Re: [tied] Some accentological thoughts...

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 00:16:58 +0100 (CET), Mate Kapović
<mkapovic@...> wrote:

>On Uto, veljača 27, 2007 8:36 pm, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal reče:
>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:44:14 +0100 (CET), Mate Kapović
>> <mkapovic@...> wrote:
>>
>>>On Pon, veljača 26, 2007 10:35 pm, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal reče:

>> These are not problematical for my theory. We can have final
>> accentuation throughout (zelenÚ [> zelénU], zelenó, zelená),
>> or, in cases where a prefix is involved, we can have initial
>> accentuation, shifted right by Dybo's law (po-króvU,
>> po-króva: > pokróvU [c.q. pokrovÚ > pokróvU], pokrová).
>> In forms involving a suffix (such as *-enU, *-elU, *-okU),
>> all it takes is for the suffix to be dominant to produce
>> this pattern. As I have stated on previous occasions, I
>> think that "dominant" simply means "stressed" (in PIE).
>
>You didn't consider MAS theory about dominant (+) and recessive (-)
>morphemes in PIE?

I considered it and I can see nothing in support of it.

>> In
>> principle, dominant suffixes like the ones mentioned above
>> could in PIE have had the stress on either syllable: *-énos
>> or *-enós. Balto-Slavic seems to make no distinction between
>> the two types: we always have -énas, -élas in Lithuanian, we
>> have -énU, -ená; -élU, -elá in Slavic (except when there's
>> an acute: -i"nU, -i"na etc.) Slavic end-stress can be
>> original, or it can be due to Dybo's law. I think it's
>> original (the stress in -i"na is then simply due to Hirt's
>> law).
>
>You can deal with just about anything in this way...

What do you mean? I'm just pointing out that I think there
is no way to distinguish *-énos and *-enós from the
Balto-Slavic data. So if I, for other reasons, prefer
*-enós, there can be no objections.

>>>Thematic *-e- was lengthened in some Slavic dialects, perhaps only localy
>>>in a later period, perhaps already in Common Slavic period (after the
>>>re-establishment of distinctive length on all new vowels) in the stretch
>>>from Posavina till present-day Slovakia and Czech Republic.
>>
>> It's also attested in Old Polish. It's attested in Modern
>> Polish, if you count ja biorę, oni biorą...
>
>That's different, I think.

How is it different? What I'm saying is that
"a.p.c-stressed" endings were lengthened (if not already
long), and that "a.p.c-unstressed" endings were shortened
(if not already short). Biorę :: biorą is exactly that.

>> I don't think
>> there's a way to tell if it once occurred in East Slavic as
>> well. Well, perhaps Nikolaev can find it :-)
>
>Oh he did... :-) Not in verbs though, but he did...

Konechno...

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