46 Contributions to Persian Lexicography. [No. 1, 



Nor is Vullers happy in his etymologies. The reference to pisang 

 under u£wj, p. 243, may be learned ; but a date-palm is not a 

 plantain-tree. CHj^I, P- 249, does not come from patricius, but from 

 patriarch. Under Spb bddrah hastiness, p. 1G2, Vullers compares 

 8> rah with 81; rah, mistaking 8j,jIj for a Persian word; but the word 

 is Arabic, and should be pronounced b&dirah®^*^. bakshi, p. 197, is 

 quoted as belonging to a lingua exotica, but it is Persian, and the same as 

 z&XiS fj^si. Under cHS*^ ^over, p. 221, he says, deest in ceteris lexicis ; 

 it is in every Arabic Dictionary ; just as &jy, p, 480, is in every 

 Turkish Vocabulary. The Sanscrit word under J-*~-J, p. 239, may 

 also be very learned, but it was useless, as the whole word is one of 

 the FJ.'s blunders* 



Another defect of Vullers' Lexicon is this, that in case of words 

 having several forms, the meanings are often given under the unusual 

 or doubtful form. Thus, in the case of Jy=f and Jj^f, where Vullers 

 has put the meaning to Jj-^f , instead of to di^f, for which alone the 

 Dictionaries give examples. Examples of such displaced meanings 

 are frequent. 



The use which Vullers has made of the Bahar i 'Ajam, cannot be 

 approved of. His extracts are most desultory. In hundreds of cases 

 he has given the least useful examples, whilst the number of words 

 which he has altogether omitted — on what principle, I do not know — 

 is very large. We have only to compare the articles J.^ jul, ■$&*■ jalldd, 



i_;lx&- janndb, Jblx^ ojU-=» 3 &L~jjc> cuxa. } jJUsr*^, ^ x ^, k -i3* J 5*j J^> 

 Jlj»>, ^'j-*, j-^j-^j JJ^, CJ&wj-a., SjXm^. } ^xi?^; ^«^, *^J^ as given 

 in Bh. and Vull. Bh.'s valuable notes to some of these words, his fine 

 articles headed & -^-=>-, AJw-JpoJ^ J.^., uU^., &c, are entirely left out. 



* It should be Ar. *Uj bassdm, smiling ; Khusrau (metre mujtass) — 



" The world which in the eyes of wise men is a book of laughter, is not 

 worth half a smile from the ever-laughing lip of the sweetheart" — where 

 the FJ. reads *l£~J bistam, inventing at the same time the meaning a coral. 

 Besides it would not be Persian to say lab-i-bistdm, a coral lip ; it should at 

 least be <^£ijAL~j t_J, as you say vjjjojl^yo «__J. Similar mistakes of FJ., 

 adopted by B. and Vullers, are \j)\ ulwd, a star, for A. \y\ anwd, pi. of s-y 

 nau ; /♦^>j-=>- jtfam, for the Arabic /♦^■a* hojam, &c. 



