• No se han encontrado resultados

BASE "NÚMER01"

In document El Dios Que Adoran Los Hombres (página 190-195)

PERIODO Vil LA MATRIX INFERNAL

BASE "NÚMER01"

The substitutions that have been suggested in the literature are briefly presented here. The table below is modelled after the presentation of substitution rules in the Germanic loanwords of Finnic in LÄGLOS I. Only the substitutions that are argued in recent works by Koivulehto (1999a&b, 2001a&b, 2007, 2009), Parpola (2010, 2015, 2017, 2019), J. Häkkinen (2007, 2009), Helimski (1997, 2000), Napol’skikh (2010, 2014), Aikio (2015b), Kallio (2009, 2015), Zhivlov (2013) are presented here, because in earlier works attention has not been paid to substitutions (Joki 1973; Rédei 1986) or the ideas of different donor languages (such as Munkácsi’s 1903 layering of Iranian and “Indic” loans) is clearly obsolete. The substitutions suggested by Katz (1985; 2003) will be discussed individually in the context of each etymology.

The chronology and environments of these substitutions will be commented on in more detail in the analysis of the individual etymologies, and in the Results chapter it will be shown which substitutions can stand up to critical review and which have to be abandoned. Here the suggested factors causing the possible substitutions will be very briefly presented. It is usually assumed (Joki 1973; Rédei 1986; Koivulehto 2016) that the loans which show Uralic *e vocalism reflect the retained PIE *e, not a substitution of later (PII) *a. Regarding the *o vocalism, this can reflect either the retained PIE *o or a substitution of PII/PI *a (a similar substitution is also found in the Germanic and Baltic loanwords of Finnic). Various environments for these “o-loans” have been suggested, including the substitution of *o ← *a in word-initial position (Minissi 1970; Gamkrelidze & Ivanov 1984; Lushnikova 1990), before *r (Gamkrelidze & Ivanov 1984), or before *rC (Lushnikova 1990), as well as before a nasal (Heikkilä 2014: 46). Also the labial environment (after *p or *w) has often been considered as a factor that causes the *o-substitution. Distinguishing retained *o from the o-substitution of *a is a major task of Uralic and Indo-Iranian etymological research. The idea of *o loans is being revived to some extent because of the new vowel reconstruction by Aikio (2015b), which shows that a part of the *o–a words have to be reconstructed as *a–i-stems.

For the substitution *i̮ ← *a, only J. Häkkinen (2009) has attempted to establish clear conditions, assuming that the unaccented Indo-Iranian *a was substituted by Uralic *i̮. Aikio’s new idea of the divergent development of *a–i and *i̮–i-stems in West Uralic also has an impact on the ideas regarding the *i̮ loans.

The substitutions of Indo-Iranian and Iranian long *ā are largely the same as those of the short *a. Although in Indo-Iranian there probably was a notable difference in the realization of the long and short *a, with short *a being rather ə (Lubotsky 2018: 1875; Oberlies 2017: 360), this difference does not manifest itself in loanwords. However, it is often problematic to determine whether the Uralic word has been borrowed from a form which had long *ā, as especially in borrowed verbs it is very difficult to determine the precise donor form, due to the Indo-Iranian ablaut and Brugmann’s law. Many of the long

vowels in Indo-Iranian also result from earlier *VH sequences, and as a reflex of the laryngeals probably was in some form present in Proto-Indo-Iranian and Proto-Iranian, many of the alleged long-vowel donor forms can be reconstructed with *aH.

The substitutions of Iranian *r̥ and *r̥H are likewise diverse, but less attention has been paid to the conditions that cause the different substitutions here. Gamkrelidze & Ivanov (1984) and Lushnikova (1990) assume that *r̥ was usually substituted by Uralic *ar, but only part of the material fits this rule, and numerous other substitutions are found, as can be seen from the table below. It is important to note in general that Joki (1973), Gamkrelidze & Ivanov (1984), Rédei (1986c) and Lushnikova (1990) do not reconstruct the opposition of *a and *i̮ for Proto-Uralic, and a large number of cases that they consider *a loans could in reality be reconstructed equally well with *i̮.

Only the substitutions in the initial syllable of Uralic are presented here systematically because of the more limited vocalism of the unstressed non-initial syllables and because not much has been written about this earlier. The substitutions in non-initial syllables will be discussed in the results.

The substitution of consonants is less problematic. The main problems concern the possible substitutions of the Indo-Iranian reflex of the laryngeals, and the different substitutions of Iranian *ts, *dz.

The Proto-Uralic (PU) here denotes all the reconstructed stages (Finno-Permic, Finno- Ugric, Finno-Saamic, etc. in the traditional sense) unless noted otherwise.

Dubious cases (substitutions involving forms with controversial reconstructions, uncertain Indo-Iranian etymologies) are marked with “?”. In some cases it is impossible to show which vowel should be reconstructed for the proto-form, due to the vowel mergers that are shared by different branches. These ambiguous cases (such as PU *a or *i̮) are listed separately.

Following the practice of LÄGLOS (I: XVII), completely implausible etymologies or etymologies that show implausible substitutions are not listed in the table, but they will be commented on in the text.

1.7.1. Vowels

PII/PI *a → U *a or *i̮ *ačwa, ? *ajsa, ? *ajwa, ? *apV, *arwa, *asma, *aśnas, *asora, ? *aštira, *jama, *ćara-, ? *karšV, *kata-, *mača, ? *maksa-, ? *mana-, ? *martas, *pakas, *para(s), *śaδa- ? saja-,? *sammV-,

*sampas, *sasarV, *śara-, *śasra, ? *śata,9 ? *šaji-, ? Pre-P *šata (> PP *šud)

? *šatas, Pre-Md *ćaγa, *tajwas, ? *tarwas, *wajna, ? *waŋka, *wasa → U *a *ajša, ? *čača-, Pre-S *jawi (>PS *jäə̑),

Pre-P *kada- ‘to steal’, *kana-, *kara-,

9Both *śata and *śi̮ta are listed because of the controversial vocalism of the words for ‘100’ in the various

Pre-P *karka, ? PUg *manći, *parta, saγi-, ? *śali, *sara, ? *talas, ? PUg *tala, ? Pre- Sa *waćim, *waćara, Pre-S *wakša-, ? *watsa

U *a or *o *anti/onta, *śami/śoma-, Pre-Md *jawi/jowa, *wajni/ojna-, Pre-Sa *pari/pora, Pre-Sa *sami/soma

U *o or **i̮ *pośi, *soŋka

→ U *o ? *kota, POUg *mē̮ja (< ? *moja) ? *očra, ? *omtVrV, ? *ońća, ? *oŋki, ? *orpa, Pre- P *poči, *počaw, *pora, ? *porćas, ? *portta, Pre-Sa *pottik, *šoji-, ? *śolki, *śoma, *somas, PUg *sora, *śorsa, ? *wermen, *wojna-, *woraśi

→ U *i̮ *ji̮ni, *ki̮ntaw, ? *mi̮γi, *pi̮ŋka, *śi̮ta, PUg *si̮rańa

PII/PI *a → U *ä PMs *ǟrV, ? *äkštärä, POUg *ćäkV, ? Pre- OUg *ärkä (> POUg *ēräɣ), ? *kärtänä, PKh *kǟrtV Pre-Ms *mäńći, POug *päčäγ,

Pre-Kh *päntä, Pre-Ma *pänti-, PMa *pärća, *pärtä, *pätäri-, PMs *rǟsVnV,

PUg ?*śäŋkV, ? PUg *säptä, *täjV, *täjVnV, POUg *wǟnV, POUg *wǟŋkVrV,

POug *wǟrV, PKh *wǟr(ə)sV, *wärkä,

Pre-P *äŋkVrV, PMs *ǟrV

PII *a < Pre-II *e → U *e ? Pre-Sa *ćerti, *ertä, ? *jewä, *kečrä, *kekrä, *kert(t)ä, *kert(t)ä- *mekši, ? *mertä, *meti, *peijas, *pejmä, *pertä, ? *rećmä, *repä, *sejti, ? *sentü-, ? *šerä-, ? *serä, ? *šewči-, ? *tejni(š), ? *ternV, *weni(š), ? *werśV

PII/PI *a

< Pre-II *o

→ U *o ? *ońća, *orpa

PII/PI *ā → U *a Pre-Ms *aćtira, ? POUg *ńātV-, PUg *taja, ? *takra, ? POug *wātV-

→ U *o *ora, *orja, ? *tojwV-, ? *tora-

PII/PI *i, *ī → U *i ? *ićä, ? *ićäntä, *iša (*iša2), *išta, ? *iso,

? *(j)išV, Pre-OUg *itra, ? *niska, *šišta, ? *šiwa, *wiša (*wiša2), *wirä

PII/PI *u,*ū → U *u *juma, ? Pre-Sa *kupa, *mura-, ? *puntas, *šukta, ? *śuka, *surV, ? PP *śumi̮s ? PP *sur, Pre-P *tura, *uška, ? *utarV, Pre- Mari *wuδarV

? → U *ü ? *mükkä

PII/PI *r̥ → U *ar *śarwi

→ U *i̮r *si̮rńa

→ U *er *kertä, ? *mertä, Pre-Md *serńä, Pre-Md *serä, ? Pre-Md *werkas, ? Pre-FI *werśV → U *ir *wirta-

→ U *är *wärk(k)ä → U *ür *kürtńV

→ U *ur ? Pre-S wurka (> PS *wǝ̂rkǝ̂)

PII/PI *r̥ > Iranian *ər~ *ar

→ U *ar or *i̮r *warsa PII/PI *r̥H (> ?

PI *ər)

→ U *or *tora-, *toraksi → U *er ? Pre-Sa *ćero

1.7.2. Consonants

PII *ć → U *ś ~ ć ? *aćnas, ? *ćara- ‘brown; to dawn’, *ćara- ‘to shit’, ? Pre-Sa *ćero, Pre-Sa *ćerti, *ońća, ? *porćas, *śaŋka, *śi̮ta

PII *ʒ́, *ʒ́h → U *ś ~ ć *waćara, *woraći

PII *ć > PI *ts → U *š ? *šiwä, *šukta

→ U *č *mača, *počaw, *päčäγ ? → U *ks *-teksä

PII *ʒ́, *ʒ́h > PI

*dz

? → U *s ? *sentü-, ? *serä, ? *sewči- ? → U *č ? *čača- → U *š ? *šatas ? → U *ks *maksa-, *paksu PII *ts > Iranian *s → U *s ? *asma,*wasa PII *ʒ́, ʒ́h > Iranian *z

→ U *s Pre-Md *serńä, PUg *si̮rańa PII/PI *č ? → U *ć POug *ćäkV

PII/PI *ǯ ? → U *š ? *šerä-

PII/PI *š, *ž → U *š *aštira, *ašja, *išta, *(j)išV, *karšV, *karsi, *mekši, Pre-S *wakša-, Pre-S *täši, *wiša

? → U *s *kärsä, *niska

? → U *ć ? Pug *mańćV, PMa *pärća PII *š > Alanic *s → U *s ? *kärsä, *warsa

PII/PI *b, *bh → U *p *pakas, ? *pi̮ŋka, *puntas, *sampas

PII/PI *p → U *p *apV, *parta, *pakas, *para(s), *pänti-, *pärća, PFi *pe̮rna, *peträ, *počaw, *pora, ? *porćas, *puntas, *päčäγ, *pärtä, *pottik, *repä

> Iranian *f PII/PI *g, *gh → U *k ? *kertä ? → U *w *arwa PII/PI *g, *gh > PI *γ ? → U *w *arwa

Pre-II/PII/PI *k → U *k *kečrä, *kekrä, *kerttä, *pi̮ŋka, *wärkä PII/PI *k > PI *χ → U *k *šukta

PII/PI *d, *dh → U *t *takra, *tejniš, *tejV, *tejVnV, *tervV,

? *tora

PII/PI *t → U *t *kertä, *martas, *mertä, *meti, *parta, *peträ, ? *port(t)a, *pärtä, *sejti, *sukta, *ti̮rna, *tora, *toraksi

PII/PI *t > PI *θ *iträ (> POUg *eträ)

PII/PI *m → U *m *juma, *mača, *maksa-, *mana, *martas, *mekši, *meti, *mertä, *mura-, *mükkä, *sampas

PII/PI *n → U *n *mana, PFi *pe̮rna, *puntas, *pänti-, PMs *rǟsVnV

→ U *ń ? POUg *ńātV-, *ońća, ? PMs *pī̮ńtV, Pre- Md *serńä, PUg *si̮rańa

PII/PI *r → U *r *arwa, ? *aštira, *asora, *ćero, *ćerti, *itra, ? *karšV, *kečrä, *kekrä, *kertä, *kärtä, *martas, *mertä, *mura-, *ora, *parta, PFi *pe̮rna, *pertä, ? *port(t)a, *repä, PMs *rǟsVnV, *śara-, PUg *si̮rańa,

*śorsa, *surV, *ti̮rna, *tora, *toraksi, *werśV, *wirä, *wärkä, *woraći, *worna, PS *wə̑rkə̑, *wärkä

PII ? *l10 → U *l ? *ola, ? *śali, ? *talas, ? PUg *talV

PII/PI*y [i̭] → U *j *jama, *juma, *ji̮ni, *sejti

PII/PI *w [ṷ] → U *w *waćara, *wajna-, Pre-S *wakša-, *warsa, *wasa, POug *wātV-, *weniš, ? *werkas, *werśV, *wojna-, *woraći, *wiša, *wirä, *wirtä, *worna, POug *wǟnV, POug *wǟŋkVrV, POug

*wǟrV, PKh *wǟr(ə)sV, PS *wə̑rkə̑, *wärkä

PII/PI *H → U *γ *saγi-

→ U *k ? Pre-Fi *karšV → U *Ø11

10 It is highly uncertain whether *l was a separate phoneme in Proto-Indo-Iranian or Proto-Iranian, and

there are no convincing loan etymologies that would support the reconstruction of *l. See above for a discussion of the problem of the Indo-Iranian *l > *r change.

11 The cases where a laryngeal was not substituted are too numerous to be listed here. The problem is that

PII/(?PI) *s → U *s *asora, *saγi-, *saŋka, *surV, *sejti, *säptä

→ U *ś *pośi

1.7.3. Word-initial consonant clusters

PII/PI *dy- → U *j *juma

PII/PI *st → U *s *sampas

PII *sć → U *ś ~ *ć Pre-Md *ćaγa, ? PFi *sooja ? Pre-Sa *ćerti

PII/PI *sk → U *k *ki̮ntaw

In document El Dios Que Adoran Los Hombres (página 190-195)