1920.] Further notes on Gypsies in Persia. 285 
stood by any body except trast ia Pascoe! therefore in 
business transactions. In a conversa of this kind the 
object of discussion is quite well known a ‘both sides, and only 
a few allusions are sufficient to settle the details. This is 
probably why they are fond of generalising names ert: 
convey often a large number of ideas joined under a secondar 
unessential “ differentia specifica” as e.g. shakhki, cuiadbicelis 
from 
sour milk, vinegar, etc. For it is is difficult to realise the 
reasons which lead them to costa these shapeless expressions 
and forget the old words. At the same time their thought is 
very concrete, and they do not like any abstract names. Such 
primitive abstractions as ‘price, value” they invariably 
render by ‘ ‘money, » etc. 
clear r and 1, e.g. agi sounds often agir, a ; cheti—cheti (r-l); 
masi (r-l) ; rarely goré (r), etc. Itis not the Persian suffix of the 
objective case ra, and this phonetic rule has no parallel in 
local Persian, Turkish and Kurdish. 
2. nis often n very guttural, similar to ng but used quite 
differently from those occasionally observed in Turkish dialects 
and in Kurdish. 
. J whenever, it occurs in the middle of a dissyllabic 
word comes in front, as in lwmbo=mullo, loptin= polun, labund 
=buland, lawe=bale, ete. It is difficult to decide in what 
degree this may be intentional. 
Frequent use of Dacca something like the spiritus 
asper with the initial vowel, and after consonants as well, 
especially with labials (hot "phutok, bhukar, etc.). This is quite 
uncommon in local Per 
In morphology nothing essential can be added to what 
was stated in my previous The difference appears only 
when the grammar of local Persian slightly changes the rules 
common in Qaini. Verbsare the same in Nishapur and 
e calling for mention are the pumerals, which in 
different from the 
os numerals. But they are in reality quite the same, and 
