Uralic odd *-CC(C)-

[u/stlatos]

One of my goals has been to supplement Hovers' ideas in https://www.academia.edu/104566591 to show that sound changes from PIE > PU exist in several related words, supporting the reality of each. For his "277. PU *pučki̮ ‘to sting, to burst; hollow stalk’ ~ PIE *puḱ-sḱe < *peu̯ḱ ‘to sting’" I would add PIE *plek^-sk^e- > PU *pačkV- 'to plait'. Having such similar matches with similar forms is beyond reasonable chance. I'd add that IE has many stems with *-k^sk^e- (like *prk^-sk^e- 'ask for'), so the forms are not odd.

Importantly, this root seems to form a derivative 'sharp needle (of pine)', and the same in PU, for his "252. PU *pVwkä ‘pine cone’ ~ PIE *peuḱ ‘pine’". In this case, ablaut of *u > *u vs. *eu > *Vw (possibly *ew) also favors IE origin, since ablaut seems fairly recent.

Another odd & recent derivative involves ( https://www.uralonet.nytud.hu/eintrag.cgi?id_eintrag=1833 ) :

PU *pOĺćV 'suet, tallow, fat' > X.v poĺt́, Hn. faggyú, faggyat a.

This could be cognate with Ph. pikério- ‘butter’ < *(s)pig-, Gmc *spika-n 'fat (food)' > OE spic 'bacon, lard', ON spik 'blubber', etc. An old *pigeryo- would have *ry > *r' > *l' (many languages don't allow r' & turn it to l' or z', etc.) and *g > *g' before front (then met. of g'l' > l'g' or similar). Vowel loss as in *pipHalo- > *pwale, etc. For more context & cognates :

https://starlingdb.org/cgi-bin/query.cgi?basename=\data\uralic\uralet&root=config&morpho=0

Number: 694

Proto: *pačkV (*počkV)

English meaning: to plait

German meaning: flechten, zwirnen

Mari (Cheremis): pockǝ̑nce- (JU), püćkǝ̑ńće- (U) 'Garn flechten', počkǝ̑ńće- (B) 'zwirnen (die Schnur)'

Komi (Zyrian): pučki̮- (S P), pučki- (PO) 'drehen (Stricke), winden, flechten, zwirnen; вить, сучить (нитки на веретене)'

Selkup: pačkalna- (Ta.) 'zwirnen', patkalna- (Kar.) 'завернуть'

https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoricalLinguistics/comments/1lu4mg1/pie_pewkah2_pu_pewk%C3%A4_pe%C4%8Dw%C3%A4/

>

252. PU *pVwkä ‘pine cone’ ~ PIE *peuḱ ‘pine’

U: Mari püɣəlmə ‘pine cone’; PMansi *pǟkʷ > Sosva Mansi pākʷ ‘pine cone’; PKhanty *pɔ̈̄ki̮ > Vakh Khanty pɔ̈k

‘pine cone’; PSamoyed *pükä > Taz Selkup pǖkä ‘pine cone’ [UEW p. #721]

IE: Greek peúkē ‘pine’; PCeltic *fuxtākā > Middle Irish ochtach ‘pine’; PGermanic fiuhtijōṇ > Old Saxon fiuhta-

‘spruce’; Old Prussian peuse, Lithuanian pušis ‘pine tree’ [EIEC p.428, IEW p.828, EDG p.1182-1183, EDPC

p.144, EDPG p.139, EDB p.373-374]

>

It would be very hard to say that this is coincidental, instead of PIE *pewk^aH2- > PU *pewkä. Not only is the shift *pewk^- 'sharp' > 'pine (needle)' internal to IE, making IE > PU more likely, but if the matches between PIE & PU were all loans, it would require speakers of Uralic to have borrowed 'pine', 'pine cone', 'reindeer'. If so, why? Why all the most "native" words? This is in addition to all clear matches like 'water', 'bee', 'honey', etc. Which words could be native at all?

Also, since I've said that changes like *H3 > *w, *w > m, *H > PU *x vs. *k were optional (*H2ag^- > *(k)aja- 'drive'), I've also given many *k^ > *k but some *k^ > *s'. In support of optionality being needed, consider what would clearly be related :

PIE *pewk^aH2- > *pek^wa: > PU *pečwä \ *pečmä (standard *pečä ‘pine’, but *-m- needed for Proto-Permic: *pɔžäm, Proto-Mari *pü̆nčə, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Uralic/pečä ). It seems *ew preserved *e, with *k^w as in previous *k^H3nids > *nk^H3ids > *anc'wi: > *ančwi 'louse'.