A. Sauvageot also uses other methods for increasing the number of parallels. They are very doubtful when he operates with the morphological elements. In order to show this, I will quote two instances which do not exhaust all types of his proceedings, but which may give an idea of the method used [141].
Case 34. The word pikta (Goldi) — «the son,» has been shown to originate from pita←ita, etc [142]. In order to show that the Tungus stem is pY. A. Sauvageot cuts off -kta as a suffix. In fact, in Tungus there is such a suffix (even two suffixes of the same phonetic complex -kta), but it has an entirely different function in the formation of «nouns» and cannot be used in the terms of relationship. On which ground has -kta been considered as a suffix? The reason is very simple, — A. Sauvageot did not know the origin of k and the syllable ta did not suit the hypothesis pY, so he decided to suppress it.
Case 156. The word icha (Solon, Ivan) — «the elbow,» which is well known in Tungus ichan (Bir., Kum.) (Neg., Sch.), icha (Khin.) (Neg., Sch.), icho (Oroci, Sch.), ichon (Ner.), Man (Turn.), uiche (Olcha, Grube), xuicha (Goldi) — «the elbow»]. However, A. Sauvageot wants to connect a certain stem (kV?V) with icha through the aspirated Goldi form (this form is not perhaps an original form) xuicha, so he does not want ch to be in the stem and he dismisses it under the pretext that -cha,-chan, are met with in Tungus as suffixes. Such suffixes do exist — la as suffix of «part, perf.» and chan as «diminutivus» (the same phonetic complexes may also have other functions as suffixes), both of which have nothing to do with icha—«the elbow.»
When A. Sauvageot needs new parallels, he sometimes uses curious etymological suggestions. I will illustrate it with a case which is rather serious — Case 27. A. Sauvageot is now looking for a Tungus initial p in the semantic complex of «bruler,» etc., and faute de tnieux brings forth «to boil» (kochen), etc. This is the well-known Tungus uju — «to spout,» «to bubble,» whence «to boil» but never kochen, for the water may «boil» (bubble), e.g., the sources, without being gekochi and the Tungus use uju in reference to the water in sources and in the kettle [143]. The Manchu word is fujembi (in which W. Grube has wrongly printed or read zh instead of j; however, A. Sauvageot could see it from both I. Zaxarov's and P. P. Schmidt's dictionaries). In some Tungus dialects the initial vowel is aspirated, in some other diaiects it is bilabialized, and in some of them it is left intact, e.g., uju, huju, xuju, fuje, but A. Sauvageot considered it opportune to reproduce an instance quoted by W. Grube; namely, muju ujuren, which has only one possible translation — «the water (he or she) is boiling,» or, in English, «he (or she) is boiling water» (-ju in muju is a suffix of accusativus, the stem is mu — «the water,» well known in all Tungus dialects). However, A. Sauvageot is not satisfied with W. Grube's translation (W. Grube, op. cit., p. 116) and he gives his own interpretation here reproduced in extenso — muju-(m-<*p), ujuren — «faire bouillir de l'eau.» [144]. So mu (water) is transformed into puju, whence only one step to make of it pYd. It is remarkable that even a new «law» is formulated on this good occasion, — «Paasonen et K. Donner posent *-b— en ouralien. On aurait donc oural. *-b-~ tong. i (ma. -dz-)» (id, p. 24).
The loan-words also occur in their quality of connexion between Tungus and other languages, two instances of which I shall give.
Case 162. The Goldi word ata («schuh») and Tungus unta («winter-stiefel, bas») is compared with Dahur uddza («bas») and Tchouv. aDe («stiefel») and it is supposed that -nt of unta corresponds to t of Ural-Altaic. Of course, the words are different. Dahur uddza is Chinese wazhe — «the stockings,» in the form of vase known in Manchu, whence vasa (Bir.), wasa (Khin.) — «the stockings,» of Chinese type (cf. Mongol, Rudnev).
Case 159. The Goldi word xuse is translated mann, mdnnchen, and connected with kisi (Turk, Osmanli) — «person,» «mensch.» However, xuse is not «man» and is not Goldi, even not Altaic, but «beard» in Chinese -xuzhe. This Chinese word is used in Manchu, in a slightly joking sense, in reference to the adult men who have a beard -xuse (xuseta -plur.) as xuse may be used in Chinese intimate family language. The class of instances with the defects as to the morphological operations, etymologies, and loan-words is rather large, but it is impossible to quote all of them,—the corrections of errors take much more time than in the doing of them, for in every case one must bring evidences and reasons where and how the error might have crept into A. Sau vageot's text. Most of these errors and mistakes have been made because of a great need of linguistic evidences, for what has been called «la cause commune» — the Ural-Altaic hypothesis. It may be supposed that A. Sauvageot did not have any intention of adapting unreliable and doubtful material, but he is affected by a kind of blindness when the material may help his great cause of proving the existence of the Ural-Altaic reality.
141. It is true that the using of the Tungus published material meets with great difficulties, owing to the fact that the records are not always ready for comparative analysis. In fact, the Tungus languages, and especially the Northern Tungus dialects, are very rich in suffixes. This is well known from the earlier publications (M. A.Castren, L. Adam, A. Schiefner, I. Zaxarov, and others). Yet some of the suffixes have already been fused with the stems to form new «starters,» as occurs, for instance, with some terms of orientation which have been formed from a certain stem containing one vowel (F) (cf. «Northern Tungus Terms.» op. cit., p. 180). In such cases the isolation of stems requires great caution and sometimes is even impossible if the lexic material is limited. On the other hand, in the material published one may often see stems together with the suffixes of relation, time, space, etc., which must be separated when they do not form the new starters. The most complex cases are those in which the suffixes have a double function, — semantic and morphological. I point out these difficulties here, (or even experienced comparatists who are familiar with the Tungus published material often become victims of prematureness of these attempts.
142. The case is not a simple one. Cf. my «Bilabializatior. and Aspiration,» op. cit., also 'Social Organization of the Northern Tungus,» op. cit., pp. 177-179.
143. This kochen it one of the misfortunate
translations from Russian into German, due to the difference in the semantic
complexes,—in German kochen and in Russian kipet'.
144. The original source (A. O. Ivanovskii, op. cit., p. 20) gives »(muju) ujuren. S. Kip'atit' vodu. Sr. Cast, hujum, kochen.» Indeed, ujurin cannot be translated as infinativus (of a trans, verb), for the suffixes re and n definitely indicate «is boiling» without presuming its transitive meaning. The latter may be given either by addition of the suffix of the accusativus to the object (mu+ju where ju~wV~vV) or its insertion into the verb (e.g., ujuv (V) ren~ujuwren) if there is no object to be increased with this suffix. Yet when the phonetic character of the verbal stem permits, some Tungus would prefer to give, along with the suffixes, both the object and the verb. In this particular case it is likely that uju in its transitive function will appear without the suffix if the latter may be agglutinated to the object. Anyhow, ujurin, taken alone, is understood by the Tungus as intransitive «is boiling.» A. O. Ivanovskii's sentence presumes that there was a person who was boiling water, for mu is supplied with the suffix indicative of the function of mu as an object. W. Grube has suppressed brackets and separated words with a full stop. A. Sanvageot has changed it into a comma, whence his equation. This case shows how dangerous it is to «correct» the original material and that the operation with the Tungus published material requires great caution and a certain knowledge of language. The problem is still complicated by the fact that there are, in the dialects, two series of words with seemingly different stems; namely, ui and uju, the origin of which would require too long a discussion.