Comments:See SKE 162 (Kor-Jpn.). The Jpn. word is not attested in OJ and MJ texts and may well be borrowed from Korean - which would also explain the irregular high tone.
Comments:A Western isogloss. See VEWT 180 (Turk.-Tung.; but Kor. mjǝk 'neck' cannot belong here), ОСНЯ 2, 92, АПиПЯЯ 293. Doerfer (TMN 4, 104) tries (in vain) to destroy the Turk.-Tung. paralle l ("aus lautlichen ... als auch semantischen Gründen inkorrekt" - ?). The comparison of the Mong. form with Man. ikursun in KW 281, Rozycki 115 should be regarded as erroneous (Man. ikursun < ТМ *xīKeri q. v.). For further Nostratic parallels see ОСНЯ 2, 92.
Comments:An Eastern isogloss. The original meaning must have been 'mild', particularly (but not necessarily) applied to feelings, whence the more general meaning 'soul' in Kor. Turk. *jakĺɨ 'good' (see ЭСТЯ 4, 63-64) may be a merger of this root with *jakɨĺ- 'to approach' (q. v.).
Comments:Phonetics in the Mong.-Tung. area presents some problems, probably because of an early dissimilation *ńi̯ama > *ni̯ama in part of the dialects, and some dialectal mixture afterwards (cf. several different reflexes in Evk.).
Comments:There are some indications in Turkic and TM that the root in question denoted a big vessel for tanning skins; in the Eastern area, however, it is also used for a boat or part of a boat (with a natural transition 'vessel' > 'boat').
Comments:Владимирцов 188, Poppe 28, Дыбо 14. Initial *l- is possible if we relate here Jurch. lar-ru- 'to write' (809) - the PTM form in this case must be reconstructed as *liru-. Despite Doerfer's criticism (TMN 4, 69-70), the etymology seems quite plausible (and the TM forms can certainly not be explained as borrowed < Mong.).
Comments:EAS 77, Poppe 39, Menges 1984, 281, Street 1980, 300-301, АПиПЯЯ 30-31, 78, 87, 275. For the Turkic form cf. Mong. *ni-l-mu-sun (KW 281; Владимирцов 146), ТМ *(i)ńa-mū-, MKor. nún-mɨ́r, PJ *na-mi(n)tV 'tear' < PA *ńi̯ā(ĺ)-mi̯ūri 'water of the eye'. PT irregularly preserves length here: it is probably due to the influence of other homophonic and synonymic roots. Jpn. *m- here deserves special comment. It is a usual reflex of *ń- or *ŋi̯-, but none can be safely reconstructed here (not *ń- because of Mong. ni-dün, not *ŋi̯- because of TM *ńia-sa). One may note, however, that Jpn. has n- in *na-mi(n)tV 'tear', and perhaps also in the old deverbative OJ niram- (also *nia-m- > nem-) 'to glare at, keep an eye on' = Kor. nori- 'to have an eye upon' = TM *ńia-ru- 'to stare' (ТМС 1, 291) = Karakh. jeze- (EDT 985, TMN 4, 163) 'to patrol, keep an eye on' < PA *ni̯ā-ŕV. One can also pay attention to the nasal suffix present in Kor. nu-n and Jpn. *mai(N); it may suggest that we are actually dealing with reflexes of an archaic suffixed form *ni̯a-ŋ(V), the velar in which also can account for some unexpected TM forms: Jurch. ŋia-ĉi and Nan. dial. ŋasar ( < *ŋia-sa < *ńiaŋ-sa). Japanese may have had a similar assimilation (*ma-iN < *ŋi̯a-ŋ < *ni̯a-ŋ), while the suffixless form is preserved in a compound (*na-mi(n)ta < *ni̯a) and a derived verb (niram-). Cf. also KBalk. ǯalamuq 'tear' (probably < Bulg., reflecting a trace of the original compound in PTurk.). Traces of *-ĺ- in some forms (Turk. *jāĺ, Mong. *nil-mu-sun) may reflect a distinct root, preserved in Mong. *naliqa 'wing-like membrane, corner of the eye', as well as nilma / milma 'pupil of the eye'.
