--- In nostratic@..., "Glen Gordon" <glengordon01@...> wrote:
> >Therefore I postulate that some nouns right before the zero-grade
> >process had an accent pattern with constant stress on the second
> >syllable. (These nouns may or may not have had penultimate stress
> >in an even earlier time)
> But why complicate a theory unnecessarily? A good theorist tries
> to find the _simplest_ theory possible. The simplest theory, as far
> as I see, is that there was penultimate stress up until final
> vowels were lost (whereby this loss directly obscured the original
> stress pattern). Everything is explained.
> Therefore, it's simpler to presume that these thematic nouns
> had penultimate stress like any other word up until their final
> vowels were lost. Further, if you were correct, there's absolutely
> no reason for the difference in accent pattern at all. It's too
> loose in comparison.
> I think the "important thing right now" is that you start thinking
> about whether you want a logical theory or whether you just want
> to propose something unique for the sake of uniqueness.
> - love gLeN
The, problem is simply that I do not think a late developement could
explain the whole scenario of thematic noun usage. The teory seemes
easy at the first glance, put is not if you try to explain all
instances of thematic wovels from it. I can explain in greater depth
why I think so later.
Therefore I think we are forced to find some mechanism that allowed
the thematic wovel to develope at an earlier stage.
And to do so, I think we must presume a somewhat more complicated
state right before the zero-grade process.
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at