INTRODUCTION

inship terms are of considerable interest for a number of reasons. From a linguistic perspective, one aspect of their importance lies in their being part of the core vocabulary that is usually regarded as inherited and often used for purposes of historical and comparative linguistics. Indeed, the existence of a language family such as the Indo-European one is established on the basis of such lexical items. At the same time, it is data such as Fig. 1 from which one draws conclusions about the changes that have occurred in the various branches to yield the attested languages. Owing to their antiquity, family terms sometimes also highlight interesting elements of historical morphology. 1 From an anthropological point of view, a particular interest lies, among others, in the question how a system of kinship terms is structured and which types of relations are distinguished in the system of family terms (cf. [START_REF] Pehrson | The social organization of the Marri Baluch[END_REF][START_REF] Orywal | Die Balūč in Afghanisch-Sīstān: Wirtschaft und soziopolitische Organisation in Nīmrūz, SW-Afghanistan[END_REF]: 228-233 and Ferraro 1988 for such studies on the Balochi kinship terms).

As a minority language spread over several countries, Balochi (Bal.) is heavily fragmented dialectally (Fig. 2), which is reflected in all parts of its grammar and lexicon. As will be shown in Section 3.3, this also applies to the kinship terms, which vary significantly between the dialects; this concerns not only their dialectal form, but also the inventory of relations that are encoded with a specific term. It is thus in fact the structure of the kinship term system that varies significantly between Balochi dialects.

The variation of kinship terms may also be due to the fact that the contact languages are to some extent different for the various languages (Fig. ------1 Unless otherwise noted, asterisks mark reconstructed Proto-Iranian, Common Iranian (or occasionally Proto-Indo-Iranian) forms in what follows. K 3). Persian has had a strong influence on Balochi throughout its history, but Indo-Aryan languages are an important factor as well, particularly of course for the dialects spoken in Pakistan. In some regions, there is also contact with Pashto, and there has been a high level of bilingualism with the Dravidic language Brahui throughout several centuries.

Sharing Prof. Adriano Rossi's interest for the Balochi language, I intend to illustrate some stray points about its family terms that, although mostly not entirely new, might be of interest as a case study on the lexicon.

SOME POINTS OF HISTORICAL INTEREST

Historical phonology

There are some items within the Balochi kinship terminology which are of particular interest for historical linguistics. From the etymological point of view, one such item is Bal. trū 'aunt', dialectally trī (some of Southern and Eastern Balochi), which is shown as an inherited word by its obvious connection to Avestan (Av.) tū i riiā-'father's sister '. 2 Besides this Av. word, there is also the male equivalent tū i riia-'father's brother', which in turn is related to Sanskrit pitr̥ -vyà-(Br+) 'id. '. 3 This clearly is a derivative from 'father' (Sanskrit pitár-, oblique stem pitr-).

Other Indo-European (IE) languages also have parallel formations for 'father's brother' (e.g. Latin patruus, Greek pátrōs, etc.), which is also seen in several Iranian (Ir.) languages, e.g. Chorasmian (ʾ)fcwr. 4 Pashto trə, which, depending on the dialects, means 'father's brother' or 'uncle' in general, shows that the male equivalent was transmitted into Modern Iranian, but it is not found in Balochi. Conversely, the aunt's name is not preserved in Pashto, which has secondary trōr (with dialectally more or less specified semantics as for trǝ) formed from trǝ by analogy to mōr ------2 [START_REF] Bartholomae | Arica III[END_REF]Bartholomae ( : 263, 1904: 657): 657). Geiger (1893: 189) accepts Bartholomae's etymology against his earlier derivation (Geiger 1891: 434) from *strī-(at the time, only Bal. trī was known, which had led Geiger astray). 3 Bartholomae (1904: 657) etc. 4 Cf. Mayrhofer (1992, II: 130) with further references. 'mother'. 5 Khotanese appears to agree with Balochi in preserving the aunt's name (pyarīja-'father's sister (?)'). 6 So far as the details of the sound changes are concerned, the Avestan development of tū i riia-< *ptr̥ wiya-might be compared to (virtual) */k w twr̥ ya-/ > tū i riia-'fourth' (vs. āxtū i rīm 'four times'). In both cases, the loss of the word-initial consonant is likely to be not PIE, but Indo-Iranian. 7 For the oblique stem, Old Avestan also shows f ǝ δr-, providing evidence for a word-initial cluster *ptr-(> *fθr-). Another form that appears to show a reflex of the cluster *ptr is New Persian (NP) afdar 'father's brother, nephew'. However, it is unlikely to belong to this group: 8 as argued by Szemerényi (1977: 59), one would expect *p(i)tr̥ (w)(i)ya-to yield NP -īr (cf. *pr̥ (H)w(i)ya-> pīr 'old', *gr̥ wya-> gīr-'seize', 9 *mr̥ ya-> mīr-'die'); also, it is hard to see how the -fd-could have come about (the δ in Av. f ǝ δr-is unlikely to stand for a voiced consonant). 10 Szemerényi (ibid.) also discusses a derivation of afdar from *ha-pitar-'having the same father' (cf. Old Persian hama-pitar-), but dismisses it because the formation is not (otherwise) attested. This would to my mind not exclude the etymology, in view of the fact that parallel formations are attested in New Iranian (cf. Av. ha-paθnī-'co-wife', NP āmusnī etc., to which Bal. hapōk, hapōg might be related).

Szemerényi (ibid.) thus favours a derivation from (Persian from Arabic) āfad 'nephew from the brother's side', which would have been adjusted to the other family terms by analogy to pid vs. pidar, brād vs. brādar, etc. The analogy seems well motivated to me; and the syncope that Szemerényi needs to assume has parallels in Middle Persian (MP) examples adduced by ------5 Morgenstierne (1927: 81). Several other derivatives ('trǝ's daughter' etc.) are also in use [START_REF] Morgenstierne | An Etymological Vocabulary of Pashto[END_REF](Morgenstierne : 81f., 2003: 83): 83). For secondary forms either from 'fathers' or 'mother's brother' in other IE languages, see Schmidt (1973: 72ff.). 6 Bailey (1979: 251). 7 Mayrhofer (1986: 118, 138 fn. 172), Szemerényi (1977: 59f.). Szemerényi (1977: 59f.) assumes that the word-initial cluster *pt-arose in a paradigm featuring accusative *ptarǝm vs. dative piθre etc., yielding a nominative ptā 'father' analogically; thus also de Vaan (2003: 517), pace e.g. Hoffmann and Forssman (1996: 94). 8 Pace e.g. Steingass (1892 s.v.). 9 This present stem is likely to go back to *gr̥ bya- (Hübschmann 1895: 146) vs. Old Persian gr̥ bāya-, Av. gǝ u ruuaiia-etc. (cf. Sanskrit gr̥ b h āya-). 10 Semantically, Szemerényi's logic (he finds a connection of afdar to *ha-pitar-'having the same father' more convincing than to *ptr̥ wya-) seems less compelling to me. Klingenschmitt (2000: 210f.) such as Pahlavi <lpd> raβd 'goes' (*rábati), <tzd> tazd 'runs' (*táčati), <ʾpdwm>, Manichean MP aβdom <ʾbdwm> 'last' (*apatama-).

So far as the rest of the word is concerned, Av. tū i riia-is not quite clear. Bartholomae (1904: 657) assumes that the graphic form stands for /tǝrwya-/. 11 However, the argument by de Vaan (2003: 302, 421, 515-518) seems more convincing to me: Av. tū i riia-could come about by a (regular) development of "*r̥ u̯ i̯ > *uri̯ followed by i-epenthesis", thus "*ptr̥ u̯ i̯ a-> *tr̥ u̯ i̯ a-> *turi̯ a-", 12 a development which is largely parallel to *pr̥ Hu̯ (i)i̯ a-> *parwya-(Old Av. pao u ruiia-) > *pawrya-> Young Av. pao i riiya-'first' on the one hand (de Vaan 2003: 421) and to */k w twr̥ ya-/ > *turya-> tū i riia-(Sanskrit turya-) 'fourth' on the other. Alternatively, Mayrhofer (1986: 138 fn. 172) suggests (virtual) PIE *ph 2 tr̥ u̯ ii̯ ó-> (with regular loss of the laryngeal) pre-Av. *ptruwiya-, 13 which would be parallel to *mātruu̯ ii̯ ā-seen in Greek μητρυιά 'stepmother', Old English mōdrie 'mother's sister'.

For Bal. trū, one might be tempted to assume either *ptr̥ wya-> *turya-as suggested by de Vaan for Avestan, or else a development to **turwya-, considering also that *r̥ yields Bal. ur in phonetically neutral context (thus Bal. turs-'be afraid ', kurt 'did' vs. MP andParthian tirs-, kird, cf. Korn 2005a: 149, 2016: 409-412). However, how this form would yield trū is not clear. Also, such a development does not take into account the other cases of *-r̥ (w)y-, where Balochi appears to show -ir-: I see no way of getting around the fact that the development should be parallel to that yielding gir-from *gr̥ wya-(and mir-'die' < *mr̥ ya-etc.), 14 the i of which cannot be analogical to the past stem gipt, gitt, gīpt because the past stem itself should be †gur(p)t etc. and needs to have its i from the present stem. 15 ------11 Szemerényi (1977: 59) adds to this that <trwy> might have been misinterpreted as <twry> in the Pahlavi script and that a "real" -ū i rii is rendered improbable by the Persian development of *r̥ wy > īr (which, however, does not seem a compelling argument for Avestan). 12 Similarly Schmidt (1973: 72f.) and Hoffmann and Narten (1989: 73 fn. 126: "*(p)tə u ri̯ a-"). 13 Somewhat similarly Normier (1980: 46f.), who also derives Chorasmian (ʾ)fcwr from Ir. *fθruya-. 14 This obviously leaves pīr 'old' as a Persian loanword. 15 Cf. Korn (2005a: 144). The same situation does not arise in Avestan (cf. note 9).

At last on the face of it, there has been a resyllabification of the sonorant group that has led to trū, which might suggest the *ptruwiya-noted by Mayrhofer. Alternatively, one might perhaps think of *(p)tr̥ wya-yielding (virtual) **(p)truya-. The resyllabification surely is straightforward enough phonetically, and it is in fact regular in PIE, where both *r̥ w and *wr̥ yield ru in interconsonantal position (e.g. *k u̯ etu̯ r̥ -C > *k u̯ etru-> Av. čaθru-, Latin quadru-, etc., Mayrhofer 1986: 161-163). However, this regularity applies to early Indo-European and does not normally occur in (Proto-)Balochi. It also would not entirely solve our problem, because there does not seem to be a parallel for *(p)truya-> trū (though admittedly this development is perhaps not excluded either).

Starting from "*pitr̥ (u̯ )ii̯ ah" > Pashto trə, which Skjaervø (1989: 401) adduces as an instance of the development of *iya, one wonders whether a form without *-w-might also account for Bal. trū. Clearly *mr̥ ya-> Bal. mirwould suggest that also a form without *-w-(viz. *(p)tr̥ ya-) should yield †tir vel sim. However, the vocalism begs the question whether the variant trī could be the original form and whether there might have been a resyllabification parallel to the one just mentioned (and similarly ad hoc), thus *(p)tr̥ wya-> *(p)tr̥ ya-> (virtual) **(p)triya-. As argued in Korn (2005a: 105f., 136), postconsonantal *yā yields ā in Balochi, as in nākō 'uncle, Sir' (Av. niiāka-'grandfather', NP niyā 'ancestor'), but postconsonantal iya/ā yields ī: zī(k) 'yesterday' (Sanskrit hyás, NP dī-rūz), Eastern Bal. ǰīġ 'bow string' (Av. ǰiiā-), gīn 'breath' (*wi-āna-, thus a cognate of MP gyān, NP ǰān). Thus, trī would be the regular result of *triya-.

This assumption would require that to an original trī a form trū was added, based on the reinterpretation of the former as dialectal, and applying to it the (hypercorrect) reversal of the dialectal change ū > ī. 16 This would in principle not be excluded, as might be shown by šūnz 'green', if this variant is secondary to šīnz and if this is to be connected to Pashto šīn 'green' (possibly related to Avestan axšaēna-'dark'). 17 Also, a dialectal (re-)distribution of pre-existing variants arising secondarily is not unparalleled either, as shown by the "dialectal variants" pis(s) / pit 'father', mās / māt etc. (see Section 2.2). However, the amount of extra assumptions needed to get this explanation working seems rather high.

------ 16 This change is regular for much of Southern and Eastern Balochi, producing e.g. bīt < būt 'was', dīr < dūr 'far', was(s)ī(g) < was(s)ū(g) 'mother-in-law', cf. e.g. Korn (2005a: 196-198). 17 See Korn (2005a: 113f., 198) for discussion of this word.

At any rate, one wonders whether there might be a more direct way to arrive at the attested forms. If the cluster of sonorants in *(p)tr̥ wya-was reduced not by losing the *-w-as assumed by Skjaervø (1989: 401) but the *-y-, the resulting *(p)tr̥ wa-could perhaps have been resyllabified to *truwa-.

It seems to me that this form might yield trū regularly: *w often behaves in a way parallel to y, and the sequences with y just discussed would suggest that there might have been a development of postconsonantal *uwa > ū (parallel to Ciya > Cī). The numeral dō 'two' < *duwa is not a counterargument, as the whole set of numerals has been borrowed from Persian into Balochi. 18 Also, a development *uwa > ū surely does not seem unlikely a priori, and is also seen in some instances in Persian (while other cases of *uwa yield MP/NP ō under conditions that are not clear yet). 19One advantage of this assumption is that one could still derive Pashto trə from the same form, since, according to Skjaervø (1989: 401), *uwa yields the same result as iya, as shown e.g. by psə 'sheep, goat' < "*psuu̯ (ah)".

Clearly each of the developments just outlined requires a certain amount of ad hoc assumptions. However, they seem to come at different levels of "cost": *(p)tr̥ wya-> *(p)tr̥ wa-> *truwa-is slightly irregular, but not more so than *(p)tr̥ wya-> *(p)tr̥ ya-> **(p)triya-, for which then further assumptions are needed to yield trū. Thirdly, *(p)tr̥ wya-> *(p)truya-seems somewhat more straightforward, but that this form should have given trū (or trī, for that matter) is so far as I can see not quite likely. If one admits the ad hoc assumption of a sonorant simplification *(p)tr̥ wya-> *(p)tr̥ wa-(> *truwa-> trū), this would remove the problem that one would expect the development to be parallel to that of *gr̥ wya-. Indeed, one might say that these forms show a converse simplification of the sonorant cluster.

The development of *Cuwa > Bal. ū just suggested as possibly regular would imply that du (< *dū ?) 'two' might perhaps be the inherited outcome of *duwa, although it is possible that this form is borrowed from Persian as well. Similarly, besides tau, tō 'you' (certainly going back the genitive *tawa just as man 'I' derives from the genitive *mana) one might expect that there was at some point **tū deriving from the nominative *tuwam, but lost at the time when the inherited case distinction was abandoned in the pronominal paradigm. Though no trace of **tū seems to survive in Balochi, the exis-------tence of such a form has been assumed for Parthian, and the form clearly is present in Bactrian (τοο etc. vs. OBL ταο) and probably New Ir. languages such as Zazaki (tı vs. OBL to). 20 *Cuwa > Bal. ū would arrange itself with other developments of w/u that mirror those of y/i. Further examples of these are *aw(a) > Bal. ō, in wordfinal position dialectally also -au (with examples such as tau, tō 'you.SG' < *tawa, which are parallel to *ay(a) > Bal. ē, dialectally also -ay (e.g. GEN *-ahya > -ay, -ē). 21 This begs the question whether Cyā > Bal. Cā mentioned above may have a parallel containing w, and whether this might provide a more convincing derivation of the variant ta 'you.SG' than the analogy proposed for lack of a better idea in Korn (2005b: 299f.), and which is otherwise unexplained so far as I know. 22 The input form might perhaps be seen in the ACC *θwām (Av. θwąm), maybe (also) motivated by the clitic forms ACC *=θwā, ABL *=θwad (which yield Sogdian =f, Chorasmian =f etc. 23 ). Whether or not the t from *θw is regular is difficult to decide. The Bal. items that show h (among them *čahār > čār 'four', *čihill > čil(l) 'forty', puhl 'bridge' etc.) can all be borrowed from Persian; 24 conversely, the t-in ta could have been adjusted to tō and to the clitic =t deriving from the GEN/DAT *=tai. 25 Admittedly, a derivation from an ACC would be rather isolated in the nominal and pronominal paradigm of Balochi; perhaps there might be a pragmatic motivation to it. However, a possible parallel might be seen in the 1SG pronoun mε in Gavrouni (Zoroastrian Dari), which Bernard (2016: 74) derives from ACC *mām (Av. mąm) rather than from *mana (which should not have lost the -n). Incidentally, Gavrouni also has ta as 2SG pronoun (Bernard 2016: 68).

If all this is so, the various developments of wa in different contexts would correspond to the variants of 'you.SG', viz. NOM *tuwam > *tū (as re-------20 Cf. Korn (2016: 423), Sims-Williams (2007: 268, 270). 21 Cf. Korn (2005a: 101f., 107f., 151). The GEN ending -ī seen on names and some pronouns also listed in this context in Korn (2005a: 108) is better explained as the adjective suffix -ī (Korn 2005b: 293, 299). 22 Note that Geiger (1901b: 240) notes ta and tō for the direct case, but tau for both the direct and the oblique case. 23 Cf. Sims-Williams (1996: 161, 164), Korn (2009: 162f.). 24 Cf. Korn (2005a: 120f.). 25 This is probably the case for NP =t, which in Middle Persian still occurred in the variants =t and =d.

flected in Bactrian, Zazaki etc.), 26 GEN *tawa > Bal. tō /tau (dialectal) (and Persian, Parthian etc. tō), clitic GEN/DAT *=tai > =t, ACC *θwām, *=θwā > ta.

Historical morphology

If the argument in Section 2.1 is on the right track, the pronoun of the 2SG would preserve different forms of one paradigm that have become variants on the synchronic level. In fact, they have to a certain extent been redistributed dialectally: While Eastern Balochi sources give all three forms t h au, t h ō, t h a 27 (but Dames 1881 and Gilbertson 1923 do not have ta), only one variant each is given by Southern and Western Balochi sources: it is tau in all WBal. and SBal. dialects of Pakistan 28 and also in Ir. Sarawan, 29 but tō in Kech 30 and Oman (SBal.) 31 vs. ta in Lashari 32 and Koroshi 33 as well as in WBal. of Ir. Sarhadd, of Sistan (Iran and Afghanistan) and Turkmenistan. 34 The pronoun 'you.SG' would not be isolated in showing different forms of the paradigm redistributed as dialectal variants synchronically: a parallel phenomenon has been observed for the family terms. Besides pit 'father', māt 'mother', brāt 'brother' and zāmāt 'son-in-law', all with -t as might be expected for Balochi, there are forms with -s(s), viz. pis(s), mās, brās and zāmās (Fig. 4). As suggested by Bartholomae (1885: 130, 133), these forms, synchronically WBal. variants, are likely to be from the oblique stem (*piθr-etc., e.g. GEN *piθrah), rendering Balochi different from the Persian forms (pidar, mādar, brādar), which go back to the accusative (*pitaram etc.) besides (in Middle Persian) pid, mād, brād corresponding to Bal. pit etc.

------While Middle Persian shows evidence of pidar etc. being the OBL case and pid etc. the direct case, Balochi does not show any trace of this distribution. Conversely, the forms preserved in Balochi agree with what is otherwise shown in the language insofar as pis(s) etc. and the pronouns go back to a form that is (also) the genitive. The Pashto forms might go back to the ACC and GEN (Skjaervø 1989: 406), thus combining the OBL forms seen in Persian and Balochi.

DISTRIBUTION AND ETYMOLOGY OF FAMILY TERMS

Structure of kinship systems

Another interesting point to be observed about Bal. trū is that it etymologically means 'father's sister', but synchronically refers to 'aunt' generally. Somewhat similarly, Pashto trə still refers to 'father's brother' at least in some dialects, but means 'uncle' generally in others.

This might perhaps be related to the fact that in a patriarchal society such as the Baloch, the aunt whom the children are liable to meet would be father's sister in the first place, i.e. an aunt who is not married yet, or who has returned to her parents' place e.g. after the death of her husband, or the splitting up of a marriage.

It should be noted, however, that practices in reality are much more diverse than such statements about Baloch society in general. For instance, Schindler 2008 finds that in the village she studied, where, as is common in Baloch society (and generally in the region), cousin marriage is a preferred pattern, many members of the given village were in fact related, and often by the maternal and paternal side at the same time. 35 The primacy of relation via the male line may be more of a construct at times. As a case in point, Schindler (2008: 242) cites a case where "on one occasion an older male member of the family gave me a complex patrilineal explanation of a relation, which, as close female friends had informed me, was a straightforward matrilateral one." Consequently, relatives of the female line are in fact often quite present in daily life: "Often, wives and children of negotiating parties sit together and exchange information and preferences regarding ongoing and future projects. More often still, the negotiating parties are related, and the female voice, especially that of older women, operates openly" (Schindler 2008: 244).

------ 35 Cf. [START_REF] Salzman | Kin and contract in Baluchi herding camps[END_REF] Caution is thus needed when drawing conclusions about family structures from the study of inventory of family terms, and the latter should rather be regarded as reflecting a "gedankliches System, das die durch Abstammung und Geburt sowie durch Heirat gebildeten sozialen Beziehungen (...) zum Gegenstand hat" (Rzehak 1995: 207).

That said, it is of course interesting to study the inventory and linguistic make-up of the family terms in Balochi dialects. All Balochi dialects taken together have an impressive inventory of family terms, which is symbolized by their English equivalents in Fig. 5, where (as in the diagrams to follow), each item stands for one Bal. term. 36 Terms for relations in the direct line (grandparents, parents, children, grandchildren etc.), shown with bold frame, are completed by a significant number of terms for siblings in all generations as well as by items for spouses and kin's spouses and their relations. (It should be kept in mind, though, that not all Bal. dialects are represented in the data used here (and the statements made below need to be read in this perspective); also, some authors might not have thought of enquiring about some more remote relationships.)

As in all other domains of the Balochi language, and discussed in Section 3.3, there is a major dialectal variation in the distribution of family terms, underlining again the point made by Adriano Rossi on various occasions that in principle each dialect of Balochi needs to be described as a system in its own right.

Family terms etymologically

At the same time, and likewise representative of the Balochi lexicon as a whole, the inventory of Bal. family terms is of diverse origin, mirroring its Balochi heritage as well as its contact over all of its history with closely related, more remotely related and unrelated languages.

The inherited inventory is shown in Fig. 6. The terms represented include the core family (parents, grandparents, aunt, uncle, children, grandchildren etc.), but also 'wife' (and possibly 'co-wife') and members of spouse's family (parents-in-law) as well as sibling's spouses. Most of these ------ 36 The actual Bal. words that these items stand for are given in the Appendix. The data are from [START_REF] Dames | A Text Book of the Balochi Language, consisting of Miscellaneous Stories, Legends, Poems, and a Balochi-English Vocabulary[END_REF][START_REF] Gilbertson | English-Balochi Colloquial Dictionary[END_REF]Pehrson 1966: 36ff.;Ahmad 1985 (EBal.) ;Farrell 1990;Sayad Hashmi 2000 (SBal.); [START_REF] Barker | A Course in Baluchi[END_REF]Pastner (1978: 269ff.) ;[START_REF] Nawata | Baluchi (Asian and African Grammaticals Manuals 17b)[END_REF][START_REF] Elfenbein | A Vocabulary of Marw Baluchi (Quaderni della sezione linguistica degli annali 2)[END_REF]Rzehak (1995: 185f.) (WBal.). Note that address terms are not discussed in what follows.

terms are shared by all dialects, some are shared by two dialect groups and two are specific to Southern Balochi.

As in all other semantic fields, inherited terms are completed by terms borrowed from other languages. Throughout its history and except for recent times, Persian has been the chief source of borrowings. So far as family terms are concerned, this is seen in several terms for members of the male direct line as well as by a term for 'wife' borrowed from Persian (Fig. 7). Somewhat unexpectedly perhaps, Pashto family terms also feature here, providing terms for grandchildren and their offspring after them. How to account for this peculiar feature is not quite clear to me.

As in other parts of the Bal. lexicon, the items borrowed from other Ir. languages are part of the core vocabulary, and Persian terms figure among the terms shared by all dialects. Others are shared by two dialect groups, as are the Pashto terms, and one term is specific to Western Balochi.

Being situated in the Indian cultural sphere, Balochi has also adopted a substantial amount of borrowings from Indo-Aryan languages (Fig. 8)37 as well as from Brahui, a Dravidian language that has been in very close contact with Balochi throughout the last centuries up to a point that "in the same family the father will speak to one son in Brahui, to another in Balochi; sons will speak Balochi to their father but Brahui to their mother, or vice versa; a conversation between several persons can take place quite indifferently in both languages at the same time; the leading families of sardars use Balochi to one another but Brahui to members of other families" (Elfenbein 1982: 77). 38 Most noteworthily, this bilingualism is reflected by a term for grandmother borrowed from Brahui, which is shared by Western and Southern Balochi.

Indo-Aryan borrowings include terms for siblings as well as items specific to the maternal vs. paternal side of the family (mother's / father's parents and siblings), introducing an aspect that otherwise is not present in the system of Bal. family terms.

Conversely to the borrowings from Ir. languages, none of these terms is shared by all Bal. dialects, and the contribution of Indian languages seems ------more "peripheral" compared to that contributed by Iranian languages. However, the vast majority of Indo-Aryan borrowings are again shared by two dialect groups.

Family terms dialectally

As already indicated by the above, the inventory common to all Bal. dialects is quite limited (Fig. 9). These are mostly inherited terms, but there are also some Persian ones. The cross-dialectal terms include names for the direct line, but also aunt, uncle, one's spouse and his/her parents as well as children's spouses. The fact that the same term is used for daughter-and sister-in law (and for son-and brother-in-law) probably rather indicates a problem in translation; the meaning is likely to be 'young woman married into the family', which, depending on the speaker's position, will refer to one's daughter-or sister-in-law.

To this basic inventory, each dialect group adds further terms. As pointed out by Ferraro 1988, among others, EBal. dialects show terms differentiating the male and female side of the family (Fig. 10), viz. mother's vs. father's father, mother, sister and brother. All of these are borrowed from Indo-Aryan, as is a term for 'uncle' (not specified for the male / female side) and 'brother'. Eastern Balochi also adds terms for greatgrandchild and their children, which are borrowed from Pashto, and preserves another inherited term for 'wife'.

In WBal. dialects (Fig. 11), Indo-Aryan terms are less present, and Pashto terms are rare as well, though these sources are not entirely absent. Terms specific for the paternal / maternal side are mostly absent, agreeing with Ferraro 1988's statement to this effect. The majority of the words that Western Balochi adds to the common core are shared with Southern Balochi. These are inherited terms for 'child' and 'daughter' as well as a Persian word for 'son' and a Pashto word for 'grandchild' as well as a Brahui word for 'grandmother'. Indo-Aryan words for 'sister', 'wife' and 'father's brother' complete the picture. An Indo-Aryan term for 'brother' is shared with Eastern Balochi. In fact, according to the sources used here, the only term specific to Western Balochi is a Persian term for 'greatgrandchild' and a word for 'wife's sister's husband' (origin unknown).

In addition to the just mentioned terms also found in Western Balochi, Southern Balochi (Fig. 12) shares with Eastern Balochi the side-specific Indo-Aryan terms for parent's siblings as well as inherited words for 'grandmother', 'child' and 'wife' as well as a Pashto term for 'greatgrandchild'. Specifically SBal. terms are limited to inherited words for 'cowife ' and 'great-great-grandchild'. This shows that the statement by Ferraro 1988 seems to require modification insofar as she notes that the female and male side are not distinguished in "Western Balochi", which in her study follows a broad division of Bal. dialects such as found in [START_REF] Grierson | Balōchī. Linguistic Survey of India X: Specimens of Languages of the Eranian Family[END_REF], essentially separating Eastern Balochi from all other dialects, so that her "Western Balochi" comprises what are here the WBal. and SBal. groups. As far as Southern Balochi is concerned, the data do in fact show separate terms for maternal and paternal aunts, and also for uncles, as well as some other side-specific terms. Conversely, separate terms for the grandparents from the two sides are indeed mostly limited to Eastern Balochi.

CONCLUSION

As in all other fields of its lexicon (just as in its grammar), there are major differences in the vocabulary of family terms. While there is also a considerable overlap between the three groups of Bal. dialects, most items being shared by at least two dialect groups, and terms exclusive to a dialect group are a minority, the common core is rather limited. It is composed of inherited words as well as Persian loans, showing the central position of Persian for the Balochi language throughout its history. In Koroshi, language contact with Persian has gone so far that most inherited family terms have been replaced, including 'father' (bowā / bowo / bābā) and 'mother' (mādar), cf. [START_REF] Nourzaei | Koroshi. A Corpus-based Grammatical Description[END_REF]; noteworthy exceptions are gāhār 'sister' and maybe berād 'brother'.

The other contact languages of Balochi are likewise present in the lexicon of family terms: Pashto contributes terms for grandchildren and their offspring; Indo-Aryan chiefly contributes terms specific for the maternal and paternal side, but also a good amount of others. The close contact with Brahui over many centuries is reflected in a term for grandmother. None of these terms are common to all dialect groups, though.

Concerning the inventory of family terms (including possible conclusions that might be drawn from it), it seems that a note of caution is in order. The difference noted in the literature between Eastern Balochi on the one hand, employing terms specific for maternal vs. paternal uncles, aunts and parents' siblings, and the other dialect groups apparently not using them, by and large applies to Western Balochi, but not to Southern Bal. dialects. Noting that all SBal. terms included here are from the Pakistani part of Balochistan, it actually seems that Indo-Aryan terms distinguishing the maternal and paternal side are integrated into the Bal. dialects spoken in Pakistan in general, even if to a different degree.

FIGURES (PLATES XXVII-XXXII)

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig.1. IE family tree (selected branches) with the terms for 'father' and 'mother', exemplifying e.g. the results of intervocalic *t in some daughter languages. Fig.2. Map of Balochi dialects.

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Major contact languages for Balochi dialects. Fig. 4. Dialectal distribution of some family terms (trū/ī 'aunt'; pit 'father' as an example for items in *-tar-/ -θr-) and the forms of 'you.SG'. Fig. 5. Family terms in Balochi dialectally and etymologically. Fig. 6. Balochi kinship terms inherited from Old Iranian. Fig. 7. Kinship terms borrowed from other Iranian languages. Fig. 8. Kinship terms borrowed from other languages. Fig. 9. Kinship terms shared by all Balochi dialects. Fig. 10. Kinship terms found in Eastern Balochi dialects. Fig. 11. Kinship terms found in Western Balochi dialects. Fig. 12. Kinship terms found in Southern Balochi dialects.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. IE family tree (selected branches) with the terms for 'father' and 'mother', exemplifying e.g. the results of intervocalic *t in some daughter languages.

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. Map of Balochi dialects.

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Major contact languages for Balochi dialects.

Fig. 4 .

 4 Fig. 4. Dialectal distribution of some family terms (trū/ī 'aunt'; pit 'father' as an example for items in *-tar-/ -θr-) and the forms of 'you.SG'.

Fig. 5 .

 5 Fig. 5. Family terms in Balochi dialectally and etymologically.

Fig. 6 .

 6 Fig. 6. Balochi kinship terms inherited from Old Iranian.

Fig. 7 .

 7 Fig. 7. Kinship terms borrowed from other Iranian languages.

Fig. 8 .

 8 Fig. 8. Kinship terms borrowed from other languages.

Fig. 9 .

 9 Fig. 9. Kinship terms shared by all Balochi dialects.

Fig. 10 .

 10 Fig. 10. Kinship terms found in Eastern Balochi dialects.

Fig. 11 .

 11 Fig. 11. Kinship terms found in Western Balochi dialects.

Fig. 12 .

 12 Fig. 12. Kinship terms found in Southern Balochi dialects.

Korn (2006: 201, 205),Hübschmann (1895: 78),Geiger (1901a: 216).

Hübschmann (1895: 169), cf. NP durōd 'blessing' vs. padrūd 'farewell' (Av. druuatāt-'health') and xūb 'good' (Sanskrit su-apas-'having good acts').

Note that the Indo-Aryan element would be even stronger if address terms were included in the study. For instance, several items of Indo-Aryan origin feature among the address terms collected by Rzehak 1995 in Western Balochi of Turkmenistan, otherwise very far from Indo-Aryan influence.

 38 Cf. alsoRossi (1982: 163-171) on the nature of the bilingualism of Brahui and Balochi.

39 Some terms that are not included in the graphs in Section 3. are omitted here as well. For further details and etymological discussion see Korn (2005a: 298-308).