OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.

org/articles/ossetic

About
Support & Donations
Printed Volumes
Contact

OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and

description

OSSETIC LANGUAGE, an Iranian language spoken in the Central Caucasus, mainly in the North
Ossetic Republic (Alaniya) of the Russian Federation and in the South Ossetic (until 1990, autonomous)
area of Georgia. In addition, minor Ossetic settlements exist at various places in the North Caucasus. An
Ossetic-speaking population is also found in a few villages in central and eastern Anatolia (Turkey), the
descendants of refugees who left their native country in the North Caucasus in the 1860s.

i. History and description.

ii. Ossetic Loanwords.

HISTORY

According to the 1989 Soviet census, Ossetic is spoken by about 500,000 people; of these, about 330,000
live in North Ossetia and 125,000 in Georgia (ca. 64,000 in South Ossetia). These figures should,
however, be regarded with some caution as a large part of the Ossetic population is bilingual, speaking at
least one of the neighboring languages—Kabardian (Cherkes), Ingush (a Nakh, NE Caucasus language),
or Karachay-Balkar (Turkic languages). Knowledge of Russian is also widespread, especially in towns,
for Russian serves as a medium of administration and instruction and as a lingua franca for
communication with the various neighboring peoples. Bilingualism goes far back and must have
characterized the normal social situation from time immemorial all over the North Caucasus. Language
shifts and the change of linguistic and tribal borders must therefore have been common.

Ossetic belongs to the eastern branch of the Iranian family of languages. The linguistic ancestors of the
present-day Ossetes were Alan tribes who, according to Greek and Roman sources, emigrated from
Central Asia to the lands north and east of the Black Sea about the beginning of the Christian era (see
ALANS, ASII). The Alans were, in their heyday in the early Middle Ages, a predominant people in the
Northwest Caucasus, and their dialects were widespread in the area. The language was gradually ousted
by Turkic and Cherkes immigrants from the west and north, and it is now limited to a relatively small
region. There is some evidence that the present Ossetic-speaking area was formerly inhabited by Nakh-
speaking (Ingush-Chechen, NE Caucasus) tribes. The previous presence of the Alans in the Northwest
Caucasus is borne out by a number of place names of Iranian origin in modern Turkish and Cherkes areas.

Ossetic, like its Alanic predecessor, has for millennia been separated from the sister languages of Central
Asia, being spoken in non-Iranian surroundings. It has developed certain characteristic peculiarities, in
part due to the influence of adjacent languages (Turkic, Caucasic). This applies to vocabulary as well as
phonetic and grammatical structure. As regards lexical borrowing, the influence of Turkic languages

2 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

seems to have been particularly strong.

Among the phonetic and grammatical features that may be ascribed to Caucasus or Turkish interference
are the voiceless unaspirated glottalic stops, that is, stops accompanied by a closure of the vocal cords: p’,
t’, c’, č’, k’ (q’). The glottalics are mainly found in Caucasic loanwords, but also in a few indigenous
words, especially after s: xuịsk’/xusk’ “dry” (< OIr. *huška-). Unlike the Caucasic languages, the
functional load of the glottalization is inessential in Ossetic; minimal pairs opposing t’ and t, d, etc. are
rare. In loanwords, the Russian voiceless stops and affricates are usually rendered by their glottalic
counterparts, even if this practice is not shown by the orthography.

Grammatical features that may be ascribed to North Caucasic (or Turkic?) influence are: the extensive use
of a gerundial form (converb) to mark syntactic subordination, the system of orientational preverbs, the
development of an intricate case system, the compound verbs consisting of a noun plus an auxiliary that
jointly behave as a syntactic unit, the loss of gender, the use of enclitic pronouns and adverbs for
anticipating noun phrases. Some of these features are, of course, found in other Iranian languages.
Vigesimal (base 20) counting (e.g., fondz-ịssädz- ị “100,” i.e., 5 x 20) is also to all appearances due to
Caucasic influence.

In general, however, the Ossetic grammatical structure has been resistant to foreign influence. Especially
the verb has roughly retained the character of Old Aryan. The verb is unipersonal, showing concord with
only one actant of the clause. Ergativity (see ERGATIVE CONSTRUCTION), which is traditionally
considered as common to the Caucasic languages, has not penetrated Ossetic, either syntactically or
morphologically. The subject of the verb is almost invariably put in the nominative. Actually, Ossetic has
gone through a stage of ergativity: the genitive continues to be used as the subject of the past tense of
transitive verbs. This historical stage is also still reflected in the use of the genitive case of the personal
pronoun of the 1st and 2nd plural as the subject case. Like most other modern Iranian languages, Ossetic
has abandoned the ergative system.

The basic core of the lexicon, words signifying elementary human experience, are mostly of Iranian
origin. Turkish and Caucasic loanwords are, as a rule, denotations of social and natural phenomena
peculiar to the Caucasus. It is noteworthy that quite a large number of plant names seem to be of Turkish
origin.

Preliterary evidence. So far three medieval Alanic texts have been identified and published: (1) an
inscription found on the Zelenchuk River in the Northwest Caucasus, dating from the 11th-12th century
(see Zgusta); (2) a couple of verses in a manuscript of the Theogony of the Byzantine writer Ioannes
Tzetzes (late 12th cent.; see Hunger, 1953); (3) the Yassic word list in a Hungarian document dating from
1422, containing some 40 words with Latin translations from the language of the Yass, descendants of
Alan immigrants who together with Turkish Cumans fled from the Mongols about the middle of the 13th
century (Németh, 1958; Bielmeier, 1989b; see CODEX CUMANICUS). In addition there exist two short
lists of words from the 17th-18th centuries (Bielmeier, 1989a) and a few texts with a list of words and a
short grammatical sketch in Julius von Klaproth’s travelogue (II, appendix, pp. 176-224).

Literary language. The first Ossetic book to appear in print was a short catechism by the Archimandrite
Gai, printed in Moscow in 1798; it was written in the Cyrillic script with some modifications (see
Thordarson, 1989, pp. 457-58). At the beginning of the 19th century Ivane Ialğuzidze (1775-1830)
published three Ossetic religious texts, translated from Georgian, and an abecedary; he used the Georgian
(xucuri “ecclesiastical”) script, with some adaptations and additional letters. His language was South
Ossetic (Akhvlediani, 1960, pp. 80 ff.). About the middle of the 19th century, a writing system was
created by the Russian scholar Andreas Johann Sjögren on the basis of the Russian script. This was in

3 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

general use until the 1920s. In 1923 the Latin script was introduced; it was replaced in North Ossetia in
1938 by a new variant of the Russian alphabet. In 1939 the Georgian (mxedruli “secular”) script, with a
few additions, was adopted in South Ossetia. It was abandoned in 1954 in favor of the North Ossetic
Cyrillic script (TABLE 1).

Khetägkatị K’osta (1859-1906), the national poet of Ossetia, is traditionally regarded as the “father” of
Ossetic literature. His collection of poems, Iron fändịr (Ossetic lyre), was written in the Iron dialect. In
the 20th century, especially after the Revolution of 1917, an abundant literature evolved, almost entirely
in Iron. The Ossetes also possess a rich folklore; of special importance is the oral Nart epic cycle, known
all over the North Caucasus, but no doubt rooted in ancient Iranian epic poetry and mythology.

DIALECTS

Ossetic falls into two distinct dialects which are barely mutually intelligible: Iron (Iron ävzag, East Oss.)
and Digor (Dịguron ävzag, West Oss.; see DIGOR and IRON). There is some variation within each
dialect; the idiom of the South Ossetes is a variant of Iron. The literary and administrative language is
based on Iron. In all essentials Digor represents a more archaic stage of development; the relationship of
the dialects can be described in the terms of a focal versus a marginal dialect. Innovations have arisen in
the eastern areas around Vladikavkaz (Oss. Dzävdžịqäu), from there radiating to the west and south. Both
dialects go back to a fairly homogeneous Alanic proto-dialect. One can only make a guess about previous
dialectal differences. The language of the medieval documents, as far as their evidence goes, is closer to
Digor than Iron, but this is no doubt due to the more archaic character of that dialect. In vocabulary the
dialects differ to a considerable extent, but in the main the basic core vocabulary is the same. In their
phonological and grammatical structure they are closely related, although the morphological material used
in the inflections differs in some instances. These differences may reflect prehistoric dialectal
divergences. The inflection of the verb “to be” (uịn/un), some personal endings of the verbs, and the
demonstrative pronouns can be mentioned as examples. Case inflection has developed more slowly in
Digor than in Iron. In the creation of a symmetric bi-dimensional system of orientational preverbs, Digor
is less consistent than Iron. Unlike Iron, Digor retains vestiges of tmesis of the preverb and the verb. The
exclusive use of the present optative to express repeated action in the past is another archaic feature of
Digor, whereas in Iron the past optative is also used with this meaning. In a variant of Digor, the old
decimal system of counting was in use until recently, while Ossetic has in general adopted the Caucasic
vigesimal counting.

PHONOLOGY

1. The Iron dialect has the following vowel phonemes: i, ị, e, ä, a, o, u, a (or a), o, u. The vowels i, e, a, o,
u are long (strong Russ. sil’ye), ị ä short (weak, Russ. slabye); ị is a high, central vowel, but with a
considerable latitude according to the surroundings, having a back variant (IPA in the neighborhood of the
velars).

The Digor vowel phonemes are as follows: ī (the long i), i, e, ä, a, o, u. In writing ī and i are not kept
distinct (both written i).

Iron i corresponds to Digor e, and u corresponds to Digor o (e.g., iu/ieu “one,” urs/uors “white”). The
Digor short vowels i and u have in Iron merged in ị. In Digor e is found as a sandhi vowel: ä + ä and ä +
i, in which case it corresponds to Iron e. In indigenous Iron words, e is normal only as the result of vowel
contraction: me’mbal (< mä + ämbal) “my comrade,” festịn (Digor: festun) “arise” < fä + istun. The
semivowels j and w are here treated as allophones of i and u respectively.

4 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

Diphthongs are: ai, au, äi, iä, iu, ua uä, uị (Iron only), ui.

The historical background of the vowels will be sketched in broad outlines in the following.

OIr. *ai, *au result in Digor e, o and Iron i, u respectively. Digor initial e is preceded by a prethetic i [j]
[y?], initial o by u [w]: iu/ieu (< *aiwa-) “one,” urs/uors (< *aurša-) “white”

2. In principle Old Iranian final *ă, short and long i and u have been lost. Initial and medial *ă (hă)
becomes ä in both dialects, unless there follow two consonants, when it becomes a: däs (< *dasa-) “ten,”
but avd (< *hafta) “seven.” If there is a morpheme boundary between the two consonants, *ă (hă)
becomes ä: käs-tär (< *kasu-tara-) “junior”; *ă (hă) also becomes ä if it is followed by another syllable:
fäzdäg (< *pazdaka-) “smoke.” In words that had become monosyllabic in old (i.e., pre-dialectal) Ossetic,
initial and medial *ă (hă) become o if followed by a consonant cluster starting with n: fondz (< *panča-)
“five,” but fändzäm (< *pančama-) “fifth.”

Old Iranian non-final a frequently becomes Digor u, Iron ị: Digor mud, Iron mịd (< *madu-) “honey,”
Digor cuppar, Iron cịppar (< *čaθwāra-) “four” in the neighborhood of u (*w): u-umlaut. OIr. ă > Digor
ī, Iron i in the neighborhood of i (*y): innä (beside annä) (< *anya-) “another,” Digor suğzärinä, Iron
sịğzärin (gold) (< *suxta- “burnt” + zaranyā- “gold”). OIr. a > Digor i, Iron ị in the neighborhood of n:
Digor find-däs, Iron fịnd-däs (< *panča-dasa-) “fifteen.” (following the author’s article in Compendium,
p. 460)

Old Iranian initial and medial *ā > a: Digor and Iron max (< *a(h)māxam-) “we, us,” art (< *āθr-) “fire,”
except when a nasal follows, in which case *ā- > on, om: Digor and Iron nom (< *nāman-) “name,” don
(< *dānu-) “water.” This narrowing of OIr. *ām/n, which is common to both dialects, is evidently recent,
dating from late medieval times (cf. dan “water,” ban “day” in the Yassic list of words). OIr. *ā seems to
be shortened before i (*y) in a number of words: Digor mäiä, Iron mäi (< *mā(h)yā-) “moon, month,” but
Digor naiun, Iron naiịn “to bathe”; cf. Old Ind. snāyate, but Av. snaiia-. However, *āw > au; cf. the
equative suffix -au (<*-āwa-).

3. Before certain suffixes and in compounds, a is shortened to ä. Thus before the plural ending -t(ä): marğ
“bird,” pl. märğ-tä, don “water, river,” pl. Digor dänttä-, Iron dättä, ävd-säron (< avd “seven” + sär
“head” + the adjectival suffix –on) “seven-headed.” Also occasionally before case endings: Iron färs-ịl
“on the side,” adessive of fars “side.” This applies to both dialects. As this vowel shift cannot be
explained within the framework of modern Ossetic phonology, it is tempting to assume that it was caused
by a dynamic stress on the following syllable at some earlier phase in the development of the language.
The syncope of medial vowels is also indicative of a previous prosodic system of free dynamic accent
affecting the quantity of the vowel in a preceding syllable, which has been abandoned in the modern
language, for instance avg/avgä (< *āpakā´-) “glass,” čịzg/kizgä “girl” (< *kizakā, Turk. qïz) “girl,” the
gerund in -äg, if from an oxytone instrumental of a verbal noun in -aka-: *-akā.

4. While Old Iranian * ạ and ā have in principle been kept as distinct phonemes ä, a, Old Iranian short
and long i and u have merged in short i and u respectively—a stage that has been retained in Digor. In
Iron medial i and u have further merged in ị: Digor cirğ, Iron cịrğ (< *tigra-) “sharp,” Digor furt, Iron fịrt
(< *puθra-) “son.” Initial Digor u- > Iron uị (diphthong): Digor urdug, Iron uịrdịg “upright” (cf. OInd.
ūrdhva-, Av. ərədwa-; AirWb., col. 350). In Iron initial ị is lost: Digor i bälas, Iron bälas “the tree” (i is
the definite article, see below).

The Old Iranian diphthong *ai results in Digor e and Iron i, and OIr. *au in Digor o and Iron u: iu/ieu (<
*aiwa-) “one,” urs/uors (< *aurća-) “white” (cf. Av. auruša-; AirWb., col. 190); Old Iranian initial and

5 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

medial *ṛ becomes är if there follows another syllable: Iron and Digor ärzät (< *ṛzaqa-) “ore,” (cf. Av.
ərəzata-; AirWb., col. 352); if no syllable follows, *ṛ > ar: mard (< *mṛta) “dead.” Final *ṛ > -är: Digor
nauär, Iron nuar (with contraction) < *snāwṛ- “vein, sinew.”

5. The relative chronology of the sound changes sketched above needs elucidation, as does the influence
of a prehistoric accentuation on the vowel quantity and quality.

6. The consonant phonemes of Iron can be set forth as follows:

Stops: voiced: b d dz dž, g gu

voiceless, aspirated: p t c č k ku q qu

voiceless, glottalized: p’ t’ c’ č’ k’ k’u

Spirants: voiced: v z ğ ğu (h often before initial vowels)

voiceless: f s x xu

Nasals: m

Liquids: l r

Digor has the following consonant phonemes:

Stops: voiced: b d dz g gu

voiceless, aspirated: p t c k ku q qu

voiceless, glottalized: p’ t’ c’ k’ k’u

Spirants: voiced: v z ğ ğu

voiceless: f s x xu

Nasals: m n

Liquids: l r

7. The phonological status of the labiovelars is questionable. They have here (hesitantly) been interpreted
as consonant velars (k, x, etc.), followed by u [w], although a monophonemic interpretation may be
preferable (kʷ, xʷ, etc.).

OIr. *xwai becomes Digor xe, Iron xi: xid/xed (<*xwaida-) “sweat.” In Digor ancient *xw is retained
before a, ä, while in Iron the labialization is (virtually) lost: Digor xuärun, Iron xärịn “to eat,” but > -o-
before a consonant cluster: past participle Digor xuard, Iron xord, Digor xuarz, Iron xorz “good.”

The uvular stops q and qu have penetrated both dialects from neighboring languages. Old Iranian initial
*g- has become ğ- in common Ossetic, which is retained in Digor; in Iron it has become q-: Digor ğarm,
Iron qarm (< *garma-) “hot.” This development is recent (late 19th-early 20th century) in South Ossetic.

The phonological interpretation of the geminate stops raises problems; some scholars treat them as a

6 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

fourth series of non-aspirated, non-glottalic, voiceless stops, variously written bb, pp, pb, bp, etc., but it
seems most economical to interpret them as clusters on a par with other geminates.

8. OIr. *s and *š, and *z and *ž, have merged into one phoneme: s and z respectively; but the phonetic
realization varies considerably in the local idioms. In South Ossetic a dental-alveolar pronunciation
prevails, while in North Iron, and at least in Digor variants, a more palatal pronunciation is usual.

The Old Iranian affricates are represented as c and dz. In addition, c derives from *ti/y, *θi/y and *čy (IE.
*kʷy): Iron -ịnc, Digor -uncä, (< *-anti) 3rd plural ending (e.g., cärịnc/cäruncä “they live”); Iron, Digor
äcäg (< *haθyaka-) “true”; cäuịn/cäuun (< IE. *kʷyew-) “to go, come” (cf. Av. š(ii)auu-; AirWb., col.
1714). Digor has only one affricate and one sibilant series, thus retaining the structure of common Old
Ossetic. In Iron a secondary affricate series has arisen through the palatalization and later affricatization
of the velar stops before front vowels: č, dž (č’), originally were allophones of the velar stops k, k’, g. This
development is recent (18th century). Through paradigmatic pressure, the older pronunciation is retained
as a variant: lägị beside lädžị, gen. sg. of läg “man.” There is considerable local variation in the phonetic
realization of both the sibilants and the affricates (dental-alveolar, alveolo-palatal pronunciation). In South
Ossetic the old affricates were realized as č and dž until the 19th century (probably an archaism). In the
modern pronunciation they have become palatal sibilants: šärịn = cärịn “to live,” except after n and when
geminated, in which case the palatal affricate is retained: žurịnč “they talk.” The secondary affricates are
realized as c, dz (c’). In North Iron a palatal pronunciation of the sibilants predominates: žonịn “I know” =
zonịn; the old affricates are here realized as dental sibilants. Thus the main variants of Iron tend towards a
system of two sibilant and one affricate series, the same system as in Digor and the Alan proto-dialect.

9. OIr. *t, k, č are retained as voiceless, aspirated stops/affricates. In intervocalic position and after voiced
consonants, sonorization is the rule: Iron, Digor zärond (< *zarānt-) “old,” sudzịn/sodzun (< *sauəa-) “to
burn” (trans., intr.).

Old Iranian initial *p becomes f- (attested in Sarmatian documents from late antiquity): Iron, Digor fad (<
*pāda-) “foot.” In intervocalic position p >b > v: äxsäv/äxsävä (< *xšapan-) “night,” but b is retained
after m: ämbịd/ämbud (< *ham-pūta-) “rotten,” and also in words where a preceding vowel has been lost:
Digor -bäl, the adessive suffix (Iron -i) (< *upári-) “into”; Iron, Digor preverb ba- (< *upá-) in
badịn/badun (< *upa-had-) “to sit.” A secondary p (pp) has developed through the assimilation of a labial
consonant (semi-vowel) and a preceding stop or spirant: cịppar/cuppar (< *čaθwāra-) “four.” Owing to
lexical borrowing, p (p’) has become a common phoneme in the modern language.

Old Iranian initial *b- is represented by b-: Iron, Digor bon (< *bānu-) “day.” In intervocalic position and
after voiced consonants (except m) *b > v: davịn/davun (< *dāb-) “to steal,” ävzär “bad” (cf. Av. zbar-
“to walk crookedly”; AirWb., col. 1699), but ämbarịn (< *ham-bār-) “to understand.”

OIr. *d is represented by d:darğ (< *darga-) “long,” and -g by ğ except after n, when it remains as g:
marğ (< *mṛga-) “bird,” cong (< *čanga-) “arm.” For the development of initial g-, see above.

OIr. *θ > t: Iron, Digor ärtä (< *θrayah-) “three,” art (< *āθr-) “fire,” but ard (< *ṛta- [*arta-?]) “oath.”

OIr. *ri/y results in l: näl (< *narya-) “male.”In a few words l seems to represent IE. *l:läsäg “salmon”
(uncertain documentation, but hardly a Russian loanword losos’; cf. Tokh.B. laks, Ger. Lachs, etc. — a
Eurasian migratory word?).

10. Consonant clusters, as a rule, consist of two consonants only; clusters of three consonants are found
where there is a morpheme boundary within the group. Clusters normally follow the pattern: spirant,

7 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

nasal, liquid + stop, spirant, liquid. Clusters consisting of two stops seem to occur in loanwords only:
fätk’uị/fätk’u “apple”; note, however, what was said above about geminate stops. As in other East Iranian
languages, ancient *xt and *ft have been sonorized: avd (< *hafta-) “seven” lịğd/liğd, past participle of
lidzin/ledzun “to run away”; cf. Av. irinaxti- (•raēk-, l < *ri- generalized; AirWb., col. 1479; for details of
the historical phonology, see Bielmeier, 1977, pp. 18-45; Thordarson, 1989, pp. 459-66, with
bibliographical references).

11. Prosody. The accent is a weak expiratory stress. Word accent is subordinate to phrase accent. The
flow of speech is divided into prosodic groups, where a single syllable carries the main accent; a
secondary accent may fall on other syllables in the group. As a rule, the first syllable of the group is
stressed if the vowel is long; if it is short, the second syllable is stressed. In Iron, where an initial ị is lost,
the first syllable of the group is stressed, although the vowel is short. This happens when the definite
article, still preserved in Digor, has been elided. Thus we get in Iron minimal pairs: sịrx xädzar “a red
house,” the second syllable stressed, = Digor surx xädzarä, but Iron sịrx xädzar “a red house,” the first
syllable stressed = Digor i súrx xädzarä. These prosodic features can hardly be old, and are probably to be
ascribed to the influence of some Caucasic (East, South?) languages. Possible traces of a previous
prosodic type, with a distinctive (free?) accent at the word level have been treated above (Phonology, 3).

MORPHOLOGY

1. Noun phrase. We distinguish between three basic parts of speech: nouns, verbs, and indeclinables.

There is no clear-cut distinction between substantives, adjectives, and adverbs. Pronouns and cardinal
numerals can be singled out as separate subclasses on the basis of certain morphological and syntactic
peculiarities. Lexical items that are classified as adverbs in other languages possess, to some extent, the
inflectional properties of nouns: niṛ “now,” niṛ-mä (all.) “until now,” nịr-ị (gen) cardäi mälät xuịzdär u
“death is better than the present life.”

Some nominal bases tend to be used primarily or exclusively in one particular capacity; this has to be
indicated in the lexicon. Thus, for instance, the suffix -on (<-*āna-) is frequent in the formation of
adjectives corresponding to Russ. -sk-: proletaron = Russ. proletarskiĭ.

As a rule, noun phrases are continuous. In most complex noun phrase types, the modifier precedes the
noun it modifies. The suffixes that mark the syntactic function of the noun phrase occur only once, in
most cases at the end of the phrase. A derivative affix can be added to a complex noun phrase (e.g., the
possessive -on: cịppar-k’ax-on “having four feet”). Concord in case and number between the members of
the noun phrase is not morphologically marked. The modifier is as a rule put in the nominative (absolute
case) or genitive. In the following clause: mäguịr zärond xäxxon lädžịk’ux-äi amad mäsịg u “this is a
tower built with hands of a poor old man from the mountains” (lit.: poor old mountaineer man’s [gen.]
with-hands [abl.] built tower is).

2. Modifiers. Cases other than the nominative (though hardly the Iron comitative) may occur as
modifiers—for instance, the material or partitive ablative; also the case-like prefixes äd- “with,” änä-
“without.” In these instances the position of the modifier can be freer than that of the nominative or
genitive: birätị kadžịn lägt-äi ämä iäxi ärvadält-äi amardta “he killed many of the worthy men and of his
own brothers” (lit.: many [gen. pl.] worthy of-men [abl. pl.] and his [gen. sg.] and of-brothers [abl. pl.] he-
killed).

In association with the genitive of enclitic pronoun, the dative can be used as a modifier, expressing
possession: män-än mä xo “my sister,” adäm-än sä ku’ist “the work of the people.” The word order can

8 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

also here be comparatively free. Similar constructions are found in the neighboring Northwest Caucasic
languages: Kabardian ḥa-m yə-pa-r “the dog its nose” (dog-obl. 3rd poss. nose-absol.), that is, “the dog’s
nose.”

3. Word order. The usual order of the noun phrase (i.e., modifier and head) occurs inverted as a stylistic
device; thus traditional surnames follow the proper name, as do epithets: Beduxa räsuğd “Beduxa the
beautiful.” Compare also inverted bahuvrīhis: zärdä-ruxs “joyous” (“whose heart is bright”) beside ruxs-
zärdä. This type of phrase is especially found in traditional epic style, and is evidently indicative of a
previously more flexible word order.

4. Inversion. The head can be put in the genitive followed by the modifier: mä fịdi zärond “my old father.”
This type of phrase has been explained as originating from the ancient relative (eżāfa) noun phrase
structure (head + *ya- + modifier), the relative *ya- having been identified with the genitive ending by a
syntactic re-interpretation (Bailey, 1946, pp. 205-6). In Digor a preclitic i- may precede the noun phrase
as a marker of definiteness: i duuä mugkag-än “for the two families (clans).” In Iron, where unstressed
initial ị is lost, definiteness is marked by the shift of accent (cf. Phonology, 11, above).

The article derives from the old relative pronoun *ya- (*ya(h) > i). Ossetic has thus two types of noun
phrases, where OIr. *ya- is found: as a definite article and as a link connecting a head with a following
modifier, an archaic feature that Ossetic shares with Avestan and Chorasmian.

5. Numerals in the phrase. Cardinal numbers higher than “one” and some quantifying nouns take the
genitive singular of the head: däs bäxị “ten horses.” If the noun phrase is used in an oblique case, the case
marker is added to the last member in the singular: k’ord läppu-imä “with a group of boys” (com.). This
construction probably reflects an old nominative plural in *-ah that has been identified with the
homonymous genitive -ị (< *ah).

6. Comparison. An intensifying or comparative suffix –där (< *-tara-) can be added to a noun; the
standard of comparison is put in the ablative: mä xo lägdär u m’efsịmär-äi “my sister is more manly than
my brother.” A superlative can be expressed lexically, for instance, äppä-t-äi stịrdär “the greatest of all”
(lit. greater than all).

7. Gender. There is no grammatical expression of gender, but natural sex can be expressed lexically: näl
“male,” sịl/silä “female” (cf. Av. nar- “man,” strī- “woman;” AirWb., cols. 1047, 1609). The old
declensional classes have also disappeared. Digor possesses two declensions, characterized by (1) -ä and
(2) zero in the nominative singular. In Iron there is only one declension. The membership of either
declension is without a semantic function: Digor fidä “father,” madä “mother” = Iron fịd, mad. The final
-ä of the first declension is lost before the endings of oblique cases, except the allative and the adessive,
and before the pluralizer -t-. The two declensions of Digor are presumably the result of a transfer of most
(all?) nouns to the two thematic classes in *-a(h), and *-ā. A vestige of this division is apparently
preserved in Digor, while in Iron the two declensions have been conflated.

8. Plurality. The plural of nouns is expressed by the suffix -t-, nom. –tä. In Iron the -ä is lost before the
oblique case endings, while in Digor the case inflection is treated according to the same rules as the -ä of
the ä-declension. The pluralizer derives from an Indo-European suffix *tā-, denoting collectivity,
plurality, approximation. The same suffix is used as a pluralizer in Sogdian and modern Yaghnobi (Sims–
Williams, p. 183; Bielmeier, 1989, p. 483). It is also attested in the Greek rendering of Scythian and
Sarmatian ethnic names as early as the 5th century BCE (Massagétai, etc.; see Herodotus 1.201, 1.204).
The original collective or amplifying meaning is still reflected in the use of -tä, -tị/ti with adverbs: kuịd-tä

9 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

“how, in which manners,” amị-tị, uịmị-tị “here, there, in these, those parts,” dälä-tị “below.” It is also
noteworthy that number agreement between a plural noun phrase as the subject and the verb is not
mandatory. Therefore, we regard the pluralizer as a derivational rather than an inflectional morpheme,
which is in agreement with its origin.

9. Case system. Modern grammarians assume nine morphological cases in Iron, namely the nominative
(nom.), genitive (gen.), dative (dat.), inessive (iness.), allative (all.), ablative-instrumental (abl.), adessive
(add.), equative (equ.), and comitative (com.). In Digor the comitative is lacking. In addition to these
primary cases, Ossetic has a number of postpositions, the majority of which are nouns used
metaphorically to express local and temporal meanings (secondary cases). Most postpositions are added
to the genitive. There are also a few prepositions. Prepositions and postpositions can take markers of
number and case: bälas-ị sär-äi “from the top of the tree” (sär “head”). Prepositions with case-like
functions are, e.g., äd- “with” (< *hada-), änä- (< *ana), däl- “below” (< *adari-), uäl “above” (<
*awari-? or *upari-?), fäs “behind” (< *pasā, cf. Av. pasča-; AirWb., col. 882): fäs-qus-t-äi (abl.) “(from)
behind the ears,” änä-sịmax-ba-fars-gä (gerund) “without asking you,” (lit.: without-you-asking).

The nominative (indefinite case, absolute) is as a rule derived from the Old Iranian nominative; nouns like
zärond (< *zarānt-) “old,” bärzond (< *bṛzānt-) “high,” and art (< *āθr-) “fire” are most likely based on a
thematization of an old oblique case form. Note Digor xuärä (< *xwahar-, obl.-) “sister,” but Iron xo (<
*xwahā, nom.). The nominative functions as the subject of both transitive and intransitive verbs as a
modifier in complex noun phrases. In competition with the ablative, it is used as a predicative
complement. It can express local and temporal meanings; in isolation it can have a naming and a vocative
function. In the latter function a few nouns may add the particle -ai (e.g., us-ai “oh woman”).

The genitive functions as a nominal modifier: mä fịdị xädzar “my father’s house,” Dzugatị Iosif “Joseph
of the Dzugatä clan.” If the direct object and the subject of a transitive verb both refer to animate things,
the object can be put in the genitive, especially if it refers to a definite thing; personal pronouns and
proper names always stand in the genitive when they are used as direct objects. With a few affective verbs
the genitive marks the experiencer; the verb appears in the 3rd singular: fändị mä, uịrnị mä “I want, I
believe.” The ending -ị/i seems to go back to the old athematic genitive suffix *-ah (< -*as; *-ahya would
probably have become -*äi).

The dative signifies the abstract notion towards somebody or something, the purpose or result of a
process. With three-place verbs it marks the indirect object: acị činịg dịn dädton “I shall give you this
book;” nä bäzzịn čịzg-än “I am no good as a girl” (bäzzịn “I am fit for”); ämä mịn us-än cäuị “and she
will become my wife, is coming to me as a wife” (predicative use). The ending -än is homonymous with
the suffix -än of a verbal noun that signifies purpose, suitability: bad-än “a seat” (bad-ịn “to sit,” ba-cäu-
än “entrance,” ba-cäu-ịn “go into”). Historically, the dative ending and the verbal noun in -än are
probably identical, going back to Old Iranian nouns in *-ana-.

Ossetic possesses three local cases: inessive, allative, and adessive, all indicating both “where” and
“whither,” contrasting with the ablative in the meaning “from where.” The inessive stands as the
unmarked locative case, expressing in general a point in time or place: uịcị xädzar-ị “in that house,” acị
rästädž-ị “at this time.” The ending -ị/-i goes no doubt back to the OIr. loc. *-yā.

The allative (locativus exterior) signifies direction towards, and rest at, or by, a place: xädzar-mä acịdi
“he went home, to the house.” With three-place verbs it is commutable with the dative: ämä sịn zağta
cuanon-t-äm “and he said to them the hunters.” In Iron the allative suffix is -mä in the singular, -m in the
plural, Digor -mä in both singular and plural.

10 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

The adessive expresses the notion on, along the surface of, according to: däs saxat-ịl “at ten o’clock,”
arast is sä fäd-ịl “he set out after them (on their footsteps).” The ending is Iron -ị and Digor –bäl. In Iron
a final velar is not affricatized before this case ending (but gen. lädž-ị, “the man’s,” com. lädž-imä “with
the man”); at the time when the palatalization/affricatization took place, the Iron ending was still
pronounced as -uị (diphthong), still recorded in the texts of Ialğuzidze (see Akhvlediani, 1960).

Unlike the inessive, which derives, as already mentioned, from the Old Iranian locative, the allative and
adessive are relatively late additions to the case system. Their endings go back to old postpositions that
were originally added to the nominative. This is borne out by the Digor ä-declension, where -mä, -bäl is
added to the nominative, not to the stem, as occurs with the other case endings. Adessive -ịl/bäl goes no
doubt back to *upári-. The origin of allative -mä is not quite clear, but a derivation from *hama- (instr.
*hamā?) is a plausible suggestion.

As a local case, the ablative expresses the starting point of an action in place and time: kalak-äi xädzar-
mä är-cịdi “he came home from the town.” Its function as the standard of comparison also expresses the
ablative notion, as well as its partitive use: avd ärvad-äi kästär “the youngest of the seven brothers.” In its
instrumental meaning, it expresses the circumstances accompanying the verbal process or action. Here
belongs its use as a predicative complement: am badịnc ast-äi “they sit here eight (in number).” This
undoubtedly reflects a similar use of the Old Iranian instrumental. The ending is -äi in both dialects, in
Iron -iä after vowels. It seems to go back to either the genitive-ablative of the ā-stems (*āyāh-) or an
instrumental in *-ayā or a conflation of both.

The equative expresses how an action proceeds: fatau ataxti “he flew like an arrow,” Iron-au xorz nä
dzurịn “I do not speak Ossetic well.” The ending -au goes back to the nominative singular masculine of
an adjective in *-āwan-, which also functions as an adverb in Sogdian and Khototanese.

The Iron comitative denotes the second participant in the action: Iron us-imä cärịn “I live with an Ossetic
woman.” The ending goes back to *-iu-mä, the allative of iu “one.” Its recent character is evident, as it is
absent in Digor, where the comitative meaning is expressed by the postposition xäccä (cf. Av. hamča-
“united”[?]; Air.Wb., col. 1778): mä furtt-i xäccä “with my sons,” or by the preposition äd- (< *hada-):
äd-don xädzarä-mä ra-cudi “she went home with (the) water.” The formation of the Iron comitative is
typologically reminiscent of the Georgian expression mas-tan ert-ad “with him” (dat. + the adess. -tan +
adverbial case of erti “one”).

We can thus reconstruct a previous stage of development with four morphological cases, namely
nominative, genitive, locative, and ablative-instrumental. With the exception of the comitative, the system
is identical in both dialects and must therefore be presumed for the proto-dialect. To this system
secondary cases have been added at various stages. In all instances the morphological material used is of
Iron origin.

When two or more noun phrases stand paratactically, the syntactic marker appears after the last one: mä
mad ämä mä fịd-ị xädzar “the house of my mother and father.”

10. Numerals. Vigesimal counting (i.e., base 20) prevails in both dialects: ịssädz/insäi “twenty,” fondz-
ịssädz-ị “one hundred,” cịppar ämä ärt-issädz-ị “sixty-four” (lit. 4 + 3 x 20). The old decimal counting
was in use in local Digor idioms until recently, and has in modern times been introduced into the official
language. The Caucasian background of the vigesimal counting is probable, although similar systems are
found in other East Iranian languages (e.g., Pamir). Ordinal numerals are formed by the ending -äm (Iron)
and -äimag (Digor): avdäm/avd-äimag “seventh,” or by -ag:fịccag/ficcag “first” (fịndz/findzä “nose”).
This numeral has evidently replaced an older *(f)ratama-, which seems to be attested in Hellenized

11 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

Scythian-Sarmatian proper names (e.g., Radamophourtos “the first son”). The modern word is
typologically reminiscent of Georgian p’irveli “first” (p’iri “mouth”); parallels are also found in other
Caucasian languages.

11. Pronouns. The personal pronouns of the first and second person singular are based on the opposition
between the nominative and the genitive: nom. äz (Iron, Digor), dị/du “I,” “you” (sg.), gen. män, däu
(Iron, Digor). The endings of the other cases are added to the genitive: dat. män-än, däu-än; abl. män-äi,
däu-äi. The inflection of the plural is based on the old genitive that serves both as a nominative and
genitive: max (< *a(h)māxam), sịmax/sumax (< *yušmāxam- or *šmāxam-). When the pronoun is used as
the direct object, the genitive ending of the nominal declension is added: max-ị etc. As a third person
pronoun, the demonstrative pronoun uịi/ie (ieiä) “that” is used. Three series of enclitic personal pronouns
refer to the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person singular and plural: gen. sg. mä, dä, äi, iä/äi, ä, pl. nä, uä, sä (Iron,
Digor). They are placed after the first prosodic unit of the clause, except the genitive when it is used as a
possessive pronoun. Both the enclitic pronoun and enclitic adverb can anticipate a following noun phrase:
nä näm (us, encl.) cäuịmaxmä (us) “he is not coming to us.”

Emphatic-reflexive pronouns are derived from the genitive of the enclitic pronoun by adding
-xädäg/xuädäg (< *hwataka-), nom., -xi(c)/xe(c) (< *xwai, *xwahya, gen.), the obl. cases: mä-xädäg,
nom., mä-xic, gen., mä-xic-äi, abl.“I myself,” etc.

The demonstrative pronouns distinguish between two degrees of proximity. In both dialects a- “this”
refers to a near object; in Iron u- (< *awa- or *hau-, or a conflation of both?) “that” is used in reference to
a distant object, and in Digor nom. ie, obl. cases uo- (< *ayam-, gen. *awahya?) is used for the same
purpose.When used as modifiers, the demonstrative pronouns are followed by the particle cị/ci: ac-ị läg
“this man.” In fixed phrases the particle is lacking: a-bon “today.” It is worth noting that in the
neighboring languages a system of three-term demonstrative pronoun is the rule. As triple deixis is
common in East Iranian languages, it is reasonable to assume that the different lexical elements used by
the dialects to express the remote deixis reflect an older three-term system.

The interrogative-relative pronoun distinguishes between animates and inanimate objects: či/ka “who,”
cị/ci “what” (< *čid-). Digor ka may go back to *kā (*ā > a, instead of ä in a monosyllable; cf. ma <
*mā- “not”); Iron či seems to be identical with Digor gen. ke (< *kai < *kahya?), in which case Iron gen.
käi is an innovation. The inflection is based on the stem kä-/cä-. It is remarkable that the order of the case
and plural endings is inverted, the case ending preceding the pluralizer: Digor dat. pl. käm-än-ti, cäm- än-
ti. In the Iron comitative, the order is optional: kä-imä-tị = kä-t-imä “with whom? (pl.).” In the dat., iness.
abl. -m- (< *-hm- < *-sm-) is inserted before the case ending (cf. Av. loc. kahmi, abl. kahmaṯ). This -m- is
partly found in the demonstrative pronoun in the same cases, in Iron only in the sg. am/am-i “here,”
uịm/uomi “there,” but Iron adon-ị, Digor anä-mi “in these places.” The interrogative-relative pronoun can
be made indefinite by the addition of suffixes or prefixes: či-där “somebody,” či-där-ittär “whoever,” is-
či/ies-ke “anybody.” A number of adverbs are derived from the interrogative-relative pronoun (kuịd/ kud
“how,” etc.).

12. Verbs. The structure of the verbal inflection is in principle the same in both dialects, but the
morphological material used, and its historical background, partly differs.

The verb possesses morphological markers of person and number, tense, mood, and transitivity versus
intransitivity. Aspect is mainly expressed by pre-verbs, but also in part by the lexical meaning of the verb.
The inflection is based on two stems: the present and the past. From the present stem are formed the
present indicative (ind.), subjunctive (subj.), optative (opt.), imperative (imper.), future (fut.), besides
verbal nouns, pres. participle (part.) -äg (< *-aka-), future participle -inäg/uinäg (< ?), and the infinitive

12 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

-ịn/un (< *-una-). The verbal nouns can be inflected for number and case but share properties of the finite
verb, for instance, transitivity. A gerund in -gä (> *-akā, OIr. instr.?) is formed from the present stem,
which marks the circumstances concomitant with the action expressed by the finite verb. A verbal noun in
-än (homonymous with the dative ending; see above, Morphology, 9) denotes fitness, destination: zịn zon-
än uịdi “it was hard to understand.” A verbal noun in -ag/agä (< *ākā-) denotes a permanent quality:
nuaz-ag “drunkard,” but part. nuaz-äg “drinking” (nuazin “to drink”).

From the past stem in -t (< *-ta-) are formed the past indicative, the optative, and the past participle; as a
rule the participle is identical with the past stem. In the past tense transitivity is expressed
morphologically, while in the present there is no morphological distinction between transitive and
intransitive verbs. A pair of verbs, one transitive and the other intransitive, can be derived from the same
root, in which case the intransitive verb is characterized by a short vowel and the transitive verb by a long
vowel: quịsịn/iğusun (< *wi-guš-) “to be rumored, audible,” but qusịn/iğosun (< *wi-gauš-) “to hear.” The
latter verbs reflect Old Iranian causative in *-aya-.

Intransitive verbs can be formed by the suffix -s- (< *-sa- < IE. *-sk’e/o-). As a rule the stem vowel is
short: täf-s-ịn “to become warm,” tav-ịn “to make warm.” Intransitivity (passive) can be expressed by the
past participle and the verb cäuịn “to go” (e.g., arazịn “to make,” aräst cäuị “to be made”). The agent is
either absent or expressed lexically: xädzar amad cäuị kusdžịtị kuxäi “the house was built by (the hands
of) the workers.” An impersonal form can be formed by the past participle, in part by adding a final -ä: nä
räğau nịn fä-tard-ä u “our herd (horses) are being driven away.”

Causative verbs are formed by the verb känịn/känun “to do” and the infinitive of the main verb. The verb
gets a perfective aspect by the addition of a preverb to the infinitive. The agent of the main verb appears
as the object of the verb phrase: avd äfsịmärị är-badịn kodtoi Äxsärtädžị “the seven brothers made
Äxsärtäg sit down.” The auxiliary and the main verb appear as a lexical unity.

Verbal composition is a productive way of creating new verbs. A verbal compound consists of a noun and
an auxiliary verb, mainly känịn (trans.) and uịn (intr.). Such compounds behave as lexical and syntactic
units. The noun can be inflected for number and case. The preverb can be placed either before the
auxiliary or the compound as a whole: ra-arfä iịn kodta “he thanked him” or arfä-tä iịl ba-kodta “he
thanked for that” (arfäkänịn “to thank”).

The structure of the verbal inflection, unlike that of the noun (which has developed some original
features), is highly archaic. The verb has retained the Old Iranian unipersonal inflection, showing
grammatical agreement with one nominal argument only (the subject). The distinction between past and
present stems and between the past intransitive and transitive inflection is inherited from early Middle
Iranian. The modal system (ind., subj., opt., imper.) is archaic. The formatives of the moods are
tranformations of the Old Iranian suffixes, although their history is only partly clear. An Ossetic
innovation is the formation of the future by means of *čanah- “to wish” and the verb “to be”: Iron -dzịn-,
-dzän-, Digor -dzän-, -dzin-: cär-dzịn-än/cär-dzän-än (< *čar-čanah-ah-) “I will live.” The use of
periphrases containing lexical elements denoting “wish” to express futurity is a common Iron
phenomenon.

The conjugational plethora of Old Iranian has been eliminated. In the present day, all verbs are inflected
in the same way except the verb “to be.” The expression of person and number is of the fusional type,
much in the same way as in Old Iranian. The historical background of the personal endings raises
problems. The comparatively great difference between the dialects is especially noteworthy.

The forms of the verb “to be” derive from various sources: (1) ancient ah- < *as-, (2) bū- < *bhū-, (3) st-

13 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

< *stā- “to stand,” (4) demonstrative pronoun (3rd sg.): pres. ind. Iron sg. dän, dä, u, is, pl. stäm, stut, stị,
Digor sg. dän, dä, äi, ie(s), pl. an, aitä, äncä. The d- of the 1st and 2nd sg. (common to both dialects) is
enigmatic. The old forms -än, -ä- (< *ahmi-, *ahi-) are found in the future and the intransitive past (cardt-
än, cardt-ä from cärịn “to live”). The inflection of the past—Iron uịdtän, uịdtä, uịd(i), uịdịstäm, uịdịstut,
uịdịstị—is based on ud- (< *būta-). The same root seems also to be represented in the subj. uon, etc., and
the opt. uain, etc. (or uin, etc.), in the imper. u, uäd, etc., in the pres. part. uaväg, fut. –uinag; these forms,
however, need historical elucidation. In Digor the past is based on the stem ad (< *hāta-, *ah-): adtän
“was,” etc.; but ad- is also found in Iron past opt. fä-c-ad-ain (beside fä-uịd-ain; -c- is inserted to prevent
hiatus).

The intransitive past is derived from the past participle and the present stem of the verb “to be”:
cịdtän/cudtän “I was going.” The transitive past is also based on the past participle, but otherwise its
forms require explanation: sg. kodton, kodtai, kodta (Iron, Digor), pl. kodtam,kodtat, kodtoi/kodtan,
kodtaitä, kodtoncä. The personal endings coincide with subjunctive endings, except in the 1st pl. -am/an,
vs. subj. -äm/än; but, for both semantic and formal reasons, a derivation of the past from the subjunctive
is hardly thinkable.

The present subjunctive Iron, Digor känon, etc. seems to go back to the Old Iranian thematic (?)
subjunctive, but the transformations that have taken place are obscure.

An optative is derived from both the present and the past. The optative is formed in the same way by both
transitive and intransitive verbs. The optative forms contain an -i- that probably goes back to the old
optative suffix *-ī-, but otherwise the formation is obscure. An infix -kk- that appears in the Iron plural
forms (pres. käni-kk-am, past kodta-i-kkam) but has no counterpart in Digor is enigmatic.

The present indicative is semantically the unmarked tense and mood. The subjunctive has a prospective
meaning, with or without the notion of will. The optative denotes desirability and possibility or
supposition. In conditional clauses the optative has a dissociative meaning, being used for hypothetical
conditions, while the subjunctive denotes real conditions. To some extent the two moods are
interchangeable, particularly in expressions of doubt. An archaism is the use in Digor of the optative
present to signify recurrent action in the past; in Iron the optative past is used to express this meaning.

The Iranian derivation of the imperative second and third person (sg. kän/känä, Iron., Digor känäd, pl.
känut/kän(e)tä, känänt/känäntä) is clear enough.

A final -ä that is added in some Digor verbal forms (e.g., pres. ind. 2nd and 3rd pl.: kän-et-ä, kän-unc-ä)
has not been satisfactorily explained.

The preverbs have a double function. Primarily they mark a local-directional meaning; through
metaphorical uses they may change the meaning of the simple verb. They also function as perfectivizers,
giving the verb a perfective aspect, more or less losing their concrete semantic content. In their local-
directional meaning, the preverbs express the orientation of the action or movement from the speaker’s or
observer’s point of view. Thus the preverb a- or ra- marks the notion “out, away” according to the
location of the speaker (observer).

In Iron the following preverbs are used, exemplified by cäuịn “to go, come”: a-cịdi “he went out” (the
speaker is inside), ra-cịdi “he came out” (the speaker in outside); ba-cịdi “he entered,” ärba-cịdi “he
came in;” är-cịdi “he came down, arrived;” nị-ccịdi (gemination of c- after a short vowel) “he went
down.” The preverb s- “up” covers both dimensions: s-cịdi “he went, came up.” In Digor, ra- also

14 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

expresses both dimensions: ra-cud “he went, came out.” The preverb fä- mostly denotes perfectivity
(fequịston “I heard”), but as a marker of motion it expresses movement away from the speaker, without
informing about the direction.

The Iranian etymologies of the preverbs are clear: a- (< *ā-), ra- (< *frā-), ba- (< *upá-), är- (< *awar-),
nị/ni- (< *ni-), (i)s/s- (<*us-), fä-(<*pa- [rather than *pati-]). In Digor an enclitic pronoun can be inserted
between the preverb and the verb: ra-iä-marä “kill him!”

A particle -cäi- (probably from the gen. of the inanim. interrog.-rel. pron.) can be inserted between the
preverb and verb as a deperfectivizer: ra-cäi-cịdi “he was on the way out.”

The bi-dimensional, orientational function of the preverb is no doubt a recent innovation. This appears
clearly from the gaps in the dimensional system that are particularly conspicuous in Digor, indicating that
it has been carried through only imperfectly. The orientational meaning of the preverb has its typological
counterparts in both the Northwest and, especially, South Caucasian languages (cf. the Georg. mo-/mi
opposition: Oss. [Iron] ba-cịdi = Georg. še-vida, ärba-cịdi = šemo-vida “he entered/he came in,”
respectively).

SYNTAX

The order of the members in complex noun phrases, as stated above (Morphology, 1, 3-4) is primarily of
the pre-modifying type. The order of the verb and its nominal arguments is flexible, but the sequence
subject-object-verb may be regarded the unmarked order. Adverbials normally precede the verb.

Clause subordination is primarily carried out by relative pronouns or conjunctive adverbs in association
with finite verbs. As a rule, the subordinate clause precedes the main clause. In most subordinate clauses
the relatives are placed immediately before the verb, with which they constitute a prosodic unit. A
demonstrative adverb or pronoun in the main clause corresponds with the relative of the subordinate
clause: mä cästịtäi nịrmä kuịd uịdton, aftä sä nal uịnịn “as I saw them previously with my eyes, thus I do
not see them any more”—lit. “my with-eyes (abl.) until-now (all.) as I-saw, thus them no-more I-see.”

The gerund in -gä, is frequently used in the ablative: Iron -gä-iä, Digor -gä-i (with vowel apocope due to
dissimilation) denotes an action or event concomitant with the action expressed by the finite verb of the
clause. The implied agent of the gerund can be co-referent with the subject or some other noun phrase of
the clause, or it may be used absolutely (gerundium pendens).

Examples: kaf-gä-iä Äxsarbeg fästä-mä ra-kast “Äxsarbeg looked back while dancing” (the agent of the
ger. is co-referent with the subj. of the finite verb); c’iu, am dälä-mä čịzg ämä läppu lidz-gä nä fedtai?
“bird, did not you see a girl and a boy running here downwards?” (lit. bird here downwards [all.] girl and
boy [nom.] running [ger.] not you-saw? [here the agent is co-referent with the obj.]); uälä-bäl k’umäl
cäğd-gä-i k’umäl-gor, ba-cäu-gä-i k’umäl nä lävardta “in the upper-world, while filtering small-beer, and
somebody coming to ask for small-beer, she did not give (him) small-beer” (lit. in-upper-world [adess.]
small-beer [nom.] beating [ger.-abl.] small-beer-seeker, coming [ger.-abl.] small-beer not she-gave); in
this example, the gerund cäğd-gä-i refers to the subject inherent in the finite verb lävardta, while k’umäl-
gor ba-cäu-gä-i stands as an absolute construction (from a Bäx fäldisịn “Horse consecration” sermon,
traditionally delivered at the funeral of chieftains; text in Digor).

The gerund of the verb zäğịn/zäğun “to say” (zäğ-gä [-gä-iä/i]) functions as a citation particle, embedding
reported speech or thought, for instance, in narrative texts, when a proper name occurs for the first time:
cardis ämä uịdisiu läg Toredze zäğ-gä iä nom “once there lived a man called Toredze.” The ger. zäğ-gä is

15 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

also used to mark cause or purpose: läppu, midä-mä ba-xiz-on zäğ-gä, kuịd zağta, aftä iu zdäxt, fä-kodta
Satana-mä “when the boy was about to enter (lit.: saying I shall enter), he turned round to Satana” (lit.:
boy to-inside [all.] I-shall-enter [subj.] saying [ger.], as he-said, thus one turn he-did to-Satana [all.]; from
a Nart epic text).

LEXIS

As already mentioned, the Ossetic core vocabulary derives in large measure from Iranian sources.
Loanwords such as k’ax “foot,” k’ux/k’ox “hand,” dzịx/dzux, c’ux “mouth,” were probably borrowed as
expressive words that have ousted the Iranian words fad, arm, kom respectively; the latter group of words
is used in compounds, in metaphoric expressions, and in fixed idioms. There exist numerous lexical and
idiomatic calques, due to a long-standing influence of neighbor languages.

Kinship terms are mostly Iranian. The noun ärvad/ärvadä (< Ir. *brātar-) means “brother, cousin,
kinsman,” no doubt an archaism. A new noun has been formed to signify a consanguineous brother:
ävsịmär/änsuvär (< *(h)äm- suvär) “co-uterinus, of the same womb” (sịvär/suvär).

Patronymics in -on (< *āna-) seem to have been in use previously, and have in modern times been re-
introduced individually. Today family affiliation is signified by adding the genitive plural of the clan’s
name to the personal name, for instance, AbaitịVaso, “Vaso of the Abaitä clan” (Abaev, 1962).

Most proper names in modern usage belong to the onomasticon of the Caucasian peoples. Some of the
heroic names of the Nart epic cycle are of Iranian origin (e.g., Äxsärtäg < *xšaθraka-; cf. Av. xšaθra-
“power,” AirWb., col. 542). There are also many names that are of uncertain derivation. Nart, the name of
the mythological race of the Narts, derives most likely from *narθra- “manhood” (*nar- “man, warrior;”
cf. Av. nar- “man,” AirWb., col. 1047).

The great number of Iranian words referring to traditional culture testifies to social continuity and
coherence in the Alan-Ossetic tribes. A number of Christian terms have been borrowed from Georgian,
but there exist apparently traces of old pagan terms that have been used to express Christian notions.
Muslim terms have been introduced from Arabic-Persian through the medium of Caucasic neighbor
languages. Azeri Turkish (see AZERBAIJAN viii), which previously functioned widely as a lingua franca
in the Northeast Caucasus, has been a link connecting the Ossetes with the other North Caucasian
peoples, as well as with the Islamic nations of the south. Moreover, a great number of cultural words have
entered Ossetic through Azeri as a direct or indirect source. Numerous Russian words, mainly technical
and political terms, have been borrowed in modern times.

TEXT SAMPLES

A. Iron

Dzerassä-Räsuğd
“Dzerassä the Beautiful”

Äxsärtäg dendžịz-ị bịn Donbettịrị xädzar-mä b-aftịd.

Äxsärtäg sea’s (gen.) bottom (nom.) Donbettịr’s house (all.) he-arrived.

Xädzar ta axäm xädzar uịd, ämä iä k’ul-tä - ärğäu, iä bịn –

House but such house it-was and its walls mother-of-pearl, its floor

16 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

c’äx avg, iä sär - säuuon st’alị. Xädzar-ị badịnc avd äfsịmär-ị,

blue glass, its roof morning-star. In-house (iness.) they-sit seven brother’s (gen.sg.)

sä uäle - sä dịuuä xoi-ị, am-äi ai räsuğd-där-tä.

their above their two sister’s (gen.sg), from-this (abl.sg.) this more beautiful (pl.).

Sä särị xil sịğzärin-au ärttivị.

Their head’s hair like-gold (equ.) shines

Farn uä xädzar-ị ämä uä raisom xorz! – zağta Äxsärtäg,

Peace your in-house (iness.) and morning good, he-said Äxsärtäg,

xädzar-mä kuị ba-xịzti, uäd.

to-house (all.) when he-came in, then.

Xorz dä xai uäd! Zäğgä, iịn zağtoi uịdon där ämä

Good your share shall-be (imper.) saying (ger.) to-him (dat.) they-said they too an

s-ịstad-ịstị, avd äfsịmär-ị ämä sä dịuuä xoi-ị, ämä

they-arose seven brother’s (gen. sg.) and their two sister’s (gen. sg.), and

badịn kodtoi Äxsärtädž-ị: är-badt-ịstị sä-xuịdtäg där avd

to-sit-down (inf.) they-made Äxsärtäg (gen.): they sat.down they-themselves too seven

äfsịmär-ị, ärtä-iä Äxsärtägän iä uällag fars, cịppar-äi ta

brother’s (gen.sg.) as-3 (abl.) for-Äxsärtäg (dat.) his upper side, as-four (abl.) but

dällag fars. Čịsịl kuị a-badt-ịstị, uäd äfsịmär-tä ba-kast-ịstị

lower side. Little when they-sat, then the-brothers (nom. pl.) looked

Äxsärtäg-mä ämä iịn zağtoi:

to-Äxsärtäg (all.) and to-him (dat.) they-said:

Dä xuịzän uazäg näm nä cäu-gä ’r-kodta, nä där näm

Your similar guest to-us (all.) not coming he-did, not either to-us

cäu-gä ’kändzän ämä dịl ba-cin känịn qäu-ị, fälä

coming (ger.) will-do, and on-you (adess.) joy to-do it-must (3rd sg.), but

mast-ịl stäm.
on-trouble (adess.) we-are.

Translation.

Äxsärtäg came to Donbettịr’s house at the bottom of the sea. The house was such a house that its walls
were nacreous, its floor blue glass, its ceiling the morning star. In the house sat seven brothers, above
them their two sisters, the one more beautiful than the other. The hair on their head shone like gold.

“Peace in your house and good morning,” said Äxsärtäg when he came into the house.

17 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

“Good be your fate,” they said to him and stood up, the seven brothers; and the seven brothers and their
two sisters made Äxsärtäg sit down, and the seven brothers sat down apart, three above Äxsärtäg four
below him. When they had sat for a while, they looked to Äxsärtäg and said to him:

“No guest like you has come to us, nor will ever come to us, and indeed we should welcome you, but we
are in trouble.” (Nartị kaddžịtä, Dzäudžịqäu, 1946, p. 8)

B. Digor

Uruzmäg äma ie ’nänom läquän

“Uruzmäg and his Nameless Son”

Nart adtäncä, äma sä-bäl xucau ästong anz is-kodta.

Narts they-were, and on-them (adess.) God famine year he-made.

Nart-i muggag-äi Äxsärtäggati Uruzmäg balc-i randä ’i äma fä-

The Narts’ of-clan (abl.) of-Äxsärtäggatä (gen.) Uruzmäg on-journey went-away and was

c-äi ärtä-duuä anz-i, uädta är-cud-äi ä xädzarä-mä. Ärba-

three-two year’s (gen.sg.), then he-went his-to-home (all.).

cud-äi nixas-mä är-festäg äi ’ma zağta:

He-went to the assembly-place (all.), pedestrian he-became, and said:

Uä bon xuarz! - äma iimä Nart-i adam-äi ba ä sär där ne-ke

Your day good! and to-him (all.) Narts’s (gen.) of-people (abl.) but his head nobody

ra-qel kodta, uoi tuxx-än äma sä tog nä kusta, sä zärdä roxs nä

standing he-made, their hardly and their blood not worked, their heart glad not

adt-äi, istong anz sä-bäl is-kodta. Uruzmäg där fästä-mä ä

was, famine year on-them (adess.) became. Uruzmäg too again (all.) his

bäx-bäl ra-badt-äi äma ä xädzarä-mä är-cud-äi. Medä-mä ba-

on-horse (adess.) he-sat-down and his to-house (all.) went. To-inside (all.)

cud-äi äma k’ela-bäl äxe zust gälst är-kodta, ’ma k’ela ä

he-went and on-chair (adess.) himself angry thrown he-made, and chair his

bun-i ra-sast-äi. Satana ii-mä dzorui:

below (iness.) it-broke-down. Satana she-speaks to-him (all.):

- Ci kän-is.? Me ’rcäun-i bon-äi aci bon-i ualängä dä uotä

What you-do? My-arrival’s from-day (abl.) this day’s (gen.) till so

mästgun-äi ku ne-käd fä-uuidton.

angry (abl.) yet never I-saw.

Translation.

18 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

There were the Narts (in the days of the Narts), and God caused a famine among them. Uruzmäg of the
Äxsärtäggatä clan of the Narts set out on a journey abroad and was away for two-three years, then he
came home. He went to the assembly place, dismounted and said: “Good morning,” but none of the Nart
men stood up for him, because their blood was almost frozen (did hardly work), their heart was not
joyous, they had suffered a famine. Uruzmäg mounted his horse again and went home. He entered and
threw himself angry on a chair, and the chair broke down under him.

Satana said to him: “What is wrong? Since the day when I came to you till this day I never saw you so
angry.” (Nartä, Iron gerioikon epos I: činịg, Moscow, 1990, p. 128)

Bibliography:

Abbreviations.

I. = Iron dialect
D. = Digor. When the oblique stroke is used between two dialect forms, the Iron form is placed before,
the Digor form after the stroke. When nothing else is said, Iron is meant.
Turk. = Turkic

Grammatical surveys.

Vasiliĭ Ivanovich Abaev, Grammaticheskiĭ ocherk osetinskogo yazyka, in idem, Osetinsko-russkiĭ slovar’,
2nd ed., Ordzhonikidze, 1962; tr. Steven P. Hill as AGrammatical Sketch of Ossetic, ed. Herbert H. Paper,
The Hague, 1964.

Giorgii Saridanovich Akhvlediani, ed., Grammatika osetinskogo yazyka (Grammar of the Ossetic
language), 2 vols., I: Fonetika i morpholigiya II: Sintaksis, Ordzhonikidze, 1963-69.

Julius von Klaproth,: Reise in den Kaukasus und Georgien, Halle and Berlin, 1812-14, “Kaukasische
Sprachen,” appendix at the end of vol. 2; tr. F. Shoberl as Travels in the Caucasus and Georgia, London,
1814.

Vsevolod Fedorovich Miller, “Die Sprache der Osseten,” in Grundriss der iranischen Philologie I,
Strassburg, 1903, appendix, pp. 1-111.

Idem, Ossetica, Moscow, 1904.

Andreas Johann Sjögren, Ossetische Sprachlehre, St. Petersburg, 1842.

Fridrik Thordarson, “Preverbs in Ossetic,” in Monumentum Georg Morgenstierne II, Acta Iranica 22,
Leiden, 1982, pp. 251-61.

Idem, “Ossetic,” in Rüdiger Schmitt, ed., Compendium linguarum Iranicarum, Wiesbaden, 1989, pp.
456-79.

D. Weber, “Beiträge zur historischen Grammatik des Ossetischen,” Indogermanische Forschungen,

Zeitschrift für Indogermanistik und allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 85, 1980, pp. 126-37; 88, 1983, pp.

19 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30
OSSETIC LANGUAGE i. History and description – Encyclopaedia Iranica https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ossetic

84-91.

Dialects.

Vasiliĭ Ivanovich Abaev, “Ocherk raskhozdeniĭ ironskogo digoroskogo dialektov” (A sketch of the
differences between the Iron and Digor dialects), in Ostinskiĭ yazyk i fol’klor (Ossetic language and
folklore) I, Moscow and Leningrad, 1949, pp. 357-493.

Idem, “O dialektakh osetinskogo yazyka” (On the dialects of the Ossetic language), in Indo-Iranica:
Mélanges présentés à Georg Mogenstierne à l’occasion de son soixante-dixième anniversaire,
Wiesbaden, 1964, pp. 1-7.

D. G. Bekoev, Ironskiĭ dialekt osetinskogo yazyka (Iron dialect of the Ossetic language), Tskhinvali, 1985
(survey of the local variants of Iron). E. J. A. Henderson, “A Phonetic Study of Western Ossetic
(Digoron),” BSOAS 13, 1949, pp. 36-79.

Magomet Izmailovich Isaev, Digorskiĭ dialekt osetinskogo yazyka: fonetika, morfolgiya (The Digor
dialect of Ossetic: Phonetic, morphology), Moscow, 1966 (includes texts with Russ. tr.).

Dictionaries.

Vasiliĭ Ivanovich Abaev, Istoriko-etimologicheskiĭ slovar’ osetinskogo yazyka (A Historical-etymological

dictionary of Ossetic language), 4 vols., Moscow and Leningrad, 1958-89; repr, with index, Moscow,
1995.

Zoia Georgievna Isaeva and Aanastasiya Dzabolaevna Tsagaeva, Kratkiĭ russko-osetinskiĭ slovar’
(Russian-Ossetic) Moscow, 1978.

Vsevolod Fedorovich Miller, Osetinsko-russko-nemetskiĭ slovar’ (Ossetic-Russian-German), 3 vols.,

Leningrad, 1927-34; repr., The Hague and Paris, 1972.

Idem, Osetinsko-russkiĭ slovar’ (Ossetic-Russian), 2nd ed., Ordzhonikidze, 1962.

Studies.

N. K. Bagaev, Sovremeniĭ osetinskiĭ yazyk (Contemporary Ossetic), Ordzhonikidze, 1965.

Harold W. Bailey, “Asica,” Transactions of the Philological Society, 1945, pp. 1-38, and “Supplementary
Notes to Asica,” ibid., 1946, pp. 202-6; repr. in idem, Opera Minora, ed. M. Nawabi, 2 vols., Shiraz,
1981, II, pp. 223-65.

Emile Benveniste, Études sur langue ossète, Paris, 1959.

Roland Bielmeier, Historische Untersuchunngen zum Erb- und Lehnwortschatzanteil im ossetischen

Grundwortschatz, Frankfort am Main, Bern, and Las Vegas, 1977.

Idem, “Zur Entwicklung der ossetischen Deklination,” Indogermanische Forschungen 87, 1982, pp.
58-69.

20 of 23 10/02/2021 22:30