[tied] Re: IE thematic presents and the origin of their thematic vo

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <magwich78@...> wrote:

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

wrote:

> > Rob wrote:
> >
> > > On another note, do you know where the English accentual
> > > distinctions, such as accént vs. áccent and recórd vs. récord,

come

> > > from?
> >
> > To sum up a rather long and complex story, the stress in Franco-

> > Latinate words was essentially final (on the last full vowel) at

the

> > time they were borrowed, but later tended to be retracted (in

ways

> > depending on English syllable weight). Verbs and adjectives were

more

> > likely than nouns to retain final stress (primary or at

least

> > secondary), because they often occurred with syllabic suffixes

and

> > inflections, e.g. record --> recorded, recordeth,

recording,

> > recorder, and consequently the final syllable had fewer

opportunities

> > to become "extrametrical".
>
> There is evidence that some Modern English speakers hesitate

between

> initial and non-initial stress in some Latinate words,
> e.g. "impóssible" vs. "ímpossible", or even the "accent" words
> (personally, I tend to pronounce the noun and the verb the same,

with

> initial stress).
>
> The point you make, then, is that these English stress

alternations

> were not originally native to English itself, but rather that it
> acquired them from Latinate borrowings. That was the impression
> (there's that word again!) I had gathered already.

Odd, the impression I gathered from Piotr's posting was that English
stress patterns were created within English because of the syllabic
vs. non-syllabic nature of its verbal and nominal suffixes,
respectively. Cf German Rekórd, Rekórde with a syllabic nominal
suffix.


Torsten