|
Various Proto-Uralic homeland hypotheses, concerning the origin of the Uralic languages and the location (Urheimat or homeland) and period in which the Proto-Uralic language was spoken, have been advocated over the years. ==Europe vs. Siberia== The Proto-Uralic homeland has always been located near the Ural Mountains, either on the European or the Siberian side. The main reason to suppose a Siberian homeland has been the traditional taxonomic model that sees the Samoyed branch splitting off first; because the present border between the Samoyed and the Ugric branch is located in Western Siberia, the original split was seen to have occurred there, too. However, the Ugric languages are known to have earlier been spoken on the European side of the Urals, so a European homeland would be equally possible. In recent years it has also been argued that on the phonological basis the oldest split was not between the Samoyed and the Finno-Ugric, but between the Finno-Permic and the Ugro-Samoyedic language groups.〔Häkkinen, Jaakko 2007: Kantauralin murteutuminen vokaalivastaavuuksien valossa. https://oa.doria.fi/handle/10024/7044〕 The lexical level is argued to be less reliable, and lexical innovativeness (a small number of shared cognates) can be confused with a great age of the division. For a long time, no new arguments for a Siberian homeland have been presented. Both European and Siberian homeland proposals have been supported by palaeolinguistic evidence, although only such cases are valid in which the semantic reconstructions are certain. A Siberian homeland has been claimed on the basis of two coniferous tree names in Proto-Uralic, although these trees (''Abies sibirica'' and ''Pinus cembra'') have for a long time been present also in easternmost Europe. A European homeland is supported by words for 'bee', 'honey', 'elm' etc.〔Sebestyén-Németh, Irene 1951–1952: Zur Frage des alten Wohngebietes der uralischen Völker.〕 These can be reconstructed already in Proto-Uralic, when Samoyed is no more the first entity to split off.〔Häkkinen, Jaakko 2009: Kantauralin ajoitus ja paikannus: perustelut puntarissa. – Suomalais-ugrilaisen seuran aikakauskirja 92, s. 9–56. http://www.sgr.fi/susa/92/hakkinen.pdf〕 More recently also the loanword evidence has been used to support a European homeland: Proto-Uralic has been seen borrowing words from Proto-Indo-European,〔Rédei, Károly 1986: Zu den indogermanisch-uralischen Sprachkontakten. (Toim. Manfred Mayrhofer & Volfgang U. Dressler.) Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Linguistik und Kommunikationsforschung, Heft 16. Wien.〕〔Koivulehto, Jorma 1991: Koivulehto, Jorma 1991: Uralische Evidenz für die Laryngaltheorie. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte, 566. Band. Wien 1991.〕 and the Proto-Indo-European homeland has rarely been located east of the Urals. Proto-Uralic even seems to have developed in close contact with Proto-Aryan,〔Häkkinen, Jaakko 2012: Uralic evidence for the Indo-European homeland. http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/UralicEvidence.pdf〕 which is seen to have been born in the Poltavka culture of the Caspian steppes before its spread to Asia.〔Mallory, J. P. & Adams, D. Q. (editors) 1997: Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. London and Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. p. 439〕 Although Proto-Uralic is now located on the European side of the Urals, Pre-Proto-Uralic seems to have been spoken in Asia, as argued on the basis of early contacts with the Yukaghir languages 〔Häkkinen, Jaakko 2012: Early contacts between Uralic and Yukaghir. Tiina Hyytiäinen, Lotta Jalava, Janne Saarikivi & Erika Sandman (editors): Per Urales ad Orientem Iter polyphonicum multilingue Festskrift tillägnad Juha Janhunen på hans sextioårsdag den 12 februari 2012. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 264, p. 91–101. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura. http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust264/sust264_hakkinenj.pdf〕 and typological similarity with the Altaic (in the typological meaning) language families.〔Janhunen, Juha 2001: Indo-Uralic and Ural-Altaic: On the diachronic implications of areal typology. – Carpelan, Parpola & Koskikallio (editors): Early Contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: Linguistic and Archaeological Considerations, p. 207–220. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 242.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Proto-Uralic homeland hypotheses」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|