On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 02:20:53 +0100 (CET), Mate Kapović
<
mkapovic@...> wrote:
>On Pon, ožujak 5, 2007 12:17 am, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal reče:
>> On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 19:45:10 +0100, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>> <miguelc@...> wrote:
>>
>>>(hmm, maybe zimoN-sI is not so ungrammatical after all!).
>>
>> I think I'll drop the "maybe". All of the words in this
>> group are feminine (noktjI-sI, jesenI-sI, vesnoN-sI,
>> zimoN-sI), except dInI-sI (masc.) and lęto-sI [for lęto-se]
>> (n.).
>
>Jens derives them from *k'im. What do you think about that?
I replied to this some hours ago, but the message hasn't
turned up yet. Maybe it'll still do, but I have some other
things to add...
My answer was:
*k^im is the masculine accusative, as seen in dInI-sI. The
feminine accusative is *k^ih2-m > *k^i:m. I had never
actually thought about applying my rules to the accusative
of the de:vi:-stems, because, well, it wasn't supposed to
exist. That the result is expected -I, as shown in these
relict forms, is a nice confirmation.
Additions:
I've found where Jens says that. I don't think he's trying
to make a point there about the issue at hand (the acc. sg.
of the feminine pronoun *k^ih2).
Jens' article mentions one further form, which I had
forgotten: jutro-sI (for jutro-se), another neuter.
The accentuation of these forms (on which Dolobko's law is
based) is:
(a.p. c)
dinI'sI
notjI'sI
zimóNsI
jesenI'sI
(a.p. a)
lé^to-sI
(j)útro-sI
Only vesná (a.p. c) vesnoNsI => Russ. vësnus' is somewhat
unexpected, but vesná has passed into a.p. b in Russian (at
least in the singular: vesná, vesnú; the plural vësny is
still "a.p. c"). If we take vësnus' as an a.p. b form, we
have the same accentuation as in the a.p. b definite
adjectives (bé^lU-jI, bé^lo-je, bé^la-ja), without
advancement of the stress as in indefinite bé^lU, be^ló,
be^lá (and in vesná). As expected.
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
miguelc@...