Talk:Ormuri

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 6 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zainachaudhry. Peer reviewers: Saraphina9666.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jaydeepodedra.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ř of Czech?

Is there a second source for this? Everywhere I've seen that claims this references the first reference of this article, which quotes someone else who describes the sound as "a voiceless trilled r of Czech (as in the name of the composer Antonin Dvorak)". However, the ř in Czech is normally voiced (and is voiced in Antonín Dvořák), is usually described and notated as raised [r̝] and contrasts with the non-raised r [r] in Czech in many common minimal pairs. Czech also has voiceless raised alveolar trill [r̝̊], through assimilation of voicing and allophonic to [r̝]; this seems to be how many are interpreting that rather ambiguous description of the Ormuri sound — see eg Arabic version of this article, which has a phonetic chart listing [r̝̊] — but I don't see much to support that interpretation.

The second reference seems to describe the sound as simply "dental trill" (page 87 in PDF, labelled 67) without comment on voicing, raising or any particular rarity; indeed, they also use it in a variant pronounciation of a Tirah Afridi Pashto word (p129 of PDF, labelled 111). Presumably by "dental trill" they mean [r] or possibly [r̥], not [r̝] or [r̝̊].

If it is true, it should probably be noted in the various articles that claim [r̝] is a uniquely Czech sound.

Sabik (talk) 03:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not Eastern Iranian

This language is certainly not Eastern Iranian. Whoever used Ethnologue as a source for it being Eastern Iranian didn't actually read it because Ethnologue states it is Northwestern Iranian. I think since Morgenstierne in the '20s or '30s, every subsequent linguist has demonstrated this language is Western. It is spoken in the east, but it is decidedly not an Eastern Iranian language... I don't even know how to change the mess that's on this page that indicates it as being Eastern Iranian... But there are at least six or seven sources placing Ormuri-Parachi amongst the (North)Western branch, and only one (Morgenstierne) placing it amongst the East. Morgenstierne was a fantastic Iranicist but some of his theories are horribly outdated at this point. For a discussion of the placement of this language, see Wendtland, A. (2009) The Position of the Pamir Languages within East Iran. Orientalia Suecana, LVIII. Pp. 172-188. (with references). Vindafarna (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent publication on the Parachi and Ormuri(Baraki) is "On the place of Ormuri and Parachi among the Iranian languages ..." by Artor Trafimov who compiled a Swadesh list and suggested an Eastern-Iranian classification. Effimov's work is the most extensive work on

Ormuri and Parachi and it happens to argue for a Western classification, but it does have some age now and it should be noted that Morgenstierne and Kieffer, the other biggest authorities, supported an Eastern classification. Kieffer up until his death of some years ago supported an Eastern classification. All in all - taking into account the geography of the languages and that at face value they sound Eastern Iranian - a South-Eastern classification should be given for Parachi and Ormuri. However, the wikipedia articles on Ormuri and Parachi should make mention of the conflicts in positioning them and the arguments that exist among both sides. Infact, these languages show that the archaic classification if the Iranian languages needs to be improved to fit in the anomalies like Ormuri-Parachu better as mentioned by Trafimov. 2607:FEA8:4ADF:8AB0:1C56:538B:CBA8:AE36 (talk) 19:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But look, here's the problem. There are two phonological isoglosses that distinguish the Eastern from the Western Iranian languages. Lenition of voiced stops word-initially, and fronting of /t͡ʃ/ to /ts/. Neither of those features are present in Ormuri-Parachi. So, what is the evidence for it being Eastern Iranian? It's like saying "hey, that whale has gills and a vertical tail." What is the evidence that it's a whale and not a shark if it demonstrates all of the features of a shark but is called a whale? I agree wholeheartedly with your assertion that Iranian languages need an update to their classification. But at this point, we have to work within the framework of an early East vs. West split. And Ormuri-Parachi really cannot be considered Western Iranian.

Vindafarna (talk) 15:47, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]