If the small font size prevents you from seeing whether the accent is acute or grave, click on View and Zoom and scroll up to 125% to 150% . Please select UTF-8 unicode fonts for displaying the extended characters used in this document, with Czech, Greek, Russian also enabled. The newer XP systems are the most compatible with all the fonts used. For those who wish to comment about this study, pro or con, my email is millenia2@verizon.net
Introduction
Sumerian is an agglutinative language, which has many features in common with the nearby Uralic, Altaic and Dravidian agglutinative language families, including many common nouns, verbs, pronouns and cases, which are used instead of prepositions. Therefore it is quite incorrect to say, as has often been said, that Sumerian is only similar to these languages in its typology! It is often also stated, not to compare Sumerian to anything else! Why not? Of course there are many expected differences between other language families, however there are also many undeniable similarities. Even today's daughter languages of a single family can vary considerably in grammar and their vocabulary so that most are uninteligable to the other members in the language family. Yet these member languages are still believed to be of common origin, just separated by a large time gulf, during which many changes have occurred. These large differences are no reason to throw out the idea that they can be related, provided of course that a set of consistent sound rules can be generated that explains the differences. That is the goal of the following article, to systematize the sound changes between Sumerian and FinnUgor languages.
Commonly heard warnings against tyring to relate Sumerian to other languages
There are several problems in comparing Sumerian to other
languages, besides the usual simple sound alike comparisons, which
constitute a percentage of most languages, due to coincidences. These
sound alike words aren't necessarily wrong, but within a small number of
matches, they can be totally accidental similarities. It
is completely unreliable to compare two languages based on a dozen or two
or even three dozen words. If that is all that matches, then its unlikely
that they are related. Add to this the tendency to stretch the meanings
to accommodate the other language, by playing the game of free association and
you can be guaranteed to be totally misleading yourself. The words must
be close in meaning to be considered valid. It is even better when there are
multiple derivations from a common root word. That is the case in many examples
listed here. When dealing with different languages certain body parts or plant
and animal names can and do shift from one to something similar and close. We
see this even in American English versus European English. Changes in territory
and climate of different groups can cause this. When using something similar,
it should be something quite close, not like a hand and a foot but more like a
hand and a finger or hand and arm. A close function is also important.
Generally its best to keep very close to the original meanings as derived by
comparative linguistics, that used the comparative methods. Sound alike words
are not acceptable, when their meanings are different or their protoforms are
different. During the evolution and "mutation " of a word, it can by accident
can come to sound like another word, even if it came from a totally different
root. There are a considerable of such words listed in the Sumerian lexicon,
with common logograms. It is true that many Sumerian logograms have different
sounds for the different meanings, but many aren't different sounding and are
in fact homonims, but use a common same sign.Were these due to amateurish
mistakes?
Another major problem is, comparing to a language that has ceased to be spoken
nearly 4000 years. That is quite a long time, to be sure. Many
languages, like English are nearly incomprehensible if we try to read it from a
few hundred years ago. Just try reading Chaucer. At the same time you can
read Hungarian from this time without much effort. If we compare to a
language from its ancestor 4000 years ago it can be expected to be totally
incomprehensible. What we are talking about is not an easily understandable
link at all. The comparisons rely not on any modern living languages at
all, but a derived protolanguage, which is older than the time of Sumeria.
In fact it's much closer in time to Sumerian than any modern language
today. While we can make a claim that there are some languages that don't
degrade nearly as fast as English, they still do in fact change greatly over
this length of time. They change fast in times of turmoil and
foreign domination and slower in peace and isolation. I am not talking
just about vocabulary, but even the structure of the language also changes some
over time.
Another commonly claimed insurmountable obstacle, is the lack of precision of the phonetics of Sumerian. What is truly worse is the way Sumerian tended to drop certain trailing vowels and consonants and also certain leading consonants like certain sibilants. When the old words were reduced to a CV or VC form, they sometimes also reversed the order of the Consonant and Vowel to a VC or vica versa (metathesis). Luckily there are many variations or derivations of Sumerian words that do show many of the older and more complete forms also. By doing extensive "internal reconstructions" of the word forms it is possible to get a much better picture of the older complete words, rather than their later abbreviated forms, which became used especially by later Semitic scribes as well as to just simplify and reduce the extensive number of cuneiform signs. This process eventually lead to an alpabetic cuneiform script. It is unfortunate that many modern translations of sumerian texts tend to use the shorten simplified sounds of the pictographic logograms. Homonyms were used at times to group unrelated words to a common sign, and these weren't necessarily related words, nor were they necessarily totally sound alikes, but very similar none the less. These problems render a certain small percentage of words to be uncertain in derivation, except that they are often in groups that are recognizable to be from homonimic groups in FinnoUgrian languags also. Most of the sound rules found in Sumerian are also very common in FinnoUgrian also, but there are only a few that are unique to Sumerian, such as the extensive shortening of words. Individual sound rules are found in groups of languages, but a unique combinational pattern of all rules is unique to each language, else they would have identical words. Particular words which use small subset of rules may be in common between members of a language family. That also can and does happen, resulting in a small set of look alike and similar meaning words between two languages, however without the sound rules the majority of shared words aren't as easy to recognizeable. Sometimes they are totally unrecognizable to be related without applying the sound rules, which act like an encryption code, where certain letters or combination of letters are replaced by another letter. These changes occur at times unconditionally, which I simply notate as "was"/"is", while at other times only when certain conditions occur like having a certain adjacent sounds next to the letters. These are notated as "was"/"is"/"condition"& "location _" . These equations also follow a hierarchy starting with the most precise to the gross generality, which due to the sequence already removed the precise matches leaving the subset of the gross generality. What I mean is that rules are checked in my system sequentially and are ordered in the sequence to access the most important and precise rules first and leaving the generalities for the remainder conditions toward the end. This method helps to simplify the implementations of the rules, which otherwise would require more complex equations with OR statements for all cases. The first rule that matches terminates the phoneme rule search and is used to substitute the transformation of the old "WAS" phoneme by the new "IS" phoneme. If no rule is found the phoneme is left unchanged. For example " t/d " would change the word "toward" to become "doward".
It has been claimed by some that the inexact phonology of Sumerian prevents writing accurate sound rules for it. This is in fact not true, but it does cause problems. We know the sounds approximately and as long as the rules work, it isn't really relevant that the precise pronunciation isn't known. It is close enough to be understandable. Like certain dental sounds tend to vary from t or d, as well as certain sibilants tend to vary from z, s, s'. Such things are quite common in dialects of many languages and aren't the showstoppers that they are claimed to be, by those not familiar with the methods of Historic Linguistics. Certainly it would be nice to know these more precisely, but one can work around them. What is the most important is, consistency. The greatest problem is the dialectical and temporal variations. However if they also tend to have many examples, then that's not a problem. Repeatability is everything and large numbers of random rules and many dissimilar terms is a sure sign of unrelatedness. What is perhaps harder to understand from a casual comparison is that the gramatical particles may cloud the similarities also, because the order of agglutination is unique in many languages and the particles have slightly different forms also. In Hungarian for example there isnt just one but about half a dozen deverbal and formative suffixes, so that if we include the particle in the comparison we are hiding the root word that is meant to be compared, since there is no guarantee that the same particle is used or is even available in another language.
The other major problem is that our information on Sumerian vocabulary isn't tied to a certain region or locality, nor is it related to a certain period of time. Sumerian lasted for a long time and over that long time evolved and changed and it's virtually guaranteed to have had several dialects. While Emesal and Emegir dialects are known and mentioned, there were many more regional separations and therefore dialects than just these two. There are plenty of signs of that also in the multiple ways to write a word, implying multiple pronunciations. There was no "standard Sumerian" language, which all scribes had to follow. Instead the dialectical and regional variations were all allowed and apparently weren't too confusing for the users. Since most words were read in a hyeroglyphic sense it did not matter how they varied, until these were converted to an alpabetic form toward the end of Sumerian existance. This variation makes the rule equations tougher, because there is more than one solution to a transformation. Yet this is also very common in living languages. We can tie a certain variations in living or well documented languages to a time or a region/dialect, whereas we can only notate the variations in Sumerian. I generally use the symbol "~" when indicating multiple solutions. I also place in brackets ( ) around those phonemes which may or may not be deleted in a word. This again may be due to one dialect keeping the sound and another one dropping it, but it may also mean that it dropped the phoneme only after a certain time, so that it was in the early language, but was dropped later. For example we could write the following rule s/(z~s') which would mean that the s can changes to z or s' or it may be eventually dropped in some dialects or after a certain time. While this seems a bit complicated and broad in meaning, it is still a lot more definitive then a random exchange, especially if there are many examples to prove the rule.
Because many amateurish claims have been written about Sumerian using very incorrect definitions and even coincidental associations of words, whose real meanings aren't known well, or simply look or sound similar, the work of many amateurs are ignored outright. This happens even though the major discoveries were often made by learned amateurs. They are often the founders of the later sciences. I am disappointed to say that I have also seen the work of so called linguists, who are familiar with the methods required but who also at times cut corners and lack the precise and accurate definitions of the words they purport to compare. Their methodology at times may be innovative, but if they start with bad definitions, then the process degenerates to "garbage in and garbage out". The material used here comes from various sources which I have compared from multiple sources and which is currently accepted. The University of Pennsylvania's Sumerian Dictionary is excellent, but before I had access to it I started to use the compilation of several dictionaries which John Halloran published on the WEB. That material I have verified from multiple sources and know to be reliable and up to date also. It is also important to use the phonetic notations and not to simplify it for convenience, because these variations signify different sounds, even though somewhat similar, and that in turn has different sound rules. For example a leading "s" in some languages are dropped, but a palatized s "s'" is not. Part of the variation in Sumerian may be because their notation wasn't as precise as it could have been, since the later scribes had the limitations of their alphabet to write a language that they knew only imperfectly by then. The fact is that despite all of these obstacles, there are a very large number of root words in Sumerian, that can be reliably derived from FinnoUgrian. In the end what matters is that the method works, with some areas of uncertainty rather than rampant randomness. The fact that there are some words which cannot be perfectly converted is not a problem, since there is a huge time interval for which we have no written material so that uncertainties do occur, and aren't unique in the study of various languages. The thing that is important that for the majority of cases the system works well.
There is one other major obstacle that I must mention, which is by far the
biggest obstacle found in the humanities. The problem of racism and bias
toward certain groups and cultures, which precludes them from ever getting a
fair and honest consideration. This may sink to a
more politicized level when certain languages aren't truly free to
represent themselves before the international scientific community.
Indeed their "own" home school may be nothing more than a front with a
secondary aim of maintaining a negative self image as well as a negative image
to the rest of the world. This may seem extremely strange to any western
nation today, but it's real enough for some, who have only recently lost the
yoke of communism or are under the rule of another nationality in their
homelands. The study of Sumerian in these places were virtually outlawed
and books were even burned that talked about history that claimed more that the
begrudgingly little that was accepted. For those who think that this
negative past can be a proof of anything, I say of course it is not.
It only states the fact that a lot of false facts have been spread in the past
about certain nationalities. However these so called "facts" aren't
proven, but because they were thought for a long time they are accepted without
proof. My goal was only to try to explain why these similarities have been
repeatedly ignored and anyone claiming them was attacked, with racist slogans
and amateurism labels, whether they were PhDs in linguistics or truly some
country bumpkin, who thought he knew everything, because he could muster
up one example that proved his case. Unfortunately many academicians are
afraid to look beyond the status quo and perhaps some are even afraid that new
ideas may obsolete their own learning. For whatever the case, political
or self protection, the early ideas about the similarity of Sumerian to other
language families propagated by the early pioneers of Sumerian and cuneiform
studies like Jules Oppert (France), Archibald Sayce (England), A.H. Layard
(England), Francis Lenormant (France), DeSaulcy, Norris, Dielitz (Germany) and
others, has been totally ignored and all attempts have been blocked, with many
claims to "proven to be not true" . The so called proofs of these
disclaimers however are not to be found anywhere. Some cursory,
biased attacks on individual word correspondances were
made, however these were on single words only, and some of these were also
incorrect in their claims also. So again nothing was really proven. Don't
misunderstand what I mean to say, any new idea must be beaten up as much as is
possible, to see if it can stand the test of viability. However this
beating up of the new idea must not be based on personal attacks, racist
slurs, personal innuendoes, political bashing, claims that the
author is only interested in glorifying his nation, and the like, which
are the tactics of domination, not the methods of science. Such attacks are
normally selectively tied to those they want to silence the most. The attack
must be made on a linguistic level, with opportunities for the critiqued items
to be explained. 99% of the real amateurish claims will fail that test
immediately. All people make mistakes, but any and all mistakes do not
prove that the thesis is wrong, just as the early pioneers of linguistics made
many mistakes, but their theories have survived and were refined and
corrected. The scales of how much is right vs how much is wrong must be
placed on a balance, with opportunity to correct small errors. I must also
state that my goal is certainly not to disprove or to throw out any of the
currently accepted language families, but to simply expand on them and to
show that Sumerian wasn’t an isolated language after all. In fact I had been
using the fruits and labor of the FinnoUgrian linguists and it would be
illogical to use their data and refute their work at the same time. I
have absolutely no intention of doing such a thing. I also make no claim of
origin for any language directly from Sumerian, rather the origin of
Sumerian itself from the FinnoUgrian proto language, and its
separation from that language family after about 5,000BC to 3500BC. After
all, there are absolutely no signs that their unique cultural achievments were
transmitted to the other members of this language family nor any slightest
remnant of terminology for things that were found in Messopotamia. However many
of the Sumerian religious traditions and names of their gods do in fact
reflect their northern FinnoUgrian origins. That however is in a separate
study.
The Phonology and Sound Changes of Sumerian
One of the biggest problems in analyzing Sumerian phonology is the fact that early Sumerian was basically a language written in pictorial hieroglyphic type script, and we only know its pronunciation from the later evolution of this script that allowed for basic sounds, which was used by Semitic scribes to represent Sumerian words. Especially when dealing with Sibilants there seems to be a total randomness. Such variation also seems to occur with the k, ng, g, h but these in fact reflect the situation also prevalent in FinnUgor languages, where there are a lot of strange changes to the vellar-nazal "nk" and the "k" phonemes. Sumerian also tends to drop the trailing -kV adjectival suffix of old FinnoUgrian, just as other FinnoUgrians have done so, even though the influence of the k is seen in many cases. Sumerian words also often became further truncated and trailing consonants, especially liquid sounds like l, j, kV, mV and leading consonants like Sibilants (s, c) were often deleted, much the same as in several FinnUgor languages. Later Semitic use of Sumerian terms as categorical markers only further truncated the word. In many cases we do have the earlier forms, but they are often not tied together for reference, and all too often Sumerian is read with the late truncated form rather than the old fully pronounced words. This only further clouds the links to Sumerian. Not only trailing vowels were lost but these were most commonly lost. To recognize the many links to Finn-Ugor laguages is not that easy for those who are not familiar with both and the history of the evolution of the phonetics of all of these languages. One of the many things I tried to figure out are the main conditions where lead consonants and vowels are lost. For that reason I have included a few examples of the modern forms of the word derived from the protowords, along with the protowords that were recreated by FinnUgor linguists. These languages are very distantly related in time, much like modern IndoEuropean languages are. The family may be smaller but still very distantly related in time and spread out from North and Central Europe to the Pacific Ocean, if we consider Yukagir as a distant link. Many of them have incurred a lot of other linguistic influences over this huge time of independent evolution and thus have also lost a lot of the old FinnUgor or Uralic terms.
Root Word Structures and Vowel Harmony
While Sumerian has a lot of VC "Vowel + Consonant", CV and VCV root words, compared to FinnUgor, most of these seem to be caused by deletion and simplification of FinnoUgrian VCV and CVCV root words. Other languages have done similar things to their vocabulary also, except much later in time. One of the key rules in Sumerian for keeping the main vowel from a FinnUgor proto word of the VCV type, is when the Consonant after the lead vowel is an Unvoiced Consonant, a Nasal Consonant (m,n, nk) or Liquid Consonant (l, j) then the vowel is kept. Otherwise most other lead vowels followed by the remaining Voiced consonant types are lost. Usually when the lead vowel is kept the trailing vowel is lost and when the lead vowel is dropped the trailing vowel is kept. The short VC or CV words also may swap letters (metathesis) to avoid conflict with homonyms. This has occured even in longer words in some Hungarian root words which swapped the first and second syllable, and are especially common in languages like Etruscan where the lead sillable often swaps the Vowel and Consonants order. In certain cases the lead and trailing vowels of VCV words are also kept, especially if the consonant is geminated.(VCCV) CVC words are quite common in Sumerian and most of these come from a CVCV protoroot word in FinnUgor, which are by far the most common in the FinnUgor proto-languages. Normally the trailing vowel is lost, but certain types of trailing CV ending are also unstable, just as they are in Finnish and Estonian which looses trailing s ounds like: -ηV#, -wV#, -jV# while lengthening the first vowel by geminating it (doubling it) . Hungarian also usually drops the -kV and -mV ending in FinnUgor since these are archaic adjectival and formative endings that were replaced. Most longer words are normally combinations of two root words in Sumerian and Finnugor and was a common device for creating new words. Some of the key words used this way, were also used as classifiers. Eventually these commonly used words became suffixes and case markers in various languages. The vowel in these classifiers then became irrelevant and adapted to keep vowel harmony to the root words vowel. Normally they were minimalized to a single vowel and consonant, where the vowel followed the root words vowel type, high or low vowel. Like FinnUgor and Altaic, Sumerian also used vowel harmony, which was most prevalent in the early form of the Sumerian language.
Stress and Emphasis
Accents and marks
Sumerian and FinnUgor phonemes
a as in father,
u as in pull, (the u also substitutes for o, ü, ö and at times for w )
e as in peg,
and i as in hip.
According to both Poebel and now Liberman the 'o' is actually represented by u,
ù, and u 4 while u is represented by "ú".
According to Thompson, the following consonants are distinguished
in Sumerian writing: b, d, dr, g, ng, h, k, l, m, n, p, r, s, š, t, z.
However I haven't really seen dr in the literature. Of the special consonants,
"ng" is often symbolized as g~ and is pronounced like ng in rang.
This is a vellar nazal, which I have replaced with the FinnUgor η symbol
instead to avoid confusion with FU orthography. (this is normally symbolized as
a g with a ~ on top, however for consistancy with FU we used η). The
Sumerian h is normally
written with a dot underneath the h and is pronounced like ch in German Buch or
Scottish loch. This is symbolized with X in FinnUgor languages and
š is pronounced like sh in dash. In general I have maintained
the orthography used in Sumerian, except for the nazal velar. I have also
maintained the orthographies of various national languages of FinnoUgrian along
with the FinnoUgrian linguistic orthography used for smaller languages and the
protolanguage. I am sorry that this may cause confusion as to how to
interpret some of the phonetics for people that arent familiar with
these. The following table will help to clarify at least some of these.
In FinnUgor orghography we have the protoFU symbols which are used at times along with the national orthography used in some cases. Most of these tend to be quite similar with a few special symbols. George Lakó lists the following phonemes of the protolanguage, in his "Proto Finno-Ugric Sources of the Hungarian Phonetic Stock", Indiana University, he lists a simplified list of consonant groups which I have expanded.
|
Finnugor Consonants |
Nasalized UnvPlosive |
Unvoiced |
Voiced Plosive |
Aspirated | Palatized Fricatives |
Fricatives |
Affricatives |
Laterals |
Tremulant |
Nasals |
|
Labials |
mp |
p |
bh |
w |
|
|
|
m |
||
|
Dentals |
nt |
t |
δ=dh |
δ'=(ð) |
s, š (ts) |
č =(t'š) |
l |
r |
n |
|
|
Palatal |
ńć |
j (y) |
ś = (sh) |
ć=(ch) |
l' |
ń |
||||
|
Vellar |
ηk |
k |
gh |
|
|
|
|
η |
||
| Sumerian Consonants |
Nasalized UnvPlosive |
Unvoiced Plosive |
Voiced Plosives * |
Aspirated | Palatized Fricatives |
Fricatives | Affricatives | Laterals | Tremulant | Nasals |
|
Labials |
*mp>b |
*p>b,p |
b |
*bh>b |
|
w >b,blk |
|
|
|
*m > m,n |
|
Dentals |
*nt>d |
*t >t,d |
d |
*δ(dh)>d,s |
*δ'(dj)>d, l |
*š(ts) >"z" |
*č (t'š) > s, š |
*l |
*r >r,l |
*n > n, ŋ |
|
Palatals |
*ńć> n, g |
|
|
|
*j >g, l,blk |
*ś(sh) >s,š |
*ć (ch) > š |
*l' > l |
|
*ń -> ŋ, n |
|
Vellar |
*ηk > g |
*k>k,g,h, |
g |
*gh >g |
*η> ŋ > g |
The proto FinnUgor languages didn't have any voiced stops (b,d,g), but later many did add some of them. Often the change between t and d made little change in meaning. Sumerian is now generally believed not to have had Voiced Plosives (b,d,g) originally, but later added them. Etruscan, like FinnUgor didn't have voiced stops and never adopted them. Some also believe Etruscan to be from FinnoUgrian. Similarly Sumerian and Etruscan didn't have the W,J,O phonemes. It is believed by some that it did have an O and U was used to substitute for it, but there is no proof only a likelyhood. The sh was found in old Sumerian and later replaced. The same thing happened in many FU languages which converted sh to s, some much later readopted it and converted ch and s at times to sh.
PFU vowels are a,ä,e,i,o,ö,u,ü
Sumerian changed these as follows
*ä > a, e
*a > a, u ( a and u seem to be almost interchangeable in certain root
words.)
*e > a, e
*i > e, i
*o > a, u
*ö > u
The Sumerian vowels as proposed by S.J Lieberman based partly on the theory of Poebel, who argued for a 5 vowel system where ú=u, but u, ù, and u4 are o.
| front vowel | front vowel | central | back vowel | back vowel |
|
i |
u |
|||
|
|
e |
o |
||
|
|
a |
A lead w often changes the following vowel to a backvowel a,u. An l often
changes the preceeding vowel to an i regardless. A lead k or a nasal
also greatly changes the rules. The preceeding changes for the woels
are but a most common cases and is not allways the case for more
complex rules. The effects of often undocumented dialects and temporal
differences create common doublets of interchangeable vowels, just as they do
in modern language dialects today. The following will be much more
detailed, but first I will try to summerize the key rules, before
illustrating them.
The common sound changes found in Sumerian and FinnUgor
Without some regularity in the sound changes it's very difficult to compare two languages and not suspect coincidental random similarity, which are much more common than most people would ever suspect. Some of these changes are found by looking at dialectical variations in Sumerian and comparing it to the Finn-Ugor proto-language and daughter languages. Unfortunately few Sumerian dialects are known and current documentation does not specify the location and time of various words, which would help differentiate change by time and location. Sumerian has many very similar sound changes when compared to FinnUgor languages and the quantity of shared vocabulary has been constantly growing along with our understanding of its rules of sound change. If the opposite were true, then the percentage of matches would constantly decline with quantity. Provided that meanings and rules were kept close to the meanings and laws of change. In Sumerian we found not just regular sound changes but also similarity between groups of associated words that used the common logograms. That is, words really derived from different roots, but sounding similar and associated with a common sign, by the scribes who may have actually thought them to be from a common root at times or just used the common symbols out of convenience. Such mistakes are commonly done by non linguists and are called "folk etymologies". The Sumerian scribes of course had no other language to compare their language to in Mesopotamia, since Sumerian became isolated from its related languages when they settled there from the north. All they had as a frame of reference was the current state of their own language and its dialects. The mind is just too prone to make false generalizations, free association of words and therefore is capable of inventing false etymologies for these chance similarities of similar sounding words.
Detailed examples and sound changes can be found for all the FinnUgor languages using the program I wrote called Lingua for Windows installation. I used a work file with a list of around 790 root words and an associated sound rule file, with examples from all of its key daughter languages to validate not just the sound rules of one language, but all of them. The following list in this document illustrate the derivations of Sumerian and just a few FU daughter languages from *FinnUgor protolanguage. I believe that a few daughter languages are also required to get a better illustration of the source of the derived protowords and the range of meanings for the word, especially for those who don't see how the examples match. The protoforms are predominantly from forms derived by professional linguists and documented in internationally known literature. In some cases however minor tweaks were made in the protoword and alternate known protolanguage dialectical versions were also used.
The following table is a summary of the examples that are given in the last part of the article of the most common Sumerian phonetic changes found from comparing the FinnUgor proto-language to the basic Sumerian word forms. While the bulk of the sound rules are quite well proven there are some which are quite difficult to be shure of because of the lack of sufficient Sumerian examples. Perhaps in time these also will be available or perhaps due to the lack of precision of the orthography and the lack of knowledge of all the Sumerian dialects and their contribution, we will never have a perfect solution and only a marginal one. A marginal proof that still proves that there is much more here than mere coincidence!
Warning, the crossed zero is often modified by my HTML converter to look like
the Greek psi, a trident like shape. This is the symbol ø
This represents a blank, or dropped character.
|
FinnUgor
|
Sumerian phoneme |
Explanation of conditions for change |
|
lead *j- |
η |
very small set makes rule identificati
on impossible
|
|
lead *j- |
η > g |
mainly g, generally followed by front vowels, when the second consonant a liquid l,j,r |
|
lead *j- |
l, ø |
deleted when followed by e,
|
|
internal *-j |
η > g |
predominantly becomes a g;
|
|
internal *-jL |
l, ø |
when followed by liquid sound (l, j, r),
|
|
internal *-ήk or ή |
n (?ø) |
unconditional for ή or ήk |
|
internal *-η |
η > g |
when preceded by front vowels and followed by a vowel |
|
internal *η |
g, k |
when preceded by back vowels, followed by a vowel |
|
internal *η |
m, g |
when preceded by long back vowel and followed by a vowel |
|
internal *- η |
l, (?b) |
when preceded by long vowel (uncertain rule, few examples found to test.) |
|
internal -ηk- |
η |
generally η stays after unvoiced stops like p or k plus a vowel. Otherwise predominantly g, |
|
lead *ń- |
η~n |
predominantly n |
|
internal *-ń |
η, n, _ |
mostly n or η or at the end of the word delete. |
|
internal *-ńć |
g |
unconditionally |
|
lead *n- |
n /Emegir |
unchanged, except in dialectical variation with m or l or
š in Emesal. |
|
internal *-n |
ø, (n) |
n dropped unless it's the first consonant or first consonant is k or ć |
|
lead *kB- |
g~h |
When followed by a back vowel B it changes to g or h. |
|
lead *kF- |
k > g |
When followed by front vowel F, predominantly stays k, but some dialects do change to g. |
|
internal *-k |
_ (h) |
mostly drops k , few cases have h, and end suffixes -kV dropp. |
|
Internal *-kk |
g, h, blk |
g and h seem very interchangeable in Sumerian |
|
Internal dh (δ) |
d (l) |
Aspirated d (dh ) normally changes to d, in rare cases it becomes L which is the most common in Ugrian, Finnic becomes d however. |
|
Internal dh' (ð) |
d~š~ g |
Palatized & Aspirated d ( dj used at times) ;
|
|
Lead *#l- or #Vl |
l |
Unchanged in lead positions or first consonant position. |
|
Internal -l- |
_ |
L followed by a Nasal is dropped and absorbed by the nasal. |
|
Internal -l
|
_ or l |
normally dropps L if preceeded by Back Vowel, unless its first. Front Vowel + l doesn't drop the L. The L is also absorbed when followed by a nasal. |
|
Lead *s- |
_ |
drops s when followed by a Vowel + Liquid(l,j,η) or R |
|
Internal *-s |
š~z |
Kept. Sibilants are used quite indiscriminately in Sumerian and probably dialectical variations. |
|
Lead *ś- |
s~š |
Predominantly s, with about 1/3 also as š |
|
Internal *-ś |
s~š |
Predominantly s |
|
Lead *š- |
_ |
drops when followed by Front Vowel + η |
|
Internal *-š |
š /ES |
few examples! |
|
Internal *-kš |
_ or š |
few examples! |
|
Lead *ć- |
š~s |
Normally š but Emesal z , when second consonant a Nasal then s instead. |
|
Internal*-ć |
#Vs |
As the first consonant it becomes s, but as a non lead its š, Emesal z |
|
Lead č |
s~ š / EG |
s predominates by far in E.G. |
| Internal č | #Vs CVš |
As the lead consonant its normally s,
but if not its normally š (Emesal z) |
|
Lead *t- |
d ~ t |
Usually d, no real explanation of the difference is available (yet) except dialect. |
|
Internal *-nt |
d |
This is a standard Hungarian, Votjak, Udmurt sound rule also. |
|
Internal *tt |
d |
Predominantly d, Sumerian doesn't differentiate
|
| Internal VtV | t/t~d/_B t/s~z/_F |
t becomes t or d if preceeded by a Vowel
& followed by a Backvowel t becomes s or z if preceeded by a Vowel & followed by a Frontvowel. |
|
Lead *wä or *wu |
b ~p |
when lead w is followed by "ä" or "u" in the proto-language. |
|
Lead *w+V |
u |
for remaining cases ! w + next Vowel becomes a "u" and w is lost. |
|
Internal *-w |
ø (b) |
w is dropped, unless it's the first consonant. Then it becomes a b. Only exception is *tawte > tab ="fierry", which is also "tabh" in ObUgrian. |
|
Lead *p- |
p > b |
predominantly b |
|
Internal *-p |
m |
a single exception found as a b, probably went through a p>pp change early. Probably went through p> mp>mb > m as in FU. |
|
Internal *-pp |
_ |
deleted when preceded by a Front vowel |
|
Internal *-pp |
b |
when preceded by a Back Vowel. |
|
Lead *m- |
m /Emegir |
rare instances of n, also found due to dialectical differences between Emegir and Emesal. |
|
Internal *-m |
m /Emegir |
Dialectical variation with Emesal causes η. |
|
Internal *-mp |
m ~b |
Splits up the cluster into its components and uses m or b |
|
Lead or internal r |
r ~ l |
unchanged rarely becomes l,
|
| Internal front vowel ä,e, i | F/u~a/#C_η | Internal Front vowel converts to Backvowel when followed by η |
Sumerian definitely favored the g phoneme and had several types of phonemes be transformed to it.
Sumerian dialectical variations between the key Emegir (E.G)
dialect and the Emesal (E.S.) dialects.
|
Emegir |
Emesal |
Sumerian Emegir |
Sumerian Emesal |
FinnUgor Examples if available |
|
d |
z |
udu =sheep |
e.zé=sheep |
üszö = heifer/Hungar ; ObUgrian sheep |
|
g |
b |
igi =eye |
i.bí =eye |
ügy-el & figyel =observe /Hungarian |
|
ŋ |
m |
diŋir =godly |
dimir =godly |
is-ten=god /Hung; teŋry=sky,god/Altaic |
|
ŋ |
n |
kiη =seek |
kin =seek |
kém=spy /Hungarian (m~n) |
|
h |
g |
ha-l-am =destroy |
ge.le-eg =destroy |
hal=death; hul =to fall down, topple. |
|
m |
n |
munus =woman |
nu-nus =woman |
menyecs-ke=young wife, daughter inlaw |
|
m |
ŋ |
nam -(un) |
na.áη |
nem =type, gender; procreate, to seed |
|
n |
l |
niη -ir =herald |
li.bi.ir =herald |
|
|
n |
m |
nu.gig =hierodule |
mu.gi4.ib =hierodule
|
mü- = magic, creation, etc
|
|
n |
š |
nin =lady |
šen=lady |
1)néni=lady; nej=wife; nö=woman |
| s | z,
š |
sum =to give sig 4 =brick saŋ =head |
zé.èŋ =to give še.eb=brick še.en=head |
- - _agy=brain/Hu; henki=head, person/Finn š>h |
Emesal is a later dialect of Sumerian, perhaps Subarian, but may be a later
settlement into
Southern Mesopotamia from the north.
Illustrations of sound changes with examples
*j> η >g but also *j>l'>blank
In Sumerian there is no Y (Y is symbolized by J in most European languages and used here) letters, but there is ample evidence that the J phoneme or its derivative existed in Sumerian, but changed in pronunciation from the palatal area to further back toward the throat so that it became more Vellar and merged with the η =nk/ng sound and at times became a g or h also. In a few words where the J didn't shift to become a η sound the J is either dropped or an L is used to represent it. In some Hungarian dialects the L can also become LY which is much like the J (Y) in sound. Similarly in some instances the J in Hungarian becomes GY while in certain modes its dropped. Lappish also converts certain j sounds often to ggj. The variations of the η and the j in protofinnugor is one of the most complex changes in some FinnUgor languages, paralleling closely what we see in Sumerian, where it is also equally complex and messy. To this complexity the lack of a J, which often also converts to η only makes this change even more difficult.
Various FinnUgor languages also go through many of these changes as does
Sumerian. Sumerian substitutes *η
which is something like ng in English and is symbolized by η is FinnUgor
orthography.
This is similar from the point of view that *η often
changes to a j in some FU languages.
*J > ŋ (This is a common change in FU, but normally is represented as η > j instead)
FinnUgor *j- |
Sumerian
|
Hungarian
|
Ob Ugrian |
Other |
|
*joήe =come/go |
ŋan=come,
|
jön, jöv, jö_=come |
jäj, juv /Vogul |
jää-da=be left,return /Finn |
|
*jor-ke =travel, walk about, roll |
ŋiri =road,trip,feet |
jár=travel,
|
jouer=travel/Vogul |
jorrât=rush about, go around;/Lapp |
Due to the extremely few examples of this case a definitive rule cannot be constructed, however the many parallels in other languages and internal to the word substantiates the rule.
|
FinnUgor #j |
Sumerian *j >l >blk |
Hungarian j |
Ob Ugrian j |
|
|
* jume=good/Ug |
lam =good fortune |
jó, jav (m>v) =good, right |
jam-es=good/V |
|
|
jelä == light , day , sun |
_ila, _ili=to shine |
|
jäl'i=lighten |
jale=day/Sam |
| ju-ke (-ke=adjectival) =water,drink |
_e- =water, na=drink | _i+ (sz, n, v ..)=drink | äj | juo /Finn |
Lead j Normally followed by a backvowel
(j >g),
but this isn't consisent (see jälke), but exceptions are also rare.
|
FinnUgor
|
Sumerian
|
Hungarian
|
ObUgrian
|
Other |
|
*jäl-ke=sign,track> |
gal-am=artist < "decorator" |
jel~jegy =sign, symbol |
jäG--el=ornament /V |
jälki=track /Finn |
|
*jor'e=scraping iron, shaver |
gur 10,4=sicle |
gyalu =wood plane |
_iarr =to plane, scrape, shave |
|
|
*juj =pain, injury, ouch |
gig, gi =sickness |
juj, jaj =pain; gyogy=heal |
xox =bitter <??hurt |
|
|
*jal-ka=foot,walk |
ŋiri=road,trip,feet (l>r) |
gyal-og-ol=walk |
kor-pure=legg shank |
jaka=foot,leg |
|
*jo-ke=river, water |
gu_=riverbank |
-jó_=river (suffix) |
ia=river |
joki=river |
|
jor-ke=spin,wind,roll |
gur 4=roll,turn |
gur-ul=roll, |
jouer=travel |
jorgot/Lap |
|
FinnUgor *-j |
Sumerian ŋ>g |
Hungarian j~gy / blnk |
Other |
Other |
|
*üje=night, north |
_gi(g)=night,dark |
éj_ =night, north |
ji, ii, jie, jiγ =night |
jöö=night/Finn |
|
*keje, kejme=mating |
kiag=love |
kéj=lust, (j~g) |
kei-ti =to rut (of animals) |
giemba=to mate/Lapp |
|
*äja =to chase, drive |
_ ŋá =to go |
haj-t =to drive animals |
woj-t=to chase/Vogul |
aja =to chase/Finn,Est |
|
ajηe=skull |
ugu =skull |
agy =brain |
uj_=marrow,brain?Mordvin |
uju=skull/Est |
|
čijε / čiη e= hurry |
zig, zi_=go out |
sie-t=hurry |
tšije-ms=run /Mordvin |
x |
|
śije-le = porcupine |
šáh(2)-zé (j>g>h) |
siul > sün |
soule/Vg |
siil /Finn |
| čijε == hurry (čiηe or čikε also possible) | zig =to go out ? | siet=hurry | x | tšije-ms =run/Mordvin |
| kaje =bowed,bent | gil=to bend, to bow | haj-l=bend, ijj=bow | xoi-t=to bow, bend/Vg | kajra=crooked/Finn |
|
FinnUgor *-j > l |
Sumerian l |
Hungarian j , ø |
Ob Ugrian |
Other FU lang. |
|
*peje =heat, cook |
bil=roast,cook |
fö_-z=cook; föl=cooks |
pii -t=cook/Vogul |
pai-sta=cook/Finn |
|
*kaja =toss up |
_illu-ru=throwing stick (kB> ø ) |
haj-it=toss, throw |
x |
kaja=throw/Mordvin |
|
*kaje =to bend,
|
gil =to bend, bow |
haj-ol =bend,bow |
xoi-t= bend, bow/Vogul |
kaj-ra=crooked/Finn |
|
*kuja =skin,leather |
kulla=peel, |
héja =peel, rind |
xal= birch bark |
koja=bark,rind/Finn |
|
*laje =small, weak |
lal, la_ =deficient, light; |
lá-ny=girl < weak |
läi=small, feeble, young; |
|
|
pejće = ax |
bal =demolish, teardown ?? |
fejsze=ax |
paš-ting=with ax |
pež /Slekup |
|
peljä=ear |
pi_, bur=ear |
fül=ear |
pil'=ear/Vg |
pielje=ear/Lapp |
|
pojka =boy,son |
ibil_a=son,heir |
puj_a=child, |
pú, pöw=son/vg |
poika=son/fi |
|
kaje=incompetent |
gala = sophomore |
hüje=stupid |
x |
kaja=absent minded/Finn |
|
kolja = devil, demon |
gala=demon |
golyho=angry ghost |
xul -=devil |
kol'l=spectre/Est |
|
FinnUgor -Bj |
Sumerian ø |
Hungarian j, ø |
Ob Ugrian |
Other |
|
*woje=fat/butter/FU |
_ia_ (#w>blk) |
vaj =butter |
_ui_=fat, butter, oil/O |
voi=butter /Finn |
|
*sōja=sleeve lenght/FU |
su_13, su-d =length |
_újj=sleeve; ( #s/_ ) |
x |
seje-s/Votjak |
|
*koja=shell, husk |
ku_-s=skin,hide |
héja =shell, rind |
x |
koja =bark, rind/Finn |
|
*kuje=body fat, blubber |
he_=abundance,
|
hája=blubber; |
kut= blubber,fat |
ku_u =fat, tallow/Finn |
|
*kuja =resting place |
ku_ =lie down |
hál=rest,sleep |
kuj=rest, sleep |
kije=lie down/Mordv |
|
*najε =ligth, fire, sun |
nu_ 11= light, fire;
|
na_+ p = sun |
naj =light, fire, sun; |
|
|
*orja =slave |
er_u =slave girl |
x |
ver_=slave/Vog |
orja=slave/Finn |
|
*muj a = touch >taste > show |
me_ 6 =behave, act |
mu_-tat =show |
moi-epte |
moi-staa = familiarize,
|
|
*naljä =4 |
ni_-min, nin=40 |
négy=4 |
nilä=4 & symbol of female/Vg |
nelja=4 |
|
*laje =young, weak |
lá_ =light+ge=girl |
lá-ny=young girl |
läi=feeble,young |
|
|
*paje=glisten,shine |
ba_-r=white,shine |
pej=whitish, |
x |
boegj-ot =shine,white/Lp |
| *kerje=ask, beg | u-kur_=poor man, needy | kér=ask for,beg | x | kerjä =to beg |
| *kuðja =cover, blanket, tarp | gadd_a =linen, loincloth | gatya=light summer pants, underpants. | x | kuðjo =cover, tarpaulin/Lapp |
| *pulje =thick,dense,fat | bu_ 7 =swolen | fejl-et=developed; ?bö=plenty,spacious |
paal'=dense | paljo=much/Finn paju=dense,thick/Sam |
| *wije =to take, carry along |
_ú-s =to follow, | vi-sz=to carry along | x | vi_i-ma, vie-da/Finn wijke/Lapp |
Internal *ŋ >n/g/k
η > n > m ;
η > k > w > v ;
η > g' > j > l' ;
ηk > ηx > h ;
ηk > *ng > g ;
|
FinnUgor |
Sumerian |
Hungarian
|
Other |
Other |
|
*säήe =sky |
_an=sky, heaven, high , sky god(#s>ø) |
_ég=sky (#s>ø) |
_in> jen= heaven,god |
šańń =weather /Lapp |
|
*ńiή a =woman,wife, |
nin=lady, 40; nig= bride, bitch |
nö=woman; |
nèη,niη,ne_, ni_=woman, wife, she;/Ostjak |
nei-nen=woman /Finn |
|
* joήe = come |
ŋan, ge_ 4=come;
|
jön, jöv =come |
jäj~juw=come /Vog |
jää-dä =be left, remain, stay/Finn |
|
*päήe = (päηe?) head , high , main |
pa_=peak/D295;
|
fö_=chief, head,main |
põη, päηk =head /Vog |
pää=head /Finn&Est |
|
*kāή ke = climb up, ascend , ladder |
kun 4,5 =ladder, stairs; |
hág=climp up;
|
χāηγ=ascend, climb up /Ostjak |
kaini =to climb up, go up/Votjak |
|
*čüή ke=knuckle |
su_, sil-ig =hand; |
csög ~ csüd, =pastern, bird's foot;
|
ťuη-en=joint,limb, muscle; ťuń=finger/Ostjak |
ťśuń,ćyń=finger /Zürjen |
|
reήke =hot |
ara_ 4=blaze,shine |
rek-edt=humid |
rei,rou=heat,warm |
rejLws=burn/Sam |
Front Vowel + ηV
|
FinnUgor FηV>g/k |
Sumerian
|
Hungarian
|
Other FU |
Other FU |
|
*aηa=opening |
ig_=door |
aj-tó=door,
|
äη_ =opening, outlet |
uk'sâ/Lapp |
|
*ajηe =brain,skull
|
ugu=skull |
agy_=brain |
uj_ = marrow, brain /Mordv |
aju=skull/Estonian |
|
*aiηa= (aηa) opening |
_ká = gate (g>k) |
aj-tó=door <áj=opening |
oη=opening, entrance /Ostjak |
uk'sâ/Lapp |
|
*aiηe = (aηe) mouth |
_ku=mouth |
aj_-ak=chin, lip |
oη=mouth, opening |
ń-ŕη _ mouth /Samoy |
|
*müηä = behind, rear , sexual areas |
mug 2=naked |
mög =behind, rear |
män-ta, män-tel =undressed/Vog |
mâηηi- =back, rear /Lapp |
|
*päηe = hold, keep, grab |
pag=cage, confine |
fog =to hold,
|
puχi, puγi =to grab, to hold / Vogul |
x |
|
*püηe = hazel grouse |
bag =bird type, cage |
fog-oly =partridge |
püηk =wood grouse |
pyy=grouse/Finn |
|
*śäη e = light |
sig 7=pale, yellowish |
szöke =blonde;
|
säηki=clear, light-coloured |
x |
|
*šäηe = branch |
_áhi, ah 5=arm,wing |
_ág =branch, fork(river) |
taγ/Vogul |
_äη /Cheremis |
|
*šeηe = true , yes , correct |
_ge(n) =just;
|
_ig-az=just, true |
šäń=good /Zürjen |
šuvva=good/Lapp |
|
*wiηe = end , death |
_ug 5,7,8 =to die, death (w> blk) |
vég =end > death; |
x |
vii- mane=the last/Finn |
|
*-eηe =plu ral suffix |
-ene =plural suffix |
-k, nk =plural suffix |