Talk:շահպրակ

Persian

@Fay Freak, is Vullers saying the Persian -r- forms are due to the misreading of waw as resh? I don't understand his abbreviations and Latin. Vahag (talk) 22:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vahagn Petrosyan: In Vullers, Johann August (1856–1864) “شَهبوی”, in Lexicon Persico-Latinum etymologicum cum linguis maxime cognatis Sanscrita et Zendica et Pehlevica comparatum, e lexicis persice scriptis Borhâni Qâtiu, Haft Qulzum et Bahâri agam et persico-turcico Farhangi-Shuûrî confectum, adhibitis etiam Castelli, Meninski, Richardson et aliorum operibus et auctoritate scriptorum Persicorum adauctum‎^[1] (in Latin), volume II, Gießen: J. Ricker, page 484a Vullers gives for the nōmen commūne (“common noun”) شَهبوی defined as i.q. “the same as” شاه بوی (“amber”) defined previously by him (Vullers, Johann August (1856–1864) “شاه بوی”, in Lexicon Persico-Latinum etymologicum cum linguis maxime cognatis Sanscrita et Zendica et Pehlevica comparatum, e lexicis persice scriptis Borhâni Qâtiu, Haft Qulzum et Bahâri agam et persico-turcico Farhangi-Shuûrî confectum, adhibitis etiam Castelli, Meninski, Richardson et aliorum operibus et auctoritate scriptorum Persicorum adauctum‎^[2] (in Latin), volume II, Gießen: J. Ricker, page 394a) a verse also given by the Ferheng Suʕūrī (فرهنگ شعوری) from which he gathers the entry and says that “in this lexicon however for شهبوی falsely شهبری is read”, which apparently means that Vullers does not believe in a word ـبری (-barī) or ـپری (-parī) added to the king-morpheme meaning either amber or stock, though I instantly find it in an Ottoman private print of the very same Ferheng, what ever it says, perhaps شاهپری (šāhparī, “amber”) freely variated with شاهبوی (šāhbūy, “amber”) in living language, with a focus on either “a spirit”, “a witch”, “a fairy”, “a fair woman” (پری (parī) or “scent” (بوی (bōy, būy)) according to preference. It might mean that the middle form شهبری (šahbarī) is not true, but this variant could have had an independent life, like ساداوران (sādāwarān) existed then only explained by tradition rather than by morphologic transparence. But this is only for idealized Persian speakers themselves, not for Turks or Armenians who knew only enough Persian to appear educated, certainly not the complete Iranian flora.

So we are at the end of a textual variant complex in which people didn’t know what is true any more. Should we believe in شنبوی (šanbōy, “stock”) Vullers, Johann August (1856–1864) “شنبوی”, in Lexicon Persico-Latinum etymologicum cum linguis maxime cognatis Sanscrita et Zendica et Pehlevica comparatum, e lexicis persice scriptis Borhâni Qâtiu, Haft Qulzum et Bahâri agam et persico-turcico Farhangi-Shuûrî confectum, adhibitis etiam Castelli, Meninski, Richardson et aliorum operibus et auctoritate scriptorum Persicorum adauctum‎^[3] (in Latin), volume II, Gießen: J. Ricker, page 469b as an alt form of شب‌بوی (šabbōy)? Fay Freak (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I have resolved your unease about the r, this more likely occurred to an Armenian. Fay Freak (talk) 23:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)