Re: Uralic Loanwords in Germanic

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "gprosti" wrote:

>
> Just curious: where did you get the list of s-final words from?

Harvested from Torsten's link to the Wiktionary inflection category (with a few others added where I could come up with them).

> I notice that <aulis> "willing" is missing (just as it's missing from Häkkinen's NES) -- do you know what the leading theory on <aulis> is?

No idea, sorry (does not come up in Uralic databases tho, so most probably not inherited).

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" wrote:
> > The suffix -as develop'd to a sort of "loanword suffix" in
> > Finnic, and later to a general diminutiv; Livonian is
> > particularly fond of it.
>
> and
>
> > A large number of the Germanic ones have limited distribution
> > (generally only North Finnic, or Finnish proper), so even if
> > they have a non-IE origin in Gmc, I'd bet Finnish got them from
> > Gmc anyway.
>
> How do these two statements match?

The list comprises those Germanic words that have *-s in Finnish in particular. Listing every word that has *-s in some Finnic language would be a bigger task (especially as I don't think Wiktionary is as up-to-date with eg. Veps inflection classes!)

So what I mean is Livonian has added the suffix to (or retains it in) some words that are lacking it in Finnish. Some examples:

-Livonian only
pee'gõz "nut" : E. pähkel, F. pähkinä (< U. *päSka)
voraabõz "squirrel" : E. orav, F. orava (< U. *ora-pa)
kukkõrz "purse" : E. kukkur, F. kukkaro (< Gmc *kukaraz)
a'ddõrz "plough" : E. ader, F. aura (< Gmc *arTraz)
põ'ddõrz "deer" : E. põder, F. peura (~ Baltic? Li. bríedis "elk")

-South Finnic only
iilgaz "seal", E. hüljes : F. hylje (< ??, compared with Gmc *selxas, from which Livonian would be regular too)
araagõz "magpie", E. harakas : F. harakka (< Baltic, cf. Li. Sárka)


> > Exceptions with wider distribution: hauras, kangas, karvas,
> > kaunis, kauris, kuningas, paljas, parras, patsas, rengas, rikas,
> > ryväs, teuras, äyräs.
>
> Let me guess: some of them have a distribution outside the IE area.
> Would you mind telling me which ones?

Since we're discussing loans into Finnish, obviously all words here are found "outside IE". ;)

But I mean that these particular words are also found in Estonian/Votic/Livonian. The others aren't.


> > tikkaat <~ tika-puut < Old Swedish stige
>
> Interesting that it's plural, considering the *wang- "sidepiece"
> etc discussion.

A ladder does usually have two supports. _Tikapuut_ would be literally "step-trees" or "step-timbers" - it's in contrast to single-support ladders with steps on two sides.


> > karsas < Baltic, cf. Li. skẽrsas
>
> What vowel was that?

e tilde. I'm not sure if that was intended as a phonetic accent sign or as a replacement for e ogonek.


> Would you mind adding translations to both sides of the equations?
> It would be very helpful.

Häkkinen generally doesn't provide translations for Proto-Germanic & the Finnish translations can be found via Wiktionary.

I could list the Baltic tho (Finnish same, unless noted):
*angurjas "eel"
*ansVs "hook" (ansas "truss", ansa "trap", Samic vóssé "handle")
*Zambas "tooth"
*Sirvis "deer" (hirvas "bull elk", hirvi "elk")
*irta- "loose" (irto "loose", irstas "perverted")
Li ske~rsas "across" (karsas "avoided")
Li gy´vas "lively (kiivas "angry, intense")
*kirvis "ax"
Li gídis "greedy" (kitsas "mean")
*awinas "ram"
La strazds "thrush"
*rugis "rye"
*ratas "wheel"
Li stíebas "pole"
La duulis "light for attracking fish"
Li veSùmas "lush" (of vegetation)
La eceeSas "harrow"


> And it would be nice if you marked cases of 'double citizenship'
> (Germanic/Baltic/Straight Finnic/FP/Uralic) too.

_Varras_ "spit" (_varsi_ "stem") was the only one for which I noticed such to be the case. Also the only farther Uralic cognate is Mari _wurdo_, whichy isn't regular against Finnic, so this looks like a parallel loan.


> > > 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,
> >
> > Why should that be?
>
> Well, you deleted my proposal that a frequently used case was taken
> as a new stem.

I don't see what that matters. 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.

> > 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.)

John Vertical