apr MAJ AUG 29 2005 2006 2009 3 captures 29 maj 06 - 22 okt 09 Close Help URALISTICS VS. VOODOO A BIBLIOGRAPHY



This is a somewhat selective bibliography of publications by both the 'revolutionary' Uralists and their critics. It is not complete, and I may add more references later. To begin with, I have not listed the recent 'revolutionary' articles by Marcantonio, Julku, Wiik, Künnap and their patient debunking by Aslak Aikio, Ante Aikio, Christian Carpelan, Petri Kallio and Raimo Anttila at the website of Kaltio I highly recommend reading them, though.

Also, I have not listed the recent exchanges in the Finnish cultural magazine Kanava or earlier articles in Hiidenkivi and so on. I will add those when I feel like it.

The bibliography of Wiik's works is selective. For a non-selective, complete bibliography, have a look at: Kalevi Wiik's Bibliography

My comments are in no way intended to be objective, or even fair.

Thanks go to Petri Kallio, who provided me with additional references.

Merlijn de Smit

Anttila, Raimo 2000: The Indo-European and Baltic-Finnic Interface: Time against the Ice - Renfrew, C., McMahon, A., Trask, L. (ed.): Time Depth in Historical Linguistics 2. Cambridge p. 481-528.

Wonderful paper on the current state of the art in Finnish prehistory, with nicely merciless criticism towards Wiik et al.

Dolukhanov, Pavel M. 1998: The most ancient North Europeans: Consensus in sight? - Roots I p. 9-27.

Yes, there is a lot of consensus within the small circle of researchers putting out Roots after Roots volume…

Hajdú, Peter 2001: Egy vitás paleolingvisztikai teória. Magyar Nyelvjárások XXXIX p. 3-12. Readable on-line Here

Hasselblatt, Cornelius 1998: Avunhuuto lounaasta. Virittäjä 1998 p. 232-239.

A criticism of, among others, the rather original way 'revolutionary' Uralists read their source material.

- 2001a: Wo ist die Revolution? Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen 56 p. 429-436.

A pretty lethal review of Künnap 1998a.

- 2001b: Wo die wahre Revolution ist. Wiener Elektronische Beiträge des Instituts für Fenno-Ugristik 4/2002. Readable online Here

Scathing criticism of the 'revolutionary' paradigm. Must read.

Honti, László 2000: Grundsprache oder Unsprache? (Eine kurze Information über jüngste wunderliche Ideen in der Uralistik - Carli, A., Töttössy, B., Vasta, N. (ed.): Amant alterna Camenae: Studi linguistici e letterari offerti a Andrea Csillaghy in occasione del suo 60o compleanno. Torino p. 129-151.

- 2001a: Eine Lingua franca als Grundsprache: ein Scherz oder Ernst gemeint? - Studi offerti ad Alexandru Niculescu dagli amici e allievi di Udine. Udine p. 105-118.

-2001b: Hol és milyen uráli/finnugor "õsnyelvet" beszéltek távoli eleink? (Hipotézisek és téveszmek az uráli nyelvtudományban). Magyar Nyelvjárások XXXIX p. 13-32. Readable on-line Here

-2002: "Was ihr wollt!" Science Fiction und den uralischen Forschungen - Helimski, E., Widmer, A. (ed.): Wa wa - Sei gegrüsst! Beiträge zir Finnougristik zu Ehren von Gert Sauer dargebracht zu seinem siebzigsten Geburtstag. Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica 57. Wiesbaden p. 117-153.

Fire at will! Hear the dull thud of paradigm shifts crashing down to earth, the soft whimper of revolutionary breakthroughs running aground… László Honti's article is a very detailed and appropriately fierce critical review of the 'roots'-discussion of the past seven years. Hightly recommended.

Häkkinen, Kaisa. 1984: Wäre es schon an der Zeit, den Stammbaum zu fällen? Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher neue Folge p. 1-24.

This paper by Kaisa Häkkinen is generally seen as one of the most important criticisms of the "Family Tree Model". It examines the foundations for a large number of intermediate nodes - between Proto-Uralic and the most shallow language families, and finds them often lacking in strength. I would not say, however, that it criticizes the Family Tree Model as such.

- 1996: Suomalaisten esihistoria kielitieteen valossa. Tietolipas 147. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura Hämeenlinna.

A general, highly readable introduction to the conventional view on the prehistory of the Finns.

- 1999: Äussere Form und wissenschaftlicher Gehalt. Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen p. 177-183.

Acid review of Julku (ed.) 1997 Itämerensuomi - Eurooppalainen Maa. Does not leave much of it standing.

Itkonen, Esa 1998a: Sukupuu ja kontakti. Virittäjä p. 90-103.

-1998b: Keelepuu vajas uuendamist sada aastat tagasi. Keel ja kirjandus 3 p. 213-215.

-1999: There is nothing wrong with the comparative method: part two - Künnap, A. (ed.): Indo-European-Uralic-Siberian linguistic and cultural contacts. Fenno-Ugristica 22. University of Tartu, Division of Uralic languages. Tartu.

These three articles by Esa Itkonen stand as a very effective vindication of the Family Tree Model both in general linguistics and in Uralistics. Highly recommended!

Janhunen, Juha 2001: On the paradigms of Uralic comparative studies. Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen 56 p. 29-41.

Janhunen examines three "paradigms" within Uralistics: the traditional family tree, strong modifications of it proposed in recent years by ao. Häkkinen (see above) and the total rejection of it by Künnap et. al. The latter is rejected. Marcantonio briefly comments it in Marcantonio 2002b.

Julku, Kyösti (ed.) 1997: Itämerensuomi - Eurooppalainen Maa. Societas Historiae Fenno-Ugricae 2. Oulu.

The title means "BalticSeaFinland - An European Country" and if that sounds to you like nonsense, it's because it is nonsense. This is a collection of papers all from the 'revolutionary' point of view. Häkkinen remarks in her acerbic review (Häkkinen 1999) that the layout and the nice hard cover is the best thing about the book. I agree.

Julku, Kyösti 1998: Suomen asutuksen jatkuvuuden ongelma - Roots I p. 9-27

2000: Die ältesten Wurzeln der finno-ugrischen Völker im Lichte der heutigen Forschung - Roots II and III p. 125-136.

The Finnish historian Kyösti Julku is a strong supporter of the idea of ancient (eg. glacial) Finnish inhabitants all over Northern Europe.

Kallio, Petri. 1997a: Uralic substrate features in Germanic? Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja 87 p. 123-130.

Petri Kallio's article destroys Wiik's hypothesis of an ancient Uralic phonetic substratum in Germanic, and does so extremely effectively, in my opinion.

- 1997b: Uralilaisten alkuperä indoeuropeistisesta näkökulmasta - Virittäjä 101 p. 74-78.

- 2002: A Uralic Substrate in Germanic - Blokland, R., Hasselblatt, C. (ed.): Finno-Ugrians and Indo-Europeans: Linguistic and Literary Contacts. Proceedings of the Symposium at Groningen University, November 22-24, 2001. Studia Fenno-Ugrica Groningana 2. Maastricht p. 168-184.

Again, Petri Kallio dealing with Wiik's substratum theory like Geiseric dealt with ancient Rome in 455 AD.

Künnap, A. 1995: The Uralic language tree model and the myth of the migration from the east at the Jyväskylä congress - Minor Uralic languages: grammar and lexis. Tartu and Groningen p. 123-127.

- 1996: Mea Culpa, aga omakeelsed Eesti põlisasukad oleme olnud ehk juba 12.000 aastat. Keel ja Kirjandus 8, p. 505-513.

- 1997a: Uralic Languages and Linguistics. Study aid for undergraduate students. Tartu.

Aw! Poor undergraduate students! This booklet in fact foreshadows a lot of the claims in Künnap 1998a.

- 1997b: Uralilaisten kielten läntinen kontaktikenttä - Julku, K. (ed.) 1997 p. 63-74.

- 1997c: Potential Finno-Ugric substratum in Slavic. Linguistica Uralica p. 253-257.

- 1998a: Breakthrough in present-day Uralistics. Tartu.

This book consists for a large part of quotes - from Künnap's own work as well as from fellow 'revolutionary' Uralists, and as such it is not an easy read. As a general introduction to the wonderland of 'revolutionary' Uralistics, it may be useful.

- 1998b: Ensiapu koillisesta. Virittäjä 3 p. 420-421.

A reply to Cornelius Hasselblatt's Avunhuuto Lounaasta.

- 1998c: Olemme väsyneet puihin. Virittäjä 4 p. 607-609.

- 1998d: über uralisches Substrat in indoeuropäischen Sprachen. Linguistica Uralica p. 1-7.

- 1999: On the oldest Uralic lingua franca - Künnap, A. (ed.): Indo-European - Uralic - Siberian linguistic and cultural contacts. Fenno-Ugristica 22. University of Tartu, Division of Uralic languages. Tartu p. 142-150.

- 2000a: About some morphological features of Proto-Uralic - Roots II and III p. 27-32.

-2000b: Miscellanea Uralica - Roots II and III p. 308-317.

- 2000c: Comparativistics and Uralistics. Congressus Nonus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum pars I. Tartu p. 109-126.

- 2000d: Contact-induced Perspectives in Uralic linguistics. Lincom Europa. München.

-2000e: Ergänzungen zu den ostseefinnisch-lappischen-samojedischen Gemeinsamkeiten. Linguistica Uralica 2000/3. Readable as PDF-file Here

- 2001: Fennougristika alused. Tartu. On-line Here

Künnap on the 'New Paradigm' of Uralistics. On-line.

-2002a: On the critique of Traditionalists in Uralistics against the Innovative Trend. Fenno-Ugristica 24. Keelekontaktidest keelevahetuseni. Tartu p. 135-144.

A not particularly competent defense against his critics, in which Künnap appears to be still confused on whether I'm a He or a She

-2002b: Main language shifts in the Uralic languages. Lincom Studies in Asian linguistics 45. München.

-2002c: Some features of the Finno-Ugric verbal negation in the Volga Area - Volgan Alueen kielikontaktit. Symposiumi Turussa 16-18.8.2001. Turku p. 35-39.

Ago Künnap applies his new methodology of only reconstructing things in proto-languages that are already there in the daughter languages, and not reconstructing anything that is not already there.

- 2003a: A. Marcantonio: The Uralic language family: Facts, myths and statistics (Review). Linguistica Uralica p. 55-57.

I will only mention this one once in my bibliography, although basically the same review - titled with variations of 'An Orthodoxes Horror Dream' (Künnap means ´nightmare´, I think) - has appeared in Keel ja Kirjandus, in Eurasian Yearbook 2003 and attached to Fenno-Ugristica 24. Predictably, Ago Künnap´s take on the book differs somewhat from my own, as you could read in the review right next to above-mentioned one (De Smit 2003).

- 2003b: Veel veidi kahtlasest *k-st. Keel ja Kirjandus 2 p. 133-134.


Laakso, J. 1995: A spade is always a spade - comment on "The 'pragmareal' challenge to genetic language tree models" - Suhonen, S. (ed.): Itämerensuomalainen kulttuurialue. Castrenianum Toimitteita 49. Helsinki p. 70-75.

Like Esa Itkonen's articles mentioned earlier, this paper - a commentary on Raukko and Östman's 1995 paper - does a great job of explaining the relationship of the Family Tree Model and what we know about language change.

-1997: Neue Perspektiven für die Grundsprachenforschung? Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen 54 p. 205-213.

A critical review of Pusztay 1995.

-1998: Tyvestä puuhun noustaan. Virittäjä 4 p. 610-612.


-1999a: Voiko väittää mitä vaan? Virittäjä 4 p. 637-639. On-line (PDF) Here

-1999b: Language contact hypotheses and the history of Uralic morphosyntax. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja 88 p. 59-72.

- 1999c: Pohjois-Euroopan väestön alkukysymyksiä kontaktilingvistiikan kannalta - Fogelberg, P. (ed.): Pohjan Poluilla. Bidrag till kännedom av Finlands Natur och Folk 153. Helsinki p. 37-53.

A critical examination of Wiiks archaeological/linguistic ideas.

- 2001: Suomalais-ugrilaisten kielten kontaktien tutkimuksen näkymiä. Lecture at the UKANin Ulkomaanlehtorinpäivät, Joensuu. Available on-line Here

- 2003a: Kuuma keskustelua - ja mitä opimme tästä? Tieteessä Tapahtuu 2 p. 56-57. Readable as a PDF file Here

An answer to Rydman's remarks (Rydman 2003).

- 2003b: Linguistic Shadow-Boxing. Review of Marcantonio 2002, to appear in Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen. Readable on-line < href="http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/Johanna.Laakso/am_rev.html>Here

Nicely critical review, taking the book that Künnap (2003a) praised to Epsilon Eridani back down to earth and a little bit lower even. Compare also De Smit 2003.

- 2003c: Mitä kielitiede voi kertoa kansan juurista (ja mitä ei). Text of a lecture held at the M.A. Castrén Society 10.04.2003. Readable on-line Here

Lecture on the problems of combining archaeological, genetic and linguistic knowledge, interdisciplinarity and the post/trans/nondisciplinarity of contemporary 'root-seeking'. In other words, if you are (still) wondering why it is absolute nonsense to talk about 'Finns' and 'Finnish roots' in the Pleistocene, this article will explain.

-2003d: Uralistics and linguistic theory: where does discussion begin? - Bakr—-Nagy, M., Rédei, K. (ed.): ünnepi kötét Honti Lászlo — tiszteletére (Festschrift for Lászl— Honti). MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet. Budapest p. 268-277.

Detailed examination of the historical roots of the "Breakdown in Present-Day Uralistics".

Marcantonio, Angela 2002a: The Uralic language family: facts, myths and statistics. Publications of the Philological Society. Cambridge.

The newest attack - and one of the most detailed ones, it must be said - on the 'traditional' paradigm of Uralic linguistics. For a review praising it right up to Epsilon Eridani, see Künnap 2003a. For detailed criticisms of Marcantonio's central thesis and methodology, see Laakso 2003a and De Smit 2003, more coming soon…

- 2002b: Comment on "On the paradigm of Comparative Uralic Studies" by Juha Janhunen (FUF 2001 Vol. 56: 29-41). Finnisch-Ugrische Forschungen 57 p. 466-470.

Angela Marcantonio comments here on Janhunen's excellent article (Janhunen 2002).

Marcantonio, Angela, Nummenaho, Pirjo, Salvagni, Michela 2001: The "Ugric-Turkic Battle": A Critical Review. Linguistica Uralica 2001/2. Readable as a PDF file Here

Mikone, Eve 1996: Suomalais-ugrilaisia kieliä puhuvan väestön alkuperä. Virittäjä p. 401 and further.

A classic. Eve Mikone takes apart Wiik's ideas about the origins of Finnish and its speakers, which at that time had received quite a bit of attention in popular media. Eve Mikone probably has the honour of being one of the first to go out and slay the beast.

- 1997: Tutkijan taustasta riippumätöntä kritiikkiä. Virittäjä p. 83-85.

A rebuttal to Wiik's (1996) angry reply.

Nuñez, Milton 1998: Old and new ideas about the origins of the Finns and Saami - Roots I p. 151-160.

Pusztay, János 1995: Diskussionsbeiträge zur Grundsprachenforschung (Beispiel: Das Protouralische). Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica Band 43. Wiesbaden.

In this book, Pusztay rejects the idea of a Uralic proto-language and puts forward a model of more shallow proto-languages in contact with each other in Northern Eurasia, taking into account Palaeo-Asiatic and other Siberian non-Uralic languages as well. Marcantonio (2002) supports the same model. On of the linguistically most detailed arguments for the "revolutionary" view.

- 1997: Ajatus uralilaisten kansojen ketjumaisesta alkukodista - Julku, K. (ed.): Itämerensuomi - eurooppalainen maa. Oulu p. 9-22.

- 1998: Zur entstehung des sprachlichen Bildes Nord-Eurasiens - Roots I 161-167.

Raukko, J. and Östman, J.-O. 1995: The 'pragmareal' challenge to genetic language tree models - Suhonen, S. (ed.): Itämerensuomalainen kulttuurialue. Castrenianiumin Toimitteita 49. Helsinki p. 31-69.

In this paper, Raukko and Östman put forward their idea of Finnish as a mixed language: the genetic origin of a language and contact influences it may have incurred over time are not distinguished, so we are left with a picture in which the relationship between Finnish and Swedish (contact influence) is conceptually similar to that between Finnish and Mordvin (genetic relationship). In the same book, Johanna Laakso (1995) does a good job of setting the record straight on this. See also De Smit 2001.

Rédei, Károly 2000: Urheimat und Grundsprache (Wissenschaftliche Hypothesen und unwissenschaftliche Fehlgriffe). Congressus Nonus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum pars I p. 109-126.

Károly Rédei's criticism of 'revolutionary' Uralistics: the title pretty much says it all.

Renfrew, Colin 2000a: At the edge of knowability: towards a prehistory of languages. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10:1 p. 7-34. Readable as a PDF file Here

- 2000b: 10000 or 5000 years ago? Questions of time depth - Renfrew, C., McMahon, A., Trask, L. (ed.): Time depth in Historical Linguistics 2. Cambridge p. 413-439.

Roots I = Julku, K., Wiik, K. (ed.): The Roots of Peoples and Languages of Northern Eurasia I. Societas Historiae Fenno-Ugricae. Turku 1998.

Roots II and III = Künnap, A. (ed.): The Roots of Peoples and Languages of Northern Eurasia II and III. Fenno-Ugristica 23. Societatis Historiae Fenno-Ugricae. Tartu 2000.

Rydman, Jan 2003: Lyhyesti. Tieteessä Tapahtuu 1 p. 49-49. Readable as a PDF file Here

Mentioned here because Jan Rydman - the editor of Tieteessä Tapahtuu - comments on the outcry over Wiik's 2002 Eurooppalaisten Juuret book's nomination for the Tieto Finlandia award. Rydman views the discussion as an intolerant, overemotional, foaming-at-the-mouth reaction to an original if speculative work. As one of the signers of the appeal against the book's candidacy in Helsingin Sanomat mentioned by Rydman I of course disagree, and if you wonder why the tone of the recent exchanges have been rather sharp, the shear volume of the work put out by Künnap and Wiik listed in this bibliography and it's inverse relationship to scholarly quality should give you an idea. See Johanna Laakso's answer to Rydman (Laakso 2003a)

Saarikivi, Janne 2003: Fiktiivistä tiedettä? Hiidenkivi 1 p. 38-39.

Good debunking of Wiik's Eurooppalaisten Juuret (2002).

Sammallahti, Pekka 1995: Language and Roots - Congressus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum Jyväskylä 10.-15.8.1995 pars I. Jyväskylä p. 143-155.

This is one of the first papers in which Nuñez and Dolukhanov's continuity model of Finland's prehistoric habitation is examined from a Uralistic point of view. Interestingly, Sammallahti sees no need at all to overhaul 'traditional' Uralistics - that is, the elementary principles of historical linguistics.

Saukkonen, Pauli. 2000a: On the ancestors of Lapps (Saamis) and Finnic peoples -Roots II and III p. 372-380.

In my copy, the paper printed in the book was not the final version, which was provided separately. Like Raukko and Östman's, and also Künnap's papers, I regard this more as an exercise in misunderstanding historical linguistics than anything else.

-200b: Suomen kieli, suomalaiset ja Eurooppa. Olemmeko suomalaiset uralilaisia vai eurooppalaisia? Kielikuvia 2 p. 19-27. Readable as a PDF file Here

The title is already pretty bad… "Are dogs mammals or domesticated animals?" "Are we bananas yellow or do we grow on trees?". But trust me - the rest is even worse…

De Smit, Merlijn 1999: A. Künnap: Breakthrough in Present-Day Uralistics (review). Linguistica Uralica 134-140.

An, in hindsight, slightly tame but nevertheless critical review of Künnap 1998a. Compare Sutrop 1999, for fun's sake.

- 2001: Uralists Against History. On-line Here

A somewhat more detailed debunking of the more linguistic aspects of 'revolutionary' Uralistics, especially focusing on Raukko's and Östman's (1995), Künnap's (1998a) and Saukkonen's (2000) ideas concerning genetic linguistics and the Family Tree Model.

- 2003: A. Marcantonio: The Uralic language family. Facts, myths and statistics (review). Linguistica Uralica 57-67.

A review of Marcantonio's 2003 book. Again, the editors of Linguistica Uralica placed it nicely next to a rather hagiographical review - Ago Künnap´s, this time.

Sutrop, Urmas. 1999: A. Künnap: Breakthrough in Present-Day Uralistics (review). Linguistica Uralica 140-145.

Very positive review of Künnap 1998a. Compare De Smit 1999.

-2000a: The Forest of Finno-Ugric Languages - Roots II and III p. 165-196.

-2000b: From the 'Language Family tree' to the 'tangled Web of Languages'. FU 2000 pars I p. 197-219.

These two articles by Urmas Sutrop examine Language Family Trees as, well… trees. Meaning, they are linked with a host of other genealogical tree models - from Jacob's Ladder to Darwinist evolutionary models - but the article does not tell much about the relevance of the Family Tree Model for historical linguistics.

-2001: Zum Jubiläum von Ago Künnap. Linguistica Uralica 2001/3, readable Here as a PDF file.

A pretty hagiographic tribute to Ago Künnap. Interesting because of its somewhat saccharine praise of the proponents of the "new paradigm".

Uesson, Ants-Michael 1970: On linguistic affinity. The Indo-Uralic Problem. Malmö.

Criticizes the Family Tree Model. Referred to often in more recent criticisms.

Viitso, Tiit-Rein 2003: Pôhiverbi muutumine eitussõna järel, Lingua Franca ja algkeel. Keel ja Kirjandus 1 p. 24-31.

Tiit-Rein Viitso critically examines Künnap's ideas on Uralic historical morphology.

Wiik, Kalevi. 1992: Suomen kielen ja murteiden syntykysymyksiä - Remes, H. (ed.): Lähivertailuja 6. Suomalais-virolainen kontrastiivinen seminaari Mekrijärvellä 10.-11.4.1992. Kielitieteellisiä tutkimuksia - Studies in Languages 27. Joensuun Yliopisto. Joensuu p. 85-110.

- 1993: Suomen syntyvaiheita - Kieliposti 1 p. 4-9.

- 1995: The Baltic Sea prosodic area revisited - Suhonen, S. (ed.): Itämerensuomalainen kulttuurialue. Castrenianum toimitteita 49. Helsinki p. 75-89.

- 1996a: Kuinka itämerensuomalaiset kansat ja kielet syntyivät - Julku, K. (ed.): Congressus primus historiae Fenno-Ugricae. Historia Fenno-Ugrica I. Societas Historiae Fenno-Ugricae. Oulu p. 591-598.

- 1996b: Alkuperäiset ajatukeni. Virittäjä p. 590 and further.

Wiik takes offense at Mikone's (1996) detailed criticism and responds…

- 1996c: Põhja-Euroopa rahvaste ja keelte päritolu küsimusi. Keel ja Kirjandus 9 p. 581-189.

- 1996d: Missä itämerensuomen eteläraja on aikaisemmin ollut?- Pajusalu, K., Sullõv, J. (ed.): Õdagumeresoomõ lõunapiir. Võro Instituudi Toimõtiseq 1 p. 10-19.

- 1997a: The Uralic and Finno-Ugric Phonetic Substratum in Proto-Germanic. Linguistica Uralica p. 258-280.

One of the more detailed arguments for a Uralic substratum in Germanic.

- 1997b: Keelepuu vajab uuendamist. Keel ja kirjandus 12 p. 845-850.

- 1997c: Suomalaistyyppistä ääntämistä germaanisissa kielissä. Julku, K. (ed.) 1997 p. 75-103.

- 1997d: Mistä olemme lähtöisin - suomalaisten juurilla. Syrjänen, A., Westermarck, I. (ed.): Maailmalle, maailmalta - kulttuurisia katsauksia. Porvoo.

- 1997e: On the Baltic Sea phonetic area - Lehiste, I., Ross, J. (ed.): Proceedings of the International Symposium on Estonian Prosody October 29-30, 1996. Tallin p. 235-250.

- 1997f: Kantagermaanien suomalais-ugrilainen substraatti. Tieteessä tapahtuu 4 p. 25-29.

- 1997g: How far to the south in Eastern Europe did the Finno-Ugrians live? - Fennoscandia Archaeologica 16 p. 23-29.

- 1998a: Vähän kontaktiteoriastani. Virittäjä 1998 p. 421-434.

- 1998b: Olisiko kantagermaanissa sittenkin suomalais-ugrilaista ääntämistä? Tieteessä tapahtuu 1 p. 40-44.

- 1998c: Taistelu germaanien sielusta. Tieteessä tapahtuu 5 p. 50-53.

- 1999a: Suomalaisten alkuperävaihtoehdot. Tieteessä tapahtuu 3 p. 21-25.

- 1999b: Pohjois-Euroopan indoeurooppalaisten kielten suomalais-ugrilainen substraatti. - Fogelberg, P. (ed.): Pohjan Poluilla. Bidrag till kännedom av Finlands Natur och Folk 153. Helsinki p. 37-52.

- 1999c: Europe's oldest language? Books from Finland 3 p. 207-212.

- 1999d: North-European populations and languages - Künnap, A. (ed.): Indo-European-Uralic-Siberian linguistic and cultural contacts. Fenno-Ugristica 22. Tartu p. 292-300.

- 2000: European lingua francas - Roots II and III p. 202-236.

- 2002: Eurooppalaisten juuret. Jyväskylä.

This is the book all the fuzz is about. It was nominated for the "Tieto-Finlandia" award, which caused a rather stormy discussion in Finnish general media. Latest info is that Wiik is now big in Estonia: the book has been spread to high schools, and english and an estonian translation is to appear. The book suffers from all the ailments of the new paradigm in general - a mechanistic and highly improbably mirroring of the current "tripartite" linguistic situation in Europe to massive time depths (the Ice Age and beyond), and therefore, a lack of historicity - even though it takes a low profile on the question of the validity of the comparative method and the family tree.

Winkler, E. 1999: Wie kommen die Uralier an den Rhein? Anmerkungen zur neuesten Theorie über die Genese der uralischen Sprachen. Linguistica Uralica 4 p. 241-250.

An excellent paper examining the foundations of 'revolutionary' Uralistics, commenting also on the lack of historical depth of the "historical" linguistics of Künnap et al.