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

From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 32154
Date: 2004-04-21

On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 19:08:42 +0000, Sergejus Tarasovas
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

> *-u:m > *-um looks like a regular Slavic development
>(do you have any objections?)

I couldn't believe it at first. Looks like a stroke of
genius. I'm not yet 100% sure it doesn't mess up anything
somewhere else (acc.sg. *-eh2m > -á:m > -ó:m > -om > -oN [or
without nasal raising: -á:m > -am > -om > -oN] is safe). I
should do a complete check with the Sound Change applier.
Later.


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