Re: [tied] Proto-Albanian Timeframes

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

>
> alexandru_mg3 wrote:
>
> > Piotr, you need to add an argument to the following question:
> > 'Why -(ë)shti in madhështi: couldn't be added later?"
> >
> > I ask this because -(ë)shti seems to be an 'active' suffix in
> > Albanian...
>
> Abdullah has already explained part of it. A few additional

comments:

>
> The vowel of the suffix is etymological, not merely epenthetic,

since a

> cluster of three consonants would otherwise have been simplified at

a

> very early date (cf. *s(w)ek^s- + *-ta: > gjashtë. The suffix is

not one

> of those recent things (like -ishtë/-ishte from Slavic) but looks

like

> an old and unproductive formation, possibly derived from a

comparative

> in *-jos/*-is-. I believe the absence of palatal umlaut excludes in

this

> case a preform like *ma3-is-t-ija:, with the nil grade of the

suffix,

> and the *a vocalism here and in the basic adjective <madh> makes a
> direct connection with *meg^h2- rather difficult. It would perhaps

be

> easier to derive the Albanian words from the root *magH- via *magH-

jó-

> (or comp. *mágH-jo:s), *magH-jes-t- (cf. Lat. ma:iesta:t-). We only

need

> to assume that *-gHj- developed like *-g^H- in Albanian. I know of

no

> counterexamples to that.
>
> Piotr

Piotr, a/not-stressed > ë in Roman Times both in PAlb and PRom.

Please see Alb. këmishë 'shirt' > Rom. cãmaSã 'id'

So madhësht'i: accented on the last i: couldn't be like this since
Roman Times because if so it would be mëdhësht'i:

So is clear that the suffix or the suffixes was/were added later
on the top of mádhë-

Marius