--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
<miguelc@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:07:51 -0400, "Brian M. Scott"
> <BMScott@...> wrote:
>
> >At 12:50:44 PM on Sunday, March 16, 2008, alexandru_mg3
> >wrote:
> >
> >> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> >> <miguelc@> wrote:
> >
> >>> The problem is that you are unfamiliar with the Greek law of
> >>> limitation :-)
> >
> >> 1. This is one bibliography for you Miguel regarding
> >> some 'limitations rules'
> >> http://www.stanford.edu/~kiparsky/Papers/opacity2.pdf
> >
> >> Now please apply it => in order that everybody here to see
> >> that Is You that Don't Know to apply this rule (for
> >> tHuga'te:r) => I hope that at least finally will be clear
> >> for you too that the accent is on the SECOND SYLLABLE (as
> >> I said)
> >
> >Miguel has said all along that the accent is on the second
> >syllable. I quote him:
> >
> > The accent in Greek was retracted to the _first_ syllable,
> > under the influence of the vocative (thúgater), or the
> > word for mother (mé:te:r), or both.
> >
> > By the law of limitation, *thúgate:r becomes thugáte:r.
> >
> >Read that last line again: unattested <thúgate:r> becomes
> >attested <thugáte:r> by the law of limitation. That is an
> >explicit statement that the attested accent is on the second
> >syllable. You're not beating a dead horse: you're beating a
> >figment of your imagination. Wasting all that indignation
> >on something that never happened can't be good for your
> >digestion.
>
> Thanks Brian for making my point for me.
>
> This afternoon I made turbot poached in court-bouillon with
> velouté sauce on top, grilled in the oven. I didn't feel
> like ruining my appetite or digestion.
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> miguelc@...
Miguel, seems that you didn't understand even now what I have really
tried to transmit you:
The fact that you really didn't understand anything regarding Greek
accentuation when you wrote:
"unattested <thúgate:r> becomes attested <thugáte:r> by the law
of limitation"
I would say finally ->this is not a problem....
But in addition it was still you that showed the "idiots" on the
other side
I would say finally ->this is really a problem.
Usually I never said directly such things till the other side didn't
create problems...
SO NOW I FEEL OBLIGED TO EXPLAIN YOU DIRECTLY WHERE YOU DIDN'T
UNDERSTAND :
A) The Greek rythmic rules trigger the apparition of the long
vowels (etc...) by preserving the original accentuation
AND NOT
B) The Long Vowels (or other heavy clusters) triger the change of
the accentuation (=> As you have wrongly understood)
Please read twice the text above because is a very important remark.
Explanation for you:
a) The PIE original accent of the Vocative WAS ON THE FIRST SYLLABLE
(->see In Skt. -> see in Grk.)
As result, you can see that the Greek accent is also there and due
to the rythmic rules of Greek the ORIGINAR final short vowel has
remained unchanged.
b) Next the original accent of the basic form WAS ON THE LAST
SYLLABLE => if the vocative accentual pattern would have been
influenced the basic form => in this case the vocative form would
have been adopted as it it: /accent on the original vowel and short
vowel at the end/ => that is not the case
c) So the accent on the second syllable IS The ORIGINAL GREEK ONE (a
Proto-Greek one < a PIE dialectal one (very probable due to
aspiration)) => and only next as a result the long vowel appeared on
the last syllable to preserve the rythmic rules.
e) Take Now: whatever Greek word you like on the most conservative
family
'father' -> *ph2te'r
'mother' -> *me'h2ter
vocative of 'daughter' -> *dHu'gh2ter
Note:
'Long' IE forms *ph2te':r/*me'h2te:r apparently fit also -> but is
not at all necessary to be reconstructed for Greek based on what I
showed you (they are usually reconstructed with long e:, only because
each one see a long e: there) => This is an important conclusion
too.
So you will see that the GREEK PRESERVED THE ORIGINAL PIE
ACCENTUATION
pate':r
ma':te:r
[vocative] tHu'gater
and the Rythmic rules ensured NEXT by Changing (usually) the Length
of the final vowel, only if necessary
pat /e':/ r => /e': -> e'e/
ma':t /e:/ r
[vocative] tHu'gater => no need to change something
So I hope is clear now that
tHuga'te:r
preserved also the Pre/Proto-Greek original accent
*dHug(H)a'ter
by changing the length of the final vowel too
*tHuga't /e:/ r
So the accent on the second syllable *dHug(H)a'ter is NOT A GREEK
Evolution because Greek preserved the accent with ANY PRICE
I hope that you understand also better now why we have long vowels in
all these Greek forms (My Answer for you: in order to preserve the
original accentuation and to respect the rythmic rules too -> so no
need for -te:r in place of -ter for Greek)
Finally SO MIGUEL => When I said that you didn't understand the rule
that you quoted (I indicated: 'vocative accent first syllable and
final short vowel' ; 'accent second syllable and final long vowel'
and also 'putting a .pdf with the rules there': I have really asked
you 'to start to apply the rules to see your mistake')
=> so I thought that you will really take a closer look on this
=> that wasn't the case
But, of course, as I said 'this is not a problem'...
Marius
P>S> Brian, please refrain you, for the future, to make remarks
till you understand my point completely...I don't know why you like
to play the police-man role here, this is your choice...but first
you need to find first who is right and who is wrong ...otherwise you
will become only a bodyguard.
They usually take mechanically what is written in different
books => at least the discussion around Olsen's theory clearly show
me this, and the Greek accentuation collateral topic too