Re: [tied] a:/o: merger

On Sun, 30 Sep 2001 21:29:41 -0000, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

>To be pedantically precise,
>1. merged in some, not all, positions in Old Prussian.
>2. merged in most Samogitian (^zemai~c^iu,) dialects of Lithuanian as
>well (*a:, *o: > uo or even u:).
>3. And of course we all know of that quirks in Proto-Slavic which
>formally don't let us state they merged in a sense '*a: and *o:
>reflexed equally in all equivalent positions' (cf., eg, *-a:n >
>*<o,>, while *-o:n > *y2).

My apologies for overlooking Baltic...

As to *-o:n > -y, I have my doubts. I'd rather explain that through
the influence of a (secondary) -s [> -h] (ka:mo:ns > kamy), cf.
a:-stem Acc.pl. -a:ns > -y [or even Gsg. and Npl. -a:s > -y].
And thematic 1sg. -/o:+m/ > -/o,/