[1] This applies not only to case or personal suffixes, but to any
formative element.
[2] Kalevala. 3 painos. 1887. Johdanto. p. XV.
[3] The following sketch of Esthonian is taken mainly from Wiedemann’s
‘Grammatik der Estnischen Sprache.’ Petersburg, 1875.
[4] Donner’s ‘Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der Finnish-Ugrischen Sprachen’
also contains many comparisons with Samoyede.
[5] But =suola=, _salt_, and =puola=, _bilberry_, change the final =a=
into =o= to distinguish them from =suoli=, _an intestine_, and =puoli=,
_half_.
[6] It is noticeable that this rule does not apply in the rare case of a
monosyllabic root ending in a short open vowel becoming closed. =Ku=, the
root of the pronoun =kuka=, forms =kun= not =gun=.
[7] In the Kalevala dialect =t= always disappears instead of becoming
=d=, and some traces of this remain in ordinary Finnish, (_a_) In the
declensions of such roots as =lyhyte=, short: gen. =lyhyen=, and in some
contracted substantives. (_b_) In the loss of =t= in the syllable =ta=
used to form infinitives and partitives.
[8] In the Bible and old Finnish are found such forms as
=kaksitoistakymmentä=.
[9] This suffix frequently loses its vowel and becomes simple s.
[10] The closing of the root and omission or weakening of =t= in the
first and second forms of the infinitive is no doubt due to the extremely
frequent use of the forms with suffixes. Thus =saadakseni= from =saata=
is grammatically correct, as is also =lukeakseni= from =luketa=,
according to the euphonic rules of the Kalevala or Old Karelian dialect.
Such forms as =saada= are probably not nominatives, but shortened
translatives.
[11] The first infinitive is occasionally found in the Bible, e.g. Psalm
xliv. 12 =Sinä annat meitä syötää niinkuin lampaita=.
[12] The participle is =nousnut= _or_ =noussut=.
[13] These forms are ably discussed by Mr. Setälä, in vol. II of the
Journal de la Société Finne-Ugrienne, p. 29 ff. He endeavours to prove
[and it seems to me with success] that =k= is a suffix of the present
tense, and =se= a pronominal affix.
[14] Cf. =kaikkialla=, =toisialla=, =kuusialla=. Some consider these
forms as compounds of the pronominal stem with the word =ala=, so that
=muualla= stands for =muu + ala + lla=.
[15] It is noticeable that peasants frequently use the passive with
the pronoun of the first person plural, as if it were a personal form.
=Jokohan mekin tuo lehmä myötäisiin?= _Shall we not sell this cow too?_
[16] Analogy has no doubt played a great part in the development of
these constructions, but they clearly have their origin in the use of
the participle as a substantive, just like the infinitive. Compare =Minä
toivon saada rahoja= with =Minä luulen saavani rahoja= and =Miehet
nayttävät tulevan= with =Miehet taitavat tulla=. Compare such Turkish
constructions as كلديكمى بلدكز geldiyimi bildiniz, _you knew I had
come_.
[17] =Vasiten= or =vaseten= occurs in dialects.
[18] I should say that in this account I am deeply indebted to the
Finnish introduction to the edition of the Kalevala, published in 1887 at
Helsingfors.
[19] The word seems to imply low-lying marshy places.
[20] This is apparently a reference to some kind of costume in which a
corpse was dressed.
[21] This passage seems a little confused. Wäinämöinen was building a
boat by means of magic spells, of whose efficacy so much is said in the
Kalevala. During this process he lost (apparently forgot) three words
which were necessary. The language in 350 ff. is metaphorical: the sledge
of his song was broken, i.e. the spells did not run smoothly.
[22] It would seem that this is not the same personage as the ‘dwarfish
daughter of Tuoni’ (also called Tuonetar in 263). But who this new
character is, is not explained.
[23] This rather obscure remark appears to be a taunt. ‘Every body is a
man, in the sense of adding to the male population. But one wants a good
deal more to really deserve the name.’