Dr. O. M. Chunakova & Dr. A. A. Umnyashkin
Saint-Petersburg University & Center for Study of ancient and modern languages GLOSSA, Russia & Azerbaijan
For all the differences of the vocabulary of modern Iranian languages in them can be traced inherited from the ancient times common lexical basis which covers most of the household vocabulary. Conducting of our research on Iranian languages of the Caucasus within 1997-2018 was very difficult, because mostly they are spreaded in the mountainous regions and remote areas. Talysh, Ossetic, Kurdish, Tat languages and their dialects are in close contact with each other as well as with other languages, as kindred, and also not allied languages haven’t any relationship (Turkic, Caucasian-Iberian). Our research experience of living Aryan languages showed that the results we got from the field expeditions are often not inferior in importance to the results of comparative-historical analysis of the materials of languages of antiquity. Among these languages, a considerable proportion that do not have an old centuries tradition of writing or are completely non-literate, such as the Iranian languages of the Caucasus. The low level of knowledge in comparative historical perspective many of them should be considered as a major source of a sort of “white spots” in comparative linguistics in general, and in the Indo-European, in particular. In Indo-European studies of the past often considered only the material of the ancient languages of the family – the ancient Indian, Avestan, old and middle Persian, modern languages also remained almost completely out of view of researchers. This level of study of the Aryan languages in comparative historical perspective, no doubt, cannot be considered adequate. For all the differences of the vocabulary of modern Iranian languages in them can be traced inherited from the ancient common lexical fund, which covers most of the household terminology such as ‘father’ – OP pita (r), Persian, pedär, Taj. padar, sludge, pid, Rush. pi (d), osөt. fæd, Baloch, pis, gil. rer, mazand. rer, tal. ria, Afg. plar; ‘mother’ – old pers. māta (r), Persian, mādär, Taj. modar, Rush. mōd, Ossetian. mad, Afg. TOR; ‘brother’ – old pers. bräta (r), Persian, beradär, Taj. barodar, Tat birår, tal. bo, a Kurd. bərd, Baloch, brās, Afg. vror, gil. bərar, Bart. virö (d), Rush., hufsk. v (i) röd, shugp. v (i) ro (d), a witch. vlrot; ‘woman’, ‘wife’ – Avesta. jēni / jaini, Persian, zän, Taj. zap, mazand. zan, Kurd. žəp, Baluchis. jnēn / jinak, shugn. yin / yinik, Rush. jan / janak, Bart. jan, janik; ‘dver’-old pers. duvara, Persian, där, Taj. dar, a Kurd, där, Bart. divör, Rush. divö, shugn. divi, Yagn. devär, Ossetian dwar. Comparative historical analysis of the morphological level has to be reduced to search in the Iranian languages of the Caucasus possible etymological parallels to those known to few inflectional and derivational elements, which, having a different view of the ancient Iranian languages that do not recognize each other regular phonetic correlations. A systematic review of lexical material in household vocabulary Iranian languages of the Caucasus in the comparative-historical aspect, as can be judged from available to us at the moment works not carried out by researchers and will be a great scientific and practical interest.
The above abstract is a part of the article which was accepted at The Fourth Annual International Conference on Languages, Linguistics, Translation and Literature (WWW.TLLL.IR), 1-2 February 2020, Ahwaz.
