[tied] Re: Late Proto Albanian *3 /dz/ = Early Proto Romanian *3 /
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org
, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
> > Conclusions: Both lp-Albanians and ep-Romanians HAD PROBLEMS to
> >reproduce the Latin /di/.
> My conclusion is that you have problems with the basic principles of
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
The examples given by Marius have no probing value and they are right
disproved by Miguel.
Some things are ought to know, there are words which are not supposed
to derive from Latin like "ridica" with variant "ardica",
like "adia", etc. For these words have been supposed a Latin etymon
but they have been rejected due several considerations ( for each
word I can give suplim. info if requested).
I just hate two things here. The posiblity of having /i/ from /a/
with the explanation of influence of the next /i/ in the next
syllable ( see the once discusse example anima > *ânima > inima ).
The second one I hate is one of basic the principle of Romanistic, if
this is a principle. Is this principle "try to explain everything in
Balkan due Latin" a basic principle of Romanistic?