Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues

----- Original Message -----
From: "elmeras2000" <jer@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] The disappearance of *-s -- The saga continues

> We only need *-oH2ns analogically if that is the only preform that
> creates an acute. It is not, pure length does the same - unless
> evidence on which this insight is based is constantly being doctored
> away.
>
> There is acute in the Slavic reflex of *se:k- 'cut' (SCr sje` ` c'i)
> and in Lith. súolas 'bench' (vs. *sel- in OSax. selmo).
>
> The doctrine that pure length produces circumflex is based on a long
> series of root nouns (thus explicitly Kortlandt in Baltistica 22), but
> the trouble with root nouns is that the one form that was born with a
> long vowel, i.e. the nominative singular, was also monosyllabic.
> Therefore one cannot know whether the observation drawn from this
> (which is indeed a very solid observation) is that lengthened-grade
> vowels have circumflex, or that monosyllables have falling tone. The
> latter is certainly true: Lith. ju~s (: júduN), tie~, nuo~, Slov.
> ti^, mi^, vi^, ta^, kri^. Especially clear is the Lith. future dúosiu
> dúosi dúosiva dúosita dúosime dúosite with 3rd person duo~s. These are
> archaisms that cannot be explained as analogical on a prodoctive
> pattern. The same will be true of some root aorists by and da which
> form SCr. bi^, da^ and so differ from the tone of the infinitive.
>
> There is also acute in Lith. várna 'crow', a vrddhi derivative from
> var~nas 'raven', the old relationship between the genders being as
> with Germanic *ho:n-a- vs. *han-an-(Huhn/Hahn). I see no way of
> getting a laryngeal into the root segment of várna.
>
> Thus, if plain length does produce acute, there is no call for
> laryngeals in Lith. acc. nósiN 'nose' and sólymas 'brine' either; they
> can have simple lengthened grade *na:s-, *sa:l-, the regular
> alternants of the Sanskrit root segments of nas- and salilá-.
>
> And there is no need to push a laryngeal into the prehistory of the
> Lith. acc.pl. in -ùs, -úos-ius.
>
> There may not be many places where it can be determined whether a
> given long vowel is laryngeal-triggered or not. I have produced those
> I find decisive. On this background the doctrine that pure length
> produces circumflex just cannot stand. If one assumes something else,
> it will have to be without any foundation for it.

OK. I get your theory, it is conviencing I must admit. One thing I don't
like is this *na:s- and *sa:l- you are reconstructing. Is this supposed to
be BSl or PIE? I think laryngeals are an easier explanation.
And something else, you say that bi^ and da^ in Croatian is evidence for
falling tone in monosyllables but this is misrepresentation of the facts. In
a. p. c verbs in aorist in some stems have initial accent thus being
enclinomena with circumflex on the first syllable. Thus Croatian isko`vah
but i``skova, done`soh but do``nese, po`zvah but po``zva. If the verb is a
monosyllable like bi^, da^ or cˇu^ (cf. cˇu``h), of course it has circumflex
here instead of acute. It has nothing to do with the fact that it is
monosyllabic.

Mate