Re: [tied] Some accentological thoughts...

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?

*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.

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