Re: [tied] spylian (PIE part)

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "alex_lycos" <altamix@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 8:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Old English "a-spylian"
>> But it seems there are some errors how you are treating the problem
> I invite you to take in consideration the followings: -who said that
> the PIE root is the Germanic form with "*spul" -who said that the
> first vowel in the root with the form "CCVC-" is an
> PIE "u" ?
>
>
> It was you who wanted to compare <spãla> and <shpëlaj> with
> <-spylian> etc. I only said that the _Germanic_ reconstruction was
> *spul- and that it was incompatible with the Romanian and Albanian
> words. Whatever the PIE reconstruction, you can't derive all three
> "reflexes" from the same root
>

Yes. And I said that one hypothesis can be a loan from Germanic
languages into Romanian and Albanian language.
But how you said, a form with "spul-" in the years 400-800 AC would
remain practically an "spul-" since in the Romanian loans from Slavic
there are not such vocalism changes of Slavic "u" becoming a Romanian
"ã" ( are there any?)

In so far, I agree that the hypothesis of a loan from Germanic is not
correct ; I go further with my toughs and I suppose there is a PIE root
which allowed the Germanic form and the Romanian and Albanian form. A
root like "*sp(h)el(e)"- should be a very good candidate for Romanian
and Germanic but I don't know how Albanian will react here.

P.S.
If the rhotacism in Romanian is so important in your eyes, there can be
the root "*sp(h)ell(e)-" as well :-)))))

Alex