Re: [tied] Re: Some accentological thoughts...

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:53:43 -0000, "tgpedersen"
<tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>> The solution is to start from a mobile paradigm
>> *vIdová, acc. vÍdovoN. Then, weak yers lose their
>> stressability: *vIdová, *vIdóvoN.
>
>In terms I can understand:
>*vidová, *vídovoN -> (jerification)
>*vIdová, *vídovoN -> (regularization)

I wouldn't put it like that. The change i > I was
unconditional and independent of stress.

>*vIdová, *vIdóvoN
>
>which means that after i -> I, is jerified, it is no longer
>syllable-forming, and since there is thus no longer a syllable in the
>nominative corresponding to the one where the accusative places the
>stress, the whole paradigm gets too strange, so stress in the
>accusative is moved to the next syllable? Does that make sense?
>
>BTW what does this a. p. correspond to in PIE?

Which a.p.? In my view, PIE consonant stems become a.p. I
[initial-stressed] if acrostatic, a.p. III [final-initial-
-stressed] if mobile (proterodynamic, amphidynamic and
hysterodynamic). Barytone vowel stems ('-os, '-is, '-us,
'-a:) become a.p. I, oxytones become a.p. III (-ós, -ís,
-ús, -á:), except neuters (-óm > -ód) and compound nouns
with a stressed suffix (*-ikós, *-otós, etc.), which become
a.p. II [theme-stressed]. The distribution of verbs is
similar for athematic verbs: acrostatic -> a.p. I, mobile ->
a.p. III. But thematic verbs become a.p. III when _barytone_
(bhéro:), but a.p. II when oxytone (tudó:, -jó:, -nó:,
-dhó:, -éi(h1)o:).



=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
miguelc@...