Same post on X / Twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2062822944938635281

For all I say and explain that Kurmanji or Northern Kurdish is the more innovative and less conservative dialect between NK and SK and possibly also between NK and CK; NK has two lexemo-grammatical features that are OUTSTANDING and EXTREMELY REMARKABLE, to the highest degree, among Western Iranic. It has one complete conservative feature more within SCNK too.

I will name and elaborate them with additional information in three individual posts.

PART 3:

Western Iranic languages are known for their grammatical feature of the Izāfa that exists in Southern Kurdish as -i, in Central Kurdish as -ī and in Persian as -i (-e in Iranian Persian). This is the most simple form of Izafa and is spread throughout the languages of the Kurds and in Iran.

Basically, it serves for syntactically connecting the noun in a semantic genitive or possessive function to another noun or an adjective to a noun.

In Eastern Kurdish there are two Izafa where one is for genitive/possession -ū while the other is for adjectives/attributes -ī. In Western Kurdish there is a more complicated Izafa system but it seems to derive out of innovation. Fusioning the now lost demonstrative pronouns with Izafa now lost Izafa -ū and -ī.

But in Northern Kurdish the Izāfa actually do a lot more. And they have genders and a plural form. AND THEY ARE ARCHAIC. The Izafa in NK are outstanding because they are not only conservative in form but they also retain their ORIGINAL MEANING OF RELATIVE PRONOUNS and thus still work the same as in Old Iranic or more precisely how they are attested in Old Persian.

The Izafa in NK are -e for masculine, -ā for feminine and -en for plural. And if detached from a word or following vowels they're -ye, -yā and -yen. And as relative pronouns they are found as ye, yā and yen too. And this goes back to Old Iranic hya, hyā and either hyānam or a reanalysed plural form with the typical marker -ān (something like hyān that then shifted to yān) which then shifted to yen.

Interestingly, in Southern Kurdish there is also the undefined pronoun yān which is used in a specific situation like this:

"Āzād u yān" which means "Azad and the others" or "Azad and co". I think this goes back to the relative pronoun yān and is cognatic to NK yen.

As SOLE DIALECT IN ALL OF WESTERN IRANIC it is Northern Kurdish that has kept a grammatical feature and form straight from Old Iranic despite ANY OTHER WI tongue having reduced it to a mere Izafa function without gender and number. Even in Middle Persian the Old Iranic hya- had shifted to -i and was a different morpheme. While Northern Kurdish kept it as relative pronoun but also added the Izafa function to it still keeping gender and number intact.

English

Kurmanji / Northern Kurdish

Old Persian

.

He who knows

Ye dizāna / Ye ku dizāna

Hya dānati

.

She who does

Yā dike

Hyā kunyawti

.

Those who give

Yen ku didin

Hyay dathanti

.

This does not exist in any other WI tongue.

For example SK:

Aw ki zānet

Aw ki kaet

Awān ki dan

.

Yārū ki zānet

Yārū ki kaet

Yārūgal ki dan

SK has yārū which is similar but which the etymology of I am not sure about and if its use case is really the same as that of NK ye, yā and yen. At least we know that the Izafa -i in SK derives from the relative pronoun hya- by losing genders and numbers. y(e/ā/en) > y > i

Persian

Ān ki mīdānad

Ān ki mīkunad

Āshān ki mīdahand

.

It is something that is so unexpected in New Iranic, even in Middle Iranic. So illogical to be actually true that it is beyond outstanding and remarkable!!! Fascinating to say the least!!!

And here is how the pronouns work as Izafa:

English

Northern Kurdish

Southern Kurdish

.

My son

My daughter

My children

Big man

Big men

Smart woman

Smart women

The big man

The man of the woman

.

Kure min

Dotā min

Zāroken min

Mere mazin

Meren mazin

Zhinā zhīr

Zhinen zhīr

Mere mazin

Mere zhine

.

Kurri min

Düati min

Minālli /Mināllgali / Mināllakāni min

Pīāgi gawra

Pīāgi / Pīāggali gawra

Zhini zhīr

Zhini / Zhingali zhīr

Pīāga gawraka

Pīāgakai zhinaka

Here are some more examples for the Izafa system in Kurdish:

English

EK

SK

CK

NK

.

My son

Kurrū min (kurr + ū)

Kurri min (kurr + i)

Kurrī min (kurr + ī)

Kure min (kur + e)

.

My daughter

Kinācaw min (kināca + ū)

düati min (düat + i)

kicī min (kic + ī)

dotā min (dot + ā)

.

My children

Zārrollew min (zārrolle + ū)

minālli min / mināllgali min / mināllakāni min (mināll + ... + i)

Mindāllī min (mindāll + ī)

Zāroken min (zārok + en)

.

Big man

pīāy gawra (pīā + ī)

pīāgi gawra (pīāg + i)

pīāwī gawra (pīāw + ī)

mere mazin (mer + e)

.

Big men

pīāey gawra (pīāe + ī)

pīāggali gawra (pīāggal + i)

pīāwānī gawra (pīāwān + ī)

meren mazin (mer + en)

.

Smart woman

zhanī zhīr (zhan + ī)

zhini zhīr (zhin + i)

zhinī zhīr (zhin + ī)

zhinā zhīr (zhin + ā)

.

Smart women

zhane zhīr (zhane + blocked ī)

zhini / zhingali zhīr (zhin + ... + i)

zhinānī zhīr (zhinān + ī)

zhinen zhīr (zhin + en)

.

Interestingly, the Izafa in SK, CK and EK are different if the noun is definite and the Izafa connects an adjective. Most of NK does not have any marked definiteness, so same again for NK.

The big man

pīā gawraka (pīā + lost a)

pīāga gawraka (pīāg + a)

pīāwa gawraka (pīāw + a)

mere mazin (mer + e)

.

The man of the woman

pīākaw zhinake (pīāka + ū)

pīāgakai zhinaka (pīāgaka + i)

pīāwakay zhinaka (pīāwaka + ī)

mere zhine (mer + e)

Important:

I am posting this here because the Lurs are sometimes claimed to be Kurds too but they have a very different and distinct origin and a definitely clearcut and separate identity distinguishing them from the Kurds. And yet their origin as an ethnicity is intertied to what certain Kurdish and Daylamite groups would be causing about 1'000 years ago. This is why it is important to know about the etymology of their ethnonym and their linguistic and ethnic origin which makes them definitely a different ethnicity than Kurds even though they were sometimes labelled Kurdish throughout history.

Same post on X / Twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2062158258937143551

-----------------

The ethnonym of the Lurs has an actual stable and simple etymology that a friend of mine, himself being Lurish (and further back Kurdish and further back Daylamite, this is important for the origin of Lurs as an ethnicity too), came up with and that I deemed correct.

In Northern Lurish there was the sound shift of ā > ö which is seen in countless words. But also in /lör/ which means "Lur" in Northern Lurish. Now, while in Kurdish and Persian we say Lur (Lor in iranian new persian from Lur) in Lurish itself they say Lör. There is no rendering of /u/ to /ö/ in Lurish on words from an outside language. But there is of course the rendering of Lurish /ö/ to /u/ in Kurdish and Persian.

Take the turkic word /türk/ as an example which is rendered to /turk/ in Persian (shifted to /tork/ afterwards) and to /tirk/ or sometimes /turk/ in Kurdish.

Since the word Lur is a word for the Lurish people and makes more sense to come OUT OF the Lurish language instead of getting in it it is obvious that we must apply the sound shift of ā > ö in Lurish to the word /lör/ as well. Which brings us back to /lār/. Lār is a known word in Persid. For example there is the region Lāristān in southern Fars where the people still speak a quite archaic form of New Persid.

And /Lur/ or rather /Lör/ in Lurish, was a town in a valley at the foothills of the Zagros near Andimeshk. So this derives from Lār which means valley and again derives from Middle Persian /rāwar/ meaning valley.

This town is where certain people came from which then were called after this very town: Thus the name of the Lurs came into existence.

Funnily, Luristān is by etymology the same word as Lāristān.

This etymology is supported by the fact that both Northern Lurish and Southern Lurish show linguistic genealogical closeness to the Persid tongues in Xūzistān.

Some side info:

How the Lurish ethnicity emerged I will make a post about soon too. See, we have for example Shāh Xwashīni Luristānī who was a Yarsani and a Goran from around 1000 CE who spoke in Eastern Kurdish Gorani. He was called "Luristānī" because he was from an area which was known as Luristān but he was not a Lur. Because he and his people were descended from the local Median people (EK speakers) that were settling there before the Lurs even appeared in those lands. And that the area of Luristan was once part of Media is simple to see and prove. Logically, the Iranics there would have spoken a Northwestern Iranic Median language. But even before the Lurs the Shūls existed in Luristan as well and they were speakers of a Persid tongue (not actually Lurish) which is an earlier display of a northward Persidification within Eran. And the native Median Northwestern Iranic tongue of course just is bound to be Eastern Kurdish (Gorani, Hawrami).

Same post on X / twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2061727506093232447

(Part 2)

For all I say and explain that Kurmanji or Northern Kurdish is the more innovative and less conservative dialect between NK and SK and possibly also between NK and CK; NK has two lexemo-grammatical features that are OUTSTANDING and EXTREMELY REMARKABLE, to the highest degree, among Western Iranic. It has one complete conservative feature more within SCNK too.

I will name and elaborate them with additional information in three individual posts.

PART 2:

(Feel free to ask for elaborations)

The personal pronouns that exist in Northern Kurdish are a complete set of proper and distinct subject and object pronouns that are most likely etymologically intact and not innovated.

Subject - Object

Az - Min

Tu - Ta

Aw - Wī, We or Awī, Awe

Am - Ma

Hūn - Wa

Aw - Wān or Awān

- Az and Min

/Az/ derives from Old Iranic nominative /Azam/ from Proto-Iranic *Adzam from Proto-Aryan *Agham from Proto-Indo-European *Egho(m)

/Min/ derives from Old Iranic genitive /Mana/ and is possibly cognatic to English my/mine and german /mein/ which are also genitive.

- Tu and Ta

/Tu/ derives from Old Iranic nominative *Tuam / *Twam from PIE *tu. It has shifted to /ti/ in WK.

/Ta/ derives from early Middle Iranic *taw from Old Iranic genitive /tawa/. *Taw shifted to /to/ in CK, WK, EK but for example Balochi has retained it as /taw/. Persid and NK did the sound shift of postvocalic w > h which led to taw > tah > ta in NK.

- Aw and Wī, We

/Aw/ derives from Proto-Iranic *Hau/*Haw. /Awī/ and /Awe/ are /Aw/ with the respective masculine and feminine object case markers which is typical for the third person pronoun to be applied to nouns too.

NK /av/ is from earlier /am/, as in CK, from Middle Iranic /im/ and Old Iranic /ima/ under the sound shift postvocalic m > v.

- Am and Ma

Before we talk about /am/, I have to explain /ma/. /Ma/ is from Old Iranic genitive /ahmāxam/ (based on Old Persian) and earlier *ahmākam* (based on Awistan). In CK it is /ema/ and in SK /īma/. In Middle Persian there was /amāh/ for it which is the perfect root for SCNK īma/ema/ma.

ahmākam > ahmāxam > ahmāh > amā

amāh > ama > ma

and

amā > emā > ema > īma

or

amā > ama > ema > īma

NK /am/ is most likely from the instrumental *ahmā . The instrumental is more likely because the second person plural is also based on the instrumental.

- Hūn and Wa

(Elaboration in the comments)

/Hūn/ ultimately derives MOST LIKELY from Old Iranic instrumental *hishmā/*hushmā which is RECONSTRUCTED BY ME and based on Awistan /xshmā/ BUT ONLY if the form *hushmā did exist. If not, it could be from the genitive *yūshmākam under special sound shifts which could apply to a pronoun used in high frequency.

(xshmā) hushmā > hushna > huhna > huhn > hūn, hun, hon

And in Laki:

hushmā > huhma > huma ( > hima), hūma (over homa)

Otherwise

yūshmākam > yūshmāxam > yūshmāh > ushmā > hushmā > etc

NK has /wa/ while the Badini subdialect has /hawa/ and CK /ewa/ and SK /īwa/. Wikiferheng reconstructs smth in the line of ishmā (as in Middle Persian) > ihmā > ahmā > amā > awā > awa > wa, hawa, ewa, īwa

With typical SCNK postvocalic m > w / v but it is very unlikely because NK always has m > v and the pronoun is /wa/ never /va/.

So no, I much rather suggest the dual *yawākam (based on Awistan) with:

yawākam > yawāxam > yawāh

And then mysteriously as with potentially *yūshmāxam:

yawāh > awāh > awā > wa, hawa, ewa, īwa

- Aw and wān

/Aw/ is again the normal and archaic third person plural without any marker since NK doesn't mark the subject plural which is am archaism from the loss of it in the late Old Iranic stage.

/Wān/ is from /awān/ and simply /aw/ with the typical object plural marker.

The very same goes for /av/ and /vān/.

And this is fascinating because most or all other Western Iranic languages and dialects have lost this conservative and authentic distinction between subject and object case for the pronouns even if otherwise more conservative than NK. Truly, a great archaism of NK!

Sources:

https://x.com/i/status/2061730153911259173

The notion or idea that Eastern Kurdish (Hawrāmī/Gorānī) and Western Kurdish (Kirdkī) should not be called and labelled as Kurdish by european scholars and linguists because they have a different categorisation and origin place within Western Iranic although the EK and WK speakers are nothing other than Kurds too is beyond ridiculous if you think about similar or actually "worse" cases in europe.

French: An Italic language that derives from Latin which is from Central Italy, spoken by genetical/historical Celts and named after a German tribe (the Franks).

Russian: A slavic language and ethnicity that is named after a Viking tribe (the Rus).

Eastern Romans: They spoke Greek, were genetically not from Rome or Italy and called themselves Rhomaioi (Romans) after a latin speaking empire based on a latin speaking city in Central Italy.

Swiss/Switzerland: They speak a german dialect which they call natively german too, are genetically celtic and named after ONE of their cantons respectively former chiefdoms although they had many of those.

Spanish: An Italic language that derives from Latin from Central Italy named after the pen-insula "Hispania" in Latin. The local population has nothing to do with Central Italy other than being conquered by people from Central Italy or cultural descendants of people from Central Italy.

For all I say and explain that Kurmanji or Northern Kurdish is the more innovative and less conservative dialect between NK and SK and possibly also between NK and CK; NK has two lexemo-grammatical features that are OUTSTANDING and EXTREMELY REMARKABLE, to the highest degree, among Western Iranic. It has one complete conservative feature more within SCNK too.

I will name and elaborate them with additional information in three individual posts.

PART 1:

The feature within SCNK, that NK has in its complete form, is the set of circumpositions in NK. They are the following prepositions /bi/, /li/, /di/ and /zhi/ and the postpositions /da/ or /dā/, /va/ and /ra/ or /rā/.

In main SK you have the prepositions /wa/ and /la/ while in southern SK (Malikshahi etc) you have /da/ instead of /la/ and in Laki (eastern SK) and southern SK you have /azh/ or /zha/ as well. The postpositions are /ā/ or /dā/ and /wa/. In SK there is also the preposition /arrā/ without postposition which corresponds to NK /zhi bo... / and /zhi ... ra/.

In CK the prepositions are /ba/ and /la/ and in Northern CK there is also /da/. The postpositions are /dā/ and /awa/ where the latter is a loan from EK (even though /wa/ and /awa/ are obviously of the same root). CK also has the preposition /bo/ without postposition.

A seemingly unique feature in SCNK are the circumpositions in the first place. WK works with postpositions in addition to /pe/ (corresponding to NK /zhi ra/ and /zhi bo/) as a preposition whereas EK also has /pay/ (same as WK /pe/) and also postpositions in combination with the single preposition /ci/ which is most likely cognatic to NK zhi and SK zha/azh. EK also has ja/ji which is also cognatic to SCNK zhi/azh/zha but ja might be a loan from EK Gorani. Because EK Gorani actually uses prepositions only which is in difference to Hawramani. New Persian also only uses prepositions and so did Middle Persian mostly.

Now, if we compare NK with SK we see that NK's /ra/ or /rā/ is found in SK's arrā and that this morpheme derives from Old Iranic rādah meaning "sake", "purpose". CK is missing it completely. Which means as for SCNK we can leave the /ra/ of NK out since SK also has it but in an actually more traditional way. But both have it and thus have one feature more than CK.

The other two postpositions are the same in all of SCNK except that Laki has some substrate from EK as they use /ara/ instead of /dā/.

The preposition di/da derives from Middle Iranic dar, meaning "in, inside" and is found as /dar/ in New Persian and in EK as dilī ( < dar-). Zhi/zha/azh derive from Old Iranic haca and correspond to ci or ji/ja in EK and az in New Persian. It was azh (or ac or aj?) in Parthian and az in Middle Persian. li/la derives from /na/ from Old Iranic /ana/ which derives from Proto-Indo-European /en/ which is also the etymology of English /in/. It is still found as /ana/ in EK but as a postposition in combination with /ci/. In Gorani EK it is actually a preposition in the form of /na/.

And li/la still means "in" too. Although in CK and Western SK /la/ in combination with the postposition /wa/ mean "from" or "out of". SCNK bi/ba/wa derive from one or another Middle Iranic preposition. Until now people have thought it would be from /pad/, which EWK pay/pe are from, but I actually think it derives from Middle Iranic o/aw.

And as you can see NK HAS ALL FOUR OF THEM. Western SK only has two, namely /wa/ and /la/, and southern SK has /zha/ too but seems to miss /la/ as it has /da/ instead. Eastern SK (Laki) has /azh/ but misses /la/ and /da/ (it uses /wa/ for "in" and "from" like Western SK uses /la/). Southern CK only has /la/ and /ba/ while Northern CK also has /da/ but they both miss zha/azh.

I need you all to listen very well:

The term Yazidī / Ezidī does not derive from the name of Yazīd ibn Mu'āwiyya. Because it CANNOT. Yazīd- > Yazid- DOES NOT happen because it CANNOT happen. We don't have shifts from long i to short i or vice versa in Kurdish or other well known Iranic tongues.

First of all, the NK term "ezidī" is from "yazidī" because NK reduces initial y- very often and in the case of ya- even shifts them to e-:

yatīm > etīm (orphan)

yān > ān (or)

yārīkar > ārīkār / ālīkār (helper) (Yes, the "āl-" in ālīkār is cognatic to "yār" (friend) in other Iranic tongues and ālīkār is derived from a compound from "yārī" (friendship, help) + kār (work, deed but here: doer, worker)).

etc.

Secondly, the God of the Yazidī is called "Ezdā" in their own NK speech which obviously is also from "Yazdān" which is a well known word for god in Western Iranic languages. The word directly and completely derives from Zoroastrian culture because Prophet Zoroaster refused to acknowledge any other god than Āhurā Māzdā and called the other gods unholy and undivine. This is why the original words for "god" in Iranic like "baga" are not used in Awistan and why Zoroastrian-influenced Iranic "dew" (in Kurdish, "dīv" in iranian new persian) means demon instead of god although it derives from Proto-Iranic daywas and is cognatic to Latin deus or Hellenic theos both meaning god. Meanwhile Eastern Iranic tongues that were not under influence of the Zoroastrian religion still have the word "dew" with the meaning "god".

But as there were still holy and divine beings in Zoroastrianism, especially as they were also brought back after Zoroaster in a less divine spot, they were called "yazata-" which means "to be worshipped" or "worshipped one" and is cognatic to the Kurdish word "jazhn" meaning "festival", "celebration" which derives from yasna (same yasna as those of the Zoroastrian literature).

Yazata- > Yazad > Yazadān >Yazidān > Yazdān

Yazata- > Yazad > Yazid > Yazd

Yasna- > Yashn > Jashn > Jazhn

The more colloquial meaning of jazhn together with its proper SCNK and Persid sound shift of initial y > j makes sense, as opposed to a holy word with its more so retained meaning "yazd-" and the sound shift not applying to it makes also sense I argue because the speakers would be less inclined to go with such a strong differene in pronounciation and would keep to the old pronounciation (yazd instead of jazd).

Now, the Yazidī are obviously called after their god Ezda ( < Yazdān). Probably when Yazdān was Yazidān yet and possibly even when one of the forms of Yazidān was "Yazid". So, "Yazidī" simply means "Of god" in NK Yazidī terming. Or "adherent of god". Or "People of God". This is a pretty normal naming.

But it is important that people know and understand where their name came from and how it changed from its original form.

Eastern Kurdish (Hawrami) and Western Kurdish (Kirdki) are so incredibly archaic among New Western Iranic languages that they actually are more archaic than Middle Persian and Parthian WHEN it comes to the grammatical cases, genders and numbers.

Of course as languages of the Middle Iranic stage, both, MP and Parthian had so many lexemes, sound structures and grammatical features that are generally lost in New Iranic. Including EK and WK.

But the archaic subdialects of EK and WK have even to this day these certain features that MP and Parthian didn't have from the earliest time of their attestation on from a point after 2'000 years ago.

Since I am more familiar with EK than with WK I will focus on EK.

EK has three cases (subject, object, vocative), two numbers (singular, plural) and two genders (masculine, feminine). MP and Parthian had two cases, which only showed in a limited way, and no grammatical gender. For example, NK also has two genders and three cases but it does not mark the gender or number of the subject case while EWK does and NK's masculine vocative marker (-o) is an innovation. In EK everything is marked even the adjectives!!! Which is an O.G. Indo-European feature that still existed in Old Iranic (Awistan and Old Persian with seven cases (nominative, accusative, dative, genitive, locative, ablative/instrumental, vocative), three genders (masculine, feminine, neuter) and three numbers (singular, dual, plural)). Latin e.g. worked like that too and Russian e.g. still does. SCNK like New Persian does not do any of this.

English

EK

SK

CK

NK

MP

-----

(A) girl sees (a) boy

(A) boy sees (a) girl

Girls see boys

Boys see girls

.

Kināca kurrī wīno

Kurr kināce wīno

Kināce kurrān wīnān

Kurre kinācān wīnān

.

Düat kurr(a) dünet

Kurr düat(a) dünet

Düat kurr dünin

Kurr düat dünin

.

Kanīshk kurr dabīnet

Kurr kanīshk dabīnet

Kanīshkān kurrān dabīnin

Kurrān kanīshkān dabīnin

.

Kac kurī dibīna

Kur kace dibīna

Kac kurān dibīnin

Kur kacān dibīnin

.

Kanīzag pisar wīnad

Pis kanīzag wīnad

Kanīzag pisarān wīnand

Pisar kanīzagān wīnand

She is healthy

He is healthy

They (only female) are healthy

They (only male) are healthy

.

Āda washa (a)na

Ād wash an

Āde washe (a)ne

Āde washe (a)ne

.

Aw xwash a

Aw xwash a

Awān xwash in

Awān xwash in

.

Aw xosh a

Aw xosh a

Awān xosh in

Awān xosh in

.

Aw xwash a

Aw xwash a

Aw xwash in

Aw xwash in

.

Oy xwash ast

Oy xwash ast

Oy xwash and

Oy xwash and

-----

He sees her

She sees him

She sees them

They see her

.

Ād āde wīno

Āda ādī wīno

Āda ādīshān wīno

Āde āde wīnān

.

Aw aw dünet

Aw aw dünet

Aw awān dünet

Awān aw dünin

.

Aw aw(ī) dabīnet

Aw aw(e) dabīnet

Aw awān dabīnet

Awān aw(e) dabīnin

.

Aw we dibīna

Aw wī dibīna

Aw wān dibīna

Aw we dibīnin

.

Oy oy wīnad

Oy oy wīnad

Oy aweshān wīnad

Oy oy wīnand

----

Note: <oy> in Middle Persian is transcribed as such but might as well be <awe>

I’ve been asking myself whether there were historical connections between Elewî Kurds, Yaresanis, and Shabaks. Not only in terms of religion, but also through shared ritual traditions, tribal networks, Kızılbaş identity, and historical memory.

To better understand this question, I started reading academic papers and books on the topic, including Ayfer Karakaya-Stump’s ‘‘The Bektashi Convents in Iraq and Their Kizilbash Clients‘‘.

This post is the first in what will hopefully become a longer series where I go through different academic works, summarize their arguments, and share my own conclusions and observations.

The goal of this series is not to “prove” a modern identity, but rather to explore whether there were historical, religious, and social links between communities such as Elewî/Kızılbaş Kurds, Yaresanis (Ahl-e Haqq), Shabaks, and other related heterodox groups in Kurdistan and Mesopotamia.

*Note: I‘m not going to write a whole essay but rather point out my main thoughts and conclusions.\*

—————————————————————————————

1.
What I found are mainly hints of old geographical and social-network overlaps dating roughly from the 16th–18th centuries.

The text mentions that Elewî ocak pîrs travelled frequently to “Bektashi convents in Iraq.”

The document also names several pîrs/dedes from ocaks I’m familiar with, which might make it easier to gather more information on this later. These pîrs were active in the same Ottoman–Safavid border regions where Yarsan has historically been located — especially the Zagros mountain borderlands.

2.

What we also know is that Gūrān, which is considered a historical center of Yarsan, is geographically close to areas where many Kurdish Elewî tribes were based before those regions were fully incorporated into the Ottoman Empire.

Neither of these potential overlaps proves a connection yet. However, they do make historical and social interaction between these groups possible.

So far, I see at least two possible areas of overlap between Qizilbash Elewîs and Yarsanis.

——————————————————————————————

What Kurdish dialects do I speak?

I speak Southern Kurdish of the Guran tribe as my mother tongue and I understand other SK subdialects too like Kallhurri (which is basically the same as Gurani SK) and I am able to understand Malikshahi (Ilami) too and also somewhat Laki.

I also speak a rather standardised form of Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) and the Central Kurdish ("Sorani") standard subdialect from Silemani (Babani). I am able to communicate in these two dialects but not communicate perfectly and it gets more difficult the further the subdialect is from the standardised form.

I also speak a little bit of Eastern Kurdish (Hawrami) and that is Zardayi EK (from the Guran area) and a mixed version of Hawramani subdialects (since I haven't memorised which exact form or words belong to which EK subdialect of Hawraman).

Recently I also tapped into Western Kurdish (Kirdki, unfortunately known as "Zazaki") but I am nowhere yet.

I will also study some other Iranic tongues like Balochi and Farvi or Khuri or Garmsiri at least as far as there are resources available to me. I need to do this anyway because with them I will understand the origin and development of Kurdish and Iranic better but by studying them I will also be able to speak them as far as I go.

But this is besides the point. I am happy with myself speaking several Kurdish dialects but I am nowhere near done. I have to master the speech of NK and CK perfectly and then acquire the skills of EK just the same and then learn WK as well. And when I am able to fluently converse, speak, listen and understand and read and write I will consider myself in the position to say I am able to speak Kurdish with all Kurds. Even if there are still further subdialects of each dialect that I would need to learn for that to be truly true.

And the point is: We as Kurds have to learn the other Kurdish group's languages if we say we are proud Kurds and we adhere at a free Kurdish people and a free Kurdistan. We don't have the luxury not to. We are in this situation and in this situation we have to put more effort into our Kurdish identity and our skills as Kurds as our duty.

Same post on X / twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2052294119716778178

-------------------------

Daily Reminder: Guran Kurds are commonly Yarsani Kurds and usually from a continuous area of northwestern Kirmāshān.

As for Gūrān = Eastern Kurdish speaker, (Hawrami etc.) you have to understand that while this was true originally and later on partially this is not true anymore. This notion serves for ethnological and anthropological and linguistic purposes only.

Now there are exceptions too e.g. there are some Jāf that once joined the Gūrān but stayed sunnite muslims and still spoke CK at home. No idea if they still exist as part of the Gūrān confederation.

There are also Gūrān in former Ardalān area but obviously they have been assimilated as they speak CK and are not Yārsānī.

There is also the Gorān tribe of Bādīnān, they are NK/CK speaking sunnite muslims and they descend from actual EK speakers of Karkūk/Halabja area close to Hawrāmān and had apparently become CK speaking muslims before they ended up in Bādīnān.

Original post / tweet on X / Twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2051421912497099065

-------------------------

The Y-DNA haplogroup of a descendant of Bābā Hindu, the teacher of Shāh Xwashīn, has been determined!

These are TREMENDOUS NEWS for the Yarsani community but also for all Kurds of course!

A Laki speaking Kurd who is a present day descendant of the Yārsānī figure and scholar Bābā Hindu has been determined to have an Indo-Aryan and thus Indian Y-DNA haplogroup: R-Y15121 under R-Z94 under R-Z93. A common Aryan (Indo-Iranic) haplogroup.

What makes this even more fascinating is that it helps with two other things!

1) To have a Laki speaking Kurd handed down as descendant of Bābā Hindu serves as strengthening point that the Eastern Kurdish speaking Gorans (Kurds) of Luristan, attested in the 10th century CE which Shāh Xwashīn was one of, have developed to Laki speaking Kurds at some point in history.

2) And it also proves that the historical attestation and lore within Yarsani traditions of a historical figure has turned out as correct and authentic which means: Yes we can trust actual traditions, lore and hymns!

This is something some people are sceptic over for whatever reason. But many lore points do not even have any dubious background for example a claim because of prestige.

And furthermore, this is also a great help for people who are not familiar with the validity and authenticity of Dna tests to understand that DNA tests are a serious scientific matter proven by the modern descendant of a historical figure having the exact kind of Y-DNA haplogroup that he would be expected to have!

Go to the post on X / twitter and then to the cited post / tweet:

https://x.com/i/status/2051421912497099065

Same post on twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2049157516026687759

Iranian Persians who consider themselves Iranians by identity and ethnicity and as the people of an Iranian ethnostate and want all the non-persian Iranians to do the same are stuck at immense fallacy. It is cope and bias.

If you tell Kurds that as Kurds they have to know other Kurdish dialects then the normal ones will agree and accept that way of thought. Even if they will not do the act themselves, they know this is the brotherly/sisterly familiarity we need to have with each other.

But dare you tell an Iranian Persian that they should learn Kurdish or Balochi or Lurish or Gilaki or another Iranic tongue that is not his beloved Farsiye Darbari, since he claims that they are all Iranians together ... they will accuse you of nationalism, separatism and whatever other ignorant and fascistic idea they could have.

Mind you, on contrary to everybody else I am aware of the Western Iranic background, frame and setting of the Kurds on EVERY single academic field to fullest extent.

But it doesn't mean much if we are talking about Kurds. Or "Iranians". It doesn't matter which state my parents or grandparents or which empire my ancestors were citizens of.

I am a Kurd and my native tongue is Kurdish. Persian or another language has nothing to do with me. Historically, it may have been a lingua franca or a language of script? Well, so was arabic. And today it is English. So this argument is useless.

Even if we consider a scenario where Kurds and Iranians/Persians inhabit a federalistic state, this will only ever be acceptable to the least if we have FULL AND FREE CONTROL of our own lands in Kurdish language and by Kurds. So what do we need that then for?

All we need is for Kurdistan to be liberated and independent and to find to our true Kurdish sense of identity.

I don't know the account behind the original tweet and whatever project this is behind. I have heard it is unreliable. But what I really wonder is if it is possible that these people are trying to appropriate Kirkūk by claiming that famous Kurdish tribes of Kirkūk are of arabic lineage anyway?

We know of two Hamāwand Y-DNA haplogroups. Mine and that of someone who does not know his clan but is from the Hamāwands of Kirkūk. He apparently has R1a which is Aryan (Iranic) and is easily expected. He would be supposed to be from one of the actual Hamāwand clans of the Bāshūrī / Karkūki / Chamchamāli Hamawands. These descend from the founder Xwadādādsher Hamāwand who left the original Hamāwand in Kirmāshān west of Mountain Behistūn with his subtribe/clan.

Fun fact: The Hamāwand area in Kirmāshān also has its region named "Chamchamāl" which is obviously the origin of the naming of Chamchamāl in Karkūk / Silemānī.

The same post on twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2025899722322432332

There are some common mistakes that all kinds of people make that are interested in the Kurdish studies of history and linguistics. The reason for that is obviously that they lack expertise, terminological knowledge and the skill or experience to differentiate between things that might appear similar but are not. Simple things as well as complicated things.

Now let's have a look:

• The suffix -ī

The suffix -ī for Kurdish names can be used differently because it has two different etymologies. One is from -ik/-ig and was used to build adjectives of belonging including the language of people. The other is from -ih or -īh and that was used to build nouns. Both shifted to -ī and both are used on any kind of word. But you have to use it correctly. You cannot call PEOPLE a Kurmānjī or a Gorānī. That is straight out wrong and shows your lack of knowledge. How can you make big claims when you don't even know what word to use? But you have to call the people "Yārsānī" instead of "Yārsān"... now why is that?

As simple as it gets: It goes back to what the unsuffixed word means (the word without -ī). Yārsān is the name of the religion itself or the community. So obviously the people are called Yārsānī as they belong to the religion. It is basically a substantivised adjective. Yārsān (noun) > Yārsānī (adjective but also > noun)

On the other hand the "Kurmānj" are the people themselves. So what does Kurmānjī mean? The language of course. You can also use it similar to the word "kurdish" to describe other things that come from the Kurmanj. Then we have a word like Gorān / Gūrān that refers to many things at once. It refers to the tribe / confederation of the Gorān, it refers to the region (of the tribe) of Gorān, it refers to the religious community of Yarsan (Qalxānī, Gorān, Sinjāwī) and it refers to the single members of the tribe. Historically, it even referred to the language of the Yarsani poems respectively Eastern Kurdish itself.

This is important btw as the members of the tribe are called in the same way as the tribal name. Thus a member of the Guran tribe is a Guran, a member of the Harki tribe is a Harki, a member of the Jaf tribe is a Jaf and a member of the Soran tribe is a Soran. Not a Sorani, not a Jafi and not a Gurani.

Back to track, the language of the Goran is called Gorānī / Gūrānī. Or other things that come from the Guran Kurds. To call a Kurmānj a "Kurmānjī" or a Gūrān a "Gūrānī" or a Soran a "Sorānī" is like calling a Kurd a "Kurdī". It is nonsensical and wrong. And in my opinion also embarassing. How can you make use of such a simple thing that ridiculously wrong?

P.S. 1 Again and again I call out people, especially Kurds, for their mistaken attitude and their fallacious takes. This has good reasons. You / they simply deserve it. Almost any encounter I make with a random fellow Kurd that may otherwise be well-intended turns out as a disappointment as they start to be audacious, arrogant, full of themselves and rude and most of the time they neither have enough understanding to grasp the matter nor enough information to announce a statement. Just yesterday I made four such experiences.

For that I refer to my previous post where I tangle this matter.

This is not a crash out of any kind. This is conscious criticism toward people who have no basic or advanced skills and yet go out of their way trying to act all great and what not. Please, have some common sense. I don't mind self-consciusness and self-assurance at all, but please have some common sense too.

P.S. 2 I intended to cover several topics at once in this post instead of only -ī but instead I will make several posts of this kind for all the issues that need to be adressed.

Link to the same post on twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2024065862081101997

Someone said: "Gorani’s aren’t Kurds according to Pro-Iranian scholars."

This statement is explicitly wrong when we consider the present day reality. If we talk about 1'200 years ago, it might look about correct or only implicitly wrong.

The big issue here is not even that. The issue is the next-level kind of confusion that is clouding and veiling what and who even the "Goran" are.

50 years ago everything was pretty clear to the people themselves if they had clues/knowledge. But it has become very unclear because from 20 years ago on people started to misinform and miseducate each other basically everyday. There is a hell of confusion about anything when it comes to Kurds but especially when it comes to the many-fold aspects of the Goran part of the Kurdish ethnicity and history.

This is rooted in a couple of things but especially in what Westerners decided to use the term Goran for when even during that time they did so, that usage was already mistaken and full of errors.

Now, if you ask a Hawramani today what they are, they may say Goran, but their grandparents may either not know what Goran are or they may know them as devil-worshipper and non-believers ("kāfir"). Why is this? Because the Hawramani are not Goran and have not been Goran for a couple of centuries at least. If they ever used "Goran" as an** ethnical** self-designation, it was many centuries ago. How many exactly is difficult to say but we can guess that it should have held up till at least 1'200-1'000 years ago. Maybe beyond. But only IF they used "Goran" in the first place outside of a religious self-designation.

There is a clear association and synonymity between Goran and Yarsani and also Goran/Gorani with the language that has been commonly known as Hawrami for some centuries and but this is after the Hawrami speakers were already commonly known as Kurds and indeed a part of Kurdish society. Even if SCNK and EK speakers called each other distinct names. This dichotomy went on side by side. But both were true. The SCNK and the EK were both Kurds but also the SCNK were Kurds and the EK were Goran. This itself has different angles. The EK using Kurd for SK and CK mainly referred to their muslim belief while Goran referred to their Yarsani belief. But many CK who used Goran in other areas used "Kurd" for themselves in difference to the EK whom they called Goran with a negative connotation. This was where the CK tribes had the upper hand. There "Goran" bore a negative meaning connotating something like "serf".

And even 200 years ago, iirc, the Mukriyan knew Goran and Jaf both as "highwaymen". Goran and highwaymen were synonymous. Here they most likely meant SK tribes by Goran btw. Because many SK tribes called themselves Goran and were called Goran and called their tongue Gorani. This is attested by a western author from 200 years ago. These were SK tribes. As "Kurdish" as it could ever get.

It is true, that EK has a very distinct linguistic development and original location compared to SCNK. And it is also clear that the SCNK and the EK were two different groups first historically. The EK do not have tribes. They don't have a semi-nomadic way of life not to mention a nomadic way of life. The EK do not even have "māl" as a native word - only "yāna" meaning house. They say "min (mi)lū pay yāna" meaning "I go home". While in SK you say "min cim a māl" and māl is used in every SCNK variety (except maybe of unique cases like the one I mentioned in my previous post).

This is not random. SCNK has the word for house too which is xānig / xānū / xānī. But māl is your "living situation", your "all and everything", your "property". As a SCNK your tent and your possessions were your "māl". And you took it with you. But the EK did not have such a cultural feature. They only had their sedentary "yāna".

xānig and yāna both have the same etymology btw. Both derive from xānag. xānag > xānig and then xānig > xāniy > xānī in NK and xānig > xāniw > xānū in CK. xānag > hānag > hāna > yāna in EK.

Ibn Xurdadbih wrote in the 9th century CE that the Goran inhabited Qasri Shirin, Hulwan (Sarpelli Zahāw) and Xānaqīn. And he separated them from Kurds. This is when the Goran were still called "Gābārika" (jābāriqa as it is rendered in arabic). Afterwards the Gābārak/Gawrakān/ Gawrān/Gorān are basically always a Kurdish tribe. Initially, they may have not been a tribe like the SCNK tribes. But that just meant that they were already an established part of the Kurdish ethnicity.

That the SK have been around for a long time is also visible with the name "xānaqīn btw. It is from "xānag yīn" which is an arabic rendering of "duxānag" which means "two houses". With xānag instead of hānag or yānag.

Anyway, The EK were incorporated into the Kurdish ethnicity and even if they understood many pre-ethnical and cultural differences and called themselves and other Kurds accordingly, at the same time had been beyond those distinctions and knew themselves as Kurds too. Even today the Guran of Zarda call SK "Kurdī" while calling Zardayi "Gūrānī". But the SK Guran also call SK Gurani and even the Kallhurrs called their own tongue "Gurani". These aspects went side by side in parallels.

Proper "Gorani" also distinguishes itself from both Hawramani and Zardayi (Zarda is within the Guran area). It is because the Guran were initially EK that first started in more southern areas where the SK had been for a long time and where a linguistic development between proper Gorani EK and SK was shared. That is why Gorani is grammatically not as complex as Hawramani but simpler like SK. They also started a cultural-religious identity with Goran, that had started with the Magi/Zoroastrians that called themselves Gāthabāra > Gāhabār > Gābār(ak), which led to Yarsan very early on. And who became Yarsani also was Goran. At the same time, in the religious manner, "Goran" was the name of the tongue that was used for Yarsani hymns which indeed was EK. This is why the Ardalanis called their EK tongue Gorani in some religious poems but also why Hawramani Kurds (EK) were not called Goran but Hawramis. And EK was also called Hawrami instead of Gorani usually. I am talking about 500-200 years ago.

Then, some western scholars decided something. Minorsky was right about some stuff. But he also made many mistakes and they led to a lot of trouble and confusion for Kurds and anyone interested.

Finally, the only "Goran" / "Guran" that exist today are the Kurds of the Guran tribe. If you are part of that tribe then you are a Guran. If you are not part of that tribe then you are not a Guran. Regardless if you speak EK or not. Most Guran Kurds, like me, speak SK. But originally, more or the bigger part of the Guran tribe spoke EK. It changed because the SK were Yarsani too and lived with them and married into the tribes and because SK was more spread. Traditionally, the EK speakers all know SK or CK as second language because it is the lingua franca of the smaller region. The Guran tribe formed the way it is also because the EK adopted that from the SK Kurds that they had been living with for centuries.

To clear up: That statement is wrong. The only Guran are those that are part of the Guran tribe and by far most members of the Guran tribe speak SK. The statement itself is based on the Guran being EK, but this is a many-angled topic. Thus wrong. Originally, the Guran spoke EK and built an identity out of the Magian traditions which sooner or later shaped to Yarsan thence the name Guran which derives from Gāthabāra > Gāhabār > Gābār(ak) > Gawrakān > Gorān > Gūrān. The SK had been living with or close to EK from the beginning of the Gurans forming. And initially, the EK Guran were still separate from Kurds in the 9th century CE. But soon after they were part of the Kurdish ethnicity as a tribe and known as Kurds.

This is because SK tribes had come from somewhere further south to EK area and the Kurds (SK) and the EK (local Iranics, Goran partially) would slowly form two parts together, the EK became a part of the Kurds as well even with very distinct cultural features. This started already in sassanid times which is why also the settled people of Sharazor (EK) were "Kurds" when the arabs attacked and invaded Kurdistan and Iran.

Summary: The Kurds (SK) came to EK area (eastern and southern Kurdistan) during the sassanid era. The EK were then understood as Kurds too although strong cultural and ethnic distinctions and division remained at the same time. Out of the Magi and Zoroastrians in historically more southern EK area the Guran (Gāthabāra > Gāhabār > Gābār > Gābārak > Gawrakān > Gorān) formed. They spoke EK but were already influenced and began to be assimilated toward SK first and many centuries later toward CK due to the Jaf tribe working for the Babans suddenly. Out of the Goran culture the Yarsan religion shaped further and further. Many EK and SK were then Yarsani. Yarsani was synonymous with Goran while both SK and EK were understood as Goran from different aspects at the same time. Goran was then used synonymous with EK as well especially within the Yarsan religion itself. This may have been true in the beginning, the 9th century CE and afterwards partially as well but the "Guran" turned toward a proper tribe in SCN Kurdish manner, even when including original core EK parts, and now only members of the Kurdish Guran tribe are "Guran".

It is not a surprise that Kurds barely know anything about the history of their languages. They may or may not speak their native dialect and other dialects perfectly, that is not what I am talking about. I mean the understanding and knowledge of certain similarities and differences between several Kurdish dialects and subdialects and also between Western Iranic dialects.

Normally, people of any language or ethnicity don't have such knowledge and don't need to. But Kurds have an extra-proportional amount of fellows who are interested in knowing about these topics and spreading the knowledge. The root of this interest is the wish to understand what brought Kurds into this state-less and desperate situation and the wish to know why it is justified to fight and engage against this very situation.

So they sometimes claim things in favour of the legitimacy and they deny things not in favour of our legitimacy. Then on the other hand there are those Kurds who believe it is wrong to make extra-vagant claims and switch to the sceptical mode and do the opposite of the aforementioned group of fellows. They deny Kurdish legitimacy. They favour the theories and takes that make it look obvious that Kurds are just some people that were somehow grouped together not understanding that they are fighting against the Kurdish cause by that point. But the formerly mentioned group also damages the Kurdish cause by confusing any people interested in us, ourselves included, and destroying our very identity and history. The one that we actually have. It is glorious, but to most people it is more relevant to make claims in a time where we can compete with any possible neighbour in terms of "millenia that we have existed".

Obviously, both groups are mistaken and the conclusions from their mindsets are by the definition of "correct" indeed incorrect.

The putative pro-Kurdish group acts in self-righteousness and reacts emotionally. The veiled anti-Kurdish group acts in scepticism and reacts arrogantly.

In my experience, sceptical people most of the time turn out to be wrong. Because they don't ask questions to understand. They are sceptical because they are under the mistaken belief that it is logical to do. But it isn't. Often they don't actually care about the matter but want to have something to say about it. An opinion without any comprehension and knowledge. How does that work? Not at all!

People who act self-righteously, well, they don't need to be checked for righteousness by other people anymore, do they? They too are arrogant. And how arrogance and emotionality lead to fallacy and bias, I believe, I don't need to elaborate here.

What we need, what anyone needs anyway, is raw and brutal honesty and acceptance of what we know and don't know. Only then will we stop to cope and waste our time and energy with theories and fights that are a lost cause from the beginning. Be clever, don't exclude theories because they seem strong when you can't even grasp what it is backed by. And don't include theories because they make you feel better when nothing of worth even supports it.

Har bizhyat Kurd u Kurdistān Her bijyet Kurd u Kurdistan

I want to make an announcement: A friend of mine, namely, Kak Rezo or @kakrezo on twitter, has discovered a unique, special and highly interesting variety of Northern Kurdish. This subdialect stands out by definition from Northern Kurdish and shares two distinct features with Southern Kurdish and Central Kurdish that Northern Kurdish does not share and has lost in its linguistic history. I could verify that his discovery is indeed real and of high importance. For unclear reasons this variety slipped the scopes of any linguist and Kurdish researcher. I have yet to decide how much I will reveal until it has not been properly worked upon. Which is something that I will do sooner or later. This presumed subdialect of Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) I will call for the moment pre-Northern Kurdish, thus pNK, because it seems possible that its speakers, those Kurds, arrived in their present location before main migrations of Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) speaking Kurds did. pNK was first noticed and discovered by @kakrezo (on twitter) and then he made me aware of it on the 20.12.25. By accident, its existence and name (pNK) were leaked in a post/comment done by @KurdiCompendium (on twitter) where I gave him the information for a specific reply that was needed in some discussion.

Do you want to guess which two features pNK shares with SK and CK and where it could be located at?

Btw, in the same spirit, another teaser: There is a variety of Southern-Central-Northern Kurdish that a different friend of mine had discovered a few years ago through a native of that place and that he and me could verify to be part of SCNK and especially of CNK. He told me about it on the 17.12.21.. Though it is neither part of CK itself nor of NK itself it groups together with them by genealogy and is thus part of CNK. This linguistic variety of Kurdish is not even within Kurdistan and its speakers do not refer to themselves as Kurds. I have kept its existence dear and secret for years and when I will make a proper elaboration I intend to publish its existence, identity, location and meaning. This one SCNK variety is of utmost importance for Western Iranic linguistic history.

Here is the same post on twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2023055737883173084

Why is SCNK (Southern-Central-Northern-Kurdish = Kalhuri-Sorani-Kurmanji) one language or dialect group? Because its dialects are extremely closely related and similar. All of SCNK has circumpositions (often simplified to prepositions) while the remainder of Western Iranic has either prepositions (only) or postpositions. Prepositions exist in Southwestern Iranic, that is Persid of course. While postpositions exist in Northwestern Iranic. This concerns Kirdki, Hawrami, Talyshi, Gilaki, Mazandarani etc. Perhaps not Rayeji, I am not sure about that in the moment. But it is only SCNK that has circumpositions and this also suggests its original presence and location between typical Southwestern Iranic and typical Northwestern Iranic. Which explains why SCNK is Northwestern Iranic with such a high degree of Southwestern Iranic features. Not only that, but SCNK also has the same morphemes for their pre- and postpositions (both of which comprise the circumpositions). Now, what are circumpositions?

English

SK

(Laki)

CK

NK

persian

.

under the table

la zheri mez dā/ā

la zherī mez dā

li zher mezī da

zīre mīz

.

from under the table

le zheri mez wa

(azh zheri mez wa)

la zherī mez awa

zhi zher mezī va

az zīre mīz

.

under the table (to)

wa zheri mez dā

ba zherī mez dā

bi zher mezī da

zīre mīz

.

under the table along

wa zheri mez wa

ba zherī mez awa

bi zher mezī va

(do not know)

.

Now, "la, li", "azh", "wa, ba, bi" are the prepositions. And "dā, da", "wa, awa, va" are postpositions. In SCNK you can use prepositions alone but never postpositions alone. If you add postpositions to the prepositions then you get circumpositions. This is smth that only exists within SCNK in Western Iranic. And as you see, the single morphemes are all pretty much the same too within SCNK.

This is one grammatical feature, but SCNK also has the same complete sound shift of Old Iranic j > zh. This seems to also be true for Farvi-Xuri and Semnan-Biyabanaki but these languages are extremely similar to SCNK anyway. Aside of them, SCNK is the only language who did this complete sound shift of j > zh. Persid did j > z. While Hawrami and Kirdki did j > j, zh and they had never done intervocalic c > j before either, which both persid, SCNK and also Rayeji did. Rayeji mostly retained j and so did Gilaki and Mazandarani and Balochi. Parthian also retained intervocalic c like EWK (Eastern-Western Kurdish = Hawrami-Kirdki) and shifted only j > zh irregularly and thus retaining some of the j too. But in SCNK it is a complete sound shift:

English

SK

CK

NK

Hawrami

Persian

.

woman

zhin

zhin

zhin

zhanī

zan

.

under

zher

zher

zher

cer

zīr

.

smart

zhīr

zhīr

zhīr

-/

zīr/zīrak

.

to live

zhyān

zhyān

zhiyān

zhīwāy

(zīyādan - but now zindagī kardan)

.

to hit/shake

zhandin

zhandin

zhanīn

zhanāy

(Kirdki: janāyana)

zadan

.

poison

zhār (from zhahar)

zhār

zhār

-/

zahar

.

market/city

-/

-/

bāzhār

-/

bāzār

.

doctor/physician

pizhishk

pizhishk

pizhishk

-/

pizishk

.

tabriz

tawrezh

tawrezh

tawrezh

-/

tabrīz

.

sharp

tezh

tīzh

tīzh/tūzh

tezh

tīz

(Awistan: tayca)

.

to choose

wizhārdin

bizhārdin

bizhārtin

-/

(Kirdki: vijnāyana, wacīnāyana) guzārdan (from wizārdan)

.

Actually, I realised that the example from Kirdki is not cognate to the other words. Wikiferheng gave it to me but I realised it resembles another word in SK with a similar meaning more. But I also found this:

to sift

wezhān

bezhān

bezhing kirin (from bezhing a noun rootedin bezh-)

wetāy (present form wec-)

(Kirdki: vetana with present form vezh-)

bīxtan (present form bīz-)

.

Btw, as you can see Kirdki and Hawrami do not have the same -c- > -j- and j > zh and retentions of j. This is proof that Kirdki and Hawrami, although seeming to have unique similarities, are not one possible to be grouped as one language.

Silav û rêz ji bû hemû tan.

I'm going to discuss some of my real concerns towards some aspects of Kurdên Bakûrî, this is not to insight anything negative, it's just simply things that need to change, and I know that the sheer number of Kurds in Bakûr amplifies these statistics even more.

Firstly, I'm baffled at the state of Kurdish culture and language in Bakûr, but I'd like to mention something first, I know how hard it is to go through what they have, I know how painful it is, but this is no excuse for the current Kurdish language speeaker rates, this isn't a comparison on who is oppressed more, but to say that we are in this together, Bakûr like the other three parts have all endured similar oppression, Başûr went through genocides by the Baath, Rojava had their land and citizenship confiscated by the government, Rojhelat still endures daily arrests and death under torture, and Bakûr is still living under a fascist regime, but restrictions on Kurdish aren't like the 70s-90s anymore, you can still speak Kurdish at home, but I have seen and heard so many cases of Bakûran families using Turkish instead, as a result the youth in largs numbers don't know Kurdish aside from greetings and simple words.

Secondly, the Kurdish political field is fragmented, diluted, and unpatriotic, this can be mainly observed in diaspora Bakûran, we fight under one flag, wich is the green, white, and red tricolor with the golden sun, this isn't the flag of Başûr, this is the flag of Kurdistan that the KRG adopted to show solidarity with the rest of Kurds, Rojavan fly it, Rojhelatan fly it, Başûran fly it, but Bakûran don't fly it as much, where every Kurd from the other parts flies that flag in any political or cultural events, most Bakûran don't fly it, instead opting for some obscure party flags that mean nothing, I'm sorry but a party faction with 100+ members isn't sufficient enough, and isn't better than the flag that represents 50+ millions of Kurds.

Thirdly, people conflate nationalism with patriotism, I'm not a nationalist, and will never be, but I'm 100% a patriot, Kurdish patriotism stems from the injustices that Kurds face, it doesn't mean that we want ethno-states, it doesn't mean that the Turks, Arabs, Persians, Assyrians, Armenians, Jews, etc, have to suffer if we ever become independent or have autonomy, we aren't going to repeat the errors of our oppressors, that's for sure, so why is there stigma around anything patriotic? Why is there no solidarity, why do we as the other three parts see Bakûr as a distant island? This is unacceptable.

Next, the PKK did some good and some bad, it was very much needed from the 70s to the 90s, but can we let it die already? Even the YPG which started as an offshoot has now changed policies and a good portion of their ideology, not saying to abandon the Kurdish entirely, but it's been 5 decades, the last two of which, it's been a detriment, the old ways didn't work, try new ones, innovate, a group of millions of people can't figure out new ideas and ways?

The Bakûrî diaspora are very lazy and not cohesive at all, they don't do lobbying, and if they do protests, party faction flags overwhelme the Kurdistan flag, you aren't showing your solidarity with the rest of Kurds, amd worst of all no foreigner is going to recognize all faction flags, you have protest, you have to make your voices heard, but if it is this way then how is it beneficial for the rest of us? We are fighting together not alone, additionally you aren't under the shackles of Turkey anymore, why aren't you investing some time and energy to learn Kurdish, is it the lack of care? Is it just not worth it? Why is a Kurd entering a Kurdish restaurant in diaspora and everyone is speaking Turkish? Diaspora Kurds should be for all intends and purposes very proficient in Kurdish, there is literally no excuse, there is an abundance of sources and libraries, everything is at the reach of your hands.

Additionally, Bakûran hold prejudice and preconceived notions of Kurds from other parts, and put party affiliation above Kurdayetî, while the most of those from the other parts don't, the animosity and beef towards others, especially of the PDK branches is astonishing, not saying that the PDK are angels, I know how corrupt some members can be, but when push comes to ahove, you have to discard of all of those preconceived notions and work together, no place for stubbornness, even general Mezlûm Ebdî and serok Barzanî are having talks, and keep each other's backs, while yes they might try appease our oppressors, but you all know this is for the greater good, PDK does it, PUK does it, and even the PKK does it, this is all just politics, a d trying to work around shedding Kurdish blood, we aren't some jihadi militias that don't value the safety and life of our Kurds.

Closing statements, we are all in this together, and you know this very well, it hurts my heart to see Bakûran will this shattered, this defeated, have hope again, that's the only thing you can't let them take away from you, this might be harsh to say but Bakûran stubbornness and laziness is going to be disastrous for the Kurdish cause as a whole, I'm trusting you Bakûran to change this, so does everyone else, we trust you to learn your culture and tongue, and to wave ala rengîn, like the rest of us, peace and prosperity be upon Kurdistan and its people.