From: Richard Wordingham
Message: 16724
Date: 2002-11-13
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:24:13 -0000, "Richard Wordingham"so
> <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
> The odd thing is that the spelling does not reflect the lenitions,
> we have <t> for what is later t- / -d-, and <d> for what is later d-/
> -dd-. Perhaps this reflects [th-]/[-t-] vs. [d-]/[-D-] (there isIs this so odd? I would expect the lenitions to apply to the Old
> also -tt-, later -t- for aspirated medial [th]).
> The Latvian broken tone represents an old acute (rising) tone in anfirst
> initial syllable, where the stress used to be on another syllable in
> the word (in Latvian the stress has been always retracted to the
> syllable). So Lith. líepa, galvà = Latv. lie~pa (long tone =Unfortunately, I can't locate a description of the Latvian broken
> originally accented acute), gal^va (broken tone = originally
> unaccented acute). The Baltic circumflex (~) is continued in the
> Latvian falling tone (`).