In this paper, I discuss the open issue of the phylogenetic position of Parachi and Ormuri among other Iranian languages. Based on data from freshly constructed annotated 110-item Swadesh lists of Parachi and Ormuri compared with the same list as tentatively reconstructed for the Proto-Iranian stage (including additional synonyms with Western or Eastern areal distribution), I conclude that Parachi and Ormuri more probably align with the Eastern Iranian branch of languages. This is primarily concluded from the fact that Parachi and Ormuri show correlations with secondary synonyms of Eastern origin. It is important to note that phonetic isoglosses are not nearly as indicative, since Parachi and Ormuri show both Western and Eastern peculiarities; however, the prosodic systems of these languages are strongly reminiscent of the one attested in Pashto and preserving the Proto-(Indo)-Iranian system better than any other Iranian language. These conclusions support Morgenstierne’s original opinion on the Eastern character of Parachi and Ormuri; on the other hand, Morgenstierne's assumption of the existence of a separate Southeastern Iranian group requires additional confirmation.
[1]
Georg Morgenstierne,et al.
A New Etymological Vocabulary of Pashto
,
2003
.
[2]
George Starostin,et al.
From wordlists to proto-wordlists: reconstruction as “optimal selection”
,
2016
.
[3]
D. A. Rees.
Towards Proto-Persian : an Optimality Theoretic historical reconstruction
,
2008
.
[4]
J. Cheung.
Etymological dictionary of the Iranian verb
,
2007
.
[5]
R. Segal,et al.
IN DEFENSE OF THE COMPARATIVE METHOD
,
2001
.
[6]
G. Morgenstierne.
Etymological vocabulary of the Shughni group
,
1974
.
[7]
R. Turner,et al.
A Comparative Dictionary Of The Indo Aryan Languages Fasc-x
,
1966
.
[8]
G. Morgenstierne.
Report on a linguistic mission to Afghanistan
,
1926
.
[9]
G. Grierson.
The Ōrmurī, or, Bargistā language : an account of a little-known eranian dialect
,
1918
.