schastlivo

[John Dunn]

Lopatin's Russkij orfografičeskij slovar' (2005) allows either счАстлив, счАстливо or счастлИв, счастлИво (without comment) for the short adjective and the adverb, but only счастлИво for the greeting.  Zaliznjak's Grammatičeskij slovar', usually more tolerant of variants, considers stress on the second syllable to be archaic for the short adjective and the adverb, without recognising the greeting as a distinct form.  Both recognise only second syllable stress for the long adjective.

Zaliznjak does, however, suggest a partial answer to Ralph's question.  Adjectives ending in –ливый with four or more syllables can have the stress on any syllable (except, obviously, the last), but almost all trisyllabic adjectives have the stress on the penultimate; the only exceptions that I can find are въЕдливый and вЕжливый (which presumably explains why I keep having to look the latter up).  But if force of analogy can explain the change of stress in the long adjective, it still leaves the problem of the short form.

John Dunn. 

________________________________________
From: SEELANGS: Slavic & East European Languages and Literatures list [SEELANGS at bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of R. M. Cleminson [rmcleminson at POST.SK]
Sent: 24 October 2011 23:17
To: SEELANGS at bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: [SEELANGS] schastlivo

This is a complicated question (as indeed one might have inferred from the fact that you trouble to ask it).  In modern standard Russian it seems reasonably clear that the adjective счастливый is stressed on the second syllable in the long form and on the first syllable in the short form/adverb (when it is actually used as an adverb).  However, it was not ever thus: in Pushkin we find счастливый stressed on the first syllable and счастлив stressed on the second!  Both these I think are now regarded as archaic, though possibly still theoretically permissible.  I cannot offer any suggestions why this switchover should have happened.

However, it seems to be clear that when счастливо is used as a greeting (or part of one) it is always stressed on the second syllable.  This at least can be explained as a fossilised form that has persisted in this particular context, having gone its separate way from the adjective from which it was originally derived.

But can anyone explain the development of the stress in that adjective?

----- Pôvodná správa -----
Od: "John Dingley" <jdingley43 at GMAIL.COM>
Komu: SEELANGS at bama.ua.edu
Odoslané: pondelok, 24. október 2011 17:46:25
Predmet: [SEELANGS] schastlivo

Hi!

Where is schastlivo stressed in the following? Is it
schästlivo or schastlívo?

1. Mne zdes' schastlivo.

2. Uzhe uxodish'? Schastlivo!

3. Schastlivo ostavat'sja!

John Dingley

--
http://members.shaw.ca/johndingley/home.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
_____________________________________________________________________

Dajte sa do prace a vytvorte si zivotopis | http://praca.sme.sk/praca/cv-promo.aspx

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------