Re: [tied] *eH3k'u- 'swift; accipiter, doe, wind, hawk'

On Čet, travanj 6, 2006 1:55 am, Jens Elmegĺrd Rasmussen reče:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
>>
>> On 2006-04-05 16:33, Mate Kapović wrote:
>> > If I get you right, you think that the root is *h1ek'u-/h1k'u
> which is
>> > made into *oh1k'ú- via Jens's o-infix?
>
>
>> Precisely, except that the root proper is *h1ek^- and that
> the "infix"
>> is a prefix in this case, which is what Jens's theory predicts for
> *HeC-
>> roots.
>
> I like your analysis of this example very much, Piotr. I only wish I
> had other examples of o-infixed (or o-prefixed) u-stems. Of course, I
> do believe that u-stems are in origin thematic, the -u- being a
> reduced variant of the thematic vowel, originally conditioned by
> accent on the preceding syllable (possibly only in disyllables). I
> have of course noticed that u-stem adjectives have accented -ú-, which
> I would like to ascribe to the effects of a jumping contrastive
> accent.

How do you explain the nouns with the accented *-ús like *suHnús? I know
that Lubotsky has some kind of explanations with the final accent and the
laryngeals...

Also, if you explain u-stems as originally thematic, how do you explain
the origin of i-stems?
Isn't it a little bit strange to claim that u-stems derive from the
o-stems when o-stems look like a new thing, being 'regular', not
'complicated' etc., while u-stems look old because of the complicated
ablaut and accentual changes?

Mate