From: stlatos
Message: 70499
Date: 2012-11-30
>Kh had stressed short a > o (other related l. have O or A (back a)):
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, johnvertical@ wrote:
> >
> > > > > Would early Proto-Baltic (with retained */o/) work here, including Osthoff's shortening but no Brugmann's lengthening?
> > > >
> > > > Possibly for some of them, but at least *ora and *orja look patently II in origin, similarly the substitution *k´ >> *c^ in *poc^a seems to point to Iranian in particular? A couple examples might run into a lack of an attested Baltic o-grade reflex too, and a number of cases here (*s´ola, *s´orwa, *ons´a, *orpa) have a distribution extending to Ugric where no Baltic loans are otherwise known nor should be expected. Also about as many of this list's words are found in Permic and I'm only aware of Finnic-mediated Baltic loans known from there.
> > >
> > > With *s'ola we also have the matter of PIE *-l- retained as *-l-. Is that expected from Iranian loans? Cf. *ora above.
> >Kh shows rec. r. > l. or r (no r. exists in modern l.).
> > No, I don't think there's any reason to expect -l-. Here however we could well think of a pre-PII loan on account of *o-vocalism in PIE. (Is there any way to date *l > *r with respect to the other innovations seen in PII?)
>
> I don't know, and as for the "dialectal" words with -l- in Sanskrit (including Vedic), I don't know what the current thinking is either.
>
> > > > I have the impression a full reinvestigation of the big picture of the oldest IE loans into Uralic is necessary one of these days.Fin. didn't have -ww-, so in adapting Vww > VVw, nothing odd exists. Since the type of Gmc isn't known, and ww / jj has such diverse outcomes, nothing seems to be shown concerning H.
> > >
> > > Yes, and the difficulties cannot be resolved simply by positing one or two additional branches of IE as sources. Since much of the research in this area has been published in Finnish, obviously I need to acquire a reading knowledge. Merely examining the comparative charts in Finnish papers, like an illiterate child looking at the pictures in a storybook, is insufficient for serious work.
> > >
> > > DGK
> >
> > Many (most?) papers from Koivulehto, who has been doing the most work in this area, are in German. This compilation is probably the best starting place:
> > http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust237.html
>
> Thanks very much for this list. The most intriguing title is the one about words with Fi. -aav- corresponding to Gmc. *-aww-. If these came indeed from Gmc., they must have been borrowed before the Verschaerfung, when Gmc. laryngeal residues still constituted distinct phonemes, with the vowel-lengthening occurring later within Proto-Finnic. But the Gmc. shift *-o- > *-a- had already occurred (otherwise Fi. *-oov- from Early PGmc *-oHw-, no?), so if there is a stratum with Fi. *ka- from PGmc *Ha-, one would expect the EARLIER borrowings from EPGmc *Ho- to show *ko-, not *o-, unless I'm overlooking something (which I could well be, considering my track record in this thread).
>