Harazat - Haraberakan

[MosJan]

Harazat - Haraberakan, kam aveli jisht HAR masniki imast@.

 

Yete HArazati Har@ da motik/sert e nshanakum apa Azat@ kam Zat@ inch e?

 

MOvses

[Arpa]

Pataskhan@ oughagroutyan mej e.
Harazat begins with the letter "ho" while haraberakan with "hi". The latter is based on "har" or better yet, "yar/jar" which in fact is a variation of "ar" with eventual addition of the "hi". It means "kits", nex-to or adjoining. It can also be found in the Latin "ar(me)" in words such as "armoire", "armament" which simply mean composition in the sense of "sarq/sarqavoroum", this is attested by another Armenian word "sar" (not mountain in this instance). It is also based on the "ar" as seen in the previous sentence "sarq/sarqoum". Going one step further -"shar/sharq/sharel", again to mean to compose to build. Therefor, based on all these- "haraberil" which in its pure form literally means to "place next to one another", to compare, "haraberakan"=comparable/relative. We cannot but wonder why then a redundant word-"harakits/yara-kits" simply a repetition of "har"=next to, and "kits" abutting.

On the other hand "har" as in "harazat" (spelled with the letter "ho") is from the Pahlavi "harazate" or "har-zata/zade", the first part "har"= alike, and "zade" born of(tsnyal), therefor- born alike, of the same parent (father). In this sense the phrase "har yev nman" is another redundancy.

[Azat]

Movses, es inch harts@. Azat@ yes em.

[Harut]

so, however we look to Armenian language, it has similarities with European AND Middle Eastern languages.

[MosJan]

Shnorhakal em

 

Arpa jan dzer masnagitutyun@ inch e ???

[MosJan]

hetaqrqirn iyn e vor mez hamar amenaharazat bari himqum @enkats e Pahlavin,

[Arpa]

Asum es te nuynisk "harazat" bar@ harazat chi?

MosJan,
Noritz @ndvzum es.
Don't get frustrated. It is not all that bad.
Etymologists(I am not), just as all scientists must rely on evidence and record, they cannot make sweeping assertions without citing the source.In his preface to the Armatakan Bararan Ajarian says;"... bayts yes partq em hamarel kataryal xghjmtutyamb tertel bolor ousoumnasirutyunner@...". And in another place he states that his search went from the east to the west always trying to decide which record went further back. James Russell, in his Zoroatrianism in Armenia has this to say; "On the other, the inaccesssibility of much of historical Armenia, the absence of archaeological material, and the detruction of the ancient Armenian communities and consequent scarcity of modern, scientifically presented ethnographic evidence creates gaps which cannot be filled".
As mentioned above, scientists must stick to evidence, I don't have to. I can even be wishful in thinking that what we attribute to Pahlavi today may have in fact been original Armenian, borrowed into Pahlavi and come full circle. There are those who firmly believe that Armenian is the "mother tongue" of all IndoEuropean languages. Of which all European languages as as well as Armenian, Pahlavi and even Sanskrit (Hindic). The reason etymologists rely heavily on Pahlavi may be due to the fact that the latter was the lingua franca of Persia well into the 7th and 8th c. AD, before being supplanted by the Quranic language. Hence there is more literature in that language than in ancient Armenian. All this thanks to Souren Pahlavuni, aka Souren Partev, son of Anak. Who, after his father's execution was smuggled to Caesaria where he was indoctrinated with western (Roman, Byzantina)values, and who being convinced that Armenia's salvation lay in aligning with the west and rejecting the east. He may have been right. At the time Armenia was a satrapy of Persia, all culture including language, tradition, and even religion was persified. At that time also the west was fast rushing towards christianization. Souren, took the name of Grigor Pahlavuni, returned to Armenia and engaged in a hot contest to distance the country from Persia and bring it in line to Byzantium. The contest was in our favor, we adopted the new religion before them. We succeeded to emphazize our difference if only by religion. Later Souren, better known as Grigor Lousavorich made sure that every vestige of our previous heritage was totally destroyed and obliterated. He succeeeded. All preChristian literature was forever lost. Yes Armernians did have written language, forever lost until Mesrop invented an all new alphabet (good thing).
When our etymologists invoke Pahlavi as the root to many of our words it is mainly because our ancient literature was lost while the Pahlavi continued to relatively modern times.
And as mentioned above; Who is to say that those words we attribute to Pahlavi and other languages were not originally invented by Armenians, loaned out and reloaned again?
So, let us say they are native Armenian words and pass the onus on them to prove otherwise.

[Twilight Bark]

Exactly. Bravo Arpa!
Without any bias, one can make the argument that since the indo-european language spread from the Armenian direction (regardless of whether Armenia was the "ground-zero" of the indo-european language) towards Persia, it is entirely reasonable that the speakers of "proto-Armenian" used the precursors of those words before Pahlavi and Persian diverged into distinct languages.