Re: [tied] Balto-Slavic C-stems / long vowel endings

On Sri, siječanj 17, 2007 11:11 pm, mcarrasquer reče:

> Just a thought, before I forget.
>
> Could Slavic nogá "foot, leg" and no``gUtI "nail" be split forms of a
> common paradigm?
>
> We could have:
> N. *h3nógh(W)-o:t-s,
> A. *h3nógh(W)-ut-m.
>
> [Perhaps an oblique featuring /s/, like in *méh1no:ts, *m(e)h1nésos and
> the ptc. in *-wo:ts, *-usos]. The N. regularly gives Balto-Slavic
> *nagó:ts[*] > Slavic nogá:, while the A. yields BS *nágutiN > Slavic
> no``gUtI.
>
> [*] Which reminds me: I believe there was a very early Balto-Slavic
> soundlaw whereby a long vowel (not contracted, not laryngeal) in the
> ending attracted the stress. That explains why PD and AD nouns
> consistently have an oxytone Nsg. (classical example *h2ák^mo:n >
> akmuő), and why the i- and u-stem (mobile) Lsg. is oxytone in (Early)
> Slavic (from PIE *-e:i and *-e:u/*-o:u).
>
> The present tense 1sg. ending *-o: does not attract the stress (Slavic
> be``roN), which would, alas, be yet another argument against *-o:(u)
> and in favour of *-oh3.
>
> This would also resolve the discussion we had some time ago
> about "mother": whether PIE had *máh2tV:r or *mah2té:r, Balto-Slavic
> surely had *maHté:r (c.q. *maHté~), which subsequently became
> *má:te:r/*má:te~ after Hirt's law.

How do you figure that? I'm not sure I get your point...