--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> Are such e(n)-less forms also attested for the loc.sg.?
>
> For the o-stems, I know there is nam-ie~.
Also dial. _orie~_ 'out there' (_óras_ 'air; weather; open space'),
_va~karie_ 'in the evening', _artie~_ 'close, near' (_ar~tas_ 'close
(adj.)', now shifted to the u-stems: _artùs_, the shift still
operating in the present-day Lithuanian), _tolie~_ 'far'
(_to~las_ 'far (adj.)', cf. _tolíese_ 'far away' < *tolíesu 'far-
LPl', now _tolùs_), _ankstie~_ 'early' (_an~kstas_); their Standard
Lithuanian counterparts _artì_ (note an erroneus analysis in EIEC: <
*i-stem *h2értis), _tolì_, _ankstì_ (-ì < *-íe < (eventually) *-ói),
as well as the adessive forms like _mis^kíepi_ 'to the forest' (*-
íe '-Lsg' *píe 'at, to') would point to the originally acuted *-íe <
*-ói, the circumflex of _namie~_ being secondary. Any ideas on the
origin of the acute?
> In the a:-stems Loc = Dat (-ai), as in Slavic?
The ending is not directly attested, but the postpositional locative
(-ojè < *-a:i *én) and adessive (-áipi < *-á:i *píe) unequivocally
point to *-á:i -- with long acuted *-á:, while for the dative a long
circumflexed *-ã:i is traditionally reconstructed, so, strictly
speaking, L != D. Any ideas?
> I have no idea what to expect in Old Lith. for the eu- and i-stems ?
>Loc. sg.
> *-e:u (*-o:u) and *-e:i.
The "free" (unagglutinated) Lsg ending is not directly attested for
the i-stems; archaic Lithuanian and dialects would point to -ije
(thus most likely < *-i *én) as an older variant, and the adessive
sg. of _akìs_ 'eye' (a C-stem shifted to the i-stems) is _akìpi_ (< *-
ì 'Lsg' *píe), so the free form would be *-ì ( < *-íe < *-é:i ?). As
for the u-stems, dialectal (Low) archaic Lithuanian still has -uõ
(jè), -uõ probably being a normal phonetical outcome of PIE *-o:u (or
what?).
Sergei