Re: [tied] Re: Ingvar and Ivar

Stress alternation in *PIE* nouns is nothing unusual -- I gather you really mean Germanic. Vernerian alternations in nouns were indeed levelled out in prehistoric Germanic (in historical times the same happened to verbs in many languages, cf. English choose : chosen vs. Old English c^e:osan : coren), but old stress dublets may have left sporadic traces in the recorded languages. There must be a reason why OHG haso contrasts with NW Germanic -r- forms such as OE hara -- an exact cognate with the same morphological structure (a masculine n-stem). What, according to you, is "the standard explanation"?

Piotr

----- Original Message -----
From: tgpedersen@...

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 1:25 PM

Subject: [tied] Re: Ingvar and Ivar

Always glad to be of service. But can we conclude from the existence of such a Verner-alternating pair that they both came from a stress-alternating single word? This is routinely done for verbs, but this new-fangled idea of stress-alternating PIE nouns (after my time at uni) seems not to be quite accepted as the standard explanation for eg. Hase/hare?