Re: PIE *a -- a preliminary checklist

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
<miguelc@...> wrote:

>
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 15:52:08 -0800 (PST), Rick McCallister
> <gabaroo6958@...> wrote:
>
> >Thanx for explaining. No such law or traces in Gmc?
>
> Dybo did an article on vowel shortenings in Italo-Celtic and
> Germanic, which look like a kind of mirror-image of Hirt's
> law (where Balto-Slavic retracted the stress from e.g.
> *suh1nús to *súh1nus, Germanic shortened the vowel in
> *sunuz). The problem is that there are a number of
> exceptions in Italo-Celtic with unexpected long vowel
> (fu:mus is the one that comes to mind). In Germanic, the
> rule only works if there is resonant between the laryngeal
> and the stressed vowel.
>
> Dybo's conjecture is well worth a re-evaluation. Does
> anyone have the original article at hand?
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> miguelc@...
>

The only free article on Internet that resumes this is

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mert1033/Dybo's%20law%20an%
20ItalicCelticGermanic%20sound%20change.pdf


Important is Schrijver(1991) reformulation for Germanic Italic and
Celtic:

"Any long vowel in a praetonic syllable is shortened before a
Reasonant" ...but even so there are exceptions

If you could find Dybo or Schrijver original articles please to tell
me too.

Marius


P.S. For Piotr:
What about 'a general' i/i: u/u: a/a: ablaut Rule in PIE?
(I'm not a supporter of a/a: ablaut => but I only saw (maybe
I'm wrong) the similarity