Kadagidze 1984: 256; Desheriyev 1953: 319 (transcribed as wamaʔ). Formally a derivative from wum 'something' [Kadagidze 1984: 256].
Proto-Nakh:*=arr-ikʼ1
NED # 1. Distribution: The original root =arr- is only preserved in Vainakh; no parallels in Batsbi. Replacements: Batsbi wum-aʔ is easily etymologized on internal grounds as a morphological derivative from the word 'something'. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The stem is morphologically structured like a standard adjectival stem with the widespread Vainakh suffix *-ig(a) = Batsbi -ikʼ.
Matsiyev 1961: 531; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 190. Oblique stem: owqʼ-ar- {овкъар-}. This is the default word for 'wood ashes' ('lye', Russian зола). It is distinct from čim [Matsiyev 1961: 492; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 387] '(fine) ashes' (Russian пепел).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 86; Ozdoyev 1980: 224. Oblique stem: owqʼ-ar- {овкъар-}. This is the default word for 'wood ashes' ('lye', Russian зола). It is distinct from čil [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 188] '(fine) ashes' (Russian пепел).
NCED: 681. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: The cluster -bqʼ is reconstructed based on Batsbi -pʼqʼ and the oblique stem: Chechen owqʼ-ara-n = Ingush owqʼ-ar-o = Batsbi apʼqʼ-ayr-i < Proto-Nakh *ʔabqʼu-r- (probably from an earlier *yabqʼu-r-). Vowel gradation in this root complies with the same model as 'earth' q.v.
Matsiyev 1961: 214; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 229. The form is listed as the only equivalent for 'bark' in the latter source, but is clearly a diminutive derivate of kowst {ковст} [Matsiyev 1961: 220] with vocalic assimilation (= Ingush kɔst-ilg 'little (piece of) bark').
Kadagidze 1984: 611. Borrowed from Georgian kerk-i.
Proto-Nakh:*kaːbst1
NCED: 770. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: Replaced by a Georgian borrowing in Batsbi. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular. Vowel length is reconstructed based on Ingush ɔ (phonetically ɔː). The final coronal cluster could alternately be reconstructed as *-stʼ (diagnostic data from Batsbi are absent).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 188; Ozdoyev 1980: 182. Vowel length is not indicated in either of these dictionaries (carried over from the notation in NCED). The former source gives the meaning as 'bosom' (Russian пазуха), but anslysis of various texts shows that 'belly' is a more accurate translation. The latter source also quotes, as potential synonyms: (a) giyg (written as čiyg, clearly a misprint under the influence of the preceding če), actually "stomach" [Ozdoyev 1980: 47]; (b) čuraš, actually "chitterlings" [Ozdoyev 1980: 190].
NCED: 430. Distribution: Preserved in all the languages except for Ingush, where the semantic transition {'inside > belly'} seems to have operated on a more active scale than in Chechen. Replacements: The original root *gag-, polysemous in the meanings 'belly' and 'stomach', has, in some dialects, begun to be replaced by *čVwV ([NCED: 339]; vocalization is most likely *čuw-e or *čuw-a) 'internal organs', a derivative from the simple root *čuw 'inside'. At least in some varieties of Ingush the original giyg has only been retained in the meaning 'stomach'. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (*-g- is always lost or lenited in Chechen), but the second vowel is hard to reconstruct (*gagi-? *gaga-?). Semantics and structure: The stem is occasionally encountered in "pure" form as well as with suffixal extensions, e. g. *gag-ikʼ > Ingush giy-g, or cf. the variation between Batsbi gaga and gaga-ʔŏ.
NCED: 610. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular. Traces of stem-final -n are still seen in the nasalization of the final vowel in Batsbi.
Kadagidze 1984: 912; Desheriyev 1953: 313. The meaning is glossed as '(small) bird' in the former source and as 'sparrow / bird' in the latter.
Proto-Nakh:*ʔaːlxaʒur1
NED # 8. Distribution: Preserved in all Vainakh languages, but replaced or at least significantly pushed aside in Batsbi. Replacements: The word *ʔaːlxaʒur is found in older Batsbi dictionaries: Matsiyev, in a 1932 edition, lists the form alxaʒur meaning 'bird', and A. Schiefner ("Versuch über die Thusch-Sprache", St. Petersburg, 1856) gives alxaʒur with the meaning 'eagle' ('Adler'). This implies reconstructibility of *ʔaːlxaʒur as 'bird' or, at least, as 'large bird' on the Proto-Nakh level. Batsbi ħacʼukʼ 'bird', 'small bird', 'sparrow', on the other hand, is cognate with Chechen ħoːza 'sparrow' [Matsiyev 1961: 469], Ingush ħaz-ilg 'sparrow' (with a common diminutive suffix) [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 170] = Proto-Nakh *ħaːcʼu [NCED: 525]. This presupposes one of two semantic scenarios: (a) a Proto-Nakh opposition between *ʔaːlxaʒur 'big bird' and *ħaːcʼu 'small bird'; (b) Proto-Nakh *ʔaːlxaʒur as a generic term for (any) 'bird' vs. *ħaːcʼu 'sparrow'. In either case, modern Batsbi comes out as semantically innovative, having either merged the opposition in (a) in favour of the former 'small bird', or generalized the older term for 'sparrow'. For typological reasons, the development {'sparrow' > 'bird'} is marginally preferable. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are mostly regular, although vocalic reconstruction in such a complex trisyllabic form is somewhat ambiguous. One important exception is the lack of the expected regular development *-lx- > -tx- in Batsbi (cf. 'meat', 'sun' etc.). This could either suggest that the word is not really a Proto-Nakh item, but was independently borrowed into both branches already after this phonetic tendency ceased to operate in Batsbi; or, more likely (since the source of borrowing is nowhere to be found), that the original shape was even longer, e. g., *ʔolaxaʒur, with subsequent compression in both branches (and, perhaps, compensatory vowel lengthening in Vainakh?). Semantics and structure: The word formally looks like a derived nominal stem, but the primary stem has not yet been recovered in either Proto-Nakh or through external comparison with Daghestanian languages.
Matsiyev 1961: 477; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 241. Complex form, literally 'to stick (in) the teeth'. Said of people; for animals, the verb leːca (originally 'to catch, seize') is used instead [Matsiyev 1961: 278].
Ozdoyev 1980: 291. Complex form, lit. 'to stick (in) the teeth'. Said of both people and animals. This compound is listed as the equivalent to Russian intransitive кусаться ('to bite' = 'to have a habit of biting'); the equivalent to Russian transitive кусать ('to bite /someone/') is listed as carg-aš etta, lit. 'to hit (with) the teeth'.
Kadagidze 1984: 721; Desheriyev 1953: 316. Literally 'to stick (in) the teeth'. The former source lists a synonymous, non-idiomatic form: qaħ-ar 'to bite' (terminative) [Kadagidze 1984: 831], which may be more archaic, but is not mentioned in [Desheriyev 1953] as the primary equivalent for 'to bite'.
Proto-Nakh:*qaħ- #2
NCED: 625. Distribution: Most modern forms of Nakh languages form the meaning 'to bite' idiomatically, as a combination of *ca-r-ikʼ 'tooth' q.v. + different verbal stems (*=oxk- 'to put in, stick in, insert' in Vainakh; =aɬ- 'to give' in Batsbi). Only in Batsbi one also finds a (seemingly) less frequently used verbal stem qaħ-, which Nikolayev and Starostin historically analyze as q=aħ- (q= may, indeed, be a fossilized preverb in Nakh) and for which they find external parallels in Daghestanian languages. Considering that (1) the Batsbi form is unmotivated and does not find an internal Nakh etymology; (2) the idiomatic constructions for 'bite', used in modern Nakh languages, are not easily traced to a common Proto-Nakh idiom; (3) the incentive for the derivation {'tooth' > 'bite'} may have been triggered by Kartvelian influence (cf. Georgian kʼb-ena 'to bite' vs. kʼb-il- 'tooth'), the optimal scenario is to posit *qaħ- (possibly < *q=aħ-) as the Proto-Nakh term for 'bite', only retained as an archaism in Batsbi. (A potential relic in Chechen may also be the derivative nominal stem qaħ-am 'a taste of (the quality of cornmeal)' [Matsiyev 1961: 237] < 'a bite'; etymology belongs to Oleg Mudrak). On the other hand, individual replacements in Vainakh and Batsbi, out of caution, are still counted together (in any way, the tradition itself of substituting the original 'bite' for 'tooth + vb.' may already date to the Common Nakh era). Semantics and structure: The stem *qaħ- must have been perceived as a monolithic root already in Proto-Nakh. But in Batsbi, cf. also laħ-ar 'to eat (smth.) together with (smth. else)' [Kadagidze 1984: 374], possibly reflecting the combination of the same root with a different preverb.
NCED: 556 (written as ʕaːrčʼi-). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and mostly trivial, with the exception of the root vowel (where length is reconstructed based on dialectal data). It should be noted that the reconstructional notation given in [NCED] is incorrect: according to the system of correspondences on pp. 91-92, the initial laryngeal should have been written as *ʡ (since it yields the reflexation ʕ- in all three languages). Here, we correct that obvious mistake. Semantics and structure: Derivatives usually preserve the monovocalic variant *ʕaːrčʼ-, e. g. Chechen ʕarž-dan 'to blacken', etc.
Kadagidze 1984: 760; Desheriyev 1953: 315 (transcribed as cʼig).
Proto-Nakh:*cʼeːgi1
NCED: 376. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are completely regular. Semantics and structure: The same stem also serves as the derivational basis for Proto-Nakh 'red' q.v.
Kadagidze 1984: 751; Desheriyev 1953: 337. Borrowed from Georgian ʒwal-i.
Proto-Nakh:*dʡexkʼ1
NCED: 528. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch, but replaced with a Georgian borrowing in Batsbi. Reconstruction shape: Due to lack of Batsbi data, the word-final cluster may be reconstructed either as *-xkʼ or *-xk. The former reconstruction, however, is preferable, since it helps explain the irregular glottalized reflexation tʼ- in Ingush. (Cf. a similar example, albeit without the laryngeal: Chechen döxka 'belt, girdle' = Ingush tʼexkar id. = Batsbi duxkʼã id. < Proto-Nakh *doxkʼV [NCED: 678]). Word-medial vocalism is somewhat uncertain; the reconstruction may be bisyllabic (*deʡexkʼ).
Matsiyev 1961: 311; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 116. Distinct from maːmag 'female breast' [Matsiyev 1961: 286], although naːqa is also frequently used to indicate the female breast (maːmag is probably a "Lallwort").
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 124; Ozdoyev 1980: 136. No distinction between 'male breast (chest)' and 'female breast'.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:aqʼar2
Desheriyev 1953: 311. Strangely absent from Kadagidze's dictionary, but supposedly distinct from tʼar 'female breast, nipples' [Kadagidze 1984: 557].
Proto-Nakh:*naːqa #1
NCED: 829. Distribution: Preserved only in Vainakh languages (if the selection is correct). Replacements: Obscure situation. Vainakh *naːqa '(male) breast' may formally correspond to Batsbi naq 'throat, larynx' [Kadagidze 1984: 474], but the semantic match would be unusual unless both meanings were descended from some non-trivial anatomical term; without additional confirmation, we do not dare advance the connection. This makes *naːqa a very good candidate for '(male) breast' in Proto-Nakh, but Batsbi aqʼar does not have an internal etymology either, and could also be archaic. The selection of *naːqa is, therefore, somewhat dubious. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences between Chechen and Ingush are regular and trivial.
Kadagidze 1984: 33. The corresponding intransitive stem is akʼ-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 32].
Proto-Nakh:*=aːkʼ-1
NCED: 633. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: All correspondences are regular. Semantics and structure: The etymon, already on the Proto-Nakh level, is reconstructible as a simple intransitive verbal base (*=akʼ-) and an extended transitive base (*=akʼ-d-).
Matsiyev 1961: 293, 310; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 322. Polysemy: 'nail / claw / hook'. The latter source only quotes the variant mʕaːra, and its primacy is also confirmed by external data.
NCED: 814. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are completely regular. The oblique stem shows vowel gradation in the second syllable: *mʡaːre- > Chechen mʕeːra-, Ingush mʕara-, Batsbi mʕare-.
NCED: 795. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch only. Replacements: In Batsbi, replaced with doxkʼ = Chechen, Ingush doxk 'fog' < Proto-Nakh *doxkʼ 'fog' [NCED: 947]. The meaning shift is more likely to have been {'fog' > 'cloud'} in Batsbi than the opposite, because the meaning 'fog' in that language has merged with the meaning 'smoke' (see under *kʼur). Reconstruction shape: Correspondences in the Vainakh branch are fully regular.
Kadagidze 1984: 596; Desheriyev 1953: 319 (transcribed as pšeli).
Proto-Nakh:*pšeː-l-i(n)1
NCED: 393. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular, although the initial cluster *pš- is ultra-rare (Batsbi preserves the more complex archaic articulation in this case, as in many others). Semantics and structure: The adjective is a regular derivative of Proto-Nakh *pšeː-l 'cold (n.)' (Batsbi pše-l, also preserved in Chechen še-l-dan 'to cool', etc.), which, in turn, is derived from the oblique stem *pšeː- of Proto-Nakh *pšaː 'ice' (Chechen, Ingush ša; Batsbi pša). The derivation {'ice' > 'cold'} is typologically quite secure.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 37; Ozdoyev 1980: 558. The root is =a (cf. d=a 'to arrive (of an inanimate object)' with a different class marker). Also used in the complex form ha=w=a (with the preverb ha= 'to'). Ozdoyev [1980: 558] also lists the form ha=qač-a as synonymous, but its preverb-less equivalent qač-a is translated as 'to arrive' in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 97] = Chechen qaːč-a id. [Matsiyev 1961: 237].
Kadagidze 1984: 72. Terminative stem; the corresponding durative is d=aɣ-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 51].
Proto-Nakh:*=aʔ-1
NCED: 1016. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Vowel length in Chechen may be compensatory, caused by the loss of word-medial laryngeal, or archaic, in which case the reconstruction should be changed to *=aːʔ-. Semantics and structure: A "class verb" (used only with class prefixes); the stem *=aʔ- is the original terminative stem, from which, with vowel gradation, already in Proto-Nakh the durative stem *=eʔ- (> Chechen =eʔ-, Batsbi =eʔ-) was formed.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 38; Ozdoyev 1980: 748 (listed with different class prefixes). Distinct from =al-a 'to finish, terminate' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 38], a homophonous root (but with significantly differing morphological behaviour).
NCED: 662 (written as *=aŁ-). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: In [NCED], the word-medial consonant is reconstructed as *-Ł- (its phonetic interpretation as a voiced lateral affricate is arbitrary) based on controversial data from Batsbi dialects: -l- in Kadagidze's dictionary vs. -ɬ- in Matsiyev's earlier dictionary from 1932. However, this distinction between two dictionaries of the same language is too dubious to serve as the basis for the reconstruction of a special phonological opposition (the authors of [NCED] themselves add that "our suggestion requires a field verification" on p. 93). Additionally, in this particular case ('die') both Desheriyev [1953] and Schiefner ("Versuch über die Thusch-Sprache", St. Petersburg, 1856) steadily note forms with -l- in Batsbi. We feel justified to change the reconstruction to a simpler *=al-.
NCED: 1074. Distribution: Preserved in the original meaning only in Batsbi. Replacements: Already in Proto-Vainakh, the original meaning of *pħu was narrowed: {'dog' > 'male dog'} > Chechen pħu, oblique stem pħära- [Matsiyev 1961: 354], Ingush pħu, oblique stem pħaro- [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 137]. In the general meaning 'dog', Proto-Vainakh innovated the stem *ǯʡali, of unclear origin (possibly a borrowing from Kartvelian, cf. Georgian ʒaɣl-, Megrel ǯoɣor- 'dog', but the correspondences are somewhat unclear, so that we currently refrain from counting the word as a borrowing). Traces of the original semantics are still seen in such archaic derivatives as Chechen pħar-cerg 'fang' [Matsiyev 1961: 353], literally 'dog-tooth'. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. The oblique stem is reconstructed as *pħare- (cf. the Batsbi pl. form and the Chechen and Ingush oblique stems quoted above).
Matsiyev 1961: 300. Durative stem; in [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 403] for the meaning 'drink' (Russian durative пить) the authors quote the terminative stem mala 'to drink to the end' (Russian terminative выпить), which is not quite correct. Nevertheless, both forms obviously represent the same root.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 117; Ozdoyev 1980: 488. Both sources list as primary the terminative stem mal-a 'to drink to the end'; durative mel-a 'to drink, be drinking' is only found in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 119], without any specific indication of the semantic difference.
Kadagidze 1984: 433. Durative stem; the corresponding terminative stem is maɬ-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 401].
Proto-Nakh:*maɬ-1
NED # 26. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular. Semantics and structure: The original verbal base is terminative: *maɬ- 'to drink (to the end)'. The terminative stem in Proto-Nakh, reflecting regular vowel gradation, was *meːɬ-; however, Chechen miyl- (= miːl-) is better explained as a development from the (dialectal) infixed grammatical variant *meː[b]ɬ-.
Kadagidze 1984: 52. This primary source for Batsbi only lists the verbal stem d=aqʼ-d-ar 'to dry (tr.)'; the adjectival form d=aqʼ-ĩ is listed in [Nikolayev & Starostin 1994: 631], where it must have been reproduced from one of the older Batsbi dictionaries (e. g. Matsiyev's from 1932), although this has not been verified.
Proto-Nakh:*=aqʼ-i(n)1
NCED: 631. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular. In Vainakh, *a > e due to the influence of suffixal *-i-; the original vocalism is still preserved in the "pure" verbal stem *=aqʼ- 'to dry'. Semantics and structure: The stem is originally verbal (*=aqʼ- 'to dry').
NCED: 756. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular; the shift *-a- > *-e- in Vainakh is due to the influence of the vowel in the diminutive suffix *-ikʼ. Semantics and structure: The original simple root la- is still preserved in such verbal formations as Chechen la-diyɣa 'to listen' (literally 'to ear-set'), etc. Already in Proto-Nakh, the main equivalent for 'ear' was a diminutive stem, formed from the old oblique base *la-ri- + diminutive suffix *-kʼ (for similar cases, see 'eye', 'tooth', etc.).
NCED: 750. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: For Batsbi, it makes sense to reconstruct the semantic shifts {'earth' > 'rubbish'} (since Vainakh *laːtte etymologically = Batsbi latt 'rubbish' [Kadagidze 1984: 357]) and, consequently, {'loose earth' > 'earth'} (since Batsbi yobstʼ = Ingush yostʼ 'loose earth' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 86]). The reverse is less likely due to the improbability of the semantic shift from 'rubbish' to 'earth', and also due to the lack of any obvious alternate for the complex meaning 'loose earth' in Proto-Nakh. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences in the Vainakh branch are fully regular.
Matsiyev 1961: 120; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 150. If no specific object is present, the usual construction is huma y=aʔa 'to eat (food)' (huma = 'thing(s); food').
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 55; Ozdoyev 1980: 760. If no specific object is present, the usual construction is hama d=aʔa 'to eat (food)' (hama = 'thing(s); food'). In [Ozdoyev 1980: 177], the compound form hama qalla is also listed as synonymous, but in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 96] qalla is glossed as 'to take a bite' (Russian 'закусить'), and it seems to be a more specific expression.
NCED: 559. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are somewhat irregular, since Batsbi -qʼ- rarely, if ever, corresponds to Vainakh *-ʔ-. Nevertheless, the roots are completely identical in every other respect (including morphological characteristics) and do not have alternate etymologies, so it is permissible to suggest an irregularity (possibly due to semantic contamination with some other lexical item) either in Batsbi or in Vainakh. The variant *=aqʼ- seems more archaic for several reasons: (a) it has better external connections in Daghestanian languages; (b) explanation in terms of loss of uvular focus is more economic than that of gaining an extra uvular focus; (c) Proto-Nakh *=aʔ- to eat would have been homonymous with *=aʔ- 'to come' q.v., i. e. a kind of homonymity between two very basic verbal stems that usually tends to be avoided.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 222; Ozdoyev 1980: 818. Polysemy: 'egg / forage' (the two meanings are homonyms synchronically, since the words belong to different morphological classes). Oblique stem: fuʔo-.
Kadagidze 1984: 109; Desheriyev 1953: 140 (transcribed as gaga).
Proto-Nakh:*gaga-n2
NCED: 437. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi. Replacements: In the Vainakh branch, the meaning 'egg' merged with the meaning 'grain', formerly expressed by Proto-Nakh *foʔ [NCED: 763], although the difference between the two continued to be upheld through morphological means ('grain' and 'egg' belong to different noun classes in Chechen and Ingush). The semantic shift {'grain' > 'egg'} is more likely than the reverse one both for typological reasons and also because of the more secure external connections of *gaga-n in the meaning 'egg'. Reconstruction shape: The Batsbi form is isolated in Nakh, so the reconstruction shape is not very certain. Various assimilations at least were quite possible.
NCED: 250. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are completely regular. Semantics and structure: The original simple root *bʡa- is still preserved as the archaic Ingush form bʕa [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 36] and is present in a few archaic compounds. However, already in Proto-Nakh, the main equivalent for 'eye' was a diminutive stem, formed from the old oblique base *bʡa-ri- + diminutive suffix *-kʼ (for similar cases, see 'ear', 'tooth', etc.).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 123; Ozdoyev 1980: 646. Oblique stem: maħa-ro-. Somewhat dubious. Both sources translate this word as 'inner fat, lard', but at least one newer source gives the equivalence 'fat; lard' [Kurkiyev 2005: 311]. A potential alternative is dätta, listed as one of two synonymous translations for 'fat (n.)' in [Ozdoyev 1980: 183] (the other synonym is ħoa-nal, a "qualitative" derivate from ħoa 'brain', translated as "state of being fat, level of fatness" /Russian жирность/ in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 180]). It is used in a reliably diagnostic compound: dulxa dätta 'animal fat'. On the other hand, in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 58] the word is translated as 'butter, oil' (масло), i. e. with the same meaning as its counterpart in Chechen; the equivalent for 'fat' in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962] is listed on the same page as a derivate of dätta, namely, dättel. In [Kurkiyev 2005: 137] dätta is translated only as 'butter', and dättel as 'dregs' (from melted butter). In the light of external data, it is probably reasonable to distinguish between muħ as '(generally) solid fat' and dätta as '(generally) liquid fat', although some dialectal confusion may be inevitable.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:sacxim-1
Kadagidze 1984: 535. Borrowed from Georgian cxim-.
Proto-Nakh:*moħ1
NCED: 794. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: In Batsbi, Proto-Nakh *moħ was replaced by a Georgian borrowing. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 27. Listed as bedar-g, with a diminutive suffix, in [Ozdoyev 1980: 484].
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:bumbul-1
Kadagidze 1984: 98. Meaning glossed as 'feathers / down'. Borrowed from Georgian bumbul- 'down'.
Proto-Nakh:*peːla-kʼ #1
NCED: 879. Distribution: Preserved only in Chechen (and even in that language, the archaicity of the etymon is somewhat doubtful). Replacements: The Batsbi word is a transparent Georgian loan, and Ingush bedar has no internal or external etymology (the comparison with Chechen bedar 'clothes', suggested in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 27], is phonetically ideal, but semantically dubious; in any case, even if it is true, the direction of the shift could only have been from 'clothes' to 'feather', i. e. 'bird's clothing', rather than vice versa). This leaves only Chechen peːlag as a potential candidate for Proto-Nakh status, although its antiquity is also questionable (word-initial p- before vowels is almost non-existent in Chechen words of Proto-Nakh origin).
NCED: 354. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are completely regular. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructible as *cʼa-ri-.
NCED: 385. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: All three forms clearly belong together, but the word-initial correspondence (Chechen čʼ- : Ingush čʼqʼ- : Batsbi čʼ-) is unique, reflecting a special cluster with a laryngeal. We preserve the NCED notation of this cluster as *čʼʕ-, but recognize its somewhat arbitrary character. The vocalic correspondences also follow a very rare pattern, so the vocalic reconstruction in NCED is approximate.
Matsiyev 1961: 276; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 245. Chechen has no special verb to denote the process of 'flying'; for leːla, the polysemy 'move / walk / perambulate / fly (around)' is attested, and the directional meaning 'to fly (somewhere, in a particular direction)' may also be expressed by the verb d=aː-n 'to come' q. v.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 111; Ozdoyev 1980: 298. Ingush has no special verb to denote the process of 'flying'; for lela, the polysemy 'walk / perambulate / fly (around)' is attested, and the directional meaning 'to fly (somewhere, in a particular direction)' may also be expressed by the verb =a 'to come' q. v.
Kadagidze 1984: 379. The situation here is the same as in Chechen and Ingush: the basic meaning of lel-ar is 'to walk', but in order to specifically distinguish the process of 'flying', the idiomatic expression pʼʕanar lel-ar, literally 'to walk on wings' (pʼʕã = 'wing'), may be used.
Proto-Nakh:*leːl-1
NCED: 422 (written as *=eːŁ-). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular. On the unreliability of NCED's Proto-Nakh *Ł see discussion under 'die'; as in that case, we feel justified to change the reconstruction to simple *-l-, despite the spelling leɬ- in Matsiyev's earlier dictionary of Batsbi. Semantics and structure: The basic meaning of this root in Proto-Nakh, as well as in most of its descendants, is not 'fly', but rather 'move around, perambulate', applicable to various situations, including 'flying' and 'swimming' q.v. The stem is reconstructed with a durative meaning (hence the front vocalism *-eː-); the corresponding terminative stem is preserved only in Batsbi (lal-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 358]). NCED also suggests that initial l- goes back to a reduplicated segment or a former prefix; this is reasonable, but the stem is unsegmentable on the Proto-Nakh level.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 92; Ozdoyev 1980: 389. No general semantic difference between 'leg' and 'foot', but for the latter meaning the more specific compound form koga kʼiyle may be used [Ozdoyev 1980: 389]. Oblique stem: koga-.
NCED: 720. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular. Vowel length is predictably shortened in the closed syllable of the direct stem, but still preserved in the oblique stem in Chechen (and probably remains unmarked in standard Ingush orthography). Semantics and structure: Final -kʼ is not detachable as a diminutive suffix.
Kadagidze 1984: 578. Derived from the verbal stem =ucʼ- 'to fill' [ibid.].
Proto-Nakh:*=ucʼ-1
NCED: 525. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (Vainakh *-z- is the expected reflexation for Proto-Nakh *-cʼ-); front vocalism in Vainakh (Chechen ü, Ingush i) is due to the assimilative influence of the suffixal vocalism - the simple verbal stem in Chechen still preserves the original vowel. Semantics and structure: The complex stem 'full' is a participial formation (something like *ucʼ-in-; no specially reconstructed form in [NCED]) from the simple verbal stem *=ucʼ- 'to be filled up, full, satiated'.
Kadagidze 1984: 36; Desheriyev 1953: 159. Terminative stem; the durative is (with Ablaut) t=eɬ-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 36].
Proto-Nakh:*=aɬ-1
NCED: 640. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial (the lateral fricative is unambiguously reconstructed based on Batsbi evidence). Semantics and structure: The stem *=aɬ- is terminative; the corresponding durative, with front vocalism *-eː- and an additional preverb, is preserved in Batsbi and also reflected in Chechen teːl-a 'to pay' [Matsiyev 1961: 397] < Proto-Nakh *t=eːɬ-.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 62; Ozdoyev 1980: 777. Initial d- is not a class prefix, but part of the root.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:ɣaz-ẽ2
Kadagidze 1984: 634. Polysemy: 'good / kind'. The older equivalent is dakĩ [Kadagidze 1984: 156]; it is explicitly stated in [Desheriyev 1953: 319] (where the word is transcribed as dakin) that it is no longer properly functional as an adjective, but is mainly used in an adverbial function (dakin-da 'well').
Proto-Nakh:*dak- ~ *dik-1
NCED: 643. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, but with narrowed functions in Batsbi. Replacements: In Batsbi, the old word for 'good' is now mainly limited to adverbial functions; in the adjective function, it has merged with the former adjective for 'beautiful' {'beautiful' > 'good'} (cf. ɣazar-d-ar 'to make beautiful' [Kadagidze 1984: 634]; etymologically most likely related to Chechen xaza [Matsiyev 1961: 441], Ingush xoza [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 167], although the initial consonant correspondence is irregular). Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial, but reconstruction of vocalism is uncertain. Most likely, the original stem *dak-in influenced the root vocalism in Vainakh (Nakh *dak-in > *dik-in > *dik-a with reduction of the suffix). Semantics and structure: External parallels show that d= in this stem may actually be a fossilized prefix (cf. also 'many'), but it is not detachable on the Proto-Nakh level.
NED # 46. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi, but highly dubious even in that language. Replacements: Vainakh *bäcca-ra 'green' is, in all likelihood, derived from Proto-Nakh *buːc 'grass' ([NCED: 1053] > Chechen, Ingush, Batsbi buc; oblique stem, with vowel gradation *baːci- > Chechen beːca-, Ingush bäco) with expressive gemination of the affricate. The derivation {'grass' > 'green'} is typologically common and precludes the form *bäcca-ra from being judged as archaic. However, the primary, non-derivable, stem in Batsbi (apẽ 'green') is also somewhat dubious, since it has neither internal etymological Nakh parallels, nor external comparanda in Daghestanian languages. Its selection for the proto-item position is, therefore, rather formalistic.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 188; Ozdoyev 1980: 84. Polysemy: 'head hair / body hair'. Singular form; the regular plural formation is čo-š. In some contexts, the word korta 'head' q.v. can also be used in the meaning 'hair'.
NCED: 347. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, but with a narrowed meaning in Chechen. Replacements: In modern Chechen, some of the former functions of *čo have switched over to mas (more precisely, in the collective meaning 'head hair', to its plural mes-aš) < Proto-Nakh *mos 'down; tuft' (= Ingush mos 'tuft of hair' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 121]) [NCED: 805]. Semantic merger: {'down' > 'head hair'}. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: Proto-Nakh *čo should be reconstructed as polysemous, used for both 'head hair' and 'body hair' (cf. the semantics in modern Ingush and Batsbi). Modern Chechen and, to a lesser extent, Ingush dialects display variably successful attempts at overriding this polysemy.
NCED: 706. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: According to [NCED], the original direct stem *ko is still preserved in Batsbi and is also attested in Chechen as the archaic variant ka [Matsiyev 1961: 206] and in Ingush as ka 'hand; grip (n.)' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 87] and ko 'handle' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 91]. The vowel -a in these forms is due to analogy with the oblique stem *ka-r-, which is also preserved in the Vainakh adverbial formation ka-r-a 'into one's hands' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 88]. The present day Vainakh forms go back to diminutives: *ku-ʔikʼ > Chechen küg, *ku-likʼ > Ingush kulg. Semantics and structure: Proto-Nakh *ko, oblique stem *ka-r- 'hand', opposed to Proto-Nakh *pħars 'arm' [NCED 885].
NCED: 695 (written as *koːrta). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. In [NCED], vowel length is apparently reconstructed based on non-trivial correspondences in the oblique stem; the pattern, however, does not match the correspondence tables on pp. 98-99, and it is perhaps preferable to explain the vowel gradation exclusively through the influence of the oblique stem vocalism -i- rather than its combination with vowel length. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructed as *korti- (= *koːrti in [NCED: 695]).
NCED: 678. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: Final *-kʼ is not detachable as a diminutive suffix. The oblique stem is reconstructed as *dakʼi-.
Matsiyev 1961: 293; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 532. The word specifically denotes 'hollow horn' (of domestic cattle), as well as 'drinking horn', and is distinct as such from kur 'antler (of deer and various wild ungulates); (metaphorically) > forelock' [Matsiyev 1961: 232]. According to formalized rules, 'hollow horn' is eligible in this context rather than the more complex, less stable meaning 'antler' (this is also justified by the fact that only maʕa, not kur, clearly goes back to a Proto-Nakh word meaning 'horn').
Kadagidze 1984: 462; Desheriyev 1953: 30, 32 (transcribed, rather chaotically, as mʕa or mʕaʔ).
Proto-Nakh:*muʡaʔ1
NCED: 494 (written as *mɦaʔo). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: The reconstruction *mɦaʔo in [NCED] reflects a complex pattern of correspondences, but does not offer the optimal solution, since it resorts to a near-unique cluster with a voiced laryngeal (*ɦ) that constitutes one of the most dubious elements of the Proto-Nakh reconstruction. A scenario can be offered that helps avoid postulating this unwanted extra entity. First, -ŏ in Batsbi is a rather standard nominal suffix in that language and does not need to be reflected in the reconstruction (cf. Desheriyev's transcriptions without it). The remaining mʕaʔ can be the result of a regular reduction from *mVʕaʔ (cf. the same process in 'liver'). Data from Sharo and Khildikharo dialects of Chechen, quoted in [NCED], namely, the variant mʕaʔa, also support a triconsonantal reconstruction with the structure *m(V)HVH. In this structure, the first laryngeal is reflected as ʕ in all the dialects and thus satisfies the necessary conditions to be reconstructed as *ʡ (see notes on *ʡaːrčʼ(-i) 'black'). The second laryngeal, where it is present, is always a basic glottal stop; it has probably disappeared in literary Chechen and Ingush due to dissimilation with the first one. For the vocalism, we can tentatively offer the scheme *muʡaʕ (due to Ingush) with assimilation in Chechen, but other variants are not excluded. Note that the phonetic resemblance to *mʡaːra 'claw, nail' q.v. is, most likely, accidental (not only are the second syllables incompatible, but the semantic connection between 'horn' and 'nail' seems to be missing in the Caucasus altogether).
NCED: 1084. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Vowel length is reconstructed for "early" Proto-Nakh based on its preservation in certain case forms (e. g. dative *soː-nu > Chechen suː-na). The oblique stem *s(a)- and special ergative form *ʔa=s (cf. 'thou' q.v. with a symmetric paradigm) are also reconstructible.
Kadagidze 1984: 923; Desheriyev 1953: 159 (transcribed as d=iw-ar or w=ʕew-ar with a different class prefix).
Proto-Nakh:*=ʡeːw-1
NED # 55 (written as *=ɦeːw-). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: As in 'horn' q.v., it is possible to get rid of the rare and suspicious "extra" laryngeal ɦ. Taking into consideration the fact that *ʡ is never reconstructed in [NCED] as a root-initial consonant in class verbs, one can easily suggest the regularity of the development "Proto-Nakh *=ʡ- > Proto-Vainakh *=ʔ- after class prefixes" and avoid postulating an extra phoneme. Otherwise, correspondences are perfectly regular. Semantics and structure: The stem *=ʡeːw- is, by default, terminative; a special durative stem with vowel gradation (*=ʡaːw-) was also preserved in Batsbi (ʕaw-).
Kadagidze 1984: 117; Desheriyev 1953: 311 (transcribed as gawg). The latter source glosses the meaning as 'knee / elbow', but in [Kadagidze 1984] only the semantics of 'knee' is mentioned.
Proto-Nakh:*gagu1
NCED: 443. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular. Batsbi gawg < *gagu (cf. the plural form gagu-i); Vainakh languages predictably drop the intervocalic voiced *-g- with subsequent vowel contraction. Semantics and structure: Chechen goː-la is a suffixal extension that can be correlated with Ingush go-la ~ guo-la 'elbow; turn (n.)' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 48]. This surmises relatively free variation between *goː and *goː-la in all three meanings ('knee / elbow / turn') on the Proto-Vainakh level.
Kadagidze 1984: 803; Desheriyev 1953: 59 (transcribed in the infinitive form, as xa-ã). Terminative stem; the corresponding durative is xeʔ-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 808].
Proto-Nakh:*xaʔ-1
NCED: 646. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: All correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The stem *xaʔ- is terminative; the corresponding durative stem is *xeʔ-, still preserved in Batsbi.
Kadagidze 1984: 589; Desheriyev 1953: 336. Borrowed from Georgian potol-i.
Proto-Nakh:*ɣa1
NCED: 472. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch, replaced by a borrowing in Batsbi. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences in the Vainakh branch are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The onlique stem is reconstructed as *ɣa-na-.
Matsiyev 1961: 556. In [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 244] 'to lie' (state) is translated as v=ižina ʕilla (an idiomatic compound with *=iž- 'to lie down'), but only the second component expresses the meaning 'to lie' in most syntactic contexts (e. g. lättah ʕilla 'to lie on the ground' etc.).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 15. In [Ozdoyev 1980: 295] the meaning 'to lie' (state) is translated as v=iža all-a (an idiomatic compound with *=iž- 'to lie down'), e. g. bäca tʼa viža alla 'to lie / be lying on the grass'. This is, however, a specially marked construction; normally, the meaning is simply conveyed by the verbal stem all-.
Kadagidze 1984: 311. Meaning glossed as 'to lie / to lie down'.
Proto-Nakh:*=ill-1
NCED: 278. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: The situation here is subtle, but, nevertheless, interpretable as a replacement. Proto-Nakh clearly distinguished between the static verbal stem *=ill- 'to lie, be placed on smth.' and the dynamic *=iž- ~ *=iš- 'to lie down' (the first variant is Common Vainakh, the second one is Batsbi; the consonantal correspondence is irregular, but the forms are still too similar, and too devoid of alternate etymologies, to be taken apart). This situation is still observed in modern Vainakh languages, although the basic semantics of *=ill- is generally shifting in the direction of a general 'to be, be located, be placed', so that the exact static meaning 'to lie (horizontally)' is frequently expressed through an idiom that combines both stems (i. e. 'to lie' literally becomes 'to be in the position of having lain down'). In Batsbi, however, *=ill- as an intransitive stem is no longer in use (only its transitive functions have survived), so that *=iš- has taken upon itself both the static and dynamic meanings in the process of the merger {'to lie' > 'to lie down'}. Reconstruction shape: Chechen and Ingush forms contain the same root, but in different morphological variants. Ingush all-a formally corresponds to Chechen d=all-a 'to be inside, be contained within smth.' [Matsiyev 1961: 126], whereas Chechen ʕ=ill-a is a special preverbial variant of *=ill- 'to put (smth. upon smth.), cover (smth. with smth.)' > Chechen, Ingush d=ill-a [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 63] (the likeliest solution is that this ʕ- is really a contracted form of ʕa- 'to sit' q.v. Furthermore, *=all- 'to be (put) inside smth.' and *=ill- 'to (be) (put) upon / on top of smth.' form a morphologically related pair connected by vowel gradation (a detailed explanation, with additional examples of related words, is provided in [NCED]). This means that we cannot, on formal grounds, postulate lexical replacement in between Chechen and Ingush, even if the Chechen form basically means 'to be upon smth.' and the Ingush form means 'to be inside smth.'.
Kadagidze 1984: 218; Desheriyev 1953: 30 (transcribed as dʕe).
Proto-Nakh:*doʡax ~ *doʡex1
NCED: 955 (written as *daHVx). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: The relatively complex (and, therefore, unique) shape of the word in Proto-Nakh makes it difficult to reconstruct all the segments unequivocally. Chechen and Batsbi agree on a triconsonantal structure; Batsbi -ʔ in this structure is, according to NCED, the result of a dissimilation from -x, and this is more likely than the opposite process in Vainakh (where, in some words, sequences like -ʕVʔ- are quite permissible). The situation is further aggravated by the fact that in Ingush, the original stem *dVʡVx has been extended with the diminutive suffix *-ikʼ, with subsequent simplification of the now four-consonantal base (loss of laryngeal) and vocalic assimilation through the influence of -i- in the suffix. Discarding Ingush vocalism as innovative, we are left with Chechen and Batsbi variants that do not really fit together well; we list both as possible phonetic equivalents of the Proto-Nakh item.
NCED: 550. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (including the "weak" laryngeal *ʕ, preserved in Ingush but not in Chechen or Batsbi), except for the gemination -xx- in Batsbi, which is attributed to "expressive" semantics in [NCED]. Front vocalism in Vainakh is due to assimilation with the vowel of the adjectival suffix *-in; Chechen =ax-dan 'to lengthen' still preserves the original vowel. Semantics and structure: The original verbal stem is simply *=ʕaːx- 'to be long'; *=ʕaːx-in is the Proto-Nakh adjectival derivative.
Kadagidze 1984: 427; Desheriyev 1953: 315. Also alternatively quoted as macʼa in [Desheriyev 1953: 25].
Proto-Nakh:*macʼe1
NCED: 846. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: All correspondences match the ones indicated in [NCED], including the vocalic structure *CaCe (Cheberlo dialect of Chechen preserves the most archaic shape: maze). Proto-Nakh *-cʼ- regularly > Vainakh *-z- (see 'full' et al.).
Matsiyev 1961: 378; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 270. Same word as 'person' q.v. In order to specifically denote a male human being, the compound börša stag may be used [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 270], where börša is an adjectival derivate from borš 'male; young bull' [Matsiyev 1961: 71, 72]. This is not, however, basic usage; the semantic opposition 'man / woman' is normally rendered in Chechen as stag vs. zuda q.v.
Ozdoyev 1980: 328. A compound form: maʕa 'male' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 118] + sag 'person' q.v. The form sag may occasionally refer to 'man' (= 'male human being') per se, but the basic opposition between 'man' and 'woman' in Ingush is maʕa-sag vs. qal-sag q.v., meaning that the compound form should be lexicostatistically judged by the morpheme maʕa (no match with Chechen as a result, which is reasonable given that the two languages express this basic opposition in very different ways).
Kadagidze 1984: 550; Desheriyev 1953: 311. Same word as 'person' q.v.
Proto-Nakh:*stʼakʼ1
NCED: 579. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, but with a functional shift in Ingush. Replacements: In Proto-Nakh, the words for 'person' (= 'human being') and 'man' (= 'male human being') were basically the same, but, in order to specifically designate the semantics of 'not female', *stʼakʼ could be used with different attributes denoting the male sex of certain domestic animals. One such extension may have been *borš 'bull' [NCED: 1043], still active in Chechen (and, to a lesser extent, in Ingush); another is reflected in Ingush maʕa, which does not have any Chechen parallels and is left without an etymology in NED. O. Mudrak, in his database, suggests cognacy with Batsbi maħ 'gelding'. This is phonetically acceptable (if Ingush maʕa-sag < *maʕ-sag < *maħ-sag with devoicing of the laryngeal within a cluster; also, for the same rare correspondence cf. Chechen, Ingush baʕ 'bur' = Batsbi baħ id. [NCED: 316]), but semantically acceptable - for obvious reasons! - only if the original meaning was 'stallion' (in general) rather than 'gelding'. Fortunately, that this was indeed the case is explicitly suggested by the symmetry with Ingush qal-sag 'woman' q.v., literally 'mare-person'. See notes on the Ingush form for the explanation why we count this as a replacement {'stallion' > 'man' (?)}, despite the continuous presence of the root -sag in the compound. Reconstruction shape: See notes under 'person'.
NCED: 754. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: If the initial consonant of *duqa is a fossilized prefix, which may be suspected of several Nakh adjectival stems (cf. 'good' q.v.), one might think of a further etymological connection to *=aqqu-n 'big' q.v.; however, the vowel gradation pattern would also require explanation, since this is not a productive model.
Kadagidze 1984: 201; Desheriyev 1953: 313 (transcribed as ditx).
Proto-Nakh:*dilxu2
NCED: 945. Distribution: Preserved in Ingush and Batsbi, with a secondary semantic shift in Chechen. Replacements: In Chechen, the old basic term has become specialized: dilxa 'fleshy part (of body, applied to people and animals)' [Matsiyev 1961: 147]. Its replacement, žiži and the more widely used variant žiži-g (with the productive diminutive suffix), has no certain etymology; however, if it really represents a 'Lallwort', one might try to explain it as a reduplicated variant of žiy (< Proto-Vainakh *žiy) 'sheep'. The semantic shift {'sheep' > 'meat'} would be quite natural, since mutton is one of the basic staples of Chechen diet. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are fully regular (*-lx- > -tx- is the expected development in Batsbi, cf. 'sun' q.v.). Vocalic correspondences also satisfy the conditions for stem structure CiCu in [NCED: 99].
NCED: 1044. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructed as *batti-, with vocalic assimilation in Proto-Vainakh (*batti- > *bett-).
NCED: 834. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial. Length of the root vowel is reconstructed based on the oblique stem *laːmu- > Ingush lɔmo, which also led to paradigm levelling in Ingush; in Chechen, on the other hand, the oblique stem followed the nominative case, but cf. Uslar's archaic notation of the form lɔːmu 'up the mountain' [NCED: 834].
Kadagidze 1984: 81; Desheriyev 1953: 312. Spelled almost everywhere consistently as bak (including A. Schiefner's old dictionary from 1856), but also with a glottalized velar as bakʼ in [Desheriyev 1953: 25]. Secondary synonym: čʼočʼ 'mouth' (of animals and humans) [Kadagidze 1984: 785]; in [Desheriyev 1953: 312], the word is said to be synonymous with the more archaic bak, but, apparently, not as strongly stylistically marked as in Chechen and Ingush, where it can only denote 'mouth' in a pejorative aspect. A possible case of transit synonymy.
Proto-Nakh:*bakʼa1
NCED: 289. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences for the second consonant are irregular: Batsbi must have bakʼ here, when, in fact, most sources, except for one sporadic context in [Desheriyev 1953: 25], only list bak without glottalization. No explanation is currently available; this could have been the result of some obscure semantic contamination (perhaps analogical influence of zok 'beak'?). All the other segments match perfectly with Vainakh data, so there is no major reason to separate the words into different etymologies.
NCED: 1098. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial (in Ingush, there is a regular narrowing *-e > -i at the end of monosyllabic words). Semantics and structure: The paradigm is reconstructed as direct stem *cʼe, oblique stem *cʼa-ri-.
Number:58
Word:neck
\1:Chechen\2:Чеченский:worta {ворта}-1
Matsiyev 1961: 94; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 703. The latter source treats this as the general term, distinguished from lag [Matsiyev 1961: 267] 'front part of neck; throat' and yäʕna [Matsiyev 1961: 551] 'nape of neck'. However, [Matsieyv 1961] glosses worta as 'part of the neck below the back of the head; upper part of neck (of animals)' ('часть шеи ниже затылка; верхняя часть шеи (у животных)'). Still, considering also the existence of the adjectival derivate wortanan [ibid.] 'belonging to the neck; jugular, etc.', the word may safely be considered the primary entry for 'neck'.
\1:Ingush\2:Ингушский:fɔrt {фоарт}-1
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 163; Ozdoyev 1980: 800. The latter source adds qʼamarg as a synonym, but the word is translated only as 'throat' in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 101], and this is clearly its primary meaning.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:sakʼer1
Kadagidze 1984: 523; Desheriyev 1953: 25. Similar to Georgian kʼiser-i 'neck', but not analyzable as a straightforward borrowing (this would imply metathesis).
Proto-Nakh:*yaʡ #2
No reference. Distribution: Lost everywhere except in Chechen, with a specialized meaning. Replacements: Extensive comment is necessary here. Chechen worta and Ingush fɔrt 'neck' do not correspond to each other regularly (if the word were Proto-Vainakh, *horta would be expected in Chechen) and must be analyzed as relatively recent borrowings from Russian vorotŭ 'neck; collar'. Less clear is the status of Batsbi sakʼer, which does not have any external cognates and is suspicious of representing a Kartvelian borrowing with metathesis (although the reasons behind such a metathesis would be unclear). This makes the very existence of a special word to denote the meaning 'neck' in Proto-Nakh somewhat dubious. The reason for this, and for the necessity of eventually borrowing the "missing" term from other languages, can still be seen from [Matsiyev 1961], where two distinct Chechen words of native origin are listed for 'front part of the neck = throat' (lag) and 'back part of the neck, nape of the neck' (yäʕna). It is interesting to note that in Chechen dictionaries from the XIXth century (P. Uslar; A. Schiefner) the Russian word 'neck' (шея) is consistently rendered by the word yäʕni (whereas the existence of worta is not even mentioned). The optimal solution here is that, in Proto-Nakh, the best equivalent for Swadesh's 'neck' was indeed the ancestor of yäʕna ~ yäʕni (whereas the ancestor of lag would be closer to the meaning 'throat'). These days, however, worta is the most generally quoted equivalent of 'neck' in Chechen (and *yaʕ has not been preserved at all in Ingush). Reconstruction shape: Since the word is preserved only in Chechen, the reconstruction is problematic. The modern variant yäʕna is likely to represent a restructured variant of earlier *yaʕni; since -ni is reconstructible as an old suffix in Nakh, the original root may be segmented out as *yaʡ. Semantics and structure: The Proto-Nakh opposition may be plausibly represented as *yaʡ 'neck; (more specifically) nape of the neck' vs. *lakʼ 'front part of the neck, throat' [NCED: 502] (but distinct from *qʼamʔar 'inside part of the throat, larynx' [NCED: 473]).
Number:59
Word:new
\1:Chechen\2:Чеченский:kerla {керла}1
Matsiyev 1961: 215; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 322. Polysemy: 'new / fresh'. Secondary synonym: cʼina [Matsiyev 1961: 486]. The latter form, as seen from attested textual examples, despite its archaic character, is mainly used today only in the meaning 'not used up, not worn out' (e. g. cʼina kostüm 'a new costume'), whereas in the required meaning 'newly made; having recently made its appearance' the basic form is kerla. (The two words form a square opposition with, respectively, tiša 'old' = 'used up, worn out' and šira = 'ancient; having existed for a long time').
\1:Ingush\2:Ингушский:kerda {керда}1
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 90; Ozdoyev 1980: 389. The latter source adds cʼena as a secondary synonym. Polysemy: 'new / fresh'. The latter form, as seen from attested textual examples, despite its archaic character, is mainly used today in the meaning 'not used up, not worn out' (e. g. cʼena kostüm 'a new costume') and related figurative meanings (cf. the translation of cʼena as 'clean' in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 185]), whereas in the required meaning 'newly made; having recently made its appearance' the basic form is kerda.
Kadagidze 1984: 764; Desheriyev 1953: 319 (transcribed as cʼin).
Proto-Nakh:*cʼin-a #2
NCED: 357. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, but with a minor lexicostatistical shift in Vainakh. Replacements: Proto-Vainakh and both of its descendants discerned strictly between *kerla 'new' = 'not used up' and *cʼina 'new' = 'having recently appeared', whereas Batsbi, in both these meanings, employs *cʼin-. It is not excluded that Vainakh preserves the original state of affairs and that Batsbi has simply generalized *cʼin- in both meanings. However, there are arguments for the contrary: (a) Vainakh *kerla itself may simply represent a slight semantic extension from 'fresh'; it is also more complex in form than *cʼin-, with a rare adjectival suffix *-la; (b) more importantly, all external evidence points towards the lack of this semantic distinction between two types of 'new' in Proto-Northeast-Caucasian, and also indicates that Batsbi cʼinĭ is, in fact, the archaic direct descendant of the main stem for 'new' in that language. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The stem is essentially verbal (cf. Chechen cʼin-d-an 'to renew'); the Proto-Nakh derived adjective is *cʼin-a.
Kadagidze 1984: 97; Desheriyev 1953: 314 (transcribed as buyswa).
Proto-Nakh:*bus-ya > *buysa1
NCED: 319. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: All correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The original simple root is *bus, preserved in adverbials: Chechen bus-a, Ingush bus 'at night' (Batsbi buys id. has been levelled by analogy with buysa). The nominal stem was formed with the addition of the productive Proto-Nakh suffix *-ya, with subsequent metathesis *bus-ya > *buysa.
Kadagidze 1984: 406; Desheriyev 1953: 312 (transcribed as marɬ).
Proto-Nakh:*marɬo1
NCED: 1041. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: The original shape of the root has been best preserved in Batsbi (marɬ-), with a regular simplification of the cluster in intervocalic form in Vainakh (the intermediate form marhŏ, still preserving traces of the former lateral fricative, is still preserved in Sharo and Itumkala dialects of Chechen).
The issue of Ingush mera-ž is quite complex. It can be analyzed as a secondary formation from the former oblique stem *marɬi- > Vainakh *mera-; but it should be noted that (a) this secondary formation is polysemous, denoting 'nose' as well as 'snot'; (b) it is formed with the suffix -ž that is not devoiced in word-final position and, therefore, has to go back to Proto-(Vai)nakh *-ǯ and cannot have anything to do with the regular productive plural marker *-š; (c) it cannot be separated from Chechen marš, also with polysemy: 'muzzle / snot'. The following scenario can be set up: (1) Proto-Vainakh had the simple stem *marho (< *marɬo), obl. stem *marhi- 'nose' as well as the derived stem *marhi-ǯ, possibly with a general semantics of 'smth. around the nose' (hence concretizations of 'muzzle' = 'nose-area' and 'snot' = 'stuff coming from the nose'); (2) Ingush later underwent the common semantic shift {'muzzle' > 'nose'}, although, formally, this does not count as a lexical replacement, since the root remains the same. The strange suffix *-ǯ is somewhat questionable, but cf. a similar case in Chechen bel-š (Cheberlo dialect bali-š, Sharo dialect beli-š) = Ingush bela-ž 'shoulder' vs. Batsbi bali id. (no suffix) and Chechen bola-m, Ingush bala-m 'shoulder (from neck to arm)' (a different suffix) [NCED: 313]. Note: In NCED, Chechen mara 'nose' (p. 1041), marš 'muzzle' (p. 794), and marš 'snot' (p. 816) are all explained as reflexes of three different North Caucasian roots, contaminated in Nakh. For the meaning 'muzzle', this is highly unlikely (semantic fluctuation between the meanings 'nose', 'face', 'muzzle' are quite common); for the meaning 'snot', it could, indeed, serve as an alternate explanation (if only because the development of a single complex stem *marhi-ǯ in two closely related languages into 'muzzle' and 'snot' respectively does look somewhat exotic).
Matsiyev 1961: 476; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 296. This is the basic negative particle for the indicative mood, to be strictly distinguished from the prohibitive ma [Matsiyev 1961: 283]. The same root is also encountered as a verbal negative stem ('not to be / have'), in the form =ac- [Matsiyev 1961: 131], used instead of ca in the future tense.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 182; Ozdoyev 1980: 357. This is the basic particle for indicative negation, to be strictly distinguished from the prohibitive ma [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 116]. The particle is preposed to non-indicative verbs and suffixed (as the shortened variant -c) to indicative ones [Nichols 1994: 109, 139].
NCED: 1101. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: The original vowel is unclear (Vainakh a does not normally correspond to Batsbi o), but the main focus should be on the alveolar affricate, preserved intact in all daughter languages. Semantics and structure: This negative morpheme, already in Proto-Nakh, could function both as a prefix and a suffix, depending on the context (see the distribution in Ingush).
NCED: 323. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Stem-final glottal stop is a regular fixture of all the numerals from 1 to 5 in Vainakh languages (but not in Batsbi) and is therefore detachable as a suffix. (The simple stem cħa is still found in numerous suffixal formations both in Chechen and Ingush). According to NCED, Ingush caʕ < *cħa-ʔ with assimilation (and subsequent simplification of the word-initial cluster *cħ-), which is probably the easiest explanation for its odd choice of stem-final laryngeal. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is *cħa-ni (Batsbi cħa-ynĭ, Chechen cħa-nna, etc.).
Matsiyev 1961: 481; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 691. Same word as 'man' q.v. Oblique stem: stega-. In certain contexts the word has been replaced by the secondary synonym adam [Matsiyev 1961: 31], [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 691], an Arabic loanword, but the original Nakh word stag is still quite commonly employed to denote 'human being'. Suppletive plural form: nax 'people' [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 252].
Kadagidze 1984: 550; Desheriyev 1953: 311. Same word as 'man' q.v. Suppletive plural form: nax 'people' [Desheriyev 1953: 311].
Proto-Nakh:*stʼ-akʼ1
NCED: 336, 579. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are completely regular (including the expected simplification *stʼ- > s- in Ingush). Semantics and structure: The word may be segmented on the Proto-Nakh level as *stʼ-akʼ, where *stʼ- is the original root and *-akʼ is a fairly common Nakh suffix, originally with diminutive semantics (cf. Chechen maːm-i ~ maːm-ag 'female breast, teat' etc.). The analysis of the second component as reflecting an original lexical root ('person'), descended from Proto-North Caucasian *HĭrḳwĔ in [NCED: 579] is, therefore, quite dubious. Just as dubious is the attempt to relate the root *stʼ- to Proto-Nakh *pstʼu 'bull' (> Chechen stu, Ingush ust, Batsbi pstʼu) [NCED: 336]. Semantically, a development from 'bull' to 'person' (= 'human being') is questionable (it at least requires an intermediate stage in 'man = male human being'), but even worse is the fact that there is no reasonable basis behind the supposed irregular development *pstʼ-akʼ > *stʼ-akʼ already on the Proto-Nakh level (other than an ad hoc explanation by frequency of usage, etc.). It seems to be more appropriate to keep the two roots separate for the time being. Note also suppletivism: the plural form is easily reconstructible as *naːx [NCED: 840].
NCED: 1010. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: Vainakh *doɣa has no parallels in Batsbi. On the other hand, Batsbi qʼar 'rain' is a perfect phonetic correspondence to Chechen qʼora 'hail' [Matsiyev 1961: 255] (a connection already mentioned in [Desheriyev 1953: 338]). Since the latter form may well have been the default Proto-Nakh equivalent for 'hail' (Ingush has generalized ša 'ice' in this meaning), it is possible to suggest the semantic shift {'rain' > 'hailstorm' > 'hail'} for Batsbi. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are trivial. The Vainakh vocalic structure CoCa, according to the rules in [NCED], goes back to Proto-Nakh CaCu, hence *daɣu. Semantics and structure: This is a purely nominal stem in Nakh. The connection between it and the verbal stem *=aːɣ- 'to come' (a suppletive variant of *=aʔ- ~ *=aːʔ- q.v.) is most likely accidental, despite the phonetic closeness of the two in such idioms as doɣa d=oːɣ-u 'it is raining', literally 'rain is coming' in Chechen [Matsiyev 1961: 152]. However, that does not ultimately preclude the possibility of segmenting the word as *d=aɣu, with a fossilized class prefix.
NCED: 376. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (including the expected loss of word-medial *-g- in Vainakh). Semantics and structure: The word is an adjectival stem, formed with a productive suffix from the same root as in *cʼeːgi 'blood' q.v.; the semantic derivation {'blood' > 'red'} is typologically common.
NCED: 604. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial. Vowel length is reconstructed based on its preservation in the oblique stem in Chechen; also, Chechen neqʼ is an irregular development by analogy with the oblique stem neːqʼa- (regularly < *naːqʼi-). Semantics and structure: Reconstructed with vowel gradation on the Proto-Nakh level: direct stem *niːqʼ, oblique stem *naːqʼi-.
Kadagidze 1984: 750; Desheriyev 1953: 336 (transcribed as ʒiri). Borrowed from Georgian ʒir-.
Proto-Nakh:
Not reconstructible. Replacements: This is one of the most complicated items on the entire wordlist. (1) The Batsbi word is a transparent borrowing from Georgian and need not be considered further. (2) Chechen oːram is completely isolated in this language; it may be segmented as oːra-m, where -m is a fairly frequent derivational suffix (usually, but not always, forming noun stems out of verbs), but oːra- is not encountered on its own. One weak, but not altogether impossible etymology is to view oːra- as a contraction from oħara 'lower, below (adj.)' [Matsiyev 1961: 329], itself derived from the verbal prefix oħa= 'down, below'. The semantic derivation {'below' > 'root'} is typologically perfect, but the contraction would be irregular, although it could be ascribed to the polysyllabic nature of the resulting stem. (3) Ingush owla is the only form here that has been offered an etymology in [NCED: 571], but a dubious one: it is compared with Chechen ewla 'village'. The comparison is unsatisfactory (a) from a phonetic point of view: the vocalism does not match, and there is no evidence in either case for any special oblique stems with vowel gradation; (b) from a semantic point of view: for Chechen, it requires a gigantic semantic leap from 'root' to 'ancestry' to 'kin, family' to 'village', something quite unlikely to have happened over the less than a thousand years of separate development from Ingush; (c) finally, because Chechen ewla is easily explained as a borrowing from Tatar awɨl 'village' (with the word-initial vowel "colored" by the front vocalism of the suffix, as it regularly happens in Chechen nouns). Furthermore, Ingush owla is very unusual from the phonotactic point of view, and is best viewed as a morphologically complex stem: ow- + -la (standard nominal suffix). This begs for a similar explanation, namely, that ow-la could be traced back to oħ-la (with assimilation of the laryngeal to the following resonant) and, thus, to the same Proto-Nakh root *ʔaħu 'down; lower part' [NCED: 228] as Chechen oħa-. However, this is based on an even bolder assumption than the Chechen scenario; for the moment, it is more prudent to keep the two stems apart (at the very least, they represent their own ways of independent development in the two languages, even if the root might - but is not guaranteed - to be etymologically the same).
In the light of all this (the Batsbi word is an identifiable loan, and Chechen and Ingush forms are new complex morphological formations) the original equivalent for the Swadesh meaning 'root' seems to be unrecoverable. It could have been one of the above mentioned, or any other, derived variants of *ʔaħu, or of another root with a similar meaning: *=ʔux 'bottom, lower part' [NCED: 423] (frequently encountered in the figurative meaning 'beginning, foundation, root', which, typologically, is often derived from 'root (of plants)'.
NCED: 438. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial, except for an understandable metathesis in Vainakh (*goːg-r- > *goːrg-). Vowel reflexation in the first syllable is influenced by the second syllable. Semantics and structure: This adjectival stem is a Proto-Nakh level derivative of goːga 'circle' (> Chechen, Ingush goː, Batsbi gogŏ).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 54; Ozdoyev 1980: 485. Borrowed from Turkic *qum 'sand'.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:kwiš-1
Kadagidze 1984: 613. Borrowed from Georgian kviša.
Proto-Nakh:
Not reconstructible for Proto-Nakh (all known forms are borrowed either from Turkic or Georgian languages). Cf. *yobstʼ 'loose earth' (see notes to 'earth'): could this word possibly have the semantics of 'sand' in Proto-Nakh?
Matsiyev 1961: 34; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 109. Terminative stem, as opposed to durative leː-n [Matsiyev 1961: 277]; should also be distinguished from d=iyc-a [Matsiyev 1961: 145] 'speak, talk'.
Kadagidze 1984: 36; Desheriyev 1953: 32. Terminative stem, as opposed to durative lev-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 376].
Proto-Nakh:*ʔaːɬ- / *leː-1
NCED: 572. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. The archaic lateral fricative -ɬ- is preserved in Batsbi. Semantics and structure: The Proto-Nakh paradigm was *ʔaːɬ- (terminative: 'to say /smth./') vs. *leː- (durative: 'to be saying, to speak'); both stems go back to the same root, since *ɬ- was not allowed in the initial position in Proto-Nakh.
Ozdoyev 1980: 72. Polysemy: 'see / understand'. The default form is listed as bʕarga-g-o, literally 'eye-see'; in actual use, however, the first part of the compound is frequently omitted (cf. sona dika gu "I see well = I have good eye-sight").
Kadagidze 1984: 25. The stem =ag- is terminative; cf. the corresponding durative stem gu- in gu-ar [Kadagidze 1984: 26]. Transcribed in the infinitive form as d=ag-ã in [Desheriyev 1953: 315].
Proto-Nakh:*=ag- / *gu=1
NCED: 572. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The Proto-Nakh paradigm was terminative *=ag- vs. durative *gu- (cf. the same correlation of syllabic structures in 'say' q.v.). In [NCED] the loss of this opposition in Vainakh is attributed to the elision of word-medial *-g- (so that *=ag- would have to become *=a- and phonetically merge with several other roots).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 47; Ozdoyev 1980: 658. Oblique stem: giw-. Secondary synonym: fu [Ozdoyev et. al 1962: 163], glossed in that source as 'seed; breed' (Russian 'семя; порода'). Although external evidence shows this to have been the original root for 'seed', synchronically Ozdoyev [1980] does not indicate it any longer as a convenient equivalent for Russian семя.
NCED: 1021. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, except for Ingush, where it is an archaism. Replacements: In Ingush, Common Nakh *fuw is replaced by gi, whose origins are unclear. The word itself does not look like a borrowing, but, considering that fu is still present in the language in a more figurative use, is quite assuredly a replacement. The original meaning might have been a particular kind of seed or grain, but no evident parallels can be quoted from either Chechen or Batsbi. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial.
Matsiyev 1961: 439; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 557. The simple verbal stem ʕan (durative, opposed to the terminative ʕeː-n [Matsiyev 1961: 555]) is translated in [Matsiyev 1961] as 'to be in a state of rest' (Russian 'находиться в состоянии покоя'). This meaning is too broad to satisfy the requirements for the item 'sit'; the correct equivalent is, therefore, the composite expression xiʔ-na ʕan, where xiʔ-na is a participial form of xaʔa 'to sit down'. Cf. the example in [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 557]: ɣanta tʼeħ xiʔna ʕan 'to sit on a chair'.
Kadagidze 1984: 930. A composite verbal stem, consisting of the original verbal root *=aɣ- and a preverbal component that is, however, unattested outside of this stem. This is quite distinct from xeʔ-ar 'to sit down' [Kadagidze 1984: 808].
Proto-Nakh:*=aːɣ-2
NCED: 275. Distribution: Preserved in the original meaning everywhere except in Chechen. Replacements: In Chechen, the original intransitive stem 'to sit' was lost (only the correlating transitive stem 'to set (up)' was retained), replaced by a periphrastic expression literally meaning 'to be in the state of having sat down'; in a simplified way, we could postulate semantic derivation {'to sit down' > 'to sit'}. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences between Ingush and Batsbi are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The basic root here, as is correctly described in [NCED], formed three different stems in Proto-Nakh: (a) intransitive *=aːɣ- 'to sit', preserved in Ingush and, with a further preverbal extension ʕe=, in Batsbi; (b) transitive terminative *=oːɣ- 'to set up, plant, erect' > Chechen =oːɣ-, Ingush, Batsbi *=oɣ-; (c) transitive durative *=eː<b>ɣ- > Chechen =iːɣ-. It was also lexically different from the dynamic action verb *xaʔ- 'to sit down' > Chechen, Batsbi xaʔ- id. [NCED: 647].
Matsiyev 1961: 315; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 221. The former source defines neʕ as 'skin, hide' (of people and animals); the latter - only as 'hide', whereas for the meaning 'human skin' it offers a different stem, cʼoːka [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 221]. This form, however, is only assigned the meaning 'hide (of animal)' in the earlier dictionary [Matsiyev 1961: 486]; the meaning 'skin' in that source is assigned to čʼqʼor 'human skin / layer / shell, cover' [Matsiyev 1961: 493] (sic!). This confusion most likely reflects a case of "transit synonymy"; the confusion is caused by the contamination of the meanings 'human skin' and 'animal skin', quite distinct in Proto-Nakh. We include the variants neʕ and cʼoːka as synonyms (but not čʼqʼor, since it is referred to as 'skin' or 'hide' only in one source).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 186; Ozdoyev 1980: 265. Polysemy: 'skin / hide' (same stem, but assigned to different classes depending on the meaning). Secondary synonym: niħ ('skin / кожа' in [Ozdoyev 1980: 265], but only 'hide / шкура' in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 126]).
Kadagidze 1984: 831. Meaning glossed as 'hide' (Russian шкура), but textual examples confirm parallel usage in the meaning 'human skin'; it is also the main (and only) equivalent for 'skin' in A. Schiefner's dictionary from 1856. Transcribed as qaqa in [Desheriyev 1953: 31]. Secondary synonym: čʼar 'skin / rind' [Kadagidze 1984: 776].
Proto-Nakh:*cʼoːka2
NCED: 1091. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch (although already confused with a close synonym in both of its languages), but not in Batsbi. Replacements: (a) Proto-Nakh (or, at least, Proto-Vainakh) must have distinguished between *cʼoːka 'human skin' and *neħ 'animal skin, hide' [NCED: 755], but the distinction was relatively weak, and continues to be violated in modern dialects as well, with the gradual shift {'hide' > 'human skin'} going on in some forms of Chechen at least; (b) Batsbi qaqã regularly corresponds to Chechen, Ingush qaqa 'sheepskin' < Proto-Nakh *qaqa-n [NCED: 455]; this must have been the original meaning in Proto-Nakh; (c) Batsbi čʼar regularly corresponds to Chechen čʼqʼor, Ingush čʼor 'rind, peel, shell', which must have been its original meaning in Proto-Nakh; this root is reconstructed as *čʼʡoːr in [NCED: 344], and the semantic shift {'shell / cover' > 'human skin'} is trivial. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences for Vainakh *cʼoːka are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: Quadruple opposition reconstructible: *cʼoːka 'human skin' : *neħ 'animal skin (in general)' : *qaqa-n 'sheep skin' : *čʼʡoːr 'any natural cover or wrapping' in general.
NED # 93. Distribution: Preserved in Batsbi, and with a slight semantic shift in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: The basic Vainakh equivalent for the static meaning 'to sleep' is a periphrastic construction, formed with the use of the Common Nakh nominal stem *nʕaːpʼ 'sleep (n.)' > Chechen, Ingush nab, Batsbi nʕapʼ (reconstructed as *nɦaːpʼ in [NCED: 619]); thus, {'sleep (n.)' > 'sleep (vb.)'}. The original verbal stem is preserved in Batsbi (toħ-ar); in Vainakh, it is recoverable in the morphologically complex stem *tħ-a-b-s- (> Chechen, Ingush tħows-a) 'to go to sleep; to lie down to sleep (for a while)'. The latter stem is analyzed in [NCED: 1037] as a compound, consisting of *tħ- (< *toħ-) + an independent root *=abs- (possibly = *=a<b>s- with the old plural action infix). Analysis of *=abs- as a separate root rather than a desemanticized word-formative component is questionable, but *tħ- may and, by all means, should be viewed as cognate with Batsbi toħ-; Vainakh *tħ-abs- 'to lie down to sleep' is, therefore, 'to sleep' + a grammatical component (some obsolete desiderative suffix?). Semantics and structure: For Proto-Nakh, the optimal solution is to assume the opposition *toħ- 'to sleep' : *=iž- ~ *=iš- 'to lie down, go to sleep' (see 'lie') : *nʕaːpʼ 'sleep (n.)'.
NED # 95 (written as *ǯʕVm-). Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, but see notes below on reflexation in Ingush. Reconstruction shape: Batsbi and Chechen adjectival stems are easily reconcilable with each other: Chechen -a vs. Batsbi -ẽ goes back to *-in (see 'long' for an identical example), and the expected Chechen reflexation *žüma > žima due to an undesirable (usually avoided) phonetic sequence. The real trouble is with the Ingush form. The laryngeal may be included into the reconstruction as one of the cases in which, out of all three languages, only Ingush preserves the laryngeal (again, see 'long'), but the alveolar reflex z- and the vowel -a- are both quite irregular. The irregularities could be due to peculiar "expressive" changes or contamination with some unknown word; excluding the form from the etymology, in the light of undeniable phonetic similarity and lack of alternate etymological explanations, however, would not be right.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 108; Ozdoyev 1980: 173 (in the latter source, misprinted as kʼurg in the main entry, but shown correctly as kʼur in the examples). Oblique stem: kʼur-.
NCED: 731. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructed as *kʼure-.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 110; Ozdoyev 1980: 700. Polysemy: 'to be (somewhere) / to stand'; this prompts for a more specific designation of the meaning 'to stand (vertically)' by the compound form cħan mette uralatta, literally 'to stand in one place' [ibid.], but this is clearly not the default expression, cf. "the sentinel is standing": časovoy latt [ibid.], etc.
NCED: 1025. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial; vowel length is reconstructed in [NCED] based on such verbal forms as Chechen present lätta, Ingush past lättad. Semantics and structure: It is well argumented in [NCED] that *l= should be analyzed as a fossilized preverb, since the stem *l=aːtt- fits into a whole set of semantically close stems, differentiated through preverbs and vowel gradation: *h=itt- 'to stand upon (smth.)' (> Chechen h=itt-), *ott- ~ *h=ott- 'to stand up, appear' (> Chechen h=ott-, Ingush, Batsbi ott-).
Kadagidze 1984: 568; Desheriyev 1953: 62 (transcribed as tʼʕir).
Proto-Nakh:*tʼʡari #2
NCED: 1098. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi. Replacements: The archaic nature of the Batsbi form is ascertained only through its external connections in Daghestanian languages, which the Vainakh form lacks. The Vainakh form itself (reconstructed as seːtʼHo in [NED # 99]) is fairly unusual: the correspondence "Chechen -d- : Ingush -dqʼ-" is unique, and such Chechen dialectal variants as Cheberlo syeːdo, Sharo syeːtʼo, Khildikharo syoːdo only complicate the picture. Furthermore, it is very hard to separate these forms from the Batsbi word for 'hail', transcribed as setʼqʼ in [Desheriyev 1953: 338] and as setʼqʼw in A. Schiefner's dictionary from 1856 - but this word, on the other hand, is usually assumed to be a borrowing from Georgian setʼqʼva 'hail' [Desheriyev ibid.]! While the latter assumption may be correct (the form in Batsbi matches its Georgian equivalent very closely, and Batsbi is a well-known heavy borrower from Georgian), the Georgian word itself does not have a solid Kartvelian etymology; together with Vainakh *seːtʼHo, or *seːdqʼo, they may go back to an old cultural "Wanderwort" with the general semantics of 'small round object falling from sky' (> 'hail' or > 'shooting star' > 'star' in general). Additional data are required to make the situation any clearer. Reconstruction shape: The Batsbi form looks rather archaic in form, although alternate schemes of vocalism are also possible.
Number:81
Word:stone
\1:Chechen\2:Чеченский:tʼulg {тIулг}1
Matsiyev 1961: 428; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 211. Secondary synonym: qeːra {кхēра} [Matsiyev 1961: 239] (apparently obsolete, with practically no derived forms; not listed at all in [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978]).
NCED: 467. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, but only as an archaism in Chechen. Replacements: The word qeːra is no longer in active usage in Chechen; the replacement tʼulg has no immediate parallels outside Chechen. It could be segmented as *tʼul-g < *tʼul-ikʼ or as *tʼu-likʼ (both of these are old productive diminutive suffixes), but this would probably bring on "umlautization" of the vowel (e. g. *tʼülg rather than tʼulg); another possibility, judging by schemes of correspondences in [NCED], is *tʼolu-kʼ. Relations between this stem and Chechen tʼo 'pebbles, small stones' [Matsiyev 1961: 427] are unclear. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences for *qeːra are regular and trivial. Vowel length is still preserved in Chechen.
NCED: 822. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular, including the development *-lx- > -tx- in Batsbi (cf. 'meat'). Vowel length reconstructed based on vocalic reflexation in the oblique stem. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructed as maːlxe-.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 117; Ozdoyev 1980: 488. Lit. 'swimming-make', a compound form in which näk (orthography according to [Ozdoyev 1980]) ~ nek (orthography according to [Ozdoyev et al. 1962]) is a noun.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:curi ħaq-ar-1
Kadagidze 1984: 740. All of the expressions denoting the process of 'swimming' are formed in Batsbi with the aid of the stem cur-, borrowed from Georgian cur- 'to swim': curbad-d=alar 'to swim (about)', curi ħaq-ar (terminative), curi ħeq-ar (durative) 'to swim (in a given direction)'.
Proto-Nakh:*naːki1
NCED: 857. Distribution: Preserved only in the Vainakh branch (and may be an innovation even there). Replacements: In Batsbi, replaced with a Georgian borrowing. Vainakh *naːki 'swimming' is also suspectable of having been borrowed from Ossetic nakä id.; NCED's counter-argumentation (North Caucasian ancestry in the light of Urartian nek- 'to flow') is not very convincing, since the Ossetic word has a solid Indo-European etymology (< *snā-ka- 'swimming'), whereas the Urartian connection is semantically more distant, and parallels in other North Caucasian languages are lacking. Nevertheless, the direction of the borrowing cannot be established definitively, so, for the moment, we do not mark the Vainakh forms as borrowings. Reconstruction shape: Within Vainakh, correspondences are regular. Semantics and structure: As in many other Caucasian languages, Nakh languages express the meaning 'to swim' as a periphrastic construction: 'to make swimming', where 'swimming' is a nominal stem (*naːki).
NCED: 801. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi. Replacements: Vainakh *cʼagu 'tail' goes back to Proto-Nakh *cʼakʼu [NCED: 739] = Batsbi cʼawkʼŭ 'short tail' [Kadagidze 1984: 756]. The meaning in Batsbi is probably archaic, i.e. Vainakh languages have undergone the generalization {'short tail' > 'tail'}. This is confirmed by the Vainakh parallel to Batsbi muɣ: Chechen, Ingush mulɣa (< *muɣ-la) = Batsbi muyɣ-lĭ 'crupper', i.e. 'piece of harness passed under the horse's tail'. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The Proto-Nakh opposition *cʼakʼu : *muɣ can be described as 'short tail' : 'tail (in general)' or 'short tail' (e. g. of sheep) : 'long tail' (e. g. of horse). Final decision would depend on a more precise study of the functions of both words in Batsbi. External Daghestanian evidence explicitly supports *muɣ as the more archaic word for 'tail'.
Matsiyev 1961: 173. Quoted as dʕora in [Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 625]. The stem is used for far deixis; there is also an "intermediate" or "neutral" stem, i ~ i-za [Matsiyev 1961: 192-193], more frequently used to denote the 3rd p. personal pronoun and less clearly eligible for inclusion, since the basic deictic opposition 'this / that' is generally formed by the stem pairing of dʕaː- and ha- q.v.
NCED: 218. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi. Replacements: Nakh languages, like most other Caucasian languages, have a wide variety of deictic stems, and precise semantic reconstruction of their main functions in the protolanguage is a very complicated task. In choosing between the two main morphemes that express the idea of "far deixis" in Nakh, it is preferable to consider Batsbi o as the more archaic stem and Vainakh *dʕaː as the more innovative one, for the following reason: Vainakh *dʕaː-ra is formally derived (with the adjectival suffix -ra) from the adverbial form *dʕaː 'there' [Matsiyev 1961: 169], which, as is noted in [NCED], corresponds to Batsbi da-ħ ~ da-ħa 'there' [Kadagidze 1984: 159], i. e. is itself derived from an even simpler *da-. Batsbi ʔo, on the other hand, has no obvious parallels in Vainakh languages, but cannot be explained away as a secondary formation. This does not exactly "prove" that the simple morpheme *da could not be used in an adjectival, not only adverbial, function in Proto-Nakh, but at least there is no direct evidence for that. The optimal scenario is to reconstruct Proto-Nakh *ʔo 'that' (adjective / pronoun) vs. *da(-ħa) 'there' (adverb), with morphological / semantic derivation in Vainakh: {'there' > 'that'} ('the one that is there').
Matsiyev 1961: 472; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 715. The stem is used for near deixis. Oblique stem: hoq-. On the functions of the quasi-synonymous i ~ i-za see under 'that'.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 76; Ozdoyev 1980: 815. Oblique stem: uq-. The latter source also quotes i-z as a synonym; this pronoun corresponds to Chechen i(-za) and has more or less the same functions (indication of intermediate deixis as well as 3rd p. pr. usage).
Kadagidze 1984: 220, 302. The same source also lists morphologically complex variants: e-h and i-ħ. In [Desheriyev 1953: 177], i is defined as generally indicating the 1st (nearest) degree of deixis, e is defined as indicating the 2nd degree, but the distinction is also said not to be strictly observed in actual speech. Kadagidze's dictionary treats both stems as complete synonyms; Nikolayev & Starostin, in their etymological notes, explicitly suggest that the two stems are simply "vacillating" phonetic variants.
Proto-Nakh:*ʔi #2
NCED: 218. Distribution: Preserved in Batsbi and, with a slight semantic change, in Vainakh. Replacements: It is not clear whether for Proto-Nakh one should reconstruct two or three degrees of deixis: all the modern languages feature a three-degree system, but there are cardinal differences between Vainakh and Batsbi that do not allow to easily reconcile them. In addition, for 'this' even Chechen and Ingush are not in full agreement: similarities both between direct and indirect stems indicate common origin, but Chechen h- does not correspond to Ingush y- (or zero in the oblique stem). In [NCED] this is explained as a contamination between *ʔi and *ha-, which might be concretized as a development from an original complex form *ʔi-ha-ra, obl. stem *ʔi-hoq- 'this + here + adject. suffix' (with loss of word-medial weak laryngeal and contraction: > *ʔi-a-ra / *ʔi-oq- > yer / uq-). Were this right, one might have to count the Ingush compound as a lexicostatistical match with both Chechen and Batsbi, but the scenario is hard to prove, and, besides, the form *ʔi-ha-ra is not formally traceable to Proto-Vainakh level.
By analogy with the far deixis stems *ʔo 'that' (pronoun) and *da(-ħa) 'there' (adverb), it is reasonable to think of a symmetric opposition *ʔi 'this' (pronoun) and *ha 'here' (adverb; not preserved in this original function in any of the languages) for Proto-Nakh. Unlike *ʔo, however, the stem *ʔi did not vanish altogether in Vainakh, but shifted to indicate a 'neutral' degree of deixis; one of the reasons behind this may have been its frequent usage in the function of the 3rd p. sg. personal pronoun 'he, she, it' already in Proto-Nakh.
NCED: 483. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Vowel length is reconstructed in [NCED] based on such forms as Chechen dative ħuː-na < *ħoː-na, but, formally, the nominative case must have been *ħo already in Proto-Nakh. Semantics and structure: The paradigm is reconstructed as follows: direct stem *ħo(ː), oblique stem *ħa-, ergative case *ʔa=ħ (Ingush ʕa < ʕaʕ < ʔaʕ < ʔaħ. The complex chain of assimilations and dissimilations was triggered by the voicening of the final laryngeal, cf. the same process in az 'I (ergative)' < *ʔas.)
NCED: 802. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. The glottalized geminate *-tʼtʼ- is predictably deglottalized in Vainakh. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructed as *matʼtʼi-.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 183; Ozdoyev 1980: 225. The simple stem ca 'tooth' is also listed in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 183], but functions only as an archaism.
NCED: 326. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular; the shift *-a- > *-e- in Vainakh is due to the influence of the vowel in the diminutive suffix *-ikʼ. Semantics and structure: The stem is a diminutive formation along the same lines as *la-ri-kʼ 'ear', *bʡa-ri-kʼ 'eye' etc., from the oblique stem *ca-ri- of the simple root *ca-. The latter, on its own, is still preserved as an archaism in Ingush ca and, probably, in Chechen ce 'horse's tooth' [Matsiyev 1961: 477] (with vowel levelling by analogy with its oblique stem cena- and/or cerg).
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 44; Ozdoyev 1980: 150. Polysemy: 'tree / branch' (thus according to [Ozdoyev et al. 1962]; according to [Ozdoyev 1980: 67], the current main word for 'tree branch' is tqʼovro, whereas ga only functions as a figurative 'branch', e. g. in idioms such as mašinnäqʼa ga 'railroad branch'). Secondary synonym: xi [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 166], [Ozdoyev 1980: 150]; this item seems to be somewhat more archaic and is less frequently encountered in texts.
NCED: 854. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi, with independent semantic shifts in the two languages of the Vainakh branch. Replacements: (a) Chechen ditt means either 'tree' (in general) or 'mulberry tree' (specific); the latter is the word's only meaning in Ingush [NCED: 406]. The semantic generalization {'mulberry tree' > 'tree'} in Chechen is more probable than the reverse process for systemic reasons; (b) Ingush ga means either 'tree' or 'branch', with indications (see notes on the Ingush form) that the semantics of 'branch' is more archaic; it also exclusively means 'branch' in Chechen, and the Batsbi cognate gag means 'bunch (of grapes)' [NCED: 429]; hence, a metonymic shift: {'branch' > 'tree'}. In contrast, Batsbi xẽ corresponds to Vainakh *xeːn 'wood (material)' > Chechen xen, Ingush xi id., reflecting the typologically frequent shift {'tree' > 'wood'}. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences for *xeːn are regular. Vowel length is reconstructed based on the oblique stem xeːna- in Chechen. Semantics and structure: The abovementioned and other "tree-related" items may be summarized for Proto-Nakh as follows: *xeːn 'tree' (growing) : *dače-kʼ 'wood (material)' (> Chechen dečig, Ingush daxča) [NCED: 401] : *dos 'firewood' (> Batsbi, Ingush dos id.) [NCED: 946] : *ħun 'forest' [NCED: 425] : *gag 'branch' : *ditt 'mulberry tree'.
NCED: 845. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are fully regular. Stem-final glottal stop is a regular fixture of all the numerals from 1 to 5 in Vainakh languages (but not in Batsbi) and is therefore detachable as a suffix. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is *ši-na- (> Chechen, Ingush šina-).
Kadagidze 1984: 314. Meaning glossed as 'to walk / to flow' (Russian 'ходить; течь'), but this seems to be the default verb for the meaning 'to go (somewhere)' as well; cf., with a different Ablaut grade, also d=ax-ar 'to go away' [Kadagidze 1984: 56].
Proto-Nakh:*=ax-1
NCED: 664. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial, except for occasional confusion caused by different grades of Ablaut. Semantics and structure: As stated in [NCED], this verbal root had several Ablaut grades in Proto-Nakh, including *ʔex- ~ *=ix- (cf. the Batsbi form as well as Chechen ex-a 'to go, walk, move, fly, flow' [Matsiyev 1961: 526]) and *=ax-. The former stem must have been durative and the latter terminative, but usage has become blurred over time.
The default source only lists the Ablaut verbal form d=epx-d-ar 'to heat' (tr.) [Kadagidze 1984: 232]; the adjectival form =apx-ẽ is quoted according to [Nikolayev & Starostin 1994: 563], where it must have been reproduced from one of the older Batsbi dictionaries (e. g. Matsiyev's from 1932). The word is distinct from 'warm' = mal-ĩ [Kadagidze 1984: 400].
Proto-Nakh:*=ʕaːbx-in1
NCED: 563. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular, including the preservation of the "weak" laryngeal *ʕ in Ingush vs. its loss in Chechen and Batsbi; different paths of development of the cluster *-bx-; and its labializing influence on the vowel in Chechen. Semantics and structure: This is a verbal root ('to be hot'), represented in Nakh languages in several vowel grades (*=ʕoːbx- / *=ʕeːbx- / *=ʕaːbx-); a whole set of derived stems is found in Batsbi, all of them listed in [NCED: 563]. In Proto-Nakh, the root and its derivatives were differentiated from *mal-in (reconstructed as *mɦal-i(n) in [NCED: 807]) 'warm' (also 'weak, loose').
NCED: 786. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Vowel length is reconstructed in [NCED] based on such forms as Chechen dative txuː-na < *txoː-nu, but, formally, the nominative case must have been *txoː already in Proto-Nakh. Semantics and structure: The Proto-Nakh paradigm for the 1st p. pl. exclusive pronoun was as follows: direct stem *txo(ː), indirect stem *txa-, ergative case *ʔaː=xu or *ʔaː=xo (the first variant, suggested in [NCED], fits in better with its proposed series of vocalic correspondences, but the second one would be more expectable in the context of the entire paradigm; Batsbi a=txŏ is the result of secondary analogical levelling). The consonantal alternation tx- : -x- reflects this cluster's original provenance from a lateral affricate (on the Proto-Nakh-Daghestanian level).
NCED: 1014. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: This is the 1st p. pl. inclusive pronoun.
NCED: 122. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages, although in different morphological settings. Reconstruction shape: Within the root morpheme *fu-, all correspondences are regular. Semantics and structure: One of two most widespread interrogative morphemes (for the second one, see 'who'). The Vainakh forms go back to a common prototype *fu-n and formally correspond to Batsbi wũ 'why?' [Kadagidze 1984: 257]. Batsbi wu-x allegedly contains the same second element as Chechen muː-xa 'which?' [NCED: 1062], but the exact nature and function of this suffix are unclear. Nevertheless, the root morpheme is undeniably the same in all three languages.
Kadagidze 1984: 347; Desheriyev 1953: 42 (transcribed as kʼuy).
Proto-Nakh:*kʼay-in ~ *kʼuy-in1
NCED: 730. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular. The vocalism, however, is not: Batsbi -u- does not correspond to Vainakh -a-. Reasons for the irregularity are unknown; possibly some undetectable contamination. Semantics and structure: The stem *kʼay-in ~ *kʼuy-in is adjectival; formally, the word could be viewed as derived from *kʼay > Chechen, Ingush kʼay 'wall-eye, albugo' ([Matsiyev 1961: 258]; [Ozdoyev 1980: 42]; cf. 'red' derived from 'blood'). Ultimately, however, both are probably independent formations from the same verbal stem *kʼay- (or *kʼuy-) 'to be white'.
Kadagidze 1984: 435; Desheriyev 1953: 320 (transcribed as me). Direct stem.
Proto-Nakh:*me-n / *mi-la1
NCED: 843. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular. Vocalic differentiation is caused by interference between the root vowel and various suffixes, making the original vocalism very hard to reconstruct convincingly. Semantics and structure: One of two most widespread interrogative morphemes (for the second one, see 'what'). Vainakh languages reflect the stem *mi-la (with further assimilation to ma-la in Ingush); Batsbi mẽ < *me-n (cf. Batsbi wũ 'why?' < *wu-n). The same stem is represented in various other question words, listed in [NCED], e. g. *mi-ča 'where' > Chechen, Ingush miča, Batsbi mič ~ miča (this allows us to safely segment mi-la, ma-la even on the synchronic level).
NCED: 491. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial. Semantics and structure: The Common Nakh paradigm of the pronoun 'who?' is suppletive, and the ergative case form may actually preserve the more archaic morpheme within the pairing *mV- : *ħa.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 96; Ozdoyev 1980: 181. Formally a compound form: qal 'mare' + sag 'person' q.v. Forms a binary opposition with maʕa-sag 'man' q.v. Suppletive plural: qal-nax 'women'. Possible secondary synonym: se-sag [Ozdoyev 1980: 181], from se 'female' (= Chechen steː id.) + sag; not equally well eligible because the word specifically denotes 'wife, married woman' as opposed to 'woman' in general.
Kadagidze 1984: 593; Desheriyev 1953: 311. Standard term to denote a 'married woman' (as opposed to yoħ 'little girl / young girl'), formally derived from the shorter root stem pstʼu 'wife' [Kadagidze 1984: 591].
Proto-Nakh:*pstʼuw3
NCED: 374. Distribution: Preserved only in Batsbi. Replacements: The word for 'woman' is notoriously unstable in Nakh. The original equivalent was replaced: (a) in Chechen, by zud-a, a Chechen-only derivate (earlier form *zud-an, cf. the form zudaŋ in Uslar's dictionary) of Vainakh *ʒud 'bitch' > Chechen, Ingush zud id. [NCED: 1094]; the semantic derivation {'bitch' > 'woman'} is typologically common; (b) in Ingush, by qal-sag, an Ingush-only derivate (literally 'mare-person'; cf. maʕa-sag 'man' q.v., possibly 'stallion-person') from Proto-Nakh *qadela 'mare' > Chechen qeːla, Ingush qal, Batsbi qadal [NED # 126]; the derivation {'mare' > 'woman'} is less common, but, in this case, undeniable. This leaves Batsbi pstʼuy-nŏ 'woman', a derivate of pstʼu 'wife', as the only serious candidate for Proto-Nakh 'woman'; in modern Vainakh languages, it corresponds to Chechen stuː, Ingush suw 'princess'. For the semantic shift {'woman' > 'wife' > 'princess'}, cf., e. g., English queen from Indo-European *gʷen- 'woman'. Semantics and structure: Batsbi may be preserving the most archaic situation, namely, the polysemy 'woman / wife'. In Vainakh, this has become a "polite" term to denote noble women, whereas the meaning 'wife' has begun to be expressed by the compound *steː-stʼakʼ > *seːsag, literally 'female-person', from *steː- 'female' ([NED # 915], dubiously written as *stVd-) + *stʼakʼ 'person' q.v. (The etymology of *steː-stʼakʼ as a separate stem *seːsa-kʼ in [NCED: 969] is hardly valid, since the word is perfectly well analyzable as a compound within Proto-Nakh. Reflexation seːsag in Chechen instead of the expected *steːsag is explained through an early simplification of *steː-stʼakʼ to *seːsag already in Proto-Vainakh).
NCED: 820. Distribution: Preserved only in Chechen, and in Ingush with a slight semantic shift. Dubious. Replacements: (a) Ingush ʕaža-ɣa 'yellow' (with a productive adjectival suffix -ɣa) is compared in [NCED: 557] to Chechen ʕoːža 'light-bay' (of horses). The resulting Proto-Vainakh adjective *ʡaːǯu, morphologically, would look like a perfect derivative of *ʡaːǯ 'apple' [NCED: 621] (> Chechen, Ingush ʕaž, cf. obl. bases in Chechen: ʕeːža- 'apple', ʕoːža- 'apple-tree'), but semantically the derivation of 'yellow' from 'apple' is somewhat questionable, unless the original meaning of the color term was not 'sun-yellow', but a different shade. (b) Batsbi kʼapʼraš has no parallels in Vainakh languages and is shaped very unusually for an authentic Nakh item. Since the source of borrowing is unknown, we still include it in the calculations. (c) Chechen moːž-a corresponds to Ingush mɔža 'orange' [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 120], and, since the word has a credible "Nakh" shape, no obvious internal etymology, and the "yellowest" semantics of all, we tentatively project it onto Proto-Nakh level. Reconstruction shape: Since the Batsbi parallels are missing, the root may have been *maːǯ- or *maːčʼ-.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 46; Ozdoyev 1980: 140. Adjective derived from the adverbial form gäna 'far (away)'.
\1:Batsbi\2:Бацбийский:čaq-ĩ2
Kadagidze 1984: 691.
Proto-Nakh:*gaːni #1
NED # 141. Distribution: Preserved in the Vainakh branch. Replacements: Batsbi čaq-ĩ is phonetically comparable to Chechen čeq [Matsiyev 1961: 489], Ingush čaq- [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 187] 'through', 'to the (very) end', an adverbial that also functions as a verbal prefix. Semantically, this would imply a shift like {'thorough, final' > 'farthest' > 'far (away)'}, which is atypical, but not inconceivable. This leaves the Vainakh adverbial stem *gaːni as a slightly more reliable candidate for Proto-Nakh 'far'. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are trivial; vowel correspondences satisfy the conditions for the scheme *CaːCi in [NCED: 99].
NCED: 525. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular, including the development *-cʼ- > *-z- in Proto-Vainakh and the coloring of the root vowel by the front vocalism of suffixal *-in. Semantics and structure: This is a verbal root (cf. Batsbi =acʼ-dar 'to make heavy', etc.); in [NCED] it is proposed that it represents a different Ablaut grade of *=ucʼ- 'to be filled; full' q.v., but this is not certain, since the semantic connection is unclear.
Kadagidze 1984: 115; Desheriyev 1953: 29. Adjective derived from the adverbial form garg 'near'.
Proto-Nakh:*garge1
NCED: 518. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial. Vocalic correspondences fit the scheme proposed for root structure *CaC(C)e in [NCED: 99]. Semantics and structure: The adverbial *garge is the same in all three languages; the adjective 'near' is formed as *garge-ra in Vainakh and as *garge-lin in Batsbi.
Kadagidze 1984: 296; Desheriyev 1953: 313 (transcribed as tuyx).
Proto-Nakh:*tuxe1
NCED: 371. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial. Vocalic correspondences fit the scheme proposed for root structure *CuCe in [NCED: 99].
NCED: 1021. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial. Ingush l= is not quite clear, but most likely, of a fossilized prefixal nature. Vocalic correspondences fit the scheme proposed for root structure *CaːCu in [NCED: 99]; vowel length is preserved in Chechen. Semantics and structure: The simple verbal root *=aːc- 'to be short' may be seen in such forms as Chechen =ac-dan, Batsbi =ac-dar 'to shorten'.
Matsiyev 1961: 274; Karasayev & Matsiyev 1978: 189. Polysemy: 'snake / adder'. The latter source also quotes teːqarg, lit. 'crawling', as a synonym, but the form is marked as 'figurative' in Matsiyev 1961. Finally, of note is the word böːxa-lla [Matsiyev 1961: 73], glossed as polysemic: 'dirt, impurity / snake'; the meaning 'snake' is also marked as 'figurative', but this time, external parallels in Ingush show that this figurative usage is somewhat archaic.
Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 37; Ozdoyev 1980: 223. The situation here is complicated. In [Ozdoyev et al. 1962] the word is marked as 'figurative' (exactly the way it is in Chechen). However, already in [Ozdoyev 1980] it is given as the only acceptable equivalent for 'snake', and is also simply translated 'snake', without any special notes, in [Kurkiyev 2005: 79]. The main word for 'snake' in [Ozdoyev et al. 1962: 113] is given as leħa, but both in [Ozdoyev 1980: 119] and in [Kurkiyev 2005: 281] (in this latter source it is given as leħ, possibly a misprint or a dialectal variant) the only associated meaning is the specialized term 'adder' (Russian гадюка). This indicates that the old figurative term for 'snake' may now have completely supplanted the old literal term.
Kadagidze 1984: 373; Desheriyev 1953: 315 (transcribed as laħă).
Proto-Nakh:*laħi1
NCED: 787. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages (but possibly transformed into an archaism in Ingush at least). Replacements: Already in Proto-Vainakh, the word 'snake' must have acquired an expressive (figurative) synonym *bʕeːxu-l (> Chechen böːxalla, Ingush bʕexal), derived from *bʕeːxu- 'dirty'. (In [NCED: 1048] *bʕeːxu- and *bʕeːxu-l are considered to be two different roots that have contaminated with each other, but this suggestion is rather far-fetched: the derivation is quite transparent, and in Chechen, the derivate preserves both its original and figurative meanings). In modern Ingush, the new expressive term has all but ousted out the old word. The semantic derivation {'dirt' > 'snake'} is typologically not surprising (words for 'snake' are frequently formed from 'earth' and semantically similar words in the world's languages). Reconstruction shape: Correspondences for *laħi are quite regular; vocalic correspondences fit the scheme proposed for root structure *CaCi in [NCED: 99].
NED # 136. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Consonantal correspondences are regular and trivial. Ingush =itʼqʼ- reflects regular vowel assimilation under the influence of the suffix *-in; lack of similar assimilation in Chechen suggests ultimate provenance from a slightly different morphological variant *=utʼqʼ-an, but NED also lists such dialectal forms as Cheberlo =utʼqʼ-ĩ, Sharo =uytʼqʼ-ĩ, Akka =ütʼqʼ-a, all of which regularly reflect the same old stem *=utʼqʼ-in. Semantics and structure: The stem is originally verbal; cf. the "pure" root in Batsbi =utʼqʼ-dar 'to make (smth.) thin', etc.
NCED: 590. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular (including the narrowing *-o- > -u- in Ingush after labial consonants). Semantics and structure: The oblique stem, with vowel gradation, is reconstructed as *maxi-.
NED # 138. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular and trivial except for a not quite clear narrowing of the vowel in Chechen (a specific development triggered by the laryngeal cluster?); cf. the Pharcho dialect variant nʕana without this secondary change.
NCED: 968. Distribution: Preserved in all daughter languages. Reconstruction shape: Correspondences are regular. Semantics and structure: The oblique stem is reconstructible, with vowel gradation, as *ša-ri-.
Build tree