O akcentuaciji pridjeva tipa neslъ i povezanim problemima

In a recent article of major importance (2013), Tijmen Pronk has treated the accentuation of l-participles of the type neslъ in western South Slavic. Pronk points out correctly that Dybo’s law did not shift the accent onto final jers, e.g. in *kòņь, *bòbъ, and that the short vowel was preserved in Slovak osem < *òsmь, oheň < *ògņь, mohol < *mòglъ. Contrary to what Pronk claims, Slovene nę́sǝlis the phonetic reflex of *néslъ < *neslъ̀, Slovak niesol. The Slovene doublets (v)ǫ̑gǝl < *ǫ̀glь and (v)ózǝl < *ǫ̀zlъ suggest an earlier paradigm with vǫ̑- < ǫ̑- in the nom.sg. form and ó- < *ǫ̀- in the oblique cases. The vowel of ógǝnj < *ògņь also stems from the oblique cases. The expected neo-circumflex in the nom.sg. form is actually attested in rę̑bǝr < *rèbrь beside rę́bǝr with the reflex of Stang’s law from the oblique cases. There is no reason to assume that the accent was not retracted at an early stage in *neslъ̀, nor is there any reason to assume that Dybo’s law shifted the accent to the final jer in *dòbrъ and *sèdmь, as Pronk claims.U nedavno objavljenome važnom članku (2013.) Tijmen Pronk obradio je akcentuaciju zapadnojužnoslavenskih pridjeva radnih tipa neslъ. Pronk ispravno ističe da Diboov zakon nije pomaknuo naglasak na finalne poluglase, npr. *kòņь, *bòbъ, i da je kratki samoglasnik sačuvan u Slovačkom osem < *òsmь, oheň < *ògņь, mohol < *mòglъ. Suprotno onome što Pronk tvrdi, slavenski je nę́sǝl fonetski refleks *néslъ < *neslъ̀, slovački niesol. Slavenske dublete (v)ǫ̑gǝl < *ǫ̀glь i (v)ózǝl < *ǫ̀zlъ upućuju na postojanje ranije paradigme sa vǫ̑- < ǫ̑ u Njd i ó- < *ǫ̀- u kosim padežima. Samoglasnik u ógǝnj < *ògņь također dolazi iz kosih padeža. Očekivani neocirkumfleks u Njd zapravo je potvrđen u rę̑bǝr < *rèbrь uz rę́bǝr s odrazom Stangova zakona iz kosih padeža. Nema razloga pretpostaviti da naglasak nije povučen u ranoj fazi u *neslъ̀, kao ni to da je Diboov zakon pomaknuo naglasak na finalni poluglas u *dòbrъi *sèdmь, kao što Pronk tvrdi