dъr-

Comments: In the ESSJa, it is argued that Ru. dyrá, which occurs alongside dirá (-> * dira), results from secondary ablaut (starting from * dъr- instead of of * dьr- `tear'. The same is suggested for -> * dura. It seems to me that such a scenario requires that there existed a formally and semantically similar root. In this particular case the root of Lith. dùrti `stab, push' has often been mentioned, but more often than not (e.g. Vasmer s.v. dyrá, Fraenkel LEW: 113, Sɫawski SEJP I: 208) the latter root is considered etymologically identical. This implies that already in Balto-Slavic both * dir- and * dur- functioned as the zero grade of * der- `tear'. Here I would like to adopt a more agnostic attitude, i.e. I prefer to separate forms belonging to the "u" ablaut series provisionally from * der- `tear'. Note that Baltic * duris firmly acute, while in the case of the verb `to tear' there are many indications for an old circumflex.

Comments: In the ESSJa, it is argued that Ru. dyrá, which occurs alongside dirá (-> * dira), results from secondary ablaut (starting from * dъr- instead of of * dьr- `tear'. The same is suggested for -> * dura. It seems to me that such a scenario requires that there existed a formally and semantically similar root. In this particular case the root of Lith. dùrti `stab, push' has often been mentioned, but more often than not (e.g. Vasmer s.v. dyrá, Fraenkel LEW: 113, Sɫawski SEJP I: 208) the latter root is considered etymologically identical. This implies that already in Balto-Slavic both * dir- and * dur- functioned as the zero grade of * der- `tear'. Here I would like to adopt a more agnostic attitude, i.e. I prefer to separate forms belonging to the "u" ablaut series provisionally from * der- `tear'. Note that Baltic * duris firmly acute, while in the case of the verb `to tear' there are many indications for an old circumflex.