HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO HELSINGFORS UNIVERSITET INDO-IRANIAN LOANWORDS UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI HUMANISTINEN TIEDEKUNTA HUMANISTISKA FAKULTETEN IN THE UGRIC FACULTY OF ARTS LANGUAGES Sampsa Holopainen, [email protected] Department of Finnish, Finno-Ugrian and Scandinavian Studies, University of Helsinki

Helimski (1997) has claimed that many of the loans in Ob- INTRODUCTION Ugric can be derived from an unattested branch of Indo- REFERENCES According to the traditional view, the Khanty and Iranian, alanguage he dubs”Andronovo Aryan”. Bakró-Nagy, Marianne 2013: Mit tudunk az ugor fonológiáról? Nyelvelmélet és Mansi languages constitute the Ob-Ugric Some of the loans are from an Alan-type Iranian language kontaktológia II. Szerk. Agyagási Klára, Hegedűs Attila és É. Kiss Katalin. subgroup of the Uralic family, which together with (Helimski 1997; Korenchy 1972). Piliscsaba: PPKE BTK. Hungarian forms the Ugric branch. As all the Traditionally the loans have been stratified according to Blážek, Vačlav 1990: New Fenno-Ugric-Indo-Iranian lexical parallels. Uralica- Uralic languages, the lexicon of the Ugric Indogermanica II. 40–45. their distribution, but a closer look at the material shows Helimski, Eugen 1997: The southern neighbours of Finno-Ugrians: Iranians or languages contains a number of Indo-Iranian that this is an erroneus way to distinguish the an extinct branch of Aryans („Andronovo Aryans“)? Finnisch-ugrische Sprachen loanwords dating from different periods of chronological layers of Indo-Iranian borrowings. in Kontakt. Vorträge des Symposiums aus Anlaß des 30- jährigen Bestehens contact. Korenchy (1972) has dealt with the early der Finnougristik an der Rijksuniversitejt Groningen 21.-23. November 1996. Maastricht. 117-125. Indo-Iranian-Ugric contacts, but many of her Joki, Aulis J. 1973: Uralier und Indogermaner. MSFOu 151; Helsinki: Finno- conclusions can be considered outdated by now. Ugrian Society. Also the traditional taxonomy of Ugric has Koivulehto, Jorma 1999: Varhaiset indoeurooppalaiskontaktit: aika ja paikka frequently been challenged in recent research (cf. EXAMPLE lainasanojen valossa. Paul Fogelberg (ed). Pohjan poluilla. Suomalaisten juuret nykytutkimuksen mukaan. Bidrag till kännedom av Finlands natur och folk 153; especially Bakró-Nagy 2013). Helsinki: Suomen Tiedeseura. 207–236. My research aims to explain whether the three ETYMOLOGIES -- 2007: Saamen ja suomen ‘poro’. Aikio, Ante & Ylikoski, Jussi (doaim.) Sámit, Current settlement area of the Ob-Ugric peoples. sánit, sátnehámit. MSFOu 253. 251–258. Ugric language branches were separate entities Etymologies collected from: Korenchy 1972; Joki Map © Ob-Babel. 1973; Blážek; 1990; Helimski 1997; Koivulehto Korenchy, Éva 1972: Iranische Lehnwörter in den obugrischen Sprachen. already when the Indo-Iranian loanwords Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. common to them were acquired and how can the 1999, 2007 (Ob-Ugric reconstructions from Napol'skikh, Vladimir = Напольских, В.В. 2014: Проблема начала финно- different loanword layers be distinguished. Zhivlov 2006). See the handout for a full list of угорского-иранских контактов. Ананьинский мир: истоки, развитие, etimologies. CONCLUSIONS связи, исторические судьбы / Археология евразийских степей. Вып. 20.  Many of the loans are difficult to date, and it is Казань. 76—89. Живлов, Михайл = Zhivlov, Mikhail 2006: Реконструкция праобско- hard to distinguish the different loanword layers. угорского вокализма. Unpublished dissertation. PUg *mańćV ‘ethnonym’ > Hu magy-ar, Mansi The earliest loans can date from Proto-Indo- moańś, Khanty mōś < PI *manuš ‘man’ -- 2013: Андроновский арийский язык. Реликтовые индоевропейские языки Iranian. Передней и Центральной Азии. Редакционная коллегия тома: Ю.Б. - The vowel relations between Mansi and the Коряков, А.А. Кибри. Языки мира. Москва: Academia. 217–220. other languages are irregular. Probably a parallel  *ä seems to be a common substitute for Indo- loan. Iranian *a, but based on Zhivlov’s (2006) Ob- Sources of the pictures: Ugric reconstruction, there were other kinds of substitutions for *a as well, the conditions of The Uralic family tree: POU *mēja̮ > PM *mūj(-ə) ‘guest’:, PKh *māj which are hard to determine. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2012: After the protolanguage: Invisible convergence, false ‘wedding’ < PII *maya- > Avestan maya- mating’, divergence and boundary shift. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 61. 7-28. OI máya- ‘enjoyment’ Contrary to Zhivlov (2013) and Helimski (1997), The map of settlement areas: - There are no phonological problems in the there are no loans in Ugric that point to the Ob-Babel project: http://www.babel.gwi.uni- etymology, but the semantic connection is not ”Andronovo Aryan” donor language (this view is muenchen.de/media/pics/Russlandkarte.png Obtained 20 August 2015 straight-forward. The Ob-Ugric cognates are supported also by Napol’skikh 2014). regular. The vowel seems to continue Pre-OU *a. My reserach has been supported by the Wihuri foundation.  Among the presumably oldest lonword layer One version of the Uralic family tree, rejecting Proto-Ugric but accepting the Ob-Ugric unity. there are phological irregularities that point to POU *päčäɣ > PM *pǟšəɣ; PKh *päčəɣ 'reindeer parallel loans. calf' ’reindeer calf’ < PI *pacu- ’animal, cattle’ - *č is an expected substitution of Proto-Iranian  The loanwords common to Hungarian and (at *č. POU *ä probably reflects the Proto-Iranian *a; least one of) the Ob-Ugric languages are acquired OVERVIEW OF THE this seems to be a common substitution. Ob-Ugric before the Proto-Ugric consonant changes, and it cognates are regular. is notable that some loans attested only in one CONTACTS Ugric language also point to equally early origin. There are different layers of Indo-Iranian loans in the Ugric languages, the oldest ones inherited from the Proto- Pre-Kh *saγVrV > ʌăγǝr ’ring armour’ < MI *zγar-,  The loanwords in Ugric should not be classified Finno-Ugric period. The loanwords common to Khanty, compare Ossetic zγar ‘armour’ according to their distribution. Mansi and Hungarian are traditionally derived from the - Although limited to Khanty, the word was Ugric proto-language and are thought to be Proto-Iranian acquired before the Proto-Ugric sound change *s >  Many unclear points in Ugric historical loans. It is also usually assumed that Proto-Ob-Ugric and *θ (> Khanty *ʌ). phonology still need thorough working out before later Khanty and Mansi separately had contacts with later the problems with the Indo-Iranian contacts can Middle Iranian languages. There are also multiple later be convincingly solved. Iranianloansin Hungarian.