Re: [tied] Re: Alabanian "ngujon"

Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
>> I should like to know if there is any work about Latin loans into
>> Albanian since it should better to read by myself instead of
> asking :is
>> this so?, is that so?, etc.
>>
>> For instance in this case, there is the Albanian verb "ngujon". I
> have
>> no ideea about this one if this is a latin loan or not. If this is
> a
>> Latin loan, then the Latin verb wherefrom the Albanian "ngujon"
> derive,
>> should be the verb "incuncare" ( my opinonin).
>> If yes, then how is to explain the /nc/ > /j/ ?
>>
>> Alex
> ************
> The verb <ngujon> 'to close, to shut, to fasten' is a prefixed form
> of n- + kunj + - oj, where n- is prefix, like in ngul 'to settle, to
> stick', ngulim 'settlement', besides shkulem 'to be displaced',
> shpërngul 'to be removed', all from PIE root *kel-2, indeed, of its
> zero-grade form *kl.- 2. Second element is kunj 'peg', until -oj or
> much earlear -onj is regular Albanian verb ending.
>
> Konushevci

it may be. The explanation of the people who studied romanistic looks
something different. Maybe you will wonder what I am talking about. Well
as counterpart of Albanian "ngujon" ther is the romanian "'ncuia",
literary "încuia"
so, this word is given as deriving from Latin "incuncare".
since it is crystal clear that the Albanian word and Rumanian word is
one and the same:
ngujon / 'ncuia ( oder încuia for mentaining the actual ortography)

In this manner we can assume safe that there is no "incuia" from latin
"incuncare" in Romanian , but there is a substratum verb as Albanian
"ngujon".


Alex