From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
Message: 10901
Date: 2001-11-02
>Miguel bites:I would expect a rule about accent/stress to solve all problems
>>>*wat:er (> wódr) -> coll. *wet:ár-xe
>>>*t:áreu (> *dóru) -> coll. *t:eráu-xe
>>>*k:Wa:u (> *gWo:us) -> coll. *k:Wáu-xe
>>
>>Well, seriously now, how does your "penultimate accent rule" explain
>>the difference between the paradigms of *ph2té:r(s), *ph2trós and
>>*máh2te:r, *máh2tr(V)s?
>
>To match your seriousness, might I ask how you can expect a
>rule to solve ALL problems at the same time?
>The penultimateSo the irregularity was just created recently out of nothing?
>accent rule accounts for the _overall_ irregularities in accent
>existant in IE. It can't account for changes that have happened
>later such as the acrostatic regularisation of thematic nouns,
>for instance, or the prehistorically improper accentuation of
>*máh2te:r.
>
>IE *pxte:r/*pxtros is perfectly expected by the PA rule and if the
>word were in fact an ancient root, we'd expect it to end in a vowel
>at one time. Unfortunately, it's a recently created term and
>likewise so is *maxte:r.
>So, your question is laced with an assumption that these words areThey are. Even if they weren't, how do you explain the threeway
>ancient.
>The paradigms of *xawi- "sheep" & *k^wo:n "dog", for example,Let me see if I have this straight: *k^wó:n dropped a final vowel,
>are better choices. They are certainly ancient roots. The PA rule
>is simply that a stem with accent on final syllable is indicative
>of a lost final vowel.