Finnic Language Puns

In my beginners Russian course last term, my professor told us that the Russian form of possession: "I have [noun]" is "У меня есть [noun]" is derived from the Finnish: "Minulla on [noun]". Now, given that both of these constructions SEEM to be fairly common, I was skeptical. I did some research, and found that among Eastern Slavic languages, there's the same construction:

Minulla on- Finnish (possible source of phrase into Russian?)

/'minulla on/

"min + lla" "on"

"1sg + adessive" "be-3sg present"

Mul on- Estonian

/'mul on/

Same thing-- "mu + l" = "1sg + addessive"

У меня есть- Russian

/u mʲi'nʲɑ jɛst/

"At" "1sg + accusative" "be + infinitive"

У мене ес- Ukrainian

Simliar to Russian in both transcription and definition/parsing

У мяне есць- Belarussian

More similar to Russian in transcription, same in definition/parsing

=============================================================================

Маю- Ruthenian (it seems that this is indeed an East Slavic language, so what's the deal with the construction simliar to Polish?)

/mɑ'ju/

"have-1sg present"

http://www.metropolitancantorinstitute.org/other_files/RusynLessons.pdf, p.19

But not in non-East Slavic languages:

Mam- Polish

/mam/

"have-1sg present"

Google Translate tells me that all of the Southern and Western Slavic languages do it like Polish

Clearly there's a difference here. In Finnish, we use the addessive case attached to "minä". The East Slavic languages use something that means approximately "At me there is," and Polish and old Ruthenian have specific verbs meaning "to have".

Does anyone have any insight on how the Finnish form could have affected the East Slavics? Given the history between the two peoples (Finns and Slavic-speaking Russians), it seems unlikely that there would have been enough contact between the two given that Russia did not acquire Finland until very recently (1809). Also, it doesn't seem likely that the other Finno-Ugrian groups within the Empire beforehand c

Hello everyone, I study nordic languages, and amongst others Finnish, and I've got an interest for Northern Sámi. So I've been wondering about something: At what point did the a/ä and u/y distinctions appear in Finno-Ugrian languages? I'm not really talking about vocalic harmony, but rather about the phonetical distinction between /a/ and /æ/ and the appearance of /y/ (which weirdly enough exists in Hungarian but not in Northern Sámi ... or does it?).

Is the fact that /a:/ is written 'á' in Northern Sámi related to the appearance of 'ä' in Finnish, Carelian,asf.?

Thank you.