Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 23:32:15 +0100, Mate Kapovic <mkapovic@...> wrote:

>
>----- 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.

The loc.sg. of the o-stems never had a long vowel. That's a significant
difference with the a:-stems. Another difference is that in the a:-stems
the length was caused by laryngeal *h2, while in those o-stems endings that
have a long vowel (dat. -o:i, abl. -o:t, acc.pl. -o:ns, ins.pl. -o:is), the
ins. sg. excepted, the lengthening agent probably wasn't a laryngeal (one
can't be totally sure of the ins.pl., given ins.sg. *-oh1).

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...