Khot Khotanese Kurd

Parthian From

Turfan Psht

Pashto Sbal

Balōčī Kārgōnag (quetta

Aqil Khan

Questions

The concept of Common Balochi 9

In an attempt to offer at least a partial solution for some of the problems named above, the concept of Common Balochi (CBal.) is used here. The term is meant to denote the stage of Balochi immediately prior to the splitting into different dialects. From a methodological point, the term has the advantage that it makes explicit which developments are assumed to be attributed to the Balochi dialect group as a whole and which ones should be ascribed to some specific dialect(s). 10 The existence of a Common Balochi stage, inherently probable, is made likely by the fact that it is indeed possible to reconstruct such a stage, that the contemporary varieties may be derived from it by the assumption of changes which are of a kind as may occur in varieties of a language and are in some cases even demonstrable by the presence of unchanged variants. This model is also in line with the historical details as assumed by various authors (cf. I 3.2.1). Common Balochi might be posited for a period prior to the migration of the Baloch into what is presently Pakistani Balochistan, i.e. prior to the contact with Ind. languages.

Consequently, the discussion of Balochi historical phonology is done in two parts: chapter II 2 discusses the development of OIr. sounds into Common Balochi, chapter II 3 presents the phenomena which are likely to have happened in a post-Common Balochi stage. 11 In both chapters, a table gives a survey of the sound changes treated.

Sources 12

Unfortunately, there are not enough data for any Balochi dialect, and the quality and approach of the existing sources differs markedly. The main sources are the following:

9 The first (and hitherto rather isolated) use of the term "Common Balochi" seems to be MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255, where it is used without further comments. 10 One of the implications of this model is that the fricatives of Eastern Balochi (f, \, x) are secondary developments of Common Balochi p, t, k, and not something preserved (cf. II 2.1.1, 3.2.1.1.1). 11 GEIGER 1891 treats Bal. historical phonology the other way round, i.e. by noting the OIr. sources for each Bal. phoneme. Given the dialectal variation, this seems less useful: Geiger thus has to note the Eastern Bal. (EBal.) phonemes separately, stating which phoneme of the other dialect it derives from. Geiger thus in fact enumerates Southern and Western Bal. (SWBal.) phonemes (assumed to be identical with CBal. phonemes) to describe their sources, and to derive EBal. from them. ˙ H MAD et al. (eds.): Haft-zubānī lu ġat (Lahore 1978). Ahmad also states in the preface that the book is based on the Raxšānī dialect. In fact, however, it contains a considerable number of words obviously of Eastern Balochi origin (verbs with infinitives in -a ġ, words in -āō (i.e. /-āb/, corresponding to non-Eastern -āb, e.g. xarāō < xarāb "bad"). The book thus presents a selection of words from diverse dialects, with a sizeable portion of Eastern Balochi words. It is thus an important source for Eastern Balochi, for which otherwise modern sources are lacking, and has the additional advantage of being independent from the older sources. 15 14 Note e.g. that the lists making up the majority of the early sources were assembled by asking people "How do you call X in Balochi?", which involves certain methodological problems. The early date of this material along with limited knowledge of Balochi on the part of the authors is a reason for a number of errors (imperfect recording, inadequate transcription, misprints etc.). Since more up-todate information about the Eastern Bal. dialects is lacking, it is not always possible to be sure whether a given word involves some error.

15 There are numerous errors in this book. However, since the words are given both in Arabic orthography and transcription, it is in most cases possible to find out what is intended.

The criteria for the selection of vocabulary items remain unclear: some words appear in two or even more (dialectal or other) variants without discernible reason; there is a marked redundancy in some fields (e.g. each of the entirely regular numbers 71-79 is noted separately, with the exception of 75 and 78), contrasting with lack of information in others. The latter phenomenon is probably due to chance since AŠFAQ A ˙ H MAD 1978 is based on word counts.

1. Aim, Method and Technical Questions although material of other dialects is included as well. As the book is intended for Balochi readers, grammatical information (e.g. the past stems of verbs) is not given.

In addition, there is an English-Biluchi (sic) Dictionary of 1910 by Thomas J.L. MAYER (with a considerable number of errors); much of its material again comes from Dames.

In Pakistani Balochistan, several further lexicographical works were assembled mainly in the 1970s, with the double aim of introducing the Urdu language to speakers of Balochi (and/or Balochi to speakers of Urdu) 20 and of saving the heritage. 21 These sources generally suffer from low printing quality, methodological problems 22 and a lack of information necessary for non-native speakers of Balochi. 23 1.4.2 Other sources BMC: The two-volume Course in Balochi (1969) by Muhammad Abd-al-Rahman BARKER and Aqil Khan MENGAL is a description of Pakistani Raxšānī spoken in the region of Noshke (cf. BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxvi). 24 It is the most detailed (in fact, the only detailed) description of any single Balochi dialect. The second volume also contains a Balochi-English and English-Balochi glossary. In some cases, BARKER/ MENGAL seem to be led by some preconception about what the "pure" Balochi form should look like, 25 but, apart from that, BMC is a very valuable, error-free source.

: emendation (word found in another form, but to be read thus) ‡ : word (form) the existence of which is not sure †: non-existing word (form) : word not found in EAL (symbol used in III)

Bibliographical abbreviations

ABG

Preface

It is high time that something was done about the orphaned state of Balochi studies. ELFENBEIN 1990/I:1

In the Introduction to his Anthology of Classical and Modern Balochi Literature, Josef Elfenbein has outlined the desiderata in Balochi linguistics as follows: there is "no systematic description of the language, no dictionary, no comprehensive description of the dialects". More than ten years later, the situation has changed insofar as a comprehensive Balochi-Balochi dictionary (Sayad Ganǐ) is now available, and a series of workshops and conferences held at Uppsala University has brought to light important new material from a wide range of dialects. However, since most of Elfenbein's statement unfortunately is still true (and will probably continue to be so for some time), any study about the history of the Balochi language as a whole must remain tentative in several aspects. Nevertheless, as the last (also the first and only) systematic treatment of Balochi historical phonology, viz. GEIGER 1890 and 1891, is now more than one hundred years old, one may consider it worthwhile to use the data gathered in the past century to undertake a fresh look at the history of the Balochi language.

The present book is a revised version of my PhD thesis submitted to and defended at the Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe University Frankfurt a.M. in 2003. During the writing of the present study, many teachers, colleagues and friends have kindly extended their much appreciated help to me. The staff of the Department for Comparative Linguistics has supported my work in many ways. Sabir Badalkhan, Carina Jahani, Joachim Matzinger, Gerhard Rammer and Pakzad Yusefian have provided me with data and writings. I am indebted to Georg Buddruss, Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, Jost Gippert, Christian Rammer, Ralf-Peter Ritter, Lutz Rzehak and Nicholas Sims-Williams, who read previous versions of the present study, drew my attention to language material and references, and saved me from many errors I would otherwise have committed. Special thanks are due to Jost Gippert, Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst and Nicholas Sims-Williams, who have patiently discussed all sorts of linguistic problems with me, and to Christian Rammer for, among many other things, making the maps in the appendix. Bernice Archer helped with proof-reading, for which I am very grateful. Jost Gippert has accompanied the work on the present study with continuous sympathetic interest in the major and lesser questions that the study of the Balochi language and its history involves. Needless to say, all remaining errors are my own. -I am thinking with grateful memories of the late Jochem Schindler, who kindled in his students the love for historical phonology and taught us to appreciate the beauty of sound laws.

Balochi belongs to the less intensely studied Modern Iranian languages. It has, however, fascinated those who studied it by its archaic appearance in phonological matters. In spite of the relatively small number of academic works devoted to Balochi linguistics, the language is of great importance both for Iranian studies and for historical linguistics.

Balochi is of particular importance for the study of the history of the Iranian languages since (in contrast to all other modern Iranian languages) it directly reflects the Old Iranian consonants in all positions of the word: "Von allen Dialekten [i.e. Iranian languages] hebt sich das Balūtschī durch grosse Ursprünglichkeit glänzend hervor. (...) Das Balūtschī repräsentirt also in den wichtigsten Punkten des Consonantismus eine Sprachstufe, die um rund 1500 Jahre hinter der Gegenwart zurückliegt" (GEIGER 1901:417). Although the remarkable archaicity noted by Geiger might be the result of somewhat more complex processes than hitherto assumed (cf. II 2.1.1, IV), Balochi is a key witness for the reconstruction of earlier stages of the Iranian languages for which the evidence is often scarce or difficult to interpret.

Among the contemporary Iranian languages, Balochi occupies an important place due to the comparatively large area where it is spoken and the number of its speakers (cf. I 3). A further interesting point is that the Balochi lexicon as well as its historical phonology reflects the contact with a variety of neighbouring languages. The numerous loanwords are not only of Persian and (through Persian and, in some cases, Urdu) Arabic origin, but a number of them also come from Brahui or Indo-Aryan languages. The latter are supposedly chiefly from Sindhi and Lahnda and, in the recent decades, Urdu (cf. I 1.2.1, 3.3).

It follows that Balochistan is an interesting field for the study of multilingualism with a variety of closely related (Persian, Pashto), not so closely related (Indo-Aryan) and unrelated (Brahui) languages involved. It is also a model case for the study of the complex relationship between tribal / ethnic and language identity (cf. I 2.2).

Aim, Method and Technical Questions

Aim of the present study

The aim of the present work is to contribute to the knowledge of Balochi historical grammar, especially in the field of phonology and lexicology.

It will be seen that with regard to historical phonology, the rules set up by GEIGER 1890 and 1891 are essentially correct insofar as the historical phonology from Old Iranian to the Common Balochi stage (on this concept, cf. I 1.3) is concerned. It is, however, possible today to be more precise concerning quite a number of points. In addition, the developments from Common Balochi into the different dialects could not be treated systematically by Geiger due to lack of data; a treatment of this field will be attempted in II 3.2. Until now, no attempt has been made to distinguish systematically those developments that all Balochi dialects have in common (cf. II 2) from those which seem to be specific to one or some of these (cf. II 3).

As the history of Balochi is closely intertwined with that of Persian and of other Western Iranian languages, it cannot be treated in isolation. In the present work, the Balochi words will be compared to their Persian 1 and Parthian 2 counterparts throughout wherever these are available. Phenomena of the historical phonology or etymology of Persian, Parthian etc. will also be discussed in passing where appropriate.

No attempt is made, however, to compare systematically the Balochi material to languages other than Persian and Parthian, neither is the present book intended as a historical grammar of Persian or Parthian or as an etymological dictionary.

Methodological questions

Any study of Balochi historical grammar is faced with several methodological problems. These are briefly outlined below, although a solution is not always at hand. 31 Persian (Pers.) words will be cited in their New Persian (NP) form (cf. I 1.5.2.4) to give an impression of the synchronic differences and because it is assumed that NP is the Iranian (Ir.) language most readers will be familiar with. In many cases, this form is identical to the Middle Persian (MP) form as found e.g. in MACKENZIE 1986. A note "NP" thus denotes New Persian plus Middle Persian provided that the latter does not differ from the former. Where appropriate and if different from the NP form, the MP word form will also be cited.

2 Parthian (Prth.) plays a particularly important role for the history of Balochi (Bal.) since it is the only North Western Iranian (NWIr.) language attested from Middle Iranian (MIr.) times. As will be seen, Parthian is not the predecessor of Balochi (nor of any other contemporary Western Iranian (WIr.) language), but the protolanguage of Balochi is likely to have been quite closely related to it.

Loanwords

It goes without saying that a study about historical phonology has to be based on inherited words only and leave all loanwords aside. Now, it is not always obvious which words are to be considered as loanwords. Conversely, it is precisely the study of historical phonology which has to show which words might be genuine and which might not. This task is particularly complicated in cases like Balochi since the language which has exercised the strongest influence, namely Persian, is closely related, and there is not always a straightforward answer to whether a given word is "foreign" (borrowed from Persian) or "genuine" (inherited). 4As far as the status of borrowedness or non-borrowedness is concerned, the Balochi lexicon may be said to comprise the following groups of words: first, words which show features typically shown by Bal., but not by Persian words (e.g. gwāt "wind" with Old Iranian (OIr.) ˘ u ˘ a-> Bal. gw ˘ a-, rōč "day" with OIr. -č-> Bal. č). Second, there are Bal. words which have obviously been borrowed since they show a Persian sound change not observed in Balochi (e.g. bačik(k) "son" with OIr.

˘ u ˘ a-> NP b ˘ a-, rōza "fasting" with OIr. -č-> MP/NP -z-).

However, in many words, there is no context in which one of the typically Bal. sound changes would operate and none for the typically Persian ones either. This means that as far as is known so far, the OIr. input would yield the same result in Balochi and Persian (e.g. nām "name", gōš "ear"). Here, it is definitely and per se impossible to determine whether a given word is inherited or borrowed. Such words will be marked with the note "= NP",5 indicating that the word may be genuine as well as borrowed. 6This group is augmented by those cases where the borrowing process may have made a foreign word identical to an inherited Bal. one. Since, for instance, NP x may be rendered by Bal. k in a borrowed word (e.g. Bal. kabar "news" from NP-Ar. xabar, cf. II 1.2.2), the borrowing of e.g. kargōš "rabbit" from NP xargōš cannot be ruled out. Furthermore, a devoicing of word-final consonants often operates in loanwords (e.g. kilīt "key" from NP kilīd, cf. II 3.3.1.4), so that e.g. āzāt "free" and mark "death" may represent borrowed NP āzād, marg, respectively. At the same time, these words conform to Bal. sound changes and may thus also be inherited. As the assumption of a change effected by the borrowing process is necessary, it will generally be assumed in what follows that words of this kind are inherited unless there is evidence to the contrary. 7 It should be kept in mind, however, that they may also have been borrowed. Some cases remain where the material at hand does not allow one to decide whether the given words may be inherited at all. This situation occurs whenever the development of some OIr. sound or combination of sounds into Balochi is not clear since all relevant words are identical with the Persian ones, which means that they may have been borrowed from Persian. For instance, all Bal. examples for OIr. \ ˘ u (e.g. čār "four", čil(l) "forty", cf. p. 120) are identical with the corresponding Pers. words, so that there is no unambigous evidence about the Balochi outcome: Balochi might show OIr. \ ˘ u > h as does Persian (in which case each of the examples may still be either genuine or borrowed), or it might show some other result (in which case all examples are loanwords), but there is no way to decide this matter.

In several cases, the only course available is to determine to which of the mentioned groups a given Bal. word belongs and with what sort of probability it might be a loanword or inherited.

Dialects

From a synchronic point of view, there is no such thing as "the Balochi language", but rather a "sometimes bewildering variety of speech forms" (FARRELL 2003:169). 8Therefore, it is crucial to determine the variety a given Balochi word belongs to. The problem with assigning a word to some dialect (cf. I 3.1) is that Balochi dialectology is still in its infancy. The mobility of the Balochi speaking people, interdialectal borrowing etc. make the establishing of dialect characteristics difficult (cf. I 3.3). ZARUBIN 1932ZARUBIN , 1949, possibly also additional material

Main sources used for the present work and their data bases

The Eastern Bal. dialects, mainly treated in works by British officers, are based on material collected in the second half of the 19th century, reflect the scientific practice of the time, and are written by non-native speakers; modern sources are basically nonexistent. Research on the Western and Southern Bal. dialects, on the other hand, is from 1. Aim, Method and Technical Questions about a century later. Some dialects have not been treated systematically at all, let alone the dialectal differences within each of the three groups. It is thus sometimes difficult to assess whether a given difference in the variants of a certain word is to be attributed to a difference in time or to dialectal differences or even to the scientific method involved. 14 The markedly differing approaches, the uneven quality and the time gap present in the studies on the Balochi dialects amount to a methodological problem, the importance of which will be evident in many of the following pages. Any statement about dialectal features must thus necessarily remain tentative.

The following paragraphs describe those sources on which the present work is mainly based, as well as a number of additional sources.

Balochi dictionaries

ABG: According to the preface of MUMTAZ AHMAD's Baluchi Glossary (1985), the source of the book is AŠFAQ A EAL: The Glossary (vol. II) of Josef ELFENBEIN's Anthology of Classical and Modern Balochi Literature (1990) is much more than a glossary for the texts assembled in vol. I of the work. The glossary is rich in material, good to use and draws upon a variety of sources. The author has also incorporated some of the material found in earlier works on Balochi. This means that the glossary is not necessarily an independent testimony about the existence or form of a given word. 16 In many cases, EAL notes the dialect(s) a word belongs to, and these notes will be cited in the following chapters where appropriate. 17

EVM: Josef ELFENBEIN's Vocabulary of Marw Balochi (1963) is a glossary for the texts collected by Ivan I. Zarubin in the 1930s (published as ZARUBIN 1932, 1949, cf. I 2.1).

It therefore presents the Turkmenistan variety of Western Balochi, which, among other things, is characterised by the absence of h (cf. II 3.2.3.1). Unfortunately, misprints and other errors are quite numerous, some of them corrected by corresponding remarks in EAL. 18GCD: George W. GILBERTSON's English-Balochí Colloquial Dictionary (1925) presents rich material (not only isolated words, but also phrases and sentences) from Eastern Balochi, mainly gathered from one informant. The dictionary draws heavily on MAYER 1910 and on Dames' works (ROSSI 2000:3, pace ELFENBEIN 1985:226).

SHG: Sayad Ganǐ (2000), the material for which was collected by the late SAYAD H ĀŠM Ī19 and prepared for publishing by a body of editors, is the only Balochi-Balochi dictionary, and one of the very few Balochi dictionaries of considerable size. It is used as the main reference in the present work. The dialect is basically Southern Balochi, 16 The existence of a few words in EAL seems somewhat uncertain, e.g. als "tear", which otherwise only appears in GEIGER 1891:400, 416, the only source being MARSTON 1877. Similar cases are kap "foam", which (apart from EAL) is found only in GEIGER 1890:131, who only cites PIERCE 1874, and rōt "river" (cf. p. 270). gužg "root" cited in EAL obviously comes from MORGENSTIERNE 1927from MORGENSTIERNE :95, 1932::46 (who learned it from one informant) and is not found anywhere else.

17 The citation of a dialectal classification of a given word does not necessarily mean that the word is originally from that dialect, and there are a number of cases where one might rather assume some other dialect as "home" of the word or variant in question. Citations like "EAL: Eastern [Balochi]" do not imply an agreement of the present author to the categorisation made in EAL.

FBB: The extremely useful teach-yourself Basic Balochi (1990) by Tim FARRELL presents the Balochi spoken in Karachi, which is the city housing the world's largest community of Baloch (at least 1 million native speakers of Balochi according to FARRELL 2003:169), coming from various regions and speaking different varieties of Balochi. Due to its practical approach, the work has the advantage of presenting a purely synchronic picture of Balochi as found in Karachi nowadays and is not influenced by purism, or by traditional, political or other considerations.

GEB: The etymological glossary Etymologie des Balūčī (1890) by Wilhelm GEIGER (as well as his Lautlehre des Balūčī, 1891) draws upon material from several sources 26 (cf. p. 22), the majority of them describing Eastern dialects, and three manuscripts from the 19th century (cf. p. 33).

Nigel A. COLLETT's Grammar, Phrase Book and Vocabulary of Baluchi (1983) treats the Balochi spoken by soldiers in the army of Oman. The dialect which is spoken there is for the most part Kēčī which belongs to the Southern dialect group. It is a very valuable source for that dialect, though the vocabulary (a glossary Balochi-English and English-Balochi is provided on pp. 68-171) is centered heavily on military issues.

The Balochi dialect spoken in Afghanistan in the 1970s and 1980s is treated in Tetsuo NAWATA 's Baluchi (1981) and Georg BUDDRUSS's Aus dem Leben eines jungen Balutschen, von ihm selbst erzählt (1988). Both present first-hand material, the second work in the form of a story which is supplemented with a translation, a full glossary and a grammatical appendix.

Data about the Balochi dialects spoken in Iran are found in SPOONER 1967[START_REF] Pākzād | Gorūh-e esmī, fe c lī va qeidī-ye zabān-e balūčī[END_REF](Lāšārī) and BARANZEHI 2003 (Sarāwānī). 27In addition, there are a number of articles in which Balochi language material can be found, particularly important among these are those by Georg MORGENSTIERNE (especially 1932, 1948) and Josef ELFENBEIN (e.g. 1961ELFENBEIN (e.g. , 1963aELFENBEIN (e.g. , 1985)).

1. Aim, Method and Technical Questions 1.5 Technical details

Citation of Balochi words

In the chapters to follow, Balochi words are given in their Southern/Western (SWBal.) form (if available) unless otherwise indicated. The reasons are that nowadays, the sources for these dialects are much more reliable than those for the Eastern dialect and -above all -that the Eastern Bal. forms can for the most part be derived from the non-Eastern ones by applying the rules given in I 3.1.1 and II 3.2.1.1.1, but not vice-versa.

Balochi words are cited as they appear in SHG unless otherwise indicated. If a word does not appear in SHG, the source(s) where it is found is/are given. 28 Verbs are cited by their present stem (e.g. kan-"do") or by present stem plus past stem (e.g. kan-/ kurt means: the present stem is kan-, the past stem is kurt).29

Transcription

Transcription of names

The transcription of names in the present work follows the principle of omitting diacritics where the name in question is (more or less) generally known, viz. the names of languages (Balochi, Sindhi etc.), of places (e.g. Karachi) and regions (e.g. Sarawan). Diacritics are used in the case of more specialised and/or technical expressions, i.e. tribes, dialects (e.g. Sarāwānī) and provinces. The names of Baloch and Persian individuals are written with diacritics (e.g. SAYAD H ĀŠM Ī) unless "English" variants are used by the persons themselves (for istance, when appearing as the author of an English book, e.g. Aqil Khan MENGAL).

I. Introduction

Phonological symbols

All words cited from Balochi or other languages for which Arabic or another oriental script is used are cited in Latin transcription. The transcription is meant to be mainly phonological (although certain allowances are made to indicate the actual pronunciation) 30 and uses the symbols that are commonly met with in writings on (Iranian) historical linguistics. Avestan (Av.), Proto-Iranian (PIr.), Proto-Indo-Iranian (PIIr.) and Proto-Indo-European (PIE) are noted as in HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1996. 31 OIr. diphthongs are noted as ai, au, PIr. ones a ˘ i , a ˘ u .

Balochi vowels will be noted as follows: short: a i u long: 32 ā ē ī ō ū diphthongs: 33ai au

Nasal vowels, where they occur (cf. II 3.1.3.3 and II 3.2), are written as ã etc. (short nasal vowels) and ã etc. (long nasal vowels).

30 These are mentioned in footnotes 32, 33 and in II 1.1. In the chapters on the dialects (II 3.2), further deviations of the principle of phonological notation occur. The phonetic correlates of the phonemic opposition were first established systematically by SOKOLOVA 1953. Modern studies in the phonetics of dialects other than Turkmenistan Balochi are lacking. For a survey of phonetical and phonological studies of Balochi, cf. ROSSI 1979a. Some works on Balochi (e.g. [START_REF] Barker / Aqil Khan | A Course in Baluchi[END_REF], FARRELL 1990) use a more phonetically oriented notation and note e.g. /a/ as e and /ā/ as a, but such an approach does not have advantages for the present work.

31 Note especially Proto-Iranian (PIr.) *ś and *ź and Proto-Indo-Iranian (PIIr.) *ć and *j for the outcome of PIE * ḱ and *ǵ, respectively (HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1996:20, 93, 102 etc.). Syllabic r and l are noted with circle below ( ˚ r, ˚ l) to avoid confusion with retroflex sounds. For additional notes on the citation of Persian, Kurdish and Zazaki, cf. I 1. 5.2.3f. below. 32 The marking of the length on ē and ō is superfluous since (on the phonological level at least) no short counterparts exist, and is thus omitted in many works on Balochi. However, in order to avoid any misunderstandings that might arise when a reader is not aware of the fact that Balochi <e, o> are meant as long, the present author considers it better to mark the length. This notation has the additional advantages of being also the one used for (Middle and most dialects of New) Persian, and of making it possible to note the Bal. phoneme /i/ as e in those dialects which pronounce it thus, i.e. in the Balochi dialects of Iran (cf. II 3.2.4.2); this notation is the one used by those who have written on Iranian Balochi (cf. SPOONER 1967[START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF].

1. Aim, Method and Technical Questions

The transcription of the consonants can be inferred from the table below.

Transcription of the Arabic alphabet

The Arabic letters are transcribed as follows: 34 Arabic letter transcription notes

Z ' [ b ^p \ t V = ˙ t ] s, ¯ s Arabic ¯ t, Eastern Balochi \, s (cf. II 3.2.1.1.1), otherwise ¯ s _ ǐ c č a ˙ h b x d d V d ˙ d e z, ¯ z Arabic ¯ d, Eastern Balochi d, z (cf. II 3.2.1.1), otherwise ¯ z f r V f ˙ r g z h ž i s j š
34 The transcription ¨ t etc. for some Ar. consonants is chosen here to avoid confusion with retroflex consonants, which are noted ˙ t etc. With regard to the use of the symbols \, d, b etc. for other fricatives, a transcription g instead of ġ might seem more consistent. However, the notation ġ follows the tradition observed for NP and Arabic.

I. Introduction

k ¨ s l ż Arabic ¨ d m ¨ t n ˙ z o c p ġ q f r q Ù k u g v l w m x n V & ˙ n & cf

Transcription of the Arabic alphabet

The letters which occur only in Arabic loanwords (e.g. k) are replaced by many Baloch and in many sources (including SHG) by the identically pronounced letters also used in inherited words (e.g. i). 35 Since Balochi is predominantly a spoken language, the same policy will be followed in the present work, i.e. a Bal. word containing e.g. k being transcribed with i unless all available sources cite the word with k.

Ossetic is cited according to ABAEV I-IV. In the transcription of Ossetic and Georgian, y stands for /dz/ and y for /dž/.

For reasons similar to those outlined in I 1.5.2.2 for Balochi and since some New Indic (NInd.) languages have short counterparts as well, the length of ē and ō will also be marked. The implosive consonants found in Sindhi are marked as ¯ b etc., with ¯ d denoting a retroflex implosive.

Marking of loanwords

In many cases, words will be marked as borrowings from "NP-Ar.". This means that the word comes from Arabic originally, is also used in NP and is likely to have been borrowed into Balochi via NP. It is not meant to exclude the possibility that the word also exists in Urdu and might have come from that side. Similarly, "NP-Turk." denotes Balochi loanwords of Turkic origin also present in NP.38

Cross-references

The notes "see above" and "see below" refer to a point further up or further down in the same chapter. References between chapters are noted as e.g. "cf. II 3.1.2.3.1".

Linguistic studies

Western European scholarship, attracted by the conservatism of Balochi phonology, focussed on the historical grammar of Balochi. GEIGER published an etymological glossary (1890) and a treatment of historical phonology (1891) and also wrote the article on Balochi in Grundriß der iranischen Philologie (1901).

With the exception of PIERCE 1874 and MARSTON 1877, all the works cited so far focus on the Eastern Balochi dialect(s) 46 since this is the dialect mainly spoken in the area which was under British rule even before 1858. Due to this bias in the early sources, the Eastern dialects occupy a special place in the literature on Balochi dialects.

The next dialect to be studied more closely was the one spoken in the Mary oasis of Turkmenistan (a dialect of the Western group) which was investigated by a number of Soviet scholars: texts were collected (ZARUBIN 47 1932 and 1949, SOKOLOVA 1963; ELFENBEIN 1963 is a glossary for these texts), sketches of Bal. grammar and of specific linguistic issues appeared [START_REF] Zarubin | K izučeniju beludžskogo jazyka i fol'klora[END_REF][START_REF] Valentina | Beludžskij jazyk[END_REF][START_REF] Sergej | Grammatičeskij očerk jazyka beludžej Sovetskogo Sojuza[END_REF], FROLOVA 1960[START_REF] Vera | Beludžskij jazyk[END_REF] and ethnographically oriented studies (VINNIKOV, PIKULIN 1959[START_REF] Richard | Beludži Turkmenskoj SSR. Leningrad Robert GAUTHIOT[END_REF] were written. As phonetic research occupied a prominent place in Soviet linguistics, SOKOLOVA also published a detailed study of Balochi phonetics (1953). 48 Other studies of Balochi dialects are BARKER/MENGAL 1969 (a course book in the Pakistani dialect of the Western group) and SPOONER 1967 and1971 (Balochi of Iran) as well as ELFENBEIN 1966 and1990/II:VIIff. (survey of dialectal features).

The newly collected material fostered new publications on Balochi grammar (MORGENSTIERNE 1948, ROSSI 1979a, ELFENBEIN 1989and 1989a) and was the basis for a couple of etymological studies (MORGENSTIERNE 1932, ROSSI 1982, ELFENBEIN 1985). The data were also used for new studies of the interrelationship of the Western Iranian languages [START_REF] Neil | The Origins of Kurdish[END_REF][START_REF] Gernot | Isoglosses: A Sketch on Persians and Parthians, Kurds and Medes[END_REF][START_REF] Pierre | Le classement des langues irano-ariennes occidentales[END_REF], GIPPERT 1996). 49 46 Cf. I 3.1. 47 Zarubin collected his texts from Balochi speaking Turkmen students who came to Leningrad to pursue their education.

48 For a survey of the different approaches to Balochi phonetics, cf. ROSSI 1979a. It is noteworthy that Balochi was among the first languages to be described in the USSR according to the new methods developed for phonetic and phonemic analysis (ROSSI 1979a:181).

49 The basic work is TEDESCO 1921. For a treatment of the subject, cf. also KORN 2003. Since the foundation of Pakistan and especially since the establishment of Balochi academies in Karachi (1956) and Quetta (1959) as well as of other bodies which attempt to further research about Balochi and to publish material, 50 the Baloch in Pakistan have themselves begun to investigate their language, especially in the fields of history and poetry. The resulting publications form a new basis for further research.

Ethnolinguistics

The study of Balochi involves interesting issues of language contact, socio-and ethnolinguistics. Areal phenomena have played an important role for the Balochi language since the Baloch have always been in close contact with people speaking other languages (cf. I 3.3). It seems that a sizeable proportion of Baloch has always spoken other languages as well.

Furthermore, the relationship between tribal and ethnolinguistic identity is not yet entirely clear (BARTH 1964:13). It was Denys Bray who already in 1911 found that, in a number of cases, the identification of a tribe as e.g. Brahui or Balochi does not correspond to the language spoken by that same tribe: the members of the Raisānī and the Zarakzāī, who identify as Pathan (i.e. belonging to a tribe of Pashto provenance), do not speak Pashto at all but Brahui, and the leading family of the Raisānīs speaks Balochi. Among the Mīrwārī, who are counted among the original Brahui tribes, Bray could hardly find anybody who spoke Brahui, most people using Balochi instead (findings cited by EMENEAU 1980:335). It seems that "many tribes have changed their language, sometimes more than once" (ELFENBEIN 1982:78).

It would probably be more appropriate to say that the languages in question here have been spoken alongside each other, with varying preferences. Bray reported that members of the leading Brahui families spoke Brahui to some family members and Balochi to others (cf. EMENEAU 1980:335). According to ROSSI 1982:166, in a plurilingual society, the choice of a certain language is comparable to that of a certain style in a monolingual society. It would therefore be interesting to inquire in which circumstances (region, social status, kind of work, settled vs. nomadic way of life) each language is spoken in Balochistan. 51Anthropologists have also been attracted by the Baloch and studied the nomadic life, kinship and hierarchy structures, and the relationship with other ethnic groups. Research into Balochi social structure in general has been undertaken by -among others -Fredrik Barth, Carroll Lewin (formerly Pastner), Steven Pastner, Jean and Robert Pehrson, Philip Salzman, Brian Spooner, Fred Scholz, Farhat Sultana, Nina Swidler and Paul Titus. 52and there was complete disregard for the fact that not all persons of a "household" necessarily speak the same "main language". The linguistic results from the 1972 census have not been published due to riots in the province of Sindh. The 1951 and[START_REF] Josef | A Balūčī Text, with Translation and Notes[END_REF] censuses had asked about the mother tongue of the inhabitants as well as self-assessed fluency in other languages. Add to this the practical difficulties of interviewing people in rural areas, where in many cases the father will answer for the whole family or clan (this phenomenon occurs even in big cities of Turkey, Georg Warning, personal communication), so data on the speech habits of women, children and lower-ranking household members in general may not be as reliable as one might wish.

The Balochi language

The exact number of speakers of Balochi is not known. 53 It has been estimated to be 3.5 million (ELFENBEIN 1990/I:2), 4.5 million (JAHANI 1989:93) or between six and seven million (ORYWAL 1982:84). The area in which Balochi speaking people predominantly live stretches (west to east) from eastern Iran to the lower Indus and (north to south) from Mary in Turkmenistan to the Gulf States, the main areas being south-eastern Iran (province of Sīstān wa Balōčistān), western Pakistan (province of Balōčistān) and southern Afghanistan (provinces Nīmrūz and Hēlmand). 54 The status of Balochi is that of a minority language throughout (cf. I 3.3).

Balochi has been described as belonging to the North Western group of Iranian languages, 55 which means that it shares certain sound changes with (among other languages) Kurdish and Parthian against NP, e.g. z from PIE *ǵ (h) vs. NP d (Bal. zāmāt, Kurd. zava "son-in-law" vs. NP dāmād; Bal. zān-, Kurd. zan-"know" vs. NP dān-). On the other hand, Balochi also exhibits some South Western (SWIr.) characteristics. 56 With regard to phonological matters, Balochi stands out from all other Modern Iranian languages through the (at least seemingly) systematic preservation of Old Iranian consonants (MACKENZIE 1961:72), 57 e.g. āp "water" (Av. āp-/ap-) vs. NP āb, Kurd. av; pād "foot" (Av. pād-/pad-) vs. NP pāy, Kurd. pê; rōč "day" (Av. raočah-) vs. NP rōz, Kurd. r'oj. 58 With regard to grammatical categories, Balochi shows features also seen in some other Modern Western Iranian languages: the verbal system exhibits the dichotomy of present stem (from the old present stems) 59 and past stem (from the old past participle), e.g. bar-/ burt "take" (NP bar-/ burd), ǐan-/ ǐat "hit" (NP zan-/ zad), with an ergative construction in the past tense. 60 There is no distinction of grammatical gender. The case system varies among the dialects; a four-case system (direct, oblique, object case, genitive) plus vocative may be said to represent the basic system. 61

Balochi as a group of dialects

The fact that Balochi is spoken in the more remote areas of several states, in none of which it is taught in schools, 62 and the resultant low level of literacy in Balochi63 account for the existence of several regional varieties. None of these is generally accepted as a standard: "In the nature of things, it would be very surprising if there existed a 'standard Balochi', even as a literary language, and in fact there does not" (ELFENBEIN 1985:226).

Similarly, there is no standard orthography (cf. JAHANI 1989). When Balochi is written at all, it is predominantly the Arabic script in its Urdu (thus in Pakistan, cf. JAHANI 1989) or Pashto (in Afghanistan, cf. RZEHAK 2003) varieties which is used. In addition, "the native orthography, in whatever style of Arabic-derived script employed, has always varied from writer to writer" (ELFENBEIN 1990/I:4). In Turkmenistan, Latin and Cyrillic letters have been used to write Balochi (cf. AXENOV 2000). In Pakistan, sporadic attempts to introduce a Latin orthography for Balochi have not met with success (cf. ELFENBEIN 2000).

57 For a discussion of this point, cf. II 2.1.1 and IV.

58 For the transcription of Bal. and other word forms as used in this study, cf. I 1.5.2.

59 For reflexes of OIr. present stem formations in Balochi, cf. BARJASTEH DELFOROOZ 2003. 60 The ergative constructions found in the Balochi dialects are described in KORN (frthc. 1).

61 For further discussion, cf. KORN (frthc. 1,2). A morphological sketch will be presented in V 1.

62 The only country where Balochi enjoyed a certain official status -including its use in primary education -was Afghanistan in the years [START_REF] Cardona | Aus dem Leben eines jungen Balutschen, von ihm selbst erzählt[END_REF]-92 (cf. RZEHAK 2003)).

Apart from dialects proper, the speech of the nomadic and the settled groups also differs (cf. also II 3.2.4). It seems that this is not only due to a differing way of life, but also to the different regions the groups have come from (SPOONER 1967:56). At the same time, the fact that many Baloch -in addition to the periodic nomadic wanderings -have migrated both within and outside of the Balochi speaking area makes it next to impossible to establish strict dialect borders since speakers of different speech forms have continually interacted. 64 Words have been borrowed from one dialect to another and back again, and hypercorrect forms have come into existence when the speakers wish to express their (real or assumed) membership in a certain dialect community.

Isoglosses of Eastern Balochi vs. the other dialects

According to GEIGER 1889:71, MARSTON 1877 was the first to note the existence of at least two markedly differing dialects or rather (as already noticed by GEIGER 1889) groups of dialects, and to establish the most important dialectal differences. 65The features which set out the Eastern dialects from the remaining ones were described by GEIGER 1889:75 and by numerous authors in later times (e.g. [START_REF] Grierson | Linguistic Survey of India X: Specimens of Languages of the Eranian Family[END_REF]:337, JAHANI 1989:79ff.). 66So far, most studies about Balochi have treated the non-Eastern dialect forms as the Balochi ones proper, thereby implying that it is basically the Eastern dialect which deviates from the rest and that the non-Eastern dialects more or less represent the common Balochi variety. This approach has been criticised by ROSSI 1979a:179 who stresses that the dialects have to be treated as systems of equal rights.

Non-Eastern dialects

Eastern dialects word-initial and postconsonantal position postvocalic position p, t, k p h , t h , k h (aspirated) f, \, x (fricatives) b, d, g b, d, g (no change) b, d, g (fricatives)

č, ǐ čh (aspirated), ǐ (no change) š, ž (sibilants) w w h (aspirated) 67 w (no change)

3. Isoglosses of Eastern vs. non-Eastern Bal. dialects

Opinions vary as to the degree of aspiration 68 of word-initial voiceless stops (and č, w) and therefore to the degree of difference with regard to the articulation of word-initial voiceless stops in the different dialects. 69 In any case, the aspiration of word-initial voiceless stops is phonologically irrelevant since there is no opposition to unaspirated stops (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255f.). The other differences, however, do affect the phonemic system: first, OIr. č, ǐ yield the same result as OIr. š, ž, and, second, through the adoption of a massive number of loanwords, the fricatives attain phonological status. 70

Survey of dialect groupings

Right from the beginning of Balochi linguistics, it was clear that there are more dialectal differences than those described in the table above. The number of dialects / dialect groups assumed and the terms for these have differed to some extent. Elfenbein 67 w h is only assumed by some authors, cf. II 1.1.2.2, 3.2.1.1.1.

68 Note that aspiration is unfortunately not marked consistently in the sources. GEIGER 1889:75, 1891:403ff. concludes from his sources a marked difference between aspirated stops in the Eastern dialects and unaspirated ones in the others (with the aspiration of čh being less marked and therefore less consistently noted and the aspiration of w h only found in some sources, cf. GEIGER 1891:413). According to MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255, aspiration of voiceless stops is general in Eastern Balochi whereas it is at least occasionally heard in the other dialects.

69 Aspiration of word-initial voiceless stops occurs in other dialects as well (cf. II 3.2.2.1, 3.2.3.1); statements (e.g. SCHMITT 2000:82) about the exclusive existence of aspirates in Eastern Balochi are not correct.

70 It is hard to see how MORGENSTIERNE could have the impression (1948:256) that the coalescence of č and š to š and of ǐ and ž to ž does not lead "to any disturbance of the phonemic system".

For more discussion of these points, cf. II 1.1.2.2.

assumes six dialects, with the difference between the Eastern dialects (in his terminology "Eastern Hill Balochi") and the other dialects being the most marked one.

In more recent times, it has been found useful to assume three major dialect groups and to ascribe the subdialects to one of these. 71 The following table shows the dialect groupings as assumed in selected works by some important authors. 72 The topic of mutual understandability of the dialects, although a problematic concept, 78 has been discussed by the majority of those who have written on Balochi, and markedly differing opinions have been expressed. In the earliest writings (e.g. GEIGER 1901:232, based on DAMES 1881:1), the impression was that Eastern Balochi is not understood by speakers of the other dialects and vice-versa. 79 Later on, it was thought that the differences are not marked enough to prevent communication [START_REF] Longworth | A Sketch of the Northern Balochi Language, containing a grammar, vocabulary and specimens of the language [Extra number of the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal I/1880[END_REF]:659, GILBERTSON 1923:7), and less important than the ones between certain Pashto dialects (MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:10, stressing the "unity of the language from Merw to Karachi"). In more recent times, evidence has again suggested that interdialectal communication is not as easy as earlier writers had thought: Neil and Valerie Carleton (cf. JAHANI 1989:72) did some intellegibility testing in the 1980s and found that "the greatest barriers to communication exist between the Eastern dialect group and the other dialects", and "there are significant comprehension difficulties at the first hearing of speech in the other dialect" even between Western and Southern Balochi. JAHANI (1989:75) found that speakers with good educational background and travelling experience understand other people's Southern or Western Balochi, but speakers of the same dialect with lack of experience do not. Some Baloch also underestimate dialectal differences because they do not have enough experience with speakers of other dialects 80 and sometimes also for political reasons.

Dialectal differences seem to have become more marked in recent times, due to the growing influence of the educational systems of the respective states and the increased access to mass media. Language contact with the national languages has changed the Balochi dialects spoken in the respective states to a degree that mutual understanding becomes even more difficult than before. On the other hand, it is to be expected that the increased (though still limited) production of written material, cassettes, videos etc. and communication via mailing lists and internet will bring more and more Baloch into contact with other dialects, including those who do not have the opportunity to travel.

78 The ability to understand another person's dialect depends very much on, among other things, that person's experience with the other dialect and with dialects in general (cf. also JAHANI 1989:75). 79 GEIGER 1989:89f. and1901:232 stresses that the differences making mutual intellegibility impossible are to be attributed to the lexical level as well as to phonological matters. In fact, Ind. loanwords do occur in all dialects of Balochi, including those spoken in Turkmenistan today, but their share in the lexicon differs significantly among the dialects.

80 For instance, Sabir Badalkhan (originally from Turbat, Pakistani Balochistan) noted when meeting Iranian Baloch at a symposion in Uppsala 2000 that dialectal differences are more marked than he had thought.

The Baloch as an ethnolinguistic group

Although it cannot be taken for granted that a given Baloch speaks Balochi nor that everyone speaking Balochi considers him-/herself a Baloch (cf. I 2.2), a short survey on the history and use of the term balōč as an ethnonym will be undertaken here.

3.2.1

The Baloch in early sources 81 The earliest documents for the term balōč are Arabic sources. The historiographers al-Balā" dūrī (9th century AD) and a# t-# Tabarī (10th century) treat the Arab conquest of Kirman in AD 645; al-Ma# s c ūdī, al-Istaxrī and Ibn ˙ H auqal (all 10th century) supply geographical information. These sources say that at the time of the Arabic conquest, 82 the mountains of Kirman were inhabited by people called kūǐ (also quf ¨ s or qufǐ) and balūǐ / balū ¨ s. 83 During the lifetime of the Arabic writers, the kūǐ / quf ¨ s and balū ¨ s were still living in Kirman, and the sources give descriptions of their life (summaries in ORYWAL 1982:54ff.).

In Persian sources, the terms balōč is found, often together with the term kōč. The Persian epic Šāhnāma is of particular importance: 84 the poet Firdausī mentions groups of balōč in Xorasan and Sistan 85 at the time he was writing (ca. AD 1000). The balōč are described as serving in the army of Kai Xusrau (i.e. Kyros II, 6th century BC) which was allegedly composed of diverse groups inhabiting Gilan at that time. Then, the balōč (together with other groups) reportedly revolted against Ardašīr Bābākān (3rd century AD) and Xusrau Anōšērwān (6th century AD). The battles of the latter are likely to have taken place in Gilan and Azarbaijan, so that it has been assumed that the Baloch lived in the Caspian region in pre-Islamic times. 8681 For the data discussed in this subchapter, cf. [START_REF] Longworth | A Sketch of the Northern Balochi Language, containing a grammar, vocabulary and specimens of the language [Extra number of the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal I/1880[END_REF]:26ff., ORYWAL 1982:51ff., ELFENBEIN 1989a:350, SPOONER 1989:606f., 609. 82 It has to be kept in mind that this information was noted down 300 years after the events took place (ORYWAL 1982:54).

83 The substitution of ¨ s for Iranian č is common in Semitic, especially in Arabic, sources (HENNING 1958:60 3 ).

84 For discussion of relevant Šāhnāma passages, cf. BOYAJIAN 2003. 85 The presence of a larger number of Baloch in Sistan at that time is rather to be doubted (ORYWAL 1982:57).

It is far from sure whether the term balōč in the sources named above does designate the ancestors of the present-day Baloch, i.e. whether the term is an ethnonym of some sort at all, since it is probable that it was used (synonymous with kōč) in the meaning "bandits, robbers, vagabonds" (ELFENBEIN 1989a:350). 87 In spite of the doubts involved, the following setting has generally been assumed with due caution since DAMES (1904:26ff.): the Baloch could have lived in the Caspian region in pre-Islamic times, from where they might have been driven south by Xusrau Anōšērwān (6th century AD). At the time of the Arab conquest (i.e. in the 7th century AD), they inhabited the Kirman region. The conquest of Kirman by the Seljuks under Toġril Bek (ca. AD 1045) might have been the reason for the eastward migration into what is nowadays the Iranian province of Sīstān wa Balūčīstān.

In contrast to this, the Baloch native tradition from the Daptar Šā c irī 88 has it that they are of Arab origin and descendants of Mīr ˙ H amza (the uncle of the prophet, s.a.s.), that they came from Aleppo, fought in the battle of Karbalā' on the side of c Alī (a.s.) 89 and, owing to the defeat in that battle, migrated to the east. It is to be assumed that this part of the tradition is of a legendary character and has the function of establishing the Baloch as Muslims of the first rank. 90With regard to later times, however, the Daptar Šā c irī might be (and has been) taken as a historical source. It is said that the Baloch were living in Sistan in the 12th century. At the beginning of the 13th century, they reportedly left for Sindh, probably due to the invasion of Jingiz Khan. 91 It seems that today's Balochi settlements in Sistan are the 87 SPOONER (1989:607) assumes that, at the time the balōč were living in Kirman, the term was used by the settled population for (potentially threatening) tribal communities (note that in some parts of Iranian Balochistan this is the meaning of balōč even nowadays). The Baloch probably shared no feeling of common ethnicity yet, but, in the course of time, they came to be the "nomads/bandits par excellence" of the region and took over the name given to them. Other tribal communities of the area might have been grouped -or grouped themselves -with them and taken over the language.

88 The historical epics of the Baloch have been handed down orally under the title of Daptar Šā c irī. The poems were first collected and edited by DAMES 1907.

89 The contrast with the fact that nowadays most Baloch are Sunnis is interesting. However, Ibn ˙ H auqal (see above) reports that the balōč are of Shia faith (ORYWAL 1982:52, 55). result of reverse migrations of a later date (ELFENBEIN 1966:28), perhaps in the 16th century. The Baloch found in Turkmenistan nowadays are descendants of groups that came there from Afghanistan and the border regions of Iran only at the end of the 19th century and in the 1920s and 1930s (cf. AXENOV 2000:71 and MOSHKALO 2000).

Etymologies of the term balōč

The etymology of the word balōč is not clear yet, although a number of suggestions have been made, which will be outlined here.

Native popular etymologies include the derivation of balōč from: 92 • *bad-lōg (etymology used by the Indians): bad "bad" (NP, also used in Urdu and Bal.) + lōg "people" (Urdu, also used in Bal.); • *bar-lūč (etymology used by the Baloch 93 ): bar "desert" (NP) + lūč "naked"; 94 92 Cf. DAMES 1904:21. For the etymologies of words which are discussed in other chapters, cf. the index in V 2.

93 The legend has it that the forefather of the Baloch, a son of Mīr ˙ H amza and a parī, was found abandoned in the wilderness (DAMES 1904:21). 94 Bal. lūč seems not to have been treated etymologically so far (the same applies to its possible cognates). The second Bal. word for "naked" is luč(č) which might be suspected of being a loanword because of its final geminate (cf. II 3.3.1.5). NP has luxt, lūt and (in older dictionaries, e.g. in 19th century Ġiyā ¯ s-ul-lu ġāt) lūč, Tajiki has luxt and luč. Pashto lūc and l e c have obviously been borrowed from lūč, luč (the latter probably from Taj.) respectively, since OIr. č /V_ gives Pashto j (e.g. wraj vs. Bal. rōč "day", cf. GEIGER 1893:212), and c is often substituted for č of loanwords when in word-final position (e.g. balōc for balōč); wordinternal č in loanwords is preserved as such (e.g. balōčistān). NP lūč and Taj. luč (note that Taj. /u/ represents MP /u/ and /ū/; Taj. ū is from MP ō, cf. RZEHAK 1999:5 1 ) cannot be genuine either (OIr. č /V_ gives z, e.g. rōz "day", HÜBSCHMANN 1895:225). On the other hand, Urdu luč "bare, naked" is the only word in sight which comes near to having an etymology, since there are cognates in all branches of NInd. (cf. TURNER 1966:643b) pointing to an albeit unattested OInd. *lucca-"defective" (the derivation from OInd. tucc h yá-"empty" assumed by PLATTS 1894:953 is certainly wrong). As long as there is no better explanation, one might assume that Urdu luč has been borrowed into Bal. (luč(č)), as GILBERSTON 1925:787 assumes, and Persian; Taj. luč could then represent old /u/ and thus preserve a variant which has otherwise been lost in NP. Through reinterpretation of Taj. luč, i.e. of the /u/ as ū, or maybe rather through some sort of distortion due to taboo, the variant NP lūč might have come about. Bal. lūč might be due to the same phenomenon or have been borrowed from NP as ELFENBEIN 1990/II:89 assumes. The relationship (if any) to NP lūt (note also Kurd. r'ût) and luxt, all "naked", is not clear.

• *bē-lūč: bē "without" 95 + lūč "naked"; • *bad-rōč (etymology probably used by some neighbours of the Baloch 96 ): bad "bad" + rōč "day".

The explanations advanced by scholars are the following: An etymology connecting balōč to OInd. mlecc h á-"ununderstandable speech; barbar" was suggested by several authors, and soon dismissed by others (cf. DAMES 1904:21).

Apart from phonological problems, it was stated that mlecc h á-has never been used for any specific group of people living to the west of the Indus, but denotes "barbarians" in general. 97 A connection of balōč with Av. bar e zah-"height" 98 is tempting and has been assumed e.g. by Herzfeld (cf. FRYE 1961:47), who further assumes that the rest of the word goes back to * ˘ u ači ˘ i a-, thus allegedly meaning "shouting loudly". The Persian sound law involved here is that PIE *rǵ (h) > MP l. The NP result of PIr. *ard (PIE *-erǵ (h) etc.) is āl, however,99 so that one would expect †bāl-here, not *bal-, and *č(i) ˘ i is likely to yield š both in NP and Balochi (cf. II 2.2.2.3).

A connection with Gedrosia (name of an eastern Iranian landscape in Greek sources) appears to have been first suggested by Mockler (via *bad-rōš, cf. DAMES 1904:21). BAILEY 1973:586f. advances the "purely speculative" idea of a protoform * ˘ u adra-˘ u at-(č)ī-" [land] having water [channels]". This form is supposed to give Gedrosia / Gadrosia by application of one set of sound laws on the one hand, and, via *badla ˘ u tčī-, balōč on the other. 95 bē may be derived from PIE *b h ˘ e (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996a:185f., cf. p. 139) which implies that the word need not be a NP lownwoard.

96 This popular etymology is also employed as a proverb: "balōč -badrōč". A person X may say that to a person Y if X has inadvertedly done something which harms the interests of Y; the meaning is something like "there is no use in us Baloch" (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication). The saying is parallel to the Turkish expression Türk iş (lit.: "Turkish work") which is "used [by Turks] in selfdisparagement when something goes wrong" (LEWIS 1967:44).

97 DAMES himself thinks (1904:21) that the name is equivalent to NP balōč which means "cockscombe, crest", and was used as a nickname first. This leaves the question of the etymology open, however.

98 For the zero grade formation (Bal. burz "high", NP buland, Av. b e r e za ˙ n t-), cf. p. 97, 145.

Although this solution seems very attractive, several problems are involved here which are liable to render the etymology highly unlikely. First, the form * ˘ u adra-˘ u at(č)ī-is maybe not a good formation: in spite of Bailey's claim of * ˘ u adra-being a "likely" derivative of Av. vadi-"water channel", it seems in fact rather implausible that a stem in -i-might have a derivative (of the same meaning) with -ra-replacing -i-. 100 Then, Bailey's assumption of * ˘ u adra-being "replaced by *gadra-" is faced with the problem that there seems to be no WIr. idiom which would show a change * ˘ u a-> ga-. In Balochi, PIr. * ˘ u a-gives gwa-(cf. II 2.1.3.3.1). Furthermore, there seems to be no parallel for *dr > *dl > l. 101 Moreover, Bailey's explanation seems difficult to bring in line with historical data: the term balōč is used in the Šāhnāma for a group of people who are hostile to several Persian kings up to the 6th century AD (cf. I 3.2.1). Although it is not clear whether balōč is meant in any ethnic or linguistic sense, it would seem that, whatever its meaning at that time, the term balōč in the Šāhnāma is the same word as the term balōč used today, and the same applies to the term balū ¨ s in Arab sources (see above). On the other hand, the term Gedrosia / Gadrosia is found in Greek sources from Strabon's times. So if any "balōč" were present in the Caspian region at the time of Xusraw Anūšīrvān and in Kirman some centuries later -a scenario suggested both by the early sources (see above) and by the status of Balochi as a North Western Iranian language -, it is difficult to see how they could have acquired their name from a country which has been called Gedrosia at least for 2000 years. It seems next to impossible that the term balōč originated in Balochistan, came to the Caspian region and later went back to Balochistan. Indeed, it would seem that the term Gedrosia cannot be related to the term balōč. 102The etymology of the term balōč thus remains an open question. 100 A derivative * ˘ u adra-from PIE * ˘ u edor-/ *udn-"water" is not likely either.

101 It is not certain either whether *-tī-may yield Bal. -čī. For further etymologies of Gedrosia (even less plausible than the ones cited above), cf. FRYE 1961:47.

Balochi as a contact language

The status of Balochi as a minority and unofficial language (cf. I 3.1) means that it has always been used in only certain spheres, some other language(s) being used as a medium of interregional communication, for official, educational, scientific and other purposes, 103 with the result that most speakers of Balochi have -at least to a certain degree -probably always spoken other languages as well. With increasing school attendance and the use of mass media even in the more remote areas of Balochistan, the respective official languages Persian (Iran), Sindhi and Urdu (Pakistan), Dari and Pashto (Afghanistan), 104 Russian and Turkmen (Turkmenistan) have made their influence felt much more than ever before.

The languages which have influenced Balochi are, in the first place, those which have served as a medium for interregional communication and for official purposes. This function has been filled by Persian for the greater part of the history of the Balochi language (which explains the paramount importance of the diverse stages of Persian for Balochi, cf. I 1.2.1), and, for some centuries (cf. I 3.2.1), by Indic languages (Sindhi/Lahnda and probably others, in modern times increasingly Urdu). 105 In certain parts of Afghanistan and (increasingly in recent decades) Pakistan, Pashto has played an important role as well. 106For a considerable time, Balochi has also been in contact with the Dravidian language Brahui (cf. I 2.2) and has influenced the latter in many aspects (see below). Due to the lower prestige of Brahui, 107 its influence on Balochi has not been very strong.

Additional languages with which Balochi has been in contact include Arabic as well as African 108 and European languages (Portuguese and, in recent times, English).

The bilingualism which has probably been the rule rather than the exception for most speakers of Balochi throughout its history has caused the influx of a massive number of loanwords into the Balochi language. 109 As a result, the Balochi vocabulary is composed of layers from diverse sources, with the importance of the layers varying from (sub)dialect to (sub)dialect, but also according to other factors. Some selected fields of the lexicon will be shown in chapter III to give an impression of the variability of the Balochi lexicon and of the sources from which it draws.

Generally speaking, there is an enormous quantity of Persian loanwords from different periods, a considerable number of words from various Modern Indic languages and quite a number from other languages. Contrary to what one might assume, it is not only the Eastern dialects of Balochi which show Indic elements and the Western ones which have incorporated Persian elements; rather all Balochi dialects have been influenced by Persian and by Indic languages to a remarkable, albeit somewhat varying, degree. 110 107 It is noteworthy that although Brahui was the language of the leading families in the Kalat State, it has been considered inferior to Balochi by the speakers themselves according to all those who have reported on the relationship of Balochi and Brahui (cf. e.g. GEIGER 1889:66, DAMES 1913:658, ELFENBEIN 1982:79) and also according to recent observations in Iranian Balochistan (by Vahe Boyajian in 2000, by myself in January 2005). It goes without saying that the negative opinion of the speakers about their language lessens the chances of its survival. In some parts of Pakistan, the situation might be better today, however, and academic institutions promoting research on Brahui have been established.

108 One might assume that the languages spoken by people brought to the Makran coast as slaves have also left their traces in Balochi, but the evidence is scarce (FARRELL 2003:169, 183). Note, however, the remark by SULTANA 1996:50 4 that spiritual healers in Makran speak "a mix of Swahili and Balochi".

109 For methodological problems involved here, cf. I 1.2.1.

110 Thus, statements to the effect that "the northern [dialect]" (i.e. Eastern Balochi) has been influenced by Sindhi and "the southern [one, i.e. the other dialects] by Persian" (FRYE 1961:47) are not correct, as shall be seen throughout this work.

The Persian loanwords are unlikely to have been borrowed from the standard variety of the language as spoken in Tehran today (and noted in the Persian dictionaries), but rather from the varieties spoken by those living close to or together with the Baloch. Indeed, it has been noted that Persian words found in Balochi often do not show the standard Persian meanings, but rather the ones they have in Dari or other dialects (SPOONER 1967:53, RZEHAK 2003:264f.).

It is not entirely clear from which language the Ind. words which are found in Balochi have been taken, which is in part due to the imperfect knowledge about the languages spoken in the relevant parts of Pakistan. 111 It has generally been assumed that the older loanwords are from Sindhi/Lahnda112 and the more recent ones increasingly from Urdu (ROSSI 1982:160ff.). 113In the present work, an Ind. source language will be defined as the source of a Balochi word if a fitting word exists in that language; this is not meant to exclude the possibility that the word exists in a similar form in some other Ind. language and could therefore (also) have come into Balochi from there. In cases where a fitting word is found in several Ind. languages, priority is given to languages other than Urdu as a possible source since the influence of Urdu is a rather recent phenomenon, i.e. the word will be marked as being of e.g. Sindhi origin if there is a fitting Sindhi word.

Loanwords of sources other than those just described are less obvious, but are also found (for examples, cf. III). Although some Balochi dialects have been in contact with speakers of Pashto for a considerable time, the number of Pashto loanwords in Balochi is rather low. Words from Turkic languages, especially from the spheres of military and tribal organisation, are encountered in Balochi as in other Iranian languages. 114 It goes without saying that the Balochi of Turkmenistan has adopted Turkmen and Russian words, especially in the field of civil services or phenomena typical for social organisation in the (former) Soviet countries (cf. AXENOV 2003).

Linguistic contact and the borrowing of words is of course by no means only a phenomenon of modern times. It is thus not surprising that there is evidence that Balochi may have borrowed some words from (a predecessor of) Kurdish or a language closely related to it. 115 Since both languages belong to a subgroup of the WIr. languages that is much closer to Persian than other NWIr. languages, 116 it is quite likely that they were in contact for a certain period of their history.

Due to the intense contact of Brahui and Balochi, there are quite a number of Balochi loanwords in Brahui (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:5ff., ROSSI 1979). There is even a group of Brahui words of probable Balochi origin which are not found in Balochi itself. Some Brahui words which MORGENSTIERNE 1937MORGENSTIERNE , 1948 assumes to have been borrowed from Balochi, although not attested there, have in the meantime been reported as Balochi words. Brahui has also adopted some grammatical structures from Balochi (cf. [START_REF] Murray | Dravidian etymological dictionary. Oxford ---1972: "Dravidian etymological notes[END_REF][START_REF] Cardona | Aus dem Leben eines jungen Balutschen, von ihm selbst erzählt[END_REF]and ELFENBEIN 1982). In spite of the relative insignificance of Brahui for Balochi stressed by many authors, considerable loaning from Brahui into Balochi has been observed at least in the Quetta area (cf. FARRELL 2003:183), andMORGENSTIERNE (1932a:9) noticed "a number" of Brahui words in the Balochi of Noshke and Panjgur. There is indeed a certain number of borrowings to be found in the topical vocabulary presented in chapter III.

II. Historical Phonology 1. General Remarks

The purpose of this chapter is to update the findings about Balochi historical phonology as presented by GEIGER 1890 and 1891, taking into account the works on Balochi etymology and related subjects which have been produced in the meantime, e.g., by MORGENSTIERNE (1932MORGENSTIERNE ( , 1948 etc.) etc.), ELFENBEIN (1963ELFENBEIN ( , 1985ELFENBEIN ( , 1990 etc.) etc.) and others. 1The statements by Geiger will systematically be referred to and reassessed, using material which has come to light from Balochi as well as from other Iranian languages in the past hundred years and discussing implications for the historical phonology of the Western Iranian languages as a whole.

For methodological reasons (cf. I 1. Before entering the subject, a brief account of the Balochi phonemic systems and the pronunciation of loanwords is given.

Phonemic system

The following pages present the phonemic systems of Common Balochi (cf. I 1.3) as well as of the contemporary dialects as assumed in the present study.

Most authors, beginning with GEIGER (e.g. 1891:403), have described the phonemic systems of the Balochi dialects in such a way that the system of the Eastern dialects (EBal.) is said to include "additional" phonemes as compared with the Western and Southern dialects (SWBal.), and the phonemic system of the latter is declared as the "basic" one and/or as more or less identical with that of Common Balochi. 3 While, from a historical perspective, the SWBal. phonemic system is indeed closer to Common Balochi than that of Eastern Balochi, the SWBal. as well as the EBal. phonemic systems are systems in their own rights with "clearly describable autonomous features" (ROSSI 1979a:179) and should be discussed accordingly. In what follows, the phonemic system of the dialect groups will thus be presented from a synchronic point of view.

Common Balochi

When compared to the phonemic systems of Old Iranian languages, the absence of fricatives from the phonemic system of Common Balochi is striking. Bal. sound laws discussed in II 2.1.2.1 "reduced the original phonemic system of Bal. to a simplicity unknown to any other Ir. language" (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255). that Common Balochi had (biphonematic) *hw-. The result for the phonemic system of Common Balochi is the same, however, since, with both assumptions, Common Balochi had (only) one wphoneme.

7 So far, geminates in Balochi have only been mentioned, but not described, with the exception of short notes in BUDDRUSS 1988:44f. andJAHANI 1989:16. Both works note gemination as a not too common phenomenon, although it is rather frequent in some sources. ROSSI 1979a:225 notes that gemination is one of the points that need further investigation. In metrical texts, geminated consonants are treated like other sorts of consonant clusters.

Geminated consonants only occur after short vowels (cf. II 3.1.1.1). 9 They are of markedly differing frequency in the individual dialects (frequent in some Western dialects, less frequent elsewhere); 10 the details remain to be studied (cf. II 3.2), but the effect is that all sorts of geminates are optional only when considering the Bal. language as a whole. According to ELFENBEIN 1991:115, a word-final geminate is always shortened when the next word begins with a consonant.

Gemination will be noted as C(C) throughout, e.g. čam(m) "eye", duz(z) "thief". This is meant to indicate that some source(s) show(s) gemination (and, in most cases, others do not). If a word is quoted from a certain cited source, it is given as it appears there, e.g. pakkag (BMC) "ripe".

Vowel hiatus

Adjacent vowels may be separated with the help of h, y or w, e.g. šā(h)ir "poet" (NP-Ar. šā c ir), mahī "May" (Europ.), zā(h)-/ zāy-"give birth", grē(w)-"weep" (cf. II 2.4.3).

The choice of the consonants depends in part on the dialect involved (cf. II 3.2.1.1.3,3.2.2.1,3.2.3.1,3.2.4.1).

In other cases, the vowel hiatus remains, and a kind of secondary diphthong seems to develop, e.g. fāida, pāida "advantage" (NP-Ar. fā'ida). 11

Phonemic systems of the dialects 12

In addition to the phonemes present in the phonemic system of Common Balochi, the phonemic systems of the contemporary Bal. dialects include the retroflex phonemes ˙ t ,

9 Isolated cases of violation of these rules do occur; all of them show a geminate after long vowel in what is likely to be a loanword: zīrrag "cumin seed; ray, beam" (BMC, EAL, SHG; probably borrowed from NP zīra, which in turn may be from Indic, HORN 1893:259), šāddī "joy" (BMC, borrowed from NP). For additional gemination in some dialects, cf. II 3.2.2.1, 3.2.4.1. The absence of gemination might in some sources be due to imperfect accuracy in hearing and/or notation, and gemination also differs according to the subdialect or other sort of variant involved.

10 The use of geminated consonants also seems to depend heavily on the idiolect of the speaker (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication).

11 Cf. also p. 63-64, 165, 191 for further variants of this word and II 1.2.2 for the treatment of '.

12 The phonemic systems as assumed here on the whole correspond to those assumed by ROSSI (1979a:207ff.) and JAHANI 1989:79ff. Differences from these two will be noted. All phonemic analyses that have been proposed for Balochi are treated in detail in ROSSI 1979a.

57

1. General Remarks ˙ d and ˙ r . 13 Although these phonemes are mainly found in loanwords of Ind. origin, they are rather frequent, there are no distributional limits, and they are never replaced by other sounds. This indicates that they are part of the speakers' phonemic systems, and there is no reason to consider them as peripheral phonemes. Besides its occurrence in loanwords, ˙ r develops from r in certain contexts (cf. II 3.1.1.4,3.1.3.5); the use of ˙ d is likewise augmented by a tendency of some dialects to substitute ˙ d for d (cf. II 3.1.1.4).

Some authors do not include ˙ n in the Balochi phonemic system. However, it occurs not only as an allophone of n in front of ˙ d (cf. BUDDRUSS 1988:44), but also in intervocalic position in borrowings from Ind. languages at least in some Bal. variants, including dialects from both the Eastern and the other groups (cf. JAHANI 1989:84, FARRELL 2003:177). As it only occurs in a rather limited number of loanwords and since it seems uncertain that all speakers of a given dialect will pronounce it (other speakers substituting n for it), it is considered a peripheral phoneme here. 14 Further additions to the phonemic systems include fricatives which have been introduced into the phonemic systems of the dialects to varying degrees: f, x, ġ are found as peripheral phonemes in the Western and Southern dialects (cf. II 1.1.2.1), while the complete set of f, x, \, b, d, ġ is present as regular phonemes in the Eastern dialects. q (in NP-Ar. loanwords) is beginning to gain ground in some dialects, too (cf. II 1.2.2), but, even there, it still seems more adequate not to count it as a phoneme.

Nasal vowels are found in most Bal. dialects. They can usually be analysed as allophonic sequences of V + n, but there are dialects where at least some nasal vowels seem to have phonological status (cf. JAHANI 1989:80f., FARRELL 2003:173f.). 15 In some dialects, ī is used in words where other dialects have ū (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1, 3.2.1.2, 3.2.2.2). However, since there is a certain degree of interdialectal borrowing 13 Some authors have doubted the existence of ˙ d and ˙ r as two separate phonemes and have regarded them as allophones. However, it seems that these doubts are caused by imperfect notation and errors in the data (cf. RZEHAK 1998:152). For dialects possibly without retroflexes, cf. II 1. 1.2.1. 14 FARRELL 2003:180 assumes that the adoption of ˙ n into the phonemic system might be due to its being mentally analysed as a sequence of n (or nasal part of a vowel) + ˙ r .

15 ROSSI 1979a:209f. concludes from the unconvincing reasoning of BARKER/MENGAL 1969:xxxviff. that nasal vowels are generally not phonemic in SWBal. This statement is liable to modification: it seems that, in this respect, the phonemic system of (some) SBal. and maybe some dialects spoken in Iran differs from that of the remaining non-Eastern dialects, cf. II 3. 1.3.3, 3.2.2.3, 3.2.4.3. everywhere, it seems that there is no phonemic system of a dialect (or other variant) from which ū is entirely absent.

Western and Southern Balochi 16

Strictly speaking, there is no common phonemic system of the non-Eastern dialects of Balochi, and it might be more adequate to present a different chart for each dialect. On the other hand, the divergences are not so great either, so an overall chart will be given with a discussion of the debatable cases.

Consonants: Vowels:

p t ˙ t č k i ī u ū b d ˙ d ǐ g ē ō (f) s š (x) a ā z ž (ġ) m n ( ˙ n ) r ˙ r Diphthongs: w l y h ai, au
Phonemic system of Southern and Western Balochi ž only occurs in loanwords and is rather rare in SWBal. (comparable to its status in NP). Its distribution is limited, but, as there are minimal pairs, it constitutes a phoneme of its own. h is absent from the WBal. dialect of Turkmenistan and weak in the remaining Raxšānī dialects (cf. II 3.2.3.1).

16 ROSSI 1979a:169ff. cites the phonemic system (or, rather, inventory of phones, in the case of earlier authors) of SWBal. as conceived by the following previous authors: GEIGER 1901[START_REF] Grierson | Linguistic Survey of India X: Specimens of Languages of the Eranian Family[END_REF], MORGENSTIERNE 1948[START_REF] Valentina | Beludžskij jazyk[END_REF]: Balochi of Turkmenistan, SPOONER 1967

General Remarks

There is a "very limited number" of dialects in Iran without retroflex consonants (FARRELL 2003:177). Since all other Balochi dialects have them, it seems that these dialects have lost the retroflex consonants (presumably under the influence of NP).

x, ġ and f are peripheral phonemes in that they only occur in loanwords, mainly of NP or Arabic origin. Another possible source is Eastern Balochi where these sounds have phonemic status (cf. II 1.1.2.2). The tendency to substitute the corresponding stops is rather strong (cf. II 1.2.2), and they are absent from the repertoires of many speakers, so they are given in brackets here.17

In at least some SBal. dialects, nasal vowels exist as separate phonemes (cf. II 3.2.2.3).

Eastern Balochi 18

The main differences which set Eastern Balochi apart from the other dialects have been treated in I 3.1.1 and will be dealt with in detail in II 3.2.1.

Since MORGENSTIERNE 1948:256, it has been clear that the EBal. fricatives have phonemic status. They started out as allophones of the corresponding stops in postvocalic position; with the adoption of loanwords containing fricatives not only in post-vocalic position, the fricatives ceased to be a conditioned phenomenon. When the fricativisation rule did not operate any longer, postvocalic stops in new loanwords have created a new phonemic opposition.

Consonants: Vowels:

p (h) t (h) ˙ t (h) č(h) k (h) i ī u ū b d ˙ d ǐ g ē ō f \ s š x a ā b d z ž 19 ġ m n ( ˙ n ) Diphthongs: w (h) l r ˙ r y h ai, au
Phonemic system of Eastern Balochi

It is not entirely clear whether the same can be said of aspirated voiceless stops (including č) as JAHANI 1989:83 assumes. 20 The examples of unaspirated voiceless stops seem to be Ind. loanwords exclusively (ROSSI 1979a:213). In this work, it will thus be assumed that there is no phonemic opposition of aspirated and unaspirated stops in Eastern Balochi. 21 The marking of the aspiration is therefore superfluous from a phonological point of view. Since aspiration of word-initial voiceless stops has been observed in other dialects as well (cf. p. 40, 242, 251), it does not distinguish Eastern Balochi very much from the remaining dialects either. The reason it is noted here nevertheless is that traditionally, EBal. words have been cited this way (not only in the earlier sources, but also e.g. in ABG).

Several authors have noted that in a number of loanwords, aspirated voiced stops also occur, viz. b h , d h , ˙ d h , g h and the affricate ǐh . However, minimal pairs have not yet been found, so it does not seem necessary to ascribe a phonemic status to them. 22The number of labial fricative / glide phonemes in Eastern Balochi is not entirely clear. The maximum solution is three phonemes: w with a word-initial allophone w h23 corresponding to CBal. w, 24 b25 as product of postvocalic CBal. b (cf. II 3.2.1.1.1) and v in loanwords e.g. from Ind. languages. This approach is indeed advocated by GILBERTSON 1923:7. Most other authors do not assume three phonemes, though. Two phonemes are assumed by e.g. GEIGER (1891:433 etc.), DAMES (1891:1ff.), GRIERSON (1921:337ff.), ROSSI (1979a:211ff.), these being w from CBal. w (with or without wordinitial allophone w h ) and b from postvocalic b (and possibly also in word-initial position in loanwords with v-). It does not seem impossible, however, that some authors who have assumed two phonemes have done so for historical reasons26 or systematic ones (thus apparently ROSSI 1979a:211). 27 Some authors assume only one phoneme w, e.g. II 2.1.3.3.1). The observation by GRIERSON 1921:339 and MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255 4 that EBal. w hcomes from OIr. h ˘ u -is correct (cf. II 2.2.1.5.4), but the same is true for SWBal. w-. If the aspiration (probably rather a devoicing, cf. GRIERSON 1921:339) does preserve something old, it must have been lost in Western Balochi. On the synchronic level, however, the distribution seems to be completely parallel to that of the voiceless stops. MOŠKALO 1991:29 assumes that the outcome of OIr. h ˘ u -as v-is not limited to the EBal. dialects while word-internally, there is a phoneme w (< OIr.

˘ u )

; the note about a "tendency of substitution of w by v" (MOŠKALO 1991:29f.) seems to be taken from GILBERTSON 1923:7 (see below). In the non-Eastern dialects, however, there seems to be no evidence suggesting that the Bal. product of OIr. h ˘ u -is different from word-internal w. Moreover, a difference in pronunciation would not necessarily constitute a phonemic opposition. BARKER/MENGAL 1969/II:1ff., EDEL'MAN 1975:74. 28 The question cannot be decided without new relevant EBal. material. For the purposes of the present work and in order not to lose potentially relevant information, the distinction w (with word-initial allophone w h ) vs. b (< CBal. postvocalic b) is made throughout.

Although nasal vowels are widespread in Eastern Balochi (cf. II 3.2.1.3), there is no evidence that they have attained phonemic status.

Pronunciation of loanwords 29

Arabic sounds 30

The typical Arabic sounds are treated the same way as in NP (cf. also I 1.5.2.3), i.e.

• ¨ t is rendered as t, • ¯ s, ¨ s are rendered as s, • ¯ z, ż, ż as z, • ˙ h as h.
As to the orthography of Arabic words, Balochi sources vary quite a bit. The two main approaches are the following: some authors use the NP-Ar. orthography, thereby demonstrating learnedness, and/or the desire to make recognition of (Arabo-)Persian and Urdu words possible (thus e.g. ABG where even the transcription tends to correspond to the Arabic orthography). Others prefer to indicate the actual Balochi pronunciation, one motive being the strengthening of a "pure" Balochi language (thus SHG where none of the phonemes given in brackets in II 1.1.2.1 occurs either). 31 Mixed strategies are also found. In BMC (where the words are ordered by their transcription), both variants of orthography are given, while the transcription reflects the pronunciation. 32Arabic c (o) disappears without trace in word-initial position, e.g. 33• ākibat "future" (NP-Ar. c āqibat), adālat(t)34 "court" (NP-Ar. c idālat "justice"), izzat "honour" (NP-Ar. c izzat), uzr "excuse" (NP-Ar. c u ¯ zr), akl (cf. also p. 207, 265, 267) "intelligence" (NP-Ar. c aql), aib (for variants, cf. p. 228, 278) "fault" (NP-Ar. c aib). In post-vocalic position, it lengthens the preceding vowel: 35• bād (FBB, EAL) "later" (NP-Ar. ba c d), tārīp (FARRELL 2003:182) "praise" (NP-Ar. ta c rīf), tām "taste" (NP-Ar. ¨ ta c m), dāwā "lawsuit" (NP-Ar. da c wā). The hiatus which results from the loss of intervocalic c may be filled by a vowelseparating consonant,36 e.g. sāhat, sahat "hour, time" (NP-Ar. sā c at). Word-final c seems to be lost, cf. EAL tama "desire" (NP-Ar.

¨ tama c ). ABG's ¨ tamā "greed" might reflect the lengthening of word-final -a which is common in this source (cf. II 3.1.2.2.2).

Arabic ' (Y) is lost. The loss may result in a secondary diphthong, e.g. pāida, fāida "advantage" (NP-Ar. fā'ida). 37

II. Historical Phonology

Persian sounds

The fricatives of loanwords are usually replaced in SWBal. by sounds belonging to the basic phonemic system, usually by the corresponding stops (cf. SPOONER 1967:58, BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxff., BUDDRUSS 1988:44, FARRELL 2003:176f., 179). 38 This chiefly affects f, x, q, ġ of Persian (and Perso-Arabic) loanwords, but also fricatives of other languages.

Speakers of Balochi with higher education do use the original pronunciation. Furthermore, the tendency of substitution seems to be stronger in the Southern dialects than in the Western ones. In Iran, and some regions close to its border, due to the growing influence of mass media and the educational system of the respective states, the pronunciation of f, x, q, ġ in loanwords has become more usual in recent times, 39 so that doublets of the same word occur, one with the Persian pronunciation, one with the adapted one (examples below). Religious terms and those used in particularly formal styles are especially liable to appear in the "learned" pronunciation.

f is mostly replaced by p, 40 e.g. • pāida "advantage" (NP-Ar. fāida, cf. p. 63), pakīr "beggar" (NP-Ar. faqīr).

ġ is replaced by g in most cases: 41 • garīb 42 "poor" (NP-Ar. ġarīb), galat (cf. p. 282) "wrong" (NP-Ar. ġala ¨ t "mistake"), gam(m) (EAL) 43 "grief" (NP-Ar. ġam(m));

• augān "Afghan" (NP af ġān, cf. p. 277).

General Remarks

q in Arabic loanwords is as a rule replaced by k, e.g. in • kismat "destiny" (NP-Ar. qismat), kulp (cf. p. 265) "(door-)lock" (NP-Ar. qufl); • ākubat (BMC, cf. p. 286), ākibat "future" (NP-Ar. c āqibat, cf. p. 63), pakīr "beggar" (see above). Sometimes we find x, probably reflecting some NP pronunciation variety: 44• āxibat (EAL), āxōbat (BMC,p. 193,201) "future" (see above), arax (EVM)

"sweat" (NP-Ar. c araq).

If a word with q is taken over from Standard New Persian where q and ġ fall together, the result in Balochi may likewise be ġ or g:

• al ġa-gōš (EVM) "earring" (NP-Ar. ˙ h alqa "ring"), • āši ġ, āšix (both EVM), āšik45 "lover" (NP-Ar. c āšiq),

• āgā "lord" (NP-Turk. āqā).

In the case of NP-Ar. x, several strategies are met with. In a minority of cases, it is pronounced x, especially in terms from the religious sphere:

• xairāt (EVM), xērāt (FBB) "alms, offer" (NP-Ar. xairāt), xidmat (ABG, DTB)

"service" (NP-Ar. xidmat). The most common substitution is that by h: • hālīg "empty" (NP-Ar. xālī), habar "news, word, matter" (NP-Ar. xabar), 46 hatar "danger" (NP-Ar. xa ¨ tar), halās "finished" (NP-Ar. xalā ¨ s), halk "village, people" (NP-Ar. xalq), hairāt "alms" (see above), hidmat "service" (see above). Usually, these words are written using the normal letter for h (y). Some writers, however, choose to use a (a letter which is -apart from the diacritical mark -identical in shape to that for x: b) to indicate their knowledge that this word is originally a foreign word with x 47 , e.g. • AE §< or AE §≈ (orthography meaning: this word is xabar originally) habar,

AE•< / AE•≈ hitar, hatar (cf. p.

285).

As h disappears in some WBal. dialects (see below), x in a loanword may appear as zero (cf. e.g. BUDDRUSS 1988:44):

• abar "news etc.", alās "finished", alk "village, people".

II. Historical Phonology

In other cases (maybe especially in the Southern dialects or at least some of these), x is replaced by k (cf. FARRELL 2003:176): 48 • kāmōš (FBB) "quiet" (NP xāmōš, cf. p. 157), kat (FBB) "letter" (NP-Ar. xa ¨ t "line"). 49 It is thus not unusual to find the same loanword in multiple forms, e.g.

• k(a)rāb, (h)arāb (cf. also p. 283) "bad" (NP-Ar. xarāb "out of order"); • kudā (FBB), xudā (EVM, FBB), hudā "God" (NP xudā);

• kīāl (FBB), xayāl (ABG, 50 EVM), hayāl "thought, opinion" (NP-Ar. xayāl, xiyāl "imagination, idea"); • kēriat, (h)ēriat (both FARRELL 2003:176), xairiat (FBB) "healthy" (NP-Ar. xairiyat "welfare").

Indic sounds

The retroflex consonants of Ind. loanwords are pronounced as such in Balochi, including ˙ n (cf. II 1.1.2). In some loanwords with dentals, retroflex consonants are even secondarily introduced (cf. II 3.1.1.4, 3.3.1.7.3). Although v in loanwords is as a rule replaced by w, some cases of word-initial v-show g-or b-when taken over into Balochi (cf. II 3.3.1.7.1).

Sindhi

European sounds 51

Fricatives occurring in European loanwords are treated the same way as those in NP words (cf. II 1.2.2).

48 The use of k in loanwords with x might have been motivated by the observation that Balochi has k in some cases where NP has x (both the result of OIr. (FARRELL 2003:180) "(satellite) dish".

Accent

The Balochi accent remains an issue to be investigated. Most studies on Balochi and collections of Balochi texts have neglected it altogether. From those works which have treated it, it seems that the accentuation of words differs considerably among the dialects. The available information is the following:

For the Western Balochi dialect of Turkmenistan and Afghanistan, a system of accentuation has been noted which is similar to the New Persian one.

In Turkmenistan Balochi, the accent is on the last syllable of the word as a rule according to RASTORGUEVA 1966:328ff. andMOŠKALO 1991:40ff. Exceptions are the element -ān(-) of the plural nominal forms, which is always accented, and the indefinite article -ē and the pronominal suffixes, which are enclitic. According to MOŠKALO 1991:40, the singular case endings are enclitic, too. 53 The verbal stem is accented on the last syllable, the verbal element a (cf. V 1.7.6), the verbal endings and the copula being enclitic; the endings of the present tense, however, are accented, and the copula in the past is accented on its stem at-. The negative prefixes na-and ma-always bear the accent (MOŠKALO 1991:67); the irrealis is accented on the first syllable (b-|guštēnun "[if] I said" vs. subjunctive b-gu|šun "[that] I say", RASTORGUEVA 1966:336). There are a few adverbs which are accented on the first syllable.

The rules of accentuation given by BUDDRUSS 1988:45ff. for Afghanistan Balochi differ from the Turkmenistan system54 in that case endings added to monosyllabic nouns always bear the accent (on their first syllable if the ending has more than one syllable),55 whereas polysyllabic nouns are always accented on the last syllable of the stem, all case endings being enclitic. Inflected forms of the interrogative pronoun čē "what" are accented on the first syllable, however. Verbal forms with the prefix b(i)likewise have the accent on the first syllable56 while the prohibitive prefix ma-is proclitic, e.g. ma-|āyay "you should not come!". Verbs in the present tense, usually accented on the ending, are also found with accent on the stem if this is a heavy syllable.

The accentuation in the Southern Balochi dialect of Karachi differs markedly from this system in that the place of the accent depends on the length of the syllables. From a preliminary collection of material by Tim Farrell, one may deduce the following rules:

A heavy syllable (-) is one which contains a long vowel or diphthong or a short vowel followed by more than one consonant. The nasal element of nasal vowels is not taken into account. A word-final long vowel and a word-final short vowel followed by one consonant count as light syllables (∪).

The domain of the accent is the last three syllables of a word. The accent is on the first syllable, counting from the end of the word, which is heavy. This means that the accent is on the last syllable of a word if this syllable is heavy (or if the word is monosyllabic): (n x)'-. If the last syllable is light, the accent is on the last but one syllable provided that it is heavy (or the first syllable of the word) (n x)'-∪. If the two last syllables are light, the accent is on the last but two (antepenultimate) syllable, be it heavy or light: (n x)'x∪∪.

A secondary stress may fall on the initial syllable of longer words if the primary accent is not on the second syllable.

one is accented (|saka|tar "partridge", |aška|na ġ "to hear"). 60 Gilbertson also observes that phrases like compound verbs and preposition + noun are treated as a unit as far as the accent is concerned, e.g. |dar-bu|rag "to save", |p h a wa|\ ã "among themselves".

The accentuation rules observed in Southern and Eastern Balochi agree with those observed for Urdu (SPIES 1945:11ff.): Urdu words of Indic origin 61 have the accent on the last of the last three syllables which is heavy (natura or positione) and on the last but two syllable if all three are short, word-final long vowels counting as a light syllable. 62 Some nominal endings are enclitic.

The evidence suggests that the accentuation of the Balochi dialects has been influenced very much by (or even taken from) the respective neighbouring languages. 63 As the accentuation systems are based on entirely different principles, it does not seem possible at present to determine the accentuation of Common Balochi.

60 With this additional rule, apart from |p h iriš|ta ġ (cf. the preceding footnote), the only examples which do not fit into the rules are si|d h ā "straight" (a loanword from Sindhi) and |čuk h čōrī "children" which is a compound from čuk "child, boy" and Urdu čh ōrī "girl" (thus "boys and girls").

61 There are some specific rules for the accentuation of Persian and Arabic loanwords.

62 The note in SPIES 1945:12 indicates that in contrast to Karachi Balochi, final long nasal vowels count as a heavy syllable.

63 One may even wonder if the accent system of Urdu and Karachi Balochi has been influenced by Arabic since Standard Arabic has the same system (KRAHL/REUSCHEL 1990:75f.).

Old Iranian > Common Balochi

In the following pages, the development of the Old Iranian phonemes to Common Balochi (cf. I 1.3) will be discussed in detail. For practical purposes, the term "Old Iranian" is used in a somewhat abstract sense and denotes an OIr. variety which does neither shows the specific developments seen in Old Persian1 nor the subphonematic phenomena characteristic for Avestan. As Balochi is a member of the group of Western Iranian languages, it shares the MP and Prth. loss of final syllables. In contrast to all other Western Iranian languages (Middle and Modern), however, most phonemic oppositions seen in Old Iranian are preserved in Balochi (for further discussion, cf. II 2.1.1.1 and IV).

The development of sound classes from PIE to Common Balochi may be tabulated as follows:

PIE Old Iranian Common Balochi details in chapter

T T T II 2.1.1 D D D II 2.1.1 T/_C V T II 2.1.2.1 R R R II 2.1.3 E ˘ i E ˘ u ai au ē ō II 2.3.3 i, u ī, ū (< UH etc.) i, u ī, ū i, u ī, ū II 2.3.1.2 II 2.3.1.3 E Ē (< EH etc.) a ā a ā II 2.3.1.2 II 2.3.1.3

Development of sound classes from PIE to Common Balochi

The table on the following pages summarises the development of the individual sounds and the chapters where these are discussed. II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4.1 II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4 4.1.3,2.4.1.4,2.4.1.5,2.4.3 II 2.4.3 Development of PIE sounds into Common Balochi

( ˘ u ) /_C *k ( ˘ u ) t *k ( ˘ u ) s, *k ( ˘ u ) t 2 *k ( ˘ u ) m *k ( ˘ u ) r *k ( ˘ u ) ˘ i *sk ( ˘ u ) /_{* ˘ e, ˘ ı, ˘ i , e ˘ i , h} k -ka- č x xt xš xm xr š ˘ i Av. sč, OP s k -k č k *kt #š-, -šk- m kr- -hr š š II 2.1.1.1 II 2.4.
Av. sč, OP s s hm #h ˘ u - xš rš rž h ∅ š m(m), n(n) st sT, šT # e sT-, # e šT- š s m(m) w-/_ ˘ a, h-/_ī,ē #š, -šk- š(š) ž ? II 2.1.2.6 II 2.4.1.2 II 2.1.2.5 II 2.2.2.2 II 2.1.2.3 II 2.2.2.1.1 II 2.3.4 II 2.2.2.1.3 II 2.1.2.3 II 2.2.1.3 II 2.2.1.5.4 II 2.2.1.2 II 2.2.3.2 II 2.2.3.2 *z /{*r, ˙ r , ˘ u, ˘ u , ˘ ı, ˘ i , velars}_ *zd (h) z ž žN zd z ž N ? z(z) II 2.1.2.3 II 2.1.2.5 II 2.1.2.5 II 2.2.2.1.2 *m *k ( ˘ u ) m *d (h) m *sm /{*r, ˙ r , ˘ u, ˘ u , ˘ ı, ˘ i , velars}_ *n *nd (h) *sn /{*r, ˙ r , ˘ u, ˘ u , ˘ ı, ˘ i , velars}_ *rn m xm dm hm šm n nd šn rn m m ? m(m) m(m) n nd n(n) n(n) r #fra- Av.
˘ u /_V *- ˘ u - *p ˘ u *t ˘ u *#d (h) ˘ u - *#s ˘ u - *# ˘ u r- *E ˘ u /_C ˘ u# ˘ u - a ˘ u a ā ˘ u a - ˘ u # f ˘ u\ ˘ u #d ˘ u - #h ˘ u - # ˘ u r- au w g-/_ ˘ ı, ē; gw-/_ ˘ a ō ā ∅ hw ? h ? *v-? w/_ ˘ a, h-/_ī, ē r ? ō 2. Old Iranian > Common Balochi * ˘ i /_V *- ˘ i - *k ( ˘ u ) ˘ i *E ˘ i /_C ˘ i# ˘ i - C ˘ i ˘ a Ci ˘ i ˘ a a ˘ i a ā ˘ i a š ˘ i ai y ǐ- C ˘ a Cī ē ā š ē
.2 II 2.2.2.3 II 2.3.3 syllabic elements # V- # V- ∅ II 2.3.1.1 *E, i, u a, i, u a, i, u II 2.3.1.2 * Ē, ī, ū ā, ī, ū ā, ī, ū II 2.3.1.3 * ˚ r * ˚ rH PIr. * ˚ r PIr. * ˚ r( ˘ u ) ˘ i PIr. * ˚ rH ir in palatal context ur otherwise ir ar II 2.3.2.1 II 2.3.2.2 II 2.3.2.3 *E ˘ i /_C * ˘ i E ai a ˘ i a ā ˘ i a C ˘ i ˘ a Ci ˘ i ˘ a ē ē ā C ˘ a Cī II 2.3.3 II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4.2 II 2.1.3.4.2 *E ˘ u /_C * ˘ u E au a ˘ u a ā ˘ u a ō ō ā II 2.3.3 II 2.1.3.3.2 II 2.1.3.3.2 ∅ ∅ h y, w II 2.

Consonants

This subchapter treats the outcome of Old Iranian simple consonants, i.e. the development of consonants in word-initial, intervocalic and word-final postvocalic position, and in contexts in which the development is the same as in these. Developments of consonants in clusters which differ from the development of the respective simple consonants are treated in II 2.2.

Old Iranian plosives

OIr. (voiced and voiceless) stops and affricates seem to be preserved in Balochi without any change (cf. e.g. ELFENBEIN 1989:635, SCHMITT 2000:83). This "almost complete conservatism of Bal. with regard to intervocalic consonants" (MACKENZIE 1961:72) makes Balochi look the most archaic contemporary Iranian language.

The assumption of the stops and affricates being preserved entirely unchanged from Old Iranian to Balochi is faced with several problems: both Middle Persian and Parthian show lenition of postvocalic consonants (SUNDERMANN 1989:108), 3 and with regard to the obviously intense contact of Balochi with neighbouring languages, one is bound to wonder whether Balochi is likely to have escaped a process which otherwise would seem to have happened in Western Iranian as a group. The alternative assumption would be that Proto-Balochi postvocalic stops underwent some lenition as MP and Parthian did and that the products were later reversed to the original state. The change which re-produced the OIr. stops may have been the same one which eliminated the OIr. fricatives of whatever source and brought about the simplicity of the Common Balochi phonemic system (cf. II 1.1.1). If so, the archaic look would be due to a secondary phenomenon. 4At any rate, most OIr. phonemic oppositions are indeed preserved in Balochi. This does constitute an important archaism and gives Balochi a special place among the Ir. languages, and makes it particularly important for the reconstruction of earlier stages in the history of the WIr. languages.

OIr. p, t, k

OIr. p, t, k are represented by Balochi p, t, k.

p > p (GEIGER 1891:431f.):5

• pač-6 "cook" (Av. pača-, NP paz-/ puxt, Prth. pažag "cook (noun)" / puxt), pit "father" (Av. pitar-, NP pidar, Prth. pid(ar)), • kapōt7 "dove" (OP kapautaka-"blue", NP kabūtar, MP kabōtar, kabōd), āp 8 "water" (Av. āp-, NP, Prth. āb).

t > t (GEIGER 1891:426f.): 9

• tač-10 "run" (Av. tača-, Prth. taž-/ taxt, NP tāz-/ tāxt (caus.) "hurry"),

• būt 11 "been" (Av. būta-, NP, Prth. būd), māt "mother" (Av. mātar-, NP mādar, Prth. mād(ar)), gwāt "wind" (Av. vāta-, NP bād, Prth. wād, cf. p. 99), huš-/ hušt 12 "dry (verb, itr.)".

k > k (GEIGER 1891:417):

• kap-/ kapt "fall" (Prth. kaf-/ kaft), 13 kasān "small" (Av. kasu-, NP kih, Prth. kas),

• makisk 14 "fly" (NP, Prth. magas), rēk 15 "sand" (NP rēg), hušk "dry" (Av. huška-, NP xušk, Prth. hušk).

For OIr. k in suffixes, cf. II 2.4.4.1.

In Eastern Balochi, postvocalic p, t, k yield f, \, x, while word-initial p, t, k are aspirated (cf. II 3.2.1.1.1).

OIr. b, d, g

OIr. b, d, g are represented by Balochi b, d, g.

b > b (GEIGER 1891:433):

• bay-/ būt 16 "become" (Av. būta-, NP, Prth. buw-/ būd), brāt "brother" (Av. brātar-, NP barādar, Prth. brād(ar)), • kumb 17 "pool" (Av. xumba-, NP xum(b) "jar", Prth. xumb "jug"). 18 14 For variants and for a > i, cf. II 3.1. For variants, cf. p. 180.

The most common past stem is šušt, which shows an assimilation vs. the less common variant šust, cf. p. 180. HÜBSCHMANN observed (1890:561) that šōd-cannot belong to OInd. √śud h "purify" as presumed by GEB and that Av. xšaodah-"river" and xšusta-"melted, liquid" do not fit well with regard to the meaning. However, it seems preferable to assume that the Av., Bal. etc. forms do belong together, and to connect them to OInd. √k ˙ s ud "spread, crush, let flow" (EWAia I:439).

MACKENZIE 1986:31 reads MPZ <'dwynk> ēwēnag, probably implying that the derivation is the same as that which has been assumed for its homonym and homograph ēwēnag "custom, manner", i.e. *abdēn (via *adbēn > *a ˘ i bēn, HENNING 1944:110 1 ). MP would thus show a different preverb (*abi) than that found in NP āyīna, Prth. ādēnag and Bal. ādēnk, all of which may go back to *āda ˘ i (a)na- (BAILEY 1979:19b), a derivative of OIr. √dī (Av. √dāy) "see".

The contemporary form is āyina, but the Šāhnāma has āyīna.

There is no trace of the assimilation nd > nn found in some cases of MPM (cf. HENNING 1958:98) -sār-(HORN 1901:139); alternatively, gusil-/ gusist (< *gusid-, √saēd) may have been borrowed from Eastern Iranian which would explain the l for expected d (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). This is a suppletive verb (GEIGER 1891:429) with the present stem from OIr., OInd. √vid "find" (thus not corresponding to NP bīn-, Zaz. vên-, MP, Prth. wēn-< Av. √vaēn) and the past stem dīt etc. (cf. p. 188) from OIr. √dī, OInd. √d h ī "look" (GEIGER 1890:122). A trace of the expected past stem Bal. *gist-(Av. vista-) may be seen in the past stem variant dist (cf. p. 188). g > g (GEIGER 1891:419):

• gas-/ gast 27 "bite" (NP gaz-/ gazīd, Prth. gaz-/ gašt, OInd. √gāh), gōk "cow" Prth.,NP gāw,cf. p. 102,163), • nigōš-28 "listen" (Av. √gaoš, NP niyōš-/ niyōšīd, Prth. nigōš-/ nigōšād), bōg 29"joint" (OInd. b h ogá-"bend").

In Eastern Balochi, postvocalic b, d, g yield b, d, ġ, respectively (cf. II 3.2.1.1.1). f > p (GEIGER 1891:432): 31

Old

• kōpag "shoulder" (Av. kaofa-, NP kōh "mountain", Prth. kōf "hill"), kap 32 "foam" (Av. kafa-, NP kaf), nāpag "navel" (Av. nāfa-, NP nāf, Prth. nāfag "centre").

\ > t (GEIGER 1891:427): 33

• patan "wide" (Av. pa\ana-, NP pahn), gūt "mud" (Av. gū\a-"excrement", NP gūh), mētag 34 "village" (Av. maē\ana-"place of living", NP mēhan "homeland").

An older stage of Parthian is likely to have had \ (SUNDERMANN 1989a:123), while PrthT has h for OIr. \. This means that Balochi reflects the stage of older Parthian.

x > k (GEIGER 1891:417f.):

Although it has long been assumed that OIr. x yields Bal. k 35 , one might also consider 31 GEIGER 1891:432 cites hapt "7" as one of his examples, but the Bal. numeral system is likely to have been borrowed from Persian (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:78, GEIGER 1901a:216, KORN, frthc. 3). MOŠKALO's assumption (1991:36) that OIr. f may result in Bal. h (besides Bal. p, MOŠKALO 1991:38) is rather unfounded since his example kōh "mountain" has surely been borrowed from NP (cf. the genuine development in kōpag "shoulder").

32 kap (only in PIERCE 1874 cited by Geiger, and EAL) could also be a loanword (NP kaf).

33 GEIGER 1891:427 also cites čāt "source, well" and derives it from OIr. *čā\-(thus corresponding to NP čāh), but čāt may also be derived from OIr. (Av.) čāt- (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:555). ān-gāt (EVM), an-gat "yet" may likewise come from OIr. gātu-(while NP ān-gāh, ān-gah will be from OP gā\u-"place"). gāh "time" is also attested in Balochi and may have been borrowed from NP. MOŠKALO (1991:36, 38) xarsang "rock" (from sang "stone") and postulate a word xar°"big". However, the existence of such a word is not sure (xarsang would be the only example), and rabbits are not usually called "having big ears" (it is rather "having long ears" which is a common designation, but this does not match the meaning of xar in xarsang), given that they are rather small animals.

• kumb "pool" (declared possibly genuine Balochi by MORGENSTIERNE 1948:288) may have been borrowed from Si. kumb h u "pond" (thus ELFENBEIN 1990/II:80), and kumb "jar" could be from Ur.

kumb h (a) or from NP xumb.

OIr. č, ǐ i

OIr. č and ǐ (from PIE *k ( ˘ u ) and *g ( ˘ u )(h) before palatal vowels) seem to be preserved in Balochi. As in the case of the stops, it is possible that in postvocalic position, Bal. č, ǐ go back to lenited allophones, the OIr. state of affairs being restituted later. However, as there is evidence for the preservation of č, ǐ in Middle NWIr. (see below), it may be assumed that they have indeed been preserved in their OIr. form.

č > č (GEIGER 1891:423f.): 45

• čar(r)-46 "turn" (Av. čara-"move", Prth. čar-"graze"), čam(m) "eye" (Av. čašman-, NP, Prth. čašm), čin-47 "pick, gather" (Av. činao-, NP, Prth. čīn-/ čīd), 43 GERSHEVITCH 1971:257 24 assumes that the word-initial consonant of MPZ haftār/xaftār "hyena" and some Ir. cognates is due to an assimilation of fricatives vs. the original form seen in NP kaftār etc. If so, Bal. haptār is likely to be a MP borrowing (thus also Sogd. 'bt 'r, cf. SIMS-WILLIAMS 1976:61).

44 Zazaki has h, e.g. her "donkey", hêrn-, erin-"buy". 45 Geiger's example gwač "calf" is likely to be a loanword, cf. p. 280.

46 Most Bal. dialects have two verbs (EAL 31) čar(r)-/ čar(r)it "turn" and čar-"graze" (past stem čart (BMC), čarit (EAL)). This is a secondary distinction as both are etymologically identical (Av. √čar, OInd. √car). However, the verb may also have been borrowed from NP, Urdu or Sindhi (cf. p. 319).

• gičin-48 "select, choose" (Av. vī-činao-, NP guzīn-/ guzīd, Prth. wižīn-/ wižīd-) 49 < * ˘ u i-čin-, sōčin 50 "needle" (NP sōzan), rōč "day" (Av. raočah-, NP rōz, Prth. rōž), ač 51 "of" (Av. hača, NP az, Prth. až).

It is commonly assumed that intervocalic č has resulted in ž in Parthian, but earlier stages of the language must have preserved č as is shown by loanwords in Armenian 1986:85) uzēnag "exit" vs. uzīdan "go out" (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). MPZ wizēn which is attested several times as a simplex (Shaul Shaked, personal communication) is also found in compounds (<wcyn-kl> "chooser, selective", <hwp-wcynyh> "good choosing"), and the same applies to Bal. gičēn, e.g. gičēn-kār (BMC, EAL) "electing, elector", x-gičēn "selecting x". 49 The Prth. present stem is found only twice (DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:338a).

The ī in the Pers. verb is likely to be due to a metanalysis of *wizid as containing the past stem suffix -īd, and the same probably applies to the Pers. simplex čīd < *čid (SALEMANN 1901:272). The ī might then have spread to the present stems MP wizīn-, čīn- (HORN 1901:26). The Manichaean orthography does not allow to determine the quantity of the i in the corresponding Prth. forms, but it has been assumed that these are likewise to be read wižīn-/ wižīd, čīn-/ čīd. (cf. GIPPERT 2000:2) and Hungarian 52 and reflected by the spellings with <c>. Balochi thus corresponds to the Early Parthian stage with regard to word-internal č, while some Zazaki dialects have /ǰ/, and Middle and Late Parthian and Kurdish show /ž/.

ǐ i > ǐ i (GEIGER 1891:424):

• ǐan-/ ǐat 53 "strike" (Av. ǐan-/ ǐata-, NP zan-/ zad, Prth. žan-/ žad), ǐan "woman, wife" (Av. ǐa i ni-, NP zan, Prth. žan), • bōǐ-54 "open" (Av. būǐa-, MP bōz-/ bōxt, Prth. bōž-/ bōxt, both "save"), raǐ-/ raǐit 55 "colour (tr.)" (NP raz-/ rašt, razīd, OInd. √raj "colour"), drāǐ "long" (Av. °drāǐah-, NP dirāz).

Again, attested Parthian shows a more advanced stage, namely ž, except for an allophone ǐ after n (RASTORGUEVA/MOL ČANOVA 1981a:159, 177), possibly also after r, (cf. DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 56). Kurdish has ž, too. Zazaki, however, preserves ǐ in some dialects, so this stage may be postulated for Early Middle NWIranian.

In Eastern Balochi, č, ǐ yield š, ž in postvocalic position (cf. II 3.2.1.1.1).

OIr. (non-Persian) s, z

As in other North-Western Iranian languages, the Bal. ) is likely to have been borrowed, and the same applies to its compound hamsā'ig, hamsāhig "neighbour" (NP hamsāya). The variant sāh (DTB, EAL) may be inherited (cf. p. 109). siāig (EVM) "shadowy" is probably rather to be connected with syāh "black".

57 Balochi preserves the distinction between zero-grade suč-"burn (itr.)" (past stem sutk (BMC, EAL, FBB), suht (EAL: Raxšānī), sut (Turkmenistan)) and full grade sōč-"burn (tr.)". The past stem (sōtk (BMC, EAL, FBB), sōht (EAL: Raxšānī), sōt (Turkmenistan)) has probably been modelled on the present stem, in order to distinguish it from the past stem of suč-.

58 These forms may most conveniently be derived from *āś ˘ u an(i) ˘ i ā-> MPZ <'syn'>, Psht. ōspīna, *āśuna-> MPM āhun, Prth. āsun, Zaz. asın, Kurd. hesin, Bal. āsin (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:193 7 ). If so, Bal. āsin would show a palatalisation of the kind discussed in II 3.1. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:193 7 ). For previous discussions of the Ir. forms, cf. BENVENISTE 1935:132f., BAILEY 1979:487a, SKJAERVØ 1994:271. 59 brēs-/ brēst is likely to go back to a formation with preverb, cf. p. 134f. 60 purs-/ pursit "ask" may have been borrowed from NP (cf. p. 147).

61 EAL has the past stems tusit, tōsit, respectively, the attestation of which seems unclear. BMC has tust, tōst, DTB the corresponding EBal. forms t h ust, t h ōsta, the other sources do not note these verbs (SHG has only the present stems). The -s-has been analogically introduced into the past stems.

On the etymology of this word, cf ). Geiger's derivation of nawāsag "grandchild" from *napā\ra-fits with NP nawāsa (the better preform is (obl.) *napā\r-, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:102f.), but not with the Bal. word, which has been borrowed from NP (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559). For Bal. nimāsag, cf. p. 234, 303. MOŠKALO 1991:32 assumes that s for OIr. \r is seen only in loanwords, citing sai "three" as example (for which see below). Not noting that the family terms pis(s) "father" etc. occur in some dialects only, MOŠKALO 1991:31 wrongly assumes that these words show a development of OIr. t (for which cf. II 2.1.1.1) > Bal. s, leaving the other examples for \r > s(s) unexplained.

71 āč is also used; it has probably been borrowed from NP ātiš, cf. p. 282.

72 Raxšānī according to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VIIff. The forms are found in BMC (Pakistani Raxšānī), NAWATA 1981 andBUDDRUSS 1988 (both Afghanistan Balochi) and EVM (Turkmenistan Balochi), cf. p. 250, 300ff.

• duskīč "sister-in-law (spouse's sister)" may represent a metathesised form of duksīč 74 and is derived from *dux\rī-čī-("daughter" + a feminine suffix) by MORGENSTIERNE 1932:43. 75 Note that there is no example for word-initial OIr. \rsince sai, saē, sē "three" (MP s ˘ e, seh, NP sih, CNP se vs. Prth. hrē) is likely to be a loanword (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:78) The two examples that could be adduced here are spēt 77 (Av. spaēta-, OInd. śvetá-, Prth. ispēd) "white" and asp 78 (Av. aspa-, OInd. áśva-, Prth. asp) "horse". However, these words do not occur in their SWIr. form anywhere (except for OP asa-bāra-> NP suwār "horseman" and NP astar "mule", cf. OInd. aśva-tará-). The attested corresponding WIr. words resemble NP (originally NWIr.) asb and sapēd (plus variants) and may thus have been borrowed from NP (or rather from MP spēd in the case of Bal. spēt). 79 A further item often used as example is NP sag "dog" (Prth. ispag) which is identical with the NP word in Balochi (sag) and thus does not prove anything either.

There is some evidence for s as Bal. result of PIr. *ś ˘ u : • sāh "breath, life" which (GEIGER 1891:430f.) Another interesting sound cluster would be PIr. *ź ˘ u . The only example is zubān 83 "tongue", which -like the cases for *ś ˘ u above -has a form similar to NP zabān (originally NWIr.) 84 in all contemporary WIr. languages. So there is no evidence which could be used here.

OIr. š, ž

OIr. š, ž, irrespective of their PIE origin, are preserved in Balochi.

š > š (GEIGER 1891:425) This would imply that the OP dialect from which MP and NP are derived must have differed from attested OP in that it distinguished the product of PIE * ḱs, ḱt, *ǵs from regular š. For further discussion of the relevant Pers. words and the etymologies, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208ff.

A reading šōrēn [START_REF] Kent ; Gert | Der Beitrag der Pahlavī-Literatur zur Interpretation des Avesta[END_REF]:208, DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:320) is surely to be preferred to šūrēn in BOYCE 1977:85.

Bal. šōr and its derivatives are cited by GEIGER 1891:431 from the early sources (DTB etc.), but not found elsewhere, the usual word for "salty" being sōr. The word may go back to PIIr. *ćša ˘ u ra- [START_REF] According | 301). More specifically, kabk is not "partridge" (arborophila, Germ. "Rebhuhn"), but rather "sand partridge, seesee partridge" (ammoperdix, Germ. "Wüstenhuhn"; Lutz Rzehak, personal communication) or "rock partridge" (alectoris, Germ. "Steinhuhn"; SCHAPKA 1972). 220 tar-"swim" is only found in DTB, GCD and EAL. The relationship of tar-, tarr-recalls that of čar, čarr-(cf. p. 150, 319). It is thus possible that an inherited tar-"turn" was changed to tarr-under the influence of borrowed tar-"swim". For EBal. past stems in -a\-which[END_REF]:411b, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208). HENNING 1947:289 assumes that it has been borrowed from some substratum language.

A compound of kaš with the demonstrative pronouns ā and ē might be seen in āškā "on that side", ēškā "on this side", cf. p. 177 and BUDDRUSS 1974:28ff. For variants, cf. p. 216. If the variant kašš noted in EAL exists (all other sources have kaš only), the word would be likely to have been borrowed (cf. II 3.3.1.5) 113 Prth. <zys-> has been interpreted as an inchoative formation of this verb by HENNING 1937:90. The only attestation is <zysyd 'w hrw bzgyft> (M 284a V i 30-31) which might indeed be translated "Refrain (ipr.pl.) from all evil!" (information kindly provided by Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst). However, <zys-> may more conveniently be connected (thus GERSHEVITCH 1954:68) to Sogd. jyš ¯ t-, žyš ¯ t-"hated", Av. zōišnu-, zōiždišta-"(most) horrible", NP zišt "ugly, filthy" which are likely to be cognates of OInd. √he ˙ d "be angry" (EWAia I I:819). This solution is more plausible since a past stem zišt is attested in Parthian (M 92 V 16b and M 229 V i 9, Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication), thus <zys-> may be read zēs- (DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:388a). 114 The assumption by ELFENBEIN 1985:237 of zān, zānuk being "found only in Ra[xšānī]" is not correct (cf. p. 297). It is possible that zān(uk) has been borrowed from Persian as ELFENBEIN 1990/II:165 assumes, but since the suffix does not have the same form as MP zānūg, NP zānū, it is perhaps more likely not to be a loanword.

• rōp-/ rupt "sweep" (Av. urūpaiia-, NP rōb-/ ruft), rēk "sand" (NP rēg), 116 war-117 "eat" (Av. x v ara-, NP x w ar-/ x w urd, Prth. wxar-/ wxard), • brāt "brother" (Av. brātar-, NP barādar, Prth. brād(ar)), gwahār "sister" (Av.

x v aohar-, NP x w āhar, Prth. wxār, cf. p. 99, 123).

Non-Pers. OIr. rz and rd are not changed to l as in NP and maybe in some Kurdish dialects. 118 Geiger concludes the preservation of rz and rd in Balochi from the single example of zird "heart". In the meantime, some more examples have emerged:

rd > rd (GEIGER 1891:414):

• (cf. EMMERICK 1971:61ff., WEBER 1994:112, cf. also BAILEY 1979:190, who doubts that Khot. nūha-"top" goes back to the same form).

143 Choresmian has a suffix -'wk in similar function (cf. HENNING 1958:116). In Parthian, however, there seems to be no example of -ōg in agentive function. No unambiguous examples have been found which would show the Bal. result of OIr. a ˘ u ā, pāk 151 "pure" being possibly borrowed from NP pāk. Parthian preserves a ˘ u ā (pawāg "pure", pawāž-"purify", awā°"thus", cf. SIMS-WILLIAMS 1990:11). There is a singular contraction of EBal. šawā "you (pl.)" (vs. SWBal. šumā,cf. p. 126,232f.) in its variant šā, presumably an allegro form since e.g. EBal. kawān vs. SWBal. kamān "bow" does not show the same contraction.

˘ u after other vowels:

With regard to postvocalic ˘ u in other contexts, the evidence is not clear: • pīg "fat" (NP pīh, Av. pīuuah-, Prth. fra-bīw "fat, stout") would show loss of ˘ u ,152 • while in ēwak153 "alone" (Av. aēuua-, NP yak "one", Prth. ēwag "alone"), the ˘ u has been preserved. 158 The -ā might have been attached to the word due to influence from NP and/or as an obl. ending, since the obl. is also used as a local case (e.g. gis-ā "at home", šap-ā "at night").

159 In ABG, the orthography -N ≠D is used, obviously assuming that this is an instance of dialectal z for EBal. d < CBal. d (maybe implying a popular etymology with NP ǐudā "separated"). For Ir. and other cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:20a and LIV p. 315. HORN's 1893:94 etymology of NP ǐustan as belonging to OInd. √yud h "fight" is rejected by HÜBSCHMANN 1895:50 for semantic reasons. Maybe ABG's ǐōzā "emotion" also belongs here.

Pointing in the same direction is the fact that most of the words beginning with y-are obviously loanwords, chiefly from NP, e.g. yāzdah "eleven", yak(k) "one", yatīm "orphan" (NP-Ar.), yal "brave, strong" (NP-Turk.). 160 It is probable that the remaining words with y-have been borrowed as well, e.g. yāt "memory" (pace GEIGER 1891:413) which is a case of devoicing of the final consonant in a loanword (vs. NP yād). GERSHEVITCH 1998:120ff.) or * ˘ u i ˘ i āna-, cf. p. 136); • the suffix -īk seen in e.g. zamīk "field", šudīk "hungry" may come from *-i ˘ i a-ka-as does MP -īg (SALEMANN 1901:272). 164 As Prth. and MP -īg have also been derived from *-i ˘ i a-ka-, one may assume that the change OIr. i ˘ i a > ī is common to Western MIr. as a whole. 165 On the other hand, nākō "uncle" 166 (vs. Av. niiāka-, OP niyāka-"grandfather", NP niyā "ancestor", Prth. niyāg) shows a loss of OIr. ˘ i .

Several explanations are possible, for example: 167 This idea seems to go back to GEIGER 1891:408.

168 The short vowel seen in the Av. hapax ǐiia.ǐat åohō "propelled by the bowstring" is likely to be due to a secondary phenomenon, i.e. to the dot separating the compound into two words and the subsequent application of the YAv. shortening of word-final vowels (DE VAAN 2003:43). As this shortening only takes place in polysyllabic words, it also shows that ǐiia°has two syllables.

169 His only example for ˘ i ā > ī is paǐī (SHG paǐīg) "together with" besides paǐyā "id.". paǐī need not go back to paǐyā, though, but may be a formation with the suffix -ī(g). GEIGER 1890:140 interprets (DAMES 1881, HITTU RAM 1881) paǐyā, paǐī "together with" as pa + ǐā "place". However, such a phrase might be expected to mean "instead of" as does ba-ǐā-ē (FBB, borrowed from NP), so that some other explanation seems to be required. paǐyā may be the oblique case of paǐī since many postpositions are oblique cases of nouns (cf. V 1.5). ). This implies that the gen.sg. ending can be derived from the Old Iranian genitive ending (thus MORGENSTIERNE 1948:257, 259). 180 The consistent ē of čē might be attributed to the influence of the demonstrative pronoun ē.

-ā ˘ i a-> ā?

GEIGER 1891:411 assumes that OIr. ā ˘ i a is reduced to Bal. ai. In his examples haik "egg" (also hāik, hēk, haig, āig, āyag, cf. NP xāya), sā'ig "shadow" (also sāhig, sāyig, sāī, sāyag,181 cf. NP sāya, OInd. c h āy á-) and kait "comes" (also kē, kaē (FBB),182 see also below), ā ˘ i a has indeed been shortened, but the outcome obviously depends on the dialect. Moreover, there may be peculiar morphological processes involved: haik (cf. p. 156f.) and sā'ig with variants can be loanwords from NP, and the processes resulting in kait and variants are not quite clear. So if the examples fit here at all, the shortening of ā ˘ i a > ai seems to be a post-CBal. phenomenon. 183 sai "three" (also saē, sē, sah, NP sih) is likely to be a NP loanword as well (cf. p. 90).

The evidence for a possible change ā ˘ i a > ē is not convincing either: • MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50 assumes that Br. sēxā "shadow, ghost" has been borrowed from Bal. *sēkā which could be the genuine Bal. word for "shadow" (with sā'ig etc. borrowed from NP, see above). It is, however, not sure if Bal. *sēkā ever existed, and the Br. word might also have been borrowed from Si. sēya. • The most probable etymology of parērī "the day before yesterday" is *para-a ˘ i ar- (GERSHEVITCH 1964:81), and parērī could therefore be an example for -ā ˘ i a-> ē184 , but it can as well have been borrowed from NP parēr. The variants pairī (SHG), pērī (FBB, EAL: Eastern, Coastal, Kēčī) seem to be derived from parērī by haplology (GEIGER 1890:140 also notes the form pairērī).

In the absence of trustworthy counterexamples, one might postulate a loss of ˘ i in the sequence -ā ˘ i a- (MOŠKALO 1991:21, 35) 185 parallel to the loss of ˘ u in ā ˘ u a (cf. p. 102f.). This would mean that sāh "shadow" (with hypercorrect -h) and ā-murg 186 "egg" are the genuine variants (note that sāh and āmurg might not be so easily explained as loanwords as the variants sā'ig, hāik etc. discussed above).

A change ā ˘ i a > ā might also explain the infinitives with -ā-in Eastern Balochi (cited by GEIGER 1891:407 and GEIGER 1890 q.v.) where the other dialects show (-)āya-:

• ā ġ "to come" (other dialects āyag 187 , 1sg. k-ān (otherwise (k-)āyã etc.), • ǐā ġ "to chew" (SWBal. ǐāyag, cf. p. 103),

• zā ġ "to give birth" (SWBal. zāyag), 188184 GEIGER 1891:411 assumes a preform (Av.) *parō.a ˘ i ara-and considers this an example for a ˘ i a > ē. • gā ġ "have sex" (SWBal. gāyag). 189 The -y-seen in the SWBal. present stems may either have been preserved -which would make the change ā ˘ i a > ā an EBal. phenomenon -or lost first and then reintroduced as vowel separator, separating the stem in -ā from the endings which begin with vowels (for vowel separators, cf. II 2.4.3). The variants āh-"come", ǐāh-"chew", zāh-"give birth" and sāh-besides sāy-190 "shave" (with unetymological, vowelseparating h) show that on a synchronic level, -y-is interpreted as a vowel separator.

The interpretation of the loss of -y-as an exclusively EBal. feature (note that sāh "shadow" is only attested in DTB and EAL) would have the disadvantage of leaving āmurg, āh-, zāh-and sāh-"shave" without explanation. It thus seems better to assume that OIr. ā ˘ i a gave Bal. ā and that the SWBal. present stems āy-etc. (infinitives āyag etc.) show irregularly retention of y as morpheme separator or its reintroduction as vowel-separator. Since a change of OIr. ā ˘ i a > ā has also been assumed for (Middle) Persian (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:167f.)

Consonant clusters

The consonant clusters treated here are ordered according to their first member. Wherever the result is a geminated consonant (cf. II 2.2.1.3,2.2.2.1.2,2.2.2.2,2.2.2.3,2.2.3.2,2.2.3.3), it has to be kept in mind that these are restricted to the position after short vowels and that not all dialects preserve these (and/or not all sources mark them consistently), 192 so that gemination is always only optional.

Combinations with fricatives

As seen above (cf. II 2.1.2.1), OIr. intervocalic fricatives are changed to the corresponding stops in Balochi. There are a number of contexts, however, where the fricatives are assimilated or lost.

Fricative

OIr. xt

OIr. xt shows special developments: where it occurs in past stems of roots in (PIr.) *-k and *-g (PIr. *-k-ta-> OIr. -x-ta-), we find different developments in the dialects [START_REF] Wilhelm | Balūčische Texte mit Übersetzung[END_REF](GEIGER :95, 1891:423):423). A closer look at the relevant forms in the sources suggests that the distribution of the variants coincides with the major dialect groups: 194 192 Cf. II 1.1.1, 3.1.1.1 and 3.3.1.5. 193 GEIGER's example (1891:432) hapt "seven" is most probably a loanword (cf. p. 81).

194 For more details about the development in the dialects, cf. II 3.2.

• the Southern dialects show a metathesis *-kt > -tk 195 (e.g. gētk as past stem of gēǐ-"throw", cf. p. 241), • the Western dialects have developed -ht 196 (e.g. gē(h)t, cf. p. 248),

• the Eastern dialects have -xt (e.g. gixt, cf. p. 230). 197 This variation is best explained as secondary developments from Common Balochi *-kt-, the expected result of OIr. xt.

It is possible that OIr. xt when not in a past stem or in a word not recognised as a past stem any more gives (*kt >) k(k):

• sak(k) "hard, very" might belong to NP saxt (GEIGER 1890:144), Prth. saxt, • pakkag (BMC) "ripe, cooked" and the denominative (based on *pakk-) pakk-/ pakkit (BMC, EAL) "become ripe" could represent *paxta-, originally the past stem of pač-"cook" (pakkit is noted as past stem of pač-for Turkmenistan Balochi in SOKOLOV 1956:81, EVM and EAL, otherwise it is pakt, paht, patk, see above). Both words may have been borrowed from Urdu (sak "power" and pakkā "cooked" 198 , respectively), however.

• A further possible case is zāk "child", if it derives from *zākk < *zātk (cf. p. 185).

Fricative + š

Word-initial fš-, xš-is reduced to š-as in several other Ir. languages.

OIr. fš-> š-:

• šupānk199 "shepherd" (Av. fšu-"cattle" + √pā "protect", NP, Prth. šubān).

With regard to Sogd. (Christian) xwšp'ny, Bactr. xobanano (pl.) "shepherd", it seems quite possible that *fš-and *xš-fell together to *xš-first to be reduced to š-in Persian, Parthian, Balochi etc. later (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). t-. For the outcome of PIE * ḱs, * ḱt, cf. II 2.1.2.5. šēp "creek, abyss" (MP, NP šēb "declivity"), šēp-mār (a kind of snake, cf. NP šēbā, STEINGASS 1892:771 has šībā) need not be an example for xš-: there are two roots, viz. PIIr. √ćšip "throw" (e.g. OInd. √k ˙ s ip) and √kš ˘ u ib "move back and forth" (e.g. Av. xšuuaēuua-"fast") which got mixed e.g. in MP šēb-"move quickly" (YAKUBOVICH 2002:544f.). Bal. šēp(°) and MP, NP šēb "declivity", on the other hand, may be related directly to √ćšip only. Prth. <šybh> "path" might also be adduced here: a compound OIr. *šaipa-pa\a-(or *(x)šaiba-pa\a-) "steep path" > *šaipa\a-(haplology, suggestion by Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication) would account both for the semantics (for a semantic parallel of a word for "steep path", cf. German Steig) as for the form (for Prth. \ > h, cf. p. 81, RASTORGUEVA/MOL ČANOVA 1981a:179). If this etymology is correct, Prth. <šybh> is to be read šēbah (pace BOYCE 1977:85). Word-initial xš is preserved in the Prth. inscriptions (e.g. < ˙ h štr> "country" (GIGNOUX 1972:53)) as well as in Arm. loanwords (ašxarh) while PrthT has š-, e.g. šahr (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

201 For the past stem, cf. p. 180, for the etymology, cf. p. 79. 202 BMC, DTB, EAL. The past stem baškāt (BMC, DTB) is one of the few past stems in -āt (cf. III 4).

EAL seems to assume that baškāt is due to some error and restores baškīt which would be a unique formation. EAL also has the regularly built baškit. bašk-might have been borrowed from NP baxš-/ baxšīd; bakš-/ bakšit and baxš-/ baxšit (FBB) surely are (cf. p. 177).

203 For variants and attestation,cf. p. 198,214,309. 204 Cf. II 2.3.1.1 for the assumption that initial short vowels are lost when in open syllable.

(cf. III 3), it is more than probable that šīnz, šūnz is a loanword. 205 There is no suitable form among the cognates [START_REF] According | 301). More specifically, kabk is not "partridge" (arborophila, Germ. "Rebhuhn"), but rather "sand partridge, seesee partridge" (ammoperdix, Germ. "Wüstenhuhn"; Lutz Rzehak, personal communication) or "rock partridge" (alectoris, Germ. "Steinhuhn"; SCHAPKA 1972). 220 tar-"swim" is only found in DTB, GCD and EAL. The relationship of tar-, tarr-recalls that of čar, čarr-(cf. p. 150, 319). It is thus possible that an inherited tar-"turn" was changed to tarr-under the influence of borrowed tar-"swim". For EBal. past stems in -a\-which[END_REF]:26b, MACIUSZAK 1996:31), though.

The -z may have been influenced by NP sabz (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). There is (pace GEIGER 1891:425) (GIPPERT 1999:19f.). -Prth. čaxšābed "precept, command" does not belong here, but has been borrowed from OInd. śik ˙ s āpada- (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1983b:139), the vowel of the second syllable may be due to an association by popular etymology to °bed < OIr. pati-"master" (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). If this change proceeded through a stage *hm, which seems quite likely, it might fit the change of OIr. hm > m(m) as seen in am(m)ā: OIr. xm may have yielded *hm early enough for this *hm to be treated like OIr. hm. The variant tuhm may then be explained as a NP loanword and the ū of tūm as showing the effect of raising (cf. II 3.1.2.3.2).

Alternatively, it does not seem entirely impossible that the examples are to be explained in the light of the Bal. change of uh > ō (cf. II 3.1.3.2): the vowel shortening observed in NP tuxm, šuxm 215 may also have occurred in Balochi. If so, OIr. xm > hm must have operated after OIr. hm was assimilated to m(m), otherwise one would expect tuhm, *šuhm > †tum(m), †šum(m). An argument which might speak for this solution is that the variants tuhm (EAL, SHG), tōhm (only EAL) and tūm (GEIGER 1890:159) show the same pattern as the other cases of uh, i.e. uh besides ū in old sources vs. ō (and possibly hypercorrect ōh) in more recent ones.

OIr. dm

The outcome of OIr. dm-in Balochi is not known since no cognate of Av. d e māna-, NP bān (borrowed into Georgian as ban-and into Armenian as banak) has been found so far. For Bal. bānuk "lady", cf. p. 164.

Fricative + r

The consonant clusters involving fricatives and r show particularly interesting changes, differing from what one might expect when considering the developments of the individual sounds. 216

Word-initial position

OIr. fr-> š- (MACKENZIE 1961:79) ', e.g. š'c "tomorrow", cf. Sogd. fr'k;š'b'r "witness" < *frā-bāra-(HENNING 1958:114, MACKENZIE 1990:122) [START_REF] Carl | Mahlagha SAMADI[END_REF]:260, WEBER 1994:112, MOŠKALO 1991:22) seems difficult to combine with the rules for MP syncopation as set out in KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:210ff.

OIr. xr-> kr-(MORGENSTIERNE 1948:254):

Word-initial xr-develops as expected with regard to OIr. x > Bal. k (cf. II 2.1.2.1): 225 • krōs 226 "cock" (Av. √xraos "to cry", NP xurōs, Prth. xrōsag "caller").

Word-internal position

GEIGER 1891:415 (cf. also BARTHOLOMAE 1890:551, HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559) expects *rp, *rt, *rk as the outcomes of word-internal OIr. fr, \r, xr. This assumption would have the advantage of being in line with the usual development of OIr. fricatives; it would imply that suhr "red" is a loanword from MP suxr. However, the only example speaking for this view is čark "wheel, machine" (Av. čaxra-, NP čarx, Prth. čaxr) which as Geiger admits may have been borrowed from NP čarx. There is no evidence for *rp, *rt as the Bal. outcome of OIr. -fr, -\r. It is thus better to assume that fr, \r, xr have been weakened as in other NWIr. languages. There is not much evidence for that either, but the examples cannot be dismissed easily.

OIr. -fr > -hr (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:254):

• gwahr "cold (noun)" (Av. vafra-, NP barf, Prth. wafr, all meaning "snow"), 227 • ǐahl "low" (Av. ǐafra-"deep", Prth. žafr, cf. p. 161), 225 If kurm "pit for storing grain" comes from *krum < *xrum, it is another example. Its etymology is not clear, though. Br. xurrum "grain-pit" may be a Dravidian word (in this case, Bal. kurm could be from Brahui), but a borrowing in the other direction is likewise possible (ROSSI 1979:103). MORGENSTIERNE 's connection (1938's connection ( :267f., similarly BAILEY 1979:501a) :501a) 227 There is no necessity for ELFENBEIN's assumption (1989:635) that gwahr has been borrowed from Khetrani vahōr, which would moreover imply the loss of the second (long) vowel.

• ǐuhl "deep", MP zofr will be a contamination of Av. gufra-"deep" and ǐahl (BARTHOLOMAE 1904:525) with a redistribution of the semantic fields.

ǐahl leads GEIGER 1889:82 to suppose that -fr-gives -hl. gwahr, however, shows that -hr can be the regular outcome. One may thus assume that ǐahl and ǐuhl show the occasional development of r > l discussed in II 2.4.2; in addition, a popular etymology with NP-Ar. ǐahl "ignorance", maǐhūl "hidden" may play a role here.

OIr. -xr > -hr, -hl (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:254):

Like in the case of fr, -hr / -hl is likely to represent the regular outcome of OIr. -xr:

• suhr228 "red" could also have been borrowed from MP suxr, but might also be genuine (cf. Av. suxra-, Prth. suxrag "purple"); The parallel change of fr > hr might suggest that hr is the regular outcome here, and that the l is to be seen in the context of other changes of r > l (cf. II 2.4.2).

OIr. gr, dr

The Bal. outcome of OIr. gr is not clear. MOŠKALO 1991:22 assumes a change igr > īr in tīr "arrow, bullet" (Av. tigra-"sharp", MP tigr "arrow", Prth. tirg "fast"), but the word may have been borrowed from NP tīr (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556, 560). The same may apply to dēr "late" (Av. dar e ga-, MP dagr > dēr, Prth. darg, all "long", NP dēr "late", HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556) and šēr "lion" (NP šēr, MP šagr, Prth. šarg).230 However, if čēr "under" is not a compound formed in Balochi from č-"of" and MP ēr, but an older formation (cf. p. 199), it might derive from *čadr < *č-adari (cf. Sogd. c'dr, cf. GERSHEVITCH 1954:232) [START_REF] According | 301). More specifically, kabk is not "partridge" (arborophila, Germ. "Rebhuhn"), but rather "sand partridge, seesee partridge" (ammoperdix, Germ. "Wüstenhuhn"; Lutz Rzehak, personal communication) or "rock partridge" (alectoris, Germ. "Steinhuhn"; SCHAPKA 1972). 220 tar-"swim" is only found in DTB, GCD and EAL. The relationship of tar-, tarr-recalls that of čar, čarr-(cf. p. 150, 319). It is thus possible that an inherited tar-"turn" was changed to tarr-under the influence of borrowed tar-"swim". For EBal. past stems in -a\-which[END_REF]:62b, 64b, SIMS-WILLIAMS 2000:197a). Bal. variants include kwahn (SHG) / kwān (FBB) / kōhn / kuhn "old". 232 kwān may be explained as a dialectal variant of kwahn (cf. II 3.2.3.3) and kōn derived from kuhn (cf. II 3.1.3.2), thus leaving kwahn and kuhn as primary variants. As kuhn might have been borrowed from NP, kwahn could be the genuine Bal. word. If kwahn is not a borrowing from MP kahwan, it shows that the change of OIr. f ˘ u > hw has operated in Balochi as well as in MP.

OIr. \ ˘ u

It would be particularly interesting to know the genuine Balochi result of OIr. \ ˘ u as the treatment of this consonant cluster is one of the isoglosses often used to distinguish South Western (MP h) 233 from North Western Iranian (Prth. f 234 ). Unfortunately, however, all possible examples may be loanwords: • the numbers "four" (čār vs. Prth. čafār, Av. ča\bārō) and "forty" (čil(l), Prth.

čafrast, Av. ča\bar e sat-) are likely to have been borrowed from NP (čār, čahār and čil, čihil) since it is probable that the whole numeral system has been borrowed 231 For further discussion of MP kahwan, cf. WEBER 1994:113. Weber's statement that the development of MP hw (in kahwan) is the same as that of MP x w , xu (as in naxust, saxwan) appears questionable, however, since NP shows x in the latter cases (naxust, suxan), but h in the former one (kuhan etc.). 232 ABG's transcription <k e whn> (i.e. kauhn) of "¡¸may be a misprint for <kwhn> (i.e. kuhn), cf. also the attributive form kuhn ī (for which cf. p. 200) listed as a separate lemma.

233 For a discussion of the possible MP outcome word-initial \ ˘ u , cf. WEBER 1994:114f., KORN (frthc. 4).

234 The Prth. outcome of OIr. word-internal \ ˘ u (for the word-inital position, cf. HENNING 1958:97 2 ) has been assumed to be f e.g. by TEDESCO 1921:199 andHENNING 1958:97. The possibility of Prth. tf being the result at least in word-final position has also been discussed (cf. WEBER 1994:111 11 and HENNING 1958:97 2 , note that Prth. <ctf'r> "four" noted by WEBER 1994:111 11 is not attested, the word being written <cf'r>). The discussion has been summarised by SIMS-WILLIAMS 2004 who concludes that the PrthT outcome of OIr. \ ˘ u is df in word-internal position as shown by nidfār "haste" and its family (the f in čafār being the result of a dissimilation) while in word final position, there are the dialectal variants -f and -ft. For further discussion, cf. KORN (frthc. 4).

(cf. p. 81); the gemination in čil(l) also speaks in favour of this assumption (cf. II 3.3.1.5); GAUTHIOT 1918:66f., TEDESCO 1921:199f.) and has been borrowed from NP/MP 238 (HENNING 1958:97 1 ) since early MIr. -h or -f(t) would probably not be lost in Balochi.

-ī corresponds to NP -ī, MP -īh, Prth. -īf(t) 237 ), it comes from *-i ˘ i a-\ ˘ u a-(

OIr. d ˘ u -

The case of OIr. d ˘ u -(usually producing NWIr. b-, SWIr. d-) is not straightforward either. It has been concluded from dō, du "two" (Av. duua-), duwāzdah "twelve"(Av. duua.dasa), digar "other" (OP duvitā°) and dar "door" (Av. duuar-) 239 that Balochi shows *d ˘ u -> d [START_REF] Paul | Dialektologie der mitteliranischen Turfantexte[END_REF]:200, MACKENZIE 1961:75, WINDFUHR 1975:459ff.) as do Persian 240 and Kurdish. However, dō and duwāzdah probably do not show the relevant context since they probably go back to *du ˘ u -as shown by Prth. dō, dwādes and MP dwāzdah (WEBER 1994:111). Moreover, digar 241 and duwāzdah must for reasons of their -g-and -h, respectively, have been borrowed from Persian anyway, and the same is probably true for dō. 242 235 čār-dah "14" is obviously a loanword for reasons of °dah.

236 Prth. <pwrt> is derived from *p ˚ rtu-by BOYCE 1954:194. However, with regard to Prth. <bwrd> "carried" from *b ˚ rta-, <mwrd> "died" from *m ˚ rta-etc., the t in <pwrt> seems to call for another explanation. Deriving it from *p ˚ r\ ˘ u -as the other WIr. forms and assuming a development via *purft and a simplification of the consonant cluster (or dissimilatory loss of f), the word might be seen as a further example of OIr. \ ˘ u > Prth. -ft and is thus liable to confirm the rules established by SIMS-WILLIAMS 2004 (see above), cf. KORN (frthc. 4). 237 -īf is found in the inscriptions, -īft in the Turfan texts (HENNING 1958:96f.).

238 MP -ī is a late variant of both the abstract suffix -īh and the adjective suffix -īg (DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 115), the latter corresponding to Bal. -īg. Prth. -ī may be due to the influence of MP or to scribal errors (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

239 Parthian has bar. The more common Bal. word for "door" is the NP loanword darwāzag. (vs. NP d ˘ ıgar). A second instance could be the even rarer wārdaf (only in MAYER 1910) "door-opening" (with the EBal. form of dap "mouth") if it is to be connected with Av. duuar-"door" etc. MORGENSTIERNE's assumption (1932:52) of a dissimilation from *d ˘ u ar-daf 244 would imply the assumption that d ˘ u -was preserved for a very long time 245 since otherwise w-would have given gw-.

A way out seems to be that d ˘ u -could have given *v (or another sound different from the input to the change of OIr.

˘ u -> gw-), which would have turned into normal w in wārdaf and was assimilated to the following consonant in (i)ptī. The evidence is extremely weak, unfortunately. 247 Prth. <xwn-/ (pd)xwn'd> involves the problem that one would expect a full grade for the pres. stem of a transitive verb which, if the etymology is correct, would be †wxan- †<wxn->. The consistent writing with <xwn-> (cf. also abxun "cry (noun)") suggests the interpretation xun-with the zerograde being taken from the past stem xunād (thus also DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:368a, giving up the reading xōn-advocated in DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2000:83).

OIr

. h ˘ u - h ˘ u -> w-/_ ˘
• wāb "sleep" might either have been borrowed from NP x w āb248 with a change of the beginning of the word in analogy to waps- (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:52) or represent genuine *wāp with "assimilation" of the word-final to NP x w āb (Jost Gippert, personal communication). • gwahār "sister" (OInd. svas ˚ ŕ-, Av. x v aohar-, cf. also p. 99) seems to an exception; it looks as if it went back to * ˘ u ahār, probably (MORGENSTIERNE 1927:97) a dissimilation from *h ˘ u ahār. 249 Note that the vowel quantities are etymologically correct, in contrast to those of NP x w āhar. 250Based on the fact that OIr. h ˘ u -comes out as w h -in Eastern Balochi (cf. p. 226), MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255 4 assumes that OIr. h ˘ u -was preserved as such in Common Balochi with a metathesis resulting in the Eastern Balochi outcome. Although this is possible, it seems at least equally plausible that the aspiration of w h -has developed together with the general aspiration of word-initial voiceless stops in Eastern Balochi (cf. II 1.1.2.2, 3.2.1.1.1), so it is assumed here that OIr. h ˘ u -yields w-in Common Balochi.

Note that CBal. w-from OIr. h ˘ u -is not an input for the rule (OIr.) (GEIGER 1891:423):

˘ u -> g(w)-(cf. II 2.1.3.3.1). h ˘ u -> h-/_ī, ē
• hēd "sweat" (OInd. svéda-, Av. x v aēda-, NP x w ai) and • hīt "young grain" (NP xawēd251 ).

Parthian has <wx-> in all relevant cases. There is no example of the reverse change which is rather common in MP (cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1895:236f.): dōst "friend" vs. Av. zaoša-"wish", Prth. zōš "love" has not been "influenced by" (thus MOŠKALO 1991:32), but borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:448).

ōšt-/ ōštāt, ušt-/ uštāt "stand" vs. ust-/ ustāt (Afghanistan and Turkmenistan Balochi: EVM, NAWATA 1981:17)255 might be derived from *a ˘ u a-hišt-ati / *a ˘ u a-stāta-(SOKOLOV 1956:82) > *ōšt-/ *ōstāt-with generalisation of either št or st in different dialects (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication).

The two examples which according to GEIGER 1891:434 show a reduction of wordinitial st > t do not hold (BARTHOLOMAE 1893:263):

• trū, trī "aunt" can most convincingly be connected with OInd. pitrvyà-, Av. tū i riia-"father's brother" (etymology accepted by GEIGER 1893:189), thus deriving from 253 The etymology of this word seems not to have been discussed yet. For prothetic vowels, cf. II 2.3.4.

254 The Psht., Sogd. etc. cognates would confirm the etymology (a connection with Av. ska i riia-, according to BARTHOLOMAE 1904:1587 a device used for making fire) by [START_REF] Horn | Grundriß der neupersischen Etymologie[END_REF]:163, 1901:87 and BENVENISTE 1955:300 (pace HÜBSCHMANN 1895:76) rather than the derivation from *uz-kāra- (ROSSI 1979:148, following EILERS' 1974:307 2 , 321f. explanation of NP zu ġāl and nigāl, Psht. ngarai "fireplace" < *ni-k ˘ ara-). *pt ˚ r ˘ u i ˘ i ā-"father's sister" > "aunt",256 • tān(a) "stall" might (as supposed by Bartholomae) have been borrowed from an Ind.

language, e.g. Si. ˙ t ā ˙ n u "stall in stable" (TURNER 1966:739b), thus not from OP stāna-; it is only attested in Geiger's sources, all of them from the Eastern dialects.

OIr. zd

zd is assimilated to z(z) in possibly inherited as well as in borrowed words: 257• naz(z), naz(z)īk "near" (Av. nazdiiō, NP nazd(īk), Prth. nazd) can be genuine; • muz(z) "wages" shows zd > z(z) in a loanword (Av. mīžda-, NP muzd, Prth. mužd); • duz(z) "thief" and derivatives may have been borrowed from MP duz, it might also show an assimilation of borrowed NP duzd.

OIr. s + č

Av. sč > š (GEIGER 1891:425):

Balochi might go with other NWIr. languages in the development of sč > š (vs. OP etc. s). The examples often cited (TEDESCO 1921:209 etc.) involve the combination of PIr. *pas "behind", *kas "someone", *čis "something" plus an element with č-. 258 In Balochi, paš, pašt "back" (Av. pasča, OP pasā, NP pas, Prth. paš) and kas "person" are attested. MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290 assumes that pašt is the genuine Bal. outcome and that paš came about through metanalysis of the comparative paštir "later" (originally *pašt-tar-according to Morgenstierne) as paš + tar. Although this cannot be ruled out, it seems equally possible that pašt is due to an analogy to pušt259 "back" (the same could apply to Semnani pašt cited by MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290), and that paš is the Bal. result of OIr. pasča. kas may be explained as NP loanword (thus also GEIGER 1891:452). This would be in line with the other NWIr. languages, and with the development in word-initial position which seems to be *sč > š as well: Bal. šanik(k)

"young goat" has been connected to Av. sčaini- (HOFFMANN 1976b:493 15a • čam(m) "eye" (Av. čašman-, NP, Prth. čašm);

• šumā "you (pl.)": from a form like Prth. išmā(h), MP ašmā(h), one could expect a result †a/im(m)ā;264 an input form *šmā (Av. xšma-, OInd. yu-˙ s má-) might yield †mā since an assimilation which operates in postvocalic position may be expected to take place in word-initial position as well. Both †mā and †a/im(m)ā would be (nearly) identical to the pronoun of the 1pl., viz. mā, am(m)ā (cf. p. 115). Unless Bal. šumā has been borrowed from NP (thus GEIGER 1891:422),265 the consonant reduction might have been prevented -under the influence of NP šumā -by the otherwise resulting identity with the 1pl. pronoun.266

OIr. šn > n(n) (GEIGER 1891:434): 267

• gēnīč "coriander" (NP gišnīz); 268 • tun(n) "thirst", tun(n)ag, tun(n)īg "thirsty" (YAv. taršna-, NP tišna, OInd. The NP loanwords gušn "hunger", gušnag "hungry"271 show that the assimilation has ceased to operate. (MORGENSTIERNE 1942:264, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:204 44 ).

268 Only in MARSTON 1877, GEIGER 1891:400 (from Marston) and EAL (maybe from the same source).

kīnīč is also given by GEIGER 1891:400 (from PIERCE 1874) and EAL p. 52 (p. 81 misprinted kinīč), which is a form showing Turkish influence, cf. NP kišnīǐ etc. (HENNING 1963:195). The k-seen in CTurk. kişniş might be a hypercorrect development since old *k-changes to g-in CTurk. According to BAILEY 1963:70f., NP gišnīz is secondary to gašnīz which he concludes from Pazand gašnīz and links to MPZ gašnak "small". In this case, Bal. gēnīč would have been borrowed from NP (or from some related idiom, cf. Mashhadi gešnīz) and show hypercorrect -č for NP -z. With regard to the fact that the MPZ word can also be read gišnag (MACKENZIE 1986:36), Henning's etymology of gišnīz gains ground. HENNING 1963 shows that there is no reliable variant gašnīz (which moreover could easily be derived from gišnīz by the common change of unstressed i > a, but not vice-versa, HENNING 1963:195), and -with Arm. ginj in view -proposes an etymology of *g ˚ rzna-"round" (NP gird, Sogd. gwrs) + diminutive suffix -īč (1963:198). He takes Bal. gēnīč as borrowed from MPZ gišnīč (1963:196). In any case, this word involves a change -šn-> -n(n)-. OIr. (non-Persian) sn > n (GEIGER 1891:434):

• If nōd "cloud" is to be connected with Av. snaoda-(hapax from the Vidēvdād), MPZ snōy, it could belong here; • nišār "daughter-in-law" 272 may be another example: although one might expect OIr. *hnušā-corresponding to OInd. snu ˙ s á-, the Ir. forms must or may be derived from OIr. *snušā-, e.g. NP sunār. 273 MORGENSTIERNE's assumption (1927:55, 2003:55) of a borrowing from Psht. nˇ ˙ z ōr does not seem necessary (nor even quite likely, given the difference in form) since nišār may be the regular Bal. outcome of *snušā-(for Bal. u > i in palatal context, cf. p. 195f.). The -r must be analogical (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:44) in any case, e.g. on the model of gwahār "sister".

Sibilant + sonorant

OIr. š ˘ i > š (GEIGER 1891:425):

The product of OIr. š ˘ i (< PIIr. *č ˘ i ) seems to be š as in NP (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:152) and Parthian (RASTORGUEVA/MOL ČANOVA 1981a:176). 274 • šāt "happy" (Av. šiiāta-, NP, Prth. šād) and šut (suppletive past stem of raw-275 "go", Prth. šaw-/ šud, YAv. śuta-) could also have been borrowed • guš-/ gušt < gwaš-/ *gwašt 277 "say" is most likely to be connected to √ ˘ u ač "speak". Since it is not plausible that an EBal. form gwaš-(< SWBal. *gwač-) would have spread to all other dialects, one may derive the word from * ˘ u ač-˘ i a-. 278

• Similarly, it seems most convenient to derive dōš-"milk" from *da ˘ u č-˘ i a-, 279 the preform which has been assumed for NP dōš-(past stem dōxt) and several EIr. forms (HENNING 1958:111, MORGENSTIERNE 2003:46). The past stem dušt is analogically made from the present stem.

OIr. (non-Persian) s ˘ i > š

From the admittedly little evidence it seems that the Bal. outcome of OIr.

s ˘ i (PIE *(s) ḱ ˘ i ) is š: 280 • šēnak 281 "falcon, hawk" (YAv. saēna-, NP sīmur ġ282 "phoenix", MP sēn, OInd.
śyená-); • šān 283 "black" (Av. siiāuua-, OInd. śyāvá-, Prth. syāw(ag)) may indeed be the genuine cognate of NP siyāh as MORGENSTIERNE 1932:51 cautiously supposes. OIr. OIr. ā ˘ u a is likely to result in Bal. ā (cf. p. 102f.), but a derivation of šān from the Av. etc. form would leave the -n unexplained; as the root shows several suffixes, cf. OInd. śyāmá-"dark, black" (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication), one might assume that it derives from a protoform with a different suffix.

277 For these forms, cf. p. 218.

278 This is the explanation e.g. by MEILLET 1925:18 for Av. vaša-. Av. vaša-has also been declared a cognate of Bal. gwaš-by GEIGER 1890:126 etc., who derives both from PIr. * ˘ u axš-. However, OIr. -xš does not otherwise yield š in Avestan or Balochi (cf. p. 112). Moreover, Av. vaša-means "surge, flow (thoughts etc.)" and corresponds to Vedic vacyá-"go rapidly, surge" (√vañc "go crookedly", HUMBACH 1956:75, HOFFMANN/NARTEN 1989:65 96 ).

279 Since OInd. has √duh (past part. dugd h á-), the Ir. forms should be *dōž-and must involve some analogical development (BARTHOLOMAE 1901:22).

280 sāy-"shave" is not a counter-example, cf. p. 110.

281 This word is not found in printed material, but was supplied by Azim Shahbakhsh and is also noted in c ABDURRA ˙ H M ĀN PAHW ĀL (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication). Up to now, the Av. and Pers. words were the only Ir. cognates known in the literature.

282 sīmur ġ comes from *sīn-murġ (MP sēn murw). For Pers. nm > m, cf. SIMS-WILLIAMS 1990:11. 283 Only in EAL 100: šānēn mirč "black pepper", and MAYER 1910. Mayer's šā might be an error for šān, cf. šānwār "black snake" (MAYER 1910), maybe a contamination of *šān-mār (mār "snake") with ǐānwar "animal" (for which cf. p. 284).

Bal. syāh will be a loanword (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559), cf. also III 3 for the colour terms.

A change of OIr. s ˘ i > š is also found in other Ir. languages and has variously been regarded as a typically SWIr. or EIr. 284 feature (SUNDERMANN 1989:107). However, Georg. šav-"black" and Arm. compounds with šava°indicate that š-is the result of OIr. s ˘ i -at least in some NWIr. idiom (HÜBSCHMANN 1897:489, Jost Gippert, personal communication).

If so, Prth. syāw "black" (the source of Arm. seav "black") and *sin(a)marg (thence Arm. siramarg "peacock", cf. GIPPERT 1993/I:194) may have been borrowed from MP. Alternatively, one might assume that syāw and *sin(a)marg are genuine Prth. words, which would imply that OIr. s ˘ i gives Prth. sy-as it does in MP. If the latter is the case, Balochi goes back to a NWIr. idiom which differs from attested Parthian (at least) in the handling of OIr. s ˘ i . The source of Georg. šav-and Arm. šava°would then have to be a Balochoid dialect.

OIr. (non-Persian) -sr-> -s(s)-(GEIGER 1891:435):

• was(s)ū 285 "mother-in-law" (NP xuš, OInd. śvaśr ú-).

Word-initial sr-does not seem to undergo assimilation: 286

• srumb "hoof" (NP surū, sarūn "horn") is explained by MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50 as a contamination from (the Bal. cognate of) Av. srū-"horn" and NP sum(b) "hoof" or its Bal. cognate. The seemingly original form Bal. srō (BAILEY 1979:410b) does not seem to be attested anywhere (ELFENBEIN 1985:236); • srēn "loins, (SHG:) backbone" (NP surūn, surīn, Av. sraoni-);287 284 It is found in Sogdian, Khotanese (SUNDERMANN 1989:107) and Choresmian (HENNING 1958:111).

285 For dialectal variants,cf. p. 197. 286 If šar(r) "good" goes back to OIr. (Av.) srīra-"beautiful" (cf. EWAiA II:669 concerning Sogd. šyr etc.), shows the EIr. development of sr-> š-and is therefore probably a loanword from some EIr. language, although no direct source is in sight (Psht. has ˇ ˙ s e , Orm. šir), or may come from Prth. <šyr> (for which cf. SIMS-WILLIAMS 1989:171). The reason for the vowel quality of the Bal. word is not clear. sun-"hear" if existing and if not borrowed from Urdu (cf. p. 147) will rather go back to *s ˚ rn-> *surn-(for OIr. rn > n(n), cf. II 2.2.3.3) and not to *srun-. For variants of words with sVr-, cf. p. 205.

• srup "lead (metal)" (NP surb): Pashto also has surup (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:74), Gabri surob (HORN 1893:161) which may all have been borrowed from NP; if this applies also to Bal. srup, it must have undergone metathesis from *surp;288 • srōš "elbow" might also be an example, but the etymology is not entirely clear.289

Combinations with sonorants

Similar to consonant clusters involving fricatives, some combinations with sonorants show specific developments.290

OIr. r\ r\ > hl ?:

If OIr. r\ gives Bal. hl as in NP, this would be remarkable with regard to the fact that otherwise OIr. \ gives Bal. t (cf. II 2.1.2.1).

• pahlawān "bard" (OP Par\ava-, NP pahlawān "hero"); • puhl, pōl 291

rž > ž(ž) ?

It is probable that there is a parallel reduction of rž, but the only example is gužg "root" which is only reported from Morgenstierne's informant, in EAL and maybe in Br. guž ġ, it may go back to * ˘ u ˚ ržaka- (MORGENSTIERNE 1927(MORGENSTIERNE :95, 1932(MORGENSTIERNE :46, 2003:94):94).

As far as Parthian is concerned, the pair xož 298 vs. Arm. axorž "sweet" suggests that 293 It has been assumed that MP <hl> represents a voiceless lateral fricative or something similar (HOFFMANN 1986:173, 178f NP has rn > rr, which occurs in the following loanwords in Balochi: 302 • bur(r)-/ bur(r)it 303 "cut" (Av. brīna-, NP burr-/ burrīd), 304 • dir(r)-/ dir(r)it "tear" (NP darr-/ darrīd, see above) seems to be the product of some contamination (cf. p. 145), • zar(r) "gold, money" (Av. zaranaēna, NP zarr, cf. also p. 311).

MEISTERERNST 2004:368a notes "/xuž/, /xōž/?"). For Av. x v arzišta-, MPZ xwālist "most delicious", NP x w āl "food" etc. two possibilities remain: they may go back to PIE *s ˘ u elǵ, an extension of which may be seen in *s ˘ u el ḱs (NP x w aš, Bal. waš(š), Prth. wxaš, see above) as assumed by KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:204 41 or from *s ˘ u elǵ h . In any case, *√s ˘ u el "eat" seems to show two different extensions, i.e. *s ˘ u elǵ h -s (> *s ˘ u elǵ h z h ) and *s ˘ u el ḱs (< *s ˘ u elǵ-s?), both being preserved in Parthian.

299 The present stem kan-"do" (past stem kurt), which is also found in Bashkardi kan-, Osset. kaen-, Khot. yan-is probably the result of a contamination of the stems kun-and kar- (GERSHEVITCH 1970:172 32 ) and thus, against GEIGER 1891:435, no example for rn > n. This auxiliary-like verb shows irregular developments in various Ir. and Ind. languages (for the past stem, cf. p. 146), for which cf. HOFFMANN 1976:587f. Parthian has kar-/ kird. -For sun-"hear", cf. p. 147. 300 GEB, BMC, EAL. pan(n) could also have been borrowed from Si. panu (thus MORGENSTIERNE 1927:57).

301 DTB, GEB, GCD, EAL. Cf. also p. 145.

302 For čar(r)-"turn" vs. čar-"graze", cf. p. 84, for tar(r)-"turn around", cf. p. 150. For geminates in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.5. The etymology of tir(r) "fart" (BUDDRUSS 1988:82) is unclear to me.

303 DTB bar-"cut" is probably due to the immediately preceding entry bar-"carry".

304 NP burr-will be from *b ˚ rna-, the past stem should be †birīd < *brīta-and has been changed to burrīd to match the present stem (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:28).

Parthian has rn in zarn(ēn) 305 "gold(en)" and in some loanwords (e.g. tarnīs "throne"), and n(n) in pannag "foliage" and maybe in pannīg "forehead" (if this is a Prth. word). 306 If one assumes that Parthian shares the Bal. change of rn > n(n), the Prth. words with rr < *rn (e.g. parrag "fin", farrox "fortunate", dušfarr "ill-fortuned", ispurr "full", warrag "lamb", wurraw-"believe") are borrowings from MP. 307 Kurdish has r' (e.g. zêr' "gold", dir'în "to tear", ASATRIAN/LIVSHITS 1994:97). 308 Zazaki seems to show r(r) in old sequences of *rn (per "leaf", pır(r) "full") while secondary rn results in r(r)n (zerne "gold", bır(r)n-"cut", hêrn-, erin-"buy" < *xrin-), similar to the developments seen in Armenian (Jost Gippert, personal communication). Pashto has rn > ˙ n (GEIGER 1893:210, SKJAERVØ 1989:404).

OIr.

˘ u r

#

˘ u r-> r-?

There are two verbs for "twist, spin", brēs-/ brēst and rēs-309 , which one might want to connect with Av. √uruuaēs "turn, twist". The question is which one -if any -shows the genuine Bal. outcome of # ˘ u r-. If the Ir. words (BAILEY 1979:218a, EWAia II:462 against MORGENSTIERNE 1973:337 andothers) belong here at all and not with OInd. √riś "tear, rip", this means that # ˘ u r-gives NP r-: rēs-/ rišt (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:210 67 ). Parthian has ā-rwis-/ ā-rwist, ā-rwisād. 310 Bal. brinǐ "rice" (cf. p. 283) vs. OInd. vrīhí-is not a piece of evidence since it may be a Pers. loanword (thus GEIGER 1891:446), cf. MP brinǐ.

305 In MP zarr, the second vowel seen in OIr. (Av.) zaranaēna-has already been lost in MIr. times. It is possible, however, that the vowel was preserved for a longer time in Parthian (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication) so that zarn did not undergo the assimilation; it might also show the influence of Sogd. zyrn.

306 <pnyyg> is derived from *paranīk (cf. OP paranam "before, in former times") by HENNING 1940:26.

307 Prth. rr is also the product of other assimilation processes, cf. DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 65.

308 Khotanese likewise shows rn > rr, e.g. purr-"overcome" (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1989a:258).

309 The past stem is rist (GEB, EAL), rēst (DTB), rēšt (GEB), rēsit (BMC, EAL). 310 Georg. asṗarez-"racing track, stadium", Arm. asparēs, asparēz (cf. the co-occurrence of Av. aspa-"horse" and uruuaēsa-"turning point", cf. JANDA 1997:39, 179ff.) points to Prth. r as outcome of OIr. ˘ u r (GIPPERT 1993/I:16ff.), while Georg. briny-/ Arm. brinj "rice" suggests an outcome br-(Jost Gippert, personal communication) at least in word-initial position.

There are the following possibilities: • Bal. rēs-may be a loanword from NP rēs-/ rišt (MORGENSTIERNE 1936:337) 311 and brēs-the genuine variant, i.e. # ˘ u r-> br-(cf. Yaghn. riwes-, MORGENSTIERNE 1973:337); • if rēs-is genuine (# ˘ u r-> r-), there must be another explanation for brēs-.

With regard to the parallel doublets in Pashto (wrēš e l, rēš e l) which are not particularly likely to have been borrowed, GEIGER's assumption (1890:116) of some preverb (e.g. *abi°) in brēs-(similarly MORGENSTIERNE 1927:90 concerning Pashto wrēš¯ e l) seems to be the most convenient solution accounting for both variants in both languages. The possibility of Bal. rēs-being a loanword remains (the existence of the zero-grade past stem rist does not speak for that, however), so there is no sure example for OIr. ˘ u r.

(Early) MIr. ˘ u (i) ˘ i -

Given the change of OIr. ˘ u -> Bal. g(w)-(cf. II 2.1.3.3.1), it seems possible that (early or pre-) MIr.

˘ u (i) ˘ i -was changed to gy-and subsequently to ǐ-as in Persian: 312 Evidence for a process Bal. gy-, gī-> ǐ-may be seen in the variant ǐābān (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:101) "desert" (vs. usual gīābān, cf. p. 279). However, as the Bal. words are identical to the NP ones, it is equally possible that they have been borrowed from NP (thus GEIGER 1891:451f.).

On the other hand, Bal. gīn "breath" has been derived from * ˘ u i-ana-(likewise from vi + √an i ) by GERSHEVITCH 1998:120ff. This etymology appears clearly superior to the previous derivation from * ˘ u a ˘ i na-. 315 In the light of the discussion in II 2.1.3.4.2, it seems possible to derive Bal. gīn from * ˘ u i-āna-, which would make it a direct cognate of OInd. vyāná-, MP gyān, NP ǐān. This would imply that ǐā and ǐān are to be interpreted as loanwords.

Miscellaneous consonant clusters

GEIGER 1891 reports various additional simplifications of consonant clusters which do not hold. 316 These as well as other OIr. consonant clusters the Bal. result of which is not clear are presented here.

*ts

On the basis of gwač(č) "buffalo calf", GEIGER 1891:424 assumes that OInd. ts (vatsá-"calf") corresponds to Bal. č. There is, however, good reason to regard gwač(č) as a borrowing from Sindhi (cf. p. 280). gwask "calf" also adduced for the same context by Geiger does not correspond to an OInd. form with ts either (cf. p. 100). The only other example for this context would be māhīg "fish", which for reasons of its -h-(instead of NWIr. -s-317 ) must have been borrowed from NP (pace MOŠKALO 1991:36).

št

GEIGER 1891:434 assumes that št is reduced to t, but the two examples he adduces, īt "brick" and p h ut "back" (both only attested in the old sources) may have been borrowed from Ind. languages, cf. Hindi ī ˙ t , Si. pu ˙ t h ō, respectively. išt (cf. p. 156f.) and pušt (cf. p. 147) can be the genuine forms, although they might also be NP borrowings.

st

Conversely, there might be a reduction of a word-final consonant cluster in mis(s) "urine" which stands for *mist according to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:120.318

Other losses

Geiger's gwānǐ-"cry" is probably the result of a back-formation: DTB has gwānk ǐan-319 , the past stem is gwānk ǐat "he/she uttered a cry" (GCD). A reduced form of this is gwān-ǐan-/ gwān-ǐat (DTB). gwānǐat might also be interpreted as the past stem of gwānǐ-(found in GLADSTONE 1874 and LEWIS 1885 according to GEB) from which a secondary past stem gwānǐi\-(only MAYER 1910:27) might have been formed (GERSHEVITCH 1971:283). 320Other reductions of final consonant clusters enumerated by GEIGER 1891:435 are probably due to specific phenomena:321 • truš besides trupš etc. "sour" has been borrowed from NP turš (cf. p. 145, 209); • rō "day" besides normal rōč might be a back-formation from a phrase like rōč šut "day has come" > *rō-šut; • gar "abyss", for which GEIGER 1891:400, 414f. assumes a loss of a final consonant (vs. Av. g e r e da-"cave") may be explained as a cognate of Av. ga i ri-(cf. p. 150, 220); • mar "man" besides usual mard (borrowed from NP) is likely to involve a secondary change, cf. p. 220.

Vowels

Simple vowels

As a rule, monophthongs are preserved in Balochi. 322

Loss of vowels

In contrast to the statement just made, word-inital short vowels of polysyllabic words seem to be elided when in open syllable: 323

• pa "for" may be derived from OIr. (BAILEY 1979:44a, EWAia II:192), so the semantics do not fit. If Khot. brū ˙ s c-goes back to PIr. *bra ˘ u š-, PIE *b h re ˘ u s-"break" (BAILEY 1979:316a), Bal. pruš-, prōš-cannot belong here for reasons of its pr-. BAILEY 1979:234a, 298b considers connecting Bal. pruš-to Khot. bur ˙ s -"burst", past part. pār ˙ s ˙ t a which he derives from * ˘ u i-ruš-, *pā-rušta-, respectively. For Bal. pruš-, he deems *pa-ruš-(or *frauš-, for which see above) possible. In any case, if the etymology of pruš-, prōš-involves a preverb, it is more probable that the verbs are to be connected to *ruš-(cf. the Khot. words above) rather than to OInd. √ruj as GEIGER 1891:142 assumed.

• prinč-/ pritk (only in MARSTON 1877, MOCKLER 1877), p h irič-/ p h iriči\- (MAYER 1910:220), prēnč-(EVM, reference read "III 672" for "IV 670") is derived from *pa-+ the root of Av. √raēk, OInd. √ric "leave, let free" (cf. Bal. rēč-, cf. p. 151) by GEIGER 1891:401, which is semantically somewhat unattractive. The derivation from *upa-t ˚ rnč-(PIE √trenk "urge, press", cf. Sogd. btrync-"oppress", GERSHEVITCH 1964:282) needs the additional assumptions of a palatalisation of *p(a)trunč-(cf. II 2.3.2.1) or, if from the full grade, of (*upa-tranč->) *p(a)tranč-, and of analogical loss of the nasal in prič-. While both is possible (for palatalisation of a or u next to r, cf. II 3.1.2.3.1), there seems to be no other example of all variants of a word showing the palatalised vowel, and of an upgrading of the same to ē in a secondary ablaut. Maybe the compounding might have taken place at a stage when OIr. upa (and pati?) had already resulted in Bal. pa. alternatively, it might have been borrowed from early NP pa "in, on"; 325 maybe it derives both from upa°and from pati°(in an irregular development) as does NP ba "towards" (GERSHEVITCH 1971:289 42 ); 326 • par (synchronically a variant of pa) 327 "for" (NP (a)bar 328 , Prth. abar, Av.

upa i ri°, OInd. upári°); • pač, pāč "open" (Av. ap ąš, NP bāz, Prth. abāž, OInd. ápāc-);

• pak(k)ār "necessary, useful" could be derived from OIr. *upakāra-(cf. OInd.

upakāra-"help"); it is, however, more likely that it is modelled (as a compound of pa and kār "deed") on its NP (ba-kār) and/or Psht. (p e -kār) equivalent, or even borrowed from Pashto; borrowing would also explain the geminate (cf. II 3.3.1.5), which might alternatively have been motivated by pak(k)ā "ripe, cooked"; 329 • pōšī 330 "day after tomorrow" is another example if the etymology (MORGENSTIERNE 1928(MORGENSTIERNE :45, 1932:49) :49) of *upa-a ˘ u ši ˘ i a-or rather (GERSHEVITCH 1964:84 19 ) *upa-a ˘ u šah-+ Bal. suffix -ī (the second element cognate to Av. ušah-, OInd. u ˙ s ás-"dawn") is correct; 331 • sang "stone" (for variants, cf. p. 194, 244) may also be a case (cf. Av. as e ˙ n ga-, Prth. asang) if not borrowed from NP sang (thus GEIGER 1891:460); • marōčī 332 "today" might belong here if it goes back to *ima-ra ˘ u č-ī-(cf. NP imrōz) as ELFENBEIN 1990/II:100 assumes (against GEIGER 1891:436 who assumes a metathesis from *amrōčī).

This word is found in Judeo-NP (cf. the next footnote).

NP ba is the result of two prepositions (MACKENZIE 1968:255): on the one hand, it derives from earlier pa "in, on" (attested in Judeo-NP) < MP pad "to, at" (which goes back to OIr. pati, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:21), on the other from <by> "to" likewise attested in Judeo-NP, according to MacKenzie a "specialisation" of MP b ˘ e "out, but", NP bē "without"; <by>, b ˘ e and the verbal particle NP bi-may be derived from PIE *b h ˘ e "out" (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996a:185f.).

The forms of pa(r) when used with pronouns may yield a compound with geminate, e.g. 1.sg. pamman, pl. pammā (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:80).

For details in the prehistory of NP (a)bar, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:214.

A connection to Prth. pad-kār-"contend, strive" with an adjustment in semantics due to the influence of NP ba-kār, Psht. p e -kār seems less likely (but note that EAL has a verb pak(k)ār-/ pak(k)ārit "be useful"). ELFENBEIN's assumption (1990/II:114) of a borrowing from e.g. Ur. upakār "favour, benefit" has the disadvantage of the difference in meaning and the difficulty of an unparalleled loss of the initial vowel in a seemingly recent loanword. For EBal. pakar, cf. p. 186. For variants, cf. p. 216. For cognates, cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1928:45, GERSHEVITCH 1964:84f., EWAia I:236. BMC, EAL, NAWATA 1981:31, EBal. marōšī (DTB). SHG marūčī (besides the next entry marōčīg) seems to be an error. For the variant marčī, cf. p. 243.

Accordingly, the vowel deletion rule does not operate in monosyllables:

• the pronominal stems id 333 and iš-334 (both "this") do not lose the initial vowel;

the vowel is analogically also present in the inflectional forms (idā "here" (obl.), idai "of here" (gen.) etc., obl. išīā etc., gen. išī(ē) etc.).

It is not clear why the word-inital vowel has not been lost in the following examples:

• anīčag "forehead" 335 for which SHG gives the variant hanīčag 336 : perhaps there was some influence of pēš-ānī 337 (also "forehead"); • apūtag / (h)apītag (a certain plant which grows after rainfall, tastes a bit sour and is eaten with salt according to SHG), which is derived from *a-pūtaka-by MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290. 338 Maybe the secondary h-seen in some variants has prevented the loss of the vowel. On the other hand, the addition of h-(cf. II 2.4.1.3) would seem to be a more recent phenomenon than the loss of word-initial vowels.

The vowel loss only operates in old words. Loanwords (e.g. arab "milliard", imām "Imam", ulus "people") and words with dialectal loss of h-(cf. II 3.2.3.1) are not affected, e.g. apurs "juniper" (vs. Av. hap e r e si-),339 (h)abar "news" (NP-Ar. xabar).

For anaptyxis, cf. II 3.1.2.4, for prothesis, cf. II 2.3.4.

333 The stem id might have been extracted from idā "here" (cf. Av. ida, OP idā (GEIGER 1891:129), OInd. ihá (EWAia I:202)) by interpretation of -ā as the ending of the obl. case (the obl. is also used in local function). If Prth. < c yd> "here" is to be read ēd (thus the dictionaries), it does not correspond to Bal. id or the OIr. cognates. Bal. ōd "there" (also ōdā) does correspond perfectly to Prth. ōd <'wwd> (cf. p. 101).

334 The direct case is usually ē, ēš

(cf. V 1.2).
335 GEIGER 1890:112, assuming that the original meaning is "fate", connects it with NP anōša "happy", which is rejected by HÜBSCHMANN 1890:555. MORGENSTIERNE 1936:244 cites a preform *ānīčaka-for Khowar anič and Bal. anīčag which, if not a misprint, is in contrast with *anīčaka-in 1932:40, Av. a i nika-and OInd. ánīka-.

336 The EBal. form is (h)anīša ġ.

337 As pēš is probably a NP loanword (cf. p. 179), the same applies to pēšānī (EAL 126), cf. NP pēšānī.

338 Morgenstierne derives these from an Ir. root *p ˘ u "decay" which he also sees in a couple of other words (cf. p. 212 for one of them), obviously PIE √*pe ˘ u H.

OIr. a, i, u

Except for the cases just discussed, short vowels are preserved in word-initial and wordinternal position. 340 a > a (GEIGER 1891:404): 341

• am(m)ā "we" (Av. ahma-, NP mā, Prth. am(m)āh, cf. p. 115), ač 342 "of" (Av. hača, NP az, Prth. až); • pač-"cook" (Av. pača-, NP paz-, Prth. pažag "cook" (noun), cf. p. 77), pas "sheep, goat" (Av. pasu-, Prth. pas), wat "self" (Av. x v a-, NP x w ud < x w ad, Prth. wxad, cf. p. 122).

i > i (GEIGER 1891:407): 343

• išt "brick" (Av. ištiia-, NP xišt, cf. p. 95);

• pit "father" (Av. pitar-, NP pidar, Prth. pid(ar)), čin-/ čit "gather" (Av. činao-, NP, Prth. čīn-/ čīd, OInd. cinóti, cf. p. 84), gis "house" (Prth. wis°, OInd. víś-).

The assumption of a compensatory lengthening (i > ī when following consonants are lost) assumed by GEIGER 1891:408 appears to be unfounded (for īt "brick", cf. p. 137, for p h īm "wool", cf. p. 178).

u > u (GEIGER 1891:409):

OIr. ā, ī, ū

As a rule, long vowels remain stable. 345 ā > ā (GEIGER 1891:406): 346

• āy-"come" (NP āy-, cf. p. 109f.), ās "fire" (Av. ātar-/ ā\r-, NP ā ¯ zar, Prth. ādur, cf. p. 89), • zān-"know" (NP dān-/ dānist, Prth. zān-/ zānād), gwāt "wind" (Av. vāta-, NP bād, Prth. wād), māt "mother" (Av. mātar-, NP mādar, Prth. mād(ar)), am(m)ā "we" (NP mā, Prth. am(m)ā(h), cf. p. 115).

ī > ī (GEIGER 1891:408): 347

• pīg "fat" (Av. pīuuah-, NP pīh, Prth. fra-bīw, cf. p. 103), dīt "seen" (Av. dīta-, NP dīd, Prth. dīd).

ū > ū (GEIGER 1891:409): 348

• būt "became" (Av. būta-, NP, Prth. būd), zūt 349 "quick" (NP zūd), gūt "mud" (NP gūh, cf. p. 81), was(s)ū "mother-in-law" (NP xuš, cf. p. 130), hūk "pig" (Av. hū-, NP xūk, Prth. hūg). ū is changed to ī in a number of dialects (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1).

345 For shortening of vowels, cf. II 3. 1.2.2.1,3.1.3.1,for change of vowel quality,cf. II 3.1.2.3.1,3.1.2.3.2,3.1.2.3.3,3.2.3.2,3.2.4.2. 346 For GEIGER's example gwānǐ-"cry", cf. p. 137, for nār-"groan", cf. p. 220.

347 For GEIGER's example gīn "breath", cf. p. 136, the -ī-of sīkun "porcupine" is not likely to be old either (II 2.3.2.1), so these do not fit here. pīruk "grandfather" might rather be a loanword (cf. p. 149), for mīk "stake", cf. p. 200. For gīst "twenty", cf. p. 279. 348 GEIGER's example sūčin (for variants, cf. p. 198) "needle" does not belong here since its ū goes back to *a ˘ u (NP sōzan); for ō > ū, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2). As to mūd(d)/mīd(d) "hair", it is not clear whether it goes back to *a ˘ u (as NP mōy would suggest) or to *ū since OIr. cognates are lacking (OInd. √mū "bind", m úta-"basket" are far from clear, EWAia II:366), Gabri mīd also points to *ū [START_REF] Horn | Grundriß der neupersischen Etymologie[END_REF]:223, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:200), and so does Pazand mūi (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:196).

349 zūt and NP zūd probably go back to *zūta- (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:201), cf. Av. z e uuīštiia-"fastest", uzū i ti-"coming fast" (water), OInd. jūtí-"hurry". ELFENBEIN 1989:640 correctly remarks that zūt may be a loanword. The same applies to GEIGER's examples dūt "smoke" (NP, Prth. dūd) and sūt "use, gain" (NP sūd). For devoicing of final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.4. Geiger seems to assume ar as the genuine outcome of PIr. * ˚ r (cf. also GEIGER 1891:405, 413) which is changed to ir in palatal contexts (1891:407f.) and ur in some other cases (1891:409). This opinion may be concluded from the statements that burz is a loanword since the genuine form would be †barz (GEIGER 1891:407), that turs stands for tars 351 (GEIGER 1891:409) and from the treatment of Bal. i and u. Similarly, MOŠKALO (1991:21ff., 37) 351 tars is mentioned in DTB, the verb tars-in ABG, both may be considered as borrowed from NP.

PIr

352 The latter specification (the example is tun(n) "thirst") is not necessary since šn gives Bal. n(n) anyway (cf. II 2.2.2.2). MOŠKALO's example (1991:21) for * ˚ r > ar is warnā "young" which, however, might rather be interpreted as a borrowing (cf. p. 278). us (as result of * ˚ rš) in MOŠKALO 1991:37 is a misprint for uš.

353 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:146f. does note some words with Bal. ur after non-labial consonants, which would be exceptions to his rule: gōkurt, tun(n), turs (for which see below).

354 For Moškalo's alleged example for * ˚ r > ar see above. gurk "wolf" is cited by MOŠKALO 1991:23 as an example of * ˚ r > ur.

• gwark "wolf" (Av. v e hrka-, OInd. v ˚ ŕka-): gwark, if it exists at all, 355 seems to be the older variant of gurk since there is an ongoing change gwa-> gu- (cf. II 2.1.3.3.1,3.1.3.4). However, as in a number of cases the variants with gwa-and gu-exist side by side, gwark might also be explained as a hypercorrect variant of gurk. • din-359 "tear" might be derived from *d ˚ rna-via *dirna-and the past stem dirt (DTB, GCD, BMC, EVM, EAL, FBB) from *d ˚ rta-. The better attested variant dir(r)-and the past stem dir(r)it (GEB, FBB, EAL: Coastal) 360 show that some contamination with NP forms (NP darr-/ darrīd) must have occurred in this verb. 361 NP *dirrīd from which Bal. dir(r)it may have been borrowed would be the regular NP outcome of a secondary past stem *d ˚ rnita-, and the present stem dir(r)-can be based on dir(r)it. Although the root is originally ani ˙ t (EWAia I:702), 362 the best solution for NP darr-/ darrīd seems to be the one proposed by HÜBSCHMANN (1895:62) Also trus-/ past stem trusit (GEB, EVM), cf. p. 209; the variant EAL truss-/ trussit does not seem to be found anywhere else.

NP tars-/ tarsīd is best explained as a denominative of NP tars (Prth. likewise has tars).

A past stem Prth. tišt might be found in tištēn "dreadful", tištīft "dreadfulness" etc. <tyšt> itself is not attested, the word in Angad Rōšnān Ib 13a is to be read <ryšt> (pace BOYCE 1954:126, 196), but the meaning is not clear (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

BMC, DTB, FBB, EAL, GEB, NAWATA 1981:17.

Note that Av. √zar also adduced here by Geiger belongs with OInd. √h ˚ r i , h ˚ r ˙ n īte "be angry" (BARTHOLOMAE 1904.

With regard to OInd. hárati, one would expect a present stem †zar-. zūr-(which yields zīr-in some dialects, cf. p. 197) and zōr-(only ABG) are obviously formed by application of a principle that the present stem should be somehow "stronger" than the past stem. Analogical past stems are zūrt (GEB, EVM), zīrt (GEB, EAL) and zōrt (cf. p. 202). BMC, EVM, EAL: Raxšānī, Sarāwānī, other dialexts have kut (DTB, FBB, EAL: Kēčī, Lāšārī, Coastal, Eastern), probably a phenomenon of "Allegro-Aussprache" (HOFFMANN 1976:587 26 HENNING 1940a), the word for "sulphur" might rather be a different one than the Av. word for the incense tree, and derived from the protoform assumed by Bailey. GEIGER 1891:401 remarks that if gōkurt is a loanword from Persian, it has to be a very old one. HÜBSCHMANN 1895:147 lists it as an exception to his rule (see below).

The following examples may have been borrowed from NP:

• burt (past stem of bar- (Sabir Badalkhan, personal communication). Some examples which are not easily explained as borrowings have -ur-after a labial: apurs, burz, šamuš-, gužg, muš-. HÜBSCHMANN therefore maintains (1895:143ff.) that PIr. * ˚ r comes out as Bal. ir, ur under the same conditions as in NP, i.e. ur after p, b, m, w, and ir in other contexts. This would leave the other instances of ur unexplained, however, viz. turpš, tun(n), zurt, kurt, gōkurt. The examples turpš and gōkurt exhibit some sort of labial context, but in tun(n), zurt and kurt, there is no labial element whatsoever.

One might therefore assume a rule which is in some sense the mirror of the NP īn, a subsequent shortening of the vowel and an analogical adjustment of the past stem. While Gershevitch's reserves against Morgenstierne's etymology seem well justified, his solution does not appear entirely convincing either: MIr. ēn is preserved in Balochi as a rule (cf. p. 151); the occasional change of ē > ī (cf. II 3.1.2.3.2) appears to be a rather late phenomenon (the same may apply to shortening of ī, for which cf. p. 187). situation: PIr. * ˚ r gives Bal. ir in palatal contexts and ur otherwise. The case is made even stronger by the fact that palalisation of u and a next to r is common (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1), so that preserved ur deserves special attention. 375 The rule "PIr. * ˚ r > ir /palatal, > ur otherwise" would account for all the instances of -ur-and explain zirdē < *ź ˚ rda ˘ i a-376 and kirm (OInd. k ˚ ŕmi-377 ). Explanations for the apparent counterexamples are also at hand: kiš-/ kišt may have been borrowed from NP which is all the more probable since †kuš-would have been homonymous with kuš-/ kušt "kill" (NP kuš-/ kušt); 378 the past stem gipt would stand for expected †gurpt with analogical introduction of the vowel from the present stem gir-; din-"tear" might have replaced †dun-to become more similar to the doublet dir(r)-borrowed from NP, and dirt could be a secondary formation from the present stem dir-(variant of dir(r)-).

It would follow that Balochi does not share the development of PIr. * ˚ r which, when judging from the transcription of MP and Parthian e.g. in BOYCE 1977 and DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004, might seem to be a common Western Middle Iranian one. 379 The contrast between Prth. tirs-/ tirsād "fear", trifš "sour" and kird "done" vs. Bal. turs, turpš and kurt indeed suggests that with regard to the treatment of PIr. * ˚ r, Proto-Balochi must have differed from Parthian. The present stems 380 gir-381 "take" and mir-"die" (Av. miriia-, OInd. mriyá-) 382 suggest that Balochi has ir from PIr. * ˚ r ˘ i , thus different from NP (gīr-, mīr-). A borrowing of the two verbs from NP (thus HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557, 1895:92 for gir-) seems less likely since one would expect Bal. †gīr-, †mīr-; and the past stem gipt etc. is probably not a loanword, since an irregular loss of the r is more probable with a protoform *girpt than in a borrowing from MP grift or NP girift. It is not clear whether the loss of w in gir-vs. Av. g e u ruuaiia-, Prth. <gyrw->, MPM <pdyrw-> 383 may be termed regular or not. The development might either have been *g

˚ r ˘ u ˘ i a-> *gir ˘ u -> gir- or *g ˚ r ˘ u ˘ i a-> *g ˚ r ˘ i -> gir-. If * ˚ r ˘ u ˘ i -> ir
as in gir-is regular, Bal. pīr "old, saint" (also in pīruk "grandfather") has been borrowed from NP, as one would expect Bal. †pir. 384 With regard to the Bal. verbs, one might consider reading Prth. <gyrw->, <myr-> as girw- (thus BOYCE 1977pace GHILAIN 1939:89) and mir- (vs. mīr-in BOYCE 1977, GHILAIN 1939 etc.), respectively. 385 Although Prth. mir-would not prevent a reading of <gyrw-> as gīrw-since the context is not identical, there seems to be no good reason to exclude girw-either. As it has been stated that cognates of Av. ga i ri-are only found in EIr. languages (ELFENBEIN 1989:636, SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996:651), one might consider Bal. gar as a borrowing from Psht. gar "mountain", but the fact that the meanings differ might rather speak against such an assumption; moreover, the word is also found in MPZ gar "mountain" (MACKENZIE 1986), NP place-names with Gar°(BAILEY 1979:80b), Prth. personal names with Gar°(WEBER 2003:127).

• tar(r)-/ tar(r)it "to turn around" might have been borrowed from Ur. tar-nā "to cross, pass over"386 which would also explain the gemination of the r (cf. II 3.3.1.5); alternatively, one might derive it from *t ˚ rh 2 -like OInd. tiráti (Avestan has the present stems titar-, taraiia-, ta u ruua-), 387 the -rr-then might result from analogy to the semantically very similar čar(r)-"turn" (cf. p. 84).

The result of PIr. * ˚ rHt is Bal. ārt (cf. p. 189).

Diphthongs

The OIr. diphthongs ai, au come out as ē, ō in Balochi as in most other Modern Iranian languages. For the secondary change of ē > ī, ō > ū which has also taken place in standard contemporary Persian, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2.

OIr. ai > ē (GEIGER 1891:410): 388

• ēwak "alone" (PIr. *a ˘ i ˘ u aka-, Av. aēuua-, NP yak, Prth. ēwag "alone", ēw "one"), rēč-"pour" (Av. √raēk, NP rēz-/ rēxt, Prth. rixt 389 ), gēč-/ gētk etc. "sift" (Av. vaēča-, NP bēz-, bēxt, cf. p. 98), mētag "village" (Av. maē\ana-"house", NP mēhan "homeland", cf. p. 81), hēd "sweat" (Av. OIr. au > ō (GEIGER 1891:411):

• ōmān "desire" (Av. aoman-"helping", cf. also p. 186); 392

• rōč "day" (Av. raočah-"light", NP rōz, Prth. rōž), sōč-/ sōtk "burn" (Av. saoča-, NP sōz-/ sōxt, Prth. sōž-), šōd-"wash" (Av. xšaodah-"stream", NP šōy-, Prth. šōd-), kōpag "shoulder" (Av. kaofa-, NP kōh, Prth. kōf, all "hill", cf. p. 81).

There is no necessity to assume that OIr. au may occasionally also result in Bal. au: haur "rain" mentioned by GEIGER 1891:412 might be a loanword (p. 158f.), for EBal. bauf "mattress" vs. SWBal. 391 For the causative suffix -ēn-, cf. p. 107, for gīn "breath", cf. p. 136. 392 Av. aoman-is only attested once in the form aomna (instr.sg.). The strong stem *a ˘ u mān-needed for Bal. ōmān can be found in OInd. om ánam (acc. of omán-"help, support"). It seems that no etymology has been proposed for the Bal. word yet. For Ir. cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:309b.

Prothesis

CBal. sT-> e sT-, CBal. šT-> e šT-: 393 Clusters of word-initial s, š + voiceless stop are subject to prothesis in Balochi, Parthian and MP (in contrast to Standard NP which has siT-). Balochi shows i-in the majority of cases and sources, and the Prth. and MPM predominant orthography < c -> has also been interpreted as i-in the relevant dictionaries. However, the older sources (cf. DTB and GEIGER 1891:405) cite cases of a-prothesis (besides i-, DTB, GEIGER 1891:408). 394 As the change of a to i is common in palatal contexts like these (cf. p. 193f.), it is possible to assume that the prothesised vowel was a-first which then changed to i. Alternatively, one may assume that the vowel was a central one first which then produced varying outputs in the dialects. However, MPM and Prth. < c -> does indicate a palatal vowel of some sort; it need not have been /i/ as suggested by the dictionaries, though.

Examples:

• ispar "shield" (NP sipar, Prth. ispar) 395 , ispulk "spleen" (Av. sp e r e zan-) 396 , istār397 "star" (Av. star-, NP sitāra, MP istārag, Prth. astār(ag)); • ištāp398 "haste" (NP šitāb, Prth. awi-štābišn "oppression"), 399 iškand "unfinished" (NP šikan-/ šikast "break", cf. p. 124). Recent loanwords are treated in the same way, e.g. iskūl (BMC) "school". In the probably borrowed spēt "white" (Av. spaēta-, cf. p. 90), ispēt occurs beside sipēt.

Special phenomena

This subchapter summarises the discussion of some Bal. phonemes which come from several sources and involve certain peculiarities.

Balochi h

In some dialects, h is lost (cf. II 2.4.1.3). Since words have continually been borrowed between the dialects, words with h-in many cases appear in the form of doublets with and without h also in those dialects which usually do not lose h. The existence of these doublets may lead to the emergence of hypercorrect (secondary) h. It is thus not always easy to determine whether a given case of h is genuine or not.

Sources of Bal. h

OIr. h

As seen above (II 2.1.2.6), OIr. h is preserved in most Bal. dialects, e.g.

• hušk "dry", gwahār "sister", zahg "child", dūžah "hell".

x in loanwords

x in loanwords is rendered in most cases by h, but sometimes also by k (cf. II 1.2.2), e.g.

• NP-Ar. xabar "news" → Bal. habar, kabar,

• NP-Ar. xarāb "out of order" → harāb, karāb "bad".

Loss of h

Postvocalic h is liable to be lost, resulting in a variation uh / ō and ih / ē (cf. II 3.1.3.2), e.g.

• fātēā / fātihā / pātiyā etc. "memorial prayer" (NP-Ar. fāti ˙ h ā), • pōl / puhl "bridge", suhr / sōr "red, golden".

Similarly, ah gives ā in Western Balochi (cf. II 3.2.3.3), e.g. • zāg "child" (vs. other dialects zahg), bār "share" (vs. bahr), wād "time" (vs. wahd, waht etc.).

In some WBal. dialects, h is lost altogether (cf. p. 248), e.g.

• abar "news" (other dialects habar, NP-Ar. xabar), arāb "bad" (vs. harāb, NP-Ar.

xarāb "out of order"), awāl "news" (vs. ahwāl), wad "time" (vs. wahd etc.).

Secondary h

The variation just described, i.e. doublets like habar vs. The interpretation of h as element which is optional in some contexts might facilitate its use as a separator of two adjacent vowels (cf. also II 2.4.3), e.g.

• sāhig, sā'ig 407 "shadow" (NP sāya), hamsāhig, hamsā'ig "neighbour" (NP hamsāya), • šāhir (EAL), šāhar (ABG), šā'ir (BMC, DTB, EAL) "poet" (NP-Ar. šā c ir),

• mahī (FBB) "May" (Europ.).

In a couple of verbal stems in -ā (which are likely to go back to OIr. ā ˘ i a, cf. p. 108f.), -h-functions as a vowel separator and a morpheme separator at the same time: • āh-"come", zāh-"give birth", sāh-"shave" besides variants with -y-instead of h.

Bal. words with h-the NP cognates of which show secondary x-

There is a group of NP words which show unetymological word-initial x-(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:265). The corresponding Balochi words show h in several sources (GEIGER 1891:423), but none in others (see the table below). Variants with x-and k-are also found, which haqve been borrowed from NP (cf. p. 65, 82ff.). 408 There are three possible explanations of the Bal. data: • the variants with h-may be cases of hypercorrect h-of the type hārōs (cf. II 2.4.1.3) or • the variants with h-may been borrowed from NP with the substitution of h for x as in habar "news" (cf. II 2.4.1.1). In either case, the words without initial h-may be the genuine ones or represent the WBal. dialectal variants (cf. II 2.4.1.2) of those with h-.

• Alternatively, there may be a phenomenon of secondary h-in Balochi parallel to the NP one which results in secondary x-. In this case, the variants without h-would be due to the dialectal loss of h-.

The relevant examples are the following: For NP xāmōš "quiet",426 only the surely borrowed variants xāmūš (NAWATA 1981:38) and kāmōš (FBB) are found, and the same applies to xišm "fury" which only turns up as xašm (EVM, NAWATA 1981:42).

The variants without h-are predominantly found in WBal. sources, so it is probable that they show dialectal loss of h. This would leave the variants with h-as the primary ones. The only item which may not be a loanword is āmurg (cf. p. 108ff.) which unfortunately is only attested in sources where all sorts of h are lost, so it does not tell us anything about word-initial h-. 427There is some, albeit scanty, evidence that Parthian and/or some closely related dialect might have had h-in words where NP shows secondary x-: while most of the words cited above are not attested in Parthian, a possible candidate is hištīg "brick". 428 A second case is reflected by Georg. hešma ˙ k -, a variant of the more usual ešma ˙ k -"devil", and Arm. hešmak°"idol" (cf. GIPPERT 1994:62 17 ) while PrthT has išmag "demons".

It appears possible that the Bal. words with h-might be genuine, even if it is hard to imagine how the secondary h-developed exactly in the same words as in NP and not in some of the countless other words beginning with a vowel. The possibility that all words from the table above (with the exception of āmurg) are loanwords can thus not be ruled out.

Bal. words with h-the Kurdish cognates of which also show secondary h-

There is another particular group of words with secondary h-, viz. cases in which the Kurd. cognate also shows secondary h-. Secondary h-is very common in Kurdish (SOCIN 1901:256: "überaus häufig in allen Dialekten"), e.g. hindik "few" (NP andak), hesin "iron" (NP āhan).

The Bal. words with unetymological h-agreeing with Kurd. h-are the following: (cf. p. 90f.), and (h)uštar etc. is probably likewise a loanword anyway. 438 So it seems possible that they have been borrowed from a Kurd. (or similar) dialect. 439 This might also apply to haur (in this case the h-form is the one attested in all Bal. sources for dialects with h) where other NWIr. languages also show h-. (h)aur cannot be a genuine Bal. word anyway because of its -au-for OIr. ab-, so that GEIGER 1891:415 already suggested that this word might have been borrowed from Kurdish.

Balochi Kurdish cf. h- ∅- haik,

Balochi l

The status of Balochi l is a peripheral one since it chiefly occurs in loanwords (including some the etymology of which was not clear to GEIGER 1891:416) from Indian languages, e.g. lankuk "finger" (cf. p. 293), lōg "house, family". 440 In addition, a number of words show l where one might expect r, for which reason GEIGER 1891:415f. assumes that there is an occasional change of r > l.

The following examples of loanwords show l besides or instead of r: 439 If this assumption is correct, it hints at interesting implications about the economic history of the Baloch (cf. KORN, frthc. 3): they would have acquired the "use" of bigger household animals through contact with speakers of other NWIr. language(s) whereas the use of the smaller animals (sheep, goat) is probably traditional, as it indeed appears to be. Note that the word for "dog" might have been borrowed from Kurdish as well (II 3.1.2.2.1). Conversely, one might wonder whether Kurd.

gîsk "young goat" has been borrowed from Balochi (or a similar language) gēs "female goat of less than one year" since word-initial OIr. ˘ u -does not regularly result in Kurd. g-(ASATRIAN/LIVSHITS 1994:95); Bal. -ē-, Kd. -î-make it appear questionable whether Kurd. gîsk may be connected to MP wahīg "kid" and its cognates (OInd. vatsá-"calf" etc., cf. BAILEY 1979:274a) as assumed by ASATRIAN/LIVSHITS 1994:95.

440 The word may have been borrowed from an Ind. language (e.g. Ur. lōg "people, family"). It is also possible that the word is not a recent loanword, cf. Prth. lōg "world", lōgīg "worldly" (borrowed from Middle Indic), but less likely semantically. bāzul is found in COLLETT 1983 and EVM (bāz ´ ul is likely to be a misprint for bāzúl). The more common variant is b ãzul (for secondary nasalisation, cf. p. 215ff.). Baloch informants add that the word is also used in the sense of "arm of a baby" (pace ROSSI 1998:380, 420 3 ).

It seems questionable whether one needs to read Prth. <b'zwr> with a long ū as do BOYCE 1977 and DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:105b.

• šapčal, čapčal besides šapčar "bat" (originally "flying at night", HÜBSCHMANN 1890:560) 450 might involve a popular etymology with (borrowed) čal-"go" (cf. p. 322) besides čar(r)-"turn"; • hastal "mule" (DTB, EAL), istal (GEB, EAL; SHG istil) vs. istir (SHG); note that there is no common Balochi word for this animal (EVM reports ġātī (NP-Turk. qā ¨ tir) for Turkmenistan, FBB xačar (Ur. xaččar) for Karachi), 451 some of the dialects presenting an obviously borrowed word. It thus seems probable that hastal etc. is also a loanword (NP astar, Kurd. hêstir). 452 Then, there is a group of examples with hl:

• hl < OIr. -r\: puhl "bridge", pahlawān "hero", these cases might be loanwords from Persian (cf. II 2.2. In contrast to the general merger of PIE *r,l > PIr. r, Parthian preserves old l in some cases (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:213 79 ), but no example of old *l is found which comes out as Bal. l. One might assume that the readiness to substitute l for r in Balochi has something to do with the Parthian heritage, but the tendency might as well be attributed to neighbouring languages (i.e. Dari, Pashto and Urdu). This is to a certain degree confirmed by the considerable number of loanwords where l appears in the place of r (cf. the examples above where the form with l may have been borrowed), which would speak for a rather late date of the process. 453 It is thus not surprising that the substitution of l for r is a common phenomenon in the borrowed vocabulary of Karachi Balochi -a dialect in particularly close contact with a number of Ind. languages.

Vowel separators

There are quite a number of words with vowel hiatus caused by the loss of c , ' (cf. p. 63), h (cf. II 2.4.1.2, 3.2.3.1) or * ˘ i . As a rule, this does not seem to present a problem to the speakers of Balochi (cf. p. 56, BUDDRUSS 1988:43), but even so, several consonants are in use (sometimes optional) as vowel separators, viz. h, y and w.

In some words, several vowel separators occur: • āyān, āhān, āwān "those" (obl.pl. of the dem. pronoun ā, cf. p. 102f.),

• sāyig, sā(h)ig "shadow" (NP sāya, cf. p. 87),

• grēw-(SHG, ABG, BMC, FBB, EAL: Raxšānī), grēh-(EAL: Kečī, Coastal, Lāšārī, Eastern), grēy-(EAL: Sarawānī) vs. g(i)rē-(DTB) "weep". 454 A special group is formed by the verbs containing *ā ˘ i a > Bal. ā (cf. p. 109f.), which are found in the following forms: • ā-, āy-, āh-"come", • ǐā-, ǐāy-, ǐāh-"chew" (cf. p. 103),

• zā-, zāy-, zāh-"give birth", • sāy-, sāh-"shave", • gā-, gāy-"have sex".

The most common vowel separator is h (cf. šā(h)ir "poet" (NP-Ar. šā c ir), mahī "May"). The use of h as a vowel separator may be motivated by the existence of secondary h (mainly in word-initial position) which in turn is motivated by the dialectal loss of h (cf. II 2.4.1.2). The choice of vowel-separating consonants is used by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VII as a dialect marker. As will be seen below (II 3.2, not always in agreement with Elfenbein's findings), h is found in Southern and Western (maybe also Eastern) dialects, w and y in Western dialects, y also in the Bal. dialects of Iran.

Parthian has vowel-separating h (RASTORGUEVA/MOL ČANOVA 1981a:179); a vowelseparating h also occurs in Middle Persian (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:212). In spite of the regular development OIr. k > Bal. k (cf. II 2.1.1.1), suffixes reflecting OIr. k show an apparently arbitrary variation of -k, -g and zero, and many words are found with more than one suffixal variant. However, it may be possible to establish some regularities (in part already hinted at by GEIGER 1891:421f.):

k-suffix after long vowel

After a long vowel, it is predominantly -g which is found:

• -īg: e.g. pārīg "last year", pīg "fat", šudīg "hungry", kānīg "well";

• -ūg: e.g. pahlūg "ribs", 456 ǐātūg "sorcerer";

• -āg: e.g. urmāg "date", gurāg "crow" (MPZ warāg); užnāg "bathing", čarāg "pasture, grazing" (from čar-/ čarit "graze").

However, -k occurs as well: 457

• -īk: e.g. naz(z)īk "near", bandīk "thread", zamīk "field"; 458 • -ūk: zanūk "chin";

• -ōk: e.g. gōk "cow", nōk "new"; 459 agentive suffix -ōk (MP -ōg), e.g. wān-ōk "student" (from wān-"read", cf. p. 101).

455 For cognates of words already mentioned in the preceding chapters and references to further discussion, cf. the index in V 2. In this subchapter, the OIr. protoforms of all suffixes are marked by * to indicate that not all of them necessarily derive from an attested OIr. suffix.

456 pahlūg is a loanword since OIr. (Av.) par e su-would give Bal. -rs-(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:44). The meaning indicates that pahlūg has been borrowed from MP pahlūg "side, ribs" (vs. NP pahlū "side"). For further variants, see below and p. 197, 253, 268. 457 Some NP-Ar. words show pseudo-suffix with -k, e.g. sundūk (BMC) "box", mahlūk "people", EBal.

šarīx (ABG) "partner" which have been borrowed from NP-Ar. ¨ sandūq, maxlūq, šarīk, respectively. Note that in those dialects which show gemination of consonants after ī and ū (cf. p. 242, 259), -īk, -ūk appear as -īkk, -ūkk, respectively. In addition, suffixes without -k/-g occur:

• -ī: e.g. lōgī "wife" (from lōg "house");

• -ū: e.g. pahlū "ribs" (beside pahlūg, see above).

k-suffix after short vowel

Conversely, after short vowels, predominantly -k is found: 3), and a borrowing from MP warrag would probably yield †gwar(r)ag. GEIGER 1891:421 maintains that the correct form would be gwark which, however, does not seem to be attested and could moreover fall together with gurk "wolf" (for gwa-> gu-, cf. II 2. 1.3.3.1, 3.1.3.4). borrowed from Persian (some of them maybe in MP times), e.g. gušnag "hungry" (NP gušna, cf. p. 100). The infinitive in most Bal. dialects also shows this suffix which is attached to the present stem, e.g. kan-ag "to do", war-ag "to eat".

Bal. words with -ag often have variants with -a (GEIGER 1889:7), and in some dialects (at least in the Raxšānī dialect described by BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxi, SPOONER 1967:58 463 ), -a and -ag are used as sandhi variants, with -ag being used if the next word begins with a vowel, and the variant -a in other contexts. The variation of -ag and -a is even applied to nouns of Ar. origin, e.g. • BMC, SHG pāida(g) "advantage" from NP-Ar. fā'ida, • BMC xazāna(g) "treasury" from NP-Ar. xizāna, • FBB, SHG kīssag, BMC, EAL kīsa(g) "pocket" from NP-Ar. kīsa.

k-suffix after consonant

It is striking that -k is particularly frequent after sibilants and n: 464 • āsk "gazelle" (NP āhū), bāsk "arm" (NP bāzū), rōpāsk 465 "fox" (NP rōbāh, Prth.

rōbās), kurōsk "cock" (NP xurōs, Prth. xrōsag "caller"), gwask "calf", makisk "fly"; • bušk 466 "mane" (NP buš), xargōšk "rabbit" (NP xargōš), mušk "mouse"; • dr ˘ ačk "tree" (see below), kučk "shell"; 467 • burwānk 468 "eyebrow" (NP abrū, MP brūg), šupānk "shepherd" (NP, Prth. šubān), rōtink besides rōtīnk 469 "intestines" (NP rūda, MP rōdīg). The existence of a considerable number of words ending in -nk may be the reason for the intrusion of secondary n in nouns in -k (cf. p. 216f.), and for the suffix substitution seen in pallūnk (EAL), pahlunk 470 vs. pahlūg "ribs". -nk is thus not, as claimed by Bray, a Brahui suffix: it is indeed found in Br. words of Ir. origin [START_REF] Adriano | Iranian Elements in Brahui I: Stems with -ā/ȃnk, -ī/ȋnk, -ū/ȗnk, -ēnk, -ōnk[END_REF].

Words with several k-suffixes

Since there is no difference in the meaning of most of the suffixes listed above, they are interchangeable to a certain degree, 471 and words with several variants occur, e.g.

• ādēnk, ādēnag, ādēn "mirror",

• tank, tang "narrow" (cf. p. 244), tanak "thin" (see below),

• čūčag, čūčūk, čūč "little finger" (cf. p. 293),

• sā'ig, sāyag, sāī "shadow",

• šudīg, šudīk "hungry",

• h ˘ aik, haig, āyag, āig "egg", • pahlik (EAL) vs. common pahlū(g) "ribs", • EBal. ǐink h besides more common ǐanik(k), ǐinik(k) "girl" (cf. p. 235), • EBal. zanāx vs. SWBal. zanūk "chin" (cf. p. 291) etc., • nākū(g) (SHG; GEIGER 1890:138) vs. normal nākō "uncle".

There are also a number of words with a k-suffix the NP cognate of which shows a different one or none at all, e.g.

• bāsk "arm" (NP bāzū),

• šupānk "shepherd" (NP šubān),

• tun(n)īk, tun(n)īg besides tun(n)ag "thirsty" (NP tišna),

• hāmag "raw" vs. NP xām.

Due to this variation, there are cases of secondary -k and -g, e.g. čū ˙ r īk "ring around the wrist", mundrīk "ring" from Ur. čū ˙ r ī, mundrī, respectively, hālīg "empty" (NP-Ar. xālī). 472 Conversely, there is a loss of -k in drāč "tree" (MAYER 1910

Possible explanations

Given the multitude of suffixes, the question is whether they may be derived from Old Iranian by Bal. soundlaws (if so, which ones), whether some of them may have been borrowed (if so, which ones), and how the remaining ones may be explained. Several explanations are possible. What follows is what seems to me the most likely solution.

The sound laws otherwise assumed for Balochi would suggest that the suffixes containing -k are inherited since in other contexts, OIr. k corresponds to Bal. k. The suffixes with -g, on the other hand, are identical with those found in MP and may have been borrowed from there. 473 This assumption may be confirmed by the following:

• The suffix -ūg shows unetymological length of the vowel (e.g. ǐātūg vs. Av. yātu-, OInd. yātú-). For MP, however, the length of the vowel is likely to be regular. 474 • On the other hand, the agentive suffix -ōk does not seem to be borrowed since there is no corresponding formation in Persian. This would imply that words with -ūg which are unlikely to be loanwords show an adjustment of the suffix (e.g. ǐātūg replacing *ǰātuk).

Following this line of argumentation, one may add that • -īk can be derived from OIr. *-i ˘ i a-ka-by Bal. sound laws (cf. p. 105); 475 • -īg would be the regular MP result of both *-i ˘ i a-ka-and *-i-ka-(the latter parallel to *-u-ka-> -ūg, see above) and may have been borrowed into Balochi; • similarly, the MP agentive suffix -āg 476 might have been borrowed into Balochi; • on the other hand, -uk would be the genuine Bal. outcome of OIr. *-u-ka-; • -ūk might then be the result of a contamination of -ūg and -uk;

• -ī and -ū are most likely to have been borrowed from NP. 477Since the vowelless suffix -k is found predominantly after certain consonants, it seems to represent OIr. *-V-kain specific contexts, 478 viz. (at least) č, š, s, n + -V-ka-> Bal. -čk, -šk, -sk, -nk: *bāzu-ka-> *bāzk > bāsk "arm", *āda ˘ i (a)na-ka-> ādēnk "mirror", *tanu/a-ka-> tank "narrow". This confirms the argument made above of bānuk "lady" being a loanword to which -uk was added since otherwise one would expect †bānk.

The suffixes which remain to be explained are -ak, -ag and -ik(k), the latter being found in a few words only. Either -ag and/or -ak may be the result of the popular OIr. suffix -aka-479 in contexts other than those which produced Bal. -k, i.e. at least after stops where syncopation may have been prevented by the clumsy consonant clusters which would otherwise have emerged. Several explanations seem to be possible: • if -ag was the Bal. result of OIr. -aka-(cf. the extremely common use of -ag), -ak might have been borrowed from the NP diminutive suffix -ak (thence the use of -ak in words like kitak "insect", gwarak "lamb"). • Alternatively, the genuine Bal. outcome of OIr. -aka-may be -ak, the suffix -ag being borrowed from MP. Since borrowed suffixes may be used on inherited words (cf. ǐātūg above), the existence of e.g. kōpag "shoulder", madag "locust" which cannot be interpreted as MP/NP loanwords is not a good counterargument. For systematic reasons, the second solution would seem to be preferred: it corresponds to the interpretation of the suffixes -ūg and -īg as borrowings from MP (see above) on the one hand and to the development of OIr. k otherwise observed in Balochi and to the assumption of OIr. *-u-ka-, *-i-ka-yielding Bal. -ik, -uk made above on the other. -ik(k) may have been borrowed from NP -ak with a palatalisation having first occurred in bačik(k) "boy" (cf. p. 193f.) and subsequently generalised to the other words (note that bač(č) from which bačik(k) is derived is a loanword, cf. p. 100); the gemination may be due to the borrowing process (cf. II 3.3.1.5), it is also possible that the suffix has been borrowed from Persian at a time when it still contained geminate k.

In any case, it remains possible to derive -ik(k) from *-ikka-< *-i-ka-ka-or even from OIr. *-a-ka-ka-480 with a palatalisation of *akk occurring in bačik(k) (see above).

The suffix -a which predominantly occurs as a variant of -ag is most likely to be borrowed from NP.

The diminutive suffix -uk is occasionally found in the form -uk(k), probably by analogy to -ik(k), thence daǐuk(k) / ǐaduk(k) "hedgehog" (cf. p. 227). The motivation for the gemination in ˘ azmānak(k), ˘ asmānak(k) "story" (cf. p. 186) and in BMC hīwakk "alone" (which might be due to some misinterpretation of probably genuine ēwak, cf. p. 103) is not clear.

The possible development of the OIr. suffixes containing -ka-into Balochi and Persian may thus be summarised as follows, the MP and NP suffixes which have been borrowed into Balochi marked with underlining:

OIr. Balochi MP NP *-a ˘ u (a)-ka- -ōk -ōg *-ā-ka- -āg -ā *-i ˘ i a-ka- -īk -īg -ī *-i-ka- -ik /č, š, n _: -k *-u-ka- -uk -ūg -ū *-a-ka- -ak -ag -a *-a-ka-ka- -ik(k) -ak
Bal. suffixes deriving from OIr. suffixes with -k-480 Thus the explanation of the NP diminutive suffix -ak by KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:212, the double suffix being necessary because simple *-ka-had lost its function; other cases of NP -k may be explained in a similar way, e.g. tanuk "thin" < *tanu-ka-ka- (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:212). Similarly, Bal. tanak may go back to *tana-ka-ka-> *tanakk while *tana/u-ka-yields Bal. tank "narrow". In Zazaki, words with -e (< OIr. -aka-) are classed as feminines while the diminutive suffix is -ık (*-kaka-).

-b

The following words show an unexpected -b (GEIGER 1891:433): 481

• srumb "hoof" might have got its -b in analogy to NP sum(b) "hoof" (cf. p. 130).

• HÜBSCHMANN 1895:63 assumes that the addition of -b in dumb "tail" (vs. Av. d ˘ uma-etc.) is specific to Persian and that those Ir. languages which show dumb have borrowed it from NP dunb.

On the other hand, the -b of namb "wet, dew" vs. NP nam need not be secondary if HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559 is right in supposing that it comes from < *nabna-.

Conversely, the -b seen in MP aškamb (MACKENZIE 1986:13, also aškambag) "belly, womb" has been lost in šikam, EVM uškumag "belly, stomach". The Bal. word may have been borrowed from NP šikam (thus ELFENBEIN 1963:19), which is all the more probable as uškumag shows a labialisation of the vowel which seems to occur typically in loanwords (cf. p. 286, for the first vowel, cf. p. 204), so this loss need not be attributed to Balochi. The word is likely to be connected to OIr. √skamb (OInd. √skamb h ) "fasten, make firm", cf. MPM padiškamb "room" (for further cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:413b).

Common Balochi > contemporary varieties

This chapter treats the changes which for one reason or the other seem to be later than the stage of Common Balochi. These phenomena, which for the most part have not been accounted for systematically so far, are grouped according to whether they are to be attributed to specific dialects (II 3.2), seem to be restricted to loanwords (II 3.3) or neither of these (II 3.1). As Bal. dialectology and lexicology are in their infancy still, this arrangement is highly tentative and subject to change as new findings are made.

The following table presents the phenomena treated in this chapter. The order is parallel to that of the table in II 2.1. Note that the changes listed below are in the majority not sound laws, but occur only sporadically and/or in specific dialects. Some refer more to the phonetic than the phonemic level.

Changes not specific to certain dialects

The phenomena treated here are those which cannot be attributed to a specific dialect or group of dialects (yet), including those which occur in some varietie(s) of more than one of the main three dialect groups. Some might or will be due to contact with a neighbouring language and thus affect (mainly or only) those Bal. idioms geographically nearest to that language, irrespective of the affiliation of the Bal. dialect(s) in question. It is quite probable that with further research, it will be possible to attribute at least some of the following phenomena to specific dialects.

Consonants

Shortening of geminates

CBal. geminated (long) consonants (cf. II 1.1.1) only occur after short vowels. 1 Those Bal. assimilation processes which result in geminates (cf. the table in II 2.1) are likely to have done so irrespective of the length of the preceding vowel first, the geminates being reduced to simple consonants after long vowels later:

• čam(m) "eye", tun(n) "thirst", WBal. pis(s) "father" vs. mās "mother", ās "fire". 2

Metatheses

Metatheses are a frequent phenomenon in Balochi. 3 Some of them seem to be characteristic for specific dialects (cf. p. 234, 240f.). The more generally occurring ones are those involving a stop and s or š; those with p seem to be of a sporadic nature, those with k apparently operate as sound-laws:

CBal. -pš > šp (GEIGER 1891:436):

• trušp "sour" (EAL, GEB, SHG) can be derived by metathesis from trupš (Prth. trifš, cf. p. 145).

1 For dialectal gemination after some long vowels, cf. p. 242, 258f. 4 "horse" for more usual asp, the reverse process occurs, maybe motivated by the idea of making a "correct" Bal. equivalent for NP asb.

CBal. -kš > -šk (GEIGER 1891:436):

• bašk-/ baškāt "forgive, bestow" (NP baxš-/ baxšīd, Prth. baxš-/ baxt, cf. also p.

113); • bušk-(/ buxt h a) "let go, go off (shoot)" is limited to DTB and EAL;

• ša-wašk-(/ ša-waxt, ša-wašt) "sell" (Av. vaxš-, cf. p. 117); • waškī (DTB, EAL) for wakšī (ABG, EAL) "wild animal" represents NP-Ar. wa ˙ h šī with a noteworthy reflex of the non-standard CNP pronunciation waxšī (cf. p. 66); • āšk (BMC, EVM) "that side, the other side", ēšk (BMC), išk5 (EVM) "this side" (obl. āškā "over there", ēškā "here") involves the same metathesis if it is a compound from the dem.pron. ā, ē (cf. V 1.2) and kaš "armpit" (cf. p. 92) in its zero-grade form *-kš-, thus *ā/ē-kš > ā/ēšk (BUDDRUSS 1974:28ff.). 6The only counterexamples found so far are bakš-/ bakšit "forgive" and wakšī "wild", both besides variants with metathesis, so that bakš-/ bakšit may well be a loanword. The metathesis -kš-> -šk-may thus be considered a regular change for Bal. words.

CBal. -ks > -sk:

• taskīr (GEIGER 1891:461) "error" besides taksīr (EAL) from NP-Ar. taq ¨ sīr;

• MORGENSTIERNE's etymology (1932:43) of duskīč 7 "sister-in-law (husband's / wife's sister)" 8 as from *dux\rī-čī implies a metathesis (cf. p. 90).

The consonant cluster ks is only found in • duksīč (only SPOONER 1967:67 and EAL) and • in loanwords, e.g. maksad "purpose" < NP-Ar. maq ¨ sad, EBal. aksarā "generally" < Ur. aksar "all together". 9

• diks "CD" for Engl. disc (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication) shows sk > ks in a recent loanword. One may thus assume that in inherited words, the change -ks-> -sk-operates as a rule.

Assimilations 10

CBal. š > ž (cf. GEIGER 1891:426):

Most assimilations of š to a following voiced consonant involve a change of šm > žm. Since old šm is assimilated to m(m) (cf. II 2.2.2.2), words which exhibit žm < šm must either show secondary developments (cf. p. 93) or š from sources other than PIE *s.

• užnāg, (h)ūžnāg 11 "bathing", pažm, pašm 12 "wool", gužnag, gušnag 13 "hungry", mēžmurg, mēšmurg "pelican" 14 have been borrowed from NP;

7 The sources are FBB, SHG, BMC, EVM, EAL. EVM (i.e. ZARUBIN 1932:100) duskíč might be a typing error for dusk íč.

8 For semantic details, cf. p. 306. 9 The etymology of EBal. aks-"sleep" is not clear, but the word is not genuinely Eastern Balochi in view of its post-vocalic k. The past stem akast h -(sic) and the ipr. biakis seem to suggest, moreover, that aks-is a syncopated form of *aka(?)s-, so that the cluster might be secondary.

10 For other sorts of assimilations, cf. p. 235, 267.

11 NP ušnān "washing herb" is compared to NP šinā etc. "swimming" by BAILEY 1979:466b. š-of šinā seems to be due to some sandhi condition (HORN 1893:176). Prth. has snāž-"swim".

12 Qualified as a loanword by EAL 120. For cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:249, for the variant pažam, cf. p. 207. The genuine form could be p h īm, if it exists (it seems to be only attested in LEECH 1838, cf. GEIGER 1891:434) and if it is to be derived from something like *pašm( ˘ i )a- (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49). As OIr. čašman-gives Bal. čam(m) "eye" (cf. p. 126) etc., it seems rather unlikely that *pašm( ˘ i )a-would result in p h īm.

13 For further discussion, cf. p. 100, for genuine Bal. šudīg, cf. p. 92, 105.

14 With regard to the fact that Kurdish has the same word, HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 considers it as a loanword from NP. mēš "sheep" and murg "bird" (originally NWIr.) can also, but need not, be loanwords (GEIGER 1891:444), cf. Prth. mēš and murg. For murg, cf. also p. 147.

• ˘ ažmān "sky" may come from * ˘ ašmān, but the reason for š here is not clear; 15 • rōžnā (ABG, SHG), rōšnā (SHG) "light (adj.)", rōžnāī (BMC, SHG, EAL), rōšnāī (ABG, BMC, FBB, SHG, EAL) "light (subst.)" is likely to have been borrowed from NP rōšan "light (adj.)", rōšanā, rōšanā'ī "light (subst.)" (cf. p. 114).

Other assimilations of š are seen in the following words:

• pēž-dār-"show" (only in PIERCE 1874) for pēš-dār-(for dār-, cf. p. 320); pēšdah, pēždah "pistol". If pēš comes from *pait ˘ i ā > OP paišiyā (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:214 82 ), 16 it is a Pers. loanword in Balochi, and the same would apply to Prth. pēš.

• až (reported in GEB, DTB, EAL, SHG) is likely to have originated as a sandhi variant of aš "of" (EBal. equivalent for SWBal. ač), it is indeed reported to be used in front of voiced consonants;17 ža (EAL) may either be a sandhi variant of EBal. š(a) (cf. p. 85) or modelled on ša. • EBal. āž-gēž (besides SWBal. ās-gēǐ) 18 "lighter" is less likely to be a case of ž for s (ās "fire") as GEIGER 1891:426 assumes, but the first member probably is āč "fire" (for which cf. p. 283), its EBal. variant would be *āš (not attested as simplex) and may then have been assimilated to the second member of the compound.

Assimilation / loss of nasal

A nasal is occasionally assimilated to a following consonant, resulting in a geminated consonant, or entirely lost. This is likely to be motivated by the phenomena of unetymological nasals and secondary nasalisation of vowels discussed in II 3.1.3.3 leading to the existence of doublets with and without nasal. dattān, čikka and lakkuk show an assimilation of the nasal. EBal. ap h ān and dat h ān indicate that the loss of the nasal is more recent than the EBal. fricativisation (GCD da\ān is the regularised EBal. form).

Assimilations at the compound boundary

There are a couple of examples of assimilations occurring at the morpheme boundary between members of a compound:

• brāzātk "brother's child (nephew, niece)" from brās, brāt + zātk (cf. p. 185); • pamman "for me", pammā "for us" from par + man, mā (cf. p. 139); • pai ġammar "prophet" (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication)

r > ˙ r

There is a tendency to change r to the retroflex counterpart particularly when followed by a dental. According to GRIERSON 1921:394, the change of r > ˙ r /_[+ dental] is regular in the areas around Loralai in Northern Balochistan, and SOKOLOVA 1953:55 reports the same rule for Turkmenistan Balochi (cf. also ROSSI 1979a:209). A parallel change is seen in Brahui, Pashto and Sindhi (MORGENSTIERNE 1932a(MORGENSTIERNE :8, 1948:256):256). (MORGENSTIERNE 1937:347, 1974a:278, cf. also ROSSI 1979:68), cf. Bal. bōd(išt) "smell" (NP bōy, Prth. bōdestān "garden"); if so, izbōtk would show an assimilation from *uzbōdk-and a reinterpretation as a SBal. form, maybe involving a popular etymology with SBal. bōtk, past stem of bōǐ-"open", corresponding to EBal. bōž-/ bōxt), so that an EBal. variant in -xt (izbōxt, DTB, MAYER 1910) could be formed.

Changes in quantity

Shortening

There are sporadic cases of short vowels where one would expect long ones: 45

CBal. ā > a (GEIGER 1891:405): 46 42 brā-zātk is assimilated from *brās-zātk, brāt-°, cf. p. 181.

43 The meaning "lovage (ligusticum ajowan)" is confirmed by all sources (including field-work by TURCHETTA 1989:29); it is only MAYER 1910 and EAL who note an additional meaning "aniseed".

Lovage is a spice used in Indian cooking and for medical purposes (used on wounds according to SHG, against a sore throat or pains in the stomach according to TURCHETTA 1989:29); the word is also used as a women's name (SHG).

44 The function of *iz in EAL's *iz-ba ˘ u da-ka-is not clear while OIr. uz°is attested (for Bal. u > i next to z etc., cf. p. 193f.). *uz-ba ˘ u da-is also seen in EIr. words (MORGENSTIERNE 2003:103).

45 For shortenings specific for loanwords, cf. II 3.3.2.2, for those with simultaneous lengthening of the consonant, cf. II 3.1.3.1.

46 EVM adat "custom" (NP-Ar. c ādat) is not found on the page in ZARUBIN 1930 noted in EVM, adat and ādat are not found in other sources. EVM adāb "politeness" is probably a misprint for ādāb (pl. of NP-Ar. adab) motivated by the next entry bē-adabī "impolite(ly)". mal-"stroke" (only LEWIS 1838) has been borrowed from NP māl-(vs. genuine Bal. marz-, cf. p. 97), provided it exists.

• armān "longing" (maybe borrowed from NP ārmān);

• asmānak (EVM, SHG), azmānak (SHG) "story" vs. āsmānakk (SHG), āzmānak(k) (BMC, EAL, SHG): the variation in vowel length might have been motivated by the existence of the parallel doublets ˘ asmān, ˘ azmān "sky" (for which cf. p. 190); the etymology might be (Pers.) *ā-zamāna-ka-, cf. (borrowed) zamān(ag) "time" (for which cf. p. 235), the semantic development is parallel to Engl. tidings (Jost Gippert, personal communication); if so, the variant with -s-would be hypercorrect and based on the assumption that -z-has come about through assimilation (cf. p. 268); 47 • an-in anga, angat 48 Additional cases of shortening of ā are confined to individual sources.

Another idea might be to connect the word to āzmāy-"examine" (only found in MARSTON 1877, the causative āzmāēn-being better attested; the word has been borrowed from NP āzmāy-, cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1890:555), although the way of derivation of āzmānak would not be clear. For -k(k), cf. II 2.4.4.1.

The short quantity of the second a is also of unclear origin, though parallel to NP gah vs. gāh.

A parellel shortening is seen in Sogd. rwps (for which cf. GERSHEVITCH 1954:16). The word commonly used in Balochi is the NP loanword rōbāh, cf. also p. 165.

DAMES ' (1904:4 3 ) examples need not involve shortening processes:

• the existence of bakkal "shopkeeper, Hindu" (only DTB) is questionable, other sources (BMC, EAL, SHG) have bakkāl (NP-Ar. baqqāl "tradesman") as expected; • bōlak(k) (DTB, EAL, SHG) "tribe" for Turk. bulāk (DAMES 1904:4 3 ) might be caused by the interpretation of the second syllable as the Bal. suffix -ak; • pattan for pat h ān "Pashtun" does not seem to be found in the sources;

• tuman (BMC, EAL, SHG) "tribe" for NP-Turk. tōmān / tūmān / tumān might be a loanword from Ur. tuman; 51 FBB, GEIGER 1891:407 biǐ "seed" need not (pace GEIGER 1891:407) be an example of vowel shortening vs. EAL bīǐ (NP bīǐ) since it may have been borrowed from Si. ¯ biǐu. DTB has - † at the place it alphabetically belongs, but transcribes it bīǐ and remarks "Panj." which means that he considers the word to have been borrowed from Panjabi. The word cannot be genuine in the Eastern dialects (e.g. DTB) anyway since then it would then show the change of ǐ > ž. bīǐ might have been borrowed from NP rather than from Lhd. biǐa ˙ n as MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41 assumes. For piš(š)ī / pīš(š)ī "cat", cf. p. 198.

52 The connection of kitak with Av. kaēta-(term for inimical creatures) assumed by GEIGER 1890:132 and ELFENBEIN 1990/II:87 is more than questionable (BARTHOLOMAE 1904:428b). Moreover, one would then expect Bal. †kēt(ak). OInd. kéta-"desire" also placed here by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:87 probably does not belong with the Av. word (EWAia I:399).

Lengthening

There is a certain number of words with long vowels where one might expect short ones. A notable proportion of these are loanwords.

CBal. a > ā (GEIGER 1891:407):

There • hāsp, hāps (GEB) "horse" for asp, aps (probably a loanword, cf. p. 90, 158f.).

Word-final -a corresponding to NP -a (CNP -e) often appears as -ā (already noted by GEIGER 1891:406). The majority of the words with -ā for -a are NP(-Ar.) loanwords.

Only some examples are given here, all from ABG which has -ā in all relevant cases (all examples written y-unless otherwise indicated, but transcribed -ā). fā'ida); • faisalā (EAL fais(i)la, BMC paisla(g)) "decision" (NP-Ar. (also in Urdu) fai ¨ sala); • qiblā (EAL, SHG kibla) "direction of prayer" (NP-Ar. qibla); • rāǐā (‰DZf) "king" might have been borrowed from NP rāǐa (which in turn is from Hindi-Urdu), alternatively, it might also be mixed from Ur. £DZf rāǐā, ‰DZf rāǐa and reinterpreted as belonging with the NP-Ar. items above.

According to GEIGER 1891:406, the same variation is observed in perfect stems: 73 • bītā, bīsā vs. bīta (from bay-"become"); 74 • dīsā vs. dīta (from gind-"see", cf. p. 79, 98);

• ǐasā vs. ǐata (from ǐan-"strike", cf. p. 86).

The number "10" (FBB dā) and its compounds from 11 to 19 (-dā according to FARRELL 1990:87 and ABG 75 , -da according to BMC 76 , FARRELL 1990:26, 30 77 ) are treated like words in -a in most dialects. This means that -h was lost here before the lengthening of -a took place.

In the case of word-final c (o), a transcription like (both ABG) żilā c "district" (NP-Ar. 75 ABG has dah "10", but -dā for the following numbers.

76 BMC even has -da(g) for 11-19. For -a(g) in BMC, cf. p. 165.

77 The apparent inconsistency in FARRELL 1990 is due to the fact that the precise length of -a/-ā is very difficult to determine (Tim Farrell, personal communication). BARKER/MENGAL note (1969/I:xlii) that all word-final vowels "tend to be somewhat shorter in duration than those within the word".

żil c "rib, side") and ¨ tamā c78 "greed" (NP-Ar. ¨ tama c ) is probably a spelling pronunciation since it may be assumed that c is not pronounced. The -ā might be due to the lengthening phenomenon described above. Alternatively, a compensatory lengthening similar to the one occurring in the word-internal context Vc C > VC (cf. p. 63) might operate here. 79 As to the origin of this variation, one may first note that ¯ zimmā "responsibility" vs.

¯ zimma-wār "responsible" (both ABG) shows that the phenomenon is something secondary and presumably fairly recent. Furthermore, dīwānā, ¯ zar(r)ā might have been borrowed from Urdu, and since the same variation also occurs in a number of NP loanwords in Urdu (but not in all or even the majority of them according to PLATTS 1884), it may be assumed that it is due to language contact. In Urdu, the lengthening of -a might arise from masculine nouns in -a (including NP loans in -a) being inflected in the same way (obl. -ē etc.) as those in -ā.

CBal. i > ī (GEIGER 1891:408):

The majority of the examples are loanwords again: • baxšīš (ABG) "gift; forgiveness" seems to be a mixture of NP baxšiš with Si. bakšīs and/or Ur. baxšiš, baksīs (all from NP); • fīkar (ABG) "thought" for (NP-Ar.) fikr (ABG, EAL), pikr (BMC, EAL, SHG); 80 • kapīnǐar (PIERCE 1874, MARSTON 1877, EAL) "partridge" besides kapinǐar (cf. p. 276); • kunčīt besides kunčit 81 (EVM, EAL), kunčat 82 (SHG) "sesame" might have been influenced by NP kunǐīd besides kunǐid. 83 78 ABG <# t e m c a> is likely to be a misprint for intended <# t e ma c >, i.e. ¨ tamā c in the transcription used here. EAL has tama "desire". 79 ABG fiqāh "islamic law" (NP-Ar. fiqh) might be an idiosyncratic combination of the idea that wordfinal <h> is pronounced as ā and the knowledge that in this case, <h> indicates a consonant. 92 GEIGER 1891:407f. also places mir-"die" and gir-"take" here (for which cf. p. 149). dir(r)-"tear", if it belongs here, would be the only example with ar(r) > ir(r) (for a different solution, cf. p. 145). GEIGER's example (1891:408) wasirk "father-in-law" belongs in the following section.

93 The genuine Bal. cognate might be par (cf. p. 139).

• pir "on, upon" which (if not a variant of par "for", for which cf. p. 139) might derive from OIr. para°"further, distant, highest"; 94 • dārindag (AXENOV 2003:252) "wealthy" vs. its source NP dāranda;

• SHG digir 95 "other" vs. digar (borrowed from NP digar, cf. p. 121); • EAL girdēn 96 "neck", girdō "circle around the neck on a dress" vs. gardin (cf. p. 285), gardan "neck" (borrowed from NP).

Examples with -tir form a specific subgroup:

• SHG kunčat "sesame" vs. kunčit otherwise (cf. p. 192);

• BMC, FBB, SHG uštir, EAL huštir vs. ABG uštar, GEB huštar, EVM uštur, DTB, EAL huštur "camel" (cf. p. 158f.); • ǐintir, ǐantir vs. ǐantar "millstone", see above;

• comparative suffix -tir (all sources) vs. DTB, FBB (besides -tir) -tar and NP -tar.

Hypercorrect reversals of the palatalisation process may be seen in • WBal. kučak(k) vs. SBal. kučik(k) "dog" (for the etymology, cf. p. 188) might show influence of the NP diminutive suffix -ak and/or NP kūčak "small"; 97 • the suffix of ˘ azmānak(k), ˘ asmānak(k) "story" (cf. p. 186) might be due to a contamination of -ag and diminutive Bal. -ik(k) and/or NP -ak (cf. II 2.4.4.1).

CBal. u > i (GEIGER 1891:405): 98

u is palatalised in similar contexts as a, although not to the same extent, cf. (by order of palatalising consonant):

• čin-ka(s), čin-kā, činčō "how much/many" is a compound of čunt "how much" (NP čand, Av. čuua ˙ n t-, Prth. čwand, cf. p. 219) and kas "person" (cf. p. 125) and čō "so (much)" (cf. p. 200), respectively; 94 GEIGER 1890:141 considers pir as a cognate of OIr. pari°(Av. pa i ri°) "around" which he concludes from pir dēag, pir kanag "to put on (clothes)" in which, however, "upon" for pir would also fit. The additional verbal compounds in EAL 117 as well as the glosses to pir in SHG show that "upon" is the basic meaning. It is not clear to me where pirr (EAL 117) is attested.

95 SHG ‰˝d digih is likely to be due to a contamination of digir and diga (cf. p. 283).

96 The ē in the suffix is not clear to me. 98 For dialectal a in some of these cases, cf. p. 236f.

• ǐitā "separate" vs. NP ǐudā (cf. p. 104);

• FBB iškan-/ iškut, SHG iškun-/ iškut vs. SHG uškun-/ uškut, BMC, EVM (k-)uškin-/ (k)uškit "hear" 99 ; Southern šipānk vs. Western šupānk, NP šubān "shepherd"; 100 nišār 101 vs. NP sunār "daughter-in-law"; • wasirk vs. NP xusur "father-in-law": wasirk 102 comes from *h ˘ u asura-ka-, the suffixless form (cf. Av. x v asura-, OInd. śváśura-) can be seen in wasir-zā(t)k 103 "brother-in-law" ("father-in-law's son"); • izbōtk "lovage" is likely to derive from *uzbōtk (cf. p. 185), palatalisation of OIr.

uz°is also found in Parthian, cf. iz-bōg "release", iz-gām "exit"; • birwān (FBB) vs. burwān(k) "eyebrow" (cf. p. 208, 236).

CBal. ū > ī (GEIGER 1891:410): 104

The change of ū > ī does occur in certain dialects, but the isoglosses do not coincide with the major dialect divisions (pace MOŠKALO 1991:24). ū is preserved in Raxšānī (Western), Kēčī (Southern) and Lāšārī, it is modified to ū (written ū) in Sarāwānī according to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII 105 and changed to ī in all positions -and in inherited words and loanwords alike -in Coastal (Southern) and the Eastern dialects (ELFENBEIN 1990 Since the change of ū > ī is an ongoing process, even secondary ū resulting from ō (cf. p. 200) is affected in some cases: 113 • SHG, FBB sīč(č)in, Eastern (DTB, EAL) sīšin vs. sūč(č)in 114 SHG "needle", NAWATA 1981:37 has the etymologically correct sōčin (cf. p. 85, 142); • maybe the word for "cat" belongs here as well: it is found in the forms pīššī (SHG) pūš(š)ī (GEB, SHG), piš(š)ī (BMC, FBB, GEB, EAL, SHG), pišik (EVM), puššī (SHG). 115 When considering the Bal. words alone, one might say that pūšī is the primary form (gemination after ū, ī being regular in SHG, cf. p. 242) and could derive from *pōšī (whether or not this has been borrowed from NP pōšak) by raising (cf. p. 200), pīš(š)ī being the dialectal variant of pūš(š)ī. puššī might be explained as arisen from pūšī by isometric substitution (cf. p. 209), piššī might have either come about in the same way or by a palatalisation of puššī (see above). However, with regard to the existence of NP pīšī and pušak and Psht. piši, other solutions are possible as well; irregular developments in a word from the sphere of child language or among the terms of endearment are also probable. 116 A hypercorrect reversal of the change ū > ī may be seen in šūnz "green, blue", 117 if this variant is secondary to šīnz. 118 The change of ū > ī is seen in quite a number of other modern Ir. languages (including Pashto dialects). The Bal. change must be independent from the developments seen in the other languages, however, since it only occurs in some dialects, and the same is likely to apply to the corresponding change in other Ir. languages. The use of ū > ī for a grouping of Western Ir. languages (e.g. LECOQ 1989) thus seems problematic. For mik "nail", cf. p. 187.

It is not clear whether this word is meant as kuhn ī (suggested by the Arabic orthography and its place in the glossary) or kōhn ī (thus the intention of the transcription). Both kuhn and kōhn are attested in other sources (cf. p. 211).

If the vowel of NP mōy "hair" is genuine (which is not sure, cf. p. 142), mūd, mīd might belong here, too. Otherwise, NP would show a hypercorrect change also observed in some words in Balochi (see below). A further example might be involved in pūš(š)ī (cf. p. 198).

As there are some apparently related words for "apple" in other NWIr. languages (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50), Bal. sōp is unlikely to have been borrowed from Si. sūp h u. It is also difficult to see how Bal. sōp etc. could be related to NP sēb; DTB assumes that sūf has been borrowed from Arabic, where, however, the word does not seem to be attested (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50). 201 3. Common Balochi > contemporary varieties Some terms of relationship have variants in -ū besides the more usual ones in -ō: 130 • mātū, māsū "stepmother" besides mātō, similarly, pitū, pis(s)ū "stepfather" besides pitō, pis(s)ō (for the sources, cf. p. 307); • SHG nākū(g) (also reported by GEIGER 1890:138) vs. nākō (everywhere else)

"uncle", 131 the suffix might be secondary in this word anyway since the cognates do not show it (Av. niiāka-, OP niyāka-, NP niyā, Prth. niyāg). The vowel change might have been motivated by the existence of the common suffix -ū(g) (cf. II 2.4.4.1), which is e.g. seen in was(s)ū "mother-in-law" (see below).

Lowering

A number of words show lowering which might be interpreted as a hypercorrect reverse of the raising process just discussed. ē > ī: 132 • grē(w)-"weep", borrowed from NP g(i)rī-(cf. p. 162); • gušnagē (GRIERSON 1921:376) "hunger" (if not an error) instead of gušnagī (from gušnag "hungry", for which cf. p. 100, 127, 178).

ū > ō:

• BMC, EAL āxōbat for ākūbat (BMC) besides ākubat, ākibat "future" (NP-Ar. c āqibat, cf. p. 193, 286);

130 In a group of family terms given by FARRELL 1990:80 and RZEHAK 1991:185, there is a suffix -ō or -ū in words for not directly related relatives, e.g. čukō "stepchild", mātō "stepmother", pitō "stepfather" (all formed from the corresponding terms for non-step relatives, cf. III 2). It seems likely that the variants in -ō are the more original ones since raising is more common than lowering. Moreover, in a number of cases SHG does not show the original forms of suffixes, e.g. in wassō "mother-in-law" (see below) where wassū of other sources can be shown to be the older form (cf. p. 130 and above), thus in this respect, the other sources seem to be more trustworthy. • ABG ann ȭ for usual annūn, ann ū "right now" (cf. p. 214); 133 • GRIERSON 1921:376 bōt for usual būt (past stem of bay-"become");

• ABG dōt for usual dūt "smoke" (cf. p. 142);

• ABG zōr-for usual zūr-"take" (cf. p. 146);

• with regard to the variants with -ō-from ABG just cited, it is probable that ABG zāl-bōl is secondary vs. BMC, SHG zāl-būl "woman, feminine"; the etymology of būl is unknown (maybe there is some connection with būl "nose-ring"?); 134 • SHG wassō besides normal was(s)ū, was(s)ī "mother-in-law" is perhaps influenced by the relation terms in -ō, see above.

ō > ē:

There are some words which are best explained by assuming raising of ō > ū, subsequent change of ū > ī (cf. p. 196f.) and hypercorrect lowering:

• barēbar (SHG) for (ABG, SHG) barōbar (cf. p. 283, 286) for barābar "equal";

• srēn "loins" instead of expected †srōn (Av. sraoni-) might have come about approximately in the following way: *srōn > *srūn (raising of the vowel, cf. NP surūn) > srīn (attested in LEECH 1838 according to GEIGER 1890:145, cf. NP surīn) and the hypercorrect reinstallation of ē. The Bal. word might also have been borrowed from NP surīn and then suffered a change of the vowel. 135

Diphthongisation 136

There are some cases of ai, au where one would expect ē, ō, respectively. It is not clear whether the phenomenon is to be regarded as a feature of a certain dialect, all examples but the last three coming from ABG:

133 This word is a variant of nūn "now" (NP nūn, OInd. nūnám etc.). ai for ē:

• kardai 137 "some, any" for k h ardē (GRIERSON 1921:394, for further discussion, cf. p. 183) might involve a reinterpretation of -ē with regard to the fact that in the case of the gen.sg., variants of the ending include -ē and -ai (cf. p. 108); • gaištar "majority" besides gēštar "additional" (gēštir in other sources) is the comparative of gēš "more" (for which cf. p. 279).

au for ō: 138 • pauz "mouth, face" for usual pōz "nose" (NP pōz "mouth etc."), 139 • ǐau "canal" vs. usual ǐō(h) "river" (for which cf. p. 104),

• kaupag "shoulder" besides kōfa ġ "id." (usual SWBal. form kōpag, cf. p. 81);

• EBal. bauf (DTB, GCD) "mattress" besides bōf (GLADSTONE 1874), SWBal. bōp (BMC, FBB, EAL); 140 • EBal. naux besides nōx "bride" (cf. p. 102); • the relationship of au "and" (BMC, GRIERSON 1921:376) to ō (FBB, GRIERSON 1921:376) and u 141 is not quite clear. However, ō and au are somehow secondary to u (Av. uta, Prth., MP ud, u-); the loss of the dental may be due to the word being an unaccented / allegro form, unless it has been borrowed from Persian.

137 Note that the k-is not aspirated. The orthography is 'dAE¸(sic).

138 There is a parallel change ō > ou (instead of ū) which occasionally occurs in CNP, e.g. roušan "light (adj.)" < rōšan. taupak "gun" vs. tōpak (GEB, EAL), tūpak(k) (BMC, EAL, SHG) need not be secondary since NP also has taupak, tūpak, cf. also p.

Vowel assimilation

In some examples, the quality of a vowel is assimilated to that of a neighbouring (usually: following) vowel:

with u: with a: 142 • ǐagar "liver" (borrowed from NP ǐigar) may be interpreted either as vowel assimilation or as a hypercorrect form reversing a "palatalisation" (cf. p. 195).

Anaptyxis

Anaptyxis is one of the strategies to avoid clumsy consonant clusters (another strategy is metathesis of the consonants, for which cf. II 3.1.1.2, 3.2.1.1.3, 3.2.2.1, 3.3.1.1).

Although the majority of cases are loanwords, genuine words (e.g. drāǐ "long" and the words with sr-) are affected, too. Anaptyxis seems to be particularly common in (potentially) EBal. sources. 143 Anaptyctical vowels are inserted in word-final or wordinitial consonant clusters, but not in word-internal ones. 144 The anaptyctical vowel either corresponds to the vowels of the surrounding syllables or is the neutral vowel a (cf. II 3.1.2.3.4, 3.2.1.2).

Again, a remark of caution has to be added: differences in the occurrence of anaptyctical vowels might be due to imperfect perception and notation by the respective 142 It cannot be ruled out that the cases of a < u in Eastern Balochi (cf. p. 236) are to be placed here.

143 GEIGER 1891:405, 408f. treats phenomena of anaptyxis together with processes of vowel change and does not differentiate for dialects.

144 Cf. e.g. zahar "anger" (see below) vs. zahran "angry", sā ˙ r at h "cold" (see below) vs. sā ˙ r t h ī "cold (noun)" (all ABG), šukur, šukar (see below) vs. šukrāt (BMC), šukrīā (FBB) "thanks". The only exception among dozens of examples is ABG qutubī "Northern" which is probably analogical to *qutub "North", even if ABG has qutb (NP-Ar. qu ¨ tb), but kutub is attested in ABG, BMC, EAL.

sources. Furthermore, variants with and without vowel seem to occur in the speech of the same speaker, probably depending -among other things -on stress patterns and the position of the word in the sentence (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication). Note also that some sources have drawn their material from metrical texts, where the number and structure of syllables might be affected by the necessities of the metre. 145 Anaptyxis in word-initial consonant clusters may be sorted into the following groups:

• it occurs in all words with sr- • sawaz "green" vs. otherwise EBal. sabz, sauz, SWBal. sabz; 166 • in hawar (otherwise always haur, cf. p. 158f.) "rain", the /w/ which is part of a diphthong in at least some other dialects changes to consonantal status.

(
sā ˙ r at h and c ainaš show that anaptyxis is secondary to the change of r > ˙ r (cf. II 3.1.1.4) and the introduction of secondary nasals (cf. p. 215f.). Given that similar sorts of anaptyxis occur in Indic languages (e.g. Ur. šahad "honey", qabar "grave", Si. asur "dawn"), it is possible that the influence of Ind. languages plays a role here, and some NP(-Ar.) words might have been borrowed from Ind. into Balochi in that form.

Vowels + consonants

Metathesis of elements

Metathesis of liquids

In some examples, CrV-is changed to CVr-:

• burwān(k) etc. 167 "eyebrow" vs. NP abrū, MP brūg, OInd. b h r úetc.; • ABG durstī "acquaintance" vs. drustī (BMC); 168 • ABG daršak vs. dračk etc. "tree" (cf. p. 166, 189, 205, 229).

EBal. wasrik (GCD), wasarik (DTB) vs. SWBal. wasirk "father-in-law" (cf. p. 196, 306) is unlikely to show a metathesis: EBal. wasar-zāxt "father-in-law's child" suggests that the primary form for "father-in-law" in EBal. is *wasar, to which a suffix is added to give was(a)rik. 169 The suffix used here is probably the diminutive suffix -ik(k) found also in e.g. bačik(k) "son", ǐinik(k) "daughter" (cf. II 2.4.4.1) since simple k does not change to EBal. -x (for k > x in EBal., cf. p. 227f.). 170166 sabz (for variants, cf. p. 277) "blue, green, grey" is most likely to have been borrowed from NP sabz, although the etymology is not clear; MORGENSTIERNE 1927:66, 2003:73 and BAILEY 1979:140a, 355b assume *sapači-, and compare it to Psht. sāb e "grass" etc. which they derive from *sāpači-.

167 For variants, cf. p. 196, 236, for the suffix, cf. p. 165.

168 drustī may have been borrowed from NP durustī "entireness, propriety"; alternatively, it may be a Bal. derivative from drust "all", which is most likely to have been borrowed from Pers. drust (MP), durust (NP) "right" (GEIGER 1891:444), cf. Prth. društ, druwišt (cf. also p. 124).

169 For vowel elision in EBal., cf. p. 235.

In the following cases, #CVr-is changed to #CrV-(for all three, cf. II 2.3.2.1):

• trus (EVM, EAL, SHG), verbal trus-/ trusit (EVM, EAL) 171 besides BMC, DTB, EAL, SHG turs, verbal turs-/ tursit "fear"; • truš (DTB) vs. turš (BMC, EAL), which has been borrowed from NP turš "sour"; • in turpš "sour", the final consonant cluster is reduced by a metathesis to trupš, trušp (EAL, GEB, SHG) similar to the one in MPZ tru(f)š (MACKENZIE 1986:84) and Prth. trifš. 172

Isometric substitution 173

There seems to be a principle at work in some examples which reduces a long vowel to a short one with compensatory lengthening of the following consonant:

• ǐur(r)āb < NP-Ar. ǐūrāb "stocking";

• ǐuz(z)-174 "move" vs. NP ǐōy-, Av. yaoza-, unless ǐuz(z)-is another formation; The converse process may be seen in

• tūn "thirst", tūnag, tūnīg (GEIGER 1981:409) "thirsty" vs. tun(n), tun(n)ag, tun(n)īg etc. (cf. p. 127); • one might also consider to explain bāz "much, many, very" vs. bazz (GCD, EAL, in other sources baz) "thick, coarse (of paper, cloth etc.)" in a similar way. Both words have been connected to Arm. bazum, OInd. bahú-"much, numerous" etc. by HÜBSCHMANN 1890:560 and others. 177 The alternative hypothesis would be to interpret bāz as Bal. rendering of NP-Ar. ba c ż(ī) "several, some" (thus e.g. ROSSI 1979:174, FARRELL 2003:181); Bal. bāz is indeed written ◊∑ † in BMC (besides g£ †) and cited as ba c z in GCD. 178 However, it seems difficult to see the "completely coinciding" semantics of Bal. bāz and baz(z) with NP ba c ż "several" and Ur. bāz "back, again" 179 adduced by ROSSI 1979:174 in support of this argument, and the etymology advocated by Hübschmann etc. might seem the better assumption; if so, baz "thick" would be the original form of the Bal. word, it might have got its geminate by analogy with the NP loanword bas(s) "enough" (cf. p. 100); by application of the reverse of VC > VCC, bāz might have developed, 180 written or maybe even pronounced by some in accordance with a popular etymology linking it to NP-Ar. ba c ż.

The following instances of compensatory strengthening of vowels (II 3.1.3.2) might be interpreted in the context of isometric substitution as well.

Compensatory strengthening of vowels

There are some cases of a consonant being lost and the preceding vowel changed in quality and quantity. 181

CBal. i → ē: 182 Regardless of whether gēnīč "coriander" was borrowed (NP gišnīz) or not (for a detailed discussion, cf. p. 127), it shows an irregular "strengthening" of the vowel (GEIGER 1891:411) not usually connected to the regular Bal. change of šN > N(N), e.g. tun(n) "thirst" < *turšn, čam(m) "eye" vs. NP čašm (cf. p. 126). FBB fātēā (ABG fāti ˙ h ā, SHG pātiyā 183 < NP-Ar. fāti ˙ h a) "memorial prayer" shows the phenomon even in a case where a hiatus results.

CBal. u → ō:

The following words exhibit a variation uh, ō:

• puhl (ABG, SHG), pōl (BMC, SHG) "bridge" (MP puhl, NP pul, cf. p. 121, 131, 147); • suhb (EAL, SHG), suhb (DTB), sōb (BMC, FBB) "morning" (from NP-Ar.

¨ sub ˙ h , cf. p. 265); • suhr (GEB, DTB, ABG, SHG), sōr (BMC, EVM, FBB, EAL) "red, golden" (NP surx, cf. p. 119); • kuhn (EAL, SHG), kōn (BMC) "old" (NP kuhan, kuhna, cf. p. 120).

The variants sōhb (EAL) "morning", sōhr (BMC, EAL) "red" and kōhn (BMC, EAL) "old" show a contamination of the respective forms mentioned above, presumably due to an underlying assumption that the absence of h in the forms with ō is due to a dialectal phenomenon (for which cf. 2.4.1.2), parallel to the variants with -āh-found in BMC besides the dialectal variants ah, ā (cf. II 3.2.3.3). 184 181 For ah > ā, cf. p. 252f. In some cases, ah, ih, uh likewise give ā, ī, ū, respectively, in NP (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:268, HORN 1901:23, 26, 31f.) The fact that the variants with -ō-are not attested in the older sources points to a late stage of this reduction and might suggest that at the time the reduction took place, short i / u were nearer in quality to ē / ō than to ī / ū, i.e. to a rather open pronunciation of i / u. In the unlikely, but possible case of all mentioned words being borrowed from Persian, the same argument would apply to the pronunciation of Persian at that time.

Instead of uh > ō, some older sources show uh > ū: sūr "red", tūm "seed" (GEIGER 1891:409, from diverse sources). This would align with tūn "thirst" (cf. p. 210) and point to a more closed pronunciation of /u/ in those times.

It is possible that the alleged examples of OIr. xm > m are to be placed here (cf. p. 115f.).

185 The words cited from SPOONER 1967 are adapted to the transcription used here (cf. p. 261).

186 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290 derives this word from a root *p ˘ u "decay" which is also seen in (h)apūtag (a certain plant, cf. p. 140) and a couple of other words. As this root (PIE *pe ˘ u H no. 2 in LIV) "barely shows an ablaut" (LIV p. 480f.), pōn may either be explained as a case of lowering (cf. p. 201f.) or as inferred from a verb (not attested) with a present stem *pōn-which might have its vowel from the application of a secondary ablaut present stem ō vs. past stem *-u-(cf. III 4.1).

187 According to SPOONER 1967:58, Banfuhl is found in Persian texts only, but he assumes it to be a Bal. word. Cf. also p. 262.

188 The f may either be due to Ar. influence (Pavel Lurje, personal communication) or to a hypercorrect introduction of a "Persian" f which is as a rule not used in Balochi (cf. p. 64), but used by Baloch when speaking other languages. The converse assumption of Bamfuhl being the original variant and Bampūr more recent seems less likely since °pūr is maybe not common enough in the region to be introduced here.

Nasalisation of vowels

The degree to which vowel + n changes to a nasalised vowel differs considerably depending on the dialects, nasal vowels being most frequent in Eastern and Southern dialects and less frequent, in some dialects even nonexistent (Afghan and Turkmen Raxšānī), in the Western ones (for further details, cf. II 3.2). The phenomenon is not limited to one of the major dialect groups, however. As will be seen, nasalisation -at least the processes not limited to a certain dialect -may be regarded as a conditioned phenomenon (cf. JAHANI 1989:81), and as operating on a subphonemic level.

Nasalisation of long vowels

In all those Bal. dialects which do show nasalisation of vowels, there is a tendency to nasalise a long vowel + nasal when a consonant follows. With a following vowel, the nasalisation does not always take place.189

In (FARRELL 1990:11, 82, 84), For variants and the etymology, cf. p. 202.

According to HÜBSCHMANN 1895:78, there is also a NP variant sīnzdah (the common variant is sēzdah) which by reason of its vowel does not match the Bal. variants, however. Other numerals also show secondary nasals in some sources, e.g. yānzda "eleven", dwānzda "twelve" (NAWATA 1981:27). For °da(h), cf. p. 191, for secondary nasals, see below.

sīngār is an Ind. loanword, cf. Ur. and Pnj. sĩgār-nā "to adorn", TURNER 1966:730 (Georg Buddruss, personal communication). FARRELL's mazanēn-ē "that big one " (1990:18) shows that the use of the nasal vowel before vowel must be a recent phenomenon of analogy even in this dialect.

FARRELL 1990 (e.g. p. 13) has ã in the same function (also the ending for the 1sg.pres. in this dialect). I have not found an example of word-final -ū in Farrell's material (this dialect often changes ū to ī, moreover).

For the etymology, cf.p. 79, for variants, cf. p. 199. This is a variant of pūnz, for which cf. also p. 127, 197.

Thus also SHG. See also below.

For the etymology, cf. p. 113f., for further discussion, cf. p. 198.

• vs. the variants gurān ˙ d , šīnz (FARRELL 1990:82, 86).

Even in this dialect, most cases of word-final -Vn are pronounced as such and not nasalised (there are some exceptions like g ȭ "with"): 202 • dān 203 "grain"; ōn 204 "blood" (FARRELL 2003:174); ǐūn "June" (FARRELL 1990:89).

Nasalisation of short vowels

In a number of dialects, nasalisation of short vowels occurs as well. In some dialects, these are limited to word-final nasals in pronouns and -Vn and The following items show secondary nasalisation of the vowel:

• b ãzul vs. bāzul "wing, baby's arm" (cf. p. 160);

• ǐ ãs ūs (ABG) vs. ǐāsūs (DTB) "spy" (NP-Ar.); 217

• balk ē (SHG), balk ī (FARRELL 2003:175) vs. balki (BMC, EVM, EAL) "maybe" (NP-Ar.); 218 • s ȭčag (FARRELL 2003:175) vs. sōčag (FBB) "to think" (Ur. sōč-nā); 219 • p ūšī (GEB) vs. pūš(š)ī (SHG, GEB) "cat"; 220 • ča ūk (ABG) vs. čauk (SHG) "crossroads" (Urdu); • ša ūq (ABG), š ȭk (FARRELL 2003:175) vs. šauk (SHG), šōk (FARRELL 2003:175) "desire" (NP-Ar. šauq).

The same happens to Engl. loanwords (all from FARRELL 2003:175):

• The short vowel of EAL's ǐasīs might be a misprint or else due to the metre of the text it is found in; ǐasūs obviously shows the reversal of the sound-change ū > ī (cf. p. 196f.); the existence of this form in other sources than EAL remains unclear.

Here, the presence of the nasal might be motivated by the adj. suffix -ēn; for ē > ī and vice-versa, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2.

This verb is not attested in other sources; the past stem is sōčit (FBB). EAL has sōč "worry, reflection, thought" and considers it to have been borrowed from Sindhi; it could also be from Ur. sōč (same meaning).

For additional variants and the etymology, cf. p. 198, 209.

aw, uw and (u)wa aw > (u)w:

Postconsonantal aw is assimilated to (u)w. As Cuw is difficult to distinguish from Cw, notations without u need not reflect an elision. A possible counterexample would be raw-"go" (for other stem variants, cf. p. 128), but here the morpheme boundary might have prevented the assimilation.

The reverse change may be seen in • šawān(k) vs. šwānag "shepherd" (cf. p. 225); • EBal. šawā "you (pl.)" vs. šumā (cf. p. 126, 232f.). These may also be explained as showing uw > w with subsequent introduction of an anaptyctical vowel (cf. II 3.1.2.4).

(u)wa > u (GEIGER 1891:409):

There is an optional change of postconsonantal -˘ u a-> -u-. It is possible that gu-started out from certain dialects, although synchronically no clear picture of distribution emerges, so this feature does not lend itself to an isogloss for defining dialect boundaries. 230The only example of ˘ u a > u which does not involve gwa-seems to be • *č ˘ u ant > čunt (NP, MP čand, Prth. čwand) "how much". It points to a general tendency of C ˘ u a-> Cu-.

It is quite likely that CwV was pronounced CuwV in Common Balochi, and that Cwa-> Cu-might be described as Cuwa-> Cu-with elision of the second vowel (Ralf-Peter Ritter, personal communication). The reason for kwahn "old" being preserved might then be that the metathesis from *kahwan (cf. MP kahwan, cf. p. 120) is a rather recent phenomenon. u ardika-(borrowed from Balochi, the Bal. word itself was not known to him yet). With regard to the palatalisation processes discussed in II 3.1.2.3.1 and to the fact that a suffix -ig is not found otherwise while -ag is extremely common (cf. II 2.4.4.1), it seems more probable that gwā ˙ r ag is the primary form and gwā ˙ r ig the palatalised variant.

3

Dialect-specific changes

As already stated, the Balochi language comes in a number of considerably differing dialects (cf. I 1.2.2, 3.1), the degree of mutual intelligibility being judged differently (cf. p. 42). The most obvious differences on the phonological and phonetic level are those between the Eastern (for other terms, cf. p. 41) vs. non-Eastern dialects; these have been noticed and described right from the beginning of Balochi linguistics. Attempts to describe further dialects and to define their features are few and comparatively recent. Most contributions in this field are by Josef Elfenbein: ELFENBEIN 1989 and 1989a contain a description of the geographical distribution of dialects, ELFENBEIN 1966 233and 1990/II:VII-XVIII give isoglosses for a number of dialects, the latter intended to "correct and update" the former. 234 A comparative study of the dialects is rendered difficult by the fact that reliable data from the majority of dialects are lacking (cf. I 1.4).

In the following pages data are presented to show how Common Balochi (for this concept, cf. I 1.3) might have developed to the individual dialects / dialect groups, i.e. to present that part of Balochi historical phonology which is supposed to be post-Common Balochi and liable to attribution to a specific dialect / dialect group. These developments will be presented and discussed together with the dialect isoglosses suggested in other works.

For these purposes, the dialect picture as presented by Jahani and others (cf. p. 41) is used, i.e. a division of Balochi into the main dialect groups Eastern, Southern and Western Balochi. For practical purposes, the Bal. dialects spoken in Iran are treated separately (II 3.2.4). A new classification of Balochi dialects is not aimed at here. The purpose is rather to assemble and categorise the information as given by others, complemented by my own observations. It is to be hoped that the findings made below will contribute to a better understanding of the dialect picture of Balochi.

Eastern dialects (EBal.)

The Eastern dialects were the first to be established as a separate group by different scholars, 235 termed "Northern Balochi" in older sources and "Eastern Hill Balochi" by ELFENBEIN (e.g. 1990/II:XV). It is fortunate that sources from the 19th century are available for these dialects, but less fortunate that sources for later times are scarce (cf. also I 1.4 It should be kept in mind that most EBal. material comes from publications which differ markedly from modern ones with regard to printing quality, approach, methods and availability of previous studies; a number of lexical items are more or less likely to involve errors on the part of the authors (and/or the publishing houses).

Consonants

General features of EBal.

Non As has been remarked above (I 3.1.1), the most noticeable difference between Eastern Balochi and the other dialects is the change of all postvocalic stops to fricatives and the parallel change of č, ǐ to š, ž as well as (according to some authors) the aspiration of word-initial and postconsonantal voiceless stops. Comparing EBal. words like k h ōfa ġ "shoulder" to OIr. (Av. kaofa-), one might wonder whether the OIr. fricatives might have been preserved in Eastern Balochi236 instead of deriving from an intermediary CBal. stage of voiceless stops as generally assumed. Such a hypothesis would involve the following changes and non-changes:

OIr. > EBal. > SWBal. f, \, x f, \, x /V_ p h , t h , k h /#_ p, t, k p, t, k b, d, g b, d, ġ /V_ b, d, g /#_ b, d, g
This model brings more disadvantages than advantages, though: it is only the OIr. postvocalic fricatives which would have been preserved while in word-initial position, there are stops in Eastern Balochi. Moreover, in all Bal. dialects, the outcome of the OIr. fricatives is the same as that of the stops, i.e. the two series have coalesced also in Eastern Balochi as in the remaining dialects. The development of the voiceless stops and fricatives is also parallel to that of the voiced stops. As these change to fricatives in the same context where voiceless fricatives are found, it seems much more likely that the OIr. fricatives changed to stops first, and that all stops underwent a lenition in postvocalic position later, resulting in voiceless and voiced fricatives. The model which has generally been assumed is thus to be preferred: [START_REF] Grierson | Linguistic Survey of India X: Specimens of Languages of the Eranian Family[END_REF]:3) vs. kastir "smaller", sārt h245 vs. sārt "cold", perf. stems (when after a consonant 246 ) -t h a e.g. ārt h a ‰¡°fÚ "brought", murt h a ‰¡°AE* "died", wārt h a ‰¡°fZz "eaten", 3pl. -ant h , e.g. bī\a ġ-ant h (for -\-, see below) ‰•¿∏ ¶√ † (GRIERSON 1921:388) vs. būtagant 247 "they became" (perf.). 242 The sources vary with regard to aspiration of word-initial voiceless stops in front of a consonant, e.g. t h rōngal (GLADSTONE 1874, DAMES 1881) "hail" vs. DTB truš "sour" (GEIGER 1891:428). Note that there is no example of t h in ABG.

OIr. > CBal. (& SWBal.) > EBal. f, \, x p, t, k p h , t h , k h /#_ f, \, x /V_ p, t, k b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g /#_ b, d, ġ /V_

CBal. k > k

243 As in the case of ap h ān, the loss of the nasal must be very recent, as otherwise it would be †da\ān.

244 For the comparative suffix, cf. p. 195.

245 The orthography in DTB ‰¡°f£# seems to be an error, perhaps analogically to the perfect stems in -t h a (ABG has ¡°V f£# sā ˙ r at h , for which see below).

246 For \ after a consonant, cf. p. 227, for -ft, -xt, cf. p. 229f. In some EBal. sources, there is no simple past, the present perfect assuming also the function of the simple past (cf. KORN, frthc. 1).

247 For ū > ī, cf. p. 196ff., 237.

248 ABG has some examples of k h , too, e.g. k h anda ġ "laughter", k h ār "deed". The cases of intervocalic k h given by GEIGER 1891:418 must be borrowed from SWBal. GEIGER 1891:418 remarks that as far as it can be inferred from the not entirely consistent sources, word-final k after s, š is not aspirated.

249 šawānk h along with šawān (JAHANI 1996:123) and šwānag (cf. p. 218) could be EBal. variants of borrowed NP šabān. It is, however, unlikely that such a word was borrowed from NP precisely by the remote Eastern dialects and then spread from there to the others (šawān and šwānag are attested in non-Eastern dialects). It thus seems better to consider them as borrowings from Kurd. şıvan or some related idiom. For animal terms possibly borrowed from Kurdish, cf. p. 158f.

250 GEIGER 1891:424 notes that the aspiration of čh is not consistently marked in the sources (i.e. even less so than with the other aspirated consonants). Examples in ABG include čh am "eye", čh ōkē "since" etc., the latter probably somehow reflecting CNP čūn-ke.

CBal. w > w h : 252

Some sources also have w h for w in word-initial position (GEIGER 1891:413):

• w h ād e£<z vs. SWBal. wād "salt", w h aš '<z vs. waš(š) "good, sweet".

b) Fricatives: CBal. K > EBal. X /V_ (GEIGER 1891:404):

The second, and much more important, typical feature of Eastern Balochi is the "opening of postvocalic stops" (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:256) 253 to the corresponding fricatives, including č, ǐ which yield š, ž, respectively, thereby merging with Common Balochi š, ž. 254 Loanwords are treated in the same way.

The fricatives f, x, ġ are written with the corresponding graphemes from the Ar.-NP alphabet. \ and d are for the most part written ] , e , respectively. 255 b is written z and thus not different in writing from w (for discussion of its status, cf. p. 61f.).

Examples from DTB:

CBal. -p > -f (GEIGER 1891:433): 256

• k h afa ġ ¤π¡¸vs. SWBal. kapag "to fall", čh ōfa ġ ¤˘¬¡À vs. čōpag "to hit", k h ōfa ġ ¤˘¬¡v s. kōfag "shoulder"; • āf qÚ vs. āp "water".

CBal. -t > -\ (GEIGER 1891:428): 257 • wa\ī ÁBz vs. SWBal. watī "own", perf. suffix (after a vowel) -\a e.g. bī\a ‰ ¶√ † vs.

būta "was, became"; • p h i\ OE¡C vs. pit "father", čh ā\ ]£¡À vs. čāt "well, spring", gwā\ ]Z¬˝vs. gwāt "wind".

CBal. -k > -x (GEIGER 1891:418): 258

• nāxō ¬ £" vs. SWBal. nākō "uncle";

• rēx ">f vs. rēk "sand", hīx "√< vs. hūk "pig"; 259 • suffixal -k is treated in the same way, e.g. dužux bhd (SWBal. daǐuk(k)) 260 "hedgehog", zārix bfZg (vs. zahrak) "gall-bladder", 261 agentive suffix -ōx (vs. -ōk), e.g. guš-ōx b¬≤˝"singer, recitor". The SWBal. dim. suffix -ik(k) appears as -ik (h) , e.g. šanik h ‰¡º¿$ (sic) "young goat", wasarik tAE#z "father-in-law" (cf. p. 208f.).

257 GRIERSON 1921:394 notes \ instead of expected t h in some past stems in -˙ r found in texts from the Loralai area and supposes that this is an error of the scribes. However, with regard to gurx "wolf" in DTB, it is possible that there is a subdialectal phenomenon involved here. The cases in question are ā ˙ r \-(otherwise ārt h -) from ār-"bring", mu ˙ r \-(vs. murt h -) from mir-"die", wā ˙ r \-(vs. wārt h -) from war-"eat" (for r > ˙ r , cf. II 3.1.1.4). For the development of \ > s in some dialects, cf. p. 230f.

258 Examples from ABG: zayō-nāx "pretty" (from zayō "ornament", cf. p. 278, + -nāk "characterised by..."), šarīx "partner, participating" (NP-Ar. šarīk), wānōx "reader, student" (from wān-"read"). Note that DTB also has gurx "wolf". • barābar fzZAE † (cf. also p. 283, 286) "suitable, equal" (NP barābar), zabān xZzg "tongue" (NP zabān), sabab 263 z¬# "reason, excuse" (NP-Ar. sabab); • aib ¬>Z "spot, bolt" (NP-Ar. c aib "fault"); • if haur f¬< "rain" is not a loanword (cf. p. 159f.), it belongs here.

Hypercorrect substitution of b for w may be seen in • ABG c użbā "limb, organ" (NP-Ar. c użw "member"); 264 • nībag (SHG) "fruit" for the usual form nīwag (cf. p. 268).

CBal. -d > -d (GEIGER 1891:429): 265 • šōda ġ pe¬$ vs. SWBal. šōdag "to wash", šuda ġ p≠$ vs. šudag "hungry", kad ē266 »>≠¸vs. kadī "when"; • w h ād e£<z vs. wād "salt", nōd e¬" vs. nōd "rain-cloud".

CBal. -g > -ġ (GEIGER 1891:419): 267 • ni ġōša ġ ¤$¬∏" vs. SWBal. nigōšag "to listen", ǐa ġar AE∏D vs. ǐagar "liver" (NP loanword); • bō ġ p¬ † vs. bōg "joint", nominal suffix -a ġ vs. -ag, e.g. nēma ġ ¤ø√" vs. nēmag "butter".

262 Cf. p. 61f. for further discussion, also on the notation of the sound. Note that sure examples of genuine words are lacking. ABG has e.g. garībī "poverty" (from garīb, see below), qiblā "direction of prayer" (otherwise kibla, NP-Ar. qibla, cf. 190f.).

263 SHG, EAL and ABG have a variant sawab besides sabab.

264 A cluster zw does occur in Balochi, albeit in heterosyllabic position, in pāzwār "footwear" (probably a NP loanword involving NP pā "foot", zabar "upon" and/or bār "load", although a fitting NP word is not found). As zb is not more usual than zw, there seems to be no phonotactic reason for the substitution.

265 For the further development of d > z in some dialects, cf. p. 230f.

266 In kad ē, the suffix -ēn of the attributive adjectives seems to have been introduced for some reason.

267 Examples from ABG include: ā ġā (SWBal. aga(r) etc., cf. p. 190f.) "if", sarō ġān (SWBal. sarōgān) "head of a gang", lō ġī (SWBal. lōgī, cf. p. 305) "wife" and numerous adjectives and infinitives in -a ġ.

CBal. -č > -š (GEIGER 1891:426):268 • p h aša ġ ¤≤¡C vs. (other dialects) pačag "to cook", t h aša ġ ¤≤¡°vs. tačag "to run", sīšin "≤√# vs. sōčin, sūčin "needle" (cf. p. 85,180,194,198,200); • rōš jzf vs. rōč "day, sun", namāš j£ø" "prayer", aš jZ vs. ač "of" (cf. p. 85). Loanwords are for the most part treated in the same way as genuine words. However, there are also borrowings which do not show the expected changes, but are aspirated instead, e.g. bač h "son" (NP, cf. p. 100) and muč h "collected" (in other dialects muč(č), borrowed from Si. sik h a ˙ n u (DTB), both examples from GRIERSON 1921:391), DTB, GCD sik h a ġ (ABG sikk h a ġ, SWBal. sik(k)ag, borrowed from Sindhi according to DTB) "to learn", šak h al "sugar" (šakar in other sources, for -l, cf. p. 159).

CBal

c) OIr. ft, xt

For OIr. ft, which chiefly occurs in past stems, one would expect EBal. ft, but all relevant forms show pt (GEIGER 1891:426, HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556), e.g. 270• k h apt-(past stem of k h af-"fall"), gwapt h -(past stem of gwaf-, SWBal. gwap-"weave"), wapt-(past stem of waps-"go to sleep"), hapt "seven" (all DTB).

As these forms are unlikely to have systematically been borrowed from other dialects, there is obviously an EBal. change ft > pt (the same phenomenon is found in Avestan).

Subdialectal features 272

There is a certain number of phenomena which are specific to some, but not all EBal. dialects. The features below are ordered according to their probability of being characteristics of one or several subdialect(s).

\ 271 DTB has pakk-as past stem of p h aša ġ "to cook" (see above), for which cf. p. 112.

272 It is not sure whether šai "three" (LEECH 1838, HITTU RAM 1881) for usual sai (for which cf. p. 90) is a subdialectal phenomenon as assumed by GEIGER 1891:425 or rather an error of the sources of some sort. Note, however, that Choresmian and Sogdian have šy, too (MACKENZIE 1990:122).

273 The terms of relationship thus become brās "brother", p h is "father", zāmās "son-in-law", mās "mother". One should not confuse these with the (apart from the aspiration in p h is) identical forms in -s found in some WBal. dialects, since the latter are unlikely to have been borrowed from Eastern Balochi, but will go back to the respective obl. case forms in OIr. -\r-, cf. p. 89f.

Examples from ABG:

• čh ās "spring, font" vs. standard EBal. čh ā\, āf-u-gwās "weather (lit.: water and wind)" vs. otherwise gwā\ (for both examples, cf. p. 227), mubārak bās 275 "congratulations" (NP mubārak bād "may he/she be fortunate"); • šuz "hunger" vs. šud, šōza ġ "to wash" vs. šōda ġ, wahāz 276 "salt" vs. w h ād (for all of these, cf. p. 228), šāhiz "witness" (NP-Ar. šāhid), quzrat (EAL kuzrat) "power" (NP-Ar. qudrat).

In This change is also seen in a number of other Western Ir. languages and is a typical feature of Kurdish, so that reason some authors have assumed that it might be inherited (e.g. MACKENZIE 1961:70). However, this seems rather implausible as far as Balochi is concerned since the feature only occurs in the EBal. dialects (GEIGER 1891:413), and even there only side by side with the variant preserving m. 279 In some cases, the preceding vowel is nasalised (GEIGER 1891:411) There are some possible cases of hypercorrect m for w:

• The -m-in pīmāz (all sources) "onion" may be explained as a hypercorrect substitution of m for w in *pīwāz (GEIGER 1891:417). 286 kawāsag "great-grandchild" might be the result of a contamination of ku ˙ r āsag (cf. also p. 303) and nawāsag or borrowed from another Psht. dialectal variant (GERSHEVITCH 1973:275).

287 This verb (the past stem is nibišt) has been borrowed from Persian (cf. MP nibēs-/ nibišt). In the case of "to write", it is not as surprising as in the case of other verbs that the word was borrowed from neighbouring languages in which all written communication has been done (cf. also lik(k)-, p. 322). The MP verb itself shows NWIr. features (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:216 86 ).

288 The existence of EBal. nawiš-/ nawišt (EAL) does not seem to be sure.

289 The two isolated cases of EBal. palatalisation assumed by GEIGER 1891:436 are probably to be explained otherwise: čyār "four" (otherwise čār) is likely to have been borrowed from NP (cf. p. 120), and paǐyā, paǐī "together with" need not be explained as pa + ǐā "place" (cf. p. 106).

290 Thus MORGENSTIERNE 1984:50. EAL notes sagar which would be the SWBal. form corresponding to sa ġar, but its existence seems questionable. The same applies to EAL sarag (SWBal.), which is maybe postulated because of Morgenstierne's etymology of sa ġar.

Assimilation

There is an assimilation of a kind not found in other dialects in • čugzāxt (DTB), ču ġzāxt (GCD) vs. čuk h -zāxt (DTB, GCD) "grandchild" (cf. p. 303);

• gīdmahisk (DTB) "fly" from EBal. gī\ (SWBal. gūt "mud") + mahisk "fly".291

Status of h

In contrast to some other Bal. dialects (cf. II 2.4.1.2), Eastern Balochi preserves h.

According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XVI, it is also used as vowel separator (cf. II 2.4.3).

Vowels

Syncopation

As noted above (cf. II 3.1.2.1), there is a certain shortage of examples for syncopation in Common Balochi. The following cases are found in Eastern Balochi:

• āfsin "pregnant" (EBal., GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881, DAMES 1881) has an additional suffix vs. SWBal. āpus (cf. p. 89), • wasrik (GCD) vs. wasarik (DTB) "father-in-law" (cf. also p. 208 and below); two cases of syncopation and subsequent nasalisation (from ABG):

• zam ãg for (other sources) zamānag292 "time", • -ēg < -ēn-ag (caus. inf.); plus two cases of syncopation in declension:

• ēkwā (GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881) besides ēwakā, obl. of ēwak "alone", • the obl. case of ǐinik "girl" is ǐinka293 in Sibi (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:283).

• a similar phenomenon might be responsible for the past stems garand\-"thundered", sub\-"pierced", sik h \-"learnt" (cf. p. 317, 318, 322, respectively) besides variants in EBal. -a\-(for which cf. p. 186) or SWBal. -it-. According to GRIERSON 1921:401, the Upper Sindh dialect shows occasional contractions in verbal forms like bī ġē for bīa ġē (from bīa ġ "to be, become"). GRIERSON 1921:405 notes that syncopation is frequent in the Kasrānī dialect, shortening verb forms like (common EBal.) bī\a ġant to bīd ġ ã294 "they became", čh arāna ġā > čh arān ġā "for feeding" (for further contractions in this dialects, cf. p. 239).

Neutralisation

There are a number of words in EBal. which seem to show a neutralisation of vowels, i.e. a in places where other dialects have some other vowel. 295 It is also possible that the process in question is to be regarded as a vowel assimilation given that in most words treated here, the other syllable contains a or ā.

At least some variants of Eastern Balochi show a in words and in contexts which are liable to give i in other dialects (cf. p. 193ff.). Cases of original u are: 296 • DTB aškan-/ aškut h -297 vs. SWBal. uškun-, iškan-"hear"; • DTB, GCD barwān vs. SWBal. (thus also GLADSTONE 1874) burwān, birwān "eyebrow" (cf. p. 208); • DTB šafānk298 vs. šupānk, šipānk "shepherd"; • GLADSTONE 1874 našār vs. (thus also DTB) nišār "daughter-in-law" (cf. p. 128); • GLADSTONE 1874, DTB wasar-zāxt "brother-in-law" besides wasir-zāxt etc.

The explanation of a here might be either that u changed to a in palatal contexts in EBal. while it became i in SWBal., or that u was palatalised to i as in other dialects and then neutralised to a. The fact that all EBal. words with a < u are found in variants with i in other dialects (cf. p. 195f.) might speak in favour of the latter hypothesis.

In the cases of prothetic a-, EBal. might preserve an earlier stage than the other dialects which have i- (cf. II 2.3.4). The examples are aspēt (ABG) vs. otherwise ispēt "white", astār (DAMES 1881, DTB) vs. usual (thus also GLADSTONE 1874) istār "star", aštāfī (DAMES 1881, DTB) vs. ištāp "hurry, quickness".

The appearance of a for i and u in loanwords shows that some process of vowel neutralisation must be at work anyway: sa ˙ h r (NP-Ar. si ˙ h r) "magic", šāga ˙ r d (NP šāgird) "student", kalāh (NP kulāh) "cap, hat"299 , kalīt (NP kilīd) "key"300 and wardaš (NP warziš, cf. p. 231) "exercise" (all from ABG) as well as ǐa ġar (also ǐagar in SWBal.) "liver" (from NP ǐigar). It is thus possible that cases like astār, aštāfī do not represent the original stage but are also secondary products of istār, ištāp, respectively.

For the Kasrānī dialect (cf. also p. 231), GRIERSON 1921:405 notes additional cases of neutralisation in occasional k h ada for k h uda "made" (Standard EBal. k h u\a). The present stem of the same verb also appears as k h in-instead of k h an-. 301

ū > ī

In EBal. dialects, OIr. ū is regularly changed to ī (cf. p. 196ff.).

Word-final vowels

MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:9 notes that in the Balochi of the Upper Sindh Frontier, a short vowel is often added to words ending in a consonant, perhaps reflecting the tendency observed in Sindhi of having every word ending in a vowel.302 Secondary nasalisation is seen in the pronouns (DAMES 1891:15f.): man ã (obl.) "me", maĩ (gen.) "my", ma ī (gen.) "our", but, as GRIERSON 1921:401 notes, not in the dialect of the Upper Sindh frontier (manā, maī "me, my"). 306 The Upper Sindh dialect, on the other hand, shows optional secondary nasalisation (GRIERSON 1921:401)

Vowels + consonants

Nasalisation of vowels

gwa-

In spite of ELFENBEIN's statement (1990/II:XVI) that "the reduction [of gwa-] to gu-is unknown" in Eastern Balochi, gu-seems to appear most consistently in the Eastern dialects compared to the others:307

• DTB guz-"pass by" and guf-"weave" for SWBal. gwaz-and gwap-, respectively;

• HITTU RAM 1881 (cf. GEIGER 1890:125) gumz "wasp" for gwamz;

• in the case of guš-"say", this form has replaced gwaš-in nearly all dialects (for all examples, cf. p. 219).

Contraction

There is a contraction of awa and awā in • šawā, šā "you (pl.)" (cf. p. 103, 126, 232f.);

• šōšk-(GEB) "sell" besides šawašk-(DTB, GCD, EAL, SHG, cf. p. 117, 177); ABG šōšak "sale" is likely to represent *šōšk-ag.

Other cases of contraction from ABG are:

• mābatt (also in BMC)308 "love" for mahabbat (NP-Ar. ma ˙ h abbat); • šālā (written ‰˛£$ !) "hopefully" for NP-Ar. inšā'-llāh.

GRIERSON 1921:405 reports contractions of various kinds from the Kasrānī dialect (cf. also p. 236), e.g. p h ād-ā ġ ã > p h ādw ã "I will rise (lit.: come [onto] foot)".

Southern dialects (SBal.)

The Southern dialects as presented here include the dialects termed Kēčī and Coastal dialects in ELFENBEIN 1990/II:IXff. 309 These dialects are considered prestigious by many Baloch, 310 for which reason SBal. words may be found in texts from other dialects. They contain a number of literary words not necessarily found elsewhere. The Kēčī dialect in particular is used for writing literary works. FBB (Karachi Balochi) and SHG (project based in Karachi) are sources for the Southern dialect, although occasionally elements of other dialects also occur, due to the mixed character of the Balochi population of Karachi 311 and (in the case of SHG) due to the long experience of Sayyad Hashmi with diverse varieties of Balochi. Among the older sources, PIERCE 1874, MARSTON 1877 and MOCKLER 1877 are based on Southern Balochi. Further information is found in GRIERSON 1921. 312

Consonants

Metatheses

The metathesis of CBal. *-kt-(for which cf. p. 111f.) to -tk in past stems of roots in velars seems to be best explained as a characteristic of the non-Eastern (with GEIGER 1891:418, 436), and, as it turns out, more precisely the Southern dialects. 313309 For Sarāwānī and Lāšārī, cf. II 3.2.4. 310 Cf. e.g. ELFENBEIN 2000:85.

311 For further discussion of Karachi Balochi, cf. FARRELL 2003. 312 Those older sources which treat the non-Eastern dialects do not specify their material for Southern or Western Balochi since the importance of that dialect division has only been recognised in more recent times (cf. I 3.1.2). However, of the sample texts in GRIERSON 1921, those on p. 364ff. are Southern Balochi with occasional WBal. characteristics, those on p. 376ff. are from the Panjgur area, thus WBal. (GRIERSON 1921:385). However, there are quite a number of SBal. characteristics in the latter texts, too, so they will be treated in this chapter.

• Examples of past stems from FBB: 314 atk 315 (past stem of (k)āy-"come"), bōtk (past stem of bōǐ-"open"), patk (past stem of pač-"cook"), tatk (past stem of tač-"run"), dōtk (past stem of dōč-"sew"), rētk (past stem of rēč-"pour"), gētk (past stem of gēǐ-"throw")

Fricatives

In Southern Balochi, the use of fricatives potentially occurring in loanwords is extremely restricted. SHG has no f, x, ġ at all, and FARRELL 1990:12 notes that they may always be replaced by p, k/h and g, respectively.

Status of h

The SBal. dialects generally preserve h (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:IXff.). However, at least in some (probably eastern) Coastal dialects, h seems to be lost, and in Karachi, h is absent from the speech of many speakers, many more speakers having a very weak h (FARRELL 2003:177).

314 SHG does not note the past stems of verbs.

315 atk seems to have been analogically shortened from ātk (EAL: Coastal, Kēčī; Lāšārī yātk), following a principle that the past stem should be "lighter" than the present stem.

316 The forms cited by MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290 as well as their derivation do not seem to be beyond doubt, cf. also ROSSI 1979:39. 317 The meaning "daughter" is only attested in MAYER 1910(cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1932:44) and EAL.

According to SHG, the word means "doll, heavily decorated girl", it also denotes some plant which gives lots of flowers. In Brahui (for which cf. ROSSI 1979:13), duttuk means "doll, pupil of the eye". A variant dut(t)ag "daughter, doll, girl" (with the suffix replaced by the common suffix -ag) also exists (SHG, EAL, marked as literary in BMC). The usual word for "daughter" is ǐanik(k) (also "girl").

According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:IXff., secondary h-(cf. II 2.4.1.3) is quite common in Kēčī and the Coastal dialects and is also used as the preferred vowel separator. GRIERSON 1921:377 indeed notes šāhir (NP-Ar. šā c ir) "poet" for the "Makrānī dialect", and sāhat (NP-Ar. sā c at) "time" is found in SHG.

Subdialectal phenomena

GRIERSON 1921:376 notes that occasionally, word-initial consonants are aspirated, e.g. p h ād "foot", t h au "you", čh am "eye". 318 Similarly, FARRELL 2003:179 notes that in Karachi "many speakers lightly aspirate all voiceless stops" (cf. also p. 224, 251).

According to GEIGER 1889:79, p-is changed to f-in some variety of Kēčī and/or Panǰgūrī, e.g. fatk for patk "cooked" (see above), fidar for (NP loanword) pidar "father".

Unlike the other SBal. sources, SHG shows consistent gemination of consonants after ī and ū (not after other (long) vowels) in inherited and borrowed words, e.g. 319 • čīrr 320 "rip, tear" (but no gemination in čēr "under"), dīmm 321 "stern (of a ship)" (vs. dēm "face"), mīkk "stake, pole, top of head"; • zūmm, zīmm "scorpion", sūččin, sīččin "needle"; 322 • in pīnzz, pūnzz (sic, not †p īzz, p ūzz) "heel", the gemination operates even across n (cf. p. 197).

318 GRIERSON 1921:376 assumes that stops may change to fricatives occasionally also in this dialect. However, family terms like OEC / OE¡C which he interprets as pi\ etc. will rather represent pis etc. (these forms seem to belong to the Western dialects, cf. p. 89, 250), and the isolated case of the past stem gift (for gipt, from gir-"take", cf. p. 144) might have been borrowed from Eastern Balochi. Other points described by GRIERSON 1921:376 as characteristics differing from other SBal. sources are maybe not dialectal differences: the losses of final elements might rather point to morphological or syntactical differences than to phonological processes (cf. p. 243), paš "back, behind" besides pašt is likely to represent a different formation (cf. p. 125). For ku and bū, cf. p. 246.

319 For a similar phenomenon in Lāšārī, cf. p. 259.

320 EAL has čīr. The word has been borrowed from Ur. čīr "tearing etc.".

321 GEIGER 1891:410 has dīm "back" which he compares to Av. d ˘ uma-(cf. also HÜBSCHMANN 1895:63). While the original vowel quantity of the Av. word is not clear (DE VAAN 2003:308), Balochi would require a proto-form *dūma-, provided the etymology is correct, while NP dunb (cf. p. 170) would rather point to a short vowel.

Vowels Loss of vowels 323

There is a loss of a vowel in FBB, SHG marčī "today", probably an allegro variant of marōčī of the other dialects (for which cf. p. 139).

ū > ī

Southern Balochi shows preserved ū as well as variants in ī (for examples and more discussion, cf. p. 196ff.). SHG usually has a variant with ī besides the one with ū. In FBB, the variants in ī predominate (e.g. bīt "been", p īz "heel", dīr "far", zīr-"take"), but in some cases, both variants are cited (trū, trī "aunt"). According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:IXff., it is the Coastal dialects which change ū > ī, with Kēčī preserving ū. It is not clear whether there are SBal. variants in which there is no ū at all (cf. also p. 57f.), although the interdialectal borrowing makes it probable that there are words with ū in every SBal. variant.

Vowels + consonants

Nasalisation of vowels

Nasalisation is far-reaching at least in some SBal. dialects. According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:IXff., nasalisation is avoided in Kēčī and occasional in the Coastal dialects. However, the data in FBB and SHG indicate that the tendency towards nasalisation is very strong, "even heavier than in the rest of Makrān" (JAHANI 1989:81). 324FBB shows rather regular nasalisation of long vowels + n (e.g. g ȭ "with", p īz "heel", adj. suffix -ē, cf. also p. 213) while in SHG, nasalisation is common, but not without exceptions (gōn "with" vs. p ūz "heel").

In Karachi, nasalisation of short vowels is seen in a number of verbal forms (for which see below) as well as in the pronoun mã 325 "I" (man in other dialects).

Some SBal. dialects show nasalisation of short vowels outside of the domain of pronouns and verbal inflection. The details are not completely clear yet, though. 326Examples are:

• ã ˙ r as (ABG) "tear" (maybe borrowed from Ur. anras "distaste"); • tãk (SHG) "narrow" vs. regular tank which may be genuine (cf. p. 168f.) whereas tãg (ABG, SHG) "narrow" (other sources: tang) has been borrowed from NP tang (GEIGER 1890:148); • ǐãg (ABG) "battle, war", ǐãgī (SHG) "relating to battle" vs. regular ǐang(ī)

(borrowed from NP ǐang, GEIGER 1891:451); • ǐãgal (ABG, SHG) "forest" vs. regular ǐangal (originally from Ind., LOKOTSCH 1927:74, but the Bal. word might nevertheless have been borrowed from NP) with its derivative ǐãglī (ABG) "wild" vs. regular ǐangalī; • čãgul (ABG, SHG) "claw" vs. čangul (Ur. loanword); • rãg (ABG) "colour" vs. rang;327 • zamīn-ǐũb (ABG)328 "earthquake"; • sãg (ABG, SHG), sĩg (SHG) "stone" vs. regular sang, sing (cf. p. 139); • šãbā (ABG) " Saturday" vs. šamba,šambē (cf. also p. 191).

The nasalisation processes in SHG seem to depend on the preceding consonant, if not even on the individual who prepared the respective chapter of the dictionary: with word-initial tVn-, nasalisation in anteconsonantal or word-final position is regular (the only exceptions being tandō "web-like" and tandūr "oven" where it is probably the 325 In FARRELL's transcription (1990:15 etc.), the word appears as <m e n / mã> (with < e > being used for /a/ and <a> for /ā/). There is no difference in the vowel of <ǰã> (Farrell's orthography, cf. the table below) "he/she hits", i.e. /ǰant/, and <zã> "he/she knows", i.e. /zānt/, so the nasalisation products of long and short a are obviously pronounced identically at least in this dialect.

following dental which prevents nasalisation), whereas in the case of ǐVnC, the only words which do show nasalisation are ǐãgī, ǐãgal (see above) and ǐĩgul "little sparrow".

The following verbal forms show nasalisation of -Vnt when not in antevocalic position: 329 nasalised form (FARRELL 1990(FARRELL :29f., 2003::

gwa-

Although according to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:IXff., gwa-is sometimes changed to gu-in Southern Balochi, gušag (which is almost exclusively attested in this form) "to say" seems to be the only instance of gu-< gwa-found in SBal. sources.

Word-final consonants

FARRELL 2003:178 observes a tendency to drop word-final consonants in the Balochi of Karachi, maybe reflecting influences of Sindhi syllable structure (for a similar phenomenon in Eastern Balochi, cf. p. 237). ku for ku(r)t "did" and bū for būt "became" may be explained in this context and simultaneously show a phenomenon of allegro pronunciation (for kut, cf. p. 146).

Western dialects (WBal.)

Although not the most prestigious group of dialects, Western Balochi, which chiefly comprises the dialects known as Raxšānī, is by far the most widely spoken Bal. idiom and therefore serves as a "lingua franca" in many situations of communication among [START_REF] Sergej | Grammatičeskij očerk jazyka beludžej Sovetskogo Sojuza[END_REF]:81, NAWATA 1981:17 rēt (past stem of rēč-"pour"); EAL gē(h)t (past stem of gēǐ-"throw").

Status of h

In WBal. dialects, h is always only optional. According to BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxii, word-initial h is lost more often in front of long vowels than in front of short ones. Similarly, word-final h tends to be dropped more often when it follows a long vowel. 335 Barker/Mengal also note that the non-pronunciation of h is not always reflected in writing.

In other WBal. dialects, the weakness of h is even more marked (BUDDRUSS 1988:44 notes complete absence of h in word-final position and very weak articulation elsewhere for Afghan Balochi), with Turkmenistan Balochi marking the extreme point where no h occurs at all.

Examples:

• ak (EVM), (h)ak (BUDDRUSS 1988:44), (h)akk "right" for hak(k) (NP-Ar. ˙ h aqq); amra 336 (BUDDRUSS 1988:44), amrā (EVM), (h)amrā(h) (BMC) "companion" for (NP) ham-rāh; ušk (EVM), (h)ušk (BMC) "dry" for hušk (cf. p. 94); • bā (EVM) "price" for (NP) bahā; gwār (EVM, FBB, EAL, NAWATA 1981:37, BUDDRUSS 1988:74), gu(h)ār (BMC) "sister" for gwahār (cf. p. 99, 123, 219); • tīrmā (EVM, NAWATA 1981:19) 337 "autumn" for tīrmāh (borrowed from NP tīrmāh "autumn" 338 ); kō(h) (BMC) "mountain" for (NP) kōh.

334 EAL duht would show the original zero-grade form of the root, which may be from SPOONER 1967:57 who has IrBal. doht which in his notation means /duht/ (cf. p. 257).

335 For anteconsonantal h, cf. p. 252f.

336 For the shortening of word-final vowels, cf. p. 251.

337 BMC tīrmag implies loss of the -h and subsequent interpretation of -ā as a case of neutralisation of word-final -a (cf. p. 190f.) and treatment of the latter as suffix -ag (cf. p. 165).

338 tīr-māh literally means "month of tīr". tīr is etymologically connected to Av. tištriia-"Sirius", a star appearing on the sky in autumn and thus described as the bringer of rain by the speakers of Avestan (cf. FORSSMAN 1968:56ff.). For the semantic change of tīr as the name of a given month to "autumn", cf. SUNDERMANN 2003:250f.

Loss of h is also found in spoken Dari (DOROFEEVA 1960:16) and Pashto (GEIGER 1893:215).

Vowel-separating consonants

Western Balochi has secondary y, w and h in vowel-separating function (examples from BUDDRUSS 1988:43f. unless indicated otherwise): 339

• kō ˙ t a-y-ai (gen. of kō ˙ t a "room"); ē-y-at "this was"; • čē-w-ā (obl. of čē "what"); na-w-ai "you are not" (cop.2sg.); • čā-h ant "there is (lit.: are) tea" (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxiii); sahat (sic) "hour" (NP-Ar. sā c at). 340 Some WBal. dialects (EVM, EAL: Raxšānī) 341 have ra-"go" for raw-of other dialects. It is possible that this loss of w represents an analogical loss of a perceived secondary w. The variant ray-(EAL: Raxšānī, Sarāwānī, Coastal dialects) shows a vowel-separating y.

Gemination

WBal. sources vary quite a bit with regard to the gemination of consonants.

In BMC, gemination of word-final consonants is very frequent (with the exceptions of two words, after short vowels only). One group where final gemination occurs are loanwords (cf. II 3.3.1.5), the rest are words where a consonant group has been Aspiration of word-initial stops is not uncommon also in WBal. dialects: according to ELFENBEIN 1963:365, it often occurs in Panǰgūrī, andSOKOLOVA 1953:50ff. notes that the voiceless stops are aspirated at least in word-initial position and that postvocalic stops tend to be pronounced as fricatives or affricates.

n has the allophones [ ˙ n ] and [n] next to a retroflex and velar, respectively [START_REF] Valentina | Beludžskij jazyk[END_REF]:50ff., RASTORGUEVA 1966:327, BUDDRUSS 1988:44)

Vowels

Loss and shortening of vowels Some WBal. dialects show elision of vowels in certain pronominal forms: mnī "my" and mnā "me" for manī, manā of other dialects (gen. and obl. of man "I", respectively), trā "you (sg.)" for tarā, turā elsewhere (obl. of tau) [START_REF] Vera | Beludžskij jazyk[END_REF]:332, BUDDRUSS 1988:50, šmā "you (pl.)" for šumā (RASTORGUEVA 1966:332). 347 According to BUDDRUSS 1988:43, unstressed word-final vowels in Afghan Balochi are often shortened to medium length, thence e.g. the obl. sg. ending -a. 348 Turkmenistan Balochi has obl. -ā, but gen.pl. -āni for -ānī of other dialects (RASTORGUEVA 1966:329).

345 It is highly likely that similar allophones are found in other dialects as well without being noted by the relevant sources.

A contraction of [b e

w-] is also seen in Zaz. bıw-> bo-(Jost Gippert, personal communication).

347 NAWATA 1981:11 has mnā, but no syncopation in the other forms.

348 There is a similar phenomenon in Sarāwānī (cf. p. 260). Some uncertainty concerning the length of word-final -a/-ā is also found in other sources, cf. the variation of (°)da / (°)dā "ten, °teen" in FARRELL 1990:21, 26, 30, 86f.; the comparatively common lengthening of word-final -a might also point to a general coalescence of -a and -ā (cf. also p. 190f.) at least in some (sub)dialects. No notice of this phenomenon has been found in other WBal. sources. The addition of w-is obviously more recent than the loss of h in these dialects.

In contrast to some other Bal. dialects (cf. p. 237, 243), ū is not changed to ī in Western Balochi (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VII).

Vowels + consonants

VhC

CBal. ah > WBal. ā: 351 For the etymology, cf. p. 206. bār kanag "to apportion" is even given in (the basically SBal. source) FBB. There are two other words bār, viz. bār "load" (from bar-"carry") and bār "time (x times)".

WBal. h is
If the latter is a cognate of OInd. vāra-"appointed time, turn" (cf. HORN 1893:36), MPZ bār (not †wār) must have been adjusted to bār "load", both words being interpreted as one. If so, Bal. bār "time" has been borrowed from Persian (thus GEIGER 1890:116). It is possible that bār < bahr is interpreted as yet another meaning of the same word, which might facilitate the change of bahr > bār.

ELFENBEIN 1990/II:21 states that GEIGER 1890:115f. is wrong in assuming that bār "load" and bār "time" coalesced in Balochi as they did in NP and that Bal. bārē "always" is derived from this word. The reason for this statement is not entirely clear; maybe Elfenbein's underlying assumption is that Bal. bār "time" either does not exist or is secondary to the variant bar. However, both bar and bār "time" do exist. It thus seems to be better to assume that bār "time" has been borrowed from NP and that bar is a shortened variant of it (for vowel shortenings, cf. II 3.1.2.2.1). Bal. wār "time" (BMC, NBA, EAL; also in yak wār "suddenly") has certainly been borrowed from Ind. (cf. ELFENBEIN 1963:80, ROSSI 1979:337 etc., cf. Lhd. vār, Si. vāri, all from OInd. vāra-"appointed time, turn", cf. TURNER 1966:673). JAHANI's statement (1992:175) that wār is "clearly the same word as Persian bār" (obviously rejecting the interpretation of wār as Ind. loanword cited in BUDDRUSS 1988:82) seems to imply that wār has been borrowed from NP; this appears impossible, though, since NP b-is rendered by .

352 For more details and the etymology, cf. p. 206.

353 pahnād may have been borrowed from early MP *pahnād, cf. MPZ <phn'd> pahnāy (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). Alternatively, it might have been formed in Balochi from the NP loanword pahn "wide" (a cognate of Bal. patan, cf. p. 81) with the suffix also seen in derivatives of inherited words, e.g. burzād "above", EBal. drāžād "length".

zaxm "wound")354 etc. 355In analogy to these forms, there are cases of secondary h in words with āC not going back to ahC, e.g.

• BMC pā(h)rī "last (time)" vs. normal pārī (cf. p. 163);

• kā(h)n (BMC) for kānīg "well, spring", and there is even a common variant (EAL, SHG) kahnī(g) (cf. p. 82-83).

Some (presumably particularly recent) loanwords show loss of h after short a without compensatory lengthening:

• awāl (BMC, EVM) for ahwāl (BMC and other sources) "news" (NP-Ar. a ˙ h wāl); • malūk (BMC) for mahlūk, maxlūk "people" (NP-Ar. maxlūq);

• wad, wat (BMC) for wahd, waht "time"356 (NP-Ar. waqt). ih, uh are changed to ē, ō, respectively (cf. II 3.1.3.2).

Nasalisation of vowels

In Western Balochi, nasalisation is much less widespread than in some EBal. and SBal. dialects (cf. p. 238, 243ff.) and seems to be entirely absent from Afghanistan andTurkmenistan Balochi (cf. EVM, NAWATA 1981:3, BUDDRUSS 1988:43).

However, the change of Vn > V is common at least in Pakistani Raxšānī: 357 "Within the word, a long vowel + /n/ + a consonant often sounds like a nasalised vowel + the consonant" (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxvi). In the majority of cases, Barker/Mengal feel that "there is (...) enough length to the /n/" to justify a transcription as Vn. In some words (among them the numbers 11-19), however, the pronunciation with nasalised vowel is more common (for examples, cf. p. 214). Word-final -Vn is preserved as such with the exception of "certain (...) suffixes which consist of a vowel + /n/ before a following word beginning with a vowel, and a nasalised vowel before a following consonant-initial word." The suffixes in question are obl.pl. -ān (-ã before a consonant) and the adj.suffix -ēn (anteconsonantal variant -ē) as well as some elements which behave similarly (cf. p. 213f.).

gwa-

Although ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VII notes that gwa-changes to gu-in Western Balochi, no gu-variant of gwap-"weave" or gwaz-"pass by" is found in WBal. sources. guš-"say" is in line with the general tendency of all dialects, gwaš-being only attested in some traditional sources (cf. p. 219). The situation with regard to gwa-is thus the same as in Southern Balochi.

ya-> ē-:

The following words with ya-also appear with ē-in EVM:358 • ērā ġ "arms" for NP-Turk. yarāq;

• ēla (otherwise yala) "free" (borrowed from NP yala). It is not entirely clear whether this is a dialectal feature or a phenomenon limited to the two mentioned words.

Iranian Balochi

The Balochi dialects of Iran are treated together here although in a historical sense, they do not constitute a separate group. However, they seem to present some common characteristics in phonology and phonetics. It is not entirely clear yet which (sub-)dialects of Balochi are spoken in Iran. Descriptions of these are for the most part not available yet. In Makran, Coastal dialects are assumed to be spoken. From Khash northwards and in the whole of Ir. Sistan, including Zahidan, WBal. dialects are reported to dominate. These will only be referred to in what follows if they have been noted to differ from the SBal. and WBal. variants discussed in II 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 above.

In addition to Southern and Western Bal. varieties also found in other countries, there are two particularly characteristic dialects which are not found outside of Iran, viz. the so-called Lāšārī and Sarāwānī dialects. 359 Sarāwānī (itself composed of several subdialects) is spoken in an area including the town of Sarawan, and is described in BARANZEHI 2003. The dialect described by BARANZEHI 2003 as being the one spoken in the town of Sarawan itself and its immediate surroundings largely corresponds to the notes in SPOONER 1967, but -as will be seen below -differs from the "Sarāwānī" as defined by ELFENBEIN (e.g. 1990/II:XIIf.). In what follows, BARANZEHI 2003 will be taken as a basis unless otherwise specified. 360 On the whole, Sarāwānī occupies an intermediate position between WBal. and SBal. (BARANZEHI 2003:77). With regard to the phonological characteristics treated below, it is nearer to the Western than to the Southern dialects, though. Some data from the Lāšārī dialect(s) may be found in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 and MAHMOODI BAKHTIARI 2003. 361 359 For the probable distribution, cf. the maps. The term Lāšārī was brought into use by Elfenbein (replacing the term Lō ˙ t ūnī used in his earlier publications).

360 For further information on Sarāwānī, cf. JAHANI 2003. SPOONER 1967:56 notes that the dialect borders are not a geographical question only, but also one of the nomadic vs. settled population, with e.g. the nomadic groups using mās "mother" etc. (WBal., cf. p. 250) and the settled population māt etc. (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII has māt etc. for the family terms which are not attested in BARANZEHI 2003, apart from the loanword barādar "brother"). The importance of distinguishing the "kūhī" and "šahrī" idioms is also stressed by c Abbās Parwīn (personal communication), characteristic differences including ū > ī vs. preserved ū, past stems dīt "saw", kut "did" vs. dīst, kert, 1sg. ȭ vs. ã, use of genitive vs. eżāfe; this would point to a SBal. character of the former and a more WBal. character of the latter. BARANZEHI 2003:79 reports that the nomads are called balōč and the rest šahrī ("town-[people]"), while both are ethnic Baloch and speak some variant of Balochi.

Not surprisingly, the influence of Persian on the Bal. dialects spoken in Iran has been even heavier than on the other dialects. 362 For Sarāwānī, BARANZEHI 2003 shows influences from NP on all levels of grammar. 363 In all Bal. dialects spoken in Iran, the pronunciation of the vowels seems to be that found in CNP, i.e. e, o, ei for /i/, /u/, /ai/, respectively (cf. p. 261). As the sources treating Ir. Balochi note them in accordance with the pronunciation, this practice will be followed here, too.

Consonants

OIr ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992: ham-īešī "this", hīed "sweat" (cf. p. 123), gohār "sister" (cf.

p. 219), bohā "price" (cf. p. 100), wahd "time" (cf. p. 281), kūeh "mountain" (cf. p. 81); and I have not seen an example of secondary h in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 and BARANZEHI 2003. 370 The preservation of h in Sarāwānī and Lāšārī is a SBal. rather than a WBal. feature (cf. p. 241f., 248).

For h as vowel-separating consonant, see below.

Gemination

There is no case of gemination of consonants in [START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF]. SPOONER 1967:57 remarks that "any final consonants (but not clusters) may apparently be doubled at will, except when followed by a word beginning with a consonant". Since SPOONER does not note gemination in his glossary, it is possible that there are rules for gemination also in this dialect (cf. II 1.1.1).

In Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992, gemination occurs in words which are also found with gemination in other dialects, e.g. ha ˙ d ˙ d "bone" (cf. p. 272), čukk 371 "child", mess "urine" (cf. p. 137). There are also additional cases of gemination. It seems that all those which do not occur in other dialects involve gemination after ī/īe, ū, recalling a phenomenon observed in SHG (cf. p. 242), e.g. čīppok "chicken" (čīppuk 372 in SHG), sīnna 373 "breast", nebīss-"write" (cf. p. 234), rīešš 374 "beard", dūtt "smoke" (otherwise dūt, cf. p. 142), pūss-/ pūsset "wither, decay". 375 More data are needed to compare the range of gemination with Western and Southern Balochi.

Other phenomena

The data of BARANZEHI 2003 confirm ELFENBEIN's statement (1990/II:XII) that y is used as vowel separator in Sarāwānī, e.g.

• hodā-y-eš 376 (God-y-pron.suff.2pl.) "[may] God [give] you (pl.) ..." (BARANZEHI 2003:84); • nesta-y-ē377 (sit(perf.)-y-1pl.) "we are sitting" (BARANZEHI 2003:88); • kas-ē-y-ei (person-indef.-y-cop.2sg.) "you are a (...) person" (BARANZEHI 2003:84).

However, h is used as well:

• na-h-at-ē (neg.-h-cop.past-1pl.) "we have not been" (BARANZEHI 2003:89); • āh-ī (dem.pron.obl.) "that" (JAHANI 2003:121); • rah-īn "I go" (JAHANI 2003:122). 371 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:283 and[START_REF] Gilbertson | The Balochi Language. A Grammar and Manual[END_REF]/I:48 assume some connection with Ur. čh ōkrā, Si.

čh ōkaru "boy", but the case is not completely clear. There might be a relationship to čūčag "child, baby; tiny", čūčūk, čukī "little finger" (cf. p. 293).

372 The etymology of this word is not known to me. It seems possible that onomatopoetical phenomena might be involved.

373 sīna(g) has been borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:444), but sēnag might be genuine. For cognates and further discussion of MP sēnag, cf. GIPPERT 1993/I:243.

374 If this is not an error (rīešš would be the only example with gemination after īe) it shows Bal. /rēš/, which would agree with some cognates cited by MORGENSTIERNE 1927:107. The other Bal. sources have rīš which may be a form showing raising of the vowel or a borrowing from NP (thus GEIGER 1891:458), since Tajiki and Dari have likewise rīš. Av. raēša-does not mean "beard" as HORN 1893:142 assumes. Thus, the etymology of rīš is not clear (HÜBSCHMANN 1985:68).

375 This word (not found in other Bal. sources) is likely to have been borrowed from NP pūs-/ pūsīd.

376 hodā (other dialects hudā) has been borrowed from NP xudā (GEIGER 1891:450), cf. p. 66.

377 The past stem is ništ in other dialects (cf. p. 96).

Conversely, y is found as vowel separator in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 while ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XIV states that h is used in Lāšārī.

• man wat āyī-y-om dī 378 "I myself saw him/her" (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:52);

• ta gošna-y-at-ī "you were hungry" (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:69).

This feature is closer again (although still different) to the situation found in WBal. than to that of Southern Balochi.

In Lāšārī, a secondary y is often found prefixed to word-inital ˘ a-in inherited as well as in borrowed words, e.g. • (y)āp "water" (cf. p. 77), (y)āteš "fire" (borrowed fom CNP āteš), yāšnā "known" (from NP āšnā), yāy-/ yaht "come" (all from Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992), yaps / asp 379 "horse" (Pākzād Yūsefiyān, personal communication).

It thus seems that the y-noted by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XIIff. for the verbs yār-"bring" and yāy-"come" is in fact not a feature of verbal morphology, but a phonological process of more general nature. The prefixing of y-seems to be optional in some words, and there are words which seem not to take it at all (e.g. the pronoun ā-"that"); the conditions of its appearance thus remain to be investigated. 380

Vowels

Vowel shortening Some word-final vowels are shortened: the indefinite article -ē is often pronounced -e (BARANZEHI 2003:83), and the obl.sg. ends in -a (SPOONER 1967:58, BARANZEHI 2003:81) as it does in Afghan Raxšānī, but not in other WBal. variants (cf. p. 251).

378 ayī is certainly a misprint for āyī correctly noted otherwise. The agent is marked twice here, by the full pronoun man and the suffix -om. āyī is equivalent to the variant āhī quoted above.

379 For the metathesis, cf. p. 177.

380 In Sarāwānī, the two verbs indeed seem to be the only examples of this phenomenon which are found. Maybe there is some connection with the loss of word-initial y-seen in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.7.2.

Short high vowels

The pronunciation of i and u tends towards e and o in all Balochi dialects spoken in Iran (not only Sarāwānī and Lāšārī), reflecting the CNP pronunciation (SPOONER 1967:58, BARANZEHI 2003:81, Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992). 381 The SBal. and WBal. dialects spoken in Iran differ in this respect from the corresponding dialects spoken across the Pakistani or Afghan border, with the pronunciation from CNP being an areal feature.

Diphthongs

The diphthong ai of other dialects is pronounced ei (SPOONER 1967:58, BARANZEHI 2003:81). According to SPOONER 1967:58, ei, ē 386 It is not clear whether the first member is identical to the place-name Bam (town in Kirman province), which is Bamm in older sources (Pavel Lurje, personal communication). If not, a possible etymology of Bam°in Bampūr would be a connection with MP wan "tree, trunk" (due to the presence of a considerable number of trees and other plants as compared to other regions of Balochistan) with the NP change of wa-> ba and an assimilation of *np > mp, but not the labialisation of the vowel seen in NP bun "trunk, root" (Pavel Lurje, personal communication).

On the other hand, it does not seem impossible either that Bom°is indeed the original variant, "assimilated" to Bam°in official use, due to the much greater importance of the town Bam. If so, Bom°might be explained as (NP, Bal.) bun "fundament" (cf. p. 299) and hint to the Sassanian castle there. For the second member, cf. p. 212.

Vowels + consonants

Nasalisation of vowels

Nasalisation of vowels is very common in Sarāwānī, all long and short vowels also occurring in nasalised variants (BARANZEHI 2003:81) (cf. p. 181, 199, 214), k ã ˙ t "horn" (cf. Ur. kān ˙ t ā "sting, thorn etc."), pointing to a situation quite parallel to that described in BARKER/MENGAL 1969 (cf. p. 213f., 254).

Vn is pronounced as such when followed by a suffix with initial vowel in all Bal. dialects of Iran, but when there is no such suffix, the degree of nasalisation is stronger in Sarawan than in Zahidan and Khash (Carina Jahani, personal communication).

In Lāšārī, a nasal pronunciation of vowels followed by a nasal is likewise present, but always on a subphonemic level (Pākzād Yūsefiyān, personal communication).

gwa-

According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII, XIV gwa-is preferred in Sarāwānī and Lāšārī. Unfortunately, there are no relevant examples in SPOONER 1967[START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF]and Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 2003 to prove this right or wrong. Even guš-/ gwaš-"say" is not found, the verb being replaced by a NP loanword at least in part, thence goy-(sic) / gopt (NP gōy-, CNP gūy-/ guft) in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:105393 and gap kanag "to talk" in SPOONER 1967:61.

Phenomena occurring in loanwords

This chapter treats changes or substitutions of sounds which seem to occur specifically in loanwords. It is possible that some of the phenomena treated here are due to the language/dialect the relevant words have been borrowed from and thus not to be ascribed to Balochi.

Consonants

Regular substitutions of sounds foreign to the Bal. phonemic system are treated in II 1.2. In addition, a number of occasional changes are found in loanwords.

Metatheses

In addition to metatheses found in genuine words (cf. II 3.1.1.2) or in specific dialects (cf. II 3.2.1.1.3, 3.2.2.1), certain sorts of metatheses seem to be found exclusively in loanwords. Similar metatheses have been observed in spoken Dari (e.g. dayrā "river" for NP daryā, tilf "child" for NP-Ar.

¨ tifl, rusxat "holiday" for NP-Ar. rux ¨ sat, pāntus < *pātnus for Russian podnós "tray", DOROFEEVA 1960:17). It is possible that some of the words mentioned below have been borrowed from Dari in their metathesised form.

The consonant clusters which undergo metathesis are not systematically excluded by Bal. phonotactics, and variants of the same words without metathesis do occur.

Reordering of consonant clusters according to decreasing degree of sonority

• alg, al ġ (both EAL 3) "sense, intelligence" is a metathesised variant of agl (for which cf. p. 267) which renders NP-Ar. A similar development may take place in word-internal position:

• DTB aršafī for (SHG) ašrapī from NP ašrafī (a coin);

• halma (SHG), halmā 396 (ABG) occurs besides ˙ h amlā (ABG) "attack" (NP-Ar.

˙ h amla) and shows the same phenomenon also in word-internal position; • the only word with this metathesis which may be genuine is hidrik (GEIGER 1891:422, EAL), idrik (EAL, SHG) "squirrel" > hirdik (DTB, GEIGER 1891:422, EAL), irdik (SHG). The etymology is not known, so the direction of the metathesis is not clear. However, it seems more probable that (h)idrik changed to (h)irdik than vice-versa.

Other metatheses

Conversely, a change of -rK > Kr may be seen in:

• babr-ī-ēn "snow-white" (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41) from barp "snow" (NP loanword; for Tr > Dr, cf. p. 267); the metathesis has the effect of returning to the original order of consonants (Av. vafra-); • čakar (ABG) "circle" might be a metathesised form from čark "wheel" (NP loanword, cf. II 2.2.1.4.2), but a borrowing from Ur. čak(a)r "wheel, circuit" is at least equally likely.

Further metatheses of word-internal consonant clusters are Distant metatheses of consonants are seen e.g. in:

• tarūn (SHG, EAL) "oven" besides tanūr; 398 • nyām "middle" has been borrowed from NP miyān (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559, cf. p. 232f.), the metathesis may imply a popular etymology involving nēm(ag) "half";

396 For the lengthening of word-final -a, cf. p. 189ff.

397 For further discussion of this word, cf. p. 187, 268.

398 This case of metathesis has been noted by BUDDRUSS 1974:33 who seems to assume that the word has been borrowed from NP tanūr (this form is also found in Balochi). Av. tanūra-(hapax) has been borrowed from a Semitic language according to HÜBSCHMANN 1897:155. The (NP and Urdu) variant tandūr is also used in Balochi.

• dušmān "insult" (EVM, SPOONER 1967:67, EAL) might show a metathesis vs. NP dušnām "abuse" (BUDDRUSS 1974:33), maybe motivated by dušman, dužmin "enemy". Alternatively, dušmān may be connected to NP bahnām, MP awāhmān, Prth. awānmān "so-and-so" etc. These have been interpreted (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1990) as showing °*nmānam, acc. of a compound form of "name", so dušmān may be the original form while NP dušnām has been adjusted to nām "name". 399

In the most recent layer of loanwords, metatheses of diverse sorts are met with. FARRELL 1990FARRELL , 2003:180 notes a number of Europ. loanwords from Karachi Balochi which have been adjusted to Bal. word structure by way of metatheses:

• pā ˙ t pōs "passport", palam ˙ t ī "penalty" (football), čīmag < čīgam "chewing gum", singal "signal" (traffic lights), mēlōn < mēnōl "manhole" (all FARRELL 2003:180), pilsin < pinsil "pencil" (FBB).

Assimilations

Apart from assimilation processes noted in genuine words (cf. II 3.1.1.3), loanwords show some more changes which may be classified as assimilations.

CBal. -TL# > -DL#:

In a couple of examples, stops are voiced before a word-final liquid:

• agl (EAL, SHG) might either be an assimilated variant of akl 400 "intelligence" (NP-Ar. c aql) or a borrowing from the CNP pronunciation a ġl, 401 but in the light of the following examples, the former interpretation seems more likely; • babrīēn "snowwhite" < *bapr-(cf. p. 266), cf. barp "snow"; • pigr (BMC, EAL, SHG) vs. pikr "thought" (NP-Ar. fikr; cf. also p. 192); • zigr (BMC, SHG) vs. zikr (ABG, EAL) "memory; chanting of religious formula" (NP-Ar. ¯ zikr); • šugr (EVM, SHG) vs. šukr 402 "thanks" (NP-Ar. šukr) and its derivative šugrāna, šugrānō (EAL, SHG) vs. šukrān (EAL) "Mulla's fee, sacrifice"; • kubl (EAL, SHG) vs. kulp etc. "lock" (cf. p. 207, 265) for NP-Ar. qufl. 399 ELFENBEIN's lemma (1990/II:42) "dušm ˘ an 'enemy, foe'" is misleading; there seems to be no evidence that dušmān means "enemy". 400 For the variant c aqqal, cf. p. 207, for the metathesised form alg, cf. p. 265.

401 For the rendering of NP ġ, cf. p. 64.

402 For the variants šukur, šukar, cf. p. 207.

Other assimilations:

• āzmān (ABG, BMC, EAL, SHG) besides āsmān (BMC, EVM, FBB, EAL, SHG) "sky" (cf. also p. 186, 190) shows an assimilation of the -s-, the hypercorrect reversal of the same is seen in ˘ asmānak(k) for ˘ azmānak(k) "story" (cf. p. 186); • pallūnk (EAL) "ribs" vs. pahlūg etc. (cf. p. 163f., 253)

Dissimilations

Some cases of dissimilation are also found:

• nīwag 404 "fruit" vs. NP mēwa; 405 • kānūd (BMC, EAL), qānūd (ABG), 406 kānūt (EAL) "law" for NP qānūn 407 (borrowed from Greek kan< on-) shows a dissimilation of the second n.

Devoicing of consonants

There is a widespread, but optional devoicing of word-final stops and fricatives in loanwords (cf. KORN 2001:3 19 (HENNING 1947:56).

406 The derivations kānūdī "legal" (BMC, EAL) and kānūd-sāz "lawmaking" (BMC) are also found.

407 NP qānūn is found in kānūn-gō (ABG, BMC) "clerk".

408 ELFENBEIN 1963:365 notes that the (WBal.) dialect Panǰgūrī "tends to unvoice final stops", for which he only gives the example mart "man" vs. mard of other dialects. mard might, however, have been borrowed from NP twice, once in the NP form and once with the common devoicing of the final consonant. mart would be the genuine Bal. form of the word (cf. OInd. márta-), so it is not • šaht, šahd (cf. p. 207, 253) "honey" (NP-Ar. šahd);

• harč (ABG, BMC, EAL), xarč (ABG, EAL), harǐ (SHG) "costs". 410The variants ādam-zād, ummēd, šahd, harǐ and yād as well as numerous further loanwords show that the devoicing is an optional change, probably characteristic of rather recent loanwords.

Inherited Bal. words of similar structure show that the devoicing indeed operates only in loanwords, e.g. • hēd "sweat" (cf. p. 123), pād "foot" (cf. p. 79), šurd "mild" (cf. p. 97), zird "heart" (cf. p. 97).

The above said implies that there are two groups of words where it is impossible to determine whether they are genuine or NP loanwords (cf. I 1.2.1), the first group being those cases where the Bal. sound laws produce the same result as the Pers. ones (e.g. bār "load", bar-"carry", purs-"ask", pušt "back", ǐau "barley", ǐwān "young, good", dān "grain", drōg "lie", sar "head", nēm "half", ham "also", cf. also GEIGER impossible that Panǰgūrī has preserved something which the other dialects have replaced by the loanword. Devoicing does not seem to be a feature of some specific Bal. dialect(s), though.

1891:444). 411 The second group consists of Bal. words which differ from their NP cognate only in that the final consonant is voiceless and the NP one voiced.

Examples from the second group are: 412

• ārt "flour" may be genuine (cf. p. 189) or from NP ārd;

• āzāt "free" may be genuine (Av. āzāta-, Prth. āzād) or from NP āzād (NWIr. form);

• burt (past stem of bar-"carry") may be genuine (PIr. *b ˚ rta-, cf. p. 147) or from NP burd;

• dāt (past stem of day-etc. 413 "give") may be genuine (Av. dāta-, Prth. dād) or from NP dād; • dūt "smoke" may be genuine or from NP dūd (cf. p. 142); • šut (past stem of raw-414 "go") may be genuine (YAv. śuta-, Prth. šud) Since Dari shows devoicing of final consonants, too (DOROFEEVA 1960:17, ELFENBEIN 1989:640), this tendency may have come from Dari (cf. also Psht. ziyāt "more"). Some words might have been borrowed from Dari and therefore would not show a Bal. devoicing process. However, the evidence does not suggest that all words from the group above have been borrowed precisely from the Persian of Afghanistan.

411 For more information about the examples, cf. the index (V 2). 412 A further example is rōt "river" (OP rautah-, OInd. srótas-, Prth. rōd) which is only cited by GEIGER 1890:144 from a British Museum manuscript and by EAL. Otherwise, the surely borrowed rōd is used. rōd (DTB) is the regular EBal. variant of rōd; GEIGER's (1890:144) interpretation as a cognate of OInd. ród h as-"dam, bank" is not necessary. If rōt exists and is not to be interpreted as a borrowing, it shows that OIr. hr-is reduced to r-as in MP and Parthian.

413 The present stems day-(BMC, SHG, EAL: Raxšānī, Coastal dialects, NAWATA 1981:), dah-(EAL: Lāšārī), da-(EVM, EAL: Raxšānī, Sarāwānī, Coastal dialects, Kēčī) must have been borrowed from Persian (note that day-shows the result expected for NP from OIr. dadā-, while NP has the NWIr. variant dah-occuring also in Parthian), the variants dēy-(ABG, FBB), dē-(DTB, EAL: Kēčī, EBal.), dī-(EAL: Kēčī, EBal.) may also have been borrowed from Ur. dē-nā, cf. KORN 2001:3 13 . It is also possible that the variation of stems is (to some extent at least) modelled on that of bay-"become" (for which cf. p. 78).

One motivation for the devoicing in loanwords might be the fact that Balochi has voiceless consonants in cases where other languages, notably NP and MP, have voiced ones, e.g. Bal. māt "mother", pit "father" vs. MP mād, pid, respectively. If one assumes argumenti causa that e.g. gurk "wolf" is genuine Balochi, speakers might note that NP has gurg and conclude that "the Persians have -g where we say -k". When borrowing e.g. NP marg "death" (assuming argumenti causa that it is a loanword), they might want to assimilate the word to Bal. speech habits by devoicing the word-final consonant to give mark. 416 The Bal. tendency of strengthening word-final consonants can also be seen in the secondary gemination of word-final consonants in loanwords (cf. II 3.3.1.5).

Gemination of consonants

There is a considerable number of cases of gemination (mainly of word-final consonants) in loanwords. 417 Just like in the case of gemination in inherited words, the extent of gemination depends on the dialect (or author of a given work). BMC is the source with most instances of gemination, so in what follows the examples are from BMC unless otherwise indicated. As in the case of genuine words, geminates in loanwords are particularly common in monosyllables and only occur after short vowels. 418 It goes without saying that when a word with geminate is borrowed, the geminated consonants are often taken over from the original.

Gemination occurs in loanwords from all languages, e.g. (to give but a few examples)

• NP(-Ar.): hukūmatt 419 "government", bačakk 420 "son" (NP bačča);

• Turkic: uluss 421 (BMC, EAL) "people", bairakk 422 "flag"; It seems that every consonant can be geminated, with the possible exception of ˙ r , h and the foreign phonemes f, ġ for which no example of gemination has been found. In addition, geminated w and y are only found in word-internal position (see below). 433 Maybe waǐǐ (BMC, EAL, SHG) represents NP-Ar. waǐh "face, method, cause, privileges" which is used in Urdu also with the meaning "salary".

434 hašš (EAL, SHG; EVM āšš is a misprint for ašš as the references to Zarubin's texts show, EAL āšš is therefore to be deleted) has probably been borrowed from some other Ir. idiom, cf. Bashkardi yaš, waš, Kurd. aş (ELFENBEIN 1963:15). With regard to the h-which seems to be secondary in Balochi, one might assume a borrowing from Kurdish or some related idiom (cf. II 2.4.1.5), even though Kurmanji does not show h-in this word. ELFENBEIN's etymology (1963:15) Examples for nn: minnat "favour" (NP-Ar. minnat), munnā (FBB) "child" (Ur. munnā "darling"), tunn "thirst" (from an OIr. consonant cluster, cf. p. 127), annūn "right now" (cf. p. 202, 214), cases of family language are also found, e.g. nunnuk "baby".

442 For žž, only the following words of uncertain etymology have been found: ġažž-/ gažž-(BMC, EAL, SHG) "swell with rage, be angry", hēžž-(EAL) "whizz", hīžžag (EAL, SHG) "howling of the wind", perhaps to be connected to ižžag (EVM) "hiss, flutter"; its origin might be onomatopoetical. For ǐuzz-"move" and for ǐurrāb "stocking", cf. p. 209.

443 attar also shows an anaptyctical vowel (cf. p. 206).

444 DTB has badragā with lengthening of word-final -a (cf. p. 190f.). The word is likely to derive from Turk. badraq "flag, section of an army" (thence also NP-Turk. bairaq "flag"), cf. DOERFER II:279f.; badrakka may have been borrowed from Pnj. badrakka.

445 DTB has čab h a. According to EAL 27, the word has been borrowed from Lhd. čh a ¯ bā.

• maččī 446 (FBB, EAL) "fish"; puǐǐ-/ puǐǐit 447 (ABG, BMC, FBB, EAL, SHG) "arrive"; čašš-(BMC, EAL) "taste, sip" (NP čaš-, cf. p. 114); kīssag 448 (FBB, SHG) "pocket" (NP-Ar. kīsa); azziyat (EVM) "offence" (NP-Ar. a ¯ ziyat "molesting"); • čakarr-"turn, be dizzy" (Si. čakaru "dizziness"); balluk "grandmother" (Br. balla, cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1948:283).

It is noteworthy that the gemination is also found in quite a number of borrowed verbs, e.g. (in addition to those just mentioned): The (sources dealing with) Eastern dialects show but few examples: the only words with final geminate in DTB are ones where the geminate has been borrowed durr "pearl; excellent" (NP-Ar. durr), rabb "God" (NP-Ar. rabb), sill "brick" (Pnj. (DTB) sil), kull "whole" (NP-Ar. kull), k h ill 452 "axe of millstone" (Ind.), mudd "harvest; period" (NP-Ar. muddat "time"). These words are cited with geminates in all sources which have them.

maččī has been borrowed from Si. mač h ī; the other dialects have Pers. māhīg (cf. p. 136).

GCD has puǐ-/ puǐi\-. It has generally been assumed [START_REF] Gilbertson | The Balochi Language. A Grammar and Manual[END_REF]:35, FARRELL 2003:183) that the word has been borrowed from Si. pahuča ˙ n u / puhča ˙ n u "arrive", but it seems much more likely that it comes from Si. pu ¯ ǐa ˙ n u, Lhd. puǐǐa ˙ n "to be finished, arrive at" (Georg Buddruss, personal communication, cf. TURNER 1966:473).

For secondary addition of -ag, cf. II 2.4.4.1.

For čar-"graze" and čarr-"turn", cf. p. 84. In the case of tar(r)-"turn", one may suppose that an analogy to čar(r)-is at work, motivated by the similar meaning, but a borrowing from Urdu is also possible (cf. p. 150).

GCD has čik-/ čiki\-; the word has been borrowed from Si. čh ika ˙ n u (EAL: Lhd.).

The past stem is išt (NP hišt, hilīd-). The Bal. product of PIE *ǵ+t would be št as well, but it seems more probable that the past stem has been borrowed along with the present stem, although a change *(h)uršt > *(h)iršt > išt is not excluded for Balochi either (see II 2.3.2.1, 3.1.2.3.1). All sources note this Bal. verb without h-, with the exception of Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:89 who has hel-/ hešt (standing for /hil-/ hišt/, cf. II 3.2.4.2).

The word may have been borrowed from Ur. k h il "nail, pin".

Other loanwords in EBal. sources do not exhibit final geminates although one might expect them, e.g. hak "rights" from NP-Ar. ˙ h aqq. ABG has quite a number of words with final geminates, 453 but none of these show Eastern dialectal features. Note that geminated consonants in postvocalic position do not yield fricatives as simple consonants do (cf. p. 228), e.g. dim. suffix -ik(k), pakār "necessary, useful".

If the assumption is correct that Bal. geminates are either due to an OIr. consonant cluster or to the borrowing process, it allows in certain cases to decide whether a given Bal. word has been borrowed: words which (from the viewpoint of Bal. historical phonology) might be genuine and differ from their NP cognate only in the gemination of a consonant would be likely to have been borrowed. The absence of gemination should, however, rather not be used to identify a word as genuine, since (the notation of) geminates depends very much on the respective sources and dialects.

Weakening of consonants 454

Voicing of word-initial consonants 455

In some words, the word-initial consonant appears voiced instead of being voiceless: • bādšāh 456 "king" for usual pādšāh (from NP pādišāh); • bažm (EAL) "wool" for usual (NP) pašm (for which cf. p. 178, 207); • guǐ (EVM, EAL), guǐā [START_REF] Sergej | Grammatičeskij očerk jazyka beludžej Sovetskogo Sojuza[END_REF]:74, NAWATA 1981:31, EAL) for kuǐā 457 "where"; guǐām (NAWATA 1981:12) for kuǐām 458 "which one". (DTB etc., MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48). kut h ān is unlikely to contain an element *tān (thus ELFENBEIN 1990/II:78), but to reflect CBal. *kutām with the -n taken from the (EBal.) pronoun ān "that" (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48). If so, EBal. kut h ān must have been borrowed from SWBal. (otherwise one would expect †ku\ān) and be cognate with NP kudām (Prth. kadām, Sogd. kt'm, Av. katāma-); its -u-is taken from kuǐā "where" (HORN 1893:188).

The reason of the voicing is not clear. One might assume (for all the examples above) that there is some sort of assimilation to the voiced consonant(s) in the rhyme of the syllable (Ralf-Peter Ritter, personal communication). 459

Voicing and vocalisation of labials

In a number of examples, word-internal voiced labials are observed where one might expect voiceless ones. There does not seem to be a sure case of a genuine word. 460

p > w:

w for p appears in several words found in Eastern Balochi (GEIGER 1891:434): • EBal. s(a)wē\, swēs (cf. p. 206) besides safē\ (SWBal. spēt etc.) "white", the word has probably been borrowed from Persian, cf. p. 90; • kawinǐar (GLADSTONE 1874) "partridge" vs. kapinǐar (SHG) is probably from some Ind. language (cf. OInd. kapiñjala-, ELFENBEIN 1990/II:82); 461 • EBal. (h)awōx (MAYER 1910, EAL) besides hapōk "co-wife" (cf. p. 307) might have been influenced by NP hawū. 462 There are some words which maybe do not show a substitution of w for p/f, but are likely to have been borrowed from a language which has -w-(or b):

• šawān(k), šwānag vs. šupānk "shepherd" (maybe from Kurdish, cf. p. 225); • nawāsag "great-grandchild" vs. napāt-(NP nawāsa, cf. p. 89); • wāb (LEECH 1838, GLADSTONE 1874, DAMES 1881, DTB) "sleep" is not a voiced variant of *wāf, 463 but rather the regular EBal. form of SWBal. wāb, which in turn has been borrowed from NP x w āb (cf. p. 123).

459 SOKOLOV 1956:74 assumes a sandhi phenomenon for guǐ etc., which commonly directly precedes the verb, e.g. ta guǐā šutai? "Where did you go?" (example kindly provided by Lutz Rzehak). It is not clear whether such an explanation would match all examples, though. Similar phenomena have been observed e.g. in NP bādafrāh "revenge, punishment" for †pādafrāh (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:36).

460 The only case of b for p in a genuine word is kaba ġ "to fall" (ABG vs. kapag of all other sources, cf. p. 77), the reason for the voicing is not clear. For b from p next to a liquid, cf. p. 267.

461 For NP kabk, see below, for the variant kapīnǐar, cf. p. 192.

462 Prth. has <'bwg> according to DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:15a; the word might just as well be Middle Persian, though (thus HENNING 1940:18). The reading abōg seems to be taken from Henning, who, in that article, has MP and Prth. b, d, g for OIr. postvocalic voiceless stops, so it would be abōg following the transcription system otherwise used in DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004. 463 The existence of wāf is not sure: it is found in LEECH 1838 in the phrase wāf šu\a (besides wāw), which (if not an error) might show an assimilation to the following voiceless sibilant.

For those cases which show w/u for NP f in anteconsonantal position, a borrowing from some NP variant which changes f > w in this position (e.g. Dari, cf. DOROFEEVA 1960:17) is probable: 464 • augān (BMC, EAL, SHG) "Afghan" (NP af ġān, Dari aw ġān);

• kauš (BMC, FBB, EAL, SHG) "shoe" (loanword according to HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556, NP kafš, Dari kawš); 465 • nabs 466 (DAMES 1881:123) "pulse" (NP-Ar. nafs "soul", HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556).

b > w: 467 In a couple of borrowed words, word-final or anteconsonantal b appears as w or as u / ō, forming a diphthong with the preceding vowel. This would seem to reflect the EBal. form of the word (cf. p. 228), but the attestation suggests that the phenomenon is not limited to Eastern Balochi. It is quite possible that the relevant cases have been borrowed from Dari which regularly shows ˘ ab > ˘ au /_C,# (DOROFEEVA 1960:16f.). 468

• auzār (BMC, EAL) "tool" (NP abzār, afzār); 469 • sauz (ABG, BMC, SHG) vs. sabz (FBB, SHG), EBal. sabz (DTB) "green"; 470 • kaug (BMC, DTB, EAL, SHG), kauk (EAL) vs. kabg (EAL, SHG), kabk (EAL) "partridge" (NP kabk). 471 ABG has R zZ-, transcribed -āō, in all cases of word-final -āb; if this is not a misinterpretation of some sort, this might indicate some subdialectal pronunciation of EBal. -āb: • ˙ h isāō "calculation" (other sources hisāb, NP-Ar. ˙ h isāb), xarāō "bad" 472 (NP-Ar. xarāb), šarāō "wine, alcohol" (otherwise (NP-Ar.) šarāb), kabāō "roast meat" (otherwise (NP-Ar.) kabāb);

¬>-(EBal. -īb) appears as -yō in ABG: • ¨ tabīyō "physician" (SWBal. tabīb, NP-Ar. ¨ tabīb), zayō "ornament" (SWBal. zēb) 473 , c ayō "mistake" (otherwise aib, NP-Ar. c aib), garīyō "poor" (SWBal. garīb, NP-Ar. ġarīb "strange").

A particular case is warnā "young" (all sources), probably a cognate of NP burnā "young man", Av. ap e r e nāiiu-"underage". A derivation of the Bal. word from PIr. *ap ˚ rnā ˘ i a ˘ u -as assumed by MOSHKALO 1991:21 seems rather unlikely here since it presupposes p > w, otherwise unattested * ˚ r > ar (cf. p. 143f.) and the preservation of OIr. rn (cf. II 2.2.3.3). It seems more probable that warnā has been borrowed from NP burnā (which in turn is a loanword from Av. ap e r e nāiiu-, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 1978KLINGENSCHMITT :95, 2000:217):217), although it has to be admitted that the details remain unclear.

Voicing of word-final consonant groups 474

In very few examples, word-final consonant clusters are voiced:

• gužg "root" if existing and if from PIr. * ˘ u ˚ ržaka-(cf. p. 132, 144); • gōžd (GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881, DTB) "meat" for usual gōšt. 475 The informant who supplied gužg was from Noshke (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:39), i.e. from a WBal. speaking area. The second example is found in EBal. sources. 475 MP/NP gōšt may be derived from *ga ˘ u š-sti-"cut (piece of) meat", the second member being a ti-stem from (OInd.) √dā "cut"; if so, it is a direct cognate of Khot. ggūśta-, but not of Psht. gwaˇ ˙ s a, which may be derived from *ga ˘ u -štra- (GERSHEVITCH 1976:64). Alternatively, the Pers. and the Psht. word have been derived from *ga ˘ u -gžd h i-"eating of meat" (cf. OInd. sá-gd h i-"common eating", KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:216 86 ). In any case, Bal. gōšt may have been borrowed from NP. ˘ u -in an otherwise Persian word: 477 • Gwahrām (name of a hero) might have been borrowed from MP Wahrām or modelled on NP Bahrām (cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1937:347 1 ); • gīāb, gīābān "desert" (NP bīābān, MP, Prth. wiyābān, for which cf. JUNKER 1929:143f.) must have been borrowed (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41) regardless of whether it goes back to Av. vīuuāp(a)-"plundering" or not; • gēš "more" has been borrowed from MP wēš, NP bēš (its derivation is somewhat unclear) according to GERSHEVITCH 1964:87; • since all numbers are likely to have been borrowed from NP (cf. p. 81), gīst "twenty" may also fit here; on the other hand, it is not entirely impossible that gīst is a survival of the inherited Bal. numeral system (cf. KORN, frthc. 3). MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41, 1937:347 interprets these cases as showing a substitution of the typical Bal. outcomes of ˘ u -for NP word-initial b-. The assumption of this somewhat problematic process does not seem necessary, however, since the words may have been borrowed from MP, i.e. before the change of w-> b-. 478 Similarly, gwāz "fathom" need not represent a borrowing from NP bāz(a) (related to bāzū "arm") as MORGENSTIERNE (1937:347) • ākūtt 484 (SHG) "ruby" vs. yākūt (EAL) "precious stone" (NP yāqūt, NP/MP yākand, Prth. yākund); 485 • atīm (EVM, BUDDRUSS 1988:70)486 vs. yatīm (DTB, EAL, SHG) "orphan" (NP-Ar. yatīm).

t > ˙ t

It would not be surprising to find ˙ t instead of t, parallel to the occasional changes of d > ˙ d and r > ˙ r found in some not necessarily borrowed words (cf. p. 182f.). However, the loanword SHG ˙ t ōp (written ^¬V ¢ with missing vocalisation mark) "canon" besides tōp (NP tōp, originally from Turkic, DOERFER II:948ff.) is the only example found so far.

In addition, ˙ t is regularly used for European t in English loanwords (cf. p. 67) as it is in Ind. languages (FARRELL 2003:178), and probably the words in question are taken over from there (presumably from Urdu), e.g. ˙ t ika ˙ t ( ˙ t ) "ticket" (cf. p. 271), ˙ d āk ˙ t ar "doctor", pār ˙ t ī "party (celebration)" (FBB) etc.

Peculiar cases

As in NP, the Ar. word waqt is rendered in Balochi in a number of different ways, not only in the way one would expect from the usual rules applied to Ar. loanwords:

• the usual rendering of q with k (cf. p. 65) is seen in wakt (MARSTON 1877, BMC, EAL, FBB, BUDDRUSS 1988:82); • the NP and Psht. pronunciation waxt is seen in waxt (BMC, DTB, EAL); • x is replaced by h as usual (cf. p. 65) with an irregular voicing to bring about wahd (PIERCE 1874, MARSTON 1877, BMC, EAL, SHG) which is the basis for WBal. wād, wāhd and wad (cf. p. 253f.).

484 For the gemination of word-final consonants in SHG, cf. p. 242.

485 Prth. yākund occurs together with other (semi-)precious stones in M 229 R i 9-15: hō radan wuzurg xōž pāy, čē-d padgrift až šāh rōšn ō hawīn dwādes yākund ud haft bilōr argāw "Protect well the big jewel which you received from the king of light, the twelve hyacinths and seven noble crystals" (transcription by COLDITZ 2000:280, German translation by RECK 1992:345). The origin of the word is Greek " u < akin\o# (HENNING 1937:89) which denotes a semiprecious stone of blue colour. For bilōr, cf. p. 203., for Prth. <xwj>, cf. p. 132.

Vowels

Loss of vowels

In addition to MIr. vowel elision (cf. II 3.1.2.1), and phenomena of loss of vowels typical for some dialects (cf. II 3.2.1.2, 3.2.2.2, 3.2.3.2), there is a rather systematic loss of vowels found chiefly in seemingly rather recent loanwords.

In most cases, it is the vowel a of non-first open syllables which is lost, e.g. 487 • aimnī (ABG) "security, safety" from Ur. aimanī; 488 • aulī (BMC, FBB) "first", auliyā (SHG) "excellent" vs. awal "first"; 489 • badlī (ABG) "exchange", badl-(BMC, EAL) "change" vs. badal "exchange"; 490 • paisla(g) (BMC), fais(i)la (EAL) "decision" (NP-Ar. fai ¨ sala); 491 • ǐãglī "wild" vs. ǐangal "forest" (cf. p. 244); • sadka (BMC), ¨ sazqā (ABG, cf. p. 191) "alms, charity" vs. (SHG) sadak(k)a (NP-Ar.

¨ sadaqa); • sangtī (ABG) "loyalty" vs. sangat(t) "friend" (Urdu loanword, cf. p. 272); 492 • šāmlī (ABG) "included" from NP-Ar. šāmil "including"; • harkat (EAL), arkat (EVM) "motion" 493 vs. NP-Ar. ˙ h arakat.

487 darǐa(g) (ABG, BMC, SHG) "degree, position" and ramzān "Ramadan (name of a month)" need not show a Balochi syncopation vs. NP-Ar. daraǐa, ramażān, respectively, since Urdu has dar(a)ǐa, ram(a)żān. Parallel cases are żāmnī (ABG) "guarantee, bail" which need not be derived from Bal. zāmin (ABG, EAL) "bail, security" but may have been borrowed directly from Ur. żām(i)nī (NP-Ar. żāmin; Elfenbein's connection (EAL 165) of Bal. zām ˘ ın with Av. z e māna-is not correct), and ġal ¨ tī (ABG) "misunderstanding" which corresponds to Ur. ġal(a) ¨ tī "mistake, misapprehension" vs. ġala ¨ t (ABG), ġalat (DTB, EAL), galat (SHG) "wrong, mistake" (in Urdu, the word is used both as adj. and as a noun, thence probably the Bal. semantics), all from NP-Ar. ġala ¨ t.

488 Ur. aimanī is based on NP aiman "safe, secure", which occurs in Urdu in the form ēmin. ēmin has been borrowed into Balochi as ēmin (SHG, EAL), according to EAL also ēman, hēmin. BMC, EAL have ēmanī "security" which is derived from ēmin / ēman.

489 From NP-Ar. awwal. The adverb awalā (BMC, EVM) "at first" might be a still younger copying of NP-Ar. awwalan, cf. also V 1.4.

490 From NP-Ar. badal. FBB badalī "exchange" may have been formed anew on the basis of badal.

For the anthropologically interesting use of badal as a name, cf. BADALKHAN 2003:286.

491 For further variants, cf. p. 191, for the -g added by BMC, cf. p. 165.

492 Since sangtī means "loyalty", the word is unlikely to have been borrowed from Ur. sangatī, which means "comrade" and is not found without the a of the second syllable, but will rather represent a Bal. formation from the Ur. loanword sangat(t).

493 The meaning "mischief" given by EAL (no source given) is surprising.

Elision of a vowel (not only of a) in the first syllable is seen in: 494 • brōbarī (ABG) "equality" vs. barōbar (cf. p. 286) "equal" (NP barābar(ī));

• adga, agdar (EVM, for the metathesis, cf. p. 266) vs. diga(r) (BMC, FBB, cf. p. 195) "other" (NP diga(r)); • krāb (FBB) "bad" vs. karāb etc. (NP-Ar. xarāb "broken", cf. p. 66); • klīt (EAL) vs. kilīt (cf. p. 237, 269) "key" (NP kilīd).

Syncopation of ˘

aya > ˘ ai in NP loans is found several times: • āindag (ABG) "future" vs. NP āyanda;

• bāid (BMC), bāīd (EVM), mē-bāīt (EVM, cf. p. 269) vs. bāyad (SHG, NAWATA 1981:22) "(to be) necessary" (NP bāyad); 495 • h ˘ aik, haig, āig vs. āyag 496 "egg" (NP xāya); • in sā'ig, sāhig, sāī "shadow", hamsā(h)ig "neighbour" (cf. p. 108f.) vs. NP (ham)sāya, āi is perceived as a hiatus liable to be prevented by h (cf. p. 162).

Vowel elision in a closed syllable has been found in • āč "fire" (besides genuine ās, for which cf. p. 89) is most probably a syncopated form of borrowed NP ātaš (BARTHOLOMAE 1885:133); 497 • ba ġl gir-(DTB) vs. bagal kan-(BMC) "embrace" (NP ba ġal "armpit", cf. p. 292); • palk (EAL), p h alk (DTB) "time, moment" vs. NP-Ar. falak "circuit, sky"; • šarp (ABG) vs. šarap/f (BMC, SHG) "honour, hospitality" (NP-Ar. šaraf). It is possible that the vowel elision took place in a form where the vowel in question was in an open syllable (e.g. obl. case, which is also used in locative function).

494 brinǐ (GEIGER 1891:446, EAL, SHG) "rice" (cf. p. 134) and brinǐ "copper" (GEIGER 1891:446), "copperware" (EAL), "nickel" (SHG) need not show elision of a vowel vs. NP birinǐ "rice", birinǐ "bronze, brass", as the words may have been borrowed from MP brinǐ. In this case, BMC, DTB birinǐ "rice" might come from a later layer of borrowings or a contamination with the NP form. For the etymology of both words, cf. HORN 1893:48, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:27f. For prāh, cf. p. 117.

495 bāid is used as an adj. in BMC: bāid int "it is necessary", whereas in Afghanistan and Turkmenistan, the construction is exactely parallel to the NP one, e.g. (NAWATA 1981:22): šumā bāyad ōdā šutēnit "you should have gone there" (for the irrealis suffix, cf. p. 340). NP bāyad is likely to derive from *apa-a ˘ i a-"be missing" (TREMBLAY 2003:127).

496 For more details and a discussion of the probable loanword status, cf. p. 108f., 156f.

497 NP ātaš (MPZ ātaxš) has been borrowed from Av. ātarš (nom.sg. of ātar-, cf. HORN 1893:3, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:217), and the same is also possible, but unlikely for āč. ELFENBEIN's note (1990/II:2) about āč "< *āt-(i)š" is not clear to me. āčiš "fire, burning ashes" seems to be a contamination of NP ātiš with āč (ELFENBEIN 1991:112).

Changes in quantity

In addition to the cases discussed in II 3.1.2.2, the following changes in vowel quantity seem to be limited to loanwords:

Metathesis of vowel quantity

A small number of loanwords show lengthening of the vowel in one syllable and shortening in the other:

• ǐanāwar besides ǐānwar "animal"; it is most probably composed of ǐān (cf. p. 135) and bar-"carry", the w shows that it has been borrowed from NP ǐānwar; • kāsib vs. SHG kasīp "turtle, tortoise": kāsib only occurs in PIERCE 1874 and in EAL (with the remark: Coastal dialects; maybe taken from PIERCE 1874). A genuine Bal. word should show š (cf. p. 129f.) for OInd. śy (kaśyápa-), Av. -sii-(kasiiapa-) as does NP (which should have s) kašaf. The Bal. word might have been influenced by Ind. words (cf. e.g. Ur. kasyap, kaśyap "a kind of fish or deer"), but the details are not clear. For additional Ir. cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:75.

Monophthongisation

The cases are not numerous and might belong to specific dialects only. ē, ī for ai:

• xērāt (FBB) "alms" for regular hairāt, xairāt and kēriat, (h)ēriat (both FARRELL 2003:176) "healthy" for xairiat belong to the sphere of religious expressions and have so far only been reported from Karachi (cf. p. 65, 66); • ( c )īd (ABG, EAL; otherwise aid) "holiday" and qīmat (ABG), kīmat (GEIGER 1891:453, EAL) "value" are more likely to have been borrowed from NP (same form in Urdu) c īd, qīmat, respectively, than from CNP c eid, qeimat. ō for au: • k (h) ōr "river, ravine" (ABG) may be from Lhd. k h ōr,498 alternatively, it can be a monophthongised variant of possibly inherited k (h) aur (BMC, DTB, FBB, SHG).499

Changes in quality 500

The degree of variation of vowels is even greater in loanwords than in genuine words (for these, cf. II 3.1.2.3). Unlike some of the cases discussed in II 3.3.2.2, I have not found corresponding forms in Urdu etc. which would explain the vowel quality.

Neutralisation

As a often functions as neutral vowel in Balochi, 501 it appears in some cases where the etymology would suggest a different vowel:

• adālat(t) for NP-Ar. c idālat "justice" (cf. p. 63);

• ulas (ABG) for usual ulus(s) "people" (cf. p. 271);

• ġarūr (ABG) "pride, haughtiness" for NP-Ar. ġurūr;

• qa ¨ sūr-dār (ABG) "culprit, accused" from NP-Ar. qu ¨ sūr "guilt"; • c āqabat (ABG) "future" for NP-Ar. c āqibat (for further variants, see below); • kamak (EAL) for kumak(k) "help" (cf. p. 193, 272).

Palatalisation

In genuine words, i for a and sometimes also u is seen next to a palatal consonant (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1). There are some cases of loanwords where the motivation for the palatalisation is less clear: • binā (EVM, EAL) "beginning" for NP-Ar. banā' "foundation"; 502 • ˙ h itar 503 "fear" (ABG) for hatar "danger" (EAL) from NP-Ar. xa ¨ tar "danger"; • gardin (ABG, BMC, FBB, EAL, SHG) vs. DTB, GCD gardan "neck";504 • nimāz "prayer" (NP namāz, cf. p. 193); • the WBal. formation of the infinitive by adding -in to the past stem (vs. the -ag suffixed to the pres. stem in the others) is likely to have been influenced by, if not borrowed from, the parallel formation in NP (past stem + -an).

500 For aimnī, ēmanī "security", cf. p. 282. On the treatment of word-inital ya-, cf. p. 255, 281f.

501 For a similar phenomenon in EBal., cf. p. 236f.

502 The parallel palatalisation process has taken place in Georg. bina "flat" and Dhivehi bina + k ˚ r "build", both borrowed from the same NP-Ar. word (Jost Gippert, personal communication).

503 It is interesting that the word is written AE•≈ , indicating knowledge about the origin of the h as x (cf. p. 65), but not of the t as ¨ t.

Labialisation u for a or even i is found mainly when next to a labial consonant or in case of u in a neighbouring syllable. There are three cases of labialisation in possibly inherited words:

• rōmust (SHG) vs. rōmast (DTB) "rumination", OInd. romant h a-(cf. p. 95);

• muǐ, muž "fog" < * mižā-(cf. p. 93, 229);

• if muzg "back of head" is the same word as mazg, maǐg "brain" (cf. p. 88), it might be another example. The remaining cases of labialisation are loanwords:

• ākubat (BMC) for ākibat (SHG), axibat 505 (EAL) "future" from NP-Ar. c āqibat (cf. also p. 93, 201, 285); • uškumag (EVM) for šikam (ABG, SHG) "stomach" (cf. p. 170, 204); • tumun (SHG) for normal tuman "tribe" (cf. p. 187); • sundūk (BMC) for sandūq (GCD) "box" (cf. p. 163); • (y)āsumī (SHG) for āsamī etc. "jasmine" (cf. p. 280).

The reason for the appearance of u in the following words is not clear: • ārunǐ, ārung "elbow" vs. NP āranǐ (cf. p. 292); • arzun "millet" (cf. p. 97); • ġultī 506 "mistake" vs. ġal ¨ tī "misunderstanding" (both ABG, cf. p. 282). A special sort of labialisation is seen in • barōbar (for the variant barēbar, cf. p. 202) for barābar "equal"; 507 • mōbatt (BMC) 508 for mābatt "love" (from NP-Ar. ma ˙ h abbat).

Dipthongisation

An unetymological diphthong is seen in the following cases:

• aiǐzī (ABG) "humility" could somehow be formed from NP-Ar. c aǐz (in Urdu also c iǐz), c āǐizī "weakness";

• airād (ABG) vs. īrād (EAL) "objection" (NP-Ar. īrād).

505 The short a-may be a misprint since none of the other variants (nor of the other sources) has a-.

506 The transcription has <u> which means ū in the system used in ABG, but the Ar. orthography (with vocalisation mark) indicates u; ABG obviously assumes the existence of two words both written Áµae¯.

507 Since NP barābar may be interpreted as "breast-to-breast" (BAILEY 1979:376b), the Bal. word is a loanword (cf. p. 99, 294 for the Bal. cognate of NP bar). Cf. also p. 283.

III. Lexicon

The purpose of this chapter is twofold: first, exemplary parts of the Balochi lexicon are presented to give an impression of the variability of the sources the Bal. words come from.1 It will be seen that the variation is not found between the dialects only, but also within them. Second, the chapter should provide a picture of the different layers of loanwords (Persian of diverse stages, Indic of diverse sources, other languages) which overlap to a considerable degree, not always along dialect borders.

In the tables which follow, the Balochi word(s) for the concept under discussion are given in their SWBal. form. 2 Where several designations are in use, the sources are given. 3 The words are grouped into the following categories: presumably genuine Balochi words (noted as "old"); 4 words where the sound laws of Balochi and of NP would lead to the same result so that it is impossible to decide whether it has been borrowed from NP or genuine (noted as "= NP", cf. p. 19); words of uncertain origin ("?"); and loanwords from NP ("NP"), (NP-)Arabic ("Ar."), Ind. languages ("Ind."), further specified if possible ("Si.", "Ur." etc.) or other languages. A word derived from a NP loanword is noted as "(NP)". Where a borrowing is likely, but the source not sure, a question mark is added. For references to discussion of words in the previous chapters and of those not discussed yet, cf. the index in V.2.

Body parts

It is generally believed in historical linguistics that among those words which tend to be preserved rather than borrowed, the terms in the semantic field of body parts figure among the important ones. The following table shows, however, that this is only partly true for Balochi: genuine words and borrowed ones form a mixture which moreover varies significantly from one dialect to the other. The languages from which material is taken include not only NP and a range of Ind. languages, but also Arabic and Brahui.

The share of genuine words in the field of terms for body parts is much lower than one might expect (less than half of the vocabulary), but still high with respect to the rate found in other fields. The motivation for borrowing is not always clear, neither are semantic differences always noticeable; it might seem quite surprising to find e.g. the use of borrowed kōn ˙ d "knee" besides inherited word zān. 6 EVM and GCD also give the meaning "self" which is also the meaning given in BMC, DTB and SHG. ǐind has been borrowed from Sindhi/Lahnda (GILBERTSON 1925/I:77 etc.), cf. Lhd. ǐ¯ı dā (TURNER 1966:289; thanks are due to Georg Buddruss for drawing my attention to this connection).

7 Although it is commonly assumed that pōst has been borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:458 etc.), this is not a necessary assumption, since OP pavastā-"parchment" with which NP pōst is connected (BRANDENSTEIN/MAYRHOFER 1964:140, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:215) EAL has ma ġz, FBB magaz, ABG ma ġaz. Cf. also p. 88, 207.

In EAL, the meaning is "hair tress", in SHG "women's long hair". EVM has māparr "tresses", maybe a popular etymology with NP parr "feather". The etymology of m ˘ ahpar is not clear. Maybe there is some connection with Zaz. por, Kurd. por' "hair", but the question remains to be solved. Note that the variant māhpar is attested not only in BMC and EAL, but also in ABG and SHG. It is thus not likely to be a case of hypercorrect WBal. āh which results from a misinterpretation of the WBal. process ah > ā (cf. p. 252f.). This word means "men's long hair, curls" (for a photo, cf. MATHESON 1967:54a) in SHG and EAL; in this meaning DTB has gulālax, SWBal. variants are gulālik, gulāluk according to EAL. gulg etc. might be connected with NP gulūla "bullet, ball of thread", Kurd. gulok "ball" (perhaps also OInd. gláu-"swelling, bump", HORN 1893:207, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:94f., EWAia I:511). SHG has pu ˙ t in the meaning "feather", EAL has both meanings. Bal. pu ˙ t "hair; feather" has probably been borrowed from Br. pu ˙ t "hair" (EMENEAU/BURROW 1972, ROSSI 1979:109); a semantic shift from "hair" to "feather" is not improbable. SHG (besides hanīčag) also has the EBal. variant anīšag (replacing EBal. -a ġ by SWBal. -ag).

EVM and EAL have pēšānī "brow; destiny"; cf. p. 140. Also used for "pupil of the eye" (BMC, EAL). In DTB, dīd means "sight". For the notion of "pupil of the eye" in Ir. languages, cf. FILIPPONE 1995. ).

rakk appears as "cheek" in BMC. It is not clear whether rak(k) might be connected with rak(k) "protection" (which is an Ind. loanword); one might think of Homeric ) erko@ òd< ontwn "enclosure of the teeth [i.e. mouth]", though.

The retroflex might indicate an Ind. origin of the word, but no suitable form has been found. Maybe there is also some connection with NP lunǐ "lip, cheek". GEIGER 1891:421 connects kalak(k) with NP kala "face, cheek" (its origin is not clear), ELFENBEIN 1961:94 4 notes further Ir. cognates (Bashkardi kalak "chin" and Yidgha kyeliko "jaw", which need not be an Ind. loanword as MORGENSTIERNE 1938:221a assumes). Sulaimani Kurd. kalaka "flank" is rather to be connected with NP kalk "side of the body" (cf. ROSSI 1979:101). For the semantics, cf. German Backe which denotes both "cheek" and "buttock".

As DAMES 1891:80 remarks, gal has probably been borrowed from Si. ¯ galu.

According to ELFENBEIN 1985:237, DTB zanāx "is an error for zanax (LW < NP)". Although this is indeed possible, its attestation only in an EBal. source would be surprising. NAWATA 1981:37 has bāsk in the meaning "elbow", cf. also p. 166, 168.

dast is also used for "arm" in a number of sources. Bal. dast, Zaz., Kurd. dest etc. seem to have been borrowed from NP dast (GEIGER 1891:447 etc.) since NWIr. languages should show z-here (cf. Av. zasta-, OInd. hásta-etc.). As Parthian has dast as well and since several EIr. languages likewise reflect dasta-, however, an early dissimilation (*dzasta-> *dasta-or *zasta-> *dasta-) is more likely (KLINGENSCHMITT 1975:77 2 , 2000:200 30 , MORGENSTIERNE 2003:45).

panǐag has obviously been borrowed from NP panǐa "hand, claws". DTB has p h anǐak "one fifth, share of plunder due to a chief", also borrowed from NP; both are derived from NP panǐ "five". Bal. panč "five" could be genuine (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:560), but since devoicing of word-final consonants is common in loanwords (cf. II 3.3.1.5) and as in fact all numbers seem to have been borrowed from Persian (cf. p. 81), the word is more likely to be a loanword.

For further discussion, cf. p. 131, 180, 188, 200, 205. MORGENSTIERNE 1932:51 has ārung from a Makrani informant. It is probable that ārunǐ, ārung have been borrowed from NP āranǐ, ārang since the suffix -g / -ǐ (vs. NP āran, for cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:8a, EWAia I:109) seems to be peculiar to Persian, and with regard to Sogd. ''r'ync (KLINGENSCHMITT 1972:63), one might expect genuine Bal. *ārVnč. For discussion of the Av. forms, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 1972:63.

muk means "bee's sting" in SHG. EAL has the meanings "elbow joint, knot in wood".

DTB and GCD have dast-muč h for "wrist" and p h ād-muč h for "ankle". The EBal. form muč h (not *muš) and the gemination of the word-final consonant point to the word as being a loanword, maybe from NP muč (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:95). Alternatively, muč(č) might be identical with muč(č) "gathered, collected" (via "handful") which has been borrowed from Si. muč h u "heap" (DAMES 1891:89, cf. also p. 275).

GILBERTSON 1925:788 assumes Ur. kalā'ī as source, but Si. karā'ī is even more likely. BARTHOLOMAE 1904:1682, BENVENISTE 1931:223, MORGENSTIERNE 1932:40); and WINDFUHR 1992a:251 notes that *engul is found in a number of Central Dialects of Iranian Balochi angul is thus less likely to have been borrowed from an Ind. language as one might suppose with regard to OInd. aṅgúri-.

ABG and BMC have lunkuk (cf. p. 204), SHG and FARRELL 2003:176 have also the variant lakkuk (cf. p. 181).

GCD has murdāna ġ for "the fingers" and expressions with °murdān for the individual fingers.

According to the same source, "toe" is p h ād-murdān. The etymology of murdān is not clear: it might be composed of (GEIGER 1890:136) *mur = MP/NP/Prth. muhr "seal, signet ring" + °dān "holding". Bal. *mur is not attested, however (and cannot be derived from OIr. *mudrā-, cf. OInd. mudr áwhich is a cognate of NP muhr, cf. KEWA II:653f.), but might have been borrowed from NP (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558). BARTHOLOMAE's derivation (1890:553) of murdān from *murd (OIr. *mudra-) + dān holds the same difficulty of *murd not being attested. ELFENBEIN 1990/II:100 assumes that murdān has been borrowed from some Ind. language, but the source is not clear.

The variant mōrdānag appears only in BMC and EAL which makes it possible that it is due to the assumption by BMC that murdān is based on a more genuine *muhrdān which might have a variant with -ō-for -uh-(for hypercorrect reversal of uh > ō, cf. p. 211).

The other sources have čangul in its original meaning "claw".

In BMC, čūč means also "sprout, baby plant". EAL has čūčī, čūčag, čūčik as additional variants. čūč, if not an onomatopoetic formation, might have been borrowed from Si. čīča with a hypercorrect reversal of the change ū > ī (cf. p. 196ff.). čūčūk etc. can be specialisations of čūčag "child, baby; tiny" (SHG) which might also be of onomatopoetic origin.

In GCD, čukī is used for "finger" in general. SHG also has the variant čunkī (for secondary nasalisation, cf. p. 215ff.). Maybe čukī is derived from čuk(k) "child" (cf. p. 259), cf. the discussion of čūčūk etc. above. GCD's nahun is perhaps an error.

For variants, cf. p. 163f., 166, 197, 268.

ABG, EVM have sīnag.

DTB has gwadān besides regular gōdān, GCD has gwadān, gwa\ān. In both sources, the word means "udder" (this meaning is also noted in SHG). EBal. gwa-is perhaps the result of an analogy to gwar "breast". The etymology is "containing milk" with the cognate of Av. gao°"(product of) cow: milk, meat" (GEIGER 1890:124), cf. Av. gaodana-(sic) "milk container" (BARTHOLOMAE 1904:481). It is remarkable that Bal. preserves OIr. gau-in the meaning "milk" here. Another Bal. compound with the same first member is gōkurt "sulphur" (cf. p. 146).

dōbar is probably a compound of dō "two" and NP bar "breast" (the cognate of Bal. gwar). For d > ˙ d , cf. p. 99. If so, Eastern Balochi must have borrowed the word from SWBal. dialects.

In DTB and GCD, gwar means "neck" (maybe meant as "throat"). The obl. of gwar (gwarā) is used as a postposition in the meaning "near, at". d ) is the upper part of the back. It also means "load (on someone's back)" (thus in BMC, EAL). ba ˙ d also exists in Brahui and might be connected to words for "carry" etc.; but a borrowing from Balochi into Brahui is also possible (ROSSI 1979:91). The etymology is then not clear yet, though.

For variants, cf. p. 205, for further discussion, cf. p. 130, 202. myān is a loanword from NP miyān "middle". Another product of NP miyān is Bal. nyām "middle" (cf. p. 232f., 266). mugūn ˙ d is designated as EBal. by BMC and EAL (note that it is not found in ABG, DTB or GCD). In EAL, it means "thigh", and the variant mu ġūn ˙ d (which, if it exists, might be Eastern Balochi although it is not noted as such) means "small of back".

With regard to the existence of MP kūn (HORN 1893:195) and Sogd. kwn (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1976:66), it is not necessary to assume (pace GEIGER 1891:444) that Bal. kūn has been borrowed from NP.

The SWBal. form lāp is also found in EBal. (GCD), and the EBal. form (lāf) also in Karachi (FBB). In SHG, lāp is also used for "intestines". The obl. lāpā is used as a postposition "in". The etymology is not clear yet. The only words which have been considered as possible cognates are NP lambar "bottom" and Gurani lam "belly" (GEIGER 1890:134). However, the connection is questionable (note that Kurd. lam means "cheek").

SHG has gōš-ē pi ˙ d ˙ d "lobe of the ear". pi ˙ d "belly" also exists in Brahui from where it might have been borrowed into Balochi (if not vice-versa); Emeneau/Burrow say that the word might be of Dravidian origin, but this is not sure (ROSSI 1979:107).

zird is mainly used for poetic purposes, in normal language, dil is used. Maybe ǐū ˙ r (not found in any source but BMC) is derived from ǐō ˙ r "well, healthy, constructed" (which is from Ur. ǐō ˙ r "joining, joined, connection etc.", or its cognates, e.g. Si. ǐō ˙ d "addition").

III. Studies in the Balochi

There is one vocalisation mark missing in the entry in SHG, so it is not clear whether dilū'īg or dilō'īg is intended, but the former seems more likely. The word is obviously a derivative of dil "heart", although the formation is not entirely clear.

Since PIE * ḱt, * ḱs (PIIr. *ćš) gives Bal. š (cf. p. 92, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208), kus must indeed have been borrowed from NP as stated by GEIGER 1891:444. For a discussion of the cognates of kus, cf. SIMS-WILLIAMS 1979:134.

EAL also has kīr while all other sources which have the word note only kēr.

The vowel ē seen in Balochi as well as in NP does not match the possible cognates (Khot. kūra-, Bīābānakī kūr etc., cf. BAILEY 1979:62b) which point to *ū. BAILEY (1979:62b) therefore assumes a protoform *kur ˘ i a-, as a parallel case to MPZ <tyl> "butter" (a cognate of Av. tū i riia-). As the reading of the latter as */tēr/ is only an assumed one (maybe argumenti causa by Bailey himself), it does not seem clear whether *kur ˘ i a-would indeed give NP kēr and Sogd. kyr (noted in SIMS-WILLIAMS 1976:66), and whether kēr may be a genuine Bal. word. Note also that * ˚ r ˘ u ˘ i a is likely to yield MP/NP īr (cf. pīr "old"), but Bal. ir (cf. p. 149).

According to ROSSI 2002:156ff., NP gund ultimately derives from an Ir. word *gund-"circular object etc." (cf. e.g. Av. gu ˙ n da-"dough" etc.). The Bal. word may have been borrowed from NP (thus GEIGER 1891:449). In ELFENBEIN 1983, it EVM padūn is an error for pādūn. The text EVM refers to (ZARUBIN 1932:28) has pādūnai (gen.pl.) which looks as if the gen.sg. ending -ai was added to a pl. morpheme -ūn (cf. the NP pl. morpheme -ān which is pronounced -ūn in some dialects); the expected form of a gen.pl. would be pādāni (for shortening of word-final vowels in Turkmen Balochi, cf. p. 251). rān could of course be a NP loanword as GEIGER 1891:458 assumes, but since Av. rāna-would produce the same result in Balochi, it might also be genuine.

According to GCD, zān is also used for "thigh"; in DTB, this is the only meaning.

EAL has

Kinship terms

The terms for family members76 are another field which plays a major role in historical studies of languages. Moreover, the choice of relations for which a given language has a specific word has often been taken to reveal important facts about the social structure of the community. Thus, in addition to the sources used throughout this chapter, data from three not mainly linguistically oriented works from different regions are taken into account as well, namely PEHRSON 1966:36ff. (abbreviated Pe here for the sake of saving space) who studied the Marrī Baloch (EBal. dialect), PASTNER 1978:269ff. (Pa here) who collected data in Panjgur (WBal. dialect) 77 and RZEHAK 1991:185f. (abbreviated Rz) studying the Baloch of Turkmenistan (WBal. dialect).

Although the relationship of kinship terminology to social organisation is a complex one (cf. PASTNER 1978:268 for references), the comparison of the terms and their usage in neighbouring dialects or languages might be linked to parallel differences in social organisation. It turns out that tribal structure and pastoral lifestyle (thus in many EBal.speaking areas) as contrasted with the sedentary life in feudal social structure (Makran) is reflected by the vocabulary used (PASTNER 1978:268ff.).

It is noteworthy that words for relationships which play an important role in Baloch social organisation turn out to have been borrowed, e.g. the distinction between father's brother and mother's brother and the corresponding sisters. Some of these surprising findings might be explained by changes in family structures, e.g. it is possible that for some time, only father's relations played a role, so trū and nākō came to denote "aunt" and "uncle" in general; when the necessity arose to have words also for mother's relations, these were borrowed. The reasons for some other phenomena, e.g. the missing distinction in by far most dialects between grandparents from the mother's side and the father's side remain unclear. EAL also has the forms ballū and ballī, the latter is noted as a term of address for grandmothers in Rz. The three forms show different adaptations of Br. balla. According to Rz, balluk may also refer to grandmother's or grandfather's sister and grandmother's or grandfather's brother's wife. Rz also has bun-balluk "great-grandmother"; the first member of this word is bun "root, fundament, bottom" which may be the product of two words, on the one hand bun (Av. b ˘ una-"bottom, fundament"), on the other the NP loanword bun "root, trunk of tree", which has been explained as a cognate of OInd. ván(a)-"tree, wood", MP wan (the genuine Bal. cognate is gwan "pistacchio", cf. p. 99). It is not sure, however, whether there is indeed a trace of the second word present in Bal. bun.

Pe also has nānō which, however, should rather mean "grandfather" (see below).

Rz has pīruk also in the senses of grandmother's or grandfather's brother and grandmother's or grandfather's sister's husband. A derivative of pīruk is bun-pīruk "great-grandfather" (Rz). In addition, there is pīrō "grandfather's brother" (Rz) and p h it h -p h īrū "forefather" (DTB).

In GCD, nānā, nānō are used for both grandfathers. Ur. nānā, Si. nānō mean "maternal grandfather".

FBB has

˙ d ā ˙ d ā "great-grandfather" and par ˙ d ā ˙ d ā "great-great-grandfather" vs. the data from the other sources and the Si. and Ur. words (Si. ˙ d ā ˙ d ō, Ur. dādā "paternal grandfather", Si. par ˙ d ā ˙ d ō, Ur. pardādā "paternal great-grandfather"), so it seems that there is some error involved with FBB's terminology, probably based on the existence of pīruk in Karachi Balochi (which otherwise occurs in those dialects which do not distinguish the different sorts of grandparents) and/or on the use of ˙ d ā ˙ d ā as a term of address for (very) old men (note that Pe has ˙ d ā ˙ d ā in brackets as an alternative designation of "great-grandfather" and also as term for father's father's brother).

According to Pe, bābū is used for father's father and for father's brother. Rz has bābū as a term of address for "grandfather" and "grandfather's brother". bābū may be the product of a secondary differentiation (by means of suffix substitution) of bābā (see below abbō BMC BMC remarks that māt is "makrani" (SBal.) which is not entirely correct. It is striking that the other terms in -t, i.e. pit, brāt and zāmāt, are not noted by BMC. For the distribution of the forms in -s, cf. p. 250. mās and the other three forms in -s(s) (for the etymology, cf. p. 89) are noted as secondary forms to those in -t in SHG. EAL's assumption that māsī "aunt" (see below) might have something to do with mās "mother" is not to be preferred. Note, however, that māsī is also used as a term of address for mother in Rz (SHG has māmē for that purpose), which might show that there is some reinterpretation of Ind. māsī as derivative from mās done also by the Baloch themselves, maybe motivated by the fact that specification of aunts and uncles is not deemed necessary in WBal. dialects. In addition to (or instead of) the genuine words for members of the core family (māt, mās etc.), the NP designations are used in Iranian Balochi and some other dialects (cf. p. 242, 257, MORGENSTIERNE 1948:284 notes the NP words for the Dehwārī dialect); isolated occurrences in other dialects are duxtar "daughter" in EVM and birādar "brother" in DTB.

bābā is used as a term of address for "father" according to Rz (SHG 751 has bābē in that function), it means "child" according to EVM and EAL, "son" in EVM and "elder man, grandfather" in EAL and SHG. Pe has bābā for father, father's brother, father's father's brother (for all those, alternative terms are noted as well) and the latter's son. The word might have been borrowed from NP where bābā means "father, grandfather" and is also used to address one's children (probably meant as "father['s child], father['s darling]").

abbā is also used as a respectful form of address for (elder) men according to EAL. According to DTB, it is used by children, however, and BMC glosses abbō as "daddy". The precise route of wandering of this word is not entirely clear. ROSSI 1979:297 notes that Br. abā might have been borrowed from Balochi or from an Ind. language (cf. Si. abō). The word is likely to derive ultimately from Ar. ab. In DTB, GCD and EVM, the word denotes father's sister. This must indeed be the original meaning when judging by the etymology (cf. p. 124f.). In the other sources, however, trū, trī is used for father's as well as mother's sister, in Pa and SHG also for spouse's mother (thus also MORGENSTIERNE 1932:51), in Pa and Rz for uncle's wife.

tātī is also an address term for aunts, mothers-in-law and stepmothers (Rz). In the Dehwārī dialect, tātā (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:284), tātē (GRIERSON 1921:453) are used for different kinds of aunts. tāta also exists in Brahui; etymology and direction of borrowing are not clear (ROSSI 1979:114).

Sindhi and Urdu have māsī "maternal aunt". Cf. also mās above.

Similarly to trū, trī (see above), nākō means "father's brother" in DTB and GCD and both uncles in the other sources, according to ABG, FBB, BMC and Pa also "father-in-law", according to Pa and Rz, also "aunt's husband" and term of address for stepfather and father-in-law. GCD nákho instead of nákho (GCD's representation of what would be nāxō here) is probably an error, cf. his regular EBal. nákhozákht "cousin" (see below). For SHG nākū(g), cf. p. 201.

māmā is also used for addressing (elder) men (EAL), Pe also has it for mother's brother's son.

In EVM, both nākō and kākā are noted for "uncle" without any differentiation. In SHG, kākā means "any sort of uncle; eldest brother". Rz has kākā as a term of address for father-in-law.

According to SHG, dādā is the term of address for an elder sister (on p. 751, SHG notes dādē as child's name for sister), according to Rz, for sisters in general. Sindhi has dādī "elder sister" and dādō "elder brother", Urdu has dādā "paternal grandfather, elder brother" from which Bal. The word means "master, teacher of the master's children, slave" in NP and Urdu, which fits well with the data from Rz, who has lālā as a term of address for brothers (SHG has lālē in that function).

˙
The words for "daughter" and "son" are also used for "girl" and "boy", respectively.

For the semantics, cf. p. 241.

EAL baččak is probably the result of a contamination of bač(č) and bačak(k). Rz's variant bačag shows the suffix -ag (cf. II 2.4.4.1) instead of the diminutive suffix.

For WBal. ah > ā, cf. p. 252ff.

aulād, although an Ar. plural form, means "child, offspring" (cf. also p. 266). These four variants are used, as will be shown below, to form compounds of the sort "aunt's child", i.e. "cousin".

For zāk, cf. p. 185. Rz uses °zāg for the purposes for which the other sources have °zātk etc.

In Pe, nawāsa ġ also means "brother's grandchild". GCD has nawāsa ġ "grandson" and nawāsa ġīn "granddaughter".

For a discussion of nimāsag, cf. p. 234.

Additional variants are čug-zāxt (DTB) and ču ġ-zāxt (GCD) showing an assimilation. The word literally means "child's child". For čuk(k) "child" and °zāxt (EBal. form of WBal. zātk), see above.

Note that in those sources which have ku ˙ r āsag as well as kawāsag (probably borrowed from different Pashto dialects, cf. p. 234), the former has come to mean "great-great-grandchild". Brahui has kū ˙ r āsa "great-grandchild" (ROSSI 1979:28).

This word is obviously composed of a suffixless variant of n(u)wāsag "grandchild" (see above) and NP bar "on" (cf. p. 194), parallel to Rz's bun-balluk, bun-pīruk "great-grandmother, -father" (see above) and parnākō-zāxt (see below).

It is noteworthy that the genuine Bal. cognate of OInd. obl. náptar-is preserved. In this compound and the following ones, form and meaning of both members correspond to those of the simple words in the respective sources (see above).

Note that nākōzāxt also occurs in Pe (as father's brother's child and father's brother's grandchild) where Ind. terms for uncles have been substituted for nākō.

Pa has the term for father's and mother's brother's grandchild, Pe only for father's brother's grandchild (the other uncle's grandchild not being mentioned). For Bal. par, cf. p. 139.

Note that the final consonant of brāt / brās "brother" has been assimilated totally to the following consonant in all dialect forms of this word. In Pe, the word also denotes brother's grandchild.

lōg-wāǐa DTB SHG

Terms of address for one's spouse include expressions like čukānī māt / pit (FBB) "mother/father of the children" or X-gen. mās / pis "mother / father of X", X being the name of the eldest son (Rz); the latter sort of expression is also used as a general form of address for women (BADALKHAN 2003:293). If there is no son, the name of the eldest daughter may be used (Carina Jahani, personal communication). This practice reflects name taboos which are widespread in the area (for further discussion and references, cf. BADALKHAN 2003:292ff.). When the couple gets older, the taboo is less strong, and first names or (thus Rz) the expressions pīrazāl / pīramard may be used (from pīr "old", cf. p. 149, + zāl / mard).

ǐan is also the common word for "woman".

The two latter words which show an enlargement by the adj. suffix -ēn might be explained as standing for "relating to women; womenfolk", with the collective expression also used for the individual as in German Frauenzimmer. For the palatalisation seen in ǐinēn, cf. p. 194.

zāl also means "(old) woman". For zālbūl, cf. p. 202.

BMC notes that lōgī is from "makrani" (i.e. SBal.), which is confirmed by the other attestations. lōgī is derived from lōg "house" (cf. p. 159). Another expression formed from lōg is lōg-bānuk "housewife" (for bānuk "lady", cf. p. 164).

girōk noted by EVM as meaning "husband" occurs only once, and is more probably meant literally as "the one who takes, i.e. marries [a certain woman]" (gir-+ agentive suffix -ōk). lōg-wāǐa is not noted as a separate lemma in SHG, but is used e.g. in the explanation of zāmāt (for which see below) in the meaning "husband". This expression means literally "master of the house" and is composed of lōg "house" (see above) and wāǐa "master, Sir" which has been borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:462, thus also EAL who erroneously has wāǐah. According to Friedrich C. Andreas (apud LENTZ 1926:293), NP x w āǐa is a sort of allegro form of *x ˘ u a-ta ˘ u a-(which otherwise gives NP xudā). If this interpretation is correct, NP x w -was replaced by Bal. w-in the borrowing process (the other example for this phenomenon is wāb "sleep", which is different in that there are inherited Bal. words from the same root, cf. p. 122f.). Note that in a number of dialects, nākō "uncle" is also used in this meaning (see above).

In SHG and EAL, wasirk also means spouse's brother (husband's brother in Pe); this is the only meaning in Pa where nākō is used for father-in-law. MORGENSTIERNE's (1932:52) rendering as "mother-in-law" seems to be an error.

For EAL's wasarix, cf. p. 208. Cf. also p. 228.

wasar-zāxt means "sister/brother-in-law" in GCD, wasir-zāxt is "wife's brother" in Pe.

duskīč commonly means "wife's / husband's sister" (in BMC also "brother's wife"). FBB notes it in the meaning "wives of brothers". For more discussion, cf. p. 90, 178, 180.

nišār is noted for son's wife in NAWATA 1981 and for brother's wife in FBB and Pa (neither notes an expression for daughter-in-law). In addition, it also means "bride" in SHG, "nephew's wife" in GCD and aunt's child's spouse, wife's brother's wife, brother's son's wife in Rz, grandson's wife, brother's son's wife, brother's grandson's wife, uncle's son's wife and wife's brother's wife in Pe.

zāmāt / zāmās means "son-in-law" in most sources, only "brother-in-law" in FBB and Pa (but there is no expression for son-in-law in these sources) and both in Pe, SHG and Rz; the word may denote every man marrying into the family, thus also (Rz) aunt's child's spouse, husband's sister's husband, brother's daughter's husband or (Pe) cousin's husband, niece's husband and granddaughter's husband or at least (Pa) mother's sister's husband (most other combinations not being inquired by Pa). The etymology is not clear yet. One might assume ham°"together" or some connection with hanǐ (according to EAL "girl given in marriage by the guilty tribe as compensation for a person killed"), whereas SHG has hanǐ (from DAMES 1907) "graceful, pretty", but in both cases, the rest is not clear.

ham-zāmāt is composed of zāmāt (see above) and ham "together, also" (cf. p. 94).

It seems questionable whether this is a compound of ham + NP-Ar. zulf "lock of hair". Note that Rz discusses the Balochi dialect from Turkmenistan in which h is lost in all positions.

For EBal. (h)awōx, cf. p. 276. The derivation of hapōg (and a number of Ir. cognates) is not entirely clear; it can hardly go back to OIr. (Av.) hapa\nī-(pace ELFENBEIN 1990/II:66) as Psht. b e n, NP āmūsnī and cognates do, but the two words may have influenced each other (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:47).

For the -ō in the words below, cf. p. 201. mātūn cannot be genuine in EBal., maybe it has been borrowed from Br. mātuna (note that ROSSI 1979:105 has Br. mātuna among the words where the direction of borrowing is not clear).

pitārk is one of the items for which MORGENSTIERNE (in this case 1932:37) assumed a borrowing of a Br. words from a "lost" Bal. word. STEBLIN-KAMENSKIJ 1999:249), implying that the word goes back to some form of OIr. (Av.) napāt-/naf e dr-"grandchild". As a is not usually changed to u in genuine Bal. words even when next to a p (for labialisation in loanwords, cf. p. 286), one may assume that some reinterpretation of the word as belonging to pus(s)ag "son" has taken place. The OIr. preform would have to be *napa\r-(cf. also p. 89).

The word seems to represent a compound from pit, pis(s) and MP zādag, NP zāda, thus "father's son" (DTB has "stepson, husband's son") with total assimilation of the consonant group, with ē in the WBal. variant representing the product of a compensatory lengthening of i (cf. the change ih > ē discussed in II 3.1.3.2). Note that the variant found in DTB must have been borrowed from a SWBal. dialect, otherwise one would expect *°zādaġ.

Colours

The terms for colours belong to that part of the vocabulary which highly depends on the material culture of the society in question. New terms of colours are liable to be introduced together with the corresponding technologies, e.g. the dying of cloth and the trade of the substances used for that purpose.

It is not surprising to find a considerable number of loanwords among the terms for colours. However, the high number of borrowed terms is striking nevertheless: šān, a word for "black" which is only used for specific purposes and found in a small number of sources, is indeed the only word which is surely inherited. suhr "red" and bōr "brown" might be genuine as well, but the whole rest are most probably loanwords, chiefly from NP, but Ind. loanwords also play a prominent role. Material from other languages does not seem to be used in this field. Further derivations also occur: nīlbō "blueish", nīlī "blue-grey" (both BMC and EAL).

Maybe this word comes from Ur. gullī (name of a certain bird).

nāsī is derived from nās "snuff (tobacco)", a borrowing from Ur. nās "snuff".

bōr is especially said of horses and might have been borrowed from NP bōr "red, sort of horse" (GEIGER 1891:444) or genuine (Osset. būr / bor goes back to *ba ˘ u r-, too, cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1887:89). For a discussion about a connection of the Ir. words for "brown" with OInd. bab h rú-"brown", to OP Baurakka-or to PIr. *bar ˘ u a-, cf. MAYRHOFER 1960:146 74 , 1973:144, SIMS-WILLIAMS 1992:47. It is also possible that the word has been borrowed from Si. bōrū as DTB assumes. GCD has b h ūrā "brown" which is a loanword from Urdu.

Maybe there is some connection with pur(r) (DTB p h u ˙ r ) "ashes", the etymology of which is likewise unclear.

kambar means "brown-grey, spotted, striped" and is mostly used for animals. ELFENBEIN 1990/II:80 assumes borrowing from some Ind. language, citing TURNER 1966:139 who has OInd. kambara-"spotted", Si. kamirō. surkind means "red-grey" in BMC. surkind might represent sarkind (DTB), the name of a tree (most probably from Ur. sarkan ˙ d ā "reed, saccharum sara"), with the vowel adapted to suhr "red".

According to BMC, kīrg means "white-grey". Note that the definition given in SHG is rang-ē ("a colour") without further specification which might indicate that the word is not part of the active vocabulary of the author(s) of SHG. BMC might therefore be the only source where the word is used (EAL is not necessarily an independent source, cf. p. 24). Maybe there is some connection with Ur. kairā "light blue, grey" or k h airā "brown, blueish grey", although this hypothesis is very vague.

nārinǐī "orange" has been borrowed from NP nārinǐī "dto." and is derived from nārinǐ "orange (fruit)" (GEIGER 1891:456); for the wanderings of the word for "orange", cf. LOKOTSCH 1927:125. This word is derived from wānga ˙ r "eggplant"; its origin is not clear.

BMC gulāb, FBB gulābī "pink" is from NP gulāb "rose-water", gulābī "rose-colour".

Cf. Ur. sunahrī. zarrī can mean "golden" or "silver". zarrī is a derivative of zarr "gold, money" which has been borrowed from NP into Balochi (cf. p. 133).

čandan also means "shining" and is originally a designation for perfumes, especially sandal wood (from Ur. čandan "sandal tree").

Verbs

The lexicon of Balochi verbs can be shown to be composed of essentially the same layers which are found for nouns and adjectives, i.e. a certain portion of genuine words and a considerable amount of borrowed material. The verbs which are presented in the following tables are in the majority those discussed in the preceding chapters, which means that the genuine words are overrepresented to a certain extent since they have been used to establish the Balochi sound laws. As in the other parts of the lexicon discussed above, the number of loanwords found in what one might consider the basic vocabulary is surprising.156

Balochi verbs which can be traced back to OIr.

The first category comprises those verbs which might be considered genuine since at least one of their stems shows features typical for Balochi, but not for Persian. The etymology of the verb is not entirely clear (cf. p. 138, 184), but it appears to go back to an older formation, and there are no signs for it being a loanword.

These two verbs may go back to an older ablauting paradigm *prōš-/ prušta (cf. the parallel case of šōd-/ šust below) which resulted in two verbs by adding one new present stem pruš-(vowel taken from the past stem) and one new past stem prōš-(analogical vowel from the present stem).

The evidence for WBal. duht is somewhat questionable, cf. p. 248, 257. The other dialects have dōtk etc. with the vowel of from the present stem.

The past stem is identical with the NP one, but the present stems are formed differently (NP rōy-, showing Pers. *-d-> y).

The past stem again corresponds to the NP cognate ruft.

The other dialects have rētk etc. into which the vowel of the present stem has analogically been introduced. For a variant of the present stem, cf. p. 199.

For additional past stems, cf. p. 96.

suč-and sōč-show a parallel redistribution of ablaut as pruš-, prōš-above, cf. also p. 87. A secondary past stem šawašt also exists.

For an additional variant, cf. p. 460.

For the present stem, cf. p. 133, 143, for the past stem, cf. p. 146.

For the rather problematic attestation, cf. p. 85.

dīt and variants may have been influenced, if not borrowed from, NP dīd (cf. p. 188).

The other dialects have gētk etc. with the vowel from the present stem; for details, cf. p. 98.

The forms might reflect an older paradigm mēč-/ mitk, with the other formations being added analogically.

The secondary past stems mēst and mēzit also occur; for the EBal. present stem miž-, cf. p. 88.

For the present stem, cf. p. 127; for the past stem, cf. p. 96. Iranian Balochi has nist.

The past stem is based on the present stem which is an innovation vs. MPM xwān-/ xwand (thus BOYCE 1977:99). As the same process has happened in the prehistory of NP (x w ān-/ x w ānd), the innovation process need not be an exclusively Balochi one. The ā in the past stem is due to a specific lengthening process (cf. p. 189), wart (only in EVM) might be a secondarily regularised form.

In several of these cases, the vowel of the present stem has been generalised to the past stem.

The past stems must be secondary since the -s-goes back to *s ḱ (EAWia I:652, cf. p. 87). As the suffix *-s ḱeis usually added to zero-grade roots, tōs-is likely to have been built to the model of verbs with zero-grade itr. and full-grade tr. form (e.g. suč-, sōč-).

The other dialects have secondary ǐāyit, ǐāhit.

There is some suffix involved in the formation of the present stem to give Bal. -š-(cf. p. 129), which has been introduced also into the past stem.

The past stem seems to be an exclusively Bal. formation (Parthian has zānād, MP/NP has dānist).

For variants of the past stem, cf. p. 144.

The past stem (with the vowel from the present stem) is only attested in its SBal. form.

Since the past stem is identical with the NP one, it could have been borrowed from there. In that case, the present stem could be secondary, but might also be genuine (cf. p. 92).

The vowel of the present stem has obviously been introduced into the past stem vs. the Av. past stem gušta-(Parthian has the secondary formation nigōšād, MP/NP correspondingly niyōšīd).

zūr- (and zīr-, cf. p. 197) shows the application of an analogical rule that present stems should be "stronger" than past stems. The word is only found in LEECH 1838, DAMES 1881 and SHG (a past stem is not noted), which does not speak against its existence, however, since words from this semantic sphere tend to be omitted in glossaries and dictionaries. The NP cognate is rīn-/ rīd.

Variants with assimilation also occur (šašt-/ šaštit, EBal. šašt ˘ a\-, cf. p. 180). The past stem morpheme -āt is only found in a small number of Bal. verbs; here, it reflects *fra-stā-ta-(cf. p. 116f.).

The verbs with gwa-, gu-in the present stem have imported their word-initial consonant(s) into the past stems since a paradigm present stem * ˘ u a-> gwa-> gu-/ past stem *u-> + u-would be too abnormal to be preserved. Cf. also p. 99, 218f.

If the derivation of gwaš-/ guš-as discussed in 2.2.2.3 is correct, the past stem must be built from the present stem which involves a suffix.

Bal. verbs which were formed within Bal. from genuine words

There is a small group of verbs which seem to be an exclusively Balochi formation from words which are probably inherited. , cf. p. 147, for variants, cf. p. 154, 196, 236, 252. 198 Although the past stem looks like an old formation, the verb is not likely to be old since there are no corresponding formations in Avestan or other Ir. languages (note that comparable verbal forms from an OInd. root √k ˙ s ud are considered secondary by EWAia I:440 as well). The existence of adjectives like šudag, šudīg etc. "hungry" might have supported the formation of the EBal. infinitive šuda ġ. The past stem (GCD has an assimilated form šušt h a) might be analogical to šud-/ šust h -or šōd-/ šust "wash" (cf. p. 314). It is thus probable that EBal. šud-(only in DTB, GCD) is a denominative of šud "hunger" (for which cf. p. 79, 92). 199 Cf. also p. 115f. The verb is only found in SHG, so the past stem is not known. cf. p. 186),.

grand is not likely to have been borrowed from Ur. garaǐ "thunder" (pace GILBERTSON 1925:683), but may be connected with Sogd. gr'yntn etc. (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1976:60).

201 For a discussion of the present stem, cf. p. 137.

Balochi verbs which might be borrowed from NP or genuine

Just as in the case of nouns, there is a considerable portion of the verbal part of the Bal. lexicon where the sound laws of Balochi would produce the same result as those of NP, so that it cannot be decided whether or not the words in question have been borrowed.

Balochi verbs which have been borrowed from Persian

There is a group of verbs which must have been borrowed from some stage of Persian since they show the result of sound changes which otherwise do not operate in Balochi.

206 The gemination of the r in čar(r)-"turn" suggests that a borrowing is involved (cf. II 3.3.1.5). However, the NP as well as the Ur. and Si. verbs čar-mean "graze", cf. also p. 84.

207 In the case of čūšš-, the gemination of the š need not imply a borrowing since čūšš-is only found in SHG which has regular doubling of consonants after ū (cf. p. 242), the other sources have čūš-, for čušš-(also only in SHG), cf. p. 209.

208 For a possible explanation of the different forms (involving a contamination of a genuine and a borrowed form), cf. p. 145.

209 ras-seems to occur otherwise only in Persian (OP rasa-, inchoative stem from √ar (BARTHOLOMAE 1893:264 etc.), so the Bal. word is probably a NP loanword. Wakhi r e ˇ ˙ c -"leave" etc. adduced by GEIGER 1890:143 are to be connected with Bal. rēč-"pour" (STEBLIN-KAMENSKIJ 1999:300f.). 210 x in loanwords from NP is usually replaced by h, the substitution by k is mainly seen in SBal.

dialects (cf. p. 65f.). As kand-/ kandit is attested in all dialects, it seems likely that it is inherited rather than borrowed. The possibility of a borrowing cannot be ruled out, however The present stem day-is not the one found in NP, but the one which one would expect to find in NP. The variant dēy-found in other dialects might have been borrowed from Urdu (cf. p. 270).

Cf. p. 103.

A past stem is not attested. In fact, āzmāy-is only found in MARSTON 1877, whereas the causative āzmāēn-which is formed from it is found in the majority of sources (cf. p. 186).

It is not impossible that kiš-/ kišt might be genuine in Balochi, but it seems more probable that it has been borrowed from NP (cf. p. 144,148).

This verb might also be a denominative formation from the Pers. loanword duz(z) "thief" (for whi ch cf. p. 88, 125). However, since NP has the exactly parallel verbal formation, the verb may have been borrowed into Balochi along with the noun.

For further discussion, cf. p. 162, 201, 205. 321 5. Verbs

Balochi verbs which might be genuine or borrowed from Ind. languages

Similarly to the verbs discussed above, there are also some verbs which might be derived regularly from Old Iranian, but may have been borrowed from Ind. languages as well.

IV. Conclusion

In the preceding chapters, an attempt has been made to give a picture of the Balochi language as the product of its specific history, reflecting a variety of factors and influences: first, the North Western Iranian heritage; second, the intense contact with neighbouring languages, among which Persian has occupied a place of pre-eminent importance; and third, the dialectal diversity, echoing, among other things, the precarious ecological environment and the differing occupation of the speakers as shepherding nomads or settled farmers. The preceding pages attempt to show how these factors interact and are mirrored in the Balochi lexicon.

In conclusion, the question arises of how the position of Balochi among North Western Iranian languages of past and present times may be described in the light of the issues raised.

At The remaining Western as well as Eastern Middle Iranian languages show a lenition of postvocalic stops. As the preceding chapters have shown, there is ample evidence for continuing and intense contact between Balochi and neighbouring languages. So one is bound to wonder whether it is a likely hypothesis that Middle Balochi did not take part in a development shared by all neighbouring Iranian languages.

If one assumes that Balochi underwent the same lenition that operated elsewhere,3 the lenition products must have later been reversed to their original state. This reversal might have been the same process that changed the Old Iranian fricatives of whatever source to stops, thereby coalescing with the product of OIr. stops (elements which have changed in the same way in Balochi and Parthian are underlined in the following tables): These dialectal differences are by no means isolated phenomena, but may be grouped with other features. Balochi differs from all known varieties of Parthian in several points: for instance, Parthian shows sy-from OIr. s ˘ i -as is seen in syāw(ag) "black" and reflected in Arm. seav "black" and siramarg "peacock" while Balochi shows š-in šān "black" and šēnak "falcon" (cf. II 2.2.2.3). It is noteworthy that the existence of a NWIr. language from Middle Iranian times with š-for OIr. s ˘ i -is anyway implied by Arm. šava°, Georg. šav-"black".

While the product of PIr. * ˚ r is ur in labial contexts and ir otherwise in Parthian, Balochi shows ir in palatal contexts and ur otherwise (cf. II 2.3.2.1). Particularly telling examples are pairs like Prth. <tyrs-/ tyrs'd> tirs-/ tirsād "fear", <tryfš> trifš "sour" and <kyrd> kird "done" vs. Bal. turs-/ tursit, trupš and kurt, respectively. Even if <y> in e.g. Prth. <tyrs->, <kyrd> stands for e as has been assumed for MP, forms like kerd are unlikely to have been the protoforms of the Balochi words since there is no labial context and no analogy in sight which might have motivated a change to turs-, kurt.

It would follow that Balochi goes back to a Middle Ir. dialect which corresponds to Parthian in a number of respects, but differs from it in others. The existence of more than one NWIr. idiom in Middle Iranian times, a priori highly likely, is not only presupposed by doublets like Arm. seaw, šava°"black", both commonly assumed to have been borrowed from "Parthian", but also by evidence from other contemporary Ir. languages. The Western Ir. languages (with only two of them attested in manuscripts, inscriptions etc.) may have formed a continuum of dialects at Middle Ir. times. 8The origin of Balochi as a WIr. language whose ancestor is similar to, but not identical with Parthian can thus be established. Other findings complicate the picture at once, however. While a number of Bal. sound changes correspond to those of neighbouring NWIr. languages as one might expect (e.g. OIr. postvocalic č, ǐ, ž preserved in Balochi vs. Pers. z, e.g. rōz, bōz-, dōzax; PIE *ǵ > Bal. z vs. Persian d), other Balochi sound laws are the Persian, not the NWIr. ones (e.g. PIE *tr > Bal. s(s), cf. II 2.1.2.4). A similar statement may be made for Kurdish, whereas Zazaki shows NWIr. features in all these cases. Balochi and Kurdish thus occupy a position between the NWIr. and the SWIr. languages and might in this respect be called "Transitional Western Iranian languages".

If one looks at the NWIr. and SWIr. features of contemporary Western Iranian languages from a purely synchronic point of view (cf. PAUL 1998), one might get the incorrect impression that the languages hitherto called North Western Iranian started out as NWIr. idioms and gradually came more and more under the influence of Persian, with Balochi and Kurdish occupying the positions next to New Persian in terms of "South-Westernness" or "lack of North-Westernness". However, increasing absorption into the Persian sphere does not adequately describe the data as the SWIr. characteristics of Balochi and Kurdish date from widely differing periods (cf. KORN 2003:53ff.), beginning with the treatment of PIE *tr where already Old Persian shows ç (> MP s) vs. Av. \r.

The NWIr. characteristics of Middle and New Iranian languages are predominantly of the type that Parthian etc. preserves certain OIr. sounds while Persian shows some sort of innovation (e.g. OIr. rz, rd retained in NWIr. languages vs. NP l). The only innovations seen in Parthian (all of them also found in Zazaki) are the development of OIr. \ ˘ u > f (vs. MP h), OIr. d ˘ u -> b-(vs. MP d-) and OIr. h ˘ u -> wx-(or devoiced w-), if the latter can be called an innovation, vs. MP xw-. Balochi seems to share the latter two features (cf. II 2.2.1.5.3,2.2.1.5.4) while unfortunately no data are available which would permit one to say anything about the first one (cf. II 2.2.1.5.2). Kurdish, on the other hand, goes with Persian again and does not share any NWIr. innovation. Other changes which have been considered as common NWIr. innovations (e.g. m > w) will rather be independent developments (cf. KORN 2003:56ff.).

The question remains whether the "Transitional WIr. languages" may be established as a group in the sense of being a third member in between North and South Western Iranian, i.e. whether (preferably typologically marked) features can be found which are neither present in the NWIr. nor in the SWIr. languages. Evidence for this scenario has not yet been discovered. For the time being, it seems that the characteristics which have lent a partially SWIr. look to Kurdish and Balochi may be explained by the influence of Persian at various points during history, starting with the time of the Achaemenian empire (thus e.g. s(s) for PIE *tr). Unfortunately, the data do not permit us to determine the character of the contacts with the Persian language and its speakers. The term "Transitional Western Iranian" thus designates languages which have witnessed the repeated, if not continuing, influence of Persian -an influence which has been strong enough to effect the adoption of typically Persian sound changes.

The impression of continuous contact with Persian is confirmed by the Balochi vocabulary. Among the lexical items of various semantic fields, one finds an impressive number of Persian words from different periods, the oldest stage being represented by dap "mouth" which recalls Av. zafar/n-, but with typically Persian treatment of the word-initial consonant, the MP period by words like pahlūg "side" and k h ard "portion", and the NP time by a host of words from literally every sphere and including numerous words of Arabic origin. But the Persian loanwords are by no means the only borrowings in the Balochi lexicon: words from several Indic languages play a considerable role as well, e.g. (to cite but a few) pupī "father's sister", pul(l) "flower", sik(k)-/ sik(k)it "learn", lē ˙ t -/ lē ˙ t it "lie down". Not so numerous, but not less remarkable are borrowings from Pashto (ku ˙ r āsag "grandchild", kō ˙ t a "room") and Brahui (bal(l)uk "grandmother", sil "skin"). Interdialectal borrowing is not rare either.

A particularly interesting group of loanwords is the terms for animals such as horses and camels (whereas the word for the smaller animals, pas, is inherited). Along with the fact that many terms for colours as well as the Balochi (and Kurdish) numerals have been borrowed from Persian, this situation mirrors a social situation of the Baloch as shepherds coming to the bazaar to sell the products of their sheep and to buy what they do not produce themselves, including the bigger animals and cloth, from people who speak other languages. The kinship terms (cf. III 2), a sizeable portion of which comes from Sindhi and Urdu, reflect, among other things, intense contact on the family level with the settled population of the Indus valley.

It is to be expected that the position of Balochi as a Transitional Western Ir. language can be confirmed by the study of Balochi historical morphology, and by studies of the history of neighbouring Iranian languages. Such studies are thus an urgent desideratum.

Morphological sketch

The aim of this chapter is to give the reader an impression of the morphological system of Balochi and to provide the grammatical information which might be necessary to make use of the other parts of this work. It is not the purpose of these pages to write a grammar of "the Balochi language", though. What follows will only outline the most important characteristics of Balochi morphology. It is thus to be taken cum grano salis throughout, since exceptions to the statements made below or additional variants might be found in some (sub-)dialect. The survey is also a purely synchronical one, diachronical aspects being reserved for future studies. 1As has been seen before, Balochi dialects differ considerably in many aspects, and the morphology is no exception. This chapter will chiefly be based on the following sources as representatives of the three major dialect groups: BUDDRUSS 1988 for the WBal. dialect of Afghanistan, FARRELL 1990 for the (predominantly SBal.) dialect of Karachi, DAMES 1913 for Eastern Balochi. BARANZEHI 2003 will be used for the Sarāwānī dialect of Iran. The forms cited below will tend to appear in the order from west via south to east. Dialect categorisations are for the most part omitted, however, since the distribution of the forms does not necessarily coincide with dialect borders, and some dialects have more than one form. Forms involving a nasalised vowel are noted when a corresponding form with vowel + n is not found in the sources just cited.

Nouns

The categories found in the Balochi nominal system are the following: • numbers: singular (sg.), plural (pl.) • cases: direct (dir.), 2 oblique (obl.), object (obj.), genitive (gen.), 3 vocative (voc.). There is no grammatical gender in any Balochi dialect.

The direct case is the case denoting the subject in sentences constructed nominatively and the object in sentences constructed ergatively. The oblique case is used for the agent in ergative sentences (see below), for direct and indirect objects, with prepositions and in locative function. The object case may be used instead of the oblique to denote direct and indirect objects in nominative and sometimes also in ergative constructions, particularly if some emphasis is required. 4 As in Persian, objects are only marked when they are definite ("identified object marking"). The genitive is used for possessors and with postpositions (see below). The vocative is used for addressing someone. dir.

obl. obj. gen. voc.

sg.

-∅

-ā 5 -ārā -ai, -ē, -ī, -a, -∅ -∅
pl.

-ān, 6 -ānā -ānā, -ānrā -ānī 7 -ān 1. Bal. case system and endings Some dialects add further forms. For instance, there is an "obl. II" in -ayā (sg.), -ānīā (pl.) in some WBal. dialects with mainly locative functions (BUDDRUSS 1988:45).

Conversely, in Bal. dialects of Iran, the dir. and obl. cases tend to fall together, presumably under the influence of NP (cf. JAHANI 2003). The resulting system may be described thus: nom. obj. gen.

sg.

-∅ -ā(rā) -ey

pl.

-ān -ānā -ānī

Reduced case system of Iranian Balochi

In some of these dialects, the gen. is replaced by the e ˙ z āfe-construction (cf. JAHANI 1994, 2003:128, BARANZEHI 2003:81), e.g. • manzel-e māwat "our house".

There is no definite article. The indefinite article is -ē,8 e.g. kitāb-ē "a book".

4 For the use of cases in ergative constructions, cf. KORN (frthc. 1).

5 For a variant,cf. p. 251,260. 6 In several dialects, the obl.pl. appears as -ã (cf. p. 213f., 238, 254, 263).

7 For a variant found in WBal. dialects, cf. p. 251.

Morphological sketch

When two semantically similar nouns are enumerated, nominal endings and the indefinite article may be used only with the second noun (BUDDRUSS 1988:49), e.g.

• watī dast u dēm-ā šušt-un "I washed my (lit.: own) hand[s] and face".

Pronouns

Personal pronouns

The forms of the personal pronouns differ considerably, so it is necessary to cite forms for the three dialect groups. With the exception of the vocative, the cases are the same as for the nouns. For the 3rd person, the demonstrative pronouns are used (see below).

V. Appendix

A separate form for the 1pl. inclusive (m ˘ a-š(u)mā) has been noted for Afghanistan (BUDDRUSS 1988:51), Turkmenistan (SOKOLOV 1956:69) and Sarāwānī; the latter also has an additional exclusive (mā-wat, BARANZEHI 2003:85). The object case is used for the direct or indirect object throughout. For the agent and after prepositions, some dialects use the oblique case, others the direct case (cf. KORN, frthc. 1). , cf. p. 199. ān, īn are also found (cf. p. 103, 186, 201, 233, 238, 243).

Demonstrative pronouns

14 For details about ā and its forms, cf. p. 102f., 162.

15 The Sarāwānī dialect is particularly rich in pronominal suffixes (BARANZEHI 2003:86).

Many postpositions are originally nouns in the obl. case. Therefore the noun is in the gen. case, e.g.

• čuk-ē dēm-ā "in front of (lit.: in the face of) the child" (SBal.);

• ēš-ānī pad-ā "behind (lit.: in the trace of) them" (WBal.).

In dialects influenced by Ind. languages, prepositions are mostly used with the genitive.

In the dialects influenced by Persian, prepositions are for the most part used with the obl. of nouns and with the dir. case of pronouns of the 1st and 2nd person, e.g.

• bi man "to me", gō zāgā "with the son" (WBal.), baǐāē + gen. "instead of" (SBal.).

Circumpositions occur in most dialects; they are composed of one of the most common prepositions, i.e. mostly ač, ča (etc.) "of", to some degree also bi "to(wards)", and one of the postpositions, e.g.

• bi darwāzagai burzagā "above the door" (WBal.), až ... p h adā "behind" (EBal.).

Noun phrases

The Bal. noun phrase is head-final as a rule: genitives are placed before the noun, e.g.

• man-ī brāt-ē kitāb (SBal.) / mn-ī brās-ai kitāb (WBal.) "my brother's book(s)".

The same applies to attributive adjectives, e.g. mazan-ēn asp "big horse(s)", and to adpositions, since, on the whole, postpositions dominate.

Verbs

This subsection describes the "minimal system" of verbal morphology common to most Balochi dialects. In addition, every (group of) dialect(s) has further formations formed from the elements discussed below. Negated forms are built with the prefix na-and the prohibitive prefix ma-.

Verbal stems

As in most Ir. languages, the Bal. verbal system is based on the dichotomy of present stem and past stem. Most past stems are formed from the corresponding present stems by adding the suffixes -t, -it and, in a small number of cases, -āt, e.g. gwār-/ gwār-t "rain", raǐ-/ raǐ-it "colour", bašk-/ bašk-āt "forgive". Some verbs have synchronically unpredictable past stems, reflecting OIr. formations (e.g. kan-/ kurt "do").

Verbal adjectives and nouns

A present participle is formed by adding -ān to the present stem.

The suffix -ag (often reduced to -a when no ending follows) added to the past stem gives the perfect participle.

The formation of the infinitive depends on the dialects: many dialects use -ag added to the present stem. In the remaining dialects (all of the WBal. group), the infinitive is formed by adding -in to the past stem.

The copula and the verbal endings

As the verbal endings are for the most part identical with the corresponding forms of the copula, they may conveniently be presented together in one Many dialects have forms for the past tense of the copula which are formed from a base at-to which the copula forms as shown above are added (the 3sg. is without ending: at). Other dialects use the past stem of "become", i.e. bīt-20 plus verbal endings for the same purpose.

Ergativity 21

Many dialects of Balochi show "split ergativity", i.e. in all tenses formed from the past stem (including those formed from the perf.part.), the treatment of a verb depends on whether it is transitive or intransitive. An intransitive verb is inflected according to the nominative pattern as in the present tense, the endings of the verb agreeing with the subject.

A transitive verb, on the other hand, shows the logical subject (also called agent) in the obl. case. In a regular ergative construction, the object is in the dir. case. Other constructions are also found, however. In some dialects, agreement of the verb with the object is found if the latter is in the 3rd person, i.e. the ending of the 3pl. may be used if the object is a third person in the plural. In the dialects with a reduced case system (cf. p. 332), both agent and object of ergative constructions are in the nominative. Pronominal suffixes are widely used to mark the agent.

The dialects differ to a considerable degree in their use of ergative construction, ranging from a more or less consistent ergative pattern to a complete substitution by the nominative construction in some WBal. dialects. This variation may be attributed to the influence of neighbouring languages (Ind. languages with ergativity potentially strengthening the preservation of ergativity vs. entirely nominative New Persian, cf. FARRELL 2003:197ff.).

Tenses

Present

The present endings are joined to the present stem to build the present tense. 22 Some verbs have a 3sg. ending -t (vs. the more common ending -ī(t)) in at least some dialects, sometimes with lengthening of the vowel: ǐant "hits", dant "gives", raut etc. "goes", zānt "knows", kant "does", gīrt "takes", wārt "eats".

Some verbs show a prefix k-which does not change the function of the form in any way.

Simple past

The past endings are added to the past stem of intransitive verbs to produce a simple past. It seems that in (some?) Eastern dialects, the perfect is also used for the simple past.

With transitive verbs, the bare past stem is used with the subject in the obl. case (ergative construction, see above), e.g.

• Sābirā ē hawāl uškit "Sabir (obl.) heard this news (dir.)" (WBal.); āyā gōk kušt "he/she (obl.) killed the cow (dir.)", kučikā hamā ǐinikārā dīst "the dog (obl.) saw that girl (obj.)" (SBal.). The verb may agree with the object in that an ending is facultatively added if the object is understood to be plural, e.g. • man xat likit-ã "I wrote letters" (SBal.). Some dialects pattern nominatively throughout, the personal endings being used for all verbs, e.g. (WBal. from Afghanistan) • man dōšī watī mēš-ã mārit-un "last night I counted my sheep (obl.pl.)".

In some dialects, a "verbal element" a is used with the present and past tenses to give an imperfective aspect. It is enclitic to the word preceding the verb, and thus generally written as if it were a suffix, 25 e.g. rāst-a gušīt "he/she says correctly".

Periphrastic and modal constructions

In Southern Balochi, continous present and past tenses are formed using the infinitive in the obl. case with the copula (cf. FARRELL 1990:73ff.), thus • man guš-ag-ā y ã "I am saying"; man guš-ag-ā it ȭ "I was saying".

Depending on the linguistic area, modality may be constructed in the Persian way (verb meaning "want, should etc." + subjunctive of the full verb), e.g. • lō ˙ t īn b-rīn "I want to go" (WBal.), or from a verbal noun + auxiliary, somewhat along Ind. models, 26 e.g.

• man rawag lō ˙ t ã "I want to go"; manā rawagī ẽ "I have to go" (SBal.); "can" may be expressed with kan-"do" as auxiliary, 27 e.g. • wāntagā kanai "can you sing?" (WBal.); tau wapt kanai "you can sleep"; āy ã kapt kutagā "they could have fallen" (SBal.); šut na-kurt "he/she could not go" (IrBal.).

Of similar character are SBal. constructions such as • man guš-ān ã "I keep saying"; man gušagī ã "I am about to say".

Note that all these constructions pattern ergatively in the relevant dialects if the finite verb is transitive, thence e.g.

• āy ã gušt kutagā "they (obl.) could have said" (kan-/ kurt tr.); ā gušag ã it ã "they were saying" ("to be" itr.), whereas in compound tenses, it is the (in)transitivity of the main verb which determines the construction, e.g. • ā kapta bītag ã "they had fallen" vs. āy ã gušta bīta "they had said" (see above).

25 For further discussion, cf. BUDDRUSS 1977:9ff., 1988:62f. SOKOLOV 1956:84 (SUNDERMANN 1989a:129, DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2002:57f.).

Causatives

Causatives are built by adding the suffix -ēn-to the present stem, e.g.

• man čuk-ã ras-ēn-ã "I transport the children (lit.: cause the children to arrive)" (SBal.).

Double causatives occur in many dialects. The suffix is -āēn-(EBal. -ain-), e.g.

• man āyā čē čuk-ã ras-āēn-ã "I make him/her transport the children (lit.: cause the children to be transported by him/her)" (FARRELL 1990:49).

Conjunctions

As Balochi is mainly a spoken language, the syntax is usually rather simple, and texts tend to be composed of main clauses for the most part. 28 It is therefore not surprising that the conjunctions which do occur have been borrowed from neighbouring languages, e.g. agar "if", lēkin "but".

Word formation

Some of the most common derivations are:

• from adjectives:

-ī forms abstract nouns (cf. p. 121); • from nouns (cf. II 2.4.4.1):

adjective suffixes without specific meaning: -ak, -ag, -ūg, -īg, -ī etc.; -ik(k), -uk, -luk have diminutive meaning; denominative verbs can be formed from nouns without the addition of suffixes (cf. III 4).

• from verbs:

-ōk forms agent nouns from the present stem of verbs (cf. p. 101, 163).

Etymological index

The etymological index on the following pages gives a survey of the Balochi words discussed or mentioned in the chapters above and the most important cognates (New Persian, Avestan, Parthian and Old Indian), as well as the most relevant literature. Each entry is to be understood as a kind of notecard on which only the most important catchwords have been written. It is not the aim of the index to list all cognates, nor are the cognates in every case necessarily completely equivalent to the Balochi word with regard to their morphological structure or other details.

The order of the lemmata follows the Arabic alphabet. Arabic loanwords are grouped according to their Balochi orthography/pronunciation (i.e. < ˙ h > as h etc., <f> under p), provided the latter is found in some source (otherwise the word is found where the Arabic orthography would have it). Nasal vowels are treated as the corresponding vowel + n and are only noted as such if no variant with vowel + n has been found. The aspiration ( h ) found in some dialects is not taken into account in the ordering. Following the practice of SHG and other dictionaries in Arabic script, words with ā-(Ú) come before those beginning with other vowels (i.e. Z). Words with variants with ā-and a-are found under ā-.

The Balochi words are cited in their SWBal. form if available. Verbs are cited as present stem / past stem (the same applies to Prth. NP and MP verbs). 1 The past stem of verbs which differ from the corresponding present stem in a synchronically unpredictable way are cited as a separate lemma. In the case of past stems in Common Balochi *kt which have different forms in each dialect group (see II 2.2.1.1 and the subchapters of II 3.2), the SBal. variant (-tk) is cited as a representative of all variants.

GEB is cited according to the numbers given in GEIGER 1890, all other works according to pages. In case GEB is in need of correction or addition, the first mentioning of these (if any is available) or other works relevant for the word in question are also referred to. Note that in a number of cases, the works referred to do not discuss the Balochi word, but the NP cognate. In case of obvious borrowings from NP-Ar., there is usually no reference given as to who was the first to observe the borrowing. For details see the cited chapter.

Words in brackets indicate that it is not sure whether the given word belongs here or not, or that they are not related, but cited to show what some language has for the concept in question. ‡ means that the existence of the words is questionable. ≈ marks words which are not direct cognates of the respective Balochi words. "= NP" means that the Bal. word might be genuine according to Bal. sound laws, but might also have been borrowed from NP. The same method of marking a possible loanword is used with other languages (e.g. = Ur. means that the word might come from Ur. or be genuine). II 3.1.3.3, 3.2.1.3, 3.3.1.5 ELFENBEIN 1990 II 2.2.2.5,3.1.1.3,3.1.1.3,3.1.2.3.2,3.1.2.4 x w āb 123, 276, 410

x w āǐa 305, 410

x w āl 133

x w ān-/ x w ānd 122, 314, 411

x w āhar 94, 97, 123, 257, 258, 372, 400

x w āi 410

x w ad > x w ud 122, 141, 335, 411

x w ar-> x w ur-/ x w urd 97, 122, 411 195, 266, 283, 347, 359, 374, 395 dil 83, 97, 279, 295, 374, 380 dum(b)

x

  :269ff. (abbreviation used in III 2) Pe = PEHRSON 1966:36ff. (abbreviation used in III 2) Rz = RZEHAK 1991:185f. (abbreviation used in III 2) SHG = SAYAD HASHMI: Sayad Ganj. The First Balochi Dictionary. Karachi 2000

  ¯ d is replaced by ˙ d or d (cf. II 3.1.1.4). The remaining implosive consonants are replaced by corresponding non-implosive consonants.

  the reduction of *turšn > tunn involves šn > n regardless of the way of the development (via *turn: ršn > rn > n(n) or via *tušn: ršn > šn > n(n)); 269 • nind-"sit" might involve a similar change if there was some protoform *nišnd-(OIr. ni + nasal stem from √had) involved. 270

  communication). It is derived by SALEMANN 1901:280 from *-k-a ˘ i na-, i.e. a combination of a ksuffix with the adj. suffix Av. -aēna-, Prth., Bal. -ēn (cf. p. 151).

  obviously a derivation of būn ˙ d (EAL; būnd is a misprint) "old quilt, bedding" with change of d > ˙ d (cf. II 3.1.1.4).

  It has long been noticed that Balochi shows examples of a change of m > w /V_{V, #}.

472

  This word is used in a number of variants: xarāb (FBB), (h)arāb (BMC, SHG), k(a)rāb (FBB). 473 For cognates (e.g. Sogd. zywr), cf. BAILEY 1979:21a. zēb may have been borrowed from NP. 474 gwabz (EAL, SHG), gwamz (SHG, EAL: EBal.) is not a case of voicing of consonants (vs. PIE * ˘ u opsā-), but goes back to PIr. * ˘ u abza-< PIIr. * ˘ u abz h a-, cf. Av. vabžaka-(BARTHOLOMAE 1890:552, HOFFMANN/ FORSSMAN 1996:105), cf. p. 99.

  g(w)-(cf. II 2.1.3.3.1), word-initial v-/ w-of borrowed words is treated in various ways:A couple of words show the Bal. treatment of OIr.

  299

  Abbreviations:

  2.1.2.2 OIr. č, ǐ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2.3 OIr. (non-Persian) s, z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2.4 OP ç < PIr. *\r, OP s < PIr. *ś ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2.5 OIr. š, ž . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2.6 OIr. h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3 Old Iranian sonorants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.1 OIr. m, n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.2 OIr. r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.3 OIr. ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.3.1 Word-initial ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.3.2 Postvocalic ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.4 OIr. ˘ i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Consonant clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 Combinations with fricatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.1 Fricative + t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.2 Fricative + š . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.3 Stop/Fricative + nasal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.4 Fricative + r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.4.1 Word-initial position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.4.2 Word-internal position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.5 Fricative + ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.5.1 OIr. f ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.5.2 OIr. \ ˘ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.5.3 OIr. d ˘ u -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1.5.4 OIr. h ˘ u -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Combinations with sibilants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2.1 Sibilant + stop/affricate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2.1.1 OIr. sT > šT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2.1.2 OIr. zd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2.1.3 OIr. s + č . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2.2 Sibilant + nasal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2.3 Sibilant + sonorant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 Combinations with sonorants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3.1 OIr. r\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3.2 OIr. rš, rž . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3.3 OIr. rn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3.4 OIr. .2.4 Miscellaneous consonant clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Vowels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Simple vowels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1.1 Loss of vowels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1.2 OIr. a, i, u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1.3 OIr. ā, ī, ū . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 PIr. * ˚ r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2.1 PIr. * ˚ r/C_C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2.2 PIr. .3.3 Diphthongs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . first singular (the other persons are abbreviated accordingly)

		Abbreviations
	V: any vowel
	E: PIE *a,e,o
	2.2.3.5 (Early) MIr. accusative ˘ u (i) ˘ adv. adverb aor. aorist caus. causative cop. copula comp. comparative dat. dative dem. demonstrative dim. diminutive du. dual gen. genitive indef. indefinite inf. infinitive instr. instrumental ipr. imperative itr. intransitive neg. negative nom. nominative obl. oblique part. participle perf. perfect pl. plural postp. postposition pref. prefix #: word boundary i -. acc. adj. adjective +	.
	prep.	preposition
	pres.	present
	pron.	pronoun
	sg.	singular
	subj.	subjunctive
	suff.	suffix
	tr.	transitive

2.1.3.4.1 Word-initial ˘ i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3.4.2 Word-internal ˘ i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 ˘ u r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2* ˚ r ˘ i > ir? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2.3 PIr. * ˚ rH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

  (cf. also II 2.2.1.5.4), MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255 thinks (based on his interpretation of EBal. w h , cf. II 1.1.2.2)

				1. General Remarks
		Consonants:		Vowels: 5
	p	t	č	k	i ī	u	ū
	b	d	ǐ	g	ē	ō
		s	š		a	ā
		z
	m	n
		r			Diphthongs:
	w 6	l	y	h	ai, au
	Phonemic system of Common Balochi
	Long (geminated) consonants 7

Geminated consonants are mainly found in loanwords (cf. II 3.3.1.5). Where geminates occur in genuine words, they go back to a consonant cluster (cf. the table in II 2) 8 or are the result of isometric substitution (cf. II 3.1.3.1). With the exception of y, h and the phonemes of limited occurrence (given in brackets in the following tables), all consonants may occur in geminated form

(for examples, cf. II 3.3.1.5)

. ˘ u -

  2.3.1. Balochi and NP point to PIIr. buua i nti in some way (not regular by Bal. sound laws). Other present stems of this verb are b-(EAL: Kečī, Coastal, Sarawānī, Lāšārī, Eastern dialects), bēy-(ABG, FBB, EAL: Lāšārī), bū-(ABG, BMC, NAWATA 1981), buw-(SHG). For a parallel variation of present stems in the case of "give" (day-etc.), cf. p. OInd. k ˙ s úd h -), ādēnk 22 "mirror" (NP āyīna, 23 Prth. ādēnag), • OIr. nd and rd are also preserved as such: 24 sind-25 "break" (OInd. √c h id: c h inád-, Prth. °sind-/ sist (GHILAIN 1939:83)), gind-26 "see" (Av. √vaēd: vinad-, OInd. √vid: vindá-, Prth. wind-/ windād).

	270.
	The Osset. verb wyn "to be" cited by GEB might belong here despite the irregular development of
	OIr. b-> w-noted by HÜBSCHMANN 1890:555; it might show an assimilation of *ba	˘	u a-> *w-w-
	(CHEUNG 2002:244).

*makas(-ka)-(EAL 98), whereas Av. (maxši-) and OInd. (mák ˙ s -, mák ˙ s ikā-) derive from PIIr. *makš-. 15 For the variant rīk "desert", cf. p. 199. The classification of rēk as a NP loanword (thus GEIGER 1891:444) is possible (for devoicing of word-final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.4), but not necessary. The word is probably neither to be connected to síkatā-as HORN 1893:142 assumes nor to Av. √raēk, OInd. √ric, Bal. rēč-"pour" as GEIGER 1890:143 maintains, but rather to OInd. √ri "flow" and words for "river" derived from this root in a number of IE languages, for which cf. EWAia II:437. 16 The present stem bay-(SHG, EVM, EAL: Raxšānī) might be derived (SOKOLOV 1956:81f.) from *ba ˘ u -(then a SWIr. form, cf. TEDESCO 1921:197) or be connected with Av. 17 For a detailed discussion of this word, cf. p. 82f. 18 There is a certain shortage of examples with postvocalic and word-final b and sure etymology. For some further possible examples, cf. II 2.4.4.2. d > d (GEIGER 1891:429):

• dōč-19 "sew" (NP dōz-/ dōxt), dantān 20 "tooth" (Av. dantān-, NP, Prth. dandān),

• šōd-21 "wash" (NP šōy-/ šust, Prth. šōd-/ šust), kadī "when" (Av. kada, NP kai, Prth. kad), pād "foot" (Av. pād-, NP pāy, Prth. pād), šud "hunger" (YAv. šud-, NP šuy,

Past stem dōtk (BMC, EAL, FBB), dōt (Turkmenistan),

EBal. dōxt, cf. also p. 230, 248, 257.

Iranian fricatives and affricates 2

  Parthian and NP may go back to *geǵ h "intrude, enter"(LIV p. 183, BAILEY 1979:349a) and the Bal. verb to an inchoative present from this root. The Bal. past stems are then secondary formations based on the present stem.

.1.2.1 OIr. f, \, x OIr. f, \, x (i.e. the product of PIE stop /_C, including PIE stop + *h 2 , which comes out as OInd. p h , t h , k h ), change to the corresponding stops (HÜBSCHMANN 1879:387), i.e. they fall together with the outcome of OIr. p, t, k.

30

Similarly, fricatives occurring in loanwords of all times and sources are in most cases replaced by the corresponding stops (cf. II 1.2.2). This change effects the striking absence of fricatives in the phonemic system of Common Balochi (cf. II 1.1.1). 27 The past stem gast has hitherto only been found in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:108. The EBal. past stem is gasi\-(MAYER 1910). According to MORGENSTIERNE 1932:45, the present stem (which is also found in SHG) shows the inchoative suffix OIr. -s-(PIE *-s ḱe-) attached to the root seen in Av. √gah (OInd. √g h as) "eat, devour". A connection to Prth. and NP gaz-/ gašt "bite" (NP gašt is found in addition to gazīd according to HORN 1895:197) seems more likely, however. 28 The past stem is nigōšt (DTB, EAL, GEB) or nigōšit (BMC). "To hear" is uškunag etc. (cf. p. 147).

  alternative hypothesis that the regular outcome is h since most examples are indeed attested both with k and with h. Variants with x are clearly loanwords from Persian. But neither the words with h nor those with k are sure evidence since Persian words with x can be rendered with h or k in Balochi (cf. II 1.2.2). The relevant examples are the following ones: is found in MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48, also mentioned by BAILEY 1979:72b, but not found in any of the glossaries apart from MAYER 1910. ELFENBEIN 1985:233 suggests that it might have been borrowed from Indic (e.g. Lhd. k h ād h "food") and that kād is a "Balochified Persian form for expected Bal *kāz", i.e. a hypercorrect substitution of "Pers." d for z on the model of Bal. zāmāt, NP dāmād "son-in-law", Bal. zān-, NP dān-"know". As these two are the only examples of exact pairs (Bal. zird vs. NP dil "heart" and the other examples where NP shows d will certainly not be recognised as etymologically related pairs), which moreover have the speciality of z/d in word-initial position, such a substitution does not seem likely. Moreover, no Modern Ir. *xāz seems available which might have suffered the hypercorrect change that Elfenbein assumes. 38 It is much more probable that kād is either the genuine Bal. form or borrowed from an Ind. language. At any rate, k h ād-may be a denominative from kād.

			2. Old Iranian > Common Balochi
	Notes:
	•	k h ād-
		Old, Middle Ir. etc. Balochi	NP
		Av. vi-xāda-	kād (noun),	xāy-/ xāyīd	"chew, bite"
		"break off"	EBal. k h ād-/ k h ādi\-(verb)
		OInd. √k h ād
		Av. x ąniia-	kān(īg)	xānī	"spring, well"
		MP, Prth. xānīg
		OInd. k h á-
		Av. xara-	k h ar; (h)ar; xar	xar	"donkey"
		OInd. k h ará-	kargōš, xargōšk	xargōš
		Prth. n ˘ axun 37	nākun, nā(h)un,	nāxun	"fingernail"
		OInd. nak h á-	EBal. (DTB) nāxun
		OInd. śá k h ā-	šāh, šāx	šāx(a)	"branch, horn"

assumes that OIr. \ gives Bal. h, but his examples šāh "king" and rāh "road" may rather be NP loanwords. Similarly, MOŠKALO 1991:22 infers from prāh "wide" (Av. fra\ah-) that OIr. a\a results in Bal. ā, but prāh is likewise a Pers. borrowing

(cf. p. 117)

. 34 For further cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:219a. 35 It seems that Bartholomae was the first one to clarify this point. Referring to GEIGER 1889, he states: "Geiger, Dialektsp., S. 77 sieht in har und handag ächte Balutšiwörter. Gewiss mit Unrecht. Die ächten Wörter sind die mit k und k', die andern aus dem neupers. xandīdan, xar entlehnt" (BARTHOLOMAE 1890:550). MORGENSTIERNE 1948:254 also discusses this point with the conclusion that k is the regular outcome. MOŠKALO 1991:27 has both Bal. k (1991:27) and Bal. h (1991:36), the examples for the latter being har "donkey" (see below) and suhr "red" (for OIr. xr, cf. II 2.2.1.4.2). The following words probably do not belong here: sīk (SHG), sīh (DTB, GEB, Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:96), sī (GEB, SHG) "pike, hook" is likely to have been borrowed from NP sēx (CNP sīx). The etymology is not clear: there are no OIr. cognates, and the connection with OInd. śik h ará-"pointed" etc. has been rejected by KEWA III:334. the "rabbit (lit.: donkey-ear)" Prth. xand-"smile" kand-/ kandit; (h)and-/ handit; xand-/ xandit 36 xand-/ xandīd "laugh" Av. xumba-Prth. xumb kumb "pool, jar"; humb "jar" xum(b) "pot, vessel" OP may ˘ uxa-, Prth. mēx, OInd. may úk h a-mīk "top of head", mik, EAL mēk; mēh "tent peg", EVM mī mēx, CNP mīx "stake, pole, nail" Bal. cognates of words with OIr. x The origin of (h)ōrk (BMC, EVM, EAL, SHG), hōr(g) (DTB), kōrk (BRAY 1934:185, according to EAL used in Kēčī, but perhaps non-existent according to ROSSI 1979:29), (h)urk (for which cf. p. 188) "empty" is not clear. According to ROSSI 1979:29, Brahui xōrk, hōrk has probably been borrowed from Balochi, but this need not imply the existence of Bal. *xōrk, since the Br. word may also have been borrowed from hōrk. GEIGER's argument (1891:451) that the word has been borrowed from NP xōlā "empty" because of the Bal. h-is not convincing either (ROSSI 1979:29). It remains possible, but far from sure, that Bal. (h)ōrk is a cognate of some sort of NP xōla. 36 xand-is from DTB and GEB. hand-is qualified as a loanword by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:68. 37 Prth. <n'xwn> is found in Angad Rōšnān Ia 1b, which is to be read (correcting BOYCE 1954:120) <hrw [b]nd pdbnd ẅ n'xw(n m)[yx] cy bndyst'n> "every tie, bar and nail, rivet of the prison" (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication), <nxwn> is attested twice. MP also has n ˘ axun according to MACKENZIE 1986:xxiii. • kānīg (also kā(h)n (BMC), kahnī(g)) 39 is also attested indirectly in Br. k h ānī (Bal. loanword, MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48). According to EWAia I:451, this word (the OInd. cognate is k h á-) does not belong to NP kan-/ kand "dig" (OInd. √k h an). Av. has xā-and x ąniia-(cf. KELLENS 1974:384). • k h ar is only found in GCD, xar in DTB, GEB, GCD. kargōš occurs in NAWATA 1981:35, xargōšk in DTB. One might also connect the first member of Bal. kargōš, NP xargōš to the xar-of NP

  in loanwords might be explained as being analogical to words with a regular opposition Bal. h vs. NP x. This is the case with OIr. hu-, which regularly gives Bal. hu-, NP xu-(e.g. Bal. hušk vs. NP xušk "dry", Bal. hūk vs. NP xūk "pig", cf. II 2.1.2.6). On the other hand, a replacement of x by k would be parallel to the replacement of f by p and of ġ by g (cf. II 1.2.2), but is much less common and seems to be restricted to SBal. dialects.

	38 Elfenbein implies (as does EMMERICK 1968:26) that NP xāy-belongs with Prth. xāz-/ xāzād
	"devour" and Khot. k h āś-"eat" and not (as presumed by EWAia I:451f.) with OInd. √k h ād.
	39 For WBal. ah > ā and its hypercorrect reversal, cf. II 3.2.3.3.

•

It is not clear whether OIr. -ay ˘ u-(OP may ˘ uxa-) would give Bal. ē or ī or rather something else.

There seems to be no EBal. †mē/īx < mē/īk which would make the case for an inherited word stronger. 40

• šāx is found in ABG, DTB, EAL, EVM, GEB. šāh is qualified as a loanword by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:68. OInd. initial ś does not usually correspond to Ir. š. 41 I do not see how NP šāx etc. could be connected (as does BAILEY 1979:409b) to OInd. ś ˚ ŕṅga-"horn". 42 It is probable, although not entirely sure, that k is the regular outcome: most items are represented by a form with k, although the number alone is no conclusive evidence. For systematic reasons, one would also expect Bal. k from OIr. x, parallel to Bal. p and t 40 GEIGER 1890:136 assumes that mēh (also in DTB) has been borrowed from NP. For further discussion of the Ir. (proto-)forms, cf. ABAEV I:124f., EWAia II:317. For mik "nail", cf. p. 187. 41 Cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 1982:169, 2000:208 and EWAia II:628 for a discussion of this problem. 42 For a Bal. cognate of this word, cf. p. 130. from OIr. f, \, respectively. 43 Another argument may be that Kurdish, which is closely related to Balochi in a number of other aspects, has /k h / (MACKENZIE 1961:71): k'êr "donkey", k'enîn "to laugh", k'anî "spring", korōs (cited by GEIGER 1890:133) "cock", k'irîn (OInd. √krī, NP xar-/ xarīd, no cognate attested in Balochi) "to buy". 44 The frequent replacement of x by h For secondary NP x-, cf. II 2.4.1.4. For OIr. h ˘ u -(NP x w -), cf. II 2.2.1.5.4.

  48 This verb is found in MOCKLER 1877 (thence GEIGER 1890:122), EAL (maybe from the same source), and SHG. The past stem is gičit. The past stem gičint mentioned in EAL is likely to be based on EBal. gišint h -with a reversal of CBal. č/V_V > EBal. š (cf. II 3.2.1.1). gišint

	from *	˘	u i-ča ˘ i -ana-,
	parallel to other formations from the full grade of a root in *a ˘ i with suffix *-ana-, e.g. (MACKENZIE

h -noted by GEIGER 1890:122 is obviously an error for gišaint h -taken from DAMES 1881:106, though. The following EBal. forms are found: GILBERTSON 1925:121, 586 has gišēn-/ gišēnt h -, DTB gišain-/ gišaint h -. The seemingly causative formation gišēn-and the "double causative" (cf. V 1.7.8) gišainare probably due to an adaptation of the unusual stem in -in-to the common causative formations, the past stems also being formed as if derived from a regular causative stem. ELFENBEIN 1985:231 assumes that gičēn "selected, chosen, outstanding" is the result of a contamination of gēč-"sift" (for which cf. p. 98) and gičin-, i.e. of the past stem gičint (for which see above), via *gēčēn(t). An easier way than this rather complicated assumption would be to have gičēn influenced by the present stem in -ēn-and/or the adj. suffix -ēn. No specific explanation is necessary, however: gičēn may directly correspond to MPZ <wcyn> which is interpreted as wizēn "choice" by MACKENZIE 1986:93. MP wizēn (and Bal. gičēn) may be derived

  (in all dialects and stems) is secondary. For cognates of the root in non-Ir. languages (e.g. Latin fugiō "flee"), cf. LIV p. 84. Prth. wis°); • PIE *s ḱ: sind-/ sist "break" (Av. √saēd, OInd. √c h id, cf. also p. 79); suffix *s ḱe-60 : tus-"suffocate" (cf. NP tuhī, Prth. tusīg, both "empty"), tōs-61

	Georg. vaˇ ˙ c ar-"tradesman".
	53 This verb belongs to a small group of verbs which have a 3sg. ending -t (ǐant) vs. usual -ī(t).
	54 EAL 17 considers this verb (past stem bōtk etc., cf. p. 230, 241) as "perhaps genuine (...) rather than
	L[oan]W[ord]" from Si./Lhd.	¯ buǐǐ h a	˙	n u, which indeed does not fit well since there is no evidence that
	Bal. -ō-

outcome of the PIE palatals (* ḱ,*ǵ (h) > PIIr. *ć, *j (h) > PIr. *ś, *ź; OP \, d > MP/NP h, d) falls together with s, z of other sources (PIE *s in consonant clusters): 52 Hungarian vásár "market", obviously borrowed from a cognate of NP bāzār, must go back to a word with -č-, i.e. presupposes * ˘ u ačar (BENK Ő 1993ff.:1610) which can also be seen in Arm. vačar and 55 The etymology of raǐ-has apparently gone unnoticed so far, nor is the word noted in linguistic works treating Balochi. For Ir. cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:362, MACIUSZAK 1996:26, 28 (who do not mention Bal. raǐ-), for the EBal. variant, cf. p. 229. Non-Pers. OIr. s > s (GEIGER 1891:430f.): 56 • PIE * ḱ: sōč-57 "burn sth." (Av. saoča-, OInd. √śuc, NP sōz-/ sōxt, Prth. sōž-/ suxt (GHILAIN 1939:63)), āsin "iron" (NP āhan, Prth. āsun), 58 brēs-59 "spin" (Av. uruuaēsa-, NP rēs-/ rišt, Prth. ā-rwis-/ ā-rwist, ā-rwisād), rōpāsk "fox" (NP rōbāh, Prth. rōbās, OInd. lopāśá-), pas "sheep, goat" (Av. pasu-, OInd. paśú-, MP pah, Prth. pas), gis "house" (Av. vīs-, OInd. víś-, "extinguish" vs. forms without this suffix, e.g. Av. taošaiia-; waps-62 "go to sleep" (Av. x v afsa-); • PIE *t s t: past part. in PIE *-d-to-(OIr. -s-ta-), e.g. rust (pres. rud-"grow", Prth., NP rust); sist (pres. sind-, see above). 56 Geiger's example sā'ig "shadow" (also sāhig, sāyig (EAL, cf. p. 162), sāī (EAL), sāyag (BMC)

  63

.2.4 OP ç < PIr. *\r, OP s < PIr. *ś ˘ u

  At least some Modern Ind. words may have been borrowed from Portuguese mesa (Jost Gippert, personal communication).68 For the suffix, cf. p. 163. There is a regular reduction of zd > z(z) (cf. II 2.2.2.1.2), e.g. muz(z)

	2.1In the case of these two consonant clusters, Balochi does not seem to go with other
	NWIr. languages, but with Persian, which reduces the cluster to a sibilant.
	• PIE *ǵ (h) :
	zān-64 "know" (Av. zanā-, NP dān-/ dānist, Prth. zān-/ zānād), zāmāt "son-in-PIr. *\r > s(s) (GEIGER 1891:415, 430): 70
	law" (Av. zāmātar-, NP dāmād); mazan 65 "big" (Av. maz-, MPM (NWIr. form)
	mazan "monster", OInd. mahánt-), mēz-66 "urinate" (Av. maēza-, NP mēz-/ mēzīd); • pus(s)ag "son" (Av. pu\ra-, Prth. puhr) and dās "sickel" (OInd. d átra-) may have
	• PIE *z: 67 been borrowed from MP pus, MP/NP dās, respectively;
	• if āpus "pregnant" (Av. apu\ra-, NP ābistan, Prth. (with a different first member) bar-buhr) was borrowed (cf. MP ābus), it would have to be a very old loanword. The following words do not have a direct Pers. counterpart, so that they are less likely to have been borrowed. This speaks for s(s) as the regular Bal. result of PIr. *\r. • ās 71 "fire" (Av. (obl.) ā\r-vs. MP, Prth. ādur from OIr. (Av.) ātar-); • pis(s) "father", mās "mother", brās "brother", zāmās "son/brother-in-law" of some WBal. dialects 72 go back to the OIr. (Av.) obl. cases (pi\r-, mā\r-etc.) according to BARTHOLOMAE 1885:130, 133); 73 70 A further example would be Br. his, hīs, hēs "ashes" if this comes indeed, as MORGENSTIERNE naz(z)(īk) not (pace GEIGER 1932:47 would have it, from Bal. *ēs and if this goes back to *ā\r ˘ i a-(Psht. ēre etc.
	1891:431) examples for *z, but rather Pers. loanwords (otherwise they should have ž, cf. Av.
	duždāh-"evildoing" (NARTEN 1986:286); mīžda-, Prth. mužd), cf. II 2.1.2.5.
	69 EAL; otherwise muzg "back of head" (SHG). The variant maǐg (EVM, EAL "brain"; SHG: "stone
	of a fruit etc.", EBal. (DTB) mažg) leads MOŠKALO (1991:29, 38f.) to assume that OIr. z may result
	in Bal. ǐ (with maǐg as the only example). Although a special development of OIr. zg is possible, it
	does not seem necessary since maǐg may be interpreted (GEIGER 1891:426, ELFENBEIN 1985:234) as
	a hypercorrect substitution of ǐ for perceived Pers. z (cf. e.g. NP zan vs. Bal. ǐan "woman" etc., cf.
	II 2.1.2.2), with mažg as its EBal. variant. For mazg, magz, cf. p. 86, 207.

68

"near" (Av. nazdiiō, NP nazd(īk), Prth. nazd), mazg 69 "brain, marrow" (Av. mazga-, NP ma ġz).

63 Since Balochi shows z for PIE *ǵ

(h)

, dap "mouth" must have been borrowed from Persian (certainly not from NP as ELFENBEIN 1990/II:38 assumes), although a fitting OP word is not attested

(GEIGER 1890(GEIGER :119, 1891:431):431)

. Bal. dap, Av. zafar/n-and NP dahān show a (dialectal?) substitution of f (> NP h) for *b h vs. OInd. jámb h a-"teeth", Greek g< omfo@ "nail, post" etc. (cf. BAILEY 1979:351b). For Bal. dast "hand", cf. p. 292.

64 Like ǐan-, this verb has a 3sg. in -t (zānt, identical with the past stem zānt).

65 NP mih, Av. mas-do not belong here, but with Greek makr< o@ etc. (BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553).

66 The past stem of this verb is mēst (EAL), mēzit (EAL), mišt (DTB, EAL: mainly Eastern). EBal. also has present stems miž-(DTB), mēž-(EAL: mainly Eastern)), the ž may be hypercorrect (z being perceived as "Pers. variant" of Bal. ǐ / Ebal. ž) or influenced by Psht. mēž-.

67 mēz (BMC, NAWATA 1981:9) "table" would be an additional example (NP mēz, Av. miiazda-, OInd. miyéd h a-, both latter words "sacrificial meal", note that the further connection to OInd. méd h a-is doubtful, EWAia II:356). However, since tables do not figure among traditional Baloch household items, the word will rather have been borrowed from those who introduced the object into Baloch society (cf. ˙ t ēbal (FBB) "table

"

). mēǐ (ABG, EAL) could be (as suggested by ELFENBEIN 1985:234) its hypercorrect variant or (EAL 97) borrowed from Lhd. mē ¯ ǐ. "wages", duz(z) "thief" (also duzd (EVM), duz(z)ī "theft" (DTB, FBB) and duz(z)-/ duz(z)it "steal") unless duz(z) has been borrowed from MP duz. With regard to this parallel, naz(z), naz(z)īk could, but not necessarily has to, also be a loanword from Persian. muz(z) and duz(z) are

  .

	PIr. *ś	˘	u > s (GEIGER 1891:430): 76
	In a NWIr. language one would expect PIr. *ś	˘	u (Av. sp, OP s) to come out as sp.

Av. zb) > ?

	• sīy-/ sīt (DAMES 1881, HITTU RAM 1881, EAL) "swell" which according to GEIGER
	1891:430 and BAILEY 1979:476a is a cognate of OInd. śváya-;
	• šiš "louse" (NP supuš, šipiš, Av. spiš-), if existing, 81 might go back to a form with
	*ś	˘	u -; this reconstruction is supported by Wakhi šiš (MORGENSTIERNE 1927:69,
	STEBLIN-KAMENSKIJ 1999:30, 330), if there is no process of assimilation involved
	in the Wakhi word. The Bal. development could have been *siš > šiš (for
	assimilations of this kind, cf. p. 180).
	While the examples are not entirely convincing, in the absence of evidence for sp, one
	may assume that s is the regular outcome of PIr. *ś	˘	u . 82
	PIr. *ź	˘	u (
				might belong to Psht. sāh, Gabri šā,
	OInd. śvāsá-, unless it has been borrowed from Pashto or from Ind. (which might
	then also apply to Psht. sāh, MORGENSTIERNE 1927:66); 80
	74 This form is noted by SPOONER 1967:67, who writes doksīč with -o-representing the IrBal.
	pronunciation of /u/ (cf. II 3.2.4.2). For further discussion of this word, cf. p. 178.
	75 It seems that Judeo-NP <dwškyzh> (cited in MACKENZIE 1986:27) might be explained in the same
	way and that MPM duxš "maiden" may also belong here.
	76 GEIGER 1891:430 notes that "in isolated cases" of word-initial sp, a loss of p seems to have taken
	place. MOŠKALO 1991:25, 31, 37, 39, citing the examples spēt and asp, assumes Bal. sp < PIr. *ś	˘	u .
	Note that āsin "iron" is not to be adduced here (against GEIGER 1891:435), cf. p. 87.
	77 EVM, EAL, NAWATA 1981:37; otherwise sipēt, ispēt etc., for which cf. also p. 152.
	78 Also haps (GEB), aps. gō ˙	r ā (FBB; from Ur. g h ō ˙	r ā) and bōr (cf. p. 310) are also used. For further
	discussion of asp, cf. p. 158f.
	79 For the devoicing of final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.4.
	80 Elfenbein seems to assume (EAL 130) that the Ind. word (Lhd. sāh etc.) has been borrowed from NP
	where it does not seem to be attested, however.

.3 Old Iranian sonorants 2.1.3.1 OIr. m, n

  .

	GEIGER 1891:426 cites a number of examples in which š is assimilated to a following voiced consonant, thereby becoming ž. Several cases involve an alleged assimilation šN > žN. With regard to the rule that in good examples š is assimilated to a following nasal (cf. II 2.2.2.2), Geiger's cases must be so young that the reduction was no longer operating. Most of them can indeed be shown to be loanwords. This assimilation 2.1.2.6 OIr. h With the exception of some dialects (cf. II 3.2.3.1), h is preserved in Balochi, including word-initial hu-, which gives NP xu-. For OIr. h ˘ u -, cf. II 2.2.1.5.4. n > n (GEIGER 1891:416): • ništ 110 "sat down" (NP, Prth. nišast), EBal. namāš 111 "prayer" (Av. n e mah-, NP namāz, Prth. namāž), 2.1The OIr. nasals are preserved and are rather unproblematic. • zin-112 "seize" (Av. zinā-), 113 dantān "tooth" (Av. dantān-, NP, Prth. dandān),
	process is therefore to be attributed to the post-Common Balochi era (cf. II 3.1.1.3). For h > h (GEIGER 1891:423): 98 zān(uk) "knee" (Av. zānu°, NP (NWIr. form) zānū, Prth. zānūg), 114
	an EBal. additional case of assimilation cited by Geiger, cf. p. 235. m > m (GEIGER 1891:417): 103 sind-"break" (OInd. √c h id: c h inád-, Prth. °sind-/ sist (GHILAIN 1939:83)), gind-
	• ham 99 "also" (Av., NP, Prth. ham), gwahār 100 "sister" (Av. x v aohar-, NP x w āhar, "see" (Av. √vaēd: vinad-, OInd. √vid: vindá-, Prth. wind-/ windād). 115
	ž > ž: Prth. wxār); • mič-104 "suck" (NP maz-/ mazīd), madag "locust, prawn" (Av. madaxa-, NP
	• hu-: huš-/ hušt "dry (verb, itr.)" (Av. √haoš, NP xōš-/ xōšīd, MP hōš-/ hōšīd, Prth. maig 105 ), Some dialects tend to replace vowel + n by a nasalised vowel. Secondary n also occurs
	GEIGER 1891:426 only considers secondary cases of ž, i.e. assimilations of the type huš-/ hušād 101 ), hušk "dry" (NP xušk, Prth. hušk), hūk 102 "pig" (Av. hū-, NP • rōmast 106 "rumination" (OInd. romant h a-), nēm(ag) "half" (Av. naēma-, NP quite often (for both phenomena, cf. II 3.1.3.3).
	discussed immediately above and in II 3.1.1.3 and the ž of the Eastern dialects resulting xūk, MP xūg, Prth. hūg). nīm(a), MP nēm(ag) 107 , Prth. nēm°).
	from CBal. ǐ in postvocalic position. However, it is possible that OIr. ž (for its sources, 2.1.3.2 OIr. r
	cf. HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1996:102, 104) is preserved in some words: The loss of h in ač "of" (for further discussion, cf. p. 85) vs. OIr. hača goes back to GEIGER 1891:416 notes that m is written <n> before labials (obviously in imitation of
	MIr. times (cf. Prth. až) and may be attributed to sandhi phenomena. NP orthography), e.g. ‡ §"f rumbag 108 "to hurry", ÿ¸kumb 109 "pool". SHG has both r > r (GEIGER 1891:417):
	• dūžah 95 "hell" (Av. daožao v ha-, NP dōzax, Prth. dōžax, MP dušox, cf. also p. 227); <-nb-> and <-mb-> in each case with the mb variant as the main entry.
	• dužman 96 "enemy" (NP dušman, Prth. dušmen) may show a secondary assimilation For secondary h, cf. II 2.4.1. For the dialectal change m > w, cf. p. 232f. OIr. r is likewise preserved in Balochi:
	(cf. e.g. mēžmurg, cf. p. 178f.) of borrowed dušman. The Bal. outcome of OIr.
	(Av.) dušmanah-, dušma i niiu-might be expected to give †dum(m)an, but the
	morpheme boundary may have prevented the assimilation. If so, it could be 103 GEIGER's 1891:417 example zūm "scorpion" which he (GEB 428) connects with Av. √zū, OInd. √jū
	"hurry" has no cognate with a similar meaning and/or suffix (cf. also p. 197, 242). The only compared to OAv. dužmanah-(vs. YAv. dušmanah-, HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 98 For Geiger's example hapt "7", cf. p. 81, for sāh "breath", cf. p. 90. derivative of this root in Modern Iranian seems to be Bal. zūt, NP zūd "quick" (EWAia I:580), for 110 BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553 underlines that this is a remarkable form, going back to zero-grade *ni-šd-1996:104) and show that žm was not reduced to m(m) as was šm (cf. II 2.2.2.2). which cf. p. 142, 197. I cannot see how zūm might be connected (as does EVM) with OInd. jámb h a-ta-while NP has the full grade. For the present stem nind-, cf. p. 127. 99 This is again a word which may have been borrowed from NP, but might also be inherited (GEIGER There seems to be no second Bal. word with žN, all potential examples being 1891:444). The same applies to ǐih-"flee" (past stem ǐist), cf. NP ǐah-/ ǐast (qualified as a "teeth" (for Ir. cognates of this word, cf. p. 88 and BAILEY 1979:351b). 111 This word (for the variant nimāš, cf. p. 193) corresponds to (unattested) SWBal. *namāč and to NP
	loanwords, and with regard to šN > N(N), it seems at least equally likely that žm loanword by GEIGER 1891:115), the etymology of which is not clear; HÜBSCHMANN 1895:50 doubts 104 The past stem of this verb is mitk (EAL, BMC), mičit (EAL). In Turkmenistan, mēč-(NAWATA namāz. Buddhist Sogd. nm'cyw suggests a derivation from *namāči ˘ i am, acc. of a derivative of
	would have likewise assimilated 97 and that dužman has been borrowed from NP. HORN's assumption (1893:94) of a relationship with OInd. √yas "boil" on semantical grounds. 1981:17: mič-) / mēt is used (EVM, SOKOLOV 1956:80, BUDDRUSS 1988:78). According to *namāka-"praising" (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:215).
	• muž (ABG, DTB) "mist, fog" may be connected with other Ir. words deriving from OIr. *mižā-(for these, cf. GERSHEVITCH 1964a:90f., cf. also p. 229, 286). 100 For discussion of this word, cf. p. 123. of the root may be seen in MP hōšāg "warm wind" (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal (e.g. Av. maēka ˙ n t-"(water) coming out"), cf. BAILEY 1979:322b. BOYCE 1977 and DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2000:83). The transitive verb with the appropriate degree rules in II 3.1.2.3.1), thus NP maz-must stand for *miz-. For possible cognates in other Ir. languages 101 With regard to the Bal. verb, one might consider reading the Prth. itr. verb huš-/ hušād (against HÜBSCHMANN 1895:98, the NP dialect forms mentioned in HORN 1893:219 show that the vocalism 112 The past stem is zit (BMC, DTB, EVM, EAL: Raxšānī, Eastern), zīt (EVM, NAWATA 1981:17, EAL: of Balochi which points to √*ma ˘ i k is old (and not a palatalisation product of *mač-according to the Kečī, Coastal, Lāšārī), zint h -(DTB).
	105 NP maig may be derived from OIr. *madika-(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:100), but also from *madaka-communication), hōšāgēn "drying, withering". Parallels for u in a Prth. past stem are xunād (pres. xun-"sound", cf. p. 122) and tuxšād (pres. tuxš-"strive"). If so, one may assume that WIr. originally (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:203 40 ), thus from the same form as Bal. madag.
	95 ABG; DTB dōžī. The variants dōzah (SHG), dōzak (EAL), dōzax (DTB), dōzix (BMC) have been had itr. *huš-/ hušt and tr. *hōš-/ hušt (?). Since the meaning of the past stem is similar at least in
	borrowed from Persian (GEIGER 1891:448). It is not entirely impossible that dūžah etc. has likewise terms of result ("became dry" and "made dry"), only one verb survived, its form being MP hōš-/
	been borrowed from NP, although a rather complicated combination of processes would have to be hōšīd, NP xōš-/ xōšīd, Prth. huš-/ hušād and Bal. huš-/ hušt, all itr. A present stem *huš-(y)a-may
	assumed, with NP dōzax being made into hypercorrect dōǐak/x (replacing perceived "Persian" z by also be seen in Osset., Sogd. and Khot. (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1989a:257).
	Morgenstierne, obviously unaware of Bartholomae's explanation, prefers to derive muš-(together "Bal." ǐ as if it came from OIr. ǐ; dōǐik, dōǐak is found in EAL, but its existence does not seem to EAL 68 considers Br. huš-"burn" as "not related" to (i.e. not borrowed from) the Bal. word,
	with ambiguous Psht. muˇ ˙ s e l etc., cf. also MORGENSTIERNE 1973:92) from the Ir. cognate of OInd. be sure); its EBal. variant would be †dōžax. For the occasional change of ō > ū, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2. probably because MORGENSTIERNE 1932:47 assumes that it might have been borrowed from some
	√m ˚ rś. If this was the case, the present stems Prth. °marz-, NP māl-would come from a different 96 ABG, DTB, EAL; SHG dužmin. NP dušman (BMC, EAL), dušmin (SHG) is also used. For further Ir. cognate of OInd. √u ˙ s "burn".
	root (i.e. the cognate of OInd. √m ˚ rj) than the past stem. discussion, cf. p. 193.
	For * ˚ r and rš > š, cf. II 2.3.2 and 2.2.3.2, respectively. 97 Cf. the parallel assimilations of šN and žN in some variants of Sogdian (GERSHEVITCH 1954:58).

.3.4 OIr. ˘ i 2.1.3.4.1 Word-initial ˘ i

	The occasional change of w to m mentioned by GEIGER 1891:417 seems to be a
	hypercorrect reversal of the EBal. change m > w (cf. II p. 232f.). For OIr.	˘	u + other
	consonants, cf. II 2.1.2.4, 2.2.1.5, 2.2.3.4, for au /_C, cf. II 2.3.3.
	2.1# ˘ i -> ǐ i-: 154
	• ǐau "barley" (Av. yauua-, NP ǐau, cf. p. 102), ǐug, EBal. ǐō ġ155 "yoke" (NP ǐu ġ,
	Prth. yōg), ǐwān "young, good" (Av. yuuan-, NP ǐawān, Prth. yuwān, cf. p. 218)
	may have been borrowed from NP; ǐantar 156 "mill" (NP ǐandar) may have been
	borrowed from Ur. ǐantr(a) (EAL 73); 157 ǐōd "man" might have been borrowed
	from Ur. ǐō(d)d h ā "warrior";
	• more reliable examples are: ǐātūg "sorcerer" (Av. yātu-, NP ǐādū), ǐitā 158
	"separate" (Av. yūta-, NP ǐudā, Prth. yud), ǐuz(z)-/ ǐuz(z)it 159 "move" (NP ǐōy-
	/ ǐust, MP Psalter <ywd>, Prth. yōz-/ yušt, Av. √yaoz).
	154 GEIGER 1891:425 was not yet sure about this development, but it seems quite clear that it takes place
	in Balochi as it does in NP and most other Modern WIr. languages. -ǐō "river" is probably not to
	be adduced here, since it is rather a borrowing from NP ǐō(y), as a disyllabic form might be
	expected in Balochi (cf. OP yauviyā-"canal", OInd. yavy á-"stream"), although there is no parallel
	case. For variants, cf. p. 154, 203. -ǐagar "liver" (cf. p. 204) must indeed be a NP loanword (cf.
	Av. yākar-, OInd. yák ˚ rt-) as GEIGER 1891:419, 425 cautiously assumes.
	155 The SWBal. word may have been borrowed from NP, the EBal. one (DTB, EAL) from Urdu. ō of
	MPM ǐōg "pair" is confirmed by Georg. ǐog-"pair, group" (Jost Gippert, personal communication).
	156 For variants, cf. p. 195. DTB ǐat h ir (with loss of nasal) might point to the word being borrowed
	148 The other NP examples of ā since postvocalic stops are changed to fricatives in Eastern Balochi (cf. II 3.2.1.1.1). It is also ˘ u a > ā (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:168) are not attested in Balochi. For the
	Bal. cognate of NP siyāh "black", Av. siiāuua-, cf. p. 129. possible, though, that the loss of the nasal is such a recent phenomenon that the stop has not been
	149 The past stems are EBal. ǐā\-and, with secondary past stem suffix -it, ǐā(y)it (DTB, EAL: Raxšānī, changed (yet), cf. p. 180f. ǐantar is a handmill consisting of two stones between which the grain is
	Eastern), ǐāhit (BMC, EAL: Coastal, Kēčī, Eastern), cf. also p. 109f. ground (cf. the photo in BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:178).
	150 BAILEY 1979:405a assumes *ǰa 157 This word is in fact an Ind. borrowing in all Ir. languages (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:50). ˘ u ˘ i -and a connection with Av. √gah, but this seems to be unfounded.
	151 According to KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:212f., the preservation of -k in NP pāk, nēk "good" and yak
	"one" shows that intervocalic	˘	u was not yet lost completely in MP. For Bal. yak(k), cf. p. 105.

161 2.1.3.4.2 Word-internal ˘ i

	Ci ˘ i ˘ a > Cī (cf. GEIGER 1891:408): 162
	There are not many examples for this reduction:
	• zī(k) "yesterday" (NP dī-rōz, OInd. hyás);
	• EBal. ǐī ġ "bow string" (< *ǰ(i) ˘ i ā-ka-); 163
	• gīn "breath" (< *	˘	u i ˘ i ana-(

  > Bal. ai noted by GEIGER 1891:411 may be explained otherwise: the EBal. causatives in -ain-probably correspond to the double causatives -āēn-of other dialects 174 which are likely to be secondary combinations of ā and the causative suffix; other variants with ai of words which usually exhibit ē noted by one or the other of Geiger's sources are too marginally attested to build any assumption on them.175

	2. Old Iranian > Common Balochi	107
	-a ˘ i a-> ē? (GEIGER 1891:411): 172 • gen.sg. ending -ai (WBal.), -ē (SBal.), -ī 178 , -a, -∅. 179
	Parallel to the change of a Judging from čē, MOŠKALO 1991:23, 37 assumes that OIr. -ah ˘ u a > ō, one may assume that OIr. -a ˘ i a-comes out as Bal. ē, ˘ i a gives the same result
	although there are no unambiguous examples: as OIr. a ˘ i a, i.e. ē. This would correspond to the development stated for MP (SALEMANN
	• it is not absolutely clear how the causative suffix -ēn-came into existence 1901:272) and Parthian (RASTORGUEVA/MOL ČANOVA 1981a:164), but it leaves kai and
	(SUNDERMANN 1989b:151), but it is likely to go back to a formation with -a ˘ i a-, the variants of the gen.sg. ending unexplained. It thus seems possible to assume that the
	probably *-a ˘ i a-na-(HENNING 1934:212). Since it is an innovation of MP not Bal. outcome of OIr. ah ˘ i a is ai and ē depending on the dialects, parallel to the
	occurring in Parthian (apart from a few instances which may be loanwords, cf. development assumed for MIr. -a ˘ u (cf. p. 101f.
	DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 155), Balochi might have taken it over from Persian. 173
	• zird "heart" (Prth. zird) is cited as zirdē in older sources which might go back to
	MIr. -a ˘ i , OIr. -a ˘ i a-, cf. Av. z e r e daiia-, OInd. h ˚ ŕdaya-, with subsequent
	reinterpretation of -ē as the indefinite article (cf. p. 102, 144).
	The cases of OIr. a ˘ i a ah ˘ i a > ai?
	The cases showing this context are
	• čē 176 "which, what" (Av. gen. čahiia, NP či, Prth. čē),
	• kai 177 "who" (Av. gen. kahiia, NP ki, Prth. kē),
	172 Geiger's examples parērī and ādēnk "mirror" (the only example adduced by MOŠKALO 1991:23 for
	a ˘ i a > ē) probably do not belong here since it is not sure that there was a sequence *-a ˘ i a-in the
	preform of ādēnk (cf. p. 79); for parērī, see below.
	173 The original ē quality of the vowel in the caus. suffix cannot be seen in NP and must be inferred
	from other Ir. languages (e.g. Balochi) since ē gives ī in front of a nasal in NP (HORN 1901:26).
	170 GEIGER 1891:435 cites nākō as an example of word-internal loss of OIr.	˘ i .
	171 This would of course only apply to old *i ˘ i ˘ a (vs. the loanword gīābān "desert", cf. p. 279).

  and Parthian (DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 89), 191 this development may be a common Western Middle Iranian one.

	For OIr. a ˘ i /_C, cf. II 2.3.3.
	(SUNDERMANN 1997:107f.).
	189 The etymology of this verb (past stem gāt) is somewhat unclear. For discussion of some possibly
	related Ir. words (e.g. NP gāy-/ gād), cf. MORGENSTIERNE 2003:30. The connection to OInd. √jyā
	"rob, violate" (BAILEY 1979:82b and others) is not plausible (EWAia I:602f.).
	190 The past stem is sāt. BMC and EAL also have sāht (from the present stem sāh-), DTB has sāin-/
	sāint h -. Note that Bal. sāy-seems to be the only Ir. cognate of the OInd. present stem c h āy-< *s ḱeh 2 -
	˘ i e-(Av. sāzdūm is probably rather to be connected to √sāh "teach", LIV p. 547), only of OInd. c h yáti
	(cf. EWAia I:558).

+ t OIr. ft > pt

	OIr. ft, mainly occurring in the past stems of roots in -p (PIIr. *-p-ta > OIr. -f-ta-),
	develops as expected, i.e. is changed to p like OIr. intervocalic f (cf. II 2.1.2.1, GEIGER
	1891:432):
	• rupt (past stem of rōp-"sweep", NP ruft), kapt (past stem of kap-"fall", Prth. kaft),
	gwapt (past stem of gwap-"weave", NP bāft), wapt (past stem of waps-"go to
	sleep", NP, Prth. xuft, cf. p. 87). 193
	Note, however, that EBal. has -pt-, too, although postvocalic p otherwise changes to f
	in these dialects (cf. p. 226).

OIr. -xš-> -šk-:

	OIr. xš-> š-(GEIGER 1891:425): 200
	• šap "night" (Av. xšap(an)-, NP, Prth. šab),
	• šōd-201 "wash" (Av. xšudra-"liquid", NP šōy-/ šust, Prth. šōd-/ šust).
	Word-internal xš is changed to *kš and then shows a metathesis (cf. p. 177) > šk
	(GEIGER 1891:425):
	• bašk-202 "forgive" (Av. baxša-, NP baxš-/ baxšīd, Prth. baxš-/ baxt);
	• šawašk-"sell" (OIr. *fra-	˘	u ax-š-, cf. p. 117);
	• šīnz, šūnz 203 "green-blue" would be an exception if one connected it to Psht. šīn
	"green", which MORGENSTIERNE 1927:74 (following HÜBSCHMANN 1884:427f. and
	others) links to Av. axšāēna-"dark": it would either show a reduction of word-
	internal xš or the loss of an initial vowel in a closed syllable. 204 Since words for
	colours are even more readily borrowed than other vocabulary items and, moreover,
	since Bal. names for colours of sure genuine character are nearly entirely lacking
	200 OIr. xš goes back to PIE *k (	˘	u ) s-, *k (	˘	u )
	195 Such sorts of metathesis are quite common in these dialects, cf. II 3.2.2.1.
	196 Some WBal. dialects drop h with compensatory lengthening of the vowel: e.g. tahta > tāta "run",
	past stem of tač-"run" (cf. p. 247).
	197 For Elfenbein's claim that Sarāwānī also shows xt, cf. II 3.2.4.1.
	198 pak(k)ā has been borrowed into Balochi at any rate and means "cooked, paved (of roads), mature".
	It is noted as the perf. part. (which otherwise ends in -a) of p h aš-"cook" in DTB.

.1.3 Stop/Fricative + Nasal OIr. hm > m(m): It seems that hm is assimilated with lengthening of the m:

  no need to assume that OIr. xš may also result in Bal.

	š since gwaš-"say" need not be explained as coming from *	˘	u axša-(cf. p. 129).
	čaš(š)-/ čaš(š)it "taste, sip" may be explained as a loanword from NP čaš-/ čašīd (for
	gemination in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.5). At any rate, it need not be an example of *xš
	as MP čāxšēn-"cause to taste" might suggest, since a base *čaš-is necessary for Sogd.
	pcš-"drink, taste", cšnt "drink" which cannot go back to *čaxša-(Nicholas Sims-
	Williams, personal communication). Arm. čaš "breakfast", čašak "taste" (HÜBSCHMANN
	1897:187), with the -k proving rather old age of the borrowing, i.e. a Prth. source (Jost
	Gippert, personal communication), will likewise derive from *čaš-. 206
	With regard to the change šn > n(n) (cf. II 2.2.2.2), it does not seem likely that OIr. xšn
	gives Bal. šn. The example is rōšnā "light (adj.)", rōšnāī "light (subst.)" (Av. raoxšna-
	(adj.), Prth. rōšn (noun, adj.), NP rōšan (adj.), cf. also p. 179); its -ā likewise seems to
	suggest an explanation as borrowing from NP rōšanā, rōšanā'ī "light (subst.)".
	2.2205 šīnz should show -ē-if it was a genuine cognate of Av. axšaēna-. This is not an absolute
	requirement, though (for occasional ē > ī, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2). šūnz seems to show a hypercorrect
	reversal of the widespread dialectal change ū > ī (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1). Hypercorrect ī > ū is rather rare,
	but hypercorrect reversals of other changes do occur (cf. p. 201f. for ī > ē, ū > ō), and doublets with
	ū / ī are so common that a hypercorrect form would not be surprising.
	206 It seems that OIr. xšn was regularly reduced to šn in Parthian (e.g. išnōhr "grace, gratitude" vs. Av.
	√xšnao "favour", NP xušnūd "content"); so Prth. and MP čāšnīg "taste" may be derived from
	*čāxšni ˘ i ak ˘ a-(thus KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:216 86 , comparing MP čāxšēn-"cause to taste"). OIr. word-
	internal xšV was preserved: Prth. baxš-might have been borrowed from MP, but Arm. loanwords
	show that Parthian had xš (changed to šx in Armenian), e.g. Arm. vašx "usury" from Ir. *	˘	u ax-š-

  • tahl 229 "bitter" < *taxra-(KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:206 51 ), if it was not borrowed

from MPZ (same form in Parthian) taxl, MPM tahr, NP talx; • wahl "crooked" might go back to *hu-˘ u axra-(cf. OInd. vakrá-) as NP x w ahl does (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:206) or else may have been borrowed from MP wahr (< * ˘ u axra-, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:206).

  . So it seems possible that MIr. agr, adr yields Bal. ēr. If so, igr may indeed give īr as well. The only example of OIr. f ˘ u is NP kahun, kuhan, kuhna "old", Prth. kafwan, MP kahwan (MPZ <khwbn'>, MPM <qhwn>, MACKENZIE 1986:48), 231 Khot. kuhana-, Bactr. kaboggo etc. which have been derived from *kaf ˘ u ana-/ *kapuna-(BAILEY

	120			II. Historical Phonology
	2.2.1.5 Fricative +	˘	u
	2.2.1.5.1 OIr. f	˘	u

  Pers. word (MP puhl, Prth. purt 236 , cf. II 2.2.3.1); • gāh "time" may have been borrowed from NP gāh (cf. p. 81); • the Bal. abstract suffix

	235
	• similarly, puhl, pōl (< PIr. obl. stem *p ˚ r\	˘	u -(Av. p e r e tu-/ p e r e \b-) via *purh)
	"bridge" might be a

  Occasionally, Bal. š is found where one might expect s (MOŠKALO 1991:33):• iškand "penalty (EAL), unfinished (SHG)" 253 and the etymologically related NP šikan-/ šikast "break" show an unexptected šk vs. Av.

	sk e	˙	n dō "harm, impairment"
	(√skand, cf. EWAia II:750);

According to MACKENZIE 1967:26

29

, the orthography may denote devoiced w. 252 2.2.2 Combinations with sibilants 2.2.2.1 Sibilant + stop/affricate 2.2.2.1.1 OIr. sT > šT • iškār (MAYER 1910:32), iškar "(char)coal, ember" vs. the maybe earlier form reflected in Br. isxar-zūr "tongs" (lit.: "coal-taker", cf. ROSSI 1979:148); the word may be connected to NP si/a/ukār, Psht. skōr, Sogd. sq'r etc. (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication), i.e. *skāra-(MORGENSTIERNE 2003:74). 254

  OIr. š and s are assimilated to a following nasal in Balochi.261 It is not entirely clear whether this change is to be seen in the context of OIr. hm > m(m) and possibly xm > m (cf. II 2.2.1.3) or whether it proceeded via šN > žN > N(N) (cf. II 2.1.2.5).

), Bashkardi šen and derived from *sčani-(Wakhi sk e n) by GERSHEVITCH 1971:267ff. 260 2.2.2.2 Sibilant + nasal 262 OIr. šm > m(m) (GEIGER 1891:434): 263

  269 For these developments and for * ˚ r, cf. II 2.2.3.2, 2.2.3.3, 2.3.2.1. EAL also has tūnag (Coastal, Lāšārī), tūnīg (Coastal, perhaps from PIERCE 1874 cited in GEIGER 1890:150). 270 The details are not entirely clear. SOKOLOV 1956:82 suggests that nind-might be built analogically to sind-"break". The cases are not quite parallel, though, since a past stem nist which would correspond to sist is only found in some IrBal. dialects, most dialects have ništ (cf. p. 96).

Conversely, the past stem nist might be due to the influence of sist. HÜBSCHMANN's explanation (1893:101) for NP nišīn-(*ni-šīd-nā-) is less good than the one by SIMS-WILLIAMS (1981:166), who assumes an assimilation of n...d/d (cf. Prth. nišīd-, MPM nišīy-) > n...n, which accounts both for MPZ/NP nišīn-and the caus. nišān-.

  (FBB, BMC), ray-(EAL: Raxšānī, Coastal, Sarāwānī), ra-(EVM, EAL: Raxšānī, Sarāwānī, Lāšārī)) is certainly a loanword from NP since *rab-would have been preserved in Balochi (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559), cf. KORN 2001:3 20 . The past stem rapt which may have been borrowed from NP raft is found in DTB. For etymological discussion, cf. HÄUSLER 2000.

	e	x (ABAEV
	1958/II:190, MORGENSTIERNE 1974:108, STEBLIN-KAMENSKIJ 1999:318, SIMS-WILLIAMS 1992:72,
	2000:182a, EWAia II:771).
	274 A parallel development is already seen in YAv. which shows š ˘ i > ś (HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN
	1996:101).
	275 The present stem (also rō-, ruw-

from NP šād, šud, respectively; 276 272 For more discussion of this word, cf. p. 306. 273 Cf. also Bactr. asnwuo, Sogd. (with assimilation of s-) šwnšh, Shughni zina g, Wakhi st Cf. also p. 249. 276 For devoiced final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.4. GEIGER's šuda (1889:86, without giving a source) might come from the Kasrānī dialect which shows d for \ of other EBal. dialects (cf. p. 231). Alternatively, it may be the EBal. form of borrowed NP šud.

2.2.3.2 OIr. rš, rž rš > š(š)

  2.2.1.5.2) likewise only the results known from MP/NP are found, albeit again in words which may be interpreted as loanwords, one might consider to assume that Balochi II. Historical Phonology indeed shows the same changes as does Persian. 293 (GEIGER 1891:435): 294• bušk "mane" (YAv. barša-, NP buš, cf. p. 147),• šamōš-/ šamušt 295 "forget" (NP farāmōš-/ farāmušt, Prth. frāmōš-/ frāmušt,

	<pwrt>) < *p ˙ r \ • muš-/ mušt "rub" (NP past stem mušt, OInd. √m p e r e ˚ r ˙ s ), ˚ rj or √m ˚ rś, cf. p. 92), ˘ u -(Av. p e r e tu-/ \b-) via OInd. √m • kaš(š)-

"bridge"

(NP pul, MP puhl,

.

As both examples may be Pers. loanwords, the Bal. outcome of OIr. r\ is not clear. On the other hand, no evidence is available which would suggest that Balochi shows something different from NP.

292

Since in the cases of OIr. f ˘ u and \ ˘ u (cf. II 2.2.1.5.1, 296 "pull" (Av. karša-, NP kaš-/ kašīd, MPM karš-/ karšīd), • waš(š) "good" is a cognate of NP x w aš, Prth. wxaš; these are derived from PIr. *h ˘ u arša-< PIIr. *s ˘ u arćša-by KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:204, 297 • maybe tun(n) "thirst" (YAv. taršna-, NP tišna, OInd. t ˚ ŕ ˙ s ˙ n ā-) rš > š (cf. p. 127). The same reduction has operated in NP and Parthian.

  ˚ rš gives uš (for which cf. II 2.3.2.1) and that OIr. arš yields Bal. aš. It seems more adequate, however, to assume a general change rš > š(š).295 For variants and etymological considerations, cf. p. 117. 296 This verb (past stem kaššit (BMC, EAL), kašit (EVM), kašt (DTB, EVM, NAWATA 1981:16)) may, but need not, have been borrowed from NP. The past stem kašt might speak against a borrowing.rž > ž has operated between the stage from which the loanwords were borrowed into Armenian and the stage of the Manichaean texts.

	2.2.3.3 OIr. rn
	rn is assimilated in different ways in Ir. languages.
	rn > n(n) (GEIGER 1891:435): 299
	• pan(n) 300 "leaf" (Av. par e na-

.,

DE VAAN 2003:602)

. Bal. hl, on the other hand, does not seem to be anything else than /h/ + /l/. 294 Geiger's examples kiš-/ kišt "sow" and gušnag "hungry" can

(kiš-, cf. 144, 148)

or must (gušnag, cf. p. p. 127) have been borrowed from NP. MOŠKALO 1991:33 notes that PIr. * 297 These words (to which Zaz. weş may be added) point to PIE *s ˘ u el ḱs "taste (sweet)" (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:204 41 ). The NWIr. form waš is also found in Persian (LENTZ 1927:304). 298 Bactrian xozo, Prth. <xwj> "good, pleasant" etc. are derived from *x ˘ u ˚ ržu-< *s ˘ u ˚ lǵ h -su-by SIMS-WILLIAMS 2000:232f. This implies that Prth. <xwj> is likely to have a short vowel; Arm. axorž (SIMS-WILLIAMS 2000:233) would seem to speak for xož (BOYCE 1977:100 has xōž, DURKIN-, NP par(r) "feather", Prth. pannag "foliage"), • sīkun "porcupine" (Av. sukur e na-, NP sugur, cf. p. 145), • din-/ dirt 301 "tear" (Av. d e r e na-, NP darr-/ darrīd), if from *dirn-< *d ˚ rna-, • tun(n) "thirst" (YAv. taršna-, NP tišna, OInd. t ˚ ŕ ˙ s ˙ n ā-) and derivatives (cf. p. 127), if not an example of rš > š, might also show rn > n(n).

  (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). Bal. ǐāgah might have come into Balochi via Si. ǐāgaha (cf. ELFENBEIN 1990/II:70). For gāh, cf. p. 81, 121, for kuǐā "where", cf. p. 275. 314 The etymology goes back to a note in ANDREAS/WACKERNAGEL 1931:322 (cf. the survey of the

	313 A proto-form *	˘	u i-	˘	u āha-ka-(thus NYBERG 1974:83, 217) would probably have given Sogd. †yw'k vs.
	attested wy'k

• ǐā, ǐāh "place"

(NP ǐā(y)

, ǐāyg ˘ ah, MP gyāg, Prth. wyāg); the word is likely to go back to * ˘ u ˘ i āka-(KEWA III:271, MOŠKALO 1991:29); 313 • ǐān "life, soul, body" (NP ǐān): it seems that a NWIr. cognate with wy-is not attested, Prth. gyān "soul" has been borrowed from MP (DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2000a:360). It derives from * ˘ u i-āna-, cf. OInd. vi + √an i "breathe", vyāná-"one of the five vital airs". 314 311 DTB assumes a borrowing from Psht. rēš e l which, however, does not fit quite well in form. 312 This seems to be the assumption by MOŠKALO 1991:29. I have not seen his variant Bal. ǐāgag; it might have come about through the suffix variation processes described in II 2.4.4.1. MP spellings indicate that gyān "soul", gyāg "place" changed to ǐān (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:194), ǐāg (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication), respectively, already in MP times. etymological discussion in SUNDERMANN 1997:12 27 ), and is also noted by MOŠKALO 1991:29. The Prth./MP form is reflected by Kurd. giyan. Zazaki might show a secondary development in gan, can "life, soul", but probably preserves the earlier stage in gian, cian daene "to earn, make profit" (Mesut Keskin, personal communication).

  315 To the arguments adduced by Gershevitch, one might add that the old etymology may be expected to yield Bal. †gēn. Although a change ē > ī does occasionally occur (cf. II 3.1.2.3.2), an etymology which does not require this assumption seems preferable. GERSHEVITCH 1998:115, 124 himself assumes that PIr. a ˘ i n, MIr. ēn regularly gives Bal. īn, which seems to be unfounded (cf. II 2.3.3).

316 For other losses assumed by GEIGER 1891:435, cf. p. 87 (alleged loss of p < OIr. sp < * ḱ ˘ u in āsin "iron"), p. 124f. (#st-> t-), p. 105f. (#n ˘ i -). Cf. also the chapters on dialects (II 3.2). 317 OInd. mátsya-corresponds to OIr. *mass ˘ i a-(or rather: *mac ˘ i a-, Jost Gippert, personal communication) which gives (with v ˚ rddhi and suffix -ka-) OP *mā\(i) ˘ i aka-> MP māhīg, Prth. māsyāg (HOFFMANN 1976/II:637 25 ). For Bal. mač(č)ī, cf. p. 274.

  344

ir in palatal context, otherwise ur 350

		. *	˚ r
	2.3.2.1 PIr. *	˚ r/C_C
	PIr. *	˚ r >

  assumes Bal. ar, ir and ur for PIr. For the latter contexts, cf. II 2.3.2.2, 2.3.2.3, respectively. For an earlier treatment of this issue, cf. KORN 2003a.

	350 This subchapter discusses * ˚ r in contexts other than * ˚ r ˘ i , * ˚ rH.

* ˚ r with no rule given except for the note that * ˚ rš results in Bal. uš and * ˚ ršn in un(n). 352 On the other hand, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:146f. maintains that PIr. * ˚ r comes out as Bal. ir, ur under the same conditions as in NP, i.e. ur after p, b, m, w, and ir in other contexts (1895:143ff.). 353 It seems, however, that the Bal. outcome may be more adequately described as being ir only in palatal contexts and ur otherwise. The evidence is as follows: Possible cases of PIr. * ˚ r > Bal. ar Examples that might be adduced for ar are (GEIGER 1891:405, 1893:205): 354 • kan-"do" (Av. k e r e nao-, OInd. k ˚ r ˙ n óti, Prth. kar-, NP kun-): kan-, might go back to *k ˚ rn-via *karn-. However, it seems more likely that it is the result of a contamination of the stems *kun-and *kar-(cf. p. 133).

  The extremely rarely attested gwark is thus the only instance of PIr. * ˚ r > Bal. -ar-. It is possible that there is a special condition here, e.g. that PIr. *# ˘ u ˚ r-gives Bal. gwar-.356 The only other example besides gwark is gužg "root". If it exists and if it gwar-, although gužg might be a secondary development of *gwažg (cf. II 3.1.3.4). It seems better to assume that gurk is the genuine cognate of OInd. v ˚ ŕka-and gwark (if existent) its hypercorrect variant. It cannot even be ruled out that gurk has been borrowed from NP gurg (cf. II 3.3.1.4). Prth. kār-/ kišt) may have been borrowed from NP(GEIGER 1891:444).355 Only in PIERCE 1874 (thence GEIGER 1890:126) and in EAL (probably from Geiger), all other sources have gurk.

	derives from *	˘	u ˚ ržaka-as MORGENSTIERNE 1927:95, 1932:46 maintains (cf. p. 132 and
	below), it would rather speak against * r-> Cases of PIr. 356 Cf. also II 2.1.3.3.1, 3.1.3.4. There is no evidence that Bal. ar might be the result of PIr. * ˘ u ˚ ˚ ŕ-: there
	are no Bal. cognates of a number of OIr. words going back to PIr. * ˚ ŕ (cf. KORN 2003a:66).
	Assuming PIr. * ˚ ŕ > Bal.

* ˚ r > Bal. ir Bal. ir occurs in the following examples of PIr. * ˚ r: 357 • zirdē "heart" (DTB, GEB) may be the regular outcome of PIr. *ź ˚ rda ˘ i a-(Av. z e r e d(aiia)-, OInd. h ˚ ŕd(aya)-, Prth. zird). The modern form zird might have come about by reinterpretation of -ē as the indefinite article -ē (cf. p. 102). • The vowel of gipt (DTB, GEB, EVM, EAL: Raxšānī, Kēčī, Coastal, Sarāwānī, Eastern, NAWATA 1981), gitt (BMC, FBB), gīpt (EAL: Lāšārī) < *g ˚ rpta-(cf. Av. g e r e pta-) may have been influenced by the present stem gir-"take". 358 • kirm "worm" (NP kirm, OInd. k ˚ ŕmi-) and kiš-/ kišt "plant" (NP kār-, kiš-/ kišt, ar, one would have to explain Bal. zird and kirm as showing the change of ar > ir described in II 3.1.2.3.1 and tun(n) as deriving from *t ˚ ršná-.

  : the vowel of the NP present stem *dirr-(< *d ˚ rna-) seems to have been adjusted to the past stem *dard-(< PIIr. *d ˚ rH-ta-), the latter being replaced by darrīd. Kurd. sîxur, NP sīxūl adduced by GEIGER 1891:408 and other variants, cf. HORN 1893:164) is not clear either. The Bal. form might go back to *sū°(cf. p. 196), but the length of the vowel remains unclear. (for the reduction of the consonant cluster, cf. p. 127, 132, 133);• zurt 368 (past stem of zūr-) "taken" is best explained as a direct cognate of OInd. , bring" (as GEIGER 1890:153 seems to assume 369 and in spite of HÜBSCHMANN's 1890:560 statement that zūr-, zīr-does not fit 370 ), although there are no other Ir. cognates of this root (EWAia II:803f.); • šamuš-/ šamušt "forget" (OInd. √m

	Cases of PIr. d e r e n ą, act. 3pl. d e r e n e ˙ n ti (PRAUST 2000:438). *sVk ˚ rna-which would imply that Av. sukur e na-stands for + suk e r e na-. There is, however, no direct evidence for * ˚ r here, all Ir. cognates seem to go back to -ur-(cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1927:73), e.g. Sogd. + sykrn (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1976:61), Psht. šku ˙ n < *sikurna-(MORGENSTIERNE 2003:78). The origin of ī (also ˚ rs-; alternatively, it may go back to PIE *t ˚ rs-s ḱe-(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:47) as Av. t e r e sa-and Prth. tirs-/ tirsād do; 367 in the latter case, turs might be derived from the verb; • tun(n) "thirst" (NP tiš, YAv. taršna-, OInd. t ˚ ŕ ˙ s ˙ n ā-f. "thirst", t ˚ r ˙ s ˙ n áj-"thirsty") < in Gabri sīxur, *t PIr.*t ˚ ršn ˘ a-h ˚ rtá-, √h ˚ r "take˚ r ˙ s , m ˚ r ˙ s yá-

* ˚ r > Bal. ur Most instances of PIr. * ˚ r show Bal. ur: 363 • apurs "juniper" (NP awirs, burs "fruit of juniper", Av. hap e r e sī-, cf. p. 140); • burz "high" (Av. b e r e za ˙ n t-, NP buland, OInd. b ˚ rhánt-, Prth. burz); • turpš, trupš, trušp 364 "sour" (NP turš, Prth. trifš, for further cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:130a) < PIr. *t ˚ rfša-; 359 GEB, DTB, GCD, EAL. 360 EAL also reports dirrt which -if existing -may be a secondary formation from present dirr-. 361 For -rn-> NP rr, Bal. n(n), cf. p. 133. 362 The only sure se ˙ t forms in Avestan are those from the nasal present: part. act. sg. m. 363 hūrt "tiny" might be placed here, too, if the etymology given by Morgenstierne is correct (cf. p. 122); the quality of the vowel fits with the rules established below, the reason for its quantity is unclear, however. sīkun "porcupine" (NP sugur) would be a further example if it goes back to PIr. There is also a variant sīnkur (BMC, EAL, MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50) which might have come about through "anticipation and subsequent dissimilation of n" via *sīnkurn just as Wanetsi suogū ˙ n (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50). • turs-/ tursit 365 "fear" may be a denominative of turs, trus "fear" 366 < PIr. , Prth. frāmōš-/ frāmušt), cf. p. 117; • kurt 371 (past stem of kan-) "did" (Av. k e r e ta-, NP kard, OInd. k ˚ rtá-, Prth. kird); • gužg "root" of doubtful existence (cf. p. 132) is claimed by MORGENSTIERNE 1927:95, 1932:46 to go back to PIr. * ˘ u ˚ ržaka-; • gōkurt "sulphur" (NP gōgurd, cf. Av. gaok e r e na-(name of a tree) is derived from *ga ˘ u -k ˚ rta-"yellow (< milky) stuff" by BAILEY 1979:96a; 372 • muš-"rub" (maybe cognate with OInd. √m ˚ rj or √m ˚ rś, cf. p. 92).

  ).

	Av. gaok e	r e na-(also used as a name for Haoma) is interpreted as gau-"milk" + *k ˚ rdna-"resin"
	(from PIIr. *k ˚ rd "give resin"), thus "having white resin" (perhaps a term for the frankincense tree)
	by KLINGENSCHMITT 1965:31f. Bal. gōkurt cannot go back to *°k ˚ rd, however. Since Sogd. gwkt,
	gwq ¯ t ¯ t also speaks for *-t (

  373 The 3sg. has irregular bā (FBB), bārt (BMC) which makes it less probable that the verb has been borrowed from NP.

	374 It is not even mentioned in DTB. The usual word for "hear" is uškun-/ uškut (with numerous
	variants, cf. p. 196, 236) which has been explained as a compound of "ear" (Av. uš-) and "do" (kan-
	/ ku(r)t, cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41). According to GERSHEVITCH 1998, it derives from a phrase
	*uši ˘ i ā	˘	u a ˘ i na-(past stem *	˘	u a ˘ i ta-) "perceive by means of audition" > *úšV gīn-(past stem *gēt) >
	uškin-/ uškit, which implies a change of *a ˘ i n > Bal.

  The MPZ variant kōxš-probably shows unetymological xš which in several cases occurs instead of MP š (cf. HORN 1893:239 2 ). It is questionable whether any pertinent forms exist in Parthian(pace BOYCE 1977 who has Prth. kōš-/ kōšād and kušt, also in GHILAIN 1939:66), since e.g. MIK III (= formerly IB) 4970a R <k(.)šyn'd> is to be read <'](xš)yn'd> "princes"(Desmond Durkin- Meisterernst, personal communication). The Zaz. past stem kut-"beat" is evidence for the existence of NWIr. *kušt, however. 379 Note that according to MACKENZIE 1967:24 25 , PIr. * ˚ r in non-labial contexts gave MP er or ir, both being written MPM <yr>, MPZ <r/l>. The former cases yield NP ar (e.g. kard), the latter ir (e.g. kirm "worm"). This assumption does not change the argument made here, though; regardless of whether the MP words are to be read kird or kerd etc., Balochi requires a rule different from that needed for MP and Parthian.

				2. Old Iranian > Common Balochi	149
	2.3.2.2 PIr. *	˚ r ˘ i > ir?
	377 PIE has *k	˘	u ˚ rmi-(EWAia I:394). The meaning of Av. k e r	e ma-is unclear (BARTHOLOMAE 1904:469).

375 It might be possible to explain all instances of ir as palatalised outcomes of ur (and/or ar). However, the examples given in II 3.1.2.3.1 seem to be of a more recent nature and occur besides variants with preserved ur, ar.

376 It is also possible to explain the i of zirdē as being due to the z-, cf. p. 193f.

378 MP has kuš-/ kušt both in MPZ and MPM according to MACKENZIE 1986. The verb may originally have been MIr. *kōš-/ kušt "fight, kill" and, by forming a new pres. stem from kušt and a new past stem from kōš-, has been split up into kōš-/ kōšīd "fight, strive" and kuš-/ kušt "kill". Its cognates are the Av. hapax kuša i ti "kills" and Tocharian B kau ˙ s -, A kos-"kill, destroy" (ADAMS 1999:208).

  380 For the past stems, cf. p. 144, 147, respectively.381 Although the stem is gir-in all dialects, the 3sg. shows an unexpected long vowel in some (gīrt in

	2.3.2.3 PIr. *	˚ rH
	The development of PIr. * ˚ rH seems to be the same as in other Iranian languages.
	PIr. *	˚ rH > ar:
	• gwarm "surf, wave", cf. Prth. warm, Av. var e mi-, OInd. ūrmí-< PIE *	˘	u ˚ lHmi-
	(HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558, EWAia I:245);
	• sar "head" (NP, Prth. sar, Av. sarah-, OIn. śíras-< PIE * ḱ ˚ rh 2 os-, cf. HÜBSCHMANN
	1895:150 2 , EWAiA II:639), if not borrowed from NP sar;
	• gar "abyss, precipice" (BMC, EAL), "pimple, boil" (DTB) is likely to be a cognate
	of Av. ga i ri-, OInd. girí-< *g	˘	u ˚ rHí-"mountain" (thus MORGENSTIERNE 1927:26 for
	Psht. gar) and not of Av. g e r e da-"cave" (pace GEIGER 1891:400).
				is not
	plausible. -In NP pīr < *p ˚ r	˘	u (i) ˘ i a-, there seems to be no trace of the laryngeal seen in Av. pao i riia-
	(for details, cf. FISCHER 1998) < *p ˚ rH	˘	u i ˘ i a-, BARTHOLOMAE 1907:112, followed by GERSHEVITCH
	1964:81f.). NP nīrō "force" might show a similar development (< *n ˚ r-˘ i a-	˘	u a-ka-, KLINGENSCHMITT
	2000:196). -In the development of trū "aunt" from *(p)t ˚ r	˘	u i ˘ i ā-, irregular losses of elements must
	have taken place, although the details are not entirely clear (cf. p. 124f.). -The statements by
	MOŠKALO are somewhat confusing: on the one hand, there is a note that * ˚ r	˘	u ˘ i gives īr (1991:22, the
	example being pīr) whereas 1991:37 states that * ˚ r	˘	u ˘ i results in ir; if the latter is not a misprint for īr,
	it might allude to the example gir-which, however, is explained (1991:22) as coming from *g ˚ rb ˘ i a-.

BMC, EAL: Raxšānī, Lāšārī, NAWATA 1981:15, gīt in EAL: Raxšānī, BUDDRUSS 1988:73

, gī ˙ r t in EAL: Eastern) which might be analogical to 3sg. forms like bārt from bar-(cf. p. 189).

382 GEIGER 1891:407 assumes that both forms had -ar-first which was then changed to ir; evidence for this assumption is lacking.

383 MPM <pdyrw-> is found only once, the usual MPM form is <pdyr-> padīr-

(DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:272f.)

.

384 Note that no Prth. †pīr is attested. Zaz. pir (i.e. /pīr/) is also likely to be a loanword. ANDRONI ˙ K AŠVILI's assumption (1966:207) that Georg. ber-"old" is a loanword from MP

  x v aēda-, NP x w ai, cf. p. 123); • nēm(ag) "half" (Av. naēma-, NP nīm(a), MP nēm(ag), Prth. nēm°), ādēnk "mirror" (cf. p. 79), bēnag "honey" (NP angubīn) 390 , šēnak "falcon" (Av. saēna-, cf. p. 129) and the adj. suffix -ēn (Av. -aēna-, MP, Prth. -ēn) etc. show that -unlike in NP -ē is also preserved in Balochi also when a nasal follows(GEIGER 1891:410f., pace GERSHEVITCH 1998:115, 124).391

	For *a ˘ i in other contexts, cf. II 2.1.3.4.2.

  393 For OIr. sT > Bal. šT, cf. II 2.2.2.1.1. For anaptyxis in middle syllables, cf. II 3.1.2.4. 394 EVM adga, agdar "other" (variants of borrowed diga(r) which has obviously lost the vowel first, cf. p. 283) can also be adduced here. 395 Av. spāra°which HORN 1893:155 adduces here is of unsure meaning. It is not sure either whether OInd. p h álaka-"board, bench" etc. belongs here (EWAia II:202). 396 It is remarkable that in the case of ispulk, Bal. shows the SWIr. word (MP spul) whereas in NP, the NWIr. variant (supurz) is used. The assumptions about ispulk by DAMES 1891:3 (borrowed from Brahui) and GILBERTSON 1925:628 (derived from the Engl. word) are not correct. For a recent discussion of the PIE word, cf. HAMP 2002.

  abar, huš-vs. uš-, motivates the emergence of hypercorrect h, 400 e.g.• hādēnk (GEB, EAL) vs. ādēnk "mirror" (NP āy ˘ ına, cf. p. 79); • hārōs (ABG, BMC, EAL) vs. ārōs (BMC, EAL 401 ) "wedding" (NP-Ar. and ' are pronounced /'/ in NP, there seems to be no reason to assume a difference in pronunciation in any stage of Balochi. In the case of word-initial c , the Balochi evidence suggests that it is lost completely, and the relevant words are not treated differently in any way from those with word-initial vowel. Even if Balochi shared the development of -\n-> -šn-(there is no second example for this cluster), hariš must have been borrowed from NP since OIr. šn is assimilated to Bal. n(n) (cf. II 2.2.2.2). For cognates of NP araš (the relationship to OP arašni-is problematic, cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1895:12), cf. BAILEY 1979:8a.405For variants, cf. p. 196, 236, for the etymology, cf. p. 147.

	404 While Avestan has *ar e \n-(OInd. aratní-, EWAia I:109), OP has arašni-
	(BRANDENSTEIN/MAYRHOFER 1964:104) resulting in NP araš.

c arūs 402 );

403

• hariš (GEB, EAL), harš(a) (DTB) "ell" (NP araš);

404

• har(r)ag / ar(r)ag "saw" (NP arra); • haškun-(EAL V) vs. aškun-etc. "hear"; 405 • ǐōh (BMC), ǐō (BMC), ǐū "river" (probably borrowed from NP ǐō(y), cf. p. 104, 200). 406 For secondary VhC arising from contamination of VhC and VC, cf. II 3.1.3.2, 3.2.3.3. 400 The statement by MOŠKALO (1991:36) that secondary word-initial h appears in the SWBal. dialects only is not correct since several cases are also found in EBal. sources: hariš in GLADSTONE 1874 and DAMES 1881 (thence GEB and probably EAL), harrag in DTB and GCD (and in SWBal. sources). 401 EVM ārusī is an error according to EAL 6. For the ā-, cf. p. 190. 402 According to HÜBSCHMANN 1895:32, the classical Pers. pronunciation is c arōs. 403 As indicated in II 1.2.1, it is assumed here that at least the vast majority of the Arabic loanwords has entered Balochi via NP. As both Ar. c 406 One might assume that -h in this case is somehow substituted for NP -y; this would imply that the -h is interpreted as a case of h with variant y (for this phenomenon, see below and II 2.4.3). Note, however, that BMC has a certain bias for overcorrect, if not hypercorrect, h (cf. II 3.2.3.3).

  Prth. <'y'g> "place" noted by BAILEY 1979:19b does not exist, the relevant text passage should be read <wy'g> wyāg (ANDREAS/HENNING 1934:882) as is shown by the duplicate M 891b+ R 10 (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

	NP	cf.	Balochi
	xāk "earth" 409		xāk 410	hāk 411		āk 412
	xām "raw"	OInd. āmá-		hāmag 413		āmag 414
	xāya "egg" 415	YAv. aēm		hāik, haik, hēk, haig 416		ā-murg
						āyag, āig 417
	xurmā "date"		k h urma,	hurmā(g) 419		urmāg 420
			xurm ˘ a 418
	xišt "brick"	Av. ištiia-	xišt 421	hišt 422		išt 423
	xōša "ear of grain"			hōš(ag) 424		ōšag 425
	ABG.
	ABG, SHG, BMC, EAL; the corresponding EBal. form hāx is found in DTB and GCD. hāk is
	qualified as a loanword by GEIGER 1891:444.
	FBB, BMC, EVM.
	ABG, BMC, SHG, EAL; EBal. hāma ġ (DTB, GCD); the word is noted as a loanword by EAL 64.
	FBB, BMC, EVM.
	MORGENSTIERNE 1932b:56a derives NP xāya, MP xāyag etc. from *ā	˘	u ˘ i a-ka-.
	BMC, EVM.
	EVM.
	ABG, SHG, BMC, EAL; hišt is qualified as a loanword by EAL 68.
	407 For further discussion, cf. p. 87, 108f. BMC. For ī ˙ t "brick", cf. p. 137.

408 Additional items with secondary x-in NP (no Bal. cognates attested) are xirs "bear", xastū "kernel", xēš "plow". As far as the corresponding Kurd. words are concerned, xak "earth", xav "raw", xamûş "quiet", xurme "date" are likely to have been borrowed from NP, ax "earth", hêk "egg" and hirç "bear" may be genuine. Bal. cognates of NP words with secondary x-NP xāk, Kurd. ax and Mazanderani xōk have been derived from *āhaka-(cf. OInd. ása-"ashes") by MORGENSTIERNE 1942:266 and KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:213 77 and from *ā ˘ i ka-by GERSHEVITCH 1962:77, adducing Av. āi. hāik is found in EAL (Kēčī, Coastal), haik in EAL (Raxšānī, Sarawānī), SHG and GCD (haix), hēk in EAL (Raxšānī, Sarawānī), haig in ABG. āmurg is found in EVM, Nawata 1981:37, āyag in BMC, āig in EAL (Raxšānī). k h urma is found in MORGENSTIERNE 1932:46, xurm ˘ a in GCD. SHG, BMC, EAL. According to MORGENSTIERNE 1932:47, this is an "adaptation of P[e]rs. xurmā". SHG, BMC, EAL; EBal. hōša ġ (DTB, GCD). hōšag belongs here if the etymology (GEIGER 1891:451, MORGENSTIERNE 1927:95 etc.) which connects the word to Psht. waˇ ˙ z ai, Kurd. ûşî "bunch" is correct. In MORGENSTIERNE 2003:86, Elfenbein opts for Bal. hōšag being borrowed from NP. BMC.

  Ar. żarūr) "necessary" might be interpreted as a dissimilation;• balg 443 (EVM, SHG, NAWATA 1981:37) "leaf" (NP barg) might have been borrowed fromDari (thus ELFENBEIN 1963:23), cf. the variant balg besides barg noted by AF Ġ ĀN Ī-NAW ĪS 1956:56; • dīwāl (ABG, BMC, FBB, EAL, SHG) "wall" has probably been borrowed from Ur.dīwāl/r (borrowed from NP dīwār).444 The following cases are not or not necessarily loanwords: • istāl (BMC, EAL 445 , SHG) besides istār "star" (Av. star-, NP sitāra, Prth.

	• mō ˙	t al (ABG, BMC, EAL, SHG, FARRELL 2003:180) "car" for mō ˙	t ar; 442
	• nalgis (EAL) "narcissus" (NP nargis);
	• mālkē ˙	t for Engl. "market" shows a popular etymology with (NP-Ar.) māl "goods"
	(FARRELL 2003:185);
	• zalar (EVM) "harm" (NP-Ar. żarar) and zalūr (FARRELL 2003:180) "certainly" for
	zarūr (EAL) (NP-The variant mō ˙ t ar (probably borrowed from Pashto) is reported by FARRELL 2003:180. In addition,
	SHG explains mō ˙	t al as mō ˙	t ar-kār.
	The NP variant dīwāl (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:65) is maybe too rare to have been borrowed into
	Balochi. Pashto uses dēwār, dēwāl. ABG also has a variant	˙	d īwāl (cf. p. 182).
	The classification of istāl as literary by BARKER/MENGAL 1969/II:596 might be the reason for
	ELFENBEIN's assumption (1985:229) that the variant istāl is the "better" one.
	DTB, EAL; not mentioned by Geiger.
	BMC, EAL; the simple causative is ōštārēn-. Cf. also V 1.7.8.

astār(ag));

• ōštālāēn-446 is a (according to EAL 11, mainly EBal.) dialectal variant of the "double causative" ōštārāēn-447 of ōšt-/ ōštāt "stand" (cf. p. 101); • bāzul "wing" 448 vs. Prth. bāzūr, 449 Av. °bāzura-; the l may have been motivated by NP (Sistan) panǐul "claw" (Behrooz Barjasteh Delforooz, personal communication); • als "tear" is of doubtful existence (only found in MARSTON 1877 and EAL, the latter maybe taken from the former) besides usual ars (Av. asru-) which might have been borrowed from NP (thus EAL);

The Bal. word must have been borrowed, cf. Prth. wargar, Sogd. wrkr

(HENNING 1937(HENNING :89, 1940:4):4)

.

Apart from Parthian, a stem in -r is only found in Eastern Iranian (Sogdian, Khotanese). The existence of Av. var e ka-is doubtful

(HENNING 1940:4)

.

  458 According to GEIGER 1891:444, Bal. zamīk has been borrowed from Persian. If so, the source may

have been MP zamīk (for the

MPZ orthography, cf. KLINGENSCHMIT 2000:201 34

). Cf. also p. 105.

459 Early NP <nwkrwz> "new year" found in Abū Nuwās

(cf. HENNING 1958:88

) is unlikely to represent NP †nōk°(vs. MP nōg, NP nau), but rather shows the use of the Arabic letter <k> for /g/ (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

  • -uk: bānuk "lady" (NP bānū, MP bānūg 460 ), zānuk "knee", pīruk "grandfather" (from pīr "old", cf. p. 149); daǐuk(k) "hedgehog"; -uk is also used as a diminutive suffix on names, e.g. Māmaduk from Māmad / Muhammad(RZEHAK 1995:211), Maruk(k) for Maryam (BADALKHAN 2003:287); 461 • -ak: e.g. kitak "insect", gwarak (also gwarag) 462 "lamb" (NP barra, MP, Prth. (with the NWIr. development of \n > hn, later > n with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel) can indeed give bān-; The genuine SWIr. cognate of Av. d e m ąnō.pa\nī-can be seen in MP bān-bišn "queen". Bal. bānuk is thus highly likely to be a Pers. borrowing.

	461 -uk combines with an element l of unclear origin to give another diminutive suffix (which replaces
	other suffixes), e.g. ǐinik "girl" → ǐinaluk "little girl", piš(š)ī "cat" → pišluk "kitten" (FARRELL
	1990:48).
	462 The Bal. word goes back to *	˘	u araka-(the same applies to Psht. warg, MORGENSTIERNE 2003:89)
	while the NP one comes from *	˘	u arnaka-(MORGENSTIERNE 1927:88, HOFFMANN 1982:85f.);

warrag); ēwak "alone"; • -ik(k): bačik(k) (also bač(č)) "son, boy, child", ǐanik(k) "daughter, girl" (from ǐan "woman"), šanik(k) "young goat", kučik(k) "dog", pahlik (if existing, only in EAL), pālunk (EVM) vs. pallūnk (EAL) and the common pahlūg "ribs" (see above).

In addition, -ag is found in a huge number of words. Particularly interesting examples include words which cannot be interpreted as Pers. loanwords, e.g. kōpag "shoulder", madag "locust" (cf. p. 95), mētag "village" etc. Other words have obviously been 460 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:25 doubts the connection with Pers. bān "house" established by HORN 1893:41. GIPPERT 1993/I:35ff. draws the attention to MP <ktk-b'nwk> which in Frahang-ī ōīm translates Av. d e m ąnō.pa\nī-"lady of the house" (KLINGENSCHMITT 1972:23), and notes that °pa\nī-* ˘ u arnaka-would result in Bal. †gwanak (cf. II 2.2.3.

  It is noteworthy that it seems to occur in the Eastern dialects only, WBal. (BMC) showing the hypercorrect form bučk.

	467 GEIGER 1891:422 has gwačk "calf" (gwač(č) in all other sources), for which cf. p. 280.
	468 BMC, EAL; otherwise burwān. For further variants, cf. p. 196, 236.
	MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255f. considers burwānk as Eastern Balochi, corresponding to a supposed

463 SPOONER 1967:58

notes that this is the case "in most dialects, except Sarāvānī". It remains to be studied, however, which dialects do show this phenomenon.

464 Two examples of -k after C are only attested in Brahui: dask "thread" (Balochi has dasag according to EVM), rōtk "root" (Bal. rōtag, which cannot, as GEIGER 1890:144 presumed, belong to rud-"grow"; BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553 compares Av. uru\a-"growth"). A number of the following words also have variants without -k.

465 Most sources have the NP loanword rōbāh, cf. also p. 87.

466 DTB, EAL. bušk may be a NP loanword (thus HÜBSCHMANN 1890:560). SWBal. burbānk (without giving sources for the latter), which seems to be a rather unfounded assumption. The word seems to represent *brū (cf. OInd. b h r ú-, NP abrū) + the obl.pl. suffix -ān, thus *brūān > *bruwān > burwān (for metatheses of liquids, cf. II 3.1.3.1).

469

Both in EAL and MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49

, the other sources have rōt, cf. also p. 217.

  , EAL: Coastal) vs. drāčk (EAL: Kēčī), usual dračk < *draǰaka-via *darčk (cf. p. 189). 470 The replacement of hl by ll seen in pallūnk might have been motivated by the existence of pallaw

(BMC, EAL) "side, corner". For the dialectal changes affecting ah, cf. II 3.2.2.3.

471 Parallel phenomena occur in other Ir. languages, e.g. Khotanese (cf.

SIMS-WILLIAMS 1983a:359)

.

472 Similarly, a suffix -k is often attached to NP and (NP-)Ar. loanwords in Choresmian, e.g. k'lk "goods" (NP kāl ˘ a), f'ydk "advantage" (NP-Ar. fā'ida, see also above), cf. MACKENZIE 1990:111.

  473 One sure case of borrowing is māhīg "fish" (cf. p. 136).474 There is a lengthening of OIr. -i/uC# > MP/NP -ī/ūC, noteworthy examples being the past stem suffix -īd < *-i-ta-and the suffix MP -ūg < *-u-ka-(observation by Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). The context and conditions of this change remain to be studied. At least as a starting point, one might perhaps formulate this lengthening process as occurring in the context [i, u] > [ī, ū] /_D#. This would explain all cases of unexpected vowel length noted bySALEMANN 1901:272 and HORN 1901:26, 31f. with the exception of MP wizīr "judgment" (vs. Av. vīčira-), which may have been influenced by MP huzihr, Prth. hužihr, NP xuǐīr "pretty" and NP āžīr "clever" (< OIr. °či\ra-); NP būn "fundament" adduced by HORN 1901:32 might represent a result of PIr. *budna-(cf. OInd. bud h ná-) differing dialectally from the usual form bun (for which cf. p. 299).

475 Note the specific derivation of the suffix -īk in NP nazdīk by KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:213 77 . 476 -āg does not go back to OIr. *-ā ˘ u a-ka-(pace SALEMANN 1901:278), but to *-āka-as is shown by the corresponding suffixes in Khotanese and Sogdian (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication).

2

  In the case of the other sound changes producing geminates, there are no examples with long vowels.

	CBal. -ps > -sp:
	• waps-(DTB, FBB, EAL: Lāšārī, Coastal, SHG) "go to sleep" is changed to wasp-
	(NP, Prth. xusp-) especially in the Western dialects (BMC, EAL: Raxšānī,
	Sarāwānī, EVM, NAWATA 1981:17, BUDDRUSS 1988:83), but not only in these
	(ABG, EAL: Kēčī).
	In aps, h ˘ aps, yaps

3 The same is true for several neighbouring languages, e.g.

Dari (cf. p. 265), Pashto (GEIGER 1893:218)

and Brahui

(MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:8)

. For metatheses involving a liquid and a vowel, cf. II 3.1.3.1, for metatheses in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.1. If ars "tear" (cf. p. 160) is not a loanword from NP, it belongs here, too.

  exists inBalochi (cf. p. 190),MOŠKALO 1991:33, 38 assumes EBal. sporadic change of sm > žm for which ažmān would be the only example. Similarly, GEIGER 1891:426 assumes a sporadic change of s > ž, the only other example being āžgēž which may be explained otherwise (see below). It might be possible that ˘ ažmān has been influenced by a word for "moon" found e.g. in Zaz. aşme, Talyshi ovšym "moon" (PIREJKO 1976); for further discussion of this word, cf. BENVENISTE 1936:230f.(Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication).

	Distant assimilations involving s, š and č (cf. GEIGER 1891:436): 19
	• čapčal besides šapčal "bat" (cf. p. 161);
	• duškīš (EAL: EBal.) "sister-in-law" instead of EBal. *duskīš for SWBal. duskīč (cf.
	p. 90, 178);
	• šarōš "elbow" (only in LEECH 1838) for usual srōš (cf. p. 131, 205);
	• šīšin (several EBal. sources, cf. GEIGER 1890:146) "needle" for sīšin (DTB etc.)
	which is the equivalent of SWBal. sūčin (cf. p. 85, 198, 200);
	• šašt "60" (MOCKLER 1877) for usual šast; 20
	• šašt-/ šaštā\-(GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881, GCD, EAL) for šast-/ šastā\-
	"send" (cf. p. 117);
	• šušt (GEB, BMC, EVM, FBB, EAL; past stem of šōd-"wash") for šust (BMC,
	DTB, GEB).
	16 GERSHEVITCH 1964:87 derives NP pēš from *pas ˘ i a-, still considering Bal. pēš a NP borrowing
	(GERSHEVITCH 1964:78).

15 One might be tempted to compare YAv. ašn-(obl. of asman-) here. However, it is hard to see how something like ašn-could have escaped the Bal. reduction šN > N(N) (cf. II 2.2.2.2). As ˘ asmān also

  notes that this word is etymologically unclear. It might have been borrowed from some Ind. language. It also occurs in Persian and in Pers. Gypsy dialects(MORGENSTIERNE 1932:40). For lunkuk, cf. p. 204.25 The interpretation of gō as the denasalised variant of gōn seems to be a convenient solution for this variation which BUDDRUSS 1988:73 termed unclear(BUDDRUSS 1988:73). FBB has gōnā (besides gōn), which is constructed analogically to the other postpositions with a noun in the oblique. FBB's other variant gōmā might show that the nasalised form g ȭ (for which cf. p. 214) is interpreted variously as containing n or m. The etymology given by GEIGER 1890:124, HORN 1893:34 (cognate with NP bā etc.) is not correct(HÜBSCHMANN 1890(HÜBSCHMANN :557, 1895:21):21). The word may be connected to NP gūn, MP gōn, Prth. gōnag "sort, kind", Av. gaona-"mode, way, colour" (with area may have been motivated by contact to Sindhi 28 and seems to be more marked in EBal. dialects than in others, although there are examples from diverse Bal.

	3.1.1.4 Other phenomena 26 d > ˙ d 27 The occasional substitution of • ABG has ˙ d umb (besides dumb, cf. p. 170) "tail" and ˙ d for d which GRIERSON 1921:394 reports from the ˙ d seems to be particularly common: ˙ d īwāl (vs. dīwāl, cf. p. 160) "wall"; • BMC, EVM, EAL have kan ˙ d "ditch, hole" (probably to be connected to NP kan-/ kand "dig", cf. kand "cutting"); • SHG, BMC, EAL show ˙ d ōbar "breast" for DTB, GCD, EAL dōbar (cf. p. 294); • hin ˙ d (SHG, EAL) for hind (DTB) "bitch"; 30 • gwand (DTB, EAL) vs. gwan ˙ d (remaining sources and Brahui) "small, short". 31 The reverse change can be seen in ǐadgāl (SHG) and its metathesised form ǐa ġdal (DTB) which stands for ǐa ˙ d g ˘ al (EAL) from *ǰa ˙ t gāl "Ja ˙ t ˙ t " (ethnolinguistic group in 24 GEIGER 1891:416 dialects (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:256). 29 nd > n Pakistan, cf. p. 187, 266, 268).

besides paigambar (EAL), paigāmbar (BMC). a semantic shift via "quality" > "equipped with" > "accompanied by"). For the etymology of NP bā < MP abāg (OIr. *upāka-, OInd. upāké "before, in the presence of"), cf. SIMS-WILLIAMS 1972:615 6 . 26 For alleged loss of word-final consonants, cf. II 2.2.4, 3.2.2.3. 27 For t > ˙ t , cf. II 3.3.1.7.3. For a discussion of the phonemic status of ˙ r and ˙ d , cf. II 1.1.2. Loralai

  EAL, also in Brahui according to EAL) and mind (DTB, EAL) are attested, also meaning "girl, daughter". Maybe this is a case of echo word (a word being doubled, the second of the pair changing its word-initial consonant to m, cf. SABIR 2003:220). It seems preferable, though, to explain it as a variant of the better attested gar (probably a cognate of Av. ga i ri-"mountain" (cf. p. 150); EAL kard "portion", classified by both as EBal. might have been inferred by the authors from Grierson and DTB (who have k h ardē "some"). The word is also found in ABG (cf. p. 203). kard might have been borrowed from MP kardag "section". Note, however, that NP-Ar. qadr "measure" which is found in Bal. as kad(a)r (cf. p. 206) could also come out as kard via the metathesis of CL# > LC# which is common in loanwords (cf. II 3.3.1.1). This homonymy might even be the reason why kard "portion" is only known from a few sources.There is a certain tendency to elide (presumably: unstressed) short vowels in noninitial 39 open syllables. It is probable that several elision processes have been at work in Balochi, perhaps one in MIr. times,40 and at least one in Modern times, which may be seen in a couple of dialectal examples (cf. II 3.2.1.2, 3.2.2.2, 3.2.3.2) and in recent loanwords (cf. II 3.3.2.1). Prth. žahr "poison" go back to *ǰan\ra-(cf. p. 206), Bal. zahg, MP zahag, Sogd. z'k might derive from *zanha-ka-(maybe a derivation of *zanah-corresponding to OInd. jánas-, CBal. *ākt > ātk, āxt, ā(h)t, past stem of āy-"come" < OIr. (Av.) ā-gata-; • zātk "offspring" (EBal. zāxt) occurs especially in compunds such as brā-42 , gwahār-zātk "brother's, sister's child: nephew, niece", nākō-, trū-zatk "uncle's, aunt's child: cousin"; it may be derived from *zāta-ka-(cf. MP, Prth. zādag), a derivation of zāt "born" (past stem of zāy-, cf. p. 109); the variant zāk (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:284) might reflect *zākk-< *zātk, thus the development of OIr -xt in words not interpreted as past stems (cf. p. 112): alternatively, it might be a product of some contamination with zahg, zāg (see above) "child" (cf. also p.

	184			II. Historical Phonology
	The cases noted so far are: 3.1.2 Vowels
	• with r followed by d: 3.1.2.1 Loss of vowels 38
	u ˙	r d (ABG) vs. (other sources) urd "army" (NP-Turk. loanword), da ˙	r d (ABG) vs.
	dard "pain" 32 , za ˙	r d (ABG) vs. zard "yellow" (NP loanword), šāga ˙	r d (ABG) vs.
	šāgird "pupil" (NP loanword), k h a ˙	r d-ē vs. k h ard-ē (both GRIERSON 1921:394) 33 "a
	few", ma ˙	r d (GRIERSON 1921:394, ABG, EAL) vs. mard "man, husband";
	ga ˙	r "precipice", if existing (only found in EAL), might be a cognate of Av. g e r e da-
	28 Sindhi often has 1872:XX, e.g. ¯ duk h "sorrow" vs. Ur. duk h ) for which ˙ d or ¯ d (the latter especially in the beginning of a word) for etymological d (TRUMPP ˙ d is used when borrowed into Balochi, cf. ABG ˙ d uk h "sorrow". ROSSI 1979:xxxiv notes that Brahui regularly substitutes ˙ d -for d-in Bal. loanwords, which might also account for some cases of ˙ d -in Balochi since Br. words may get borrowed into Balochi. Thus, the example ˙ d ēh (vs. DTB dēh) "country" given by GRIERSON 1921:394 might have been borrowed directly from Si. ¯ dēh with a substitution of ˙ d for ¯ d (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:45). 29 The Karachi Bal. examples in FARRELL 2003:177 may be explained as borrowings from Sindhi. 30 Besides these, min ˙ d (SHG, 31 For cognates (e.g. Khot. vanda-"small"), cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1929:256a, BAILEY 1979:374b. "cave". • with r followed by t: sā ˙ r at h "cold (adj.)", sā ˙ r t h ī "cold (noun)" (both ABG) vs. (other sources) sārt; 34 gu ˙ t ( ˙ t )ag "kidney" may well be a cognate of Av. v e r e dka-, OInd. v ˚ rkká-, both from PIIr. * ˘ u ˚ rtka-(EWAia II:571). 35 PIIr. * ˘ u ˚ rtka-might have developed to Bal. * ˘ u ˚ rt(t)a-(> *gwart(t)-?) > *gurt(t)-(for PIr. * ˘ u ˚ r-> Bal. gur-, cf. p. 100, 144) > *gu ˙ r ˙ t ( ˙ t )ag. The loss of ˙ r (and the transfer of the retroflex quality to the adjacent consonant) might have been motivated by the existence of gu ˙ t ( ˙ t ) "throat", Ur. ga ˙ t ˙ t h ī "ball" 36 and by Si. gu ˙ d ˙ d ō "kidney"; • with r followed by \ (only GRIERSON 1921:394): 37 ā ˙ r \-vs. (other sources) ārt h -"brought", mu ˙ r \-vs. murt h -"died", wā ˙ r \-vs. wārt h -"eaten"; • with z: bu ˙ r z (GRIERSON 1921:394, BMC) vs. (other sources) burz "high". For further developments of ˙ r and rd, cf. II 3.1.3.5. 32 dard is most probably a NP loanword (GEIGER 1891:447) since it is likely to derive from *darta-(SIMS-WILLIAMS 2000:200). 33 BMC, 34 For the anaptyctic vowel, cf. p. 207, for the etymology, cf. p. 189. 40 For syncopation in Middle Persian, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:210ff. MP syncopation mainly affects short vowels in open syllables when a resonant follows (KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:210ff.). 41 If NP zahr, 303); • izbōtk (EAL, SHG) "lovage, ajowan" 43 is likely to derive from *uz-ba ˘ u da-ka-44
	ELFENBEIN's 1985:231 assumption of a borrowing from Sindhi/Lahnda is not to be preferred since 35 WEBER 1994:115 29 reconstructs * ˘ u ˚ rtaka-for MPZ gurdag (NP gurda). One might also derive it from
	the allegedly corresponding words (TURNER 1966:514 s.v. ba * ˘ u ˚ rtka-ka-, however, i.e. from the same form as its cognates, apart from the additional suffix, similar ˙ n ˙ d á-) fit neither in form nor in
	semantics; neither does it seem necessary (pace ELFENBEIN 1989:636) to consider gwand an EIr. to Sogd. gwrdtq-which is derived from * ˘ u ˚ rdkak(k)ā-by SIMS-WILLIAMS 1983:49.
	"substrate" word. It seems possible that gwan 36 GILBERTSON's assumption (1925:368) of gu ˙ t ( ˙ t )ag being borrowed from Urdu does not seem likely. ˙ d has been influenced by a group of terms for body
	parts containing n	˙	d (cf. p. 219, 296f.).

Examples from pre-CBal. times are not numerous, probably mainly due to the shortage of corresponding polysyllabic input forms: • the OIr. suffix -aka-comes out as Bal. -k at least in some contexts (cf. II 2.4.4.1); • iptī, t h ī "second, other" may reflect *ptī vs. Prth. bid(īg) (cf. p. 122); • zahg "child" (for dialectal variants, cf. p. 253) vs. MP, Prth. zahag; 41 • nind-"sit" vs. Prth. ni-šīd-, NP ni-šīn-is likely to involve the loss of a vowel, although the precise derivation of the Bal. form is not clear (cf. p. 127); • further cases might be āzmānak "story" if it is to be interpreted as *ā-zamān-aka-(cf. p. 186), brēs-"spin" if it derives from *abi°, prinč-"squeeze", pruš-"break" (itr.) and prōš-"break" (tr.) if they contain a preverb *upa°(cf. p. 139).

The following two cases show that the first syncopation must have taken place before CBal. *kt was changed to EBal. xt, SBal. tk and WBal. ht (cf. II 2.2.1.1):

38 For loss of word-initial short vowels, cf. II 2.3.1.1.

39 The seeming elision in ǐ(ō)wak (EAL) "small stream" (diminutive of ǐō "river") might rather reflect the pronunciation /ǰōa-/. The variants nwāsag (otherwise nawāsag) "grandchild" and ǐwān "good, young" (cf. NP ǐawān "young") might involve a change of aw > uw (note that BUDDRUSS 1988:75 has ǐuwān and EAL ǐ(a)wān), cf. p. 218. Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). It is not clear whether Bal. zahg can be an inherited word. For alternative etymologies, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:201. With regard to MP zahag, ELFENBEIN's interpretation (1989:636) of zahg as EIr. substrate word does not seem necessary.

•

  "still, yet", ančēn(FBB, EAL, BUDDRUSS 1988:69) "such (adj.)", anču, ančōš "in such a way, thus" might be composed with the pronoun ān (for which cf. p. 102), cf. the variants āngāt, ānčēn, ānčōš found in EVM and NP ān-gāh; alternatively, ančōš, anču might be dialectal variants (cf. p. 248) of *hančōš etc. (this seems to be the assumption ofEAL 4), i.NP sikār etc. (cf. p. 124); • bar (BMC, DTB, EAL, SHG) "time" besides bār (cf. p. 253); • pač vs. pāč "open" (on the etymology, cf. p. 139); • EBal. (cf. GEIGER 1890:135) pakar vs. usual pak(k)ār "necessary" (cf. p. 139); • rōp h ask (DTB, GEB) besides rōp h āsk (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49) "fox"; 49 • zatk (FBB, SHG) for zātk "offspring" (cf. p. 185); • EBal. shows the past stem suffix -a\-, it is a secondary variant of the past stem suffix -ā\-(SWBal. -āt, Prth. -ād), which is comparatively rare in Balochi, but well known from Parthian (cf. DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2000) and Zazaki.

e. compounds with ham°like (h)am-ē "same, this very" and (h)am-ā "that very" (with ē "this", ā "that", respectively); it is, however, not clear if the same might hold for anga(t); • EVM (two attestations in ZARUBIN 1932 each) has ōman (other sources: ōmān, cf.

p. 151) "desire" and bad-i "after" vs. FBB, EAL bād (cf. p. 63); • iškar "(char)coal, ember" vs. iškār,

  Pakistan); the shortening of the second syllable may be due to interpretation as gal "group, multitude" (also used as a quasi-pl. suffix).50 Similarly, BMC has zardalū "apricot" while the expected form zardālū (loanword from NP zard-ālū) is much better attested (EVM, FBB, SHG).

	• ǐa ġdal (DTB), ǐag	˙	d al and ǐa	˙	d gal (both EAL) besides ǐagdāl (EAL) which is likely
	to have developed via ǐa	˙	d gāl (EAL, cf. SHG ǐadgāl) from ǐa ˙	t gāl "Ja ˙ t ˙ t "
	(ethnolinguistic group in CBal. ī > i (GEIGER 1891:407): 51
	• EVM (two attestations in ZARUBIN 1932) akikáttā "certainly" vs. SHG hakīkat
	"truth" (NP-Ar.	˙	h aqīqat);
	• DTB dix besides dīx "spindle" for SWBal. dīk(k) (< dūk(k), cf. p. 197);
	• kitak "insect, louse" could show a shortening of ī if it belongs with the somewhat
	unclear (EWAia I:355) OInd. kī ˙	t á-"worm" (GEIGER 1891:407) and Sogd. kyc'kh
	(BAILEY 1979:101a); 52
	• mik "nail" vs. mīk(k) "top of head", EAL mēk "nail" (NP mēx "nail, stick", cf. p.
	200).

50 Bal. gal might have been borrowed from NP galla "flock"

(GEIGER 1890(GEIGER :121, 1891:44):44)

. For the metathesis, cf. p. 266.

  seems to be a regular lengthening art > ārt, probably including arč [artš] > ārč[ārtš].57 Note that some Ir. cognates of the following examples also go back to *ārt. MP afsār-/ afsārd, Prth. wisār-"to cool" also show -ā-vs. NP sard, wārt "eats" and bārt "carries" (cf. p. 147) vs. present stems war-, bar-in the remaining forms, the past stem wārt (vs. Prth. wxard) shows the same lengthening, which operates across the morpheme boundaries; • the long a seen in drāčk (EAL: Kēčī), drāč(MAYER 1910, EAL: Coastal), d(a)rāšk (EAL: Eastern) "tree" might be explained by assuming a variant *darčk which would result in *dārčk. The metathesis effecting the other variants dračk, DTB drašk, ABG daršak (cf. NP diraxt) would thus be older than the lengthening. 62 57 This change does not operate in recent loanwords, cf. e.g. harč "costs" (NP-Ar. xarǐ, cf. p. 269). Historical Phonology For lengthening in the context ard, cf. II 3.1.3.5. Most other cases of lengthening of non-final a involve loanwords: • ābrēšum "silk" vs. (borrowed from NP abrēšum, 63 BAILEY 1931:425), only EVM has abrēšūm (sic); • (h)ārōs "wedding" for NP-Ar. c arūs (cf. also p. 154); • the lengthening seen in āžmān 64 (GLADSTONE 1874, LEWIS 1885, EAL), āzmān, āsmān (both in many sources) "sky" vs. ažmān (DTB, GCD), azmān (DTB, GCD), asmān (GCD, NAWATA 1981:38) < OIr. (OP) asmānam may be explained by the influence of NP āsmān "dto."; 65 • ā ġā (ABG) "if" for aga(r) (NP agar, Prth. ag); 66

	Two examples go back to PIE * ˚ lH > PIIr. * ˚ rH: 58
	• ārt "flour": Zaz. ardi (pl.), NP ārd and Pashto ō ˙	r e , all "flour", and Khot. sek. PP
	ārda-"ground" 59 all seem to derive from *ārta-(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:134,) while
	Av. aˇ ˙ s a-"ground" (past part.) goes back to *árta-< PIE *h 2 ˚ ĺh 1 -to-
	(KLINGENSCHMITT 1982:93, HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1996:92);
	• sārt "cold": Av. sar e ta-"cold", < PIE * ḱ ˚ lH-tó-60 (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:150 2 ).
	Other examples derive from PIr. *ar:
	• kārč "knife" corresponds to NP kārd 61 in vocalism vs. Av. kar e ta-< PIr. *karta-
	(TREMBLAY 1999:90); -č might be due to an additional suffix, e.g. a diminutive
	formation (GEIGER 1890:132) or *-˘ i a-(ELFENBEIN 1990/II:83);
	• 3sg. 58 For PIr. * ˚ rH > Bal. ar, cf. II 2.3.2.3.
	59 *arta-is seen in Khot. ā	˙	d a-"flour" (EMMERICK 1968:10).
	60 EWAia II:641: OInd. śíśira-"early spring" goes back to * ḱi-ḱ ˚ lH-ro-.
	61 There are some NInd. forms which likewise seem to require *kārta-(TURNER 1966:156). In spite of
	OInd. k

˚ rtí-, it is not necessary to assume a zero-grade formation for Iranian (EWAia I:390).

62 If dračk is to be connected to Av. √drang (PP draxta-) "make strong/firm" as suggested by KEWA II:37 for NP diraxt, it could come from *draǰaka-> *draǰk-> dračk (note that MORGENSTIERNE 1932:43 postulated a preform OIr. *dr ãǰaka-, but without giving the Av. cognate). This seems more 190 II.

  KEWA II:75). Cf. also p.166, 208. 63 STEINGASS 1892:8a only has abrīšam, abrīšum, but the ē is confirmed by the Georg. loanword abrešum-(Jost Gippert, personal communication).64 For the -ž-, cf. p. 179.65 This lengthening seems to take place already in Middle Iranian, cf. MPM, Prth. <'sm'n, ''sm'n>. For the ā-, see above. It is possible that the existence of Ur. āgā "front, fore-part, future" plays a role in this case. sikkā "coin" (NP-Ar. (also in Urdu) sikka); • šãbā 70 "Saturday" (NP šanba, Prth. šambat);

	67 • xazānā (BMC xazāna(g)) "treasury" (NP-Ar. xizāna, CNP xazāne); • ā ġā "if" (NP agar); 68 • išārā "sign" (NP-Ar. (also in Urdu) išāra); • dīwānā (EAL dīwānag) "mad" (NP dīwāna, Ur. dīwān ˘ a); • ¯ zarā (Zfe) "atom, particle" (NP-Ar. ¯ zarra, Ur. ¯ zarra, ¯ zar(r)ā); • zardā (also FBB) "rice with saffron" (NP (also in Urdu) zarda); 69 convincing than GEIGER's (1890:120) linking of dračk with the late and rare OInd. drāk ˙ unclear origin (66 Although the details are not entirely clear (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:17), NP agar is likely to derive from s ā-of OIr. (OP) hakaram (HORN 1893:25), which implies that the Bal. word has been borrowed. For further variants, cf. p. 216. 67 It is not entirely clear what pronunciation is intended by SHG in corresponding cases (e.g. išāra, sadakka) since the orthography is, e.g., y G f G £$ G Z . ¨ sa ¯ zqā 71 (BMC sadka, SHG sadakka) "alms, charity" (NP-Ar. ¨ sadaqa); • fāti ˙ h ā (FBB fātēā 72 , SHG pātiyā) "memorial prayer" (NP-Ar. (also in Urdu) fāti ˙ h a); 68 • • fāidā (DTB, EAL fāida, BMC, SHG pāida(g)) "advantage" (NP-Ar. (also in Urdu)

69 For zard "yellow" and the other colours, cf. III 3.

•

  This is the regular oblique case of (NP) šamba in Urdu, but not the case used in expressions like "on Saturday", for which purpose postpositions are used.71¯ z is the EBal. equivalent for d here, cf. p. 230f. For vowel elision in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.2.1.

	72 For ih > ē, cf. II 3.1.3.2.
	73 GEIGER 1891:406 states that GLADSTONE 1874 and HITTU RAM 1881 have the forms in -ā whereas
	DAMES 1881 has -a throughout.
	74 These are variants of būta (for ū > ī, cf. p. 196f., for t > s, cf. p. 230f.).
	For further details, cf. p. 77.

70 For nasalisation of short vowels, see below. BMC, FBB, SHG have (in the case of SHG, additionally) šambē.

  80 For further variants, cf. p. 267. 81 This form is exactly what HÜBSCHMANN 1890:561 reconstructs as the basis for Arm. (borrowed) knčit c . The Bal. word is a nice confirmation for the existence of kunčit in Middle NW Iranian.82 The vowel of the second syllable (if not an error) must be a hypercorrect reversal of a perceived palatalisation process (for a > i, particularly frequent inSHG, cf. p. 193f.).Palatalisation of a (and, to a lesser degree, u) is common, although the unchanged variants without palatalisation are in most cases attested as well. The i of ABG nimāš "prayer" vs. namāš (cf. p. 96) may be explained as being due to the NP loanword nimāz "prayer" (for which cf. p. 285). For āsin "iron", cf. p. 87; NP āhan is used in the form āhin in some Bal. dialects, its -i-being probably due to an analogy to āsin. The i of dušmin, dužmin (SHG) "enemy" may either be due to the * ˘ i in *duš-man ˘ i u-(cf. Prth. dušmen <dwšmyn>, Kurd. dijmin) or to its being borrowed from Persian (MP likewise dušmen) while dušman (BMC, EAL), dužman (ABG, DTB, EAL) may have been borrowed from or influenced by NP dušman (cf. also p. 93). 86 Bal. mič-"suck" vs. NP maz-probably does not belong here, cf. p. 95. GEIGER's 1891:407 example pūnzig "heel" occurs only once (all other sources have pūnz, for the etymology, cf. "sift" (cf. p. 98) and cognate of Kurd. bêjing "sieve"; • ABG ǐibar vs. NP-Ar. ǐabr "force" (cf. p. 206); SHG ǐintir vs. EAL ǐantir vs. BMC, DTB, EAL ǐantar (cf. NP ǐandar) "millstone" (cf. p. 104); ǐinik(k) 87 vs. ǐanik(k) 88 "girl, daughter", ǐan (NP zan) "woman"; EAL dōǐik vs. EAL dōǐak "hell" (usually dōzah etc., see below); • GEB, EAL hariš vs. DTB harš(a) (NP araš) "ell"; • EBal. + diž-"brand" which GEIGER 1891:400 presumes to be the correct form of DTB did-(cf. the past stem daxt) < *daž-can belong here if it exists, 89 cf. OInd. ¨ sabr, cf. also p. 206); DTB, BMC, FBB, EAL sing vs. DTB sang 90 "stone" (NP sang, Prth. asang); EBal. kisān (otherwise kasān) "small"; 91 SHG, FBB, EAL, NAWATA 1981:35 makisk and borrowed magis(k) (EAL, SHG) vs. GEB makask, NP, Prth. magas "fly" (cf. p. 78); • BMC dōzix vs. DTB dōzax, SHG dōzah, EAL dōzak, ABG dūžah (NP dōzax) "hell" (cf. p. 93); • one possible explanation for the diminutive suffix -ik(k) is its derivation from DTB ǐanik h . 89 EAL has daž-, but this might be due to Elfenbein's reading of Geiger and/or DTB. Geiger's connection of the word with NP daža "seal" is rejected by Müller (apud HÜBSCHMANN 1895:63). There is no corresponding SWBal. verb attested; one would expect *daǰ-(< PIE *d h eg For the variants sĩg (SHG) and sãg (ABG, SHG), cf. p. 244, for the etymology, cf. p. 139. 91 The data do suggest (pace GERSHEVITCH 1964:88) that kisān (DTB, MAYER 1910) is a secondary variant of kasān (all SWBal. sources, including the palatalisation-friendly SHG).

	CBal. u > ū (GEIGER 1891:409): 84
	• EVM abrēšūm "silk" vs. ābrēšum, see above; • DTB apūrs "juniper" vs. normal apurs (cf. p. 140, 145); • kūmak (DTB) "help" for kumak(k) (NP-Ar. kumak, cf. p. 272, 285); • ākūbat (BMC) "future" for ākubat, ākibat (NP-Ar. c āqibat, cf. p. 286). Note that last example has a variant with -ō-, for which cf. p. 201. 3.1.2.3 Changes in quality 3.1.2.3.1 Palatalisation ˘ u a ˘ i č-ana-(ELFENBEIN 1985:231), a derivative of 85 p. 85, 198, 200); gēčin "sieve" < * gēč-˘ u h ). Av. daž-
	for expected *daǰ-is explained as a dialectal phenomenon by HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1986:101.
	90

83 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:81 assumes that the word was borrowed from Ind., but this is not probable since OInd. kuñcita-and its decendants mean "crooked" ("sesame" is tilá-, tíla-in OInd. and similarly in Modern Ind. languages), so it is more probable that the words are cognates. For Ir. cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:61f.

CBal. a > i (GEIGER 1891:407):

85

In words which are likely to be inherited, palatalisation seems to be limited to the context next to č, ǐ, š, ž, s and z. It seems to occur more frequently in SBal. than in the other dialects. Examples (sorted according to the palatalising consonant) are: 86 84 For (h)ūrt "tiny" vs. NP xurd, cf. p. 122, 197. gandīm "wheat" (used in the Eastern and Southern dialects mainly, the Western ones using gal(l)a instead (BMC), for the corresponding location of the change ū > ī, cf. p. 196ff.) < gandūm (EAL) might be regular (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556 who assumes PIIr. *gand h ūma-) in spite of NP gandum since the Ir. forms seem to go back to different protoforms (EWAia I:498f., against MORGENSTIERNE 1932:45 who assumes that only †gantum would be regular). p. 127, for variants see below) and even if it existed, it need not involve a palatalisation process but might contain a suffix *-ika-. The source of EAL's pūnzīg is not clear to me. The existence of the variant čihār "4" (otherwise čār, cf. p. 120) found in EAL is, although rather probable, not sure. Maybe an underlying assumption for the establishing of čihār is that EBal. čyār • pāčin vs. NP pāzan "goat" (cf. p. 126); sōčin, sūč(č)in vs. NP sōzan "needle" (cf. √dah "burn", Av. daž-, Prth. dažn "hot, spicy"; • ABG sibr (otherwise sabr) "patience" (NP-Ar. *-ak(k) in palatal context (cf. II 2.4.4.1), cf. bačik(k) "son" < bačak(k). r seems to have the same palatalising effect: 92 • BMC, EVM, EAL bir "on, upon, back" (borrowed from NP bar); 93 • DTB birā\ "brother" vs. barās, SWBal. brāt (cf. p. 205); (cf. p. 234) might be based on such a form. 87 BMC ǐinikk, ABG, FBB, NAWATA 1981:35 ǐinik; DTB also has ǐink. 88 SHG ǐanikk,

  /II:VIIff.). 106 99 iškun-/ iškut are Kēčī and Sarāwānī according to EAL X, XIII who also cites the variant iškēn-. EAL qualifies both as Coastal and Kēčī. For further variants, cf. p.236, for the suffix, cf. p. 165f., for the etymology, cf. p. 112. For the etymology, cf. p. 128, for the semantics, cf. p. 306. For semantic details, cf. p. 306, for further discussion, cf. p. 208. 228. EAL. RZEHAK 1991:186 has wasir-zāg "husband's brother". The Eastern dialect form (EAL, PEHRSON 1966:45) is wasir-zāxt, wasar-zāxt (for which cf. p. 208, 236). The dialect called Sarāwānī by Elfenbein is obviously not the same as the dialect described by SPOONER 1967, BARANZEHI 2003 and others under the same name (meaning the dialect of the Some examples: 107 • (h)apītag SHG vs. apūtag SHG, MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290 (a certain plant, cf. p. 140); • bīt FBB, EAL: Coastal, Eastern bī\ DTB, EAL vs. būt EVM, BMC, BUDDRUSS 1988:71, NAWATA 1981:19, EAL: Raxšānī, Kēčī, Lāšārī, b ūt EAL (Sarāwānī) "became" (NP, Prth. būd); • pahlī(g) SHG, DTB, GCD vs. pahlū(g) SHG "side" (cf. p. 163f.); • pīnz 108 vs. pūnz 109 "heel"; • trī SHG, FBB, MORGENSTIERNE 1948:284 vs. trū SHG, FBB, BMC, MORGENSTIERNE 1932:51 "aunt" (cf. p. 124f.); • dīt SHG vs. dūt(t) SHG, EAL, BMC, EVM, NAWATA 1981:37 "smoke" (NP, Prth. dūd, cf. p. 142); • dīr 110 FBB, DTB, EAL (Coastal, Eastern) vs. dūr SHG, EAL, EVM, BMC, d ūr EAL (Sarāwānī) "far" (NP, Prth. dūr); • dīk(k) SHG, dīx DTB vs. dūk(k) SHG "spindle" (NP dūk); 111 • zīt(t) SHG vs. zūt(t) SHG, BCM, EVM "quick" (cf. p. 142); • zīr-SHG, FBB, DTB vs. zūr-SHG, FBB, EAL, BMC, EVM, NAWATA 1981:17; DTB, SHG, EAL: Coastal vs. was(s)ū(g) BMC, NAWATA 1981:5, EAL, SHG "mother-in-law"; • hūrt, ūrt, hīrt (all in EAL and SHG), īrt (SHG) "tiny". 112 107 For gemination of after ī, ū in SHG, cf. p. 242. 108 EAL (Coastal); FBB has p īz, SHG pīnzz. DTB, GCD p h īd is a spelling pronunciation (EAL 116), assuming that z is a dialectal variant of EBal. d (< CBal. d, cf. p. 230f.), and p h id in MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49 might be a misprint. 109 EAL; FBB has p ūz, SHG pūnzz. For the etymology, cf. p. 127, for the forms in SHG, cf. p. 242. 110 dūr, dīr (possibly, but not necessarily borrowed from NP dūr) is not to be confused with dēr "late" (for which cf. p. 119).

	For mūd, mīd "hair", cf. p. 142.

uškun-/ uškut (for which cf. p. 204) and (k)uškin-/ (k)uškit are Raxšānī according to EAL VIII. NAWATA's 1981:16 ušk-is obviously modelled on the past stem uškit. For

EBal. aškan-etc., cf. p. 236. If GERSHEVITCH (1998:111)

is right in considering uškin-/ uškit the original variant (cf. p. 147), iškun-/ iškut might also be explained as showing a metathesis of vowel quality

(GERSHEVITCH 1998:110)

. SHG has šipānk, BMC šupānk, Iranian town of Sarāwān and its surroundings). The latter does not show a change of ū > ū (cf. p.

262).

The fact that the Eastern dialects in general and the remaining ones in part show this change was already described by GEIGER 1889:88. "take" (for the etymology, cf. p. 146, for the variant zōr-, cf. p. 202); • zīm(m) SHG, FBB, DTB vs. zūm(m) SHG, EAL, FBB, NAWATA 1981:37 "scorpion" (maybe -with GEIGER 1890:153 -from the root of NP zūd "quick", Av. zauuah-"speed", i.e. OInd. √jū "hurry", although the m-suffix is unparalleled with this root, cf. p. 95); • was(s)ī(g) 111 dōk (GEIGER 1890:121) is declared to be an error for dūk by GEIGER 1891:410. The word might have been borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:444).

  113 For srēn "loins", cf. p. 202. 114 Raxšānī according to EAL. There is an unexpected e in some variants cited in EAL, where <e> is used for what is ē in the present work: Kēčī, Lāšārī sūčen and Sarāwānī s ūčen, only the latter of which might be interpreted as showing IrBal. [e] for /i/ (cf. p. 261). Maybe the reason for these forms is the entry sūčēn in EVM, likewise not entirely clear; maybe this is a misinterpretation of ZARUBIN 1932 who uses <e> for ē and <% e> for an allophone of i (ZARUBIN 1932:VII). Alternatively, it seems possible that it is an inherited word: Sogd. c'dr "below, under" (GERSHEVITCH 1954:232) might indicate that the composition with the preposition OIr. hača is an older formation, and it appears possible that MIr. adr, agr gives ēr in Balochi (cf. p. 119). If so, EBal. šēr would show an adaptation to the preposition š(a). MPZ gōn "colour" (MP, Prth. gōnag, Av. gaona-"sort, kind"). One would have to assume *gōn > *gūn with subsequent ū > ī (cf. p. 198). For gōn "with" as a possible further reflex of this word in Balochi, cf. p. 181, 214. "top of head", EVM mī "halter" vs. EAL mēk "stake, pole, top of head", mēh "tent peg" (NP, Prth. mēx): the words may have been borrowed from or influenced by CNP mīx, NP mēx (cf. p. 82f.); 126 • nīwag "fruit" vs. NP mēwa (cf. p. 268); • hīt "young grain" vs. MP xwēd, NP xawēd (cf. p. 123); • adj.suffix -īn in ABG kuhn ī127 "old-fashioned" vs. -ēn otherwise (cf. p. 151). GRIERSON 1921:405f. notes ūdā in the EBal. dialect Kasrānī (for which cf. p. 231) corresponding to ōdā "there" in SWBal. (cf. p. 101); • there is a variant ǐū "river" for (BMC) ǐō(h) (cf. p. 104); • FBB činčū "how much" (cf. p. 195) vs. EAL činčō and čō "so (much)" (all sources); • SWBal. sōp "apple" appears as sōf in EBal. according to BMC and EAL, but DTB has sūf; 129 • sōčin > sūč(č)in > sīč(č)in (cf. p. 198) "needle"; • according to EAL, srōš (cf. p. 131, 205) "elbow" has a variant surūšk, this variant is also the basis for surušk (for which cf. p. 188); • kūr (EAL, BMC) "river" is a (according to BMC, Raxšānī dialectal) variant of kōr, kaur (for which II 3.3.2.2); • hōrk "empty" has a variant hurk (cf. p. 188) which seems to imply a stage *hūrk.

	3.1.2.3.2 Raising and Lowering
	Raising
	Although as a rule, MIr. ē, ō (< OIr. ai, au, cf. II 2.3.3) are preserved in Balochi, there
	are examples of the same merger ē, ī > ī and ō, ū > ū which has operated regularly in
	Standard Modern Persian.
	115 For variants with secondary nasalisation, cf. p. 217. CBal. ē > ī: 119 123 The second meaning "river-like" (BMC) may be due to a popular etymology with rōd "river" (cf. p. 270). 124 Cf. NP gūn, CBal. ō > ū: 128
	116 For further cognates in Ir. languages, cf. GEIGER 1890:142.

117 Cf. p. 113f. for an etymological discussion and p. 214 for further variants.

118 pulūs "police" (Engl. loanword) need not show a Bal. change of ī > ū

(pace FARRELL 2003:180)

since pulūs is widespread in the languages of Northern Pakistan and Balochi may have borrowed the word in this form (Georg Buddruss, personal communication).

• ABG ād īk vs. usual ādēnk "mirror"; 120 • GEB ī (dem.pron.) vs. usual ē (cf. V 1.2) might belong here, if it exists; 121 • ABG čīr 122 (čīr būag "to hide") for usual čēr (Eastern šēr) "under";

• ABG dīmā vs. usual dēmā "in front of" (obl. case of dēm "face") could have been influenced by the NP cognate dīm (MP, Prth. dēm); • EBal. rīš-vs. other dialects rēč-"pour" (cf. p. 151); • ABG rīk "desert" vs. usual rēk "sand" (cf. p. 97); • -gīn in BMC rōd-gīn "red, reddish" 123 (from rōd "copper", NP rūy, MP rōy): one might be tempted to derive the word from *rōd-gōn "copper-coloured", 124 but the suffix is probably a cognate of the MP, Prth. possessive suffix -gēn; 125 119 gīn "breath" is probably not a case of ēn > īn (cf. p. 136).

120 For further variants and nasalisation processes, cf. p. 214, for the etymology, cf. p. 79. 121 GEIGER's assumption (1891:408) that ī has been borrowed from NP does not seem likely.

122 Note that simple īr cited by GEIGER 1890:129 is not attested (Geiger's source DAMES 1881:46 and DTB have only ēr). As ēr has been derived from OIr. adari "under" (Av. ada i ri), it would seem that it has been borrowed from Persian (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556), cf. MP ēr. Since čēr cannot have been borrowed from NP (which has the parallel formation z-ēr), however, it must be a compound formed in Balochi from č(a) / EBal. š(a) and ēr.

125 Examples include Prth. zēn-gēn "armed" (zēn "weapon", RASTORGUEVA/MOL ČANOVA 1981a:196), nām-gēn "famous", MPM awezmāh-gēn "lewd" (DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 114). The suffix is quite common in Armenian, e.g. srtagin "hearty", divagin "demonical" (Ralf-Peter Ritter, personal

• GEB, SHG mīk(k)

•

  131 For the semantics, cf. p. 301. 132 It is not quite clear how ABG <ye£$ šaze> (sic!) "marriage; happiness, pleasure" is meant. If šāzē is intended (which is how the transcription in ABG is normally used), the word might represent NP šādī "joy" with EBal. d > d > (dialectal, cf. p. 230f.) z and hypercorrect -ē for -ī, maybe by reinterpretation of the abstract suffix as the indefinite article. For barēbar, see below.

The other instances of ē for i or ī noted by GRIERSON 1921:376 are likely to require other explanations (if they exist): for the pronoun ī instead of ē, cf. p. 243; šē for ši "from" (more commonly, ša, aš etc., cf. p. 85, 229) might show analogy to or composition with the demonstrative pronoun ē; čē "what" is not secondary to čī, but rather the other way round (cf. p. 107f.).

  According to GERSHEVITCH 1979:141, NP hanūz "yet, still" < MPZ <'hnwc> goes back to a compound from OP a\ai "still, as yet" and *nūči (cf. Av. nūči ˜ t ), MPM <'hnwn(-c)> "now" would then show a\ai + *nūnam. If Bal. hannūn (only EAL) exists, it might show unetymological h-(cf. p. 154) and/or a reinterpretation as involving ham as first syllable (ham-nūn is the interpretation of hannūn by EAL 108).134 zāl "woman" is a NP loanword, cf. GEIGER 1891:444. According to EAL, būl is a borrowing from Lahnda. For a photo of a Bal. woman with nose-ring, cf. MATHESON 1967:22a.135 An alternative explanation is that the -i seen in Av. sraoni-effected a change of the preceding vowel with the result of NP surīn(KLINGENSCHMITT 1972:73 195 , 2000:206 52 , GIPPERT 1993/I:243) and Bal.

	3. Common Balochi > contemporary varieties	203

srēn. NP surūn "buttocks" must then be a dialectal form without umlaut (GIPPERT 1993/I:243), perhaps influenced by sarūn "horn". (Note that the NP forms show NWIr. features, the SWIr. form would be *sēn.) A second case for such a change is lacking for Balochi, though.

136 For the diphthongisation ē > īe, ō > ūe in Lāšārī, cf. p. 261.

  180. The same applies to BMC bilaur vs. SHG bulūr, EAL bilōr, b(u)lōr (Bal. informants) "crystal, glass" since the variants occurring in NP according to STEINGASS 1892:199 are ballūr, billaur, bulūr, from where the Bal. variants bilaur, bulūr may have been borrowed. Parthian has <bylwr>, which COLDITZ 2000:280 transcribes bilōr (cf. p. 281); this would match Bal. bilōr, b(u)lōr very well. The word which has wandered all over Asia originally comes from a Middle Ind. language, cf. Pali ve ˙ l uriya (HÜBSCHMANN 1899:19), CARDONA 1980. 139 For variants, cf. p. 216. If BAILEY's 1979:250b etymology (Khot. paujsīda "they kiss", Orm. pōč "kiss") is correct, pōz must have been borrowed from NP; the same applies to Psht. pōza (MORGENSTIERNE 2003:68). The relationship to Osset. fyny etc. which seems to go back to *pinz-

(ABAEV I:497) is not clear. 140 There seem to be no cognates apart from MPZ, NP bōb. 141 BMC has u only in compounds and the like, but in ABG, SHG, NAWATA 1981:29, BUDDRUSS 1981:82, u is the only variant. BUDDRUSS 1988:82 also has NP-Ar. wa.

  • DTB, EVM, EAL uštur besides uštir, uštar "camel" (cf. p. 158f., p. 195); • EVM uškumag besides ABG, SHG šikam "stomach" (cf. p. 170, 286); • SHG, EAL uškun-"hear" < *uškan-or *uškin-(cf. p. 147); • DTB dužux vs. SWBal. daǐuk etc. (cf. p. 227) "hedgehog";

• ABG qubūl "accepted" besides kabūl, (NP-Ar.) qabūl; • ABG, BMC lunkuk besides FBB, SHG lankuk "finger" (cf. p. 181, 293).

  cf. II 2.2.2.3): 146 surup (BMC, PIERCE 1874) vs. srup (EAL, SHG) "lead (metal)"; surum (DAMES 1881) vs. srumb (LEECH 1838, SHG) "hoof"; sarōš (GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881, DAMES 1881, DTB, GCD, EAL: EBal.), surōš (EAL), surūšk (EAL: Coastal) vs. srōš (SHG, EAL) 147 "elbow"; sarēn (GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881, DAMES 1881, DTB, GCD), sirīn (LEECH 1838) vs. srēn "loins"; • anaptyxis in other consonant clusters of the type #Cr-is rather common: For references to the etymologies of the words presented here, cf. V 2.146 surōp "apple"(FARRELL 1990:47), if not a misprint for srōp(thus FARRELL 1990:84 and SHG) might show that anaptyxis occasionally also occurs in Karachi Balochi. The etymology of srōp is not clear yet, and the word has been only reported from Karachi so far. It is not clear if one might speculate about some contamination of the word for "apple" found in other dialects, sōp (cf. p. 200) with Ur. surūp "well-formed, beautiful". If so, this word would not show anaptyxis. 147 According to EAL, srōš is Eastern Balochi, which seems improbable given its attestation in SHG; EAL in addition has srōšk without dialect specification. For šarōš, cf. p. 180, for surūšk, cf. p. 200, for surušk, cf. p. 188. 148 Note that a next to r is often changed to i (cf. p. 194f.). 149 Both variants occur in ABG, darāǐ shows the SWBal. consonantism (cf. 86, 229). the only other example of anaptyxis in a word-initial consonant cluster is safē\ (LEECH 1838), sawē\ (DAMES 1881), sawēs (GLADSTONE 1874) besides swē\ (DTB) vs. SWBal. spēt etc. "white" (cf. p. 90, 152); for šawā "you", cf. p. 126, 218, 232f. Anaptyxis in word-final consonant clusters can be seen in a number of Ir. loanwords and rather regularly in Ar. loanwords of the structure CVCC: • words of the structure CVCr quite regularly show anaptyxis in ABG and comparatively often in other sources as well; only some examples are given here: at(t)ar 153 (ABG, EAL) vs. atr (EAL) "perfume" (NP-Ar. c a ¨ tr), asur (DTB, FBB, SHG) vs. asr (EAL) "afternoon (prayer)" (NP-Ar. c a ¨ sr), bahar (MARSTON 1877, HITTU RAM 1881, GRIERSON 1921:391, DTB) vs. bahr 154 "share", paǐar (SHG), faǐar (FBB) "morning (prayer)" (NP-Ar. faǐr), ǐibar (ABG, cf. p. 194) "force" vs. NP-Ar. ǐabr, zahar (ABG) "anger" besides zahr 155 "poison", sabar (FBB) vs. sabr (all other sources) "patience" (NP-Ar. šukur (FBB) vs. šukr (DTB, SHG) "thanks" (NP-Ar. šukr), qabar (ABG), kabar (FBB) 156 vs. kabr (EAL, SHG) "grave" (NP-Ar. qabr), kadar (SHG) vs. kadr (BMC) "measure" (NP-Ar. qadr); HÜBSCHMANN 1895:33) than from Av. hu-badra-, OInd. b h adrá-"fortunate" (thus GEIGER 1891:446, HORN 1893:56). If so, Bal. bahr has been borrowed from NP bahr (originally a NWIr. form, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:202) as GEIGER 1891:446 assumes since PIr. *\r is likely to result in Bal. s(s) (cf. p. 89). Alternatively, one might assume a simplification *bax\r-> *baxr (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication) which would regularly yield Bal. bahr (cf. p. 119). 155 The two words are in reality the same. zahr means "poison" in ABG, EAL, SHG, "anger" in DTB, EAL, "bitter" in DTB. The WBal. variant (for ah > ā, cf. p. 252f.) zār means "anger" (EVM, EAL), "angry, bitter" (BMC, FBB). The etymology is probably *ǰa-\ra-"medium for killing" (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:71); as Sogd. j'r derives from *ǰan\ra-(GERSHEVITCH 1965:14 1 ), the WIr. words may also go back to this protoform (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). Bal. zahr (vs. Prth. žahr) is a NP borrowing (NP zahr, GEIGER 1891:463). It is possible that the semantics of zahr, zār have been influenced by zār "lament" which may have been borrowed from NP zār. NP āzār-/ āzārd "torment" and further cognates noted by BAILEY 1979:354a, LIV p. 178. 156 FBB, EAL also have kabaristān "graveyard". 207 3. Common Balochi > contemporary varieties • words of the structure CVCl show an anaptyctic vowel in ABG and occasionally in other sources: c aqqal (ABG) vs. akl 157 (EVM, EAL, SHG) "intelligence" (NP-Ar. c aql), puhal (DTB) vs. puhl (ABG, SHG, cf. p. 121, 131, 147, 211) "bridge", tahal (ABG) vs. tahl (EAL, SHG) 158 "bitter", šikil (ABG, SHG) vs. šikl (SHG) "form" (NP-Ar. šikl), ġusul (ABG) "bath" (NP-Ar. ġusl "ritual washing"), fażal (ABG) "favour" (NP-Ar. fażl) ABG, kubul (FBB), kubal (ABG) vs. kubl 159 (EAL, SHG) "lock" (NP-Ar. qufl); • examples for anaptyxis in other clusters (ordered by word-final consonant): ahaz 162 "marriage contract" (both ABG) vs. ahd 163 (SHG) "time; promise" (NP-Ar. c ahd), šahad (ABG) vs. šahd (EAL, SHG) 164 "honey" (NP-Ar. šahd) ABG, magaz (FBB), ma ġaz (ABG) vs. magz (SHG), ma ġz (EAL) 165 "brain", pažam (ABG) vs. pažm (EAL, SHG) "wool" (cf. p. 178), ġaban "fraud" (NP-Ar. ġabn). noteworthy are the following examples (all from ABG): • c ainaš vs. EAL, EVM aiš (NP-Ar. Thus also all SWBal. sources. DTB has sārt h . For the etymology, cf. p. 189, for r > ˙ r , cf. p. 183. For EBal. dialectal d > d > z, cf. p. 230f. The two words are in fact the same. For EAL āhd, cf. p. 253. Further variants are šāht (BMC), šāt (BMC, EAL), šaht (EAL); the first two show WBal. features (cf. p. 253), for the devoicing of word-final consonants, cf. II 3.3.1.4.Although it is possible that Bal. magz shows a spontaneous metathesis, it may also be explained as a loanword from NP ma ġz. The original order of the consonants is preserved in Bal. mazg (cf. p.

	turšap (ABG) vs. turšp 160 "sour", sā ˙	r at h besides sārt 161 "cold",	¯ zaba	˙	h (ABG)
	"slaughtering" (NP-Ar.	¯ zab	˙	h ), fata	˙	h (ABG) "victory" (NP-Ar. fat	˙	h ), c ahad (ABG)
	vs. sa "period, era", Especially					¨ sabr), sa	˙	h ar (ABG, in sa	˙	h ar-gō "sorcerer")
									garand, garanda	ġ
	(DAMES 1881, DTB, GCD) for grand, granda ġ152 "thunder, to thunder"; girē-
	(GLADSTONE 1874, DAMES 1881, DTB) besides grē-(DTB), SWBal. grē(w)-
	153 According to ROSSI 1979:163, attar is also found in Brahui. For gemination in loanwords, cf. II "weep" (cf. p. 162); 3.3.1.5.

148

EBal. birā\ (DAMES 1881), barās

(GLADSTONE 1874) vs. SWBal. brāt "brother" (cf. p. 78, 230)

; darāǐ, darāž 149 vs. SWBal. drāǐ "long"; darašk, ABG daršak 150 "tree" besides drašk (DTB), SWBal. dračk; darōg (PIERCE 1874, ABG, EAL) for drōg 151 "lie" (Prth. drōg); zirā (MARSTON 1877) "sea" and zirih (DAMES 1881) "spring, well" vs. Av. zraiiah-"sea" (NP daryā, Prth. zrēh); 145 150 GEIGER 1890:120 states that EBal. has darašk and drašk without specifying which source shows which variant; cf. also p. 166, 189.

151 Bal. drōg might, but need not have been borrowed from NP durō ġ (GEIGER 1891:447).

152 The past stem is grandit (BMC, EAL), garanda\-(DTB, GCD), cf. also p. 317.

• ˙ h r (ABG, cf. p. 236) from (DTB, EAL) sihr "magic" (NP-Ar. si ˙ h r), šukar (ABG), 154 This variant is given in EAL, SHG; for the variant bār, cf. p. 253. The word is more likely to derive from PIr. *bax\ra-, cf. Av. bax e dra-, Prth. bahr "portion", OInd. √b h aj "give a share" (zār (also Prth. zār) has been connected to PIE *√ǵar "make noise" (cf. BAILEY 1979:355a, LIV p. 161). Alternatively, one might assume a connection with Av. √zar, OInd. √h ˚ r i , cf. Av. huuāzāra-"easy to insult", c c aiš) "luxury" shows an anaptyctical vowel after a secondary nasal (cf. p. 216);

For further variants and discussion of this word, cf. p. 265, 267.

NAWATA 1981 has the WBal. form tāl, BMC the combinated variant tāhl (cf. p. 253). For the etymology, cf. p. 119. ROSSI 1979:219 also reports kulaf

(vs. kulf, kulp of different sources, cf. p. 265, 267)

.

turšp is found in EAL only, the other sources have trupš, trupš

(cf. p. 145, 176, 209)

. The sequence -ur-in turšap might be due to the NP loanword turš (BMC, EAL; DTB, GEB truš). 88), MPZ mazg, Chor. mzg, Av. mazga-etc.

According to GERSHEVITCH 1965:209

, MPM magž shows a change zg > <gj> gž regular for MPM. NP ma ġz may be explained as showing a contamination of the MP forms and/or the influence of Buddhist Sogd. mgz-(suggestion by Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst). For maǐg, mažg, cf. p. 88.

  Bamfuhl 187 noted by SPOONER 1967:58 for Bampūr (town in Iranian Balochistan) might be explained similarly, it might involve a popular etymology with puhl "bridge", motivated by the presence of a river in the Bampur valley.188

	The hypercorrect reversal is seen in
	• puhn (SPOONER 1967:58) 185 for pōn (MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290, EAL, SHG)
	"rotten (of dates and other fruit)"; 186
	• duhmī (ABG) for dōmī (BMC, FBB), dumī (SOKOLOV 1956:74) "second";
	• muhbat (SHG) for mōbatt (BMC) besides more common mahabat, mābatt "love"
	(from NP-Ar. ma	˙	h abbat, cf. p. 286).
	The variant

.

182

GEIGER's examples (1891:408)

of i > ī by compensatory lengthening do not hold

(cf. p. 137, 178)

.

183 For lengthening of final -a, cf. p. 190f.

184 EAL even has sōbh which, if existing, is still another result from contamination, or shows an influence of the CNP pronunciation sobh.

  (optional colloquial variant, BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxiv); • prep. gōn /_V vs. g ȭ /_C "with" (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxvi, cf. p. 181); • adv. annūn /_V vs. ann ū /_C "right now" (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxix). 192

	Examples of word-internal nasal vowels:
	• p ãzda "fifteen" vs. (NAWATA 1981:27) pānzda;
	• s ēzda "thirteen" (nasal analogical) 193 vs. (NAWATA 1981:27) sēzda;
	• s īg ār, sīngār 194 "cosmetics";
	• n ȭzda "nineteen" (nasal analogical) vs. (NAWATA 1981:27) nōzda;
	• b ū	˙	d uk, būn	˙	d uk 195 "pile of bedding and carpets".

the dialect described by BARKER/MENGAL 1969 (Western dialect: Pakistani Raxšānī, i.e. one of the dialects with a low degree of nasalisation), nasal vowels do not occur in word-initial position. ī and ū are particularly rare in this dialect, mainly used in poetry for metrical reasons and optional in all cases (BARKER/MENGAL

(1969/I:xxxiv, xxxix

). Examples of word-final nasals are: 190 • obl.pl. ending -ān /_V vs. -ã /_C, e.g. in (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:13): kitāb gis-ān ant "the books are in the houses", 191 šumai gis-ã kitāb ant "in your (pl.) houses are books"; • adj. attributive ending -ēn /_V vs. -ē /_C, e.g. in (BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:43): mazan-ēn asp "big horse" vs. syāh-ē buz "black goat"; • 1sg. -īn besides -ī In other dialects, e.g. Karachi Balochi, nasalised vowels occur in every context, e.g. • obl.pl. -ã (FARRELL 1990:33); • mazan-ē amb "big mango" (FARRELL 1990:18); 196 • ȭ "I am" (FARRELL 2003:174). 197 Word-internal nasalisation is common, but not systematic: • gur ã ˙ d "ram" (FARRELL 2003:174, cf. p. 100); ād ēk 198 "mirror"; p īz 199 "heel"; p ȭz 200 "nose"; š īz, š ūz 201 "green"

  The variant hūn reported by GEB and EAL (ABG has hūnī "murderer, deadly" and writes it Á"¬≈ to indicate the author's assumption that it is a NP loanword, cf. p. 65) need not be a case of raising (cf. p. 200), but may have been borrowed from NP xūn.

	• bānklēnk 215 , b ãkl ēk (SHG, FARRELL 2003:175), b ãkl īk "broad bean" vs. bāklīk,
	bāklē ˙	t (sic; FARRELL 2003:175), NP-Ar. bāqilā';
	• agān (EAL: Coastal, Kēčī), ag ã (SHG, FARRELL 2003:175) 209 vs. aga (BMC, • nazīnk (FARRELL 1995:238) "near" vs. naz(z)īk (cf. p. 88);
	EAL: Raxšānī, SHG), agar (FBB, EVM, EAL, SHG) "if" (NP agar); • rōtīnk (EAL, MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49) besides usual rōt "intestines" (NP rūda,
	• c ainaš 210 (ABG) vs. aiš (EAL) "luxury" (NP-Ar. c aiš); MP rōdīg). 216
	• bānz, b ãz (BMC, GEB, EAL, SHG) vs. bāz 211 "falcon" (NP bāz); 212
	• pōnz, p ȭz (GEB, GCD, FBB, BMC, EAL, SHG) vs. pōz (GEB, EVM, EAL, SHG,
	NAWATA 1981:34) "nose" (cf. p. 203);
	• pōnšī (SHG, EAL: Coastal), p ȭšī (FARRELL 2003:175) vs. pōšī (BMC, FBB, EAL)
	"the day after tomorrow"; 213
	-Vnt > -Ṽ occurring in • tanš (EAL), tãš (SHG) vs. taš (EAL, SHG), t h aš (GCD, DTB) "adze" (NP taš "axe",
	verbal endings (cf. II 3.2.1.3, 3.2.4.3); word-internal nasalisation of short vowels seems cf. p. 92);
	˘ • k ȭčag vs. kōčag (both SHG and FARRELL 2003:175) 214 "to dig"; u ahu-na/i-), cf. SCHWARTZ 1982. Prth. <gwxn> (read goxan, guxn by to be a feature of Southern dialects (cf. II 3.2.3.3). forms (going back to OIr. * • gan ˙ t pāč-besides ga ˙ t pāč-(both FARRELL 2003:175) "bite".
	DURKIN-MEISTERERNST 2004:168a) seems to have been borrowed from proto-Balochi or a similar
	dialect since Parthian otherwise preserves *	˘	u -(cf. II 2.1.3.3.1).
	205 The statement by ELFENBEIN (1966:5) "In Pakistan, all dialects tend to drop final nasals and nasalise
	the preceding vowel. Particularly common is [adj.] -en > -ẽ and, with dropping of final -t, -int > 213 For the etymology, cf. p. 139.
	[3sg.] -ĩ" is at variance at least with the data from BARKER/MENGAL 1969 (for which cf. p. 254). 214 As the word seems to be found in the Karachi area mainly, a borrowing from Ur. kōč-nā "rip, tear,
	206 For assimilation and loss of nasals, cf. p. 180f. pierce" appears likely. On the other hand, with regard to Bashkardi kōč-"dig" (GERSHEVITCH
	1970a:306), Bal. kōč-might also be an inherited word; conversely, Sogd. ptkwc-"pierce" cited by
	Gershevitch is probably not connected (Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication). SHG
	notes gwaǐag and k ȭ	˙	d ag as equivalents; kō(n)	˙	d "hole" is also found in Brahui, which according to
	ROSSI 1979:70, may have been borrowed from Balochi into Brahui or vice-versa. kō(n)	˙	d and kōn	˙	d -
	are probably Ind. loanwords, though (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:81), cf. Ur. k h ūn	˙	d -nā "dig".

205

Secondary nasalised vowels and secondary nasals

206

Those dialects which are in a particularly close contact with Ind. languages (i.e. some SBal. and EBal. dialects) frequently show secondarily nasalised vowels

(FARRELL 2003:175)

and, probably as a consequence to the emergence of these, unetymological nasals. The phenomenon also occurs in some words from WBal. dialects.

207

202 Cf. SHG which has ann ū, but gōn.

203 dān might, but need not, have been borrowed from NP

(GEIGER 1891:444)

.

204 This is a h-less variant (for loss of h, cf. p. 241) of hōn. The word is most likely to have been borrowed from NP xūn, MP xōn

(GEIGER 1891:444)

. For discussion of this word and related Ir.

207 Not really belonging here, but rather due to an analogical process is the past stem gičint vs. gičit (both in EAL, GEB) from pres. gičin-"collect" (cf. p. 85). tān (EAL), t ã

(BMC, SHG, FARRELL 2003:175

) "until" besides tā is probably not an example for secondary nasal, but rather (EAL 148) tā + ān (literally: "until that"), cf. other "compounds" with tā: tānki "so long as" (< NP tā ān ki), BMC tāba "until" (< NP tā ba). There are parallel variants Quite a number of words show secondary n, 208 e.g.

Due to the common noun ending -nk, which has been regarded as a suffix in its own right by some authors (cf. p. 166), -n-has been introduced in some nouns in -Vk: with d-: dān (EAL), d ã (BMC, SHG, FARRELL 2003:175), dānki etc. MPM dā, NP/MP tā have been derived from PIr. *atā (instr. of *at-), *taHat (n. of *taH-ant-), both "so much", respectively (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1997:319f.). dān and tā(-) would thus be Pers. loanwords. EVM āzmūndag is a misprint for āzmūdag (thus in ZARUBIN 1949:144, NP āzmūda) "try, attempt". 208 The occurrence of secondary nasals is noted for loanwords by FARRELL 2003:175. The phenomenon does not seem to be limited to loanwords, though. For secondary nasals in numbers, cf. p. 214. 209 For the substitution of -ā for -a, cf. p. 190f. ABG has ‰¯Ú ā ġā (sic), cf. p. 190. agat given by EAL (Coastal) is probably influenced by angat "yet" (for which cf. p. 81, 186). 210 For the introduction of secondary vowels in this dialect, cf. II 3.1.2.4. 211 According to GEIGER 1891:446, bāz occurs once in a Bal. manuscript in the British Museum. 212 GEIGER 1891:446 and HORN 1893:37 link the word to OInd. v ája-"race, triumph, victory". Arm. bazē does not tell us anything in this case since it might be a very recent loanword. It has also been assumed that the word is of Semitic origin, cf. Ar. bāzī (GREPPIN 1977:7). Other words for "falcon" are šēnak (cf. p. 129) and šāhīn (borrowed from NP, a derivative of šāh "king", GREPPIN 1977:9).

  is not directly attested: FBB has bānklēk (1990:51), b ãklēnk (1990:83), EAL bānkalēnk, bānklīnk and bāklik. According to GEIGER 1891:446, bāklīk occurs once in a Bal. manuscript in the British Museum, b ãkl īk in MARSTON 1877.

		č ãp "chop (of meat)"; č ãklē ˙	t , čāklē ˙	t "chocolate, sweets"; kōp-s ãsar "cup and
		saucer";
	•	˙	t ē ˙	t ,	˙	t ē ˙	t "tight, well, good"; s ēkal, sāikal "bicycle";
	• ramp "rough".
		Further cognates include Av. uru\uuar-and some words from non-Ir. languages (IEW 873f.), for
		Psht. l e rai, cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49, 2003:45.

bānklēnk

  (DTB) vs. SWBal. gwap-"weave"; 224 • EBal. guz-(DTB, EAL) vs. SWBal. gwaz-"pass"; 225 • guhār (ABG, BMC, EAL) vs. gwahār "sister"; 226 • in the case of guš-/ gušt 227 "say", this variant replaces gwaš-; the latter variant is only found in Eastern Balochi (DTB, MAYER 1910 and EAL), and it is not clear whether it is still in use; 228 • for gwabz, gwamz "wasp", the variant gumz is only found in HITTU RAM 1881 (cf. also p. 234). 229

	• EBal. guf-
			It especially occurs with
	gwa-(< OIr.	˘	u a-, cf. II 2.1.3.3.1). Most words with gwa-have variants in gu-(cf.
	GEIGER 1891:409):

  ). Several works among the sources used by Geiger treat Eastern Balochi, viz. LEECH 1838, GLADSTONE 1874, HITTU RAM 1881, DAMES 1881 (much of which reappears in DTB) and LEWIS 1885. More recent EBal. data are found in ABG and EAL: althoughAHMAD (1985:v) claims that ABG is based on Raxšānī material, a considerable number of the words cited in fact exhibit characteristics which have been shown to be being features of Eastern Balochi, so that to a certain degree, ABG is a source for Eastern Balochi. EAL also includes EBal. material, which is, however, predominantly taken from the early sources named above.

-Eastern dialects Eastern Balochi

		{#,C}_	V_
	p, t, k	aspirated: p h , t h , k h	fricatives: f, \, x
	b, d, g	(no change: b, d, g)	fricatives: b, d, g
	č, ǐ	aspirated: čh	sibilants: š, ž
		(no change: ǐ)
	w	aspirated: w h	(no change: w)

  SWBal. tačag "to run", t h au ¬¡°vs. tau "you (sg.)"; • dat h ān243 x£¡°d vs. dantān "tooth", k h ast h ar 244 AE¡•±¡¸

	CBal. t > t h (GEIGER 1891:428): 242	:404): 237
	• t h aša ġ ¤≤¡°vs.
	It has been stated by numerous authors (GEIGER 1889:75 was one of the first, cf. also
	GRIERSON 1921:337) that the aspiration of word-initial and postconsonantal voiceless
	stops and of č (and, in some sources, also of w) is a typical feature of Eastern Balochi.
	Others have remarked, however, that aspiration is also found in other Bal. dialects, e.g.
	in Karachi Balochi (cf. p. 242) and some WBal. dialects (cf. p. 251). MORGENSTIERNE
	1932a:8 (similarly in 1948:255): "a slight aspiration seems, however, to be existing to
	some extent in these [the non-Eastern dialects], too". 238 It is thus questionable whether
	aspiration is a useful isogloss.

a) Aspiration: CBal. T, č, w > EBal. T h , čh , w h /{#, C}_

(GEIGER 1891

Aspiration may be indicated in writing by adding the letter y to the consonant, cf. the examples given below. Note that in word-final position, some sources (e.g. DTB) use the form ‰ , others (e.g. ABG) have (as would be the case in Urdu etc.) ¡. However, there seems to be no source where aspiration is marked absolutely consistently. Some examples for aspirated stops from DTB: 239 CBal. p > p h (GEIGER 1891:433): 240 • p h aša ġ ¤≤¡C vs. SWBal. pačag "to cook", p h i\ OE¡C vs. pit "father"; • ap h ān

241

x£¡CZ vs. ampān "leather sack".

  h (GEIGER 1891:418):248 • k h afa ġ ¤π¡¸vs. SWBal. kapag "to fall", k h ār f£¡¸vs. kār "deed, act"; • gurk

h ‰¸AE˝vs. gurk "wolf", -C + suffixal -k, e.g. šawānk h ‰º"Z¬$ "shepherd". 249 CBal. č > čh (GEIGER 1891:424): 250 • čh ōfa ġ ¤˘¬¡À vs. SWBal. čōpag "to hit", čh am '¡À vs. čam(m) "eye", čh i 251 ‰¡À vs. čē "what".

  . -ǐ i > -ž (GEIGER 1891:426): 269 • bōža ġ ph¬ † vs. (other dialects) bōǐag "to open", gēža ġ p∞√˝vs. gēǐag "swing, throw, bring forth" (cf. p. 98); • drāž hZfd vs. drāǐ "long" (cf. p. 86, 205). There are some cases of hypercorrect SWBal. ǐ for perceived EBal. ž, e.g. • daǐuk(k) "hedgehog" for EBal. *dažux (see above); • muǐ "mist, fog, storm" for EBal. muž < OIr. *mižā-(cf. p. 93, 286).

  The past stems of roots in PIr. *-k, *-g show xt in Eastern Balochi as one would expect, e.g. āxt-(past stem of ā-(SWBal. āy-, cf. p. 185) "come"), bōxt-(past stem of bōž-"open", see above), t h axt-(past stem of t h aš-"run", see above), dōxt-(past stem of dōš-

	(SWBal. dōč-, cf. p. 79) "sew"), rixt-(past stem of rīš-(SWBal. rēč-, cf. p. 199)
	"pour"), gixt-(past stem of gēž-"swing", see above). 271
	MORGENSTIERNE 1932:44 and ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XVII maintain that past stems in -tk
	also occur; such forms may conveniently be explained as borrowings from the literary
	language which is a Southern Balochi dialect (cf. II 3.2.2.1).

  some cases, SWBal. / standard EBal. s, z is perceived as being due to this dialectal phenomenon and hypercorrectly replaced: \rēn (PIERCE 1874, cf. GEIGER 1890:145) MP wardišn "turning". The OP name Artavardiya-is likely to show a cognate of NWIr. *warz-(cf. Av. √varz, BRANDENSTEIN/MAYRHOFER 1964:106), but an OP influence in Armenian is unlikely. 278 For further features of the Kasrānī dialect, see below.

	275 Since bās implies the existence of a development < *bā\ < *bāt, it is an example of devoicing of
	final consonants in loanwords (cf. II 3.3.1.4).
	276 This might be intended to represent /w h āz/, cf. p. 226.
	277 Neither wardaš nor warziš are found in other Bal. sources.
	Arm. vardapet "instructor, master" is connected to the OP name Artavardiya-and the MP (and Prth.)
	verb ward-by A ČARYAN IV:318f. The latter means "turn", however (OIr. √vart, OInd. √v ˚ rt), but the
	Arm. word might indeed involve a popular etymology which combines *varza-pet (lit.: "master of
	the exercise") and MIr. ward-,

"loins" for srēn (cf. p. 202) and wardaš (ABG) "exercise" (NP warziš "sports"). 277

GRIERSON 1921:338 and MORGENSTIERNE 1948:256

suggest that the development of \, d > s, z might be due to influence from Ind. languages which do not have \, d.

\ > d

EBal. \, d both yield d in the Kasrānī dialect (spoken in the utmost North of the Bal. area,

[START_REF] Grierson | Linguistic Survey of India X: Specimens of Languages of the Eranian Family[END_REF]:406, MORGENSTIERNE 1948:256)

, 278 e.g. barād "brother" (vs. standard EBal. brā\), dīda "seen" (vs. dī\a), wadī "own" (vs. wa\ī).

-pt > -tt

GRIERSON 1921:406 reports an assimilation pt > tt for the Kasrānī dialect (the example is k h atta "fallen" for k h apt h a) and attributes it to Ind. influence.

  . The examples attested so far are shown in the table below, corresponding standard EBal. forms and Kurd. cognates given where attested. With the exception of namāš and nawad, corresponding words are attested in SWBal. as well.280

			3. Common Balochi > contemporary varieties		233
	Notes:
	•	Kurd. dîw and nöj are from HALKAWT HAKIM 1996 (Sorani).
	•	d ēw is found in GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from GLADSTONE 1874). For further details about this
		word, cf. p. 199.
	•	r ēw occurs in GEIGER 1891:414 (from GLADSTONE 1874). The word is a derivation of a root seen
		in rīy-"defecate" (OInd. √ri etc., cf. EWAia II:437), it might have been borrowed from NP (thus
		EAL). The semantics of NP rīm "pus, filth, cinders, sediment" (MPM rēm "dirt, filth") render it
		plausible that rēm "pus" and rēm "grass" are indeed one word.
	•	z ãw ā\ is attested in GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from LEECH 1838 who has ǐ ãw ā\, its ǐ-being
		interpreted as an error for z-by Geiger). For further details, cf. p. 88 and above.
	•	kawān: GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from GLADSTONE 1874, DAMES 1881, HITTU RAM 1881), DTB,
		EAL. The word may have been borrowed from NP.
			EBal. dial.	standard EBal.	Kurd.	NP
		"face"	d ēw	dēm	dîw	dīm
		"grass; pus"	r ēw	rēm		rīm
		"son-in-law"	z ãw ā\	zāmā\	zava	dāmād
		"you" (2pl.)	šawā, šā	SWBal. šumā		šumā
		"bow"	kawān	SWBal. kamān	kevan	kamān
		"doubt, suspicion"	guwān	SWBal. gumān	guman	gumān
		"incomplete"	nā-twām	SWBal. nā-tamām		nā-tamām
		"prayer"	nawāš	namāš	nöj	namāz
		"felt"	nawad			namad
		"between (in the middle)" ny ãw ã	nyāmā	nîv	miyān
		"butter"	nēwa ġ	nēma ġ	nîvişk
		"that very"	hawān etc.	≈ ham-ā	hew	ham-ān
		EBal. words with w for CBal. m
	279 For further discussion, cf. KORN 2003:57. Note that the Prth. forms which have been claimed to

show m > w require other interpretations

(KORN 2003:57)

. For the

Kurd. sound law m > w, cf. MACKENZIE 1961:70, ASATRIAN/ LIVSHITS 1994:95f

. For examples from other Modern WIr. languages, cf. MACKENZIE 1961:70. 280 Except for nā-twām and citations in EAL, the items only occur in 19th century sources. • guwān is from GEB (from DAMES 1881), DTB. As the gu-shows, the Bal. and Kurd. words have been borrowed from NP (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557, cf. p. 98). EAL has gubān, a hypercorrect form based on the assumption that the -w-of guwān is due to the EBal. change b > b (cf. p. 228). • šawā: GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from DAMES 1881, HITTU RAM 1881), DTB, cf. also p. 103, 126, 239. • nātwām is found in ABG. For aw > (u)w, cf. p. 218. • nawāš: GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from LEWIS 1838). For further details, cf. p. 96 and above. • nawad is found in DTB, EAL. Judging from Av. n e mata-"brushwood", the Bal. word has been borrowed from NP. For further cognates (Osset. nymaet etc.), cf. ABAEV II:202f. The Ir. word has been borrowed into many neighbouring languages, including Arabic and Hungarian. • ny ãw ã: GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from GLADSTONE 1874, DAMES 1881, LEWIS 1885), DTB, EAL. For discussion of this word which has been borrowed from NP miyān, cf. p. 266. • nēwa ġ: GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from LEWIS 1838). For possible cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:184b. • hawān: GEB, GEIGER 1891:414 (from GLADSTONE 1874, DAMES 1881, HITTU RAM 1881, LEWIS 1885), DTB. haw-ān has either been borrowed from NP ham-ān or composed of ham and the pronoun ān (cf. p. 238). SWBal. ham-ā is a parallel formation with the pronoun ā.

  281 *pīwāz might have been borrowed from Kurd. pîvaz; if borrowed from NP piyāz (HORN 1893:77), 282 pīmāz shows a substitution of the vowel separator w for -y-(cf. II 2.4.3).283 • nimāsag (FBB, SHG, EAL) 284 might be a hypercorrect formation from the variant nawāsag (DTB, EAL, SHG etc.) "grandchild", which is a NP loanword, cf. p. 89. Although the variant gwamz for gwabz "wasp" (cf. p. 99) is not found in EBal. sources only, it might be possible to account for it by assuming the usual EBal. change of -b > -b (thence *gwabz) with substitution of m for b. • nimis-/ nimist, nimišt (EVM, EAL) "write" shows hypercorrect m for w. The details are not entirely clear; the EBal. variant of SWBal. nibīs-/ nibišt 287 would be *nibīs-/ nibišt, so that analogical developments have to be assumed.

	Alternatively, nimāsag may have been borrowed from Pashto nmasai, 285 which is
	not unlikely since ku ˙	r āsag "great-grandchild" 286 has likewise been borrowed from
	Psht. ka ˙	r wasai etc. (GERSHEVITCH 1973:275).
	•

288

3.2.1.1.3 Other phenomena 289

Metathesis

Eastern Balochi exhibits some instances of metathesis which are not found in other dialects, e.g.:

• ēkwā, obl. of ēwak "alone" (cf. p. 235); • sa ġar "head" probably stands for *saraġ, a derivative of sar; 290 • nērmōš (cf. GEIGER 1890:138) "noon" vs. usual nēmrōč (GEIGER 1891:436).

284 EAL numāsag might be a contamination of EVM nuwāsag (cf. p. 218) and nimāsag.

285 There are several forms of this word in Pashto (borrowed from NP), cf.

MORGENSTIERNE 1927:54.

nmasai is used in Eastern Psht. dialects

(Lutz Rzehak, personal communication)

, which makes a borrowing into Balochi possible.

  294 For \ > d in Kasrānī, cf. p. 231, for nasalisation, cf. p. 238.

	295 The pronunciation of Bal. a is described to be something between [a] and [ e ], thus the transcription
	< e > in ABG, BMC and in works by Tim Farrell.
	296 For variants of other dialects, cf. p. 195f. tanak "thin" vs. NP tanuk (for which cf. KLINGENSCHMITT
	2000:212) which GEIGER 1891:405 would place here may show a different suffix (cf. p. 169).
	297 According to EAL XII, the Coastal dialect has aškan-/ aškut

h -, EBal. aškun-, aškan-/ aškut h -. Lāšārī has haškun, haškut according to EAL XV, for which cf. p. 154. GERSHEVITCH 1998:111 assumes aškun-to have arisen by metathesis from *uškan-. For the etymology, cf. p. 147, for more

variants, cf. p. 196, 204.

  Examples of nasalised long vowels from DAMES 1893 include: obl.pl. -ã, adj. suffix -ē, 1pl. pres. -ū; these are used in all contexts (not only in front of consonants as in some other sources, cf. p. 213f.). Examples from ABG are numerous and include b ãg "cry" (borrowed from NP bāng), ād īk 303 "mirror", ann ȭ304 "now".

	According to GRIERSON 1921:394, 401 and ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XVI, vowel + n often
	appears as a nasalised vowel in Eastern Balochi. The nasalisation processes are more
	far-reaching than in some other dialects (cf. II 3.1.3.3).

Nasalisation of short vowels seems to be limited to pronouns and verbal suffixes in Eastern Balochi: 305 (DAMES 1891:15) mã "I" (otherwise man), maĩ (gen. of mã, see below), 3sg. copula ẽ (this form also occurs in Southern Balochi, cf. p. 245, 337).

Cases of loss of the nasal are ap h ān "leather sack" vs. SWBal. ampān, dat h ān "tooth" vs. dantān

(cf. p. 224, 225, respectively)

, DTB ǐat h ir "millstone" vs. regular ǐantar, ǐantir

(cf. p. 104, 194f.)

; the loss of the nasal is obviously more recent than the EBal. change of postvocalic stops to fricatives.

  Baloch of different dialects. With regard to the sources, the situation is much better than for other dialects: BARKER/MENGAL 1969 describe Pakistani Raxšānī, NAWATA 1981 and BUDDRUSS 1988 Afghan Raxšānī, and several works by Soviet scholars treat the Balochi of Turkmenistan (with ELFENBEIN 1963 as a glossary). On the other hand, testimonies for earlier periods are mostly wanting. The WBal. dialects are the only ones which have been treated phonetically (e.g.[START_REF] Valentina | Beludžskij jazyk[END_REF], cf. also the notes by BUDDRUSS 1988:43ff.). Since corresponding studies for the other dialects are lacking, it is possible that some of the features described below are also found in other dialects, but have gone unnoticed so far.

	331 BMC, although being a description of a WBal. dialect, has the SBal. forms in -tk (cf. p. 240f.). The
	only WBal. past stem with -ht in BMC is (k)ā(h)t(k) (sic) as past stem of āy-"come" which is
	probably intended to imply that the WBal. past stem (k)ā(h)t is used besides SBal. ātk (note that
	FBB has atk, though, cf. p. 241).
	The WBal. past stem of bōǐ-"open" is not found in the sources available to me.

3.2.3.1 Consonants

OIr. xt

WBal. dialects exhibit ht in past stems of roots in velars. In those dialects which have no h (for which see below and II 3.2.3.3), ht is simplified to t (with compensatory lengthening where possible). However, substitution of SBal. forms (owing to the prestige of Southern Balochi) or of secondary past stems in -it are often found. Examples: 331 • GRIERSON 1921:376 aht (for the a-, cf. p. 241), EVM, SOKOLOV 1956, NAWATA 1981:36 āt (past stem of (k)āy-"come"); EAL pā(h)t 332 (past stem of pač-"cook"); EAL tā(h)t 333 (past stem of tač-"run"); 332 EVM, EAL, SOKOLOV 1956:81 have the neo-past stem pakkit. pakt noted by NAWATA 1981:17 might be (if not an error for SBal. patk) a contamination of SBal. patk and expected paht. EAL pāht is a contamination of expected paht with pāt (for ah > ā and the contamination process, cf. p. 252f.). 333 EAL, SOKOLOV 1956:80 have secondary tačit.

  • SOKOLOV 1956:80, NAWATA 1981:17 dōt 334 (past stem of dōč-"sew"); EVM,

  is directly replaced by h does not seem plausible: there is no dialect of Balochi (neither of NP from where the Ar. loanwords are likely to have been borrowed for the most part) in which Ar. , e.g. piss 342 "father", čamm "eye" (cf. p. 126), nazz "near" (cf. p. 125) vs. simple consonants (not going back to a consonant group) e.g. in gis "house" (cf. p. 87), ǐan "woman" (cf. p. 86), ač "of" (cf. p. 85).Although the fricatives x, ġ, f occurring in NP and NP-Ar. loanwords are mostly replaced by k/h, g, p, respectively (cf. II 1.2.2), it seems that in Western Balochi, the fricatives are pronounced rather frequently(MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:7f.), indicating a rather high degree of familiarity with NP on the part of the speakers compared to that of other dialects. Note that mās "mother" and brās "bother" do not show a geminate, which is due to the long vowel (cf. II 3.1.1.1). The family terms in -s(s) (for the etymology, cf. p. 89) clearly belong to the Raxšānī dialect (thus also ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VIIff.). Although GRIERSON 1921:385 says that they are typical for the Panǰgūrī dialect, the distribution (at least in contemporary times) is much larger than that, the forms being attested in BMC,EVM, NAWATA 1981, BUDDRUSS 1988, i.e. Pakistani Raxšānī, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. They are also mentioned in SHG where the main entry is pit etc. Conversely, MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:9 notes the use of pit etc. corresponding to "SBal." pis for Nōškē which belongs to the WBal. dialect area.

	339 According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VII, the vowel separator is w in Afghan Raxšānī and y, w elsewhere. However, h is found quite often, too. in most words where BMC has it. Gemination is not found in EVM and NAWATA 1988 either. 343 Other phenomena MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:8 notes an occasional change of d, ˙ d to d, ˙ r , respectively, for the dialect of Panǰgūr. 344 340 BUDDRUSS's assumption (1988:44) that Ar. BUDDRUSS 1988:44f. notes that in the speech of his informant, there is no gemination 342

c c is pronounced as such

(cf. p. 63). 341 NAWATA 1981:22 has b-ra (ipr.), but raw-ai (2sg.pres., NAWATA 1981:38), BUDDRUSS 1988:80

similarly has ra(w)-īn (1sg.pres.), b-ra-īn (1sg.subj.), but raw-ai.

For the distribution of further variants, cf. p. 128.

assimilated

The use of fricatives is mentioned in NAWATA 1981:3; BUDDRUSS 1988:44 notes that in the speech of his informant, x occurs quite often (in the rest of the cases, it is replaced by h or zero), ġ in most relevant cases (only one case of g), but f only in conscious imitation of educated speech (usually p appearing instead); NP(-Ar.) q is always replaced by k. RASTORGUEVA 1966:327 has x and ġ (but no f) for the Balochi of Turkmenistan.

343 The impression gathered from fieldwork by Lutz Rzehak (personal communication) is that gemination seems to be rather arbitrary, depending markedly on the idiolect of the speaker.

344 For other phenomena involving ˙ d and ˙ r , cf. II 3.1.1.4.

  . In addition, BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxv note a palatal allophone of n when next to č, ǐ.345

	The pronunciation of bw-at least in Afghan Balochi is [bȏ o-] according to BUDDRUSS ˘
	1988:44, e.g. b-wārt [bȏ oa:rt] "he/she should eat", so that the imperative b-war comes ˘
	out as [bo:r]. 346

  lost with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel in the context ahC. In most cases, BMC also has variants with hypercorrect h, i.e. āhC. 350 BMC, EVM, EAL) for bahr "share" (cf. p. 184); 351 zār "anger" for and besides zahr "poison"; 352 • pālunk (EVM) for pahlūg etc. "side" (cf. p. 163f., 166, 268); tāl(BMC, NAWATA 1981:38), tāhl (BMC) for tahl "bitter" (cf. p. 119); • pānād (EVM, BMC), pāhnād, pā(h)nāt for pahnād, pahnāt "side, width"; 353 kwān (FBB) "old" for kwahn (SHG) etc. (cf. p. 120); • zām (PIERCE 1874, BMC), zāhm (BMC) for zahm "sword" (borrowed from NP

	Examples (ordered according to the following consonant):
	• šā(h)t (BMC, EAL) for šahd, šaht "honey" (cf. p. 207, 269);
	• āhd (EAL) for ahd "promise" (cf. p. 207); wād (BMC, EVM, EAL, NAWATA
	1981:29), wāhd (BMC) for wahd "time" (NP-Ar. waqt, cf. also below);
	• zāhg (BMC) for zahg "child" (MP zahag), zāg (BMC, EVM, NAWATA 1981:35,
	BUDDRUSS 1988:84, EAL, cf. p. 184);
	• bār (
	349 For i, u pronounced as [e], [o] in Iranian Balochi, cf. p. 261.
	350 The process of loss of h appears not to be entirely clear to BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xxxii who treat
	e.g. šār (also in NAWATA 1981:38, BUDDRUSS 1988:81) as a h-less variant of šāhr (sic) "town" etc.,
	comparable to abar vs. habar "word, matter", without explaining the difference in vowel length in

comparison with the form šahr of the other dialects (and NP). It is not entirely clear whether the variants with āhC noted by Barker/Mengal (and in EAL, maybe following Barker/Mengal) exist or are due to their interpretation of the processes affecting ah. ahC > āC can also be observed in Tajik dialects (e.g. šār "town", LAZARD 1956:124) and in Dari (e.g. šār "town", pālū "side", dā "ten", DOROFEEVA 1960:16).

  with the data from YUSEFIY[START_REF] Pākzād | Gorūh-e esmī, fe c lī va qeidī-ye zabān-e balūčī[END_REF] MAHMOODI BAKHTIARI 2003. 362 With regard to the lexicon, there are many loanwords from NP which are not found in other Bal.dialects, e.g. barādar "brother" and xāhar "sister" instead of the Balochi words used in the other dialects, and mohtaram "honoured" (see below) which is not found in the other sources.363 For Lāšārī, it is difficult to make a statement about other levels of grammar than phonology and phonetics since the data available to me consist at least in part of elicited material.

	Status of h
	While ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII, XIV remarks that "h is stable", SPOONER 1967:57 notes
	that word-initial h is often lost. Conversely, Spooner reports that h is often secondarily
	added, 368 a tendency confirmed by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII, XIV.
	However, in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 and BARANZEHI 2003, h appears in all positions where it
	is to be expected, e.g.
	• from BARANZEHI 2003: hormā "date" (cf. p. 156), ham-ē "this", hesāb
	"consideration" (NP-Ar.	˙	h isāb); xāhar "sister" (from NP x w āhar), sohr "gold" (cf.
	p. 119, 211), mohtaram "honoured" (NP-Ar. mu	˙	h taram), teh "in"; 369
	• from Y
	364 -xt is otherwise only found in Eastern Balochi, cf. p. 230. SPOONER's remark (1967:58) that ā[t] is
	"reduced to ah[t]" is not correct. For uh for ō as cited by SPOONER 1967:58, cf. p. 212.
	365 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XV reports yātk for Lāšārī (for y-, cf. p. 260).

. -xt ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII, XIV notes that -xt is used besides -ht in the past stems of verbs in velars in Sarāwānī, and that Lāšārī has -tk. However, SPOONER 1967:57, BARANZEHI 2003 and Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 only have -ht, 364 e.g. • yaht: past stem of yāy-(other dialects āy-) "come" (BARANZEHI 2003:91, Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:89); 365 • doht: past stem of dōč-(SPOONER 1967:57), 366 dūeht: 367 past stem of dūeč-"sew" (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:98); • sūeht: past stem of sūeč-"burn tr."; soht: past stem of soč-"burn itr." (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:100); • rēht: past stem of rēč-(JAHANI 2003:128), rīeht: past stem of rīeč-"pour" (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:98). Sarāwānī and Lāšārī thus go with Western Balochi in this point (cf. p. 247f.) while Southern Balochi has -tk (cf. p. 240f.). agreeing 366 SPOONER 1967:57 also has reht for what is rēht in JAHANI 2003:128. If not an error for dōht and rēht, respectively, the forms cited by Spooner correspond to duht (EAL: Raxšānī), EBal. rixt with regard to its ablaut.

  and ī are difficult to differentiate, and ū and ō fall together,382 which would mean that raising (cf. p. 199f.) is very marked in the variant studied by Spooner. However, there is no example of raising in BARANZEHI 2003.ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII, XIV maintains that the diphthongisation product of ō is ūo, 384 which is not confirmed by the data in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992, MAHMOODI BAKHTIARI 2003 and my own observation, and that the diphthongisation also occurs in Sarāwānī, but there is no such example inSPOONER 1967 and[START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF] This might indicate that e and a are phonetically not too far apart. The change might be facilitated by the variation e / a observed in a considerable number of words in CNP (e.g. CNP āteš, ātaš "fire"). These dialects thus show -ent for the 3pl., -et[START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF] / -e (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992) for the 3sg., and o (BARANZEHI 2003) / en(t) (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:69) for the 3sg.cop. while the other dialects have 3pl. -ant, 3sg. -īt and 3sg.cop. int, ẽ.

	Palatalisation and labialisation
	The data found in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 and BARANZEHI 2003 show some cases of e for
	expected a:
	• part.perf. -eg for otherwise -ag (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992), teh for otherwise tah "in"
	(BARANZEHI 2003, cf. p. 258), 3pl. -ent vs. -ant of other dialects (both sources, cf.
	p. 263). 385
	¯ u
	posited by ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XII for Sarāwānī is not noted in SPOONER 1967 and
	BARANZEHI 2003.

The most striking feature of Lāšārī is the diphthongisation of what is ē, ō in the other dialects to īe, ūe, respectively.

383

The data in Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992 point to a consistent diphthongisation in all positions of the word, e.g.

• īer "down" (vs. ēr of other dialects, cf. p. 119, 199), hīed "sweat" (vs. hēd), rīeč-"pour" (vs. rēč-), hamīešī (vs. ēš-; all cf. p. 258), adj.suffix -īen (vs. -ēn), indef. article -īe (vs. -ē); • ūedān "there" (vs. ōdā, cf. p. 101), dūeč-"sew" (vs. dōč-), kūeh "mountain" (vs. kōh, cf. p. 257, 258, respectively), brātūe "step-brother" (vs. brātō, cf. p. 307), rūe "day" (vs. rō, cf. p. 137).

On the other hand, assimilation of a to a preceding labial is seen in e.g. mon "I"

[START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF]

vs. man of the other dialects, bohā "price" (Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:102) vs. bahā otherwise, Bompūr (local pronunciation) vs. Bampūr (official name of a town in Iranian Balochistan).

386

The change of ū > ī does not occur in the Lāšārī and Sarāwānī data, 387 which is nearer to Western than to Southern Balochi usage

(cf. p. 243, 252)

. The change to 385

  In addition, the verbal ending of the 2pl. -ēt 392 varies with -ē under the same conditions as nasalisation. 2003 also has examples of nasalisation in regular words, e.g. n ū "now" (cf. p. 202), g ȭ "with"

		. Word-final vowel + n of a
	number of endings and suffixes appears as -Vn before vowel, and -Ṽ before a
	consonant (BARANZEHI 2003:81ff.) 388 and before a pause (SPOONER 1967:58). The
	same is true for -ent (cf. p. 262) of the 3pl.: 389
		/_V		/_C
	obl.pl.	-ān	-	ã
	adj.suffix	-ēn	-	ē
	pron.suffix: 390
	1sg.	-on	-õ
	1pl.	-en	-ẽ
	pronoun 1sg.	mon	mõ
	verbal endings = copula pres. 391
	1sg.	(-)ān	(-)	ã
	1pl.	(-)ēn	(-)	ē
	3pl.	(-)ent	(-)ẽ
	irrealis suffix	-ēn	-	ē
	pres.part.	-ān	-
	388 This distribution is not made explicit in BARANZEHI 2003, but can be concluded from the data.
	389 As at least one of these endings occurs in about every sentence, ELFENBEIN's statement (1990/II:XII)
	that "nasalisation (...) is sporadic" is misleading, although the note that it is "mainly confined to"
	certain endings is basically correct.

ã 390 Most other Balochi dialects have pronominal suffixes for the 3rd persons only. 391 In other dialects, the verbal endings are not necessarily identical with the copula present. 392 Other dialects have -ē (FARRELL 1990) or -it (BARKER/MENGAL and other Raxšānī sources).

BARANZEHI

  c aql; • kulp, kulf (ABG, BMC, EAL, ROSSI 1979:219) "lock (on a door)" 394 shows a metathesis vs. kubl etc. (NP-Ar. qufl, see below) which is also shared by Br. and Psht. kulf, Ur. kalaf (ROSSI 1979:219) as well as spoken Dari and Tajiki (Lutz

	Rzehak, personal communication);
	• suhb (MOCKLER 1877, EAL, SHG), suhb (DTB) 395 for NP-Ar.	¨ sub	˙	h "morning".

  assimilation is seen in nīmōn (DTB), nīmū (GCD) vs. līmū (DTB, GCD), Ur. līmū, NP līmū(n) "lemon", perhaps under the influence of Ur. nīmbū, n īb ū, nimbū.403

				;
	• ǐa	˙	d g ˘ al (EAL), ǐadgāl (SHG) are derived from ǐa ˙	t gāl "Ja ˙ t ˙ t " (ethnolinguistic group
	in Pakistan, for further modifications, cf. p. 187, 266);
	• pai ġammar "prophet" (Lutz Rzehak, personal communication) vs. pai ġam-bar
	(EAL, GCD; NP loanword) shows a total assimilation;
	• a distant

  ). Some of the more remarkable examples include: 408 403 līmbō (BMC, EAL), līmbū (EAL, SHG) is another mixture of the above-mentioned forms. 404 The existence of nīwag doubted by GEIGER 1891:444 is confirmed by SHG, EAL, BMC, NAWATA 1981:37. The variant nēwag is only found in EAL and it is questionable whether it is attested. For ē > ī, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2, for SHG nībag, cf. p. 228. 405 NP mēwa comes from *mēg < *madg (cf. Prth. migd(ag)) which is somehow related to Hebrew migdā, Syriac magdā; it is not clear whether it is a Semitic loanword in Iranian or vice-versa

  • mēbāīt (EVM), bāid (cf. p. 283) "it is necessary" (NP (mē-)bāyad);• yāt (ABG, BMC, EAL, SHG), yād (SHG) "memory" (NP yād, cf. p. 105).-VCD# > -VCT#:

	-VD# > -VT#:
	• ādamīzāt (EVM, EAL), ādam-zāt (SHG), ādam-zād (SHG) "human (being)" (NP
	ādam(ī)-zād, lit.: "man-born");
	• ispī ˙	t "speed" (Engl. speed, FARRELL 2003:179);
	• ištāp "hurry" (NP šitāb, cf. p. 152);
	• ōmēt (BMC, EVM, EAL), umēt (SHG), ōmīt/ūmīt (EAL), ummēd (ABG, SHG)
	"hope" (NP ōmēd, ūmīd, MP ummēd, GEIGER 1891:462);
	• zyāt (ABG, EAL, SHG) "much, more" (NP-Ar. ziyād);
	• kabā ˙	t (FBB, SHG) "cupboard" (Engl. cupboard, cf. p. 67);
	• kilīt "key" (NP kilīd, cf. p. 237);
	• masǐit 409 "mosque" (NP-Ar. masǐid);

  • mark "death" may be genuine(YAv. mahrka-, i.e. PIr. *márka- (HOFFMANN/FORSMAN 1996:92) or from NP marg (GEIGER 1891:444);415 • nōk "new" may be genuine or from MP nōg (cf. p. 101).

			or from
	NP šud (cf. p. 128);
	• gurk "wolf" may be genuine (PIIr. *	˘	u ˚ ŕka-, cf. p. 144) or from NP gurg;

  bačč 432 "boy" (NP), waǐǐ 433 "dowry", hašš 434 "millstone", mažž 435 "leprosy" (BMC), "epilepsy" (EVM), uruss (BMC, SHG) "Russia", gazz 436 "tamarisk"; • kamm 437 "few, little", ˙ d ann 438 "plain, space", barr 439 "penis", pull 440 "flower".

	Gemination of word-final consonants is particularly common. 424
	Examples are:
	• čapp 425 "left", sangatt 426 "friend", ǐu ˙ ˙ t t 427 "old she-camel", kumakk 428 "help",
	yaxx (ABG, BMC) "cold" (NP);
	• labb 429 "bride-price, bribe", sudd (BMC, EAL, SHG) "consciousness" (from Ur.
	sud h ), ha	˙	d ˙ d 430 "bone" (Ur. ha	˙	d ˙ d ā or Si. ha	¯ du), bagg 431 "camel herd";
	• 427 ǐu ˙ ˙ t t (SHG ǐu ˙	t ) is likely to have been borrowed from some Ind. language.
	428 kumakk (BMC, EAL; EVM kumak, SHG has both) has been borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:421).
	429 labb (BMC, EAL, SHG) is from Si. laba	˙	n u "bribe" (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:89).
	430 ha	˙	d ˙	d (ABG, BMC, SHG; a	˙	d ˙	d EVM, FBB, a	˙	d NAWATA 1981:34, ha	˙	d DTB).

424 This is probably why JAHANI 1989:16 notices gemination only in the case of word-final consonants. 425 čapp (thus ABG, BMC, EAL, SHG; DTB and EVM have čap) has been borrowed from NP čap (also attested as čapp) according to HÜBSCHMANN 1895:52. 426 Thus BMC, FBB; SHG has sangat, EAL has both. The word has been borrowed from Urdu. 431 For further discussion about bagg (thus BMC, EAL, SHG; EVM has bag), cf. p. 280. 432 For bačč (BMC, EAL, SHG; DTB has bač h , cf. p. 229), cf. p. 100.

  which assumes a preform *ar\r-, linking the word to NP ās, seems questionable. -internal gemination is also found with most consonants. No examples for the nasals have been found, though, all examples for mm, nn either being borrowed from a word with geminate or are derivations of a word with word-final geminate.441 For ww, quwwat (ABG) "strength" (NP-Ar. quwwat) is the only word found so far. Geminated yy has only been found in ABG; the relevant cases may be due to some uncertainty concerning the question how to write sequences of ē + y: bayy-, bēyy-for usual bay-, bēy-"be, become" (cf. p. 78), yakayyēn "alone, only" (adj. derivation of the NP loanword yak(k) "one", for which cf. p. 105).

	435 The etymology of mažž is not clear. 436 gazz (BMC, EAL, SHG; DTB, EVM has gaz) has probably been borrowed from NP gaz (GEIGER 1891:449), but OIr. *gaza-(cf. BAILEY 1979:80a) would give Bal. gaz as well. • ruppī (BMC) "Rupia (monetary unit)" (FBB rupē, Ur. rupayā); attar 443 (ABG, EAL) "perfume" (NP-Ar. c a ¨ tr); ču ˙ t ˙ t ī (ABG) "holiday" (Si. čh u ˙ t ī); badrakka (BMC, EAL) for badraqa, badraga (GCD) 444 "escort, convoy"; • čabbaw 445 (BMC, EAL) "sandal"; paddar (ABG, BMC, EAL, SHG) "evident" (Si. 437 kamm (BMC, FBB, SHG; ABG, EVM kam; DTB k Examples for the other consonants are: 442 pad h irō); bu ˙ d ˙ d -(BMC, EAL, SHG, NAWATA 1891:16) "sink (itr.)" (Si. ¯ bu ¯ da ˙ n u);

h am) has been borrowed from NP

(GEIGER 1891:452)

. With regard to Prth. kambīg and the fact that the MP assimilation nd > nn does not take place in

Balochi (cf. p. 79)

, it seems indeed best to consider kam(m) a loanword. 438 The obl. of ˙ d ann (BMC, EAL, SHG, NAWATA 1981:45) means "outside". The word may be an Ind. loanword (maybe connected to Ur. ˙ d h a-nā, ˙ d ah-nā "to fall, to be destroyed"?). Word439 barr (BMC, EAL) might have been borrowed from NP bar "breast, side, small of back, embrace", for the semantics, cf. German Lenden "loins" which may be used to refer to the male genitals. 440 pull (BMC, EAL, SHG; ABG, FBB have pul, DTB has p h ul) is from Ind. (e.g. Si. p h ulu). 441 Examples for mm: ammā "but" (NP-Ar. ammā), ummēd "hope" (MP ummēd, cf. p. 269); kammō "few" from kam(m) (see above). ABG kammāš "greyhaired, respected man, president" for kamāš of other sources (the etymology is unclear, cf. ROSSI 1979:69) is maybe due to a misinterpretation of the word as of the Arabic type CaCCāC which denotes professions. -The etymology of the hapax a ˙ d ammag (EVM) "broad" is unclear.

  (BMC, FBB, EAL, SHG) "leave, let" (NP hil-, Prth. hirz-/ hišt, cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1884:110 5 ).451

	449
	• čikk-/ čikkit (BMC, FBB, EAL, SHG) "pull"; 450
	• ku ˙ ˙ t t -(ABG, EVM, EAL, NAWATA 1981:16) "crush" (Ur. ku ˙	t -nā);
	• ill-

  mučč "supplied" (Si. (DTB) muč h u "heap"), wass "control, grasp" (Si. (DTB) vasu).454 For voicing in groups with liquids, cf. p. 267. 455 GEIGER 1891:436 assumes a voicing process in EBal. paǐā vs. SWBal. baǐā, but the identity of these two words is doubtful (cf. p. 106).456 ABG, BMC, JAHANI 1997:118 (from a poem by Gul Khan Nasir). The word might have been borrowed from Psht. bādšāh.457 kuǐā is likely to be a NP loanword. For the Bal. equivalent of NP ǐā etc., cf. II 2.2.3.5.458 kuǐām is likely to be a mixture of NP kudām with kuǐā (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:78). More genuine forms might be EBal. kut h ān, kit h ān

	453 Most words are from Ind., e.g. lu ˙ ˙ t t "plunder" (Ur. lu ˙	t , Si. lu ˙	t i, Lhd. has lu ˙ ˙ t t -"to loot", ELFENBEIN
	1991:112),

  assumes, but might be from Psht. wāz e "fathom". 479 476 For r > l in loanwords, cf. II 2.4.2. 477 A further example is gwadil "coward" (a literary hapax legomenon from DAMES 1881:155): the word is explained by GEIGER 1891:125 as gwad-dil, i.e. a compound of *gwat "bad" (cf. NP bad < MP wad) and (NP loanword) dil "heart", and a convenient cognate indeed exists in MP waddil "fainthearted" (Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication). It is possible that gwadil has been borrowed from MP.

	478 Other examples by MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41 of alleged "analogical substitution of [Bal.] gw-for
	[NP] b-" are even less convincing: gwālag "bag" may have been borrowed from NP guwāl (cf.
	MORGENSTIERNE 1948:288, for guw-> gw-, cf. p. 219) rather than showing an adaptation of NP bāla
	(cf. p. 97).

Similarly, gu ġ (DTB), gug (EAL), gugū (SHG) "owl" may be explained as a borrowing from Lhd. g h ug h

(ELFENBEIN 1985:230)

and is thus unlikely to have been borrowed from NP buh. 479 For further discussion of Psht. wāz e and its cognates, cf. MORGENSTIERNE 2003:94, SIMS-WILLIAMS 1983a:359.

  might have resulted in Bal. pōst as well.

							1. Body parts
	bone	ha	˙	d ( ˙	d )	Ur./Si.
	joint	bōg 9		old
	head	sar				ABG, DTB FBB, SHG BMC, EVM	= NP
		sa ġar		DTB, GCD	from sar
	brain	magz 10	SHG	NP
		mazg		old?
		maǐg		DTB, GCD SHG	EVM
	hair	mūd, mīd	SHG	EVM	old
		māh-par,	ABG	SHG	BMC, EVM	? 11
		mahpar
		gulg		SHG	EVM	old? 12
		pu ˙	t		GCD	EVM	Br. 13
	forehead	(h)anīčag 14 DTB, GCD SHG	old?
		pēšānī 15	SHG	BMC	NP
	eye	čam(m)	old
		dīd(a(g)) 16	SHG	BMC	NP

In EBal. (DTB. GCD), bō ġ means "knot in stalk". EAL also has this meaning.

  As shown in II 2.1.2.3fn., dap is a borrowing from some older stage of Persian. lap is apparently attested only once in a manuscript in the British Library, cf. GEIGER 1890:134, so its existence is somewhat questionable.Although Lat. labium goes back to *lab (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:96), NP lab presupposes Ir. *lap, so Bal. lab is a loanword. Zaz. lew might go back both to *lab and *lap; Kurd. lêv may go back to *lap; the Kurd. outcome of OIr. -b-is not clear[START_REF] Albert | Die Sprache der Kurden[END_REF]:263, ASATRIAN/LIVSHITS 1994:82f.

	eyeball	dīdōk 17	DTB, GCD	SHG	from dīdag
		˙	t ēla(g) 18	DTB	BMC	Ind.?
	eyebrow burwān
	eyelash	mičāč	DTB	FBB, SHG	old
		p h imblī	GCD	Si.
	ear	gōš			= NP
	nose	pō(n)z	DTB, GCD	FBB, SHG BMC	= NP
		gīn 19		EVM	old
	mouth	dap			Pers. 20
	lip	lap 21		old
		lab		GCD	NP 22
		rak(k)	DTB	SHG	Ind.? 23
		lun ˙	t	ABG	FBB, SHG BMC, EVM,	Ind.? 24
						NAWATA 1981:34
	tooth	dantān		old
	tongue	zubān		SHG	BMC, EVM	= NP
		zawān	ABG, DTB, GCD
		zuwān		EVM
		lillik		FBB, SHG	Ind.?
	Also for "pupil of the eye" in GCD.
	DTB has	˙ īla ġ. t
	gīn otherwise means "breath" (cf. p. 136).

  If the word is correctly noted and not a loanword, it presupposes CBal. *zanāk which could correspond toOrm. zināk (cited in BAILEY 1979:345a). For further data from Ir. languages, cf. NARTEN 1970, EWAia II:801. The -x in NP, Prth. zanax has nothing to do with EBal. -x but shows a suffix substitution comparable to those discussed in KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:203 40 , e.g. NP malax vs. Bal. madag "locust". MAYER 1910 has zānik which ELFENBEIN 1985:237 qualifies as being "also wrong" and maybe standing for *zanīk. It is also noted in GCD, however.

	shoulder	kōpag	old
	armpit			kaš	SHG	BMC	= NP
					bagal	GCD	SHG	BMC, EVM	NP
	arm				bāsk 32	old
	hand				dast	NP? 33
					panǐag	SHG	EVM	NP 34
	elbow			srōš 35	DTB, GCD SHG	old
					ārunǐ	NAWATA 1981:34	NP 36
					muk 37	FBB	?
	wrist				muč(č)	DTB, GCD FBB, SHG	NP? 38
					karā'ī	GCD	Si. 39
	The source is not entirely clear: MORGENSTIERNE 1932:38 assumes Lhd. g h u ˙	t "gulp" while
	GILBERTSON 1925:681 has Si. nir-g h a ˙	t u, cf. also Ur. ga ˙	t "gulp".
	sun ˙	t means "beak" in BMC and EAL, "sting" in EAL; SHG has all three meanings. EAL also has
	the variant sunt. According to ELFENBEIN 1990/II:133, sun ˙	t has been borrowed from Lhd. sun	˙	d .
	DTB has k h ā	˙	d ī, EAL kā	˙	d ī, GCD both forms. As DAMES 1891:73 remarks, k h ā	˙	d ī is probably a
	loanword from Si. k h ā	¯ dī.
	DTB, GCD have gu ˙	t h .
	gu ˙	t ( ˙	t ) has most probably been borrowed from some Ind. language (MORGENSTIERNE 1927:27), and
	the same applies to Br. gu ˙	t (MORGENSTIERNE 1932:38, against ZARUBIN 1930:660).

DTB, GCD have gardan, for which (and for further variants),

cf. p. 195, 285.

  According to ELFENBEIN 1985:232, gur noted in DAMES 1881:133 is a "substandard form, common to all dialects", but it is not noted anywhere else, not even in DAMES 1891. Cf. also p. 99.

							1. Body parts
	back			pušt	DTB, GCD SHG	BMC, EVM	= NP
				ba	˙	d ( ˙	d )	FBB, SHG EVM, NAWATA 1981:34 Br. 56
	waist, loins,	srēn 57	DTB	FBB, SHG EVM, NAWATA 1981:34 old
	small of back	myān	ABG	SHG	BMC	NP 58
				mugūn	˙	d 59	BMC	?
	bottom, anus kūn, kīn	= NP 60
	stomach,	lāp	ABG,	FBB, SHG BMC, EVM	? 61
	belly						DTB, GCD
				uškumag	EVM	= NP
				šikam	ABG	SHG
				pi	˙	d ˙ d	EVM	Br.? 62
	heart			zird 63	DTB, GCD SHG	BMC, NAWATA 1981:34 old
				dil	ABG,	FBB, SHG BMC, EVM	NP
							DTB, GCD
	liver			ǐagar	NP
	ba	˙	d ( ˙
							>	˙	d , cf. II 3.1.1.4, for gemination of
	word-final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.5.

MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 and EAL also have nāp.

The word has obviously been borrowed from Si. dunu. For d

  ).

	mother māt	ABG, DTB,	FBB, SHG BMC	old
		GCD, Pe
	mās 85	ABG	SHG	BMC, EVM, NAWATA	old
				1981:35, Pa, Rz
	father pit	ABG, DTB,	FBB, SHG		old
		GCD, Pe
	pis(s)		SHG	BMC, EVM, NAWATA	old
				1981:35, Pa, Rz
	bābā	Pe	SHG	EVM, Rz	= NP 86
	abbā	ABG, DTB, Pe SHG		Ar. 87

  in EAL is the SWBal. form which would correspond to EBal. nafusx, but it does not seem to be attested anywhere, neither is EAL nafusk. The only attested form seems to be nafusx which is cited in MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 from DTB and his Sibi informant; the -x implies an earlier form *nafusVk. MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 notes nafusx as "possibly genuine" and compares it with Wakhi napüs "niece, nephew" (cf.

	stepdaughter	nafusx	DTB	old? 135
	stepson	pēzāda(g)	Rz	136
		p h izāda ġ	DTB
	stepchild	čuk(k)ō	FBB, SHG	(Ind.?)

napusk

  Parthian has xun-/ xunād, cf. p. 122).

			5. Verbs
	go to sleep	waps-, wasp-	wapt
	eat	war-	wārt, wart 180
	present stem old, past stem with analogical features: 181
	spin	brēs-	brēst
	open	bōǐ-	bōtk etc.
	suffocate	tus-	tust
	extinguish	tōs-	tōst 182
	chew	ǐā(y/h)-	EBal. ǐā\-183
	milk	dōš-	dušt 184
	know	zān-	zānt 185
	take	gir-	gipt 186
	sift	gēč-	gētk 187
	rub	muš-	mušt 188
	listen	nigōš-	nigōšt 189
	past stem old, present stem with possible analogical features:
	take	zūr-	zurt 190

  For zurt, cf. p. 146. Secondary past stems include zūrt, zīrt.

	forget	šamōš-, šamuš-	šamōšt, šamušt 191
	dry (itr.)	huš-	hušt
	past stem secondary formation or not known:
	fear	turs-	tursit 192
	move	ǐuz(z)-	ǐuz(z)it
	colour	raǐ-	raǐit
	defecate	rīy-193
	send	šast-	šastit, EBal. šastā\-194
	bite	gas-	gast, EBal. gasi\-
	rain	gwār-	gwārt, gwart
	weave	gwap-	gwapt, 195
		EBal. guf-	EBal. guft
	pass by	gwaz-	gwast
		guz-
	say	gwaš-	gušt 196
		guš-
	The forms with ō are secondary (cf. p. 117), probably analogically to verbs of the type šōd-/ šust,
	thus šamuš-/ šamušt > šamōš-/ šamušt > šamōš-/ šamōšt.
	It is possible that turs-is a denominative of the noun turs "fear". However, it might also be regularly
	derived from *t ˚ rs-s ḱe-and thus represent a parallel formation to that of Prth. tirs-/ tirsād, Av.
	t e r e sa-(cf. p. 146). The past stem is secondary in any case.

  As devoicing of word-final consonants is a common phenomenon in loanwords(cf. II 3.3.1.4), past stems which differ from the corresponding NP ones only in that they end in -t where the NP ones have -d are also possible loanwords. In the case of bar-, however, a borrowing is made less probable by the existence of irregular forms of the 3sg.pres. (cf. p. 147).203 The difference in vocalism is no obstacle to the possibility of the word being a loanword since a may change to i next to a palatal consonant (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1). Cf. also p. 94.204 A present stem sumb-is apparently only found in MOCKLER 1877 and EAL (the latter probably informed by the former). DAMES 1881 and DTB have sumba ġ "a stitch in the side". DTB and GCD have a past stem sub\a (reflecting a past stem *subV\-, cf. p. 236) for the present stem sub-, which is likely to have been modelled on the past stem. The verb may be a denominative formation from sumb "hole"; sumb may have been borrowed from NP (thus GEIGER 1891:433), but with regard to Sogd. swmb-"pierce", it may be genuine as well.205 For the variants bakš-, baxš-which are loanwords (cf. p. 177), cf. p. 320.

			5. Verbs		319
	graze	čar-	čar(i)t		čar-/ čarīd "graze"
	turn	čar(r)-	čar(r)it 206
	kiss	čuš(š)-, čūš(š)-čūšit 207		čōš-/ čōšīd
	tear	din-, dir(r)-	dirt, dirrit 208		darr-/ darrīd
	arrive	ras-	rasit 209		ras-/ rasīd
	laugh	present stem past stem kand-kandit 210	NP	xand-/ xandīd
	past stem formation possibly old: groan nār-nārit		nāl-/ nālīd
	carry Bal. verb from a possible NP loanword: bar-burt 202	bar-/ burd
	bind hit	band-čōp-	bast čupt, EBal. čōfi\-211	band-/ bast NP čōb "wood",
	flee	ǐih-	ǐist 203	ǐah-/ ǐast Bal. čōp "stick" 212
	give birth zā(y/h)-	zāt, zāhit	zāy-/ zād
	pierce	sumb-	supt, sumbit 204	sunb-/ suft, sunbīd
		EBal. sub-
	pull	kaš(š)-	kašt, kaš(š)it	kaš-/ kašīd
	kill	kuš-	kušt	kuš-/ kušt
	have sex	gā(y)-	gāt	gāy-/ gā(ī)d
	secondary past stem:
	forgive	bašk-	baškāt 205	baxš-/ baxšīd
	ask	purs-	pursit	purs-/ pursīd

202

  . For the variant hand-/ handit, cf. p. 320. 211 čupt is noted by Y ŪSEFIY ĀN 1992:104, SWBal. čōpit is only found in EAL. The EBal. form čōfi\is found in DTB and GCD. The present stem is found in the SWBal. sources SHG, MOCKLER 1877 and one 19th century manuscript as well. If čōp-is a denominative verb, čupt shows a secondary ablaut. 212 čōp seems to be a hapax (only in Cod. Or. 2921, cf. p. 33). Its etymology is not clear.

			present stem	past stem	NP
	present stem could also be genuine:
	hold, have	dār-		dāšt	dār-/ dāšt
	past stem could also be genuine:
	give		day-213		dāt	dah-, dih-/ dād
	go		raw-, ra(y)-	šut	raw-/ šud
	NP features in present and past stem:
	bring		ār-		ārt etc.	ā(wa)r-/ āward 214
	try		āzmāy-215	āzmāy-/ āzmūd
	release		il(l)-		išt	hil-/ hišt, hilīd
	sow		kiš-		kišt 216	kiš-/ kišt
	write		nibīs-		nibišt	MP nibēs-/ nibišt
	past stem might have been formed secondarily in Bal.:
	cut		bur(r)-		bur(r)it	burr-/ burrīd
	forgive		bakš-		bakšit	baxš-/ baxšīd
			baxš-		baxšit
	fear		tars-		tarsit	tars-/ tarsīd
	steal		duz(z)-		duz(z)it 217	duzd-/ duzdīd
	weep		grē(w)-		grēt 218	girī-/ girīst
	laugh		hand-		handit	xand-/ xandīd
					It cannot be
	connected to OInd. k ˙	s upa-"bush" as GEIGER 1890:118 assumes (HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557) since
	OInd. k ˙	s -corresponds to Bal., NP š-(cf. p. 92, 113). Cognates of OInd. k ˙	s upa-might include Wakhi
	š e pk (STEBLIN-KAMENSKIJ 1999:337).

Balochi verbs which are borrowed from languages other than Persian

		verb									from
	sink	bu	˙	d ( ˙	d )-/ bu	˙	d ( ˙	d )it, EBal. bu	˙	d a\-	Si.	¯ bu	¯ da	˙	n u
	arrive	puǐ(ǐ)-/ puǐ(ǐ)it				Si. pu ǐa ¯	˙	n u, Lhd. puǐǐa	˙	n
	weigh	tōr-, EBal.	˙	t ōl-/	˙	t ōla\-		Si. tōra	˙	n u, Ur. tōl-nā
	pull	čik(k)-/ čik(k)it				Si. čh ika	˙	n u
	go	Bal. verb čal-/ čalit					Ind.	Ur. čal-nā
	become ripe pakk-/ pakkit 219 learn sik(k)-/ sik(k)it 226		pak(k)ā "ripe, ready" Si. sik h a ˙ n u
	turn think	tar(r)-/ tar(r)it sōč-/ sōčit		Ur. tar-nā Ur. sōč-nā
	swim crush	ku ˙	EBal. tar-/ tara\-220 t ( ˙ t )-/ ku ˙ t ( ˙ t )it		Si. tara	˙ Ur. ku n u ˙	t -nā
	live get lost	EBal. ǐī-221 gisir-					Ur. ǐī-nā Si. visira	˙	n u
	hear write	EBal. sun-/ suni\-lik(k)-/ lik(k)it 227		Ur. sun-nā 222 Si. lik h a	˙	n u, Ur. lik h -nā
	chew want	lō ˙	EBal. k h ād-/ k h ādi\-223 t -/ lō ˙ t it		Lhd. k h ād h "food" Ur. lō ˙ t -nā "to long for"
	dig lie down lē ˙	kōč-, k ȭč-t -/ lē ˙ t it					Ur. kōč-nā 224 Si. lē ˙	t a	˙	n u, Ur. lē ˙	t -nā
	meet	mil(l)-/ mil(l)it				Ur. mil-nā "to join"
	verbs made from borrowed nouns: 4.6 For the following verbs no Iranian etymology is in sight, but a convenient verb from a change badl-/ badlit badal "exchange" (NP-Ar.)
	neighbouring language from where it may have been borrowed: 225 turn čakarr-/ čakarrit Si. čakaru "diziness"
	4.7 Unclear cases
	Some verbs remain the origin of which is not clear yet, e.g.:
								verb						cf.
	sleep							EBal. aks-/ akast h -		p. 178
	hurry							rumb-/ rumbit		rumb "run", cf. p. 95
	swell with rage		gažž-, ġažž-/ ġažžit		p. 273

  first sight, it seems that Balochi occupies a position apart from all other Western Iranian languages since the Old Iranian stops and affricates appear as such in the Southern and Western dialects and presumably in Common Balochi, while they undergo modifications in the closely related languages Parthian and Persian. 1 It seems to have generally been assumed that the OIr. stops and affricates have been preserved in Balochi up to the present day. The only change would be that of the OIr. fricatives to Bal. stops (bold type marks elements which are changed in Balochi):

	Old Iranian	*Middle Balochi 2	New Balochi	classical Parthian
	b, d, g /V_		b, d, g		b, d, g
	p, t, k /V_				b, d, g
			p, t, k
	f, \, x				f, h, x
	č /V_, ǐ, ž		č, ǐ, ž		ž
	OIr. >	*Middle, New Balochi
	voiceless fricatives >	stops
	[-voiced, +cont] >	[-voiced, -cont]
	2. Model A (preservation of OIr. stops and affricates)
	OIr.	Balochi	Parthian	Middle Persian
	C /V_V	(S, W)	(classical)	(classical)
	b, d, g	b, d, g	b, d, g	w, y, y
	p, t, k	p, t, k	b, d, g	b, d, g
	č	č
	ǐ ž	ǐ ž	ž		z
	1. Stops and affricates in Western Ir. languages
	This well-known fact has appeared striking to all researchers who have dealt with the
	subject.

  (lenition and reversal of stops from a classical MIr. stage)This model has the advantage of bringing Middle Balochi considerably nearer to Parthian, but the disadvantage of needing one more change than model A to effect the New Balochi state of affairs, the two changes not being necessarily logically related. It is thus not clear which model is the better one.A closer look at the MIr. data, specifically the development of the stops and affricates in Parthian, appears necessary. The following table shows the Prth. results of OIr. stops, fricatives and affricates in the stage of Parthian represented by the Nisa ostraca and certain names("Prth. 1" here, cf. SUNDERMANN 1989a:123), in the stage reflected in the Prth. loanwords in Armenian ("Prth. 2")4 and in a postclassical stage ("Prth. 4").5 The resulting picture is as follows (changes in Parthian in bold type): Stops and affricates in Old Iranian, Balochi and ParthianThe Prth. stage that Balochi seems to share most characteristics with is "Parthian 1". However, the assumption that Balochi is derived from the Middle Ir. stage represented by Parthian 1 would amount to a model of the same structure as model A discussed above; it does not offer any advantages in comparison with the assumption that Balochi is derived directly from the OIr. stage. (lenition and reversal of stops from an older MIr. stage) This model combines the advantages of models A and B: it brings Middle Balochi nearer to a known stage of Parthian (like model B); it needs only one change to derive Balochi from Middle Iranian and is thus as simple as model A. It may be noted in passing that the change assumed here (MBal. fricatives > CBal. stops) would also produce the CBal. result from the Sogdian state of affairs as far as the stops and fricatives are concerned: Stops, fricatives and affricates in Balochi, Parthian and SogdianThe only difference between Middle Balochi as assumed here and Parthian is that Balochi preserves two OIr. phonemic oppositions which got lost in Parthian, viz. OIr. \ vs. h and ǐ vs. ž. Had Balochi experienced the change of OIr. \ > h seen in Parthian 2 and following stages, it would have been impossible to reverse only those cases of h to t which go back to OIr. \ without affecting h from OIr. h (cf. II 2.1.2.1). Similarly, it seems that OIr. ǐ and ž fall together in Parthian 2 while Balochi preserves the three phonemes (rōč "day", bōǐ-"save", dūžah "hell", cf. II 2.1.2.2, 2.1.2.4). It follows that Balochi cannot go back to Parthian 2, 3 or 4. These differences (MBal. \ vs. Prth. 2 h, MBal. ǐ vs. Prth. 2 ž) would thus remain; they might be considered quite minor dialectal differences between two neighbouring MIr. dialects. 7

	Old Iranian b, d, g /V_ p, t, k /V_ f, \, x č /V_, ǐ, ž OIr. > b, d, g /V_ p, t, k /V_ f, x \ h č /V_ Old Iranian b, d, g /V_ p, t, k /V_ f, \, x č /V_, ǐ, ž OIr. > 3. Model B Old Iranian ǐ ž 4. An alternative possibility would be to assume that Middle Balochi corresponds to the *Middle Balochi New Balochi classical Parthian b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g p, t, k b, d, g f, \, x f, h, x č, ǐ, ž č, ǐ, ž ž *Middle Balochi > voiced stops > [+voiced, -cont] > fricatives > [+cont] > New Balochi voiceless [-voiced, -cont] stops [-cont] New Balochi Parthian Prth. 1 Prth. 2 Prth. 3 (class.) Prth. 4 b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g p, t, k p, t, k p, t, k b, d, g f, x f, x f, x f, x \ h h h h h č č č *Middle Balochi New Balochi Parthian 2 b, d, g b, d, g b, d, g p, t, k p, t, k p, t, k f, \, x f, h, x č, ǐ, ž č, ǐ, ž č, ž *Middle Balochi > fricatives > [+cont] > New Balochi stops [-cont] ž ž ǐ ǐ6 ž ž ž (model C) 5. Model C Old Iranian *Middle Balochi New Balochi Parthian 2 Sogdian
	MIr. stage represented by Parthian 2: # b, d, g -b, d, g # b, d, g -b, d, g	b, d, g	# b, d, g -b, d, g	b, d, g
	# p, t, k -p, t, k	p, t, k	p, t, k	p, t, k	p, t, k
	f, \, x	f, \, x		f, h, x	f, \, x
	# č, ǐ, ž -č, ǐ, ž	č, ǐ i, ž	č, ǐ, ž	# č, ž -ž	č, ž
	6.

  are used inAfghan and Turkmen Balochi (cf. p. 115). Cf. also p. 238.12 For the variant šmā, cf. p. 251. For further discussion, cf. p. 126, 232f.

				dir.	obl.	obj.	gen.
	sg.	1st 9	WBal.	man		manā
						m(a)nī
			SBal.	man	manā	manārā
			EBal.	mã, ma, m ã	mā	manā, man ã	maī, maĩ
		2nd 10	WBal.	taw, ta		tarā
			SBal.	tau, tō	t(a)rā	tarārā	t (h) aī, t (h) ī
			EBal.	t h au, t h a		t h arā
	pl.	1st	WBal. 11	(am)mā		(am)mārā
						(am)mai, mē
			SBal.	mā	mārā
			EBal.	mā		mār(ā)	ma	ī
		2nd 12	WBal.	š(u)mā		šumārā
						šumai, šumē
			SBal.	šumā	šumārā
			EBal.	š(a)wā, šā		š(a)wār, šār	š(a)wāī, šāī
	3. Inflection of the Bal. personal pronouns
	9 For variants of man and its flexive forms, cf. p. 238, 244, 251, 263.
	10 For etymological discussion, cf. p. 102, for variants, cf. p. 251.
	11 The forms am(m)ā-

  table. As usual, the endings differ depending on the dialects. 19

			present	copula	past
	sg.	1st	-īn; -ān	-un; -ȭ; -ān
		2nd	-ai; -ē
		3rd	-t, -īt; -ī; IrBal. -e(t) int, ẽ; IrBal. o	-∅
	pl.	1st	-an; -ēn; -ōm	-an; -ēn; -	ū
		2nd	-it; -ē(t)
		3rd	-ant; -ã
	6. Bal. verbal endings and copula

  seems to have been the first to note that the function of a corresponds somehow to that of CNP mī-. For a discussion of this construction, cf. ZARŠEN ĀS 2002. The statement by ZARŠEN ĀS 2002:259 of such a construction not being found in Western MIr. languages is not correct since it does exist in Parthian

	The parallelism goes
	so far that an expression †man-a dārīn is as unacceptable as NP †man mī-dāram (SOKOLOV
	1956:84).
	26 Cf. KORN 2001:6.

27

Index of Non-Balochi words and word forms

  The order is the Arabic script for New Persian, Pashto, Urdu/Hindi, Sindhi/Lahnda and Brahui; Devanagari for other Ind. languages and Khotanese; modified Devanagari order following HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1996:283 for Avestan and Old Persian; the Greek alphabet for Bactrian and Greek; the Latin alphabet for the remaining languages. 1 On transcription, transliteration and sources, cf. I 1.5.2. Some words and reconstructions of questionable existence or relevance have been omitted.

	, III 1 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:51 GEB 354 II 3.2.1.1 from sar II 2.2.2.5, 3.1.2.3.2, 3.1.2.4, 3.2.1.1, III 1 GEB 338 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:75 II 3.2.1.1, III 1 see sar-II 2.2.1.1, 2.2.4.3, 3.3.1.5fn. GEB 333 II 3.2.1.1, III 5.6 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword II 3.1.4.3 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.2.2.3 III 1 EMENEAU/BURROW 1961 ROSSI 1979:110 Br. loanword II 3.3.1.5 DAMES 1891/II:57 Ind. (Pnj.) loanword II 2.4.3.2fn., III 5.3 GEB 351 = NP II 2.4.3.2fn., III 5.3 GEB 352 from sumb? II 3.1.1.3 FARRELL (in print) Europ. (Engl.) loanword II 2.2.3.4fn., 2.3.2, III 5.5 GEB 353 = Ur. III 1 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:133 Ind. (Lhd.) loanword II 2.1.2.3, 2.2.2.1fn., III 5.1 GEB 342 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559 II 2.3.1.1, 3.1.2.3.1, 3.2.2.3 GEIGER 1891:460 BRANDENSTEIN/ MAYRHOFER 1964:107 = NP II 3.2.2.3 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.3.1.5, 3.3.2.1 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.3.2.1 from sangat(t) II 3.3.1.1 FARRELL (in print) Europ. (Engl.) loanword III 3 Ind. loanword II 3.1.2.3, 3.1.2.4fn. see also srōp II 2.3.1.3fn. GEB 357 EWAia II:623f. II 2.1.2.3, 2.3.3, III 5.1 GEB 358 see also suč-II 3.1.3.3, III 5.6 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 2.1.2.2, 2.3.1.3fn., 3.1.1.2, 3.1.2.3.1, 3.1.2.3.2, 3.2.2.1 GEB 356 EWAia II:739 II 2.1.2.4 GEIGER 1891:431 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208 see also šōr II 3.1.3.2, 3.3.1.1 GEIGER 1891:460 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.2.1.4, 3.1.3.2, 3.2.4.1, III 3 GEB 350 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559 II 3.1.2.4, 3.2.1.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.3.4, 2.2.1.4, 3.2.1.1fn., III 4 GEIGER 1891:411 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:78 NP loanword III 4 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:202 NP loanword II 2.1.2.1fn. GEB 344 GEIGER 1891:344 KEWA III:334 = NP II 2.2.2.3 GEB 347 II 2.1.3.3, III 3 GEB 343 GEIGER 1891:444 NP loanword see also šān II 3.1.3.3, III 4 NP loanword see dah II 2.2.3.4, 2.3.2fn. GEB 345 HORN 1893:164 III 1 GEB 346 GIPPERT 1993/I:243 see also sīna II 3.1.3.3 III 1 GEB 346 GEIGER 1891:444 see sēnag II 2.2.2.2 HORN 1893:169 = NP II 3.1.1.1fn. NP loanword see also šāt II 3.1.1.4, 3.2.1.2 NP loanword II 3.3.2.1 NP-Ar. loanword III 3 II 2.1.3.3, 2.2.4.1, III 3 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:51 III 4 NP loanword see dah II 2.1.2.1 GEIGER 1891:460 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208 NP loanword II 3.2.1.1 NP-Ar. loanword II 1.1, 3.2.2.1fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.3.3 GREPPIN 1977:9 NP loanword II 2.2.1.2 GEB 362 II 2.1.1.1, 2.2.1.2, 2.4.3.2, 3.1.2.3, 3.2.1.1, 3.3.1.6 GEB 367 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:560 see also šawān II 3.1.1.3 GEB 362 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:560 see šap and čar-II 2.2.2.2, III 5.4 GEB 322 = NP II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.1.2, 2.3.1.2, 3.3.1, III 5.2fn. GEB 371 EWAia I:667f. see also gušn III 5.2 from šud III 5.1 GEB 372 see also šōd-II 3.3.1.6 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.2.1 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.2.3.2, 3.3.1.4 II 3.1.1.3, III 4 NP loanword II 2.2.1.4, 3.1.1.3, III 5.1 GEB 360, 363 BAILEY 1979:487b III 4 NP loanword II 2.2.2.3 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:69 II 3.3.1.5fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. GEIGER 1891:401 MORGENSTIERNE 1932c:30 II 3.2.1.1, 3.3.1.5, 3.3.1.7 GEIGER 1891:248 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.4+fn., 3.3.1.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.3, III 1 NP loanword see uškumag II 3.2.1.1, 3.2.3.2, V 1.4 GEB 365 HORN 1893:176 = NP II 3.1.4.3, 3.2.2.3 NP loanword II 2.2.1.4, 2.2.3.3, 2.3.2, III 5.1 GEB 360, 361 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:64 EWAia II:332 II 2.2.2.4, 3.2.1.1, 3.3.1.5 HOFFMANN 1967:36f. GERSHEVITCH 1971:267ff. II 3.1.3.4, 3.2.1.1, 3.3.1.6 = Kurd. see also šupānk II 2.1.1.2, 2.2.1.2, 2.3.3, 3.1.1.3, 3.2.1.1, III 5.1 GEB 373 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:561 EWAia I:439 LIV 373 see also šud-II 2.1.2.4 GEIGER 1891:431 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208 II 3.2.1.3 from šawašk-II 2.2.1.4, 3.1.1.2, 3.2.1.3, III 5.1 GEB 360, 364 MACKENZIE 1961:79 II 3.1.3.3 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.3.3, III 3 see šīnz II 2.2.1.3, III 5.2 MORGENSTIERNE 1937:348 MACKENZIE 1961:71 II 3.1.2.4, 3.2.2.2, 3.3.1.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.2.3.3 NP loanword II 2.2.1.2 GEIGER 1889:81 GEB 370 BAILEY 1979:67B EWAia I:437 LIV 373 II 2.2.1.2, 2.3.1.1fn., 3.1.3.3, III 3 HÜBSCHMANN 1884:427F. MORGENSTIERNE 1927:74 loanword? II 2.2.2.5 II 3.3.2.1 NP-Ar. loanword (via Ur.) see also zāmin II 3.1.4.3 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.2.1.1.1 NP-Ar. loanword II 1.2.1, 3.1.4.3 NP-Ar. loanword see also tama II 2.1.3.2 NP-Turk. loanword II 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.2.3 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.2.1fn., 3.3.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword see also galat II 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.4.3fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.2.3 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.5 NP-Ar. loanword V 1.6 II 2.1.1.1, 3.1.4.1, V 1.8 see also -ak, -ag II 2.1.2.1, III 5.5 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 ELFENBEIN 1985:233 EWAia I:451f. LIV 359 III 1 DAMES 1891:73 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 3.1.2.2 GEB 195 EWAia I:390 EAL 83 III 2 Ind. (Ur.) loanword III 2 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 1.2.2, 2.4.1.3 NP loanword II 3.2.4.3 Ind. loanword II 3.3.1.3 NP loanword II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.2.1, 2.3.1.3 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 EWAia I:451 II 3.3.1.6 NP-Ar. loanword II 1.2.4, 3.3.1.4 Europ. (Engl.) loanword II 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.6 NP loanword see also kapinǐar II 3.1.2.4, 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2 NP-Ar. loanword see also kulp II 3.1.4.3, 3.2.1.1 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.3.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.2.1fn. GEB 188 II 2.1.1.1, 2.2.1.1, 3.3.1.6fn., III 5.1 GEB 189 II 2.1.1.1 GEB 191 EWAia I:303 II 3.1.2.2.2, 3.3.1.6 GEB 190 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:82 Ind. loanword see also kabg II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.2.4fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.1.1, 3.1.2.2 GEB 199 BAILEY 1979:101a EWAia I:355, 399 II 3.3.1.5fn. ELFENBEIN 1990/II:87 Ind. (Si./Lhd.) loanword II 3.3.1.5, III 5.6 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.3.1.5 = NP II 3.3.1.5 see kuǐā II 2.1.1.1 II 3.1.2.2.1, 3.1.2.3.1, 3.3.1.5 GEB 203 = Kurd. II 3.3.1.5fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.1.4fn., 3.1.2.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.1.2, 2.3.1.3, 3.2.1.1+fn. GEB 182 II 1.2.2 NP loanword see also hudā II 2.1.2.1 GEB 192 see kargōš, har II 1.2.2, 3.3.2.1 NP-Ar. loanword see also harāb III 1 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 2.2.3.5, 2.3.2, 3.2.1.2, III 5.1 see kan-II 3.1.1.4, 3.1.2.3.3 MP loanword II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.2.1 GEB 192 see also kar, har II 2.3.2 GEB 197 II 2.2.1.4 MORGENSTIERNE 1938:268 ROSSI 1979:103 II 2.1.1.1, 2.2.1.4 GEB 202 II 3.2.1.1.2, III 2 GERSHEVITCH 1973:275 Psht. loanword II 3.1.1.3fn., 3.2.4.1 GEIGER 1891:452 NP loanword III 1 GEB 206 GEIGER 1891:444 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208 NP loanword II 2.1.1.1, 2.2.3.2, 3.2.1.1, V 1.2 GEB 439 II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loonword II 3.2.3.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.2.2 GEB 196 III 1 GEIGER 1891:453 = NP II 2.2.3.3, III 5.3 GEB 193 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 = NP see also kiš-II 2.2.3.3fn., 2.3.2, III 5.4 GEB 198 NP loanword see also kaš(š)-II 2.3.2, III 5.3 GEB 207 KELLENS 1984:101 = NP II 3.3.1.5 Ind. loanword? II 3.3.1.5 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.2.1.2 GEIGER 1891:453 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:88 NP loanword II 1.2.2, 3.2.1.2fn., 3.3.1.1 NP-Ar. loanword see also kubl III 1 GEIGER 1891:421 ELFENBEIN 1961:94 4 ROSSI 1979:101 II 3.2.1.2, 3.3.1.4, 3.3.2.1 GEIGER 1891:453 NP loanword (from Greek) II 3.3.1.5 GEIGER 1891:452 NP loanword II 3.3.1.5 ROSSI 1979:69 II 3.2.1.1 GEB 194 GEIGER 1891:444 NP loanword II 2.1.2.1, 2.1.3.1 GEB 204 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:288 see also humb III 3 GEB 184 GEIGER 1891:444 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:80 Ind. loanword II 3.1.1.3 FARRELL (in print) Europ. (Engl.) loanword II 3.1.2.2.2, 3.3.1.5, 3.3.2.3 GEIGER 1891:421 NP loanword II 2.2.3.4fn., 2.3.2, 3.2.2.1fn., III 5.1, V 1.6 GEB 185 GERSHEVITCH 1970:172 32 HOFFMANN 1976:587f. see also kurt II 3.1.2.2 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:561 BAILEY 1979:61f. II 1.2.2fn., 2.1.2.1, III 5.3 GEB 186 BAILEY 1979:71 see also hand-II 3.1.1.4 = NP II 3.2.1.1.2fn. GERSHEVITCH 1973:275 Psht. loanword see ku ¨ rāsag II 3.1.3.3 FARRELL (in print) Europ. (Engl.) loanword II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.2.1, 2.1.2.3fn., 2.3.3, 3.1.2.3, III 1 GEB 211 II 3.2.3.1 BUDDRUSS 1988:76 Psht. loanword II 3.1.3.3, III 5.6 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.1.2.3, 3.3.2.2 GEB 212 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:99 II 3.3.1.6 GEB 213 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556 NP loanword III 1 GEB 208 GEIGER 1891:444 NP loanword III 1 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:81 Ind. (Ur.?) loanword III 1 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:81 Ind. (Si.) loanword? II 3.2.3.1 NP loanword see kōpag II 2.2.1.5, 3.1.2.3.3, 3.1.3.2, 3.3.2.3 see kuhn II 2.2.1.5, 3.1.2.3.2, 3.1.3.2 BAILEY 1979:56b, 64b NP loanword see also kōhn V 1.4 GEB 200 II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword see also hayāl III 1 III 3 Ind. loanword? II 1.2.2, 3.3.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword see also hēriat II 3.1.4.1, 3.3.1.5 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword (via Ur.) II 2.1.3.4, III 5.3 GEB 102 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:24 EWAia I:602f. II 2.1.2.1 = NP III 1 II 3.3.1.5fn. NP loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. Ind. (Si.) loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. ROSSI 1979:64 III 1 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:27, 1932:38 GILBERTSON 1925:681 Ind. loanword III 1 II 3.3.1.5fn. Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 2.1.2.2, III 5.1 GEB 104 HORN 1893:101, 204 see also čin-II 2.1.2.2fn., 2.1.3.3fn. from gēč-II 3.3.1.1 NP loanword see also digar II 2.3.2, 3.1.1.4fn. GEIGER 1891:400 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:26 II 2.3.2, 3.1.2.2.1, 3.1.2.3fn., 3.2.2.1fn., III 5.4 GEB 106 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557 pres.stem = NP II 3.1.3.3 Ind. loanword? II 3.1.2.3, 3.3.2.3, III 1 GEIGER 1891:449 HORN 1893:201 NP loanword II 2.3.2, 3.2.1.1fn., 3.1.1.4 GEB 140 = NP II 3.2.3.2 II 3.1.2.4, III 5.7 GILBERTSON 1925:683 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.1.2.4, III 5.7 GILBERTSON 1925:683 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 1.2.1, 2.4.3.1, 3.1.2.3, 3.1.2.4, III 5.4 GEB 117 HENNING 1934:203 NP loanword II 1.2.2, 3.3.1.6 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.5 GEIGER 1891:449 BAILEY 1979:80a NP loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. GEIGER 1891:449 NP loanword II 3.1.3.4 see also gwaz-II 3.3.1.5fn. II 2.2.3.3, 2.3.2, 3.2.1.1 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:95, 1932:46 II 2.1.2.3, 2.3.1.2, 3.2.3.1 GEB 108 II 2.1.1.2, III 5.1 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:45 II 3.3.1.7, III 5.6 DAMES 1891:79 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 2.2.1.2fn., 2.2.2.2, 3.1.3.4, 3.2.1.3, 3.2.2.3 GEB 143 HUMBACH 1956:75 HOFFMANN/NARTEN 1989:65 96 see also gwaš-II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.3fn., 2.2.2.1, 3.1.1.3, 3.1.2.3 GEB 120 HORN 1893:202 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:204 41 NP loanword II 3.2.1.1 from guš-II 2.1.3.3, 3.1.3.4, III 5.1 see gwap-II 3.1.2.2.1 GEB 96 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP III 1 DAMES 1891:80 Ind. (Si.) loanword III 3 NP loanword II 1.2.2, 3.3.2.1fn. NP-Ar. loanword see also ġal ˙ t ī III 1 HORN 1893:207 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:94f. EWAia I:511). III 3 Ind. loanword? II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.2.1.1 GEB 121 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557 NP loanword II 1.2.2 NP loanword II 2.1.3.3 GEB 119 partially NP II 2.1.3.3, III 5.1 GEB 105 see also dīt II 3.1.2.2fn. GEB 98 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:556 EWAia I:498 II 2.1.1.1, 2.3.1.3, 3.2.1.1 GEB 148 II 2.1.3.3, III 5.1, V 1.6 GEB 147 II 2.2.3.2 MORGENSTIERNE 1932;46 III 2 see gwahār II 3.3.1.7 MORGENSTIERNE 1937:347 adaptation of NP II 2.1.3.3fn., 3.1.3.4fn. MORGENSTIERNE 1948:288 NP loanword II 2.2.4.2, III 5.2 GEB 144 GERSHEVITCH 1971:283 see also gwān-ǐan-, gwānk II 2.2.4.2, III 5.2 GEB 144 GERSHEVITCH 1971:283 see also gwānk, ǐan-II 2.1.3.3+fn., 2.2.4.2 GEB 146 II 3.1.3.4fn. MORGENSTIERNE 1948:288 NP loanword II 3.2.1.1fn., 3.2.1.3 GEB 132 BARTHOLOMAE 1890:552 BAILEY 1931:212 II 2.1.3.3, 2.2.1.1, 3.1.3.4, 3.2.1.1, III 5.1 GEB 134 BARTHOLOMAE 1890:552 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557 see also gup-II 2.1.2.1, 2.3.1.3, 3.2.1.1 GEIGER 1891:400 BAILEY 1979:85a II 3.3.1.7 GEIGER 1891:424 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:45 Ind. loanword see also gwask III 1 GEB 122 see gōk II 2.1.3.3fn. GEB 130 III 1 MORGENSTIERNE 1932c:16 Ind. loanword? III 1 GEB 135 BARTHOLOMAE 1904:1365 III 1 GEB 136 from gwar II 2.3.2 see gurk II 2.1.1.1 GEB 137 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:88 HOFFMANN 1982:84ff. II 2.3.2 GEB 141 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 EWAia I:245 II 2.2.2.3 MORGENSTIERNE 1973:334 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 2.1.3.3, 3.1.3.4, 3.2.1.3, III 5.1 GEB 144 see also guz-II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.3 GEB 142 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:26 III 1 GEB 125 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP II 2.1.3.3, 3.2.1.3, 3.2.2.3, III 5.1 GEB 143 see guš-II 3.3.1.6 GEB 128 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:218 86 II 2.1.1.1 GEB 123 BAILEY 1979:89A EWAia I:479 II 2.3.2, III 1fn. GEIGER 1891:401 KLINGENSCHMITT 1965:31f. BAILEY 1979:96a II 3.1.1.3, 3.1.2.3.2fn., 3.1.3.3, 3.2.2.3, 3.2.4.3 GEB 124 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:557 II 2.1.3.3, III 2fn. GEB 133 II 3.1.1.4 MORGENSTIERNE 1929:256A BAILEY 1979:374B II 2.1.2.5, 2.1.3.3, 2.2.1.6, 3.2.3.1 GEB 131 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:97 see also guhār II 2.1.3.2, 2.2.1.4, 3.3.1.7fn. MORGENSTIERNE 1948:254 II 2.1.3.3 BARTHOLOMAE 1904:1422 MORGENSTIERNE 1937:347 1 Pers. loanword II 3.1.3.4 see gwahār II 2.1.3.3 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:41 Pers. loanword II 2.1.3.3 GEB 115 BARTHOLOMAE 1904:1314 II 3.2.1.1, 3.2.2.1, 3.2.3.1, III 5.1 GEB 113 II 2.1.3.3, 2.3.3, III 5.1 GEB 112 KELLENS 1984:139 II 2.1.3.3, 2.3.1.3fn., III 4 GEB 111 II 2.1.3.3, 2.3.3fn., 3.1.2.3 GEB 114 GERSHEVITCH 1964:87 Pers. loanword II 2.1.3.3, 2.3.1.3fn., 3.1.2.3, III 1 GEB 109 GOT Ō 1987:298 II 3.1.2.3.2 SALEMANN 1901:280 = MP II 2.2.2.1, 3.1.3.2 GEIGER 1891:400 HENNING 1963 III 1 GEB 219 III 2 Ur./NP loanword III 1 II 3.3.1.5 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:89 Ind. (Si.) loanword III 1 GEB 216 II 3.3.1.5fn. Ind. (Si./Lhd./Ur.) loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. DAMES 1891:85 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword I 1.3 GILBERTSON 1925:787 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. DAMES 1891:86 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 3.3.1.5 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword III 5.6 Ind. (Si.(Ur.) loanword II 2.1.1.1fn. II 2.1.3.3 GEB 215 EAL 90 Ind. loanword III 1 Ind. loanword? III 1 Ind. loanword? II 3.1.1.3, 3.1.2.3.4, III 1 Ind. loanword? III 1 GEB 220 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP III 5.6 Ind. (Ur.) loanword I 1.3 = NP see also luč(č) I 1.3, II 2.4.2, 3.2.1.1fn., III 2 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.2.1.1.1fn., III 2 from lōg III 5.6 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword V 1.7 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.2 NP loanword see also nīmōn V 1.2 II 3.2.1.3, V 1.4 = NP see also am(m)ā II 2.1.1.1, 2.3.1.3, 3.2.1.1fn., 3.2.4.1fn., 3.3.1.4, III 2 GEB 234 see also mās II 3.1.2.3, III 2 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:49 see also māt II 2.2.1.4, 3.1.1.1, 3.2.1.1, 3.2.3.1fn., III 2 BARTHOLOMAE 1885:130, 133 see also māt II 3.1.2.3, III 2 see mās III 2 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:284 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword II 3.3.1.7 Europ. (Engl.) loanword III 2 DAMES 1891:88 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword III 2 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword III 1 II 2.1.1.1fn., 2.2.4.3 HOFFMANN 1979/II:637 25 NP loanword see also mač(č)ī II 3.3.1.5fn. DAMES 1891:89 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 2.1.2.4fn., 3.2.1.1fn. GEB 246 II 2.1.2.3fn. see mazg II 3.2.1.1fn., 3.3.1.5fn. DAMES 1891:89 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 2.1.3.1, 2.3.1.2fn., 3.1.2.3fn., III 5.1 GEB 235 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:98 BAILEY 1979:322b see also mēč-II 3.1.1.3fn., III 1 GEB 236 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 EWAia II:379f. II 3.3.1.5 Ind. (Si.) loanword see also māhīg II 3.3.1.5+fn. DAMES 1891:89 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.1 GEB 221 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:100 II 2.3.2, 3.1.1.4, 3.1.2.2.1, 3.1.2.3.1fn., III 5.3 GEB 237 = NP II 3.2.3.2, 3.2.1.1 see also marōčī II 2.2.4.3, 3.1.1.4, 3.3.1.4, III 2 GEB 224 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 NP loanword III 1 GEB 242 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 GEIGER 1891:415 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:100 Ind. loanword? II 2.2.3.2, III 5.2 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:290 see also marz-II 2.2.3.2, III 5.2 HORN 1893:214 ELFENBEIN 1985:233 see also marz II 2.3.2fn., 3.3.1.4 GEB 225 GEIGER 1891:444 HOFFMANN/FORSSMAN 1996:92 = NP II 2.1.3.4fn., 2.3.2, 3.1.1.3 GEB 243 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP II 2.3.1.1, 3.2.1.1, 3.2.3.2 GEB 226 GEIGER 1891:436 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:100 II 2.1.2.3, 3.3.1.5fn. EAL 104 NP loanword II 2.1.2.3, 3.1.2.4 GEB 229 ELFENBEIN 1985:234 see also maǐg II 2.1.2.3, 2.2.3.2fn., V 1.2 GEB 227 BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553 II 3.3.1.5fn. loanword? II 3.3.1.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.4 ROSSI 1979:321 Ind.-Ar. loanword II 2.1.2.4, 2.2.3.3, 2.3.2, III 5.1 GEB 244 BARTHOLOMAE 1901:76 EWAia II:331f. see also marz, marz-III 1 GEIGER 1891:455 BAILEY 1979:339a II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.2.4, 3.1.2.2.1 GEB 245 GEIGER 1891:444 II 3.1.2.2 GEIGER 1891:407 see also mīk(k) III 1 II 3.1.1.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.1.1, 3.2.1.1 GEB 222 EAL 98 II 2.1.2.3, 3.1.2.4 NP loanword see also mazg III 1 II 3.1.2.2fn. see also marz-III 5.6 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 3.2.1.3, 3.2.2.3, 3.2.3.2, 3.2.4.3, V 1.4 HORN 1893:222 = NP II 3.3.1.5fn. ELFENBEIN 1990/II:100 Ind. (Lhd.) loanword II 3.3.1.5 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. Europ. (Engl.) loanword II 3.1.1.4 II 3.1.3.2, 3.3.2.3 see mahabat II 3.3.1.7 Europ. (Engl.) loanword (via Psht.) II 2.3.1.3fn., 3.1.2.3fn. GEB 247 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:200 EWAia II:366 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:202 II 3.2.1.3, 3.3.1.5fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 3.2.4.1 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.2.3.3 NP-Ar. loanword II 1.1, 2.4.3.1 Europ. loanword II 3.2.1.3 see mā III 1 NP loanword see nyām II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.2.1, 2.3.3 GEB 241 BAILEY 1979:219a II 2.1.2.3fn. BAILEY 1979:326b EWAia II:356 loanword II 2.1.3.1, 2.3.1.2fn., 3.1.2.3fn., III 5.1 GEB 235 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:98 BAILEY 1979:322b see also mič-II 2.1.2.3, III 5.1 GEB 238 II 3.1.1.3 GEB 240 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP II 3.1.1.3 GEB 240 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:558 = NP see also mēš, murg II 2.3.1.3fn., 3.1.2.2.1, 3.1.2.3.2, 3.2.2.1 GEB 239 II 3.3.1.1 FARRELL (in print) Europ. (Engl.) loanword V 1.6 II 2.1.2.1, III 1 GEB 259 BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553 II 3.1.3.4, 3.2.1.1.2 NP(-Ar.) loanword II 2.2.3.2 GEB 260 MORGENSTIERNE 1937:348 NP/MP loanword see also *nard-III 3 GEIGER 1891:456 LOKOTSCH 1927:125 NP loanword III 3 Ind. (Ur.) loanword II 2.1.2.1, III 1 GEB 257 see also nāhun II 2.2.4.1, 3.1.2.3, 3.1.3.1, 3.1.4.1, 3.2.1.1 GEB 258 III 2 GILBERTSON 1925/I:295 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword III 2 Ind. (Si./Ur.) loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. NP loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. NP-Ar. loanword II 2.1.2.1, III 1 GEB 257 NP loanword see also nākun III 5.4 GEB 261 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559 MP loanword III 2 see also nafusx II 2.2.3.2 MORGENSTIERNE 1937:348 see also nār-II 2.1.2.3, 2.2.2.6, 3.2.3.1, 3.3.1.5fn. GEB 256 II 2.2.2.5, 3.1.2.3, 3.2.1.2, III 2 GEB 254 MORGENSTIERNE 1927:54 II 2.1.3.1, 2.2.2.1fn., 3.2.4.1, III 5.1 GEB 264 BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553 III 2 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 see naptag II 2.2.4.1fn., 3.1.3.1, III 2 GEB 250 see also nākō II 2.1.1.2, III 5.1 GEB 262 II 3.3.1.7 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:107 NP loanword II 3.2.1.1.2, III 2 Psht. loanword? see nawāsag, naptag II 2.1.3.1, 3.1.2.3, 3.2.1.1 GEB 251 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:568 GERSHEVITCH 1954:152 II 2.4.3.2fn. GEB 252 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559 nišīn-/ nišast II 2.2.2.1, 3.1.2.1, III 5.1 surūn, surīn saxt sikka sag sumb(a) sunb-/ suft (gusil-/) gusist sang sūd sōz-/ sōxt sōzan šōr ˙ s ub ˙ h surx si ˙ h r sih sī sēx siyāh sēzdah sugur sīna sīna šād šādī šāgird šāmil siyāh šānzdah šāx(a) šāhid šā c ir šāhīn šab šubān, šabān šud MP suy, šuy NP šuy šōy-/ šust šarāb šaraf šul "weak" šast ≈ firist-/ firistād šaš šipiš šakk šakar šukr šikl šikam šumā šanba farāmōš-/ farāmušt šōy-/ šust šōr MP frōxš-/ frōxt NP furōš-/ furōxt šauq šuxm šahd šahr šēb "declivity" xašīn "blue etc." MP sēn NP sī-mur ġ ˙ z ila "side" c u ˙ z w "member" ˙ t ama c ġabn ġurūr ġusl "ritual washing" fat ˙ h fa ˙ z l fiqh qu ˙ s ūr quwwat MP -ag NP -a xāy-kārd xāmōš qānūn xānī kabāb qabr kabk qufl qibla qabūl kaf MP kabōtar, kabōd NP kabūtar xa ˙ t ( ˙ t ) qutb ku, kuǐā kudām ≈ kōčak "small, young" qadd qadr kai xudā xar xarāb "broken" ≈ kard MP kardag "section" xar-gōš kirm xirman "heap of grain", xirām "beautiful gait" xurōs kas kus Prth. kas°k sraoni-śró ˙ n i-√sak "think of" Prth. saxt "compressed" √śak "be able" span-Prth. < c spg> śván-√srav: surunao-√śru: ś ˙ r ˙ n ó-√saēd Prth. °sind-/ sist √c h id: c h inád-as e nga-OP a\anga-Prth. asang ≈ áśman-√sav √śū √saok: saoča-Prth. sōž-/ suxt √śuc sūkā-sūc í-suxra-Prth. suxrag "purple" śukrá-"light, clear" \raiia-Prth. hrē tráyas \risat-tri ṁśát-√sav "be of use" √śav: śváya-sukur e na-saēni-"top, peak" šiiāta-siiāuua-Prth. syāw(ag) śyāvá-śá k h ā-xšap-Prth. šab k ˙ s áp-fšu-"sheep etc." + √pā "protect" Prth. šubān paśú-"sheep etc." + √pā "protect" YAv. √šav: šuta-√cyu: cyutá-YAv. šud-k ˙ s úd h -xšudra-"liquid" √k ˙ s ud "crush" xšuuašti-˙ s a ˙ s tí-≈ fraēšiia-Prth. frēštag "angel" ≈ √i ˙ s xšuuaš ˙ s á ˙ s -spiš-xšma-yu ˙ s má-Prth. frāmōš-/ frāmušt √m ˙ r ˙ s s(a)čaēni-xšaodah-"stream" Prth. šōd-/ šust "wash" √k ˙ s ud "crush" Prth. adj. šūrēn √vak: vaxš-Prth. wāž-/ wāxt √vac xša\ra-"rule" k ˙ s atrá-"rule" xšuuaēuua-"fast" Prth. <šybh> "path" √k ˙ s ip "throw" k ˙ s iprá-"fast" axšaēna-"dark" saēna-śyená--aka-Prth. -k vī-xāda-"break off" √k h ād kar e ta-≈ k ˙ r tí-xā-, x ąniia-Prth. xānīg k h á-kafa-kap h a-Prth. kaf-/ kaft OP kapautaka-"blue" kapóta-kapíñjala-kī ˙ t á-"worm" (?) kudā kúha kada Prth. kad kadā xara-k h ará-√kar: k e r e ta-Prth. kird √k ˙ r : k ˙ r tá-k´ ˙ r mi-√xram √kram i "step" √xraos "cry" Prth. xrōs "call" xrōsag "caller" √kroś kasči ˜ t kascit kuk ˙ s í-"stomach" kasu-ih qismat qi ˙ s ˙ s a kasiiapa-kaśyápa-kašaf kaša-kák ˙ s a-kaš √karš √k ˙ r ˙ s : kár ˙ s a-MPM <qrš-> NP kaš-/ kašīd √karš Prth. kār-/ kišt √k ˙ r ˙ s : k ˙ r ˙ s á-kār-, kiš-/ kišt kuša i ti Prth. kōš-/ kōšād, kušt MP kōš-/ kōšīd, kuš-/ kušt NP kuš-/ kušt kull kulāh qufl kala kilīd kamna-Prth. <kmbyg> "short" kam kamān xumba-"pot" Prth. <xwmb> "pitcher" k h umbá-"pot" xum(b) "pot" kambara-"spotted" kumak √kar: k e r e nao-Prth. kar-(/ kird) √k ˙ r : k ˙ r ˙ n ó-kun-(/ kard) kuñcita-"crooked, bent" kunǐid, kunǐīd Prth. xand-xand-/ xandīd kanti-"digging" ≈ Prth. ab-gan-/ ab-gand "throw" √k h an "dig" kand kaofa-"hill" Prth. kōf "hill, mountain" kōh "mountain" kaura "torrent" kafš kūn kōh Prth. <kfwn> MP <khwn> NP kuhan, kuhna ka-ká-ki xiyāl kēr xairiyat "welfare" kīsa qaimat gāy-/ gā(ī)d gātu-"place" gāh gap v e r e dka-v ˙ r kká-gurda √kay: vī-činao-Prth. past stem wižīd-√ci: vi-cinó-guzīn-/ guzīd digar ga i ri-"mountain" girí-"mountain" √gar e w: g e ruuaiia-Prth. girw-/ grift √grab h : g ˙ r b h āyá-gīr-/ girift √var e t "turn" √v ˙ r t "turn" gardan v e hrka-v´ ˙ r ka-gurg garmī √gar e z √g ˙ r h girī-/ girīst ġarīb gaz gaz vīs-Prth. wis°v íś-√gah: gaoha-≈ Prth. gaz-/ gašt √g h as ≈ gaz-/ gazīd vaša-Prth. wāž-/ wāxt √vac: vacyá-Prth. <wšynd> gušna galla "flock" gulāb "rose water" gulābī "rose-colour" ġala ˙ t "mistake" ≈ gláu-"swelling, bump" gulūla "bullet, ball of thread" ġam(m) gumān ġamgīn ≈ vinasta-"damage" Prth. winās vināśa-"destruction" gunāh √vaēd: vi-na-/ vista-Prth. wind-/ windād √vid ga ˙ n tuma-god h úma-gandum vāta-Prth. wād v áta-bād vāra-"rain (noun)" Prth. wār-/ wārād v ár-"water" bār-/ bārīd Prth. wār gul bāzū guwāl MP wāng NP bāng MP wigāhīh NP guwāhī vabžaka-MP wawž √vab Prth. waf-√vab h bāf-/ bāft gū\a-"excrement" gūt h a-gūh gaodana-wad-dil varah-úras-bar Prth. warrag ≈ uraka-, úran-barra var e mi-Prth. warm ūrmí-√vaz: vaza-"transport" Prth. waz-"move swiftly" √vah "bring" waz-/ wazīd "blow" vatsá-gaoša-√g h u ˙ s "sound" gōš gōšt gau-gáv-gāw; gōg "calf" gaok e r e na-(name of a tree) gōgurd gaona-"colour" MP gōn "colour" vanā-"tree" vána-"tree, wood" bun "log, root" x v aohar-Prth. wxār svás ˙ r -x w āhar vafra-"snow" Prth. wafr barf "snow" V e r e \ra-gna-"slaying the demon" Bahrām Prth. wiyābān bīābān vaēti-vetasá-"calamus rotang" bēd √vaēg √viǰ "move quickly, surge" angēz-/ angēxt "instir, get to move" vaēča-Prth. wixtag "chosen" √vic bēz-/ bēxt vīsa i ti vi ṁśatí-bīst bēš vaēnā-"nose" véna-"follow, track" MP wēnīg NP bīnī "nose" Prth. -gēn MP -gēn gišnīz lab lab ling lūč lēkin līmū(n) ma-mā mātar-Prth. mād(ar) māt´ ˙ r -mādar obl. mā\r-obl. mātr-Prth. māsyāg mátsya-māhī muž MPT <mgj> maēkant-"(water) coming out" maz-/ mazīd √mi ˙ s "open the eyes" muža muddat madaxa-maig √mar: miriia-Prth. mīr-/ murd √m ˙ r : mriyá-mīr-/ murd maˇ ˙ s a-Prth. mard márta-mard mudr á-"seal (ring)" muhr "seal (ring)" māla "harrow" √marz: mar e za-Prth. <n-mrz-/ n-mwšt> "wipe off" √m ˙ r j māl-/ mušt, mālīd YAv. mahrka-(Prth. murt) marká-, márka-(name) marg m e r e ga-Prth. murg m ˙ r gá-"wild animal" mur ġ im-rōz mīžda-mī ˙ d h á-MP mizd NP muzd mazga-majj á-"marrow" ma ġz maz-mahánt-MPM mazan "monster, monstrous" masǐid √mar e z √m ˙ r j māl-/ mušt mušti-mu ˙ s ˙ t í-mušt mū ˙ s aka-etc. mūš maq ˙ s ad maxši-Prth. <mgs> mák ˙ s (ikā)-etc. magas ma ġz māl-/ mālīd obl. man-man minatt mōy ma ˙ h abbat mu ˙ h taram maxlūq miyān maē\ana-"house" mēhan "homeland" miiazda-"sacrifice" miyéd h a-mēz maēkant-"(water) coming out" maz-/ mazīd maēza-√mih mēz-/ mēzīd maēša-Prth. mēš me ˙ s á-mēš mēš-mur ġ Prth. mēx ≈ may úk h a-mēx na-nāfa-náb h ya-etc. nāf nā-tamām MP <n'ryšn> NP nāl-/ nālīd nārinǐī Prth. <n(')xwn> nak h á-nāxun OP niyāka-"grandfather" Prth. niyāg "ancestor" niyā "ancestor" nāwak nā-haqq MP nibēs-/ nibišt NP niwīs-/ niwišt napāt-, naptar-nápāt-/náptr-nawāsa MP <n'ryšn> NP nāl-/ nālīd nazdiiō "nearer" Prth. nazd nédīyas-"nearer" nazd(īk) snu ˙ s á-sunār √had Prth. nišast √sad (nišīn-/) nišast √gaoš Prth. nigōš-/ nigōšād √g h u ˙ s "sound" niyōš-/ niyōšīd nargis ≈ n e mah-"praise" Prth. namāž ≈ námas-"praise" namāz nam √had Prth. nišīd-(/ nišast) √sad GEB 264 II 3.3.1.5 nauua náva-nuh III 4 NP loanword nawāsa II 2.2.1.4fn., 3.2.1.1, 3.3.1.6, III 2 GEB 255 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:48 NP loanword see naptag nūr e m nūnám nūn II 3.1.3.3fn., 3.2.4.3, 3.3.1.5 GEB 270 EWAia II:53 snaoda-MPZ snōy II 2.2.2.4, 3.2.1.1 GEB 271 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:105 nauua i ti-navatí-nawad III 4 NP loanword n e mata-"brushwood" namad II 3.2.1.1.2 HORN 1893:233 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:102 NP loanword MP nōzdah NP nūzdah II 3.1.3.3, III 4 NP loanword see dah nafs "soul" II 3.3.1.6 HÜBSCHMANN 1895:556 NP-Ar. loanword nauua-Prth. nōx náva-MP nōg NP nau II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.3 GEB 272 = MP maidiia-mád h ya-miyān II 3.2.1.1, 3.3.1.1, III 1fn. GEB 265 HÜBSCHMANN 1890:559 n íla-"dark blue" nīl III 3 GEIGER 1890:420 EWAia II:51 NP loanword naēma-néma-"other" nēm(a) II 2.1.3.1, 3.3.1.4 GEB 267 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP Prth. nēm-rōž MP nēm-rōz NP nīm-rōz II 3.2.1.1 see nēm, rōč II 3.2.1.1.2 GEB 268 līmū(n) II 3.3.1.2 NP loanword see also līmbō MP mēwag, NP mēwa II 3.1.2.3.2, 3.3.1.3 GEB 266 NP loanword uta utá u II 3.1.2.3 BAILEY 1979:35b NP loanword wa II 3.1.2.3fn. HORN 1893:240 NP-Ar. loanword x w āb II 2.2.1.6, 3.3.1.6 GEB 410 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:42 NP loanword see also waps-xwāǐa III 2 svādú-"sweet, tasty" x w āi "taste, flavour" II 3.2.1.1 GEB 411 II 2.2.1.5 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:51 see also dar √x v an "sound" Prth. xun-/ pad-xunād √svan "sound" x w ān-/ x w ānd II 2.1.3.3, 2.2.1.6, III 5.1 GEB 412 III 3 Ind. loanword? II 2.1.3.3 from wān-√x v ap: x v afsa-Prth. xusp-/ xuft √svap xusp-/ xuft II 2.1.2.3, 2.2.1.6, 3.1.1.2, 3.2.1.1, III 5.1 GEB 403 x v a-Prth. wxad svá-xud < x w ad II 2.2.1.6, 2.3.1.2, V 1.4 GEB 408 II 3.2.1.1, V 1.4 gen. of wat waǐh? II 3.3.1.5 NP-Ar. loanword? x v ara-Prth. wxar-/ wxard x w ar-/ x w urd II 2.1.3.2, 2.2.1.6, 3.1.1.4, 3.2.3.1, III 5.1, V 1.6 GEB 404 √var e z "work" warziš "sports" II 3.2.1.1.2 = NP ap e r e nāiiu-"underaged" burnā "young man" II 2.1.3.3 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:217 Pers. loanword II 3.3.1.5fn. DAMES 1891:101 Ind. (Si.) loanword II 3.1.2.3,, 3.2.1.2fn., III 2 GEB 405 see also wasirk x v asura-śváśura-xusur II 3.1.2.3, 3.1.3.1, 3.2.1.1.1, 3.2.1.2, III 2 GEB 405 śvaśr ú-x w aš II 2.2.2.5, 2.3.1.3, 3.1.2.3.1, III 2 GEB 406 Prth. wxaš x w aš II 2.2.3.3, 3.2.1.1 GEB 407 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:204 Prth. -ōg MP -ōg II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.3, 3.2.1.1, V 1.8 waqt, waxt II 1.2.2fn., 3.3.1.7 NP-Ar. loanword see also wahd wa ˙ h šī II 1.2.2, 3.1.1.2 NP-Ar. loanword MP -ūg, NP -ū II 2.1.1.1, 3.1.4.1, V 1.8 II 3.3.1.5fn. DAMES 1891:101 Ind. (Si.) loanword V 1.6 see also (-)an, -ēn V 1.6 see also (-)un, (-) ą V 1.6 see also (-)an, -ēn V 1.4 see also -un, -in, -ą waqt, waxt II 3.2.3.3, 3.3.1.7 NP-Ar. loanword see also wakt vakrá-x w ahl II 2.2.1.4 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:206 xāk II 2.4.1.2 GEB 154 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP see also āk ˙ h ākim II 3.3.2.3fn. NP-Ar. loanword xālī II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword xām II 2.1.1.1, 2.4.1 GEB 155 EAL 64 = NP see also āmag MP haft-dah NP habdah, hifdah II 3.3.1.2fn., III 4 NP loanword see haft and dah xabar II 1.2.2, 2.3.1.1, 3.2.3.3fn. NP-Ar. loanword hapta-saptá-haft II 2.1.2.1fn., 3.2.1.1, III 4 GEIGER 1891:432 NP loanword haptā i ti-saptatí-haftād III 4 NP loanword ≈ hapa\nī-≈ sapátnī-hawū ≈ āmūsnī II 3.3.1.6, III 2 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:47 xa ˙ t ar II 1.2.2, 3.3.2.3 NP-Ar. loanword xudā II 1.2.2, 3.2.4.1 GEIGER 1891:450 NP loanword s.a kudā II 3.3.1.1 see also (h)irdik xidmat II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.5+fn. Ind. (Ur.) loanword xar II 2.1.2.1 GEB 152, 192 NP loanword see also kar xarāb "out of order" II 1.2.2, 3.3.1.6, 3.3.2.1 NP-Ar. loanword see also karāb xarǐ II 3.3.1.4 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.3.1.1 see also (h)idrik OP arašni-aratní-ar(a)š II 2.4.1.2 GEB 153 KENT 1953:170 BRANDENSTEIN/ MAYRHOFER 1964:104 NP loanword ˙ h arakat II 3.3.2.1 NP-Ar. loanword MP, NP xormā II 2.1.2.1, 3.2.4.1 MORGENSTIERNE 1932:47 = NP see also urmāg MP hašt-dah NP hiǐdah III 4 NP loanword see hašt and dah ˙ h isāb II 3.2.4.1, 3.3.1.6 NP-Ar. loanword ās II 3.3.1.5 Kurd. loanword? √haoš Prth. hōš-/ hōšād √šu ˙ s xōš-/ xōšīd II 2.1.2.5, III 5.1 GEB 160 ašta a ˙ s ˙ t á-hašt III 4 NP loanword Prth. <hyštyg> xišt II 2.4.1.3 EAL 68 = NP see also išt aštā i ti-≈ aśītí-hāštād III 4 NP loanword huška-Prth. hušk sú ˙ s ka-xušk II 2.1.2.5, 3.2.3.1 GEB 160 haqq II 3.2.3.1 NP-Ar. loanword hukūmat II 3.3.1.5 NP-Ar. loanword xalā ˙ s II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword xalq II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword ham°" together" Prth. ham sám "together" ham II 2.1.2.5, 3.2.3.1, 3.2.4.1, 3.3.1.4 GEB 150 GEIGER 1891:444 = NP ham-ān II 3.2.1.1.2 see ham, ā xum(b) II 2.1.2.1 NP loanword see also kumb III 2 ham-rāh II 3.2.3.1 NP loanword III 2 see ham and zāmāt III 2 hamsāya II 2.1.2.3fn., 2.4.1.2 = NP see sā'ig ˙ h amla II 3.3.1.1 NP-Ar. loanword II 3.1.1.4 xand-II 2.1.2.1, III 5.4 GEB 152, 186 NP loanword see kand-abra-"rain cloud" ab h rá-"rain cloud" abr "cloud" II 2.3.3fn., 2.4.1, 3.2.1.2 GEB 163 xurd II 2.2.1.6fn., 3.1.2.2fn., 3.1.2.3.1 MORGENSTIERNE 1937:347 II 2.1.2.1fn., 3.1.2.2.1 GEIGER 1891:451 ROSSI 1979:29 xōša II 2.4.1.3 GEIGER 1891:451 MORGENSTIERNE 1948:289 = NP hū sū-kará-"boar" MP xūg NP xūk II 2.1.2.5, 2.3.1.3 GEB 157 EWAia II:738 vohunī-≈ vásā-"fat" MP xōn NP xūn II 3.1.3.3, 3.2.3.2 GEB 162 GEIGER 1891:444 EWAia II:533 NP loanword xayāl, xiyāl II 1.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword see also kīāl MP xwēd NP xawēd II 2.2.1.6, 3.1.2.3 GEIGER 1891:423 x v aēda-svéda-x w ai II 2.2.1.6, 2.3.3, 3.3.1.4 GEB 158 xairāt II 1.2.2, 3.3.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword xairiyat "welfare" II 1.2.2, 3.3.2.2 NP-Ar. loanword see also kēriat II 3.3.1.5fn. xāya II 2.1.3.3, 2.4.1.3fn., 3.3.2.1 GEB 159 NP loanword see also ā-murg V 1.1 V 1.6 see also ai, ē aēuua-Prth. ēw -ē II 2.1.3.3, 3.2.4.2, V 1.1 V 1.4 see also -iš, -ēš, -ą Prth. -īf(t) MP -īh, -ī NP -ī II 2.2.1.5, V 1.8 GEIGER 1891:408 NP loansuffix V 1.6 see also -t, -īt II 3.2.4.3, V 1.6 see also -it, -ēt; ē yād II 2.1.3.4, 3.3.1.4 BAILEY 1979:308a NP loanword yār II 2.1.3.4 NP loanword yāzdah II 2.1.3.4, III 4 NP loanword yāsamīn II 3.3.1.7, 3.3.2.3 GEIGER 1891:463 NP loanword Prth. <y'kwnd> yāqūt, yākand II 3.3.1.7 NP loanword (from Greek) Prth. -ēd -īd V 1.6 see also -it, -ē ≈ Prth. -ēd II 3.1.2.2.1, 3.1.2.3.2, 3.2.1.3, V 1.6 see also -t, -ī yatīm II 2.1.3.4, 3.3.1.7 NP-Ar. loanword yax "ice" V 1.4 see also ē, iš-V 1.4 see also -ē, -iš, -ą yak II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.4, 3.3.1.5, III 4 NP loanword see also -ē Prth. -īg, -ī MP -īg, -ī NP -ī II 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.4, 2.2.1.5fn., 3.1.4.1, V 1.8 DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 115, 117 = MP yal II 2.1.3.4 NP-Turk. loanword yala II 3.2.3.3 ELFENBEIN 1990/II:163 NP loanword īn II 3.2.2.3, V 1.4fn. = NP -aēna-Prth. -ēn -īn II 2.3.3, 3.1.2.3.2fn., 3.1.3.3, 3.2.2.3, 3.2.3.3, 3.2.4.3, V 1.2 II 3.2.4.3, V 1.6 see also (-)an, -ōm, -ų; ēn II 3.1.3.3, V 1.6 see also (-) ą MP -ēn-II 2.1.3.4, V 1.6 Geiger 1891 HENNING 1934:212 KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:195 16 DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 155 MP loansuffix? II 3.2.4.3, 3.3.2.1fn., V 1.6 419 3. Index of Non-Balochi words 421 3. Index of Non-Balochi words V. Appendix 423 3. Index of Non-Balochi words 425 3. Index of Non-Balochi words ˘ u elǵ h z h -u elǵs?) 132, 133 "head of a gang" sarōgān srēn "loins" sa ġar "head" sak(k) "hard" sik(k)-/ sik(k)it "learn" suk(k) h "comfort" sik(k)a, -ā "coin" sag "dog" sil "skin" sil(l) "brick" sumb "hole" sumb-/ supt, sunbit "pierce" simi ¨ t( ¨ t) "cement" ‡ sun-/ sunit "hear" sun ¨ t "chin, beak, sting" sind-/ sist "break" sang, sing "stone" sang "companionship" sangat(t) "friend" sangtī "loyalty" singal "signal (traffic lights)" sunērī "golden" sōp "apple" sūt "use, gain" sōč-/ sōtk "burn sth." sōč-/ sōčit "think" sōčin, sūč(č)in "needle" sūr "salty" suhb, sōb "morning" suhr, sōr "red, golden, gold" sihr, sa ˙ h r, sa ˙ h ar "magic" sai, saē "3" sī "30" sī, sīk "pike, hook" sīy-/ sīt "swel" syāh "black, dark" sēzdah, s ęzda(g) "13" sīkun "porcupine" sēnag "breast" sīngār "cosmetics" sīna "breast" šāt "happy" šād(d)ī "joy" šāgird "pupil, beginner" šāmlī "included" šāmīr "red, crimson" šān "black" šānzdah "16" šāh "horn, branch" šāhid "witness" šā(h)ir "poet" šāhīn "falcon" šap "night" šupānk, šipānk "shepherd" šapčar, čapčal "bat" šut (past stem of raw-"go") šud "hunger" šud-"hunger" ‡ šud-"wash (itr.)" šarāb "wine" šarap, šarp "honour" šurd "mild" šast, šašt "60" EBal. šast-, šašt-/ šastā\, šaštā\-"send" šaš(š) "6" ‡ šiš "louse" šak(k) "doubt" šak(k) "comb" šakar, šak(k)al "sugar" šukr, šukur, šugr "thanks" šikl, šikil "form" šikam "belly" šumā, šawā "you (pl.)" šambā, -ē "Saturday" šamōš-, šamuš-/ šamōšt, šamušt "forget" šanik(k) "young goat" šawān(k), šwānag "shepherd" šōd-/ šust, šušt "wash" šōr "salty earth" šōšak "sale" šawašk-/ šawaxt, šawašt "sell" šauk "desire" šūnz "green" šōm-"plough" šahd, šahad, šā(h)t "honey" šahr "town" šēp "creek, abyss" šēp-mār (a certain snake) šīnz / šūnz "green" šēnak "falcon" ˙ z āmnī "guarantee, bail" ˙ z ilā c "district" c u ˙ z bā "limb, organ" ˙ t amā c "greed" ġātī "mule" ġaban "fraud" ġarūr "pride, haughtiness" ġusul "bath" ġal ˙ t ī "misunderstanding" fata ˙ h "victory" fa ˙ z al "favour" fiqāh "Islamic law" qa ˙ s ūr "guilt" quw(w)at "strength" k-(pref.pres.) -k (noun suff.) kād "bite" EBal. k h ād-/ k h ādi\-"chew" EBal. k (h) ā ¨ dī "chin" kārč "knife" kākā "uncle (father's brother)" kākī "aunt (father's brother's wife)" kāmōš "quiet" kān ¨ t "horn" kānūd, qānūd "law" kānīg "spring, well" kabāb "roast meat" kabā ¨ t "cupboard" kabr, kabar "grave" kabg, kaug "partridge" kubl, kubul "lock (at a door)" kibla, qiblā "direction of prayer" kabūl "accepted" kap "foam" kap-/ kapt "fall" kapōt "dove, dove-coloured" kapinǐar "partridge" kat, xat(t) "line, letter" kutub "North" kitak "insect, louse" ka ¨ t( ¨ t) "profit" ku ¨ t( ¨ t)-/ ku ¨ t( ¨ t)it "crush" kuǐā "where" kuǐām "which one" kučk "shell" kučik(k), kučak(k) "dog" kad(d), qad(d) "size" kadr, kadar "measure" kadī "when" kudā, xudā "God" *kar "donkey" karāb, krāb "bad" karā'ī "wrist" ku(r)t (past stem of kan-"do") EBal. k h ard "portion" kar-gōš, xargōšk "rabbit" kirm "worm" kurm "pit" krōs, kurōs(k) "cock" ku ¨ rāsag "great-grandchild" kas "person, somebody" kus "vulva, vagina" kasān "small" kastir "smaller" kismat, qismat "destiny" kissa "story" kasīp, kāsib "turtle, tortoise" kaš "armpit" kaš(š)-/ kaš(š)it, kašt "pull" kiš-/ kišt "sow" kuš-/ kušt "kill" k (h) il(l) "axe of millstone" kul(l) "whole" kulāh "cap, hat" kulp, kulf "lock (at the door)" kalak(k) "cheek" kilīt "key" kam(m) "few, little" kamāš "greyhaired, respected" kamān "bow" kumb "pool" kambar "coloured, grey-brown" kampō ¨ dar "pharmacist" kumak(k), kūmak "help" kan-(/ ku(r)t) "do" kunčit, kunčīt "sesame" kand-/ kandit "laugh" kan ¨ d "gap" kawāsag "great-grandchild" kōp s ąsar "cup and saucer" kōpag "shoulder" kō ¨ ta "room" kōč-"dig" kaur, kōr, kūr "mountain river" kauš "shoe" kūn "anus" kōn ¨ d "cave; lair" kōn ¨ d "knee" kōh "mountain" kwahn, kōhn, kauhn "old" kuhn "old" kai "who" kīāl "thought" kēr "penis" kīrg "grey-white" kēriat "health" kīs(s)ag "bag, pocket" kīmat, qīmat "value" gā(y)-/ gāt "coire" gāh "time" gub(b) "cheek" gap(p) "talk, conversation" gap(p) "mud" ga ¨ t( ¨ t) "busy" gu ¨ t( ¨ t) "throat" gu ¨ t( ¨ t)ag, gu ¨ t( ¨ t)ig "kidney" gač(č) "crowded" ‡ gičin-/ gičint "collect" gičēn "selected" gidar "other" gar "abyss" gir-/ gipt "take" gurān ¨ d "male sheep" gardin, gardan "neck" gurk "wolf" garmī "heat" grand "thunder" grand-/ grandit "thunder" grē(w)-/ grēt "weep" garīb "poor" garībī "poverty" gaz(z) "tamarisk" gaz(z) "yard" EBal. guz-/ gwast h -"pass" gaž(ž)-, ġaž(ž)-"swell with rage" ‡ gužg "root" gis "house" EBal. gas-/ gasi\-"bite" gisir-"get lost" guš-/ gušt "say" gušn "hunger" gušnag "hungry" EBal. gušōx "singer, reciter" EBal. guf-/ ‡ guft "weave" gal "group, multitude" gal "cheek" gulāb(ī) "pink" galat "wrong" gulg "hair" gul(l)ī "blue" gam(m), ġam "grief, sorrow" gumān, guwān "doubt" gamgīn "sad" gunās "sin" gind-(/ dīt, dist) "see" gandīm "wheat" gwāt "wind" gwār-/ gw ˘ art "rain" ‡ *gwār(d)ik "flower" gwārō "stepsister" gwāz "fathom" gwālag "bag" ‡gwānǐ-/ gwānǐi\-"call" gwān-ǐan-/ gwān-jat "cry, call" gwānk "cry" gwāhī "testimony" gwabz, gwamz "wasp" gwap-/ gwapt "weave" gūt "mud" gwač(č) "calf, hen" gōdān "breast, udder" ‡ gwadil "cowardly" gō ¨ d "knee" gwar "breast" gwarā "near" ‡gwark "wolf" gwarag, gwarak "lamb" gwarm "surf, wave" gō ¨ rā "horse" gwaz-/ gwast "pass by" gwask "calf" gōš "ear" gwaš-/ gwašt "say" gōšt "meat" gōk "cow" gōkurt "sulphur" gōn "with" gwan "pistachio" gwand, gwan ¨ d "small, short" gwahār, gwār "sister" gwahr "cold (noun)" Gwahrām (name) guhār "sister" gīāb, gīābān "desert" gēt "willow tree" gēǐ-/ gētk "swing, throw" gēč-/ gētk "sift" gīst "20" gēš "more" gīn "breath" -gīn (adj. suff.) gēnīč "coriander" lāp "belly" lālā, lālō "brother" lab "lip" lab(b) "bride-price, bribe" lap "lip" lu ¨ t( ¨ t) "plunder" laǐ(ǐ) "shame" luč(č) "wretch; naked" la ¨ d( ¨ d) "load, moving" lak(k) "100.000" lik(k)-/ lik(k)it "write" -luk (diminutive suffix) lagōr "coward" lil(l)ik "tongue" lun ¨ t "lip" lankuk, lunkuk "finger" ling "leg" lō ¨ t-/ lō ¨ tit "want" lūč "naked" lōg "house, family" lōgī "wife" lē ¨ t-/ lē ¨ tit "lie down" lēkin "but" līmbō, līmbū, līmū "lemon" ma-(neg.pref. ipr./subj.) mā obl. mārā gen. mai "we" māt "mother" mātō, mātū(n) "stepmother" mās "mother" māsū "stepmother" māsī "aunt (mother's sister)" mālkē ¨ t "market" māmā "uncle (mother's brother)" māmī "aunt (mother's brother's wife)" māhpar, mahpar "hair" māhīg "fish" ma ¨ t( ¨ t) "equal" muǐ, muž "fog, storm" maǐg, mažg "brain" muč(č) "collected, supplied" mič-/ mitk "suck" mičāč "eyelash" mač(č)ī "fish" mud(d) "period of time" madag "locust" mir-/ murt "die" marčī "today" mard "man, husband" murdān "finger" marz "clodcrusher" marz-/ marzit "stroke, harrow" mark "death" murg "bird" marōčī "today" muz(z) "wages" mazg, muzg "brain, marrow" mazan "big" mastir "bigger" maž(ž) "leprosy, epilepsy" masǐit "mosque" masīt "mosque" muš-/ mušt "rub" mušt "fist" mušk "mouse" mik "nail" muk "elbow, joint" maksad "purpose" makisk "fly" magz "brain" mugūn ¨ d "small of back" ‡ mal-"stroke" mil(l)-/ mil(l)it "meet" man obl. m(a)nā gen. m(a)nī "I" man(n) "appreciation" min(n)at "favour" mina ¨ t( ¨ t) "minute" mind, min ¨ d "bitch, daughter" mōbat(t), muhbat "love" mō ¨ tal "car" mūd(d), mīd(d) "hair" mahabat, mābat(t) "love" muhtaram "honoured" mahlūk "people" mahī "May" mai "us" (obl.) myān "middle; waist" mētag "village" mēǐ, mēz "table" mēč-/ mēt "suck" mēz-/ mēst "urinate" mēš "sheep" mēš-murg, mēžmurg "pelican" mīk(k), mēk, mēh "stake, pole, top of head" mēnōl, mēlōn "manhole" na-(neg.pref.) nāpag "navel, umbilical cord" nā-tamām "incomplete" nār-/ narit "groan" nārinǐī "orange" nās "snuff" nāsī "brown" nākun "fingernail" nākō "uncle" nānā, nānō "grandfather" nānī "grandmother" nāwak(k) "arrowhead" nā-hak(k) "unjust" nāhun "fingernail" nibīs-/ nibišt "write" naptag "great-great-grandchild" *nard-"groan" naz(z), naz(z)īk "near" nišār "daughter-in-law" ništ, nist (past stem of nind-) EBal. nafusx "stepdaughter" nak(k) "grandmother" nigōš-/ nigōšt "hear" nalgis "narcissus" nimāsag "grandchild" EBal. namāš, nimāš "prayer" namb "wet; dew" nind-(/ ništ, nist) "sit down" nun(n)uk "baby" nō, nu "9" nawāsag "grandchild" nūn, nū "now" nōd "cloud" nawad "90" EBal. nawad "felt" nōzdah, nūzdah "19" naws "pulse" nōk "new" nyām(ag) "middle" nyāmā "in the middle" nīl "blue" nēm(ag) "half" nēmrōč, nērmōš "noon" nēmag "butter" nīmōn "lemon" nīwag "fruit" u, ō, au "and" wa "and" wāb "sleep" wāǐa "master, Sir" wād "salt" ‡ wārdaf "door-opening" wān-/ wānt "read" wānga ¨ r "eggplant" wānga ¨ rī "purple" wānōk "student" waps-, waps-/ wapt "go to sleep" wat "self" watī "own" (poss. pron.) waǐ(ǐ) "dowry" war-/ wārt "eat" wardaš "exercise" warnā "young" was(s) "strength" wasir-zā(t)k "brother-in-law" wasirk "father-in-law" was(s)ū(g), was(s)ī(g) "mother-in-law" waš(š) "good" -ōk (agentive suff.) wakt, waxt "time" wakšī, waškī "wild" -ūg (noun suff.) wal(l) "creeper, vine" -ōm (1pl.pres.) -ǫ (1sg.past) -ų (1.pl.past) -ų (pron.suff. 1sg.+pl.) wahd "time" wahl "crooked" hāk "earth" hākim, ˙ h ākim "governor" hālīg "empty" hāmag "raw" habdah, hawdah "17" habar, xabar "word, matter" hapt, haft "7" haptād, haftād "70" hapōg, hapōk "co-wife, second wife" hatar, hitar "danger, fear" hudā "God" (h)idrik "squirrel" hidmat, xidmat "service" ha ¨ d( ¨ d) "bone" har, xar "donkey" harāb, xarāō "bad" harč, harǐ, xarč "costs" (h)irdik "squirrel" hariš "ell" harkat "motion" hurmā(g) "date" haždah "18" hisāb "calculation" haš(š) "millstone" huš-/ hušt "dry (itr.)" hašt "8" hišt "brick" haštād "80" hušk "dry" hak(k) "right" hukūmat(t) "government" halās "finished" halk "village, people" ham "also" ham-ā "that very" humb "jar" hamǐirāt "wives of brothers" hamrāh "companion" ham-zāmāt, ham-zāmās "husbands of sisters" hamzulp "husbands of sisters" hamsā(h)ig "neighbour" halma, ˙ h amlā "attack" hind, hin ¨ d "bitch, girl" hand-/ handit "laugh" haur "rain" hūrt "tiny" hōrk, hurk "empty" hōš(ag) "ear of corn" hūk "pig" hōn, hūn "blood" hayāl "thought" hīt "young grain" hēd "sweat" hairāt, xairāt, xērāt "alms, charity" hēriat "health" xairiat "healthy" hēž(ž)ag, hīž(ž)ag "howling of the wind" haik, haig, hēk, hāik "egg" -ai, -ē (gen.sg.) -ai, -ē (2sg.) -ē (indef. article) "one" -ē, -ī (pron.suff. 3sg. +pl.) -ī (abstract suff.) -ī (3sg.pres.) -ē (2pl.) yāt "memory" yār "friend" yāzdah "11" yāsumī, āsamī "jasmine" yākūt, ākūtt "ruby" -ēt (2pl.) -īt (3sg.pres.) yatīm, atīm "orphan" yax(x) "cold" ēš (dem.pron.) "this" -ēš (pron.suff. 3pl.) yak(k) "one" -īg (nominal suff.) yal "brave" yala, ēla "free" īn (dem.pron.) "this" -ēn (adj.suff.) -ēn (1pl.) -īn (1sg.pres.) -ēn-(caus. suff.) -ēn-(irrealis suff.) 422 3. PIE *b h ˘ e 139 *b h re ˘ u s-138 *d h eg ˘ u h 194 *geǵ h 80 *ǵar 206 *ǵ ˘ i e ˘ u H 103 *g ˘ u ˚ rHí-150 *h 2 ˚ ´lh 1 -to-189 *h 2 m ˚ rǵ-s-92 * ḱi-ḱ ˚ lH-ro-189 * ḱ ˚ lH-tó-189 * ḱ ˚ rh 2 os-150 *k ˘ u ˚ rmi-148 *pe ˘ u H 140, 212 *-s ḱe-80, 87 *s ḱeh 2 110 *s ˘ u el 133 *s ˘ u elǵ 133 *s ˘ u elǵ h , s ˘ u elǵ h -s-> *s 133 *s ˘ u ˚ lǵ h -su-132, 133 *s ˘ u el ḱs (< *s ˘ *-to-87 *trenk 138 *t ˚ rh 2 -150 *t ˚ rs-s ḱe-146, 316 * ˘ u ˚ lHmi-150 * ˘ u ob h -so-99 * ˘ u opsā-278 Proto-Indo-Iranian *ćša ˘ u ra-92 *√ćšip 113 *d ˚ rH-ta-145 *gand h ūma-193 *Hm ˚ rćš-92 *-i ˘ i a-106 *ǰ(i) ˘ i ā(-ka)-106 *k ˚ rd, k ˚ rdna-146 *√kš ˘ u ib 113 *makas(-ka)-78 *makš-78 *mūš-, *muška-91 *sū-ka-94 *s ˘ u arćša-132 *taH-ant-, taHat 215 * ˘ u abz h a-99, 278 * ˘ u ˚ rćš-100 * ˘ u ˚ ŕka-270 * ˘ u ˚ rtka-183 Proto-Iranian and reconstructed Old Iranian (for items not found here, cf. Avestan) *ā-da ˘ i (a)na-79 *āhaka-156 *ahmāxam, ahmākam 115 *-a ˘ i ana-107 *ā ˘ i ka-156 *a ˘ i ˘ u aka-151 *-a-ka-168, 169, 184 *-ā-ka-167, 169 *anīčaka-140 *apa-a ˘ i a-283 *a-pū-ta-ka-140 *ár-ta-, ār-ta-189 *āśuna-, ˘ aś ˘ u an ˘ a-, āś ˘ u an(i) ˘ i ā-87 *at-, atā 215 *a ˘ u a-hišt-/ *a ˘ u a-stā-ta-124 *-a ˘ u (a)-ka-169 *ā ˘ u ˘ i a-ka-156 *ba ˘ i na-151 *bar ˘ u a-310 *ba ˘ u r-310 *bax\ra-206 *bra ˘ u š-138 *b ˚ rna-133 *b ˚ rša-147 *b ˚ r-ta-270 *budna-167 *čaš-114 *čā\-81 *čāxšni ˘ i a-k ˘ a-114 *čis 125 *dar-ta-183 *da ˘ u č-˘ i a-129 *draǰaka-166, 189 *d ˚ r-na-, d ˚ r-ta-133, 145 *dux\rī-čī-90, 178 *d ˘ u itī ˘ i a-122 *frā-bāra-116 *frā-m ˚ rša-117 *fra-pt-tra-117 *fra-stā-ta-316 *frā(h)u ˘ u a-117 *fra-˘ u ax-š-, fra-˘ u ax-ta-113, 117 *fra ˘ u š-138 *ga ˘ u (a)-ka-102 *ga ˘ u -k ˚ rta-146 *gaza-272 ˘ i a-162 *g ˚ rb-˘ i a-149 *g ˚ rzna-127 *gund-297 *ham-pāna-180 *hu-˘ u axra-119 *h ˘ u arša-132 *h ˘ u asura-ka-*h ˘ u -˚ rta-122 *-īč-127 *-i ˘ i a-ka-167, 169 *-i ˘ i a-\ ˘ u a-121 *-i-ka-167-169, *ima-ra ˘ u č-ī-139 *-i-ta-167 *ǰa-\ra-, ǰan-\ra-184, 206 *-ka-136, 167-169 *kaf ˘ u ana-/ *kapuna-120 *-k-a ˘ i na-200 *kar-ta-, kār-ta-189 *kas 125 *kunda-297 *kuta-/-ī-188 *mada/ika-95 *mad ˘ i āna-106 *ma ˘ i k 95 *márka-270 *mass ˘ i a-, mac ˘ i a-136 *mič 180 *miš 180 *mižā-93, 229, 286 *m ˚ rśš-, *m ˚ rš-*mudrā-293 *namāči ˘ i am 96 *namā-ka-96 *nap ˘ a\r-89, *na ˘ u akī-102 *nax ˘ u a-101 *n(i) ˘ i āka-106 *nik ˘ ara-124 *ni-šd-ta-96 *°nmānam 267 *n ˚ r ˘ i a ˘ u aka-149 *nūnam 202 *pait ˘ i ā, pas ˘ i a 179 *para-a ˘ i ar-109 *par\ama-131 *pas 125 *pašm( ˘ i )a-178 *pax-ta-112 *p ˚ rH ˘ u i ˘ i a-149 *p ˚ rtu-/ *p ˚ r\ ˘ u -121, 131 *p ˚ r ˘ u (i) ˘ i a-149 *pt ˚ r ˘ u i ˘ i ā-125, 149 *p ˘ u 140, 212 *°ruš-138 *s ˘ apači-208 *skāra-124 *snušā-128 *sra ˘ u ša-131 *s ˚ rd 79 *s ˚ rn-130, 147 *šaipa-pa\a-113 *taxra-119 *t ˚ rfša-145 *t ˚ rs-146 *t ˚ ršna-144 *ubda-99 *-u-ka-167-169 *upa-a ˘ u šah-139 *upa-čāra-277 *upāka-181 *upa-kāra-139 *upa-t ˚ rnč-, °tranč-138 *upa-za ˘ u ar-277 *ušmākam, ušmāxam 115 *uz-ba ˘ u da(-ka)-185 * ˘ u ab-99 * ˘ u abza-99, 278 * ˘ u ačar-86 * ˘ u ač-˘ i a-129 * ˘ u af-, * ˘ u af-ta-99 * ˘ u ahuna/i-215 * ˘ u a ˘ i čana-194 * ˘ u a ˘ i na-/ ˘ u a ˘ i -ta-136, 147 * ˘ u ara-ka-, ˘ u arna-ka-164 * ˘ u arda-ka-220 * ˘ u axra-119 * ˘ u axš-114 * ˘ u i ˘ i ˘ ana-105, 106, 135 * ˘ u i-ča ˘ i ana-85 * ˘ u i-čin-85 * ˘ u ˘ i ā-ka-135 * ˘ u ˚ rš-100 * ˘ u ˚ rža-ka-132, 144, 146, 278 *xrin-134 *(x)šaiba-pa\a-113 *zanah-, zanha-ka-184 *z ˘ a ˘ u ar-102 *ź ˚ rda ˘ i a-148 Avestan -aēna-151, 200, 416 aēm 156, 158, 346 aēuua-102, 103, 151, 352, 415 aēša-352 aēšma-372 aoman-151, 351 a i pidbaoga-80 a i nika-140, 351 auua°101, 351 auuada 101, 351 axšaēna-113, 114, 138, 388 ada i ri 199, 352 ap ąš 139, 358 ap e r e nāiiu-278, 411 apu\ra-89, 344 abi°79, 135, 184 abra-158, 414 °aoura-351 √ay 347 √ar 319 *ar e \n-154, 345 a-saiia-381 as e ˙ n ga-139, 383 aspa-158, 348 asman-179, 345 asru-160, 348 aˇ ˙ s a-189, 345 ahma-141, 350 ā°79, 117, 157, 345, 347 āi 156 ā-gata-185, 196, 344 ātar-/ ā\r-89, 142, 283, 345 āp-/ ap-38, 77, 344 ā-bara-103, 345 āzāta-270, 345 °iiaoda-368 ida 140 ištiia-141, 156, 349 uta 203, 351 upa i ri°138, 139, 359 √uruuaēs, uruuaēsa-87, 134, 355 uruuaēsa-134 uru\a-165, 378 uru\uuar-217, 378 urūpaiia-97, 378 uz°185 uzū i ti-142, 380 uš-147, 350 ušah-139 uštra-158, 159, 349 kaofa-81, 151, 223, 394 katāma-275, 390 kada 79, 391 kafa-81, 390 ka ˙ n ti-393 kamna-393 √kay, činao-85, 86, 141, 371, 395 √kar, k e r e nao-, k e r e ta-143, 391, 393 kar e ta-189, 389 √karš, karša-132, 392 kasiiapa-284, 392 kasu-77, 392 kasči ˜ t 392 kaša-92, 392 kahiia 107, 394 kāra°389 k e r e ma-148 kudā 391 kuša i ti 148, 392 xara-82, 391 xā-83, 389 x ąniia-82, 83, 389 xumba-78, 82, 393 √xraos 118, 391 xrafstra-117, 377 xrū-118 xrūma-118 xšaodah-79, 151, 387 xšap(an)-113, 385 xšudra-113, 386 xšusta-79 xšuuaēuua-113, 388 xšuuašti-180, 386 √xšnao 114 xšma-126, 387 x v a-122, 141, 411 x v aēda-123, 151, 415 √x v ap, x v afsa-87, 122, 411 x v aohar-94, 97, 123, 400 √x v ar, x v ara-122, 411 x v arzišta-133 √x v an 411 x v asura-196, 411 gaok e r e na-146, 400 gaodana-294, 399 gaona-181, 199, 400 √gaoš 80, 91, 409 gaoša-399 ga i ri-137, 150, 183, 396 gau-80, 146, 294, 400 ga ˙ n tuma-398 √gam 235 √garb, g e u ruuaiia-, g e r e pta-144, 147, 395, 396 √garz 162, 396 √gah 80, 103 gātu-81, 346, 395 g e r e da-137, 150, 183 gufra-119, 369 gu ˙ n da-297 gušta-315 gū\a-81, 398 ča\bar e sat-120, 370 ča\bārō 120, 369 √čar, čara-84, 370 čaxra-118, 370 čašman-78, 92, 126, 178, 370 čahiia 107, 371 čāt-81 či\ra-167 ǐa i ni-86, 368 √ǰan, ǐan-, ǐata-86, 367, 368 ǐafra-118, 369 ǐiiā-, ǐiia.ǐat åohō 106 taoxman-115, 366 √taoš, taošaiia-87, 365 tauua 102, 365 √tak, tača-77, 364 tanūra-266, 365 √tar, titar-, taraiia-, ta u ruua-150, 364 -tara-364 taršna-127, 132, 133, 146, 365 taša-92, 365 tāpa-363 t e r e sa-146, 316 tigra-119, 366 tištriia-248, 366 tū i riia-"father's brother" 124, 364 tū i riia-"cheese" 296 \raii-384 √\rah, t e r e sa-364 daēman-376 daēuua-376 daožao v ha-93, 375 dantan-79, 374 √dar, dāraiia-, d e r e ta-372 √dar, d e r e na-133, 373, 374 dar e ga-119, 375 daž-194, 374 √dā, dadā-, dāta-270, 372, 375 dānō°372 √dāy, dīta-79, 142, 188, 375 d e māna-116 d e m ąnō.pa\nī-164 d e r e n ą, d e r e n e ˙ n ti 145 duua-121, 374 duua.dasa 121, 375 duuar-121, 122, 373 dug e dar-372 d ˘ uma-170, 242, 374, 376 duždāh-88, 373 dušmanah-, dužmanah-93, 374 dušma i niiu-93, 193 dūra-375 draoga-373 √drang, draxta-189 °drāǐah-86, 373 druua-373 paēnaēna-151 pao i riia-149, 362 pao u ruua-358 pa i ti-114 pa i ti°138, 139 pa i ri°195 paxruma-118 √pač, pača-77, 141, 359 pa\ana-81, 359 °pa\nī-164, 353 pa ˙ n ča 361 para°195, 360 par e na-133, 361 par e su-163, 362 paršta-147, 360 pasu-87, 141, 360 pasča 125, 360 √pā 112, 385 pād-/ pad-, pāda-38, 79, 358 pāšna-127 p e r e tu-/ p e r e \b-121, 131, 147, 362 pitar-/ pi\r-77, 89, 141, 358, 360 pīuuah-103, 142, 363 pu\ra-89, 360 fra°117, 386 fraēšiia-117 fra\ah-81, 117, 360 fra-muxti-346 √fras, p e r e sa-147, 360 fra-sā-na-381 fšu-112, 385 √baog, būǐa-86, 357 √bag, baxša-113, 356 bax e dra-206 baxtar-357 √band, banda-, basta-356 √bav, bauua-, buua i ˙ n ti, būta-77, 78, 142, 357 √bar, bara-, b e r e ta-103, 147, 345, 354 bar e zah-46 bar e ziš-46, 97, 355 barša-132, 147, 355 bāzu-353 °bāzura-160, 353 b e r e za ˙ n t-46, 97, 145, 355 b e zuua ˙ n t-355 b ˘ una-299, 356 √bray, brīna-133, 354 brātar-/ brā\r-78, 89, 97, 354, 355 bruua ˜ t bii ąm 355 naēma-95, 151, 410 nauua-409 napāt-, naptar-/ naf e dr-276, 308, 408 nazdiiō 88, 125, 408 nāfa-81, 407 nāman-408 n e mata-233, 409 n e mah-96, 409 ni°127 niiāka-, niiākā-105, 408 nūči ˜ t 202 nūr e m 410 maēka ˙ n t-95, 403, 407 maē\ana-81, 151, 407 √maēz, maēza-88, 407 maēša-407 ma i diiāna-162, 410 maxši-78, 405 madaxa-95, 403 mana 405 √mar, miriia-, m e r e ta-147, √marz, mar e za-92, 97, 404, 405 mas-88 maz-88, 405 mazga-88, 207, 404 maˇ ˙ s a-404 mahrka-270, 404 mātar-/ mā\r-77, 89, 142, 402, 403 m e r e ga-147, 404 miiazda-88 mīžda-88, 125, 404 mušti-405 √yaoz, yaoza-104, 209, 367 yauua-102, 104, 368 yahmāi 115 yākar-104, 368 yātu-104, 167, 367 yuxta-367 yuuan-104, 368 yūta-367 √vaēk, vaēča-98, 151, 401 √vaēg, vaēǐa-, °vixta-98, 400 vaēti-98, 400 √vaēd, vinad-, vista-79, 96, 98, 188, 398 √vaēn 79 √vač, vaxš-129, 177, 387, 397 vadi-47 vafra-118, 266, 400 vabžaka-99, 278, 398 vanā-99, 400 √var 353 varah-99, 399 ‡ var e ka-160 var e mi-150, 399 √vart 231, 396 √varz 231, 355, 411 √vaz, vaza-99, 399 vaša-129 vāta-77, 99, 142, 398 vāra-99, 398 v e r e dka-183, v e hrka-144, 147, 396 vohunī-415 vi-xāda-389 vinasta-398 vista-79 vīuuāp(a)-279, 400 vī-činao-85, 395 vīčira-167 vīmanah°98, 397 vīs-87, 98, 396 vīsa i ti-401 √raēk 78, 138, 151, 378 raēša-259 raoxšna-114, raočah-38, 85, 151, 378 √raod 377 raodita-378 ra\a-377 raohā-377 √ray 378 rāna-297, 376 †ruma 95 √saēd 79, 87, saēna-129, 151, 388 saēni-384 √saok, saoča-87, 151, 382, 384 √sak 383 √sav, sauua-314, 384, 385 sarah-150, 382 sar e ta-189, 381 sāzdūm 110 √sāh 110 siiāuua-103, 129, 385 sukur e na-133, 145, 384 suxra-119, 384 surunao-147 sūkā-384 ska i riia-124 √skand 79, 124, 350 √skamb 170, 349, 386 sk e ˙ n dō 124, 350 star-152, 160, 349 √stā 117, 351, 386 sti-373 spaēta-90, 152, 382 span-383 spāra°152 sp e r e zan-152, 349 spiš-91, 386 snaoda-128, 409 √snā 348 sraoni-130, 131, 202, 382 √srav, surunao-383 srīra-130 sru-131, 382 srū-130, 382 za i rita-380 zaoša-124, 375 zauuah-197 zafar/n-88, 330, 372 √zan 379 zanauua 380 zauuah-381 √zar 146, 206, 379 zaranaēna-133, 134, 380 zar e ta-379 zasta-292, 374 zānu°96, 379 zāmātar-88, 379 z e māna-282 z e r e d(aiia)-97, 107, 144, 380 z e uuīštiia-142 zinā-96, 380 zōišnu-96 zōiždišta-96 √zū 95 √znā, zanā-88, 379 zraiiah-205, 380 šiiāta-128, 385 šud-79, 92, 141, 386 śuta-128, 270, 386 √haoš 94, 413 hača 85, 94, 141, 199, 347 hapa\nī-307 hap e r e si-140, 145, 347 hapta-413 ham°94, 414 hizuuā-379 huuāzāra-206 hubadra-206 huška-78, 414 hū-94, 142, 415 Old Persian a\ai 202 a(h)miy 115 amāxam 115 arašni-154, 413 Artavardiya-231 asabāra-90, 348 asman-(acc. asmānam) 190 *āzamānaka-184, 186 idā 140 uša°159 kapautaka-77, 390 k(a)rnuvaka-101 xšāya\iya-385 gā\u-81, 346, 395 dauštar-375 duvitā°121, 347, 359 pavastā-288, 362 paranam 134 Par\ava-131, 362 pasā 125 paišiyā 179, 363 Baurakka-310 *mā\(i) ˘ i aka-136 niyāka-105, 201, 408 may ˘ uxa-82, 83, 407 yauviyā-104 vasiy 399 °vāhara-357 raučah-378 rautah-270, 378 rasa-319, 377 hakaram 190 √harz 350 Middle Persian (for items not found here, cf. New Persian) <'hnwc>, <'hnwn(c)> 202 <'syn'> 87 abāg 181 abōg 276 ābus 89 abzār 277 ādur 89 afsār-/ afsārd 189 -ag 168, 169, 389, 395 -āg 167, 169, 346 ahlaw 131 ahlomōg 131 āhun 87 -ak 169 amā(h) 115 ˘ asmān 190 aškamb(ag) 170, 349, 386 ašmā(h) 126 ātaxš 283 awāhnām 267 awezmāhgēn 199 bān-bišn 164 bānūg 164, 353 bār "time" 253 bār "load" 253 b ˘ e 139 bōb 203 bōz-/ bōxt 86, 329 brinǐ 134, 283, 355 brūg 165, 208, 355 čand 219 čāšnīg 114 čāxšēn-114 čīn-/ čīd 85 dā 215, 372 dagr, dēr 119 dēm 199 drust 208 dušmen 193 dušox 92 duxš 90, 374 duz(d) 88, 320 dwāzdah 121 ēr 119, 199, 352 -ēn (adj.) 151 -ēn-(caus.) 107, 416 ēwēnag "mirror" 79 ēwēnag "manner" 79 farrox 117 frāmōš-/ frāmušt 117 frāx, frāx w 117, 360 frēstag 117 frēstr 117 frōxš-/ frōxt 117 gar 150 -gēn 199, 401 gišnag, gašnak 127 gīr-/ grift 149 gišnīč 127 gōn 181, 199 gōnag 199 gōšt 278 griy-162 gurdag 183 gyāg 135, 366 gyān 135, 136, 367, 401 h/xaftār 84, 413 hamahl 131 hōš-/ hōšīd 94 hōšāg(ēn) 94 hrēstag 117 huzihr 167 -ī 121 -īd 167 -īg 105, 121, 167-169 -īh 121, 415 istārag 152, 349 išnās-/ išnāxt 152 ǐān 135 ǐōg 104, 369 kabōd, kabōtar 77, 390 kahwan 120, 219, 394 kardag 183, 330, 391 karmīr 309, 385 karš-/ karšīd 132 kirrōg, kirrōgī(h) 101 kōš-/ kōšīd 148, 392 kōxš-148 <ktk-b'nwk> 164 kūn 295 kun-/ kerd 148, 328 kuš-/ kušt 148, 392 mād 271 magž 207, 403 māhīg 136, 167, 274, 403 marg 270 mazan 88, 405 mazg 207 mēw(ag) 410 mizd 404 muhr 293 murw 404 mušk 91 nārišn 220, 408 n ˘ axun 82 naxust 101, 120 nēm(ag) 95, 151 nibēs-/ nibišt 234, 320, 408 nišān-/ nišāst 127 nišīn-/ nišast 127 nišīy-/ nišast 127 niyōš-/ niyōšīd 315 nōg 101, 163, 270, 409 nox 101 -ōg 163, 169 pad 139 padīr-/ padīrift 149 padiškamb 170 pah 87 p ˘ ahlom 131 pahnāy 253, 362 pid 271 puhl 121, 131, 147, 161, 211, 362 pus 89 rang 244 rēm 233 rōdīg 165, 217, 378 rōy 199 sāl, sār 220 saxwan 120 s ˘ e, seh 90 sēn (murw) 129, 388 sēnag 259 snōy 128, 409 sōr 92 spul 152, 296, 348 suxr 118, 119, 309 suy, suyag 92, 386 syā 106 šab 161 šagr 119, 388 šawāg 161 šēb 113 šēb-113 šuy 92 tā 215 tahr, taxl 119, 366 tarw-150 tigr 119 tōhm, tōm 115 <tyl> 296 ud, u-203 -ūg 167-169, 389, 412 ummēd 269, 273, 350 uzēnag 85 uzīdan 85 waččag 100 wad 279 waddil 279, 399 wahāg 100 wahār 100 wahišt 100 wahr 119 Wahrām 279 wan 262, 299 wāng 398 wār-/ wārīd, wārist 99 warāg 163 ward-231 wardišn 231 warrag 164 was 100 wēn-(/ dīd) 79 wēš 279 wigāhīh 218, 398 wināh 101 wiyābān 279 wizēn(-kār) 85 wizīn-/ wizīd 85 wizīr 167 xānīg 82 xāyag 156 xōn 215, 288 xūb-wizēnīh 85 xūg 94 xwad 122 xwālist 133 xwān-/ xwand 314 xwar-/ xward 122 xwēd 123, 200, 415 yākand 281 yāsaman 280 <ywd> 104 zādag 185, 308 zahag 184, 253, 381 zamīk 163, 380 zānūg 96 zarr 134 zī(w)-/ zī(wi)st 369 zofr 118 zōr 277 zūzag 227 contemporary) (including Dari and Tajiki and Ar., Turk., NWIr. etc. loanwords in NP) -ā 169, 346 āb 77, 344 ābistan 89, 344 ātaš, CNP āteš 260, 262, 283, 344 ādam(ī)zāt 269, 345 ā ¯ zar 142, 345 ārd 189, 270, 345 ārmān 186 āran, āranǐ, ārang 286, 292, 345 āzād 20, 270, 345 āzār-/ āzārd 206 āzmāy-/ āzmūd 186, 320, 345 āzmūda 215, 345 āžīr 167 ās 272, 413 āsmān 190, 345 āšnā 260, 346 āqā 65, 346 āmōxta, CNP āmūxte 188, 346 āmūsnī 307 ān 102, 215, 238, 344, 346 -ān-(caus.) 347 -ān (part.) 346 ān-g ˘ ah 81, 186, 346 āwar-, ār-/ āward 103, 320, 345 āhan 87, 157, 193, 345, 347 āhū 165, 345 āy-/ āmad 109, 142, 312, 344, 347 āyanda 283, 347 āy ˘ ına 79, 154, 345 abr 158, 414 abar 139, 359 abrū 165, 208, 355 abrēšum 190, 344 a ˙ h wāl 254, 351 adab, pl. ādāb 185, 344, 348 a ¯ ziyat 274, 348 urdū 183, 348 arzan 97, 286, 348 ars 160, 176, 348 aris 347 ar(a)š 154, 194, 413 arra 154, 348 az 85, 141, 347, 348 asb 90, 158, 177, 348 ˘ ıst-/ ˘ ıstād 124, 351 astar 90, 91, 158, 161, 349 išāra 190, 349 ašrafī 266, 349 ušnān 178, 348 afdar 364 afzār 277, 351 af ġān 65, 277, 351 agar 190, 216, 350 ammā 273, 350 imām 350 imrōz 139 anbān 180, 350 andak 157 inšā'llāh 239, 385 angubīn 151, 358 anōša 140 awirs 145, 347 Dari aw ġān 277 awwal, awwalan 282, 335, 351 aulād 266, 302, 351 ōmēd, ūmīd 269, 351 īrād 286, 352 aiman 282, 352 īn 102, 352 bi-139, 352 bā 100, 181 bābā 299, 300, 352 bād "wind" 77, 99, 142, 398 bād (form from buw-) 231, 406 bādafrāh 276 bār "time, turn" 253, 353, 411 bār-/ bārīd 99, 398 bāz "again, open" 139, 358 bāz "falcon" 216, 353 bāz(a) "fathom" 279 bāzār 86 bāzū 165, 166, 279, 353 bāf-/ bāft 99, 111, 398 bāqilā' 217, 353 bālā 46 bāla 97, 279, 355 bāliš 46, 355 bān 116, 164 bāng 99, 238, 353, 398 bāng-/ bāngīd 137 bānū 164, 353 bāyad 269, 283, 353 ba-ǐā-i 106, 353 bačča 100, 229, 271, 272, 280, 302, 353 baxš-/ baxšīd 113, 177, 318, 320, 356 baxšiš 192, 354 bad 45, 279, 354 badal 282, 322, 354 badan 288, 354 bar "on" 139, 194, 303, 354, 359 bar "breast" 99, 273, 286, 294, 296, 354, 399 bar "desert" 45 bar-/ burd 38, 147, 269, 270, 318, 354 burr-/ burrīd 133, 320, 354 barābar 228, 283, 286, 354 barādar 78, 97, 123, 256, 257, 300, 354 barzgar 97, 355 burs 145, 347 barf 118, 266, 400 barg 160, 356 burnā 278, 411 barra 164, 399 bas 100, 210, 399 buš 132, 147, 165, 355 ba c d 63, 353 ba c ż(ī) 210 ba ġal 283, 292, 356 baqqāl 187, 356 ba-kār 139, 361 balki 217, 356 Dari balg 160 buland 46, 97, 145, 355 balōč 45-47 ballūr, billaur, bulūr 203, 356 Bam(m) 262 Bampūr, Banfuhl 212, 262, 356 bun "log, root" 99, 299, 356, 400 bun "fundament" 167, 262, 299, 356 banā' 285, 356 band-/ bast 318, 356 buw-/ būd 77, 78, 142, 197, 312, 357 bōb 203, 356 bōr 310, 357 būn 167 bōy 185, 357 ba 139, 215, 357 buh 297, 397 bahā 100, 248, 357 bahār 100, 357 bahr 206, 357 Bahrām 279, 400 bihišt 100, 357 bahnām 267 bē 46, 139, 357 bīābān 279, 367, 400 bīǐ 187, 357 bēd 98, 400 bairaq 271, 273, 358 bēz-/ bēxt 98, 151, 400, 401 bīst 100, 358, 401 bīn-(/ dīd) 79 pā 228 pādišāh 275, 358 pār-sāl 358 pāzan 126, 194, 358 pāšina 127 pāk 103, 105, 358 Dari pālū 252 Dari pāntus 265 pānzdah 358 pāy 38, 79, 358 pidar 77, 141, 242, 358, 359 par(r) 133, 289, 361 purs-/ pursīd 147, 269, 318, 360 parēr 109, 360 paz-/ puxt 77, 141, 359 pas 125, 360 pisar 360 pušt 147, 269, 295, 360 pušak 198, 209, 361 pašm 126, 178, 275, 361 pul 131, 147, 211, 362 panǐ 20, 292, 361 panǐa 292, 361 dial. panǐul 160 pōz 203, 290, 362 pūs-/ pūsīd 259, 362 pōst 288, 362 pōšak 198, 362 pahlū 163, 294, 362 pahlawān 131, 161, 362 pahn, pahnā 81, 253, 359, 362 pai 359 piyāz 233, 363 pīr 149, 296, 299, 362 pēš 140, 179, 363 pēšānī 140, 289, 363 pīšī 198 pai ġ˘ ambar 268, 363 pīh 103, 142, 363 -t 363 tāb-/ tāft 363 tāz-/ tāxt 77, 364 tupak, tufak 180, 366 tuxm 115, 116, 366 -tar 195, 364 tars 146, 364 tars-/ tarsīd 146, 320, 364 turš 137, 145, 207, 209, 364 taš 92, 216, 365 tiš, tišna 127, 132, 133, 146, 166, 365 ta c rīf 63, 363 taq ¨ sīr 177 takāsul 159, 365 talx 119, 365, 366 tilf 265 tumān, tōmān, tūmān 187, 365 tandūr 266, 365 tanuk 169, 236, 365 tang 244, 365 tanūr 266, 364 tu 102, 364, 365 tōp 281, 365 taupak, tūpak 203, 366 tah 258, 366 tuhī 87, 365 tīr "arrow" 119, 366 tīr(-māh) (month) 248, 366 ¨ ta c m 63, 363 ¨ tama c 63, 365 ǐā(y) 135, 275, 366 ǐādū 104, 367 ǐāsūs 217, 367 ǐān 106, 135, 136, 288, 367, 401 ǐānwar 284, 367 ǐāyg ˘ ah 135 ǐabr 194, 206, 367 ǐudā 104, 196, 367 ǐu ġ 104 ǐigar 104, 204, 228, 237, 295, 368 ǐang 244, 368 ǐangal 244, 368 ǐau 102, 269, 368 ǐawān 104, 184, 218, 269, 368 CNP ǐūǐe 227 ǐūrāb 209, 367 ǐō(y) 104, 154 ǐōy-/ ǐust 104, 209, 367 ǐah-/ ǐast 94, 318, 369 ǐahl 119 čār 120, 234, 369 čārdah 369 čāh 81, 369 čāi 369 čap 272, 370 čar-/ čarīd 84, 319, 370 čirā ġ 370 čarx 118, 370 čaš-/ čašīd 113, 274, 370 čašm 84, 92, 126, 211, 370 čil 120, 370 čand 195, 219, 371 čandan 371 čang 371 čōb 319, 371 čōš-/ čōšīd 209, 319 CNP čūn(-ke) 225, 346, 350, čahār 120, 369 čihil 120, 370 či 107, 371 čīz 371 čīn-/ čīd 84, 85, 141, 371 ˙ h arakat 282, 413 ˙ h isāb 258, 278, 413 ˙ h aqq 248, 275, 414 ˙ h aqīqat 187, 414 ˙ h ukūmat 271, 414 ˙ h alqa 65, 350 ˙ h amla 266, 414 xāk 156, 346, 372, 412 xālī 65, 166, 412 xāmōš 66, 157, 389 xānī 82, 389 xāy-/ xāyīd 82, 83, 389 xāya 108, 156, 158, 283, 346, 347, 412, 415 xabar 19, 65, 140, 153, 154, 390, 412 xuǐīr 167 xudā 66, 259, 305, 391, 413 xidmat 65, 413 xar 81, 82, 391, 413 xar-/ xarīd 84 xarāb 66, 153, 154, 278, 283, 391 xarǐ 189, 269, 413 xurd 122, 193, 415 xirs 155 xarsang 83 xargōš 20, 82, 83, 165, 372, 391 xurmā 102, 156, 391, 413 xirman 118 Taj. xurma 118 xurōs 118, 165, 391 xizāna, CNP xazāne 165, 190, 372 xusp-/ xuft 87, 111, 122, 177, 411 xastū 155 xusur 196, 411 xuš 130, 142, 411 xišt 141, 156, 349, 372, 414 xušk 78, 84, 94, 414 xišm, xašm 157, 372 xušnūd 114 xašīn 388 xa ¨ t ¨ t 66, 390 xa ¨ tar 65, 285, 413 xalā ¨ s 65, 414 xalq 65, 414 xum(b) 78, 82, 83, 393, 414 xand-/ xandīd 66, 81, 82, 319, 1 *grad-*ǰa\ma-253 *sčani-126 *zūta-142 upa°138, 139, 184, 362 xša\ra-387 čuua ˙ n t-195, 371 dužaka-227, 373 √baod 357 149, 404 V e r e \ragna-400 sčaini-126, 387 √had 95, 127, 408, 409 stāna-125, 364 dān-/ dānist 315 ǐāg 135 pahlūg 163, 294, 330, 362 wahīg 159 New Persian (classical and abzār 277, 351 bār "load" 228, 253, 269 birinǐ 283, 355 bēš 279 tā 215, 363 ǐandar 104, 194, 368 xām 156, 166, 346, 412 320, 393, 414
	306 336 341

For the methodological problem of the unevenness of sources, cf. I 1.4.

It should be kept in mind that any Persian word may be found in Balochi (much like Arabic (Ar.) words in NP), be it instead of or in addition to an inherited Bal. word.

A statement about a Bal. word being borrowed from "NP" is meant to imply that the borrowing may have taken place at any time when the Pers. word form was the one as seen in NP, in many cases thus including MP.

The same phenomenon may of course occur with languages other than Persian, e.g. sun-"hear" is "= Urdu" in the sense described above. However, as Indic (Ind.) languages are not as closely related to Balochi as Persian, such cases are not as common.

Bal. panč "five" is such a case: it is the form expected for Balochi from OIr. panča. Since all Bal. numbers are likely to have been borrowed from Persian (HÜBSCHMANN 1895:78), however, one may assume that the word has been borrowed from NP panǐ along with the rest of the numerical system (cf. KORN, frthc. 3).

For the corresponding lack of a standard orthography, cf. p. 38.

Cf. also ELFENBEIN 1985:226f. and ROSSI 2000 for a description of sources. For the abbreviations used in table 1, cf. the descriptions on p. 23ff.

With respect to the theoretical basis and some dialect material, BMC (also) depends on previous works, e.g.ELFENBEIN 1966 and SPOONER 1967 (cf. ROSSI 1979a:206).

Note the remark of caution by the author himself (ELFENBEIN

1985:227) that EVM is only to be used together with the texts.19 On the peculiarities of the orthography as advocated by Sayad Hāšmī, cf. JAHANI 1989 (especially pp. 153ff.), TAN 2000:66.

BARKER/MENGAL's treatment of dialectal variants with ā for ah (cf. II 3.2.3.3) is likely to be one example in point.

It is fortunate that Geiger lists the sources for every word.

Cf. also II 3.2.4.

This means that words for which no source is given appear in SHG and in most cases also in other sources.

A citation by infinitive is less useful since there are differing infinitive formations found in the dialects, one from the present stem (kan-ag), the other from the past stem (kurt-in). As the endingless past stem is used in the function of a finite form in SWBal. dialects, it is cited without hyphen (e.g. kurt). In Eastern dialects, the past stems of verbs apparently never occur with ending zero, so EBal. past stems will be cited with hyphen (e.g. kurt h -).

The diphthongs may be analysed biphonematically, i.e. as being composed of a plus y, w respectively, but in order to avoid ambiguities of the sort <hawr> which might mean [havr] or [haur], the notation will be haur "rain" in the present work.

For the use of the "Arabic letters", cf. II 1.2.1.

This also means that a cited NP word figures in STEINGASS 1892 if no additional note is made.

In the bibliography, contemporary works published in Iran are given in the CNP transcription.

For "= NP" as notation for potential NP loanwords, cf. I 1.2.1.

History of Research on Balochi

Cf. JAHANI 1989:27ff. on the achievements of these institutions.

Note that the censuses carried out in Pakistan are not adequate for the linguistic situation(ADDLETON 1986:56): the 1981 census asked only about the main language spoken in every household (sic), with the result that data on bilingualism (let alone knowledge of further languages) were not collected,

For a bibliography, cf. TITUS 1996:299ff.

The Balochi Language

The use of Balochi in writing is still extremely restricted, cf. e.g.FARRELL 2000 and[START_REF] Eunice | A Mother Tongue Literacy Programme among the Baloch of Singo Line, Karachi[END_REF]

Different varieties of Balochi may exist side by side in the same area or town, overlapping and overlaid by different patterns of influences from neighbouring languages(FARRELL 2003:169). For instance, FARRELL 2003:172 notes that many Baloch have come to Karachi from Iran, which makes the Persian element stronger than might be suspected for a Balochi dialect in that region.

Cf. also map 3.

ROSSI 1979a:163ff. surveys the history of the study of the dialectal differences. For a detailed discussion of Eastern Bal. features cf. II 3.2.1.1, for a comparison of the phonological system of the dialects cf. II 1.1.2.

Note that this fits well with the classification of Balochi as a North Western Iranian language. The Balochi language may thus have come to its present area by the way that has generally been assumed (see below).

It is indeed possible, though, that some groups of Arab origin have been absorbed into the population that became known as Baloch(SPOONER 1989:609).

For the history of the Baloch in later times,cf. DAMES 1904:36ff., ORYWAL 1982:61ff., SPOONER 1989:609ff.

Examples include bālā "height", bāliš "cushion" (Av. bar e ziš), cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1895:220f., 260.

It is likewise difficult to see how the statement by ELFENBEIN 1989a:350 about the Baloch having "taken their present name from the country in which they finally settled" might be brought in line with the historical data and early sources.

This situation amounts to a significant threat for the survival of Balochi, cf. FARRELL 2000.

Cf. RZEHAK 2003. At the moment, the influence of Persian is increasing (at the expense of Dari) in the province of Nimruz, where most Afghan Baloch are living, as Iranian television is available nearly everyhere (whereas Afghanistan television is broadcast for only a few hours per day). The availability of Persian television has significant effects on Afghanistan Balochi(Lutz Rzehak, personal communication). The Afghanistan Balochi dialect as described byNAWATA 1981, BUDDRUSS 1988 and others is still in use among Afghan refugees living in Iran(Behrooz Barjasteh Delforooz, personal communication).

For example, education in most parts of the province of Sindh, including villages around Karachi which are currently becoming suburbs of the city, is in Sindhi. In the more central parts of Karachi, it has been in Urdu for some time, with the result that nowadays the Balochi spoken in Karachi is in the first instance influenced by Urdu, while some 30 years ago, Sindhi would have played the most important role(FARRELL 2003:172).

For the relative status of Pashto and Balochi in Pakistan, especially inQuetta, cf. ARCHER 2003 and TITUS 2003. Whereas traditionally, due to sociological factors described e.g. by BARTH 1964, assimilation of Pashtuns into Balochi tribes (which, in the long run, might lead to the members' use of Balochi rather than Pashto) was a common phenomenon, the immigration of large numbers of refugees from Afghanistan has caused an increase in the relative importance of Pashto, such that Pashto has become the dominant language e.g. in the Quetta bazaar(TITUS 2003:234).

Cf. the judgment byEMENEAU (1980:337): "What Indo-Aryan languages (...) are spoken by large numbers in Baluchistan is somehow uncertain."

This has been the general assumption since Bray's study in the Census of India. Older sources generally assume Sindhi as source language for most Bal. loanwords of Ind. origin. In most (but not all) cases where these note Sindhi as a source, ELFENBEIN (1990/II, occasionally also in other more recent works) notes Lahnda instead, perhaps because the geographical distribution of Lahnda makes it a more likely source for the Ind. loanwords in Eastern Balochi. ELFENBEIN 1982:81, on the other hand, says that "Sindhi" noted in earlier works should probably be replaced by "Siraiki".

In 1929, MORGENSTIERNE (1932a:5) observed that Urdu influence on Balochi is taking the place Sindhi and Lahnda had occupied before.

Some Turk. loanwords have already been recognised byDAMES 1904:13.

Geiger was apparently the first to consider the possibility of classifying a Bal. word as a Kurd. loanword: in GEIGER 1891:415, he asks whether haur "rain" might not have been borrowed from Kurdish. For examples of possibleKurd. loanwords, cf. II 2.4.1.5.

The latest systematic treatment of Balochi historical phonology is MOŠKALO 1991:21-40, which is based on GEIGER 1891 for the main part, including the approach of tracing back Bal. phonemes to their OIr. sources and mentioning Middle Iranian (MIr.) material only in rare cases. Moškalo's views will be noted where they differ from those of Geiger and/or those presented here.

The order is thus not the one chosen by Geiger, but the other way round.

MORGENSTIERNE (1948:255) was probably the first to distinguish the phonemic system of Common Balochi from those of the contemporary dialects. He was also one of the very few to do so. Cf. e.g. JAHANI 1989:81ff., who posits a set of "original Balochi phonemes" which is also meant to be the phomemic system of the non-Eastern dialects; this set includes the retroflex consonants as well as the fricatives which occur in loanwords only (as peripheral phonemes), and the EBal. phonemic system is treated as "disturb[ing] the indigenous picture". This view has been the one found in most works so far.

MORGENSTIERNE 1948:255 assumes that the loss of fricatives was not due to the contact with Ind. languages, but dates back to an earlier period.

For the notation of the vowels and diphthongs, cf. I 1.5.2.2. Although the diphthongs may be analysed as biphonematic and thus would not need to be mentioned, they are included here and in the following charts for the reader's information.

Whereas in the present study it is assumed that Common Balochi shows w-from OIr. h

The changes resulting in geminates are those discussed in II 2.2.1.3, 2.2.2.2, 2.2.2.3, 2.2.3.2 and 2.2.3.3.

JAHANI 1989:81 is the only author to note q as an additional "borrowed phoneme", though noting that it is very rare and only occasionally found as an "elegant phoneme", usually being replaced by k (cf. II 1.2.2). It is thus not considered necessary here to establish it as a separate phoneme.

For the data available for Eastern Balochi, cf. I 1.4. Charts of the phonemic system as assumed by previous authors are given by ROSSI

1979a:167ff. These include DAMES 1891,[START_REF] Grierson | Linguistic Survey of India X: Specimens of Languages of the Eranian Family[END_REF][START_REF] Gilbertson | The Balochi Language. A Grammar and Manual[END_REF], MORGENSTIERNE 1948[START_REF] Barker / Aqil Khan | A Course in Baluchi[END_REF][START_REF] Džoj | Evoljucija fonologičeskogo tipa[END_REF]

Note that the set of palatals, which, on a synchronic level, corresponds to the set as seen in the other dialects, is something different from a diachronic point of view: CBal. č, ǐ in postvocalic position are represented by EBal. š, ž respectively. Due to that sound change, the status of ž within the phonemic system is much stronger than in the remaining dialects. č, ǐ have been reintroduced in Eastern Balochi in postvocalic position via borrowings from other languages and dialects.

The main authors who have investigated this question are BARKER/MENGAL 1969 (several hints at various places, cf. ROSSI 1979a:212) and EDEL'MAN 1975:68ff. ROSSI 1979a:211ff. declines to accept these authors' arguments about the aspirated voiceless stops being separate phonemes.

The fact that aspiration has not always been noted with due accuracy makes it also probable that some perceived oppositions between aspirated and unaspirated stops are due to misinterpretation by the authors of the first-hand sources. Note also that aspiration in the case of word-initial stop followed by a resonant seems to be even less marked than when followed by a vowel (there is apparently no example of kR-, cf. II 3.2.1.1.1), so that unaspirated stops have probably always been present to some degree in Eastern Balochi.

General Remarks

Note that there is no example of an aspirated voiced stop in ABG, but it is possible that the presence or absence of aspiration is due to inaccuracy of notation. ROSSI 1979a:211 contents himself in stating that some authors have assumed the existence of aspirated voiced stops as phonemes, without further discussion of the matter. JAHANI 1989:83 states that the question has to remain open until further investigation about Eastern Balochi is made. GEIGER 1901:235 notes the occurrence of aspirate voiced stops in Ind. loanwords (only), independent of the dialect.

The reason for which ROSSI 1979a:211 concludes, fromMORGENSTIERNE's (1948:255 4 ) mentioning of w h , that Morgenstierne intends it to be a phoneme separate from w is not entirely clear to me.

The notation b is chosen here for systematic reasons, without implications as to its pronunciation intended. Some other authors have used v; Geiger uses w for what is b here and v for w.

Note that GEIGER 1891:433 says that he "corrected" some inconsistencies in the material by Dames and others by taking into account the etymology of the words in question.

ROSSI does not explicitly discuss the phonemic status of b (his v), but, from his statements about w (h) (1979a:213, see above), one might conclude that b is meant to be a separate phoneme.

Note that there is no difference to be found in ABG, who notes both cases as v, that there are "mistakes" in DAMES' DTB, who has e.g. barāwar where his system of notation (see above) would require barāvar (i.e. barābar in the notation used here), and that GILBERTSON 1923:7 says that b may take the place of w. Moreover, both w and b are written with the same character in the Arabic orthography (i.e. z), which might lead to errors in the sources and further blur the picture.

For phenomena occurring specifically in loanwords (e.g. devoicing of final consonants), cf. II 3.3.

For q and ġ, cf. II 1.2.2.

The question how to deal with the "Arabic letters" is much debated among the Baloch (cf. JAHANI 1989:150ff.). The problem is rendered even more difficult by the use of some of these letters for writing certain phonemes of the Eastern Balochi dialects(cf. II 3.2.1.1, 3.3.2.3).

A number of sources do not note the Arabic orthography, among them the works by Gilbertson (GCD), Elfenbein (EVM, EAL etc.) and Farrell(FBB, FARRELL 2003). The same applies to Afghanistan Balochi as treated byNAWATA 1981 and BUDDRUSS 1988. In Turkmenistan, Balochi has been written in Cyrillic and Roman script (cf. AXENOV 2000), if at all (cf. RZEHAK 1998:152), so the question of Arabic orthography does not arise.

This corresponds exactly to the situation in NP where c is noted in the orthography, but not pronounced as such.

This is the variant in BMC; ABG has the NP-Ar. orthography and the transcription c adālat. For the system of citing Balochi words adopted in the present work, cf. I 1.5; for adālat(t), cf. also p. 285.

Since the same strategy exists in Urdu/Hindi, it is possible that at least some of these words have been borrowed from there: bād, tārīp h and dāwā are even found in BESKROVNIJ 1953. However, spoken CNP shows the same phenomenon, so the influence may (also) come from this side.

The use and choice of the vowel-separating consonant(s) depends on the dialect in question (cf. II 2.4.3, 3.2.1.1.3, 3.2.2.1, 3.2.3.1, 3.2.4.1).

For further variants, cf. p. 165, 191.

In the case of Bal. waxt, wakt "time" (cf. also p. 281), the pronunciation of NP-Ar. waqt as waxt is even common in NP (and the standard variant in Pashto) as well.

ABG and GCD have the NP-Ar. form c āšiq.

ABG and EVM have the NP variant xabar in xabar kan-"say" and xabar-dār "take care!", respectively.

On devoicing of word-final consonants in loanwords, cf. II3.3.1.4.

Moškalo gives only examples of polysyllabic noun stems. RASTORGUEVA 1966:328f. has only monosyllabic ones, with accented endings. It is thus possible that the rule observed by BUDDRUSS 1988:46 for Afghanistan Balochi (see below) applies here, too.

Given the otherwise far-reaching similarity of Turkmenistan and Afghanistan Balochi, one might wonder whether some of the differences in the set of rules are due to incomplete data.

The possible exceptions to this rule noted by BUDDRUSS 1988:46 are likely to be due to errors of some sort, since the relevant words were treated like all other monosyllabic nouns when checked again with Afghanistan Baloch by Lutz Rzehak (personal information).

This implies that when the vowelless allomorph of b(i)-is used, the first syllable of the stem is accented, e.g. agar b-|raway "if you go" vs. |bi-ār "bring!"(BUDDRUSS 1988:59).

It is assumed here (following e.g.SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996:649) that in Old Iranian times, the Iranian languages (only two of which are attested) formed a continuum of dialects, only the peripheral varieties (Old Persian and the Saka languages) displaying a set of very distinctive features, so that a distinction of Western and Eastern Iranian is not useful for that period.

The rules for lenition in MP are given e.g. byBACK 1981.

For more discussion, cf. IV.

Old Iranian > Common Balochi

The development of p > w assumed for certain contexts by MOŠKALO 1991:30, 38 (with warnā "young" as the only example) is likely to be attributed to loanwords only (cf. II 3.3.1.6.2).

The past stem is pakt(NAWATA 1981:17), paht, pāt (EAL: Raxšānī, Sarawānī), patk (BMC, EAL, FBB), pakkit(EAL, EVM, SOKOLOV 1956:81).

EAL

seems to assume Ind. influence. However, there seems to be nothing in Modern Ind. languages which would fit here. Conversely, Arm. kapoyt "blue" shows that the word must have existed already in Middle Iranian (cf. GIPPERT 1993/I:334). 8 According to GEIGER 1891:444, this word might also have been borrowed from Persian. For devoicing of word-final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.4. 9 MOŠKALO 1991:31 assumes an additional change of OIr. t > Bal. s, the examples being the family terms pis "father", mās "mother" etc. (besides pit, māt etc.). These are better explained as going back to the oblique stems pi\r-etc., however, cf. p. 89.10 The past stem is tatk (BMC, EAL, FBB), tā(h)t (EAL: Raxšānī), taht (EAL: Raxšānī), tačit(EAL, SOKOLOV 1956:80).11 Words with ū also occur in variants with ī, thence bīt (cf. II 3.1.2.3.1). For the pres. stem, cf. p. 78.12 For further discussion of huš-/ hušt, cf. p. 94, 316.13 Cognates of this word, which has considered NWIr., include Kurd. kev-/ ket'-, Zaz. kewn-/ kewt-.

The only Av. form which might be connected is a i pidbaoga-(if "hinterher einbiegend", BARTHOLOMAE 1904:85), but there are Khot. forms belonging here (EWAia II 275). GILBERTSON assumes (1925:362) that Bal. bōg has been borrowed from Urdu, but no fitting form seems to exist.

For OIr. f, \, x /_C, cf. II 2.2.1.

The past stem is čit; EAL seems to be the only source which also has čint, maybe taken from the alleged past stem gičint (cf. next footnote).

pit, māt, brāt, zāmāt of the remaining dialects come from the strong cases (OIr. pitar-, mātar-, brātar-, cf. p. 77f.). For the distribution and derivation of the corresponding MP and Prth. forms, cf.SIMS-WILLIAMS 1981:166ff.

For discussion of the EBal. form, cf. p. 227. OInd. sūkará-"boar" is likely to be a derivative of *sū-ka-(EWAia II:738), a direct cognate of the Bal. and NP form.

Thus DTB; SHG has rōmust. MORGENSTIERNE 1938:537b suggests a protoform "*raum ą\ + ta ?". The details of this formation as well as of OInd. romant h a-are not clear (EWAia II:470). It is interesting, however, that Balochi preserves this word of which there are otherwise only EIr. cognates(MORGENSTIERNE 1938:537).

Again, the Bal. word can be either genuine or borrowed (GEIGER 1891:444). In the latter case, the source must be MP since even Tajiki and Dari have nīm(a).

The etymology is not clear. GEIGER's connection (1890:143) with Av. †ruma "running quickly" does not hold(BARTHOLOMAE 1890:553).

For discussion of this word, cf. p. 82f.

For further discussion of the examples involving nd, cf. p. 79.

The pronunciation of gw-approaches [gu-] according to GRIERSON 1921:406. ABG transcribes ‡"Z¬" cry" as gōāng which points in the same direction (this variant of gwānk seems to be adjusted to NP bāng as far as the word-final consonant is concerned).

The word looks as if it was borrowed from an Ind. language, although the source is not clear. Cf. also p. 214.

A number of cognates in Ir. languages point to a protoform * ˘ u asa-which would also suit the Bal. form(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:26). For more Ir. cognates and their preforms, cf. BAILEY 1979:274a. The precise derivation of NP bačča is not entirely clear. For gwač(č), cf. p. 280.

A parallel case would be ǐī-(no past stem noted) "live" (Prth. žīw-/ žīwād, NP zīy-/ zīst, OInd. √jīv) which is, however, only reported by MAYER 1910 and might be a loanword (cf. Ur. ǐī-nā).

ELFENBEIN 1985:229 assumes that the correct form is haiwakk, the reason for which is unclear to me. BMC has (h)īwakk with secondary h-and dialectal ē > ī (cf. II 3.1.2.3.2). For NP yak, see above, for -ak(k), cf. II 2.4.4.1.

An example of such a causative is(FARRELL 1990:49) ras-"arrive" (itr.) → rasēn-"cause to arrive, transport" → rasāēn-"make someone transport somebody else".

For diphthongisation, cf. II 3.1.2.3.3.

This is the variant found in all SBal. and WBal. sources. EBal. sources have čī (DTB čih) which is also found in addition to čē in some other sources; it might show the influence of the adjective suffix -ī (cf. II 2.4.4.1) and of čī "thing" (a variant of čīz).

kai is used in all dialects. SHG has kaī (also in EAL) and kaē, probably indicating the same thing as kai of the other sources. k h āī (DAMES 1881:24) is likely to be an error for k h aī (thus DTB).

The gen.sg. ending -ī is found in the WBal. dialects of Turkmenistan and Afghanistan on personal names and for xudā "God" (cf. e.g.[START_REF] Sergej | Grammatičeskij očerk jazyka beludžej Sovetskogo Sojuza[END_REF]:63, BUDDRUSS 1988:48). A gen. ending -ī also appears on the sg. personal pronouns.

The endings -a and -∅ are found in EBal. In addition, -ē and -ī are found in these dialects; besides these, adjective formations (-ē ġ, -ī ġ) are used(GILBERTSON 1923:19ff.).

The "genitives" in -ī are likely to be originally adjective formations. The origin of the EBal. gen. endings -a and -∅ is not clear. For more discussion, cf. KORN (frthc. 2).

For the attestation, cf. p. 87.According to MORGENSTIERNE 1932:50, this word is "possibly borrowed".

This form is the 3sg. pres. of āy-"come". k-is a prefix of the present tense occurring in some verbs beginning with vowels. The personal endings differ quite markedly depending on the dialect.

Conversely, it seems that a shortening ˘ aya > ˘ ai is typical for loanwords (cf. p. 283).

The past stem is zāt. NP has the NWIr. forms (identical with Prth.) zāy-/ zād. Parthian shows transitive and intransitive use of the present stem zāy-, which derives from an intransitive formation

Note that šāh "king" need not be a Median (or otherwise non-SWIr.) word(HOFFMANN 1976:637 26 ).

For variants, cf. p. 196, 236, for the suffix cf. p. 165. Note also that Pashto has špāna etc.(MORGENSTIERNE 1927:75) so that a borrowing cannot be ruled out.

Also sōr (BMC, EAL, EVM, FBB). For uh > ō, cf. II 3.1.3.2.

For dialectal variants, cf. p. 207, 253. NP talx is also used.

For etymological discussion of MP šēr etc., cf. BAILEY 1979:421, KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208 64 .

For further Ir. cognates, cf. BENVENISTE 1929:75. Cf. also p. 276.

Morgenstierne assumes that the same development has taken place in Greek ( eore@ which is not strictly necessary since it can also come from a dialect without initial h-(psilotic). This explanation seems more likely than BARTHOLOMAE's (1890:552) who assumes a Sandhi phenomenon.

The vowel quantities of NP x w āhar have probably been adjusted to those in mādar "mother" and barādar "brother" (Jost Gippert, personal communication).

Also xiwēd and x w aid according to STEINGASS 1892:490. The etymology beyond MP xwēd is not known. For ē > ī, cf. II 3.1.2.3.2.

MacKenzie's interpretation has widely been accepted, cf. e.g. SUNDERMANN 1989a:122. An example for Prth. <wx-> + palatal vowel is wxēbēh "own".For MP <xw>, cf. WEBER 1994.

The forms with u-must be due to an analogical ablaut, cf. rōp-/ rupt "sweep", thus *ōšt-/ uštāt. Prth. awi-št-/ awi-štād shows a different preverb. NP has ˘ ıst-/ ˘ ıstād.

For the semantics, cf. p. 301, for discussion of the Psht. cognates, cf. MORGENSTIERNE 2003:83. For details in the development from Proto-Iranian to Avestan, cf. FISCHER 1998:84. The variant trū was not known yet to Geiger and Bartholomae (for dialectal ū > ī, cf. p. 196ff.), otherwise GEIGER 1891:434 would probably not have made a connection with OInd. str í-"woman".

Cf. MOŠKALO 1991:32. On the etymology of the examples, cf. p. 88. muzd (EAL) and duzd (EVM) are also found, these are more recent borrowings from NP.

Note, however, that HENNING 1958:98 1 is sceptical whether the relevant forms do involve *-s-č-.

For discussion of pušt, cf. p. 137, 147.

For further cognates, cf.STEBLIN-KAMENSKIJ 1999:313. The vowel of Russian ščenok "puppy" adduced by Gershevitch does not seem to fit with the words of the other languages. If pāčin "male goat" (NP pāzan) belongs here (some word for "mountain" + *sčani-"goat", cf. Orm. gar-canai), it cannot, as GERSHEVITCH 1971:268f. maintains, contain the same *sčani-since it seems unlikely that sč would go to č here and to z in NP which otherwise has s for sč.

GEIGER 1891:434 assumes a loss of š due to inadequate marking of gemination in his sources. The change is not noted byMOŠKALO 1991. For MP sm, zm > m, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:209 67 .

Note that the assimilation of OIr. šm is not likely to be a useful isogloss for NWIr. languages(KORN 2003:57), pace e.g. WINDFUHR 1975:461, who notes šm > hm for Balochi and some other languages.

Geiger also cites p h īm "wool" vs. NP pašm, but the existence of this word and the possibility of its derivation from *pašm ˘ i a-or the like are doubtful, cf. p. 178.

In contrast to NP, Balochi shows prothesis in word-initial clusters, e.g. istār "star" vs. NP sitāra (cf. II 2.3.4), so one would not expect a form šumā to arise in Balochi.

Thus GEIGER 1891:422. EBal. šawā would not speak against šumā being a loanword since loanwords are indeed affected by the EBal. change m > w (cf. p. 232f.).

Similarly, in some EIr. languages, the 2pl. pronoun is subject to a secondary modification, in this case by prefixing of the 2sg. pronoun (e.g. Bactr. twmaxo), which prevents its becoming identical with the pronoun of the 1pl. (cf.SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996:651a, 2000:227b).

NP gušna is analogically modelled on tišna "thirsty"(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:92). gušn is a NWIr. form for reasons of its š for PIE * ḱs (cf. p. 92), the genuine NP form being gurs(KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:208ff.). For further discussion of this word, cf. p. 100, 178.

For the vowel of srēn, cf. p. 202.

For this kind of metathesis, cf. II 3.1.3.1. All the cited words show a word-final labial which is not present in Av. sru-(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:75).

According to MORGENSTIERNE 1948:51, GEIGER's 1890:146 connection to Shughni čerost does not hold. The preform might be *sra ˘ u ša-which might have something to do with Av. sraoni-"loins", Bal. srēn (for which see above).

There is an irregular loss of r in the past stems kut "did" (also kurt) and gipt (also gitt), cf. p. 144, 146.

EAL pul can show the dialectal loss of h or may have been borrowed from NP. For variants and furtherdiscussion, cf. p. 147, 207, 211.

Bal. cognates of the following MP words containing hl have not been found (yet): ahlaw "righteous" and its derivatives, ahlomōg "heretic", hamahl "comrade" (OInd. samart h a-"appropriate", cf. HÜBSCHMANN 1895:208), p ˘ ahlom "excellent" (< *par\ama-, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:208).

This word belongs to mēz-/ mēst "urinate" (cf. p. 88).

For gwānk "cry", cf. p. 99, for ǐan-/ ǐat "strike", cf. p. 86.

Note that this means that gwānǐ-ag is not a cognate of NP bāng-/ bāngīd as GEIGER 1890:126 assumes. For the implications with regard to the etymology of theKhot. and other cognates, cf. GERSHEVITCH 1971:283f.

For the other examples of GEIGER 1891:435f., i.e. sak(k) "hard", cf. p. 112, for gipt (past stem of gir-"take"), cf. p. 144, for voiced consonants instead of voiceless ones, cf. II 3.3.1.6.

MORGENSTIERNE 1932:52 reports Br. hapurs which might have conserved the h-(if it is not secondary here). For variants, cf. also p. 193.

Note that there is a (presumably rather late) change of ar to ir, cf. p. 194f.

NP has girift, Prth. grift. Zaz. has the past stem guret-which goes back to *graft and is thus not parallel to the Bal. past stem. For the present stem, cf. p. 149.

For discussion of the variants, cf. p. 207, 209. Borrowed truš is also used (cf. p. 137).

DURKIN-MEISTERERNST p. 86 reads gīrw-and (following HENNING 1934:206) mīr-and attributes the long ī of both verbs to the specifities of syllable structure, comparing NP pīr "old". The Sogd. cognates myr-"die" and grb-"know" likewise contain short vowels(GERSHEVITCH 1954:72, 92).

DTB, GCD, EAL tar-/ tara\-"swim" is from Sindhi according to DTB (cf. tara ˙ n u) or from Lahnda (EAL).

Cognates include NP gu-zar-/ guzard, Prth. wi-dar-/ wi-dard, wi-darād "pass", NP gu-zār-/ guzārd, Prth. wi-dār-/ wi-dārād "let pass" and Prth./MP tarw-"overcome".

For the variant istāl, cf. p. 160.

It is not impossible that Bal. ištāp has been borrowed from NP šitāb (for devoicing of word-final consonants in loanwords, cf. II 3.3.1.4). For further discussion of šitāb, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:217 88 .

Additional examples with Prth. išT-are išmār "number" (NP šumāra), MPM, Prth. išnās-/ išnāxt "know, recognise" (NP šinās-/ šināxt); no Bal. cognates of these have been found so far.

According to HORN 1893:103, NP xāmōš is composed of the preverb *ā°and the root which is also present in NP farāmōš "forgotten". If so, xāmōš must have taken over the ō from farāmōš since the vocalism of the latter is the product of an analogical ablaut (cf. p. 117).

As has been argued above(II 2.1.3.4.2), āyag, āig was probably borrowed from NP (dialectal variant of *hāyag). For an alternative solution for the "egg"-words with h-, cf. II 2.4.1.5.

In addition to the passage in BOYCE 1954:164f., the word also occurs in the unpublished fragment M 92 R 3a(Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

The reverse process is seen in takāsur "calm"(ELFENBEIN 1991:115), SHG tak ãsur "restless" (for secondary nasalisation, cf. p. 215ff.), BMC taksur "tension" for NP-Ar. takāsul "laziness, negligence". The meanings noted in SHG and BMC are surprising.

The abstract suffix -ī has likewise probably been borrowed from NP (cf. p. 121).

For further discussion of syncopation in Balochi, cf. II 3.1.2.1.

This suffix could be attached to any OIr. noun without noticeable change of meaning, cf.KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:212)

Common Balochi > contemporary varieties

For h ˘ aps, cf. p. 158, for yaps, cf. p. 260.

The vowel of išk may have been assimilated to that of idā "here"(BUDDRUSS 1974:39).

While it is correct that āšk, ēšk, išk are only known from some WBal. sources, it is doubtful whether the use or non-use of these or similar expressions is a good criterion for establishing dialect boundaries as does ELFENBEIN 1966:8. It might also be due to chance that the formations are not attested from other dialects, and they are not found in the sources treating the dialect of Afghanistan(NAWATA 1981, BUDDRUSS 1988) which is very closely related to that of EVM (Turkmenistan Balochi) either.

It seems that this information noted by GEIGER

1891:426 goes back exclusively to GLADSTONE 1874:5 (GEIGER 1890:112), though. 18 āž-gēž occurs in HITTU RAM 1881, āž-giž (with a quasi-zero grade second member) in GLADSTONE 1874, ās-gēǐ in Cod. Or. 2439 of the British Museum (GEIGER 1890:114). For ās, cf. p. 89, for gēǐ-"swing", cf. p. 98, 229.

It is striking that the main entries in SHG are ūrt, īrt although in this source the Raxšānī loss of h does not usually take place. For a possible etymology, cf. p. 122.

It does not seem impossible that the EBal. form wasarix (EAL 159) is due to Elfenbein's application of EBal. sound laws to the SWBal. forms or as "correction" of was(a)rik.

The past stem is ǐuz(z)it, a secondary formation which cannot directly have brought about the short u of the present stem. For etymological discussion, cf. p. 104.

SHG has čūšš-which results from the regular gemination of consonants after ī and ū in that source. čūš(š)-might have been borrowed from NP čōš-(ELFENBEIN 1963:29).

If EAL nakō "old, uncle, father-in-law, grandmother" is not a misprint for nākō, it might be a derivative of nak(k) *"grandparent, elder relative".

Note that the converse distribution has been assumed for classical Latin(LEUMANN 1977:225f.) with -Vm pronounced as such when a consonant follows and -Ṽ in front of a vowel.

The transcription of Barker/Mengal's examples is adjusted to the system used here. In the present work, the nasalisation product of a short vowel + n is written as e.g. ã, that of a long vowel + n as ã etc., in order to make the process transparent and since there seem to be dialects with a difference in pronunciation between long and short nasal vowels (cf. p. 263). In other dialects (cf. p. 245), ã and ã, for instance, seem to fall together in pronunciation, so that e.g. FARRELL 1990 has <mã> for /man/ "I" and <-ã> for /-ān/ (obl.pl. ending) etc. DAMES 1891:15 (cf. p. 238) writes maṅ "I", maiṅ "my", maīṅ "our", transliterating the Urdu-style orthography; the implications for the actual pronunciation are not entirely clear.

Barker/Mengal's translation "The books are in the house" must be an error.

Cf. also the (probably only apparent) loss of u, ō in EAL ǐ(ō)wak "small stream" (from ǐō "river", cf. p. 104, 184), gwālag "bag" (loanword, cf. NP guwāl, cf. p. 279), gwāhī "news" (borrowed from NP guwāhī which derives from MP wigāhīh, Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst, personal communication).

ABG, FBB ǐawān "young" has probably been borrowed from NP ǐawān. EAL has ǐawān, ǐwān without distinction in form, but stating that the meaning is "good, nice" in Raxšānī and "young" in Kēčī, Coastal and the Eastern dialects.

Other sources have zubān (cf. p. 91).

The past stem guft(only in MORGENSTIERNE 1932:45) might be a contamination of the regular form *uft-and gwapt as MORGENSTIERNE 1932:45 assumes, but can be explained more easily as secondary development of *gwaft (SWBal. gwapt), cf. also p. 99.

The EBal. past stem gwast h -shows the secondary nature of the change seen in the present stem.

The variant gwār(EAL, EVM, FBB, NAWATA 1981:37) can be a result from either gwahār or guhār since both would give gwār when the h is lost. As loss of h is a chiefly WBal. phenomenon (cf. p. 248f.), gwār has to be considered as an interdialectal borrowing in FBB.

According to EAL 58, this variant is particularly common in Raxšānī and Kečī, but it is also the form mentioned in ABG, BMC, DTB, EAL, EVM, FBB, SHG. For the etymology, cf. p. 129, for further discussion, cf. p. 246.

Note that guš-is even mentioned in the EBal. sourcesGCD and MAYER 1910.

gwand, gwan ˙ d "small" (cf. p. 182) does not seem to show a variant †gund, †gun ˙ d , presumably because this would be homonymous with gund, gun ˙ d "testicles" (cf. p. 296f.).

ELFENBEIN 1990/II:VIIff. has -broadly speaking -gu-for WBal., gwa-, gu-for SBal. and gwa-for EBal. The evidence does not always seem to fit this assumption, cf. II 3.2 for the individual dialects.

ELFENBEIN 1990/II:108, referring to TURNER 1966:401, presumes that Br. nard-has been borrowed from an Ind. language. The Ind. words cited by Turner (Hindi n ˘ ad-etc.) do not seem to fit, however.

This work is deemed as being "in need of geographical corrections, and partly out of date" by the author himself(ELFENBEIN 1989a:361).

It will be seen that not all assignments of features to certain dialects as stated by Elfenbein can be confirmed. Notes of the form "EAL [i.e. ELFENBEIN 1990/II]: Eastern [Balochi]" are meant as quotes and do not imply an agreement of the present author that the characteristic or word in question is only found in or typical for Eastern Balochi.

Cf. I 3.1.1, 3.1.2. A résumé of the history concerning the study of EBal. isoglosses can be found in ROSSI 1979a:163ff.

This assumption seems to be made by MOŠKALO 1991:29. For further discussion, cf. IV.

More precisely, GEIGER's rule (1891:404) is that in Eastern Balochi, aspirated stops in word-initial position in front of vowels and r as well as word-internally in postconsonantal position correspond to SWBal. voiceless stops. Geiger also gives one example for t h r-and p h r-each (t h rōngal "hail", p h ruša ġ "to break"). For discussion of the phonemic status of the aspiration, cf. p. 60f. For changes of postvocalic consonants, cf. p. 226ff. For etymologies of the examples hereafter, cf. the index in V 2.

MORGENSTIERNE 1932a:8 also notes that aspiration (and the change of postvocalic stops to fricatives) in Brahui dialects is likely to be due to the influence of Balochi and is found in those Br. dialects spoken in the neighbourhood of Eastern Balochi.

Note that even in DTB, aspiration is not systematic.

ABG pahsal "harvest, season" besides usual pasl (NP-Ar. fa ¨ sl) and pahqīr "beggar, ascetic" besides normal pakīr (NP-Ar. faqīr) are likely to be due to misinterpretation of the Ar. orthography and to be read as /p h asal/, /p h aqīr/, respectively, they are thus (the only) examples of p h in ABG. A comparable case with k h is ABG kahzī "when" for /k h azī/, corresponding toSWBal. kadī (cf. p. 79, for d > z, cf. p. 230f.). For anaptyctical vowels, cf. II 3.1.2.4).

Note that the loss of the nasal (cf. p. 180) must be a very recent phenomenon, otherwise one would expect †afān. ap h ān is Geiger's only example for p h in non-initial position.

Dames' transcription <chih> is probably a spelling pronunciation to render the orthography, cf. the prep. "from" (otherwise č(i), ač etc.) which is also spelled <čhih> in DTB. Another EBal. form of the latter is aš (also found in DTB), equivalent to SWBal. ač, see below.

For the status of w h within the phonemic system, cf. p. 61f. ABG has wahāz "salt" (for d > z, cf. p. 230f.) and nā-wahš "angry" which might represent /w h āz/ and /nā-w h aš/, respectively (cf. the note on ABG's examples for p h above).

This formulation of the rule is more economical than that by GEIGER who assumes (1891:404 and in the sections of fricatives) a development of fricatives for intervocalic position and for some cases of word-final postvocalic position.

For implications for the phonemic system, cf. p. 60. For unknown reasons, the change of CBal. ǐ /V_ to EBal. ž is not mentioned byMORGENSTIERNE 1948:256.

ABG has rōš "sun", nimāš "prayer" (cf. p. 96), daršak "tree", maršī "today". The latter two words need not show č > š /r_, but might reflect CBal. *dračak (cf. SWBal. dračk etc., p. 66) > *drašak with metathesis (cf. p. 189) and marōčī > *marōšī with syncopation of the second vowel (parallel to or influenced by SBal. marčī vs.WBal. marōčī, cf. p. 139, 243). For hypercorrect bučk, cf. p. 165.

ABG has raža ġ (SWBal. raǐag) "to colour", darāž "long", dargēž ġ (syncopated from or a misprint for dar-gēža ġ, SWBal. dar-gēǐag) "invention, contrivance" (from gēǐ-).

It seems that in the case of postconsonantal t h , the (expected, see above) aspiration is marked even less consistently than with word-initial t h . GRIERSON 1921:391 has k h apt h -.

Dames thought (opinion expressed in a letter to Geiger, cf. GEIGER 1891:428) that s, z for \, d is due to imperfect rendering of the data by some authors; with regard to the cumulative evidence of the sources, the phenomenon rather seems to be a real one, though.

EAL 116 notes Bashkardi pīmū, pīwāz which shows something parallel to the Bal. situation. EAL has EBal. pīwāz, although it remains unclear where this form is found (DTB and Geiger's sources do not have it, neither doMAYER 1910[START_REF] Gilbertson | The Balochi Language. A Grammar and Manual[END_REF].

The identification of Bal. pīmāz as a loanword was stated by HORN 1893:77, although on different grounds. For Ir. cognates (e.g. Sogd. py'kh) and their possible derivation, cf. BAILEY 1979:250b.

Similarly, ASATRIAN/LIVSHITS 1994:83 assume that the v seen in Kurd. pîvaz is a vowel separator.

Thus the explanation of GEIGER 1891:427, 429. GEIGER's former explanation (1890:134) of the word as containing gis "house" is rather unlikely. The inherited word for "fly" is makisk (cf. p. 78, 194), magis(k) was borrowed from NP magas (cf. p. 194). The reason for the -h-in the EBal. variant mahisk is not clear to me. For gūt, cf. p. 81.

The etymology given by HORN 1893:146 (OInd. jarimán-"age" etc.) is not correct(HÜBSCHMANN 1895:69). Corresponding words found in diverse languages (e.g. Arm. žamanak, HÜBSCHMANN 1895:69) have been borrowed from Iranian (not vice-versa, as assumed in Horn's times), and the Bal. word was borrowed from NP(ELFENBEIN 1990/II:165). It belongs with (OInd., OIr.) √gam "go", for furtherIr. cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:110a, for the MP orthography, cf. KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:201 34 .

Maybe the stem ǐink h (cf. p. 166) is based on this form. If this is not a misprint for ǐinkā, it shows a shortening of -ā found in some other dialects(cf. p. 251, 260), but not noted for Eastern Balochi.

Other EBal. sources have šawānk h , for which cf. p. 225.

The SWBal. sources have kulā(h). For the etymology, cf. HORN 1893:192f., HÜBSCHMANN 1895:88; according to the latter, Kurd. kulav (found in OMAR 1992 in the meaning "felt carpet") shows that the suffix probably goes back to *-f, giving NP -h. This means that kulāh is a loanword (thus also GEIGER 1891:453).

BMC, EAL, SHG have kilīt. The word cannot, as GEIGER 1891:453 assumes, be authentic on account of its -t since it is a Greek loanword in NP (kleid-). kilīt from NP kilīd thus shows the devoicing of word-final consonant common in loanwords(cf. II 3.3.1.4).

For parallel considerations phenomena in Karachi Balochi, cf. p. 246.

Cf. V 1.2. The demonstrative pronoun ã is less likely to show secondary nasalisation vs. ā of the other dialects, but may rather have been borrowed from NP ān, cf. p. 243.

gwa-> gu-is also noted for Kasrānī by GRIERSON 1921:406. The past stem of guz-is given as gwast h -in DTB, though.

EAL has mahabat, mahābatt, the latter probably representing a contamination of the original mahab(b)at and mābat(t). For mōbatt, cf. p. 211.

Cf. ELFENBEIN's note that the forms in -tk are found in the Lāšārī (but cf. p. 257), Kēčī and Coastal dialects (1990/II:IXff.). The classification of -tk as also EBal. feature(ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XVII, MORGENSTIERNE 1932:44) is unlikely to be correct (cf. p. 230).

The loss of final -ā (obl.) and the -a of the perf. suffix assumed by GRIERSON 1921:376 need not be one, as the phenomena in question might rather reflect the use of the direct case instead of the oblique observed in some dialects(cf. e.g. BARANZEHI 2003:82, JAHANI 2003:123ff.) and the use of the simple past instead of the perfect.

The nasalisation observed by(GRIERSON 1921:376) in the demonstrative pronouns ã and ī for usual ā, ē is not secondary as he supposes since the (probably borrowed NP) pronouns ān, īn are used in some Bal. dialects as well(cf. p. 102, 238).

It is not clear whether the examples from ABG do come from a SBal. dialect. However, evidence of nasalisation of short vowels in regular nouns in other dialects is lacking so far, and none of the words in question show EBal. characteristics, so it is assumed that they belong here.

According to MACIUSZAK 1996:26, Ir. rang (for cognates, cf. BAILEY 1979:362b) is an Ind. loanword (cf. OInd., Pali raṅga-). If so, Bal. rang has been borrowed from NP rang as GEIGER 1891:458 assumes. Arm. erang has been borrowed from MP (Jost Gippert, personal communication) and thus does not help to decide anything.

Bal. zamīn has probably been borrowed from NP zamīn (cf. also zamīk, p. 163).

NP zaxm is derived from *ǰa\ma-by MACKENZIE 1967:26. Parthian has <jxm>, <jhm> žaxm. ABG also has the more recent loanword zaxm "wound".

Note that the examples of ahm > ām must be loanwords since hm is changed to m(m) in genuine words (cf. II 2.2.1.3).

wa(h)t is found in BARKER/MENGAL 1969/I:xl, wa(h)d in BMC, waht is attested in EAL. For further variants, cf. p. 281.

ELFENBEIN's statement about Raxšānī (1990/II:VII) that "postvocalic n is stable" thus appears questionable.

Note that words with y-cannot be genuine(cf. II 2.1.3.4.1). The change ya-> ē-may or may not have some connection with the change ya-> ī-seen in Av. loanwords in NP(KLINGENSCHMITT 2000:198 22 ).

It seems that some of the sample sentences in MAHMOODI BAKHTIARI 2003 do not come from Lāšārī proper. Some characteristics of the dialects are listed in ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XIVf., not all of them

In Lāšārī, īe, ūe correspond to what is ē, ō in other dialects, cf. p. 261.

SPOONER 1967:57 concludes that therefore h has no phonemic status; this need not be a necessary consequence, though.

The Sarāwānī preposition is probably identical with tah "interior", used as a postposition: x-(gen.) + tahā (obl. of tah) "in (lit.: in the interior of) x" in the other dialects and NP tah "bottom"; its etymology does not appear to be clear. The issue of Sarāwānī prepositions vs. pre-and postpositions of the other dialects is treated in BARANZEHI 2003:87f.

ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XV reports haškun-/ haškut "hear" (cf. p. 236) for Lāšārī.

In SPOONER 1967, the vowel e, i.e. /i/, is noted varyingly as i or e, the reasons or conditions for which remain unclear(cf. also ROSSI 1979a:192 165 , 210).

This is why SPOONER 1967 has <u> (sic) for ū and ō, and <o> for /u/.

This change is also found in some of the sentences in MAHMOODI BAKHTIARI 2003. Other sentences do not show this phenomenon, though, and may be considered as coming from a different dialect.

If so, the process would be the same as the one seen in Bashkardi (ELFENBEIN 1990/II:XIV).

But cf. the note on p. 256 about the "kūhī" variant of Iranian Balochi.

[START_REF] Nader | The Sarawani Dialect of Balochi and Persian influence on it[END_REF], only the past stem gopt is found.

ELFENBEIN's definition (1990/II:80) of kulp as "lock of hair" is obviously an error. For further variants, cf. p. 207.

For further variants, cf. p. 211.

This form is only found in NAWATA 1981:38. All other sources have masīt which is a loanword from an Ind. language(ROSSI 1979:321).

From NP-Ar. xarǐ. For the etymology of this word, cf. HENNING 1935.

This present stem must have been borrowed anyway, cf. p. 128.

The fact that Parthian has murt "death" while MP has no murt, but only marg (cf. KORN, frthc. 4) might favour the interpretation of Bal. mark as NP loanword.

BUDDRUSS (1988:44) has (h)atīm, with optional secondary h (on secondary h-, cf. II 2.4.1.3).

This word is reported by MORGENSTIERNE 1927:99, who considers it a loanword from Balochi.

Note that Psht. x(w)a ˙ r "(dry) watercourse" cannot, as GEIGER 1890:133f. assumes, be a cognate of Bal. kaur(MORGENSTIERNE 1927:99). Morgenstierne agrees with Geiger in connecting Bal. kaur to NP kaura "torrent". For the variant kūr, cf. p. 200.

From NP gardan; for the variant girdēn, cf. p. 195.

For discussion about selected semantic fields, cf. TURCHETTA 1989 (herbs and spices), ELFENBEIN 1992 (times of the day and length measures) and FILIPPONE 1996 (terms and expressions for denoting space in general).

Regular EBal. forms that differ from the SWBal. forms according to the rules given in II

3.2.1.1.1 are not mentioned separately. If EBal. sources (ABG, DTB, GCD) are given, e.g. "maǐg in DTB, GCD; SHG; EVM; EAL", that means that DTB, GCD have (EBal.) mažg and the rest have (SWBal.) maǐg. Where EBal. forms are found in other sources than the regular EBal. ones or if SWBal. forms figure in Eastern sources, they will be cited. Other regular variations (e.g. the loss of h in some WBal. dialects, cf. p. 248, the doubling of consonants after ī and ū in SHG, cf. II 3.2.2.1) are not noted either. 3 The following sources have been used: (predominantly) EBal.: ABG, DTB, GCD; (predominantly) SBal.: FBB, SHG; WBal.: BMC, EVM, NAWATA 1981. Words which are not found in EAL are marked with " " in the WBal. column. If EAL is the only source, it is cited in the WBal. column, since EAL (while by no means limited to words of a specific dialect) has a certain bias towards the Western dialects.4 It is possible that some possibly genuine words have been borrowed from older stages of Persian.

It is probable that rag has been borrowed from NP (GEIGER 1891:458) since the Prth. cognate is rahag, cf. OInd. rása-"juice" (cf. also EWAia II:442).

For a discussion of Bal. household structures, cf. FERRARO 1990.

Kinship terms

Colours

The variant sōr found in EVM, FBB shows the rule discussed on p. 211f. In addition to sōr, BMC and EAL have the hypercorrect form sōhr.

The word seems to be related to MPZ karmīr, Sogd. krm'yr(Nicholas Sims-Williams, personal communication), but the reason for the š-is not clear. For further discussion of MPZ karmīr, NP qirmiz (ultimately an Ind. loanword) etc., cf. MACIUSZAK 1996:29f.

Cf. GEIGER 1891:463.

Both words noted here vary in semantics between "green", "blue" and sometimes also "grey".

Note that the EBal. form sawz is also seen in other dialects: BMC sauz (cf. p. 277).

Verbs composed of a nominal part and a verb ("X kan-" etc.) are not discussed here. Secondary past stems in -it will mostly not be noted if there are other formations as well. For further information about the verbs listed in the following pages, cf. the references in V 2. On genuine and borrowed verbs in the Bal. lexicon, cf. also[START_REF] Agnes | Metrik und metrische Techniken im ˚ Rgveda[END_REF]

Note that āy-is identical with the NP present stem āy-"come". The past stems, however, are formed differently (NP āmad). The result of OIr. xt (and also of secondary *kt) are discussed in II 2.2.1.1 and the subchapters of II 3.2. For the purposes of this chapter, the variant in SBal. -kt is chosen and "etc." added to indicate that there are other variants as well.

For the variants ušt-, ust-(past stems uštāt, ustāt), cf. p. 124.

The derivation of bay-is not entirely clear (cf. p. 78). būt is nearly identical with NP būd (for devoicing of final consonants in loanwords, cf. II3.3.1.4).For variants of būt, cf. p. 197, 246.

pak(k)-may be a denominative from possibly inherited pak(k)ag or from borrowed pak(k)ā (both "ripe"), cf. p. 112.

GCD has the past stem sik h \-(sic).

In the tables to follow, "classical" Parthian / Middle Persian denotes the stage reflected in the orthography of the Manichaean texts from Turfan. As for Parthian, this stage is termed "Mittelmittelparthisch" by SUNDERMANN 1989a:123.

The term "Middle Balochi" will be used to denote the (reconstructed) Middle Iranian stage of Balochi.

Note that the lenition of postvocalic b, d, g is termed "common throughout Iranian" bySIMS- WILLIAMS 1996:650.

This stage is called "Frühmittelparthisch" by SUNDERMANN 1989a:123f. The older Prth. loanwords in Armenian show the OIr. voiceless stops and č in unchanged form (e.g. spitak "white", ročik "daily bread"), but fricatives for OIr. voiced stops: Ir. b is rendered by Arm. v (e.g. žanvar "sedan chair" < *ǰani-bara-"carrying women"), and Ir. d by Arm. r.

This stage is called "Spätmittelparthisch" by SUNDERMANN 1989a:122ff.

I have not seen evidence that OIr. ǐ is preserved in "Parthian 1", but assume it here for systematic reasons.

Note that the preservation of OIr. \ has been considered a typically Eastern Ir. feature; some EIr. languages show a change of \ > t (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996:650).

It seems indeed that all Middle Ir. languages (including the Eastern ones) formed a continuum of dialects(SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996:650).

Morphemes the history of which is discussed in the previous chapters may be found in the index. For the history of the nominal system, cf. KORN (frthc.

2).2 Since some Balochi dialects use ergative constructions (see below), the term "direct case" (= absolute or rectus) is used here. However, many descriptions have used the term "nominative".3 Some Bal. dialects do not have a genitive case (see below).

For the etymology, cf. p. 102, for a variant, cf. p. 260.

Morphological sketch

For the vowel, cf. p.

Noteworthy synchronically irregular forms include mas-tir "bigger" (from mazan), kas-tir "smaller" (from kasān) and bus-tir "higher" (from burz), cf. p. 97f.

For additional variants, cf. p. 238, 263.

bīt is a dialectal variant of būt (cf. p. 197).

For more information about the situation of the ergative construction in Balochi dialects, cf. KORN (frthc. 1).

These forms are called "aorist" by some authors since they are also used for the future tense and in statements of a general nature, and there is a separate present tense of a structure parallel to Engl. I am going in most dialects. However, the term "present tense" is used here, since, in the first place, the forms do denote present tense, and their use for the future has parallels in the present tense of many languages; periphrastic constructions of the Engl. kind may conveniently be termed present continuous(thus e.g. FARRELL 1990:74). Other authors use the term "aorist" for what is called subjunctive here.

For a discussion of some material belonging here, cf.[START_REF] Vyacheslav | K voprosu ob opisatel'nyx sposobax vyraženija modal'nyx i vido-vremennyx značenij v beludžskom jazyke[END_REF]

The vowel may be u when the following syllable has a labial vowel. The vowel may also be omitted, the prefix b-being assimilated to the following vowel(BUDDRUSS 1988:59), e.g. p-kašš "pull!"(BARANZEHI 2003:96).

Note that the published texts are fairy tales, stories of legendary character etc., and samples of everyday speech like those in FARRELL 2003:205ff. create the same impression. It is possible, however, that free speech and conversation, at least from certain dialects, might show more complex structures. The collection of data from as many sorts of text as possible and from the diverse dialects is an urgent desideratum.

Cf. I 3.3.

II. Historical Phonology

The variants of the past stem of gind-"see" may be explained as follows: dīt (DTB, GEB, EAL: Eastern, Kēčī, Lāšārī, Coastal) is the regular past stem of OIr. √dī, OInd. √d h ī "look" (GEIGER 1890:122, cf. NP dīd, Prth. dīd); dist (EVM, NAWATA 1981:17) and dīst (BMC, FBB, EVM, EAL: Raxšānī, Sarāwānī) will represent contaminations of dīt and * ˘ u ist-(the past participle of OIr., OInd. √ ˘ u id "find", cf. MORGENSTIERNE 1932:44). 53 CBal. ū > u (GEIGER 1891:409): 54 • EVM āmuxta 55 "accustomed" which because of its x must have been borrowed

from NP appears to be a shortened form of NP āmōxta, CNP āmūxte (Prth. ammōxtag "learned"); • PIERCE 1874, EAL (noted as Coastal, i.e. probably taken from Pierce) surušk "elbow" for surūšk, which is a variant of srōš (cf. p. 131, 205); • kučik(k) "dog" vs. Kurd. kûçik "dog" shows a shortening of the vowel; 1929:263b) that NP kūčak cannot belong here does not seem to be conclusive. The Parachi word is likely to have been borrowed from Tajiki and the Taj. word from Turkic according to DOERFER III:630. GEIGER 1891:409 assumes that kučik(k) has been borrowed from NP kōčak (thus the proper reading according to DOERFER III:628) "small", but the semantics make this assumption rather implausible. The Bal. word is less likely to belong with Osset. kwydz, Sogd. (')kw ¯ t-etc. (cf. ABAEV I:605) which have been derived from *kuta-/ *kutī-and considered to be exclusively Eastern Iranian (SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996:651); on the other hand, Zazaki has kutik, and although the precise history of this word is not known, it seems that it belongs to the EIr. forms.

II. Historical Phonology

In some cases, Ind. v-is treated like OIr. ˘ u -, i.e. changed to Bal. g(w)-: 480 • SHG gisir-"get lost" 481 comes from Si. visira ˙ n u according to DTB; • MORGENSTIERNE 1948:256 considers gwač(č) "(buffalo) calf" (also used to denote "chicken") to be a loanword since the Eastern dialects have gwač as well, not †gwaš. Although this argument is not entirely conclusive since the Eastern dialects may have borrowed the word from SWBal., gwač(č) is indeed likely to have been borrowed from Si. vač h "buffalo calf", the identity of the meaning and the doubling of the č speaking for a borrowing rather than in favour of the word being inherited (if the latter was the case, gwač(č) might be a direct cognate of NP bačča "child, son", as GEIGER 1891:424 presumed).

In other cases, b-is substituted for Ind. v-, presumably because v-sounds more like bthan like w-to a Bal. ear:

• bag(g) "camel herd" might have been borrowed from Si./Lhd. va ¯ gu (thus ELFENBEIN 1963(thus ELFENBEIN :22, 1990/II:14), alternatively, the change of the word-initial might be attributed to Brahui (thus ZARUBIN 1930:660) which has bag, too;

• bēr "revenge" might have been borrowed from Si. vēru (ELFENBEIN 1963:24), if not from Ur. bair "revenge"; • bāhō ˙ t "refuge, refugee" which is also found in Brahui might be a further case provided that it has been borrowed from Balochi into Brahui and not vice-versa and that the etymology advocated by BRAY III:61 (Si. vāha "protection" + ō ˙ t a "sanctuary") is correct.

y-> ∅

Some loanwords exhibit loss of word-initial y-: 482 • ābū (EVM) "pony" from NP yābū (originally Turk., cf. DOERFER IV:48); • āsamī (BMC), āsumī 483 (SHG) vs. yāsumī (SHG), yāsmīn (EAL) "jasmin" (NP yāsamī(n), MP yāsaman); 480 ELFENBEIN's assumption (1989:635) of gwahr "cold" being borrowed from Khetrani vahōr is not necessary (cf. p. 118).

481 Also gisar "forgetting" (DTB), "mistake, oversight; died, disappeared" (EAL).

482 Note that words with y-are necessarily loanwords, since in genuine words, y-is changed to ǐ-as in NP (cf. II 2.1.3.4.1). In other loanwords, ya-is changed to ē-(cf. p. 255).

483 For -u-instead of a, cf. p. 286.

Other pronominal elements

• wat "own" is used as a reflexive pronoun (cf. the example sentence in V 1.1). 16 • kai "who" and čē "which" are inflected like demonstrative pronouns.

Adjectives

Adjectives in attributive position are used with the suffix -ēn. 17

The comparative is formed by adding -tir, 18 the superlative by -tirēn (FARRELL 1990:66), e.g. šar(r)tir "better", šar(r)tirēn "best" from šar(r) "good". However, some dialects prefer to use analytic expressions like "from X big" (BUDDRUSS 1988:50), e.g.

• ša muččān dārindagēn mardum "the wealthiest man of all (lit.: from all wealthy man)" (AXENOV 2003:252), • āīā čē mazan "bigger (lit.: from him/her/it big)" (FARRELL 2003:197).

Adverbs

Certain adjectives in obl. case may function as adverbs, e.g. sak-ā "hard" (adv.), EBal. aksarā "generally" (from Ur. aksar). Ar. adverbs in -an appear as -ā in Balochi, e.g. awalā "at first" (from NP-Ar. awwal), probably in analogy to the obl. formations.

Further adverbial expressions are formed with the help of the postposition sarā "on" (obl. of sar "head"), e.g. zōr-ē sarā "powerfully" (FARRELL 1990:68).

Prepositions and postpositions

Both prepositions and postpositions are found in Balochi. Those dialects heavily influenced by Persian prefer prepositions, those in direct contact with Ind. languages chiefly use postpositions (cf. JAHANI 2003:127, FARRELL 2003:195ff.).

16 The use of wat is entirely parallel to that of NP x w ud with which it is etymologically cognate (cf. p. 122).

17 -ēn appears as -ē under the same circumstances as the obl.pl. -ã (cf. p. 213, 238, 243, 263).

Compound tenses

The basis of the compound tenses is the perfect participle. They are constructed ergatively in those dialects which pattern ergatively.

The present perfect uses the perf.part. with the copula present, but without ending in the 3sg., e.g.

• man kapt-ag-ȭ "I have fallen"; ā kapt-a "he/she has fallen"; man gušt-a "I have said" (SBal.); mā zahm ã ār\-ag-ant "I (obl.) have brought the swords (obl.pl.)" (EBal., with 3pl. ending on the verb for the pl. object).

The past perfect uses the cop.past, e.g.

• ǐat-at-un "I have hit"; āw ã kalāt-ē bastag-at-ant "they (obl.) had built a fort (dir.)" (WBal.); man kapta bīt-ag-ȭ "I had fallen" (SBal.).

Mood, voice and aspect 23

The prefix bi-24 is used with the present tense to form a subjunctive, its use being exactly parallel to the NP subjunctive. bi-plus the present stem yields the imperative sg.; the pl. is identical with the 2pl. subj.

bi-with the past stem and the suffix -ēn-(according to FARRELL 1990:75 also without -ēn-) gives a form which is used as an irrealis and/or an iterative past: ki man bi-dāštēn-un "(each time) when I had" (BUDDRUSS 1988:61), na-ke ōda be-rapt-ēn-ã "I wish I had gone there" (BARANZEHI 2003:99).

Forms with bi-are negated by replacing the prefix by ma-.

A passive voice is also found, although not too frequently, and rather rarely with an agent expressed. It is made from the infinitive (cf. p. 337) with būt "was/became" as auxiliary, e.g.

• lānč girag bītagitã "boats (dir.) had been caught (pl.)" (SBal.).