Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

962Rhotacism and stress (was Re: "Tolkien in Oxford")

Expand Messages
  • hisilome
    Nov 6, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In lambengolmor@yahoogroups.com, "Pavel Iosad" <edricson@...>
      wrote:

      > > Hm. I thought the stress in _Mondósaresse_ would lie on the _e_
      > > preceding the double consonant _ss_ (according to the
      > > pronunciation rules as for example given in the Appendices of
      > >_LotR_, although the example given there involves double _n_)?
      >
      >This is the realm of guesswork: the rule, as given, does imply that
      >we could have _s_/_r_ alternations in the paradigm relative to stress
      >(witness similar developments in Germanic due to Werner's law with
      >rhotacised and non-rhotacised forms coinhabiting the same paradigm,
      >as in OIcel _kjósa_, participle _kørinn_ 'to choose'). Indeed the
      >very word _ósanwe_ could be expected to exhibit this alternation, of
      > course. However, since no examples are provided by Tolkien, it is
      > rather pointless to speculate whether the paradigm would be levelled
      > to follow the nominative or remain true to the historical phonology;
      > what we can do is only note that something like that could be
      > possible.

      My original objection was mainly to Roman's statement that in
      _Mondósaresse_ the _s_ is followed by the stressed vowel, which is
      patently false (if one agrees that it should be followed
      _immediately_ by the stressed vowel, just as in Verner's Law it is
      the stress on the _immediately_ _preceding_ vowel that prevented
      voiceless fricatives from becoming voiced ones [and, by extension,
      _s_ from becoming _r_ via _z_]). Thus the accent of the word should
      probably not be seen here as a reason why rhotacism did not occur.

      This is why I do not fully agree with your argument: yes, one might
      assume of _ósanwe_ that, for example, the locative could be
      _óranwesse_ ("true to historical phonology", and similar to your Old
      Icelandic example), while it might just as well be _ósanwesse_
      (analogical leveling).

      I just don't see how this is relevant for _Mondósaresse_ and its
      assumed nominative, since the stress is never in the pertinent
      syllable anyway. All one can say is that if the word's second element
      is indeed derived from SAR-, rhotacism "should" probably have
      occurred (in both the nominative and the locative), but for some
      reason it didn't. Of course it is also quite possible, as Roman says,
      that SAR- is not involved at all.

      David
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic