English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this article I shall review the field of studies: “Uralic vs Indo-European contacts”. I shall report the thesis of what can be called the “old” and the “new” school, respectively, dealing with this topic. According to the old school, the contacts took place, essentially, among the historical languages, whereby the criteria for identifying loanwords are often unclear. According to the new school, instead, the (intensive) Uralic vs Indo-European contacts took place, essentially, at the level of protolanguages, and the loanwords are easily identifiable, thanks to the regularity of the relevant sound changes and substitutions. I shall claim that the thesis of new school is unlikely to be correct, on methodological and factual grounds: borrowing among proto-languages is impossible a priori ; sound changes and substitutions are not always regular and systematic; the “binary” analysis “borrowing vs inherited” is out-of-date; the Uralic and Indo-European languages belong to different, distant “areal contexts”. Kokkuvote. Angela Marcantonio: Uurali ja indoeuroopa keelte kontaktid: laenamine, kohalik kujunemine, juhuslik sarnasus. Artiklis annan ulevaate uurimisteemast “Uurali ja indoeuroopa keelte kontaktid”. Kasitlen kusimust, mida voib selle teemaga seoses nimetada “uueks” ja “vanaks” koolkonnaks. Vana koolkonna jargi toimusid kontaktid ajalooliste keelte vahel, kusjuures laensonade kindlakstegemise kriteeriumid on sageli ebaselged. Uue koolkonna jargi aga toimusid (intensiivsed) uurali ja indoeuroopa kontaktid algkeelte tasandil ja laensonu on lihtne kindlaks teha tanu oluliste haalikumuutuste ja haalikuasenduste reegliparasusele. Vaidan, et uue koolkonna tees ei nai metodoloogiliselt ja faktiliselt aluselt korrektne: algkeelte vaheline laenamine on a priori voimatu, haalikumuutused ja -asendused ei ole alati reegliparased ja susteemsed, “binaarne” jaotus “laenatud voi genuiinne” on aegunud, uurali ja indoeuroopa keeled kuuluvad erinevasse, teineteisest kaugesse “areaalsesse konteksti”. Marksonad : uurali keeled, indoeuroopa keeled, konvergents, divergents, juhuslik sarnasus, sugulassonad, laensonad, keeleareaalid

Uralic vs Indo-European contacts: borrowing vs local emergence vs chance resemblances