Comments:KW 92. A Western isogloss. The Turkic and Mong. forms are no doubt related, but Ramstedt treats them both as derived from *deg- 'top'. Since we divide the traditional reconstruction of the latter root into *di̯òge and *tēga (q. v.), such a derivation seems less plausible. The Ud. form diŋe-, albeit isolated in TM, also supports deriving Turk. *jẹŋ- and Mong. dejil- from a separate root.
Comments:The root is not widely represented, but seems quite reliable. A derivative *ĕbà-rV is reflected in Nan. ebiri- = OJ apu-t-, apu-r-. Cf. *ap`i.
Comments:A Turk.-TM isogloss; cf. *kumi. Doerfer (MT 240) tries to refute the comparison (by deriving the Turk. forms from kirpi "hedgehog" and the TM forms from kiri- "to glitter") - quite unconvincingly.
