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 Baltic verbs, Lith. kláusti ‘to ask questions’, klausýti ‘to listen’, Latv. klàust ‘to ask questions’ and klàusît / klaũsît ‘to listen’ exhibit intriguing morphological and accentological distributions. For a long time, this has interested linguists as shown by numerous previous studies starting with Schulze (1904). Despite several proposals put forward so far, researchers have not yet agreed on a historical interpretation of the acute tone of Lith. kláusti, or on the historical relationship of kláusti to its cognates not only in Balto-Slavic but also in Indo-European languages. In this paper, all the relevant data and hypotheses available to the current author will be examined again, and a more probable historical interpretation will be sought.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract