Notes: An interesting common NC root. Phonetically it is one of a few roots with the structure HRVHV. Semantically it also presents some interesting features. The original meaning was most probably 'smell, odour' with two subsequent semantic developments: a) > 'mint' (as 'odorous grass') and b) > 'expiration, movement of air' > 'cry, moan' (only in Nakh).
Perhaps we should also relate to this root Lak. jaj 'a k. of grass' (пажитник) and Khin. jenje-č 'caraway' (if these forms can be traced to an intermediate structure *HinHV < *HimHV).
The root *HmĭɦwV probably served as basis for deriving PEC *miɦwVrV 'a k. of odorous grass' (q.v.), which perhaps in this case should be reconstructed as *HmĭɦwV-rV.
See Abdokov 1983, 98 (containing also a suggestion of a possible etymological connection between *HmĭɦwV 'smell' and PEC *mɨ̆ɦwVlV 'nose' q.v.).
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. The root structures correspond well, but due to metatheses and verbal Ablaut, the vocalism is rather hard to reconstruct.
Notes: The EC-WC comparison is quite probable. However, there is one irregularity: in PWC we would expect tense -c:- (because the correlation of root structures - PN *HVRCV : PL *mVRCV points to the original structure with long final vowel, *HmVrʒĀ).
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Although the root is preserved only in four languages (Bezht., Lak., Darg. and Khin.), they all belong to different subgroups, and the reconstruction seems quite reliable - both semantically and phonetically (the only irregularity is metathesis in Lak., which is a frequent phenomenon).
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. It is hard to establish whether the original meaning was 'bee' (preserved only in Lak.) or 'sweet' (and 'bee' in Lak. metaphorically as 'sweet-maker'). One of the rare cases of the root structure *HRVHV. In PL (Tab.) m- is the result of secondary labialisation (*neHwV- > *meHwV-).
Notes: A Nakh-Lezg. isogloss. The root structure *HNVRCV̆ regularly yields PN *RVCV (r- > d-) and PL *RVCV; we do not reconstruct *rHVCV̆ (*rHɨ̆kwV) because Nakh does not have any trace of laryngeal.
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. There are some irregularities: a) PN has -q- instead of expected *-ħ- - maybe this can be explained by a contamination with the homonymous *nāqa 'breast' (q.v.) - 'palate' as 'breast of mouth' ? b) PD has *χ instead of expected *χ:. This may be explained by the influence of the phonetically similar PEC root *χɦwɨ̆mχV 'cheek' q.v. (note an analogous contamination in Avar; however, note also that this contamination in PD must have taken place rather early, because the reflex of *χɦwɨ̆mχV - PD *χIʷaχI - has in PD already acquired the meaning 'buttock').
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Despite some influence of other verbal roots (see above), the root seems to be independent and the reconstruction looks rather probable. Note that the root has a laryngeal Anlaut and does not have prefixed class markers.
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Some interlingual loans: Bezht. holo < Avar.; Darg. Ak. hulu-qara 'lentil' (qara 'pea') < Lak.; other adduced forms are genetically related.
The final vowel is not quite clear; PL points to *-ā, Av. - to *-ū. Since we have to reconstruct -w- (to account for the reflex *-o- in PA, and possibly for *-e- in PC), we may conjecture that final *-ā passed to *-ū in Av. under influence of the medial -w-.
Notes: Despite some assimilations (quite usual for stems with two stops), the correspondences are quite regular and the PNC reconstruction is quite probable. Not quite clear, though, is -r- in the PA form: *borto may go back to *bot(V)-ro with an original suffixation. It is interesting to note initial ħe- in the Av. form, corresponding to Arch. pharyngealization and speaking in favour of the initial cluster *Hp- in PNC.
Note also Chech. bedar (Cheb. badir) "clothes" which is probably a loan from Western Daghestan languages (loss of *-d- would be regularly expected).
Notes: Darg. has a metathesized form (*lap instead of *pal). Not clear is the Lak. initial p:- (perhaps, a bad recording of a dialectal form?); p- should be expected. The original meaning of the root must have been "pipe; kennel" - cf. also related HU forms: Hurr. pala, Ur. pīlǝ "canal" (see Diakonoff-Starostin 1986, 16) - but in several subgroups a semantic shift "pipe" > "blood vessel, sinew" took place.
