Re: [tied] PIE prek'- ; prok' ; prk'- 'to ask' -- a self-correction

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:20:33 +0000, Sergejus Tarasovas
<S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas"
><S.Tarasovas@...> wrote:
>
>> >*pric^ína
>>
>> I've used the acute character to denote a possible neo-acute
>(rising)
>> pitch, but the word seems to have recieved its untepenultimate
>ictus as
>> a result of Dybo's (rightward) shift, in which case a falling pitch
>> contour would probably be expected.
>>
>
>But in that case, why hasn't the ictus been thrown back to the first
>syllable by Stang's Law? And if this is because of the old acute in
>the penultimate syllable, what would be its source? There's no
>laryngeal or Winternian media in the vicinity.

Both c^inU and c^initi are a.p. c, so there is no doubt that
the basic intonation was falling, both in pri- and in
-c^ina. The fact that it's a compound a-stem with a
"minusovyj" prefix explains the fixed (a.p. a) accentuation
on the root, at least for Russian: see Zaliznjak 2.26.


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