|
 |
Finno-Ugric languages | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7154 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes  20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 9 of 15 16 October 2010 at 8:28pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
The second part of the answer dealing with vocabulary follows.
--- On the subject of vocabulary, approximately 200 words/roots have been reconstructed for Proto-Uralic using techniques that satisfy the greatest number of scholars in comparative Uralic linguistics. In other words this conservative total reflects the quantity which raises the least objection/dispute. In the past more roots had been reconstructed but many of these etymologies have been deemed to be unsuitable or less than convincing because of the apparent difficulties in reconciling the reconstructions with current mainstream thinking in Uralic linguistics. In case anyone is interested, this site contains an online database of 1898 etymologies within Uralic languages (see “Uralic etymology”). These not only include the approximately 200 agreed-upon Uralic roots but also others roots which have been reconstructed as Finno-Ugric, Finno-Permic or Ugric. The database also includes etymologies within the Uralic family which have found less acceptance among the experts, or are new proposals. starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/main.cgi?root=config Linguist Rein Taagepera’s book “The Finno-Ugric Republics and the Russian State” includes a table showing the degree to which basic words are common or shared within Uralic languages. His table is based on a study by another linguist, Alo Raun which made comparisons using Swadesh’s list for 100 basic words. From the Finnish point of view, the table shows that among the 100 basic Finnish words: 15 of them have a genetic connection with one in Nenets 27 of them have a genetic connection with one in Hungarian 31 of them have a genetic connection with one in Komi 36 of them have a genetic connection with one in Mari 34 of them have a genetic connection with one in Erzya Mordvin From the Hungarian point of view, the table shows that among the 100 basic Hungarian words: 13 of them have a genetic connection with one in Nenets 26 of them have a genetic connection with one in Komi 30 of them have a genetic connection with one in Mari 25 of them have a genetic connection with one in Erzya Mordvin 27 of them have a genetic connection with one in Finnish Based on the table alone, Taagepera suggests that Mari may be the most conservative of the Uralic languages when it comes to retaining vocabulary reconstructed for Proto-Uralic. However Taagepera also notes that it's possible that the interaction between speakers of Mari and those of Mordvin, Komi and Udmurt may have led to the incorporation into Mari of words typical of other Uralic languages to the point of giving the impression that Mari’s basic vocabulary is the most conservative or “most typically Uralic” (i.e. most likely to be intelligible to a randomly-selected speaker of any other Uralic language). From the Mari point of view, the table shows that among the 100 basic Mari words: 19 of them have a genetic connection with one in Nenets 30 of them have a genetic connection with one in Hungarian 40 of them have a genetic connection with one in Komi 36 of them have a genetic connection with one in Erzya Mordvin 36 of them have a genetic connection with one in Finnish You can find the table and most of Taagepera's comments online by running a search for the title “The Finno-Ugric Republics and the Russian State” (pp. 40-42) on Google Books. 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| alexptrans Pentaglot Senior Member Israel Joined 6763 days ago 208 posts - 236 votes Speaks: English, Modern Hebrew, Russian*, French, Arabic (Written) Studies: Icelandic | Message 10 of 15 17 October 2010 at 9:22pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
Thank you again. It's fascinating to see how each language took those suffixes into a slighty different direction.
One more thing: looking at the map of Finno-Ugric languages on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Ugric_languages), it doesn't really look like Hungarian is anywhere near the center of the geographical span of those languages - in fact, it looks just as peripheral, if not more so, than Finnish. Unless of course Finno-Ugric spread to the north and east from the present location of Hungary. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7154 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 11 of 15 17 October 2010 at 11:24pm | IP Logged | |||||
You're welcome. The following post from earlier this year may also be of interest even though it's meant more for someone who knows one of Estonian, Finnish or Hungarian and would like to apply some rules of thumbs or "cheats" to get a better grasp of the other two languages. It includes some sound correspondences between Estonian or Finnish on the one hand and Hungarian on the other which indirectly conform to the idea that Hungarian is relatively innovative and has diverged from Proto-Uralic more than Estonian or Finnish. how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1991 6&PN=1
Linguistic research has shown that Hungarian shows the most similarity to the Ob-Ugric languages (Khanty and Mansi) which are now spoken near the confluence of the Ob and Irtysh rivers. Because of the divergence of the Ugric languages (i.e. Hungarian, Khanty and Mansi) from the other Uralic languages, it suggests that the people speaking an Uralic language (i.e. the Finno-Ugric speaking ancestors of the Hungarians) entered the Carpathian Basin rather late in history. Outside linguistics, this is part of the idea that the semi-nomads speaking an Uralic language settled the Carpathian Basin as a discrete entity starting in 896 AD. Old Germanic records talk about the Battle of Lechfeld of 955 where these newcomers lost to a combined force of Bavarian, Swabian, Franconian and Bohemian knights, thus ending the Hungarians' raids throughout Europe. (i.e. I hesitate to use "ancient Hungarians" to describe these people since the Hungarians themselves have been a mixed group and are merely lumped together as a more homogeneous group thanks to their use of an Uralic language. In other words these people would have assimilated or mixed with any other peoples whom they encountered regardless of the different languages used). Looking at the modern geographical distributions, Hungarian would appear to be a peripheral language. Yet the fact that it's highly divergent from peripheral languages such as Finnish and Nganasan and that there are some chronicles mentioning the activities of a new people (~ Magyars/Hungarians) in the late 9th and early 10th centuries AD throughout Europe support the case of Hungarian being a more innovative "core" language since this speech community stayed closer to the hypothesized homeland of Uralic-speakers in the eastern part of European Russia for longer than most other groups. They would have stayed in this region until around 500 AD. In contrast the Uralic-speaking peoples have been hypothesized as having settled in Scandinavia and the northern Baltic coast since around 4000 BC and already away from a "Proto-Uralic homeland" somewhat further away in northeastern Europe or northwestern Asia. Here are a few studies that touch on these ideas of origin as they relate to the origins of the Finns and Lapps using findings in anthropology or archaeology. www.mankindquarterly.org/samples/niskanenbalticcorrected.pdf sydaby.eget.net/swe/jp_finns.htm www.utexas.edu/courses/sami/dieda/hist/genetic.htm It's interesting that you bring up the idea of the Carpathian Basin being a possible area where people speaking Finno-Ugric languages began to disperse. Anthropologist Grover Krantz wrote a book called "Geographical Development of the European Languages" which develops this idea thus countering the oft-repeated belief/assertion/conclusion that the Uralic language that we call Hungarian was brought to Europe by a group of semi-nomads from somewhere further east. - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pannonian_Basin_before_the_Hungarians (scroll down to "Some alternative theories" for the relevant point from Krantz) 3 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| alexptrans Pentaglot Senior Member Israel Joined 6763 days ago 208 posts - 236 votes Speaks: English, Modern Hebrew, Russian*, French, Arabic (Written) Studies: Icelandic | Message 12 of 15 18 October 2010 at 10:23pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
Very interesting. I guess I'll be doing a lot of reading about Finno-Ugric in the next several days to weeks...
1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||
| koba Heptaglot Senior Member AustriaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5866 days ago 118 posts - 201 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, French | Message 13 of 15 30 October 2010 at 12:22am | IP Logged | |||||
|
@Chung: Hungarian has an unusual aspect called definite and indefinite conjugation. I am wondering if such a thing also exists in other Finno-Ugric languages, in particular, Finnish, which is also a language that I intend to study in the future.
Also, comparing both languages, can shared word roots be found between them? And if yes, are they easily noticed? edit: Actually, Chung, I'd appreciate if you could write about both languages and show their contrasts, that would be great. Edited by koba on 30 October 2010 at 12:34am 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| Chung Diglot Senior Member Joined 7154 days ago 4228 posts - 8259 votes 20 sounds Speaks: English*, French Studies: Polish, Slovak, Uzbek, Turkish, Korean, Finnish | Message 14 of 15 30 October 2010 at 8:49am | IP Logged | |||||
Erzya, Moksha, Khanty, Mansi, Enets, Nenets, Nganasan, and Selkup also have something akin to the Hungarian distinction between indefinite (subjective) and definite (objective) conjugation. The difference lies in how elaborate the distinction is. The Hungarian setup as you know is between whether the direct object is definite (i.e. direct object is preceded by a definite article / antecedant to a subordinate clause beginning with "hogy" (that) / designating a direct object that as a subject is the 3rd person or a proper name) or indefinite (i.e. direct object lacking a definite article / preceded by numerals / designating a direct object that as a subject is the 2nd person). This is relatively plain compared to what's used in certain other Uralic languages. For example, Erzya conjugation extends this concept further than in Hungarian. Erzya, present tense indefinite conjugation: - siń kand-IT́= they bring definite conjugation: - siń kand-SAMIŹ = they bring me; they bring us - siń kand-TADIŹ = they bring you (singular or plural) - siń kand-SIŹ = they bring him/her/it/them The conjugational endings here in Erzya tell you which grammatical person the definite direct object is. These endings apply in the subject is the 3rd person plural (i.e. "they") and so the endings here are different for other personal subjects. In total, the present tense in Erzya has 6 endings for indefinite conjugation (i.e. one ending per personal pronoun: I, you, he/she/it, we, you, they) but 28 endings (including syncretized or merged endings) for definite conjugation depending not only on the "person" of the direct object but also on the "person" doing the action. In contrast, these Mordvin patterns above would be divided as follows in Hungarian: indefinite conjugation - hozNAK = they bring definite conjugation - hozZÁK = they bring [it] Hungarian just divides it into indefinite or definite and has 12 endings in total - 6 for indefinite, 6 for definite, with the 6 corresponding to the personal pronouns) rather than the 34 seen in Erzya as Hungarian doesn't make such fine distinctions on the "person" of the direct object. Mansi, which is considered to be the most similar language to Hungarian, also has a very elaborate pattern for conjugation. Mansi conjugation not only accounts for the indefinite and definite concepts, but also the number and identity of the subject, as well as the number of the direct object in the definite object. Mansi also uses the dual, thus expanding the number of endings for both the subject and the definite object. indefinite conjugation: - teeγ-əm = I eat - teeγ-men = we (two) eat - teeγ-uw = we (more than two) eat definite conjugation: - teeγ-ləm = I eat [one definite object] - teeγ-aγəm = I eat [two definite objects] - teeγ-anəm = I eat [more than two definite objects] - teeγ-lamen = we (two) eat [one definite object] - teeγ-aγmen = we (two) eat [two definite objects] - teeγ-anmen = we (two) eat [more than two definite objects] - teeγ-luw = we (more than two) eat [one definite object] - teeγ-aγuw = we (more than two) eat [two definite objects] - teeγ-anuw = we (more than two) eat [more than two definite objects] The Hungarian equivalents of these above forms would be - eszem = I eat (indefinite and definite conjugations) - eszünk = we eat (indefinite conjugation) - esszük = we eat (definite conjugation) Hungarian's lack of a dual and lack of a fine distinction in the object's number means that Hungarian uses 3 forms to do what 12 forms do in Mansi. In total, the definite conjugation in present tense for Mansi has 27 endings (including syncretized or merged endings) while the indefinite conjugation in present has 8 endings (including syncretized or merged endings) for 35 endings in total. After seeing these examples from Erzya and Mansi, no one should ever complain about Hungarian conjugation being insurmountably difficult to grasp. Show that complainer how it's done in those other Uralic languages, and he or she will stop talking $#!t about Hungarian. Finnish does not use anything like definite and indefinite conjugation BUT it has a somewhat elaborate way of treating direct objects. Whereas in Hungarian the definiteness of the direct object determines which set of verbal endings you will use, N.B. Finnish: lue- = read (verbal stem); kirja = book (nominative singular); kirjaa (partitive singular); kirjat (nominative plural); kirjan (genitive singular); kirjoja (partitive plural) Hungarian: olvas- = read (verbal stem); könyvet (accusative singular); könyveket (accusative plural) E.g. "I'm reading a book (and give no hint if I'm reading it to completion)" - Luen kirjaA. (Finnish) - OlvasOK könyvet. (Hungarian) "I read books (as a hobby)" - Luen kirjOJA (Finnish) - OlvasOK könyveket (Hungarian) "I'm reading the book (and give no hint if I'm reading it to completion)" - Luen kirjaN. (Finnish) - OlvasOM a könyvet. (Hungarian) "I'm reading the books (which are part of an assigned set for my homework)" - Luen kirjaT (Finnish) - OlvasOM a könyveket (Hungarian) "I'm not reading a book" - En lue kirjaA (Finnish) - Nem olvasOK könyvet (Hungarian) "I don't read books" - En lue kirjOJA (Finnish) - Nem olvasOK könyveket (Hungarian) "Read one book!" (but you don't need to finish it) - Lue kirja! (Finnish) - OlvasS egy könyvet! (Hungarian) "Don't read books!" (as a general prohibition) - Älä lue kirjOJA! (Finnish) - NeolvasS könyveket! (Hungarian) To reiterate: Notice how it's the declension of the noun that changes in the Finnish translations, but it is the conjugation of the verb that changes in the Hungarian translations. This is tied to the presence of indefinite/definite conjugation in Hungarian, and lack thereof in Finnish.
See my post below called the "Estonian/Finnish/Hungarian 'cheat sheet'" how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1991 6&PN=1&TPN=1#223174 5 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||
| koba Heptaglot Senior Member AustriaRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5866 days ago 118 posts - 201 votes Speaks: Portuguese*, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, French | Message 15 of 15 30 October 2010 at 10:59pm | IP Logged | |||||
|
Thanks for the extensive post and the examples. It's interesting to analyse how both languages can be so similar, but at the same time so different.
1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
