Yearly Archives: 2015

Errata for the Karelian dialectal atlas

A recent acquisition of mine has been the not long ago released dialectal atlas of Karelian: Диалектологический атлас карельского языка / Karjalan kielen murrekartasto, Helsinki 2007; based on data collected in the 1930s. Covering 209 traits — many of them

Tagged with: , , ,
Posted in Commentary

Gradation of *st in Finnic (and related complications)

The development of consonant gradation in Finnic (and why not, also elsewhere in Uralic) is one of those topics that really needs a new monograph-scale treatment one of these days. Not just for the sake of collecting the accumulated knowledge

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Reconstruction

Finnic o-umlaut, continued

I’ve often seen the Finnic languages considered to demonstrate that vowel harmony acts a counterforce to the common tendency for second-syllable (“stem”) vowels to trigger various conditional developments (umlauts) of first-syllable (“root”) vowels. At least within the larger Uralic comparative

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Commentary, Etymology

Proto-Finnic *c in Karelian

During some casual investigation of Karjalan kielen sanakirja, I appear to have stumbled on something interesting. One of the more distinctive innovations among the Karelian dialects is the reflexation of Proto-Finnic *s. In Northern Karelian, and in the northernmost dialects

Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in Reconstruction

Some observations on Votic õ versus o

One of the bigger open problems of Finnic historical phonology is the shift *o > õ in Southern Finnic. The non-front non-open illabial vowel õ found across Southern Finnic — the exact realization varies from /ɤ/ to /ɨ/ — most

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Reconstruction

Inheritance in Phonology

It occurred to me that there’s one concept I have never seen anyone else define or use, although I’ve been working with it in my own research for a while now: that of an inheritance phoneme. This is in effect

Tagged with: , , ,
Posted in Methodology

Weighing etymological distributions

I’ve sometimes remarked (but until now, not on this blog) that one interesting difference between Uralic and Indo-European studies is radically different approaches to lexical reconstruction. Uralic studies have for long hung on to the idea of a deeply stratified

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Methodology

Etymology squib: Huoma & co.

An interesting paper I’ve recently found, by Kirill Reshetnikov from 2011: “Новые этимологии для прибалтийско-финских слов”, Урало-алтайские исследования 2 (5): 109–112. A Russian-only journal is a slightly odd location for publishing research on Finnic etymology, but I suppose technically still

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Commentary, Etymology

*je-: A Reprise

Summer’s wrapping up, a new academic year’s about to roll in, and if all goes well, I might be returning to more active blogging around here. I have also returned, about a week ago, from the 12th International Congress for

Tagged with: , , ,
Posted in News, Reconstruction

On comparison in Proto-Uralic

Here is a somewhat speculative idea that recently occurred to me. I don’t think I will be able to deliberate on all the comparative implications just now, but it wouldn’t surprize me too much if something similar had already been

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Etymology, Reconstruction

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.