Re: [tied] Re: Various loose thoughts

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 6:00 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Various loose thoughts


>The PIE (athematic) mobile paradigms had end-stress in the
>plural oblique (*-mós, *-sú, *-mí:s), so what one expects is
>end-stress transferred to the vowel stems.

Yeah, but one may as well expect the columnal stress on the thematic vowel
to be preserved.

>This means that the Slavic a:-stems are regular: *-ah2-mós,
>*-ah2-sú, *-ah2-mí:s become -á:mos, *-á:s(^)u, *-á:mi:s by
>Hirt's law. Everything in Slavic is explained by oxytonesis
>through Pedersen's law, and retraction by Hirt's law in the
>ah2-stems. We cannot apply Dybo's law, because Dybo's law
>doesn't appy to mobile paradigms (just try to apply it on a
>mobile o-stem singular for a laugh), and we don't need to.

Not necessarilly. Dybo's Law does not apply to enclinomena forms in mobile
paradigms because they are phonologically unaccented. It could work when the
accent is on the thematic vowel (thus in the middle syllable of a word), it
doesn't matter the paradigm is mobile. Thus, Dybo's Law would apply to
*b'abu > *bab'u, to *wilk'amu > *wilkam'u, but not to *'wilku because the
latter is not really accented in the way *b'abu is.

Mate