--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "whetex_lewx" <whetex_lewx@...>
wrote:
> Have dialectologists registered this word in LKZ^ with ending -as?
AFAIK it's Z^emaitian, but that's not a problem -- Z^emaitian words
are declinable, and Z^emaitian has deleted only short unstressed
endings, while other endings are up and kicking, being either
shortened (historically long unstressed) or left intact as to the
length (historically stressed). So if a dialectologist hears:
N.sg. ûobouls
G.sg. ûoboula
D.sg. ûoboulô.u
N.pl. ûoboulã
etc., he immediately identifies it with the standard language's
N.sg. óbuolas
G.sg. óbuolo
D.sg. óbuolui
N.pl. obuolai~
and puts it in the LKZ^ as <óbuolas> (3a).
On the other hand, if he hears:
N.sg. ûoboulis ([i] can be reduced)
G.sg. ûoboule. ([e.] can be reduced)
D.sg. ûoboul'ô.u
N.pl. ûoboulê
etc., he immediately identifies it with the standard language's
N.sg. óbuolis
G.sg. óbuolio
D.sg. óbuoliui
N.pl. obuoliai~
and puts it in the LKZ^ as <óbuolis> (1).
If he hears
N.sg. ûobouli~s
G.sg. ûoboule.
etc., he identifies it with the standard language's
N.sg. obuoly~s
G.sg. óbuolio
etc.
> The
> fact is that l in uobouls ... palatalized.
So your word for 'apple' is probably [ûoboulis] (=<óbuolis>, [i] may
be optionally reduced in some (sub)dialects and you can perceive it
as a mere palatalization), not [ûobouls] (=<óbuolas>) and -- that's a
bit strange! -- not [ûobouli~s] (=<obuoly~s>). If so, you've been
talking about a different word all the time.
Sergei