Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction


> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:55:54 +0100, Mate Kapovic <mkapovic@...> wrote:
>
> >There cannot be any difference between *-i and *-y endings because *i and
*y
> >is one and same vowel the difference between *i and *y being only in
> >position (allophones).
>
> I don't think so.

OK, but this your own private theory, not a known or accepted fact.

> As Sergejus showed, the Lith. fem. dative has circumflex, but the locative
> had acute. Both can be reconstructed with a long vowel (*-a:i).

This is the same as in Slavic, cf. D. *'vode^ and L. *vod'e^. The first one
should be PIE *-eh2ey > *-ah2ay > *-a:y and the second one *-eh2i > *-ah2i >
*-ay. In o-stems, L. *-oy > *-ay (after *o > *a the same as in a-stems!),
but L. of o-stems is not acuted, cf. Slavic *'gorde^. This ending should be
the same as the a-stems ending and there is no clear reason why the a-stems
L. sg. ending shuld be acuted. This maybe points to original root stress in
L. of a-stems as well (enclinomen) as Dybo sugested.

From: "Sergejus Tarasovas" <S.Tarasovas@...>
>which is from < *íe < *éi (*ey) or *ói (*oy, if one accepts *oi > [some
>not very certain prosody-related conditions] *ie in East Baltic ) (this is
>rather for Mate than for you).

This is also very strange. I cannot think of a reason why this ending should
have an acute. But this is not the only problem, why is the development
different from adjectival -i` and pronoun tie~?

Mate