--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
>
> In various places in postings and popular press stuff, I've read
> about Germanics supposedly residing in Finland before the arrival of
> the Finns as well as an IE-substrate in Finland before the arrival
> of the Finns. I've never seen any real lx evidence to prove this
> --just the idea that Finns are supposedly genetically closer to
> Scandinavians than to their linguistic congeners. Any truth to this?
> It would make sense if Germanic entered W. Europe via Finland from
> the east and then moved south from southern Scandinavia. That would
> seem to explain Germanic's links with Baltic and Slavic as well as
> its later adstratal relationship with Celtic and Celtic-looking
> names as far north as Denmark.
> Tell me Torsten, swear on the hammer of Thor, is there any viability
> to this idea or is it DOA?
It's beyond the temporal horizon of the things I think I have cleared up, ie it's before ca. 200 BCE. At that time there seems to have been some residual Finnic-speaking population onthe Baltic, among the Aestii, enough that it pays off for me to include Uralic glosses when I try to untangle Germanic and Slavic for the Przeworsk time. That time, BTW, gives me plenty of contact between Baltic/Slavic and Germanic, so that I am not forced to seek an explanation for those links in an earlier time.
You might be referring to this guy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalevi_Wiik
cf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_substrate_hypothesis
You may recall my analysis of the Aestian word glaesum/glesum "amber" as *gl-aN-s-. Now the *gl- part exist as a related(?) word in Uralic
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/65469
and de Vries has:
'gljá schw. V. 'glänzen (spät bezeugt)
(< germ. *gliwÄ"n; dagegen
Noreen. Gramm § 133 hiatusform neben glæa < *glÄ"wan;
vgl. auch E. Olsen ANF 31, 1915, 147).
nisl. gljá,
fär. glÃggja,
anorw. glaa,
nschw. dial. glia
(vgl. shetl. glī).
Hierher wohl auch
run. dä. gleaugiR ('mit scharfem blick' ? s. Br. 7, Krause Nr 37).
â" afr. glÄ«a 'glühen'.
Daneben mit m-erw.
nnorw. glīma 'schimmern',
aschw. glīma,
nschw. glimma,
ada. glimme 'glänzen',
vgl.
nnl. glimmen
und weiter
ae. glæm, gleomu,
as. glīmo, 'glänz',
ahd. glīmo, gleimo,
nnd. glÄ"m 'glühwürmchen'.
- Zur idg. wzl. *ghlei 'glänzen', vgl.
gr. Ïλίειν 'warm sein, prunken', ÏλιαÏÏÏ 'warm',
lat. laetus 'fröhlich',
lett. glaima 'scherz',
air. glé 'glänzend, klar'.
Die wzl ist eine erw. zur wzl *ghel,
vgl. gall
und hat selbst (ausser wohl glý und glæa) die
erw. mit s, vgl. glira, glis
,, ,, dental ,, glit, glata und glaðr
,, ,, m ,, glÃma
,, ,, n ,, gleinr, glinga.'
In other words, a lot of 'extensions' of the *gVl- root. Germanic is full of such stems 'extended' from a single KR- (stop + liquid) root. Those stems must obviously have come into the language before stress shifted to the first syllable. And at least in this (*gVl-) it seems the root (but not the 'extended' stems) exists in Uralic. Thus at least in this case it seems that Uralic was a substrate or an adstrate to some ancestor of Germanic, but which of the two I can't tell.
Torsten