Loss of inital clusters is a phonetic change. But devoicing did not occur. German doesn't have voiced plosives the could possibly be devoiced (except inter-vocalic in Low German and maybe some other dialects). The plosives represented by the letters "b", "d" and "g" correspond to the sounds represented by "p", "t" and "k" in Baltic languages, i.e. unvoiced and unaspirated....due to the phonetic changes (devoicing, loss of consonants in word-initial clusters)
It is true that for 'library', most European languages use 'biblioteca', but apart from Estonian, derivations of the native word 'book' are used in Finnish, Icelandic, Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian and Welsh.Interestingly, Estonian sometimes seems to create its own words in cases where other languages tend to borrow from English (or French):
tarkvara (tark = clever, intelligent) = software = German: Software
arvuti (arvama = to think, to speculate etc) = computer = German: Computer
raamatukogu ("book collection") = library (many languages have borrowed "biblioteque" from French)
It's Dutch (appelsien, synonymous to sinaasappel: Chinese apple), in Estonian most probably via Russian (апельсин).A few more examples (Estonian - English - German):
apelsin - orange - Apfelsine (this is probably a borrowing in German as well)
German also has the less frequent Bücherei as a synonym to Bibliothek.It is true that for 'library', most European languages use 'biblioteca', but apart from Estonian, derivations of the native word 'book' are used in Finnish, Icelandic, Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian and Welsh.
... and apart from that, "raamat" is a borrowing from Greek via Russian "грамота/gramota" (gr- > r-), so "raamatukogu" wasn't the best example for a "home-grown" Estonian term, I agree.German also has the less frequent Bücherei as a synonym to Bibliothek.
In Romance languages, words derived from the Latin liber (book) like libreria, librería and librairie mostly mean book store.
Russian has книгохранилище (store room for books, which is only a part of a library or a book store; so it's only a partial synonym) and читальня (building or place where you read books).
Russian has an ancient Romance borrowing либерея/libereya for a library (more precisely, for the library of Ivan IV).German also has the less frequent Bücherei as a synonym to Bibliothek.
In Romance languages, words derived from the Latin liber (book) like libreria, librería and librairie mostly mean book store.
Russian has книгохранилище (store room for books, which is only a part of a library or a book store; so it's only a partial synonym) and читальня (building or place where you read books).
Oh my goodness, I could understand almost all of those, most of those words are loaned in latvian as well. I added latvian version at the end.A few more examples (Estonian - English - German):[...]
I'd say, it takes more than that to prove direct influence. Show me how many variations of syntax you can make with a subject, an object, a verb, and an adverbial. It is so limited that they would all have to fit with hundreds of languages.On the other hand, one similarity with Gerrman seems to be the word order. I don't know if that's a German influence or just coincidence:
"I go to the library twice a week" - in German and Estonian the word order here is:
"I - go - two - times - in the week - in the library":
"Ma - käin - kaks - korda - nädalas - raamatukogus"
"Ich - gehe - zwei - Mal - in der Woche - in die Bücherei/Bibliothek"
Of course, the example above shows similarities with Latvian as well (in terms of vocabulary).
http://203.250.148.79/upload/word/7-03-Martin%20E
[...]
Further evidence is provided by the sentences with verbal complexes: the auxiliary verb is in the second position and the non-finite part at the end of the sentence
as in (11):
(11) X O V
a. Lapse-d on täna suppi söönud.
child-PL have today soup.PART eaten <-- compare: die Kinder haben heute Suppe gegessen
b. ???Lapsed on söönud suppi täna.
children have eaten soup today
The alternative sentence ???Lapsed on söönud suppi täna is very unusual and it is hard to imagine the context where this sentence might sound acceptable. The same regularities hold for verbal particles.
In (12) the verbal particle üle is at the final position in the sentence while the finite verb is in the second position:
(12) X O V
Lapse-d värvi-vadi täna maja üle.
child-PL paint-3PL today house.GEN over <-- compare: die Kinder streichen heute das Haus über
‘The children will overpaint the house today.’
It is reasonable to assume that üle värvima ‘to overpaint’ is a single lexical unit which is located at the V node. Thus, when the verb is moved to the second position, the particle is left behind. That the verb is moved, not the particle is confirmed by changing the tense from present to perfect as in (13). The alternative *Lapsed on
üle värvinud maja täna is ungrammatical, not just unusual.
(13) Lapse-d on täna maja üle värvinud.
child-PL have today house.GEN over painted <-- compare: die Kinder haben heute das Haus übergestrichen
‘The children have overpainted the house today.’
[...]
Similarities don't prove influences, of course.(11)
Lapse-d | on | täna | suppi | söönud.
[ child-PL | have | today | soup.PART | eaten ]
Die Kinder | haben | heute | Suppe | gegessen.
The children | have | eaten | soup | today.
(12)
Lapse-d | värvi-vadi | täna | maja | üle.
[ child-PL | paint-3PL | today | house.GEN | over ]
Die Kinder | streichen | heute | das Haus | über.
The children | will | overpaint | the house | today.
(13)
Lapse-d | on | täna | maja | üle | värvinud.
[ child-PL | have | today | house.GEN | overpainted ]
Die Kinder | haben | heute | das Haus | übergestrichen.
The children | have | painted | over | the house | today.
Modern Estonian have many Russian words too, for example:Recently I read is wikipedia that the Estonian language has borrowed nearly a third of its vocabulary from Germanic languages, mainly from German. Is this really true? Does knowledge of German can be very helpful in studying Estonian vocabulary?
http://www.eki.ee - funny "office"That's generally true, but meri is a Germanic (or Baltic, or Indo-European?) borrowing, whereas mõtlema is casually similar to the Russian word: it is a Baltic-Finnic derivative from a Germanic loanword (http://www.eki.ee/dict/ety/index.cgi?Q=mõtlema&F=M&C06=et). Otherwise, the thread is about German borrowings ,-)
Выше я так и сказал, что корень - это эст. слово "mõte" т.е. "мысль". (Ссылаться на Википедию или на русофобскую контору типа "института" эст.языка - это странно)mõtlema is the ma-Infinitive form, the da-Infinitive is mõtelda (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mõtlema#Conjugation). That there is no vowel between t and l in the first form, is the Estonian peculiarity: in Finnish, which preserves unstressed vowels much better, this will correspond to ajattelemaan — ajatella (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ajatella#Conjugation). The Estonian root is actually mõt-, whereas -el/l- is the suffix, found in many verbs.
В википедии даны парадигмы (должны раскрываться по ссылке: если нет, там справа нужно нажать на треугольнички): они не меняются в зависимости от степени русофобскости ресурса. Из мысли mõte не получится, а к тому же там есть и другие производные. Если хотите ущучить эстонцев, напомните им лучше, что слово vaba «свободный» заимствовано из дописьменного древнерусского.Выше я так и сказал, что корень - это эст. слово "mõte" т.е. "мысль". (Ссылаться на Википедию или на русофобскую контору типа "института" эст.языка - это странно)
I don't see any logic in your assumption.According to Suomen sanojen alkuperä ("The Origin of Finnish words"), the most up-to-date etymological dictionary of Finnish, mõtlema (which itself is derived from mõõt 'measure', the -le- part is a derivational suffix) is probably of German origin (SSA: "< Germ *mēt- : Old Norse mát ’measure, evaluation’, Old Swedish mat ’measure’), but it may have been influenced by Russian, not by мысль but the verb метить.
Why not? Multiple imports of from the same ultimate root are not uncommon, e.g. chase and catch from Latin captiare through different French dialects.If a verb mõtlema would be derived from the root mõõt, why here are two verbs together now, mõtlema and mõõtma?
You mean it would be logical if there were only one derived word per root stem? That makes no sense. Besides, the words have different meanings: mõõtma 'measure', mõtlema 'think'. Estonian has a rather rich derivational system, which means you can derive a lot of words from one stem using different means, e.g. suffixes.I don't see any logic in your assumption.
There are two different words in Estonian: mõtlema and mõõtma.
If a verb mõtlema would be derived from the root mõõt, why here are two verbs together now, mõtlema and mõõtma?