u/sheerwaan

What Kurdish dialects do I speak?

I speak Southern Kurdish of the Guran tribe as my mother tongue and I understand other SK subdialects too like Kallhurri (which is basically the same as Gurani SK) and I am able to understand Malikshahi (Ilami) too and also somewhat Laki.

I also speak a rather standardised form of Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) and the Central Kurdish ("Sorani") standard subdialect from Silemani (Babani). I am able to communicate in these two dialects but not communicate perfectly and it gets more difficult the further the subdialect is from the standardised form.

I also speak a little bit of Eastern Kurdish (Hawrami) and that is Zardayi EK (from the Guran area) and a mixed version of Hawramani subdialects (since I haven't memorised which exact form or words belong to which EK subdialect of Hawraman).

Recently I also tapped into Western Kurdish (Kirdki, unfortunately known as "Zazaki") but I am nowhere yet.

I will also study some other Iranic tongues like Balochi and Farvi or Khuri or Garmsiri at least as far as there are resources available to me. I need to do this anyway because with them I will understand the origin and development of Kurdish and Iranic better but by studying them I will also be able to speak them as far as I go.

But this is besides the point. I am happy with myself speaking several Kurdish dialects but I am nowhere near done. I have to master the speech of NK and CK perfectly and then acquire the skills of EK just the same and then learn WK as well. And when I am able to fluently converse, speak, listen and understand and read and write I will consider myself in the position to say I am able to speak Kurdish with all Kurds. Even if there are still further subdialects of each dialect that I would need to learn for that to be truly true.

And the point is: We as Kurds have to learn the other Kurdish group's languages if we say we are proud Kurds and we adhere at a free Kurdish people and a free Kurdistan. We don't have the luxury not to. We are in this situation and in this situation we have to put more effort into our Kurdish identity and our skills as Kurds as our duty.

Same post on X / twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2052294119716778178

-------------------------

Daily Reminder: Guran Kurds are commonly Yarsani Kurds and usually from a continuous area of northwestern Kirmāshān.

As for Gūrān = Eastern Kurdish speaker, (Hawrami etc.) you have to understand that while this was true originally and later on partially this is not true anymore. This notion serves for ethnological and anthropological and linguistic purposes only.

Now there are exceptions too e.g. there are some Jāf that once joined the Gūrān but stayed sunnite muslims and still spoke CK at home. No idea if they still exist as part of the Gūrān confederation.

There are also Gūrān in former Ardalān area but obviously they have been assimilated as they speak CK and are not Yārsānī.

There is also the Gorān tribe of Bādīnān, they are NK/CK speaking sunnite muslims and they descend from actual EK speakers of Karkūk/Halabja area close to Hawrāmān and had apparently become CK speaking muslims before they ended up in Bādīnān.

Original post / tweet on X / Twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2051421912497099065

-------------------------

The Y-DNA haplogroup of a descendant of Bābā Hindu, the teacher of Shāh Xwashīn, has been determined!

These are TREMENDOUS NEWS for the Yarsani community but also for all Kurds of course!

A Laki speaking Kurd who is a present day descendant of the Yārsānī figure and scholar Bābā Hindu has been determined to have an Indo-Aryan and thus Indian Y-DNA haplogroup: R-Y15121 under R-Z94 under R-Z93. A common Aryan (Indo-Iranic) haplogroup.

What makes this even more fascinating is that it helps with two other things!

1. To have a Laki speaking Kurd handed down as descendant of Bābā Hindu serves as strengthening point that the Eastern Kurdish speaking Gorans (Kurds) of Luristan, attested in the 10th century CE which Shāh Xwashīn was one of, have developed to Laki speaking Kurds at some point in history.

2. And it also proves that the historical attestation and lore within Yarsani traditions of a historical figure has turned out as correct and authentic which means: Yes we can trust actual traditions, lore and hymns!

This is something some people are sceptic over for whatever reason. But many lore points do not even have any dubious background for example a claim because of prestige.

And furthermore, this is also a great help for people who are not familiar with the validity and authenticity of Dna tests to understand that DNA tests are a serious scientific matter proven by the modern descendant of a historical figure having the exact kind of Y-DNA haplogroup that he would be expected to have!

Go to the post on X / twitter and then to the cited post / tweet:

https://x.com/i/status/2051421912497099065

Same post on twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2049157516026687759

---

Iranian Persians who consider themselves Iranians by identity and ethnicity and as the people of an Iranian ethnostate and want all the non-persian Iranians to do the same are stuck at immense fallacy. It is cope and bias.

If you tell Kurds that as Kurds they have to know other Kurdish dialects then the normal ones will agree and accept that way of thought. Even if they will not do the act themselves, they know this is the brotherly/sisterly familiarity we need to have with each other.

But dare you tell an Iranian Persian that they should learn Kurdish or Balochi or Lurish or Gilaki or another Iranic tongue that is not his beloved Farsiye Darbari, since he claims that they are all Iranians together ... they will accuse you of nationalism, separatism and whatever other ignorant and fascistic idea they could have.

Mind you, on contrary to everybody else I am aware of the Western Iranic background, frame and setting of the Kurds on EVERY single academic field to fullest extent.

But it doesn't mean much if we are talking about Kurds. Or "Iranians". It doesn't matter which state my parents or grandparents or which empire my ancestors were citizens of.

I am a Kurd and my native tongue is Kurdish. Persian or another language has nothing to do with me. Historically, it may have been a lingua franca or a language of script? Well, so was arabic. And today it is English. So this argument is useless.

Even if we consider a scenario where Kurds and Iranians/Persians inhabit a federalistic state, this will only ever be acceptable to the least if we have FULL AND FREE CONTROL of our own lands in Kurdish language and by Kurds. So what do we need that then for?

All we need is for Kurdistan to be liberated and independent and to find to our true Kurdish sense of identity.

I don't know the account behind the original tweet and whatever project this is behind. I have heard it is unreliable. But what I really wonder is if it is possible that these people are trying to appropriate Kirkūk by claiming that famous Kurdish tribes of Kirkūk are of arabic lineage anyway?

We know of two Hamāwand Y-DNA haplogroups. Mine and that of someone who does not know his clan but is from the Hamāwands of Kirkūk. He apparently has R1a which is Aryan (Iranic) and is easily expected. He would be supposed to be from one of the actual Hamāwand clans of the Bāshūrī / Karkūki / Chamchamāli Hamawands. These descend from the founder Xwadādādsher Hamāwand who left the original Hamāwand in Kirmāshān west of Mountain Behistūn with his subtribe/clan.

Fun fact: The Hamāwand area in Kirmāshān also has its region named "Chamchamāl" which is obviously the origin of the naming of Chamchamāl in Karkūk / Silemānī.

The same post on twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2025899722322432332

---

There are some common mistakes that all kinds of people make that are interested in the Kurdish studies of history and linguistics. The reason for that is obviously that they lack expertise, terminological knowledge and the skill or experience to differentiate between things that might appear similar but are not. Simple things as well as complicated things.

Now let's have a look:

• The suffix -ī

The suffix -ī for Kurdish names can be used differently because it has two different etymologies. One is from -ik/-ig and was used to build adjectives of belonging including the language of people. The other is from -ih or -īh and that was used to build nouns. Both shifted to -ī and both are used on any kind of word. But you have to use it correctly. You cannot call PEOPLE a Kurmānjī or a Gorānī. That is straight out wrong and shows your lack of knowledge. How can you make big claims when you don't even know what word to use? But you have to call the people "Yārsānī" instead of "Yārsān"... now why is that?

As simple as it gets: It goes back to what the unsuffixed word means (the word without -ī). Yārsān is the name of the religion itself or the community. So obviously the people are called Yārsānī as they belong to the religion. It is basically a substantivised adjective. Yārsān (noun) > Yārsānī (adjective but also > noun)

On the other hand the "Kurmānj" are the people themselves. So what does Kurmānjī mean? The language of course. You can also use it similar to the word "kurdish" to describe other things that come from the Kurmanj. Then we have a word like Gorān / Gūrān that refers to many things at once. It refers to the tribe / confederation of the Gorān, it refers to the region (of the tribe) of Gorān, it refers to the religious community of Yarsan (Qalxānī, Gorān, Sinjāwī) and it refers to the single members of the tribe. Historically, it even referred to the language of the Yarsani poems respectively Eastern Kurdish itself.

This is important btw as the members of the tribe are called in the same way as the tribal name. Thus a member of the Guran tribe is a Guran, a member of the Harki tribe is a Harki, a member of the Jaf tribe is a Jaf and a member of the Soran tribe is a Soran. Not a Sorani, not a Jafi and not a Gurani.

Back to track, the language of the Goran is called Gorānī / Gūrānī. Or other things that come from the Guran Kurds. To call a Kurmānj a "Kurmānjī" or a Gūrān a "Gūrānī" or a Soran a "Sorānī" is like calling a Kurd a "Kurdī". It is nonsensical and wrong. And in my opinion also embarassing. How can you make use of such a simple thing that ridiculously wrong?

P.S. 1 Again and again I call out people, especially Kurds, for their mistaken attitude and their fallacious takes. This has good reasons. You / they simply deserve it. Almost any encounter I make with a random fellow Kurd that may otherwise be well-intended turns out as a disappointment as they start to be audacious, arrogant, full of themselves and rude and most of the time they neither have enough understanding to grasp the matter nor enough information to announce a statement. Just yesterday I made four such experiences.

For that I refer to my previous post where I tangle this matter.

This is not a crash out of any kind. This is conscious criticism toward people who have no basic or advanced skills and yet go out of their way trying to act all great and what not. Please, have some common sense. I don't mind self-consciusness and self-assurance at all, but please have some common sense too.

P.S. 2 I intended to cover several topics at once in this post instead of only -ī but instead I will make several posts of this kind for all the issues that need to be adressed.

Link to the same post on twitter: https://x.com/i/status/2024065862081101997

---

Someone said: "Gorani’s aren’t Kurds according to Pro-Iranian scholars."

This statement is explicitly wrong when we consider the present day reality. If we talk about 1'200 years ago, it might look about correct or only implicitly wrong.

The big issue here is not even that. The issue is the next-level kind of confusion that is clouding and veiling what and who even the "Goran" are.

50 years ago everything was pretty clear to the people themselves if they had clues/knowledge. But it has become very unclear because from 20 years ago on people started to misinform and miseducate each other basically everyday. There is a hell of confusion about anything when it comes to Kurds but especially when it comes to the many-fold aspects of the Goran part of the Kurdish ethnicity and history.

This is rooted in a couple of things but especially in what Westerners decided to use the term Goran for when even during that time they did so, that usage was already mistaken and full of errors.

Now, if you ask a Hawramani today what they are, they may say Goran, but their grandparents may either not know what Goran are or they may know them as devil-worshipper and non-believers ("kāfir"). Why is this? Because the Hawramani are not Goran and have not been Goran for a couple of centuries at least. If they ever used "Goran" as an** ethnical** self-designation, it was many centuries ago. How many exactly is difficult to say but we can guess that it should have held up till at least 1'200-1'000 years ago. Maybe beyond. But only IF they used "Goran" in the first place outside of a religious self-designation.

There is a clear association and synonymity between Goran and Yarsani and also Goran/Gorani with the language that has been commonly known as Hawrami for some centuries and but this is after the Hawrami speakers were already commonly known as Kurds and indeed a part of Kurdish society. Even if SCNK and EK speakers called each other distinct names. This dichotomy went on side by side. But both were true. The SCNK and the EK were both Kurds but also the SCNK were Kurds and the EK were Goran. This itself has different angles. The EK using Kurd for SK and CK mainly referred to their muslim belief while Goran referred to their Yarsani belief. But many CK who used Goran in other areas used "Kurd" for themselves in difference to the EK whom they called Goran with a negative connotation. This was where the CK tribes had the upper hand. There "Goran" bore a negative meaning connotating something like "serf".

And even 200 years ago, iirc, the Mukriyan knew Goran and Jaf both as "highwaymen". Goran and highwaymen were synonymous. Here they most likely meant SK tribes by Goran btw. Because many SK tribes called themselves Goran and were called Goran and called their tongue Gorani. This is attested by a western author from 200 years ago. These were SK tribes. As "Kurdish" as it could ever get.

It is true, that EK has a very distinct linguistic development and original location compared to SCNK. And it is also clear that the SCNK and the EK were two different groups first historically. The EK do not have tribes. They don't have a semi-nomadic way of life not to mention a nomadic way of life. The EK do not even have "māl" as a native word - only "yāna" meaning house. They say "min (mi)lū pay yāna" meaning "I go home". While in SK you say "min cim a māl" and māl is used in every SCNK variety (except maybe of unique cases like the one I mentioned in my previous post).

This is not random. SCNK has the word for house too which is xānig / xānū / xānī. But māl is your "living situation", your "all and everything", your "property". As a SCNK your tent and your possessions were your "māl". And you took it with you. But the EK did not have such a cultural feature. They only had their sedentary "yāna".

xānig and yāna both have the same etymology btw. Both derive from xānag. xānag > xānig and then xānig > xāniy > xānī in NK and xānig > xāniw > xānū in CK. xānag > hānag > hāna > yāna in EK.

Ibn Xurdadbih wrote in the 9th century CE that the Goran inhabited Qasri Shirin, Hulwan (Sarpelli Zahāw) and Xānaqīn. And he separated them from Kurds. This is when the Goran were still called "Gābārika" (jābāriqa as it is rendered in arabic). Afterwards the Gābārak/Gawrakān/ Gawrān/Gorān are basically always a Kurdish tribe. Initially, they may have not been a tribe like the SCNK tribes. But that just meant that they were already an established part of the Kurdish ethnicity.

That the SK have been around for a long time is also visible with the name "xānaqīn btw. It is from "xānag yīn" which is an arabic rendering of "duxānag" which means "two houses". With xānag instead of hānag or yānag.

Anyway, The EK were incorporated into the Kurdish ethnicity and even if they understood many pre-ethnical and cultural differences and called themselves and other Kurds accordingly, at the same time had been beyond those distinctions and knew themselves as Kurds too. Even today the Guran of Zarda call SK "Kurdī" while calling Zardayi "Gūrānī". But the SK Guran also call SK Gurani and even the Kallhurrs called their own tongue "Gurani". These aspects went side by side in parallels.

Proper "Gorani" also distinguishes itself from both Hawramani and Zardayi (Zarda is within the Guran area). It is because the Guran were initially EK that first started in more southern areas where the SK had been for a long time and where a linguistic development between proper Gorani EK and SK was shared. That is why Gorani is grammatically not as complex as Hawramani but simpler like SK. They also started a cultural-religious identity with Goran, that had started with the Magi/Zoroastrians that called themselves Gāthabāra > Gāhabār > Gābār(ak), which led to Yarsan very early on. And who became Yarsani also was Goran. At the same time, in the religious manner, "Goran" was the name of the tongue that was used for Yarsani hymns which indeed was EK. This is why the Ardalanis called their EK tongue Gorani in some religious poems but also why Hawramani Kurds (EK) were not called Goran but Hawramis. And EK was also called Hawrami instead of Gorani usually. I am talking about 500-200 years ago.

Then, some western scholars decided something. Minorsky was right about some stuff. But he also made many mistakes and they led to a lot of trouble and confusion for Kurds and anyone interested.

Finally, the only "Goran" / "Guran" that exist today are the Kurds of the Guran tribe. If you are part of that tribe then you are a Guran. If you are not part of that tribe then you are not a Guran. Regardless if you speak EK or not. Most Guran Kurds, like me, speak SK. But originally, more or the bigger part of the Guran tribe spoke EK. It changed because the SK were Yarsani too and lived with them and married into the tribes and because SK was more spread. Traditionally, the EK speakers all know SK or CK as second language because it is the lingua franca of the smaller region. The Guran tribe formed the way it is also because the EK adopted that from the SK Kurds that they had been living with for centuries.

To clear up: That statement is wrong. The only Guran are those that are part of the Guran tribe and by far most members of the Guran tribe speak SK. The statement itself is based on the Guran being EK, but this is a many-angled topic. Thus wrong. Originally, the Guran spoke EK and built an identity out of the Magian traditions which sooner or later shaped to Yarsan thence the name Guran which derives from Gāthabāra > Gāhabār > Gābār(ak) > Gawrakān > Gorān > Gūrān. The SK had been living with or close to EK from the beginning of the Gurans forming. And initially, the EK Guran were still separate from Kurds in the 9th century CE. But soon after they were part of the Kurdish ethnicity as a tribe and known as Kurds.

This is because SK tribes had come from somewhere further south to EK area and the Kurds (SK) and the EK (local Iranics, Goran partially) would slowly form two parts together, the EK became a part of the Kurds as well even with very distinct cultural features. This started already in sassanid times which is why also the settled people of Sharazor (EK) were "Kurds" when the arabs attacked and invaded Kurdistan and Iran.

Summary: The Kurds (SK) came to EK area (eastern and southern Kurdistan) during the sassanid era. The EK were then understood as Kurds too although strong cultural and ethnic distinctions and division remained at the same time. Out of the Magi and Zoroastrians in historically more southern EK area the Guran (Gāthabāra > Gāhabār > Gābār > Gābārak > Gawrakān > Gorān) formed. They spoke EK but were already influenced and began to be assimilated toward SK first and many centuries later toward CK due to the Jaf tribe working for the Babans suddenly. Out of the Goran culture the Yarsan religion shaped further and further. Many EK and SK were then Yarsani. Yarsani was synonymous with Goran while both SK and EK were understood as Goran from different aspects at the same time. Goran was then used synonymous with EK as well especially within the Yarsan religion itself. This may have been true in the beginning, the 9th century CE and afterwards partially as well but the "Guran" turned toward a proper tribe in SCN Kurdish manner, even when including original core EK parts, and now only members of the Kurdish Guran tribe are "Guran".

It is not a surprise that Kurds barely know anything about the history of their languages. They may or may not speak their native dialect and other dialects perfectly, that is not what I am talking about. I mean the understanding and knowledge of certain similarities and differences between several Kurdish dialects and subdialects and also between Western Iranic dialects.

Normally, people of any language or ethnicity don't have such knowledge and don't need to. But Kurds have an extra-proportional amount of fellows who are interested in knowing about these topics and spreading the knowledge. The root of this interest is the wish to understand what brought Kurds into this state-less and desperate situation and the wish to know why it is justified to fight and engage against this very situation.

So they sometimes claim things in favour of the legitimacy and they deny things not in favour of our legitimacy. Then on the other hand there are those Kurds who believe it is wrong to make extra-vagant claims and switch to the sceptical mode and do the opposite of the aforementioned group of fellows. They deny Kurdish legitimacy. They favour the theories and takes that make it look obvious that Kurds are just some people that were somehow grouped together not understanding that they are fighting against the Kurdish cause by that point. But the formerly mentioned group also damages the Kurdish cause by confusing any people interested in us, ourselves included, and destroying our very identity and history. The one that we actually have. It is glorious, but to most people it is more relevant to make claims in a time where we can compete with any possible neighbour in terms of "millenia that we have existed".

Obviously, both groups are mistaken and the conclusions from their mindsets are by the definition of "correct" indeed incorrect.

The putative pro-Kurdish group acts in self-righteousness and reacts emotionally. The veiled anti-Kurdish group acts in scepticism and reacts arrogantly.

In my experience, sceptical people most of the time turn out to be wrong. Because they don't ask questions to understand. They are sceptical because they are under the mistaken belief that it is logical to do. But it isn't. Often they don't actually care about the matter but want to have something to say about it. An opinion without any comprehension and knowledge. How does that work? Not at all!

People who act self-righteously, well, they don't need to be checked for righteousness by other people anymore, do they? They too are arrogant. And how arrogance and emotionality lead to fallacy and bias, I believe, I don't need to elaborate here.

What we need, what anyone needs anyway, is raw and brutal honesty and acceptance of what we know and don't know. Only then will we stop to cope and waste our time and energy with theories and fights that are a lost cause from the beginning. Be clever, don't exclude theories because they seem strong when you can't even grasp what it is backed by. And don't include theories because they make you feel better when nothing of worth even supports it.

Har bizhyat Kurd u Kurdistān Her bijyet Kurd u Kurdistan

I want to make an announcement: A friend of mine, namely, Kak Rezo or @kakrezo on twitter, has discovered a unique, special and highly interesting variety of Northern Kurdish. This subdialect stands out by definition from Northern Kurdish and shares two distinct features with Southern Kurdish and Central Kurdish that Northern Kurdish does not share and has lost in its linguistic history. I could verify that his discovery is indeed real and of high importance. For unclear reasons this variety slipped the scopes of any linguist and Kurdish researcher. I have yet to decide how much I will reveal until it has not been properly worked upon. Which is something that I will do sooner or later. This presumed subdialect of Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) I will call for the moment pre-Northern Kurdish, thus pNK, because it seems possible that its speakers, those Kurds, arrived in their present location before main migrations of Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) speaking Kurds did. pNK was first noticed and discovered by @kakrezo (on twitter) and then he made me aware of it on the 20.12.25. By accident, its existence and name (pNK) were leaked in a post/comment done by @KurdiCompendium (on twitter) where I gave him the information for a specific reply that was needed in some discussion.

Do you want to guess which two features pNK shares with SK and CK and where it could be located at?

Btw, in the same spirit, another teaser: There is a variety of Southern-Central-Northern Kurdish that a different friend of mine had discovered a few years ago through a native of that place and that he and me could verify to be part of SCNK and especially of CNK. He told me about it on the 17.12.21.. Though it is neither part of CK itself nor of NK itself it groups together with them by genealogy and is thus part of CNK. This linguistic variety of Kurdish is not even within Kurdistan and its speakers do not refer to themselves as Kurds. I have kept its existence dear and secret for years and when I will make a proper elaboration I intend to publish its existence, identity, location and meaning. This one SCNK variety is of utmost importance for Western Iranic linguistic history.

---

Here is the same post on twitter:

https://x.com/i/status/2023055737883173084