Comments: Av. paradigm B or C (gen. mahdí-l); -d may be a result of partial contamination with another PEC root (see *qVdV), but as a whole Av. mehed is hard to separate from the Andian and EC root. *n- in PA is obviously secondary (an influence of the former medial *-n-).
Comments: Av. paradigm B (gen. nusí-dul). In some languages the root is also used within a distorted compound meaning 'spider' (see under *χwarVcV), cf., e.g., God. nusaχar. Cf. also Tind. is:qara-nis 'cobweb'. In the MSU recordings we find Cham. (U-Gakv.) nis 'loom': this is obviously the same word as nis: 'cloth' (recorded by Bokarev with a misspelling - or, perhaps due to contamination with a word reflected in Cham. Gig. as nis:u 'rope' and quite different etymologically: < PA *mirš:ʷi q.v.).
Comments: The Bagv. recording (in Leksika 1971) is obviously faulty instead of nakʷa (the And. word is also spelled there as nok:o). Unclear is the vowel -i- in Akhvakh.
Comments: Av. paradigm B (pl. nucá-bi). Most Andian languages do not distinguish the stems *nuco 'bride-groom' and *nusa 'bride' (q.v.), because of the regular merger of *-c- - *-s- and *-o - *-a. The two roots, however, are well opposed in Avar (nucál 'prince' /cf. also nucí-ja-w id./ vs. nus 'bride') and And. (nuso vs. nusa).
Comments: Av. paradigm B (pl. nusá-bi ). The Av. word was borrowed in Arch. nus-dur 'daughter-in-law' (with a suffixation typical for Archi kinship terms).
Comments: Cf. also Cham. Gig. mus:ija. The And. form (taken from Khaidakov 1973) is obviously misrecorded instead of *nus:ĩʔo (there is no -c- in Andian). Theoretically a reconstruction *ʔuns:inHV ( or *ʔums:inHV) is also possible; since the reflexes of this root are attested only in three languages, it is hard to choose between *ʔun- and *nu-.
Comments: Used only in conjunction with other deictic stems. Cf. And. ho-no-w,he-ne-w 'this', hi-n(i)-di-w, hi-n(i)-gi-w etc. 'that'. In Tind. and Cham. the stem is preserved only as vowel nasalisation (Tind. ã-b, Cham. hã-w 'this').
