[tied] Re: Russ. pilá

Maybe we should consider the possiblity that infinitives with an
acute -í- in Slavic may also reflect the full-grade *-eyH-, where
the -H- isn't vocalized and therefore may trigger Hirt's Law.

Otherwise, the examples of Hirt's Law should then of course only
reflect roots with -h1-. Indeed *wiH-ró- 'man' (to *wih1-
'strength'?), *dHuh1-mó- 'smoke', puh1-ró- 'wheat' show Hirt's
Law and *gWih3wó- doesn't. On the other hand, isn't Latv. gru~ts
'heavy' < *gWruh2-tó- problematic?

But I would like to see more positive examples like *gWih3wó-,
where Hirt's Law doesn't work with h2/3.

Anders

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:02:16 +0100 (CET), mkapovic@...
> wrote:
>
> >> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
> >> <S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:
> >>
> >>> But we still have acute, eg., in the infinitives: *píti,
*býti,
> >>> *z^íti etc.

> >> On a second thought, this is not a problem, if the circumflex
is not
> >> a result of the contraction, but rather a metatony by Meillet's
law
> >> (infinitive stands out of the paradigm, so Meillet's law doesn't
> >> operate on it).
> >
> >The accentuation of *pil7, *pila, *pilo is definitely due to
Meillet's
> >law, as is the accentuation of *byl7, *z^il7 etc. But the
question is why
> >do we have the mobility here in BSl and not the fixed root
stress? The
> >same goes for Slavic *pivo, *z^ir7 (this we have already
mentioned),
> >*dar7, *z^iv7 etc.
>
>
> My provisional explanation is that *gwih3wós first became
> *gWy&3wós (*gWiOwós), then Hirt's law applied vacuously,
> then *y&3/*iO became *i: (I'm withdrawing my suggestion that
> it became explicitly _circumflex_ î:).
>
> In that case, *gWriHwéh2 must be *gWrih1wéh2, which
> regularly became barytone *gWríh1weh2 by Hirt's law. (This
> means that there is no connection with *gWer(h3)- as
> suggested in EIEC).
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...