On 2006-09-04 14:20, Sergejus Tarasovas wrote:
> I've never heard of the rule for such a retraction. Hirt's Law is about
> retraction to a pre-tonic nucleus flanked by a (non-vocalized)
> laryngeal, and here you propose a secondary acute of non-laryngeal
> origin, don't you?
Laryngeal insertion by analogy (after verbs in *-ah2- and *-eh1-) is
always an option, but I was toying with the idea that the result of the
early lengthening of *i and *u in Balto-Slavic (as in certain vr.ddhied
iteratives) was acuted and therefore indistinguishable from old *-ih-,
*-uh- (the only source of regularly inherited long high vowels).
See this recent discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/45034
etc.
Piotr