Azeri morphology in Kryz (East Caucasian) Gilles Authier Gilles Authier 2010. Azeri morphology in Kryz (East Caucasian). Turkic Languages 14, 14-42. The paper deals with the copying of morphemes and patterns from Turkic into the morphology of Kryz, an East Caucasian language of northern Azerbaijan. The copied morphemes in question are clitics found in the periphery of the verb system (expressing evidentiality, indefiniteness) and valency–changing morphology imported globally to- gether with Azeri forms, as well as adjective-forming derivational suffixes. The copied structures are more diverse, and have left a mark on many areas of the morphology, in both verb and noun phrases. Gilles Authier, 50 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, 75003 Paris, France E-mail: gilles.authier@gmail.com 1. Introduction Most of the data presented here are taken from Authier (2009), which is a complete description of one of the dialects of Kryz, a language belonging to the Lezgic branch of East Caucasian. In this paper we shall discuss some of the issues related to lan- guage contact which have left traces in the grammar of Kryz, namely the global and selective copying (for these terms see Johanson 2006a) of Turkic (Azeri) morphological features. There are some striking typological similarities between East Caucasian and Turkic languages, in contrast with other adjacent languages or language families such as North Caucasian, South Caucasian (Kartvelian) or Indo-European. For in- stance, the major strategies for subordinate clauses are left-branching, involving the use of non finite or low-focal elements as heads of subordinate clauses (participles in relative clauses, converbs in adverbial clauses, and masdars (nominalized verbs) in complement clauses); the unmarked word order is also rather similar (basically SOV, GN, AN) in Turkic and East Caucasian. On the other hand, some very basic features of these two language families con- trast sharply and make all the more striking these common points and other, conver- gence-driven phenomena connecting East Caucasian and Turkic languages. At the noun phrase level, Turkic has only a few, exclusively syntactic cases, while East Caucasian sets world records for nominal declension sizes thanks to its extensive use of spatial cases, which can even distinguish semantic nuances in grammatical rela- tions, e.g. differential subject marking or differential recipient marking. Gender is not grammatically distinguished in Turkic, whereas the morphosyntax of the great