COMMENT: The word is ultimately probably of Iranian origin (cf. especially the Lak. form), but may have been borrowed at a rather early (PEC?) stage. However, the PTs form can belong to another EC root (see *wɨse), which would make the PEC reconstruction of *bārʒV less reliable.
COMMENT: An expressive reduplicated root with some irregularities (reduplication conditioned a specific development of the medial cluster *-mb-); reconstructed for PEC.
COMMENT: A rather strange And.-Lezg. isogloss. We would not compare the two roots, but the phonetic correspondence is very much the same as in *bʕaltkē 'big hoofed animal' q.v. (i.e., PA *-rt- : PL *-lk- or *-rk-). The root can be an old loan from some unknown source.
COMMENT: Reconstructed for the PEC level. See Trubetzkoy 1922, 242. Abdokov (1983, 126) compares the EC root (including several unrelated Lezg. forms) with Kab. ṗṣ́ā-nṭa 'yard'. This can be true (alternative etymologies of the Kab. word - Kuipers 1960, 111 and Shagirov 2, 52 - are not convincing), if the first part of the Kab. word goes back to PWC *Pǝƛ̣a-; Kab. ṣ́, however, has many PWC sources, and without other WC data the etymology is still questionable (we must note that theoretically the Kab. form could be also compared with PEC *bŭlƛ̣V̆ 'house' q.v.).
COMMENT: Although not very widely represented, the root seems quite reliable (although we should note that in PL we would rather expect *meṭ, and the absence of regressive nasalisation is still to be explained). See also *ɦwVmṭV 'red'. Cf. Trubetzkoy 1930, 277.
COMMENT: For PEC an intermediate form *bēnŁ_wă must be reconstructed (with *Ł regularly < *g in a tense word). In PL we must assume a metathesis (*ƛ̣:ʷema < *meƛ̣:ʷa); otherwise the correspondences are regular. PWC demonstrates a usual delabialisation (*ɣʷ > w) after a labial consonant.
COMMENT: Reconstructed for the PEC level. A rare (but secure) case of the CVHVCV root structure. Cf. perhaps also Lak. (Khosr.) belsa ( = biIl-sa ? - Laki does not have an -e-vowel) 'a good mountain pasture'.
[In PWC one would expect a form like *bIV: in fact, there exists such a root with many meanings: 'thick(ness), big, bulge' etc. We attribute it to the common NC root *bV̆HV q.v. The reflex of *bǝHǝɫV could have, however, merged with *bV̆HV in PWC. Cf. in particular, cases like Ub. bIǝ-šá 'top of a hill' (ša 'head, top'), which could be directly related to PNC *bǝHǝɫV.]
COMMENT: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Medial -r- in Lak. is clearly secondary in this case (burču < *bučV-ru ?), because other languages do not show any trace of resonants.
COMMENT: Reconstructed for the PEC level. The situation is rather typical, as for most words of the CVCV structure with two stops: we observe metatheses (thus it is hard to choose between *bHaḳV and *ḳHabV) and as-/dissimilative processes. In this case it concerns the Lak. form (with progressive glottalisation) and the PL form: most probably the original *ḳHabV changed to *gHabV > PL *k:ap: through assimilation; later in a part of Lezghian dialects there occurred a new dissimilation (*k:ap: > *k:ap).
COMMENT: The PTs (Bezht.) form has undergone a metathesis (*ƛapV (with assimilation) < *ƛabV < *baƛV). It is much more difficult to explain the PA form with *-ƛ- (or *-ʎ-) instead of the expected *-ƛ̣:-; reasons for deglottalisation are not at all clear.
The root has probable correspondences in HU: Hurr. pōra-(m)mi, Ur. porā "slave" (with a typologically frequent semantic shift and a regular development *-Ł- > -r-), see Diakonoff-Starostin 1986, 16.
COMMENT: Reconstructed for the PEC level. An expressive root - however, with quite satisfactory correspondences.
In a few cases (cf. the root for "feather") labial initials get lost in Av. before a following laryngeal; if this is the case here, we could compare also Av. ħaṭ (gen. ħaṭú-l) "clay", Chad. ħaṭ (ħaṭí-l,ħaṭá-l) "dung".
COMMENT: The PA form has a suffixed -rV (probably originally plural), commonly present in many animal names. Correspondences are regular (except for the assimilative voicing in PWC).
COMMENT: Correspondences are plausible (in Darg. and Arch. there occurred an assimilation *b- > *p-; note that both forms reflect an identical old compound with *q_Hemdu 'crow' q.v.). Reconstructed for the PEC level.
COMMENT: Basically a PL root: the Darg. and Khin. forms can be explained as loans (respectively from Agul and Shakhdagh). The PEC antiquity is dubious.
