Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 96. kötet (1998-1999)
Tanulmányok - Dezső László: Typological Comparison of Root Structuring in Uralic and Early Indo-European. [Az uráli és korai indoeurópai tőstruktúrák tipológiai összevetése] 3
22 LASZLO DEZSŐ turn to be précise: the différence is c. 10% in favour of back vowels. The share of back Vi is lower (318 and not 361), that of front Vi is higher (153 and not 115). The différence is c. 10% and is probably of various origins. It should be re-examined in a detailed analysis. The data of UEW admit a hypothesis of high-middle (HM) vs. low (L) opposition. The data of HM vowels in Vj position are: e (110), 3 (201), u/o (4), total 315. Low vowels in Vi position: ä (48), a (110), total 158, are nearly equal to the number of V2 low vowels: ä (36), a (121), total 157. The frequency of HM vs. L opposition shows the dominance of HM over L in 2 : 1 ratio. The frequency of high vowels in Vi position is close to that of low vowels: 172 : 157. In V2 position it is impossible to separate E and -3 according to high and middle positions. Such a cross-examination of etymons according to front-back harmony and high-middle and low opposition contributed to the clarification of the high and middle E sound and the not-reconstructable 3. Examination of front-back vowel harmony and level opposition raises the question of the évolution of the vowel System in Uralic. Greenberg (1989) discusses the problem of a kind of level harmony in the pronominal System of the languages of Northern Eurasia, focusing on Indo-European. He présents the problem of level harmony in Uralic studies briefly and then the arguments in favour of an early System of level harmony in Uralic, which was similar to those in other NEA proto-languages (ibid. 27). In his later work (Greenberg 1995), he reconstructs the pronominal System of Eurasic in detail and also deals with the Uralic pronouns. First, I shall discuss the typological possibilities of an évolution of a level harmony, typical of NEA languages, then I shall examine some questions of PU pronominal system. The level harmony in NEA can be presented in a generalized form: / e ] u e2 a o In Uralic it was transformed into a front-back harmony at a later stage, according to Greenberg. In my view, the phonological realization of the level harmony in Uralic was a system with two high vowels (/, u), a high middle e\ middle-low e2 and o, and a low a: i u
