Re: [tied] Re: Lith.

From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Message: 16082
Date: 2002-10-08

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Wordingham [mailto:richard.wordingham@...]
--- In cybalist@..., Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen <jer@...> wrote:

>>I would get from a presumed *-omùs via attested -ómus to
-óms much
>> as one gets from vandenès via vandènes to present-day
though I
>> do not know a good formulation of a rule that
would enable us to
>> the syncope.

>Why vanden~s
and not **vandéns? 
Because  /o/ (<*a:, it's still [a:] in some North Low Lithuanian dialects, as that of my wife's parents) in -óms < *-a:mùs (pace Jens' *-omùs) is historically _long_, while *è in *vandènes is short.