Re: [tied] Re: PIE *aussiio-

I agree too, that something appears in Albanian in 155
isn't the reason that Albanian word coudn't be the
loan. But it is wellkonwn fact that this word is, as
you claim too, is inherited from PIE.
I just like to clear the confusion about standard
form.

--- Piotr Gasiorowski <piotr.gasiorowski@...>
wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Abdullah Konushevci" <a_konushevci@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 7:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE *aussiio-
>
>
> >
> > No, it coudn't be, cause "�sht�" is standard form,
> > derived form oldes one anst, documented in 1555,
> so it
> > is very similar to sansk. ansti and pers. asti.
>
> Skt. "ansti"?? The Skt. word was <asti> (< *h1esti).
>
> The fact that something appears in Albanian in 1555
> does not mean that it can't be a Latin loan, since
> Balkan Latin loans entered (pre-)Albanian many
> centuries earlier. But Tosk �sht� (Geg �sht) is
> inherited anyway, along with the rest of the
> paradigm (<jam, je, �sht�, ...>).
>
> Piotr
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/