581Q _ulundo_ < _ulgundô_ vs. _felya_ < *_felga_
- Jan 5, 2004Quoting Lukas Novak <lukas.novak@...>:
> Andreas Johansson wrote:I'd rather expect the words to syllabify as fel.ya and u.lun.do, respectively,
> > (And yes, I'm aware of Q _ulundo_ < _ulgundô_, which raises
> > the question why we're not seeing **fela instead.)
> Perhaps because of the difference of the stress pattern?
> In "felga>felya" the "felg>fely" syllable is stressed, whereas
> in "ulgundo>ulundo" the "ulg>ul" syllable is not stressed?
> To me it makes sense - but who is me :-) ?
but the idea that the difference is due to the difference in stress might be
correct nonetheless. I don't think I've ever heard any other decent internal
explanation, while the obvious external one, that the good Professor changed
the rules during the composition of Etym, has been advanced repeatedly.
Another possible internal explanation that struck me right now is that it
could simply be due to the different following vowel. No closely parallel case
is known to me, but the phenomenon as such, the same consonant behaving
variously depending on the following vowel, is examplified by the different
fate of primitive *w before *a and *o, for instance. (I'm unfortunately unable
to provide a proper citation for that, having again left my library back in
[Comparison of derivatives of Etym. WÔ- (Q _o-_/_ó-_) and bases in WA-,
such as WA3- (Q _vára_), WAN- (Q _vanya_), etc. exhibit this contrast.
See also the statement in _Quendi and Eldar_ that initial _w-_ was "lost in
Quenya before _ô_" (XI:367). (Please note that I make no promise of
providing citations in the future!) CFH]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>