From: Juha Savolainen
Message: 19144
Date: 2003-02-24
In case somebody is interested, this is Jorma Koivulehto�s view (�The Earliest Contacts between IE and Uralic Speakers in the Light of Lexical Loans�, �Uralics and Indo-Europeans: Problems of Time and Space, in Christian Carpelan, Asko Parpola and Petteri Koskikallio (eds.), Early contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: Linguistic and archaeological considerations�. (M�moires de la Soci�t� Finno-Ougrienne, 242.) Helsinki: Finno-Ugrian Society, 2001):
�In the earlier layer the substitute was FU ks, which in the initial position was replaced by s � according to the general rule, which prohibits initial consonant clusters and means that in loans only the last consonant of a cluster of the source is replaced. This substitution was due to the fact that the Finno-Ugric did not possess a corresponding dental, non-palatalized (�sharp�) affricate *c [ts] and a two-phoneme cluster �ts- was unknown, too. � Note that the present cluster Finn. � ts- (<Late Proto-Finnic �tts-) goes back to the Pre-Finnic geminated palatalised affricate -�� -. � So the phonotactically impossible cluster �ts- was replaced by the existing cluster �ks-��
Regards, Juha Savolainen
--- "tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...>" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski
> <piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <tgpedersen@...>
> > To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 11:20 AM
> > Subject: [tied] Re: "Will the 'real' linguist
> please stand up?"
> >
> >
> > > *ts > *ks ? Do I see a finger on the weight
> here?
> >
> > I should have written Iranian *ts --> FU *ks
> (substitution, not
> change). *ks was apparently a regular Finnic
> substitute for the
> Iranian affricate during that period.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> Apparently? If the issue is whether k was on its way
> to
> satem, 'apparently' is does not quite count as
> evidence.
>
> Torsten
>
>
>