Shahsavari-Laki and Kurdish

Iran and the Caucasus 14 (2010) 79-82

Lakī and Kurdish * Faramarz Shahsavari Yerevan State University Abstract This paper aims at verifying the traditional set of phonetic changes, defined by D. N. Mackenzie as the main distinctive feature of the Kurdish dialects, with regard to Lakī having yet no clear affiliation in the Iranian dialectology. It is usually considered to be a dialect of Kurdish, sometimes a transitional dialect between Kurdish and Luri, and even a separate idiom. Keywords Iranian Dialectology, Kurdish, Lakī

The Lakī dialect continuum is concentrated in south-western Iran and south-eastern Iraq, at the frontier between the Southern Kurdish and Luri ethno-linguistic areas. Some smaller pockets of Lakī speakers are also reported to live in other parts of Iran, particularly in the province of Eastern Azerbaijan1 and Southern Caspian regions (Mīrčerāγī 1990: 35; Minorsky 1989). It was only at the end of the 20th century that more or less sufficient materials in Lakī from Mazandaran and Luristan were first introduced by F. Mīrčerāγī (1990) and G. Lazard (1992). Since that time, no other research has appeared on this important issue; while especially during the last years a still unsettled dispute over the ethnic affiliation of the Laks and the origin of their language has been initiated by E. J. Anonby (2004/2005). Unfortunately, the existing classifications regarding the place of Lakī among Iranian languages are generally based on rather intuitive findings, in some cases even native speakers’ perceptions, than on an unbiased analysis of the relevant data (see, e.g., Anonby, ibid.: 11). *

I am deeply grateful to Dr. Vardan Voskanian for his help and valuable comments on this paper. 1 In Azerbaijan, the former Lakī-speaking population now almost entirely is turkophone.  Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010

DOI: 10.1163/157338410X12743419189423

80

F. Shahsavari / Iran and the Caucasus 14 (2010) 79-82

At the present stage of our knowledge of Lakī, it is merely evident that this variety should be placed among the North-Western Iranian dialects, although its dialectal affiliation even within this framework appears to be in many ways controversial and still open for debate. Nevertheless, most linguists considered Lakī either as a separate language closely related to Kurdish (Izadpanāh 1978) or simply a dialect of Kurdish (Windfuhr, 1989, Lazard 1992, Kamandâr Fattah 2000). There is also the view of the mixed nature of Lakī, forming a transitional link between Kurdish and Luri dialects (Asatrian 2009: 12). What follows is an attempt of a closer look at the traditional set of sound changes, defined by D. N. Mackenzie (1961) as the main distinctive feature of the Kurdish dialects, with regard to Lakī. Such a verification of Mackenzie’s phonetic rules for Kurdish had never been done before in defining the dialectal affiliation of Laki, although they proved to be viable in various disputed areas of Iranian dialectology. It should be noted that almost each of these phonetic developments has its parallel in at least one other (outside Kurdish) Iranian dialect, but only in Kurdish all the three appear together as a system (Mackenzie, ibid.: 7072). 1) The development of OIran. intervocalic *–m- and *-xm-/*-šmgroups to -v/w- in Kurdish versus the preservation of –m- in Lakī: nām “name” vs. North Kurd. (NKd.) nāv, South Kurd. (SKd.) nāw; cf. NPers. nām < OIran. *nāman-; hāmīn “summer” vs. NKd. hāvīn, SKd. hāwīn; cf. NPers. hāmīn < OIran. *hāmīna-; nīm “half” vs. NKd. nīv, SKd. nīw; cf. NPers. nēm < OIran. *naima-; döm “tail” vs. NKd. dūv, SKd. dūw; cf. NPers. dum < OIran. *duma-; nām (< *myān with metathesis) “between” vs. NKd. nāv, SKd. nāw; cf. NPers. miyān; kamar “stone” vs. NKd. kavir, SKd. kawer, Avromani kamar; cf. NPers. kamar; zomā “son-in-law” vs. NKd. zāvā, SKd. zāwā; cf. NPers. dāmād < OIran. *zāmātar-; tōm “seed” vs. NKd. t‘ōv, SKd. tōw; cf. NPers. tuxm < OIr. *tauxma-; šöm “furrow” vs. NKd. šōv, SKd. šōw; cf. NPers. šuxm; čam “eye” vs. NKd. ĉav, SKd. čāw; cf. NPers. čašm < OIr. čašman-; etc. 2) The innovative change of the OIran. initial *x- to k‘-/k- in Northern and Central Kurdish (CKd.) and its preservation in Lakī. In this single case the Southern Kurdish dialects stand aside from the other two Kurdish groups and share this development with Lakī. Cf.:

F. Shahsavari / Iran and the Caucasus 14 (2010) 79-82

81

xar “donkey”, SKd. xar vs. NKd. k’ar, CKd. kar; cf. NPers. xar < OIran. *xara-; xan- (pres. stem) “to laugh”, SKd. xan- vs. NKd. kan-, CKd. (pē)kan- < OIran. *xand-; xeř- (pres. stem) “to buy”, SKd. xar- vs. NKd. k‘iř-, CKd. kiř- < OIran. *xrī-; etc. An exception from this phonetic rule is attested only in Lakī kyanī “spring”; cf. NKd. kānī, CKd. kānī vs. NPers. xānī, a phenomenon, which can probably be explained by direct borrowing from Central Kurdish dialects. 3) The preservation of the OIran. initial *č- in Kurd. čūn “to go” (