This post discusses terms relevant to animals that would have been present during Helleno-Uralic contact, due to their proposed loaning. Previously discussed were HFS nákā (the skin of an animal) and (e)pʰolkḗ (a vessel that might have been towed by animals, such as reindeer).
apsí– ~ (h)apsí-
mesh of a net (HS); net (HMa.);? mesh net (HSMa.?)
PS *vuopsë;? Ma. vapš / вапш <? He. apsí- / ἀψίς < háptō / ἅπτω < ?
Con.: G hābaz > EPS *ap(a/i)si > PS *vuopsë (Kallio 2009, p. 36)
The phonological advantages of a He. > PS (vs. G > PS) loan are: Initial h- could be optional; medial -ps- is explained; and final -i(-) is explained. However, the syllable stress, and absence of final -s, in S are unclear. It is also unclear how both HS apsí– and HS apʰḗ (> PS *āppē) can be phonologically explained as loans into Sami, given their mutual derivation from He. háptō. However, this incongruency might be explained by rapid pace of PS vowel shifts, as discussed by Petri Kallio re: G > S loans (Kallio 2009, p. 37). In this model, HS apsí– would have been loaned earlier than apʰḗ. Re: Ma.: Cf. vapš < vaptáš / вапташ ‘to tangle up’ with He. (h)apsí- < háptō ‘to fasten or bind to’. However, a paradigm is not reconstructed for He. (h)a- >> Ma. va-.
B (cf. Lit. šárka) ?> F harakka ?> He. karakáksa / καρακάξα* < ?
Two phonological problems are presented by the proposal of HF karakáksa: The correspondence of F h- = He. k-; and the He. final-syllable -ksa. These are both left unresolved at present: While F h- = He. kʰ- is precedented, the phonological environment that would result in F h- = He. k- is not identified; and the He. final-syllable -ksa is not identified as a morpheme.
*LSJ:GM defines He. karakáksa as “κίσσα“, which can refer to either a type of jay (Garrulus glandarius) or magpie (Pica caudata) (LSJ:FEE). He.-language Wikipedia identifies the karakáksa / καρακάξα as the Eurasian magpie.
wolf (Ud.), dog (He.)
Ud. kion / кион <? He. kǐ́ōn / κύων << PIE *ḱu̯ōn
Cf. Ko. köin / кӧин. However, Riho Grünthal writes that “the Udmurt and Komi variants suggest different reconstructive forms”. If Ud. kion was loaned from He. kǐ́ōn, this suggests that loaning was synchronous with other HU kǐ- terms.
kórak- ~ korák-
Ma. korák / корак <<? He. kórak- / κόρᾰξ ~ korák- / κοράκι(ον) <1 PIE *kor-
It can be difficult to propose ornithological etymologies due to extra-familial similarities (eg: Fi. kurki ‘crane’ =? Sumerian kur.gi.). If HMa. korak- is correct, it is unclear from which He. form loaning into PMa. would have taken place: He. koráki(on) matches Ma. syllable stress; but a HMa. paradigm has not been reconstructed that would explain Ma. loss of He. -i(on).
squirrel (FP?); tail (He.)
FP? *ora <? He. ourā́ / οὐρά <1 PIE *h₁ors- ‘hindmost’ (cf. He. ὄρρος)
The He. term for ‘squirrel’, skíouros / σκίουρος, has been etymologized from skiá / σκιά ‘shadow’ + ourā́: Thus “shadow-tail”. However, this etymology has been disputed. The significance of the squirrel’s tail is implied in HFP? ourā́.
dirt, excrement (F); dung, mud (He.)
FU *pućka ~ *paćka > F paska ?> He. páskos / πάσκος < ?
If FUg. *pućka is the correct form, then Fi. paska shows the greatest phonological affinity with He. páskos. The revision of F -a with He. -os is reminiscent of other F > He. loans, such as HF laĩpʰos and nákos.
red (F); hair (FUg.); red, red hair (He.); red hair? (HU)
FUg. *puna <? He. purrā́ / πυρρά < ?
He. -rr- is unprecedented in HU: So it is unclear what its outcome in a H > U loan might be. If a feminine term, HFUg. purrā́ might have referred to the red squirrel (Fi. punaorava <<<? HU purrā́ ourā́). However, most He. terms for human and animal hair are feminine (cf. θρίξ, κόμη, ἔθειρα, χαίτη): So HFUg. purrā́ could simply be connected to a He. term for hair that hasn’t been reconstructed in HU; or, since ‘hair’ is already implied in He., it could describe a female.
butt (HF); tail (Er.,? He.); butt, tail (HFV?)
Fi. pylly (SSS),? Er. pulo / пуло <?> He. pýnnos / πύννος < ?
The meaning ‘tail’ attributed to He. pýnnos is by equation with πρωκτός. The primary meaning reconstructed is HF ‘butt’. Also compare Ne. pūna ‘behind’ (preposition; Lyublinskaya).
síka ~ s̜íka
pig (HF ~ HFV)
Fi. sika <(<) PF *cika ~ PFV *tika ?> He. síka / σίκα < ?
He. síka is from Laconian Doric: the dialect of Sparta. This does not necessarily mean that Spartans were involved in HF(V) contact: Only that the term was only attested in Laconian. The potential effects of assibilation on a loan into He. are unclear: So it is unclear what FV form might have been loaned into He. Assibilation is already a H feature (cf. HFUg. s͔éhō; HF sō̃ma ~ s͔ō̃mə).