>*wlkWos is initially stressed ('acrostatic') despite the zero >vocalism,
>but this may be a relatively late shift (cf. contrasts like >t�mos 'slice',
>tom�s 'cutting, sharp'; it seems that accent retraction >could be used to
>distinguish thematic nouns from adjectives).
Wait! What the hell's wrong with me? My brain's on crack. I get it now! The
thematic nouns and adjectives are both based on a misanalysis of the
genitive, of course, but it was the thematic nouns developing out of the
adjectives that underwent the further regularisation process, producing the
acrostatic accent.
The adjectives, no longer being perceived the same as nouns, didn't undergo
the same regularisation of accent and retained the more ancient genitive
stress... erh, which was no longer viewed as a genitive termination anyways
because it was now "thematic" with a nominative ending, agreeing with the
noun it modified... Hence the alternation of accent which arose _not_ to
distinguish nouns and adjectives per se, but rather as a regularisation of
accent that only applied to nouns, not adjectives. Yes! It WAS a late
process too.
Cool! I never knew so much grammar could happen in a mere thousand years.
- gLeN
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com