--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "pielewe" <wrvermeer@...> wrote:
> Actually, the situation is more complex in that several other
> possibilities are attested in the manuscripts alongside the textbook
> ending -y, most spectacularly the use of a glagolitic letter that
was
> apparently developed for the express purpose of writing this very
> ending and nothing else.
Omygawd! That is of course highly relevant information, of which I was
not aware. It does change the picture, and the unanimous -a of ORuss.,
Czech and OPol. indeed looks significant after all. If the final vowel
of nesy was a vowel different from other cases of Cyrillic y, there is
of course very good reason to equate it directly with ORuss. etc. -a.
That may indicate a more open pronunciation, i.e. something like an
unrounded o (ë). It must somehow reflect a difference in the outcome
of *-onts and *-o:ns (or *-ons?). In hindsight, it is highly
reminiscent of the Lithuanian difference between veda~Ns and vilkùs.
Jens