"You had the treasure, but you did not know the yen for it; because of (this) ignorance, you did not hold it in your hand."

(Asadi)*

On December 25, 2012, an outstanding linguist, specialist in the field of Iranian philology and Indo-European linguistics, Leonard Georgievich Herzenberg, passed away at the age of 79. Leonard Georgievich was a senior researcher at the Institute for Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences and a professor at the Department of General Linguistics of St. Petersburg State University. The scientific heritage of the scientist includes four fundamental monographs and about 200 articles covering the problems of Iranian and Indo-European linguistics.

Leonhard Georgievich Herzenberg was born on June 21, 1934 in Liepaja (Liepaja, Libau, Courland, Latvia) in a family of highly educated parents. Leonard Georgievich was named after his grandfather. He had to go through a difficult childhood. After Latvia joined the USSR in 1940, his father Georg Leonardovich Herzenberg did not have time to immigrate to Bolivia to live with relatives and was exiled to the Soviet concentration camp in the Kirov region, where he died on May 8, 1942 (in the so-called Vyatlag). The entire Herzenberg family came under repression: his mother, Lina (Linzit) Nikolaevna Grazde, and young Leonard were "special residents". On June 14, 1941, they were exiled to Siberia, to the Krasnoyarsk Territory. Leonard Georgievich graduated from primary school in the village of Chelkonovo. Then they moved from one city to another. After graduating from high school in 1951, due to well-known reasons, he was unable to enter a humanitarian university and had to choose the Krasnoyarsk Forestry Engineering Institute. Even then, a fairly well-read young man developed an interest in Oriental studies, and he dreamed of entering the Eastern Faculty of Leningrad State University. Thanks to the thaw that came after Stalin's death, the life of Leonard Georgievich began to develop more favorably. After working as a mathematician at a school in Krasnoyarsk and saving up money to move, he was able to leave Siberia with his mother forever.

* This bayt of the Persian poet Asadi Tusi is taken from a recent article by Leonard Georgievich Gsrtsnberg ("Towards the etymology of Persian asu, arj, axs", 2008), devoted to the etymology and semantics of the Persian word arj "treasure".

page 204
In 1956, Leonard Georgievich was accepted to the Iranian / Afghan Department of the Eastern Faculty of Leningrad State University (LSU). Among his teachers were prominent Iranists and Orientalists: M. N. Bogolyubov, A. N. Boldyrev, V. S. Sokolova, S. N. Sokolov, A. T. Tagirdzhanov and I. P. Petrushevsky.

After graduating from the University, L. G. Herzenberg worked as a senior bibliographer in the Foreign Acquisition Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences. During this period, in addition to his main work, he collected materials for his future dissertation and compiled a file of Saka texts. In 1962, he entered the Leningrad Branch of the Institute of Linguistics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, majoring in Comparative Indo-European and Indo-Iranian Linguistics. Along with a serious study of the dialects of the Saka languages of East Turkestan, he studied Sanskrit texts, continued to study ancient Greek and Latin, Lithuanian, Sogdian and Khorezm languages under the guidance of M. N. Bogolyubov.

The beginning of L. G. Herzenberg's scientific work was marked by the study of the Khotanosak language (hvatanau). Khotanosak, or Khotan (Saka), is an eastern Middle Iranian language that was spoken in the Khotan oasis (southern Chinese Turkestan, now a district of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China) on the territory of the Khotan Buddhist Principality during the 1st millennium AD. Hvatana was located at the southern edge of the Taklamakan Desert at the intersection of the Great Silk Road from Central Asia to China and the route leading from India to the north, and thus played a major role in the cultural and trade exchange between the ancient countries. It is assumed that the Iranian tribes appeared in it in the first century BC. It was the Saks who settled in Khotan who did not reach India during the migration that led to the Saka conquest of northern India. In the second century AD, the population of this Saka principality adopted mainly Mahayana Buddhism and entered the orbit of Indian civilization.

Up to the beginning of the XX century. nothing was known about the Saka language. The first Buddhist manuscripts written in the Indian Brahmi script (see Fig. 1) and dating back to the VIII-X centuries AD, were discovered in Khotan and in nearby Buddhist fortresses as a result of the archaeological expeditions of Mark Aurel Stein to East Turkestan (from 1906 to 1930). The language of some manuscripts and documents was later recognized as Indo-Iranian (Indo-Scythian, i.e. Khotanosak), and the language of another Some parts are Tocharian (dialects or languages A and B). E. Leymann showed that this language is Indo - Iranian (Northern Aryan), and S. Konov and G. Luders established the phonetic affiliation of the newly found language to the Iranian group. In addition to religious books translated from Sanskrit, Khotanosak materials included military and business documents, travel guides, private correspondence, and Buddhist poems. Most of the discovered Khotanosak materials were researched and published by the English scientist Sir G. W. Bailey. M. Leymann, Mark Jan Dresden, Ronald Eric Emmerick and other researchers have made a great contribution to the study of Khotanosaksky. In the post-war years, the Khotanosak language in the USSR was studied by B. C. Vorobyov-Desyatovsky. The Institute of Oriental Manuscripts of the Russian Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg has a large collection of Khotanosak manuscripts and documents that were found in the collections of the Russian Consul in Kashgar N. F. Petrovsky (1880-1904), the orientalist S. F. Oldenburg (1863-1934) and the Turkologist S. E. Malov (1880-1957).

Despite the efforts of many scholars, not all Khotanosak texts have been published and interpreted to date. Using all the Khotanosak texts published at that time and comparing some fragments from the collection of the Hebrew Academy of Sciences, Leonard Georgievich for the first time in Russian science investigated the grammatical structure of the Khotanosak language and published the first grammatical reference books, in which he provided both extralinguistic and basic linguistic information about the language, with a detailed analysis of phonetics and morphology (Khotanosak language., 1965; 1981; 2000).

Based on the comparative historical method of studying Khotanosak phonetics, L. G. Herzenberg identified the following stages of its development: common Saka, pre-Khotanosak, and written attested Early Khotanosak (the actual language of the Khotan oasis, the "Book of Zambasta", several sutras and documents) and Late Khotanosak (the language of Turfan, business documents, phrasebooks, and guidebooks). In addition, L. G. Herzenberg and other researchers identified several other dialects close to Saka: Murtukskosak (north-east of Kashgar), Tumshukskosak (north-east of Kashgar), Indo-Saka (the language of the conquerors of north-west India Shakyas, known by several words), Krorayin-

page 205

Figure 1. Sample text in the Khotanosak language

Saka (east of the Khotan oasis, several borrowed words in Prakrit) and Kashgar-Saka (a number of words from Mahmud of Kashgar).

According to the observation of L. G. Herzenbsrg, a number of words in the Khotan Saka language are continued by Avestan "Devo" words: kamala "head", cf. avest. "the demon's head", "teacher", cf. Avest. "false teaching", which may indicate a confrontation between the Avestians and the ancient ancestors of the Khotan Saks and in some ways confirms the hypothesis of the non-Zoroastrian religion of the Central Asian Saks. It is noteworthy that the Khotanosak word urmaysde, aurmaysde (DKS, 40, 48) is not a designation of the supreme deity Ahuramazda, but a common name for the sun, as, for example, both in Khorezmian rēmažd and in Ishkashim rēmuz (these words can be considered the result of late Zoroastrian influence).

After publishing an essay on the grammar of the Khotanosak language in 1965 in the series "Languages of the Peoples of Asia and Africa", L. G. Herzenberg completed his PhD thesis "The language of Khotanosak Buddhist monuments" and successfully defended it in 1966 under the supervision of B. S. Sokolova.

Since 1968, on the initiative of the outstanding linguist Yu. S. Maslov, in addition to his main work at the Institute of Linguistics, he began to teach an optional course "Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics" and conduct seminars on one of the ancient Indo-European languages at the Department of General Linguistics of the Philological Faculty of St. Petersburg State University., Latin, Ancient Greek, Ancient Armenian, Baltic and Celtic languages, from non - Indo-European-Altaic, Finno-Ugric, Semitic and Kartvelian languages.

In 1972, L. G. Herzenberg's monograph "Morphological structure of the word in ancient Indo - Iranian languages" was published-a fundamental work on morphology for many generations of Iranists and indologists.

In 1976, Leonard Georgievich published the article "Iranian Etymologies I" in a collection of scientific articles dedicated to the 75th anniversary of the outstanding Soviet Iranian scholar V. I. Abayev. Using the basic principles of etymological research adopted by V. I. Abaev and consisting in regular reference not only to the Iranian material, but also to the broader linguistic landscape, not limited to the Indo-European family, I attempted to study the origin of several Iranian words. He compared the first word to the Tajik interrogative particle my ("li"), which is also common in the Turkic languages of the region, with the similar early Khotanosak particle tпаpa. The scientist tried to reconstruct its late Khotanosak form, which could have had the phonetic appearance * mä [mə] approximately in the IX-X centuries and could well have served as a source of borrowing for the Turks.

The second word is taj. lof (also: loba, lobidan; words related to the process of speaking, pronouncing), which has parallels in the Pamir languages (shugn. luv- "to speak, to sing"; Yazg. ləv - "to talk in a dream"; Afg. lawdəl- "to pronounce"). Pamir and ai, according to the rule of B. S. Sokolova, can only go back to other-ir. * - ai -, which is contained in the root of the well-known verb *mlu - (cf. ab. Mraot). Hence, taking into account the complexity of the distribution of 1 and r in Indo-Iranian languages, he proposed to consider Art. - sl. mlviti, Russian. to speak as an Iranian borrowing, which, in his opinion, fits into the system of sacred vocabulary brought by Iranians to the Slavs.

Further, he considers the problem of the origin of the Tajik word zabon " language "(cf. other-Persian hizān - < hizwān, mfa. *hizbān -, Sogd. 'zb"k < *hizwāka -, hot. - sak. biśai < *wizwāka-). Labour-

page 206
the problem arises when it is necessary to explain its relationship with other indus. jihvā -, which is solved when reconstructing the root with a previous doubling in both Iranian and Indian: other-ind. jihvā - < *ii-ĝhua -, other-ir. *hizwa- < *si-ĝhua-. The root *hhuā - is attested in many Indo-European languages (Arm. jaunem "to sanctify", Art. - sl. zvati). He explains the doubling in Iranian by the coincidence of *z from *g and *z from *s before a voiced consonant in an older period. In other Indo-European languages, the roothhuā - is marked with other preformants that do not give words any additional meaning (Latin lingua/dingua- < arm. lezu < *1ē - ĝhuā). Looking at the Taj. mondan, he examines the origin of the Tocharian (A and B) mask -, which, in his opinion, may be an Iranian borrowing (cf. hot. - sak. hämä - then the irregular functioning of the verb suffix (- sk -) can be explained. The next word is Fargon "Ferghana". The previously proposed etymology seems to him semantically and phonetically unsatisfactory (*fra-kana - "excavated, excavated, cultivated"), so he suggests that this toponym should be considered a form of a well-known toponym with a prefix and a suffix characteristic of toponyms: with the phonetic development "located further, below, beyond the Raga" and with the possibility of a different localization of Avestan

The last word is taj. "slave, slave girl" is considered by him not as a borrowing from Old Uzbek, but as connected with the Avest. "young woman", shugn. "husband, spouse, person", and the vocalism of the first syllable in Tajik is explained by it as a consequence of the fact that it passed through the Turkic languages or was borrowed from the Eastern Iranian language.

In 1982, L. G. Herzenberg, at the invitation of the R. Acharian Institute of Language, took part in the international symposium on Armenian Linguistics in Yerevan with a report on the origin of the word "Armenia", in which, based on the possibility of reflecting I.-e. *dh in Armenian as-r-, he suggested its proximity to other-gr. "garden of Eden, earthly paradise", related to the Hebrew and Arabic word for "enjoyment, well-being". Such a comparison, in his opinion, would allow us to abandon the construction of the word "Eden "to the Akkadian-Sumerian edinu"steppe, desert".

Also noteworthy is the publication of Leonard Georgievich on the etymology of the Armenian word Astwac " god " (1984). He suggested interpreting the word as an archaic Indo-European relic that has certain parallels in other Indo-European languages, and denied directly interpreting it as a continuation of the Phrygian Sabázios in light of the alleged Armenian-Phrygian connections.

In the Armenian Astwac, he saw the Indo-European reflex preserved as the segment-tw-. Hence, he adopted the division As-tw-ac, the first component of which is easily identified with the other-ind. "deity, spirit", etc. - sk. oss "deity of one of the categories", and the last component-as has a suffix character and can go back to the i-e * - sk'e/o-or to the i-e root. In this regard, the analogy to the Armenian Astwac can be represented, for example, in ancient Indian as a designation of the supreme deity Varuna and in Phrygian Sabazios < +*Dios.

In 1981, L. G. Herzenberg published the monograph "Questions of Reconstruction of Indo-European prosodics", and in 1983 defended his doctoral dissertation on its basis and received the degree of Doctor of Philology. Leonhard Georgievich's dissertation, "Syllabic accents of the late Indo-European community", which was carried out under the supervision of his teacher in the field of Indo-European studies, Professor I. M. Tronsky, was highly appreciated by specialists. In this work, an attempt was made to recreate the essential features of the proto-language of the syllable-morphemic type, namely syllabic accents. On the basis of many Indo-European and non-Indo-European languages, such problems of Indo-European studies as Indo-European accentology, laryngality and voiced aspirants, laryngality and heteroclysis, accent-ablaut reconstruction, laryngality as a distinctive feature, reconstruction of Indo-European consonancy were considered in detail.

In 1988, L. G. Herzenberg was appointed a leading researcher at the Institute for Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The title of professor in the specialty "Theory of Linguistics" was awarded to him in 1993 at the Department of General Linguistics of the Philological Faculty of St. Petersburg State University.

Since 1991, Leonard Georgievich has made multiple trips to the United States to conduct classes in the Tajik language as part of the program of the Department of Languages and Civilizations of Near East Asia at the University of Seattle (Washington). The result of the first year of classes was

page 207
publication of a special study guide for students studying the Tajik language (Tajik Teaching Materials. Seattle, 1992).

In 1994, he was elected an Honorary Foreign Corresponding Member of the Italian Institute for the Study of Africa and the Near and Middle East, Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (Rome, Italy). In Italy, he gave lectures at the universities of Rome, Naples, Venice, Catania, Messina and Calabria. In Spain, he lectured and conducted practical classes in the Persian language at the University of Madrid, lectured on Indo-European studies and Oriental studies in Salamanca, Seville, Granada, and Valladolid. In Europe, he made research trips to the universities of Oxford (UK); Utrecht, Leiden, Amsterdam (Netherlands); Berlin, Hamburg, Bamberg, Heidelberg (Germany); Vienna (Austria); Uppsala and Stockholm (Sweden); Jerusalem (Israel); Paris (France) and Geneva (Switzerland).

During his trips to the United States, Leonard Georgievich made presentations and lectures at Columbia University (New York), Harvard University (Massachusetts), the universities of Arizona, Louisiana (New Orleans), St. Louis (Missouri), Chicago (Illinois), the Universities of California (Berkeley, Los Angeles) and Maryland.

L. G. Herzenberg maintained scientific contacts with such outstanding professors as B. Schlerath, A. Rossi, R. Emmerick, I. Cirtautas, with the Iranists P. O. Schervet, B. Utas, with Academician G. Nyoli and many other scientists.

Since 2000, L. G. Herzenberg became the chief researcher of the Institute for Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences and continued to work both in the Department of Comparative Historical Studies of Indo-European languages and areal studies of this Institute, and at the Department of General Linguistics of the Philological Faculty of St. Petersburg State University.In 2002, the specialization "Comparative Historical Indo-European Linguistics"was opened at this department. Leonard Georgievich has been teaching elective lectures and seminars on "Introduction to Indo-European Linguistics"for 30 years. Lectures were delivered thanks to the joint efforts of the Department of General Linguistics of St. Petersburg.State University and the Institute of Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences. A master's degree in Indo-European comparative and Historical linguistics was also opened in 2005.

In 2010, L. G. Herzenberg published another fundamental work "A Brief Introduction to Indo-European Studies", which is a modern presentation of the key problems of Indo-European comparative historical linguistics. It briefly presents the basics of classification of Indo-European languages, highlights the problems of language reconstruction at various levels, and questions about the correlation of language reconstruction data with the results of archaeological excavations.

The article discusses in detail the principle of restriction of the Indo-European language family, reconstruction of the consonant and vowel system, the system of verb categories, reconstruction of words and syntagmas, prosodics (the doctrine of stress and tonality), the composition of the Indo-European language family (groups Anatolian, Indo-Iranian, Greek, Italian, Balto-Slavic, Celtic; Armenian, Tocharian, Albanian, Phrygian, Thracian and Illyrian languages) and ancient and archaic languages used to reconstruct the proto-language.

A hypothetical laryngeal theory is also highlighted, which is based on an attempt to explain the patterns of proto-linguistic functional vowel alternation (ablauta, from German. Ablaut, engl. vowel gradation), in which the following levels of alternation are distinguished: normal, zero, and extended.

A special section is devoted to a detailed review of the fable of the German linguist A. Schlseicher (1821-1868) and its reflection in various language materials. In 1868, Schleicher composed the fable "Sheep and Horses" in Proto-Indo-European in order to show the possibility of reconstructing a fragment of a hypothetical Proto-Indo-European language. Since then, the proto-Indo-European reconstruction of this fable has been constantly rewritten by linguists, taking into account the latest achievements of Indo-European comparative studies. In his Introduction, Leonard Georgievich gives a detailed analysis of the translation of this fable into Proto-Indo-European in the version of the Viennese Indo-Europeanist M. Peters (see Fig. 2), its translations into other Indo-European languages: Ancient Indian, Ancient Greek, Latin, Gothic and Old Slavonic.

The text of the fable in Russian: A sheep, [on] which had no wool, saw horses: one-carrying a heavy cart, one a large burden, one quickly carrying a person. The sheep said to the horses: "My heart burns when I see a man driving horses." The horses said, " Listen, sheep, our heart is burning from what we have seen: the man, my lord, is made of sheep's wool

page 208

2. August Schleicher's fable "Sheep and Horses" translated into Proto-Indo-European by the Viennese Indo-European scholar Martin Peters (From the book "A Brief Introduction to Indo-European Studies" by L. G. Herzenberg, § 34, p. 101).

he makes himself new warm clothes, but the sheep have no wool left." When the sheep heard this, it ran off into the field.

Since 1974, Leonard Georgievich worked on compiling a fundamental "Etymological dictionary of the Persian language". Unfortunately, the work remained incomplete. In the last years of his life, he published several articles on the etymology of some words of the Persian classical language ("Persian. Dabba", 2003; "Dabab", 2006; "On the etymology of Persian asu, arj, axš", 2008; "The Etymology of Persian öbak", 2010; " Two etymologies [ABNĀXŪ/ ŌN, ABREŠIM]", 2011), and in 2011 in the main A preliminary publication of etymologies of Persian words beginning with the letter A (aleph) ("Studies in Persian Etymology I") was published in English in the scientific journal of the Russian Academy of Sciences"Acta linguistica Petrovitana" ("Proceedings of the Institute for Linguistic Research"). In it, he summarized the main achievements of such well-known researchers as P. de Lagarde, D. Darmsterer, P. Horn, G. Hubschmann, W. B. Henning, W. Euler and M. Mayrhofer. Of great value in this article are precisely those words in which L. G. Herzenberg sees the Eastern Iranian or Khotanosak origin.

In 2005, together with N. N. Kazansky, Director of the Institute for Linguistic Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Leonard Georgievich published an important article "Proto-linguistic Reconstruction: general Problems" (Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences). In the same year, a collection of scientific articles prepared by colleagues from ILI RAS for the 70th anniversary of the birth of L. G. Herzenberg was published." SPb., 2005). The collection's articles cover the main problems of modern Indo-European comparative-historical linguistics. They deal with the reconstruction of accent-ablaut paradigms, aspects of laryngeal theory, concepts of the development of syntactic constructions, methods of etymological analysis, and interpretation of texts in Indo-European languages, including Hittite, Armenian, and Ossetian. The collection is of great interest to philologists-Indo-Europeans, specialists in Indo-Iranian, classical, Anatolian philology and for those who are interested in the problems of the history of the language.

The name of this anniversary collection was not chosen by chance, the scientist's colleagues wanted to once again emphasize the spiritual qualities and cordiality of the hero of the day, reflected even in his name (Leonhard Herzenberg). It is extracted from the following verse in the Rig Veda:

Indra-heart, spirit, thought...

Throughout his scientific career, L. G. Herzenberg paid much attention to working with students, and more than 25 postgraduates and doctoral students defended their dissertations under his supervision. Many linguists from St. Petersburg and other cities of Russia and the CIS have passed through his school of linguistics.

Many admirers of Leonard Georgievich should probably be grateful for the fact that in Latvia in 1939 there was no consulate or embassy of Bolivia,

page 209
otherwise, his father Georg Herzenberg would have been forced to go with his family to distant Bolivia. "if we imagine that there was an Iranian embassy there, then Leonard Georgievich could have ended up in Iran, but, fortunately for us, all this did not come true. Leonard Georgievich's heart has always been in the land of his ancestors, in Latvia, in his native St. Petersburg, in Iran and Central Asia, and, finally, in the expanses of his imaginary Indo-European ancestral homeland that he loved so much.

In conclusion, here is a verse by the Persian poet Lnsari from a recently published etymological article by Leonard Georgievich:

"The treasure itself is constantly multiplying (its) value."

So Leonard Georgievich, like the "treasure", all his life increased his value by scientific creativity, teaching activities and a kind attitude to his students and colleagues. The death of Leonard Georgievich Herzenberg was an irreparable loss for the entire Russian Oriental and philological science. The memory of him as a brilliant scientist and a wonderful person will always remain in our hearts.

L. A. LMBARTSUMYAN

LIST OF SELECTED PUBLICATIONS BY L. G. HERZENBERG 1

Khotanosak language. Grammatical essay, Ser. "Languages of the peoples of Asia and Africa", Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1965, 156 p.

The language of Khotanosak Buddhist monuments: Diss. Candidate of Philological Sciences, Part 1: Texts. Glossary. Grammatical essay. Part 2: Appendices. Pointers. L., 1966. 142 p.

Argumentation on the Khotanosak verb / / Iranskaya filologiya I. 1966. Dushanbe, 1970. pp. 32-41.

Altaistics from the point of view of an Indo-European scholar // Problema obshchnosti altayskikh yazykov. l.: Nauka, 1971. pp. 31-46.

Morphological structure of the word in ancient Indo-Iranian languages, Nauka Publ., 1972, 274 p.

Ob issledovanii rodstva altaiskikh yazykov [On the study of kinship of Altaic languages]. 1974. No. 2. pp. 46-55.

Kushansky and Saki / / Central Asia in the Kushan era. T. I. M., 1974. pp. 344-349.

O tadzhiksko-khotanosakskikh otnosheniyakh [On Tajik-Khotanosak relations]. Collection in memory of I. I. Zarubin, Moscow, 1974, pp. 15-27.

On the origin of the attribution indicator in the Yazgulyam language / / Izvestiya Otdeliya obshchestvennykh nauk AS Tajik SSR. No. 1. Issue 4 (78). Dushanbe, 1974. p. 88-89 (together with I. Rakhimov).

Iranskie etymologii I [Iranian Etymologies I]. History, etymology, typology (to the 75th anniversary of professor V. I. Abaev). Moscow, 1976.pp. 130-135.

Voprosy iranskoy i obshchey filologii (Iranuli da zogadi pilologivs sakitxebi: Sbornik statei, posvyashchii sevidesyatiyu V. I. Abaev) [Issues of Iranian and General philology (Iranuli da zogadi pilologivs sakitxebi: A collection of articles dedicated to the seventieth anniversary of V. I. Abaev)]. Tbilisi: Metsniereba. P. 73-79.

Voprosy rekonstruktsii indo-evropeiskoi prosodiki [Issues of reconstruction of Indo-European prosodics].

Linguistic thought and linguistic practice in Iran in Pre-Mongol times // History of linguistic studies. Medieval East, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1981, pp. 96-114 (together with D. Saimiddinov).

On the Afghan accent / / Iranskoe yazykoznanie. Yearbook. 1980. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1981, pp. 48-56.

Fragmenty khotanosakskoy Sanghata-Sutra [Fragments of the Khotanosak Sanghata-Sutra]. 2: Iron philologists. Ordzhonikidze, 1981, pp. 22-26.

Osnovy iranskogo yazykoznaniya: sredneiranskie yazyki [Fundamentals of Iranian Linguistics: Middle Iranian Languages], Moscow, 1981, pp. 233-313.

1 When compiling the list of publications, the following work was partially used: Nikolaev AS. List of works by L. G. Herzenberg / / Hrdā mánasā. SPb.: Nauka, 2005. pp. 13-22.

page 210
About the sound development of the Eastern languages, Theoretical problems of linguistics East. H 2. Moscow, 1982, pp. 46-51.

Syllabic accents of the late Indo-European community period, L., 1983, 340 p.

Contrastive grammar and functional grammar (the experience of analyzing the category of the Tajik verb type) / / Problems of functional grammar, Moscow, 1985, pp. 171-179 (together with P. D. Jamshedovym).

History of the Tajik language. Dushanbe, 1988. 75 p. (together with R. Kh. Dodikhudoev).

Monuments of Khotanosak writing of the VIII-X centuries / / Vostochny Turkestan in antiquity and early Middle Ages. Ethnos-Languages-Religions, Moscow, 1989, pp. 75-76.

Tajik Teaching Materials (Textbook on the Tajik language). Seattle, 1992. 89 p.

Texts in the Jewish-Tajik language from the Native Jewish Museum in Samarkand, Trudy po Judaiki, vol. 4, St. Petersburg, 1995, pp. 87-98 (together with S. A. Bruk and M. I. Nosonovsky).

Khotanosak language / / Languages of the world. Iranian languages. III. East Iranian Languages, Moscow: Indrik, 2000, pp. 46-57.

Persian. Dabba / / Proceedings of the Institute of Linguistic Research, vol. 1, part 2, St. Petersburg, 2003, pp. 65-72.

Proto-linguistic reconstruction: general problems / / Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 75, no. 12, 2005, pp. 1077-1088 (together with N. N. Kazansky).

Indo-Iranian languages and typology of linguistic situations. To the 75th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Leonovich Grunberg. SPb., 2006. pp. 111-113.

A brief introduction to Indo-European Studies, St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 2010, 316 p.

Studies in Persian Etymology I // Acta linguistica Petropolitana. Transactions of the Institute for Linguistic Studies. Vol. VII. Pt 1. Proceedings of the Institute for Linguistic Research, Vol. VII. Part 1. Colloquia Classica et Indogermanica V. Classical philology and Indo-European linguistics. St. Petersburg, 2011, pp. 201-224.

History of the Indo-European text // Indo-European linguistics and Classical philology XVI. Materials of readings dedicated to the memory of Professor Iosif Moiseevich Tronsky, St. Petersburg: Nauka Publ., 2012, pp. 152-162.

page 211

Permanent link to this publication: