Re: [tied] Re: Albanian, pronouns,plural

Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

>> You touched the point where it seems something is not very clear and
>> this was the point how made me to think that the "aj/ajo" are not
> the
>> reflexses of "sa-".
>> Assuming *au-saH > ajo, one accepts that the reflex of "s" is "gj"
>> which can be simplified to "j".
>> Assuming that (a)saj is the reflex of *so-, then here we have a "s"
>> reflex of "so-" the Alb. (a)saj.
>> Is there not a contradiction?
>>
>> Alex
> ************
> No, I think that your wrong again, because /s/ followed by stressed
> vowel: in our case we have regular sequence *saH2-> contracted to
> *sa: > gjo > j, yields /j/ and followed by unstressed vowel: in our
> case *so- has regular sequence > sa, compare also different behavior
> of labiovelars, followed by front vowels and followed by back vowels.
> So, to assume: *saH2->*sa:- > gjo and *so- > sa.
> Maybe Mr. Rasmusen or others may have better explanation.
>
> Konushevci

I agree with the different treatment of labiovelars and velars when
followed by front vowels, there is everything clear.
It seems just very amasing the substantial change of "s" just because of
the stres and nothing else. How would be the stress alone be able to
make such radical changes? We see in the concordances which Albanian has
with Romanian that the unstressed /a/ became /ë/, unstressed /e/ became
too /ë/. These changes are simple and acceptable since they are sounds
very near to each other and does not make unrecognoscible a word. Even
the change of "c" to "s" when a front vowel followed is simple since is
not found just in Romanian and Albanian, but in several IE
languages...hmm..
OK, I have put one question, I got an answer:-))

Thank you and Jens for your answers.

Alex