Hungarian Historical Phonology ár2
ár 'stream; flood; to stream, flood'
First attestation/Old Hungarian data
1193 ? aruod [verb]; 1266 ? Wisarahel [noun; place name] (see EWUng: 43, s.v. ár1)
Important dialectal forms
[coming]
Uralic/Ugric/Pre-Hungarian reconstruction
PUg *ϑora or *ϑara ’lake (?)‘ < PU *tora or *tara
UEW: PUg *ϑarɜ ‘während des Hochwassers entstandener See‘)
Status of the Ugric etymology
Uncertain
Loan etymology
Ug ← IIr *sáras-
Cognates suggested in earlier research
Khanty: East (V) lar ‘während des Hochwassers an einem Wiesenufer entstandener See’, (Vj) ‘tiefliegendes, baumloses Wiesenufer od. Wiesengelände, das im Frühling überschwemmt wird‘; South (DN) tor ‘See‘; North (O) lar ‘bei Hochwasser überschwemmtes Ufergebiet; See ‘ < Proto-Khanty (Zhivlov 2006) *ʌār (Honti 1982: *ʌar)
Mansi: East (KU) tūr, West (P) tūr, (LO) tor, North (So) tūr ‘See’ < Proto-Mansi (Zhivlov 2006) *tūrə (Honti 1982: *tūrɜ)
Commentary
The Ugric etymology features no problems and it is universally accepted (TESz; MSzFE; UEW; Zhivlov 2014). Katz’s (2003) idea to remove the Hungarian cognate from the Ob-Ugric forms is based on obsolete views of Uralic historical phonology. No cognates outside the Ugric branch are found: the Permic words Komi šor, Udmurt šur have been connected here by earlier research (see UEW for references) as wel as more recently by Harmatta (1977) and Häkkinen (2009), but these reflect a different Uralic stem *šerä (UEW; Holopainen 2019: 218). The Proto-Ugric form can formally reflect an earlier Uralic form with *s or *š (Zhivlov 2014: 127). The reconstruction of both *o–a and *a–a stem is possible.
EWUng assumes that the Ugric word is originally a nomen verbum, but it is very difficult to substantiate this claim; no traces of a verb are found in Ob-Ugric.
An Indo-Iranian etymology for the Ugric word has been suggested independently by several researchers (Harmatta 1977: 171; Koivulehto 1999: 215; Katz [1985: 119–120] 2003: 102), and the idea that the Ugric word reflects a loan from Proto-Indo-Iranian (or Proto-Iranian) *sáras- is formally unproblematic (the Indo-Iranian word is an s-stem, but all the early Indo-Iranian loans in Ugric/Uralic are borrowed as vocalic stems). While it is true that a word for ‘lake’ had to belong to core vocabulary of the Ugric speakers, the word *sara is likely to be a loan from somewhere, as it has no Uralic etymology.
If the loan etymology is correct, the word has to be borrowed before *s, *š > *ϑ took place in Ugric. The same is true of most other Iranian loans as well, such as *ϑe̮rańa ‘gold’. More precise dating of the loan is difficult (cf. the problems with the dating of *s > h in Iranian, see Hintze 1998).
Due to the meanings referring to ‘flood’ and ‘stream’ attested in Hungarian and Khanty, it would also be tempting to connect the Ugric words with Indo-Iranian forms like Vedic sarít- ‘stream’, derived from the root sar- ‘to run’. However, as the etymology of such forms is not quite clear and as no meaning ‘to flow’ can be reconstructed for the Indo-Iranian root *sar- (see EWAia II: 707), this possibility remains quite speculative.
Conclusion
A convincing Proto-Ugric etymology with Indo-Iranian origin.
References
Abondolo 1996: 93: PUg
EWUng: 43, s.v. Proto-Ugric; nomen verbum?
Harmatta 1977: Proto-Ugric + Permic ← Indo-Iranian
Holopainen 2019: 217–218: Proto-Ugric ← Indo-Iranian
Honti 1982: 139 Proto-Ob-Ugric *θūrɜ
Häkkinen 2009: 22: Proto-Ugric + Permic ← Indo-Iranian
Katz 2003: 102 Ob-Ugric (Hungarian not here) ← Indo-Iranian
Koivulehto 1999: Proto-Ugric ← Indo-Iranian
Kümmel 2020: 252: Proto-Ugric ← Indo-Iranian
UEW: Proto-Ugric Uralonet
Zhivlov 2006: 163 Proto-Ob-Ugric
Zhivlov 2014: 127: Proto-Ugric/Uralic