Re: [tied] Re: Alb. 'delirium'

Abdullah Konushevci wrote:

>> To my view, problem is that Alb. <jerm> didn't exists independently,
>> but only in verbal phrase (VP) <flet n� jerm> 'to speak in delirium',
>> synonymic with <flet p��art�> 'to speak in disorder', which, for me,
>> is a metaphorical expression for <speach, oratio, sermo>, that was
>> and still is, for common vulgus, irrational. Other derivatives, like
>> 'li�gj�r�oj> 'to speak', <n�gj�r�oj> 'to insert, taste' just prove my
>> suspicion that they are all derivatives from PIE *ser- 'to line up',
>> but Hett <sarra> 'brechen, teilen'.
>> I am grateful to your responds, even I wait to have some feedback
>> from Mr. Jens and Piotr, especially about *s > j.
>>
>> Konushevci

I am afraid the word "ngj�roj" in its second meaning ( it is a second
word in the dictionary) has no connection with the subject here. The
word _is_ the same as Rom. "�nc�iera" and Alb. "ngjir" is the same as
Rom. "caier".
The meaning is absolutely identicaly and the phonetic aspect is the same
less the noun "ngjir" which is prefixed with "n".
Rom. "caier" cf DEX from Latin *caiulus which inmy opinion is wrong.
Thus, at least for this "ngj�roj", there is no IE "s" there.

Alex




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.10/43 - Release Date: 06.07.2005