Wikiqısebend ra
(Vaten:cuer ra kırışı yê)
Xıl de be pusula Xıl de cıgeyrayışi

cuwer ciciyo? Ino xeleto, gerek cor bo. -- 09:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Cuwer comes from *hača-upairi-. This shows that the word has two parts: *hača + *upairi.

  • hača becomes cı
  • upairi becomes uwer/ower, (p-->w) is a classic change.

So two words come together at cıuwer/cıower. Later "ı" is dropped because of dissimilation with u/o). This cannot be something like "cewr" as Asmen claims. --Xoser 15:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

has the same root as the "cor", yeah this is right. but the developing of "cor" was different.
Convert the old iranic example please first always to the zaza alphabet, then you see.
  • heče + *upeiri
This will in Persian "zeber", in Balochi "zebr" (loaned from persian), in Proto Zazaki "cewr", then cor.
Like you know: Old Iranic "ep" will be in Zazaki "w".
What is more realistic? That this "w" comes from old iranic "p" or this "w" comes from old iranic "u"?
Do you belive that this old iranic "p" get losing? You can see this "p" in Persian as "b", whic will changes in Northwest-languages to "w".
Like i said, this "u" in "upeiri" was lost before yeartousands. Like the "u" in upe-serde, which will wesar.
This "w" louds comes from "p".
PS: upeiri cant become "uwer", because such word like "uwer" can not exist.
Beside "w" doesn't come "u", "uwer" you read: uuer.
Its simple: "cuer" in Bingol-Dialect is from o > ue changing.

--Vacarıc 16:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Where does your "e" comes from, given that we have *hača --> cı change. Keep in mind, these two words come together after *hača --> cı change. We don't have a word like "hačaupairi" in Avestan or Old Persian. Xoser 17:03, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Moreover, in Persian i-->e and e-->i change is very common. Middle Persian has many dialects and different forms also. Xoser 17:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Not all loud-shifts arranged in all words in the same developing-.
This "cı" was in Middle Persian and Parthian with "e" too, in Kurdish and Zazaki then changed to "ı".
i -> e in Persian mean in Zaza Alphabet: i > ê changing.
Persian didnt change /ae/ louds in to /i/. You can see in the Proto-Word *hača-upairi any E (ê)-Louds. Only /ae/ louds.
And the word "from" was in Parthian with /ae/ too: azh (Persian Alphabet), ej (Zaza Alphabet). Every linguist does know, that the /ae/-loud in "from" is older then the dump i-loud in kurdish and zazaki.
If a word make a loud shift, this don't mean, all words with the same root make it.
That you have more than 2 theses, showes that you are not sure on this topic:
1. these of you: cı+wer
2. these of you: cuwer, actually: cuuer
3. these of you: c-wer
So, which these you actually support??
See the developing: heče +upeiri, what will change? eče will change to "ce", "peir" to "wer".
Look Balochi: zebr, Persian: zeber (eče+peir) < this are the evidences. That Old Iranian "ep" will be in New/Middle Iranian "eb", then in Zazaki "ew". --Vacarıc 17:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
You claim that in Zazaki, it should be like "cewr". Okay. So my question is that why we don't see "cewr" versions at all? There are many dialects that still has ew (like hewt, čewt...). Why we don't have this word then? Xoser 17:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
The word "cı" in Zazaki, comes from Proto-Zazaki "ce", Hewrami and some Caspian dialects: "ce".
And imagine now: Thi word-combination for "yukari" is TOUSANDS years old. So only because New Zazaki and New Kurdish changed it to /ı/, that now means, that this tousand year old word also change the /E/ to /ı/.

The developing was suchwise:

*heče- > Middle Persian: ez (from Proto-Version: *eze), Parthian: ej (from Protoversion: eje.
Many Kurdish dialects: je (from Proto-Version: *eje) [look Paul Horn, he also writes for Kurdish: je and jı)
Now take a look to the developing of "cor"
*heče + upeiri + > will be in Persian: zeber, in Proto-Zazaki: cewer > in later Proto Zazaki: cewr, then finally: cor.
You must differ between "ue" and "eu". "ue" in Bingol dialect is a change of "o". But "eu" is the original loud.
Today also doesn't exist the Variant "emşew" for "tonight", all dialects using: emşo.
If you don't will change your opinion and think, "cuwer" were the most original variant, then make at least right spelling:
Right spelling is: cuer. Beside "u" doesn't comes beside "w".
"w" comes only beside other vocals as difong, like "ew". But not as "uw", because uw were in reading: UU and this makes not sence, because this were then not a diftong, so the function of "W" were then away. --Vacarıc 15:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC) --Vacarıc 15:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
How do you know the proto-zazaki is ce? persian zeber comes from ejwer, not zeber. this doesn't has to do with bingols "ue". Bingol's ue is just a development of last 100 years. emşew exist in my dialect. why does u and w comes together in these variants: zuwon, zuwun? Xoser 15:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Because my friend, this people don't know the function of the diphtong-letter /W/. This people should learn their langauge better. Ask Asmen, if you not believe to me.
Such words like zuwon or zuwun don't exist. They are: zuon and zun.
If you write "zuwon", then you read it suchwise: zuuon. And this makes not any sence. Because /w/ is only for this function: /w/ (oku: u) sesi yandaki vokallerle bir sese kaynasiyor, mesela /ew/ gibi. O halde e-u okunmuyor, /eu/ bitesik okunur, as a unit.
Why you believe, that Paul horn let a SPACE between "ec" and "wer? Because he don't know what loud was BETWEEN this word-ragments. This losing loud was /ae/.
So, if persian "zeber" comes from "ecewer", then persian changed /w/ to /b/ in this case. Like hizwan > zeban.
Then the developing was suchwise:
*heče + upeiri > ecewer > zeber.
How do you know the proto-zazaki is ce? < Because kurdish and zazaki changed old iranian /ae/ in to dump /i/. Until Middle Iranian this loud was /ae/, also in Hawrami it is "ce". --Vacarıc 15:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, all your explantions does not work for "cowr" version. How about that? --Xoser 06:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)