> > cf Russian derz^í!, vs búd'!, PSl *-í vs *´-I, ie PIE *-éi vs
> > *´-i. Since the two forms are related by stress-induced ablaut,
> > the variation must go back to PIE (and impv *-éi-/*´-i- is
> > therefore PIE, and traditionally assumed *-dhi- is impv. of *dhe:-
> > as aux. verb. in periphrastic composition.
> >
>
> I agree with you about your claim that stressed yers were 'normal'
> short vowels. I just think they were lax - so that they didn't merge
> with tense i and y after the latter vowels had been shortened in
> some contexts. This also explains the fact that yers (sometimes)
> became tense before a 'j' (mladyi 'young, Nsg.m.' from mladUjI, Cro.
> mijem 'wash, 1sg.pres' from mIje-...). It's quite an ordinary
> phenomenon then.
> The point is, however, that the UNSTRESSED yers (and not all of
> them) became 'reduced' and eventually disappeared. Now, the question
> is why did the stress shift from word-final yers to the preceding
> syllable and not from, say, e or o?
The *-óN, *-´esI, *-´etI pattern reminds me (but Schmalstieg first) of
PIE secondary *-om, *-s, *-t. Now assume there was some rule of
trochaic or iambic ordering similar to Havlík's in PIE. If that had
proceeded from the front, 123sg would have similar stress-patterns, so
that is out of the question. However, if a PIE Havlík rule started
from the end of words, the extra syllable of the 1sg would have thrown
it off course, thereby creating the fine mess that Piotr's example
illustrated. 123sg becomes sort of odd, even, even; note that the 1sg
is either stressed on the last *or* the first syllable, preferably the
preverb, in accordance with the general principle that stress changes
not by moving a syllable, but by selecting the second-most stressed
syllable as the new most-stressed syllable, unless non-phonetic causes
apply.
Eng. altérnative Da. altérnativ Ger. alternatív
Eng. áctive Da. áktiv Ger. aktív
Eng. pássive Da. pássiv Ger. passív
Eng. mássive Da. massív Ger. massív
This illustrates how stress moves out of the semantically unsatisfying
final position (where the contrast of the various -íves will be
minimal) to the secondmost-stressed position two syllables away even
though this position removes this adjective from the verb álternate,
itself from alternáte. The process is in various stages in the
sequence German -> Danish -> English, with German being the most
conservative and English the most activist. Once the two-syllable
jumps are completed, the rest of the -ives move stress on an
individual, semantic basis, áctive/pássive for maximal contrast when
they are mentioned in one utterance (cf Danish infanterí/artillerí,
but in professional use ínfanteri/ártilleri for contrast), and finally
the stragglers get the same treatrment for conformance.
That's why I don't believe in not otherwise motivated one-syllable
stress jumps.
I assume this was what you meant by your question on the stress-losing
jers, or?
Torsten