--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> How does the theory deal with mobile words such as [from
> Zaliznjak's list]
> (a-stems)
> bedra, vesna, vIrsta, dUska, zvêzda,
> (adj)
> gustU, desnU,
> prostU, prêsnU, pustU, têsnU, xolostU, c^astU ?
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...
I now seem to recall that we (Slaaby-Larsen, Thomas and I), when
discussing the retraction some years ago, found it not to apply to a
sequence of -s- + -t/k-. Thus the suffix -iskó- > mobile '-IskU, -
Iskà, '-sko, (cf. Lith. -is^kas, which gives a mobile paradigm
with
mobile words). However, -k^-C- and -z-d/g- does trigger the
retraction.
This also accounts for *te^sto (c) < *taHistó- and some of the
words
mentioned above.
bedra 'thigh' is etymologically obscure, as far as I know. It is
sometimes connected with Lat. femur, -inis (with -bH- ~ -m-?). If
this is correct, we would have had an ablauting paradigm, with
instances of -en-, where the syllable wasn't closed. This is most
likely the case with _vesna_, cf. Balt. *vasar-. So these words can
be explained away.
dUska is a loan-word. gve^zda is ap (b). This leaves some adjectives
in -no-, of which at least one one reflects an earlier *-ino-,
desno, cf. Lith. de~s^inas, Skt. daks.iná-. pre^snU and te^snU I'm
not sure about at the moment.
Anders