Finno-Ugric, Finno-Ugrian or Fenno-Ugric is a traditional grouping of all
languages in the Uralic language family except the Samoyedic languages. Its
commonly accepted status as a subfamily of Uralic is based on criteria
formulated in the 19th-century and is often criticized by contemporary
linguists. The three most-spoken Uralic languages, Hungarian, Finnish, and
Estonian, are all included in Finno-Ugric.
Linguistic roots common to both branches of the traditional Finno-Ugric language
tree are distant. About 200 words with common roots in all main Finno-Ugric
languages have been identified by philologists including 55 about fishing,
15 about reindeer, and three about commerce.
The term Finno-Ugric, which originally referred to the entire family, is
sometimes used as a synonym for the term Uralic, which includes the Samoyedic
languages, as commonly happens when a language family is expanded with further
discoveries. Status
The validity of Finno-Ugric as a genetic grouping is under challenge, with some
feeling that the Finno-Permic languages are as distinct from the Ugric languages
as they are from the Samoyedic languages spoken in Siberia, or even that none of
the Finno-Ugric, Finno-Permic, or Ugric branches has been established. Received
opinion has been that the easternmost Samoyed had separated first and the
branching into Ugric and Finno-Permic took place later, but this
reconstruction does not have strong support in the linguistic data. In the
past, and occasionally today as well, the term Finno-Ugric was used for the
entire Uralic language family. Origins
Attempts at reconstructing a Proto-Finno-Ugric protolanguage—that is,
a common ancestor of all Uralic languages except for the Samoyedic
languages—are largely indistinguishable from Proto-Uralic, suggesting that
Finno-Ugric might not be a historical grouping but a geographical one, with
Samoyedic being distinct due to lexical borrowing rather than actually being
historically divergent. It has been proposed that the area where
Proto-Finno-Ugric was spoken reached between the Baltic Sea and the Ural
mountains. Traditionally, the main set of evidence
for the genetic proposal of Proto-Finno-Ugric has come from
vocabulary. A large amount of vocabulary is only reconstructed up to the
Proto-Finno-Ugric level, while only words with a Samoyedic equivalent have
been reconstructed for Proto-Uralic. This methodology has been criticised, as
no coherent explanation other than inheritance has been presented for the
origin of most of the Finno-Ugric vocabulary. The Samoyedic group has
undergone a longer period of independent development, and its divergent
vocabulary could be due to mechanisms of replacement such as language contact.
Proponents of the traditional binary division note, however, that the
invocation of extensive contact influence on vocabulary is at odds with
the grammatical conservatism of Samoyedic.
The consonant *š has not been conclusively shown to occur in the
traditional Proto-Uralic lexicon, but it is attested in some of the
Proto-Finno-Ugric material. Another feature attested in the Finno-Ugric
vocabulary is that *i now behaves as a neutral vowel with respect to front-back
vowel harmony, and thus there are roots such as *niwa- "to remove the hair from
hides". Regular sound changes proposed for this
stage are few and remain open to interpretation. Sammallahti proposes
five, following Janhunen's reconstruction of Proto-Finno-Permic:
Compensatory lengthening: development of long vowels from the cluster of vowel
plus a particular syllable-final element, of unknown quality, symbolized
by *x Long open *aa and *ää are then raised to
mid *oo and *ee respectively. E.g. *ńäxli- → *ńääli- → *ńeeli- "to
swallow" Raising of short *o to *u in open
syllables before a subsequent *i E.g. *lomi → *lumi "snow"
Shortening of long vowels in closed syllables and before a subsequent open
vowel *a, *ä, predating the raising of *ää and *ee
E.g. *ńäxl+mä → *ńäälmä → *ńälmä "tongue"
Sammallahti further reconstructs sound changes *oo, *ee → *a, *ä for the
development from Proto-Finno-Ugric to Proto-Ugric. Similar sound laws are
required for other languages as well. Thus, the origin and raising of long
vowels may actually belong at a later stage, and the development of these
words from Proto-Uralic to Proto-Ugric can be summarized as simple loss of *x
The proposed raising of *o has been alternately interpreted instead as a
lowering *u → *o in Samoyedic. Janhunen notes a number of derivational
innovations in Finno-Ugric, including *ńoma "hare" → *ńoma-la,, *pexli "side"
→ *peel-ka → *pelka "thumb", though involving Proto-Uralic derivational
elements. Structural features
The Finno-Ugric group is not typologically distinct from Uralic as a
whole: the most widespread structural features among the group all extend to
the Samoyedic languages as well. Classification disputes
The relation of the Finno-Permic and the Ugric groups is adjudged remote by some
scholars. On the other hand, with a projected time depth of only 3 or 4
thousand years, the traditionally accepted Finno-Ugric grouping would be
far younger than many major families such as Indo-European or Semitic, and
would be about the same age as, for instance, the Eastern subfamily of
Nilotic. But the grouping is far from transparent or securely established. The
absence of early records is a major obstacle. As for the Finno-Ugric
Urheimat, most of what has been said about it is speculation.
Some linguists criticizing the Finno-Ugric genetic proposal also
question the validity of the entire Uralic family, instead proposing a
Ural–Altaic hypothesis, within which they believe Finno-Permic may be as
distant from Ugric as from Turkic. However, this approach has been rejected
by nearly all other specialists in Uralic linguistics. For refutations, see
e.g. Aikio 2003; Bakró-Nagy 2003, 2005; De Smit 2003; Georg 2003; Kallio 2004;
Laakso 2004; Saarikivi 2004. Common vocabulary
= Loanwords = One argument in favor of the Finno-Ugric
grouping has come from loanwords. Several loans from the Indo-European
languages are present in most or all of the Finno-Ugric languages, while being
absent from Samoyedic; many others also must be for phonological reasons dated
as quite old. According to Häkkinen the alleged
Proto-Finno-Ugric loanwords are disproportionally well-represented in
Hungarian and the Permic languages, and disproportionally poorly represented in
the Ob-Ugric languages; hence it is possible that such words have been
acquired by the languages only after the initial dissolution of the Uralic family
into individual dialects, and that the scarcity of loanwords in Samoyedic
results from its peripheric location. = Numbers =
The number systems among the Finno-Ugric languages are particularly distinct from
the Samoyedic languages: only the numerals "2" and "5" have cognates in
Samoyedic, while also the numerals, "1", "3", "4", "6", "10" are shared by all or
most Finno-Ugric languages. Below are the numbers 1 to 10 in several
Finno-Ugric languages. Forms in italic do not descend from the reconstructed
forms. The number '2' descends in Ugric from a
front-vocalic variant *kektä. The numbers '9' and '8' in Finnic
through Mari are considered to be derived from the numbers '1' and '2' as
'10–1' and '10–2'. One reconstruction is *yk+teksa and *kak+teksa respectively,
where *teksa cf. deka is an Indo-European loan; notice that the
difference between and is not phonemic, unlike in Indo-European.
Another analysis is *ykt-e-ksa, *kakt-e-ksa, with *e being the negative
verb. = Finno-Ugric Swadesh lists =
100-word Swadesh lists for certain Finno-Ugric languages can be compared
and contrasted at the Rosetta Project website: Finnish, Estonian, Hungarian,
Erzya. Peoples
The four largest groups that speak Finno-Ugric languages are Hungarians,
Finns, Estonians, and Mordvins. Three inhabit independent nation-states,
Hungary, Finland, and Estonia, while the Mordvins have an autonomous Mordovian
Republic within Russia. The traditional area of the indigenous Sami people is in
Northern Fenno-Scandinavia and the Kola Peninsula in Northwest Russia and is
known as Sápmi. Some other Finno-Ugric peoples have autonomous republics in
Russia: Karelians, Komi, Udmurts, Mari, and Mordvins. Khanty and Mansi peoples
live in the Khanty–Mansi Autonomous Okrug of Russia, while Komi-Permyaks
live in Komi-Permyak Okrug, which formerly was an autonomous okrug of
Russia, but today is a territory with special status within Perm Krai.
= Population genetics = The linguistic reconstruction of the
Finno-Ugric language family has led to the postulation that the ancient
Proto–Finno-Ugric people were ethnically related, and that even the modern
Finno-Ugric-speaking peoples are ethnically related. Such hypotheses are
based on the assumption that heredity can be traced through linguistic
relatedness, although it must be kept in mind that language shift and ethnic
admixture, a relatively frequent and common occurrence both in recorded
history and most likely also in prehistory, confuses the picture and
there is no straightforward relationship, if at all, between
linguistic and genetic affiliation. Still, the premise that the limited
community of speakers of a proto-language must have been ethnically
homogeneous remains accepted. Modern genetic studies have shown that
the Y-chromosome haplogroup N3, and sometimes N2, is almost specific though
certainly not restricted to Uralic or Finno-Ugric speaking populations,
especially as high frequency or primary paternal haplogroup. These haplogroups
branched from haplogroup N, which probably spread north, then west and
east from Northern China about 12,000–14,000 years before present from
father haplogroup NO. Some of the ethnicities speaking
Finno-Ugric languages are: (Baltic Finnic)
Chud Estonians
Finns Izhorians
Karelians Livonians
Setos Veps
Votes ("Volgaic")
Burtas Mari
Merya people Meshchera people
Mokshas Mordvins
Muromian people Sami
(Permic) Besermyan
Komi Komi-Permyaks
Udmurts (Ugric)
Hungarians Székely
Csángó Magyarab
Jász Kun
Palóc Khanty
Mansi See also
Finnic peoples Finnic languages
Ugric peoples Volga Finns
Comb Ceramic culture Uralic languages
Uralo-Siberian languages Old Hungarian script
Old Permic script Proto-Finnic language
Proto-Uralic homeland hypotheses References
Further reading Aikio, Ante. Angela Marcantonio, The
Uralic Language Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics. In: Word – Journal of the
International Linguistic Association 3/2003: 401–412.
Bakró-Nagy Marianne 2003. Az írástudók felelőssége. Angela Marcantonio, The
Uralic Language Family. Facts, myths and statistics. In: Nyelvtudományi
Közlemények 100: 44–62. Bakró-Nagy Marianne 2005. The
responsibility of literati. Angela Marcantonio, The Uralic Language Family.
Facts, myths and statistics. In: Lingua 115: 1053–1062.
Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Ungarischen: Register. 1997. ISBN
978-963-05-6227-0. Björn Collinder. Fenno-Ugric Vocabulary:
An Etymolog. Buske Verlag. ISBN 978-3-87118-187-0.
Campbell, Lyle: Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh University
Press 1998. Márta Csepregi; Gábor Bereczki. Finnugor
kalauz. ISBN 978-963-243-862-7. De Smit, Merlijn 2003: A. Marcantonio:
The Uralic language family. Facts, myths and statistics. In: Linguistica Uralica
2003, 57-67. Encyclopædia Britannica 15th ed.:
Languages of the World: Uralic languages. Chicago, 1990.
Georg, Stefan 2003. Rezension: A. Marcantonio: The Uralic Language Family.
Facts, Myths and Statistics. In: Finnisch-Ugrische Mitteilungen Band
26/27. Heikki Paunonen; Päivi Rintala.
Nykysuomen rakenne ja kehitys: Näkökulmia kielen vaihteluun ja
muuttumiseen. ISBN 978-951-717-360-5. Kallio, Petri 2004. The Uralic Language
Family: Facts, Myths, and Statistics. In: Anthropological Linguistics Vol. 46,
no. 4: 486-489. Laakso, Johanna: Karhunkieli.
Pyyhkäisyjä suomalais-ugrilaisten kielten tutkimukseen. Helsinki: SKS,
1999. Johanna Laakso. Uralilaiset kansat:
tietoa suomen sukukielistä ja niiden puhujista. ISBN 9510164852.
Laakso, Johanna 2004. Sprachwissenschaftliche
Spiegelfechterei. In: Finnisch-ugrische Forschungen 58: 296-307.
Marcantonio, Angela: What Is the Linguistic Evidence to Support the
Uralic Theory or Theories? – In Linguistica Uralica 40, 1, pp 40–45,
2004. Marcantonio, Angela: The Uralic Language
Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics. 2003.
Marcantonio, Angela, Pirjo Nummenaho, and Michela Salvagni: The "Ugric–Turkic
Battle": A Critical Review. In Linguistica Uralica 37, 2, pp 81–102,
2001. Online version. Saarikivi, Janne 2004. Review of: Angela
Marcantonio. Uralic Language Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics. In: Journal
of Linguistics 1/2004. p. 187-191. Pekka Sammallahti; Matti Morottaja.
Saami-Suoma-Saami Skovlasanikirje =: Inarinsaame-Suomi-Inarinsaame
Koulusanakirja. Ruovttueatnan Gielaid Dutkanguovddas. ISBN 978-951-9475-36-3.
Pekka Sammallahti. Sámi-suoma-sámi sátnegirji:
Saamelais-suomalais-saamelainen sanakirja. ISBN 978-951-8939-28-6.
Sinor, Denis: Studies in Finno-Ugric Linguistics: In Honor of Alo Raun.
Indiana Univ Research, 1977, ISBN 978-0-933070-00-4.
Vikør, Lars S.: Fenno-Ugric. In: The Nordic Languages. Their Status and
Interrelations. Novus Press, pp. 62–74, 1993.
Wiik, Kalevi: Eurooppalaisten juuret, Atena Kustannus Oy. Finland, 2002.
Языки народов СССР III. Финно-угорские и самодийские языки. Москва: Наука, 1966.
A magyar szókészlet finnugor elemei. Etimológiai szótár. Budapest: Akadémiai
Kiadó, 1967–1978. External links
Some Finno-Ugrian links A more comprehensive link collection
Swadesh lists for the Finno-Ugric languages
FAQ about Finno-Ugrian Languages Linguistic Shadow-Boxing Johanna
Laakso's book review of Angela Marcantonio's "The Uralic language
family. Facts, myths and statistics" Uralic Linguistics Vs. Voodoo Science! A
collection of links about the "new paradigm" debate by Merlijn de Smit
Numbers in Asian languages Counting to ten in a variety of languages
Ugri.info Finno-Ugric peoples infobase Finno-Ugric Electronic Library by the
Finno-Ugric Information Center in Syktyvkar, Komi Republic Interface in
Russian and English, texts in Mari, Komi, Udmurt, Erzya and Moksha
languages. The Finno-Ugrics: The dying fish swims
in water The Economist, December 20, 2005
"Ethnic origins of Finno-Ugric nations and modern Finno-Ugric nationalism in
the Russian Federation" by Konstantin Zamyatin