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

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 05:29:52 +0000, pielewe
<wrvermeer@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:52:12 +0000, elmeras2000
>> <jer@...> wrote:
>>
>
>[On Slavic *dUbrI vel sim.]
>
>
>> I don't get the impression that the word was terribly
>> frequent (it survives, barely, and as a pl.t., in R. and
>> Ukr., and is also obsolete in Cz. and Pol., unknown
>> elsewhere). A low-frequency word may not have been attested
>> with all its inner yers by accident. It depends on which
>> OCS manuscripts exactly have it, which I don't know and
>> cannot easily find out. I find the parallel with Lith.
>> dubury~s "'Einsenkung, Vertiefung, Grube, mit Wasser
>> gefulltes Loch', auch Flußn." striking, but it would require
>> a bit of O.C.S. philology to see if it can be true.
>
>
>The 1994 "Staroslavjanskij slovar' (po rukopisjam X-XI vekov)"
>reports seven attestations (from the Codex Zographensis onwards).

According to Leskien's OCS grammar, in the Cod. Zogr. "die
gänzliche Weglassung des Vokalzeichens ist häufig genug, in
einzelnen Wörtern z. B. mnogU = mUnogU, mnê = mInê, psati =
pIsati gewönlich".

I just checked Vasmer, who gives dIbrI (Mar., Zogr., Savv.)
and dUbrI (Supr.). The Savva Gospel and the Codex
Suprasliensis are described in Leskien as having more or
less the same characteristics as the Codex Zographensis with
regard to the dropping of inner yers. Of the Codex Marianus
it is only said that <I> is usually replaced by <U> and that
yers in strong position can be written <e> and <o>.

> In
>addition to that there is also at least one early Old Russian
>attestation in the Izbornik 1076. g. ("Sreznevskij", "Slovar'
>drevnerusskogo jazyka (XI-XIV vv.)"). None of these attests to the
>presence of a jer between the "b" and the "r". Given my knowledge of
>the present state of jerology (which is nil) I wouldn't hazard a
>guess at the chance that the word nevertheless did have a jer in that
>position.
>
>
>By the way, how do you guys explain the coexistence of "I" (e.g.
>R. "debr'" or for that matter the Albanian toponym "Dibar") and "U"
>(e.g. Czech debr^) in the first syllable?

That looks like yer-Umlaut. I see that Vasmer gives OPol.
debrz, modern debra or dziebra. He also gives South Slavic
instances (SCr dabar, Slov. deb&r).


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