Re: [tied] Albanian as a satem langauge

> Thank you for your informative reply.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cybalist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cybalist@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of Piotr Gasiorowski
> Sent: 04 May 2005 10:49
> To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [tied] Albanian as a satem langauge
>
>
>
> David Webb wrote:
>
>> What words reveal Albanian to be satem?
>
> All native words reconstructed with *k^, *g^ or *g^H followed by a vowel
> or glide, e.g.:
>
> *g^Hesr(+ *-ah2) > dorë 'hand'
> *g^ombHos > Geg dhâmb, Tosk dhëmb
> *k^onid(+ *-ah2) > Geg thëni:, Tosk thër(r)ijë
> *g^Heimon- > Geg dimën, Tosk dimër 'winter'
>
> Cf.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/29877
>
> and the ensuing discussion (note the special development of the *K^
> series before *w).
>
> The frequently repeated idea that Albanian is neither satem or centum is
> based on two false arguments:
>
> (1) Albanian shows non-satemised *K^ stops in some words, e.g. *smek^ru
>> mjekër 'chin, beard', or *k^lu-eh1- > quaj (kluoj) 'call, name'. Such
> examples, however, represent regular dispalatalisation before liquids
> and nasals, i.e. in a well-defined phonetic context.
>
> (2) Albanian probably shows different reflexes of *K^, *K and *KW before
> front vowels. However, the merger of "plain" *K and labiovelar *KW is
> not, strictly speaking, part of the satem shift but an independent later
> process that failed to be carried through in some satem dialects
> (Armenian also distinguishes *K from *KW some contexts). Likewise, some
> non-satem languages show traces of the *K vs. *K^ distinction.

Could you yield more information on the last point? On the non-satem lgs
with traces of *K - *K' distinction, I mean. Thanks,

Mate