latin geminate "ll" ( it was: Re: [tied] Re: *g'(h)- > d as aberran

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

> Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
> >
> > Alb. /ll/ is from /l/ in intevocalic position, cf. o:lena > Geg.
> > llânë, Tosk. llërë.
> >
> > Konushevci
>
>
> about intervocalic "ll":
> that sound healthy to me and shows why actually Alb. "ll" in
> intervocalic position has a counterpart in Rom. "r" in intervocalic
> position; since the Latin "l" has too a counterpart in Rom. "r" if

in

> intervocalic position one can say for sure there is an old *l with
> output : Latin "l", Alb. "ll", Rom. "l".
>
>
> My question here is what about Latin geminate "ll"; which is its
> origin in fact and why this is geminate one? The geminate "ll" is to
> find in Greek as well and I remember having read somewhere that

Latin

> "l" should have had 3 phonetical values as per testimonies of the
> gramairs. Is that true or just a miss-interpretation of the texts?
>
> P.S.- is there any modality to find out when did happen the
> methathesis in Alb. or this is a stil living phoenomenon? So far I
> know for Slavic there is the VIII-X century considered to be the
> period of methathesis but it can be there was posbile the
> determination in time due OCS-texts.
>
> Alex

************
So far I know, intervocalic /l/ was not affected from the time when
Slavic loans start to enter in Albanian: valjanica > valanicë,
stoljica > stolicë, etc.
But, liquids' metathesis is hard to be dated, it affect also Slavic
loans, like <prispeti> 'to popu up' > Alb. <përspjet>, but this mine
etymology is disputed by others, trying to find it Albanian archaic
compound për- + shpejt, that looks to me not convinced one.

Konushevci