Names of Cereals in the Turkic Languages

Kamil Stachowski

The work presents etymologies of the Turkic names for the seven most important cereals: barley, corn, millet, oats, rice, rye and wheat. Altogether, 106 names are discussed. As yet, this subject has not been dealt with as a whole. Propositions for etymologies of various names in single languages are scattered in dictionaries and articles, usually only accompanied by a brief explanation. Here, the author tries to provide a possibly comprehensive commentary. Each entry presents a list of phonetic variants of the word, an overview of previous etymologies and the author’s standpoint expressed as exhaustively as possible but without loquacity. The work closes with an enumeration and brief commentary of the most common naming patterns and semantic types which can be distinguished in the presented material.

Studia Turcologica Cr acoviensia K amil Stachowski Kamil Stachowski (born 1981) is an assistant lecturer in the Chair of Languages of Central Asia and Siberia at the Jagiellonian University. His main ields of interest are etymology and historical linguistics. He studied Turkish philology at the Jagiellonian University. He published seven articles (one currently in print), took part in two international conferences and held a lecture at the Polish Academy of Sciences. 9 788371 880988 www.akademicka.pl st cs st c K. Stachowski Names of Cereals in the Turkic Languages ISBN 978-83-7188-098-8 in the Turkic Languages tc Names of Cereals in the Turkic Languages he work presents etymologies of the Turkic names for the seven most important cereals: barley, corn, millet, oats, rice, rye and wheat. Altogether, 106 names are discussed. As yet, this subject has not been dealt with as a whole. Propositions for etymologies of various names in single languages are scattered in dictionaries and articles, usually only accompanied by a brief explanation. Here, the author tries to provide a possibly comprehensive commentary. Each entry presents a list of phonetic variants of the word, an overview of previous etymologies and the author’s standpoint expressed as exhaustively as possible but without loquacity. he work closes with an enumeration and brief commentary of the most common naming patterns and semantic types which can be distinguished in the presented material. Names of Cereals STC 11  Księgarnia Akademicka Studia Turcologica Cr acoviensia  Jagiellonian University · Institute of Oriental Philolology Studia Turcologica Cr acoviensia  Edited by Stanisław Stachowski Kr aków  Jagiellonian University · Institute of Oriental Philolology K amil Stachowski Names of Cereals in the Turkic Languages Kr aków  Recenzja wydawnicza: prof. dr hab. Henryk Jankowski Korekta: Kinga Maciuszak Projekt okładki: Kamil Stachowski © Copyright by Kamil Stachowski and Księgarnia Akademicka, Kraków 2008 Książka doinansowana przez Wydział Filologiczny Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego ISBN 978-83-7188-098-8 Księgarnia Akademicka ul. św. Anny 6, 31–008 Kraków tel./fax: (012) 431·27·43 tel.: 422·10·33 wew. 11·67 [email protected] www.akademicka.pl contents Introduction Barley Corn Millet Oats Rice Rye Wheat Final Remarks Abbreviations Literature Index of non-Turkic forms 7 9 19 33 49 61 71 87 103 107 109 117 Introduction Aim and Scope of This Work he aim of this work is to work out the etymologies of the names of the seven most important cereals (barley Hordeum L , corn Zea mays L , millet Panicum L , oats Avena L , rice Oryza Sativa L , rye Secale Cereale L , and wheat Triticum L ) in the Turkic languages he current, rather uneven state of comparative dialectology and lexicography of the Turkic languages does not allow us to perform full comparisons We have therefore limited ourselves to literary names, and only included selected dialectal forms For the same reason, the names of subspecies and varieties have been excluded State of Art and Sources Our subject has not as yet been dealt with as a whole Of the papers in the Turkic languages that are devoted to the names of plants (not just cereals) the most detailed has been written L V Dmitrieva (1972) his, however, only contains an extremely limited commentary Etymological propositions for various names in single languages are scattered in etymological dictionaries, generally only accompanied by a brief explanation, and in numerous articles where a more comprehensive commentary is usually provided he bulk of the sources used in this paper are dictionaries, mainly Russian post-revolutionary ones (abbreviated RKirgS, TuwRS &c ), also etymological dictionaries (an especially large amount of data is to be found in ÈSTJa), various articles and publications devoted to the vocabulary and/or grammar of single languages, and descriptions of dialects (mainly Turkish) Structure of an Entry – Alphabetical list of forms ordered by pronunciation Enables a preliminary investigation of the phonetical diversity of names All variants are ordered alphabetically and linked with a system of cross-references – Alphabetical list of forms ordered by languages Presents the diversity of the names in one language Comparing the stock of names in languages from one group can help to ind out which forms should be treated as the standard ones – Brief overview of previous etymologies For lesser investigated words, we have tried to summarise the entire literature available to us For those which are better known, we have only selected the most important works All papers have been treated equally, including the ones which we cannot be ready to accept, given the present state of art – Commentary he commentary consists of a discussion with the propositions summarised before and a presentation of our own views 8 IntroductIon Transcription We have tried to present all Turkic forms in a uniied, phonological transcription he distinction between palatal k, g : velar q, γ has only been preserved for OUyg , Uyg and Uzb , as in all the other languages it is unequivocally determined by the position By the same token, we have abandoned the marking of labialization of a in Uzb (as resulting systematically from the orthography) and of spirantization of s and z in Trkm ; however, we have preserved it in Bšk where it has a phonological signiicance Apart from this, a dual transcription has been employed for e: wide ä vs narrow e for languages where they are separate phonemes, and neutral e for the others Thanks I am grateful to many people for helping me in various ways Most of all, I would like to express my special gratitude to (alphabetically): – Professor Árpád Berta (Szeged, Hungary) for expert advice and access to his working materials, – László Károly, MA (Szeged, Hungary) for helping me access some of the more inaccessible literature, – Doctor Kinga Maciuszak (Cracow, Poland) for professional advice and Iranistic help, – Professor Andrzej Pisowicz (Cracow, Poland) for professional advice and Iranistic help, – Professor Marek Stachowski (Cracow, Poland) for a great amount of help and time without which this work would not be completed, – Professor Alexander Vovin (Honolulu, USA) for Sinological help barley hordeum l. Barley was one of the irst domesticated cereals in the world he oldest grains of spelt are thought to be nine thousand years old, and have been found in Jarmo, Kurdistan from where it probably originates Its cultivation had spread westwards from this region around the 5th millennium BC, to Mespotamia, Egypt and elsewhere Domesticated barley (Hordeum vulgare) is believed to have originated from the eastern part of the Central Asian Centre, from where it spread West and South-West, i e to India, Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria and Egypt, and later to Greece and Italy (4th c BC) and even further he area between Siberia and the Paciic is now used for the cultivation of barley, but the plant was only introduced there in the 19th c Compared to other cereals, especially to wheat which is equally old, or perhaps even older, barley has very few varieties: 29 species, including 16 stable, but they already existed in the second half of the 4th millennium BC In the ancient world, barley was very popular; almost every higher culture cultivated it Names for ‘barley’ are most uniform in the Turkic languages Almost all languages have the word arpa, and all the other names only have a very limited range Interestingly, barley is quite oten identiied or confused with oats, and while Tel sula ‘barley’ < ‘oats’, all the other examples of this confusion display just the opposite direction of development his is understandable given the chronology of domestication of these two cereals – cf commentary on julaf (point 2), and arpakan and harva ‘oats’, and footnote 1 forms: apa → arpa arba → arpa arbaj → arpa arpa arpä → arpa arpagan arpagān → arpagan arpakan → arpagan arva → arpa arvaj → arpa as aš → as erpe → arpa harva → arpa jačmeń köče köže → köče nečimien → ǯehimien nehimien → ǯehimien ńečimien → ǯehimien ńesemen → ǯehimien orpa → arpa sula ša‘īr tak-tak urpa → arpa žesemen → ǯehimien ǯeh ǯehimien → ǯehimien ǯesemen → ǯehimien Com : arpa Crm : arpa CTat : arpa Čag : arpa Čuv : orpa, urpa Gag : arpa Kar : arpa KarC: arpa languages: Az : arpa Blk : arpa Brb : aš Bšk : arpa 10 arpa || BARLEy KarH: arpa KarT: arpa Khak : arba, as, köče Khal : arpa Kirg : arpa, arpakan Kklp : arpa Kmk : arpa Krč Blk : arpa Küär : arba Kyzyl: arba Kzk : arpa, tak-tak MTkc : arpa MTkc H: arpa MTkc IM: arpa MTkc KD: arpa MTkc MA: arba, arpa MTkc MA B: arpä MTkc MK: arba, arpa, arpagān Nog : arpa Oghuz Ir : arpa OTkc : arpa, arpagan Ott : arpa, ša‘īr OUyg : arpa Oyr : arba Sag : arba SarUyg : arva, harva Šr : aš Tat : arpa, arpagan Tat Gr : arpa Tel : arba, sula Tksh : arpa Tksh dial : ǯeh Tof : jačmeń Trkm : arpa, arpagan Tuv : arbaj, arvaj, köže Uyg : apa, arpa, erpe Uzb : arpa yak : nečimien, nehimien, ńečimien, ńesemen, žesemen, ǯehimien, ǯesemen arpa forms: apa Uyg.: Raquette 1927, ÈSTJa, Dmitrieva 1979 arba Khak.: Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Dmitrieva 1979, Çevilek 2005 || Küär.: R I 335t, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, Eren 1999 || Kyzyl: Joki 1952, 1953 || MTkc.MK: Egorov 1964 || MTkc.Zam: Egorov 1964 || Oyr.: R I 335t, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, Egorov 1964, RAltS, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Dmitrieva 1979, Eren 1999, Çevilek 2005 || Sag.: Joki 1952 || Tel.: R I 335t, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, Ryumina-Sırkaşeva/Kuçigaşeva 1995, Eren 1999 arbaj Tuv.: RTuwS, Egorov 1964, Tatarincev 2000–, Çevilek 2005 arpa az.: Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, RAzS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Blk.: ÈSTJa || Bšk.: RBškS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Crm.: Joki 1952 || CTat.: Zaatovъ 1906, ÈSTJa || Čag.: Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, VEWT || Gag.: ÈSTJa || Kar.: Joki 1952 || KarC: KRPS, Levi 1996 || KarH: Mardkowicz 1935, KRPS || KarT: Kowalski 1929, KRPS || Khal.: Doerfer/Tezcan 1980, Doerfer 1987 || Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899, RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Kklp.: RKklpS-BB, RKklpS-ST, Egorov 1964, RKklpS-B, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Kmk.: Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, RKmkS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Kzk.: RKzkS-46, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, RKzkS-54, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, DFKzk, Eren 1999 || MTkc.: Räsänen 1949: 236 || MTkc.H: (‫ )ارپا‬Houtsma 1894 || MTkc.IM: VEWT || MTkc.KD: ‫ ارب��ه‬Golden 2000 || MTkc.MK: Joki 1952, Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 || MTkc.Zam: Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1979 || Nog.: RNogS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Oghuz.Ir.: Doerfer/Hesche 1989 || OTkc.: Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, Dmitrieva 1972 || Ott.: (‫ )آرپ��ه‬Wiesentahl 1895, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, VEWT || OUyg.: Çevilek 2005 || Tat.: Voskresenskij 1894, Imanaevъ 1901, ‫ آرپ��ا‬Tanievъ 1909, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, RTatS-D, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva BARLEy || arpa 11 1972, ÈSTJa, RTatS-G || Tat.Gr.: Podolsky 1981 || Tksh.: Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Çevilek 2005 || Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929, Räsänen 1949: 236, RTrkmS, Nikitin/ Kerbabaev 1962, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, Eren 1999, Dmitrieva 1979 || Uyg.: Raquette 1927, Räsänen 1949: 236, Joki 1952, RUjgS, Egorov 1964, VEWT, ÈSTJa, Dmitrieva 1972, 1979, Jarring 1998: 14, Çevilek 2005 || Uzb.: ‫ آرپ��ه‬Nalivkinъ 1895, Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912, RUzbS-A, Egorov 1964, RUzbS-Š, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa arpä MTkc.Ma.B: Borovkov 1971: 99 arva SarUyg.: Çevilek 2005 arvaj Tuv.: ÈSTJa, Dmitrieva 1979 erpe Uyg.: Çevilek 2005 harva SarUyg.: Çevilek 2005 urpa Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909, RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E, Egorov 1964, VEWT, RČuvS-A, Dmitrieva 1972, 1979, Eren 1999 languages: az.: arpa || Blk.: arpa || Bšk.: arpa || Com.: arpa || Crm.: arpa || CTat.: arpa || Čag.: arpa || Čuv.: orpa, urpa || Gag.: arpa || Kar.: arpa || KarC: arpa || KarH: arpa || KarT: arpa || Khak.: arba || Khal.: arpa || Kirg.: arpa || Kklp.: arpa || Kmk.: arpa || Krč.Blk.: arpa || Küär.: arba || Kyzyl: arba || Kzk.: arpa || MTkc.: arpa || MTkc.H: arpa || MTkc.IM: arpa || MTkc.KD: arpa || MTkc.Ma: arba, arpa || MTkc.Ma.B: arpä || MTkc.MK: arba, arpa || Nog.: arpa || Oghuz.Ir.: arpa || OTkc.: arpa || Ott.: arpa || OUyg.: arpa || Oyr.: arba || Sag.: arba || Tat.: arpa || Tat.Gr.: arpa || Tel.: arba || Tksh.: arpa || Trkm.: arpa || Tuv.: arbaj, arvaj || Uyg.: apa, arpa, erpe || Uzb.: arpa etymology: 1949: Räsänen: 236: limits himself to a comparison with Mo arbaj, Ma arfa, Afgh ōrbūšah, Gr ὀλφα [sic; cf KWb 1976 and Steblin-Kamenskij 1982] 1952: Joki: the Altaic forms belong to the same group as Afgh and Gr , ‘but not directly’ against uniting PIE *albhi-, Gr ἄλφι and Alb eľp [eľbi] 1963: TMEN 445: Tkc > Mo (> Sal , Tuv ; Ma ), Hung et al against the possibility of PIE *albhi- > Ir *arpa-, but does not exclude the possibility of IE origin in general 1964: Egorov: limits himself to enumerating forms from various Tkc languages 1969: VEWT: limits himself to providing bibliography and remarking that Hung árpa ‘barley’ < Čuv urpa 1972: Clauson: ? < IE (? Toch ) (referring to TMEN 445) 1974: ÈSTJa: limits himself to summarizing previous propositions 1976: KWb: puts together Tkc arpaj and Ma arfa, Afgh ōrbūšah, Gr ἀλφι 1979: Dmitrieva 164f : < OIr or old IE; or common in Alt and IE MTkc MA arbaj, Tuv arvaj < Mo 1982: Steblin-Kamenskij: puts together Afgh orbəši, urbeši et al < ? *arpasyā- (ater EVP) and maybe Gr ἄλφι, ἄλφιτον ‘(pearl) barley (porridge); lour’ 1990: Róna-Tas: 31: quotes the comparison with Gr aliton, Alb eľp and Ir *arb/pa allowing the possibility of < Ir *arb/pa, but remarks that the Ir form has only been reconstructed basing on the Tkc ones; Ma arfa, Mo arbaj < Tkc 12 arpa || BARLEy 1993: EWU: probably from some IE language Hung árpa ‘barley’ from some Tkc language, cf Uyg , Com arpa, Čuv urpa, orpa &c 1998: Jarring: 14: probably < IE (? Toch ) 1999: Eren: limits himself to summarizing previous propositions 2000: Tatarincev: *ar- ‘to multiply oneself, to be numerous’ + -p intens + -a Joki’s 1952 proposition not grounded suiciently 2000: Tietze: limits himself to quoting Doerfer’s 1993: 85 opinion on borrowing from Mo to Tkc 2003: NEVP: unclear expression: ‘if Pashto orbəša et al < *arpasyā, then cf Tkc arpa’ 2005: Çevilek: accepts Clauson’s 1972 proposition commentary: his word is unusually common in the Tkc languages, and, at irst glance, the phonetic diversity of all its forms is surprisingly small 1 his commonality might be understood as a sign that the Tkc people became acquainted with barley very early on, perhaps as one of the irst cereals he uniformity of the sounding should probably be attributed to the phonetically very simple structure of the word, which does not provoke any serious changes by itself 2 he meaning of the word is the same everywhere, too, except for 1. SarUyg harva which means both ‘barley’ and ‘oats’ (cf ), 2. for an obvious inluence of Russ in Bšk , Tat and Tksh meanings of ‘stye’ (ater ÈSTJa; see also VEWT), and 3. for a simple semantic shit in Az dial ‘ladies’ barley grain shaped decoration’ &c (ater ÈSTJa) he name is also present in the Mo and Ma languages, where it is probably a loanword from Tkc cf ÈSTJa for further bibliography Almost all the etymologists dealing with this word limit themselves to quoting previous works (oten quite inaccurately) about the possible Ir origin 3 Only some of them add their own commentary, which is usually not particularly innovative 1 Perhaps Sal arfa and Tuv arva deserve a bit more interest, as the spirantization of p could be regarded as a trace that these forms are not a continuation of OTkc *arpa, but rather borrowings from one of the Mo languages (cf Klmk dial arva – however, meaning ‘oats’), or alternately, though this does not seem very probable due to cultural-historical reasons, from Ma arfa ‘oats; barley’ (cf julaf ‘oats’) However, it might be equally probable that the spirantization is a trivial innovation in these languages, cf SarUyg harva ‘oats’ Also Sal ahrun ‘barley lour’ < arfa un (Kakuk 1962: 175) has a strange sounding which does not seem to be explicable by any regular phonetic law 2 However, beyond the Tkc languages the situation is not so simple any more A Ma form arfa quoted by Räsänen and Ramstedt is not entirely clear phonetically Cincius 1949: 163f gives two examples of such a correspondence: Ma gabta- ‘shoot a bow’ = Even, Evk , Nan , Sol , Ulč -rp-, Mo -rv- and Ma arfuku ‘мухогонка’ = Even, Evk , Ulč -rp-, both qoted by Benzing 1955: 48; but the derivation, and additionally the word gabta- are marked with a question mark (although the entire expression is unclear) 3 It seems to us that this proposition is relatively improbable he word is not found beyond eastern Ir languages, has no etymology there, and apparently no cognates, either See below BARLEy || arpagan 13 To our knowledge, the only exception here has been made by Tatarincev 2000– who submitted his own – and more importantly a very probable – proposition: *ar- ‘multiply oneself, be numerous’ + -p intensiication + -a, cf OTkc arka ‘multitude; collection; crowd; group’, Mo arbin ‘plentiful’ et al Possibly, an interesting addition to this hypotheses might be made of OJap *apa ‘millet’ (Martin 1987: 388, Omodaka 2000)4 which, it seems, may be genetically related to the Tkc form – and then to the Mo and Ma ones, too If this was indeed true, it would give added weight to Tatarincev’s proposition It remains to be determined whether Pashto orbəša &c are borrowings from Tkc (not very plausible for cultural-historical reasons but deinitely not impossible5), another realization of a much older cultural wanderwort of unknown origin (which seems to be quite probable but is absolutely impossible to determine, at least for now)6, or whether the similarity of these words is a pure coincidence he current state of art does not allow for a inal answer arpaGaN forms: arpagan OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 ‘wild barley’ || Tat.: ÈSTJa ‘wild barley; a plant similar to barley’, Dmitrieva 1972 || Trkm.: Dmitrieva 1972 ‘agropyron’ arpagān MTkc.MK: Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 ‘a plant similar to barley’ arpakan Kirg.: ÈSTJa ‘wild barley; common wild oat (Avena fatua)’ languages: Kirg.: arpakan || MTkc.MK: arpagān || OTkc.: arpagan || Tat.: arpagan || Trkm.: arpagan etymology: 1974: ÈSTJa: < arpa ‘barley’ + -gan commentary: his form has a very clear structure -gan is quite a popular suix for plant names, here with a distinct meaning of ‘similar to, such as’ Cf arpakan ‘oats’ he MTkc MK long -ā in the suix is supposedly a transcription of alef, and not an actual length of the vowel, otherwise completely incomprehensible 4 his word is attested as early as the oldest Jap monument, Man’yōshū (8th c ) Interestingly enough, it is written with the 粟 sign, nowadays used for Mand sù < MChin sjowk > OTkc and others sök ‘millet’ (cf ) 5 If so, then probably from a Px3Sg form (in a compound?) 6 Such a solution should also be considered for Hung árpa, whose origin from Čuv is not likely for phonetic reasons (Čuv o/u- vs Hung á-) From among the possible sources quoted in EWU, Com arpa seems to be most probable phonetically and cultural-historically but perhaps other sources with non-Čuv sounding can not be entirely excluded, too 14 as || BARLEy aS forms: as Khak.: Dmitrieva 1972 aš Brb.: R I 585b || Šr R I 585b languages: Brb.: aš || Khak.: as || Šr.: aš etymology: 1974: ÈSTJA: < Ir āš ‘soup’ commentary: Corresponds with Tkc aš ‘food’ et al , including Khak , Kmk ‘cereal’; Oyr , Tat dial ‘cereal in ears and the like’; Khak , Oyr ‘grain’, presumably < Ir (ÈSTJa) he word appears in many Tkc languages in diferent meanings (ÈSTJa) which can be reduced to three groups: 1. ‘soup’, ‘pilaf’; 2. ‘food, nourishment’, and 3 ‘cereal’, ‘grain’ ÈSTJa believes the irst group to be a Čag innovation (even though such a meaning is attested in MIr where the word originates from), the second group represents the original meaning (this is the only meaning attested in older Tkc monuments), and the third one to be a later concretization of meaning 2 (it only appears in Brb , Khak , Kmk , Oyr , Tat dial and Šr ) In the oldest monuments, the word is only attested in the meaning of ‘food, nourishment’ (ÈSTJa) However, it does not seem to be very probable that such a meaning would evolve into ‘cereal’, ‘grain’ and so on in Khak , Kmk , Oyr , Tat dial &c We would rather believe that it is these languages that preserved the original meaning from before the OTkc period his hint, together with the commonness of the word in Tkc could suggest that its relationship to Ir aš ‘kind of soup’ has just the opposite direction than the one suggested by ÈSTJa However, the Ir word has an established etymology: Pers āš < Skr āśa ‘food, nourishment’ (Turner 1966–69: 66), Skr aca- in prataraca- ‘breakfast’, Av kahrkasa- ‘Hühnerfresser’ (Horn 1893: 29) hus, we should probably accept the slightly strange evolution from ‘food’ to 1. ‘soup’, 2. ‘cereal’, where 1 must have come into existence still in the OTkc period Whether Khak has evolved the meaning of ‘barley’ from ‘cereal; grain’, or independently (i e from the original ‘food, nourishment’), cannot be determined with certainty he latter seems, however, to be more plausible because: 1. it has almost always been wheat and not barley, that was the most important cereal for the Tkc peoples, and so we would rather expect ‘cereal; grain’ to evolve into ‘wheat’, rather than ‘barley’; 2. barley was an important part of nourishment in the form of a gruel or a pulp; also, beer was made from it (Tryjarski 1993: 54, 123) which seems to point to the evolution from the meaning of ‘soup’ rather than ‘cereal; grain’ Cf aš(lyk) ‘wheat’ jaČMeń forms: jačmeń Tof.: RTofS etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: < Russ jačmenь id BARLEy || köče 15 KöČe forms: köče Khak.: RChakS, ÈSTJa, Tatarincev 2000 köže Tuv.: RTuwS, Tatarincev 2000 languages: Khak.: köče || Tuv.: köže etymology: 1974: ÈSTJa s v köǯe: < Pers ‫ گوجه‬gouǯe ‘Prunus divaricata Ledeb. [species of plum]’ 2000: Tatarincev: < *köč- ‘to reduce (oneself)’ commentary: his word is quite common in the Tkc languages in diferent meanings Almost all of them are names of various dishes or their components (most oten, lour) made of cereals (barley, corn, millet and wheat, very occasionally rice and sorghum as well), and only in a few cases of cereals or grains In dialects other meanings sporadically appear, too (see below) A comprehensive list can be found in ÈSTJa he geographical distribution of the meanings does not seem to contribute much to our understanding Only Tksh dialects have all four meanings of the most important cereals at once, and only in eastern Siberia is there no other meaning present but ‘barley’ Apart from Tksh dialects, ‘barley’ appears in the North and East, ‘corn’ in the South, and ‘millet’ and ‘wheat’ in the centre, which corresponds quite precisely to the ranges of cultivation of these cereals When taking all of this into account, one could try to suppose that all these meanings are relatively young, but it must not be forgotten that the word is attested in the Tkc languages from the 14th c , and the choice of cereals for cultivation is mainly inluenced by climate, which has not changed signiicantly in the last few centuries he etymology proposed by ÈSTJa does not seem to be grounded very well from the semantic point of view, as it assumes the following evolution: Pers ‘species of plum’ [> (a) Tkc ‘mulberry fruits lour’ > (b) ‘lour made of roasted barley or wheat’] > (c) ‘lour of various cereals’ > (d) ‘various dishes of cereals’ &c , which is only supported by the following facts: 1. [in the Pamir languages] ‘mulberry fruits lour’ and ‘lour made of roasted barley or wheat’ was designated by one word; 2. Uzb dial , Tksh dial gȫǯә, kȫǯötūt ‘species of mulberry’; 3. Uzb dial gȫǯә ‘species of plum’ While (c) > (d) is trivial, (a) is not very likely, and it must be remembered that (b) refers to the Pamir languages, not Tkc Whether the information that mulberry fruits lour became so popular in Pamir that it ousted lour made of cereals, also refers to Tkc is unclear (cf Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 87, quoted by ÈSTJa) We believe that these diiculties provide suicient reason to discard the etymology he still unclear forms 2 and 3 may be understood as a quite strange evolution, probably under Pers inluence, especially in the case of 3 Tatarincev 2000 is against this etymology, too Tatarincev’s proposition seems to be much more likely He derives köče < *köč-, and supports this reconstruction with words like Tkc g/küčük ‘puppy; young of an animal’, 16 sula || BARLEy also ‘bud’, köš/ček ‘young of a camel’, also ‘young of an animal’, and Tksh güǯük ‘short; without tail’, göč(k)en ‘(one year old) hare’ and so on As to the derivation, it might be regarded as being problematic, that the word has a long vowel in Trkm (kȫǯe) But a secondary evolution in Trkm is possible, too – under the inluence of Pers gouǯe? he reconstruction of *köč- is very interesting but it seems to us that the examples listed by Tatarincev point quite clearly to the original meaning of ‘to be small’ rather than ‘to reduce (oneself)’ Actually, this seems to it köǯe even better (barley grains are quite small) SUla forms: sula Tel.: Ryumina-Sırkaşeva/Kuçigaşeva 1995 etymology: see süle ‘oats’ commentary: his word is one of the examples of the quite common identifying/confusing of ‘barley’ and ‘oats’: cf commentary on julaf (point 2) and arpakan, harva and taγ arpasy ‘oats’ Only the direction is unclear here: this is the only word where ‘barley’ < ‘oats’ Ša‘īr forms: ša‘īr Ott.: (‫ )شعير‬Wiesentahl 1895, ša‘īr Redhouse 1921 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: < Arab ‫ َش ِعیر‬ša‘īr ‘barley’ TaK-TaK forms: tak-tak Kzk.: ‘wild barley’ DFKzk etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his name is completely obscure Presumably, Kzk tak ‘1 throne; 2 odd number’ corresponds to Uyg taγ ‘1 mountain; 2 odd number’, but the semantic relationship is utterly unclear Also, the word has a strange structure which we cannot explain Cf taγ-arpasy ‘oats’ ǯeH forms: ǯeh Tksh.dial.: Pisowicz 2000: 239 etymology: 2000: Pisowicz: 239: < Kurd ǯeh ‘barley’ commentary: We can see no law in the etymology presented by Pisowicz 2000: 239 BARLEy || ǯehimien 17 ǯeHIMIeN forms: nečimien Yak.: Pekarskij 1917–30, Anikin 2003 nehimien Yak.: Anikin 2003 ńečimien Yak.: Pekarskij 1917–30, Slepcov 1964: 37, 109, Anikin 2003 ńesemen [ɔ: -h-] Yak.: Pekarskij 1917–30, Anikin 2003 žesemen [ɔ: ǯehemen] Yak.: (жэсэмэн [ɔ: дь-]) Dmitrieva 1972 ǯehimien Yak.: RJakS, Anikin 2003 ǯesemen [ɔ: -h-] Yak.: Pekarskij 1917–30, Anikin 2003 etymology: 1964: Slepcov: < Russ jačmeń ‘barley’ 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ jačmeń ‘barley’ 2003: Anikin: Russ jačméń (alternately Sib *jašméń) > yak ǯesemen > other forms, cf Ubrjatova 1960: 23 for ǯ- ~ n- / ń- , and indicates Russ člen > yak čilien, silien for -s- ~ -č- and refers to Slepcov 1964: 109 commentary: he etymology presented by Slepcov 1964 and more comprehensively by Anikin 2003 is undoubtedly true in general However, it is unclear to us why Anikin 2003 believes that ǯesemen is the oldest form, from which ńesemen and ńečimien evolved by means of assimilation It seems that his reasoning is based solely on the sounding of these forms, but it is impossible to unambiguously settle the chronology of their borrowing, as assimilation depends not so much on the time of borrowing, as on how well the borrower knew Russian, and therefore it can only help to establish a chronology expressed in generations, not in absolute years; cf Stachowski, M 1999b: 23 he diferences between the forms are: 1. anlaut ( ǯ-, n-, ń-), 2. adaptation of Russ -s- (-h-, -č-), 3. epentetic vowel (-e-, -i-) and 4. yielding or not of the Russ accent (-ie-, -e-) From among these features only 3 lets us draw some conclusions regarding chronology: in the Tkc languages epentetic vowels are high7, and so -e- should be understood as a result of assimilation We believe therefore that jačmeń > yak *JaČimien > JeČimien > JeČemen Regarding phonetics, cf ebies ‘oats’ 7 his is a constant feature of the Tkc languages; cf e g the necessity of Tkc mediation in Hung király ‘king’ << Southern Slav dial *kral’ь or similar (Helimskij 2000: 434) Cf also aryš ‘rye’ 18 Barley Kar Čuv Gag Tat Khak Bšk arpa ‘barley’ CTat Oyr Krč Tksh Nog Tuv Kzk Blk Kmk Az Kklp Kirg Trkm Uzb Uyg SarUyg Khal corn zea mays l. Corn originates from the Mesoamerican centre he irst traces of cultivation of corn were found in the Tehuacán valley, Mexico hey are dated around 5th millennium BC, while the domestication probably happened between 10th and 5th millennium BC he oldest remains of cobs of a cultivated form are dated 3000–3500 years BC and were found in the ities in Bat Cave, Mexico (cobs from these period are just 25 mm long) he oldest pollen of a wild form was discovered in the city of Mexico and is about 80 thousand years old All presently known forms of corn are domesticated; wild forms have not survived at all Corn was extremely important for all the cultures of Central and South America, and was also known in North America It appeared very oten, and it still does, as a motif in art, and it played a role in mythology and religious rituals Columbus mentioned it as early as 5 November 1492, and brought it to Europe a year later when he came back from his irst voyage From Spain (cultivations in Andalusia since 1525), it spread to Southern and Central Europe (Fr blé d’Espagne, G Welschkorn), and to Middle East and Anatolia from where it difused further Eastern and Central Europe (for the second time) learned about it later, from the Turks (cf e g Slvn turščica; Cz turkyně; Pol pszenica turecka and Fr blé de Turquie, G türkischer Weizen and türkisch Korn, It granturco et al ) he Portuguese played a great role in its circulation by delivering it to Java as early as 1496, to Angola about 1500, to China in 1516 and to the Philippines in 1520 (Nowiński 1970: 193–202 ) he Latin name is a compound of Lat zēa ‘type of grain’ + mays < Sp maís, máis < mahíz < Taino maisí, majisí ‘corn’ Fr maïs and Eng maize are borrowings from Spanish (Lokotsch 1926) In the Tkc languages there are altogether 16 diferent names for ‘corn’ Nine of them are compounds built of an attribute + name of another plant, or are an abbreviation of this model In three (four?) of them the attribute is a place name, always referring to an Arabic country (Mäkke, Mısır, Şam, ? käbä bödoj) forms: aži bijdaj ažy bijdaj → aži bijdaj basadohan bordoq čüžgün qonaq dary gargydaly habiž(d)aj käbä bodaj → käbä bödoj käbä bödoj kargi-dali → gargydaly kokoroz köma qonaq → (kömme) qonaq kömbö konok → (kömme) qonaq kömek → (kömme) qonaq köme qonaq → (kömme) qonaq kömme qonaq kömür qonaq → (kömme) qonaq konag → (kömme) qonaq kukkurus → kokoroz kukurus → kokoroz kukurūsa → kokoroz kukurusь → kokoroz kukuruz → kokoroz kukuruza → kokoroz makkažavari → meke žügörü makkažŭxori → meke žügörü makka(-)ǯuari → meke žügörü 20 aži bijdaj || CORN mäkke mäkke žueri → meke žügörü meke žügörü mekgeǯöven mekke ǯeven → mekgeǯöven mokka-ǯavari → meke žügörü mysir bogdaj → mysyr (bugdajy) languages: Az : gargydaly Bosn Tksh : kukuruz Bšk : kukuruz || kukuruza CTat : mysir bogdaj Čuv : kukkurus || kukurusь || kukuruza KarC: kokoroz || mysyr-bogdaj KarH: basadohan || sary Khak : kukuruza Kirg : meke žügörü || žügöri || žügörü || ǯügeri Kirg dial : kömbö konok Kklp : mäkke || mäkke žueri Kmk : habiž(d)aj mysyr bogdaj → mysyr (bugdajy) mysyr-bogdaj → mysyr (bugdajy) mysyr bugdaj → mysyr (bugdajy) mysyr (bugdajy) nartük nartux → nartük nartüx → nartük qonaq → (kömme) qonaq sary šam darysy žasymyk žügeri → žügörü žügöri → žügörü žügörü → žügörü žŭxori → žügörü ǯügeri → žügörü Krč Blk : nartux || nartüx || Tksh dial : dary || kokoroz || žügeri Kzk : žügeri Kzk dial : žasymyk Nog : aži bijdaj || ažy bijdaj || nartük Ott : kokoroz || ? mysyr bogdaj || ? mysyr bugdaj || šam darysy Oyr : kukuruza Sal : konag Tat : käbä bodaj || käbä bödoj || kargi-dali || kukurus || kukuruz || kukuruza Tksh : mysyr (bugdajy) kukuruz Trkm : mekgeǯöven || mekke ǯeven Tuv : kukuruza Uyg : bordoq || čüžgün qonaq || köma qonaq || kömek || köme qonaq || kömme qonaq || kömür qonaq || qonaq Uzb : makkažavari || makkažŭhori || makka(-) ǯuari || mokka-ǯavari || žŭxori yak : kukurūsa || kukuruza ažI BIjDaj forms: aži bijdaj Nog.: RNogS || ažy bijdaj Dmitrieva 1972: 213 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < ažy ‘bitter’ + bijdaj ‘wheat’ commentary: While it is not easy to present a convincing counterargument for the etymology proposed in Dmitrieva 1972, neither can one accept it without reservations Semantics is deinitely its weak point Grains of wheat might indeed have a sweetish taste when compared to other cereals, but they certainly can not be regarded as sweeter than corn, which has a very distinct sweet lavour Certainly it is not sweet enough to make it a distinctive feature hough we are not able to present a counterproposition, we do not want to accept Dmitrieva’s solution, either Not at least, in so brief a form Perhaps she knows of more ethnographic data which could provide a more convincing argument in favour of her proposition CORN || dary 21 BaSaDOHaN forms: basadohan KarH: KRPS 105, Mardkowicz 1935 ‘1 corn; 2 corn gruel, polenta’ etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: We believe that this word is a compound of basa ‘pasha’ + dohan < Hebr ‫ דּוחן‬dochan ‘millet’8 Millet is quite oten uniied or confused with corn (cf žasymyk) Such a compound has a nice semantic parallel in Bulg carevica ‘corn’ Cf cebedogon ‘millet’ BOrDOq forms: bordoq Uyg.: ‘roasted corn’ etymology: 1974: ÈSTJa: Tkc bürtük ~ bürčük ‘1 grain; 2 bread; 3 little bite; 4 et al ’ < PTkc *bürt‘come of, fall of’ he Uyg form is not quoted here; all quoted forms (except for Čuv ) have vowels e, i, ö and ü commentary: Despite phonetic diiculties (front vs back vowels), we are convinced that this word belongs to the family of bürtük A semantic shit from ‘grain’ to ‘species of cereal’ is absolutely natural; cf e g Witczak 2003: 128–30 Cf also Trkm bürdük ‘oats’ ČüžGüN qONaq forms: čüžgün qonaq ‫[ چوژگون‬sic] Uyg.: Jarring 1998: 15 ‘species of corn’ etymology: 1998: Jarring: 14: ž indicates a non-Tkc origin; the word is enigmatic commentary: Jarring 1998: 15 only remarks that ž indicates a non-Tkc origin, and that the word is enigmatic He also mentions čüzgün ‘green bristlegrass (Setaria viridis)’ (ater Schwarz 1992: 356) which is yet another example of calling ‘corn’ and ‘millet’ with one word (cf dary, mysyr bugdajy, žasmyk and žügörü) It is not out of the question, that the word is etymologically identical with čigin, cf čüzgün ‘green bristlegrass (Setaria viridis)’ in chapter Millet DarY forms: dary Tksh.dial.: Tietze 2002– etymology: see dary ‘millet’ commentary: See šam darysy ‘corn’ 8 Although it could alternately be Hebr ‫ דּגן‬dagan ‘cereal’ 22 gargydaly || CORN GarGYDalY forms: gargydaly az.: RAzS, Dmitrieva 1972: 213 kargi-dali Tat.: ‫ قارقی دالی‬Tanievъ 1909 languages: az.: gargydaly || Tat.: kargi-dali etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < gargy ‘reed’ + daly ‘its branch’ commentary: he structure of this word is so clear, and the similarity of corn to reed so obvious that we can see no reason to question the etymology presented by Dmitrieva 1972 HaBIž(D)aj forms: habiž(d)aj Kmk.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, RKmkS etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his word is unclear morphologically It is possible that -biž(d)aj corresponds to Tkc bugdaj ‘wheat’ (with a simpliication of the consonant cluster) he ha- in anlaut remains however, utterly incomprehensible KäBä BöDOj forms: käbä bödoj Tat.: R IV 1714t || käbä bodaj Voskresenskij 1894 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his name is not entirely clear Its second element, bödoj raises no doubts about its Tkc origin (Tkc bugdaj ‘wheat’), even though its vocalism is not quite so comprehensible As to käbä, it seems most likely to us that it is in fact a place name, Kaaba A very nice semantic parallel for such a naming is provided by Trkm mekgeǯöven and similar names in Kirg , Kklp and Uyg , Tksh mysyr bugdajy and Ott šam darysy However, front vowels in this form remain a mystery to us Possibly, although this does not seem very likely, this word is identical with Tksh kaba ‘simple, coarse’? Naming one species of cereal with the name of another one, and an attribute raises no doubts (corn was brought to the Tkc peoples relatively late) KOKOrOZ forms: kokoroz KarC: ‘roasted corn grains’ Levi 1996 || Ott.: R II 509b‫قوق��وروز‬, MiklTürkEl ‫قوقورس‬, Redhouse 1921‫قوقوروس‬, ‫ || قوقوروز‬Tksh.: Eren 1999 kukkurus Čuv.: RČuvS-A kukurus Tat.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 CORN || kokoroz 23 kukurūsa Yak.: Slepcov 1975 (from 1935) kukurusь Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909 kukuruz Bosn.Tksh.: R II 897m || Bšk.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 || Tat.: RTatS-D, RTatS-G || Tksh.: Eren 1999 kukuruza Bšk.: RBškS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Čuv.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, RČuvS-A, RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E || Khak.: RChakS, Dmitrieva 1972: 213 || Oyr.: RAltS || Tat.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 || Tuv.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 || Yak.: RJakS, Dmitrieva 1972: 213, Slepcov 1975 (since 1935) languages: Bosn.Tksh.: kukuruz || Bšk.: kukuruz, kukuruza || Čuv.: kukkurus, kukurusь, kukuruza || KarC.: kokoroz || Khak.: kukuruza || Ott.: kokoroz || Oyr.: kukuruza || Tat.: kukurus, kukuruz, kukuruza || Tksh.: kokoroz, kukuruz || Tuv.: kukuruza || Yak.: kukurūsa, kukuruza etymology: 1930: Nikolić9: Tkc [? ɔ: Tksh ] koku (or mum for the form mumuruz) ‘stink’ + uruz ‘rice’ > ‘rice of poor species’ his proposition is thoroughly false for the following reasons: 1. there is no such word in the Tkc languages as mum ‘stink’; 2. there is no such word in the Tkc languages as uruz ‘rice’; 3. a compound of two nouns in Nom which would have this kind of a meaning is impossible in the Tkc languages; 4. to the best of our knowledge, the Tkc peoples never considered corn to be a worse kind of cereal (and neither did the Slavic peoples, cf e g Bulg carevica ‘corn’), in fact, the exact opposite was true; 5. it is very hard to ind a major similarity between corn and rice, and we know of no parallel for unifying these two meaning in the Tkc languages 1972: Dmitrieva: Tat kukurus, Bšk kukuruz; Bšk , Khak , Čuv , yak , Oyr , Tat , Tuv kukuruza < Russ 1999: Eren: Tkc kokoroz from the Balkan languages; cf Bulg kukuruz, Serb kukùruz, Rom cucurúz; ultimate source unclear commentary: We believe that this word was borrowed to the Tkc languages from Slav , as Dmitrieva 1972 and Eren 1999 proposed it In particular, the fact that the word has a very rich family in the Slav languages and absolutely no relatives in the Tkc , speaks in favour of this proposition he sounding does not allow for a precise determination of the Slav source We can only make a guess based on historical and cultural-historical premises In the case of Asian Tkc languages it was most probably Russ ; in the case of Bosn Tksh we may suspect a borrowing from one of the Slav languages of the Balkans or, less likely, from Tksh (Ott ); and inally in the case of Tksh (Ott ) – history seems to support the idea of a borrowing from the Balkans (as proposed by Eren 1999) rather than from Russ (as Dmitrieva 1972 wants it) All this might seem somewhat strange given the fact that Europe (except for Spain and Portugal10) has learned about corn from the Ottomans (see above) However, the 9 Nikolić, Agronomski glasnik 1930 and 1931; quoted ater Skok 1971–74 s v kukuruz 10 From Spain corn spread to France among other regions, and from there to Germany, but it only gained popularity later, probably under Turkish or Hungarian inluence 24 kokoroz || CORN linguistic data does not allow for any other solution Most probably, the whole thing might be explained by the following facts: 1 in Ott (and later in Tksh ) the forms kukuruz ~ kokoroz are dialectal; corn was more popular among the Slavic people than it was among the Turks; in a limited area, a Slav word could oust its Tkc equivalent, and then ind its way to the literary language 2 a) all the other Tkc languages where this word is present, have been under a strong Russ inluence b) it is possible, that these Tkc nations only learned about corn from Russians he diferences in auslaut among the Tkc forms (-uz vs -uza) should probably be explained by variations in Russ dialects (although Filin 1965– only attests kukuróz), or by a borrowing from Tksh (Ott ) rather than from Russ he only thing that might still be regarded as being problematic is that our word has no established etymology in the Slav languages An overview of previous solutions (chronologically) and our proposition is presented below Blr.: kukurúza || Bulg.: kukurùz || Cz.: kukuřice, kukuruc (19th c ; Jungmann 1835–3911) || pol.: kukurydza (20th c ), kukurudza, kokoryca (19th c ), kukuryza, kukuruca, kukuryca, kukurudz (18th c ) (SEJP) || SC: kukùruz, kukùruza, kùkurica, kukuriza, kokuruz (Skok 1971–74) || Slvk.: kukurica, kukuruc || Slvn.: koruza || Ukr.: kukurúdza || USorb.: kukurica 1 < Tkc kokoroz, kukuruz ‘corn’ pro: Muchliński 185812; MiklTEl, Karłowicz 1894–190513; Lokotsch 1927; Weigand14; Holub/Lyer1967; Skok 1971–74; Witczak 2003: 124 contra: MiklTElN; SEJP; Bańkowski 2000 he word is incomprehensible on the Tkc ground Vast family in the Slav languages No related words in the Tkc languages 2 native word; cf Slav S kukurjav ‘1 curly; 2 splayed out’ (from ‘hairs’ protruding from corns) pro: Berneker 1908–1315, Brückner 1927; Holub/Kopečný 1952; SEJP; Machek 1968; Zaimov 195716; Schuster-Šewc 1978–89; ESUM; Černych 1993 contra: Vasmer 1986–87 See below 3 < Rom cucuruz ‘1 cone; 2 corn’ pro: ? MiklFremdSlav, BER; Marynaŭ 1978–; ? Bańkowski 2000 See below 4 < kukuru used when luring birds with corn grains pro: Vasmer 1986–87 11 12 13 14 15 16 Jungmann 1835–39; quoted ater Machek 1968 Muchliński 1958: 71; quoted ater SEJP s v kukurydza Karłowicz 1894–1905: 323; quoted ater SEJP s v kukurydza Weigand, G : Jahresbericht des Instituts für rumänische Sprache XVII-XVIII: 363f ; quoted ater SEJP Berneker 1908–13: 640–41; quoted ater SEJP s v kukurydza Zaimov 1957: 113–26: 117–19; quoted ater SEJP s v kukurydza CORN || kokoroz 25 contra: SEJP Very unlikely Would require an assumption that the name for ‘corn’ only came into existence ater its grain had been acquired in some way, and used to lure birds while shouting (why?) kukuru Apart from the above, it is not known which language the proposition refers to 5 = ? Alb kúqur ‘baked; roasted’ or = ? Alb kókërr ‘1 grain of pea; 2 berry’ pro: Bańkowski 2000 Kókërr (< kokë ‘head; bulb; berry; grain’; Orel 1998) seems to be more probable, but as a source of borrowing, rather than an equivalent It also has, however, a very likely Slav proposition (see below), this coincidence should probably be regarded as accidental What is important, though, is the idea proposed by Bańkowski 2000 that the word might have been borrowed via two routes (see below) SEJP suggests that the word should be derived from PSlav *kokor-, a reduplicated form of *kor- (> *korenь), such as bóbr, gogołka or popiół; cf also kąkol ‘corncockle (Agrostemma githago)17’ and kuklik ‘Geum urbanum L ’18 In the Slav languages there are very many names of plants with a very similar sounding, cf e g Bulg kukurják || Cz kokořík || LSorb kokrik || Pol kokornak, kokorycz || Slvk kokorík, kukurík || Ukr kokorička || USorb kokorac (more examples e g in SEJP s v kokornak) he semantic basis were most probably curly (crooked?) leaves or tendrils, or some kind of curls or ‘locks’ characteristic of the given plant (cf Machek 1968; SEJP) Cf Slav S kukurjav ‘curly(-headed)’19 We believe that PSlav *kor- ‘bent’ can with quite a high degree of probability be accepted as the root of our word: cf also Russ dial kokóra ‘trunk […] together with a crooked root […]’, Hung dial kukora ‘crooked; bent; […]’20, and Pol and others krzywy ‘crooked’, maybe also Lat curvus Many Slavists point out phonetical diiculties Two routes of borrowing, proposed by Bańkowski 2000, seem to ofer the best explanation Only instead of the Alb etymons, we would rather assume native Slav names either shited from another similar plant, or neologisms created in the same way as the already existing names Presumably, some of the forms may be explained by a contamination of two (or more?) forms (for Pol , cf Bańkowski 2000) 17 NB: Probably also Hung kankalék ‘primrose’ (in the same way as konkoly ‘corncockle’) is a borrowing from the Slav languages – against EWU, where it is regarded as an ‘Abl[eitung] aus einem iktiven Stamm, Entstehungsweise aber unbest[immt]’ Cf also Lith kãnkalas ‘(little) bell, something clanging’ (Spólnik 1990: 64) 18 From Cz , where it meant among others ‘monk’s hood’; cf Spólnik 1990: 84, though an unclear expression 19 Also Hung kökürü ‘curly(-headed)’, which probably from the Slav languages, too – against EWU, where it is derived from kukora ‘crooked, bent, […]’, which is an ‘Abl[eitung] aus einem relativen iktiven Stamm’ 20 See footnotes 17–19 Cf Pol kąkol ‘corncockle (Agrostemma githago)’ of a very similar structure 26 (kömme) qonaq || CORN Finally, we should also consider whether it would be desirable to assume a PaleoEurop source, which could be connected with OBask and Pre-Romance *kuk(k)ur‘Kamm; Spitze’ (more: Hubschmid 1965: 39), and the Rom form (originally ‘cone’), instead of deriving it directly from Bulg (cf Cihac 1879: II 86 vs Cioranescu 1966) An Ott meaning attested by Redhouse 1921: ‘any tall, ill-shaped thing’, might also be used to support this idea We suppose that Arm gogaṙ and the like ‘hooks with two points used for hanging pots over a ire’ (Bläsing 1992: 58) could also belong to the same family, such as inally Tksh kokoreç ‘meat dish roasted on spit’ (KöMMe) qONaq forms: köma qonaq Uyg.: (Turfan) Jarring 1998: 14 kömbö konok Kirg.dial.: ÈSTJa ‘corn’ kömek Uyg.: Jarring 1998: 14 ‘special species of corn’ köme qonaq Uyg.: Jarring 1998: 14 ‘special species of corn’ kömme qonaq Uyg.: ‫ كومه قوناق‬RUjgS, Jarring 1998: 14 ‘special species of corn’ kömür qonaq Uyg.: Jarring 1998: 14 konag Sal.: ÈSTJa qonaq ‫ قوناق‬Uyg.: Raquette 1927, ÈSTJa languages: Kirg.dial.: kömbö konok || Sal.: konag || Uyg.: köma qonaq, kömek, köme qonaq, kömme qonaq, kömür qonaq, qonaq etymology: 1998: Jarring: 14: ? kömme < köme ~ kömer ‘coal’ (cf kömür qonaq), or ? kömme < kömek ‘?’ commentary: kömme: Jarring’s 1998: 14 proposition which is based on the form kömür qonaq, and derives kömme from kömür (~ Uyg köme(r) ) ‘coal’ is interesting but, semantically, rather enigmatic It seems more plausible to us that kömme is a deverbal noun from the verb köm- ‘to bury, dig in the ground’ Such an attribute may result from the way corn is planted: rather than simply sowing seeds onto ploughed ground, its seeds are thrown into specially prepared pits, and then covered with soil For semantics, cf also the somewhat enigmatic in this regard, sokpa Although this proposition does not explain forms with -r in auslaut, which still remain incomprehensible to us, it still, nonetheless, seems be more plausible It is probable that the same root that can be found in Tkc kömeč ‘1 bread; 2 pie; dumpling’ qonaq: See konak ‘millet’ MäKKe forms: mäkke (plant and dish) Kklp.: RKklpS-B, RKklpS-BB, RKklpS-ST etymology: see meke žügörü and mekgeǯöven CORN || mekgeǯöven 27 commentary: Mäkke as a name for ‘corn’ is certainly an abbreviation of mäkke žueri, created by the same token as mysyr buğdajy > mysyr in Tksh According to Dmitrieva’s 1972 explanation, it means ‘Mecca’ – cf Kirg meke among others ‘Mecca’, and comes from Arab makka ‫( مكة‬quoted by Dmitrieva as Meke s v meke žügörü, and as Mekke s v mekgeǯöven) Cf meke žügörü and mekgeǯöven, and mysyr buğdajy and šam darysy MeKe žüGörü forms: makkažavari Uzb.: ‫ مكه جواری‬Nalivkinъ 1895 makkažŭxori Uzb.: RUzbS-A, RUzbS-Š makka(-)ǯuari Uzb.: Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912 mäkke žueri Kklp.: RKklpS-BB meke žügörü Kirg.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57 mokka-ǯavari Uzb.: Smolenskij 1912 languages: Kirg.: meke žügörü || Kklp.: mäkke žueri || Uzb.: makkažavari, makkažŭhori, makka(-)ǯuari, mokka-ǯavari etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Arab Meke ‘Mecca’ + žügörü ‘corn’ commentary: meke: See mäkke žügörü: See žügörü Cf mäkke, mekgeǯöven, and mysyr buğdajy and šam darysy MeKGeǯöveN forms: mekgeǯöven Trkm.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962, RTrkmS mekke ǯeven Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < mekge < Arab Mekke ‘Mecca’ + ǯöven commentary: mekge-: See mäkke and mäkke žügörü -ǯöven: his word is etymologically unclear hough not listed among equivalents by Eren 1999, it is presumably the same word as Tksh : çöven ‘kökü ve dalları sabun gibi köpürten bir bitki’ < çöğen Eren 1999, dial çoğan, çoğen, çovan, cöiven, çuvan DS || Az çoğan || OKipč çoğan || Trkm çoğan (kökü) ‘çöven’ We believe that it might be closely related to čigin ‘millet’, which unfortunately is unclear, too We should not completely discount the notion that its ultimate source is Pers ǯou- ‘barley’ (see julaf ‘oats’), or alternately, that čigin < čüžgün – which would probably rule out such a connection Cf mäkke, mekgeǯöven, and mysyr buğdajy and šam darysy 28 mysyr (bugdajy) || CORN MYSYr (BUGDajY) forms: mysir bogdaj CTat.: Zaatovъ 1906 mysyr bogdaj ? Ott.: ‫ مصر بوغدای‬Wiesentahl 1895 mysyr-bogdaj KarC: Levi 1996: 45 mysyr bugdaj ? Ott.: ‫ مصر بوغدای‬Wiesentahl 1895 mysyr (bugdajy) Tksh.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 languages: CTat.: mysir bogdaj || KarC.: mysyr-bogdaj || Ott.: ? mysyr bogdaj, ? mysyr bugdaj || Tksh.: mysyr (bugdajy) etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Arab Misr ‘Egypt’ 1999: Eren: does not explain the word – presumably, because he assumes it is obvious – that this name is a compound of a place name + a name of another plant (cereal), i e mysyr bugdajy liter ‘Egyptian wheat’ 2000: Bańkowski s v kukurydza: Tksh mysyr < common Europ mais (Sp maís, Fr maïs et al ) commentary: Bańkowski’s 2000 proposition seems to be deeply problematic for serious phonetical and historical reasons We think that a much better solution has been presented by Dmitrieva, and we believe, that also Eren implied that he had the same solution Currently, an abbreviation of mysyr bugdajy to mysyr caught on in Tksh , just as Kklp mäkke žueri > mäkke Cf šam darysy, and mäkke, meke žügörü and mekgeǯöven An exact semantic parallel (a calque from Ott ?) is ofered by Arm egipt-a-c’oren ‘corn’, liter ‘Egyptian wheat’ It remains somehwat enigmatic to us why this name has been formed with the help of a word for ‘wheat’ if in all the other compounds of this kind, a word for ‘barley’ has been used Interestingly enough, in dialects mysyr bugdajy might actually mean ‘barley’, too: cf mysyr ‘barley’ and dary, jasymuk and jügür id NarTüK forms: nartük Nog.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, RNogS nartux Krč.Blk.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 nartüx Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS languages: Krč.Blk.: nartux, nartüx || Nog.: nartük etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his word is etymologically incomprehensible We can see two ways of trying to explain it, but neither of them is anything more than a conjecture, and none of them is fully clear However, the irst seems to be more probable: CORN || šam darysy 29 1 Osset nartxor ‘corn’, liter ‘food of the Narts’21 Semantically, such a connection raises no doubts It is, however, quite inexplicable phonetically One might believe that it is a Tkc derivative from *nart ‘Nart’ with a meaning calqued from Osset nartxor, but a non-harmonic vocalization undermines this solution 2 common Europ nard he word nard is present in many European languages (Lat nardus, Eng , Fr , Pol , Russ et al nard) but to the best of our knowledge, it has no etymology he plant originates from the region of India and Tibet, and has been known to Europeans since antiquity as a material for perfume production It does not look similar to corn, but it should be remembered that ‘corn’ happens to be the same word for ‘millet’ (see čüzgün qonaq, mysyr bugdajy, žasymyk and žügörü), and that the popular terms for ‘millet’ might in fact mean various, not necessarily closely, related species (see commentary on ‘millet’) A distant analogy is that čikin ‘millet’ may also mean ‘French lavender’22, and the word nard is not always entirely monosemantic as well, e g Gr νάρδος, except for Nardostachys Jatamansi might in various compounds also mean ‘Valeriana Celtica’, ‘Cymbopogon Iwaraneusa’, or ‘nard oil’ (Lidell 91968) and others SarY forms: sary KarH: KRPS etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: From corn’s extremely distinct colour ŠaM DarYSY forms: šam darysy Ott.: Eren 1999 s v mysyr etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: Cf mysyr buğdajy, and mäkke, meke žügörü and mekgeǯöven For a comparison to millet, cf dary and mysyr bugdajy, and čüzgün qonaq, žasymyk and žügörü 21 he Narts were a race of giants described in the mythology of the peoples of Caucasus, including the Ossetians According to the legends, a long time ago, out of pride they rose against God God punished them by sending upon them a terrible famine At night, they would shoot with their bows grains glittering in the sky and eat them but there were not enough, and eventually the entire race starved to death Ater that, the grains fell to the ground and corn sprouted from them (Dumézil 1930: 14) Other languages of Caucasus might also be taken into consideration, see Dumézil 1930: 11: ‘Peut-être qu’on songe que dans une bonne partie du Caucase du nord […] le maïs, n’a d’autre nom que « l’aliment des Nartes »’ 22 he expression in Clauson 1972 is not entirely clear to us: ‘çiki:n […] (3) the name of a plant called usṭūxūdūs ‘French lavender’ […]; çekin same translation; [… ]’ 30 žasymyk || CORN žaSYMYK forms: žasymyk Kzk.dial.: ÈSTJa etymology: see jasymuk ‘millet’ commentary: For naming ‘corn’ and ‘millet’ with one word, cf dary, šam darysy and žügörü, and čüžgün qonaq žüGörü forms: žügeri Krč.Blk.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 || Kzk.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, DFKzk, DKzkF, RKzkS-46, RKzkS-54 žügöri Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899 žügörü Kirg.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213, RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57 žŭxori Uzb.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 ǯügeri Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS languages: Kirg.: žügöri, žügörü, ǯügeri || Krč.Blk.: žügeri || Kzk.: žügeri || Uzb.: žŭxori etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: only points to a connection with OTkc jügür, jür, ügür, üjür and Čuv vir ‘millet’, and with Oyr üre ‘кашица из толчeной крупы’, Tat öjrä, üre ‘кашица; крупяной суп’, Mo ür ‘grain; seeds’, OTkc jügürgün ‘plant similar to millet’ commentary: Žügörü as a name for ‘corn’ is presumably an abbreviation of meke žügörü (cf also mekgeǯöven) Similarly mäkke However, the word is not entirely clear from the etymological point of view he -ü in auslaut is probably a possessive suix which originally created the so-called second izafet in compounds such as Kirg meke žügörü – cf Tksh dial cögür ‘species of grass’ DS, and Tksh mysyr bugdajy ‘corn’ and Ott šam darysy id Eren 1999, Tksh dial dary TS We believe that Dmitrieva’s 1972 proposition to connect the word with OTkc ügür &c has much to commend it (see ügür ‘millet’) Cf meke žügörü yak kokoroz ‘corn’ KarL Čuv Tat Khak Bšk Oyr Tuv Tksh Trkm corn 31 Trkm Uzb Kirg Uyg corn Kklp 32 mäkke, meke žügörü and mekgeǯöven ‘corn’ millet panicum l. Millet is one of the irst plants ever to be cultivated by mankind It is understandable then, that the name for ‘millet’ encompasses in colloquial use many diferent, and not necessarily closely related species (see below) India, Central Asia, China and Africa’s tropical savannahs are considered to be the homeland of millet An exact dating of the beginnings of cultivation is very diicult, as distinguishing separate species in the archeological materials raises serious problems In Europe, which is not the homeland of this cereal (or rather, cereals), it has been discovered in neolithic inds, and in China it had already been one of the ive most important cereals sown by the emperor himself during the vernal equinox as early as in the 28th c BC 23 Proso millet has been traditionally cultivated in China, Central Asia, Turkestan and Transcaucasus he two most important species are colloquially both called millet: proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L ) and setarias, especially foxtail millet (Setaria italica P B = Panicum italicum L and others) Also, some species of sorghum are sometimes called millet, too Both the colloquial and even the botanical terminology is somewhat in confusion (see table in Nowiński 1970: 186), mainly because of numerous synonyms and polysemantic names here is no reason to believe that the situation is any clearer in the Tkc languages 24 We believe that some of the names we list with the meaning of ‘millet’ refer in fact to some other species than proso millet, or that they refer to many species at once Unfortunately, the lexical data we have had access to usually does not allow us to make these kinds of distinctions he lexical data itself does not let us determine whether it was millet or wheat that was the irst cereal the Tkc peoples became acquainted with he fact that we know of no examples of a semantic shit ‘millet’ > ‘wheat’, and that we know of two examples in the opposite direction (unfortunately, both non-Tkc : Nan būda ‘millet’, Žu-čen pùh-tuu-kai ‘millet’ as opposed to Tkc bugdaj ‘wheat’ (Joki 1952: 107)) might suggest that it was wheat that came irst Interestingly, names for ‘millet’ are sometimes mixed or uniied with names for ‘corn’ (cf čüžgün, dary, jasymuk, jügür and mysyr) Possibly, it results from the fact that the grains of these two cereals are similar to each other, both in shape and colour, though the grains of millet are smaller and latter It is also possible, perhaps even more probable, that this uniication arose from the fact that corn had in many regions become the most important cereal, thus taking, at least to some extent, the place of millet 25 One could suppose, for historical reasons, that the direction of the shit would always be ‘millet’ > ‘corn’ but this is not the case with mysyr (see below) 23 his refers to both the most important species: proso and foxtail millet (see below) 24 In fact, it is just the opposite: many of the names we list have a meaning such as ‘a species of millet’ or ‘a plant similar to millet’ &c 25 Cf also e g Pol burak ‘borago’ > ‘beetroot’ resulting from beetroot’s displacing borago and taking over its place (Boryś 2005) 34 MIllet forms: cebedogon čäkin → čigin čigin čigit → čigin čikin → čigin čingetarā → tarā čüžgün čygyt → čigin darā → tarā dari → dary daru → dary dary indäü itkonak → konak jasymuk jögür → ügür josmik → jasymuk jügür → ügür jügürgün → ügür jügürgǖn → ügür jür → ügür kojak → konak konag → konak konaγ → konak konak konāk → konak konakaj → konak konok → konak kunak → konak mysyr mysyr buğdajy → mysyr mysyrda(ry) → mysyr mysyrgan → mysyr nardan ögür → ügür öjür → ügür prosa proso qonaq → konak qunoq → konak sök sokpa sük → sök tarā taragan taraγ → dary taran → taragan tarān → taragan tari → dary tarī → dary tarig → dary tarik → dary tariq → dary taru → dary tarū → dary tary → dary taryg → dary taryγ → dary taryk → dary teri → dary teriγ → dary terik → dary teriq → dary tögi → tögü tögü töhö → tögü tügä → tögü tügi → tögü tügü → tögü tui → tögü tüi → tögü tüjtary tyră → dary ? tyryq → dary ügür ügürgǟn → ügür üjür → ügür *üör → ügür ǖr → ügür vir → ügür xonak → konak xōtarā → tarā ǯavers KarC: dary || tary KarH: cebedogon Khak : prosa || taryg Kirg : konak || konok || tarū || tary Kklp : konak || tary Kmk : tari || tarī || tary Kmnd : taragan Krč : tary || tüi Krč Blk : tary Kzk : itkonak || konak || sök || tary || tüjtary MTkc : čikin || jögür || jügür || kojak || konak || ögür || öjür || taryg || taryk || tügi || ügür MTkc H: tary MTkc IM: taryg MTkc KD: taru || tügü MTkc MA B: kojak || konak || konāk MTkc MK: jügür || jügürgǖn || taryg || tögi || tügi || ügür || ügürgǟn || üjür languages: Az : dary Blk : tary Brb : taran Bšk : tary Com : tary [tari] CTat : dary Čag : čäkin || čigin || indäü || konag || konak || sök || tarig || tarik || taryg || tügi Čuv : tyră || vir Fuyü: nardan Gag : dary MILLET || čigin Nog : konakaj || tary OTkc : čigit || jasymuk || jügürgün || jür || kojak || konak || sök || tarik || taryg || tögü || töhö || tügä || üjür Ott : čigit || čygyt || daru || dary || tary || ǯavers OUyg : qonaq || taraγ || ǖr Oyr : taragan || tarān SarUyg : sokpa || taryg Tat : dari || sük || tary Tat Gr : tary Tel : taragan || tarān || taru || tarū || tary Tksh : dary Tksh dial : mysyr || mysyr bugdajy || mysyrda(ry) || mysyrgan Tob : tary Tof : darā Trkm : dary || konak || taryg || tui 35 Tuv : čingetarā || tarā || xonak || xōtarā Uyg : čüžgün || konaγ || konak || konok || qonaq || sök || tariq || taryγ || teri || teriγ || terik || teriq || tügi || ? tyryq || üjür Uzb : čigin || josmik || konak || kunak || qunoq || tarik || tariq || taryk yak : proso || tarān || *üör CeBeDOGON forms: cebedogon KarH: KRPS etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his name is unclear Most probably it is a compound of cebe + dogon, where dogon < Hebr ‫דּגן‬ dagan ‘cereal’ or alternately ‫ דּוחן‬dochan ‘millet; millet groats’; cebe is however, unclear Cf basadohan ‘corn’ ČIGIN forms: čäkin Čag.: ‫‘ چیكین‬species of millet’ čigin Čag.: R III 2110m ‫‘ چیغی��ن‬very ine millet’, ‘cotton seeds’, R III 2114b ‫چیكی��ن‬ ‘species of millet’, VEWT 107 ‘very ine millet’, ‘cotton seeds’ || Uzb.: ‫‘ چیغی��ن‬very ine millet’, ‘cotton seeds’ R III 2110m čigit OTkc.: VEWT 107 || Ott.: VEWT 107 čikin MTkc.: VEWT ‘ährenbildende Futterplanze, die zwischen Weinstöcken angeplanzt wird’ čygyt Ott.: VEWT 107 languages: Čag.: čäkin, čigin || MTkc.: čikin || OTkc.: čigit || Ott.: čigit, čygyt || Uzb.: čigin etymology: as yet not proposed commentary: his name is unclear, and to the best of our knowledge no etymology has been proposed for it as yet It seems to us that it might be etymologically the same word as unfortunately the equally unclear ǯöven in mekgeǯöven ‘corn’ his is entirely possible both phonetically and semantically (for naming ‘millet’ and ‘corn’ with one word cf čüžgün, dary, jasymuk, jügür and mysyr) If it turned out, however, even though it is not very likely that ǯöven << Pers ǯou- (cf julaf ‘oats’), than the possibility of connecting čigin with cüžgün and ǯöven should probably be excluded 36 čüžgün || MILLET ČüžGüN forms: čüžgün Uyg.: Jarring 1998: 14 (ater Schwarz 356) ‘Setaria viridis’ etymology: 1998: Jarring: 14: ž indicates a non-Tkc origin; enigmatic word commentary: Cf čüžgün qonaq ‘corn’ his word is unclear One cannot help noticing the phonetic similarity to čigin ‘millet’ (cf ) which is unclear, too If these two words were to be related, čüžgün is probably the older form DarY forms: dari Tat.: ‫ داری‬Tanievъ 1909 daru Ott.: ÈSTJa dary az.: RAzS, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || CTat.: ÈSTJa || Gag.: ÈSTJa || KarC: ÈSTJa, KRPS, Levi 1996 || Ott.: (‫ )داری‬Wiesentahl 1895, ‫داری‬, ‫طاری‬, տարը R III 1627m, VEWT || Tksh.: Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999, Tietze 2002– || Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929, RTrkmS, Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 taraγ OUyg.: ÈSTJa tari Kmk.: Dmitrieva 1972 tarī Kmk.: ÈSTJa tarig Čag.: ‫ تاریق‬R III 850m, VEWT tarik Čag.: ‫‘ تاری��ق‬Ackerfeld’ R III 850m, ÈSTJa || OTkc.: ‫ تاری��ق‬R III 850m || Uzb.: Eren 1999 tariq Uyg.: Brands 1973: 33 || Uzb.: RUzbS-A, Dmitrieva 1972, Brands 1973: 33, ÈSTJa taru MTkc.KD: ‫ || تاروا‬Tel.: Ryumina-Sırkaşeva 1995 tarū Kirg.: RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57, Dmitrieva 1972, Brands 1973: 33, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Tel.: R III 851m, Eren 1999 tary Blk.: VEWT, Eren 1999 || Bšk.: RBškS, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Com.: [tari] Grønbech 1942, ÈSTJa, KWb 380 || KarC: KRPS, ÈSTJa, Levi 1996 || Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899, ÈSTJa || Kklp.: RKklpS-BB, RKklpS-ST, RKklpS-B, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Kmk.: RKmkS || Krč.: VEWT || Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Kzk.: RKzkS-46, RKzkS-54, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, KWb 380, DFKzk, DKzkF, Eren 1999 || MTkc.H: (‫ || )طاری‬Nog.: RNogS, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Eren 1999 || Ott.: R III 986b || Tat.: R III 846m, III 1047m, IV 1857b, Voskresenskij 1894, Imanaevъ 1901, RTatS-D, RTatS-G, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, KWb 380, Eren 1999 || Tat.Gr.: Podolsky 1981 || Tel.: R III 851m || Tob.: ÈSTJa taryg Čag.: ÈSTJa || Khak.: ÈSTJa || MTkc.: ÈSTJa, VEWT ‘1 grain; 2 millet’, Eren 1999 ‘sowing; plant; barley; wheat; grain’ || MTkc.IM || MTkc.MK: Dankof/ Kelly 1982–85 || OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 ‘millet; grain; grass, Eren 1999 ‘sowing’ || SarUyg.: ‘1 grain; 2 millet’ VEWT || Trkm.: (‫ )تاریق‬Nalivkinъ 1895 taryγ Uyg.: VEWT ‘1 grain; 2 millet’ MILLET || dary 37 taryk MTkc.KD: ‫ || طارغ‬Uzb.: Lapin 1899, (‘крупноe’) Smolenskij 1912 teri Uyg.: ‘1 grain; 2 millet’ VEWT teriγ Uyg.: ÈSTJa terik Uyg.: R III 850m, VEWT teriq Uyg.: Menges 1933, ‫ تیریق‬RUjgS, Dmitrieva 1972 tyră Čuv.: VEWT ‘grain; millet’, Eren 1999 ‘cereal’ ? tyryq Uyg.: ‫ تریق‬Raquette 1927 languages: az.: dary || Blk.: tary || Bšk.: tary || Com.: tary [tari] || CTat.: dary || Čag.: tarig, tarik, taryg || Čuv.: tyră || Gag.: dary || KarC.: dary, tary || Khak.: taryg || Kirg.: tarū, tary || Kklp.: tary || Kmk.: tari, tarī, tary || Krč.: tary || Krč.Blk.: tary || Kzk.: tary || MTkc.: taryg, taryk || MTkc.H: tary || MTkc.IM: taryg || MTkc.KD: taru || MTkc.MK: taryg || Nog.: tary || OTkc.: tarik, taryg || Ott.: daru, dary, tary || OUyg.: taraγ || SarUyg.: taryg || Tat.: dari, tary || Tat.Gr.: tary || Tel.: taru, tarū, tary || Tksh.: dary || Tob.: tary || Trkm.: dary, taryg || Uyg.: tariq, taryγ, teri, teriγ, terik, teriq, ? tyryq || Uzb.: tarik, tariq, taryk etymology: 1960: VGAS 62: OTkc taryg ‘Ernte, Getreide’ = Mo tarijan ‘Feld, Saat’, MMo tarijad ‘Saaten, Getreide’, Xlx tariā ‘Saat’ 1969: VEWT: ~ Mo tarijan ‘sowing; cereal; land, soil; grain’ 1972: Clauson: < tary ‘to cultivate land’; d- by contamination with Pers dārū ‘medicine, drug’ 1972: Dmitrieva: OTkc taryg ‘millet; grain; grass’ < tary ‘to sow’ + -g 1974: ÈSTJa: 1. Forms without -g: < tar- ‘to cultivate land; to sow’ + -y; 2. Forms with -g: < tar-y- ‘to sow’ or like 1 1979: Dmitrieva: < tary ‘to sow’ + -yg ‘result, outcome’ Tuv tarā, Oyr tarān, Tat , Brb taran ‘millet’ < Mo tarijan ‘grain’, where -ān < -γan 1999: Eren: < tary ‘(ekin) ekmek’ + -ğ 2002: Tietze: < OTkc taryg (ater Clauson 1972) commentary: his word has relatively uniform meanings in all the languages (ater ÈSTJa): 1 he form without -g apart from ‘millet’ can mean: ‘grain’, ‘cereal’, ‘groats’ and the like, and other cereals All these meanings are understandable given the etymology and, except for the last group, are of a very limited range (at most one of the following languages: Oyr , Tof , Tuv ) For Tksh dial meaning of ‘corn’, cf mysyr, the commentary at the beginning of this chapter, and čüžgün, jasymuk and jügür 2 he form with -g means also ‘wheat’, ‘barley’, ‘grain’, ‘cereal’, ‘fodder’, ‘sowing’, ‘crops’, ‘harvest’, ‘cultivation’, ‘descendant’ and the like All these meanings are older and, except for the last possibility which is not fully clear, understandable in view of the etymology he morphological structure of this word and its deverbal origin are quite obvious he problematic part is the inal vowel of the verbal stem (see tara and taragan) It has been, 38 indäü || MILLET however, solved by ÈSTJa in a very convincing way by interpreting -y ~ -a as a denominal suix and deriving the verbal tary- ~ tara- from nominal *tar ‘sowing; harvest; ield’, which at the same time explains dary (< tar-), taryg (< tar-( y-)) and such forms as Sag and others tarlaγ ‘fodder’, and OUyg taraγ ‘cereal’ and the like (< tar-a-) Cf tarā, taragan he contamination with Pers darū ‘medicine, drug’ assumed by Clauson 1979 to explain the voiced anlaut in Oghuz is, as has been justly remarked by ÈSTJa, not very likely (although it seems to us that the semantic diiculty, not mentioned by ÈSTJa, migh be even more important than the fact that the Pers dārū is unknown to SW Tkc languages), and moreover, absolutely superluous since the voicing of occlusives in anlaut is a regular change in the Oghuz languages, and the d- forms in Kipč (KarC and Tat ) may be easily, and with a very high degree of plausibility, explained by an Oghuz inluence or borrowing 26 For further bibliography cf irst of all ÈSTJa and Eren 1999 Dmitireva 1979: 163 has suggested that the fact that this name derives from the verb ‘to sow’ might be regarded as a testimony that millet was the irst cereal cultivated by the Tkc peoples But, it might also not be true since, she continues, D tarwe ‘wheat’ AS tare ‘tare, vetch’ et al < [sic] OInd dūrvā ‘millet’ < PIE *der- ‘to rip of; to skin’ his seems to us to be quite poor reasoning OInd and the Grmc languages are only very remotely related with one another, and the fact that what originally was one word now has diferent meanings is not actually very surprising he Tkc languages are related much more closely, and dary has a very uniform meaning (with a few exceptions, see above) of ‘millet’; only in a few of the languages does it include ‘grain’, ’cereal’ and the like he situation is then, quite diferent However, even in these, much more favourable conditions we do not believe – as Dmitrieva apparently does – that it is possible to establish which was the irst cereal cultivated by the Tkc peoples using only the etymology of one word One could equally well suppose that the irst cereal was named with a borrowing rather than a native word, and such a guess could not be proved any more Cf also (-)tarā and taragan INDäü forms: indäü Čag.: ‫ ]…[‘ اینداو‬родъ проса, изъ котораго приготовляeтся масло […]’ R I 1449m etymology: R I 1449m: < indä+-ü commentary: he etymology ofered by Radlof is rather odd indä appears in various languages, but with the meaning of ‘to call, to summon’ hus, the semantic connection – if it even exists – would require a comprehensive commentary, which Radlof fails to provide Regrettably, we cannot ofer a more convincing proposition, either 26 hey could also be understood as the result of an assimilation to the next consonant, i e t-r > d-r, which is however not very convincing since such a change is characteristic of Oghuz , not Kipč languages MILLET || konak 39 jaSYMUK forms: jasymuk OTkc.: ‘? millet’ DTS, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa josmik Uzb.: [‘?’] VEWT languages: OTkc.: jasymuk || Uzb.: josmik etymology: 1969: 1972: 1974: 1991: VEWT: Čag jasmuk ‘lentil’ < jasy ‘wide’ Clauson: jasymuk, ? jasmuk ‘a lat (seed)’ < jasÈSTJa: < jas- ‘to latten’ or jasy ‘lat’ Erdal: 101: < jasy ‘lat’ Commentary: his word is quite common in the Tkc languages It has many meanings, the most basic deinitely being ‘lentil’, and not ‘millet’ 27 Etymologically, there can be no doubt that the word is a derivative from jas- ‘to latten’ or jasy ‘lat’; what does raise doubts though, is whether it is a deverbal or a denominal derivative; for bibliography cf ÈSTJa We believe that the former is much less likely due to the fact that -muk is in fact a denominal suix (see Erdal 1991: 100) Two-syllable forms are surely the result of dropping the high vowel in the middle syllable, which is a completely natural phenomenon in the Tkc languages he meaning of ‘millet’ most probably results from the fact that the grains of millet are quite lat heir shape can actually be used as an auxiliary argument for the denominal origin of the word: the suix -myk with the meaning of ‘low intensity of the feature’ its the shape of millet grains better than any other would Cf also jasmyk ‘wheat’ and žasymyk ‘corn’ KONaK forms: itkonak Kzk.: DFKzk kojak MTkc.: ‘mediocre species of millet’ VEWT || MTkc.MK: DTS, ÈSTJa || OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 || konag Čag.: ‫‘ قون��اغ‬species of millet’ R II 538m; VEWT, ÈSTJa konaγ Uyg.: ÈSTJa konak Čag.: ‫‘ قون��اق‬родъ крупнаго проса’ R II 535b; ‘mediocre species of millet’ VEWT || Kirg.: Dmitrieva 1972 || Kklp.: ÈSTJa || Kzk.: ‘родъ крупнаго проса’ R II 535b || MTkc.: ‘mediocre species of millet’ VEWT || MTkc.MK: Dankof/ Kelly 1982–85 || OTkc.: R II 535b ‫‘ قوناق‬родъ крупнаго проса’; VEWT ‘mediocre 27 A comprehensive list is available in ÈSTJa However, it does not contain some interesting related forms in -mak, such as: Khak naspax, Tuv čašpak ‘pearl millet mixed with boiled potatoes or fat’, Tat dial jasmak ‘lentil’ < jas- ‘to latten’ (here the descent from jasy must be excluded due to a clearly deverbal character of -mak) (Stachowski, M 1995: 151f ) 40 mysyr || MILLET species of millet’, Dmitrieva 1972 || Trkm.: ÈSTJa || Uyg.: ‘mediocre species of millet’ VEWT || Uzb.: ÈSTJa konāk MTkc.Ma.B: Borovkov 1971: 106 konakaj Nog.: ÈSTJa konok Kirg.: ÈSTJa ‘Setaria italica var. mogharium Alef ’, Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 36 ‘Setaria italica var. mogharium Alef ; setaria (Setaria P B ); foxtail millet (Setaria italica P B )’ || Uyg.: VEWT kunak Uzb.: (‘мeлкоe’) Smolenskij 1912 qonaq OUyg.: DTS ‘species of millet’, Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 36 || Uyg.: Jarring 1964, Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 36 qunoq Uzb.: Dmitrieva 1972, Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 36 xonak Tuv.: ÈSTJa ‘Setaria viridis P B ’ languages: Čag.: konag, konak || Kirg.: konak, konok || Kklp.: konak || Kzk.: itkonak, konak || MTkc.: kojak, konak || MTkc.Ma.B: konāk || MTkc.MK: kojak, konak || Nog.: konakaj || OTkc.: kojak, konak || OUyg.: qonaq || Trkm.: konak || Tuv.: xonak || Uyg.: konaγ, konak, konok, qonaq || Uzb.: konak, kunak, qunoq etymology: 1969: VEWT: ~ Mo qonaγ, qonuγ ‘millet’ 1974: ÈSTJa: limits himselt to quoting two previous comparisons with Mo against Clauson 1972 1976: KWb 185: only points to the comparison with qonaγ, qonuγ commentary: his word is common in the Tkc languages and has many meanings28, ‘millet’ being the most common one Clauson’s 1972 etymology is, as ÈSTJa has stated, very improbable for phonetic (konak, not *kōnak) and semantic (kōn- ‘to sit’, not ‘to seat’) reasons Unfortunately, no other etymology has been proposed, and we are not able to provide one, either About borrowing this word to the Pamir languages, see Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 35f MYSYr forms: mysyr Tksh.dial.: DS mysyr bugdajy Tksh.dial.: ‘millet’ Eren 1999 mysyrda(ry) Tksh.dial.: DS mysyrgan Tksh.dial.: DS etymology: as yet not discussed in the meaning of ‘millet’ 28 Most of them are related to cereals – as a general term, or as the name of some species Apart from ‘millet’, they are: ‘setarias’ (Tuv ), ‘corn’, ‘sorghum’ (Kirg ) and others (ÈSTJa) See also (kömme) konak ‘corn’ MILLET || prosa 41 commentary: Usually mysyr means ‘corn’ in Tksh Using one word to name these two cereals oten happens (see čüžgün, dary, jasymuk and jügür) but the direction is always natural from the historical point of view, i e ‘millet’ > ‘corn’ To assume that some of the Anatolian Turks learned about millet from Egypt would be totally unrealistic, given the history of the cultivation of millet Probably, the only acceptable guess would be that corn displaced or at least surpassed millet in importance in some regions of Turkey (which is quite likely), and hence the secondary meaning (cf footnote 32) To some extent, such a scenario is pointed to by Tksh dial mysyrda(ry) and mysyrgan with a clear suix -gan which is used very oten to form names of plants, usually with the meaning of ‘similar to; -like’ (cf arpakan ‘oats’ and arpagan ‘(wild) barley’) Mysyr itself is probably an abbreviation of one of these forms, or simply a shit from mysyr ‘corn’ NarDaN forms: nardan Fuyü: Zhen-hua 1987 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: Probably from Pers nārdān ‘pomegranate seeds; (= nārdānag) dried seeds of wild pomegranate used as a spice’ (Rubinčik 1970), though the semantic is not entirely clear A devisable connection with nartük ‘corn’ should probably be ruled out despite of some remote associations prOSa forms: prosa Khak.: RChakS, Dmitrieva 1972, Brands 1973 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ proso ‘millet’ 1973: Brands: < Russ proso ‘millet’ commentary: he inal -a might be a result of two possible events: 1. a phonetical, not graphical borrowing; 2. borrowing of the Gen form used as Part 29 It seems impossible to determine, which is more likely In reality, probably both these factors were present at the same time and separating them would be but an artiicial operation, which would result in a more methodical description of the change mechanism 29 Similarly to e g yak pruoška, boruoska, Šr prašqa &c ‘snuf’ << Pol proszka (Helimskij 1990: 41, Anikin 2003) || Dolg häldäj ‘herring’ < Russ selьdej Gen Pl < selьdь ‘herring’ (Stachowski, M 1999b) || Tuv köpǟk ‘kopeck’ < Russ kopeek Gen Pl < kopejka ‘kopeck’ (Pomorska 1995: 99) &c he phenomenon is absolutely understandable, given that borrowings are usually made during conversation when Nom is normally used less frequently than oblique cases, cf also yak ostolobuoj < Russ stolóvoj Gen , Praep or Dat Sg < stolóvaja ‘canteen’ || Tuv laptū ‘kind of baseball’ < Russ (igratь v) laptú (Pomorska 1995: 102 and 100 respectively) and others 42 proso || MILLET prOSO forms: proso Yak.: RJakS, Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ proso ‘millet’ commentary: It is diicult to criticise the etymology proposed by Dmitrieva 1972 A complete lack of assimilation (cf ebies ‘oats’) indicates that the borrowing was made only very recently, or alternately that the orthography does not in fact render the actual yak pronunciation SöK forms: sök Čag.: SKE 240 TMEN, VEWT ‘husked millet’ || Kzk.: SKE 240, TMEN, VEWT ‘husked millet’, DFKzk, DKzkF || OTkc.: VEWT ‘husked millet’ || Uyg.: SKE 240 sük Tat.: ‘millet pap’ VEWT languages: Čag.: sök || Kzk.: sök || OTkc.: sök || Tat.: sük || Uyg.: sök etymology: 1935: 1949: 1963: 1969: KWb: 333: = Mo sög, Klmk sög ‘chassed millet’ SKE 240: < Chin TMEN: ? Tkc < Pers sōk ‘ear of corn, beard of corn’ VEWT: < Chin , KorS (ater: SKE 240) sok = Mo sög ‘millet; spelt’ commentary: his word appears also in Kirg , Kzk , Trkm , Uyg and Uzb meaning ‘spelt’ he origin proposed by SKE 240 seems very likely (see below) TMEN, reasoning from the fact that the word is only attested as late as Čag , suggests the possibility of a borrowing from Pers sōk ‘ear of corn, beard of corn’ which would directly, or via Tkc dialects, originate from Chin his proposition can not be completely discounted30, even though its seems to complicate the route of borrowing beyond what is necessary hat a word was not attested earlier than Čag does not mean it did not exist before As has been proposed by TMEN, the Chin etymon SKE 240 most probably meant is 粟31 sù ‘foxtail millet (Setaria italica P B )’ We believe that its MChin sounding, *sjowk (Baxter: 129, oral information from Prof A Vovin [Honolulu]), *siok4 (Tōdō 2001) raises no doubts about the phonetics, and neither about the meaning 30 he change of harmony from back to front could be explained by the palatal pronunciation of -k in Pers he semantic change could be explainable as easily 31 he same sign is used to write OJap *apa ‘millet’ (Martin 1987: 388, Omodaka 2000), cf arpa ‘barley’ MILLET || tarā 43 SOKpa forms: sokpa SarUyg.: Tenišev 1976 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: While morphologically this word is absolutely clear (sok- ‘to stick, to poke’ + -ma), its meaning is quite strange he literal meaning of *‘seedling’ indicates ‘rice’ or ‘corn’ rather than ‘millet’ One could try to look for a semantic parallel in tögü32 but the meaning of *tög- ‘to beat, to hit’ enables an evolution to basically any cereal, and makes it impossible to compare with sok- Perhaps this is an example of unifying/mixing ‘millet’ with ‘corn’ (cf (kömme) konak)? Tarā forms: čingetarā Tuv.: RTuwS, Dmitrieva 1972 darā Tof.: ÈSTJa tarā Tuv.: R II 135b (in: kara ~ ‘black millet’), Brands 1973: 33, ÈSTJa xōtarā Tuv.: RTuwS languages: Tof.: darā || Tuv.: čingetarā, tarā, xōtarā etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Tuv činge ‘thin’ + tarā ‘grain; cereal’ 1973: Brands: 33: < Mo tarijan, tarān ‘harvest; cereal’ 1979: Dmitrieva: Tuv tarā, Oyr tarān, Brb , Tat taran ‘millet’ < Mo tarijan ‘grain’, where -ān < -γan commentary: tarā As opposed to tara(ga)n, this form has no -n in auslaut, and thus it can be hardly expected to contain a trace of -gan, as has been proposed by Dmitrieva 1979, or that it is borrowed from Mo , as Brands 1973: 33 has suggested (cf taragan) What seems much more probable is that they are -g derivatives from tar-a- For tar-a- and the semantic of OUyg forms cf ÈSTJa’s commentary on dary ‘corn’ čingetarā Dmitrieva’s 1972 etymology is quite obvious, and it would be wrong to assume any other origin of this word ‘hin’ surely refers to the shape of this plant: millet stalks are much thinner than those of other cerals hey are also more elastic, making millet bend and lie down which makes the impression of thinness even stronger kara tarā: name fully clear etymologically and semantically xōtarā: name unclear 32 Perhaps also tüjtary 44 taragan || MILLET TaraGaN forms: taragan Kmnd.: Eren 1999 || Oyr.: R III 840b || Tel.: R III 840b, Eren 1999 taran Brb.: R III 841m, ÈSTJa, KWb 380 tarān Oyr.: RAltS, Dmitrieva 1972, Brands 1973: 33, ÈSTJa, KWb 380, Eren 1999 || Tel.: R III 841m, ÈSTJa, KWb 380, Eren 1999 || Yak. Fedotov 1996 ~ üöre ‘millet; groats’ languages: Brb.: taran || Kmnd.: taragan || Oyr.: taragan, tarān || Tel.: taragan, tarān || Yak.: tarān etymology: 1935: KWb 380: Brb tarian, Oyr , Tel tarān < Mo 1960: VGAS: Mo tarijan ‘ield; sowing’, tarijad ‘sowing; cereal’ &c = OTkc taryg ‘crop; cereal’ 1973: Brands: 33: < Mo tarijan, tarān ‘sowing; cereal’ 1974: ÈSTJa: < tar-a-; against deriving < Mo tarija(n) 1999: Eren: < Mo commentary: ÈSTJa is against KWb 380 for phonetic reasons (Mo -ija : Tkc -aγa-), and supports VGAS 62 assuming a parallel evolution tar-a- + -gan > Tkc taragan &c , Mo tarija We too, support this conception Cf dary, -tarā TöGü forms: tögi MTkc.MK: (Oghuz ) Eren 1999 ‘husked millet’ tögü OTkc.: TMEN 979, ÈSTJa töhö OTkc.: ÈSTJa tügä OTkc.: VEWT ‘husked yellow millet’ tügi Čag.: ‘husked millet’ TMEN 979 || MTkc.: VEWT ‘husked millet’ || MTkc.MK: Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 || Uyg.: VEWT ‘husked millet’ tügü MTkc.KD: ‫‘ تكو‬husked millet’ tui Trkm.: ‫توی‬, ‫ طوی‬R III 1423b tüi Krč.: Pröhle 1909, VEWT languages: Čag.: tügi || Krč.: tüi || MTkc.: tügi || MTkc.KD: tügü || MTkc.MK: tögi, tügi || OTkc.: tögü, töhö, tügä || Trkm.: tui || Uyg.: tügi etymology: see tüvi ‘rice’ commentary: See tüvi ‘rice’; also dövme ‘wheat’ Trkm tui (‫توی‬, ‫طوی‬, so tüvi and tuvi can not be excluded either; cf Trkm tüvi ‘rice’) is most probably, as suggested by TMEN 979 borrowed from Čag or another Kipč source, as is indicated by the voiceless auslaut (cf also dary) MILLET || ügür 45 TüjTarY forms: tüjtary Kzk.: TMEN 979 ‘foxtail millet’ etymology: 1963: TMEN 979: < *tügi-taryg commentary: he etymology ofered by TMEN 979 appears to be quite probable, although the meaning is a little surprising One could expect such a compound to yield a meaning like ‘husked millet’ or something similar (cf tüvi ‘rice’), not ‘foxtail millet’ While from the semantic point of view a compound *tüj-tary ‘millet with hair’ would seem much more likely, and would be a nice parallel to the European names (cf Eng foxtail bristlegrass, Slav włośnica or Lat setaria (< Lat saeta (sēta) ‘(hard) animal hair, horse hair’; Genaust 1976) ), such a solution raises phonetic doubts: in Kzk ‘hair’ is called tük Maybe a borrowing from one of the Oghuz languages? hough not very probable, it nevertheless cannot be ruled out that tögü &c < *tügī ‘hair’ (adj ) < tük ‘hair’ + -ī adj (< Pers ), cf tüvi ‘rice’ his idea is interesting semantically but it seems that it, too, leaves the sounding of tüjtary unexplained üGür forms: jögür MTkc.: VEWT jügür MTkc.MK: MK III 9 (DTS) || OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 jügürgün OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 jügürgǖn MTkc.MK: ‘plant similar to millet’ Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 jür OTkc.: DTS, Dmitrieva 1972 ögür MTkc.: VEWT öjür OTkc.: Egorov 1964, VEWT, Fedotov 1996 ‘millet; spelt’ ügür MTkc.MK: MK I 54, II 121 (DTS), Dankof/Kelly 1982–85, Eren 1999 s v darı || OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 ügürgǟn MTkc.MK: ‘grain eaten by Qarluq Turkmān’ Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 üjür MTkc.MK: (Oghuz ) Eren 1999 s v darı || OTkc.: DTS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Uyg.: Eren 1999 s v darı *üör Yak.: Fedotov 1996 tarān ~e ‘millet; groats’ ǖr OUyg.: Çevilek 2005 vir Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909, RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E, VEWT, RČuvS-A, Dmitrieva 1972, Eren 1999 s v darı languages: Čuv.: vir || MTkc.: jögür, jügür, ögür, öjür, ügür || MTkc.MK: jügür, jügürgǖn, ügür, ügürgǟn, üjür || OTkc.: jügürgün, jür, üjür || OUyg.: ǖr || Uyg.: üjür || Yak.: *üör etymology: 1957: Ramstedt: Čuv vir = Mo üre ‘seed; fruit’ 1964: Egorov: limits himself to a comparison to Mo ür ‘grain; seeds; crop’ 46 ǯavers || MILLET 1972: Dmitrieva: = OTkc jügür, jür, ügür, üjür; indicates a comparison to Kzk žügeri ‘corn’ and Tat öjrä, Tat üre ‘кашица; крупяной суп’, Oyr üre ‘кашица из толчeной крупы’, Mo ür ‘grain; seeds’, OTkc jügürgün ‘plant similar to millet’ 1995: Stachowski, M : Khak ügrä ‘soup’, OUyg ügrä ‘gruel; pap’ &c < *ügür- ‘to grate; to squeeze; to grind’ 1996: Fedotov: limits himself to indicating a comparison to Mo üre ‘seeds; fruit’ 1999: Eren s v darı: ügür &c = Čuv vir commentary: his word has quite a large number of phonetic shapes which is understandable given its phonetical structure It appears in a relatively large number of meanings, of which only the ones connected with ‘millet’ have been listed here; see Egorov 1964, Stachowski, M 1995, Fedotov 1996 To the best of our knowledge, the only etymology to date is the one proposed by Stachowski, M 1995: 158 It seems to be based solely on the meanings of the type ‘gruel’, ‘pap’, ‘soup’ and the like, but connecting these two words does not pose any major problems We know that the Turks have been eating various cereals, including millet, in the form of gruels, mashes and the like (cf Tryjarski 1993: 120 and others) Shiting the name from ‘gruel (or something similar) made of millet’ to ‘millet’ itself is only natural However, the morphological structure does pose a problem here While the ‘gruel’ &c words have a vocalic auslaut (Khak ügrä ‘soup’, OUyg ügrä ‘gruel; pap’, Tat öjrä ‘soup with gruels’ &c ), the ‘millet’ ones have a consonant at the end In OTkc , the existence of nomen and verbum with the same sounding is not a rare phenomenon, but a uniication of meanings ‘to grate; to squeeze; to grind’ and ‘millet’ in one stem, with no suixes, is hardly probable ‘To grind’ and ‘gruel’ would make a more likely couple, but it is the meaning of ‘gruel’ that has the suix, and of ‘millet’ that does not It hardly seems plausible that the forms meaning ‘gruel’ &c would not be related in this or another way to the words mentioned above but it is impossible to establish the exact nature of this relationship at the moment Further bibliography in Eren 1999 Cf also öjür ‘wheat’, and for the inal semantics – tüvi ‘rice’ and dövme ‘wheat’ ǯaverS forms: ǯavers (‫ )جاورس‬Ott.: Wiesentahl 1895 ǯāvers Ott.: ‘species of millet growing wild among wheat’ Redhouse 1921 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: From Pers ‫ جَ��اوِِرس‬ǯavers ~ ‫ گاورس‬gawres ‘foxtail millet (Setaria italica P B ); Setaria viridis P B ’ On the surface, the semantics might raise doubts here But setarias, like in all probability other grasses, too, are named in various languages of the world, including those in Asia, with the word for ‘millet’ and some kind of an adjective (cf Nowiński MIllet 47 Nog konak ‘millet’ Trkm Kklp Kzk Uzb Kirg Uyg Tuv 1970: 186), cf e g Russ просо вeнгeрскоe ‘foxtail millet’ his pattern is even relected in the biological nomenclature: Setaria italica P B = Panicum italicum L and others, Setaria viridis P B = Panicum viride L 48 MIllet dary tarā taragan KarL dary ‘millet’ Gag Čuv Tat Khak Bšk CTat Oyr Krč Tksh Tof Kzk Nog Blk Tuv Kmk Az Kklp Kirg Uzb Trkm Uyg SarUyg oats avena l. In comparison to other cereals, the cultivation of oats began relatively late, only about the beginning of the Common Era he plant was known much earlier but was regarded as being more of a usable weed, a supplement to wheat or barley his is most probably the reason why names for ‘oats’ are so oten mixed with names for ‘barley’ (cf commentary on julaf (point 2), harva, taγ arpasy ‘oats’, and sula and arpagan ‘barley’) 33 Because the cultivation of oats began so late, it is not entirely clear which region is its homeland Ancient Greece only knew it as a medicinal weed, the most important cultures of ancient Asia and Africa did not know it as a cereal at all In China, it appeared in the former role, as late as the 7th c It seems the the Tkc peoples had already known oats in the period before written monuments (cf commentary on süle) Presumably, however, it was not highly regarded, for in ancient texts it is rarely mentioned, unlike e g wheat or barley he basic name is deinitely süle It appears in very many phonetic variants, surprisingly many given its simple sounding he range of the word julaf, the second most common name, is huge, but it is absolutely understandable from a cultural-historical perspective forms: arpakan at tarāzy → a"tarāzy a"tarāzy bürdük ebies gara gyjak harva holo → süle hölö → süle hŭlŭ → süle huly → süle jolap → julaf julaf nyxa ovjos ovjot ovsa sĕlĕ → süle sinir bozan sölĕ → süle solo → süle sölö → süle sōlō → süle soly → süle sula → süle süle suli → süle süli → süle sully → süle sulu → süle sulū → süle sülü → süle suly → süle sŭly → süle sūly → süle śĕlĕ → süle śĕlĕlli → süle taγ-arpasy urus arpa uvus uwys xarva → harva zyntxy *ǯilap → julaf ǯylap → julaf 33 Interestingly enough, this only concerns oats and barley, not oats and wheat he only explanation we can ofer here is a guess that the Turks have always valued wheat more highly than barley, or that they had known wheat before they learned about barley he fact that wheat appears in monuments more oten seems to support the former rather than the latter So does süle (cf commentary on süle) Concurrently, botanical sources emphasise the antiquity of wheat However, for how long exactly the Turks have been acquainted with it is unknown 50 arpakan || OATS languages: Az : julaf Brb : soly Bšk : holo || hölö || hŭlŭ || huly || ovsa Com : sulu CTat : *ǯilap Čuv : sĕlĕ || sölĕ || sölö || śĕlĕ || śĕlĕlli Gag : julaf Kar : sülü KarC: julaf || ǯylap KarT: uvus Khak : sula Kirg : sulu || sulū || suly Kklp : sully || suly Kmk : nyxa || sulu || suly Koyb : sula || sulu Krč : sula Krč Blk : zyntxy Kyzyl: sulu Kzk : sulu || suly || sūly Leb : sula Nog : suly Ott : julaf || sinir bozan Oyr : sula Sag : sula || sulu SarUyg : harva || xarva Šr : sula Tat : julaf || solo || sölö || sōlō || soly || sŭly Tat dial : uwys Tat Gr : jolap Tel : sula Tksh : julaf Tob : sulu Tof : ovjot Trkm : bürdük || gara gyjak || ovjos || süle || süli Tuv : at tarāzy || a"tarāzy || sula Uyg : arpakan || sula || sulu || taγ-arpasy Uzb : suli || süli || urus arpa yak : ebies arpaKaN forms: arpakan Uyg.: R I 334m etymology: Uyg form as yet not discussed commentary: he structure of this word is absolutely clear: arpa + -kan What seems to be more enigmatic is its meaning, given Tkc arpa ‘barley’ However, these two cereals are to some extent uniied or mixed by numerous peoples, cf commentary on julaf (point 2), harva and taγ arpasy, and arpagan ‘barley’ a"TarāZY forms: at tarāzy (ат тараазы) Tuv.: Dmitrieva 1972: 213 || a"tarāzy RTuwS etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < at ‘horse’ + tarāzy ‘its cereal, grain’ commentary: his name is absolutely clear from both morphological and semantic point of view, and it is very diicult to ofer an explanation diferent than the one presented by Dmitrieva 1972 BürDüK forms: bürdük Trkm.: R IV 1892m etymology: see bordoq ‘roasted corn’ commentary: he original meaning of ‘grain’ is a perfect tertium comparationis for the seemingly unconnected meanings of ‘oats’ and ‘corn’ Cf bordoq ‘roasted corn’ OATS || harva 51 eBIeS forms: ebies Yak.: Slepcov 1964, RJakS, Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: 1964: Slepcov 77: < Russ ovës ‘oats’ with an irregular correspondence ie < jo, maybe from a dial pronunciation *ovjes 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ ovës ‘oats’ 2003: Anikin: < Russ ovës ‘oats’ commentary: Dmitrieva 1972 and Anikin 2003 are undoubtedly right, but they entirely disregard the somewhat strange phonetics of the yak form, only briely mentioned by Slepcov 1964 where an unattested Russ dial form *ovjes is proposed Although there is no proof for this, it seems to be a quite plausible explanation Another possibility – rather unlikely though, given the cultural realities – would be a graphical borrowing with regressive vocal harmony caused by long (a rendering of the Russ accent), accented -ie in the second syllable (cf žesemen and ǯehimien ‘barley’) Gara GYjaK forms: gara gyjak Trkm.: (Kara-kala) Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: gara: ‘Black’ is most likely used metaphorically here, meaning ‘worse; bad’ which is a very common phenomenon in the Tkc (and other) languages Such a meaning certainly is derived from the fact that oats were treated as a weed for such a long period gyjak: Trkm gyjak has a couple of meanings, but the one meant here is deinitely ‘пырeй волосатый; пырeй ползучий’ Harva forms: harva SarUyg.: Tenišev 1976 || xarva Tenišev 1976 etymology: 1976: Tenišev: ? < arpa commentary: he etymology proposed by Tenišev 1976, although presented with a question mark, seems to be very probable At least, it raises no doubts from the phonetic point of view: for h- ~ x- cf SarUyg harqa ~ xåřk ‘back’ < *arka , or horta ‘middle’ < *orta (Tenišev 1976: 29); and for -rv-: SarUyg terve- < terbe- ‘to sway’ and others (Tenišev 1976: 27) What might not be viewed as being absolutely convincing is the semantics (Tkc arpa ‘barley’) It must be remembered, however, that these two cereals are mixed to some extent, or uniied: cf arpa and the commentary on julaf (point 2) and arpakan, also sula ‘barley’ (H)arva also means ‘barley’, too 52 julaf || OATS Steblin-Kamenskij 1982: 36 suggests that yazg and OVanj xarban ‘millet’ is somehow connected with Tkc arpa ‘barley’, though the SarUyg form is not listed among the Tkc words Due to its initial x- ~ h-, it is precisely this form that appears to be the closest to the Pamir words However, semantics might raise much more serious doubts here, than in the case of a simple comparison of SarUyg and Tkc forms jUlaF forms: jolap Tat.Gr.: Podolsky 1981 julaf az.: RAzS, KTLS, Dmitrieva 1972, ‘oats, oats lour’ ÈSTJa || Gag.: ÈSTJa || KarC: ÈSTJa || Ott.: Wiesentahl 1895, Redhouse 1921 || Tat.: ‫ ی��واف‬R III 555m, Tanievъ 1909 || Tksh.: KTLS, Dmitrieva 1972 *ǯilap CTat.: Zaatovъ 1906 (in: ǯilaply ‘made of oats’) ǯylap KarC: ÈSTJa languages: az.: julaf || CTat.: *ǯilap || Gag.: julaf || KarC: julaf, ǯylap || Ott.: julaf || Tat.: julaf || Tat.Gr.: jolap || Tksh.: julaf etymology: 1969: VEWT: only mentions the word, without providing any etymology 1974: ÈSTJa: (?) < Pers ‫ ج��و‬ǯou ~ ǯav ‘barley’, Talyš ǯəv-, dial jəv + Pers ‫[ َعلَ��ف‬äläf] ‘grass; fodder’, Talyš alaf ‘grass’ (< Arab ); so julaf < *ju (< jəv) + alaf / ələf [sic] ‘barley’ + ‘hay’ (< ‘grass’) commentary: he etymology proposed by ÈSTJa seems a little strange from both phonetic and semantic point of view: 1 We can see no reason, why Pers dial jəv should render *ju in Tkc 2 In the Tkc languages, noun + noun compounds – such as the one suggested by ÈSTJa – render in the great majority of meanings a material something is made of, or a comparison to something herefore, the meaning one should expect from such a form should rather be ‘barley grass’, ‘grass such as barley’ and the like From this point, the road to ‘barley’ is not long Particularly in that, as it is noted by ÈSTJa, in many languages including Pers and Taj , the name for ‘barley’ evolved into ‘oats’, or the name for ‘oats’ originates from the name for ‘barley’, cf Klmk dial arva ‘oats’ (Tkc ‘barley’), and Ma arfa ‘oats; barley’; cf also arpakan and harva, also sula ‘barley’ All this is fairly understandable with regard for the history of oats (see commentary at the beginning of the chapter) However, none of this information can explain why ÈSTJa assumes a shit from ‘grass’ to ‘hay’ on the Tkc ground Deriving julaf from a compound of Pers ǯou ~ ǯav or Pers dial jəv seems to have an advantage from the point of view of the Tkc j- ~ ǯ- alternation in anlaut but it creates another phonetic obstacle (see above) which we believe is quite serious OATS || nyxa 53 We would like to suggest a slight modiication of this etymology, and – as no ultimate proof can be presented here – another proposition for explaining this word In anlaut, the alternation j- ~ ǯ- can be explained by a purely Tkc alternation which, however, has not been studied thoroughly enough to allow for a full veriication of this assumption However, what seems to be more problematic is the lack of -v- and a change from the remaining -aa-, -aə- &c into -u- his is why we believe that the irst part of this compound should have rather been borrowed from a form such as liter Pers , i e ǯou he second part deinitely should have been a word of back vocal harmony We could take into consideration such forms as Talyš , Arab or Pers (dial , not liter , with non-palatalised short a’s) Arab can probably be excluded, as it would require an assumption, that on the dial Tkc ground a presumably local borrowing from dial Pers / Talyš was compounded with a borrowing from Arab which is quite unlikely On the other hand, a compounding of a form such as the liter Pers ǯou (which could have appeared in dial , too) with a Pers dial / Talyš form [alaf], seems to be quite realistic here is still at least one more way of explaining this word Namely, it could be regarded not as a compound, but as an iotated borrowing form Arab ‫‘ عل��ف‬alaf ‘dry grass; hay; fodder’ Iotation is not a common phenomenon, and deinitely not a regular one, which is certainly a weakness of this proposition Tekin 1975: 205 gives only three examples of modern ju- deriving from MTkc long vowel: *ī-, *ō-, *ȫ-, and all of them come from SarUyg As far as our knowledge goes, it has not yet been established what the conditions allowing for iotation were in dial Tksh (Ott ) If they were the same, one could believe that ‘a- was rendered as *ȫ- > ju-34. In such a case, only the Arab form could be taken into consideration, the Pers ‘- being nothing but a graphical tradition with no importance for the actual sounding From the semantic point of view, ‘grass; hay; fodder’ > ‘oats’ is at least as probable as ‘barley grass’ or similar > ‘oats’, given that oats are oten used for fodder None of the three propositions is completely convincing Ultimately, the modiied version of ÈSTJa’s explanation appears to be the most realistic NYxa forms: nyxa Kmk.: RKmkS, Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: he sounding of the word clearly suggests a borrowing, presumably from one of the Cauc languages, but we have not managed to establish the exact source 34 Although cf Tksh dial alaf, alef ‘fodder for animals; hay’ (Tietze 2000) 54 ovjos || OATS OvjOS forms: ovjos Trkm.: RTrkmS etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his word is undoubtedly a borrowing from Russ ovjós id he initial o- supposably indicates that it must have been borrowed from some dial with an ‘okanye’ pronunciation, though it would be diicult to conirm this solution, as the Russ dialectal texts, especially the older ones, do not render the actual sounding precisely Another possibility would be to assume a partly graphical35 borrowing his, however, is deinitely less likely from the cultural-historical point of view OvjOT forms: ovjot (овëт) Tof.: RTofS, Stachowski, M 1999a: 236 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his form is undoubtedly a borrowing from Russ ovjós id he inal -t is supposably the result of a common but not fully described and not fully predictable alternation s ~ t, present in languages of various linguistic families across Siberia, including Tkc (cf Stachowski, M 1999a for further bibliography) OvSa forms: ovsa Bšk.: Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ ovës ‘oats’ commentary: his form was most probably borrowed from Russ Gen in the function of Part Cf prosa ‘millet’ SINIr BOZaN forms: sinir bozan Ott.: R IV 696m etymology: as yet not discussed commenatry: his name is unlcear Maybe it is a substantivised participle in the expression (birinin) sinirlerini bozmak ‘to annoy’? Such an explanation could be justiied by the fact that oats was oten regarded as a weed 35 Or even a fully graphical one, if one takes into account that Russ ë is usually printed as e OATS || süle 55 Süle forms: holo Bšk.: Joki 1952, RBškS, KTLS, Dmitrieva 1972, Fedotov 1996 hölö Bšk.: Egorov 1964 hŭlŭ Bšk.: ÈSTJa huly Bšk.: Joki 1952 sĕlĕ Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909, Ašmarin 1928–50, RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E, Egorov 1964, VEWT, RČuvS-A, ÈSTJa, Fedotov 1996 sölĕ Čuv.: VEWT solo Tat.: Voskresenskij 1894, Joki 1952 sölö Čuv.: Räsänen 1920 || Tat.: ‫ سولو‬R IV 591b, IV 730m, I 1335b, Räsänen 1920, Joki 1952, EWT, ÈSTJa sōlō Tat.: Imanaevъ 1901 soly Brb.: ÈSTJa || Tat.: RTatS-D, Egorov 1964, KTLS, Dmitrieva 1972, RTatS-G, Fedotov 1996 sula Khak.: RIV 772b, RChakS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Koyb.: Kannisto 1925: 168, KWb, Fedotov 1996 || Krč.: Kannisto 1925: 168 || leb.: Kannisto 1925: 168, Fedotov 1996 || Oyr.: R IV 772s, Kannisto 1925: 168, Joki 1952, Egorov 1964, RAltS, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, KWb, Fedotov 1996 || Sag.: Kannisto 1925: 168, Joki 1952, Fedotov 1996 || Šr.: R IV 772b, Kannisto 1925: 168, Joki 1952, Fedotov 1996 || Tel.: R IV 772b, Räsänen 1920, Kannisto 1925: 168, Joki 1952, ‘barley’ RyuminaSırkaşeva/Kuçigaşeva 1995, Fedotov 1996 || Tuv.: RTuwS, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Uyg.: Joki 1952 süle Trkm.: Joki 1952, Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962, KTLS, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa suli Uzb.: Joki 1952 ‘wild oats (Avena fatua)’, RUzbS-A, Egorov 1964, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, RUzbS-Š süli Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929 || Uzb KTLS sully Kklp.: RKklpS-BB, Dmitrieva 1972 sulu Com.: R IV 775b, Joki 1952, KWb, Fedotov 1996 || Kirg.: R IV 775b, RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57, Egorov 1964, KTLS, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, Fedotov 1996 || Kmk.: RKmkS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Koyb.: Joki 1952 || Kyzyl: Joki 1952, ÈSTJa || Kzk.: R IV 775b, Räsänen 1920, Joki 1952, VEWT, KWb || Sag.: Joki 1952 || Tob.: Joki 1952 || Uyg.: ‫سولُو‬ ُ RUjgS, KTLS, Joki 1952, Egorov 1964, ÈSTJa sulū Kirg.: Joki 1952 sülü Kar.: ÈSTJa suly Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899 || Kklp.: RKklpS-ST, Egorov 1964, RKklpS-B, ÈSTJa || Kmk.: ÈSTJa || Kzk.: KTLS, Egorov 1964, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, DFKzk, DKzkF || Nog.: RNogS, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa sŭly Tat.: ÈSTJa sūly Kzk.: RKzkS-46, RKzkS-54 śĕlĕ Čuv.: Dmitrieva 1972 śĕlĕlli Čuv.: Dmitrieva 1972 56 süle || OATS languages: Brb.: soly || Bšk.: holo, hölö, hŭlŭ, huly || Com.: sulu || Čuv.: sĕlĕ, sölĕ, sölö, śĕlĕ, śĕlĕlli || Kar.: sülü || Khak.: sula || Kirg.: sulu, sulū, suly || Kklp.: sully, suly || Kmk.: sulu, suly || Koyb.: sula, sulu || Krč.: sula || Kyzyl: sulu || Kzk.: sulu, suly, sūly || leb.: sula || Nog.: suly || Oyr.: sula || Sag.: sula, sulu || Šr.: sula || Tat.: solo, sölö, sōlō, soly, sŭly || Tel.: sula || Tob.: sulu || Trkm.: süle, süli || Tuv.: sula || Uyg.: sula, sulu || Uzb.: suli, süli etymology: 1920: Räsänen: ~ Mo suli 1952: Joki: ~ or rather < Mo suli &c ; Uzb suli ‘common wild oat (Avena fatua)’, Trkm süle < Mo ; Čuv = or < Tat further etymology unclear; maybe a common PAlt name 1969: VEWT: Čuv sĕlĕ, sölĕ < Tat sölö; Trkm süle, Uzb suli < Mo suli 1972: Clauson: < suv ‘water’ 1974: ÈSTJa: limits himself to summarizing and commenting previous propositions: against Clauson 1972 and Dmitrieva TÈ 97–8 (quoted ater ÈSTJa), who < suv ‘water’ + -lu (phonetics) 1976: KWb: expression unclear; perhaps = Mo suli &c commentary: his word is also common in the Mo languages, usually meaning various wild species of grass As it is supposed by Joki 1952, this is most probably the original meaning, which is understandable since oats were for a long time considered to be a weed, and its cultivation only began at the beginning of the Common Era; cf also Genaust 1976 he proposition of Clauson 1972 and Dmitrieva TÈ 97–8 (quoted ater ÈSTJa) is, as it is noted by ÈSTJa, deeply problematic for phonetic reasons (cf Khak , Tuv sula, Uyg sulu, Uzb suli instead of expected *suvluk , *suglug if they were to come from *sug/vlug) Dmitrieva’s attempt at explaining the semantics by stating that oats are a fodder liked by horses, and that they salivate when eating it (for ‘water’ > ‘saliva’ cf Tksh ağız suyu and others), is even more problematic than ÈSTJa rates it However, it needs to be noted in defence of this proposition, that Khak , Tuv , Uyg and Uzb forms could actually be borrowed from other Tkc or Mo languages Still, this would by no means solve the diiculties with the semantics For more on the phonetics cf below Unfortunately, to date this is the only full etymology that has been presented Joki’s 1952 suggestion that the word might originate from the times of the PAlt union36 appears to be very pertinent but does not in fact explain anything It merely moves the question back in time We cannot, however, ofer a more exhaustive explanation, either We believe that the original form of our word should have sounded *solo, and even this statement can we only support by guesses: 1. the Mo forms indicate a front vocalism; the luctuations in Tkc are apparently the result of the as yet undescribed alternation front ~ back vocalism; 2. it is rather improbable that the u in the irst 36 Or at least from the period of close contacts between the Tkc and Mo languages, i e of areal union, were a genetic relationship to never have existed OATS || urus arpa 57 syllable should > o; 3. we believe that the evolution *solo > sola, sula > suly, sulu, süle is more natural for the Tkc languages than any other, which would have to be assumed for a diferent set of original vowels his reconstruction does not explain all of the Tkc forms What the source of long vowels in Kirg sulū and Kzk sūly is, we do not know he difusion of this word in the Alt languages and a very high number of phonetic variants, especially high for a word of such a simple structure, indicates that it must be old, perhaps as old as PAlt Cf also footnote 23 For borrowings from Tkc to other languages see bibliography in ÈSTa and Kannisto 1925 Taγ-arpaSY forms: taγ-arpasy Uyg.: ‫ تاغ ارپاسی‬Raquette 1927 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: Being absolutely clear morphologically (lit ‘mountain barley’), this name is utterly obscure semantically he Uyg word taγ – which is perhaps closely related to Kzk tak-tak ‘barley’ (unclear, too) – has two meanings: ‘mountain’ and ‘odd (number)’ It would be diicult to assume, that the one in question is the latter, but it is also quite impossible to explain why the Uyghurs should call ‘oats’ a ‘mountain barley’ Climatic requirements of oats are much higher than those of barley; in the mountains it does not grow above 2000 m above sea level while barley sets the world record in this regard, growing as high as 4646 m above sea level in Tibet (Nowiński 1970: 182) he second part of this compound could be regarded as another example of a very common uniication/mixing of oats and barley (cf commentary on julaf (point 2) and arpakan, also sula ‘barley’), though the existence of Uyg arpa ‘barley’ seems to speak against it Maybe then taγ (presumably, etymologically diferent from Tkc tag ‘mountain’) has originally had a meaning of ‘wild’ or something similar, a trace of which would be a modern ‘odd (number)’? his, given that oats were held in low esteem, could explain such a compound as Uyg taγ-arpasy but would be useless if not preventing in the case of Kzk tak-tak ‘barley’, in light of the strange structure of the latter Unless, of course, the two words turned out not to be related in any way ater all UrUS arpa forms: urus arpa Uzb.: Smolenskij 1912 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: Urus does not appear in modern Uzb dictionaries (UzbRS, Maъrufov 1981) We believe, however, that it is just a better assimilated version of the modern word rus ‘Rus- 58 uvus || OATS sian’37 he name would then mean liter ‘Russian barley’ his would suggest that the Uzbeks knew barley before they learned about oats from the Russians, or that oats was the basic cereal grown by the Russians living in Uzbekistan, while the Uzbeks mainly cultivated barley he former of these two possibilities seems to be the more plausible, but one does not really exclude the other UvUS forms: uvus уwус ‫ אוּבוּס‬KarT: R I 1787m etymology: 1893: Radlof: < Russ ovësъ ‘oats’ commentary: he etymology proposed by Radlof 1893–1911 appears to be correct, although 1. another Slav language cannot be excluded (cf Pol owies || Ukr oves); 2. it completely omits the question of the unusual vocalism in Kar Unfortunately, we cannot explain it in a fully convincing way, either We believe that the vocalism indicates that the word was not borrowed to Kar directly from Russ , but via MTat here exists another, though less likely, possibility of a double mistake (copyist’s? printer’s? Radlof’s?) and reading? writing? ‫ וּ‬instead of ‫וֹ‬, i e uvus instead of ovos, which would be a much more understandable form, and really pointing to Russ as the source of the borrowing However, it still requires the assumption of a double mistake in a ive-letter word UwYS forms: uwys Tat.dial.: Adjagaši 2005: 153 etymology: 2005: Adjagaši: < MTat *ovus < ORuss / Russ N dial [ovós] commentary: We can see no reason to cast doubt upon Adjagaši’s 2005: 153 etymology Cf uvus. ZYNTxY forms: zyntxy Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS, Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: he sounding of this word suggests a borrowing, presumably from one of the Cauc languages Unfortunately, we have not managed to establish the exact source 37 In such a case, a double borrowing of rus would need to be assumed An earlier one, when Russ was not yet so widely known by the Uzbeks, and a later one, when it was already the mother tongue for many of them Or alternately, that the sounding was corrected some time ater the borrowing It cannot be excluded either, that urus is nothing but the real Uzb sounding, while rus corresponds faithfully to the Russ orthography As a matter of fact, all these possibilities seem to be reasonably plausible Kar Čuv Tat Khak Bšk Šr süle ‘oats’ Oyr Krč Nog Tuv Kzk Kmk Kklp Trkm Kirg Uzb Uyg oats 59 rice oryza sativa l. Rice is one of the most important cultivated plants in the world It originates from the Indian and SE Asian centres In India, where it had probably been domesticated, it was already known in the 2nd millennium BC; it spread to China about three thousand years BC (in year 2700 BC it had already been one of the ive most important plants sown by emperor Chen-Nung himself during the vernal equinox) It was brought relatively late to Persia, but must have already been known there in the 4th c BC when the Greeks learned about it from the Persians (see pirinč) It then spread to Syria, and later to Egypt (brought by the Arabs in the 8th c ) In the 15th c , the Portuguese took it to the western coast of Africa, and the Arabs to the Eastern By 1493 it had already reached America thanks to Spaniards Nowadays, there exist more then ten thousand varieties of rice, 800 in India alone It is the most basic source of nourishment in many countries, especially in the Far East (Nowiński 1970: 202–3) Given the above information, it might be surprising that none of the names for ‘rice’ in the Tkc languages is of Chin origin It seems scarcely possible that such a borrowing would never have occurred We probably should presume that this word (or words?) was later displaced by borrowings from other languages (of higher prestige?) and native names (more understandable, like akbydā or döge) forms: ak bydā → akbydā akbydā ak h(ü)rüpē aryš birinǯ → pirinč birińč → pirinč bryndz → pirinč bürinč → pirinč bürünč → pirinč ? buryž → pirinč čeltik čeltik pirinǯi → čeltik || pirinč čeltuk → čeltik čeltük → čeltik čeltūk arpasy → čeltik čiltik → čeltik döge → tüvi dögö → tüvi dogo → tüvi döğü → tüvi dügi → tüvi dugu → tüvi dügü → tüvi düğü → tüvi düjü → tüvi erz görbč → gürüč görič → gürüč gurinǯ → gürüč guriš → gürüč güriš → gürüč guruč → gürüč gürüč gürünč → gürüč gürünǯ → gürüč gürüǯ → gürüč irīs → ris küriš → gürüč kürüč → gürüč kürüš → gürüč pirinč pirinǯ → pirinč prinč → pirinč ris → ris risa → ris risъ → ris saly → šaly šal → šaly šaly šāly → šaly šeltūk → čeltik 62 akbydā || RICE šoli → šaly tögi → tüvi tok(u)rak tügi → tüvi tuturgan tuturgu → tuturgan tuturkan → tuturgan Kzk : küriš || saly || šaly MTkc : gurinǯ MTkc H: tuturgan MTkc IM: tuturgan MTkc KD: tuturkan MTkc MA B: tok(u)rak || Tat : aryš || čeltik || döge || dögö || dogo || kürüš Tksh : pirinč Tksh dial : döğü || düğü Tof : ak h(ü)rüpē Trkm : bürinč || bürünč || šaly || šāly || tüvi Tuv : ak bydā || akbydā || ris Uyg : görbč || gürüč || gürünǯ || gürüǯ || šal || languages: Az : dügü || düjü Bšk : dögö || risa Com : tuturgan CTat : prinč Čag : čeltük || tuturgu Čuv : ris || risь Gag : pirinč KarC: prinč KarH: bryndz KarT: birińč Khak : ris Khal : birinǯ || dügi Kirg : kürüč || kürüš || šaly Kklp : guriš || güriš || šaly Kmk : dugu || dügü Krč Blk : prinč tokurgak MTkc MK: tuturkan Nog : buryž || dügi OTkc : görbč || gürüč || gürünč || tögi || tuturkan Ott : čeltik || čeltik pirinǯi || čeltuk || čeltük arpasy || čiltik || erz || pirinč || pirinǯ || šeltūk Oyr : ris tügi Uzb : birinǯ || görič || guruč || gürünč || šaly || šoli yak : irīs || ris aKBYDā forms: ak bydā Tuv.: Dmitrieva 1972 || akbydā RTuwS etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < ak ‘white’ + bydā ‘gruel’ commentary: his name is absolutely clear morphologically: Tkc ak ‘white’ + Tkc bugdaj ‘wheat’ he absence of bydā in Tuv does not appear to be a serious argument against such an explanation However, the short -y- might be surprising in the light of the original -ug- It is possible, though, that this is only a spurious incompatibility: 1. the length of vowels in non-irst syllables is marked in an irregular manner in Tuv ; 2. it could have been shortened secondarily, resulting from the proximity of another long vowel aK H(ü)rüpē forms: ak h(ü)rüpē Tof.: RTofS etymology: 1971: Rassadin: hürpē < Russ krupa ‘gruel’ 1995: Buraev: h(ü)rüpē < Russ krupa ‘gruel’ commentary: his name is absolutely clear We can see no reasons to assume a metaphorical use of ak here he shit from ‘gruel’ to ‘rice’ is obvious, given the most popular method of preparation RICE || čeltik 63 arYŠ forms: aryš Tat.: Voskresenskij 1894 commentary: as yet not discussed in the meaning of ‘rice’ etymology: Aryš is a common name for ‘rye’ in the Tkc languages We know of no other word that has both these two meanings simultaneously Perhaps, the similarity of sounding to Russ ris was of some signiicance here; at any rate a separate/repeated borrowing must be ruled out as then the prothesis could not be expected to sound *a-: it would have to be at least *y- or more probably *i-(ris) (cf aryš ‘rye’) Perhaps then a contamination? ČelTIK forms: čeltik Ott.: ‫‘ چلتیك‬unhusked rice and others’ R III 1980m, ‘rice ield’ Wiesentahl 1895; ‫ چلتك‬,‫‘ لتی��ك‬rice ield; rice on the ield; unhusked rice’ Redhouse 1921 || Tat.: ‫چلتك‬ Tanievъ 1909 čeltik pirinǯi Ott.: (‫‘ )چلتك برجی‬unhusked rice’ Redhouse 1921 čeltuk Ott.: ‫‘ چلتوك‬provincial for ‫ ’چلتیك‬Redhouse 1921 čeltük Čag.: ‫ چلتوك‬id R III 1980m čeltūk arpasy Ott.: Tietze 2002– s v çeltik čiltik Ott.: ‫‘ چيلتيك‬rice on the ield’ R III 2139m šeltūk Ott.: ‫ شلتوك‬vulg ‫‘ چلتیك‬rice ield; rice on the ield’ Redhouse 1921 languages: Čag.: čeltük || Ott.: čeltik, čeltik pirinǯi, čeltuk, čeltük arpasy, čiltik, šeltūk || Tat.: čeltik etymology: 1999: Eren: < Pers šaltūk ‘unhusked rice’; for Pers š- > Tksh č- cf Tksh çakal 2002: Tietze: < Pers šaltūk ‘unhusked rice’; for Pers š- > Tksh č- cf Tksh çorba commentary: We can see no reason to doubt Eren’s 1999 proposition A few details, however, remain to be explained he Pers form has a diferent anlaut and vocalism than the Tkc ones Presumably, the change in the anlaut happened during or very shortly ater the borrowing since there are no š- forms in Tkc 38 As for the vowels, we have two contradictory hints: 1 Ott čeltūk arpasy indicates that the front harmony of the Tkc forms results from the infuence of palatal č-, and a secondary ‘reharmonization’ of the whole word: Pers šaltūk > ? Ott ? Pre-Ott *čaltuk > čeltuk > čeltük > čeltik or čeltuk > čeltük, čeltik his route is also pointed to by Tksh dial čeltük 2 Russ čaltyk ‘çeltik’, due to the initial č- should be considered a borrowing from Tkc rather than Pers 39 In such case, however, the following chain of changes should be 38 hough not attested, in theory a MPers *č- form could be assumed, too, as it would still yield š in NPers ; cf e g Maciuszak 2003: 94 39 Also Vasmer 1959, even if without giving a reason, derives the Russ word from Tksh or Az 64 erz || RICE assumed: Pers šaltūk > ? Ott ? Pre-Ott *čaltuk > *čaltyk > *čeltik his solution, as opposed to 1 , gives no convenient base for explaining čeltük Perhaps the only way to reconcile these two arguments, is to assume diferent evolutions of our word in Tksh dialects (possibly, resulting from repeated, independent borrowings) which, however, inally yielded a single sounding erZ forms: erz (‫ )ارز‬Ott.: Wiesentahl 1895, erz Redhouse 1921 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his name is unclear he sounding seems to point to Gr , but the Gr form is όριζον, όριζα (Woodhouse 1910) Perhaps from a dialectal form or from an oblique case? GürüNČ forms: görič Uzb.: VEWT görȫč OTkc.: VEWT || Uyg.: Menges 1933 gurinǯ MTkc.Ma.B: Borovkov 1971: 102 guriš Kklp.: RKklpS-BB, Dmitrieva 1972 güriš Kklp.: RKklpS-ST, RKklpS-B guruč Uzb.: (‘husked’) RUzbS-A, (no description) RUzbS-A, Dmitrieva 1972 gürüč OTkc.: VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972 || Uyg.: ‫ گوروچ‬RUjgS gürünč OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 || Uzb.: (‫ )گرج‬Nalivkinъ 1895 gürünǯ Uyg.: ‫ گوروج‬Raquette 1927 gürüǯ Uyg.: ‫ گوروج‬Raquette 1927 || Uzb.: ‘gruel’ Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912 küriš Kzk.: RKzkS-46, RKzkS-54, Dmitrieva 1972, DFKzk kürüč Kirg.: ‘husked rice’ RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972 kürüš Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899, Katanovъ 1909 || Tat.: VEWT languages: Kirg.: kürüč, kürüš || Kklp.: guriš, güriš || Kzk.: küriš || MTkc.: gurinǯ || OTkc.: görȫč, gürüč, gürünč || Tat.: kürüš || Uyg.: görȫč, gürüč, gürünǯ, gürüǯ || Uzb.: görič, guruč, gürünč etymology: 1969: VEWT: considers gürünč to be the same word as MTkc küršek ‘millet boiled in water or milk with butter’ and, (with a question mark) Krč gyrsyn ‘bread’ (? Čuv > *kürźε > Fi kyrsä ‘bread’) 1972: Dmitrieva: Kirg kürüč, Kklp guriš, Kzk küriš, OTkc gürü(n)č, Uzb guruč < Ir gürünč ‘rice’ commentary: he etymology ofered by Dmitrieva 1972 may well be true, although it does raise some phonetic doubts As for the Ir etymon, the shape gurinǯ seems to be much more realistic (Hübschmann 1897: 27) his word was presumably borrowed at least RICE || pirinč 65 a couple of times, as is indicated by the diferent assimilations of the vowels (u-u, ü-ü, ü-i and the incomprehensible forms with ö40 and Kklp u-i) and consonants ( g-(n)č, g-(n)ǯ, g-š, k- č, k-š) but the exact routes of its penetration41 are impossible to reconstruct, not at least within the current state of the subject of historical phonetics of individual Tkc languages he comparison to MTkc kuršek proposed by VEWT seems realistic phonetically, but a little odd on the semantic side To the best of our knowledge, there are no parallels for one word having the meanings of ‘rice’ and ‘millet’ at the same time 42 Cf pirinč pIrINČ forms: birinǯ Khal.: Doerfer 1987 || Uzb.: ‘groats’ Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912 birińč KarT: KRPS bryndz KarH: KRPS bürinč Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929 bürünč Trkm.: RTrkmS, Dmitrieva 1972 ? buryž Nog.: RNogS, Dmitrieva 1972 čeltik pirinǯi Ott.: (‫‘ )چلتك برجی‬unhusked rice’ Redhouse 1921 pirinč Gag.: Dmitrieva 1972 || Ott.: (‫ )پرنچ‬Wiesentahl 1895 || Tksh.: Dmitrieva 1972 pirinǯ Ott.: Redhouse 1921 prinč CTat.: Zaatovъ 1906 || KarC: Levi 1996 || Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS, Dmitrieva 1972 languages: CTat.: prinč || Gag.: pirinč || KarC.: prinč || KarH.: bryndz || KarT.: birińč || Khal.: birinǯ || Krč.Blk.: prinč || Nog.: buryž || Ott.: čeltik pirinǯi, pirinč, pirinǯ || Tksh.: pirinč || Trkm.: bürinč, bürünč || Uzb.: birinǯ etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: Gag pirinč, Krč Blk prinč, Nog buryž, Trkm bürünč, Tksh pirinč < Ir pirinč ‘rice; латунь’ 43 1999: Eren: < Pers birinǯ commentary: Dmitrieva’s 1972 proposition seems very plausible We can only add, that Pers birinǯ ~ gurinǯ < Skr vrīhí or Afgh vriže (Laufer 1919: 393) Laufer also believes that reconstructing Av *verenǯa (Horn 1893: 208) or Ir *vrinǯi-? *vriži-? (Hübschmann 1897: 27) is wrong for historical reasons: according to his sources, rice only gained 40 he evolution ö > ü is natural in the Tkc languages; the opposite is not 41 At least some of the forms were probably borrowed with the mediation of another Tkc language 42 Tüvi &c ‘rice’ = tögü ‘millet’ is an exception here However, in this example the diferentiation of the semantics results from the source of this word: *tög- ‘to beat, to hit’, being absolutely neutral with regard to species 43 he missing “<” sign in Dmitrieva 1972: 216 is perhaps a typographical error 66 ris || RICE popularity in Persia ater the Arabic conquest However, this does not exclude the possibility that the Pers could have known rice earlier According to Nowiński 1970: 203, it is from Pers that the Greeks became acquainted with rice during the invasion of Alexander the Great Given the above, we believe, even if we cannot prove it, that at least Av *verenǯa might well have existed: if the Pers had already known rice in the 4th c BC (and it is much more probable that they would have learned about it from India rather than China at this time), and its modern name is of Indian origin, too, we suppose that the word may well be an old borrowing in Pers , perhaps even from before the 4th c BC, and therefore that it probably had existed in Av as well Cf gürünč rIS forms: irīs Yak.: Slepcov 1975 (od 1925) ris Čuv.: RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E, RČuvS-A, Dmitrieva 1972 || Khak.: RChakS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Oyr.: RAltS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Tuv.: RTuwS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Yak.: RJakS, Dmitrieva 1972, Slepcov 1975 (od 1925) risa Bšk.: Dmitrieva 1972 risъ Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909 languages: Bšk.: risa || Čuv.: ris, risь || Khak.: ris || Oyr.: ris || Tuv.: ris || Yak.: irīs, ris etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: Čuv , Khak , Oyr , Tuv , yak ris < Russ ris, and points to a comparison with OInd vrīhis ‘rice’ (ater: Vasmer 1986–87) Commentary: It is diicult to ind fault with the etymology proposed by Dmitrieva 1972 ŠalY forms: saly Kklp.: RKklpS-B, RKklpS-ST, Dmitrieva 1972 || Kzk.: ‘unhusked’ DFKzk šal Uyg.: ‫ شال‬RUjgS; Raquette 1927 ‘rice on ield’, Jarring 1998: 14 ‘rice; rice as a plant; rice on ield; unhusked rice’ šaly Kirg.: ‘unhusked, rice as a plant’ RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57, (no commentary) Dmitrieva 1972 || Kzk.: ‘unhusked rice’ DFKzk || Trkm.: Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962 || Uzb.: ‘plant’ (‫ )شالی‬Nalivkinъ 1895, Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912 šāly Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929 šoli Uzb.: (‘unhusked’) RUzbS-A, (no description) RUzbS-Š, (‘unhusked’) Dmitrieva 1972 languages: Kirg.: šaly || Kklp.: saly || Kzk.: saly, šaly || Trkm.: šaly, šāly || Uyg.: šal || Uzb.: šaly, šoli RICE || tuturgan 67 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: only points to a comparison with Mo sali 1998: Jarring: 14: < Pers šālī ‘unhusked rice’ commentary: We can see no reason to discard the etymology proposed by Jarring 1998: 14 We would only remark that -i was probably understood as a Px in Uyg , and hence the form šal TOKUrGaK forms: tok(u)rak MTkc.Ma.B: Borovkov 1971 ‘rice for pilaf’ tokurgak MTkc.Ma.B: Borovkov 1971: 108 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: he etymology of this word is not clear We believe that it is a morphologically adapted (folk etymology) version of tuturgan (probably < Mo , cf ) associated with tok- ‘to knock, to tap, to hit’ (for semantics cf tüvi, also dövme ‘wheat’) and with a Tkc suix -ak he suix -gan is there in the Tkc languages, too, so here an adaptation would not be necessary However, if the meaning was to be similar to ‘beaten (out)’, -ak would seem to suit it better Cf tuturgan TUTUrGaN forms: tuturgan Com.: R III 1484m || MTkc.H: ‫ || طوطورغان‬MTkc.IM tuturgu Čag.: ‫ توتورغو‬R III 1484m tuturkan OTkc.: Dmitrieva 1972 || MTkc.KD: ‫ || تترقان‬MTkc.MK: Ligeti 1951–52: 87 languages: Com.: tuturgan || Čag.: tuturgu || MTkc.H: tuturgan || MTkc.IM: tuturgan || MTkc.KD: tuturkan || MTkc.MK: tuturkan || OTkc.: tuturkan etymology: 1951: Ligeti: 87: < Mo tuturγan id 1963: TMEN: limits itself to scepticism towards Ligeti: ‘[…] hier dürte der strikte Nachweis Mo Herkunt allerdings schwerig sein’ (TMEN I: 5) 1972: Dmitrieva: only points to the comparison with WMo commentary: his word is not wholly comprehensible Its Mo origin, as proposed by Ligeti 1951–52: 87, is possible but to the best of our knowledge, the word remains equally unclear on the Mo ground his could suggest that the opposite direction of borrowing is no less probable However, were our proposition of explaining tokurgak to prove true, it would point to the direction proposed by Ligeti Finally, the word could have been borrowed to Mo and Tkc from yet another language independently 68 tüvi || RICE Not knowing the eventual etymology of our word, we cannot determine whether the inal -gan is a native Mo (Tkc ?) suix, or a morphologically (phonetically?) adapted part of a foreign etymon Cf tokurgak TüvI forms: döge Tat.: RTatS-D, TMEN 979, RTatS-G, Dmitrieva 1972 dögö Bšk.: RBškS, TMEN 979, Dmitrieva 1972, Eren 1999 || Tat.: Voskresenskij 1894 dogo Tat.: VEWT, TMEN 979 döğü Tksh.dial.: ‘ine groats’ Eren 1999 dügi Khal.: Doerfer 1987 || Nog.: RNogS, TMEN 979, Dmitrieva 1972, Eren 1999 dugu Kmk.: Németh 1911/12, VEWT dügü az.: R III 1802m, VEWT TMEN 979 || Kmk.: Németh 1911/12, TMEN 979, RKmkS, Dmitrieva 1972 düğü Tksh.dial.: ‘ine groats’ Eren 1999 düjü az.: RAzS, TMEN 979, Dmitrieva 1972 tögi OTkc.: Erdal 340 ‘husked and/or ground cereal’ tügi Uyg.: ‘husked rice’ R III 1539m, VEWT tüvi Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929, RTrkmS, VEWT, TMEN 979, Dmitrieva 1972, Eren 1999 ‘rice; pilaf’ languages: az.: dügü, düjü || Bšk.: dögö || Khal.: dügi || Kmk.: dugu, dügü || Nog.: dügi || OTkc.: tögi || Tat.: döge, dögö, dogo || Tksh.dial.: döğü, düğü || Trkm.: tüvi || Uyg.: tügi etymology: 1963: 1969: 1974: 1991: 2004: TMEN: *tügi VEWT: limits itself to enumerating the forms ÈSTJa s v dary: OTkc tögü, töhö probably do not belong to the same group as dary Erdal: 340: OTkc tögi ‘husked and/or ground cereal’ < tög ‘to grind; to crush’ Pomorska: 120: supports Erdal 1991: 340 commentary: his word is quite common in the Tkc languages, and is found in two basic meanings: ‘(husked) rice’ (more common) and ‘millet’ (less common)’ It seems that TMEN’s 979 reconstruction of *tügi might perhaps need a modiication of the irst vowel: *ö seems to be much more probable for phonetic reasons (the ö > ü change is natural in the Tkc languages; the opposite direction is not) We believe that the word comes from OTkc *tög- (~ *töv-) ‘to beat, to hit’ he diferences in auslaut (low : high vowels) probably suggest two separate derivates from Tkc dög- ~ döv- ‘to beat, to hit’44: 44 Perhaps also Tat dügi ‘wheat’ (cf ) speaks in favour of such a distinction RICE || tüvi 69 1 in -i: *tögi (> döğü, tüvi, tügi > dügi > dügü > düğü > düjü and dugu45) Cf e g bini ‘broken (animal)’, biti ‘writing’, japy ‘building’ (Zajączkowski 1932: 105) 2 in -e: *töge (> dögö, dogo) Cf e g jara ‘wound’, jaja ‘rainbow’, tuda ‘handle’, üörä ‘happiness’ (Pomorska 2004: 120, Zajączkowski 1932: 105) For semantic development, cf Slav proso < *per- ‘to hit’ ~ *pro- + -s, i e ‘something hit, something beaten’ > ‘husked millet grain’ > ‘millet grain’ > ‘grain’ (Sędzik 1977: 11), and it is quite possible that this parallel is not coincidental Anyway, it is interesting that millet (cf tögü ‘millet’) came to Europe from the East (Nowiński 1970: 189) One might venture then, to suppose that the Slav name is not entirely a native neologism, but rather a calque deriving eventually from some very old name, on which the Tkc *tögi/e is also based Naturally, such a convergence also might be a purely coincidental one he semantic development presented here is in fact, quite trivial Dövme ‘wheat’ provides a nice semantic parallel, too On the other hand, we should not discount the possibility that the name came from *tügī ‘hair (adj )’ < tük ‘hair’ + -ī adj (< Pers ) While seemingly acceptable from the phonetic point of view (although the -e, -ö auslaut is unclear), this proposition raises some doubts on the semantic side he meanings of ‘hair’ and ‘millet’ are quite close to each other (cf tüjtary ‘millet’) but we know of no parallels for ‘hair’ and ‘rice’ Such a shit does not seem to be impossible, though, as rice and some species of millet (especially setarias) look quite similar Both ideas seem probable but only the irst one assumes a more likely *ö in the irst syllable, requires no further semantic assumptions (for which perhaps no parallels exist), and explains the meanings of ‘husked rice’ and ‘husked millet’ in a more natural way Cf tögü ‘millet’ and djugi ‘wheat’, and (semantics) dövme, ügür and tüjtary ‘millet’ 45 he reason for the harmony shit in Kmk is unclear Most probably it can be treated as a result of the front : back alternation which, while it deinitely exists, has not yet been properly examined, and is therefore unpredictable 70 rIce Kar Gag CTat pirinč ‘rice’ Nog Krč Blk Tksh Uzb Trkm Khal rye secale cereale l. Rye is a secondary cultivable plant (formed from a weed), and is still found as a weed in some parts of the world, especially in the Indochinese and Central Asian Centres Its requirements are rather moderate, allowing it to dominate in mountainous areas and in low quality soils, but it tends to be displaced by other plants in more fertile lands Rye probably originates from the area of Asia Minor, Iran and Armenia Numerous primitive taxons with clearly weed-like features can still be found in the region and its surroundings hey surely can not have been ever been domesticated before as there never existed intentional cultivations of pure rye in this part of the world Seeds of rye turn out to be stronger when mixed with the seeds of other cereals In Central Europe mixing equal amounts of rye and wheat, and then continuously seeding with the material of the same origin, results in nearly pure rye harvests in just a couple of years It is probably this feature, in connection with a very old tradition of seeding mixtures of seeds rather than pure species, that gave birth to legends (Tkc , among others) of gradual change (a deterioration) of wheat into rye (Nowiński 1970: 176–79 ) he relatively few names and their character (borrowings and descriptive names) show that rye has never been a particularly important plant for the Tkc peoples Presumably, it was treated, as it still oten is in Asia, more as a weed than a cultivable plant forms: ārəš → aryš ărša → aryš arsānaj arys → aryš aryš aryš bidaj → aryš arǯanaj → arsānaj arǯanaj tarā → arsānaj arǯanaj taryg → arsānaj asłyk ašłych → asłyk čadagan → jadygan čadygan → jadygan čavdar čavdary → čavdar čovdar → čavdar čovdary → čavdar čovdor → čavdar dargan → darikan darikan darkān → darikan jadagan → jadygan jadygan jadygan aryš → jadygan jatkan → jadygan jatkan aryš → aryš || jadygan kara bašak kara bidaj → kara bugdaj kara bijdaj → kara bugdaj kara budaj → kara bugdaj kara būdaj → kara bugdaj kara-bugda → kara bugdaj kara bugdaj kök najza kök tarā → köktarā kök tara → köktarā köktarā oruos qara buγdaj → kara bugdaj rožь rži süle → suly sulli → suly suly tereke → darikan yraš → aryš žavdar → čavdar žavdar buγdoj → čavdar žavdari buγdoj → čavdar žovdari → čavdar ǯaudar → čavdar 72 arsānaj || RyE languages: Az : čovdar || čovdor Blk : kara budaj Brb : aryš Bšk : aryš Com : kara bugdaj Crm : čavdar CTat : aryš || čavdar Čuv : ărša || yraš Kar : aryš KarC: aryš || čavdar KarH: asłyk KarT: ašłych Khak : arys || rožь Kirg : kara bijdaj || kara būdaj Kklp : arys || kara bidaj || kara bijdaj || sulli || suly Kmk : aryš || aryš bidaj || kara budaj Koyb : arys Krč : kara budaj Krč Blk : arys || kara bijdaj || kara budaj Küär : aryš || jadygan aryš || jatkan || jatkan aryš Kyzyl: ārəš Kzk : arys || aryš || kara bidaj || kök najza Leb : aryš Nog : arys || kara bijdaj || suly Ott : čavdar Oyr : aryš || jadagan Sag : arys || čadagan || jadygan Šr : aryš || čadygan || jadygan Tat : aryš || kara-bugda Tat Gr : čavdar Tel : aryš Tksh : čavdar Tksh dial : dargan || darikan || darkān || tereke Tob : aryš Tof : arǯanaj || arǯanaj tarā || arǯanaj taryg Trkm : arys || aryš || čavdary || čovdar || čovdary || rožь || süle Tuv : kök tara || kök tarā || köktarā Uyg : kara bugdaj || qara buγdaj Uzb : žavdar || žavdar buγdoj || žavdari buγdoj || ǯaudar yak : arsānaj || oruos arSāNaj forms: arsānaj Yak.: Dmitrieva 1972 arǯanaj Tof.: Anikin 2003 s v ржаной arǯanaj tarā Tof.: RTofS arǯanaj taryg Tof.: RTofS languages: Tof.: arǯanaj, arǯanaj tarā, arǯanaj taryg || Yak.: arsānaj etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: yak arsānaj < Russ dial Sib aržanoj = Russ ržanoj ‘rye [adj ]’ 2003: Anikin s v ржаной: yak arsānaj < Russ dial Sib a/oržanój ‘rye [adj ]’ commentary: While we do not intend to negate the previous propositions, we believe they require a little more commentary Long vowel in the last but one syllable of the yak form is discordant with the Russ accent Such an adaptation can probably be explained by the fact that the Russ adjective suixes -oj and -ój are always treated in yak as non-accented, which allows for shiting the trace of the accent (the length of the vowel) to another syllable he connection with tarā ~ taryg in Tof is probably a calque from a Russ dial compound aržanó žito ‘rye’, where žito ‘cereal in sheafs; cereal in seeds; rye; wheat’ (Fedotov 1979), although it is also possible that a very popular model in Tof of naming cereals by composition with tarā could have played some role here as well, cf tarā ‘millet’ RyE || aryš 73 arYŠ forms: ārəš Kyzyl: Joki 1953 ărša Čuv.: Adjagaši 2005: 175 ‘зной и марeво во врeмя поспeванийа ржи’ arys Khak.: RChakS, Dmitrieva 1972, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48 || Kklp.: Achmetьja- nov 1989: 48 || Koyb.: VEWT, Anikin 2003 || Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS || Kzk.: RKzkS-54, Dmitrieva 1972, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48, DFKzk || Nog.: RNogS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Sag.: VEWT, Eren 1999 s v çavdar, Anikin 2003 || Trkm.: Dmitrieva 1972 aryš Brb.: R I 278b, Anikin 2003 || Bšk.: RBškS, Dmitrieva 1972, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48, Anikin 1998, Adjagaši 2005: 175 || CTat.: Achmetьjanov 1989: 48 || Kar.: ‫ אריש‬R I 278b, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48 || KarC: KRPS, Levi 1996 || Kmk.: Dmitrieva 1972 || Küär.: R I 278b, Anikin 2003 || Kzk.: VEWT 26a, DFKzk || leb.: Anikin 2003 || Oyr.: R I 278b, RAltS, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48, Anikin 2003 || Šr.: R I 278b, Anikin 2003 || Tat.: Imanaevъ 1901, VEWT, RTatS-G, Dmitrieva 1972, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48, Anikin 1998, Anikin 2003, Adjagaši 2005: 175 || Tel.: Ryumina-Sırkaşeva 1995, Eren 1999 s v çavdar, Anikin 2003 || Tob.: R I 278b, Anikin 2003 || Trkm.: Alijiv/ Böörijif 1929 aryš bidaj Kmk.: RKmkS jatkan aryš Küär.: R I 278b yraš Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909, RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E, RČuvS-A, VEWT, Dmitrieva 1972, Achmetьjanov 1989: 48, Adjagaši 2005: 175 languages: Brb.: aryš || Bšk.: aryš || CTat.: aryš || Čuv.: ărša, yraš || Kar.: aryš || KarC.: aryš || Khak.: arys || Kklp.: arys || Kmk.: aryš, aryš bidaj || Koyb.: arys || Krč.Blk.: arys || Küär.: aryš, jatkan aryš || Kyzyl: ārəš || Kzk.: arys, aryš || leb.: aryš || Nog.: arys || Oyr.: aryš || Sag.: arys || Šr.: aryš || Tat.: aryš || Tel.: aryš || Tob.: aryš || Trkm.: arys, aryš etymology: 1969: VEWT: aryš &c < Russ rožь ‘rye’ 1972: Dmitrieva: aryš &c , Čuv yraš 1989: Achmetьjanov: 48: < ORuss *rože Khak , Kzk arys < [unclear expression] Bšk , CTat , Kar , Oyr , Tat aryš CTat , Kar aryš, Khak , Kklp , Kzk arys < Tat 1996: Fedotov: aryš &c (but rožь not listed) < Russ rožь ‘rye’ 1998: Anikin RTur: Tat , Bšk aryš < Russ rožь ‘rye’ 1999: Eren s v çavdar: quotes VEWT 2003: Anikin: Bšk , Tat aryš < Russ 2005: Adjagaši: Čuv yraš < OČuv *ȧraš < [late OERuss ? early ORuss ?] [rož’] < OESlav rъžь Bšk , Tat aryš < MBšk , MTat *aryš < VBulgh 2 *aryš < OESlav rъžь 74 asłyk || RyE commentary: We can see no reason to doubt the essential part of the etymology irst proposed by VEWT, and later accepted by many scholars46, but we believe that it needs to be slightly modiied Epentetic vowels are high in the Tkc languages (cf also ǯehimien ‘barley’), and so, as has been pointed out by Achmetьjanov 1989: 48, Russ rožь should rather yield an *yryš47-like form his is why we believe that it was not the liter form that was the source of the borrowing, but a dial form *arýž48 (ORuss 12th c rъžь), which we believe raises no doubts about the phonetics he uniformity of the Tkc forms might suggest that the word was borrowed very early, and preserved in an almost or completely unchanged form in various languages However, such an early borrowing from Russ is not very likely for cultural reasons Given that it appears over a wide area, we would rather believe that it was borrowed repeatedly, and independently his does not contradict with the proposed Russ dial etymon, as it is found in very many of Russ dial As to the sounding of our word, the vocalism of the yak form is the only exception, resulting surely from it being borrowed independently he source of rožь is, obviously, Russ rožь, too his form only appears in Trkm and Khak In Trkm it is probably a very young borrowing, and for the Khak form, we can see two possible explanations: 1 the word was not borrowed for the second time; only its spelling was changed to the Russ one although the pronunciation (especially among the less educated) most probably remained unchanged his explanation seems to be more probable 2 the word was borrowed for the second time Such an explanation is possible due to the spelling which suggests a diferent sounding, but seems to be less probable due to the practice oten used in the Soviet Union, of restoring the original spelling of Russ borrowings in various languages Cf rožь aSłYK forms: asłyk KarH: Mardkowicz 1935, KRPS ašłych KarT: KRPS 46 Achmetьjanov 1989: 48 does not fully accept it but his argument is expressed unclearly He mentions, however, an important phonetic detail, that OESlav rъžь should not receive the protetic a- in the Tkc languages; cf below 47 Or, less probably, as Achmetьjanov 1989: 48 suggests it, *yreš 48 Filin 1965– does not list such a form He does list, however, aržanój ‘rye [adj ]’ in numerous dial , including Siberian ones According to Barchudarov 1997, aržanoj is attested since the 13th c he existence of Russ dial *aryž is also suggested by Čuv Anatri ărša ‘зной и марeво во врeмя поспeванийа ржи’ (Adjagaši 2005: 175) which could easily be explained by a borrowing of *arža (*arša?) in Gen Sg , and by hardly anything else RyE || čavdar 75 languages: KarH.: asłyk || KarT.: ašłych etymology: see aš ‘barley’ commentary: We do not know of any semantic parallel for combining the meanings of ‘rye’ and ‘barley’ in one word However, it is not necessarily surprising in this case, as the etymology of this word would allow it to develop quite freely ČavDar forms: čavdar Crm.: ‫ ج��اودار‬R III 1936m || CTat.: Zaatovъ 1906 || KarC: KRPS, Levi 1996 || Ott.: ‫ جاودار‬R III 1936m, (‫ )چاودار‬Wiesentahl 1895 || Tat.Gr.: Podolsky 1981 || Tksh.: Dmitrieva 1972 čavdary Trkm.: Alijiv/Böörijif 1929 čovdar az.: RAzS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Trkm.: KTLS čovdary Trkm.: RTrkmS, Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962, Dmitrieva 1972 čovdor az.: KTLS žavdar Uzb.: RUzbS-A, RUzbS-Š žavdar buγdoj Uzb.: RUzbS-Š žavdari buγdoj Uzb.: RUzbS-A žovdari Uzb.: Dmitrieva 1972 ǯaudar Uzb.: Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912 languages: az.: čovdar, čovdor || Crm.: čavdar || CTat.: čavdar || KarC.: čavdar || Ott.: čavdar || Tat.Gr.: čavdar || Tksh.: čavdar || Trkm.: čavdary, čovdar, čovdary || Uzb.: žavdar, žavdar buγdoj, žavdari buγdoj, ǯaudar etymology: 1969: VEWT: < Pers čūdār 1998: Stachowski, S : < NPers čāvdār ‘rye (Secale cereale)’ 1999: Eren 1999: < Pers čūdār ‘rye’, quoting for comparison Pers ǯaudar ‘a herb growing in wheat’, ǯaudara ‘a herb growing amongst wheat’, gaudar, gaudara ‘a plant growing amongst wheat and barley’, ǯau, ǯav ‘barley, a grain of barley’ commentary: 1 VEWT’s proposition, and its acceptance by Eren 1999 seems absolutely incomprehensible In the modern liter Pers , there exist two forms of this word: ‫چ��ودار‬ [-ou-] and ‫[ چاودار‬-āv-] Even though the alternation of ou ~ av ~ ū is quite common in Pers , we can see no reason to assume, as VEWT and Eren 1999 suggest it, a borrowing of the -ū- form when the Tkc forms point clearly to the -av- one 2 he Tkc alternation of -a- ~ -o - is probably to be explained by borrowings from diferent dialects of Pers or, even more probably, from Taj (Pers ā = Taj o; Pers a = Taj a) 76 darikan || RyE – he Uyg ž- in place of the expected ǯ- or č- is not clear to us, not least because in Uyg (at least in its liter version), all the three consonants exist in anlaut (see e g Tömür 2003) – he Uzb alternation of -a- / -o- ~ -ä- is presumably to be explained by the palatalizing inluence of č, quite common in the Tkc languages, and a secondary adaptation of the second syllable to the vowel harmony – In Trkm and Uyg there appears a inal -i / -y Although we cannot prove it directly, we suppose that they are of entirely diferent origin: – he Uyg -i is an adjective suix (cf e g Uyg ‫‘ ئقتسادي‬economical’ or ‫ئنقابي‬ ‘revolutionary’ (Tömür 2003: 121f ) ) (Lack of the i umlaut results from the original length of the vowel of the inal syllable in the Pers source; cf Jarring 1933: 91: ‘Der Vokal in dieser [inal] Silbe ist immer a oder u’ ) – he Trkm inal -ry could in theory be a harmonized version of *čavdari, abstracted from a *čavdari bugdaj (?)-like compound Since, however, such a compound is not attested, the proposition of Eren 1999, to explain the inal -y by a contamination with Trkm dary ‘millet’, seems to be more probable Such a solution would cast some light on the order in which the Tkc peoples learned about these cereals; similarly köktarā (cf ) suggests such an ordering for Tuv 3 On naming ‘rye’ with the name for ‘wheat’, cf kara bugdaj DarIKaN forms: dargan, darikan, darkān, tereke Tksh.dial.: Dankof 1995: 702 etymology: 1995: Dankof: 702: < Arm տարեկան tarekan ‘rye’ 1999: Eren: < Arm (ater Dankof 1995: 702) commentary: Dankof’s 1995: 72 etymology is probably true (although cf also (Arm >) Kurd tarigan, Dankof 1995: 702) His Arm etymology also seems to be very plausible: < տարի tari ‘year’, liter ‘annual’ > ‘harvest’ > ‘rye’, which easily explains such Tksh dial meanings as tereke ‘cereal’, tereklik ‘vegetable garden’ or tereke ‘wheat’ (cf ) &c , if assuming a borrowing from before the semantic shit in Arm (attested in Ott since the 14th c ) jaDYGaN forms: čadagan Sag.: ‘Winterrogen’ VEWT 177a čadygan Šr.: VEWT 177a jadagan Oyr.: RAltS, Dmitrieva 1972 jadygan Sag.: Eren 1999 s v çavdar || Šr.: Eren 1999 s v çavdar, R III 211b jadygan aryš Küär.: R III 203b jatkan Küär.: R III 203b jatkan aryš Küär.: R I 278b RyE || jadygan 77 languages: Küär.: jadygan aryš, jatkan, jatkan aryš || Oyr.: jadagan || Sag.: čadagan, jadygan || Šr.: čadygan, jadygan etymology: 1969: VEWT: < jat- ‘to lie’ commentary: he etymology proposed in VEWT is semantically plausible but it has some weaknesses, too: – for: – semantics: Rye, being a weed, has more fragile stems, and ripens faster than cereals, thanks to which its seeds scatter very early, even before the harvest hus, on a ield where wheat and rye grow together, broken rye stems are visible quite clearly among wheat (Nowiński 1970: 178) – against: – suixation: Generally, the suix used here has a form -gan, not -Vgan, and is consistently attached to nominal, not verbal, bases in the names of animals and plants (Poppe 1927: 116; Frankle 1948: 55f ) – distribution: If -gan was indeed the suix used here, Küär would be the only language to preserve its original form his is not very likely since Küär is not a peripheral language and it does not preserve such old forms very oten he possibility exists, however, of a partial defence against the objection from the point suixation: the appearance of -y- (-a- in Sag čadagan is surely secondary (< *čadygan) and results from the not fully clear alternation of a ~ y) could have been caused by an analogy to quite numerous derivates in -gan(a) from roots ending in -y hey are also common in the Mo languages which inluenced quite heavily the Tkc languages with the -y- forms: cf Mo üni-jen < üni-gen ‘cow’, kulu-gana ‘mouse’ (Poppe 1927: 116) Besides, -a- in Sag čadagan, too, could be explained by an analogy to Mo forms such as kila-gana ‘a species of steppe grass’, üne-gen ‘fox’, teme-gen ‘camel’ (Poppe 1927: 116) his is probably how the Brb form küʒügän ‘eagle’ came into existence: < küc ‘eagle with a white tail’ (Frankle 1948: 55f ) Still, this defence does not explain why such a derivate should be made from a verbal, and not a nominal, stem In theory, one could assume that an unknown nominal *jat was in fact the base, and it would not be an unacceptable assumption as this is actually the case with most names of animals and plants with the -gan suix, cf Poppe’s opinion (1927: 116): ‘Was dieses Suix -γan ursprünglich bedeutete und welche Funktion es hatte, ist unbekannt, da entsprechende Stämme sonst in der Sprache nicht vorkommen’ Perhaps the unknown *jat could be identiied with Čag , Kar , Oyr , Tat , Uyg jat ‘foreign, strange’ R III 190b? hen the meaning would have to be something like ‘foreign cereal’ Unfortunately, it seems to be impossible to determine when the Sag , Šr and Küär became acquainted with rye 49 49 Although it seems to be at least possible to say for Küär that the words jatkan ~ jadygan must be older than aryš, i e older than perhaps the 17th c (or maybe even older?) his is not, however, 78 jadygan || RyE However, ‘foreign, strange’ could also be understood as ‘not sown, and still appearing’ rather than ‘coming from someone foreign’ hen, such a derivate would be understandable, given the weed-like character of rye his explanation seems to be quite likely but very diicult to prove Finally, it might also be that it is not the above mentioned jat ‘foreign, strange’ that explains our word, but some unattested semantic change such as Čul Šat ~ Č- ‘Tatar’ (Stachowski, M 1998: 116) But whether the Sag , Šr and Küär became acquainted with rye from the Tatars, is unknown A semantic parallel could be provided by Pol tatarka ‘a species of groats’, gryka and others (cf also Mańczak 1999: 95f ) yet another possibility would be to assume the existence of some unknown nominal stem *jady he fact that such a stem is unknown would not in itself be a strong argument against such a proposition However, the Küär form of jatkan would then become quite incomprehensible Perhaps the most probable explanation would be to assume that the word had been shortened in Küär , which is a fairly common phenomenon with three-syllable words with a high vowel in the middle syllable Additionally, it is rather puzzling that none of the above propositions can explain the concurrent existence of j- and č- forms in Sag and Šr Generally, č- is the counterpart of Tkc j- in these languages, including in borrowings, e g Sag čablak ‘potato’ < Russ jabloko (Räsänen 1949: 162) Perhaps the most likely explanation is that of a late borrowing, and most probably from Oyr here exist in fact three explanations of our word, and none of them are wholly convincing: 1 jat- ‘to lie’; for: semantics; against: suixation (partial possibility of defence), distribution 2 *jat- nominal ( jat ‘foreign, strange’); for: semantics; against: phonetics (-ygan) 3 *jady- nominal; for: phonetics, suixation; against: not attested (not a very strong argument), Küär jatkan50 Most probably, this derivate is very old, as is suggested by the facts that the base is utterly unclear, and that the derivational model is nowadays essentially unproductive he possibility of a very old borrowing, adapted both morphologically and phonetically, cannot be ultimately discounted Determining the exact period of borrowing seems, however, to be impossible given the complete lack of old, and abundant, data a very important clue since the cultural data show that rye should have been known in this region much earlier 50 Although one can not deinitively exclude the possibility of a later, irregular change in Küär caused probably by folk etymology and an association with jat ‘foreign, strange’? ‘to lie’? RyE || kara bugdaj 79 Kara BaŠaK forms: kara bašak Ott.: R IV 1551b etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: Literary ‘worse ear’; on kara cf kara bugdaj his is understandable, given that rye was for a very long time, and sometimes still is regarded, as being a weed rather than a cereal Kara BUGDaj forms: kara bidaj Kklp.: RKklpS-BB, Dmitrieva 1972 || Kzk.: RKzkS-46, RKzkS-54, Dmi- trieva 1972, DFKzk kara bijdaj Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899 || Kklp.: RKklpS-ST, RKklpS-B || Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS || Nog.: RNogS, Dmitrieva 1972 kara budaj Blk.: Németh 1911/12: 129 || Kmk.: Németh 1911/12: 129 || Krč.: Pröhle 1909: 95 || Krč.Blk.: Dmitrieva 1972 kara būdaj Kirg.: RKirgS-Ju44, RKirgS-Ju57, Dmitrieva 1972 kara-bugda Tat.: ‫ قارا بوغدا‬Tanievъ 1909 kara bugdaj Com.: R IV 1807b || Uyg.: KTLS qara buγdaj Uyg.: ‫ قارا بوغداي‬RUjgS languages: Blk.: kara budaj || Com.: kara bugdaj || Kirg.: kara bijdaj, kara būdaj || Kklp.: kara bidaj, kara bijdaj || Kmk.: kara budaj || Krč.: kara budaj || Krč.Blk.: kara bijdaj, kara budaj || Kzk.: kara bidaj || Nog.: kara bijdaj || Tat.: kara-bugda || Uyg.: kara bugdaj, qara buγdaj etymology: 1961: Laude-Cirtautas 1961: describes the metaphorical meaning of kara as ‘usual, common; of lower quality’ when dealing with its usage in plant names (see 34f ), and exempliies it with Blk , Kmk kara budaj, Com , Uyg kara buγdaj meaning ‘wheat of lower quality’ 1972: Dmitrieva: < kara ‘black’ + bugdaj51 commentary: his name is a composition of two words, both of which requires a separate explanation kara: We can see two possibilities of explaining the usage of kara here: 1 according to the description proposed by Laude-Cirtautas 1961: 34f his option is very plausible, especially because using the names of colours metaphorically is quite common in the Tkc languages, and also because rye has never been highly regarded in Asia, to the extent that it is oten considered to be a weed 2 by linking it with ergot (Secale cornutum), i e sclerotium of a parasitic fungus in the genus Claviceps, which attacks rye among others, and can be noticed as little black 51 In Dmitrieva 1972, only the etymology of Kirg kara būdaj is given directly, but we believe it should be assumed that it concerns all the names of this kind which are quoted here 80 kök najza || RyE spots on the ears his possibility appears to be less probable as 1. ergot attacks wheat, too (though less commonly); 2. it seems quite strange, that the name of a cereal should be derived from a fungus which attacks it, and is therefore a symptom of an illness and not an integral part of the plant bugdaj: Calling rye with a name for ‘wheat’ can be explained in two planes: 1 biological: Rye behaves as a weed, i e it grows on the ields where other cereals had been sown, very oten on ields of wheat Because it ripens faster, and its stems are more fragile and break earlier, it soon equals the sown cereals in number, or even surpass them 2 ethnographical: In connection with the above, the Tkc peoples, who never greatly appreciated rye, have developed legends about wheat gradually turning (deteriorating) into rye his fact shows clearly the relative order in which the Tkc peoples became acquainted with these cereals, and is also supported by the fact that while the name bugdaj ‘wheat’ is widespread, and is native or borrowed as early as the PTkc period (or even earlier, perhaps?), the names for ‘rye’ are more numerous and are all descriptive (including by comparison to wheat) or borrowed in the historic times KöK NajZa forms: kök najza Kzk.: R III 635m etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: he meaning of kök is not entirely clear here For certain, it is more about a shade of green rather than blue: rye does not have a blue tint, neither as a plant nor as a grain It is also possible, though, that this word is not used as a simple colour name here Given that rye is oten considered to be an inferior type of cereal, perhaps we should assume a semantic development such as ‘green’ > ‘unripe’ > ‘inferior’, even if, to the best of our knowledge, there is no attestation of such a shit At least in respect to animals, kök can have meanings far from ‘blue’ or ‘green’, e g ‘gray’, ‘silver’ and even Uzb kök koj ‘brown sheep’ (Laude-Cirtautas 1961: 79) Kzk najza means ‘lance’ and is derived (VEWT) from Pers ‫ ناي��زه‬nāyze (~ ‫ نايژه‬nāyže) ‘1 bronchus; 2 bugle, tube’ he usage of this word is not accidental; the hair on the ears of rye is exceptionally stif and prickly KöKTarā forms: kök tarā Tuv.: Dmitrieva 1972 || kök tara Dmitrieva 1979 köktarā Tuv.: RTuwS etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < kök ‘blue’ + tarā ‘grain’ 1979: Dmitrieva: liter ‘dark millet’ Assuming the meaning of ‘blue’ rather than ‘green’ seems to be strange To the best of our knowledge, no cereal or its grains are blue Cf kök najza RyE || suly 81 commentary: Literary ‘green grain (?)’ On kök see kök najza Tarā corresponds to Tkc dary ‘millet’ (see) and means in Tuv ‘1 cereal; 2 grain; 3 millet’ It is diicult to determine with any certainty which is the meaning employed in this case ‘Grain’ seems to be the most probable one Grains of rye do indeed have a green tint to them, more clearly visible than with other cereals his is not, however, enough, to exclude all the other possibilities If we assumed a semantic development such as with kök najza, the meaning of ‘inferior cereal’ would seem to render the attitude of the Tkc peoples towards rye quite accurately Finally, one can not rule out the possibility that the meaning used here is ‘millet’, and that the whole name is but another conirmation of the fact the Tkc peoples became acquainted with rye ater wheat he last possibility seems, however, to be the least probable OrUOS forms: oruos Yak.: Slepcov 1964: 37, 92, RJakS, Dmitrieva 1972, Anikin 2003 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ rožь ‘rye’ commentary: Dmitrieva 1972’s etymology appears to be true, and requires no further commentary rOžь forms: rožь Khak.: RChakS, Dmitrieva 1972 || Trkm.: RTrkmS, (scientiic) Nikitin/Kerba- baev 1962 languages: Khak.: rožь || Trkm.: rožь etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: < Russ rožь ‘rye’ Cf aryš ržI forms: rži Bšk.: Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: < Russ rži Gen < rožь ‘rye’ Cf also prosa ‘millet’ SUlY forms: süle Trkm.: (Kopet-Dag) Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962 sulli Kklp.: RKklpS-BB suly Kklp.: RKklpS-B || Nog.: Eren 1999 s v çavdar 82 suly || RyE languages: Kklp.: sulli, suly || Nog.: suly || Trkm.: süle etymology: see saly ‘rice’ commentary: his word is widespread in the Tkc languages, but usually in the meaning of ‘rice’ Also in Kklp it is present in this meaning, in the form of saly he unusual meaning here might result simply from a lack of orientation or, less probably, from the weed-like character of rye; cf budaj (although rye grows mostly in ields of wheat, not rice) Kar Čuv Tat Khak Bšk aryš ‘rye’ CTat Krč Blk Šr Kzk Nog Oyr Kmk Kklp Trkm rye 83 84 rye KarL čavdar ‘rye’ CTat Tksh Az Uzb Trkm Kirg Uyg Tat kara bugdaj ‘rye’ Krč Blk Kzk Nog Kmk Kklp Kirg Trkm Uyg rye 85 86 rye yak oruos rožь rži rožь ‘rye’ Khak Bsk Trkm wheat triticum l. Wheat is one of the oldest, perhaps the oldest, and also perhaps the most important cereal of the world he Triticum genus is composed of numerous species and varieties Despite the unusually long history of cultivation, wheat can still oten be found growing wildly It is very diicult to determine exactly when the cultivation of wheat began he oldest grains of Triticum dioccum are dated seven thousand years BC he domestication probably happened in Egypt and/or in the Fertile Crescent It spread to Europe, North Africa and Asia as early as the time of the primitive farming cultures, even thousands of years BC (Nowiński 1970: 155) he oldest of the cultivated species of wheat is Triticum dioccum, once very widespread in Asia and elsewhere, and originating probably from the region of Syria and Palestine Another once very popular species is spelt (T. spelta) Its origin is not fully understood but it is probable that it came into being in Central-Eastern or Eastern Asia Nowadays, common wheat (or bread wheat; T. vulgare = T. aestivum) is deinitely the most popular It originates from the Middle East and is over four and a half thousand years old It displaced all the other species to a considerable degree Among the Tkc names for ‘wheat’, bugdaj is very clearly the most common his fact can be interpreted as an indication that the Tkc and Mo peoples became acquainted with wheat very long ago, perhaps before the decay of the Tkc Mo union52 he absence of the word from the Ma Tung languages (not counting a later borrowing from Mo ) only conirms the relative chronology of the decay of the Alt union forms: aktarā astyγ → aš(lyk) aš → aš(lyk) ašlik → aš(lyk) ašlyk → aš(lyk) bidaj → bugdaj bīdaj → bugdaj bijdaj → bugdaj bodaj → bugdaj bödåj → bugdaj bōdaj → bugdaj bödoj → bugdaj böδaj → bugdaj bogda → bugdaj bogdaj → bugdaj bögdaj → bugdaj bögdoj → bugdaj bōgōdaj → bugdaj boγdaj → bugdaj bojdaj → bugdaj bojδaj → bugdaj bojzaj → bugdaj boraj → bugdaj böraj → bugdaj böråj → bugdaj budaj → bugdaj bŭdaj → bugdaj būdaj → bugdaj buddaj → bugdaj budgaj → bugdaj būdoj → bugdaj bugda → bugdaj bugdaj bugdāj → bugdaj buγdaj → bugdaj buγdoj → bugdaj buγudaj → bugdaj bujdaj → bugdaj bujδaj → bugdaj buldej → bugdaj buraj → bugdaj būtaj → bugdaj 52 We use the term union here to avoid the discussion on what was its exact character 88 aktarā || WHEAT buvdaj → bugdaj dövme dügi genim göǯe hinta jasmyk kyzyl bodaj kyzyl tas → kyzyltas kyzyltas mejzə öjür pări → bugdaj pogtə → bugdaj pöri → bugdaj pŏri → bugdaj pūdaj → bugdaj pugdaj → bugdaj seliehinej seliesenej → seliehinej seliesinej → seliehinej šenīse šīse → šenīse šise → šenīse taryg tereke tula tulă → tula Kmk : bidaj || budaj Krč Blk : bidaj || budaj Küär : pūdaj Kzk : bidaj || bīdaj || bijdaj || boraj || bugdaj || bujdaj MTkc H: bodaj || bogdaj || budaj || bugdaj MTkc IM: bugdaj MTkc KM: bugda || bugdaj MTkc MA B: bugdaj MTkc MK: ašlyk || bugdāj || taryg Nog : bijdaj Oghuz Ir : bugda OTkc : budgaj || bugdaj || öjür Ott : bogdaj || bojdaj || budgaj || hinta OUyg : ašlyk Oyr : aš || būdaj || būdoj || bōgōdaj || boraj || böraj || böråj || bŭdaj || bugda || dügi || kyzyl bodaj Tat Gr : bogdaj Tel : pūdaj Tksh : bugda || bugdaj || dövme || göǯe Tksh dial : buldej || genim Tob : bugdaj || bujdaj Tof : šenīse || šīse || šise Trkm : bogdaj || budgaj Tuv : aktarā || budaj || bŭdaj || būtaj || kyzyl tas || kyzyltas || pūdaj Uyg : ašlyk || boγdaj || buγdaj || buγdoj || buγudaj Uzb : astyγ || ašlik || buddaj || bugdaj || buγdoj Uzb dial : buvdaj || jasmyk yak : seliehinej || seliesenej || seliesinej languages: Az : bugda Blk : budaj Brb : pugdaj Bšk : bodaj || bödåj || böδaj || bojδaj || bojzaj || boraj || bujδaj || buraj Com : bugdaj CTat : bogdaj || budgaj Čag : bogdaj || budgaj || bugdaj Čuv : pări || pöri || pŏri || tula || tulă Fuyü: mejzə Gag : bodaj || bōdaj || bŭdaj || tereke Kar : bogdaj || budgaj KarC: bogdaj KarH: budaj KarT: budaj Khak : pugdaj Khal : bogda || bugda Kirg : bijdaj || būdaj || bujdaj || pūdaj Kklp : bidaj || bijdaj || būdaj || buvdaj pūdaj Oyr dial : būtaj Sal : bogdaj || bŭdaj || pogtə Šr : bugdaj || pūdaj Tat : bodaj || bödåj || bōdaj || bödoj || bögdaj || bögdoj || aKTarā forms: aktarā Tuv.: RTuwS, Dmitrieva 1972 etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < ak ‘white’ + tarā ‘grain; cereal’ WHEAT || bugdaj 89 commentary: his name is absolutely clear morphologically; it needs, however, a brief semantic explanation missing from Dmitrieva 1972 Tarā corresponds to Tkc dary ‘millet’ (cf ), here probably in the meaning of ‘cereal’ rather than ‘millet’ Ak is presumably to be understood metaphorically, as ‘good, better’ which would be connected to the high importance attached to wheat Calling wheat with the name for ‘millet’ should indicate the order in which the Tuvinians became acquainted with these cereals However, the data from the remaining Tkc languages shows that wheat was probably the irst cereal known to the Tkc peoples Perhaps millet took over the role of being the most important cereal for the Tuvinians, and this is where a secondary name for ‘wheat’ comes from? Cf also köktarā aŠ(lYK) forms: astyγ Uzb.: Çevilek 2005 aš Oyr.: Çevilek 2005 ašlik Uzb.: Çevilek 2005 ašlyk MTkc.MK: Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 || OUyg.: Çevilek 2005 || Uyg.: Çevilek 2005 languages: MTkc.MK: ašlyk || OUyg.: ašlyk || Oyr.: aš || Uyg.: ašlyk || Uzb.: astyγ, ašlik etymology: see as ‘barley’ commentary: Given the original meaning of aš, ‘soup’, the fact that this word means both ‘wheat’ and ‘barley’ is no surprise, even in the absence of semantic parallels he suix -lyk is probably not used here in its most common meaning of ‘abstractum’, cf the following characteristic: ‘he suix -łyx, -lik, -łux, -luk is in Karaim productive and forms denominal verbs denoting abstract concepts (nomina abstracta), also names of people (originally names of status, posts), things, and especially of plants, cf e g almałyx ‘appletree’, borłałyx ‘grapevine’ and others ’ (Zajączkowski 1932: 30f ; own translation) We believe that this information is relevant to other Tkc languages, too 53 BUGDaj forms: bidaj Kklp.: RKklpS-BB, Dmitrieva 1972 || Kmk.: RKmkS || Krč.Blk.: RKrčBlkS || Kzk.: RKzkS-46, RKzkS-54, Dmitrieva 1972, DFKzk bīdaj Kzk.: Joki 1952 bijdaj Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899 || Kklp.: RKklpS-ST, RKklpS-B || Kzk.: VEWT || Nog.: RNogS, Dmitrieva 1972 53 Cf Čul aŋnyk ‘1 trap, 2 morel’ (Pomorska 2004: 74) << aŋ ‘wild animal, beast’ (Birjukovič 1984: 13), although in this case the meaning of ‘morel’ evolved probably from the meaning of ‘trap’ rather than ‘wild animal’ 90 bugdaj || WHEAT bodaj Bšk.: Brands 1973: 45 || Gag.: Güngör/Argunşah 1991 || MTkc.H || Tat.: Vos- kresenskij 1894, RTatS-D, Brands 1973: 45, RTatS-G bödåj Bšk.: Joki 1952 || Tat.: Joki 1952 bōdaj Gag.: ÈSTJa, Dmitrieva 1972, Güngör/Argunşah 1991 || Tat.: Imanaevъ 1901, VEWT bödoj Tat.: ÈSTJa böδaj Bšk.: VEWT bogda Khal.: Doerfer/Tezcan 1980 bogdaj CTat.: Zaatovъ 1906, ÈSTJa || Čag.: Joki 1952 || Kar.: ÈSTJa || KarC: KRPS, Levi 1996 || MTkc.H || Ott.: Joki 1952, VEWT || Sal.: Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Tat.Gr.: Podolsky 1981 || Trkm.: Joki 1952, VEWT bögdaj Tat.: Joki 1952 bögdoj Tat.: ÈSTJa bōgōdaj Tat.: Imanaevъ 1901 boγdaj Uyg.: Raquette 1927, ÈSTJa bojdaj Ott.: Joki 1952 bojδaj Bšk.: Dmitrieva 1972, RBškS, Brands 1973: 45 bojzaj Bšk.: Fedotov 1996 s v pări boraj Bšk.: ‘spelt’ Fedotov 1996 s v pări || Kzk.: VEWT, Räsänen 1946: 198 (~ bijdajy) || Tat.: ‘spelt’ Fedotov 1996 s v pări böraj Tat.: VEWT böråj Tat.: Räsänen 1946: 198 budaj Blk.: ÈSTJa || KarH: KRPS, Mardkowicz 1935 || KarT: KRPS, Kowalski 1929 || Kmk.: Dmitrieva 1972 || Krč.Blk.: Joki 1952, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || MTkc.H || Tuv.: Tatarincev 2000– bŭdaj Gag.: ÈSTJa || Sal.: ÈSTJa || Tat.: ÈSTJa || Tuv.: Tatarincev 2000– būdaj Kirg.: RKirgS-Ju44, Joki 1952, RKirgS-Ju57, Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa || Kklp.: Joki 1952 || Oyr.: Dmitrieva 1972, ÈSTJa, RAltS buddaj Uzb.: Witczak 2003: 95 budgaj CTat.: Joki 1952 || Čag.: Joki 1952 || Kar.: Joki 1952 || OTkc.: DTS (one attestation in MK) || Ott.: Joki 1952 || Trkm.: Joki 1952 būdoj Oyr.: ÈSTJa bugda az.: Dmitrieva 1972, RAzS || Khal.: Doerfer/Tezcan 1980, Doerfer 1987 || MTkc.MK || Oghuz.Ir.: Doerfer/Hesche 1989 || Tat.: ‫ بوغدا‬Tanievъ 1909 || Tksh.: Tietze 2002– bugdaj Com.: Fedotov 1996 s v pări || Čag.: Joki 1952, Fedotov 1996 s v pări || Kzk.: Fedotov 1996 s v pări || MTkc.H || MTkc.IM || MTkc.Ma.B: Borovkov 1971: 100 || MTkc.KM || OTkc.: DTS (four attestations in MK), Dmitrieva 1972 || Šr.: Joki 1952 || Tob.: Joki 1952 || Tksh.: Dmitrieva 1972 || Uzb.: Nalivkinъ 1895 (‫)بغ��دای‬, Lapin 1899, Smolenskij 1912, Alijiv/Böörijif 1929, RTrkmS, Nikitin/Kerbabaev 1962, Dmitrieva 1972 bugdāj MTkc.MK: Dankof /Kelly 1982–85 buγdaj Uyg.: ‫ بوغداي‬RUjgSR, Dmitrieva 1972, Fedotov 1996 s v pări WHEAT || bugdaj 91 buγdoj Uyg.: RUjgSA || Uzb.: RUzbS-A, RUzbS-Š, Dmitrieva 1972 buγudaj Uyg.: Menges 1933, ÈSTJa bujdaj Kirg.: Mašanovъ 1899 || Kzk.: Joki 1952, VEWT || Tob.: VEWT bujδaj Bšk.: ÈSTJa buldej Tksh.dial.: UA buraj Bšk.: Räsänen 1946: 198, VEWT būtaj Oyr.dial.: ÈSTJa || Tuv.: Tatarincev 2000– buvdaj Kklp.: Tatarincev 2000– || Uzb.dial.: ÈSTJa pări Čuv.: Anatri ‘spelt’, Róna-Tas 1990: 31 pogtə Sal.: ÈSTJa pöri Čuv.: ‘spelt’ VEWT pŏri Čuv.: Virjal Róna-Tas 1990: 31 pūdaj Kirg.: Joki 1952 || Küär.: Joki 1952 || Oyr.: Joki 1952, ÈSTJa || Šr.: Joki 1952 || Tel.: Ryumina-Sırkaşeva 1995 || Tuv.: Tatarincev 2000– pugdaj Brb.: VEWT || Khak.: Dmitrieva 1972, RChakS languages: az.: bugda || Blk.: budaj || Brb.: pugdaj || Bšk.: bodaj, bödåj, böδaj, bojδaj, bojzaj, boraj, bujδaj, buraj || Com.: bugdaj || CTat.: bogdaj, budgaj || Čag.: bogdaj, budgaj, bugdaj || Čuv.: pări, pöri, pŏri || Gag.: bodaj, bōdaj, bŭdaj || Kar.: bogdaj, budgaj || KarC.: bogdaj || KarH: budaj || KarT: budaj || Khak.: pugdaj || Khal.: bogda, bugda || Kirg.: bijdaj, būdaj, bujdaj, pūdaj || Kklp.: bidaj, bijdaj, būdaj, buvdaj || Kmk.: bidaj, budaj || Krč.Blk.: bidaj, budaj || Küär.: pūdaj || Kzk.: bidaj, bīdaj, bijdaj, boraj, bugdaj, bujdaj || MTkc.H: bodaj, bogdaj, budaj, bugdaj || MTkc.IM: bugdaj || MTkc.KM: bugda, bugdaj || MTkc.Ma.B: bugdaj || MTkc.MK: bugdāj || Nog.: bijdaj || Oghuz.Ir.: bugda || OTkc.: budgaj, bugdaj || Ott.: bogdaj, bojdaj, budgaj || Oyr.: būdaj, būdoj, pūdaj || Oyr.dial.: būtaj || Sal.: bogdaj, bŭdaj, pogtə || Šr.: bugdaj, pūdaj || Tat.: bodaj, bödåj, bōdaj, bödoj, bögdaj, bögdoj, bōgōdaj, boraj, böraj, böråj, bŭdaj, bugda || Tat.Gr.: bogdaj || Tel.: pūdaj || Tksh.: bugda, bugdaj || Tksh.dial.: buldej || Tob.: bugdaj, bujdaj || Trkm.: bogdaj, budgaj || Tuv.: budaj, bŭdaj, būtaj, pūdaj || Uyg.: boγdaj, buγdaj, buγdoj, buγudaj || Uzb.: buddaj, bugdaj, buγdoj || Uzb.dial.: buvdaj etymology (an overview of the most important propositions): Tkc bugdaj: 1946: Räsänen: 198: Bšk buråj, Kzk boraj-bijdajy, Tat böråj < Čuv păry &c 1952: Joki: < OChin mwɒk ‘wheat’ or OChin N *mwok id + OChin lậi ‘wheat’54 Tkc budγaj is a metathesis; Mo ~ (or <?) Tkc Both words are attested in Chin in the oldest monuments of the yin period he old Chin N form *mwok is derived by being based on Mand mo he change -gl- > -gd- as in Nog čigläk, Trkm čigelek ‘Erdbeere’ ~ MTkc jigdä ‘rote Brustbeere’ his proposition should be treated as obsolete now Currently, Mand mai4 is derived from MChin mEk < OChin *mrɨk ‘wheat’; OChin lậi is probably to be understood as modern li4, as in mai4li4 ‘wheat grain’, which however < OChin *C-rip (oral information from Prof A Vovin [Honolulu]) 54 he compound mwɒk lậi is written without an asterisk his is probably supposed to mean that both its components are attested, as opposed to *mwok-lậi where the irst element is reconstructed (writing with or without hyphen ater Joki 1952: 108) 92 bugdaj || WHEAT 1969: VEWT: OTkc buγudaj < Mo buγudaj 1972: Clauson: OTkc buğdāj, buğdaj 1972: Dmitrieva: only indicates a comparison with OTkc boguz ‘xлeб в зeрнe; фураж’, boj ‘пажитник’ 1974: ÈSTJa: summarizes and comments on other propositions without ofering its own It only proposes to assume the possibility of inal -g instead of -j, however, basing solely on Uzb dial forms buγdaγ ~ buγdək What seems to be more probable is an expansion of original *boguda (see tkc forms below) with a common suix -(a)k on the Uzb ground Such an explanation is not in contradiction to the commonness of inal -j in almost all Tkc languages – which suggests a very old derivation – as -a forms appear quite oten in dialects, especially in the Az and Tksh ones (cf e g Tksh dial bağda ÈSTJa; boğda AA, RA; byjda OA; Az dial boγda, buγda ÈSTJa) which leads us to believe that the non-deminutive (see etymology below) form must have been in use for quite a long period 2000: Tatarincev: *bug/k (nominal or verbal) ‘greater quantity; multiplication; spreading’ for multiple grains on the ear + the -(α)d- suix forming verbs > ‘накапливаться, скапливаться (напр , о зернах в клосе)’ + suixes forming nouns -(a)j, -a and -(a)g To support the reconstructed *bug ~ *buk the following examples are listed: yak buguj ‘пододвигать с краев к середине горяаще в костре дрова’, OUyg puklun ‘накоплять’, Lob bug-ana(k) ‘насыпанные, пригнанные ветром бугры песку около деревьев’ and others, also Kzk bukpa ‘густая каша’, OTkc boγuz ‘хлеб в зерне; фураж’, Uyg bogaz (in aš bogaz), boguz ~ bogus ‘провиант дла людей; корм для скота’, and inally Tkc bug ~ bugu ‘пар, испарения, дым’ and such coincidences as Kklp buvdaj ‘wheat’ : buv ‘steam’ &c , and others his proposition does not seem to be particularly convincing he reconstruction of *bug/k with the above meaning is perhaps not so well grounded Also the question of alternating o ~ u in the irst syllable remains unsolved, particularly as it would be very hard to explain it by using the assumption of the original *u Also the explanation of the diferences in the auslaut of the Tkc forms appears too brief 2002: Tietze: < OTkc buγdaj (according to Clauson 1972) Čuv pări: 1946: 1973: 1977: 1990: Räsänen: 25f : = Tkc bugdaj Brands: 45: = Tkc bugdaj Scherner: 17: late Bulgh *buraj < early Bulgh *buzaj < Tkc *buγδaj ‘wheat’ Róna-Tas: 31: Čuv Virjal pŏri, Anatri pări < OTkc buγdaj; meaning inluenced by Russ pyrej ‘spelt’ Róna-Tas assumes a disappearance of γ, spirantization of d > z, the Chuvash rhotacism and later, a reduction of u, yielding inally pŏri in Virjal and pări in Anatri An explanation of the phonetic evolution of the last syllable is somewhat missing WHEAT || bugdaj 93 It might be impossible to present any proof, for or against, such an evolution We believe however that Fedotov’s proposition is more realistic because it assumes less phonetic changes, and the ones it includes are easier to explain, and involves no semantic change at all 1996: Fedotov: < OSlav pyro ‘spelt’ Criticises connecting the word with Tkc bugdaj, as has been done in the past Instead, he ofers a comparison with OSlav pyro ‘spelt’, which seems quite convincing – both from the semantic and phonetic points of view (although the inal -i still remains incomprehensible: an inluence/contamination with pyrej ‘spelt’?) A longlasting and very thorough inluence of Russ on Čuv is another argument in favour of Fedotov’s 1996 proposition, even though he does not mention it himself commentary: his word is very common in the Tkc languages and, as one would expect, it appears in a multitude of phonetic shapes It is also present in the Mo languages, its forms being equally diversiied there In addition, we know that wheat is generally one of the oldest, or perhaps the oldest, cereal cultivated by man (Nowiński 1970: 162) A combination of these facts allows us to assume that this word existed as early as the stage of the Tkc Mo union (of whatever nature it was: genetic, areal or something else) or even earlier 55 Unfortunately, our knowledge is not deep enough to try to produce an acceptably probable reconstruction on a stage of evolution that was so long before the oldest texts his is why we are going to limit ourselves to ofering some remarks on previous propositions, and presenting some possibilities for future investigation Tkc Forms Many of the Tkc forms could be comfortably explained by a borrowing from another Tkc language his phenomenon has been and still is, quite common; in the past it was additionally facilitated by the nomadic way of life of many Tkc tribes An exact investigation into the routes of such borrowings is only possible to a very limited degree due to the poor and young attestations of many languages, and the orthographical tradition of literary koines, almost always very strong However, even without knowing precisely what the routes of our word are, it is possible to explain a great majority of its forms with just a few phonetic processes: – spirantization and disappearance of -g-, along with possible substitute lengthening of the preceding vowel and possibly, its shortening later – change of -g- > -v- or -j-, and 55 Its absence from the Ma Tung languages seems to indicate some transitional period between the Tkc Mo -Tung and Tkc Mo unions It is not, however, a very sound argument: all these peoples mainly made their living from nomadism well into historic times, and only regarded farming as an additional source of food for a very long time Agricultural terms then, did not not necessarily spread fast and reach all the languages An attempt to ascertain whether the Ma Tung peoples were powerful enough to possess lands adequate for wheat cultivation would require an assumption of when our word is present in the Alt languages, and would thus lead to a vicious circle 94 bugdaj || WHEAT – palatalization of a before j are all common phenomena in the Tkc languages Individual forms in some of the languages might raise doubts but most of them can be explained quite easily – Brb , Khak , Oyr , Sal and Tuv forms have initial p- instead of b- In Khak and Sal it is a regular change but it is not in the remaining languages We believe that borrowing is the most likely solution – perhaps from Khak , given the area of its usage – Čag , CTat , Kar , OTkc , Ott and Trkm budγaj are most probably the result of a metathesis – Kklp , Kzk and Nog -i- in the irst syllable might be understood as a result of an irregular process present in a part of the Tkc languages where the dropping of a consonant is accompanied by the change of the preceding vowel into ī – Tat and Bšk böraj are most probably borrowings from Čuv (Fedotov 1996 s v pări) Also Bšk buraj can presumably be interpreted in this way Still, a direct inluence of Russ pyrej ‘spelt’ should not be ruled out, either – Tat and Bšk -ö- in the irst syllable probably results from the inluence (contamination?) of the form böraj which has been borrowed from Čuv (see below) – Uyg three syllable long buγudaj is presumably a borrowing from Mo It is very unlikely that Uyg would conserve the original (see below) high vowel in the middle syllable of a three syllable word It seems then, that a great number of Tkc forms (not counting Čuv forms (see below) and borrowings such as Uyg buγudaj) can in fact be reduced to one initial shape of *boguda, because: – Tkc languages generally tend to avoid o in the irst syllable, and so raising the original o is much more likely than the opposite process – Tkc languages generally shorten three syllable words with a high vowel in the middle syllable, while the Mo languages do not (at least until quite recently) – inal -j is probably a diminutive suix his assumption has already been made (e g ÈSTJa, Tatarincev 2000 and others), as it allows for an easy explanation of the -a ~ -aj alternation in auslaut For auslaut cf also commentary on ÈSTJa’s proposition in etymology above, and Tuv arbaj, arvaj For Čuv pări, we believe, Fedotov’s 1996 proposition (see etymology above) is the most probable If it is, however, true, it makes deriving Hung búza ‘wheat’ from Čuv (TESz, EWU) impossible PTkc Mo nativeness None of the propositions for explaining our word on the Tkc ground which have been made so far is fully convincing Tatarincev 2000 has certainly presented the most probable proposition, though even this has a number of weak points: especially semantics and connecting the word inally with ‘steam’ seems to be a little too farreaching Also, as Tatarincev himself admits, the morphological structure is not fully explained, either WHEAT || bugdaj OSlav Tkc Mo pyro *boguda 95 Ma buda Čuv pări Bšk , Kzk , Tat bo/öraj &c ~ Tkc bo/ugdaj Mo buγudaj būdā he Tkc inal -aj (though other forms exist, too) could have inluenced Bšk , Kzk and Tat form borrowed from Čuv We believe that this is more probable than trying to derive the word directly from the Čuv form Borrowing to PTkc Mo Perhaps then, we should look for the source of our word beyond the Tkc and Mo languages he Chin proposition in Joki 1952 is unacceptable for phonetic reasons (ÈSTJa, Tatarincev 2000) While an IE origin is probable for the Čuv word (< Russ ), it is highly unlikely for all the remaining Tkc languages, again, for phonetic reasons (PIE or IE -r- could not have yielded Tkc Mo -γd-) We believe that the facts that, 1. the cultivation of wheat began in Mesopotamia, and 2. agriculture (together with the irst cultivated cereals) seems to be a borrowing among the Tkc (and Mo ) peoples, allows us to assume with equal probability that the name for ‘wheat’ was borrowed along with the plant itself, or that it was formed on the PTkc or Mo ground Currently, the situation appears to be a stalemate and allows for nothing but guesswork We believe, nevertheless, that the lack of a convincing native explanation, and the incomprehensible morphological structure indicate a foreign origin, even if no probable etymon can be presented at the moment Nostratic Gamkrelidze-Ivanov 1984 see the possibility of connecting the Tkc and Mo forms with PIE *pūròs, Hung búza and NPers buza ‘wheat’ As Witczak 2003: 95 has rightly remarked, however, this comparison is mainly based on their phonetic similarity, and should be considered wrong 56 he forms which he proceeds to list later show clearly the extremes such comparisons could lead to: Arab burr ‘wheat’, Fi puuro ‘groats, grits’, Melan pura ‘fruit’, Polyn pura-pura ‘grain’ and others Finally, we would like to mention a word which is not very oten mentioned in this context: Tkc buza ‘wheat beer’57 and perhaps Slav and other braga ‘various types of 56 Witczak 2003: 96 also provides further bibliography of negative opinions on this proposition 57 Also Hung dial boza ‘alcohol beverage made of cereal, similar to beer’, which however, is most probably a borrowing from Tkc (Čuv ?) 96 dövme || WHEAT alcohol beverages’58 he connection with bugdaj,even if self-evident to some extent, is very diicult to thoroughly establish, at least in the case of buza, and requires further investigation, presumably reaching far beyond Turkology59 – like the ultimate etymology of bugdaj itself DövMe forms: dövme Tksh.: Eren 1999 ‘husked wheat; and others’ etymology: 1999: Eren: < döv- ‘to beat, to hit’ commentary: his word is absolutely clear Cf also tögü ‘millet’, tüvi ‘rice’ DüGI forms: dügi Tat.: ‫ دوگی‬Tanievъ 1909 etymology: see tüvi ‘rice’ commentary: In Tat this word appears also as döge and dogo, and meaning ‘rice’ Generally, the word originates ultimately from *tög- ~ *töv- ‘to beat, to hit’ and is common in the Tkc languages with the meanings of ‘rice’ and ‘millet’; ‘wheat’ might then come as a surprise We believe it might turn out to be an interesting conirmation of our proposition on the two-fold origin of modern forms (see tüvi ‘rice’) We can see in theory four possibilities of explaining this form: 1 < *tög-i (while döge, dogo < *tög-e) If we accept the view of the original two-fold derivation, we may believe that both forms have been conserved in Tat , and that their meanings diversiied in the following way: the old -ö derivative preserved the most common, and probably the original meaning, ‘rice’, and the -i derivative gained a new one, ‘wheat’ It might be viewed as surprising, however, that it is ‘wheat’ and not ‘millet’, the former being the second most common meaning of our word in the Tkc languages (see tögü ‘millet’) We suppose this could have resulted from the fact that wheat has always been one of the most, or even the most important cereal – not only for the Turks, but for a considerable part of Eurasia Such an explanation seems to be reasonably plausible, probably more so than the others 58 Scherner 1977: 17: Russ brága ‘type of weak beer (Dünnbier)’ < MČuv *bura + -ka (Vga), which is however, not very convincing due to Russ accent not on the last syllable Presumably, the IE counterparts, especially Celt (cf e g Černych 1993, Vasmer 1986–87) indicate an IE origin of this word We believe that if the connection with the Tkc forms exists at all, than the direction of inluence is just opposite to the one proposed by Scherner 1977: 17 59 Cf Tietze 2000, where Tksh boza ‘weak alcohol beverage made of millet’ is derived from Pers būza ‘millet’ (cf however Rubinčik 1970, where ‫ ب��زه‬,‫ ب��زا‬buza, buze exclusively in meaning ‘millet beer’ and ‫ بوز‬bouz ‘mould, fungus’ and ‫ بیزك‬bouzak ‘yeast, sourdough’), and where a further bibliography can be found WHEAT || jasmyk 97 2 ‘rice’ > ‘wheat’ One could assume that this change is a later innovation in Tat It could be explained then by the fact that ater the Tatars departed westwards, away from the inluence of the Chin culture, they moved onto an area where the Pers culture was dominant For the Persians, wheat was the primary cereal However, in Persia rice was known and popular, too: four out of nine names for ‘rice’ in the Tkc languages, whose etymology is acceptable, are of Pers origin Moreover, this proposition does not explain the diference in sounding between dügi and döge, dogo 3 It cannot be completely discounted that our word was borrowed from some other language his, however, hardly explains its non-standard meaning 4 Some kind of uniication or mixing of ‘rice’ and ‘wheat’, such as e g ‘millet’ and ‘corn’ (see mysyr ‘millet’ where further references can be found), or ‘oats’ and ‘barley’ (see julaf ‘oats’ where further references can be found) his possibility is, however, not very likely as it would be the only example of such a phenomenon involving these two cereals GeNIM forms: genim Tksh.dial.: Bläsing 1995: 25 etymology: 1995: Bläsing: 25: < Zaza genim commentary: Bläsing’s 1995 etymology appears to be irrefutable Göǯe forms: göǯe Tksh.: ÈSTJa ‘husked wheat’ etymology: see köče ‘barley’ commentary: he only semantic parallel we know of is aš(lyk) (cf as ‘barley’, aš(lyk) ‘wheat’), combining in one word the meanings of ‘barley’ and ‘wheat’ HINTa forms: hinta Ott.: ‫ حنطه‬Wiesentahl 1895, Redhouse 1921 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: < Arab ‫ حنطه‬hinṭa ‘wheat’ jaSMYK forms: jasmyk Uzb.dial.: ÈSTJa ‘species of wheat’ etymology: see jasymuk ‘millet’ commentary: While this word is absolutely clear morphologically, its meaning of ‘wheat’ is enigmatic When taking into consideration the original meaning of this word, *?‘something 98 kyzyl bodaj || WHEAT lat’60 (> ‘lentil’, also ‘millet’), one can only guess that one of the species of wheat has characteristically latter grains, or perhaps some similarity to ‘millet’ KYZYl BODaj forms: kyzyl bodaj Tat.: Voskresenskij 1894 ‘wheat (with red grains)’ etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: his word is absolutely clear: kyzyl ‘red’ (from the colour of grains) + bodaj ‘wheat’ KYZYlTaS forms: kyzyl tas Tuv.: Dmitrieva 1972 || kyzyltas RTuwS etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < kyzyl ‘red’ + tas ‘ bald; naked; with scarce vegetation’ commentary: his word may be more complex than has been presented by Dmitrieva 1972 While the irst part of her etymology seems to be highly plausible (cf kyzyl bodaj), its second element and the type of the compound are rather odd: 1. it is unclear why ‘wheat’ should be described as ‘bald, naked’; perhaps the word in fact means not ‘wheat’ but just one of the species, which could be characterised as such? 2. to the best of our knowledge, in the Tkc languages there are no compounds with a nominal meaning, which would be made up of two adjectives61 Unfortunately, the second part62 of this word remains puzzling for us, too MejZə forms: mejzə Fuyü: Zhen-hua 1987 etymology: as yet not discussed commentary: < Mand mai4zi ‘wheat’ (oral information from Prof A Vovin [Honolulu]) öjür forms: öjür OTkc.: Egorov 1964, Fedeotov 1996 ‘millet; spelt’ etymology: see ügür ‘millet’ commentary: he etymology of this word has not been fully ascertained However, from the original meaning of ‘gruel, pap’, a semantic evolution to any cereal is possible Given that wheat 60 his meaning is most probably, though not deinitely, simply a methodological support 61 Although this distinction can hardly ever be justiied for the Tkc languages, in this very case the adjectival nature of ‘red’ and ‘bald’ on one hand, and the nominal of ‘wheat’ on the other is exceptionally explicit 62 It cannot be discounted that the word is not in fact a compound but a borrowing whose sounding is by chance (or perhaps as a result of contamination or adaptation?) identical to that of kyzyl ‘red’ WHEAT || taryg 99 has always been one of the, or even the most important cereal, it might seem odd that this word has mainly survived in the meaning of ‘millet’, but not ‘wheat’ Cf taryg SelIeHINej forms: seliehinej Yak.: RJakS seliesenej, seliesinej Yak: [ɔ: -ehe/i-] Pekarskij 1917–30, Dmitrieva 1972, Anikin 2003 etymology: 1964: Slepcov: 91: < Russ pšeničnyj ‘wheat [adj ]’ 1972: Dmitrieva: < Russ silosnyj ‘silo [adj ]’ 2003: Anikin 2003: < Russ dial pšeníčnoj (-yj) ‘wheat [adj ]’ = Russ liter pšeničnyj id commentary: he etymology proposed by Slepcov 1964: 91 is much more probable on the semantic side Phonetically, Russ n happens to yield l in yak , as in e g Alampaǯȳs < Russ Anemlodist, yak balakaǯȳla < Russ panikadilo (Slepcov 1964: 91) Anikin 2003 additionally allows the possibility of simpliication pš- > š- still on the Russ ground, which indeed cannot be ruled out, but also in all likelihood cannot be proved he etymology ofered by Dmitrieva 1972 is not only very unlikely semantically, it also raises doubts about its phonetic nature: it is not absolutely clear why Russ í-o-y or even i-ó-y63 should yield e-ie-e in yak ŠeNīSe forms: šenīse, šīse Tof.: RTofS, Anikin 2003 || šise Rassadin 1971: 231, Anikin 2003 etymology: 1971: Rassadin: 231: šise < Bur šenīse < Russ pšenica 2003: Anikin: ? šīse, šise < Russ pšenica šenīse < Bur šenīse < Russ pšenica (ater Rassadin 1971) commentary: It is difficult to find a major weakness in the etymology proposed by Rassadin 1971: 23 The expression in Anikin 2003 is not fully clear: it gives the impression that he wants to derive šīse, šise directly from Russ without the Bur mediation, which seems to be less likely We believe that Russ pšenica > Bur šenīse > Tof šenīse > šise > šīse TarYG forms: taryg MTkc.MK: Dankof/Kelly 1982–85 etymology: see dary ‘millet’ 63 here also exists, though it is considered to be incorrect, the form silósnyj, see Ageenko 2001: ‘sílosnyj, not silósnyj ’ 100 tereke || WHEAT commentary: his word is very common in the Tkc languages, but generally signiies ‘millet’ he reconstruction of its original shape and meaning *tar-yg ‘(what was) sowed’ raises no serious doubts For the meaning of ‘wheat’ cf öjür TereKe forms: tereke Gag.: Özkan 1996 etymology: see darikan ‘rye’ commentary: his name is ultimately of Arm origin, and most probably came to Gag through one of the Tksh dialects, together with settlers from Anatolia, who were displaced onto the conquered territories in the Ottoman Empire his word, sounding tereke existed in Ott between the 14th and 18th centuries meaning ‘harvest; cereal’ (Dankof 1995: 702), from where a shit to ‘wheat’ is trivial, given great importance of this cereal in the region Cf darikan ‘rye’ TUla Forms: tula Čuv.: Dmitrieva 1972 tulă Čuv.: Nikolьskij 1909, RČuvS-D, RČuvS-E || (sară) tulă, RČuvS-A Etymology: 1972: Dmitrieva: < Georg doli ‘husked wheat’, dola ‘ bread of husked wheat’ (ater: Abaev, I 400), at the same time indicating a comparison to Mo talx(an) ‘xлeб пeчeный’, Bur talx(an) ‘lour; dough; xлeб’, Ir *talxan ‘жарeныe и молотыe зeрна бобовых’ Commentary: he etymology proposed by Dmitrieva 1972 does not seem to be totally unrealistic, although it does have several weaknesses It tacitly assumes a Georg inluence on Čuv which is possible but unlikely, especially in the case of the name for ‘wheat’ which the Turks had presumably already known well; and thus borrowing it from Georgians – a nation of highlanders, not known for their farming – would be strange Cf nartük ‘corn’, in this case, though, the geographical distribution (Krč Blk and Nog ) deinitely makes this kind of borrowing much more likely We would like to mention that in theory this word could also be identiied with sula &c ‘oats’ by means of a quite common but not described, and thus unpredictable alternation s : t However, this is perhaps not very probable as it would be the only example of combining in one word the meanings of ‘wheat’ and ‘oats’ bugdaj Kar pări =? bugdaj Čuv Gag Tat Khak Bšk bugdaj ‘wheat’ CTat Šr Oyr Krč Blk Tksh Tuv Kzk Nog Kmk Az Kklp Trkm Uyg SarUyg Wheat Khal Kirg Uzb 101 final remarks statistics he table below shows the number of words (not entries) dealt with in this work he following rules have been observed during its preparation: – words which are eventually the same but appear in diferent meanings (e g dary Tkc ‘millet’, Tksh dial ‘corn’) were counted as one – compounds and abbreviations were counted as one: e g mysyr (< Arab ; an abbreviation of mysyr bugdajy) and mysyr bugdajy (< ?), were both counted as one native word with an acceptable etymology, since the compound has most probably been created on the Tkc ground – one word borrowed in diferent morphological forms, or adapted phonetically in different ways (e g Bšk ovsa, Tof ovjot, Trkm ovjos ‘oats’ ) was counted as one he overall number of words counted according to the above rules is 86 However, for ease of usage they have been divided into 106 entries cereal barley etymology Tkc. acceptable 2 dubious 1 < arab. < Chin. < pers. < russ. < other overall 1 2 2 1 unknown acceptable corn 2 12 1 1 acceptable 2 6 2 8 dubious unknown millet 4 acceptable 8 dubious 2 1 2 1 12 2 unknown wheat 2 acceptable 3 dubious 1 1 1 2 2 acceptable 9 1 unknown rice 14 dubious unknown oats 7 2 3 4 2 9 dubious unknown 2 104 FInal reMarks cereal rye etymology Tkc. acceptable 5 dubious 1 < arab. < Chin. < pers. < russ. < other overall 1 2 8 1 unknown overall acceptable 39 dubious 5 2 2 7 10 7 5 unknown overall 67 14 44 2 2 7 10 7 86 Most common naming patterns Almost a half of the words discussed here are borrowings, and thus cannot be taken into consideration when describing the Tkc naming patterns Most of the native words, however, are not built on the basis of any repetitive pattern In fact, merely two general patterns can be clearly distinguished, and they both have a fairly limited geographic and/ or semantic range: 1 attribute + ‘cereal’ name of a cereal or something similar Ten names are built according to this pattern, which can be divided into two, partly overlapping subgroups: a) the attribute is a colour name – kara: kara bugdaj ‘rye’ in various languages of Central Asia – ak: Tuv akbydā, Tof ak h(ü)rüpē ‘rice’; Tuv aktarā ‘wheat’ – kök: Kzk kök najza, Tuv kök tarā ‘rye’ b) the second part is tarā ‘1 cereal; 2 millet’ Tuv aktarā ‘wheat’, a”tarāzy ‘oats’, čingetarā ‘millet’, köktarā ‘rye’, xōtarā ‘millet’ 2 place name + name of a cereal his patterns only appears with the names for ‘corn’: – Tat käbä bödoj – Kklp mäkke (abbreviation of a compound), Kirg , Kklp , Uyg , Uzb meke žügörü Trkm mekgeǯöven – Tksh mysyr (bugdajy) – Ott šam darysy 3 derived from ‘to hit, to strike’ dövme || dügi || öjür 4 derived from ‘to bury, to dig’ kömme qonaq || sokpa 5 borrowed from an oblique case Most probably these are forms of Gen Sg , presumably used in the function of Part here are exclusively borrowings from Russ here ovsa || prosa || rži FInal reMarks 105 Semantic types hree, partly overlapping semantic types can be spotted: 1 names meaning exactly one cereal his is the dominant type here are borrowings, compounds and rare native names here, e g ebies ‘oats’, pirinč ‘rice’, ša‘īr ‘barley’, tereke ‘rye’; mekgeǯöven ‘corn’; sary ‘corn’ and others 2 names, the etymology of which allows for diverse semantic development For obvious reasons, there are native names only in this group: aš(lyk) ‘barley; wheat’, bordoq ‘corn; oats’, dary ‘corn; millet’, dügi ‘millet; rice’, jasmyk ‘corn; millet’ and öjür ‘corn; millet; wheat’ Perhaps also arpagan ‘barley; oats’ could be considered a member of this group, too Words which belong to this type, mostly belong to type 3 as well 3 names which can mean diferent cereals in a non-chaotic way a) ‘barley’ > ‘oats’ arpa || arpagan || julaf || sula64 || taγ arpasy b) ‘barley’ and ‘wheat’ aš(łyk) || köǯe c) ‘millet’ > ‘corn’ basadohan || čüžgün65 || dary || jasmyk || öjür || šam darysy d) ‘rice’ and ‘rye’ aryš || suly 64 Sula is the only name here, which developed in the opposite direction, i e ‘oats’ > ‘barley’ 65 In the case of čüžgün the direction of the development remains unknown Surely, Uyghurs became acquainted with corn later than millet but we do not know for how long this word has existed in Uyg , and what its original meaning was abbreviations afgh. = Afghan || alb. = Albanian || alt. = Altaic || arab. = Arabic || arm. = Armenian || aS = Anglo-Saxon || av. = Avestan || az. = Azerbaijanian || Blk. = Balkar || Blr. = Belorussian || Bosn.Tksh. = Bosnian Turkish || Brb. = Baraba || Bšk. = Bashkir || Bulg. = Bulgarian (Slavic) || Bur. = Buryat || Cauc. = Caucasian || Celt. = Celtic || Chin. = Chinese || Com. = Coman || Crm. = Crimean || CTat. = Crimean Tatar || Cz. = Czech || Čag. = Chagatai || Čul. = Chulym || Čuv. = Chuvash || D. = Dutch || dial. = dialectal || Dolg. = Dolgan || e. = East || eng. = English || evk. = Evenki || Fi. = Finnish || Fr. = French || G. = German || Gag. = Gagaus || Georg. = Georgian || Gr. = Greek || Grmc. = Germanic || Hebr. = Hebrew || Hung. = Hungarian || Ie = Indo-European || Ir. = Iranian || It. = Italian || jap. = Japanese || Kar. = Karaim || KarC = Karaim of Crimea || KarH = Karaim of Halych || Karl = Karaim of Luck || KarT = Karaim of Trakai || Khak. = Khakas || Khal. = Khalaj || Kipč. = Kipchak || Kirg. = Kirghiz || Kklp. = Karakalpak || Klmk. = Kalmuk || Kmk. = Kumyck || Kmnd. = Kumandin || KorS = South Korean || Koyb. = Koybal || Krč. = Karachay || Krč.Blk. = Karachay-Balkar || Küär. = Küärik || Kurd. = Kurdish || Kzk. = Kazakh || lat. = Latin || leb. = Lebedin || liter. = literary || lith. = Lithuanian || lob. = Lobnor || lSorb. = Lower Sorbian || Ma. = Manchu || Mand. = Mandarin || MBšk. = Middle Bashkir || MChin. = Middle Chinese || Melan. = Melanesian || MIr. = Middle Iranian || MMo. = Middle Mongolian || Mo. = Mongol || Mpers. = Middle Persian || MTat. = Middle Tatar || MTkc. = Middle Turkic || MTkc.H = Houtsma 1894 || MTkc.IM = Battal 1934 || MTkc.KD = Golden 2000 || MTkc.Ma = MTkc in Muqaddimat al-‘Adab || MTkc.Ma.B = Borovkov 1971 || MTkc.MK = MTkc in the Mahmud al-Kashgari’s dictionary || N. = North || Nan. = Nanai || Nog. = Nogai || Npers. = New Persian || OBask. = Old Basque || OChin. = Old Chinese || OČuv. = Old Chuvash || OeSlav. = Old East Slavic || Oghuz. = Oghuzic || Oghuz.Ir. = Oghuzic in Iran || OInd. = Old Indian || OIr. = Old Iranian || Ojap. = Old Japanese || OKipč. = Old Kipchak || Oruss. = Old Russian || OSlav. = Old Slavonic || Osset. = Ossetic || OTkc. = Old Turkic || Ott. = Ottoman || OUyg. = Old Uyghur || Ovanj. = Old Vanjan || Oyr. = Oyrot || paleo-europ. = Paleo-European || palt. = Proto-Altaic || pamir. = Pamirian || pers. = Persian || pIe = Proto-Indo-European || pol. = Polish || polyn. = Polynesian || russ. = Russian || S. = South || Sag. = Sagal || Sal. = Salar || SarUyg. = Sary-Uyghur || SC = Serbo-Croatian || Serb. = Serbian || Sib. = Siberian || Skr. = Sanskrit || Slav. = Slavonic || Slvk. = Slovak || Slvn. = Slovenian || Sol. = Solon || Sp. = Spanish || Šr. = Šor || Taj. = Tajik || Tat. = Tatar || Tat.Gr. = Podolsky 1981 || Tel. = Teleut || Tkc. = Turkic || Tkc.Mo. = Turkic-Mongolian || Tksh. = Turkish || Tob. = Tobol || Toch. = Tocharian || Tof. = Tofalar || Trkm. = Turkmen || Tung. = Tungusic || Tuv. = Tuvinian || Ukr. = Ukrainian || Ulč. = Ulča-Tungusic || USorb. = Upper Sorbian || Uyg. = Uyghur || Uzb. = Uzbek || vBulgh.2 = Volga-Bulgharian || w. = West || wMo. = Written Mongolian || xlx. = Khalkha || Yak. = yakut || Yazg. = yazghulami literature AA = Nakib, B : Antakya Ağzı. Dilbilgisi ve Sözlük, Antakya 2004 Abaev, V I : Istoriko-ètimologičeskij slovarь osetinskogo jazyka, Moskva–Leningrad 1958–89 Achmetьjanov, R G : Obščaja leksika materialьnoj kulьtury narodov srednego Povolžьja , Moskva 1989 Adjagaši [= Agyagási], K : Rannie russkie zaimstvovanija tjurkiskich jazykov volgo-kamskogo areala I (= Studies in Linguistics of the Volga-Region 2), Szeged 2005 Ageenko, F L : Sobstvennye imena v russkom jazyke. Slovarь udarenij, Moskva 2001 Alijiv, A / Böörijif, K : Orysča-turkmenče sözlik, 1929 AMA = Boz, E : Afyon Merkez Ağzı, Afyon 2002 Anikin, A E : Ètimologičeskij slovarь russkich dialektov Sibiri. Zaimstvovanija iz uralьskich, altajskich i paleoaziatskich jazykov, Novosibirsk 1998 Anikin, A E : Ètimologičeskij slovarь russkich zaimstvovanij v jazykach Sibiri, Novosibirsk 2003 AOH = Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Budapest Ašmarin, N L : hesaurus linguae Tschuvaschorum, Kazanь (some volumes Čeboksary) 1928–50 Bańkowski, A : Etymologiczny słownik języka polskiego, Warszawa 2000– Barchudarov, S G et al (eds ): Slovarь russkogo jazyka XI-XVII vv., Moskva 1975– Battal, A : İbnü-Mühennâ Lügati, İstanbul 1934 Baxter, W : An Etymological Dictionary of Common Chinese Characters [drat 28 10 2000], http://www-personal umich edu/~wbaxter/etymdict html Benzing, J : Die angeblichen bolgartürkischen Lehnwörter im Ungarischen – ZDMG 98 (N F 23) 1 (1944): 24–27 Benzing, J : Die tungusischen Sprachen. Versuch einer vergleichenden Grammatik (= Akademie der Wissenschaten und der Literatur Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschatlichen Klasse Nr 11), Wiesbaden 1955 BER = Georgiev, V et al (eds ): Bъlgarski etimologičen rečnik, Soija 1971– Berneker, E : Slavisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. A–morъ, Heidelberg 1908–13 Bläsing, U : Armenisches Lehngut im Türkeitürkischen am Beispiel von Hemşin, Amsterdam– Atlanta 1992 Bläsing, U : Kurdische und Zaza-Elemente im türkeitürkischen Dialektlexicon – DS-NELL 2 (1995): 173–218 Borovkov, A K : Nazvanija rastenij po bucharskomu spisku „Mukaddimat al-adab” – Baskakov, N A et al (eds ): Tjurkskaja leksikologija i leksikograija, Moskva 1971: 96–111 Boryś, W : Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego, Kraków 2005 Brands, H W : Studien zum Wortbestand der Türksprachen, Leiden 1973 Brückner, A : Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego, Warszawa 1927 Cihac, A de: Dictionnaire d’ étymologie daco-romane, Francofort s/M 1879 Cincius, V I : Sravnitelьnaja fonetika tunguso-manьčžurskich jazykov, Leningrad 1949 Cioranescu, A : Diccionario etimológico rumano, Tenerife 1966 Clauson, Sir G : An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-hirteenth Century Turkish, Oxford 1972 110 lIterature Černych, P Ja : Istoriko-ètimologičeskij slovarь sovremennogo russkogo jazyka, Moskva 1993 Çevilek, Ö : Dindışı Eski Uygurca Metinlerin Karşılaştırmalı Sözvarlığı, İstanbul 2005 [unpublished MA thesis] Dankof, R : Armenian Loanwords in Turkish, Wiesbaden 1995 Dankof, R / Kelly, J : Mahmūd al-Kāšγarī. Compendium of the Turkic Dialects (Dīwān Luγāt at-Turk), Harvard 1982–85 DFKzk = Kydyrbayeva, L : Dictionnaire rançais-kazakh, Paris 1983 DKzkF = Indjoudjien, D : Dictionnaire kazakh-rançais, Paris 1983 Dmitrieva, L V : Nazvanija rastenij v tjurkskich i drugich altajskich jazykach – Cincius, V I (ed ): Očerki sravnitelьnoj leksikologii altajskich jazykov, Leningrad 1972: 151–223 Dmitrieva, L V : Iz ètimologii nazvanij rastenij v tjurkskich, mongolьskich i tungusomanьčžurskich jazykach – Cincius, B I (ed ): Issledovanija v oblasti ètimologii altajskich jazykov, Leningrad 1979: 135–91 Doerfer, G : Lexik und Sprachgeographie des Chaladsch. Textband, Wiesbaden 1987 Doerfer, G / Hesche, W : Chorasantürkisch, Wiesbaden 1993 Doerfer, G / Hesche, W : Südoghusische Materialien aus Afghanistan und Iran, Wiesbaden 1989 Doerfer, G / Tezcan, S : Wörterbuch des Chaladsch (Dialekt von Xarrab), Budapest 1980 DS = Derleme Sözlüğü, Ankara 1993 DTS = Nadeljaev, V M / Nasilov, D M / Tenišev, È R / Ščerbak, A M (eds ): Drevnetjurkskij slovarь, Leningrad 1969 Dumézil, G : Légendes sur les Nartes suivies de cinq notes mythologiques (= Bibliothèque de l’Institut français de Léningrad 11), Paris 1930 Egorov, V G: Ètimologičeskij slovarь čuvašskogo jazyka, Čeboksary 1964 Erdal, M : Old Turkic Word Formation, Wiesbaden 1991 Eren, H: Türk Dilinin Etimolojik Sözlüğü, Ankara 1999 ÈSTJa = Sevortjan, È V (ed ): Ètimologičeskij slovarь tjurkskich jazykov, Moskva 1974– ESUM = Melьničuk, O S et al (eds ): Etimologìčnij slovnik ukrajinskoji movi, Kiïv 1982– EVP = Morgenstierne, G : An Etymological Vocabulary of Pashto, Oslo 1927 EWU = Benkő, L et al (eds ): Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Ungarischen, Budapest 1993–94 Fazylov, È : Starouzbekskij jazyk chorezmijskich pamjatnikov XIV veka, Taškent 1966–71 Fedorov, A I (ed ): Slovarь russkich govorov novosibirskoj oblasti, Novosibirsk 1979 Fedotov, M R : Ètimologičeskij slovarь čuvašskogo jazyka, Čeboksary 1996 Filin, F P (ed ): Slovarь russkich narodnych govorov, Leningrad 1965– FO = Folia Orientalia, Kraków Frankle, E : Word Formation in the Turkic Languages, Columbia 1948 FUF = Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen, Helsinki Gamkrelidze, T V / Ivanov, V V : Indoevropejskij jazyk i indoevropejcy. Rekonstrukcija i istorikotipologičeskij analiz prajazyka i protokulьtury, Tbilisi 1984 Genaust, H : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der botanischen Planzennamen, Stuttgart 1976 Gluhak, A : Hrvatski etimološki rječnik, Zagreb 1993 Golden, P B (ed ): he King’s Dictionary. he Rasûlid Hexaglot: Fourteenth Century Vocabularies in Arabic, Persian, Turkic, Greek, Armenian and Mongol, Leiden–Boston–Köln 2000 Gombocz, Z : Die bulgarisch-türkischen Lehnwörter in der ungarischen Sprache, Helsinki 1912 lIterature 111 Grønbech, K : Komanisches Wörterbuch. Türkischer Wortindex zu Codex Cumanicus, Kopenhagen 1942 Güngör, H / Argunşah, M : Gagavuz Türkleri (Tarih – Dil – Folklor ve Halk Edebiyatı), Ankara 1991 Helimski [= Chelimskij], E A : Ètimologičeskie zametki – Ulachanov, I S et al (eds ): Issledovanija po istoričeskoj grammatike i leksikologii, Moskva 1990: 30–58 Helimski [= Chelimskij], E A : Komparativistika, uralistika. Lekcii i statьi, Moskva 2000 Holub, J / Kopečný, F : Etymologický slovník jazyka českého, Praha 1952 Holub, J / Lyer, S : Stručný etymologický slovník jazyka českého, Praha 1967 Horn, P : Grundriss der neupersischen Etymologie, Strassburg 1893 Houtsma, M h : Ein türkisch-arabisches Glossar, Leiden 1894 Hübschmann, H : Persische Studien, Strassburg 1895 Hubschmid, J : hesaurus Praeromanicus Faszikel 2, Bern 1965 Imanaevъ, M : Russko-tatarskij orfograičeskij slovarь, Kazanь 1901 Jarring, G : An Eastern Turki-English Dialect Dictionary, Lund 1964 Jarring, G : Agriculture and Horticulture in Central Asia in Early Years of the Twentieth Century with an Excursus on Fishing, Lund 1998 Joki, A : Die Lehnwörter des Sajan-Samojedischen, Helsinki 1952 Jungmann, J : Slovník česko-německý, Praha 1835–39 Kakuk, Zs : Un vocabulaire salar – AOH 14 (1962): 173–96 Kakuk, Zs : Mischärtatarische Texte mit Wörterverzeichnis, Szeged 1996 Kannisto, A : Die tatarischen Lehnwörter im Wogulischen – FUF 17 (1925), Het 1–3: 1–264 Karłowicz, J : Słownik wyrazów obcego a mniej jasnego pochodzenia używanych w języku polskim, Kraków 1894–1905 Katanovъ, N : Kratkij russko-kirgizskij slovarь, Kazanь 1909 Kluge, F : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache, Berlin–New york 221989 Kowalski, T: Karaimische Texte im Dialekt von Troki (= Prace Komisji Orjentalistycznej Polskiej Akademii Umiejętności 11), Kraków 1929 KRPS = Baskakov, N A / Zajączkowski, A / Szapszał, S M : Karaimsko-russko-polьskij slovarь, Moskva 1974 KSz = Keleti Szemle, Budapest KTLCS = Ercilasun, A B / Aliyev, A M : Karşılaştırmalı Türk Lehçeleri Cep Sözlüğü, 1: Türkiye Türkçesi / Azerbaycan Türkçesi, Azerbaycan Türkçesi / Türkiye Türkçesi, Ankara 1991 KWb = Ramstedt, G J : Kalmückisches Wörterbuch, Helsinki 1935 Lapinъ, S A : Russko-uzbekskij slovarь, Samarkandъ 21899 Laude-Cirtautas, I : Das Gebrauch der Farbbezeichnungen in den Türkdialekten, Wiesbaden 1961 Laufer, B : Sino-Iranica, Chicago 1919 Levi, B Z : Russko-karaimskij slovarь. Krymskij dialekt, Odessa 1996 Lidell, G H : A Greek English Lexicon, Oxford 91968 Ligeti, L : Histoire du lexique des langues turques – RO 17 (1951–52): 80–91 Lokotsch, K : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der amerikanischen (indianischen) Wörter im Deutschen, Heidelberg 1926 112 lIterature Lokotsch, K : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der europäischen (germanischen, romanischen und slavischen) Wörter orientalischen Ursprungs, Heidelberg 1927 Lőrinczy, É (ed ): Új magyar tájszótár, Budapest 1979– Machek, V : Etymologický slovník jazyka českého, Praha 1968 Maciuszak, K : Persian checkmate – ‘he King is oppressed’ On the origin of the chessmens’ names – SEC 8 (2003): 91–101 Mańczak, W : Étymologie du français sarrasin – SEC 4 (1999): 95–96 Mardkowicz, A : Karaj sez-bitigi. Słownik karaimski. Karaimisches Wörterbuch, Łuck 1935 Martin, S E : he Japanese Language hrough Time, New Haven–London 1987 Martynaŭ, V U (ed ): Ètymalagičny sloŭnik belaruskaj movy, Minsk 1978– Mašanovъ, M : Russko-kirgizskij slovarь, Orenburg 1899 Maъrufov, È M (ed ): Ŭzbek tilining izoҳli luγati, Moskva 1981 Menges, K (ed ): Volkskundliche Texte aus Ost-Türkistan aus dem Nachlass von N. h. Katanov, Berlin 1933 MiklFremdSlav = Miklosich, F : Die Fremdwörter in den slavischen Sprachen, Wien 1866 Miklosich, F : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der slavischen Sprachen, Wien 1886 MiklTEl = Miklosich, F : Die türkischen Elemente in den südost- und osteuropäischen Sprachen, Wien 1884–85 MiklTElN = Miklosich, F : Die türkischen Elemente in den südost- und osteuropäischen Sprachen. Nachträge, Wien 1889–90 MK = Mahmud al-Kashgari’s dictionary (ater DTS) Mladenov, S : Ètimologičeski i pravopisenъ rečnikъ na bъlgarskija knižovenъ ezikъ, Soija 1941 MSFOu = Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, Helsinki MT = Kahramanyol, M : Makedonyada’ ki Türk ve Müslüman Toplumlarının Dilleri Konusunda Karşılaştırmalı Sözlük (Türkçe – Arnavutça – Boşnakça – Pomakça) (Üsküp – Kalkandelen – Gostivar – Ohri – Resne – İştip – Pirlepe – Ustrumca – Radoviş), Ankara 2002 Muchliński, A : Źródłosłownik wyrazów, które przeszły […] do naszej mowy z języków wschodnich […], Petersburg 1958 Nalivkinъ, V D : Rukovodstvo kъ praktičeskomu izučeniju cartovskago jazyka, Samarkandъ 1895 Németh, Gy : Kumük és balkár szójegyzék – KSz XII (1911/1912): 91–153 NEVP = Morgenstierne, G : A New Etymological Vocabulary of Pashto, compiled and ed. by J. Elfenbein / D.N. MacKenzie / N. Sims-Williams, Wiesbaden 2003 Nikitin, VV / Kerbabaev, B B : Narodnye i naučnye turkmenskie nazvanija rastenij, Ašchabad 1962 Nikolьskij, N B : Russko-čuvašskij slovarь, Kazanь 1909 Nowiński, M : Dzieje upraw i roślin uprawnych, Warszawa 1970 OA = Demir, N : Ordu İli ve Yöresi Ağızları (İnceleme – Metinler – Sözlük), Ankara 2001 Omodaka, H et al (eds ): Jidaibetsu kokugo daijiten. Jōdai hen, Tōkyō 2000 Orel, V : Albanian Etymological Dictionary, Leiden–Boston–Köln 1998 Özkan, N : Gagavuz Türkçesi Grameri, Ankara 1996 Pekarskij, È K : Slovarь jakutskago jazyka, Petrograd 1917–30 Pisowicz, A : Weitere kurdische Wörter im türkeitürkischen Dialektmaterial – FO 36 (2000): 235–45 Podolsky, B : A Greek Tatar-English Glossary, Wiesbaden 1981 lIterature 113 Pomorska, M : On the Phonetical Adaptation of Some Russian Loanwords in Tuvinian – Zeszyty Naukowe UJ. Prace Językoznawcze 117 (1995): 93–102 Pomorska, M : Middle Chulym Noun Formation (= STC 9), Kraków 2004 Pröhle, W : Karatschajisches Wörterverzeichnis – KSz 10 (1909): 83–150 R = Radlof, V V : Opyt slovarja tjurkskich narečij. Versuch eines Wörterbuches der Türk-Dialecte, Sankt-Peterburgъ 1893–1911 RA = Günay, T : Rize İli Ağızları, Ankara 2003 RAltS= Baskakov, N A (ed ): Russko-altajskij slovarь, Moskva 1964 Ramstedt, G J : Einführung in die altaische Sprachwissenschat, Helsinki 1957 Raquette, G : English-Turki Dictionary Based on the Dialects of Kashgar and Yarkand, Lund– Leipzig 1927 Räsänen, M : Die tschuwassischen Lehnwörter im Tscheremissischen (= MSFOu 48), Helsinki 1920 Räsänen, M : Der wolga-bolgarische Einluss im Westen im Lichte der Wortgeschichte – FUF 29 (1946): 190–201 Räsänen, M : Materialien zur Lautgeschichte der türkischen Sprachen, Helsinki 1949 Räsänen, M : Materialy po istoričeskoj fonetike tjurkskich jazykov, [trans A A Juldašev], Moskva 1955 Rassadin, V I : Fonetika i leksika tofalarskogo jazyka, Ulan-Udè 1971 RAzS = Orudžov, E H : Russko-azerbajdžanskij slovarь, Azernešr 1955 RBškS = Karimova, G R / Dmitriev, N K : Russko-baškirskij slovarь, Moskva 1954 RChakS = Čankov, D I (ed ): Russko-chakasskij slovarь, Moskva 1961 RČuvS-A = Andreev, I A / Petrov, N P : Russko-čuvašskij slovarь, Moskva 1971 RČuvS-D = Dmitriev, N K : Russko-čuvašskij slovarь, Moskva 1951 RČuvS-E = Egorov, B T : Russko-čuvašskij slovarь, Čeboksary 1960 Redhouse, J W : A Turkish and English Lexicon, Constantinople 1921 Rejzek, J : Český etymologický slovník, Voznice 2001 RJakS = Charitonov, L N / Ačanasьev, P S : Russko-jakutskij slovarь, Moskva 1968 RKirgS-Ju44 = Judachin, K K : Russko-kirgizskij slovarь, Moskva 1944 RKirgS-Ju57 = Judachin, K K : Russko-kirgizskij slovarь, Moskva 1957 RKirgS-O = Oruzbaeva, B O (ed ): Russko-kirgizskij slovarь, Frunze 1988 RKklpS-B = Baskakov, N A (ed ): Russko-karakalpakskij slovarь, Moskva 1967 RKklpS-BB = Baskakov, N A / Beknazarov, C B : Russko-karakalpakskij slovarь, Moskva 1947 RKklpS-ST = Saiev, T S / Turabaev, A T : [Kratkij] russko-karakalpakskij slovarь, Moskva 1962 RKmkS = Bammatov, Z Z : Russko-kumykskij slovarь, Moskva 1960 RKrčBlkS = Sujunčev, Ch I / Urusbaev, I Ch : Russo-karačaevo-balkarskij slovarь, Moskva 1965 RKzkS-46 = Sauranbaev, N et al (eds ): Russko-kazachskij slovarь, Almaty 1946 RKzkS-54 = Sauranbaev, N : Russko-kazakskij slovarь, Moskva 1954 RNogS = Baskakov, N A (ed ): Russko-nogajskij slovarь, Moskva 1956 RO = Rocznik Orientalistyczny, Warszawa Róna-Tas, A : Altajskij i indoevropejskij (Zametki na poljach knigi T V Gamkrelidze i Vjač Vs Ivanova) – VJa 1990/1: 26–37 RTatS-D = Dmitriev, N K (ed ): Rusča-tatarča süzlek, Kazanь 1955–59 RTatS-G = Ganiev, F A (ed ): Rusča-tatarča süzlek, Moskva 1991 114 lIterature RTofS = Buraev, I D (ed ): Tofalarsko-russkij, russko-tofalarskij slovarь, Irkutsk 1995 RTrkmS = Baskakov, N A / Chamzaev, M Ja (eds ): Russko-turkmenskij slovarь, Moskva 1956 RTuwS = Palьmbach, A A (ed ): Russko-tuvinskij slovarь, Moskva 1953 Rubinčik, Ju A (ed ): Persidsko-russkij slovarь, Moskva 1970 RUjgS = Rachimov, T R (ed ): Russko-ujgurskij slovarь, Moskva 1956 RUzbS-A = Abdurachmanov, R : Russko-uzbekskij slovarь, Moskva 1954 RUzbS-Š = Šanskij, N M : Russko-uzbekskij tematičeskij slovarь, Taškent 1975 Ryumina-Sırkaşeva, L T / Kuçigaşeva, N A d: Teleut ağzı sözlüğŭ, [trans from Russ : Ş H Akalın / C Turgunbayev], Kemerovo 1995 Scherner, B : Arabische und neupersische Lehnwörter im Tschuwaschischen, Wiesbaden 1977 Schuster-Šewc, H : Historisch-etymologisches Wörterbuch der ober- und niedersorbischen Sprache, Bautzen 1978–89 Schwarz, H G : An Uyghur-English Dictionary, Bellingham 1992 SEC = Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, Kraków Sędzik, W : Prasłowiańska terminologia rolnicza. Rośliny uprawne. Użytki rolne (= Prace Slawistyczne 3), Ossolineum 1977 SEJP = Sławski, F : Słownik etymologiczny języka polskiego, Kraków 1952– Sevortjan, È V : Ètimologičeskij slovarь tjurkskich jazykov, Moskva 1974– Shaw, R B : A Sketch of the Turki Language as Spoken in Eastern Turkistan (Kàshgar and Yarkand), part II: Vocabulary, Turki-English (= Extra Number to Part I of the Journal, Asiatic Society of Bengal), Calcutta 1880 SKE = Ramstedt, G J : Studies in Korean Etymology, Helsinki 1949–53 Skok, P : Etimologijski rječnik hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika, Zagreb 1971–74 Slepcov, P A : Russkie leksičeskie zaimstvovanija v jakutskom jazyke (dorevoljucionnyj period), Jakutsk 1964 Slepcov, P A : Russkie leksičeskie zaimstvovanija v jakutskom jazyke (poslerevoljucionnyj period), Moskva 1975 Smolenskij, N : Polnyj karmannyj russko-sartovskij slovarь, Taškentъ 1912 Snoj, M : Slovenski etimološki slovar, Ljubljana 11997, 22003 Spólnik, A : Nazwy polskich roślin do XVIII wieku, Ossolineum 1990 Stachowski, M : Khakas Food Names – FO 31 (1995): 147–61 Stachowski, M : Korean-Turkic Studies – Brzezina, M / Kurek, H (eds ): Collectanea linguistica in honorem Casimiri Polański, Kraków 1999a: 231–41 Stachowski, M : Konsonantenadaptation russischer Lehnwörter im Dolganischen, Kraków 1999b Stachowski, M : Notizen zur schorischen und tschulymischen Etymologie – SEC 3 (1998): 107–23 Stachowski, St : Osmanlı Türkçesinde Yeni Farsça Alıntılar Sözlüğŭ. Wörterbuch der neupersischen Lehnwörter im Osmanisch-Türkischen, İstanbul 1998 STC = Studia Turcologica Cracoviensia, Kraków Steblin-Kamenskij, I M : Očerki po istorii leksiki pamirskich jazykov. Nazvanija kulьturnych rastenij, Moskva 1982 lIterature 115 TA = Karahasanoğlu, Ö H : Trabzon Ağzı Sözlüğü – Trabzon Kültür Sanat Yıllığı 87 (1987): 131–43 Tanievъ, S -M : Samoučitelь tatarskago jazyka, vol III: Russko-tatarskij slovarь, Baku 51909 Tatarincev, B I : Ètimologičeskij slovarь tuvinskogo jazyka, Novosibirsk 2000– TDA = Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları, İstanbul Tekin, T : Ana Türkçede Aslî Uzun Ünlüler, Ankara 1975 Tekin, T : Türk Dillerinde Önseste y- Türemesi – TDA 4 (1994): 51–66 Tenišev, È R : Stroj saryg-jugurskogo jazyka, Moskva 1976 TESz = Benkő, L (ed ): A magyar nyelv történeti-etimológiai szótára, Budapest 1967–76 Tietze, A : Tarihi ve Etimolojik Türkiye Türkçesi Lugatı, İstanbul–Wien 2002– TMEN = Doerfer, G : Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, Wiesbaden 1963–75 Tōdō, A : Gakken kanwa daijiten, Tōkyō 2001 Tömür, H : Modern Uyghur Grammar (Morphology), [trans A Lee], İstanbul 2003 Tryjarski, E : Kultura ludów tureckich w świetle przekazu Mahmūda z Kaszgaru (XI w.), Warszawa 1993 Turner, R L : A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, London 1966–69 TuwRS-Pa = Palьmbach, A A : Tuvinsko-russkij slovarь, Moskva 1955 TuwRS-Pu = Puncag, G : Tuvinsko-mongolьsko-russkij slovarь, Ölgij 1986 UA = Gülsevin, G : Uşak İli Ağızları, Ankara 2002 Ubrjatova, È I : Opyt sravnitelьnogo izučenija fonetičeskich osobennostej jazyka naselenija nekotorych rajonov Jakutskoj SSR, Moskva 1960 Urazmetov, H / Bajšev, T : Terminologičeskij slovarь po botanike russko-baškirskij i baškirskorusskij, Ufa 1952 UzbRS = Borovkov, A K (ed): Uzbeksko-russkij slovarь, Moskva 1959 Vasmer, M : Ètimologičeskij slovarь russkogo jazyka, Moskva 1986–87 VEWT = Räsänen, M : Versuch eines etymologischen Wörterbuchs der Türksprachen, Helsinki 1969 VGAS = Poppe, N : Vergleichende Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen, 1: Vergleichende Lautlehre, Wiesbaden 1960 VJa = Voprosy Jazykoznanija, Moskva Voskresenskij, A : Russko-tatarskij slovarь, Kazanь 1894 Wiesentahl, W : Dictionnaire de poche rançais-turc, Constantinople 1895 Witczak, K T : Indoeuropejskie nazwy zbóż, Łódź 2003 Woodhouse, S C : English-Greek Dictionary. A Vocabulary of the Attic Language, London 1910 Zaatovъ, O : Polnyj russko-tatarskij slovarь (krymsko tatarskago narěčija), Simferopol 1906 Zaimov, J : Nazvanijata na carevicata v bъlgarski ezik. – Ezikovedski izsledvanija v čest na akademik Stefan Mladenov, Soija 1957: 113–26, 117–19 Zajączkowski, A : Suiksy imienne i czasownikowe w języku zachodniokaraimskim, Kraków 1932 ZDMG = Zeitschrit der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschat, Berlin Zhen-hua, H / Imart, G : Fu-yü gïrgïs: A Tentative Description of the Easternmost Turkic Language (= Papers on Inner Asia, No 8), Bloomington 1987 index of non-Turkic forms aca- Skr 14 ‘alaf ‫ علف‬Arab 53 alaf ‫ َعلَف‬, Pers 52 alaf Talyš 52 *albhi- PIE 11 ἄλφι Gr 11 aliton, ἄλφιτον Gr 11 Anemlodist Russ 99 *apa OJap 13, 43 *arba Ir 11 arbaj Mo 11 arbin Mo 13 arfa Ma 11, 12, 52 arfuku Ma 12 *arpa Ir 11 árpa Hung 11–3 *arpasyā OIr 11, 12 arva Klmk dial 12, 52 *arýž Russ dial 74 aržanoj, aržanój Russ dial 74 aržanó žito Russ dial Sib 72 āśa Skr 14 aš Ir 14 āš Ir , Pers 14 birinǯ Pers 65 blé d’Espagne Fr 19 blé de Turquie Fr 19 bóbr Pol 25 bouz ‫ بوز‬Pers 96 bouzak ‫ بیزك‬Pers 96 boza Hung dial 95 braga Slav 95 brága Russ 96 bristlegrass Eng 45 būda Nan 33 buγudaj Mo 92 burak Pol 33 burr Arab 95 buza ‫ بزا‬Pers 95, 96 búza Hung 94, 95 būza Pers 96 buze ‫ بزه‬Pers 96 carevica Bulg 21 *C-rip OChin 91 cucuruz, cucurúz Rom 24 curvus Lat 25 čāvdār NPers 75 čigläk Nog 91 člen Russ 17 čūdār Pers 75 dagan ‫ דּגן‬Hebr 21, 35 dārū Pers 37, 38 *der- PIE 38 dochan ‫ דּוחן‬Hebr 21, 35 dola Georg 100 doli Georg 100 dūrvā OInd 38 egipt-a-c’oren Arm 28 eľp Alb 11 foxtail Eng 45 gabta- Ma 12 gaudar Pers 75 gaudara Pers 75 gawres ‫ گاورس‬Pers 46 genim Zaza 97 gogaṙ Arm 26 gogołka Pol 25 gouǯe ‫ گوجه‬Pers 15, 16 granturco It 19 gurinǯ Pers 65 gürünč Ir 64 hinṭa ‫ حنطه‬Arab 97 jabloko Russ 78 jačmeń, jačméń, jačmenь Russ 14, 17 *jašméń Sib 17 jəv Pers dial 52 kahrkasa- Av 14 kąkol Pol 25 kãnkalas Lith 25 kankalék Hung 25 kilagana Mo 77 király Hung 17 kokë Alb 25 kókërr Alb 25 *kokor- PSlav 25 kokóra Russ dial 25 kokorac USorb 25 kokorička Ukr 25 kokorík Slvk 25 kokornak Pol 25 kokoryca Pol 24 kokorycz Pol 25 kokořík Cz 25 kokrik LSorb 25 kökürü Hung 25 kokuruz SC 24 kopeek Russ 41 kopejka Russ 41 *kor- PSlav 25 *korenь PSlav 25 koruza Slvn 24 *kral’ь Slav S dial 17 krupa Russ 62 krzywy Pol 25 *kukkur- Pre-Romance 26 kuklik Pol 25 kukora Hung dial 25 *kukur- Pre-Romance 26 kùkurica SC 24 kukurica Slvk , USorb 24 kukurík Slvk 25 kukuriza SC 24 kukurják Bulg 25 kukurjav Slav S 24, 25 kukuróz Russ dial 24 kukuruc Cz , Slvk 24 kukuruca Pol 24 kukurudz Pol 24 kukurudza Pol 24 kukurúdza Ukr 24 kukuruz, kukurùz Bulg 23, 24 kukùruz SC 24 kukùruz Serb 23 kukurúza Blr 24 kukùruza SC 24 kukuryca Pol 24 kukurydza Pol 24 kukuryza Pol 24 kukuřice Cz 24 kulugana Mo 77 kúqur Alb 25 kyrsä Fi 64 lậi OChin 61 li4 Chin 61 mahíz Sp 19 mai4 Mand 91 mai4li4 Chin 91 mais Europ 28 maïs Fr 19, 28 118 Index maís Sp 19, 28 máis Sp 19 maisí Taino 19 maize Eng 19 mai4zi Mand 98 majisí Taino 19 makka ‫مكة‬, Arab 27 mays Lat 19 mEk MChin 91 Meke Arab 27 Mekke Arab 27 Misr Arab 28 mo Mand 91 *mrɨk OChin 91 mwɒk OChin 91 mwɒk lậi OChin 91 *mwok (O)Chin N 91 *mwok-lậi OChin 91 nard Europ 29 nārdān, nārdānag Pers 41 νάρδος Gr 29 nardus Lat 29 nartxor Osset 29 nāyze ‫ نايزه‬Pers 80 nāyže ‫ نايژه‬Pers 80 ὀλφα Gr 11 orbəša Pashto 12, 13 orbəši Afgh 11 ōrbūšah Afgh 11 όριζα Gr 64 όριζον Gr 64 oržanój Russ dial Sib 72 oves Ukr 58 ovës Russ 51 *ovjes Russ dial 51 ovjós Russ 54 owies Pol 58 panikadilo Russ 99 *per- Slav 69 pirinč Ir 65 popiół Pol 25 prataraca- Skr 14 *pro- Slav 69 proso Russ 41, 47 proso Slav 70 proso vengerskoje Russ 47 proszka Pol 41 pšenica Russ 99 pšeníčnoj Russ dial 99 pšeničnyj Russ 99 pùh-tuu-kai Žu-čen 33 pura Melan 95 pura-pura Polyn 95 puuro Fi 95 *pūròs PIE 95 pyrej Russ 92 pyro OSlav 93 qonaγ Mo 40 qonuγ Mo 40 ris Russ 66 *rože ORuss 73 rožь Russ 73, 74, 81 ržanoj Russ 72 rži Russ 81 rъžь OESlav 73, 74 saeta Lat 45 sali Mo 67 selьdej Russ 41 selьdь Russ 41 sēta Lat 45 setaria Lat 45 silosnyj, silósnyj, sílosnyj Russ 99 *siok4 MChin 42 *sjowk MChin 42 sjowk MChin 13 sög Klmk , Mo 42 sok Chin , KorS 42 sōk Pers 42 stolóvaja Russ 41 sù Chin 42 sù Mand 13 suli Mo 56 َ Arab 16 ša‘īr ‫ش ِعیر‬ šālī Pers 67 šaltūk Pers 63, 64 šenīse Bur 99 talx(an), Bur , Mo 100 *talxan Ir 100 tarān Mo 43, 44 tare AS 38 tari տարի Arm 76 tariā Xlx 37 tarigan Kurd 76 tarija Mo 44 tarijad MMo 37 tarija(n) Mo 37, 43, 44 tarwe D 38 temegen Mo 77 turecka pszenica Pol 19 türkisch Korn G 19 türkischer Weizen G 19 turkyně Cz 19 turščica Slvn 19 tuturγan Mo 67 ünegen Mo 77 ünigen Mo 77 ünijen Mo 77 ür Mo 30, 45, 46 urbeši Afgh 11 üre Mo 45, 46 *verenǯa Av 65, 66 vrīhí Skr 65 vrīhis OInd 66 *vrinǯi- Ir 65 vriže Afgh 65 *vriži- Ir 65 Welschkorn G 19 włośnica Slav 45 xarban OVanj , yazg 52 zēa Lat 19 žito Russ 72 ǯau Pers 75 ǯaudar Pers 75 ǯaudara Pers 75 ǯav ‫ جو‬Pers 52, 53, 75 ǯavdar ‫ چاودار‬Pers 75 ǯavers ‫ َجاوِرس‬Pers 46 ǯoudar ‫ چودار‬Pers 75 ǯeh Kurd 16 ǯəv- Talyš 52 ǯou ‫ جو‬Pers 27, 35, 52, 53

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Names of Cereals in the Turkic Languages

Names of Cereals in the Turkic Languages

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS