On 2008-03-16 13:59, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> Piotr the thematic -o- wasn't inherently accented.
> Do you want to make for you a resume of the PIE accentuation
> patterns to see this ?
>
> Marius
>
> P.S.: And I will not open here the theory regarding the 'origin of i-
> /u-' as 'unstressed thematic o' (when I can show you that i and u
> existed as full-vowels in PIE times)
> => because Once Again this is another theory that belongs to
> Rasmussen's family and propagated by you
> Do you have some other theories with no link to Jens?
This sounds outright paranoid. To quote an article about *-tí- and *-tó-
by Brent Vine (who is a UCLA man, in no way dependent on the Rasmussen
family):
"Despite the fact that primary ti-stems (nomina actionis, abstracta)
generally appear with zero grade of the root (Ved. matí- 'thought,
devotion', etc.), it seems all but universally assumed that such
formations originally inflected according to the proterokinetic pattern,
with full-grade root and zero grade of the suffix in strong forms, and
zero-grade root with full grade of the suffix in weak forms."
From (at least) Szemerényi to Meier-Brügger all standard works on IE
will tell you the same thing. Don't blame me for agreeing with Jens
where agreement is general.
Piotr