> As everyone could understands, we have here to do with pure Slavic
> loans from (proto-)Albanian, becouse, as we see, these words in
> Slavic are orphans.
> For me, this issue is closed.
I don't see your point. Proto-Slavic *dolbto (along with *(na)dolbU and
other deverbals) is an impeccable (as to the sound change and derivation
models in charge) derivative of the root found in *delbti ~ *dolbati ~
*dIlbati ~ *dIlbiti 'peck, chisel' (< *dHelbH- ~ *dHolbH~ *dHlbH-), so
it's not an orphan; it's also an impeccable direct cognate of OPruss.
<dalptan> 'chisel' (both < BSl. *dalbta(n)). The reflexes of these
Proto-Slavic verbs themselves are galore in present-day Slavic languages
and they still mean 'peck, chisel, hole, hammer' (there are also some
metaphoric meanings, eg, in Russian <zadolbál> is what you have done to
me, and probably to some other members on the list by sticking on your
These verbs are by no means orphans: they have Baltic brothers (eg.,
Lithuanian <del~bti> *'batter down, drive down' > 'look down, throw
one's eyes to the ground', <délba> 'shaft of a hayfork; pole (esp. used
to drive something in or down)'), from whence one can conclude they have
parents as well.
Do you mean the Slavic verbs and their Baltic cognates are 'pure loans
from (Proto-)Albanian'? What are the (Proto-)Albanian sources for the