The main goal of this paper is to show that the proposed relationship between Turkish kayık ‘boat’ and Eskimo qayaq ‘kayak’ is far-fetched. After a philological analysis of the available materials, it will be proven that the oldest attestation and recoverable stages of these words are kay-guk (11th c.) < Proto-Turkic */kad-/ in */kad-ï/ ‘fir tree’ and */qan-yaq/ (see Greenlandic pl. form kainet, from 18th c.) < Proto-Eskimo */qan(ə)-/ ‘to go/come (near)’ respectively. The explicitness of the linguistic evidence enables us to avoid the complex historical and cultural (archaeological) observations related to the hypothetical scenarios concerning encounters between the Turkic and Eskimo(-Aleut) populations, so typical in a discussion of this issue. In the process of this main elucidation, two marginal questions will be addressed too: the limited occasions on which “Eskimo” materials are dealt with in English (or other language) sources, and the etymology of (Atkan) Aleut iqya- ‘single-hatch baidara’.
In this paper it will be argued that the “so-called” paradigm of the First Imperative of Tungusic is secondary. The functions attributed to the First Imperative may have been originally conveyed by particles or structures which are preserved in Manchuric. However, they were grammaticalized and modeled into a paradigm only in Common Tungusic.
In this brief contribution, a more accurate treatment of the sound correspondence Hokkaidō Ainu -r# vs. Sakhalin Ainu -rV# ~ -N# is offered. Explaining the particularities of such a correspondence requires introducing a non-trivial modification of the traditional synchronic description of Sakhalin Ainu morphophonemics.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.