From: Miguel Carrasquer
>On Wed, 19 May 2004, Miguel Carrasquer wrote:No they don't, as I already explained in my original query:
>> Is there a way to determine whether the o-stem acc.pl. was
>> -o:ms or -oms?
>Yes, I'd say. If *-o:ms is reflected at all that's the old form, for
>analogy could easily produce *-o-ms, but hardly a form with a long vowel.
>Therefore Sanskrit -a:n, -a:m.s- decides the question. I would assume the
>same for Lithuanian -úos-ius.
>> Is there a language that doesn't automatically shorten
>> vowels before -Ns, and also doesn't automatically lengthen
>I believe Indo-Iranian and Lithuanian qualify.
>Gothic -ans and Greek -ons (> -ous, etc.) seem to reflectCan I get a serious answer now?
>*-oms, but can also reflect *-o:ms with Osthoff shortening
>(V:CC > VCC).
>Lithuanian -ùs seems to reflect *-o:ms, but that may also
>reflect lengthening before *-Ns (cf. i-stem acc.pl. -ìs).
>the same goes for Slavic (o-stem -y < -u:Nh, but i-stem -i <
>-i:Nh) and Vedic (o-stem -a:n(s), i-stem -i:n(s)).