^{page 52 note 2} ‘The ancient language of Azerbaijan’, TPS, 1954.

^{page 52 note 3} A number of Iranian words used in Āzarbāijāni Turkish can be found in DrNavvabi's, Y.Zabān-e honuni-ye Āzarbaijān, Tabriz, 1954.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 4} Guyeš-e Karingān, Tehrān, 1954.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 5} ‘Guyeš-e Galin Qaya’, Farhang-e Irān zamin, V, 1.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 6} Tāti va Harzani, Tabriz, 1955.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 7} ‘Nokte'i cand az zabān-e Harzani’, Našriye-ye Dāneškade-ye adabiyāt-e Tabriz, VI, 3.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 8} See Henning, , op. cit., 166.Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 9} Kasravi, S. A., Āzari, 3rd ed., Tehrān, [1946].Google Scholar

^{page 52 note 10} [Dr. Yarshater, apparently, has not had access to A. A. Karang's pamphlet Khalkhālī, s.L, 1334, which concerns Kajalī.—W. B. H.]

^{page 54 note 1} Unlike northern Tāl. (see Miller, B. V., Talīšskiy yazīk, Moscow, 1953, 59), Shali evinces no interchange of g andγ.Google Scholar

^{page 55 note 1} cf. northern Tāl. j, ị ‘which’ (Av. katāma-) points to the same development.

^{page 56 note 2} op. cit., 64.

^{page 56 note 3} cf. Henning, , op. cit., 174.Google Scholar

^{page 56 note 4} cf. Miller, op. cit., 55, for numerous examples of the same development in Tāl.Google Scholar

^{page 56 note 5} Differently in Tal., where fr- produces h- with the loss of -r- normal in that dialect: hamue ‘to order’ (< fra-mā-), havate ‘to sell’ (MPers. fravaxlan), see Miller, op. cit., 54. An exception is Shāli pašara ‘day after to-morrow’, the second part of which goes back to fratāk (suggested by Professor Henning). Kaj. (h)ara ‘to-morrow’ and paš ‘back, behind’ leave no doubt about this etymology; cf. further Shān, and Māsāl, pašera, Cāl. pešarā, Tāk. sarā.

^{page 57 note 1} cf. further Har. espej, Karin. pež. For forms with š see Žukovskiy, Materiaī, II, 264, and Horn, Neitpers. Etym., s.v. supuš. Professor G. Morgenstierne sees the true Persian form with *s- in Baxtiyāri and Davāni šeš < *seš, s having been assimilated to š as in the case of Pers. šepeš < *sepeš. He considers teš and heš (in some Fārs dialects) as the outcome of a southern dialect form *θiš, and Baškardi hreš as a combination of hes and rešh ‘nit’.

^{page 57 note 2} cf. Miller, , op. cit., 53–5.Google Scholar

^{page 57 note 3} Unlike As., Kaj., Karg. where the two-case system exists also in the pi., dir. -e, obi. -ān, -ūn.

^{page 58 note 1} Note the same distinction in Shān., where -i is the sign of the obi., gusandi vāš bedeya, ce šeta sari begem; i tika nemek bexer.

^{page 58 note 2} cf. Miller, , op. cit., 103 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 58 note 3} No ‘ablative’ ending -o occurs in Shāli, Kul., or southern Tāl. The northern Tāl. form should, I think, be considered a shorter form of the postposition -rā etc. known from other dialects (Henning, v., op. cit., 174)Google Scholar, rather than a continuation of the old ablative, Av. (so Miller, , op. cit., 75, 91).Google Scholar

^{page 58 note 4} The only marked difference in Shān, is 3rd sg. ob]. ai, cf. Miller, , op. cit., 118.Google Scholar The secondary ‘accusative’ forms mịni, tịni, avi, etc. (ibid., 115–22) do not occur in either Shān, or Shāli.

^{page 58 note 5} Or, as Benveniste has now shown (BSL, XLVIII, 1, 1952, 52 ff.) ‘possessive’.Google Scholar

^{page 59 note 1} As generally in Tāk., which has lost its simple obi. pronouns (Henning, v., op. cit., 162).Google Scholar

^{page 60 note 1} In Kul. the Past Participle preserves its identity throughout, thus šiyeim(a), šiyeiš, šiyei, šiyeimān, šiyeiran, šiyeinde ‘I etc. have gone’. This agrees with Shān, perfect šeima, šeiša, ša, šeiinuna, šeiruna, šeina.

^{page 61 note 1} In general agreement with Tāl., cf. Miller, , op. cit., 135 ff. e-, o-, be-, da-, pe-; Shān., Tāl.-D also ve-, vi-, Shān. , ‘I take’.Google Scholar

^{page 61 note 2} See also Henning, , op. cit., p. ‘takes itself’.Google Scholar

^{page 64 note 2} Lit. ‘after lunch’.

^{page 65 note 1} cf. Pers. be faryād rasidan.

^{page 65 note 2} vaš ‘flame’; cf. Pers. alou gereftan.

^{page 65 note 3} A proverbial saying.

^{page 65 note 4} i.e. man-nam.

^{page 66 note 1} Lit. ‘put’.

^{page 66 note 2} Lit. ‘words’.

^{page 67 note 1} Versions in related dialects, see Gr. ir. Ph. I, 2, 376 ff.Google Scholar