--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mkelkar2003" <swatimkelkar@>
> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > As far as I know, the Finnish word for 'slave' (presumably
> > > captured in raids into southern territories), orja-, is
> > > considered one of the many loan words from Proto-Indo-
> > > Iranian... into Uralic which would indicate that:
> > >
> > > 1. the early habitat of Proto-Indo-Iranians was in an area close
> > > to the Central Asian steppe-taiga interface, e.g., near the
> > > Urals;
> > >
> > > 2. these Proto-Indo-Iranians called themselves *arya-.
> >
> > Apparently Wikipedia does not buy into this fantastical story
> > which is a corolloary of the now defunct Aryan Invasion Theory...
> >
> > Here Koenraad Elst squares off the IE-Uralic contact into an Indian
> > Homeland scenerio thus:...
> >
> > "It was the Iranians who came in contact with Uralic on a large
> > scale..."
> >
> > That fact that close kinship vocabularly can be borrowed puts a
> > dent into the idea of genetically separated families especially
> > if they occupay a vast contigous area like Eurasia. Morover were
> > no loand from Uralic into IE which starnge if these langauges were
> > in mutual conntact. More likely as Elst says orya is a late loan
> > from the Iranians who moved into Central Asia.
> >
> > M. Kelkar
>
> =============
>
> Koenraad Elst and the others âOut-of-Indiaâ theorists who claim
that
> the Indo-Iranian loan words in Uralic come from some Iranian source
> (s), and not from Proto-Indo-Iranian, have not studied the subject
> in depth. Just to make an example, another strong case (in addition
> to Proto-Indo-Iranian *arya- > Uralic âslaveâ) for the existence of
> old linguistic contacts between groups of Uralic and Proto-Indo-
> Iranian speakers in the steppe-taiga interface zone east and west of
> the Urals is provided by the Proto-Indo-Iranian word *asura- âlord,
> god, asura (= antigod)â, which is reflected in old loans in Uralic
> both in the meanings 'lord' and 'rich':
>
> - Mordvinian (Erzya) azoro- âlordâ
> - Mansi (Vogul) at@Ér-, o:t@... 'chieftain, sovereign, prince'
> - Udmurt (Votyak) uzir-, uz@... 'rich'
> - Komi (Zyrian) ozir- 'rich'
>
> Note that, if these words had been loaned from some Iranian language
> (s), the borrowed form should have been something like ahura- (the
> corresponding term in Avestan, where the /s/ > /h/ change had
> already occurred), not asura-. Yet the typical Iranian aspiration is
> absent in *all* the Uralic words listed above.
>
> Actually it is the whole belt from the Ukraine to Siberia that
> contains hints or direct attestations of the old Proto-Indo-Iranian
> *asura-. Compare, respectively:
>
> - Ess, the highest god of the Ket Yenisseians of Middle Siberia;
> - the Buryat Mongolian äsi gods of the forests/mountains;
> - the yz gods of the Gilyak (Paleosiberians of the the lower Amur
> valley and Sakhalin).
>
> There is much more linguistic material which contradicts the OITersâ
> odd arguments about the nature of the IIr. loans into Uralic and
> some languages of Siberia. I have just uploaded in the files section
> a Word document named âPIIr. loan words in Finno-Ugrian and
> Yenisseian.docâ. You can access the direct link from the following
> announcement message:
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/53180
>
> To Kelkar:
>
> Please read the document in question (an excerpt from a paper by
> Michael Witzel) AS A LINGUIST WOULD DO and then come back with your
> counter-arguments (if any).
>
> Regards,
> Francesco
>
It is quite unbelievable! Most if not all words referred to by Witzel
are asterkisked forms; they are not acutal words spoken by any one.
Legendary Indo-Euroepan linguist Antoine Meillet never uttered a
reconstructed word in his whole life let alone postulate a case of it
being borrowed from one language to another. Witzel does not point to
a single loanword Uralic to IE.
The most complete analysis of loan words with respect to the IE family
has been made by J. Nichols. Talageri (2000) has made what I would
call a very in depth of Nichols' work
"Therefore, Nichols examines loan-words from West Asia (Semitic and
Sumerian) found in Indo-European and in other families like Caucasian
(separately Kartvelian, Abkhaz-Circassian and Nakh-Daghestanian), and
the mode and form of transmission of these loan-words into the
Indo-European family as a whole as well as into particular branches;
and combines this with the evidence of the spread of Uralic and its
connections with Indo-European."
Then Talageri (2000) produces a long quote from Nichols and may not
not require in depth study.
"Several kinds of evidence for the PIE locus have been presented here.
Ancient loanwords point to a locus along the desert trajectory, not
particularly close to Mesopotamia and probably far out in the eastern
hinterlands. The structure of the family tree, the accumulation of
genetic diversity at the western periphery of the range, the location
of Tocharian and its implications for early dialect geography, the
early attestation of Anatolian in Asia Minor, and the geography of the
centum-satem split all point in the same direction: a locus in western
central Asia. Evidence presented in Volume II supports the same
conclusion: the long-standing westward trajectories of languages point
to an eastward locus, and the spread of IE along all three
trajectories points to a locus well to the east of the Caspian Sea.
The satem shift also spread from a locus to the south-east of the
Caspian, with satem languages showing up as later entrants along all
three trajectory terminals. (The satem shift is a post-PIE but very
early IE development). The locus of the IE spread was therefore
somewhere in the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana.�102"
So Witzel's efforts are too little too late. But the matter does not
end there. Uralic borrowings from IE also include fundamental Swadesh
words like name and water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Uralic#Geography_of_the_proposed_Indo-Uralic_family
"If the Uralic word is borrowed from Indo-European, why is it found in
nearly identical form right across Siberia? Possible cognates are also
found for the words for 'name' in Chukchi nənnə 'name' and Old
Japanese na 'name' and for 'water' in Evenki udun 'rain', Even udən
'rain', and Ainu owata 'water' (Greenberg 2002). Thus, alongside the
hypothesis of borrowing from Indo-European, another possibility is
that Indo-European and Uralic themselves belong to a larger grouping."
And the matter does not even end here. Uralic homeland is itsefl a
controversial question and depends on where you locate the
Indo-Euroepan homeland. Talk about dog wagging its own tail.
http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art203e.pdf
http://www.mankindquarterly.org/samples/niskanenbalticcorrected.pdf
"According to the traditional migration theory based
primarily on the linguists' family tree model and estimated dates
of linguistic divergences, the Finno-Ugrians (the Baltic-Finns
and Saami/Lapps) arrived in the Baltic region only about three
thousand years ago from the Proto-Uralic homeland in the east
(see Häkkinen 1996 for a review). Most researchers locate this
homeland in northeastern Europe (Setälä 1926, Korhonen.."
But the traditional theory is contracdicted by genetic studies who
support a Uralic Continuity Theory."
"As this article demonstrates, the human biological data
(craniometric, nuclear genetic markers, mitochondrian DNA,
and Y-chromosomal DNA) supports the continuity theory by
showing the Baltic-Finns to have closer genetic affinities with
their Scandinavian neighbors than with the eastern Finno-Ugricspeaking
populations."
M. Kelkar