lapin-puukko (aka puukko) revisited

Radu Transylvanicus · 29th April 2005, 01:03 AM

LAPIN PUUKO parts original nomenclature:
1. ylähela, nuppi
1.1 ponsi
1.2 koko ponsi
2. niitti, niittaus
3. kara, ruoto
4. kahva, pää, lapot
4.1 koristelevyt
5. alahela
5.1 väistin (sormisuoja), västi
6. terä
7. palko
8. lape
9. päästö, hionta, lasku
10. hamara, selkä
11. veriura, veriuurna, verikuurna, kouru
12. keikka
13. kärki

Radu Transylvanicus · 29th April 2005, 01:04 AM

The LAPIN PUUKO scabbard parts original denomination:

1. kantolenkki, kannin, linkku
2. rengas, ketju, lenkki
3. ylähela, suuhela
3.1 palle
4. tupen peili
5. lesta (sisäpuolella)
6. alahela, kärkihela
7. kärkikoriste, "tuulijarru

tom hyle · 29th April 2005, 05:07 AM

As I mentioned on the old forum, the leuko, flatter, wider, and including a version that's longer than puuko is AFAIK the usual finnish (Suomen)/Lappish (Sammi) knife, and is essentially a butchering knife similar to bichaq, as Suomen is related to Turkish. while the thicker, heavier-edged puuko is well suited for woodcarving. Some aspect of this distinction may be N American interpretation; the cultural distribution or naming issue, but not the structure. It remains my impression that puuko is a compound word meaning "wood knife" I read that in an article on puukos in a woodworking magazine. I do not think the author distinguished (or maybe knew) whether it's a knife for cutting wood or a knife for in the woods; it's usually good for both/either. I suppose I could look for an online dictionary, but then my success with the Latin ones was so miserable, and it doesn't seem tremendously important to me.......Whether the puuko is more German in its origins I don't know, but it seems to shake out that way to at least some extent within the modern setting, as far as which is more preferred as a general carry knife (we might suspect both cultures produce and use both butchering and carving knives). My puuko was a gift from a Finn who said it is the style favoured by the minority Swedes in Finnland. To clarify my language and thinking on this matter; Danes and Norse are Germans. Turks and Kazaks are Tartars. Innuits and Eskimos are North People (currently Nunnavut). Finns, Lapps, and to a lesser degree Swedes seem to fall somewhat in between, culturally, genetically, linguistically, and all of this is as one would expect from a map. A passing note of possible interest; the old traditional sheath is generally made of reindeer/caribou antler or bone (both are/were used) exposed and carved at the tip, and with a covering and upper (to borrow a shoe term) of the deer's hide, while the handle is generally birch, often burl for fanciness. Baltic birch is harder, stronger, and perhaps more weather resistant that paper birch, BTW, for the information of the N Americans who might be more familiar with that specie.
Randomish thoughts of possible interest: Ancient German tales often did not much distinquish between supernatural creatures, competing animals, or foreign or otherwise objectionable humans; all, including the risen dead, could be called "trolls" a word that seems closely equivalent in that sense to the modern N American English usage of the word "monster" Lapps and Finns are sometimes creditted with esoteric knowledge in Scandinavian folklore, and I sometimes wonder how this relates to both the magic Tartar steel (bulat/wootz) and famous "dwarf" and "Juten" smiths............................................ ..................................

VVV · 29th April 2005, 09:50 AM

Hi Tom,

I think you have mixed it up a bit about Scandinavians, Sami and Finns.
Being a Swede (with a Danish mother), who has worked several years in Denmark, Norway and Finland, I have some insight in the different languages and peoples

Quote:
"To clarify my language and thinking on this matter; Danes and Norse are Germans. Turks and Kazaks are Tartars. Innuits and Eskimos are North People (currently Nunnavut). Finns, Lapps, and to a lesser degree Swedes seem to fall somewhat in between, culturally, genetically, linguistically, and all of this is as one would expect from a map. "

Swedes, Danes and Norwegians are Scandinavian people with Scandinavian languages (part of the Germanic language family where also f.i. English belongs).
However I don't think Englishmen see themselves as Germans

Scandinavia + Finland and some small islands = The Nordic countries.
Finns have a different root with a completely different language (related to Hungarian).
When I am in the Scandinavian countries I can figure out the languages (like Italian and French) but when in Finland I always speak English.
Unless I meet a Finnish Swede (= somebody who has had a Swedish ancestor who migrated to Finland when it was a Swedish colony and still speaks Swedish).

I hope this clarifies the confusement about Scandinavia/Nordic countries etc.

Michael

tom hyle · 29th April 2005, 02:39 PM

Thanks. There's something to be said for understanding things from the inside, and there is equally sometimes an inability to, as said in modern English (German mixed with Greek and Latin and very little Celtic) "see the forest for the trees" ie it can be difficult to see an overall picture past all the details. I do not think that whether the current English (for instance) consider themselves German is much the issue (or at all important, actually); I consider them German, as do the Irish and Scotts, for instance, as I do (even moreso) the scandinavians; this is what I was explaining; that I am using a different slant on language; not any new or individual one (not that there'd be anything wrong with that) but an ancient/outmoded one, BTW. One that refers to the ancient past and to migrations and social movements as real, meaningful, and important things; taht thus emphasizes those more than the tribal/political divisions that fascinate most humans but seem much less important/informative IMHO. The most difficult thing about the word German is we have a modern polity sometimes called that (Germany, but actually Dutch Land, of course), about which there are even more emotions than about most such, and which is not a nation-state, but only a small, even random-seeming, part of the Germannic world; a tribe using the name of the whole nation; a common phenomenon, but no less confusing for that. There is not only no need, but no possibility for correctness in this matter, as it is a matter not of fact, but of interpretation; of outlook; of paradigm. Thus when reading me try to understand from/though my paradigm (which I try to explain); as when reading you I try to understand from yours.
Huns are more Tartars, at least originally, when they came to Europe.

VVV · 29th April 2005, 02:59 PM

Hi again,

Of course you could describe Central and North Europe as once a Germanic tribe and having different Germanic languages (except Finland, Hungary and the Baltic states). And we could discuss in depth if Danes are closer to Germans in a cultural way than f.i. Norwegians and Swedes etc.
Maybe we should drop this discussion and focus on the knife instead?

I only wanted to clarify the overall differences between Scandinavian and Nordic countries/languages/people.

Kind regards,

Michael

PS Don't forget that there is also a lot of old Viking terms in English - like sword and knife ;-)

29th April 2005, 01:03 AM	#1
Radu Transylvanicus Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA Posts: 271	LAPIN PUUKO parts original nomenclature: 1. ylähela, nuppi 1.1 ponsi 1.2 koko ponsi 2. niitti, niittaus 3. kara, ruoto 4. kahva, pää, lapot 4.1 koristelevyt 5. alahela 5.1 väistin (sormisuoja), västi 6. terä 7. palko 8. lape 9. päästö, hionta, lasku 10. hamara, selkä 11. veriura, veriuurna, verikuurna, kouru 12. keikka 13. kärki Attached Images

29th April 2005, 01:04 AM	#2
Radu Transylvanicus Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA Posts: 271	The LAPIN PUUKO scabbard parts original denomination: 1. kantolenkki, kannin, linkku 2. rengas, ketju, lenkki 3. ylähela, suuhela 3.1 palle 4. tupen peili 5. lesta (sisäpuolella) 6. alahela, kärkihela 7. kärkikoriste, "tuulijarru Attached Images

29th April 2005, 05:07 AM	#3
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	As I mentioned on the old forum, the leuko, flatter, wider, and including a version that's longer than puuko is AFAIK the usual finnish (Suomen)/Lappish (Sammi) knife, and is essentially a butchering knife similar to bichaq, as Suomen is related to Turkish. while the thicker, heavier-edged puuko is well suited for woodcarving. Some aspect of this distinction may be N American interpretation; the cultural distribution or naming issue, but not the structure. It remains my impression that puuko is a compound word meaning "wood knife" I read that in an article on puukos in a woodworking magazine. I do not think the author distinguished (or maybe knew) whether it's a knife for cutting wood or a knife for in the woods; it's usually good for both/either. I suppose I could look for an online dictionary, but then my success with the Latin ones was so miserable, and it doesn't seem tremendously important to me.......Whether the puuko is more German in its origins I don't know, but it seems to shake out that way to at least some extent within the modern setting, as far as which is more preferred as a general carry knife (we might suspect both cultures produce and use both butchering and carving knives). My puuko was a gift from a Finn who said it is the style favoured by the minority Swedes in Finnland. To clarify my language and thinking on this matter; Danes and Norse are Germans. Turks and Kazaks are Tartars. Innuits and Eskimos are North People (currently Nunnavut). Finns, Lapps, and to a lesser degree Swedes seem to fall somewhat in between, culturally, genetically, linguistically, and all of this is as one would expect from a map. A passing note of possible interest; the old traditional sheath is generally made of reindeer/caribou antler or bone (both are/were used) exposed and carved at the tip, and with a covering and upper (to borrow a shoe term) of the deer's hide, while the handle is generally birch, often burl for fanciness. Baltic birch is harder, stronger, and perhaps more weather resistant that paper birch, BTW, for the information of the N Americans who might be more familiar with that specie. Randomish thoughts of possible interest: Ancient German tales often did not much distinquish between supernatural creatures, competing animals, or foreign or otherwise objectionable humans; all, including the risen dead, could be called "trolls" a word that seems closely equivalent in that sense to the modern N American English usage of the word "monster" Lapps and Finns are sometimes creditted with esoteric knowledge in Scandinavian folklore, and I sometimes wonder how this relates to both the magic Tartar steel (bulat/wootz) and famous "dwarf" and "Juten" smiths............................................ .................................. Last edited by tom hyle; 29th April 2005 at 05:31 AM.

29th April 2005, 09:50 AM	#4
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Hi Tom, I think you have mixed it up a bit about Scandinavians, Sami and Finns. Being a Swede (with a Danish mother), who has worked several years in Denmark, Norway and Finland, I have some insight in the different languages and peoples Quote: "To clarify my language and thinking on this matter; Danes and Norse are Germans. Turks and Kazaks are Tartars. Innuits and Eskimos are North People (currently Nunnavut). Finns, Lapps, and to a lesser degree Swedes seem to fall somewhat in between, culturally, genetically, linguistically, and all of this is as one would expect from a map. " Swedes, Danes and Norwegians are Scandinavian people with Scandinavian languages (part of the Germanic language family where also f.i. English belongs). However I don't think Englishmen see themselves as Germans Scandinavia + Finland and some small islands = The Nordic countries. Finns have a different root with a completely different language (related to Hungarian). When I am in the Scandinavian countries I can figure out the languages (like Italian and French) but when in Finland I always speak English. Unless I meet a Finnish Swede (= somebody who has had a Swedish ancestor who migrated to Finland when it was a Swedish colony and still speaks Swedish). I hope this clarifies the confusement about Scandinavia/Nordic countries etc. Michael

29th April 2005, 02:39 PM	#5
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Thanks. There's something to be said for understanding things from the inside, and there is equally sometimes an inability to, as said in modern English (German mixed with Greek and Latin and very little Celtic) "see the forest for the trees" ie it can be difficult to see an overall picture past all the details. I do not think that whether the current English (for instance) consider themselves German is much the issue (or at all important, actually); I consider them German, as do the Irish and Scotts, for instance, as I do (even moreso) the scandinavians; this is what I was explaining; that I am using a different slant on language; not any new or individual one (not that there'd be anything wrong with that) but an ancient/outmoded one, BTW. One that refers to the ancient past and to migrations and social movements as real, meaningful, and important things; taht thus emphasizes those more than the tribal/political divisions that fascinate most humans but seem much less important/informative IMHO. The most difficult thing about the word German is we have a modern polity sometimes called that (Germany, but actually Dutch Land, of course), about which there are even more emotions than about most such, and which is not a nation-state, but only a small, even random-seeming, part of the Germannic world; a tribe using the name of the whole nation; a common phenomenon, but no less confusing for that. There is not only no need, but no possibility for correctness in this matter, as it is a matter not of fact, but of interpretation; of outlook; of paradigm. Thus when reading me try to understand from/though my paradigm (which I try to explain); as when reading you I try to understand from yours. Huns are more Tartars, at least originally, when they came to Europe.

29th April 2005, 02:59 PM	#6
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Hi again, Of course you could describe Central and North Europe as once a Germanic tribe and having different Germanic languages (except Finland, Hungary and the Baltic states). And we could discuss in depth if Danes are closer to Germans in a cultural way than f.i. Norwegians and Swedes etc. Maybe we should drop this discussion and focus on the knife instead? I only wanted to clarify the overall differences between Scandinavian and Nordic countries/languages/people. Kind regards, Michael PS Don't forget that there is also a lot of old Viking terms in English - like sword and knife ;-)