Küsimus eesti keele kohta / Questions about Estonian

[Prantsis]

Aitäh, häid jõule sulle ka!

[aaakknu]

Mis tähendab -maie? Ma hakkasin lugema "Kalevipoega" ja ma näen seda sufiksi tihti.

[ainurakne]

Häid jätkuvaid jõulupühi kõigile!

Ah, the light, refreshing taste of wood and dirt!
I want to say that it sounds so Estonian, but I think it might be misinterpreted. I'm not saying Estonians eat wood and dirt and I don't mean it as an insult.

No worries! I didn't mean it like mud or filth either. But kind of like the taste of earth.
I can't say I have tasted it, but for some reason, some tastes feel like that's how earth would taste like.

Maybe indeed, it has something in common with the smell of fresh earth. Something that induces similar reactions in the olfactory/taste organs.

But since the name Kaseke is already taken, I have no idea what we'll call the stuff.

Kõivuke?

Mis tähendab -maie? Ma hakkasin lugema "Kalevipoega" ja ma näen seda sufiksi tihti.

See on ma-tegevusnimi. Näiteks:
Tulge ruttu, noored mehed, tulge nüüd tulda hoidemaie, kibemeida keelamaie, sädemeida seademaie! =
= Tulge ruttu, noored mehed, tulge nüüd tuld hoidma, kibemeid(=kübemeid) keelama, sädemeid seadma!

As far as I know, the current standard Estonian ma-infinitive is actually fused together from two different forms: illative and instructive. The first may have looked something like *-mahen (provided it was similar to illative case endings of nouns and adjectives).
Most final "n"-s disappeared anyway. "...ahe" may have turned directly into "...aje/aie", or may have turned into "...ae" and then enhanced with "j/i" sound to retain the syllable count for poetical reasons.

For the same reasons, you may also encounter illative forms of nouns/adjectives that end with "-je".

[Linguaphile]

But since the name Kaseke is already taken, I have no idea what we'll call the stuff.

Kõivuke

Of course! That's great!

Mis tähendab -maie? Ma hakkasin lugema "Kalevipoega" ja ma näen seda sufiksi tihti.

See on ma-tegevusnimi. Näiteks:
Tulge ruttu, noored mehed, tulge nüüd tulda hoidemaie, kibemeida keelamaie, sädemeida seademaie! =
= Tulge ruttu, noored mehed, tulge nüüd tuld hoidma, kibemeid(=kübemeid) keelama, sädemeid seadma!

As far as I know, the current standard Estonian ma-infinitive is actually fused together from two different forms: illative and instructive. The first may have looked something like *-mahen (provided it was similar to illative case endings of nouns and adjectives).
Most final "n"-s disappeared anyway. "...ahe" may have turned directly into "...aje/aie", or may have turned into "...ae" and then enhanced with "j/i" sound to retain the syllable count for poetical reasons.

For the same reasons, you may also encounter illative forms of nouns/adjectives that end with "-je".

Also, an extra vowel at the end of words, or an added -da syllable at the end of words (I believe these are older forms):
meida in place of meid
kauge'ella in place of kaugel
ammetida in place of amet
taeva'aie in place of taevasse (this is the -je/-ie illative Ainurakne mentioned).
and so on. I can't remember the reason for the e'e and a'a in those examples, but it's also common (lengthened vowel made into two syllables). Somewhere I think I may have a list of this sort of thing - I'll look later!

[ainurakne]

Also, an extra vowel at the end of words, or an added -da syllable at the end of words (I believe these are older forms)

-da/-ta is the partitive case ending. Nowadays the final a has disappeared and in case of soft d, the whole case ending has disappeared (hence kala instead of *kalada) unless preceded by a long vowel (e.g. maad). Although there are lots of words that have the current partitive form extended to them by analogy (mostly -t partitive?), and so they don't fit the pattern.

I can't remember the reason for the e'e and a'a in those examples, but it's also common (lengthened vowel made into two syllables).

There is some magical amount of syllables in runic songs and verses, so all means are used to hit that mark.

[Naava]

I can't remember the reason for the e'e and a'a in those examples, but it's also common (lengthened vowel made into two syllables).

There is some magical amount of syllables in runic songs and verses, so all means are used to hit that mark.

I think these probably used to have two syllables where we now have only one: kauge'ella = Finnish kaukahalla, taeva'aie = taivahasehen.

[ainurakne]

I think these probably used to have two syllables where we now have only one: kauge'ella = Finnish kaukahalla, taeva'aie = taivahasehen.

Good point. I didn't even think about comparing those with Finnish -- double vowel in a non-stressed syllable could mean something (like h) has disappeared from there?

[Naava]

I think these probably used to have two syllables where we now have only one: kauge'ella = Finnish kaukahalla, taeva'aie = taivahasehen.

Good point. I didn't even think about comparing those with Finnish -- double vowel in a non-stressed syllable could mean something (like h) has disappeared from there?

I suppose it's true because the Proto-Uralic language had only CV and V syllables.* Of course there are loan words where the original stress has been replaced by a long vowel (while the stress was moved to the first syllable), eg. evoluutio = evolution, but loan words are always exceptions.

Another FYI: Kalevala does the same with the apostrophe between vowels when the original consonant has been lost but the metric requires two syllables. For example, rune number 2:

Laitapa ve'en väkeä
- veessä on väkeä paljo -
(The translation is something like "make the people of water [to do it] -- there are many spirits in water")

The first 'water' has an apostrophe where there used to be a consonant (cf Standard Finnish veden) to keep the line 8 syllables long. The next line doesn't have an apostrophe because it's 8 syllables long anyway. It might have been an overlong line before the consonant was lost - there are some of those, too.

*And, as you can see in ve'en and veessä and Estonian vees, lost consonants have created long vowels in stressed syllables, too.

[ainurakne]

I suppose it's true because the Proto-Uralic language had only CV and V syllables.*
...
*And, as you can see in ve'en and veessä and Estonian vees, lost consonants have created long vowels in stressed syllables, too.

I see. That's interesting.

Laitapa ve'en väkeä
- veessä on väkeä paljo -
(The translation is something like "make the people of water [to do it] -- there are many spirits in water")

I was wondering, why'd you translate väki as people until I checked it from dictionary and saw, to my surprise, that the primary meaning of väki in Finnish is indeed people. In Estonian, vägi could also mean a bunch of people (or occasionally some other things), but the primary meaning is still power, strength, force.

Also, according to the etymological dictionary, it seems that the adverb väga (very) is actually an irregularly shortened form of väega (with 'vägi' - whichever meaning it has here). Which is interesting, I think.

[Naava]

I was wondering, why'd you translate väki as people until I checked it from dictionary and saw, to my surprise, that the primary meaning of väki in Finnish is indeed people. In Estonian, vägi could also mean a bunch of people (or occasionally some other things), but the primary meaning is still power, strength, force.

Yes, but in this case it refers to the mythological creatures/spirits that live in waters, fire, wind and so on. They were said to have powers, and if you made them angry, they made you ill. It was called väen vihat (lit. the anger of the people). There is a Wikipedia article in Finnish, but sadly not in any other language.

Väki alone means 'people', but you can see the power/strength/force meaning in some words: väkivalta (violence), väkisin (by force), väkevä (strong, powerful; although you can still describe people as 'väkevä', it's more often used about food and drinks nowadays, meaning a strong taste).

Also, according to the etymological dictionary, it seems that the adverb väga (very) is actually an irregularly shortened form of väega (with 'vägi' - whichever meaning it has here). Which is interesting, I think.

That is interesting! I had been wondering where väga came from (and because I mixed it with vähe). Thanks!

[Linguaphile]

I suppose it's true because the Proto-Uralic language had only CV and V syllables.*
...
*And, as you can see in ve'en and veessä and Estonian vees, lost consonants have created long vowels in stressed syllables, too.

Thanks! Your explanation is closer to what I thought I remembered, than what I found when I looked yesterday. I looked in my notes and also found this:

Kontraheeritud tüvede tugevas astmes esinevad n. n. hilissündinud diftongid ja pikad vokaalid loetakse kahte silpi: laine'ida, kauni'id, palve'ida, valmi'eksi, varba'alle, kinda'ad, lõuka'alta, taeva'asta, arma'aksi, taeva'aie, õhtu'ella, keske'essa, keske'elle, kirve'eta, kauge'ella, kõrge'elle, Paide'esse, haige'eta, hoone'esse. Ka esimese silbi hilissündinud ja isegi algupärased diftongid ja pikad vokaalid loetakse vahel kahte silpi: e'essa, se'esta, tu'ul, su'i = suvi, ho'od (<*hoovot) jne.

Contracted stems occurring in the strong grade so-called hilissündinud (not sure how to translate this word ) diphthongs and long vowels are considered two syllables: laine'ida (laineid), kauni'id (kaunid), palve'ida (palveid), valmi'eksi (valmiks), varba'alle (varballe), kinda'ad (kindad), lõuka'alta, taeva'asta (taevast), arma'aksi (armsaks), taeva'aie (taevasse), õhtu'ella (õhtul), keske'essa (keskel), keske'elle (keskelle), kirve'eta (kirvet), kauge'ella (kaugel), kõrge'elle (kõrgel), Paide'esse (Paidesse), haige'eta (haiget), hoone'esse (hoones). First-syllable hilissündinud diphthongs and even true diphthongs and long vowels are alao sometimes read as two syllables: se'esta (seest), tu'ul (tuul), ö'ö (öö), su'i (suvi), ho'od (<*hoovot), and so on.

Also, according to the etymological dictionary, it seems that the adverb väga (very) is actually an irregularly shortened form of väega (with 'vägi' - whichever meaning it has here). Which is interesting, I think.

Wow, that's interesting! When I first read your post I thought that sounded really strange, but the more I think about it, "with strength" or "with force" actually makes a lot of sense. Täna on väga külm ilm = today the weather is "with-force" cold! Today the weather is cold "with strength"!

I mixed it with vähe

Vähe ja väga vahel on aga suurt vahet.

[ainurakne]

Yes, but in this case it refers to the mythological creatures/spirits that live in waters, fire, wind and so on. They were said to have powers, and if you made them angry, they made you ill. It was called väen vihat (lit. the anger of the people). There is a Wikipedia article in Finnish, but sadly not in any other language.

Wow, that was very interesting!

I can't say I understood it all, but this was surprisingly easy read.

Thank you!

... hilissündinud (not sure how to translate this word ) ...

Late-born? Lately-born?

(Sõnade) vähe ja väga vahel on aga suur vahe.

Vahetevahel on vahedevaheliste vahede vahel vahedevahelised vahed vahel.

[Linguaphile]

... hilissündinud (not sure how to translate this word ) ...

Late-born? Lately-born?

Yeah, that's what I came up with too, but I don't know what that means either so I was hoping there'd be some other translation....

(Sõnade) vähe ja väga vahel on aga suur vahe.

Aitäh!

Vahetevahel on vahedevaheliste vahede vahel vahedevahelised vahed vahel.

Thinking about Naava's väga/vähe comment: since they are nearly opposites, I found it funny. I don't think I've confused those two, but two other near-opposites that I've mixed up several times are õdus and õudne. I know, they don't seem much alike in nominative singular, but in other cases you end up with õdusad/õudsed, õdusate/õudsete, õdusaid/õudseid, and, well... let's say the words are describing a small cafe, or a hotel, or someone's home. One can really get the wrong idea by confusing those two.

[Naava]

... hilissündinud (not sure how to translate this word ) ...

Late-born? Lately-born?

Yeah, that's what I came up with too, but I don't know what that means either so I was hoping there'd be some other translation....

Do you mean the translation doesn't sound good or that you don't know what these hilissündinud vowels are?

In case you meant you don't know, I believe it's the same as in Finnish so I think I know what it is. As I said previously, Proto-Uralic had only CV and V -syllables. Some of these CV-syllables lost their consonants long ago, so that whatever the mother language of Estonian and Finnish was (can't remember it right now), it already had pää instead of the Proto-Uralic päŋe for head. Note that the development of Estonian wasn't discussed much during the course so I can't say when it changed to pea.

There are some long vowels that were born later, though. Again I can't talk much about Estonian, but the /ð/ as the weak grade of /t/ disappeared from the Finnish dialects during the 15th-19th centuries - that is, much later than the /ŋ/ from /päŋe/. That's why you got vees instead of veðes, and whatever the time of the change was in Estonian, it definitely was long after the previous "lost consonants". That's why they're called "later born long vowels / dipthongs". In Finnish, this means unstressed long vowels, too (which don't exist in Estonian, I believe?). For eample, the partitive kalaða changed to kalaa. I don't know if Estonian went through a similar phase or if it went straight from kalaða to kala. If someone knows, I'm interested to learn more.

Anyway, that was only one example; there are more, but I don't know that much about Estonian.

Thinking about Naava's väga/vähe comment: since they are nearly opposites, I found it funny.

I think it took me a while to learn them because both of them look a lot like the spoken Finnish vähä, 'a bit; little', which is also used as 'very' so that you can say vähä paljo and it means 'so much; very much'.

[ainurakne]

I know, they don't seem much alike in nominative singular, but in other cases you end up with õdusad/õudsed, õdusate/õudsete, õdusaid/õudseid, and, well...

And not to mention, many people decline õudne as õudsad, õudsate, õudsaid and so on.

Note that the development of Estonian wasn't discussed much during the course so I can't say when it changed to pea.

Sorry, I don't know it either. But I have had the impression that this wasn't a very widespread change, it just happened so that Standard Estonian is based on a dialect (or group of dialects) that had this change.

There are also exceptions, which means that long ää has probably crept back from other dialects. For example, in old newspapers from Tallinn, I have seen heal being used, while Standard Estonian now has it as hääl (voice, sound). And there are more long ää sounds in Standard Estonian.

For eample, the partitive kalaða changed to kalaa. I don't know if Estonian went through a similar phase or if it went straight from kalaða to kala. If someone knows, I'm interested to learn more.

Sorry, I don't know this either!

The only attempt to reconstruct North Estonian seems to be this one (page 19). And it doesn't seem to be very reliable.
There is no -da partitive in this example, but according to this, it seems that the final -a of partitive and locative cases disappeared some time between 13th and 16th century.

There's probably not much help (or maybe there is for a trained eye?) from early written texts either, as they were written by non-Estonians and according to German rules. For example, I found this from around the center of 16th century (you can click on individual words to see their meanings).

[Linguaphile]

... hilissündinud (not sure how to translate this word ) ...

Late-born? Lately-born?

Yeah, that's what I came up with too, but I don't know what that means either so I was hoping there'd be some other translation....

Do you mean the translation doesn't sound good or that you don't know what these hilissündinud vowels are?

I just meant I don't know what to call them in English. I don't think "late-born vowel" is a "thing" in English. But your explanation was helpful, too.

I know, they don't seem much alike in nominative singular, but in other cases you end up with õdusad/õudsed, õdusate/õudsete, õdusaid/õudseid, and, well...

And not to mention, many people decline õudne as õudsad, õudsate, õudsaid and so on.

Ahah! That's probably even where my confusion comes from. My dictionary and language texts don't have those forms, but now that you say that, I'm pretty sure I've encountered those forms before. And even though I wasn't conscious of it, some subconscious part of my brain was probably saying "but - but - but - I thought õdusaid was the one that had an a, not õudsaid...." and it didn't know whether to mentally move the u or mentally change the a to figure out the meaning.

The only attempt to reconstruct North Estonian seems to be this one (page 19). And it doesn't seem to be very reliable.
...
There's probably not much help (or maybe there is for a trained eye?) from early written texts either, as they were written by non-Estonians and according to German rules. For example, I found this from around the center of 16th century (you can click on individual words to see their meanings).

Thanks for the links!

[Linguaphile]

I forgot to respond to this one in my previous post....

Thinking about Naava's väga/vähe comment: since they are nearly opposites, I found it funny.

I think it took me a while to learn them because both of them look a lot like the spoken Finnish vähä, 'a bit; little', which is also used as 'very' so that you can say vähä paljo and it means 'so much; very much'.

Oh wow, that would be confusing then! I didn't know Finnish vähä could be used that way. It seems strange (to me vähä paljo sounds like "a little a lot" or some such thing, and I would have assumed it meant a small amount). But in English we can say "quite a bit" with a similar meaning, so I guess it's not so strange. (Although in English "a little bit" is the opposite of "quite a bit" though.)

[Naava]

Oh wow, that would be confusing then! I didn't know Finnish vähä could be used that way. It seems strange (to me vähä paljo sounds like "a little a lot" or some such thing, and I would have assumed it meant a small amount). But in English we can say "quite a bit" with a similar meaning, so I guess it's not so strange. (Although in English "a little bit" is the opposite of "quite a bit" though.)

How about just 'quite'? I've got the impression it's 'not so much' in BrE but 'very' in AmE. It's not exactly the same thing because it doesn't have two meanings in the same variety (as far as I know) but the two meanings are similar to 'vähä'.

Thanks for the links, ainurakne! I'll check them later - I suddenly got a high fever so I'm not going to study languages for some time. I mean, I have a cough but I didn't have a fever before.

[Linguaphile]

How about just 'quite'? I've got the impression it's 'not so much' in BrE but 'very' in AmE. It's not exactly the same thing because it doesn't have two meanings in the same variety (as far as I know) but the two meanings are similar to 'vähä'.

That's a good point! I had actually forgotten about the different meaning in BrE and you're right, together they are like the two meanings of vähä.

I suddenly got a high fever so I'm not going to study languages for some time. I mean, I have a cough but I didn't have a fever before.

I'm sorry to hear that! Saa ruttu terveks! Parane pian!

[ainurakne]

I suddenly got a high fever so I'm not going to study languages for some time. I mean, I have a cough but I didn't have a fever before.

All the best wishes from me too! Hopefully it's nothing serious and you'll get well soon!