Germanic Loanwords in Proto-Slavic

Saskia Pronk-Tiethoff: The Germanic Loanwords in Proto-Slavic. (Leiden Studies in Indo-European 20.) Amsterdam –New York: Editions Rodopi B. V. 2013. X, 316 p

THE POSITION OF LEIVU

Leivu has generally been connected with Võro and especially its Hargla dialect. However, this classification has always been based on superficial synchronic similarities rather than a rigorous diachronic analysis. Instead, closer examination shows that Leivu is the earliest offshoot of South Estonian and that its similarities with Hargla Võro can better be explained by their geographical proximity.Leivu has generally been connected with Voro and especially its Hargla dialect. However, this classification has always been based on superficial synchronic similarities rather than a rigorous diachronic analysis. Instead, closer examination shows that Leivu is the earliest offshoot of South Estonian and that its similarities with Hargla Voro can better be explained by their geographical proximity.Peer reviewe

Raimo Anttila 1935–2023

Non peer reviewe

Jorma Koivulehto 1934–2014

Nekrolog Jorma Koivulehto 1934–201

Suomen kielen kivikautisista lainasanakerrostumista

Stone age loanword strata in Finnish (englanti)1995 (99)Petri Kallio (address: Purpuripolku 35 H 152, 00420 Helsinki)Stone Age loanword strata in Finnish The oldest Indo-European loanword stratum in Finnish was borrowed into the Uralic proto-language, as evidenced both by the distribution of the loanwords and above all by their phonetic structure, which requires a Proto-Uralic source form. Yet the phonetic structure of the Indo-European originals also corresponds exactly to the Proto-Indo-European reconstructed forms. For this reason, the proto languages must still have been relatively uniform language forms during the period of the oldest loan contacts. The lexical evidence suggests, however, that Proto-Indo-European cannot be dated earlier than 4000 BC, which agrees well with the traditional datings of Proto-Uralic. Moreover, there is no conflict here with the established hypotheses concerning geographical origins (i.e. the Indo-Europeans in Southern Russia and the Uralians in Central Russia).Although occasional groups of Uralian hunters may have come as far as Finland, it is likely that most Finno-Ugrians did not arrive in the Baltic area until about 33002800 BC, at the time of the typical comb pottery. The oldest Indo-European loanword stratum affecting only western Finno-Ugric languages dates from about 25002000 BC, when the so-called battle-axe culture was prevalent in Finland and the Baltic area. The language of the Battle-axe people was still a highly archaic Indo-European dialect, which did not develop into Proto-Baltic until it spread into the Baltic Sea region. The Baltic loans in Baltic Finnic thus represent much later strata in most cases from the Bronze or even Iron Age. Also, loan contacts between the Balts and the Baltic Finns definitely seem to have taken place on both sides of the Gulf of Finland, which suggests that the cultural independence which prevailed in the coastal areas of Finland after the battle-axe culture was also at least partly linguistic

Vanhan kirjasuomen ”viimeinen korpimaa”

Harri Uusitalo: Tausta, tekijä ja kieli: Filologinen tutkimus Aitolahden koodeksin lainsuomennoksesta. Annales Universitatis Turkuensis, sarja C, osa 471. Turun yliopisto, Turku 2019. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-29-7669-0. 345 sivua

Suomi(ttavia etymologioita)

Kielenaineksethäme (kieli: suomi, sivulla: 613)saame (kieli: suomi, sivulla: 613)suoli, suolet (kieli: suomi, sivulla: 616)Suomi, suomi (kieli: suomi, sivulla: 613)tosi (kieli: suomi, sivulla: 617

Äännehistoriaa suomen kielen erilliskehityksen alkutaipaleilta

Abstraktit julkaistaan numerosta 60 alkaen