[tied] Re: Nominative Loss. A strengthened theory?

From: Sergejus Tarasovas
Message: 32148
Date: 2004-04-21

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Mate Kapovic" <mkapovic@...> wrote:

> I don't see how you explain Slavic g. pl. from *-oom > *-o::m.
Slavic -7
> looks like plain PIE *-om to me.

Probably, but I just tried to play with the idea that supelong vowels
were automatically narrowed at some stage of Proto-Slavic, thus *-
o::m > *-u:m. *-u:m > *-um looks like a regular Slavic development
(do you have any objections?), as well as *-um > *-U.

Sergei