Uralic Linguistics

This table began as a comparison of Etruscan words to other Indo-European words, and it is clear that the linkage to Etruscan illuminates some new patterns in Indo-European word relationships. We added for further comparison words from the Baltic group (Latvian), Kartvelian (Georgian) and Uralic (Finnish) and Basque, a "language isolate" that looks as much Indo-European as othes in the Indo-European group. For those who advocate Hurrian connections Hurrian words that are available have been added to the table.  *PIE specialists have been speculating on the idea that the three language families, Baltic, Uralic and Kartvelian may be related to Indo-European, perhaps as a super family.
  The Indo-European family of languages is believed to have originated north of the Black Sea (Pontic Region). Some scholars have indicated a Caucasus origin. Although we can't rule out borrowing among [unrelated] languages it appears from the interesting shifts that the languages in our "Indo-European Table may be one family. I found šāl-a, šali, šala (Hurrian)
ასული, asuli, daughter(Georgian); თვით, t’vit’, self (Georgian), sevi, self (Latvian), vete, (Albanian); ხუთი, khut’i, five (Georgian), пяць, piać (Belarussian), pieci (Latvian), pesë (Albanian), pente (Greek) and pajncha (Sanskrit) interesting. (The interesting relationships continue through the table. The table is alphabetically arranged via the right-hand column, Etruscan words.

Abstract : this study, which first aim was to demonstrate the correspondences between the Gaulish language and the Slavic languages, between which I found 500 common words, allowed me also to demonstrate, on the basis of genetical, archaeological and religious data, that those correspondences were linked with ancient migrations linked with the diffusion of the Dravidian civilisation of the Indus Valley to Iran, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, the Caucasus, the North of the Black Sea, Danubian and Balkanic Europe, towards Gaul and Iberia, where the Neolithic agriculturalists contributed to the formation of the megalithic civilisation which developed from -5.000. This explains also the linguistic correspondences I established between Gaulish and Dravidian languages – 250 common words from the 500 words I studied, as well as similarities I found in the organisation of the Society and the religion, which lead certain researchers to suggest, on the basis of the diffusion of the very ancient gene H2-P96 from India to Western Europe, that the first Europeans and the proto-Dravidians had a common origin.
Extrait : cette étude, dont l’objectif initial était de démontrer les correspondances entre le gaulois et les langues slaves, entre lesquelles j’ai trouvé 500 mots communs, m’a en outre permis de démontrer, sur la base de données génétiques, archéologiques et religieuses, que ces correspondances étaient liées à des migrations anciennes liées à la diffusion de la civilisation dravidienne de la vallée de l’Indus vers l’Iran, la Mésopotamie, l’Anatolie, le Caucase, le Nord de la Mer Noire, l’Europe danubienne et balkanique, la Gaule et l’Ibérie, où les agriculteurs néolithiques ont contribué à former la civilisation mégalithique qui s’est développée à partir de -5.000. Cela explique aussi les correspondances linguistiques que j’ai établies entre le gaulois et les langues dravidiennes - 250 mots communs sur les 500 mots étudiés, et les similitudes que j’ai constatées dans l’organisation de la société et la religion, qui amènent certains chercheurs à suggérer, sur la base de la diffusion du gène très ancien H2-P96 de l’Inde à l’Europe de l’Ouest, que les premiers Européens et les proto-Dravidiens avaient une origine commune.

Finnish grammars customarily present a case system of fifteen morphological cases. While other cases are fully productive and can be formed from all nouns, the so-called accusative in -t has only seven forms, based on the six personal pronouns and the corresponding interrogative pronoun kuka 'who'. Based on data drawn from a large corpus of modern written Finnish as used on the online social networking website Suomi24, and accompanied by the results obtained from a questionnaire survey with native-speaking university students, this paper shows that the Finnish personal pronouns can also function as heads of complex nominal phrases. Not unlike nouns, personal pronouns can have adjectival and demonstrative modifiers. The most novel perspectives to the Finnish nominal phrase and object marking are provided by phrases in which the pronominal head is in the accusative, and its modifiers only partially agree with it in the nominative or genitive.

Исследование посвящено рефлексам одной и той же частицы =OK в языках Поволжья – чувашском (=ax / =ex), луговом марийском (=ak, в некоторых говорах =ok), горномарийском (=ok), татарском (=uk / =ük), башкирском (=uk / =ük) и удмуртском (=ik). Описывается путь ее заимствования в финно-угорские языки Поволжья и контексты употребления в современных языках Поволжья.

Az uráli nyelvcsaládba sorolt nyelveket beszélő népesség napjainkban-a magyar kivételével-Észak-Európában és Észak-Ázsia nyugati felén, a Skandináv-félszigettől a Tajmir-félszigetig terjedő hatalmas, északon a tundrai, délebbre az erdős övezetbe eső területen található. Ez a terület a legutóbbi, Dryas III. kori eljegesedés idején (mintegy i. e. 10 000-ig) teljességgel lakhatatlan volt. A jégmezőktől délebbre az éghajlati viszonyok a mai tundrai területekhez lehettek hasonlóak, a gyér füvű, törpe fákkal tarkított, gyakran havas területeken a legelésző vadállatok számára a legfőbb táplálékforrást a zuzmó jelentette, és az ezen élő vadréncsordák jelenléte tette az akkori rénvadász emberek számára a "Nagy Jégfallal" határos területek elfoglalását, majd az állandó jeges területek visszahúzódását és az északabbra vonuló vadréncsordákat követve a mai "Magna Uralia" területének belakását.
Arra, hogy ez pontosan mikor, milyen irányból vagy irányokból történt, még megközelítő választ sem lehet adni. Ez eredményezte azt, hogy az uráli őshazaelméletek egymásnak is ellentmondó feltételezései különböző irányú (nyugatról keletre, keletről nyugatra, középről mindkét irányba tartó) szétvándorlásokat vizionálnak.

The purpose of this paper is to prove conclusively that Hungarian and by extension all Uralic languages are not a group of languages developed in isolation of other languages but are instead a unique branch of Indo-Aryan. This was made possible by recognizing that Latin, not Slavic or German, was the source of most Hungarian loans, and then extending the same pattern of reduction observed occurring with Latin words to Sanskrit words. All of the required consonant sound changes are identified, as well as the major steps necessary for a complete reconstruction of the transition from Sanskrit to Hungarian. To support the identified processes of change, a complete Holman list is presented. An additional 2,000 Indic-Hungarian words were reconstructed to rule out random chance as the source of the identified sound changes, but are not included in this paper. Some of those Indic-Hungarian words are already the subject of controversy, so they will be explained in more detail. And finally, from this Indic-Hungarian reconstruction, the meaning of the Hungarian self-reference Magyar is identified. Only Hungarian is discussed in this paper.

This is the first thorough English language description of Kildin Saami and the first attempt to systematically describe the basic phonological, morphological and syntactic features of this language from the perspective of general comparative linguistics. Kildin Saami is a critically endangered language of the Kola Peninsula in Northwest Russia with only about 100 active speakers. The original dialect areas have fragmented during the 20th century. Within the Saami group and Uralic in general, a remarkable feature of Kildin Saami is the high number of consonant phonemes. This is mostly due to the existence of palatalization as a distinct phonological feature. Kildin Saami has developed a very high degree of fusion in inflectional morphology, including the occurrence of several different kinds of nonlinear morphological marking. In verb inflection, there is a special form for impersonal passive. Adjectives are marked for attributive and predicative state and the language has split marking of plural, where numerals above six govern partitive case. Russian influence is found in essentially all components of Kildin Saami language structure, but is especially strong in discourse pragmatics. The chapter includes a glossed text example and extensive references to earlier linguistic literature and other sources on Kildin Saami.

The discussion of Uralic theonyms in this 2012 conference paper have been significantlu developed and discussed in more detail in "Language and Mythology" (2017): https://www.academia.edu/35369652/Language_and_Mythology_Semantic_Correlation_and_Disambiguation_of_Gods_as_Iconic_Signs

The discussion of internal developments in Finnic mythology are discussed with emphasis on the epic Sampo-Cycle in "Confluence, Continuity and Change in the Evolution of Mythology" (2012): https://www.academia.edu/3687105/Confluence_Continuity_and_Change_in_the_Evolution_of_Mythology_The_Case_of_the_Finno-Karelian_Sampo-Cycle
and with emphasis on the role of the ritual specialist in "Shamans, Christians and Things in between":
https://www.academia.edu/4049431/Shamans_Christians_and_Things_in_between_From_Finnic_Germanic_Contacts_to_the_Conversion_of_Karelia

Artikkelen kvilar på to aksiom: Genustilordning i norsk er regelstyrt, ikkje tilfeldig, og maskulinum er default genus i norsk (norske substantiv er maskuline viss ingenting tilseier noko anna). Ut i frå desse aksioma blir det presentert eit sett av semantiske, morfologiske og fonologiske reglar som gir korrekt genus for ca. 94 % av substantiva i norsk. Innfallsvinkelen i artikkelen er synkron, men siste avsnitt in- neheld ei drøfting av Olav T. Beito sine data om genusskifte frå gammalnorsk til nynorsk ut i frå teori- ar om genusskifte i germansk sett fram av Donald Steinmetz.

An introduction to the Lutsi (Ludza Estonian) language, which includes a grammatical sketch of Lutsi, example sentences, examples of connected speech, a Latvian-Lutsi-Latgalian topical dictionary (~600 words), descriptions of the history of the Lutsi speech community and the last villages where Lutsi was spoken in daily life in the 20th century, archival and new photos of these communities, transcriptions of the last fragments of Lutsi still remembered by descendants in 2020. This book is written in Latvian and uses the new standardized orthography developed by the author for writing all of the Lutsi text in the book. Lutsi is one of the language island varieties of South Estonian, which was spoken and developed independently for at least three centuries in several dozen villages around Ludza in eastern Latvia (Latgale). Publishers: University of Latvia Livonian Institute and the Ludza City Main Library.

In 'The Precursors of Proto-Indo-European' some of the world’s leading experts in historical linguistics shed new light on two hypotheses about the prehistory of the Indo-European language family, the so-called Indo-Anatolian and Indo-Uralic hypotheses. The Indo-Anatolian hypothesis states that the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European family should be viewed as a sister language of ‘classical’ Proto-Indo-European, the ancestor of all the other, non-Anatolian branches. The common ancestor of all Indo-European languages, including Anatolian, can then be called Proto-Indo-Anatolian. The Indo-Uralic hypothesis states that the closest genetic relative of Indo-European is the Uralic language family, and that both derive from a common ancestor called Proto-Indo-Uralic. The book unravels the history of these hypotheses and scrutinizes the evidence for and against them.

La Lista Swadesh de voces vascas estables resistente a la donación lingüística y lo que revela su comparación con las restantes familias de lenguas del mundo. Aún hallamos en los libros de textos universitarios y en las enciclopedias más autorizadas el viejo paradigma de que el vasco ­como aún es denominado a nivel internacional y por los mismos vascólogos­ es un idioma aislado sin pariente alguno y que por ello mismo no sabemos nada sobre su origen. ¿Es realmente cierto que la lengua vasca no tiene parientes ni siquiera en otros lugares de Eurasia? ¿Surgió espontáneamente de la nada? ¿Acaso fue inventado por una persona que vivía en una de las cuevas paleolíticas del País Vasco y desde entonces se mantuvo el idioma aislado sin apenas evolución? Vamos a intentar dar respuesta a estas preguntas desde las herramientas que nos ofrecen la Lingüística Histórica y la Léxicoestadística comparadas.

Enlace a tabla comparativa en http://atlantisng.com/blog/genealogia-de-la-lengua-vasca-y-las-lenguas-altaicas-uralicas-y-sino-caucasianas/

Book 1 of several books. These documents are developed from the Chicago Oriental Institute Akkadian dictionary which is alphabetized as Akkadian-English. I needed an English-Akkadian document, and – finding nothing readily available—decided to convert the Akkadian-English files to an abbreviated English-Akkadian version.  The oi.chicago.edu volumes are amazingly detailed, showing the specific usages and texts where each word in the dictionary is used. The individual volumes range in size from about 200 pages to 600+ pages, and as one will see in reviewing this complex oi.chicago work, the work is massive (Akk. “eŝqu”).
    My need to prepare the English-Akkadian version has to do with my work in preparation of the “Etruscan Phrases Indo-European Table.”  This table began as a table that showed Indo-European leximes/cognates that coincided with the 2,500 words vocabulary I developed from examination and translation of over 600 Etruscan texts. Later, in preparation of this table it became apparent that there was a greater mission involved with the table, of reconciling Indo-European languages with other language groups, first Baltic, Uralic and Kartvelian, then finding a need to expand the listing of concording lexemes to Hurrian/Urartian and subsequently Akkadian.  I refer those who are interested to begin with our Indo-European Table, Part 1, available at academia.edu or at maravot.com Etruscan Phrases, which is at:
http://www.maravot.com/Indo-European_Table.html or http://www.maravot.com/Indo-European_Table.html.
    Included in this dictionary is an Index to the Indo-European Table (English alphabetical). The Indo-European Table is organized alphabetically to the Etruscan words, and thus, with reference to its extended mission of producing a Concordance for the above cited languages we produced the Index. Words that are in smaller type (Times-Roman 10pt) have been incorporated in our Indo-European Table.

Data mining the Sumerian vocabulary reveals a dichotomy of the cognate associations of the Emeĝir and the Emesal dialects, with the former having mostly Dravidian and the later mostly Uralic cognates, indicating that Sumerian arose by the combination of two languages from those language families. The data mining also reveals a distribution pattern of Proto-Uralic, Proto-Finno-Ugric, Proto-Ugric and Proto-Hungarian cognates that indicates that Sumerian is farther than Minoan from Hungarian, although all are West-Ugric.

The purpose of this study is to examine an Old Hungarian inscription that was recently found in the Altai mountain and was claimed to be over 2600 years old, which would make it the oldest extant example of the Old Hungarian script. A careful observation of the Altai script and a comparison with other Old Hungarian inscriptions was made, during which several errors were discovered in the interpretation of the Old Hungarian signs. After correcting for these errors that were apparently introduced by mixing up the inscription with underlying engravings of animal images, a new sequence of Old Hungarian signs was obtained and translated into a new text. The context of the text indicates that the inscription is considerably more recent and is unlikely to be earlier than the 19th century.

Any historical study of Sámi religions links religion to the history of the language. Here, Proto-Sámi language spread is reviewed and the fundamental (and often implicit) assumption that religion spread with Proto-Sámi language is challenged. An alternative model that language spread as a medium of communication adopted by different cultures is proposed and tested against the Common Proto-Sámi lexicon. The finding is a lack of positive evidence for the spread of religion with Proto-Sámi language, while the name of the central sky-god / thunder-god in Sámi languages on the Kola Peninsula is identified as a loan from an indigenous language, indicating some degree of religious continuity through language change. The lack of positive lexical evidence for a spread of religion combines with evidence that vocabulary and apparently traditions linked to ritual and belief spread through the Proto-Sámi language networks subsequent to its spread. In addition, the archaeological record does not present positive evidence of spread of religion with the language and instead archaeological cultures seem to exhibit continuities through the relevant period. The paper concludes that religion formations documented among later Sámi language groups cannot be assumed to derive from a common Proto-Sámi religion or even to have an Uralic background.  Instead, it is possible or even probable that the diversity in later Sámi religions could be an outcome of multiple other linguistic cultural groups shifting to Proto-Sámi language while maintaining their vernacular religion, or at least parts of it. Consequently, generalizations about 'Sámi' religion, claims about common Sámi religious heritage, and also uses of Sámi evidence in comparisons with Uralic traditions should be built on arguments rather than assumptions.

1.  An unexpected event occurred somewhere between approximately 4500 and 6000 years ago in the vicinity of the central steppe: the Proto-Uralic language family began its spread, eventually to cover half of northernmost Eurasia. More definitively, about 4000 years ago its Finno-Ugric component began its rapid spread over most of that range. The speakers of Uralic/Finno-Ugric were hunter-gatherers, their technology at most barely Neolithic, yet they exerienced a language spread of a magnitude usually associated only with food-producing cultures and one that produced a Uralic monoculture across most of northern Eurasia from the forest-steppe ecotone north (i.e. above about 50°). 1 The Finno-Ugric/Uralic spread is unexpected, even anomalous, if it is seen as an ordinary expansion of the language range and speech community size of an ordinary hunter-gatherer population. This chapter aims to reconstruct for early Uralic a geolinguistic, sociolinguistic, and economic position vis-à-vis neighboring societies that explains the spread and in fact makes it almost inevitable.

This essay deals with the study of the ethnolinguistic past of the Saami. In recent years many novel findings have emerged in the field of Saami historical linguistics, and the interpretation of these new results allows a coherent timeline of the development of the Saami languages to be established. The Proto-Saami language appears to have firrst evolved somewhere in the Lakeland of southern Finland and Karelia in the Early Iron Age. A broad body of evidence points to the conclusion that the Middle Iron Age (ca. 300–800 AD) in Lapland has been a period of radical ethnic, social, and linguistic change: in this period the Proto-Saami language spread to the area from the south and Saami ethnicities formed. Prior to this, Lapland was inhabited by people of unknown ethnicity that spoke non-Uralic languages, many relics of which survive in Saami vocabulary and  place-names. In the archaeological record of Lapland the Middle Iron Age is an obscure period characterized by sparse finds and lack of ceramics and iron  production. This apparent correlation between 'archaeological invisibility' and major ethnolinguistic change poses intriguing questions regarding the nature of this period of Saami prehistory.

Книга, конечно, уже старая, но местами годится и, насколько я знаю, используется. Поэтому выкладываю имеющийся у меня скан, сделанный неведомыми доброхотами. Тут же выкладываю ещё полезную рецензию В. Чуракова. ВНИМАНИЕ! Оглавение во  "Введении" - на 254 странице, а не в самом конце.

This is part 3 of 11 parts of a table that contains a reconciliation of Indo-European, Hurrian, Hittite, Georgian (Kartvelian), Finnish (Uralic) words, including a confirmation of Etruscan words. The latest update of this table Is 6.12.21 and can be accessed through the link below.

Los 40 términos más estables determinados por Holman et al. (2008) de la “Lista de Swadesh” original de 100 voces del vocabulario nuclear básico que (salvo unos pocos excepcionales casos) no son adoptadas por familias de lenguas diferentes, y otras 23 voces de la Lista de Swadesh original, fueron reordenadas desde los términos más estables (no sustituibles por términos foráneos de familias diferentes) a los menos estables. Esta lista, estadísticamente, es igual de significativa que la lista original de Swadesh de 100 términos y su reordenamiento por voces más estables la convierte en una herramienta muy poderosa para las comparativas entre lenguas y familias. Si dos lenguas cualquieras comparadas con esta lista comparten (según Swadesh) más de un 36% de coincidencias, puede sostenerse que estuvieron emparentadas dentro de una misma familia, aunque tal parentesco sea remoto en el tiempo. Obviamente, mientras más alto sea el porcentaje de coincidencias (mejor si es por encima del 50%), más cercano será el parentesco.
-------------------------------------
Comentario
-------------------------------------
La comparativa favorece con diferencia a las lenguas Transeurasiáticas-Altaicas (Túrquicas, Mongoles, Tungúsicas, Japónica y Coreánica) que ocupan más de un 80% de la comparativa, siguiéndole en orden frecuencial (con pocas diferencias en los porcentajes) las Dravidianas, Sino-Caucasianas, Kartvelianas, Urálicas, Yeniseanas, Sino-Tibetanas y en menor grado las Afrasiáticas. Puesto que es difícil (por no decir imposible) explicar tan elevado número de coincidencias del vocabulario básico de voces estables con términos de la macrofamilia Transeurasiática-Altaica como “préstamos” o producto del mero azar, la hipótesis de Michel Morván (1995-2002) de que el Euskara no es una lengua aislada y que, de hecho, sería una lengua Eurasiática muy antigua, parece más que probable.
----------------------------------------------
Esta comparativa de voces estables, según las 40 voces más estables determinadas por Holman et al. (2008), y otras 23 de la Lista de Swadesh original, apuntan a un más que verosímil parentesco entre la lengua Euskara (y probablemente también la Ibera de acuerdo a los pocos términos iberos que hemos podido incluir) con la macrofamilia Transeurasiática-Altaica. Si el Pre-Proto-Euskara era una lengua Proto-Eurasiana, tal como sostiene Morvan, todo apunta a que esta se hallaba más cercana a las lenguas Transeurasiáticas-Altaicas que a las de las restantes familias eurasiáticas.

En cuanto al Ibero, si bien es imposible de momento hacer una comparativa de su vocabulario básico estable, hay suficientes indicios para considerar como verosímil una relación de parentesco con el Euskara, aunque remota (nunca como hermanas o como madre o hija una de la otra), lo que permite inferir, al menos como posibilidad, que igualmente se pueda incluir el Ibero dentro de la macrofamilia Transeurasiática-Altaica. De hecho, todo lo que mejor se ha podido determinar (casi hay consenso) sobre su morfo-tipología, fonosintáctica, afijaciones, formas verbales y léxico especializado (determinado por combinatoria interna y contexto favorable) encuentran las mejores explicaciones siempre —al igual que pasa con el Euskara— a través de las mismas lenguas de la macrofamilia Transeurasiática-Altaica, y en menor medida a través de algunas lenguas Caucasianas.

Referencias

Bengtson, John, ‘Basque etymology’, Compiled by John Bengtson, 2015-2019 http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?root=config&morpho=0&basename=\data\sinocauc\basqet&first=1
Cengiz Erman, Arif, «Türklerin Gerçek Tarihi. Türk Dili ve Tarihi Üzerine Tezler», Urzeni; Edición: 1, 2019.
Díaz-Montexano, Georgeos, PERRO. El origen etimológico íbero-altaico o paleolítico del nombre del ‘perro’ en el español, The Epigraphic Society, Enero de 2017. https://www.academia.edu/35819718/
Holman et al., ‘Explorations in automated language classification.’ November 2008Folia Linguistica 42(3-4). DOI:10.1515/FLIN.2008.331
Koşay, H.Z., «Dil mukayeselerine göre Basklarla Türklerin temasları, göç yolları ve zamanı hakkında.” Belleten 84.521–60, 1957.
Morvan, Michel, ‘DICTIONNAIRE ÉTYMOLOGIQUE DE LA LANGUE BASQUE’, UMR 5478 DU CNRS (2022). http://projetbabel.org/basque/basque_dictionnaire_etymologique_2022_02.pdf
Robbeets, Martine; Bisang, Walter, ‘Paradigm Change. In the Transeurasian languages and beyond,’ Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, 2014.
Orotariko Euskal Hiztegia (OEH) https://www.euskaltzaindia.eus/index.php?option=com_oehberria&task=bilaketa&Itemid=413&lang=eu

Pie de foto: Una muestra de dos de las 28 páginas de tablas comparativas que se pueden ver en el PDF https://atlantisng.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Lista-Swadesh-Eusko-Ibero-Transeurasiatica-de-voces-mas-estables-de-Holman-et-al-2008-y-su-comparacion-con-el-Griego.pdf