There are a great number of Armenian compound personal names with the element šah ‘king’ of Iranian origin (Middle Persian and New Persian šāh ‘king’). It occurs: (1) in both masculine and feminine ...names; (2) with both native Armenian and foreign components; (3) either as the first or the second component; (4) often in doublet forms with a reversed order of the components. For instance: masculine Šah-amir and Amir-šah, Šah-paron and Paron-šah, Vahram-šah; feminine: Šah-xat‘un and Xat‘un-šah, Šah-tikin. Also note masc. Šah-aziz vs. fem. Aziz-šah, masc․ Sult‘an-šah vs. fem. Šah-sult‘an, masc. Melik‘-šah vs. fem. Šah-melē/ik‘ (the latter is sometimes masculine, cf. Middle Persian > Syriac Šāh-malīk, also masculine ).
This paper aims to interpret two hapax legomena in which the component šah became synchronically unanalyzable due to phonological changes. In one of them, šah is the second member of the name (gen. Artamšin < *Artam-šah/y-in), whereas in the other it is the first one (Šaštʻi < *Šah-stʻi ‘Šah-Lady’).
This paper aims to present seven Armenian personal names of Iranian origin from the Armenian historical provinces of Siwnikʻ and Arcʻax: Dadi/Dadoy, Kohazat, Marhan, Mrhapet, Niw-dast, Niw-Xosrov, ...and *Oyz/Uz. These names are scantily attested in literature (almost all of them being hapaxes) and are, therefore, little known to scholarship.
Armenian čandari ‘plane tree’ Martirosyan, Hrach
Iran & the Caucasus,
01/2014, Letnik:
18, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
The Armenian word čandar-i appears in two basic meanings: ‘plane tree’ and ‘poplar, aspen’. It is attested in a Commentary on Genesis hesitantly attributed to Eɫišē. The other two attestations of the ...word come from authors originating from eastern parts of Armenia: Kirakos Ganjakec‘i (13th century) and Zak‘aria Sarkawag K‘anak‘eṙc‘i (17th century). Particularly important is the testimony from Chapter 21 of Ganjakec‘i who mentions čandari, the local equivalent of sawsi ‘plane tree’. The Iranian origin of čandar-i is obvious, though the etymological details are unclear. Łarabaɫ tənǰərí/ɛ́, which refers to both ‘plane tree’ and ‘poplar’ and is found in a late mediaeval Armenian dictionary, Baṙgirk‘ hayoc‘, derives from čandari through metathesis: čandari > *čəndərí > tənǰərí/ɛ́. The combined evidence from Ganjakec‘i, Baṙgirk‘ hayoc‘ and the Łarabaɫ dialect testifies to the existence and unbroken development of the word in the territory of Łarabaɫ and surroundings and shows that the metathesis (čandari > tənǰərí/ɛ́) took place at some stage between the 13th and 16-17th centuries.
The main purpose of this paper is to present lexical correspondences that unite Armenian with Greek and/or Indo-Iranian. They include shared innovations on the one hand, and isolated lexemes on the ...other. These two lexical corpora - lexical innovations on an inherited basis and isolated words - can be placed within the same temporal and spatial framework. After the Indo-European dispersal Proto-Armenian would have continued to come into contact with genetically related Indo-European dialects. Simultaneously, it would certainly also have been in contact with neighbouring non-Indo-European languages. A word can be of a substrate origin if it is characterized by: (1) limited geographical distribution; (2) unusual phonology and word formation; (3) characteristic semantics. The material presented here, albeit not exhaustive, allows to preliminarily conclude that Armenian, Greek, (Phrygian) and Indo-Iranian were dialectally close to each other. Within this hypothetical dialect group, Proto-Armenian was situated between Proto-Greek (to the west) and Proto-Indo-Iranian (to the east). The Indo-Iranians then moved eastwards, while the Proto-Armenians and Proto-Greeks remained in a common geographical region for a long period and developed numerous shared innovations. At a later stage, together or independently, they borrowed a large number of words from the Mediterranean / Pontic substrate language(s), mostly cultural and agricultural words, as well as animal and plant designations. On the other hand, Armenian shows a considerable number of lexical correspondences with European branches of the Indo-European language family, a large portion of which too should be explained in terms of substrate rather than Indo-European heritage. Adapted from the source document
The Armenian Patronymic Arcruni
Over the Mountains and Far Away: Studies in near Eastern History and Archaeology Presented to Mirjo Salvini on the Occasion of His 80th Birthday,
2019
Book Chapter
PDF
