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

30 LÁSZLÓ DEZSŐ companied by the, probably increasing, impact of consonants on vowels, especially in unaccented position: when the vowel was losing its quality, the consonants preserved their basic palatal, velar or neutral characteristics and when the apophonic situation required normal vowels, the consonants contributed to its coloring. The e phonemes occupied a special role in the vowel system: they participated in both level harmonies according to Greenberg's scheme. During the transformation of the vowel system the „elasticity" of e made possible the change of both accented and unaccented vowels into an e sound and viceversa. From a phonological point of view the old vowel system was disrupted and a new one arose; also in this process the e-sound had an important role (cf. Lehmann 1993: 138-139). Fixed and free accent can co-occur in a genetic group (such as Slavic) or in the languages of an area. The accent can change from fixed to free and viceversa. The unaccented syllable can be reduced and then even disappear. These phonological factors are well known. The change of initial CVC(V) root structures of PIE and PU were complemented with a new element. In Uralic the accent was fixed on the root and the V2 in C1V1C2V2 + C3V3 was lost and the resulting structure underwent reduction. At present, we can not say if there was any difference in the process and in the result of the reduction of the last vowel of CVCV and CVCCV. There is no consensus even on the last stage of the reduction. In Indo-European the accent was free. The С VC structure could change in a way similar to Uralic: CVCC, if the accent was on the root as in Uralic. However, if the accent was on the new element, the result was a different CCVC which was impossible in Uralic. Greenberg's reconstruction accounts for the state of Eurasic, but its change to Indo-European, to Uralic and to Altaic is to be clarified. My typological remarks started from the earliest reconstructed stage but did not reach Eurasic, they could not fill the „gap". 4. Vowels and Consonants: Possible Palatalization in Pre-Uralic. I shall use the term Pre-Uralic because the examined stage of Uralic preceded Proto-Uralic, however it is not identical with an earlier stage emerging from a possible reconstruction of Eurasic. I assume that both Rédei's and Sammalahti's reconstructions are based on the facts of Proto-Uralic; they cannot be reconciled within the description of Proto-Uralic, but contain important elements for the internal reconstruction of an earlier stage: Pre-Uralic. When reconstructing Pre-Uralic I use the statements of general phonology concerning palatalization, which is the major issue to be discussed (Bhat 1978). It will