Re: [tied] PIE *y > Alb. /z/ (was Re: Romanian Verb )

From: alex
Message: 38310
Date: 2005-06-03

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
>> I agree that it not contain a Satemisabe *g', but what do you think
>> if it was extended in *yeug-staH2, as are most of Albanian old names.
>> So, if we assume that velar /*g/ voiced the *-saH2, than it's not
>> hard to derive Alb. <zgjedh�> 'yoke' from *yeugztaH2.
>
> I find it hard to accept anything like *jeugstah2 in the first place.
> From the point of view of IE morphology, it's an arbitrary
> monstrosity. I also fail to see why the *g should have caused the
> voicing of the whole cluster instead of getting devoiced itself (the
> normal direction of voice assimilation is regressive).

that is one of the questions we tried to find a rule for. What was the
point which determined the sonorisation? Was the sonor velar or was the
"s" which became sonorized (z)? Unfortunately we (on Balkanika) did not
paid too much time on this and the subject took a place on the waiting
list. If one takes as being true cognates Latin *scabia and Rom.
*zgaib�, then we have to consider the original cluster has been *sc- .
Why became then the whole cluster a sonor one? In the words where the
cluster has been a *sg- it is 100% sure s> z because there is phonetic
interdiction to have sonor-mute/mute-sonor at the begining of the word
in Rom., thus because of "g", "s" became "z". The pertinent question
should be "why not otherway around?". Why the "s" did not influenced "g"
to became "k"?. I don't have right now an answer.

> Piotr


Alex




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.5.1 - Release Date: 02.06.2005