rec bengtson blažek on the burushaski–indo-european hypothesis by i. Čašule

7/23/2019 Rec Bengtson Blaek on the BurushaskiIndo-European Hypothesis by I. aule

1/40

Journal of Language Relationship 6 (2011) Pp. 2563 Bengtson J. D., Blaek V., 2011

John D. BengtsonAssociation for the Study of Language in Prehistory and

Evolution of Human Language Project

Vclav BlaekMasaryk University

On the BurushaskiIndo-European hypothesisby I. aule*

The paper deals with a relatively recent hypothesis, put forward by the scholar I. aule, according to which the Burushaski language, traditionally considered an isolate, actually belongs to the IndoEuropean linguistic stock. The authors approach aules hypothesis fromthe comparative side, evaluating phonological, morphological, and lexical arguments in itsfavour side by side with the corresponding arguments in favour of the DeneCaucasian hypothesis, according to which Burushaski forms a separate onelanguage branch of the vast

macrofamily that also includes NaDene, SinoTibetan, North Caucasian, Basque, andYeniseian languages.It is concluded that arguments for the DeneCaucasian status of Burushaski quantita

tively override the IndoEuropeanBurushaski hypothesis by a very large margin; suggestedIndoEuropean connections are either highly unsystematic (when it comes to phonetic correspondences), sporadic and insufficient (in morphology), or practically nonexistent (in basiclexicon). Consequently, all of the resemblances between IndoEuropean and Burushaskimust be ascribed to (a) recent contacts between Burushaski and IndoAryan languages,(b) chance resemblances, or (c) in a very small number of cases, traces of ultradeep relationship that do not represent exclusively IndoEuropeanBurushaski connections.

Keywords: IndoEuropean linguistics, Burushaski language, macrocomparative linguistics,DeneCaucasian macrofamily, language isolates.

Over the last two decades, Ilija aule has published a monograph (aule 1998) and an article(aule 2003) in which he attempts to show that the Burushaski language traditionally considered an isolate is a member of the IndoEuropean language family. One of the authorshas already published a critique of the 1998 monograph (Bengtson 2000). In this article we

shall mainly be dealing with the 2003 article in JIES, and all page number references will be tothe latter work.While we agree with aule that there are some affinities between Burushaski (Bur) and

IndoEuropean (IE), we do not consider Bur a part of the IE family, or even of the postulateddeeper macrofamily to which IE belongs (Nostratic or Eurasiatic), and we intend to show that

* We are deeply indebted to the work of the late Sergei A. Starostin, who, in the last few months of his life,worked intensively on the Burushaski language and its relationship with DeneCaucasian languages. The resultscan be seen in his DC phonology and glossary, and EHL/ToB etymological databases (see References). Since hisfathers passing Georgiy (George) Starostin has continued to work with us and we are grateful to him. We arethankful for useful comments from Elena Bashir, Bertil Tikkanen, and Michael Witzel. We are also deeply thankfulto the Evolution of Human Language Project, Santa Fe Institute, and Murray GellMann, and the Centre for theInterdisciplinary Research of Ancient Languages and Older Stages of Modern Languages (MSM 0021622435), Masaryk University Brno, for their support.


2/40

John D. Bengtson, Vclav Blaek

26

a large part of the resemblances between Bur and IE can be explained as areal, i.e., the resultsof longterm contact and borrowing in both directions between Bur and surrounding IElanguages.1

However, we shall not simply demolish aules hypothesis without providing what weconsider a better, more plausible, and more probable alternative for the classification of thisfascinating (Bur) language. We shall present evidence that Bur is more likely a member of theDeneCaucasian (or SinoCaucasian) macrofamily. This is of course not a new idea: it was prefigured long ago by scholars such as Karl Bouda, O. G. Tailleur, V. N. Toporov, and others.Recently this hypothesis has been given a firmer grounding using traditional historical linguistic methods: see, e.g., Bengtson (1997a, 2001a, 2008a), Blaek & Bengtson (1995), Starostin(n.d., 2005a, 2005b). While it is not possible to present all the evidence for this latter view (seethe references), we think some salient aspects of the phonology, morphology, and lexicon ofBur are enough to indicate the greater probability of its DeneCaucasian (DC) affiliation.2

Phonology

At first glance aules comparison of IE and Burushaski phonology seems impressive.An ample number of examples is cited, and superficially it seems that aule (henceforth )has made a good case for a correspondence between IE and Burushaski phonology. However,on closer examination a number of problems appear.

(a) Some Bur words cited for comparison are actually loanwords from IndoAryan orIranian languages. Thus, dum cloud of dust, smoke, water (p. 31) is clearly borrowed fromOld Indic3dhm smoke, vapor, mist4(even the accent is the same); prmebeforehand, before the time (p. 34) is isolated in the Bur lexicon and looks like a derivative of OI *purima >

Palipurima earlier (CDIAL 8286; cf. Eng. former); bad sole, step, pace (p. 40) appears to befrom OIpadmstep, pace, stride (CDIAL 7747), and perhaps others.(b) Some comparisons adduced in support of the correspondences are semantically tortu

ous if not utterly dubious. For example, IE *deu to die, to lose conscience (sic) ~ Bur dilynx (p. 36); IE *h2ertomwhite (metal), silver ~ Bur hargndragon, ogre, etc.

(c) The proposed correspondences are not consistent and do not form a coherent system.For example, IE *,* are said to correspond to Bur g (voiced velar stop) or(voiced uvularfricative) (p. 39), apparently in free variation, but in Bur brkat summit, peak, crest; height(pp. 30, 35) IE *is matched with Bur k (voiceless velar stop), in Bur buqhni a type of goat(p. 31) IE * is matched with Bur qh (aspirated uvular stop or affricate), and in Bur je, j I

(p. 72) IE *is matched with Burj [ = d]. IE *kwis said to correspond to Bur k (voiceless velarstop) (p. 38), but in Bur -utthe side of the body under the arm; bosom (p. 30) it is matchedwith Bur (voiced uvular fricative), while in Bur waq open the mouth, talk (p. 38) it ismatched with Bur q (voiceless uvular stop). PIE *w(*) becomes Bur win waqopen the mouth,

1The authors accept Nostratic/Eurasiatic and DeneCaucasian as working hypotheses that represent, in ouropinion, the best available explanations for language classification in northern Eurasia (see, e.g., Bengtson 2008b,Blaek 2003, 2008).

2For some history of the DC hypothesis see e.g. Bengtson (1994), Blaek & Bengtson (1995), Peiros (1988),Ruhlen (1996, 1998a, 2001).

3Old Indic (OI) here encompasses Vedic and Classical (Sanskrit) forms of OI.4H. Berger (p.c. to author Bengtson) regarded Bur dumas a loanword from Indic (CDIAL 6849). See Bengt

son (2001b, p. 185).


3/40

On the BurushaskiIndo-European hypothesis by I. aule

27

talk (p. 38),5but bin buo rinsing water; water that becomes warm in the sun (p. 31).6For the Bur uvulars (q,qh,) are merely variants of the velars and do not form an historical class oftheir own (but see [d.3] below).

(d) totally overlooks (or minimizes) many distinctive features of the Burushaski phonological system. These features include (1) the retroflex stops, (2) the phoneme //, (3) the uvularconsonants, (4) the tripartite sibilant contrast / ~ ~ s/, and (5) the cluster -

lt-, and the

t ~ -ltal

ternation (corresponding, we think, to DeneCaucasian lateral affricates). We reproduce below(with minor modifications) the table of Burushaski consonants presented by Berger (1998, I: 13):

uvular velar retroflex dental retroflex palatal laminal labialTable 1

s

qh kh h th h h ch ph

q k t c p

g d j z b

n mh r l

(1) The retroflex stops. (pp. 2627) claims We do not know the genesis of the retroflexconsonants in Bur we cannot know with certainty whether Bur originally possessed aspirates and cerebrals or whether these phonemes were acquired from IndoAryan. Although does not discuss it, the DC hypothesis provides a ready explanation for at least some of theretroflex consonants in Bur:7

Bur *gi anus; vulva; intestines with inner fat < *girt or *gilt ~ Caucasian: PEC *wlV(Dargwa ula belly, stomach, Agul guul kidney, etc.)8 ~ PY *gd fat: Ket, Yug kt,Kott kr, Arin ki(NCED 711, CSCG 119)

Bur *-pha gizzard, stomach of fowl < *phart ~ Caucasian: PEC *pHVrwV (Bezhta pirilung, bladder, Archi pri large intestine, etc.)9 ~ Basque *epurdi buttocks, rump(NCED 871, CSCG 160)10

Bur *i slime11< *irt~ Caucasian: PEC *wird (Avar xwerdpus, Agulfurd dung, etc.)~ Basque *lirdi drivel, saliva ~ PST *lt mucus, phlegm (Tibetan lud phlegm, mucus;manure, dung, etc.) (NCED 763, LDC 19, CSCG 132)

5See CSCG (p. 8) for an alternative comparison with DC.6Cf. instead OI *buyatisinks,Marathibubu sound of bubbling, etc. (CDIAL 9272).7It is important to note that * in Nikolaevs & Starostins Caucasian reconstructions does not denote a retro

flex stop but rather aglottalizedstop (similarly with other glottalized obstruents:,,,,,,. On the other hand,in this paper,h,,,,h,,in Burushaski words always denote retroflex obstruents.

8Some Caucasian words, e.g. Udi gurdakkidney, Tabasarangurdumid., seem to reflect influence of Persiangurde kidney. Perhaps in some cases there is a blend of the Persian word with ProtoLezgian *k:wr (k:wl?)(thanks to E. Bashir, pc.).

9represents a pharyngealized vowel, also (confusingly) written aI, where I represents thepaloka in the Cyrillic orthography of Caucasian languages (Catford 1977: 296).

10Assuming a semantic development such as large intestine > colon > rectum > buttock in Basque. Cf. OIgud intestine, entrail, rectum, anus, Sindhiguanus, posterior, etc. (CDIAL 4194).

11 Schlamm (feucht oder ausgetrocknet) (Berger 1998). E. Bashir (pc.) suggests possible IndoAryan origin:cf. Panjabigi ~ giddmatter that accumulates in the corner of the eye.


4/40


28

Bur *ham narrow12 < *hard ~ Caucasian: PEC *HVrdV narrow (Avar :ederab,Dargwa Akushi ra,etc.) ~ PY *tod (~ *cod-) shallow (of a river) (NCED 387, CSCG 199)

Bur *ga clothes < *gart ~ Caucasian: PEC *gwrdwV a kind of clothing (Avar gordshirt, Dargwa Akushi gurdi dress, etc.) ~ PY *t(r1) cloth, felt > Arin qot, kot trousers, etc. (NCED 449, CSCG 223)

These examples suggest that the ProtoDC intervocalic clusters *-lt-, *-r-, *-rd regularlycorrespond to Bur retroflex consonants. While this process does not account for all occurrencesof retroflex consonants in Burushaski, it does indicate a very old origin of the retroflex seriesthat is analogous to the origin of retroflexes in IndoAryan.13(See below for the developmentof a new cluster /lt/ in Bur.).

(2) The Bur phoneme //. (p. 25) briefly mentions Bur //, but it has no real place in hisIEBur phonology. As far as we can see, // figures in only one of s BurIE comparisons, thatof Bur ua hair with IE *gor hair (p. 32). provides no explanation of why IE *rbe

comes Bur // in just this one case.14

This seems to us a very unsatisfactory treatment of thisimportant Bur phoneme. Before presenting our view of the genesis of //, some further information is necessary:

Burushaski and omk (an IndoAryan language spoken in parts of the Burushaskispeaking area)15 have an unusual consonant [], variously described as a fricative r, pronounced with the tongue in the retroflex (cerebral) position (Morgenstierne 1945), a kind of and (Lorimer 1937: 72), a voiced retroflex sibilant with simultaneous palataldorsalnarrowing (Berger 1998), a curious sound whose phonetic realizations vary from a retroflex,spirantized glide, to a retroflex velarized spirant (Anderson, ms.). Because of the elusivecharacter of this sound, it has been transcribed in various ways; for example, the word for my

father, transcribed here as a,is found in the literature as aiyah,lya,gha,aa,or aa.As noted by Morgenstierne (1945), Bur [] in loanwords from IndoAryan derives fromthe retroflex sound *,which in turn can come from *,*,*h.Morgenstierne and Berger citethe examples:

Bur (H,N) da fat, strong, robust < OI dha(Beitrge 36, no. 3.35) Bur (H,N) bum mare < *vaam = OI vaab (Beitrge, ibid.)

Bur (H)pao,(N)po,(Y)plu wedge < OIpaka (Beitrge 24, no. 3.13) Bur (H, N)kila beesting curds = Late OI kila cheese (but see further below)

Note also:

[] is heard in the Hunza and Nager dialects, but not in Yasin (Werchikwar), where []either corresponds to zero (as in ba for ba millet) or a different phoneme: Yasin pluwedge ~ (H)pao,(N)po; Yasin kha(stony) shore, bank ~ (H, N) kha,etc.;

12The variant (Y, H) (h)anm appears to be contaminated by the verb du(h)an-.13The development *lt > retroflex is evident also from early IndoAryan, and later again in the Prakrits.

Nostraticists explain Dravidian retroflexes in the same way. This areal tendency should probably not be attributedto influence of Dravidian (which is not seen in the early Rgveda), but as an areal feature of the Northwest (ofGreater India), as seen in Bur, Pashto, Old Indic of the Rgveda, and later also Khotanese Saka. (M. Witzel, pc.)

14 // is also seen in s comparison of Bur bi butter with IE *p fat (p. 40), though no IE suffix corresponding to Bur -is proffered.

15omk, an endangered language, is spoken in the village of Mominabad (Hunza) and in a couple of villages in Nager (B. Tikkanen, p.c.).


5/40


29

Berger (1998 I: 22, note 8) also finds [] similar to the Tamil sound commonly transcribed as; Place names confirm the ancient affinity of [] with [l] or other laterals: Bur Nma= No

mal; Puny= Punial (Lorimer 1937: 73); The Bur word (H, N) kilaQuark aus Biestmilch is found in Vedic as kllabeestings, a

sweet drink (Witzel 1999: 3), also in Khowar as kil,kiri; Some IndoAryan dialects (including those of some Vedic texts) have/had a retroflex

cor

responding to the of Classical OI,16as in Ved. nnest = Skt. na < PIE *nizd-.

With that background, we propose that Burushaski [] apart from loanwords ultimately derives from laterals (*l,*) and clusters involving laterals (e.g., *l,*l,*l,*l) in ProtoDC. The following examples support this interpretation:

Bur *athread, strand (in weaving) ~ Caucasian: Lezgi al = al thread, etc. < PEC *Vsinew, thread (NCED 1067) ~ Basque: *ha[l]i thread, yarn, filament, wire

Bur *khi > (H,N) khi leaf, (Y) khi (fallen) leaves ~ Caucasian: Tindi koli, Abkhaz

ala sheaf, etc. < PNC *w(NCED 690). Bur *qhi> (H,N) qhi (single, small) stones, gravel ~ Caucasian: Archi il rock, cliff,Abkhaz aar rocky river bank, etc. < PNC *wi(NCED 939)

Bur *ba, (Y) ba (smallgrained) millet ~ Caucasian: Chechen borc millet, etc. < PNC*blw (NCED 309, CSCG 15)

Bur *hu to dry17 ~ Caucasian: Dargwa Urakhi =ir/=u to roast, fry, etc. < PEC*=i[l]w to roast, fry, dry (NCED 633, CSCG 103)

Bur *huo> (H,N) huo wool animal, sheep ~ Caucasian: Chechen ar lamb, Andiiosheep, ewe, etc. < PNC *lU (NCED 247, CSCG 265)

Bur *u hair18~ Caucasian: Chechen angwoollen thread, yarn, Rutul arspring wool,

Tsakhur arautumn wool, etc.19

< PEC *lV wool (NCED 242) ~ Basque *ulhehair, wool Bur *aq(-um) bitter; unsweetened; sour > aq(-um) (H,N), qaqm (Y) ~ Caucasian:Archi ala bitter, Khinalug ilez salty, Ubykh a sweet, etc. < PNC *lV (~ --)(NCED 912) ~ PY *qVqVrgall; bitter ~ Basque: *kera bitter, sour; stench (CSCG 236)20

The following examples indicate DC lateral suffixes (*-alV, *-ulV, *-ilV) with the reflexes/a/, /u/ in Bur:

Bur *tum shell of nut, fruit stone ~ Caucasian: Archi ummul grape, Budukh ombulplum, etc. < ProtoLezgian *um(:)ul(beside suffixless Chechen, Ingush, Batsbi ummar

row; kernel of fruit, nut) < PNC *mhV kernel, nut, fruitstone; marrow (NCED 1004,CSCG 205)

16The Rgveda originally did not have [retroflex l] but acquired it only during [oral] transmission, by c. 500BCE. And Pini also does not have it in his grammar He does not even have the vowel l[], just the vowel r[].The later Vedic (PostRgveda) record is quite checkered [in regard to retroflex l]. The Delhi area and some textseast and south of it had such a retroflex. [retroflex l] is now found in the mountain area of IndoAryan, from theAfghan border to the western Nepalese border. (M. Witzel, p.c.).

17(H, N) b-,(Y) bu-,duhu-.18(Y) ya, (H,N) uy hair (both with ordinary /y/), (N) -thu fine hair of small children, also in (H)

phulu,(N)phuru feather.19// denotes the Caucasian pharyngealized voiceless uvular affricate = NCED /I/.20For semantics, cf. Albanian mbl sweet, Armenian amokh sweet, maybe cognate with Latin amrus bit

ter, Old Swedish ampersauer, scharf, bitter, etc.


6/40


30

Bur (N) -phu stick, walkingstick (beside [H] -pho) ~ Caucasian: Andi moq:ol ceiling (beside suffixless Avar moq:pole, Tsez mqshort stick, rod,21etc.) < PNC *bnpole, post ~ Basque *makia stick, cane (beside Bizkaian maket club, with a differentsuffix)22(NCED 295, CSCG 14)

Bur qaruo (H), aruo (N) heron ~ Basque *kuV(-lo) crane (Bizkaian, Gipuzkoan

kurrillo, kurlo

, Zuberoankhrlo

, vs. suffixless Low Navarresekurru

, Roncalesekurri

);23Caucasian words for crane display a variety of suffixes and reduplications: cf. Chechenaruli =aruli, Andi :urru, Karata :urun Adyge q:araw crane, etc. < PNC *rwV

beside the simplex *wVrV(NCED 9145, CSCG 237).

We believe we have shown that the Bur phoneme // is an integral feature of the language, and that only the DC model provides a plausible explanation of its origin.

(3) The uvular consonants.The Bur uvular consonants, as a class, are totally ignored by, to whom /q/, /qh/, and // are simply erratically occurring variants of /k/, /kh/, and /g/. We

intend to show that the Bur uvulars constitute a class of importance and long standing in thelanguage, and can be derived from the DC uvulars.24

Bur qaruo ~ aruoheron ~ Basque *kuV(-lo) crane ~ PNC *rwV /*wVrV crane(see above)

Bur *qVt > -qat (H), -qhat (N), -qetara (Y) armpit ~ Caucasian: Avar mehd brisket(chest of animal), Bezhta ade = ade brisket < PEC *qVdV (NCED 897) ~ PY *qot (~ot-)in front, before (cf. Eng. abreast, etc.) (CSCG 170)

Bur *qorqor> (H) qorqrsoft porous stone, (N) qoqrsmall stones ~ Caucasian: Dargwaq:arq:astone, etc. < PEC *GrGV25~ Basque *gogohard

Bur *qu > (Y) qu armpit (of clothing) ~ Caucasian: PNC *Hwa hole, hollow >Chamalal :uavagina, Lezgi uarmpit, etc. (NCED 922, CSCG 176) Bur. *qaqdry, hungry ~ PY *qV[()G]i dry: Kott xjga, Arin qoija, etc. ~ PNC *wiwr:

Lak qaq dry, etc. (CSCG 223) Bur *qha >-qhi(H,N) hind end, arse, -xa(Y) female sex organ ~ Caucasian: Udi

qo behind, etc. < PEC *-VV (NCED 1026) Bur *qht >-qht (H,N), -xt,-xat (Y) mouth ~ Caucasian: Lak q (dial. q,q) Adams

apple, beak, etc.26< PEC *qwi(NCED 905, CSCG 172) Bur *qhurcdust ~ Caucasian: Tsez, Khwarshi ecdirt, mud, slush, Lezgi anca layer of

hardened dirt, etc. < PNC *qnVwV (NCED 884, CSCG 169)

21// denotes a pharyngeal vowel = NCED /aI/.22The supposed derivation of *makilafrom Latin bacilla(pl.) sticks (Trask 2008: 281) seems to us to be rather

a case of chance resemblance. Lat. bacillacannot account for the Bizk. form maket. Lat. bacillum,baculumare themselves suspect, having the rare PIE phoneme *b-, and reflexes of PIE *bak (if it existed) are found only in westernIE languages for which hypothetical DClike substrata have been supposed.

23One could suspect derivation of the Basque words from Romance (cf. Latin grs, Italian gru, French grue,Spanishgra,grulla), but the Basque words always have initial /k/ vs. Romance /g/, and in Romance a lateral suffixis found only in the Castilian variant grulla, where we can suspect Vasconic influence, or a blend of Romancegra+ Basque kurrillo. The Basque simplex forms Low Navarrese kurru, Roncalese kurri are parallel to the Caucasiansimplex forms such as Andi :urru, Karata :urun crane (NCED 915).

24In Basque all DC uvulars become velars /k, g/ or the spirant /h/; in a few cases *Gw> *gw> /b/.25< *GrqV or *qrGV?26//, // denote pharyngealized vowels = NCED /iI/, /uI/.


7/40


31

Bur *qhi revenge ~ PY *V()j to be angry ~ Caucasian: Udi uj anger, Dargwa qoath, etc.27< PEC *qwj (NCED 901, CSCG 171)

Bur -qhrpat (H,N), -xrpet (Y) lung ~ ? Cauc.: Tsez oori, Lak hutru, etc. lung < PEC*wlV(r)~*wlV(r) (NCED 901)~ ? Basque *haupobellows, lungs (LDC 22)28

Bur *qhVlt sack, pocket > (H) qhilt, (N) qhalt, (Y) xalt(y)~ Caucasian: Akhwakh :esack, pillow, etc. < PEC

*GHrwV(NCED 457, CSCG 55)

Bur *aq(-um) bitter; unsweetened; sour ~ PNC *lV ~ PY *qVqVr gall; bitter ~Basque *kera bitter, sour; stench, etc. (see above)

Bur *ul grudge, enmity, hatred ~ Caucasian: Avar wel = wel gossip, rumor; abuse,Khinalug qol offence, etc. < PEC *Gwo(NCED 465) ~ PY *q()r (-) angry ~ Basque*bVrhao / *bVraho curse, blasphemy (CSCG 55)

Bur *chur chest or box for grain or meal ~ Caucasian: Avar car = car corn bin,barn, Chechen car penthouse, etc. < PEC *cVGVr (NCED 328, CSCG 189)

Burnderes,ondoles (Y) water that runs over many stones ~ Cauc.: Botlikh adaru = adarustream, brook, Lak tara mountain stream, etc. < PEC *GHwadVrV (NCED 478, CSCG 185)

Bur *rqu >rqun (H), rquc (N), rkun (Y) frog ~ Caucasian: Tindi or:u, o:u,Khinalug uror,Kabardian andrq:wq:wa, etc. frog < PNC *wVrV (NCED 942) ~ PY*xrfrog > Ket, Yug l, Arin kere (CSCG 243)

Bur *lta > ta(Y) branch, shoot29~ Caucasian: Avar :o:stubble, etc. < PEC *wVstick, chip (NCED 778, CSCG 137)

Bur *athread, strand (in weaving) ~ PEC *V sinew, thread ~ Basque *ha[l]i thread,yarn, filament, wire (see above)

The Bur uvulars are thus far from being merely peripheral and erratic variations of thevelars: they constitute an integral series in the Bur phonological system that cannot be under

stood apart from the DC context from which they arose.(4) The tripartite sibilant (and sibilant affricate) contrast. A sibilant contrast with three

points of articulation that carries through to sibilant affricates, though ignored by , is a significantfeature of Burushaski phonology that did not exist in ProtoIE,30but is characteristic of Caucasianlanguages as well as of Basque. Below is the Burushaski system as outlined by Berger (1998, I: 13):

laminal palatal retroflexTable 2

s

ch h hc

z j

27// denotes a pharyngeal vowel = NCED /aI/.28A questionable comparison. At the very least, there have been some irregular changes and/or contamina

tions, e.g. Basque *haupowith *haudust, etc.29See below for the correspondence of Bur twith Caucasian lateral affricates.30Unlike most IE languages, Old Indic had a triple contrast (s,,). We suggest that this was an areal feature

acquired by early Indic as its speakers sojourned in the HinduKush area. A good point again about the threesibilants in IA: Iranian only has two ( and s). I agree with your assessment as an areal feature: again the NW[northwestern Greater India]. Note that many other forms result from the NW predilection for bending back thetongue: (PIE) *rks > *r > *r> (Skt) r (nom. the king). (M. Witzel, p.c.).


8/40


32

This is very similar to the slightly more complex system reconstructed for ProtoCaucasian(NCED, p. 40; palatal = hissinghushing):

hissing palatal hushingTable 3

s

z c

And cf. the more simplified system of Basque (Hualde 1991):

laminoalveolar

apicoalveolar palatal

Table 4

s

c

In the Basque orthographic system the sounds /s/, //, //, /c/, //, // are denoted by theletters z,s,x,tz,ts,tx, respectively.

We think it interesting that this characteristic DC pattern has been maintained to the present day in widely separated descendant languages. Naturally, there have been extensivechanges, but the systems as a whole have remained.

The following comparisons are typical of the Bur system of sibilants and affricates andtheir relationship to those of other DC languages. Note that some of the phonetic correspondences are complex, and CSCP (Starostin 2005b) should be consulted for the details.

Bur *-s heart, mind ~ Caucasian: Ubykh psa soul, spirit, Bezhta, Hunzib has sky,cloud, fog, etc. < PNC *ma ~ Basque *aise wind ~ Yeniseian: PY *es God, sky(NCED 243, CSCG 263)31

Bur *-so[m] kidney32~ Caucasian: Chechen samg sausage (made from a large intestine),Akhwakh s:esinew, muscle, etc. < PEC *mV / *mV~ Basque *sainvein, nerve, root(NCED 959, CSCG 187)33

Bur *-ssVn elbow34

~ Caucasian: Udi sun elbow, Lak s:an foreleg, paw, etc. < PEC*n~ Basque *sanko leg, calf, foot, paw, etc. (NCED 963, CSCG 187) Bur *sn spleen ~ Caucasian: Archi s:am gall, Dargwa *sumi gall, anger, etc. < PNC

*wjm~ Basque *beHasu[m] gall (NCED 329, LDC 18, CSCG 22)

31For semantics, cf. Rumanian inimheart, soul, mind, etc. < Latin animawind, air, breath, spirit, mind, etc.32Underlying mfound in the plural form somuc.33Starostin (CSCG 187) adds the following SinoTibetan forms: PST *sim heart, soul > Old Chinese *sm

heart; Tibetan sem(s) soul; think, bsam thought; Burmese simh to conceive, be in the charge of; Lushai thiamto know; Lepcha asm spirit, breath, etc. For semantics, cf. e.g. Skt. hra band, strip, fillet, hir vein, artery;Gk. gut, cord, string; Lat. hra empty gut; Lith. arn intestine, small intestine; Ger. Garn yarn, thread,net, Eng.yarn, etc. (IEW I: 604); Turkish bbrekkidney; ProtoTungusManchu *pugi / *pukiintestines, stomachProtoJapanese: *pnkri testicles (ToB).

34(Y) -ssen, (H, N) -ssun.


9/40


33

Bur *-s[m] umbilical cord, navel35~ Caucasian: Dargwa zu navel, Khinalug cum id.,etc. < PEC *n(NCED 1096, CSCG 249)

Bur *sasun, day, month ~ Caucasian: Lak s:awsky, Botlikh ziwuday, etc. < PNC *w(NCED 1092, CSCG 248)

Bur *sumsprout, shoot; tail; spout (of a vessel) ~ Caucasian: Lak cunspout (of a vessel),Chechen

comtrunk, etc. < PEC

*mV(~

*mV) (NCED 367, CSCG 249)

Bur *sesinclear, clean ~ Caucasian: Chechen cenaclean, pure, Abaza bzi good, etc. good > correct,

right.37Underlying final mfound in the plural form mi.38consider Kalasha [u] firewood with an IA etymology (T 12349 [< OI alk f. any small stake or

stick]) (E. Bashir, p.c.).


10/40


34

Bur *i / *i / *uto eat ~ Caucasian: Tsez, Khwarshi =ato eat, Tindi c:ato drink, etc. *ti wind ~ PEC *[a]rV movement of air > Khwarshi aca wind, Tindia:uvoice, shout, etc. (NCED 767, CSCG 134)

Bur *hibreath41~ Caucasian: Chechen ou odor, Ingush a,Batsbi ai < ProtoNakh*aodor ~ Basque *habreath; stench (LDC 17)

Bur *-me finger, toe ~ Caucasian: Kryz miek nail, claw, hoof, etc. < PEC *(H)miV ~*(H)miV~ Yeniseian: Ket bstaq5 index finger (NCED 819 [as *miV ~ *miV], LDC 38,

CSCG 77) Bur *mu > muk(H, N, Y)wood, thicket, muq (H, N) branches with leaves ~ Caucasian: Dargwa mur rod, stick, vine, Abkhaz am wood, firewood, etc. < PNC *muU /*umU~ Basque *mokotrunk of a tree < *moko (NCED 833, CSCG 147)

Bur *-ci to kindle ~ Caucasian: Abkhaz ac hot, Rutul =isa to roast (grain), etc. (Y) arg flying squirrel ~ Caucasian: Adyge ca = cwamarten, mouse,Chechen aaweasel, etc. < PNC *crwV~ Basque *agu mouse ~ Yeniseian: PY *saqasquirrel ~ PST *sre(H)weasel, squirrel, mongoose, etc. (NCED 322, CSCG 21)44

Bur *miil / *biil pomegranate ~ Caucasian: Chechen amc medlar, Khinalug m apple, etc. < PNC *am~ Basque *mahangrape (NCED 237, CSCG 267)

Bur *hapflesh, meat ~ Caucasian: Bezhta ebo liver, Chechen imkidney, etc. < PNC

*wV~ Basque *abelbelly ~ Yeniseian: PY *tVpVspleen (NCED 1106, CSCG 196)45

Bur *hemil poison ~ Caucasian: Tsakhur riman sour, Khinalug misour, etc. < PNC*mVjw / *wVjmV ~ Basque *amin bitter, pungent, piquant; choleric (NCED 521,CSCG 93)

Bur *hamnarrow~ Caucasian: Akushi ra,etc. (see above) Bur *ha: (Y)a jackdaw, (H) hancrow with a red beak ~ Caucasian: Chechen ag

= ag magpie, Lezgi a = ajackdaw, rook, etc. < PEC *m (NCED 381, CSCG 35) Bur *himountain ~ Caucasian: Chechen i amulet (stone), Lak ua small stone, etc.

< PEC *wV ~ Basque *ina small stone, pebble ~ Yeniseian: PY *s stone (NCED382, LDC 114, ToB)

Bur *hathorn ~ Caucasian: Akhwakh aathorn, prick, Ubykh cacaspit, etc. < PNC*~ Basque *a(r)ibramble, thorn (NCED 1090, CSCG 248)46 Bur *m distant relative ~ Caucasian: Tabasaran am bridegroom, Ingush zame best

man, Lak ma:akinsman, etc. < PEC *mV / *mV (NCED1101, CSCG 251) Bur *al / *al (long) hair47 ~ Caucasian: Godoberi ali fringe, forelock, Bezhta aro

horses mane, etc. < PEC **h (NCED 1101, CSCG 251) Bur *muq fringe, bunch of hair (on cows tail) ~ Caucasian: Chechen merz hair (in

horses tail), Archi moor beard, etc. < PEC *muri (NCED 800, CSCG 150) Bur * to come48~ Caucasian: Kabardian - (to move) back, Avar =ain to come,

etc. < PNC *=iw~ Basque *eucito let, leave, permit (NCED 627, CSCG 101)

43(Y) culfertile billygoat, culdrbull, (H, N) chulbillygoat, drake, chindr bull.44This etymon exhibits a wide range of semantic variation, though all pertaining to rodents or mustelids.

Within the Caucasian family the meanings include weasel, marten and mouse. According to NCED (p. 322)Georgian ciqwi squirrel is a loanword from East Caucasian. In Basque the stem *agu or its variant *at (prob.from *agt-,with a fossilized oblique marker) is used for other animal names, such as *agusahabat (lit. mouseold), *athor mole (lit. mousedog), *atiu fieldmouse (lit. mouseblind).

45This etymology may not hold together in all its parts, because of phonological difficulties. See the note inCSCG (p. 196).

46This root, with two successive sibilant/affricates, has apparently been subject to various assimilations anddissimilations. Cf. also Spanish zarzabramble, blackberry bush (OSp sara), probably of Vasconic origin (the 17thc.Basque writer Oihenart had arci: Trask 2008: 337).

47(Y)jalhairy, (H) alstrip (of cloth),ali,alibeard (of goat), (H, N)jallimi long hair (of people).48(Y)o-, (H, N)u (with retroflex //.


12/40


36

(5) The cluster /lt/, and the alternation.In the course of a thorough study of Burphonology one becomes aware of the cluster /lt/ and the fact that in certain verbs as well asnouns there is a frequent alternation of initial dental stops /t-, th/ with medial lateraldentalclusters /lt/. The dental stops occur in both noun and verb stems in wordinitial position,while the lateraldental clusters occur in the same stems when they occur after a prefix. Forexample, in Bur (H, N) -

ltrhorn is a bound morpheme and can only occur with a possessive

prefix, such as altrmy horn, gultrthy horn, while in the Yasin dialect horn is simplytur, a free morpheme. The underlying form of all these is *-ltrhorn (thus Starostin, ToB). Ina verb such as turfall apart, disintegrate the cluster /lt/ appears in prefixed froms such as(absolutive or converb circumflex) nultr having fallen apart (with analogical variants nutr,nutru). The underlying root is thus *-ltr to fall apart, etc. (Starostin, ToB).

It should be noted that Klimov & deman (1972; see also Beitrgep. 80, no. 10.9) formulatedan ingenious hypothesis that several of the words discussed here, and others that denote pairednouns (*-ltr horn, *-ltmal ear, *-lten bone, etc.) contain a prefix *-lt derived from the numeral two (see below under Numerals). While we admit this solution is inventive, we think it

is an example of the dangers of relying solely on internal reconstruction. For example, the existence of external cognates to Bur *-ltr horn, namely Avar :ar horn, Basque *adahorn, andothers (see below), would require that this prefixing of the numeral two must have taken placealready in ProtoDeneCaucasian. Furthermore, the existence of other Bur words with initial (orunderlying) *lt-, and no semantic content of pairing, e.g.Bur *lts grave, *ltap leaf,49 and ofwords for paired body parts such as Bur *qVt armpit, -qhrpat ~-xrpet (Y) lung, *-so[m] kidney, *-ssVn elbow (see above) that lack the supposed *-lt prefix, indicates to us that it isprobably only fortuitous that some words with initial *ltdenote paired objects.

The following examples show both the internal Burushaski alternation of the initial dentalstop t with the medial clusters -lt-,and the regular correspondence of both with Caucasian

lateral affricates. In the following comparisons // denotes a voiceless lateral affricate = [t], //denotes a glottalized lateral affricate = [t], and // denotes a voiced lateral affricate = [dl]:

Bur *-ltr horn > (Y) tur/ (H, N) -ltr horn (bound form) ~ PEC *wrV horn; braid, mane(Avar :ar, Chechen kur, etc.)50~ Basque *adahorn (< *arda) (NCED 771, CSCG 134)

Bur *-ltn> (Y) ten bone / (H, N) -ltn bone (bound form); (Y) tanc, (H, N) -ltnc leg ~PEC *wVnV groin; part of leg (Avar :an groin, etc.) ~ PST *l shin, ankle (NCED785, CSCG 139140)

Bur *ltap> (Y) tap leaf, (H, N) tappetal, page / (Y) dultpi-,(H, N) dultpu to wither ~PNC *pileaf (Lak aileaf, etc.) ~ Basque *lapabramble51~ PY *jpeleaf ~ PST *lp

leaf (NCED 774, CSCG 136) Bur *ltopo,*(l)tultopo> (H, N) tpo,tultpo a kind of thin bread of leavened dough ~ PEC*HrV (Tsez eeli a pastry made of barley flour, Lak r:ap a food made of barleyflour, curds, butter, and rice, etc.) (NCED 546, CSCG 63)

Bur *-ltr > (H, N) tur / nultr / -tr(u),(Y)tr-,dultr to fall apart, disintegrate, becut into pieces, etc. ~ PEC *=wV(l) to burst, tear (Hunzib =u-,etc.) ~ Basque *leheto

49The underlying form *ltapis indicated by the verb *dultpV to wither.50 In Avar (and Andian and Tsezian languages, and Archi) ProtoCaucasian lateral affricates are, by and

large, preserved as such. In Nakh, Lak, Dargwa, Khinalug, and Lezgian languages (except Archi, which has velarized lateral affricates) lateral affricates have largely been replaced by lateral resonants, velars, or uvulars(NCED); cf. Catford (1977), Starostin (2005b). However, under certain conditions there are velar reflexes in the firstgroup of languages as well.

51For the semantics, cf. the IE etymology that includes Skt. tagrass, herb, straw and Eng. thorn, etc.


13/40


37

burst, smash ~ PY *il to break, split ~ PST *r ~*rua to demolish, ruin (NCED 413,CSCG 105)

Bur *-lt > (H,N) t / -lt-, (Y) t to follow,, etc ~ PEC *=VmV to go, come (Hunzib=to go, walk, etc.) ~ Basque *urtento go out, leave (NCED 1026, CSCG 212)

Bur *-ltl > (H, N) -ltli-, (Y) -ltlito wind, turn, tlen / -ltlen to go round, etc.52~ PNC

*wri ~ *rwiwheel, vehicle > Chechen

lraoval cradle runners; fan of the mill wheel,

Agulfurwheel, etc. ~ PST *r[ua]round, roll, wheel (CSCG 134) Bur *ltul > (H, N)ltl-, (Y) tl / -ltl to saddle, tilha,telhasaddle, (H, N) tila id. ~

PEC *wisaddle (Avar:ili,Lak ili, etc.) (NCED 783, LDC 160, CSCG 139)53 Bur *-ltn > tan (tn-)/ -ltn to pound (objects) ~ PEC *=VVw to beat, hit (Avar:ab

to beat, hit; burst, shoot, Andi :ahun, :aun to burst, shoot, etc.) ~ Basque *labushort (< *pounded down) (NCED 1023, ToB)

Bur *-lt > (Y) t / -lt to swear / (H, N) teoath ~ PEC *HiVto say (Ingush le-,al tosay, Hunzib i to call, etc.) ~ PY *V() to speak ~ PST *lspeak, speech (NCED 572,CSCG 70)

Bur *-lt > t / -lt to put on (shoes, stockings) ~ PEC *=mV to put on (trousers,shoes) (Andi =i:in to put on [shoes, footwear, trousers], etc.) (NCED 861, CSCG 130)

In the following examples the Burushaski initial dental stop t corresponds with ProtoCaucasian lateral affricates:

Bur. *(l)tam54> (H, N) tam dlto swim, bathe, wash ~ PEC *HwemVliquid (adj.) > Avar:amija-, Archi :mat:u id., etc. ~ Basque *limuri moist, humid; slippery, etc. ~ PST*limto soak, etc. (CSCG 134)

Bur *(l)ti > *tiwind ~ PEC *[a]rVmovement of air, etc. (see above)

Bur *(l)tul> (Y) tul ~ (H) tol snake ~ PEC *wHrwVVsnake55

(Avar borx snake, LakVikhli bralusnail) ~ PY *urolleech ~ PST *rl ~ *rsnake (NCED 1048, CSCG 218) Bur *(l)tal > tal palate; eyelid56 ~ PEC *HlV mouth, jaw (Tindi er:i jaw, Tsakhur,

Rutul almouth, etc.) ~ PY *ji gills (NCED 589, CSCG 75) Bur *(l)tal > *tal dove ~ PEC *e(Avar:i: a kind of songbird, Lezgi ekcock, etc.)

(NCED 776, ToB) Bur *(l)tal > (H) tal belly, stomach ~ PEC *HlaV / *HalV liver (Avar ul, Tindi rela:,

Lak t:ili, Lezgi le, etc.) (NCED 586, CSCG 76)

52With other derivatives: see Berger (1998).53This comparison raises interesting questions about the spread of horsemanship and the saddle, implying

that this was prior to the diaspora of the western DeneCaucasian languages. If the split between VascoCaucasianand BurushoYeniseian took place about 10 kya (see below: Postscript), and domestication of horses only ca. 6 kya,with the saddle even later, it is difficult to reconcile genetic transmission of the word in both Caucasian and Bur.Another, probably likelier, possibility is that an equestrian culture bequeathed a word such as *uli,*tluli saddleto both Cauc and Bur separately, with subsequent usual developments in each language.

54The notation *(l)tmeans that the /l/ is only assumed from circumstantial evidence, since the correspondences are the same as in known Bur alternations of t / -lt-.

55This appears to be an old compound. Only the second element is compared with Bur *tul.56Skr. tlu palate [is] exactly matching Burushaski tal palate which is usually regarded as borrowed

from Indian, but in fact also would be quite a regular reflex of [PDC] *Hl (CSCG 7576). The Sanskrit word,which has no clear IndoEuropean etymology, is thus probably one of the words adopted from Burushaski whenProtoIndic speakers entered the Indian subcontinent. See Witzel (1999).


14/40


38

Bur *(l)tpi> (H,N) tpi stone terrace ~ PEC *(Chechen labashed, peak of cap, Avareb stone, etc.) ~ Basque *lape shelter under an eave57 ~ PST *tlp flat, tablet, etc.(NCED 777, LDC 32, CSCG 137)

Bur *(l)turcrossbeam in door > (H) tul, (N) tur~ PEC *wrHV(Tsezebridge, stairs,Tindi, Karata:eru bridge, etc.) (NCED 783, ToB)

Bur*(l)ta > ta

(Y) branch, shoot ~ PEC*wV

stick, chip (see above)

Bur *(l)tharn > (H, N) tharnum narrow58 ~ PNC *=ilV thin (Avar ernab, Agulillef, etc.) ~ Basque *lirain slender, svelte, lithe (NCED 639, CSCG 105)

Bur *(l)tan > (H, N) tno colon (lower bowel of animal), tno,tanelo bastard, of lowlybirth59~ PNC *Hnbottom (Avar inubottom, Archi, Lezgi anid., etc.) ~ PST *tlfloor (NCED 590, LDC 169)

Bur *(l)tal > (H) tal slope (of a mountain) ~ PEC * stone (Avar lu rock, rockyplateau, Bezhtaalo stone, etc.) (NCED 773, CSCG 136)

Bur *(l)tne >(Y) tne year before last, (H, N) tndili last year ~ PNC *Hwn winter,year (Avar:in winter, Bezhta iyear, etc.) (NCED 591, CSCG 76)

Bur *(l)tur > (Y) turn, (H, N) turn marmot ~ PNC*rV ~ *rVhare (Ingush lerg,Karata:anala, etc.) (NCED 788, ToB)

Bur *(l)ter > (H, N, Y) ter summer pasture, mountain pasture (Hochweide, auf die dasVieh im Sommer getrieben wird) ~ Avar lolopen enclosure (for sheep), Archi oliyard,place in front of the house, etc. < PEC *wV (NCED 791) ~ Basque *lae pasture,meadow ~ PST *rlfence, framework (CVST II: 56, no. 204)

Bur *(l)tar > (H, N, Y)tarskin bag ~ PNC *li color, skin(Avar:ercolor, Dargwa*k:uli(sheep)skin, etc.) ~ Basque *lauskin, leather (NCED 789, CSCG 130)

This development of initial *lt > tin Bur partially converges with that in one Caucasian

language, Avar (specifically northern Avar: see NCED, pp. 52, 102), where the glottalized affricate PNC/PEC *, *w yields (glottalized dental stop). (The fuller forms of the followingcomparisons are found above.):60

Bur *tno colon (of animal), bastard ~ Avar nu bottom < PNC *Hn Bur *tal slope (of a mountain) ~ Avar lurock, rocky plateau < PEC * Bur *tpi stone terrace ~ Avar (dial.) eb millstone, whetstone < PEC * Bur *tal belly, stomach ~ Avar ul liver < PEC *HalV Bur *tharnum narrow ~ Avar ernab thin < PNC *=ilV

Hermann Berger, the authority on Bur, ventured some BasqueBurushaski lexical comparisons in his early works (Berger 1956, 1959). In his last published work (Beitrge: 2008),Berger acknowledged this early interest, and reckoned that a relationship between Bur andother nonIndoEuropean remnant languages was thinkable but not demonstrable.61 Nevertheless, Berger (1959, p. 26, note 34) discovered the correspondence of Basque initial *l= Bur

57refugio bajo el alero de un tejado / abri sous un avanttoit (Azkue).58Aspirated /th/ is probably due to pretonal syllabic position. Note the similar -nextension in Bur, Avar, and

Basque.59S. A. Starostin preferred to compare this Bur word instead with PNC *anbottom (CSCG 131).60But not the tense affricates *,*w,which remain in Avar as : (or velarize to :under certain conditions;

see NCED pp. 5254).61 eine Beziehung zum Baskischen und anderen nichtindoarischen Restsprachen [ist] zwar denkbar,

aber bei dem heutigen Entwicklungsstadium dieser Sprachen nicht mehr zu beweisen ist (Beitrge, p. 1).


15/40


39

initial *t(h)-, which we consider valid (as developments of DC lateral affricates), based on thefollowing examples:

Bur *tpi stone terrace ~ Basque *lape shelter under eaves62 Bur *ter summer pasture ~ Basque *laepasture, meadow Bur

*tarskin bag ~ Basque

*lauskin, leather

Bur *tap leaf; petal, page (< *ltap) ~ Basque *lapabramble Bur *tam dl to bathe, etc. ~ Basque *limurimoist, humid; slippery

Bur (H, N) tur-,(Y)tr to fall apart, etc. (< *-ltr-) ~ Basque *leheto burst, smash Bur *(l)tharn narrow ~ Basque *lirain slender, svelte, lithe

The following examples (in addition to several above) confirm the correspondence of Burushaski medial -lt with Caucasian lateral affricates. The reflex -lj = [l] occurs in a fewwords, apparently from *-lti,*-ltja:

Bur *dltar buttermilk63

~ PNC *rw milk(Tsez ri butter, Avar rax milk, etc.)(NCED 949, LDC 153, CSCG 183)

Bur *(y)alt > (H, N) gilt spoon, scoop64 ~ PEC *j[l]wV wooden shovel (Lezgi jirf,Bezhta ko, etc.) ~ Basque *aarde pitchfork; dinner fork; rake65~ PST *jok scoop, ladle(NCED 673, CSCG 113)

Bur *yult> (H, N)yult time, (right) moment66~ PNC *jVtime, day(Akhwakh aligein the daytime, ea today, etc.) ~ Basque *ordu time, hour, occasion (NCED 766,CSCG 133)

Bur *yltar > (H,N) yltar upper leafy branches of a tree, crown of a tree, etc.67 ~ PEC*lVV (Avar ar:l branch, bough, Tsez airu pod, etc.) ~ Basque *ada branch ( (H) -ltltar,(N) tltarforeleg (of a quadruped), shoulder (of horse), humanarm (sometimes)70 ~ PNC *Hlu ~ *ulHV arm (Avar ru: arm, shoulder, Archi :olshoulderblade, foreleg (of animal), etc.) ~ PST *tlH / *tlk (?) hand, arm, wing(NCED 588, CSCG 138)

Bur *maltbutter ~ PEC *nV(Chechen nala butter, Archi n:milk, etc.) (NCED849, CSCG 146)

62 See the complete DC etymology (CSCG 137) for semantic developments: original meaning probablysomething like flat slab of stone. Chechen and Ingush also have the meaning shed, possibly originally a crudeoutbuilding with roff made of stone slabs.

63Bur initial d~ Caucasian *ris the regular initial reflex: see CSCP, p. 41.64Burgiltappears to be a compound of the verbgi pour, etc. + -ylt or -lt.65The Basque word appears to be an old compound: *a + *arde (with obscure first element).66 In stemfinal position we would expect *yul (see below). In this case there was probably a variation be

tween *yul (in absolute final position) vs. *yult (preceding inflectional suffixes), with analogical leveling to thelatter.

67Cf. also (H,N,Y)galtr small twig, (H,N)giltr pod, husk (of peas, beans, etc.).68In Basque this word has merged phonetically with *adahorn (see above).69The correspondence of Bur *y = *j ~ PNC initial * is recurrent: cf. Bur *yais head ~ PEC *wmdV

brain, head (below).70(Y) projecting breasts (hervorstehende Brste).


16/40


40

Bur *harltrain, rain cloud71~ PEC *rnw ~ *rnwcloud, fog (Chechen dok fog,Khinalug un cloud, etc.)72~ Basque *lanbro fog, mist, drizzle73~ PST *r drop, rain(NCED 947, CSCG 179)

Bur *alt two, *wlt four ~ PWC *p(:)four (Ubykh ,etc.)74~ PST *Pljfour ~Basque *lau four (NCED 314, CSCG 212)

Bur *balt

front room of house, veranda ~ PEC*blV

house (Hunzibbui

at home,Lak buralu threshold, Hurrianpurli house, etc.) ~ Basque *bordacottage, cabin, stable(NCED 312, LDC 158, CSCG 15)

Bur *-ltVr to show > (Y) ltar-, ltir-, (H, N) ltir~ PEC *iVto look(Chamalal:id,Tabasaran lig-, etc.) ~ PY *V()l ~ *V()r1-> Kott. liga I know ~ PST *tl(H) to see,look (NCED 209, CSCG 255)

Bur *mltur > (H,N) -mltur nostril ~ PEC *wnV (Batsbi mar nose, Bezhta moobeak, etc.) ~ Basque *mutu snout, muzzle; end, edge < *murtu ~ PST *lH head(NCED 1041, CSCG 216)

Bur *qhVlt sack, pocket ~ < PEC *GHrwV (see above)

Bur *-hltto wash > (Y) (ba)hlt-,(H, N) -alt/ -yalt ~ PEC *=VVn to wash, pour, weep(Chechen =lto weep; to pour (of rain), Archi e=:into make an ablution, etc.) ~ PST*tl~ *tlto wash, clean (NCED 1023, CSCG 212)

Bur *dalt >(N) daltn to thresh75~ PEC *=rV < *rVto thresh (Batsbi arl-, Bezhta=ol-, etc.; Andi loli threshing; threshing floor; Archi orom threshing board, etc.) ~Basque *laainthreshing floor (NCED 1031, CSCG 182)

Bur *-wli dream > (Y) -wlji, (H,N) -lji~ PNC *em dream (Dargwa han sleep,Karata hanu fog, cloud, etc.) ~ Basque *lainhocloud, mist, fog76(NCED 512, CSCG 93)

Bur *-li behind, backwards77 ~ PEC *i below, down (Bezhta i down, below, Lakluwid., etc.) (NCED 778)

Bur *-wli womb, afterbirth ~ PEC *rVHVnw / *HVrVnw some internal organ:Tindi re:a(:a ri:i) diaphragm, Rutul nixr placenta, etc. (NCED 955, ToB) Bur *hul > (Y) hulj to ride (a horse) ~ PEC *Vto run, leap (Avar:rd to dance,

Rutul hi=igato drive, urge, etc.) ~ PST *tlj(H) to run, gallop (NCED 209, CSCG 256)

The Burushaski reflex of all lateral affricates in stemfinal position is simply /l/:78

Bur *-yal to hear ~ PNC *=euto hear: Andi ani to hear, Budukh ixid., etc. (NCED411, CSCG 46)

Bur *wl/ *blto put on (clothes) ~ PEC *=VVto put clothes (on the upper body):

Chamalal, Tindi =al-, Khwarshi i-, etc. ~ PY *alVtrousers (NCED 1024, CSCG 212) Bur *bal-,*-wl1 place between the shoulders, 2 back of the shoulders, upper part of the

back, 3 back > (H) blbal1, blgii 2, -wldas3, (N) blbal1, blgia 2, -wldas3, (Y)

71Initial *hamay be influenced by har to urinate. In stemfinal position we would expect *(ha)rl(see below). See the note to *yult, above.

72PEC * is reconstructed on the basis of circumstantial evidence.73The Basque word requires a metathesized protoform such as *nwr.74This is probably related to PEC *bne eight (Avar mi:go,Hunzib beno, etc.).75Bur initial d < *r: cf. Bur *dltar buttermilk, above.76Andian languages demonstrate a nontrivial semantic development dream > *vision > cloud (NCED).

Likewise in Basque.77Starostin (ToB) prefers to compare Bur *-li with PNC *Hl[a]breast, back, etc.78Apparent exceptions are probably the result of analogical leveling. (See the notes to *yultand *harlt, above.)


17/40


41

wldes3 ~ PNC *bVupper part of the body (Batsbi balishoulders, Adyge, Kabardianaupper part of the back, etc.) ~ Basque *orbaldashoulder < *orbarda (NCED 313,LDC 32, CSCG 158)

Bur *-hl lip, edge, shore ~ PEC *HwV (~-,-) forehead> Chechen a, Tindi ha:a,etc.)79(NCED 543, CSCG 84)

Bur *bal

marrow, brain, kernel (of walnut) ~ PEC*brV

(large) intestines > Bezhtabaa large intestine, Udi buq:un belly, etc.) ~ Basque *barda / *marda belly, abdomen,

bowels, tripe, stomach, rennet ~ PY *p intestine(s) ~ PST *bik bowels (NCED 297,CSCG 13)

Bur *el > (Y) lden year before year before last (den year) ~ PEC *VwV last year(Avar dial. uisa, Tsez, Hinukh ei, Bezhta ie, etc.) ~ Basque *urte year (NCED 225,CSCG 259)

Bur *blis ewe that has already given birth ~ PNC *bhwsmall cattle (Bezhta, Hunzibbi sheep, Andi belirdeer, etc.) ~ Basque *bildo lamb (that has begun to feed itself)(NCED 293, CSCG 12)

Bur *(l)tal > tal dove ~ PEC *e(Avar:i: songbird,etc.)(see above) Bur *-l belly, abdomen ~ PEC *=r(a)V stomach; rennet, abomasum (Karata me:ustomach, Hunzib be rennet, abomasum, etc.) ~ Basque *urdail stomach, abomasum,womb ~ PST *tlwbelly, stomach (NCED 670, CSCG 112)

One might have noted that in some forms above (*harlt rain, rain cloud, *-hlt towash) Burushaski has /lt/ in what appears to be final position, an apparent contradiction tothe rule just cited. The restoration of /lt/ in these cases can be attributed to analogy, based oninflected forms such as harlti rainfall, rainclouds. Likewise in the case of Bur *blis ewe(see above) the development of *> stemfinal /l/ had already taken place before the addition

of -is(a frequent Bur suffix).For more details on DC lateral affricates and their reflexes, see Bengtson (2008a: 5961).

Typological parallels of the change TL > LT: If we symbolize the postulated change ofDC lateral affricates to Bur /lt/ (reduced in initial position to /t/ and in final position to /l/) asTL > LT, some typological parallels support the probability of this type of phonologicalchange. The clearest and most familiar may be the change seen in Spanish:

Lat. spatula > OSp. espadla ~ espalda> MSp. espaldaback Lat. capitulu > OSp. cabidlo ~ cabildo> MSp. cabildotown council

Lat.foliatile > OSp. hojadle ~ hojaldre> MSp. hojaldrepuff pastry Lat. titulu > (Catalan) title> OSp. tidle ~ tilde> MSp. tildewritten accent

In Old Spanish the /dl/ and /ld/ forms coexisted, while in the modern language the /ld/forms have prevailed. In JudeoSpanish the change has been extended to include imperativeplural + clitic constructions (Bradley 2006: 80):

JSp. traeldo =MSp.traedlo bring it < Late Latin tra(h)ete + illuJSp. tomalda = MSp. tomadla take itJSp. daldo = MSp. dadlo give it

79For semantics, cf. Hunzib bil lip, Tindi bala edge, end, corner, Lezgi p:el forehead, etc.; Basque *beaforehead.


18/40


42

In English a parallel can be seen in the popular name Sheltiefor Shetland pony or Shetlandsheepdog. In recent American English chipotle, the name for a dried chili pepper derived(through Mexican Spanish) from Nahuatl, is frequently pronounced /ipolti/.80

It is interesting to note the derivation of Spanish alcalde judge < Arabic alqthe judge(Corominas 1990: 38), in which the Spanish cluster /ld/ substitutes for the Arabic emphatic (which in turn comes from the Semitic lateral sibilant

*).

In Tibetan and other Bodic languages of the SinoTibetan family PST *tlmay yield /lt/,/ld/, or /l/, for example:

Tib lto belly, stomach < PST *tlw id.~ PEC *=r(a)V, Bur *-l, Basque *urdail, etc. (seeabove)

Tib lte navel, center < PST *tljcenter middle ~ PNC*=middle, half, Basque *erdiid., PY *alhalf (CSCG 46)

Tib lta look < PST *tl(H) to see, look ~ PEC *iVto look,Bur *-ltVr to show, etc.(see above)

Tib ltag nape, back part of the neck < PST *tluak back ~ PEC *arw forehead; cap,Basque *loktemple; middle of forehead (NCED 775, ToB) Tib ldeb leaf, sheet < PST *(t-)lp leaf ~ Burushaski *ltap leaf; to wither, PNC *pi

leaf, Basque *lapabramble, PY *jpeleaf (see above) Tib ldebs side < PST *tlpborder, side (ToB) ~ (? Basque *leponeck) Tib lag rod, stick < PST *tlkstake, stick ~ Bur *lta branch, shoot, Avar :o: stub

ble, etc. (see above) Tib lagsiron; lock < PST *tl[ia]kiron (ToB) ~ Bur *ltik> tikearth, ground; rust

The difference from Basque and Burushaski is that Bodic has the metathesized cluster

only initially,not medially, as in the other languages. Since Burushaski is spoken in an areaimmediately adjacent to the Bodic dialects (Balti and Purik, archaic Bodic dialects, are spokendirectly east of the Burushaski area), it is possible that at some time in the past, both familieshad lateral affricates, and that the change of *TL > /lt/ (etc.) was an areal phenomenon that affected Burushaski and Bodic, but not more distant SinoTibetan languages (such as Lushai,which frequently has /tl/ or /thl/ < PST *tl-.

Morphology

Nouns

In the Burushaski nominal system the case endings, as admitted by himself, are thesame for both singular and plural. Bur therefore has an agglutinating morphology, not the inflected morphology typical of IE. We find the Bur case endings far more compatible with thoseof Basque and Caucasian, including the compound case endings found in all three families(Bengtson 2008a: 9092).

Furthermore, though it is not mentioned by , many (about 150) of the most basic nounsare bound forms, i.e., they cannot occur without a pronominal prefix (for example, Bur (H, N)-ltr horn manifests as altrmy horn, gultrthy horn, iltr his horn, multr her horn,etc.). Toporov (1971) pointed out these remarkable parallels between Bur and Yeniseian:

80Chipotle is also the name of a restaurant chain. Evidence of the metathesis chipotle ~ chipoltecan easily befound with an internet search of chipolte.


19/40


43

my hand thy handTable 5

Burushaski (H, N) ri ri

Yeniseian (Ket) a a

These prefixes can be reconstructed to something like *aa my / *uxGu thy (see thePDC pronoun stems, below), and the word hand itself is reconstructed as *VHV (byStarostin: ToB). This type of construction is totally alien to IE patterns, as is the enormousnumber of different plural suffixes: about 70, as noted by (p. 23). So is the multiple classsystem of Bur, which is far more similar to class systems in Caucasian and Yeniseian than togender in PIE.

Table 6. Burushaski noun classes81

Class type human nonhuman

Class description humanmale humanfemalenonhuman animate(animals, countable

objects)

inanimate(uncountable

objects, mass nouns,abstractions)

Class letter (Lorimer) hm hf x y

Class number I II III IV

Examples(HunzaNager)

hirmanu fatherqhudaGod

guswomandasngirlpar fairy

har horsebaltapplelineye

phufirege snowhapflesh

Table 7. East Caucasian noun classes

Class type human nonhumanClass description humanmale humanfemale nonhuman animate inanimate

Class number I II III IV

Examples (Lak)uw manp:u fatherarsson

:arwifec:us:a femaleninumother

u horseimus onionjaeye

cu fire:in waterdikflesh

Bouda (1949); Catford (1977: 298299).

Personal Pronouns

It is perhaps the personal pronouns that show most clearly the deep incompatibility ofBur and IE. IE, as is well known, is typified by the first and secondperson pronouns *H1e(H)I / *(e)me me and *te-, *towe-, *tuHx = *t thou, thee. In Bur (Berger 1998: I, p. 80) thescheme is entirely different.

81The difference between class III and IV nouns is not as straightforward as [implied in the table.] Manyclass IV nouns are countable (and take classspecific plural endings), e.g.HN -rihand, -sisfoot, -ltmalear,-kinliver, hahouse, tom tree,ambow (made of horn), while some abstract nouns are class III, e.g. u leisure, holiday, rupimoney, ilthe coldest period of the year, haripmelody. Yet there is, of course, this strongtendency that objects and materials (incl. artifacts made from such materials) lacking a clearly defined or stablephysical form are class IV. So trees are IV, but their fruits are III. (B. Tikkanen, pc.).


20/40


44

Table 8. Burushaski Personal pronouns

Person 1 sg. 2 sg. 1 pl. 2 pl.

Dial.\ Form dir. g.e. v.p. dir. g.e. v.p. dir. g.e. v.p. dir. g.e. v.p.

Hunza &Nagir je ja a

un

uN um

gu-gg(o)k(o)

mimime

mi-

mm(e) ma

ma

mma

Yasin ja un

gu-gg(o)k(o)

mi mamam

Berger (1998); dir. = direct, g.e. = genitiveergative, v.p. = verbal prefix.

Here we see that the Bur system is suppletive, with different stems for direct forms and

oblique forms, in both first and second person. (p. 72) attempts to connect Burje,jwith PIE*H1e(H) but he can do so only by violating the sound correspondence discussed above (PIE*, * = Bur g, )! He further tries to connect Bur un (~ um,u) with PIE *tuHxom, emphaticform of *tuHx= *t-, but again only by requiring another unprecedented change: t > d> 0!

For comparison, below we present the attested forms of personal pronouns in the IndoIranian languages that surround Burushaski:82see tables 9 & 10.

Table 9. Personal pronouns in Nuristani & Dardic


Lg. \ Case direct oblique direct oblique direct oblique direct obliqueKati vuze,nc a,ye tiu to,tu ema,im,yimo a,o

Waigali aa t t am am w w

Akun ai y tu ima w y

Prasun unz ndei i/y ti as m

Dameli ai m,mo tu t ai am bi my

Gawar a m tu t am,ama m

Wotapuri au ma tu ta,tha m,mun th

umati m tu t b ama w imaPaai a ma t,t t,t hama (h)m,mm,my

Tirahi au,ao m tu,to te,t ao,m mn tao t

Kalaa mai tu / t tai bi hma/i bi mmi/e

Khowar aw ma tu ta isp pis

Torwali ,ai m ,m tu ta mo,moi mo,ma t,th to,ta

Bakarik ya ma tu tha ma tha

Garwi yah m tu ta m ta

82Thanks to E. Bashir for some corrections of Khowar forms.


21/40


45


Lg. \ Case direct oblique direct oblique direct oblique direct oblique

Maiyan m m t t b z tus s

Kanyawali ma m ,m tu t ,t be z tus c

Phalura ma tu be as tusina ma(h) m tu(h) th,t b s tsho,co

Kamiri ba(h) me c(h) ce as ase twah twahe

Vedic ahm a. m(m) tuvm a. tv(m) a. asmn,d. asmbhyam a. va, g.yumkm

deman (1978, 289); a. = accusative, d. = dative, g. = genitive.

Table 10. Personal pronouns in Pamir languages


Lg. \ Case direct oblique direct oblique direct oblique direct oblique

Yidgha zo,z mn,mun tu,t tu//o/a max,mox maf ,mof

Munjan z,z mn,mun tu,t to///aw mox mf

ughni wuz mu tu m tama

Ruan az mu tu t m tama

Khuf waz mu tu taw,t ma tama

Bartangi z mun,mu t ta m tam

Oroor waz mun,mu tu t m tamSarykoli waz my,myn tw ta,ty ma tama

Ikaim az(i) mak t fak mx() mv(o) tmx tmx(v)

Yazghulam az mn,mon tow tu,ti mox

Wakhi (w)uz,wz ma tu taw,tow sak sp s(y)it sav

Avestan azm g. mn tuum,t g. tauu g. ahmkmOPers. g. amxam

g.ymkm

Efimov & deman (1978, 218); g. = genitive.

In spite of some formally similar forms in the contemporary languages, e. g. Yidgha mox,Munjan max, Ikaim mx we, visvis Bur mi id., deeper comparison shows that they havequite separate origins. Thanks to the archaic IndoIranian literary languages, Avestan, OldPersian and Vedic OI, we can project the IndoIranian forms into the past and derive themfrom the stem *asm-, from PIE *sm-. Bur mi, on the other hand, maybe comes from PDC*mi(nV) self, (our)self, according to Starostin (CSCG 146: cf. ST: Lushai mi me, us, my,our, etc.).

We propose that comparison of the Bur personal pronouns with those of East Caucasian(and other DC languages) is more fruitful as well as more straightforward than comparison

with IE. Both Burushaski and the reconstructed Proto(North) Caucasian have suppletivepronoun stems in the first and second person singular. For the present purpose, let us compare Bur with two East Caucasian languages, Khinalug and Tsakhur. Khinalug is the highest


22/40


46

(2300 m. = 7546 ft.) and most remote village in Azerbaijan, where the inhabitants still speak aCaucasian language.83Tsakhur is also spoken in Azerbaijan as well as in Dagestan. Both languages appear to have preserved remnants of old eastern Dagestanian suppletive paradigms: see table 11.

Table 11. Personal pronouns in Eastern Dagestanian languages

direct genitive dative

Khinalugz (nom.)j(erg.)

i,e as1stperson sg.

Tsakhur zu jizn za

Khinalugw(nom.)wa (erg.)

wi o2ndperson sg.

Tsakhur84 wu ~ u (= u) j (= j-) wa

According to Nikolayev and Starostin (NCED, pp. 402, 48384, 855, 101415, 108485), theoriginal ProtoCaucasian pronominal paradigms were very complicated, and difficult to reconstruct with much certainty. In the first person singular West Caucasian and most East Caucasian languages have forms going back to PNC direct *z(-n), ergative *ez(V), genitive*iz(V),oblique *z-, though Lak and Dargwa have instead a first person stem *n (cf. Basque*ni I, PST *I, we, etc.). In the second person singular PEC had a complicated suppletiveparadigm consisting of direct*(-n)/ *w = *w,ergative*wV = *wV,genitive *eV/ *iV,and dative*d.

Clearly a great deal of rearrangement has taken place in all of these languages since the

original paradigms of thousands of years ago. West Caucasian abandoned most of the suppletive stems and kept only *sa I (= *z) and *wa thou (= *). One East Caucasian language,Dargwa (Akushi and Urakhi dialects) has retained the stems *n and *w = *w, resulting ina paradigm coinciding with that of Basque:85

I thouTable 12

Dargwa(Akushi, Urakhi)

nu u

Basque ni hi

We can then summarize the genesis of the Burushaski first and second person singularpronouns as follows: see table 13.

Interrogative Pronouns

As stated correctly by (p. 74), Bur interrogative pronouns are built on bases containingthe labials /m/ and /b/: *mewho and *bewhat, and he also quite correctly recognizes the Burtendencytowaverbetween/m/and/b/.connectstheBurinterrogativeswiththerareIEin

83http://www.xinaliq.com/; http://www.eki.ee/books/redbook/khinalugs.shtml.84Note that Tsakhur exhibits free variation between the two old second person stems: wu< * vs.u


23/40


47

ProtoBurushaski

Proposedcognates

ProtoDeneCaucasian86

Table 13

1stpers. sg. direct *a

Khinalug zTsakhur zuChechen soPWC *sa

Yen. *a

*zV

1stpers. sg. oblique *a (< *a-)87Dargwa nuBasque *niKott */88

*V

2ndpers. sg. direct *un

Archi unKhinalug wTsakhur wu(~u)PWC *waYen. *aw / *u

*wV

2ndpers. sg. oblique *gu / *go

Tsakhuru(~ wu)Chechen oDargwa uBasque *hiYen. *kV/*Vk

*xGwV

terrogative stem *me/o-, attested only in Anatolian, Tocharian, and Celtic. We must point out,however, that the *mVinterrogative is much more richly attested in DC than in IE, and furthermore the m ~ balternation is attested in DC, but not in IE:

Caucasian: PEC *mV > Chechen mila who, mia where, maca when etc.; Andi emiwho, Chamalal imid., Tind. imala who; Lezgi, Agul mus when / Archi basa when

Basque: baconditional prefix, if (Trask 1997: 225)89 SinoTibetan: PST *mV > Karen *mV what, Serdukpen mu id., Bodo *ma id., Ao Naga

*mVid., Sichuan *mVid. (ToB) / PST *Pawhat, which > Burmese bawhat, which, Jingpopha1what, Bodo bwhich one (CSCG I: 92)

86S.A. Starostin (ToB, 20042005a, 20042005b).87Loss of initial PDC * in Bur (or replacement with /h/) is regular, per Starostin (CSCP 48).88According to Starostin, Ket b/abbelongs here; but the development *b < *m < * (CSCP 48) does not agree

with the rules established by him earlier (Starostin 1982), while the Kott data agree excellently:~liga < ligaich Weiss = *mein Wissen~aiten (aiten) ich will = *mein Wunsch~apea < apeain; hinein < *mein Inneres~ani < animein Schwiegersohn : Ket Schwiegersohn~ma < mamein Mutter~p < pmein Vater.

See W. Werner, Vgl. Wrterbuch der JenissejSprachen, Bd. 2, Wiesbaden 2002, 2930, who has collected the Kott examples from Castrn 1858. Concerning Ket ab my, Arin b(i)-, Kott mino, and Ket & Yugh 1st person sg. verbalexponent ba/bo-, a promising cognate appears in Hurrian -iffu/iff/iffmy, pl. -iff=aour; and in the ergativesuffix of the 1st person -aw, e.g. td=awI love [it] (see Gernot Wilhelm, Hurrian, In: The Cambridge Encyclopediaof the Worlds Ancient Languages, ed. by Roger D. Woodard, Cambridge: University Press 2004, 107, 112).

89For semantic development, cf. Old Irish ma whether, if < PIE interrogative stem *me/o-, cited by aule(p. 74); German wennif < when; Czech iob, Polish czyob < PIE interrogative stem *kwei-,etc .


24/40


48

Yeniseian: PY *wi / *weinterrogative pronoun90> Ket bi / bia( < bia:3) where, bie who (masc.), ba who (fem.), bia5,6how, bi / biwhither; Kott bili where,bilthuwhither, bilawhence, bia which, etc.

Verb

In the verb the Bur variance from IE is just as pronounced as in the noun. The typologicalsimilarity claimed by (p. 75) is only in regard to vaguely similar systems of aspects andtenses, without any material parallels pointing to common genetic origin. The verbal endings(, pp. 7577) are similar only in that both Bur and IE have endings containing nand m, thoughthere are no real correspondences between them. Most striking is the existence of the Bur template verbal morphology with as many as four prefix positions preceding the verb stem.

Table 14. Burushaski verb template

prefix

position

4 3 2 1 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6

NEG D PRON CAUS VERB PL.SBJ. DUR 1sgSBJ

AP/

NONFIN/

MODAL

SBJ Q

function

negative

marker

subject

version

pronominal

prefix(per-

son/class)

causivity/

valence

verbstem

plural

marker

Tikkanen 1995, Berger 1998, Anderson, ms.

It is well known that ProtoIE had few verbal prefixes.91The Bur prefixal template is farmore compatible with languages such as those of the Yeniseian family, especially the welldocumented verbal morphology of Ket, and of the extinct Kott; Basque, Caucasian (especiallyWest Caucasian), and NaDene also seem to preserve distinctive features (multiple nounclasses, polysynthesis, extensive verbal prefixing of pronominal and valencechanging grammemes) of the postulated DeneCaucasian protolanguage: see, e.g. Bengtson (2008a, 2010a,2010b), G. Starostin (2010a).

Numerals

(p. 75) makes some ingenious BurushaskiIE comparisons of the numerals one, two(actually Bur two + IE *H2al other), eight, and nine. Before commenting on these attempts, let us first provide some background information on the complete numeral systems ofBur and its IE neighbors:

90Yeniseian *w is the regular reflex of PDC *m (CSCP 35).91Concerning verbal prefixes in IE, the situation is rather complex. Most of the historically attested IE lan

guages use prefixes, which represent the prepositions, sometimes frozen, as in Hittite. The verbal augment isanother example, different from usual prefixes. Its existence is attested in IndoIranian, Armenian, Greek. E. Hamp(1997, 127) tried to demonstrate that it is not excluded that it was known in other languages too, e.g.in the Latinform enoswe instead of nosin the Carmen Arvale. This means that this prefix would be free and not dependentonly on the verb. There could also be some old prefixes of the type smobile in IndoEuropean, maybe corresponding with the Afroasiatic scausative.


25/40


49

Table 15. Burushaski numerals

Dial. \ Num. 1 2 3 4 5

Hunza &Nagir

hinhanhik

altaltalt(n)

isk(n)uskisk

wltowlti

hundhind

Yasinhenhanhek

altaltalt(n)

iskiskisk

wltu/wlte

endind,

Comments H 18: hun w + *alt2

Dial. \ Num. 6 7 8 9 10

Hunza &Nagir

mindomindimao

thalthal

altmboaltmbi

hunhunt

torumotorimi

Yasin bindubinde

thalthal

altmbualtmbe

huhut

trum

Comments

mi, pl. -mianY -me, pl. -mafinger + 5

maybe cf.Khaling tr 7(Hd 361)

*altan be2 without

*hun 1minus *Cu 10?or from Y -cutake away(Bl 328)

torumY. tarumso many; cf.Khaling taham10 (Hd 361)

Dial. \ Num. 10 20 30 40 50

Hunza &Nagir

torumo ltarN lthar

ltartorumo /torimi

altltarN -lthar

altltartorumo

Yasin trum ltar

Comments < *alt + *tarum(B 16)

20 + 10 2 20 (2 20) + 10

Dial. \ Num. 60 70 80 90 100

Hunza &

Nagir

iskltar iskltar

torumo

wltiltar wltiltar

torumo

tha

Yasin iskltar walteltar tha

Comments 3 20 (3 20) + 10 4 20 (4 20) + 10

Berger 1998.


26/40


50

Table 16. Nuristani & Dardic numerals

Language 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Kati ev diu tre t()vo pu o,u sut o,ut noh,nu duc

Waigali ew,k d tr at p ,p st n d

Akun a d,du tr,tr cat pn,ponc

,du st n,n dus

Prasun i/upn l c , ip wuu wuu st st n,ny lz

Dameli ek d tr r p o sat a n da

Gawar yak,yk d / cr p(n)c u,u st,sat n d,da

Wotapuri yek,yak d , c/sawr pan/c , sat,st a, nau da()

umati yk d y, cur pn o sat,st n ds

Paai d tr,() r,cr pan sat at n d

Tirahi ek d tre cawor panc xo sat axt nab dahKalaa ek d tre au pn,pn o sat a n da

Khowar troi r pn hoi sot ot noh o

Torwali e(k), du,d,do a,a au pan ,o sat a nm da

Bakarik ak d h r pan o sat ah num da

Maiyan ak d saur pnz h st h num da

Kanyawali ek d cur ps st h nau d

Phalura k d tr r pn o st n d

ina k du e ar po a st na da

Kamiri akh z(h) tr(h) cr pnc ah sath h naw da(h)


27/40


51

Table 16 (cont.)

Language 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1000

Kativici,vc

vicaduc uvcu vcaduc

tr vc pu vc

Waigali wi

wii

d duwi

duwie

d trw(i)

att

wi pwi

Akun wiwiidus

dwiduds

trwiitrwiids

catbi,attii

catwiids

puncwi

Prasun ,z l(i) lyogu leebiz ogu pagu wugu

Dameli bii biioda dbii pbii

Gawar i iod dui i cri pin

Wotapuri b() bda dbdbda

bcawurb

panb

umati is isds dis yis curis pnis

Paai wstwstoditrw

duwyaduwyaudi

trwya,ewya

rwiyarwad

panawia

Tirahibiau,byh

biaudah dobdobiaudah

panzb

Kalaa biibiieda

dbiidbiieda

trebii(r)

trebida

aubii(r)

aubida

pbii

Khowar bir biro birbiiroeo

troiiirtroibiroe

rbirorbiroe

pnbir,r

Torwali b daob

db daodb

b ob panb,soh

Bakarik bdab

dbdadb

hab rb panb

Maiyan bdab

dbdadb

ab saurb al

Kanyawali b db ab curb al

Phalura bhbhed

dubhatrbhia

rbhia

pnbhia

ina b(h)bigda dbyo

dbyogda byo

byogadai arbyo

arbyogadai l ss,ss

Kamiri wuh trh cath panch h satat th namat hath ss,ssu

deman 1978, 28587.


28/40


52

Table 17. Numerals of the Pamir languages

Language 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Yidgha y lo uroi r pns,on xo vdo o nu los

Munjan y lu iroi fr pon xo vdo oko nau da

ughni yw,yi u,iyn ary cavr pn x (w)vd wat nw sRuan/Khuf yw,yi aw ary cavr pn xw (w)vd wat nw/nw os

Bartang yw,yi aw ary cavr pn xw vd wat nw us

Sarykoli iw,i w,a aroy cavr pin xel vd wot new es

Yazghulam w(g) ow cy er pen u uvd ut nu(w) s

Ikaim uk,k d(w) r(y) cfr pn xl(l) uvd ot naw,nu dI dst

Wakhi yi(w) bu(y) tru(y) cbr pan a b at naw as

Language 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1000

Yidgha wsto roiwist pnwist

Munjanbist Hindi siyl, siyr, sl,jackal, Oriya siya, siaa,etc. (CDIAL 729), though Berger (1998 III: 186) makes no reference to this as a source ofBur hal.


30/40


54

Next, attempts to derive Bur altmbo8 from PIE *ot(u) 8, with a change of ak > alunder the influence of the Bur numerals for 2 and 4 (p. 75). In view of the holistic relationshipof the Bur words for 2, 22, and 23, as shown above, it seems highly unlikely to us that all theother IE lower numerals would be discarded and only 8 retained, with this odd change.

Finally (p. 75) tries to connect Bur hunt9 with PIE *H1ne9, with dissimilation, presumably to eliminate the first nasal. However, the noncounting forms contain sibilant affricates:(H, N) hun, (Y) hu, and we saw (above) Tomascheks hypothesis of one (hun-) away fromten (-,-). Besides Yeniseian *tu 10and SinoTibetan *[h]Vj 10, Starostin and Nikolayev(NCED 245) have posited PNC *n 10 (Andi hoogo, Lezgi ud, Abkhaz ab, etc.), andsome have suggested that a cognate element *-ciis found in the Basque numerals *sorci8 and*bederaci9 (thus 10 2, 10 1, respectively), though this latter hypothesis has been criticized

by Trask (1995: 6465). One of the authors (Bl 328) has suggested another possibility: *hun 1 +(Y) -cutake away, i.e. (10) take away 1.98Berger (Beitrge 79) derives hun andhu


31/40


55

PIE *bhrter (*breH2ter-) brother / *sweser sister : Bur has instead one stem *uthat serves as both brother of male and sister of female, and two others, *- hulVsbrother offemale, and *-ystsister of male.101All of these Bur words are bound morphemes they canonly occur with a possessive prefix and all of them have parallels in DC languages.

Bur *uclosely resembles the Caucasian stem *= that serves as brother and sister,often with changing class prefixes (e.g., Agul

ubrother,

isister, Chechen

waabrother,

jaa sister, Dargwa uzi brother, ruzi sister, etc.); cf. Basque *anhisba sister (of awoman); PST *jHelder sister or brother; Yeniseian *b[i]()s brother, sister (CSCG 112).

Bur *-hulVs brother (of female), husbands brother resembles PEC *alV / *ValV, aword root that gives rise to Lak aalubridegrooms kinsman and aal:arbrides kinsman,along with cognates that mean guest (probably a semantic development from *wedding guest< *kinsman invited to a wedding): Dargwa Akusha al,Tabasaranaluv,etc. (NCED 1067).102

Bur *-yst sister of male, wifes sister can be compared with PEC *HdV woman (Chechen zudawoman, Dargwa Chirag cadefemale, Hunzib utulabride, etc.), Urartian atiwoman, wife, bridegroom, PY *cVt husband, Basque *(ema-)ste married woman, wife (CSCG 26).

PIE *snu-,*syo (*suHnu-,*suHyo-)son, *dhug(h)ater (*dugH2ter-)daughter :Bur has one stem, *-i, for both son and daughter. Starostin (CSCG 156) connected this with PST*e(j) child, young, with the regular Bur loss of initial *.103Cf. also Basque *ninichild, doll.

Bur also has the word *s (Yasin -s, Hunza, Nager sk) human child, animals young,probably cognate with Caucasian *=w son, daughter (Avar was son, jas daughter,Kabardian wa son, etc.); Basque *V (in *eme son, *oaba uncle, *alhabao granddaughter, *aaba ancestor, etc.); PST *grandchild (CSCG 113).

IE *suHnu-,*suHyoson are derivatives of the verb *seuH to give birth (IEW 91314;Rix et al. 2001: 538). Probably related are Kartvelian *ew/*w to give birth: Georgian vili

son (Klimov 1998, 248, 251) ||| AfroAsiatic: Cushitic: (East) Somali was,Konso osto havesexual intercourse || Omotic: Shinasha, Mocha uw-, Kafa ii-, Anfillo uy to give birth(Lamberti 1993: 384) ||| Uralic: Mari w to give birth (IlliSvity 1967: 361: IE + Kartv. +Mari). There is likely a remote (Borean) connection between PDC *=w and the other wordsin this paragraph, but the morphological features are entirely different: IE stem + suffix vs.Bur(and DC) prefix + stem.

In sum, there is no resemblance whatsoever, whether in overall kinship structure or lexemes, between Bur and IE kinship terms, apart from some possibly very remote (Borean) cognates (PIE *s ~ Bur *-s,PIE *mter ~ Bur *-mi).

Body part words

PIE *erd heart : Bur *s heart, mind.The Bur word has been compared with Caucasian: PNC *ma sky, cloud; soul, breath; god (Akhwakh as:i breath, Ubykh psa soul,spirit, etc.), Basque *aise wind, etc. (CSCG 263);104 another possibility is comparison with

101These words have extended meanings in the Burusho kinship system: *-u also serves as husband of amans sister, *-hulVs as husbands brother, and *-jst as wifes sister. The typology of the Bur sibling terms is similar to Basque: *anaiebrother of male/ *nebabrother of female; *anhisbasister of female / *aebasister of male.

102 In these words // denotes a pharyngealized vowel, and // a voiceless pharyngealized uvular fricative,otherwise written (more awkwardly) with thepalokaas /aI/ and /I/, respectively.

103Seen also in Bur *a1stperson singular pronominal prefix ~ PST *I, we, PEC *nI, Basque *niI, etc.(CSCG 156, CSCP 48).

104For semantics, cf. Rumanian inimheart, soul, mind, etc. < Latin animawind, air, breath, spirit, mind, etc.


32/40


56

Basque *bisilife; alive, PNC *HwV breath, breathe: Chechen sa soul, oblique base sina-,etc.) (CSCG 188).

The IE word is, we think, cognate with Kartvelian *merd chest, breast (Klimov 1998,123; IlliSvity 1971, #200: IE+Kartv.) and, in AfroAsiatic: Chadic: Hausa irji, pl. iraazachest, Gwandaragrijiid. (Skinner 1996).

PIE *okw (*H3ekw-) eye : Bur *li / *il (the latter in compounds). The Bur word isclearly comparable with Caucasian: PNC *wli eye (cf. especially Dargwa *uli, Tabasaran,Agul, Rutul ul) and Yeniseian: PY *des (Ket d, Kott t, Pump. dat, where *dis a regular initial reflex of PDC *l: CSCG 266, CSCP 68).

The IE word *H3ekwhas, we think, external cognates in Altaic: PA *ku to understand,look into (Old Turkic uqto understand, Old Japanese ukakap to look into, inquire, etc.);cf. also Semitic: Ugaritic aq eyeball; Hebrew q id. (Koehler & Baumgartner 2001 I: 873);Geez oqa to know, understand, observe, Amharic awwq to know, Harari qa id. (Leslau1987: 7879); Cushitic: (Central) *-aq to know > Kemant ax-, Kunfl ah-, Awngi -aq id.; (East)

Somali -aq id. (Appleyard 2006, 8990).PIE *(w)s mouth105 : Bur *qht. The latter is comparable with Caucasian: PEC *qwi

Adams apple, uvula > Lak qw ~ q ~ qAdams apple, beak,106Kryz ulularynx (< *uul), etc. (CSCG 172).107

PIE *ara-, *eras head108: Bur *yais.Cf. Caucasian: PEC *wmdVbrain, head: Avaradhead, Tsez, Hinukh atabrain, Archi nt head (of woman or animal),109etc. (CSCG 98).110

PIE *nas-, *ns nose : Bur *mu nose, *-m snot. Cf. Caucasian: PNC *m edge

(Ingush mizarg snout, etc.: NCED 813); or PEC *mHrwVpus; mucus, snot (Chechen marsnot, Tsakhur mapus, etc.: CSCG 144); Basque *mou nose, face, kiss, point, beak.

PIE *ost(h) bone111: Bur *-ltn bone, *-ltnc leg. Cf. Caucasian: PEC *wVnVgroin;part of leg: Avar:angroin, Archi:ontol fingernail, Kryz knankle, etc.; PST *lshin,ankle (CSCG 140).

PIE *ped foot : Bur *-h foot. Cf. Caucasian: Avar e / efoot, Dargwa Kaitag ahfoot, hoof, etc. < PEC *w / *w; PST *tH ~ *dHheel, ankle (CSCG 207).

PIE *yekw

(*(H)k(t))liver : Bur *ken liver. Cf. Caucasian: PEC *unHV > Chamalal liver, Bezhta, Hunzib komakidney, etc. (NCED 728); cf. PST *kjnHkidney (CVST V: 58, no. 214).

105According to D. Q. Adams (EIEC, p. 387), the form *(w)smouth should be reinterpreted as two distinctstems: (i) *H1/4H1(e)s-, gen. *H1/2eHss; (ii) *Hxoust.

106//, // represent pharyngealized vowels, also (awkwardly) written iI,uI, where I represents thepalokainthe Cyrillic orthography of Caucasian languages.

107Alternatively, cf. PNC *GwV ~*GwVcrop, craw; beak, Adams apple > Lak. q:iiuvula, etc. (CSCG 172).108 The IE word for head should be reconstructed as *rH2, gen. *H2s, singulative *rH2s, collective

*rH2or(Adams, EIEC 260). The meaning brain developed in Latin cerebrum and Old High German hirni.109// represents a pharyngealized vowel = NCED /oI/ (cf. note to mouth, etc.)110The correspondence of Bur *y = *j ~ PNC * is recurrent. Cf. Bur *yltar leafy branches, etc. ~ PEC

*lVV branch, pod (above in the discussion of Bur -lt-).111The IE word bone should be reconstructed as *H3est(H)-.


33/40


57

(p. 38) attempts to connect the Bur word with PIE *(H)k(t)(a heteroclitic -r/n stem),ignoring the root syllable *(H)k = *yekw-,112while another originally heteroclitic word, PIE*wedwater, is compared with Bur buorinsing water, which has no trace of either heteroclitic suffix -r or -n. (Cf. instead OI *buyati sinks,Marathibubu sound of bubbling, etc.:CDIAL 9272.)

PIE *(o)nAbh navel113: Bur *-s[m] umbilical cord, navel114~ Cf. Caucasian: Chamalalj, Lak un, Dargwa zu, Khinalug umnavel, etc. < PEC *n(CSCG 249).

Basic verbal roots

PIE *lewe to hear : Bur *yal to hear ~ cf. Caucasian: PNC *=euto hear: Andi anito hear, Budukh ixid., etc. (NCED 411, CSCG 46)

PIE *ed to eat : Bur *i (with class I, II, III singular object) / *u (with class I, II, III plural

object) /*i

to eat (with class IV object) ~ cf. Yeniseian: PY *sto eat ~ PST *haid. ~ Caucasian: Tsez, Khwarshi =a to eat, Tindi c:a to drink, etc. < PEC *=VV ~ Basque *auiki tobite (NCED 1017, CSCG 209)

PIE *d(w) to give115: Bur (1) *-u to give (only with class I, II, III object), (2) *-hi togive (only with class IV singular object); (3) *-un to give (only with class IV plural object).

The three classdetermined Bur verb stems have distinct DC origins:(1) cf. PNC *mxw; PST *aHto give, borrow, rent (CSCG 156);116(2) cf. Caucasian: Chamalal ito sell, give, Bezhta =isto sell, Khinalug e=wi to sell,

etc. < PEC *=iV (NCED 626);

(3) ? cf. PEC *HVVn to take, snatch (NCED 615); PST *gnto collect (CVST V: no. 56);Basque *(e)ken to take away, etc.117Here the verb used in Bur is determined by the class of the object.(Cf. the preceding exam

ple, to eat.) This is a totally unIndoEuropean feature, but it appears to be a deepseated traitof DeneCaucasian, with manifestations at least in Basque and NaDene.118

Other basic words

PIE *(e)nomen name119: Bur *yek name, reputation: (Y) -yk, pl. -yki,-ykii,(H, N)-k, pl. -kii. Cf. Yeniseian: PY *iG> Ket name, pl. ,Kott ix, x, pl. k / ek / ek.This is

112 Lorimer (1935) considered Burushaski -kin, pl. -kimi, -kini liver a borrowing from IndoIranian:OIykt, gen.yaknliver, Pashtoyna, Yidghaynid. etc. (IEW 504; Bailey 1979: 108).

113The IE word navel should be reconstructed as *H3nob(Adams, EIEC 391).114Underlying *mfound in the plural form -simuc.115In LIV 10507 reconstructed as *deH3 & *deH3.116According to Starostin < PDC *VxwVto give, borrow, with regular loss of initial *in Bur (CSCP 48).117Assuming the common semantic relationship of give and take (as in PIE *gab()-, etc.).118This trait is highly developed in NaDene: Athapaskan: e.g.Navajo -t handle animate singular object, -k

handle a rigid container with contents, -handle a set of parallel long rigid objects (each representing a different class). And at the far western extreme we find remnants of similar tendencies in Basque: the dialects havedifferent words to express the concept dry, e.g.Zuberoan agorpertains to sources and streams of water, tsaltoaliments and terrain, eiharto the human body, fauna and flora, and idorto dryness in general.

119The IE etymon name has been reconstructed as *H1nm(Polom & Mallory, EIEC 390).


34/40


58

one of the remarkable parallels between Bur and Yeniseian (cf. Toporov 1971), extending evento the inanimate plural endings with velar nasals.120

We can see from these examples that Bur really shares almost no basic vocabulary with IE.

Conclusions

It is impossible to disprove relationship. We agree with aule that there may be somekind of very deeplevel relationship between Burushaski and IE. However, we propose, andwe believe we have shown, that Burushaski is much closer genetically to the DeneCaucasianlanguages than it is to IndoEuropean.

Much of the similarity between Bur and IE can be attributed to a long period of symbiosisand language contact between Bur and its IndoIranian neighbors. There is evidence that earlyIndoAryan was influenced by Bur (or perhaps a widerranging Burushic family) as its speakers entered the Indian subcontinent by way of the Hindukush and Pamir regions (see, e.g.,

Lorimer 1937, Tikkanen 1988, Witzel 1999). We noted above such features as the vigesimalnumeral system (discussed above) in Nuristani, Dardic, Pamir, Pato, Balui, and Asiatic Romani. There

rec bengtson blažek on the burushaski–indo-european hypothesis by i. Čašule

Documents