On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:50:54 +0000, pielewe
<
wrvermeer@...> wrote:
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>
>[On the accentuation of:]
>
>> >*volja-type nouns,
>>
>> Stang's solution is to derive these from a.p. b volI'-ja >
>> vòl(I)ja > vòlja.
>
>That solution can't be correct because there is no shred of evidence of
>the presence of a *I in those nouns. I've never understood what on
>earth caused Stang to make this elementary blunder, which would be
>embarrassing in an undergraduate term paper.
Well, I find Stang's reasoning perfectly clear and
unobjectionable. The final -a is long (Pol.dial. wolå),
which indicates some kind of vowel contraction, parallel to,
but earlier than, Pol. dial. braciå < bra"tIja. Since we
have -Ijá (e.g. semIjá) and "-Ija (bra"tIja), but not -Ìja
(where one would expect *volÌja > *vòlIja), it stands to
reason that *volÌja became *voljã > vòlja:. This then also
explains kléNtva as from *kleNtÙwa > *kleNtwã > kléNtva:.
I wouldn't swear it's true (perhaps it was rather *volÌja >
*vòlIja > *vòljã, with contraction _after_ stress
retraction), but it certainly is by far the best explanation
for the vòlja-group that I have ever seen.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...