(Photo: Sami goahti in Fatmomakke, by Gunilla G.)

After more than 2,500 years since the hypothetical establishment of Helleno-Uralic contact, and various post-Hellenic lexical influences on the Uralic languages, it is unclear what everyday life would have looked like beyond and between the riparian nautical trade and immaterialism of the Uralo-Hellenic cultures. Furthermore, the Uralic peoples were likely hunter-gatherers (Aikio, p. 48), which might minimize the amount of topical terms for comparison with the urban Greek agriculturalists. Nonetheless, a small number of domestic terms are proposed.


isolated, remote (PS); obscure, unknown, unseen (He.)
SaN áidalas < PS *ājtëlës < He. aídālos / ἀΐδᾱλος <1 PIE *n̥- + *weyd-

If PS *-lës < He. -los, then HS aídālos would have referred to a masculine noun. However, S nouns in the HS lexicon are thus far only feminine, except for HFV vē̃nos. However, the -os in vē̃nos is not certainly FV < He.: So it is unclear which noun(s) that HS aídālos would have described.

building, house (HMa.)
Ma. tóma / тома <? He. dō̃ma / δῶμα <1 PIE *dem-
Con.: PIE *dṓm; Russian dom / дом

HMa. dō̃ma is phonologically similar to both PIE *dṓm and Russian dom / дом – also note adverbial doma / дома ‘at home’. However, PIE lacks final -a; and it seems unlikely that a Ru. > Ma. loan occurred, as a similar term is not found in Erzya or Permic (NDS). He. has a phonological advantage of nom. -a, and a semantic advantage of two paralleled meanings. Ma. t- <(<<) He. d- might be precedented in HMa. dugātā́. However, He. -ō̃- is unprecedented in the HMa. lexicon.

room (HF)
Fi. huone < PF *hooneh <?> He. h͔ō̃ros / χῶρος ~? h͔ṓrē / χώρη < ?

HFV vē̃nos could allow for comparison of PF *-eh with He. -os, although this correspondence is unclear. It would appear to be a secondary vowel reduction after a long vowel, as seen with HF sō̃ma and h͔rē̃ma. However, more examples are necessary for both processes.

door (PU); hatch, hole in the roof, hollow, light opening (He.)
PU *owe <? He. opḗ / ὀπή <1 PIE *h₃ekʷ-

PU *-w- < He. -p- is reminiscent of Finnic consonant gradation; and is precedented in HF kṓpā. However, He. -p- is unprecendented in PU < He. loans: So the validity of this correspondence requires more examples. The type of door described is unclear: It might be a door of a building, a flap of a tent, or a hatch of a ship.

farm, house (F); round building with a conical roof (He.)
? > F talas ~ talo ?> He. tʰólos / θόλος < ?

The various proposed etymologies of F talas ~ talo have been addressed by Sampsa Holopainen (Holopainen 2019, pp. 272-273). He. tʰólos has been compared with tʰálamos / θάλαμος ‘house, inner room, store-room, temple’, but Biliana Mihaylova describes tʰálamos from PIE *telh₂- (Mihaylova 2016, pp. 311-312). The round, conical shape of He. tʰólos is reminiscent of the Sami goahti. However, the purpose and material of the HF tʰólos is not reconstructed.

fitting, proper (HFi.); ? (HFV)
Fi. oikea << PFV *wojke < He. (w)oike- / (ϝ)οἰκεῖος < woĩkos / ϝοἶκος << PIE *u̯óiḱo-s

The FV meaning ‘straight’ might be a secondary development from ‘fitting’ that prevailed due to an unknown relevance: What was “straight” at the time of contact is unclear – perhaps amphorae or other containers in the HFV vē̃nos; or building materials for a home, such as poles for a hut.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s