Page 166 - FUD20

Basic HTML Version

L
ARS
-G
UNNAR
L
ARSSON
166
This classical problem certainly cannot be solved in this article, and it is
not needed for the following discussion. There is a unanimous opinion among
researchers in Saami language history that this mysterious sound – whatever
its quality was in Proto-Finno-Ugric – developed into a voiceless, dental
fricative, *
θ
, in Proto-Saami (Korhonen 1981: 129; Sammallahti 1998: 199).
Proto-
Saami
SaaS SaaN Finnish Other FU lang. Hung. UEW
*
t
dålle dolla tuli
Md.
tol
*
tuli
‘fire’
*
t
dïeves dievas täysi
Ma.
tić
tele
*
täw-
‘full’
*
t
dihkie dihkki
täi
Udm.
tej
tetű
*
täji
‘louse’
*
θ hibmie dapmi
tymä
Udm.
ľem –
*
ß
ümä,
ß
imä
‘glue’
*
θ hïŋse daŋas –
??Ko. ”
ľaŋes
” –
Not in UEW:
*
ß
iŋis
,
δiŋis
‘twigs’
*
θ fuome duopma tuomi
Udm.
ľõm-pu –
*
ß
ōmi
‘bird cherry’
As can be seen from the above examples, the dental fricative *
θ
in an initial
position has another representation in South Saami than it has in northern
Saami languages. The material is not extensive – language is no systematical
museum – but it is regular.
In his book on the vocabulary of common Saami, Lehtiranta (1989) presents
altogether five words with an initial *
θ
(<*
ß
), and he is the one presenting the
parallel South Saami
hïŋse
/ Komi
ľaŋes
(referring to KESK). This parallel
seems to be extremely uncertain; it is not noted in UEW, and the semantics
of the Proto-Permian *
ľaŋes
does not fit together with the Saami word (cf.
KESK). Even if the Komi parallel has to be rejected, the correspondence
within Saami – SaaS.
hïŋse
/ SaaN.
daŋas
– is regular (cf. Bergsland 1946: 22).
Bergsland (1946: 22) suggests another example as well. SaaS.
hâvva
”the
protuberant upper part of the marrowbone of the backside of the forefoot of
the reindeer” (translation from Rydving 2012:164 based on SLW s.v.
håv-
vaa
) / SaaN.
duv΄va
‘protruding upper end of the
dab΄bâ
at the back of fore-
legs of reindeer (or other animal)’ (form and translation from KN s.v.). This
word could be a Scandinavian loanword, cf. OSw.
thuva
, ON.
þúva
‘tussock,
grassy hillock’. Bergsland himself regards the correspondence as uncertain
and the semantic part seems to cause great problems. Furthermore, the deve-
lopment in South Saami seems to presuppose a dissmilation (*
θuv-
> *
huv-
>
hâv-
) to explain the initial
h-
(cf. below). So even if the contrast between
SaaS.
h-
/ SaaN.
d-
is what we expect from a Proto-Saami *
θ-,
this etmology
seems uncertain (marked with ? in the table below).