Re: [tied] Alb. katër

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> 17-11-03 19:39, alex wrote:
>
>> but it seems easy enough to link them to Rom; at least dy, tre,
>> gjashtë, shtate, tetë, nëntë, dhjetë ( if for 10 indeed "k^" got
>> lost as Abdullah assume for some stops in certain conditions) don't
>> appears to me to make some troubles in linking them, don't you find?
>> The most interesting here seems to me by now the "gjash(të)" versus
>> Rom. "Sase" ( cf. gjarpër-Sarpe).
>
> For each of the numerals you list there are good reasons why it should
> be regarded as inherited and why Latin origin can be ruled out. For
> example, <shtatë> and <tetë> preserve the PIE location of stress,
> changed in Latin. We'd get quite different forms if we took Latin as
> the point of departure, e.g. okto: --> *oft (cf, Rom. opt).
>
> Piotr

That is right. And this is because it seems to me Albanian presents
three way to handle this "kt" group.
1) kt > t
2) kt > it
3) kt > ft

I assume that "kt" > "t" is the inherited change from PIE,"kt" > "it" in
Latin loans "kt" > "ft" is from TodayKnownAsRomanians due "pt" >"ft":
The "pt" > "ft" seems more probable as "kt" > "ft"; at least we have
attested in several languages the change of "p" to "f" but I am not
aware of any language where "k" > "f" ( I know , there can be simply
ignorance by my side, thus examples of "k" > "f" excluding via "p"
should be welcome).

Alex