Re: [tied] Re: Back to Slava

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 09:40:59 +0000, tgpedersen
<tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 15:27:49 +0000, tgpedersen
>> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>>
>> >--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...>
>wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 11:06:48 +0000, tgpedersen
>> >> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >How would you deal with Latin hospes, sospes?
>> >>
>> >> From *hósti-potis regularly reduced to *hóspe(t)s.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Excuse my ignorance; which rule is that?
>>
>> Reduction of unstressed /o/ (short vowels in general) in
>> medial syllables to /e/ ~ /i/ [hospit-]), and syncope.
>>
>
>Ernout & Meillet has
>compos, impos
>and
>compes, hospes, sospes (seispes)
>
>Apparently, that rule doesn't apply uniformly.

In transparent compounds, /o/ was usually analogically
restored (Sihler $ 67).

=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...