On Mon, 11 Nov 2002 10:31:36 -0000, "tgpedersen"
<
tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>in message 16625 you wrote:
>"
>High tone is certainly associated with glottalization (just as low
>tone with aspiration). Within IE, there are a number of examples of
>high tone becoming a glottal stop (Danish, Latvian) or aspiration
>becoming a low tone (Punjabi), so I'm assuming the process can work
>both ways.
>"
>On the basis of that I made the assumption that you might want to use
>the development Swedish tone I > Danish stød in support of your
>theory.
Only as a partial parallel.
>Therefore I pointed out that a Swedish root CV:C or CVRC with
>tone corresponds to a Danish CV?C and CVR?C, thus ending up on the
>other side of the vowel. That's why.
>
>A remark: Danish stød occurs in monosyllabic roots. Generally one
>hears that since this is always so, the tone system of Old Norse must
>have been completely reorganized, and therefore Scandinavian tones
>and Danish stød are not related to PIE tones (at least that's why I
>was told in sci.lang., when I asked whether it might be related to
>the PIE system, as reconstructed from Greek, Lithuanian and Sanskrit)
>and therefore not relevant to the study of PIE tones. But that
>premise is not true, there are many stødless monosyllabic roots, and
>especially in roots of the form -CVRC- stød is unpredictable.
>Therefore the conclusion falls, and by Occam (sorry Duns Scotus) we
>should un-assume the assumed ON reorganisation of the tone system.
>But I assume that's implicit in your idea of how tone I (and stød)
>arose; the loss of the second syllable of the ON monosyllabic roots
>took place some time in Proto-Germanic, and the high-low distinction
>you talk of therefore belongs to that language, and by extension (and
>Occam!) is descended from that of PIE.
I'm not familiar with the exact details of the Danish (or vestjysk)
stød, or Swedish accentuation, so correct me if I'm wrong. My
impression is that Swedish tone I occurs on (native Germanic, i.e.
begin-stressed) polysyllables, while tone II occurs on native
monosyllables and most loanwords. The Danish stød continues tone I in
formerly polysyllabic words that have become monosyllabic in Danish,
if the first syllable is capable of bearing the stød (i.e has the
structure -VV(C) or -VR(C)). Stødless monosyllables in Danish are
then 1) original monosyllables (in ON), 2) former polysyllables with
first syllable of the structure -VC(C).
The West Jutland stød is a further development, where a glottal stop
appears in former (Danish) polysyllables which have become
monosyllables in Vestjysk (provided the first syllable ends in -Cp,
-Ct, -Ck).
The two intonational patterns of Old Norse (retained in Swedish) do
not reflect the original PIE accentual patterns, which had already
been lost in Proto-Germanic. What I believe happened in
Proto-Germanic was that the PIE free accent was replaced by a fixed
tonal/stress contour with stress and low tone on the first syllable,
no stress and high tone on the last syllable (if any). For
Proto-Germanic/Proto-Norse monosyllables, this was simplified to tone
II (rising), for polysyllables this resulted in tone I (1st syllable
falling, 2nd syllable rising).
Simplified schema:
PIE PGmc Swed. Dan
1 syll. _/ \_/ tone II no stød
2 syll. PD _/ _ \_ _/ tone I potential stød
HD _ _/ [Verner]
3 syll. PD _ _/ _ [apocope]
HD _ _ _/ [apocope]
The different PIE patterns were carried over into Germanic as
Verner-alternations (but only if *p, *t, *k(W) were involved), with an
old low tone on the second syllable reflected as aspiration *má:tè:r >
*'mò:thér > *'mo:þ&r, and lack of aspiration if the tone had already
been high, as in *pàté:r > *'phàdér > *'fad&r.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...