Uralic as a Corded Ware substrate of Indo-Iranian, and loanwords in Finno-Ugric

Asko Parpola has recently published a new paper, Finnish vatsa ~ Sanskrit vatsá and the formation of Indo-Iranian and Uralic languages.

Abstract:

Finnish vatsa ‘stomach’ < PFU *vaćća < Proto-Indo-Aryan *vatsá- ‘calf’ < PIE *vet-(e)s-ó- ‘yearling’ contrasts with Finnish vasa- ‘calf’ < Proto-Iranian *vasa- ‘calf’. Indo-Aryan -ts- versus Iranian -s- refl ects the divergent development of PIE *-tst- in the Iranian branch (> *-st-, with Greek and Balto-Slavic) and in the Indo-Aryan branch ( > *-tt-, probably due to Uralic substratum). The split of Indo-Iranian can be traced in the archaeological record to the differentiation of the Yamnaya culture in the North Pontic and Volga steppes respectively during the third millennium BCE, due to the use of separate sources of metal: the Iranian branch was dependent on the North Caucasus, while the Indo-Aryan branch was oriented towards the Urals. It is argued that the Abashevo culture of the Mid-Volga-Kama-Belaya basins and the Sejma-Turbino trade network (2200–1900 BCE) were bilingual in Proto-Indo-Aryan and PFU, and introduced the PFU as the basis of West Uralic (Volga-Finnic) into the Netted Ware Culture of the Upper Volga-Oka (1900–200 BCE).

He updates thus his quite recent model from On the emergence, contacts and dispersal of Proto-Indo-European, Proto-Uralic and Proto-Aryan in an archaeological perspective (2017).

In it he supported a North-West Indo-European expansion with Corded Ware, and a Neolithic Proto-Uralic community in East Europe (associated with the Comb Ware culture), as I did before the famous 2015 papers.

In fact, he supports that the satemization trend of Proto-Indo-Iranian is due to a Proto-Finno-Ugric substratum in its population in the Volga-Ural region, similar to the model I propose (with the Corded Ware substratum hypothesis).

NOTE. While for Parpola the ‘satemizing’ substratum of Balto-Slavic (a NWIE dialect) may not come exactly from the same Finno-Ugric population as for Indo-Iranian, but from a different Uralic dialect (as I explain in my hypothesis), for the few extant supporters of an Indo-Slavonic group there should not be any problem identifying the same ancient substrate as for the Proto-Indo-Iranian population…

Now that North-West Indo-European is clearly associated with the Yamna -> Bell Beaker expansion, I understand that his previous model is obsolete and needs a revision.

I find it especially difficult to understand (in light of his previous theory) why he compares Indo-Aryan *vatsa– and Iranian *vasa– to assert that the former is the origin of the loanword in Finno-Ugric, when the Proto-Indo-Iranian form is essentially the same as the Indo-Aryan one, with respect to the *w– evolution into *v– in both PII and late FU dialects…

NOTE: I wrote him yesterday asking for this issue, I will post here his answer.

EDIT (20 MAR 2018): The summary of his answer regarding his selection of Indo-Aryan *vatsa– vs. Iranian *vasa– (instead of just PII *watsa-/vatsa-) is one based on Archaeology (and likley guesstimates), since he understands the split into Iranian and Indo-Aryan to have happened early within the Yamna culture, so that the cultural admixture of Abashevo must have happened after the separation.

netted-ware-parpola
Potential spread of Finnic. “Distribution of the Netted Ware according to Carpelan (2002: 198). A: Emergence of the Netted Ware on the Upper Volga c. 1900 calBC. B: Spread of Netted Ware by c. 1800 calBC. C: Early Iron Age spread of Netted Ware. (After Carpelan 2002: 198 > Parpola 2012a: 151.)

His effort to link the actual expansion of Finno-Ugric to Corded Ware territory, linking it also partially to population movements from the Seima-Turbino phenomenon – probably associated with the initial expansion of N1c lineages – is another good example of convergence of the different anthropological theories thanks to recent Genomic studies.

Related:

Join the discussion...

Please keep the discussion of this post on topic.
For other topics, use the forum instead.
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
ProudPagan
ProudPagan

I am sorry, but I still don’t understand the absolute lack of Proto-Uralic words in Indo-Aryan languages of India (ancient or modern) if IIr and PU were to have been neighbors. Why are all loans from Indo-Iranian/Indo-Aryan –> Uralic?

trackback

[…] and lineages (R1a-Z645 subclades) from Abashevo. Their language did not change, though, beyond the (mainly phonetic) Uralic substrate acquired from the […]

trackback

[…] from an Anatolian homeland (following the expansion of Neolithic farmer ancestry), and avoiding the close Proto-Indo-Iranian – Uralic contacts obvious to everyone, just care about archaeological cultures and dialectal classification whenever […]

trackback

[…] them that Bell Beakers expanded North-West Indo-European. And only minority of Uralicists, such as Parpola or Häkkinen, believe in an ‘eastern’ origin of Uralic languages, around the Southern […]

trackback

[…] The Netted Ware culture emerged in the Upper Volga–Oka region, derived from the Abashevo culture and its interaction with the Seima-Turbino network, and spread ca. 1900-1800 BC to the north into Finland, spreading into eastern regions previously occupied by cultures producing asbestos and organic-tempered wares (Parpola 2018). […]

trackback

[…] The mainstream position is trying to hold together the traditional views of Corded Ware as Indo-European, and a Uralic Fennoscandia during the Bronze Age. The following is an example of how this “mixture” would hold together, from Parpola (2018): […]

EarlGraey
EarlGraey

All of my known ancestors are from a small part of North India. 23andMe correctly (but very vaguely) assigns more than 99% of my recent ancestry to South Asia. The remaining minuscule amount is split between Finnish and Scandinavian. It is very unlikely that this remainder is “recent ancestry”. I assume it is a signature of the Indo-European migration to India. If Proto-Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan speakers were once located close enough to Uralic peoples to share words, the genetic results may stem from this same ancient proximity.

trackback

[…] strict and radical direction assumed for the Netted Ware by Carpelan, as an eastward and northward expansion, within a very short time frame (ca. 1900-1800 BC), based […]

trackback

[…] can also more confidently reject the risky assumption by Carpelan & Parpola that the Volosovo hunter-gatherer language was adopted by Fatyanovo, Balanovo and Abashevo groups, […]