I.1. Eurasiatic

For this version, vocabulary from Dolgopolsky (2008) and Bomhard (2018) has been used. Discussions on grammatical details are found e.g. in (Kümmel 2009) or  Kortlandt (2010), with summaries of previous comparisons such as the following nominal declension paradigm:

 

 

PIU

Turk.

Mong.

Tung.

Korean.

Japonic

pl.

*-t

*-t

*-t

*-ta, *-te

*-tır

*-tati

acc.

*-m

 

 

*-ba, *-be

 

*-bo

gen.

*-n

*-ŋ

*-n

*-ngī

*-ń

*-n

dat.

*-ka

*-g

 

*-ga

 

*-nka

 

 

*-ka

 

*-kī

 

 

 

 

*-ga

*-ga

*-gī

 

 

loc.

*-ru

*-ru

*-ru

 

*-ro

 

loc.

*-n

*-n

 

 

 

 

loc.

*-i

 

 

 

 

*-ni

abl.

*-t

*-da

*-dur

*-du

 

*-tu

 

 

*-ča

*-ča

 

 

*-to

 

 

 

 

*-ǰi

 

*-du

 


 

Proto-Eurasiatic

poge moret

poge ˀne ˀəlet sahrinə,

morei ʕwuḳa;

tu palamə buramə eden,

tu mage ṭolamə,

tu manumə sali ṭolan.

poge moret aḳa:

“kuŋem giles,

meremə ʕwuḳan morei eden.”

moret aḳat: “ḳile poge!

kuŋen giles ʕwuḳan,

mere, ˀede, pogei sahranə

ˀone ṭäpi ḳaṗimə äres,

e pogei sahranə ˀne ˀəles.”

ˀi ḳilut poge elanə boka.

 

I.1. Altaic

This Micro-Altaic version of the fable relies heavily on vocabulary reconstructed for both Proto-Mongolic and Proto-Turkic. It uses mostly words reconstructed for both proto-languages[xxvii], if possible including those with Tungusic cognates. For morphosyntax, a simple system based on comparison of nominal and verbal endings and formants of Proto-Mongolic (Mong.), Proto-Turkic (Turk.) andwhen possibleTungusic (Tung.) has been used:

·       Vowel harmony likely a late, independent development under areal influence.

·       Ancient SOV order, as with other Eurasiatic languages.

·       Noun system:

o   Nominative in *-Ø.

o   Accusative Mong, Tung. *-(V). Turk. shows all obliques formed in *-n-, with acc. *-nVG, but the pronominal declension (arguably showing the oldest remains) has *-nI.

o   Genitive in *-n.

o   Oblique (dative, ablative, or locative) in *-T- (often *-d-).

o   Plural: Mong. *-s and *-d (with a more restricted *-n); Turk. pl. *-lAr (pronominal in *-z), Tung. *-l and *-sVl.

·       Personal pronouns 1p. in *-m-, 3p. in *-Ø; 2p. Turk. *-s-, Mong. *-c-.

·       Interrogative in *kV-, demonstrative in Mong. *e, Turk. *i (3p.).

·       Verbal system:

o   Imperative 2sg. formed with unmarked verbal stem in *-Ø.

o   Complex use of tenseaspect markers in the proto-languages, which probably developed independently, from an older system of participial endings similar to the nominal one in *-n, *-(V), and *m.

o   Common verbal endings in *-k and *-g, and also *-t, *-r with different functions.

o   Probably late development of personal markers for finite verbal forms.

·       Negative particles *e- (cf. Mong. *e-se, Tung. *e-) and *ən- (cf. Turk. *en, Tung. *ā(n)-).

Micro-Altaic

bāku ătas

bāku ke ĺepan e-biǰu

ătas ḗbǰo;

te ámba ki̯úŕui ileg,

te pĕ̀kji kji̯unei,

te ā́rii̯ am ǰugig.

dḗ bāku ătas:

siŕu ǰürekemi,

ā́ri gŏ̀reg ătas kjăčug.”

ătat dḗt: “ăĺi bāku!

siŕu ǰürekema gŏ̀reg,

ā́ri, bā́ra, bākus ĺepan

oŋned di̯ū̀lu i̯umii̯ ki,

bākus ĺepan e-biǰu.”

e ăĺik bāku keberd tjī́ŕge.

Note: For ‘horse’, cf. PM *aduxu- ‘horse; cattle; drove, herd; to herd’, PT *ăt ‘horse’, Tungus-Manchu *abdu or *adbu ‘cattle, herd’. Also interesting is derivative for ‘stallion’ **atir-ga- from the same root, cf. Turk *adgɨr, Mong *airga (possibly of borrowed from Turkish), into different Eurasian languages, cf. Dag. adirag, adirga, S.-Yugh. airga, etc.

 

Proto-Mongolic

konï morid

konï ene nourin ese büǰiǰü

morid üǰeǰü;

tere kündü tergei texen,

tere hike ǰaxuni,

tere ereni bisixü ačin.

konï morid keleluxa:

simsim ǰirüke-mini

ere üen morid hunun.”

morid keleluxa:“duxulg konï!

simsim ǰirüke-mani üen,

ere, een, konïs nouri

öxen dulaxani kunari kinam,

da konïs nourin ese büǰiǰi.”

exü duxulgsa konï talad tergeǰu.

 

Note: Mong. *axu-n ‘thing’ is used instead of ‘load’ or ‘burden’.

 

Proto-Turkic

sarïk atlar

sarïk ka uŋan jōkdi

atlar gördï;

bu iagïr kaŋag ẹltügma,

bu bedük ünäg,

bu ērag biāt ạ̄rtïgma.

sarïk atlar dēdi:

“emgeur ürekem,

ērag görügma atlar bǖnügma.”

atlar dēlar: “dïŋla sarïk!

emgeur ürekemez görügma,

ēr, bäg, sarïklar uŋag

gẹntü ïlïg čēkag qïlïr,

sarïklar uŋan ōkur.”

bu dïŋlamïš sarïk alaŋka kač-.

For Proto-Mongolic morphosyntax and vocabulary, the texts Janhunen (2003) and Nugteren (2011) have been used; for Proto-Turkic, Johanson and Csató (1998) and (Erdal 2004).