# Persian: Etymology of Fariftan



## Membre

Hello everyone!

It's been nagging me since a while, does anyone have any idea what the etymology of the Persian word fariftan is and it's derivates such as the name Fariba. Is it even Indo-European or is it a borrowing? I however I have my doubts about the latter considering it is of the few true/sheer verbs in Persian. 
P.S: If any of you know or have any speculations as to the Proto-Indo-European root (probably also starting with "p") that would be great!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Qureshpor

Here is a thread where this verb has been discussed. As for its etymology, fdb SaaHib, when he takes a look at this thread, would no doubt shed some light on your query.

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2348796


----------



## eskandar

The immediate etymology is the Pahlavi _frēftan._ Don't know what the PIE root might be, though.


----------



## Membre

Ok, thanks. Shortly after posting this I realised there was an Etymology/History of Language Category, would it be wiser to post it there?


----------



## fdb

New Persian firēftan belongs to the Iranian root *dab-, as in Avestan dab-, Skt dabh-, Ossetic dav- ‘to steal’, with the preverb fra-. The Persian development would be Old Persian *fra-δaba- > *frayaba- > Middle Persian frēb- > New Persian firēb-, with the perfect passive participle *fra-δaf-ta- > *frayafta- > MP frēft- > NP firēft.


----------



## Membre

Thanks a lot, I would never have guessed it evolved from a prefixed verb. Xoes the Iranian root *dab- derive from the same Proto-Indo-European root as "thief" (Proto-Germanic: *þiubaz)?  Also from where do most Persian words beginning with f come from?


----------



## Dib

A lot of far-/fir- words contain the reflex of the preverb fra- < *pra-.


----------



## fdb

The Germanic “thief” words seem to assume IE *teup-, which cannot very well be connected with Indo-Iranian *dabh-. In Persian, if you disregard loan words, you will notice that initial f- is almost always followed by an epenthetic vowel and then -r-. That is because they go back to something beginning with fr-, IE *pr-.


----------



## Membre

Thanks again, now that you mention it I notice that almost all verbs starting in f do have an epenthetic vowel (most often an "a" followed by an r) farmudan, ferestâdan...seem to have evolved from fra- prefixed form, which makes me wonder where non-initial f' se originated from. In Germanic they derive from p, in Latin from *dh usually. However in Persian their occurrence seems less easily traceable.


----------



## Dib

In Proto-Iranian, p, t, k spirantized to f, θ, x respectively before another consonant, including non-syllabic i and u, i.e. y and w.


----------



## fdb

Dib said:


> In Proto-Iranian, p, t, k spirantized to f, θ, x respectively before another consonant, including non-syllabic i and u, i.e. y and w.



In principle that is true. Specifically in New Persian non-initial f is almost exclusively in the cluster ft < pt, e.g. haft, like Greek hepta, Latin septem.


----------



## Dib

fdb said:


> *with the perfect passive participle *fra-δaf-ta- > *frayafta- > MP frēft- > NP firēft.*



I have a question about this. So, are you suggesting that the passive participle was "remade" in Iranian from dab-? Because, an inherited form would show effects of Bartholomae's law yielding *fra-dab-da-, right?

Btw, Pokorny (your answer seems to imply it's outdated - but just to confirm that) connects this word with the "smearing" root PIE *leip-; which explains the participle ft- easily, but I don't know if *fra-raip- > MP frēb is possible, or for that matter *fra-rif-ta- > MP frēft.


----------



## fdb

Dib said:


> I have a question about this. So, are you suggesting that the passive participle was "remade" in Iranian from dab-? Because, an inherited form would show effects of Bartholomae's law yielding *fra-dab-da-, right?



An astute observation. In Gatha-Avestan Bartholomae's law is fully operational, but in Young Avestan and Old Persian it is often neutralised by analogy. This is discussed (as far as Avestan is concerned) in Hoffmann/Forssman _Av. __Laut- u. Formenlehre_ pp. 95-6 (“Im Jaw. ist dagegen die Stimmlosigkeit des zweiten Lautes öfters analogisch wiederhergestellt; in solchen Fällen ist auch der erste Laut stimmlos“), with this very verb as one of the examples (Yav. dapta-, OP *dafta-, as opposed to Ved. dabdhá-). In Gatha-Avestan one would expect *daβδa-.




Dib said:


> but I don't know if *fra-raip- > MP frēb is possible, or for that matter *fra-rif-ta- > MP frēft.



I think the loss of the second r is not very likely.


----------



## Dib

Thanks for the explanations.


----------



## Membre

If p, t, k spirantised to f, θ, x, where do the s's in words like sâxtan and suxtan come from, Satemised k like in Persian sar (head) mirrored by its Ancient Greek equivalent κέρας (horn)?. Also where s is dominant in other Indo-European languages, Persian seems to have a x like in xōr (sōl) and xâhar (soror < swésōr). However this may be due to them both originating from a root starting with s. Also did the spirantised t's revert back to their initial form because although they survived in Avestan, there are no θ's in Persian.


----------



## fdb

IE *s becomes h in Iranian (in most positions), and *sw becomes hw and then (in some languages) xw. At a later stage IE *ḱ becomes s in Iranian and then (usually) ϑ in Old Persian, then h (initially s) in Middle and New Persian.


----------

