 |
<< Home Page << Articles and Books
1.8. From PL to modern Lezghian languages.
The PL reconstruction is presently the most developed of all intermediate
reconstructions. Besides, since the PL phonological system is characterized by special
archaic features as a result of the early split of the Lezghian family, its
reconstruction plays a specific part in the reconstruction of PEC and PNC
phonological systems. Therefore we consider it necessary to go over the characteristics of the PL system in some detail.
The existing PL reconstruction had already been completed in its entirety in
1975 (see [Starostin 1975a, 1975]) and is rather substantially different from the later
presented reconstruction of B. B. Talibov ([Talibov 1980]), as well as from the
systems, reconstructed sketchily by E. A. Bokarev ([Bokarev 1981]) and B. K. Gigineyshvili ([Gigineyshvili 1977]). The main differences in our reconstruction are:
postulation of the originality of tense unaspirated explosives and affricates and the
recognition of the secondariness of their voiced reflexes in some modern languages
(see below); reconstruction of the full lateral series for PL; reconstruction of the PL
system of laryngeal consonants; reconstruction of PL vocalism (significantly different
from the system suggested by E. A. Bokarev); reconstruction of the PL root
structure and ablaut system; reconstruction of a series of tense resonants in PL, etc.
For a short sketch of our reconstruction and a table of correspondences
(unfortunately, with some misprints), see the book [Alekseyev 1985, pp. 11-15].
1.8.1. Consonantism.
We reconstruct the following consonant system for PL:
Labials |
p |
p: |
b |
|
u |
w |
m |
m:
|
Dentals |
t |
t: |
d |
|
j |
r |
n |
n:
|
Labialized |
t |
t: |
|
|
dentals
|
Hissing |
c |
c: |
|
|
: |
s |
s: |
z
|
Labialized |
c |
c: |
|
|
: |
s |
s:
|
hissing
|
Hushing |
|
: |
() |
|
: |
|
: |
|
Labialized |
|
: |
() |
|
|
|
: |
|
hushing
|
Laterals |
|
: |
() |
|
: |
|
:
|
Labialized |
|
: |
|
|
: |
|
:
|
laterals
|
Velars |
k |
k: |
g |
|
Labialized |
k |
k: |
|
|
velars
|
Uvulars |
q |
q: |
|
|
: |
|
: |
|
Labialized |
q |
q: |
|
|
: |
|
:
|
uvulars
|
Pharyngealized |
qI |
qI: |
I |
I: |
I |
I:
|
uvulars
|
Pharyngealized |
qI |
qI: |
I |
I: |
I |
I:
|
labialized
|
uvulars
|
Laryngeals |
|
h
|
Labialized laryngeals |
|
Pharyngealized laryngeals |
I |
hI
|
Emphatic laryngeals |
|
|
Emphatic |
|
labialized laryngeals
|
We must at once note that pharyngealized consonants in PL should not be
necessarily regarded as independent phonemes, because in PL there was a full
system of independent pharyngealized vowels (see below), and pharyngealized
consonants can be regarded as allophones of simple uvulars (and laryngeals),
adjacent to pharyngealized vowels. However, since in many modern Lezghian
languages pharyngealized consonants represent a special series, often yield reflexes
different from the respective non-pharyngealized phonemes and statistically occur
much more frequently adjacent to pharyngealized vowels than other consonants, it
is convenient to regard them as separate phonological units.
Let us now separately examine the reflexation of PL explosives, resonants,
affricates and fricatives.
1.8.1.1. Explosives.
For PL it is necessary to reconstruct three local series of explosive consonants:
labial, dental and velar. Each of these series is characterized by the presence of a
four-way distinction "voiceless (aspirated)" - "tense (unaspirated)" - "glottalized" -
"voiced". We must note at once that voiced explosives (as other voiced obstruents,
see below) are more rarely encountered than explosives of other types, and can be
regarded as "peripheral" phonemes (it is worth noting that in verbal roots voiced
phonemes are lacking). However, the opposition "tense" - "voiced", found in Archi
and in Lezghian, and a good correlation between the evidence of these two
languages lead us to project this opposition onto the PL level; some features of
other languages (e.g., a specific Tabasaran reflexation of PL *g opposed to *k:, see
below) confirm this reconstruction - although, in the long run, it seems to be a PL
innovation (compared to the PEC stage).
In the system of explosive consonants (as well as in the system of affricates
and fricatives, see below) there was an opposition of labialized and non-labialized
phonemes that was neutralized only in the labial series.
Let us now give the system of correspondences of explosive consonants in
descendant languages.
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
*p |
p |
p |
p |
p |
p |
p |
p |
p |
p
|
*p: |
b |
b/w |
b/w |
p:,-b |
b |
b |
b |
b |
b/p:?
|
* |
|
, |
/p:/p |
,-b |
,-b |
,-b |
-,/b |
?-, |
?-,p:
|
|
|
-b-/-w-
|
*b |
b |
|
|
b |
b |
b |
b |
b |
b
|
*t |
t |
t |
t/ |
t/c |
t |
t |
t/ |
t/ |
t/c
|
*t |
t/t |
t |
t |
t |
t |
t |
t |
t
|
*t: |
d-,-t:-, |
d/r |
d-/- |
t:/c:, |
d |
d |
d/ |
d/ |
d(/t:)
|
|
-t |
|
(/-j-,-w-) |
-d |
|
|
|
|
/c-?
|
*t: |
-t:()- |
d/r |
d/j |
t:(),-d |
d |
d |
d |
d
|
* |
|
|
/ |
/ |
|
|
/ |
/ |
t:
|
* |
|
|
|
() |
() |
|
|
|
*d |
d- |
d |
d |
d |
|
|
|
d
|
*k |
k,-k:- |
k |
k |
k |
k |
k |
k |
k |
k
|
*k |
k(), |
k() |
k() |
k() |
k() |
k() |
k() |
k |
k
|
|
-k:-
|
*k: |
g-,-k:-, |
g |
g-,-g-/ |
k:,-g |
g |
g,-g-/ |
g |
g |
g/k:
|
|
-k |
-- |
|
--
|
*k: |
g()-, |
g() |
g() |
k:(), |
g() |
g(), |
g |
g |
-k:
|
|
-k:()-, |
|
|
-g() |
|
-g()-/
|
|
-k |
|
|
|
|
-g()-
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k:
|
* |
|
() |
() |
() |
() |
() |
() |
|
k:
|
*g |
g |
g/k: |
g//k: |
g |
g |
g |
g |
g |
k:
|
*g |
g(/-k:-) |
k:(w)/ |
k:()/ |
g |
g
|
|
|
g() |
g()
|
Comments.
The table shows that voiced, voiceless and glottalized consonants are preserved
in all descendant languages (except Udi, in which glottalized consonants are regularly
reflected as tense ones). The voiced *g is reflected (though just sporadically) as k: in
Agul and Tabasaran, as well as in Udi; there is some reason to think that alrea-dy
in PL the articulations *g and *g: were admitted as free variants.
Tense (unaspirated) consonants are at the present time preserved in Archi,
Lezghi and Udi, though in Udi PL tense consonants generally give voiced reflexes;
the preservation of tense ones is observed only sporadically, usually not in the
initial position. (It is necessary to note at once that reflexes of PL phonemes in Udi
are generally less exact than in other Lezghian languages; in many cases there
probably exists a complementary distribution of reflexes, that is, however, hard to
discover because of insufficient data). In Archi tense explosives are voiced in the
initial position, preserved in the intervocalic position and weakened in final
position (though PL *p: gives b in all positions here). In Lezghi tense consonants are
preserved in the initial and intervocalic positions, but are voiced in final
position.
In all other languages the PL tense explosives have been voiced. In Tabasaran
and Agul (to be precise: in the Northern dialect of Tabasaran and in the Koshan
and Burkikhan dialects of Agul) we observe a further process of sonorization
(probably through an intermediate stage of fricativization) of the reflexes of PL
tense explosives in non-initial position, which led to the development PL *p: > w in
all the afore-mentioned dialects. PL *t: is reflected as r in non-initial position in the
Koshan and Burkikhan dialects of Agul and in some subdialects of the Northern
dialect of Tabasaran; in the Dbek subdialect of Tabasaran PL *t: is reflected as j
in final position and as -j- or -w- (depending on the character of the following
vowel) in intervocalic position.
The voiced reflex g < PL *k: in non-initial position can be fricativized and
develop into ; this development is observed in non-initial position in Tabasaran,
where -g- and -- are in free variation; in the Mikik dialect of Tsakhur the
fricativization *-k:- > -g- >- - is obligatory. The development *-k:- > -j- (apparently, through the step --) is observed in the Nidzh dialect of Udi.
Labialized consonants are completely lost in the Budukh and Udi languages,
as well as in the Northern dialect of Tabasaran (here only specific "dentolabialized"
consonants are preserved; on those, see below). Other Lezghian languages preserve
labialized consonants. However, it must be noted that labialization is easily
transferred from the consonant to the adjacent vowel; as a result of this, the
labialization of the consonant itself is often lost. (Phonetically the consonant is
certainly still labialized, but, since in all Lezghian languages the "labialized" -
"non-labialized" opposition is neutralized in the position close to a labialized vowel,
the labialization of the consonant becomes nondistinctive in this context). Especially
unstable is the labialization of front consonants, which are preserved (in a few roots
only) in Archi, Lezghian and Rutul, but which in other languages have been
completely delabialized.
The palatalization of dental consonants before front vowels is more or less
typical for all Lezghian languages. A strong palatalization of dental explosives is
observed in Tsakhur. Here, however, the palatalized dentals have not been affected
by the further affrication that is observed in Tabasaran, Kryz, Budukh, Lezghi and
Udi (with hushing reflexes in Tabasaran, Kryz and Budukh, and hissing reflexes in
Lezghi and Udi).
We should also dwell upon the following minor points:
a) The PL phoneme * is rather rare and does not have stable reflexes. Archi
usually reflects it as (but -p- in kupar "manure" < PL *ku). Agul has - in
initial position, but in other positions the deglottalization > p: occurred, after
which this consonant behaved as PL *p: (see above). In Tabasaran the Southern
dialect (and the literary language) have the reflex ; a single known Northern
dialect example (kup "dried dung") reveals the final -p. Rutul and Tsakhur have
the reflexes - in initial position, -b- in the non-initial one.
Lezghi always has - in initial position. In other positions literary Lezghi also
has , but the Akhty dialect (Khliut) shows a variation between and p: (-b
in final position). The glottalization of the final - is lost if a preceding glottalized
consonant is present (- > -b), but is restored in medial position (cf. Nom. ab - Erg.
auni).
b) As has been mentioned above, PL tense explosives are preserved in
Lezghi in initial position. However, the Northern dialects of Lezghi sometimes
have a secondary voicing of PL *p:-, *t:- and *k:- in this position. It usually occurs in
polysyllabic words with medial glottalized or tense consonants (thus being a
dissimilative process). The central (Samur) and Southern dialects usually preserve
tense consonants in this position.
c) Unlike PL voiceless *p and *t, PL *k gives an unusual intervocalic reflex in
Archi: a tense -k:-. This led to the merger of the non-initial reflexes of PL *k and *k:
in Archi.
d) Velar explosives are not usually affected by affrication (unlike dental
explosives, see above) before front vowels. An exception is the phoneme *g, which, in
this position, developed into in Tabasaran (which, by the way, reliably
distinguishes the reflexes of PL *g and *k: : the latter also yields Tabasaran g, but
is not subject to palatalization and affricativization before front vowels).
1.8.1.2. Resonant consonants.
We reconstruct ten resonants for PL: *m, *m:, *w, *u; *n, *n:, *r, *j; *l, *l:.
Modern languages lack the opposition w-u, as well as the tense resonants m:, n:, l:.
In PL the distribution of these phonemes was limited as well: PL *u is reconstructed
only in initial position, and PL *m:, *n:, *l: - only in the non-initial one.
Phonetically PL *w probably represented a somewhat fricativized bilabial b or a
dentolabial v, and PL *u - a bilabial glide.
Let us now give the table of correspondences of resonants in descendant
languages:
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
*m |
m/b |
m |
m |
m |
m |
m |
m |
m |
m
|
*m: |
m |
b/w |
b/w |
-p:-,-b |
b |
m |
b |
b |
m
|
*w |
b |
w |
w |
w |
w |
w |
w |
w |
b-,-w
|
*u |
w/0 |
w/0/j |
w/j |
w/0 |
w/j/0 |
w/j/0 |
w/j |
w/j |
w/0
|
*n |
n/d |
n |
n |
n |
n |
n |
n |
n |
n
|
*n: |
-nn-,-n |
d/r |
d/j/ |
-t:-/ |
d |
n |
d/ |
d/ |
n
|
|
|
|
|
-c:-,-d
|
*r |
d-,r |
r |
r |
r |
r |
r/j/w/0 |
r |
r |
0/j/-r
|
*j |
0 |
j/0, |
j,-j/-0 |
j/0 |
j,-j/-0 |
j,-0 |
j-,-0 |
j-,-0 |
0,-j-?
|
|
|
-j-
|
*l |
l |
l |
l |
l |
l |
l/l/w |
l |
l |
l(-0-)
|
*l: |
-t:-,-t |
l |
l |
l |
l |
l/l/w |
l |
l |
l
|
Comments.
1) Archi: PL *m and *n in the initial position are sporadically denasalized here (cf. the development in PL *m > Arch. bi "place"; *mu > Arch. bu
"barley"; *m > Arch. bo "malt"; *ni > Arch. di "smell"); however, in most cases
it does not happen. The causes of of this development are not quite clear. We do
not exclude the possibility that one should reconstruct here PL *m:-, *n:- in
initial position (with "inverse" reflexes as opposed to those in the non-initial
position), but there are too little data for final conclusions.
PL *u gives w here, but 0 ( = ) before labialized vowels. Cf. PL *uir:- >
Arch. wi, but PL *uo-n "thou" > Arch. un, etc.
2) Agul: Here we must comment the development of PL *w, *u, *j. The initial
*j- is usually preserved in Agul; only before the vowel *i do the Keren and
Burkikhan dialects lose j- (replacing it with -), cf. PL *jirw > Ag. Rich., Burk.
irw (but Bursh., Fit. jirw) "heart". The Koshan (Burshag) and Fite dialects reveal
an interesting reflexation in this position: they usually preserve *j before *i,
but lose it (*j > 0- = -) if the following consonant is a fricative (s, f, x). Cf. PL
*jirw "heart" > Ag. Bursh., Fit. jirw, but PL *jis: "year" > Ag. Bursh. is:, Fit. is.
In final position the Keren and Burkikhan dialects lose -j after back vowels (a, u),
but preserve it after front ones (e, i; the sequence -ij is in fact already pronounced
here as -i, but in case of secondary labialization -wij > -uj and j is preserved -
unlike the old sequence *-uj > -u). Cf. PL *aj > Rich., Burk. a "fire"; PL *uj >
Rich. u "field"; but PL *:aj > Rich., Burk. xej "wool", etc.
PL *u in Agul develops into w- before back vowels (cf. wu-n "thou"), but into
j- before front ones (both Keren and Burkikhan dialects have 0 = before the
vowel i, cf. above on the reflexes of *j), cf. PL *uir- "seven" > Ag. jeri-d; PL
*ui - "ten" > Ag. Rich., Burk. iu-d, Bursh. jiu-r, Fit. jiu-d.
PL *w is usually preserved. However, the initial sequence *wi- is reflected as
u- in Agul, and the final sequence *-iw - as -u/-uj. Cf. PL *wil "calf" > Ag. ur;
PL *qI:iw "tuber" > Ag. Fit. Iuj "radish", etc.
On the development of PL tense resonants in Agul and other Lezghian
languages, see below.
3) Tabasaran: PL *j is well preserved here (though the final -j is regularly
lost in the Southern dialect, cf. PL *:aj > Kand., lit. xa, Db. xaj "wool").
PL *w is also preserved; however, the sequences *wi- and *iw develop in the
same way as in Agul (see above), cf. PL *wit:ar "grain" > Tab. udar, PL *s:iw
"oat flour" > Tab. su, etc. The sequence *we- also gives u- in some Tabasaran
dialects (Dbek, Kandik), but is preserved as we- in the literary language. Cf. PL
*wer > Kand., Db. ur, lit. wer "maple".
PL *u in Tabasaran is, in general, reflected in the same way as in Agul, i.e. it
gives w, but j before the vowel i: cf. PL *uo-n "thou" > Tab. uwu, but *ui- "ten"
> Tab. jiu-b. However, the sequence *ui- can develop into u- as well (see above
about *wi-). The principles of distribution of the reflexes ji- and u- are unclear due
to insufficient evidence (PL *u is in general a rather rare phoneme). Cf. PL *ui-
"quickly" > Tab. u-ti; PL *uir:- "seven" > Tab. urgu-b.
4) Lezghi: Extremely characteristic of Lezghi is the disappearance of the
initial sequences *mu-, *mo-, *wi-, *wo-, *ui-, *ji-, if the root consists of two or
more syllables. Cf. PL *mo:or > Lezg. gur "tomb", PL *murk:ul > Lezg. k:ul
"besom", PL *wit:ar > Lezg. t:ar "grain", PL *woher > Lezg. her "ram", PL
*ui> Lezg. u-d "ten", PL *ji:in > Lezg. :in "face", etc. The last four sequences
are preserved as ji- in the Akhty dialect (cf. Khl. jut:ar < *jit:ar "grain", Khl.
jc:ur "stable" vs. lit. Lezg. c:ur < PL *wonc:r, Khl. ji:in "face", etc.). The
same development is sporadically observed in other languages (except Archi), but it
is regular only in Lezghi.
5) Rutul. PL *u gives w before non-front vowels (cf. w, Erg. wa "thou"), and
j- before front ones (cf. jiw-d "seven", ji-d "ten"). On the zero reflex of PL *u
as marker of the first verb class in Rutul (as well as in Tsakhur, Kryz and Budukh)
see below.
PL *j is usually preserved in Rutul. It disappears only after -i in final
position (in the Ikhrek and Khnov dialects, after -a as well). In all dialects the reflexes
of *j vary after u (-uj or -u). Cf. PL *aj "fire" > Luch., Shin. aj, Ikhr. , Khn.
a; PL *tuj "saliva, spit" > Rut. tu (Erg. tuji-r), but PL *uj "field" > Rut. uj (Erg.
uji-r).
6) Tsakhur: PL *u develops as in Rutul, i.e. gives either w or j, depending on
the following vowel (cf. wu "thou", ji-lle "ten"). PL *j is preserved in the initial
and medial positions, but regularly disappears in final position (cf. ji "heart";
xa, gen. xaji-n "wool", etc.)
We must specially dwell upon the Tsakhur reflexes of PL *r and *l.
PL *r develops into r, j or 0 in Tsakhur, depending on position. In initial
position before an original *a we observe the reflexes r- (in the structure CVC, cf.
PL *rap:, Tsakh. rab "awl") or 0- in the structure CVCV, cf. PL *raqI:a > Tsakh.
aIa "comb", PL *ra:a > Tsakh. ak:a "door", etc.). This variation is possibly
connected with the prosodic opposition of these two types of roots. r- is also
preserved before PL *o, cf. PL *ro:- > Tsakh. r:i-n "dense". Before PL front
vowels *r > j, cf. PL *riI: > Tsakh. jqI "ashes", PL *rI: > Tsakh. jaqI "road",
etc. (The same reflex is present before and *u before a hushing consonant, cf. PL
*ru: > Tsakh. j "daughter"). Finally, before PL *u, *r > Tsakh. w, cf. PL *ruqVna
> Tsakh. wuqna "cave".
In medial position the reflex of *r is split (-r- or -j-); -j- occurs only before -e
(-), -r- occurs in other cases. Cf. PL *:u-Iera > Tsakh. Gelm. Iaj (in proper
Tsakhur with a contraction: iI) "pear"; PL *s:wra > Tsakh. sura "part".
In final position there is also a split reflex: -r or -0 < -j; (the lost -j is
regularly restored in oblique stems of nouns.) The zero reflex is observed in nouns
whose oblique stem ends with -i- (Gelm. -i-, Mik. --), going back to the PL oblique
stem in *-- (see below on oblique stems); the reflex -r is represented in nouns
whose oblique stems in PL end with *-a- or *-e- (> Proto-Tsakh. *-a- > Gelm.
-a-/-o-, Mik. -a-/--). Cf. PL *:er (*--stem) > Tsakh. do (Gen. Tsakh., Gelm.
doji-n, Mik. doj-n) "name"; PL *c:r (*-a-stem) > Tsakh. zer (gen. zera-n),
Gelm. zr (gen. zra-n) "cow".
PL *l and *l: are reflected in Tsakhur either as l (l) or as w. (It must be
noted that on the synchronous level, the variants l and l are in complementary
distribution: the palatalized l is obligatory in final position, otherwise - only
before front vowels; before the back ones we meet the hard l.) The distribution of
the reflexes l and w was suggested by Gigineyshvili [Gigineyshvili 1977], pp.
68-69), who proposed a dissimilative development: l, if a labial consonant is present
in the root, but w, if there is none. This distribution rule, however, is certainly
wrong, because there are very many cases in which we observe the reflex l without
any labial consonant at all, cf. the Tsakh. words il, il, gal, lat, laa, el, ul, sili,
etc.
Actually the distribution of the reflexes of *l (and *l:) is similar to that of the
reflexes of *r, that is:
a) in initial position the lateral articulation of l is preserved before
original front vowels (where *r > j) and before *a (where *r > r or 0); before *o
(where *r > r) and *u (where *r > w) we observe the reflex w. Cf. PL *la >
Tsakh. la "bracelet"; PL *la:a > Tsakh. la:a "stove" (cf. Rut. la "fireplace");
PL *lo(w) > Tsakh. wix "louse"; PL *lua > Tsakh. wue "heifer".
b) in medial position we observe the reflex l either before front vowels or
preceded by a consonant and followed by a vowel (in the structure -VClV-); in
other cases the reflex is -w-. Cf. PL *wo(r):l- > Gelm. wgli-n "male", PL
*(mu)s:wl > Tsakh. sole "wild turkey"; PL *m[a]zulaj > Tsakh. mzla
"leprosy"; PL *ula "board" > Tsakh. uwa, PL *ol:a "strap" > Tsakh. uwa, etc.
The medial complex -VwV- < *-VlV- before a closing consonant can be subject to
contraction, cf. PL *mulVqI > Tsakh. mqI "worm". Within the paradigm such a
contraction happens in the Mikik dialect in the sequence -awaC > -C, the result of
adding a suffix to the nominal root, cf. PL *al 'house' > Tsakh. aw, gen. aw-n,
Mik. -n.
c) in final position we always observe the reflex -l (=-l) after narrow
vowels i, , u, cf. PL *il > Tsakh. ul "rock", PL *ul > Tsakh. il "perch", etc.
After wide vowels the same reflex is present in nouns with an oblique stem in
-i-/-e- < PL *--, cf. PL *:l (*--stem) > Tsakh. ol, gen. ole-n, Gelm. el,
gen. eli-n "sheaf". The reflex -w appears only after wide vowels in nouns with
an oblique stem in -a-/-- < PL *-a-, *-e-, cf. PL *al > Tsakh. aw, gen. aw-n,
Gelm. aw, gen. awa-n, Mik. aw, gen. -n "house".
7) Kryz and Budukh: PL resonants are well preserved here. PL *u and *j give
the same reflexes in Budukh and Kryz as in Tsakhur (see above), i.e. *u gives
either w or j, depending on the following vowel (cf. Kryz w-n, Bud. w-n "thou",
Kryz ji-d, Bud. ji- -b "ten"); *j is preserved in initial and medial positions,
but disappears in the final position (cf. PL *ja: > Kryz jk, Bud. jk "meat"; PL
*aj "fire"> Kryz , Bud. a, etc.)
8) Udi: Here we must dwell on the reflexation of PL *u, *n, *n:, *r, *j and *l.
PL *u in Udi usually gives w (cf. wuI "seven", wi "ten"); the sequence *uo-
|
gives u- (cf. u-n "thou", oblique stem wa- < PL *uo-n, *ua-). Cf. similar reflexes in
Archi.
PL *n and *n: in usually develop into n in Udi, but in final position can
disappear as well, the conditions of this loss being unclear. Cf. PL *n "nit" > Ud.
(with a metathesis) t:e ( < t:en); PL *:n: "water" > Ud. e (with the restoration of
-n in the derived ene "aquatic"). Without the loss cf. PL *s:n "year" > Ud. u-sen;
PL *un: "flea" > Ud. in, etc.
The initial *r is dropped in Udi (less frequently *r- > j-; the distribution of
the reflexes 0- and j- is probably connected with vocalism). Cf. PL *ra:a
"threshing-floor" > Ud. e, PL *riI: "ashes" > Ud. iq:; PL *rI: "road" > Ud.
jaq:. In intervocalic position *r disappears as well, cf. PL *wiraq: > Ud. beI
"sun". In final position there is a split reflex: -r or -0 (cf. with the reflexes of
*-n above), with a yet unclear distribution. Cf. PL *Iera "pear" > Ud. ar, but PL
*qI:ora "hare" > Ud. u.
PL *j disappears in all positions in Udi, cf. PL *ja: "meet" > Ud. eq:, PL
*jir "heart" > Ud. uk:; PL *:aj "wool" > Ud. a, etc. It can only be preserved
between vowels (cf. aje "woollen", derived from a "wool"). In roots that consist of
more than one syllable the initial sequence "j+vowel" is lost, cf. PL *jatur > Ud. tur
"foot"; PL *ji:in > Ud. :Io "face".
PL *l is usually preserved in Udi, but apparently disappears in intervocalic
position, cf. PL *mulVqI > Ud. meq "worm".
9) The PL tense resonants *m:, *n: give nasal reflexes in Archi, Tsakhur and
Udi. In all other Lezghian languages the reflexes of *m: and *n: have completely
merged with the reflexes of PL *p: and *t:. Cf. PL *s:m: "gall, anger" > Arch.
s:am, Tab. seb (Db. siw), Ag. seb (Bursh., Burk. sew), Lezg. seb (pl. sep:erar),
Rut. Shin. seb; PL *:m: "nail" > Tab. ib (Db. aw), Rut. xb, Ud. mu (a
metathesis < *um); PL *q:Ien: "partridge" > Arch. qIon (Erg. qIanna), Tab.
Iud, Ag. Rud (Bursh. Rud), Lezg. q:ed (Erg. q:et:re), Rut. Iud, Tsakh. q:Ion;
PL *:n: "water" > Arch. :an (Erg. :enne), Ag. xed (Bursh. :er), Tab. id
(Db. aj), Lezg. jad (Erg. c:i < *jit:i, pl. jat:ar; cf. Khl. jad, jic:i, jat:ar), Rut.
xd, Tsakh. xan, Kryz xd, Bud. xad, Ud. e (cf. ene "aquatic"). We must note
that in intervocalic position PL *m: can give a zero reflex in Udi, cf. Ud. ul
"wolf" with Tsakh. umul, Rut. ubul, Kryz eb, Bud. eb, Arch. jam (PL *Iam:).
10) The reflexes of PL *u were already examined above. We should note that
*u as a marker of the 1st grammatical class regularly develops into w- in Archi, but
gives a zero reflex in Rutul, Tsakhur, Kryz and Budukh (Rutul also has j-,
regularly developed from *u in the same function). The reasons for such a
development are not quite clear yet.
1.8.1.3. Affricates.
We reconstruct five local affricate series for PL: hissing, hushing, lateral,
uvular and pharyngealized uvular. Each of these series is characterized by the
presence of a four-way opposition "voiceless (aspirated)" - "tense (unaspirated)" - "lax
glottalized" - "tense glottalized". The problem of voiced affricates in PL is much
more complicated. It is not to be excluded that in the hissing, lateral and uvular series
one has to reconstruct special voiced phonemes, that were, however, present only in
some pronominal and expressive morphemes. This question will be specially
discussed below.
Below we list the correspondences of affricates between Lezghian languages.
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
*c |
s |
c |
c |
c |
c-,-s/-c |
c-/s-,c |
?-,s |
-s- |
?-,s
|
*c |
s |
c |
/c |
c()/ |
c |
|
c |
-s- |
?-,s
|
|
|
|
|
k
|
*c: |
c |
z |
/z |
c:,-z |
z/ |
z |
z-/-,z |
z |
c-,z/I
|
*c: |
c |
z/z |
/ |
c:()/ |
z() |
z |
z |
z |
z
|
|
|
|
|
k:(),-z
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0,-
|
* |
|
() |
|
()/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
()
|
*: |
,-:- |
t: |
c:-/z-, |
-/-/ |
d-,-dd-/ |
d-, |
t |
t |
c:
|
|
|
|
c: |
t:-/c:-, |
-d-/-t-, |
-t:-,-t |
|
|
(:I)
|
|
|
|
|
--/--/ |
-t
|
|
|
|
|
-t:-/-c:-,
|
|
|
|
|
-t
|
*: |
-,-:- |
t: |
:-/ |
()/ |
d-, |
d-, |
t |
t |
c:
|
|
|
|
-/-, |
t:(), |
-dd- |
-t:-,
|
|
|
|
:/ |
-t |
-t
|
* |
|
|
|
-/-, |
-/-, |
|
-/-, |
-, |
-,
|
|
|
(/-?) |
|
|
|
|
|
-/-I/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-/-I
|
* |
|
()/k |
(/) |
|
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
*: |
|
/ |
/ |
:,- |
|
-,--/ |
|
|
:(?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
*: |
() |
()/ |
/ |
c:()/ |
() |
()-, |
- |
- |
-I-
|
|
|
() |
|
k:()/ |
|
--/--
|
|
|
|
|
:(),
|
|
|
|
|
-()
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0/:/:I
|
* |
() |
()/ |
/ |
()/ |
() |
|
|
|
0/:
|
|
|
|
|
()/
|
|
|
|
|
()
|
*: |
-- |
: |
:-/-, |
-/:-, |
|
? |
- |
? |
:-,--
|
|
|
|
: |
--/-t:-
|
* |
|
k/x/ |
k/x/ |
g |
x |
k-,x |
x |
x |
-q:/-q
|
* |
|
k |
k() |
f
|
*: |
|
j/g/0 |
g/// |
g//w |
/w/j |
-, |
/w |
j |
q-,-
|
|
|
|
w/ |
|
|
--/-l-
|
*: |
|
-w-, |
g/ |
g |
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
* |
|
|
/ |
/ |
|
/ |
/ |
/ |
0(/k:-)
|
* |
- |
- |
|
|
- |
|
-
|
*: |
|
k: |
k:/g/:/ |
/k:, |
g,-k |
g-,-k:-, |
k |
k |
q:
|
|
|
|
|
-k |
|
-k
|
*: |
- |
k:() |
k:() |
()/ |
?-, |
g-, |
k |
k |
-q:
|
|
|
|
|
k:(), |
-g()- |
-k:-,
|
|
|
|
|
-k |
-k() |
-k()
|
*q |
|
q |
q |
q- |
q-, |
q |
q |
-q- |
q-,-q:?
|
*q |
|
q() |
q() |
q-,- |
q,- |
q |
- |
- |
-q
|
*q: |
q |
/ |
q:/ |
q:,- |
q:/ |
q:/ |
q:-,- |
q:-,- |
|
*q: |
q |
()/ |
q:/ |
q:(), |
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
() |
|
-()
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
* |
, |
() |
() |
() |
() |
() |
- |
|
-p:
|
|
-()-
|
*: |
-, |
q: |
q: |
-/q:-, |
q: |
q: |
?-,-q- |
q |
q:
|
|
-:- |
|
|
--/-q:-
|
*: |
()- |
q:() |
q:() |
()-/ |
q:-, |
q:- |
-q- |
q:-? |
q:-
|
|
|
|
|
q:()-, |
-q
|
|
|
|
|
--/-q:-
|
*qI |
I |
qI |
qI |
q-,-q- |
qI-,-qI- |
qI |
q- |
q- |
I-
|
*qI |
I() |
qI() |
qI() |
q-, |
qI, |
qI |
-? |
- |
-qI/
|
|
|
|
|
-() |
-I() |
|
-I
|
*q:I |
qI |
R/I/ |
q:I/I |
q:,- |
I |
q:I/I |
q:-,- |
q:- |
(I)
|
*q:I |
qI() |
R/I/ |
qI:-/I- |
q:()- |
I- |
qI:/I
|
*I |
I |
I/ |
I |
|
I |
I |
|
|
*I |
I() |
I()/ |
I() |
|
I() |
I |
() |
|
p:/0,I
|
*:I |
-:I-, |
q:I/q: |
q:I |
/q:, |
q:I, |
-q:I-, |
q |
q |
q:I/
|
|
-I |
|
-q |
-qI |
-qI |
|
I
|
*:I |
-I:-, |
q:I()/ |
q:I |
--/ |
q:I-, |
-q:I-, |
-q |
-q |
q:I/I
|
|
-I |
q:() |
|
-q:-, |
-qI |
-qI
|
|
|
|
|
-q
|
Comments.
1. Archi.
As seen from the table of correspondences, the following cardinal changes
occurred in Archi: a) PL lax (aspirated) affricates were fricativized (PL *c, *c >
Arch. s; PL *, * > Arch. ; PL * > Arch. ; PL *q, *q > Arch. , ; PL *qI,
*qI > Arch. I, I); b) PL tense (unaspirated) affricates were weakened (*c:, *c: >
Arch. c; *:, *: > Arch. , ; *:, *: > Arch. ; *q:, *q: > Arch. q, q; *qI:,
*qI: > Arch. qI, qI). It must be noted that the reflexes of PL tense affricates in
Archi on the phonetic level are still tense in the intervocalic position, being affected
by weakening only in initial and final positions; but the tense articulation of
Archi affricates is no longer phonologically relevant, because of the absence of the
"tense-lax" opposition in the system of non-glottalized affricates.
Lax glottalized affricates were not changed in Archi, as far as the reflection
of laryngeal features is concerned (cf. * > Arch. , * > Arch. , etc.). As for tense
glottalized affricates, they have preserved their tense articulation in the medial position (where *: > Arch. :, *: > Arch. :, *I: > Arch. I:), but have been weakened
in initial and final positions (cf. the similar behaviour of tense non-glottalized
affricates). Somewhat different are the reflexes of PL *:, that yields in medial
position (the phoneme : is therefore completely missing in Archi), and the reflexes
of *:, that yields in all positions. The latter phoneme is phonetically rather
tense, though there is no -: opposition in Archi. Such behaviour of *: is
apparently connected with an early development of PL lax * > Arch. , as a result
of which : became the only Archi lateral glottalized phoneme.
Archi has well preserved the labialization of PL uvular affricates; the
labialization of PL hushing and lateral affricates is preserved somewhat more poorly;
finally, the labialization of PL hissing affricates is altogether lost.
2. Agul.
The Agul language has well preserved PL lax (aspirated) and lax glottalized
affricates (cf. *c > Ag. c, * > Ag. , * > Ag. k, *q > Ag. q, *qI > Ag. qI; * > Ag.
, * > Ag. , * > Ag. , * > Ag. , *I > Ag. I). The fricativization * > occurs
sporadically (in one case: Bursh. mu "hope" < PL *mu "wind"). The fricative reflex
x ( in the Koshan dialect) is attested for PL * in combination with the preceding
resonant -r- (cf. Ag. jerxi-d, Bursh. jeri-r "six" < PL *ri-; Ag. murx, Bursh. mur
"deer" < PL *meIr). We must also note the specific development *I > in Agul
proper and in the Burkikhan dialect (while the Keren, Koshan and Fite dialects
preserve I).
Tense (unaspirated) affricates in Agul, as in most Lezghian languages, have
been voiced; the resulting voiced affricates have been for the most part fricativized
afterwards. Thus, PL *c: > Ag. z; PL *: > Ag. (in the Keren dialect; the Fite
dialect has a free variation -/- in initial position and preserves the affricate in
non-initial position; the Koshan and Burkikhan dialects have preserved the affricate
character of < PL *: in all positions); PL *: > Ag. j/g/0 (in the Keren dialect -
always j; in the Koshan dialect g- in initial position before the vowel a, the
variation j-/0- in initial position before the vowel i, j in other cases; such
reflexation obviously points to the presence of the fricative * in the preceding stage
of development); PL *q: > Ag. (with a further laryngealization > in the
Koshan dialect); PL *qI: > Ag. I (only in the Fite dialect; the Keren, Koshan and
Burkikhan dialects have had a shift towards the pharyngeal series, i.e. I > R, and
Agul proper - a further laryngealization: R > ). Deviations from these rules concern
only a special reflexation of PL *: in combinations with preceding resonants (for
examples, see the dictionary), as well as a sporadic reflection of PL *q: as q:
(without fricativization). The latter phenomenon is apparently observed in loanwords
from Tabasaran.
Tense glottalized affricates have lost their glottalization in Agul and have
developed into tense ones (this could evidently happen only after the voicing of PL
tense non-glottalized affricates). Therefore, PL *: > Ag. t: (with the loss of the
fricative component); PL *: > Ag. :; PL *: > Ag. k:; PL *: > Ag. q:; PL *I: >
Ag. qI: (it is interesting to note that the Burkikhan dialect, usually preserving the
pharyngealization quite well, loses it in this case and has the reflex q:).
Typical for Agul, as well as for most other Lezghian languages, is the velar
character of the reflexes of PL laterals. The original reflexes of the PL laterals were
apparently palatal; in particular, this is confirmed by the fact that PL * in Agul
always yields a palatal , and * - a palatal x (in the case of fricativization). Reflexes
of other lateral phonemes (including labialized ones) in Agul do not preserve
palatalization anymore: PL * > Ag. k (without fricativization); PL * > Ag. k; PL
*: > Proto-Ag. * (see above); PL *: > Proto-Ag. * (in modern Agul * changed
to -w- in medial position and apparently to - in final position); PL * > Ag. ;
PL *: > Ag. k:; PL *: > Ag. k:.
Labialized affricates are well preserved in Agul. Thus, no changes occurred in
the articulation of labialized hissing (z, ), labialized laterals (velarized in Agul:
k, * > w, , k:), labialized uvulars (q, , , q:, qI, I, q:I). We should
specially dwell upon the Agul reflexes of PL labialized hushing affricates. The
Keren and Burkikhan dialects preserve proper labialized hushing sounds (i.e.
phonetically bilabialized); the Koshan dialect has turned bilabialized hushing
consonants into dentolabialized; finally, in the Fite dialect labialized hushing
consonants develop into palatalized (labialized) velars. Cf. * > Fit. k(); *() > Fit.
(); a similar reflex could be expected for PL *:, but reflexes of this phoneme in
the Fite dialect are not known. (Labialization is put in parentheses, because in all
cases it is transferred onto the adjacent vowel and, therefore, becomes
nonphonological.)
Some PL labialized phonemes lose their labialization in Agul. Delabialization is
obligatory in the reflexes of PL *: ( > Ag. t:); *q:I ( > Ag. R, : the consonants
R, do not have labialized correlates in Agul; in one case, however, we may
suppose a development of PL *qI: > Ag. w (b in the Keren dialect), cf. PL *iqI:
"to go" > Ker. baI-s, Bursh. w-s, Tp. w-s). Quite often, however, labialization is
transferred onto the adjacent vowel even from those consonants, that are
theoretically able to preserve it. This explains, e.g., the fact that PL *c (being in
general a very rare phoneme) is reflected in Agul only as c (though theoretically c
is possible, cf. the presence of phonemes z < *c:, < *).
3. Tabasaran.
The development of PL affricates in Tabasaran is very similar to their
development in Agul, described above. Thus, lax (aspirated) and lax glottalized
consonants are preserved, as in Agul: *c > Tab. c; * > Tab. ; * > Tab. k; *q >
Tab. q; *qI > Tab. qI; * > Tab. ; * > Tab. ; * > Tab. /; * > Tab. ; *I >
Tab. I. (An exception: the fricativization of PL * > Tab. x/ in combination with
a preceding -r-, cf. Tab. jirxu-b "six" < PL *riI-; Tab. mer "deer" < PL *meIr).
Tense (unaspirated) affricates in Tabasaran, as in Agul, have voiced reflexes.
Cf. PL *c: > Tab. (in the Northern dialect; the Southern dialect (Kandik
subdialect) preserves after resonants - in the combinations r, l, etc. - but has z
in other cases; literary Tabasaran always has z); PL *c: > Tab. (apparently in
all dialects, though in literary orthography, the affricate and the fricative are
not distinguished); *: > Tab. (in all dialects; in literary orthography we meet as
well, because and are not distinguished); PL *: > Tab. (in the Northern
dialect; in the Southern dialect the affricate is preserved in non-initial position,
but develops into the fricative - in the initial position); PL *: > Tab. //w (with
the following distribution: in initial position in all dialects - before back vowels, before front ones; in medial position in all dialects -w- before back vowels, -- before
front ones; in final position - if the word (noun) has an oblique stem with a back
vowel, it reflects *: as - in the Northern dialect and some Southern subdialects
(Kandik), -w in other Southern subdialects (Khiv) and in literary language; if the
oblique stem contains a front vowel, the Southern dialect (Kandik) has -, while the
Northern dialect and literary language have -j. The reflexes of *: may be
somewhat modified in clusters with preceding resonants: in this position we can
observe secondary occlusivization between vowels (like -r- > -rg-, etc.), as well as a
devoicing at the end of the word (like -r > -r > -r etc.). The wide variety of
reflexes of *: can be easily explained here by the fricative articulation * in all
positions in Proto-Tabasaran. A somewhat specific situation is characteristic for the
reflexes of tense PL *q: and *q:I. Here the Northern dialect preserves the
voiceless articulation q:, q:I, while the Southern dialect has normal voiced reflexes
(already fricativized): , I. According to the private information of S. V. Kodzasov,
the summer 1980 MSU expedition has discovered the opposition G (voiced) - q:
(voiceless), not described before, in the Dbek subdialect of the Northern dialect of
Tabasaran. G here has developed from PL *q:, and q: - from PL *: (see below).
Thus, the main principle of the voiced reflexation of PL tense (unaspirated)
phonemes seems to be observed in the system of uvulars as well.
PL tense glottalized consonants in Tabasaran, as in Agul, have lost their
glottalization and give tense reflexes. Cf. PL *: > Tab. c:; PL *: > Tab. :; PL
*: > Tab. :; PL *: > Tab. k:/:; PL *: > Tab. k:; PL *:,*: > Tab. q:, q:; PL
*I:, I: > Tab. qI:. In some cases, however, we observe the further voicing of the
reflexes of PL tense glottalized sounds. Thus, PL *: > z in the initial position in
the Northern dialect (Dbek) and in the literary language (in the Dbek subdialect
we additionally observe the development *-r:- > -r-). PL *: is reflected as (in
all positions) in literary Tabasaran and yields a voiced delabialized - in initial
position in the Dbek subdialect; PL *: is voiced in initial position in Dbek (*:->*:> -), but preserves its voicelessness in the literary language. The tense
glottalized *: also has the initial voiced reflexes g-/- in the Dbek subdialect, but is
never voiced in the Southern dialect and in the literary language. In general, most
subdialects of the Southern dialect (e.g. the Kandik subdialect) are rather conservative in this respect and always reveal voiceless tense reflexes of PL tense glottalized
consonants.
PL lateral affricates in Tabasaran, as in Agul, originally had palatal reflexes.
These palatals afterwards developed into velars before back vowels, but were
affricated and changed into hushing affricates before front vowels (as opposed to
the ancient velar consonants, that were not affricated in any position). Thus, in the
position before front vowels PL *: > Tab. , PL * > Tab. , PL *: > Tab. : (in
the Northern dialect - in initial position); the Tabasaran reflex of * before front
vowels is not attested.
The Southern dialect of Tabasaran has well preserved the PL labialized
affricates (only the hissing and hushing labialized consonants have merged in one
dentolabialized series). Cf. PL *c, * > Tab. ; PL *c:, : > Tab. /; PL *,
* > Tab. ; PL *: > Tab. :/; PL * > Tab. k; PL *: > Tab. k:; PL *q
> Tab. q; PL *q: > Tab. ; PL * > Tab. ; PL *: > Tab. q:; PL *qI > Tab.
qI; PL *I > Tab. I. Depending on the vocalic environment, the PL labialized
affricates could, however, be subject to early delabialization (with a transfer of
labialization onto the adjacent vowel); in this case Tabasaran preserves the original
hissing or hushing character of the affricate (which indicates that the merger of
hissing and hushing labialized consonants within one series occurred comparatively
late). For some PL labialized consonants, because of the process of delabialization,
only non-labialized Tabasaran reflexes are attested (this is true for the PL affricates
*:, *q:I and *:I).
The Northern dialect of Tabasaran has completely lost the labialization of
back consonants, but has preserved the dentolabialized series. Here, therefore, the
correlation in labialization is already lost, and the dentolabialized consonants form
just one more local series of front affricates, in addition to the hissing and hushing
series.
4. Lezghi.
The Lezghi language has well preserved the laryngeal features of PL
affricates. Lax (aspirated), tense (unaspirated) and lax glottalized affricates are
generally preserved here. Cf. PL *c > Lezg. c; PL * > Lezg. ; PL *q > Lezg. q; PL
*qI > Lezg. q; PL *c: > Lezg. c:; PL *: > Lezg. :; PL *q:, *qI: > Lezg. q:; PL * >
Lezg. ; PL * > Lezg. ; PL * > Lezg. /; PL *,*I > Lezg. . Here, however, we
must dwell on the following details:
a) PL * is apparently fricativized in Lezghi before PL narrow vowels (on a
similar process in Rutul, Kryz and Budukh see below), though there is only one
example of this rule: Lezg. arag "cub" < PL *rag.
b) The uvular labialized *q and *qI in Lezghi are reflected as voiced
consonants in final position, i.e. PL *q, *qI > Lezg. -. The same voiced
reflexes could be expected for PL *q, *qI, but final reflexes of these phonemes are
not attested in Lezghi (cf., however, re "shameful", presupposing *re "shame" <
PL *riwqI). The PL lax lateral * has been voiced in Lezghian and is reflected as
g (in some dialects also as ) in all positions.
c) PL tense (unaspirated) affricates have been preserved in Lezghi in initial
and medial positions, but have been voiced in the final position (cf. above on a
similar process in the system of explosives). The resulting voiced final affricates
were later fricativized. Thus, PL *c: > Lezg. -z; PL *: > Lezg. -; PL *q:, *qI >
Lezg. -.
The PL lateral affricate *: yields voiced reflexes in all positions; in initial
position Lezghi has either g- or - (their distribution is not quite clear); in final
position either -g/- (the latter - if the oblique stem has a front vowel) or -w (after
PL labialized vowels). This reflexation is evidently connected with the early
fricativization *: > *g > (on a similar process in Agul and Tabasaran see above).
The fricative is still preserved in the Yarki dialect, but all other dialects of the
Lezghi language already have the explosive g.
The PL tense glottalized affricates yield glottalized reflexes in initial and
medial positions in Northern dialects (Gne, Yarki) and in the literary language,
but tense (unaspirated) ones in the Kurakh and Akhty dialects. Cf. PL *: > lit. /,
Akht. /; PL *:> lit. , Akht. :-, -t:-; PL *: > lit. , Akht. k:; PL *:, *I:> lit. ,
Akht. q:. This reflexation (contrasting with the reflexation of lax glottalized
consonants, uniformly yielding glottalized reflexes in all dialects) apparently points
to the presence of tense glottalized consonants as late as in Proto-Lezghi. However,
in final position PL tense glottalized consonants were early deglottalized and yield
voiceless (aspirated) reflexes in all dialects (*-: > -t, *-: > -k; *-I: > -q). It is
necessary to pay attention to the desaffricatization of the reflexes of PL *: (cf. a
similar process in Agul, see above, as well as in Rutul, Kryz and Budukh, see
below). The presence of parallel hissing reflexes ( or c:, depending on the dialect)
is apparently the result of a late secondary affricatization before front vowels (these reflexes
are observed only in this position; on the same affricatization of PL explosives *t,
*t:, * in Lezghi see above).
The transformation of PL laterals into back consonants in Lezghi apparently
proceeded in a somewhat different way than in Agul and Tabasaran. Here the
lateral affricates must have originally changed into velar affricates. In particular,
PL * developed into the velar *x; afterwards the affricate articulation of this
consonant was lost if it was adjacent to back vowels (where * > *x > *), but it
was preserved somewhat longer in the case of palatalization (before front vowels or
in the vicinity of hushing consonants, which are phonetically palatalized in all
Lezghian languages). The affricate *x, preserved in this position, later developed
into the uvular affricate = (NB: the sounds which we denote as q and are
phonetically affricates /q/ and // in all North Caucasian languages). Cf. PL *an
"bottom" > Lezg. an, but PL *in "oath" > Lezg. in, PL *aa > Lezg. a "stem",
etc. Other lateral affricates in modern Lezghi only have explosive velar reflexes (on
the reflection of PL * and *: in Lezghi, see above).
Labialized affricates are preserved in Lezghi (though, like other languages,
Lezghi often has a secondary delabialization in certain vocalic contexts; therefore,
for such rare PL phonemes as * > Lezg. and *: > Lezg. g, only delabialized
reflexes are attested). Cf. PL * > *x (with a fricativization!) > Lezg. f; *: >
Lezg. /k:/k; *q, *qI > Lezg. q/; *q:, *q:I > Lezg. q:/; *, *I > Lezg.
; *:, *:I > Lezg. /q:.
PL labialized hissing and hushing consonants yield specific reflexes in Lezghi.
Hissing labialized consonants are preserved in Kurakh, Gne and some subdialects
of the Akhty dialect (the subdialect of the village Khliut), develop into hushing
labialized in most subdialects of the Akhty dialect, and change into labialized velars
in the Yarki dialect. Thus, PL *c > Gn., Kur., Khl. c, Akht. , Yark. k; PL
* > Gn., Kur., Khl. , Akht. , Yark. ; PL *c: > Gn., Kur., Khl. c:, Akht.
:, Yark. k:. The literary Lezghi, based on Gne and Yarki dialects, reveals a
variation between hissing and velar reflexes (but never has hushing ones). A specific
reflection is attested for the early desaffricatized PL *:, which has dental
labialized reflexes ( or t:) in the initial and medial positions (on the dialectal
distribution of the reflexes of tense glottalized consonants see above) and
-t (with an obligatory delabialization) in the final position.
Hushing labialized consonants are preserved in the Kurakh and Akhty dialects
(including the subdialect of the village Khliut), develop into hissing labialized in the
Gne dialect, and yield labialized velars in the Yarki dialect. Thus, PL *: > Kur.,
Akht., Khl. :, Gn. c:, Yark. k:; PL * > Kur., Akht., Khl. , Gn. , Yark.
. Therefore, the distinction between PL hissing and hushing labialized consonants
is preserved only in the Kurakh dialect, as well as in some subdialects of Akhty
(Khlyut); in other dialects they either merge in hissing labialized consonants (Gne
dialect), or in hushing labialized consonants (Akhty dialect), or else in labiovelar
consonants (Yarki dialect).
Literary Lezghi, in the place of PL labialized hushing consonants, has a
variation among all three types of reflexes, which suggests that the Kurakh dialect
has also taken part in its formation (and not just Gne and Yarki).
A specific feature of Lezghi is the loss of pharyngealized consonants, whose
reflexes have merged with the reflexes of nonpharyngealized ones. However, we
must note that vowels adjacent to originally pharyngealized consonants in Lezghi are
regularly fronted. Therefore, in most cases the presence or lack of original
pharyngealization can be determined by the character of the adjacent vowel. In
some Lezghian dialects (e.g., in Akhty) pharyngealization is still preserved by the
vowel I ( < *a adjacent to uvular pharyngealized) and in this case, of course, the
pharyngealization of respective consonants is still there, though it may already be
considered phonologically irrelevant. In most dialects, however, pharyngealization is
lost completely.
5. Rutul.
The PL lax (aspirated) affricates are generally well preserved in Rutul (cf. PL
*c, *c > Rut. c; PL * > Rut. ; PL *q > Rut. q-; PL *q > Rut. q-; PL *qI > Rut.
qI-). However, in some positions we observe the fricativization of PL lax affricates.
Thus, in final position uvular affricates are regularly fricativized: *q > Rut. -, *q
> Rut. -, *qI > Rut. -I. The affricate articulation of the final *-c is preserved
only in the Khnov dialect and in some subdialects of the Mukhad dialect (Kiche); in
most Rutul dialects, *-c was also fricativized: *-c > -s. PL * was fricativized before
the original narrow vowel * (cf. PL *r-j "sister" > Rut. rii, PL *rag > Rut.
arak "chick"), but was left intact in other positions. Finally, for the PL affricates
* and *, only fricative reflexes (resp. and x) are attested in Rutul.
The quality of PL lax glottalized affricates has been preserved in Rutul (cf.
PL *, * > Rut. ; PL *, * > Rut. , ; PL *,* > Rut. ; PL *, * > Rut.
, ; PL *I, *I > Rut. I, I).
PL tense (unaspirated) affricates have been voiced in Rutul. Cf. PL *c: > Rut.
/z ( before the narrow ; in other cases the fricativization > z usually happens);
PL *c: > Rut. z; PL *: > Rut. ; PL *: > Rut. ; PL *:, *: > Rut. /w/j (in
non-final position before a, w before , j before front vowels; in final position
usually -j, but after the vowel i the reflex - is preserved by dissimilation); PL *q: >
Rut. q:/ (the articulation /q:/ is preserved only in initial position before
the vowel a, in other cases the fricativization q: > occurs); PL *q: > Rut. ; PL
*q:I, *q:I > Rut. I. It is evident that at first PL tense consonants changed into
voiced affricates, most of which were later fricativized (the hushing has been
preserved best of all; in some positions the hissing and the uvular q: have been
preserved as well).
[We must note that in Rutul the notation q: is to be treated phonologically as
a voiced uvular phoneme, because (at least in most Rutul dialects) the opposition q: -
G is missing. On the phoneme q: (G:) , present in some Rutul dialects, see below.]
PL tense glottalized consonants have lost their glottalization in Rutul and
yield the following reflexes. In initial position in all dialects we observe voiced
reflexes (PL *: > Rut. d; PL *: > Rut. d; PL *: > Rut. g; PL *:,*: > Rut. q:;
PL *:I, *:I > Rut. q:I, q:I). In final position all the dialects have voiceless
reflexes (PL *: > Rut. -t; PL *:, *: > Rut. -k, -k; PL *: > Rut. -q; PL *:I,
*:I > Rut. -qI). In intervocalic position Rutul has peculiar reflexes: in the
Myukhrek dialect - tense voiced consonants (*: > Myukhr. -d:-, *: > Myukhr. -g:-,
*: > Myukhr. -G:-, *:I > Myukhr. -G:-); in the Ikhrek dialect - tense voiceless
(resp. -t:-, -k:-, -q:-, -q:I-); in the Shinaz dialect - lax voiceless (-t-, -k-; the reflexes of
tense glottalized uvulars are not known to us). Finally, the Mukhad dialect usually
has lax voiced reflexes (resp. -d-, -g-, -q:-, -qI:-), but the Luchek subdialect of the
Mukhad dialect has a variation of tense and lax voiced reflexes.
[We do not mark the difference between -q:- and -G:- in the orthography; the
symbol q: in Myukhrek and Luchek means a tense voiced uvular, and in Ikhrek - a
tense voiceless one. Within one dialect system a distinction between tense voiced
and tense voiceless consonants never exists].
Labialized tense glottalized consonants give similar reflexes.
A specific reflex is yielded by the rare PL phoneme *: : in the Mukhad and
Khnov dialects it is reflected as (its reflexes in other Rutul dialects are unknown
to us); cf. PL *:Im "butter"> Rut. Khn. am; PL *ar:- "right" > Rut. har-d.
(Such reflexes are typical for Kryz and Budukh, see below).
The Rutul language preserves labialized uvulars rather well; labialized laterals
(developing into labiovelars) and labialized hushing phonemes - somewhat worse;
and it has virtually lost labialized hissing consonants (in modern Rutul they are
extremely rare; we know only in the word ar "stone" and z in the verb
luzas "to stand", where labialization can be considered positional after the vowel
-u-). In most cases labialization is lost on a consonant, but preserved on the
adjacent vowel (which becomes labialized).
6. Tsakhur.
Lax PL affricates are usually preserved in Tsakhur. Cf. PL *c > Tsakh. c; PL
* > Tsakh. ; PL * >Tsakh. ; PL * >Tsakh. k-; PL *q > Tsakh. q; PL *q >
Tsakh. q; PL *qI, *qI > Tsakh. qI; PL *, *>Tsakh. ; PL *, * > Tsakh. ; PL
* > Tsakh. /; PL * > Tsakh. ; PL * >Tsakh. ; PL *I, *I > Tsakh. I.
Only in two cases do we observe the fricativization of PL lax (aspirated) affricates:
a) PL *c in initial position gives s- in Tsakhur proper, but is preserved in the Mikik
and Gelmets dialects (cf. Mik., Gelm. cwl, Tsakh. suwul "autumn"); b) PL *
gives the explosive reflex k- in initial position (cf. kuma "smoke" < PL *uma), but is
fricativized and gives -x- in medial position (cf. jix-lle "six" < PL *ri-).
PL tense (unaspirated) affricates in Tsakhur, as in most other Lezghian
languages, are affected by voicing and are often fricativized afterwards. Thus, PL
*c:, *c: > Tsakh. z; PL *:, *: > Tsakh. / (in Tsakhur proper the affricate
articulation is always preserved; the Mikik and Gelmets dialects have - in
initial position, but the fricative in other cases); PL *q: > Tsakh. q:/ (the
articulation q: is preserved only in initial position in Tsakhur proper; in other
positions in Tsakhur and in all positions in the Mikik and Gelmets dialects we
observe the reflex ); PL *qI: > Tsakh. qI:/I (with the same distribution of
reflexes). PL *: usually yields , but there is also a very specific development of
PL *: > Tsakh. l, observed in medial position before front vowels (cf. Tsakh.
h-ele-s "to give" < PL *i:-; Tsakh. moli-lle "eight" < PL *men:-). This is
surely a valuable argument for the legitimacy of the reconstruction of lateral (and not
velar or palatal) affricates in PL.
PL tense glottalized affricates in Tsakhur are reflected in the same way as in
the Ikhrek dialect of the Rutul language (see above), i.e. in initial position they
have voiced reflexes, in medial position - tense (voiceless) ones, in final
position - lax voiceless ones. For PL hushing *: we know only the reflex in
initial position, where, as in Rutul (see above), we observe the development *:- >
Tsakh. -.
Lateral affricates in Tsakhur developed similarly to Lezghi and Rutul (see
above), i.e. they first developed into velar affricates, and afterwards into velar
explosives or velar fricatives (on a specific development of PL *: in Tsakhur see
above). In fact, the affricate *, in particular, should still have been present in
Proto-Tsakhur: in Mikik and Tsakhur proper it has merged with the original velar
explosive , while the Gelmets dialect reflects it as the uvular affricate . Thus, PL
* > Mik., Tsakh. , Gelm. .
Labialized consonants in modern Tsakhur are in the process of disappearing.
In our materials we only find the labialized w ( < PL *:), -k ( < PL *-:), (
< PL *). In most cases labialization was transferred from the consonant onto the
adjacent vowels.
7. Kryz.
PL lax (aspirated) affricates in Kryz are generally preserved, but have a
rather strong tendency to become fricativized. Thus, for PL *c, only a fricativized
reflex s is attested (though the labialized *c is not fricativized and yields Kryz c);
PL * develops into the fricative before the PL narrow * (on a similar
development in Lezghi and Rutul see above), but is otherwise preserved. The
labialized * yields only the fricative reflex ; PL * > Kryz x reveals the same
fricativization. Labialized PL *q ( > Kryz -) and PL *qI are reflected as fricatives
as well; the latter phoneme has an unexpected voiced reflex (cf. Kryz me "oak"
< PL *maqIa). However, reflexes of uvular lax labialized affricates in Kryz are
observed only in final position; in other positions fricativization probably would not
be observed. The non-labialized uvular lax affricate *q is reflected as q in all
known Kryz examples; for *qI in final position the reflex - is attested (cf. *I > ,
see below), but in other positions *qI is not fricativized and yields Kryz q.
Lax glottalized affricates are preserved in Kryz, cf. PL *, * > Kryz ; PL
*, * > Kryz ; PL * > Kryz /; PL *, *, *I, *I > Kryz .
PL tense (unaspirated) affricates in Kryz give voiced reflexes; PL *c: > Kryz
/z (the affricate is preserved only at the beginning of some words in Kryz
proper; the distribution of the reflexes - and z- in this position is probably
dependent on prosodic factors; in other positions in Kryz proper and in all positions
in the Alik dialect we already see the fricative reflex z); PL *c: > Kryz z; PL
*:,*: > Kryz ; PL *:, *: > Kryz (but > w before the vowel u); PL *q:,*q:I >
Kryz q:/ (in initial position q: is preserved, in other positions q: was
fricativized and changed to - cf. the same development in the Tsakhur dialect of
the Tsakhur language, see above).
PL tense glottalized affricates give uniform reflexes in Kryz: lax voiceless in
all positions. Cf. PL *:,*: > Kryz t; PL *: > Kryz ; PL *:, *: > Kryz k; PL
*:, *:I > Kryz q; PL *:, *:I > Kryz q(). On a similar development in Budukh,
see below. It is evident that this is a result of the weakening of voiceless tense
consonants, which appeared through the deglottalization of PL tense glottalized
consonants (the previous stage - the preservation of tense voiceless consonants
is attested, e.g., in Tabasaran and Agul, see above).
Laterals in Kryz have probably developed in the same way as in Lezghi,
Rutul and Tsakhur (see above), i.e. first were turned into velar affricates, and
afterwards - into velar explosives or fricatives (cf. * > x, PL *: > , PL *: > k).
The lax glottalized * first developed into the velar affricate *x, and then - into
the uvular affricate . In a few cases the velar articulation of is preserved; this
apparently happens in initial position of bisyllabic roots as a result of the
weakening of the articulation of *x > (cf. r "bone" < PL *orap:, but n
"bottom" < PL *an, etc.).
Kryz has completely lost the labialization of front and lateral affricates. In the
system of uvulars, labialization is still preserved (thus, the development *: > Kryz
q, *I > Kryz is attested), but in most cases labialization is transferred onto
the adjacent vowel and becomes irrelevant.
8. Budukh.
PL affricates behave very similarly in Kryz and Budukh. Therefore, we shall
examine here only the features distinguishing the Budukh reflexation.
Lax (aspirated) affricates. Here the differences from Kryz concern the
reflexation of PL *c ( > Bud. s, while Kryz preserves the articulation c) and PL
*qI (in final position > Bud. -, while Kryz has -, cf. Bud. mula "meat-worm"
< PL *mulVqI). For PL * in initial position only the reflex - is attested (before the vowel *, cf. PL *j "sister" > Bud. i-der); in other positions one would
expect the preservation of , but there is no evidence available.
Tense (unaspirated) affricates. Budukh always reveals the fricativization *c: > *
> *z (in Kryz is preserved in some cases, see above). PL *: is reflected in Budukh
as j (in Kryz the intermediate stage - the fricative - is preserved). Other reflexes
are the same.
Glottalized affricates (both tense and lax) in Budukh are reflected in the same
way as in Kryz.
As we have already noted above, Kryz still preserves some labialized
consonants. Budukh has already completely lost the labialization of consonants.
9. Udi.
Lax (aspirated) affricates in Udi are only partially preserved; rather often
they develop into voiceless fricatives. Thus, for PL *c, *c only the final reflex s is
observed in Udi (in initial position one could perhaps expect c-, but there are no
examples). The hushing is preserved in initial position, while in final position
there is a variation between -/-. The affricate reflex q is attested for PL *, *q,
*q, *qI (it must be noted that reflexes of the latter phoneme are attested only in
final position, and that a parallel reflex, -, also exists). In some cases Udi reveals
an unexpected tense reflex q: in the place of PL lax lateral and uvular affricates
(cf. PL *meIr "deer" > Ud. muq:I; PL *iq- "to hold, to find" > Ud. b-iq:-sun);
the reasons for this development are yet unclear. Finally, Ud. Iaina "crow" < PL
*qIan: reveals a specific reflex of PL *qI - the voiced fricative .
Lax glottalized affricates develop in a rather peculiar way in Udi: they give
zero reflexes, i.e. they are dropped. Udi apparently had at first eliminated the oral
stop if there was a simultaneous glottal one, and afterwards eliminated the glottal
stop, too (except, of course, in the initial position, where the glottal stop is
automatically pronounced before any vowel). In some specific cases lax glottalized
consonants in Udi yield non-zero tense reflexes (the "tense" - "glottalized" opposition
is absent in Udi, therefore Udi tense consonants can be treated as glottalized as
well). Namely:
a) PL * > Ud. c: in final position (cf. PL *ui- "ten" > Ud. wic:);
b) PL *, * are also apparently preserved in final position (cf. Ud. k::
"grain, speck" < PL *aa). Besides, the reflex : can be preserved in expressive
roots (cf. Ud. :em "mud" < PL *Vm), or as a result of an earlier assimilation
(cf. Ud. k:u:an "puppy" < PL *ur/*kur);
c) PL * is reflected as k:- in a single word k:: "grain, speck" - probably as
a result of an early assimilation to the final consonant; in other attested cases * is
reflected as zero in all positions;
d) PL clusters *m, *w, as well as the labialized uvulars *, *I are
reflected in Udi as the labial explosive p: (cf. PL *nw "dream" > Ud. nep:; PL
*hIam "sweat" > Ud. ap:; PL *i > Ud. ap:e-sun "to be cooked, to ripen"; PL
*I "two" > Ud. p:aI ).
e) Being delabialized, PL *I yields a zero reflex in the Vartashen dialect,
but the variation hI/I in the Nidzh dialect. PL *I would probably have given the
same reflex, but examples of its reflexation in Udi are missing.
PL tense (unaspirated) affricates usually yield voiced fricatives in Udi
(apparently through an intermediate stage of voiced affricates). Cf. PL *c: > Ud.
z/I; PL *c: > Ud. z; PL *: > Ud. I; PL *: > Ud. -; PL *q:, *q:, *q:I > Ud. .
There are, however, some not quite clear exceptions from this rule. Thus, PL *c: in
initial position gives Ud. c-; PL *: is reflected as : in all available examples;
PL *: gives Ud. q- in initial position.
Tense glottalized affricates in Udi regularly lose their glottalization and
become tense voiceless. Cf. PL *:, *: > Ud. c:; PL *: > Ud. :- (though -- in
medial position, cf. Ud. aa "right" < PL *ar:-); PL *:, *: > Ud. q:; PL *:,
*: > Ud. q:. Pharyngealized *I:, *I:, on a par with the normal reflex q:I
(sometimes with the loss of pharyngealization, see below), can also be reflected as
the fricative I. Both reflexes can vary within the same root.
All lateral affricates regularly yield uvular reflexes in Udi (apparently,
through the stage of velar affricates), cf. PL * > Ud. q:/q; PL *: > Ud. q-, -; PL
*:, *: > Ud. q:. Only the PL * behaves differently: like other PL lax glottalized
affricates, it yields Ud. 0 (see above).
The Udi language has completely lost labialized affricates. However, their
presence in some previous stage is confirmed by a special development of certain
labialized consonants in Udi (cf. above on the development of *).
Unlike Kryz and Budukh, Udi preserves pharyngealization. If, however, the
pharyngealizations in Archi, Agul, Tabasaran, Lezghi (in dialects), Rutul and
Tsakhur correspond well to each other and allow us to reconstruct a reliable series
of PL uvular pharyngealized affricates, the old pharyngealization in Udi can
sometimes disappear. On the other hand, in some cases a new pharyngealization,
missing in other languages, appears. The reason for this, as well as the reason for
some other phenomena of Udi historical phonetics, are not yet clear. But it is
probable that it was this new Udi pharyngealization that caused the hushing (and
partially hissing) series of affricates to split in two: palatalized (non-pharyngealized)
and non-palatalized (pharyngealized) affricates. As it is, the Udi distinctions -I,
:-I:, -I, -I, do not correspond to anything in other Lezghian languages, and
must be considered an Udi innovation.
10. Voiced affricates in PL.
Three personal plural pronouns in Lezghian languages reveal specific
correspondences, for which we tentatively reconstruct the PL voiced affricates *, *
and * (*i- "we (excl.)", *[e]- "you", *- "we (incl.)". The reflexes of these sounds
are: voiced fricatives (, *L > l) in Archi; voiceless affricates (or the fricative x) in
Tabasaran, Agul and Lezghi; voiceless fricatives in Tsakhur; and either voiced fricatives
or resonants in Rutul, Kryz, Budukh and Udi. The reconstruction of voiced
affricates is probably optimal for these correspondences. The correspondences
themselves appear as follows:
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
/k |
|
/k |
w |
|
w |
w |
w
|
* |
l |
x |
x |
|
j |
|
j |
j |
j
|
1.8.1.4. Fricatives.
In the PL consonant system the local series of fricatives coincide with the
local series of affricates, i.e. we reconstruct hissing, hushing, lateral, uvular and
pharyngealized uvular fricatives. Each of these series is characterized by a three-way
contrast "lax" - "tense" - "voiced". We must say at once, that voiced fricatives (as
well as voiced explosives and affricates, see above) are rather rare phonemes; most
of them are met in expressive words. In the lateral series the voiced fricative is not
reconstructed at all.
The correspondences of fricatives in descendant languages appear as follows:
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
*s |
s |
s |
s |
s |
s |
s |
s |
s |
0
|
*s |
|
s() |
|
s |
s |
s |
s |
s |
-I-
|
*s: |
s:,-s |
s/s: |
s/s:/z |
s/z |
s |
s,-s:- |
s |
s,-z |
-,-s-,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-s/-c
|
*s: |
s:,-s |
s/s: |
/ |
s()/ |
s()-,s |
s- |
s |
s- |
-/I-
|
|
|
|
|
z()/()
|
*z |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
* |
()-, |
-- |
|
- |
() |
|
|
|
-I-
|
*: |
:,- |
/: |
/:/ |
/ |
|
,-:- |
|
,- |
-,-I
|
*: |
():-, |
/ |
/:/ |
v/f/ |
() |
?-,-:- |
f |
f-,-v |
|
|
- |
:/x |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
z
|
* |
|
|
|
z |
|
|
|
|
I
|
* |
|
x |
x/ |
x |
x |
x |
x/ |
x/ |
|
* |
() |
f |
f/x |
f/x- |
x/f |
x() |
f(/x) |
f/x |
-f-
|
*: |
:,- |
x:/x/ |
x:/x/ |
g/j/ |
x |
x,-x:- |
x |
x |
|
|
|
: |
:/
|
*: |
:(), |
f/f: |
f/f: |
f/v/ |
x/f |
x-, |
f/x() |
f/x |
q-
|
|
- |
|
|
|
-x:()-
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-,
|
* |
() |
() |
() |
() |
|
() |
|
|
-
|
*: |
:,- |
/:/ |
/:/ |
/ |
|
,-:- |
|
-- |
/q
|
*: |
:, |
()/ |
()/ |
/() |
|
- |
- |
-,- |
|
|
-() |
:()/ |
:()/
|
|
|
() |
()
|
* |
/h |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
h
|
* |
/h |
|
() |
() |
|
|
|
-0
|
*I |
I |
X/I/ |
I |
|
I |
I |
/ |
/ |
0
|
*I |
-I |
X/I/ |
-I |
-() |
-I() |
-I |
- |
-
|
*:I |
:I,-I |
X/I/ |
I/I:/ |
/ |
I |
I, |
|
/ |
(I)
|
|
|
|
I |
|
|
-:I-
|
*:I |
:I(), |
X/I/ |
:I/I |
/ |
I() |
I-, |
|
()/ |
(I)
|
|
-I |
|
|
|
|
-:I-
|
*I |
I |
I |
I |
|
I
|
Comments.
1. Laryngeal features of fricatives.
PL lax fricatives are preserved without any changes in all Lezghian languages
except Udi. In Udi all PL non-labialized lax fricatives (except the lateral *) have
given zero reflexes, i.e. fallen out. It is not quite clear why the fricative * escaped
this fate - probably, it was strengthened and already merged with *: in Proto-Udi.
However, labialization prevented the disappearance of lax fricatives (cf. PL *s, *
> Ud. I; PL *> Ud. ).
Tense fricatives are at present preserved in the Archi, Agul, Tabasaran and
Tsakhur languages. In Archi tense fricatives are preserved in initial and medial
positions, but have weakened in final position.
In Agul tense fricatives are preserved in the Koshan dialect; in other dialects
they are already lost ([Magometov 1970] points to the presence of tense fricatives in
some more Agul subdialects, particularly, in the subdialect of the village Khpyuk,
but we have no data on these subdialects). We must specially mention the reflexes
of tense uvular fricatives in Agul proper (Tpig subdialect); here PL *: > , PL *:
> , PL *:I, *:I > , i.e. they are voiced.
In Tabasaran tense fricatives have been preserved in the Northern dialect
(though not identically in all subdialects; thus the Dbek subdialect has already lost
tense fricatives in initial position), but have already been lost in the Southern
dialect and in the literary language. In the Northern (to some extent also in the
Southern) dialect of Tabasaran, there is a strong tendency to voice PL tense fricatives.
Thus in some cases the PL non-initial *s: and *: are being voiced (*s: only in
subdialects of the Northern dialect; the voicing *: > is also encountered in the
Southern dialect). PL *s: and *: are regularly voiced in all Tabasaran dialects
before the narrow vowels *, *i (in the Dbek subdialect cases of word-final voicing of
*: are also attested). PL uvular fricatives in non-initial position are regularly
voiced in all Tabasaran dialects (thus, *: > , *: > , *:I > I, *:I > *I). The
development *: > in initial position occurred only before Tab. u < PL *u, *o (it is
worth noting that *:I is never voiced in this position). Of all PL fricatives only *:,
*: are never voiced.
The Tsakhur language only preserves tense fricatives (s:, :, x:, x:, :, :) in
intervocalic position; elsewhere they have been weakened and merged with the
reflexes of PL lax fricatives.
Other languages (Lezghi, Rutul, Kryz, Budukh, Udi) have not preserved tense
fricatives as such. However, the reflexes of tense fricatives have completely merged
with the reflexes of lax ones only in Rutul and Kryz (occasional differences - like
the fact that in Kryz the reflex is attested for PL *, while f is attested for PL
*: - are apparently explained by insufficient evidence; we could expect Kryz f
from PL * as well, but all the available examples represent cases of early
delabialization * > *). As for Lezghi, Budukh and Udi, the reflexes of PL tense
and lax fricatives here remain distinct.
In Lezghi tense fricatives, unlike lax ones, can be subject to voicing. Its rules
are as follows:
a) Voicing does not occur in the Akhty dialect, where reflexes of tense
fricatives usually merge with the reflexes of lax ones. The only exceptions are the
PL fricatives *s: and *:, which may be voiced in the Akhty dialect as well. (The
voicing of *s: occurs before the PL narrow vowels *, *i; chronologically it probably
preceded the voicing of other fricatives, because it represents an isogloss, connecting
Lezghi and Tabasaran; on a similar development in Tabasaran see above. The rules
of the voicing of *: are unclear - perhaps we are facing interdialectal loanwords).
In addition, the voicing of PL lateral *: is obligatory.
b) In other dialects, voicing of the PL lateral fricative *: and of the uvulars
*:, *:, *:I, *:I is obligatory. PL *s:, just as in the Akhty dialect, is voiced
only before original narrow vowels. The hissing *s: has the voiceless reflex s in all
positions in the Kurakh dialect, but is voiced in intervocalic position in the Gne
and Yarki dialects (and therefore in the literary language). Labialized PL *: and
*: in non-initial position, on the other hand, yield voiceless reflexes in all
dialects; in initial position *: always develops voiced reflexes, while *:, like in the
Akhty dialect, reveals a variation between voiced and voiceless reflexes. We cannot
establish any rules for PL *:, whose reflexes may be both voiced and voiceless.
Such a complicated scheme of reflexes for PL tense fricatives apparently points to
processes of interdialectal influence, active in the Lezghi-speaking area until
recently.
In Budukh PL tense fricatives are regularly voiced in final position (*-s: > -z,
*-: > -, *-: > -w, *-: > -; one should also expect voiced final reflexes of PL
*:, *: and *:, but reflexes of these phonemes in final position are not attested at
all in Budukh). PL pharyngealized *:I and *:I can be voiced in other positions as
well, but the rules of distribution for voiced and voiceless reflexes of these two
phonemes are unclear due to insufficient evidence.
In Udi the basic difference between the reflexes of tense and lax fricatives is
the fact that the former are not dropped (unlike the latter, whose normal reflex in
Udi is zero, see above). Udi can also occasionally have affricates in the place of PL
tense fricatives (such are the reflexes *-s: > -c; *-: > -I; *:, *: > q); in such
cases we usually observe a free variation of fricative and affricate reflexes in the
same roots in Udi (cf. Ud. mes / mec "nest" < PL *ms:; Ud. el / qel "burden" <
PL *:l, etc.). The process of the affricatization of fricatives is rather unusual; still,
there is apparently no reason to try to reconstruct affricates in such cases, basing
this conclusion on Udi evidence alone.
Voiced fricatives are preserved in all languages (we should note only the
affricatization * > in Rutul, Tsakhur and Kryz and the laryngealization * > in
Archi and Udi languages).
2. Local features of fricatives.
The main change that occurred in all Lezghian languages, except Archi, was the
loss of lateral fricatives (on the loss of lateral affricates, see above). This led to the
appearance of velar fricatives, not present in the PL system, in most languages. In
Udi a further development of the velar x ( < *, *:) into the uvular fricative
occurred (on the uvular reflexes of lateral affricates in Udi, see above).
PL lax * developed into x in Agul, Tabasaran, Lezghi, Rutul, Tsakhur, Kryz
and Budukh. In Tabasaran, Kryz and Budukh the palatalization x > occurred
before PL front vowels (cf. Tab. ubu-b, Db. ibbu-b, Kryz ibi-d, Bud. ub "three"
< PL *ep:-). In Tabasaran this is the usual development (cf. above on a similar
affrication of lateral affricates); it is, however, not typical for Kryz and Budukh
and characterizes only this phoneme (even PL *: in Kryz and Budukh yields only
the velar x). A similar development *- > -x > - has occurred in Kryz in final
position (in a single example: Kryz li "louse" < PL *lo()).
PL tense *: yields x: (or x, depending on the dialect and on the position) in
Agul, Tabasaran, Tsakhur; in Rutul, Kryz and Budukh only the lax reflex x is
present (on the distribution of tense and lax reflexes, see above). In the Koshan
dialect of the Agul language the reflexation is unusual: PL *: > Kosh. : in all
positions (thus, the tense fricative x: in Agul is preserved as such only in some
subdialects of Agul proper, namely, in the Khpyuk and Tsirkhe subdialects; see
[Magometov 1970, 23]).
Tabasaran has a regular palatalization *: > *x: > : ( in the Southern
dialect) before front vowels.
In Lezghi *: yields g (through an intermediate stage of the voiced fricative ,
still preserved in the Yarki dialect) before back vowels and /j before front ones
(the distribution of the latter two reflexes is yet unclear). Thus, the reflexes of *:
merge here with the reflexes of the PL tense lateral affricate *: (on the development
of which see above).
Pharyngealized fricatives have lost their pharyngealization in Lezghi (though
some dialects still preserve it, see above on the reflexes of affricates), Kryz and
Budukh. In Lezghi the reflexes of pharyngealized and non-pharyngealized uvular
fricatives have completely merged, while in Kryz and Budukh the original
pharyngealized fricatives have been laryngealized and transformed into the
emphatic laryngeals , . A fricative reflexation (*I > Kryz, Bud. ) is observed
only when this fricative was the second component in a medial consonant cluster.
A similar development is observed in Agul. Original pharyngealized fricatives
are preserved only in the Fite dialect (where *I, *:I > I). In the Keren, Koshan
and Burkikhan dialects, the pharyngealized fricatives have developed into the
pharyngeal X (i.e. *I, *:I > X), and the distinction in tensity was lost (in Koshan,
usually preserving it, the opposition X - X: is absent). However, it is reflected in Agul
proper (Tpig), where a further laryngealization happened: *I > X > , *:I > *R >
. It is interesting that PL *I is preserved as I in Agul. This is perhaps an
argument in favour of reconstructing in PL not the voiced fricatives *, *I, but rather
the voiced affricates *G, *GI, whose reflexes were subject to independent
fricativization in descendant languages. (The fact is that the development *q:I > R
that happened in Agul (see above), had apparently passed through the intermediate
state I, preserved in the Fite dialect. In this case the original *I and the new *I
< *qI: should have inevitably merged. Since this has not happened, it is reasonable to
suggest, that in Proto-Agul in the place of PL *q:I there was a fricative like *I,
and in the place of PL *I - an affricate like *GI, fricativized already after the *I
> R development in Agul dialects). It is possible that PL had here a free variation
of the articulations *G/* and *GI/*I respectively.
Labialized fricatives usually develop similarly to labialized affricates in
Lezghian languages, namely:
1) The Archi language preserves all labialized fricatives except the hissing ones
(which are always delabialized). Labialized reflexes are not attested for PL *I,
because of the rarity of this phoneme.
2) The Agul language preserves the labialized hissing (s), hushing ( in the
Keren and Burkikhan dialects) and uvular fricatives (, :, ). The pharyngealized
uvular labialized I is preserved only in Fite dialect; other dialects have lost the
labialization due to the development of pharyngealized uvulars into either
pharyngeals or laryngeals (in these local series Agul has no distinction in
labialization).
The PL labialized hushing *: is reflected as a (bi)labialized consonant only
in the Keren and Burkikhan dialects; in the Koshan dialect the dentolabialized : is
represented (cf. above on the reflexes of hushing labialized affricates). The Fite dialect has the velarization *: > x here, too (just like in the reflexes of affricates).
Similar reflexes could be expected from PL lax *; but in fact, in the available
examples we see only the delabialized reflex (in all dialects). We may, however,
note the development of the PL combination *m in some Agul dialects, where -mhas disappeared, leaving behind the compensatory labialization of the following
consonant: cf. PL *am "caraway" > Bursh. am, but Rich. a, Burk. (with
metathesis) , Fite hex.
Labialized lateral fricatives in Agul have developed into labiodental fricatives
(apparently through an intermediate stage of labiovelars). Thus, PL * > Ag. f, PL
*: > Ag. f:/f. It is interesting that the clusters *-w, *-w: behave differently.
Even in Proto-Agul *, in the combination w, had been strengthened and
developed into *:. The Koshan dialect reflects the combination w: as a
dentolabialized : (unlike *: > Kosh. f:); other dialects have either the normal
reflex f ( < *: < *w:), or x (with the loss of labialization). Cf. PL *jiw "snow" >
Rich., Fit. ibx, Burk. x, Bursh. ji:; PL *:e "five" > Proto-Ag. *jew:-
(restructured by analogy with *jew- "four") > Rich. Rafu-d (with an unclear R),
Fite jf-d, Burk. ifa-d, Bursh. ji:u-r.
3) In the Tabasaran language the PL hissing and hushing labialized fricatives
have merged in a single dentolabialized series (Tab. , :, ). Labialized laterals,
as in Agul, developed into dentolabial fricatives (f, f:); there are, however, cases of
old delabialization, when * > * > Tab. x.
In the system of labialized back consonants labialization is completely lost in
the Northern dialect, but is preserved in the Southern dialect and in the literary
language.
4) In Lezghi labialized hissing fricatives are reflected exactly like labialized
hissing affricates (see above), i.e. they are preserved in Kurakh, Gne and some
subdialects of the Akhty dialect (Khliut), develop into labialized hushing fricatives in
most subdialects of the Akhty dialect and yield labialized velars in the Yarki
dialect. We must note, however, that such reflexes are only attested for PL *s:; in
the few known cases of reflecting PL *s Lezghi has the delabialized reflex s.
By analogy with the labialized hushing affricates, one would expect the
labialized hushing fricatives to be preserved in the Kurakh and Akhty dialects, to
develop into hissing labialized in the Gne dialect and into labiovelars in the
Yarki dialect. But in reality the labialized hushing * in the few attested cases has
the delabialized reflex (cf., however, the reflection of the PL cluster *m, that
developed into * in Proto-Lezghi: PL *am "caraway" > Lezg. lit. if-erar, Nt.
x-erar.). The reflex < PL *: is observed only in initial position in the
Khlyut subdialect of the Akhty dialect (cf. Khl. et "mosquito" < PL *::;
otherwise cf. lit. we, Akht. fe). The hissing z, as a reflex of *, is known to us
only in the literary language (zal "boiling" < PL *al) and apparently represents
the Gne development. The Yarki dialect indeed has labiovelar reflexes x/g <
PL *:. Other dialects (Kurakh, Akhty, Gne) always reflect PL *: as a
labiodental f or w (on the distribution of voice/voicelessness see above); the same
labiodental reflexation is represented in final position in the Khlyut subdialect
(cf. lit., Khl., Kur. jif, Nt. jx "night" < PL *i:).
The labialized lateral * is usually reflected as labiodental f in all Lezghi
dialects. The labiodental reflex (f or w) is also typical for PL tense *: in most
dialects; the Akhty dialect, however, reflects PL *: as labialized hushing - (-)
in the initial position (only the Khlyut subdialect has a labiodental reflex here, too).
Thus, within the Akhty dialect the reflexes of *: resemble an "inversion" of the
reflexes of *:, cf.
|
PL |
Akht. |
Khlyut subdialect
|
|
*: |
-, f |
f-, f
|
|
*: |
f-, f |
-, f
|
(voiced initial variants are not listed in this table).
Uvular fricatives in Lezghi generally preserve the PL labialization quite well.
5) Rutul preserves the labialization of PL *s: ( > Rut. s), *, *: ( > Rut.
), *I, *:I ( > Rut. I). For PL *s, *, * and *: only delabialized reflexes
are attested. The labialized laterals *, *: are reflected as x in the Mukhad and
Shinaz dialects (in some subdialects of Mukhad dialect, e.g. Luchek, the younger
generation already pronounces the labiodental f). The Amsar dialect has a variation
x/f. Other Rutul dialects already have only the dentolabial f.
6) The Tsakhur language has preserved only the labialized , : ( < PL *,
*:) and x, x: ( < PL *, *:), the Gelmets dialect having a variation between
x/f and x:/f:. Other PL labialized fricatives are only represented by delabialized
reflexes in Tsakhur.
7) In the Kryz language we have attested only the labialized < PL *:. In
the past, however, there were apparently at least labialized hushing and labialized
velar fricatives, judging by the development of PL *: > Kryz f and PL *, *: >
Kryz f (in the case of early delabialization PL *, *: can also be reflected as x).
8) Budukh, like Kryz, has specific reflexes of PL *: and PL *, *: (*: >
Bud. f-, -w; *:, * > Bud. f). In other cases PL labialization has disappeared in
Budukh without any trace.
9) In Udi the only trace of PL labialization is the fact that PL lax labialized
fricatives yield non-zero reflexes, while PL lax non-labialized fricatives are dropped.
Otherwise Udi has completely lost the distinction in labialization in the system of
fricatives (as well as in the system of explosives and affricates, see above).
1.8.1.5. Laryngeals.
We reconstruct three local series of postuvular (laryngeal) consonants for PL:
laryngeals proper, pharyngealized laryngeals and emphatic laryngeals. The
reconstruction of pharyngealized laryngeals in the second series is quite hypothetic:
it is clear only that this was a special series, different both from laryngeals proper
and from emphatic laryngeals.
In each local series the binary opposition "explosive : fricative" is
reconstructed. A correlation in labialization is also reconstructed in the system of
laryngeals. It is interesting, however, that in each local series one can reconstruct
only one labialized laryngeal. The articulation of labialized laryngeals could
probably vary between explosive and fricative (which explains some specific features
of the reflexation of labialized laryngeals). For the purpose of uniformity we
reconstruct only explosive labialized laryngeals for PL.
Let us adduce the system of correspondences of laryngeal consonants in
Lezghian languages:
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
* |
-,0 |
-/j-, |
(/j-) |
-/j-, |
,-0 |
,-0 |
/j-, |
-/j-, |
-,0
|
|
|
-/- |
|
-/-0 |
|
|
- |
--,-
|
* |
h |
|
|
w-/-, |
|
|
|
|
p
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
*h |
h,-j |
h-,-h/ |
h |
h |
h(/j-) |
h,-0 |
h-, |
h-, |
h-
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(/j-) |
(/-)
|
*I |
j |
-/j- |
- |
j-/-, |
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-/-
|
*I |
j-/w- |
-/j- |
- |
w-,-h- |
|
-,-h- |
-,-- |
w- |
-
|
*hI |
-/h-, |
-/-, |
|
j-(h-) |
- |
h-/-, |
- |
h-/ |
-,-0
|
|
-j |
-/-/ |
|
/- |
|
-hI |
|
-?
|
|
|
-
|
* |
I/-, |
// |
I/ |
- |
j-,-0I |
-0 |
-/j-, |
|
-,-0
|
|
-j |
|
|
|
|
-
|
* |
-hI- |
// |
|
w-/- |
I |
I
|
* |
I-,-0I |
/h |
hI/h |
h/ |
-/j-, |
j-/- |
-/j-, |
j-, |
I-
|
|
|
|
|
|
-0 |
|
- |
-
|
Comments.
1) Archi. Plain laryngeals have been preserved here (with modifications in
non-initial position, where the glottal stop has disappeared, and h > j). The
pharyngealized laryngeal *hI has been depharyngealized and apparently merged
with *h (but in initial position before back vowels *hI has fallen out, which
explains the double reflex -/h-). The pharyngealized *I has apparently developed
into the emphatic *, which afterwards lost its laryngeal articulation and developed
into j (similarly *I > * > w).
After the loss of pharyngealized laryngeals their place was taken by PL
emphatic laryngeals that yield pharyngealized reflexes in Archi.
2) Agul. Here labialized laryngeals have merged early with the respective
non-labialized ones. Plain laryngeals and emphatic laryngeals are rather well
preserved, although, compared with PL, some changes still occurred:
a) in final position PL * and *h may obtain a secondary emphatization (*
> , *h > ). The development *h > is typical for Koshan, Burkikhan and Agul
proper and apparently occurs after front vowels. The conditions of the development
* > , observed only in Koshan (where the usual reflex of the final * is -0), are
less clear.
b) The PL emphatic laryngeals * and * are well preserved in Koshan, Burkikhan
and Agul proper (we must note that in Koshan a deemphatization before front vowels
occurred: * > , * > h). In the Keren dialect * has been preserved, while * has
been fricativized and developed into . The Fite dialect has lost the emphatic
laryngeals: * > and * > h.
PL pharyngealized *I in Agul has been depharyngealized and merged with *.
However, *hI gives specific reflexes here: the Burkikhan dialect has - in initial
position, while others have *-, i.e. we observe an absolutely unique series of correspondences (cf. above on the reflexes of other laryngeals). In final position *-hI is
reflected in the same way as the emphatic laryngeal *- (i.e. gives Fite -, Ker. -,
Kosh., Burk. and Agul proper -). We can suppose that Proto-Agul had a special
phoneme * < PL *hI, which was only preserved in initial position in Burkikhan,
while in final position it merged early with the explosive *.
3. Tabasaran. In the Southern dialect of Tabasaran (and in the literary
Tabasaran language) PL laryngeals give the same reflexes as in the Fite dialect of
the Agul language (see above). The Northern dialect still preserves the
pharyngealized laryngeals I, hI < PL emphatic *, * in non-initial position.
Labialized laryngeals were delabialized early in Tabasaran, just as in Agul.
However, in Proto-Tabasaran a labialized laryngeal *h apparently existed, which
originated from a metathesis of labialization and had afterwards developed into w.
Cf. PL *m "apple" > Proto-Tab. *hI > South. wi, North. waI.
4. Lezghi. Characteristic for Lezghi is the fact that its Northern dialects (as
well as the literary language) regularly have w in the place of PL labialized
laryngeals; the Akhty dialect usually has (only sporadically w, probably due to
the influence of the literary language). Therefore, at least one labialized laryngeal
should have existed as late as in Proto-Lezghi; it yielded w in the Northern and
in the Southern (Central) dialect.
In other respects Lezghi has very much reduced the system of PL laryngeals.
Explosive laryngeals are usually reflected as (though before front vowels
sporadically - > j-), fricatives - as h (though PL *hI, * also yield or j before
front vowels).
We should also dwell on the Lezghi final reflexes of PL * and *I. In both
cases the Akhty dialect regularly has ; in the Northern dialect (as well as in the
literary language) the final *- disappears, while the final *-I yields an unexpected
reflex - (cf. PL *maI "fat" > Khl. ma, lit. ma). Such a development probably
points to the presence of two types of explosive laryngeals in Proto-Lezghi
(apparently PL *- > Proto-Lezg. *- > Akht. -, North. -0; PL *-I > Proto-Lezg. *-
> Akht. -, North. -).
5. Rutul. At the present time there are three laryngeals in Rutul: , h and I.
As in most other languages, PL pharyngealized laryngeals were early depharyngealized here. However, their reflexes have not completely merged with the reflexes of
plain laryngeals. It is probable that at first all three pharyngealized
laryngeals merged in one phoneme, similar to *I, and only afterwards *I > . This
change must have occurred already after the disappearance of the original * in
final position: cf. *- >-0, but *-I > -.
Emphatic * and * were apparently lost early. Their main reflexes are or j
in initial position (in the Khnyukh subdialect we may also meet h in the place of
*) and 0, with a possible preservation of pharyngealization, in final position.
The labialized * was apparently preserved longer, though, like other labialized
laryngeals, it was subject to the delabialization * > *. Afterwards, when the
pharyngealized *I had been depharyngealized (see above), this * had taken its
place: PL * > * > Rut. I.
6. Tsakhur. Here we must note the preservation of the phoneme hI < PL *hI
(at least in final position). Otherwise Tsakhur reflexes are quite similar to Rutul
ones.
7. Kryz and Budukh. Here it is interesting to note the development of PL
plain laryngeals into the emphatic (in some cases, such as the reflex of PL * and
*h in final position, as well as the reflex of the PL labialized *). The PL emphatic
laryngeals are generally preserved (although before front vowels they develop into
j-); it is worth noting that both * and * yield the same voiced reflex, , in Kryz.
The pharyngealized *I has lost its pharyngealization and developed into ; however,
traces of the original pharyngealization are preserved in the reflexes of PL *I and
*hI, yielding emphatic and respectively in Kryz (Budukh has w- and h- here).
8. Udi. Here only the laryngeal h < PL *h is preserved. PL labialized *
apparently first developed into *h (see above on the possibility of the variation
*/*h as early as in PL), after which *h > Ud. p (see above on the similar
development of PL * > Ud. p:). All other laryngeals were lost in Udi (i.e. in
initial position there is an automatic glottal stop, and in other positions - zero).
1.8.1.6. Consonant clusters.
In PL, as in most modern Lezghian languages, consonant clusters were not
allowed in initial position. (Initial clusters existing in modern Lezghi and Tabasaran
are secondary, being a result of the reduction of unaccented vowels of the first
syllable). However, in the medial and final positions the number of possible clusters
was rather large.
Here we will not examine the consonant clusters arising on morpheme
boundaries, nor the consonant clusters in verbal roots, but will dwell only upon the
development of consonant clusters within nominal root morphemes. These
combinations may be divided into two types:
1) Consonant clusters on the syllable borders of a partly or wholly
reduplicated morpheme (structures of the type *amam, *daldam, *itil,
*urul, etc.). In such morphemes virtually any consonant clusters are allowed.
Their characteristic feature is their stability: except cases of irregular
transformations (in expressive roots), both cluster components develop in the same
way as in the isolated position.
2) Consonant clusters within a non-reduplicated morpheme (on the
syllable border or at the end of the syllable). Here only "resonant+obstruent" clusters
are allowed. In these clusters the first element may be represented by one of the
resonants r, l, m, n or w (i.e. the opposition of tenseness-laxness is neutralized here;
the correlates of the resonants listed above (j, l:, m:, n:, u) are not attested as first
components of clusters). The second component of clusters may be represented by
any obstruent except postuvulars (i.e. emphatic laryngeals and plain laryngeals).
There are few rules limiting the freedom of combination of resonants and
obstruents (some of them may turn out to be fortuitous and it is possible that
the gaps in the place of some clusters will be eventually filled). Here are these
limitations:
1) there are no clusters of *w with following front consonants (of the type
*wt, *wc, *w) or with following velar ones (of the type *wk) (absence of the latter is
probably accidental);
2) there are no clusters of *n with uvulars (of the type *nq) or labials (of
the type *np);
3) there are no clusters of *l with laterals (of the type *l);
4) clusters with labial consonants are in general very rare, and only two types
of them are attested: "r+labial" and "m+labial".
No Lezghian language has left the PL system of consonant clusters intact. The
main tendency in the development of such clusters is their simplification through
the loss of the first component (resonant). One point should be, however, specially
discussed: the reconstruction of combinations with the resonant *l.
In modern Lezghian languages, combinations with l as the first component are
rather rare. However, we have reason to think that they were much more widespread
in PL. The fact is that in most cases PL *l is either lost or changed to r in
descendant languages. In such cases (when the reflex l is in fact not preserved in
any language) we must reconstruct *l on the basis of system considerations. For
example: if we have a correspondence "Tab. -lz: Ag., Lezg., Rut. z" (cf. "tongue":
Tab. melz, Ag., Lezg. mez, Rut. miz), the reconstruction of *l in this case is based
on Tabasaran evidence, allowing us to suppose that PL *l (at least before hissing
consonants) yields Tab. l and Ag., Lezg., Rut. 0. However, although Tabasaran has
the cluster lz (l), a similar combination with the voiceless c (lc) is missing. On the
other hand, we know of the correspondence "Tab. rc: Ag., Lezg. c, Rut. s" (cf. Tab.
marc-ar "clay stove for baking bread", Ag. Bursh. mac "fireplace", Lezg. mac "a
clay shelf over the fireplace", Rut. mas "wall"). This correspondence does not allow us
to reconstruct PL *rc (in such a case we would expect the preservation of r in
Rutul and Lezghi, see below in the table of correspondences). Therefore, one can
suppose that in this case we are dealing with the PL cluster *lc, whose development
is quite symmetrical to the development of *lc: (i.e. a zero reflex of the resonant in
Ag., Lezg. and Rut., but the preservation of the resonant in Tab.); in Tabasaran,
however, the further change *lc > rc occurred. As a result of such reasoning, we
can reconstruct a large number of PL combinations with the resonant *l, such
reconstruction often being confirmed by the data of related Daghestan languages.
The same is true for some clusters with *-n-, where -n- has either disappeared
or was denasalized and turned into -r-, and is reconstructed only on basis of system
considerations.
Let us now give the system of correspondences of the reconstructed consonant
clusters:
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
*rp |
|
|
rp |
p |
|
|
p |
p |
p
|
*rt |
|
rt |
|
t |
rt |
rt |
(r)t
|
*rt: |
t: |
rd/d |
rd |
t:/rt: |
d |
d |
d(r?) |
d |
d
|
*r |
r |
r/ |
r |
(r) |
|
|
(r) |
|
(rd)
|
*rd |
rd |
rd |
rd |
rd |
rd |
rd
|
*rc |
|
|
rs(?) |
rc |
rc
|
*rc: |
|
rz/z |
r |
z |
z
|
*r |
(n?) |
r |
r |
r |
|
|
*r: |
r: |
rt: |
rc: |
r |
|
t: |
|
|
c:
|
*rs |
rs |
rs/s |
rs/s |
rs/s |
s |
|
rs |
rs
|
*rs: |
rs: |
|
rs |
|
s |
s:
|
*r |
|
r |
r |
r/ |
r |
r |
|
|
|
*r: |
(/r?) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
*r |
|
r |
r |
r |
r |
|
r |
r
|
*r: |
r |
r: |
r: |
r |
r |
|
|
|
|
*rl |
|
r |
r
|
*r |
|
rx |
r |
rg |
h |
|
|
|
q
|
*r: |
|
rg/r |
r |
r |
|
|
|
j |
|
*r |
|
r |
|
|
|
|
|
|
*r: |
|
rk: |
rk: |
/r |
k |
k |
k |
k |
q:
|
*r |
|
rf/rx |
rx/rf |
rx/rf |
x
|
*r: |
: |
rx |
rx |
rg/g |
x
|
*rk |
|
rk |
rk |
rk/k |
k |
|
rk |
rk
|
*rk: |
k: |
g |
rg |
(k:) |
g |
g |
g |
g |
(n)g
|
*r |
|
r |
|
r |
|
|
|
|
k:
|
*rqlq? |
|
|
|
rq |
|
|
rq
|
*r |
|
(r) |
r |
(r) |
|
|
|
|
|
*rq:lq: |
|
r |
r
|
*r: |
: |
|
|
r |
q: |
|
rq
|
*r: |
: |
r(r) |
r(r) |
r() |
|
|
|
r
|
*rqI |
l(r) |
rqI
|
*rI |
I |
rI |
(I) |
|
I |
I |
(r)? |
|
/h
|
*rI: |
|
qI: |
rqI: |
rq |
qI |
|
q |
|
q:
|
*rI |
|
r |
rI |
r/ |
I |
I |
r |
r
|
*lt |
rt |
t |
rt |
|
|
rt |
lt
|
*lt: |
rt: |
rd/d |
rd |
(t:) |
d |
|
|
|
(nt:)
|
*l |
r |
|
|
|
(ld?) |
r |
|
|
*lc |
|
c |
rc |
c |
s
|
*lc: |
c |
z |
lz |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z |
z
|
*l |
|
|
r |
|
*l |
|
r |
r |
r |
|
|
r/ |
r |
()
|
*l |
|
r |
(r) |
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
*l: |
|
r/l |
r/l |
: |
|
|
?
|
*l: |
: |
r |
r |
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
*lk |
rk |
|
|
|
rk(I)
|
*lk: |
|
lg/rg |
rg |
rg |
rg |
rg |
rg |
(rg) |
k:
|
*l |
|
|
r |
r |
r |
r |
(r)
|
*lg/lg: |
rk: |
|
r |
rg
|
*l |
(r) |
r |
r |
r |
(r) |
?
|
*l: |
|
|
|
|
lq |
lq
|
*l |
|
r |
l |
l/ |
r |
r
|
*l: |
r: |
|
r |
r |
|
|
r |
l |
r
|
*lI |
|
rI/r |
lI/rI |
r |
rI |
rI |
|
|
*nt |
|
nt |
nt |
nt |
nt |
nt
|
*n |
n |
n |
n |
nt() |
n/ |
n/ |
n |
n |
t:
|
*nd |
|
|
nd |
nd |
nd |
|
nd
|
*nc: |
c |
nz/rz |
rz |
rc:
|
*n |
|
|
n |
n
|
*n |
n/n |
n/ |
n() |
n |
n |
|
(n)/n |
/n |
()
|
*n: |
() |
j |
r/r |
k/ |
j |
l |
|
j |
|
*n: |
n |
rk: |
rk: |
|
k |
(k) |
k |
k |
q:
|
*n() |
|
f |
f |
f |
rx |
rx |
f
|
*nk |
ng |
|
|
|
|
|
k
|
*n |
n |
n |
n |
n |
n |
n |
(n) |
n
|
*mp |
mp |
p |
mp |
p |
p |
b |
p/b |
p
|
*mp: |
m |
mb(b) |
mb(b) |
p: |
|
b
|
*m |
|
m |
m |
/mp
|
*mt |
nt |
t(rt) |
|
|
t
|
*m |
n |
|
(m) |
|
(d) |
|
|
|
t:
|
*mc |
ns |
c() |
c |
c |
s |
c |
|
|
s
|
*mc: |
(mz) |
bz/wz |
mz |
k:/c: |
|
(ms) |
z |
|
z
|
*m |
m/n |
(n) |
(m)c:/ |
(n) |
|
*m: |
m:/n: |
t: |
: |
rt |
t |
t() |
t |
t |
I
|
*ms |
(mu)s |
|
|
*ms: |
|
|
ms/ms: |
|
s
|
*m |
n |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
*m |
n |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*m |
(mu) |
m/ |
|
f |
|
|
*m: |
|
|
m |
w |
j |
|
w |
w
|
*m |
m |
m/ |
m/ |
/ |
|
|
|
|
p:
|
*m |
|
|
m |
|
|
*m |
n |
(m) |
(m) |
|
|
*m: |
n: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
*mI |
|
mI |
mI
|
*mk |
|
bk |
mk |
k |
|
|
k
|
*mk: |
bk |
g |
mg |
|
|
|
g |
g
|
*w |
|
bx/ |
f |
()
|
*w |
b |
/m |
w |
|
|
|
|
|
p:
|
*wq: |
bq |
b/ |
wq: |
q: |
|
|
|
|
|
*w |
b |
() |
() |
|
|
|
|
|
p:
|
*w |
b |
|
|
|
Note: in the present table we show the combination reflexes of both PL
labialized and non-labialized consonants; the behaviour of the resonant in the
combination does not depend on the labialization of the following consonant.
1.8.1.7. The development of resonants in verbal roots.
1. The reconstruction of medial resonants in the PL verbal root is very much
complicated by the following circumstances:
a) the resonant *r (sometimes *l as well, if develops into r by phonetic rules)
can be reinterpreted as a class indicator; this process, for example, led to a nearly
complete loss of consonant clusters inside the verbal root in Tabasaran;
b) the resonant *r (as well as *l, if it develops into r by phonetic rules) can
be reinterpreted as the durative stem marker. This process is connected with the
presence of three main types of conjugation in PL:
1) verbs without any resonant, neither in the durative stem nor in the
terminative stem;
2) verbs without any resonant in the terminative stem, but with the infix -r-(possibly -rV-) in the durative stem;
3) verbs with a resonant (*r, *l or *w) in the durative stem as well as in the
terminative stem.
We can properly talk about root resonants only concerning the last type of
conjugation. However, in this type of conjugation the root resonant *r or *l could be
reinterpreted as a durative marker and be lost in the terminative stem by analogy
with the second type of conjugation. This process apparently took place in many
Lezghian languages (except Agul).
[Let us note that from the historical point of view the proper "resonantless"
roots are represented only in the second conjugation type; the first type of verbs in
Proto-Daghestan probably contained the resonants -m-, -n-, lost in the PL verbal
root. This explains, first, the fact that these roots do not accept the durative
indicator -r-, second, that there are no combinations with the first component -m- or
-n- in PL verbal root].
As a result of the shown processes medial resonants have been totally lost in
Tsakhur.
In Tabasaran and Kryz resonants have been lost as well in most cases.
Tabasaran preserves medial resonants only in some verbal derivatives (like darul
"splinter" < t:-ars:al, though kt-a- uz "to rip" < PL *ars:a, cf. Arch. ars:a-s "to
cut into pieces"), or in the case of a metathesis of -r- or -l- into the beginning of the
root, mostly when the first root vowel is narrow (cf. *ir:ar "to paint" > Tab. rix-uz,
*ilan "to work"> Tab. li-uz, etc.).
A similar metathesis is often observed in Agul, though in some dialects the
old order may be preserved as well (cf. PL *irq:r "to freeze" > Rich. ru-as, but
Tp. ra-s; PL *ir:r "to kill" > Rich.,Tp. ruk:as, but Bursh. urk:as; PL *ilan
"to work" > Bursh., Tp. lianas, etc.). In other respects Agul is very conservative
and preserves well the PL combinations with medial resonants (this conservatism is
probably explained by the loss of the system of class agreement and, therefore, the
arising possibility of mixing the medial resonant with the class marker
in Agul).
In other Lezghian languages combinations with resonants inside the verbal
root generally developed in the same way as in the nominal one (though we must
keep in mind the possibility of an irregular loss of the resonant as a result of the
processes, described above).
2. Reconstruction of final resonants in the verbal root.
In final position verbal root resonants also develop differently from those in the
nominal root. This condition is due to the fact that final consonants in certain
verbal forms have a tendency to be reinterpreted as morphological markers (final -r
and -l are mixed with the PL durative gerund suffix *-r, *-ri; the final *-n - with
terminative gerund suffix *-na. We must take into account that these gerund
suffixes could apparently already form certain finite verbal forms in PL and were
quite frequent).
Final resonants in verbal roots are completely lost in Tabasaran, Rutul and
Udi (according to [Ibragimov 1978] the Borchin-Khinov dialect of Rutul still
preserves the traces of PL final resonants, but we do not possess any data from this
dialect). Other languages have the following reflexes of PL *-r, *-l and *-n (no other
resonants occurred in PL verbs in this position):
1) Archi. Here PL final *-l and *-n have merged in one -n-conjugation. Cf. PL
*ean "to forget" > Arch. ein- (emus); PL *jeal "to bind" > Arch. ein-
(emus), etc. The merger of *-l and *-n-conjugations in Archi (as well as in Agul,
see below) was caused by the rarity of -l-conjugation roots and by a formal resemblance between the -l and -n-conjugations, manifested in the presence of the durative
infix -l- in both of them (as opposed to -r-, present in the -r-conjugation and in roots
without a final resonant).
PL *-r is lost in Archi bisyllabic roots (cf. PL *jatr > Arch. ati-s "to let, to
leave"), but preserved in monosyllabic roots (that have lost the PL vowel *i-, see
below), cf. *i:ar "to fry" > Arch. ar-as, etc. However, there are cases when -r in
monosyllabic roots is reinterpreted as a durative marker and consequently lost in
the terminative forms (cf. PL *iar "to melt" > Arch. a-s, representing an
adequation based on durative ar, etc.).
2) Agul. In Agul proper and in the Koshan dialect the *-l and *-n-conjugations
have merged into a single -n-conjugation; in other dialects the n-conjugation is
already lost. Cf. PL *jeal "to bind" > Bursh. i-l-an-as, Tp. ian-as, Rich. i-as; PL
*-i:Vn "to knead" > Bursh., Tp. ian-as, Rich. i-as. In a single case the Koshan
dialect preserves the final -l, cf. PL *il "to eat" > Bursh. al-as (*-d--), but
Tp. uan-as, Rich. -as. In some cases in the dialect of Agul proper the old *-n
disappears (on the other hand, sometimes a resonantless verb can obtain the
n-conjugation in this dialect), which is probably caused by morphological analogy.
All Agul dialects have lost the PL *-r-conjugation.
3) Lezghi. Here the final resonants -n and -r are only preserved sporadically.
For *-n cf. PL *i:Vn > Lezg. uun-iz "to knead, rub"; PL *alc-an > Lezg.
alcum-iz "to measure" ( < *alcan-iz with a metathesis of labialization) and a few
others. PL *-r can be preserved only in roots with the PL narrow initial vowel *i,
lost in Lezghi (see below), and only in preverbless forms. Cf. PL *ilqIar > Lezg.
qr-ez "to laugh"; PL *jiar > Lezg. ur-az "to melt" (but with a preverb: el-e-iz
"to melt (metaphorically); be very content", etc. In most cases, however,
Lezghi has lost the final -r and -n; the final *-l has been lost completely.
4) Tsakhur, Kryz and Budukh.
In Tsakhur and Kryz, PL final *-r, *-l and *-n are preserved best of all.
Budukh has preserved PL *-l and *-n well; as for the -r-conjugation, it has merged
with the resonantless conjugation (therefore, both PL roots with the final -r and PL
roots with a vocalic ending have at the present time an identical paradigm in
Budukh).
In one type of cases Tsakhur loses the final -r: in roots with the structure
*i(R)Car, obtaining the vowel e in Tsakhur ( < PL ablaut grade *, see below). Cf.
PL *i:ar "to fry" > Tsakh. q-ees (vs. Lezg. :ra-z, Kryz ir-, Arch. ar-as); PL
*iar "to weave" > Tsakh. q-eas (vs. Lezg. ra-z, Kryz r-i, etc.). At the present
time it is hard to determine the reason for such a development of this structure in
Tsakhur.
Except this regular type, we occasionally observe the loss of *-r and *-n in
Tsakhur and Kryz. Cf. PL *irq:er "to freeze" > Tsakh. h-iar-as, but Kryz s-a-u;
PL *i:an "to want, to love" > Tsakh. k:an-as, but Kryz ik-; PL *[e]an "to
hang" > Kryz k-en-i, Tsakh. (Tsakhur proper) giwajan-as, but Mik. gw-a-as.
However, these cases are very rare. Normally the evidence of Tsakhur and Kryz
is most valuable for reconstructing the PL final resonants in verbal roots.
1.8.2. Vocalism.
For PL we reconstruct a 7-vowel system with three rows (front, mid and
back) and three heights (high, mid and low). In the front and back rows all
three degrees of height are filled (in the front row: i, e, ; in the back row - u, o,
a). The mid row is defective and represented by a single vowel , that could
probably vary between high and mid.
All vowels could also be pharyngealized (iI, eI, I, I, uI, oI, aI); usually these
vowels occurred adjacent to postvelar pharyngealized consonants, but they were
possible in other positions as well. We should note that high pharyngealized vowels
are extremely rarely met without adjacent postvelar pharyngealized consonants.
Below we give the system of vocalic correspondences between Lezghian
languages. In this table we give only the reflexes of vowels without adjacent labialized
consonants (and for pharyngealized vowels - also without adjacent postvelar
pharyngealized consonants). Moreover, we will only list the reflexes of vowels in
monosyllabic nominal roots, where there is no influence of other vowels.
Unfortunately, it is hardly possible to examine all the positional modifications of PL
vowels in each Lezghian language in this work. Therefore in this commentary we
omit almost everything related to the development of vowels adjacent to labialized
consonants, as well as to the modification of vowels in polysyllabic words. Nor will
we examine the development of pharyngealized vowels near pharyngealized
consonants. We hope to deal with all these questions in a special publication.
PL |
Arch |
Ag |
Tab |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Kryz |
Bud |
Ud
|
*i |
i |
i |
i |
i |
i |
i |
i |
i |
i
|
*iI |
i |
i |
e/i |
i |
i |
I/e |
e/i |
i |
?
|
*e |
e/a/i |
e/i |
e/i |
e |
i |
e |
e |
e |
i
|
*eI |
? |
i |
e |
i |
i |
? |
e |
? |
?
|
* |
a/e |
e/i |
i |
e |
|
e/a |
/a/e |
/e |
e/a
|
*I |
aI |
e/i/aI |
aI/i |
e/i |
|
e |
e |
e |
e/a
|
* |
o |
i |
i |
i |
|
/i |
i |
i |
u
|
*I |
oI |
? |
(i) |
(i)e |
? |
? |
i |
e |
?
|
*u |
u |
u |
u |
u |
u |
u |
u/ |
u |
u
|
*o |
o |
u |
u |
u/ |
|
|
|
u/ |
o/u
|
*oI |
oI/o |
uI/u |
uI/u |
u/i |
I/i |
I |
(i) |
|
u
|
*a |
a/o |
a |
a |
a |
a |
a |
/a/e |
a/e |
a
|
*aI |
aI/a |
aI//a |
aI/a/e |
a/e |
/a |
aI/a |
e/a, |
e/a |
(a)
|
Comments
1. PL *i.
This vowel is usually well preserved in Lezghian languages, but appears to be
rather unstable if it is adjacent to labialized consonants (the most frequent
modification in this position is the labialization i > u, but shifts in height
occur as well: e.g., a regular shift i > a after labialized back consonants in Lezghi).
2. PL *iI.
The independent (i.e. not adjacent to a pharyngealized consonant)
pharyngealized *iI is extremely rare in PL. We know of only two roots (in both cases
there is a labialized hushing consonant before *iI): *iIm: "span" and *iIl- "blue,
green". We should note that in the root "span" all the languages except Archi and Rutul
(Arch. im, Rut. ub) reflect a non-labialized variant *iIm:, which probably
appeared as a result of dissimilation with the final labial consonant.
3. PL *e.
This vowel is preserved without changes in the Lezghi, Tsakhur, Kryz and
Budukh languages. In Rutul and Udi, as well as in the Fite dialect of Agul and in
the Northern dialect of Tabasaran the reflex is a narrow i (other Agul dialects and
the Southern dialect of Tabasaran usually preserve the wide e). In Archi the
narrowing e > i, judging by the few examples available, occurs near the resonant l
(cf. PL *le "skin" > Archi ili; PL *hIel "steam, breath" > Arch. hil). On the
contrary, in some cases PL *e > Arch. a (cf. *eh "goat" > Arch. aj; *melc:
"tongue" > Arch. mac); this is possibly connected with the presence of a hissing
consonant near *e. In other cases Archi, too, preserves the vowel e.
In the case of adjacent labialized consonants the vowel *e, as well as *i, can be
affected by various modifications. In Archi and Tsakhur the most typical
development is *e > o, and in other languages *e > u (in Kryz and Budukh,
depending on the consonant environment, a secondary delabialized reflex, , may
appear as well).
4. PL *eI.
The positionally independent pharyngealized *eI, just like *iI, is very rare in
PL. It is reconstructed in the roots *p:eI:- "deaf" (cf. Ag. buIre-f), *eIl
"willow" (cf. Ag. dial. uIl) and *meIr "deer". In the latter root pharyngealization
as such is not preserved in any language, but some specific features of the vowel
development (e.g., the narrow i in the Lezghi form mirg - a reflex, typical for *e in
position near uvular pharyngealized consonants) make the reconstruction of *eI in
this root probable.
5. PL *.
This phoneme is best preserved in Rutul, where it always yields the reflex .
In other languages we observe various reflexes:
a) in Archi - front e near back consonants, but back a in other cases (cf. PL
*lk- > Arch. lek:i "bone", but *:l > Arch. al "lamb", etc.);
b) in Agul * and *e have merged; thus, in the Fite dialect the reflex is i,
while other dialects have e;
c) in Tabasaran in all dialects the normal development is * > i. We must
note that the reflexes of * and *i are not completely indistinguishable: in the
Northern dialect after the reflexes of lateral consonants, PL * yields a wide reflex
a, while *i is preserved: cf. *:l "lamb" > Db. al, but *:im "fear" > Db. gii
(the lack of affrication *: > in the second root is probably caused by
dissimilation with the next hushing consonant).
d) in Lezghi, as in Agul, the reflex of * has merged with the reflex of *e,
i.e. usually in all dialects * > e;
e) in Tsakhur the most frequent reflex of PL * is e. The wide reflex a is
observed if there was a resonant n, l or a lateral fricative ( > Tsakh. x) before a, in
which case the mentioned consonants become palatalized. Cf. PL *:l > Tsakh.
gew "lamb", PL *s:n > Tsakh. sen "year", but PL *nw > Tsakh. na "dream",
PL *la > Tsakh. laa "bracelet", PL *:n: > Tsakh. xan "water", etc. The
Gelmets dialect has an /e variation where Tsakhur proper and Mikik dialects
have e.
f) in Kryz PL * gives three types of reflexes: back a before r (cf. below on
the specific reflexes of *a in this position); e before l, hushing consonants and
consonants, going back to PL laterals (i.e. before phonetically palatal or easily
palatalized consonants); and in other cases. Cf. PL *c:r > Kryz ar "cow"; PL *:l
> Kryz kel "lamb"; PL *:n: > Kryz xd "water", etc.;
g) Budukh usually has the reflexes e or ; e is observed in cases when Kryz
also has e (cf. Budukh kel "lamb" with Kryz kel < PL *:l), and is observed
when Kryz has a and (cf. Bud. zr "cow" < PL *c:r; Bud. xd "water" < PL
*:n:, etc.);
h) the most frequent reflex of PL * in Udi is e. In two cases we observe the
reflex a: PL *:l "lamb" > Ud. q:al; PL *m[r] "handful" > Ud. maIa
(although the latter etymology is somewhat dubious). In both cases * is adjacent to
lateral affricates, but it is not clear whether this was the reason for a specific
development of the vowel in these roots (the data is insufficient).
Being adjacent to labialized consonants, PL * is somewhat more stable than
the higher *e and *i, but it can also be subject to various modifications (e.g., it can
be labialized and develop into o or u).
6. PL *I.
Without adjacent uvular pharyngealized consonants the vowel *I is
reconstructed in a very small number of roots (still it is more frequent than *iI and
*eI): *nI: "milk", *:Im "butter", *:Im- "liquid", *pI- "light" and possibly
in a few more. Pharyngealization is preserved in Archi, Agul (in all dialects except
Fite) and Tabasaran (Northern dialect) (on Tsakhur see below). In Agul and
Tabasaran the preservation of pharyngealization requires the presence of a labial
consonant adjacent to *I (therefore, in the root *nI: "milk" neither of these
languages preserve pharyngealization); even if the labial is present, pharyngealization
may still disappear in an unaccented syllable. In the same position
pharyngealization is preserved in Tsakhur, judging by the form xiImaI-n "liquid" -
probably a reduction < *xaImaI-n < *:Im-.
As for the qualitative development of PL *I, we must say that when
pharyngealization is preserved, the reflexes of *I merge with the reflexes of *aI
(see below), and in case of its loss - with the reflexes of * (see above).
7. PL *.
This vowel is preserved in Rutul and, though somewhat worse, in Tsakhur
(there * develops into i near hissing and hushing consonants; can be sporadically
preserved in this position only in the Gelmets dialect, and in the root swa
"mountain" (PL *swa) in all Tsakhur dialects; the vowel in this root behaves not
quite regularly in other languages as well). In the Agul, Tabasaran, Lezghi, Kryz and
Budukh languages, * has been fronted and has developed into i (the vowel ,
present in Lezghi dialects, Kryz and Budukh, has another source, see below). In
Archi and Udi * was subject to a secondary labialization (Arch. o, Ud. u).
If adjacent labialized consonants are present, the vowel * turns out to be
extremely unstable and most often develops into u (some other modifications of *
also occur in this position).
8. PL *I.
An independent pharyngealized *I may be reconstructed only in one root: PL
*pImp/*Im "knee, corner" (cf. the pharyngealization in Archi poImp).
Though this root preserves pharyngealization only in Archi, some specific features of
reflexation (e in the Akhty form e while the literary Lezghi has i; e in
Budukh pep; lack of labialization * > u in Kryz pip - PL * before labial
consonants is usually reflected as u in Kryz) confirm the reconstruction of a specific
PL phoneme here.
9. PL *u.
This vowel is well preserved in all Lezghian languages (except near hushing
consonants, where it is often fronted and delabialized). We must specially note the
development of *u in Kryz and Budukh. In Kryz u is preserved only near back consonants; near hushing consonants and laryngeals, as well as after some fricatives
(lateral and uvular) *u > i; in other cases *u is reflected as . In Budukh, reflexes of
the third type are unknown (because of the lack of data), and in the first two cases,
reflexes are the same as in Kryz. Cf. *ula "board" > Kryz, Bud. ul; *ruk: "dust,
earth" > Kryz, Bud. rug; *un: "flea" > Kryz., Bud. id; *ru: "girl, daughter" >
Kryz. ri, Bud. ri; PL *ur > Kryz r "pimple"; PL *rup: > Kryz. rb "needle", etc.
The pharyngealized correlate of PL *u is attested only near uvular
pharyngealized consonants; therefore, an independent phoneme *uI is lacking in PL.
10. PL *o.
The original vowel *o has been preserved only in Archi (possibly also in Udi,
where, however, in addition to o we observe the reflex u, and sometimes even a -
there is not enough evidence to establish the distribution between these reflexes). In
Tabasaran, Agul and the Northern dialects of Lezghi (as well as in literary Lezghi)
PL *o has narrowed and merged with *u, so that the reflexes of *o and *u are
completely identical in the mentioned languages. In Rutul and Tsakhur, as well as
in the Central and Southern dialects of Lezghi, the vowel *o has been delabialized
and has developed into (however, it has completely merged with the original *
only in Rutul; in Tsakhur and Lezghi the original * - in Tsakhur at least in some
positions, and in Lezghi in all cases - has fronted and developed into i even earlier,
see above). In Proto-Shakhdag (the proto-language of Kryz and Budukh) PL *o has
developed into * near back consonants, but has preserved labialization and
developed into *u near front consonants. This situation is preserved in Budukh; in
Kryz the further delabialization *u > occurred adjacent to front consonants (that
affected PL *u as well, see above). Thus, in Kryz PL *o is most often reflected as
(except some modifications near hushing and lateral fricatives). Cf. PL *:ola > Kryz
kl "arm", Bud. kla "shoulder"; PL *mo:or > Kryz mgr, Bud. jumur "wooden
ladder"; PL *ona > Kryz n, Bud. un "trough", etc.
11. PL *oI.
The independent pharyngealized *oI is reconstructed in several roots: *s:oIla
"fox", *poIr- "saddle", *t:oIt:- "larynx, gullet", *s:oIl "rye" (in the latter root we
should probably reconstruct a variation oIo, as well as in the root *qI:ol *q:ol
"wheat"). This vowel preserves pharyngealization in Tsakhur, somewhat more poorly
- in Archi, Agul and Rutul, where independent pharyngealization is at present
inadmissible near hissing consonants. We should note that the pharyngealized I in
the Rutul form (Khn. pIpIr "saddle" < PL *poIr-) is the only case of preservation
of independent pharyngealization in Rutul known to us. In other languages
pharyngealization of *oI has not been preserved, but the reflexes of *oI are
somewhat different from the reflexes of the plain *o in quality. A detailed
examination of the reflexes of *oI is, unfortunately, impossible in this book.
12. PL *a.
This vowel is well preserved in all languages, and it is less subject to
positional modifications than other vowels. In particular, the vowel *a is usually
well preserved adjacent to labialized consonants, where other vowels (especially *i,
*e) are very unstable. We should specially note the following features of the
development of PL *a:
a) in Archi, besides the usual reflex a, in some cases we observe the reflex o.
The development *a > o occurs regularly in the case of metathesis in the structure
*CV, cf. PL *aj > *a > Arch. o "fire"; PL *s:a > Arch. os "one"; PL *:aj >
*:a > Arch. o "wool", etc. (Such metathesis in the *CV structure also occurs if
other vowels are present in this structure, cf. PL *uj > *u > Arch. u "field",
etc., but other vowels do not modify their quality in the case of metathesis). The
reflex o is also present in Archi as a result of the transfer of labialization from a
following lateral consonant (cf. *mar > Arch. mo "foam"). There are also
individual cases of the correspondence "Arch. o : a in other Lezghian languages",
even if the conditions mentioned above are not met (cf. PL *dagij "donkey" >
Arch. dogi; PL *t:alk:- "(eye)lid" > Arch. dorki), but we do not consider it
necessary to reconstruct a specific PL vowel in this case (first of all, because the
there are very few examples and because only Archi has a specific reflex here).
b) in the central dialects of Lezghi (e.g. in Akhty) two a-type vowels are
observed: a more open a and a closed a. Both of these vowels correspond to the
vowel a of other Lezghian languages. We do not exclude the possibility of a
prosodic origin of this difference in Lezghi; however, this problem requires special
examination.
c) in Kryz PL *a has a triple reflection: a, e and . The first reflex is present
after all uvular consonants except - and after the emhatic laryngeal - (cf. PL
*al > Kryz al "roof, ceiling"; PL *hIam "sweat" > Kryz a, etc.); before the
uvular -, as well as before the resonants -r, -w (in the latter case there can be a
development a > o before -w), cf. PL *aa > Kryz a "jackdaw", PL *maq: >
Kryz ma "ploughshare", PL *wiraq: > Kryz wira "sun", PL *t:ar > Kryz dar
"tree", PL *c:aw > Kryz aw "sky" (Al. zow), etc. The second reflex (e) is present
after hushing consonants and j-, cf. PL *al: "tongue, word" > Kryz el; PL *:ar
> Kryz er "cream"; PL *ja: "meat" > Kryz jek, etc. The same reflex is present
in Kryz eb "wolf" < PL *Iam: (i.e. after the laryngeal *I-). In all other cases PL
*a yields Kryz , cf. PL *aj > Kryz "fire"; PL *k:a > Kryz g "famine"; PL
*an > Kryz n "bottom"; PL *ra:a > Kryz rk "door", etc.
d) in Budukh after hushing consonants and j- we observe the reflex e, the
same as in Kryz (cf. el "tongue, word", jek "meat", etc.). In other cases Budukh
usually has the reflex a, though we may sometimes meet . The distribution of the
two latter variants still requires some additional examination.
13. PL *aI.
This is the most frequent of PL pharyngealized vowels. It preserves its
pharyngealization in Archi, Agul (in the Keren and Burkikhan dialects), Tabasaran
(Northern dialect) and Tsakhur. The presence of adjacent labial consonants is
favourable for the preservation of the pharyngealization of *aI. If this condition is
missing, pharyngealization can disappear in the mentioned languages as well (we
will not go into details of the disappearance or preservation of pharyngealization
here). The loss of pharyngealization often leads to the fronting *aI > ,
and, further, > e; therefore, the reflexes of *aI are easy to distinguish from the
reflexes of PL *a, even if pharyngealization is not preserved in descendant
languages.
1.8.2.1. The development of vocalism in verbal roots.
In PL verbal roots the set of vowels was smaller than in nominal ones; first,
there were no narrow vowels *, *u; second, there were no independent
pharyngealized vowels. Therefore, in the first syllable of PL verbal roots we only meet
the vowels *i, *e, *, *o and *a. Their reflexes generally coincide with their reflexes
in nominal roots, though there are some differences. Let us relate the most
important ones:
1. Since most PL verbal roots are bisyllabic, the vowel of the first syllable is
often reduced or modified under the influence of the following vowel. This is most
obvious in Budukh, where the system of vowels of the first syllable in verbal roots
has been totally rebuilt under the influence of the vowels of the second syllable.
The only PL narrow vowel allowed in the first syllable of the verbal root, *i,
is very often subject to reduction and may disappear completely. This process (*i >
0), facilitated by the fact that the initial vowel of PL verbal roots was usually
preceded by a laryngeal (most often *-), which in this case disappeared itself, led
to a total loss of initial i- in verbal roots in Archi (cf. *i:ar- "to roast" > Arch.
ara-s; *i:- "to give" > Arch. o-s, etc.). In Archi i- is preserved only in a few
roots with a medial combination of consonants (like *ilan "to work" > Arch.
irmus). Sporadic cases of the same development are present in Tabasaran and
Agul, very rarely - in Rutul, Kryz and Budukh. The only language, in which *iis
never reduced, is Tsakhur.
This tendency to reduce the vowel of the first syllable has reached its
maximum in the Lezghi language, where in preverbless forms all PL vowels except
*a are reduced. Cf. PL *i:ar- "to roast" > Lezg. :ura-z; PL *ec:a- "to pour" >
Lezg. c:a-z; PL *a- "to break" > Lezg. a-z; PL *ot:a- > Lezg. t:a-z "to
shave"; but PL *ac:a- > Lezg. ac:a-z "to milk", PL *a- > Lezg. au-z "to tear,
to cut", etc.
2. In the PL verbal system there was a productive system of ablaut (see
below). Often a certain grade of ablaut spread over the whole verbal paradigm in
descendant languages. As a result of this, regular vowel correspondences in verbal
roots can be violated.
There are some more specific features of the reflexation of PL vowels in
verbal roots in separate Lezghian languages, but their detailed examination is
impossible in this work.
1.8.2.2. Ablaut.
Many nominal and verbal roots in modern Lezghian languages reveal
paradigmatic vowel alternations, not conditioned by position (ablaut). Since these
alternations, as a rule, correspond to each other in different Lezghian languages, it
seems possible to trace them back to Proto-Lezghian.
1.8.2.2.1. Nominal ablaut.
Vowel alternations are only observed in roots with the structure CV(R)C(V).
One should probably reconstruct the following types of ablaut for PL:
1. *a/*o.
This type of ablaut is comparatively rare. It is directly reflected in a very few
Tabasaran and Agul paradigms of the type Tab. al "house" - loc. ula, pl. ular
"house", Ag. al - erg. ula, pl. ular (PL *al, obl. stem *ola-). In Rutul this
type of ablaut gave rise to the paradigm al "mouth" - erg. lir (PL *:al, obl.
stem *:olV-); however, in most cases the ablaut type *a/*o in Rutul has been
mixed with the more widespread type */*i (see below), as a result of which
paradigms like jak - erg. jigr "meat", rat - erg. ridir "threshing-floor", rak -
erg. rigir "door" appeared.
The PL ablaut *a/*o should apparently be reconstructed in the paradigm *aj
"fire" - obl. stem *oj-; cf. Lezg. lit. aj - erg. u, Khl. aj - erg. j (metathesis
< *j-); Rut. aj - erg. -r; Kryz - erg. -r. (The Tabasaran and Agul
forms in this case reflect a contraction of the oblique stem: Tab. i-, Ag. i-).
Traces of *a/*o ablaut may be found in some adjective roots. Cf. Arch.
Ias-kes "to get tired", Rut. Ias-d "old", Tsakh. Ias:-n "old" < PL *Ias:-, but
Ag. Iuse-f, Lezg. z, Kryz us "old" < PL *Ios:-, and some others.
The main vowel in this type of ablaut is always *a, replaced by *o in the
oblique stem; no inverse correlation has been discovered (i.e., nouns with *o in the
direct stem never replace it with *a in the oblique one).
2. */*i.
This type of ablaut is attested in Rutul, Tsakhur and Kryz; at the present
time it is no longer productive, and paradigms with this alternation reveal a strong
tendency towards unification. In other languages traces of this ablaut seem to have
been lost (the Agul (Koshan) paradigms of the type ne "nit" - obl. stem niani-, pl.
ni-ar can be explained by the narrowing of e > i in a preaccented syllable; see
above on the development of * in Agul).
For Rutul, Tsakhur and Kryz cf. the following cases of */*i:
PL *m "apple", obl. stem *ima-; Rut. , erg. i-ir-.
PL *:l "lamb", obl. stem *:ila-; Rut. gl, erg. gil-ir-r; Kryz kel, erg.
kili-.
PL *l "salt", obl. stem *ila-: Rut. q:l, erg. ilir; Kryz
el, erg. ili.
PL *rI: "road", obl. stem *riI:-: Rut. raqI, erg. rqI:r (the backward
shift of pharyngealized *I, *iI is regular in Rutul); Tsakhur dialectal paradigms
with different directions of unification also indirectly reflect ablaut - cf. Tsakh.,
Mik. jaqI, obl. stem jaqI:- vs. Gelm. jqI, jqI:a-.
PL *c:r "cow", obl. stem *c:ira-: Rut. zr, erg. zirr; Kryz ar, erg. r
(apparently an adequation of vocalism < *ir, or else a transition into the
ablaut type *a/*o as a result of the development * > a in the direct stem).
PL *:m:- "nail", obl. stem *:im:-: Rut. xb, erg. xiblr (a rather obscure
development in Tsakh. Mik. xwna, Gelm. xbna).
PL *:n: "water", obl. stem *:in:-: Rut. xd, erg. xijir; Tsakh. Mik.,
Gelm. xan, obl. stem xine-, Gelm. xan, obl. stem xini-; Kryz. xd, erg. xii.
The uniform presence of the vowel i in oblique stems of Tabasaran (Db. it:i-,
Kand. t:u- < *idu-), Agul (Rich. xit:a-, Bursh. :iri-, Fite xit:i-) and Lezghi
(Khl. jic:i, lit. c:i < *jic:i) should be most probably considered a reflection of the
same ancient ablaut.
PL *nI: "milk", obl. stem *niI:-; Tsakh. Mik. nak, obl. stem nik-ne-.
PL *nq "chaff": Tsakh. Mik. naq, obl. stem nuq-ne- ( < *niq-ne-).
PL *nw "dream", obl. stem *niw[a]-: Tsakh. na, obl. stem ni-.
PL *m[r] "handful", obl. stem *mi[r]-: Kryz mek, erg. miki.
PL *:l "burden", obl. stem *:il-: Kryz el, erg. ili.
It is not to be excluded that the ablaut */*i can explain some cases in Agul and
Tabasaran when, in the place of PL *, we find reflexes of *i. Cf. PL *:l: "track"
> Ag. Rich., Burk. xil (instead of *xel), Bursh. :il (instead of *:el), Tab. Khr.
:il (instead of *:al) - cf. regular forms - Lezg. gel, Rut. xl. Cf. also the Kryz
doublet xel "track" - xil "furrow", apparently representing the "split" of a single
old paradigm "dir. stem *:l: - obl. stem *:il:a-"; apparently, the Agul and
Tabasaran forms, given above, are explained by an adequation to this oblique stem.
A similar adequation probably explains Ag. Tp. il "wing" (instead of *Ial < PL
*l, cf. Tab. il "sleeve", Lezg. el "branch; sleeve"; Kryz el-x "sleeve"); Ag.
Rich. nirX "spelt" (instead of *nerX < PL *nrI-, cf. Lezg. ne, Rut. naI,
Tab. nurI), and some other cases.
3. Other types of ablaut.
In Archi and Kryz a small number of nominal roots reveal vowel alternations
that cannot be traced back either to *a/*o or to */*i. We mean the Archi ablaut
a/e in cases like na "earth" - erg. nei (PL *n; the form nei cannot go
back to the PL oblique stem *ni-, on which, see above) and the Kryz ablaut e/i
in cases like mez "tongue" - obl. stem miz- (PL *melc:; other languages do not
point to the existence of an ablaut type *e/*i).
Both of these phenomena are probably local innovations. The alternation a/e
in the place of PL * in Archi should perhaps be explained by an old positional
development * > e before front vowels of the next syllable. (Thus it turns out that
nominal Archi roots do not reflect any PL ablaut at all; all Archi paradigms are
adequated to the direct stem). The Kryz ablaut e/i in the place of PL *e has
probably appeared by analogy with e/i < PL */*i already after the merger (in
some positions, see above) of the reflexes of PL *e and *. In any case, by now we
do not possess any data that could serve as an argument for the archaism of the
Archi and Kryz evidence.
1.8.2.2.2. Verbal ablaut.
In verbal roots, as well as in nominal ones, some Lezghian languages reveal
vowel alternations (ablaut) in the 2nd position. We can reconstruct two main types
of ablaut:
1. *i/*/*.
This type of ablaut is reflected in Archi, Rutul, Tsakhur and Kryz. Cf. in
Archi (where *i- > 0-, see above):
kar-as "to lead, to accompany" - dur. orkir, term. oka (*i/*)
:e-s "to carry" - dur. or:ir, term. o:a (*i/*)
qIe-s "to go" - dur. orqIir, term. oqIa - herqIa-s "to walk" (*i/*/*) (cf.
also qIa - term. from ais "to come")
o-s "to give" - oa-s "to sell" (*i/*)
ummus "to pull" - omus "to (be) pull(ed) out" (*i/*)
a atis "to seat smbd." - oi-s "to mount (a horse)" - ei-s "to be, to exist"
(*"to sit", cf. also eIi-s "to sit" < *aI ei-s) (*i/*/*)
eI-s "to start running" - heIraIs "to run" (*i/*)
u-bus "to enter" - aa-s "to hide" (*i/*)
In Rutul:
k-ua-s "to begin" (*-ie-) / k-a-s "to begin; to enter" (*-a-) - cf.
the Archi pair u-bus/ aa-s (*i/*)
h-ia-s "to be ripe" - l--j-a-s "to mature" (*i/*)
jie-s "to die" - term. sg. jii-r, but pl. l-r-r (*i/*)
s-ua-s / s-ia-s "to sit" - a parallel plural form s-lIa-s (vs the more
common s-ule-s) (*i/*)
In Tsakhur many verbs with the root vowel i reveal the alternation i/e (i in
the terminative stem, e in the durative stem), developed from PL *i/*. Cf. i-es
"to enter" - dur. ee; al-i:-es "to buy" - dur. il-e:-e; q-i-as "to die" - dur.
q-e-a; h-i-as "to run away" - dur. h-e-a; al-ik:-as "to make smbd. do
smth." - dur. il-ek:-a, etc. Traces of the grade * in Tsakhur verbal paradigms are
hard to discover (cf., however, the paradigm: ixe-s "to become, to be born" - dur.
exe - term. xa).
In Kryz many verbs with PL root *i replace it with (xij-i "to be" - imp. s-x; j-i "to die" - imp. s-; kur-i "to stab" - imp.
s-kr; ir-i "to roast" - imp. s-ir, etc. Traces of the grade * in Kryz are
hard to discover because of the merger of the reflexes of PL *i and * (see above).
All this evidence allows us to suppose that in the paradigms of verbs with the
root vowel *i in PL, the vowel *i characterized the infinitive and terminative stems,
while the vowel * characterized the durative stem.
This situation is well preserved in Tsakhur. In Archi this semantic opposition
is seen in "split" paradigms, cf. eI-s "to start running" - heIraI-s "to run" (cf.
also the terminative form of eI-s - aI); qIe-s "to go" - herqIa-s "to walk" -
qIa "has come" (at present qIa is already part of another, suppletive paradigm of
the verb ai-s "to come").
The meaning of forms with the grade * is harder to determine. We should
probably start from Rutul evidence, where in a few cases the forms with are used
in the plural (both in durative and in terminative). In Archi this usage is lost, and
forms with o ( < PL *) have either supplanted other forms of the durative and
terminative (cf. the terminative oqIa from qIe-s, probably with an old plural
meaning, while the normal terminative qIa moved into another paradigm) or
formed separate paradigms with various modified meanings (cf. o-s - oa-s,
ummus - omus, a atis - ois).
The use of the grade * in imperative forms in Kryz is somewhat strange (the
imperative is usually formed from the terminative stem); however, we may suppose
that the PL imperative was not strictly tied to any particular aspect, but could be
formed from the durative as well as from the terminative (with a later redistribution:
the imperative began to be formed only from the terminative stem, and the
prohibitive - only from the durative stem).
Though the ablaut *i/*/* is no longer productive in any language, its traces
may be discovered in many verbal roots; the generalization of one of the grades of
this ablaut often leads either to the split of verbal paradigms or to the violation of
regular correspondences.
Let us stress once more that * could not occur as an independent vowel in
the 2nd position in the PL verb. It is encountered in this position only as a grade
of the ablaut *i/*. On the contrary, verbs with the independent root vowel * are
rather numerous.
2. *a/*i.
This type of ablaut is at present productive only in the Northern dialect of
the Tabasaran language, where the grade a characterizes the infinitive and the
terminative stems, and the grade i - the durative stem. Cf. Db. a-w-q-us "to fall"
- dur. i-w-q- ur-, ald-a-w--us "to cut down" - dur. ild-i-w--ur-, etc. The same
type of ablaut probably explains the Tsakhur a/i alternation in verbs of the -r-, -land -n- conjugations, such as s-aal-es "to return" - dur. s-al, etc. (though this
Tsakhur type also includes verbs with other PL vowels as a result of rather
complicated modifications and unifications of paradigms).
In the past this type of ablaut was probably more productive. Cf. Arch. a:ar
"to be ill" (durative form; other forms are not preserved in Archi) and the Rut.
derived jad:al "illness, pain", pointing to the existence of a PL form of the root
*a:a-, vs. the Tab. durative ic:ru xuz "to be ill" and the forms of other languages,
pointing to the vowel *i: Ag. it:ar xas "to be ill", Lezg. a-z "to ail", Kryz tit-
"to nag". It is evident that for this (and some other similar cases) we must suppose
a PL paradigm: term. *a:a-:, dur. *i:a-, unified afterwards in individual languages in one of the two directions. Cf. also the following cases:
PL *asa(n): Arch. asa-s "to put on"; Tab. Db. a-w-s-us "to smear",
k-a-w-s-us "to stick" (dur. i-w-s-ur-, k-i-w-s-ur-); Lezg. hal-s-iz "to put on with
some effort"; Tsakh. g-ajsan-as "to close (not the door)"; Kryz q:-isn-i (with
generalization of i) "to dress oneself".
PL *ar: "to see, to look": Tab. Db. a-w-qI:-us (dur. i-w-qI:-ur-) "to
see"; Ag. Bursh. raqI:a-s; Rut. g-aq:a-s "to observe, to look"; Ud. boIa-esun "to
be found"; in Kryz - split into two paradigms: w-aq-u "to find; to graze, to
guard", but i-r-q- "to see" (= Bud. irqi "to see").
3. Other types of ablaut.
There seem to be some reasons for reconstructing a third type of PL ablaut,
that is, */*i (i.e., inverse to the type *i/*, see above). Traces of this ablaut are
found in Kryz, cf. the following two verbs: j- "to skin" - dur. ji-ri (? cf.
Tab. a-r-I-uz "to pick", Ag. Bursh. arXa-s "to shear", Rut. a-j- I-as "to pick" -
probably < PL *(j)rIa); c-- "to throw", q:-- "to pursue" - dur. c-i-ri,
q:-i-ri (PL *Ih). Cf. also PL *c:a "to sow, to plough" > Kryz j-iz-; the
vowel -i- here can point to the unification of an earlier */*i alternation. However,
outside Kryz we could not find any secure traces of the ablaut */*i.
The PL vowels *e, *o were apparently never part of any ablaut gradations.
1.8.2.3. Final vocalism.
1.8.2.3.1. Auslaut in nominal roots.
The reconstruction of the nominal auslaut in PL is rather complicated and
closely connected with morphological problems. In all modern Lezghian languages
most nominal roots in the direct stem (nominative stem) end with a consonant. The
only exception is the Dbek subdialect of Tabasaran, in which many nominal roots
end with a vowel. This is a result of the secondary addition of final vowels after
historically tense consonants. In these cases the final vowel always imitates the
preceding root vowel.
A comparatively small number of roots with vocalic endings in individual
languages (cf. Arch. dogi, Tab. dai, Ag. degi "donkey"; Arch. ma:i "winter
pasture", Ag. Tsirkh. max:i, Rut. Ikhr. mexi "stable", etc.) are explained by the
loss of the final -j (cf. its restoration before endings beginning with a vowel: Tab.
dai "donkey" - erg. daiji, etc.).
In certain cases some languages have a vocalic auslaut, others have a
consonantal one. Cf. Lezg. nisi, Rut. nis, Tsakh. nis:e, Kryz nisi, Bud. nusu
"cheese" vs. Tab., Ag. nis. These cases should probably be explained by a
*-j / *-0 variation in PL (j-forms for this root are found in Tsakh. Gelm. nis:ej,
as well as in the oblique stems: Tsakh. nis:eji-, Rut. nisiji-). For the root *ma:ij,
given above, cf. also the form of Ag. Bursh. max: "stable" without the final -j.
Such cases are rather few, and they do not form any obvious system. We may only
suppose the existence of a PL suffix -j (the meaning of which is at present hard to
determine), optionally added to some nominal roots.
If we discard such cases, some phenomena that require interpretation still
remain. Namely:
1) Tsakhur has a large number of nominal roots, ending with -a (more rarely
-e, -). In other languages these roots regularly have a consonantal auslaut.
2) Many languages insert vowels between the last consonant of the nominal
root and the case/number suffix. The quality of these vowels is often impossible to
predict. This situation is characteristic for Agul, Tabassaran, Rutul, Tsakhur, and, to
some extent, also in Archi. Thus, the problem of reconstructing the PL oblique base
arises (we certainly do not regard here cases, in which the oblique base is formed
in another way - by adding suffixes such as *-t:e-, *-ra-, etc., to the direct base.)
The last vowel of the oblique stem of the noun is interpreted in modern
languages as a connecting element between the root and the suffix and is therefore
subject to various analogical and phonetic modifications. In Archi, Kryz, Budukh
and Udi these processes were so active that all vocalic distinctions in this position
became neutralized (Archi has preserved only a few archaic oblique stems, while in
most cases the last vowel of the oblique stem is automatically predicted by the root
vowel). In Agul, Tabasaran, Lezghi, Rutul and Tsakhur the end of the oblique stem
is also subject to rather significant modifications; generally these modifications are
caused either by phonological factors (the influence of root vowels), or by
morphological factors (analogy, leading to statistical prevalence of a certain vocalic
end and resulting in the elimination of other types of oblique stems). Still, after
discarding evident innovations, there is a significant number of archaic vocalic
oblique stems left in these languages, and they can serve as a basis for
reconstructing the PL system.
For PL we reconstruct four types of nominal oblique stems, which apparently
should be interpreted as, respectively, *e, *, * and *a-stems. The correspondences
are as follows:
PL |
Lezg |
Rut |
Tsakh |
Tab |
Ag
|
*-e |
-i/-u |
-i/- |
-e/-a |
-i/-a |
-i/-u
|
*- |
-e/-a |
-/-a |
-(-e)/-a |
-i/-u |
-i/-a
|
*- |
-i/-u |
-i/-/-u |
-i/- |
-i/-u |
-i/-u/-a
|
*-a |
-e/-a |
-/-a;-/-i |
-e/-a |
-a |
-a
|
Comments.
1. In Lezghi there are two basic types of oblique stems: roots with front
vowels can form the oblique base in -i or -e, and roots with back vowels - in -u or
-a. (There are also stems ending in -, but they are only formed from roots with
the vowel -- or from roots with -e- followed by a labialized consonant: cf. r -
r "flour", ne - ne "spelt", etc. No other vocalic stems can be formed from
roots like this; therefore, stems ending with - are irrelevant for comparison). Thus,
in Lezghi stems in -u and -a are back correlates of front stems ending in -i and -e,
respectively.
As we see from the table, the Lezghi -i/-u-stems have developed from PL
stems in *-e and *- (in both cases the back -u, which is represented in central
dialects as -, must be considered secondary, having developed under the influence
of the back root vowel); the Lezghi -e/-a-stems have developed from PL stems in
*- and *-a. Probably, at first *- > -e and *-a > -a, and only afterwards
synharmonistic variants appeared: -e changed to -a after a back root vowel, and -a
changed to -e after a front root vowel.
2. Rutul also has two main types of oblique stems: stems ending in -i/-/-u
and stems in -a/-. The distribution of variants inside each of these two types is
generally similar to Lezghi, i.e. the choice of front or back vowels usually depends
on the character of the root vowel. However, unlike Lezghi, this distribution is
somewhat complicated by the fact that the vowel of the oblique stem interacts with
the root vowel in a different way, depending on its accent. In addition, the
palatality of the final consonant of the root plays a part as well. A detailed
examination of the Rutul distribution is, unfortunately, impossible here. It is also
important to mention that stems with root ablaut (on which see above) can end
only with - or -i (usually - if the accent stays on the root, and -i if the accent is
shifted) and are therefore irrelevant for external comparison.
Rutul stems in -i/-/-u, as we see from the table, have developed from PL
stems in *-e and *- - a development very similar to the one described above for
Lezghi. Stems in *- and in *-a are reflected in Rutul as -a/--stems - also similarly
to Lezghi. We must, however, say that *-a-bases yield this reflex only when the
accent shifts to the last vowel of the oblique stem; if the accent is preserved on the
root, PL *-a-stems are reflected as -i/--stems in Rutul. Cf. PL *ila- "cliff, rock"
> Rut. ula-, but *p:aIl:a- "forehead" > Rut. bli-, etc.
3. Among Tsakhur dialects the most archaic situation is represented in the
Gelmets dialect, the data of which we will utilize here (the Tsakhur proper and
Mikik dialects reveal substantial innovations). Here there are two main types of
oblique stems: in -i/- and in -e/-a. Unlike Lezghi and Rutul, the front and back
variants in Tsakhur are generally distributed depending not on the root vowel, but
on the final root consonant (as a rule, with palatal final consonants and -n we
observe stems ending with -i and -e, and with non-palatal final consonants - stems
with - and -a, respectively). The Tsakhur -i/--stems have developed from PL stems
in *-, and the Tsakhur -e/-a-stems - from PL stems in *-e and *-a. Thus, PL *-e >
Tsakh. -e with a secondary variant -a after non-palatal consonants; PL *- > Tsakh.
- with a secondary variant -i after palatal consonants; PL *-a > Tsakh. -a with a
secondary variant -e after palatal consonants. We must also note that if the root
contains labialized vowels, the final - and -a in Tsakhur may change to labialized
-u and -o, respectively.
PL *--stems have a specific reflex in Tsakhur. Here the vowel is preserved
not only in the oblique stem, but in the direct stem as well. One has therefore to
suppose that PL here had a final vowel in the direct stem as well, and that this
vowel was preserved in Tsakhur, but lost in all other Lezghian languages. In
Tsakhur this vowel is usually reflected as -a (the variant - appears after hushing
consonants and -j-< *-r-). The fact that PL *-r- changed to -j- here, except after a
back -u- (cf. *qI:ora "hare" > Gelm. Ij, *c:era "urine" > Gelm. zoj, etc.) tells
us that this vowel was pronounced as *- after -r- and hushing consonants already
in Proto-Tsakhur. In other cases, however, the vowel *-a was pronounced (cf., e.g.,
the development -l- > -w- in this position: *s:oIla > Tsakh. sIwa "fox", etc., as
well as the preservation of -r- after a back vowel -u-: sura "part", ura "belt
(ornament)" etc. The data of other languages (cf. the front reflex -i in Agul and
Tabasaran, as opposed to the single back reflex -a of the PL *-a-stems) obviously
favours the reconstruction of *- in the oblique stem. Nouns belonging to
this type in PL probably had a final *-a in the direct stem, replaced by *- in the
oblique one. This reconstruction seems to give a satisfactory explanation to all
presented facts.
4. In Tabasaran and Agul the back and front reflexes are, as a rule,
complementarily distributed, depending on the root vowel (more seldom this
distribution is influenced by the final consonant of the root). A detailed description
of inner Agul and Tabasaran distributions would take us too far (it is sufficient to
say that virtually every dialect of Agul and Tabasaran has its own rules of
distribution, often seriously differing from other dialects). In Agul and Tabasaran
the process of the analogical modification of oblique stems was more active than in
other Lezghian languages, and is still active even now (in both languages -a-stems
are apparently becoming more and more productive, while other types of oblique
stems are gradually being eliminated). The procedure of detecting archaic oblique
stems in Agul and Tabasaran requires a detailed description, which we are not able
to give in the present book.
1.8.2.3.2. Auslaut of adjective and numeral roots.
Adjectives (in other terminology - stative verbs) reveal relevant vocalic
distinctions in auslaut in Archi (-0-stems vs. -a-stems), in the Southern dialect of
Tabasaran (-u-stems and -i-stems) and in Tsakhur (-i/-/-u-stems, with a phonetic
distribution of the three variants, vs. -a-stems). In other languages the auslaut of
adjectives has been completely or almost completely morphologized and reduced to
some single vowel, at present interpreted as an adjective marker.
Among Archi, Tabasaran and Tsakhur we observe the following
correspondences, that allow us to reconstruct two types of auslaut of adjective roots
(*- and *-) for PL:
|
PL |
Arch |
Tab |
Tsakh
|
|
*- |
-a |
-i |
-a
|
|
*- |
-0 |
-u |
-i/-/-u
|
In bisyllabic numerals an *--stem is reconstructed for the numeral *men:-
"eight" (cf. Arch. mee, Tab. miri-b; Tsakhur has moli-lle instead of *mole-lle,
due to the influence of other numerals). In the numerals "three", "four", "six",
"seven", "nine", "ten" we reconstruct an *--stem (*ep:-, *jew-, *ri-, *uir:-,
*uil-, *ui-: cf. Arch. eb, eb, di, wi, u, wi; Tab. ubu-b, juu-b,
jirxu-b, urgu-b, uru-b, jiu-b; Tsakh. xibi- lle, jou-lle, jix-lle, jig-lle,
jiu-lle, ji-lle).
We must note that, although adjective auslaut has been unified in all
languages except Archi, Tabasaran and Tsakhur, numerals proved to be
more conservative. The distinction between - and --stems is here also preserved in
Agul (cf. xibu-d 3, jau-d 4, jaru-d 9, iu-d 10, but muja-d 8) and in Rutul (cf.
xib-d 3, juu-d 4, rix-d 6, jiw-d 7, huu-d 9, ji-d 10, but mje-d 8).
In monosyllabic roots *s:a 1, *I 2, *:e 5, *:a 20 vowels behave as usual.
The numeral *waIl: "hundred" behaves as a noun; its oblique stem is unknown
(judging by the Tsakhur (Gelm.) genitive waI:e-n it is either an *-a- or
an *-e-stem).
1.8.2.3.3. Auslaut of verbal roots.
The distinctions of final vowels in verbal roots are completely neutralized in
Tabasaran, most dialects of Agul (except Koshan), Tsakhur, Kryz and Udi. Let us
describe the distinctions attested in other languages.
1. Archi.
Here in bisyllabic verbal roots the following types of auslaut exist:
a) -a in infinitive, -a in durative. Cf. aca-s "to milk", dur. aca-r.
b) -a in infinitive, -u in durative. Cf. aa-s "to pursue", dur. aru-r.
c) -i in infinitive and in durative. Cf. ati-s "to let", dur. arti-r.
A very rare type with the vowel -u in both the infinitive and the durative
(ak:u-s "to see", dur. ak:u-r) is probably a variant of the last type, where -u < *-i
as a result of the transfer of labialization from the root consonant (ak:u-s <
*ak:i-s).
In bisyllabic roots of the -n-conjugation vowel distinctions are neutralized (the
vowel is reduced in the infinitive before the suffix *-bos, while the durative stem
always has an -i-, cf. asmus "to measure" < *as(i)n-bos, dur. arsin-, term. asn-i
< *asn-t:e, etc.).
Monosyllabic verbal roots (going back to PL roots with *i-) have three types
of auslaut as well: in -a (ca-s "to praise"), in -o (o-s "to give") and in -e (:e-s "to
carry away"). Two verbal roots have a unique final -i: i-s "to die", i-s "to die
out" (but in the durative: a-r, a-l).
In monosyllabic roots of the -r and -n-conjugations, vowel distinctions are
neutralized: before the resonant in a non-reduplicated durative form such roots
have -a- (with secondary positional modifications, cf. ar-as "to roast", dur. ar,
term. ere < *ar-t:e; ummus "to pull" < *an-bos, dur. an, term. enne <
*an-t:e); in a reduplicated durative form they have -e- (:ummus "to weave" <
*:an-bos, dur. :em:in).
2. Agul (Koshan dialect, Burshag village).
Here verbal roots of the resonantless conjugation distinguish between two
basic vocalic types of auslaut: in -a (rua-s "to be born", aq:a-s "to take", :a-s
"to cry", etc.) and in -i (ri-s "to freeze", argi-s "to return", ai-s "to dig", etc.).
While comparing Agul with other languages one has to consider the following
distribution: in Agul all verbs with roots ending in hissing consonants (except a few
roots with a back rounded vowel) belong to the -i-conjugation. Cf. ii-s "to melt",
at:-azi-s "to be spilt", awa-j-s:i-s "to catch", q-azi-s "to push", ai-s "to (be)
fill(ed)", k:it:-isi-s "to be silent", ici-s "to roast grain", etc. (but with the vowel -u-:
a-w-za-s "to get up", a-za-s "to stand" (*a-uza-s, cf. Fite a-uzas), uza-s "to
plough", uca-s "to mow").
In verbs of the -n-conjugation in Agul, as in Archi, vocalic distinctions of
final vowels are neutralized (all such roots end in -an, cf. dalan-as "to rock",
ilan-as "to bind", ian-as "to rub", l:an-as "to wash", etc.).
3. Lezghi.
In Lezghi, except the so-called "regular" type of conjugation (that contains
historical compounds of verbal nouns and inflected forms of the verb iji-z "to do,
to make"), the following types of auslaut occur:
a) -a in the infinitive, -a in the past tense (cf. g-ata-z, g-ata-na "to beat";
ua-z, ua-na "to scratch"). A variant of this type is the type with -e:
ree-z, ree-na "to grind", etc. (the fronting of the vowel happens in the case of
PL pharyngealization, as well as near labialized hushing consonants, which yield
either velar or hissing reflexes in dialects);
b) -u in the infinitive, -a in the past tense (cf. au-z, aa-na "to cut", gu-z,
ga-na "to give", etc.). The fronted correlate of this type is the type -/-e (cf. -z,
e-na "to take care of", etc.);
c) -i in the infinitive, -a in the past tense (cf. g-ai-z, g-aa-na "to rot", ei-z,
aa-na "to get stuck", etc.). The fronted correlate of this type is the type -i/-e (cf.
w-ehi-z, w-ehe-na "to throw"; fi-z, fe-na "to go", k-xi-z, k-xe-na "to write",
etc.), though in this case the phonetical causes of the split of these two subtypes are
less evident. Still, the distinction between -a and -e in the past tense base hardly
reflects any PL differences in this case;
d) -a in the infinitive, -u in the past tense (cf. ta-z, tu-na "to leave"; ak:a-z,
ak:u-na "to see", etc.). The fronted correlate of this type is unknown to us.
In addition to the above-mentioned types there is a single verb with a stem
ending in -u both in the infinitive and in the past tense: q:-au-z, q:-au-na "to
take, to buy" (and the derived verbs - q:-a-u-z, wa-u-z "to take away").
In the Lezghi masdar nearly all distinctions of final vowels are neutralized. It
usually ends in -un in verbs of the types -a/-a, -u/-a, -i/-a, -a/-u. Only a small
number of verbs of the fronted types -i/-e, -e/-e have a masdar ending in -in
(k-xin "to write", fin "to go" and some others).
4. Rutul.
Here verbal roots have three types of auslaut:
a) -a in the stem of the present tense and the infinitive (sg. and pl.), - in the
stem of the past tense (sg. and pl.). Cf. h-aa-s "to know", dur. h-aa-r, term.
h-a-r. If the root consonant is labialized, there is -u instead of - (cf. h-arca-s,
term. h-arcu-r "to measure" etc.).
b) -e in the stem of the present tense (sg. and pl.) and the infinitive, -i in the
stem of the past tense (sg. and pl.). Cf. j-ie-s "to carry", dur. j-ie-r, term.
j-ii-r.
c) -a in the stem of the present tense singular, but -e in the stem of the
present tense plural, and, respectively, - (-u in case of labialization) in the stem of
the past tense singular, but -i in the stem of the past tense plural. Cf. s-ata-s "to
leave", dur. sg. s-a-l-ta-r, but pl. s-a-l-te-r; term. sg. s-a-l-t-r, but
pl. s-a-l-ti-r.
However, after closer examination it appears that the two latter types are
complementarily distributed: type b) is observed, if the root has a front first vowel,
and type c) - if the root has a back vowel (a, u). Besides, all verbal roots ending
with a hushing consonant can only belong to the type b), not a) or c). Thus, Rutul
actually has two types of verbal auslaut:
1) -a/- (independent from the first root vowel);
2) -e/-i, realized in this way only if the root has a first front vowel; otherwise
the auslaut -e/-i is preserved in plural forms, but coincides with the type -a/- in
singular forms.
The comparison of auslaut vowels in verbal roots of individual Lezghian
languages allows us to reconstruct four types of PL vowels in the last position.
They should apparently be interpreted as *-e, *-, *- and *-a (see above, page 170,
on the similar four types of nominal oblique stems).
1. Stems in *-e.
The correspondences here appear as follows:
|
Arch |
Ag |
Lezg |
Rut
|
|
-e/-i |
-i |
-i |
-e
|
Archi has -e in monosyllabic roots (going back to PL roots with initial *i-),
but -i in bisyllabic ones. The phonetic reasons for this distribution are evident: the
vowel -e has been narrowed (*-e >-i) in a postaccented syllable (most bisyllabic verbal roots in Archi are accented on the first syllable, and in the postaccented
position the wide vowels e, o are not observed in Archi, except rare cases when they
occur in contracted forms or loanwords). In one case Archi has -i in a monosyllabic
root (i-s "to die", see below). The reasons for this are unclear (it is not to be
excluded that in this root we should reconstruct a unique PL final *-i, but Archi
evidence alone is not sufficient for such a solution). A second Archi verb in -i,
i-s "to die out", unfortunately, has no parallels in the Agul, Lezghi or Rutul
languages.
2. Stems in *-.
This type of stems yields the following correspondences in descendant
languages:
|
Arch |
Ag |
Lezg |
Rut
|
|
-i |
-a |
inf. -a, past -u |
-e
|
In monosyllabic Archi roots we would also expect a reflex -e (as in the first
type), but actually in the single case available we have -a (:a-s, see below). The
reconstruction *- is dictated, first, by the front character of Archi and Rutul
reflexes, second - by the reflex -a- in Lezghi and Agul. The Lezghi past tense in -u
in this type (- in the Akhty dialect), must probably be explained by old ablaut
(missing in stems ending with -a). This ablaut, however, is reflected only in Lezghi.
In two cases Archi has an -a-stem instead of the expected -i-stem: PL *a:-
> Arch. a:a-s (dur. -a-r) "to leave"; PL *a- r- "to lie, to sleep" > Arch. aa-s
(dur. -a-r). The reasons for this irregularity are unclear.
3. Stems in *-.
These stems reveal the following correspondences:
|
Arch |
Ag |
Lezg |
Rut
|
|
inf. -a/-o, dur. -u/-o |
-i |
-i/-u |
-a
|
Archi has the reflex -o in monosyllabic roots (PL roots beginning in *i-) and
reflexes -a/-u - in bisyllabic ones. It is evident that in the postaccented syllable a
narrowing occurred, normal for Archi: (PL *-) > Arch. -o > -u. In the infinitive
stem, the final vowel was apparently changed to -a- by analogy with the more
widespread -a-stems. It is interesting that even the original labialization of root
consonants regularly disappears in this type, which confirms the fact that the
unification of infinitive stems occurred later in Archi than the development *C >
*C()o > *-Cu in the postaccented syllable.
In Lezghi the reflex -u is observed if the root consonant was originally
labialized, the reflex -i - without such labialization. While explaining the reflex -a
in Rutul, we should keep in mind that --stems are absent in modern Rutul; the
a-conjugation is mixed, forms with -a being typical for the present tense, forms with
- - for the past tense. It is evident that old *- and *-a-stems in Rutul underwent a
secondary redistribution, having merged in a single conjugation type, including both
forms in - and forms in -a.
The normal reflex of *- in Agul is -i. However, in some roots with a
labialized root consonant we observe an irregular reflex -a (but these roots are very
few, compared to the number of roots with the regular reflex -i).
4. Stems in *-a.
This type of stems is the most common in PL. Here we see the following
correspondences:
|
Arch |
Ag |
Lezg |
Rut
|
|
inf. -a, dur. -a/-u |
-a |
-a |
-a
|
In Archi, labialization of root consonants in this type is preserved only in
monosyllabic roots (that have lost PL *i-). In bisyllabic roots labialization is lost, but
is preserved as the vowel -u in the durative (nonlabialized roots have -a in the durative stem). Therefore, roots ending in *-a with a labialized root consonant in Archi
are reflected in the same way as roots ending with *- (see above).
Other languages usually preserve -a-stems without any changes.
1.8.2.3.3.1. Vowel alternations in the end of verbal roots.
The final vowels of verbal roots, as well as the initial ones, could apparently
alternate in PL. There is some reasons for reconstructing two main types of ablaut
in this position:
1. *-a/*- ablaut (possibly *-a/*-o, see below).
This type of ablaut was characteristic for *-a-stems. It is directly reflected in
Archi. Cf. aca-s "to milk", dur. aca-r, but term. acu < *aco <*ac:; thus, the
vowel -o < *- in Archi characterizes the terminative stem of verbs having an
-a-stem in other forms. The same ablaut in Rutul serves to differentiate the stem of
the present tense from the stem of the past tense (pres. -a, past -). As we have
already shown, the merger of the forms of *-a-stems and *--stems (with no ablaut)
in the past tense in Rutul led to a general merger of - and -a-stems (i.e. the
vowel -a was generalized in all the forms of the present tense, even in the original
*--stems).
It is, however, not to be excluded that in this case we should reconstruct not the
ablaut *a/*, but the ablaut *a/*o, cf. -u-forms of -a-stems in Agul: Bursh. aa-s
"to make", past ger. au-na, etc. The Archi and Rutul evidence is ambiguous (*
and *o had merged in these languages).
2. *-/*-a ablaut.
This type of ablaut was apparently only characteristic of roots with the
first vowel *i (which, as was shown above, could itself alternate with * and *o).
Forms with *- were probably used for the finalis (infinitive) stem, and forms with
*-a - for the durative and terminative stems (as well as for the plural forms with
-o-). This kind of ablaut is suggested by some evidence from Archi and Rutul. Cf.
Arch. eI-s "to start running" (*hi) - terminative aI (*hia) - durative
*h-r-a-r, which served as a base for the formation of a new paradigm
heIraI-s "to run"; similarly qIe-s "to go" (*iq:I-) - term. qIa "has come"
(*iq:Ia) durative *[]-r-q:Ia-r, whence herqIa-s "to walk" - terminative
(probably, old plural) oqIa "went" (*oq:Ia), etc. (Archi contains a rather large
number of such paradigms, irregular from the synchronistic point of view; they are often
split into several paradigms, with new forms being built by analogy.
In Rutul we may point out the following cases: s-ua- "to sit" with a
parallel form s-ia-s (*-ie-/*-ia-), cf. also the plural form s--l-Ia-r ( <
*-oIa- with a pharyngealization of unclear origin; cf. Arch. a atis "to seat
smbd." < *i()a, Iejis "to sit" < *Ia ei-s < *iI()a ()-s with a
similar pharyngealization in *iI()a); Rut. k-ua-s "to begin" (root -ue <
*i, cf. pl. k-u-l-e-s) / k-a-s (*i-) "id." (root -a-) - cf. Arch.
u-bus "to enter", dur. u-r = Rut. -ue-, cf. also imperative e (labialization in
the latter form is lost in an open syllable), but aa-s "to hide", dur. aru-r <
*-r-a-r = Rut. -a-, etc.
The situation is somewhat complicated by the fact that durative forms of such
*--stems could apparently have parallel auslauts: -a, as well as the normal -. Cf.,
on a par with Archi archaic durative forms heIraI-r, herqIa-r, apparently also
archaic duratives eIri-r, heqIi-r (cf. also with o-: orqIi-r), etc. It is most
probable that in PL the ablaut *-/*-a was already unproductive and that the grade -a
was actively being supplanted by the normal grade - (by analogy with the
infinitive stem and, perhaps, some other forms as well). All these facts present some
difficulties for reconstruction; however, we should once more emphasize that this
type of ablaut can be postulated only for verbal roots with the initial *i.
3. Other types of ablaut.
At least for one root we may postulate the ablaut *-e/*-a, similar to the
ablaut *-/*-a: PL *ire "to die", cf. Arch. dur. a-r, term. a (infin. i-s), Rut.
pl. stem -ra (vs. the normal one - -ie-).
Modern languages have also some other types of final vowel alternations (cf.
Rut. -e/-i in -e-stems; Lezg. -a/-u in stems going back to PL *--stems and some
others), that apparently should not be projected on the PL level (although their
origin is not always clear).
1.8.2.3.3.2. On the reflection of final vowels in verbal roots of the Budukh
language.
After this section was already complete, we obtained an opportunity to look
through the materials on the Budukh verbal system. In Budukh there are
conjugation types with the following vowel alternations: -u/-, -u/-i, -a/-i, -a/-a,
-i/-i, -i/- and -u/-u. These types reveal the following correlations with the
reconstructed PL types of verbal auslaut:
a) the type -u/- goes back to PL *-a-stems (PL ablaut *-o/*-a);
b) the types -u/-i and -a/-i go back to PL *--stems (PL Ablaut *-a/*-), the
-a/-i type being observed in intransitive verbs, and the -u/-i type in transitive ones.
Apparently the -u grade of ablaut is secondary here, borrowed from the 1st type of
conjugation.
c) -a/-a and -i/-i types have developed from PL *-e-stems, the -i/-i type being
characteristic for intransitive verbs, and the -a/-a type - for transitive ones. This is
possibly a result of splitting the -a/-i type, which would be a normal reflex of the
PL ablaut *-a/-*-e (for the suggestion of such an ablaut type, see above).
d) types -i/- and -u/-u go back to PL *--stems, the -u/-u type being
phonetically conditioned by labialization of the root consonant. The presence of the
grade - in Budukh is not quite clear here, because other Lezghian languages do
not show any ablaut in this type of stems. This may be an archaism, preserved
only in the Budukh language.
Thus, the Budukh system of final vowel alternations in the verb confirms, in
general, the reconstruction outlined above and provides us with valuable evidence
for reconstructing individual PL verbal roots.
1.8.2.3.4. Accentuation.
We know very little about PL accentuation as of yet. In modern Lezghian languages
there is either no accent (as in Kryz and most Tsakhur dialects), or it is extremely
morphologized or phonologized (i.e. the rules of accentuation of the word-form
depend on its morphemic and phonemic content - such is the situation in Archi,
Agul, Tabasaran and Lezghi). Independent distinctions in the place of accent may
be discovered only in Rutul (in nouns; the positioning of accent in the verb is yet
unclear), in the Gelmets dialect of Tsakhur, and, possibly, in the Tabasaran verbal
system. Archi has a rather strict system of accentuation rules both in verbal and in
nominal word-forms; rare deviations (of which the most significant is the
unpredictability of accent in bisyllabic nominal roots) are probably archaic.
In the '70s the MSU expeditions have discovered tonal systems in some
Lezghian languages (in the Northern dialect of Tabasaran, in Tsakhur, Kryz and
Budukh). The number of tones ranges from two to four (two - in Budukh, three -
in Kryz, four - in the Northern dialect of Tabasaran and in Tsakhur). It is possible
that the afore-mentioned non-standard accent systems in Rutul and in the Gelmets dialect
of Tsakhur, as well as accent archaisms in Archi, are reflections of the PL tonal
system. Unfortunately, we do not yet possess the systematic tonal records of any
Lezghian language except Kryz; therefore we cannot yet talk about the reconstruction of PL tones. We can, however, expect some progress in the nearest future.
1.9. Khinalug.
In spite of the fact that this language is often included in the Lezghian group
(see, e.g.,[Talibov 1980]), there are no serious reasons for this; the impression that
Khinalug is especially close to Lezghian languages arises apparently because of a
rather large number of loanwords from the neighbouring Kryz and Budukh
languages (probably from Proto-Shakhdagh as well). Multiple specific phonetic and
lexical features of Khinalug (on the development of Khinalug phonemes from PEC,
see above) clearly distinguish it from Lezghian languages, as a separate branch of
East-Caucasian.
In general there is less data on Khinalug, than on other North-Caucasian
languages (in fact only comparatively small lexical lists, given in the works
[Kibrik-Kodzasov-Olovyannikova 1972, Kibrik-Kodzasov 1988, 1990]. Therefore, many
specific features of Khinalug reflexation are yet unclear: there are many gaps in the
reflexes of PEC consonants, uncertainties in establishing the behaviour of
vowels, the Khinalug reflexation of the verbal root is completely unexamined, the
Khinalug prosodic system has not been described. All these problems still expect their
investigation.
|
|
|