Re: [tied] Some accentological thoughts...

On Sub, ožujak 3, 2007 11:46 am, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal reče:

> On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 22:45:18 +0100 (CET), Mate Kapović
> <mkapovic@...> wrote:
>
>>On Čet, ožujak 1, 2007 11:07 pm, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal reče:
>>
>>> The MAS-approach also fails for verbal roots, as is clear in
>>> Balto-Slavic itself: be^gnoNti is a.p. a, be^z^e^ti is a.p.
>>> c. So what is the root *be^g- (*bhegW-): dominant or
>>> recessive?
>>
>>It's recessive ((-)acute) but *-noN- "immobilizes" the (-)acute, whereas
>>*-ě- does not.
>
> Then what does that make *-noN-? It's not simply (+) or
> (-). And why not an analysis making the root (+), and the
> suffix -ě- "mobilizing" it?

Because Latvian has be^gt and that is per se "(-)acute" (which yields
Slavic *´´ or *^ depending on the circumstances - the weakes part of the
theory is that the circumstances are not very clear).

Mate