Re: IE & Uralic

--- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
. . .
The Pripyat Marshes

>
> No. The Slavs derive from those IE-speakers who
> survived Attila's
> butcher tour back and forth over Europe in those
> swamps I forget the
> name of, and the various FU languages are patches of
> a language family
> that took up much more space in the area which is
> now East Slavic.
> Numerous FU languages have disappeared from there in
> historic times
> alone. The genesis of Slavic might well have taken
> place in formerly
> Fennic territory by former Fennic speakers.
>
> > Do you have ideas about why it (abl. > gen.)
> happened?

What about the negative partitive that shows up in
Germanic: German kein, English any < ane "one",
Scandinavian ikke? Although English does require a
negative, it's also a partitive for interrogatives.

> > > > Conclusion so far: the partitive genitive is
> hardly a result of
> > > > hypothetical European IE – Uralic contacts in
> the proto-epoch
> > > > but rather either a typological feature
> attested in various IE
> > > > (Germanic, Romance) and non-IE (Finnish,
> Basque) languages or a
> > > > vestige of relatively recent contacts (North
> Russian < Finnish).
> > >

Insular Celtic has the at-me for "have", and a binch
of like expressions, but it's supposedly typological
for VSO languages

>
> Ah, good that you reminded me: another hint of
> Fennic substrate of
> Slavic is: (East) Slavic has the 'at-me is'
> construction for 'have',
> which is not quite the same as a 'mihi est'
> construction; it involves
> something spatial. Estonian uses allative,
> 'coming-to-me' in 'have'
> sentences.
>

. .


____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping