Scientific position: doctor at the Universitad del País Vasco, Vitoria
José Andrés Alonso de la Fuente
Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, Volume 141, Issue 1, 2024, pp. 1-17
https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.24.001.19311It is argued that certain words for jail in Diné bizaad (Navajo)„ e.g. ’awáalya and wáalya, come from Spanish. Although it has been long suspected that this word is a loanword, all the suggestions so far presented in the literature remain unconvincing on phonological grounds.
José Andrés Alonso de la Fuente
Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, Volume 134, Issue 4, 2017, pp. 305-322
https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.17.022.7096The main goal of this paper is to describe some functional and formal similarities in the expression of imperatives and hortatives in various languages which are spoken in the Sakhalin Island. The suggestion is made that such similarities might have been contact-induced language changes that resulted from two common mechanisms: structural (inflectional) borrowing and grammatical accommodation.
José Andrés Alonso de la Fuente
Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, Volume 131, Issue 2, 2014, pp. 121-136
https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.14.006.2014José Andrés Alonso de la Fuente
Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, Volume 129, Issue 1, 2012, pp. 7-34
https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.12.001.0590In 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.
José Andrés Alonso de la Fuente
Studia Etymologica Cracoviensia, Volume 20, Issue 1, 2015, pp. 17-46
https://doi.org/10.4467/20843836SE.15.002.2788José Andrés Alonso de la Fuente
Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, Volume 127, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 7-24
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’.