Some accentological features of modern southern Russian dialects

Galinskaya Elena Arkad'evna Doctor of Philology Professor; Faculty of Philology; Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1, p. 51, 962 eagalinsk@mail.ru Other publications by this author

The accentual system of the Proto-Slavic language has now been reconstructed in detail. See, for example ^{[5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 18, 19]}. As for the accent system of the Old Russian language, it was still very close to the Proto—Slavic, although there were some changes in it, in particular, related to the modification of intonation contours: for example, in Old Russian two proto-Slavic intonations coincided - akut and new akut. The organization of the Old Russian accentual system is described in detail by A. A. Zaliznyak ^[11]. Two classes of word forms were presented in it. The first class included orthotonic word forms, one of the syllables of which had phonological stress, and the stress inherent in them was autonomous (it goes back to the Proto-Slavic akut and new akut that coincided in the Old Russian language). The second class included enclinomena, all syllables of which were phonologically unstressed, but the initial syllable of the enclinomena had some prosodic reinforcement called automatic stress (goes back to the Proto-Slavic circumflex). When phonologically unstressed syllables were added, the autonomous stress shifted to it. In orthotonic word forms, the autonomous stress was assigned to one of the syllables and did not shift when such a syllable was added ^{[11, pp. 118-120]}. The nature and place of stress were determined by the accentological characteristic, in other words, the accentological marking, of morphemes, or rather morphs, included in the word form (or in a phonetic word, which in accentology is commonly called a clock group). The main markings are of three types: self-impact, when stress is attached to a specific morph and falls on it under favorable conditions; right-impact, consisting in the fact that stress is attached to a morph, but passes to the nearest morph on the right; minus, indicating that stress is not attached to the morph. Accent markings were independent properties of morphemes/morphs, unrelated to the morpheme's meanings or its phonemic composition ^{[11, pp. 121-123]}. There is a so-called basic rule that determines the place and type of stress in a word form/clock group based on the accent marks of morphs ^{[11, pp. 123-125]}.

Depending on the scheme of stress in the Old Russian language, words belonged to different accent paradigms (hereinafter — A.P.). There were three main accent paradigms.

The words a.p. a were represented by orthotonic word forms and had a fixed autonomous stress on a certain syllable of the base (for example, I.P. unit.ch. baba, R.p. unit.ch. baba ... M.p. mn. ch. babah; 1 l. unit.ch. stanu, 2 l. unit.ch. staneshi ... 3 l. mn.ch. become).

The words a.p. b had a contiguous mobile autonomous stress, which fell on the first syllable of the ending or on the last syllable of the base (for example, I.P. unit.ch. sister, R.p. unit.ch. sisters, R.p. mn.ch. sisters... M.p. mn. ch. sisters; 1 l. unit.ch. I walk, 2 l. unit h. hodishi ... 3 l. mn. h. hodishi). The word forms here were orthotonic, with rare exceptions. Thus, the forms of the vocative case of nouns with bases on *-ŏ and *-ata were enclinomains with automatic stress on the first syllable.

The words A.P. c had a marginally mobile stress and were represented by two types of word forms - enclinomains with automatic initial stress (it is indicated by the sign ˉ before the word form) and orthotonic word forms with an accent on the ending (for example, V.P. unit h. ˉ heads u, I.P. unit h. head, Etc. unit h. with my head; 1 l. unit. h. I speak; 2 l. unit.h. I speak ... 3 l. mn.h. I speak) ^{[11, pp. 125-127]}.

On the way from the Old Russian language to modern Russian, a number of changes took place, but only one of them was phonetic — the coincidence of autonomous and automatic accents, which led to the formation of a single dynamic stress, which is why the former orthotonic word forms and enclinomena ceased to differ ^{[11, p. 178]}. Other changes were caused by analogical rearrangements of various kinds, in particular, the alignment of stress in a group of word forms united by some characteristic, and the polarization of stress in sub-paradigms, such as in a number of nouns that developed an accentual opposition of singular and plural numbers (cf. modern herd — herds, as opposed to the Old Russian herd - herd). See about this in more detail ^{[11, pp. 371-387]}.

Russian Russian dialects, however, do not have an accentological pattern that fully matches the one presented in the Russian literary language. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to identify, based on recordings of South Russian dialects, accentological archaisms that have not been preserved in the literary language, and innovations for those categories of cases where the modern language has not changed the place of the Old Russian accent. For the analysis, a collection of South Russian texts ^[16] was selected, representing all the main groups of dialects of the South Russian dialect in accordance with the dialect division developed by K. F. Zakharova and V. G. Orlova ^{[4, map VI]} and South Russian dialects that were not included in the Dialectological Atlas of the Russian language ^[4], which are localized in the Rostov and Volgograd regions, as well as in the Stavropol and Krasnodar territories. Audio recordings of the texts published in ^[16] are stored in the Phonetics Department of the Vinogradov Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The examples will be given as they are written in ^[16], that is, in simplified phonetic transcription; after each example, the number of the text in the publication and the localization of the dialect are indicated.

Noun

1). The old Russian accentuation remains in the word great-grandmother (No. 39, Voronezh region, Rossoshansky district), in which the prefix great-was self-stressed in ancient times, and therefore the stress was on the first syllable. See ^{[10, p. 179]}. In the literary language, words with the prefix great-in some cases retain the old stress (for example, great-grandfather, great-grandson, great-granddaughter, forefather), and in some cases the stress has changed (for example, great-grandmother, great-grandmother, great-grandfather, great-mother).

2) In the Old Russian language, the words of the feminine declension to *-ata, referring to A.P. S., had the following stress scheme in the singular:

After the coincidence of the ancient autonomous and automatic accents, a single dynamic stress was formed, as mentioned above. Russian Russian literature, in cases where the words of the old a.p. s continue to have a marginally mobile stress, has lost the old place of stress in the dative case, and retained it in the accusative case (cf. leg, water, head, etc.). However, some words of the Russian literary language have changed the a.p. s on a.p. b, so that in the accusative case they acquired inflection stress. This is, for example, the word pile, (modern lit. kopna — kopnu) ^{[10, p. 205]}. The word hut behaves in the same way ^{[10, p. 162]}, although the literary language allows fluctuations in the accusative case (new hut and obsolete hut)^[1] The data of South Russian dialects are as follows.

The noun earth, originally related to A.P. S. ^{[10, p. 702]}, in the central part of the South Russian dialect behaves mainly as the word A.P. B., although sometimes it can be pronounced with the old basic stress in the accusative case.

Interzonal dialects of type A

to land No. 6, Kaluga region, Khvastovichi district.

The Kursk-Oryol Group

zyamlyu (4 p.) and land (1 p.) No. 12, Kursk region, Fatezhsky district;

Land No. 14, Kursk region, Oboyansky district.

At the same time, there were no accentological changes with this word in the eastern part of the South Russian dialects, it demonstrates the old a.p. s.:

for winter No. 43, Tambov region, Staroyuryevsky district (Ryazan group);

County No. 45, Rostov region, Tsimlyansky district (Don group).

A similar situation exists with the noun water (the original a.p. s. ^{[10, p. 174]}). In the dialects of the Kursk-Oryol group (the central part of the South Russian dialect) it manifests a new a.p. b:

at Wada, in wada No. 12, Kursk region, Fatezhsky district;

wadu No. 16, Kursk region, Oktyabrsky district.

In the dialect of the Ryazan group, which belongs to the eastern South Russian zone, the old a.p. s. of the noun water is preserved with rare exceptions.:

w w odu No. 31, Lipetsk region, Khlevensky district;

water(u) No. 39, Voronezh region, Rossoshansky district;

into the water, on the pond^[2] and here on the pond No. 38, Voronezh region, Ertilsky district.

The innovative accentuation of the word foot, originally related to A.P. S. ^{[10, p. 169]}, originated in Southwestern dialects:

nauu No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district.

At the same time, the old accent paradigm remains in the central part of the South Russian dialect.:

NOU No. 13, Kursk region, Shchigrovsky district;

at NW No. 21, Tula region, Odoevsky district.

The nouns mountain ^{[10, p. 210]}, soul ^{[10, p. 236]}, winter ^{[10, p. 193]} and side ^{[10, p. 205]} are retained in South Russian dialects.:

at UU No. 16, Kursk region, Oktyabrsky district;

on desha, on desha (with reduction of unstressed [y]) No. 42, Tambov region, Pichaevsky district;

for winter(u) No. 35, Ryazan region. Klepikovsky district;

winter No. 45, Rostov region, Tsimlyansky district;

Building No. 18, Tula region, Belevsky district.

3) In South Russian dialects there are archaisms and innovations concerning feminine nouns that originally belonged to the a.p. a. Thus, in ancient times the word pine belonged to this accent paradigm ^{[10, p. 205]} and therefore had a columnar stress on the base. In modern Russian literary language, it already behaves like the word a.p. b. (cf. I.p. sosna, V.p. sosna), but in the eastern part of the South Russian dialect, the archaic form of the accusative case is fixed: pine, on pine No. 32, Lipetsk region, Usmansky district. At the same time, in the speech of the same informant, an innovative stress on the ending is presented in the prepositional case: Nǝ sasne. At the same time, the word spin, which was also originally related to A.P. A. (Old Russian I.P. spin, R.P. backs, etc.) ^{[10, p. 200]}, passed into A.P. S. both in the literary language and in the described South Russian dialects: for pin No. 18, Tula Belevsky district, the region.

On the other hand, the noun niva, which steadily preserves A.P. a in the modern literary language ^{[10, p. 166]}, is represented in one of the interzonal dialects of the type "A" with a new accent on the inflection in the accusative case, as in the words A.P. b: field No. 10, Kaluga region., Yukhnovsky district.

4) Interesting material regarding feminine nouns of the declension to *-ata is found in the records of the dialect of the village of Glazovo in the Serpukhov district of the Moscow region, belonging to the Tula group of the South Russian dialect (No. 25, comments ^{[16, p. 107]})^[3]. Here, feminine nouns belonging to different accentual paradigms develop the same ratio in the place of stress of the nominative and accusative cases in the singular (in the nominative case, the main stress; in the accusative case, the inflection):

deja deja;

mizha is an interlude.

kaza is a goat.

A cloud is a cloud.

The hall contains ashes.

This ratio is native to the pairs of words A.P. with goat ^{[10, p. 178]} and ash ^{[10, p. 191]}.

The noun cloud in early accented manuscripts demonstrates A.P. a, in later ones — A.P.b, and in modern literary language it belongs to A.P. a ^{[10, p. 235]}. Consequently, the cloud—cloud ratio peculiar to the dialect in question appeared as a result of analogical alignment according to A.P. S., and this was clearly due to the fact that a group of feminine forms of the first declension with a monosyllabic base tended to have the same stress pattern^[4].

Judging by the testimony of the accented monuments of ancient writing, the noun inter had a fluctuation between A.P. b and A.P. c, and in the Russian literary language it now behaves like the word A.P. b ^{[10, p. 177]}, and in the dialect of the village of Glazovo, in conditions of fluctuation between the two accent paradigms of this word were chosen by A.P. S. and joined the above-mentioned class of words of the first declension.

The original accentuation for the word deja ‘a wooden tub in which bread dough is prepared, leavened bread’ ^{[17, p. 333]} with the forms deja — deju is not known, since it did not occur in the accented written monuments, attracted by A. A. Zaliznyak to the analysis when compiling an accentological dictionary ^[10], but judging by According to the materials of the Dictionary of Russian Folk Dialects, it can have both basic and inflectional accents in the nominative case. As for the accusative case, it should be said that, unfortunately, not all examples are stressed in the dictionary, but where the stress is, all forms of this case have a stressed ending ^{[17, p. 333]}. Thus, most likely, the ratio of deja — deja in the dialect of the village of Glazovo, as well as in the cases of the words cloud and, apparently, between, appeared as a result of analogical alignment according to the words A.P. S.

5) Masculine nouns with a monosyllabic base, as well as feminine nouns, have some differences in Southern Russian dialects from the modern Russian literary language.

First of all, let's list those cases where the old accent paradigm has been preserved in the literary language, but in South Russian dialects it has undergone changes towards another accent paradigm.

a) Let's start with the words of the original A.P. A. The nouns brother and D.D., which in ancient times belonged to A.P.a ^{[10, pp. 617, 544]}, behave like A.P. b words, having inflected stress in the nominative plural:

brothers No. 1, Smolensk region, Pochinkovsky district;

uncle No. 27, Belgorod region, Alekseevsky district.

The same thing happens with the word edge (A.P. a ^{[10, p. 269]}), in which we observe inflection stress in the prepositional singular:

in this region^[5] No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

on the edge of No. 21 Tula region, Odoevsky district (with a secondary emphasis on the preposition).

In the word razv, which had a variable accent paradigm (a//c) ^{[10, p. 545]}, inflection stress is present in the nominative plural:

two times^[6] No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district (with a secondary emphasis on the preposition).

However, it happens that the old accent paradigm persists.:

number of t.p. units No. 27, Belgorod region, Alekseevsky district.

The word plow, which changed the old a.p. a. to the new a.p. s. in the Russian literary language, behaves the same way in South Russian dialects.:

pluuami No. 45, Rostov region, Tsimlyansky district.

b) Next, let's consider the words of the original a.p. b. There are cases when they did not turn into a.p. c in South Russian dialects, as happened in the Russian literary language, and retained the stress on the ending in the singular.:

pyryadom No. 4, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district (the word before, which in ancient times belonged to A.P. b ^{[10, p. 539]}, in the Proto-Slavic language, like other masculine nouns considered here, had a monosyllabic base — *perd-);

pad nizom No. 14, Kursk region, Oboyansky district (for its accent paradigm, see ^{[10, p. 546]}).

There are also reverse cases: the nouns sickle and pancake, which retained a.p. b in the literary language ^{[10, pp. 603, 594]}, became words of a.p. c in South Russian dialects and acquired the primary stress in the singular:

sickle No. 4, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

z pancake, with thym pancake No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district.

c) And finally, the nouns of ancient A.P. S. behave in South Russian dialects as follows.

The word moose, which once belonged to this accent paradigm, but in modern literary language fluctuates between A.P. s and A.P. a ^{[10, p. 667]}, has a stressed ending in the accusative singular, that is, it demonstrates A.P. b:

lasya No. 46, Rostov region, Vyoshensky district.

The same thing is observed with the word guest, which preserves the old a.p.s. in the literary language [p. 673]:

Village No. 11, Kaluga region, Mosalsky district.

The noun god with a stable ancient and modern A.P. S. ^{[10, pp. 540-541]} demonstrates an uncharacteristic inflection stress in the nominative case and a basic stress in the prepositional plural case.:

uada No. 4, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

d w a uada, two uady^[7] No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

ў младγ γ γ,,, in младγγ γ γ γ № № № № 16, Kursk region, Oktyabrsky district.

It makes no sense to consider the forms of the words A.P. S., which have a stressed inflection in dialects -a in the nominative plural and the accusative case coinciding with it.:

γǝda No. 27, Belgorod region, Alekseevsky district;

φ old-fashioned UADA No. 17, Orel region, Kromsky district;

creek No. 44, Tambov region, Kirsanovsky district.

The fact is that this is an innovative ending for masculine words (until the middle of the 17th century. it was rare, and the rapid growth in the number of words accepting it began in the 18th century. and continues to this day ^{[13, p. 21]}) is always stressed, regardless of the original accent paradigm.

Verb

1) There are dialectal differences related to the accentuation of the present tense forms of the verb go (A.P. b ^{[10, p. 333]}) and the forms of the simple future tense of prefixed derivatives from it.

The non-prepositional verb in all forms of presentation, except for the form 1 l. unit h., that is, forms like 3 l. unit h. j l., according to A. A. Zaliznyak, had the following dialectal variants of development: a) j b gave j and, and therefore, when dropping the stress to the left from the connecting vowel -e- (this was due to the specific accentological properties of this connecting vowel), the initial j and took on the stress, from where it came; b) j b was interpreted as a weak reduced, from where the forced stress came; in the future, this j b gave in some dialects j, as in Ukrainian, and in other dialects — and, as in Russian, it goes ^{[11, pp. 117-118]}.

Among the South Russian dialects, according to option a), only the dialects of the eastern zone, namely the Ryazan group, where the stress is fixed only on the initial syllable, went.:

canvas No. 31, Lipetsk region, Khlevensky district;

idim (1 l. mn.h.) No. 32, Lipetsk region, Usmansky district;

idim (1 l. mn.h.) No. 35, Ryazan region. Klepikovsky district;

idut No. 36, Ryazan region, Rybnovsky district.

The dialects of other South Russian zones have mainly implemented option b), in which the stress has shifted to the ending, and forms with an accent on the first syllable are an exception (in the examples below they are highlighted in bold):

neidet, nyadet No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

No idea, idesh No. 6, Kaluga region, Khvastovichi district;

za drushkom ydet No. 7, Kaluga region, Khvastovichi district;

idesh No. 13, Kursk region, Shchigrovsky district;

idut, idut-idut, yidem No. 14, Kursk region, Oboyansky district;

building No. 18, Tula region, Belevsky district;

idut, and the peopleǝ-t(o) ydut, ide (3 l. units) No. 24, Tula region, Venevsky district;

ida(t), idya (3 l. units) No. 26, Belgorod region, Novooskolsky district;

idet No. 39, Voronezh region, Semiluksky district;

Bolshovik village No. 49, Stavropol Territory, Levokumsky district.

As for the forms of presentation of prefixed derivatives of the type jb, here, jb, not being initial, normally behaved as a weak reduced and shifted the stress dropped on it from the connecting vowel to the prefix, which gave accents like jb, jb. The Russian literary language further generalized the stress of prefixed and non-prefixed forms, from where modern will come, will come, etc., and in dialects either the same innovation or archaism can be represented^[8].

In the studied material, the presentation forms of the following prefixed verbs were found to be of interest to us: to reach, to enter, to approach, to go, to come, to pass, and only one of them — to come — can have an archaic stress on the prefix:

priya (3 l. units) No. 3, Smolensk region, Rudnyansky district;

pridya, nyadya (3 l. units) No. 4, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

come (3 l. units), come No. 7, Kaluga region, Khvastovichi district;

pridut No. 26, Belgorod region, Novooskolsky district;

parish(e)t, parish (3 l. units) No. 37, Voronezh region, Borisoglebsky district;

parish(et) No. 38, Voronezh region, Ertilsky district.

At the same time, an innovative inflection stress is also recorded, but in other dialects.:

priut (=will come) No. 9, Kaluga region, Zhizdrinsky district;

come, come No. 12, Kursk region, Fatezhsky district;

pridet No. 13, Kursk region, Shchigrovsky district;

pridem No. 18, Tula region, Belevsky district;

Pridem No. 19, Tula region, Arsenyevsky district;

Pridem No. 49, Stavropol Territory, Levokumsky district.

Thus, there is some dialectal distribution in terms of the accentological behavior of the presentative forms of the verb to come.

As for the rest of the prefixed verbs, which, as mentioned, have an accent on the ending in the same way as the literary language, examples of their use will not be given due to their standardization.

2) In the Old Great Russian period, accentological changes appeared in the presentation of class IV verbs having infinitive bases on -and-and-ѣ- suffixals: they change a.p. c to a.p. b, that is, verbs like empty, suffer forms, for example, 2 l. units.h. let go, you suffer (cf. earlier forms you let go, you suffer, inherent a.p. s.). It is important to note that this happened primarily in transitive verbs of a non-book character. The earliest examples are found in the accented monuments of writing in the XVI century, and in the XVII century. these innovations are already noticeably more common. ^{[11, p. 361]}, and further their number continues to increase, and the described process took place both in the XIX and XX centuries. So, L.A. Bulakhovsky gives examples of verbs with stress not yet shifted among poets of the XVIII and XIX centuries: But whoever destroys me is not inspired (Sumarokov); No, to know, fate will pass My short century sooner Than enlightenment will cure those morals (V. Maikov); Snow falls to the ground (Pushkin) You cook your food in it (Pushkin) and others ^{[2, p. 273]}. This means that the main stress of the verbs listed here (destroys, heals, falls, cooks) and some others appeared in the Russian literary language quite late. As a matter of fact, the currently recognized non-normative forms with an accent based on the verb to call ^{[15, p. 244]} also appeared under the influence of the described trend. However, there are verbs in which forms with innovative and archaic stress coexist in the modern language, for example, crumbles ~ crumbles ^{[15, p. 326]}, baptizes ~ baptizes ^{[15, p. 322]}, etc.

Let us now turn to the South Russian dialects. Here, according to the data of the studied records, the following picture emerges.

There are several verbs that in the literary language have only a new stress on the base, and in some Southern Russian dialects they retain the old stress on the ending.:

varish No. 13, Kursk region, Shchigrovsky district;

drag (3 liters. units) No. 33, Ryazan region, Ryazan district;

vyartish, Vyartitts No. 43, Tambov region, Staroyuryevsky district;

felling (3 l. units) No. 47, Volgograd region, Kulmyzhensky district.

At the same time, there is some variability. So, along with varish (No. 13, Kursk region, Shchigrovsky district), the informant pronounces and cooks, va (ryat). A new stress is fixed in this verb and in other dialects.:

varyut, navarim No. 14, Kursk region, Oboyansky district;

svorit (=cook), urit (=cook), abvorish (=boil) No. 49, Stavropol Territory, Levokumsky district.

The following new forms with primary stress have no variability:

uamonyut No. 5, Bryansk region, Pochepsky district;

valitsa (3 l. units) No. 9, Kaluga region, Zhizdrinsky district;

to shoot (3 liters. units) No. 12, Kursk region, Fatezhsky district;

ukrestish No. 20, Tula region, Yefremovsky district;

Side street No. 25, Moscow region, Serpukhov district;

pakot(i)sh (=you will ride) No. 37, Voronezh region, Borisoglebsky district;

Pakroshut No. 39, Voronezh region, Rossoshansky district;

Kasim No. 43, Tambov region, Staroyuryevsky district;

nakroshosh, overlay, pasolish No. 49, Stavropol Territory, Levokumsky district.

And finally, there is one reverse case: the verb originally a.p. b behaved according to the a.p.c scheme, that is, it replaced the main stress with the inflection:

feed (3 l. units) No. 33, Ryazan region, Ryazan district.

So, the study showed that in South Russian dialects there are a number of accentological features that do not coincide with the corresponding phenomena of the Russian literary language. In particular, archaisms that have not been preserved in the literary language and innovations have been identified for those categories of cases where the modern language has not changed the place of the Old Russian accent.

^[1] In South Russian dialects, the forms of these two words are fixed, which do not differ from the literary language: kapnu No. 12, Kursk region, Fatezhsky district; izbu No. 2, Smolensk region, Novogudinsky district.

^[2] In the clock group, which consisted of the preposition and the enclynomen form of a word related to A.P. S., automatic stress in Proto–Slavic and Early Ancient Russian regularly stood on the preposition, and in the Old Russian language of the XV-XVII centuries, the stress on the preposition with this noun form remained almost completely relevant ^{[12, p. 805]}, but in the modern state of the language, many so-called "delays in the stress on the preposition" are no longer retained, or there is a variation of the type on water ~ on water. As can be seen from the dialect material given below, this state of affairs characterizes not only the Russian literary language, but also modern dialects.

^[3] The text given in ^[16] is small in volume, however, an extensive commentary describing the dialect includes all the notes of the informant from whom this text was written (they were made by D. M. Savinov from 1994 to 1997) ^{[16, p. 105]}.

^[4] The tuch stress is also recorded in the dialect of the village of Belyaevo in the Belevsky district of the Tula region (Kursk-Oryol group of dialects, text No. 18).

^[5] It should be noted that the inflection of the soft variant of the declension to *-ŏ is preserved here (for the paradigms of the ancient *ŏ declension, see ^{[3, p. 169]}).

^[6] In ancient times, the word dva was consistent with the form of I.P. two times, and in the modern state, the same form is reinterpreted as the form of R.P. unit and is governed by the word two, see ^{[3, p. 330]}. In the above example, syntactic compatibility of an intermediate type is presented two times, when the word two still agrees with the noun, but by analogy with the words denoting the numbers 3 and 4, it stands not in I.P. two.h., but in I.P. many.h., and has an innovative ending -s, which came from the forms V.P. ^{[3, p. 219]}). For the fact that the compatibility of the two+ I.P. type has existed in the Russian language for a long time, see ^{[1, pp. 59-60]}.

^[7] For the syntactic compatibility of two + I.P. mn.h. see footnote 6.

^[8] Here we are not talking about the verb to leave, since in all its forms the stress normally stood on the prefix due to the fact that it was self-stressed.