Re: Finnish KASKI

Well you know the comparative method...

The following words have a wide distribution and a common pattern of
correpondancies (meanings are here non-reconstructed, Finnish.
Palatalisation is shown by ´ and d stands for a fricative, not a
voiced plosive). None of the other vowels have the same series

*süks´i 'autumn'
*künci 'nail'(this one has uncertain Samoyed)
*küji 'snake'(this one has uncertain Samoyed)
*kün´ä-rä 'elbow'
*nüdi 'handle, grip'
*süli 'lap'(this one has uncertain Samoyed)
*s´üd´i 'coal' (this one has Samoyed)
*d´ümä 'glue' (this one has Samoyed)

The symmetry of the system also favours this vowel, because there is
a close unrounded backvowel as well.

But I admit that in comparison to IE there are less material
available and more irregularities and difficulties to apply the
method, because sources are later.

Maybe one day somebody will through further internal reconstruction
find some conditioning here. Until then we will have to rely on the
method and postulate a separate vowel.

Jouppe

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:

>
> Jouppe,
>
> I really appreciate the careful thought you give to your answers

for my

> questions.
>
> You are obviously very knowledgeable, and I feel pleased to share

you as a

> resource on this list.
>
> But, still, was *ü in the original PU vowel inventory?
>
> The reason I ask is because I am, what you might call, a Noahist

who

> believes that all languages descend from a common source.
>
> I can easily see a PU vowel scheme of *i, *a, *u, or *e, *a, *o, or

even *i,

> *e, *a, *u, *o but it is difficult for me to see how *ü would fit

into any

> of the schemes above.
>
> I guess I am looking for you to tell me that *ü is a result of a

mechanism

> or group of them as you explained for *ö, and consequently cannot

be

> earliest PU. It certainly would be the odd man out?
>
> But, maybe I hope in vain.
>
>
> Patrick
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jouppe" <jouppe@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 10:58 AM
> Subject: [tied] Re: Finnish KASKI
>
>
> Thinking more in depth I have to lay down a few caviats though:
>
> Quote
> > Let me put it to you that I believe Umlaut could be termed limited
> vowel
> > harmony.
> >
> >
> > Patrick
> Unquote
>
> In vowel harmony the vowels in the two syllables are "locked in
> tandem". In a certain sense this appears as the opposite of umlaut,
> in which the whole point is that one causes a change of the other.
>
> In the most typical germanic umlaut (at least nordic languages have
> other types as well) the vowel causes the phonemization of an
> allophonic vowel quality in the previous syllable only as a result

of

> dissapearing in itself. This is also a very different process from
> complete vowel harmony.
>
> If you want to see uralic vowelharmony as a rule whereby the vowel

of

> one syllable is conditioned by the other you must definitely

perceive

> it as the latter being conditioned by the first. Also this is the
> opposite from Germanic.
>
> Also in Scandinavian umlaut not only "fronting" is at work, but
> also "lowering" and "brytning" (*-e- > -ja/jä-) caused by /a/ and

lip-

> rounding and "brytning" (*-e- > -jo/jö-) caused by /u/.
> Again very different from vowel harmony, where coexistance of front-
> versus back vowels is the only issue.
>
> Also Umlaut is a way of primarely describing a change in the
> language, while vowel harmony describes a state.
>
> All in all the phenomenons are similar but yet very different. I
> would almost go as far as to say they are mutually exclusive. You
> cannot make any sense of talking about i-umlaut in a language which
> is restricted by the rules of front/back vowel harmony.
>
> Some confusion may arise from the fact that in Finno-Ugric the final
> vowels, front /-i/ and back /-ï/, have merged into a phonemically
> neutral vowel /-i/ (in UEW /e/). In Finnish this vowel is realized
> [i] or [e], but it may very well coexist with backvowels because of
> its neutral history. Therfore kaski is allowed under this more
> limited vowel harmony.
>
> Other breaches has taken place as well in Proto-Finnic. One of the
> oldest is caused by Indo-European loanwords: -e- in the nucleus
> started to allow for an -a or an -o in the second syllable, like in
> kerta (<= balt) 'time (occasion), turn, once; layer' or pelto (<=
> gmc,) 'field'.
>
> As the vowel harmony erodes, umlaut could in theory become possible
> again. And lo and behold, Livonian actually has (unlike Finnish)
> developed an umlaut-system.
>
> Jouppe
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Jouppe,
> >
> > thank you: very informative and very interesting.
> >
> > If Uralicists want to avoid the (Germanic rather than "German")
> term Umlaut,
> > that is certainly their choice.
> >
> > Let me put it to you that I believe Umlaut could be termed limited
> vowel
> > harmony.
> >
> >
> > Patrick
>