> Andrew: I am a little uncomfortable with this hypothesis. According
to this idea, shouldn't *bhorós have then become *bhóros (merging with
original *bhóros), which would then subsequently become *bhórus (as
would also original *bhóros) or *bhr.us?
Not if the shift was rather late. The first *o, according to Jens,
reflects some kind of vocalised sonorant. Between the formation of
thematic adjectives of this kind and the contrastive accent shift we
must allow sufficient time for O-metathesis and vocalisation.
> To me acceptance of this hypothesis would suggest that there would
come to be no o-stems at all, since their unstressed *o would always
be reduced to *u, including after formerly unstressed initial
syllables became stressed. I don't really understand the conditions
under which thematic *-o- would become *-u-. Also, mightn't one also
expect unaccented thematic *-e- to become *-i- (in thematic verbs, etc.)?
The thematic vowel in verbs was originally accented, and it took some
time for the accent to undergo retraction. The reductions of the
thematic vowel to *i or *u belong to a relatively deep chronological
level.
Piotr