Re: [tied] Re: Slavic accentual mobility

----- Original Message -----
From: "elmeras2000" <jer@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2004 2:39 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: Slavic accentual mobility


> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Mate Kapovic" <mkapovic@...>
> wrote:
> > The point I am trying to make is that inital accent appears all
> around the
> > system in a. p. c and that there is no reason for claiming that
> it's origin
> > in aorist comes from monosyllabic verbs originally. So 2/3 sg
> aorist cannot
> > be evidence in your monosyllabic theory. Bad "evidence" only
> weaken your
> > theory.
>
> The assignment of a lexeme to the mobile class "c" needs a reason,
> especially in the case of stems ending in -VH- which ought to move
> the stem into class "a" by Hirt's law. In such lexemes monosyllabic
> forms supply the *only* basis I can find to allow transfer to the
> mobile class. And the 2/3sg of the aorist qualifies eminently.

I don't see how can 2/3sg aorist have such an influence on the whole system,
but OK.
So do you think that all i-verbs originally had a. p. a stress on the -i-
or what? Like *dogovori´´l7?

> > [...] BSlavic *can* be innovative here but I am
> > trying to say that this methodology of looking for archaisms or
> supposed
> > archaisms isn't very good.
>
> I think it would be terrible not to do just that.

You must look for archaisms, I agree, but they have to be the real ones...
And it looks to me that lot of archaism-searching is just
neogrammarian-like, you only look at separate words, the system is not
important...

> That does indeed sound like an unsafe thing to do, given the general
> productivity of mobility (c, as in ne`` zna:m).

Oh, there's no mobility in present in Croatian. This just a sort of change
which happens in some dialects when ` is changed to ``, especially before
length (also in, for instance, ko``ji: instead of ko`ji: "which"). But there
is nothing ancient about it.

Mate