[tied] Re: Mi- and hi-conjugation in Germanic

From: elmeras2000
Message: 36737
Date: 2005-03-14

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
[JER:]
> >The word ve^dró is a vrddhi formation *we:d-r-ó- 'associated with
> >water'.
>
> I doubt it. The length looks like Winter's law.

Length looks like length, sure. A cluster /dr/ is one of the
barriers to the operation of Winter's lengthening. The semantics
supports vrddhi just fine.


> >It seems to be an isolated example, and the conditioning may
> >appear odd, but it looks as if an already-long vowel does not
accept
> >the retraction (not really out of character as Slavic accent
matters
> >go). If there is not cluster in peró it is not a counterexample
(it
> >just fits Gk. pterón).
>
> So what's the point in retracting and then advancing the
> accent if _all_ these words simply fit oxytone o-stem
> neuters in PIE????

Languages do not have a point.

> I wasn't just referring to peró of course. It was shorthand
> for (from Zaliznjak's Old Russian list): licé, loz^é, mytó,
> peró, plec^é, pljuc^é, bIrvInó, veretenó, volokUnó, govInó,
> gumInó, kopIjé, okUnó, pisImó, polotInó, pIs^enó, res^etó,
> sedIló, sukUnó, sIrdIcé, tenetó, tolokUnó, jajIcé.

Those that had final accent would keep it there, those that had it
on the preceding non-acute vowel would move it to the end by Dybo's
law. The presence of the accent on the ending is therefore not
revealing of anything.

Jens