On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:54:18 +0100 (CET),
mkapovic@...
wrote:
>The mobility of i-stems is not relevant, as I have already once mentioned
>since there is an overall tendency for i-stems to become mobile.
What it looks like is that i-stems behave as masc. o-stems,
i.e. what should have become AP(b) i-stems after Dybo's law,
appear as AP(c) mobile i-stems. There are plenty of AP(a)
i-stems.
In the u-stems, something like the opposite has happened.
AP(b) u-stems are not uncommon (they have a tendency to
become o-stems, however, filling part of the void left by
AP(b) o-stems becoming mobile), and there are practically no
AP(a) u-stems. If the AP(a) u-stems became AP(c), that
would explain why Hirt's law apparently does not apply to
synU.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...