Re: [tied] Early PAlb Depalatisations of k', g' > k, g

From: alexandru_mg3
Message: 39023
Date: 2005-07-01

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

> alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > 2. *swesora: [s/w > zero; o>a] > *wesara: > [V-s-V > V-h-V] >
> > *wehara: > vë-ha-rë (3 syllables: intervocalic h>zero as
d,g,b>zero)
> >
> >>*vëarë > varë
>
> But PIE *swéso:r had initial stress, and in none of its forms was
it
> shifted to the second syllable. Proto-Albanian shows many instances
of
> stress retraction to the initial syllable (beside rarer instances
of
> preserved PIE stress), but not, to my knowledge, of the reverse
kind of
> pattern required by your analysis.


Piotr, if the stressed was still on the first syllable, when PAlb
e > je has started, for sure we need to see a *je or at least its
trace...

But in *vë-ha-rë > *vëarë > varë (vajzë) there is no trace of je.

In this situation the proposed derivation remains coherent regarding
your obiection.

So the stress wasn't for sure on the first syllable when e > je has
started.

For a different example with the stress on the first syllable please
see :
Alb. vjé-dhull <-> Rom. viézure < PAlb *wé-dzu-la < PIE *weg^h-

For the confirmation of the stress position see Romanian viezure in
DEX: http://dexonline.ro/search.php?cuv=viezure&source=

As I already indicated, in this case the intervocalic dh is still
there...So the rules remain coherents too...

Best Regards,
Marius


P.S. But I agree that what remains to be done on my side is to
find 'a second example' showing this time a stress movement...
I will come back on this...