W dniu 2011-06-11 20:14, Santeri pisze:
> It's not so simple since the change was sporadic and nobody understands
> its conditions. There are still many /ai/ and /ei/ diphtongs left in
> both the languages. However, the change seems to have been Proto East
> Baltic, since there are only slght differences in the results between
> Latvian and Lituanian. It's either not simply the stress that matters.
Since not all instances of *ai and *ei underwent merger and
monophthongisation, little wonder that /ai/ and /ei/ have survived
beside /ie/. There are many examples of either of them alternating with
/ie/ in related forms -- e.g. Lith. <sniegas> : <snaige.>, <dievas> :
<deive.>. Even these two examples show that the alternation is not
random or sporadic; in fact, the occurrence of /ie/ is by and large
predictable. While it may be true that nobody knows the detailed truth
about the conditioning of the change (analogical restoration and
secondary accent shifts complicate the picture), its dependence on the
position of Proto-Baltic word stress is clear and generally accepted. To
say that "nobody understands its condition" is to ignore more than a
century of research on the matter (starting at least with Hermann Hirt).
Piotr