Notes: The root is, actually, an Avar-Nakh isogloss (the Darg. form may be borrowed). However, the correspondences seem to be regular and the PEC form can be reconstructed (although with some doubt). Neither PN nor Av. have Inlaut resonants here, but the presence of *-r- or *-l- is suggested by the correspondence -χ- : -q:- (without the resonant -q- would be preserved in PN).
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. As an independent pronoun this root probably served for the direct base of the inanimate pronoun 'what'; it also served as the root of the derived PEC *čw[ĕ]-mV 'how much' and in some other derived interrogative pronouns.
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. An expressive root with two stops - which explains the assimilation of the first consonant to the second in PC and PD.
We should also mention PL *č:ʷiq̇ 'buttock, anus' (Tab. ǯ̌uq̇, Ag. Fit., Burk. ǯuq̇) and Lak. cuq (pl. cuqa-l) 'hole' - they may be considered as irregular reflexes of the same expressive root.
Notes: Reconstructed for PEC. Correspondences are regular (except the vowel in Lak.: š:ama instead of š:ima. Perhaps the Lak. form reflects *č_wä̆mpV with assimilative labialisation).
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Correspondences are regular (-H- indicated by Lak. pharyngealization). In PL we should expect a paradigm *č:äl, *č:ilɨ-; the oblique base obviously superseded the former direct one.
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Correspondences are regular (some doubts are raised by PTs *-ɔ-: one would rather expect *-o-). Cf. also Hurr. šāri(y)-annǝ 'coat of mail' ( > Akkad. š/sirijām, Hebr. sirjōn), see Diakonoff-Starostin 1986, 42.
It is tempting to compare the reconstructed form *č_ɦǝ̄rV with East Iranian forms meaning 'coat of mail', 'armour': Osset. zɣär / äsqär, Afg. zɣara etc. (see Abayev 1989, 309), which are etymologically rather obscure. A more recent loan from Nakh is Osset. c̣ar / c̣arä 'skin, bark' (see Abayev 1958, 330).
Shagirov (1983, 134) compares the Lezg. forms with some WC forms meaning 'milk'; this is obviously wrong, both for semantic reasons (the meaning 'cream' in some Lezg. languages is secondary) and for phonetic reasons (see the discussion under PNC *rħăƛwV).
Notes: An And.-Lezg. isogloss. Not certain because of poor attestation in Lezghian. It is possible that this is the same root as PNC *čVrčV (/ *č̣Vrč̣V) 'lizard, snake, worm' q.v., but with expressive phonetic transformations (the semantic derivation "worm" <> "red" is rather usual typologically).
Notes: One of the few expressive verbal stems with the structure CVCV, demonstrating numerous metatheses and irregularities. Precise PEC is rather difficult (but it is not excluded that the root is an expressive derivate from *=Vwq_V 'to scratch, scrape' q.v.).
Notes: A cultural word, spread in many Caucasian languages (cf. also PK *(m)č̣ad- 'bread' > Old Georg. č̣adi, Georg. mč̣adi; Georgian is the immediate source of Gunz. č̣ɔdɔ 'corn bread'), Osset. c̣ata 'bran' (see Abayev 1958, 330). Some irregularities (loss of glottalisation in Av., Bezht., Darg., weakening *č:- > č- in Avar, assimilation *č- > č̣- in PL) are probably due to the root's structure (these are processes frequently occurring in roots containing two stops); some of them, however, can be explained by interlingual borrowing. Above we have listed reflexes that are most likely to be genuine. Besides them, there are more or less obvious loanwords: Lak. čut:u 'cake', Chech. čutta 'stuffed boiled cake', Av. čudú id., Lezg. küt ( < *čʷit) 'a k. of bread'. Judging from the phonetic side, all of these words have ultimately a Dargwa source (PD *čut:ʷi, see above).
Notes: One of the most reliable and stable common NC lexemes. The PWC form has a prefixed *ma- of somewhat obscure origin; the labialisation of *c̣ʷ must be explained either by the labialising influence of *m- or by the former oblique base vocalism *-ŭ- (suggested by PL obl. base *c̣ojɨ- / *c̣a(j)-rV-). See Trubetzkoy 1930, 276; Abdokov 1983, 98.
Many languages reflect an old oblique base formed with the *-rV suffix (*c̣aj-rV-), cf. PN *c̣ari-, PA *c̣ari- (reflected in Akhv. č̣ari), Lak. *c̣ara-, PL *c̣a(j)-rV-. The same stem with reduplication is probably reflected in PL *c̣arc̣ar 'luster, glitter' (Tab., Lezg. c̣arc̣ar) exactly corresponding to PAT *cǝrǝcǝrǝ 'to glitter' (Abkh. a-cǝrcǝr-ra, Abaz. cǝrcǝr-ra) (with the same loss of glottalisation and absence of labialisation as in *mǝca 'fire').
Another old derivate of the same root is probably PNC *c̣aj-lV 'brilliance, lightning' reflected in PN *stēla (~*sṭ-) ( > Chech. stēla-ʕad 'rainbow', stēla-χäštig 'lightning', /Usl./ stēla 'thunder', Ing. sela-ʕad 'rainbow'), Lak. c̣aj 'brilliance, glitter', PD *c̣ala (Ak. c̣ala 'sparkle', Chir. c̣ala-laIm 'lightning') and PAK *c̣ǝ-wǝ- (with a verbal stem *-wǝ-) 'to shine, glitter' (Ad. Bzhed. c̣ǝ-wǝ-, Kab. c̣ǝ-wǝ-). Note that *-j, having passed to word-medial position in PN, has caused the shift *c̣- > *st- (*sṭ-); note also the absence of labialisation in PAK *c̣ (without the prefixed *mV-).
Notes: As seen from the Lak. and Darg. forms, the use of this root with class prefixes (*w-, reflected in Av. and Ud.) is probably secondary. Medial *-w- is reflected in Darg. as -b- and in PWC as labialisation. Pharyngealisation in Dargwa may be secondary (expressive); if it is not, *c̣HĂwnV should be reconstructed. See Абдоков 1983, 142.
Notes: Correspondences are quite regular, but there is not enough information to reconstruct the vocalism (we can only say that the first vowel was short and back).
Notes: Reconstructed for the PEC level. Although the root is not widely spread outside Nakh, it is no doubt archaic: cf. Hurr. zur-gi 'blood' (see Diakonoff-Starostin 1986, 44).
Notes: PN *psiḳ goes back to a form *ć̣wä̆ḳǝ̆ with shifted labialisation. Some irregularities (shifting or loss of labialisation, as well as metatheses) are explained by the root's expressive character.
Notes: An expressive reduplicated root. The development in PN is irregular (-nc̣- in Chech. instead of expected -tt-), which should be obviously explained by the root's expressive nature. The root is similar phonetically and semantically to *c̣ŏc̣V 'tip, spout' (q.v.), and the two roots could have merged in some subgroups.
