Re: Uralic Loanwords in Germanic

> > > > > BTW, since the IE m.nom.sg *-s and the IE s-stem *-s- seem
> > > > > to have the same reflection in Finnish, are they somehow
> > > > > related in IE,

> > If a frequently used Germanic case
> > was taken as a new stem in Finnic, it is reanalysis on the Finns'
> > part and implies nothing about the origin of the Germanic form.
>
> No, you misunderstand me again. I proposed that the *IE* s-stems were based on a reinterpretation of the *IE* genitive -Vs as nominative (which BTW I think is the origin of the IE nom.sg. -(V)-s.

Okay. Then what does Finnic have to do with it?

> > > > They've the same reflection in Finnish because of the
> > > > phonetical similarity.
> > >
> > > Why should that be? Phonetical similarity of what?
> >
> > That both are -s/-z.
> >
> > > But the problem is here that this s-stem *-s# in the nominative
> > > must be earlier than PGmc,
> >
> > Oldest loans into Finnic are thought to predate PGmc.
> > (*z would also naturally be substituted by *s, if that's what
> > you're worried about.)
>
> Of course not, since -z- occurs outside of nom.sg.

I've not idea what you're trying to say, but I'm saying that Finnic has no *z and therefore must substitute *s, ie. there's nothing phonetically suspicious in a substitution such as *xrengaz > *renkas.

> BTW your -´VsV- > -´VhV- > -´VV- theory

It's not "mine", it's the long-accepted standard.

It's also not "after a stress'd vowel", but "before an unstress'd one" (if that's what the acute marks).

> doesn't work for the -s / no -s alternation cited here:
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/63871
>
> Torsten

What do you mean? Sure it does. The illativ may be a point of confusion, as there's some analogy going on there:

talo
talo-XX (-n, -ssa, -ksi etc.)
taloon < †talo-hon < *talo-zen < *talo-sen

taivas
taivaa-XX < †taivaha-XX < *taivaze-XX < *taivase-XX
taivaaseen < †taivaase-hen < *taivase-zen < taivase-sen (length analogical)

The change s > h is connected to consonant gradation and thus does not occur in the open syllable before the illativ. *z here marks the weak grade of *s and should not be taken as an actual [z].

The -h- forms are in fact attested, dialectally and in Old Finnish; *e > ecko vowel after h is regular.

---

Or if you're referring to the alternations of the type hanka / hangas (I couldn't tell, you're not being terribly clear), that's an example of the (pseudo-)suffixal status of the -s in Finnic, in that sometimes it was retained when loaning, sometimes not.

Also I've the impression Saarikivi has retracted the *alho > *volga connection; obviously "a prothetic glide characteristic of certain northern Russian dialects" cannot explain the occurrence of *volg- (rather than **olg-) in the Baltic or therearound. _Alho_ is also a metathesized Finnish form (no such metathesis occurs in southern Finnic), a backformation from alhaalla "down" < *ala-ha-lla, so there's also no way to get that form to that area.

John Vertical