# Etymology of Iranic "3" - "se"



## arn00b

Several Iranian languages use the word "se" for the number three.   The etymology of this word is apparently PIE *tréyes, but I don't understand the process of how this came to be, nor do I see any intermediate stages referenced.

The only thing I see is the vowel.  Where did the s come from?   A prefix?  Or from the t > s?  Where did the r go?

And when did this change happen?  It must have happened later (that is, not in prehistory) because some Iranian languages don't use "se" for three, using words with d/t and r.  So how did the "se" form come to be widespread?  Parallel development or borrowing from innovative sister language?

The form for 30 is similar ("si" in Persian) but PIE *tres- (to tremble with fear; the closest word I could find to *tréyes) produces tars in Persian and tirs in Kurdish.
What explains this irregularity?


----------



## Testing1234567

Which Iranian languages? The forms are quite different within the Iranian languages.

Eastern Iranian languages: It is *θri* in Avestan, *drai* in Khotanese, *ærtæ* in Ossetian, and *dre* in Pashto.
Western Iranian languages: It is *sey* in Balochi, *sê* in Kurdish, *se* in Mazanderani, and *se* in Persian.
So as we see, the *s-* is from the Western Iranian languages.

Anyway, the PIE form is **tréyes*, which gave Proto-Indo-Iranian **tráyas* (**tri-*). The **t* later underwent lenition to give **θ/*ts*. In Old Persian, the word became *çi-* (maybe pronounced */tsi-*/). In Middle Persian, we have *sē*. This means that the **r* must have disappeared before going to Old Persian (try pronouncing **sr-*).

The etymon for 30 in PIE is **tri(d)ḱomt* (whence Latin *trīgintā*), which should give rise to Proto-Indo-Iranian **triĉamt* (compare Sanskrit *triṃśát*) and then Proto-Iranian **trisamt*. I failed to find the Old Persian term, but the Middle Persian term is *sīh*, meaning that the *s* must be from the **t-* and the *h* must be from the **s*. Indeed, **s* in Proto-Iranian does correspond to *h* in Persian.



arn00b said:


> What explains this irregularity?


Some words change more than other words, even in the same language. In this case, it might be because the words are frequently used. The more irregular words tend to be the most highly-used words.

In the case of PIE **tres-* > Persian *tars*, this might be that the metathesis happened before the lenition of **t-* before other consonants.


----------



## ahvalj

Testing1234567 said:


> which should give rise to Proto-Indo-Iranian **triĉamt* (compare Sanskrit *triṃśát*) and then Proto-Iranian **trisamt*. I failed to find the Old Persian term, but the Middle Persian term is *sīh*, meaning that the *s* must be from the **t-* and the *h* must be from the **s*. Indeed, **s* in Proto-Iranian does correspond to *h* in Persian.


The Avestan form is _ϑrisant._ I wonder what is the origin of the Middle Persian long vowel.

The Proto-Indo-European triconsonantal roots experienced the so called Schwebeablaut when the vowel could appear either before or after the middle consonant, e. g. _*ters-~tres-._ For this root both forms are attested, e. g. Latin _terror<*tersōs,_ _torreō<torseı̯ohₐ,_ so apparently these Iranic forms represent the variant with the vowel between _t_ and _r._


----------



## fdb

The development of IE *tr > Iranian ϑr > Persian s is regular; compare Skt putra-, Avestan puϑra-, Middle Persian pus. Hence the correspondence of Skt tray-, Avestan ϑraii-, Persian sē.

For “fear” we can assume IE zero-grade *tṛs, full-grade *tres and *ters (Schwebeablaut, as ahvalj has explained). These give Iranian tṛš, ϑrah and tarš respectively. The present stem is from the IE inchoative *tṛs-sḱe- > Ir. *tṛsa- > MP tirs-. New Persian tars- has its vowel by analogy to words formed from the full-grade stem.


----------



## Testing1234567

I wonder where the nasal of the Sanskrit word *triṃśát* came from.


----------



## fdb

Testing1234567 said:


> I wonder where the nasal of the Sanskrit word *triṃśát* came from.



Evidently from that in viṁśati-, where it is etymological. Thence it spread to the words for 30 and 40.


----------



## Testing1234567

fdb said:


> Evidently from that in viṁśati-, where it is etymological. Thence it spread to the words for 30 and 40.


I do not see how PIE **dwi(h₁)dḱm̥ti* (20) accounts for the nasal in Sanskrit...


----------



## fdb

Testing1234567 said:


> I do not see how PIE **dwi(h₁)dḱm̥ti* (20) accounts for the nasal in Sanskrit...




*winḱṃtī- > Iranian *winsati > Digor инсæй, Iron ссæдз, as proposed by Henning, Emmerick and others.


----------



## Testing1234567

fdb said:


> *winḱṃtī- > Iranian *winsati > Digor инсæи, Iron ссæи, as proposed by Henning, Emmerick and others.


Where does the *n* in *wi*n*ḱṃtī- come from? The other Indo-European languages do not have any *n* in this location...


----------



## fdb

*widḱṃtī-  > *winḱṃtī- according to the above-mentioned scholars.


----------



## Testing1234567

Thank you.


----------



## ahvalj

That would suggest dialectal divergence within Proto-Indo-European. The long vowel in _vīgintī_ is supposed to have originated from *_hₑu̯i-hₑkʲm̥t-ihₑ,_ where the first two _hₑ _(glottal stops?) seem to have emerged as allegro-outcomes of _d_ (actually the preglottalized _ʾt_) which had lost its occlusion in both parts of this compound. Apparently, the Indo-Iranic _n_ reflects a different development, the one with a nasal dissimilation _*ʾtkʲ>*nkʲ_. Both forms would then have come from _*ʾtu̯i-ʾtkʲm̥t-ihₑ_ "two tens".


----------



## PersoLatin

fdb said:


> The development of IE *tr > Iranian ϑr > Persian s is regular; compare Skt putra-, Avestan puϑra-, Middle Persian pus.


Avestan *puϑra*- and Middle Persian *pus*, mean boy or son, and in New Persian it is پسر - *pesar*, so how or why did /r/ get back into the word?


----------



## fdb

This is a slightly complicated business. In (early) Middle Persian the words for “father, mother, son, brother” etc. still have distinct forms for the direct and oblique cases.

The word for “father” is an IE -r stem. MP direct pid is from OP nom. s. pitā < *pitā(r), and MP obl. pidar is from OP acc. s. pitaram.

The word for “son” is a thematic -a stem. MP direct pus is from OP acc. s. puçam < puϑram < putram. The MP obl. form adds -ar to this, by analogy to the MP oblique forms pidar, mādar etc., giving pusar > NP pisar.


----------



## PersoLatin

fdb said:


> This is a slightly complicated business


Thanks fdb, this is complicated & I think I can understand some but not all of it.

The part I think I understand, is that the /r/ in the Persian pusr and equally in pidar and mādar, came via the route you explained, but I don't understand where the /r/ comes from in mother & father, in say English/Spanish/Greek? I'd always assumed (wrongly?), that the three key letters which made father cognates in these four languages where, p/f, d/t and r.


----------



## fdb

All of these words (father, mother, brother, sister) have /r/ as part of the root. The word for “son” (*putra-) also had an /r/, but in Persian it merged with the preceding consonant to give tr > ϑr > ç > s. The “visible” /r/ at the end of pusar is secondary (by analogy to pidar etc.). Does that make it any clearer?


----------



## PersoLatin

fdb said:


> Does that make it any clearer?


I'm afraid it doesn't, not yet at least, I'm sure it will once I spent some time going over the basics of linguistic terminology & convention. Many thanks fdb.


----------



## desi4life

fdb said:


> The development of IE *tr > Iranian ϑr > Persian s is regular; compare Skt putra-, Avestan puϑra-, Middle Persian pus. Hence the correspondence of Skt tray-, Avestan ϑraii-, Persian sē.



Based on your explanation, shouldn't _miϑra_- have become become *_mis _in Middle Persian instead of _mihr_?


----------



## fdb

desi4life said:


> Based on your explanation, shouldn't _miϑra_- have become become *_mis _in Middle Persian instead of _mihr_?



Mihr, puhr, šahr and many others are North-West Iranian borrowings in Persian.


----------



## Treaty

fdb said:


> Mihr, puhr, šahr and many others are North-West Iranian borrowings in Persian.


Is this conclusion because:
- the MP is considered the direct descendant of Achaemenid OP (with _č_ instead of _ϑr_), so that MP _-hr_ variants must have been NW (Median/Parthian) borrowings,
or
- there are numerous other traces of [s/č] change in New SW dialects?

Also, is _harās_ (fear), from MP _ahrās_ another example of this shift?


----------



## desi4life

fdb said:


> The word for “son” is a thematic -a stem. MP direct pus is from OP acc. s. puçam < puϑram < putram. The MP obl. form adds -ar to this, by analogy to the MP oblique forms pidar, mādar etc., giving pusar > NP pisar.



@fdb In addition to _pisar_, Persian/Urdu also have _pūr. _Is _pūr _a North-West Iranian borrowing in Persian with assimilation of _h_, i.e. *_puhr_>_pūr_?


----------



## fdb

desi4life said:


> @fdb In addition to _pisar_, Persian/Urdu also have _pūr. _Is _pūr _a North-West Iranian borrowing in Persian with assimilation of _h_, i.e. *_puhr_>_pūr_?



Yes, exactly.


----------

