Meaning:1 below, down 2 locative suffix (Sub series)
Lezghian:-k 2
Tabasaran:-k: 2; k:- prev.
Agul:-k: 2; k:- prev.
Rutul:-k 2
Tsakhur:-k 2
Kryz:-k 2; k- prev.
Budukh:-k 2
Archi:-ƛ̣: 2
Udi:oq:a 1
Comment: In the adverbial use the root *ƛ̣:i- is preserved only in Archi and Budukh (Arch. ƛ̣:i-r, Bud. ko-rǝ with a not quite clear vowel reflex). All languages reflect the stem in the function of the locative suffix (in Udi - only within the adverb o-q:a 'below', formed from a pronominal stem). Most languages also reflect the same morpheme as a preverb (meaning 'below'): Lezg. ḳ(ʷ)-, Tab. k:-, Ag. k:-, Rut. g-, Tsakh. g-, Kryz. k-.
See Alekseyev 1985, 55, 119 (Alekseyev lists also the Bud. preverb č-, which is probably different in origin: cf. Bud. ače, Kryz. äčä 'below').
Comment: Cf. also Tab. Düb. gič̣i 'fright'. Despite its functioning as a verb in Rut. and Arch. (with a defective paradigm: only dur. ƛ̣:inč̣a-r), the stem is obviously nominal (even in Archi there are compounds like ƛ̣:inč̣as: eχmus 'to be afraid' - with a dative case of *ƛ̣:inč̣ 'fright'). Medial *-m- must be reconstructed on the evidence of Archi -n- (original *-n- can not be reconstructed because it would have been preserved in other languages, while *-m- regularly disappears in this position). Initial *ƛ̣:- gives regular reflexes everywhere except Lezg., Tab. and Ag., where dissimilations occurred before the following glottalized affricate. The oblique base is not quite clear (but probably *ƛ̣:imč̣a- on the basis of the archaic Archi ƛ̣:inč̣a- in ƛ̣:inč̣a-s:). The word belongs to the 4th class in Tsakhur.
Historically *ƛ̣:imč̣ is a compound of *ƛ̣:ij 'fright' (q.v.) with *Himč̣ (cf. the external evidence), not preserved separately.
Comment: The word has no parallels within the Lezghian family (from Tab. dialects cf. also Düb. ǯuv 'root'), but (assuming that Tab. č: here regularly goes back to PL *ƛ̣: before a front vowel) has very good external cognates.
Meaning:1 shoulder-blade 2 foreleg (of animal) 3 arm 4 hip
Lezghian:ḳul 1
Tabasaran:k:ül 2
Agul:k:ul 2 (K.)
Rutul:gɨl 2
Tsakhur:gɨvɨ 2
Kryz:kɨl 3
Budukh:kɨl 3
Archi:ƛ̣:ol 1,2
Udi:q:ul 4
Comment: Cf. also Lezg. Khl. k:ɨl 'shoulder-blade', k:(ɨ)l-ar 'back'; Kryz. kel-kiǯ. 'armful', Bud. kǝlkiǯ 'under one's arm' (originally a subessive form). 4th class in all class-distinguishing languages. Obl. base *ƛ̣:ola- (cf. Lezg. ḳula-, Khl. k:la-, Tab. k:üli-); the Tsakh. reflex goes back to a suffixed *ƛ̣:olV-j.
Comment: Cf. also Lezg. Khl. k:ɨn 'wedge', Tab. Düb. gum, Ag. Fit. k:um 'peg'. Obl. base *ƛ̣:ona- or *ƛ̣:onä- (cf. Lezg. ḳuna-). The original meaning must have been 'small bone of leg, ankle' with different later developments. The stem has a variant *wo-ƛ̣:on(a) ( > Rut. wɨgɨn) where *w- can be regarded as a class prefix.
Comment: Close semantics and phonetics does not allow to separate the Tab. form from Ag. They reflect a PL variation between *ƛ̣:ʷ ( > Ag. k:ʷ) and *ƛ̣ʷ (> Tab. ḳʷ). Judging from the external parallels, original is the first variant; reasons for the affricate's weakening in Tab. are yet unclear (contamination with some other root?).
Comment: Cf. also Lezg. Khl. k:am 'ravine, stream' - pointing unambiguosly to *ƛ̣:. Because of this any possibility of borrowing from Ossetian kom 'mouth; ravine' (suggested in Abayev 1958, 598-599) is excluded.
Comment: An expressive reduplicated stem (with expressive suffixes: *-Vk:/*-Vj), and somewhat irregular development; nevertheless, the reconstruction of *ƛ̣:ʷ seems secure. Cf. also Lezg. Kub. ḳʷarḳʷalag, Tab. Kand. k:erk:eleg, Ag. Fit. k:ʷedk:ʷedaj id. (the Agul forms, cited from Shaumyan, may represent a partial contamination with another expressive PL stem, *ḳʷVṭḳʷVṭ- q.v.).
Comment: Rut. and Tab. point to *-o- in the first syllable; other languages reflect a common assimilation of the first vowel to the second. 4th class in Rut., 3d class in Kryz. and Bud.
Comment: The original meaning is preserved in Archi (cf. external parallels); in other languages we observe a semantic shift *'light metal' > 'light, white'.
Comment: The Tsakh. word is quoted from Aslanov 1975, 257, where it is glossed as "sheep slaughtered in its turn by the flock's owners or share-holders after the exhaustion of meat resources". We can not exclude the possibility of its borrowing from some southern Avar dialect; however, the Lezg. word seems to be genuine.
