# F in Persian



## CyrusSH

Can it be considered as a single consonant? It seems there are just "fr", "ft", "fs" and "fš" in Persian.

Can it be said when in a Persian word "f" is combined with a vowel, this word is either a loan from another language or a Persian word with a different pronunciation?


----------



## desi4life

I think /f/ can be considered a single consonant in Persian. Some examples: _ferishteh_, _faryād, farmān, ferīb, farhang, safīd, xafeh, etc. _I don't believe any of these are loans or have alternate pronunciations.


----------



## berndf

I think he means Old and Middle Persian. For New Persian (*F*arsi) the question would make little sense.


----------



## CyrusSH

desi4life said:


> I think /f/ can be considered a single consonant in Persian. Some examples: _ferishteh_, _faryād, farmān, ferīb, farhang, safīd, xafeh, etc. _I don't believe any of these are loans or have alternate pronunciations.



But all of them are, from _frishta_ to _spid_ and _xapak_.


----------



## PersoLatin

CyrusSH said:


> Can it be considered as a single consonant? It seems there are just "fr", "ft", "fs" and "fš" in Persian.


Hi CyrusSH,
Can you explain what you mean, there are no examples, so are you talking about words like these: a*fr*uxt, â*ft*âb a*fs*ordé, a*fš*ân? If you are, then there are also "fz" in afzudan and "fk" in afkandan.



CyrusSH said:


> Can it be said when in a Persian word "f" is combined with a vowel, this word is either a loan from another language or a Persian word with a different pronunciation?


Please provide examples as this is not clear, as desi4life has shown there are many examples of "f" followed by soft vowels.


----------



## CyrusSH

berndf said:


> I think he means Old and Middle Persian. For New Persian (*F*arsi) the question would make little sense.



Also in New Persian (*P*arsi), original Persian words and arabicized Persian words are distinguishable.


----------



## CyrusSH

PersoLatin said:


> Hi CyrusSH,
> Can you explain what you mean, there are no examples, so are you talking about words like these: a*fr*uxt, â*ft*âb a*fs*ordé, a*fš*ân? If you are, then there are also "fz" in afzudan and "fk" in afkandan.
> 
> Please provide examples as this is not clear, as desi4life has shown there are many examples of "f" followed by soft vowels.



I mean the original forms of Persian words, that is _abzudan_, not _afzudan_ and _abgandan_, not _afkandan_.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> Also in New Persian (*P*arsi), original Persian words and arabicized Persian words are distinguishable.


Whatever you call the sound shift, it has happened and in Modern Persian it is /f/ and not /p/.


----------



## ahvalj

_kaf _(کف - Wiktionary) _< *kapʰas_ (cp. Sanskrit _kaphaḥ — Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit_).


----------



## CyrusSH

ahvalj said:


> _kaf _(کف - Wiktionary) _< *kapʰas_ (cp. Sanskrit _kaphaḥ — Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit_).



But that is from the verb _kaftan_, it can be compare to _waf_ that we discussed here: Persian waf- (to weave)


----------



## ahvalj

No, that's part of the general Iranic process: along with _f, ϑ _and _x_ from assibilation of voiceless stops, Iranic has independent voiceless fricatives corresponding to the Indic voiceless aspirated stops, i. e. _f : ph, ϑ : th _and _x : kh._ I don't have more Persian examples, but compare Avestan _safa-_ and Sanskrit _saphaḥ_ (शफ - Wiktionary). Also cp. the Avestan _kafa-_ (to _kaf_).


----------



## CyrusSH

ahvalj said:


> No, that's part of the general Iranic process: along with _f, ϑ _and _x_ from assibilation of voiceless stops, Iranic has independent voiceless fricatives corresponding to the Indic voiceless aspirated stops, i. e. _f : ph, ϑ : th _and _x : kh._ I don't have more Persian examples, but compare Avestan _safa-_ and Sanskrit _saphaḥ_ (शफ - Wiktionary). Also cp. the Avestan _kafa-_ (to _kaf_).



I also want to know the reason, about _hoof_ (Avestan _safa-_ and Sanskrit _saphaḥ_), in Persian there is _kafš_.

About Persian _waf_, I also mentioned Avestan _vaf_ with the same meaning, but it is not clear these two have the same origin because the original Persian word didn't have "f".


----------



## ahvalj

If you mean the reason of this fricativization (not assibilation: I used the wrong word), that's a matter of dispute — some people regard is as part of the general Iranic fricativization: the voiceless stops became fricatives before a laryngeal as before any other consonant and later, when the laryngeal disappeared, the language received independent voiceless fricatives (i. e. _*sapḫas>*safḫas>safa-_) — others prefer to separate this from the fricativization and believe that Common Indo-Iranic developed a set of voiceless aspirated stops parallel to the inherited voiced ones: both sets persisted in Indic (they have actually persisted there to this day), while Iranic merged voiced aspirated stops with simple ones (_*bʰ : *b > b : b_) whereas voiceless stops (perhaps because the aspiration was stronger in them since it had developed from laryngeals) had a special development. The second scenario seems more plausible if we compare it with the situation in Slavic where there is no general fricativization of the Iranic type, yet _*kḫ>x_ (e. g. соха - Wiktionary).


----------



## CyrusSH

I actually meant, as we know that's part of the general Iranian process, but why in Persian "f" doesn't seem to be independent? We have even p>f sound change in Persian, like _drafš_ (flag, standard) which is cognate with French _drapeau_.


----------



## ahvalj

If I understand it correctly, the independent _f<*pʰ_ emerged in a very limited number of words, the remaining _f<p _was positionally conditioned (before a consonant) and, unlike in some other languages where _f_ emerged from _p_ of from _xʷ,_ Persian didn't have this source, so _f_ has remained rather marginal: what you have now mostly comes from metathesis (_framānā>farmān>färmån, _cp. Sanskrit _pramāṇā_ — Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit) or from Arabic loans.

The change Avestan _drafša-<*drapsas,_ cp. Sanskrit _drapsaḫ_ (Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit) is part of the same process of fricativization of voiceless stops before other consonants. It was not an independent _p_ that changed into _f_ (like it happened later in Sarmatian → Ossetic): this was a conditioned shift, before a consonant.


----------



## berndf

CyrusSH said:


> which is cognate with French _drapeau_.


I wouldn't be so sure. The probable etymon of drap is PIE *_dhrebh, hit, kill._ I don't know the root of_ درفش. _Could be the same but you should not take it for granted.


----------

