek’. The forms contain a component which is < OIA galla‘cheek’ (4089). Since there is Sh. häróm ‘cheek’, this shows that Khaś. etc. gelhori and Ind. . . . harg2yli are synonym compounds with the other component of unknown origin. Note: There are the similar forms Kal. kál.i ‘cheek’, Paš.DN. kalav¯ an.t.ek ‘cheek’ (Lehr 2014: 99), Brah. kalik ‘cheek’ and Bal. kalak ‘cheek of animals’ which are, however, rather related with Pers. kala ‘the face or cheek’. 459. Bng. genz ur n.f. ‘a thick belly’ < OIA *ghana-jat.hara- ‘thick belly’ with loss of -t.hdue to syllable reduction. The OIA lemma, which is not found in the CDIAL seems to have one more modern reflex in Pang. jar¯ ot.¯ı ‘debauchery’ with metathesis if not < OIA jarat.ha- ‘old’. 460. Ki˜ ut.h. g¯e postp. ‘to’ as in ma -g e ‘to me’ (LSI [ix, iv: 579, 590]), Man.d.. t˘es-g¯e ‘to him’ — Ind. g
e ‘near, beside, to’ as in b ach a sa z ada-g e
-g a ‘the king came to the prince’ for which I suggested derivation < OIA gehá- ‘house’ (4251). 461. Bng. g er n.f. ‘vulva, womb’, Garh. ger n.m. ‘(protuberant) belly, womb, abdomen’ < OIA gad.d.uka- ‘waterpot, vessel for boiled rice’ (3984) where Turner quotes dialectal Paš. garu
‘belly’ ? But Bng. tone is inexplicable and change of -d.d.- > -r- is untypical for Bng. and Garh. 462. Ko.S. gEne ‘span’ < OIA (MBh. etc.) gokarn.a- ‘the span from the tip of the thumb to

ring finger’. that of the 463. Bhil.wag. goam ‘herd’ < OIA gorambha- *‘a lowing of cattle’ (4311) (with loss of -r-) with one modern parallel in Si. 464. Kal. goč párik ‘to go searching for something’ (with párik ‘to go’)) as in ábi pútra hátya ˇȷa goč párik day ‘we are going to look for a wife for our son’ is cognate with OIA gocara- not in the sense of ‘pasture ground’ but with the meaning of ‘(within) the range of the eye’ (cf. OIA locana-gocaram a- ‘to come within range of the eye’). . y¯ The morphology and semantics of the noun is comparable with gaves.a- ‘seeking for’. 465. Bng. goda uthO n.m. ‘kind of falcon or similar raptor’ (with - uthO probably < OIA



uparistha- ‘standing above’) — K. go th ‘kite, falcon, vulture’ — B.chit. gùn.t.i ‘paper

kite’, B.roh. gón.d.i ‘kite’ — perhaps also Ko. gon. ‘kite’. The words may reflect an older semantics of OIA *gud.d.a- ‘doll, effigy’ (4189) (regarding the Ko. form see Kt.g. gh` vn.d.i ‘doll’) reconstructed by Turner on the basis of the modern meaning ‘doll’ which is found in various NIAs besides this meaning: L. gud.d..ı ‘paper kite’; P. gud.d.a ¯ ‘large paper kite’; Or. gur.¯ı ‘paper kite’; H. gud.d.¯ı ‘paper kite’. These words may themselves have a Munda (and Mon-Khmer) background, cf. Proto-Kherwarian *kur.id ‘kite’ and e.g. Juang kEïãElaN ‘kite’. 466. Bng. gornO ‘to beat s.o. up; enchase (metal pots); hold or keep together; tighten’
Bng. c˙ , e.g. c OrinO ‘to fade or dwindle away, become extinct (e.g., a family)’ < OIA ks.árati ‘perishes’ (3663). Note: OIA ks.áya- is also contained – however with ks.- reflected as -kh- – in Bng. poet. jOkhi an, jOkhi an, jOkhiani n.m. ‘(way or location) towards the underworld’ < OIA yamaks.aya- ‘Yama’s abode’ with the ending in analogy to Bng. tith¯ an ‘burning place, way or a place towards the residency of the god of the dead’ (p. 615); note also OIA ks.áya- ‘the house of Yama, god of death’ and Bng. jOra ‘Yama, god of the dead’ < OIA yamar¯ aja- ‘king Yama’ (10425) (perhaps only an outer language word) and jim raza n.m. ‘Yama, god of the dead’ (cf. Zoller [2018b: 232, fn. 174]).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

588

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

495. Bng. c OlOndO, c Oli u ‘characterless, not trustworthy’ (with -OndO and -i u participles) <

OIA *c¯ a la-1 ‘moving’ (4768) with semantically similar modern reflexes in M. and Si. to which can be added P. c¯ al caln¯ a ‘to deceive, to cheat, to trick’, Kal. čal kárik ‘to trick s.o.’, and many more parallels. Additional parallels are also found sub OIA *caly¯ a‘gait, conduct’ (4722), which is reflected in Bng. c˙ a ¯l n.f. ‘conspiration; movement’ but cf. also Bng. c elO n.m. ‘wave, movement or upsurge (of emotion)’, but the OIA forms meaning ‘moving; conduct’ are either influenced by or sideforms of OIA chala-1 ‘fraud, deceit’. Regarding the second meaning ‘hair’ of *c¯ ala-1 see above p. 374. 496. Bng. c aitO ‘painful; difficult’ and c˙ a ¯it n.f. ‘pain, hardship’ (with -tO1 and -t suffixes) < OIA ks.atá-1 ‘wounded’ (3645) (Pa., Pk.) and ks.ati- ‘injury, damage’ (3646) with modern affricate reflexes of OIA ks.- only in Ash., Wg., Kho., Sh., otherwise kh-. 497. Bng. poet. (PAN) c˙ auri adj.f. ‘shrewd, clever’ < OIA caturá-1 ‘clever’ (4594) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Si. 498. Bng. c˙ a˙c¯er. n.m. ‘cockroach’; ‘name of a bird’ (both meanings may be related because of the assumed onomatopoeic background as suggested, e.g. in EWA, for OIA [RV] cicciká- ‘a kind of bird’, cf. also ODBL § 179), c ha cO n.m. ‘type of mosquito’; P. cicar. ‘tick’, cicr.¯ı ‘small tick’ — Paš. čäčá ‘name of a small bird’; Kho. čač ‘ditto’ (Morgenstierne [1973a: 42]). 499. Bng. c arnO3 ‘to gild or gold-plate (as goldsmith), beautify, make shining’ as in sunO c arnO ‘to gild (with) gold’ < OIA ca
ru- ‘agreeable; beloved, beautiful’ (4766) (Pa.,

and lex. ‘splendour’ with a modern parallel in Si. The word is different from the Pk.) homonym meaning ‘to graze’. 500. Sir.d.od.. c˙ a ¯t. and Chin. tr¯ at.h both ‘wooden tub for flour kneading’ — Ind. ch
2th ‘a

wooden trough filled with water in a smithy into which glowing iron is put; a feeding bowl’. There must be a connection with OIA *cas.t.ra- ‘feeding trough’ (4729) which appears in P. cat.t.h¯ a- ‘watering trough for cattle’, but the initial consonant cluster in Chin. is inexplicable as well as the different affricates. But at least the quoted words show that Turner’s suggestion to connect this lemma with OIA CAKS.2 ‘taste’ is untenable. 501. Bng. c˙ ia˜ u n.m., Him. c˜eu ˜ ‘the edible mushroom’, Garh. cyu  and shamanic language of Western Nepal (Maskarinec [1998 index]) cy¯ au, Dari. cevo all ‘mushroom’ < ¯ OIA *ciy¯ aku- ‘fungus’ (4823, 14495) with an apparent parallel in OIA (Ap) ky¯ aku‘mushroom’ and other modern parallels in N. and Him. Here also Yid. c˙ igyerë ‘mushroom’ ? 502. Bng. c irOnti n.f. ‘a term of abuse meaning: ‘gluttonous daughter” usually in teri c irOnti



‘your gluttonous daughter’ — Brj. ciran.t.¯ı ‘sayAn¯ı lar.k¯ı jo pit¯ a ke ghar rahe – a cunning girl staying in her parent’s home’ (Brajbh¯ as.a ¯ S¯ urko)ś) — K. carand ‘a woman who

control waxes after maturity resides in her father’s house, and owing to her being from fat and wanton’ < OIA (lex. and Kath¯ as.!) cirant  ‘a woman married or single who

after maturity resides in her father’s house’. 503. Bng. poet. c˙ uat.u n.m. ‘red rice’ (mentioned in the PAN as an ingredient of a dumpling [pin.d.a] used in a śr¯ addha ceremony for the manes) and c ulO3 n.m. ‘rice or wheat (with magical qualities) that is brought into the temple of God Mah¯ asu by a person who has been robbed in order to send d¯ oś ‘divine punishing power’ upon the thief’ < OIA (VS etc.) caru- ‘an oblation (of rice, barley and pulse) boiled with butter and milk for presentation to the gods or manes’ via older Bng. *˙caru-at.u and *c aru-lO with loss of -r- either due to the general -r- deletion trend in the northwest or due to syllable reductions.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

589

504. Bng. c ukO n.m. ‘bellyache (after carrying heavy load with empty stomach)’ (it is treated with some indigenous medicine), K. c˙ uku ‘the light burning pain caused (e.g.) by contact with a spark; the mark caused by such a burn; the burning sensation caused by eating something pungent; loving sympathy’ < OIA Dh¯ atup. cukkáyati ‘inflicts or suffers pain’ (4849) with a questionable modern parallel in Phal. 505. The following three closely related lemmata are morphologically differentiated by c˙ ha(r)-/˙chi(r)- and cha(r)-/chi(r)-/chu(r)- versus c˙ a(r)-/˙ci(r)-˙cu(r)-- and ca(r)-/cu(r)versus śa(r)- and s.i(r)-, thus reflecting three originally closely related allomorphs of one common macro lemma with clear Austro-Asiatic ‘cognates’ as suggested by PMK *[c]rOk ‘to drip’:85 (a) Bng. and Deog. c hOr- chOr ‘dripping, sound of raindrops’ and verbal Bng. c hirpirAnO

drizzle

(as

and Deog. c hirbiraOnO ‘to continuously’ and perhaps Bng. chirmirO ‘shallow

Pah¯

ar¯ı chir- ‘to drip (grain etc.)’, Ku. chanchan ‘sound

of rain’, N. water)’, Central . . . churra ‘the sound of splashing water’, and chalchali and chulukka in ch. . . mutnu ‘to micturate through fear’ (with verb mutnu < OIA m¯ utráyati ‘urinates’ [10238]) — Ind. c h
2r- ch2r ‘sound of raindrops dripping from the gutter’, Bur. c˙ har man´- ‘to drip, squirt’, c˙ há˙char man´- ‘to trickle’ and c˙ hú˙chur man´- ‘to trickle lightly (rain)’,86 Sh. c˙ har ‘ditto’, Gau. c˙ hvir ‘drop’, Kal. c˙ hir˙charék ‘to rain lightly, sprinkle, drizzle’, Pr. o˙cur-, vu˙cur- ‘spritzen’ — Bun. c˙ ir˙cir ‘drizzle’ — Sant. cOrO ‘urinate’ and cOrO cOrO ‘sound of falling, passing water’ and char char ‘with a splashing sound’. Perhaps cognate with OIA *ks.ar¯ a- ‘melting away; cloud; water’ (3662) (cf. loc. cit. K. char ‘a sprinkle of water etc. from the fingers’). However, the words may also be related with OIA *jhat.ati ‘falls’ (5328) e.g. L. jhar.an. ‘to drip, ooze’; and note Deś. (116,5) ciricir¯ a tath¯ a cirim ara. Here probably also Munda ȷıbır ȷıbır, ȷhıbır ȷhıbır . cira jaladh¯ ‘to drizzle’ which resembles Deog. c hirbiraOnO.

c

urk

OnO or c u (b) Bng. c˙ ur-˙cur or c˙ ur.-˙cur. and Deog. rnO all ‘sound of leaking water’,



and Bng. c˙ ur.ku n.m. ‘drop of water’, Rudh. " cruci ‘continuous but gentle trickling or oozing of water’ and cu"ruru ‘a perennial spring’, Ku. cur En and Garh. cur¯ an. ‘bad smell of urine’ (with second syllable < OIA ghr ana
- ‘smelling’ [4531]) — Rp. cy˜ uku

A. sirika (cirik¯ ‘urine’, Bun. c˙ ir˙cir ‘drizzle’ — N. culculi ‘pissing’ — a) ‘drizzle’ — Wkh. čur x ˘ak ‘to urinate as baby’ — Ind. cu
rcur kar
2v  ‘to urinate’,87 Bur. ćar ‘to pour’ and ćurućurúu ét- ‘to pee’, Kal. čuru.ék ‘to drain off, wring out’ and čuru.ík ‘to leak in a steady stream’, Kho. c˙ rax"ey- ‘drizzle’, Kamd. c˙ uň"i oa ‘urine’ (with "oa ‘water’) and c."ař č¯ apa ‘make the sound of urinating’ (note c˙ - versus c.-); also Bal. čurro and Brah. čurr¯ o ‘urine’ and cf. Psht. čur ‘a furrow or ravine made by running water; a channel; a gutter’. Cf. also Sant. sarsar which also expresses ‘watery’ sounds and which is certainly cognate with Katuic Ngeq carcEr ‘to drip (as water chute end of the rain trough)’, Bahnaric Mnong cre:t cre:t ‘drip out little by little’, Khmu cèr ‘to drip’, Monic Nyah Kur cr´ 7h-cr´ 7h ‘(dripping) continuously (of a liquid)’. (c) Bng. and Deog.
sOr-
sOr ‘pitter-patter (rain)’, Deog. also
sor-
sor ‘sound of a mountain river’, Ku. śãn.śãn. ‘sound of rain’, Pat.t..
s@ru ‘incessant rain’, Bng.
sOrkanO ‘to hose

urine, milk a cow with force’ (with intensive -k- suffix) — Ind. s2
r-s2r ‘pitter-patter 85 Although there is also Common Kartvelian *c.ur- ‘dripping’ (with initial voiceless pre-alveolar glottalized hissing affricate), this cannot be the source because of the wide spread of this lemma all over northern India. 86 The Burushaski forms are compared by Holms with Kartvelian forms (2017: 172) which is untenable. 87 Lithuanian czùrinu ‘to urinate’ (borrowing from Slavonic) is probably accidentally similar.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

590

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

(rain), sound of drizzle, trickle’, K. ś¯ ar 3 ‘a fall of water’ and ś˘ or ‘the noise of the fall of a stream of water, a splash’, Paš. sor- ‘to flow’, probably Kal. s.is.árik ‘to sprinkle’ — P. śarl¯ at.a ¯ ‘gust of rain or wind’ (T. Graham Bailey [1938: 250]; note palatal sibilant) — Par. šur"šur ‘to murmur, purl’, Mj. sarf a, sarfO, Ishk. and Wkh. šoršor, Sang. š¯ aršor, Shgh. šahršahr; Bur. śarśar ‘sound of grain trickling down’ (Berger connects this word with the group under Ind. s2
r1 ‘sow; scatter’, but Pers. šar¯ıdan ‘to drop; to flow [as rivers] with a great noise; to pour, trickle, urine’, šaršar ‘flowing or falling water’ and šurr¯ıdan ‘to flow, murmur [as water or any liquid poured out]’ seems closer), Psht. šar, šir ‘pattering of rain’ < Ir. *gžar ? (*gzar ?) ‘to flow (fast?)’ ? Notes: (a) M. sarv¯ a ‘heavy shower’, M.w¯ ar. s@r ‘shower (of rain)’ and G. sarav¯ a ‘ditto’ are cognate with OIA a ¯s¯ ara-1 ‘hard shower’ (1491), as is clarified by Deś. (276,9) sariv¯ ao tath¯ a s¯ıharao a ¯s¯ arah., and thus with SAR ‘move’. However, the etymological background of this OIA root is somehow intricate. Therefore I suggest that the M. and G. forms are actually more closely related with Pah¯ ar.¯ı forms mentioned p. 235 sub serO, seri ‘an irrigable or irrigated field’. (b) Sub Par. šarša"r¯ a ‘waterfall’ Morgenstierne points out that this is a panAfghanistan and Persia word. It is synonym with Par. GarGa"r a ‘cascade; the sound of falling water’ which is also Persian. For etymologically related(?) IA forms see p. 457. (c) Note also (as borrowings?) Korku sirsi ‘to sprinkle with water’, Bondo sisira‘to sprinkle’, Bodo-Gadaba sisra ‘to sprinkle with water’. 506. Bng. c h  Oti n.f. ‘chin’, Khaśdh. and Kt.g. c h Oti ‘chin’, Jaun. ch Ot  and c@mti ‘chin’ (Z.),

cambo ‘chin’, Bhad. Garh. cy u tu ‘chin’, Chin. cimti ‘chin’, Pat.t.. chimti ‘chin’, Kana.



and Bhal. c˙ hoti ‘chin’ (Kaul [2006 i: 325] with dental -t- a printing mistake, cf. Varma [1948: 58] Bhal. "Ch ot ‘chin’), also N. ci˜ ur.o, Kgr. chúnni and Rp. chy¯ uni all ‘chin’ —

Sh. chom and Bro. čhum both ‘chin’, D . . chomi ‘chin’ according to Turner all < OIA cibuka- ‘chin’ (4820) (Pa., Pk.) and in West Pah¯ar.¯ı with the same extension -n.t.-, n.d.-, but cf. also OIA jod.a- ‘chin’ and Sant. (Singhbhum) éoha ‘chin’. 507. Bng. c˙ himra or simra ‘dappled’ used only in connection with dogs as in the expression c˙ himra kukura ‘oh (my) dappled dog!’ in the a rul song of the Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı hero Dzitu DzOr.i¯ an. – when the hero was killed in a malicious ambush, his dog returned alone to the hero’s mother who instantly understood what had happened. The word is certainly cognate with OIA śabála- and lex. śabára- ‘dappled’ used of demonic dogs (śambara‘a kind of deer; a serpent demon’ [12314]). OIA śabála- ‘variegated, spotted’ (12297) (Pa., Pk.) has one modern reflex in Si. to which one in Kal. is added (p. 723), modern reflexes of śambara- refer to different deer. See also Mayrhofer’s comments (EWA) sub śabála- ‘dappled; scheckig’ (RV x,14,10 and AV viii,1,9 śabálau ‘epithet of the two dogs of the god of the dead’). Therefore cf. also OIA karburá- ‘variegated, of a spotted or variegated colour’ (2882, 2885; cf. also above [p. 372] Ku. kurburail ‘of greyish colour’), lex. karvara- ‘variegated, spotted’, śárvara- ‘epithet of one of Yama’s dogs’, RV v,52,3 śárvar¯ı- ‘epithet of the dogs of the Maruts’, Lith. šarvas (?) ‘greyishblack (of a horse)’ and Gr. 𝜅 𝜖´𝜌𝛽𝜖 𝜌𝑜𝜍 ‘dog of Hades’. Regarding the unclear etymology see IGN: 116 where Eulers suggests an Indo-Greek parallel. 508. Bur. c˙ hil ‘water’, Bur.ng. “tsil” ‘ditto’ has probably a parallel in Brah. č¯ıl ‘gulley, watercut’ and thus may not be a Bur. word but a word belonging to the IVC substratum. For another isolate parallel between Bur., Koh. and Rp. ‘ashes’ see p. 884.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

591

509. Bng. c hum- chumrO adj. ‘almost dark’, c humkO n.m. ‘twilight’, Deog. c hum chumO

‘almost dark’, c humko ‘near darkness’, Baur. c˙ humka and Khaśdh. chumka both ‘twilight’, Him. chimchi ‘evening’, Bhal. "ýhumi a = "ýumi a ‘at evening time’, P¯ ad.. jhõjhõ ‘ditto’ — K. c himbara ‘dusk, twilight’. The forms seem to be cognate with OIA *jh¯ ama-1 ‘burnt’ (5366) and Pk. jh¯ ama- ‘burning, dark-coloured’. 510. (a) Bng. c heu dO ‘away, apart, separate; unsolved, unworked’ < OIA chedayati ‘cuts off’ (5067) plus -dO suffix, thus original meaning *‘being separate’; the OIA root is also reflected in the following Bng. words: c˙ hezi n.f. ‘small wound’, c hezi anO ‘to inflict a small wound’ (with -¯ a- suffix), c he ziainO ‘to inflict o.s. a small wound’ (in addition

with -i-1 suffix) < OIA chedyate ‘is caused to be cut’ (5068) with a modern parallel in Bi. These forms have been quoted here because of the next one: (b) Bng. c heudO-itrO ‘separately’ cf. OIA
tara- ‘the other’ (1561) with perhaps early loss of first -a-. 511. Bng. c˙ hev¯er. n.f. ‘girl, woman’, Deog. c˙ heur.i ‘married woman’, Kva. c evEr ‘woman’,

‘woman’ Man.d.. che¯ or.¯ı ‘wife’, Kt.g. c˙ héur.ı, Kc. c˙ héur.e, Jaun. ch¯eor.i, Him. chéor.i all and all < OIA *chedu- ‘cut, slit’ (5067b) with a -t.a- extension — Sh.pales. and gil. če¯ı, Koh. čei, Tor. c.¯ı ‘woman’ derive, however, < contamination of OIA str
- ‘woman’ (13734) and *chedu- (and not just < 13734 which is phonetically unconvincing) — here also B. chin¯ ala ‘woman of loose character’ (ODBL § 287), Garh. chin¯ al ‘of loose character, adulterous, a woman with bad reputation’ and several other languages < OIA *chinn¯ ali- ‘adulteress’ (5048). Pace Paul Thieme (quoted by Turner sub 5048), who suggests that OIA chinn¯ a- ‘a whore, a harlot’ (Pk. chin.n.a ¯-) is hypochoristic in the sense of ‘having the line broken’ (see -¯ ali- ‘line’) or stand metonymically for chinnan¯ asik¯ a- ‘having the nose cut off, noseless’, I rather propose to interpret the compounded form – only found from Pk. chin.n.a ¯lia- onwards – simply as extended by the MIA suffix -alla- or by a v¯ al¯ a suffix (the modern reflexes seem to employ both), and thus also meaning ‘she with a slit’. 512. Bng. c˙ hoi1 n.f. ‘water mixed with ashes for washing clothes’, since according to the language consultants the basic meaning is ‘ashes-water’ perhaps derivation < OIA *ks.a ¯ra-toya- (if not < *ks.a ¯ra-udaka-, but that does not account for the Bng. -i) with meaning ‘corrosive’ (3674) where Turner states that “ch forms mean ‘ashes” ’ and ‘water’ (5974) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Si. Here to be added is Kal. tok ‘wet; wet place, puddle’ and note also sub 1921 Pr. t oa
-m usu  ‘fish’ (Morgenstierne) and t-@v a mis u ‘fish’ (Buddruss und Degener), and note shamanic language of Western Nepal toyo kh¯ anu ‘blood drinking’ (but literally probably euphemistically ‘to eat [floating] water’) (Maskarinec [1998 index]) both of which, or at least the Pr. form, may be Iranian borrowings: for Psht. toyedal ‘to flow out’ and its problematic etymology see Elfenbein et al. (2003: 84). 513. Bng. c horO, pl. c˙ hor.a n.m. ‘quatrains sung in alternate rhyme as responsories’, Jaun.

of ballad’ (UGK) and Ku. jhoro ‘special type of mountain folksong which is ch¯ ur.a ¯ ‘type . sung while dancing in a circle’ are perhaps cognatewith OIA (Bhar., Mallav.) chalika‘a song consisting of 4 parts’ with the -l- having been lost due to the suffix. 514. Bng. c˙ hor.i n.f. ‘skin of goat or sheep’ (with -rO1 suffix), c hori arO n.m. ‘skin of a human being, cow etc.’ (with - arO suffix), c˙ hor.i¯ ari n.f. ‘fur’ (with -¯ ari suffix) < OIA chav
‘skin, hide’ (5006) (Pa., Pk.) with many modern reflexes, but the original meaning is otherwise only also preserved in Si. 515. Bng. c˙ hod¯er, c˙ h¯ odr adj.;n.m. ‘young; small; a youth’ and c h odrinO ‘to behave like a child’ < OIA ks.udralá- ‘small, insignificant’ (3715) with Or. and H. kh¯ udar ‘small’, thus with a different development of OIA ks.-.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

592

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

516. Bng. c hornO ‘to loosen or break up (earth in a field)’ < OIA *ks.orayati ‘scrapes’ (3753)

with a modern parallel in G. and H. chorn¯ a ‘to cut’. I cannot find the Hindi word in the Hindi dictionaries (including Hind¯ı Śabdas¯ agara), and if it exists somewhere it is certainly a borrowing from an Outer Language. 517. Bng. cOiOkrO n.m. and c O ‘ghee’, and c Oti n.f. ‘small amount of ghee’, Ku. cokhu n ‘ghee’.



I suggest to analyse the first word as verb stem *cO- plus past participle -iO- plus -krO v¯ al¯ a grammeme; for c Oti I suggest that it is a combination of two verb stems, the

OtEnO ‘to heat (up), melt s.th. (e.g., butter into ghee)’, OtO second belonging to Bng.

Deog. autna ‘to melt (ghee)’ and Garh. Otnu ‘pouring

n.m. ‘heat’, OtiO ‘heated, hot’, ..

of hot liquid substance from one pot to another and thereby

and transferring cooling it down’ which are < OIA a ¯tapá- ‘heat’ (1116) plus -(V)t.(V)- suffix. The first element is < OIA *cyotita- ‘caused to trickle out’ (4950) with -y- preventing depalatalization of the Bng. word. Cf. there S. co¯ı ‘produce of dairy’. Notes: (a) Synonymous Pr. uc"o  ‘clarified butter’ and Kal. prečóna ‘ghee, clarified butter’, the latter of which Trail and Cooper derive with question-mark (and not correctly) < OIA mraks.an.a- ‘oil’, rather derive < OIA pracyavana- ‘oozing, dropping’. Reflexes of OIA CYU ‘move’ and OIA CYUT ‘trickle’ (CDIAL: 270) have fairly similar meanings. (b) There is possibly another compound not built with -óna but with -ónu in Kal. amištyónu ‘cheese dish of saco 
topped with hot butter’88 with first two syllables built in an ‘Indo-Iranian’ way: Cf. IIr. *mišti- ‘mixtures’ (quoted in EWA [ii: 357]) and regarding a- cf. OIA samiśra- ‘mixing, mingling, undergoing mixture or combination’. Note also Kal. hoc. ‘oil, shortening, or clarified butter’ which may go back to OIA upaścyotati ‘oozes or trickles down, falls in drops’. 518. Rudh. "c2mna ‘to be absorbed through the pores of the soil (said of water)’ and Garh.

- the hollowed hands placed together and raised to the forehead’ (with cumkhi ‘añjali unclear suffix) and aspirated chamot. ‘mumh ˙ se h¯ ath sat.a ¯kar p¯ an¯ı p¯ıne k¯ı sthiti – sipping by bringing the hand with water to the mouth’ (Benjwal [2010: 170, 183]) < OIA CAM ‘sip’ with only one doubtful prefix-less modern parallel in Rom. (see 4752) √ — Pr. -nˇȷüm ‘to eat soup’ (Morgenstierne) < OIA *nicamati ‘sips’ (7177) (OIA nicamana- ‘sipping’). Mayrhofer is skeptical recarding a PIE reconstruction *kw em‘sip, swallow’ (again ‘onomatopoeic’ !) but this is supported by the Pr. palatal affricate as well as by the Rudh. form because it seems that also Rudh. has dental and palatal affricates. 519. (a) Bng. c@
s ‘burning pain’, Kc. c˙ aśin.o ‘to be burnt (e.g. hand on hot iron)’, Deog. and Jaun. ci
snO ‘to burn one’s hand etc.’, Him. cośn.u ‘to burn with fire’, P. c¯ıs ‘a

ciśno¯ ‘to burn’, ciśi ‘scare of fire’ and cis ‘keen pain, scorching’, cisuk sharp pain’, Ku. . ‘very cold’, N. ciso ‘wet, cold’, Kgr. cas ‘slipped disc’ — Ind. c2s ‘sudden fierce or

pain’, Kal. čičiék stabbing pain; lumbago; a touch’ and c2s ‘sudden fierce or stabbing

‘to burn or smart (as salt in a wound)’. The words are to be seen in connection (i) with OIA *cassakk- ‘throb, twitch, sudden pain’ (4730), *c¯ıssa- ‘sharp pain’ (4847), cas.ati 2 ‘hurts’ (4727a), chas.ati ‘hurts’ (Dh¯ atup.) (the aspirated form is reflected in Garh. chas¯ ak ‘nuk¯ıl¯ı vastu k¯ı halk¯ı cubhan - slight sting or piercing through a pointed object’), cahakk- ‘burn brightly’ (4731) (with debuccalisation), and perhaps c¯ as.a-2 88 sa co
is probably a kind of cottage cheese.



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

593

‘sugarcane’ (4774) (see there G. c¯ as ‘boiled syrup’), and (ii) with OIA *atyus.ati ‘burns’, *atyos.ati, *atyus.yate ‘is burnt’ (226a), and (iii) perhaps with Dravidian DEDR kiccu (1514): Tam. kiccu ‘fire’, Tel. ciccu ‘fire, flame’ etc. which is perhaps worth comparing with Garh.n¯ a. cac-k¯ ar, cac-g¯ ar ‘very cold’ (with -k¯ ar suffix). The Bng. and Deog. forms go back to older *c.as.-, but not the Kc. form which therefore must be an early borrowing at a time when Proto-Bang¯ an.¯ı and Proto-Deog¯ ar¯ı still had three sibilants but Proto-Koc¯ı only two. See next and next but one. (b) Like in the preceding paragraph, also in this paragraph semantic-morphological amalgamations (see p. 224) have been rampant. Bng. jasnO ‘to singe s.o. (e.g., with an iron rod)’, invol. ja
sinO, j
sainO ‘to singe o.s. badly’ (with -ai- suffix), Garh. jh¯ as ‘slight

ak ‘touch through fire or nettle’ and jhusmus ‘dawn, neuralgia or birth pangs’, jhas¯ early morning’ — here also A. zah ‘heat, summer’ ? — Pal. jh¯ as."¯ı ‘caterpillar’ (contact with some types causes severe allergic reactions), Tor. .jes. ([jyEs]) ‘caterpillar’, K. za j

with the skin causes ‘a certain tiny longish insect, similar to an ant, which by contact irritation and scratching’, Dari. jhusili kir¯ a ‘caterpillar’ and Garh. jhissu or jhijju ‘ek ro˜ed¯ ar k¯ır.a ¯ – a hairy worm’ and jhusaly¯ a ‘person with unwanted hair on his face or body’ and Kho. ˇȷalás. ‘hairy (person); a disheveled, long-haired person’ derive either/or or both < OIA lex. jhas.a- ‘sun-heat’ (5359)89 or < OIA *adhyus.yate ‘is lighted up, burnt’ (280a) with a modern reflex in Kt.g. There is also Bng. uja
sO n.m. ‘the power that induces spontaneous possession (e.g., during the approaching of a deity towards a village); splendour of the sun’ (with retention of palatal feature because of coronal consonant harmony) which is < related OIA *ujjh¯ as.a- ‘shining’ (1678) (Pk.) with one modern parallel in G. to which is to be added Br.-Aw. uj¯ as ‘light; gleam’, and Bng. ja
s n.f. ‘tension, stress, impulse, cheering up’ which also derives < OIA lex. *jhas.a‘sun-heat’ (5359). (c) Bng. ki
sainO or ci
sainO ‘to scorch children in jest with glowing charcoal’ (the lat

cognate with forms listed in paragraph [a]), Khaś. kreśśn¯ ter form is apparently u > and Bhad. tlessn u ‘cries due to physical pain’ (Kaul [2006 i: 305]) < OIA *kreśayati

‘presses’ (3606) (but regarding semantics compare cognate OIA kleśayati ‘torments’) with a modern parallel in Dm., but the verb has further parallels in Roh. (3588), Kal. (3589), K. (3590, 3591) and Wg. (3605). Notes: (a) Despite the massive semantic-morphological amalgamations one wonders whether above alternation of Bng. ki
sainO ∼ ci
sainO ‘to scorch . . . with glow

¯ ‘shine, look brilliant’ which ing charcoal’ does not indicate a reflex of OIA KAŚ may be also reflected in Bng. cOsnO ‘to light, ignite, burn s.th. or s.o.’, cO
skO i.a.

‘a sudden and short apparition (e.g. of a ghost or of a god in a medium)’ and perhaps in cOk
sO, cOk
selO ‘shining, radiant’ if this is reflex of older *caśaka-(illa-) (extended with -kO2 suffix [and MIA -illa- suffix). In such a case it could be morphologically compared with OIA cás.t.e ‘appears’. This interpretations seems semantically more plausible than borrowing from Dravidian. (b) The same OIA root in form of c¯ aks.us.á- ‘relating to sight’ is perhaps the origin of Kal. čákaš ‘cowrie shell’ which, regarding basic meaning, cf. with Kal. čákaš čhína ‘animal with white mark on its face’ (with second word < OIA cihna89 Which is cognate with OIA JHAS. ‘burn’ but contaminated by derivations e.g. reflected in Bng. ju
sO ‘down, fuzz’ for which see p. 605 and OIA *jh¯ uśa- ‘hair’ (5412), but cf. also OIA lex. jhas.a‘forest overgrown with grass’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

594

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I ‘mark, sign’ [4833] and aspiration fronting).90

520. Jat.. cacr¯ a ‘stammering’ < OIA (MBh) c¯ ucuka- ‘stammering’. 521. Garh. cin(a)kh¯ı, cen(a)kh¯ı ‘bakr¯ı k¯ a bacc¯ a – kid’ < OIA *chagana- ‘goat’ (4961) (with first a > i, rightshift of aspiration and consonant metathesis [cf. Pa. chakala-) with modern parallels in Ash., Wg., Kho., dialectal Paš. all also with meaning ‘kid’. 522. Kho. čilíngi ˙ ‘hummingbird’ (also Kal. but meaning ‘sparrow’) (first element of the compound also in Kho. čili bòxtu ‘sparrow’ and Khaś. c˙ ılp@l c˙ ılp@l ‘the sound of the sparrow’ [Varma 1938: 50] which cf. e.g. with H. cill¯ an¯ a ‘to scream’) and Kho. čičib"on˙ ‘kind of bird’ (first component also in Paš. čäč"a ‘name of a small bird’ and Sgh. c˙ i˙cu ‘partridge’ all of which are < OIA *cicc- ‘scream’ [4789] but have also a parallel in Munda Mu. ciPciP-OóE, ci:-ci:-OóE ‘a very small bird so called from its call’). Kho. čilíngi ˙ looks somewhat similar to OIA kalavinka˙ ‘sparrow’. Mayrhofer (EWA) regards the word as onomatopoeic (!) and o vinka˙ as an elementary parallel with e.g. German Fink. However, Mallory and Adams note sub PIE *(s)pingo- ‘finch’ that OIA phingaka˙ ‘the fork-tailed shrike’ may be cognate. Here perhaps also Kul. pikl.u ‘bulbul’ (paharilanguages.rus). Also note that OIA lex. kalik¯ ara-, kalinga-, ˙ kulinga˙ all designate the fork-tailed shrike and all seem to have as first element a reflex of PIE *kelh1 - ‘call out to’.91 Finally, there is also Wkh. wingas, ungas ‘bird (small sized), sparrow’ (Yoshie), also mingás ‘petit oiseau, moineau; sparrow’ (Grjunberg and Steblin-Kamenskij).92 Satoko Yoshie provides a number of compounds which suggest the inadequacy of the idea of elementary sound parallels: čat. wingas ‘yellow wagtail’ (OIA lex. carat.a- ‘a wagtail’), pist wingas lit. ‘skinny bird’, ‘swallow-like bird; small bat?’, šyuk wingas ‘sparrow (very small bird)’, s.iw s.iw wingas, s.0w s.0w wingas ‘blackbird? (lit. twittering bird)’,93 žarž wingas ‘white wagtail’ (Wkh. žarž ‘milk’ is derived by Morgenstierne < Av. *Gzaraci- ‘to stream’); note also wingas tuy,ungas tuy “sparrow’s wedding’ festival, held on June 8-10’. 523. (a) Kal. čukumbís. hik ‘to swing’ as in súda har ádua čukumbís. hin ‘children swing every day’ appears related with OIA culumpati ‘swings, rocks’ and with next paragraph (b), but Kal. -ís. is unclear. (b) Deshi Prakrit cukkud.o, culuppo ‘ch¯ aga - he-goat’ (Bhayani [1988: 53]) < OIA lex. culump¯ a- ‘she-goat’ which is connected with (a); see also EWA culukin- ‘guinea pig [or a similar animal]’ and there further allomorphs. The ‘goat’ words appear also to be influenced by OIA *cul- ‘fidget, itch’ (4874) (Pk. culuculaï ‘throbs, jumps’). 524. Kal. čukus.ék ‘to tease, annoy someone’ looks like an intensive formation of OIA KUS. i.a. ‘pinch, knead’ (MW) and int. cokus.yate. The Kalasha semantics is quite different from CDIAL KUS. ‘strike’ and its reflexes. 525. Rj.shekh. and jaip. c¯ uso ‘a rat’, PAN cuśi ‘mungo’ and perhaps New. cus¯ a ‘porcupine’; cf. Turner’s reconstruction *c¯ uha- ‘rat, mouse’ (4899); the here quoted forms may reflect an earlier stage *c¯ uśa- or are rather cognate with OIA cuñcu- etc. ‘musk-rat’ (cf. 5053). 526. Pr. čö ‘bribe’ < OIA lex. ch¯ aya- ‘bribe’.

90 The Kalasha women are famous for their beautiful caps studded with cowrie shells. Jettmar assumes that these caps have a religious function (1975: 394), and on monetary and religious functions of cowries in India see Bin Yang (2011). 91 For many other modern reflexes of this PIE root see p. 785. 92 The -s must be a reflex of suffix -č¯ı- as found e.g. in OIA *mrgač¯ı- ‘small animal, bird’ (10265).  93 For twitter-chirp-whistle cognates see p. 880.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

595

527. Sh. čódo ‘abuse, swearing’, Bur. ćódo ‘derision, taunt, insult’ reflect semantically OIA codá- ‘driver’ and Pa. c¯ odaka- ‘one who rebukes’ (4926) and not – despite preservation of medial stop – OIA *coddati ‘copulates’ (4929). Mayrhofer hesitantly but rightly proposes derivation < PIE * (s)keud for which IEW (957) gives also the meaning ‘to  incite, stir up (hatred)’. 528. R¯ aj. co n2r, Kalk. con2r and Tor. čonó (Z.) all ‘yellow’ somehow < OIA c¯ urn.aka‘chalklike paleness’ (4890) with one modern parallel in Pr. 529. Kal. čhat dyek ‘to chop something up’ as in badók gri mos čhat dyel day ‘he’s chopping up meat with an axe’ — cf. PIE *skert- ‘cut’ and Mayrhofer’s IIr. SKART (EWA [i: 316]). 530. Ku. chapchap¯ an., chap¯ or.an. ‘to wash clothes’, Him. chimb¯ a ‘a washerman’ and probably P. chap¯ ak¯ a ‘the sound produced by striking water’ < OIA *ks.upyate ‘is pressed’ (3719) with modern parallels in Dm., Kal., Phal. 531. S. chichid.u ‘offal’ < OIA úcchis.t.a- ‘leavings’ (1850) via *uchicha- with change of -s.t.- > -ch- as in a number of northwestern words (or result of coronal consonant harmony?). 532. Rp. ch¯ır- ‘to milk’ derives < OIA ks.¯ırá- ‘milk’ (3696), but more interesting is Rp. chy¯ ura ‘type of Tibetan cottage cheese’ which can be compared with Ind. and Gau. c hu r ‘fresh milk’ < OIA ks.¯ırávat- ‘furnished with milk’ (3700). 533. Marw. ch tra  and chu tr a ‘husks’ (also Bhil. ch ota ra  ‘husks’) < an antecedent of OIA *chilla- ‘skin, rind’ (5052) where Turner considers parallels with *choll- ‘to peel, skin’ which compare with Marw. ch oda  ‘husks’, Bhil. ch oda  ‘husks’ and Ah¯ırv¯ at.¯ı ch ola ka 



‘husks’. 534. Him. ch v ‘the shadow of the setting sun’ derives < OIA ks.¯ın.á- ‘worn away’ (3690) which has many modern reflexes; however, the meaning ‘dark’ is only shared with Dm., Shum., Sh.pales., Bshk. and Phal. 535. Rp. chumc(h)umya ‘perfect, ideal, balanced’ – Kal. c.humc.húm ‘well, very nicely’; the Kal. word is related with c.hum ‘suddenly’ and found, together with Kho., sub OIA *ks.umbati ‘smiles’ (3662), but this is very doubtful. Therefore see next. 536. P. ch¯ umbar ‘a rustic, a clown’ < OIA *ks.umbati ‘smiles’ (3725) with modern parallels in Kho, Kal. 537. Garh. cholang ˙ ‘an orange’ (Z.) < OIA lex. colakin- ‘the orange tree’. 538. Kal. c.ángar ˙ ‘misfortune, disaster; sickness’ < OIA lex. sam . gara- ‘misfortune, calamity’, but actually perhaps with r spreading < *sram garaand ‘spontaneous’ affrication. . 539. Ind. c2
m ‘a sharp or stabbing pain’ and intens. c2
m-c2m, Bur./Sh. c.am ‘stabbing

by Turner (and accepted by pain’; Kho. c.homik ‘to feel pain. hurt’ is derived Strand) < OIA ks.amate ‘is patient, endures’ (3657) which is semantically not plausible; therefore here suggestion for derivation < OIA pramatha- ‘pain, affliction(?)’ which cf. with pramathana- ‘tormenting, torturing, paining, hurting, injuring’, and regarding derivation cf. Ind. ca l
av  ‘to obtain, achieve’ which is < OIA pralabhate ‘seize’ (8751).

The Ind./Sh. (or Kal.) type of word(form) was borrowed into Bur. and Kho. 540. Kal. c.amék ‘to imagine or suppose someone to be something’ < OIA praman- ‘think upon, excogitate’. 541. Kal. caha 
kik ‘to scream out (in pain, fear, or hunger)’ is a synonym compound in which



the first syllable may seem to derive < OIA króśa- ‘shout’ (3611) whereas -ha 
kik is <

OIA hakkayati ‘calls to’ (13939). However, there are no clear parallels known to me from Dardic for a change kr > c.. Therefore Pischel is perhaps right in reconstructing the OIA root as *SKROŚ (see EWA) from which this and the following words would be straight derivations: Kal. c.akaparáš ‘to call or cry out loudly (for help or attention)’ with c.aka- paralleling caha 
k- plus parášik ‘cry out in great distress’ which seems to



© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

596

542.

543.

544.

545.

546.

547.

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

reflect OIA prakrośa- ‘a shriek, scream’ (regarding sound change cf. e.g. Paš. kur¯ u ‘voice, word’ sub 3611), c.ikpák ‘loud noise from talking and arguing’ and c.okík ‘to bargain with or persuade someone by a lot of talking’; Ind. c2 v ‘advice; threat’ and

ca 
-ca  ‘sound of panicking goats or sheep or chicken; sound of a barking fox’ (which cf.

with

OIA krośana- ‘crying’), c2 v-c2 v ‘sound of birds or bullets flying past’; Sh. c.aun˙

‘noise’, Bur. c.aopáo ‘noise’.

Kal. ca 
cik ‘to eat meat off of bones; to wound badly in a fight’ and related aspirated




chacik ‘to thrust into, pierce’ < OIA samchid˙ ‘to cut to pieces; to cut off, hack off,

chop

off; to cut through, penetrate, pierce, split; to cut away, destroy . . . ’ with ‘spontaneous’ aspiration as in above c.ángar ˙ and elaborate CCH. Kal. c.óktu ‘steeply ascending’ as in bo c.óktu ása phond ‘that path is very steep’ < OIA pratakvan- ‘moving onwards; steep, precipitous’ < PIE *tekw - ‘run; flow’. The origin of -tu is not really clear. Sh. c.oóm ‘Schlacke; slag (while melting iron)’ < OIA praml¯ ana- i.a. ‘soiled, dirty’. Regarding semantics cf. e.g. Ind. c m(b)2r gu  ‘slag’ but lit. ‘iron excrement’ (see there for more parallels). Kal. c.hanpoč ˙ ‘sacrifice’ with kárik ‘to sacrifice an animal in the house or goat shed’ is a (quasi-synonym?) compound with c.han˙ < OIA Dh¯ atup. sagh- (saghnoti) ‘strike, hurt, injure, kill’ (cognate with OIA SAH ?) again with retroflexion and affrication of original dental sibilant, and -poč cognate with a form related to OIA pracala- ‘trembling, shaking’ (MW) or ‘tremulous, shaking’ (8489) for which Strand reconstructs ProtoNuristani pra˙ca ‘shake; beat’ (N¯ urist¯ an¯ı Etymological Lexicon). Ind. c.hap"t¯ o ‘household goods’ and c.ha"put. ‘luggage’ (both Hallberg and Hallberg) are distantly related with OIA *laptra- ‘gains, possessions’ (10938) but must actually derive < OIA pratilabhya- ‘to be received or obtained, obtainable’ to which at a later stage a -tra- suffix must have been added from a neighboring dialect (cf. e.g. Gau. n
et ‘rope for pulling the churning-stick’ < OIA netra-3 ‘cord of churning stick’ [7588]). Kal. c.hiú ‘very happy’ has a number of non-affricate parallels. But the following word groups (a) and (b) have despite their semantic and morphological similarities different origins, yet it seems they have influenced each other: (a) Bng.
siangO

‘happy’ (with -O2 suffix), PAN
siangin

O,
siaginO ‘to be happy’ and

śiangn śi¯ ang ˙ n.m. ‘happiness’; Deog.
siangin

o ‘to be happy’ and ˙ . a ‘to feel happy and proud (e.g. as a newly married bride or groom)’, N. chy¯ anginu ˙ ‘to act insolently, talk disrespectfully; flirt’ (with spontaneous affrication and aspiration as in Kal.). These are compounds with first element cognate with Bng.
siu ‘dear, beloved’ which has a parallel in Wg. “sheeau” ‘love’ (Norris’ wordlist, see Morgenstierne [1954]) and perhaps Sh.dras. surya
‘delight[ed]’ and surya
r ‘happiness’ and sira
to ‘affection[ate], dear’ (Rajapurohit

[2012: 111, 123, 122]). Both Bng.
siu and Wg. “sheeau” may have been influenced by OIA
siv
a- ‘auspicious’ (12472) but they are certainly closer to etymologically related OIA śéva- ‘dear, precious; prosperity, happiness’ and (RV 1,156,1) śévya- ‘dear (as a friend)’ which are further cognate e.g. with Latv. si˜eva ‘wife’ (see EWA and Lanszweert [1984: 173]). The second component of the compounds may either derive < OIA anga˙ ‘a particle implying attention, assent or desire’ or, since there is sometimes a meaning of eroticism (see also the following), < OIA langa˙ ‘union, association, connection; a lover, paramour’. (b) Kal. alas
n hik ‘to elope with a man’, alas
n k
arik ‘to elope with a girl’ etc. is built

her, it’ and derivation < OIA

(S¯ with ál.a ‘him, ah.) śrnga˙ ‘the rising of desire, excess 

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

548.

549.

550.

551.

552.

553. 554.

555.

556.

597

of love or passion’. Related are also Wg. sinar

‘to rejoice, be pleased’, s.inar¯ ˙ a- ‘to make happy, satisfy (a woman) sexually’, s. inár ˙ . ‘mistress, beloved; paramour’ < OIA
s
rng

ara- ‘amorous pursuits’ (12592). Note also the expression alas
n o
nta k
arik ‘to

‘sacrifice’ which is  make a feast for a daughter or sister for their marriage’ with ˇȷónta discussed p. 607. Here probably also cognate is OIA s.inga˙ ‘libertine, rake’ (see p. 599 note). (c) That (a) and (b) have influenced each other is also suggested by forms like √ Pr. sinra

‘to rejoice’ (Morgenstierne) respectively šinrav˙ ‘to be happy, be gleeful’ (Buddruss/Degener) and perhaps Sh. šuryaár and Bur. šurayaár ‘rejoicing, happiness, pleasure’. Klm. c.hibdä LH ‘immediately’ < OIA ks.iprá- ‘quick’ (3688) (Pa., Pk.) with a doubtful modern parallel in B.; probably built with instrumental postposition (-)dä H and thus structurally corresponding with Ur. jald¯ı-se. The same postposition is found in Klm. ˇȷäbdä L ‘quickly, at once’ which derives < OIA javá- (jáva- [P¯ an..]) ‘swift; speed’ (5166) (Pa., Pk.) with a modern parallel in Si. Kal. c.hek ‘trouble, bad time’ is not directly < OIA samkat ˙ . á- ‘contracted, narrow, dangerous’ (< OIA *sam-kr

ta-) but because of -e- (and aspiration?) ultimately < *samskr

ti- in the sense of‘contraction’ (see also EWA sub samkat ˙ . á-) with same  as in several above forms. processes Bng. dzOgr alu2 n.m. ‘bristly hair (before a fight, in a dangerous moment)’ < OIA

(5075), plus r¯ *jagga- ‘hair’ a.l n.f. ‘piece, portion’. CDIAL 5075 has modern parallels in P. and N., but there are also Ku. jhank¯ ˙ ar¯ a ‘head hair, long hair, a long lock’ and Garh. jhankari ˙ ‘long, matted hair of head’ which belong to the allomorph *jakka- of the same lemma with a modern parallel in Sh. Bng. poet. dzOngora

n.m. ‘type of millet much cultivated in central Garhwal’, Garh. jhangor¯ ˙ a ‘millet’ (Barnyard millet or Echinochloa frumentacea) may be a compound because of OIA langur¯ ˙ a- ‘millet’, but origin of first component is unclear. Cf. also possible cognate in Munda Ju. goNgei ‘millet’, and Ju. and So. gaNga ‘millet, Panicum miliare’ with yet another initial consonant. Bng. dzOra O1 , zOra i n.m.,n.f. ‘stag; hind’, Ku. jar.y¯ a ‘stag’, Dari. jar¯ ayo ‘antelope’ — Ra. jad.@ yo ‘deer’ and Byangsi jarya ‘stag’. Relationship with OIA lex. javana- ‘a kind of deer’ is unlikely. Bng. dzOtO n.m. ‘endeavour, effort; aspiration’ < OIA yatta- ‘striving, contending’ (10404) (Pa., Pk.) without modern parallels. Bng. dzOrinO ‘to be sorrowful’ and dzOr  n.f. ‘sorrow’, K. zara ‘sympathetic sorrow,

grief or heart-burning at the sight of another’s sorrow or pain’ and z¯ ar ‘groan, plaint, lamentation, wailing’ appear to be cognate with OIA HAR ‘angry’ as in forms like RV [ma
] juhuranta- ‘they shall [not] be angry’ or juhur¯ an.á- ‘angry’ (note also the Dh¯ atup. “root” j¯ ur- ‘to hurt, be angry with’) and Av. zar@ta- ‘enraged’ or an¯ azar@ta- ‘easy to offend’, Psht. zoral ‘to vex, provoke, fret, irritate’, etc. The Bng. and K. forms may derive from OIA, but further connections are not clear although Szemerényi (quoted in KEWA) reconstructs for the old forms Proto-Aryan źhard- ‘heart’. Therefore cf. also Pr. zir ‘heart’ and z@rks.@ ‘coward(ly)’ (with unclear -ks.@ ). Bng. dzOrbOr anO and intensive dzurbur anO ‘to crack (sound while eating, e.g., a radish)’

< OIA (RV) járate ‘crackles (as fire)’. The OIA form is quoted sub PN *k"ar- ‘to cry (out)’ (CINCL 475). Bng. dzOlua n.m. ‘bastard, natural child’: since it is said that a dzOlua is an impure person there might be relationship with OIA lex. jhallik¯ a- ‘Unreinlichkeit, Schmutz’ (EWA).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

598

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

557. Bng. dzOng

ar n.m. ‘ford, shallows’ < OIA jang¯ ˙ ala- ‘dyke’ (5080) with modern reflexes in Ku., N., B. 558. Kal. zankiá ˙ ‘poison’ cf. OIA lex. jangula-, ˙ j¯ angula˙ ‘poison, venom’. 559. Bng. dzal.i n.f. ‘skin’ < OIA jara
yu- ‘snake’s slough’ (5152) with many modern reflexes, but Bng. appears closest to the original meaning. An ex. from an incantation found in the PAN: manu ki dzali, hOnu ki kOpali ‘the skin of a frog, the skull of a monkey’.

(as

udder)’ (with -r-, -i- and -nO suffixes) cf. OIA lex. 560. Bng. dzamrinO adj. ‘swollen 1 3



jrmbha- ‘swelling’, OIA jrmbhita- ‘enlarged, increased; swelling’; note also jumbakáh.   which Mayrhofer in KEWA asks whether this word in ‘name of Varun.a’ regarding the sense of ‘one who swells; *‘Anschweller” could be cognate with j
rmbhate. Bng. dzamrinO is different from the verb dzamrinO ‘to become quiet; to  get stopped’
u. M. jhak ‘a fish’ < OIA jhas.á- ‘a large fish’ (Pk.); this must be an old tatsama because the change of s. > k(h) is also known from such tatsama words in Braj Bh¯ as.a ¯. Regarding actual meaning and etymology see Erik Seldeslachts (2006: 125) who suggests with reference to Bernhard Kölver meaning ‘Ganges dolphin’ and himself suggests derivation < OIA (a)dhyrs.á- with ARS. ‘to flow (quickly), glide, move with a quick motion’.  (1: 302) jhap¯ Garh. and MKH an ‘litter’ as in t¯ıno d¯ a p¯ ache barde kãcan.¯ı de jhap¯ an ‘after them came the harlots’ litter’, Deś. jamp¯ an. ‘palanquin’ (Bhayani [1988: 160]), also H. jhapp¯ an and jhãp¯ an ‘a kind of sedan chair (used in the hills), a “jompon” ’ and B. jha p ana < OIA jamp¯ ana- ‘a sedan-chair’. Grierson wrote (JRAS [1920,52: 348]): “ ‘Jompon” the origin of this familiar word for a kind of sedan-chair used in the Hill stations of Upper India has puzzled the authors of Hobson-Jobson, and even its indefatigable editor, Dr. Crooke. Several tentative explanations have been suggested, but, admittedly, none is satisfactory. May I add another? The word is part of the regular vocabulary of K¯ ashm¯ır¯ı, where is (sic) appears under the form zamp¯ ana, which the Pan.d.its translate by the Sanskrit y¯ apyay¯ ana – a word which the Amarakośa explains as meaning ‘palanquin’. Y¯ apyay¯ ana- would become japp¯ an.a- in Prakrit, which would develop into jap¯ an or ja p an in the modern Indian languages. The corresponding word for the latter in K¯ ashm¯ır¯ı would be zamp¯ ana.” Thus, jamp¯ ana- is actually a MIA reflex of OIA lex. y¯ apyay¯ ana- ‘palanquin, litter’; cf. also y¯ apyáti ‘causes to go’ (10462). Note: Garh. pinas n.f. ‘p¯ alk¯ı – litter’ (Purohit and Benjwal [2007: 285]) seems to be somehow connected with the following OIA words: ánas- ‘cart, travel cart etc.’ a ¯nasa- ‘belonging to a wagon’, mah¯ anasa- ‘heavy waggon or cart’, but might actually be a kind of synonym compound < OIA *y¯ apy¯ anasa-.

611. Garh. jhamk¯ a ‘song; tune, melody’ either < OIA (Vikr. iv, 2-3) jambhalik¯ a- ‘a kind of song’ (with aspiration fronting) or < jhampad.a-, jhampat¯ ala- ‘(in music) a kind of measure’. Note also Garh. jhumriy¯ a ‘professional musician’ and jhumailu ‘collective dance song’, Munda Kh. jhumair ‘dance’ and Tibeto-Burman Khm. "jahm@rya ‘a style of singing in which a boy (with his friends) sings one line, and a girl (with her friends) 99 In the Rohingya word list there is also jeśón ‘celebration’ where the first vowel is perhaps a typing mistake. 100 Regarded by Morgenstierne to be borrowing from Iranian (1936), but this looks unlikely to me.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

605

sings the next line in reply’. Quite close are certainly also H. chamcham ‘a jingling sound (as of anklets, bells)’and Sant. chamcham ‘with a tinkling sound (of toe-rings, etc.)’ and éhaméham ‘to rattle, as a child’s rattle, or as certain hollow ornaments with small pieces of metal or stone inside’ (also éhumuréhumur ‘jingle. tinkle’).101 612. Kal. ˇȷhónta, žónta ‘sacrificial animals (goats, sheep and cows)’ as in ˇȷhónta máran ‘they sacrifice goats, sheep and cows’ < OIA present participle juhvant- ← HAV ‘sacrifice’. 613. Bng. tOkO ‘rough, hard, stern, uncivilized’ (connection with tOktOkO ‘dry, hard as

and toku ‘bold, bread’ [see above p. 351]?) — K. to ka ‘very strong, very tough’ .

courageous, confident’ < OIA *targa- ‘terrible, strong’ (5718) where Turner quotes L. trakr.a ‘strong, diligent’ “with unexpl. k”. Thus the K. and Bng. words belong to a layer/language variety where, after r-metathesis, tr- became t.- (cf. Bng. terO

a ‘thirteen’). There is also Bng. takrO ‘healthy’ which must be a borrowing from

neighbouring Pah¯ ar.¯ı language, and there is Bng. tOgtOgO2 ‘healthy’ < OIA *tranga-, ˙ a

may be cognate with 5718. sideform of OIA *tanga˙ ‘strong, well’ (5627) which Notes: (a) Besides a change tr > c(h) (as in c¯ın ‘three’), or simplification of tr or retroflexion > t. (as in many other NIA languages) there are additional examples for Bng. change of *tr- (result of r metathesis) > t.-: besides c hOpr al dennO ‘to jump (across)’ (reflecting tr > c(h); see p. 351) there is also tOpnO ‘to cross s.th.,



go across’ and both are < OIA *tarpati ‘jumps’ (5727) via *trarp-; poet. tOpral n.f. ‘pricking (e.g. of a blister)’ as in PAN sira ki tOpral la (arrowhead GEN POP

arrowhead’

pricking attach.IMP) ‘prick (the blister) with an (again quoted p. 608) is perhaps cognate with OIA (W.) trphati ‘kills’; tapnO ‘to suffice, be suffi

cient’ < OIA tarpáyati ‘satisfies’ (5728). (b) There are very few cases in Bng. with a parallel development *dr- > d.-; presently I am aware of: d.igi n.f. ‘water reservoir’ < OIA d¯ırghik¯ a- ‘oblong pond’ (6372), du nO ‘to die, lie down for dying (as cattle), lie there like dead’
u, discussed below p. 803. OIA DRAI ‘sleep’ (c) A comparable retroflexion process is found in Ko.S. gut.t.u ‘secret’ < OIA guptá- ‘concealed’ (4201) with a parallel in Garh. gut.mut. ‘gupt mantran.a ¯ – secret council’ < OIA guptá-mántra- (see OIA mántra- ‘counsel’ [9834]). ´ > PIIr. *ćr- > Nur. retroflex affricate c.(d) More distantly related is PIE *kras e.g. in Kamd. c."u ˜ ‘thigh and hip’ < PIIr. ćráwniš (OIA śrón.i-). According to Buddruss (1977: 29), who furnishes more examples of this type, this process distinguishes Nuristani from Indo-Aryan (and, of course, Iranian). However, this is not quite correct since the process is very similar to an Indo-Aryan pattern of śr > s. found e.g. in OIA *śrathya- ‘to be tied’ > Nuristani Wg. saca
and > Dardic dialectal Paš. saca
both ‘waist’; there is also Sh. s.u ¯ ‘rest, repose’ (Lorimer) < OIA śraya- ‘refuge’ (12684), and there are several more examples. Thus, in case of Kamd. c."u ˜ we can justifiably speak of an example of a very archaic ‘Indian type’ process which occurred just before the change of PIIr. *ć > OIA ś. Curiously, Dardic Kalasha has preserved the ‘Iranina type’ process of lemma ‘thigh and hip’ in ustru
‘hips’ which goes back to older *˙cron.i- (thus with [st] < monophonemic

prothetic vowel) < *čroni-. /µ/ and .

101 Both voiced and unvoiced allomorphs both in H. and Sant. also express the sound of heavy pattering rain.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

606

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

614. Bng. tOkkO n.m. ‘miser, niggard’ — Kal. t.ak ‘stingy, miserly’ — Ko.chr. t@kki

‘hypocrite’ < OIA t.akka- ‘a niggard’ (?) (Kath¯ as.); there is also OIA t.a ¯ka- with same meaning in the R¯ ajatarangin¯ ˙ ı. 615. Rp. t@kty a- ‘to shake out (dust of blanket), brush off (dirt from object)’ — Ind. t2kh

‘to shake out (dusty clothes)’, Bur./Sh. thak (˙-t-) i.a. ‘to shake out, shake

kar
2 v  i.a. . a blanket’. The words are certainly influenced by OIA *t.akk- ‘cut, break’ (5421) but this specific meaning is limited to the northwest. 616. Bng. poet. tOpral n.m. ‘stabbing, thrust’ (with -r al suffix) < OIA TRPH ‘kill’ (tOpral

as in the PAN:



 < older *traph-);

dad a, khatirzuna, e la. . . , k a boli, tOthkhE sira ki tOpral la

brother.VOC, Arjuna.VOC, e attach.IMP. . . how say.PP.F, then arrowpoint.OBL GEN POP.F thrust attach.IMP ’O brother Arjuna, apply this, how is it said, then stab the arrowpoint’102 [352] 617. Garh. t.angt ˙ . ango ˙ ‘saxt jismem ˙ lac¯ıl¯ apan na ho – stiff’ — cf. Bur. tu
an-ga


s
l man
- ‘to get stiff (wet clothes in frost)’ (ga
s
l is probably a typing error for ga


s
l ‘wood block, firewood’) — Psht. t.¯ıng ‘stiff’; note also OIA *t.an- ‘be tight’ (5443). 618. Bng. t.ali n.f. ‘piece of cloth, head scarf’, Rudh. "t.allia-mullia ‘rags’ < OIA *t.alla-2 ‘piece of cloth’ (5452) with other modern parallels in K. and N. 619. P. t.a ¯t.k¯ a ‘clear sunshine’ cf. OIA (Rasik. xi, 44) t.at.ar¯ı-s¯ urya- ‘a form of the sun(?)’; the lemma is perhaps also found in OIA pat.ot.aja- ‘sunshine (?)’. 620. Bng. t anO v.t. ‘to open wide (usually the mouth); to split open’ perhaps < OIA TRD

split open’ with r metathesis (there are several parallels for a change oftr‘cleave, > t. in Bng. as in various other Outer Languages [shown right above for Bang¯ ˙ an.¯ı p. 607], cf. e.g. Kal. t.im ‘copper < OIA t¯ amrá- ‘copper’ [5779] via *tram as visible in Dm. tr¯ amba ‘red’, Wot.. t.a ¯ ‘three’, etc.), cf. also OIA (RV 8,45,25) tradá- ‘one who cleaves or opens’ — cf. also Kal. trak ‘precipice, chasm’, Kho. traq ‘ditto’ and Kal. tr
aik ‘to incise, slice, cut in two’ which might be cognate (OIA *t.ukk- ‘cut, break’

[5466] is certainly separate). The Bng. word is used e.g. in a scene in the PAN where Bhimsen challenges a giant to open wide his mouth so that he can throw stones into his throat and thereafter slip into the stomach of the giant. Bhimsen says: o , arE bElei, ubE tau khab (o yes, hey dear one.VOC, up.OBL open-wide.IMP103 mouth) ‘Hey my dear, open wide (your) mouth![806] Here perhaps also Bng. tirO n.m. ‘small window’ and t r, t rO n.f.,m. ‘mountain pass, place where two or more ridges meet, aedicula in



the kitchen’ (with -rO3 suffix?), Kt.g. Kc. t.¯ır ‘mountain-peak’, Jaun. t
r. Hendriksen

(1976: 81) quotes also from the nearby dialect of North Jubbal t¯ır ‘hilltop’, but this is probably a misspelling and his suggestion to derive the words < OIA t
ra- with meaning ‘edge’ was not accepted in the Addenda and Corrigenda. 621. Garh. t.a ¯ngru ˙ ‘ram with long horns’ — Bur. d.ágar ‘ram’, perhaps distantly cognate with OIA *d.angara˙ ‘cattle’ (5526). 622. M.w¯ ar. t.i˙c ‘span’ looks close to Bur. tís.c.i ‘span’ which ultimately goes back to OIA dis.t.i- ‘a measure of length’ (6343) with initial devoicing (cf. p. 480 cognate Kal. ˇȷis.(t.) ‘hand-span measure’). 623. R¯ aj. t.¯ıkir ‘girl; daughter’ (Z.) < OIA *t.ukka- ‘piece’ (5466) with -r- extension, has one semantic parallel in Or. t.ukul¯ı ‘girl’ with -l- extension. 102 Arjuna treats with the arrowpoint a poison-filled toe of Bh¯ıma. 103 ubE tau (up.OBL open-wide.IMP) is a composite verb (see p. 410) realizing here an intensive

aktionsart.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

607

624. Bng. t.un.iat.hi n.f. ‘biting cold (e.g. in the fingers)’ (with (i)at.hi suffix) and t.un.t.un.i n.f. ‘coldness in hands and feet’ (perhaps with CCH), cf. OIA tuhina- ‘frost, cold, mist, dew, snow’ which is cognate with tús.a ¯ra- ‘frost, snow’ (5894) for which Mayrhofer (EWA) considers the possibility of a derivation < PIE *(s)teu-s. Cf. PN *th ow- ‘to snow’ (CINCL 210). 625. Wg. t.up¯ a- ‘(mouth, eye, ear) to close; to lock up’104 appears – if there is a yogic background – to be related with OIA t.upt.¯ık¯ a- ‘collective name of the last 8 books of the Tantra-v¯ arttika’. 626. Bng. t ekanO ‘to reel, stagger’ < OIA Dh¯ atup. t.ikyate ‘is gone’ (5459a) with a modern

in A. parallel 627. Bng. t ernO ‘to con s.o.; to cause worry, concern, annoyance’ and t erianO ‘to con s.o.;

worry or problems’ (with -ia- suffix), P. t¯erna¯ ‘to discourage’,

possibly Khaś. to cause . . triur. and High Rudh. t..liur. ‘frown’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 187]) — Paš. t er- ‘to frown’ < OIA

ex. from Bng.: (Bhat.t.) karn.e-t.irit.ir¯ a- ‘whispering into the ear, tale-bearing.’ An

t eriai-t eriai khai goO ini a u

annoy.CONV-annoy.CONV



eat.VS go.PP.M.SG he.ERG. I ‘having annoyed me once and again he finished me’105 628. M.w¯ ar. t.onga ˙ ‘he-buffalo’ probably < OIA turaga-, turamga˙ ‘horse’ (5877) via *trunga. ˙ Further connection with Pr. tr@, Kamd. trañ both ‘young bull’, Gmb. tr¯ a ‘bull? 629. Bhad. tl2gru ‘light’; Chin. pr¯ agu is unclear because of two different ascribed meanings: <



‘light’ (Sharma [1991: 69]) and ‘day’ (Kaul [2006 i: 335]); the latter meaning is < OIA pr¯ agr¯ aha- ‘the day in front’ (8917), but for the former meaning relationship with OIA prak¯ aśá- ‘clearness’ (8437) cannot be excluded (with typical Chin. loss of final sibilant as e.g. in pri¯ u ‘flea’ < OIA *pris.u- ‘flea’ [9029]); note also the occasional change k > g as in K. g¯ aś ‘light’ (for more voicing parallels see p. 335). Here also Sir.d.od.. prakr.o ‘prak¯ aś - light’ (Kaul [2006 ii: 327]), Ki˜ ut.h. pagr.a ¯ ‘visible’ (LSI [ix, iv: 556]), MKH (1: 307) pagr.a ¯ ‘clearly’, Kgr. pragr.á ‘light’, and Kt.g. pOgrO ‘visible, manifest’ and prOg@rn o ‘to appear, become manifest, reveal oneself (e.g. of a god)’; cf. also sub 8438

Kt. pak˙ce- ‘to look for’. Note: Regarding OIA *pris.u- ‘flea’ cf. Him. ch¯ ach¯ a ‘a minute kind of gnat of yellow colour’ with a very similar form in Dardic Ind. c s ‘flea’.



630. Bhad. or Bhal. (see Kaul [2006 ii: 534]) tlapkunu ‘sound of water shaken by wind’ and <



tlope dhol opei ‘the sound produced by water when somebody jumps into it’ (with an <



echo formation) < OIA *trip- ‘be wet’ (6028) with modern parallels in Kt., Ash., Wg., Paš., all preserving the -p-. 631. Bng. thOrkEnO ‘to torment s.o.; snatch away s.th. from s.o.’ (with -k- and -E- suffixes)

press on’ < OIA starati ‘overthrows’ (13687) with a modern parallel in and t harnO ‘to

a doubtful one in H; also in M.w¯ G. and ar. ˇȷivt.har mar ‘to kill’. There is the following PAN line which describes how Bhimsen breaks the spine of his son: 104 Degener: “(Mund, Auge, Ohr) schließen; einsperren.” 105 Note here the ergative construction with pronominal object in nominative case, a common construction in some West Pah¯ ar.¯ı languages and Kashmiri.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

608

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

g udO thari-erO cgre di, cgrO cori-erO tOskO

press-see.PP.M.SG





spine break-see.PP.M.SG his knee spine on, ‘The knee was pressed on the spine, his spine broke’[759]

Note: There are a number of similar sounding words in Bng. with various suffixes whose origin – hardly cognate with OIA STR ‘strew’ – is unclear to me: thOrnO,

 meaning ‘to twine, double, twist’ thOr anO, thurnO, thur anO, thornO, thor anO all

and Bng.

poet.

thOrkin

O ‘to leap,

spring,

jump, bounce, throw o.s.’ The last form

is allomorph of OIA *thar‘tremble’ (6092). 632. Bng. t.han.i n.m. ‘Rajput assistant of a Brahmin priest’ (for more details see UGK) < OIA lex. sth¯ anika- ‘manager of a temple’. Cf. G. th¯ anak ‘rank, position’ which is < OIA *sth¯ anya- (13753) and H. th¯ an¯ı ‘householder’. 633. Bng. t.h¯ an. n.m. ‘beauty, radiance; standard of living’ is < OIA stha
na- ‘firm stance’ (13753) (Pa., Pk.) with very many modern reflexes, but the Bng. meanings seem to be without parallel and reflect the OIA meaning ‘shape, form, appearance (as of the moon)’. 634. Bng. thiO ‘a sitting place (in the kitchen); oblong stone(s) in a fire for propping up a

pot’, Deog. thiO and Khaśdh. thia ‘a sitting place in the kitchen’ — cf. Wg. cooking

in house’ (Morgenstierne

t.˜e ‘place, floor, mostly has t.¯e ‘floor’) and te-v at ‘(the three)

high’ < OIA stones (behind) the hearth (a y-te) for the ashes’. Cf. Pk. t.hiaa ‘upright,

sthitá- ‘standing’ (13768) and cognate OIA *t.h¯ıkka- ‘firm, right’ (5503). However, similar-looking B. teur.i ‘oven’ is derived by ODBL § 212 < tri-vrt- which matches well  with Wg. te-v at.



635. Bng. t.h¯ın.d. n.m. ‘s.o. who passes respectless and bad statements and judgements during an assembly or council, i.e. during a khuml.i’ (see p. 573) cannot derive for semantic reasons < OIA *t.hit.t.ha-, t.hen.t.ha- etc. ‘defective’ (5502) but fits quite well with OIA (Kath¯ as.) t.hin.t.h¯ a- ‘a gaming-house’. 636. Ku. poet. thula d@da ‘elder brother’, thula k@ka ‘elder uncle’, thulo baba ‘anybody

< OIA sth¯ older than grandfather’ with first word ulá- ‘large, thick, stout’ (13776) which has the following semantic parallels in the northwest and west: Ind. gh2 v ba  zhi u  ‘elder/eldest brother’ and gho  ba ‘grandfather’, Bshk. ‘grandfather’, Gau. gho gän. ‘big, elder’, Sv. ghan . yer.o ‘elder’, Paš. gan.-ay¯ om ‘my grand-mother’, Kal. gád.a bába ‘older sister’ and gád.a báya ‘older brother’, Kt. gan.vóv ‘any male relative 4 generations above Ego’, K. göd.añuku b¯ oyu ‘elder brother’, Pr. g@ndar ya ‘grandfather’ — Gadd. and P¯ ad.. m¯ ot.a ¯ puttar ‘elder son’, Garh. bar.a ¯ ‘father’s elder brother’, bar.¯ı ‘wife of father’s elder brother’, Sad. b2da ‘father’s elder brother’ and b2di ‘mother’s

elder sister’ — G. m¯ ot.a ¯ bhaï ‘elder brother’ (LSI ix,ii: 406), M.w¯ ar. mot. ay ‘father’s mother’ and mot.eba ‘father’s elder brother’ all either < OIA ghaná-2 ‘compact, firm dense’ (4424) (Ind. and Gau.) or its allomorph *ghan.d.a- or, in case of G., Gadd. and P¯ ad.. < *mot.t.a-1 ‘defective’ (10187) or, in case of Garh. and Sad. < OIA var.a- ‘big’ which is, however, cognate with vrddh
a- ‘large; old’. There is also a semantic parallel  in the very east: B.chit. t Orda ‘grandfather’ (Učida [1970: 14]) with first component < OIA sthaurá- *‘strong’ (13780) (with a doubtful modern parallel in Dardic). This is a case of intra Indo-Aryan ‘calques’ (see p. 222). Note: Semantically different is Kho. l"ot. bap ‘great-grandfather’ and l"ot. vav ‘great-grandmother’ ← l"ot. ‘big’ which Strand derives < OIA lat.t.a-1 ‘bad man’

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

609

(10917), which has in some reflexes the meaning ‘old, worn-out’. 637. Kal. t.h˜ u bí˙ca ‘enclosure or pen made between posts’ < OIA sthu
na -vicaya- lit. ‘post

gathering or putting together’. 638. Bng. t.hoka n.m. ‘woodpecker’, Jaun. thok@na ‘woodpecker’ (Z.), Mult. t.ok¯ a ‘wood a ‘clapper on a millstone’ (Bhatt [1975 pecker’ (Wilson 1899a), Garh. t.hokad. han.y¯ (vikrama 2032): 396]) — Jat.. t.hok¯ a p¯ıt.¯ı ‘carpenter’ — cf. Bhat.. ta 
k^taka re ‘a wood — Bodo

dialect pecker’; Psht. taktaka rai ‘ditto’; Kal. gonat.ak ‘a kind of woodpecker’



of Gutob t.ukt.uki ‘woodpecker’. The Bng. and the other words derive < *t.hokk‘knock’ (5513), the Psht. form may be an IA borrowing and the other unaspirated forms re-borrowings from Psht. or another Iranian language. Note also Pr. tok ‘sound of knocking on wood’, Bur. 2 t.huk -˙t- ‘to pick, peck’, Sant. t.ak t.@ki ‘to strike the ground repeatedly with the end of a stick, as done by ojhas to find out where a “bonga” [spirit] or something causing an injury is buried’, etc. Note: Regarding Garh. t.hokad.han.y¯ a, t.hakt.yõn.y¯ a ‘the clapper of a watermill’ see also Ind. t2kt2ka 
r2 y ‘the clapper of a mill’, Psht. taktaka
rai, Kal. t.akt.ák





‘clapper on a millstone’. 639. Bng. dOi n.f. ‘chattel, property, possession’ < OIA Dh¯ atup. d.a ¯payate ‘accumulates’ (5544) with a modern parallel in M.; there is also dOi-bOi n.f. ‘pride of ownership’,

regarding second word cf. OIA Dh¯ atup. b¯ıbhate ‘boasts’. 640. Bng. dOtnO ‘to be content’ and dOti kOi ‘(till or with) full satisfaction or contentment’,

kh¯

< OIA drpt
P. d.at. ke an.a ¯ ‘to eat to satiety’ a- ‘arrogant’ sub d
rpyati ‘is mad’ (6512)   dialectal Kal. and (Pa., Pk.) with CCH and with indirect modern parallels in Wg., N., however all doubtful; semantically closest is Pk. dippaï ‘is pleased’. 641. Bng. d.àbl.ia n.f. ‘woolen blanket used by shepherds’ (with unclear suffixes) — M. dh¯ abal. ‘a rough blanket’ cf. OIA (RV, AV) dr ap
- ‘mantle, garment’. 642. Bng. damOnO n.m. ‘red-hot iron rod’ (with -nO 𝑥 suffix) and d.a ¯m n.m. ‘a burn (e.g.



caused through a red-hot iron rod)’ cf. OIA dambháyati ‘hurts’ (6182) with modern reflexes in Sh. and P. but their meanings ‘discomfort’ and ‘to taunt’ do not quite match with the Bng. meanings. Under the same lemma Turner suggests alternative derivation < MIA *dambh- ‘to burn’ which is the correct one for Bng. and he continues “s.v. dáhati” ‘burns’ (6245) with many modern reflexes, but again in Bng. the verb appears with initial retroflex stop as da n.f. ‘pain’ which cf. with Ap. d.ambh ‘d¯ ah –

‘burning’. 643. Bng. dibrO, dibrarO n.m. ‘stomach; belly’ (with -rO 𝑥 and -r ar suffixes) < OIA d.imba-2





‘body’ (5551) with modern parallels only in Dardic. Note: Pr. d.ob"ul, d.ub"ul ‘a type of bread; Dickbrot, is coated or filled with ghee’ and d.obul t¯ u ‘a stomach in cattle, goat, sheep < OIA d.imba-1 ‘egg’ (5550) with modern parallels in A., B., Or.? Regarding irregular first vowel cf. rather Munda Sant. ãombo¼k ‘little balls of bread, generally made at harvest time from the flour of new rice’ and perhaps ãubãubi(@) ‘swollen or tight feeling in the stomach, costive’. ¯ 644. Pr. d.ilig"¯ı, ˇȷ¯ılig"¯ı ‘rat’ and Kt. d.ill"ik ‘ditto’ < OIA (Ap.) d.erik¯ a- ‘musk rat’.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

610

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

645. Bng. dngO,

dngi

n.m.,n.f. ‘stick, whip’ < OIA *d.inka˙ ‘stick’ (5547) with modern

in N.,

A. and perhaps Wg. to which is to be added Pr. dug"o ‘stick; stalk (of parallels . a plant)’. 646. Bng. d cO, d ci1 n.m.,n.f. ‘bulge on the body (e.g. the finger joints)’ < OIA *d.hiñca (5588) with modern parallels in Ku. and G. ‘lump, heap’ 647. Chin. d.r.agdir-pi ‘lightning and thunder’ — Paš. dr uu g, dr uu g- ‘to thunder’ (cf. also drang˙ ‘to sound’) (Morgenstierne),106 second syllable in Bro. luNd r2k ‘storm’ (built with luN ‘air’ – Ramaswami [1975: 63]) — Jat.. dhar.u ¯kn¯ a ‘to thunder’ — Rab. hikirimdikirim ‘the sound of friction between two clouds during monsoon’ (Roy [2011: 99]) — here perhaps also Kt. “oodrun” (Biddulph) or udařé sta ‘thunder’ (Strand) — Sang. doldo"rok and d oGdo"Gok ‘thunder’, same as Psht. d.oloxd.olox — Kh. dhadhir ‘thunder’

Rem. and and Munda digdag ‘flash of lightning’ (wohl zwei verschiedene Wurzeln), Bon. digdag ‘flash of lightning’ — Ora. d.hururur¯ u, d.hurd.hurrn¯ a ‘thunder’. An ‘expressive’ lemma with many allomorphs, but perhaps mixed with derivation < PIE dh er@-gh - (IEW: 251) i.a. Lith. dárga ‘squelchy, bad weather’ and Russian padoroga ‘tempest’ and ‘snow squall’. But note also similar forms in Western Tani like d¯ o-ryak ‘lightning’ with d¯ o < mesoroot #3570 *don˙ ‘weather formative; rain’. Notes: (a) Bur. tingto ˙ ng ˙ ‘thunder’ (Biddulph) resembles Munda Kh. t.hanka ˙ and Sad. t.hank¯ ˙ a ‘thunder’ and all seem to constitute a separate lemma. (b) Another probably separate lemma: Kal. d.id.ayong ˙ ‘thunder’, M. dhad.adhad.a ¯t.a ‘any loud thundering or roaring sound’, Khm. "dahdaN ni "duhduN ‘great crashing noise (esp. of thunder)’, Kh. d.hed.hrel, dhEdhrEl ‘thunder’.

of fire or thunder’ (c) Again somewhat separate are Psht. dand¯ uk¯ ar ‘the noise and Dm. dan.d.o"rok ‘thunder’. (d) The following paragraph has already been discussed above p. 230, but is left here unabridged for simpler comparison: Kho. bumburús. ‘thunder’ and, probably borrowed from Kho., Wkh. bumb@"riš ‘thunder’ are synonym compounds with second component < OIA ghós.a- ‘noise’ (4528) (cf. Si. gosa ‘roar of thunder’). The first component derives < PIE *bhrem- ±‘make a noise’ but it cannot derive < OIA bhramará-2 ‘large black bee’ (9651) which is reflected in Kho. b"umbur ‘hornet’. Cf. Mayrhofer’s skeptical remarks on here unrelated OIA BHRAM ‘to be fickle, flicker, blaze’ (EWA), characterized by him as ‘elementary sound imitations’, but which probably has a semantically related reflex in different dialects of Paš. as blämúr and l¯ [email protected] ‘lightning’. However, Mallory and Adams quote this form and, moreover, they suggest that *bhrem- tends to mean ‘roar’ in Germanic (and similar in Latin and Polish) but means ‘bee’ in Sanskrit. Yet, the lemma for ‘bee’ has been listed by Turner separately as bhramará-2 ‘large black bee’ (9651) and Mayrhofer believes that the ‘bee’ word can be equated with BHRAM only in the sense of ‘to ramble in a fickle way; unstet umherschweifen’. Thus we have here a situation where the evidence from NIA is quite clear whereas the evidence from OIA looks rather blurred. The meaning ‘thunder’ is also found in Greek 𝛽 𝜚𝑜𝜈𝜏 𝜂´ and in Latin (as Greek borrowing) front¯esia ‘thunder and lightning sign; Donner- und Blitzzeichen’. The two Kho. words are thus clearly reflexes of an OIA Vedic and a non-Vedic (OIA?) lect even though

106 But Buddruss notes (1959b: 40) du  d-, drud- ‘to thunder’.





© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

611

a hornet is bigger than a bee.

> 648. Kh¯ aśi. drl ara ‘a lizard’ (Kaul [i: 179]) perhaps < OIA grh alik a, grholik a- ‘a small



  house-lizard’. 649. Bhad. r.ir.knu ‘to churn’ (Kaul [2006 i: 191]) is probably cognate with OIA *rapaka‘churn’ (10618) (Pk.) where one finds also Ku. raur.¯ı ‘churn, churning stick’. The Pk. form ravaya- ‘churning stick’ has a clear parallel in Munda Korku rivi ‘bamboo stick used to churn butter’. 650. Bng. tOngOl

nO ‘to push, shove’ (with -l.-1 causative suffix) and tOngOl

inO2 ‘to stagger



or reel (as drunken person)’ < OIA Dh¯ atup. tangati ˙ ‘goes, stumbles, trembles’. 651. Bng. tOznO v.i. ‘to swing (as swing)’, tOz anO v.t. ‘to pull or push (a swing)’, teznO ‘to

(e.g., to a swing)’ < OIA TUJ ‘push; instigate, incite’ (tujete ‘pushes’).

give a push 652. Bng. tOnnO2 ‘to thunder’, tOni atO n.m. ‘penis’ (as “thunderer”) (with -ia-2 and -t(O)



suffixes) and Thar. thanak ‘thunder’ < OIA *tanati, allomorph of tanyati ‘resounds,

653.

654. 655.

656.

657.

roars’ and stánati ‘roars’ (stanáyati ‘thunders’) (13668) which is also reflected in Pr. t.õ, t.o ¯ ‘to thunder’ and t.õt. o, t.o ¯t.o ¯ ‘thunder’. Bng. tOpO n.m. ‘place or goal within reach or according to one’s capacity; reach, range’, tOpE kE adv. ‘in a right or fixed place’, cf. OIA (Daś.) tatpada ‘the place of that’ — here perhaps also Bur.ys. thop ‘target (in the sense of Zielscheibe)’ and Wg. tap"a ‘group, party, factionist (in playing)’ because of padá- also meaning ‘standpoint, position, rank’. Bng. tOmbnO v.i. ‘to (start to) swing; to move, go’ and tOmbanO v.t. ‘to make s.th.

(Vop.) tambati ‘goes’.

swing’ < OIA Bng. tOri alO n.m. ‘settlings in the process of brewing brandy’ and Garh. tOri ‘mal¯ a¯ı –

perhaps Kal. tr˜e ‘fresh cream’ but nasalization is unclear, < OIA (VS, cream’, and . K¯ atyŚr.) tarik¯ a- ‘skin on milk’ (5710) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in P. Bng. tOrkO, tOrgO1 n.m. ‘congelation, coagulation’ (with -kO1 or -gO1 suffix)107 — Ind. ta r ‘coagulation’, Kal. trúik ‘to congeal, coagulate’ and trúna c.hir ‘yoghurt’ (lit. ‘coagulated milk’, built with the past participle of the verb). All these forms suggest an older form *t ar- ‘to congeal’ whose connection with the OIA adjective *trpu- ‘sour’  (5930) is unclear. Bng. tOrk anO, tOrginO ‘to approach s.th. quickly and with full energy, collect all one’s



energies, move nimbly’, tOrgO2 n.m. ‘excitement, agitation’, tOrphOr ‘hasty, restless’ and tOrphOrO ‘fresh, energetic (as person)’ — Mult. trikkhe ‘quick’ (Wilson 1899a) perhaps all < OIA tarás 2 ‘quick’ (5708) with many modern parallels, but the velar extensions are only found in Bng., N. (tarkhar ‘hastiness’) and Mult. However, Turner regards this derivation as “very doubtful” and it seems that the forms are also cognate with the above forms sub Bng. tOkO (p. 607) which is < OIA *targa-. However, if this connection exists one has to assume a process *targa- > *traga (which is indeed supported by Bhad. t..lagr.o) > again targa- (for which there are also parallels as in Bng. pOrianEnO ‘to recognize’ < OIA praj an ati ‘knows’). Bng. tOkO and tOrk anO would

to

two different layers. And there is even a third layer of related

words: then belong Bng. tOgnO1 ‘to stamp the ground; to push’, t agnO ‘to stamp one’s feet rhythmically

while listening to a hero song); to be in a state of happy excitement, hot, (especially wanton’, tOg anO ‘to put or place s.th. orderly at its right place’ as in etkE tOgaO es ‘place it here!’ and t agO ‘crazed with love (e.g., as bull)’.

107 There is another homonymous lemma meaning ‘excitement, agitation’ which is discussed right below.

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

612

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

658. Bng. tOrzinO ‘to contest, compete (in singer contests with so-called lam@n and c˙ hor.a



songs)’ cannot for phonetic reasons be cognate with the OIA noun tarjanai.a. ‘surpassing’, but compares better with Sant. taraé garaé ‘loudly, to shout’ (cf. H. garajn¯ a ‘to thunder’). 659. Bng. tOr
sO garnO ‘to treat s.o. roughly, tantalize, torment, plague, harrass’ and tOr
selO2

s.o. badly’ (with MIA -illa- grammeme) < OIA *tarsati ‘trembles’ marnO ‘to thrash .

(6006) (Pa., Pk.) (with garnO ‘to pull out’) with modern reflexes in Rom. and K. (and

tars ‘fear’. Regarding origin of verb see EWA. perhaps G.); note also Pers. Notes: (a) There is also Bng. tOrsinO v.i. ‘to tremble, shake’ which is < OIA allomorph

*tarasati. It appears not unlikely that in a number of cases of ‘preservation’ of certain consonant clusters in the northwest where tatsama borrowing appears unlikely, such clusters were preserved through successive processes of separation and recombination of the phonemes. (b) And there is Bng. tOr
selO3 (with MIA -illa- grammeme) as in tOr
selO goO/phirO ‘(he/she) has become thirsty or turned pale’ and tar
sO ‘pale (when frightened)’ with contamination of the above tOr
sO with a derivation < OIA tars.a- ‘thirst’ (5729). 660. Bng. tO
si arO n.m. ‘thief’ and tO
si ari n.f. ‘theft’ < OIA táskara- ‘robber, thief’ with reflexes in Pa. and Pk., AMg. takkara. See EWA, and despite Kuiper’s deliberations (1991: 67) the consonant group -sk- is obviously a historical reality. I follow Paul Thieme who argued (1972: 79) that táskara- is the outcome of metathesis of OIA *tsaraka- ‘lurker, sneaker’ ← TSAR ‘sneak, stalk’. Notes: (a) The change sk > (*)c > ś is not common Indo-Aryan but found in some Bng. words, for which I suggest PIE origin (see p. 779), and which looks like r
 [Buddruss: 1959b: 66]) ‘shoulder’ an Iranian sound change: Paš. š¯ an"a ¯ (or su



parallels OIA skandhá- ‘shoulder’ but is a borrowing from Iranian. (b) The same change sk > ś is probably also found in Ko. śemp¯ at.o ‘fin; wing’ which is a synonym compound with second component also found in Ko. put. ‘page’ (see p. 374) < OIA páttra- ‘leaf of book’ (7733) and the first component deriving < OIA *skambha-2 ‘shoulder-blade, wing, plumage’ (13640, see there Mult. khambhar.a ¯ ‘fin’). 661. Bng. tO
stO
sO ‘rough, prickly, scratchy, uneven, rugged; dry and hoarse (as voice)’ < OIA trsta
- ‘harsh, rough’ (5938) with modern parallels in Dardic and Khet. The change -s.t. -/-ś- has stray parallels all over the northwest, cf. e.g. Sh. as ‘eight’ and reflexes  -s > . . of the same lemma in dialectal Paš. čes. ‘bitter’ and K. c˙ o ¯śu ‘acrid, atstringent’. Note: Similar looking tO
spO
s adv.,n.m. ‘quickly; friction, murmur’ and tO
spO
snO

‘to grope with one’s hands’ are said by my language consultants to be cognate with Bng. tO
skiarO ‘thief’ (built with -kiarO agent suffix as in Bng. lu
skiarO ‘[small] thief’ which is cognate with OIA l usa
yati ‘steals’ [11098]). The component tO
stherefore derives, I suggest, < OIA táskara- ‘thief’ (see p. 614 and -pOs < OIA sparśa- ‘touch’ (13809).

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

18.1. Modern reflexes of Old Indo-Aryan

613

662. Bng. tOt alinO ‘to feel dizzy’, t Ot al n.m. ‘vertigo, giddiness’ and t OtO adj.,n.m.

distressed; tiredness, exhaustion; botheration, worry’ < OIA t¯ ‘suppressed, antá‘fainting, languishing’ (5763) (Pk.) (with - al suffix) with a modern parallel in M. 663. Bng. tOsnO ‘to pull, draw, tighten’, tOsi n.f. ‘strain, stretch, draught’ and t  OsanO ‘to press or stick out (e.g. one’s belly)’ < OIA tamsáyati ˙ ‘draws to and from’ (5614) with a modern parallel in N. 664. Bng. t Ori ‘under, below’ may derive < OIA (RV) tad
t ‘closely near (as if striking

but this is quite uncertain; an ex. from the PAN:

against)’,

bOri kE butE t Ori nO
si goE

GEN POP.M.SG

pipal under go go.PP.M.PL ‘They went under the pipal tree’[726]108 665. Bng. t  Ong

n.m. and Him. t Ong

both ‘balcony’, Kann. “tang-gang” ‘verandah’, Sirm. “tung” ‘verandah’ (Gazetteer of India, Himachal Pradesh, Sirmur 1969: 438, see Negi) < OIA lex. tamanga˙ ‘platform’ (5686a) (Pk.) with a modern parallel in A. 666. Kal. tanús.u ‘ibex, mountain goat with backward curving horns’ < OIA t¯ anva-ut-śr¯ u“having own upright horns” (cf. OIA ta
nva- ‘one’s own [son]’ [5766] and *ut-
srnga



‘having upright horns’ [1856] and *śr¯ u- ‘horn’ [12715]). This derivation, if correct, suggests for Pr. z.uz.u ‘male markhor’ a synonym compound < OIA *śr¯ u-ut-śr¯ u-. 667. Chin. tande ‘waist’ cf. OIA (Nal. iii,13) tanumadhya- “body-middle’; the waist’. 668. Kt. tap
@k ‘plate’, Bro. t@b@k ‘metal plate (th¯ ali)’, Sh.ast. tab¯ ak ‘big plate’ — Dari. tapke ‘pan’ — Ko. tăb¯ ak ‘dish’ < OIA *tapaka- ‘frying pan’ (5670 and 14554). Cf. OIA t¯ apaka- ‘heating; cooking stove’. 669. Kal. tas ‘the power of a person’s presence, personality, bearing’ as in tása som tas ne šíau ‘he has no bearing’, cf. OIA tasthu- ‘stationary, immovable, motionless’ (OIA ¯ ‘stand’) and for parallels regarding preservation of -s of the OIA -sth- cluster STHA see p. 181. 670. Bng. t¯ ak n.f. ‘part of the day, fraction of time’ derives < OIA tarka- ‘inquiry’ (5714), but a semantic parallel is known to me only from N. and New. t¯ ak ‘time, opportunity’ and Garh. ghamt¯ ak ‘morning’ with gham- < OIA gharmá- ‘heat’ (4445); but the word may have also been borrowed into Munda, cf. Sant. tak ‘opportunity, time, season, moment’. 671. Bng. poet. tith¯ an n.m. ‘burning place, way or a place towards the residency of the god of the dead’ < OIA *t¯ırth¯ adahana- ‘burning place at a descent to a river’ (5847) with a modern parallel in Ku., but dental nasal in the Bng. word is unclear. Cf. also Bng. jOkhi an ‘(way or location) towards the underworld’ (p. 589). 672. Deś. tiyamai ‘woman’ (Bhayani [1988: 92]) < OIA str¯ımaya- ‘woman’ (13735) with a modern parallel in P. 673. Bng. tirnO ‘blade of grass’, low Rudh. trar. ‘common grass’ — Paš. tr n ‘grass; hay’ — G. taran. (˜ u) ‘blade of grass’ (Masica [1991: 457]) < OIA t
rna- ‘grass’ (5906) (Pa., Pk.) 

with preservation of vibrant. 674. Siripur¯ı¯ a dialect of B. tirm¯ at ‘wife’ and Haijong dialect tim¯ at ‘ditto’, A. tirot¯ a ‘woman’ < OIA *str¯ım¯ atr¯ı- ‘woman’ (13735a) with modern parallels in L., P., D og. and Bshk. . to which Mult. tr¯emit ‘wife, woman’ is to be added. 675. Garh. t¯ıtu ‘pitt¯ aśay – gall-bladder’ < OIA taiktik¯ a- ‘gall-bladder’ (5952) with a modern parallel in Ash. 108 bOri derives < vat.a- ‘banyan Ficus Indica’, but in this part of the Himalayas it designates the

tree. pipal

© 2023, Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden ISBN Print: 978-3-447-12014-2 - ISBN E-Book: 978-3-447-39381-2

614

Chapter 18. Linguistic data I

676. Bng. turkO n.m. ‘oil for roasting, ghee’ and turkEnO v.t. ‘to roast’, P. tur.akn.a ¯ ‘to pour

on vegetables, meat, to season’ probably

< OIA (B¯ hot ghee alar.) tad.atad.iti ‘crack!’, which is cognate with OIA trat.- ‘crackle’ (5988), and with a > u. 677. Bng. tundkEnO ‘to jog, push, shove s.o. repeatedly and pull around (often as baby

the empty breasts); scatter, litter; throw stuff all around’ (with intensive -k- and -Esuffixes)109 < OIA *tundati ‘strikes’ (5859); note OIA *tunda-3 ‘striking, sharp’ with a doubtful modern parallel in P. 678. M. turung ˙ ‘a prison’ is Pers. borrowing (turang ‘prison’), but Deś. dranga˙ ‘village’ 1 ‘a kind of town’ respectively dranga(Bhayani [1988: 160]) is < OIA tranga˙ ˙ ‘frontier watch-station’ (6615); Mayrhofer (EWA) suspects borrowing from Iranian which is likely if one compares (KEWA) Ir. *drang- ‘hold, make firm’; the M. form, found in M. K. Deshpande, displays a > u, but note also inherited M. forms quoted sub 6615, namely da g , da gy a ‘customs officer’.

er adj.,n.m. ‘(people who are) destitude, seedy, barbarians’ (used for 679. Bng. turkh¯ . outsiders and Brahmins) (with -er(O) suffix) < OIA turus.ka- ‘Turk’.110

runlet’, turturiy¯ 680. Garh. turtur ‘jal k¯ı patl¯ı dh¯ ar – rill, a ‘kam m¯ atr¯ a mem ˙ girne v¯ al¯ı p¯ an¯ı k¯ı dh¯ ar – steep runlet’ and probably also tar¯ ak ‘drav k¯ı patl¯ı-s¯ı ks.an.ik dh¯ ar – a very thin runlet of a liquid’ as in p¯ an.¯ı k¯ı tar¯ ak ‘a runlet of water’ may be more or less directly influenced by OIA turá-1 ‘quick’ (5874) with reduplicated ‘parallels’ in P., H. turtur¯ a and Ko. turturi all ‘nimble, active, flippant’. However, the ‘parallels’ are in no way related with a ‘stream’ meaning as in Gar.v¯ al¯ı. According to Mayrhofer, OIA turá‘swiftly, striving, keen, advancing vigorously’111 , which is cognate with TAR1 ‘cross over; overcome’ may have been contaminated by turá- ‘quick’, which is cognate with TVAR ‘hasten’. It is thus likely that the H., P. and Ko. forms are reflexes of TVAR but the Garh. forms are reflexes of TAR. This is even more likely vis-à-vis the fact that reflexes of PIE *terh2 ‘bring across, overcome’ have several water-related reflexes like OIA t¯ırthá- ‘ford’ and Alb. sh-tir ‘to cross a river’. Moreover, Pokorny suggests that OIA tará- ‘crossing over’ has correspondences in the Illyrian river names Taros, Tara112 (IEW: 1075). The Gar.v¯ al¯ı forms may be a distant parallel. 681. (a) Bng. tulkEnO and Deog. tulk onO and tulkaOnO ‘to swell, rise as water, brim over as

water’ . . . this lemma has been discussed above p. 228. 682. Kal. tus.ul.ék ‘to purify a mother and child or animal and offspring after a birth’ if < older *čus.ul.ék (cf. Kal. ta˙círik ∼ c˙ a˙círik ‘to be full [of food]’ and tatrumá ∼ čatrumá ‘name of a village’) then < OIA coks.a- ‘pure, clean’ (4918) (Pa., Pk.) and a type of causative suffix -l.e- as also in .luihék ‘to hide someone’ versus .luil.ék ‘to hide someone, cause to be immersed’ (< OIA lopayati ‘neglects, infringes’ [11083.4]). Among the many modern reflexes of coks.a, only the Niya Documents have preserved the -ks.- as an affricate. For parallel examples j > d see p. 475. 683. Garh. t¯ un ‘maveśiyom ˙ k¯ a rtu mem ˙ a ¯n¯ a y¯ aa ¯ne k¯ a samay – rutting season’ (Nautiyal and Jakhmola) probably