Re: [tied] [j] v. [i]

> From: Miguel Carrasquer [mailto:mcv@...]

> We must asssume it for PIE, where the o-stem loc. sg. *-oi is
> distinguished from the n.pl. *-oy (Slavic -e^ vs. -i).
>

Actually, you are postulating *-oi have yielded BSl. *-ai while *-oy
have yielded BSl. *-ei, aren't you? The latter (*-oy > *-ei) would
nicely fit in well with Lithuanian facts, and it would fit even more
nicely if you could also offer an explanation for the acute accent: *-oy

> *-éi (?), if we take the evidence from the definite adjectives

(<ge~ras> ~ <geríeji>) at face value, the problem, though, being that
the ending doesn't attract the ictus from unacuted syllables (<la~pas> ~
<la~pai>; the circumflex accent in <vilkai~> itself is not a problem
since -ái# > -ai~, -áu# > -au~ is an automatic phonological rule in
Standard Lithuanian).

Sergei