Re: [tied] Re: Meillet's law

On Uto, siječanj 16, 2007 10:19 pm, mcarrasquer reče:

> I have just signed up using my new e-mail address, and my reply
> apparently didn't get through (yet?). I'll try again...
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "mandicdavid" <davidmandic@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> The 'laryngeal' must have existed at some time because the acute
>> couldn't have evolved directly from the vowel length alone -
> compare
>> e.g. tra:vá, or m^e:so
>
> Vowel length alone can give rise to an acute: cf. <sla"va> (a.p. a),
> from the root *k^leu-, a formation completely analogical to that of
> <tra:vá>.
>
> The circumflex intonation in the first syllable of the word
> for "grass" is due to the shape of the root *treuH-, with final
> laryngeal.
>
> The syllabification was: *s'lá:-wa: (c.q. *s'ló:-wa: if the
> lengthened grade was already of PIE age), with acute first syllable,
> versus *trá:u-?a: (c.q. *tró:u-?a:), with (falling) diphthong in the
> first syllable. In the first case, the word simply remained barytone
> <sla"va>; in the second one, the circumflex intonation remained after
> the loss of the laryngeal (c.q. the loss of hiatal syllabification),
> giving *trá~wa:, and after Dybo's law <tra:vá>.

Of course, this is Miguel's theory... One other possibility would be that
these words belong to different periods - *sla´´va is older (cf. Lith.
šlóve.) and has an acute in vrdhhi while *tra:v'a is younger and the
vrddhi is not an acute. There are both vrddhis with acute and without it
in Balto-Slavic.