PIE and Uralic

[Patrick C. Ryan]

Dear Ante and IEists:

 ----- Original Message -----
From: "Ante Aikio" <anaikio at mail.student.oulu.fi>
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 1:26 PM

On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 X99Lynx at aol.com wrote:

<snip>

[AA wrote]
They can be identified with phonological and distributional criteria. The
earliest loans show PU *k and *x as substituents of IE laryngals, and they
have wide distribution in Uralic. The newer loans show the PU retroflex
sibilant *S as a substituent of PIE *H, and have a more restricted
distribution. The introduction of a new sound substitution pattern (IE *H
> U *S instead of earlier IE *H > U *x/*k) seems to be connected with the
fact that PU *x disappeared as an independent phoneme in all U language
branches, and these developments probably took place at quite an early
date. Some of the later loans also show other post-PU characteristics
(e.g., labial vowels in non-initial syllables, see the examples below).

The following serve as examples of later loans. All appear -only- in
Finnic, except number 2 which also has cognates in Saamic and Mari. All
etymologies derive (once again) from Jorma Koivulehto. (PU *S > Finnish h
is a regular development).

1) Finnish rehto 'row (of constructions of one type or other)' (< *reSto)
   < PIE / Pre-Germanic *rH-ts- (> Germ. *radha- 'row etc.')

2) Finn. lehti 'leaf' (< *leSti)
   < PIE / Pre-Germ. *bhlH-ts- (> Germ. *bladha- id.)

[PR]
II am so glad that someone with your background has begun to participate in
this list.

I have two questions.

1) Why do the Uralists feel that it is necessary to reconstruct a
transitional /S/ on the way to Finnish /h/?

2) Have Uralists speculated that the older responses (/k,x/) might be the
result of the PIE "laryngal" being realized as a stop /?/ and a spirant
/h,H,x/?

<snip>

[AA wrote]
PU *peli- 'fear' < Pre-U ?*pelxi- < PIE *pelH-
PU *puna- 'plait' < Pre-U ?*punxa- < PIE (zero grade) *pnH-
PU *pura- 'drill' < Pre-U ?*purxa- < PIE (zero g.) *bhrH-
PU *aja- 'drive' < Pre-U ?*xaja- < PIE *Hag4-
PU *kdliw- 'brother/sister-in-law' (-w- is a suffix) < Pre-U ?*kdlxiw-
  < PIE *ghlHi-

[PR]
Would it be possible, in your opinion, for an alternate explanation that the
words might have been borrowed before the *-H- root-extensions?

I do have an axe to grind here but, mercifully, I will not grind it on this
list. Of course, those who have been to my website know that I consider that
a strong case can be made for ultimate common origin.

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE at email.msn.com (501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th
St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE:
http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/ and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit ek,
at ek hekk, vindga meipi, nftr allar nmu, geiri undapr . . . a ~eim meipi er
mangi veit hvers hann af rstum renn." (Havamal 138)