Re: No Verner in Gothic verbs?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

> All your examples contain voicing before voiced -j-.

There's no such thing in Germnic. My examples have *-j- because they
are causatives and contain a suffix reflecting *-éje-

> But cf. nasjan etc.

That's what I said: many causatives were remodelled on the basic verb,
e.g. <nasjan> after <(ga-)nisan>.

> You mean sle:pan : saísle:p/saízle:p (Wright has both forms).

I know what I mean. There are two textual occurrences of the preterite
with /z/; both happen to have the prefix ga- (gasaízlep and gasaízlepum).

> In general:
> If the outcome is the result of a choice between two types of verb
> stem, sporadic variations is exactly what you'd expect.

Also when analogy runs its course, removing an old alternation.

> And you haven't cast reasonable doubt on the claim that given the two
> stress patterns for verbs, Grimm and Verner would produce two
> paradigms for those verb stems they affected.

What stress patterns? Absence of stress would not have removed the
effects of VL, quite the contrary. Of the two competing paradigms one
was produced by VL, the other can't have been created by anything but
analogy. The same process was reenacted a few centuries later in
English, even more thoroughly. Out of the many OE strong verbs showing
Vernerian alternations only was/were still has it.