Re: [tied] Re: Decircumflexion, N-raising, H-raising: Slavic soundr

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 13:51:45 +0000, Sergejus Tarasovas
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>> Remind me: was Krivichian masc. (o-stem) nom. sg. -e the
>> ending of both hard and soft stems, or only of hard stems?
>> And what are the corresponding accusatives? At some point,
>> when I was reshuffling rules (in this case J-umlaut _before_
>> H-raising), I got Krivichian-looking nominative *-jos > -je
>> as the result.
>
>Here's part of the *o-stems paradigm (in normalized transcription;
>please note that /k'/, /g'/ and /x'/ functioned as phonemes, and that
>*c and *c^ (< *c^,*tj) merged in /c/ ("alveolo-palatal" affricate):

Thanks.

Would it be plausible to assume the following:

* h-raising was late in Krivichian, and came in part _after_
j-Umlaut.

* this gave a paradigm in the (j)o-stems:

hard soft
nom. *-U -(j)e ~ -(j)I
acc. -U -(j)I

* "soft" -(j)e, allowing a convenient distinction between
nom. and acc., spread to hard stems, giving:

nom -e -(j)e ~ (j)I
acc. -U -(j)I

Did Krivichian use the acc. or the gen. for animate objects?


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