Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia <p class="sus_teksti"><em>Uralica Helsingiensia</em> -sarjassa julkaistaan suomalais-ugrilaisissa kieliaineissa tehtäviä tutkimuksia, alan kannalta keskeisiä artikkelikokoelmia sekä muita tutkimusta ja opiskelua tukevia materiaaleja. Sarjassa julkaistaan myös Viroon, Unkariin ja saamelaisuuteen liittyviä tutkimuksia sekä sellaisia suomalais-ugrilaiseen kielentutkimukseen ja itämerensuomalaisiin kieliin liittyviä tutkimuksia, jotka eivät esimerkiksi laajuutensa takia sopisi hyvin Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran tai muihin alan julkaisuihin.</p> fi-FI anna.kurvinen@sgr.fi (Anna Kurvinen) toimisto@sgr.fi (Katriina Ketola) pe, 24 tammi 2020 00:00:00 +0200 OJS http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 A new resource for Finnic languages https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85039 <p>The report introduces a new digital resource on minor Finnic languages. This resource is the main outcome of the project “Documentation of Ingrian: collecting and analyzing fieldwork data and digitizing legacy materials” carried out by Fedor Rozhanskiy and Elena Markus at the University of Tartu in 2011–2013. The collected materials cover several minor Finnic languages with a special focus on varieties spoken in Western Ingria: the Soikkola, Lower Luga, and Heva dialects of Ingrian, the Lower Luga varieties of Votic, and Ingrian Finnish. The resource contains (a) legacy recordings of different genres made by previous researchers in 1968–2012; (b) new audio and video materials recorded mostly in 2011–2013 by the project participants; (c) transcriptions and translations into Russian and English synchronized with sound and video using the ELAN software. Altogether the resource presents 510 hours of audio recordings, 21 hours of video recordings, and 15 hours of ELAN annotations. All media files in the resource are provided with detailed metadata specifying the place and time of the recording, sociolinguistic data about the speaker, the contents of the recording, and the access rights. The resource is available on the websites of the Endangered Languages Archive (London, UK) and the Archive of Estonian Dialects and Kindred Languages of the University of Tartu (Estonia).</p> Fedor Rozhanskiy, Elena Markus Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85039 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 The online database of the University of Tartu Archives of Estonian Dialects and Kindred Languages and the Corpus of Estonian Dialects https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85040 Liina Lindström, Pärtel Lippus, Tuuli Tuisk Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85040 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 The Archive of Estonian Dialects and Finno-Ugric Languages at the Institute of the Estonian Language https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85041 <p>This report gives an overview of the materials in the Archive of Estonian Dialects and Finno-Ugric Languages (AEDFUL) at the Institute of the Estonian Language (IEL). The AEDFUL holds the world’s largest collection of Estonian dialect examples as well as many other materials on other Finno-Ugric languages. Materials in the AEDFUL have been collected by researchers from the IEL and the Mother Tongue Society during the 20<sup>th</sup> century. All the Estonian dialect areas as well as all of the Finnic languages are represented in written and/or recorded form. Especially large amounts of language materials have been collected for Livonian, Ingrian, and Votic. At the beginning of the 21st century when active collecting work ended, a new era began focused on digitization and making these materials publicly available. At present, electronic databases and dictionaries are available via the Internet.</p> Liis Ermus, Mari-Liis Kalvik, Tiina Laansalu Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85041 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Finnic data sets in the ELDIAdata databank https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85042 Anneli Sarhimaa Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85042 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Veps language heritage in Karelia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85043 Nina Zaiceva Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85043 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Kotimaisten kielten keskuksen itämerensuomalaiset aineistot https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85044 Toni Suutari, Ulriikka Puura Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85044 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Kielikorpuksia Suomen itärajalta https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85045 Marjatta Palander, Helka Riionheimo, Hannu Kemppanen, Jukka Mäkisalo Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85045 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Expeditions among the Lutsi Estonians and the design of Language Learning Materials https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85046 <p>The Lutsi Estonians (Lutsis) are a historically South Estonian-speaking minority that has inhabited a network of more than 50 villages in the historical rural parishes of Pilda, Nirza, Brigi, and Mērdzene surrounding the city of Ludza, in the Latgale region of eastern Latvia, for at least three to four centuries. Between 2013 and 2016, I received funding from the Kone Foundation to document the present state of the Lutsis and to write a Lutsi language primer for Latvian speakers. The first part of this paper gives an overview of previous work on Lutsi followed by a description of the present state of the population of Lutsi descendants as I found it during the period of my Kone-funded research. The second part of this paper describes the Lutsi language primer, beginner’s grammar reference, and dictionary, which were the other main products of this research and discusses plans for their future use. The first extensive documentation of the Lutsis, their culture, and language was undertaken by researcher Oskar Kallas in 1893. Relatively substantial subsequent documentation of Lutsi was carried out over subsequent decades as the Lutsi population continued to be assimilated primarily into the Latvian speakers of their home region. The last fluent speaker died in 2006 and the last known passive partial speaker died in 2014. Presently, some fragmentary knowledge of Lutsi survives among descendants; however, the Lutsi Estonians today have shifted entirely to using Latvian, and less frequently also Russian, as their primary language.</p> Uldis Balodis Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85046 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Vepsän mailla Herran vuonna 2014 https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85047 Sofia Björklöf Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85047 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Introduction https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85048 Sofia Björklöf, Santra Jantunen Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85048 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Syntactic and aspectual functions of Latvian verbal prefixes in Livonian https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85032 <p>This paper presents an analysis of an assumed contact-induced change in the Livonian modes of expressing perfective aspect: the adoption of Latvian-origin verbal prefixes expressing perfective aspect. The main objective of this article is to determine whether long-standing contact between Livonian and Latvian has led to the introduction of verbal prefixes as both pure lexical elements and, in parallel, as markers of grammatical functions that distinguish Livonian from its closest cognate languages. The current study is based on the data derived from unpublished recordings and published written material representing spoken Livonian, already extinct as a first language in the traditional speech area.</p> <p>There are a total of eleven Latvian-origin verbal prefixes in Livonian, a language which usually does not display this category. The prefixes are as follows: <em>aiz</em>-, <em>ap</em>-, <em>at</em>-, <em>ie</em>-, <em>iz</em>-, <em>nuo</em>-, <em>pa</em>-, <em>pie</em>-, <em>pōr</em>-, <em>sa</em>-, and <em>uz</em>-. In Latvian, most of these items can be used as bound verbal prefixes and also prepositions marking adverbial functions. In Livonian, these prefixes can be combined with both Livonian and Latvian verbs but, as a rule – except for <em>pa</em>- – they do not occur as prepositions. The frequency of their occurrence in the data varies considerably and, presumably, corresponds to the degree that a given prefix may derive perfective verbs. In fact, verbal prefixation can be considered, to some extent, a means for expressing perfective aspect in Livonian, thereby adding a secondary strategy to the inherent Finnic way of expressing aspectual oppositions, namely the object case alternation and verbal particles.</p> Santra Jantunen Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85032 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Borrowing morphology https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85033 <p>Veps is a Finnic minority language that has long been influenced by Russian, the prestige language in the speech area. The influence of Russian can be perceived in all subsystems of the Veps language, but hardly any research has been done on its impact on morphology. The current paper focuses on the influence of Russian on the Veps indefinite pronouns and their restructuring. The contemporary Veps indefinite pronoun system is based on the use of different affixes and particles, i.e., indefiniteness markers, which are attached to interrogative stems. This article describes the various Veps indefiniteness markers, which have been acquired via morpheme transfer (MAT) and morphological pattern transfer (PAT) from Russian. The borrowing of indefiniteness markers is typical for languages under the very strong influence of another language. According to contemporary studies, the motivation for borrowing should primarily be attributed to sociolinguistic factors and less to structural-typological similarities of the languages in question. In the Veps language community, such sociolinguistic factors are the minority status of the Veps language and the bilingualism of its speakers.<span class="Apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span></p> Heini Karjalainen Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85033 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Mutual contacts and lexical relations among the Finnic varieties of western Ingria and northeastern Estonia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85034 <p>The aim of this article is 1) to describe the historical language contact situation between the genetically closely related Finnic varieties of western Ingria, 2) to give examples of the numerous loanwords originating from mutual contacts among local Finnic varieties as well as areal diffusion, and 3) to discuss the method of investigating contacts and borrowing among closely related varieties. The data are taken from old dialectal materials published in vocabularies and dictionaries as well as preserved in archives. The words that are analysed and discussed etymologically in more detail are drawn from Vote, Ingrian, and Estonian. Although it is often difficult to confirm the direction of borrowing among closely related varieties, I seek to determine the direction of diffusion in the varieties whose development cannot be described merely in terms of a traditional binary family tree model. Examples of mutual borrowing between Vote, Ingrian, Estonian, and Finnish are presented. Estonian loanwords in Vote and Ingrian can usually be recognised by their distribution. Most vocabulary originating as loans (in Vote, Ingrian, and Estonian) has been borrowed from Finnish. Loans in both Vote and Estonian often have a distribution not only in Ingrian but also in Finnish. Because of the phonetic similarity of these varieties, the donor variety usually cannot be defined. Vote loanwords occur only sporadically in Ingrian and Estonian: they may also form a substratum.</p> <p>The speakers of Finnic varieties in western Ingria used to live in old rural communities with long-term multilingualism, villages with a mixed population, and vague language boundaries. The arrival of new inhabitants from the countries, which ruled this area and the foundation of St. Petersburg in 1703 changed the ethnographic balance between different peoples in Ingria. This increased linguistic diversity and altered the hierarchy of the languages leading gradually to accelerating language and identity shift of the local peoples of Ingria.</p> Sofia Björklöf Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85034 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 On the use of perfect and pluperfect in Estonian dialects https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85035 <p>The present paper examines the use of two compound tenses – perfect and pluperfect – in Estonian. Perfect and pluperfect have emerged due to the influence of the Baltic and Germanic languages and are used frequently in Estonian. However, while looking at the usage frequency derived from the Corpus of Estonian Dialects, dialect areas display remarkable differences, which can be explained either by local language contacts with Swedish, Russian, Latvian, and Finnic languages (Votic, Ingrian, and Finnish) or by functional differences in the use of compound tenses. It appears that there are two main regions where the compound tenses are used more often compared to other areas: the Insular dialect and Mulgi dialect regions. The increase of compound tenses in the Insular dialect could be a result of contacts with Swedish. However, the Insular dialect also exhibits a high number of negated utterances using the perfect reflecting changes in the formation of negation more generally in this area. The Mulgi dialect shows a high number of pluperfect forms that can be related to the abundance of reported narratives in the data, but also as an increase of using pluperfect as an evidential strategy, which is probably a result of contacts with Latvian.<span class="Apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span></p> Liina Lindström, Maarja-Liisa Pilvik, Mirjam Ruutma, Kristel Uiboaed Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85035 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 The Finnish of Rautalampi and Värmland https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85036 <p>In this paper some of the features of the Finnish spoken in the former great-parish of Rautalampi and Värmland are discussed. These two Finnish varieties are, owing to their common historical background, closely affiliated, both being defined as Eastern Finnish Savo dialects. These varieties were isolated from each other for hundreds of years and the circumstances of the two speech communities are in many respects different. The language contact situation in Värmland involves Swedish varieties and Värmland Finnish but limited contact with other Finnish varieties. The contact situation in what once was the great-parish of Rautalampi involves mainly Finnish varieties, both dialects and Standard Finnish. Social and economic circumstances have also had an effect on the contact situations, especially since the 19<sup>th</sup> century when Finland was separated from Sweden and industrialization made its definite entrance into both areas. The differing language contact situations have in some respects yielded different results. This paper provides examples of the differences, which have occurred as an effect of the circumstances in Rautalampi and in Värmland. I provide examples from the phonological, morphological, lexical, and syntactic levels and discuss them in light of the language contact situation in these areas.</p> Torbjörn Söder Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85036 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Venäjän kielen vaikutus tverinkarjalan murteiden äännejärjestelmään https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85037 <p>Tverinkarjala kuuluu varsinaiskarjalan eteläisiin murteisiin ja jakautuu kolmeen alamurteeseen: Tolmatšun, Vesjegonskin ja Djoržan jo sammuneeseen alamurteeseen. Tverinkarjalaiset ovat asuneet jo neljä vuosisataa venäläisten keskuudessa ja puhuneet venäjää pitkään. Venäjän kieli on vaikuttanut huomattavasti tverinkarjalan äännejärjestelmään sen kehityksen eri vaiheissa. Tästä johtuvat muutamat alamurteita toisistaan erottavat piirteet. Venäjän vaikutusta tverinkarjalan äännejärjestelmään on sekä vokaali- että konsonanttijärjestelmässä. 1)&nbsp;vokaalijärjestelmässä: pitkien <em>uu</em>-, <em>yy</em>-vokaalien ja <em>u</em>-, <em>y</em>-loppuisten diftongien jälkikomponenttien redusoituminen; sekundaaristen pitkien vokaalien esiintyminen; väljenevien diftongien fonemaattiset erot; Djoržan alamurteessa loppu- ja sisäheitto; 2)&nbsp;konsonanttijärjestelmässä: <em>f</em>- ja <em>c</em>-konsonanttifoneemien esiintyminen; sibilanttien distribuutio; geminaattojen <em>kk</em>, <em>tt</em>, <em>pp</em>, <em>čč</em> reduktio <em>l</em>-, <em>r</em>-, <em>n</em>-konsonanttien jäljessä; runsas liudentuminen ja kvalitatiivisen astevaihtelun epäproduktiivisuus.</p> Irina Novak Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85037 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200 Rajakarjalaismurteiden refleksiiviverbeistä https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85038 <p>Artikkeli käsittelee rajakarjalaismurteiden refleksiiviverbejä. Rajakarjalaismurteet ovat karjalan kielen suomenvaikutteinen alamurteisto. Artikkelin aineistona on n.&nbsp;120 nauhatunnin laajuinen tekstimuotoinen Raja-Karjalan korpus. Käsiteltäviä refleksiiviverbien tyyppejä ovat refleksiivijohdokset sekä refleksiivitaivutus. Molempia tavataan niin karjalassa kuin suomessakin (refleksiivitaivutusta tosin vain suomen itämurteissa). Rajakarjalaismurteiden refleksiivitaivutus osoittautuu samankaltaiseksi kuin karjalan saarekemurteissa (ns.&nbsp;tytärkarjalaisissa murteissa) Sisä-Venäjällä, joskin se on paradigmaltaan vajaampi ja esiintymiseltään harvempi. Rajakarjalaismurteiden refleksiivijohdoksissa puolestaan tavataan joitakin karjalalle vanhastaan tuntemattomia morfologisia tyyppejä, jotka ovat selvää suomen kielen vaikutusta. Artikkelin aineistossa näkyy lisäksi rajakarjalaismurteille ominainen karjalan kahden päämurteen, varsinaiskarjalan ja livvinkarjalan, sekoittuneisuus.</p> Vesa Koivisto Copyright (c) 2019 Uralica Helsingiensia https://journal.fi/uralicahelsingiensia/article/view/85038 ti, 31 joulu 2019 00:00:00 +0200