botten-pohja?

[Eskous]

How old is the meaning of "pohja" related to the idea of "north"/"northern" in written Finnish? Here is some evidence via an example:

Psalm 89:12
"Pohjoisen ja etelän sinä olet luonut..." (New Finnish church bible 1992)
"Pohjan ja etelän olet sinä luonut..." (Biblia 1776)
"Pohian ia Etelen olet sine loonut..." (Agricola's Old Testament translations 1552)

"The north and the south thou hast created them..." (King James Version)

[Sigfrid]

How old is the meaning of "pohja" related to the idea of "north"/"northern" in written Finnish? Here is some evidence via an example:

Psalm 89:12
"Pohjoisen ja etelän sinä olet luonut..." (New Finnish church bible 1992)
"Pohjan ja etelän olet sinä luonut..." (Biblia 1776)
"Pohian ia Etelen olet sine loonut..." (Agricola's Old Testament translations 1552)

"The north and the south thou hast created them..." (King James Version)

But then, from the year 1823 (I am sure that Agricola would agree), "pohjaton" should mean a place without "pohjoinen". It exists only on the North Pole

"Näillä sanoilla jätti hän sen hätääntyneen äidin, joka sen kautta tuli vielä enämmin avuttomaksi ; niin kuin vähäjärkinen ja mielipuoli juoksi hän sinne ja tänne, siksi että hänen sydämensä kova tuska ja ahdistus runteli, ja kokonansa särki hänen ruumiinsa viimeiset voimat, ja hän lakastuneella muodolla hermotoinna lankesi tainoksiin maahan ; mutta pian tointu ja virkois hän jälleen ; hänen kasvonsa kävivät vereväksi, ja ilo loisti hänen silmistänsä, kuin olis hän avun löytänyt ; nopiast i nousi hän ylös ; ja saneli itteksensä : kusa tapaan minä koiran, joka nuolis myrkyn haavasta ? vaan tosin tuota ei tee koira, - mutta yksi äiti tekee sen, ja äkistä temmais hän nyt lapsensa helmohinsa, ikänä kuin olis hän pohjattoman kuopan partaalta sen pojes siepannut, ja epäilemätä painoi hän huulensa sen myrkyllä täytetyn haavan päälle, ja imi niin ahkerasti, kuin olis hän itsensä sen kautta kuolemasta pelastaa, ja ijäisen elon ajaan itsellensä saattaa taitanut.
Tämän ohesa huomasi poika isänsä kaukana tulevan kotiapäin, juoksi häntä vastaan, ja kertoi mitä tapahtunut oli.
Tätä kuultua hämmästyi <> isä niin sangen kovasti, että hän oli kaatumallansa, ja horjuen nojasi hän itseensä sitä varten likimmäistä puuta vastaan.
-3-

Auttaaksensa häntä, aikoi poika lähestyä isäänsä, vaan hypähti äkistä takaperin, koska hän näki kuolleen kärmeen kiedottuna isänsä matkasauvan ympärin, sanoden : samanmoinen, juuri sama mato oli se kuin pisti sisäreni käsivarteen.
Nyt valkeni taas isän kasvot ilosta, hän riemastui, ja kiittäin Jumalata sanoi hän pojaallensa : tämä mato ei ole myrkyllinen, eikä turmele ketään."

http://agricola.utu.fi/julkaisut/julkai ... 823-2.html

[Sigfrid]

The postfix "nen" (as "pohjoinen" vs. pohjainen" > kattila on paksupohjainen) was not common before the language reform in the 1800s. It was used only in a diminutive meaning, like "poikani poloinen", "äitini kultainen", " Pellervoinen, pellon poika, Sampsa poika pikkarainen". I am quite sure that also Lemminkäinen in Kalevala is something that Lönrot fabled, in old taxations books we have names as "Lemmitty", which is today more orthodoxly substituted by "Lemmetty". All nouns with the prostfix "nen" sounds dubious to me. Lemminkäinen was probably "Lemmitty" or "Lempitty", but Lönrot, as well as other Swedish speaking word inventors, loved to use "nen" also in nouns.

[Eskous]

Sigfrid, earlier there you pretended to be stupid (which is a common, but stupid, way to argue). Now I pretend to be so stupid that I did not notice it.

Context is very important when we try to understand meaning of a word. Well, you included a lot of context for the word "pohjaton" in your message, but this time it was all unnecessary. The text does not convey a meaning of an imaginary pit without north (side?), but of an imaginary bottomless pit. Therefore the text does not lend support to your claim that "pohjaton" would (sometimes?) mean something that is without "pohjoinen".

In most contexts "pohja" refers to the meaning "bottom", like it always does in "pohjaton", but in some contexts "pohja" has been used to mean "north"/"northern".

[Sigfrid]

Sigfrid, earlier there you pretended to be stupid (which is a common, but stupid, way to argue). Now I pretend to be so stupid that I did not notice it.

Context is very important when we try to understand meaning of a word. Well, you included a lot of context for the word "pohjaton" in your message, but this time it was all unnecessary. The text does not convey a meaning of an imaginary pit without north (side?), but of an imaginary bottomless pit. Therefore the text does not lend support to your claim that "pohjaton" would (sometimes?) mean something that is without "pohjoinen".

In most contexts "pohja" refers to the meaning "bottom", like it always does in "pohjaton", but in some contexts "pohja" has been used to mean "north"/"northern".

I only tried to remind you that same words have different meanings (which is of course obvious), and I did it because usually we start to twist different meanings to a direction or another, without resonable explanations. If you read my previous message, you see why old "pohja" is now "pohjoinen". It would be better still use the original form "pohja", like Estonians do. It is not a big deal to notice that "pohjoinen" was earlier "pohja", it is it only for you. You have repeatedly disclosed it, like it is a great invention. Try to find the point.


For comparison. "Hevonen", but "hevon paska". Why it has the postfix "nen"? Got it?

[aikalainen]

These names "Pohjannaula" (literally bottom nail) and "Pohjantähti" (north star) are different names by meaning of words that they consist of. I'm thinking that one comes from mythological worldview and the other name derives from direction north that compass shows. The name Pohjantähti is a younger name where -naula is substituted with -tähti and Pohjan- has a meaning 'north' (not 'bottom' any more). I think this name is a result of people forgetting or rejecting old mythological worldview.

That is one theory. It is also possible, that they both mean north (the spike/star, around which the sky rotates, and that can be seen in the direction of north, no matter if the sky is pot-shaped or flat) or they both mean bottom (the spike/star, that is exactly at the bottom of the upside-down-pot-shaped sky).

Even the pot-story, important or not important, can live happily with all of these theories. It does not solve, which theory is good or bad.

All and all, i'm starting to think that the explanation about the origin of word põhi(pohja) is lost in history for good..

Yeah, thinking process goes often in that way.

[Eskous]

If you read my previous message, you see why old "pohja" is now "pohjoinen". It would be better still use the original form "pohja", like Estonians do. It is not a big deal to notice that "pohjoinen" was earlier "pohja", it is it only for you. You have repeatedly disclosed it, like it is a great invention. Try to find the point.

No, it is not a great invention for me, but at least I had a point. Your own point in the whole discussion about meanings of "pohja" is hard to find. What was it?

[Ziilike]

But then, from the year 1823 (I am sure that Agricola would agree), "pohjaton" should mean a place without "pohjoinen". It exists only on the North Pole

/...- mutta yksi äiti tekee sen, ja äkistä temmais hän nyt lapsensa helmohinsa, ikänä kuin olis hän pohjattoman kuopan partaalta sen pojes siepannut, ja epäilemätä painoi hän huulensa sen myrkyllä täytetyn haavan päälle ... /

I didn't understatnd this text very well, but as much i did, it looks like u are mistakenly mixing up two meanings of pohja.
In estonian we have a word 'põhjatu', which i think is an equivalent of fi 'pohjaton'.
'Põhjatu' means that something is so deep that like it does not have a bottom. põhjatu kuristik, põhjatu sügavik ...
This word 'Põhjatu' has no other meaning and it does not accosiate with direction north. Well, one can say that 'põhjatu' means 'without north' but this is just a meaningless wordplay. It would be as much as meaningful as to say läänetu, kagutu (without west, without southeast) and so on. in fi i could construct länsiton, kaakkoton...
'Põhjatu' is a describing word, an adjective that usually joins to following noun. In this finnish text i can spot such a thing with words pohjattoman kuopan - pohjattoman is an adjective and kuopan is a noun. So pohjattoman is a word that just describes the following kuopan...

[Ziilike]

How old is the meaning of "pohja" related to the idea of "north"/"northern" in written Finnish? Here is some evidence via an example:

Psalm 89:12
"Pohjoisen ja etelän sinä olet luonut..." (New Finnish church bible 1992)
"Pohjan ja etelän olet sinä luonut..." (Biblia 1776)
"Pohian ia Etelen olet sine loonut..." (Agricola's Old Testament translations 1552)

"The north and the south thou hast created them..." (King James Version)

In estonian, oldest mentionig of Põhi i've found is from Andreas and Adrian Virginiuse's translation of Old Testament (1687–1690)

"Tösta oma Silmat ülles, nink waata sest paikast, kus sa ellat, Pohja poole, Louna poole, hommiko poole, nink Öhto poole."
"Rise your eyes and look from the place you live to the north, to the south, to the morning side (east), and to the evening side (west).

As you can see, here is already used the word 'Louna' with the meaning 'south', if u want to think about that how come that the fi etelä and est louna are meaning different directions - it has been like that from very old times. Also my guess about Estonia's name (Eesti) is that it might have came from finnish etelä, because Eesti is at south from Finland so maybe "Eestimaa" is a derivative of finnish Etelänmaa. But that's just my guess, according to thr common theory it comes from Ida or East, 'east side land' or smth..

Some few 17. century estonian texts i've read, just looks like something very old but for my surprise what i saw was that the language has been changed just so little. I could even say that with the last 400-500 years it hasn't changed a shit :)

So, a conclusion here would be that the use of direction's name 'põhi' (pohja) extends far back from the year 1552, at least 200-300 years, but probably even more... It's an old-old word.

[Sigfrid]

If you read my previous message, you see why old "pohja" is now "pohjoinen". It would be better still use the original form "pohja", like Estonians do. It is not a big deal to notice that "pohjoinen" was earlier "pohja", it is it only for you. You have repeatedly disclosed it, like it is a great invention. Try to find the point.

No, it is not a great invention for me, but at least I had a point. Your own point in the whole discussion about meanings of "pohja" is hard to find. What was it?

Two observations. It is obvious that "pohjoinen" is invented by people with poor knowledge about The Finnish language. The idea can perhaps be supported by some other FU-languages, but doing something professionally I expect some logic. For example

- north- west is "luode"
- we say "tuuli on luoteinen"
- we say also "tuuli on pohjoinen", not "tuuli on "pohjoinennen", neither "tuuli on luode"

Got the false idea?

All of us admit that the original form was "pohja". After understanding this I prefer discursion about the origin of "pohja" or about the meaning. In my opinion the original meaning was bottom because we can derive "pohja/pohjoinen" from "pohja" (bottom), but I see no point to say that "pohja", meaning botton, was derived from "pohjoinen/pohja", meaning north.

So it was challenging to understand your addition to this discursion. I only followed you and searched more old texts, which was stupid too.

[Sigfrid]

But then, from the year 1823 (I am sure that Agricola would agree), "pohjaton" should mean a place without "pohjoinen". It exists only on the North Pole

/...- mutta yksi äiti tekee sen, ja äkistä temmais hän nyt lapsensa helmohinsa, ikänä kuin olis hän pohjattoman kuopan partaalta sen pojes siepannut, ja epäilemätä painoi hän huulensa sen myrkyllä täytetyn haavan päälle ... /

I didn't understatnd this text very well, but as much i did, it looks like u are mistakenly mixing up two meanings of pohja.
In estonian we have a word 'põhjatu', which i think is an equivalent of fi 'pohjaton'.
'Põhjatu' means that something is so deep that like it does not have a bottom. põhjatu kuristik, põhjatu sügavik ...
This word 'Põhjatu' has no other meaning and it does not accosiate with direction north. Well, one can say that 'põhjatu' means 'without north' but this is just a meaningless wordplay. It would be as much as meaningful as to say läänetu, kagutu (without west, without southeast) and so on. in fi i could construct länsiton, kaakkoton...
'Põhjatu' is a describing word, an adjective that usually joins to following noun. In this finnish text i can spot such a thing with words pohjattoman kuopan - pohjattoman is an adjective and kuopan is a noun. So pohjattoman is a word that just describes the following kuopan...

I am not able to follow your thoughts, although I understand what you write. "pohjaton" is only a grammatical case of "pohja". Naturally it doesn't fit in with every possible derived meanings of "pohja".

A bit more thought about "pohjoinen", because it is really a stupid invention made by people who don't understand Finnish.

We can say "kalainen järvi", a fishy lake.
We can say "eteläinen maa", a land situating in south.

and

We can say "ihminen" on evoluution tulos". Cf "ihmeinen".
We can say "hevonenkin" on ...." cf "hevoinen"

It is obvious the there is nouns (ihminen) and grammatical cases or adjectives (kalainen, eteläinen).

then

We can say "pohjoinen on ilmansuunta".
We can say also "pohjoinen maa".

but

We can say "pohja on ilmansuunta".
We can't say "pohjainen maa", because the meaning reverts to the original meaning, bottom.

The derivate from "pohja" (bottom) to "pohja" (north) is absolutely lame. I believe it never happened.

[Eskous]

All of us admit that the original form was "pohja". After understanding this I prefer discursion about the origin of "pohja" or about the meaning. In my opinion the original meaning was bottom because we can derive "pohja/pohjoinen" from "pohja" (bottom), but I see no point to say that "pohja", meaning botton, was derived from "pohjoinen/pohja", meaning north.

So it was challenging to understand your addition to this discursion. I only followed you and searched more old texts, which was stupid too.

OK, we are back on track. But I have to say that you often use convoluted ways to express your points. For example, your "pohjaton" -text was really too indirect.

[Sigfrid]

All of us admit that the original form was "pohja". After understanding this I prefer discursion about the origin of "pohja" or about the meaning. In my opinion the original meaning was bottom because we can derive "pohja/pohjoinen" from "pohja" (bottom), but I see no point to say that "pohja", meaning botton, was derived from "pohjoinen/pohja", meaning north.

So it was challenging to understand your addition to this discursion. I only followed you and searched more old texts, which was stupid too.

OK, we are back on track. But I have to say that you often use convoluted ways to express your points. For example, your "pohjaton" -text was really too indirect.

I have so called funnel cake brains

[Ziilike]

Maybe it's because i'm an estonian speaker, but it's a bit funny for me this fuzz abuot fi pohja/pohjoinen/pohjainen/pohjaton and i don't see a point on wasteing energy on that.
It's just clear that the word meaning 'bottom' (est põhi) was first, and the direction's name (est also põhi) came after that (let's say after kota's bottom, or after sky dome's bottom or after whatever bottom)...

[Sigfrid]

Maybe it's because i'm an estonian speaker, but it's a bit funny for me this fuzz abuot fi pohja/pohjoinen/pohjainen/pohjaton and i don't see a point on wasteing energy on that.
It's just clear that the word meaning 'bottom' (est põhi) was first, and the direction's name (est also põhi) came after that (let's say after kota's bottom, or after sky dome's bottom or after whatever bottom)...

Maybe and sure you need to be a native speaker to understand smaller, but obvious differences, but language in general should follow certain rules. Waiting for Finnish comments, am I right or wrong.

[Eskous]

It's just clear that the word meaning 'bottom' (est põhi) was first, and the direction's name (est also põhi) came after that (let's say after kota's bottom, or after sky dome's bottom or after whatever bottom)...

Of course, but it is still interesting when the later association was conceived, by whom and where, and why (was it "random" or a natural development). Or can somebody go to the bottom of the "bottom" meaning too?

[Eskous]

By the way, I grew up in the middle of Etelä-Pohjanmaa, in Seinäjoki, in town district called "Pohja". So I am originally pohjalainen Seinäjoelta (not Seinäjoesta), Pohjasta (not Pohjalta).

I find it a bit inconvenient truth that somebody else named my proud tribe as being those who live at "bottom". In South Bothnian thinking, conditions where farmers have to grow their crops on inclined fields on hills are just pitiful. Btw, in my childhood imagination "Suupohja" meant remote edge(s) of South Bothnia where flat areas turn narrow, and after them start forest passages to somewhere else.

[Sigfrid]

By the way, I grew up in the middle of Etelä-Pohjanmaa, in Seinäjoki, in town district called "Pohja". So I am originally pohjalainen Seinäjoelta (not Seinäjoesta), Pohjasta (not Pohjalta).

I find it a bit inconvenient truth that somebody else named my proud tribe as being those who live at "bottom". In South Bothnian thinking, conditions where farmers have to grow their crops on inclined fields on hills are just pitiful. Btw, in my childhood imagination "Suupohja" meant remote edge(s) of South Bothnia where flat areas turn narrow, and after them start forest passages to somewhere else.

Not as inconvenient as calling the Finnish Ostrobothnian (notice Ostrobothnia = Österbotten, not Etelä-Pohjanmaa) seaside as Karelian coast. Those people on that coast line fought 300 years and shed blood against Novgorod, Muscovites and Karelians, who formed an alliance with Russians Why people want to falsify the history? I know it is common everywhere in the world, but still disgusting.

edit

300 years isn't even enough, we have to add 21 years of ISIS-like action from the beginning of the 18th century.

[jussipussi]

Sigfrid, viittamani kirja on juuri tuo aikalaisen mainitsema. Tämä keskustelu on melko lapsellista, kun kommentoit kirjaa ja sen pätevyyttä lukematta sitä. Palataan asiaan kun olet tutustunut teokseen.

No, sun mielestä täsmällisyys on lapsellista.

Tä?

Mitä täsmällistä on siinä, että arvioit tekstiä lukematta sitä?

Minusta se on lapsellista.

[aikalainen]

We can say "pohjoinen on ilmansuunta".
We can say also "pohjoinen maa".

but

We can say "pohja on ilmansuunta".
We can't say "pohjainen maa", because the meaning reverts to the original meaning, bottom.

Good observation. However, that kind of variation can be seen in some other words too.

Voisi olla kyse vanhakantaisesta tai murteellisesta loppuvokaalin vaihtelusta. Esimerkkejä vastaavista: lapsi-lapsonen, kuppi-kupponen, käki-käkönen, valkea-valkoinen, puhdas-puhtoinen, lappi-lappalainen/lappilainen (eri merkitys), aita-aitovieri, yms.

OK, we are back on track. But I have to say that you often use convoluted ways to express your points. For example, your "pohjaton" -text was really too indirect.

I have so called funnel cake brains

Vaikka sinulla onkin tippaleipäaivot, niin kieli rakentuu putkiaivoille. Viestiä kirjoittaessa sinun pitäisi kääntää tekstisi tippakielestä putkikieleen.