RE : [tied] Re: North of the Somme

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "caotope" <johnvertical@...> wrote:

>
> > Finno-Ugric
> > 'Hungarian féreg, férge- worm; vermin; noxious animal |
> > Komi perk Phthirius pubis |
> > Mansi peerk worm.'
>
> Either of Mansi or Komi may be a loan from the other. Or we can explain both with *-rkk-, but that would not produce -g- in Hung.
>
> > Maybe I'll add this
> > fi permu (, perma)
> > larva of gadfly (Oedemagena, Hypoderma, etc.);
> > tuber on the body of an animal,
> > containing such a larva |
> > osN pir&m gadfly;
> > boil caused by larva (beneath the skin of reindeer);
> > pîrm&n, (of reindeer hide:) with holes caused by gadfly larvae.
>
> Once we get into gadflies & such, Uralic also has *parma, in Finnic, Mari and Khanty at least; and Samic *poaró. Mordvinic puromo fits better together with the latter. Comparision points for this side of semantics are to be found on the IE side too.

Erh? How did you compute those points?

> Also plain "fly":
> F. *kärpä- (Livonian käärmi), Mo. karvo, Ma. karme
> with an irregular (non-inherited?) cluster.

Metathesis k - p?
It would seem we have two suffixes, -k and -m. -k is a NWB suffix too. -m is part of the Caland set.

> Finnic has probably affectiv fronting.

Affective... hm.
Is that similar to the *vëlki/*volki alternation you mentioned to me?



Torsten