Re: [tied] Re: Various loose thoughts

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miguel Carrasquer" <mcv@...>
To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 2:10 AM
Subject: Re: [tied] Re: Various loose thoughts



On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:14:34 +0100, Mate Kapovic
<mkapovic@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>
>> If I understand Olander's proposal, the expected forms would
>> be:
>>
>> D *-amùs -ómus *-imùs *-umùs
>> (Saussure's law, except in the a:-stems)
>> L *-ie~su(?) *-ósu *-ìsu *-ùsu
>> (no Saussure's law)
>> I *-ómis -imìs -umìs
>> (Saussure's law as above).
>>
>> Is that correct?
>
>You haven't quite got it I think. The accent is supposed to be on the
>thematic vowel (like *-'amus, *-ómus, *-'umus etc.)

>I was departing from PB Dpl. *-mo:ns (acute), which should
>have triggered Saussure's law (except in the ah2-stems).
>Maybe Thomas isn't?

He posites *-mus < (reduction) *-mas < dial. PIE *-mos. So *-mus is not
acuted which could also maybe be proved by Lith. dialects by different vowel
quality (Sergei?).

Mate