Semivowel losses and assimilations, in Finnic and beyond

Semivowel losses and assimilations

XII International Congressfor Finno-Ugric Studies

· • ☯ • ·Juho Pystynen, University of Helsinki

[email protected]

in Finnic and beyond…

The research context

● The main historical developments of the consonant systems from Proto-Uralic to the individual Uralic languages have been known long by now (cf. e.g. Collinder 1960)

● Main developments of the vowel systems have largely also been charted

● The evolution of consonants and vowels has, however, largely been investigated separately.

● Which leaves a natural blind spot:

Vowel-consonant interaction

● A well-attested motif in historical phonology, also within Uralic.

● Archetypical examples: assimilation (feature spreading)– palatalization; e.g. Romance, Slavic, Japonic…

Proto-Finnic: *t > *c (> s) / _iSamoyedic varieties: *k > ś / _V[+front]

– labialization; e.g. Geʻez (*ku > *[kʷu] > *kʷɨ)Finnic & Samic: ∅- > v- / _ōPermic: *k-, ∅- > *kʷ-, *w- / _{o ȯ} (Itkonen 1954: 280–284, 294–296)

– retraction; e.g. Quechua (i u > [e o] / _q)Hungarian: *ü >> o / p_(ŋ)k (Steinitz 1944: 87)

● Sufficiently consistent evidence can even allow establishing sound laws without obvious phonetic basis– Udmurt: *ȯ > a / _l (e.g. Itkonen 1954: 290–291)

– Proto-Samoyedic: *-a > *-ä / {l ľ}_ (HPUL: 485)

Vowel-consonant interaction

● One who seeks, shall find…– Reshetnikov & Zhivlov (2011): *a > Permic *o / _Ć, _Cj;

else *u

– Aikio (2012): *a, *ä > Finnic *oo, *ee / _{m n l r δ}ə; else ≣

– Kallio (2012): *ai, *äi > Finnic *i / VCC_; else *ëi, *ei

– Aikio (2013): *o > pre-Mo. *u > Mordvinic o / _ŋ; else > u

– Heikkilä (2013): *ai > core Finnic *ei / #{s š r}_; else ≣

– Aikio (2014): *o > pre-Ma. *u > Mari *ŭ / _[+labial]

– Zhivlov (2014): *ë > pre-S. *u > Samic *o / _k;else > *a > *ō

Semivowel loss

● Given their phonetic and phonological nature, semivowels can be expected to be particularly susceptible to affecting or being affected by adjacent vowels.

● Already phonotactic restrictions on the occurrence of semivowels are commonplace (e.g. ˣji-, ˣje-, ˣwo-, ˣwu-)

● A possibility for symmetry arguments: if a sound change involving *j is found in a given position, we might expect to also find a similar change involving *w (and vice versa).

● PU *pijə > PF *pii 'tooth'; PU *kuŋə > *kuwə > PF *kuu 'moon'● PF *velji > Fi. veli 'brother'; PF *kärvü > Fi käry 'burnt smell' — cf. Fi. kärventää 'to

char smth'● Proto-Samoyedic *j-, *w- > Kamass & Mator ď- ~ ń-, b- ~ m-

Semivowel loss

● A development *wo- > *o- is known from the four westernmost Uralic branches: Samic, Finnic, Mordvinic, partly Mari.– Northern Sami oalgi 'shoulder' ~ Hungarian váll 'id.'

– Finnish onkalo 'cavity' ~ Northern Mansi wɔɔŋχa 'pit'

– Estonian õppima 'to learn' ~ Northern Khanty wɔɔpĭ- 'to oversee'

– Mari urɣe- 'to sew' ~ Komi vur- 'id.'

● Views differ on dating the change: common Proto-Finno-Volgaic at earliest, particular to each branch at latest. (Itkonen 1997: 238–239)

Semivowel loss

● Also *je- is absent from the inherited vocabulary of Finnic and Mordvinic.

● To account for this, a parallel shift *je- > *e- has similarly been supposed for Finnic: e.g. Hakulinen (1941: 22 §) (but withdrawn in Hakulinen 1961), Häkkinen (1985: 41).

● Very little explicit evidence for such a change in Finnic has been proposed. The only example exhibited in literature with any consistency is PF *ehtago 'evening' (> Fi. ehtoo, Votic õhtago, etc.) ~ Samic *jēktē- 'yesterday' (> NS ikte, IS jieht, etc.)

ehtoo

● Numerous issues with the F ~ S comparison:● The word-initial *j- in Samic is not diagnostic of original *j-.

Glide epenthesis before long close-mid vowels is a regular Samic sound change. The process is abundantly attested before *ō, but occurs before *ē just as well. Cf. e.g. PU *änə 'sound' > PS *ēnë > *jēnë (> NS jietna, etc.); PU *aja- 'to drive' > PS *ōjē- > *vōjē- (> NS vuoddjit, etc.)

● Samic *ē-ē is an unetymological vowel combination that likely indicates a loan.

● The Finnic word likewise has the vowel combination *e-a, found almost exclusively in loanwords from Germanic and Baltic.

● A loan etymology, at least for Finnic, appears to be a possibility here, too: from Scandinavian *eft- + *dagō?(Comparison due to user "Kalevanserkku" at the online discussion forum Muinainen Suomi.)

A look at Proto-Uralic

● Both *je- and *wo- can be reconstructed in PU.– e.g. *jekkɜ- 'to dance'; *woŋkə 'hole'

● Their frequencies show clear asymmetry:– UEW: 15 examples of *wo- judged reliable; 3

examples of *je-, none reflected in Finnic.

– HPUL: ~4 examples of *wo-, 1 example of *je-.

● This is perhaps within limits of natural variation; but…

A new soundlaw: *je- > *ji- > *i-

● It appears that PU *je- has rather been underrecon-structed, due to a failure to identify a different conditional development applying in Finnic (and, probably, Samic).

● While *j- is indeed ultimately lost, it first assimilates *e to *i.

● Words showing this development have generally been previously reconstructed with plain *i-.

● The correct reconstruction can still be in several cases recovered through careful analysis of the etymological material.

● Loanword etymologies offer key support

Distinguishing PU *i and *e

● Finnic *e has been the main source of evidence for reconstructing *e to Proto-Uralic (-Finno-Ugric, -Finno-Permic, -Finno-

Volgaic) (cf. e.g. Itkonen 1954: 150; Janhunen 1981: 225, 234)

● If we suppose PU *e in a particular position is not retained in Finnic, we require clearer arguments for its reconstruction

● "In the absence of Fenno-Lappic cognates the reconstruction of an *e is nothing more than a voluntary choice among several possible options [among the front vowels]" (Helimski 2005) ?

● well, not quite…


● The following mini-survey traces the main developments of PU *i and *e in the Uralic languages east of Finnic

● Only well-known, widespread PU etyma are exhibited; cf. HPUL, UEW. Most also already in Collinder (1960)

● Reflexes pointing to the "wrong" non-open front vowel have been indicated as "clear exceptions". Entirely aberrant reflexes that suggest neither *i nor *e (e.g. Permic *mɨnɨ- 'to go') have, however, been omitted.

● I operate with a single level of wider Uralic reconstruction, including data traditionally considered "Proto-Finno-Ugric".


● Mordvinic: *i-ä > e, but *e-ä > i– *miŋä 'back part' > Er me-kej, Mk me-ki 'back(ward)'

(or *müŋä? Hungarian mëg 'and' < *i, but mögött 'behind' < *ü?)

– *śilmä 'eye' > Er śeľme, Mk śeľmä

– *enä 'big' > Er ińe, Mk ińä

– *neljä 'four' > Er ńiľe, Mk ńiľä

– *peljä 'ear' > Er piľe, Mk piľä

– *penä 'dog' > Er pińe, Mk pińä

– *pesä 'nest' > Er pize, Mk piza

(no contrast between *i-ə, *e-ə: e.g. *kiwə 'stone', *tewə 'work' > Er Mk kev, ťev)


● Mari: no clear distinction?

● E.g. Aikio (2014):– *e > *ĭ: 9 cases; *e > *ü: 6 cases

● *pesä 'nest' > *piž; *terä 'edge' > *tür

– *i > *i: 9 cases; *i > *ü: 1 case● *minä 'I' > *mińə; *nimə 'name' > *nüm

– (and indeed even: *ü > *i: 6 cases; *ü > *ü: 9 cases)


● Permic: *i > illabial *i, *e, *e *e > labial *o, *o, *ö

(the latter three proto-vowels all have literary Udmurt u ~ literary Komi o as their main reflexes; for simplicity, in the forthgoing I will mark all three as *o)

– *elä- 'to live' > *olɨ-

– *kerə 'bark' > *kor

– *lewlə 'soul' > *lol

– *metə 'honey' > *mo

– *mekšə 'bee' > *moš

– *neljä 'four' > K ńoľ (but Ud ńɨľ)

– *pelə- 'to fear' > *polɨ-

– *penä 'dog' > *ponɨ

– *pesä 'nest' > *poz

– *wetə 'water' > *vo

– *kiwə 'stone' > *ki

– *minä 'I' > *men

– *mińä 'daughter-in-law' > *meń

– *nimə 'name' > *ńim

– *piŋə 'tooth' > *piń

– *śilmä 'eye' > *śin(m-)

– *tinä 'you (sg.)' > *ten

– *wittə 'five' > *vit

(clear exceptions: *peljä- 'ear' > *peľ; *werə 'blood' > *vir)


● Hungarian: *i > short ë (e), but *e > long é

– *elä- 'to live' > él

– *kerə 'bark' > kéreg

– *lewlə 'soul' > lélek

– *mekšə 'bee' > méh

– *metə 'honey' > méz

– *neljä 'four' > négy

– *pelə- 'to fear' > fél

– *pesä 'nest' > fészëk

– *śeppä 'skilled' > szép 'beautiful'

– *werə 'blood' > vér

– *imə- 'to suck' > emik

– *kiwə 'stone' > *këw > kő : köv-

– *mińä 'daughter-in-law' > mëny

– *miŋä 'back part' > mëg

– *pidə 'high' > fël 'up'

– *pilwə 'cloud' > fëlhő

– *śilmä 'eye' > szëm

– *šiŋərə 'mouse' > egér

– *tinä 'you (sg.)' > të

– *wittə 'five' > *wët > öt

(clear exceptions: *menə- 'to go' > mëgy; *nimə 'name' > név)


● Mansi: *i > *ä, but *e > *i, *ii

– *kerə 'bark' > *kiir

– *lewlə 'soul' > *liil

– *menə- 'to go' > *min-

– *neljä 'four' > *ńiľə

– *pelə- 'to fear' > *pil-

– *pesä 'nest' > *piťi

– *sewə- 'to eat' > *tii(ɣ)-

– *śepä 'neck' > *šip

– *werə 'blood' > *wiɣər

– *wetə 'water' > *wit

– *kiwə 'stone' > *käw

– *mińä 'daughter-in-law' > *mäń

– *nimə 'name' > *näm

– *pidə 'high' > *päl(ə)t 'length'

– *piŋə 'tooth' > *päŋk

– *śilmä 'eye' > *šäm

– *šiŋərə 'mouse' > *täŋkər

– *tiwä 'deep, calm' > *täwɜnt

– *wittə 'five' > *ät

(clear exceptions: *peljä 'ear' > *päľ)


● Khanty: *i > *ee (*ööK), but *e > *ĕ, *ii~*ää

– *kerə 'bark' > *kiir ~ *käär

– *lewlə 'soul' > *ɬiiL ~ *ɬääL

– *menə- 'to go' > *mĕn-

– *neljä 'four' > *ńĕLää

– *pelə- 'to fear' > *pĕL-

– *peljä 'ear' > *pĕL

– *pesä 'nest' > *piiL

– *sepä 'neck' > *sääpəL

– *sewə- 'to eat' > *ɬii(ɣ)-

– *werə 'blood' > *wĕr

– *kiwə 'stone' > *kööɣ

– *mińä 'dgt-in-law' > *meeń

– *nimə 'name' > *neem

– *piŋə 'tooth' > *pööŋk

– *śilmä 'eye' > *seem

– *šiŋərə 'mouse' > *ɬööŋkər

– *tiwä 'deep, calm' > teeɣən

– *wittə 'five' > *weet

(clear exceptions: *pidə 'high' > *pĕL; *pilwə 'cloud' > *pĕLəŋ)


● Samoyedic: *i, *e generally merged as *i

● Nganasan: *i > i, but *e > Old Ng. e > Mod. Ng. ɨ(in non-palatalizing environments; Helimski 2005)

– *menə- 'to go' > mɨn-

– *pelə- 'to fear' > hɨɨm-

– *pesä 'nest' > hɨtɨ

– *wetə 'water' > bɨʔ

– *imə- 'to suck' > ńim-

– *nimə 'name' > ńim

– *pidə 'high' > hirəgəə

(complicated by several conditional developments left unmentioned here… no Samoyedic data will need to be handled in the remainder of the presentation, though.)

Onto the etymologies:

irvi-

● A known comparison: PU *jerɜ- > Permic *jorɨ- 'to curse, insult'; Mansi *(j)iir- 'to curse' (UEW: 97)

● A relevant Finnic root: PF *irvɜ-, whence e.g. Fi. irvistää 'to grin/grimace', irvokas 'grotesque', and numerous similar derivatives (cf. SSA)

● Grimacing is a common way of expressing disapprooval, which allows a semantical connection with 'to curse'; or making fun of someone, allowing a connection with 'to insult'.

● Reconstructing rather a medial cluster *-rw- does not present any problem: cf. PU *tälwä 'winter' > Permic *tȯl, Mansi *tääl.

● Hence: PU *jerwɜ- '(approx.) to behave disdainfully' > Finnic *irvɜ-.

ien

● PF *igen 'gums' (> Fi. ien : ikene-, etc.) is normally considered cognate with at least Hu. íny (dial. also ény, én) 'id.'

● Additional proposed cognates include Permic *aŋ 'gums, palate, jaw', Mansi *(j)iiɣən 'jaw', Khanty *ääɣən 'jaw'.– Permic shows highly aberrant vocalism, and connecting it would require an

extraordinary sound shift such as *kn > *ŋ; it is probably best discarded.

– The Ob-Ugric words fit well in, assuming a development *je- > *i- for Finnic.

– In this light Hungarian appears to have undergone the dialectal development *e > é > í, rather than a contraction of the type *Vk > *Vɣ > *Vj > í ?

● That the Ugric words point to *e- has already been noted by Sammallahti (HPUL: 541: *ekäni; the motivation for reconstructing *-ä- is, however, unclear.)

● Hence: PU *jekən(ə) > *ikən > Finnic *igən.

ilma

● PF *ilma 'air, weather' (> Fi. ilma, etc.) has several known cognates: Samic *ëlmē 'heaven', Udmurt in (: inm-) 'heaven', Komi jen (: jenm-) 'god', Mansi *(j)iiləm 'weather', Khanty *(j)iiLəm 'weather'.

● Ob-Ugric indicates *(j)e- rather than *i-.

● The development to *i appears here to be shared with Samic and Permic.(Loanwords in the latter? Cf. Fi taivas, jumala ← Indo-Iranian)

● Finnic unharmonic *-a remains puzzling.

● Hence: PU probably *jelmä > *ilmä > Finnic *ilma.

itse

● PF *i(c)cek 'self' (> Es. ise, Fi. itse, etc.) has known cognates in most Uralic languages.

● Mansi *(j)is 'spirit', Khanty *(j)iis 'soul' indicate *e.– Note also Southern Ms. jisu-, possibly indicating *j-.

– An additional discrepancy: Finnic suggests PU *ć, Ugric suggests PU *ś.

● Mari *iške 'self', Mo. eś 'self' are nondiagnostic; Permic *aćɨ- 'self' is highly irregular.

● Hungarian isz, ísz 'a kind of disease' is problematic: i, í is not a regular reflex of any front vowel.– But cf. *wetə 'water' > víz; *me 'we' *te 'y'all', *ke 'who' > mi, ti, ki; and,

previously, íny.

● PU #jećə, #jeśə > PF *ice-? Not yet fully clarified.

● PF *ikä 'age' (> Fi. ikä, etc.) has a number of well-known cognates meaning 'year'.

● *e is indicated by Erzya ije, Hungarian év.

● *j is, additionally, indicated by Samic *jëkē 'year' (contrast: *ëkē 'age' ← Finnic)

● Mari i(j) is nondiagnostic.

● Hence: PU *jekä > Finnic *ikä.

ikä

ikä

● A loan etymology has been proposed by Koivulehto (e.g. 1985, 1988): ← IE *yēgā 'Kraft, Jugendkraft'

● Koivulehto suggests loaning from an IE dialect where *ē had been raised closer to *ī.– such a development is, however, only known from

Celtic.

● Reconstructing PU *jekä resolves this issue as well.

jyvä

● Fi. jyvä 'grain' is usually considered an ancient Indo-European loan ← PIE *yewo- 'id.'– Suggested cognates in Mo. and P. are unclear due to being back-

vocalic; perhaps rather later loans ← Indo-Iranian *yawa-?

● *e is not normally labialized in this context: cf. evä 'fin', eväs 'food for work/travel', kevät 'spring', levä 'seaweed'

● Finnic does labialize *i in this context, however: *šiwä 'good' > hyvä; *tiwä 'deep, calm' > syvä 'deep', tyyni 'calm'– though still not fully regularly: cf. Estonian iva 'grain'. Labialization

must also be older in tyyni than syvä (Aikio 2015).

● Hence: pre-Finnic *jewä > *jiwä > *jüvä.

ihminen

● PF *inhimi- 'human' (> Fi. ihminen; inhimillinen 'humane', etc.) has been compared with Er. inže, Mk. indži 'guest'.

● An Indo-European loan etymology (← PIE *ǵnh₁-e/o- 'offspring', a derivative of *ǵenh₁- 'to beget') has been presented by Koivulehto.

● Later Koivulehto (1990) has suggested, given the unusual vowel correspondence, that the F. and Mo. words would have been loaned independently: approx. pre-F. *inšə- ~ pre-Mo. *jenšɜ-.

● However, the correspondence *i- ~ *i- allows reconstructing *je-. No divergence in sound substitutions needs to be assumed.– Cf. further PF *härkä 'ox' < *šärkä ← Balto-Slavic *źrgas, with the syllabic

resonant substituted with resonant + epenthetic open vowel.

– The loaning may, regardless, postdate the split of *e in Mordvinic into tenser (> i) and laxer (> *ɪ > e) allophones.

● Hence: pre-Finnic *jenšɜ- > *inšɜj- > PF *inhi-.

Further possibilities: Finnic

● PF *itä- 'to germinate' < ? pre-F. *jetä- ← PIE *ǵēid- or *ǵīd- 'id.' (Koivulehto 1988) — But alternately ~ Kh. *eet-, Smy. *ətə- 'to appear', < PU *itä- (UEW).(At least PF *itä 'east' likely belongs under the latter; the sun 'appearing' in the east is certainly a more neutral metaphor than it 'germinating'.)

● PF *ilo 'joy', *iloicce- 'to enjoy' etc.: thus far unetymologized. If *i- < *je-, possibly analyzable as an old loanword: ← PIE *ǵel-, *ǵl- 'to laugh'?(Cf. Greek γελάω / gelas- 'to laugh', Armenian całr / ծաղր 'laughter, mockery')

● PF *ilta, Mk. iľäť, Kh. *(j)iiLaaj 'evening' < ? PU *jelä 'evening' (UEW: *ilɜ). Comparison doubtful; but F. *-t- perhaps by contamination with *jetɜ 'id.' (see next slide)??

Further possibilities: non-Finnic

● S. *ëpëkē 'eagle owl', Ms. *jipəɣ, Kh. *jĕpəɣ 'owl' < ? PU *jepəkä (UEW: *(j)ipɜ)— Finnic words that have been compared here, e.g. Fi. hyypiä 'eagle owl' appear to be unrelated, likely of onomatopoetic origin (Aikio 2005: 14).

● Mo. *ičə- 'to knead', Ma. *jiše- 'to press', Kh. *(j)iič- 'to press' < ? PU *ječä- (UEW: *ičɜ-)— Permic *ɨčkɨ- 'to tear off' (Ud.) / 'to mow' (K.) may have to be discarded.

● Ma. *jüt 'night', Ms. *(j)iit(i) 'evening', Kh. *(j)iit ~ *äät 'evening ~ night' < ? PU *jetɜ (UEW: *ji/ütɜ)

Language abbreviations

● Er = Erzya● Es = Estonian● F = Finnic● Fi = Finnish● H = Hungarian● IE = Indo-European● IS = Inari Sami● K = Komi● Kh = Khanty● Ma = Mari

● Mk = Moksha● Mo = Mordvinic● Ms = Mansi● Ng = Nganasan● NS = Northern Sami● P = Permic● P$ = Proto-$● S = Samic● Smy = Samoyedic● U = Uralic● Ud = Udmurt

Literature● Aikio, Ante 2012: On Finnic long vowels, Samoyed vowel sequences, and Proto-Uralic *x. Suomalais-

Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 264: 227–250.● Aikio, Ante 2013: Uralilaisen kantakielen vokaalistosta. Paper presented at the seminar Etymologia ja

kielihistoria: Erkki Itkosen ja Aulis J. Joen 100-vuotisjuhlaseminaari. Helsinki, 2013-04-19.● Aikio, Ante 2014: Reconstruction of Proto-Mari vocalism. Journal of Language Relationship 11: 125–157.

● Aikio, Ante 2015: Studies in Uralic etymology IV: Ob-Ugric etymologies. Linguistica Uralica 1/2015: 1–20.● Collinder, Björn 1960: Comparative Grammar of the Uralic languages. Uppsala.● HPUL = Sammallahti, Pekka 1988: Historical Phonology of the Uralic Languages. In: Sinor, Denis (ed.)

The Uralic Languages. Leiden: Brill.● Heikkilä, Mikko 2013: Itämerensuomen ehdollisesta äänteenmuutoksesta /ai/ > /ei/. Virittäjä 4/2013: 583–

592.● Helimski, E. 2005: The 13th Proto-Samoyedic vowel. In: Béata, Wagner-Nagy (ed.) Mikola-konferencia

2004: 27–39.● Hakulinen, Lauri 1941: Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys. Osa 1 [1st edition]. Helsinki: Otava.● Hakulinen, Lauri 1961: Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys [2nd edition]. Helsinki: Otava.

● Häkkinen, Kaisa 1985: Suomen kielen äänne- ja muotorakenteen historiallista taustaa. Turku: Åbo Akademi.

● Itkonen, Erkki 1954: Zur Geschichte des Vokalismus der ersten Silbe im Tscheremissischen und in den permischen Sprachen. Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 31: 149–345.

Literature● Itkonen, Terho 1997: Reflections on Pre-Uralic and the "Saami-Finnic protolanguage". Finnisch-Ugrische

Forschungen 54: 229–266.● Janhunen, Juha 1981: Uralilaisen kantakielen sanastosta. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja 77:

219–274.● Kallio, Petri 2012: Jälkitavujen diftongit kantasuomessa. Fenno-Ugrica Suecana, Nova Series 14: 31–40.

● Koivulehto, Jorma 1985: Lehnwörter im bereich von 'Korn', 'Finne', 'Flosse'. In: Lyökäämme käsi kätehen. Beiträge zur Sprachkontaktforschung im Bereich des Finnougrischen und des Germanischen. A. D. Kylstra zum 65. Geburtstag. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

● Koivulehto, Jorma 1988: Alte indogermanische Lehnwörter im Finnisch-Ugrischen. Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher, Neue Folge 8: 1–7.

● Koivulehto, Jorma 1990: Entlehnung und Lautgesetz. In: Keresztes, László & Maticsák, Sándor (eds.) Congressus septimus internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum 1 A. Sessiones plenares. Debrecen.

● Reshetnikov, Kirill & Zhivlov, Mikhail 2011: Studies in Uralic vocalism II. Journal of Language Relationship 5: 96–109.

● SSA = Itkonen, Erkki & Kulonen, Ulla-Maija (eds.) 1992–2000: Suomen sanojen alkuperä. Helsinki: Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura / Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskus.

● Steinitz, Wolfgang 1944: Geschichte des finnisch-ugrisches Vokalismus. Copenhagen.● UEW = Rédei, Károly (ed.) 1986–1991: Uralisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Budapest: Akadémiai

Kiadó.● Zhivlov, Mikhail 2014: Studies in Uralic vocalism III. Journal of Language Relationship 12: 113–148.

Semivowel losses and assimilations, in Finnic and beyond

Documents

Transcript of Semivowel losses and assimilations, in Finnic and beyond