The Otsop dialect (Otsop-Horsa), to some extent, stands out among the closely related dialects of the Jauk-Vayk interdialect (about a dozen villages of the Vayots Dzor marz of the Republic of Armenia). Phonetic, morphological and lexical deviations of the Otsop dialect from the general features of the interdialect can be explained not only by contacts with the neighboring dialects (Artsakh-Syunik dialect, interdialect of Northern Goghtn), but also by the fact that in the first half of the 19th century Armenians who migrated from Khoy and Salmast moved to the village of Otsop and lived together with the local residents, whose native dialect left its mark on some features of the autochthonous dialect.

The dictionary interpretation of pronouns largely depends on the grammatical understanding of the pronoun. The problem, to which part of speech this group of words belong, has not received its final solution in grammar yet. This is one of the main reasons for controversies in the lexicography of personal pronouns.

In the Armenian language, in the semantic (thematic) group “personal jewelry” the common word is the word “ornament”, which has a great word-forming activity. The first jewelry appeared together with clothes being an expression not of fantasy and aesthetics, but of mystical ideas. There is evidence of names of various kinds of gems and jewelry of the 5th century (or earlier), which, according to genealogy, are represented by the following groups: a) native Armenian words, b) Iranian borrowings, c) Greek borrowings, d) Assyrian borrowings, e) Arabic borrowings, f) Turkic borrowings. Words of unknown origin are also highlighted.

There are numerous newly formed words related to nationality and national in the language of journalism of the Armenian press for the period from 1991 to 1993. Among the words related to nationality and national, the words consisting of the component ազգ (nation) dominate. Among the latter, there are adjectives that are composed of nation + simple noun pattern, where the noun endings express a participial meaning. Some words are formed in the pattern nation + verbal noun (with the suffix -ում (the same as -tion in English)). A number of words were formed in the pattern nation + noun (with the suffix –ություն (the same as -ity in English). We also have newly formed words composed of ազգ (nation) + adjective pattern. We have encountered only one verb with the component ազգ (nation). Some words of another kind were also composed with the suffix – ություն (the same as -ity in English). There are three words formed by the component էթն(ոս) (ethnos (ethnicity)).

The attempt to periodize the toponymic system of Artsakh is aimed at identifying historical and linguistic toponyms – realities and regularities of development of their system based on the analysis of historical and linguistic facts. Periodization is carried out on the basis of three principles: 1. The principle of the history of the toponymic system is the history of all its separate stages. 2. The principle of impossibility of absolute periodization. 3. The principle of the direct connection between the emergence of toponyms and their change in parallel with the history of the nation.

Lavrenti Hovhannisyan, contemporary Armenian linguist, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Corresponding Member of the National Academy of Sciences of Armenia, has authored a series of scientific works dedicated to the Karabakh dialect. In his works, he has examined the archaic phonetical, lexical, and grammatical features of the dialect in order to prove the existence of the Armenian population in Artsakh since ancient times. Among the most characteristic phonetic phenomena, he highlights the deafening of the initial voiced consonants in Classical Armenian, in some cases aspiration and palatalization of these consonants, which he does not associate with Turkic influence, the absence of the “f” sound and the presence of oxytonic stress.

The subject of the study of lexicology comes down primarily to a diachronic consideration of the extra-linguistic, socio-historical nature of the lexical composition of a language, for which lexicography is an indispensable source. This study is based on the sociolinguistic and systemic-semantic aspects of the study of vocabulary. The first involves the characterization and classification of words according to external socio-historical factors (borrowings from different forms of language), according to the peculiarities of the use of words (archaisms, neologisms), and according to professional areas of use of words (terms). In the case of the second, the center of consideration is the internal semantic structure of the lexeme, view at the vocabulary as a system.

In languages with declensions, the declension paradigms are formed by different principles. It is according to these principles that declension types are determined. By comparing several linguistic formations in the panchronic aspect, a new grouping of declension types by two different principles has been made for the two existential forms of the Armenian language with gender-free declension system and for languages with a gender-based declension system.

A study of words relating to a man and society in the Book of Genesis shows that this semantic group has many verbal units for denoting basic concepts, whether they are simple roots or compound constructions that are combined into subgroups that complement each other. The words included in the subgroups of this semantic field have a rich spectrum in terms of the number of synonyms. Most of these words are of Indo-European origin: մարդ, այր, ծնունդ, մանուկ, հայր, մայր, եղբայր, քոյր, ուստր, դուստր, անդրանիկ, ծնունդ, ընտանիք տուն; there are several borrowings from Iranian (ազգ, տոհմ, զաւակ) and Syrian (տղայ).

The study of the transformations that diphthongs and triphthongs underwent in epigraphic inscriptions of the 12–16th centuries allows us to conclude that some cases of phonetic changes are widespread and characteristic of almost all the dialects and accents whereas the other part is limited not only chronologically, but also in terms of manifestation and functioning of phonetic changes. These changes from the point of view of the primary usage of some linguistic realities or new interpretation of existing phenomena are novation for the Middle Armenian language.

By analogy of the relevant structures of the Armenian language of the 5th century AD to designate the concept of “English language” were first used by the phrase: անգղիացւոց բարբառ “speech of the Englishmen”, անգղիացւոց լեզու “language of the Englishmen”, անգղիական / անգլիական բարբառ “English speech” and անգղիական լեզու “English language”. From the end of the 18th century in Armenian language, five versions of language names are used: անգղիարէն, անգղիերէն, անգլիարէն, անգլիերէն եւ անգլերեն / անգլերէն, which are characterized by sounds լ/ղ, by variative suffixes -արէն / -երէն, the presence or the absence of a component ի.

From Old Armenian a small number of indigenous Indo-European names denoting clothing or apparel have come down to us (according to the samples we have collected, about 3 dozens). Some of them have passed from Old Armenian, Middle Armenian and from dialects to modern literary Armenian: although it should be noted that some of these words are presumably native Indo-European. Many of the roots have undergone significant semantic changes over time: a) changed their primary meanings,

Hadrut is located in the south of the Republic of Artsakh, it was one of the regional centers of the NKAO. Before the occupation by Azerbaijan, the Hadrut region had 1 urban and 28 rural communities with 41 rural settlements. At present, the people of Hadrut have found refuge in different settlements of the Republic of Armenia deprived of the opportunity to return to their homeland: another unique dialect of Armenian is in danger of extinction.

In the dialogues of the epic “The Daredevils of Sassoun”, the syntax (subject-expressing speech, verb-predicate-indirect object) and the content of the author's speech mostly remain the same. This is due to the fact that the above mentioned components do not always have a verbal expression which, however, as a rule, is implied. In numerous versions of the epic, most often the author’s speech is found only with a predicate expressed mainly with a verb ասել “to say”, which, as a result of extension of the lexical meaning, is used not only in the narrative but also in the combination with direct speech with different semantic shades.

The basic units of the ancient Armenian, which express the concept of “home, dwelling” are characteristic of all phases of the development of the literary Armenian language. In other words, these are common Armenian words passed into the modern literary language and dialects from the classical Armenian language. Most of the words related to the concept of “home, dwelling” are simple roots used in the formation of word combinations. Statistically, the most significant group consists of words with suffixes, followed by compound words.

Each dialect or speech is characterized by a unique vocabulary, which, by presenting commonalities and differences with the vocabulary of other dialect units, manifests itself as a system with unique semantic, word-formational, and etymological characteristics. The study of vocabulary is also important not only in terms of a comprehensive study of dialect speech, but also from the perspective of determining the interrelations and influences of dialect units, especially when there are controversial issues.

When identifying word-formation groups of toponyms of Artsakh, classical and modern principles of word-formation classification in toponymics are adopted as basis, particularly, Jahukyan’s approach (with consideration to some features). А) According to their structure, toponyms of Artsakh are grouped into simple and root toponyms that are classified as follows: a) genuine root toponyms, when the word root is the toponym itself; b) toponymic roots, i.e., names that are conceived as root toponyms.

The Karabakh dialect is one of the most distinctive Armenian dialects. Alongside original Armenian words, it contains a substantial number of borrowings from Persian, which have Iranian origin as well as Arabic and Turkic. This is quite natural, given the geographical proximity of Artsakh to the northern regions of Iran and intensive contacts with Iranian state and administrative structures during the period of melikdoms.

The focus of the founder of the Mkhitarist Congregation, Mkhitar Sebastatsi (1676–1749) and his disciples was the Armenian language, and it was exactly in this field of study that they achieved unprecedented success. It is well known that both prominent Armenologists of the time and Sebastatsi himself were primarily interested in Grabar (Classical Armenian), whereas Ashkharhabar (Modern Armenian) remained largely outside the scope of their attention. Nevertheless, Sebastatsi authored the first grammar of the emerging Western Armenian language, in which he advocated for its purification and standardization, simultaneously calling for the elimination of Latinisms from Grabar.

Arsen Aytinian (1825–1902), a prominent representative of European Armenian studies, a theorist of linguistics and a practical researcher of the history of the Armenian language. He left an indelible mark on the advancement of Armenian studies in the field of linguistics and philology in general. The activity of the Vienna Mekhitarist Congregation in the second half of the 19th century is fully connected with his name. He was an authority in the field of Armenian language in the context of general and theoretical linguistics of his time - a field that has broadly illuminated the development of Armenian studies from the very beginning and to this day.

The numerous scientific works by Hrachya Acharyan (1876-1953) cover all domains of the study of the Armenian language. He is the founder of such scientific disciplines as the history of the Armenian language, Armenian dialectology, and experimental phonetics of Armenian language. Hr. Acharyan’s monumental contributions to Armenian lexicography, etymology of the Armenian language, the study of Armenian personal names, historical and comparative grammar of the Armenian language, typological and contrastive research, and many other fields are of fundamental importance to Armenian studies. The pedagogical legacy of the eminent Armenologist is immense.

The borrowed words in the Karabakh dialect, when compared to their meanings in Russian, may have either retained their original meaning or undergone various semantic changes. One of the manifestations of semantic changes is the use of these borrowed words in phraseological units. The phraseological units are mainly composed of borrowed subordinate components and Armenian dominant components. Phraseological units with communicative meaning – that is, those functioning as a sentence – are relatively few; they mainly have a simple structure; one-member phraseological units are also encountered.