On Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:38:39, "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...>
wrote:

>But thinking more, I notice how *s'iNre "mouse" becomes Hungarian
>/egér/ where *N > -g-. So, I wonder whether a 1ps *-N might not
>have produced Hungarian -k.

It couldn't have. See Pekka Sammallahti, "Historical Phonology of the
Uralic Languages" (Sinor et al. "The Uralic Languages"):

p. 482: "The following [Proto-Uralic] consonants were apparently
confined to word internal positions: /r, N, x/.",

p. 502: "PFU *N > PUgr *Nk [...] There seem to be a number of cases
where PFU *N was preserved in PUg (e.g. in PFU *päNi "head", *sooNi-
ënter", *suNi "summer, thaw", *wäNiw "son-in-law" > Hu. fö:, avat,
Ostiak loN, Hungarian vö:)",

p. 520 "PFU *N > PUg. *Nk > Hun. *g (e.g. *jäNi "ice"> jég, *müNä
"after" > mög-, *piNi "tooth" ?> fog, *säNi "weather"> ég, *s^iNiri
"mouse" > egér [cases of original *-Nk- ...])"

p. 518: [on irregularly retained *N]: "*N > j/v/0: PFU *aNi "mouth" >
aj/áj, *päNi "head" > fö:/feje-, *sooNi- "enter" > avat, *tüNi "base"

> tö:, *wäNiw "son-in-law" > vö:/veje-".

In sum: there was no -N in Proto-Uralic, and where it secondarily
became word-final in Hungarian, it gives either zero, /-j/ or /-g/.


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...