>On 2007-09-14 John Vertical wrote:
>> The crutch is that Finnish doesn't really derive _sähkö_ from
>> anywhere - it's a completely inanalyzable word with no secondary
>> meanings, basically an a priori coinage with some vaig phonesthetic
>> influences. I was wondering if any other natlang also does THAT.
>>
>> ...I could ask the same for any other "modern" concept, really. Modern
>> Finnish is probably much more Constructed than any other extant
>> standard language, and yet I can't really think of any other such words
>> in use, so to find more such hits might require loosening the requirements.
>
>Finnish is actually only a vague reflexion of its southern
>neighbor in this respect. Linguist and language reformer
>Johannes Aavik actually created a large number of a-priori
>neologisms, some of which were successful.
>
><
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_vocabulary> says
>about 50-60 became accepted and lists the following.
>
>veenma, roim, laip, kolp, relv, ese, süüme, mõrv, ulm,
>siiras, range, sulnis, nõme, taunima, naasma, reetma,
>embama; eirama, eramu, etlema, kõlar, külmik, meetmed,
>meene, siirdama, teave, teismeline, teler, üllitis,
>ärandama, levima, süva(muusika), taies, rula
>
>Most of them are not total neologisms, but transmogrified loans, like
>_relv_ 'weapon' < _revolver_.
>
>The following book, which may be hard to come by outside
>Swedish university libraries, but should be obtainable at
>Finnish university libraries, I believe, has more info:
>
>Author Tauli, Valter, 1907-
>Title Introduction to a theory of language planning / Valter Tauli
>Publication Uppsala : univ., 1968
>Material Information 227 s.
>Series Studia philologiae Scandinavicae Upsaliensia, 6
>
>/BP