--- In cybalist@..., "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> As for the expected Slavic development of word-initial *oi-/*ai-,
I'd expect at least partial confusion of *ei- and *oi- there, like
that of *e- ~ *o-/*a-, *eu- ~ *ou-/*au- (> *ju- ~ *u-) or *e:- ~
*a:-/o:- (> *e^- ~ *a-).
To be sincere that confusion is a news for me. Examples?
> There are other possible examples, e.g. *iskati 'look for' (Lith.
ies^k-, Germanic *ai(s)-sk- 'ask, seek'). I'm not sure if the accent
is significant.
But what about recently discussed Slavic *(j)e^snU ~ Lith. ai's^kus?
The pitch accent is the same.
> _Final_ *-oi became *-i (via *-e.:) in the nom.pl. of thematic
masculines.
Curiously enough, this is often ascribed to the effect of the
_circumflex_ accent (which is rather unnatural for me if we accept at
least the assumed original Baltic phonetical rendering of a
diphthong's circumflex: it's the _first_ component which is
acoustically more prominent, not the second one).
Sergei