Monosyllabic circumflexion or shortening?

Abstract

The Lithuanian 3rd person future forms of monosyllabic acute stems are mentioned as one of the categories where the examples of a phenomenon called “monosyllabic circumflexion” or “monosyllabic metatony” are found, e. g., dúoti - duõs ‛to give’. However, there are several exceptions, e. g., lìs (∼ lýti ‛to rain’), bùs (∼ buti ‛to be’), etc. Yet, the condition of the exceptions has not been fully analyzed in the context of the verbal system involving other tense paradigms. In this paper, a thorough examination will be conducted on the 3rd person future forms and their paradigms in Lithuanian. It is found that the verbs which have shortened 3rd person future forms always have the nasal infix present. Based on this result, a possible interpretation will be presented as to how certain 3rd person future forms have been shortened. Also, I will propose that the shortening of the 3rd person future forms is a secondary development, whereas MC could be the regular process for the 3rd person future forms.

The Development of Prefixation in Time and Space

“…The language most closely related to Lithuanian is Latvian, which is the only other member of the so-called East Baltic sub-branch within the Balto-Slavonic branch of IE. The East Baltic 3 Pace Petit (2002: 256-60;2011: 259-63), Kortlandt (2002;2014: 217-18;2017: 34-6) or Yamazaki (2014;2016), we see no reason to look for a different explanation of the same circumflex metatony in each particular category. Scattered dialect forms of monosyllabic pronouns with what appears to be the acute intonation are discussed in Kazlauskas (1968: 106-8).…”

“… Pace Petit (: 256–60; : 259–63), Kortlandt (; : 217–18; : 34–6) or Yamazaki (; ), we see no reason to look for a different explanation of the same circumflex metatony in each particular category. Scattered dialect forms of monosyllabic pronouns with what appears to be the acute intonation are discussed in Kazlauskas (: 106–8). …”