Re: [tied] Slavic accentology

>>>>> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 23:36:52 +0200, Miguel Carrasquer
>>>>> <mcv@...> wrote:


>>That is surely wrong. Many Slavic languages clearly distinguish between
>>*-ja and *-Ija suffixes.
>
> Yes, as Stang recognizes, but the a.p. b words in -Ija seem
> to be missing, and in its stead we find the
> volja/c^as^c^a-words.

Nope, *volja-type represents a. p. b words of -ja stems. That's my theory
anyway.

>>>The vowel of the i:-stems is long, but that's
>>> precisely where Stang's law does *not* always work (Dybo's
>>> *loz^í:tI, *loz^í:te).
>>
>>Hm lo`z^i:m is (c) in my language.
>
> It's also c in Russian, but Zaliznjak marks it as "sledy b".
> If the paradigm was indeed theme-stressed, the tendency in
> the long run would be for it to adapt to the a.p. c paradigm
> in the 1sg. (and 2pl.) as well.

I cannot remember clearly but it sounds like one of Dybo's mumbo-jumbos.
Don't take the Russians' word for granted, especially after 1988. Willem's
article from Lehfeldt 2001 is very instructive concerning this.

Mate