| Summary: | The languages of Siberia, even those belonging to families very remote from each other, share some surprising typological similarities. One of them is compounding case suffixes, a phenomenon occurring in the two biggest families, the Uralic and the Altaic. However, there are substantial differences in typological details.All compound cases in the Uralic languages are made of suffixes of local cases, and their output meanings are local, too. There are three distinguishable reasons for compounding: 1. specifying an existing but ambiguous case; 2. creating a new, more specific case, and 3. probably strengthening the semantics of a dying case. The order of the suffixes is to some degree free. The exact number of different compoundings can be disputed, but could be approximated at about 25 or more based on eight different cases. The process of compounding cases has (with sporadic exceptions) finished by about 10th century AD.The situation in the Mongolic languages is somewhat different. Overall, only three cases can form the base for a compounding, and only one of them (Dat.-Loc.) is local. The other two are Gen. and Poss. (Com.), and they both seem to play word-forming roles rather than declensional ones. The order of suffixes is always fixed. Altogether, the number of compound cases amounts to 16. The process is definitely still active, especially so in the spoken language.In older Turkic documents, there are only two examples of compound cases, and one of them is a hapax legomenon. Both of them are local. In newer texts, however, there appears to be an entire declension paradigm in Yakut and Dolgan built on the base of the Com. form, used in a rather word-forming manner with two possible meanings ‘and' and ‘even'. Similar examples are available for Lamut. The order of the suffixes is always fixed. While limited to few languages, and mostly to spoken language, the process is definitely still active.Altogether, three types of compound cases can be distinguished in the Uralic and inner Altaic languages:doubling the (functionally) same suffix Old Turkish oγuz-dan.tan (Abl.) ‘from the Oghuz', Kalmuk köwün-äγ.in (Gen.) ‘of the one belonging to the son' reason: strengthening the semantics of a dying casetwo suffixes with similar (always local) meanings Uralic compound cases, Mongolic Dat.-Loc. + Abl., Old Turkish Dat. + Dir. reason: specifying the meaning of an ambiguous casetwo suffixes with entirely different meaning Mongolic cases based on Gen. and Com., Yakut, Dolgan and Lamut cases based on Com. reason: 1. a word-forming-like function; 2. ‘and', ‘even'The Uralic, Mongolic and Turkic–Manchu-Tungus systems of compound cases differ considerably. These differences are deep enough to make us believe that the systems must have been developed independently, and thus cannot be considered a common areal feature which would allow to connect them in one language league in this respect.
|
|---|