Re: [tied] trzymac'

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Sergejus Tarasovas" <S.Tarasovas@...>
wrote:

> Yes, I've noticed it reading his article. He must have developed his
> own theory of the origin of the non-acute *-i- in the present and the
> acute (or short rising, for him) *-i- in the infinitive of *-i-verbs
> (at least denominatives, to which *so(:)Ndi"ti belongs). The *-i- of
> the present isn't a phonetically regular reflex of *-eje- (or
> something like that) anyway and indeed demands explanation, though I
> don't know how to get his *-Ìji:- from that (neither his *-Ìjiti of
> the infinitive).
>

Who wrote this nonsense? Me? Of course he just meant that since the
verb in question is denominative, and the appropriate noun has *-Ij-
(soNdÌji (b) before Dybo), then one would expect its denominative to be
formed by simply adding *-i:- in the present and *-i?- (> *-i- in
pretonic position, according to him) in the infinitive, thus *so,dÌji:-
and *soNdÌji?ti > *soNdÌjiti. It has nothing to do with the origin of
those *-i:- and *-i?- per se. The only thing I still don't understand
is the contractions that follow (*-Ijî- > *-î- and *-Ìjiti > *-îti).

Sergei