Notes: Except for a secondary assimilation in PWC (*maq:ʷǝ < *naq:ʷǝ) correspondences are quite regular. Both semantically and phonetically the etymology seems quite plausible. Attempts to compare the Adygh forms with different Caucasian material (Osset. mäḳʷǝl / bäḳʷäl 'stack', Georg. magoli etc. - see Abayev 2, 85, or with Arch. maḳʷ 'thistle' - see Shagirov 1, 265) - seem in every respect less acceptable.
Abdokov (1983, 110-111) compares the EC forms with *-qʷa in PAK *xʷǝ(r)-qʷa 'chaff' (with *xʷǝ- 'millet' in the first part), whence Ad. (Bzhed.) fǝr-q:ʷa, Kab. xʷǝ-qʷa. Although the semantic match is exact, the phonetic side raises some questions (tense *q:ʷ would be expected in PAK). It is possible that *maq:ʷǝ 'hay' and *-qʷa 'chaff' actually represent a single root, with a secondary distortion within a compound with PAK *xʷǝ- 'millet'.