Re: [tied] Definite adjectives: correction

>
> My point was that the ablative (pronominal *-eo, *-oo; o-stem *-oo)

was

> still uncontracted in Balto-Slavic, which explains why Lith. has -o~
> (contracted *-o: would have given *-uo~) and Slavic inserted a

filler /h/

> to break the hiatus.
>
> >I see what you're thinking, but I have reservations about a

phonetic

> >change that only occurs in one unique grammatical environment.
>
> Sometimes that can't be helped, take for instance the unique

development in

> the o-stem dat.sg. (*-o:i > Lith. -ui, Slavic -u).
>

Maybe this works:

Slavic o > wo

therefore

-o.o > -owo

In those languages where g was 'turning soft' (ie. g > G) medial /G/
and /w/ were confused (in Danish, written -g- and -v-, it happens all
the time), so

-owo > -oGo

In some it turned hard again )I (suggest), so:

-oGo > ogo

In some others it wnt all the way to /h/

-oGo > oho

and in North Russian there were no soft /G/'s, but at some time /w/

> /v/, so

-owo > -ovo

Torsten