Re: the glottalic theory

From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Message: 16751
Date: 2002-11-14

--- In cybalist@..., Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen <jer@...> wrote:

> Does this mean "Is he talking nonsense?" The word is not in the

Yes, _nusikalbe:ti_ is a (non-recommended by school teachers) synonym
for _nusis^neke:ti_, but the flavour of both words is more "kind"
than that of 'to talk nonsense', I guess.

> Sense or nonsense, Kortlandt's article does not deal with the
> Danish stød, only with the socalled vestjysk stød which is a totally
> different matter.
> Kortlandt cannot be quoted for the view that the Danish stød is of
> descent.

Thank you for the clarification. I realized that vestjysk stød is a
dialectal phenomenon, but I didn't know it differs from the standard
one ontologically.

I know that you also disagree with Kortland on the possible origin of
Balto-Slavic acute: he states PIE long grade without a help from
laryngeals and mediae can result in a circumflex only and you state
it can (and should) yield an acute. But are there any non-commonplace
points in Kortlandt's _Slavic Accentuation_
( and _From Proto-Indo-
European to Slavic_ (
you do agree with?