"sergejus tarasovas" <
s.tarasova-@...> wrote:
original article:
http://www.egroups.com/group/cybalist/?start=1806
Sergei wrote:
> The examples are excellent (and in Lithuanian i in i`lgas is still
> pronounced definitely longer than in vil^kas), but as for Slavic, you
used
> only South Slavic examples. Does it mean that we can find no traces
of that
> phenomenon in other Slavic groups? My idea is that this "spuriosity"
hides
> some regularity, as both pósolon' and peÅen/polon (we don't have
poln in
> today's Russian, at least) eventually reflect V:l?
They do, but earlier both Polish and Russian had monosyllabic forms.
Also, in ogieN /ogon' 'fire', weNgiel/ugol' 'coal', etc. (there are
scores of similar cases) the "yer" is no doubt what I call spurious.
This is why I think a similar explanation for posolon is most likely.
After all, we only have dolg- 'long', never *dolog-
The reason why I didn't use the past tense when citing Russian poln is
that it has some sort of marginal currency as a poetic archaism. My
best recollection of it is from Pushkin's "Mednyj vsadnik":
Na beregu pustynnyx voln
Stojal on, dum velikix poln,
I v dal' gl'adel...
Of course there are various traces of the former quantitative
distinction in East and West Slavic. I gave South Slavic examples
simply because in them the difference is still reflected in accentual
contrasts and can be seen very clearly (East and West Slavic have no
pitch accents).
Piotr