how did you guys Pashtunized KPK ?

[kunatawar]

yes they did come from China. That's the ONLY part you got right.

They settled in pesh and spread from there.

There are scholars who believe pashtuns are Kushan Hephthalite mix.

just by looking at the language itself its pretty obvious that southern pashto is more OG than northern pakhto even though im a pakhto speaker myself

[salman47]

Pashtuns don't have one single ancestor, dna test prove that only 50% of pashtuns have r1a1 Y dna. Which is most homogenous in the region but still only 50%.

Genetic results are very unreliable for determining your ancestry.
Proof: Mutation.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Genetic results are very unreliable for determining your ancestry.
Proof: Mutation.

Mutations happen but they don't happen in the way you think, mutations happen on the molecular level and change genes over time, but signatures for gene markers are carried even through generations, regardless of mutation. otherwise scientists would not be able to isolate when a certain gene mutated and carried around to other genertaions.

[Sarbani]

just by looking at the language itself its pretty obvious that southern pashto is more OG than northern pakhto even though im a pakhto speaker myself

Where is your proof for that? Just cause Kandahari was the dialect that the Pashto script was based off of doesn't mean that it was the original Pashto dialect. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, just asking for proof.

[maneatinglizard]

Where is your proof for that? Just cause Kandahari was the dialect that the Pashto script was based off of doesn't mean that it was the original Pashto dialect. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, just asking for proof.

No modern dialect is the "original dialect." Whatever the original Pashto (if there even was such a thing, I think it's just as likely that the ethnogenesis of Pashtuns involved the confederation of various tribes that spoke their own dialects of the Aryan language, which eventually crystallized into a separate language) sounded like, it's hard to imagine that anyone preserved it perfectly when even written languages evolve over time.

As for the question of "sh" versus "kh," I think the evidence that many words would've had an "sh" in Proto-Pashto is very strong. Their existence in recorded languages like Avestan and Khotanese Saka with an "sh" makes it hard for me to accept that somehow only we got it right, and even then only a portion of us. Even if one were to argue that Avestan was influenced by Persian (which is likely to a degree, as it was recorded by Persians, not its original speakers), Khotanese Saka didn't have a strong connection to Persians as far as I'm aware; the Khotanese were instead influenced by Indics.

However, I think that the shift from "sh" -> "kh" happened early on in the development of Pashto. In fact, it probably already happened before the various tribes began to confederate. Regarding why it happened, I don't know. Languages shift seemingly no reason (for example, the shift from word-initial 'd' to 'l' in some Pashto words). However, I find the suggestion some have made that it came about due to influence from Indic languages pretty funny. "kh" is not even native to Indic, so how exactly did any contact with Indics lead to the shift?

[salman47]

No modern dialect is the "original dialect." Whatever the original Pashto (if there even was such a thing, I think it's just as likely that the ethnogenesis of Pashtuns involved the confederation of various tribes that spoke their own dialects of the Aryan language, which eventually crystallized into a separate language) sounded like, it's hard to imagine that anyone preserved it perfectly when even written languages evolve over time.

As for the question of "sh" versus "kh," I think the evidence that many words would've had an "sh" in Proto-Pashto is very strong. Their existence in recorded languages like Avestan and Khotanese Saka with an "sh" makes it hard for me to accept that somehow only we got it right, and even then only a portion of us. Even if one were to argue that Avestan was influenced by Persian (which is likely to a degree, as it was recorded by Persians, not its original speakers), Khotanese Saka didn't have a strong connection to Persians as far as I'm aware; the Khotanese were instead influenced by Indics.

However, I think that the shift from "sh" -> "kh" happened early on in the development of Pashto. In fact, it probably already happened before the various tribes began to confederate. Regarding why it happened, I don't know. Languages shift seemingly no reason (for example, the shift from word-initial 'd' to 'l' in some Pashto words). However, I find the suggestion some have made that it came about due to influence from Indic languages pretty funny. "kh" is not even native to Indic, so how exactly did any contact with Indics lead to the shift?

Also in some of our dialects there is the 'KhSh' compounding, what do you think of that?
P.S. I can understand a word or two in almost every sentence of that Avestani Atashparasti book.

[maneatinglizard]

Also in some of our dialects there is the 'KhSh' compounding, what do you think of that?
P.S. I can understand a word or two in almost every sentence of that Avestani Atashparasti book.

Can you give an example of what you mean? In my dialect, we pronounce خوشال (khushaal) without the vowel in between the kha and sheen, i.e. "khshaal." Do you mean something like that?

From the bits of Old Iranic I've seen, it seems that that compound did exist. For example, the Old Persian form of "shah" was "Xšāyaθiya" (Khshayathiya), and King Xerxes' name was actually pronounced something like "Khshayarsha." I don't think Old Persian script fully recorded short vowels, so I guess it's possible that there's actually a short vowel in between the "kh" and "sh."

A ton of Pashto words have Avestan cognates. It surprised me how much there is in common.

[salman47]

Can you give an example of what you mean? In my dialect, we pronounce خوشال (khushaal) without the vowel in between the kha and sheen, i.e. "khshaal." Do you mean something like that?

From the bits of Old Iranic I've seen, it seems that that compound did exist. For example, the Old Persian form of "shah" was "Xšāyaθiya" (Khshayathiya), and King Xerxes' name was actually pronounced something like "Khshayarsha." I don't think Old Persian script fully recorded short vowels, so I guess it's possible that there's actually a short vowel in between the "kh" and "sh."

A ton of Pashto words have Avestan cognates. It surprised me how much there is in common.

Not the old words.
Something like the following: 'Bakhshana' for 'Bakhana'(forgiveness). 'KhShata'(or ShKhata?) for 'Khkata' etc.. I heard my friends pronouncing like that.
By compounding I mean 'Consonant Clusters', i.e. There is no vowel at all between the Consonants I mentioned.