Most Russian loanwords from the youngest strata are clearly identifiable on the basis of their low degree of phonological integration and their semantics. Consequently, these words are classified as “clearly borrowed”.

Most Russian loanwords of pre-revolutionary origin as well as Komi, Norwegian, and Kare¬lian words in Kildin are relatively easy to identify. If these words are mentioned as possible loanwords by other authors (as, for example, by T.I. Itkonen 1958) as well they have also been classified as “clearly borrowed”.

In most cases of chronologically more remote borrowings, reference is made to certain pieces of etymological work on Proto-Saami and beyond. Normally, these words are phonologically and semantically highly integrated in current Kildin Saami. Without deeper knowledge of the historical phonology of Saami and its contact languages these words are hardly detectable as borrowings and have in most cases been classified as “probably borrowed” in my vocabulary.

The meanings of the LWT list have been filled in with Kildin Saami equivalents in the first instance with the help of the three existing user’s dictionaries of contemporary Kildin: Kuruč, Afanas’jeva and Mečkina 1985, Kert 1986, and Sammallahti and Chvorostuchina 1991. Items missing in the dictionaries have been looked up in the descriptive Kola Saami dialect dictionary of T.I.Itkonen (1958). The preliminary list was later cross-checked with native speakers with whom I also elicited certain items which were still missing.

The word forms are given in a practical phonemic transcription also used by KSDP. This transcription is based on certain practical considerations and preliminary phonological analyses which are described in Rießler and Wilbur (2007).

Stress is normally not marked in this transcription since it generally falls on the first syllable of a Kildin Saami word. Only in the case of a few recent borrowings where these stress patterns are ignored is stress marked in my transcription.

The orthographic representation of examples follows the orthographic variant used by the Kola Saami Documentation Project (KSDP) and is practically the same as the one found the large Kildin-Russian dictionary of Kuruč, Afanas’jeva, and Mečkina 1985.

The criteria by which a certain word was classified as “analyzable derived” are known productive or historical derivations. Some productive derivational processes are described in Kert (1971, 1987, 1988). It has to be noted, however, that my proposed glossing is preliminary. The derivational morphology in Kildin Saami needs further investigation. A better understanding especially of the semantics of certain aspect markers can facilitate the decision whether a given derivation is lexicalized or productive.

T.I. Itkonen’s Kola Saami dictionary served as a valuable source for determining the age of certain words in Kildin Saami. The occurrence of cognate word forms in different Kola Saami dialects and even in Inari and North Saami makes it easy to determine the age of a word found in this dictionary. For several entries T.I.Itkonen also suggests a loan etymology.

In order to determine the age and possible loan etymologies of inherited Saami words, these have been looked up with help of a North Saami cognate form. The starting point for this was normally the etymological database Álgu (2002–2008), which lists known etymological relations between different Saami languages or between Saami and related or unrelated non-Saami languages as well as the respective sources proposing these etymologies.

1. approx. 2000

New vocabulary coined in Sammallahti and Chvorostuchina (1991) or by the consultantsof the present investigation.

2. approx. 1980

New vocabulary coined in teaching materials during the 1980s.

3. at least 1980

Borrowed Russian vocabulary not found in T.I. Itkonen’s (1958) dictionary.

4. at least 1950

Borrowed Russian vocabulary found in T.I. Itkonen’s (1958) dictionary but without ref¬erence to his pre-revolutionary sources.

5. at least 1940

Borrowed Russian vocabulary found in the Finnish Skolt Saami varieties,i.e. these words were borrowed before the resettlement of Skolt Saami in 1940 and are found in the mod¬ern Skolt Saami dictionaries of Mosnikoff and Sammallahti (1988) and Sammallahti and Mosnikoff (1991).

6. after 1917 Typical Soviet-Russian vocabulary.

7. at least 1900

Vocabulary found in T.I. Itkonen’s (1958) dictionary with reference to his pre-revolutionary sources.

8. PS

Proto-Saami vocabulary with cognate forms in at least two western Saami languages.Proto-Saami was probably spoken until the first centuries of our era in the central and northern parts of Fenno-Scandia.

9. pre-PS

Pre-Proto-Saami vocabulary with cognate forms in other branches of Uralic.

10. PU

Reconstructed Proto-Uralic vocabulary. Proto-Uralic was probably spoken about 4500 BC in the area of present north-eastern and eastern Europe.